listen to semiological solistic Gregorian: offertories with verses, Graduale, Alleluia
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    http://www.concertzender.nl/programmagids.php?date=2011-11-13&month=0&detail=52678

    Dutch Concert Zender, 'Bonum est' nr. 48, a series about gregorian chant, by Geert Maessen, parts of first all-Dutch solo-concert, given in amsterdam, january 1989, by me, interspersed with 1992 recordings with Rollin Rachele as ensemble Euphonia.
    The link takes you right to the program which is on-line available at any time you feel like listening. Open the page and click the loudspeaker icon to activate.
    Interpretation is based on Graduale and Offertoriale Triplex, various editions of the Paléographie Musicale (the Ambrosian canticum) with melodic corrections and the 11th century treatise 'ad organum faciendum', IMM ed. Jay Huff for the Kyrie-trope.
    In the previous year I had followed a course with Dominique Vellard and Marie-Noël Colette and I wanted to test myself in practice so I organized this concert.

    Program of the broadcast:
    solo: martin spaink, 22-01-1989, Krijtbergkerk Amsterdam; duo: with rollin rachele, Petrus & Paulus crypt of the Bethanienklooster, Amsterdam, 1992

    duo:`Kyrie Cunctipotens genitor, unisono, with bourdon, parallel organum, 2-part trope 'Cunctipotens' from source 'ad organum faciendum'
    duo: Alleluia V. Pascha nostrum
    solo: improvised Benedicamus Domino - Lectio Sanct. Evang. sec. Ioh. V 1-14 - improvised Deo gratias
    duo: Sanctus, Agnus Dei
    solo: responsory from matins of Xmass: O magnum mysterium V. Ave Maria
    solo: introitus: Gaudeamus, vs ps, Gloria Patri
    solo: Graduale: Ex Sion V. Congregate
    solo: Canticum more Ambrosianum: Levavi oculos meos, V. 1,2
    solo: Alleluia V. Oportebat pati Xtum
    duo: Alleuia V. Dies sanctificatus
    solo: Offertory: Deus meus, V. 1,2
    solo: Offertory: Expectans expectavi V. 1,2
    duo: Offertory: Iustus ut palma V. 1,2,3
    solo: Benedicamus Domino
    duo: Ite, missa est
    Communio: Pascha nostrum as filler till fine
  • RobertRobert
    Posts: 343
    I enjoyed listening to this. I think it's an appealing interpretation. So many of the "adventurous" interpretations out there miss the mark completely. This one manages to be at once more adventurous and more beautiful than the average research-based performance. It gets a lot of things right. Thank you.
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    Thanks Robert, though I hear every now and then little slips and things I would do different these days, I can, at a distance of 22 years, hear at least many things that I think should be present in Chant. Clarity, stability, fluency and then add some drive, commitment, and yes, it should be beautiful, as it is supposed to allow us a glimpse of Heaven. In the mean time, it's a lot of work. I have often wondered how the public attending the concert underwent it all, it must have been a novelty to most of them, not only as far as it concerns performance practice, use of voice and and modal intonation, also as to the music that was presented with offertories with two verses and the recitation of the 14 verses of the Gospel of John in Latin. I still think that recitation, from recto tono to more developed forms, is the basis of the performance practice. It all starts there, to be able to recite a text in a sustained resonance with clarity of diction. Just listen to psalmverses, recitations, how often syllables are sung in an undiscriminating sluggish pronounciation. Nobody talks that way, it is far too evenly spaced and measured whereas Cardine has made the point that five different relative durations can be distinguished in St. Gall. This point is expressly integrated in C.F. Hakkennes' Graduale LaGal (1984) where he expresses in his own graphic rendition of square notation five relative lengths.
    When reciting a text, a rhythmical variation is necessary for intelligibility.
    regards, martin
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Lovely!

    Interestingly, "Gaudeamus" was one of the first chants my ensemble studied. Here is a live recording from our debut concert:

    Euouae: Gaudeamus.

    There are several things that I wish we had been able to do differently, but that having been said to my ear it doesn't sound too far off from your interpretation from, what was it -- twenty years ago?

    I'd love to be able to post recordings of these two side by side on euouae.com to get some feedback from others. Do you have yours as a separate file?
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    Hi, I just listened to 'Gaudeamus' on euouae and I agree as to the similarity in some aspects and healthy little local differences in approach, but in a general sense there is the same forwardness going on. Nowadays I much doubt whether the recurring porrectus on 'festum celebrantes' are indeed to be sung as equitone (thus as a clivis with equitone repercussion) and am more inclined to use the lower semitone for the second note. But then in de cuius passione the two torculus at the end on '-one' are sung all as passing light whereas in your image the last note is lengthened. Where does your sharpish melodic version come from?
    To your question, well, yes, I have separate tracks, in my computer, on CD, but may have to consult with someone as to how to get it to you short of sending you a CD with tracks? I'm curious as to know how you take in the lectio Sancti Evang. Ioh 1-14. I really wanted to do it in the concert as I thought it good to expose the public to the basic thing: recitation of a text.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    We did this before the Graduale Novum was published, so we took the melodic reading from the Graduale Triplex. With regard to the si-b and the equitone porrectus, we opted for the higher of the two possible pitches. I theorize that some of the melodic inconsistency in the various manuscripts around the semitone could have been a result of what we now consider poor vocalism. The same goes for the torculus initio debilis, which in most cases seems to take its first note from the voiced consonant of the previous syllable.

