L Subramaniam at the Kennedy Center, Washington, DC

[Ranganayaki]

L Subramaniam performed to a packed audience in the Eisenhower Theater of the Kennedy Center yesterday. Again this concert was held under the auspices of the Millennium Stage, but the venue was this auditorium with about 1,200 seats (only? It felt like there were at least a couple of thousands). I had joined the line for the doors an HOUR ahead of time, and within the first minute, fifty people joined the line after me, in spite of the driving rain and wind throughout the day. By the time the concert started, not a single seat was vacant. My son was with me and to my side, I had a very interested 5 year old Hispanic boy who clapped at all the appropriate moments and enjoyed the concert .

Ambi Subramaniam, LS’ handsome young son showed up to perform with his father and he had a beautiful, supportive presence throughout the concert. He seemed completely focused, and unfazed by the size of the audience. LS himself seemed hardly to have aged over the years and looked exactly like the old pictures I had seen of him from years ago.

This was my first LS concert. I must confess that I am more on the Lalgudi side of the rasika spectrum and I have always avoided listening to LS. I could never see the point of the fusion music and felt that his Carnatic music always placed an undue emphasis on speed. But I did go with an open mind, and kept my expectations high, and I certainly enjoyed the evening.

The concert began with the Vanajakshi varnam in Kalyani (Adi Tala). Before beginning, LS gave the audience a detailed explanation of what he was about to do: improvise in the Alapana, play the Varnam, do kalpana swaram on Nilupa Rani. He explained that he was going to play the varnam at multiple speeds: 4-, 6-, 8- 12- and 16- nadai variations. I was a little surprised that an artist of his experience used the word “note” rather loosely to mean “count” in explaining the speeds. He said that in the initial speed, there were going to be four notes to a beat, and then six, and then eight, and so on, when he meant that there would be four COUNTS. For example, we all know that in the beginning of the 4th chitte swaram, there is only one note (high ri) for 1 and a half beats (six counts) in the first speed. Still I liked the explanations, and I believe they make a lot of sense to the musically initiated among the audience.

LS did not skimp on the elaboration of the raga and it was very detailed. Of course, I was curious to hear all the speeds he promised in the varnam, but he began with a beautiful slow initial tempo, and I really enjoyed his presentation of the varnam. Then began the acrobatics - I am not strong on tala to begin with and I had to seriously count in my head to keep up. .. I plan to practice my tala by listening to this piece every now and again. He played all the speeds in perfect control, and truly precise execution, and the accompanists did a great job. I opened my eyes to look at one point, and found them both playing with admirable confidence, his bow and that of his son’s literally flying around before them, yet there was not one note out of place. I believe that the varnam was a perfectly appropriate moment in the concert to offer a study in speed. The boy had a few responses in the kalpana swaram, and he was full of ideas, fluent and impressive. I was confused however when the piece seemed to stop completely after the muktayee swaram. There was applause, they fine-tuned the violins, the mridangists stopped playing and the tala was not being even mentally maintained. Then they settled back down and restarted with the charanam. I have never ever seen this done in a concert.

LS announced his next piece as an RTP in Keeravani. Again, he dipped into his experience with European classical music to specify the notes of Keeravani, explain the concepts of Ragam, Taanam, and of the elaboration and exploration of a raga. These explanations were lacking in U Shrinivas' concert - I did wish Shrinivas would speak to people like my neighbors in the row that day, who were very interested and obviously musically knowledgeable and listening in rapture.

Keeravani was nice, it was a very beautiful exposition of the raga, with some moments of speed which really did not do much for my enjoyment. The taanam and the pallavi “yennai katharulvaay” (as I found out later) in khanda chapu taalam were short and Ambi participated fully in the pallavi. The music rose to a crescendo at a high speed with both of them playing, if I remember right (not sure), and came to an abrupt stand-still to end the concert punctually at 7 pm.

Ambi Subramaniam performed his role to perfection and held his own beautifully at each of his responses. He was obviously technically very competent, yet was careful to remain in the supportive role. He played a simple lower sa, or a ga, or a pa to embellish his father’s exposition of kalyani and did not intrude even for a second. I am looking forward to seeing how his career is going to blossom.

[mri_fan]

I noticed the same observation about the gap in the varnam when I watched it online. However, it looked like L. Sub was still using his leg to keep tala in the interval, but not for the entire duration of the gap.

