Have the Violin Trinity Left a Void?

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 01 Mar 2009, 13:59

I've been rather intrigued by several posts recently that express anguish over a certain void left by the exit of TNK-LGJ-MSG from the accompanying scene.

I personally do not feel the quality of violin accompaniment has significantly diminished since the trinity stopped accompanying. The first important question in answering the original question, for me, is: What was so great about the violin trinity? My understanding, on a historical basis, is that the violin trinity introduced a much higher level of articulation on the instrument as compared to their predecessors, and I cannot think of anyone before the trio who could produce such intricate replicas of vocal music. I imagine this would certainly have been a major factor in people's enchantment with their music (initially at least). In considering the musical value of their accompaniment, what strikes me is their acute understanding of the music of the main artiste in every concert and their ability to conform to the main artiste's style. The usually sedate TNK would provide sharp brigha-laden responses to GNB, while the usually brighaphilic MSG would play a slow and gamaka (rather than brigha) oriented bilahari ragam with MDR. They were all remarkably versatile and remarkably sensitive to the artistes they accompanied, and they all had the capacity to inspire the main artistes as well. This is why, in my admittedly half-baked opinion, they were considered so very great. Add to that the lack of other equally capable violinists in those days (MC, VVS, few others excepted), and by comparison as well, they were placed on a high pedestal.

Fast forward to today and ask the second question: What skills did the trinity have then that current violinists don't? I have not heard a SINGLE violinist today who has primitive articulation on the violin. They can follow the voice note-for-note almost all the time. They all provide understanding accompaniment as well, in my opinion. I haven't heard a concert yet where I felt the violinist did not understand the vocalist's music and was playing per his own whims and fancies. They do not, for the most part, attempt to overpower the vocalists as well, though it does happen unintentionally sometimes. They certainly can inspire the main artiste these days, and I can think of several examples offhand: RKSK's Manji response to TMK at Parthasarathy Sabha last year, Nagaraj's Shubhapanthuvarali thanam and Charukesi ragam/thanam for Sanjay last year (YGP) and this year (Vani Mahal) respectively, Charulatha Ramanujam's Keeravani thanam in NSG's IFAS concert last year, etc. In fact rarely does a concert conclude without the main artiste showering at least a handful of compliments to the violinist. On all accounts of individual musical capabilities, thus, it seems to me that today's violinists are at least 80% up to par with the trinity.

Why then the pining for TNK-LGJ-MSG? Here's what's different: (1) The violin trinity has already left the field of accompaniment after setting such towering standards that it is hard to imagine current violinists exceeding their height on the high jump. Thus, they cannot seriously "wow" rasikas who have all been wowed sometime or the other by the violin trinity to an extent where they might be considered legendary. This is not their fault. (2) Most of them are about as good as each other. There is thus no enhanced image of their greatness in a sea of mediocrity when the sea is, well, not mediocre. Where we had TNK-LGJ-MSG (+MC and VVS) then, we have RKSK, Varadarajan, Charulatha Ramanujam, Mysore brothers, BU Ganesh Prasad, Padma Shankar, Charumathi Raghuraman, MSA's sons, etc etc. As such, nobody can appear to rise above the rest. (3) The variety of main artistes and their music has grown much wider today. This is only my opinion--I can see some of you nostalgic old-timers bristling already. Accompanists today are expected to respond to a patdIp RTP, play swaras in tAnarUpi, accompany for a wider array of krithis by an increasing pool of composers, and very simply have to play for many more vocalists who all have vastly different styles that more importantly conjugates of several other styles. Violinists today have to adapt to so much more, and it is impossible for us to expect them to have all the knowledge of all the vocalists put together. I'm not saying it wasn't hard those days to accompany the vividly creative MMI (where one could well expect to play a Vijayanagari alapanai) or replay an Alathur Brothers pallavi with laya intricacies intact (and they had no prior information about the concert in those days either), but even with the yesteryear disadvantage of not having prior knowledge, it seems to me that violinists today face so many more challenges. To expect them to rise to each one is impractical, yet I sincerely believe they DO rise to a vast majority of challenges put forth. The violin trinity weren't without their failures either- I've heard all of them slip up (albeit very, very rarely) before.

In sum, I believe the agony people have about current day violinists stems from retrospective comparison without an allowance for the change in environment and circumstances from then to now. If the violinists of today are judged in an absolute manner on the basis of their musical capabilities alone, while they may not have THAT TNK shruti, or THAT LGJ laya brilliance, or THAT finger and bow control of MSG, I sincerely believe they would hold up very well. I'm inclined to go one step further and posit that this is a period of cornucopia of good violinists!

