View Full Version : Byzantine music
I was listening to some Greek chant at work one day. One of my co-workers asked me who was torturing that cat. Believe it or not, not everyone is driven to spiritual ecstasy by Greek chant.
Herman
There are tastes and tastes. Like that of the saints:
"Byzantine music is the only music that has sacredness and sanctity, and for this reason a Christian can pray with it. The feeling caused by chanting -if you are in a position to comprehend it- is called compunction." - Photios Kontoglou (+ 1965) as quoted in the CD booklet: Vigil of Saint Anthony - Chanted by the monks of St. Anthony's Greek Orthodox Monastery
Another interesting material, Epilogue (http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/music/Epilogue.htm) which is a selection from writings of Photios Kontoglou of blessed memory, where it is stated:
St. John Chrysostom strongly condemns the attempts that were made by some of his contemporaries to introduce into the Church secular music, the music of the theatre and the mimes.
The Fathers of the Church ordained that Christians use the voice alone in execution of hymns, chanting as did our Lord Himself and His disciples. St. John Chrysostom says: "Our Savior chanted hymns just as we do." The Apostolic Constitutions forbid the use of musical instruments in the church. From the time of the Apostles, psalmody was monophonic, or homophonic, as it is to this day in our churches [in Greece].
Herman Blaydoe
17-01-2008, 09:27 PM
"Byzantine music is the only music that has sacredness and sanctity, and for this reason a Christian can pray with it. The feeling caused by chanting -if you are in a position to comprehend it- is called compunction."
"... the only music..."? I think this attitude can be called "hubris".
Jake Blues: So, what kind of music do you have here at Bob's Country Bunker?
Claire: Oh we got both kinds. We got Country and Western.
From the movie The Blues Brothers
"... the only music..."? I think this attitude can be called "hubris".
Well that saying of Photios Kontoglou of blessed memory is the same version with:
-St. John Chrysostom says: "Our Savior chanted hymns just as we do."-
If Saint Chrysostom had "hubris" while saying those words, I would want that "hubris" as well.
Herman Blaydoe
18-01-2008, 12:16 AM
Well that saying of Photios Kontoglou of blessed memory is the same version with:
-St. John Chrysostom says: "Our Savior chanted hymns just as we do."-
If Saint Chrysostom had "hubris" while saying those words, I would want that "hubris" as well.
Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos says the angels sing in plain chant. I don't argue with him and write it off as rhetoric, but at least he doesn't say plain chant is the ONLY music that they are allowed to sing...
St. John had never listened to prostepenie, so I won't hold that against him. Are we to simply discard the Russian tradition then?
Are we to simply discard the Russian tradition then?
With all due respect, and with pain I say that you just did right after the cat analogy for the Byzantine one. Here:
To be honest, I find some Russian music way too operatic.
Herman
May I offer my two cent's worth here: When Byzantine chant is good, it is very, very good, and when it's bad (or even not quite good), it's horrid! I dare anyone to describe the monastic choirs of Vatopedi or Simonopetra as sounding like strangled cats, though I've been to any number of Greek churches where this description is, sadly, quite accurate.
Russian/Slavic church singing covers a large spectrum of styles, from monodic styles with great similarity to Byzantine and Gregorian chant, through to simple three-part harmony, then more elaborate four-part harmony. By Tsar Ivan the Terrible's time, contrabasses were much sought-after, and this further underpinned the already awesome sound of church choirs. For those who rightly criticise Russian church singing as "too operatic", let me assure you that the operatic, "Italianate" styles (such as the style associated with the Paris Cathedral under choirmaster VI Spassky) are, ahem, rather overblown. (A bit like the overdone Baroque church architecture with icons smothered with gold oklads and dripping with gemstones ...) However, these are but a fraction of the music available.
The Moscow Liturgic Choir, the Novospassky Monastery Choir, the Choir of the Sretenskogo Monastery of Moscow, the choir of the Trinity-St Sergius Lavra, the choir of the Kiev Caves, and the Afanasiev Male Choir are just a few examples of first-class present-day Slavic choirs.
Effie Ganatsios
18-01-2008, 10:30 AM
Totally agree. When Orthodox chant is good, it is wonderful. But we need to remember - I already submitted a quote in another thread concerning this - church music is not meant to entertain us.
Having said that I want also to say that beauty wherever it is found speaks to our souls, whether in paintings, music, poems, nature, etc.
I sometimes have the greatest difficulty understanding one of our priests when he is chanting - not only does he have a high, shrill voice but he doesn't enunciate clearly.
Twice now we have been to a little town about 100kms from our city, both times for a memorial service. The chanter there has the most beautiful voice I have ever heard. Trying to be absolutely honest I suppose I should also mention that this young man is one of the most handsome men I have ever seen. As I was listening I remembered one of St. Ephrem's reminders of sin i.e. being wounded by the beauty of another. I therefore closed my eyes and just listened to the voice. It was so heavenly that I felt uplifted. After the service other people mentioned the beauty of this chanter's voice. All of us were also extremely grateful that such a wonderful service was held on behalf of our friend.
A voice, no matter how beautiful, should not be the focus of any church service, and it wasn't. The beauty of the liturgy was somehow made even more intense through this voice. My husband also agrees that these two services were very special in part because of the chanter.
I also love the Russian choirs - they sound wonderful. I only wish I could also understand the words.
Effie
Rick H.
18-01-2008, 04:50 PM
Totally agree. When Orthodox chant is good, it is wonderful. But we need to remember - I already submitted a quote in another thread concerning this - church music is not meant to entertain us.
I remember being in a Methodist church one Sunday morning many moons ago. I was a visitor there for the first time. It was announced that they had a special singer from another church that would sing for us that day. I thought this sounded pretty good.
The man was called to the front at the appropriate time and he began singing. He was severely overwieght and had a very poor appearance. I can't remember what he sang that day, but I do remember after he started it was just like a strangled cat with a low voice that sometimes got very high pitched. I remember thinking to myself you have got to be kidding me. This guy has to be the worst singer I've ever heard. He even had a speech impediment that came through in his singing. I'm sitting there listening to this, somewhat shocked because every other church that I had been to the singers of "specials" were at least bearable to listen to.
