aThANa

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 23 May 2006, 02:55

SR,

Agreed. Let us not discuss our disagreements any more.

BTW my comment about due dilgence for historical evidence is more applicable to your second proposal. I was more interested in the historical and logical aspect of your theory, and i found them inadequate and have already expressed this and provided my reasoning amply earlier.

Maybe I was a dunce, but it wasnt clear from your original post and responses to info from DRS and me that you had not looked into historical evidence to support your claim and that you were looking for it. You said it was "secondary" and perhaps you mean that you saw a connection melodically and want to establish it and then look for historical evidence. But since the eventual conclusions you are drawing is all about history and evolution, history is "secondary" only from a thought process point of view. It is "primary" and of paramount importance to the claims your theory is making.

Hence I am surprised that you would post a "bold" theory about origin and evolution of a raga, without knowing/consulting historical texts atleast a bit. I had presumed you would have done it to some extent already which sort of explains my scorn (although i could have avoided it). I also expected you to look something up - once people started offering counter arguments. The onus is really on you - you know? But you could have also specifically solicited for any history evidence supporting your theory or otherwise from the beginning. And may be the discussion would have proceeded differently.

In any case, you have said it a way that is finally clear enough for me

But no i dont know all aspects this subject (if you look in the old thread, you wouldnt see my name). I have looked it up to some extent only after seeing your theory. Regarding aTANA under 22nd mela - see Dr. SRJ's book "Ragas at a glance". I have also seen aTANA mentioned under 22 on some articles on carnatica.

Arun

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 03:04

Dear SR
here is a short synthetic 'aTANa' aalaapan
http://rapidshare.de/files/21115120/ATa ... n.mp3.html
Since every note is under my control I can vouch for the prayOgams.
Please comment!

Thank you for the piece. You have presented the raga briefly and also incorporated the (I would call it "obsolete") G3 M R S prayoga. I do not contest that such a prayoga existed in an older version. So far I have seen one kRti (elA nI) in which it can be used theoretically, at one location. Other compositions presented (of ST, MD, and T) do not have this G3 M R S.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 23 May 2006, 03:15

CML, can you point to the timeline in your upload where G3 is used..Though I hear the beautiful aTTANa overall, there are a couple of spots that sound odd and I want to see if they somehow map to the G3 usage. Thanks.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 03:31

Dear SR

Could you kindly provide a short resume of your CM/HM training? As I myself who is mainly a rasika had some training under SSI would appreciate knowing your style of analysis based on your musical background. Thank you.

If you supply an e-mail address, I will be happy to oblige.

SR

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 23 May 2006, 03:45

kapi,

Are you sure this is MVI? His voice seems quite different (much lower sruthi) than what I have heard in one concert recording sometime ago . Besides the recording is indeed wonderful quality. If it is MVI, do you when was this recorded?

SR - Am i right in that there was no usage of G2 in kalpana swaras in the MVI rendition - or maybe i missed it? If I am right, do you feel that the aTANA's swaroopa is "diminished" because of this? I ask this because i have a Dr. S. Ramanathan version of kumAra nagarAlayE where the Kalpana swaras also doesnt include G2 (but neither G3 as well) from what I can tell, and there doesnt seem anything lacking to me.

But of course I agree that compositions have G2. Regarding tha G3 phrase, while I agree it has a kannaDa flavor but to me at least it seems to fit within the realm of "aTANA". It also seems to ring faint bells as "i have heard this in aTANA" - but i dont know when and where!

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 04:23

SR
correct again. I did use the tAra G3 (according to you 'obsolete' but not as taught by SSI) prayogas. Perhaps that was the way aTANa was in olden times. If that is true it was not an illegitimate mother of current versions where G3 (and in fact all Gs ) are eschewed. Also oldtimers like me do enjoy the prayOgams. But any shade of DK will startle us indeed (until I hear your version). The issue of the mELa is immaterial for many of us. Even SRJ admitting the traditional attribution to 28 or 29 concedes that 22 is acceptable. No point in debating it in my view. The issue I am waiting for is your DK connection!
Pl send your e-mail to me [email protected]

VK

I can post a timeline for your info later. But why don't you post your timeline where you feel uncomfortable first. Play the guessing game rather than asking for the answer

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 04:36

Arun

The MVI atana is from the posting in Rasikapriya and I think it is a recording in early 60s. Also the Gandhara prayogam was not at all uncommon among the old timers though it wa an 'alpa' prayOgam!

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 23 May 2006, 04:41

CML, OK...we can play that way

I am not sure if the WMP timeline will match with what ever player you are using ( previously there were some discrepancies with winamp... ). The total duration WMP shows is 30 seconds

These are the three spots that I thought will require some examination ( It may just be some gamaka artifact or my lack of knowledge of the raga. I am going by the high level feel I have for the raga).

14-15
18-19
24-26

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 05:40

Just checked HMB's chamUNDAmbA aShTottara kIrttanai notated. (pp162-164) cidagnikuNDasambhUtAyai has countable madhya and tAra gaandhaara prayogams (even in his ciTTaswaram). like MG,M- R',G'R',-R',G',M', etc., Now it is getting too tiring trying to track down the gaandhaaram (though currently alpa prayogam) was not at all uncommon in notations or renderings among the old veterans. I stop my search here

HMB attributes aTANa to 28th mELa...

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 06:58

Congrats VK! You have sharp hearing and aTANa. I had used the gandharam on seven occasions and you detected three of them. You missed the alpa prayOgam but got the prolonged ones which stand out like s 'sore thumb'. Here is your answer.

14-15 the phrase is S'N*PG
18-19 the phrase is R'G'S'NS'R'G'
25-26 the phrase is S'R'G', (note that this violates the grammar!)

Hence clearly the alpa prayogams are quite smooth and clean which is what our (old) masters say. However the full use of tAra gandharam does not appear nonmelodic though due to our current conditioning we find it strange!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 07:21

SR correct again. I did use the tAra G3 (according to you 'obsolete' but not as taught by SSI) prayogas. Perhaps that was the way aTANa was in olden times. If that is true it was not an illegitimate mother of current versions where G3 (and in fact all Gs ) are eschewed. Also oldtimers like me do enjoy the prayOgams. But any shade of DK will startle us indeed (until I hear your version). The issue of the mELa is immaterial for many of us. Even SRJ admitting the traditional attribution to 28 or 29 concedes that 22 is acceptable. No point in debating it in my view. The issue I am waiting for is your DK connection!
Pl send your e-mail to me [email protected]

Thanks - pleas check your e-mail. The demo is under preparation. Also the proposed connection of aThANa to DK is through aDANa.

SR

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 23 May 2006, 09:04

Here is a demo of my main points made earlier in the discussion:

http://rapidshare.de/files/21150790/dar ... a.mp3.html

The file is 27 MB, but I hope it works.

Best Wishes,
Sangeet Rasik

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 09:27

SR

Thanks for keepiing the promise. Since it is late let me listen to it tomorrow and then get back! Good night!

