| Pages:
1
2 |
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Newly Invented Instrument: Nautilauta
Hello again — Just one week left to help fund this little rebel — we can use a dollar if that's what you can give — thanks!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/610528987/the-nautilauta
Hi everyone - please check out this Kickstarter project to crowd-fund the prototype of the Nautilauta, a new fretted musical
instrument designed for playing all kinds of Near Eastern musics:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/610528987/the-nautilauta
If you know someone who might be interested in it, please pass the link on!
Thanks!
Eric
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
I dunno, right off the bat, his Rast is D, and his Neva is A. This shows some of the issues are maybe tricky. Tying movable frets on an oud or a lauta
seems like a simple solution, if frets are needed.
Crowding 10 strings into a narrow neck makes playing chords very hard, it's largely what limits the oud mostly to 2 note chords.
|
|
|
Sasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 95
Registered: 1-12-2003
Location: San Diego, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood.
|
|
Knowing the gentleman (and his background), I expect that Eric knows exactly what he's on about... 
~Sasha
|
|
|
Jono Oud N.Z
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1119
Registered: 12-14-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
Wow!!
Cool instrument, what a good idea.
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hi all - thanks for the replies! I personally play more often with Arab-based ensembles than Turkish ones these days and have asked the luthier to
prepare the soundboard for a CGDGC tuning, where the lowest tone is kaba/qarar rast (the 'cello's low C) - the open strings are thus: kaba/qarar rast
- yegâh/yakah - dügâh/dukah - neva/nawa - gerdaniye/kirdan (this, of course, is true also at the Turkish level DAEAD, whose increased tension I
hope the instrument will also be able to bear).
Apart from the fact that uds had 5 courses for quite a long time, the Western cittern is a five double-coursed instrument hundreds of years old and, I
think, used primarily for chording (see http://www.atlasofpluckedinstruments.com/cittern.htm) - very easy to play even 5 course barre chords on. I have designed the Nautilauta so that
the scale (therefor the neck) is long enough to accommodate all the needed frets (i.e., for the intonational idiosyncrasies of Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi,
Levantine and Egypytian maqām musics, as well as for Persian dastgāh) - having no less than 3mm space between any two frets (and only one
pair as small as that) - but not so long that chording is difficult even in first position (though that is in some ways dependent on the tuning).
I appreciate your curiosity and support!
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Just Intonation enthusiasts may want to look at this chart for the Nautilauta's fretting pattern:
http://www.ericederer.com/misc/instruments/images/BEST-nauti-RATIOS...
Enjoy!
E.
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2916
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
This is interesting! I haven't had a chance to go through the whole thing, but a few observations/questions:
In the Turkish system, you say that Iraq is 5:4 and Segah is 5:3.
These correspond exactly to the standard Just Intonation major 3rd and major 6th used (still) in Western music.
Yet it seems to me that many Turkish performers (especially on older recordings) play them lower.
I'm curious about the use of the 1024:729 low Augmented fourth. I'm not sure I've encountered it. Logically, the analogous interval to Iraq would
be 54:32.
Also curious that the 64:45 just Gb is included, but that the Pythagorean F# of 729:512 is omitted. It's super high, so not surprising it's not so
useful, but still curious due to the high prevalence of other Pythagorean intervals.
Can't figure out the 22:15 Gb. Not too familiar with Ottoman theory, so I'd be interested to know the usage context of 22:15 and 64:45.
Interesting that 7:6 is included, this is considered by some to be the "blues" or sub-saharan African minor 3rd.
Thanks for posting this, I am fascinated by this stuff.
Have you seen the movable-fret guitar by some Turkish guy, I can't recall his name?
|
|
|
abc123xyz
Oud Junkie
Posts: 114
Registered: 5-17-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Tolgahan Çoğulu.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYK_PF9WTRE .
David
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2916
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
That's it. I think it's brilliant (I know it wasn't all his idea, but still great).
Making intonation adjustable would be really practical IMO.
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Brian's Q's re: ratios
Brian, thanks for your questions — here we go toward some answers!
I like unaccompanied choirs, string ensembles, and horn quintets as much as the next guy, but except for that sort of exceptional small group of
fine-tunable instruments I wonder in what sense we may say that Just intonation is standard in Western music? The standard in recent centuries, of
course, has been 12-tone equal temperament, whose major third is some 14¢ higher than 5:4 and whose major sixth is about 16¢ sharper than 5:3 —
helping JI return as *a* standard in Western music is one of the reasons for creating an instrument such as the Nautilauta!
