1. Is there a commonly acceptable definition of the following terms in Byzantine Ecclesiastical Music?

Chronos

G. K. Michalakis: Firstly, it is interesting to note that there are many definitions for each of the terms
"chronos" and "rhythmos", with lots of overlap, and this leads to an overall confusion, not only among
authors but mostly those reading their explanations. My answers are based on things I have been told,
as well as my own personal organisation of all this information.

In my view, it is important to distinguish between "Rhythmos", which is a compositional criterion (ie

method of notating psaltic neumes) and "chronos", which is the way the neumes are actually chanted
according to traditional means of allocating "units of time" to each neume. Using a compostion written
in a given "rhythmos" and chanting it usding different types of "chonos" leads to creating "other
rhythmos", which are not written out. If a computer were to transcibe the way the simple rhythm
hymns are actually chanted, the result would be a very compicated score. The compication will arise
because some "standard unit of time" will have to be established by the compouter. When using a
particular choronos which varies the unit of time, the computer will have to find the smallest unit of
time so as to describe the rest of what it "hears". The end result will be (in this particular case of
"compolex chonos counting") a score where there will be no gerular rhythm within each measure (in
contrast to the original, written forme of the composition, which has some "rhythm regularity" within
measures). Yet, regularity in terms of duration is still maintained among measures.

Description of "chronos": The cyclical motion of a hand, moving upwards to eye-level and coming down
upon the knee of a sitting person is to be considered as one complete chronos. This does not necessarily
imply one measure, because one cyclical motion may be used to describe anything from one beat to one
measure to a number of measures.

One chronos per beat = "monosimos" or "kata chronon paedagogical"

One chronos per measure = haplos when the duration of each beat's unit of time is constant or "kata
chronon"
One chronos per "set" of measures" = "thesis to thesis" counting, or "kata rhythmon". See below.

Furthermore, chronos is also a generic term used to describe all phenomena having to do with the
intensity of variations and durations within some regular temporal domain. "Good chronos" is
sometimes used to describe a "good attack", a regularly good engagement into whatever measure is
used.

Finally, combining all of the above "regularity", "good engagement", "good intensity variations", good
unit of time duration variations, etc may all be constituents of "good chronos".

The way these intensity and unti of duration phenomena are subdivided and used gives rise to Haplos,
diplos, syneptigmenos chronos, although there is much debate as to the latter, of which I am an ardent
defender. Haplos, diplos, and syneptigmenos chronos are not to be confused with rhythmos, which may
be disimos, trisioms, tetrasimos, etc., and which is a matter of compostion. As an example, a "terirem"
composed in disimos rhythmos as it is in classical editions may be "recomposed" as trisimos rhythmos as
well, but the disimos rhythmos composition may be interpreted as either haplos, "kata chronon" or
"kata rhythmon" (the term "syneptigmenos"" is sometimes used to describe this situation, when the
tempo is quickened)

Nevertheless, the case of "diplos chronos" is an interesting case, because here one may see the link
between "written form" rhythmos anda particualr interpretation giving rise to a new rhythmos. What is
called "diplos chronos" can be though out as follows: take the syllabic heirmos "Anoixo". Either write out
a new composition, or just chant it by makin the duration of each beat the double of its original value.
While chanting, don't change the thesis (chant as if adding a "klasma") but add "neumes" so as to make
some melodu on the arsis. If using the original syllabic score to do this, then the psaltis is interpreting
according to "diplos chronos". However, if one is to write it out, as did Ioannis prosotpsaltis, we may say
that the composition is written in a particular diplos "rhythmos"... the term does not exis, of course, but
it shows how a single "paleographic" score can be used not only in terms of "rhythmic emphasis" (see
below", but in terms of chronos variations as well, leading to numerous interpretations, even if we do
not take into consideration the various "analyseis=developments".

The case of "diplos chronos" in "Anoixo" is interesting as well in that it helps demonstarate the difficulty
of getting one's chonos correct. Some psaltis cannot vary the arsis part during a duration compatible
with diplous rhythmos, and they end up doing trisimos. For excellent chronos diplou, kata
rhythmons, listen to Metropolitis Eirinaios. Compare this to other pslaltis doing either trisimos-
hexasimos or chronos diplos kata chronon (Stanitsas).

Rhythmos (Rhythm)

G. K. Michalakis: One complete chronos duration may be divided into smaller temporal subsections.
Their number and their combinations of duration may give anything from Disymos to anything else.
Psaltiki does not use as many rhythms as demotic or "exoteric" = external = non ecclesiastical music
does. Rhythmos is used in theoretcial representations. A psaltis does not make use of rhythmos when
interpreting but only when learning to chant a piece, in which case he counts accoridng to "chornos
haplos paedagogikos": During this phase, the psaltis determines regular temporal "signposts", and then
gives emphasis to different syllables depending on the accentuation and on the significance of the word,
when doing the actual interpretation of the hymn. Strictly speaking, each syllable is no longer exactly
equal to its neighbours as far as duration is concerned. Therefore, what was initially composed as
disimos is no longer exactly disimos throughout during the interpretation, if this is done according to
"kata rhythmon" or "syneptigmenos". Yet, the "signposts" are in the same temporal positions as with
those of a pure, disimos rhythmos interpreted in haplos chornos. This is one great problem of
contemporary psaltis, who seem to "drag" the melody. Once the hymn has been well integrated, they
way it will sound will be determined by the chronos. Applying rhythm concepts instead of Chronos
podas to podas thinking will break down the fluidity of a chanted hymn. On the other hand, not applying
rhythmos when composing and when learning will, of course, lead to unstructured hymns.

