Short Kyrie

This is the Kyrie that will be part of a Mass and/or set of liturgical music for the the penitential seasons (advent and lent).

I only have a sib file of it no live recording so the playback is not ideal. Also, keep in mind the break between soloist and choir will be more than what the playback gives.

Anyway, commentary welcome for ideas for setting remaining text. Looking at the Agnus Dei right now.

Regards

UPDATE - Please look at the revised Kyrie I posted about 3 entries down

I really like the idea of this piece. It's something close to my heart, the merging of old and new styles of music. The alternation of solo (sort of recitation) with tutti is effective.

Anyway a few comments: The slurs in the baritone - I assume these are just for phrasing? As they don't follow the syllables. There are other ways to notate this, but this one is probably the simplest notation, especially for those not too familiar with modern music.

Hopefully the choir is good - dissonances in general just cause difficulty. But if it works it should be rather beautiful.

One more thing: I would perhaps have used a few more resonant chords - just in this a capella style I think it could help, if it could be merged into your existing harmony (which is good).

Also, your form means that we don't hear "Christe Eleison" thrice. Will that be acceptable?

Anyway, I await the rest of the mass.

Yes ythe slurs are suggestive. Want the solo to be a bit improvisatory -- something like the free chant you here in synagogues and the call to worship in the mosques.

As for more resonant chords. I agree it may need that but I thought I'd save that for the Agnus or Gloria. I consider the Kyrie an "atrium" to the rest of Mass. Nevertheless, when I hear it live I may change my mind.

As for Christe Eleison repeated only twice. I did struggle with that but I see in the Episcopal church's liturgical setting that this has been done.

Great comments though

I love that last measure and the bass solo. Otherwise it needs abit of tightening up, but everything does. It was a very enjoyable listen thank you for creating such music for me to listen too. :) Very nice

Thanks note. Appreciate the unity criticism. Definitely keep in mind as I set more of the text -- your idea impels me to consider using some of the motivic ideas from it to give the whole Mass a greater unity.

Update - Just listened to it and I hear what you and Dan were speaking of. It is the first two choral entries which need to be revised so that they are more closely related to thepreceding bass solo. Nothing too radical.

BTW - great ears as I work hardest on the bass solo and the final choral tutti. Writing a good melisma is HARD!

Thanks so much for these comments.

Ok - UPDATED Kyrie taking into consideration the above.

I think you may want to check the Sibelius file on post #5 - though the pdf is different, the .sib file is the same as in your first post. No matter for me, though...I just printed your updated pdf score and took it over to the piano.

For the benefit of those who don't know, old Gregorian Kyries were recited much the same as this - a call and answer between a celebrant or cantor and the choir, sometimes with organum, fauxbourdon or other harmonic treatment overlaying the chanted choral response, though as Daniel intimated, the form was 3 kyries (cantor-choir-cantor), 3 christes (choir-cantor-choir) and 3 kyries (cantor-choir-cantor). I think what you have done by compressing and rearranging this form is perfectly acceptable for modern liturgies, when as few as one each of kyrie-christe-kyrie suffice, and it works well.

I like the solo baritone incipits very much, though having tried to sing them, I think some phrases may be a bit long to sing in one breath, and I wouldn't want to break any of the phrases up by breathing. As a practical as well as a musical consideration, I hope you intend to allow the cantor some license to press the tempo a bit if he needs to do so. I've been cantoring Gregorian and Anglican chants for over 20 years, and I barely made it through these. I will say with pleasure that singing them was a worthwhile challenge, and their effect in a good accoustic would be stunning.

The harmonic language you have employed, though quite contemporary, pays homage to its ancient forbears and is to my ears entirely appropriate to the application, especially after you took Daniel's very good advice and filled out a few chords to make them slightly more sonorous. I love some of the things you've done here, particularly in the way you handled the final Kyrie - truly a cry for mercy, yet not over-the-top. The doubling of the soprano by the second alto at the octave in the middle of the eleison melisma is wonderful. Hearing as I do, however, male altos possibly singing these parts, I think you may have taken the first alto line a bit high at the end; countertenors often sound strident that high, and yet I can't imagine not having that D in the chord. In my church choir, the trebles would probably split, the seconds and female first altos taking that note while the countertenors remain below. I'd leave it is it is and let each choir work it out according to its needs, but keep such considerations in mind as you proceed. The second Christe is also much improved with the filling out of the harmony, though I'm not sure I see why you would want to double the middle voice in the 2nd alto and 1st tenor as you have done here; did you particularly want extra weight and a mix of colour on this note? That's what you're likely to get. As long as it's intentional, it's fine...just make sure you thought about it.

Beyond what I've said, there is something remarkable about this brief setting that I can't quite put into words. There is an appealing and appropriate austerity about it withoug being maudlin, with something of the bare trees and brown grass of winter in it. I think if you continue in this vein, with a baritone incipit at the beginning of Agnus Dei and possibly even the Sanctus, you'll have a very effective piece that draws upon and reveres the past while serving the needs of the moment. Keeping it concise will make it all the more attractive for actual liturgical use. Since it is a Mass for Advent, you will of course not set the Gloria, which is omitted during that season. You could write a Credo or not, as you see fit; though it would probably not be sung liturgically, the text can be a great expressive vehicle and would make a fine centrepiece for a concert performance.

