Mujitsu and Tairaku's Shakuhachi BBQ

Kiku Day wrote:

We need Shin-tozan, Zensabo, Chikuho-ryu, Ueda-ryu......
It will become a massive 5.7 at the end when we have finished adding schools! : )

A 5.7, eh? I'm not sure if my arms are long enough, but I'll figure something out. Lemme know when I can place a preorder.

Zak -- jinashi size queen

Last edited by Zakarius (2008-08-06 10:47:13)

Daniel Ryudo wrote:

Yes, I think I'd like one of those all ryu flutes; nice prototype, Chris.

Very cool Chris. Is the Kinko A11 button Yamaguchi Goro or Jin Nyodo style?  I think you need to add a toggle switch for a Tairaku Ryu

Thanks for your reply, Perry, and for the link to the article "What is a Functional Shakuhachi"; very to the point article -- I guess a lot depends on what music one plays or wants to play as to whether one considers a shakuhachi acceptable or not.

That flute had some good points but very weak around Kan no Chi. A beginner trying to learn would have a very difficult time. This is one of those situations where it's not the player but the flute and since he was a beginner, he would not have known that.

Perhaps the question I asked you was a bit too flippant as I imagine that most makers are like you, intent on seriously testing their flutes for all the techniques they know, depending on what genre or genres or music they are playing though maybe I should be wary of saying anything like most makers are doing this or that as it is only the individual makers that I can really gather that kind of information from.

Yes, every maker has their own processes and criteria. I've examine a lot of flutes that look super beautiful but do not match in playability. While other flutes can look quite boring but play exceptionally well. Making a flute play well is much more difficult than making one look good.

That's interesting that you have learned/are learning dokyoku pieces directly from Watazumi Do's notation.

I should clarify this. The music I was given and learned with was handwritten and transcribed by Kinya according to his favorite versions of the Koten Honkyoku as interpreted by Watazumi (among other versions - Watazumi recorded lots of versions of the same piece). Kinya transcribed versions he felt was best for transmission. Some of what I learned may be the same as what is taught by Yokoyama, but I suspect that some are different. I only realized this after Monty released the Yokoyama 1.8 Honkyoku collection. One example, according to the collection's notation - Yokoyama's Tamuke starts with a Nayashi up to the anchoring Otsu no Ro. But, on Kinya's notation the first note is a written Dia Ro Meri and the next note is the anchoring RO. There is no slide or Nayashi written between the two. Kinya was clear about starting a whole tone below RO.  I am not saying one is better then the other, only pointing out a difference of interpretation. On the MD recording I have from Watazumi (made from a cassette tape by Kinya), he plays a Dai Ro Meri and then the anchoring RO. Perhaps someone who studied Tamuke with Yokoyama can tell me how he taught that bit, Nayashi up to Ro or start with Dai Meri? Or both?  This is the kind of of thing that confuses beginners (and me!).

And as Kiku mentioned before, I also consider my self a beginner at 14 or 15 years of playing. I find it very much like life, the more you know, the less you know. I guess it would be boring to know exactly what will come with each breath

Namaste, Perry

indigo wrote:

Justin wrote: "insist on kan no ro dai meri being strictly at the pitch of ri, or lower even, and insist that it should be more powerful than regular ro"

I would love to hear some examples of this possibility.

And I would love it if Justin would pay my health insurance premium after I have tried.

Kiku Day wrote:

We need Shin-tozan, Zensabo, Chikuho-ryu, Ueda-ryu......
It will become a massive 5.7 )

Yungflutes wrote:

Very cool Chris. Is the Kinko A11 button Yamaguchi Goro or Jin Nyodo style?  I think you need to add a toggle switch for a Tairaku Ryu

Sorry, I neglected to show and demonstrate the Sub-Ryu Magic Mixer Mojo Pedal.

For Jin Nyodo you'd press down Myoan, Real Myoan and Kinko simultaneously.

For Tairaku-ryu, you'd press down the same plus Watazumi, then add some Aoki Reibo II Chorus-Fuzz Fusion with the pedal. (Either that or you do something simple like reinvent shakuhachi music in the West.)

And so on.

I apologize for for the oversight. Order yours today.

I have been reading this thread with great interest, and I find both sides of the discussion regarding louder(I will not say more powerful) and softer meri, especially dai-meri notes, very inspiring.

Justin, when you mention the volume of dai-meri being louder, do you make your kari notes much softer? I am studying Dokyoku and that is how I am learning.

