22/8 time?

[FMiguelez]

The basic unit of musical thought in the work is 22 beats long. Period. Performing the work, I don't think "6/8; 3/4, etc." I think of the ENTIRE musical phrase, which IS, in fact, 22/8. Were I to set the piece today, the bar lines would, in fact, be SOLID at the 22 beat mark and the internal rhythmic structure would contain dotted bar lines.

Exactly. That's how I'm used to reading those longer pharases, with the dotted barlines for ease of reading.

An analogous thing are the dotted slurs. I think it makes good practice to use solid slurs to mark string bowings, and use dotted ones to delineate complete melodic phrases. Combined freely, is a great way to get the best of both worlds. Clarity for the performers from a technical and musical pont of view.

Good stuff, MLC!

[MIDI Life Crisis]

An analogous thing are the dotted slurs. I think it makes good practice to use solid slurs to mark string bowings, and use dotted ones to delineate complete melodic phrases. Combined freely, is a great way to get the best of both worlds. Clarity for the performers from a technical and musical point of view.

Good stuff, MLC!

Thanks. But I have to admit that the dotted slurs are not something I like. The musical phrase should be apparent from the notes on the page and apparent to the listener because it is well crafted. If mahler used dotteed slurs in the 2nd mvt. of the Sym. V, the entire piece would be one long dotted slur! Same with the Prelude to Act I of Tristan (Wagner).

[FMiguelez]

An analogous thing are the dotted slurs. I think it makes good practice to use solid slurs to mark string bowings, and use dotted ones to delineate complete melodic phrases. Combined freely, is a great way to get the best of both worlds. Clarity for the performers from a technical and musical point of view.

Good stuff, MLC!

Thanks. But I have to admit that the dotted slurs are not something I like. The musical phrase should be apparent from the notes on the page and apparent to the listener because it is well crafted. If mahler used dotteed slurs in the 2nd mvt. of the Sym. V, the entire piece would be one long dotted slur! Same with the Prelude to Act I of Tristan (Wagner).

True. But it takes all of the guess work out of the equation. Especially for non-professional orchestras. The other day i went to an open-door reherasal of Wagner's Tristan und Isolde, with this youth orchestra, and the concert Meister and the director spent most of the time sorting out the bowings. Clearly, Wagner didn't bother with those. He only indicated musical phrases, and it would be up to the strings to figure them out.
Watching that was a bit boring, but I did learn of their bowing preferences/idiosincracies. They BUTCHERED the piece in the performance, though. They were racing through that glorious theme

[MIDI Life Crisis]

...concert Meister and the director spent most of the time sorting out the bowings...

Bowing is one of the most important things a composer can include in a symphonic score. It is not only well worth the time to do in advance, but essential if you are presenting a new work to a major orch. as your rehearsal time (for most of us) is severely limited. Sometimes to a 5 minute "discussion" by the conductor and a one-time read thru before the performance.

Of course, everything else needs to be in place as well.

[Spikey Horse]

I love the 'classical Indian take' on 'time sigs', particularly that the 'Taals' are so much than 'just' time sigs, that they have clearly defined musical 'content', they are a sort of rhythmic poem in themselves even if most of the time they are not actually played 'out loud' (in their most fundamental form). Instead they are sort of imagined in real time in the mind of the audience while listening to what the musician is actually playing over the top of it. It is this interplay between the two that give the music so much meaning, significance and spine tingling pleasure... jazz can come close to this kind of experience but still, to me at least, nothing somehow does it like classical Indian!

So (the sort of) point is that I think this is one type of music where not knowing about the Taal (time cycle) and what it is for whatever piece you are listening to will result in not being able to appreciate/ enjoy it fully. This is not snobbery at all. I remember when I first started listening to Indian classical (while learning the Tabla) being totally lost in sections of music not knowing where the beginning of a Taal was, even with a relatively simple one if it took 20 seconds to go through just one cycle it was hard to know what was going on ... then later on after learning a bit more when I listened to the same pieces again I could usually get the 'taal' straight away (and maintain it in my head while the music did acrobatics all around it) .... only then did the music suddenly became comprehensible... just like learning a spoken language.

