I just listened to the Doxologia by Stanitsas. His apechema is a STANDRAD Protobarys, with NO special intervals.... PA is in its "Chrysanthos" diatonic position, beginning to end. We do hear a nice Ni-Zo in the end. However, the choir does bring down the "PA" a bit (not enough to my liking" in " anthropois eucokIIIIIIa". In the "Doxa soi", they not only bring down Di, but Ga a bit a well. However, they can't keep the "special intervals" throughout, and the piece does NOT sound like the Barys of Sfikas or Proussalis... The determining factor is Pa and BOU, which they cannot keep LOW enough at all times... and the piece is no longer the "special" barys, and it is not the PROTOBARYS either (where Pa, Bou, Ga are in their NATURAL diatonic positions, EXCEPT the conclusions on Zo, where we lower Pa slightly = special intervals). So, the real question isn't about Ga diesis in itself, but about Ga diesis in RELATION to ALL sorts of SHIFTED intervals....

So, those who focus on ONE note without realising the BEAUTIFUL intervals done by MANY-shifted notes (which I have amply described, and all I got in return is "disagreement", with NO one offering an example to accompany their "legetos" or xe-legetos or Ga-diesis Karas et al affabulations = made-up stories) are missing out on this "serious, sweetly tenebrous mode" which is of exceptional beauty and which NO instrument other than human voice can express correctly.

Thank you for the Sfikas and Proussalis recordings... I'm not alone out there singing the "special intervals". And listen to how Sfikas also "drags down" the UPPER Zo-Ni-Pa intervals, when shifting to hepthphonos. The melodic line is that which we find in plagal fourth and even in plagal first.. yet, the INTERVALS are different. Now, if we need to go BEYOND that with NORMAL Pa intervals, the classical authors will put a fthora of BOU on Zo (or Zo diatonic fthora on the UPPER UPPER Ga= Zo, thus Bou = Ke, Pa= Di, etc), just like in the kallophonikos heirmos "Tas kakotheisas" by Anonymos, page 143. Also note in this composition, the initial syneptegmenos "shifted" measures that fall back onto their feet (just like "Anympheute" in "Ti hypermacho"). Pringos and Stanitsas do not maintain special intervals throughout their Barys, so I wouldn't use them as references for either pure probarys vs. special intervals barys. As for all the other psaltis, as far as Barys is concerned, "if it isn't Giannis, it's Giannakis"...

In all these pieces, we are NOT dealing with POTOBARYS and we are NOT dealing with "special intervals". We are dealing with "sabach or even ousak" that just simply go down to Zo. The Ni and PA are in their NORMAL diatonic positions. Di is lowered to GA in its normal diatonic position. Bou is not too raised, so we're not really in Spatheion. for instance:

bestenegar_pesrev: the initial long note is our GA.... Bou here is a bit high, and we have spatheion in just one measure... Then Bou is normal, PA in its NORMAL (high) diatonic position...

Cemil-bestenigar-pesrev: Starting from ga, we hear a DI and Ke enharmonic all the way to Zo... then back to Ga, with Di later on hyphesis... and the melody stagnates on Ga (polar note), with quick passage to diatonic Pa, and then diatonic Zo. The string and bow do Ga di ga bou pa, typical of the FIRST MODE (the one most of you like calling "diphonos"... the PA is in its position...), and typical of the line Shota scanned and put up.

To my ears, most of these musicians are quite coherent, (except for ney_bestenegar_taqsim). But their mode has NOTHING to do with Barys as sung by Sfikas, and Proussalis, Tsolakidis at times, and Xerodemas. I feel that we should NOT mix up VOCAL with instrumental music... The ONLY corrections that need to be made in psaltiki are those of all contemporary and auto-didact psaltis and their followers, who should listen to old recordings and correct THEIR perception of psaltiki... the Turks know what their doing with their instruments... so do the Greeks... but the psaltis should learn from CREDIBLE psaltis, and not
from some instrument..