But, the point is after I went through this range of emotions, I finally just shut down and started staring at my shoes waiting for it to be over. And, the next thing I knew, I was getting choked up by the whole thing. I was really touched and was trying to hide the fact that my eyes were starting to water. I began to see and feel this man's love for Jesus in his song. I began to see the sincerity and genuineness of the whole thing, and I was overwhelmed by the Beauty that was present in him, and the Holy Spirit that was at work through him in this place.
In Christ,
Rick
Kornelius
18-01-2008, 04:59 PM
May I offer my two cent's worth here: When Byzantine chant is good, it is very, very good, and when it's bad (or even not quite good), it's horrid! I dare anyone to describe the monastic choirs of Vatopedi or Simonopetra as sounding like strangled cats, though I've been to any number of Greek churches where this description is, sadly, quite accurate.
There is a logical fallacy happening in this conversation that I would like to address. The reason behind it is I believe the confusion and or the blending of the levels within the topic.
Let me explain. The topic is Greek Byzantine Music. The levels within the discussed topic are: 1. The Greek Byzantine music is intrinsically beautiful and divinely inspired (essential); and 2. The Greek Byzantine Music can be horrid if chanted by an unskillful chanter (non-essential).
Everyone is focusing on the latter (the non-essential) as if that has consequences for the former (the essential). However, whether the chanter is good or bad, that does not change the fact that the Byzantine music is intrinsically melodiously divine. It is as if encountering a horrible sinner who nonetheless believes in Christ, and consequently condemning the entire Christian faith and dogma because of him. The veracity of the Christian dogma, remains purely intact and is not affected by the sinfulness and impurity of its believers.
In other words a bad chanter cannot affect the essence of the Byzantine music.
Syllogistic logic and deductive reasoning very often entertain fallacies, and I just wanted to remind the participants of this thread of it.
But, provided that we settled this issue, or rather the logics part of it, I would also like to say a few things about the nature of Byzantine music. It is the ONLY genre of music that has God and His angels as its own 'muse'. We are familiar with the divine trances of St. John Koukouzelis, and the ones of St. Romanos the Melodist. (The latter was even rewarded by Panagia with a golden coin, because of his divine chanting THAT PLEASED HER). I am open to the idea that others genres can be as divinely inspired as Byzantine music, when Panagia will reveal to us that she is equally pleased by them.
Furthermore, there are even cases when byzantine music is not simply inspired by God or the angels, but literally descended from heavens already written in that form. For instance, the chant "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal" it is said to have descended from above. It was part of the eternal liturgy happening in heavens, and through the mercy of Christ, it intersected our time, and became part of our worshipping.
Eric Peterson
18-01-2008, 09:08 PM
"Byzantine music is the only music that has sacredness and sanctity, and for this reason a Christian can pray with it. The feeling caused by chanting -if you are in a position to comprehend it- is called compunction." - Photios Kontoglou (+ 1965)
I think it would be good for us, since we're all from different traditions, most of them Orthodox, to evaluate what Kontoglou's audience was, when he made this statement. Does anyone have proof that he was speaking to Russians or Georgians or Orthodox from pre-millennial Western Europeans, Ethiopians, Copts, Eastern or Western Syrians, the Old Testament Jews, etc.? I don't think his intention was to exalt Byzantine chant above the other forms of traditional Orthodox chant. Rather, it seems to me his intention was to compare traditional Orthodox chant to modern music and, perhaps, especially modern "revisions" of ecclesiastical chant. Of course, not having the rest of the text or Kontoglou here in person to talk to, I don't really know. But, Kontoglou's target audience appears most likely to be exclusively Greek, and the Greek kind of traditional Orthodox chant is Byzantine chant.
Traditional Orthodox chants of all kinds, whether they be Byzantine, Valaam, Georgian, Mozarabic, Sarum, etc., are all capable of bringing about compunction in the soul. I know this personally through experience.
It would not be at all beneficial or productive to "discuss" one form of traditional Orthodox chant being "better" than another. That would mean reducing a topic involving many centuries, many geographies, many cultures down into simplistic polemics--regardless of how many quotes one can come up with from whatever source. We're probably not there yet on this thread, but I wanted to say something at this point, before we go there. Forgive me if this was untimely or unwarranted.
Eric
We're probably not there yet on this thread, but I wanted to say something at this point, before we go there. Forgive me if this was untimely or unwarranted.
Eric
No, Eric, I appreciate very much your contribution. Since I am the one who started this thread maybe I should explain.
Like you, I also, did not appreciate the comment about Byzantine music which was being compared to a cat being tortured. The other day since it was the day of St. Anthony's, I opened the CD of St. Anthony's Vigil to play it, and the quote was looking back at me and I thought of the cat analogy; and while listening to some other CDs from Valaam etc. I thought that it is worthy to say that listening to Byzantine music, it is not like hearing a tortured cat. No other ecclesiastical music was compared to a cat (although it was a comment from an outsider, it is indeed something offensive) therefore like you talked now, I talked yesterday. There are moments when we should speak and when we should be silent. It is not right to say such comments -comparing it to a tortured cat- about Byzantine music, which is part of the tradition of many saints. Things like this are unnecessary and maybe people just need some more information and education.
About the audience. I am not sure to which audience Kontoglou addressed his words, since that saying on the CD cover, is an extracted quotation like quotations are in general from great minds in every field which we have in books, profiles here etc. But from what I read at the other article that I linked in my first post here, Kontoglou, does refer to churches that have instruments, not obeying to what Fathers have said. I am not sure if there were churches with instruments at Kontoglou's time in Greece, because I do not know. Maybe someone else can enlighten us about the historical aspect of this, since you were asking. But even if there were Greek churches with instruments contrary to what Fathers have taught, since we have this phenomenon continuing today and since Fathers did not permit that, it is something actual and a current issue also. On the other hand Kontoglou's relics are uncorrupted and he is usually referred to as of blessed memory. Also he may address the Greek audience, but if we read these words from this link (http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/music/Epilogue.htm):
How divine, indeed, is the psalmody of the Orthodox Church! It seems sweeter and sweeter each year to the Christian—a new wine that fills the heart with joy and makes it soar to the ethereal region of immortal life.