Kiku I am glad you mentioned that intensity of soft meri notes as well, because I am starting to learn techniques that are like this as well. Kinda hard to explain but it's a sort of intensity built up coming from a heavy, Loud dai-meri to a soft kari note. So  in a way it's the concept of intensity in a soft meri note but used in a kari note.

A great reminder of how easy shakuhachi music is....yeah right.

Yungflutes wrote:

Hey Kiku, A big apology, I wanted to quote you above but edited it by mistake! Please repost for our edification.
Gomenasai.
Sorry, Perry

Maybe you can use your "back" button and restore it?

Yungflutes wrote:

On the MD recording I have from Watazumi (made from a cassette tape by Kinya), he plays a Dai Ro Meri and then the anchoring RO. Perhaps someone who studied Tamuke with Yokoyama can tell me how he taught that bit, Nayashi up to Ro or start with Dai Meri? Or both?  This is the kind of of thing that confuses beginners (and me!).

Hi Perry
That is the trouble with trying to play a piece from the notatoin without having a teacher. Actualy these two things you have mentioned are identical - just two ways of writing that technique. The confusion probably comes because in many Kinko schools a nayashi is played at only one semitone depth. Here is means 2 semitones.

Chris Moran wrote:

indigo wrote:

Justin wrote: "insist on kan no ro dai meri being strictly at the pitch of ri, or lower even, and insist that it should be more powerful than regular ro"

I would love to hear some examples of this possibility.

And I would love it if Justin would pay my health insurance premium after I have tried.

Peter Hill will be in LA to teach on August 16 & 17 if you are in the area. Otherwise I think there are a number of Chikushinkai shihan available in the U.S., or you can come here to Japan to study. That would be the best way to understand, although you may be able to hear though listening to Yokoyama Katsuya's recordings.

Kiku Day wrote:

The pitch of ro meri (same pitch as ri/ha) is almost inaudible.

Hi Kiku. That would be an example of how not to play, according to our school. It is exactly that which is connected to what I was saying - many instruments can only play in that manner making the expressoin of our school from overly difficult to impossible. Those instruments (such as my Tozan one I mentioned I had to stop using) are inappropriate for use in our school at that level of expression. This is connected to what schools want, and how makers play and make. I understand that in some schools such a ro meri is desired to be weak (in volume) and that will of course be the correct way for those schools. In fact that is how it will naturally sound - the more meri the note, the quieter it gets. Hence my describing this point in Chikushinkai as tough! (For all of us!)

shaman141 wrote:

Justin, when you mention the volume of dai-meri being louder, do you make your kari notes much softer? I am studying Dokyoku and that is how I am learning.

Hi shaman141
I'm not sure I said louder, did I? I thought I said more powerfull. But, actually we are aiming for them to be louder. That is a difficult aim! Of course, we are certainly NOT aiming for them to sound like a kari note. The tone colour is entirely different, and the tention is entirely different too. Kiku has described this very well. The only difference I would say in our school and how Kiku describes it is the volume. This may be to actually incrtease the tension. And then yes, the kari note after is a big release. It (the kari note) can be played softer to give more contrast, yes. And the thing is, even if the meri note is quieter (when you are aiming to make it louder), because of the amount of power in it, it may even seem to be louder than the kari note (even though a machine  may notice it is actually quieter). I hope you get what I mean.

shaman141 wrote:

Kinda hard to explain but it's a sort of intensity built up coming from a heavy, Loud dai-meri to a soft kari note.

Something like that.

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Tairaku wrote:

Justin wrote:

Yungflutes wrote:

On the MD recording I have from Watazumi (made from a cassette tape by Kinya), he plays a Dai Ro Meri and then the anchoring RO. Perhaps someone who studied Tamuke with Yokoyama can tell me how he taught that bit, Nayashi up to Ro or start with Dai Meri? Or both?  This is the kind of of thing that confuses beginners (and me!).

Hi Perry
That is the trouble with trying to play a piece from the notatoin without having a teacher. Actualy these two things you have mentioned are identical - just two ways of writing that technique. The confusion probably comes because in many Kinko schools a nayashi is played at only one semitone depth. Here is means 2 semitones.
/

They are not the same thing. A nayashi has the element of portamento or sliding whereas what Perry describes is a way of playing two separate distinct notes without hearing the slide up. They may be interchangeable in some cases but they are not the same motif.

