$350 and it's all yours...Baronius Breviarium Romanum

[Allan]

With all due respect, what is your problem? It would be perfectly justifiable to publicize a product that was riddled with errors. But any initial publication with over six thousand pages from any source is bound to have a mistake here and there. That is how things are in this life. But you seem to be on a mission to nitpick the Breviary to excess and loudly trumpet whatever imperfection you can find, for the sole purpose of embarrassing the company and potentially discouraging sales. Might I suggest keeping things in proper perspective and stop with the game of "gotcha"? What you are doing is hardly a Catholic way of supporting a Catholic operation.

Totally disagree.  Baronius took the better part of a decade of (their own!) missed deadlines to bring it to market.  They also publicized all they were doing to scrub errors from drafts, their indirect point (pitch?) being that the wait would be worth it.  If you followed the pre-release discussions, you'd know just how high market expectations had been ratcheted.

After all this, to still have typos scattered throughout the final product is totally inexcusable. Forgivable, certainly, but not excusable. 

Like I said, this whole Breviary fiasco has been amateur hour from A to X.*

(*pun intended)

[Ineffable1]

With all due respect, what is your problem? It would be perfectly justifiable to publicize a product that was riddled with errors. But any initial publication with over six thousand pages from any source is bound to have a mistake here and there. That is how things are in this life. But you seem to be on a mission to nitpick the Breviary to excess and loudly trumpet whatever imperfection you can find, for the sole purpose of embarrassing the company and potentially discouraging sales. Might I suggest keeping things in proper perspective and stop with the game of "gotcha"? What you are doing is hardly a Catholic way of supporting a Catholic operation.

Totally disagree.  Baronius took the better part of a decade of (their own!) missed deadlines to bring it to market.  They also publicized all they were doing to scrub errors from drafts, their indirect point (pitch?) being that the wait would be worth it.  If you followed the pre-release discussions, you'd know just how high market expectations had been ratcheted.

After all this, to still have typos scattered throughout the final product is totally inexcusable. Forgivable, certainly, but not excusable. 

Like I said, this whole Breviary fiasco has been amateur hour from A to X.*

(*pun intended)

Perhaps you missed my point. I was not objecting to annoyances about mistakes, per se, as long as they are not blown way out of proportion. In the case of the Breviary, now that it is physically in people's hands the amount of time it took and the expectations during the process are no longer relevant considerations. The only question is whether the mistakes are acceptable or not - "acceptable" being quantity and effect on usability.

More directly to my response to Nightflier101BL is that as of this writing, that account is brand new with only 3 posts, all of which are self-congratulatory announcements of possible typos he found in the new Breviary. The obvious conclusion is that the account was created expressly for the purpose of attacking the new publication and damaging the reputation of the Breviary and, by extension, Baronius Press. I will not hazard a guess as to his motive for doing so, but my point was that his actions strike me as unfairly targeting it for some unknown agenda. That is not the same as one of us regulars posting a comment now and then. So I politely requested him to cease his campaign. If he does not, I will appeal to the moderator to have his account suspended.

[tmw89]

Ineffable, I've been around on this site for very nearly a full year longer than you, and have even made it into the top 40 posters (albeit with no small help from the Games subforum  ), so I think you'll agree that I'm something of a regular.

Yes, it can be annoying when somebody like Nightflier101BL registers on a forum solely to complain about a new, highly-anticipated product - in this case, the six-years-in-the-making Baronius Breviary.  But before you go ahead and report him for his criticisms of the books - certainly not "attacks" if what he alleges as mistakes are, indeed, errors in the finished product - please consider how many other users here have yet to post about their own experience with the Breviary.  It's not like this thread is going to end on Nightflier101BL's sour notes!

I don't discourage anybody from reporting posts that violate the letter or spirit of the Forum Rules, but I don't see much need for reporting Nightflier101BL.  At least not yet.  You said as much yourself:  it's obvious he joined the forum with one motive in mind; I know we're on the Internet, host of illustrious Wikipedia articles and YouTube comments, but I'd like to think even the non-registered readers here can pick up on whether a critique is relevant and warranted... or not.

At least, I'd like to think that!   

