pancha shruthi rishabam

[ajaysimha]

hi Rasikas,

i have heard in lecdems/ read in books that there existed a note called pancha-shruthi-rishabam. which lost its identity,
many ragas which used this pancha-shruthi-rishabam started using chatur-shruthi-rishabam in the due course of time.

anybody shed some light on this topic.

thanks,
Ajay Simha

[SrinathK]

You may see our 22 shruti thread for an explanation. This would be the Pythogorean minor third at 32/27 (times base frequency), while shatshruti rishabham is the minor third in just intonation at 6/5. The shruti values and the system of music that used them has long been forgotten, but the names still persist, a vestigial remnant of those concepts

Ditto for dhaivatam. shatshruti dhaivatam is a just minor 7th at 9/5, while a hypothetical pancha shruti dhaivatam would correspond to a Pythogorean minor 7th at 16/9

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shruti_(music)

[RSR]

this page may give some clarification.
http://www.22shruti.com/research_topic_38.asp

though, it is a bit difficult to understand how 22 strutis are there while there are only 12 notes.
if illustrated with keyboard layout of harmonium . But in string instruments and perhaps influte played by experts, and good vocalists, the specified sruthis can be brought out.
Efforts are being made to create a keyboard to play 22 sruthis.
Some simplified code for indicating the different sruthis will be welcome.

[SrinathK]

The algorithm to derive the relationships from Sa gives 2 sets of values for each of the 12 positions, separated by the ratio 81/80 (Syntonic comma). So that makes 24 possible values.

Some values are natural (just) frequencies corresponding to natural harmonics, others are Pythogorean derivatives. By keeping S and P fixed at 1/1 and 3/2, that eliminates 2 dissonant shrutis, and leaves the final number at 22 shrutis.

There are videos of the 22 shruti harmonium and metallophone : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_gsbTcwTMI

As you can see, the 22 shrutis in the right combos are as harmonic as they can get : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_CBjW2zt1A

After a lot of checks, I also figured out that this system is the best possible one for graha bhedam and playing chords - you will get at least 12 ratios available on all the positions. However, it also means at each position a scale will be slightly different in character. This set also passes Bharata's double veena test.

[RSR]

Both CM and HM follow the same pattern for denoting the notes.
S R1 R2 G1 G2 M1 M2 P D1 D2 N1 N2 S
-----------------------------------
Simply put, without fancy names, lower and upper R and so on.
----------------------------------
My query is that is there a way to write down a sruthi not covered here in this scheme.

Let us follow the standard harmonium keys pattern.
and perhaps use lower case for such sruthis.
what then would be the notation for successive keys in 22 sruthi harmonium?
Are ragas differentiated on the basis of sruthis? I dont think so.
How do we convey to learners, such subtle frequency difference by NOTATION?

[SrinathK]

@RSR , did you read the notation on the site or see the design of the 22 shruti harmonium - the reed at the bottom changes the shruti frequency of a key, otherwise it's a regular harmonium with the same standard keys.

The notation for this is S r1 r2 R1 R2 g1 g2 G1 G2 M1 M2 m1 m2 P d1 d2 D1 D2 n1 n2 N1 N2 S

No one uses the 22 shruti system in CM since centuries now. The gamakas have no relation to those fixed frequencies. So for CM the 12 notes are enough.

[RSR]

@RSR , did you read the notation on the site or see the design of the 22 shruti harmonium - the reed at the bottom changes the shruti frequency of a key, otherwise it's a regular harmonium with the same standard keys.

The notation for this is S r1 r2 R1 R2 g1 g2 G1 G2 M1 M2 m1 m2 P d1 d2 D1 D2 n1 n2 N1 N2 S

No one uses the 22 shruti system in CM since centuries now. The gamakas have no relation to those fixed frequencies. So for CM the 12 notes are enough.

