Long version of "O Strange Wonder"

[GabrielCremeens]

Hello all,

I've written out, in English, the long version of "O Strange Wonder" (Ο του παραδόξου θαύματος), using the Heirmologion of Ioannis Protopsaltis. Just wanted to ask if anyone has suggestions for improvement or take a look for any errors. Some ison suggestions might also be nice on the second page. I'm a little unsure as to where it should descend from Ke back down to Pa.

I've also discovered http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u2Za4PmIWo which has a recording of the above. If anyone else knows of similar recordings (for instance, for the other two long melodies), I'd be obliged.

-G

 

[GabrielCremeens]

Update: I've typset the piece above, in case anyone would like to print out a copy that's more readable.

 

[basil]

Dear Gabriel,

Nice work! I remember adapting these same stichera into English back in 2009. Unfortunately, I don't have access to my manuscripts at the present time. I noticed only a few minor errors in your score:

1. In order to conform to Papa Ephraim's conventions for rhythmic notation, the barline should be removed from line 4 of page 1, and a 4 should be written above the last ison on the same line.
2. The barline on line 6 of page 1 should be deleted, and the vareia should be moved to the next line. A 4 should be written above the first ison on line 7 of page 1.
3. The barline should be removed from the last line of page 1, and a 4 should be written above the last ison on the same line. A barline should be added after the first martyria on page 2.
4. In my opinion, the ison should jump back down to Pa on the word "thou" on page 2 rather than on the word "with."
5. The barline should be removed from line 2 of page 2 and the last line of page 2.
6. If my memory serves me correctly, the text in the HTM Menaion for this prosomion does not contain any quotation marks; therefore, the quotation marks on page 2 should be removed.

Basil

 

[GabrielCremeens]

Dear Gabriel,

Nice work! I remember adapting these same stichera into English back in 2009. Unfortunately, I don't have access to my manuscripts at the present time. I noticed only a few minor errors in your score:

1. In order to conform to Papa Ephraim's conventions for rhythmic notation, the barline should be removed from line 4 of page 1, and a 4 should be written above the last ison on the same line.
2. The barline on line 6 of page 1 should be deleted, and the vareia should be moved to the next line. A 4 should be written above the first ison on line 7 of page 1.
3. The barline should be removed from the last line of page 1, and a 4 should be written above the last ison on the same line. A barline should be added after the first martyria on page 2.
4. In my opinion, the ison should jump back down to Pa on the word "thou" on page 2 rather than on the word "with."
5. The barline should be removed from line 2 of page 2 and the last line of page 2.
6. If my memory serves me correctly, the text in the HTM Menaion for this prosomion does not contain any quotation marks; therefore, the quotation marks on page 2 should be removed.

Basil

Hi Basil, thanks for the corrections. At what point in the word "thou" should the ison descend back to Pa? The word "thou" contains 7 notes.

I'm working on the other corrections now.

Edit 1: I'm interested to hear your thoughts on adapting the other ones. The word order for this first prosomion fits superbly into the Greek original; the words "heaven", "heights", "rejoice", etc, all fall in approximately the same location as the Greek, making this particular adaption very nice in terms of text painting, etc.

However, the same cannot be said for the other two prosomia. (An example that comes to mind is a phrase something like "as the throne of God Most High"; the English falls in a different order than the Greek. The Greek, however, has some very beautiful text painting on these words.) Any thoughts on adaptation?

Edit 2: I've attached the corrected file, in which I addressed (I think) everything except the ison question.

 

[basil]

I've attached the corrected file, in which I addressed (I think) everything except the ison question.

Great! It looks much better now. The only thing you missed is that a 4 should be written above the last ison on line 4 of page 1.

At what point in the word "thou" should the ison descend back to Pa? The word "thou" contains 7 notes.

I myself would jump back down to Pa at the beginning of the word "thou."

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on adapting the other ones. The word order for this first prosomion fits superbly into the Greek original; the words "heaven", "heights", "rejoice", etc, all fall in approximately the same location as the Greek, making this particular adaption very nice in terms of text painting, etc.

However, the same cannot be said for the other two prosomia. (An example that comes to mind is a phrase something like "as the throne of God Most High"; the English falls in a different order than the Greek. The Greek, however, has some very beautiful text painting on these words.) Any thoughts on adaptation?

