Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By Mili Leitner
Maqamat
Maqamat (singular: maqam) are the many interrelated modal systems used in traditional music
from Persia/Iran, Turkey, Central Asia and Arab nations. The various maqam traditions are
referred to by local variants of this term, such as makam (Turkey), shashmaqam (Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan) and dastgah (Persia), with the exception of the Arabic system, which simply goes by
maqam. These modal systems encompass musical aspects such as the tuning system, scale, affect,
structural melodic organization, and pitch contour. Performances are improvised within the
structure provided by the maqam. In some cases a larger structure exists for organizing the
complete repertory of the musical tradition, such as the radif (Persia) or mukam (East Turkistan;
Uyghur territory of China); as in the latter case these collections of melodic outlines may bear the
same name as their modal system.
While maqam refers specifically to the Arab tradition, it can be used to refer to maqamic traditions
as a super-national whole; it is in this context that I use the term, referring specifically to the local
variants where appropriate. I opt to conflate these distinct musical systems because in terms of
transcription, the many maqam traditions have been subject to the same treatment by Western
and indigenous scholars, most importantly in the near-universal application of Western staff
notation by both the former and the latter for at least the past century.
Maqamat have been the subject of indigenous theoretical musical investigation for over 700 years.
Keogh states, [a]rticulating the connection between music theory and practice has for many
centuries been the subject of intellectual enquiry concerning the musical practices associated with
maqam; there remains a divide between theory and practice in both Western
Ethnomusicological and indigenous theoretical understandings of maqamat. As transcription is
central to theory, and (traditionally, in Ethnomusicology,) to analyzing musical practice, this
paper will review whether and how it is currently being used to this end.
Literature Review
Transcriptions Purpose, Past and Present
Ethnomusicologists have engaged in transcription of non-Western musics for as long as the
discipline has existed. Ellingson offers an explanation for the earliest reasons scholars gave for
this practice, stating that it was seen to provide objectively quantifiable and analyzable data that
furnished a solid base for ethnomusicologys claim to scientific validity (1992:110).
Today, with notions such as objective data and scientificism being thoroughly out of fashion in
Ethnomusicology (which often finds itself situated within humanities departments), one searches
for new justifications for transcription relevant to current trends within the discipline. With an
increasingly critical outlook on the usefulness of transcription, which was rejected during the
Ethnomusicological crisis of representation in the 1990s, one must ask: What is the purpose of
transcription? What does it offer the Ethnomusicologist? And as Simms (2003:5) asks, referring
specifically to his own attempts to transcribe Iraqi maqam, [w]hy transcribe music that inevitably
eludes the quantitative confines of notation? These questions are critical because they shape the
methodologies and representative styles that the scholar chooses for her work during the process
of transcription.
Regardless, transcription certainly has lost its central place within the discipline that it once held.
Cooley and Barz state that [t]oday it is not transcription but fieldwork that
constitutes ethnomusicology (2008:62). Indeed, if the discipline defines itself by what it does,
this is undisputedly true. Institutions of higher education routinely offer courses in field methods
and implicitly require fieldwork as part of any Masters or Doctoral dissertation. By contrast, a
survey of the graduate school curricula of twenty well-regarded schools in Canada, USA and UK
illustrated that transcription holds no such position, being a required course at but three of these
institutions, and a compulsory element of qualifying exams at just one. Further, none of these
institutions actually use the word transcription in their course titles, but instead employ the
methodology under the guise of modal analysis (University of Chicago) or laboratory
methods (UCLA). This in itself is telling; in the first case transcription is put to use to serve a
broader goal of musical analysis, in the second it is just one methodology amongst many, no
longer worthy of its historically elevated status, just as Cooley and Barz so rightly claim. Clearly
the disciplines perspective on transcription has transformed from a century ago when
Hornbostel/Abraham claimed that [w]riting down melodies in notation is essential (1909:1),
and even from Lists 1979 assertion that For a study to be ethnomusicological the scholar must
transcribe the music (1979:1).