Re: segâh and ırak:
Of course unlike most tones in a makam system, ırak and segâh — or for that matter any tone acting as the first degree of a segâh trichord,
second degree of an uşşak/hüseyni genus, or the third degree of a rast genus in any transposition — is performed within a range of ratios
in accord with the idiosyncrasies of the makam and the general direction of melodic movement of the gesture in question; in fact there are but few
makam-s with these tones that do not also employ the lower part of that range (though written as though a 256:243 half step below) as a leading tone.
Obviously we may expect discrepancies between theory and practice, but it is worth noting that the first major Turkish theorist of the modern period,
Rauf Yekta (a dervish, singer, neyzen and tanbur player as well as musicologist), wishing to make an association between the music and Pythagorean
theory, first introduced the (stable/standard/upper-end) interval as 8192/6561 (about 2¢ flat of 5:4), but conceded that in the practice of his day
it was 5:4 (Yekta 1922 [1913]: 2947-62). The next most influential theorists Suphi Ezgi (see 1935-53) and H.S. Arel (see 1991 [1943-48]), whose
mission was to simplify the theory and make it appear related to Western classical music, insisted on the Pythagorean interpretation, but evidently at
the expense of earlier normative understandings among performers (see Ederer 2011 Chapter 3).
As for practice, I would only say that although my recent PhD dissertation (“The Theory and Praxis of Makam in Classical Turkish Music 1910-2010”
UCSB 2011) had goals other than defining interval sizes per se, I did get to analyze a couple dozen rast taksim recordings spanning the 20th century
(see 4 transcriptions in Chapter 5) and many in several other makam-s using those intervals, and I think it is fair to place 5:4 as the top of the
aforementioned range (ırak as 5:4 from yegâh and segâh as 5:4 from rast, plus whatever transpositions are needed) for the entire period during
which there have been recordings of Turkish music (i.e., since 1910). As for the lower end of the range in Turkish practice, I would say that there
are certainly situations when the 13:12 may be used, though in most instances I prefer the slightly higher 12:11, even though I left it off the
Nautilauta in order to accommodate what I heard as a 11:10 more appropriate as Syrian and Egyptian high-ish sikah-s. Having played for a decade in a
couple of Arab music ensembles, I find 13:12 about right most of the time as the lower-end sikah or iraq (etc.), though it certainly can go as low as
the 16:15 in descending passages in Bayyati etc.
As for 1024:729, I would prefer 45:32 (= 9/8 x 5/4 — about 2¢ higher — I’m guessing that’s what you meant by “54:32”?) for both Turkish
and Arab but it is needed for the “sori” 4th degree in Persian music and I could not fit both frets on a fingerboard of this size.
As for 64:45 vs. 729:512, they are also only 2¢ apart; there is neither room nor a need for both. But looking at it more closely I think you are
right (if you meant that the former is more appropriate), not because of Mr. Pythagoras but because 9/8 x 81/64 = 729:512.
Let me say that our man Pythagoras was a fine mathematician and Greek-language interpreter of Mesopotamian music theories dating from millennia before
his birth, but also a wacky cult leader with fetishes regarding beans and the number 3 — as far as I’m concerned the Turkish system (which,
obviously, I am taking as the norm against which to describe the other music culture’s systems represented on the nautilauta) is explained in its
most plausibly simplest Just Intonation form as a 5-limit system; all of the 3-limit intervals you refer to as “Pythagorean” here are of course
also 5-limit intervals, and they appear here in that capacity when used in that system — but I simply can’t remember why I had chosen 64:45 — I
think I’ll change it!
re: 22:15:
Other than at the very beginning and very end of the Ottoman Empire describing intervals in terms of ratios was pretty much abandoned, so I wouldn’t
speak of any of these choices in terms of “Ottoman theory”! But this problem is for good or ill a thing far from theory: the fret(s) that would
and should be there are 40:27 for maqam and 13:9 for dastgah — but I find by tying them on my lâvta (also 68 cm scale length) that they both impede
getting quickly and efficiently to the very much used dügâh/dukah/3:2 fret; the 22:15 is simply the most convenient compromise for the virtually
unused dik zirgüle that I could find!
re: 7:6:
Yes; 7:6 (e.g. from yegâh) is not there for 7:6’s sake, but to provide a preferable 7:4 “minor seventh” from the 3:2 below the open string
(e.g., from rast) — dik buselik simply isn’t used often enough melodically to keep it at 125:72.
I have seen some videos of Tolgahan’s guitar — we haven’t met yet but I bet we’ll have some interests in common! For me his solution is too
much trouble all the way around but I wish his project the best — short of switching to baritone-length guitars maybe it’s the best solution for
classical guitarists. For adjustable frets, I like ‘em tied, but there’s something about metal frets and high tension metal strings (not to
mention chords!) that I miss — hopefully not for very much longer!