Good point. Sometimes, the word order and meter of the English translation allows us to preserve the traditional melody and its word painting intact; other times, however, more work is required. I think it is important to keep in mind that the composer of the Greek melody for the second and third prosomia was also dealing with a poetic text and a traditional melody that was handed down to him. He judiciously introduced slight changes to the automelon in order to make it a better fit for the text and to add beauty to the end result. Of course, this composer used fthores and melodic formulæ that fit the Greek words he was trying to emphasize, but why should we be restricted to exactly the same ones? On the contrary, because the word order and patterns of accentuation are often different in English, we ought to choose different formulæ in many instances, being careful at all times to preserve the overall melodic contour and rhetoric of the original and to stay within the established parameters of the tradition. But as Ioannis Arvanitis once mentioned, this can be done properly only by one who is also a composer.

 

[GabrielCremeens]

I've addressed the ison question, plus the additional mistake which I missed correcting the first time.

Do you have a reference or source which you recommend reading regarding isokratima? Personally, I simply do it by ear, doing what I've picked up or heard from recordings. (Some people tell me that I'm a little too fond of Ni in pieces in first mode... I tried to be conservative in this piece, even though I think some people would quite disapprove of the cadences to Ni, and the move to Di on the high phrase. I think, however, that this is how Papa Ephraim executes the ison in similar pieces. It is what it is, I suppose.)

Good point. Sometimes, the word order and meter of the English translation allows us to preserve the traditional melody and its word painting intact; other times, however, more work is required. I think it is important to keep in mind that the composer of the Greek melody for the second and third prosomia was also dealing with a poetic text and a traditional melody that was handed down to him. He judiciously introduced slight changes to the automelon in order to make it a better fit for the text and to add beauty to the end result. Of course, this composer used fthores and melodic formulζ that fit the Greek words he was trying to emphasize, but why should we be restricted to exactly the same ones? On the contrary, because the word order and patterns of accentuation are often different in English, we ought to choose different formulζ in many instances, being careful at all times to preserve the overall melodic contour and rhetoric of the original and to stay within the established parameters of the tradition. But as Ioannis Arvanitis once mentioned, this can be done properly only by one who is also a composer.

Was this your methodology in the prosomia for the Stichera of Sts. Peter and Paul?

I was looking into doing something like this... I briefly perused Papa Ephraim's formulas, but I must have missed it. Where can I find the slow heirmologic formulas?

-G

 

[herron.samuel]

I've addressed the ison question, plus the additional mistake which I missed correcting the first time.

Do you have a reference or source which you recommend reading regarding isokratima? Personally, I simply do it by ear, doing what I've picked up or heard from recordings. (Some people tell me that I'm a little too fond of Ni in pieces in first mode... I tried to be conservative in this piece, even though I think some people would quite disapprove of the cadences to Ni, and the move to Di on the high phrase. I think, however, that this is how Papa Ephraim executes the ison in similar pieces. It is what it is, I suppose.)

-G

I personally am a big advocate for simple, non-moving isokratima. If I were to use your piece for my personal use, I would take out every single one of your Ni's, and the one Di you use as well. The Ke is good where it is.

The reasoning for this is that by using those moves there, you are drawing attention to that melodic phrase with almost a feeling of a "chord change" instead of relying on the marriage of the musical formulas with the emphasis of the text to draw the attention of the listener and, frankly, the psaltis. The Ke fits as the melodic phrase ascends from Ke at that moment, but you are adding the Ni and Di in there for musical effect, not for any real reason regarding the construction of the piece. I personally find isokratima of this type distracting and a bit showy.

My personal source is what I learned from Angelopoulos while in Greece, various recordings, and what I have heard at the Patriarchate. This practical experience along with what most older theory books say when they address ison is in essence to keep it simple. I can also add that in regards to practical application in a parish, it is much easier to say "Hold pa and don't move" than to teach them all these superfluous note changes.

 

[GabrielCremeens]

I personally am a big advocate for simple, non-moving isokratima. If I were to use your piece for my personal use, I would take out every single one of your Ni's, and the one Di you use as well. The Ke is good where it is.