----------------------------------
This refers to series of posts in an earlier thread
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=27823&start=25

I think, I am referring to the same 22 sruthi instrument.
My point is if it is possible to have sepoarate keys for the 22 sruthis.
If not, I am all for HM notation.
s
R1 SUDDHA RISHABAM
R2 CHATHUSRUTHI RISHABAM/
SUDDHA GANDHARAM
G1 SADHRANA GANDHARAM
SHATSRUTHIRISHBAM
G2 ANTHARA GANDHARAM
M1 SUDDHA MADHYAMAM
M2 PRATHI MADHYAMAM
-------------------
P PANCHAMAM
-------------------
D1 SUDDHA DHIVATHAM
D2 CHATURSRUTHI DHAIVATHAM
SUDDHA NISHADAM
N1 KAISIKA NISHADAM
SHATSRUTHI DAIVATHAM
N2 KAKALI NISHADAM
----------------------------------------
https://sites.google.com/site/cmhm4me/h ... a-keyboard

[RSR]

In continuation of the previous post. ( for clarification of my query)

22-Shruti-Harmonium was created by Vidyadhar Oke (Indian Patent No. 250197). To achieve this, he first clarified the essential difference between 'Nada' and 'Shruti' and pinpointed the positions to play the 22 Microtones (Shrutis) on any string instrument. He documented the specific difference between 22 Shrutis versus the 12-Tone Equal temperament Scale. His 22-Shruti-Harmonium provides special knobs below each of the keys to regulate the reeds, making 22 Shrutis available within 12 keys. As this is a modified hand-pumped harmonium, no special playing skill is necessary. The 22-Shruti-Harmonium enables the creation of any Raga with all the notes perfectly consonant with a Tanpura. Additionally, by positioning all the knobs in the central position, the 22-Shruti-Harmonium can produce the sound of an Accordion.

Ref: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonium

[SrinathK]

If I had to design a keyboard to play music using the 22 shruti intervals, I'd probably program it to self select the combinations for the HM raga scales as per Dr. Oke's logic.

For playing non-Indian music on it, I'd just program it to self select the most harmonic frequency combinations while playing chords and use natural frequencies for plain notes. That way the player can use his normal playing technique without thinking too much about choosing ratios.

I believe that before Western Music adopted Equal Temperament, they tried to come up with organs that could do this dynamic adjustment, but it work out.

[ganesh_mourthy]

that 22 shruthi is almost impossible for human ears to decipher . It can be used only for research purposes and can never be put into practice. or our human ear will then lose hold of even the 12 shruthi distinction

[RSR]

If 22 sruthis are impossible for our ears to detect correctly, why not dispense with them and just confine ourselves both in rendering and notations as HM does , to 12 swaras only. ?
S R1 R2 G1 G2 M1 M2 P D1 D2 N1 N2 ..S
=======================
Following this scheme, it is not necessary to use the confusing R3,G3,D3 and N3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The aim is to do away with scholastic / textbook approach and concentrate on the ragam.
Is it really necessary to know the janaka ragam? ( even if there are controversies)? Each ragam has its own swaroopam . We generally are fist captivated by a song/krithi and then inquire about the ragam . Then , identify new songs if they are in the same ragam. While introducing CM to learners, we must begin with the ragam , and choose a few krithis which best illustrate the ragam, sung or rendered by the best musicians of yore and limit ourselves to some 100 well-known ragas . Is it really necessary to know the logic of melakartha scheme? About the difference in nomenclature of the ragam ibetween Dhikshithar school and Thyagaraja school? How according to Dikshithar, a melakartha ragam need not be sampoornam even! ..The ' theme ' is very important and that is why we learn about ragas through the krithis.
HM uses only the above notation and just 10 scales and HM alaaps ,like our Nagaswaram alaapanais, are excellent . That tales me to wonder if the original composers cared more for the lyrics and theme or for the ragam and grammar. Any known instance of them engaging in raga alaapanai at any time?
Did the stalwarts of the 1940-1960 decades give any lec-dem? They just sang. ( unless, they were engaged in teaching) I understand that Ariyakkudi Ramanuja Iengar never participated in any academic discussion in the MA or elsewher. Right ?

[SrinathK]

Following this scheme, it is not necessary to use the confusing R3,G3,D3 and N3

But what will you do for vivAdi ragas? Any just curious, why do you keep thinking people use 22 shrutis today or that R3, G3, D3 and N3 have anything to do with them? These notes are required even with the 12 note system we use now. For example, if we have R1, that gives us 3 possibilities G1,G2 and G3 which can all be used. There is a necessity to distinguish between R and G and D and N, which is why we use 3 varieties of each even though D2 = N1, D3 = N2 and R2 = G1 and R3 = G2.