And yet, in 21st century maqam literature, transcription appears to be put to use in almost every
scholarly study. This suggests that maqam scholarship is somewhat at odds within
Ethnomusicology at large. My colleagues, all of whom have some experience in listening to and
analyzing maqam, suggested during discussions I shared with them concerning this issue that the
genres scholarship is lagging behind the mainstream of Ethnomusicology in its methodology;
however I question whether this is necessarily the case. Perhaps instead, maqam scholars have
continued to see value in transcription, and refused to follow disciplinary fashions in favor of
doing good work using methodologies that serve their goals. I suggest two key reasons that
maqam scholars might offer for their continuing attribution of value to transcription.
The first, espoused by Tenzer, is that the goal of transcription is the experience of transcription
in itself (2006:8). Nettl (2005) supports this, stating as his third of five reasons for doing
transcription that the pleasure gained from the act of transcription is a worthy end-goal, because
it is fun and gives the Ethnomusicologist a sense of ownership over their subject of study.
(Whether ownership over another peoples music is something to be desired is certainly
debatable.) Interestingly, Nettl appears to be invested in transcription for the sake of the
researchers personal gain, than seeing it as useful for productive scholarship per se; his other
justifications for doing transcription include its historical status within the discipline (which can
be illustrated with Ellingsons comment that [t]ranscriptionhas long been considered
universally applicable and universally requisite to ethnomusicological methodology 1992:110)
and its use to prove an Ethnomusicologists competence. These may serve the scholar and the
discipline, but they do not serve the music, nor a readers understanding of it. The latter is
addressed by the last two purposes given by Nettl, firstly that transcription shows a respect of
real music through the labor required in transcription (echoed by Tenzer: [When]
peopleanalyze others music, it is usually motivated by respect (2006:10)) thus demonstrating
the importance of cross-cultural respect to the reader, and secondly that the Ethnomusicologist
may choose what is significant through making her own transcriptions. Significance is a key
concept touched upon by Hood (1971:55), and in the introductions to the volumes edited by
Tenzer (2006) and Roeder/Tenzer (2011). Further comments on this will be offered under the
discussion of method later in this paper.
I have failed to find the viewpoint that transcriptions purpose is to serve the Ethnomusicologist
or the discipline stated explicitly within maqam literature, although Nettls generalist writing is
surely based to some extent upon his extensive personal experiences transcribing and analyzing
radif. Transcription may be an enjoyable experience for some (and I count myself amongst that
number), but certainly I know many fine Ethnomusicologists who would disagree with this view.
Further, this argument is based on a subjective opinion, and one which is completely inadequate
in justifying transcription at worst, it does the methodology a disservice, framing it as a useless
and indulgent hobby, which surely is not how Ethnomusicologists would want to represent their
work in times when funding is hard to come by!
Simms, in his thorough reflexive commentary on his own experience transcribing the Iraqi
maqam, posits a commonly held view amongst Ethnomusicologists regarding the purpose of
transcription, which rejects Tenzer and Nettls viewpoints in favor of seeing transcription as a
means to a greater end:
For those who can read notation I believe that it makes certain structural features
more readily apparent and discernable, allows for certain comparative and analytical
observations outside the flow of time, facilitates the memory of musical materials,
and can help one locate and follow the series of events that occur in a long
performance. Some benefits only go to the transcriber Transcription increases the
speed and volume of musical transmission compared to traditional oral means,
differing radically in both quality (i.e., it is less accurate) and quantity (places a larger
repertoire at ones fingertips. [It] has the potential to deepen our understanding of
various levels of musical structure (2003:5)
Based upon the literature reviewed in this paper, Simms position seems to be representative of
Ethnomusicologists, past and present. Most often, their transcriptions are contextualized by
analysis of the music, in some cases to illuminate a point about the relationship between
individual performances and the piece (e.g., Gerson-Kiwi 1963), in other cases to give weight
to a point about extra-musical cultural behavior (e.g., Shelemey 1998), and occasionally seemingly
to simply make a peoples musical practices more widely known and understood in their own
right, without external referents or a desire to make a generalizable point (e.g., Kligman 2009).
