Talk:Mass (music)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Classical music / Compositions 
WikiProject icon Mass (music) is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Compositions task force.
WikiProject Christianity / Catholicism / Anglicanism (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (marked as Mid-importance).

Stub question[edit]

I cheerfully concede this is more elaborate than most stubs, but it is indeed a stub that needs work. Feel free to add to it. Perhaps a list of notable composers of Masses, similar to the list I put at requiem, might be appropriate. ---User:Ihcoyc

I think the section Form of the Mass should be moved to Ordinary of the Mass. I think that's a more appropriate place for the full text to appear. Also, I think Sanctus and Benedictus are usually considered to be one part, not two. Alcuin 03:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Placement of info[edit]

Is Rutter's Mass of the Children in the right place? It is in fact a missa brevis, as it has no credo section. ---User:Hesperus

Oh yes Hesperus you are correct..I agree with you 100%, that was such a delightful comment

Yes i'll second that agreement, no credo section is positively shocking, thank you for bringing that important comment to our attention Hesperus. No longer will I look at missa brevis's in the same light again.

I question the parenthesis of the filioque and thus am putting it fully into the text -- since Mass is a Western term, there is no reason to include the Eastern Orthodox caveat on the filioque.

Baroque to the present?[edit]

This is a huge period. Should we not split it up into subsections? Maybe Viennese Masses (Haydn & Co); Romantic/Operatic Masses (Gounod, Rheinberger et al.); 20th C Masses. Should a distiction be made between 'liturgical' masses and 'concert' masses? (Bach's Mass in B minor could never be used as part of the liturgy, for example)

Fiddleback 20:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes: it should be subdivided and expanded greatly, in my opinion. (I added a bunch to the pre-Baroque, but haven't edited the rest.) Thanks! Antandrus (talk) 20:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

A lot of this is already in the Ordinary of the Mass article; I think it belongs here.Sparafucil 05:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

History sections[edit]

I have added two sections concerning the history of the mass from Baroque through Romantic and 20th and 21st century in addition to the lists already in the article. Feel free to add or amend! Aprickel (talk) 01:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Aprickel

File:Gregorian chant.gif Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Gregorian chant.gif, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 23 December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Requiem mass[edit]

I see several examples of a Requiem mass listed, but think they should go to the special article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

"a cappella" vs. "unaccompanied"[edit]

There seems to be disagreement whether "a cappella" or "unaccompanied" should be used. If this article is supposed to approach scholarly quality on this topic, then the term "unaccompanied" is the correct term. To put it succinctly, I quote this paragraph from Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians:

Normally, choral music sung without instrumental accompaniment. Originally (c1600) the term was used to distinguish works composed in the older polyphonic style of the Renaissance from those written in the newer concertato style of the early Baroque. During the 19th century the Roman Catholic Church idealized 16th-century polyphony and the works of Palestrina in particular. Noting that no instrumental parts were included in the sources containing this music, and unaware that instruments were often used during the Renaissance to double or substitute for vocal parts, musicians came to believe that a cappella referred to unaccompanied choral singing (see Chorus (i), §4). Since that time, the term has become synonymous with "unaccompanied singing", both religious and secular. (emph. added)

Although the use of the term a cappella for unaccompanied vocal music is the vernacular (of which I have no problem and use myself), in this article "unaccompanied" is more accurate. Especially considering that we are using the words "can be accompanied," the use of "unaccompanied" is better suited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B0cean (talkcontribs) 02:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The foregoing is correct. Historically "a cappella" was used for a style that was liturgically appropriate. It would not have been used of the madrigal, for example, which was often unaccompanied, but not liturgical music. In today's vernacular, unaccompanied madrigals are commonly described as "a cappella," in contravention of its historical meaning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fugueman (talkcontribs) 02:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This is all covered, appropriately enough, in the blue linked A cappella article. This article's lead currently distinguishes a cappella style from orchestral masses (a fair chunk of the concert repertoire). If a 3-fold division is felt useful, it could be reworded thus: "Masses can be a cappella, that is,either unaccompanied or without an independent accompaniment, or they can be accompanied by..." Sparafucil (talk) 22:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

"Missae breves"[edit]