In my opinion, things are fine as they are and it is not so complicated using R3, G3, D3 and N3. In fact your solution will create a few other problems. And why should CM limit itself?

[RSR]

I had raised the same question in an earkier thread ( cited) already. and Sirs VK and Vayu flute had pointed out that when VOCALISTS sing SWARAMS , if we do not adopt the overlapping R2=G1, R3=G2, D2=N1 , and D3=N2 scheme, how can they SING the SWARAMS? Valid point but only in that special circumstance. Though we can 'play' and even sing, R1 followed by R2 and so on, ( vivadi swaras) ,( they do not sound pleasing in most cases), for the sake of grammar of 72 janaka ragams, they are there. but we cannot sing the swaram as R1 by R2 and so on. As that is an exceptional situation, ( Is there any insistence on swara singijng? or how many listeners can listen to a song without words but only by swarams? .. The solution then is to choose only such scales which do not create this problem. That is what HM has done. as I have illustrated in my page
https://sites.google.com/site/cmhm4me/h ... m-notation

[SrinathK]

Mathematically, there are only 12 notes. 22 shrutis exist only to give variations for each note for the sake of harmony. Swaras are 7, their sub divisions add to 12 and their shruti variations make it 22.

They are also a good help during graha bhedam - they ensure that at least 12 notes are possible at any point on the scale. So there is a rational basis for why we ended up with 12 notes.

The tambura and the drone are more recent inventions - they in fact post date Bharata by 2000 years at least, even though the production of overtones using a flat bridge was probably known all the way back to the Mesopotamian Civilization and Ancient India.

The gamaka as it exists today is a modern invention as well. When you do not have a harmonic drone to align to, your only way of ensuring alignment is the harmonic relationships between the notes themselves - that's why the 22 microtones. This was exploited to create the oldest ragas. It is a harmonic system first, not a pure melodic system that we use today. The oldest ragas were probably only combinations of notes.

http://www.22shruti.com/research_topic_55.asp -- though if I were honest with you, if I chose shrutis in this manner, I would not use a tambura for accompaniment at all -- as the tambura only aligns properly with natural frequencies (just intonation). Which makes sense as the tambura did not exist back then.

[SrinathK]

Frequency analysis of today's gamaka based music has conclusively disproven the belief that we use the 22 shrutis these days. At best we use just intonation for the natural plain notes, and everything else are moving frequencies (i.e. gamakas) - these movements vary quite a bit from instrument to instrument, voice to instrument and even from one musician to another.

So, while we have some vestigial names to remind us of a music system that existed a long time ago, trying to assign shrutis to today's gamaka based music is actually a very wrong idea. Some scholars have also made the mistake of trying to assign shrutis to today's notes -- what they didn't realize is that the 22 shruti model was a harmonic system and worked only on plain notes.

But one further thing which I question is - why is vivAdi even a problem? My ears have never had a problem with the chromatic effect of vivAdi scales. But then that is me. I do however feel that the scope of gamaka becomes limited when the big gamaka notes are too close to each other.

In my opinion, the new scalar melakartas have a long way to go before they acquire sufficient distinction from each other. Many of them share common phrases and gamakas, which results in them sounding like two known ragas spliced and stiched together at times. Perhaps this may have been a reason why the first attempt at 72 melakarthas were asampoorna in nature. In fact it was only Koteeswara Iyer and M Balamuralikrishna who first attempted composing in all of them.

Did the stalwarts of the 1940-1960 decades give any lec-dem? They just sang.

Once you get into the scholarly or analytical aspects of music, you can't be asking this. There is a set of people who are going to go that route. That side is needed, otherwise everyone was happily editing ragas and changing songs as per their fancy in the post trinity period - some of the old debates in the Academy were all about trying to find out which are the key phrases of a raga (one day when I cover some selected MA Journals we'll see just how much debate there was about the identity of ragas).

But it is also very clear that composers followed the lakshaNa aspects of both lyrics and the music quite well. Of course, one does not have to know all this to enjoy music, but it wouldn't be fair for the heart to just dismiss the brain or vice versa. Our great composers have given something for all kinds of rasikas!

