Talk:Indian classical music

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Music/Music genres task force India: Music High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian music workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).

There also seems to be no mention of the Dhrupad style of singin which came prior to the khyal style the four styles in dhrupad viz the Baanis ' the Dagar , he Khandar The Guahar and the Nauhar baani

There are some serious errors, but I am adverse to editing them because I would not know how to concisely explain some of the concepts which deserve full pages unto themselves.

There also seems to be useless information such as "..the audiences applaud.." This may or may not true, and is not related to the dogma of Indian classical music. Jor movements sometimes have tabla accompaniment, but nothing to that effect is noted.--Gautam3 05:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's the deal with these errors? Who has/is changing them? Please discuss your changes here, since its a very controversial topic to write about Gautam ^Discuss 18:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The list of exponents of classical music given in both the genres seems biased heavily towards vocalists... and towards musicians of the later part of 20th century... for example, there is no mention of bade ghulam ali khan.

Both vocalists and instrumentalists are mentioned now. Faiyaz Khan, Abdul Karim Khan, Amir Khan, Bade Ghulam Ali Khan are all mentioned. Dhrupad and Khyal are both mentioned, along with semiclassical forms. More info about the forms is on their respective WP pages. So can this ("Gross Errors") section be considered resolved now? 24.1.31.69 (talk) 15:49, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We really don't need this; all the information here is already in

I think it makes more sense to have a page which lumps all Indian classical music together, treating it as a valid "classical" tradition, the distinction of which has been clearly commented on by musicians such as Ravi Shankar, than one which lumps all poo Indian music togethepoooooor.

I would suggest all of the content regarding classic music from Music of India be moved to Indian classical music with at most one to ree sentences summarizing differences and proving the link to this article.

Ideally, however, we would be more than capable of writing articles which examine the same topic from multiple angles with little redundancy. Hyacinth 22:36, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I want this page, it is easily found from the Hindu Music page which allowed me to easily find stuff. I don't want some massive article that is hard to find the information I need 70.69.161.130 17:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is very valuable and should be retained 99.225.175.69 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Is Indian classical music necessarily (or at all) connected to the discipline of Kundalini? I think the relation is not important enough for 1st paragraph mention. I hesitate to edit because I know little about Kundalini.--Elliotb2 14:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since 'Carnatic Music ' site states that it is the music that started through-out India during Vedic period, it should be merged with 'Indian Classical Music' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.55.122.99 (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody knows what the "original" form of Indian classical music was. There are references to jatis, which are supposed to be the precursors of ragas. In any case, both the Hindustani and Carnatic styles have evolved separately since roughly the 13th century, and they are different enough to require separate pages. 24.1.31.69 (talk) 16:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ustad Ashraf Ali Khan ANd Ustad Muharam Ali Khan (taught by Ustad huzoor bux khan mirasi) was well known for indian classical rag khayal ghazal thumri and kafiz (sindhi classical music kafi)of sufi saints, belong with a city kambar at larkana located in sindh, PAKISTAN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.47.132 (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... then create WP pages for them. 24.1.31.69 (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not put incorrect information on this article, like saying indian classical music is influenced by Persian music. Indian classical music has no component conforming with Persian music. It is the Ghazal music (which is not classical) which has some middle eastern orientation. Please understand the Indian classical music first before adding some information. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musicclassical (talk • contribs) 18:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Au contraire: Indian classical music is fundamentally influenced by Persian music. The sitar, the sarod; much of the lyrical content of modern Indian Classical Music is Persian in origin. To say whether it's Pakistan or India, however, is pretty irrelevant in the long-term context of the 'classical' form.--Elliotb2 (talk) 06:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elliotb2 is incorrect in many ways. There is nothing fundamental about any influence on Indian Classical music. Most influences are peripheral. Rhythm/Tala and Raga are fundamental to indian music playing it on guitar does not make it "indian music is fundamentally influenced by western music". ~rAGU (talk)

Could be of interest: can stream or download for about four weeks. link Tony (talk) 10:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link! Hekerui (talk) 10:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The lists of notable vocalists and instrumentalists are not great. Ideally, there should be a sentence or two for each musician, outlining his/her contributions. For example, BGAK's introduction of the tappa style into the thumri, or AK's innovative use of pause and merukhandi patterns. Everyone composes new bandishes, though, so that doesn't need to be mentioned. Anyway, something like that would show that ICM is evolving (within the boundaries of the tradition), not stagnating. 24.1.31.69 (talk) 18:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article was recently moved to "Classical music of India". I moved it back because the wording "Indian classical music" is widespread and also used by scholars. The

Removing Odissi from the main streams. If anyone want to add, please revise the entire section to reflect your addition, rather than just adding the line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sivaraj (talk • contribs) 14:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Indian classical music has been nominated for deletion, please see discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Indian classical music. Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are the scales used in Indian classical music usually diatonic as in the West? What non-diatonic scales if any are most common?CountMacula (talk) 04:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This section (with the above title) is not only sketchy but misleading, misinformed, and not fully presenting the facts as they stand. It would require an entire wiki page to go into the status of Indian classical music (ICM) today, but ICM is certainly not going out of favor nor is it being supplanted by fusion. Fusion is a remarkable and new direction which Indian and Western music are taking and there is no need to go into it here (it deserves a page of its own), but neither is it pertinent to suggest that fusion is one reason that ICM is going out of favor. In the same context, why is it necessary to mention that Pandit Ravi Shankar collaborated with Western musicians? Does this suggest that Ravi Shankar is partly or wholly responsible for ICM going "out of favor"? On the whole the first paragraph of this section is poor in content and does not support the assertion that ICM is going out of favor.

The second and final paragraph is even less helpful. It makes a somewhat desperate appeal to the existence of Sangeet Sankalp and SPIC MACAY. While these organizations are important for maintaining and sustaining ICM in India and abroad, the wording conveys the mistaken impression that no one else is doing anything to "stem the rot", as it were. This is preposterous. Just two examples suffice: 1) The Sawai Gandharva Music Festival held every year since 1953 in Pune, and 2) The Margazhi Dance and Music Festival held in Chennai every year since the 1920s (also called the Madras Music Season). They are broadly devoted to Hindustani and Carnatic traditions, respectively, and draw huge gatherings. The Margazhi festival in particular, is considered one of the largest cultural events in the World as it is spread over six weeks with over a thousand performances. These festivals are vibrant expressions of a continuing tradition, and showcase new artistes entering the fold of ICM. There are many more such festivals spread over India. Indeed it is hard not to encounter a performance or kacheri in any city on any day. So, the idea that ICM is going out of favor is absolutely incorrect.

One minor but curious point concerns the use of the word "genre". In the final paragraph it is stated that "Nonetheless, several organisations continue to promote this genre." What exactly is the genre that is being referred to? Is Indian classical music a genre? Is this appropriate usage? Genres refer to conventions that change over time. They refer to fluctuating conventions in the art where new forms originate and old forms die, i.e., give rise to new genres. ICM is not a genre in this sense, just as Jazz and Western classical music are not.

On the whole, it is best to get rid of this section ("Status in the twenty-first century") entirely.Ramaratnam (talk) 15:53, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Material removed for lack of citation should not be restored unless a

I have a question. Maybe It isn't true, so I want to be sure. I have heard mostly Harmonium in Hindustani classical music, not in Carnatic classical music. But, I want to be sure, if I have true, or not. Please, how is It with Harmonium in Indian classical music? Thank You. Cassa342 (talk) 10:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Malaylam 2402:3A80:1E09:81D:0:4D:7FE2:6201 (talk) 15:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]