FROM SEVENTEEN TO TWENTY-FOUR: INSTRUMENTS OF

BAĞLAMA FAMILY AND TRADITIONAL TONE SYSTEM

Okan Murat ÖZTÜRK

Lecturer, Nineteen May University, State Conservatory

One of the main features that make instruments of the bağlama family important in terms of
the Anatolian music culture is their fret system. The contemporary practices in the
arrangement and voicing of the bağlama frets show a clear orientation towards a quarter-tone-
based and, in a sense, equally spaced system that traditionally contains 17 intervals in the
octave. Due to the increasing prevalence of the bağlama in almost every type of music
production in the music industry and the frequent need to perform according to the Western
tone system, contemporary performers have adopted the use of the tuning devices (tuners),
manufactured according to the tempered system, and set instrument frets with the use of these
devices. In fact, in the present conditions this situation also shows no difference with regard to
the tanbur and other fretted instruments. Commonly, instrument makers and performers now
very often set frets on traditional instruments using the tuning devices that are produced
according to the tempered system.

The aim of this report is to make a contribution to the topic of the structure of the bağlama
frets and, therefore, to the tone system in terms of the trends that have gained a great
momentum nowadays, proceeding from the works of such authors as Yalçın Tura and Cihat
Can that have so far particularly pointed the direction to the basic studies and discussion on
the Turkish musical tone systematics. In this report, the nature of the intervals forming the fret
system of the bağlama and carrying 18 frets in the octave, as well as the logic of their
arrangement will be discussed through such instruments as ud-tanbur-bağlama that reflect the
traditional tone system. An attempt will be made to give a different explanation to such a
common topic of discussion in the Turkish music circles as systems with 17 and 24 intervals
and their interrelations, again proceeding from the bağlama frets.

Tura (1988) and Can (1994, 2001) addressed in a comprehensive manner the similarities of


Kocaeli University – Motif Foundation, report for the International Symposium on Folk Music Instruments,
December 14-16, 2007, Kocaeli

1
the bağlama frets in terms of arrangement and string division with that of the tanbur of
Khorasan (as described by Al-Farabi in the 9th century) and Safi al-Din's system of the 13th
century. This report will attempt to analyse the structure of the bağlama frets, approaching the
aforementioned similarities especially in terms of the concept and practical application of the
tetrachord. In this sense, it is necessary to focus on the functional role of the tetrachord
intervals in the formation, development and usage of the fret structure, as tetrachord intervals
are, in a sense, the basis of the tone system due to their inducing role in the formation of the
octave. In other words, it is impossible to understand the octave and, therefore, the tone
system without understanding the tetrachord. Proceeding from this point, the focus will be on
the question whether various changes in the number of frets on different bağlamas (decrease
or increase), lowering or raising the position of certain frets are an “anomaly” or indicate a
correlation with a particular system. If the order and divisions of the bağlama frets show a
correlation with a certain system, such as the tanbur of Khorasan or Safi al-Din's system, what
are the structure and properties of this system?

There are two relevant fundamental source fields that can be considered for answering this and
similar questions related to the understanding of the traditional musical tone system. The first
of them is the field of the “oral tradition”. This area includes the preferences and techniques
that have been born and transmitted through traditions and customs in different regions, aren't
observed in writing and are peculiar to a more practical level. The other source field, in the
historical sense, is represented by the sources of the “written culture” that directly or indirectly
concern music and allow compiling and comparing information related to the tone system,
besides many spheres of music. However, the information that is transmitted in writing
embodies a different oral tradition in its nature, its simultaneous and perhaps more specialized
character. For instance, together with the information presented in Safi al-Din's Sharafiyyah,
we shouldn't forget about the possibility of changes that may contradict the original source,
being formed in the dynamics of the oral culture amongst the transmission of this information,
mostly oral, from generation to generation in the master-apprentice relationship. In fact, the
possibility of coexistence of the both traditional cultures, often simultaneous, is an important
factor that should be taken into account. While reading Sharafiyyah is one of the ways and
methods of learning (keeping in mind the limitations on the direct access to this source that
were peculiar to the pre-printery times), receiving the information learned from Sharafiyyah
from another source (master) without dependence on any text should be considered as another

2
valid option. Indeed, it is possible to find many examples in the edvar tradition1 that could
shed light on the “inter-textual” relations and music-related “rumours” (Popescu-Judetz,
1998). Moreover, the extent to which the written sources are based on the convention known
to and applied by all musicians at the time of their writing is a separate topic for discussion
and examination. However, what is transmitted by written sources is doubtlessly of great
importance and value for understanding the fret systematics. After all, the information
obtained from these two sources and assessment of the combination of data will allow for
enrichment and the ability to compare the materials that are related to the subject of interest.

So far, many expeditions have been conducted for understanding the practice of the Turkish
native music culture. A part of these expeditions allowed obtaining some information about
various types of the bağlama and sizes of their frets. It is unclear with the use of what methods
and how accurately the given measurements were done. The values in savart2 units, presented
by Gazimihal and Karsel (1937), as well as by Ataman (1938), are the most concrete examples
of publications regarding the bağlama frets. A comparison of these values, transferred to cents,
is provided in (Table 1). It's worth noting that the values of the bağlama specimen that
contains 5 frets within the fourth have no mücenneb and binsir frets, bearing much
resemblance to Safi al-Din's system.

The measurements of two bağlamas with frequency values are drawn in Yönetken's article
(1963) that critically approaches Sarısözen's comma frets. It's worth noting that one of the
bağlamas for which the frets measurements are given has 6 frets in a fourth, while the other
has 7 frets (Table 2). The fret arrangements presented by such researchers as Bartok (1991)
and Picken (1976) are also important for the accurate measurements and inclusion of the data
that were obtained in the process of collection. For instance, Bartok (1991) while arranging
the frets of Kır İsmail's Cura Irızva from an expedition held in Osmaniye in 1936, put a
downward arrow over the second fret starting from the open string of the instrument and
declared that this sign indicated the lowering by about a quarter-tone. If we examine the
provided arrangement of frets, it appears to have five frets in the B-E fourth (1991: 177).

