PaulS
Oud Junkie
Posts: 101
Registered: 9-7-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Turkish style
After some time playing Arabic tuning and style, I have decided to explore Turkish style and tuning.
So a couple of beginner questions:
1) Why is the EABead tuning preferred to the C#F#Bead? I find it awkward to shift from the A string to the B string and leap over several notices.
There is more resonance it seems. Is that the main rationale? A lot of the Arabic songs I know rely heavily on the scale starting from the low G (on
the F string) and integrate it so... Is something different happening in Turkish music?
2) I need a simple explanation of the notation issue: everything is written in G or A but atypically starts on the D Yegah? Which is actually played
as an A (Dugah) is that right? And if so why??
Thanks!
|
|
|
Jody Stecher
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1373
Registered: 11-5-2011
Location: California
Member Is Offline
|
|
EABead is an older tuning. It has a particular resonance. It puts the oud player in a frame of mind that allies the oud with instruments all over the
world that have a tuning involving a gap of one whole step between adjacent strings. Certain things can be done in that tuning arrangement that do not
sound the same in other tunings. EABead is an extension of Abead which itself an extension of bead.
Many Turkish oud players tune C#F#Bead. Why do you think EABead tuning is preferred? and by whom?I haven't interviewed every Turkish player in the
world but it does seem to be used more these days than EABead. Personally I prefer BF#Bead and DF#Bead.
What do you mean by "notices"?
What do you mean by "everything is written in G or A"?
|
|
|
PaulS
Oud Junkie
Posts: 101
Registered: 9-7-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thanks Jody. I think I hear the resonance. I meant notes not notices. I.e.., from c on the A string to d on the B string. I will play around with
it.
It seems that songs are played a fifth beneath the way they are written?
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2939
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
The standard is for the music to be played a fourth beneath where they are written, not a fifth.
This way, the makams are in the same place as the Arabic maqamat on the instrument, just a whole step higher in tuning.
Example: Rast is written in G in Turkish notation. It is played a fourth lower, on D. This puts the tonic on the fourth (B) string, third finger.
This is the same position an Arabic player would use for Rast, but in regular Arabic tuning, the pitch would be C (and would also be written that
way).
I think you are somehow transposing twice in your thought process.
When you look at the Turkish note names in a table like the one below, they are assigned to the written pitch. The actual Yegah pitch in Turkish
music is normally A (G in Arabic music). This is written as D. There's no other transposition going on.
That doesn't make it Dukah, it's still Yekah, it's just the difference between the written and sounding pitch. Dukah is written an
octave higher than Yekah sounds, which is what is confusing you—the note names and makams have to be though of
either in terms of sounding pitch or written pitch. But you can't go back and forth between one and the other.
In this system, you really learn to read the music by makam, and play the makam on your instrument, rather than read the individual notes in relation
to your instrument. You may find it helpful to think of the note names as describing strings/finger positions rather than pitches. "Girdaniye" is
your highest open string. "Neva" is your second open string. "Dukah" is your third open string, "Asiran" is your fourth open string, etc.
|
|
|
PaulS
Oud Junkie
Posts: 101
Registered: 9-7-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thanks Brian! That helps so much, I think. Well it seems counterintuitive but that probably because I am starting from a western musical model. I get
the idea of focussing on the maqams though and will make a difference. A whole new world to explore. I am curious about how this evolved though. Is
because of the shift to Arabic tuning? What could a beginner read about this?
|
|
|
Jody Stecher
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1373
Registered: 11-5-2011
Location: California
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by PaulS  | Thanks Jody. I think I hear the resonance. I meant notes not notices. I.e.., from c on the A string to d on the B string. I will play around with
it.
It seems that songs are played a fifth beneath the way they are written? |
The more likely move would be from C on the B string to D on the same string. Just as you would move from B flat to C on the fourth string (course
)of an Arabic oud. You don't look for B flat on the fifth string, right? But if when playing an ascending phrase that began on the (Turkish) fifth
string you want to delay the shift to the next highest string and play C on the fifth string (tuned to A in this example) you can flatten the finger
and get both pitches in the same position on the two adjacent strings. Just as you would do in a barre (bar) chord on guitar.
To answer your question to Brian (who understood your original questions better than I did) about origins of Turkish notation: it had nothing to do
with oud. It was intended for whatever instrument the reader happened to be playing. It is not aligned with absolute pitch. That the ouds of Turkey
are typically tuned higher than the ouds of the Arab world is a separate issue.
Karl Signell explains in "Makam" that its origins may have been an attempt to align local sonic reality with western staff notation. The makam whose
full octave scale most closely resembles the western Major Scale is Cargah. Forget for now that the actual pitch of Cargah on a typically tuned Arab
oud is F and that is called Jaharkah and that the Arab Maqam of that name doesn't typically use a major seventh. Forget that the dastgah Chahargah in
Persian music is utterly different. If staff notation for Turkish makam music was to easily work, the "major scale" based on the *NOTE* C (not the
pitch) could be assigned to the Cargah position on an instrument. By doing that the "major scale" of Cargah would have no sharps or flats or its
microtonal variants in the key signature. If Cargah is represented by what we call "F" or Fa then Rast would have to be represented by C or Do. Never
mind for now that when we do this on an oud tuned Turkish the sound we hear for Rast is what we call D and the sound of Cargah is G.
