Comparative Analysis of Swaras in Indian Classical Music: A  
Structural, Theoretical, and Pedagogical Perspective  
Dr. Nishshanka Abeyrathna  
Department of South Indian Music University of the Visual and Performing Arts, Colombo, Sri Lanka  
Received: 22 November 2025; Accepted: 28 November 2025; Published: 09 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This paper presents a comparative study of Swaras in Indian classical music, with a particular focus on the  
structural, tonal, and theoretical differences between the Hindustani and Carnatic traditions. Drawing upon  
ancient treatises and modern scholarship, the research analyzes the evolution, classification, and practical  
applications of Swaras. The study also explores improvisational techniques, modal systems, and  
ornamentation, thereby offering a systematic understanding of the role of Swaras in pedagogy and  
performance. This comparative inquiry contributes to the discourse on musical divergence and unity within the  
broader framework of Indian classical music.  
This study provides a deeper investigation into the conceptual, structural, and pedagogical interpretations of  
Swaras in the Hindustani and Carnatic classical traditions. Beyond describing differences, it critically  
examines how pitch classification, modal systems, microtonality, ornamentation, pedagogy, and aesthetic  
orientation contribute to unique musical identities. The study contributes to broader Indian musicology by  
explaining how theoretical frameworks, performance practice, and pedagogy collectively shape Swara  
interpretation in contemporary practice.  
Keywords: Swaras, Indian classical music, Hindustani music, Carnatic music, music theory, pedagogy  
INTRODUCTION  
Indian classical musicencompassing the Hindustani and Carnatic traditionsis one of the most intricate  
melodic systems globally. At its core lies the concept of Swaras, the fundamental pitch units that structure  
ragas and define melodic expression. Although both traditions draw upon ancient Sanskrit treatises such as the  
Nāṭyaśāstra and Sangīta Ratnākara, their evolution diverged significantly as a result of regional histories,  
pedagogical philosophies, and aesthetic preferences. Although current research often broadly compares  
Hindustani and Carnatic music, there is a need for a detailed, integrated analysis that connects theoretical  
constructs with actual performance practice and pedagogical science. This study addresses that need by  
combining textual analysis with comparative structural mapping and pedagogical insights.  
Indian classical music is one of the oldest and most sophisticated musical traditions in the world, characterized  
by its intricate melodic and rhythmic systems, improvisational depth, and spiritual foundations. Central to this  
tradition is the concept of Swarasthe basic tonal elements that form the foundation of melody and raga  
construction. Both the Hindustani (North Indian) and Carnatic (South Indian) systems of classical music share  
a common heritage rooted in ancient treatises such as the Nāṭyaśāstra and the Sangīta Ratnākara, which  
establish the theoretical underpinnings of Swaras and their role in musical expression (Bharata, 1996;  
Sarangadeva, 2002).  
Despite these shared origins, the two systems have diverged significantly over centuries due to cultural,  
geographical, religious, and historical influences. The Hindustani tradition evolved through interaction with  
Persian and Islamic cultures, especially during the Mughal period, leading to stylistic innovations and the  
development of the Thaat system of raga classification (Bhatkhande, 1934). In contrast, the Carnatic tradition  
Page 761  
retained a more orthodox and text-based approach, emphasizing the Melakarta raga framework and preserving  
many elements of ancient Sanskritic theory (Venkatamakhi, 2002).  
Understanding the role of Swaras in these traditions is essential for comprehending the broader structure of  
Indian classical music. While both traditions utilize seven primary Swaras, their treatment, ornamentation, and  
microtonal nuances differ greatly. These differences are not merely technical but are deeply embedded in  
performance practice, pedagogical approaches, and aesthetic philosophy.  
This paper seeks to conduct a detailed comparative analysis of Swaras from both a structural and theoretical  
perspective, with the aim of highlighting how similar conceptual elements have been interpreted and applied  
differently in the Hindustani and Carnatic music traditions. Through an exploration of scale formation, pitch  
classification, ornamentation, improvisation, and historical evolution, this study contributes to a nuanced  
understanding of the role of Swaras in shaping the identity of Indian classical music.  
2. Research Aim and Questions  
The aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive comparative analysis of Swaras in the Hindustani and  
Carnatic systems, examining their theoretical structure, practical application, and pedagogical implications.  
Research Questions  
1. How are Swaras conceptualized, classified, and applied differently in the two traditions?  
2. How do these differences shape improvisation, performance aesthetics, and musical pedagogy?  
3. What historical and cultural factors contributed to divergence in Swara interpretation?  
METHODOLOGY  
This research uses a qualitative, comparative, and analytical approach including: 3.1  
Textual Analysis  
Primary sources:  
1. Nāṭyaśāstra (Bharata)  
2. Sangīta Ratnākara (Sarangadeva)  
3. Chaturdaṇḍi Prakāśikā (Venkatamakhi)  
Secondary sources:  
1. Bhatkhande’s Hindustani Sangeet Paddhati  
2. Modern scholarship on acoustics, pedagogy, and raga theory  
3.2 Performance Analysis  
Selected recordings and compositions were examined for ornamentation, improvisation, and Swara treatment.  
