# I was so wrong - the Hilliards and the Dufay Missa L'homme arme



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

There are some vocal groups that sing mixed key signatures in early music as if the mixed signatures didn't exist, but the Hilliards isn't one of them. It is just that previously I believed that an accidental applied to a single note in this music only affected that one note that it was applied to. It's actually a lot more likely from studying the score that it affects all the notes of the same pitch until, well, this is the tricky part but basically a singer trained in Renaissance music conception of singing would know when.

Point is, I think the Hilliards pretty much nail that mass. They don't by any means sing all the flats that the editors have added to the score (which you can find online), they just seem to sing those that are related to Dufay's own accidentals by the system I referred to in the above paragraph.

For those interested in this topic, the kyrie of that mass is well worth studying, as it has both flats and a natural added by Dufay himself - these give a clue to how Dufay thought of the use of accidentals as he seems to use a natural after a long passage - and a couple of cadences - of apparent B's, suggesting that the earlier flat on the B was in force all the way to that natural.

I've also been told by a guy whose opinion I value that this is probably how it is. This isn't actually about mixed key signatures but the way accidentals are used in Renaissance music. So I was probably right that the mixed signatures should be taken at face value, but I didn't realise that the accidentals that Dufay sometimes added to a note here and there had a longterm effect and weren't simply passing accidentals.

And I'll take the opportunity to recommend this mass and two different recordings of it: the ones by the Hilliard Ensemble and Oxford Camerata. I'm used to being wrong about stuff. This just is a topic that I should correct myself on since I've disparaged these recordings here in the past. Les jeunes solistes in their 1997 recording of the mass actually sing all the editorial flats in the score, and there's a new recording with even more flats - many not even in the score as editorial accidentals. Perhaps these recordings are rightfully not as well known as the two other ones.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

This is interesting, because I've noticed on other threads that you're very quick to judgement of some of the most respected names in the performance of early music. I've wanted to say before that the directors of these groups are not mere dilettantes, but serious scholars who have spent decades in the archives, in conversation with other scholars, musicians and historians, and if they deviate from your view of the text it is likely that they have good reason for doing so, or at least an arguable an interesting position.

You clearly know miles more than I could ever hope to on the subject, but I wonder if in future when criticizing them you might quote their essays, interviews or even liner notes as part of your dismissal of their approach, so as to demonstrate the error in their ways without having it seem that they have just blundered into the field.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Well, issues of musica ficta are, alas, something that are at best glossed over in liner notes. I don't usually read liner notes but I remember one (Firminus Caron boxset by the Sound and the Fury) where all that the writer said about interpreting mixed key signatures was that only the composer and singers associated with him would have known how to interpret it.

There's an academic article, "A Practical Guide to Musica Ficta" (Routley, 1985) that seems to be in accord with popular practices. It's old enough that it may even be what many groups use to interpret these scores. The problem with this article is that the writer admits that the part on mixed key signatures is speculative, and another problem is that he doesn't really do much in terms of analysing scores for the accidentals that are used and what clues they might give.

He also merely assumes that the early composers wanted to avoid cross relations. This is actually a topic I forgot in my previous post. There are some points in the mass, for example measure 24 in the Agnus dei, where the top voice can't predict the B flat that will be sung in a lower voice and create a cross relation if the top voice doesn't pre-emptively flatten its B. The editor and all these groups avoid the cross relation by pre-emptively flattening the top B. However, it's well known that Renaissance singers sang from seperate parts so as I said the top voice couldn't have predicted the B flat, so would have sung B. I can't be sure this is what would have been done instead of, say, a rehearsal where the cross relations would be corrected before the performance - this just seems like a lot to demand from one's memory. But anyway, this one interpretative decision then affects a long stretch of music because if the B is flattened, it has to be flattened for as long as that same "hexachord" is used. Dufay actually flattens that B at bar 48 after a hexachord (I think) changes, so it does seem like he is just keeping that B flat there so perhaps these groups are correct to avoid the cross relation. On the other hand, it could just be that he wanted that B flat there only at that point. I guess the answer depends on how good you believe the memories of the singers were back then.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Chordalrock said:


> He also merely assumes that the early composers wanted to avoid cross relations. This is actually a topic I forgot in my previous post. There are some points in the mass, for example measure 24 in the sanctus


Actually meant Agnus dei. Sorry.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I'm trying to hear what you're saying. Am I right to think that Oxford Camerata only apply an accidental to one note? 

I very much like what Hilliard do with this mass, by the way, just as a casual listener.


----------



## George O (Sep 29, 2014)

Guillaume Dufay (c. 1397-1474)

Missa "L'homme armé"
Nuper rosarum flores
Ecclesiae militantis
Alma redemptoris mater
O sancte Sebastiane
Salves flos Tuscae gentis

The Hilliard Ensemble / Paul Hillier

on EMI Reflexe (Germany), from 1987


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> I'm trying to hear what you're saying. Am I right to think that Oxford Camerata only apply an accidental to one note?


