Grahabedham and sruthibedham

charukesi · Post by **charukesi** » 05 Jul 2008, 11:33

I have heard contradictory things about these 2 terms. Some say they both mean the same. Others say there is a SLIGHT difference. Can someone illustrate this slight difference with examples?

The Mohanam-Madhyamavathi-Hindolam-Sudhdhasaaveri-sudhdhadhanyaasi transitions with change in tonic note-are they sruthibedhams or grahabedhams?

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 05 Jul 2008, 20:49

I dont have an example now, but long ago a musician explained to me that in sruthi-bedham, the "gamakas" of say a phrase that is "repeated" before and after bedham "are retained" even though they are associated with different swaras - which is unlike the case for most grahabedham. The example that was demonstrated was nATAkurinji to nilAmbari - although I have forgotten most of the details now (i actually recorded it, but I think carelessly lost it - I will hunt for it).

In standard grahabedham e.g when say you go from mOhanam to madyamAvati, which involves a grahabedham on ri, obviously the ri of mOhanam which takes gamakas, becomes flat sa - similarly da of mOhanam becomes flat pa of madyamAvati, and flat sa of mOhanam becomes gamaka-laden nI of madhyamAvati. So in most cases what is always or usually flat, may turn into a swara that usually takes gamakas and vice versa. In the other case, I am told that all (or most?) gamakas are retained.

But it is possible this is one school of thought which takes this as a differentiating factor. In other school of thought (and may be more common interpretation), graha-bedham and sruth-bedham are the same.

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 06 Jul 2008, 06:06

Does not sound right to me Arun. When the grahabhedam is done the new raga takes on its own gamakas and the original gamakas are lost. That is how I have heard GNB perform the grahabhedam. On the other hand I understand that the term shruti bhedam is just a synonym!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 06 Jul 2008, 07:52

cml - (i found the cassette, it was a very informal session lo...ng ago - so i cannot share it - sorry)

In this case the bedham is such that the flat notes remain flat. The other swaras take "same" gamakas. But importantly, this applies NOT throughout for the two ragas, but in the part that is shown only. In other words, what is showcase is a specific phrase (or phrases) that allow for this condition to be true.

The phrase demonstrated starts with nATakurinji on tara shadjam - something like
S n d- p d n/ d ma... m ga~~~
which becomes on nIlambari
p m p- r g m g sa..... s n~~~

So bedham is on ma (ma of nATakurinji is sa of nIlAmbari). Here the tara shadjam becomes pa (both flat). The ma of nATakurinji (as in ma....) here in this phrase is flat (ma is not always flat in nATakurinji), and thus works well for the sa.. on nIlambAri. The ga~~~ with slight gamaka for nATakurinji works well for the signature kakali ni of nIlambari.

When this was demonstrated then, while I understood the concept, I can't say I grasped it musically well - I can appreciate better now.

Also, per other content of the demo, I gather that in "standard" grahabedham as done in a concert, one should not compromise the original sa and pa and shake it nilly-willy because they translate to shakable swaras "raga after bedham". In other words the sanctity of the orignal graham cannot be tampered with. So what is shown after bedham, is sort of "shadow" of the actual raga. Only in case like sruthi-bedham above, you have the true color of "after bedham" raga show up in correct form and that is the difference between sruthi and graha bedham as per this demo.

Again, I do not know if this adhered to in all showcases of grahabedham in concerts.

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 06 Jul 2008, 08:08

Another angle to think about is, the distinction between grahabedham and sruthibedham may have existed before the fixed Sa concept was widely adopted. Before that time, the Graha swara (Starting swara) was different for different ragas and in that context, the term grahabedham made sense. After fixed sruthi, grahabedham probably came to mean the same thing as sruthi bedham. This is just my speculation for another angle of thinking about this, Arun, you know more about the graha swaras and how they were used in anciet times, see if this point of view has any merit.

gobilalitha · Post by **gobilalitha** » 06 Jul 2008, 11:15

theoretical knowledge should be supplemented by rendering vocally then only the full impact would be felt . gobilalitha

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 07 Jul 2008, 06:14

Arun
I am lost when you say that th original sa and pa should not be violated through gamakams so that the return is possible. That places a very severe restriction on the grahabhedam ragas. Even if you morph sa to pa then original sa becomes madhyamam and to claim that there should not be a gamakam on madhyamam is highly restrictive. I am sure it is never followed in practice. Can you clarify your position?

