Amplification of tampura in our cutcheries.

[CC]

Great thread to read, our experts taking part in it...

Most of us are Instant Pundits on any given subject, thanks to Wikipedia.

[prashant]

CC - as a long-time opera listener, I thankfully haven't come across anyone ready to make 'the supreme sacrifice'.

Arbitrarily fixing C to 256 Hz [or whatever you choose] does not seve any purpose other than introducing a predictable monotony into the music. As a singer, I completely fail to see why this would be in any way useful - perhaps I am missing something very obvious.

[arunk]

perhaps what CC asks is e.g. for "1-kattai" to mean 130.813 (and/or times 2, times 4 of that) and not something approximately around that (as may be the case nowadays)?

Assuming so, even then, I see this as pointless for CM. It seems to imply that vocalists should be able to "attach" better to these pre-defined frequencies (for use as tonic) rather than the current "more flexible" scheme. But these predefined frequencies themselves were arbitrary choices. Besides if we take C, then the D for it is 200 cents away, which in itself is an approximation of equi-tempered scale - that just does not fly for CM. It works only for WM based orchestral music.

These fixed frequencies may help a violin and mridangam to be *pre-tuned* against some external reference that is known to reliably emit this pitch (one can question this for many performances - how do you confirm that your piano's middle C is precisely 261625? Besides instruments always drift as you play - there is simply no substitute for tuning by the ear - and I believe all professionals (CM, HM and WM) are very good at that. And this works for any pitch.

Having all instruments tuned the same way, is not going to guarantee avoidance of sruthi lapses while singing /playing. That is related to being *consistent* in having precise control over your voice/instrument. The misses are not because the performer suddenly cannot perceive where the actual sa is (of course with amaeturs land beginners that indeed happens)


Arun

[martin]

Arun
Could I request you to write a small paragraph explaining tonic music, the role of tonic in WM, AdhAra shadja in ICM, etc...It might be useful for many.

Being of the West and having a foot in both WCM and ICM I can try to put it in a nutshell.
In Europe, (church)music before 1250-1300 is called Ars Antiqua and is based on the widespread traditions of Gregorian Chant. I'm going back this far because at least here is a Western, very large, well documented repertoir that has its very roots in the 3rd and fourth centuries, where we can find a meaningfull likeness with the esthetics of ICM.
'Musica Nova' of course followed it gradually early 1300 and forms of polyphonic composition were developed, moving to different musical ideals and societies etc. Gregorian chant shares some basic and essential characteristics with ICM: it is both modal and monophonic. The latter means, one voice, infering there is one melody-line that makes up the full music. Modal in that it is sung in one of 8 modes, derived from 4 basic modi, those on D, E, F & G. The pitch letters have no absolute relevance, compare to sargam. Each of these 4 modes exists in two ways, for instance:D authentic and D plagal . Authentic means here: D we can call Sa. A =Pa, F is komal Ga, can have both Bflat or natural (komal Dha or shuddh) and the melody will be sung in this thaat, using most of its upper range, descending to Sa and ni below it on a cadence (end of a phrase). The 'tenor' or reciting tone that is very strong is Pa. Plagal is in the same thaat, but using the lower range. Still phrases cadence on D, but now F is the tenor and it will go down to mandra Pa. In a similar way, so goes it with the modes on E, F and G. E authentic is Bhairavi thaat. F authentic is Yaman/Kalyani etc. Now some of the chants can be sung with a tanpura in a similar fashion as in ICM as I know from having done it often. It requires the chant to be composed in such a way that the whole melody behaves like a raga and have no modulations (going into another mode). An example, most chants in D authentic can be sung with tanpura were it not that there is a significant bit of it were temporarily, the tanpura would have to drop one whole tone lower at the cadence, where Sa can not be maintained, as temporarily, mandra komal NI takes over that function. When around 1200 florid organum was developed, a part of a chant would be used for a two-voice composition, which has the chant melody in very long held syllables in the lower part, moving thus extremely slow, which would be used as a chain of 'Sa' s which serve as the root or tonic for the newly composed 2nd voice. So here we have the root of polyphony, having (at least) two melodies make a harmony. Soon after 4-part layout in separate parts became a standard (SATB, soprano, alto, tenor, bass) Now we call the singers such but it used to refer directly to the relevant parts of a 4-part motet. So basically there is some ancient music that can very well be sung with a tanpura but of course other instruments were used to do something similar, to wit: create a tonic resonance field that sonically enhances the melody. Particularly suitable are also a lot of the chants composed by Abbess Hildegard of Bingen (mid 12th). As soon as any music is no longer modal and monophonic the tanpura can't join in as lower parts start moving all over the place and there will be no fixed, unchanging single tonic.
Equal Temperament came much later and only since WW I has been widely put in force, as well as fixing an international standard for a' at 440 Hz., but that's a different post.