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 23 May 2006, 13:56

SR, thanks for uploading your demo. Very well done in bringing out the raga lakshnas of the three ragas discussed there.

Before I try to dissect it and understand it from the point of view of your hypothesis, first possibly a silly question: After the dhaivatha substitution, why do you say the same gamaka for 'dha' is used? You sing them well side by side and they don't sound to be the same type of oscillation.

Second, is the CM aThAna pUrvAnga avarOhanam you sing the nominal one? If I just listen to that in isolation, yes, it sounds same as aDDAna ( because you sing the same sequence ) but I do not hear that prominently in a CM aThAna krithi ( that has a very strong kAnaDA connection which I would have noticed ).

Third, dhaivatha substitution is a very big deal ...so to test your hypothesis, are the other similarities really strong enough to look beyond the 'big deal' Dha substitution....Because if you allow this too easily, you are opening the door too wide for making such connections in other such 'only different in one swara but otherwise with similar prayogas' raga pairs...

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 May 2006, 20:43

SR

You have done a nice job. The delineation of DK though brief is elegantly done. The transition to ADANA is done seamlessly. It is a capsule summary of Rajan Parikkar. But now in less than three minutes you sweep your hand and produce aThANa. Of course your phrases come out nice and convincingly but then that can be done with many more ragas with similar uttaranga. Then one can claim that every raga has multiple parents. It is simplistic to claim that the replacement of su D with cha D is all that is there to CM aThANa. The poorvanga of aThANa is equally important. Gaandharam is a workhorse in DK and to some extent in aDANa too (though I am not too well versed here). Our CM aThANa has indeed evolved over time and there was a legitimate parent from whom all the sancaarams can be derived. It is clear that parent existed long before Tansen's DK from which aDANa was derived. It is nice to see the similarity in some of the sancaarams and that is all. It is very doubtful Thyagaraja was in anyway influenced by HM. SvAtI certainly was and did do a masterpiece in DK but then to my knowledge none in aDANa and his aThANa for what we know through SSI and HMB is patterned after Thyagaraja only. You cannot derive those phrases let alone aalaapana from HM! You have established the similarity in 'certain' sancaaraas with morphing between the two ragas. it is indeed a leap of faith to claim that there is a filial bond! Thanks for your efforts and for sharing it with us!

raviraj · Post by **raviraj** » 23 May 2006, 22:00

Folks,

In this ongoing discussion, wWhile there was a fleeting reference by arunk to SSP, just wanted to provide
reference to what Subbarama Dikshithar actually said about the raga lakshana of Atana in SSP and I quote him:

1. Since both kaiÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â´siki nishadam and kaakali nishaadam come mixed in this raagam, people of modern saampradaayam have determined that this is a janyam of (29) dhıraÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â´sankarabharanam.Therefore, Venkatamakhi who is the principal guru for those who revere the ancient sampradÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¯ayam, treating kaisiki as the lakshana svaram (kuRippu svaram), has determined that this is a janyam of (28) harikedaragaula.

2.Gandharam- This svaram shows up as saadhaarana gandharam in some places, antara gandharam some other times, and sometimes with kampitam without even touching the level of antara gandharam.

His notation for Brihaspate as well as Tyagarajo Virajate seem to indicate usage of both the gandharams I shall try to collate and post those portions of the sahitya from SSP.

Please continue your discussions..

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 24 May 2006, 01:29

SR, I gave it a second listen... I know the poorvanga is not the focus of your hypothesis but at the end where you do the avarohana poorvanga of aThANA, that segment has too much out-of-aThANA feel.. lot closer to kAnaDA than aThANA. To some extent this out-of-aThANA feel is also there ( for my not so trained ear ) for your 'mapped and dha transformed' prayogas in the uttarAngA but not as pronoucned as the avarOhana poorvangam

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 01:57

But now in less than three minutes you sweep your hand and produce aThANa. Of course your phrases come out nice and convincingly but then that can be done with many more ragas with similar uttaranga.

The phrases come out convincingly because the core of the two ragas is the same. It is not an isolated phrase or a group of swaras, but the lakshaNa that is is strikingly similar. All the more given the fact that both are fairly limited ragas. This is not possible to extrapolate arbitrarily to any raga.

Then one can claim that every raga has multiple parents. It is simplistic to claim that the replacement of su D with cha D is all that is there to CM aThANa.

We have to ask ourselves what the content of a typical aThANa alapana is. It is essentially variations on the same set of phrases as presented in the demo. In other words the core of the raga is the same.

The poorvanga of aThANa is equally important.

It is not. All compositions are confined to uttarAnga with forays into the pUrvanga as needed in the madhya- and tara- octaves.

Gaandharam is a workhorse in DK and to some extent in aDANa too (though I am not too well versed here).

Gandhara is a workhorse in DK but not in aDANa. It is not clear what a statement such as "workhorse to some extent" means. One has to speak in musical terms.

Our CM aThANa has indeed evolved over time and there was a legitimate parent from whom all the sancaarams can be derived. It is clear that parent existed long before Tansen's DK from which aDANa was derived. It is nice to see the similarity in some of the sancaarams and that is all.

It is not at all clear. I have no trouble is believing that there are several other add-ons to aThANa. All ragas go through phases of refinement and modification. Phrases such "G3 M R S" may have been add-ons. We really do not have any method for tracing ragas in detail in texts before the 16th century or so. Also, the appearance/non-appearance of a raga in a text does not mean it did not exist or was not well-known in another part of India. There was very little standardization in those days. This is why I consider a carefully-developed melodic connection to be more reliable than historical documents.

I understand your "conservative" viewpoint, all the same I believe there is much merit in going beyond "scratching the surface". New insights are created in this manner. While I want to confine the discussions in this thread to aThANa, in general there is a fairly large group of ragas whose connections are inadequately considered in the wider classical music community. These ragas are (for example):

HM: darbArI kAnaDa, aDANa, nAyakI kAnaDa, SahAna kAnaDa, huseni kAnaDa
CM: kAnaDa, darbAr, aThANa, nAyaki, SahAna, huseni

Perhaps there is a PhD thesis or paper somewhere in the literature on this subject. Or perhaps this could be a good topic for a PhD thesis. But it seems it is not well known at the moment.

It is very doubtful Thyagaraja was in anyway influenced by HM. SvAtI certainly was and did do a masterpiece in DK but then to my knowledge none in aDANa and his aThANa for what we know through SSI and HMB is patterned after Thyagaraja only. You cannot derive those phrases let alone aalaapana from HM! You have established the similarity in 'certain' sancaaraas with morphing between the two ragas. it is indeed a leap of faith to claim that there is a filial bond! Thanks for your efforts and for sharing it with us!

