On Thursday, December 10, 2020 at 11:32:05 AM UTC-8, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> So 2021 is the 500th anniversary of the death of Josquin Desprez.
> According to some people, he's the greatest composer in Western
> music history. I don't have any particular interest in engaging
> with that debate per se, and don't necessarily even consider him
> to be the best of his era myself, but did want to contextualize the
> anniversary....
>
> Are there people here who will be interested and/or following the
> releases? I hope there are many releases. There have been a few
> already, and my intent is to review all of them (well, depending
> on volume & perhaps not if done in a modern style, etc.)....
>
> This is far from symbolic for me. Pace discussions elsewhere in
> this group (to which I often cannot relate), I'd say that much of
> Josquin's best music has received mediocre (at best) renditions to
> this point. Getting the understanding together AND getting the
> vocal technique together has taken a long time. To this point,
> pace the other conversation, I'd say most of "the music" (in the
> abstract/silly Kantian or Platonic sense) has been left on the page
> -- so to speak. Some gets through.
>
> I've been eager for improved performances around this repertory for
> a long time, and am hoping the anniversary will spur much. I mean,
> things have continued to improve, slowly....

(Recent Y. upload):

Unsatisfyingly sweet: Josquin's Mille Regretz

Not Josquin, but I’ve found myself really enjoying Andrew Kirkman’s old recording called Josquin and his Contemporaries - and in particular the De Produndis by Nicolas Champion. Graindelavoix also recorded it. I don’t care if Kirkman’s style is part of a neo colonial subjugation of the pre modern, it’s fucking gorgeous.

So little of this composer on record, but there is a whole mass by Graindelavoix - Schmelzer clearly an advocate.

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 3:37:26 PM UTC+1, Mandryka wrote:
> Not Josquin, but I’ve found myself really enjoying Andrew Kirkman’s old recording called Josquin and his Contemporaries - and in particular the De Produndis by Nicolas Champion. Graindelavoix also recorded it. I don’t care if Kirkman’s style is part of a neo colonial subjugation of the pre modern, it’s fucking gorgeous.
>
> So little of this composer on record, but there is a whole mass by Graindelavoix - Schmelzer clearly an advocate.

Also listened to Capella Pratensis with Missa Ave Maris Stella - what’s interesting is that I think you can hear Rebecca Stewart’s influence even though it Stratton Bull.

In article <55150405-e313-49fe-8b0a-653f2abc8ba9n@googlegroups.com>,
Mandryka <howie.stone01@gmail.com> wrote:
>Not Josquin, but I’ve found myself really enjoying Andrew Kirkman’s
>old recording called Josquin and his Contemporaries ....

Didn't someone say Kirkman is doing a new Josquin album?

I see that eight mass recordings from Tetsuro Hanai are now on spotify and elsewhere, i.e. out of Japan.

In article <dbf66fd4-e808-4d4d-8bf3-d5027fc6fd97n@googlegroups.com>,
Mandryka <howie.stone01@gmail.com> wrote:
>I see that eight mass recordings from Tetsuro Hanai are now on
>spotify and elsewhere, i.e. out of Japan.

Ha, after I finally relented this year & ordered from Japan...!
Well, it's good these will be in the more general conversation.

On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 at 2:41:29 PM UTC-4, Mandryka wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 at 7:27:52 PM UTC+1, Mandryka wrote:
> > And the booklet for the Hilliard set describes it as one of Josquin's finest works -- an essay by Mark Audus who is, or was, in the music department of Nottingham University.
> And work on the attribution was done by Patrick Macey, who has created a Josquin edition -- apparently he argues it's more likely to be Champion than Josquin -- based on a statistical analysis of their "musical habits."
>
> (From Josquin's Qui habitat and the Psalm Motets by Leeman L. Perkins -- in Jstor.)

Oof - knowing what I know how about the history of attribution of the Josquin(?) Missa Mater patris I feel strongly predisposed to distrust such analysis...

On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 5:05:55 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> In article <dbf66fd4-e808-4d4d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Mandryka <howie....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I see that eight mass recordings from Tetsuro Hanai are now on
> >spotify and elsewhere, i.e. out of Japan.
> Ha, after I finally relented this year & ordered from Japan...!
> Well, it's good these will be in the more general conversation.

