Swara Identification Exercises, Instrumental: Post Answers

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 06:49

I think so (although I dont have what I wrote down with me now

) - for #3 I was interpreting the start as N N S (where both N have gamakas) - but I think I was getting the same breakdown for others.

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:50

vk, cmlover - are you guys still in on this one?

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 20:09

Arun
I am thinking! But have no clue yet. You lost me somewhere. I followed Suji's svara posts but am missing the pattern to find a link among the three 'threats'. The tube light may flash as the discussion proceeds. Go on unless unless VK has some bright ideas. Perhaps Uday will critique when you are ready

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 20:17

cmlover: Some more clues

1. All 3 ragas are closely allied Two are very well known and the third one is not exactly rare. The first job is to get the ragas.
2. They are all considered mangaLa ragas.
3. They differ slightly in raga structure in the pUrvAnga in avarOhaNa, which is what is highlighted here in this sample. But one raga does have a vishEsha prayOga in avarOhaNa in uttarAnga which makes it more different - but that prayOga is "rare" - so much so that one prominent composer has avoided it in his compositions

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 20:59

Somehow my mind was flitting around madhyamavati, sriragam, brindavana saranga though the svara disclosures did not fit..
Am I any closer?

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:05

Yes closer indeed. You got 2 out of 3. You got the 2 very popular ones. For the other one - suji offered an indirect clue in one of her posts. That is one is not a bhAshanga raga unlike your other

. It is also not as popular

Also - do you know which of the 2 samples matches the 2 you mention?

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:22

Let me also throw in manirangu

The last one should be madhyamavat
The first one closer to brindavani
(going by gut feelings...)

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:28

you are still off by one raga. You missed the more popular one, one which holds a high status

. You got the swaras for #1 - how would it fit brindAvani?

You are right in the order for madyamavati.

Now the next step is to understand why. The swara breakdown tells us why.

Arun

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:28

cmlover wrote:Let me also throw in manirangu
The last one should be madhyamavat
The first one closer to brindavani
(going by gut feelings...)

Did I not give a clue- bell rang for the second one?
Also the #3 raga shows in the middle?

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:28

Third clue? presence of occasional D

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:39

Sri, of course!

-Ramakriya

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:41

Of course the gandaharam in 1 rules out Brindavani!
Shri needs MRGRS due to its vakra

Suji
I ring the bells only with madhyamavat or Surutti

The latter has no place here :0

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:41

This exercise was great.
Infact the first raga I guessed was manirangu. The raga contour is so well presented in just those few swaras that it took me directly to Jaya jaya padmanabha. The stretches on N, S, . The MPM sounds very nice. If you listen to DKJ rendition with kalpanaswaras you will find all the ingradients of this raga.

The first one too I guessed inspite of glitches in swara breakdown. I started humming endaro, sri vishwa...and ramayana ragamalika.
The third one I did not work much on it, but it resolved itself when first one got its place.

This exercise shows the difficulty in guessing raga in few swaras but shows how our attention span is.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:50

Suji
jaya jaya padmanabha always takes me to ecstatic sarasangi

But I know what you mean!

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:02

Of course I missed the classical P,MGRS where usually the mridangists get excited but not in this case

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:14

The main objective was to illustrate the differences between these three ragas in structure itself and in a short span i.e. how the raga swaroopa differences are present even in short snippets.

manirangu - I get it mostly in mgr itself and I think there is even a mr where the r has a flavor of ga - I hear this in alapana. The mpmgr in the sample rings so much of mannirangu.

Sri - the g is more pronounced and of course r-g-r stands out. In both manirangu and sri, the ri is emphasized many times but is flat.

madyamavati - the ri is emphasized here too but is most notablly NOT flat. There is a also good gamaka on ni (more deeper kampita than in sri?). You see the nice gamakas in ri and ni in the sample. I think there is also a flavor of ni which has slight shades of n3 as anuswara.

