[Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
Can anyone point me at a reliable modern transcription of this chant? I found a PDF in chant notation, but it has been too long since I had to read chant notation to be certain I'm reading it correctly. Thanks very much, Robert -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
At 04:07 PM 1/6/2007 -0600, Robert Patterson wrote: Can anyone point me at a reliable modern transcription of this chant? I found a PDF in chant notation, but it has been too long since I had to read chant notation to be certain I'm reading it correctly. HAM 120a, but it's only for the incipit to a piece, unless the chant itself is very short. I don't find it in the LIber. Where is this from? HAM calls it an Ambrosian hymn. Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
If you send me the pdf I could give a transcription a try. Barbara Robert Patterson wrote: Can anyone point me at a reliable modern transcription of this chant? I found a PDF in chant notation, but it has been too long since I had to read chant notation to be certain I'm reading it correctly. Thanks very much, Robert ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
On 6 Jan 2007 at 16:07, Robert Patterson wrote: Can anyone point me at a reliable modern transcription of this chant? I found a PDF in chant notation, but it has been too long since I had to read chant notation to be certain I'm reading it correctly. What do you need besides pitch? I mean, there's no rhythm in the contemporary notation of chant -- any rhythmic interpretation given the Solesmes notation is purely an invention of the monks of Solesmes, and can be safely ignored. I just don't understand how anyone could have difficulties with transcribing chant notation, but, then again, I've been reading it regularly (and sight-singing from it) for over 20 years, so maybe I'm overlooking something that's obvious to me and opaque to others. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
David W. Fenton wrote: I just don't understand how anyone could have difficulties with transcribing chant notation, Correct transcription of the various neumes, perhaps? Interpretation of different embellishments? (Yes, they exist in Gregorian chant, as do microtonal notation.) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
Ficta or embellishments are my concern. Also how to read ligatures, although the particular example is quite simple. Also how to interpret dashes and dots over/by tones. My exposure is mostly limited to one medieval music survey course 25 years ago, so I don't have the advantages of many on this list. But the biggest problem seems to be an embarassment of different versions. The PDF I downloaded from http://www.cantoambrosiano.com/spartiti.htm (Each line has the same music.) Then there is a version in a javascript popup link at http://interletras.com/canticum/Eng/Translation_Xmas.html (Click the score icon to see it.) This version does not match at all the version in the PDF, unless my reading skills are even worst than I thought. Finally there is the incipit in HAM 120a. (Thanks to Dennis for reminding me to go and look there.) However, it seems to be yet different again from either of these other two. The problem with the web is, of course, a dearth of citations. Or at least no accepted conventions for providing them, even if they are there. More than notation help, if anyone can offer guidance in understanding why the discrepancies exist, that would be a big help. All three are called Veni Redemptor Genias--Ambrosian Chant or something like that. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
I'm going to sleep now (it's 1.14 over here). More to (my) morrow. Robert Patterson wrote: Ficta or embellishments are my concern. Also how to read ligatures, although the particular example is quite simple. Also how to interpret dashes and dots over/by tones. My exposure is mostly limited to one medieval music survey course 25 years ago, so I don't have the advantages of many on this list. But the biggest problem seems to be an embarassment of different versions. The PDF I downloaded from http://www.cantoambrosiano.com/spartiti.htm (Each line has the same music.) Then there is a version in a javascript popup link at http://interletras.com/canticum/Eng/Translation_Xmas.html (Click the score icon to see it.) This version does not match at all the version in the PDF, unless my reading skills are even worst than I thought. Finally there is the incipit in HAM 120a. (Thanks to Dennis for reminding me to go and look there.) However, it seems to be yet different again from either of these other two. The problem with the web is, of course, a dearth of citations. Or at least no accepted conventions for providing them, even if they are there. More than notation help, if anyone can offer guidance in understanding why the discrepancies exist, that would be a big help. All three are called Veni Redemptor Genias--Ambrosian Chant or something like that. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
At 4:07 PM -0600 1/6/07, Robert Patterson wrote: Can anyone point me at a reliable modern transcription of this chant? I found a PDF in chant notation, but it has been too long since I had to read chant notation to be certain I'm reading it correctly. I'm afraid my Liber is in chant notation (and I wouldn't have it otherwise!). It takes my students about 10 minutes to be up and reading it. Is it by any chance in HAM 1? John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