Byzantine music is peaceful, sad but consoling, enthusiastic but reserved, humble but heroic, simple but profound. It has the same spiritual essence as the Gospels, the hymns, the psalms, the books of the lives of the saints, and the iconography of Byzantium. That is why Byzantine music is monotonous for one to whom the Gospels are monotonous, naive for one to whom the Gospels are naive, circumscribed for one to whom the Gospels are circumscribed, mournful for one to whom the Gospels are mournful, antiquated for one to whom the Gospels are antiquated. But it is joyful for one to whom the Gospels are joyful, filled with compunction for one to whom the Gospels are filled with compunction, enthusiastic but humble for one to whom the Gospels, are enthusiastic but humble, and peaceful for one who experiences the peace of Christ.
we may notice that he directs his words to all those Greek, or non-Greek; Orthodox or non-Orthodox by distinguishing between their attitude towards Byzantine music.
This is not a historical account, just a personal one. Instruments are used in all protestant churches. When done properly, it always set a prayerful atmosphere. I was trying to figure out why that was necessary, since it didnt' seem to be necessary in Orthodox churches, and the only conclusion I could come to was that the songs themselves (the protestant ones), were quite weak, and needed the help of the instruments to aid in prayer.
But the words in all orthodox hymns are so wonderfully deep, and in order to get the full effect of the words, the music itself has to be very simple. That's why chants are so effective... they do not distract from the words. They also don't rouse your emotions like intricate music, or instruments would.
But, church music is like church paintings... like icons. There's a program on Ancient Faith Radio, that they call "Icons in Sound". I haven't listened to it, but I thought that was a beautiful way to describe Church music. And like real Icons, in order to carry the beauty of the words, the chanting has to be done right, or else, it will sound like strangling cats... =(
I agree, that church music is not for entertainment. At the same time, we're to bring the best to the Lord. You won't let an untaught person, who has no skills of painting, to paint an icon, would you? Same with music. It does make a difference, and it does aid in worship, when done beautifully, and it does distract and offend, when done poorly. And it has nothing to do with entertainment. It has to do with prayer. If the chanters aren't serious about what they do, and don't really care how they sound, it does show.
On the other hand, if there is an entire monastery or parish not blessed with one single good voice, God fills in the gap, I'm sure, and worship will still be possible... as long as we keep bringing all we've got, and doing our best...
I think, the most beautiful thing I've ever heard, was the Gospel read in Arabic. His voice was smooth, and flowed so clear and strong over the words. I, of course, couldn't understand a word, but if I hadn't already converted, i would've converted then! =)
Mary.
Father David Moser
19-01-2008, 06:02 AM
On the other hand, if there is an entire monastery or parish not blessed with one single good voice, God fills in the gap, I'm sure, and worship will still be possible...
Oh, so you've been to my parish have you? Please God, send me a reader with even an average voice! or perhaps a trio that can be my choir!
Fr David Moser
Oh, so you've been to my parish have you? Please God, send me a reader with even an average voice! or perhaps a trio that can be my choir!
Fr David Moser
LOL =)
Haven't been, yet. We have a quartet. But it's having trouble. Soprano has been commanded not to sing - by her doctor. Alto, can only make it every other week. Tenor got snowed in. That left Bass, a 'newbie', who only knew his own parts and was totally clueless about everything else... But, it was still good. =) So, some days, we show up, and don't know if we're going to have a choir or not. I wonder, if it ever does happen that we don't have even one choir member, if we can hear the angels sing?
just wondering... =)
Mary.
Effie Ganatsios
19-01-2008, 07:54 AM
Furthermore, there are even cases when byzantine music is not simply inspired by God or the angels, but literally descended from heavens already written in that form. For instance, the chant "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal" it is said to have descended from above. It was part of the eternal liturgy happening in heavens, and through the mercy of Christ, it intersected our time, and became part of our worshipping.
Kornelius, I agree with you concerning the essence of Byzantine music and even though the voice of the chanter is not that important, it does make a difference when you can hardly understand the words because of a bad rendition. But, again, we are not there to be entertained.
Could you provide more details concerning the chant "Aghios o Theos, Aghios Ishiros, Aghios Athanatos" please.
Effie
Effie Ganatsios
19-01-2008, 08:00 AM
I agree, that church music is not for entertainment. At the same time, we're to bring the best to the Lord. You won't let an untaught person, who has no skills of painting, to paint an icon, would you? Same with music. It does make a difference, and it does aid in worship, when done beautifully, and it does distract and offend, when done poorly. And it has nothing to do with entertainment. It has to do with prayer. If the chanters aren't serious about what they do, and don't really care how they sound, it does show.
On the other hand, if there is an entire monastery or parish not blessed with one single good voice, God fills in the gap, I'm sure, and worship will still be possible... as long as we keep bringing all we've got, and doing our best...
Mary.
Mary, priests and most chanters study Byzantine music here in Greece. They are taught how to chant properly. There are of course wonderful natural talents that have never studied Byzantine music but they are the exception I think. The son of a good friend has been studying since he was a young boy and I was surprised - being totally ignorant of Byzantine music - to find that the notes are nothing like the music notes I studied in school.
effie
In regards to the chanter, Kontoglou says in the article above:
That these arts are truly of unique spirituality has been realized by many non-Orthodox, especially clergymen, whose sense-organs have been exposed, from youth on, to formative influences different from those in which Orthodox Christians have been brought up. Nevertheless, they confess that our icons and psalmody evoke in them contrition-of course, when executed by inspired and pious artists.But still do not rush to judge Byzantine chanters when they chant not so skilfully because we might be like the ones who did not like the chanting of Saint Roman the Melodist (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Romanos_the_Melodist) before he saw Panagia in a vision and received a most melodious and beautiful voice. The only thing we can do is pray to him for our chanters.