Was a very welcome surprise to find them suddenly on youtube...

Anyway, arbitrarily returning to Stewart's and related recordings in the past few days, still thinking about the issue of this approach rendering rhythmic ideas clearly present in the written music almost inaudible... I think it's a strong criticism.

I think I was wrong to generalize from my impression of the Cappella Pratensis Dufay recording (formless, directionless) to the idea that the Stewart approach doesn't effectively serve pre-Ockeghem composers. The 2002 (not 2005!) Machaut with Schola Cantorum Brabantiae has, since then, become for me the premier example of the strength of the overall approach, the piece sounding more formed and directional than in anybody else's hands. I think I just don't really like the Dufay mass itself, the booklet even proposes that it's a show-off-y consolidation of many international styles by a young Dufay with something to prove, which indeed doesn't seem likely to appeal...

Also, I seem to remember that the argument for extreme close-miking in Beauty Farm and related ensembles is: there's all this (rhythmic etc.) nuance/complexity in the written music, but there's 'no way' (in quotes because of course Stewart at least claims to have 'solved' this 'problem) to sing it such that, in church acoustics, that effectively translates to the churchgoing audience, who hear more of a smeared smudged sound, so it must have been written for the enjoyment and indulgence of the singers (cf. Ockeghem's various notational puzzles), so we should make recordings that present what the singers hear rather than what the audience hears? If I am representing this correctly, it does seem to be about as much of a 'plot hole'/implausibility as the issue of rhythm in Stewart's approach. What does Beauty Farm sound like from the audience? (As I'm typing this, I haven't even yet bothered to type 'beauty farm live' into youtube...)

Also - been listening to vocal subgenres of gagaku music, saibara and roei, and really quite strongly struck by the similarities with Stewart and with, by extension, Dagar dhrupad... I knew Stewart had played in a gagaku ensemble in the 1960s but without hearing this type of vocalization I didn't have the pieces to put together, to imagine the seed of Stewart's approach as: noticing similarity between gagaku and dhrupad vocalization (and, I don't know, presumably Sardinian modal polyphony too or something like that), generalizing from this about an archaic layer of overtone-oriented vocal techniques once common to liturgical chant in general, and then of course reconstructing an analogous approach for Josquin etc....

In article <834e9271-1238-4f87-8623-ef5a60166e8cn@googlegroups.com>,
cheregi <elirkerry@gmail.com> wrote:
>I seem to remember that the argument for extreme close-miking ....
I would not call it "extreme." In fact, I would say that a lot of
mic'ing in this repertory is rather distant. :-)
>... so we should make recordings that present what the singers
>hear rather than what the audience hears?
This is more or less what Jesse Rodin says in his new recording,
where they go for more presence as well. It's welcome to me, and
I think you're dividing the poles too much, in that in practice,
in person, one can adjust one's ear fairly well between "closer"
listening & hearing the bigger acoustic. However, when recordings
focus on the latter, the former becomes impossible. Perhaps that
will change with the "high def" recordings genre....
But of course, who was really the intended audience for this music?
As far as implausibility arguments go....

Also:
>The 2002 (not 2005!) Machaut with Schola Cantorum Brabantiae ....

This recording seems not to be listed at the FAQ. Where is the
information for it? It seems not to have been a commercial release....