I just finished listening to Stephanos Proussalis: EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT.. hyphos, chronos, EVRYTHING... even good Barys "special" intervals. Does anyone know who he learned from? He sounds very much like the monk Dositheos. And Sfikas... yes, we have EXCELLENCE here as well... BEAUTIFUL "special" intervals. Now, what do the interpretations of these two psalits, (and you may add mine, as well) have to do with either LEGETOS or all the other "theories" running around, especially from Karas et al.

I get the impression that ONLY occidental musicians can understand Karas' "descriptions". Andrea, for instance, would agree that Sfikas' intervals are good, special intervals. She was the one who actually sat down and demonstrated to me on paper what I was doing., But I really DON'T understand how she agrees with Karas' descriptions....

As for the Apostolos "spatheion Ga, Kliton Di", she had NEVER read of it anywhere... not even in Karas' manual... So, I put up one of the messages I had posted in the past to describe the "special intervals" of Barys diatonikos. There are so many barys diatonikos schools that one has to make one's proper "synthesis".

There are those who sing as LEGETOS at Zo, and I will not even quote them, but they have had traditional and respectable teachers (I was referring to Andrea). But acoustically, they don't manage to convince me. Then there are those that pull down Di to Ga, and keep Pa in place. They either do an EPITROPI PA, close so Ni, in turn close to Zo, OR they do a CHRYSANTHOS PA, quite distant from Ni, this Ni being still close to Zo.

I guess that the issue about Ke is resolved. No one agrees with Stanitsas, and you'll find that Iakovos (Nafpliotis) and Priggos are quite similar (this was demonstrated by Dimitrios' comparisons). What I'm about to describe is none of all this, regardless of my admiration for Iakovos.

The following is my "Synthesis" after having heard Parallagi [VERY IMPORTANT] on bits and pieces of Barys by the Protocanonarchos [student of Iakovos, Binakis AND Kamarados], as well as my grand (meaning "great") uncle Nicolaos Xirodimas (his son, now in his late 60's, would sing with Beloussis at Ag. Panteleimon Acharnon).

By Epitropi vs. Chrysanthos, I was referring to MY visual conception of the scale. Ioannis (Arvanitis) and Panayiotis (Papadimitriou) have now demonstrated the SIMILARITIES of the two scales REGARDLESS of the visual and numeric differences which describe the SAME FREQUENCIES in DIFFERENT manner. Anyhow, I insist that the Chrysanthos diagram helps me do CORRECT intervals in terms of its "psychological effect", which is "different" from that of the "epitropi".....The Chrysanthos diagram helps me do almost "Didymos" intervals, as Panayiotis (Papadimitriou) demonstrated. The Epitropi diagram, on the other hand, tends to push me into doing "piano" intervals...

I just came off the line with Andrea. She really enjoyed the Barys by Proussaslis (especially his hyphos = like Iakovos) and Sfikas (for the clarity of the intervals). She mentioned a "high Ga towards Di", so I guess we're in the theory I was mentioning. SOME intervals may sound like those of Legetos, but Barys is NOT EXACTLY legetos, she insisted. She just discovered Feihrouz singing legatos (in some folk song) and was astounded with the INTERVAL precision as well as difference as to most Greek psaltis, and said that Karas' description is not too bad. Ibrahim does the same intervals. And I recall that Bardas and I had some trouble "tuning into each other's legetos after many years of separation. Bardas does, most of the time, those particular intervals of legetos that Faihrouz and Ibrahim do.