Oh btw the krithis whose kalpanaswara sections were used in the sample:

maNirangu - mAmava paTTAbhirAma (DKP)
Sri - nAma kusumamula (MDR)
madyamAvati - pAlincu kAmAkshi (MDR)

(i should really mention the violinists but i dont know. I think SrI is cAlakuDi)

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:40

arunk wrote:madyamavati - the ri is emphasized here too but is most notablly NOT flat. There is a also good gamaka on ni (more deeper kampita than in sri?). You see the nice gamakas in ri and ni in the sample. I think there is also a flavor of ni which has slight shades of n3 as anuswara.

I think dIrgha kampita would be a good description of R, M and N in madhyamAvati

-Ramakriya

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:47

Alll the three are highly popular. Why did you discriminate by throwing a wrong cue

I kick myself for not recognizing DKP's maamava which I have heard a thousand times directly from her

I think one will fail to notice the differences in all three if they are sung seamlessly together. The thom thom of the mridangam is distracting but they do blend!

Arun/Ramakriya
Where are your raga lakshnas coming from? Is it SSP?

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:50

Arun
Do you also have the audio of the vocal renderings of these phrases?

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 23:51

i can dig them up (dont have them readily available now) but my guess is they are not going to be identical to the violinist.

Btw, the DKP mamava is on musicindiaonline (very nice one with alapana, kalpanaswara and a short tani).

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 24 Oct 2007, 23:53

cmlover wrote:Where are your raga lakshnas coming from? Is it SSP?

Mine are like hearsay i.e. after my own understanding on correlating between what I have read and what I hear in renditions.

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 00:12

'atta boy!
You should start writing a monograph based on your keen observations.
Hundred years from now they will quote ASP (Arun's Sampradaya Pradarshini) (or Arun Self Proclaimed (on the QT)

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 25 Oct 2007, 00:35

ayyayyo. That would be premature.

But even so - I think it would be called AKP. No - not Arun K's Pradarshini, but aRakoRai kattukkuTTi's pradarshini

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 00:50

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 25 Oct 2007, 07:29

Hallo CMLovers,and Arun

Sorry for the interruption.
About sri Ragam , I would request honourable members to view and listen to one of my kritis in Shree Ragam , beginning with "Shree RAa gavendhra satguru dhyAnamE" as pallavi line in which the flavour of the Ragam is depicted with the unique , syllable
REE ri ga ri sA sa.
being a follower of Thyagaraja school, I have not used the supposed to be Solfa prayogam PA DA NI PA MA any where. since my strong contention is that even without the so called pa da ni pa ma prayogam Shree raaga's beauty can be depicted without deviation whatsoever.
The link ref:www.karnatik.com/c3532.shtml
Ramaraj

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 08:21

Nice composition indeed Ramraj!
Of course PDNPM ought to be used sparingly if at all. On the otherhand Thyagaraja completely eschewed dhaivatam ( check endaro..). I am not too sure your rendering is free of dhaivatam!

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 25 Oct 2007, 08:49

arunk wrote:vk, cmlover - are you guys still in on this one?

I have been too busy to spend time with your three raga clip, Arun. Till today, I have not been reading the answers thread on the hope I may be able to spend time on it. I still have not read the answers and I will try to do the exercise but if not, I will read up. You all can go to the next exercise if you like.

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 25 Oct 2007, 09:51

CMl ji I agree with you Sir, where as I have not even sparingly used pdnpm, which may please be noted.
I have not used Deivatam at all in Sri Ragam.As per me ,
SA RI MA PA NI SA ; SA NI PA MA RI GA RI SA will suffice to depict this great raaga.
Even in the famous VarNam Sami ninnEkori , I prefer in the cjittai portion
sa ni paa ni pa ma ri ga ri sa or sa ni pa sa ni pa ma ri ga ri sa for the sahityamportion
pa..su pa thi sa... (SAmi) with odukkal deployed craftily will give a rhythamic beauty
to that particular phrase.
Ramaraj

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 10:44

Again in the navaragamalika varnam there is in the sri raga sectionthe solitary use of PDNP and it would not hurt at all if it was PS' NP !