Hope this helps, regards

[martin]

Martin
That is an advanced psycho-acoustic debate and I am willing to have it separately, to the extent that I am qualified to have it. I would deem it as a learning experience from you rather than a "debate". And no promises to drop dead .

Right now, we're still at the level of clarifying the "purpose" of the tampura on Carnatic stage. Some think it serves as a "reminder" of "where the Sa is"! That would be like saying that the mridangam is there as a "reminder" of where the tala is !

Maybe we can agree on that just being a bad choice of words, which is actually found very often though that doesn't make it less silly, indeed!

A good musician does not 'need' a tanpura to know where any svara is, but having it clearly defines everything. The trained musician can 'feel' whether he/she is getting every svara right in relation to sa or other important svaras, by singing very precise pitches that are part of a web of resonances. A propos my post on modes and modulation, by restricting itself to one single tonic it is possible to have the strongest possible web of internal resonances by natural harmonics, as these are always defined by their characteristic relations to the fundamental, tonic, or simply, Sa.

When I would be away from home I kept singing or humming without tanpura and I could go on practising internally. But once I sit with grandmother tanpura all the svaras are put in perspective by receiving a special colour when they sound in the tonic resonance field of the tanpura, and are enhanced and supported by the rich and dynamic sound. The tanpura creates a steady humming which acts like a carrier-wave to the svaras that are sung or played. So it is nothing abstract, it is very concrete physically, you can hear it, feel it, almost touch it...

Another example, I may carry a tuning fork around, so I may check where A 440 is if I want to. But knowing it is not the same thing as singing a melody when A 440 is sounding as 'Sa' and I have to adjust every svara so that the physical effect of the svara sounding 'in' that A-pitched tone is spot-on according to the raga's scale and internal dynamics. I have a lot of experience tuning various instruments, listening to beats, harmonics aligning or difference-tones and what have you. I have sung and whistled to any stable sound I chanced upon, always searching for those specific relations that define a raga sonically as a way of playful practice. When this gets in your system the tanpura is a joy for ever. Indeed it is unique in this function in the world and it is the only string instrument that allows you through the jivari-threads to vary the timbre of the tone of the strings without taking out your toolbox. So in the restriction to one single tonic as in ICM one can aspire to the greatest heights of pure resonance which is almost magical. This is one of the things that originally drew me to ICM.
Sadly, the apparent lack of these 'magical powers' as found often today when concerts become boring through lack of authentic atmosphere, genuine charm and tonal purity, is putting my ears out of joint so I tend to attend less and less to concerts.

I know that I am more Catholic than the Pope himself in this respect but this is nevertheless my POV, very personal and biased, yes indeed. Life might be easier if I could just tag along with everybody else but no can do. In respect of loss of tonal purity I have noticed a lot of change for the worse over the last decade, and I will pull out if there's no way of bending this degrading trend. We now witness a young generation of musicians who obviously have had most of their practice with bland sounding boxes and sadly, it shows. ICM is born out of Nada Brahma, we need living sounds to teach our ears. In the end, the Cultural Heritage is in the collective minds of the community of musicians therefore sursadhana (particularly for vocalists) based on pure tanpura is so important to keep your ears clean, in service to Music.

I only dare to take this maybe conservatist traditional POV as I believe it is on behalf of Music and not my own interests. My ultimate loyalty will always lie with Sarasvati. Having been so intimate with many great artists and having tasted the nectar of the Gods I would think this is something worth protecting and trying to keep sound and well.

In medieval europe in the Benedictine abbeys monks had the holy duty of singing God's glory through the divine office, singing all 150 psalms in the course of a week and singing Mass every day. This was in imitation of the Angels, who sing to the glory of god in saecula saeculorum amen, for ever and anon, so be it. Chapels and churches, built in stone with domed vaults, arches do something marvelous with a listening voice: a solo singer can build up resonances with his chant in which the acoustic does for the singing what a tanpura does for an Indian vocalist, he carries his 'temple' with him in the tanpura. There is a great number of recordings of Gregorian chant out in the world, but few of those have whatever it takes to achieve the effect as their intonation is not sufficiently precise to create the proper rasa or raga svaroop - they more or less sing the 'form' of it but without some inherent qualities that give it life. Also, this kind of music needs the temple-acoustic, you can not separate it and record it in a studio with added echo.
You can all see how this, by way of analogue, may apply to ICM in some instances, and maybe more so in the future.

[martin]

CC - as a long-time opera listener, I thankfully haven't come across anyone ready to make 'the supreme sacrifice'.

Arbitrarily fixing C to 256 Hz [or whatever you choose] does not seve any purpose other than introducing a predictable monotony into the music. As a singer, I completely fail to see why this would be in any way useful - perhaps I am missing something very obvious.

