brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Rāga related discussions
Post Reply
Sundar Krishnan
Posts: 496
Joined: 19 Feb 2008, 18:50

#1

Post by Sundar Krishnan »

Hello, 19th Feb, 2008

I would like to know the difference if any, between the Ragams :
brindhAvanasAran'ga | 22 | S R2 M1 P N3 S | S N2 P M1 R2 G2 S
and Brindavani (of which I don’t have the Ar-Av). Could someone pl send it to me.

This doubt arose wrt a Thillana song :

Thillana : Dheem Tha Dheem … Vinnor Paniyum Madhava Yadava … -> … Adi -> Lalgudi Jayaraman

In http://www.carnaticcorner.com/articles/lj-comp.html, the Ragam for this Thillana is described as Brindavani ; however, the title for this song in one Violin Duet CD that I purchased, as well as in the description of the (last) song in : http://www.raaga.com/channels/carnatic/ ... 00520.html describes the Ragam as Brindavana Saranga.

A friend of mine told me that the 2 Ragams are different. Is this stmt true ?

This confusion is best sorted out by getting the Ar-Av of Brindavani, I guess. Some more expert analysis on the diffs would be appreciated.

Thanks and Rgds

Sundar Krishnan

Lakshman
Posts: 12916
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 18:52
x 22

#2

Post by Lakshman »

For brndAvani:
S R M P N S / S N P M R G R S is the scale that I have as per R.R.Keshavamurti.

Sundar Krishnan
Posts: 496
Joined: 19 Feb 2008, 18:50

#3

Post by Sundar Krishnan »

Lakshman said :
brndAvani is :
Ar : S R M P N S
Av : S N P M R G R S
Could you pl expand and give full details of notes like :
R2, M1, N3/N2, G2 etc, instead of the "vanilla" R, M, N, G etc.

Also, could you pl let me know the Parent Ragam of brndAvani.

TIA

Sundar Krishnan

PS : By the way, if these two Ragams have alternate names in different schools of music, {like we have alternate names for many Ragams in Muthuswamy Dikshitar's School}, pl let me know those alternate names ; if there is some change in the Ar-Av signature of these two alternate Ragams, could you pl let me know those alternate signatures too. Thanks.

...

Lakshman
Posts: 12916
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 18:52
x 22

#4

Post by Lakshman »

The parent rAgA of brndAvani is mELA 22 (kharaharapriyA).

Sundar Krishnan
Posts: 496
Joined: 19 Feb 2008, 18:50

#5

Post by Sundar Krishnan »

Sundar Krishnan requested earlier :
Could you pl expand and give full details of notes like :
R2, M1, N3/N2, G2 etc, instead of the plain "vanilla" R, M, N, G etc.
So, thanks Lakshman, for the Parent Ragam confirmation, but as requested earlier, can you pl give me the exact Ar-Av for Brindavani in all it's details including for eg, R2, M1, N3 or N2, G2 etc, instead of the plain "vanilla" R, M, N, G etc.

Sundar Krishnan

PS : Or, atleast pl confirm if an "extra R = R2 in Av ?" is the only difference ? wrt Brindavana Saranga ? - this would mean that the Ar-Av signature of Brindavani would be as foll :
Ar : S R2 M1 P N3 S
Av : S N2 P M1 R2 G2 R2 S
Is this correct ? If not, pl correct the above signature.
Can you pl confirm the above, or correct the above signature, and send it to me.

Thanks

vijay
Posts: 2522
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 16:06

#6

Post by vijay »

Your scale looks to be right...but just as a thought - instead of splitting hairs on raga names, it may be worthwhile to dwell on the melodic structure of the composition and suitably structure your manodharma...a brindavani by any other name sounds just as sweet

kmrasika
Posts: 1170
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 07:55
x 3
x 7

#7

Post by kmrasika »

I think the bAlamuraLi tillAnA is based on br.ndAvani while compositions like rangapuravihAra, saundararAjam, br.ndAVana sArangan maruganE, kaliyugavaradan are in br.ndAvana sAranga. The difference between the two rAgAs (I think) lies in the use of appropriate nishAda note (I'm not so skilled to elaborate) in each. I have however heard a prayOga of g m r n# s used in the latter.
Last edited by kmrasika on 26 Feb 2008, 11:33, edited 1 time in total.

tmohan
Posts: 27
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 16:44

#8

Post by tmohan »

For any practical purpose both are the same ragas. This rAga, imported from Hindustani is quite a bit carnaticized in brindavani- mostly without g2 where the graham (eDuppu)may be mantra Shadjam or pancamam or tAra Shadjam where as in MuttusvAmi dikShitar's kritis, we can see the pattern the sancAris are mostly in the uttrAngam ( ranga pura vihAra or svAmi nAtena )

These are all somethings like sOhini and pUriya in HM. In CM both are hamsAnandi. HamIr is different from kEdhAr in HM. For CM both make no difference.

