Origin of the special terms Kaikasi and Kakali for Nishadam

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 05 Mar 2008, 20:53

Yes VK!
Looks like an error! If discussions continue we will be in a real mess!

sbala · Post by **sbala** » 05 Mar 2008, 22:09

VK,
My post was in response to Uday's comment.
"I don't believe in cultural fascism of any kind (it was disturbing to read sbala and others propose "vetting" systems for composers. bizzare!).".

Feel free to move this to another thread.

Cienu - As regards composers being creative and going with the flow, so does everyone. Creativity is not the exclusive domain of composers or artistes. I did say that every song be rated but that was a suggestion taking a parallel with films being rated and not a demand. Someone suggested in the other thread that artistes know what is a good composition and what is not. That is exactly what I wanted to break. Composers should become equals to performers and these steps would also aid in giving them visibility. It would be interesting to see how the CM scene changed from composer dominated during the Trinity era to performer dominance as we witness now. Anyone who has listened to CM for a year can reel off the names of Sudha, Sanjay, TMK etc. How many of us even know modern composers? To be honest, the good ones will not fear being tested. As far as earning money, a good rating can definitely get more recording companies interested in a composer and give an incentive for them to take it up as more than a serious hobby.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 06 Mar 2008, 01:06

OK, that is fine then. It would have been better if you quoted his words, so it will be clear what your post is in reference to. Thanks.

cienu · Post by **cienu** » 06 Mar 2008, 02:21

sbala,

Your point is well taken and appreciated

Now the Moderators may kindly move this discussion to an appropriate forum.

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 06 Mar 2008, 11:58

Uday I think sBala's views on accreditation was in the context of secular music. As he says, he did not recommend a "license" which is a different thing.

Anyway, let us keep this wonderful thread on track here. This proving to be a veritable treasure-trove of information and the quality of discussion/knowledge of participants is astounding! Specifically I would like to know from Uday how one should go about improving sruti sense...I can barely tell R1 from R2 and so on! Is this only possible if one plays an instrument? Are there any electronic devices that can reproduce, say, any given ratio between 1 and 2 (with the reference points displayed for instance)? Maybe it is time for another Jam session!

vgvindan · Post by **vgvindan** » 06 Mar 2008, 21:44

arun,
I came across the following pdf document -
http://www.newtalavana.org/ebooks/saptasvarah.pdf

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 06 Mar 2008, 22:48

Thanks VGV! Interesting doc and the reference to Quantum Theory is fascinating! Will read it carefully....

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 06 Mar 2008, 23:08

Thanks VGV (and welcome back). On a cursory glance, I found the Figure 7 quite interesting - it adds fodder to "22 being special" in a very unique way

Arun

uday_shankar · Post by **uday_shankar** » 06 Mar 2008, 23:33

vijay wrote:Specifically I would like to know from Uday how one should go about improving sruti sense...I can barely tell R1 from R2 and so on! Is this only possible if one plays an instrument? Are there any electronic devices that can reproduce, say, any given ratio between 1 and 2 (with the reference points displayed for instance)? Maybe it is time for another Jam session!

Vijay,
I'm going to answer with a cliches as well as unorthodox suggestions!

1) First cliche - learn many Tyagaraja kritis in different ragas from a good guru. Nothing better for raga, swara and laya gnyanam to develop. vgvindan might add to the list of attributes

.

2) Second cliche - get a tampura, get trained to tune it (I'll be glad to help when you're in Chennai) and practice everyday.

3) Unorthodox suggestion...initially, there's no better way to get your ear accustomed to the ballpark swarasthanas than playing with a chromatic (i.e., equally tempered) instrument like the keyboard. Later, if you feel the compulsion to explore shrutis in a deeper way, you can experiment with ratios. I've found in the chitravina sympathetic strings a convenient dhruva as well as chala vina

. A surmandal (?) like the one Pt. Jasraj uses may do the same. Keep in mind that most practising musicians, even ones with good shruti gnyanam, don't know about ratios but just sing intuitively. Again, many folks explore ratios and write about them as a theoretical hobby quite disjointed from their music practice which is all intuitive. Nothing wrong with that either. Bottom line, at this stage don't expect to improve shruti gnyanam with numerical ratios. There may come a time for that. Instead follow the 3 T's - Tyagaraja, Tampura and Tempered (equall tempered!).