Bou = ison. Di is QUITE HIGH, and Ke seems to be lowered, and ZO is DIATONIC and quite high (at all times, no Zo hyphesis). In the lower part, Pa is close to Bou (because it is naturally high", yet NI is slightly "uplifted" = does not sound in its plagal fourth position, when we transiently go past it. Zo is STABLE in ascent AND descent, with NO hyphesis. You can hear all this in Bardas' chanting of "Anoixo to stoma mou" or in "Ek neotitos mou" under "kyr Bardas" in Montral Psaltiki in www.graeca.mrezha.net/upload/

Somewhere along the line we all "mess him up", because we all have OTHER legetos in our heads... but there are parts where he applies those exact intervals (especially in the very beginning of each hymn). I admit that those intervals sound a bit "funny" as compared to those of Tsolakidis, and we do not have much of legetos by Iakovos for comparison. We know, however, that his plagal fourth Di is a bit higher as compared to a First mode Di (listen to Mi apostrepsis"). So, this INTERVAL stability in legetos, with a HIGH di and a slightly lowered Ke seems to have pleased Andrea enormously, for she "rediscovers" legetos.... in a manner that corresponds well to the descriptions given by Karas.....

Use of "syneptigmenos" in OTHER languages: As for rhythmos, in Greek we tend to prolong the accentuated syllable a bit more than the non accentuated syllable in Heirmologic chanting. In Andrea's native language, Hungarian, it seems that accentuated syllables should NOT be prolonged, and that iambic type of distribution may be better suited than trochaios in "thesis to thesis" counting.

About Barys diatonic [Sfikas]: Andrea said that the Sfikas intervals are those she had learnt from Angelopoulos... now, if anyone has EBX chanting Barys diatonikos, I'd like to verify the connection between theory and practice.. She'll have to listen to all this much more carefully so as to come up with some "interval diagram", because all this was discussed over the phone...

Since Dimitrios mentioned a "high Ga" and so did she, I thought I'd share all this with you. I personally hear Pa-bou-Ga-di ALL downshifted.... this doesn't really make Ga sharp... We had come up with that diagram together, but she'd like to rehear things and come up with something more concrete.... To my ears, the Pa-bou-Ga-di ALL downshifted scale describes very well all that is happening in Barys diatonikos "special intervals" and explains what happens when ison is brought to normal diatonic Pa so as to make "protobarys".

From memory, Chatzimarkos does a very nice "Barys diatonikos" in the Psalmos 50 with "Anastas of Ihsous" as well... I hope someone can find this recording of his... the situation is similar: The ison remains on Zo diatonic. The Heptophonic Zo becomes ENARMONIC, with Ano Ni and Ano Pa lowered a bit ("special interval" as applied to the octave). Coming back down, the Di is in HYPHESIS, and the Ga is Lower than diatonic, the Bou lower than diatonic, the Pa lower than diatonic, the Ni more or les in its position, Zo diatonic in its position...("special intervals"). Listen to the line "Eis mnimosinon aiOOOOOOOOOOOnion estai dikaios, Alliluia".

In the line "oi ta cherouBEIIIIIIIM", in its ending melodic formula, we hear the "special intervals". During the Orthros, all of the recorded psaltis do a NICE Ga DI (LARGE) in the Enarmonios pieces that precede this hymn, yet the ALL mess up the KE (TOO low for enarmonios).

According to Andrea (Atlanti): Karas is perhaps correct about Naos but quite correct about Barys being almost equal to legetos at lower "basis". According to me and from what I've understood from Chatzitheodoros, the use of put second mode fthora is for "approximation" purposes... and I tend to agree much more with him... and I add, Barys is NOT legetos from a lower Basis. Andrea admits that she's never heard the "special intervals" as I do them THROUGHOUT a papadic melos, yet she DOES agree that those are the VERY intervals when I sing something like "eleison me o Theos" = Psalm 50...

