Mohanam / Bhupali & 5-note scales
Arthur Levine
This is a question concerning a single raga, and addressed
primarily to the Carnatic music people. As a "sample problem",
however, I think it has broader implications.
Mohanam is a five-note raga which uses the same notes as the
Hindustani rag Bhupali. In the West, where the resource of scales
is much smaller, it is simply known as "the pentatonic scale", or
"the major pentatonic":
Carnatic: S R2 G3 P D2
Hindustani: S R G P D
Western: C D E G A
Carnatic music theory assigns this raga to the 28th melakarta -
Harikhamboji, which is the equivalent of the Hindustani Khamaj
thaat, and the Western "Mixolydian":
Harikhamboji: S R2 G3 M1 P D2 N2 (mnemonics: ri gu dhi ni)
Khamaj: S R G m P D n
Mixolydian: C D E F G A Bb (sol la ti do re mi fa)
N.B. My pitch signs for Hindustani are: S r R g G m M P d D n N
My question concerns the fact that Mohanam has been assigned
to the 28th melakarta at least partially on the basis of the
certain pitches which it DOES NOT USE. From this point of view, it
could be argued that the fourth note is M2, rather than M1, and the
the seventh is N3 rather than N2. Indeed, the enharmonic
possiblities of the Carnatic system even allow us to suggest that
the D2 is in fact N1. Taken together, these interpretations yield
some nice alternatives (notes in parentheses are omitted in
Mohanam):
S R2 G3 (M2) P D2 (N2) (ri gu di ni) - #64 Vachaspati
S R2 G3 (M1) P D2 (N3) (ri gu di nu) - #29 Dhirasankarabharanam
S R2 G3 (M2) P D2 (N3) (ri gu di nu) - #65 Mechakalyani
S R2 G3 (M1) P (D1) N1 (ri gu dha na) - #25 Mararanjani
S R2 G3 (M2) P (D1) N1 (ri gu dha na) - #61 Kantamani
- in Hindustani terms, the second and third are Bilaval and Kalyan
respectively; the first, fourth, and fifth have no equivalents. The
Hindustani sargam and European-style notes would be:
Hindustani Europe
S R G (M) P D (n) C D E (F#) G A (Bb)
S R G (m) P D (N) - Bilaval C D E (F) G A (B)
S R G (M) P D (N) - Kalyan C D E (F#) G A (B)
S R G (m) P (d) D C D E (F) G (Ab) Bbb
S R G (M) P (d) D C D E (F#) G (Ab) Bbb
After such an elaborate introduction, my question is a rather
simple one. Why is Mohanam assigned to the 28th Melakarta? Three
possible answers which occurred to me: 1) something to do with the
type of melodic behavior, typical phrases, that sort of thing; 2)
just a tradition, whose reasons and origins have been lost in the
mists of time; 3) some principal of "economy" or "parsimony" in
identifying the missing notes.
How is it?
On a more general level. This question came up because of some
work I've been doing on pentatonic scales in general. One thing I
realized was that I have no idea how many pentatonic scales are in
use in the Carnatic system, either from the purely theoretical
side, or from the (more interesting to me) practical side. And a
second problem concerned the Melakarta assignment of those
pentatonic rags I do know (another example would be Hindolam, but
I'm sure there are zillions).
Any enlightenment on these questions would be appreciated,
Yours truly,
Art Levine (second syllable rhymes with "keen")
Rajan Parrikar
nuts!) for a while, albeit peripheral to the question Art has raised
in the original post. It is, however, related to the pentatonic scale.
Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities. Which
are:
S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
fruit.
I had never thought of this until a music rasik asked me via e-mail.
It seems strange that all the other possibilities have been
formally recognized but not this one. Why? Melodically, it (the last
possibility) does make sense.
Rajan [surprises never cease in music and electromagnetics] Parrikar
====================================================================
email: parr...@mimicad.colorado.edu
parr...@spot.colorado.edu
Krishna Kunchithapadam
ale...@epas.utoronto.ca (Arthur Levine) writes:
:
:Raga Mohanam
:
:This is a question concerning a single raga, and addressed
:primarily to the Carnatic music people. As a "sample problem",
:however, I think it has broader implications.
[ some discussion deleted ]
:
: After such an elaborate introduction, my question is a rather
:simple one. Why is Mohanam assigned to the 28th Melakarta? Three
:possible answers which occurred to me: 1) something to do with the
:type of melodic behavior, typical phrases, that sort of thing; 2)
:just a tradition, whose reasons and origins have been lost in the
:mists of time; 3) some principal of "economy" or "parsimony" in
:identifying the missing notes.
All three of the rules Art mentions are used in assigning a raga
to a parent scale. Most people would like to believe that rule-1
(characteristics phrases and srutis) is used in a majority of
cases. Unfortunately, musical scales have evolved a great deal
over time and janaka-janya pairings that might have made sense in
the past are probably no longer valid.
That brings us to rule-2 (tradition). It is generally accepted
that the creator of a new raga has the privilege of specifying
the parent scale (especially in cases where rule-1 cannot be
applied and multiple mela ragas satisfy the bill of parenthood).
Controversy regarding the newness of a scale and its creatorship
aside, this rule has been used in the past and in contemporary
music a good deal.
Rule-3 (economy of notes) is also used in the following sense. A
scale without the madhyama note is almost never considered a
janya of a prati (tivra) madhyama raga, unless there are very
very *very* good reasons for doing so. In the case of other
missing notes, the general practise is to fill in the gaps with
the most "natural" ones appropriate for the context. Therefore,
one does not in general use the cathusruthi versions of R/D when
the sudha versions would suffice (sudha and komal rspy in
hindusthani terms).
I would also like to add a rule-4. There are many instances where
a new raga evolves from an older one by the elimination of a single
note. If this process is repeated two or three times, one gets a
chain of sampurna, hexatonic, pentatonic, quadronic (?) scales, in
which adjacent ragas are very closely related (melodically) but
there is much less of a connection between the parent scale and
the pentatonic/quadronic scales. My favourite example of such a
chain in harikamboji -> nartaki (-m1) -> valaji (-d2) -> mahati (-r2).
It is very difficult to come up with a good reason for considering
mahati a janya of mela-28 based on srutis or economy of notes, but
the above chain of descent validates the pairing (this pairing is
the one suggested by Balamuralikrishna, the creator of mahati).
There are exceptions to the above rules, but in all but the most
obscure cases, these guiding principles are sufficient.
As to the parent raga of mohanam (bhupali), I had posted a
rationale a while back for considering mohanam to be a janya of
kalyani (yaman), although my arguments were based on graha-bedham.
If there is sufficient interest, I can dig out the article and
edit/post it here.
