In the past 250 years (and possibly earlier) there have been a number of Ecclesiastical compositions known to belong in a special type of Barys Diatonic Mode which is often identified as Barys Tetraphonos or maqam Bestenigar by some psaltai. The earliest well known composition that we know of in this mode is a doxology of Iakovos Protopsaltis in late 18th century According to most of the -relatively few- Byzantine theoreticians that talk about this mode, Barys Tetraphonos uses the "diatonic scale" where DI is flattened temporarily or permanently (throughout the piece) and ZW is also flattened sometimes as in other diatonic modes. Since no mention is made about GA, one assumes that GA is meant to be performed natural. Indeed, this theory corresponds exactly to the way maqam Bestenigar is performed today in secular (external) music. However, this theory does not correspond to modern psaltic practice. In all recorded performances of such pieces, Barys Tetraphonos does not use "the diatonic scale". It uses "a diatonic scale" of its own which requires new theory to describe it. Some theoreticians, Konstantinos Psahos being the first of them, already tried to present such a new theory in the past but their views appear incomplete and sometimes incorrect. In this page, we examine the history of the issue, the different theories and compositions from both Ecclesiastical and Secular repertoire and we attempt to draw conclusions regarding questions such as:

• When does Barys Tetraphonos appear in Ecclesiastical music?
• Why do most chant theoreticians not talk about Barys Tetraphonos?
• Why do even modern theoreticians present an incorrect theory about this mode?
• Are there more than one type of Barys Tetraphonos in Ecclesiastical music?
• Why is Barys Tetraphonos different than modern maqam Bestenigar?
• Could maqam Bestenigar have been the same as Barys Tetraphonos in the past?
• Are papadic pieces of Barys Diatonic meant to be chanted in Barys Tetraphonos?
• What do the chromatic fthorai mean in pieces of Barys Diatonic?
• Is Barys Tetraphonos an Authentic (Kyrios) or Plagal mode?
• What is the apechema of Barys Tetraphonos?
• How should Barys Tetraphonos be notated in scores?
• and more...

We support our conclusions with as many scores and recordings of this mode as we could find.

Maqam Bestenigar is a well known and popular maqam in "external" (non-Ecclesiastical) music. The following excerpt from K. Signell's book "Makam: Modal Practice in Turkish Art Music" contains the currently accepted scale of this maqam [pdf, 72 Kb]. The maqam is a combination of maqam Iraq (or Arak) and maqam Sabah "sitting" on top of it. The melodies make use mostly of maqam Sabah and they only make cadences to Iraq every now and then. The interval ZW-GA in this maqam is an imperfect fifth interval which is what gives this maqam its special character. This theory agrees with instrumental practice as shown by the following two recordings:

Ecclesiastical compositions thought to be written in this maqam are labelled with inconsistently different names in the literature. Here is a list of different indications we have seen or heard about pieces of Barys Tetraphonos. Examples scanned from scores can be found in the analysis that follows.

From the above descriptions, only the last one gives a hint about the pitch of GA in performance.

Without a GA sharp in its scale (8-12-10-8-12-12-10) we have a non-conventional scale where the basis note does not have an octave relationship with its Heptaphonia (the upper end of the scale) and which is 4 moria short of a perfect Diapason scale (68 instead of 72 moria). Adding the missing 4 moria by assuming GA sharp a permanent part of its scale, then the Mode has a typical Plagal scale with two diatonic tetrachords disjunct by a major (12) tone. This agrees with the general perception of Barys acting as Plagal Third Mode and with the theoretical rule that only a Plagal Mode can have a Tetraphonos special sub-mode. However, Barys Tetraphonos is special in that, although it is called Tetraphonos, it does not seem to correspond to an Authentic Mode, as happens with the Tetraphonos' branches of all other Plagal modes. We are not sure why this is like that.

When the melody reaches GA from below and descends, it seems there is more or less agreement between theoreticians (and oral practice from what it seems) that GA "returns" to its natural (un-sharpened) position (e.g. see Simon Karas' "Theoretikon", vol I. p. 337). However, in practice, the musical scores often indicate special chromatic fthorai in such melodic passages to show that even then GA is sharp sometimes. The rest is left to the experience of the psaltis.

It is clear that the intervals of the recordings below match those of Barys Tetraphonos, rather than maqam Bestenigar.