1 Coined after Kitab al-Adwār, a music treatise by Safi al-Din al-Urmawi, “edvar” refers to music theory treaties
that describe Turkish makams (translator's note).

2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savart (translator's note).

3
Apart from such sources as this method or fret charts based on comma units, data concerning
bağlama frets are presented “indirectly” and have, in a sense, an insufficient character. These
qualities are based either on changing the bağlama frets for education purposes (most often,
reduction of the number of frets) or by various differences resulting from the efforts to suit the
theory of comma intervals (increase of the number of frets). I.e., while the trend to reduce the
number of frets is getting stronger among the methods, the trend to standardise the number of
frets that are based on comma interval calculations gains strength in fret charts.

As it is known, there are 17 intervals in the octave in contemporary bağlamas (Figure 1).
Many of the bağlama makers already widely use tabulated fret measurements or even directly
use tuning devices. In the tables that spread to the whole Turkey from such big cities as
Ankara, Istanbul and Izmir, the number of frets on the bağlama fretboard and their distances
from the bridge are already standardised through calculations. In general, there are two
noteworthy styles in the calculations. One of them is the fret measurement based on comma
units. The other is directly based on the chromatic arrangement. The bağlamas that are made
according to these tables by such respected masters as Coşkun Güla and Cafer Açın, who
made their name particularly in the sphere of the bağlama production, mostly contain 17
intervals in the octave and therefore, 18 frets. These numbers of frets exhibit a situation that
has become a standard in terms of their prevalence, frequency of use and adoption.
Doubtlessly, besides the three examples that contain just 10 frets (Figure 2) (Öztürk, 2006),
such as Ramazan Güngör’s cura, there are also alternative examples that are based on the
comma intervals and theoretically allow having 53 frets. Thus, nowadays some bağlama
performers, inspired by the tanbur and lavta, also tie additional frets (in fact, between which
frets they are added, the logic of division of the spaces between the frets and whether they
reflect adherence to a certain system are the questions that deserve a special attention).

According to the theory that is set forth by the Yekta-Arel-Ezgi line, the Turkish music
contains 24 intervals and 25 frets in the octave. In the formation of this theory, the only
ground in the historical sense, set forth as evidence by Yekta and then by Arel and Ezgi, is the
statement that “If there is an arrangement, it has 24 frets”, developed by themselves (Tura,
1988:57–58). Though there are examples when the traditional tone system contains 15, 16 and
17 frets in the octave, the one that has 17 frets is mentioned in most edvars. Nevertheless,
Arel-Ezgi theory and system are bound to the basis of 24 intervals; tanini (T), bakiye (B) and
mücenneb (C), categorized as “melodic intervals” in the old edvars, were standardised again

4
with increasing them to fazla (F), bakiye (B), small (küçük) mücenneb (S), large (büyük)
mücenneb (K), tanini (T) and artık ikili (A). Finding whether there is a “genetic” connection
between the systems of 17 and 24 intervals seems to be an important question that needs to be
discussed and studied at this point, because while studying the systematics of the bağlama
frets it becomes clear that the ties between the frets have the quality that allows completing the
system to 24 frets. Thus, Can (1994: 231) expresses the following point on this issue:

“The 17-tone scales that have second intervals around 150 cents3 in their
structure resemble a kind of an incomplete 24 quarter-tone chromatic scale.
After splitting into two the yet undivided small seconds for transposition
needs, the number of intervals will increase from 17 to 24."

In fact, this was also noticed in the middle of the 19th century by Mikhail Mishaqa in Lebanon
(Maalouf, 2003) and Ali Naqi Vaziri in Iran (Zonis, 1973), and created the theoretical
framework in the form of 24-interval quarter-tone system that is still used in the Arabic and
Persian music.

Before explaining how the 17 intervals of the bağlama inherently accommodate the 24-interval
system, it's worth browsing through the historical information regarding the divisions of the
tetrachord that serve as the basis for the traditional fret system:

1. Before Safi al-Din, the main works among the fundamental sources of the edvar culture
were created by Mausili, Kindi, Farabi, the society called Brethren of Purity (Ikhwãn al-
Safã) and Avicenna. These works are important for discussing the contemporary bağlama
frets and especially the logic of division of the tetrachord on the bağlama. The explanation
of the music theory by the first of them, Ishaq al-Mawsili, and his pupils Ibn al-Munajjim
and al-Qurtubi, referred to as the “Old Arabian School” by Farmer (1986), exhibits the
divisions of the oud strings and frets that are influenced by the approaches based on the
Greek cithara. The basic scale of this school is the Pythagorean scale and the positions of
frets and fingers on the oud are explained according to the tetrachord logic (Figure 3). The
most remarkable point in this division is division of the tetrachord as [tanini + tanini

3 There seems to be a lapse: since a quarter-tone is about 50 cents and the interval of small second (mentioned in
the next sentence) is about 100 cents, the values of the seconds that need to be split into two should be
around 100, not 150 cents (translator's note).

5
(bakiye+mücenneb) + bakiye].

The structure of the oud frets and intervals presented by Al-Kindi exhibits changes (Figure
4), because, while using bakiye on the oud bam, mesles and mesna strings, he uses infisal
(contemporary küçük mücenneb, Greek apotome) on zir and zir-i sani (had), added as the
fifth string. Thus, division of the tetrachord on Kindi's oud became [tanini
(bakiye+fazla+bakiye) + tanini (bakiye+mücenneb) + bakiye). For this report, another
source of great importance in terms of approach are the measurements related to the
arrangement of frets and the interval structure of the 9th century al-Farabi's oud and the
tanbur of Khorasan (Figures 5 and 6). According to Can (2001), the frets of the tanbur of
Khorasan are formed according to tanini intervals, and tanini is divided as
(bakiye+bakiye+comma). However, there arises a contradiction to the revealed
information on Farabi's division of the oud and the tetrachord. Accordingly, if division of
all the taninis on the tanbur of Khorasan as (bakiye+bakiye+comma) is taken as the basis,
there appears the question of division of the tetrachord, and the formation of the octave
looks as completion of the octave by two bakiye intervals put after five taninis. The fret
determination of such a kind, based entirely on the tanini interval, clearly contradicts the
concept of tetrachord that is the basis of the music theory. In case division of the
tetrachord fits the [tanini+bakiye+tanini] logic, the character that possesses three types of
the tanini division that are the basis of the tanbur of Khorasan will also appear to be
critically important in terms of the relations that are to be established among bağlamas.
Accordingly, while the tanini that is situated at the beginning of the first tetrachord is
divided as (bakiye+bakiye+comma), the one that is located at the end is divided as
(bakiye+comma+bakiye). An interesting case is also the third division of tanini (as
comma+bakiye+bakiye), seen in the second tetrachord. The same determination can be
found in the book “Azerbaijani Tar” by Vagıf Abdulgasımov, (1996:37):