One great problem with Gregorian chant is that there is no oral tradition as the rhythm By
consequence, all neumes have been counted in metrophonia, according to different theories that give
such and such a neume such or such an identical temporal (duration) value, along with some debatable
rhythmic concepts introduced by the Solemenian School, which give perpetually alternating rhythms
that allow no room for good, regular chronos, the result being that all the interpretations we hear are
"insipid". However, many such hymns seem to have inherent trisismos and Tetrasimos rhythm, which,
when chanted as such may "disrespectfully add and subtract durations to the various neumes" but,
when sung according to "kata rhythmon" or "syneptigmenos" chronos, will reveal the inherent beauty of
these hymns, in complete agreement with the patriarchal "terirem" interpretation which is neither
disimos (regardless of the composition) as it is chanted by the Karas et al school nor trisimos as it is
chanted by Athonites and Thessalonicean "Patriarchal style" Protopsaltis. One must count according to
the chronos mentioned above, which allows one to extend some neumes more than others, thus
establishing some chronos regularity, regardless of any internal "stricto sensu" rhythmic changes
(transcirbed by the "computer").
"Metron"

--

"Pous/Podas"

--

"Thesis"

G. K. Michalakis: The moment the hand hits the knee, we are in thesis. The very brief moment that
precedes it is the preparation phase and, if things are done correctly, the vowels will explode exactly on
thesis, just like the " ringing of a bell ". Thesis literally means taking position. The whole podas starts on
the thesis.Thesis is the beginning of chronos: it's the moment when one "bangs" one's foot and remains
standing on it when dancing. In psaltiki, it is the accentuated part of a musical formula (and not always
that of a Textual formula).

"Arsis"

G. K. Michalakis."Arsis" literally means elevation. In poetry, the arsis was on the accentuated syllable,
where the upward movement of the hand would be the representation of the upward movement of the
voice = a pitch interval = fifth so as to produce an oxeia, for instance. This definition of arsis as used in
poetry was erroneously utilized by the Solemnian school in an inappropriate musical definition. In music,
arsis is the elevation of the hand so as to produce and maintain a cyclical motion.
If the arsis is the exact temporal antipode of thesis (that is = delta time (thesis to arsis) equals delta time
(arsis to thesis), then we have haplos disimos chronos, where the "unit of time" is constant. If the
duration of the first beat is slightly longer at times, we get "kata rhythmon" or "syneptigmenos", and the
"unit of time" is variable. But syneptigmenos is not trisismos. Trisimos means we apply the exact same
delta time (thesis to arsis) and delta time (arsis to thesis) throughout the melody (althoughthe two
deltas are not equal, contrary to the previous, haplos chronos, they are different between themselves,
yet identical from one measure to the next. In other words, the. "unit of time" is constant..
Syneptigmenos means we're thinking of an entire measure = Podas, but not of where the arsis is: this
will be determined by traditional learning = memory, and it will not always be in the same temporal
position. the only regularity is in chronos duration among measures (measure to measure = thesis to
thesis) and not within a measure's subdivisions.

"Chronike agoge"

--

"Protos chronos"

--

"Haplos Chronos"

--

"MonosChronos"

--
"Monosemos"

--

"Diplos Chronos"

--

"Synthetos Chronos"

--

"Syneptygmenos Chronos/Rhythmos"

G. K. Michalakis: Applied in quick Heirmologic and Kratima. The composition isn't in regular rhythm.
When it is (example "Epinikos hymnos, Tin gar sin, Meg. Basileiou), we are dealing with diplous chronos
(actually written out as "rhytmos diplos ="zero dot, one dot", for the most ).. That is, the composition is
such that we hear every thesis as a "double duration". We can apply syneptigmenos there as well, but
one has to be a good and well-learned performer. In the Kratimas and the Heirmologics, Syneptigmenos
is what gives some accentuated syllables slightly longer duration that others. One learns syneptigmenos
by chanting while walking, and feeling the "alternating balancing motions " of the body. No
syneptigmenos has been put on record by Iakovos, although it was chanted in the Patriarcheion.

As for the question concerning the syneptigmenos symbol in Boudouris transcriptions of Exapostilarions
with the added comment "haplos" chronos, my opinion is that, in these few cases, he uses the symbol in
the current, occidental use of "cut time" = give every neume half its value without further extending or
abbreviating the durations, which would give rise to syneptigmenos, which is what one should sing
traditionally when the aforementioned symbol is indicated.

"Diastolae - Vertical lines single/double "

--

"Tonikos (accent-based) Rhythmos"

--

"Paratonismos"

G. K. Michalakis: Two situations: 1) when the textual accentuated syllable is not on the thesis of a
musical rhythmic podas of an otherwise well-corresponding musical formula, or 2) when the musical
formula would be better suited by a non-accentuated syllable where an accentuated one has been put.
The first case is rare in classical pieces. The second is more common, but a psaltis who has learned how
to apply the correct temporal redistribution (=duration of notes) as well as the correct intensity changes,
the famous "paratonon criticised" "eroooo" no longer sounds as the "EEEEro" in "o Angelos Eboa" of
Chourmouzios' transcription if one is to t apply "syneptigmenos" philosophy to this one measure so as to
avoid what otherwise sounds as paratonia if "haplos" chronos is applied in this case, as it is thought to
apply by the many who not learned the traditional secrets of this piece =apply syneptigmenos
philosophy to this one measure. Most psaltis have dared call this composition "paratonon" and have
come up with other, extravagant "solutions".

2. Where there are disagreements on the definitions above, what are the reasons?

(no answer yet)

3. Are vertical bars needed in Byzantine musical texts?

G. K. Michalakis: The lines exist in the composition, because there cannot be expression without rhythm.
When the composition has regular rhythm with a regular syllable distribution, Chrysanthos speaks of
rhythmiki emphasis. Old melodic formulae are almost always tetrasismos, and use the same number of
syllables below them. Iakovos Prostopsaltis, "breaks" this tendency in some of his Doxology
compositions. When comparing Antiphons of Holy Friday, Ephesios respects more of Rhythmic emphasis
than does Stephanos and than do later on Iakovos Nafpliotis and Pringos, who are either transcribed
(Iakovos by Boudouris) or who put on paper themselves (Pringos) abrreviated = condensed melodic
formulae for the same number of syllables. Such abbreviated formulae are traditional condensed
versions of older, more rhythmic emphasis respectful formulae. Therefore, vertical bars are to be used
for composition and learning purposes. When one learns, one even counts chronos differently (haplos).
When performing, however, the more one sees on the score; the less one is free, and the less one will
think in terms of overall chronos (if one is to think in terms or rhythmos while performing Psaltiki, one
will lose in fluidity). So, there is no need for vertical lines on a final, analogion copy, so as to avoid
rhythmic counting in place of thesis to thesis chronos counting.