Anyway, I'm rambling ... actually I just wanted to post this link to a short clip in sheer adoration of my tabla teacher pandit Sharda Sahai. He is playing a rela (fast section in a tabla solo, actually not a particularly complicated section, the main emphasis on speed and fluid, exiting playing). The point is it's in 'Teentaal' which is 16 beats long divided 4|4|4|4 so about as common time as Indian classical gets. Like I said what he is doing is not particularly 'fancy' (compared to other sections of a table solo) but somehow to me it just demonstrates brilliantly what can be done in even a simple 4 bars of 4.

OK , in case anyone is unsure, I've typed out the lahara used. Beat 1 is that long sustained high 'c' note. A simple melody (lahara) like this is often used to help define the time cycle length (especially its first beat) especially useful as the time cycles are often slow and quite 'plodding' even if the rhythms being played are fast and complex. I think it's a semi tone higher in the clip than show in my pic below. The length of the Lahara and the Taal is the same.



This is the actual Taal (written in tabla language). It's called Teentaal (4|4|4|4 = 16 beats long)

Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Tin Tin Ta | Ta Dhin Dhin Dha

And this is what Pt. Sharda Sahai does with it. Enjoy....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jYTLjDnaobA& ... =1&t=t&f=b

Note the 'Tihai' at the very end (starts at 2:10) ... a long-ish phrase repeated three times in such a way that end of the last repeat lands (climactically!) on the first beat of the next Taal.

BTW Shaking of head in Indian classical circles translates as 'this bit rocks!'

[MIDI Life Crisis]

...

Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Tin Tin Ta | Ta Dhin Dhin Dha

...

It is interesting to note that classical Indian dancers are taught these in much the same way (identical way?) that classical Indian musicians are taught.

<shaking of my head for your post>

[Spikey Horse]

...

Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Dhin Dhin Dha | Dha Tin Tin Ta | Ta Dhin Dhin Dha

...

It is interesting to note that classical Indian dancers are taught these in much the same way (identical way?) that classical Indian musicians are taught.

<shaking of my head for your post>

Yes, totally. Both Khattak and Bharatanatyam styles (the only two I have any experience of) use the same or slightly adapted language, certainly the same concept of taals. You can pretty much ''speak the steps of the dance' just as you can 'speak the strokes on a tabla'. The 'bols' used are the same or slightly modified (eg slurred to describe a sliding foot etc).

All can use rhythmical structures like tihais etc and tabla (or similar drum) is usually used as accompaniment after all. And Khattak is a lot like drumming on the ground with your feet anyway - or occasionally while standing on a metal fruit dish .. those crazy Khattak dancers... !

[FMiguelez]

.

Hi, Spikey Horse. I admit TOTAL ignorance regarding Indian music, but it sounds fascinating.
They don't use the western tunning system, do they? That example you cited, when played by authentic Indian instrumets, does it really sound like a harmonic minor scale, or the tunning is different?

Also, would you mind pointing me out to some authentic sounding Indian music, that includes some sort of explanation in terms of what's going on in the music, as you described? (figuring out where/what the taal is, etc).

I'd like to listen to some, but I want to not only listen to it, but feel it, as you were talking about.

Thank you for sharing this. Totally ad hoc for this rhytmic discussion.

[FMiguelez]

.

Oh, and one other related thing we could discuss is beaming over bar lines.
I like doing this from time to time, but performers, in my experience, prefer changing time signatures. Some people insist this 2 have slight different effects, or feels.

What do you guys think? When and why would you use one device over the other? I'm curious about your views regarding this, since this starts to be not very standarized.

[FMiguelez]

I have a strong impression that you are taking theoretical issues personally, and that you are trying to pass as a musical authority ("correct theories," etc.). Everything is questionable, there are no "correct" theories, but only theories. There really is no authority, only opinions - that would be a basic (and correct) assumption that should make all of us humble and polite with each other. There is no competition running here about who knows more and better, what is the correct theory and what whose facts are truer.

Well, yes and no. It's always good to question things, but there are MANY things in music that are already pretty well established, and just questioning for the sake of questioning would lead you (or anyone) nowhere but to dog-chasing-tail land.