Owen Jones
19-01-2008, 05:09 PM
These are just gut level prejudices of mine, not knowing anything substantive about church music.
The Congregation should sing. Surely people could be taught and encouraged to at least carry the esone. Chanters should be taught to sing in such a way that the congregation can carry the esone at appropriate times. Certain hymns should be well known by us all and sung together with some feeling. Sitting in pews and listening to the choir strikes me as too passive.
I don't know what is "traditional" and what isn't. By traditional, what era of the Church do we mean as being the example? I find it hard to imagine that the chanting and singing done in Greek churches in America are not influenced by many later things. Islam even?
Chanting I have heard in Arab churches is far more melodious and easier and pleasing to the ear (and to the heart).
In churches using the St. Vladimir style of church music, I have seen far more congregational singing.
We should sing the Creed as a congregation.
Where are the deacons who can sing? We ought to be recruiting deacons who can sing. I attend a large Greek church with several priests but not one deacon -- who serves a most important liturgical function.
A good basso profundo deacon is a god-send, Greek or Russian. Do such people not even exist in the Church?
I met someone years ago who was trying to convince the archdiocese to assist him in his work of teaching people in traditional byzantine chant and he put together a choir to demonstrate how it should really sound. It was wonderful. But so far as I know, he did not make much if any progress in gaining patronage for his work.
What we have in Greek church choirs must be a mixture of episcopalian influences on Greek (byzantine) traditions. When the choir does do traditional chant it is beautiful. But it seems infrequent.
:) This is not 'Byzantine music in America' thread, but in general. Visit churches in Greece and hear. But even in America there are marvelous chanters of Byzantine music, at least in the places I have been.
Surely people could be taught and encouraged to at least carry the esone.
I'm not so sure I agree with this. You'd be surprised how many people just don't have the ability to harmonise, let alone hold a note for a long time. Having the congregation sing a melody they're familiar with (and assuming they're regulars at church, I'd assume they'd be familiar with most of them) seems more doable than having hundreds of people trying to carry the ison all at once.
But on that subject, does anyone know when and why congregational singing began to disappear in many Byzantine churches? Any mention in the Fathers regarding lay participation?
It seems to be a uniquely Byzantine thing - and I'm assuming fairly recent - since congregational participation is the norm in both the Catholic and Non-Chalcedonian traditions.
What we have in Greek church choirs must be a mixture of episcopalian influences on Greek (byzantine) traditions.
Thankfully, this seems to be a mainly American phenomena. Here, I've never come accross it anywhere but the Agia Sophia Cathedral in London.
What we have in Greek church choirs must be a mixture of episcopalian influences on Greek (byzantine) traditions.Thankfully, this seems to be a mainly American phenomena.
Just for the record and truth's sake. It depends where one goes here. And if it is influenced, it is not Byzantine. It will not qualify as Byzantine because Fathers actually criticized many such things that are happening in some parishes here.
And Kris, I agree with you that people should not be carrying the ison. :) Here might be so difficult. Many folk songs in Greece in certain areas are sung with ison and it is beautiful to hear it. It seems that all (at least people I have heard in weddings) have the gift there for the ison. :) They are so talented that the groom's family starts and then the bride's family tries to outdo some excellent singing and so on. This continues for days in the respective family's celebrations - and how they do not loose their voices singing so much, is beyond me. And it is with no instruments whatsoever. I think these folk songs were influenced by Byzantine chanting (although this is strictly my opinion and I can't say it with authority). :) It is so wonderful when faith permeates other aspects of life though. But even in those areas where people are so talented I do not think it is wise to start having all keep the ison. Why some feel that the congregation is doing nothing in Liturgy? We are supposed to pray inside of of us, follow the prayers, or read them.
Paul Cowan
19-01-2008, 07:09 PM
I agree with you that people should not be carrying the ison.
please define ison. I have not heard this word before. I thought it was some new form of technology.
Herman Blaydoe
19-01-2008, 07:10 PM
The Congregation should sing. Surely people could be taught and encouraged to at least carry the esone. Chanters should be taught to sing in such a way that the congregation can carry the esone at appropriate times. Certain hymns should be well known by us all and sung together with some feeling. Sitting in pews and listening to the choir strikes me as too passive.
You would like our parish then. Liturgy is indeed the "work of the people" and most everybody sings. That is one of the major strengths of plain chant. The melodies are relatively simple and easy to learn (for the most part). In fact, only the melody is generally written, the harmony is pretty much ad hoc. Many visitors have commented on how "sincere" and "lovely" the Liturgy was, and I am sure it is not because of the cantor, but in spite of him! It is very much congregational, and it does not require operatic training to sing. You can't help but want to sing a long and participate.
As I have pointed out before, Carpatho-Russian (sometimes called Ruthenian) prostopinije represents something springing from the monophonic Greek chant but adding harmony, but not to the formal and sometimes overblown extent that classical Russian polyphonic tradition went to. It is closely related to the ancient Znamennyj chant, but reflects the influence of the many cultures that make up the Carpathian mountain region. It is already a "polyglot" music that is very flexible and could easily morph into a unique tradition in American culture. Again, I suspect the purists will be aghast, but centuries from now I suspect many churches in America will be singing something that sounds different from what we sing now, and yet it will still be "holy".
Mary, priests and most chanters study Byzantine music here in Greece. They are taught how to chant properly. There are of course wonderful natural talents that have never studied Byzantine music but they are the exception I think. The son of a good friend has been studying since he was a young boy and I was surprised - being totally ignorant of Byzantine music - to find that the notes are nothing like the music notes I studied in school.
effie
Dear Effie,
I haven't heard authentic Byzantine chant, and was only talking about stuff I've heard, which, from the looks of it, could be anything!! Thanks, Nina, for specifying, that this isn't about 'American' Byzantine Chant! (Can there be such a thing?)
Anyways, while thinking about all this, I realized another aspect of all this Chanting, that hasn't been mentioned yet....
The ears that hear, should be prepared spiritually, to see and understand the beauty of it...