Should we mention this is the plural form of "Missa Brevis" when we use this? This isn't apparent for everyone. --Ahyangyi (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Merge Missa brevis in?[edit]

Per suggestion here

I'm rather indifferent on such merge proposal, the more important point being that the current content of Missa brevis needs some serious updating: whether that is done before or after (or without) a merge is secondary imho (I can live with both a merge and a no-merge option), but a higher quality of the content is something I see as a first objective. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstood my proposal: I suggested to have one article Missa (music) covering the many meanings in which the term Missa is used in music, and several special meanings such as Missa brevis, Missa solemnis etc. It is difficult to improve the quality of Missa brevis as long as there are types of the mass covered which are not usually named "brevis", such as Missa as Bach understood it (Kyrie and Gloria) or a mass intentionally without Gloria for Lent. - By just translating Missa to mass we would loose recognisability, - you see Missa on many title pages, not mass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hoboken XXII:9 (containing all five "Ordinarium" parts of the tridentine mass) = Missa in tempore belli = Mass in Time of War = Paukenmesse = Kettledrum Mass. May I suggest that your confusion probably originates from WP:OR on this frontispiece: File:BWV 232 Titelblatt Missa.jpg (which is all in all a quite exceptional case, not normative in its time, nor before, nor afterwards)? --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:17, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I look at this, for example. Many composers of different nationalities called a mass Missa and marked a movement Allegro, both internationally understood. I think Wikipedia should have room for that. We don't substitute Allegro by "fast" or (better) "joyful". - You can of course go ahead with your proposal, but please don't say that it was my idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Non-argument. Some terms are always translated, some are often translated, others are sometimes translated, some are almost never or never translated. Missa is the latin word for Mass. Note that the Carus Verlag page you linked to (on Johann Michael Haydn's Missa Tempore Quadragesimae) indicates "Masses" as genre for the work. Missa is not a different "genre" from "Mass". All masses with five, four, three of two Ordinarium parts can be indicated as "Missa" or as "Mass", the same way as a Masses "Credo" can be called "Nicene Creed" in English ("Nicene" while that is the usual version in tridentine mass). Depends on author whether it is translated or not. --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
FYI, some composers have translated tempo indicators, e.g. Adagio into "Langsam" (Mahler, 7th symphony). --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps I misunderstand. Is "Missa brevis" a genre? Is it worth explaining even if not? Same for Missa. Some composers have tempo and other markings in their native language, - that isn't what I talked about. I said that IF a composer marks Allegro, we don't go and translate it. - In case you went for including the various types of Missa here, how would a lead look like, with many bolded redirects? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:31, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
"Missa brevis" is a mixed bag concept, depends on which meaning(s) is/are taken out of the bag. Some authors have argued that "Missa brevis et solemnis" is a separate genre that applies to the kind of masses Colloredo made Mozart write. Missa brevis is latin for "short Mass", so much is sure, but it has several meanings, some of which are a genre, some are not. --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC) I come back to the first argument I made in this section: the Missa brevis article content needs some serious updating, while it sheds a lot of unclarity... yes, the many meanings of Missa brevis are messy, no excuse though to write an article that leaves readers unclear... --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I found Missa brevis like this in 2010, and expressed the wish for "Missa" then already, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I see no relevance in those remarks: say what you have to say, without innuendo please. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:24, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
(e.c.) Another example that translation has little to do with this (sometimes symphony/sinfonia is translated, sometimes it is not, says little about its meaning):
  • Eine Alpensinfonie (arguably rather a tone poem than a symphony) usually translated in English → An Alpine Symphony
  • Sinfonia domestica (by the same composer, also arguably rather a tone poem than a sinfonia or symphony) usually not translated — although, as in Wikipedia, for this title the Italian term "sinfonia" is sometimes translated in latinized Greek (sic) "symphonia".
Also the Petite messe solennelle can be called a Mass or Missa, while it contains a setting of all five "Ordinarium" parts, in Latin. --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Why would you call it Missa if the composer called it messe? - Btw, I was told that you can't say "a Mass", only "a mass" (I think by Tony1). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Why would one call a tone poem a "Sinfonie" or a "sinfonia"? Why would one translate either of those in English (symphony) or latinized Greek (symphonia)? Rhetorical questions: the why question is of little consequence here. The fact is: it is done sometimes or often depending on the case.
Another example: why would one translate Glagolská mše or Mša glagolskaja into Missa Glagolitica or Glagolitic Mass? I don't know why it happens, but it happens. --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Good answers to not my question. I didn't ask why translate to mass (English). I asked why translate to Missa, French to Latin that is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Missa Glagolitica is the better example (Czech to Latin translation). --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:10, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Here's "messe" translated into "Missa" for Rossini's petite solennelle (in an English-language publication) [1] —— Why? I have no clue. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:16, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Returning to Gerda's original question (which I initially misunderstood, my bad): Should Missa brevis be moved to Missa (music)? No, Missa (music) should redirect to Mass (music), unless someone can demonstrate that in the context of music "Mass" and "Missa" have generally accepted divergent meanings. I.e.: not a part of the sources giving different meanings (like for Missa brevis), which should be explained in a single article, but widely accepted divergent meanings. That is not the case. Note that I saw a lot of sources when straightening out the list of Mozart Masses: while many of these gave a different interpretation to Missa brevis and the like, none of them indicated "Missa" would not be a synonym to "Mass". Same for the sources I saw when working on the Mass for the Dresden court article. Some would avoid the ambiguous "Missa brevis" qualification altogether (using "Kyrie–Gloria Missa" or whatever), but none of them indicated that Missa would not be a synonym to "Mass". --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Fine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:23, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm about to remove the merge suggestion templates I posted yesterday at Mass (music) and Missa brevis. I suppose there's no objection to that then? --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
With the re-arranged and expanded content of Mass (music)#Short and solemn masses (and other updates that occured before that) I think some major steps in updating (as suggested above) are completed, and the merge suggestion templates can now be removed. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Addition and need for clarifictions[edit]