Nah, they do apply it to longer stretches of music.

BTW, when I wrote, "On the other hand, it could just be that he wanted that B flat there only at that point," I meant "starting from that point (until the next hexachord change)".

The Hilliards and the Oxford Camerata do apply accidentals somewhat differently, but the difference is rather small. One notable one is at "et homo factus es" in the credo, where I think I hear the Hilliards singing a B in the top voice while the Oxford Camerata sing B flat.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Chordalrock said:


> Nah, they do apply it to longer stretches of music.
> 
> BTW, when I wrote, "On the other hand, it could just be that he wanted that B flat there only at that point," I meant "starting from that point (until the next hexachord change)".
> 
> The Hilliards and the Oxford Camerata do apply accidentals somewhat differently, but the difference is rather small. One notable one is at "et homo factus es" in the credo, where I think I hear the Hilliards singing a B in the top voice while the Oxford Camerata sing B flat.


So what should I listen to to hear what's at stake here?


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> So what should I listen to to hear what's at stake here?


There are basically sections that would be in something like G major if the B is not flattened, as compared with something like G minor. You would really need a score to be able to know where Dufay's own accidentals are. The editorial accidentals are marked above the staff in the score. Here's the score I use:

http://imslp.org/wiki/Missa_l'Homme_Armé_(Dufay,_Guillaume)

I recommend trying the kyrie or anything except the gloria, following from the score while listening to the music. I think the gloria is confusing to follow and would require in depth analysis to understand (locating cross relations and hexachord changes).

The idea is that a hexachord change invalidates a previously applied accidental. (edit: I'm probably remembering the concept of hexachords incorrectly. I better not say anything more about them until I figure them out.)

Like I said, the main problem in rendering these pieces is in deciding whether to flatten the B in the top voice when there's a cross relation in the score (and until next hexachord change) - when Dufay hasn't used an accidental in the top voice and when it would, if unmodified, sing B while another voice sings B flat shortly after or shortly before (or even at the same time).


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Can someone explain why Cantica Symphonia use instruments? I read on the Glossa website



> In this [use of instruments] we are not striving for (presumed) authenticity, but rather for a way to help the modern listener to perceive this "stratification", the peculiar dialectics between voices, and the full structural and conceptual complexity of the polyphonic texture, which escapes our aural perception if we level all timbres and flatten the differences between voices.
> 
> The practice of mixing voices and instruments, then, led us to feel that Dufay, while writing only three or four voices to form a polyphonic work, often seems to demand a genuine "orchestration", rich and varied in tone colours. This seems, in our view, to comply with the idea of "varietas" of which Dufay was the acclaimed master.


What is this stratification of voices? I suppose the instruments are underlying a voice which is at the top of a hierarchy, but if so, how do they decide which is top voice? What am I as a modern listener supposed to see more clearly when I listen to Cantica Symphonia, more clearly than when I listen to Hilliard? I'm much more used to 16th century music where in counterpoint an ideal is voix égales. So I'm feeling all at sea with Dufay at the moment.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

I think they're trying to sell their product.

It's a lot easier for me to hear the different parts/voices in Oxford Camerata's performance than the awfully balanced recording by Cantica Symphonia (I guess their other recordings are better, but I'm not enough of a fan to have listened to them much).

I find that vocal groups have enough balance issues without bringing in brass instruments, authentic as that may have been in some cases.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

It's just that they talk about this hierarchy of voices as if it's a well known fact among scholars of early music. It's like they don't want you to hear all the voices equally like you can in other recordings, they seem to think that you miss out on something important (harmonically? I'm not sure what really.) I'd be surprised if they were charlatans. But maybe I'm gullible. I don't think they ever claim to be authentic, at least not in the sense of trying to play it like Dufay may have done.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Accidentals apply only to the note in front of which they occur. Not all chromatic changes are notated, as you know (musica ficta). Some years ago, Willi Apel, in his _The Notation of Polyphonic Music_, wrote that issues about when to apply accidentals in the case of partial signatures were among the most contentious in musicology. He generally favored observing the notated signatures, often even when it resulted in cross-relations. But he also developed a rule of thumb for the top voice (the one without a Bb) when the other voices have Bbs: He suggested that when a notated B is reached by step from either side, it should be natural, but when it was approached or left by leap, it should be flatted. This was more than fifty years ago, however, and I'm not sure what the current state of play is on these issues.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> It's just that they talk about this hierarchy of voices as if it's a well known fact among scholars of early music. It's like they don't want you to hear all the voices equally like you can in other recordings, they seem to think that you miss out on something important (harmonically? I'm not sure what really.) I'd be surprised if they were charlatans. But maybe I'm gullible. I don't think they ever claim to be authentic, at least not in the sense of trying to play it like Dufay may have done.


