Why Veena Is Not a popular Concert Instrument?
Geetha Ramanathan Bennett
In a recent review, Mr. Ramaswamy from Hong Kong has raised an
interesting question. As a veena performer, I would like to get your
openions on the subject. I am typing the last paragraph verbatum.
Thanx. Geetha Bennett
Why is the veena not as popular a concert instrument in South Indian
music as the violin, flute or mandolin? Is it due to the low pitch of
the instrument, or its status as a vehicle for serious and sombre music,
or is it just due to the personalities and playing styles of the
particular veena artistes who have been performing over the last few
decades? If the Sangeetha Kalanidhi award is some measure of the
contribution of veena players, then certainly the veena had its heyday
during the last decade, with the title being awarded to K.S
Narayanaswami, Mysore Doraiswamy Iyengar and K P Sivanandam. But it is
arguable if these artistes enjoyed the kind of audiences of T N
Krishnan, Lalgudi Jayaraman, M S Gopalakrishnan, U Srivinvas, N Ramani,
K S Gopalakrishnan, and other violin and flute artistes. S
Balachandar, Chitti Babu and Gayatri have had their share of fans, but
none of the them, IMHO, ever had the kind of popular appeal of the
violinists and flutists. Among North Indian instruments too, the veena
seems to have little popular appeal.
Srikanth Gopalan
: Geetha Ramanathan Bennett <gee...@haven.ios.com> wrote:
: >Why is the veena not as popular a concert instrument in South Indian
: >music as the violin, flute or mandolin?
: Some ideas
: (i) The nature of its frets don't permit smoothness of flow as
: in a violin or even gOTTuvAdyam, this curtails speed.
: (ii) Sound produced by pluck decays so easily that one is forced to
: either adopt high amplification (making strident ding-dong) or use
: extra plucks (raises svara/sahitya ratio unpleasantly)
[deleted]
One only has to listen to about 2 minutes of vIna playing by the late
Karaikudi Sambasiva Iyer to know that this is not true. Unfortunately
not many (any?) recordings have survived. After you have heard him
(even once) it is difficult to settle for anything else. Some of the
sweetest vIna playing I have heard.
-Srikanth
S Govindarajan
>Geetha Ramanathan Bennett <gee...@haven.ios.com> wrote:
>>Why is the veena not as popular a concert instrument in South Indian
>>music as the violin, flute or mandolin?
>Some ideas
>(i) The nature of its frets don't permit smoothness of flow as
>in a violin or even gOTTuvAdyam, this curtails speed.
This is not necessarily a drawback. There are other instruments that
do not produce a continuous sound (the flute for instance). And
recently, the mandolin, based on the same priciples as the veena has
attained popularity. As it is, the veena is capalble of producing a
near continuous sound (continuous as far as the ear can percieve).
>(ii) Sound produced by pluck decays so easily that one is forced to
>either adopt high amplification (making strident ding-dong) or use
>extra plucks (raises svara/sahitya ratio unpleasantly)
Again, not true. History is replete with artists who were able to play
in big concert halls without the aid of the mike. The Karaikudi
Brothers were able to play to an audience of 2000 without a mike. So
were Sangameswara Sastri, Venkatramadas and Veenai Dhannammal.
Germane to this piece of info was the fact that they practiced hours
at a stretch concentrating on the plucking hand (the right hand).
>(iii) Tradeoff between tonal continuity facilitated by high pitch and
>that permitted by lateral deflection: those who play in
>a high shruti are unable to achieve those gamakas that require
>'string pulling' (many of the Karnataka schools), and those that
>employ the latter use a fairly low shruti that doesn't sound too
>pleasant (eg. Sivandandam/Sarada)
If Mandolin Srinivas can play at that high pitch AND produce gamakas,
there should not be anything preventing the veena artists from doing
so. Also, lower shrutis tend to be carried over a long distance
without any appreciable damping. So the artists could be playing to a
large audience too.
>(iv) Not as easy to carry around as the other instruments.
What about the grand piano, then? Have you seen piano concerts in the
piano shops :-)?
>In my opinion, the vINA is not designed to be a concert instrument.
>The tonality is invariably altered by the kinds of amplification one
>uses, and this impairs the sweetness of vINA tones more than that
>of other instruments.