“Apart from the 90+90+24 organizing sequence, others, such as 90+24+90 or

24+90+90, are also available in the classic 17-fret system.”

In other words, the tanbur of Khorasan has tetrachords of two different forms and the
tanini interval also demonstrates three types of division. While division of the first
tetrachord is [tanini (bakiye+bakiye+comma) + bakiye + tanini (bakiye+comma+bakiye)],
division of the second one is [tanini (bakiye+comma+bakiye) + tanini
(bakiye+comma+bakiye) + bakiye]. The division of the tanini that completes the octave is
6
 (comma+bakiye+bakiye). The following statement of Al-Farabi is also important in terms
of connections between the instruments (Can, 2001: 74–75):

“There are many frets on the tanbur of Khorasan. These frets cover almost a
half of the scale of the instrument, starting from the bridge. While the
positions of some of them remain the same for all players and regions, the
positions of others are changed depending on the players and regions. The
variable frets are used less often. The number of fixed frets is generally five,
though there can be more of them.”

Although the bağlama is largely standardized nowadays, the specified feature also remains
valid for it. A comparison will be useful for further concretisation of the relations between
the contemporary bağlama and the tanbur of Khorasan, established by Tura (1988) (Figure
7).

The structure of the oud intervals and frets, presented by Avicenna (10th century),
especially with the different values presented in the mücenneb area, bears similarity to the
values of the mücenneb area that are used for bağlama frets. Avicenna has intervals of 149
cents that correspond to the contemporary approximate ¾ of a tone (150 cents) (Figure 8).

2. Edvar tradition and Safi al-Din came to the recipe of the system that contained 17 intervals
in the octave, on which the modern theory was built until the beginning of the last century.
Safi al-Din bound division of the tetrachord and the conforming arrangement of frets on
the oud to a new system in the light of the preceding knowledge and experience (Figure 9).
These 17 intervals include the fourth, the fifth and the octave, and take their origin in the
three-part division of the interval called “tanini”, (bakiye+bakiye+comma). In other words,
two more frets are situated between the two tones of a tanini. Two frets that follow each
other according to the order and don't have any other frets between themselves are denoted
by the bakiye interval (256/243). The mücenneb interval, in its turn, constitutes the
“volatile” part of the system. Tura (1988: 108) calls these melodic intervals, whose values
vary from 15:14 to 11:10, the “mücenneb area” of the traditional tone system. But from
our perspective, the most important criterion for the “recognition” of mücenneb in the
system is the presence of one more fret between the frets that are created by such intervals.
That is, the two tones that belong to the mücenneb interval also have one more fret
between themselves. In our opinion, although mathematical calculations give different
7
 results, this “relative” and even “descriptive” criterion is very important for identifying the
mücenneb interval.

3. The historical background of the concepts of fret and interval in the edvar tradition lies in
the concepts of fret and tetrachord (genus) of the ancient Greek music theory. Both the
tetrachord and pentachord genera of the edvar tradition and the scales that are explained as
their various combinations were formed within this 17-interval system. Starting from
Kindi's oud, such scholars as Farabi, Avicenna, Safi al-Din and Maraghi, who pointed the
direction to the Eastern music theory, took division of the tetrachord as the basis for the
fret systematics. Though some ratios and numeric values vary, the order and ratios of the
fret division that form the tetrachord according to the mentioned sources are shown in
(Table 3).

4. There is an important difference between Safi al-Din's logic in the discovery of frets within
the octave and the way of explaining the oud frets. Accordingly, while Safi al-Din starts
calculating the frets that divide the octave from the octave, the fourth and the fifth in the
section entitled “Fret Divisions”, the explanation of the oud frets begins directly from
dividing the tetrachord on the bam string (Arslan, 2007). This practice of Safi al-Din is
extremely important with regard to the approach to the tone system this report seeks to
introduce, due to the clear importance of the solution to the “fret chaos” that exists in the
edvar lineage, offered by this practice. The key feature of this division is the requirement
of presence of the “bakiye” interval between the “binsir” and “hinsir” frets. However, this
contradicts to Safi al-Din's own calculations of frets within the octave and the values
provided for ratios. As Safi al-Din divides all taninis as (bakiye+bakiye+comma) in the
octave calculation, there appears a 24-cent interval between binsir and hinsir. Yet, in the
arrangement of the same frets on the oud the value of the intermediate interval is presented
as 90 cents. What is more important, fixing the interval between these frets as 90 cents also
allows this interval to appear between these frets on other strings of the oud, where the
frets correspond to other tones. I.e., after determining the fret positions on the Bam string
of the oud, Safi al-Din, – as these frets are known to be “finger positions” [sebbabe
(index), vusta (middle), binsir (ring), hinsir (little)] – saw no need to make separate
calculations for the frets on other strings (Arslan, 2007).