[ajaysimha]

Thanks all for the info on 22 shruthis.
when it comes to vivadi ragas, it reminds me of something:
people in olden days (mostly pre-trinity period) considered singing vivadi ragas to be inauspicious.
(ಎಟುಕದ ದ್ರಾಕ್ಷಿ ಬಹಳ ಹುಳಿ, which translates to inaccessible grapes are too sore, moral from Fox and Grape story)
Thyagarajar composed many songs in vivadi ragas and erased the inauspicious-ness tagged to them
Salute to thyagarajar !!

[SrinathK]

@ajaysimha Well, a brief (ok not so brief) history of Indian Classical Music for you. Might have mistakes in it, but I think it's mostly accurate.

Music is probably as old as the first time a human saw the difference between pitched and unpitched sound. Rhythm is probably even older. The oldest bone flute found is over 35000 years old, so who knows. We are aware of music right from the Indus Valley civilization in India.

It is quite likely that the mutual consonance principle that is the mother of this whole concept is far older than all these systems of music. Between the Pythogorean, the Just Intonation, and the Mesopotamian systems, you have 20 of the 22 intervals already present. So this is at least as old as the time humans distinguished between 5ths, 4ths and 3rds from natural harmonics.

In India, we know of the classical music that started from the sAma vEda, whose notes still exist as kharaharapriya even today. Murchana was like shruti bhedam, and that resulted in a few more proto ragas appearing. By the time the Puranas came along, the term raga already existed.

By the time Bharata came along, all the concepts of shruti, 7 swaras, 22 shrutis and ragas and gramas were well known. Tamil music with the concept of panns was also well developed at this time. A lot of what we use today in CM comes from tamil music, including the concept of 12 tones. Tamil Music also used graha bhedam.

The algorithm used to derive the microtones gives 2 fine values for each of the 12 tones, giving a total of 24 microtones, and even today, some people wonder which of the 2 were discarded. Discarding the additional microtones for S and P, or whichever was the base note of a scale makes sense because those would be the most discordant of all, a direct Syntonic comma. Pretty neat stuff. It makes logical sense.

Except that in those days, they didn't split the swaras in this manner. Tamil music might come up with minor and major variants of a swara, but Bharata really didn't - he still used shrutis. So they assigned different numbers of shrutis to each of the 7 swaras on what seems to be an adhoc basis. There is even confusion on exactly how they did that.

At this point, the theory of classical music was pretty much the same everywhere, and not just in India. Western Music was also using the same ideas like the circle of 4ths and 5ths and Just Intonation, the Pythagorean ratios, minor and major notes - because it was based on math and physics. The only difference is, they didn't know ragas.

So far all this theory concerns mArga music. There was also another system called dEsi music and actually the music we sing today, including our talas are far closer to dEsi music than mArga music.

The next big book is Brhaddeshi by Matanga muni, written nearly a thousand years later, that first mentions the word gamaka. This is a book on dEsi music.

Sharangadeva took another 600 years or so to write sangeeta ratnAkara. It looks like the 22 shruti concept was still known and was around for 1600 years at least. The theoretical math behind it might have never existed in India in my opinion, because it can be derived entirely through tuning notes together. That might have even been the logic of assigning shrutis to ragas - mutual consonance. It is the west that invented the written language of math, while India invented the zero.

But there's plenty of evidence to suggest that many people even in those days didn't quite get it and had various interpretations. I don't think anyone knew the full math behind it in India. In the west, it is clear they got all the values right and the math (every one of the 22 shrutis has a proper interval name in Western Music), but never managed to harmonize them into one system. Then they adopted Equal Temperament, using mutual consonance only when playing purely by ear, that too not on keyboards. Once keyboards adopted ET, everyone else drifted to them.

By this time, Indian classical music had split into HM and CM. I think at this point the 22 shruti system began to get forgotten, especially up North. Once the tambura and drone came in, I'm sure it started to vanish.

The next lead was Venkatamakhin. He knew about the old system, but he came up with the ancestor of the asampoorna mEla system with 19 melas and he even assigned shrutis to the notes in these ragas. Whether he used the mutual consonance principle needs to be seen.

I'm pretty sure that by the time the British began to come to India, the whole logic of the 22 shruti system was long forgotten and it existed in name only, applied in adhoc ways. So by the trinity period, it must have vanished. Instead we had the 2 systems of ragas - one from Thyagaraja and the other from the rest (Dikshitar, OVK, etc.)

By this point the 22 shruti system existed only on paper. Ragas and gamakas had begun to take their current forms. Music as we know it by this point was all dEsi.

