Choral Public Domain Library

Anyone know how one pronounces the "ex audi" in the Requiem sentence "Ex audi orationem meam". In our conductors opinion is must be "ekzaudi", while sometimes on recordings "eks, audi" in a cut way, is heard. Which is the right way?
Thanks!

I checked the editions of the Requiem available to me, and all of them show "exaudi" as a single word (not "ex audi").

From a syntax viewpoint, the word "exaudi" may be regarded as composed by the prefix "ex" and the verb "audi", but I don't think this is enough to justify a complete separation between the two syllables when they are pronounced. Honestly speaking, I would not sponsor the "eks, audi" version.

Also, I'm not sure that "ekzaudi" is best, as it probably tends to produce a too soft sound for the "x". I would suggest "eksaudi" with a sharp "s" (such as in "class").

Regards.

Max

Exaudi is actually a single word (imperative of exaudire, "listen to!"). My old Novello edition of the Mozart Requiem doesn't show any particular articulation on the exaudis, so to that extent your conductor is probably right. I've tried to check on the Neue Mozart-Ausgabe site to see what current scholarship makes of this passage, but it seems to be currently inaccessible. (I know exactly what you mean about those recordings that go ex-au-di at this point - perhaps in the MS there are staccatos here. I'll wait for the Neue Mozart-Ausgabe to come back and take a look.)

DF

Hi Dave,

The editions I checked are the NMA, the transcription of the original manuscript made by Philip Legge, plus two commercial editions (Peters and Baerenreiter). Apparently, no one of them shows a "staccato" a that specific point.

Regards.

Max

Thanks, Max. What should we say then - just enough separation to avoid sounding like "Eggs Audi" (which sounds like something you would cook in a powerful car)?

DF

I'm reminded how many (at least American) choral conductors insist their choristers pronounce excelsis ... namely as "eggshell sis" ... which really grates on my nerves. I think they are seeking to make (too) easy the pronunciation "eks-chel-sis" - as opposed to pronunciation "ex-sel-sis", as often (here in the states, at least) in the chorus to the carol "Angels we have heard on high".

Chuck

I don't know which pronounciation you prefer, but in most English speaking countries the Italian pronounciation of Latin is the most common one.
For Italian it has to be: ks for x --> eks-au-di

It might be possible to use gz (egz-au-di), but I'm not shure. The main problem is, that a letter "x" does not exist in Italian any more. But the "ks" version should be fine.

During a year in Britain I surprisingly experienced that most English speaking people have quite big problems with the Italian pronounciation. For Germans it's much easier, because the vowels are nearly similar.

It is probably interesting to note that the pronounciation of Latin language may be either "Classical" (i.e., as pronounced by the Romans some 2000 years ago) or "Ecclesiastical" (i.e., as commonly adopted by the Catholic Church). Given the nature of the sacred music works, I think that the use of the ecclesiastical pronounciation is more appropriate.

The ecclesiastical pronounciation is almost identical to the Italian pronounciation, besides few exceptions. See this article: http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/eccl ... _latin.htm for details. Being Italian mother tongue I do not completely agree with the way some sounds are represented in the article, however it's probably an acceptable compromise for native English speakers (or actually singers, in our case).

Max

It's almost impossible to pronounce right classical Latin, also it's not common to do so in music.

There was a special French, English, German, Italian etc. pronounciation in the past, but only the Italian (I suppose this is meant by the "Ecclesiastical" one) and the German ones have survived.

That's not true. There is also the Latin spoken and sung in 15th-16th century Britain, distinctly different from ecclesiatical (italianate) Latin and from germanic Latin.

Chuck

I wish to thank everybody for taking the time answering my question. I didn't know one simple word would bring us so far.
The answers tend to go in one direction. The x should be hard "ks" and not like in "eggs". And the word should be heard as one word, no staccato's.
I listened to my version of the Requiem by Van Herreweghe's Collegium Vocale (the clearest articulating choir in the world, i think) and I noticed something special here. The sopranos have longer notes (quarters and not eigths like the other voices) and the exaudi is slightly different. The beginning vowel in audi is more clearly articulated. In the other voices the exaudi is more bound.

Thanks again,
Regards.

CHGiffen wrote:There is also the Latin spoken and sung in 15th-16th century Britain, distinctly different from ecclesiatical (italianate) Latin and from germanic Latin.

That's right, but I think today it's quite unusual, athough there might be some people using it.

We're going off the original subject now, but a lot of early vocal ensembles now seem to use vernacular Latin pronunciation - The Cardinalls Musick and Chapelle du Roi in their respective Byrd and Tallis recordings, for example. And one of the (many, many) joys of the Oxford Camerata's recording of the Messe de Nostre Dame is the medieval French pronunciation ("Credo in ünung Deung")

DF

Latin pronunciation is indeed a can of worms! On the first, original point, given that Mozart was a German-speaker, it would seem to make sense to use a German pronunciation of Latin, which is what most German-speaking singers still do. On the specific word 'exaudi', Germans would spot that the word has 2 separate components and would separate them with a glottal stop on 'au', just as they would in a German word like 'unerwartet' (unexpected) which has a break after the 'n' and a glottal stop on the 'e'. The Germans are not as obsessed by singing with a clinging legato as some! However, to be consistent in performance one would need to take on board all the other peculiarities in their pronunciation of the Mass, starting with the very first syllable: Ky (pronounced u Umlaut), and not forgetting that whilst final e's are neutral in sound, long e's in the middle of a word are narrow (the first vowel of 'venit' sounds like that of 'Ehre').

Secondly: excelsis. As 'eks-chelsis' is quite a mouthful, many are prepared to compromise by singing 'ek-shelsis', which calls for less movement of the tongue and sounds fairly similar.

Finally, I have to tell you that English scholastic Latin pronunciation (as previously used at Eton College etc.) survived to my certain knowledge into the 1960s, and pretty grotesque it was, too! However, I often wonder, when my choir sings Stanford's 3 Motets or his Latin Magnificat (now THAT should be on CPDL), whether that is not what he would have expected.

RMD wrote: Secondly: excelsis. As 'eks-chelsis' is quite a mouthful, many are prepared to compromise by singing 'ek-shelsis', which calls for less movement of the tongue and sounds fairly similar.

There's more to it than that: this is actually the pronunciation recommended by the Solesmes monks for Gregorian chant, at least in their pronunciation guide at the beginning of English editions of the Liber Usualis. The logic would appear to be: x is equivalent to (Italian) cs, so xce equates to csce, which can be analysed as c-sce, hence the pronunciation /k-ʃɛ/.