Thoughts on Thaats

Classical Music of North India
Ranganayaki
Posts: 1040
Joined: 02 Jan 2011, 06:23
x 26
x 26

#76 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Ranganayaki » 14 Mar 2018, 21:38

RSR wrote:
14 Mar 2018, 11:17
Ranganayaki » 14 Mar 2018, 07:04
HM: 7 swaras, 12 distinct swarasthanas. Apart from sa and pa which are fixed, all the other swaras have 2 swarasthanas each.CM: 7 swaras, 16 sometimes overlapping swarasthanas. Ri, ga, dha and ni have three swarasthanas each that may overlap, and ma has two.
-----------------------------------------
I know about that.
Ok, I was only speaking to the wider group and correcting what I had said wrong. It was not addressed to you.


I exclude all the 46 janaka ragams that need breaking the rule.
First I'm not sure which 46. I thought you meant to exclude only 40.

So are you saying there should be no Vivadi ragas? But they exist in songs. Are you saying that Ganamurthe should not be sung? Are you saying that you want to change the musical convention that has developed? I can understand if you say that some ragas are only scales and you don't like them. You can exclude them in yournlistenig and some musicians exclude them in their performances. But if you want to limit carnatic music to what hm has, you could just listen only to hm.. your stance seems absurd to me (without meaning any disrespect, honestly) and I feel confused. Am I missing something? Why do you want to negate the entire difference between cm and hm?
That will bring some nice ragams from CM to HM'
How? If these nice ragams haven't already been adopted, how will a new system which removes OTHER ragams make the north adopt your nice ragas?
But, if we analyze the CM ragams usually composed and sung, we will find that quite a few of the janaka ragams and derivatives are lacking in musicality.


So? Don't listen to them! It may even be that no one is singing them! I don't understand the need to change the entire convention or how you propose tonsingle-handedly achieve it.

If you are actually trying to explain cm to your hm friend, you seem to be insisting on making cm fit in your hm structure. How does that inform your friend? Then he already knows what you have to teach him anyway. Again this seems so absurd that I feel I must be wrong, I'm missing something!

-----------------------
To put it simply, there are only 12 swarams and swarasthanams that can be written down.
They are S r R g G m M P d D n N S
S = Shadjama
So nowyou are not making the distinction between swaras and swarasthanas. Why have two terms for the same thing?

Also, you say there are only 12 swarasthanas that can be "written down," whatever that means, yet you proceeded to list 16.
S = Shadjama
Just a friendly note that the word is Shadjam, and not Shadjama. If you are removing the last M, which I often do, it would be Shadja, and not Shadjama. The word does not resemble " Madhyama" or "Panchama."

So in a nutshell, I don't follow what you are trying or wishing to do. Are you arguing for a completely new musical system that negates much of the old and tries to fit it into the hm mold?


[/quote]From this, your subsequent explanation, becomes unnecessary. No offense meant. [/quote]

None taken. But the way I see it, your entire exercise makes no sense. And i keep feeling that I am not following you fully, you can't possibly be wanting to say something absurd. Which is why I am even writing back. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother to write back to your view! Also, you said "subsequent explanation." Your view is so completely different, I'm not sure which part of what I said is acceptable to you.
Last edited by Ranganayaki on 14 Mar 2018, 23:54, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#77 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 14 Mar 2018, 23:08

@76->RN-> I need to prepare a table for all the 72 MK using HM notation. Will do that tomorrow and share.
Sri.VK has answered the doubt raised by me nicely. I circumvent, by avoiding all the vivadi scales. as HM has done.
So, no need for things like r3,g3,d3 and n3. I would suggest to the HM friend that they can adopt a few more perfect sampoorna mk and their janya ragams. . I am now preparing a chart for 100 popular CM ragams using the HM notation only. This is purely for personal use.
0 x

Ranganayaki
Posts: 1040
Joined: 02 Jan 2011, 06:23
x 26
x 26

#78 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Ranganayaki » 14 Mar 2018, 23:54

Sachi_R wrote:
14 Mar 2018, 21:18
For me the 22 shruti scale of Dr Oke brings a common ground to map the "scales" of HM and CM.
What is the need to map the scales? We have successfully appropriated a lot from hm, and have been able to accommodate all of it without trouble. There is no restriction on doing this further. I think we should have proper research to actually understand the two systems in their current forms in a language that is accessible to most of us, like English. We need more lecdems to make correspondences and differences clear and common knowledge to all Rasikas. So that we can move freely between the two systems easily.