They seem to often be bringing out the tenor - the cantus firmus (usually in elaborated form so that you don't even recognise it) that Dufay's late masses are based on. I find it equally tasteless as highlighting the subject in a fugue every time it appears.

I suspect that if Dufay had wanted the cantus firmus to be emphasised, he wouldn't have taken such pains to make it a transparent part of the texture as a whole.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Chordalrock said:


> They seem to often be bringing out the tenor - the cantus firmus (usually in elaborated form so that you don't even recognise it) that Dufay's late masses are based on. I find it equally tasteless as highlighting the subject in a fugue every time it appears.
> 
> I suspect that if Dufay had wanted the cantus firmus to be emphasised, he wouldn't have taken such pains to make it a transparent part of the texture as a whole.


It's really annoying that they can produce such a contentious recording and yet say so little about what the reasoning behind it is. When Harnoncourt and Leonhardt started to perform with small cell articulation there was lots of justification about rhetoric in the background, so at least there was a way of making sense of what they were up to. But with Cantica Symohinia, I can find nothing more than the interview on the Glossa website, which is opaque.

Anyway, the good news is that I've been really enjoying Oxford Camerata play the mass today. And I feel so enthusiastic about the music that I've ordered Jeunes Solistes.

It's just that at the back of my mind there's this little voice which keeps telling me that I may be hearing 14th century music through a 16th century lens!


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> Anyway, the good news is that I've been really enjoying Oxford Camerata play the mass today. And I feel so enthusiastic about the music that I've ordered Jeunes Solistes.


Prepare for a tempo shock. They are quite a bit faster than the Oxford Camerata, even considerably faster than the Hilliards. They're great though. I've come to enjoy their tempos and suspect that they are closer to authentic than the other groups, though I still prefer Oxford Camerata for the credo (who are actually quite fast in the last few minutes because they speed up at one point).


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I heard Missa Ecce Ancilla Domini for the first time today, the recording by Ensemble Gilles Binchois. Wikipedia (France) says this is much later than Si la face est pâle and Homme Armé. Missa Ave Regina Coelorum is late too, I haven't heard it yet. 

Re Cantica Symphonia, I noticed that their early recordings on Stradivarius show that they took advice from Kees Boeke (he's credited as music director) and so it could be him who gave them ideas about how to use instruments in masses. Has anyone heard those early recordings? I wonder if their style changed.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> I heard Missa Ecce Ancilla Domini for the first time today, the recording by Ensemble Gilles Binchois. Wikipedia (France) says this is much later than Si la face est pâle and Homme Armé. Missa Ave Regina Coelorum is late too, I haven't heard it yet.
> 
> Re Cantica Symphonia, I noticed that their early recordings on Stradivarius show that they took advice from Kees Boeke (he's credited as music director) and so it could be him who gave them ideas about how to use instruments in masses. Has anyone heard those early recordings? I wonder if their style changed.


Their "Missa Ave regina caelorum" from 1999 is on Spotify. I'm not that interested in doing comparisons, so I'll let you do the work. I remember their recording of that mass as being pleasant enough, but I'd prefer a group like Binchois Consort.

The mass "L'homme arme" is the second-to-last of Dufay's surviving masses and a very late work according to Taruskin (in his Oxford History of Music). His arguments are speculative, and I don't think there's any certainty about it one way or another.

David Fallows (the pioneering Dufay biographer) has very nice things to say about all of Dufay's mature masses, so you may be interested in them all, including the mass for St Anthony of Padua (nicely done by Binchois Consort). Don't confuse this mass with the spurious and rather weak Mass for St Anthony Abbott that they also recorded.

All the five of Dufay's major surviving masses have now been mentioned. Another mass from him that I would mention is the mass for St James the Greater, which is more Medieval, though not as glorious as some of his early isorhythmic motets, but certainly something you may like. Cappella Pratensis did a slow churchy rendering that has a certain magic to it. Binchois Consort are tons faster, have drier acoustics, and sound like they're singing one-voice-per-part (though they have enough singers to sing two voices per part, so I'm not sure what the reality is). This album also has three of his early isorhythmic motets, nicely performed (though I'd like a better, more uniform balance instead of highlighting different lines at different times).


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

In case you didn't notice, Cantica Symphonia have some stuff on youtube as well. Here's the gloria from their 2013 recording of "Missa Se la face ay pale":


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

That's quite a contrast between Cappella Pratensis and Binchois Consort in the St James Mass. I find CP challenging at the moment, because there seem to be relatively few contrasts within movements. But what they do is beautiful and interesting. They make it sound static and introspective.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

It's interesting that Dufay set both the mass ordinary and the mass proprium in that work. And good, because I think Offertorium is the highlight of that mass. The St Padua mass is another one where Dufay set the whole mass instead of just the five movements you find in his later masses.


----------

