mELa ragas

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:09

First vanaspati.

An excellent vanaspati by Manda Sudharani with an AlApane and swaraprastAra. Will clearly delineate and detail the rAga. A must-have.

http://rapidshare.de/files/36507649/par ... garAja.mp3

More from MIO. To me pariyAcakamA by Maharajapuram Santhanam is the prototype.

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/music/c ... /ragam.25/

The same by Lalgudi

http://70.132.30.134:8080/musd/servlet/ ... track03.rm

On sangeethapriya, we have BMK singing his own composition "ISvari jagadISvari"

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:30

drshrikaanth wrote:First vanaspati.

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/music/c ... /ragam.25/

The same by Lalgudi

Very melodious recital of vanaspati.
We are getting close to manoranjani.. my favorite

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:46

ramakriya - you misspelt vanaspati in the heading

.

SSP notes 2 krithis by dIkshitar in bhAnumati. The other one is guruguhaswAmi (khanDa tripuTa). Is its authenticity in doubt?

You can listen to the S.Rajam's rendition of the kOTISwara Iyer's composition at: http://www.musicalnirvana.com/script/mu ... e=carnatic. It also has alapana and kalpana swaras (besides ciTTaswaras - i think).

I will post my (probably half-baked) interpretation of this raga separately.

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:51

arunk wrote:The other one is guruguhaswAmi (khanDa tripuTa). Is its authenticity in doubt?

Not in the least.

Ramakriya, looking forward to your rendering.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:54

I am guessing g, m, p, d (and ni too?) are all important swaras? You do have sa-ma ga-da, ma-ni (besides sa-pa) samvAdi relationships and perhaps that has something to do with this.

The difference to note with previous melas is that dhaivatam plays a lot more prominent role. Of course it is a different sthanam but these were the kind of differences i was hoping we would learn/infer as we moved in the "traditional order" of melas.

As is typical in all the first cakra mELas, the slide down from M1 to G1 is employed here as well.

For some reason, to me the AlApanA of manda sudhArANi gave out whiffs of kharaharapriya - unlike in other cases you only see whiffs of cakravAham (even in krithis)

. The resemblance of cakravAham is perhaps understanable and not unavoidable as it differs from vanaspati by only one swara, but i didnt expect kharaharapriya. I am assuming it is just me - i have been confused before!

The kOTISwara Iyer composition starts nicely with swarAkshara on "dAsa" and in general seems to highlight the usage of dhaivatam in the raga. The ga-da with a samvAdi relationship seems to be highlighted in the first 2 sangatis of the pallavi (starts with elongated da and ends in elongated ga).

BTW, does the tyAgarAja krithi also start with swarAkshara at the very start with the mandra pancama?

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:57

drshrikaanth wrote:
arunk wrote:The other one is guruguhaswAmi (khanDa tripuTa). Is its authenticity in doubt?
Not in the least.

arunk,

didn't I say I wrote from the top of my head

Pardon me for skipping guruguhaswAmini..

-Ramakriya

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 02:57

drshrikaanth wrote:Ramakriya, looking forward to your rendering.

yes me too! You should render the other one too following SSP notations. I have heard you sing and I think you of all people should be able to pull it off!

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:22

arunk wrote:IBTW, does the tyAgarAja krithi also start with swarAkshara at the very start with the mandra pancama?

Scratch that. The manda sudhArANi kalpana swara section leads up to a (later) sangathi that starts with the madya stayi panchama and that was leading me to think so even for the first sangathi (but in mandra stayi), but now i think that is not the case.

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:26

Even though it does'nt start with svarAkshara, I think tyAgarAja has fallen(!) prey to svarAksharas in this kriti becausepa and ma fall on the respective svaras in some sangatis at least

-Ramakriya

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:28

arunk wrote:You do have sa-ma ga-da, ma-ni (besides sa-pa) samvAdi relationships and perhaps that has something to do with this.

Nope. G1 is a vivAdi swara and does not get counted as samvAdi to any other swara. It does not even sound like samvAdi. So tha pair is out. So also M-N dont get counted as a consonant pair although I think they do sound consonant.

