The upper jins of maqam Kurd is listed in some sources as Nahawand and other sources as Busalik. Other than having different typical starting notes,
the main difference seems to be that Busalik has a slightly flattened third note compared to Nahawand.
Oudipedia says:
Quote:
A variant of Nahawand is Busalik (بوسليك) or Ushaq (عشاق) jins, which is usually based on
D (dukah) and has a slightly flattened third note compared with Nahawand jins.
Which one is the correct upper jins for maqam Kurd, or are both possible?
I've always played maqam Kurd as Kurd + Nahawand, but the Oudipedia site lists it as Kurd + Busalik which would indicate flattening the Bb (when
playing Kurd on D)?DavidJE - 4-22-2018 at 11:42 AM
Nahawand/nihavend and buselik jins are identical as far as I know. Actually, in Turkish music theory the first jins of nihavend is simply a
transposition of the buselik jins to rast instead of dugah. So, the jins is called "buselik" but in the makam Buselik it starts on the note dugah
(written as an "a" on the staff) and in the makam Nihavend it starts on the note rast (written as a "g" on the staff). The jins is the same in both
cases...jins buselik. The makams are different in terms of their progression/seyir, but the first jins are the buselik jins in either case. Does
that make sense?
So the upper jins of the makam Kurd is buselik. You could call it nihavend (Turkish) or nahawand (Arabic), but it is the same.
Regarding your quote from Oudipedia...hmmm...obviously they are talking about Arabic makams/jins based on the spellings, but I think that must be a
typo. Ushaq has a flattened second note (segah), but neither Busalik or Nahawand have a flattened second or third note in a microtonal sense.
To answer your last question, in Turkish theory the makam Kurdi has a jins/cins kurd + buselik. As far as I know, in Arabic theory the makam Kurd is
the same...jins kurd + jins nahawand, where jins nahawand is identical to jins buselik.Jody Stecher - 4-22-2018 at 12:58 PM
If it relieves worry consider the second jins to be Kurd once more, starting from the fifth note. 1234 Kurd. 5678 Kurd.
In actual music I hear phrases that begin from the 4th note that could be called Nahawand or Buselik so I understand the theory that the second jins
starts on note 4. But then I also hear phrases beginning on the third note that could be called Ajam/Acem if one were so inclined. As to the
microtonal exactness of the third note of the secondary jins I have a few thoughts and one possible remedy. Kurd from Rast and Kurd from Dugah might
behave slightly differently according to convention and fingering habit. Also the exact pitch of each note in a phrase can vary according to context.
To counteract uncertainty maybe listen to your favorite oud player or singer or whatever and do your best to replicate their pitch. Once you have
that more or less reliably under your fingers you can decide if the problem note is part of jins Nahawand or Buselik.adamgood - 4-22-2018 at 06:24 PM
In terms of Turkish makam theory, makam kurdi confuses me...there's not a ton of repertoire so how do we really know? In the theory books, kurdi is
noted as
kurdi tetrachord +buselik pentachord
(upper extensions continue kurdi, lower extensions I believe are buselik pentachord)
BUT
Looking at what little repertoire there is, the old pieces show a seyir that starts on the pitch huseyni (in Arabic transposition, starting on A) so
wouldn't that mean the makam would be built from kurdi pentachord + kurdi tetrachord?
In later pieces by someone like Refik Fersan, he's showing the makam like it is in the books, kurdi tetra + buselik penta. However in the beginning of
the seyir it's using Ussak before getting swapped to kurdi.
It's not a common makam. Some details have gotten lost along the way through misuse and has generally become misunderstood.
Brian Prunka - 4-22-2018 at 06:53 PM
Adam and Jody both offer good points. Regarding the flattened third note, this is a theoretical occurrence since a Pythagorean m2 (which is what the
theoretical position of the second degree is) is lower than the equivalent m2 found in typical just intonation. But more practically, you should
listen to performers as Jody suggests and mimic their intonation. You'll find that the intonation may vary according to contextual cues. adamgood - 4-23-2018 at 05:02 AM
Here's the Kurdi pesrev from Refik Fersan, late or modern "Turkish classical" composer, student of Tanburi Cemil Bey. This seems like a good example
for showing what's possible inside the makam in the modern use but even here or in his saz semai, I have a hard time understanding what the entry note
is for the makam. Neva? Huseyni? Dugah? I think it's neva.
So, I come to figure that it's less of a makam and more a part of the color palette.
Brian, I'm confused by what you're saying about a flattened third note. Do you mean only on the 2nd jins? Which would be what in Arabic...Bb?al-Halabi - 4-23-2018 at 06:57 AM
Adam, you rightly point to the rather elusive character of makam kurdi. The collection of notations of Cantemir, which includes about 350 Ottoman
instrumental pieces mostly from the late 17th century, includes very few pieces in makam kurdi. In his analysis of the actual workings of the makam
based on this repertoire Owen Wright is hard pressed to nail down some clear and consistent features that define its performance practice at the time.
Historically this makam did not develop a genuinely autonomous life and a sizable repertoire to display it. But the kurdi cins/jins, with its
distinctive set of intervals, has been very much central to the structure of many makams as well as to modulation.