On a closing note---the taxonomy of ragas in Carnatic music is a
very touchy subject. Some very bitter battles have been fought
over decades just because two or more musicians could not see
eye-to-eye on what the parent scale of a raga should be.
--Krishna
Vidyasankar Sundaresan
-
- Carnatic music theory assigns this raga to the 28th melakarta -
- Harikhamboji, which is the equivalent of the Hindustani Khamaj
- thaat, and the Western "Mixolydian":
-
- Harikhamboji: S R2 G3 M1 P D2 N2 (mnemonics: ri gu dhi ni)
- Khamaj: S R G m P D n
- Mixolydian: C D E F G A Bb (sol la ti do re mi fa)
-
- N.B. My pitch signs for Hindustani are: S r R g G m M P d D n N
-
- My question concerns the fact that Mohanam has been assigned
- to the 28th melakarta at least partially on the basis of the
- certain pitches which it DOES NOT USE. From this point of view, it
- could be argued that the fourth note is M2, rather than M1, and the
- the seventh is N3 rather than N2.
- After such an elaborate introduction, my question is a rather
- simple one. Why is Mohanam assigned to the 28th Melakarta? Three
- possible answers which occurred to me: 1) something to do with the
- type of melodic behavior, typical phrases, that sort of thing; 2)
- just a tradition, whose reasons and origins have been lost in the
- mists of time; 3) some principal of "economy" or "parsimony" in
- identifying the missing notes.
-
- How is it?
The best possible answer, IMO is 2. Harikambhoji by itself is a new raga,
while Mohanam is ancient. The process of generating the 72 melakartas by
insisting on a sampoorna-sampoorna scheme, gave certain new ragas, which
were surprisingly not in use, despite their vadi-samvadi relationships.
Examples of this are Kharaharapriya and Harikambhoji. In Venkatamakhi's
asampoorna mela scheme, the corresponding melas are Sri and Khamas. On the
other hand, it is surprising that Harikambhoji was not in use at the time
of Venkatamakhi, because the scale corresponds to one of the panns of
ancient Tamil music.
As for Mohanam, the ma is conspicuously absent, while in Khamas and
Harikambhoji, it is conspicuously present. The assigning of Mohanam to
Mela no 28 is therefore not based on similarity of phrases or other
criteria, but by tradition.
As for arguments based on graha bhedam for assigning Mohanam to Kalyani,
there is not much basis for it. The janya-janaka relationship is not based
on the complicated graha bheda technique - it follows from the more simple
criterion of missing notes, accompanied by tons of tradition which
predates the melakarta nomenclature.
S.Vidyasankar
Vidyasankar Sundaresan
Parrikar) writes:
- This reminds me something that has been bothering me (well, driving me
- nuts!) for a while, albeit peripheral to the question Art has raised
- in the original post. It is, however, related to the pentatonic scale.
-
- Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities.
Which
- are:
-
- S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
- S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
- S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
- S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
- S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
- S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
-
- Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
- fruit.
-
Carnatic music has all these scales as ragas except Bibhas. The Bibhas of
Bhairavi ang is called Revagupti (Regupti) and the Bhoopal Todi is called
Bhoopalam. As for the last scale, Lalgudi Jayaraman has composed a tillana
in it. He calls the raga, Basanti. This raga is one of those which we in
the Carnatic music frame of reference would say has "a Hindustani
flavour"!
If I remember right, Lata Mangeshkar sings a Marathi folk song in this
raga.
S.Vidyasankar
Vidyasankar Sundaresan
ale...@epas.utoronto.ca (Arthur Levine) writes:
- Raga Mohanam
-
- to the 28th melakarta at least partially on the basis of the
- certain pitches which it DOES NOT USE. From this point of view, it
- could be argued that the fourth note is M2, rather than M1, and the
- the seventh is N3 rather than N2. Indeed, the enharmonic
- possiblities of the Carnatic system even allow us to suggest that
- the D2 is in fact N1. Taken together, these interpretations yield
- some nice alternatives (notes in parentheses are omitted in
- Mohanam):
-
- S R2 G3 (M2) P D2 (N2) (ri gu di ni) - #64 Vachaspati
- S R2 G3 (M1) P D2 (N3) (ri gu di nu) - #29 Dhirasankarabharanam
- S R2 G3 (M2) P D2 (N3) (ri gu di nu) - #65 Mechakalyani
- S R2 G3 (M1) P (D1) N1 (ri gu dha na) - #25 Mararanjani
- S R2 G3 (M2) P (D1) N1 (ri gu dha na) - #61 Kantamani
-
I think it is time we clarify our thinking about Melakarta ragas a bit.
This has to do with the vivadi relationships found in Mela ragas. In the
Mela scheme, it is true that G1, R3, D3 and N1 exist as possibilities.
However, these notes have no existence in themselves, but only in relation
to those notes to which they are vivadi. Thus G1 takes its swaroopa as G1
only in opposition with R1. A raga which uses the value 9/8, (G1 or R2),
cannot be said to use G1, if it does not have R1. Thus -
1) Suddha Saveri (S R2 M1 P D2) cannot be said to be S G1 M1 P D2 or S G1
M1 P N1. G1 takes its character only when it opposes R1. Similarly N1 can
be N1 only when it opposes D1.
2) Suddha Dhanyasi (S G2 M1 P N2) cannot be said to be S R3 M1 P N2 or S
R3 M1 P D3. R3 always defines itself with respect to G3, and similarly for
D3 and N3.
3) This can be extended to other scales e.g. Hindolam, Madhyamavati,
Abhogi, Sivaranjani, etc. thus eliminating Melakarta possibilities for the
parent scale of these ragas.
In Mohanam, where there is no hint of D1, there can be no asignation of D2
as N1. Thus Mararanjani (#25) and Kantamani (#61) are ruled out as
possible Melakartas for Mohanam.
S.Vidyasankar
Srini Pichumani
>
> After such an elaborate introduction, my question is a rather
>simple one. Why is Mohanam assigned to the 28th Melakarta? Three
>possible answers which occurred to me: 1) something to do with the
>type of melodic behavior, typical phrases, that sort of thing; 2)
>just a tradition, whose reasons and origins have been lost in the
>mists of time; 3) some principal of "economy" or "parsimony" in
>identifying the missing notes.
The assignment of Mohanam to the 28th melakarta is a relatively
new tradition as far as I know (< 100 years). Came about more as
a matter of convenience -- i.e assign a upAnga rAgam to the very
first melakarta possible -- than for any other reason. In this
sense, the classification is based on the "missing" notes you
talk about.