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 07 Jul 2008, 21:57

vk - not sure. Food for thought though.

gobilalitha sir - entirely agree, but I am not in a position to post it - sorry

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 07 Jul 2008, 22:00

cml,

I just conveyed what was explained to me. I do agree that this is a severe restriction which prevents the "destination raga" to be brought out clearly (or atleast in a perceptible form) in almost all cases

In any case, if one wants to make a distinction, a way to "adopt" this above interpretation into the popular notion of graha/sruthi bedham is as follows: In sruthi-bedham the "exact phrase" (including nuances/gamakas) translate "as-is" after shadham is shifted. With graha-bedham once shifted, the swaras are adjusted as per new raga.

The caveat then is that for the sruthi-bedham case, how can one tell you have actually shifted

?

So perhaps this is more a "theoretical/academic" concept. There are two kinds of shifts (theoretically).
1. In one, a phrase like the one in nATAkurinji sung say in alapana form, is present "as-is" in another raga - the only difference being shadjam has shifted.
2. In the other, a phrase in the first raga, gets morphed into another phrase, once you shift shadjam, the morphing being done to the resultant swaras accordingly (i.e. introduce approp gamakas).

Note that if for #2 we instead sing the ragas in pure scalar form i.e. all notes flat, you get #1.

Arun

balusatya · Post by **balusatya** » 07 Jul 2008, 23:03

For a better understanding why not we have such srutibedams/grahabedams
demonstrated by stalwarts themselves in the Forum/ with relevant downloads of useful links of TNS ,MLV,GNB,TSK and others.Technicalities are better understood that way for people like me! Is it so popular in HM aswell.?

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 08 Jul 2008, 00:02

The caveat then is that for the sruthi-bedham case, how can one tell you have actually shifted

I am curious about that in case of singing the swaras in pure scalar form, assuming scalar form produces enough raga personality even with ragas that need gamakas. This is especially startling if you consider the instrumentalist's point of view since the same swara positions are played before and after the shift. So what has changed? What changes is the perception in the minds of the audience what the tonic is. The artists have to do enough things to have the audience focus on the new tonic like singing the new tonic as a long note, sing louder than the sruthi box, or lower the volume of the sruthi box or a combination of the above. Once the audience catches on to the new Sa, then the new raga swaroopa should show itself even though the same notes are played.

In another thread a long time back, I likened this to the visual trick one can play with pictures where if you focus on one set of features you see an older woman but if you focus on another set of features, you see a younger woman. I think this is basically the auditory equivalent of that visual phenomenon.
If you really try hard and defeat the artist's attempts to change the tonic by paying a lot of attention to the "background tampura', you will not perceive the switch in raga but if you "buy in" to the artists's attempt and focus on the "foreground", you will hear the new raga. Quite amazing!!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 08 Jul 2008, 00:15

vk - Indeed - this is why for some chinese music, some may perceive mohanam and others s.saveri and others hindolam. This is also true with some film songs I believe.

Arun

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 08 Jul 2008, 06:36

Arun
I am fully comfortable to accept the definition and distinction of Shrutibhedam vs Grahabhedam as posed by you. This ought to be accepted and vindicated by our performers. Perhaps you could provide the definition of the terms as it exists in the ancient literature. At present the terms are used loosely though we always are able to identify when the 'bhEdam' is performed. Since it is difficult to detect 'shrutibhedam' with the flat notes (absence of characteristic gamakams) it is only for the connoisseurs. As Balusatya states it will be nice to look at some examples to distinguish the two!

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 08 Jul 2008, 08:49

VK,
Yes, your example of a tromp l'oeil fits here. You can gaze at the picture and go back to it again because it is there.! In a concert, the bhEdam is too fleeting, and before I zero in on it, it is gone! In a lecture demonstration, it registers. This is a typical lay rasikA talking. Sometimes I see those super rasikAs nodding and whispering'gruha bhEdam, shruti bhEdam' and a wave of recognition passes through among them and helps me focus on it, but it is gone, like a falling star! it is one of those tricks of the trade as far as I am concerned, and don't mind if I missed it too...