8
5. Since the appearance of the first Turkish edvars in the 15th century, frets appear to be
expressed not through calculations, but within their modal context. In later sources, the
tones A, B, C, D, h, V and Z that form the full tetrachord according to Safi al-Din, are
referred to as Rast, Şuri, Zirgüle, Dügâh, Kürdi, Segâh, Buselik and Çargâh. What is worth
noting here, the observed method of naming the frets can be discrepant or expressed in
different ways in some of the sources. For instance, the modification of the earlier fret
names, Yekgâh, Dügâh, Segâh, Çargâh, all of whom used to indicate the ordinal numbers
(for example, beginning of the use of Neva instead of Pençgâh, Hüseyni instead of Şeşgâh,
Eviç instead of Heftgâh and Gerdaniye instead of Heştgâh); inclusion of the expressions
“nerm” and “tiz” in the octaves (such as Nerm Segâh, Nerm Hüseyni, Tiz Çargâh, Tiz
Neva) and another interesting factor, the possibility of difference in the number of frets in
the sections below and above the “optimal octave” (Rast-Gerdaniye) from their number in
this basic octave, can be seen by tracking the sources (Popescu-Judetz, 2002). In other
words, even in the written tradition there is no full “agreement” about the number and
positions of frets in the tone system, just like in the case of the information related to the
frets of Farabi's tanbur of Khorasan. In addition, for instance, in various sources the tones
that are situated between Çargâh and Neva are referred to as Uzzal, Hicaz and Saba. The
question which of them is bakiye and which is mücenneb remains open. In one source
Hicaz may not be mentioned, in another – Saba can be absent; some of them present Saba
as a nim tone, others – as a mücenneb tone. In this sense, we shouldn't ignore the
fundamental difference that emerges on the practical level between literate and illiterate
Anatolian musicians. Again, there is no doubt that, irrespective of the extent to which it
was put into writing, as the traditional music culture was largely formed within an “oral
tradition”, there is also a variety and differences in the theory and practice, and, most
importantly, conflicts in terms of nomenclature. For instance, while the Kürdi tone is
referred to as Nihavend in some sources, Şuri can be found in notable sources, too. In this
sense, the concepts and terminology of the music culture, learned and passed through
customs and traditions, often seem to protect an individualized character in various fields
as well as on the theoretical plan.

6. As the arrangement of frets and intervals on stringed instruments is basically perceived, so

to speak, as a line of the “only” string (monochord), it is based on the systematisation of
frets and intervals within this linear division. However, in the different tunings that are
possible on stringed instruments, division of each string according to the same ratios leads

9
 to the absence of a particular tone, found on one string, on another string; and therefore,
brings on the problem of the difference between the tones of an octave situated on different
strings. A typical example is the difference in division of the Çargâh-Neva intervals on the
Dügâh and Rast strings of bağlamas. The tones found between these two are Uzzal (I use
this name for flattened Hicaz) and Hicaz on the Dügâh string, while on the Rast string
there are Hicaz and Saba. In other words, the fret that allows the completion of the fifth on
the bağlama string and is found as Saba (Re) on the Rast string (the same tone is found on

the 17th fret of the Yegâh string), is present on the Dügâh as (Do); these two tones have no

equivalents outside the strings on which they are situated. In fact, this question that appears
on the practical level is regarded as non-existent in the “theoretic” aspect of the system due
to the underlying principle of 17 intervals, set up as the “limitation choice” in the theoretic
framework of the system. Likewise, the voicing of the Irak (later Hicazi) genus (C T C) in
the makams whose tonics (karar) are Irak-Segâh can differ from such makams and
compounds as Hicaz, Saba, Nikriz, Hüzzam and Karcığar. The traditional theory (where
melodic intervals are confined to bakiye, mücenneb and tanini) doesn't “recognize” “artık
ikili”, which is said to be disappearing in the contemporary theory, as a melodic interval.
As this interval is naturally considered as “non-existent” in the theory, the preferred
solution that is set forth at the “practical level” is its elimination.

7. While in the sources of the 15th century the string divisions were still explained on the oud,
after the 17th century the fundamental role in the explanations of the tone system seems to
be overtaken by the tanbur. Kantermir and some of the later edvar authors (Hızır Ağa,
Abdülbaki Nasır Dede, Haşim Bey) based their explanations either on the tanbur or on the
ney (the basic instrument of the Mevlevi tradition). As the tanbur neck is two octaves long,
there is offered a “model” for the order of frets on the string that contains all intervals of
the tetrachord and can explain the fret arrangement as “repeats” of this model. Therefore,
there are two locations that can be called the “optimal octave” in terms of the location of
the tonic fret on the tanbur and the usage of its neck. The first of them is the “Rast-
Gerdaniye” octave and the second is Dügâh-Muhayyer. If we compare the Dügâh-
Muhayyer octave with the tanbura, it seems to be formed exactly as on the tanbura, from
“Fourth+Fourth+Tanini”. Generally, the traditional two-octave range is completed by
adding a fourth above the optimal octave (Muhayyer-Tiz Neva; or sometimes there can be
the Muhayyer-Tiz Hüseyni fifth) and tanini+fourth (Yegâh-Rast) below it. If we compare
the methods of dividing the fourth, division of the first tetrachord of the optimal octave
10
 looks like the “model tetrachord”, while all others seem to replicate it. These octave
formations and a comparative diagram of the relation of tetrachordss to the tanbura are
presented on (Figure 10).

8. Division of all tetrachords and the order of frets on bağlamas are based virtually on the same logic
as that coming from the fret division on Kindi's oud. Zalzalian vusta that is used on bağlamas is
clearly the mücenneb fret splitting the (tanini+bakiye) interval. In its position, it splits the bakiye
interval between the old vusta and binsir approximately into halves. This interval that is referred to
as “irha” (R) in some sources and constitutes ¼ of tanini, corresponds to a quarter-tone.
Accordingly, the way of the fret division for the bam string seems to be valid for the fret division
in the basic tetrachord on the bağlamas, which is different from the division of the octave in Safi
al-Din's Sharafiyyah. This fret division (Figure 11) that fills the Dügâh-Neva space exactly
replicates the division of the Neva-Gerdaniye tetrachord, and the tanini interval between
Gerdaniye-Muhayyer, divided according to the first type, completes the octave. Such structure of
the octave, which appears after all other intervals and is obtained by conjunction of tetrachords,
suggests a cycle related to the old Neva genus. Though the fret called Zalzal's vusta can be located
as “optional” in the Muhayyer-Tiz Neva fourth, normally it is not used in this high tetrachord.
Herein, the effect of the scanty use of the specified interval is quite clear.

