Veena sound quality

Miscellaneous topics on Carnatic music
Post Reply
Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

In the past few weeks/months, whenever I have listened to veena music on the radio, TV, Youtube etc. I am assailed by questions and uneasy feelings about the quality of veena sound. In all these instances, the musicians have been quite confident of their musical prowess and have gone on to produce rather good music technically.

The sound of the veena has been a far cry from what I have heard in the past. The veena sound seems to have been rendered tinny or electric guitarish, lacking the saukhyam and sparkle of a good stringed instrument. This problem doesn't seem to beset guitar or even violin in most cases.

What ails the veena pick-up and reproduction technology today? Who should address it? Is it the sruti, the making of the veena, Strings, pick-up design, placement, sound envelope shaping, pre-amplifier,
mixer controls, what is it?

Three/four musicians seem to have managed the issues better:
Ashwin Anand
Revathi Sadasivam
Yoga Vandana
D Balakrishna
Nirmala Rajasekhar
Parthasarathy....

Finally, the radio seems to do the best in transmission. All else seems to worsen the issue, especially Youtube.

rshankar
Posts: 13754
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by rshankar »

I think Smt. Jayanthi's vINa sounds great to me. Rich and vibrant
Recently heard Ramana's concert (thank you Parivadini) - sounded awesome to me. Do you ageee, or are my ears inferior? ;)

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

I don't agree or disagree... I have noticed a variation in their tonality across concerts.

I can string a number of audio samples, but I feel such a discussion becomes more artiste-specific, which is not very productive. My exact issue is that same artiste has of late poorer tonality. Why?

Nick H
Posts: 9379
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 02:03

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Nick H »

I think that quite a few artists make wonderful, musical sounds on the modern veena --- but it is as electronic as the modern mandolin or non-acoustic guitar. At least with the guitar the acoustic version is still alive and well in the world!

Do veena students and artists ever listen to the acoustic sound of their instruments? Or do they plug in even when practising at home?

Sivaramakrishnan
Posts: 1582
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 08:29

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sivaramakrishnan »

The 'culprits' are:
1.Amplification
2.Type of Veena (traditional / electronic)
3.Method of playing (plucking, mainly)

I have been fortunate to listen to Sri KS Narayanaswamy/ KK Sivaraman and later R Venkataraman during 60s/ 70s/80s at Navaratri Mandapam Trivandrum where you had a special ( 'made for Veena') ambience with no contact mikes. The speakers would be placed outside the Mandapam for listeners sitting in there. And traditional wooden vadyams were used.
Contact mikes made its advent during (late) seventies and the tone of Veena 'changed'. Numerous versions appeared with distinct tonal variations (but of immense relief to the vainika).
Electronic Veena offers a yet different but muffled tone but the facilities and scope outweighed the limitations.

Most importantly the style of playing also influences the tone. 'Pleasantness' of meettu is obtained by adjusting the intensity of plucking (which however varies from school to school).

Thus tone or Naadam of Veena is the result of a combination of the Vadya, amplification and type of instrument (including the material used) and method of playing.

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

Sri Sivaramakrishnan, you're right.

Already Vainikas are complainimg about dwindling opportunities. If they don't preserve the great sound quality of the original veena, and start producing an electronic type of new age sound, I feel veena will lose out.

I waa lucky to hear Ustad Dagar play the rudra veena last year in Ranga Shankara, a mikeless concert with Parvathy Baul. After we settled down and sharpened our hearing faculty, we were given a memorable treat of delicate sounds.
Image

melam72
Posts: 494
Joined: 02 Nov 2016, 16:12

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by melam72 »

Observe the mediocrity of the sound quality of the veena in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejm5kB_JMQE

Will post detailed post in a bit.

Sivaramakrishnan
Posts: 1582
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 08:29

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sivaramakrishnan »

It is an electronic Veena.
You don't get the original veenaanaadam.

Nick H
Posts: 9379
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 02:03

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Nick H »

Last time I saw J&J perform, it was on the "normal" electrically-amplified veena, but they have done plenty of experimenting. I have seen/heard them play on electronic instruments that sounded so superb that I was sorry that they had not stuck with them.

But, as ever, my "superb" is within the meaning of 20/21st-century veena sound, which is absolutely defined by the involvement of electricity.

When I have heard purely acoustic veena, eg in the home, it is barely audible on the other side of the room. It is almost like listening to an unplugged electric guitar. So I am really puzzled by this, and I wish someone could help clear up the mystery. How was veena ever played as a purely acoustic instrument? How was veena played in, say, 1817? Were it's audiences limited to a very small room? And if not, what changed?