[vasanthakokilam]

>He said that in the initial speed, there were going to be four notes to a beat, and then six, and then eight, and so on,
>when he meant that there would be four COUNTS.

I have heard it used like that as well. it has to be understood as 'sarvalaghu' notes ( non-kArvai). To the general audience who have a vague notion of what a note is, his way is more relatable though not strictly correct. Clarity trumps correctness in these contexts.

[rajeshnat]

ranganayaki
Tx for the review,1200 plus attended the concert. That is just amazing patronage. By any chance was this a free concert? LS generally takes very few numbers , I have just heard him only once way back in 2001 before I started intensely listening to CM in chennai, I liked him a lot then .

[rshankar]

Ranganayaki - it is lovely to read your reviews. Keep them up! I am looking forward to your review of Smt. Alarmel Valli's performance.

[Nick H]

...he was going to play the varnam at multiple speeds: 4-, 6-, 8- 12- and 16- nadai variations. I was a little surprised that an artist of his experience used the word “note” rather loosely to mean “count” in explaining the speeds.

and that he confuses the concepts of nadai and kallai?

I'm not enthusiastic about simply showing off speed with multiplication, but still, he has a level of physical virtuosity that has to be seen to be believed. I have seen him, a couple of times, and been astounded and amazed each time. I might not recommend the CD I have, on which he plays a varnum in I-can't-even-count-how-many speeds, but I'd recommend anyone, of any musical taste, with an interest in the violin, to see him play live.

Rajesh, I think he could fill a hall of that size in London. I remember seeing him at The Royal Festival Hall, which is one of London's bigger classical venues. I am not sure that I recall seeing any other Southern musician there, although a handful would get a decent proportion of its smaller sister hall, The Queen Elizabeth Hall.


Edit: RFH, capacity 2,500. QEH, capacity 900

[vasanthakokilam]

>and that he confuses the concepts of nadai and kallai?

In normal parlance, for a given kaLai, geometric increase in sub-counts/beat ( 1, 2, 4, 8 ) is referred to as speed or kAlam ( ambiguously, since there is another meaning to refer to overall tempo ) and increases of the kind ( 3, 5, 6, 7,..) as naDai. All refer to 'counts/notes' in a beat.

[uday_shankar]

when he meant that there would be four COUNTS

PLEASE NOTE (COUNT? ): This is not wrong, especially to a western audience. It is common when talking about the time signature in stave notation to use "note" to denote the number of counts in a beat. Thus the common 4/4 time signature can be said to consist of 4 "notes" to a beat. Even drummers in an orchestra have to play their "notes". And when there's no sound, it's a "silent note" and the space on the staff is blank. Again, I believe a "kaarvai" like sustained note is denoted by a devanagari script-like line that joins the discrete notes/counts. Finally, the word "notation" is derived from "note".

For further information please see...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signature

Otherwise, thanks for a great review of yet another countworthy concert of LS .

[appu]

I was confused however when the piece seemed to stop completely after the muktayee swaram. There was applause, they fine-tuned the violins, the mridangists stopped playing and the tala was not being even mentally maintained. Then they settled back down and restarted with the charanam. I have never ever seen this done in a concert.

Ranganayaki, I just heard and put talam for the varnam. Yes, they completely lost track of the talam after the muktayi swaram. Neither did LS nor Ambi keep track of the talam. A more competent mridangist would have kept track of the talam and put the teermanam at the correct spot in the talam. LS had no choice but to start whereever in the talam. Of course a lot is desired with experienced pakhavadyam. I did not recognize anyone in his troupe.

[Nick H]

>and that he confuses the concepts of nadai and kallai?

In normal parlance, for a given kaLai, geometric increase in sub-counts/beat ( 1, 2, 4, 8 ) is referred to as speed or kAlam ( ambiguously, since there is another meaning to refer to overall tempo ) and increases of the kind ( 3, 5, 6, 7,..) as naDai. All refer to 'counts/notes' in a beat.

But this is the former --- with the addition of the tisra --- and the progression is in "speeds" not nadai.

I think that the root of this kind of performance is palavi singing, where it is standard that the palavi be sung in three speeds.

Further elaboration of that is to include tisra in the steps, with perhaps a second-speed tisra, and to include mixed speeds, for which I hope someone will tell the technical term, because I have forgotten it.