In European Concert life it has some obvious practicalities that do not necessarily apply to ICM, which allows for a wide margin of personal choice, according to the qualities of voice or instrument at which they sound best or are most comfortable or whatever reason one finds. With instruments it is as with voices. If they're not of uniform measure and scale, pitches may vary. Nevertheless, it sometimes poses problems as well. It will be extremely difficult for instance to find a sarangi player who may join with a male vocalist who takes his Sa at a very low B-flat, if not right out impossible.

[CC]

cc
I'm not trying to turn this into a slugfest, but I don't agree with much of what you've said. Prashant has already voiced some of my objections, I might be repeating them in different words.
- Uday

The only reason I am bothering to reply is to make sure that people on this forum do not accept as gospel truth the obfuscations and non-sequitur arguments you have given us.

Let us first ask the question: is there a tambura in any Western music concerts? No, there isn't one. And the reason is Western music is based on a fixed frequency for the adhara shadja.

Actually, quite the opposite. There's no "need" for a tampura in western music because it's an entirely different system of music with an entirely different evolutionary history and it bears very little analogous resemblance to Carntic music except in the very broadest of terms. It is a system based on harmony, counterpoint, modulation, etc., where the tonic (which is a remote analogue to "AdhAra" shadja) is changing constantly.

Martin has given us a wonderful explanation of how Western Music essentially grew out of a melodic base before turning to polyphony, harmony, orchestration, etc. That doesn't mean that there aren't pieces performed even today that do not bring in harmony, counterpoint, etc.

If you take Vivaldi's Concerto for Violin (and I mean, for one violin ( and he has written several such concerti), can you tell us where harmony and counterpoint come into play? Does Isaac Stern or Pinchas Zukerman need a drone when they play Vivaldi or any other piece for the violin? Conversely, can a Carnatic violinist play a geetham without a drone? Why not?

If you now tell me that the extensive use of gamakams is what forces the Carnatic musician to use a tambura as a reference, I would like someone, a Carnatic violinist or flutist, to play all of Muthuswamy Deekshithar's nottu swara sahithyams without using a tambura. Being replicas of Western airs that Sri Deekshithar wanted to capture, I am sure they don't have any of the gamakams on which you would like to pin the blame. I am equally sure that a Western violinist would play the same 39 sahithyas with only sheet music and without a drone.

Thus, the real reason for a tambura in an Indian music concert is to remind the musician the frequency of the adhara shadja he has chosen to use that day.

No sir, that's not the reason. Musicians can sing effective enough without a tampura too - haven't you heard lec-dems, prayers, in car rides, etc. ? They don't need a "reminder", especially after years of singing at the same pitch. So the real purpose of the tampura, when properly tuned, is that it adds a special, "classical", professional, fine dimension to pitch discrimination. This level of pitch discrimination is not needed for light music or western music (classical or pop). Of course, often it is also not needed (or more precisely, heeded) for Carntic music .

Exactly what do you mean by "fine dimension to pitch discrimination"? Are you saying that, in a raga like Saveri, the Carnatic musician needs to refer back to the "sa" of the tambura because the "ri" of Saveri is different from the standard "ri"; that the musician would know where his "sa" and regular "ri" are as also the rest of the swaras but it is the Saveri "ri" that is giving him trouble by being lower than its nominal value? In which case, you are trying to make a distinction without a difference.

As to singing in a car for a few minutes, that is not the same as singing for the duration of a concert. As for prayers and lec-dems, you should have been at the most recent one at Raga Sudha Hall. Dr. SRJ used a drone but then he sang entire krithis too!

I would accept your statement that our musicians know exactly where their shadjam is if they don't practically scream out for "feedback" all the time. Can you tell me why they need feedback? Don't they hear what they are singing? Are their ears miraculously placed hundreds of feet away from their mouths? Haven't you heard the booming sound created by the feedback monitors feeding into the microphones?

If a Western musician can play without a drone, an Indian musician should be able to do the same too. I don't question that the tambura adds a pleasant ambient sound to the music. What I do object to is the blaring cacophony produced by the electronic abomination that ruins my recordings. As I have said, I am not the only person to find the electronic abomination annoying and annoyingly loud. Vocalists themselves are surprised at how loud the drone sounds on the recordings of their concerts I give them. If they are unaware of the loudness of the electronic abomination until they hear the recording, I wonder exactly what the state of their hearing is. Perhaps, they mentally "tune out" the additional noise as they "tune in" to the "sa" of the drone.