What say you?

Sathej · Post by **Sathej** » 01 Mar 2009, 15:50

Well, a nice detailed analysis done. Shall repsond in more detail after carefully considering this at leisure. But, to just begin with, I disagree with one statement - that present day vocalists have more variety and hence a violinist has to 'adapt' more in the present times. I, on the contrary feel, otherwise. A Tanarupy or Patdeep is definitely not an innovation per se. Have heard several recordings where a detailed Ahiri Swarams was sung/played in two Kalams with Kanakku galore by people in the 70s.

And as such, my opinion (without sufficient backing, atleast as of now - shall definitely write in detail sometime soon), is the 'overall' standard of violin has definitely risen in the present days. However, most present day violinists have a long long way to go before matching the standards of TNK/MSG/LGJ. I don't venture to say that they were 'the' best because 1) I haven't sufficiently listened to violinists before their period and 2) violinists before their period had considerably different methods, from what I've heard. Like Gamakams were much less developed in th 20s and 30s in many Ragams and the bowing techniques differed vastly. So, its perhaps not quite fair to compare two vastly different artistes. On the other hand, there is not that distinct a change in the ways of violinists between now and the 70s say. So, on a comparitive basis, while there are several good violinists today, the exceedingly brilliant are lacking.

Just to start off, I honestly don't see too many violinists today who would stand up to an intense Layam scrutiny test on the lines of LGJ.

Sathej

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 01 Mar 2009, 17:53

Hi Sathej,

this is a public forum and you always have a next session to learn. watch out buddy. and you are not in a pseudonym too. wish no one reads it.

kadambam · Post by **kadambam** » 01 Mar 2009, 18:10

..........The variety of main artistes and their music has grown much wider today. This is only my opinion--I can see some of you nostalgic old-timers bristling already. Accompanists today are expected to respond to a patdIp RTP, play swaras in tAnarUpi, accompany for a wider array of krithis by an increasing pool of composers, and very simply have to play for many more vocalists who all have vastly different styles that more importantly conjugates of several other styles..............

Spot on Sathej..

Bilahari, your analysis is apt except for this one point. It is an argument of breadth vs. depth. I don't think we are yet in an era of DISTINCT different styles like what we had in GNB vs. ARI vs. MMI vs. SSI vs. MDR vs. Musuri.

If you listen to any of the recent speeches given by TNK or LGJ, they attribute their success to playing for past masters and we are talking about at least 2 or 3 decades with each of these maestros. That kind of quality experience may not be available for the present day violinists. However, there is another disadvantage that was not there earlier, i.e. quantity of reasonably good accompanists have increased significantly. So, the main artist has a wider pool to choose from.

Sathej · Post by **Sathej** » 01 Mar 2009, 18:19

@ganesh_mourthy,

Well, I have not been too careless with my wordings, have I?:) Have only said I don't see 'too many violinists'. And well, its not a statement against anyone in particular. And moreover, the comparison is only the present day violinists with TNK/MSG/LGJ and not anyone in particular

Sathej

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 01 Mar 2009, 18:57

Don't worry, Sathej, you are discussing an interesting point in an inoffensive way.

G_M "doesn't know how true this is". Fair enough... I shouldn't take any notice of the rest of his post.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 01 Mar 2009, 18:58

phew I have cannot read anything in this forum nowadays. sentences are always mutilated.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 01 Mar 2009, 19:04

Nick may not understand why.

well Sathej, I meant, you picked one nagai out . That is the reason. dont worry I had a conversation about this forum and folks are ignorant of this site. but the next generation is alert. rare visitor though . hope you understand.

Nothing grave apart from that.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 01 Mar 2009, 19:45

Nick may not understand why.

Always a possibility.

But I was enjoying the history lesson, and I'm still looking forward to more.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 01 Mar 2009, 20:16

Hi Nick more history here.

People here in this forum like music.

Some People here in this forum some times learn some music.

Learning could be some vocal.

or learning could be some instrumental.

you may adore a musician.

you may learn from a musician.

sometimes you learn from a musician you like.

sometimes the musician you learning from, you like

both conditions are tough to go along though.

but you still learn from the musician though.

do musicians read this forum?.

oh I doubt if they are old.

but young ones yes they do.

teachers should know the student's adoring if only it is them.

if so both the condition proves right.

if otherwise the teacher better not read.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 01 Mar 2009, 20:30

Satej,
Are you still there?

Knock knock, who's there?
No, Nick is not there...

