Kaushiki / Kaunsi Kanada

[anandvyasorg]

Thats why I smiled. Okay forget the Vedas ~ bro tuning the "Ma" is Asavari will give you MISHRA Bhairavi Because you use SHUDDHA RE as well. Chll man ~ I bring the Vedas in because thats where ALL of this came from. Really how can you separate the two? Many of you want the mechanics but not the spirituality. Doesn't make ANY sense. Why play this music then? Even Ustad Zakir Hussein mentions the Vedas on stage ~ even on You Tube hen he tells the photographers to stop shooting. I have seen this live as well. I will keep them separate for you and this forum i suppose ~ but the whole point is being missed without it. Call it what you want ~ even if its wrong. Okay? Better now?

[anandvyasorg]

And of course PHYSICALLY you can tune the drones to Ma or Ni or anything. Are you suggesting that it makes it correct?

[anandvyasorg]

It is also Bhairavi Thaat because the feeling and sound is not one of Sadness like Asavari. It is not happy ~ but it IS a lot like Bhairavi, majestic, signifying simultaneously the Beginning and Ending of "something" ~ sorry for a Vedic thought The flat DHA is pivotal in Asavari Thaat for Any Raga in that Thaat as well.

[povster]

According to your example Bhairavi is of the Bhilaval that?

No, no. Râg Bhairavi belongs to the mode with the notes Sa kRe kGa Ma Pa kDha kNi - famous as Bhairavi tHât.

I was going by the seeming secondary transposition example you gave where you said "If one transposes the tonic to the second scale degree of Bilawal, Kafi is attained, transpose to the second degree of Kafi and Bhairavi is attained, and so on and so forth.." again - I know nothing of these kinds of technical aspects of music. My head persists in swimming!

I was just curious what CD said Malkauns was Asavari that.

For me, a raga - well - how it is played, how its uniqueness and expression is played is the thing. I suppose the theory is interesting but I really do not have the brain for it.

[jaan e kharabat]

OK - am understanding a little more. How does transposition fit in? What makes transposition a key criteria in all this?

I've already explained how transposition fits in. But just reiterate, it has to do with the 6 shuddha scales. These were known even to the ancient Greeks and was the basis of their system of modes. It is not by accident that find themselves, verbatim, in Bhatkhande's tHât scheme. In naming these 6 shuddh Scales in his system, Bhatkhande tried to find Râgs in the Hindustani tradition that best fitted in terms of notes and used the name of that Râg for his tHât. Thus we got Bilawal, Kafi, Bhairavi, Kalyan, Khamaj and Asavari.

Now of course, his system of naming tHâts after Râgs wasn't perfect. Kafi Râg uses both Ni's, Khamaj uses both Nis and the oldest version of Asavari has a Komal Re instead of Shuddh Re and therefore fits better in BHairavi tHât.

Back to shuddh scales. As mentioned, they are attained by transposing the tonic to another scale degree. Similarly, there are 5 Pentatonic Râgs that fit into these scales that also hold that relationship in transposition: Durga of Bilawal; Dhani of Kafi; Bhupali of Kalyan; Megh of Khamaj; and Malkauns/Hindolam of Asavari tHât. This series is broken if Malkauns jumps ship to Bhairavi tHât.

Another telling fact: In the Carnatic Mela system, the Bhairavi tHât goes by the name HanumaTodi. The Asavari tHât goes by the name nataBHAIRAVI! Furthermore, Malkaun's equivalent in Carnatic music, Hindolam, is a janya of NataBHairavi mela!

[anandvyasorg]

Povster makes the best point. Just listen and you can simply feel it. And no I have never seen in print Malkauns attributed ti Asavari. I just checked with my Gurus Ustad Sultan Khan and Pandit Sukhraj Jhalla ~ called them both, even though I was sure to get the definitive answer (Ustad Ikram Khan is still sleeping ). Malkauns = Bhairavi Thaat

[jaan e kharabat]

Thats why I smiled. Okay forget the Vedas ~ bro tuning the "Ma" is Asavari will give you MISHRA Bhairavi Because you use SHUDDHA RE as well. Chll man ~ I bring the Vedas in because thats where ALL of this came from. Really how can you separate the two? Many of you want the mechanics but not the spirituality. Doesn't make ANY sense. Why play this music then? Even Ustad Zakir Hussein mentions the Vedas on stage ~ even on You Tube hen he tells the photographers to stop shooting. I have seen this live as well. I will keep them separate for you and this forum i suppose ~ but the whole point is being missed without it. Call it what you want ~ even if its wrong. Okay? Better now?