This is a very nice beginnig to what I hope will be a wonderful Missa Brevis for Advent.

As it happens, some time ago I started a Proper Mass for the 1st Sunday of Advent, for mixed chorus a cappella with chant incipits (though mine are strictly Gregorian). This puts me in the mood to take it up again!

Graham -

Thank you SO much for your instructive comments. Especially the sib file. You saved me from losing that file! I do need a new computer.

1) First, thanks for the historical background. I only came to enjoying chant in recent years hearing it done in Lutheran and Episcopal churches -- but the settings were various of the Kyrie. Your explanation provided needed clarification.

2) Good ear about the countertenors. At Holy Trinity Church in New York City the choir uses countertenors and altos for its Vespers and special services. So, it could be done for either this combo or just 1st and 2nd altos.

3) The doubling of 1st tenor and 2 nd alto was to provide some thickness and a little intensity to the pianissimmo singing of tenors and altos. If a choir director chooses to redistribute this due to the timbre of his choirmembers and the acoustics, I am all for it.

4) Will consider your idea to continue with this alteration. I was thinking of treating the Agnus Dei and Sanctus without an incipit but this could be a great structural device to unify the whole work AND make it very practical.

5) Write that Proper Mass for Advent -- I'd love to hear what an experienced singer of chant and someone well-educated about liturgical music would do.

Thanks again for your wonderful comments and insight!

ok. So I printed the PDF off and played it out and sang various things... and since you were so kind to PM me about this, I wanted to look extra carefully. However, I am not going to look at Graham's comment. I want to JUST give a review of what I see... so here we go:

*Morivou plays piece*

OKKKKKK. here's the thing about this piece. It makes almost NO harmonic statement. Now, what that means is that it just sounds like chords with no direction. And, while that's ok.. you are making a REAL risk... Why? It's because you WANT to have people interesting from the start. Using a solo at the beginning is smart. I think you could work on moving the emphasis of the syllables...

Look at it.. sing it yourself, figure out WHERE you want to put the syllables... because every time I sang it... it just sounded unnatural. But, it's just personal preference. At least look at it.

The chorus parts... well... They just DON'T make any melodic or harmonic statement. Which is important for me. I think you could have dissonance to consonance (no, open 5th do not count). I think you should have a FULL major chord SOMEWHERE. Preferably in more than one place. If you want to go the dissonant route... either go REALLY crunchy or just added notes. The third choice is just let the notes settle melodically...

I honestly think that if you SERIOUSLY revise this piece, it could be great... I just think it missed the mark on a musical level. If you want me to take it measure by measure with you, I can... just tell me. I wouldn't offer and be so forward if you hadn't asked me to review it... just know that. :)

So, really, look at it and tell me what you think you can do.

Well Morivou I disagree with your assessment. I sang through the solo and choral parts many times. Granted it is not extraordinary but it suits my purpose of an improvisational like solo. I expect the singer to add quite a bit of rubato.

Harmonically it may seem static until you realize the scale I used. E Locrain (with a secondary tonal center on A in the same scale). Second the choral part is more a declamation than a "melodic" line. Again I am not saying it is fantastic, directional choral writing but it is not purposeless as you imply. Also, the aesthetic I aimed was a very pre-Rennaissance declamatory melody with a harmony mixing contemporary and ancient styles.

So, in sum, I disagree because I think your criticisms are based on your aesthetic preferences. Yet this is an invaluable and I appreciate you taking time to go through it and comment on it honestly and conscientiously - I greatly appreciate that much more than

Wow, really cool or I don't like it it just doesn't flow". Only tiny critique of your comments is you could define better what is to you good harmonic and melodic direction? Also, solely on a technical level, do you detect anything that would give the singers trouble?

PS. MAJOR PROVISO TO ABOVE - Whenever I FIND a choir to sing this all of the above may be moot - I learn much more about composing when I hear my works performed live rather than working w/o performers and relying on computer realization. Performer's body language and the way the say their critiques tell you as much as about your work as how they play it.

Well Morivou I disagree with your assessment. I sang through the solo and choral parts many times. Granted it is not extraordinary but it suits my purpose of an improvisational like solo. I expect the singer to add quite a bit of rubato.

Harmonically it may seem static until you realize the scale I used. E Locrain (with a secondary tonal center on A in the same scale). Second the choral part is more a declamation than a "melodic" line. Again I am not saying it is fantastic, directional choral writing but it is not purposeless as you imply. Also, the aesthetic I aimed was a very pre-Rennaissance declamatory melody with a harmony mixing contemporary and ancient styles.

I agree. I am only trying to think from an audience's perspective. Purely questioning: "What do think the audience will find attractive in this piece"?