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 07 Mar 2008, 00:39

So then the 3 D's will be Dikshatar, Damaaram and Diatonic scale which will help develop Laya as well as extended CM consciousness

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 07 Mar 2008, 11:40

Thanks Uday...would certainly be great to learn how to tune the tamboora once I am in town...will call you sometime after I get back and figure it out....about keyboard, I actually had one once (before I donated it away!) and it was certainly very useful in helping things along...but one would not be able to make out different "shruthis" as opposed to swaras...

There is also one fundamental Q about sruthis emerging from the above...how is it possible to play a different sruthi for 2 ragas say having the same note but different sruthis in a fretted instrument like the Veena? Is it retuned before the song?

vainika · Post by **vainika** » 11 Mar 2008, 00:18

vijay wrote:how is it possible to play a different sruthi for 2 ragas say having the same note but different sruthis in a fretted instrument like the Veena? Is it retuned before the song?

You can pull strings to get where you want to be

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 11 Mar 2008, 10:39

Hmmm...after all, art is a mirror of society...

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 11 Mar 2008, 10:52

Vainika, Vijay: Good one...

PUNARVASU · Post by **PUNARVASU** » 11 Mar 2008, 14:13

Vainika, I really liked it;good sense of humour!
As a student of veena, I agree with you.

uday_shankar · Post by **uday_shankar** » 11 Mar 2008, 14:38

Indeed, clever all round, so I'll let that "slide"

.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Mar 2008, 23:20

Somebody out of band suggested that maybe I should use my "gamaka modeling with MIDI" online software to demonstrate that experiment. Not sure about that but here is a silly attempt at something else

I have *tried* to use the "popular" ratios derived for sadja grama and madyama grama with my software. Some huge caveats:
1. (My opinion) I dont take these ratios as the highest laws of land. I would like to consider them as as close to what the gramas probably were. So two caveats built in here "close to" and "probably"

. You may feel differently (i.e elevate them or demote them) about these ratios - that is fine.
2. The software doesn't allow enough resolution to precisely nail ratios - it was not the original intent. So I dont think I got them spot on. I used http://www.music.sc.edu/fs/bain/atmi02/ ... fault.html to get the cents value from S and then used that to come at a "close enough" spot for that value. So again "close enough" caveat.

You can run this by clicking: http://arunk.freepgs.com/gcreate/load.p ... gramas.cdb

When you click on that link, the application should load. It is a java applet and so may take some time on some computers.
The application's window has two parts - the left part should have some ratios (under Default), and also finally two entries "sadjagrama", madhyamagrama_samurchana etc. Click on any of these and cllck "synth" button to play them.

(note: on Safari, the right window takes up all the room, and so you have to click at the dot on the left edge of the window to expose the right part).

This may be a good way to find out more about your perception skills (at the least it may something to fool around for a few minutes). Some things to check:

0. Can you spot where the ratios arent quite right i.e. due to big caveat #2 above? If so, skip all of the following steps

- Your hearing is amazing (and that means you Uday

)
1. Can you spot a difference between sadjagrama and madhyamagrama-samurchana?
2. What about pa_vs_pa?
3. What about 10/9_vs_9/8?

(NOTE: This is NOT a quiz. Its not like i have the correct answer - but it may prove fodder for some interesting thoughts. I myself found out that 40/27 isnt as bad as I thought it would be

Arun

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 04 Oct 2008, 19:06

Sub-Topic of this msg under this main thread :
22 Shrutis and Pramana, Purna and Nyuna Shrutisâ€™ Calcs â€“ Arunâ€™s article

Hello Mr Arun, 4th Oct, 2008

This is wrt yr article : http://arunk.freepgs.com/blog/bharatas_22_sruthis.html.
My appreciations for writing a nice article.

1) This is just my guess. I presume that one of the main trigger keys for this article most probably came after â€œdiscoveringâ€

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 04 Oct 2008, 20:12

For those who may wonder what "ln" is (in Pt 7) PS of my previous msg just sent) :

ln => log to the base "e"

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 05 Oct 2008, 05:27

Sundar Krishnan,

Thanks for those (silly) typos - I will correct them when I get a chance. I may not be able to answer all your questions now -as there are just too many of them.

The objective of the article was NOT to show complex ratios but to show that what 22 sruthi ratios seem most plausible if one simply stuck to what is said in Natya Sastra (particularly the 2 vina experiment), and Dattilam (as other sort of from same time period) and followed it to the tee, with as little outside assumptions. As a corollary, it shows how some of those ratios differed from those other "popular ratios".

I was indeed trying to find out what the 22 ratios would be if one followed the experiment - that was the objective from the beginning. When I ran into complex ratios, I was initially doubtful as to whether all this made any sense. But I then realized they not only made sense but were an unavoidable outcome, because the experiment demanded two vinas to be "slightly out of tune" with each other after step-1 if that 80/81 as the first reduction is valid.