There's nothing in the Vedas about Malkauns, Asavari, Bhairavi, tHâts, chikaris or tampura tunings. Trust me on this!

[anandvyasorg]

This is now hilarious ~ Another "telling fact"?!?!?!?! The Fact is Malkauns belongs to Bhairavi Thaat. Find one place in print or one Master who says otherwise and I will quit Sitar and give mine to you. No mis-prints please And real masters ~ not wannabees. And your transposition explanation ~ I still have no clue why you think it fits this dialogue. Of course ALL music "transposes" from mode to mode. It is possible yes. But irreverent in ICM ~ for jazz yes, ICM no. And Kafi does not use both Ni's unless we call it Mishra Kafi. Where are you getting this?

[jaan e kharabat]

Povster makes the best point. Just listen and you can simply feel it. And no I have never seen in print Malkauns attributed ti Asavari. I just checked with my Gurus Ustad Sultan Khan and Pandit Sukhraj Jhalla ~ called them both, even though I was sure to get the definitive answer (Ustad Ikram Khan is still sleeping ). Malkauns = Bhairavi Thaat

Yes, it is well known to me that Malkauns is commonly held to belong to Bhairavi tHât. That is what Bhatkhande said, and he created the tHât system.

I am simply pointing out some fishy things about his system and naming conventions.

[anandvyasorg]

In the 108 Upanishads which are part of the Vedas ~ absolutely these are all listed brother. Trust you ? This has nothing to do with trust ~ i have read them ALL as well. And yes they do not speak DIRECTLY of Malkauns ~ but inside it implies in Sankrit with the original Thaats that ARE listed in the Vedas. Singing Chants like the Bendictian Monks. Anyway ~ you are right ~ everyone else in the entire World is wrong. Okay? Any heavy hitters out there that comment on Malkauns being Bhairavi Thaat? Calling Pandit Pomerantz, Pandit Zuckerman, Pandit Courntey, etc

[anandvyasorg]

Bhatkande did not invent the Ragas ~ just one system about 200 years ago. There are many other systems. His is flawed at times. From The Raga Guide
There are quite a few inconsistencies in this system, however, which Bhatkhande himself was partly aware of. For example, it cannot really accommodate important ragas such as Patdip (S R G M P D N), Ahir bhairav (S R G M P D N) and Madhuvanti (S R G M sharp P D N), since they have a scale type that does not belong to the ten-that system. Again, raga Lalit (S R G M M sharp D N) cannot be classified since it omits the fifth degree (Pa) and has both varieties of Ma. It is also hard to group other ragas with both varieties of either Re, Ga, Ma, Dha and Ni, and there are quite a few of them. In each case one has to decide between two possible thats. Furthermore, it has been argued that hexatonic and pentatonic ragas cannot be classified in the ten thats since the missing notes make the classification ambiguous.

More importantly, using scale types as the main criteria for his classification and referring to them as 'genera' from which the ragas (conceived of as melodic 'species') could be derived, Bhatkhande obscured the fact that the thats are mere skeletons, and not genera in the historical and evolutionary sense of the word. As we shall see, quite a number of ragas have different scale types but are historically and musically related (for instance, raga Bilaskhani todi is classified in Bhairavi that but raga Miyan ki todi in Todi that). In addition, many ragas grouped together in one scale type by Bhatkhande seem to have no further relationship with one another.

Two centuries after Damodara, N. Augustus Willard observed that there was not only disagreement in the various systems about the main ragas and their raginis and putras, but that there was also "very little or no similarity between a raga and his raginis." This is probably the reason why the raga-ragini schemes had largely fallen into disuse by the beginning of the 19th century.

Pundarika, a South Indian musicologist who migrated to the North in the second half of the 16th century, was the first to introduce the southern method of classifying Hindustani ragas according to scale types (melas). His method was adopted by contemporary and later authors, including Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (1860-1936), whose monumental study on Hindustani music and compilation of hundreds of classical songs grouped by raga are undoubtedly the most influential reference works of the century. Bhatkhande's rational and pragmatic raga classification is based on ten heptatonic scale types, called thats.

A that ('framework'), as Bhatkhande used the term, is a scale using all seven notes including Sa and Pa, with either the natural or altered variety of each of the variable notes Re, Ga, Ma, Dha and Ni. In Bhatkhande's system all ragas are grouped under ten scale types, each of which is named after a prominent raga which uses the note varieties in question.
For these and other reasons, many musicians have challenged Bhatkhande's that system. Omkarnath Thakur (1897-1967), one of the century's influential music theoreticians and a famous khyal singer, for example, rejected the idea of classifying ragas under scale types. Yet no musicologist has so far been able to come up with a raga classification system that has been accepted as widely as Bhatkhande's. Until the history of ragas has been traced through a detailed and comparative study of both historical literature and oral traditions, it will not be possible to replace Bhatkhande's scheme with a more comprehensive and scientific system that reflects the evolutionary development of individual ragas. Needless to say, such a study is long overdue.