The performance of an entire composition in this way seems to be essentially a gimmick, so, although we have a tradition of some controversy when the term "nadai" is concerned, it is probably not worth trying to tie down a technical term for something that is not generally done anyway.

[vasanthakokilam]

Nick: Not the entire composition but just the front part. The tradition of singing of the pUrvAnGA of the varnam ( the front part ) in 2 speeds and in trisram exists. But LS takes it to a different level by playing the pUrvAnGA in 4 or 5 speeds ( 1, 2, 4, 8, 16).

>and the progression is in "speeds" not nadai.

Well, no difference in this usage of 'naDai'. As you said, Varnam and Pallavi singing share common techniques. As performed in Varnam and RTP, using common parlance...geometric increases in subdivision ( 1, 2, 4, 8,..) are called speed changes and non-geometric increases in subdivision ( 3, 5, 6, 7,..) are called naDai changes. Just to add to the confusion, naDai pallavi is conceptually a different thing, that may be what you are thinking of.

[Nick H]

OK... I now admit to complete confusion . But thanks for the additional information there.

[mri_fan]

The ghatam artist was none other than Sri Giridhar Udupa, one of the top young stars of ghatam these days. The Tavil player was Sri Arun Kumar, who is well known in Banglore for his versatility with several instruments. He also performs with a lot of dancers. As to the mridangam artist and the morsing player (who contributed nil), they are unknown to me.

[mahavishnu]

On the mridangam is Sri VV Ramanamurthy, an excellent vidwan from Andhra Pradesh. He is a regular accompanist for Pantula Rama, Shashank and others.

[Ranganayaki]

>and that he confuses the concepts of nadai and kallai?

In normal parlance, for a given kaLai, geometric increase in sub-counts/beat ( 1, 2, 4, 8 ) is referred to as speed or kAlam ( ambiguously, since there is another meaning to refer to overall tempo ) and increases of the kind ( 3, 5, 6, 7,..) as naDai. All refer to 'counts/notes' in a beat.

Hello, All.. Good to see this discussion..

@ Nick: The use of the term nadai in my posting was mine. As I remember it, LSubramaniam did not use the term. Though the correctness of the term "nadai" is in question, I don't believe there is confusion between the two terms here. We are not talking about kalai.

As I said before, my taalam is not strong, and neither is my conviction in taalam terminology. But I did give this a little thought before I wrote it and felt then that as Vasanthakokilam says, this was not just a speed increase in "kaalam" terms, because then we would have 4, 8 and 16 counts. But between mothal and 2nd kaalam, there was the double speed (6-count) trishra nadai as I believed my father would have called it (I reached into my memories of my younger days), and thought these were nadai changes. Vasanthakokilam's explanations appeal to me the most.

Can we say there was kaalam progression in two nadais, the chaturasra (?) and the trisra(?).. Please continue to discuss and enlighten.

Is Nick right in saying there may be no single technical term for this type of speed increase and there is no need to try for one? I agree that it seems to be a gimmick, and if he had done this in any type of composition other than a varnam, I would have hated it.

Uday Shankar says: This is not wrong, especially to a western audience. It is common when talking about the time signature in stave notation to use "note" to denote the number of counts in a beat. Thus the common 4/4 time signature can be said to consist of 4 "notes" to a beat. Even drummers in an orchestra have to play their "notes". And when there's no sound, it's a "silent note" and the space on the staff is blank.Otherwise, thanks for a great review of yet another countworthy concert of LS .

So there is a second discussion here.. Uday, I gave some thought to what you wrote and though what you say is true, I believe that when you explain the 4/4 time signature and say 4 notes to a measure, I think "note" refers to a count of a note value. Each of the measure's 4 notes (numerator) is a quarter note as specified by the denominator. I don't think it refers to "sound" notes. The silent note also refers to the time-value of the "note". In Carnatic Music, we do not have time value notes, we only have melodious notes and counts and cycles. I guess we could call this a difficulty in translation? Doesn't what you choose to say need to be correct in both systems?

As I said before, the words he used didn't bother me TOO much. I was only surprised, it had the effect of a raised eyebrow. Still, since we are discussing it, my own idea is that this is a translation difficulty and since both cultures would understand the simple concept of count, it would have been perfectly correct to say 4 counts, 6 counts, etc.