transcribed, standardized version of the radif during the 1960s, whereas those from outside the
capital used regional variants of intonation and dastgahs. Gerson-Kiwis work is representative of
her generational cohort, with Nettl (1987) and Cohen/Katz (2013 NB, a forty year project that
began in 1963) providing further examples of maqam transcriptions. Notably, these scholars all
cite Idelsohn as an influence on their transcription and analysis style, either as direct teacher in
Gerson-Kiwis case, or through sporadic mentorship or scholarly influence for Nettl, Cohen and
Katz. Idelsohns own transcriptions (1914 et al) appear to have served as a precedent for
transcribing maqam during the mid-part of the 20th century.
detail at all possible areas of analysis. He also hopes to offer an objective way of dealing with the
discrepancies between individual performances of Arabic maqamat, by creating a mathematical
formula that discards statistical outliers in any given area (he uses intonation as an example) in
order to reveal the piece that emerges from diverse performances.
Published in the Analytical Approaches to World Music journal, Keogh and Polits articles inhabit
interdisciplinary spaces. Pohlit straddles Music Theory and Historical Ethnomusicology, whereas
Keogh draws upon Ethnomusicology, Media Studies and Cultural Studies. Lartillot works in
Music Cognition and Audio Theory. This might go some way to accounting for their relatively
provocative proposals, which sit in stark contrast to maqam literature from journals such as
Ethnomusicology or Music Theory Spectrum.
order to demonstrate its inadequacy in representing the sounds being transcribed. Not so, in the
case of these four current Ethnomusicologists. Their transcriptions could easily be mistaken for
Western music, based on visual appearance. The only indication of some deviation from this is
the use of quarter tones to accommodate a 24-note scale, where necessary. This is achieved in a
standardized fashion, following the precedents laid down by Idelson (1914), Gerson-Kiwi (1963),
Nettl (1987), and indeed indigenous maqam in written form, such as Farahanis early 19th century
publication of the radif (precise date of publication unknown) (Nooshin 2015).
G
Individual
transcriber
Cultural determinants
The x-axis, labeled cultural determinants, refers to those factors within a cultures musical
tradition that inform how an Ethnographer will choose to represent that music in transcription.
Hood implicitly hypothesizes that some musics intrinsically require more detailed transcription
than others. This is debatable at best, and at worst seems to undermine cultural relativism and
impose subjective value hierarchies upon now-competing musical traditions (with those requiring
more specific transcription being more complex, and therefore more valuable, and the product
of a more developed society a slippery slope indeed). An alternative interpretation is possible, if
one presumes that Hood is referring to the notation systems indigenous to the musical culture in
question. In this case, one might place Western art music at the S end of the spectrum, and radif
at the G end. However, all aurally transmitted musical traditions would end up at the G end,
undermining the notion of a spectrum. Either way, in my analysis his x-axis is flawed.
The y-axis shows an individual Ethnographers tendency towards, as Nettl (2005:82-85) puts it,
either thoroughness (S) or elegance (S). This is an entirely useful idea, which offers a more
nuanced take on representation beyond the various incarnations of the insider/outsider
paradigm. Since Ethnomusicology has done away with this paradigm in its current trend towards
reflexive ethnographic writing, it follows that transcription representation styles should be
understood in a similar way.
The maqam literature reviewed in this essay sits at various points along the y-axis of Hoods G-S
spectrum. This can be displayed (approximately and subjectively) as follows:
Precedents
Ethno. mainstream
Non-mainstream
Kligman (2009)
Zeranska-Kominek et al (1982)
Shelemey (1998)
Simms/Koushkani (2012)
Nettl (1987)
Kartomi (2004)
Idelson (1914)
Keogh (2014)
Simms (2003)
Gerson-Kiwi (1963)
Akko et al (2015)
Lartillot (2012)
(Bartok (1940s))
Pohlit (2012)
Hoods concept brings to light some important points of comparison. Pre-21st century literature
on maqam spans the same section of the G-S spectrum as current Ethnomusicological
mainstream on the same genre (the extreme S end example under precedents is by Bartok,
for the sake of comparison). This illustrates the strength of transcription precedents for
contemporary scholars. No maqam literature in these two categories falls at the S end of the
spectrum. By contrast, maqam scholarship coming from other disciplines, such as those studies
published in Analytical Approaches to World Music, falls at the extreme S end of the spectrum. The
diagram from the previous page is repeated below, with short representative excerpts of
transcription style replacing the names of scholars to give a visual impression of the G-S
spectrum (again, approximate and subjective, and a limited selection for the sake of clarity).