Other compositions in Barys Tetraphonos differ from the above in that DI flat is rarely or never notated and the melodic movement is somewhat (but not a lot) different. For instance, DI flats do not appear at all in the Polyeleos "Logon Agathon" of Georgios Kres [pdf, 1.5 Mb] as they do in Iakovos' doxology - which by the way was probably written down originally by the same Georgios Kres. Some DI flats are notated in the version of Georgios Kres' "Logon Agathon" published by Petros Ephesios in his Anthologia (see examples below). In terms of oral tradition, the mode is interpreted exactly the same as the above recordings of the doxologies in Barys Tetraphonos. To prove this, we superimposed two such pieces by Stanitsas and Sfikas after transposing the base pitch of one of the recordings to match the other [mp3, 2.5 Mb]. Here are the relevant scores and recordings:

• Polyeleos "Logon Agathon" (Psalm 44) by Georgios Kres [pdf, 1.5 Mb] (from "Mousike Pandekte" vol 2, Constantinople, 1850) chanted by Stephanos Prousalis [mp3, 1.7 Mb] (broadcasted on the radio by Stamatios Kissas) and Georgios Michalakis [wma] (offered by Georgios Michalakis).
• The same Polyeleos in a different composition (from a score unknown to us currently) chanted by protopsaltis Leonidas Sfikas [mp3, 2.9 Mb] (broadcasted on the radio by Lykourgos Angelopoulos and Konstantinos Angelidis).

Barys Tetraphonos as a name is mentioned since the Byzantine times and chanted as part of Ioannis Koukouzelis' Mega Ison of Papadike (between 12-14th centuries) [jpg] (scanned from Agathangelos Kyriazidis "En Anthos Ecclesiastikes Mousikes", reprinted by Regopoulos). However, this Tetraphonos the way it is written and chanted is totally different to the Barys Diatonic Tetraphonos that we understand today by that name. Clearly here we are talking about the Tetraphonos of the so-called "Enharmonic" Barys from GA, which sounds like Plagal Fourth from GA. Listen to the sample of the excertpt above by the Maistores choir directed by Prof. Gregorios Stathis [mp3, 950Kb].

A few centuries later, at the end of the 18th century, Apostolos Konstas presents the first theoretical evidence of Barys Tetraphonos as we know it, as a separate modal branch of Barys Diatonic. Apostolos gives a sample score (see below) that seems to be identical to what we call Barys Tetraphonos today. It is not clear to us yet as to what the fthorai mean at the beginning of the piece. It is surprising why the Three Teachers (Chrysanthos and Chourmouzios in particular), the Patriarchal Committee of 1881-83 and following theoreticians until Boudouris (with the exception of Georgios Lesvios who mentioned it in 1840 with a different name) chose to ignore this modal branch in their theoretical works (even though the mode was clearly present (and mentioned) in musical scores such as the manuscripts of Gregorios Protopsaltis, official Patriarchal scores such as the Pandekte of Stephanos and Ioannis, 1850 and elsewhere.

At the same time as Apostolos (late 18th century), Iakovos Protopsaltis composed his famous Doxology in Barys Tetraphonos.[jpg] (scanned from Mousike Pandekte, 1850, vol 2). At least in Mousike Pandekte there is no special indication that this mode is indeed Tetraphonos except for the explicit flattening of DI at many places and the movement of the melody.

Another theoretician of the Old Method, Vasileios Stephanidis, writes in 1819 about Barys Tetraphonos as it is found in Koukouzelis' Mega Ison, however he doesn't describe the Barys Tetraphonos we are interested in here. This could be an indication that either Stephanidis did not know much about this mode which could possibly be because this mode was introduced in Ecclesiastical Music around the end of the 18th century.

A few years later, in early 19th century, the Three Teachers did not mention Barys Tetraphonos in their theoretical works. However, they did write and publish pieces in Barys Tetraphonos (Gregorios' Axion Estin and Doxology/Chourmouzios' Second Stasis of the Typika) and in maqam "Bestenigar" (Gregorios) using notation identical to the Ecclesiastical pieces of Barys Diatonic. Here are some examples of the relevant work of the Three Teachers on the subject:

Petros Ephesios in his Anthologia [18xx, reprinted by the Greek Byzantine Choir in 1997] gives some more hints on the performance of Barys Tetraphonos in the Polyeleos of Georgios Kres by the frequent use of flat and sharp signs and fthorai. We scanned some examples:
(a) Here GA could be natural (see part labelled (c)):

(b) Descending from above, DI - GA - BOY, can have GA either sharp or natural. Often the choice is with the psaltis whether to sharpen GA on descend or not. Here is an example from Petros Ephesios' Anthologia where a sharp GA on descent is mandated with a sharp sign:

(c) Other times, a hard chromatic fthora is placed on DI to remind of a sharp GA and a flat BOY.