You are right about cakravAka chAye. I did not get kharaharapriya.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:37

drshrikaanth wrote:
arunk wrote:You do have sa-ma ga-da, ma-ni (besides sa-pa) samvAdi relationships and perhaps that has something to do with this.
Nope. G1 is a vivAdi swara and does not get counted as samvAdi to any other swara. It does not even sound like samvAdi. So tha pair is out. So also M-N dont get counted as a consonant pair although I think they do sound consonant.

. I should not have used the term "samvAdi" perhaps. I am not sure (or didnt know) that the samvAdi rules for not applying to vivAdi swaras and m-n etc. in grAma system applies today. I was mainly talking in terms of fifth and fourth relationships - but which again is perhaps misleading too. I guess all I was implying was that the fact that ga-da has a distance equivalent to sa-pa does play some role here but not able to define it clearly.

drshrikaanth wrote:You are right about cakravAka chAye. I did not get kharaharapriya.

It was probably me. I got it only initially - the first time I listened. Now the more I listen to it, the less of kharaharapriya I get and whatever "familiarity" i sense is only cakravAham (as i would expect).

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:44

arunk wrote:. I should not have used the term "samvAdi" perhaps. I am not sure (or didnt know) that the samvAdi rules for not applying to vivAdi swaras and m-n etc. in grAma system applies today. I was mainly talking in terms of fifth and fourth relationships - but which again is perhaps misleading too. I guess all I was implying was that the fact that ga-da has a distance equivalent to sa-pa does play some role here but not able to define it clearly.

You do react sharply dont you

What you said was very clear. And I was hoping what I said was clear too. I was not aware that these rules were from grAma system. WHat is the reference fo this one? Anyway G-D dont even give the feel of consonance. Several reasons. These 2 are almost never taken together. In asampUrNa mELas, the G is eschewed in the ascent so there is no way you can sing G-D. Even in sampUrNa scales, these dont get sung together. You can try but it will sound highly contrived. Also G1 is a chAyaA swara with an oscillation and a relation to the neighboruing swara for ots existence.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:50

i wasnt upset or anything! I will post later on the rules of grama system (have to go now). I also didnt mean samvAdi as in you sing ga-da together as in sa-ma and sa-pa. I agree from that point its not going to sound natural as you note. Only that you could have "similar" consecutive patterns that use them as end-points (or pivot points) - sort of like that first sangati of the pallavi of kOTISwara Iyer composition. I think if the end-points have this relationship, it soudns more musical. I think this is supposedly used in other music too. But i have also been told that the role of such relationships are overplayed too (and more so perhaps in CM). So maybe i should scratch this reference of mine too

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 03:54

But arun, Im saying G-D pair, however you sing it (Paired or unpaired) does not result in a musical effect. I dont understand this end-point business. Do explain if you can.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 06:38

drshrikaanth wrote:But arun, Im saying G-D pair, however you sing it (Paired or unpaired) does not result in a musical effect. I dont understand this end-point business. Do explain if you can.

I probably cant

because I am beginning realize it is one of those half-baked ideas. I should have probably begun by asking whether the G-D interval here had anything to do with the prominence of the swaras and silently evaluated whether the hunch had any credibility. I didnt and sort of presumed too much and so the only logical course of action is serious back-pedalling

.

But I had always been intrigued by the question "why different melas/ragas have different jIva swaras" and thought perhaps swaras in a raga separated by consonant intervals played some part. It is loosely based on the research work of N.A. Jairozbhoy (whose details i dont know well and so have only passing knowledge) who has some theories on evolution of scales in Hindustanic music (and the old classical music). But knowing all too well the diversity of scales we have in CM, i did think it of as a "long shot" if any.

Anyway sorry for the diversion/mis-direction. If you are still interested as to why I connected the samvAdi relationships you mentioned to grama-system, i can post that separately.

Arun

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 13 Oct 2006, 08:30

The latest posts got me thinking - perhaps the ascent of G1-D2 would be unmusical, but there should be nothing wrong in pairing D2-G1, since this can be justified by either the musicality of N1-G1* or its functional equivalent, D2-R2*, which, furthermore, would be regarded as samvAdi. Isnt this true? (btw I say "functional equivalent" because the process of derivation of the notes using cycles of fourths and fifths does not yield the exact ratios, but is good to a high accuracy).