It's as though now that you have one Europe, you should somehow try to fit all its languages into one mold. But if a large number of people are multilingual in that context, ease can be managed without loss.
But the melakarta scheme is scale based, and that's the current discussion.
The melakarta scheme just classifies what exists in a certain logic and makes available the complete number of combinations. It does not dictate that you should practice what doesn't appeal, and most people know that. Not does it describe gamakas or any realities of the ragas. But it is not out of the question that some beauty is found in obscure melakarta ragas and some composer can tap it and release new beauty and create ragaswaroopa.
Mr Vinayakam has created a gamaka "box" notation that maps Carnatic gamakas. This was discussed some time ago.

I feel the 22 shruti scale implementable in CM combined with the gamaka box will meet many needs.
Could you please explain the needs that you feel will be met? A link might suffice if you have already discussed them.
0 x

Ranganayaki
Posts: 1040
Joined: 02 Jan 2011, 06:23
x 26
x 26

#79 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Ranganayaki » 15 Mar 2018, 00:05

If no source described the concept of "thaat" fully and correctly and if I could find only one source hidden a bit deeper that clearly stated that a thaat cannot be sung, we suffer from a poverty of sources at such a fundamental level. Sources like Wikipedia freely confuse the concept of raga and thaat. This was true wherever I looked. How can such a fundamental piece of information not be known widely?

If we are struggling at this level to understand what exists, why speak of changing the systems before we clearly understand what's available?
0 x

Ranganayaki
Posts: 1040
Joined: 02 Jan 2011, 06:23
x 26
x 26

#80 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Ranganayaki » 15 Mar 2018, 00:07

I plan to read those pdfs over time, they seem to fulfill this need. I hope I am able to understand how to navigate through them from beginning to end.
0 x

Ranganayaki
Posts: 1040
Joined: 02 Jan 2011, 06:23
x 26
x 26

#81 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Ranganayaki » 15 Mar 2018, 00:11

Rsr, I asked you so many questions that you haven't answered. But if you don't want to that's fine. I think like most discussions here it leads nowhere, not even to understanding! This has just been two people talking in two different tracks. I hope I have the sense not to bother with such stuff in the future.
1 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#82 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 15 Mar 2018, 12:26

@81->RN->(Madam/Sir)-> i managed to read the pdf from cover to cover and having some issues with the notations. though, it is useful. Did you read Sri.Vasanthakokilam's replies, in the earlier part of this thread? I have answered all your questions. Kindly have a look at
https://sites.google.com/site/cmhm4me/h ... a-keyboard
I am just 30% through the work. MK shown in red are excluded by me. Those in green are accepted among the ten scales in HM. Those in blue are the MK that could be included in HM. The criterion is that there should be no occurence of rR gG mM dD nN . in successive places in aro or avaro.
It takes time to rewrite the notes for all the 72 first and then the janyaragams based on perfect sampoorna ragams. So give me time. It is just for my personal use. I just wanted to know, if such a representation will break CM totally. Sri.VK has assured that except when singing swarams , it wont. ....
As for Sachi Sir's note on gamakam, my understanding is that there is no gamakam in HM.
Have a look at another of my sites, just begun and making little progress because of lack of time and perhaps energy. http://sites.google.com/site/carnaticgems
Do not take anything personally. What is the harm in approaching things from a different angle? I did not proceed from grammar to literature.The other way round. See my site http://sites.google.com/site/dkpattammalsongs. One can love these songs even without knowing anything about the ragam and grammar stuff. Very often , we miss the wood for the trees. Wrong approach.
I have never bothered to give aro-avaro of any of the saongs or the MK scale or chkara stuff. It is just unnecessary jargon. Sri.VK puts it simply as 'chinna ri, periya ri'. Simple. What grandiose and pompous names! For a few days, let us take a break. Not that thousands of people are following this thread after all!
0 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#83 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 17 Mar 2018, 00:01

Ranganayaki
Rsr, I asked you so many questions that you haven't answered
Madam, Just now prepared the page given below.
Kindly see that . I think, it should clarify what I am trying to say.
https://sites.google.com/site/cmhm4me/h ... m-notation
0 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#84 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 17 Mar 2018, 13:24

Very informative and plain -speaking posts on janya ragams and parent scale.
How some ( even many) in the 72 MK scheme are unfit for janya ragams.
viewtopic.php?t=2982
Thank you Sirs.
0 x

MadhavRayaprolu
Posts: 43
Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 13:04
x 3

#85 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by MadhavRayaprolu » 28 Mar 2018, 10:45

RSR wrote:
19 Feb 2018, 16:10
In short, can we substitute g2, g3,n2, n3 with g1,g2,n1,n2 respectively as in HM?
Yes, except you get 32 non-vivadi melas instead of 72. I actually like the simplicity of 32 parent ragas as a replacement for the 10 thaats.