I see no basis for such statements. Firstly, all CM composers have been influenced to a significant extent by HM, and probably vice versa. Our two systems are much more interconnected than many believe. There was very considerable exchange of musicians between North and South India ever since the middle ages (and even before). It is not at all a leap of faith to claim a connection between these two ragas. I understand your "traditionalist"/"conservative" point of view, but I disagree with it because I believe it prevents us from going deeper into this subject.

In particular, aThANa is a raga that has always defied classification under 29 and 28 because it does not fit with the ragas of that fold. I believe that part of the reason is because the origin of this raga in the kAnaDa fold has not been fully considered nor well understood. Now we can see possible beginnings of a natural convergence towards a more rational classification (under 22) as well as perhaps a better understanding of its kAnaDa roots. I do understand that this may be disturbing to traditionalists, and indeed their criticisms will be valuable in ensuring that theories are carefully developed and properly validated. But after a point, it may become a question of denying the obvious.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 02:10

SR, I gave it a second listen... I know the poorvanga is not the focus of your hypothesis but at the end where you do the avarohana poorvanga of aThANA, that segment has too much out-of-aThANA feel.. lot closer to kAnaDA than aThANA. To some extent this out-of-aThANA feel is also there ( for my not so trained ear ) for your 'mapped and dha transformed' prayogas in the uttarAngA but not as pronoucned as the avarOhana poorvangam

You may want to consider the material below, and perhaps this gentleman may have some additional views on this subject. Does anyone know him ?

I just googled to see if there is anything online that has been said of this issue. And here is what I found. As in the case of the 22nd janya issue, I find (to my satisfaction, I must admit) that I am not the first one to consider this, and I am not just pulling rabbits out of a hat.

This original link (http://www.sangeetham.com/dec_news.php3 ... =yes&id=60) does not work but the Cache file still exists:

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:Pz ... =clnk&cd=2

Sriram Parsuram at Sri Parthasarathy Swami Sabha

Lec-dem on Comparative study of rAgas in HindustAni and KarnAtik music by Sriram
Parasuram-22nd December 2004 at Parthasarathy Swamy Sabha

Sriram started the demonstration with an AlApana of kAnaDa. Then he sang svAmi yEzhai nAn ayya un saraNam nambinEnÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦.a composition of Anai and Ayya. He said that the Hindustani rAgas are more melodic in nature and are classified based on the sancAra and prayOga. There are 10 thATs in Hindustani music and they are phrase based. In Carnatic music the 72 mEla scheme is complete and comprehensive. The word kAnaDa has come from kAnhara and this means Krishna in braj bASha. In the north, rAgas are named after a king, tribe (bilAwal), region (gaud sArang, sudda bangAla) etc.

There are two complex musical phrases found in all kinds of kAnaDas(ga ma ri and dha ni pa). The two prayOgas are the dha ni pa and ga ma ri. darbAri kAnaDa, ADAnA kAnaDa, nAyaki kAnaDa, suha kAnaDa are some rAgas in the kAnaDa family. In Carnatic music, the rAgas sahAna, aThANa, darbAr and nAyaki have strong traces of kAnaDa. He sang darbAri kAnaDa and explained the sancAra sa ri g a, ga ma ri. In the north, kAnaDa means darbAri kAnada. To explain the rAga darbAr, he sang the varnam calamE. The signature of the rAga is ga ga ri sa ri in the pUrvAnga and ni ni dha pa dha in the uttarAnga. The prayOgas in kAnaDa are ga; ma ri sa ri and ni, dha pa dha.

Then he took the rAga nAyaki and first sang some lines from kanukOnu saukhyamu. Then he explained that darbAr and nAyaki have subtle differences in the ga ma ri and dha ni pa prayOgas. He also added that, the flavour of the prayOga defines the rasa of the rAga. nAyaki is pathos filled and darbAr is majestic. Gopal Nayak was a musician at the time of Amir Khusro. The name nAyaki is said to have come as he created the rAga. Tansen made darbAri years after Gopal Nayak made nAyaki but when somebody says kAnaDa it means darbAri kAnaDa by default. The dha ni pa prayOga is rare in the rendition of nAyaki. It only occurs 3or 4 times during the Alap.

ShahAna means to the king or of the king or sometimes even refers to god. The name sahAna has been derived from this. The rAga sahAna has ga ma ri as the main prayOga or jIva. He sang the divyanAma kIrtana ÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“vandanamu raghu nandanaÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 24 May 2006, 06:41

SR: Sriram Parasuram is a CM concert performer... his wife Anuradha Sriram is also a singer, film playback, CM and HM. I think they have given concerts together combining CM and HM styles in one sitting. ( Hope I got the couple right )...

I read the material. I am not sure which parts you were drawing my attention to: The words 'ga ma ri prayOga is found' or the general adana-athana connection. If it is the latter, I am not really sure if you can draw any conclusions from what the reviewer wrote about what Sriram said.

SR, a question for my info: In HM raga genealogy convention, do they allow for swara substitution while considering such inheritance hierarchies and put them under the same tree even if they do not sound similar to the ear?

I know that in HM the raga geneology based on common phrases and prayoga is the core for classification but the many such families that Rajan P. had discussed, when I listen to the music in such a family of ragas, there is that melodic resemblance while listening..

I listened to adana from Rajan Parikkar's sawf archive. After 17 seconds or so, I went 'how could this adana have morphed into CM attana'.. As you wrote, it is really not about my side vs your side, if there is really such a transformation happened I want to relate to it but they sound so far apart while listening...it is hard to reconcile melodically. ( and I have not gone past the dha substitution which is a big stumbling block even if I forgo the aural dissimilarity and look at the underlying scales )

kmrasika · Post by **kmrasika** » 24 May 2006, 07:26

While on the wonderful discussions on the subject of this rAga, I wondered whether someone could post a clip and possibly a notation for the rarely heard varNam of paTTaNam subrahmaNya iyyer, "ShrInivAsa nannubrOva rAdA." It does have a beauty to its ciTTasvara and eTTugada svara passages.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 07:30

SR: Sriram Parasuram is a CM concert performer... his wife Anuradha Sriram is also a singer, film playback, CM and HM. I think they have given concerts together combining CM and HM styles in one sitting. ( Hope I got the couple right )...

Yes, I know of Sriram. His family is very musical. I think he has two brothers who are also musicians. I meant to ask if anyone knew him personally and if he could be invited to the forum (if he is not already here!).

I read the material. I am not sure which parts you were drawing my attention to: The words 'ga ma ri prayOga is found' or the general adana-athana connection. If it is the latter, I am not really sure if you can draw any conclusions from what the reviewer wrote about what Sriram said.

I am not drawing any definite conclusions. I am saying that I am not the only one that sees strong connections between the ragas under discussion, and the underlying strong musical basis for those connections.

I listened to adana from Rajan Parikkar's sawf archive. After 17 seconds or so, I went 'how can this adana morph into CM attana'..

And this was explained in the demo.