My opinion is that we have "remnants" of the special intervals in various places, and that, because it is quite hard to do them throughout a piece, most will chant papadic barys diatonikos as they would a legetos, or as second mode or even as a first mode. It's true that in "ton despotin", = where the entry of the archieureus " = represents the entry of Christ into his "ship" which is the Church = where the archieureus should be "taking kairos" immediately, but I guess this has been broken into two: eis polla eti for the entry, and "ton despotin" for kairos ... "anothen" for the amphia vesting", Iakovos chants the "deuteros variant" (his Zo Ke Di is almost like Di Ga Bou of second mode), with non chromatic Pa = Ke (His pa is NOT lowered at all)... But I've heard the remnant "special intervals" in Tsolakidis' chantng. Thus far, only Ioannis has ventured a bit on all my Barys diatonikos descriptions, and I have yet to hear any serious debate on these descriptions of what happens at the lower pentachord (pa, bou Ga, Di, ALL shifted a bit lower...) .

Intonation (Apechema). Starts at NI; Chrysanthos 12 to PA. Chrysanthos GA.

Return to Chrysanthos BOY. Return to Chrysanthos Pa. Go to Bou, but slightly diminished. return to PA, but slightly diminished, as if you were doing an Epitropi Pa (Lower than First mode diatonic Chrysanthos Pa). Bring Ni bit close to this Pa. then do a Chrysanthos Zo. Thus how, PA-Bou isn't really diminished: It's just that the whole Di Ga BOU PA is "brought down in a particular way. So, this is what I think Chatzitheodoros means, when he says that the Fthora of 2nd mode is there because barys diatonickos "sounds a bit like second mode", without it being so. In the meantime, the lowered Ga is not as much lowered as the Pa, and Bou Ga might seem slightly greater than usual. Perhaps this explains Ephesios' use of the second mode fthora on Pa on short passages, so that one will not lower the Ga disproportionately. None of the all the teachers I did parallagi called the Zo by any other name, fthora or no fthora. That's interesting. My guess is that, with time, some probably started putting PA as an isson instead of ZO. In such a case, we cannot continue with a lowered pa, and the whole thing turns into a "first mode" Pa, and it's only the Di, all alone, that is lowered, giving a "pathitikos" instead of "barys special intervals".

I'm sending you a sample of these two compositions, where I try to respect, at least to a minimum, the use of the fthoras, which, of course, have nothing to do with second mode. (Back then, I did various interpretations of "Ton Despotin" either alternating of the fthores so as to get "special" vs "diatonic" or disregarding them and doing "special" throughout. The paleographers noted that there is NO fthora in the original manuscripts.... On the other hand, I send you as well a "home choir recording" I put together a couple of months ago (it' only lately that I'm beginning to recover a bit of my voice. So, I'm like an old, badly tuned violin, especially in TEMPO. anyhow, the idea here is that I did NOT try to go into first mode. I kept Zo as isson throughout.

Now, I guess things start to become clearer. If you keep isson a Zo, you can pull your Pa a bit down, and you can do this THROUGHOUT the piece, fthora or no fthora (which, I bet isn't absolutely necessary according to palaeography: please let me know. I did not do that for ton Despotin, but it is possible. I tried doing it for the KOINONIKON Petrou, Tuesdays, as it is written in "Mousikos Thesauros" edited by Nectarios Monachos, 1931.

I thank Dimitrios for putting up the barys diatonikos file. Here is some IMPORTANT information concerning the file. Composition: it is MY won. I try to show what Rhythmic emphasis is, and how toobtain some COMPOSITIONAL Rhythmic regularity.

Interpretations are of 3 "types". Protobarys, Spatheion and Barys Diatonikos. The experiment was as follows: Using the SAME score, to try and determine if there are any DIFFERENCES or similarities. Firstly, the COMPOSITION is almost INCOMPATIBLE with protobarys. In Protobarys, we chant FIRST mode hiermologic, with Pa Di as dominant notes (and not Pa Ga, as in this case). Anyhow, I just wanted to try and demonstrate the difference between Ga-DI spatheion, first mode, and "special intervals". For Protobarys, I used an ison on PA... For Spatheion, ison on Pa as well. For Barys diatonikos, ison on Zo.

D. Koubaroulis:

You are talking hypothetically now. There is no ison in the recording.