My personal opinion is that this notation may have been adopted for nationalist reasons as well. "We do it this way in Turkey". Something along those
lines. this is the effect on an outsider anyway. It seems that this notation system made modern Turkey seem more modern and more Western to Turks at
the time. It did not have that effect on the rest of the world. This notation system was adapted around the same time that the Arabic alphabet was
rejected for writing the Turkish language and around the time that western notation was starting to be used for Arabic music and in which the
fingering, notation, and pitch were aligned. I wonder if the Turkish notation was also done to be un-Arab. Or more exactly, no be Not Un-Turkish.
this is pure conjecture on my part.
|
|
|
hartun
Oud Junkie
Posts: 220
Registered: 12-26-2012
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Member Is Offline
|
|
In regard to EABead tuning, this is what almost every Armenian player in America uses especially in the wedding-dance-picnic circuit. Perhaps because
many (most?) of the Turkish-style players in the US are of Armenian descent, some sources or individuals might cite EABead as the most common Turkish
tuning, although the situation is different in Turkey itself.
Based on my limited experience, 90% of "kef bands" (Armenian bands playing the wedding-dance-picnic circuit) prefer to play in A (i.e. they use the
second highest open string as the tonic) though when a band plays a song with a wide melodic range, or an oudist attempts an Ottoman classical piece
they will play in E as is standard. Unless you are playing basically Rast or a formal version of Nihavent, the two most common keys are A and E. The
low A and E strings, naturally, are used as drone strings/accent strings in these keys (I know they aren't "keys" but I mean when playing the makam
"on A" or "on E") And of course it goes both ways as the fourth of A is E and the fifth of E is A, so both low E and low A strings are often used as
accents in playing songs in either key. I assume this is the reason this tuning is preferred by musicians playing basically a dance repertoire.
|
|
|
Jack_Campin
Oud Junkie
Posts: 333
Registered: 5-6-2007
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
A suggestion from the Greek, Turkish and Klezmer Clarinet forum: the G clarinet was introduced from the West around 1830, and Turkish notation uses
the same transposition convention as the West does for that.
But. I just looked up Charles Fonton's book on Turkish music (published in 1767 in French; I have the 1987 Turkish translation) and the facsimile
scores reproduced in it use the same pitch range as modern Turkish notation. So while the adoption of the G clarinet may have reinforced the
practice, I don't think it can have started it. And it certainly predates Turkish nationalism by a very long way.
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2939
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Jack_Campin | A suggestion from the Greek, Turkish and Klezmer Clarinet forum: the G clarinet was introduced from the West around 1830, and Turkish notation uses
the same transposition convention as the West does for that.
But. I just looked up Charles Fonton's book on Turkish music (published in 1767 in French; I have the 1987 Turkish translation) and the facsimile
scores reproduced in it use the same pitch range as modern Turkish notation. So while the adoption of the G clarinet may have reinforced the
practice, I don't think it can have started it. And it certainly predates Turkish nationalism by a very long way. |
Yes, that intuitively seems like it should be related, but by all appearances it is just a coincidence.
|
|
|
keving
Oud Maniac
Posts: 52
Registered: 5-27-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
I have been using EF#BEAD for years, though I often detune lowest string to what ever makam tonality as necessary. Tuning it to a low C# makes it feel
awfully floppy, so I don't often go down that low.
I have been generally annoyed with the Turkish system of writing the pitches a fourth higher than the rest of the world. It usually requires a talk
over with arab players when combining musics, where do you play this? Etc.
That said I am now a virtual expert at quick transposing...
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2939
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
The only ones that are sometimes an issue are Nahawand/Nihavent and Kurd . . . I've heard some Hicazkar Kurdi pieces played in A by Arabic players,
when they should be in C.
Nahawand is very commonly in both C and D for Arabic players, so that is the most confusing. If it's the same fingering it would be in C, but
sometimes it is played in D anyway.
Generally it's all maqam-based. Turkish system is to write maqams in their "home" key, but the most common key is actually a fourth down from there.
Neither Turkish nor Arabic systems traditionally had a fixed pitch reference, so the idea of "Bayati" is more important than whatever the instruments
happen to be tuned to.
If you learn Arabic traditional repertoire, you'll realize that Arabic music isn't really played in the same key it's written in either (up until
pretty recently, as people adopted "concert" tuning).
|
|
|
Jack_Campin
Oud Junkie
Posts: 333
Registered: 5-6-2007
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Kevin - northamptonsufizikr.com has been domain parked.
|
|
|
keving
Oud Maniac
Posts: 52
Registered: 5-27-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
Jack, by gosh you are correct. Thanks.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