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 9:50:40 PM UTC, cheregi wrote:
> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 5:05:55 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > In article <dbf66fd4-e808-4d4d...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Mandryka <howie....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >I see that eight mass recordings from Tetsuro Hanai are now on
> > >spotify and elsewhere, i.e. out of Japan.
> > Ha, after I finally relented this year & ordered from Japan...!
> > Well, it's good these will be in the more general conversation.
> Was a very welcome surprise to find them suddenly on youtube...
>
> Anyway, arbitrarily returning to Stewart's and related recordings in the past few days, still thinking about the issue of this approach rendering rhythmic ideas clearly present in the written music almost inaudible... I think it's a strong criticism.
>
> I think I was wrong to generalize from my impression of the Cappella Pratensis Dufay recording (formless, directionless) to the idea that the Stewart approach doesn't effectively serve pre-Ockeghem composers. The 2002 (not 2005!) Machaut with Schola Cantorum Brabantiae has, since then, become for me the premier example of the strength of the overall approach, the piece sounding more formed and directional than in anybody else's hands. I think I just don't really like the Dufay mass itself, the booklet even proposes that it's a show-off-y consolidation of many international styles by a young Dufay with something to prove, which indeed doesn't seem likely to appeal....
>
> Also, I seem to remember that the argument for extreme close-miking in Beauty Farm and related ensembles is: there's all this (rhythmic etc.) nuance/complexity in the written music, but there's 'no way' (in quotes because of course Stewart at least claims to have 'solved' this 'problem) to sing it such that, in church acoustics, that effectively translates to the churchgoing audience, who hear more of a smeared smudged sound, so it must have been written for the enjoyment and indulgence of the singers (cf. Ockeghem's various notational puzzles), so we should make recordings that present what the singers hear rather than what the audience hears? If I am representing this correctly, it does seem to be about as much of a 'plot hole'/implausibility as the issue of rhythm in Stewart's approach. What does Beauty Farm sound like from the audience? (As I'm typing this, I haven't even yet bothered to type 'beauty farm live' into youtube...)
>
> Also - been listening to vocal subgenres of gagaku music, saibara and roei, and really quite strongly struck by the similarities with Stewart and with, by extension, Dagar dhrupad... I knew Stewart had played in a gagaku ensemble in the 1960s but without hearing this type of vocalization I didn't have the pieces to put together, to imagine the seed of Stewart's approach as: noticing similarity between gagaku and dhrupad vocalization (and, I don't know, presumably Sardinian modal polyphony too or something like that), generalizing from this about an archaic layer of overtone-oriented vocal techniques once common to liturgical chant in general, and then of course reconstructing an analogous approach for Josquin etc....

I have heard concerts in Holland and Belgium in Renaissance churches which have excellent acoustics.

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 5:08:41 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> I would not call it "extreme." In fact, I would say that a lot of
> mic'ing in this repertory is rather distant. :-)

That's a good reframing, I do tend to agree with you there.

> This is more or less what Jesse Rodin says in his new recording,
> where they go for more presence as well. It's welcome to me, and
> I think you're dividing the poles too much, in that in practice,
> in person, one can adjust one's ear fairly well between "closer"
> listening & hearing the bigger acoustic. However, when recordings
> focus on the latter, the former becomes impossible. Perhaps that
> will change with the "high def" recordings genre....

Interesting, that does make sense... Living in Seattle and Denver and not being particularly interested in the majority of these ensembles I've yet to actually experience any of this music live.

> But of course, who was really the intended audience for this music?
> As far as implausibility arguments go....

I'm not totally sure what you mean here. It seems like, for example, in madrigals it makes sense to imagine the singers as the primary audience because the singers are wealthy amateurs who can patronize composers and are therefore worth impressing, but in masses the singers are lower-status working professionals, so the music is clearly public-facing.

> This recording seems not to be listed at the FAQ. Where is the
> information for it? It seems not to have been a commercial release....

I came across it almost by accident, but looking now the only place I can find any mention is here: http://www.machali.net/Early%20Music/Discography/EMD_PQ.htm , which has entries for both the 2001/2(?) and 2005 recordings. But the files I have (for the earlier recording) include scans of reasonably professional-looking CD case, booklet essay in 3 languages... There's a 'Fontys' logo, presumably the conservatory, and 'JLR 20021' in several places.. I'd happily supply the files. The 2005 is a lower-quality live recording with no metadata which I think I acquired from Mandryka, actually.

Two more Stewart-related recordings, which I haven't heard, include the Hadewijch CD that accompanied a book in Dutch, and this 2007 Cantus Modalis: https://www.muziekweb.nl/Link/DBX8501/Missa-Fontes-et-omnia

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 5:42:02 PM UTC-5, Mandryka wrote:
> I have heard concerts in Holland and Belgium in Renaissance churches which have excellent acoustics.

Excellent as in, easy to hear everything going on? Interesting. I think there's something also about how a lot of those churches have been modified since? Maybe that's b.s.