Transcription Methodologies
The methodologies used to transcribe music have changed in line with technological innovations
in sound recording and reproduction, from the invention of portable handheld recording
equipment, to new technology allowing recordings to be slowed down to aid the novice
transcriber (as described by Hood 1971, now widely available by way of the downloadable
specialist software Transcribe), to the development of automated computer transcription
software (as used by Lartillot 2012, proposed as early as 1951 by Seeger). Here, at last, we find an
area of some interdisciplinary consensus: the constant striving of Music scholars to put to use the
latest technology to aid their transcription efforts reflects the notion that [w]e should never tire
of improving and changing our methods of work in order to accomplish this task as well as is
humanly possible (Bartok/Lord 1951:20). Recent publications have gone so far as to
represent periodicity in transcription, despite Western staff notation being woefully inadequate
for this purpose due to its penchant for rigid subdivisions of regular time units. Much of the
literature being reviewed does not indicate periodicity in transcriptions of scales (a tenuous use
of the word, which is not easily culturally transferrable, but is nonetheless the closest English
term for what I describe here). If one expected periodicity to be in universal use, Akko et als
use of different note lengths to represent the relative roles of each note of the scale, such as root,
dominant, and leading note, could be misinterpreted (2015:324).
Until maqam Ethnomusicologists begin to write explicitly about their transcription methodology,
and the reasons behind it, it is difficult to make comparative comments about their work. This
paper has been concerned with asking what the state of the field is, rather than why, since
scholars lack of explanation and justification for their methodologies would relegate the latter to
the realm of pure speculation. One clear trend is that those who are doing this kind of writing
about their maqam transcriptions are the scholars who ultimately propose using an alternative to
Western staff notation. Their reflexivity may be alerting them to the inadequacies of this system,
and the significant [inevitable] distortion (Tenzer 2006:11) that it creates or the reverse may
be true, that they are reflexive in light of their creative proposals, in order to retrospectively
justify them. The meaningful comparison that emerges with regard to methodology, then, is
(perhaps unsurprisingly) the same as when representational strategies were considered earlier in
this paper: Ethnomusicologists versus those from other Music disciplines; implicit following of
precedents versus explicit reflexivity and reform.
Conclusion
Maqam transcription methodology in mainstream Ethnomusicological literature (Idelson 1914;
Gerson-Kiwi 1963; Nettl 1987; Shelemey 1998; Simms 2003; Kartomi 2004; Cohen/Katz 2006;
Kligman 2009; Simms/Koushkani 2012) has changed little in the past century. This can be traced
in large part to the adoption of Western staff notation by indigenous theorists and performers,
resulting from centuries of interactions between Western and Oriental classical music traditions.
The standardization and canonization of maqamic subgenres such as the Persian radif has
reinforced this, since the current generation of both indigenous and Western maqam scholars now
work from precedents that employ Western methods of representing music.
One finds evidence to support this, and to illustrate the strength of scholarly precedents, in the
almost-universal lack of explanation of transcription methodology and representational style
found in post-2000 literature on maqamic traditions (Simms 2003; Kartomi 2004; Kligman 2009;
Simms/Koushkani 2012). Authors have a clear idea of who will read their work, and expect them
to be familiar with the notational system employed, including, for example, how quarter tones are
represented. Similarly, the strength of scholarly precedents appears to have standardized authors
views of what is significant and therefore worth transcribing. This shows that there is general
agreement about for whom these transcriptions are intended, since there is no explicit mention in
any of the literature about transcription priorities, and yet great consistency between the sources
discussed in this paper.
