Talk:Maqam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proposed changes to the maqam entry

Gentlemen,

Here's a proposed definition (I will use [] to mean hyperlink to another wikipedia article):

Maqam ([Arabic]: maqam spelled in Arabic, pl. maqamat or maqams) is the system of [melodic modes] used in classical (traditional?) [Arabic music]. The word maqam in Arabic means place, location or position. The number of maqamat used today in Arabic music is about 30 to 40.

Is that enough ? optionally we can add another few sentences:

Each maqam is built on a [musical scale]. Maqam scales are usually made of 7 [notes] and repeat at the [octave]. Traditional Arabic music is mainly [melodic]. In addition to a scale, each maqam carries a tradition that dictates its habitual phrases and melodic development.

comments please ?

Johnny F99 23:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Gentlemen,

Lots of good stuff. I suggest we do it one section at a time and try to keep the material accessible especially in the earlier sections. This entry should provide the kind of material a person who doesn't know anything about maqams, and possibly very little about music as well as researchers with a more solid technical background. The more in depth technical discussions should be clearly labeled and should come later in the article.

I do not know enough about all the traditions that Abushumays mentions but it seems to me that the reasoning behind the all inclusive approach is somewhat flawed. The fact that things have some common history doesn't mean that they should always be discussed together. For example, modern languages that have roots in the same ancient languages (such as English and German , for example), are considered different languages to be discussed separately except in comparative discussions. Similarly the cruise ship and the speedboat both have evolved from wood-log rafts, but are rarely discussed as one concept.

This is not to diminish the valuable points that Abushumays makes. Only to voice concern that the all-inclusive approach might prove a burden since we will have to give every one of the traditions he mentions its due discussion. I recommend we stick to Arabic maqams and have the other traditions in their own separate entries.

Should we start by agreeing on a definition. I hope that we can keep it accessible to the general public.

Jattawi 13:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My first suggestion is to make it clear this article is about the Arabic Maqam not a general and comprehensive article about all related maqam traditions. That would be too ambitious of a task, plus there's already so much to write about the Arabic maqam by itself, so I think it's important to devote an article only for that.

Now to the definition. I suggest that the following points should be made:

1 - Introduce the various spellings (maqam, makam, sometimes maqaam). Plural is maqamat, maqamaat, or maqams. The most prevalent spelling is "maqam" (pl. maqamat).

2 - Origin of the word is "maqam" in Arabic, which means a place or a position. We can elaborate a little more on how it made it to musical terminology.

3 - The Arabic Maqam as a general concept is a musical tradition inseparable from the Arabic repertoire itself. The tradition comprises many individual maqams. The number of maqams used in Arabic music today is about 30-40.

4 - An individual maqam is made up of a scale, in most cases a set of 7 notes. Occasionally small variations are allowed, such that some maqams have 2 or more alternative scales.

5 - The tuning of a maqam's notes may or may not fall on semitones in a Western even-tempered scale. We can discuss the usage of perfect fifths (harmonic thirds).

6 - Introduce the quarter tone, which is a convenient approximation used mainly for notation. Discuss how, more accurately, intervals are microtonal (a lot more granular than a quarter tone).

7 - Intonation cannot be accurately notated and must be learned by ear. Regional variations allow for slightly different intonations (they act as a local accent in a language).

8 - Maqam scales are traversed according to habitual patterns, or mini-melodies, defined mostly by tradition. Learning and performing a maqam as a static scale is not enough.

9 - Introduce the concept of a "jins" (pl. ajnas), a fragment of the maqam scale, usually made up of 4 notes (called tetrachord). Ajnas are meaningful melodic sets of notes by themselves, and usually occur in more than one maqam. They are in effect the building blocks of maqamat.

10 - Some notes in a maqam scale play important roles. Each maqam has one or more "hinges" where two ajnas join. These notes are often used as a starting point for modulation.

11 - Modulation is where one maqam transforms into another maqam, according to a tradition that defines what's aesthetically pleasing and what's not. A musical piece usually has a starting maqam, then modulates into many more maqams in the course of its melodic development.

12 - we should talk about harmony (or lack thereof). The Arabic Maqam is a very melodic tradition.

what else ? I hope we can keep this thread focused on the first section for now, until we finalize it.

Johnny F99 20:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

regarding point one, i have mixed feelings about this. as i see it, all of these different varieties of maqam, turkish, azeri, persian, uzbeki, etc., all belong to one family. there are many melody types which have been passed back and forth among the various regions, and Iraqi Maqam is a very good example of this: there are some maqams of obvious persian origin, not only in name, but also in melody type. Deshti, Bengigah, Awshar/afshari and Nawa/nava all fall into this category. There are others with melodies shared by the turkish system--amir (el-saffar) and i observed that an improvisation by tanburi cemil bey in makam evic resembles Iraqi Maqam Awj melodically. A number of the Iraqi Maqams are also clearly of Kurdish origin, and still others seem to borrow more heavily from the other arab traditions--such as Maqam "Sharqi Rast" which differs from Rast--it sounds very syrian. Iraq, being geographically central to the whole region, typifies this sharing and borrowing to a great extent, but the same is true of all traditions. Think of some of the Sekah melodies, which appear virtually unchanged in melodic content from egypt through azerbaijan, even though the intonation of the sekah note may be drastically different. Melodies have been passed back and forth by traders, warriors, and preachers for over a milennium, over this whole region. So that even when there are distinct regional differences, differences most particularly in intonation and in ornamental style, a lot of the root melodies are more similar than different.