Stephanos Lambadarios and Konstantinos Protopsaltis present a confusing description of Bestenigar in Konstantinos' "Ermineia tes Eksoterikes Mousikes". There it is mentioned that maqam Bestenigar uses the pitch of Cargah (GA natural) but right next to it is a scale with ZW flat and GA sharp (!) using the same martyria as the natural diatonic GA [jpg] (scanned from Konstantinos Protopsaltis' "Ermineia tes Eksoterikes Mousikes", 1840, reprinted by Koultoura). This means that either Stephanos and Konstantinos mixed up the maqam with some other maqam which is unlikely or that they wanted to say that GA is sometimes (or mainly/always) sharp in Bestenigar or that GA is sharpened when attracted by DI as explained by Panagiotis Kiltzanidis a few years later (see below). In either case, their scale diagram coincides with Ecclesiastical practice where GA is mainly performed sharp. It disagrees with their own text a few lines above where they describe that GA is natural which coincides with instrumental practice. Or they meant something else that escapes us currently.

Following the example of his predecessors, Konstantinos Protopsaltis composed a doxology in Barys Tetraphonos too [jpg]. Notice the odd notation in places (g) and (j) where it is not clear whether the flat sign corresponds to BOY or to GA. Our opinion is that it corresponds to BOY and requires GA sharp as does Barys Tetraphonos when cadencing to GA. Konstantinos (or rather Stephanos Lambadarios who actually transcribed the doxology in the New Notation) also notates the occasional GA sharp with chromatic fthorai [jpg] (notice the unusual flat on an ison) and here [jpg]. In other cases like (c) here, GA is probably meant to be performed natural [jpg].

In that same year (1840), Georgios Lesvios (a student of the Three Teachers in early 19th century) proposes a new name "Tenth Mode" to replace the "barbaric" [sic] in his opinion Arabo-Persian name "Bestenigar" which he identifies with "Barys Tetraphonos" and mentions that in this mode are chanted "the doxology of Iakovos Protopsaltis, the katavasiai of Pentecost and the "Ainei e Psyche Mou" of Chourmouzios Chartophylax and plenty of external music songs" [html, page 11] (from anemi.lib.uoc). Here is the presentation of this "Tenth mode" by Georgios Lesvios from his theory book. [jpg] (scanned from Georgios Lesvios' "Eisagoge Eis to Theoretikon te kai Praktikon Tis Mousikis Technis", Athens, 1840, reprinted by Regopoulos, 1994, click for original size). So, according to Georgios Lesvios, both the Ecclesiastical pieces of Barys Tetraphonos (like Iakovos' doxology) and the external music songs are chanted in one and the same mode. That simplifies the presentation however does not resolve the issue of the pitch of GA. If we were to accept Lesvios' description, GA is always natural and DI is always flat in this mode which clearly is not true in Ecclesiastical oral practice (only in external/folk modern instrumental practice).

Forty years later, Panagiotis Kiltzanidis presents Bestenigar with GA natural (and only sharp when attracted by DI but no other time) and DI and ZW flat and occasionaly BOY flat.[jpg] (scanned by Vasili Zacharis from Panagiotis Kiltzanidis' "Methodike Didaskalia of Greek Music", Constantinople, 1881, reprinted by Regopoulos). Surprisingly, Kiltzanidis writes a flat sign next to the martyria of DI on the scale diagram, however he does not provide a special interval line for that flat in the diagram (as he does with the other flat/sharp signs on other notes). Note also that the normal diatonic martyria of DI is used for the permanently, according to the scale, flat DI. Of interest is that Kiltzanidis, a member of the Patriarchal Committee of 1881-83, knows and publishes about Bestenigar before the Committee convenes however no explicit mention of it or Barys Tetraphonos was made in the presentation of the Ecclesiastical Modes by the Committee.