When I play Ro dai mer nayashi up to ro pitch I keep breathing and you hear the slide. If I play Ro dai meri followed by Ro I will cut the breath temporarily while raising the head. The effect is somewhat like "ha ro" but in otsu. You'd never play "ha ro" with a nayashi for example.

Anyway I think of these as two separate musical expressions. Maybe Perry can advise whether he understands it the same way.

Hi Brian
I understand your point, but we are talking about a specific notation in Chikushinkai in a specific piece of music. Again this stresses the importance of not just seeing the notation but studying the piece under the teacher. I am lucky that my teacher is actually the one who wrote that notation. In this case they are the same. And there should be no slide.

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Last edited by Justin (2008-08-07 03:28:53)

Perry by mistake edited my original post. That can happen to anyone. Don't worry, Perry. I have been asked to try to re-write my post. I find that to be impossible, but I will do a little try here.

I first asked Perry:
This is very interesting! Thank you for clarifying how you feel about dokyoku and the way it has been transmitted to you! I didn't know Kinya was doing this because he so clearly states he learned from Yokoyama. Did he tell you what made him search one generation further up for the pieces he is now transmitting?

Then I went on to comment on the power behind a note, in this case what can power behind a meri note be. This is just copied and pasted from Jim's reply to the post. Thanks Jim for having quoted it.

There are many ways of looking at the power behind a note.

For me the difference in timbre between meri and kari has a lot to do with the power and energy in honkyoku music. The timbre and volume differences between kari and meri CREATES power and energy. In fact kari notes are also thoguht of as the notes where there is a release while meri notes in honkyoku melodies are where tension is built up. Meri notes therefore has a lot of tension and power in them - also when they are played very with very low volume. When a ro meri is played - with less volume than ro that is to come but with a lot of energy and power behind it, it can be such a powerful note. This less loud note may to the uninitiated listener sound meagre, weak or without content, but I think it is here honkyoku melodies build up their power. Imagine the power behind a ro meri where the embouchure has been relaxed more and a muraiki/kusabibuki in PIANISSIMO is heard. The pitch of ro meri (same pitch as ri/ha) is almost inaudible. It is in these almost inaudible places this note have so much power! But the intent has to be there from the player, and focus and concentration should be above normal ability. That's what we train when we play. In these moments you can hear and feel the power of the almost inaudible note. That is anyway how I have learned and more and more learn from older recordings + some of the Myoan players I have met. I had some lessons with people who had learned directly from Jin Nyodo and Watazumi last year, and they could talk about notes in this way.
So, to me - when I hear meri notes pushed to play with almost equal timbre to kari notes, I can feel a lack of energy and power behind them. They all sound like release and therefore do not build up tension.
But I have reached a stage where I try to find the power behind notes that, for me and what I have learned, have no energy. I know there is energy and intent there - it is just different. So, I enjoy the powerful loud meri notes played by players who want to have as many notes equal in timbre and volume. It is, of course, played on instruments build to play meri notes as loud as possible. I know I can't do it - and I have no desire to do it - but I so enjoy listening for these differences in tone colour - which gives the music such a different effect.

Now why not add something new since I am writing this new post:

Justin wrote:

Kiku Day wrote:

The pitch of ro meri (same pitch as ri/ha) is almost inaudible.

Hi Kiku. That would be an example of how not to play, according to our school. It is exactly that which is connected to what I was saying - many instruments can only play in that manner making the expressoin of our school from overly difficult to impossible. Those instruments (such as my Tozan one I mentioned I had to stop using) are inappropriate for use in our school at that level of expression. This is connected to what schools want, and how makers play and make. I understand that in some schools such a ro meri is desired to be weak (in volume) and that will of course be the correct way for those schools. In fact that is how it will naturally sound - the more meri the note, the quieter it gets. Hence my describing this point in Chikushinkai as tough! (For all of us!)

I am not talking about playing instruments that "can only plan in that manner". I am talking about consciously choosing to play like that with an immense amount of power and energy behind. It has nothing to do with the natural low volume or quietness of meri notes. It is the intensity of a quiet note. To be able to play like that is tough - very tough. It is extremely difficult. And since the note doesn't come out blasting in volume, one has to sense this energy with something else - like the energy around a person meditating or the like...
We know by now that Yokoyama/dokyoku/KSK/Chikushinkai is tough about the ro dai meri being loud and powerful and I have no doubt about the toughness there. My point is that ro dai meri is an important note, and many schools are just as tough about it, but aiming at something different! The above is an example of one way of being very particular with ro dai meri. It is very tough to make your teacher satisfied with the ro dai meri played like that, low in volume but with a power as you were playing a ferry horn behind it. You could perhaps say it is a little more esoteric than a loud ro dai meri.