Thanks again for your great feedback!
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Actually, Brian, there's probably room for both 13:9 for the Persian and 45:32 as nim zirgüle, getting rid of 1024:729 — let me look into that!
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Oh - 1024:729 is also there because it's a 256:243 half-step above the 4:3 (4:3 x 256:243 = 1024:729).
If we substitute 13:9 then that "half step" is 27:26 — I have to think on that a bit.
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
OK - got halfway to sleep and remembered that 64:45 is there because it's 16:15 up from 4:3 — in other words the frets round about there are an
attempt to reproduce the most systemically useful ratios happening a 4th below.
If I were designing a general scale for just one system that's how I'd go about it: fill the space between 1:1 and 4:3 with whatever was most useful,
then try to reproduce that pattern at the 9:8, the 4:3 and the 3:2 (NB sometimes overlapping to make interesting new ratios) — but the nautilauta
fretting is an attempt to merge the overlapping utility of the tones of 4 general scales in the same limited space, so... you can see the compromises
at work...
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
With clarity like this, who needs murky?
G'morning! (Nothing like a couple hours sleep to clear the mind, eh?)
So, 22:15 is there because it was the most feasible "segâh" for transpositions from the 32:27 and 4:3 frets below (at a distance of 99:80 and 11:10,
respectively) — the 99:80 "neutral 3rd" is one of those "surprise!" intervals that are going to make the first nautilauta a safari to get into. But
if 22:15 is my choice then there's little space for 13:9 or 40:27 without messing with the ease-of-use of 3:2/dügâh, so... uh... coffee.
Thanks for helping me clarify it!
E.
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2916
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Plum_Pasha  | Brian, thanks for your questions — here we go toward some answers!
I like unaccompanied choirs, string ensembles, and horn quintets as much as the next guy, but except for that sort of exceptional small group of
fine-tunable instruments I wonder in what sense we may say that Just intonation is standard in Western music? The standard in recent centuries, of
course, has been 12-tone equal temperament, whose major third is some 14¢ higher than 5:4 and whose major sixth is about 16¢ sharper than 5:3 —
helping JI return as *a* standard in Western music is one of the reasons for creating an instrument such as the Nautilauta! |
Thanks for the detailed response. Of course 12TET is the instrumental standard, but JI is still an obvious reference. Even when all the instruments
are 12TET (good) singers are singing closer to JI most of the time, with various compromises when necessary.
In jazz contexts, trumpet and saxophone players are generally hewing closer to JI than 12TET, again with compromises as necessary. In big-band music,
woodwind and brass sections are playing close to pure JI most of the time.
I say it's "standard" in the sense that given no context to interfere with it, Western musicians still gravitate toward it, and both musicians and
listeners generally consider it to sound more "in tune".
Of course, it depends--if the musical context demands equal temperament (certain compositions by Brahms, Chopin, Liszt, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, for
example), then it is what will be used and what will sound most natural. Heavily chromatic passages tend to sound odd with variable size half-steps,
and symmetrical scales and modulations also present strangely in JI.
| Quote: |
As for 1024:729, I would prefer 45:32 (= 9/8 x 5/4 — about 2¢ higher — I’m guessing that’s what you meant by “54:32”?) for both Turkish
and Arab but it is needed for the “sori” 4th degree in Persian music and I could not fit both frets on a fingerboard of this size.
|
Oops, you're right. Sorry for the typo. Interesting that 1024:729 is needed for Persian music, but 45:32 is needed for Hindustani music. I wonder
at what point they diverged (though 2¢ is as close to negligible as you can get while still being perceptible).
Of course I understand that you can't simply use Yekah as the reference, since it is not the tonal center of all makam.
Interestingly, Arab transcriptions of Ottoman pieces reflect the issues regarding the 5:4 Iraq issue. Older (pre-1960) transcriptions tend to match
up with the "name" but use the more typically Arab ratios, while newer ones often designate the same ratio, which in Arabic music would not be the
same name.
Not sure if it was clear what I meant there, so here's an example.
An old Arab transcription of Samai Shad Araban, for example, will use the segah note just like a Turkish one, even though it would be performed
lower.
A newer transcription will often designate the equivalent to 5:3, even though an Arab would never consider it to be segah. That way, it sounds more
like Turkish practice, but from the Arab perspective the maqam has changed.
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Right, right - well, that's sort of the purpose of mixing all the systems — so that everyone can find their "sikah" and still call it that, etc.,
yeah!
