Ana Sayfa
Yeni Mesajlar
Forumlarda Ara
Eser (Nota) Arşivi
Yeni Mesajlar
Kayıt Arşivi
Yeni Mesajlar
Köşe Yazıları
Yeni yazılar
Yeni yorumlar
Yazı dizisi
Yazıları ara
Ansiklopedi
Yeni maddeler
Yeni yorumlar
Yeni puanlamalar
Ansiklopedi'de ara
Bizimle Paylaşın!
Giriş Yap
Kayıt Ol
Türkçe (TR)
Dil Seçici
English (US)
Türkçe (TR)
Neler Yeni
Ara
Ara
Sadece başlıkları ara
Kullanıcı:
Yeni Mesajlar
Forumlarda Ara
Menü
Giriş Yap
Kayıt Ol
Install the app
Yükle
Ana Sayfa
Klasik Türk Mûsikîsi (Alaturka)
Müzik Sohbetleri
Bir Makam ve Diğer Makamın Sınıflandırılması Hakkında
JavaScript devre dışı. Daha iyi bir deneyim için, önce lütfen tarayıcınızda JavaScript'i etkinleştirin.
Çok eski bir web tarayıcısı kullanıyorsunuz. Bu veya diğer siteleri görüntülemekte sorunlar yaşayabilirsiniz..
Tarayıcınızı güncellemeli veya
alternatif bir tarayıcı
kullanmalısınız.
Konuya cevap cer
Mesaj
<blockquote data-quote="Sadikkara" data-source="post: 85928" data-attributes="member: 1605"><p>If we practically and generally say it, uşşak does a musical “sentence” resting on dügah at the beginning using rast as a supportive note, you can see in many songs or taksims. Then it may rest on the perde of uşşak. Then it settles on dügah again. Then it makes a sentence using acem but centered on neva. Then it returns to the dügah. As a Meyan/the middle section of the piece, the makam Muhayyer is easy to implement it could be anything there. Then when Meyan is done, you should complete it on dügah using acem and it ends there. The issue is about the scent. The example I gave is very general and for the people who listen this music, if not it doesnt make much sense. Even to us. The subject makam should be known by memorizing former pieces.</p><p></p><p>However, Hüseyni begins with a sentence resting on Hüseyni/Mi or using Dügah-Hüseyni or another dual relation depicting perde of Hüseyni. Most eye catching detail is it uses higher notes than mi generally and rests on mi. Than it gradually reaches dügah using neva çargah and so on. It could be direct as well. Also sperately it uses distant notes like la-mi sol-mi, do-sol in a distinct sharp melody. Like this.. This I would say probably unexistant in Uşşak, Im open to opposing arguments.</p><p></p><p>So, each known makam has its routes to follow and a spesicfic way of impression. Also it has a color/scent i.e. uşşak is not sharp like Hüseyni. Probably that its a higher pitch centered makam. Also for players, I can say the way you press notes and hit the pick is different. Its not by training but developes by listening. </p><p></p><p>All in all, I think difference btw makams are by default came trough different tribes of people into turkish music and the color/scent is repeated as its taken from them troughout the centuries and although some look very similar they kept their original tonalities. For example, Hicaz from city of Urfa and Trabzon, everything would look similar but the color; way of expression is totally different. I think this scent issue is by default. Its from the people who had them first. Like Hacı Arif Bey inventing Kürdilihicazkar, he found a new scent not only mixing the two makams but also defining its default sentences, texture, resting notes, the karar and so on. If one doesnt know his pieces its impossible to repeat as how he did it.</p><p></p><p>If we say they are not so distinct we would act against the analogy of makam music. Its generally even a single musical expression that should be done to implement or identify a makam. Thats the whole point. We could name blacksea hicaz and urfa hicaz as two different makams, the theory allows and supports us to do it in this way.</p><p></p><p>Uşşak, Hüseyni and all.. has its own default melodies and scent. This is understandable trough learning/memorizing these pieces as [USER=3556]@efrūḫte[/USER] mentioned in his first message up here.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sadikkara, post: 85928, member: 1605"] If we practically and generally say it, uşşak does a musical “sentence” resting on dügah at the beginning using rast as a supportive note, you can see in many songs or taksims. Then it may rest on the perde of uşşak. Then it settles on dügah again. Then it makes a sentence using acem but centered on neva. Then it returns to the dügah. As a Meyan/the middle section of the piece, the makam Muhayyer is easy to implement it could be anything there. Then when Meyan is done, you should complete it on dügah using acem and it ends there. The issue is about the scent. The example I gave is very general and for the people who listen this music, if not it doesnt make much sense. Even to us. The subject makam should be known by memorizing former pieces. However, Hüseyni begins with a sentence resting on Hüseyni/Mi or using Dügah-Hüseyni or another dual relation depicting perde of Hüseyni. Most eye catching detail is it uses higher notes than mi generally and rests on mi. Than it gradually reaches dügah using neva çargah and so on. It could be direct as well. Also sperately it uses distant notes like la-mi sol-mi, do-sol in a distinct sharp melody. Like this.. This I would say probably unexistant in Uşşak, Im open to opposing arguments. So, each known makam has its routes to follow and a spesicfic way of impression. Also it has a color/scent i.e. uşşak is not sharp like Hüseyni. Probably that its a higher pitch centered makam. Also for players, I can say the way you press notes and hit the pick is different. Its not by training but developes by listening. All in all, I think difference btw makams are by default came trough different tribes of people into turkish music and the color/scent is repeated as its taken from them troughout the centuries and although some look very similar they kept their original tonalities. For example, Hicaz from city of Urfa and Trabzon, everything would look similar but the color; way of expression is totally different. I think this scent issue is by default. Its from the people who had them first. Like Hacı Arif Bey inventing Kürdilihicazkar, he found a new scent not only mixing the two makams but also defining its default sentences, texture, resting notes, the karar and so on. If one doesnt know his pieces its impossible to repeat as how he did it. If we say they are not so distinct we would act against the analogy of makam music. Its generally even a single musical expression that should be done to implement or identify a makam. Thats the whole point. We could name blacksea hicaz and urfa hicaz as two different makams, the theory allows and supports us to do it in this way. Uşşak, Hüseyni and all.. has its own default melodies and scent. This is understandable trough learning/memorizing these pieces as [USER=3556]@efrūḫte[/USER] mentioned in his first message up here. [/QUOTE]
Alıntı ekle...
Kullanıcı Doğrulaması
Gönder
Ana Sayfa
Klasik Türk Mûsikîsi (Alaturka)
Müzik Sohbetleri
Bir Makam ve Diğer Makamın Sınıflandırılması Hakkında
Üst
Alt