Homepage >> Forum Archives >> Archives >> Sitar Forum >> This Page

INDIAN MUSIC FORUM ARCHIVES: Sitar Forum: Tastes Great, Less Filling

 

Author Message
Neal
Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 02:31 p.m.

Mini poll. .do most of you out there like a more open / buzzing {Tastes Great} or closed / less buzz, more smooth [Less Filling} Jawari ?
Jeff
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 03:20 p.m.

I like it somewhere inbetween I suppose. But I plan on getting a few more sitars so I can have different sounds when the mood hits me.
Jeffrey R King
Lars
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 03:51 p.m.

Closed. . . . .Nikhil Banerjee style though. . . .which is a little more open than Vilayat Khan. . .but I like that sound too. . .
Like open too, hell. . .I like it all!

Russ
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 04:41 p.m.

I'm with Lars on this. Depends on the mood I'm in. I typically like a long sustain, so closed works good there. But there's nothing wrong with a good buzz. What was the question again?
sitarsrule
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 11:00 p.m.

I play by my self, I've learned how to get a tambora sound & play the main raga as well. So the more buzz the better. Of course there are many styles, as there are players. If i wanted less buzz, I'd had suck with playing Lead Guitar. . . . .Peace
sitarsrule
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 08, 2002 11:01 p.m.

Stuck, But then there may have been those who thought I sucked. . . . . .Oh well
Jeff
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 09, 2002 11:36 a.m.

sitarsrule (Sep 08, 2002 11:00 p.m.):
I play by my self, I've learned how to get a tambora sound & play the main raga as well. So the more buzz the better. Of course there are many styles, as there are players. If i wanted less buzz, I'd had suck with playing Lead Guitar. . . . .Peace

I practise alone also but the other night I had my wife play the tanpura I got about 5 years ago and man did it thicken up the sound. And thanks to this forum I learned about the silk thread trick, I hadnt really messed with this tanpura because it never droned, but now it drones away.

Jeffrey R King
K.K.
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Sep 09, 2002 11:49 a.m.

Hey All: I have to say that I like all the styles too. Each of the masters has found their unique voice and have tweaked their instruments to suit. Regarding MY instrument's jawari. . .after having my Mangla for six months now. .well, I'll let you know in a couple of life times. - K.K.
Clay
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Feb 26, 2003 08:13 p.m.

I have been reading some posts, although not contributing to the dialoque much. But now I have a question-How does a maker determine whether an instrument will have an open or closed bridge?

Is it by model?
by price?
by his mood?

I remember Lars or Russ saying that he had purchased 4 or 5 Mangala Prasad Sharma sitars and the first few had a closed jawari and the latter ones had a very much open jawari. What accounts for this variabilty. Is it according to the nuances of each hand-made instrument. i.e- an open jawari would better suit this particular instrument and a closed jawari over here for this particular one etc?

Is one more desireable than another? I would think closed would be most desirable because it will open with playing, as opposed to an open one from the get-go which will become overly open with playing.
Russ
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Feb 27, 2003 12:27 p.m.

I think the trend is to sell open jawari sitars destined for north american sitarjis, and more closed jawaris for India and other places. Seems that most americans prefer the open buzzy sound right out of the box, rather than wait the years it often takes to open up a closed jawari. I do have 3 sitars, but only one Mangla, and it is fairly closed. The other sitars are mostly open, so I have the best of both worlds!

I believe you are on the right track here. An open jawari sounds great with the volume and buzz, but the trade off is that it isn't long before it has to be "touched up" again. A closed jawari takes a long time to break in, but at least it lasts a long time. Perhaps a good alternative would be the in between, semi-open style where you have good sound and doesn't take that long to break in?
K.K.
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Feb 27, 2003 04:20 p.m.

Hi All: Another factor to consider is whether or not the sitar was "tweaked" by someone AFTER it was delivered from the manufacturer. Even just moving the bridge a fraction of an inch to adjust intonation, can have the effect of opening or closing the jawari. This is one reason why some sitarists install pins to hold the bridge in place rather than gluing them to the tabli. Even a then layer of shellac can change the angle of the bridge.
Mike
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 10, 2003 02:10 a.m.