9. The logic followed by the frets that are “added” to bağlamas shows no significant
deviation from the available fret systematics. Tanini intervals are usually divided, bakiye
intervals are never divided and mücenneb intervals are sometimes divided. Following a
strong today's tendency, division of the frets on bağlamas is moving to some kind of
equally-spaced quarter-tone system within the 17-tone system. For musicians, studio
recording techniques and the continuously increasing demand of and need for a “common
meeting point” of the traditional and the western tone systems, as well as such common
practices as setting frets with the use of tuners developed according to the chromatic
system, seem to be the technological factors fostering the orientation towards a quarter-
tone system. Moreover, this trend was expressed years ago by Tura (1988) due to its
compliance with the structure of the folk music. There is also a similar assessment by Can
(1994) on this topic. By comparing the cent values of the bağlama frets in the tetrachord
with Safi al-Din's system on the basis of this trend, the differences of (Table 4) are
obtained. The values that are close to the quarter-tone system are found in Farabi's and
Avicenna's works. In particular, the difference between the frets called Zalzal's vusta and
sebbabe, which is about 150 cents, shows a great conformity to the mücenneb interval that
corresponds to the use of the 1st and the 2nd fingers by the contemporary bağlama
11
 performers. Therefore, the trend for the quarter-tone orientation should not be considered
as dictated by the technological needs, contrary to what it used to be thought of earlier.

10. The tanini interval on the bağlama reveals two types of fret division. If presented with the
approximate traditional interval names, they acquire the following form:
(~bakiye+irha+irha) and (irha+irha+ ~bakiye). In this division, where the irha interval
receives the value of 50 cents, the mücenneb interval acquires the value of 150 cents
because of (~bakiye-irha). These values, highly characteristic for such bağlama tones as
Segâh, Hisar, Saba and Eviç in terms of the fret voicing, correctly express the practice. As
stated by Karl Signell (2006) a year ago, the average value within the interval called
“incomplete large mücenneb” (“eksik büyük mücenneb”) in the measurements of the
intervals between the frets of Necdet Yaşar's tanbur, is 141 cents, being obtained from the
values that are up to 11 cents higher or lower than itself. In fact, these measurements are
quite important for the tanbur-tanbura relations and the tradition in terms of voicing of the
mücenneb interval, because the specified average values between certain makams and
certain frets largely conform to the values of bağlamas. According to the specified fret
division, the logic of the arrangement of the basic tetrachord on bağlamas that is based on
tanini and bakiye, which is (T+B+T), (old Neva genus) on Dügâh, seems to be repeated in
the same manner on the Neva fret. This “conjunct” combination of tetrachords, starting
from the open string, arranged as [(T+B+T)+(T+B+T)+T], reveals the logic of the octave
division on the bağlama.

11. Given the relations with the tunings of other strings, the 17-interval system on a single
string contains an inherent “hidden” 24-interval system. In this case, a system with 24
intervals in the octave is obtained in seven steps by means of adding a fret given in the
following order and found on a string, to a string where it is absent, in a “nexus” with the
fret intervals of that string. The order of the occurrence of these frets is as follows:

a) The 9th fret on the Rast string, the same as the 17th fret on the Yegâh string, is
available in the system as the Saba fret. However, there is no unison fret for this
fret on the Dügâh string. Adding this fret on the Dügâh string (the 1st addition)
leads to the appearance of two new tones on the Rast and Yegâh strings.

12
 b) The traditional theory doesn't have any specific names for the new tones produced
by the Saba fret on the Rast and Yegâh strings. With such peculiarity as leading to
division of the bakiye interval between the Buselik and Çargâh frets on the Rast
string into two (the 2nd addition) - by which the rule of the indivisibility of bakiye
is also violated (!) – it also leads to the addition of a fret between the Irak and Rast
frets (the 3rd addition).

c) As there are no equivalents for the two new frets on the Dügâh string, there is a
need for fastening on Dügâh the ones having the unison or octave relationship with
them. Accordingly, there will be added a fret between the Buselik and Çargâh frets
on the Dügâh string, making a unison with the fret on the Rast string (the 4th
addition); and one more fret between the Mahur and Gerdaniye frets, making an
octave with the fret on the Yegâh string. The changes brought to the Yegâh and
Rast strings by these new frets are as follows: the fret that is added between the
Mahur and Gerdaniye frets, a step that allows splitting the interval between the
Buselik and Çargâh frets on the Yegâh string, has already been obtained. But the
new fret added on the Rast string leads to splitting the interval between the Hüseyni
and Acem frets into two (the 5th addition)4, which again brings on unison and
octave relationships.

d) Producing unison on the Dügâh string, division of the interval between the Hüseyni
and Acem frets on the Rast string also leads to division of the interval between
Dügâh and Kürdi on the Yegâh string, as well as the interval between Neva and
Bayati on the Rast string. The two new frets that are obtained by this step need to
be added on the Dügâh string.

e) Accordingly, adding a fret between Dügah and Kürdi on the Dügah string (the 6th
addition), and one more between Neva and Bayati (the 7th addition) ensures that all
tones of the 24-interval system hidden in the 17-tone system take their places and
have perfect unison and octave relationships between themselves on different
strings.

4 First of all, on the Yegâh string (translator's note).

13
 CONCLUSIONS

Bağlama, which can have 10, 12, 14, 18 or 20 frets in all its varieties, reflects the principles of
the tone system established by Farabi and Safi al-Din. Increasing or decreasing the number of
frets of the 17-interval system without going contrary to its principles, removal or addition of
frets to the system, are peformed according to the same logic. Though the 17-interval system
theoretically hosts a 24-interval system, it continues being 17-interval on the practical level,
entirely due to the performers' preferences and practices. Though differences can be observed
in the current fret system, especially in the voicing of the mücenneb intervals, the theoretical
framework has the inherent ability to get standardised and adapt to all kinds of “new”
situations. In fact, contemporary bağlama players and performers seem to be moving towards
an equally-spaced quarter-tone system within 17 intervals. This feature also indicates the
ability of the 17-tone system to maintain the crucial importance, qualifications and
peculiarities in terms of performance of the makam music for rather long periods. In this
spirit, I consider and suggest naming the frets found on bağlamas not as Si b2, Do #3, but by
classifying them in the following way according to the nature of the three intervals inspired by
Kantemir (2001) (Table 5).