[quote]2-c-i) Pl check if the comment â€œas observed hereâ€

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 05 Oct 2008, 11:28

Arun, 5th Oct, 2008

Thanks for yr replies.

You have stated my guess in different words ! :

When I ran into complex ratios, I was initially doubtful as to whether all this made any sense.

This sort of indirectly confirms my guess - ie, intermediate ratios such 2560/2187 may have acted like triggers from deep within the subconscious. Let us not discuss further on this guess.

I never thought otherwise - I definitely agree that the article does not aim to be one on complex ratios, but to finally arrive at popular, simpler ratios - but, via some of those intermediate seemingly complex ratios.

Credit to you for bringing out these ratios by the simple act of shifting the shrutis one step backwards - 4 times. Similar experiments may have been referred to in the Granthas, but credit is to you for explaining it with some Maths.

****************

Yes, I was referring to ma's "current ratio" = 5/4 in Fig 4 - After Step 2.

BTW, you could consider adding this suffix in the legend to each Fig n : " - After Step n"

****************

I have not been able to grasp the reference to different gramas made so often by many who discuss in this forum - specially, if as you say, it is still an enigma, or if they (all the 3 gramas ?) have all merged now.

You state :

"Why 2/3 gramas" - no sure answer. It is still an enigma. The texts do not say - they just always start with the existence of the gramas as a given.

One could ask :
If as you say, all this "grama" talk is somewhat of an enigma, why base the experiments' foundation on 2 of the 3 gramas ?
But, yes, I know that atleast one benefit is to arrive at simple popular ratios, and to reconcile with the intermediate complex ratios.

Even the other article by Vidyasankar talks of shadja and madhyama grama ; also many forum discs take refuge to these 2 gramas. If it is an enigma, why resort to these gramas for support ?

****************

From a person who is the author of the article, I expected a better, more concrete answer on : "Why one more ri ratio = 256/243 was left out ?" ! - instead of simply saying : "not sure" !

256/243 is NOT complex ; why ? - because, it is derived directly using the cycle of fifths and fourths - it is (4/3)^5 (application of 4/3 rule 5 times).

I was hoping that you would either confirm or reject my assumption that of the 24 ratios in Table V of Vidyasankar's (VS) article, those 7 ratios that I listed, may not be initially so straight-forward - even though they themselves are realtively fairly simple ratios, not complex.

****************

I wanted to understand atleast "pAlaiyAzh" in VS's article.
Why ? - because, it has referred to 2 scales, one with Ri = 9/8 (which ratio, one may say, is a more straight-forward ratio), compared to 10/9 (which is a ratio arrived at by back-calculating for eg, from Ga = 5/4), yet, the 2 scales have same ratios except for Ri and ga - for it states :

shaDja grAma - same scale as that of kharaharapriya (kAfi thAT) :
sa Ri ga ma pa Dha ni
1 10/9 32/27 4/3 3/2 5/3 16/9

pAlaiyAzh, the same scale as of harikambhoji (khamaj thAT) :
sa Ri ga ma pa Dha ni
1 9/8 5/4 4/3 3/2 5/3 16/9

I wonder if there is a typo in the above 2 ratios' rows.

Since I have not understood pAlaiyAzh, and also because I have no Musical thoroughness wrt singing either KaraHarapriya (22) or HarikAmbhOji (28), I am hazarding a guess :

Purely, thinking from symmetries, and not from any musical background, I wonder if they should instead read as :
shaDja grAma :
sa Ri ga ma pa Dha ni
1 10/9 32/27 4/3 3/2 5/3 9/5 ??

pAlaiyAzh :
sa Ri ga ma pa Dha ni
1 9/8 5/4 4/3 3/2 27/16 16/9 ??

[Perhaps, the ga ratios also may change from symmetry point of view - not sure.]

If there is indeed a typo error in the ratios' rows, then this may have a direct bearing on / from the 7 ratios that I listed earlier, all my inferences being purely from guess, Maths and Symmetry point of view, and not from any Musical background.

On the other hand, if there is no typo error, I would like to understand mathematically, the real diff betn shaDja grAma (- KaraHarapriya (22) scale) and pAlaiyAzh (- HarikAmbhOji (28) scale).