Arun,
I like your alluding to chinese music and the rAgAs we hear when speaking of the ambiguity of bhEDams. I hear mOhanam almost all the time in ch music! Film music is even worse when it comes to recognizing the rAgam.
If some of the performers fancy gruha, Sruti bhEdams, then they better sing a stretch of the stuff, or at least make a mention of it before they launch on one so that we are ready for it!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 08 Jul 2008, 22:15

cml,

(I am waiting for Uday to rap our knuckles again as to why we are again getting caught up so much in this topic of grahabedham

! And he has a point! )

I will check later but unless I am mistaken, there are no references to the term "grahabedham" in texts. Sure there are references to shift of shadjam etc. to get various murchanas, and also how to derive one grama from another, but the term "graha-bedham" is not used, and even otherwise the concept is not used in the context of how it is practiced today (i.e. showing reflection of another raga "within" one raga).

Coming back to today's use of it, first of all I am not sure that such a distinction can be effectively realized in practice and hence like I mentioned - it seems now to me as more from a theoretical/academic standpoint. There are different interpretations - and I for now am quite ok with it.

Good examples would be nice - I will see how I can come up with something, given my limitations in practical aspects of CM

- but in any case will take some time.

Arasi - I am also quite bad in detecting it. By the time I can latch on to the "new shadjam", it is all over

Arun

cienu · Post by **cienu** » 09 Jul 2008, 00:12

gobilalitha wrote:theoretical knowledge should be supplemented by rendering vocally then only the full impact would be felt . gobilalitha

Gobilalitha,

For a simple example,(since you also happen to be a film buff), you could listen to the Song "Marghazi Poove" in the film "May Madham", wherein you would notice that ARR has by shifting the tonic base note, made the starting lines of the Venkateswara Suprabatham (which in the original corresponds to Shudha Saveri) resemble Hindolam

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 09 Jul 2008, 01:42

Cienu,
An example, atlast! Gobilalitha and others may be able to follow this, but I have no clue about 'mArgazhip pUvE!' I am a zero when it comes to any film song which came after 1960!

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 09 Jul 2008, 02:51

(ennAl muDinda kainkaryam)

Here is an example in the form of "quiz" (not really!). Pl. try to follow the steps faithfully (if possible

).

1. Listen to this sample: http://arunk.freepgs.com/bedham/raga1.mp3 - What raga is this? Make sure you can identify it and see how the tune (i.e. following aro/avaro at the beginning) matches the raga before going to next step.
2. Now listen to this: http://arunk.freepgs.com/bedham/raga2.mp3 - what raga is this? Again make sure you can identify it. See if the tune (i.e. following aro/avaro at the beginning) matches the raga etc.
3. Now what is so special about the tune? What is going on?

I am sure most (or all of you) can get this. For those you can't I hope others can help as I wont be able to answer after today (out of town for a few days)

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 09 Jul 2008, 03:29

Arun,

Very nicely illustrated

-Ramakriya

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 09 Jul 2008, 03:54

I think i got the ragas. Ill wait for others to identify.
The starting swara position for this varnam is different for these 2 samples -

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 09 Jul 2008, 06:41

suji - I am not sure what you mean by "starting swara position is different".

For others: It may not be surprising if the raga identification is sort of hard as the ragas are rendered all flat and so a pale imitatiion of the real ragas. But to get the import of what is going on, I think it is crucial to be able to associate to the ragas So I am going to give the answers (in jumbled reverse order): 1. ihtavamayhdam, 2. manahom.

Also, if you find the raga via the answer above, it may be worthwhile to see how much you perceive the tune to be part of it in the corresponding sample. It may be interesting to note your perception of one sample before moving to the other. Your feeling for the "appropriateness" of the tune to one the ragas may change (basically once you recognize the tune for what it is, its familiarity may trump over other things).

Arun

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 09 Jul 2008, 08:45

Arun
the first has BS flavor too, that;'s how I could get the raga. The second is fine

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 09 Jul 2008, 09:07

Good illustraton Arun. For the first one, I got the aro/ava first ( which is a rare thing for me ) rather than the raga by its swaroopa. The second one was fine.

(basically once you recognize the tune for what it is, its familiarity may trump over other things).

Exactly. More than the tune/melody/notes, it is that familiar rhythmic structure that pulls you in towards the familiar song.

