Writing Gregorian Chant

[japhy]

I’ve seen web sites that explain how to read the musical notation used for Gregorian Chant, but I’d like to know if there’s a web site that explains the mechanics of it. I would like to write a chant, but I’m not sure where to begin. I know there’s a handful of “modes”, but I don’t really know what they entail, what their restrictions are, etc.

Does anyone have advice?

 

[VAC]

I’ve seen web sites that explain how to read the musical notation used for Gregorian Chant, but I’d like to know if there’s a web site that explains the mechanics of it. I would like to write a chant, but I’m not sure where to begin. I know there’s a handful of “modes”, but I don’t really know what they entail, what their restrictions are, etc.

Does anyone have advice?

I was hoping that someone would translate the more popular Gregorian chant into standard musical notation…

 

[VociMike]

I was hoping that someone would translate the more popular Gregorian chant into standard musical notation…

Believe it or not, rewriting chant notation into standard musical notation results in very clunky, non-flowing chant when sung. Chant simply doesn’t fit into modern western notions of meter. It is much, much better to sing chant from chant notation.

 

[VociMike]

I’ve seen web sites that explain how to read the musical notation used for Gregorian Chant, but I’d like to know if there’s a web site that explains the mechanics of it. I would like to write a chant, but I’m not sure where to begin. I know there’s a handful of “modes”, but I don’t really know what they entail, what their restrictions are, etc.

Does anyone have advice?

I suggest you look up anything written by the various chant masters of Solesmes over the years.

And if you can (unlikely, I know), attend this course.

 

[VAC]

Believe it or not, rewriting chant notation into standard musical notation results in very clunky, non-flowing chant when sung. Chant simply doesn’t fit into modern western notions of meter. It is much, much better to sing chant from chant notation.

That’s interesting.
It seems that it would be very difficult to teach except by ear.
We do not have a surplus of choir members who read standard notation… I could not imagine trying to teach something totally different…

 

[VociMike]

That’s interesting.
It seems that it would be very difficult to teach except by ear.
We do not have a surplus of choir members who read standard notation… I could not imagine trying to teach something totally different…

You might be surprised at how quickly people can pick it up. At first glance it looks more complicated than it is, since the notation has a number of different combinations of neumes for what are essentially “going up” and “going down”. Who knows, the “exotic” nature of chant notation might appeal to some of your singers.

Just remember, if you’re keeping a beat when singing chant (tapping foot or just in your head) you’re doing it wrong. The surest way to kill chant is to sing it like you’re clumping up and down stairs. Listen to the more recent recordings of the monks of Solesmes to hear how fluid it should sound. They take amazing liberties with the meter and it really comes alive.

 

[MelanieAnne]

As someone who minored in music, I have to say that standard notation of the notes is perfectly fine for modal music of any kind, including chant. Music students do it all the time.

The timing is something else. Simon and Garfunkul wrote some of their music in the Dorian mode, but didn’t sing it as chant, so most people didn’t recognize it was modal.

 

[VociMike]

As someone who minored in music, I have to say that standard notation of the notes is perfectly fine for modal music of any kind, including chant. Music students do it all the time.

The timing is something else. Simon and Garfunkul wrote some of their music in the Dorian mode, but didn’t sing it as chant, so most people didn’t recognize it was modal.

The issue is whether the information supplied by standard notation is appropriate to chant. Standard notation supplies both pitch and duration information. While the pitch information is appropriate, the duration information is not. Gregorian chant is simply not compatible with a rigid beat. Thus the problem with standard notation is that it supplies too much information - more information than is necessary or suitable for the style.

It’s probably true that a person could, when singing chant written in standard notation, learn to unlearn the timing information built in to standard notation. But that would require a level of expertise and practice that we cannot expect of most people. Thus when most people sing chant as written in standard notation they sing clunky chant, chant with far too rigid a beat. They sing what’s on the page, and what’s on the page in standard notation does not accurately represent the intended sound.

 

[Sarabande]

I’ve seen web sites that explain how to read the musical notation used for Gregorian Chant, but I’d like to know if there’s a web site that explains the mechanics of it. I would like to write a chant, but I’m not sure where to begin. I know there’s a handful of “modes”, but I don’t really know what they entail, what their restrictions are, etc.