Now, I think you might say it's the terrible Sibelius rendering... if you want to, then I agree with you. I think the musicality of the piece could bring it alive and have purpose. And, E Locrian... wow! You are going out there, aren't you. ;)

Listening to it with all you have said in mind, I understand what you are saying.

So, in sum, I disagree because I think your criticisms are based on your aesthetic preferences. Yet this is an invaluable and I appreciate you taking time to go through it and comment on it honestly and conscientiously - I greatly appreciate that much more than

Wow, really cool or I don't like it it just doesn't flow". Only tiny critique of your comments is you could define better what is to you good harmonic and melodic direction? Also, solely on a technical level, do you detect anything that would give the singers trouble?

I meant, really cool ideas, but I didn't like it as a whole.

"GOOD" harmonic direction and melodic direction is not a point... harmonic and melodic direction on their own will satisfy here. What I am saying is, you are going to have to rely on the musicality of your singer to bring a scale alive that not many people are used to. Even I, who has done a lot of theory, didn't SEE that at first. I sang it as a major scale with a leading tone at the beginning. Like I said, you might want to put a performance note stating what mode it's in.

It will allow the singer to become more familiar with the scale they are singing. Which will make for a MUCH better sound. I learned that even showing my singers what Lydian was in my piece made them understand and comprehend MORE of what they were doing.

Technically? No. I could sightread every part and everything was in range. Take a look through and see if you see any tritone skips in voices, I couldn't see any that would be a problem, but if there are, since the Locrian mode is VERY liable to have them, see if there is a way around them. Most singers don't like tritone skips, and I usually have the courtesy to let them alone. But, once again, personal preference. I think the only time this happens is maybe a couple of times in the solo. But, because it's a solo, it probably will be easier. I know I didn't have a problem with it.

I enjoy this. I think with a soloist, who would really make the lines rubato and add feeling, this would have a great spark and come to life. In measure 3, I think the word son needs to be tied, it's confusing to me reading it, because there is no tie, I want to put another emphasis on a 1 syllable word. Other than that, most things are covered by other folk.

Thanks everyone - very enlightening.

I appreciate the modality. Way cool there.

Hi, I rendered Chris's Sibby with EWQL Symphonic Choirs

and a pdf of the score.

mp3: Mass for Advent - Chris Sahar.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

score: Mass for Advent.pdf - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

Wow, Exan this rendition brings it much closer to how I heard it internally. In performance the tempo would be less rushed - but not your fault - I think it is very difficult to recreate a good rubato and "breathing" phrases you can get from a live choir. Also, 90 is a little fast. My fault there.

But thank you, it inspires me to return to finish this piece.

about the newest score. Do you agree with Examinous joke. In 'measure' 6 (i know they are not real measures, but since you numberd them...) the tenors start praying to you in stead of the lyrics "Christe eleison"

another question. The Baritone solo, is that a quotation of an gregorian plainchant hymn or is it your own? It looks a written version of a rubato (quavers and tuplets). Why dont you, as in plainchant, use only the bullet, without the flag, only the notes, so the soist can improvise the rhythm. The bows and the repeating of the last note of a frase suggest plainchant techniques...

nice

Thanks for pointing that out in the score - No don't agree entirely with Exanimous' joke but i know Exan's convictions so I am not offended.

The solo is my own, inspired by gregorian plainchant. On the fence about your suggestion - I'd like to try it out in a reading though to determine which would suit the singer best. Good point.

What happened at the end there on the sib file? :huh:

:)

This version is much more coherent and has MUCH more direction. With a real choir this could be fantastic. Good work.

heckel -

At the end of the Sib file are blank measures that were intended to have the Sanctus and Agnus Dei and Nunc Dimitus to complete the Missa Brevis. I just never got around to doing those texts. Is that what you mean?

Morivou -

Thanks. Did you notice I made only one change - the soprano line on the final cadence moves to an A while in the earlier version it stayed on G. That's all I changed.

Morivou -

Thanks. Did you notice I made only one change - the soprano line on the final cadence moves to an A while in the earlier version it stayed on G. That's all I changed.

Yeah I know. Did you also know that a single note change can alter an entire piece of music for me. It provided closure and base support that culminated the entire piece.

I am no fool, I compared scores. lol.

heckel -

At the end of the Sib file are blank measures that were intended to have the Sanctus and Agnus Dei and Nunc Dimitus to complete the Missa Brevis. I just never got around to doing those texts. Is that what you mean?

Ay, your right :P I was wondering what happened there

Hi,

Chris, I just checked my voicemail, and I decided to post all of it.

Here is the updated sib file that only works with sib 6 I believe but I am not sure. If this is true I'll try to find a way around it: Mass for Advent - Chris Sahar.sib - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

PDF FILE: Mass for Advent - Chris Sahar.pdf - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

MP3 (Pseudo-realistic rendering, much better than sibelius or finale default library): Mass for Advent - Chris Sahar.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

Wow. Absolutely beautiful. I love your harmonies.

thanks Glenn