| Pages:
1
2 |
charlie oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 694
Registered: 11-19-2007
Location: Newcastle upon tyne. UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: chords prefer frets
|
|
Every piece of music has a path (seyir). Its the quality of this path that counts not its ruling. The fact that so many questions are asked about
seyir indicates that "seyir" itself is not to be restricted or trapped in tradition. It longs to be a free spirit. So many seem so concerned about
what is or is not a bayati or any other maqam. Its a piece of music. C
Best Wishes, Charlie
|
|
|
Edward Powell
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1212
Registered: 1-20-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: g'oud
|
|
I just thought of a much more simple and basic way to describe the fundamental difference btw bayati and ussak...
1- take the same scale and use "re" as the tonic (hold low "re" as a bass note drone), stay mostly around low notes and you have ussak
2- take the same scale, exactly the same notes, but pretend that "sol" is the tonic... holding low sol as a bass note a lot - - - but finally in the
end conclude finishing on "re". There you have bayati.
bayati FEELS like sol is the tonic, but actually re is the first note of the scale.
but arabs don't do it like this anymore... but still a little hint of it is there, and i think it is really good to be aware of this distinction. It
gives you the tools to really give a very strong pure bayati flavour if you so choose. ---otherwise you are just noodling in that "bayati scale", and
you need a really strong imagination to keep it interesting.
the funny thing about the "difficult" ragas, is that finally it is much much easier with them to make sweet music than with an easy raga. An easy
ragas is basically a free scale that anyone can learn in 5 minutes... but then you need a great imagination to keep it interesting. But with a
difficult phrase oriented raga, it is heard to learn, but finally, as long as you follow the grammer correctly you are automatically playing sweet
melodies. So finally the really difficult ragas are the free scale ones like MAL KAUNS, CHARU KESI, WACHASPATI... etc
|
|
|
adamgood
Oud Junkie
Posts: 499
Registered: 6-27-2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: 2.7 koma flat
|
|
Edward by the way it's getting a little confusing now that you are referring to the solfege names within the makams, any Turkish musician will
consider the Karar or tonic of Ussak to be LA.
Dugah = LA
Rast = SOL
Neva = RE
etc...it's tied to how the notation is read. I suppose it's the Arabic method you're calling up, Rast = DO, etc..
|
|
|
katakofka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 811
Registered: 1-24-2008
Location: Cleveland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gypsy
|
|
Thanks Ed this was of great help. To conclude what we essentially call bayati in arabic music is USSAK in Turkish and when we play around the Dominant
we both talking about bayati in this case. Correct?
|
|
|
adamgood
Oud Junkie
Posts: 499
Registered: 6-27-2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: 2.7 koma flat
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by katakofka
Thanks Ed this was of great help. To conclude what we essentially call bayati in arabic music is USSAK in Turkish and when we play around the Dominant
we both talking about bayati in this case. Correct? |
I think though that in Arabic music there exists a maqam Ushaq (sorry I don't know the spelling) so actually, how do Arabic musicians distinguish
between Bayati and Ushaq?
|
|
|
Reda Aouad
Oud Junkie
Posts: 553
Registered: 1-2-2009
Location: Lebanon
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Very interesting discussion.
| Quote: | | I think though that in Arabic music there exists a maqam Ushaq (sorry I don't know the spelling) so actually, how do Arabic musicians distinguish
between Bayati and Ushaq? |
I will talk from a purely Arabic perspective. My reference is my book "Oriental-Arabic Theories نظريات شرق-عربية" by the Lebanese professor Walid
Ghelmyye.
Ushaq is closer to Nahawand than it is to Bayati from a seyr and mood points of view.
Ushaq is: Nahawand tetrachord on Dugah + Bayati Tetrachord on Husseini
Dugah, Busalik (and not Segah), Jiharkah (played slightly lower), Nawa, Husseini, Awj, Kerdan, Muhayyar
RE MI FA SOL LA SI half-flat DO RE
Ushaq revolves more around the lower tetrachord. You can think of it as derived from Nahawand rather than Bayati. Listen to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYWLY61AZgA.
|
|
|
Edward Powell
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1212
Registered: 1-20-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: g'oud
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by adamgood
Edward by the way it's getting a little confusing now that you are referring to the solfege names within the makams, any Turkish musician will
consider the Karar or tonic of Ussak to be LA.