In books like the Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini, Mohanam is
classified under the 65th Melakarta (mEca or shAnta)KalyANI,
if I remember right. This classification was accepted practice
in many schools and probably has more basis in tradition -- may
have come about since many people tend to sing Mohanam with a
hint of kAkali niShAdam as that which occurs in KalyANI.
-Srini.
Rajan Parrikar
>In article <1993May26....@colorado.edu> parr...@csn.org (Rajan
>Parrikar) writes:
<deleted>
>Carnatic music has all these scales as ragas except Bibhas. The Bibhas of
>Bhairavi ang is called Revagupti (Regupti) and the Bhoopal Todi is called
>Bhoopalam. As for the last scale, Lalgudi Jayaraman has composed a tillana
>in it. He calls the raga, Basanti. This raga is one of those which we in
>the Carnatic music frame of reference would say has "a Hindustani
>flavour"!
>
>If I remember right, Lata Mangeshkar sings a Marathi folk song in this
>raga.
Aha!! The motivation of my friend was precisely that - the Lata "bhaavgeet"
which he said starts off as "Maalavoon....".
Rajan Parrikar
==============
email: parr...@mimicad.colorado.edu
parr...@spot.colorado.edu
Arthur Levine
>Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities. Which
>are:
>
>S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
>S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
>S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
>S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
>S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
>S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
>
>Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
>fruit.
>
>I had never thought of this until a music rasik asked me via e-mail.
>It seems strange that all the other possibilities have been
>formally recognized but not this one. Why? Melodically, it (the last
>possibility) does make sense.
The scale shares notes with both Charukeshi and Nat bhairav, so maybe
you could call it Charu Bhairav or something.
Seriously, I think part of the difficult is with the procedure you have used to
generate your scales. What you have done is to take all of the
permutations of the three variable notes (3x2) to get 5 valid scales
plus one anomaly. But if the theory -- and you are clearly applying a
theory of scale derivation here -- produces an anomaly, then perhaps
one should investigate other approaches.
Consider taking any scale as a set of intervals. For example, in terms
of semitones, the scale for Bhoopali could be given as:
22323 = S R G P D S> = Bhoopali
This scale may be rotated four times:
32232 = S g m P n S> = Dhani (Bhimpalasi aroha)
23223 = S R m P D S> = Durga
32322 = S g m d n S> = Malkauns
23232 = S R m P n S> = Megh, Madhmat sarang, sarangs in general
What these scales share is that they lack semitones. And they get tons
of use. So maybe what's really at work here is something deeper than
the surface of the scale, i.e. whether it use R or not. Something more
to do with the internal tensions of the scale as a melodic system.
According to this way of thinking -- which is the one I use in cooking
scales at my place -- one has to make basic distinctions according to
such things as the presence of 0 , 1, or 2 semitones, the number of
tones, the number of 3-semitone steps, whether the larger steps are
conjunct (have a note in common) or disjunct. So your mystery scale is:
22314 = S R G P d S> - I think John has Usman Khan rec.
42231 = S G M d N S>
14223 = S r m P D S> - Manaranjani, type II
31422 = S g G d n S>
23142 = S R m M n S>
This is a little more rarified company. Anyhow, this is how I approch
things. Also, scale theory is a BIG topic, and we're only touching the
surface here. But for what it's worth, just a different way of
thinking about it.
Gotta go, got a free ticket for Mahler's 2nd "Symphony of a Thousand"
(I won't review it!)
Art
Kumaran Santhanam
of the 28th Melakartha Harikhamboji (at least in Karnatic music) is
the fact that the gamakas present in Mohana are much more indicative
of Harikhamboji. The flavor of the slides and lilts present in Mohana
presents a subset of Harikhamboji's gamakas. Other melakarthas such
as Kalyani, Vachaspathi, and Shankarabarana are farther from Mohana
in their gamaka style.
I hope this clears some things up...
Kumaran
--
Kumaran Santhanam ksan...@uclink.berkeley.edu
"A man sits with a pretty girl for an hour and it seems shorter than a minute.
But tell that same man to sit on a hot stove for a minute, it is longer than
any hour. That's relativity." -- Einstein
Arthur Levine
>Rule-3 (economy of notes) is also used in the following sense. A
>scale without the madhyama note is almost never considered a
>janya of a prati (tivra) madhyama raga, unless there are very
>very *very* good reasons for doing so. In the case of other
>missing notes, the general practise is to fill in the gaps with
>the most "natural" ones appropriate for the context. Therefore,
>one does not in general use the cathusruthi versions of R/D when
>the sudha versions would suffice (sudha and komal rspy in
>hindusthani terms).
>
This is very interesting to me. I think I understand what you mean,
although the word "natural" has been used by artists and musicians for
centuries as an excuse to bash each other over the head. You don't
refer to the most "natural" forms of G and N here, but from other
things I have read, I suspect that these would be G1 and N1 (i.e.
Melakarta #1). Can you imagine trying to convince a Hindustani
musician that the most natural scale is: S r R m P d D S>? There's an
old saying that whenever "nature" and "art" get into a disagreement,
nature always agrees to ride in the back seat ("nature always loses" is
the way I learned it). I guess this is a
fairly clear instance of that.
In any case, the more important implication of your statement is that
R1 and D1 are the "defaults", if you like. So if a scale has no R at
all, then R1 is assumed in assigning it to a Melakarta. Ditto for D1. I
don't know enough about South Indian ragas, but I would appreciate
some verification, refutation, elaboration of this , because it's
quite a remarkable notion.
Thanks for your very informative reply,
Art
Arthur Levine
>I think it is time we clarify our thinking about Melakarta ragas a bit.
>This has to do with the vivadi relationships found in Mela ragas. In the
>Mela scheme, it is true that G1, R3, D3 and N1 exist as possibilities.
>However, these notes have no existence in themselves, but only in relation
>to those notes to which they are vivadi. Thus G1 takes its swaroopa as G1
>only in opposition with R1. A raga which uses the value 9/8, (G1 or R2),
>cannot be said to use G1, if it does not have R1. Thus -
> - subsequent discussion omitted
>In Mohanam, where there is no hint of D1, there can be no asignation of D2
>as N1. Thus Mararanjani (#25) and Kantamani (#61) are ruled out as
>possible Melakartas for Mohanam.
>
Great. I didn't realize the extent to which R3 D3 G1 and N1 are
"accessory tones" in the system. But it makes perfect sense, the way
you explain it. Thanks.
Art
Sri_G
>nuts!) for a while, albeit peripheral to the question Art has raised
>in the original post. It is, however, related to the pentatonic scale.
>
>Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities. Which
>are:
>
>S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
>S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
>S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
>S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
>S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
>S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
>
>Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
>fruit.
>
>I had never thought of this until a music rasik asked me via e-mail.