I respect your right to respond to something that upset you. I thought you already had done so, but then you come back again and continue. Come on, nicky. Just let it go. This will take us nowhere. And it's gotten boring already. Why don't we continue discussing the topic at hand? For instance, what I suggested just a thread above, regarding beaming over barlines.

[nickysnd]

Well, yes and no. It's always good to question things, but there are MANY things in music that are already pretty well established, and just questioning for the sake of questioning would lead you (or anyone) nowhere but to dog-chasing-tail land.

I respect your right to respond to something that upset you. I thought you already had done so, but then you come back again and continue. Come on, nicky. Just let it go. This will take us nowhere. And it's gotten boring already. Why don't we continue discussing the topic at hand? For instance, what I suggested just a thread above, regarding beaming over barlines.

And who started the deviation from the topic, was it me? This is the kind of questions that would not be right to avoid, I think.

Of course, music notation is all about accepted conventions, I was not questioning that. For example I said that it is a good convention that players do need grid-barlines and "well established" time signatures. I just said that that convention has not much to do with the music itself, but with easy playability, with saving time. I was not questioning anything "for the sake of questioning." I was only giving some opinions on the matter, to the point, on topic. MLC's reaction to that was... well, what it was. I apologize again for the second OT response, but, as I said, it was triggered by a PS that MLC added in his attacking post.

I did not and I will not initiate any personal addressing, but I will always respond to one - only if I will be attacked and provoked in a personal way. I am aware that this is getting boring for everyone else - that was what my disclaimer was for, so one can skip my post. You can even delete it, I mean it. But please don't delete MLC's "THINK before you spew" post, as I consider it as a great example of how a moderator (or a forum member) should not behave. And also, in all (un)fairness, it is far less boring than my posts - I find it utterly negative, yet highly entertaining, in a most peculiar way.

I am not aware of any "dog-chasing-tail" statements in my posts. Please point it to me. I actually hate those type of things probably as much as you do.

Since you asked, my opinion about beaming over barlines: if a composer feels that it would make the phrasing clearer to the performers, without making the reading harder, then there might be a point in doing it. But I think that a similar phrasing hint can be given by legato, and some articulation marks, maybe changing time signature, etc. There are means to let the performers know what your phrasing intentions are, so beaming over bars can be avoided most of the time. I admit that may be situations where they are the only way to display the phrasing, like in highly polyphonic situations. But generally, I am on the performers side - there is no reason to beam over bar just for displaying graphical cleverness while making things harder to read. (with all the respect and admiration towards him, Ligeti's piano Etudes provide a few beam-over-barline examples that I believe could have been written in a simpler manner without affecting the phrasing. But of course I may be wrong about it - just as anyone else. So, Ligeti fans - don't shoot, I am a fan myself! )

[FMiguelez]

I am not aware of any "dog-chasing-tail" statements in my posts. Please point it to me. I actually hate those type of things probably as much as you do.

I meant that as a general comment, not directed particularly to you.

I can tell you are a nice guy, and very polite. I don't think this is the 1st time you and MLC have had these disagreements, if my memory serves me well. We all tend to be very passionate when we discuss music, since it's something very personal and something we trully love. And some of us tend to defend our personal views. That's great. This is how interesting and provocative discussions are supposed to be carried out, as long as we don't cross the line and start making things personal.
Where there is total disagreement, you can explain your points, and even challenge the other. But sometimes it's obvious none will yield.

I know MLC is quite an accomplished musician, with very strong views. So are you. So, may I suggest we just forget about this and just carry on with our musical discussion?

[Spikey Horse]

Just to keep the multi topic thread thing going....

.

Hi, Spikey Horse. I admit TOTAL ignorance regarding Indian music, but it sounds fascinating.
They don't use the western tunning system, do they? That example you cited, when played by authentic Indian instrumets, does it really sound like a harmonic minor scale, or the tunning is different?

Hey I'm pretty ignorant too, not much more than a 'fan' really .... and not anywhere as advanced as I should be on the tabla as I just haven't had the chance to practice as much as I'd have liked.

I know very little about the Indian MELODIC theory or tuning of a sitar / veena etc. I do know there are officially 22 divisions in an octave but I've never learned any theory regarding of all those 'shrutis'!