Dugah = LA
Rast = SOL
Neva = RE
etc...it's tied to how the notation is read. I suppose it's the Arabic method you're calling up, Rast = DO, etc.. |
yeah, I know... I have got the impression that most of the people new to all of this are playing arab oud, and might have no idea about the note
names. (usually I try to qualify by saying "Do in Arab tuning"... but I've been getting lazy)
...however, as much as I prefer Turkish theory over Arab, I must admit that I do prefer the Arab notation much much more. Starting Rast from SOL, in
the notation, seems strange to me.
|
|
|
Edward Powell
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1212
Registered: 1-20-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: g'oud
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by adamgood
| Quote: | Originally posted by katakofka
Thanks Ed this was of great help. To conclude what we essentially call bayati in arabic music is USSAK in Turkish and when we play around the Dominant
we both talking about bayati in this case. Correct? |
I think though that in Arabic music there exists a maqam Ushaq (sorry I don't know the spelling) so actually, how do Arabic musicians distinguish
between Bayati and Ushaq? |
Actually I would say that Arabs are still playing Bayati, but starting from the tonic, and more or less dropping this idea that the dominant in more
important than the tonic. Sure, this ends up "looking" like USSAK... but I wouldn't go as far as to say that Arabs are playing USSAK as Bayati. But
now perhaps we are going into too much detail.
Mohammed Antar prefers to call this Arab Bayati as Maqam Dugah. He says that there is an old maqam dugah which is basically a bayati from the tonic...
but also as we know, there is a modern Turkish new makam dugah which is something totally different again (Adam can you tell us about this?).
I think that after the Ottomans left, Arabs dropped a lot of the maqam "theory", and began to think of maqams more in terms of 'scales'. The result
has been a more 'free' kind of playing - but a definite "blurring" of the particular distinctions existing between very similar makams.
I have the impression, maybe incorrect, that many or most Arab musicians are not particularly interested in, or bothered about theory. "Bayati is
Bayati" and "everyone know what that means", and then off you go and play what you want - as long as it somehow relates to the "bayati scale".
I think this is fine as long as you grew up in that culture and have that music in your ears all your life...... but as a fresh adult newcomer from
another culture, this approach is not helpful at all. The Turkish "rules", I have found very very helpful in trying to make sense out of all of it.
|
|
|
katakofka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 811
Registered: 1-24-2008
Location: Cleveland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gypsy
|
|
What would be the name of those makaam in turkhish music?
A, B1/4, C. D, E, F 1/2#, G, A
or
G, A 1/4, B 1/2, C, D, E1/4, F, G
Or at least the first 4 notes forward and backward played?
thanks
|
|
|
katakofka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 811
Registered: 1-24-2008
Location: Cleveland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gypsy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Reda Aouad
I will talk from a purely Arabic perspective. My reference is my book "Oriental-Arabic Theories نظريات شرق-عربية" by the Lebanese professor Walid
Ghelmyye.
. |
Reda: does Walid mention the seyir concept in his book? if yes what does he call it in arabic?
Thanks
|
|
|
Reda Aouad
Oud Junkie
Posts: 553
Registered: 1-2-2009
Location: Lebanon
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by katakofka
| Quote: | Originally posted by Reda Aouad
I will talk from a purely Arabic perspective. My reference is my book "Oriental-Arabic Theories نظريات شرق-عربية" by the Lebanese professor Walid
Ghelmyye.
. |
Reda: does Walid mention the seyir concept in his book? if yes what does he call it in arabic?
Thanks |
He doesn't directly mention it.. nor he defines the seyr of each maqam. But he defines the maqam as being a group of musical notes, arranged in a
certain order, bound to fixed rules and which progress in a special systematic way.
He also defines maqam families, which are the basic maqams from which others are derived. The basic maqam families according to him are 9 - only those
of Arabic origin and not of any other origin, and the other maqams are either derived from or similar to them. So one can count the number of maqams
he included in his book.
|
|
|
katakofka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 811
Registered: 1-24-2008
Location: Cleveland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gypsy
|
|
thanks Reda
|
|
|
eliot
Oud Junkie
Posts: 252
Registered: 1-5-2005
Location: The Gorges
Member Is Offline
Mood: Aksak
|
|
The main distinguishing feature of Beyati, as I learned it, is something that hasn't been mentioned yet: a final descent from Acem to Dugah (the 6th
note to the karar). If we're thinking in Arab tuning, and have the notes
D E1/2 F G A Bb
that means that a prominent descent from Bb to D is a mandatory aspect of makam Beyati. You find this in most of the best known Beyati Saz Semai-s if
you look at the seyir of the teslim sections. You find it in Arab repertoire in pieces like "Ya Salat iz-Zayn." You find it in some of Farid's
qaflah-s.