Although interdisciplinary scholars (Lartillot 2012; Pohlit 2012; Keogh 2014; Akko et al 2015),
have put forward some novel proposals for alternative notation systems, these have had no
noticeable impact on Ethnomusicologys North American mainstream at this point in time. This
mainstream appears to sanction a particular kind of maqam literature, as illustrated by the
literature reviewed in this paper, which is at odds with the rest of the disciplines output. While
maqam literature continues to evoke a traditionally musicological style of transcription and
analysis, institutional training in North American graduate programs suggests that these skills
have taken a back seat to Anthropological- and Sociological-based Ethnomusicology. Over the
past decade, the content of the journals such as Ethnomusicology and Ethnomusicology Forum, and
panels at SEM, ICTM, and BFE conferences have reflected this trend, hence the emergence of
the society Analytical Approaches to World Music, which appears to accommodate radicals and
reformists in the field of maqam studies.
It appears then, that transcription of maqam is mediated according to the established disciplinary
boundaries and expectations of the various Music-related fields. A shift in disciplinary paradigms
could be achieved through an increase in interdisciplinary work amongst maqam scholars, and/or
a willingness of disciplinary journals and conferences to give airtime to less disciplinarily
conventional approaches to maqam transcription. This might have the effect of facilitating a more
in-depth musical analysis (from AAWM members approaches), which could inform perspectives
on the cultural significance of music (as espoused by North Americas Ethnomusicological
mainstream). This would have the positive effect of moving Ethnomusicological maqam
scholarship beyond its current century-old methods and into dialogue with current crossdisciplinary discourse.
Bibliography
Akko, Can, William A. Sethares, and M. Kemal Karaosmanolu. 2015. Experiments on the
Relationship between Perde and Seyir in Turkish Makam Music. Music Perception: An
Interdisciplinary Journal 32 (4): 32243.
Cohen, Dalia and Ruth Katz. 2006. Palestinian Arab Music: A Maqam Tradition in Practice. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Cooley, Timothy J and Gregory Barz. 2008. Casting Shadows: Fieldwork is Dead! Long Live
Fieldwork! Introduction. Shadows in the Field. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellingson, Ter. 1992. Transcription and Notation. Ethnomusicology: An Introduction. London:
The Macmillan Press.
Gerson-Kiwi. 1963. The Persian doctrine of Dastga-composition; a phenomenological study in the musical
modes. Tel Aviv: Israel Music Institute.
Hood, Mantle. 1971. The Ethnomusicologist. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Hornbostel, E. M and Otto Abraham. 1909 (1977). Indian Melodies from British Columbia
Recorded on the Phonograph. Hornbostel Opera Omnia. New York: Springer.
Idelsohn, Abraham Z. 1914. Thesaurus of Hebrew Oriental Melodies, Band I. Leipzig: Breitkopf Und
Hartel.
Kartomi, Margaret. 2004. Tracing Routes with Song Trade and Identity through Music, With
Reference to Seven Versions of a Song of Praise Melody. Ethnomusicology Forum 13 (1).
Keogh, Brent. 2014. Between Theory, Representation and Practice of Maqm: Rethinking the
Representation of the Arabic Maqmt. Analytic Approaches to World Music 3 (2).
Kligman, Mark L. 2009. Maqam and Liturgy. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Lartillot, Olivier. 2012. Computational Analysis of Maqam Music: From Audio Transcription to
Musicological Analysis, Everything Is Tightly Intertwined. Acoustics 2012 Hong Kong, 16.
Tenzer, Michael (ed). 2006. Analytical Studies in World Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Titon, Jeff, et al (eds). 2008. Worlds of Music: An Introduction to the Music of the Worlds Peoples.
Boston: Cengage Learning.
Touma, Habib Hassan. 1971. The maqam phenomenon: An improvisation technique in the
music of the Middle East. Ethnomusicology 51 (1): 38-48.
Zeranska-Kominek, Slawomira, Beniamin Kostrubiec, and Joanna Wierzejewska. 1982.
Universal Symbols in the Bukharan Shashmaqam. Asian Music 14 (1): 7493