But at some level neither thaats nor 32 non vivadis nor 72 melas are overly impressive to me. First off, this classification has nothing to do with aesthetics and it is purely for organization based on notes as people pointed out. It also do a poor job of organizing ragas - given that ragas could have different notes in arohana and avarohana, vakra prayogas, child ragas can belong to multiple parents, etc etc.

Perhaps the main benefit we got out of the melakartha scheme is that it provided a clever way to notate and explore the possibilities of vivadis. It took an explicit stance that if you are going to have 2 Ri’s, you can’t also have a Ga etc. That is brilliant indeed and we have some wonderful vivadi ragas that perhaps may not have been discovered without this scheme. But even this is not comprehensive. Eg; it doesn’t provide a way to have 2 Ma’s and avoid G. I don’t see anything fundamentally wrong with a scale like: S R2 M1 M2 P D2 N3. Sing avarohanam of this scale and it even sounds beautiful, people sing it all the time in HM’s Shuddha Sarang. As for the 32 non vivadis, that is too simple of a combination problem to give any credit to the melakartha scheme.

My overall take is, while CM has done a much better job in classifying scales compared to HM or Western music, it is still unimpressive by modern standards. I’d love to see classification based on raga aesthetics and/or a mathematically more comprehensive organization of ragas. (Sorry about the negativity in my post).
1 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#86 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 28 Mar 2018, 14:08

MadhavRayaprolu wrote:
28 Mar 2018, 10:45
RSR wrote:
19 Feb 2018, 16:10
In short, can we substitute g2, g3,n2, n3 with g1,g2,n1,n2 respectively as in HM?
Yes, except you get 32 non-vivadi melas instead of 72. I actually like the simplicity of 32 parent ragas as a replacement for the 10 thaats.

But at some level neither thaats nor 32 non vivadis nor 72 melas are overly impressive to me. First off, this classification has nothing to do with aesthetics and it is purely for organization based on notes as people pointed out. It also do a poor job of organizing ragas - given that ragas could have different notes in arohana and avarohana, vakra prayogas, child ragas can belong to multiple parents, etc etc.

Perhaps the main benefit we got out of the melakartha scheme is that it provided a clever way to notate and explore the possibilities of vivadis. It took an explicit stance that if you are going to have 2 Ri’s, you can’t also have a Ga etc. That is brilliant indeed and we have some wonderful vivadi ragas that perhaps may not have been discovered without this scheme. But even this is not comprehensive. Eg; it doesn’t provide a way to have 2 Ma’s and avoid G. I don’t see anything fundamentally wrong with a scale like: S R2 M1 M2 P D2 N3. Sing avarohanam of this scale and it even sounds beautiful, people sing it all the time in HM’s Shuddha Sarang. As for the 32 non vivadis, that is too simple of a combination problem to give any credit to the melakartha scheme.

My overall take is, while CM has done a much better job in classifying scales compared to HM or Western music, it is still unimpressive by modern standards. I’d love to see classification based on raga aesthetics and/or a mathematically more comprehensive organization of ragas. (Sorry about the negativity in my post).
============================================
Absolutely Brilliant , Sir, Thank you.
(Sorry about the negativity in my post).
Not at all, Sir! Yours is the most aesthetic ( vis a vis mathematical/ conventional) understanding and positive post.
and paves the way for true development of both HM and CM.
---
just an observation. I find that only about 20 janaka ragams ( including the ten in HM) are parents of pleasing ragams. Though, as you rightly point out, it is not always easy to find the parent scale of a janya ragam ,unambiguously. However, I am basing myself on the book by Subba Rao, and am preparing a list of all the CM ragams and their parent as mentioned by him. May take a month's time. Thank you again for a thoughtful input to discussion.
0 x

Vayoo Flute
Posts: 42
Joined: 15 Jan 2018, 00:53
x 4
x 6

#87 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by Vayoo Flute » 29 Mar 2018, 20:33

MadhavRayaprolu wrote:
28 Mar 2018, 10:45

My overall take is, while CM has done a much better job in classifying scales compared to HM or Western music, it is still unimpressive by modern standards. I’d love to see classification based on raga aesthetics and/or a mathematically more comprehensive organization of ragas. (Sorry about the negativity in my post).
When you say "unimpressive by modern standards", you must have some ideas in your mind and we would love it if you could share those with us.