Can we infer this diff from the A-A :
22 | KaraHarapriya | S R2 G2 M1 P D2 N2 S | S N2 D2 P M1 G2 R2 S

28 | HarikAmbhOji | S R2 G3 M1 P D2 N2 S | S N2 D2 P M1 G3 R2 S

Just as an aside : Looking purely at A-A of the 2 Ragams, it may appear that the only diff is G2 vs G3. But since these two ragams can be heard so distinctly different by the human ear, perhaps, there are differences in the other ratios too ?
If true, what are the exact base ratios of all the swarams in these 2 Ragams ? ie, forgetting for the moment, gamakas etc.

****************

I know you have said that you are not racking yr brain on this subject (of mathematical ratios' calculations ?), but may be, these questions give you an incentive trigger to re-think !
For Music lovers like me who can distinguish Ragams, and different singing / playing styles purely by listening alone, and not by any knowledge of singing ourselves or by playing any instrument ourselves, Maths and Symmetry are the only tools to find any underlying reasons for the differences.

Rgds

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 05 Oct 2008, 18:19

Sundar Krishnan,

You seemed to have ignored the main thrust of my response as to what the article was abou. Again, It was precisely about what is mentioned in natyasastra and dattilam - the earliest available sources on 22 sruthis, swaras and gramas. Those sources do not get into why different gramas, what they mean etc. etc. But ALL melodic entities are categorized by gramas and hence gramas were very important although WHY SO is not explained. That is what I mean by an enigma particularly w.r.t the question why did they have 2 gramas in the first place. Just because we cannot answer that question does not mean we cannot make any use of gramas. And as far as I can tell, nor do those sources (i.e. natyasastra, dattilam and even sangitaratnakara although that came almost 1000 years later) anywhere infer about cycle of fifths and fourths etc.

256/243 - yes I could have taken - but again you seemed to have simply ignored the point that this ratio will not work for the experiment anyway (although I comes later). Besides, we were selecting a ri for the grama - one of 3 sruthiis. This is closer to kharaharapriya. The 256/243 is quoted for saveri and gowla and lower than even the standard mayamalavagowa (i think it is around 90 cents and not 111 cents?). Now, why would I even consider such a ratio for the one ri for sadjga grama

? Simply stated there is simply no way 256/243 could have been the ratio for the ri of the sadja and madhyama gramas.

I am not going to to back into delving into these ratios. I now find the subject not as interesting, but more importantly, I think ultimately it is not very useful because
1. I find many of discussions seeming to run orthogonal to what is mentioned in the texts. While it is certainly good to try to "fill in the blanks" of what is not said in text, one cannot also ignore the points made in the texts as well.
2. The cycle of fourths and fifths is not a closed model leading to a "cantor dust" and so eventually one need to stop - and different people stop at different points, and develop their own affinities. So this gets more subjective
3. There are more other interesting subjects that involve me now from time to time.

But these are my opinions only, and so I dont expect all others to see it this way. So allow me to excuse myself. This will be the last post here (atleast on this subject). You can contact me by email if you wish (you can do it via the forum itself).

Arun

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 05 Oct 2008, 19:49

Yes, 90.22499... Cents is correct, not 110 Cents.
ie, ln (256/243) * 1731.234049 = 90.22499 Cents

Thanks Arun, for this correction, and yr nice article.

*****************

OK, let us forget the disc on gramas for now.

*****************

Arun has stated the R ratio as :

... 256/243 is quoted for saveri and gowla and lower than even the standard mayamalavagowa

Similarly, I hope, that someone can let us know the exact ratios of all the diff swarams for these 2 Ragams ie, the exact defined ratios for R2, D2, N2, G2 / G3 and M1 ratios in each of these 2 Ragams (and perhaps, even P if 40/27 is used in one or both Ragams instead of 3/2 ?) :

22 | KaraHarapriya | S R2 G2 M1 P D2 N2 S | S N2 D2 P M1 G2 R2 S

28 | HarikAmbhOji | S R2 G3 M1 P D2 N2 S | S N2 D2 P M1 G3 R2 S

********************

Similarly, could someone give some explanation for the various ratios in the pAlaiyAzh scale - specially, Dha and ni.

Thanks

vk · Post by vk » 06 Oct 2008, 10:18

SaRi"Ve"Ri

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 07 Oct 2008, 00:05

vk,

I don't understand - if this is any answer to my previous query.

Could you pl explain.

Sundar Krishnan · Post by **Sundar Krishnan** » 07 Oct 2008, 00:07

â€œUday_Shankarâ€

martin · Post by **martin** » 13 Oct 2008, 13:35

>>>Perhaps the word â€œharmonicâ€

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 15 Oct 2008, 00:40

[quote="Sundar Krishnan"]
Elsewhere in some discussions, in this forum on some topic, I have seen the mix-up of the usage of "average"