Ashwin

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 20:39

Ashwin wrote:perhaps the ascent of G1-D2 would be unmusical, but there should be nothing wrong in pairing D2-G1, since this can be justified by either the musicality of N1-G1* or its functional equivalent, D2-R2*

That was one part of my thinking. The vivAdi feel of G1 comes mainly when R1 also appears (not necessarily always after but anywhere in vicinity). When doing a rAga with G1, I would expect that you must show G1-R1 combo "often enough" (?). But in ragas like vanaspati, maybe you could emphasize G1 in some sort of tandem with D2 for some-time without showing R1 and that maybe can "lessen" the vivadi touch (in those specific portions)? That was my thinking when saying "more musical" and for wondering whether G1's role was somehow enhanced in vanaspati by presence of D2 (and also maybe vice-versa).

But then you take cakravAham which doesnt have R2/G1 sthana - yet i think D2 plays a similar role to that in vanaspati. You see in gAnamUrti that G1 plays a prominent role (say like in vanaspati), and it doesnt have D2

. So thats why i thought it was a long shot in cm - where i think the diversity of mELas is quite impressive.

I think P D2 N2 S' dictates the colour of D2 and N2 i.e. role of da and ni are influenced by the uttarAnga structure. Would that be a better statement? But I was thinking that maybe something about pUrvAnga also plays a role on dha and ni (of course similar logic applies to uttarAnga swaras). I wonder this because I am not sure all ragas with P D2 N2 S' would have identical usages of dha and ni. I can believe the usages are similar but there are perhaps subtle variations - and maybe the difference in uttarAnga structure has some role.

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 20:47

arunk wrote:But in ragas like vanaspati, maybe you could emphasize G1 in some sort of tandem with D2 for some-time without showing R1 and that maybe can "lessen" the vivadi touch (in those specific portions)?

Sure you can sing D2-G1, but how do you propose to avoid R1 here? R1 will always follow G1 in this phrase. You dont propose to climb up from D2 to g1 and further up do you

Would that be a better statement? But I was thinking that maybe something about pUrvAnga also plays a role on dha and ni (of course similar logic applies to uttarAnga swaras). I wonder this because I am not sure all ragas with P D2 N2 S' would have identical usages of dha and ni. I can believe the usages are similar but there are perhaps subtle variations - and maybe the difference in uttarAnga structure has some role.

Correct observation. Yes, each swara influences every other swara. So changing combination will definitely affect the gamaks, usages of other swars often. We may not be always able to see why but it does happen.

Lakshman · Post by **Lakshman** » 13 Oct 2006, 21:00

Here are the songs in vanaspati.

Anni dharma-Sriramachandra Murti Sistla
Balidanavasam harure (lkg)-Triputa-Govindacharya
Brihadamba madamba jayati brahmanda-Adi-Muttusvami Dikshitar
Dasa nesha guheshane nija tejane klesha-Adi-Kotishvara Iyer
Dravida nattin arum tamizh taye tirumagale-Adi-Tamizhnambi
Garuda vahana-Rupaka-Chitravina N.Ravikiran
Guruguha svamini bhaktim karomi nirupama-K/Triputa-Muttusvami Dikshitar
Ishvari jagadishvari maheshvari krpakari amba-Adi-Balamuralikrishna
Kappatra tarunam ide kadaikkan-Adi-Shuddhananda Bharati
Karana kariyattal iyangum prapancham-Adi-T.R.Vaidishvaran
Mal maruga muruga guha shanmukha marakata mayilini-Adi-D.Pattammal
Nama rupamula-T/Triputa-Dokka Sriramamurti
Nivega naranarayana-Sriramachandra Murti Sistla
Pa ma ga sa ri ni (sj)-C/Triputa-Vina Sheshanna
Paratpari parameshvari patalisha priya-Adi-Cuddalore Subramaniam
Pariyachakama mata padigurilo bogadinadi-Adi-Tyagaraja
Prakrushtamaina-Sriramachandra Murti Sistla
Rajata chala shrunga madhya nilaye-S/Rupakam-R.K.Suryanarayana
Shriranga vasini devi gambhira (lkg)-Jhampa-Venkatamakhi
Vana durge maharajnyi matangi-Rupaka-Muttiah Bhagavatar
Vanaspati samraksha-Rupaka-Bangalore S.Mukund
Vandeham sada vagdevim vinavadinim jagadambam-Chapu-Ashok R.Madhav

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 21:04

drshrikaanth wrote:Sure you can sing D2-G1, but how do you propose to avoid R1 here? R1 will always follow G1 in this phrase. You dont propose to climb up from D2 to g1 and further up do you

(embarassingly - whats the emoticon for this?)I was if G1 can nyAsa (?).