3.3 Conceptual Mapping  
Structured comparison of Thaat vs. Melakarta; Shuddha/Komal/Tīvrā vs. alphanumeric Carnatic variants.  
Theoretical Framework 4.1 Concept of Swara  
A Swara is not simply a pitch but an expressive melodic entity with tonal, emotive, and contextual meaning.  
Page 762  
Both traditions recognize seven primary Swaras (Sa, Ri/Re, Ga, Ma, Pa, Dha, Ni), yet their variant structures,  
notation systems, and ornamentation rules differ significantly.  
4.2 Śruti: Microtonal Dimension  
Śruti—the smallest audible pitch differenceforms the microtonal basis of Indian classical music.  
Tradition  
Hindustani  
Carnatic  
Interpretation of Śruti  
Flexible, aesthetic, realized through Meend, Andolan  
Theoretically fixed 22 Śrutis with defined Swara positions  
Carnatic music preserves a more textually grounded microtonal model, while Hindustani Śruti is more  
interpretive and performance-driven.  
4.3 Ancient Origins and Foundational Texts  
The theoretical foundation of Indian classical music is rooted in ancient Sanskrit treatises such as the  
Nāṭyaśāstra (Bharata, 1996), which introduces early concepts of Jātis, the precursors to modern Rāgas.  
Although the modern concept of Rāga is not explicitly defined, the treatise lays a foundational framework for  
the melodic organization that later evolved differently in the two traditions.  
Sarangadeva’s Sangīta Ratnākara (13th century) is a seminal text that bridges the Northern and Southern  
musical systems, reinforcing the existence of a unified early tradition that diverged over time (Sarangadeva,  
2002).  
Swara Classification  
Both systems recognize seven basic notes (Swaras): Shadja (Sa), Rishabha (Ri), Gāndhāra (Ga), Madhyama  
(Ma), Panchama (Pa), Dhaivata (Dha), and Nishāda (Ni). However, each tradition has developed distinct  
terminologies and classifications:  
1. Hindustani music classifies Swaras as Shuddha (natural), Komal (flat), and Tīvrā (sharp).  
2. Carnatic music uses alphanumeric designations such as R1, R2, R3 to indicate pitch variations  
(Venkatamakhi, 1934/2002).  
The Carnatic tradition identifies 22 Śrutis (microtones) in an octave, which are more rigidly codified than in  
Hindustani music, where microtonal expressions are conveyed through Meend, Andolan, and Gamak  
(Viswanathan & Allen, 2004).  
5. Comparative Structural Analysis  
5.1 Scale and Modal Frameworks  
1. Hindustani music follows the Thaat system, comprising 10 parent scales categorized by Vishnu  
Narayan Bhatkhande (1934).  
2. Carnatic music employs the Melakarta system, a comprehensive framework of 72 parent Rāgas  
formalized by Venkatamakhi in the 17th century (Venkatamakhi, 2002).  
These scale systems are crucial to raga formation and are integral to both theoretical instruction and creative  
performance.  
Page 763  
Hindustani Thaat system (10)  
Primarily pedagogical and classificatory.  
Carnatic Melakarta system (72)  
A complete, mathematical framework governing raga generation.  
Feature  
Hindustani  
10 Thaats  
Carnatic  
Parent Scales  
72 Melakartas  
Swara Variants  
Microtonality  
Theoretical Orientation  
Shuddha, Komal, Tīvrā  
Flexible  
R1, R2, R3 … N1, N2, N3  
Codified (22 Śrutis)  
Systematic & generative  
Descriptive  
5.2 Correspondence of Swaras  
Swara Correspondence Chart  
Swara  
Hindustani Notation  
S
Carnatic Notation  
Shadja  
S
Rishabha  
Gāndhāra  
R (Komal, Shuddha)  
G (Komal, Shuddha)  
R1, R2, R3  
G1, G2, G3  
M1, M2  
P
Madhyama M (Shuddha, Tīvrā)  
Panchama  
Dhaivata  
Nishāda  
P
D (Komal, Shuddha)  
N (Komal, Shuddha)  
D1, D2, D3  
N1, N2, N3  
6. Ornamentation and Aesthetic Interpretation  
Each tradition exhibits unique stylistic techniques for ornamenting Swaras:  
1. Hindustani music emphasizes Meend (glide), Kan (grace note), Murki (short trill), and Gamak  
(oscillation) (Bhatkhande, 1934).  
2. Carnatic music utilizes Kampita (oscillation), Jāru (slide), Nokku (grace flick), and Spuritam  
(repeated touch) (Subramaniam, 1981).  
These ornamentations reflect regional aesthetic preferences and significantly influence the expression of a  
Rāga. Ornamentation (Gamakas) shapes Swara identity more strongly in Indian classical music than in most  
world musical traditions.  