Sathej · Post by **Sathej** » 01 Mar 2009, 20:59

@ arasi,

Yes, am very much there

@ganesh_mourthy,

I understand your point. But I really don't believe I have talked against anyone in particular. And its just a point of view. And I have been quite universal. So, I don't foresee any issue with this. Anyway, have edited the post now to remove any references.

Sathej

rajeshnat · Post by **rajeshnat** » 01 Mar 2009, 21:24

bilahari
A very good flying start.You have to have your id changed to nAttai (not I is also apt for you)

.

When we call LGJ-TNK-MSG as violin trinities (no wonder they are top), I think apart from their individual capacity to excel, there is also others who so closely contribute wherein their excellence is also taken along the violinist . For eg when I think of shri LGJ , i cannot seperate MMI-PSP's excellence , so in a way LGJ-MMI-PSP collective display of excellence gets registered , to an extent same with TNK where I think about SSI-UKS-TNK . With respect to MSG he is to me an extraordinary vidwan, his versatility and speed is something that is so wonderful, that despite me not associating any famous combination of him , he is great too. But overall they have lifted concerts to great heights for atleast 5 decades each which is what is incredible and perhaps is some thing we have to wait if today's greats do that.

I think one other point that we generally miss out that we are unfair with many present great artist and have quite a deep opinion (prejudice may be a better word) and think these artist are not as great as yesteryear vidwans. I think the reason is mainly we only hear the best of best concerts of yesteryears and we never hear their average concerts at all. But for today's vidwan, one average concert we keep remembering his mediocrity for years despite the other excellent concerts.(Perils of excess recording )

Also possibly of relatively high volume preset for mridangam and vocalist as of today, it always becomes too difficult to register the excellence of violinist. To that extent I would like to throw away today's close sensitive mikes and bring in andha kAlathu konda mike which is a receptive range that is shared by all vidwans.

In general I am looking to hear concerts after 30 years(2040) where I have a recording of mmi-ssi vs today's list of great artists (I have atleast 6 of them in that list), and possibly may be I will not know the difference . To call any one as legend we have to crave and miss their best of best concerts.

On a side note , you should also include KumbakOnam MR gopinAth , delhi sundarrAjan , vitttal rAmamurthy (he is generally not playing much as an accompanist)and nAgai sriram in today's list of very good to excellent performers.

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 01 Mar 2009, 23:01

Sathej, what then made each of the violin trinity "brilliant" and why are today's violinists merely "good"? Also, why would you not consider Tanarupi or Patdeep innovative?

I KNEW people would largely disagree with me about the variety then vs. now! But for now I'm sticking to my opinion. Kadambam, wouldn't you say that Sanjay, TMK, Vijay Siva, for instance, all have distinctly different styles? I suppose I just don't see what specifically separates the depth of the yesteryear greats vs. today's (let's compare yesteryear greats at the same age as current vocalists, so they're on the same footing).

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 01 Mar 2009, 23:03

Rajesh, interesting points! I particularly agree with you on the mic problem today. I only included in my list the violinists I've heard myself, and I know there are several others out there who are in their range!

annamalai · Post by **annamalai** » 01 Mar 2009, 23:05

While, the violin trinity are great there were also great violinists in the previous generation and also in the next generation.

Dwaram Venkataswamy Naidu - who started violin solo as a concept
Papa Venkataramiah
Kumbakonam Rajamanickam Pillai
Mysore T. Chowdiah
Tiruvalangadu Sundaresa Iyer
Mayarvaram Govindara Pillai - typically, in he last round of kalpana swaras - his bowling mind blowing.
RK Venkatarama Sastri

There are also very good violinists in the next generation after the trinity.

Tiruparakadal Veeraghavan - regular for DKP & DKJ
V. Thyagarajan - son of Papa V.
T. Kesavulu - who has played for T. Brinda
Dwaram Mangathayaru - who has played for Mali
T. Rukmani
Kovai Balu - who used accompany KVN
A. Kanyakumari
Annavarapu Ramaswami - who used to play for Balamurali
Lalgudi Srimathi - who played with LGJ

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 01 Mar 2009, 23:36

Another way to phrase the question--while attending concerts these days, how many times do you find yourself thinking, "I wish TNK/LGJ/MSG were playing this response..."? For me, this has happened about two times, which I wouldn't consider significant.

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 02 Mar 2009, 03:12

Another way to ask the question could also be:
Would an Ariyakudi, GNB, MMI, MDR etc have felt happy if some of today's leading violinists were to accompany them?
I feel they would have.

Shivadasan · Post by **Shivadasan** » 02 Mar 2009, 08:41

The issue raised is a vital one that has perplexed every one with the question what was in this trio that they outshone every other violinist of the day ? What is the secret behind their domination of the scene for decades ?