The reasoning for this is that by using those moves there, you are drawing attention to that melodic phrase with almost a feeling of a "chord change" instead of relying on the marriage of the musical formulas with the emphasis of the text to draw the attention of the listener and, frankly, the psaltis. The Ke fits as the melodic phrase ascends from Ke at that moment, but you are adding the Ni and Di in there for musical effect, not for any real reason regarding the construction of the piece. I personally find isokratima of this type distracting and a bit showy.

My personal source is what I learned from Angelopoulos while in Greece, various recordings, and what I have heard at the Patriarchate. This practical experience along with what most older theory books say when they address ison is in essence to keep it simple. I can also add that in regards to practical application in a parish, it is much easier to say "Hold pa and don't move" than to teach them all these superfluous note changes.

Hi Mr. Herron,

Thanks for addressing the ison question. I'm aware of the objections that most people have to isokratima that moves in the fashion I have notated in the piece. I have taken some lessons from Mr. John Boyer, as well as Dr. Menios Karanos' chant classes, while studying at Hellenic College in Brookline, MA. Both of them are very much in favor of stable isokratima without superfluous movement, and it's definitely something I am aware of and appreciate. I have to admit that I found it almost disconcerting at first (listening, for instance, to the Holy Pascha CD from Vatopaidi Monastery), but I do appreciate the stability and sound of the "mono-Pa" isokratima in first mode.

However, other people whom I know or have heard (Papa Ephraim, for instance, or Fr. Ephraim in Roscoe, NY), or even Photios Ketsetzis (though his isokratima has too much movement even for me, sometimes) use an ison that is far more "mobile". For instance, one can hear it on the Vigil of St. Anthony CD (in the long prosomia, particularly the one in first mode, or the long Kekregarion), or in various pieces Papa Ephraim has written. For the cadences on Ni in first mode, one can easily see it in this piece, or alternating between Di and Ke in this piece, on the third page.

I honestly had qualms about putting it in there, simply because I knew that people would object to it. However, I think that there's going to be an objection any way it's done... those who prefer it to be more mobile will go ahead and write it in themselves. On the other hand, those who don't like it can simply cross it out. I guess the only other thing to do is not to write it in at all, and the psaltis can simply direct (using hand signals, or whatever way he prefers) whoever may be holding ison to change when the psaltis feels is appropriate.

Personally, I kind of like what Fr. Ephraim in New York does - a little card on the analogion, with the different notes written on it, and the protopsaltis can point to the appropriate note. John Boyer's hand signals are also very handy, and I find myself using those pretty often.

 

[herron.samuel]

Hi Mr. Herron,

However, other people whom I know or have heard (Papa Ephraim, for instance, or Fr. Ephraim in Roscoe, NY), or even Photios Ketsetzis (though his isokratima has too much movement even for me, sometimes) use an ison that is far more "mobile". For instance, one can hear it on the Vigil of St. Anthony CD (in the long prosomia, particularly the one in first mode, or the long Kekregarion), or in various pieces Papa Ephraim has written. For the cadences on Ni in first mode, one can easily see it in this piece, or alternating between Di and Ke in this piece, on the third page.

My final point to this is I would believe many of these chanters who use moving isokratima would readily admit that in the larger historical and traditional perspective, their style is the more innovative and the "break" from tradition, not the other way around. I personally wouldn't view these as two traditional styles of ison that are different but equal, such as I would view a subject like Athonite style vs. Patriarchal style chanting. If one chooses to use moving ison, I think it is important to know and realize they are using the more modern, less traditional method.

As to your other points, I find myself liking your idea more and more of not notating ison and letting the psaltis add it in himself. I would assume any psaltis capable of reading Byz notation would also naturally be very opinionated on how the isokratima should be.

I personally have utilized the piece of paper method before, and it works well after a bit of practice. I find it frustrating to have to scratch out so much on many of the English pieces I download.

Thanks for sharing this piece! Blessed feast.

 

[GabrielCremeens]

My final point to this is I would believe many of these chanters who use moving isokratima would readily admit that in the larger historical and traditional perspective, their style is the more innovative and the "break" from tradition, not the other way around. I personally wouldn't view these as two traditional styles of ison that are different but equal, such as I would view a subject like Athonite style vs. Patriarchal style chanting. If one chooses to use moving ison, I think it is important to know and realize they are using the more modern, less traditional method.