Dr. Oke finally discovered the math behind the concept and how to derive it by mutual consonance without any math knowledge - it is quite simple if you look at the graph I posted up there. This is the only way it fits both the math and the theoretical descriptions in the books, regardless of interpretations on whether S had 4 shrutis or whether there were 2 Ps or not. I believe the confusion is due to the fact that S itself was not a fixed base note for a long time.

The math also answers why we ended up with 12 notes and 7 swaras and 22 shrutis out of a total of 24 (2 for each note). In any case without the help of finely tuned instruments, the 22 would not remain as it is and it would quickly come down to 12 because the 2 microscopic variations of each note would be impractical to register - 12 is the practical limit of the human ear. And there it stays, all over the world.

Today, I see the problem of microtones crop up whenever people talk about consonance and intervals, and how equal temperament has corrupted our ears, but no one other than the Indians managed to resolve it to the theoretical limit.

Even scholars and musicologists have become confused over time because since pre-trinity, the music increasingly began to depart from the theory in the books and theory and practice no longer added up. They made errors in trying to fit concepts of mArga music into dEsi music. Once the kampita gamaka and jhAru began to distinguish ragas apart, the link was completely broken. There is now no connection between the 22 shrutis and today's gamaka based ragas, except the few plain notes that are aligned to natural harmonics and are used for singing kArvais. Even these are only Just Intonation.

In fact in the post trinity period, people seemed to have made a routine practice of editing songs and ragas and tunes. Only the developments of the 20th century and the growth of musicology began to finally freeze Carnatic music into its current form. In the 21st century, increased knowledge of Dikshitar is allowing the asampoorna mEla system to find its place again.

But as soon as you realize this, you also see that there is no connection between today's CM and that music, though there is clearly a long historical link going back at least 2500 years and far beyond that. The only thing that hasn't changed is the physics and the math of plain note intervals. And we don't use plain note music today in CM. We use moving gamakas now. And here we are - with Carnatic Music at one end and a 22 shruti harmonium at the other.

[RSR]

Despite the lengthy reply, my specific query has not been ,answered.
I am not a votary of 22 sruthi system. not even for the 16 names system.
I am all for 12 swarasthanam system with simple notation as in HM.
I have quite clearly illustrated how the 72 MK ragams can be expressed in HM notation.
which corresponds to successive kets in jeyboard and frets in veeNai
-----------------------------------------------------------
I still stick to the explanation given by Sri.VK and Sri.VF. .as the most acceptable.
-----------------------------------------------------------
https://sites.google.com/site/cmhm4me/h ... a-keyboard
-----------------------------------------------------------
Thus, though there are 72 janaka ragams, many break the rule that r should be followed
by g. etc. So, we can leave out such mk ragams. ( shown in red) . So, out of 72, we get 32 MK ragams only ( non-vivadhi). ( varaaLi and Nattai are exceptions).
In fact I believe that the composers confined themselves to these 32 only for creating janya ragams. Even there, just 24 are having many compositions by them.
Among the great many janya ragams of karaharapriya ,for example, just two ragams are having vivadhi swarams.
It will be instructive to create a web page for listing all the janya ragams with their notes, for each of these 32 janaka ragams.
If we add up all those derived ragams, it will be a formidable list. of not less than 300 ragams. ( will continue in next post)

[SrinathK]

Why should CM go the HM way? I'm not in favour of that. I see absolutely no problem with the current notation system and it's not that complicated either. Let's agree to disagree on this.

Since you asked for a janya list, here's a big one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Janya_ragas - many of those janya ragas don't have any compositions in them.

Ragas containing more than one variation of one note should not belong under this classification.

In one way the mela system is good, but in another way not so good, because while it gave easy form to ragas, it also turned ragas from organic, hand crafted, bespoke products into template based, factory made ones that can now be mass produced. Most of it's products are quite good, but this does create a problem where each raga has to be more limited in it's own scope to avoid treading into the territory of another. But this system alone will not create another nATa, behAg or kAmbhOji or bEgaDa.

It has been a very long time since anyone tried to create a raga directly out of the ocean of phrases that has a unique identity with huge scope for elaboration - this is far more difficult than constructing a scalar raga.