>It seems strange that all the other possibilities have been
>formally recognized but not this one. Why? Melodically, it (the last
>possibility) does make sense.
>
>Rajan [surprises never cease in music and electromagnetics] Parrikar
>
Hmmm ....
It was roughly about a year ago, I think, that I had a posted a query
about Mehndi Hassan's ghazal, "Abke Ham Bichhde", which, it seems to me,
is in this raga. My question then was the same as yours.
I don't remember having seen a consensus among the replies I received.
This raga has a haunting feel to it, and I remember one of the replies
mentioned that Mehndi Hassan refused to sing this raga in public because
it affected the listener adversely at some subtle level....
Wish I'd saved those responses ... :(
Cheers,
SriG
--
% "SRI_G" Sriganesh M, Grad student, Dept of CS, SUNY at Buffalo
% email: mad...@cs.buffalo.edu
Seshadri Kumar
|> In article <1993May26....@colorado.edu> parr...@csn.org (Rajan Parrikar) writes:
|> The scale shares notes with both Charukeshi and Nat bhairav, so maybe
|> you could call it Charu Bhairav or something.
|>
And, pray, just exactly why not Nat-keshi??????? :-) :-)
Friends, I think here we have a classic case of discrimination against
Nat in general, and Nat-Bhairav in p.--- see that our friend Art prefers to
assign the primary and more important role to Charukeshi by including
the Charu prefix for his suggested raga!! :-) Also, note that he wishes
to forget entirely the contribution of Nat to this lovely new scale and
deny Nat its parental rights. Aren't we for equality here???
Hasn't Bhairav had its share of the limelight, having hogged almost every
important morning raga you can think of --- Bhairav, Ahir Bhairav,
Bairagi Bhairav, etc.? Poor Nat, on the other hand, would be virtually
unremembered today if it were not for the ceaseless efforts of
the late and great Mallikarjun Mansur and the other members of
the Jaipur gharana, who have adopted this abandoned raga and cherished
almost every offspring it has ever produced --- Nat-Bhairav, Nat-Bihag,
Shuddh Nat, Nat-Bilaval, etc. ... yet how many of these are recorded
or heard often ... or heard as often as the monopolistic Bhairav???
Really, this has gone far enough, and now having shown you the reasons,
I shall brook no opposition to my proposal that our new raga be
named Nat-Keshi!! :-) :-)
|>
|> Art
|>
Your honor, I rest my case. :-)
Kumar
--
***************************************************************
"Robinhood underwear banian Robinhood...
Robinhood - Soft! Robinhood - Durable! Robinhood!"
Oh well ... :-)
John Campana
>In article <1993May26.2...@epas.toronto.edu>, ale...@epas.utoronto.ca (Arthur Levine) writes:
>
>
>!> The scale shares notes with both Charukeshi and Nat bhairav, so maybe
>!> you could call it Charu Bhairav or something.
>!>
>
>And, pray, just exactly why not Nat-keshi??????? :-) :-)
>
>Friends, I think here we have a classic case of discrimination against
>Nat in general, and Nat-Bhairav in p.--- see that our friend Art prefers to
>assign the primary and more important role to Charukeshi by including
>to forget entirely the contribution of Nat to this lovely new scale and
>deny Nat its parental rights. Aren't we for equality here???
>Hasn't Bhairav had its share of the limelight, having hogged almost every
>important morning raga you can think of --- Bhairav, Ahir Bhairav,
>Bairagi Bhairav, etc.? Poor Nat, on the other hand, would be virtually
>unremembered today if it were not for the ceaseless efforts of
>the late and great Mallikarjun Mansur and the other members of
>the Jaipur gharana, who have adopted this abandoned raga and cherished
>almost every offspring it has ever produced --- Nat-Bhairav, Nat-Bihag,
>Shuddh Nat, Nat-Bilaval, etc. ... yet how many of these are recorded
>or heard often ... or heard as often as the monopolistic Bhairav???
>Really, this has gone far enough, and now having shown you the reasons,
>I shall brook no opposition to my proposal that our new raga be
Charunat is good, but I think I prefer "Poor-nat", but that would be
changing Thaths. :-)
John
>!>
>!> Art
>!>
>
>Your honor, I rest my case. :-)
>
>Kumar
>
>--
>***************************************************************
>"Robinhood underwear banian Robinhood...
> Robinhood - Soft] Robinhood - Durable] Robinhood]"
> Oh well ... :-)
Thyagarajan Mohan
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Keywords:
In article <1u14ei$2...@agate.berkeley.edu> ksan...@uclink.berkeley.edu (Kumaran Santhanam) writes:
>The reason that Mohana (S R2 G3 P D2 S) is assigned as a derivative
>of the 28th Melakartha Harikhamboji (at least in Karnatic music) is
>the fact that the gamakas present in Mohana are much more indicative
>of Harikhamboji. The flavor of the slides and lilts present in Mohana
>presents a subset of Harikhamboji's gamakas. Other melakarthas such
>as Kalyani, Vachaspathi, and Shankarabarana are farther from Mohana
>in their gamaka style.
>
>I hope this clears some things up...
>Kumaran
>--
>Kumaran Santhanam ksan...@uclink.berkeley.edu
This is one of the rAgAs of Carnatic Music which is not assigned to
its parent correctly.There seems to be a tradition to fill up the remaining
notes of a janya rAga with those of less frequency.Accoding to this
tradition,mOhanam might have been assigned to 28th mELa.Its gamakAs don't have
any resemblance to mELa 28;close to 65th mELa (mEca)kalyANi in all its
gamaka,dhIrga nyAsa swarAs,prayOgas etc.Also,one can see its resemblance at
times to mOhana kalyANi,not to dEsAkShi or pilahari.
This is well in agreement with the original Venkatamahi's tradition.
(I believe Krishna would agree according to his `grahabEda' matrix).Also one
can see the equivalent Hindustani rAgA `bhUpAli' is assigned to the
kalyAN tata.For the same reasons,it's better to assign `hamsadhwani' to 65th
mELa rather to 29th mELa.
MOHAN
ps:Because of some problems with the server,I missed the articles of Vidya
and Krishna.Can you mail them to me.Thanks a lot.
SUBU Ramasubramanian
|> - Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities.
|> Which
|> - are:
|> -
|> - S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
|> - S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
|> - S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
|> - S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
|> - S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
|> - S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
|> -
|> - Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
|> - fruit.
|> -
|>
|> Carnatic music has all these scales as ragas except Bibhas.