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

Nick, having heard the "acoustic" Veena in homes over the years, and even recently a veena concert WITHOUT mic in a small, wooden-panelled basement hall (Ananya) with mridangam accompaniment, my take is:
1. The acoustic veena is only a chamber instrument.
2. Different playing techniques (plucking, strings, pitch, veena's basic sound level) produce barely audible to feeble to normal voice level volume. Loud accompaniment and even fan sounds drown out the veena sound.

Radio concerts capture perhaps pure veena sound, as well as good mridangam sound. The studio is an anechoic chamber, they have good mics and recording levels.

Listen to this. It appears to be a radio concert:

https://soundcloud.com/rsachi/emani-siv ... di-pallavi

And this comes closest to a reasonably well-recorded veena sound in a concert, to my ears:
http://gaana.com/share/titemI27554

Nick H
Posts: 9379
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 02:03

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Nick H »

Listening to that first clip. Super! And what superb mridangam!

Yet to come to the second clip.

But I'm thinking that the world, including India, is full of stringed instruments, plucked and bowed, that work, acoustically, better than the veena does. Why? With musical instruments, makers and players work together over history to make them sound better. Speaking of UKS (first clip), his life has been in trying to improve the instrument as well as play it. What happened to our poor veena.

Could it be that people didn't dare mess with what some sculptor thought Saraswati plays? Just an idea.

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

Great idea.
I have asked this of veena players and makers many times. Mr.Ramji of Trichy had an answer. He made the veena kudam and dandi etc. in a specific way to improve the sound sustain and also sound quality. There is a resonance hole like in a guitar and violin in his instrument. There is a peg to close it if the artiste so desires. I find a big change in the sound volume with the hole open.

The veena players find it hard even to get the fret positions fixed in wax properly. You will find in every veena at least 2-3 frets misaligned.

Now the developments in veena technology I have noticed are:
1. Veenas are smaller and lighter.
2. Pick-up placement, type of pick up (magnetic/condenser etc) are tried, with Preamp mixer etc
3. Some parts of the veena are replaced by prostheses of metal or plastic to make them look ugly and become dismantlable.
4. There is even a veena without strings, only some synthesiser sounds.
5. Veena is competing with electric guitar etc. in noisy ensembles with drums, trumpets, sax., nagaswaram, etc.
6. The soul of the acoustic veena has repaired to heaven long back.
7. Newer instruments are claiming the veena name. Chitraveena. Mohana veena. Even violinists are there who claim that the violin is the original veena. The current design of the acoustic veena seems to be around 350-400 years old, and was designed by Govinda Dikshitar who migrated from Mysore to Tanjavur court of Raghunatha Nayaka and named his veena design in praise of his royal patron.

Sivaramakrishnan
Posts: 1582
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 08:29

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sivaramakrishnan »

I expected at least a couple of full-time Veena professionals to participate in this discussion.

Radhika-Rajnarayan
Posts: 289
Joined: 27 Jun 2009, 20:18

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Radhika-Rajnarayan »

Sivaramakrishnan wrote: 13 Jun 2017, 22:01 It is an electronic Veena.
You don't get the original veenaanaadam.
Hi, would like to correct you on this statement. This is not an electronic veena. It is an electric veena with a guitar pickup and amp
On the other hand, listen to this:
https://youtu.be/v0ufV6AnXl4 This is an electronic veena with specially designed pickup, matched amplispeaker, and suitable embedded software to ensure the sweet tone of the traditional veena is retained.
Thank you.

Radhika-Rajnarayan
Posts: 289
Joined: 27 Jun 2009, 20:18

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Radhika-Rajnarayan »

Nick H wrote: 14 Jun 2017, 16:32 Last time I saw J&J perform, it was on the "normal" electrically-amplified veena, but they have done plenty of experimenting. I have seen/heard them play on electronic instruments that sounded so superb that I was sorry that they had not stuck with them.

But, as ever, my "superb" is within the meaning of 20/21st-century veena sound, which is absolutely defined by the involvement of electricity.