As you wrote, it is really not about my side vs your side, if there is really such a transformation happened I want to relate to it but they are so far apart while listening...it is hard to reconcile melodically. I know that in HM the raga geneology based on common phrases and prayoga is the core for classification but the many such families that Rajan P. had discussed, when you listen to the music in such a family of ragas, there is that melodic resemblance to ear... here I do not get that.

As I mentioned earlier, an immediate melodic impact is neither a necessary nor sufficient criterion, and is more often than not, misleading. The more rigorous tests lie in:

1) Their phraseology which can withstand changes in swara. For example, you wrote eloquently about the different bhavas that the two ragas aDANa and aThANa bring forth. That is one amazing thing about Indian classical music - a single swara change can alter the entire mood and even allows additional technical scope, while retaining the core of the previous raga. Indian musicologists over the ages have revelled in this type of "raga-smithing". In phraseologically related ragas, we usually see changes in one swara, as in the kAnaDa family.

2) Nomenclature: Some people do not give much credence to nomenclature (i.e. comparative raga names). I believe this is a mistake and goes against common sense in many cases. Many times "raga-smithing" goes to the extent of complete somersaults, yet the two ragas are obviously related by the manner in which one was conceived from the other.

E.g., bhUpAli (HM) and bhUpAlam (CM) do not sound anything like each other but they are related. The latter can be obtained by switching the swaras of the former (R2 --> R1, G3 --> G2, D2 --> D1). Both ragas likely started out as one. Somewhere, the swara-switch was done by an enterprising musician, and a new raga was created. One cannot say that this process is "dishonest", since the new raga carries a variant of the name of the old one. A curious process indeed!

Similarly the HM Todi and CM Todi are quite different melodically, but must obviously be related. In other words, one of them must have evolved out of the other by the very process of "morphing". It is hard to imagine that two musicologists (one guy in North India and the other in South India) independently created these two sampurna ragas and also named them Todi. A more plausible explanation is that there was originally one Todi, which evolved into two by the process of "raga-smithing". Of course, there is nothing preventing the "original" Todi itself from evolving incrementally over the ages. This additionally complicates matters in some cases. The name is an important clue, not just a coincidence as some people tend to dismiss it as !

Another example: the HM Shri Raga has the scale of Kamavardhani whereas the CM Shri Raga is a "somersault". Its swaras are the exact opposite of the HM Shri.

Yet another: the HM Hindol (S G3 M2 D2 N3 S) and the CM Hindolam (S G2 M1 D1 N2 S) are related inversely. The melodic equivalent of HM Hindol is CM SunAdavinodinI. Yet, it is more likely that Hindolam and Hindol are evolutionary cousins, whereas SunAdavinodinI is a product of a different line in CM and is melodically the same as HM Hindol.

Thus, it is likely that the creator of CM SunAdavinodinI was not at all influenced by HM Hindol, and neither was the CM Hindolam influenced by HM Malkauns ! Again, the nomenclatural similarity provides the clue.

Sometimes the names as well as the swaras are preserved. E.g., HM Ahir Bhairav has the same scale and phraseology as CM Bhairavam (a janya of Chakravakam melakarta).

In the present case also, both the weight of phraseology and nomenclature are strongly in support of the aDANa-aThANa connection.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 24 May 2006, 09:22

I can't really comment on the nomenclature based genealogy though at first blush words like 'the two thodis must obviously be related", "all CM composers have been influenced to a significant extent by HM" seem too strong given the scant evidence to support the 'leave no doubt' qualifiers that you use... But I know next to nothing about this stuff to say one way or the other about the nomenclature thing you talk about.

But here are some questions...

1) If not for the nomenclature similarity between aDANa-aThANa would you have gotten curious about their possible relationship by just listening to them and then examine them closely to ferrett out the prayoga similarity after the dha substitution?

2) If you consider only prayoga similarity and not swara sameness, what raga aesthetic criteria do you use to decide when to stop the swara substitution?

3) The sub-question of the above in the light of not considering the two related ragas to be not even in the melodic or bhava neighborhood.

2 and 3 are significant since if you do not have an aesthetic criteria, then you allow for relationships where none might actually exist. Given the little historical record, the argument itself then self-destroys in terms of useability due to its own tremendous success.

4) Sort of related to the above...You wrote: ".. a single swara change can alter the entire mood and even allows additional technical scope, while retaining the core of the previous raga...". What does "retaining the core" mean artisitically and aesthetically? ( and not in terms of phrase structure ).

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 May 2006, 19:33

VK
This is especially for you as a language specialist

DarbAri KANADA--->KANADA-->(KADANA)-->ADANA-->AThANA(CM)

The mutation took place gradually. The intermediate form (KADANA) did not survive. The K-gene being unfit got deleted. The D(dhaivatam) N (NishAdam) transposition was mostly linguistic slip. The D(dhaivatam) mutated in CM and according to dravidian (Tamil) linguistics got 'hardened' (kharaM). Also this evolved ragam fused with a preexisting raga of the same name derived from shankarAbharaNam which was mutating into the neibhouring HarikAmbOdhi to produce the present aThANa.

Thus aThANa is a mongrel but being famous everybody can lay claim to its glory!

Now for your entertainment here is a (fictional?) story.

MD was spending considerable time at vAraNAsi polishing his CM and looking for the best in HM. One fine evening he heard a majestic tune floating around which made him spell bound. He promptly recognized it as the Darbaari of Tansen but not quite. As he came out in search he located a panvaalaH singing blithely and not knowing hindusthani asked: 'kim rAgA?' The perplexed panvaalaH assumed that he was asking for (all of his) 'pAn paraaga' responded promptly 'AThANA saab' (Ath(eight)+ ANNA(british coinage)). MD understood it as the name of the raga and promptly composed the majestic 'brihaspatE'

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 May 2006, 20:39

Dear SR
Pl listen to mama
http://www.sangeethapriya.org/~tvg/02%2 ... 0Atana.mp3
especially 4:14 to 4:17 where he rolls the antara gaandharam. That is his typical style with atana!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 21:04

1) If not for the nomenclature similarity between aDANa-aThANa would you have gotten curious about their possible relationship by just listening to them and then examine them closely to ferrett out the prayoga similarity after the dha substitution?

Of course - as I mentioned to ArunK, the name-similarity was not the feature that provoked my curiosity but rather it helped to support my initial feeling that aThANa sounded more like it came out of a kAnaDa group than the 29th or 28th group.

2) If you consider only prayoga similarity and not swara sameness, what raga aesthetic criteria do you use to decide when to stop the swara substitution?

Aesthetics is a loose word and its definition varies for different people. As I see it, the use of prayogas/phrases to define ragas which are then used to create music, is aesthetics in itself.

When we try to trace connections between existing ragas, one has to rely on several factors, including phraseology and nomenclature. Where one draws the line is somewhat unclear - but if I have two ragas that 1) contain very similar phraseology, 2) show major alterations in only one swara, 3) share essentially the same name, and 4) are part of a larger group that share such phraseological and/or nomenclatural similarity - that would definitely qualify as a strong case.