BIBGLIOGRAPHY

ABDULGASSİMOV, Vagıf (1996) Azerbaycan Tarı (Çev. S. Turhan), Yardımcı Grafik,

Ankara.
ARSLAN, Fazıl (2007) Safiyüddin-i Urmevi ve Şerefiyye Risalesi, Atatürk KM Yay.,
Ankara.
ATAMAN, Sadi Y. (1938) Anadolu Halk Sazları, Burhaneddin Matbaası, İstanbul.
BARTOK, Bela (1991) Küçük Asya’dan Türk Halk Musikisi (Çev. B. Aksoy), Pan Yay.,
İstanbul.

CAN, Cihat (2001), XV. Yüzyıl Türk Musikisi Nazariyatı (Ses Sistemi), MÜ SBE İTS ABD,
(Yayımlanmamış DT), İstanbul.
------------- (1994) “Türk Müziğinde Ses Sistemleri” GEFAD Kış, Sf: 228–264.
FARMER, Henry G. (1986) Studies in Oriental Music, (Ed. E. Neubauer), Institut für
Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften an der Johann Wolfgang
Goethe-Universitat, Frankfurt am-Main.
KANTEMİR, Dimitrie (2001), Kitab-ı Edvar (XVII. Yy), (Ed. Y. Tura), YKY, İstanbul.
KÖSEMİHAL, Mahmut R. ve H. S. Karsel (1937) Ankara Bölgesi Musiki Folkloru.
MAALOUF, Shireen (2003) “Mikhail Mishaqa: Virtual Founder of the Twenty-Four Equal
14
 Quartertone Scale”, JAOS, Vol. 123, No.4, Sf: 835–840.
PICKEN, Laurence (1976) Folk Musical Instruments of Turkey, Oxford UP, London.
POPESCU-JUDETZ, Eugenia (2002) Tanburi Küçük Artin, Pan Yay., İstanbul.
SIGNELL, Karl (2006) Makam (1977), (Çev. İ. Gökçen), YKY, İstanbul.
TURA, Yalçın (1988) Türk Musikisinin Meseleleri, Pan Yay., İstanbul.
YÖNETKEN, Halil B. (1963) “Türk Halk Musikisinde Oktav Bölümü”, TFA, S:15,
Sf: 3029–3031.

This report was translated into English by Aleh Zhudki. The original text (in Turkish) is
accessible at: http://www.muzikegitimcileri.net/bilimsel/bildiri/O-Ozturk_4.pdf

15
 TABLE-1

COMPARISON OF BAĞLAMA FRET VALUES PROVIDED BY GAZİMİHAL-KARSEL (1937) and ATAMAN (1938)

Safi al-Din Gazimihal and Karsel (1937) Ataman (1938)

Tetrachord interval Bağlama-1: Bağlama-3: Bağlama-2: Bozuk: Six-string:
Oud Tanbur 730 mm ? mm
780 mm 762 mm 728 mm
Fret Name Cent Savart Cent Savart Cent Savart Cent Savart Cent Savart Cent Savart Cent
Open String: Mutlak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1st Fret: Zaid 90 22,8 91,2 39 156 32 128 30,2 120,8 22,7 90,8 26,6 106,4
2nd Fret: Mücenneb 180 45,6 182,4 - - - - - - - - - -
3rd Fret: Sebbabe 204 51,2 204,8 51,3 205,2 49,4 197,6 50,5 202 54 216 49 196
4th Fret: Acem Vusta 294 73,8 295,2 74,5 298 77,1 308,4 71,1 284,4 72 288 77 308
5th Fret: Zalzal’s Vusta 384 96,5 386 97,6 390,4 96,6 386,4 96,5 386 96,2 384,8 98,7 394,8
6th Fret: Binsir 408 102,2 408,8 - - - - - - - - - -
7th Fret: Hinsir 498 125 500 125,7 502,8 123 492 121,8 487,2 125 500 125 500

16
 TABLE-2

COMPARISON OF BAĞLAMA FRET VALUES PROVIDED BY YÖNETKEN (1963)

Yönetken (1963)
Tetrachord Interval
For La=880 For La=870

Frets Frequency Cents Difference Frequency Cents Difference

Open String (La) 220,0 0 0 435 0 0

1st Fret (Si ) 233,5 103,1 103,1 461 100,5 100,5

2nd Fret (Si ) 241,5 161,4 58,3 485 188,4 87,9

3rd Fret (Si) 246,9 199,7 38,3 488 199,1 10,7

4th Fret (Do) 261,6 299,9 100,2 517 299,0 99,9

5th Fret (Do #) 277,2 400,2 100,3 548 399,8 100,8

6th Fret (Re ) - - 578 492,1 92,3

7th Fret (Re) 293,7 500,6 100,4 580 498,1 6

17
 FRETS AND INTERVALS WITHIN
DÜGAH-MUHAYYER OCTAVE ON
CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS

(the fret arrangement and notes are provided according to division of the lowermost string)

NOTES La Si Si Si Do Do Do Re Mi Mi Mi Fa Fa Fa Sol la la la
INTERVAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
No.

~B R R ~B R R ~B ~B R R ~B R R ~B ~B R R
INTERVAL
TYPE

Tiz Şuri

Muhayyer
Gerdaniye
Eviç
Bayati
Uzzal

Hüseyni

Şehnaz
Hicaz

Neva
Çargâh

Acem

Mahur
Hisar
Dügâh

Buselik
Kürdi

Segâh

FRETS

FIGURE - 1

18
 FRETS AND INTERVALS WITHIN DÜGAH-
MUHAYYER OCTAVE ON RAMAZAN
GÜNGÖR’S 3-STRING CURA

(the fret arrangement and notes are provided according to division of the lowermost string)

NOTES La Si Si Do Do Re Mi Fa Fa Sol la (This fret was added to

the instrument by Güngör later.)
INTERVAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No.