As to your other points, I find myself liking your idea more and more of not notating ison and letting the psaltis add it in himself. I would assume any psaltis capable of reading Byz notation would also naturally be very opinionated on how the isokratima should be.

I personally have utilized the piece of paper method before, and it works well after a bit of practice. I find it frustrating to have to scratch out so much on many of the English pieces I download.

Thanks for sharing this piece! Blessed feast.

1) I would be inclined to agree with you. However, you said that one of your main sources is Angelopoulos... can you make the same case for double-ison that you make for simple, conservative, relatively unchanging ison that you do in a previous post? That is, I think I would tend to agree that, indeed, the more mobile ison might be a little more innovative (although I would like to research it a little more; such might not be the case, and I simply haven't really looked into it). That is, the more stable ison might be indeed the more traditional practice, and could be defended from listening to recordings of older Patriarchal chanters, etc. However, I'm not sure you could make the same case for double-isokratima.

I'm not trying to be contentious here, and I'm sorry if the tone comes across that way. I do honestly want to hear your thoughts, since you brought up Angelopoulos, etc.


2) I was going to mention this earlier, and it simply slipped my mind. Most of the older "standard" books (e.g. the Zoe Anastasimatarion, Pandektis, Kypseli, etc) don't have the isokratima written in, either.

 

[herron.samuel]

1) I would be inclined to agree with you. However, you said that one of your main sources is Angelopoulos... can you make the same case for double-ison that you make for simple, conservative, relatively unchanging ison that you do in a previous post? That is, I think I would tend to agree that, indeed, the more mobile ison might be a little more innovative (although I would like to research it a little more; such might not be the case, and I simply haven't really looked into it). That is, the more stable ison might be indeed the more traditional practice, and could be defended from listening to recordings of older Patriarchal chanters, etc. However, I'm not sure you could make the same case for double-isokratima.

I'm not trying to be contentious here, and I'm sorry if the tone comes across that way. I do honestly want to hear your thoughts, since you brought up Angelopoulos, etc.


2) I was going to mention this earlier, and it simply slipped my mind. Most of the older "standard" books (e.g. the Zoe Anastasimatarion, Pandektis, Kypseli, etc) don't have the isokratima written in, either.

http://analogion.com/Isokratema.html

This will answer 1) why simple isokratima is more traditional and 2) the origins of double ison.

Basically, you had psaltis of varying ability at the Patriarchate (obviously), and thus some would only hold 1 note, and the more "advanced" students would move the ison, and a double ison would naturally form. It was a rather organic development that was later systematized by others, including Simon Karas etc., etc.. That's the extremely short version.

I'd read every word on that page, it is helpful.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

The patriarchal tradition (from live services on tapes since the 50s and through the responses on the matter by living psaltai who served the Patriarchal church of St-George) the isokratemata were the root or the apex of the tetrachord that the melody alluded to, or in some cases the pentachord. There was very little (if any) movement to create "harmony" of any sort.

There was no such thing as a "double-ison" at the Patriarchal church.

These practices were quite strict not only at the Patriarchal church but also in most of the churches of the Archdiocese of Constantinople from where many of the psaltae derived following the Greek pogroms who came to Greece in the 30s and 60s.

The double-ison was an innovation of Psachos when he came to Greece. Karas adopted it much later. Since then, the isokratema has undergone a number of innovations that do not reflect Constantinopolitan practice.

Those trained by the psaltai of old-time from C/ple+Asia Minor do not dance around the melody with isokratema but keep it very steady and firm with VERY CONSERVATIVE -if any- "western" harmonisations.

NG

 

[herron.samuel]

Many non-Karas influenced chanters completely disagree with your statement, including the man who despises Karas the most in G. K. Michalakis. Specifically he had to say this when I asked him many years ago about isokratima practice in the Patriarchate:

What did Stylianos Tsolakidis (expressing Patriarchal practice at the time of Iakovos Nafpliotis) have to say about ison?