When I have heard purely acoustic veena, eg in the home, it is barely audible on the other side of the room. It is almost like listening to an unplugged electric guitar. So I am really puzzled by this, and I wish someone could help clear up the mystery. How was veena ever played as a purely acoustic instrument? How was veena played in, say, 1817? Were it's audiences limited to a very small room? And if not, what changed?
Nick, my thoughts completely resonate with yours.
However, it is difficult to break down the decades of conditioning among our populace - that the traditional veena is the one used by the goddess Saraswati as depicted by Raja Ravi Varma - never mind that the painting was made in the early 20th century, or even that the present day acoustic veena is only around 4 to 5 centuries old....never mind that sculptures much older show the goddess holding a veena with 2 gourds...never mind that our vainikas perform concerts with magnetic pickups placed on traditional veenas, thus effectively playing an electric veena, bypassing the natural acoustics of the instrument....nothing matters as long as it looks like the acoustic veena.
J&J have to comply with such expectations by sabhas perhaps? I do not know. But I must acknowledge their contribution to popularising the electronic veena.
As for the acoustic veenas, I cannot speak for the ones made today, but the couple of 80-year-old ones have, produce a lovely sound that can definitely be heard across a small hall. Their kudams are very thinly carved out, and the top surface of the kudam actually bends when one presses down on it. It is also true that in the '40s and '50s, the ambient noise was much less than you hear today, and the percussion accompaniment was much softer! :)

Nick H
Posts: 9379
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 02:03

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Nick H »

that the traditional veena is the one used by the goddess Saraswati as depicted by Raja Ravi Varma - never mind that the painting was made in the early 20th century
As the goddess herself has almost certainly never "sat" for any earthly sculptor or artist of any period, the represented form is... what they are used to seeing mortal beings playing.
J&J have to comply with such expectations by sabhas perhaps? I do not know. But I must acknowledge their contribution to popularising the electronic veena.
I know that they are dedicated to getting the best possible sound, and that is probably true for many if not most most vainikas.
but the couple of 80-year-old ones have, produce a lovely sound that can definitely be heard across a small hall.
I would love to hear an acoustic concert on such an instrument. :)

deepadevadiga
Posts: 9
Joined: 30 Oct 2017, 14:28

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by deepadevadiga »

how can i imporove my veena sound quality

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

Deepadevadiga,
Disclaimer: asking such a question in this forum will throw up a lot of answers, not all compatible with your situation.

Please upload an audio clip from your veena play. We will take this forward.

aratnam
Posts: 3
Joined: 22 Dec 2016, 07:59

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by aratnam »

First time posting on Rasikas. Hello everyone!

This is a topic that is near and dear to every vainika's heart and therein lies a conundrum (disclaimer: I am the student of Mysore D Balakrishna)- every player will have a basic preference on how the Veena SHOULD sound. Guarding against the bias that I know I have, let me offer my opinion.

It is almost unanimously agreed that the following are true to make a veena sound to its true potential:

1. The original timbre of the instrument should be conveyed as accurately as possible since the fundamentals of the instrument are sound. That used to mean no amplification when the Veena used to be a chamber instrument. That's not possible anymore- so one has to be tasteful in how amplification is used. It is possible to run away with digital sound techniques. Restraint on this specific aspect goes a long way in the future.

2. Plucking technique is key: metallic plucking sounds are undesirable- a good workaround is to pluck with real nails. Amplitude should take full advantage of the instrument but not in a manner that is harsh. The student gets to this precise level in the same way a tiger knows how hard to bit when it lifts a cub in its mouth. This is intuitive after a while

3. No undue gamakam and no undue meetus, with one caveat. As much as we want it to be, the veena is not the vocal cord and while the gayaki angam should fundamentally guide the player, an ideal balance should be found by factoring in the vadya dharmam. There are several sounds that the veena is capable of, that the human voice isn't and it would be a shame if those aren't taken advantage of. Each master (Emani, Doraiswamy Iyengar, Balachander, ...) approached this differently and there is no one right answer

4. There are 10 kinds of gamakams and pulling is only one of those.

Here is an opinion that was written by a listener (who is hopefully unbiased) on the usage of amplification
http://akhileshmagal.blogspot.com/2014/ ... ounds.html

Cheers,
Aravind

Sachi_R
Posts: 2174
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 20:20

Re: Veena sound quality

Post by Sachi_R »

Sri. Aravind,
Thank you.
You echo my thoughts.
The current trend is for vainikas of great accomplishment to express themselves through the inst rument called veena in a way that suits their manodharma. All discussions on the original chamber music quality of a pure veena sound with no electronic effects are received by vainikas with indifference or disdain.
Perhaps they feel compelled to compete with so many electronic sounding string instruments around and even keyboards etc.

I welcome the fresh breeze of your opinion and echo it.

I like, among present day vainikas, the veena sound of Smt Yogavandana (whom I have heard only on the radio) very much.

Post Reply