But maybe thats nonsensical. Did you listen to that kOTiswara iyer composition? Can you break down the pallavi part? I maybe wrong but I thought it was using D2 and G1 in tandem (first sangati/iteration) but maybe it was ending in M1G1R1 as opposed to M1G1.. - because you still get the vivAdi feel in that line.

But i also think maybe once we hear G1-R1 combo first (as in alApanA), we get the vivadi feel, and from then on G1 gets attached to that feel. So even if that line ended only in G1, we would still get a vivadi feel in that context. (but maybe i should shut up as perhaps i am slipping quite fast down a slippery slope

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 13 Oct 2006, 22:07

There was a recording of guruguhaswAmini by Smt Vedavalli on www.guruguha.org on krithi of the week series.

If any one has this recording, please post a link. paanini, narayanan? Are you listening?

-Ramakriya

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 13 Oct 2006, 22:28

drshrikaanth wrote:Sure you can sing D2-G1, but how do you propose to avoid R1 here? R1 will always follow G1 in this phrase. You dont propose to climb up from D2 to g1 and further up do you

I think this is very true - from a practical standpoint G1 cannot be a terminal svara in the ascent - R1 is required to follow. However, in the descent, it may be possible (inviting your comments). One example I can think of is a brilliant round of kalpanAsvarAs by TKG Mama for gAnamUrttE (available as part of the gAnamandir trust set of recordings), in which successively shorter phrases were all terminated in G1, until finally it ended with 'G1-M1-gAnamUrttE'... I doubt whether phrases ending in 'S-R1-gAnamUrttE' have as much musical quality...

Ashwin

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 22:41

Per Ashwin's last post: Actually I think this was what I was trying to convey. You take a phrase that gets down to G1 but render it as a "final point - and then start a new phrase (from higher), so that the 2 phrases are sort of disjoint and not continuous. This can happen in kalpana swaras, and like in that kOTIswara Iyer comp (assuming i sensed it correctly)

drs,ashwin - Are you guys saying that if G1 is used to start a phrase, then it should be descending one via R1? Otherwise it would sound odd/unnatural?

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 13 Oct 2006, 22:46

arunk wrote:drs,ashwin - Are you guys saying that if G1 is used to start a phrase, then it should be descending one via R1? Otherwise it would sound odd/unnatural?

Pretty much. vivAdi notes are not used to start phrases. As I said earlier, these swaras depend on their neighbours for support and identity. So it is artificial to start on them. It may sound like R2 and you risk confusing yourself and the audience about the rAga identity. And then, when things look hunky dory, R1 will make a jarring entry. It just wont work.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 22:56

drshrikaanth wrote:Pretty much. vivAdi notes are not used to start phrases. As I said earlier, these swaras depend on their neighbours for support and identity.

Yes - i think i follow.

Arun

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 13 Oct 2006, 23:03

SSP notes the following under bhAnumati:

NOTE: In ragams such as bAanumati and sAmavarALi which have only sruti variations, there are many sancAara bEdhams in the mUrcchana. These will be clear when the gIta, tAna, kIrttana sancAris of sAmavarAli and bhAnumati are observed.

Can people explain what he exactly means? That they are very similar in character but differences show up in the usage as observed in patterns in the gitas, kIrtanas etc.?

But why would a D1-N3 (sAmavarALi) and D2-N2 (bhAnumati) be similar?

Arun

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:06

drshrikaanth wrote:Pretty much. vivAdi notes are not used to start phrases.

I dont know if we can go so far. Since we are talking about vanaspati, consider the vanaspati caraNam in mahAvaidyanAtha Sivan's mElarAgamAlika: 'SRI vanaspati...", which begins as G1,,M1-M1,P,P,D2,D2,,,. Im amused by the distinct possibility that his choice of the svara G1 for the sAhitya "SRI" was a deliberate attempt to highlight the equivalence in stature of G1 and R2 for the take-off...

Ashwin

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:09

Ashwin wrote:Sivan's mElarAgamAlika: 'SRI vanaspati...", which begins as G1,,M1-M1,P,P,D2,D2,,,. Im amused by the distinct possibility that his choice of the svara G1 for the sAhitya "SRI" was a deliberate attempt to highlight the equivalence in stature of G1 and R2 for the take-off...