I think it's exactly the same instant human preference for the simpler ratios that made ca. 1913 Turkish musicians (and everyone since) dig 5:4 over
8192/6561 — *of course* we'd play and sing in JI if so many of our instruments weren't telling us not to.
You know, I should officially retract the idea that Persian needs 1024:729 — although I have seen that as a description of the "sori" of the 4th
degree, I think really that should be 18:13 — I just couldn't fit that fret in there; 1024:729 is there as the 256:243 above the 4:3 fret, basically
to be able to play Kurd on rast and related makam-s at the 5th position — sorry for the confusion!
|
|
|
mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
Great discussion, and best of luck with your project! I'm really interested in reading your dissertation!
Take care,
mavrothi
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thanks Mavrothi!
The dissertation is for sale over at ProQuest (http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb) — I think it's like $40 (for 653 pages!). They had promised me that the 8 DVDs of taksim videos — 5 hours
worth, half of them with the artists' analysis as subtitles! — would be included but unfortunately they have as yet managed to biff that promise. So
I put up the videos at a link from this page:
http://www.ericederer.com/diss/diss.html
But for copyright reasons I had to password protect it — the username and password are found in the diss — sorry! I feel obligated not to give
them away, but since I gave away a few pdf copies in the last few months, I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PREVENT ANYONE WHO ALREADY HAS A COPY FROM SHARING IT
WITH YOU IF THEY SHOULD SEE THIS AND FELT LIKE SHARING. (hint hint)
I would also be remiss not to mention that a pdf copy of the dissertation is one of the rewards for funding the Nautilauta project!
Thanks for your support!
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
SO! After considering Brian's questions I have decided to make a couple of changes to the fretting scheme (see http://www.ericederer.com/misc/instruments/images/BEST-nauti-RATIOS... again):
There are now frets for 18:13 and 13:9 so that 16 of the 17 exact Persian tones are available, and 40:27 (= 4:3 + 10:9) is the new dik zirgüle/tik
zirkulah while the somewhat anomalous 22:15 is gone. Essentially a Syrian-as-averaged version of "sikah" up from the rast at the 4:3 was replaced in
favor of a Turkish version and two Persian tones. I think it's a good swap and not too hard on the fingertips!
Thanks for your input! It feels like a little United Nations, over here!
E.
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Update — I have been convinced by Dr. Ozan Yarman to put a fret at 243:128 — this now completes the set for all Persian intervals and gives us
that ratio as hicaz/hijaz for all makam/maqam systems represented.
Better and better, folks — your input is valued!
Thanks,
Eric
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hey all! Here's a new graphic (without ratios!) giving a basic demonstration of the issues involved in merging the four intonational systems involved
in the Nautilauta: http://www.ericederer.com/misc/instruments/images/4-systems.jpg
(info on it is now at the bottom of the Kickstarter page: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/610528987/the-nautilauta)
Thanks for all the eyeballs, folks!
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hey all — I decided to go ahead and put a fret at 14:9 (as Arab "nim kurd" — also usable as a low "nihavend perdesi"), and to change 11:10 for
12:11 — I like it better and for my ear it works well for both Turkish and Syrian/Iraqi. For lack of space, however, the analogues of 12:11 in
higher positions (i.e., 27:22, 16:11 and 18:11) will have to be approximated by their 13-limit partners (39:32, 13:9 and 13:8 — about 12¢ lower,
each of them). Whee!
Check out the whole scheme here: http://www.ericederer.com/misc/instruments/images/ratios-nautilauta...
Again thanks for your interest!
|
|
|
Arto
Oud Junkie
Posts: 120
Registered: 4-1-2006
Location: Finland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Great name! "Nauti lauta" in Finnish could be translated roughly as "Enjoy the Plank"! 
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
I love it, Arto — I hope we make our goal so we can all enjoy that plank! Thanks!
While I'm here ... I see that this page has been looked at many hundreds of times since I put it up and I want to thank everyone on the Forum for
their feedback and support...
...but as of today (Monday, Feb. 13) there are 15 days left and the project still needs about $2000 to get the first nautilauta built — I realize
how tight everyone's money situation is these days, but even if you only know someone or some other list or forum where people might be interested in
this — even just your Facebook, etc. — I would *really* appreciate it if you could pass along the Kickstarter link (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/610528987/the-nautilauta) — again, many thanks!
Eric "that unemployed ethnomusicologist with the seafood-shaped mandocello thingy" Ederer
|
|
|
Plum_Pasha
Oud Maniac
Posts: 73
Registered: 5-31-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
9 days left, folks — nobody wants to chuck $5 at it, see if it sticks? Last day to fund the Nautilauta prototype is February 29!
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