On 6 Jan 2007 at 18:05, Robert Patterson wrote: Ficta or embellishments are my concern. There's no agreement on what those should be. Also how to read ligatures, Eh? What's complicated about it? I'm missing something here. although the particular example is quite simple. Also how to interpret dashes and dots over/by tones. Added by the monks of Solesmes and modern editors in most cases, so you can ignore them, since they likely don't reflect original sources. My exposure is mostly limited to one medieval music survey course 25 years ago, so I don't have the advantages of many on this list. But the biggest problem seems to be an embarassment of different versions. The PDF I downloaded from http://www.cantoambrosiano.com/spartiti.htm (Each line has the same music.) The dashes and dots in this transcription tell you nothing beyond the fact that it's the end of a phrase or sub-phrase, something that the two types of semi-barlines already tell you. It's customary to lengthen the last note of a phrase/sub-phrase, but it's not known at all if that is historically correct (it makes sense textually, but we know that they didn't have the same esthetics about the relationship between music and text that we do, post-1600 or so). As to the ligatures, there's only one two-note ligatures in that transcription, and since the bar is on the right, the bottom note is first, and the ligature only tells you that both notes are sung on one syllable. This would often be transcribed as two noteheads with a slur. Then there is a version in a javascript popup link at http://interletras.com/canticum/Eng/Translation_Xmas.html (Click the score icon to see it.) This version does not match at all the version in the PDF, unless my reading skills are even worst than I thought. No, it's not even in the same mode. Finally there is the incipit in HAM 120a. (Thanks to Dennis for reminding me to go and look there.) However, it seems to be yet different again from either of these other two. Another unrelated chant. I question why an English musician in the 15th century would be writing an organ piece based on an Ambrosian chant, but maybe I'm unaware of the dissemination of Ambrosian chant. I'd expect an English musician to use the Sarum repertory (see below for a hint of there being a Sarum tune for this hymn text). So, perhaps the bibliographic note in the back of HAM is wrong about the origins of this melody for the chant presented there. For another variant of the PDF version above, see the 1982 Episcopal Hymnal, #55. It's clearly based on the same melody, but the phrase endings seem to have been Gregorianized, with the falling thirds filled in and the terminating phrase of the verse substantially altered. The 12th-century Einsiedeln manuscript is cited as the source, which would be fairly distant from the original. I found pointers to the 1982 hymnal here: http://www.hymnsandcarolsofchristmas.com/Hymns_and_Carols/NonEnglish/v eni_redemptor_gentium.htm That suggests that Non komm, der Heiden Heiland is a translation of the text, and you'll note many similarities to the original tune (the 1982 Hymnal version is about half-way between the two, in fact). This page discusses the connection between the Luther hymn and the Ambrose: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Nun-komm.htm and gives a version of the original with a comparison to the Luther, as well as quite a long history of the use of the Luther melody -- indeed, this is quite a splendid resource for this kind of thing, very beautifully put together. This page: http://www.oremus.org/hymnal/mid/v.html lists variants on the text (but not necessarily the Ambrose tune), and lists German, St. Gall, and Sarum versions, which implies that there were at least 4 different tunes associated with the text (though the German and St. Gall may not be for Veni redemptor gentium, but for some other text beginning with the same two words). I think it's likely that what you're after is the version that Luther used, either in the version in the 1982 Hymnal, or in the version quoted on the detailed cantata page above. The problem with the web is, of course, a dearth of citations. Or at least no accepted conventions for providing them, even if they are there. More than notation help, if anyone can offer guidance in understanding why the discrepancies exist, that would be a big help. All three are called Veni Redemptor Genias--Ambrosian Chant or something like that. Well, Ambrosian Chant was never codified like the so-called Gregorian Chant (which was actually from Gall, though St. Gall chant is something different entirely, as Old Roman is completely different from Gregorian (though they have some common origins)), so there was plenty of variation. Before the codification of the Gregorian, there was likely just as much variation, but most of it is lost in the mists of time. Basically, you're faced with
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
At 6:05 PM -0600 1/6/07, Robert Patterson wrote: Ficta or embellishments are my concern. Hi, Robert. Ficta should not be a factor in the chant, just in later useages of the chant in polyphonic pieces, but even that use of ficta is an artifact of the arrangement and not of the original chant. OK, I just realized that there's one obvious exception in chant, the use of una nota super la semper est canendum fa (i.e., one note that exceeds the upper range of the hexachord--la--and returns to it is sung fa or lowered. This almost always involves B becoming Bb, or rarely E becoming Eb, but it wouldn't be notated in the chant. You'd have to understand Guido's solmization. Also how to read ligatures, although the particular example is quite simple. Treat them as equivalent to slurs, of course, indicating that they share a single syllable of the text. Then read from left to right, OR from bottom to top if the upper note is swiveled to the left on its stem. Same thing in a more complex ligature with more notes. Anything more complicated had to wait for the rhythmic modes and mensural music. Also how to interpret dashes and dots over/by tones. Generally interpreted as a lengthening or tenuto, and almost always at a phrase end. They may be inserted by the Solemes monks, or they may be in the