JavaScript devre dışı. Daha iyi bir deneyim için, önce lütfen tarayıcınızda JavaScript'i etkinleştirin.

Konuya cevap cer

Mesaj: <blockquote data-quote="ZaphodB" data-source="post: 88063" data-attributes="member: 2777">Thank you for the interesting information, [USER=393]@orkun zafer özgelen[/USER]. Come to think of it, your initial remark about the ney being Nasır Dede's reference could by itself account for the fact that he didn't find it necessary to conceptualize and indicate Dik Kürdi as a separate note, even if this flatter inflection was in all likelihood already in use during his time. Perhaps if a tanburi had written a treatise at that time instead, he would have indicated the necessity of moving the Segâh fret up or down for certain makams, or adding an additional Uşşak/Dik Kürdi fret.The key reason I suspect that something like the küçük mücennep/büyük mücennep distinction of Rauf Yekta and Arel-Ezgi could have already been in effect during the late 18th century lies in the style of Nasır Dede's contemporary and student İsmail Dede. For example, "Yine bir Gülnihal" being performed with the same inflection of Segâh as "Ey büt-i nev eda" wouldn't make sense. The Segâh note in the Rast şarkı needs to be no flatter than the modern intonation, as the melody would sound very awkward in the modern Arab/Iranian intonation, which only use the quartertone flat Segâh. On the other hand, the Hicaz şarkı can perhaps sound fine with the quartertone flat Segâh as the 2nd and a slightly sharp Uzzâl as the 3rd degree, which the old system seems to imply, but the modern intonation still seems more style-appropriate from the modern-day perspective. I wonder how this particular melody or other Hicaz melodies would be spelled in Hampartsum notation?</blockquote>

Kullanıcı Doğrulaması