3) The sub-question of the above in the light of not considering the two related ragas to be not even in the melodic or bhava neighborhood.

If I had two ragas that essentially share the same name and if their scales are the direct "inverse" of each other, that would definitely get my attention. If the nomenclature similarity was weak, and in addition there is no obvious swara-exchange pattern, then there is a much weaker case.

So far I have not mentioned any such weak cases at all, to the best of my knowledge.

1) aDANa - aThANa : similar phraseology, similar name
2) darbArI kAnaDa - kAnaDa : similar phraseology, similar name
3) bhUpAli - bhUpAlam: similar name, exact inverse swaras
4) hindol - hindolam: similar name, exact inverse swaras
5) Shri : same name, exact inverse swaras
6) Ahir Bhairav - Bhairavam: similar name, same scale, similar phraseology

2 and 3 are significant since if you do not have an aesthetic criteria, then you allow for relationships where none might actually exist. Given the little historical record, the argument itself then self-destroys in terms of useability due to its own tremendous success.

You are talking about pathological cases, which I have not approached even closely.

4) Sort of related to the above...You wrote: ".. a single swara change can alter the entire mood and even allows additional technical scope, while retaining the core of the previous raga...". What does "retaining the core" mean artisitically and aesthetically? ( and not in terms of phrase structure ).

Phrase structure is at the core of aesthetics in Indian classical music.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 24 May 2006, 21:15

Phrase structure is at the core of aesthetics in Indian classical music.

This is probably the most difficulty I have with this. Phrase structure without considering what variant of the swaras make up the phrase structure is NOT at the core of raga aesthetics in Indian Classical music. But your "limited" definition where you stop the swara substitution to one swara is something one can discuss but the above "strong" belief seems counter to what is normally understood to be the essence of indian classical music. I wonder, treating the above statement in isolation, if this statement 'phrase structure regardless of which swarasthana" can withstand the true test of overwhelming counter-evidence. Where I am going with is, aren't there countless examples in HM itself where there are similar phrase structures and where the ragas are not related?

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 21:42

This is probably the most difficulty I have with this. Phrase structure without considering what variant of the swaras make up the phrase structure is NOT at the core of raga aesthetics in Indian Classical music.

I did not say that there is no consideration of which swaras are actually used. I have already mentioned this - in the two ragas the swaras in the main phrases are also same sve for the dhaivata substitution.

But your "limited" definition where you stop the swara substitution to one swara is something one can discuss

It seems that we are running around in circles. I clearly meant that I am considering phraseology and limited swara substitution. Obviously I not naive enough to compare cases in which one might keep keep some phrases similar and change any arbitrary number of swaras. Of course, musicians may have done this in the past but it is impossible to trace such connections unless there is some other historical evidence or some type of other clue like preservation of the raga name. But even then, these cases would be weak. We are not considering such cases - waste of time.

Where I am going with is, aren't there countless examples in HM itself where there are similar phrase structures and where the ragas are not related?

Why only in HM - even in CM this is the case. There seems to be a disconnect between what I am saying and what you are thinking about. I am not trying to prove any general rule for connecting ragas. I am considering specific cases for which is there is a preponderance of evidence for a strong connection.

I do not understand why we need to extrapolate this to a clearly irrelevant limit of ragas that have no relation to each other. Let's focus the discussion and let us not assume that the other does not understand these general points.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 24 May 2006, 21:58

Dear SR
Pl listen to mama
http://www.sangeethapriya.org/~tvg/02%2 ... 0Atana.mp3
especially 4:14 to 4:17 where he rolls the antara gaandharam. That is his typical style with atana!

Thanks. When I played this file, the entire time was only 2:39.

Again, there was no trace of G3 in the kRti itself.

Again, the "G3 M R S" prayoga appears once (at 1:36 in my player) in the kalpanaswara.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 May 2006, 21:59

I think there is no point in beating around the bush. SR has made his case. None of us deny traces of Kanada, darbar in aThANa (as the learned lecdem supports). There is no objection to claiming the parentage to 22nd mELa. Clearly the older aThANa was diffferent with more prominant use of antara gaandhara. It is preserved for us in the recordings of the old veterans. Now let us look forward to see what the aDANa connection will do (which I think is justified). SR has not done his homework in showing the full potential. I would suggest that he provides a demonstration of aalaap as well as a short kriti with the innovation slanted towards HM. perhaps if he can invite Sriram parashuram to give us an insight it will be indeed a major contribution to CM. I am looking for other constructive suggestions!

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 25 May 2006, 00:25

MD was spending considerable time at vAraNAsi polishing his CM and looking for the best in HM. One fine evening he heard a majestic tune floating around which made him spell bound. He promptly recognized it as the Darbaari of Tansen but not quite. As he came out in search he located a panvaalaH singing blithely and not knowing hindusthani asked: 'kim rAgA?' The perplexed panvaalaH assumed that he was asking for (all of his) 'pAn paraaga' responded promptly 'AThANA saab' (Ath(eight)+ ANNA(british coinage)). MD understood it as the name of the raga and promptly composed the majestic 'brihaspatE'

Everything cooks well - also, an ancestor of Shammi Kapoor happened to be passing by and asked "Ek se mera kya hoga ?" whereupon the paanwalla replied "Sau ANNa !" which MD understood as "sahAna" and proceeded to compose "SrI kamalAmbikAyAm" right after "bRhaspate", which totally explains why MD uses only sadharana gandhara in Sahana and classifies it under 22 melakarta.

Here is another distinct possibility:

One day MD was singing the aThANa version handed down by VenkaTamakhin. However, that day he was suffering from stomach-ache and hence his dhaivata and gandhara were a bit off-key. To his surprise he felt much better after singing this "fake" version of aThANa and composed the monumental piece "bRHaspate" in this version. Later (as is well known) he used this same trick to cure the stomach-ache of one of his disciples (a chap named Pillai) - the disciple was asked to sing "bRhaspate" regularly and indeed he too was cured. However, Semmangudi insisted on singing the old version of aThANa - no wonder he sounds "constipated".

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 May 2006, 01:15

SR
nice riposte!

If you play it in window's player the total timing is 5:09!

I shoul have added that MD's brihaspate is totally gaandhaara varjitam is primarily uttaraanga prayOgams!

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 25 May 2006, 06:24

SR: I agree we are going in circles. what I am saying has for sure gone beyond the addana-athana connection, but for a good reason. Sorry if I came across as assuming you do not know stuff. Far from it.

Here are my two final 'distilled' issues ( you can safely assume I fully understand what you have written )

1) You said "I do not understand why we need to extrapolate this to a clearly irrelevant limit of ragas that have no relation to each other.". My logical rebuttal is "How do you know they are not related to start with. I thought your interest is in finding those relationships".

2) You said "I clearly meant that I am considering phraseology and limited swara substitution" - What is the limit? 1 substitution or 2 or more. I am not being knee-jerkish here, that is the crux of the issue.