Although the terminology may differ, the same principle seems to be advocated by Boudouris:

A. Boudouris:

D. Koubaroulis: Boudouris says that ecclesiastical pieces can be chanted both "by-beat" ("kata chronon")
and "by-rhythm" ("kata rhythmon"). He argues that although pieces can be chanted beat by beat
(monosimos), however, the pieces are not properly executed until the experienced psalti adds the
rhythmic element in the interpretation. That is to aggregate the beats ("xronous") of the piece into
groups ("podes") to form rhythms (as he says elsewhere in the definition of rhythm). He went on to say
that the Patriarchal psaltai are exemplary for chanting by-rhythm and not by-beat.

G. K. Michalakis: Boudouris calls "kata chronon" "by-beat" (monosimos) what I have called either
"haplos chronos paedagogikos", which is to applied when learning, and which is used by Iakovos
throughout his recordings for pedagogical purposes or "haplos chronos" . Boudouris calls ("kata
rhythmon") the "aggregation of beats ("chronous") of the piece into groups ("podes") to form more
"complex" rhythms (as he says elsewhere in the definition of rhythm). This is what I call "thesis to thesis
"chronos counting, which avoids internal rhythmic punctuation which would be that of the compositon,
and giving rise to a new, humanly "impossible to transcribe" interpretation, which can only be learned
by tradition (example, the famous syneptigmenos of terirem, which is neither disimos nor trisimos this
principle can also be applied to Gregorian chant, revealing thus all its beauty that has been lost because
of textual applications of what is otherwise oral/aural tradition.

D. Koubaroulis: Boudouris (in the footnote) considers vertical bars in texts an "innovation" that destroys
the structure and movement of melos. He seems to contradict himself because in the main text of the
chapter he supports the view of counting 1-2 (thesis-arsis, down-up, knee-air) and always stressing the
downbeat more than the upbeat. On one hand he says "count 1-2 and always stress 1", but "never write
this down, because it destroys the structure of the melos".
G. K. Michalakis: In the first case, Boudouris is referring to "thesis to thesis" counting he is referring to
chronos regularity, with an arsis which is simply an upward motion (the thesis, however, is invariably the
"stressed downbeat". Dont write it down means "dont tire the eye with vertical lines, because this
extra information will push the brain to be "too careful" with arsis, thus breaking the "fluidity" of the
patriarchal style of chanting. In the second case, he is most probably referring to "kata chronon
paedagogikos", where much more emphasis is given to the thesis, so as to mark the accents. Some
pslatis (Eirinaies, or instance, applies the principle even when chanting "kata rhythmos", thus stressing
the accent of each word).

4. Can it be that there is no such thing as rhythm in Byzantine music?

D. Koubaroulis: P. Agathocles seems to be the only author to claim so. Does he really mean it?

G. K. Michalakis: Rhythm is the foundation of life, and the environment that surrounds it. There is
regularity in many temporal aspects (from less than nanosecond periods of the electron to microsecond
periods of vocal vibration to second periods of a baseball flying according to de Broglies theorum, to
hundreds of years as concerns planetary orbits around some star). There cannot be prayer without some
form of regularity, even though this regularity may be broken from to time to time, but not so as to give
some destructured compositions some wish to suggest. The problem with not putting vertical lines is
that, if one does not learn traditionally in parallel, one will sing like contemporary Solemnian chanters (=
arhythmos and achronos chanting).

5. Is Tetrasemos an "haplos" (primitive) or "synthetos" (complex) rhythm?

D. Koubaroulis: A. Efthemiadis is not sure.

G. K. Michalakis: For some classical formualae, we can hear is as an haplos.. In some contemporary ones,
it sounds as synthetos.

6. Has rhythm sometimes been influenced by external (non-Ecclesiastical) music?

For instance take pieces in Trisemos by Simonopetra Monastery (Mt Athos).

G. K. Michalakis: Here is where the whole issue of syneptigmenos finds its importance. Not having
learned how to do it correctly, some hear a thesis syllable being somewhat prolonged at times. From
then on, even though the manuscripts show gorgon on chi = cut time = which is not cut time, but
syneptigmenos, they prolong each and every thesis regularly... and we get trisimos terirem. Now, if in
Anoixo to stoma mou =diplous chronos = one hasn't learnt the traditional way, that too will, at many
points, become trisimos. I believe that trisimos is the outcome of bad syneptigmenos and Diplous
chronos applications, and that it has no place in the hymns it is used for (especially Kratimas).

7. How do we count each type of rhythm?

What movements of the hand should we use to count rhythm while learning and when in church (if
any).

G. K. Michalakis: When learning, one must chant very, very slowly (48/min). Chronos is counted with the
hand, and the foot: the foot counts thesis to thesis. The hand counts the famous "tak tak" = tak for
thesis, tak for arsis, tak for en eventual second arsis (in trisimos, we'd say thesis, mesis, arsis). This
method helps punctuate each and every neume, and helps learn the steps (patimata) correctly by
"tuning" into the master's parallagi. When alone, the Parallagi will "tune" the hymn.

In church, we forget about the rhythm of individual measures: it's already there, inherent within a well-
balanced composition (be it utterly or only partially respectful of Rhythmic Emphasis). We only care
about thesis as to chronos or, to paraphrase Boudouris, according to overall = combined "kata
rhythmon") counting. Here, we have "Thesis, arsis, chronos eis" = the entire time taken from thesis to
arsis back to thesis is to be considered as one time = one measure, and we shouldn't be breaking if down
rationally into smaller rhythms by various regular "thesis and arsis durations. Here, we let tradition do
her job: we may alternate between syneptigmenos andHaplos (and even diplos, if we decide to add
Klasmas here and there), or we may do syneptigmenos throughout. We may even do Trisimos. But we'll
count the measures by a vertical cyclical (wide elliptical) motion of the hand, and not by the famous 1-2-
3 triangle, or the 1-2 "up down", or some "1-2-3-4" baguette motion type of counting (as we see some
occidental music orchestra directors do): all traditional psaltis do vertical cyclical thesis to thesis
motions.
Chronos is of such importance (and that's why I put first on the list of priorities for hyphos), that the
Protocanonarchos Stylianos Tsolakidis would keep track of it using 3 parts of his body: each hand as well
as his foot! But let's take things from the beginning.