But the first one has enough perceptible differences to suspect that something is going on. That is even more apparent after listening to the second sample and then listen to the first sample again.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 09 Jul 2008, 16:59

vasanthakokilam wrote:But the first one has enough perceptible differences to suspect that something is going on. That is even more apparent after listening to the second sample and then listen to the first sample again.

BTW, the tune is *exactly* (to the tee) same for both the samples - the difference is shadjam (purposefully reinforced by the tampura which was mixed in later). And all notes (including aro/avaro) are of course strictly flat - they are MIDI generated tones as is perhaps obvious.

suji: Yes BS certainly, because of the flatness - especially the ni (but no kakali touch of course).

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 09 Jul 2008, 19:52

Arun, Yes, understood. What I meant by 'perceiptible difference' is the one caused by that difference in Shadjam.

Motivated by your effort, I tried to do the same ( play something flat and mix in different sruthi tampura sounds ) and I did not get the same effect. I will have to look into why. May be, since I did it, I may be 'aware' of the trick too much to perceive the difference. I may have to listen to it in a day or so.

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 09 Jul 2008, 23:06

Motivated by your effort, I tried to do the same ( play something flat and mix in different sruthi tampura sounds ) and I did not get the same effect. I will have to look into why. May be, since I did it, I may be 'aware' of the trick too much to perceive the difference. I may have to listen to it in a day or so

VK,
you will have to choose the right Sruti to get that effect. In the sample Arun provided the mixed Sruti in the first clip is shifted lower so G3 becomes D2. I hope I am right.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 10 Jul 2008, 05:34

Suji, that is what I did. I recorded Mohanam on a G flute ( G is SA ). I then recorded G, A and B sruthis separately. And mixed the sruthi-sound-less mohanam with these three sruthi sounds one at a time. The mohanam is still so clear in all the three combined files. With the A sruthi background, I was expecting to hear Madhyamavathi ( or atleast some difference to give the impression of a different raga ) and I did not get that at all. I even added some leading sounds of the sruthi so I get used to the new sruthi. May be there was something wrong with my methodology.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 10 Jul 2008, 06:06

vasantakokilam this seems to be the same methodology that Arunk has used.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 10 Jul 2008, 07:17

Sorry! Being tied up with other commitments I am missing all the fun! I do not get madhyamavati at all in raga1 which is only a 5 secs clip just having the arohanam. Am I missing something? The mohanam is loud and clear. Pl help....

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 11 Jul 2008, 01:20

I redid my experiment, this time not showing the aro/ava from sa to SA. I also kept the notes as plain as possible and also not to resemble any familiar tunes. I am enclosing three audio files below at this link and see if you can sense different ragas due to sruthi bedam.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/js4ssu

The problem for me is, given the utmost plainness, it is hard to get the original raga even before the bedam.. Let us see what you all hear. It is also possible that my flute is not quite on G.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Jul 2008, 06:45

suji - in that example g of mohanam becomes ri of madyamavati (or ri of madyamavati becomes ga of mohanam based on how I presented it).

vk - i think the key is all in perception and for that the sample needs to be such that that perception can be changed. So first unless you "set the listener up" for the new sa, it is going to be difficult for it to be pulled off. IMO, this may involve a combination of following:
1. aro/avaro or even a raga sketch (i.e. for the new raga) - I tried to do that with just aro/avaro.
2. Second the sruthi (for that raga) needs to be accentuated quite strongly. In my case if you notice the tampura sruthi is quite loud. In yours they are too weak.

I also employed a bit more. I first presented madyamavati. If I had first presented mohanam with a well known tune, I doubt anyone would had disassociated mohanam from that tune, and switched over to madyamavati.

Also, in my case if you notice I switched from "low C" for madyamavati to "high B" (not low B) for mohanam. The switch to high B rather than low B, may have played a role too (it wasnt intentional - i felt low B was too bass).

I think listening to the same base tune against different sruthis back-to-back without any explcit attempt at trying to influence a switch of base of reference wont work. As you see even in my case, some of you got it, but others like cmlover did not - My guess is cmlover may have probably recognized the tune even in raga 1 context, or may be listened to raga 2 first which as I mention is likely going to immediate color the perception.

I will try to present the same example in a "better context" and see how that goes. Later

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 14 Jul 2008, 08:22

Arun, Thanks. I also tried drowning the melody with the sruthi sound and it did not seem to make a difference. So it has to be the other things you wrote.