Both of these issues may not really require a response if you are limiting this discussion to aDDAna-AThaNA

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 25 May 2006, 09:52

I think there is no point in beating around the bush. SR has made his case. None of us deny traces of Kanada, darbar in aThANa (as the learned lecdem supports). There is no objection to claiming the parentage to 22nd mELa. Clearly the older aThANa was diffferent with more prominant use of antara gaandhara. It is preserved for us in the recordings of the old veterans. Now let us look forward to see what the aDANa connection will do (which I think is justified). SR has not done his homework in showing the full potential. I would suggest that he provides a demonstration of aalaap as well as a short kriti with the innovation slanted towards HM. perhaps if he can invite Sriram parashuram to give us an insight it will be indeed a major contribution to CM. I am looking for other constructive suggestions!

I think the melodic connection has been made to a great extent. At this juncture I can see no merit in showing that an AlAp of aDANa will sound "similar" to one of aThANa. Of course they will, as the alapana will be based on the phraseology encountered in the demo already presented. It will be a trivial exercise (and as you have already commented, the characteristic phrases are convincingly similar). The many excellent pieces already available in the two ragas make the connection evident to a listener who is not misled by superficial similarity or differences.

What "sounds similar" varies from one listener to another, and cannot be used as a reliable guideline. It is more reliable to break the ragas into their legitimate characteristic phrases and analyze those in a more "technical" sense - swarasthAnas, gamakas, lakshaNas. This is what was done in the demo. Both ragas have evolved over the ages, and have developed minor differences, but the essential phraseology - that makes each of them unique, and well-defined, and distinct from other ragas of their fold - is the same.

In addition, the fact that they carry the same name (how likely is it that two ragas were invented separately in different parts of India and given the same name ?), and the fact that they belong to a larger group of closely connected ragas that also carry similar names to each other (how probable a coincidence is that ?), already create a preponderance of evidence.

I do agree that an exercise in analyzing material from HM/CM texts (ideally from the 13th century through to the 19th) will likely be useful and needs to be done. I am in the process of carefully analyzing this material, and also estimating the extent of its reliability in view of the lack of "standardization" in the days before mass communication became easy. Once I get the ball rolling on this aspect, sharing textual information available to you will be useful (preferably in the original Sanskrit/Hindi/other language, and/or translation).

I also agree that it would be very desirable to have Sriram Parsuram weigh in with his views on this subject, since he apparently takes chronological precedence over me in publicly proposing a comparison of these ragas. If anyone here personally knows him, kindly invite him to share his knowledge. Else, I will try contacting him.

SR

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 25 May 2006, 20:41

SR

could you list svaras of the four phrases you have chosen for illustration and also the svaras for the concluding purvanga elaboration. I have a vague feeling that you are substrituting kaisihi nishadam in place of the cha dhaivatam. I could verify if you can provide the svaras. Thanks.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 26 May 2006, 00:36

1) You said "I do not understand why we need to extrapolate this to a clearly irrelevant limit of ragas that have no relation to each other.". My logical rebuttal is "How do you know they are not related to start with. I thought your interest is in finding those relationships".

And I do not know a priori if an arbitrary raga X is related to another aribitrary one Y. Neither do I care. I picked a case wherein a strong similarity already exists.

2) You said "I clearly meant that I am considering phraseology and limited swara substitution" - What is the limit? 1 substitution or 2 or more. I am not being knee-jerkish here, that is the crux of the issue.

I really don't know - and again, it is irrelevant for the most part. There isn't any set rule. It depends on other things - phraseology and nomenclature. In general, I would be most comfortable with the following two extremes:

1) Phraseology is similar, the raga names are similar, there is already well-known connections between similar ragas, and only 1 swara is changed at the most. This is what we are dealing with presently.

2) The raga names are similar, and the scale involves a complete somersault, i.e. all swaras are systematically inverted. There need be no phraseological similarity - someone just inverted the swaras and created a new scale which has its own melodic possibilities. There are several such examples as I have mentioned.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 26 May 2006, 05:41

SR

could you list svaras of the four phrases you have chosen for illustration and also the svaras for the concluding purvanga elaboration. I have a vague feeling that you are substrituting kaisihi nishadam in place of the cha dhaivatam. I could verify if you can provide the svaras. Thanks.

CMLover,

The substitution is a chatussruti dhaivata sans doubt. A most evident feature is the similarity in the kampita gamaka. In both ragas, when descending from tara shadja, the dhaivata is strongly linked with the nishada:

S (n)d(n)d, n p

The easiest way to tell is by noticing the difference between the two kampita dhaivatas "(n)d(n)d" and the nishada that follows it.

Phrases:

#1: pnSR,S (n)d(n)d, n p

#2: m p S, n R S (n)d(n)d, n p

#3: m p S (n)d(n)d, n p

#4: m p R S (n)d(n)d, n p

#5: (n)d(n)d n p m p S (n)d(n)d ,

concluding purvanga phrase:

m p S, (n)d(n)d, n p m p g m r s (rmpnS) (n)d,

SR

PS: When singing the kampita dhaivata of these phrases in HM aDANa, I had only one "(n)d", whereas I often sang two "(n)d(n)d" in CM aThANa for emphasis. Maybe that threw you off a bit.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 26 May 2006, 08:41

Thanks SR
It will take some time for me to analyze and compare the two strings. I am sure it will be interesting and objective. In the meantime continue with the historical issues.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 26 May 2006, 17:53

SR

here is an objective analysis of your phrase1.
The audio is in
http://rapidshare.de/files/21427502/Phrase1.wav.html
The phrase is
pnSR,S (n)d(n)d, n p
where the the first dhaivatam is shuddha and the second chatushruti. The following is an FFT graph of your audio.

The final straight line is 'pa' and the preceding blip is 'ni' preceded by your crucial 'da'. The picture clearly shows that you are clearly singing
pnSR,S n,n p
whereas you have the kampitam on the nishadam at the latter. I have objective frequency measurements in (Hz) (I am sure Arun can do a superb job here!).
The phrase as such is legal in both ADANA and ATANA since the uttaranga is same for both the ragas. While I have heard a ton of atana my exposure to aDANa is minimal. I have heard a few now (just recently amir khan's immortal 'jhanak jhanak paayal baaje' (thanks to Lakshman's recommendation!) which does not have a shadow of atana!).

I can analyze the other phrases which will be time consuming. But the conclusions won't be different and the message is clear. Your case is weak. You need more convincing or hard historical facts. Good luck!

kaumaaram · Post by **kaumaaram** » 26 May 2006, 17:54

CML:

Hats off. Great work.

Kaumaaram

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 26 May 2006, 18:26

SR

here is an objective analysis of your phrase1.
The audio is in
http://rapidshare.de/files/21427502/Phrase1.wav.html
The phrase is
pnSR,S (n)d(n)d, n p
where the the first dhaivatam is shuddha and the second chatushruti. The following is an FFT graph of your audio.