In article <d2f01e72-a21a-4d5c-9058-2db102c47444n@googlegroups.com>,
cheregi <elirkerry@gmail.com> wrote:
>It seems like, for example, in madrigals it makes sense to imagine
>the singers as the primary audience because the singers are wealthy
>amateurs who can patronize composers and are therefore worth
>impressing, but in masses the singers are lower-status working
>professionals, so the music is clearly public-facing.

We're talking about prior to the Reformation. And a public that
was accustomed e.g. to listening to entire services in a language
they didn't understand. To me, this is a matter of degree: Then
as now, someone's grandma (to pick an unfair trope...) will simply
glory in the overall sonic spectacle. Someone else will be listening
to musical details. And various degrees of attentiveness in between.
The economic situation you're suggesting, though, didn't really
maintain yet. The sorts of expert singers singing a Josquin mass
would be more like ivory tower academics -- even cloistered! These
were among the most educated people of the period. They had bosses,
but the public wasn't them (& the public sometimes resented it!).

[re: Stewart Machaut...]
>I came across it almost by accident, but looking now the only place
>I can find any mention is here:
>http://www.machali.net/Early%20Music/Discography/EMD_PQ.htm

Hmm, Jorge Salazar has contributed many entries to the FAQ discography,
but not those "private label" items.

So I ask first from my "institutional" role about listing these
recordings.... Of course "private recording" opens up who knows
what....

But yes, I would also be happy to hear this as a listener, if it's
convenient and doesn't seem like it's running afoul of someone's
rights....

I believe the source of Rebecca Stewart’s Machaut recording is here - if the link on the page doesn’t work say and I’ll upload it for you

http://intoclassics.net/news/2010-09-17-18584

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 9:50:40 PM UTC, cheregi wrote:
> On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 5:05:55 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > In article <dbf66fd4-e808-4d4d...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Mandryka <howie....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >I see that eight mass recordings from Tetsuro Hanai are now on
> > >spotify and elsewhere, i.e. out of Japan.
> > Ha, after I finally relented this year & ordered from Japan...!
> > Well, it's good these will be in the more general conversation.
> Was a very welcome surprise to find them suddenly on youtube...
>
> Anyway, arbitrarily returning to Stewart's and related recordings in the past few days, still thinking about the issue of this approach rendering rhythmic ideas clearly present in the written music almost inaudible... I think it's a strong criticism.
>
> I think I was wrong to generalize from my impression of the Cappella Pratensis Dufay recording (formless, directionless) to the idea that the Stewart approach doesn't effectively serve pre-Ockeghem composers. The 2002 (not 2005!) Machaut with Schola Cantorum Brabantiae has, since then, become for me the premier example of the strength of the overall approach, the piece sounding more formed and directional than in anybody else's hands. I think I just don't really like the Dufay mass itself, the booklet even proposes that it's a show-off-y consolidation of many international styles by a young Dufay with something to prove, which indeed doesn't seem likely to appeal....
>
> Also, I seem to remember that the argument for extreme close-miking in Beauty Farm and related ensembles is: there's all this (rhythmic etc.) nuance/complexity in the written music, but there's 'no way' (in quotes because of course Stewart at least claims to have 'solved' this 'problem) to sing it such that, in church acoustics, that effectively translates to the churchgoing audience, who hear more of a smeared smudged sound, so it must have been written for the enjoyment and indulgence of the singers (cf. Ockeghem's various notational puzzles), so we should make recordings that present what the singers hear rather than what the audience hears? If I am representing this correctly, it does seem to be about as much of a 'plot hole'/implausibility as the issue of rhythm in Stewart's approach. What does Beauty Farm sound like from the audience? (As I'm typing this, I haven't even yet bothered to type 'beauty farm live' into youtube...)
>
> Also - been listening to vocal subgenres of gagaku music, saibara and roei, and really quite strongly struck by the similarities with Stewart and with, by extension, Dagar dhrupad... I knew Stewart had played in a gagaku ensemble in the 1960s but without hearing this type of vocalization I didn't have the pieces to put together, to imagine the seed of Stewart's approach as: noticing similarity between gagaku and dhrupad vocalization (and, I don't know, presumably Sardinian modal polyphony too or something like that), generalizing from this about an archaic layer of overtone-oriented vocal techniques once common to liturgical chant in general, and then of course reconstructing an analogous approach for Josquin etc....