If you simply play around with the notes above G and then move down to the lower tetrachord, that's more like makam Neva than Beyati. And don't even
get me started about makam Tahir... 
|
|
|
adamgood
Oud Junkie
Posts: 499
Registered: 6-27-2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: 2.7 koma flat
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by eliot
The main distinguishing feature of Beyati, as I learned it, is something that hasn't been mentioned yet: a final descent from Acem to Dugah (the 6th
note to the karar). |
See this is the kind of thing that I'll never get on my own without someone telling me. Thanks Eliot!!!
Now that I look at the compositions I see that. Actually many of the final karars I'm seeing are from FA or MI to LA.
Eliot can you tell us anything else?
|
|
|
Edward Powell
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1212
Registered: 1-20-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: g'oud
|
|
Interesting... and this is exactly HOW to learn makams. KEEP STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND, AND ASK THOSE WHO KNOW! This is a "cumulative process" and
there is a MAKAM OCEAN out there!
I remember talking to Yurdal about USSAK-BAYATI differences, and he said that in Bayati, even though neva is the most important note, the final karar
should be (ARAB TUNING) RE - LA - SOL - FA - MI - RE - RE... just as you find in the famous Bayati pesrev teslim karar. (is this a shortened version
of the SI to RE karar?)
Something Mohammed Antar told me about Bayati is that the SEGAH note should never shift position - whereas in USSAK it slides around a lot. (???)
Eliot, please tell us about NEVA and TAHIR.... I have been very fascinated by these mysterious makams. All so seemingly similar to
ussak-bayati-etc.
Also, Adam, can you give us the seyir of GULIZAR. I am so curious about this one too - - - I have been gives several conflicting information about all
of these less common common makams.
[then of course there is Makam Asiran, which Necati told me is something like USSAK from Yegah!?)
|
|
|
Reda Aouad
Oud Junkie
Posts: 553
Registered: 1-2-2009
Location: Lebanon
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Are you talking about the Arabic Ushaq? Does that mean that what I said before is wrong and that the Arabic Ushaq is not what I described? Because I'm
starting to have doubts in my references.. that would be really disappointing 
|
|
|
adamgood
Oud Junkie
Posts: 499
Registered: 6-27-2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: 2.7 koma flat
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Edward Powell
Something Mohammed Antar told me about Bayati is that the SEGAH note should never shift position - whereas in USSAK it slides around a lot. (???)
Eliot, please tell us about NEVA and TAHIR.... I have been very fascinated by these mysterious makams. All so seemingly similar to
ussak-bayati-etc.
Also, Adam, can you give us the seyir of GULIZAR. I am so curious about this one too - - - I have been gives several conflicting information about all
of these less common common makams.
[then of course there is Makam Asiran, which Necati told me is something like USSAK from Yegah!?) |
1. Yes for Ussak, the segah pitch can slide around all over the place in very typical ways, it's very rubbery. In general this pitch is lower than
Segah but is simply notated as Segah for simplicity. Also glissando is very important for segah in ussak.
For Beyati I would say it moves less but is not stationary. Really no pitch is stationary, everything can be moving and come alive in their own
ways.
2. Eliot I would also love to hear about Tahir. I see it as a close sibling to Muhayyer except the dominant for Tahir is Neva rather than Huseyni.
What are the other characteristics?
3. Gulizar, I don't know from my head so I'll check a piece, be right back...
Hm tricky, ok I only have a few pieces and here's what I notice, looks like a descending makam beginning on Muhayyer but not acting like muhayyer (so
maybe more related to Tahir?). I assume the dominant is Neva? So and Ussak tetrachord plus Rast Pentachord (like Neva makam). It uses some pretty
obvious Karcigar tricks and melodies. With karar on Dugah. My oversimplified analysis
4. I never heard of a makam Asiran, you're not thinking Huseyni Asiran? Or any of the other "XX" Asiran makams?
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
