Is Rupaka Taala the same as Chappu Taala?

[Srividyaram]

I am learning the taala theory and I am not sure where chappu taala comes under? It is not one of the 7 basic tala. I know chappu is a 3 akshara count. Can somebody please clarify this?

[vijay]

There are two common chapu taalaas - Khanda Chapu and Misra Chapu - they have 2.5 beats and 3.5 beats respectively. They are not part of the 35 tala scheme per se.

However they can be seen as reduced forms of Khanda Eka/Misra Jhampa (Khanda Chapu) and Tisra Triputa (Misra Chapu).

Both are also different from Rupaka taala.

[Srividyaram]

Thanks Vijay. Would you happen to know laghu/Dhrutam notation for the Khanda Chapu and Mishra Chapu ?

Also if you know the sollu kattu for these it would be helpful.

[Nick H]

There is no laghu/etc notation for Khanda chapu or Misra chapu talams, as they do not have this division. That is what marks them out.

Simply, they divide 2+3 and 3+4 (the smaller unit always comes first in the chapu talams. It is worth remembering this; you won't have to ask us about Sankeerna!)

TakaTakitha
TakithaTakadimi

The confusion with Rupaka talam is usually between rupaka as one of the 35 talams, which is one drutum followed by a laghu, and Rupaka talam which is commonly put as two claps and one wave

12-1234 or 1 - 2 - 3

Many rupaka talam songs have a rhythmic 'feel' which is closer to 12-1234 than to 1 2 3. I've noticed this, but do not know enough to tell you which songs, or whether the performer's choice of tala physical expression was the same as the composer's or not.

[Srividyaram]

Thank you Nick. This does help.

[Nick H]

You may pick talams from the 35-talam scheme that have the same number of counts as each other, or the same number of counts as a chapu talam.

You may then search forums such as this for questions such as why is talam 'x' of n counts different to talam 'y' of n counts? Sometimes there are answers.

It is probably a never-ending study

[msakella]

Unfortunately nobody is aware that this kind of study ends in ‘Talaprastara’ only. amsharma

[Nick H]

... I was thinking of that when I posted my previous response!

[msakella]

In fact, among all, mathematics is the easiest, of course, for the brilliants. In the same manner, though people of afraid of it, I feel, Talaprastara, having fully been deciphered, now became the easiest in music. Even though it has taken 40 years for me to decipher 40 hours, though not continuously, are more than enough to learn it. But, of course, people of afraid of it to approach even now. amsharma

[Nick H]

I spent some time with my guruji recently, who showed me certain calculations to make the composition of set mridangam pieces that have to be played on stage 'easy'.

I said that I could see how he had simplified it, making it clearer than any other published mridangam calculations I had ever seen, but to think it through and play it, on the spot, on stage, was still far from easy.

He replied that whether or not a person had a brain, well, that was a different question!

We went on to agree that yet another stage, having worked out the numbers, was to translate numbers into music.

But for those of us to whom this never-ending study is too much, or at least too frightening, there is still the never ending wonder of experiencing those who can not only work wonders with maths, but make the wonders that they work beautiful to listen to

[msakella]

There lies the genius of a man and, being a Mridangam player in my younger days, I was made dumb found to find many more easy methods in such calculations in the ‘Mullapudi-school of Mridangam of Vizianagaram. amsharma

[soungalo]

Hi
Sorry about the off-topic, but I'm trying to get in touch with Nick H, and there seems to be no other way to do this...
So Nick, please write here your E-mail address or contact me at liorglck@gmail.com

Thanks and sorry again...

[vijay]

You can mail him through the forum - click on his handle...