BTW, CML's issue may have been due to some audio issues with madhyamavathi link. He wrote he heard only a few seconds of it. Right after that, I tried that and it had problems after the first few seconds. CML, try again.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Jul 2008, 08:53

Yep the hosting server for arunk.freepgs.com seems to be having problems now. Hopefully it will get resolved soon.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 15 Jul 2008, 00:24

Ok - experiment #2 (same concept as last time) this time with credits to my shy friend C. S Pitchappa (i.e. C Sharp Pitchappa):

There are two audio files (sendspace link: http://www.sendspace.com/file/upk316 to a zip file containing 2 audio files)

First audio file: bedham.mp3

Here, after singing the aro/avaro of mOhanam (in a flattish manner), the swaras for the pallavi part of mOhanam varnam is sung (again flat notes). Now at the end of it, where it ends in ri, a "grahabedham" is done by switching that ri pitch to sa pitch, and thus to madyamavati. This is followed by aro/avaro of a flat (cinematic) madhyamavati.. And then then the same "tune" of pallavi of ninnukori is sung but this time as as madyamavati swaras i.e. by transposing the swaras as per the shift in bedham (sa becomes ni, ri becomes sa, ga becomes ri, pa becomes ma, da becomes pa).

Second audio file: bedham_mix.mp3
Here, I have intermingled the mohanam part and madhyamavati part - to show that how similar in tune the same parts are (subject of course to CSP's well known limitations in keeping sruthi).

Some thoughts:
Now my presumption is that just in this case the (cinematic) madhyamavati should hopefully come through even stronger compared to last time. I believe this may be due to vocalaization of the swaras. The fact that what is sung as "ga ga ri ... s s r r g g r r" in mohanam is sung as "ri ri sa.... n n s s r r s s" may have a strong effect in shifting the perception of shadjam. If it was simply instrumental (like the earlier time), the switch may be more tenuous for many people. But this is my presumption - it is possible that even this doesnt do it.

I also note that in spite of CSP's attempt at singing flat, some tiny gamakas in the form of stress has crept in and they may vary between the mohanam part and madyamavati part. That may also play a part although I think the notes are largely flat.

Also, I found the flat ri as in ga ga ri.... in mohanam to be most odd.

Let me know what you think. I would appreciate if the people what the people who clamored for examples think of all this. I know you asked for experts and artists' samples - and I am providing rank amateur ones but some feedback as to whether this helped or not to know about grahabedham may help and also provide additional motivation. Otherwise this is just another game played by the "usual suspects" (not that - that is not fun!) - to the recreation of silent spectators who have simply egged us

Arun

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 15 Jul 2008, 07:00

Arun,
I cannot access the site you posted the samples

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 15 Jul 2008, 07:38

oops - the previous URLs had a mistake but the website is also acting up. So here is the sendspace link: http://www.sendspace.com/file/upk316. I have also updated the earlier post

Sorry for the trouble

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 16 Jul 2008, 07:11

arunk: Excellent. CSP came through loud and clear. CSP convinced me ( hoodwinked me

) of Madyamavathi with the 'Ma Pa Ni Pa. Ma Ri Pa Ma Ri Sa" phrase..Wow! It is quite a realisctic example since in concert conditions they keep the tampura at the same sruthi ( may be lower the volume a bit ) and in your case I can not hear any sruthi sound at all ( probably none existed ). As you wrote, the illusion is created by the solfa names than anything. Can one do this with just humming? Also, instrumentalists have to do something extra pull this off. The one thing I can think of is a long karvail on Ri and as you did play Ri to Ri to create the illusion that the sruthi is now on Ri.

I tried to defeat the effect by having a loud C# sruthi in the background. That did not spoil it. The solfa symbol effect over powered it. Then I tried to sing along with the original Ga Ga Ri Ri when you were doing Ri Ri Sa Sa. That created a quantum effect, both ragas existed at the same time!! I am now even more puzzled by all this. Are predominantly scalar ragas just illusions in the swaroopa they exhibit? If so, that adds anoher dimension to the normal understanding that ragas are more than just scales, meaning they have to transcend these illusions and do something with gamakas and prayogas that count towards something real.