Speaking of which, the old grama system that Bharata followed sounds like an attempt at using absolute pitch in Indian music - it was really only after the dEsi system came in that S become a fixed tonic note.

Even today, western music composes using absolute pitch (C major or D minor) -- and I tell you, the 22 shruti scale or it's parent 24 microtonal scale would be absolutely ideal for this kind of work - you'd sacrifice a few intervals each time you shifted scale, so the tonic character of each "grama" would be different, but you'd get 12 notes all the time. This phenomena was actually known to both Indian authors and in Western music theory until 12 tone ET came into the picture.

With today's synthesizers, if they could simply use transpose and change the base pitch, even this limitation can be overcome.

Anyway @ajaysimha, this topic has probably reached it's limit. I remember covering it to the death in technical discussions. To sum up, the music we use today is a fusion between new gamaka developments, a lot of dEsi ideas, and some mArga ones - these ideas still exist in music systems outside India as well.

For more info,
https://www.thehindu.com/features/frida ... 598101.ece
https://sreenivasaraos.com/2015/04/21/m ... -part-one/ - this is a huge multi part series

There are so many resources out there on the web talking about old music history, it might need a separate thread altogether that could run for who knows how long. But only http://22shruti.com/index.asp has the math behind the ideas.

I have to admit, the more I look into this, the more stuff I find I never knew about, every day. We had several thousands of years worth of music, dance and tradition in this land - and that's an enormous body. Of this, CM and HM are just the current chapters running in the classical music book.

[RSR]

There are hundreds of sites and blogs and great articles . If we start reading them all, our entire time will be taken up. Googling gives almost all the information that we need. I have seen the wiki page which lists the janya ragams of the 72 MK ragams. But in a single page.
Sometimes, we come across surprising points like ' Dikshithar and ShyamaSastry have not composed any krithi in Karaharapriya. though it was a ragam in which Thyagaraja has given us so many krithis, all very popular.
What I meant to say, is that the Trinity have given most of their compositions in the MK parents which do not have any vivadhi scales. To bring home the point, we need to create 72 pages. one each for the MK ragam and list the derived ragams from that scale. Notations are not needed. ( sometimes, it may be very long !). And better to stick to Thyagaraja and Shyama Sastry kritis. Then it becomes very clear that they have preferred the MK without vivadhi notes. That would make the triple R,G,D,and N notation quite unnecessary.
We are not in anyway straying into HM or WM. but just making the CM notation far far easier to follow for keyboard learners.
As I am yet to find such pages, I will have to create them myself. Takes time and effort.
All history notes etc are nothing new. I am following the famous book by Subba Rao. How I wish that he had dealt with CM and HM separately!

[SrinathK]

If we read the history of music, one thing we observe is that none of the issues that we debate about on today's CM or HM are new. They've happened again and again in the past and new changes kept happening to address that. The thing is, the information age is so big now that the last 10 years feel bigger than the last 2000, but that was not the case!

[RSR]

Even with the Internet, it is sometimes VERY DIFFICULT to get the information on ragams which we want. 1) riding my hobby horse.....exact ragam of Smt.MS's 1947 plate 'Pyaare Dhrasana ' .
2) Ragams of all the songs in Hindi Meera of Smt.MS ( 1947).
--------------------------------------------------------
To the best of my knowledge, there is no site or web-page which gives the MK ragam and its janya ragams , for each parent ragam. If you know of one,, kindly enlighten and share.
It will save me a lot of work.
If not, and if I manage to list them , it will be useful work.
It is not enough however to just mention the names of the derived ragams but give the swaram pattern and some one or two at least of songs.with audio links to illustrate

[RSR]

mk
1) 8 TODI...............( BAIRAVI (HM))

2) 9 DENUKA

3) 10 NATAKAPRIYA

4) 11 KOKILAPRIYA
----------------------

5) 14 VAKULABARANAM

6) 15 MAYAMALAVAGOWLA ( BAIRAV in HM)

7) 16) CHAKRAVAHAM

8) 17) SURYAKANTHAM
------------------------
9) 20) NATABAIRAVI ( ASAVERI in HM)

10) 21) KEERVANI

11) 22) KARAHARAPRIYA ( KAPI in HM)

12) 23) GOWRIMANOHARI

-------------------------
13) 26) CHARUKESI

14) 27) SARASANGI

15) 28) HARIKAMBODHI ( KAMAJ in HM)