Mohan

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

#9

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Indeed this issue creates considerable confusion. My take:

1. Yes, all vrindavani and vrindavana saranga versions circulating in CM seem to be imports from HM.

2. The HM brindavani sarang has no gandhara, this is an addition in CM (see below)

3. The CM "vrindavana saranga" has three different versions:

- Dikshitar's version (referred to as either "vrindavana saranga" or "vrindavani" in literature) has only N2, no N3. Some of his compositions also have shades of other related HM ragas. In HM, the counterpart of Dikshitar's version is "madhmad sarang" (SRMPN2S-SN2PMRS), not "brindavani sarang" (which also has N3).

- Tyagaraja's version, which has gandhara (G2) as in the composition "kamalaptakula". This G2 seems a CM modification/insertion. Also this version (as far as I have heard it) has no N3 either.

- The third version is the the one that identical to the HM "brindavani sarang" (SRMPN3S-SN2PMRS). This one is the most popular on the current CM circuit, there are a number of compositions in this version.

In my opinion the musicologists should resolve this confusion and "rename" the ragas as "dikshita saranga", "tyagaraja saranga", and leave "brindavana saranga" for the third type of raga. As far as I can see the first two versions did not exist in CM before Dikshitar and Tyagaraja...if there are previous compositions in these versions they should probably be named after the persons who introduced these ragas in CM.

SR

PS: The CM ragas like madhyamavati, pushpalatika, manirang, etc are all in the "Shri raga" family in CM, they are not related to the "saranga" ragas despite similarity in scale, and are not imports from HM. In HM there is no equivalent of the Shri raga family, and these ragas would get classified in Kafi thaat.
Last edited by Sangeet Rasik on 02 Mar 2008, 22:16, edited 1 time in total.

Vocalist
Posts: 1030
Joined: 19 Feb 2006, 18:53
x 12

#10

Post by Vocalist »

kmrasika wrote:br.ndAVana sArangan maruganE
It goes as Sarangan Marugane - in Saranga. Not Brindavana Saranga ;)

jyestha07
Posts: 28
Joined: 11 Jul 2007, 09:02

#11

Post by jyestha07 »

Sangeet rasik
Thanks, thats very comprehensive! In this year's Raga lakshana discussion @ the Music acad, Dr. SAK Durga gave a v clear picture of the three ragas. Balamurali tillana is in Brindavani, with both Ns. Ranga pura is in Brindavana Saranga. I'sure these can be presented true to their forms!

vignesh.ishwar
Posts: 30
Joined: 05 Mar 2008, 19:41

#12

Post by vignesh.ishwar »

the raga which has only kaishiki nishada in it going both ways is now called brindavana saaranga but then (THIS IS A BIG BUT! ) in 1904 sangeetha saampradaya pradarshini ...the raga that is in todays context called brindavana saaranga is said to be brindavani .....so the big question is that how and when this changing and switching of names took place ......because the raga with both the nishadas is rather called brindavani in the hindustani music tradition .the truly karnatic version that is the ranga pura vihara version of the raga is now called brindavana saaranga BUT was then called brindavani .....so if anyone can please elaborate or get an answer to this confusion as to when the name change took place and how?....because the Pradarshini is very authentic in context to carnatic music ......
Last edited by vignesh.ishwar on 12 Apr 2008, 14:19, edited 1 time in total.

Suji Ram
Posts: 1529
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 00:04

#13

Post by Suji Ram »

I am confused here. MD's RangapuravihAra has N2 and N3 right? That's the version(MS) I learnt.
The N3 with a unusual gamakam.

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

#14

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Excellent point. In general one may make a somewhat interesting observation about several HM ragas imported into CM - i.e. that different versions spring up in CM with different usages of nishada (N2 and N3). Other than brindavani sarang", other well-known examples are Kapi and Khamas (both of which have been treated by different composers with only N2 or with both N2 and N3).

Regarding Dikshitar's version of the raga "vraindavana saranga", it is a very strange situation indeed. For example, Sundaram Iyer's "Dikshita Kirtanamala" introduces the compositions "rangapuravihara", "saundararajam", and "swaminathena", as being in raga "Vrindavani", whereas the raga mudra embedded in the first two compositions indicates that Dikshitar himself considered this raga as "vrindavana saranga". In other words, the musicologist's nomenclature of the raga differs from that of the composer himself !

One possibility derives from the notion that Dikshitar's school is well-known for following the "older" nomenclature of ragas and sticking to their "older versions". It could very well be that the "old"version of "brindavani sarang" in HM (from which Dikshitar borrowed his "vrndavana saranga") did not have N3. It may be that later the HM "Sarang" went through some changes (insertion of N3) that are also reflected in the currently popular version in CM.