I remember how I couldn't see any beauty in either icons or the 'boring' orthodox music long before I truly started to seek and understand. At that time, my exposure to orthodox music and iconography was all Ethiopian, but still... I couldn't see anything attractive about it. I found all the color and flash of the feasts really gaudy. I found the music to be very tedious and long and altogether too tiresome, and I found the icons to be very poorly drawn children's cartoons.
I think, there is an aspect of orthodox music, art, etc, that is beyond worldly standards of beauty, that cannot be seen, heard or understood through worldly eyes, ears and hearts.
In Christ,
Mary.
Paul Cowan
19-01-2008, 07:34 PM
Again, I suspect the purists will be aghast, but centuries from now I suspect many churches in America will be singing something that sounds different from what we sing now, and yet it will still be "holy".
Are there not only 8 tones in which to sing. How can the music sound differently if we and the choir stick to them? I admit personal abilities are lacking in many people, but does not God love their heart for him more than their abilities to sing for Him? I say this because I have to remind myself of this everytime I hear "bad" sounds coming from someones lips. It is my flesh that desires "good" music and not the heart to song.
In my great grandmother's Baptist church it seemed the worst singers always sat on the front row and sung the loudest to the pain of everyone else behind them. In hindsight, they had the biggest hearts for God as they were right up to the stage as close as they could get to Him and were singing out to Him with all their might.
Paul
Andreas Moran
19-01-2008, 07:45 PM
In the Russian Church, the 'baroque' style of both singing (I won't call it chanting) and of architecture is due to a certain sort of Ukrainian influence, I am told. However, the choir of Holy Trinity St Jonah Monastery in Kiev is excellent. If anyone comes across the choir of Holy Trinity St Sergius Lavra singing Hymns to the Mother of God, buy it!
please define ison. I have not heard this word before. I thought it was some new form of technology.
:D :D :D
Can you hear this chant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BpBgU-gUMA&feature=related)? Can you hear the main voice? Can you hear the background voices? The latter is ison.
P.S This is by the way the 'Thrice Holy Hymn' Agios o Theos, ... (Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal have mercy on us) - that Kornelius said that was given to us by Heaven.
Are there not only 8 tones in which to sing. How can the music sound differently if we and the choir stick to them? I admit personal abilities are lacking in many people, but does not God love their heart for him more than their abilities to sing for Him? I say this because I have to remind myself of this everytime I hear "bad" sounds coming from someones lips. It is my flesh that desires "good" music and not the heart to song.
In my great grandmother's Baptist church it seemed the worst singers always sat on the front row and sung the loudest to the pain of everyone else behind them. In hindsight, they had the biggest hearts for God as they were right up to the stage as close as they could get to Him and were singing out to Him with all their might.
Paul
That's the spirit! Think St. Romanos.
Effie Ganatsios
19-01-2008, 08:07 PM
Dear Effie,
I haven't heard authentic Byzantine chant, and was only talking about stuff I've heard, which, from the looks of it, could be anything!! Thanks, Nina, for specifying, that this isn't about 'American' Byzantine Chant! (Can there be such a thing?)
Anyways, while thinking about all this, I realized another aspect of all this Chanting, that hasn't been mentioned yet....
The ears that hear, should be prepared spiritually, to see and understand the beauty of it...
I remember how I couldn't see any beauty in either icons or the 'boring' orthodox music long before I truly started to seek and understand. At that time, my exposure to orthodox music and iconography was all Ethiopian, but still... I couldn't see anything attractive about it. I found all the color and flash of the feasts really gaudy. I found the music to be very tedious and long and altogether too tiresome, and I found the icons to be very poorly drawn children's cartoons.
I think, there is an aspect of orthodox music, art, etc, that is beyond worldly standards of beauty, that cannot be seen, heard or understood through worldly eyes, ears and hearts.
In Christ,
Mary.
Unfortunately, even though we are supposed to reverence all that is in our churches, poor taste sometimes prevails. I too dislike garish colours and poorly executed icons. Nature is beautiful, and I believe that God would want beauty in His churches.
Elder Paisios made beautiful wooden carvings - small but beautiful and in good taste. I have noticed, Mary, that old icons and frescoes are usually beautifully executed. Sometimes artists are more interested in quantity than quality but as you imply, we should concentrate on the essence and not on the trappings.
Effie
Paul Cowan
19-01-2008, 08:08 PM
Can you hear the background voices? The latter is ison
I sing bass. This seems relatively easy to do. I just get embarassed being heard in front of others. I prefer being hidden in the background.
Herman Blaydoe
19-01-2008, 09:29 PM
Are there not only 8 tones in which to sing.
Only 8 tones? Not hardly. There are many systems of 8 tones. And are you talking Resurrectional tones, Vesperal tones, or the special tones? Do you have any idea how many different ways "Christ is Risen" can be sung?
Greek, Bulgarian, Georgian or Romanian or gee, perhaps at least four different "Russian" octoechos, above and beyond the Carpatho-Russian versions which also have more than one version? And that is just for Tropars. Kondak tunes are often different from the Tropar tune even in the same tone, and the Theotokion may be different yet.
Only 8 tones. And there are only three primary colors, unless you are talking additive or subtractive....
Only 8 tones. Yeah, technically speaking.
I sing bass. This seems relatively easy to do. I just get embarassed being heard in front of others. I prefer being hidden in the background.
Well that's just the alpha. :) It is more intricate.
I do not chant. I am a very happy member of the ecclesia - like someone liked to mention. Yes it is the work of the people but it does not mean only chanting but the implementation and the execution of everything before and after the Divine Liturgy. Ecclesia - or the work of the people involves actions and items from the dust rag with which we clean the floor of the church, to teaching a child how to light a candle and everything in between and on the sides. I am happy if the priest asks us during the Liturgy to chant along a very popular hymn when there is a great feast, but other than that sometime we should be happy to even be allowed to enter the church. What did St. Mary of Egypt have more, or less than us before she went to the desert and when an invisible force did not allow her to enter the church? She sinned, we sin and maybe we sin much more. Jewish people for repentance had to wear a sack and throw ashes all over, but us because we take many things for granted in our modern times, think that we deserve to be there in our best Sunday clothes and do whatever we want. We got to learn humility! I am not against anything what happens today at church but we have to be more mindful of the Patristic teachings.