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 25 Oct 2007, 14:31

CML ji ,
You have exactly hit the nail at it's head.You might have noticed that the chastity of Sri ragam is kept in tact.
Ramaraj

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 25 Oct 2007, 19:33

Hi sri ramaraj,

I listened to your composition. Very nice! I like the usage of the raga mudra here too.

I feel differently from you and cmlover as I actually like the p-d-n-m prayOga in Sriragam. To me, it seems to have a nice unique effect - sort of like g-m-p-g-r-s in nATakurinji (although lot more common in nATAkurinji compared to p-d-n-p-m in Sriragam).

The p-d-n-p-m to me is like finding an occasional drAkshai (raisin) in a spoon of a already very tasty pAyasam

. It won't have the same effect if it is there in every other spoon - but your taste buds find it occasionally, it is quite nice.

Do I require it and miss it if not there? I cant say that either as I love tyAgarAja's compositions which have avoided it. But when it is there, I do relish it. When I practice the navarAgamAlika varnam, in the Sriragam section, the part I enjoy the most is the part that has p-d-n-p-m.

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 21:29

Arun
I have nothing against it. But my point is ( as well as Ramraj's I believe) that
Shree can retain her dhaivatvam without dhaivatam

Now I would like you and Suji to listen to the following and say whether bells still keep ringing

http://www.mediafire.com/?2mtwinnmmtq

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 25 Oct 2007, 21:40

cmlover wrote:Now I would like you and Suji to listen to the following and say whether bells still keep ringing
http://www.mediafire.com/?2mtwinnmmtq

I hear P, MRS. G is eschewed here.

I'm with Arun in "pdnpm" effect in Sri. Ah! that comparison to payasam is making me..... we do have a saliva donation collection camp today here which is timely

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 25 Oct 2007, 21:41

cmlover wrote:Arun
I have nothing against it. But my point is ( as well as Ramraj's I believe) that
Shree can retain her dhaivatvam without dhaivatam

I got your point(s) indeed. Tastes do differ and for my taste, I dont see the need to make a big deal about nature of Sri without it - that it is fine without it etc.

Like I said it is indeed a great, majestic raga even without it - and omitting it does not diminish that. But for me, when it is used, the bright sparkle of Sri has another dimension to its hue - albeit briefly.

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 25 Oct 2007, 21:57

interesting cmlover - you took out g. And also I think that slide to pa has been changed-to/replaced-with slide to ma - s/mrs?

Are you trying see if you can get one of the other ragas by doctoring stuff and if not - why? If it is why not madyamavati, then the ri is straight here and the doctored slide to s /m also looks un-madhamavati (when I sing it going sa-ma does not fit - sa-ri-ma where last two are shaken is more like it). Also m-r-s again with flat ri.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 Oct 2007, 23:53

You got it! Each raga has its unique characteristics. Just changing a note will not destroy the raga characteristic. The loss of the gandharam does not morph manirangu to madhyamavati clearly! Just as changing the pratimadhyamam in Kalyani to shuddha will not make it shankarabharanam! As much as we are trying to develop 'svara sense' in these exercises we also should focus on the wholistic raga concept.

You should explain sometime why each of these threats have their individuality in spite of their similarity in 'notes'. That is the reason for my debunking the dhaivatam in Sri which is non essential.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 26 Oct 2007, 00:11

cmlover wrote:Just changing a note will not destroy the raga characteristic

Did it not here? Manirangu without gandharam (especially) would not be madyamavati, but it also certainly is no longer manirangu.

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 26 Oct 2007, 00:15

cmlover wrote:You should explain sometime why each of these threats have their individuality in spite of their similarity in 'notes'.