In summary, only the currently popular version of CM "brindavana saranga" (having both N2 and N3) is faithful to the currently accepted HM version as listed by Bhatkhande. Dikshitar's version is basically faithful to what is called "madhmad sarang" in HM. I do not have a problem with calling both as "vrindavana saranga" or "vrindavani", the situation being very similar to other HM-derived ragas like Kapi or Khamas (where there are two versions, one with only N2 and the other with both N2 and N3).

What further complicates the picture is the third version (Tyagaraja's) which also inserts a G2 (I have heard an old BMK rendition of "kamalaptakula" with the G2). Amazingly, I could track down that recording on the internet, thanks to this archive:

http://www.surasa.net/music/tyagaraja-a ... index3.php

See Volume 48 to play the kriti. Note the subtle application of G2 at "kalashabdhichandra" a couple of times (b/w 1:10 and 1:41) and at "kamaniyagatra" (around 3:20). Some other places also. I have no idea where that G2 came from, but it seems that the composition can be very well sung without any G2, and with only N2 (as sung by BMK) or both N2 and N3 (as sung by other musicians).

SR

Sangeet Rasik
Posts: 591
Joined: 16 May 2006, 00:19

#15

Post by Sangeet Rasik »

Suji Ram wrote:I am confused here. MD's RangapuravihAra has N2 and N3 right? That's the version(MS) I learnt.
The N3 with a unusual gamakam.
No, MD's version does not have N3. Any illusion of N3 is created by gamaka between N2 and S.

arunk
Posts: 3424
Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 21:41
x 1

#16

Post by arunk »

SR - Thanks for your thoughts on this. Excellent stuff. Now I need to spend some time listening to various flavors and look for the points made here

Suji Ram
Posts: 1529
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 00:04

#17

Post by Suji Ram »

No, MD's version does not have N3. Any illusion of N3 is created by gamaka between N2 and S.
Now I will have to re-learn keeping that illusion of N3 as N2 in mind. But there seems to specific regions where there is N3 inclination than N2. May be I have mistaken it. I see some disadvantages of self-learning here.

The song kaliyuga varadan has distinct N2 and N3 I guess. Now I am afraid to give a name to that raga - version 3?

vignesh.ishwar
Posts: 30
Joined: 05 Mar 2008, 19:41

#18

Post by vignesh.ishwar »

Another point to be noted is that before the time when ragas used to be known by their scale that is when ragas were beyond just swaras....the madhyama and nishadha were counter swaras.....the ma-ni prayoga is very common....that is the changes in the Ma are reflected in thte Ni so the point here is that all sarangs hav 2 madhyamas ....that is the textual definition of any Sarang . Here in Brindavana Saranga as there is a Ri-Ma(1)-Ri-Ma(2) prayoga there culd also be one Pa-Ni(1)-Pa-Ni(2) prayoga...so this can be one of the answers for the multiple nishadas sung in todays Brindavana Saranga.......it is like the Sree in HM and CM....they r the Different but sound Same because of the same origin..which is beyond just scales and Swaras.....so one must understand that the GRAMMAR COMES AFTER THE LANGUAGE..... like wise the scale comes after the music....at the same time the scales are very very important to know the limitations and the range of the raga.....

tmohan
Posts: 27
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 16:44

#19

Post by tmohan »

I am reminded of the AlApanA of DKP in her old record for "ranga puravihAra" ; the AlApanA is in brndAvani and it tailors only the note. I feel that the brndAvana sAranga of MD has g2 at certain places like " pankaja mukha" in "rangapuravihAra'. In fact, brndAvani doesn't have any g2 anywhere. Knowing MD, he might not have called madhumad sArang as brndAvan sArang. In HM also there could be variants. - like I'm told some schools never use`pa' in bhAgeshri when we know "m p d g r" is a very charactersitic phrase.

Regarding the names of ragAs, even if our musicologists try to clarify, our musicians will continue to confuse us and themselves. Even today, some vidwans name the rAga of 'enta nercina' as "udaya ravicandrika(ur)" when we know it is "shudda dhanyAsi" different from the formor ( ur is a janya of Dhenuka ; MD has a song in this with the rAga mudra). It was decided in music Academy ( in late 20's on early 30's) to use n2 for "shudda dhanyAsi" andn3 for ur.- WHO CARES?

The original Abheri of MD is not in practice now ( which uses d1 in his song vINAbheri) . I am told that the musician S.Rajam used to sing "nagumomu" only with d1 which gives the mood of pathos. In a sanagti in the caraNam, both Musiri and MSS uses d1. The rAga that is prevailing as Abheri is really is the " KarNAtaka devagAndhAri" . To confuse this further we have two more imported rAgAs "bhImplasi and dhanashrI" from HM.
Incidentally, I heard that dhanashrI also has a variant in HM with d1!!.

In SSP, SD does mention about the meeting of MD with St.Thyagaraja and their discussion about the importance of rAga mudra in their compositions. SD further says that St.Thyagraja, the desciple of Sonti Venkatramayya , who in turn was the desciple of muddu venkaTamakhi, might not have changed the names of the rAgAs.

