First Things has tried its hand at the music controversy, with an article by Nathaniel Peters, but it comes up short. I agree that hymns should be good (who doesn't agree?) but he brushes over the Mass propers almost as if they don't exist postconcilar or can only exist in Latin. He says: "the Tridentine Mass had chants for particular days—the propers of the Mass—not hymns." And then he stops.
Can we agree that the ordinary form also has propers and that they are the primary text of the liturgy that ought to be sung? It's not obvious to me that Peters really gets this point.