I believe this raga is called Rasika Ranjani ( if I recall it
correctly from one of Krishna's postings ). I do not know any
composition in this raga, though. Can one of you net gurus enlighten??
|>
|> S.Vidyasankar
Subu
Arthur Levine
>|> Which
>|> - are:
>|> -
>|> - S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
>|> - S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
>|> - S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
>|> - S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
>|> - S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
>|> - S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
>|> -
I looked at it again. I think there are eight possibilities, and three
of them are anomalous:
1) S R G P D = Bhupali
2) S R g P D = Shivranjani
3) S r G P D = Vibhas (Marwa)
4) S r g P D = :-(
5) S R G P d = :-(
6) S R g P d = :-(
7) S r G P d = Vibhas (Bhairav)
8) S r g P d = Bhupal todi
Perhaps the line of inquiry is defective.
Art
Rajan Parrikar
<deleteed>
>I looked at it again. I think there are eight possibilities, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^you're right!
>three of them are anomalous:
>
>1) S R G P D = Bhupali
>2) S R g P D = Shivranjani
>3) S r G P D = Vibhas (Marwa)
>4) S r g P D = :-(
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^In conjunction with the komal nishad, this scale
yields Raga Saalagvaraali (which, I think, is an import from the
Carnatic pantheon). Jitendra Abhisheki has composed and sung a nice
natyageet in this Raga viz., Gheyi chhand makarand priya ha milind...
>5) S R G P d = :-(
>6) S R g P d = :-(
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This scale is sometimes considered as a
variant of Shivranjini.
>7) S r G P d = Vibhas (Bhairav)
>8) S r g P d = Bhupal todi
>
>Perhaps the line of inquiry is defective.
I still don't see why.
Rajiv Chakravarti
In article <1993May26....@colorado.edu> parr...@csn.org (Rajan Parrikar) writes:
>Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities. Which
>are:
>
>S R G P D S" ----> Raga Bhoopali/Deshkaar
>S R g P D S" ----> Raga Shivranjini
>S r g P d S" ----> Raga Bhoopal Todi
>S r G P D S" ----> Raga Bibhas
>S r G p d S" ----> Raga Bibhas (of Bhairavi ang)
>S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
>
>Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
>fruit.
>
>I had never thought of this until a music rasik asked me via e-mail.
>It seems strange that all the other possibilities have been
>formally recognized but not this one. Why? Melodically, it (the last
>possibility) does make sense.
---------------------------------------------------------
The last raga that you mentioned is apparently called :
Bhupeshwari (source: Hariprasad Chaurasia, talking to his
disciple Radhaprasad (surname= ?? ) ) . There is a Carnatic equivalent,
again, not sung in South indian music also (for some strange reason), and
known as : Simha-naadam.
Melodically, i find the raga very melodious, but have no idea
why it is not popular, or properly recognized....
Regards
--
=====================================================================
Rajiv Chakravarti
Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
University of Texas at Arlington
ra...@utacfd.uta.edu ra...@me.uta.edu
=====================================================================
Krishna Kunchithapadam
:>|> - Take the 5 notes, Sa Re Ga Pa Dha, and there are six possibilities.
That depends on what the inquiry is !!
If you want to be really comprehensive (and consider the vivadi
notes---sudha gandhara and shatsruthi rishaba and dhaivata), then
here goes.
Given the 5 notes Sa-Re-Ga-Pa-Dha, the number of valid scales
are:
r1 (g1/g2/g3) (d1/d2/d3) : 1 x 3 x 3 = 9
r2 (g2/g3) (d1/d2/d3) : 1 x 2 x 3 = 6
r3 g3 (d1/d2/d3) : 1 x 1 x 3 = 3
----------------------------------------------
total : 18
----------------------------------------------
a total of 18.
Okay. If you don't want to consider the vivadi scales (ie.
eliminate the r3/g1/d3 notes), the number of possibilities is:
r1 (g2/g3) (d1/d2) : 1 x 2 x 2 = 4
r2 (g2/g3) (d1/d2) : 1 x 2 x 2 = 4
----------------------------------------------
total : 8
----------------------------------------------
a total of 8 (as Art just pointed out).
Given my rather "sketchy" knowledge of hindusthani music, I will
give below only the Carnatic equivalent of the above 18 scales.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Scale Parent Mela Carnatic Hindustani |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r1 g1 d1 Kanakangi (1) Ranga-Nayaki ??? |
|r1 g1 d2 Vanaspati (4) Tamasvini ??? |
|r1 g1 d3 Tanarupi (6) Gyana-Svarupini ??? |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r1 g2 d1 Hanuma-Todi (8) Bhoopalam Bhoopal-Todi |
|r1 g2 d2 Natakapriya (10) Vijayanti ??? |
|r1 g2 d3 Rupavati (12) Shasanka-Kirani ??? |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r1 g3 d1 Mayamalavagaula (15) Revagupti(*) Vibhas (Bhairav) |
|r1 g3 d2 Chakravaham (16) Rasika-Ranjani Vibhas |
|r1 g3 d3 Hatakambari (18) Varna-Rupini ??? |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r2 g2 d1 Nata-Bhairavi (20) Katyayani ??? |
|r2 g2 d2 Kaharahapriya (22) Sivaranjani Shivaranjani |
|r2 g2 d3 Varunapriya (24) Sevati ??? |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r2 g3 d1 Mara-ranjani (25) Janasammodini ??? |
|r2 g3 d2 Harikambhoji (28) Mohanam Bhoopali/Deskaar |
|r2 g3 d3 Naganandini (30) Vahini ??? |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|r3 g3 d1 Ragavardhini (32) Vipula ??? |
|r3 g3 d2 Vagadisvari (34) Vihavati/Mohanangi(+) ??? |
|r3 g3 d3 Chalanatta (36) Lolakshi ??? |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
(*) There are about 6-7 different names for this scale. I am
giving only the most commonly used one.
(+) mohanangi is a bhashanga raga and uses the d1 note in some
prayogas. otherwise, it is a very good candidate for being
called the shatsruthi rishaba clone of mohanam.
The above table is not the full story. For example, there is a
raga with the same scale as Rasika-ranjani which is considered a
janya of Suryakantham (name of the scale is varna-rupini, yes the
same name as the penta-tonic derivative of the mela hatakambari,
as given in the above table). There are probably similar cases
with the other scales as well.
In a previous posting on this topic, Vidyasankar pointed out that
the vivadi notes in isolation in the purvanga or uttaranga of a
raga cannot occur. The above table says otherwise. A scale with
just the d3 note in the uttaranga is considered perfectly valid
in Carnatic music. There are ragas with scales (s-rgp-d3-S and
s-rgp-n2-S). The two are considered valid _and_ distinct. The
way the scales are (or rather should be) distinguished in
practice is through gamakas and sruthis.