In early 20th century, the first Ecclesiastical music theory book to talk about GA sharp in Barys Diatonic Mode was that of Konstantinos Psahos [jpg] (scanned from Konstantinos Psahos' "To Oktaechon Systema...", published by Georgios Hatzitheodorou). Psahos didn't see GA sharp as a permanent sharpening, just as a melodic attraction towards making the fifth interval perfect when the melody revolves around GA because in his opinion the imperfect fifth interval is "not acceptable by nature" (analogion.com: Wonder whether he thought that maqam Bestenigar of external intrumental music was also unacceptable by nature!). Surprisingly he doesn't talk about flattening DI and ZW which is so common in compositions of Barys Tetraphonos. And he does not cover cases where GA is sharpened when the melody does not revolve around it (as we demonstrate on this page). Despite that, it seems that this is the first attempt at an explanation of when GA is sharp and when it isn't in Barys Diatonic.

A contemporary of Psahos, Monk Nektarios presents a Cherouvikon of Misael Misaelidis Protopsaltis of Smyrna in a modal branch of Barys which according to the comment at the top of the piece has "GA always sharp". It is not clear whether the comment was added by Misaelidis or by Monk Nektarios. Regardless, the author of the comment either ignored the name "Tetraphonos" or intentionally omitted it to avoid the exact confusion discussed on this page. However, this seems to be the first Ecclesiastical score that explicitly mentions Barys with a permanent sharp GA.

Around the same time (early 20th century), Ioannis Palasis wrote a Trisagion in Barys Tetraphonos (not labelled as such though) that is chanted with GA always sharp by the choir of the Constantinopolitan Friends of Music. See the score [jpg] (scanned from Lykourgos Petridis' "Leitourgia") and listen to the recording [rm, 1.7 Mb] (from ieropsaltis.com). A number of other modern (20th cent.) compositions of Trisagia and Dynamis exist that are all chanted in exactly the same way, even though GA is not explicitly notated sharp.

A few years after Psahos, in the 1940s, Archon First Domestichos Angelos Boudouris becomes the first ever Patriarchal theoretician to acknowledge the existence of Barys Diatonic Tetraphonos as an independent modal branch and presents it as an independent branch of Barys Diatonic. He says that Barys Tetraphonos (the mode of Iakovos' doxology) has DI flat and does not mention at all about GA (therefore assuming it natural). Boudouris reiterates the incorrect theoretical descriptions of the past regarding GA, disagreeing with oral tradition. He seems to ignore (or chose to ignore) Psahos' explanation about a sharp GA in Barys Diatonic. He could obviously hear the sharpened GA in performance however he did not go on to describe "new theory" for it.

A few years later, in the 1950s, Avraam Efthemiadis does not talk at all about a sharpened GA when discussing Barys Diatonic Tetraphonos, he only mentions the flattening of DI and ZW when the melody revolves around GA which he observes that is the same in all diatonic modes [jpg] (scanned from "Mathemata Byzantines Ecclesiastikes Mousikes", p. 437). He says that this is the mode in which Iakovos' doxology is chanted in. From the description one understands that Iakovos Doxology is chanted with GA natural which disagrees with oral tradition. Efthemiadis seems to also have ignored (or chose to ignore) Psahos' explanation about GA sharp in Barys Diatonic and tried to justify the reiterated confusing theory of GA being the "same as in all diatonic modes" by giving a generic explanation which however appears incorrect.

In 1982, Simon Karas in his "Methodos Tes Ellenikes Mousikes - Theoretikon", vol I, p. 335, [jpg] attempted to resolve the confusion by becoming the first to theoretically present Bestenigar as a special case of what he called plain ("haplos") Barys Diatonic mode with GA always natural. This was a different mode from Barys Tetraphonos which according to Karas has a sharp GA which only natural when the melody reaches it from below and then descends. The intervals of Barys Tetraphonos "Bestenigar" as presented by Karas match exactly those of the maqam Bestenigar i.e. there is an imperfect fifth interval ZW- GA natural (38 instead of 42 moria). Karas acknowledges that this mode has also been called "Barys Tetraphonos" by the modern ecclesiastical musicians. He also observes that ecclesiastical musicians before him had not presented a special martyria (modal sign) for this mode, choosing to just indicate it with flat signs on DI and ZA througout the piece instead. Karas even composed and presented a suitable apechema for it as there didn't exist one (he did the same for Barys Tetraphonos with GA sharp for the same reason). Specifically, according to Karas, the Greek name of the mode should be Mesos of Plagal First Diphonos Mode, consisting of a diphonia [ZW-PA] followed by diphonia [PA-GA natural] followed by a soft chromatic tetrachord [GA natural-DI flat-KE natural-high ZW flat].". He mentions that this is the mode in which Iakovos' doxology is chanted. What is strange here is that Karas doesn't seem to have noticed or chose to ignore the discrepancy between oral tradition and his theoretical presentation. He didn't consider the possibility of the mode using a different scale in folk (Bestenigar) and ecclesiastical music (Tetraphonos).

