Chant accompaniment - best practices
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    What are the best practices when it comes to accompanying chant on instruments?

    I've seen and heard some fairly hair-raising approaches. It seems the chief dangers are a) forcing chant into an excruciating, plodding meter, b) chaining its modal flexibility to the rack of a major/minor key or insipid harmony, and c) overpowering it with too much volume.

    So much is obvious.

    If one has to live with accompaniment, and even (dare I say?) embrace it, perhaps the Nova Organi Harmonia represents the best harmonic approach. It also stays very light in terms of texture. I've heard the even simpler approach of simply providing a moving ison, which can be effective for some things, but not all.

    Thoughts? It would be good to make this thread a one-stop source for all things "chant accompaniment."
  • athome
    Posts: 31
    Given that the Greek bible translated the Hebrew word 'zamir' to 'psallein' which means to pluck and also the frequent reference in the book of psalms to the harp and lyre, I've secretly wanted to try a stringed accompaniment. I still prefer acapella, but I realize that's not the point of your thread.
  • priorstf
    Posts: 460
    Pes - Care to provide a definition/description of an ison? Not a term with which I am familiar and a quick online search displays only some disturbing images.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Pes, at the parish where I sing, the director usually chants against a drone on the organ. You might find that effective, and it's quite helpful to the singers.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Dear Pes,

    For those interested, this article may serve as a conversation starter.

    In Christ,
    JMO
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    Right, priostf, an ison is a vocal drone. Here is a nice explanation.

    You need men with big lungs, resonant basses, and adept at staggered breathing, to do this well. Also, the best isons I've heard are not just flat tones -- they pulse, subtly, like some vast humming generator, or primordial ground of Being, out of which chanted melodies emerge and disappear.

    Nothing else like it.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 993
    Using an ison is quite wonderful. However, here's a warning. Everyone thinks they can sing one - particularly people who are weak singers. They think, "Hey, it's only one or two notes." Wrong. It takes a rich vocal quality - male or female - and a remarkable ear. One way to help singers work toward a good ison is to have them start by singing the words on the drone notes. They need to incorporate the rhythm that is moving above them into their understanding of their part. Then strip out the words, but tell them to keep thinking them while they sing.

    I know a fair amount about this practice with Byzantine and Znammeny chant. Any interesting resources on its use in the West? (Preferably in English or French.)
  • priorstf
    Posts: 460
    Pes and MJ - Thanks for the explanation. Seems something like a basso continuo. Unfortunately I'm familiar with only one voice in the diocese who could really do that well. Not surprisingly he is Eastern European. Might have to pair him up with a good pedal tone to overcome that little difficulty of air!
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    Jeff,

    That is a WONDERFUL article. I'm printing it for study.

    Excellent advice, MJ!
  • Steve CollinsSteve Collins
    Posts: 1,021
    OK. I have a new word for the day - ISON. Is then the difference between an ison and "organum" that the latter moves, at least occasionally, and the former does not? If that is the case, then the organum cannot actually simulate the modal melody, but at least manages not to clash too often. And the ison pretty much destroys the modal movement of the melody. And what about longer Introit Antiphons in which the mode shifts in the middle, and then back again? Does the ison shift? Does the organum take this into account?

    IMO I would characterize chant with an ison as minimalism at its ultimate; organum a somewhat less distracting minimalism; major/minor as somewhat "classical", yet still quite distracting; and the NOH modal accompaniment as the only one where the harmonies actually harmonize with each and every modal nuance present in the melody.
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    Steve

    When I was at the Univ Monastery in Ukraine this past May, I bought a CD of the monks there singing a Great Vespers. Their drone pitches did move with the melody, but not often. Maybe once every period, or on some other basis. I'd have to listen again more carefully to give you a precise answer. I'm not sure they'd call this "organum," though. You're right that it resembles organum, but it's not the melody replicated below at a constant interval. Maybe they have a different term for it. Whatever they call it, the effect is startling.
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Pes: make this thread a one-stop source for all things "chant accompaniment."