Hey- I don't know. .I have an open, Western Jawari. Dag nabbit I want to play closed like Vilayet! lol. .Does anyone know if its possible to buy a bridge, say from Buckingham and pay them extra do customize the jawari? Do you think they could/would do that?

Mike
Stephen
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 10, 2003 07:44 a.m.

You would still have to send your instrument to whoever you find to do the javari work. I would check with Lars first as he would probably know of someone that is geographically in the closest spot to help you out. Perhaps you'll be fortunate enough to have someone within driving distance (and you can drive pretty far for the amount you would spend to pack/ship a sitar) that can do this work for you.
Dan
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 11, 2003 01:28 a.m.

Hi, sitar friends,

Well, sitar is sitar, there must be a minimum of buzz like Neal call it. First of all, let's say that the sympathetics sit on a bridge as �open� as it can get jawari, so they can buzz from even a soft melody.

:-) Now the question is, at least for myself, whether or not I want the main strings (the Ma string in particular) to sound exactly like the sympathetics? In this case, which would be an �open jawari�, the sympathetics become part of the overall sound of the melody.

:-) Or do I want the sympathetics to be more like an echo with a short delay of the melody being played? In this case, which would be a �closed jawari�, the amounth of buzz would be directly proportional of the aquity (in frequency) of each note being played. . due to the buzz coming mainly from the sympathetics.

:-) A trick in painting, in order to produce more depth, is to add a new element right over the existing one which get pushed furthur back. The same goes with sitar: using a �closed jawari�, less buzzing, makes the sound closer to you which push the sympathetic sounds furthur back in space.

Guess I'm more into Nikhil Banerjee's school of thought. Darn, that remings me of the jawari job I'll have to do on my unique sitar! :-\

Dan :-)
Russ
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 11, 2003 11:42 a.m.

Whew. . .well alrighty then. I think you have stated something that most of us have already agreed upon, that it boils down to what you like best and sounds best for the mood you want to create.

Since this music is based upon producing a mood (rasa), then some raags sounds best played with an open jawari. More resonance, more power, more "up-front" (don't have the right words here).

Other raags with a completely different mood sound sweeter with a closed jawari. You get that time-delay on the tarabs, with a more 3-D kind of thing going. I prefer that type more often as it just suits me. But like I say, I really do believe its all up to you.
Neal
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 11, 2003 08:30 p.m.

I have not heard much about changing the tarab/ sympathetic jawari to an open or closed sound. Is this even done? Often done? Neal
Russ
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 12, 2003 11:51 a.m.

Neal, closed tarabs make no sense to me. Why would you even have them if you can't hear them? I would guess that's why nobody talks about closed sympathetic bridge jawaris.
Amitava
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 12, 2003 01:54 p.m.

There is wear/tear on the tarab strings as well - but significantly less than the main strings. So over time, the bridge is usually replaced or re-jawaried (is that a word). You may want a "closed" jawari if the instrument's sensitivity to resonance is too strong. . .or open them up if it likes to hold back the sound. I have not given this much attantion. .but need to keep at the back of my mind.
Russ
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Mar 12, 2003 02:08 p.m.

I have to admit I haven't thought about it either. I would suppose that after time, the tarab jawari would have to be redone. But I would expect that to be quite a long time. My oldest sitar is near 33 years old, and the sympathetic bridge is original, no jawari done other than what it came with way back then. Tarabs sing out just fine. I was thinking that because that bridge is more fragile than the main, it might be easier to just replace it. That thing would be a pain to work on. . . . . .
Neo
Re:Tastes Great, Less Filling Apr 20, 2003 01:03 p.m.

I've been listening to the different masters who use different jawari types, such as Vilayat Khan, Nikhil Banerjee, Ravi Shankar, etc. For a while, I almost thought I wanted a lot of buzz like in Ravi's younger years. I kind of prefer Ravi's new jawari. There is not as much buzz as before, but still a nice kind of resonance like in an open jawari. It's not as open as before. The New Ravi jawari is the one that he is currently using with his Rikhi Ram sitar. Although, I also really like Nikhil Banerjee's sound, too.
[Previous] [Up] [Next]

SPONSORED LINKS