In late 20th century, Karas' student, musicologist Marios Mavroeidis, disagrees with Karas in his book "Echos, Tropos, Maqam" [reference pending] and says that maqam Bestenigar does not have an equivalent in Ecclesiastical music. Mavroeidis obviously had in mind the instrumental version of the maqam. Despite that comment, Mavroeidis does not endeavour to resolve the confusion discussed in this page.

In 1991, protopsaltis Charalambos Karakatsanis presents yet another theory, more to the point, although not without confusing or missing elements. In his book "Mousikon Leimonarion" (vol. 7 on Barys Mode) he attempts to clarify some things based on his experience and his reading of earlier works by Simon Karas, Spyros Kapsaskis and Theodoros Hatzitheodorou. Karakatsanis says that Barys Diatonic uses a single scale with GA sharp. He doesn't accept GA natural in Barys Diatonic, with Spyros Kapsaskis' justification that the mode should have a major tone (12 moria) as a disjuntive (diazeuktikos) tone between its two tetrachords. And he correctly points out the raison d'etre of the chromatic fthorai in pieces of Barys Diatonic mode to signify a sharp GA (and a flat BOY). Inside his book (page 232) he presents an apechema of Barys with GA sharp [scan pending]. He also proposes using a different martyria for GA of Barys Diatonic, to signify that it is sharp, following the example of Simon Karas. His theory is unclear in a few places at least:
(a) He says that GA is to be performed natural as in First Mode when a diatonic fthora "resolves" a chromatic one. This may be true sometimes (like in "Ton Despotin") in modern oral tradition but certainly it is not a general rule. E.g. the Polyeleos "Logon Agathon" of Georgios Kres and other pieces do not follow this rule. Even the second part of "Ton Despotin" can be chanted in Barys Tetraphonos as demonstrated by Georgios Michalakis [mp3]. He doesn't mention anything about GA returning to its natural position when the melody reaches it from below and then descends.
(b) He quotes Theodoros Hatzitheodorou (page 5 of the introduction) saying that in "Barys Tetraphonos" (as he calls it) GA is steady ("statheros", meaning natural) as opposed to Barys Heptaphonos where GA is always sharp. However, this is not true in today's practice as we have seen.
(c) In page 8 of the introduction, he provides a scale for maqam Bestenigar with BOY flat, GA sharp, DI flat, KE flat (!), and ZW enharmonic (atzem) with the following explanation "starts from GA, ends in low ZW, ascending it requires ZW flat and descending it requires GA sharp". He doesn't mention where he got this scale from and it is surprising that he doesn't refer to the difference between the external and ecclesiastical music traditions on the matter. Finally, KE flat in this mode seems incorrect. The indication that Bestenigar pieces start from GA is interesting and it is generally true that so-called "Bestenigar" pieces do start from GA. So perhaps "Bestenigar" after all could be Barys Tetraphonos which starts from GA and descends.
(d) He doesn't provide references for most of his theoretical points about Barys.
In the music scores of the book, in the Leitourgika of Dimitrios Mavropoulos (page 285), we spotted a NH flat on descent in Barys Diatonic mode which was rather surprising.

In 2005, musicologist Vasilios Katsifis in his book criticising Karas' theory [reference pending] does not mention anything particularly relevant about Karas' presentation of Bestenigar, however elsewhere he says that in his opinion Barys Tetraphonos always has DI flat and ZW flat (unlike Karas who supports only Bestenigar has those flats). He does not present a numbered scale of Barys Tetraphonos. He disagrees with Karas about the existence of Barys Bestenigar and also about Plain "Haplos" Barys and presents Barys Tetraphonos with GA natural and DI/ZW flat without mentioning anything about GA sharp in it [jpg, 256 Kb]. We do not know why Katsifis also chooses to ignore oral tradition and previous theoretical works in this matter and keeps reiterating incorrect theories.