PS. I am not trying to make this into a Carnatic vs. Western musician fight. My personal opinion is that the Carnatic musicians have gotten lazier over time and have decided that they could always fall back on the tambura and re-align their sruthis as opposed to being consciouly aware of it all the time. But that is my opinion and I have a right to be wrong. Just as I respect your right to be wrong!:lol:

[uday_shankar]

CC
I don't think this format is suitable to respond to someone like you . Too much blah-blah.
If you're in chennai as you've hinted, why don't you send me a private email at [email protected] and I can inivite you over to my home and disabuse you of some of your pet theories on pitch. Obviously you've got strong opinions and love to state them in a strong and verbose fashion that precludes any succinct responses but I believe a lot of it is based on a seriously faulty understanding of pitch discrimination as well as stage acoustics.

[srikant1987]

If you now tell me that the extensive use of gamakams is what forces the Carnatic musician to use a tambura as a reference, I would like someone, a Carnatic violinist or flutist, to play all of Muthuswamy Deekshithar's nottu swara sahithyams without using a tambura. Being replicas of Western airs that Sri Deekshithar wanted to capture, I am sure they don't have any of the gamakams on which you would like to pin the blame. I am equally sure that a Western violinist violinist would play the same 39 sahithyas with only sheet music and without a drone.

Indeed, gamakams are possibly why we need tamburas. For gamakam-free songs, we Indians need tambura because we're used to the tambura. That enhances playing and listening pleasure substantially.

Another thing is, we can "play by sound" better when there's a drone around. In "playing by sight", a drone is obviously of no use.

[srikant1987]

My personal opinion is that the Carnatic musicians have gotten lazier over time and have decided that they could always fall back on the tambura

Oh, the common view seems to be that Carnatic musicians have indeed become lazier, but most people seem to be craving for them to fall back on the tambura!

[martin]

In vieuw of the loudness issue of droneboxes, I think that the cause may be partly in lack of pitch-definition (most boxes giving a thick, muddy sound) next to the general perception that when left to the musicians, first the vocalist wants a bit more volume, which also wants the violinist want to have a bit more etc. My best experiences were always with sound-technicians who remained true to the natural balance between members as an ensemble and sends that into the hall (and on to the monitors) nad who can deal with the wish to interfere from the musicians. They're on stage, the technician is in the hall. If he knows his job, it should best be left to him. Happily in some places natural acoustic concerts are promoted, no miking at all, which, if possible (smaller, more intimate audiences) is best of all. Indeed, for some things: small is beautiful.

[martin]

[

If a Western musician can play without a drone, an Indian musician should be able to do the same too.

Apples and pears are being compared here. I can sing Gregorian chant without a drone, any folk-melody (most of them are originally modal, as far as they have not been spoilt by a piano-accompaniment, as Equal Temperament and WC Harmony does not agree with modal music). For this you need to have a strong inner sense of shruti. Most of WC singers depend heavily on the piano for keeping pitches. But there is an essential difference here. To present the form, by way of example, I may sing a frase of gregorian chant or a line from a dhrupad in a dull room, no drones, just by way of example.
This is ok and should pose no problem for a trained musician. But to properly sing it I need church-acoustics or my tanpura.
The pitch-control that a musician has gained from svara- and sursadhana is always ready but is greatly enhanced by the proper acoustic context which is, therefore, to reach that level, a conditio sine qua non. At that level, you pass from the 'form' to 'content'. The church-acoustics help me to reach a far higher consistency and overall precise intonation as the reciprocity of the voice and ear is extended, I should like to say that my ears fill the room. This allows more delicate handling of the melodic material in a most tangible way. Of course, the same goes for a Dhrupad alapa. There is no sense in doing anything like that without tanpura. But with it, be it sound and well, you can totally merge your voice in it and control many nuances that would not be controllable or perceptible without the carrying wave of the tanpuras resonance.
I would like to share this nectar of the gods, at least testify that once it flew like honey and now it is getting rare.

[martin]

I watched some concerts from the Paris Raga Night & Day online, they will be vieuwable in their entirety for a month from sept. 30.
I personally attended the 2003 march 22nd issue of the same. In vieuw of having proper tanpuras, this recent issue was just as bad as the 2003 happening. Even some Dhrupadiya's of the Dagarvani do not care to have proper tanpuras anymore, what will come next?

[Nick H]

Don't they hear what they are singing? Are their ears miraculously placed hundreds of feet away from their mouths? Haven't you heard the booming sound created by the feedback monitors feeding into the microphones?

Very often they cannot hear what they are singing, no.

Very often they and other musicians cannot hear each other

At the same time that this is happening, people in the audience may be complaining of the ridiculously high volumes.

I have no idea how this strange miracle was achieved by the designers of theatres and public halls, but, believe me, they succeeded again and again and again.

Feedback (foldback, or monitor speakers) does not cause 'feedback' (screaching and booming). This is caused by bad positioning of microphones and speakers, and by bad adjustment of the sound desk

Martin, thank you for some fascinating history lessons