The old Mass is the awesome Mass.
Agreed. Except the silent canon- I could never get used to that.
I go back and forth on it. On the one hand, I appreciate pregnant silence, but on the other hand it's fairly short-lived, frequently punctuated by bell-ringing, and, if at a sung Mass, is of even shorter duration. I think it's an interesting development, considering no other Liturgy has an entirely silent anaphora, and how much importance the RC's placed on the words of institution. The words which effect transubstantiation are said silently, but the actions are dramatised, which is almost the opposite of what the East does. I also wonder how "safe" it is: at least with the ad libbing that often happens with the Mass texts nowadays, you can hear it and know it's wrong, but who's to say that a priest reciting a silent canon is actually reciting the canon? And it was clearly meant to be recited audibly.
What I really can't get used to is Low Mass. At least where I go, the silent parts are silent, the audible parts are mumbled, and the Mass is drowned out by the blessed babbling of children and the congregants shifting in their creaking pews and kneelers. The homily and the Leonine Prayers are the only thing you can hear. I don't know why the priests can't read the audible parts louder? The silent canon helps confirm the idea that the Liturgy ought to be mostly silent, if not in theory then in practice. High Mass, on the other hand, is a sublime experience, at least equal to all the Eastern Liturgies and even better than one or two of them IMO (comparing an average RC parish Mass to an average EO/OO parish Liturgy). I want to like Low Mass, but no matter how often I attend, I can't.