Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Ideas and innovations in Indian classical music
Post Reply
SabashBale
Posts: 68
Joined: 09 Jan 2012, 08:37

Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by SabashBale »

That TS Kalyanaraman introduced the concept of dwi-madhyama ragas, which resulted in 36 new (and as yet unaccepted?) melakarta ragas is well known. Just to kindle my curiosity, I thought about introducing vivadi-tvam with G3 (antara gandharam) sharing space with a new madhyamam, which I will denote as M0 (in order to avoid confusion with the already existing M1 & M2 and also to signify that M0 is lower in pitch than M1). With this, we now have the following exhaustive possibilities for the purvangam part of a parent ragam's arohanam:

1) S R1 G1 M0 M1 (no P) > New chakra
2) S R1 G1 M0 M2 (no P) > New chakra
3) S R1 G1 M0 P ......... > New chakra
4) S R1 G1 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Indu and Rishi chakras
5) S R1 G1 M1 P ......... > Indu chakra
6) S R1 G1 M2 P ......... > Rishi chakra

7) S R1 G2 M0 M1 (no P) > New chakra
8) S R1 G2 M0 M2 (no P) > New chakra
9) S R1 G2 M0 P ......... > New chakra
10) S R1 G2 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Netra and Vasu chakras
11) S R1 G2 M1 P ......... > Netra chakra
12) S R1 G2 M2 P ......... > Vasu chakra

13) S R1 G3 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Netra and Vasu chakras
14) S R1 G3 M1 P ......... > Agni chakra
15) S R1 G3 M2 P ......... > Brahma chakra

16) S R2 G2 M0 M1 (no P) > New chakra
17) S R2 G2 M0 M2 (no P) > New chakra
18) S R2 G2 M0 P ......... > New chakra

19) S R2 G2 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Veda and Disi chakras
20) S R2 G2 M1 P ......... > Veda chakra
21) S R2 G2 M2 P ......... > Disi chakra

22) S R2 G3 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Bana and Rudra chakras
23) S R2 G3 M1 P ......... > Bana chakra
24) S R2 G3 M2 P ......... > Rudra chakra

25) S R1 G3 M1 M2 (no P) > Dwi-madhyama counterpart of the Rutu and Aditya chakras
26) S R1 G3 M1 P ......... > Rutu chakra
27) S R1 G3 M2 P ......... > Aditya chakra

We now have a total of 9 new chakras - all vivadi, but with chakras 2,3,8,9,17 and 18 having less vivadi-tam and (therefore) the potential for discovering new ragams? Would love to hear from experts about possibilities here. Or is this blasphemy?

Suryasriram
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 Sep 2015, 22:27

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by Suryasriram »

I think that would be a little harsh on one's ears wouldn't it? :?:

SabashBale
Posts: 68
Joined: 09 Jan 2012, 08:37

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by SabashBale »

.
Last edited by SabashBale on 22 Jan 2016, 22:11, edited 1 time in total.

SabashBale
Posts: 68
Joined: 09 Jan 2012, 08:37

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by SabashBale »

Ok. I figured out how to insert images. So, here goes:

The point I would like to make is that, given that a melakarta ragam has to use:
a) seven swaras
b) the achala swaras Sa and Pa, and
c) permit no more than 3 variants of the achala swaras
the original melakarta system of 72 ragams is complete. If you remove the restriction in the usage of Pa, then we get the 36 Dwi-madhyama ragas. However, this is not complete and this is what I indicated in my first post (which I probably should have articulated better). The nine new chakras with 54 new ragas now completes the set.

As for the musical or aural attributes of these new ragas, I worked it out using an Excel sheet. Here is an explanation of the scoring system I used. Take a raga, let us say Kanakangi. I defined two indices:
(i) the Proximity index 'P' which is simply the count of how many consecutive pairs of swaras have adjacent notes. For Kanakangi, we have S-R1, R1-G1, P-D1 and D1-N1, giving us a total proximity score P of 2.
(ii) the Jumpiness index 'J' which is defined using a jumpiness score for each consecutive pair of swaras. The jumpiness score is defined as the number of notes that separate the pair of swaras minus one, disallowing negative numbers. Thus, for Kanakangi, we have:
S-R1 (jumpiness score = 0)
R1-G1 (jumpiness score = 0)
G1-M1 (jumpiness score = 1)
M1-P (jumpiness score = 0)
P-D1 (jumpiness score = 0)
D1-N1 (jumpiness score = 0)
N1-S (jumpiness score = 1)
The Jumpiness index J is simply the sum of the jumpiness scores, which results in a value of 2 for this raga. The combined index 'C' is simply P+J and is equal to 6 for this raga.

Arguably, the lower the C value, the more pleasing the raga. Scoring all the ragas this way, including the new ones I proposed, we get the following tables.

Image

Image

Image

From the above tables, we observe the following:

1. As expected, ragas like Thodi, Natabhairavi, Kharaharapriya, Harikambodhi, Shankarabharanam and Kalyani have the lowest combined scores (C=2).

2. Other ragas that also have C=2, which one might not have expected, are Natakapriya, Kokilapriya, Gowrimanohari, Charukesi, Rishabapriya, and Vachaspati.

3. The Dwi-madhyama ragas Hanumashree, Natashree and Charushree also have C=2, suggesting potential for further exploration and development.

4. Ragas Tanashree, Hatashree and Rasikashree have the highest scores (C=8), consistent with their apparent unpleasantness.

5. Mayamalavagowla has C=6, yet is seemingly pleasant and has many Janya ragas.

6. Among the new ragas I proposed, there are three with C=8 and three with C=2.

Thus, these new ragas are not necessarily harsh, and the question I am asking is whether these ragas offer scope for development, exploration and elaboration?
Last edited by SabashBale on 23 Jan 2016, 05:53, edited 1 time in total.

Suryasriram
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 Sep 2015, 22:27

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by Suryasriram »

While you efforts are laudable, and I think I get the C=P+J, adding M0 will make the raga sound more like a Dvigandhara (and maybe Dvimadhyama as well) than a Trimadhyama or the concept of third madhyama as you put it.
It can be argued that pronouncing it as Ma would make it M0, but I I think we are all so conditioned from birth to sing Madhyama nothing lower than M1 (Shankarabharanam excluded), that this concept will be tough to adapt and even more tough to popularise - it is like the Vivadi-est if the Vivadis, if you get me. ;)

SabashBale
Posts: 68
Joined: 09 Jan 2012, 08:37

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by SabashBale »

I guess if you go by the scores, it is no more or less vivadi-ic than the ones that already exist. Course, it may be tough to adapt to and popularize since heresy always engenders an opposition first. What if one just tried to play any of these on an instrument? - just to avoid having to spell out the swara names?

Suryasriram
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 Sep 2015, 22:27

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by Suryasriram »

SabashBale wrote:What if one just tried to play any of these on an instrument? - just to avoid having to spell out the swara names?
Then they would be Dvigandhara Bhushanis.
Besides there is much more to raga then just perms and comms don't you think?

ramakriya
Posts: 1876
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 02:05

Re: Logical(?) Extension to Dwi-Madhyama Ragas

Post by ramakriya »

The concept is not entirely new:

In fact, in one of the earlier schemes of mELas ( I forget if it was Pandarika Vithala or someone else) , created a 4th variety of gAndhAra called Urdhwa gAndthara , which was higher than antara gAndhAra and was at the same place as shuddha madhyama. (Now this scheme calls for calling antara gAndhAra as one of the madhyamas).

Post Reply