G. K. Michalakis:

As a matter of fact, I did use ison in one ear, but it is not in the recording. when I do interval experiments, the ISON must be there, as it is in Church, otherwise things aren't that "comparable". I used Occidental notes, so the Zo-Pa isn't exactly psaltic... Isson allows one to find the CORRECT harmonics (chord fractions that will give the LEAST dissonance... Thus how, when isson is on Ni, Di is a bit higher so as to get a good fifth. When isson is Pa, Di is a bit lower, and the Fifth is Ke. Thus, for a SAME PA, DI is DIFFERENT depending on whether we're in first mode of plagal first mode... The same applies to BARYS with isson on Zo... placing an isson on Pa will change MANY intervals.. ..Anyhow..

For the first two cases [Protobarys and Spatheion], Ke should be HIGH (although I do mess it up a bit on the spatheion... it needs to be a bit higher, toward the Zo hyphesis). Pa is in its isson position. Zo is in its diatonic position. This Zo sounds higher than the Barys diatonic Zo.... Andrea insists that it shouldn't be, even in first mode.

D. Koubaroulis:

Andrea is right. ZW diatonic is ZW diatonic. Its position doesn't change. It is the basis of the mode!

In Protobarys, the Basis is mainly Pa... so is the basis = Pa in Kyrie ekekraxa and, recall, I DON'T change the ison from Pa to Zo in the "eisakouson mOUOUOUOU".... Ibid for "spatheion". the ison is NOT Zo...

In first mode kekragarion ending on Zo, arabs chant this a bit lower, Greeks a bit higher (what I'm actually doing).. She insists that it's an occidental Zo... I treat it "elxeis"... Please tell me what you all think about this.

D. Koubaroulis:
I don't understand what is an "occidental Zo" and what it means to "treat it "elxeis"". There is no such thing as elxis on the base note of the mode.

G. K. Michalakis:
Occidental Zo is a bit higher for an equal Pa...

I'm dealing with FIRST MODE with ison on PA... I repeat, I'm dealing with FIRST MODE with ison on PA

D. Koubaroulis:
In any case why are you doing Protobarys as a Greek and Barys as an Arab?? :)

G. K. Michalakis:
I don't know, Dimitris. the whole thing is an experiment. I've noticed that there are two different Zos from time to time. Spontaneously, I do a higher Zo in
first mode vs. Barys. What I'm trying to figure out is... is it all right or is it not? To answer my question, try doing ison on Pa continuously. If it sounds "ackward", maybe I should be doing a lower Zo. After some thought and listening to Iakovos and Dositheos, I realize that psaltic Zo in fist mode should be LOW. So, my "occidental" Zo in Fisrt mode is an error.....

In Barys diatonikos, I try to do the Special intervals. We should try figuring out if the PA I do here is in the same position as the PA in protobarys and spatheion.

D. Koubaroulis:
About Barys diatonikos: I haven't paid attention to PA yet, from a first listen it sounds the same throughout, I will listen more carefully. For the moment let's
concentrate on what you do to ZW and GA. Basically you do what I observed and reported but well, you cheat! Instead of keeping ZW
the same in all branches of Barys and lowering or raising GA accordingly (to 8 or 12 moria in terms of the BOY-GA interval), you keep GA the
same and you move (in particular you lower) ZW so that the ZW-GA interval sounds like a perfect fifth (to satisfy Psaxos' argument).

G. K. Michalakis:
Notice that the Ni Zo is quite "large", and that Zo is quite "low", just like a GA BOY in legetos.

D. Koubaroulis:
Yes...only that you lower it too much in my opinion. It sounds almost enharmonic. By the way, the PA-NH-ZW = DI-GA-BOY analogy is
correct and it is witnessed by theoreticians of the old method as well (B. Stephanides, 1819 is an example). Panagiotidis agrees as well.
Stanitsas disagrees in his interview, who knows why.. maybe because he doesn' t like Karas.