Demetra S.
17-11-2008, 02:40 PM
But on that subject, does anyone know when and why congregational singing began to disappear in many Byzantine churches? Any mention in the Fathers regarding lay participation?
It seems to be a uniquely Byzantine thing - and I'm assuming fairly recent - since congregational participation is the norm in both the Catholic and Non-Chalcedonian traditions.
Thankfully, this seems to be a mainly American phenomena. Here, I've never come accross it anywhere but the Agia Sophia Cathedral in London.[/quote]
I can't comment on all Greek churches in America, but it's been my experience that the congretion only sings when there is no choir or if it is very important, ie: Christos Anesti, Ti Ipermaho, church's feast day. I think people don't sing when the "professionals" are there (choir and/or psalti) perhaps due to embarrassment or lack of skill. But they do step up when it's necessary - or the priest would go hoarse on Saturday of the Souls!
Herman Blaydoe
17-11-2008, 04:03 PM
I can't comment on all Greek churches in America, but it's been my experience that the congretion only sings when there is no choir or if it is very important, ie: Christos Anesti, Ti Ipermaho, church's feast day. I think people don't sing when the "professionals" are there (choir and/or psalti) perhaps due to embarrassment or lack of skill. But they do step up when it's necessary - or the priest would go hoarse on Saturday of the Souls!
Thankfully, in the Carpatho-Russian tradition, congregational singing is pretty much the norm, although some parishes have choirs. Ours doesn't have a formal choir and won't as long as I have any say in the matter, even when we move out of our little garage worship space into a dedicated building (in a couple of years, God and the county bureaucracy willing). Plain chant takes a little getting used to but it is great for congregational singing. It is easy to learn and to sing. I think of it as a bridge between the Greek monophonic tradition and the Russian polyphonic. Only the melody is generally written down, with the harmony being somewhat improvisational, but often a little more elaborate than a simple ison, depending on the number and talent of the worshippers assembled.
Even on "bad" days, where I cringed through much of the service, people have come up to me and commented about how nice the service was! I know from personal experience that the Holy Spirit provides what is lacking!
Herman the cantor
Owen Jones
17-11-2008, 11:35 PM
I went to the music linked by Nina in her January post. There is a comment that eleos does not accurately translate to mercy. Anybody good with Greek?
Owen, eleos is indeed accurately translateable to mercy. Ignore any possible references in your travels which suggest eleos is related to elaion (oil, more specifically olive oil). This is a linguistic mistake.
Owen Jones
18-11-2008, 02:08 AM
I think the point was being argued that it is a more nuanced meaning than mercy. Softer, somehow.
Anthony Stokes
18-11-2008, 02:31 AM
But on that subject, does anyone know when and why congregational singing began to disappear in many Byzantine churches? Any mention in the Fathers regarding lay participation?
I have experience with both the Greek practice and Russian. I think part of the problem in the Greek church, at least when I was growing up, was that the music was rarely the same every week. The choir would change many pieces quite often. With the Byzantine chant, the chanters never really chanted anything the same twice either.
In the parish where I direct the choir, we try to sing the same settings often enough for the congregation to catch on pretty quickly. That doesn't keep us from doing new music, but it is much less complicated than what we did at in my GOA parish.
That's just my take on it. I do find that Athonite chant lends itself to congregational singing more than the Constantinopolitan chant that is typical in parishes in the US.
Sbdn. Anthony
I think the point was being argued that it is a more nuanced meaning than mercy. Softer, somehow.
Yes, historically it has another nuance. This thread (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1478) from monachos explains it.
David M.
03-12-2008, 08:36 PM
Hello all. I just wanted to pipe in here since music is something that I hold quite dear. I am a recent convert to Orthodoxy from various Protestant traditions. I was involved in a number of praise and worship bands (singing and playing the piano or guitar) as well as several choirs. Currently, I am a member of our Church's choir.
In the protestant realm, I found music to be one of the top causes of conflict within churches unless they were a relatively new church. The older generations often prefer the traditional hymns and the younger crowd wanted the more modern praise and worship music. Then you have the issue of the piano/organ or a full P&W band. There are some protestant traditions that don't use any instruments (one of the branches of the Reformed church will only sing accapella arrangments of the Psalms, and the Church of Christ traditionally only sings accapella." I still love many of both the old hymns and the newer praise and worship songs of my past tradition. I still listen to them and sing them regularly, and I think that God is glorified in them. I mean, how can you go wrong with something like, "Great is Thy faithfulness, O God my Father; There is no shadow of turning with Thee; Thou changest not, Thy compassions, they fail not; As Thou hast been, Thou forever will be...morning by morning new mercies I see, all I have needed Thy hand hath provided Great is Thy faithfulness Lord unto me." Don't get me wrong, I don't want to start singing these in the Liturgy or anything, but they certainly can have their place in the spiritual lives of Orthodox christians. The more songs of praise for God we have in our hearts, the better (just look at King David for a good example of this).
When it comes to liturgical music I appreciate our parish's approach. We have wonderfully talented chanters (mostly of arabic orgins) as well as a magnificent choir that sings a mix of byzantine, arabic, and russian music (and probably others as well...I'm still learning it all : ). There are those in our church who would like to see all chanting and others who want all choral...and that is why we have both. I think it is best that instruments be kept out of liturgical worship if for no other reason than to prevent the kind of turmoil I have witnessed over them (I also am a big fan of accapella singing, so I may be somewhat biased here). But this business of saying that Greek or Byzantine or whatever type of chant is the form that is most Holy and ought to be the only one used in liturgical worship seems to be legalistic, and it undermines one of the greatest strengths of Orthodoxy: in every different region that Orthodoxy has reached It did not attempt to erradicate that culture but instead it brought the seed of Orthodoxy and allowed it to blossom in the soil that existed there. That is why we have these different traditions, and instead of looking down our noses at other traditions, I think we should embrace the diverse beauty of each.