I would love to hear opinions on this, and will be happy to learn, if my thinking is flawed.

rshankar and Uday Shankar, thank you for your encouraging words. I'm enjoying writing for and learning from you all.

[Nick H]

Ranganayaki, when I wrote about nadai I did so with a certain amount of conviction. I can only say that it has been weakened by subsequent contributors. :$

My feeling about the word "note," in Western terms, is that it is meaningless, timewise, without further definition. Many novices, at least, would say four beats to a bar --- and it seems a simply appropriate term to me, whether speaking of Western or Carnatic systems, except to those who believe a beat is a clap, and there seems to me to be no linguistic, and little musical, justification for that. These are my opinions. I may hold them fairly strongly, but I'm certainly not arguing with Uday. After all, he is a musician --- and I'm not. I do, though, suspect a typo, and that he meant to say four notes (/counts/beats) to a bar/measure?

[Ranganayaki]

I think Uday Shankar used the word beat the way we use it in Carnatic Music to say something like Adi Taala has an 8 beat cycle. Then a beat is a clap (though what we would say for a 2 kalai cycle beats me - really no pun intended).. I understood him to mean "measure". If Uday Shankar is a musician, then I am even more interested in reading his response. As someone interested in languages, I find this discussion fascinating in unexpected ways. And I wonder if this may be an area where specific terminology needs to be developed and established, allowing for communications between artists of different cultures to be clearer and more precise.

[vasanthakokilam]

Ranganayaki, understood. I, and I am sure others, feel the same pain that you do about terminology issues.

>my own idea is that this is a translation difficulty and since both cultures would understand the simple concept of count,
>it would have been perfectly correct to say 4 counts, 6 counts, etc.

The CM word for this is mAthrai.... but some people refer to that as Aksharam. So it is not just translation across languages and musical systems. We have talked about this terminology confusion within CM. But it looks like majority of people refer to these counts as mAthrai.

>Many novices, at least, would say four beats to a bar

I agree.

1) Does the 'bar' translates to a 'thala avarthana' or a beat of CM?
2) Does the 'beat' translate to a CM beat or CM mAthrai?

I will provide my answer once I hear from you all. There is an interesting point to be made here.

[Ranganayaki]

>Many novices, at least, would say four beats to a bar

I agree.

1) Does the 'bar' translates to a 'thala avarthana' or a beat of CM?
2) Does the 'beat' translate to a CM beat or CM mAthrai?

I will provide my answer once I hear from you all. There is an interesting point to be made here.

Are 1) and 2) questions you are inviting answers to? If you are:

1) I think "bar" as Nick said, or "measure" as we both said, would at best be translated as a BEAT in CM. This simply cannot be completely accurate because a CM beat is necessarily a fraction of an avarthana. The concept of avarthana does not exist in western music, as far as I know, though a lot of songs do seem to have 8 or 4 beat(?)(not Nick's "beat" but Uday's) cycles. Oh, this is hard!!

2) Because of having learned CM, I am not comfortable with "Beat" the way Nick uses it and prefer to use "count". I am not positive on what terminology is allowable within the western music system.

[Ranganayaki]

--

[VRV]

Hello Everyone,

A very interesting discussion. Let me put in my two pennies worth and try to give an explanation. For the sake of clarity, Adi talam has 8 beats or 32 pulses. A beat = 4 pulses (Tha, Ka, Dhi, Mi). Four beats = 16 pulses, and 8 beats = 32 pulses.

The varnam starts out in 2 pulses to a beat (Chatusram Lower speed) 16 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle.The artist is at liberty to pick his speed.

He then plays 3 pulses to a beat (Thisram Lower speed) 24 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle. The thing to note here is the talam does not change. The number of pulses per beat does.

He then plays 4 pulses to a beat (Chatusram regular speed) 32 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle
He then plays 6 pulses to a beat (Thisram second speed) 48 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle
He then plays 8 pulses to a beat Chatusram double speed) 64 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle.

This is how he gets his 5 speeds. LS sometimes will start the varnam in 4 pulses to a beat. In which case the chatusram double speed will have 16 pulses to a beat equivalent to 128 pulses against a 32 pulse cycle which then becomes a lesson in virtuosity.

In his kalpana swarams his approach is differen, wherein various nadais are introduced. I will try to elaborate on this later.

Hope this helps.