Firstly, when one is learning or practising (so, what will follow is not a description of theatrical
movements during church services), chronos is kept by an ample circular movement of one hand. The
hand rises well above the head, from where it is suddenly thrust forward and downward in circular
motion, not with constant speed, but with acceleration, before "hitting" the minimal height position
(which is just in front of the thigh) which corresponds to the thesis, or the most intense part of a
measure.

The return upwards is at constant speed, the same as that of the initial downward movement. You may
wish to call this maximal height position arsis, but it does not always correspond to maxima=arsis=
antipode of thesis, as it does in occidental musical theory books = . thesis and only thesis corresponds to
thesis!

All focuses on the preparation of this thesis. The whole body moves so as to establish this regularity of
thesis in the brain. Indeed, if one wishes to learn chronos, one must walk, balance one's arms and
chant according to each thesis footstep. Learning chronos while walking is important because of a lever
effect: Legs are longer, and the brain has more time to integrate the position of the thesis once it has
given out the command to take a step. Bringing chronos to the hand corresponds to shortening this
lever effect. Just standing on an analoghion, leaning with both arms outstretched on the stasidion, and
doing little cheiromic movements is certainly not keeping chronos, for there is no lever effect and, worse
of all, if the chanter never did learn how to sing while walking, the correlation between vocal cords and
hand by the brain is only illusionary!!! Doesn't the Euaggelion say something about this? So, not only
does one learn chronos, but above all, one is in constant prayer by this method of chanting while
walking.

Getting back to practising chronos with my teacher (he was too short so as to keep up with me using a
constant pace, so he showed me the method and let me work on it). We then resorted to using the
ample circular, thesis-oriented acceleration movement of the hand: the whole body was programmed to
strive towards the thesis.

For those that have also studied traditional Hellenic dances as myself, the principle is the same: for most
dances, it's the right foot (podas) that controls all movement so as to coincide with the musician's thesis.
Now, one should not confound the poetic arsis, which is the accentuated syllable, for which the voice
goes up by at least a fifth (and which thus corresponds to the musical thesis), with the musical Arsis.
Poetic arsis (accentuated syllable) thus corresponds to Musical thesis for which the podas (the foot)
should be stepping forth.

What is the importance of all this ample movement? It is that of engaging correctly into the following
thesis! so, once my hand is up, I'm already starting to prepare my consonants, in such manner as to have
completed their vocalisation and to be started on that of the vowel when my hand is in front of my
chest. At this point, the vowel is fully articulated, just in time for the accelerating movement, which will
give my whole body impetus so as to explode that vowel upon the hand's arrival at the thesis position. If
I have many consonants, I prepare them even before the return to the "arsis" position. I hope it is
becoming evident that arsis is almost illusionary, especially in rapid tempo.

Thesis kai arsis, chronos enas: (or "eis")" because arsis is not the temporal opposite of thesis: it is just
an upwards movement of the hand, whereas thesis is an exact explosion of sound!!! So why did
Tsolakidis use three body parts to count tempo? Well, at the analoghion, we do not have the luxury of
ample circular motion, nor that of being able to "skip" a step (just as one might do so as to walk in pace
at a military parade in case everybody else is on pace on the other foot!) for rhythmic changes. Stylianos
Tsolakidis would stand up straight, head tilted slightly upwards, facing the icon of Jesus at the north
entrance (so, he wasn't looking at books, he wasn't hanging on to some stasidion, and both his arms
dropped beside his thighs). He kept chronos with small movements of the left hand, with a slight touch
of his fingers upon his left thigh. The left foot would discretely tap every 2nd thesis (importance of
equilibrated 4/4 measures in most chants of tradition). His right hand would take control fro rhythmical
changes, by transiently counting both thesis and arsis, and the left hand would pick up again.

Interesting, isn't it, that a 80 year-old man would place so many "controls and regulators" for a piece
such as "Idi Baptetai, which was second nature to him. Yet, chronos could not succumb to any
compromise whatsoever.

8. In a line with a series of ison signs, is there such a thing as hitting a thesis at every sign ("monos
chronos", "tak tak tak")?
D. Koubaroulis: D. Nerantzis seems to be the only author explicitly supporting it, although he also
supports disemos/trisemos/tetrasemos for learning.

G. K. Michalakis: When learning, yes, we'll count slowly and by hitting each isson symbol as a thesis by
tapping ones finger on the table = small cirular motion, one per isson. When chanting the exercises, one
will pass from the previous "tak tak" = "by beat counting" to 1-2 counting (one beat thesis, the other
arsis). Finally, we'll give fluidity to the hymn by counting using the vertical cyclical motion:the melody
will then become disimos or trisimos, depending on how many ison will be between the thesis, and will
become haplos or syneptigmenos depending on the extra, non-equal and non-regular

hesitations we'll add on some of the first isons of each measure.

9. Is S. Karas' syneptygmenos the same as the Patriarchal psaltai syneptygmenos?

G. K. Michalakis: Many have tried and many "try" to do syneptigmenos chronos. Panagiotidis does it
more or less decently at times, Taliadoros quite rarely as well. Tsolakidis, of course, is the best I've
heard. I don't know what Karas' definiton is. If it is simply "cut time", = chant the thing at twice the
tempo", then I certainly don't agree. I've never heard ebx do syneptigmenos ( therefore, much less so as
according to the Patriarcal definition)?

10. What does A. Boudouris' "haplos chronos" mean e.g. in "Agios o Kyrios o Theos Hmwn"?

(scores)

G. K. Michalakis: Concerning the syneptigmenos symbol in Boudouris transcriptions of Exapostilarions

with the added comment "haplos" chronos, my opinion is that, in these few cases, he uses the symbol in
the current, occidental use of "cut time" = give every neume half its value without further extending or
abbreviating the durations, which would give rise to syneptigmenos, which is what one should sing
traditionally when the aforementioned symbol is indicated.

11. Are there Ecclesiastical compositions that are written in one rhythm from beginning to end? For
instance consider the debate about "Theotoke h Elpis" as done by S. Karas.

G. K. Michalakis: Rare are the rhythmic changes in old, papadic pieces = very respectful of identical
rhythmic emphasis. In Gregorios transcription of Petros Heirmologion, we note that the trisimos is
"interrupted" at the end of each line by a tetrasimos.This suggests that the cyclical motions were of
the "kata rhythmon" or "syneptigmenos" type, and on the last measure, an extra "small circular motion"
is added so as to mark a "pause" In my opinion, all this is not proof of "regular trisimos", but of
"syneptigmenos with marked pauses".

