On 22-Mar-09, at 9:01 PM, Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote:
Hello silklister,
I am hoping that the many clever people on this list can provide me
with
some credible resources examining the major theoretical and practical
differences between Indian and Western music, particularly the
classical
forms of each. I'm just an enthusiastic n00b, but some of what I've
gathered so far:
Having suffered through Carnatic Classical music (on the violin) for
about a decade and a half, here are a few of my observations (apart
from yours, all of which I agree with, even the Harmonium bit)
1. Indian classical music generally involves much more improvisation
than Western Classical, where the most leeway a performer has is
restricted to interpretations in terms of tempo and other acoustic
characteristics such as tremolo, sustain etc. A composition in Indian
classical music is at most a loosely defined template for extensive
improvisation.
2. Rhythm in Indian classical music has much more variety. Time
signatures of 5/4, 7/4 and even 9/4 are pretty common.
3. While key changes are uncommon, they are not unheard of. In
Carnatic concerts, one particular key change (to the fourth) is
reasonably commonplace for certain kinds of compositions. For example,
if a male vocalist generally sings in the key of C, he will shift to F
for a song like "Krishna Nee Begane Baaro".
4. The role of accompanying artistes (such as a violinist or a
harmonium player) is very different from that of a western orchestra.
A violinist in a Carnatic concert provides alternative improvisations
for the Aalaapana (which is an exploration of the Raaga) and Kalpana
Swara (which is an exploration of the raga set to beat) and also
Niraval(explorations of actual song phrases), but does not stop at
just doing that. The violinist still follows the vocalist, note for
note when he is singing. There is also an unspoken rule that the
accompanist shall not outdo the vocalist in musical creativity. It is
considered rude to do so.
5. Indian Classical music has generally had an uneasy relationship
with technology. My grandmother, who is 90, still reminisces about
some of the performers of her age, who could hold forth without
microphones. The acoustics at most concerts is still fairly atrocious,
and it is perfectly acceptable for vocalists to clear their throats,
percussionists to constantly tune their instruments (by beating them
with a smooth stone, no less). In fact among Carnatic vocalists, voice
training is not very common. Creativity and improvisation is valued
more than a sonorous voice. Some of the "stalwarts" such as Semmangudi
Srinivasa Iyer had voices that could, rather literally, fall in the
genre "Industrial"