yet those differences are significant enough to warrant discussion, but in that sense, the egyptian and iraqi traditions are as different from each other as each one is from the turkish or the persian. so if we want to divide up into different regions, the "arab" region should also be divided up. we would then have as different maqam traditions: 1. North african (west of egypt) 2. Egyptian 3. Syrian 5. Iraqi 6. Gulf Arab 7. Turkish 8. Iranian (which probably also deserves to be divided up... but i'm not an expert on Iran) 9. Azeri 10. Uzbeki Shash-Maqam 11. Other central asian maqam varieties 12. Uighur 13. Greek (some of the rebetika and smyrnaika traditions are clearly part of the maqam family, and they even use some of the same names for some of the same melodic types: Rast, Sekah, Huzam, and Saba, for example) (see my podcast comparing Greek, Turkish and Arabic Maqams at shumays.libsyn.com)

the question is, what is the point of division? Theoretically speaking, there is an underlying modal similarity underlying all of these traditions, a similar treatment and development of melodic material--some of which similarity is surely the result of a relationship to Qur'anic chant and its influence on the meter of maqam music.

theoretically speaking, i believe all of these traditions should be treated together. And i agree with the earlier comment that describing it as "uniquely arab" is misguided. The historical orgins are also mixed, none of these traditions developed in isolation.

I think that the regional differences should be emphasized, but in such a way as to make clear that they are dialects of the maqam language. their differences should be discussed, but it should be clear what those differences are: intonation, ornamental style, language used, and some particular maqams & melodies unique to each region. my preference, therefore, is to give all of them different sections within the Maqam entry, rather than different entries altogether. a discussion of "maqam" as such should make clear the diversity within what we know as one shared system.

or, if they each have different entries, the entry under just "maqam" should discuss all of them together, and then allow the different entries to talk about the unique regional characteristics.

Abushumays 06:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that the following changes should be made to this entry (and of course I am working on them and hope to collaborate with other specialists):

1- Arabic maqams are different from Turkish makams, which are different from Assyrian etc.. They are different in intonation, melodic progression and even tonal content. They are also different in practice and in implied modulations. I therefore think that Turkish makams, assyrian makams and all the rest deserve either separate entries or at the very least separate sections within the maqam entry. I favor separate entries altogether.

2- More references are needed. The Touma book is OK as a general reference or as a survey of Arabic music, but it is hardly the definitive study in Arabic music theory.

3- Because theory and practice have evolved over the years, some historic time line should be included. Some eras are better documented than others, so there may have to be "holes" in the time line.

4- It might be a good idea to also include a section (or perhaps a separate entry) on metric modes (iqaat). There is no such Wikipedia entry at the moment.

5- It might also be useful to have a section defining modulation within compositions in the maqam system and discussing its use.

But most importantly:

6- Provide more accurate definition and use citations where appropriate (while the the current entry relies heavily on pages 38-55 of Touma it appears to have information that is not in the Touma).

Other thoughts?

Jattawi 23:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I strongly disagree with the opening paragraph of the current (6/21/2005) version of "maqam", because (a) maqam is not uniquely arab, the same term being employed in ottoman/turkish music (makam), as the article itself explains. The article fails to substantiate the claim that the maqam is uniquely arab, or the claim that in arab music it plays the role of a "technique for improvised music" as distinct from a basic concept for modal melodic phenomena in all music within the genre. (b) maqam is not only, or not even primarily a fundamental concept for improvised music, but a fundamental concept of all music within the said near eastern musical cultures. It is rougly equivalent to echos and raga. All composed music as well as all improvised music in these musical cultures is classified as belonging to a certain maqam. I will check more references and sources before editing the opening paragraph of this article. Iani 17:59, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I have to admit, I agree with your disagreement about the makam system (whatever name it may go under) being "unique to Arabian art music". When I started adding information about the Turkish makam system, I chose to leave that claim there simply because it was quoted from a book; however, thinking about it again, it's a quote that really did/does not need to be used. It would be good, in fact, to change it (or simply remove the quote), as you seem to be planning to do. Saposcat 14:18, 25 June 2005 (GMT+02:00)
  • OK I am going ahead with the change. I'll try to maintain a NPoV maqam -> Arabic, makam -> Ottoman/Turkish counterpart. Also neither of these are entirely or even primarily improvisation techniques, they are music theoretic concepts relating to modal phenomena at large. Someone specialist in Arab music comment on this please?. [...] Finally I replaced the opening paragraph. If someone can offer a more differentiated discussion of maqam as concept, please do so, but to say that maqam is a unique arab technique of improvisation is onesided. Look at any description of maqam accessed by a Google search.

Please Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks. Hyacinth 01:49, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Salute to the author(s)/ when were the maqams made?

This is truly a first-rate article. Many musical topics are stubs, lacking music theory content. Fantastic work!

When were maqams created? Dogru144 03:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC) 03:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

I believe more sources are needed. There are many excellent references in Arabic, but not so many in English. I would like to addd one source in English, it's the excellent Ph.D. dissertation by Prof. Scott Marcus (now teaching at UCLA) from 1989, called "Arab music theory in the modern period". He also has many papers on intonation, modulation, etc, that I may quote later. Johnny F99 17:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC) Johnny F99