12. What about the rhythm of the kratema of Theotoke Parthene of Bereketis?

D. Koubaroulis: A. Boudouris mentions elsewhere that it is a mistake to chant it in Trisemos (as many
modern Patriarchal teachers do).

G. K. Michalakis. He is absolutely right it is not trisimos but syneptigmenos which has been reduced to
Trisimos by untraditionally-trained psaltis.

13. What is the "rhythm of the prosomoia" that Petros Byzantios was so irritated to see Iakovos
Protopsaltis "destroy"?

G. K. Michalakis. Rhythmiki emphasis. An example of decent rhythmiki emphasis theses days is the
compositon "Idi Vaptetai" by Nafpliotis as transcribed by Pringos...

D. Koubaroulis: See more on this on the analogion (link pending)

14. Is a hexasemos bar the same as two trisemos bars? For instance, are Athonite stixologiai chanted in
hexasemos or trisemos?

(no answer yet)

15. Is there any evidence about rhythm in Ecclesiastical chant before Ms EBE 716?

(no answer yet)

16. Does the energy (effect) of the musical signs contradict with the division of a composition into bars?
Is D. Neratzis correct to claim so in his book?

G. K. Michalakis: Sometimes you hear me doing an oligon, anatinagma [antikenoma], gorgon, which is
in the end of some theorectical podas `measure) by taking a break in the middle of the measure, by
giving it a lot of brief energy, and by connecting to the next note, which will be the thesis. If I was
counting using vertical lines, I wouldn't feel free to do this "breaking of a measure". But because I'm
thinking of thesis to thesis, I use the above symbol combination as a preparation for the upcoming
thesis. So, it gets more energy than a usual arsis, but I'm already thinking thesis, because I'm not
"guided" by some vertical line (which, I repeat, exists in the composition, but is abolished in the
interpretation, in favour for a more global thinking while counting chronos)

17. What is the fast and slow "dromos" (way of chanting) of heirmologic pieces? Is it equal to chanting
the same piece in "haplos" and "diplos" xronos?

G. K. Michalakis: When doing syneptigmenos and slowly, we're in slow dromos: listen to how I do the
"Thou Kyrie" in the Third mode Kekragarions ...

18. Is thesis-arsis time interval the same as arsis-thesis?

D. Koubaroulis: A. Boudouris says the hand movements are completely isochronous (equal in time). G. K.
Michalakis disagrees.

G. K. Michalakis: I didn't read the passage. The movement of the hand is regular. When singing
paedagogically and haplos, up = down (but we still do a cyclical motion = wide ellipse, not just simple
"up and down". When singing syneptimenos, however, the [thesis to hypothetical arsis] is not equal to
the [hypothetical arsis to thesis] duration. Thesis to thesis is, of course, isochronous Where I seem to
disagree is when I say that there are "larger and smaller" circles... this is due to the "rhytm of the
composition". In classical "argon" mathima, there is almost never any need for any variation as to the
duration of a "circles".

19. Is there such a thing as "ad lib" rhythm in Ecclesiastical music (excluding Kalophonikoi Heirmoi)?
Many famous masters nowadays are chanting slow pieces with no rhythmic emphasis.
G. K. Michalakis: Rhythmic emphasis is a composition criterion. "loose Chronos", "faint impulse", "laxist
singing without pulsations/impulse, are intensity criteria of interpretation Kalophonikos heirmos is not
ad lib = "achronon" in its interpretation. The measures are well defined, they are mostly in fours. So,
there is rhythmos. But when counting chronos without punctuating the beginning of each podas
correctly, when loosening the "engagement too" much, one tends to do "ad lib" which is arythmos or,
more correctly, achronos and invertebrate. However, kalophonikos heirmos does require less
punctuation and "smoothening" of attacks, but in no way is it arythmos or achronos.

All "Ad lib" must fall back to its "feet". There may be some small passages, just like a violin solo in some
island melody, while the percussion maintain regular rhythm on the backround. The classical
transcription example is in the "chaire Nymphi anympheute", just after the gorgon on chi = trisimos
/dysismos dysimos /trisimos, and the melody "shifts from the "backround percussion" only to fall back
on its feet). The initial "trisimos" gives an "eternalising" effect, and it sounds "ad lib" but it is well
accounted for in terms of Overall rhythmic structure.

20. Should tempo slow down before the final cadence of the piece?

D. Koubaroulis: Th. Stanitsas disagrees (in his interview published Ch. Tsiounis)

G. K. Michalakis: I agree. We shouldn't even be starting off "slower so as to go faster" = Therefore, "no"
to initial acceleration and "no" to final deceleration is warranted.

S. Gugushvili: Slowing down at the end is witnessed in classical books. This one by Ioannis Protopsaltis,
published by his son, Dimitrios Protopsaltis.

(click for larger image)

21. Chrysanthos claims that all ancient pieces are suited to be chanted in Tetrasimos. What does that
mean? How to count Tetrasimos?
D. Koubaroulis: Possible examples of counting:

thesis-thesis-thesis-thesis (as in monos chronos)

thesis-arsis-thesis-arsis (as in two disemos)

thesis-arsis-arsis-arsis (as in 4/4 in Western music)

thesis (slow as to include two beats) - arsis (slow as to include two beats) (as in S. Karas' syneptygmenos)

Are there more?

22. Is Disemos, Trisemos, Tetrasimos of Ecclesiastical music the same as 2/4, 3/4, 4/4 of Western music?
(e.g. are the strong/weak beats the same)

G. K. Michalakis. Yes in terms of composition. No in terms of interpretation (except if done too

paedagogically)

23. What is "engagement into chronos" mentioned by G. K. Michalakis?

G. K. Michalakis: Chronos kai "lipsis chronou", as taught by Tsolakidis. Andrea Atlanti came to her own
identical conclusions without any mention of the protocanonarchos' teachings. She called it
"anticipation" of "tempo". Kyriakos Tsiappoutas very correctly coined the English term "chronos and
Engagement into tempo).

