Messages
131
Reactions
201
Hi! Unfortunately, this is quite a difficult question to answer, for a number of reasons. There are many different types of ensembles that exist for different reasons, and they therefore play in very different styles. What historical period are you most interested in?

Edit: I do agree with @Sadikkara that these masters are definitely good choices for listening/understanding today's performance practice. However, keeping in mind that you wanted to see older repertoire, I wanted to ask if you wanted to see some ensembles that do reconstructive work and try their best to replicate older performance practice.
 
Last edited:
Messages
10
Reactions
13
Hi! Unfortunately, this is quite a difficult question to answer, for a number of reasons. There are many different types of ensembles that exist for different reasons, and they therefore play in very different styles. What historical period are you most interested in?

Edit: I do agree with @Sadikkara that these masters are definitely good choices for listening/understanding today's performance practice. However, keeping in mind that you wanted to see older repertoire, I wanted to ask if you wanted to see some ensembles that do reconstructive work and try their best to replicate older performance practice.
I want to see ensembles that I can use as examples of how this music should be played.
 
Messages
131
Reactions
201
I want to see ensembles that I can use as examples of how this music should be played.
Then Sadikkara's suggestions are a good start, for instrumental music especially. However, it is pretty important to keep in mind that makam music has changed throughout the centuries, so while the modern repertoire can be very nicely played with this type of performance practice, pre-19th century works do not function the same way.

A demonstration of this:
The two pieces I have attached are, in fact, the same piece. The reason they are different is that one had been transcribed soon after the composer (Derviş Mustafa) composed the piece, around the 1690s. However, the piece also got transmitted through oral transmission, changed with the aesthetic shifts of the next century before accidentally being transcribed again, and mistaken for a different piece, a century and a half later. Despite the fact that this is all one piece, these two can not, in any plausible way, be played at the same tempo, the same amount of melodic ornamentation, nor the same performance practice. (More on this on Owen Wright's paper, Mais qui était 'Le compositeur du Péchrev dans le makam Nihavend'?)

I understand that you want a straightforward answer, but that answer does not exist. Necdet Yaşar, Niyazi Sayın and İhsan Özgen were great masters of their craft, but they were not music historians. You can not play Baroque pieces and Modern pieces in the Western repertoire the same way, and this is quite a similar situation.

However, if you still want a relatively simple (yet incomplete) answer, go for the performance style of early 20th century masters, but increase the tempo of older pieces until they reach a similar level of melodic density as the new repertoire. I'd already given you an assortment of pieces from the 17th century, and this was my guiding principle in my suggested tempos.
 

Download all Attachments

Messages
105
Reactions
186
1) For instrumental pieces “Türk Sazları Beşlisi” is a good one.

2) The records of “Tanburi Cemil Bey”.

3) Radio programs of Kani Karaca singing “Takım”s.

4) Bekir Sıdkı Sezgin, Hafız Sami, Hafız Kemal as a singer.

5) Early recordings of Münir Nureddin Selçuk.

6)Safiye Ayla, Sabite Tur Gülerman, as a singer.

7)For religious music, the youtube channel “Nağme-i Aşk” is one and only. To my aware.

Present ensembles would be:
1) “Ahmed Şahinle Meşk”, “Makamat”
2) Özer Özel - Kemal Karaöz “duo”.
 
Messages
96
Reactions
137
YouTube
link
Then Sadikkara's suggestions are a good start, for instrumental music especially. However, it is pretty important to keep in mind that makam music has changed throughout the centuries, so while the modern repertoire can be very nicely played with this type of performance practice, pre-19th century works do not function the same way.

A demonstration of this:
The two pieces I have attached are, in fact, the same piece. The reason they are different is that one had been transcribed soon after the composer (Derviş Mustafa) composed the piece, around the 1690s. However, the piece also got transmitted through oral transmission, changed with the aesthetic shifts of the next century before accidentally being transcribed again, and mistaken for a different piece, a century and a half later. Despite the fact that this is all one piece, these two can not, in any plausible way, be played at the same tempo, the same amount of melodic ornamentation, nor the same performance practice. (More on this on Owen Wright's paper, Mais qui était 'Le compositeur du Péchrev dans le makam Nihavend'?)