Classification almost always implies some logical order. In that, I think there is very little to complain about the Melakartha scheme. I don't believe that an aesthetics-based classification makes much sense as aesthetics by its nature is too subjective. For example, unlike RSR, I find beauty in all of the 72 scales. Going back to my Periodic Table analogy, it makes little sense to classify chlorine and sulfer in the same family just because both have a bad smell. A kedaragowlam and natakuranji are so aesthetically differrent, yet both come from the same harikambodhi family.

Let us also not forget the tremendous impact the melakartha scheme has had in bringing new ragas to the forefront and making the musical ground so fertile that it generated a galaxy of great composers.
0 x

MadhavRayaprolu
Posts: 43
Joined: 18 Jan 2018, 13:04
x 3

#88 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by MadhavRayaprolu » 31 Mar 2018, 09:21

Vayoo Flute wrote:
29 Mar 2018, 20:33
When you say "unimpressive by modern standards", you must have some ideas in your mind and we would love it if you could share those with us.
I think we should scrap the idea of janaka and janya ragams or trying to classify ragams using Melakartha scheme given all the issues we discussed earlier. We should leave Melakartha scheme to do what it does best, which is classification of 7-note scales.

We should have a clear definition for what scale makes it into Melakartha and why. Currently it defines a bunch of rules but the intent is not clear. Like the 2 Ma's scale that I pointed out needs clarity on why it is out. Similarly, a scale like the following is not part of Melakartha: S R2 G2 G3 P D2 N2. This is Mishra Shivaranjani with a N2, no less beautiful than other vivadis. If our intent is to pick 7 notes out of 12 possible notes, and given S is a constant, there are 11C6 combinations. Many of them sound awkward and they should be out. Eg; S R1 R2 G2 G3 M1 M2 S" is obviously awkward. This awkwardness needs to be clearly defined and codified. If the intent is to spread the 7 notes more or less evenly, then we can define a max distance between two notes of a scale and eliminate scales in the 11C6 combinations that exceed max limits. We can also debate and decide whether P is a must for a melakartha ragam. With all this, we'll have clear and meaningful objectives for the melakartha system and a mathematically robust system to generate the scales instead of arbitrary rules.
Classification almost always implies some logical order. In that, I think there is very little to complain about the Melakartha scheme. I don't believe that an aesthetics-based classification makes much sense as aesthetics by its nature is too subjective. For example, unlike RSR, I find beauty in all of the 72 scales. Going back to my Periodic Table analogy, it makes little sense to classify chlorine and sulfer in the same family just because both have a bad smell. A kedaragowlam and natakuranji are so aesthetically differrent, yet both come from the same harikambodhi family.
Unlike periodic table, ragas are all about aesthetics :) I agree it is a messy exercise. But I think it'll be pretty insightful to see the underlying melodic components that make up a ragam. We can start with key phrases or key gamakams and classify ragas that are based on these phrases and gamakams. Eg; a G2 M1 phrase with a kampitha gandharam is a very characteristic phrase. As a music student, I'd love to know all the ragas that have this phrase, and further narrow down by other characteristic phrases. That is so much more insightful to me than a purely notes based classification. Parrikar does a great job explaining the raganga system in HM: http://www.parrikar.org/hindustani/kalyan/

Having key phrases based classification doesn't preclude us from having other classification systems. In fact, the more the merrier. We can still have notes based classification. We can also classify ragas based on the "bigness" (total number of defining phrases). Or mood - lighter vs heavier etc.
0 x

RSR
Posts: 860
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 41
x 24

#89 Re: Thoughts on Thaats

Post by RSR » 01 Apr 2018, 22:07

Vayoo Flute wrote:
29 Mar 2018, 20:33

.
A kedaragowlam and natakuranji are so aesthetically differrent, yet both come from the same harikambodhi family.
Respected Sri.V.F.Sir,
yes. The ragams kedaragaulam , nattakurinji and harikambodhi each have their own beauty. On what basis are they clubbed together? which came first?...the ragam or classification? My understanding is that the ragam came first. Who ever, 'invented' these ragams, did not start from the notes of the scale.
0 x

Post Reply