Maybe this might be of interest:

http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/indian/indian.htm

I do know that the frets of a sitar all are movable (just tied on by silk thread) and I tune my sitar and nudge the frets about until it sounds 'right' to me and this often changes depending on what scale I am (generally) playing ... this works well enough for me!! But I am quite sensitive to tuning - I can often tell not only that someone else has been playing my acoustic guitar but who it was from the way it's been left tuned.

So anyway I would bet the tuning will be slightly different for each raga played - they all sound so individual that has to be the case ...... and maybe there is a difference in each gharana (regional playing style) and I'm sure each player will have their own tuning 'fingerprint'.

But in practice, just as important as the how instrument is tuned (and maybe more so) I would say it is the way it is played which is really what dictates the exact pitch of each note. The sitar is almost more like a fretless instrument in the way you have to play it. The sitar has very long strings which are much easier to bend (intentionally or not) than a western guitar and there is no fret board so the note you get is so dependant on the pressure on the string... added to this it is much easier to bend a string sideways on a sitar, and you can bend much further too - in fact whole melodies (within melodies) can be played by bending the string to play several notes during a sustain...

The really great players have such an amazing ear and control of pitch it is quite amazing, and if I listen to them a lot over a period of time I find my pitch sensitivity goes up in the same kind of way heavy mixing periods can over sensitize your ears to sonic detail. I once heard of an experiment done where a sitar performance was analyzed and they discovered the player changed his intonation gradually as the raga developed. That about sums it up I think!

Also, would you mind pointing me out to some authentic sounding Indian music, that includes some sort of explanation in terms of what's going on in the music, as you described? (figuring out where/what the taal is, etc).

I'd like to listen to some, but I want to not only listen to it, but feel it, as you were talking about.

Thank you for sharing this. Totally ad hoc for this rhytmic discussion.

A lot of CDs I have bought actually have brilliant notes about the raga and taal being played, I remember for me they were a great way into the music - especially if already a musician. Otherwise I'd say just google it .... there's a lot out there - but there will be a lot of contradictory facts, terms, spellings etc don't worry this is normal (as it's really supposed to be taught guru-disciple style - not on the net! - and there are so many different styles)

Off the top of my head some classic CD's (and artists) for starters....

'Afternoon Ragas' by Nikhil Banerjee (or anything by him ...)

These next two are fantastic studio recordings - recoorded in Wales I think!!! They are all world famous sitar players and also features the 'bass sitar' or surbahar as well as sitar and tabla.

Imrat Khan, surbahar and sitar, Rag Marwa (link below)
http://www.wyastone.co.uk/nrl/world/5356a.html

Nishat Khan / Irshad Khan: Rag Bhimpalasi, Rag Tilak Kamod (this version of Rag Bhimpalasi on surbahar is just absolute divine perfection)

Er, anything by Ravi Shankar (especially with tabla player Ustad Alla Rakha) - I particularly like older recordings which were often more traditional and less Western influenced. But it's all good.

But really there's so much .. it's so dependent on taste... apart from classical there's some amazing folk (and all in between) .... and instrument wise there's tabla, pakwaj, flute, sitar, veena, sarangi, surbahar, vocal ....

Also I've just discovered a ton of stuff (old recordings of Nikhil Banerjee etc) on youtube - might be a good place to get a flavour of what you like before buying... that and those amazon audio demos.

This is vid is also quite a good resource, in fact it's a must see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3Ho0Y_N ... ed&search=

[MIDI Life Crisis]

As a moderator of this board, you MLC should be an example of impartial and rational reasoning, self control, and politeness -

Wrong. I am a moderator for this section as I am a working composer with 30 years of professional experience. It has nothing to do with being polite or impartial.

I suggest you raised the bar in the discussion with the following comment:

Let me understand correctly: first - you have written a piece, second - you have subdivided it in 6/8 3/4 6/8 2/4, and third - you have decided that your cycle counts twentytwo 8ths, therefore your signature is 22/8. Is that correct?

Now, if someone will tell me that the second movement of Beethoven's 5th symphony is written in 66/8 time signature, I will respond that he must be jocking. [sic] If he will tell that it is written in 3/8, I will respond that that is just a graphic grid so the musicians don't get lost.