16) 29) SANBKARABARANAM ( BILAWAL in HM)
--------------------------
17) 44) BHAVAPRIYA

18) 45) SUBAPANTHUVARALI ( TODI in HM)

19) 46) SHADVIDHAMARGANI

20) 47) SUVARNAMBI
------------------------
21) 50) NAMANARAYANEE

22) 51) PANTHUVARALI ( POORVI in HM)

23) 52) RAMAPRIYA

24) 53) GAMANASRAMA ( MARWA in HM)
(POORVI KALYANI)

-------------------------
25) 56) SHANMUGAPRIYA

26) 57) SIMMENDRAMADHYAMAM

27) 58) HEMAVATHY

28) 59) DHARMAVATHY
---------------------------

29) 62) RISHABAPRIYA

30) 63) LATHANGI

31) 64) VACHASPATHY

32) 65) KALYANI ( YAMAN in HM)
--------------------------
Normally, if the parent does not have vivadi pattern, the derived raga also wont.
If so, we can easily represent all these parent ragams and their derived ragams by HM notation. And it may well be that it will cover almost 96% of all the CM ragams in use. ( by Thyagaraja school)

[shankarank]

To the best of my knowledge, there is no site or web-page which gives the MK ragam and its janya ragams , for each parent ragam. If you know of one,, kindly enlighten and share.
It will save me a lot of work.

To the best of my knowledge - I own the tamizh version of this by Dr M.N DandhapANI and Kalaimamani SrImati D. Pattammal ( not DKP) and I googled to see the English version online:

http://www.dpattammal.com/downloads/rag ... h-full.pdf

[RSR]

To the best of my knowledge - I own the tamizh version of this by Dr M.N DandhapANI and Kalaimamani SrImati D. Pattammal ( not DKP) and I googled to see the English version online:

http://www.dpattammal.com/downloads/rag ... h-full.pdf

==================================================
Sir,
Just now saw the post and glanced through the contents of the pdf. Thank you very much.
I will create a web page for each of the 32 MK ragams ( non-vivadhi) and their janya ragams with their ascending and descending notes . and try to give mp3 links to a few well-known songs of the Trinity. It gives me the basic framework to proceed. Thank you very much , once again.
I presume that the ragas refer to CM only. ( there seem to be a few names of HM there, however.) Let me not rush to hasty conclusions.
I hope that there are no copy right issues if I create web page for easy reading.
and switch over to simpler HM notation .

Best Regards.

[SrinathK]

It is a massive effort by the authors to catalogue so many rAgAs in one place.

[ajaysimha]

thanks for the write-up SrinathK, the 22 sruthis theory is now clear

[shankarank]

Here is the caturdanDi prakaSikA from Sruti Lec Dem mELA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et4CE6d37J4

Dr Sumitra Vasudev did a scholarly presentation. There were moments where she comes out defensive about concepts then and usage now. The usage now was never a concept by itself right? We have to make one of it.

I saw some parallels in this:

Something I picked up at random to read the foreward off my shelves - the pdf link below:

http://poincare.matf.bg.ac.rs/~zarkom/B ... ra%202.pdf

Modern or" abstract" algebra is widely recognized as an essential element
of mathematical education. Moreover, it is generally agreed that the axiomatic method provides the most elegant and efficient technique for its study.
One must continually bear in mind, however, that the axiomatic method is an
organizing principle and not the substance of the subject.

And then the foreword quotes another :

Emil Artin wrote: We all believe that mathematics is an art. The author of a
book, the lecturer in a classroom tries to convey the structural beauty of mathematics to his readers, to his listeners. In this attempt he must always fail. Mathematics is logical to be sure; each conclusion is drawn from previously derived statements. Yet the whole of it, the real piece of art, is not linear; worse than that its perception should be instantaneous. We all have experienced on some rare occasions the feeling of elation in realizing that we have enabled our listeners to see at a moment's glance the whole architecture and all its ramifications. How can this be achieved? Clinging stubbornly to the logical sequence inhibits visualization of the whole, and yet this logical structure must predominate or chaos would result.

So physicists who sometimes deem Math as a dry area , often are forced to to use it as a metaphor - a million metaphors that it gives.

If Math could be marketed as an art, then what sort of perspective should we develop for music and language?!