The final straight line is 'pa' and the preceding blip is 'ni' preceded by your crucial 'da'. The picture clearly shows that you are clearly singing
pnSR,S n,n p
whereas you have the kampitam on the nishadam at the latter. I have objective frequency measurements in (Hz) (I am sure Arun can do a superb job here!).
The phrase as such is legal in both ADANA and ATANA since the uttaranga is same for both the ragas. While I have heard a ton of atana my exposure to aDANa is minimal. I have heard a few now (just recently amir khan's immortal 'jhanak jhanak paayal baaje' (thanks to Lakshman's recommendation!) which does not have a shadow of atana!).

I can analyze the other phrases which will be time consuming. But the conclusions won't be different and the message is clear. Your case is weak. You need more convincing or hard historical facts. Good luck!

CMLover,

Please explain this graph in more detail. FFT is nice but can I have a more detailed explanation including your frequency analysis ?

SR

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 26 May 2006, 19:09

SR

I cannot explain the math here without using the mathematical symbolism. Let me explain in lay terms (Arun can do a superb job since he has created the program that does this analysis!).

The X-asis of the graph is the time coordinate and the Y-axis is the frequency in Hz (cycles per second). Using the graph we can determine what note you are singing at any particular time. The first graph is the fundamental and the other faint ones are the harmonics. The first graph determines your note. Your pa holding steady is about 190 to 196 Hz which corresponds to your aadhaara shadjam at (127 to 131 Hz)which corresponds to (1 kaTTai). Your shu D should be (202 to 208 Hz) the kak nishadam (226 to 233Hz). The observed value of your su dhaivatam is (218 to 229) which is closer to nishadam than dhaivatam. The standard error in all these cases is about 3Hz and clearly these deviations are significant.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 26 May 2006, 20:01

Your shu D should be (202 to 208 Hz) the kak nishadam (226 to 233Hz). The observed value of your su dhaivatam is (218 to 229) which is closer to nishadam than dhaivatam. The standard error in all these cases is about 3Hz and clearly these deviations are significant.

Do you mean my chatussruti dhaivata, not shuddha dhaivata.

You can be technical as you want - I am quite familiar with FFTs and spectral analysis, having used them extensively.

Simply saying that my dhaivata is in the 218-229 Hz range and is closer to nishada is not convincing. In fact that is where it should be. I have checked my recording again and am pretty sure that I am substituting a chatussruti dhaivata for the original shuddha dhaivata in aDANa.

Since the only information you gave me was the graph, I am going to magnify the portion of interest and see what it looks like. Of course the resolution will not be great but I will try. There are several "blobs" in the region of interest, and a clearer analysis is required. There is already one guy in the thread that is in a congratulatory "hats off" mode.

If you can post another graph wherein the Y-axis does not go above 640 Hz, that would be helpful.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 26 May 2006, 21:48

SR

I am being objective. Here is the graph of your pancamam sampled at 2.71 seconds.

The x axis is frequency and y axis is in dB (power spectrum). The peak occurs at 194Hz

Here is your su dhaivatam sampled at 1.5 secs. The reading is 218 Hzat the peak.

here is your kakaLi niShadam sampled at 2.12 secs and the peak occurs at 221

You could blow up the graphs and read them!

I have also given the sound file (extracted from your lecdem) and you can perform your own analysis.

(Pl do not quote me with the pictures. Simply cite me rather than wasing web space.)

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 27 May 2006, 00:45

These results do not mean much to me. You are basically saying: "believe me". The frequency you measure appears to depend on when you sample it. With gamaka-containing swaras this method appears entirely unreliable.

I am not even clear if you are talking about the shuddha dhaivata or the chatussruti dhaivata. In your first post you were concerned if I was substituting a kaishiki nishada instead of a chatussruti dhaivata in place of the shuddha dhaivata. Now you are presenting the shuddha dhaivata of aDANa.

I really do not understand what you are trying to accomplish, and (having used FFT and spectral analysis quite extensively over the years) I do not see any clear explanation of what exactly you are doing. You can be as technical as you want.

Here is a blow-up of the spectrum of my demo. I have magnified it to the 160-320 Hz region and also drawn gridlines at 200, 210, 220, 230, and 240 Hz. I have also highlighted the region of interest.

The panchama is steady just below 200 Hz. I can clearly see than I am delivering a shuddha dhaivata between 200-210 Hz (presumably for aDANa), a chatussruti dhaivata (for aTHANa), as well as the nishada.

Admins: If the image posting is consuming bandwidth, please let me know and I will just link any images from now on.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 27 May 2006, 01:19

PS:

CMLover,

1) I have examined my shuddha dhaivata at 1.5 sec and it is a shuddha dhaivata clear as daylight.

2) I have examined the nishada following it (at 2.1 sec) and it is a kaishiki nishada, also quite clearly.

It seems to me you need to ensure that you are appropriately using your program.

Perhaps the developer of the program can comment.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 27 May 2006, 01:42

What I have shown is that 'your' shuddha dhaivatam in ADANA is too close to kaakaLi nishaadam! You have to explain this first!

You have blownup the 'ATANA' segment. Note that what you have inside the square is nishaaadam since your phrase is pnSR,S (n)d(n)d, n p.
If what is below 200Hz is pancamam then the preceding one is nishadam (since it is n p). Note it is not the gamakam excursion since it is an independant note as notated by you! The preceding one(inside your square) (what you call cha D) is above nishaadam and hence it must be kakaLi-kaisiki nishaadam. It is well known that in ATANA the nishaadam occupies the whole space between the two nishaadams.

So how can you justify that the morphing of dhaivatam is producing the aTANa when you are working in the range of nishaadam! Pl clarify.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 27 May 2006, 03:32

What I have shown is that 'your' shuddha dhaivatam in ADANA is too close to kaakaLi nishaadam! You have to explain this first!

Sir, if you listen to the demo it is all too clear that there is a shuddha dhaivata. Now I would understand if there was a problem differentiating a shuddha dhaivata (D1) from a chatussruti dhaivata (D2) or even a kaishiki nishada (N2), but how can a shuddha dhaivata (D1) sound like a kakali nishada (N3) ??

You have blownup the 'ATANA' segment. Note that what you have inside the square is nishaaadam since your phrase is pnSR,S (n)d(n)d, n p.

No, there is a also a shuddha dhaivata between 200-210 Hz and a chatussruti dhaivata just above 210 Hz. Then there are the nishadas (both the kaishiki and the "intermediate" N2/N3). The lowermost horizontal line I have drawn is at 200 Hz, and the next one is at 210 Hz. Do you not see the shuddha dhaivata between these two ?

If what is below 200Hz is pancamam then the preceding one is nishadam (since it is n p). Note it is not the gamakam excursion since it is an independant note as notated by you! The preceding one(inside your square) (what you call cha D) is above nishaadam and hence it must be kakaLi-kaisiki nishaadam. It is well known that in ATANA the nishaadam occupies the whole space between the two nishaadams.