gobilalitha · Post by **gobilalitha** » 16 Jul 2008, 16:27

T his is another pet subject of Ramaraj . gobilalitha

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 16 Jul 2008, 23:11

Here is experiment #3 (ok - i am beating this to death perhaps):

http://www.sendspace.com/file/9o2c6e

This is a zip file with 4 audio files:

both_swaras.mp3
Here, CSP (probably will be called Cant Sing Pitchappa after this) has sung the swaras for mohanam and madhyamavati with gamakas - just to illustrate an hypothetical case as to how the swaras would morph it were real. I dont think he got the shake on the madhyamavati "ri" correct - especially at the start. He also has goofed up atleast on the initial ga of mohanam.

both_swaras_mixed.mp3
Some post editing to show both side by side. One can e.g. compare ga-ga-ri.... of mohanam vs ri-ri-sa.... of madhyamavati

both_akaram.mp3
Here CSP has gone past his limitations to sing the pieces in akaaram (with gamakas for respective ragas)

both_akaram_mixed.mp3
Some post editing to show both side by side.

CSP tried to actually sing the pallavi song itself in madhyamavati - but is having a hard time not slipping into the familiar tune of mohanam. The association of the words to the tune in mohanam playing a strong role there. He eventually got it done once, but wasnt happy.

In all these cases, the madyamavati still sounds light and watered down - i.e. cinematic. It is most probably CSP's limitations showing through. The most obvious place is ni ... pa..... - not sure how that can be sung. I think there isnt enough places for shaking ri, ma and ni here and that may have contributed in this cinematic feel too...

Naaah - it is CSP

!!

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 17 Jul 2008, 08:12

Arun: Listened to all four. Again, great effort on CSP's part. On the first two, with swara names, I got the gamakam laden Mohanam and Madhayamavathi effect pretty well. On the Akaram side, during the transition when CSP sang the Aro/Ava I got the Madhyamavath effect. But rest of it all sounded like Mohanam to me. The first part as traditional gamakam laden Mohanam and the second part after the aro/ava as flatter Mohanam with some gamakams. So other than little part in the middle, Madhyamavathi disppeared for me. In akAram, may be the familiarity of the melody overpowered whereas in swara singing, the swaras had a dominating effect, hence the difference between aural perception between the two sets of samples.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 18 Jul 2008, 21:53

- it is possible even in akaram "CSP slipped into familiar tune" although I remember playing it back and thinking strains of madhyamavathi remained. But I could be wrong. This is very much dependent on perception etc.

In the madhyamavati aro/avaro, the ri and ni are shown stressed, shaken etc. as per madhyamavathi, and perhaps this is the reason why you were able to perceive i there. In contrast, in the actual tune except for the starting ri, ri (which CSP did not give enough shake I think), there are no places to show them as such. Thus the tune itself is not easily amenable to madhyamavathi perhaps and at best one can achieve a filmy one even with gamakas (i felt that way even with the vocalization of swaras).

So the lesson is: One cannot take a tune in a raga, transpose it as per bedham apply gamakas for the "post bedham" raga, and except a classical flavor of the "post bedham" raga. Here is where perhaps the importance of jiva swaras, nyasa swaras etc. to a raga flavor start to show

But again, a pro probably can wring out the real madhyamavathi even here, and we know CSP is not pro!

Arun

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 18 Jul 2008, 22:29

Here is where perhaps the importance of jiva swaras, nyasa swaras etc. to a raga flavor start to show

Exactly. Add to that, the starting note ( graha swara ) which is included as an important attribute of a raga from ancient times and I am beginning to realize that it matters in the fixed Sa scheme as well.

Arun, this exercise brings to focus those point very clearly. Thank you and thanks to CSP!!

One related question: We have talked before in the Swara identification exercises about detecting the tonic of a piece without any background sruthi. I sense that is a relevant topic here but can not describe the questions I have clearly. How does one figure out the tonic without referring to a tampura sound? Is it built in to the music? Which aspects of the music gives us that feeling of tonic? .

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 18 Jul 2008, 23:19

It is a difficult question I think. Based on above, if all notes are flat, the "tonic" may not not inherent in a particular tune, but needs to be enforced by a combination of "setup" (i.e. aro/avaro) and "continual enforcement" via shruthi or by other means - vocalization of swaras. I say this because in the very first example - we were able to switch tonic for the exact same tune (although not all perceived it) with "setup" and "continual enforcement". In the second example, "continual enforcement" changed from shruthi to solfa which was stronger.

