• RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • Bobby Bolin
    Posts: 389
    No wonder you've been so busy lately! While I am not a music director, I most certainly will be getting a copy of this. Thanks for all your hard work.
  • OlbashOlbash
    Posts: 310
    I know I might be struck down for uttering this during Lent, but...

    HALLELUJAH!!!
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    This looks like a great project, and I will watch it with much interest. Looks like something I would love to get at my next Catholic job.

    That said, I have encountered some reservations (although I will seek out a hard copy so as to gain a more informed perspective). Perhaps this is just useless griping about subjects over which none of us have any control, or my own irrelevant curmudgeonness, but I think it needs to be said:

    - The sample web site I saw is rather busy. I want to begin my Mass on Jan 1st, and so I click "Beginning of Mass" (if I can navigate the sensory overload of CAPS CAPS CAPS EVERYWHERE!!!). I am then given four introits and hymn selections! Ok, that's a bit much, but say I want to do the first option listed. I click on it, and are given ten links to look at on four pages. I then decide to do "Gentle Woman" instead because then all I have to do is sustain an E chord on the vox celeste for 5 minutes! (Not really, but I hope you see my point about the design)

    - The hymn site is under construction, and I look forward to what may be (?) another orthodox Catholic hymn concordance. I think this is just great! But this too suffers from too many options, and it's just two hymns! If I want to sing "Now Thank We All Our God", I have five links to click on.

    - Is it intended that all hymns shall say "Harmonizations (c) Corpus Christ Watershed"? I find the altering of harmonizations for tunes in hymnals to be a most unfortunate trend, especially for such common tunes as Nun danket Alle Gott.

    - The presence of this copyright after the first line of music is very visually disruptive to me.

    - I don't get this obsession with writing music for all verses. You can use seven pages to sing one hymn, I'll just open a Hymnal 1982 pew book for it.

    - I suppose my side is the losers on the "parts in hymnals" argument, but it sure would be nice. Ditto for eliminating three different successively lower keys for hymns. I appreciate the availability of the traditional keys, but I don't want to some day take another Catholic job and find out that the congregation, although having this excellent hymnal, refuses to sing above a Bb.

    All that aired, I think this is going to be a GREAT resource, and I heartily look forward to buying one for my own study and possibly a whole set for a parish someday!
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    If this works, it's a new world. Totally revolutionary.
  • Jeff and I have talked about the need for a hymnal in the past numerous times. Well, at least three times, and I am really glad he is doing something about it!

    It's all about choices, and people really have not had any.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    That's just the problem, Jeff - I can't wait!

    Noel is absolutely right. For the first time, we have a TRULY different hymnal!
  • OlbashOlbash
    Posts: 310
    Gavin does bring up some important points. I am somewhat of a minimalist when it comes to the cleanliness of layout. Even the Parish Book of Chant -- a comparatively clean work visually -- is slightly too busy for my tastes. JMO, if you like, I'd be happy to circulate sample pages to some graphic designer friends for feedback.
  • I agree with Olbash that a clean layout is very important.

    I remember when I first got involved in church music that I found GIA's hymnals far superior to OCP's when it came to this criterion. And I preferred GIA solely for this reason. I still find their hymnal layouts to be easiest on my eyes.

    Layout projects an air of legitimacy regardless of content.
  • BruceL
    Posts: 1,032
    +1 to Aristotle's observations above, although (after looking through some WLP/Paluch missalettes for work this morning) I think that GIA's content is better than OCP/WLP...even when RitualSong's name magically changes to Worship IV. How sad all those observations are!

    Jeff, two things, rather unrelated to the original post, but I hope you humor me:

    1) The Simms Gloria is really nice...until the last bit (from m. 32 on). That would discourage me from using it, which is a pity because it is a nice setting otherwise. I don't know Mr. Simms, but is it possible for him to revise it with (for example) no rest on strong beat before "Jesus Christ" and slower declamation (read: fewer 16th notes) and harmonic rhythm from m. 32 to the end? These are just things that from my experience would discourage participation in the congregation; I think there are other solutions to the end of the setting that would still have integrity.