Carnaticizing HM rAgAs is another problem. Once Ravikiran told that the behAg of HM doesn't have any n2
(Is it true ?). MSS would sing desh of the bhajans with g2, not otherwise. One guy commented that HM rAgas in CM is like mixing masala tea with Tamil Nadu Coffee. It would have a different flavor .

Mohan

vainika
Posts: 429
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 11:32

#20

Post by vainika »

tmohan wrote:Carnaticizing HM rAgAs is another problem... HM rAgas in CM is like mixing masala tea with Tamil Nadu Coffee. It would have a different flavor . Mohan
And what analogy can one use for the practice of Hindustanifying CM rAgas?

PUNARVASU
Posts: 2498
Joined: 06 Feb 2010, 05:42
x 4

#21

Post by PUNARVASU »

vainika wrote:And what analogy can one use for the practice of Hindustanifying CM rAgas?
May be " adding 'katti perungayam-whole hing' in palak paneer"!

Lakshman
Posts: 12916
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 18:52
x 22

#22

Post by Lakshman »

Or mixing rasam with punjabi kadhi.

Suji Ram
Posts: 1529
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 00:04

#23

Post by Suji Ram »

I would say - turning sambar into plain dal...

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10937
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
x 11
x 2

#24

Post by vasanthakokilam »

:D Suji, you mischievous one!! ;) ( and nodding in agreement based on the Charukesi example )

rshankar
Posts: 13721
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
x 831
x 21

#25

Post by rshankar »

Suji Ram wrote:I would say - turning sambar into plain dal...
If we are talking HM, it should be sambhar, and not sambar - as evidence, I invite you to walk through any Indian store and look for the instant mixes and such!:P

tmohan
Posts: 27
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 16:44

#26

Post by tmohan »

I am reminded of an interesting comment by S.Balachandaron the rAga kIravAni of HM which is exported from CM. " Let them name as either pUri or cappAti- not as kIravAni". Incidentally, in his music in theTamil film " NaDu iravil", he has composed an excellent song by P.Susheela, " KaN pArkkum pArvaiyile kAviyam kaNNE"

There are some musicians like MSS who renders flawless HM rAgAS like PatdIp, shankara , miyan-ki tODi , puriya dhanshrI etc. Her "Dhani" in her "nAma RamyaNam" is quite pleasing to listen to. However, one person commented long pack to me that in Meera Bhajans MSS smells sambar!! This means that Sambar of Tamil Nadu is quite famous- Thanks to Asafoetida, Mustard/Methi powder and Curry Leaves.

Mohan

sasa110
Posts: 10
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 13:46

#27

Post by sasa110 »

I am looking to listen to a vocal rendition of the brindavana saranga thillana by lalgudi jayaraman but can't find it anywhere on the net... does anyone know where to find it?

thanks heaps

sasa110
Posts: 10
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 13:46

#28

Post by sasa110 »

I am looking to listen to a vocal rendition of the brindavana saranga thillana by lalgudi jayaraman but can't find it anywhere on the net... does anyone know where to find it?

thanks heaps

mdmurthy
Posts: 15
Joined: 27 Jun 2007, 12:18

#29

Post by mdmurthy »

in my view, both are same and called interchangeably..

mdmurthy

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#30 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

Needs a bump up now that we're coming to this.

arasi
Posts: 16383
Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
x 626
x 8

#31 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by arasi »

Srinath,
That would be interesting. In the passage of time, cooking methods have freely flown into each other that even non-metropolitan cuisines do not mind fusion of spices in their cooking!
Two thngs I noticed: 1: still miss Suji and Vijay among us, and Punarvasu rarely posts these days :(
2: Vignesh Easwar is a seasoned musician now. He could write on this with his experience...

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#32 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

@arasi and @Sundar Krishnan -- This is stage for a lengthy discussion, because it's a big mess. So be patient and listen as I unravel the present confusions around this matter.

Well, one thing is clear. Dikshitar's ranga pura vihAra uses N2 through and through, but on janTa notes on S (like NRSS, (N), P) it must necessarily touch a N3 for that janTa to happen. This is essentially the HM version of madhyamAvati or madhumad sArang (note the similarity in the names as well)

So here's ranga pura vihAra -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSuzkcyebOI - courtesy @cienu

And this is madhumad sArang - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqgW7I1tpkk (from Darbar festival's channel). As you can see (I mean, as you can hear,) these 2 are the same. :)

EDIT : I knew I should have listened to soundararAjam AshrayE before concluding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW4YUtctXM8 - Yes, there's the occasional G2, but again no N3.

Now, the HM rAgA vrindavani sArang uses a very clear N3 in the ascent and a N2 in the descent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiV4GQFAtKY - First Edition Fine Arts Channel

Most CM singers singing brindAvana sAranga these days go the S R2 M1 P N3 S - S N2 P M1 R2 S route. Is this actually brindAvani?

