raga and Bach

>> It only has 2 rags (well, maybe a few more if you count the different
>> minors, plus the "church modes" for mixture), but it makes up for
>> that
>> with harmony.
>
>
>
> Actually, if one accepts Werckmeister III tuning for Bach, then there
> are
> 24
> distinct scales which alludes much better with the variations found in
> raga.
> I do.
>

OK . . . . but although in this case e minor and g#-minor may sound
different, is there any evidence for a syntactical difference between
them? I.e., leading-tones still behave the same way, etc. etc.

Whereas a Rag would have more marked difference, both in tuning/sound, and
in syntax/"rules".

But I guess that's like saying that Indian Classical music and European
Classical music are different, which is obvious. . . .

Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
melodies, perhaps modes. In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not relevant.
Besides major and minor both have the same leading tone functions. WIII
provides for 3 diffferent leading tones.

Johnny

Hello Johnny, could you please tell me about "leading tone" and
"leading tone syntax"?

thanks,
Haresh.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Afmmjr@a... wrote:
> Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
> melodies, perhaps modes. In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax
is not relevant.
> Besides major and minor both have the same leading tone functions.
WIII
> provides for 3 diffferent leading tones.
>
> Johnny

Hi Haresh,

Leading tones are semitone melodic relationships that bring great tension
just before its release. While there can be a chromatic leading tone downward
towards a tonic, it is more usual to have one pointing up to the tonic.
Harmonically, this is done by the famed authentic cadence of a V chord resolving to a
I chord. The V chord's major third resolves upwards to the root of the I
chord.

In the Romantic period and since the leading tone is sharpened melodically
for the greatest possible tension. In the Baroque period the leading tone
travelled a greater distance before resolution.

Hope this helps. Johnny

>
>Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
>melodies, perhaps modes. In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
>relevant.
>

My understanding is that a Rag is a like a scale, but one that comes
with a set of "rules" or "guidelines" about how the tones move one to the
other -- for example, Note X only appears as a neighbor of Note Y, or
Note P must always resolve to Note Q. A Rag is not a melody . . it is a
bunch of possibilities for how to construct melodies.

Therefore, from that point of view, the Major Scale of Western
Classical Music could be looked at as one raga, with certain . . if not
rules, then guidelines. . . the leading tone (scale degree 7), tends
to want to resolve up to 1 --- the 4, tends to want to resolve down to
3. also, of course, 1 and 3 are points of rest, 5 is kind of neutral,
etc. these aspects of major and minor, that go beyond a simple,
character-less scale set, are what reminds me of the Rag idea.

Also, I think major and minor are different. . . for example, in the
minor mode, when you descend, 7 and 6 are typically flattened, when
ascending, typically raised. Again, that's a melodic "guideline"
that's very Rag-like, I think.

On Friday 31 December 2004 10:29 am, Afmmjr@aol.com wrote:
> Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
> melodies, perhaps modes.

This is incorrect. Ravi Shankar in his 'Introduction to Indian Music'
recording states that ragas are "neither melodies nor scales", but rather a
set of rules for the construction of melodies, which is different than what
you just said above. A good definition of a rag would be a "precise melodic
formula", as Shankar suggests.

> In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
> relevant. Besides major and minor both have the same leading tone
> functions. WIII provides for 3 diffferent leading tones.

Leading tones, being 'tendency tones', *are* relevant to the discussion,
because it is sort of a Western version of a rag idea--certain tones tend to
resolve in certain ways. Not a rag idea precisely, but suggestive of the same
idea, albeit in simpler form.

It seems to me a bit "Procrustian" to try to link Werck III to anything about
Indian music. Different worlds.

Best,
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com

In a message dated 1/1/2005 2:21:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
akjmicro@comcast.net writes:
On Friday 31 December 2004 10:29 am, Afmmjr@aol.com wrote:
> Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
> melodies, perhaps modes.

This is incorrect. Ravi Shankar in his 'Introduction to Indian Music'
recording states that ragas are "neither melodies nor scales", but rather a
set of rules for the construction of melodies, which is different than what
you just said above. A good definition of a rag would be a "precise melodic
formula", as Shankar suggests.