Inside my square, I have notes of frequencies between 200-240 Hz. Please look carefully. You will see several peaks of intensity. The lowest one is in the shuddha dhaivata position. The next higher one is the chatussruti dhaivata position. This is followed by the nishada and then the tara shadja. Again, you were earlier talking about the D2, then you suddenly switched to analyzing the D1, and now again the D2. If you look carefully, all these swaras are clearly there.

Even if one does not understand the FFT analysis, it is clear as daylight that I am singing a shuddha dhaivata (D1) in the aDANa phrase, which I then substitute with a D2 to demonstrate aThANa the second time I sing the phrase. Is it just you, or is there anyone else that cannot hear a shuddha dhaivata in my aDANa phrase ? How anyone can mistake it for a kakali nishada is beyond me!

You also need a lot of time-series data to do a reliable FFT. With a 10-sec phrase, you will have noisy results in the first place. How about taking my earlier 2-min alapana of aThANa and analyzing that ? Then pick a 10 sec section of it, analyze it, and see the difference.

Sangeet Rasik · Post by **Sangeet Rasik** » 27 May 2006, 23:53

I have performed my analysis of Phrase #1 upon which doubts have been cast.

There are three purposes of this post:

1) To show that the phrase 1 executed in the demo is perfectly valid for both aDANa and aThANa. There should be no confusion in any of the swaras used.

2) To caution forum members that careful use of the spectral analysis programs is essential, and one should not simply believe any graph and numbers presented.

3) Reality checks are essential, i.e. if something is obvious in the audio file but doesn't show up in the spectral analysis, check the FFT analysis and its limitations first, instead of casting doubt on the singing.

My intention is not to waste time on FFT analysis which is useful for other purposes but not for the present thread. The features in the demo are obvious and valid. Any discussion on the validity of the swaras in the demo can be done offline - [email protected].

Files and Tools used:

Phrase 1 from my demo:

http://rapidshare.de/files/21427502/Phrase1.wav.html

FFT analysis:
There are any number of FFT programs available to analyze audio files. I used the commercially available program Spectrogram 14 downloadable from:

http://www.visualizationsoftware.com/gram.html

FFT Parameters:

The results depend on these parameters. Especially for short files (such as this one), high resolution is critical. I chose 16384 FFT points. To avoid excessive noise, averaging of results over 20 millisec intervals was done. Results without averaging are the same, but have more noise and are harder to analyze reliably.

Calibration:

First I calibrated the swaras for a sruti of 1 kaTTa (C), using the FFT program with a tanpura recording set to various notes:

http://rapidshare.de/files/21538504/Cal ... n.mp3.html

The calibration results are (with an error of +/- 4 Hz):

Swara Freq. (Hz)
S 130
R1 138
R2/G1 146
G2 155
G3 164
M1 175
M2 183
P 197
D1 207 (shuddha dhaivata)
D2/N1 218 (chatussruti dhaivata)
N2 233 (kaishiki nishada)
N3 246 (kakali nishada)
S' 261 (tara shadja)

Analysis of Phrase 1:

The graph shows the Phrase 1 sung in HM aDANa (left) and CM aThANa (right). The FFT has nominal accuracy of +/- 4 Hz and there is additional error of +/-2 Hz or so when swara frequecies are determined by averaging around a small region. The real swaras are represented by the most intense (green) regions of the spectrum. Less intense regions represent FFT noise or almost inaudible swaras that are touched on during singing.

aDANa (left graph)

The initial part is the "p n S' R' ," phrase which ends at tara shadja (S', Feature #1) at 260 Hz.

The final part is the panchama (p) at about 195 Hz (Feature #4).

Feature #2: In aDANa, this is a meend (glide) down from the S' to shuddha dhaivata (D1) touching kaishiki nishada(N2). S/ --> D1. The meend is nicely visible in the left graph, and ends accurately at D1 (207 Hz). There is no kakali nishada. Blind averaging of the meend can give a false result that looks closer to the nishada. Thus, a reality check is most important - there is obviously no N3 in the audio file at this point.

Feature #3: This is the kaishiki nishada (N2) of the ending phrase "d1 n2 p", measured to be 226 Hz.

Thus all aspects of the aDANa phrase are perfectly clear.

aThANa (right graph)

Feature #1 and Feature #4 are identical to the left graph and need no explanation.

Feature #2: In aThANa, I illustrated the S --> D oscillation two times, replacing D1 with D2 and singing it more quickly than in aDANa. There are hence two quicker meends/gamakas , both beginning at S' and ending in chatussruti dhaivata D2 (measured at 220 Hz and 217 Hz respectively. There is no kaishiki nishada nor kakali nishada here. However, blind averaging of these fast gamakas can give a false result that looks like a nishada. Again, reality checks are essential.

Feature #3: This is again the kaishiki nishada (N2) of the ending phrase "d2 n2 p", measured to be 229 Hz.

Thus all aspects of the aThANa phrase are also perfectly valid within limits of vocal capability.

Of course there are slight "imperfections" which go unnoticed during singing. e.g. the panchama (feature #4) on the left seems to start slightly lower nearing prati madhyama. This imperfection is not seen on the right graph. In superior voice-cultures like BMK and KJY these imperfections would be almost non-existent. But if I could sing like these guys, I wouldn't be here either.

It would be more worthwhile to focus on the discussion at hand, rather than cast doubts on the audio files based on superficial analysis using a mathematical tool that needs to be handled carefully.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 28 May 2006, 04:48

Congratulations SR

You have very well defended your side. I very much enjoyed the academic debate and your tenacity.

Let me recount an anecdote here during my early career days at the med school. A good friend of mine who was brilliant was defending his 'long case' (important make or break case for diagnosis) for his MS (Master of Surgery). The examiner was a very famous surgeon but extremely tough on isssues. My friend 'X' claimed that the patient had a tiny tumour (cancer) which was causing the problem. The patient also had TB and the Prof was adament that it was due to TB. He failed X on that score claimng that it was a misdiagnosis. X claimed that the tumour was too small to be detected on X-rays or palpation (feeling by hand) (those were the days of no MRI or other sophisticated apparatus). Now X had to wait for two more years to try again if the board permits. X was devastated and unconsolable. That night the patient died and X went to the relatives and begged them permission to peform an autopsy (usually in those days they don't permit autopsies thinking it was mutilating the dead body!). But they took pity on X and agreed. He promptly got the pathologist and performed the autopsy and there it was; the tumour too small but blocking the crucial respiratory passage. The Prof was called in the middle of the night which he grudgingly obliged. Rest is history. X passed with flying colours and later became a famous surgeon. I had met him on a few occasions during my visit to India. But here is the Irony of Fate. He died of Lung Cancer during the prime of his life.

He was a chain smoker (a habit he cultivated during the hectic medical career)

I will comment on your analysis and some more on the atana issue later tomorrow since I am on a rush! Cheers!