B C B B C T B B C T
INTERVAL TYPE

Gerdaniye
Hüseyni
Hicaz

Neva
Çargâh

Acem

Mahur

Muhayyer
Dügâh

Buselik
Kürdi

FRETS

FIGURE - 2

19
 OUD INTERVALS ACCORDING TO MAUSILI-
MUNAJJIM and QURTUBI (VIII-IX. CC.)

4. string

3. string

1. string
(mesles)

2. string
(bam)

(mesna)

(zir)
Intervals

Open string (mutlak) 0 498 996 294

204 tanini (T)

1st finger (sebbabe) 204 702 1200 498
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (vusta) 294 792 90 588
114 mücenneb (C)
3rd finger (binsir) 408 906 204 702

90 bakiye (B)
4th finger (hinsir) 498 996 294 792
[906]
996

FIGURE - 3

20
 AL-KINDI’S DIVISION OF TETRACHORD
AND OUD FRETS (IX. C.)

(zir-i sani)
1st string
3rd string

2nd string
(mesles)

Added
(mesna)
4th string

string
(zir)
(bam)
Intervals
Open string (mutlak) 0 498 996 294 792
90 bakiye (B)
1st finger (mücenneb 1) 90 588 1086 [384] [882]
24 fazla (F)
1st finger (mücenneb 2) [114] [612] [1110] 408 906
90 bakiye (B)
1st finger (sebbabe) 204 702 1200 498 996
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (vusta) 294 792 90 588 1086
114 mücenneb (C)
3rd finger (binsir) 408 906 204 702 1200
90 bakiye (B)
4th finger (hinsir) 498 996 294 792

FIGURE - 4

21
 AL-FARABI’S DIVISION OF TETRACHORD
AND OUD FRETS (IX-X. CC.)

The highest
string (had)
3rd string
(mesles)

2nd string

1st string
4th string

(mesna)
(bam)

(zir)
Intervals
Open string (mutlak) 0 498 996 294 792
90 bakiye (B)
1st finger (old mücenneb) 90 588 1086 384 882
55 ~ irha (R)
1st finger (Persian mücenneb) 145 643 1141 439 937
23 ~ fazla (F)
1st finger (Zalzal’s mücenneb) 168 666 1164 462 960
36 ?
1st finger (sebbabe) 204 702 1200 498 996
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (old vusta) 294 792 90 588 1086
9 ?
2nd finger (Acem vusta) 303 801 99 597 1095
52 ~ irha (R)
2nd finger (Zalzal’s vusta) 355 853 151 649 1147
53 ~ irha (R)
3. finger (binsir) 408 906 204 702 1200
90 bakiye (B)
4. finger (hinsir) 498 996 294 792

FIGURE - 5
22
 AL-FARABI’S STUDY OF FRETS AND INTERVALS WITHIN
DÜGAH-MUHAYYER OCTAVE ON TANBUR OF KHORASAN

(the fret arrangement and notes are provided according to division of the lowermost string)

NOTES La Si Si Si Do Do Re Re Re Mi Mi Fa Fa Fa Sol Sol la la

INTERVAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
No.

B B C B B C B B C B B C B B C B B
INTERVAL TYPE

Eviç

Gerdaniye
Şehnaz
Acem

Muhayyer
Uzzal

Hüseyni

Tiz Şuri
Bayati
Hicaz

Neva
Çargâh

Mahur
Hisar
Segâh
Buselik
Kürdi
Dügâh

FRETS

FIGURE - 6
23
 LOCATIONS OF FIXED FRETS ON TANBUR OF KHORASAN AND
STRUCTURE OF FRETS AND INTERVALS ON CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS

(The interval values for this diagram were taken from Tura (1988).)
TANBUR OF KORASAN
1:1 9:8 4:3 3:2 2:1 9:4

Tanini Tanini+Bakiye Tanini Fourth Tanini

TANBURU

TETRACHORD TANİNİ TETRACHORD

O C T A V E
CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS

TETRACHORD TETRACHORD TANİNİ

1:1 9:8 4:3 3:2 2:1
18:17

81:68

27:22

81:64

24:17

27:17

27:16

32:17

64:33
12:11

16:11

18:11

16:9
Gerdaniye
Hüseyni

Eviç
Bayati
Kürdi

Uzzal

Hicaz

Şehnaz
Neva
Çargâh

Acem

Mahur
Segâh

Hisar
Buselik

Muhayyer
Dügâh

Tiz Şuri
24
FIGURE - 7
 OUD FRETS ACCORDING TO AVICENNA (XI.C.)
(the interval between zir and mesna strings is major third)

The highest
2nd string
3rd string

1st string
(mesles)
4th string

(mesna)

string
(bam)

(zir)
Intervals
Open string (mutlak) 0 498 996 204 702
112 ~ mücenneb (C)
1st finger (mücenneb) 112 610 1108 316 814
27 ~ fazla (F)
1st finger (Zalzal’s mücenneb) 139 637 1135 343 841
65 ?
1st finger (sebbabe) 204 702 1200 408 906
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (Persian vusta) 294 792 90 498 996
149 ?
2nd finger (Zalzal’s vusta) 343 841 139 547 1045
65 ?
3rd finger (binsir) 408 906 204 612 1110
90 bakiye (B)
4th finger (hinsir) 498 996 294 702 1200

FIGURE - 8

25
 OUD FRETS ACCORDING TO SAFI AL-DIN (XIII. C.)

string (hadd)
The highest
2nd string

1st string
(mesna)
3rd string
4th string

(mesles)