    2) On this page (http://www.ccwatershed.org/hymns/replacing_Mass_propers_with_hymns/) at the 1969 Paul VI quote: what document is that from? My "audience" is more likely to listen to Paul VI's ideas than, for example, Pius XII's ideas—don't shoot me, I'm just the musician!
  • lmassery
    Posts: 274
    This is so awesome! Praise the Lord. Question....Jeff mentions in no. 9 that the vatican condemned disposable Missalettes!? I never heard that before - who said that where and when?
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • This is great news indeed, Jeff! I look forward to seeing the sample pages.
  • Yes, this is very exciting ... our priests are very interested in seeing the samples ... thanks you Jeff!

    Bob
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Jeffrey,

    First of all, CONGRATULATIONS on your new little one! I must have missed the news. (Name?)

    I'm very excited about this project. A few questions:

    (1) You say that the hymnal will have all the readings (for all three years) AND all the propers. Regarding the propers, will that just be the text of the propers? (I wouldn't think you would need or even want notation, since this is a hymnal for the congregation, and to conserve space.) Will you have the Latin text, an English translation, or both?

    (2) Regarding the same, am I correct in reading that you will provide the text for the propers for the Introit and the Gradual/Tract and the (Gregorian) Alleluia/Acclamation and the Offertory and the Communion? All of them? For every Sunday for all three years? (I'm getting excited here…)

    (3) Regarding your inclusion of the Chabanel Psalms and the Garnier Alleluias… will you include those for all three years' Sundays, too?

    (4) Continuing on that same question, I know that on the Chabanel site there are always many options for a given Sunday… at least a few settings by you, and a few by other people as well. Would I be correct in guessing that you'll be including your own compositions for the hymnal… and probably only your "favorite" setting for a given Sunday?

    (5) Would there be a Kyriale included, too? And/or, would you include your beautiful St. Ralph Sherwin setting of the ordinary? Or the new ICEL chants? Square-note notation, or modern notation?

    (6) Regarding the "more than 100 good hymns" — melodies only, or four parts? If the former (which would be most understandable, for space reasons), would organ accompaniments be available online?

    (7) Could you throw in a kitchen sink, too? :)

    Again, this is very, very exciting! A final question… when can I place my pre-order?
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    (8) How about an imprimatur/nihil obstat?
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    Will it be possible to include a couple of the better, well known settings from the major publishers? Mass for the City comes to mind, as does the John Lee chant Gloria and Richard Proulx's new Gloria Simplex from WLP.
  • Wow! This looks spectacular!

    I'm also interested in the details on point #9. That's a new one, and of great interest.

    Thanks,

    Mark
  • Erik P
    Posts: 152
    Well there's really no excuse for poor music in the OF these days. Between the Gregorian Missal, Parish Book of Chant, Vatican II Hymnal, the forthcoming Simple Propers Project, Chabanel Psalms, Adoremus Hymnal, CPDL.org, IMSLP.org and limitless resources online from MusicaSacra.com there's beautiful music in both English and Latin at every level of difficulty for any choirs' or cantor's ability.

    The only explanation is direct defiance of all church legislation and Pope Benedict's petition for a return to Sacred Music.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,354
    That is not the only explanation.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Yes, good resources are absolutely essential. People on this forum can get by with selective downloads, but for most we have to have books to hand people. It's really the only way forward, IMHO
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,354
    I'm shocked, shocked to find a lack of good music in this establishment.
  • JMO,

    Yes, I agree, as a cradle Episcopalian (now Catholic) I often incorporate the absolutely beautiful traditional music of the Anglican church, the Anglican chant and hymns (e.g., we used the "Ah, Holy Jesus" from the EH last Sunday and it was well received). Thank you for the already very comprehensive hymnal we are excitedly looking forward to! Great work!!!