    Certainly a datapoint somewhere on the line between hair-raising and best-practice
    is this 1860 item by Jacques Louis Battmann (1818-1886) ...

    http://hdl.handle.net/1802/5545
    https://urresearch.rochester.edu/handle/1802/5545

    Hommage Respectuci
    a Sa Saintete Pie IX Souverain Pontife
    LE PLAIN-CHANT
    Romain
    HARMONISE
    Repertoire
    Le plain-chant romain harmonise
    Repertoire
    Des Messes, des Hymnes, des Proses, des Saluts
    des l'antiennes a la Ste Vierge, du Te Deum et de la maniere
    d'accompagner les Psaumes dans les huit tons du plain chant
    Mis en harmonie
    pour
    orgue ou harmonium
    a l'usage des Dioceses qui suivent le Chant Romain
    par
    J. L. Battmann.
    Op. 250. Prix : 10 _ Net
    PARIS
    CARTEREAU, Editeur, 10 Quote du Louvre. Maison speciale de Musique Religieuse
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS!!!!
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    An 1854 item by Abraham Louis Niedermeyer (1802-1861) ...

    http://hdl.handle.net/1802/5435
    https://urresearch.rochester.edu/handle/1802/5435


    Gregorian Accompaniment
    A theoretical and practical treatise
    upon the
    Accompaniment of Plainsong
    by
    Louis Niedermeyer
    Founder of the Ecole de Musique Religieuse
    and
    Joseph D'Ortigue
    Formerly of the Liturgical Commission of the
    Diocese of Paris
    With an Appendix containing:
    I. The various Tones for the Psalms and Canticles, and for the Gloria Patri
    at the Introit; harmonized by L. Niedermeyer.
    II. Plainsong melodies in the eight modes, with examples of transposition,
    harmonized according to the principles of this treatise by Eugene Gigout,
    Professor of the Ecole de Musique Religieuse, Organist of the Church of
    St. Augustin.
    Revised and Translated into English by
    Wallace Goodrich.
    Novello, Ewer & Co.
    New York Chicago London


    Copyright, 1905,
    by
    Novello, Ewer & Co.
    Stanhope Press
    F. H. Gilson Company
    Boston, U.S.A.


    Translator's Note.
    Nearly half a century has elapsed since this treatise was written.
    If any excuse for its translation after so long a period were necessary,
    it would be that since its completion has appeared no better work upon
    the subject, in point of simplicity and clearness of expression, and faith-
    fulness to the principles of ecclesiastical music instinctively recognised
    by musicians of the hightest authority, and most sensitive appreciation of
    the element of individuality in music.
    At the time which marked the appearance of this work there was a
    crying need of reform in France in the prevailing methods of plainsong
    accompaniment. Today, in England and America the need of such a
    work as that here presented is hardly less imperative. The recent
    decree prescribing the restoration of plainsong in many portions of the
    Roman ritual in which its use has gradually been superseded by the
    introduction of modern polyphony, together with the increasing use of at
    least the Gregorian Tones for the Psalms and Canticles in many Anglican
    parishes, have been emphasized by the a singular lack of published works
    from which may be obtained a thorough knowledge of plainsong, through
    a simple and yet sound exposition of its elementary structure and rational,
    artistic treatment.
    [...]
    To the authors' chapter on the Gregorian Tones have been added
    some remarks upon their treatment in the Anglican church. In all other
    respects, whatever in this work is laid down for the Roman offices is equally
    applicable to the Anglican; since the book treats of plainsong accom-
    paniment, and not of ritual.
    The translator has taken the liberty of omitting certain examples
    given by M. Niedermeyer, in view of the fact that their place is amply
    filled by the illustrations contained in the appendix.
    WALLACE GOODRICH.
    Manchester, Mass.,
    Aug 22, 1904.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Amazing! THANK YOU for posting this!!!
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    http://www.archive.org/details/gregorianchanc006474mbp

    Gregorian Chant
    by Willi Apel
    Indiana University Press, Bloomington Indiana, 1958
    page xii:

    No true admirer of Gregorian chant can help looking with dismay at
    present trends toward providing organ accompaniment for the liturgical
    melodies. This practice, although ostensibly meant to promote the chant,
    is actually bound to destroy it. To what extent it has dulled the minds of
    "those that should hear" became clear to me during a conversation with a
    group of young seminarists, whom I met in a train several years ago. When
    I mentioned my interest in Gregorian chant, one of them said, his face
    radiant with delight, "Oh, Gregorian chant is so wonderful in our church;
    we have an organist who makes it sound like Debussy." I know that it does
    not always sound like that. In another church it may sound more like
    Vaughan Williams, and elsewhere like parallel organum. Invariably it will
    sound like "something" other than what it really is and what it should be.
    Moreover, the very variety of possibilities inherent in this practice is bound
    to weaken the catholicity of one of the most precious possessions of the
    Catholic Church. I have no right to voice an opinion in matters pertaining
    to the Church, but I am saddened to see a venerable tradition, which has
    been restored to new life after centuries of neglect and indifference, sub-
    jected once more to destructive practices.