manuscripts they studied. And of course they may have been misinterpreted by the faithful monks. My exposure is mostly limited to one medieval music survey course 25 years ago, so I don't have the advantages of many on this list. Understood! It's the kind of thing you have to work with in order to remember it. But the biggest problem seems to be an embarassment of different versions. The PDF I downloaded from http://www.cantoambrosiano.com/spartiti.htm (Each line has the same music.) A lovely and very readable transcription. As I said above, both dashes and dots indicate a lengthening of the notes (and they always come at phrase ends), and the single 2-note ligature is read G A (i.e. bottom note to top note). (And there's no question of ficta. The melody covers the entire soft hexachord, G to E, and does not exceed it. Not very adventurous!!) Then there is a version in a javascript popup link at http://interletras.com/canticum/Eng/Translation_Xmas.html Your observation that this is a different chant melody is quite accurate. There are often different regional variations with the same melodic contour and internal variations, but that is not the case here. The setting is even slightly more neumatic rather than syllabic (i.e., more ligatures, or neumes). Different tune, same words. This version does not match at all the version in the PDF, unless my reading skills are even worst than I thought. Finally there is the incipit in HAM 120a. (Thanks to Dennis for reminding me to go and look there.) However, it seems to be yet different again from either of these other two. Mine's packed away somewhere, so I can't compare it. More than notation help, if anyone can offer guidance in understanding why the discrepancies exist, that would be a big help. All three are called Veni Redemptor Genias--Ambrosian Chant or something like that. Actually no, they're both called Veni Redemptor Gentium, not Genias. And such variations in the incipits can indicate totally different texts. OK, first it is a hymn. That is a form that was imported from the Eastern Church, largely through Milan, where St. Ambrose was Bishop (thus Ambrosian Chant, one of the main historical variations. And a hymn IS THE TEXT! It is the poetry. I learned this in grad school when I went to look at Hymna Analectica (or something close to that), expecting to find something like a modern hymnbook, and instead found 10 or 20 volumes of nothing but poetry! The hymn (the poetry) could then be set to music--a chant, a hymn tune, whatever. And it could be set to quite different music by different people in different times and different places. That's what we seem to have here. Which one is the REAL hymn? Both of them. All of them! Because they are all settings of the same hymn (i.e. poem). For such things musicologists--and musicology students--live. Pathetic, isn't it?!! John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias--Oops!
At 9:24 PM -0500 1/6/07, John Howell wrote: The melody covers the entire soft hexachord, G to E, and does not exceed it. Sorry. That should be the entire hard hexachord. David and Dennis will know the difference! Mea culpa. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
On Jan 6, 2007, at 9:24 PM, John Howell wrote: OK, I just realized that there's one obvious exception in chant, the use of una nota super la semper est canendum fa (i.e., one note that exceeds the upper range of the hexachord--la--and returns to it is sung fa or lowered. This almost always involves B becoming Bb, or rarely E becoming Eb, but it wouldn't be notated in the chant. You'd have to understand Guido's solmization. Funny coincidence; this just came across my inbox from a colleague (theory teacher!) If you aren't familiar with Kyle Gann, check him out, he's hilarious and often right on the money. full text at: http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic/2007/01/ my_last_theory_professor_rant.html January 1, 2007 My Last Theory Professor Rant of 2007 My tombstone is going to read: Here lies KYLE GANN Remember to raise the seventh scale degree in minor so that whenever my students drop by with flowers they'll get an extra reminder. I wanted to also include the rules for acceptable resolutions of the six-four chord, but I'm afraid the engraving costs would be a hardship on my heirs. Why is it that some students cannot be persuaded to write a triad without adding a seventh on it? I assume these kids had a jazz teacher in high school who was very, very successful in drilling into them that every chord, every friggin' chord, contains a seventh. And since it's often nice in classical harmony to spice up the occasional chord with a seventh, you can't flat out forbid them, and it's really not possible to get across the inexpressible nuances of why sevenths sound nice in some contexts and not in others. And if you're teaching four-part writing, the presence of a seventh in every chord wreaks havoc with voice-leading. And what is it with ending tonal compositions on six-four chords? If I never mentioned six-four chords, would their natural instincts lead them to close in root position? Is it because I so emphatically bring six-four chords to their attention, as something to avoid, that they subconsciously or passive/aggressively end up writing epic strings of parallel six-four chords in their final compositions? What is so freakin' attractive about having the fifth in the bass on every beat? Did I miss a meeting? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Veni Redemptor Genias
David W. Fenton wrote: But my bet, as I said above, is that you want one of the two versions I mentioned above, tending towards the melody of Nun komm, der Heiden Heiland. Thanks for the further info. I should have followed some of those links my self. I tend towards the Nun komm melody as well. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