The fundamental "error" here is that treating swaras as notes - as in always flat. They are not. They have their (contextual) gamakas which sort of gets lost in our labelling. Also, the raga structure somehow leads towards specific gamakas in specific phrases -this part is still an enigma (atleast for me)

But let us take the swaras are not notes part. What if they were? If madyamavati and manirangu were all sung/played completely flat and interpreted like a true western scale (i.e. no vishesha patterns), then if you take a scalar-manirangu, and remove the "ga', you will end up with scalar-madyamavati.

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 26 Oct 2007, 02:05

Arun, I am with you on what you are conveying. CML may after all be on the same camp, though may be playing devil's advocate for learning purposes

I do not want to go back to the SM-Kiravani discussion, but even in your stripped down scalar example, if certain notes are elongated only in one raga as opposed to the other ( no gamakam still ) and certain swaras are rest points in one raga vs the other, they can still have some minimal identity differences.. Possible?

CML, taking away notes do not necessarily make it another raga, but as Arun said, you are essentially taking away something from that raga even if it still that raga. If I am attracted to Sri with 'dha', if you take dha out I will call it Sri, no doubt, but with some prayogas and characteristics missing. So the question to ask is, if Sri complete without the 'dha'. That may be a personal value and aesthetic judgement rather than anything else.

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 26 Oct 2007, 03:26

So the question to ask is, if Sri complete without the 'dha'. That may be a value and aesthetic judgement rather than anything else.

Yes it is complete without D.
The pdnpm is just one finale phrase to some compositions.

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 26 Oct 2007, 07:20

DearCML, Arun, and others
Though it may be attributed to opening yet another proverbial 'PANDORA'S BOX"
I FEEL IT APPROPRIATE to expatiate certain facts that emerged from the debates during Dec.season , (years back) held at the music academy,morning sessions.
pdnipama,( in shree ragam)as per certain knowledgeable quarters was a deliberate later year insertion.The episode goes like this.
As per dhikshitar school , who followed the venkatamahin mELakartha scheme, shree ragam was adopted nay, alternated , for KARAHARAPRIYA., which according to kadapayadi skankhya system is fullfledged sampoorna mEla Ragam.(22)There are certain quarters who swear that this is the reason why there is no dhikshitar krit AVAILABLEi in the raga K.H.PRIYA , and according Diksh.school , shri is the parrallel of K.H.Priya
a.ny way "The DEIVATWAM"(as rightly opined by CML ji)rules SUPREME and dhaivatam even if sparingly used , ads only color to the Divine Ragam that is SHREE RAAGAM.( as opined by Sri Arun

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 26 Oct 2007, 08:02

Mr.Arun,and others,
Please view and listen to my kriti in the raga Nattakuranji "GAMAKAEZHIL KAMAZHUM
NAADHAPRIYE' to have some idea as to how I have handled this raga.
Ramaraj
Link Ref:www.karnatik.com/c3485.shtml

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 26 Oct 2007, 08:27

Dear Ramaraj: Thanks for the explanation and I understand.

One point to consider is: What about the fate then of that very nice sounding 'pa da ni pa ma' usage especially when combined with the rest of the Shri prayogas.It does not at all matter to me if someone calls that Shri or something else but I personally would not want that to go away ( not that I expect it to go away ). We can just call it a variation on Shri, used by some composers including Patnam. So, as long people do not get written up for using that sequence, the current state of affairs is OK, don't you think?.