    The rhythmic reading of the torculus in "de cuis passione" is clarified by comparison to the two identical phrases at "in honore" and "et colaudant," and further by comparison to the Laon notation of the three phrases: short-short-long long-long and short-short-short-short long-long both equal four longs. The only question is whether there ought to be two pitches or one for the liquescent sounds.

    Again, our performance wan't 100% what I was going for (I do not approve of the percussive accents in the psalm verse, for example), and I hope we'll get a little closer with the ensemble's second performance tomorrow (recordings to follow).
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    About your idea that inconsistencies in the semitone areas might be a result of poor vocalism, I have a feeling you might be turning things around.
    I think, rather the other way around, that given what kinds of music people are familiar with, what is in their ears and minds that may severely limit the way they approach Gregorian chant. In this sense the repertory is gruesomely burdened with a lot of mediocre, bland and tuneless singsong. From what I have in my ears it is rather plain and easy to see how Chant, being monophonic and modal, uses in its very own way a melodically rich style with ornamentation on different levels, on the smallest level, a passing bit of spice by touching lightly upon the semitone below, once you have seen it, heared it, those instances are abundant. These are usually called 'minor variants' and because of the choices made by the editorial board of the Gr. Nov. many of these minor variants still await reinstatement.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Note I said "what we now consider poor vocalism." I think before conservatory training taught us all how to sing everything absolutely even, there was more variety in the vocal sound. What we might now think of as a mistake became part of the idiom of the chant. I do think there was a tendency (as there is now) for singers to let the pitch fall in certain places, thus alphabetical letters that caution singers to "raise" for a unison or "do not drop" frequently found on notes with a semitone below.
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    Incantus, how about those questions i asked in my third post from the top?

    As to your last post: sure, some added letters or signs seem to have been entered by the original scribe as a memory-aid, as a note to not make a particular error. Apart from those cases, I think that in general chant was more rich in the sense that it may have included more little ornamental notes, passing notes etc especially around the semitone area, as in the non-unisono porrectus which should not be read as for instance d c c but d b c, so instead of an equitone repercussion there is semitonal embellishment. The equitone repercussion could easily have been written as an added oriscus minor or a strophic note. Same seems to hold for the trigon, which might not be an equitone repercussion folowed by a lower note.
    ps I wonder why it's just you and me talking about thses issues, nobody else to throw in comments here? By the way, I have no idea to what degree Latin masses according to the oldest mss holds a place in services in the USA? If, say, 95 % are singing English newer forms, that would explain something.
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    A little follow-up on the last question in the last post: I have noticed, over the years, in the various media available, a significant reluctance to discuss performance practice related issues. It seems no problem to go to great lengths discussing why a in a given mss an episema or 'lettre significative' should be present or absent, but performance related matters are seldom addressed. Nevertheless, seeing the amount of mss available today, the amounts of tableaux made for all kinds of chants, various recent editions (Graduale Lagal, Gregor und Taube, Fluxus,Graduale Novum), it seems to me that it is paramount to ask the proper questions in how to deal with all the information when it's time to sing. On the musicologie médiévale forum I notice the same reluctance. Adding injury to insult, there is hardly anything published in this area.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I'm not the right person to ask about the tracks. I would just import them into iTunes or some other media player as an mp3 file and then e-mail the file as a gmail attachment. You could also use Dropbox to share the file.

    I haven't had a chance to listen to all of the recording (gave a concert on Friday and have been traveling for the holiday), but I have heard concert performances of readings before. I like it in an all-chant program because it puts the more melismatic chants into relief. But I wouldn't have performed the readings along with, say, the Obrecht Mass I directed this weekend because in comparison they would seem long and possibly uninteresting to the audience. They are also extremely difficult to do well. But if you have a singer who sings well, the audience will listen to him recite the phone book. So it all depends!
  • martin
    Posts: 19
    I will ask a friend about how to get you separate tracks. Concerning your last remark, a phone book would seem an insurmountable challenge to recite and not fall asleep.
    Going back on the similarity of our approaches, where did you get he mustard? As I stated, I followed a course with Dominique Vellard and Marie-Noël Colette in 1988 and continued working along those lines, but where did you pick up your insights in interpreation?
Add a Comment