Jim Thompson wrote:

Kiku,  I think you are totally correct on this one. When I first heard Shakuhachi honkyoku I was amazed at how they got that ro to have so much expression in it.  It took ten years of Masa hammering at me about contrast for me to realize part of it was the volume and tone quality difference between tsu meri and ro. I was unconsciously trying to make them equal. That was a very thick mental wall to break down. Now it feels so good and right when do it also have no desire to move away the contrast.  If a person wants to develope strong meri notes thats fine but make sure it's a conscious decision and not an avoidance of the task of mastering the contrast. Your explanation is really good.  You should write it down and keep it handy to whip out as needed.

Jim, I think many of us coming from Western music backgrounds would reach that huge wall (among many others) to break down stone for stone (in your case pieces of metal ). I can only imagine Masa being really fantastic transmitting points like this. Masa was a master in both Western wind instruments as well as shakuhachi etc etc. He understood well the difference in aesthetics and his very wide experience made him understand music with a big heart. He is really missed! I find it very nice that you can tell us about how he taught.

Daniel Ryudo wrote:

Speaking of a listening opportunity, do you happen to know, Kiku, the date this fall when Myoan players will gather together to play at Myoan-ji in Kyoto?

I unfortunately don't know the exact date. Prem should be able to answer that question if he sees this. I will ask for the date. I SO wish I could join, but no traveling for me until I have finished my thesis... and it is moving ahead so slow!
Ryudo, you have written many very interesting and well-written posts, I have enjoyed! But thank you for your positive comment!

Yungflutes wrote:

Justin wrote:

Hi Perry
That is the trouble with trying to play a piece from the notatoin without having a teacher. Actualy these two things you have mentioned are identical - just two ways of writing that technique. The confusion probably comes because in many Kinko schools a nayashi is played at only one semitone depth. Here is means 2 semitones.

Thanks for your reply Justin. I was referring to how beginners can get confused when different teachers teach the same piece differently. I understand the different between the Kinko Nayashi and the Dokyoku Nayashi. But, it's interesting what you write. Does Chikushinkai players see Dai Ro Meri to Ro and Nayashi to Ro as identical? I learned that the two are different and are played differently. It's as Brian describes:

Tairaku wrote:

They are not the same thing. A nayashi has the element of portamento or sliding whereas what Perry describes is a way of playing two separate distinct notes without hearing the slide up.

Hi Perry
With Chikushinkai they are the same more or less. When there is a nayashi preceding ro in honkyoku notation, we never slide up - no portamento. Unless it is specifically written/taught for a specific instance.

But I can't stress enough how important it is to learn each piece with a teacher, as it may change from piece to piece, or place to place, and there may be no indication of this in the notation. (It's music after all). One example where it is better to write ro dai meri instead of nayashi would be if the lenght of time to hold the ro dai meri is significantly longer than you may expect for a nayashi. To make that clear, it could be written as ro dai meri, then ro. Can that be said to be a different technique? I think there's no clear boundary. That's where it can happen that the same intention can be written in different ways. It's up to the notater.
There are many choices to be made when we notate music. In this case it's a choice between whether to write a nayashi or write ro dai meri and then ro. it would be best to ask Furuya-sensei himself. If I might hazard a guess, I might think he avoided writing ro dai meri and then ro in case people from outside the school, such as on the seminars are school runs under KSK, may get confused and start using atari when they come up to ro. I would think a slide would be a lesser mistake than that atari, and maybe easier to correct. Well, that's just my speculation for you.

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Justin wrote:

Yungflutes wrote:

Justin wrote:

Hi Perry
...Does Chikushinkai players see Dai Ro Meri to Ro and Nayashi to Ro as identical? I learned that the two are different and are played differently. It's as Brian describes:

Hi Perry
With Chikushinkai they are the same more or less. When there is a nayashi preceding ro in honkyoku notation, we never slide up - no portamento. Unless it is specifically written/taught for a specific instance.