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 26 Oct 2007, 09:18

Vasanthakokilam ji,
Whatever said and done,It is quite pleasing to hear variations that add color to the conventional get-up of of great Ragam SHREE There is no second opinion at all.The
point I want to stress is that the pATAntara variations have brought along with it certain variable opinions too that attracted controversial points for debate.In the music academy sessions there used to be verbal live wire wars during raaga lakshana discussions.
As per DR.V.V.SriVatsa (Musicologist and seceretary, and vageyakara)M.D.has one kriti in k.H.priya but it is not available for public since it is kept in safe custody by Dikshitar-parampara family members at Manali a near by village to chennai
Ramaraj.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 26 Oct 2007, 11:45

Ramaraj ji, I understand what you are saying and I agree. Thanks.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 26 Oct 2007, 20:27

Ramraj
Thanks for that sideline story on sri at MA. It makes sense that MD did not explore KHpriya since he was satisfied with sri with all the notes.But we are eternally indebted to Thyagaraja for building a palace for KHpriya. It is a jewel in his crown! If only MD had heard any one of them when in his ecstasy he would have poured out a flood of kritis in that raga. Perhaps one of those is trapped in the vaults

Arun
I am surprised you in your conservatism still don't recognize Manirangu in spite of the 'amputation'. My point is that a raga may morph by subtle changes like addition and deletion of notes or even gamakas and a true 'CM Lover' should with open mind appreciate the 'new comers'. Also vaggeyakaras should be ready to compose and foster those new-born offsprings. Let us make liberal use of dhaivatam in sri which while retaining its maternal 's(t)rItva' will be an added glory to the repertoires of CM. After all
Sree gave birth to Manmata the most beautiful being in the univers as glorified by Psivan in hsi immortal lines 'manmathanai InRa thAyE..' (ref 'mahalakShmi in shankarabharaNam)

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 26 Oct 2007, 20:43

cmlover - you cannot take ga out and still expect it to be manirangu

! What you were going for may work sometime but depending which swara in which context. Also, I am of the firm belief that the melodic individuality of the raga is very much dependent on the order of its swaras (as defined by structure) being followed most of the time. You can skip swaras here and there, but you omit one completely, then the raga individuality is lost and it takes another one. Now one can it still "resembles the original raga" (you know like allied ragas) but cant stay it is still the original raga despite the loss. Here (IMO) manirangu's melodic character is largely dependent on mgrs - and you changed exactly that. That is why I said it is not manirangu.

Sri Ramaraj - thanks. Actually from what I read all early works make Sri sampUrNa only (i dont have my reference with me now). But they dont necessarily call out how da is used - they mention the r-g-r vakra prayoga I believe. Yesterday I was thinking and I came to the same conclusion as vk. Just like there are 2 legitimate versions of Anandabhairavi today - one with G3 (Syama Sastry), and one without (dIkshitar), we can simply say there are 2 legitimate versions of Sri - one with dha, and one without.

Arun

vageyakara · Post by **vageyakara** » 26 Oct 2007, 20:51

Dear CMLji,
One singular mute point , ( nay, Fact) is that Both MD.and Thyagaraja belong to the same period.It may be due to the singular point that theyu adopted different mElakartha schems,at the same time most of the ragams , if not scales, are almost identical , excepting the names given to them and prayogas imbibed in them.e.g Kanakaangi for kanakAmbari etc., The were great souls indeed.! They really had foresight and left an eternal legacy behind for the later generations to cherish .
Please view my e.mail
Ramaraj

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 26 Oct 2007, 21:05

maybe Sri. Ramaraj and/or Uday can offer insights on this:

The R-P combination seems to make sense in manirangu (and common like rpmgr) but never in madyamavati? Am I correct? Also s-m (not sure about manirangu) - but does not fit madyamavati? I dont know but when I try it looks like omitting R or M does not seem to be preferable in madyamavati.

Arun

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 26 Oct 2007, 22:04

arunk wrote:maybe Sri. Ramaraj and/or Uday can offer insights on this:

The R-P combination seems to make sense in manirangu (and common like rpmgr) but never in madyamavati? Am I correct? Also s-m (not sure about manirangu) - but does not fit madyamavati? I dont know but when I try it looks like omitting R or M does not seem to be preferable in madyamavati.

Arun

RP can be followed by MRS
like RPM MRS (in madhyamAvati)
I think.