6.1 Hindustani Ornamentation  
1. Meend Gliding between notes  
2. Andolan Slow oscillation  
Page 764  
3. Murki Quick turn  
4. Gamak Strong oscillatory expression  
Character: fluid, introspective, continuous.  
6.2 Carnatic Ornamentation  
1. Kampita Oscillation on a Swara  
2. Jāru Slide  
3. Nokku Grace flick  
4. Spuritam Accented repetition  
Character: rhythmically precise, ornamentation as essential grammar.  
7. Pedagogical Approaches  
7.1 Hindustani Pedagogy  
1. Oral tradition (gurushishya parampara)  
2. Emphasis on imitation and absorption  
3. Early focus on meend-based intonation  
4. Gharana-specific stylistic identities  
7.2 Carnatic Pedagogy  
1. Structured curriculum (Sarali → Jantai → Alankaras → Geethams) Early introduction of gamakas  
2. Standardized teaching texts and patterns  
3. Strong theoretical grounding through Melakarta system  
Carnatic pedagogy is more standardized; Hindustani pedagogy prioritizes lineage and stylistic nuance.  
8. Improvisation Frameworks  
Improvisation serves as a central feature in both traditions, albeit in structurally different formats:  
1. Hindustani music: Improvisation is articulated through Ālāp (non-rhythmic exploration), Jod  
(rhythmic buildup), and Tān (rapid melodic runs).  
2. Carnatic music: Improvisation occurs in structured forms such as Ālāpana (non-metrical elaboration),  
Niraval (lyrical improvisation), and Kalpana Swaras (creative swara patterns) (Viswanathan & Allen,  
2004).  
Hindustani  
Ālāp  
Carnatic  
Ālāpana  
Jod  
Niraval  
Tān  
Kalpana Swaras  
More rhythmic & syllabic  
Less syllabic  
Page 765  
Carnatic improvisation integrates mathematical rhythmic play; Hindustani focuses on mood and expansion.  
9. Historical Evolution and Cross-Influences  
The evolution of Swaras reflects centuries of cultural exchange and regional refinement. During the Mughal  
period, Persian influences altered the melodic landscape of Hindustani music, resulting in new Rāgas and  
melodic idioms. Conversely, Carnatic music maintained continuity with earlier Sanskritic treatises such as the  
Chaturdaṇḍi Prakāśikā (Venkatamakhi, 2002).  
Bhatkhande’s (1934) reform of the Hindustani music curriculum through the Thaat system paralleled  
Venkatamakhi’s earlier codification of the Melakarta scheme, illustrating parallel developments shaped by  
distinct historical contexts.  
Summary of Major Similarities and Differences  
Aspect  
Similarities  
Differences  
Origins  
Shared Sanskritic roots  
Divergence due to regional/cultural evolution  
Swara System Seven  
Swaras  
foundational Variant structures differ  
Ornamentation Essential to raga identity Techniques and aesthetics differ  
Pedagogy  
Oral tradition valued  
Carnatic more systematized  
Aspect  
Similarities  
Differences  
Raga Structure Codified rules  
Carnatic more formulaic; Hindustani more  
fluid  
CONCLUSION  
This study highlights the complex interplay of shared origins and divergent evolutions in the treatment of  
Swaras within Indian classical music. While both traditions spring from a common theoretical past, regional  
influences, historical shifts, and pedagogical needs have led to distinct structural, tonal, and expressive  
systems. This expanded research demonstrates that although Hindustani and Carnatic traditions share  
foundational principles, their treatment of Swaras diverges in structure, interpretation, performance, and  
pedagogy. The Carnatic system prioritizes systematic codification, microtonal precision, and structured  
pedagogy, whereas the Hindustani system values expressive freedom, fluid microtonality, and lineage-based  
learning.  
These differences contribute to two distinct yet interconnected musical worlds that continue to evolve. Future  
research could incorporate psychoacoustic studies, computational pitch analysis, or cross-tradition pedagogical  
models to deepen understanding of Swara perception and transmission in a technologically globalized musical  
landscape.  
REFERENCES  
1. Bharata. (1996). Nāṭyaśāstra (M. Ghosh, Trans.). Asiatic Society. (Original work published ca. 2nd  
century BCE)  
2. Bhatkhande, V. N. (1934). Hindustani Sangeet Paddhati. Sangeet Karyalaya.  
3. Ramamatya. (1550). Svaramelakalanidhi. Sarangadeva. (2002). Sangīta Ratnākara (S. R. Sharma,  
Ed.). Motilal Banarsidass. (Original work published ca. 13th century)  
4. Subramaniam, L. (1981). Euphony in South Indian Classical Music. Oxford & IBH Publishing.  
Page 766  
5. Venkatamakhi. (2002). Chaturdaṇḍi Prakāśikā (S. Subrahmanyam, Ed.). Music Academy of Madras.  
(Original work published 17th century)  
6. Viswanathan, T., & Allen, M. (2004). Music in South India: The Karnatak Concert Tradition and  
Beyond. Oxford University Press.  
Page 767