Also, the above table (the assignment of the parent mela scales
in particular) explains why I did not specify the "natural" notes
used to fill in the "missing gaps" in derived scales if the
missing notes are g/n. In the case of r/d and m notes, the lowest
frequency rule is fairly well applicable. In the case of g/n,
(which is what is relevant in our case), the distinction is not
so well specifiable. For the first three scales, the smallest
valued N is used. In the case of bhoopalam (n2 is used although
the rule would require n1 to be used). In the case of revagupti
n3 is used (instead of n1). and so on ... [Who ever said life was
simple.]
Of the 18 scales listed above, I have heard performances of 7 as
ragas. I would'nt be surprised if detailed lakshanas (and
recordings) are known for the remaining scales.
Now, all that remains to be done is for the hindustani gurus
to fill in the missing gaps (atleast for the 3 non-vivadi ragas).
--Krishna
PS: A request to all posters on RMIC. Unless you are posting a
concert announcement or sale/wanted announcement or something
like that, please specify a distribution of "world". This will
help archive your articles better and ensure propagation to non-
us sites (where there surely are many avid rmic readers).
Arthur Levine
>rama...@ecn.purdue.edu (SUBU Ramasubramanian) writes:
>:
>:In article <1u0c46...@gap.caltech.edu>, cco.caltech.edu!vidya (Vidyasankar Sundaresan) writes:
>:|> - S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
>No. The last scale specified above (s r2 g3 p d1 S) is that of
>the rAga jana-sammodini.
Maybe something I'm doing wrong, but I just looked up "Janasammodini"
in W. Kaufmann's *The Ragas of South India*, p.396, and he gives it
under Melakarta 28, with the six-note scale: S R2 G3 P D2 N2. This is seconded
by S. Bhagyalekshmy, *Ragas in Carnatic Music*, p.180.
rasika-ranjani has the somewhat
>complementary scale of (s r1 g3 p d2 S) ie. it has the same scale
>as the hindustani raga bhibas.
>
>In summary, mohanam (bhoopali/deshkaar) with a sudha rishaba is
>rasika-ranjani while mohanam with a sudha dhaivata is jana-
>sammodini.
This analysis of rasika-ranjani agrees with what Kaufmann says. Subba
Rao does not mention either janasammodini or rasika ranjani (too
recent?), and he does not mention a South Indian cognate in hsi
discussion of Marwa-thaat Bibhas.
>
My collection of South Indian pentatonic ragas grows steadily. How
many are there, using, say, commercially available recording as a "control"?
Art
Arthur Levine
> >S R G P d S" ----> ????????????????????????!!!
> >
> >Just what is the last one called? E-mails to net-gurus haven't yielded
> >fruit.
> >
> The last raga that you mentioned is apparently called :
>
> Bhupeshwari (source: Hariprasad Chaurasia, talking to his
>disciple Radhaprasad (surname= ?? ) ) . There is a Carnatic equivalent,
>again, not sung in South indian music also (for some strange reason), and
>known as : Simha-naadam.
The name Bhupeshwari rings a bell. I'll have to check. According to
Kaufmann (the only source of info i could find) , p.492 - simhanadam
goes like this:
S R1 M2 D1 N2 S; S N2 D1 M2 G1 S
No Pancham! Doesn't quite tally with what you were saying. Also note the use of R1
in ascent, and G1 in descent.
Also, I'm not sure that this sort of melodic
behavior squares with what was being said regarding the function of
G1, N1, R3, and D3 as "accessories" -- if I may put it that way, since
the G1 is more autonomous here. Why not call it R2. Theory problems?
Comments welcome as ever.
Incidentally I use the books because I have them. It doesn't mean that
I think they are necessarily correct. Just to be quite clear. What do
people who should know think about Kaufmann's book?
Art
Krishna Kunchithapadam
No. The last scale specified above (s r2 g3 p d1 S) is that of
the rAga jana-sammodini. rasika-ranjani has the somewhat
complementary scale of (s r1 g3 p d2 S) ie. it has the same scale
as the hindustani raga bhibas.
In summary, mohanam (bhoopali/deshkaar) with a sudha rishaba is
rasika-ranjani while mohanam with a sudha dhaivata is jana-
sammodini.
Both rasika-ranjani and jana-sammodini are very new ragas and it
is difficult to find many classical compositions in them.
However, there are a few film songs based on these scales (check
the apprpriate FAQ for such a list, maybe it is time to repost
the list here).
--Krishna
Krishna Kunchithapadam
ale...@epas.utoronto.ca (Arthur Levine) writes:
:
[ long list of headers and followups deleted ]
:
:Maybe something I'm doing wrong, but I just looked up "Janasammodini"
:in W. Kaufmann's *The Ragas of South India*, p.396, and he gives it
:under Melakarta 28, with the six-note scale: S R2 G3 P D2 N2. This is seconded
:by S. Bhagyalekshmy, *Ragas in Carnatic Music*, p.180.
janasammodini is a new raga---the scale that I am refering to was
created by Dr.Balamuralikrishna. Hence, I am not surprised that
Subba Rao does not mention it (although I don't know how recent
Kaufmann's collection is). As far as modern ragas are concerned,
I would consider any book earlier than 1970 or so suspect (or out
of date).
The scale mentioned by Art (another Jana-sammodini, janya of
Harikambhoji) was one of the reasons surrounding a _minor_(*)
controversy over the authorship of the Mara-ranjani derived
scale. The Madras Music Academy, after its customary
deliberations, decided that the two scales are distinct inspite
of their identical names, and that the credit for the innovation
of the new scale goes to Dr.BMK.
The best way to keep track of new scales/ragas in Carnatic music
is to read the Proceedings of the Madras Music Academy. In
addition, the concert reviews during the December "music season"
in Madras are also useful---Subbudu credited T.V.Sankaranarayanan
with the creation of a new raga Surya in one of his reviews 3-4
years back.
(*) I say minor, since the arguments regarding Jana-sammodini
were nothing compared to those in connection with Mahati and
Revati (another pentatonic scale).
:
:My collection of South Indian pentatonic ragas grows steadily. How
:many are there, using, say, commercially available recording as a "control"?
:
Would a hundred be enough ! :-)
I am sure the actual number in vogue in contemporary music is
atleast half that many and recordings are surely available for
many more. If I find time this weekend, I'll try to prepare a
list of pentatonic scales which I have recordings of.
--Krishna
PS: Without any intention to enter into a controversy, the raga
with scale "s r2 g3 p d1 S" IS jana-sammodini, not simha-naadam
or any such. I have mentioned this before on RMIC. Simha-naadam
is a completely different raga, whose scale does not even have
the same notes as jana-sammodini's.