Vinod Venkataraman

[Ranganayaki]

Vinod (VRV), I am completely confused by your response.. Unless there is some fine point about tala that I have completely missed, I still feel he played the first tempo at par, not at half speed. There certainly were four matras to 1/8 of the avarthanam making the 32 pulses. He did not do the 3 pulse beat unless I am making a gross mistake, but moves to a higher-speed six-pulse beat. And then 8- and then 12- and then 16. Please do explain how you say that the whole thing is halved.
Thanks!

[Nick H]

1) Does the 'bar' translates to a 'thala avarthana' or a beat of CM?
2) Does the 'beat' translate to a CM beat or CM mAthrai?

1) I think "bar" as Nick said, or "measure" as we both said, would at best be translated as a BEAT in CM. This simply cannot be completely accurate because a CM beat is necessarily a fraction of an avarthana. The concept of avarthana does not exist in western music,

A bar is a cycle ... is an arvarthanam. Not only are the concepts shared, they are identical! I believe this to be a useful association of idea, even though any serious comparison would, for example, require a cycle of adi talam to be written in western notation as a 4-beat bar followed by two 2-beat bars

A bar is not a beat: it is a number of beats.

Isn't mathra specifically the number of counts a certain note receives in a particular spot? For example the 4th chitteswaram ri that I referred to in my initial posting would receive 6 mathras.

In so far as one can define the duration of a note in mathras, yes, it is, but, in the context of this conversation, it is the number of subdivisions of an akshara (except for those who reverse the definition of akshara and mathras).

I think Uday Shankar used the word beat the way we use it in Carnatic Music to say something like Adi Taala has an 8 beat cycle.

Exactly.

But some people would say it has three beats... because there are three claps. Thus we are confused by what might have been a simple translation error? eg "beating with one palm on the other, separating the palms and the counting of fingers are the kriyas" --- Dharmala Ramamurty's book in translation. Might not clap and wave have been more succinct and meaningful than the first two? The angaas define the tala, the kyiyas do not, they are merely visual/physical indications of it.

All this is open to ongoing argument, of course, except (as far as I am concerned. Each must follow their own path --- or the teachings of their school ) for mathra is a subdivision of akshara, not the other way around. The last time we "did" this one on the forum, I took a straw poll of every textbook I could lay my hands on, and it won hands down. At that time, I discovered that Hindustani musicicians use "mathra" for beat, and my guess was this is where that usage has originated.

(Vinod, what you say makes perfect sense to me, in principle. I won't try and count in practice).

[squims]

Is this concert's recording available? Links please?

[arunk]

A bar is a cycle ... is an arvarthanam... a cycle of adi talam to be written in western notation as a 4-beat bar followed by two 2-beat bars

:^) - isn't the second part contradicting the first? If the bar is truly a cycle I wouldn't expect the cyclical nature to be represented by 2 asymmetric bars (?)

Perhaps additive time signatures/meters are more applicable? But I think in many cases these are used to actually represent the general rhythm pattern of the melody. Our tala IMO is more indicative of a time measure rather than a rhythm pattern. I think cm melodies particularly of the tyagaraja type don't have a steady rhythm even within a line (irrespective of the steadiness in the tala "beats")

Arun

[vasanthakokilam]

Is this concert's recording available? Links please?

http://www.kennedy-center.org/programs/ ... &year=2011

( beware: You can spend a lot of time at this archive site.. Mind boggling and vast array of thousands of past performances of art forms from around the world. They have a concert every day!! )

[mahavishnu]

Yes and unbelievable recording quality to boot. Sounds especially good if you are used to converted old doordarshan/podhigai clips on apnatube.

[Nick H]

:^) - isn't the second part contradicting the first? If the bar is truly a cycle I wouldn't expect the cyclical nature to be represented by 2 asymmetric bars (?)

Perhaps additive time signatures/meters are more applicable? But I think in many cases these are used to actually represent the general rhythm pattern of the melody. Our tala IMO is more indicative of a time measure rather than a rhythm pattern. I think cm melodies particularly of the tyagaraja type don't have a steady rhythm even within a line (irrespective of the steadiness in the tala "beats")

Arun

I felt I had to add the second part --- somebody would have. i think that there is an essential correspondence between an avarthanam and a bar or measure of Western music. They are both repetitions of measure, if not pattern, and, if tempo remains constant, of time. This does not mean that the "beat" (using the word, this time, in the sense of something to tap one's foot to) is necessarily obvious in either. My novice extreme example of this in CM might be something like the swara sections of the Pancharatna kritis where, as I would put it to a non-CM-listener, a percussionist simply cannot play unless he has memorised the song just as the vocalist has. Is this the kind of lack of "steady rhythm" that you mean?