I rather appreciate the Cappella Pratensis Dufay, I don’t think it is directionless, there are cadences and climaxes. What I like most is that they’re good with the words, they make the poetry of the mass sound meaningful.

Re the acoustics of churches, remember that some of this music was site specific and written for specific occasions. Dufay’s Nuper Rosarum Flores was written for the consecration of Florence Cathedral, for example - the motet was written for a grand public ceremony in precisely that building..

On Wednesday, November 10, 2021 at 2:08:26 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> We're talking about prior to the Reformation. And a public that
> was accustomed e.g. to listening to entire services in a language
> they didn't understand. To me, this is a matter of degree: Then
> as now, someone's grandma (to pick an unfair trope...) will simply
> glory in the overall sonic spectacle. Someone else will be listening
> to musical details. And various degrees of attentiveness in between.
> The economic situation you're suggesting, though, didn't really
> maintain yet. The sorts of expert singers singing a Josquin mass
> would be more like ivory tower academics -- even cloistered! These
> were among the most educated people of the period. They had bosses,
> but the public wasn't them (& the public sometimes resented it!).

Interesting... surprised as always by the sheer scale of societal transformation in Europe from pre-imperial to imperial era... and also feeling like I should read up a bit on the actual social circumstances in which Josquin masses etc. were performed...

> Hmm, Jorge Salazar has contributed many entries to the FAQ discography,
> but not those "private label" items.
>
> So I ask first from my "institutional" role about listing these
> recordings.... Of course "private recording" opens up who knows
> what....
>
> But yes, I would also be happy to hear this as a listener, if it's
> convenient and doesn't seem like it's running afoul of someone's
> rights....

Just sent a link. One of the singers credited for this recording actually happened to have answered my email inquiry to Cantus Modalis a few years ago, when I couldn't find some of the early Cappella Pratensis CDs. He freely sent over all the files. If I'd known about this Machaut I would've asked for it too, instead of stumbling upon it later.

On Wednesday, November 10, 2021 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-5, Mandryka wrote:
> I rather appreciate the Cappella Pratensis Dufay, I don’t think it is directionless, there are cadences and climaxes. What I like most is that they’re good with the words, they make the poetry of the mass sound meaningful.

I might have just been overwhelmed by sheer variety, with no monophonic chant to rest my ears on between sections. I listened again to the Alleluia and enjoyed it more without context. I agree that there is an especial attention to words here that pays off.

> Re the acoustics of churches, remember that some of this music was site specific and written for specific occasions. Dufay’s Nuper Rosarum Flores was written for the consecration of Florence Cathedral, for example - the motet was written for a grand public ceremony in precisely that building.

I've often heard Gabrieli's later innovation of polychoral style described as the most significant instance where the acoustics of a single building shaped evolution in musical aesthetics across an entire continent. Maybe this is true of Nostre Dame as well? And I'm curious if anything else was written with Florence Cathedral in mind. I've been thinking a lot about the ways that acoustic environments shape development of music in hunter-gatherer/pastoralist/farming/'mostly-outdoors' cultures, attention to harmony correlating with dense jungle or high mountain, attention to monophonic melody correlating to deserts and flatlands. Armchair ethnomusicology...

Anyway I just sent the 2001 Machaut to you as well on talkclassical.

Re the Dufay St James mass, Andrew Kirkman doesn’t mention the idea that is a show off student work. Reading his essay reminded me of something I knew but am always forgetting, that Dufay composed the propers as well as the ordinarium. An interesting scholarly essay, and it’s good to have Kirkman’s interpretation to complement Stewart’s.

https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/notes/55272-B.pdf

On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 9:17:13 AM UTC, Mandryka wrote:
> Re the Dufay St James mass, Andrew Kirkman doesn’t mention the idea that is a show off student work. Reading his essay reminded me of something I knew but am always forgetting, that Dufay composed the propers as well as the ordinarium. An interesting scholarly essay, and it’s good to have Kirkman’s interpretation to complement Stewart’s.
>
> https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/notes/55272-B.pdf

My real point is, that it’s a good idea to NOT skip the propers - which is what I often do out of habit! Of course it makes the experience much longer, but that’s good!