Thesis is where the vowel explodes, and corresponds to a maximum point on the intensity vs. time wave
function we see on the computer. Regularity of the chanted piece is determined by the regularity of
those maximal thesis points, and a good analogy is the electorcardiogram. Irregularities can be
pathological if they appear punctually (the chronos = "trips up") because one is most likely using part of
what belongs to it, by erroneoulsy allocating it to the previous measure.

Engagement is the delay necessary for the good, sudden, well-accelerating intensity transition to a
maximum = vowel explosion, as if "ringing a bell"(=dixit Zacharias Paschalides). If this "refractory" period
is not respected, we either do not hear an explosion, or the explosion is "pushed away" = " trips up".
When one has not learned to do vocalisations (= trills = laryngismos) traditionally, one will usually do
them too late in the measure, thus taking up the upcoming preparation = chronos engagement time.
This is what all beginners do. The experts ( and I certainly don't include90% of those recording these
days) do nice explosions with excellent, well-balanced trills on the explosions, without hindering the
upcoming engagement time.

Finally, sufficient engagement time allows for a good preparation and for a nice, sudden transition to
the thesis maximum, thus giving intensity punctuation and impetus to the measure and to the whole
hymn. The lack of chronos Engagement is today's greatest Psaltiki epidemic, and leads to solemnian =
Westernised = invertebrate and effeminate chanting, which is well applauded by the Western audiences
who indulge in this pathology, and which has found its way into our unvigilant church life.

This engagement into tempo principle is the foundation of positivist attitude in psaltiki, which should
reflect the continuous Resurrection message of the Orthodox Church, as opposed to the sentimentalist,
expiatory, purgatory and auto-flagellating attitudes that have tainted off into the occidental vocal
church music.

24. Can the same musical phrase sometimes be interpreted in slow or fast "dromos" (way)?

D. Koubaroulis: In papadic pieces Chourmouzios often seems to transcribe one musical phrase in a slow
manner (say spanning 8 beats) whereas Gregorios transcribes the same phrase in a fast manner (say
spanning 4 beats). For at least one specific example, compare the score of Koinonikon "Agaliasthe" of
Petros (on the analogion, transcribed by Gregorios) with that of Tameion Anthologias (Th. Fokaeus,
transcribed by Chourmouzios).

25. Are there paratonismoi in classical texts? If yes, are they mistakes that should be corrected? Should
every single accented syllable fall on a thesis (downbeat)?

(a contentious topic)

G. K. Michalakis. When one knows how to apply transient syneptigmenos, there is no need whatsoever
to touch on anything of the classical compositions.
26. What is the relationship of the tempo of an appended kratema with respect to the tempo of the
preceding and following (non-kratema) melody? Is it always a 2:1 ratio?

G. K. Michalakis: The hand should be turning at the same speed, but we sing twice as many notes as in
the "before" and "after" sections". We still count thesis to thesis but syneptigmenos on top of that (so
for an initial tempo of 60, terirem should sound like 120/min, but it is to be counted by sets of four isons
vs. sets of two isons of the principle piece)? We may wish to slow it down a bit or speed it u p bit, by
about 16/min?

G. K. Michalakis: Let us take the terrirem. In ancient editions, it is in simple time. Yet Priggos seems to
sing at trisimos, and all new editions of "patriarchal style chanters" have it written in trisimos. In Agion
oros, as well, we have "top of the chart" trisimos chants. Is there a link between what Priggos sings in
the Theotoke parthene and the way contemporary chanters have understood and transcribed? It all
depends on the tempo chosen. If one is to sing slowly a terirem, and neglecting arsis in simple rhythm,
most of the time the rhythm is trisimos. But when I'd ask my teacher to sing it faster, it did not become a
disimos 1-2, 1-2!!! No, it became something which is indescribable: neither disimos, neither trisimos.

Apparently, that is what I do as well, when I sing terirem quickly (that is what an occidental musicologist
told me once). So, put otherwise, arsis is not always (systematically) an equal temporal fragment of a
measure: it is simply a preparatory process for the thesis explosion!

27. What does "free tempo" ("eleutheros chronos") mean?

G. K. Michalakis: Tsolakidis (see S. Tsolakidis page for audio sample of "Kai Eulogemenos") is singing
"eleutheros chronos" = "free counting of tempo", and this has absolutely nothing to do with
"Kalophonikos Heirmos type of Chronos". Chronos does not necessarily mean keeping up with a
metronome. That's why I so insistently dealt with "engagement of tempo" as Kyriakos so correctly
adjusted the original "anticipation of chronos" principle. I put that file up because it is one of the rare
pieces he sings in this style, and that so many try to copy in their interpretation of Theotoke Parthene's
"Evlogimenos" in plagal 1st mode), regardless of the original. Even though his tempo is not consistent,
his chronos in general is, because of correct engagement (I will not go back into this) of the Thesis part
of the measure, even if he does continuously change "Tempo".

Now, I don't know where this version of "Evlogimenos" comes from. But it's in all contemporary books. I
personally don't sing it like that, I just follow the book. I use all the elements Tsolakidis gave me so as to
re-establish what is there in notes. He had agreed with my project, and he never said that what he sang
was better than what was in the book. For instance, Abagianos' Dynamis was never chanted at the
Patriarcheion: only at Agios Ioannis o Chios, which was where most of the rich businessmen would go,
and where Binakis would sing (eventually other businessmen from Chios put in a lot of money so at to
bring him to Chios, were he taught many other disciples, of which Chantzistamatis and some old man I
met between New York and Montreal, whose son owns a restaurant where Greyhound buses stop). As
for the Kyrie Triplexes by Kamarados, well, Tsolakidis heard those from the composer himself.

So, Chronos is not to be understood as pure Tempo. The piece was chosen to show that, even with free
tempo, there is still chronos, because of the engagement principle. And this, I've said already, is the
foundation of all traditional psaltiki and all of traditional chanting in general.