Ashwin
what is the previous swara. We are talking of a rAgamAlike. vanaspati is not the first rAga. Im sure the previous swara is R1 or possibly M1. We cannot take this unit as a stand-alone part.

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:23

drshrikaanth wrote:what is the previous swara. We are talking of a rAgamAlike. vanaspati is not the first rAga. Im sure the previous swara is R1 or possibly M1. We cannot take this unit as a stand-alone part.

The cittasvarAs preceding "SRI vanaspati" certainly will end on R1 or M1, and certainly we wouldnt expect G1 to pop out of nowhere. However, this seems to be an ambiguous way of defining the beginning or end of a stand-alone unit. We know that most svarAs in a sampUrNa rAga will be preceded or succeded by one of the adjacent svarAs. As a bona fide caraNam of this kRti, I think there may be an argument for treating this as a stand-alone unit, particularly if you consider that the caraNa sAhitya ends on S ("vidhitOsi") before G1 is once again used as the take-off. That being said, the oscillation about a vivAdhi svara must also be considered when assessing its ability to begin or end a phrase - in most rAgas with N1 and G1, the usage will most often be as N1-S-N1 and G1-M1-G1 (gamaka

). It is here, perhaps, that its relationship to adjacent svarAs is defined, and its vivAdhi nature established.

Ashwin

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:29

Ashwin wrote:The cittasvarAs preceding "SRI vanaspati" certainly will end on R1 or M1, and certainly we wouldnt expect G1 to pop out of nowhere. However, this seems to be an ambiguous way of defining the beginning or end of a stand-alone unit.

It is not ambiguous at all. If you dont expect G1 to pop out od nowhere, then you dont have a case

This unit is sung in continuity with the previous unit that ends in the ciTTeswara. So music-wise, it is NOT a stand-alone unit. sAhitya-wise, yes it is a different caraNa.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:37

Ashwin wrote:in most rAgas with N1 and G1, the usage will most often be as N1-S-N1 and G1-M1-G1 (gamaka ). It is here, perhaps, that its relationship to adjacent svarAs is defined, and its vivAdhi nature established.in

No. The vivAdi is i relation to D1 and R1 and not with S or M. In fact no swara can be affected by vivAditva with respect to S even if the Sruti interval fits the definition of vivAdi. And N1 and G1 are sung commonly in relation to D1 and R1 respctively rather than with the swars above them.

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:38

Ashwin wrote:
drshrikaanth wrote:Pretty much. vivAdi notes are not used to start phrases.
I dont know if we can go so far...

Ashwin

I am with Ashwin. What about gAnamUrtE, it starts on g1, continuing to r1 and s, which is vivAdi ?

Similarly the very beginning of EdAri sancharinturA begins with a vivAdi phrase. So does paramAtmuDu veligE.

IMO, if that is what is required to bring out the rAga bAva, no harm in bringing it as start phrase.

-Ramakriya

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:39

drshrikaanth wrote:It is not ambiguous at all. If you dont expect G1 to pop out od nowhere, then you dont have a case This unit is sung in continuity with the previous unit that ends in the ciTTeswara. So music-wise, it is NOT a stand-alone unit. sAhitya-wise, yes it is a different caraNa.

What I meant was that you would never end a cittasvara on a note far from G1 in this case (so that G1 would pop out of nowhere) for stylistic reasons, e.g. "G1 M1 P D2 N2 SRI vanaspati..." However, this general practice for svaras does not say that G1 cannot be a take-off svara. For example, there are kRtis in kalyANi taking off on every note in the scale. By singing kalpanAsvarAs for any one of those kRtis, do we then conclude that the corresponding svaras cannot be taken as starting notes in kalyANi?

Ashwin

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:46

Ramakriya
Good point about gAnamUrte although I will refrain from saying what I think of melodic quality here. paramAtmuDu does not start on a vivAdi note. It starts on ShaDja.

Ashwin, dont bring kalyANi here and confound the issue. kalyANi is not a vivAdi rAga and has no place here.

