(by properly chanted i mean in the byzantine style, deep voices, non latin etc)
The closest you'll get is znamenniy chant, Kievan chant, Valaam chant, or one of the other "home-grown" chants which arose in Rus' and Russia as a development of Byzantine chant, in much the same way as Gregorian chant developed from Byzantine in the west. Not sure what you mean by "deep voices" - much of the chant of the type I've mentioned is sung in the tenor to bass-baritone range, much like Gregorian and similar chants. The ascendancy of Russian contrabass coincided, IIRC, with the adoption of polyphonic singing styles, which began no later than the 15th century.
Straight Byzantine chant has not been part of Russian church singing for many centuries, other than in some interesting recordings by both male choirs and female choirs of the present-day, whose choirmasters/mistresses have adapted Slavonic hymns to Byzantine-style musical settings. Quite lovely.
I quite agree that there was a time in recent centuries where Russian church singing became increasingly baroque and operatic. An example of this is the work of VI Spassky, choirmaster of the Russian Cathedral in Paris in the 1950s and 1960s. Very florid, shrill and bombastic, even when the contras are singing. Don't like it. Don't like it at all.
But, just because church music is sung in polyphonic style does not mean that style is unsuitable for church use. It's how that style is used to further the glory and worship of God. In much of the work of Arkhangelsky, for instance, it grates and detracts from prayerfulness and compunction. In the hands of many other composers, it doesn't. I dare you to listen to Kedrov's Lord's Prayer
, or L'vov's It Is Meet
and not be moved to prayer.
Similarly, Byzantine chant can suffer from improper execution. She is a stern mistress. When it's good, it's very, very good, and when it's only not quite good, it's truly horrid.