    WILLI APEL
    Indiana University
    January 1958

    If I ever locate any Debussy-like or Williams-like accompaniments,
    I will point to them here. :-)
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    I share in Apel's dismay, and in his assessment of this practice. Hearing live, or acquiring a CD with an organ droning away is a disappointment which I strive to avoid. Invariably, such accompaniment has the effect of sapping, leaching, any rhythm and bouyancy from the chant that it should have untrammeled on its own. I have been greatly surprised by presentations on this forum which would attest to the artistry and scholarship of some of these accompaniments. While they have caused me to 'take another look' lest I fail to appreciate a worthy musical accomplishment, they have not altered the conviction which I share with quite a few (by far, most) scholars that this practice is among those many historical debasements of chant which need correction, not encouragement. Though I have tried to listen with an open mind, I have yet to hear an accompanied performance which wouldn't profit by being un-accompanied.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    People who use organ accompaniment, why accompaniment? What is that people trying to get, or accomplish in chant accompaniment? Just curious.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    . . . Go here and look in the upper right hand corner

    Click (skip) until you get it to play Assumpta Est Maria Alleluia.

    That is the answer. It is beautiful.

    It is an organic development, it is beautiful.

    If you don't like it, don't do it. At least this is my thought.

    But I am not sure how far quoting Apel will get us, in terms of the validity of it. Apel was an odd chant scholar. Almost his entire book is based on a 19th century edition of chant. It can be very useful in some areas, and I think it is a great book. But I think there are other areas in which he is not qualified to have an opinion. For instance, he is completely in the dark when it comes to Vollaerts. He does not mention specific chant accompaniments, so it is hard to know what he was hearing, or what it sounded like. If he had mentioned the type of accompaniments he was citing, I could better comment. Needless to say, there are some awful accompaniments. My article gives most a pretty harsh judgment.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    If one is to be a true purist about chant, then one should not sing any chant that is embedded in polyphony either! That is a complete dismissal of organic development. If you want to recreate a historical performance, well, that is absolutely fine. Sometimes I prefer the austerity of chant without an accompaniment and then sometimes with -- a lot has to do with the acoustic, the instrument, the celebration at hand, the ability of the choir, etc. Sometimes I will improvise on the organ under a common chant with my schola. But I don't think there will ever be a right or better way to sing chant, just a conjecture about how it may have been performed at a particular point in history.

    I can see why you might think "Le plain-chant romain harmonisé" presents itself as naive or simple, however, it still contains a beauty that stands on its own. And I don't think God minded the people worshipping him with those accompaniments all that much.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Jeff O. - Many thanks for the recording. I went 'here' and looked in the right hand corner. This is indeed a beautiful, artful, and sensitive, one might say 'worshipful', performance of Te Deum. My only adverse thoughts were: 'why the organ? what on earth is the organ playing for?' The organ neither enhances nor enables the chant. It is a distraction, a romantic left-over representative of the debasement of chant that should be an object of correction, not encouragement. This is not using (enshrining) chant as the basis of a composition, or arranging it a la Willcocks' Corde Natus, it is simply muddling up the 'plain chant' with an annoying gossamer of organ chords that really don't belong there and have the effect of some sort of mumbling background interference. Still... the Singing 'here' is outstanding! - in spite of the accompaniment.

    Francis - I really do agree totally with you. Even for those of us who are (at times) wont to be 'purists', the attainment of such purity is, for the reason you state, beyond attainable. And further: what year or decade or century would we choose as a standard of 'purity'? There is no end to it. However, I think that if one is going to play the organ with chant, one should really unabashedly do something with it (as you undoubtedly do) by way of stylistic, organistic, improvisatory creativity rather than grind out this apologetic, anemic, background distraction which happens to be going on while the chant is sung. (As for God not minding... he may not. But a lot of abuse is covered by (other) people who habitually remind us that God doesn't mind. However, it is WE who should be mindful of what we present. [Sorry for preaching to the choir!])
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    M. Jackson,

    I will have to go hear the TE DEUM you found, because I have not listened to it.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    M.