Still with me? Now here's where the really confusing part begins --- :twisted:

Here's BMK singing Thyagaraja's kriti kamalApta kula which is also claimed to be in "brindAvana sAranga" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSG0uFo1XKI - but this is very clearly closer to Sri rAga than anything else (it sounds like it has the same aro and avarohanam and is totally endarO-ish as well). He doesn't use N3 at all. EDIT 2 : Ok, It used a RGS in the descent -- but this isn't anything like Dikshitar's version.

But now this same kriti of Thyagaraja when sung in Dikshitar's way - No N3, all N2 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY2T2oNRJSw - uh oh....

And again, this time sung with N3 ascending and N2 descending !! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtOaO6Td3zo - Trichur Brothers (hopefully they'll not take my deviation from the rules seriously this once, but this is just to show you what's happening)

When Maharajapuram Ramachandran sings it, he also goes N3 up and N2 down : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW1vS6lJ-Sw

As does this senior vidushi : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3G-z8kXf_c

So here you have 3 rAgas, all of which are having the same name of brindAvana sAranga, out of which only the last one is actually the real one as on date. The one that uses only N2 is madhmad sArang, and the one using G2 is actually Sri. And as our "traditions" would have, it, we have 3 versions of one Thyagaraja kriti in all 3 ragas. Ouch!

And what about the HM raga mEgh malhAr? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iQHe2hIJGM

Well, that rAgA is the same as the one above!! But that name comes from the dhrupad tradition. So here you go, from Bhimsen Joshi https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHn6a-_Dt5w

In fact, this same confusion also exists in HM between mEgh malhAr and brindAvani sArang as well, with some musicians claiming megh malhAr should use only N2. If we accepted that, then it would become identical to madhumad sArang. This is because HM ragas have also been morphing over the years like CM ragas.

And I haven't heard a rAgA that goes S R2 M1 P N3 S -- S N2 P M1 R2 G2 R2 S amongst all of them.

So the next big question, did Thyagaraja really compose in HM ragas? Or did he compose it in Sri and his song is a victim of retuinitis?

CM, clear up this mess and use only HM names for imported HM rAgAs henceforth!! HM, please reciprocate the favour! :lol:
Last edited by SrinathK on 04 Feb 2019, 15:54, edited 2 times in total.

sr_iyer
Posts: 82
Joined: 18 Sep 2006, 11:13

#33 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by sr_iyer »

but this is very clearly Sri rAga than anything else (it has the same aro and avarohanam and is totally endarO-ish as well). He doesn't use N3 at all. This then, is essentially in Sri rAga.


There's a difference between the rAga in this version of kamalAptakula and s'rI. This version has the intended krama (as also mentioned in some books) : srmpns - snpmrgs. Apart from the krama aspect, you can see that his rendition consciously disambiguates the rendered kRti from s'rI.
when sung in Dikshitar's way - No G2 or
Dikshitar's version does involve sAdhAraNa gAndhAra or g2. Subbarama Dikshitar in SSP mentions G2 as a svalpa gAndhAra and mentions phrases r/grs and s/grs (BTW, Subbarama Dikshitar also that mentions that this rAga is synonymous with brindavana saranga. Just mentioning his comment here --- today, we do come across different forms of course).

Also, the notated saundararAjam in SSP has g2 for:
saun_da_rarAjam
ambudhigar_va_nigraham
s'ambara_vai_ri

(the respective occurences within _ _ )

Again, the form of the rAga in saundararAjam (even in versions that incorporate g2) is sufficiently different from s'rI

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#34 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

sr_iyer wrote: 04 Feb 2019, 15:29
but this is very clearly Sri rAga than anything else (it has the same aro and avarohanam and is totally endarO-ish as well). He doesn't use N3 at all. This then, is essentially in Sri rAga.


There's a difference between the rAga in this version of kamalAptakula and s'rI. This version has the intended krama (as also mentioned in some books) : srmpns - snpmrgs. Apart from the krama aspect, you can see that his rendition consciously disambiguates the rendered kRti from s'rI.
when sung in Dikshitar's way - No G2 or
Dikshitar's version does involve sAdhAraNa gAndhAra or g2. Subbarama Dikshitar in SSP mentions G2 as a svalpa gAndhAra and mentions phrases r/grs and s/grs (BTW, Subbarama Dikshitar also that mentions that this rAga is synonymous with brindavana saranga. Just mentioning his comment here --- today, we do come across different forms of course).

Also, the notated saundararAjam in SSP has g2 for:
saun_da_rarAjam
ambudhigar_va_nigraham
s'ambara_vai_ri

(the respective occurences within _ _ )

Again, the form of the rAga in saundararAjam (even in versions that incorporate g2) is sufficiently different from s'rI
Oh yes, it is R G2 S - I was fooled by the use of RGGS that comes often in that AlApana. Ok, still far closer to Sri than brindAvana sAranga. The fact that Dikshitar uses the words brindAvana sAranga in both rangapura vihAra and soundararAjam means this is what he called this rAgA.