Having heard all the violinsts of that era I believe that are a few factors that stood out in their favour.

1. They were very young compared to all other violinists of the day. They were considered as prodigies.
2. Their violin technique far outdated the technique of others. The were known for the sweetness of the bow without any harshness at all. They had elevated the status of violin. Even though Papa Venkatramaiah had an excellent technique, the trio had made further improvements on it. They had introduced more gaki into their play. MSG has established a standard which, even today, very few can reach.
3. They were pitted against the best brains in vocal music who enjoyed testing their caliber. The custom in those days was to repeat the phrases of the vocalists exactly in the same manner. It called for extraordinary preparedness, prodigious memory and presence of mind. Twists and turns of swaras, difficult laya patterns, unheard melodies and kritis, unusual pallavis were all presented to them by giants like ARI, MMI, SSI, GNB and others and in every occasion, for decades, they had come out with flying colours, thus establishing their caliber. Others could not do so.
4. By the time they were 30 they had listened to and accompanied stalwarts for two decades. That gave them extraordinary musical maturity.

In the present day, similar circumstances do not exist where a violinist can be tested and evaluated. The violinists of the present day have not passed through the ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢fireÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ as the trio had done and so could not reach such heights as the trio. Even though violinist with very good technique exist today, they appear not to be interested in accompaniment.

The trio was a phenomenon which just happened at that particular period due to the unusual combination of great vocalists like ARI etc., Mridangists like PSP, PMI, and listeners of very high calibre. Such a phenomenon may not occur again.

subhiksha rangarajan · Post by **subhiksha rangarajan** » 02 Mar 2009, 08:52

i believe violinist sri.v.v.subramaniam as an equally incredible artist to join the trio to make it a quartet ..TNK-LGJ-MSG -VVS

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 09:27

I am sorry to say, this trio crio and all is a real fancy term. And this whole thread is a farce to me. Where did M.Chandrashekar go?

To appreciate the nuances of a musician the analyst should also be musician. Appreciation is different from gauging. And to precisely analyse and appreciate the analyst should be of that same genre and playing the same instrument. Otherwise the judgments become derisory.

A sofware expert cannot handpick the best doctor just by his own judgements. Here he gathers info from many sources. And he is merely influenced. And again within doctors the best cardiologist can be picked picked by another expert cardilogist not by an ophthalmologist.

So, for the trio and to gauge the aptititude of present and past day violinist , it can only be done by those real big violin vidwans. Brimming with humbleness they prefer not to say. they find it frivolous
and this debate comes to dabblers like us

For who ever coined this term trio ever , what are the parameters used ? So how do you term Chandrashekar ? and what are the qualities he lacks to be omitted from this trio.

I would appreciate some healthy reply to this. I guess very few are violinists here.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 09:30

P.S.- I am no way related to Shri.Chandrashekhar school nor to Shri. M. Chandrashekar.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 02 Mar 2009, 10:01

G-M, I think the key word is 'void'. Bilahari is going with the thesis that those three have for the most part not performing actively. M.C is still pretty much active. OTOH I agree, your trio may be different from my trio.... hmmm..I do not even have a trio

( I think the purpose of this thread is wider than the concept of trio )

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 02 Mar 2009, 10:02

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 10:25

Vasanthakokilam ,

Going by your statement, since M.C is active the word VOID should not have creeped in at all.

Coolkarni,

very true though I belong not to that school. Nice to know that you are his fan. His techniques and playing style is so unique and Inimitable. So complex fingering to follow but what beautiful anuswarams.

viswam · Post by **viswam** » 02 Mar 2009, 10:32

As a lover of instrumental music especially flute and violin ,I think its very limiting to just mention only three veterans ..
it could be a bit more lengthy .
TNK-LGJ-MSG -VVS-MC-KV
ie.tnkrishnan,msgopalakrishnan,lalgudijayaraman,vvsubramaniam,mchandrasekharan,kunnukudivaidyanathan...

each one of them have created their own empire in the carnatic violin field..

similarly i wonder what will be the situation if we take on flautists..

mali-t.viswanathan-n.ramani-shashank .

i think comparitively flautists are less in number ..

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 02 Mar 2009, 13:11

May be one way in which they resemble the trinity is that they changed the "State of the Art" in a permanent way.

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 02 Mar 2009, 14:01

I merely used a colloquialism in referring to the trinity because as long as I've listened to CM, they have been referred to it as that. Notice I do not include MC and VVS in my reference to possibly less articulate violinists at the time. The point of this debate is not to compare yesteryear violinists with each other (and I'm excluding MC from this discussion precisely because he still does accompany and my broad comparison is between those who no longer accompany and the current crop of violinists, which is the reason for my excluding senior artistes like Nagai Muralidharan as well). The word void is used becaused it IS a comparison between those who've stopped accompanying and those who do.