28. In what tempo should the Katavasiai be chanted?

G. K. Michalakis. Katavassiae are nowadays sung according to "syndomes" with slow tempo,
Cheroubikon as a Kalophonikos Heirmos etc. Although Thrasyboulos Stanitsas gives some indication of
tempo in this Triodion, it still does not correspond to Iakovos Nafpliotis's tiempos. eg. Troparion at
Vespers can be as slow as 56/min, and as fast as 240/min in some occasions. Katavasiai were always
"argon version chanted at about 110 to 120/min and not syntomes at 60. People complain that we have
no time to sing complete services. This is not so. Most chanters do not know how to read quickly enough
(one doubts if they ever did any Biblical readings in Church), and are ignorant of heirmological formulae
used in canons. In about 100 years, we have lost more than half of the hymnological singing repertoire,
in favour of "autocomposed " doxasticons and Cheroubikons that go in all sorts of directions...

28. What tempo fits each composition style?

G. K. Michalakis. There is a difference when counting Chronos in a Kalophonikos Heirmos, vs. a Canona,
vs.Cheroubikon, vs the Epinikios Hymnos (victory Hymn) in 2nd mode (syneptigmenos). Today's chanters
do not distinguish but two varieties: Kalophonikos style and an almost 1-2 "schola" chronos. This means
that the Cheroubikon of most chanters sounds as a Kalophonikos Heirmos (sometimes, it is so "loose" is
chronos, that it becomes a "drunk man's song" type of chanting). This also means that the "Agios, agios"
of the Liturgy of Megas Vasileios is just simply "faster". I sent out some samples of the canon, for
instance. What's the difference between that and what we hear today: the way I count the chronos? If
the piece sounds "heavy" in that it is not "melsimatic", it is not "super trilled" in a 1-2 count as Stanitsas
would do it. Let's take the Agios Agios: one should not count in twos, but in fours. That is, the First thesis
is fundamental, and all the other three counts are "free" (the two mesis and the arsis are not always in
the same place"). Now, it takes a lot of listening to do that correctly. As far as Iakovos' recordings are
concerned, and according to Tsolakidis, he used the simplest way to count time. Apparently, he had
more of a pedagogical goal in mind rather than to show off. So, the "Tin gar sin mitran" he has chanted
on record is not the "ultimate" in chronos complexity he'd execute.

Older topics of discussion

Selected topics from the Typikon and byzantinechant discussion groups.

A. Lingas: There appears to be some confusion here between 'rhythm' and 'metre'. As Fr. Constantine
and Don have pointed out, the idea of music without rhythm is problematic (as avant garde composers
who have tried to write pieces without rhythm have discovered), because pitches will inevitably have a
measurable duration. In 'free rhythm' the durations supposedly do not adhere exactly to prescribed and
predetermined values, but are supposed to vary according to a number of factors: e.g. the shape of the
phrase, the text, signs of indeterminate lengthening or shortening. This is certainly not true of Kievan
square notes or Chrysanthine notation, both of which possess a hierarchy of predetermined note values
(which may be affected, of course, in performance by rubato, 'lilt', etc.). In the case of either notation, it
is possible to provide bar lines for chants originally written without them in order to clarify the larger
rhythmic groups which are the constituent elements of the metre, which may be irregular.
Consequently, a transcription of Slavonic or Byzantine chant without bar lines (other than a recitative)
that faithfully renders the relative durations of the original notation would certainly have both rhythm
and metre (the divisions of the latter would simply remain unnotated, as in the original).

As for 'free rhythm' in medieval Byzantine chant, this concept was imported by Tillyard and Wellesz from
the Solesmes school of interpreting Gregorian chant. They did this for a variety of scholarly and
ideological reasons reasons and without getting into the historiographic issues here (my forthcoming
Royaumont paper discusses them in some detail), it might be useful for me to note that the rhythmic
theories of Dom Mocquereau--despite their wide influence--have been thoroughly discredited. Even at
the time that Mocquereau was propounding his theories, many other scholars of Gregorian chant
rejected his interpretations, preferring instead a variety of 'mensural' interpretations (substantiated by
some medieval theorists) in which Gregorian neumes had precise durations. The debate continues to
this day

(for brief introductions to these issues, see David Hiley's Western Plainchant: A Handbook and his
remarks about Gregorian chant in the medieval section of the New Grove article on performing
practice).

Regarding rhythm in medieval Byzantine notation, I defer to my colleague Ioannis Arvanitis, who has
done extensive work on the subject.
S. Gugushvili: The main witness is Chrysanthos, who says the following: He was a good grammarian and
would have been an excellent chanter if he didn't have bad rhythm (eton kakorhythmos). This is
because, ignoring the rules of rhythm and poetry--supposedly to preserve the meaning of the troparion-
-he didn't preserve the rhythm of the prosomoia. ok, now I understand that the problem isn't concerned
with Iakovos' Papadic compositions or Doxastarion, Chrysanthos talks about prosomia.

A. Lingas: According to Chrysanthos Iakovos' general stance was one of conservatism (cf. ThM, ii, li,
where he says that Iakovos 'did not really approve of innovations (den echaire toson eis neoterismous)'.
Iakovos' conservatism seems to have led him into conflict with Agapios and, if you prefer, at least
profound disagreement with Petros over two areas: a) melodic style and b) performance practice. How
these were related is hard to discern from the brief comments of Chrysanthos, who was in any case
clearly biased toward Petros.

S. Gugushvili: He admits that Iakovos knew the grammar well. What could "supposedly to preserve the
meaning of the troparion" refer to? Can it mean that he was avoiding wrong
accentuation/paratonismos? On the other hand "he didn't preserve the rhythm of the prosomoia"
seems to be contradicting to this conjecture. In general, how could Iakovos be "a good grammarian", if
he was ignoring "the rules of rhythm and poetry"?

A. Lingas: Although Chrysanthos mentions the prosomoia as his specific example, it remains possible
that his general condemnation of Iakovos as 'kakorhythmos' affected his performance of other
repertories. Since this is hard to prove with the available evidence, I won't insist on this idea.

Nevertheless, it is worth remembering that one of the New Method's greatest achievements was the
systematisation of different levels of rhythmic subdivision, something that the medieval notation could
only show by implication. In the absence of the Chrysanthine system's precise regulation of rhythm
through gorga, digorga, etc., it is conceivable that a chanter reading from the old notation could have
exercised in performance a greater degree of rhythmic freedom than would generally be allowed when
reading from scores written according to the New Method (itself a product of Petros' students).