Finally, the issue of St. John Chrysostym seems a bit unfair:
1) Monophonic Chant was, styalistically, where music was in his day as Polyphonic chant would not come around for several hundred years. - "The practice of doubling a chant at the fourth, fifth, or octave became common in the late 9th century."
2) Since we know he wasn't speaking against harmonies (as shown in 1) ) it seems he may have been speaking in opposition to instrumental music due to it's association with pagan religions. - "Early Christian music, largely monophonic chant influenced by the Jewish cantorial tradition, was entirely vocal as the church attempted to purge the masses of the instrumental music associated with competing religions."
Both quotes come from the following site which gives a really helpful timeline of the styalistic history of music from ancient times on. http://www.stevenestrella.com/composers/index.html?styletimeline.html
Anyways, if you want to really go by what the earliest musical tradition was, it would have to be much more Jewish sounding. I do find it interesting that some people want to go back, but only so far as their tradition goes back. Anywho, this post was too long, but music is one of my favorite subjects : )
David
Robert Hegwood
04-12-2008, 07:25 PM
Some shotgun comments on the thread so far, and speaking as memory serves.
(Note: I've no substantive musical training or education and can only carry a tune as a rule if two experienced singers are on either side of me and I just carefully try to make my voice not sound horrid [technically speaking] when joined with theirs. That said, God helping me, my reading/chanting voice when tasked with a prokeminon or an epistle is acceptable. So...my opinions expressed below are all qualifed by my general ignorance.)
Ison: As I recall an Ison is a type of drone note which other elements of a melody resolve themselves around...flowing in and out of it, wreathing about it, etc. If not mistaken it is regarded as being theologically expressive of the voice of the Father...or something like that out of which all that is takes being.
The loss of congregational singing: If not mistaken I believe the loss of it is some quarters along with the rise of more professional choirs is related to the concept of "kalos" with regard to worship. If the temple is to be adorned with expertly made icons, and the vestments are rich, and the utensils used in the Divine Liturgy are to be of highest quality, then every other thing ought to point towards and give expression to the archtypical beauty of the heavenly worship. Since as some have said, there is much that changes in the cycles of music in worship, and given that some of it is difficult to execute well it was handed to trained choirs so that all of the worship found in the temple should be beautiful...should express "kalos".
With regard to the "sound" of Byzantine music. For those raised on western musical conventions it takes practice to learn to hear it. Its scales...if that is the right term, its use of microtones and the like give it much more in common with the tonal systems you hear all the way from North Africa to Japan. Indeed the 'native' singing styles of most of humanity outside western civilization (broadly speaking) have greater affinity to the Byzantine. But if you can like bagpipes you can learn to hear the Byzantine style more appreciatively....and as a footnote, either done badly is very much like tortured cats...tone deaf tortured cats. But that is a periferial issue. The Orthodox style(s) easiest for most central and northern European stocks to listen to and sing that is also very close to Byzantine sensabilities is the Znamenie (which I've been told has a lot in common with English plainsong). It is basically the core Byzantine tonal system bumped up a notch or so the notes seem more natural to northern cultural ears. Others doubtless know much more than I do on this.
Modern Orthodox congregational singing: From my perspective congregational singing is alive and well in Orthodoxy in America...at least the part I am from in the Deep South (aka Orthodixie). Whether that is Carptho-Russyn influence or Southern Baptist convert, I don't know, but I do know, at least in my parish, the parts that stay generally the same, or have only large seasonal variations are sung by all, including the Creed. One of the more interesting cultural baptisms I've seen of late is some intersection between Orthodox singing and Southern Shaped Note/Sacred Harp psalmody. The harmonies are a lot alike in places.
Convert problem: What to do with old standard Protestant hymns. Those which are theologically sound...keep singing, just not in the Divine Liturgy. That said, I used to wonder about this before...what to do with that legacy when I was becoming Orthodox. But the first time I heard the Xristos Anesthi by the Valaam Brotherhood Choir...I never looked back. I'm not as thrilled by CCM or contemporary "P&W" the former of which is too often frivilous, shallow, and sentimental and the latter of which too much like entertainment (a complaint similar in substance to that leveled against overly operatic styles of church singing). In my unvarnished and unexpurgated opinion the contemporary worship music wars in other communions are disgraceful...just another assault on what shreds of tradition are left in those communions...and for absolutely no gain theologically, indeed more often than not at great loss. However I have found it very useful because the storm it creates makes the value of Tradition much easier to illustrate to older Protestant worshipers who see their traditional hymnography threatened with obselitization in the name of the flashy and new.
There are though some new forays into CCM from an Orthodox perspective available at St. Romanos records. I must say I'm not overly impressed so far with most of it...when they can outshine Barry McGuire, 2nd Chapter of Acts, and Kieth Green...maybe my opinion will change (ok I'm dating myself I know). But at least they are trying to find ways past the spiritual tapioca (with sprinkles) that is typical of most modern CCM (broad sweeping sterotype...nonetheless accurate IMOFWIMBW).
welll...I think the barrels are empty...
I would like to talk more about ison, because I'm not sure how it works practically. When you hear a good Byzantine chant, the ison is non-stop. I'm assuming this is because when some singers pause to take a breath, the others continue singing, and vice versa. Is there a system for this? Are there set points in the music where some singers are determined to take a breath?
Also, while ison generally maintains the "tone" of the hymn, the ison can sometimes change to match the chief cantor's notes, especially when he goes particularly high or low, before reverting back to the original tone. I'm wondering what determines when the ison changes.
Anthony Stokes
04-12-2008, 09:47 PM
I would like to talk more about ison, because I'm not sure how it works practically. When you hear a good Byzantine chant, the ison is non-stop. I'm assuming this is because when some singers pause to take a breath, the others continue singing, and vice versa. Is there a system for this? Are there set points in the music where some singers are determined to take a breath?