In 2006, Georgios Michalakis [html], acknowledges that new theory needs to be written for Barys Diatonic (especially for the type of Barys with "special intervals" as he calls the Barys Tetraphonos we study on this page) and presents his ideas on the matter (see our page on Barys Diatonic [html]). Disagreeing with all other theoreticians he sees what we have been calling GA sharp of Barys Tetraphonos as GA natural and, to justify the Tetraphonos intervals below it, he proposes a theory where all intervals below (the natural) GA are lowered. A tentative interval diagram without numbers for all intervals of interest is presented. His theory does not seem to have basis in psaltic practice. Psaltai generally think of a sharp GA when chanting this mode and not of shortened intervals below it.

Very little has been written by Byzantine Music theoreticians about Barys Diatonic and Barys Tetraphonos in particular. The descriptions are incomplete, contradicting each other and confusing. This probably is a result of losing the sense of modal branches (Diphonos, Triphonos, Tetraphonos, Heptaphonos) after the reform of the Three Teachers in 1814. The most likely reason in our opinion is that Barys Tetraphonos was assumed "known" for someone who knew how to chant Barys Diatonic therefore not requiring special mention. The relative silence of past theoreticians on the subject could also indicate that the mode was perhaps recently (18th century) "imported" from external music and therefore noone really knew much about it. Finally, it could be that the mode changed in the course of time to use special intervals that needed new theory to be written.

According to the literature, there is strong evidence that Barys Tetraphonos was seen as identical to maqam Bestenigar of external music in the 19th century (see literature survey above). If that's indeed true, it means that either Ecclesiastical oral tradition changed since then or that the performance of the maqam in external music changed. A hypothetical explanation is that oral tradition changed the intervals of Barys Tetraphonos due to the difficulty or detest of performing the imperfect fifth of Bestenigar or for other reasons. Another equally likely hypothesis is that the maqam changed in the 19th or 20th century to use a Sabah scale on top of Iraq. Finally, it is not unlikely that the identity of Barys Tetraphonos and maqam Bestenigar may have always been a misconception of psaltai and theoreticians which led to the misrepresentation of the maqam (and the mode) in the musical scores and theory books until today.

Identifying Barys Tetraphonos with maqam "Bestenigar" as it is today performed in instrumental music is wrong. Psaltic oral tradition and external instrumental music use different intervals to perform (secular in this case) pieces that are written in this mode. Based on the literature, the mode and the maqam could have been identical in the 19th century however today they are performed differently. Because of this uncertainty, we cannot be sure how they songs of Euterpe and Pandora were chanted in the 19th century.

There is only one independent Barys Tetraphonos Mode Ecclesiastical music, which in terms of intervals it is performed the same way regardless of the presence of flat signs on DI and ZW and regardless whether the name "Bestenigar" is associated with a piece (like Iakovos' doxology). The name "Bestenigar" could just mean melodies of Barys Tetraphonos that start from GA (sharp) showing the DI flat and ZW flat pitches and descending to low ZW (as mentioned by Charalambos Karakatsanis). Simon Karas's presentation of "Bestenigar" as an Ecclesiastical mode (mesos of Plagal First Diphonos Mode) has no basis in modern Ecclesiastical practice. There is also Barys Tetraphonos of Koukouzelis' Mega Ison which is essentially Plagal Fourth Mode from GA and only appears in passages of papadic pieces.

If some compositions today require to be chanted in maqam Bestenigar (with GA always natural) then only such pieces should be labelled "Bestenigar" with a note requiring GA natural. All others should be labelled "Barys Tetraphonos" and notated consistently (for instance using the useful modal martyries of Barys Tetraphonos presented by Simon Karas in his Theoretikon).

The papadic pieces of Barys Diatonic are generally chanted in Barys Tetraphonos with passages of First (or Plagal First) Mode Diphonos, and Barys Heptaphonos [Recordings pending].

Given the above analysis, it would be useful to write a complete theory of Barys Tetraphonos (and Barys Diatonic). We will be grateful if anyone provides more information on these subjects.