(zir)
(bam)
Intervals
Open string (mutlak) 0 498 996 204 792
90 bakiye (B)
1st finger (zaid) 90 588 1086 384 882
90 bakiye (B)
1st finger (mücenneb) 180 678 1176 474 972
24 fazla (F)
1st finger (sebbabe) 204 702 1200 498 996
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (Persian vusta) 294 792 90 588 1086
90 bakiye (B)
2nd finger (Zalzal’s vusta) 384 882 180 678 1176
24 fazla (F)
3rd finger (binsir) 408 906 204 702 1200
90 bakiye (B)
4th finger (hinsir) 498 996 294 792

FIGURE - 9

26
 TABLE–3

FRET DIVISIONS THAT CREATE TETRACHORD

FRET STRING/FINGER INTERVAL CENT SAMPLE STRING DIVISION

Mutlak Open string - 0 Dügâh Rast

Zaid Bakiye 90 Kürdi Şuri

Mücenneb-i Sebbabe Index Finger Bakiye 180 Segâh Zirgüle

Sebbabe Comma 204 Buselik Dügâh

Old (kadim) Vusta Bakiye 294 Çargâh Kürdi

Middle Finger
Zalzal’s Vusta Bakiye 384 Uzzal Segâh

Binsir Ring Finger Comma 408 Hicaz Buselik

Hinsir Little Finger Bakiye 498 Neva Çargâh

27
 COMPARISON OF “OPTIMAL OCTAVE” WITH
TETRACHORDS OF TANBUR and TANBURA

A.) TANBUR

OPTIMAL OCTAVE (FOURTH+FOURTH+TANİNİ)

(TYPE 1)
TANİNİ
LOWER TETRACHORD TANİNİ TETRACHORD HIGH TETRACHORD TANİNİ TİZ TETRACHORD
(MODEL REPLICATION) (TYPE 1) (MODEL) (MODEL REPLICATION) (TYPE 1) (MODEL REPLICATION)

DÜGÂH
YEGÂH

RAST

TİZ NEVA
NEVA

MUHAYYER

(TİZ HÜSEYNİ)
GERDANİYE
B.) TANBURA
OPTIMAL OCTAVE (FOURTH+FOURTH+TANİNİ)

TETRACHORD HIGH TETRACHORD TANİNİ TİZ TETRACHORD

(MODEL) (MODEL REPLICATION) (TYPE 1) (MODEL REPLICATION)
DÜGÂH

NEVA

MUHAYYER

TİZ NEVA
GERDANİYE
28
FIGURE - 10
TETRACHORD DIVISION ON CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS
(according to the equally-tempered system)

(middle string)
(upper string)

(lower string)
2nd string
3rd string

1st string
Intervals
Open string (mutlak) 500 0 700
100 ~bakiye (B)
1st finger (zaid) 600 100 800
50 ~irha (R)
1st finger (mücenneb) 650 150 850
50 ~irha (R)
1st finger (sebbabe) 700 200 900
100 ~bakiye (B)
2nd finger (Persian vusta) 800 300 1000
50 ~irha (R)
2nd finger (Zalzal’s vusta) 850 350 1050
50 ~irha (R)
3rd finger (binsir) 900 400 1100
100 ~bakiye (B)
4th finger (hinsir) 1000 500 1200

FIGURE - 11

29
 TABLE–4

COMPARISON OF BAĞLAMA FRETS WITHIN TETRACHORD

WITH SAFI AL-DIN’S SYSTEM

QUARTER-
FRET SAFİ AL-DİN DIFFERENCE
TONE
Mutlak 0 0 0
Zaid 100 90 +10
Mücenneb 50 90 -40
Sebbabe 50 24 +26
Persian Vusta 100 90 +10
Zalzal’s Vusta 50 90 -40
Binsir 50 24 +26
Hinsir 100 90 +10
Total 500 498 +2

30
COMPARION OF DIVISIONS OF TETRACHORD ON TANBUR OF KHORASAN,
IN SAFI AL-DIN’S SYSTEM AND ON CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS

TRADITIONAL TETRACHORD FRETS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Çargâh
Buselik
Dügâh

Segâh
Kürdi

Hicaz

Neva
Saba
AL-FARABI’S SYSTEM (X. C.)
“Tanbur of Khorasan”:
Division of the tetrachord: Tanini+Tanini+Bakiye
A ‘A F H D KR h Tanini+Bakiye+Tanini
Division of tanini: a.) bakiye+bakiye+comma
90 90 24 90 90 24 90 b.) bakiye+comma+bakiye
c.) comma+bakiye+bakiye
SAFI AL-DIN’S SYSTEM (XIII. C.)
Division of the tetrachord: Tanini+Tanini+Bakiye
A B C D h V ZH Division of tanini: bakiye+bakiye+comma
90 90 24 90 90 90 24
Uzzal

CONTEMPORARY BAĞLAMAS

La Si Si Si Do Do Do Re A.) According to the comma system:

Division of the tetrachord: Tanini+Bakiye+Tanini
Division of tanini: a.) 4+3+2 comma
90 ~66 ~48 90 ~66 ~48 90
b.) 3+2+4 comma
Uzzal

B.) According to the quartertone system:

Division of the tetrachord: Tanini+Bakiye+Tanini
La Si Si Si Do Do Do Re Division of tanini: a.) bakiye+irha+irha
b.) irha+irha+bakiye
100 50 50 100 50 50 100

FIGURE - 12 31
 TABLE–5

KINDS AND NAMES OF BAĞLAMA FRETS

TAM FRETS NİM FRETS YAN FRETS

YEGÂH
NERM BAYATİ
TANİNİ LOW ER FOURTH

NERM HİSAR
NERM HÜSEYNİ
NERM ACEM
IRAK
REHAVİ
RAST
ZİRGÜLE
ŞURİ
DÜGÂH
KÜRDİ
SEGÂH
BUSELİK
ÇARGÂH
UZZAL
OPTIMAL OCTAVE

HİCAZ
NEVA
BAYATİ
HİSAR
HÜSEYNİ
ACEM
EVİÇ
MAHUR
GERDANİYE
ŞEHNAZ
TİZ ŞURİ
MUHAYYER
SÜNBÜLE
TİZ FOURTH

TİZ SEGÂH
TİZ BUSELİK
TİZ ÇARGÂH
TİZ HİCAZ
TİZ NEVA

32