Re: [Shaku] Chidori no Kyoku, kaete question: Notational Atavism

Hi David and all
If I may I'd like to add some thoughts here:

--- David Wheeler <shakudavid@gmail.com> wrote:

> Historically, this notation system did not use meri
> indications because=20
> the scale in use, which determined the correct pitch
> (meri or kari) for=20
> those notes in question, was understood by the
> musicians so that it was=20
> not an issue.

Actually the old Chikuyuusha notation does contain
meri and kari marks sometimes. As you say, there are
rules of the sankyoku music, and so as long as the
notes are following the usual patterns of the scales,
there is no need to write meri or kari. However, where
the music departs from the usual scale patterns, then
they are marked.

So, for example in the old Chidori no Kyoku score, the
second phrase reads:
"ha ro ro ri ro tsu-kari chi-kari re re"

If it read merely
"ha ro ro ri ro tsu chi re re"
then the meaning would be
"ha ro ro ri ro tsu-meri chi-meri re re"
So, they must write the kari marks.

Then the last chi of the piece is not marked at all.
Since it is preceded by hi and followed with re, it is
therefore chi-meri. It is actually very logical.

I would guess a large reason for changing this
notation system, and writing in all the (previously
implied) meris and karis, would be because there was
new music which did not follow these rules of
traditional sankyoku. This notation is really for this
genre. So it makes quite a mess for other genres
following other scale patterns, thus necessitating
notes to be more explicit.

> So the solution was
> to write a kari=20
> chi, which would automatically be raised to ri no
> meri, since a=20
> kari-chi does not exist in the scale where this
> situation arises.=20
> (nowadays, kari, or oo(-kari) is written next to the
> chi to tell us=20
> when to raise it (sometimes).

This brings an interesting question. Why not merely
write ri-meri? And furthermore, is there any
difference between ri-meri and chi-kari?

First of all I am not sure what you are meaning by
chi-kari. I would think of chi-kari as having 2
possible pitches. One is that of chi, as in the
beginning of Chidori, the kari to indicate it is not
meri. Then, in this context you now bring up, I would
think of kari-ing chi so that the pitch is
approximately that of ri-meri.

It may be worthy of note here that that pitch is
difficult to get, but, on the older shakuhachi (such
as were used at the time of that notation) chi was
often sharp, and so chi-kari was easier to reach than
with most modern shakuhachi. This has been suggested
by some as a reason why the chi hole was kept sharp.

So if we take in this context chi-kari to be
approximately the same pitch as ri-meri, and, in your
next example, ro to be the same pitch as tsu meri, we
might ask, are they equal, identical?=20

If we are to assume that what is being notated is
pitch, it could appear bizarre that "ro" is written
where we should play "tsu-meri". Or "chi" where we
play "ri-meri". But I suggest that they are not
referring to pitch as much as they are referring to
tone colour.

Tsu-meri and ri-meri are clearly dark. Chi-kari is
very bright. This is a big difference. To understand
this, we must look at the scales:

A common scale:
ro tsu-meri tsu re chi ri-meri ri

Change key:
ri ro-meri ro-kari tsu re chi-meri chi-kari=20

Of great importance in this is this pattern:
bright dark bright bright bright dark bright

This is the same reason why re-meri exists.

Furthermore, if you would really like to push
yourselves, you may try to play with precise pitch.
The interval between ro and tsu-meri is not 100 cents
as it might be if you try to imitate it with a piano.
It is less. Most commonly it seems to be somewhere
around 75 cents. This applies to all the meri notes.=20

Now, seeing as chi-kari is not a meri note, it should
not be played as a 75 cent interval. I would suggest
trying about 100 cents. The same applies for ro-kari.
If you play it dark and with a 75 cent interval, I
would call it tsu-meri. I see it as being written as
"ro" because it is closer in nature to ro, being
bright (whereas tsu-meri is dark, as so more different
in nature, if tone colour is primary). Moreover, to
aquire that tone colour, the fingering is had better
be ro fingering or thereabouts. Thus the notation is
about tone colour and fingering, rather than western
notation as merely pitch.=20

So you can play that ro very kari, and in kan you can
open holes 4 and 5. This gives a bright note of
hopefully the right pitch (about 25 cents above
tsu-meri).=20

And you can play chi-kari either very kari
(difficult!), or, you can play it with the ri-meri
position. The important point thought, I think, is to
know that you are NOT playing ri-meri. Even if you
have to use ri-meri fingering, play "chi-kari". This
means, the INTENTION is chi-kari, and with that, you
can convey brightness, and perhaps even pitch (25
cents above ri-meri).

So, that's my thought.
The joys of sankyoku!
Justin

=20
_________________________________________________________________________=
___________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
_____________________________________________

List un/subscription information is at:
 http://communication.ucsd.edu/shaku/listsub.html
Received on Thu Mar 1 09:19 PST 2007