[Ranganayaki]

All, I just removed the words of posting # 20 belonging to me, about mathras, because thinking further, I thought it was probably factually wrong and I thought no one had responded to it anyway. Only after deleting the words did I realize that I had not carefully read Nick's response (I'm sorry about that) yesterday, and he had quoted from it. I apologize.

I am still hoping VRV or anyone else will explain to me if the speeds we were discussing were really halved. I watched the taalam again, and could see that the first line of the varnam received exactly one full avartanam. And LS did mention his counts as 4-, 6-, etc. Yet this topic is clearly right up VRV's alley.. I'm really needing to feel clarity on this, one way or the other. Thanks to anyone who will throw light on VRV's comment.

[rshankar]

Ranganayaki - were you able to attend 'samanvay' the oDissi-bharatanATyam presentation by Smt. Madhavi Mudhgal and Smt. Alarmelvalli? I belive it has been presented before in India to rather rave reviews - I think one reason it works really well is because Smt. Valli has had extensive training in oDissi herself. I would love to hear/read your take on it as well.

[VRV]

Ranganayaki,

Check your email when you get a chance.

Vinod

[arunk]

Nick,

I am still quite confused about western time signatures and bars/measures as such - but it seems to me that use of the time signature (and thus the bar) is quite varied - sometimes as a basic cycle sometimes to indicate rhythm patterns etc. When i glanced through stuff on additive/compound time signatures - it seemed to point in the direction of the nature of a basic rhythm pattern leading to the need for such signatures.

Lack of steady rhythm - yes sort of. I think the accents change - the inner pattern grouping change etc. I would "guess" that putting a steady beat to it would be a poor fit. But I also think the same thing isnt there in western classical pieces as well (?) - and thus the steady rhythm concept is more applicable in popular western music(?)

Arun

[Ranganayaki]

Ranganayaki,

Check your email when you get a chance.

Vinod

All,
Is there a space here where I can receive messages? Do messages sent from rasikas go directly to your email account, or do they wait to be seen here? I've looked around, and don't see any way of receiving messages after signing in to rasikas.org. Please help.

Vinod, I checked my email account associated with rasikas and there was nothing from you.. . I wonder when it was sent. could you re-send your email, or simply post your response? Thank you.

[vasanthakokilam]

Not much time now, but let me state briefly and pick it back up later..

I posed those two questions for a reason and you two willingly fell in that trap ..no, just kidding...willingly obliged with your answers..Great. That helps.

The point regarding rhythmic notation is, there are two aspects to it. structural and compositional. I know it sounds obtuse but it is rather quite simple. The time signatures specify the structural backdrop for the rhythm. 4/4 establishes a base and all it says are: 'bar is a grouping of beats, the number of beats to a bar, what is the relative duration of the beat'. Against this background, inside the composition you have further rhythmical notations. That is the compositional part. In a 4/4 structure, if there is a notation that takes a quarter note and splits it into two 1/16 th note and join them together, it is the compositional rhythm. There are all sorts of such things notated inside the composition.

Take for example, Waltz. We feel it is like trisram. But a Waltz is typically notated with a structure of 3/4. That looks like Rupakam, Chathusra nadai for us. WM practice is, if the entire composition is in a triplet like feel, then use 3/4. If triplet split is needed only here and there, use the triplet symbol inside the composition.

The actual choice is left to the composer.

In CM also, we have these two divisions but we do not explicitly talk about them. The 'Speed/Nadai' changes that we talk about is all compositional rhythm and if a song is set in a certain thalam and Nadai, that is the structural reference rhythm against which the entire song is set. The compositional rhythm is also refered to as layam ( in some circles at least ).

[Ranganayaki]

shankar, I have to apologize, I misread the program and I had a different date in mind for the alarmel valli program.. I knew that I would have to stay in line for cancellations to be able to buy tickets and watch that program. That is most often possible if I am early enough, but I found out just a couple of days ago that I had already missed it. I was really hoping to be able to go, I was just as curious as you to know what I was going be able to write. I'm so sorry.