Hmm, I knew I should have listened to soundararAjam AshrayE before concluding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW4YUtctXM8 - Yes, there's the G2 right where you said it is, but again no N3. Also these sparing use of G2 is far removed from BMK's style. What is the real name of that rAgA BMK sings in?

sr_iyer
Posts: 82
Joined: 18 Sep 2006, 11:13

#35 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by sr_iyer »

Oh yes, it is R G2 S - I was fooled by the use of RGGS that comes often in that AlApana
Yes, I was about to write about a R jantai anusvaram potentially in GG in his rendition and then decided to keep it brief. :)
Yes, there's the G2 right where you said it is
Yes, g2 has been explicitly sung in saun_da_rarAjam. In ambudhigar_va_nigraham in her version, it has been lifted to the m1 - of course, in cm, we come across certain cases of implied-g2 in some phrases that have been lifted to m1.
Also these sparing use of G2 is far removed from BMK's style. What is the real name of that rAgA BMK sings in?
Yes, g2 is sparingly used in saundararAjam. (In fact, for the record, the SSP also quotes a raga lakshana sloka which says it is audava with ga and dha varjita. The earlier comments on G2 were Subbarama Dikshitar's further comments on the raga lakshana)

The raga bmk sings in is also a form of brindavana saranga - probably, the traditional mettu of kamalAptakula. We do see similarities in the two said forms at a higher level of abstraction. This is similar to some other cases, where Tyagaraja kritis are sung with (more of) an ascent-descent concept while Dikshitar kritis could use a more abstract form of similar visesha sancaras (in this case, g2 occuring very infrequently in saundararAjam, while occuring more regularly as a bridge note between R and S in descent in the traditional form of kamalAptakula). We do see similarities at a higher level of abstraction between kiranavali and manoranjani used by both the great composers, though in these examples, Tyagaraja kritis are practically handled using (more of the) ascent-descent concept.

RSR
Posts: 2199
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 23:31
x 234
x 27

#36 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by RSR »

maNirangu ( maamava pattaabiraama by DKP)
sri ragam ( Naama kusuma ..Alathoor bros)
madhyamavathi ( Smt.MS )
and Brindavana Saranga ( rangapura vihara by DKP) ( trying to get Madurai Mani Iyer mp3)
----------------------------------------------
They may sound very close but yet they have very distinct phases. Unique.
I feel that even within sriragam, by the same composer, Namakusuma sounds different from entharo mahanubavulu. Ragams are not really defined by ascent-descent and swaras.
------
I should even add , the singer of the krithi and age of the singer.
Last edited by RSR on 05 Feb 2019, 18:06, edited 1 time in total.

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#37 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

There are addons to firefox that will allow you to take out just the mp3 out of a Youtube video. In high bit rate too.

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#38 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

Lalgudi Jayaraman's tillAnA in brindAvana sAranga by Maharajapuram Santhanam (N3 up, N2 down version) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_CIT8rruUw

On a side note, there is a category of channel called "Various artistes" that is autogenerated by Youtube these days : http://musicweird.blogspot.com/2014/11/ ... utube.html

shankarank
Posts: 3580
Joined: 15 Jun 2009, 07:16
x 4
x 27

#39 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by shankarank »

SrinathK wrote: 04 Feb 2019, 14:43 But now this same kriti of Thyagaraja when sung in Dikshitar's way - No N3, all N2 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY2T2oNRJSw - uh oh....
Ok that was one refreshing Alapana and a beautiful rendition. This carried over to later compositions as well it seems. For a local group event, a resident vidvan was seen teaching kaliyuga varadan with this as reference , and he did mention pointedly about the dIkshitar sampradAya being followed, especially how the svarAksharam in pazhaniyilE is taken with a clear N2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkFt9si8rZQ

for kaNNudaRkaDavuLIn - exactly at kaDavuLin here https://youtu.be/zkFt9si8rZQ?t=196 am I spying a rgrs?? or No?

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#40 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

Ok now that I have had some more time, some more understanding has come in, and what I'm going to say is going to make me a tad unpopular.

There are many rAgA versions here.
1) For the modern version of what is called brindAvana sAranga with 2 Ns, what we're singing is the HM brindAvani sArang

2) Thyagaraja's version of brindAvana sAranga is completely different from #1 and closer to Sri rAgA. In fact there is a Walajapet version of it available, and as it turns out, the so called rebel BMK was in fact the traditionalist.

Here it is :- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AMpC_aQ8EU - it uses G2 in phrases like GRM and RGS, but a direct RS is also possible.

This is BMK's version : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF1fNdW7YxE - He however introduces a bit of GR as well.

Raga #2 uses only N2, no N3. We will simply designate this as an allotrope of Sri rAgA. This is actually the original CM version.