Does anyone have advice?

Find a composition teacher who has an understanding of early sacred music. It will also help if you have some background in music theory. I don’t know where you are located, but Harold Boatrite, located in Philadelphia, is an excellent composition and theory teacher and an extremely devout Catholic convert. He loves chant and polyphony and can give you extremely interesting private lectures regarding the history of the Catholic church, its music and art. He is Curtis trained and have had many of his compositions published, performed and recorded throughout this last century and the current one.

 

[MelanieAnne]

The issue is whether the information supplied by standard notation is appropriate to chant. Standard notation supplies both pitch and duration information. While the pitch information is appropriate, the duration information is not. Gregorian chant is simply not compatible with a rigid beat. Thus the problem with standard notation is that it supplies too much information - more information than is necessary or suitable for the style.

It’s probably true that a person could, when singing chant written in standard notation, learn to unlearn the timing information built in to standard notation. But that would require a level of expertise and practice that we cannot expect of most people. Thus when most people sing chant as written in standard notation they sing clunky chant, chant with far too rigid a beat. They sing what’s on the page, and what’s on the page in standard notation does not accurately represent the intended sound.

I think I covered that in a previous post, but perhaps I did not make myself appropriately clear.

If someone does not know what they are doing in respect to chant, I suppose they will get it wrong if they are attempting to read “standard notation” as we understand it today. Those that I have known have been able to read and sing chant using standard notation because they knew what they were doing, i.e., they were musicians. I suppose you might say that, in regards to any timing indicated in the standard notation, they did not take it “literally”.

Lots of chant is written using “standard” notation and no one that I know that is musically trained has any trouble with it. So I truly fail to understand the difference you are trying to make. But then, I am a trained musician as are all of those that I am referring to.

 

[VociMike]

I think I covered that in a previous post, but perhaps I did not make myself appropriately clear.

If someone does not know what they are doing in respect to chant, I suppose they will get it wrong if they are attempting to read “standard notation” as we understand it today. Those that I have known have been able to read and sing chant using standard notation because they knew what they were doing, i.e., they were musicians. I suppose you might say that, in regards to any timing indicated in the standard notation, they did not take it “literally”.

Yes, the standard notation must not be taken “literally” when applied to chant. But even then standard notation is not a substitute for chant notation. Standard notation not only adds incorrect information (duration information), it also removes information such as phrasing information contained in chant notation. So even a good musician who can ignore the incorrect added information in standard notation still cannot (unless they already know the piece well) add in the missing information.

So standard notation can only be as good as chant notation if (a) sung by a good musician, (b) much of the standard notation information is ignored, and (c) the singer already knows the piece. So what exactly is the benefit of standard notation in that case? Better to just give them the text and let them sing the melody from memory.

Lots of chant is written using “standard” notation and no one that I know that is musically trained has any trouble with it. So I truly fail to understand the difference you are trying to make. But then, I am a trained musician as are all of those that I am referring to.

You say you and others have no trouble with it, but I expect that I or others could tell in an instant that you were singing from standard notation. It’s something that one can hear in the very first line. The difference in sound is like the difference between marching and ice skating.

Besides, nobody is saying that we should have chant in standard notation for the benefit of good musicians. They are saying we should have it for beginners and non-musicians. In which case, neither (a) nor (b) nor (c) apply, and the beginners are immediately saddled with an unnecessary impediment to learning how to sing chant correctly.

There is an old rule, use the right tool for the job. Standard notation is not the right tool for chant. Chant notation is the right tool for chant.

 

[MelanieAnne]

If we were in the same physical location, I am sure I could show you examples that would challenge your assertion that you would be able to discern chant sung from standard notation. But we are not.

You seem determined to assert that yours is the only right way. So I will leave you to it. I know differently, so kindly respect my right to hold a different opinion. You have made your point, repeatedly. You don’t need to try to convince me any further. I obviously have a different experience from you. But then I have been trained in music beginning when I was a child and I have been around professional musicians all my life.

You’ll note that I did say “if someone knows what they are doing” at the beginning. The professional musicians I have known most certainly do. I’m sure they could sing from any kind of notation. I’ve seen them (and heard them!) do so.