[Ranganayaki]

Nick,
I thought I had understood you correctly the first time you wrote about bars. You really seemed to be using the word "bar" to mean "measure". And I did believe the two terms were interchangeable, except that "bar" also means the actual bar that is written. I was stumped to read your next response to Vasantakokilam. Now I really don't know what you mean. I am no musician, yet I thought I had understood the two terms ok. I looked it up on wikipedia (the most accessible and reasonably acceptable source) and here's what I found.

In musical notation, a bar (or measure) is a segment of time defined by a given number of beats of a given duration. Typically, a piece consists of several bars of the same length, and in modern musical notation the number of beats in each bar is specified at the beginning of the score by the top number of a time signature (such as 3/4).

The word bar is British English, while the word measure is American English, although musicians generally understand both usages. In American English, although the words bar and measure are often used interchangeably the correct use of the word 'bar' refers only to the vertical line itself, while the word 'measure' refers to the beats contained between bars[1].

I don't mean to be starting an argument here with you but I really do feel uncomfortable with the confusion.

I feel this discussion needs to be clarified, with a single glossary of terms to specify exactly what we are talking about and then those terms need to be used with the specified meaning. Otherwise, we are going to be turning blindfolded in circles here.

As for me, I am just going to stand by to see if I get an answer to my question about the email, so that I can access VRV's explanation. Any help, anyone?

[Nick H]

The point regarding rhythmic notation is, there are two aspects to it. structural and compositional. I know it sounds obtuse but it is rather quite simple.

No, it does not sound obtuse. I think you have a perfect combination of words there! We can set a metronome to beep, or click, and we can use the clicks to measure out our four beats, or our eight beats, but the clicks are dead, they have no emphasis, life, or musicality, which is added by composition --- and different forms of composition can give different rhythmic feel to the same clicks.

Nick,
I really thought I had understood you the first time you wrote about bars. You really seemed to be using the word "bar" to mean "measure". And I did believe the two terms were interchangeable, except that "bar" also means the actual bar that is written. I was stumped to read your next response to Vasantakokilam. Now I really don't know what you mean. I am no musician, yet I thought I had understood the two terms ok. I looked it up on wikipedia (the most accessible and reasonably acceptable source) and here's what I found.

Oh dear... I thought that was what I meant too! :$ Not sure how I managed to be confusing, except that I know I don't have perfect clarity on this subject either

In musical notation, a bar (or measure) is a segment of time defined by a given number of beats of a given duration. Typically, a piece consists of several bars of the same length, and in modern musical notation the number of beats in each bar is specified at the beginning of the score by the top number of a time signature (such as 3/4).

I can go for that!

In musical notation, a bar (or measure) is a segment of time defined by a given number of beats of a given duration. Typically, a piece consists of several bars of the same length, and in modern musical notation the number of beats in each bar is specified at the beginning of the score by the top number of a time signature (such as 3/4).

The word bar is British English, while the word measure is American English, although musicians generally understand both usages. In American English, although the words bar and measure are often used interchangeably the correct use of the word 'bar' refers only to the vertical line itself, while the word 'measure' refers to the beats contained between bars[1].

I have a feeling I once knew that bar was British and measure was American. I didn't know that bar really means the vertical line, like || in CM. Makes sense!

Ranganayaki, you are very welcome to argue with me! I have no education about Western music at all. I struggle almost as much to make sense of the notation as I do a line of carnatic notation. At least Western notes visibly go up and down, whereas carnatic is just a line of letters. Of course it is more than that to anyone with even a basic vocal or instrumental education.

In carnatic rhythm, at least I have a few mridangam classes that did stick in my poor brain. Thus, If I have to "think along" with the rhythm of a piece of music, it is more comfortable for me to do it in the carnatic way.

[Ranganayaki]

Thank you for your kind words, Nick, I was afraid of being misunderstood. The couple of times I've seen you express your embarrassment, I've commiserated with you. But I am sorry you've put in a blush because of my posting. It is completely unnecessary. I believe that no matter what our level, we are all learners here, sometimes teachers too, and that's the most admirable thing about all of us. I hope I am speaking for all of us.

[Nick H]

No problem, and I am sure you do speak for all of us. It is good to knock our heads together on this sort of stuff. Definitely a learning process

Don't worry about my blushes. I'm actually far more bold on the net than I am in physical life --- which results in more blushes, but more learning too.