3) Now the Dikshitar school's version. The SSP has an interesting take on the name. While it calls the rAgA as brindAvani, according to Subbarama Dikshitar, "...this rAgA is also known as brindAvana sAranga by those who know the tradition" . And according to him, it does use G2 in RGR and SGRS.

But here's the difference, saundararAjam as per SSP has plenty of dhrupad style touches, with occasional long drawn glides on SNSN and PMPM and also MR(G)R and also the famous P-R jhAru so characteristic of dhrupad. But if sung as is in the book, it will sound different from today, because those glides are not always.

Today, we've amped up those dhrupad touches and glides until the whole thing sounds utterly different from CM's original version of brindAvana sAranga.

4) As for ranga pura vihAra, it doesn't find mention in the SSP. Notwithstanding the magnificence and power of this kriti, there is doubt as to whether this is even originally Dikshitar's at all <crowd gasps and boos here> :o just like akhilAnDEshwari (which has been explicitly said not to be Dikshitar's).

The difference in this version of brindAvani / brindAvana sAranga here is the complete lack of G2 and the overwhelming presence of the dhrupad style slides, no N3, only N2.

But when you do this, what you end up with is madhmad sArang. One explanation is that some nATa - like phenomenon is at work in avoiding that extra note G2 (nATa has versions with and without D3). The other is that there seems to have been some dispute even in Subbarama Dikshitar's time over that G2 and SD must have mentioned that to resolve the matter.

Another kriti attributed to Dikshitar (but most likely not his) is swAminAthEna, which uses this version.

There has clearly been some confusion between the HM names and CM names for sure, even by the experts. HM names are clear about the differences. CM in the evolution of rAgas and the confluence of styles seems to have got them mixed up.

It turns out that Rangaramanuja Iyengar has another version of ranga pura vihAra in fact. If I find it, I will see whether it is different enough that I should later add a 5th to the list. :lol:

5) D Pattammal's Raga Pravaham has 7 sequences in total - 2 for brindAvani (Dikshitar's brindAvana sAranga), 4 for Thyagaraja's brindAvana sAranga (because all those prayogas are there), and one version of brindAvani sArang with only N2 - this is most likely madhmad sArang wrongly labelled. And to add to this there is the HM brindAvani sArang with both N2 and N3. That covers all the variants seen so far.

So what we have is not 1 but 4 rAgas under one name, of which only one is the original CM one, the other is a dhrupad-ised version of that, the third lacks the G2 (which actually makes it HM madhmad sArang) and the 4th is HM brindAvani sArang with N2 and N3 which is what we're using now.

mEgh and mEgh malhAr I am not covering here. Enough headbreak already!!

In such confusing cases, the only way out is to see it composition by composition. So may I present the 4 versions here :

1) LGJ's tillAnA in modern brindAvani (sArang) with both N3s - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_CIT8rruUw
2) kamalAptakula - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AMpC_aQ8EU - The original CM brindAvana sAranga
3) saundararAjam - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AxA0WYiE5g - This is more modernized and dhrupadized than the SSP version, although it's almost the same as the book version. I'll have to wait for a baroque version
4) ranga pura vihAra - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYKum1K6ffw - The G3 varjya (absent) version, which is actually madhmad sArang in HM.

The Pattamal school tries to use N2 as far as possible in kaliyuga varadan -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkFt9si8rZQ,

But the modern version is clearly version #1 with both N3 and N2 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOVDQRKzDsA - this is HM brindAvani sArang.

The other rAgA that met with a similar fate is nATa. But both these 2 cannot beat kalyAnavasantam with 6 versions so far!

You think this is confusing? Just wait till I get to kApi, for you haven't seen anything yet - not even close. It's a full fledged menu - and I have even found out which rAgAs will act as the ice cream and who will cut the ribbon for the kApi shop. :twisted: - Hint, so far I'm counting 17 members (SEVENTEEN) of that family, and I might extend the invitations north of 20 by the time I open the cafe. I am not joking. :shock: :shock: :o :lol: :lol: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

SrinathK
Posts: 2374
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 16:10
x 174
x 25

#41 Re: brindhAvanasAran'ga vs Brindavani

Post by SrinathK »

Update : After listening to MSS version of ranga pura vihAra, I conclude there is indeed a GRR prayoga in "kodanDa" In the pallavi. So yes, while most of it is madhmad sArang, there is one usage of G alright.

https://youtu.be/n6AWO2CklyI

She sings the GRR phrase in the shloka preceding the kriti as well (at shikarOjvala).

One might have a doubt the lyrics of this kriti, as to whether it is describing Rama or Ranganatha, it is actually closer to Rama! Now I am not aware of any Rama-Ranganatha in Srirangam and no one said anything about any Rama lying on Ananta Sesha when I went there. This is one reason why some wonder if the kriti is really MDs.