    Yes, I understand the abuse thing and quite agree with you. However, I believe that God DOES mind the true abuse that is going on in the liturgy in terms of music that is not appropriate. He doesn't like people making light of His Sacrifice.

    I have had a difficult time tagging any kind of chant 'abusive, lol. For heavens sake (pun intended), I believe that anyone who is performing latin chant (or attempting their best at doing so) is probably on our side of the fence.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Francis - Amen, and Amen! Thus... it is fitting (shall I say 'meet and right') for each of us to 'raise the bar' as high as he or she is able.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    M.

    I have to be real careful with the bar thing... some of the choir members are leaving cause they say I am expecting them to be professionals. I keep luring them back with little bacon bits ditties like simple rounds and AA (used to be called negro) spirituals in between the real servings of victoria and palestrina. I have a good solid core of singers now, though, who really like and want the solid music!
  • priorstf
    Posts: 460
    miacoyne - I see two reasons to consider accompanying Chant.

    The first is the choir whose members lack the ability to hold pitches well. I think most choirs do a good job of shaking them out early on, but they do have a way of ignoring their limitations at time.

    The second is to perhaps enrich the sound for those ears unaccustomed to voice alone. Until we work to educate (and re-educate) our congregations we may be turning some people off to what Chant is all about.

    In either case, I would hope that time well spent can reduce the need for the organ with Chant.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    I don't know priorstf:

    So far, our schola has performed all chant selection a cappella. We are going for high quality at very few liturgies rather than a quantity of not well rehearsed pieces more often. The congregation has been very accepting and encouraging about the schola. The members get pats on the back directly from the pips, so I am hoping we are well on our way to celebrating a completely latin Mass sometime in the future.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    "Jeff Ostrowski CommentTime20 hours ago edited
    . . . Go here and look in the upper right hand corner

    Click (skip) until you get it to play Assumpta Est Maria Alleluia.

    That is the answer. It is beautiful.

    It is an organic development, it is beautiful.

    If you don't like it, don't do it. At least this is my thought."

    What is one to do with these chant flat-earthers? They will be the ruination of us all. ;-) Yes, it is beautiful. The organ is a valid part of Catholic liturgy, as various papal and council documents have decreed over time. No apologies need be offered to anyone for that. I freely admit it's always possible to misuse any intruments, human or mechanical. It's the misuse I oppose, not the use.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    I guess I should have made it more clear about what I was asking. I was strictly asking musical reasons for organ accompaniment for chant. I heard some beautiful ones. But I emphasize something like musical excution of mora vocis and podatus in our chant singing, although we are far from mastering those skills. If you listen to Dr. Marier in the book 'A Gregorian Chant Master Class.' you hear him saying he is very 'fussy' about those. That's just a small example of delicate nuances that practically only voice can express. Maybe some master organists can play mora vocis on the organ. I really don't know. I'm just a beginner. I was honestly asking the musical reason. I understand that organ can support schola' s singing and also the congregation. Also maybe some organists can accentuate the chant and make it more beautiful by giving effect of something like' halo' behind the voice. I'm trying to figure out how you can do that without muddling up the singing, especially when you are following the music without strict rhythm, but embedded with subtle nuances. For me that's a challenge, a musical one, to play organ with chants, once in a while, than just to give harmony to the singing, even it's modal.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    There are some genuinely bad chant accompaniments in some hymnals. I have become a fan of the NOH, since it is now available, thanks to CMAA. NOH accompaniments are a vast improvement over many I have heard, and I will be using them during Lent this year.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    NOH is tops. Ya really don't need anything else.
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Pes: make this thread a one-stop source for all things "chant accompaniment."

    Yes this Discussion is from Sep 2008.
    But this comment is best added here for historical reasons (see above).

    Here I provide another datapoint somewhere on the line
    between hair-raising and best-practice, this time a sample from 1840.

    Francois-Joseph Fetis (1784-1871)

    Messe N. 6 faciles pour l'orgue
    Messe des dimanches et doubles du temps de Paques
    http://imslp.org/wiki/6_Messes_faciles_pour_l'orgue_(Fétis,_François-Joseph)
    The page has both score PDFs and midi soundfiles.

    It is Missa I (lux et origo) in alternatim.
    Some chant phrases get organ accomp.
    Some chant phrases get replaced by organ versets.

    There are five other Masses in the set
    but none of those scores are online.
    Among the missing is Missa VIII (de angelis)
    which has a performance available online.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZNriftHqdE
    Thanked by 1BruceL
Add a Comment