In article <cdf8f71a-6df1-41da-a7d9-4c84973dbab2n@googlegroups.com>,
cheregi <elirkerry@gmail.com> wrote:
>... significant instance where the acoustics of a single building
>shaped evolution in musical aesthetics across an entire continent.
>Maybe this is true of Nostre Dame as well?

Not really, no. Although the acoustics of Nostre Dame have been
identified (speculated?) as contributing to specific harmonic
relations in the Machaut Mass, most of the more elaborate polyphonic
Mass movements of the period are actually from Avignon & elsewhere.
That Machaut wrote an entire Mass Ordinary as a single cycle was a
novelty, but not the style in general.

>Anyway I just sent the 2001 Machaut to you as well on talkclassical.

Thanks also for that. I have a couple of basic thoughts.

1) The "first thing" I wanted to hear in a 2001 recording was how
they handled the long texts of the Gloria & Credo. It was 2004,
as I recall, that Clemencic put out a recording with a more declamatory
style, and that's changed how these pieces are performed. These
are rather limp, maybe parts of the Credo are steps in that
direction....

2) Especially for a group concerned so strongly with vocal
sound/technique that they let it determine their pace/phrasing, the
prominence of women's voices must be noted. Not only that, they
come off to me as pretty generic Western singers of the 21st century
-- more so than the men. And dominate much of the sound, seeming
particularly jarring in the plainchant IMO.

In article <smmhns$dan$1@hope.eyrie.org>,
Todd M. McComb <mccomb@medieval.org> wrote:
>Although the acoustics of Nostre Dame have been identified
>(speculated?) as contributing to specific harmonic relations ....

Sorry, I'm confusing my remarks. :-)

In article <smmhns$dan$1@hope.eyrie.org>,
Todd M. McComb <mccomb@medieval.org> wrote:
>It was 2004, as I recall, that Clemencic put out a recording with
>a more declamatory style, ....

2001, recorded in 1999, so bad memory there....

(I should really learn something about thinking I should post hastily
before setting off on some stressful errands for the day. But was
thinking I'd forget what I wanted to say.... Instead I'm just
highly inaccurate. Sigh.)

Regarding the cathedral line, it's been proposed that acoustics of
the Reims Cathedral affected the harmonies of the Machaut Kyrie.

On Saturday, November 13, 2021 at 2:06:33 AM UTC, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> In article <smmhns$dan$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
> Todd M. McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
> >It was 2004, as I recall, that Clemencic put out a recording with
> >a more declamatory style, ....
>
> 2001, recorded in 1999, so bad memory there....
>
> (I should really learn something about thinking I should post hastily
> before setting off on some stressful errands for the day. But was
> thinking I'd forget what I wanted to say.... Instead I'm just
> highly inaccurate. Sigh.)
>
> Regarding the cathedral line, it's been proposed that acoustics of
> the Reims Cathedral affected the harmonies of the Machaut Kyrie.

That Clemencic recording of Machaut - all of it, not just the mass - is a great favourite of mine. It’s probably the Machaut recording I play the most.

I’m not really in the mood today, but some time soon I’ll listen to the Stewart and also to Tetsuro Hanai in the mass, from memory they were not dissimilar. I don’t know if I’ve ever got through all of Stewart’s recording, I think I’ve always skipped the propers.

I feel a bit disgruntled to discover that Tetsuro Hanai haven’t recorded my favourite Josquin mass, Gaudeamus. Is it not really by Josquin?

In article <4868670d-12d1-4762-84c8-d4d768382ff4n@googlegroups.com>,
Mandryka <howie.stone01@gmail.com> wrote:
>I feel a bit disgruntled to discover that Tetsuro Hanai haven’t
>recorded my favourite Josquin mass, Gaudeamus. Is it not really by
>Josquin?

Never seen anything to suggest it wasn't by Josquin... certainly
sounds it to me.

Is it on their final recording of the cycle? That sounds right
to me.