G. K. Michalakis: : [My teacher] Tsolakidis said "ena einai to ison". In slow pieces, whether the melody ascends or descends, the ison remains the same, fixed on the basis and does not move. The canonarchs [of the Patriarchate] were allowed to change ison on some occasions, in general by triphonia (fourth) or tetraphonia (fifth), ver rarely diphonia (third). Those who were not initiated would keep the same ison, which suggests that there might have been a form of double ison in the Patriarcheion. In fast pieces (canon), the ison would involve the known "M" for "mazi" or "melody", meaning that in the descending, below the ison part, the isocrate would sing along. In slow pieces, things are bit more complicated. Recall, there were Isokratis, Domestichos, Canonarchos, etc... The first canonarchos was the only one allowed to do what the the "boithos" =helper Domestichos would do: sing along the various conclusion cadences. The first Domestichos would sing along almost 100%, except for difficult passages. My conclusions are the following: The patriarchal choirs were never 100% complete, for at Iakovos' time, there was lack of personnel. But imagine we have 10 isokratis, 3 canonarchos of which the first (for one octave higher voices), 2 helper domestichos and the first.. what can we do? We may do double ison, but the second, non basis ison will be much more disecreet than what is done by EBX... the "entrance" and "exit" is done with "progressive changes of intensity", and the overall volume of a second ison is only about 30 to 60% of that of the basis ... it is discreet.

I add here what I had said elsewhere: when the number of chanters is limited to 2, the one doing "ison" can do almost any other function: that of domestichos, canonarchos, ison, etc. In this case, when the melody "changes" to some new principal note (fthongos) the isokratis can change so as to "help" the teacher. This is the method that has remained in the "Patrarchal" ison of today, and which Stanitsas, and later on Vassilikos pushed to "extreme" = never-ending ison changes. When the choir was in complete form, the Protos canonarchos would change his recitation to the chord of the melodic line (for instance: in "ton pathon", ison is on Ni... the melody goes to Ga.. the Canonrchos does so, at "ta panta prosietai", and then comes back down to Ni for "tois prowkynousin en potho..). In choral form, the ison would stay on NI, in spite of the canonarchos' change of pitch. Yet, the canonarchos would do his ison at his pitch of recitation. This gives us a form of "double ison". In none of these situations does the canonarchos do a recitation on Pa or on Di = Pa (that is, he does not use a "dissonant" interval as to the basis, Ni in the first case, Ga in the second).

Now, when chanting alone with the teacher, on lines of plagal fourth concluding on PA , or on Di = Pa, Tsolakidis would change his ison. He explained to me that when the choirs were at their fullest "Pascha, Acathistos", they'd apply the above- mentioned "isokratima" tactics. On other days (about 95% of the situations), the Protocanarchos would learn to change just as modern Stantisas-type of choirs in very limited manner... for instance, a simple Pa on plagal fourth, with no Low Di, no Bou, ... in other words, the only other ison allowed, except for tri/tetraphonia of the canonarch's recitation, was the dissonant (as to the main ison) fthongos, with no double ison (the canonarch's recitation was also the ison). eg: Idou o Nymphios argon: Recitation on Ga = Ni... changes to Pa for "alla ananipson krazousa". Just about when started learning the neumes, he had to learn by heart where to change the recitation for Iakovos. And here, we add the other very important purpose of ison: it's an integration element = it is used to initiate novices to psaltiki, so that they may progressively "blend in" and participate.

"Ena einai to ison" does not come just from Tsolakidis, but from Iakovos... he would teach him to "change" ison in one or two places (and he even told me when Iakovos told him this... =when they were studying "ton Agion Pateron"), all in saying "kanonika, ena einai to ison" normally, one is the ison. the variable ison in a few positions, by the entire choir, and especially as concerns dissonant note as to the original ison is really to be considred as a concession. When he chanted "ton Nymphona sou", "makarios anir", etc, he would ask me to keep tha same ison, and not even to "chant along the lower than ison fthongos". Is pieces such as fourth stichiraric, ison = bou, and [co-chanting] "mazi" for descending lines. Quite honestly, this is one mode where it's hard to keep a constant Bou... the isokratis was always in advance on coming back to the BOU (the psaltis would not have to "imagine it), before the psaltis would go on chanting. third mode always GA, even if the melody would go beyond Ke.. or below Ga

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Dear Samuel,

Michalakis' (Tsolakidis) experience and mine do not diverge. Where do you see a divergence???