So for the flat case, for this particular tune tonic was not inherent - it is possible this is true for a lot of "flat" tunes.

Once gamakas come into picture, things get more complex. It is possible that tonic is hinted in the tune, by the fact that sa/pa are flat, they are used in "crescendos" (particularly tara sthayi sa) etc. Now to recognize raga, does one *subconsciously* know the tonic (it is obvious we do not make it consciously)? Not sure. But once you recognize the raga, I am sure most people can sense the tonic subconsciously - even if you dont pin it (e.g. we all can hum along a brief flourish for the raga at end of song to say sa - even amateurs). Here which swaras take gamakas - in which form for that raga, which are jiva/nyasa/graha may play some role to help us know that sa - again all mostly subconsciously.

Note even in the flat case, the "setup" using aro/avaro is the same as "knowing the raga" or atleast conveying the raga. Once a listener can associate the (flat version of the) raga, then the tune falls into place as per raga - and thus subconsciously one may know the sa.

But even in the non-flat case for some ragas, one can be "tricked". That natakurinji and nilambari example had all the gamakas (and the jiva/nyasa etc. all matched). So there again one needs other cues like tampura sruthi, knowing the raga etc.

How all this precisely works - i do not know

Arun

charukesi · Post by **charukesi** » 21 Jul 2008, 23:06

Hmm.. I started this thread and saince then didnt have time to contribute. Looks like a lot of discussio s had happened since then. Arun, I have some questions for you.

1. Are you sure that graha and shruthi bedham arent quite different at all? From what you are saying it looks like they are almost synonymous, except for the gamaka diferences.

Just so that I got the difference right, you say in the resultant raga the "sa" and "pa" should not be shaken , which is an universal rule, right?

so for sruthibedham the pair of ragas is chosen in such a way that the "sa" and "pa" of the original raga gets conveniently transposed into those kind of notes in the resultant raga which do not need shakes, right? Also the flat notes of original gets transposed to flat notes of rsultant raga. And the notes with gamakas from the original raga sits well with the gamaka-laden notes of the resultasnt raga. So that places a SEVERE limitation on the choice of ragas for sruthibedham .
It is possible only to find a few phrases from raga pairs like that, right?

You say in Shruthibedham there are no such restrictions. what does this mean?
you say:
The caveat then is that for the sruthi-bedham case, how can one tell you have actually shifted wink ?

So perhaps this is more a "theoretical/academic" concept. There are two kinds of shifts (theoretically).
1. In one, a phrase like the one in nATAkurinji sung say in alapana form, is present "as-is" in another raga - the only difference being shadjam has shifted.
2. In the other, a phrase in the first raga, gets morphed into another phrase, once you shift shadjam, the morphing being done to the resultant swaras accordingly (i.e. introduce approp gamakas).

Note that if for #2 we instead sing the ragas in pure scalar form i.e. all notes flat, you get #1.
----------------------------

how is it same as 1 in scalar form?
I didnt quite understand the above. can you explain it again with an example

charukesi · Post by **charukesi** » 21 Jul 2008, 23:31

Arun, never mind I think I got it.

violinravi · Post by **violinravi** » 11 Sep 2008, 15:18

Hi all,
I'm a violinist new to this forum. I went thru the definitions of both "bhEdams". But to me, both are same, when comes to practical implementation. The notion that "Sa" and "Pa" should not be shaken, may be an old dictum. Take for example, Shadjama and Panchama Varjya Pryogas from Thodi or Kalyani. From madhya sthayi "ri" to tAra sthayi "ri" it gives mohanam. Where does the question of having Sa and Pa arise, leave alone shaking it!!! - Ravi.

gobilalitha · Post by **gobilalitha** » 11 Sep 2008, 17:25

cienu, I just now heard the song margazhi poove in the film May madham, captivating music by ARR, MENTIONED BY YOU IN POST16, could find traces of mohanam. hondol;am. sudha saveri , a terrible likeness to Ilaiyaraja's tunes.. happiness in the evening 5.24 pm at BANGALORE.thanks cienu.

kartik · Post by **kartik** » 13 Sep 2008, 06:36

I think I am lost-I need to understand melakartha to melakartha "transition" first.Say Shankarabharanam to Natabhairavi or Dharmavathi-Sarasangi-Chakravaham.
Can we retain the gamaka phrases in these cases?