    Blessings,
    Bob
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,884
    Adam... which establishment?
  • It's wonderful that the open door to Anglicans will open the door to their music in people's minds. Roman churches in England have done it forever, and some here have, but now the door is flung wide.
  • Jeffrey,

    I love everything you've said about the contents, and personally, I like the sample cover -- it's colorful, ornate, and fresh. However, I know plenty of locals who are NOT going to go for a book whose cover will look to them so garish and over-the-top. Would it be possible to have a cover option that is rather plain but elegant -- something blue or red or dark green, with stamped letters, or even a glossy paperback cover like many of the MusicaSacra volumes available from Lulu?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,338
    Dittos on the cover. Books with a high-quality appearance don't have promotional text on the back.

    It might even be worthwhile to consider whether the title might tend to evoke a variety of confused reactions.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,884
    You might consider not calling it a hymnal promoting a new emphasis on singing the Mass and putting less stress on the hymn element. Something like Missale Cantiones or the like if you get my drift.
  • Mark P.
    Posts: 248
    Is this death by a thousand cuts? I think what Jeffrey is doing is wonderful. God bless him for his initiative.
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    No offense to Francis or anypone else but I disagree. It needs to be called a hymnal and it needs to have some mainstream material in it.

    The way to make sure that it only appears in maybe less than 10 parishes in the US is to call it a Missale Cantiones and have it be devoid of ANYTHING even remotely mainstream.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • Nisi
    Posts: 72
    my comment removed
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    removed
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,884
    JO et al:

    We need not fear scrutinizing each others efforts. We are all trying to do the best by Mother Church. In the end Jeff will have an incredible product no matter if the cover is flashy or understated because in the end the content is what matters.

    When I put my book a out a few weeks ago I invited all criticism. In fact, I changed the cover as a result of comments I received. It made the book more acceptable to the masses. It avoids making the initial statement I was trying to make about the liturgy being all encompassing to the point of being tasteless, all inclusive, all things to everyone and in the end pleasing no one, including God. Covers are tricky business. We all know the phrase "Never judge a book by it's cover". Truth is, Jeff is right. Many do. I see and understand Jeff's plight.

    When we ask advice and feedback on this board, it is as a sounding board. When I post a composition, I am not looking for pats on the back. I want feedback that will make me scrutinize my artistic decisions. I appreciate and WANT criticism from everyone here because you are the minds and hearts that I trust. You are the ones that help me make better decisions in the end about sacred music. Are they always "right"? Maybe, maybe not. But we are the testing ground for what we do.

    After it's all said and done, only 1-5 % of anything we put out for critique ever changes. Most of the time it almost always makes our creations a little better.

    So let's not fear critique, but embrace it. I don't always incorporate what is suggested but I always weigh and value your input. Wisdom lies in the council of many. It's the Fords, the Chonaks, the Jones and the DougS who have made the difference for me here. Don't ever hold back on telling me what you truly think or feel. I am sure JO feels the same way. He knows we are only all about his success and the success of all of us who are committed to excellence in sacred music. Sword sharpens sword and brother sharpens brother. We are fortunate to have each other to spur us on to be the best we can be.

    Thank you friends and colleagues that we all keep each other on our toes and that we can strive to always present our best to the world.

    JO, for what its worth, I really liked the graphic on the hymnal as I myself am really into geometrics. (see my geometrics here: www.floosiga.com) [fleussiga kuenste means "fluid or flowing art" in German.] My comment about the title not using the word hymnal is a minor point. Excellent work JO. You are truly one of the movers and shakers in sacred music in our age!
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,884
    After I put up my last post, I was sorry to see that JO removed all his previous posts and I suspect, sunk this thread. JO, we are for you all the way. Your contributions and insights are invaluable here and you shouldn't feel like you need to remove them. These forums can be tenacious at times, but we are all well meaning and you are one of the shining examples of what sacred music is all about. Our appologies if you feel slighted.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,884
    Paix, yes that is a good point. My idea may just be too stuffy.