Arthur Levine
Five-note ragas which omit the fourth and seventh degrees
This is a followup to Krishna's very informative postings. I
checked three basic reference books, abbreviated as follows:
B: Bhagyalekshy, S. *Ragas in Carnatic Music*
K: Kaufmann, W. *The Ragas of South India*
S: Subba Rao, S. *Raganidhi*
Each of the 18 scales is numbered. When the "documentation" has no
comment, it means there was no problem -- that is, the sources
confirmed what Krishna said. For several ragas, there was no
documentation at all, or only one source had any info. For other
ragas, such as #11 Shivaranjani and #13 Janasammodini, there were
definite problems (#13 resolved as a new raga, vide Krishna's posting
on this subject)
And as usual, there is the central problem of the "interface"
between the elaborate theoretical system of
South Indian music on the one side, and the reality of musical
performance on the other. How many of the eighteen ragas listed
below are actually part of the living tradition of Carnatic music
as a performing art? (and I'm not talking about a single isolated
performance here)
The "formula" given for each raga shows the configuration in terms
of the sizes of consecutive steps, expressed in semitones. This is
a neutral system which allows ready access to South Indian, North
Indian, and non-Indian frames of reference.
My notation for Hindustani sargam: S r R g G m M P d D n N. I
mention this because some people use upper case "M" to signify
"shuddh Ma" (M1 in Carnatic), and lower case "m" to signify "tivra
ma' (M2 in Carnatic). I think this is a bad idea. I prefer to think
of lower case as implying lower pitch. Sensible?
For those who missed Krishna's posting, the top line of info gives:
1) the inflections of re, ga, and dha; 2) the name & number of the
melakarta; 3) the name of the derived raga; 4) the name of the
Hindustani cognate -- most frequently "???"
------
1.
r1 g1 d1 Kanakangi (1) Ranga-Nayaki ???
Documentation: K, p.9
formula: 11514
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r R P d (none)
2.
r1 g1 d2 Vanaspati (4) Tamasvini ???
Documentation: K, p.31
formula: 11523
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r R P D (none)
3.
r1 g1 d3 Tanarupi (6) Gyana-Svarupini ???
Documentation: none
formula: 11532
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r R P n (none)
4.
r1 g2 d1 Hanuma-Todi (8) Bhoopalam Bhoopal-Todi
Documentation: B, p.111; K, p.56; S, v.1, p.99
formula: 12414
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r g P d (Bhupal todi)
5.
r1 g2 d2 Natakapriya (10) Vijayanti ???
Documentation: S, v.4, p.215: "There is no raga called Vyjayanti in
Karnatak sangeet."
formula: 12423
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r g P D (none)
6.
r1 g2 d3 Rupavati (12) Shasanka-Kirani ???
Documentation: K, p.97
formula: 12432
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r g P n S (none)
7.
r1 g3 d1 Mayamalavagaula (15) Revagupti Vibhas (bv)
Documentation: B, p.292; K, p.127; S, v.4, p.36
formula: 13314
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r G P d (Vibhas - bhairav)
8.
r1 g3 d2 Chakravaham (16) Rasika-Ranjani Vibhas (m)
Documentation: K, p.179
formula: 13323
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r G P D (Vibhas - marwa)
9.
r1 g3 d3 Hatakambari (18) Varna-Rupini ???
Documentation: K, p.198
formula: 13332
Hindustani sargam & rag: S r G P n (Manaranjani, type I)
- invented by Jagannathbuwa Purohit; I wonder if the name "Ma-
na" signifies the South Indian sargam, according to which there is
no "ma" or "ni"? So the name is both a pun and a hidden reference
to Carnatic music.
10.
r2 g2 d1 Nata-Bhairavi (20) Katyayani ???
Documentation: K, p.630 - assigned to Rishabhapriya (#62) with
6-note scale: S R2 G2 M2 P N2
formula: 21414
Hindustani sargam & rag: S R g P d (none)
11.
r2 g2 d2 Kaharahapriya (22) Sivaranjani Shivaranjani
Documentation: - B, p.316: "An ubhaya vakra sampoorna raga derived
from the 64th mela Vachaspati"
- S, v.4, p.96: - Shivaranjani is a sampurna raga
belonging to 64th mela. No compositions. "Raga
Japani recently introduced by Shri V. Ramanathan
resembles Shivaranjani of Hindustani. This scale is
found in the Japanese Koto music."
formula: 21423
Hindustani sargam & rag: SRgPD (Shivranjani)
12.
r2 g2 d3 Varunapriya (24) Sevati ???
Documentation: none (but see Ratipatapriya in #20 Natabhairavi)
formula: 21432
Hindustani sargam & rag: SRgPn (none)
13.
r2 g3 d1 Mara-ranjani (25) Janasammodini ???
Documentation: B, p.180: "A shadava rag derived from the 28th mela
Harikambhoji."
K, p.396 - under #28 Harikambhoji, uses 6-note
scale: S R2 G3 P D2 N2
Krishna points out that there are two ragas with this name;
the one described above is the only one given in my sources,
and it is NOT the raga in question.
formula: 22314
Hindustani sargam & rag: SRGPd (Bhupeshwari)
- this is the rag Rajan Parrikar was looking for;
see my other posting
14.
r2 g3 d2 Harikambhoji (28) Mohanam Bhoopali/Deskaar
Documentation: B, p.246; K, p.353; S, v3, p.157
formula: 22323
Hindustani sargam & rag: SRGPD (Bhoopali)
15.
r2 g3 d3 Naganandini (30) Vahini ???
Documentation: none
formula: 22332
Hindustani sargam & rag: SRGPn (none)
16.
r3 g3 d1 Ragavardhini (32) Vipula ???
Documentation: K, p.459
formula: 31314
Hindustani sargam & rag: SgGPd (none)
17.
r3 g3 d2 Vagadisvari (34) Vihavati/Mohanangi ???
Documentation: none
formula: 31323
Hindustani sargam & rag: SgGPD (none)
18.
r3 g3 d3 Chalanatta (36) Lolakshi ???
Documentation: K, p.476 - gives scale as S R3 G3 M1 D3
formula: 31332
Hindustani sargam & rag: SgGPn (none)
------
- other quotations from Krishna's posting, and my comments:
"In a previous posting on this topic, Vidyasankar pointed out that
the vivadi notes in isolation in the purvanga or uttaranga of a
raga cannot occur. The above table says otherwise. A scale with
just the d3 note in the uttaranga is considered perfectly valid
in Carnatic music. There are ragas with scales (s-rgp-d3-S and
s-rgp-n2-S). The two are considered valid _and_ distinct. The
way the scales are (or rather should be) distinguished in
practice is through gamakas and sruthis."
"Also, the above table (the assignment of the parent mela scales
in particular) explains why I did not specify the "natural" notes
used to fill in the "missing gaps" in derived scales if the
missing notes are g/n. In the case of r/d and m notes, the lowest
frequency rule is fairly well applicable."