I understand that you want a straightforward answer, but that answer does not exist. Necdet Yaşar, Niyazi Sayın and İhsan Özgen were great masters of their craft, but they were not music historians. You can not play Baroque pieces and Modern pieces in the Western repertoire the same way, and this is quite a similar situation.

However, if you still want a relatively simple (yet incomplete) answer, go for the performance style of early 20th century masters, but increase the tempo of older pieces until they reach a similar level of melodic density as the new repertoire. I'd already given you an assortment of pieces from the 17th century, and this was my guiding principle in my suggested tempos.
Merhaba.

049_nihavend_devrikebir.pdf

This is the first time I have seen the above sheet music.
Is it the same as below?

Hisar Beste "Cam lalindir senin ayine ruy-i enverin"(TRT Repertuar Numarası:2710) in Itri(Buhurizade Mustafa Efendi)'s work exists.
If you don't mind, could you please let me know?
When did the Usul of Devr-i Kebir double and the tempo slow down?
 
Messages
131
Reactions
201
Merhaba.

049_nihavend_devrikebir.pdf

This is the first time I have seen the above sheet music.
Is it the same as below?

Hisar Beste "Cam lalindir senin ayine ruy-i enverin"(TRT Repertuar Numarası:2710) in Itri(Buhurizade Mustafa Efendi)'s work exists.
If you don't mind, could you please let me know?
When did the Usul of Devr-i Kebir double and the tempo slow down?
You are right, that piece being played is this Nihâvend Peşrev, although I would be inclined to play it faster than how Bezmârâ is playing it.

On Itrî's Hisar Beste, that piece hadn't been notated until the 19th century, so it's likely that it reflects a mix of 18th and 19th century conventions. That is why it is in 28/4, and has more melodic ornamentation than you would expect.

On Devr-i Kebîr, the usûl likely had three different forms throughout the centuries:
1) A 7-beat form, (3+2+2), equivalent to what we now call 'Devr-i Hindi'. This is found in the earliest of pieces (16th century).
2) A 14-beat form, (3+2+2+3+2+2) found in most of the Cantemir repertoire.
3) A 28-beat form, (too long to write here) found in late 18th-19th century repertoire.

The slowdown of tempo was an uneven and protracted process; but it likely started in the late 17th century, with the most complex pieces in the Cantemir repertoire. It seems to have continued until the start of the 19th century.
 
Messages
96
Reactions
137
YouTube
link
You are right, that piece being played is this Nihâvend Peşrev, although I would be inclined to play it faster than how Bezmârâ is playing it.

On Itrî's Hisar Beste, that piece hadn't been notated until the 19th century, so it's likely that it reflects a mix of 18th and 19th century conventions. That is why it is in 28/4, and has more melodic ornamentation than you would expect.

On Devr-i Kebîr, the usûl likely had three different forms throughout the centuries:
1) A 7-beat form, (3+2+2), equivalent to what we now call 'Devr-i Hindi'. This is found in the earliest of pieces (16th century).
2) A 14-beat form, (3+2+2+3+2+2) found in most of the Cantemir repertoire.
3) A 28-beat form, (too long to write here) found in late 18th-19th century repertoire.

The slowdown of tempo was an uneven and protracted process; but it likely started in the late 17th century, with the most complex pieces in the Cantemir repertoire. It seems to have continued until the start of the 19th century.
Çok detaylı anlatımınız için çok teşekkür ederim.
 
Messages
3
Reactions
0
You are right, that piece being played is this Nihâvend Peşrev, although I would be inclined to play it faster than how Bezmârâ is playing it.

On Itrî's Hisar Beste, that piece hadn't been notated until the 19th century, so it's likely that it reflects a mix of 18th and 19th century conventions. That is why it is in 28/4, and has more melodic ornamentation than you would expect.

On Devr-i Kebîr, the usûl likely had three different forms throughout the centuries:
1) A 7-beat form, (3+2+2), equivalent to what we now call 'Devr-i Hindi'. This is found in the earliest of pieces (16th century).
2) A 14-beat form, (3+2+2+3+2+2) found in most of the Cantemir repertoire.
3) A 28-beat form, (too long to write here) found in late 18th-19th century repertoire.

The slowdown of tempo was an uneven and protracted process; but it likely started in the late 17th century, with the most complex pieces in the Cantemir repertoire. It seems to have continued until the start of the 19th century.
14/4 or 28/8 at Neyzen.com?
 
Top Bottom