I said vivAdi notes are not used to start phrases. I did not use "Never" although I was thinking on those lines.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:49

Ramakriya
The phrase on which paramAtmuDu starts is sung with a dIrgha RShabha and G too is stretched. There are ways to handle vivAdi swaras to avoid vivAditva,. Elongation is one of them.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:51

Ashwin wrote:However, this general practice for svaras does not say that G1 cannot be a take-off svara.

O well. If you want to take everything that is not explicitly written in a treatise as allowed, then It wont be CM anymore

Ashwin · Post by **Ashwin** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:55

drshrikaanth wrote:Ashwin, dont bring kalyANi here and confound the issue. kalyANi is not a vivAdi rAga and has no place here.

It was your definition of what constitutes a "stand-alone unit" - that I was talking about. You said that "SRI vanaspati" was not a stand-alone unit because the note preceding "SRI" was always one note higher or lower than that of "SRI". This argument is rAgA-independent.

Ashwin

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:57

Yes I still say that as far as melody is concerned, in that composition, that unit is NOT independent from the preceding unit.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:58

well i am with both ashwin and drs

. If one starts with just M1-G1 vs G1-R1, IMO both can bring vivadi feel - but G1-R1 perhaps more. I think the main reason is because we are always "sensing" them in reference to the tonic S to which we always have a connection. As we all know vivAdi ragas have three swaras half-tone apart as in: S-R1-G1, R3-G3-M1, P-D1-N1 and D3-N3-S? What is common besides this? The vivadi swara is at one end, and a tonic or major consonant on the other end. The tonic/major-consonant part I think plays a role in making the other-end of the triad feel dissonant i.e. vivAdi.

How about this one? I think we could be influenced by "labels": if you sing S/R3~ (as swaras) alone in nATTAi, you immediately think of vivAdi feel. But you do S/G2~ (again sing them as swaras), you dont although the sthanams being hit in both are very close (but gamaks could be different). IMO, that sthanam is labelled with a "ri" - our brain tells us - vivAdi!

drs - I thought you were averse to ascending phrases starting with G1 and not any phrase (otherwise I would have quoted gAnamUrtE earlier

). I think the case for not recommending ascending phrases is stronger - isnt it?

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:04

arunk wrote:The vivadi swara is at one end, and a tonic or major consonant on the other end. The tonic/major-consonant part I think plays a role in making the other-end of the triad feel dissonant i.e. vivAdi.

Excellent point.

drs - I thought you were averse to ascending phrases starting with G1 and not any phrase (otherwise I would have quoted gAnamUrtE earlier ). I think the case for not recommending ascending phrases is stronger - isnt it?

I think you are right. Thanks for making me aware of my subconscious thought process

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:08

arunk wrote:The vivadi swara is at one end, and a tonic or major consonant on the other end. The tonic/major-consonant part I think plays a role in making the other-end of the triad feel dissonant i.e. vivAdi.

For further corroboration, we know melas (very popular, likeable ones too) with the M2-P-D1 combo (again 3 swaras half-tone apart) which dont give any vivadi feel

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:15

Good Arun.

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:20

In CM itself, as well as for us tuned to CM (Which is based on very sound melodic principles of course), S and P are always present even if not heard (anAhata nAda

And they are themselves never afflicted by vivAditva.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:38

I also want to add R1-S-N3 to the mix - no vivadiness there. How about P-M2-M1 which i have head in behAg. A bit unusal isnt it? Does not give a vivadi feel, but doesnt feel like the normal "non-vivadi" combinations. Here you have 2 major consonants on either side fighting to avoid vivadi feel

.

But what about R3-G3-M2? By my "theory" that shouldnt give vivadi feel

! Does it in reality? We have to wait a while in this thread to know that! Dont recall hearing those mELas.

But I knew there had to be !$#$ spoiler! Every time I have tried to come up with a formula in CM, there is always some exception :rolleyes: But is still 2 half-tones next to a major consonant (which is missing). Maybe that still means something - i.e maybe the "formula" is 2 consecute half-tones next to a major consonant? Yikes - the ice on which I am skating is getting thinner

;)!

In case of S-R1-G1, it is interesting that when hearing G1-R1-S, on the G1-R1 part I sometimes sense the "most" dissonant feel more when R1 is voiced. But that is definitely because G1 was voiced earlier - and both are sensed w.r.t Sa!