Before jumping the gun about corrrect and incorrect, please note the word
"perhaps" used twice. Scales are extracts from a larger set, ragas appear to be
complete in themselves. Bismillah Khan declared that there were an infinite
number of ragas.

As for Ravi Shankar, he is not the lone arbiter on this issue. There are
rules for every vocabulary of music. "Precise melodic formula" would include
Maqam, as well, and yet we hold these distinct. Maqam can modulate but raga does
not, for example.

Early ethnomusicologists tried in vain to get Indian musicians to play a raga
in a straight "scale" but they were always refused.

> In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
> relevant. Besides major and minor both have the same leading tone
> functions. WIII provides for 3 diffferent leading tones.

Leading tones, being 'tendency tones', *are* relevant to the discussion,
because it is sort of a Western version of a rag idea--certain tones tend to
resolve in certain ways. Not a rag idea precisely, but suggestive of the same
idea, albeit in simpler form.

My point was that the leading tone is used in both major and minor for the
same reasons. The mention of WIII is due to the topic being addressed to JS
Bach. Read Christoph Wolff that WIII is the likely tuning for Bach.

It seems to me a bit "Procrustian" to try to link Werck III to anything about
Indian music. Different worlds.

And yet, that was the topic: Bach and Raga.

Best,
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com
Best, Johnny Reinhard

Christopher,

What you have described "smells" very much like the 'maqam' concept/structure in maqam music.

Can Akkoc

Christopher Bailey <chris@music.columbia.edu> wrote:

>
>Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
>melodies, perhaps modes. In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
>relevant.
>

My understanding is that a Rag is a like a scale, but one that comes with a set of "rules" or "guidelines" about how the tones move one to the other -- for example, Note X only appears as a neighbor of Note Y, or Note P must always resolve to Note Q. A Rag is not a melody . . it is a
bunch of possibilities for how to construct melodies.

Therefore, from that point of view, the Major Scale of Western Classical Music could be looked at as one raga, with certain . . if not rules, then guidelines. . . the leading tone (scale degree 7), tends to want to resolve up to 1 --- the 4, tends to want to resolve down to 3. also, of course, 1 and 3 are points of rest, 5 is kind of neutral,
etc. these aspects of major and minor, that go beyond a simple, character-less scale set, are what reminds me of the Rag idea.

Also, I think major and minor are different. . . for example, in the minor mode, when you descend, 7 and 6 are typically flattened, when ascending, typically raised. Again, that's a melodic "guideline" that's very Rag-like, I think.

Can Akko�

can193849@yahoo.com

That sounds a lot like the definition of `Maqam`.

Cordially,
Ozan
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Bailey
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 01 Ocak 2005 Cumartesi 18:36
Subject: [tuning] raga and Bach

>
>Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
>melodies, perhaps modes. In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
>relevant.
>

My understanding is that a Rag is a like a scale, but one that comes
with a set of "rules" or "guidelines" about how the tones move one to the
other -- for example, Note X only appears as a neighbor of Note Y, or
Note P must always resolve to Note Q. A Rag is not a melody . . it is a
bunch of possibilities for how to construct melodies.

Therefore, from that point of view, the Major Scale of Western
Classical Music could be looked at as one raga, with certain . . if not
rules, then guidelines. . . the leading tone (scale degree 7), tends
to want to resolve up to 1 --- the 4, tends to want to resolve down to
3. also, of course, 1 and 3 are points of rest, 5 is kind of neutral,
etc. these aspects of major and minor, that go beyond a simple,
character-less scale set, are what reminds me of the Rag idea.

Also, I think major and minor are different. . . for example, in the
minor mode, when you descend, 7 and 6 are typically flattened, when
ascending, typically raised. Again, that's a melodic "guideline"
that's very Rag-like, I think.

Not all maqams modulate as far as I know.

