Could someone tell me why the harmonium is a terrible instrument? for sentimental reasons, i have recently requested my mother to bring my grandmom's harmonium as i am learning hindustani classical and it is my teacher's preferred instrument. all I know is that harmonium is either foreign or modified from the accordion and was introduced in the 19th century to India. I am interested to know what are the deficiencies versus say a Shruti box
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Krish Ashok <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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" > > > >