I wrote: "the isokratemata were the root or the apex of the tetrachord that the melody alluded to, or in some cases the pentachord. There was very little (if any) movement to create "harmony" of any sort."

Michalakis wrote (to you I guess): "the ison remains the same, fixed on the basis and does not move. The canonarchs [of the Patriarchate] were allowed to change ison on some occasions, in general by triphonia (fourth) or tetraphonia (fifth), ver rarely diphonia (third)."

So where's the divergence???

I don't understand your comment.

Also, who are the other "many non-Karas influenced chanters"? If you could supply some names, we could ask them and find out...I'll cover the conference call cost.....

NG.

 

[GabrielCremeens]

Dear Samuel,

Michalakis' (Tsolakidis) experience and mine do not diverge. Where do you see a divergence???

I wrote: "the isokratemata were the root or the apex of the tetrachord that the melody alluded to, or in some cases the pentachord. There was very little (if any) movement to create "harmony" of any sort."

Michalakis wrote (to you I guess): "the ison remains the same, fixed on the basis and does not move. The canonarchs [of the Patriarchate] were allowed to change ison on some occasions, in general by triphonia (fourth) or tetraphonia (fifth), ver rarely diphonia (third)."

So where's the divergence???

I don't understand your comment.

Also, who are the other "many non-Karas influenced chanters"? If you could supply some names, we could ask them and find out...I'll cover the conference call cost.....

NG.

Hi Nick,

The divergence would be in the part immediately following your quote from Mr. Herron's post, in which he (Michalakis) says,

Those who were not initiated would keep the same ison, which suggests that there might have been a form of double ison in the Patriarcheion.

That is, the

canonarchs [of the Patriarchate] were allowed to change ison on some occasions, in general by triphonia (fourth) or tetraphonia (fifth), very rarely diphonia (third).

This, connected with the "uninitiated" continuing to hold their ison (Pa, for instance), while the canonarchs would go to a different note (Ke, I suppose). This would result in a double ison.

Maybe I'm understanding this wrong. However, it seems to me that the whole point of this kind of double ison, Mr. Herron, is that it's a result of some of the people holding ison not really knowing what they're doing. Angelopoulos et al, on the other hand, have a very definite system, rhyme and reason, whatever we want to call it, for double ison. It kind of seems to be defeating the purpose. That is, if all the people at the Patriarch knew exactly how to hold ison and when to change, they would have done it all together, and double ison never would have existed... i.e. it's a temporary result of having half-trained chanters helping out.

Am I misunderstanding here?

-G

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

1) There was never any "double-ison" in any of the C/politan churches or the churches of Asia Minor as a matter of fact or rule. The isons were based on the tetrachord and some times the pentachord. Michalakis is correct and I am stating the basics of his argument in a different way.

2) The isokratema by principle does not (should not) distract the melody which itself does not (should not) distract the word (poem). The modern acrobatic isokratemata (or deliberate double isokratemata) gravitate towards polyphony and therefore, no matter how aesthetically-pleasant they may be, from an objective and historical perspective, they are not in line with tradition.

NG.

 

[herron.samuel]

Hey Timgabe. Have you happened to finish the remaining prosomia stichera for the Feast? I know this is a few years old, just thought I'd ask.

I've addressed the ison question, plus the additional mistake which I missed correcting the first time.

Do you have a reference or source which you recommend reading regarding isokratima? Personally, I simply do it by ear, doing what I've picked up or heard from recordings. (Some people tell me that I'm a little too fond of Ni in pieces in first mode... I tried to be conservative in this piece, even though I think some people would quite disapprove of the cadences to Ni, and the move to Di on the high phrase. I think, however, that this is how Papa Ephraim executes the ison in similar pieces. It is what it is, I suppose.)



Was this your methodology in the prosomia for the Stichera of Sts. Peter and Paul?

I was looking into doing something like this... I briefly perused Papa Ephraim's formulas, but I must have missed it. Where can I find the slow heirmologic formulas?

-G