[vasanthakokilam]

Just for reference: Regarding the standard practice of singing the pUrvAngam of the varna in three speed variations: regular speed, trisram and double speed, here is a straightforward example: http://mycarnatic.org/concerts/?title=13 ( this is the rasikalaya concert in London by Vid. Sangeetha Swaminathan, covered in this thread http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic. ... 38#p191138 )

The Abhogi varnam pUrvAngA is set to 6 Adi avarthanams. She first sings in regular speed (6 avarthanams, not counting repetition of lines), then trisram (4 avarthanams), then double speed (3 avarthanams). She shows thalam very clearly and so it is a good reference to have. Since It can be non-trivial to keep thalam for trisram due to the heavy syncopation, just watch her kriyas and count the avarthanams, if you are curious. This is what is normally done ( LS just happens to employ a few extra gears).

In the regular speed and double speed, the pallavi, anupallavi and swaras all fall within avarthana boundaries. In regular speed, each one takes two avarthanas and in double speed each one takes one avarthana. In Trisram, they do not align at such avarthana boundaries. The 6 avarthanas need to be squished into 4 and you will see the effect of this easily in the swaras starting at the non-avarthana boundary.

The math is quite straighforward: The base reference is 192 chathusra syllables/mAthrais ( 6 * 8 * 4 = 192 ). In regular speed, these are grouped by 4 yielding 48 which is 6 Adi avarthanams. In trisram, those 192s are grouped by 6 yielding 32 which is 4 avarthanas. In double speed, those 192s are grouped by 8 yielding 24 which is 3 avarthanas. As the grouping number increases from 4 to 6 to 8, the perceived speed increases while the tempo is kept constant. ( tempo refers to the thala keeping rate )

Not that this is anything new to many people here, but I thought her rendition is quite illustrative without any frills.

[Ranganayaki]

Thank you for that, Vasanthakokilam.. I listened to that concert a couple of days ago and noticed the variations in the varnam. She performed it as you described it. It was without the "12" and "16" count speeds, but with the three speeds, it was certainly similar enough. I was mulling posting a question referring to that video because of the clarity in the taalam and the similarity, but I got a response from VRV in the meantime. I thank him for his gracious call, his willingness to take the time to explain an idea to me, a complete stranger.

VRV has a different perspective on it. He says that LSub. slows it down to a 2-kallai speed and this gives him a possibility to have 8x2 counts, with 64 pulses in each avartanam. That brings his speeds to a 2-count/beat, then 3, 4 and 8-counts. I was perfectly comfortable with this idea, except that I thought he had earlier defined the avartanam as having 32 pulses, and this was why I found it difficult to understand him.

VRV, have I expressed it correctly?

[vasanthakokilam]

Ranganayaki, it took me some effort, but I think I got it.

The plan is the same. There are 6 avarthanas in the pUrvAngA.

Without worrying about the official names for these speeds or how many counts etc.

First speed (4) : 6 avarthanams
tisram (6) : 4 avarthanams
Second speed (8): 3 avarthanams
tisram second speed(12): 2 avarthanams
third speed(16): 1.5 avarthanams. ( He repeats the swaram for .5 avarthanam to get back to samam )

Sri. LS announces initially that this is 18 cycles. It would be 18 if repeats the entire 3rd speed twice but I hear him only repeating the swaram. ( if I am wrong on this, please alert me ). So I get only 17. But then he repeats other sections many different times and I was not keeping track of them.

[Ranganayaki]

I realized with dismay that I had expressed myself poorly, mixing up terms!! I used the word "count" in two different senses. Exactly what I didn't want us to do. This is what I should have written:

He says that LSub. slows it down to a 2-kallai speed and this gives him a possibility to have 8x2 counts, with 64 pulses in each avartanam. That brings his speeds to a 2-BEAT/COUNT (as we defined "beat" earlier in talking about measures in European classical music), then 3, 4 and 8-beats. I was perfectly comfortable with this idea, except that I thought he had earlier defined the avartanam as having 32 pulses, and this was why I found it difficult to understand him.

[vasanthakokilam]

Ranganayaki, Sorry I did not express myself properly. When I said 'I got it', I meant that I watched LSub a few times ( hence the effort ) to figure out what he is doing. And what I wrote was not in reference to what VRV wrote.