As a composer and a professional, I found that comment insulting and in need of some correction. If you don't like my direct style as a moderator, you can go bitch to James or simply ignore me. But if you are going to make comments like that and expect me to ignore them, you're dealing with the wrong guy. You can count on me to call you on your •••• every time.

[nickysnd]

You can count on me to call you on your •••• every time.

What is the thing that you call my "••••"? To the point please, and providing the rational arguments that make you call that thing - ••••.

Here is the Beethoven's example the I was refering to:
http://imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_No.5_(Be ... udwig_van)
(scroll a bit down, where it says Complete score of 2nd movement, then download the pdf).

I have chosen that example to illustrate my point, a few posts ago, when things were still civil in this thread. That theme is a long phrase, counting 66 eights. My point was that a 66/8 time signature would look like a joke, in spite of the fact that it will be technically correct. Within that phrase/cycle, even if the time signature seems to fragment and divide it every three eights, the music should just flow, disregarding the graphic fragmentation. Hence my comment that the 3/8 time signature is more like a graphic grid so that the musicians play together and don't get lost. That was my whole point. Now please explain what possible can be offensive to you about that? The fact that I compared the situation in your piece with the one in Beethoven's piece? From the time signature pov, those two pieces have this thing in common: Beethoven felt obliged to mark on paper a 3/8 time signature - even if he conceived the theme as a 66 beats phrase/cycle, in the same way that you felt obliged to mark on paper 6/8, 3/4, etc. - even if you conceived your piece as a 22 beats phrase/cycle. Now let me assume that most musicians who will see a 22/8 time signature, or a 66/8 time signature, would react in the same way that I heave reacted - they would smile as to a good joke. Or maybe it is only me who will smile. So what? Would that be offensive towards you, Mr. Composer? Should you become aggressive? Would that justify your attitude and language? Don't you know that musicians smile when they see things even less peculiar than a 22/8 time signature? I think you do know that, so please take it easy on other people smiles, as they are not offensive towards you personally, but towards a peculiar situation written on paper. BTW, modern scores are full of funny graphical things, like those Crumb scores. So what is offensive in smiling at a 22/8 time signature? Show me your arguments, besides the "I-hate-to-hear-that!" type of reaction. Here, in this discussion, the context was - time signatures, wasn't it? So, what else I could possible imply by my analogy between those two pieces, if not their "lengthy" phrases? And also - the similar approach of the composers to be friendly to musicians by providing them with shorter time signatures, so they don't get lost in counting to 66 or to 22.

Now please do explain to me, rationally, what is so wrong about my approach that would justify your outrageous post? Even if you hate the person who writes it and you hate his conclusions - why can't you address the issue and disregard the person who said it? It really isn't that hard. Remember: you don't know anything about me as a person, so stop making assumptions. Just stay on the topic and focus on the issue, strictly to the point. By all means, prove that everything I am saying is wrong! But to the point, not to the person. Point by point, not dismissing everything generally, as you did it so far. I could not find one single rational argument, to the point, in all your hate posts. So I am asking - how is that possible, Mr. Moderator? Please do calm yourself, and go on, expose the stupidity of all my statements - I will be the first to applaud you and to thank you for opening my eyes and make me less ignorant than I am. But for doing it - please forget about me, I do not exist. All that exists is some sentences on a computer screen. If you feel they are wrong, but you do not have rational arguments for what you feel, then simply ignore them. But when you say things like "you are wrong in all your counts" and "think before you spew" - well, that sounds to me pretty visceral for an intellectual who values credibility and authority.

You say "I found that comment insulting and in need of some correction", but you consistently fail to provide the "correction." What is the correction? And what is to be corrected? - Because you also fail to explain what would make my comment incorrect and even "insulting" to you. Define what you are talking about. When you call something : "••••", "spew", etc., why don't you point to that particular thing that you call that way? Also, it is de rigueur to put some arguments under those types of utterances. As a matter of fact, I believe that we should address each other with more urban terms - don't you think? Spew and •••• don't make one's arguments more convincing - on the contrary, I would say. Violence, even the verbal one, is not a sign of strength, is it?

Peace