- The "lowest frequency rule", I take it, is to use R1, D1, and M1
wherever possible.
"In the case of g/n, (which is what is relevant in our case), the
distinction is not so well specifiable."
- "In the case of Ni only", at the moment. I'm sure the Ga produces
interesting results elsewhere.
"For the first three scales, the smallest valued N is used. In the
case of bhoopalam (n2 is used although the rule would require n1 to
be used). In the case of revagupti n3 is used (instead of n1). and
so on ... [Who ever said life was simple.]"
- Right on. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
"Of the 18 scales listed above, I have heard performances of 7 as
ragas."
- Let me guess which ones. The seven which have "dual citizenship"
are: #4 - Bhoopalam; #7 - Revagupti; #8 - Rasika ranjani; #9 Varna
rupini; #11 - Shivaranjani; #13 - Janasammodini; #14 - Mohanam. Am
I close?
"I wouldn't be surprised if detailed lakshanas (and recordings) are
known for the remaining scales."
- I would be VERY surprised, especially regarding recordings!
--Art
Arthur Levine
>janasammodini is a new raga---the scale that I am refering to was
>created by Dr.Balamuralikrishna. Hence, I am not surprised that
>Subba Rao does not mention it (although I don't know how recent
>Kaufmann's collection is). As far as modern ragas are concerned,
>I would consider any book earlier than 1970 or so suspect (or out
>of date).
This offers an interesting parallel with the project John Campana &
party are wrestling with in Hindustani music. Is it possible to come
up with a rough list of "new" -- post 1970, say -- Carnatic ragas?
>
>The scale mentioned by Art (another Jana-sammodini, janya of
>Harikambhoji) was one of the reasons surrounding a _minor_(*)
>controversy over the authorship of the Mara-ranjani derived
>scale. The Madras Music Academy, after its customary
>deliberations, decided that the two scales are distinct inspite
>of their identical names, and that the credit for the innovation
>of the new scale goes to Dr.BMK.
Why do you suppose he called it that? Wasn't that a bit nasty of him?
Didn't he realize he was going to cause a traffic jam?
>:My collection of South Indian pentatonic ragas grows steadily. How
>:many are there, using, say, commercially available recording as a "control"?
>:
>
>Would a hundred be enough ! :-)
I think 155 would be just about perfect!
Thank you,
Art
Arthur Levine
>>4) S r g P D = :-(
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^In conjunction with the komal nishad, this scale
>yields Raga Saalagvaraali (which, I think, is an import from the
>Carnatic pantheon). Jitendra Abhisheki has composed and sung a nice
>natyageet in this Raga viz., Gheyi chhand makarand priya ha milind...
>
>>5) S R G P d = :-(
>>6) S R g P d = :-(
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This scale is sometimes considered as a
>variant of Shivranjini.
- Bhupeshwari was suggested for your "mystery rag". I have in front of
me a cassette by Mani Prasad (CBS / Swarashree PMP 00001) which has
Bhupeshwari on it, and it is indeed the scale you are after. The liner
notes say only: "This is Panditji's self-composed raga." Another one
for John's "Rag Kosh", I guess.
So we seem to have solved the immediate problem, although,
because the performance is unique (or rare, certainly) this
may be a case where "practice" follows "theory" (you don't happen to
be a friend of Mani Prasad's, do you? :-). However, all
of our snooping around produced two more scales which don't really
belong anywhere. (Notwithstanding the "slight adjustments" suggested
by Rajan above - Shivranjani with a different sixth, Salagvarali
without the seventh). Now what?
>>Perhaps the line of inquiry is defective.
>
>I still don't see why.
Maybe I don't see why either. Your purpose was to resolve an anomaly.
But the anomaly was one which you created by the way you dealt with the scale
material. Your basic assumption was that the best procedure for
generating scalar families was to alter the R, G, D to produce all
available permutations - namely 8, if we avoid the Carnatic vivadi
notes: R3, D3, G1, N1.
Now the only information I have about how scale materials are handled
within the actual tradition of Indian music theory, specifically with
respect to generating "related" or "cognate" ragas, is through
"murchana". This is a concept through which even relative novices
learn to relate such rags as Bhoopali and Malkauns, even though, on
the surface of things Bhoopali has Ga, and Malkauns doesn't; Bhoopali
has Pa, and Malkauns doesn't, etc.
So I think the whole murchana approach offers a more grounded and
time-tested way of thinking about the inter-relatedness of scales. It
is also an approach which offers some interesting resonances (pardon
the pun) with
musical thought of the European Middle Ages. But that, as they say, is
another story ....
Regards
Art
Ramesh Gangolli
>4) S r g P D = :-(
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^In conjunction with the komal nishad, this scale
>yields Raga Saalagvaraali (which, I think, is an import from the
>Carnatic pantheon). Jitendra Abhisheki has composed and sung a nice
>natyageet in this Raga viz., Gheyi chhand makarand priya ha milind...
>
Saalaga Varali was introduced to Hindustani music by SN Ratanjankar, who
composed two pieces for it a vilambit ektaal piece "aaja badhaayee baaje",
and the other a druta teetaal piece "sumara saheba sultaan-e-aalam". The
inspiration for the Raga is indeed the Karnatak raga Varali; "saalaga"
(meaning cognate or conjoint) is intended to suggest that it is not an
exact adaptation.
Both these compositions are very nice. The druta composition has been sung
by Malini Rajurkar on a commercially released cassette. I also seem to
recall that Parveen Sultana had sung a composition in this raga on a
commercial release, but I cannot remember clearly if it was the same
composition. These two compositions and the one mentioned by Rajan are the
only ones that I believe are reasonably well known. I have heard one other,
"araj suno, suno meree" a ling time ago. Are there others in this beautiful
raga that netters know of?
--
Ramesh Gangolli (gang...@math.washington.edu)
Dept. of Mathematics GN-50
University of Washington
Seattle WA 98195.
John Campana
>
.
>Both these compositions are very nice. The druta composition has been sung
>by Malini Rajurkar on a commercially released cassette. I also seem to
>recall that Parveen Sultana had sung a composition in this raga on a
>commercial release, but I cannot remember clearly if it was the same
>composition. These two compositions and the one mentioned by Rajan are the
>only ones that I believe are reasonably well known. I have heard one other,
>"araj suno, suno meree" a ling time ago. Are there others in this beautiful
>raga that netters know of?
Parveen Sultana has indeed sung this raag. The bandish was
Ratanjankar's. The only other piece I have is by Zarin Daruwala. What
a marvelous blend of Ahir Bhairav and Bilaskhani.
John Campana