But curiously, there are in fact two places where a shayana Rama can be found in Tamilnadu, one at Tiruppullani and the other at the Venugopalaswamy Temple in Kurinjipadi (which I have seen just the other day). The latter is a deity Rama lying on Anantasesha with Seeta over his left leg, an exceedingly beautiful deity in a small and somewhat remote temple. But despite the similarity to the lyrics (vAmanka gata sItA??), only God knows if MD ever came across that temple at all while traveling to and from Chidambaram, let alone compose there and I don't wish to speculate wildly.

MD undoubtedly was influenced by dhrupad Hindustani music in his interpretation of this raga and it shows up in his slow swinging slides on R M and N. Based on SSP notations, at the time, the vali gamaka (making a note oscillate across a wide range of notes, the text book definition of what is gamaka today) was not all that popular then and MD seems to have used it even less than some of his contemporaries, but in brindApvani he has used them frequently for these long swinging (and intoxicating) glides.

In this version, as well as the modern forms devoid of G, the raga reaches a crescendo of sorts on the upper octave R2, which one could say is the most intense note of the raga. Coming down to S, it feels as if all that tension and power rising to a climax is relaxed. The R2 is such a strong note that even in the murchana given by the SSP, it starts on R and not S.

Some more points, coming from saundararAjam AshrayE, the swinging gamakas on R go as GRGR while today, in, the modern versions of this raga (namely madhmad sArang and brindAvani sArang varieties), devoid of G, the R swings much wider, between R and M.

The dhrupad touches extend to many non linear phrases such as pR, PR (descending), PS, MN, RP, RN, PSNS, PSNR, as well as some powerful jharus (slides) between far away notes as well.

Having said this, I should point out that MD has only used these slides in a couple of key places, not as much as I thought based on current renditions. However since his time, as the Hindustani influence into this raga has grown, and the levels of gamaka have increased with time, It is possible to improvise entire passages full of slides.

However these particular touches of dhrupad are unique only to MD. In all other notated versions of the old "classic CM" brindavana saranga, no one else uses those haunting swinging glides, and the interpretation is what you typically expect in CM of a classic 22 mela carnatic raga.

For eg, there is also a kriti by Kumara Ettappa Maharaja (kamalasanAdi chintita padah) - many compositions of the Ettayapuram rajas are found I the SSP - and it doesn't use those glides.

Neither does Subbarama Dikshitar use them in his notated raga phrases. Someday we should bring out both of them.

Popular opinion believes that it was MD who brought in this raga (and many others) from HM. However, I have found out that Ramaswami Dikshitar had in fact used this raga before his more famous son. Also Thyagaraja has composed in old brindAvana sAranga. The characteristics of the raga have in fact been described by Venkatamakhi, who not only named it as brindAvani, but has also given a geetam for it. So it would not be correct to say that it was MD who brought it into CM from the North, it has been around for much longer than that. The Dikshitar parampara has stuck to the name given by Venkatamakhi and therefore calls it as brindAvani. However MD has used the raga mudra of brindAvana sAranga in his lyrics.

So to get the idea of how classic brindAvana sAranga used to be before the various HM versions crept in, here is the Walajapet notated version of Thyagaraja's kamalAptakula, which I have shared again as it needs it's space. Here the raga name is given as brindAvana sAranga. Courtesy Dr. Aravindhan

https://youtu.be/1AMpC_aQ8EU

Only BMK's version in the modern day comes closest to this. The kriti makes a statement about the characteristic of the raga when the opening phrase starts on a G as GR M, M P, N,. As one can observe, in this form, brindavana saranga is much closer to Sri raga and madhyamAvati , but with a more active gandharam, on the way up as well as down, but which can also be bypassed totally for a straight SNPMRS. NGRM can also be found. A straight SRM is also possible.

By comparison, in Sri raga, G is always boxed in by R IN RGR and there is probably one known usage of PMRS (Sri raga varnam, last chittaswaram).

Actually, going by phrases and swaras, the old brindavana sAranga of Thyagaraja and the brindAvani of Dikshitar (in SSP specifically), aren't really two different ragas. They both use the same phrases. The main difference is the HM influence and gamakas which again is very specific to MD and is not seen in others.

The same however cannot be said while comparing old brindavana sAranga with its two siblings who are going by his name now. One of them (madhmad sArang) has no G and the other (brindAvani sArang) has N3 on the ascent and N2 on the descent. So it would not be really correct to call these ragas as brindAvani or even as brindAvana sAranga. Still this faux pass is now universal and it isn't practical to argue with everyone about it.

So while the rest of the world keeps calling all these ragas under the common name of brindAvana sAranga and wondering just what is brindAvani, you my reader, are now much more aware of which raga they are actually performing. :mrgreen:

Some rasikas have requested for a comparison of brindAvana saranga with Sri, madhyamavati, manirangu and pushpalatikA also. I will get back to it down the road one day, because along the way I also need to cover the whole kApi family.

Post Reply