G. K. Michalakis:
For Andrea = Di Ga bou, and Tsolakidis does a nice large Ga bou in legetos, so I guess the ENDING(lower zone) might sound like legetos, but certainly not the upper zone... Do I "cheat" in Eleison me o theos as well??? THAT's the real standard, for me (something I learned well by heart)..

G. K. Michalakis:
Finally, the Eleison me O Theos is done by heart, and is my "interval reference" for Barys diatonikos.

D. Koubaroulis:
It sounds good, better than the other examples.

G. K. Michalakis:
Aha... It's because I'm really not thinking, and just applying everything I've learned..

D. Koubaroulis:
I think this is because in fast chants you don't get to spend too much time on controversial intervals and they don't stick out that much. Not saying that the
other recordings are bad, but I think they have issues.

G. K. Michalakis:
You're absolutely correct...

G. K. Michalakis:
Try and figure out if I do a "down shifted" "pa-Bou-Ga-Di", in which case the Ga-Pa is not the same as the Ga-Pa of Spatheion (= Bestengar, according to me). If you find no differences, then we may say that even thinking differently and putting the isson in different postions doesn't change much.

D. Koubaroulis:
Although I haven't paid attention to PA, it seems to me logical to
lower PA and BOY since you have lowered ZW in the first place. So your issue is ZW and not lowering PA and BOY.

G. K. Michalakis:
MMMM... let's take the one we agree on, eleison me O Theos.. does the Ni PA sound like that of first mode. Are MOST of the notes in the SAME position as first mode, or are they slightly lower. In this piece, I honestly don't feel that it is only Zo that is "quite low"... Focus in on the PA and try telling me what happens, please.

D. Koubaroulis:
I am not sure about that yet.

G. K. Michalakis:
I feel that barys diatonikos has "special" intervals and that it is not exactly spatheion melody.

D. Koubaroulis:
Nobody said it is spatheion.

G. K. Michalakis:
The instrumental recordings You put up sound quite spatheion to me... we may wish to push up bou a bit, but all in all, they are "first mode pathitikos", which eventually drop to Zo. This means that EVERYTHING is equal to first mode except Di ,and perhaps the Bou. I'm just describing what I heard.

D. Koubaroulis:
Gregorios' doxology is indicated by a 4up sign (therefore Tetraphonos) and has DI flat (what does this flat mean?). If you consider that the same as First
mode Diphonos (what you call spatheion) then we hear different things or Stanitsas is wrong in his interpretation of GA-DI in the IBM recording.

G. K. Michalakis:
NO... I'm trying to prove the OPPOSITE: I'm trying to prove that the BARYS diatonikos has NOTHING to do with the instrumental version you've put up which are CLOSER to first mode pathitikos. I'm trying to prove that the for a SAME ZO, the PA is NOT the same between Spatheion = first and Barys diatonikos. But since instruments cannot distinguish between the two, they play the SAME pa.

And I'm trying to demonstrate that what I chant in "eleison me" was not learnt from some instrument, and that names such as Betang.. have NOTHING to do with what one can learn form a teacher's mouth. What do Stanitsas' intervals have to do with the two other superb interval interpretations you put up???? NOTHING!!!

All in all: I feel that one should distinguish between Protobarys, Spatheion (Pathitikos) and special intervals. The latter are possible ONLY if one maintains isson on ZO throughout the piece. Draw a diagram according to Chrysanthos. Take DI, Ga, Bou PA and push them all down about 2 or 3units (out of 12/68). Push Ga just a bit up (one or two units = ALMOST its initial position). Push Ni JUST a bit up (one or two units). These are the SPECIAL intervals. The fthora of Di on Pa can be explained by a large BOU GA interval, which sounds SHARP, thus satisfying Ephesios’ writings. Ni Zo is large, even without moving the Ni, if one uses the Chrysanthos diagram, and it thus sounds like Legetos, satisfying the Legetos theory. Ga Di is small, satisfying the hyphesis on Di theories. Yet, this scale is NEITHER protobarys NOR spatheion.