In contemporary music practice, there are partial alternatives, grouping some ragas but not the whole range. Ragas with different scales may share a number of characteristic melodic features and motifs. To refer to them, musicians use the term ang ('part'). Well-known examples are the Kanada ang (G M R), Malhar ang (M \ R, R / P, N \ P), Bhairav ang (M G \ R — S), and Todi ang (R / G- \ R — S). The Bilaval, Kalyan and Sarang angs are more difficult to define

There are quite a few inconsistencies in this system, however, which Bhatkhande himself was partly aware of. For example, it cannot really accommodate important ragas such as Patdip (S R G M P D N), Ahir bhairav (S R G M P D N) and Madhuvanti (S R G M sharp P D N), since they have a scale type that does not belong to the ten-that system. Again, raga Lalit (S R G M M sharp D N) cannot be classified since it omits the fifth degree (Pa) and has both varieties of Ma. It is also hard to group other ragas with both varieties of either Re, Ga, Ma, Dha and Ni, and there are quite a few of them. In each case one has to decide between two possible thats. Furthermore, it has been argued that hexatonic and pentatonic ragas cannot be classified in the ten thats since the missing notes make the classification ambiguous.

More importantly, using scale types as the main criteria for his classification and referring to them as 'genera' from which the ragas (conceived of as melodic 'species') could be derived, Bhatkhande obscured the fact that the thats are mere skeletons, and not genera in the historical and evolutionary sense of the word. As we shall see, quite a number of ragas have different scale types but are historically and musically related (for instance, raga Bilaskhani todi is classified in Bhairavi that but raga Miyan ki todi in Todi that). In addition, many ragas grouped together in one scale type by Bhatkhande seem to have no further relationship with one another.

For these and other reasons, many musicians have challenged Bhatkhande's that system. Omkarnath Thakur (1897-1967), one of the century's influential music theoreticians and a famous khyal singer, for example, rejected the idea of classifying ragas under scale types. Yet no musicologist has so far been able to come up with a raga classification system that has been accepted as widely as Bhatkhande's. Until the history of ragas has been traced through a detailed and comparative study of both historical literature and oral traditions, it will not be possible to replace Bhatkhande's scheme with a more comprehensive and scientific system that reflects the evolutionary development of individual ragas. Needless to say, such a study is long overdue.

In contemporary music practice, there are partial alternatives, grouping some ragas but not the whole range. Ragas with different scales may share a number of characteristic melodic features and motifs. To refer to them, musicians use the term ang ('part'). Well-known examples are the Kanada ang (G M R), Malhar ang (M \ R, R / P, N \ P), Bhairav ang (M G \ R — S), and Todi ang (R / G- \ R — S). The Bilaval, Kalyan and Sarang angs are more difficult to define

[anandvyasorg]

To make that short ~ there are other ways to tell ~ like asking the best players in the world (since this is oral) or listening to the Raga (or liner notes ~ depending who wrote them). Bhatkhande was just man doing what many were doing ~ creating a system of his own

[jaan e kharabat]

Bhatkande did not invent the Ragas

And who said that he did?

[anandvyasorg]

Uhhh ~ no one I was making a statement, you are allowed I am not? ~ why get defensive, you mentioned his system as a reference brother not me. I won't discuss ~ my fault. Do whatever you feel. Sorry. Asawari it is

[ragamala]

I was just curious what CD said Malkauns was Asavari that.

For me, a raga - well - how it is played, how its uniqueness and expression is played is the thing. I suppose the theory is interesting but I really do not have the brain for it.

I have never thought of Malkauns as other than Bhairavi, but then the ten thaat concept is somewhat arbitrary and rul-of-thumb, and with Malkauns being pentatonic you would have to dig deeper to say more. However Sampoorna Malkauns has Shuddh re, not komal, so difficult to plop that version in Bhairavi I think? As for Kaushi Kanada......

BTW yesterday at Saptak was played another Kaunsi Kanada, by Debu Choudhury. Excellent. The performance brought out clearly both kauns and kanada elements, making the raga far more understandable to me.

P.S.

Pov no brain for this? Somewhat disingenuous. I mean that as a compliment!