So we need to agree to disagree because I know for a fact that some people are quite capable of doing what you contend is impossible. A further exchange, repeating what you have said already several times, is not going to change that. You have one experience and understanding of this topic. I have another. They are different. We can leave it at that.

 

[VociMike]

You still haven’t offered a justification for singing chant using standard notation. You insist it can be done just as well as using chant notation, but that is not a justification, simply an assertion.

And I never used the word “impossible” (I hate when people put words in my mouth!). I said difficult, and requiring a fair amount of talent, practice and knowledge of the piece being sung.

 

[MelanieAnne]

I don’t need to “justify” anything to you. I said I had seen and heard it done in a way that you say is impossible. I know it isn’t. If you can’t accept that, that’s too bad. It doesn’t change the fact that I have seen and heard it. And done it myself.

For some reason you appear to need to be “right” and anyone who has a different experience, in your opinion, obviously is “wrong”.

I don’t agree with you. So you go ahead and sing chant however you please. And I will go ahead and sing chant too. It is pointless to continue to argue. Which is why I said that we need to agree to disagree. But I have no obligation to “justify” a thing to you.

I daresay you wouldn’t believe anything I said anyway. If I put someone 10 feet in front of you, and had them sing chant in standard notation & you couldn’t discern the difference, you probably would still tell me that it couldn’t be done. So there is really no point in beating this subject any further.

 

[VociMike]

There’s no reason for such hostility towards me and towards my assertion (which I have attempted to support with evidence). There’s clearly something going on in our exchange that is below the surface, and I don’t know what that is.

But I’ll put out a general request. Would anybody care to offer a justification for why chant should be sung from modern notation?

 

[MelanieAnne]

There’s NOTHING under the surface, there is no hostility. At least not on my side. If you would like to disclose your hidden agenda, go ahead.

The only there there is here is DIFFERENCE. I have seen, heard and done something you say is impossible. Perhaps it is because the people that I have seen, heard and done it with/by were professional musicians and you are not one. I don’t know.

I have no obligation to justify the experiences of my life to you or anyone just because you haven’t had the same experiences. That’s just silly.

 

[VociMike]

I will simply note that even after I corrected your statement that I claimed something was impossible, which I did not, you have still attributed that “impossible” claim to me two more times. That is obstinate misrepresentation.

 

[VAC]

There’s no reason for such hostility towards me and towards my assertion (which I have attempted to support with evidence). There’s clearly something going on in our exchange that is below the surface, and I don’t know what that is.

But I’ll put out a general request. Would anybody care to offer a justification for why chant should be sung from modern notation?

It’s impractical to try to teach from chant notation if no one in the music ministry knows how to read it or has ever seen it. If you have a group of volunteers, and only a few read standard notation, if your practice time and space is limited. You spend time teaching new songs, not teaching them to read the music. Those who have a choirs full of members who already read music, and who have their own place to practice a few hours a week will obviously have a different view.

If all you have is standard notation for the chants and that’s all your group knows how to read (ie: all solid and open ‘whole’ notes, with no time signature or measures)
That’s what you use.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Mike, I’ll take it as a positive that you have at least some understanding of the word “obstinate”.

 

[VociMike]

It’s impractical to try to teach from chant notation if no one in the music ministry knows how to read it or has ever seen it. If you have a group of volunteers, and only a few read standard notation, if your practice time and space is limited. You spend time teaching new songs, not teaching them to read the music. Those who have a choirs full of members who already read music, and who have their own place to practice a few hours a week will obviously have a different view.

If all you have is standard notation for the chants and that’s all your group knows how to read (ie: all solid and open ‘whole’ notes, with no time signature or measures)
That’s what you use.

Well you can only do what you can do. But, people can learn. What is true today does not have to be true in one month or six months or a year. The notation is different but it it not hard. It can be picked up (by those who can read music) in a single evening. It’s a question of saddling people with second-best notation indefinitely, or taking some time to get them onto the correct notation.

There’s a reason chant was written the way it was, and still is written that way in the official books of the Church. It is simply the most expressive notation we have for this type of music.