Normally in a review like this I would give some contextual/historical information about the pieces, but Palestrina and his Missa Papae Marcelli probably need little of this. It is often pointed out that this mass was written partly as model for textual intelligibility in polyphonic music; it is, though, even more than that: it is a model for perfection in Renaissance form.

I have three other recordings of the Marcellus Mass - two are by the Tallis scholars (one on the Palestrina 400 collection and the other on another separate recording) and one is by a German Baroque choir that I can't and won't take the time to remember (the recording isn't very good). Of the two T. Scholars recordings, the one on the 400 collection is preferable for its tempo, the other for the better acoustics of the recording venue. Both are fine recordings - typical Tallis Scholars. I haven't heard the Voices of Ascension or Westminster Choir recordings of this mass, but they are probably good.

I would recommend this present recording over the T. Scholars ones, though, for different reasons. First, the acoustics are preferable - there's more resonance in this one. The most importance difference is not really in interpretation (both groups render the music as flowing smoothly and slowly) but in the choral sound. Summerly's choir simply sounds fuller. For all their precision, the Tallis Scholars recordings sound thin - their sound lacks body, compared to the Oxford Camerata, although the former does seem to carry with it, as I said, the singular advantage of linear precision. In any case, the Oxford group sounds less pinched and more full-voiced.

This really is a splendid recording - I only bought it to get the Aeterna Christi Munera mass, but was more than pleasantly surprised by the quality of both masses. This disc provides much more than you have a right to expect for 6 dollars. Strongest recommendations...


Beautiful music, great recording   June 20, 2000
 31 out of 36 found this review helpful

Palestrina's masses are unlike those of Bach, Beethoven, or Mozart. While the big three's masses are filled power and emotion, Palestrina's masses are more spiritual and reverent. They have a certain restrained quality to them which does nothing to diminish their great beauty, but perhaps makes them more reverent. "Otherworldly" might be a good word for these masses.

This is a wonderful recording - theperformances are first rate, and everything is quite clear.


Something familiar, something new   October 18, 2005
 14 out of 16 found this review helpful

--Palestrina--
Giovanni Pierluigi de Palestrina is sometimes called the greatest composer of the Roman Catholic church. Born in 1525 near Rome, he spent the better part of his career in service to the church as a choir member, choir master, conductor, composer and school master. He was sought after by many churches, and sometimes his popularity and skill got him into trouble both with his clerical patrons and with fellow musicians. He was offered prestigious positions in Rome and Vienna which were ultimately withdrawn because Palestrina's salary and conditions requirements were too high. He had some influence on the Council of Trent's musical decisions for reform of the Catholic worship practices, and was involved intimately with revising the Gradual and produced a harmonised version of the Latin Hymnal in 1589. He died in 1594.

--Masses--
The first mass presented here is Missa Papae Marcelli. Written in the 1550s, it wasn't published until the next decade. Pope Marcellus was only pope for a few weeks, but managed to endear himself to composers and conductors by insisting upon clarity as the highest of virtues for choristers. There is a joy to this, as Palestrina is definitely in the mode of celebrating the life of Pope Marcellus. This is one of Palestrina's most recorded works.

The second mass, Missa Aeterna Christi Munera is likewise a strong composition, although it is much less known than the first. Palestrina wrote over 100 masses in his lifetime (in addition to a wide range of other pieces), so it is not surprising that there might be some relatively overlooked. This particular mass has a more solemn tone to it, but still soars magnificently, and has no real flaws in composition.

--Oxford Camerata and Jeremy Summerly--
The performance of both of these pieces is superb. Perhaps the better performance belongs to the second mass; the Camerata has twelve singers, who double on the six-voice Missa Papae Marcelli, but are able to triple on the four-voice Missa Aeterna Christi Munera. They play with tempo and expression in new ways. The Oxford Camerata was formed in the early 1990s under the direction of Jeremy Summerly - this disc is their second recording. (Legend has it there was a cement mixer just outside the Dorchester Abbey, and that the recording engineers missed the first session for recording due to car trouble.)

Summerly's direction and selection of material and interpretation is such that it bears watching in the future.




Palestrina's Masses...I love them all...   November 18, 2004
 13 out of 20 found this review helpful

I don't think is a good idea to compare composers
from three different musical periods; because of
their different mentalities, different cultures,
and different resources at their disposal...The
Missa Papae Marcelli is of interest because is
one of the earliest works to challange the regulations
in music of the Counter-Reformation; but yet in
other aspects it stays very close to what was expected
of Palestrina...Of special interest of the
Missa Papae Marcelli is the Mass'Gloria....
The Missa Aeterna...is a work that is based
on a motet a procedure that at the time
was a "BIG NO, NO" to the Counter-Reformation
movement...As all of the Palestrina Masses these
works are all full of beauty and serenity...
Oxford Camerata does a wonderful job....



Outstanding - music of the spheres.   October 12, 2005
 9 out of 11 found this review helpful

I've sung much renaissance polyphony, especially Palestrina, and this is about as good as recording gets. The musicality of the entire album, the perfect blend of voices (as well as a the utterly exquisite quality of that of the second tenor) and the perfection of the composition are all factors which contribute to something nonetheless mysteriously holy and beautiful about this recording; maybe what the music was really meant to be.