[Nightflier101BL]

With all due respect, what is your problem? It would be perfectly justifiable to publicize a product that was riddled with errors. But any initial publication with over six thousand pages from any source is bound to have a mistake here and there. That is how things are in this life. But you seem to be on a mission to nitpick the Breviary to excess and loudly trumpet whatever imperfection you can find, for the sole purpose of embarrassing the company and potentially discouraging sales. Might I suggest keeping things in proper perspective and stop with the game of "gotcha"? What you are doing is hardly a Catholic way of supporting a Catholic operation.

Totally disagree.  Baronius took the better part of a decade of (their own!) missed deadlines to bring it to market.  They also publicized all they were doing to scrub errors from drafts, their indirect point (pitch?) being that the wait would be worth it.  If you followed the pre-release discussions, you'd know just how high market expectations had been ratcheted.

After all this, to still have typos scattered throughout the final product is totally inexcusable. Forgivable, certainly, but not excusable. 

Like I said, this whole Breviary fiasco has been amateur hour from A to X.*

(*pun intended)

Perhaps you missed my point. I was not objecting to annoyances about mistakes, per se, as long as they are not blown way out of proportion. In the case of the Breviary, now that it is physically in people's hands the amount of time it took and the expectations during the process are no longer relevant considerations. The only question is whether the mistakes are acceptable or not - "acceptable" being quantity and effect on usability.

More directly to my response to Nightflier101BL is that as of this writing, that account is brand new with only 3 posts, all of which are self-congratulatory announcements of possible typos he found in the new Breviary. The obvious conclusion is that the account was created expressly for the purpose of attacking the new publication and damaging the reputation of the Breviary and, by extension, Baronius Press. I will not hazard a guess as to his motive for doing so, but my point was that his actions strike me as unfairly targeting it for some unknown agenda. That is not the same as one of us regulars posting a comment now and then. So I politely requested him to cease his campaign. If he does not, I will appeal to the moderator to have his account suspended.

Well,

Please forgive me for offending anyone here.  I had no idea I would get people so upset.  My post pointing out the mistake was actually supposed to be in response to the fellow who directly asked me what specific errors I saw.  I never quoted his post, so that's my fault.

Please understand, I'm not here with any mission to hurt the company or make people upset.  This is not why I joined.  I thought this forum would be a great place to find resources and information relating to Traditional Catholicism.  It just so happened that my account became active while I was discovering these issues.  I also understand that there are plenty of folks out there who, in fact, come onto forums just to stir up things.  Now I feel terrible about my behavior and want everyone to know that it was not my intention.

Regarding the errors.  "Ineffable," you need to understand that I've been waiting patiently for these books for a couple of years.  Also, you need to understand that $350 is no small sum of money for my family.  I choose to make the investment and had no reason to expect anything other than perfection in a product that was many years in the making.  Also, I would like to think that Baronius would spend a little extra time on a product of such caliber, especially after other titles of theirs were produced with similar issues.

In regards to deterring sales, whether someone decides to buy the Breviary or not, after reading my comments, in no way concerns me or you.  If someone chooses to pass on them because of my post, then obviously they feel the same way about it that I do.  I posted my information to see if someone else found anything somewhere else to help me gauge my decision on if I wanted a refund or not.  I'm quite new to Latin and was going to use the Breviary in study along with prayer.  How can tell what's incorrect if I can't understand the language?

In closing, I do not think it is fair to make assumptions about me and start pointing fingers, let alone try to get me suspended when you haven't even given me the chance to explain myself.  Believe me, if I knew in advance that I'd be torn to shreds immediately, I would have chosen my words more carefully, especially in "Ineffable"'s presence.

Please accept my apologies.

Robert

[aquinas138]

It bears repeating that no project of this size is likely to be absolutely devoid of typos.  Every breviary I have has a few, including the Nova et Vetera edition and my 1943 Dessain.  As long as they are just typos and not incorrect texts, then it isn't that big of a deal.

[Cato76]

Thanks for the info!

The ribbons on my Divine Office from the FSSP are not the best quality either.  They look the same as on the Baronius edition.  How do you replace the ribbons and where can you buy them?

http://absnospin.blogspot.com/2010/01/paperclips-be-gone-make-your-own.html take a look

[Ineffable1]

Well,

Please forgive me for offending anyone here.  I had no idea I would get people so upset.  My post pointing out the mistake was actually supposed to be in response to the fellow who directly asked me what specific errors I saw.  I never quoted his post, so that's my fault.