Again, you are mistaken. The veena was the primary accompanying
instrument until the late 19th century. It even rivalled the vocalist
as a main concert instrument in the times of the Trinity. I have
listened to a recording of Dwaram Venkataswamy Naidu on violin being
accompanied on a veena (must be around 1950).
>L (Ramki) Ramakrishnan
Govind.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"And the moral of that is -`Be what you seem to be' - or if you'd like it put
more simply - `Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might
appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than
what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.'" - The Duchess
in Alice In Wonderland.
S.Govindarajan email: govi...@maya.rutgers.edu
Ph: (908) 445 5769 URL: http://www.caip.rutgers.edu/~govindra/
L Ramakrishnan
>I don't think the force of plucking alone decides the volume. The
>frequency of plucking also counts (higher shrutis require a more
>frequent plucking to achieve a louder volume). This frequency will
>change change continuously, which is why the older vainika practiced
>on the left hand too.
I agree with this. I'd add that increasing the frequency of plucking,
especially while playing a composition, detracts from its appreciation
and makes a technique overly 'instrumental'.
As for the shruti-damping relationship, perhaps shrutis too low are
inaudible not for reasons of decay of sound per se but because of the
sensory limitations of our auditory system.
>Primarily (IMHO), because the artists are not as dedicated as before.
>They do not practice and concentrate on improving their skills beyond
>a certain extent. You don't find 3-4 hour concerts, imaginative
>neravals or alapanas. The vina is a difficult instrument to master and
>many budding artists are put off by this.
If true, I wonder _why_ vaiNikas are not as dedicated as, presumably,
are violinists. And surely there cannot be systematic differences in
imagination w.r.t niravals/AlApanas between vINA players and those who
play other instruments?
I think there is more to the unpopularity of vINAs than lack of
motivation of vaiNikas. Several professional vocalists, flautists
violinists and sabhA secretaries I know do not like vINA music, and
will not attend/ host vINA concerts if they can help it. The only sort
of vINA music that might conceivably appeal to them is one with a
flashy instrumental technique: in this case rarely is the music itself
taken seriously
-----------------------------------
L (Ramki) Ramakrishnan
ra...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~ramakris
-----------------------------------
Ranganathan Srikanth
What is meant here by popular?
It was never an all prevading form of music ever in
the last century or so. Vocal music dominated the scene
always as far as numbers go. Nadaswaram followed in popularity
by the sheer number of performers in the early periods of this
century. Veena, flute and violin enjoyed only a consilatory
position (in numbers).
Nadaswaram being a very projecting music form performed mostly
in temples is understandably a very popular form in the days
of non-amplified music. Its slow death in this century is a different
story.
Veena on the other hand always enjoyed a dignity that has never diminished.
Most great vocalist have some training atleast in veena. However full
time performers have always been less. Depending on the musical personality
of the performer on veena, it can have a small up and down with time.
Same is the case with violin. Though the violin is the most popular
accompanying instrument throughout this century, its status as a
popular solo instrument has depended more or less on the musical personality
of the best performers. Lalgudi, msg and krishnan are the most popular
solo performers in recent memory. Chandrashekar and VVS are very popular accompanist
today of the older crop. Of the older generation thirukodikaval and later
dwaram were great soloists. malaikOtai, rajamanikam, papa, chowdiah et. al.
are great musicians and devoted mostly to accompanying rather than solo.
Today it seems like voilin is the most popular solo instrument and truly so.
Given the three giants lalgudi, msg and krishnan it has to be. But I don't see
it carrying on that way in the future.
During the peak days of the karaikudi bros. (and sheshanna for the mysore
region) veena was the dominating solo instrument taking only veena,
flute and violin into consideration.
When sharaba shastri, thirupambaram, sanjeeva rao and in recent memory mali
were popular, flute dominated or atleast shared the pedestal with
the violin and veena.
The scene has always been an up and down situation.
As of today, as far as the young crop goes, veena stands a good chance to
popularity compared to violin or flute. Voilin being a primary
accompanying instrument will always have higher visibiliity. That doesn't
however translate into solo music.
Violin with its all continuous saw effect, veena with its pseudo-discrete
doeen-doeen-doeen effect and flute with its cloying mellifluity have their
own down side. Depending on who plays these instruments its individual
positive attributes gets highlighted.
Carnatic music with its strength in gamakas cannot afford to despense
with the veena ever.
srikanth