But I can't stress enough how important it is to learn each piece with a teacher, as it may change from piece to piece, or place to place, and there may be no indication of this in the notation. (It's music after all). One example where it is better to write ro dai meri instead of nayashi would be if the lenght of time to hold the ro dai meri is significantly longer than you may expect for a nayashi. To make that clear, it could be written as ro dai meri, then ro. Can that be said to be a different technique? I think there's no clear boundary. That's where it can happen that the same intention can be written in different ways. It's up to the notater...

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Hi Justin, Thanks for your response. Your one example is one of the ways I see the difference between the two. I just found a version of Tamuke by Yokoyama (from the French Spectrum series), his Dia Ro meri to Ro is quite fast, almost like a pick up note (no portamento). Kinya plays it with a longer duration. Not much but just enough so that the Dai Ro Meri note feels like it has weight.

All the best, Perry

Chris Moran wrote:

(Jim Thompson, what is your experience? Did Masa teach lower than ri pitch for kan ro dai meri?)

No. Not in the context of any particular piece.  Sometimes we tried it more or less for fun or just as  an experiment but never really worked on it as a technique.

Chris Moran wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

Chris Moran wrote:

(Jim Thompson, what is your experience? Did Masa teach lower than ri pitch for kan ro dai meri?)

No. Not in the context of any particular piece.  Sometimes we tried it more or less for fun or just as  an experiment but never really worked on it as a technique.

Yes, I'm mistaken here. I remember Masa teaching kan Ro-meri, not dai-meri. Sorry.

So I stand with my original statement that if anyone wants to try to convince me that kan ro dai meri pitched below ri is necessary for a particular piece of music they also must be willing to visit me in the hospital while I recover from my third hernia operation.

Hi guys
Just to be totally clear in case you misunderstand what I had said, Chikushinkai does not teach ro dai meri to be played lower than the pitch of ri. As you have pointed out, just to get it to the pitch of ri is already very difficult. Then adding to that the requirement for maximum volume and power, we have an incredibly difficult feat.
My mentioning of ro dai meri at a pitch lower than ri was merely a challenge towards the claim that my opinion was "inexperienced" and due to "narrow ears and understanding":

Justin wrote:

If you would like to contribute to the discussion by informing us of other schools who also insist on kan no ro dai meri being strictly at the pitch of ri, or lower even, and insist that it should be more powerful than regular ro, please do contribute such information. That would be very interesting.

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Tairaku wrote:

GEEZ! I have a possum living in my yard. How about if I teach it to fart at the pitch of ri? Or even lower.

Why don't you post some sound files of you playing kan no ro dai meri and ri over and over again with the former being louder than the latter? I'd like to hear that. I don't think it's possible to blow ro meri as loud as ri unless your ri is very weak. Even if you can, the question remains, "Why?".

Hi Brian
Make sure your possum keeps the appropriate tension.

To be clear about louder or not, as I said above:
"I'm not sure I said louder, did I? I thought I said more powerful. But, actually we are aiming for them to be louder. That is a difficult aim!"

That is, we AIM for it to be louder, but it generally doesn't end up being louder in fact. However, we are aiming for it to be as loud as possible. Since this was originally in the context of talking about shakuhachi instruments, this means that we favour (for this aspect) instruments which aid us in this aim. I.e. (for this aspect) the louder an instrument can play such a dai meri, the better, thus this is an important aspect in our choice of instruments. (N.B. on some instruments ro dai meri at the pitch of ri is actually practically impossible. The instruments would be therefore unplayable for our school).

As for a weak ri, it is a ro which we are contrasting it with, and so yes, it is sometimes appropriate to play a softer ro (when starting the note) to help contrast it with the preceding dai meri. This as I see it is to enhance and emphasise the energetic/tone contrast already existing between the dai meri note and the kari note. As I mentioned above:

"Kiku has described this very well. The only difference I would say in our school and how Kiku describes it is the volume. This may be to actually increase the tension. And then yes, the kari note after is a big release. It (the kari note) can be played softer to give more contrast, yes. And the thing is, even if the meri note is quieter (when you are aiming to make it louder), because of the amount of power in it, it may even seem to be louder than the kari note (even though a machine  may notice it is actually quieter). I hope you get what I mean."

It's nice to hear so much interest about such specifics of technique in our school. Quite difficult by forum though. Perhaps at the next festival there can be an inter-school workshop on special techniques of each school. That would be great fun! And I'm sure enhancing for all our playing.

Best wishes

Justin
http://senryushakuhachi.com/

Last edited by Justin (2008-08-09 04:33:16)