Please understand, I'm not here with any mission to hurt the company or make people upset.  This is not why I joined.  I thought this forum would be a great place to find resources and information relating to Traditional Catholicism.  It just so happened that my account became active while I was discovering these issues.  I also understand that there are plenty of folks out there who, in fact, come onto forums just to stir up things.  Now I feel terrible about my behavior and want everyone to know that it was not my intention.

Regarding the errors.  "Ineffable," you need to understand that I've been waiting patiently for these books for a couple of years.  Also, you need to understand that $350 is no small sum of money for my family.  I choose to make the investment and had no reason to expect anything other than perfection in a product that was many years in the making.  Also, I would like to think that Baronius would spend a little extra time on a product of such caliber, especially after other titles of theirs were produced with similar issues.

In regards to deterring sales, whether someone decides to buy the Breviary or not, after reading my comments, in no way concerns me or you.  If someone chooses to pass on them because of my post, then obviously they feel the same way about it that I do.  I posted my information to see if someone else found anything somewhere else to help me gauge my decision on if I wanted a refund or not.  I'm quite new to Latin and was going to use the Breviary in study along with prayer.  How can tell what's incorrect if I can't understand the language?

In closing, I do not think it is fair to make assumptions about me and start pointing fingers, let alone try to get me suspended when you haven't even given me the chance to explain myself.  Believe me, if I knew in advance that I'd be torn to shreds immediately, I would have chosen my words more carefully, especially in "Ineffable"'s presence.

Please accept my apologies.

Robert

Robert,

OK, first, apology accepted. I admit to being a little thin-skinned about this particular subject so perhaps I over-reacted. If so, then I publicly apologize as well.

As others have also noted, expecting perfection in the first-run printing of a publication this large is unrealistic at best. So a reasonable amount of understanding and goodwill from us is appropriate. For the few questionable words in the editor's introduction, if they are typos that is unfortunate but, by definition, an introduction is something usually only read once, perhaps twice. So I am sure you will agree that they are not deal-breakers. What matters is the main body of the text.

My offer to you and all others reading this is to send me a message whenever you locate a problem. I will then compile whatever I receive and forward them to Baronius for them to review and include in the next edition, as appropriate.
 

[Pheo]

If anyone's in the mood for a good laugh, go look at the title for Reading 255 in the Table of Contents for Baronius Press's "Divine Intimacy", published in 2010. 

*waits for everyone to run to their bookshelf to check it out*

 

You've gotta be kidding me!  Note to self: E-shopping and proofreading don't mix.

The Titanium Cookware Set Act of Love.  Supposed to be The Act of Love.

Awesome haha.

[Adam Wayne]

It bears repeating that no project of this size is likely to be absolutely devoid of typos.  Every breviary I have has a few, including the Nova et Vetera edition and my 1943 Dessain.  As long as they are just typos and not incorrect texts, then it isn't that big of a deal.

QFT. I think we need a new thread since the project has been complete. I do have some very nice things to say about the Baronius Breviary.

I'll just say this for now. Their new Psalter Translation gives me joy. One reason is that my jaw doesn't hurt when reciting it. But, more importantly it is clear and less cryptic than the Pian Psalter. And the Hymns are beautiful and drip with deep meaning as do the Collects.

I don't know how to describe it. I would say I was beginning to get behind the veil of the Pian Psalter and unlocking the mysteries in the light of any given day's Office. Then this comes around and I feel like I've been sent on a rocket ship to another plateau. 

Another thing I read of interest, in a cursory glance at the introductory pages of thiis new set, was that Pope John XXIII preferred the Gallican Psalter and disliked the Pian Psalter of his predecessor. So, was he really the bad guy?

[newyorkcatholic]

So I have actually stated using this breviary now and it's excellent. The explanations of he psalms are very nice for contemplation.

The ribbons were awful, so I cut them off and put in a ribbon card I got from Daughters of St Paul. Could have tried making my own per the above link but the card was less than $3. Looks good, I should get 2 more for the other volumes.