That being said, some cantors today may be heard who sing either occasionally or constantly with a
great degree of rubato, turning apparently regular rhythms into a kind of dramatic recitative (Vasilikos,
for example, does this at times).
S. Gugushvili: From what you said, it seems Iakovos didn't chant/teach the pieces in new
sticheraric/heirmologic style, therefore the problem (if there was a problem) was concerned with e.g.
old heirmologion. Do we know what repertory Iakovos was using for heirmologic pieces? Was it the
heirmologion of Balasios? What might be wrong with it? In general can we fit somehow this
"controversy" into the interpretation of the rhythm of the Byzantine chantIoannis Arvanitis offered?

A. Lingas: Ioannis Arvanitis and Ioannis Plemmenos (who completed a doctoral thesis at Cambridge on
the Phanariote Greeks) are far more qualified to answer this question than me. Ioannis A, any
comments?

S. Gugushvili: For this reason all the students were taught the old lessons by both Iakovos and Petros,
whereas the new ones were taught by Petros alone (ThMeg, Part ii, liv). Do we know who was
responsible for the curriculum? Did Iakovos have absolute authority or Petros could also select pieces
according to his taste?

A. Lingas: I'm not sure exactly how formal of a curriculum it was. Chrysanthos merely says that although
both taught, only Petros taught the new repertories. Both Petros and Iakovos, however, are mentioned
as being responsible for teaching in the prologue to patriarchal encyclical establishing the school
(printed by Chrysanthos in the ThM, Part ii, lii-liii).

S. Gugushvili: I'm sorry for being ambiguous. What I meant in notation was "style of notating", i.e. was
Iakovos making exegesis, writing out some of the melismas?

A. Lingas: Some but not all, making his notational style rather close to that of Petros Pel. Thomas
Apostolopoulos in his book on Apostolos Konstas on pages 320-27 includes an interesting example of a
doxastikon by Iakovos and its transcriptions (exegeseis) by Apostolos and the Three Teachers.

S. Gugushvili: All in all, was there a real controversy among Iakobos and e.g. Petros? From the comments
of Chrysanthos, the answer would appear to be 'yes'. The fact of appearance of Iakovos' Doxastarion, as
well as some of his other compositions, abbreviated from the older ones (Kekragaria and Pasapnoaria),
for me is an indication, that he was following the same general direction as Petros (producing more
concise melodies), but not the same path. Until we "decipher" what Chrysanthos really meant, talking
about the conflict seems to be premature.

A. Lingas: Chrysanthos' strongly critical language of Iakovos' rhythmic sense, hisdescription of Petros'
frustrations, the fact that Iakovos only taught theold lessons seems to me to be evidence enough to
indicate 'conflict' in theform of 'profound disagreement', as I noted above. This doesn't mean that you
are not perfectly correct in saying that Petros and Iakovos were, inmany ways, going in the same
direction. As we know from today's chant scene, however, going in the same general direction is not
enough to eliminate conflicts between, for example, various teachers and their partisans (Karas, Stathis,
Simonopetrites, Angelopoulos, etc.).

I. Arvanitis: I think that , in order to understand the passage of Chrysanthos concerning the 'rhythm' of
Iakovos' singing, we must have in mind the original (or another, old) meaning of the word 'rhythm', ie.
'shape'. In this sense we can also speak about 'rhythm' in the visual arts. So, Iakovos was distroying the
'shape' of the automelon, so that its prosomoion has a full (entelh) cadence at the end of a period of the
words, a medial cadence at the place of a comma of the words of the prosomoion, in others words to
make the syntactic structure of the prosomoion conform with its music. But because the syntactic
structure of the prosomoion does not always coincide with the syntactic structure of the automelon,
Iakovos tried to alter the music of the Automelon when adapting the words of the prosomoion
(retaining of course some similarity to the music of the Automelon) , so the music of the prosomoion
reflects faithfully its syntactic structure. So, he was singing with (Chrysanthos' expression:) 'melopoiia
kata ta nooumena', ie. setting to music according to the meaning. This is exactly reflected in the whole
Iakovos' work: eg. in his Doxologies. The older Doxologies by Balasios, Bereketis, Germanos and, to a
lower degree those by Daniel and Petros Lampadarios, follow basically the same pattern in every one of
their verses. Although the verses of a doxology are not prosomoia, their singing, as well as the singing of
the old or older polyeleoi, followed the custom found in the ancient psalmody (see eg. the rubrics in
Asmatic offices; very often only the music of the first verse is given in the Mss and the rest are sung
'according to this'), ie. a certain pattern to be followed (the same custom holds also for western
psalmody). But Iakovos Doxologies deviate strongly from this rule; they are composed according the
meaning, using new high or low points, phthorai and ither devices of 'word painting'. In other words,
they are not so much 'strophic'; they are 'through composed'. The same manner of composition has
strongly affected his Doxastarion: in a frame of old sticheraric, traditional, long 'theseis', new
compositional devices are present, eg. a) new (frequent) use of phthorai but through old formulas b)
short sticheraric formulas (coinciding to the ones by Petros) etc. So, Iakovos is at the same time
traditional and innovative. He wanted to protect the long old sticherarion (= his conservatism) from
disappearance (it was thought already as too long, so Iak. composed only a Doxastarion and not a full
stichararion), but he thought he had to shorten and to 'modernize' it (through devices like the above
mentioned ), so that at least something of it be preserved; this was maybe the only way to for the old
sticherarion to survive. (I have collected material for writing an article on Iakovos' Doxastarion and its
notation. I don't know when I'll be able to write it. You know about my situation. Maybe I'll have the
chance to present it in some conference)
On the matters of phrasing and paratonismoi in prosomoia, I 'd have much to say (defending the older
books) , but allow me to stop here for the present. I hope to give details in my PhD. My article that Shota
referred to, give some basic things on this. Concerning the style of composing old stichera, Wellesz is
still valuable, as well some articles by J. Raasted. What is important, is that the Melodoi were very artful
and careful when composing. As I have studied and concluded, the manner of composition of the now
used chants (I mean the 'classical' compositions) has its roots in their work (despite the apparent
differences). So, one should not easily criticize the older composers (eg. Petros) as not having composed
artfully and appropriately. Sometimes it is as if one criticizes or accuses St. John or St. Kosmas as being
ignorant of the grammar, the syntax etc. Sorry, it's a very long story to be described here.