  • Mass of the Children and Colin Mawby's Bonifaius-Messe are also examples of additional text.
  • What does the header "other denominations" mean when the lead names Catholic, Anglican and Lutheran? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Re. other examples with parts outside the ordinarium: a few representative examples would be good in the article, yes.
  • "Other denominations" refers to "other than the denomination that uses the Tridentine Mass", i.e. the Roman Catholic domination. Yes, can be clarified a bit while "tridentine" may be less common to many readers.
On the whole, most of this article refers to mass compositions that fit in (the mindframe of) the Tridentine Mass ritual (hence Ordinarium/Proprium etc.) — which also means a lot is still missing from the article, somewhat more on Deutsche Messe compositions, Eastern Orthodox mass music (e.g. Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom compositions) etc, etc, should be added. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:22, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The lead, before going to Tridentine, says "the invariable portions of the Eucharistic liturgy (principally that of the Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion, and Lutheranism)". I would expect those in more detail in the body, which for Lutheranism might lead to discussing Kyrie+Gloria Missa (which I didn't invent), sometimes (not precisely) named Lutherische Messe. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Useful suggestions, that can be explored. I would add to that: the lead must be rewritten, its current interpretation of the subject of the article is, to say the least, a little bit POV. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:32, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Ideas as they come: The Armed Man, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:26, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Also requiem masses: Britten's War Requiem --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:40, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Sort and scope of list[edit]

Trying to insert a mass, I see that I would not know to insert where because the arrangement follows no system that is recognizable by me.

  • Why are Requiem masses listed here at all, which are also in the relevant article? - A link would do. - Btw: The Requiem article used to be Requiem (music), which seems more general and therefore more appropriate for works which are not "for the Requiem Mass", - some are for concert, some don't even use the liturgical text.
  • We could go by composer (alpha), - perhaps easiest to find, or by year of composition, or by year of composer's birth ... - we could also make a sortable table, - just ideas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:54, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
This article isn't a list: a few relevant examples are welcome per topic/period/section, that's all. If you want a list, it is possible to start one (compare List of Magnificat composers, sortable in various ways). --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:07, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Or something like de:Liste von Messen, translated in English (although I'd prefer a sortable table). --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
The table at List of symphonies with names is close to the format I'd prefer for such list. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
A sortable: Zukunftsmusik, - I am busy with articles at present. - For now: I suggest to remove all Requiem masses and need to know how this listing (is that a better word?) should be sorted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Representative Requiems should not be removed. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)