First of all, I am no expert on this either. Thomas C., another monachos member can hopefully add much to this discussion. But, I believe that it can partly depend on what style of Byzantine chant you are singing: Constantinopolitan, Athonite, or maybe an the sometimes odd, choppy sounding American versions (not all of them sound choppy). I prefer the ison to never stop, but I have seen transcriptions in Western notation with rests in both parts, and some without.
I have heard the director of the Greek Byzantine choir say that you should always have at least 3 isokratis (ison singers), partly for the breathing aspect, but also to help keep the pitch. I know this from experience with my choir, that if I only have one or two people singing the ison when we attempt something Byzantine, we tend to move around a lot pitch-wise.
Also, while ison generally maintains the "tone" of the hymn, the ison can sometimes change to match the chief cantor's notes, especially when he goes particularly high or low, before reverting back to the original tone. I'm wondering what determines when the ison changes.
It the "modern (19th cent.)" Byzantine notation, the ison is marked on the page. The Byzantine modes can have more than one pitch center during the course of a hymn, so while a hymn may start in what we Western musicians might call D minor, it might switch to G for a phrase, and then back to D. When the melodic structure changes like that, the ison changes as well. There are even times when it is appropriate, though not required, that two isons can be sung at the same time.
It is also important to note that the ison as we know it today is, I believe, a 16th century addition. Byzantine chant, and Znamenny in Russia, were monophonic up until then. Gregorian chant was actually harmonized first.
Hopefully Thomas can comment on this issue, since he is an actual trained psaltis.
Sbdn. Anthony
Here's another question about ison: when did it start? I read somewhere that ison was added in only recent centuries, but I'm not sure that's true. I've heard performances of ancient Byzantine manuscripts which have ison. Also, the Old Roman chant has a drone. Does anyone know the history here?
Niko T.
06-09-2009, 11:40 PM
I don't know if this will help you, but the following is from an excellent site with many Byzantine chant resources: http://www.analogion.com/Isokratema.html (http://www.analogion.com/Isokratema.html).
"What is the origin of isokratema practice?
S. Gugushvili: The origin of isokratema practice is unclear. Marcel Peres has speculated that it actually could originate in the West and was subsequently borrowed by the Byzantines: "There is some evidence that this practice might come not from the Greek but from the LatinÂ…. The use of the ison seems to be known in the Byzantine tradition around the fifteenth century, but not in other Eastern churches. The first clear description of this technique, though, comes from a Western source, the Micrologus by Guido d'Arezzo in the eleventh century. For him it was a sort of organum. He teaches us that this practice was common in Rome. We know from the Ordines Romani that by the seventh and eighth centuries there were traditions of organum singing in the pontifical chapel. Later the anonymous author of Summa Music, a treatise written around 1200, describes the sort of organum that consists of a drone. He calls this manner diaphona basilica: that's very interesting, because the term basilica in liturgical matters often refers to the Roman tradition. So in the thirteenth century there was still in the vocabulary of singers a word that seems to referred [sic] to the Roman Basilican tradition and that means a vocal drone. It is very possible that the Greeks borrowed this practice from the Italian singers. We find in some fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Greek sources, written in Byzantine notation, some instances of polyphony in this style with parallel fifths and contrary motion. In one manuscript a rubric says, "This is done in the Italian way." We know that from the thirteenth century the Italians, chiefly the Venetians, had a very strong influence in some regions like Crete and Byzantium itself, where there existed a Latin government for almost seventy years. So there is a strong basis for this scenario."
The criticism of Peres' opinion as far as existence of drone in the West is concerned can be found in Robert Howe's master thesis (http://www.rob-rah.com/Downloads/MA.pdf), see pp. 6-8.
I. Moody: The article (actually a submission for a college degree) regarding this matter is quite a firm dismissal of the notion of the ison in Roman chant. The problem is that, in dismissing so summarily the applicability of the terminology in this particular instance (and Peres's interpretation of the source), the author does not leave any room for the possibility of the ison being there at all. By coincidence, at the Colloquium on Mediaeval Monody currently being held in Lisbon and Evora, Professor Kenneth Levy gave today a very thought-provoking paper on the possibility of drones on Old Roman chant, based on a most exceptional neumatic occurence in a manuscript in London (BL Add. 29988). More is to be expected.
I. Arvanitis: "Diaphonia Basilica" is described in the treatise "Summa musice", written c. 1200. It is published with English translation by Christopher Page (Cambridge Univ. Press 1991): (p.124) : " Diaphonia is a manner of singing in two ways, and it is divided into 'basilica' and 'organica'. Basilica [diaphonia] is a manner of singing in two ways so that one singer continuously holds one note which is like a foundation melody for the other singer; his companion begins a chant either at the fifth or at the octave, sometimes ascending, sometimes descending, so that when he pauses he accords in some way with him who maintais the foundation" 'Organica' means contary motion of the voices. Summa musice mentions also "triphonia basilica", i.e. parallel fourths over a drone."
Alexander Zhdanov
11-09-2009, 01:10 PM
Very interesting thread, I appreciate. Thank you.
Firstly, I would like to say that I am russian but absolutely adore Byzantine chanting for its deep praying and concentrated sound. But my mother doesn't like it despite the fact that she is an orthodox christian and sings in a church choir. Byzantine chant has deep oriental roots and as far as I know it origins from ancient hebrew chanting. The right of singing had only Levites in the ancient church all others could come with their musical instruments during a sacrifice service and play making a musical accompaniment but they didn't allowed to chant. Take into consideration the Psalms of David which were singed with musical accompaniment.
When I listen to the Byzantine chant I feel this connection.
Bye,
Alexander
Alexander Zhdanov
16-09-2009, 04:22 PM
In the previous post I meant a monophonic chant, because in the ancient church there was only the monophonic chant. In our tradition znamenny and demestvo are also monophonic. A polyphonic singing occurred in Russia later in the 17th century. Znamenny has its own Kruk notation which is something similar to the Byzantine chant notation.
And also I would like to add that St. Blessed Augustine says in his Confessions that he always repents when a voice of singer enjoy him more than a meaning of words.(I don't know the exact quotation)
Bye,
Alexander
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.5 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.