You take R1 out and G1-S (or R2-S, or say M1-R2-S, or G3-R2-S) is fine. You take G1 out then R1-S (or G2-R1-S) is fine. So I think its somewhat misleading to exclusively associate vivAdiness to one swara -sthanam. It is actually a combination of all three swaras in the triad (with the tonic/major-consonant playing an implicit part). In fact instead of saying G1, R3, D3, N1 as vivadi swaras we should say G1-R1, R3-D3 and D1-N1 together are "vivAdi pairs"

Arun

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 02:57

arunk wrote:I also want to add R1-S-N3 to the mix - no vivadiness there.

This is already recognised and explicitly mentioned in books. The moment S or P appear in between, vivAdi vanished into thin air.

How about P-M2-M1 which i have head in behAg.

Have you heard this in behAg:rolleyes: It should not appear. It is PM2G3M1 that appears in behAg. If you still think you have heard PM2M1, please listen to my lecdem on hamIrkalyANi.

M1 M2 should not occur adjacent to each other.

We have to wait a while in this thread to know that! Dont recall hearing those mELas.

A LOOOONG wait. Meanwhile, try recalling nAsikabhUShaNi/nAsAmaNi, sucarita/ santAnamanjari or rasikapriya/rasamanjari.

You take R1 out and G1-S (or R2-S, or say M1-R2-S, or G3-R2-S) is fine. You take G1 out then R1-S (or G2-R1-S) is fine. So I think its somewhat misleading to exclusively associate vivAdiness to one swara -sthanam. It is actually a combination of all three swaras in the triad (with the tonic/major-consonant playing an implicit part). In fact instead of saying G1, R3, D3, N1 as vivadi swaras we should say G1-R1, R3-D3 and D1-N1 together are "vivAdi pairs"

You missed one crucial point

The moment you say G1 or N1 ec, you are talking of a vivAdi combination. If that were not the case, G1 would only be called R2, N1 will be D2 and so on.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Oct 2006, 03:21

drshrikaanth wrote:
How about P-M2-M1 which i have head in behAg.
Have you heard this in behAg:rolleyes: It should not appear. It is PM2G3M1 that appears in behAg.

Maybe my memory is not correct, but I am (vaguely) remembering some rendition of MMI where he does this in kalpana swaras

if you still think you have heard PM2M1, please listen to my lecdem on hamIrkalyANi.

I missed all that (wasnt that actively posting for a brief period). Can someone post it?

A LOOOONG wait. Meanwhile, try recalling nAsikabhUShaNi/nAsAmaNi, sucarita/ santAnamanjari or rasikapriya/rasamanjari.

And jyOtiswarUpiNi. Yep - vivadi alright

You missed one crucial point The moment you say G1 or N1 ec, you are talking of a vivAdi combination. If that were not the case, G1 would only be called R2, N1 will be D2 and so on.

You are right. But I was thinking associating vivadi feeling/perception to a sthanam as in do we get a vivAdi feel, only while we hear the g1 part in a phrase containing G1, or maybe it is also during R1 part (in tandem with G1 of course)?

But besides that yes presence of G1 implies presence of R1 and thus S-R1-G1 and thus vivAdi, and so G1 is the source of vivAdiness from that angle.

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 14 Oct 2006, 03:26

arunk wrote:
drshrikaanth wrote:
How about P-M2-M1 which i have head in behAg.
Have you heard this in behAg:rolleyes: It should not appear. It is PM2G3M1 that appears in behAg.
Maybe my memory is not correct, but I am (vaguely) remembering some rendition of MMI where he does this in kalpana swaras

IMO, if the phrase "p m2 m1 g3" occures in bEhAg very rarely, it is not detrimental to the rAgabhAva.
Of course, it should not become the staple

diet!

-Ramakriya

drshrikaanth · Post by **drshrikaanth** » 14 Oct 2006, 03:27

And that rAga could be called rAmakriyabehAg as behAg will not allow it.

arunk · Post by **arunk** » 14 Oct 2006, 03:31

whether proper behAg or not, (or proper cm or not) my question is how would we perceive P M2 M1? So it is perhaps (now) more of an academic question regarding perception of dissonance (in CM).

Arun

ramakriya · Post by **ramakriya** » 14 Oct 2006, 03:37

Sure, even in the presense of P, the prayOga p m2 m1 g3 in bEhAg(!) or d1 m2 m1 g3 in lalit does sound dissonent to me;

-Ramakriya