All the best,
Ozan
----- Original Message -----
From: Afmmjr@aol.com
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 01 Ocak 2005 Cumartesi 21:52
Subject: Re: [tuning] raga and Bach

In a message dated 1/1/2005 2:21:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, akjmicro@comcast.net writes:
On Friday 31 December 2004 10:29 am, Afmmjr@aol.com wrote:
> Perhaps a greater distinction is that scales are not ragas. Ragas are
> melodies, perhaps modes.

This is incorrect. Ravi Shankar in his 'Introduction to Indian Music'
recording states that ragas are "neither melodies nor scales", but rather a
set of rules for the construction of melodies, which is different than what
you just said above. A good definition of a rag would be a "precise melodic
formula", as Shankar suggests.

Before jumping the gun about corrrect and incorrect, please note the word "perhaps" used twice. Scales are extracts from a larger set, ragas appear to be complete in themselves. Bismillah Khan declared that there were an infinite number of ragas.

As for Ravi Shankar, he is not the lone arbiter on this issue. There are rules for every vocabulary of music. "Precise melodic formula" would include Maqam, as well, and yet we hold these distinct. Maqam can modulate but raga does not, for example.

Early ethnomusicologists tried in vain to get Indian musicians to play a raga in a straight "scale" but they were always refused.

> In that sense, the "leading tone" syntax is not
> relevant. Besides major and minor both have the same leading tone
> functions. WIII provides for 3 diffferent leading tones.

Leading tones, being 'tendency tones', *are* relevant to the discussion,
because it is sort of a Western version of a rag idea--certain tones tend to
resolve in certain ways. Not a rag idea precisely, but suggestive of the same
idea, albeit in simpler form.

My point was that the leading tone is used in both major and minor for the same reasons. The mention of WIII is due to the topic being addressed to JS Bach. Read Christoph Wolff that WIII is the likely tuning for Bach.

It seems to me a bit "Procrustian" to try to link Werck III to anything about
Indian music. Different worlds.

And yet, that was the topic: Bach and Raga.

Best,
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.dividebypi.com
Best, Johnny Reinhard

i don't claim to have any expertise in the musical cultures
and theories of India, Persia, or Turkey, aside from my
investigations into Indian tunings.

but from what i know about world history, i would not be
surprised to find similarities between those three musical
cultures which stem from ancient times ... Indian and Persian
being one connected group, and Persian and Turkish being another.

European theories and practices would appear far more recently
in the big picture, only being introduced into those three
musical cultures no earlier than about 1700 or so. my guess
would be that the highly developed ancient Indian culture
and its possible reflections in Persian and Turkish would
persevere even in the face of the introduction of European
elements.

that's just my food for thought ...

-monz

Monz is right, barring the fact that the `musical revolution` in Turkey circa 1926-1936 upheld the doctrine that the only `universal` music was ought to be the nationalist synthesis of Western-style neo-classicism mingled with folk songs (if such a thing were possible!), resulting in a crippled Maqam Music methodology designed to ban any references to `quarter-tones`, and hence lift all obstacles in the way of `traditional Western polyphony`. Such a compromise did not help, however, against the state-sponsored prohibition of genuine Maqam Music which was condescended as `Alla Turca` for a very long time.

The mess caused by this recklessness is a sight to see. I hope that my thesis can help remedy the situation and unite the Maqam Music tradition throughout the Middle East.

Best,
Ozan
----- Original Message -----
From: monz
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 02 Ocak 2005 Pazar 0:41
Subject: [tuning] Re: raga and Bach

i don't claim to have any expertise in the musical cultures
and theories of India, Persia, or Turkey, aside from my
investigations into Indian tunings.

but from what i know about world history, i would not be
surprised to find similarities between those three musical
cultures which stem from ancient times ... Indian and Persian
being one connected group, and Persian and Turkish being another.

European theories and practices would appear far more recently
in the big picture, only being introduced into those three
musical cultures no earlier than about 1700 or so. my guess
would be that the highly developed ancient Indian culture
and its possible reflections in Persian and Turkish would
persevere even in the face of the introduction of European
elements.

that's just my food for thought ...

-monz