Which brings me to the point of this thread, finally. This question, as I've mentioned initially, was prompted by a RASIKA's opinion that a void has been created by the departure of the violin trio (if you want to argue semantics and technicalities, please do so in a separate thread). As a result, the question examines the RASIKA's view of the change of guard of violinists, and how each of us feels about the quality of violinists today vs in the past. My point is not to perform a technical analysis of violinists' merits and demerits and I'm not foolish enough to start such a thread on a rasikas forum and as a rasika myself. My question is for rasikas, and their experience listening to violinists in concerts nowadays (vs recordings/ live experiences from the past with the trio and other great violinists), and whether they FEEL they miss the retired violinists. And to ask them to examine these feelings as RASIKAS. That is all I want, and I've rephrased the question in a very simple way as: do you RASIKAS find yourself pining for RETIRED great violinists when you listen to current violinists? The question has been posed with an intriguing hypothetical twist by ragam-talam as well, which might be worth examining but not right now because it is purely hypothetical and what I want is rasikas' personal accounts.

To all of you have decided my question, which I still believe is perfectly harmless and has a few interesting responses so far and the potential for more, is useless and want to pick a fight with my very offhand reference to a trinity most people do refer to, please just excuse my density and ignore this thread. Thank you very much.

For the people who are genuinely interested in answering my question, directed by a rasika to rasikas and under no pretense about musical technicality, continue to do so. Thank you all as well.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 14:12

i have to type this to read previous posting.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 14:24

Oops Bilahari. hope you have no references in reply to my post. Don't take anything to heart.
I dont beleive in the trinitity concept. that is all. I am against whoever phrased it . that is all. Not against this thead or bilahari post.

I shall come with more tit bits and informative inside story later - but with great care and without offences and harm.

all that I understand is this forum eats much of my time. lemme come later after a short to medium reak.

ciao for now

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 02 Mar 2009, 14:39

Ganesh, my reply WAS specifically in response to your posts! I felt you had hijacked the thread from its original intention which was a simple comparison between those who have retired from and those who are new to the workplace. Instead it had mutated into what I considered a rather unnecessary outburst at definitions which really didn't define the spirit of my question either. Hence my suggestion to take such a discussion elsewhere so we could refocus on what I wanted to ask in the first place. Being a huge fan of MC and VVS myself, I did take offense to the insinuation that I didn't consider them worthy of discussion (I specifically mentioned them as an exception in my original post too).

I just feel that it has become way too easy to step on others' toes these days on the forum even when your intention is anything but. A break would be nice for me as well...

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 14:54

Ok. this is squarely in connection with the post then.

Since VVS and MC and few others are still performing there is not question of VOID. Simple and plain.

If there is a void one ever feels , the so called trinity itself were the cause of it...but how?

THODARUM.....

folks do wait for a week to watch the sequel of megaserials. hang on here too....

vijay · Post by **vijay** » 02 Mar 2009, 15:26

Ganesh, I too felt that Bilahari's or Sathej's points did not deserve such a strong reaction. If you read Bilahari's post carefully he has said that there is not much of a difference between the "trinity" and present-day violinists. His reference to a void was more in the nature of a question - there is no doubt that LGJ-MSG-TNK have acquired a reputation that far exceeds that of others performing today, technical skills notwithstanding...Bilahari was trying to explain this phenomenon - not seek deficiencies in present day artistes - who, as he himself points out, are not lacking in virtuosity.

I also do not agree that you need to be an expert to pass a judgment - 2 ears are good enough to distinguish between a squeak and a sweet tone. Similarly anyone well versed in raga/krithis/laya can see whether the violinist is doing a good job of accompanying or not...Ultimately the success of a violinists depends more on the appreciation of the vocalist and the audience than fellow-violinists. If the violinist's art depends on tricks of the trade invisible to all but a few initiates, I am afraid, he/she will struggle to find a platform...

Similarly if Sathej feels LGJ was superior in laya skills, I can assure you that he is not alone - no less a person than TRS said pretty much the same thing.

Let us be more tolerant of others' opinion please.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Mar 2009, 15:41

Sathej's post was later edited and my post commenting on sathej's post was edited too for reasons we 2 only know. Probably a curious and receptive History student called Nick might have understood some

. Ask Sathej if you are curious and, BOB IS YOUR UNCLE, you would know why.

Well , I did never go charging at bilahari's post ever. He wanted to elaborate and extend the common Terminology called trinity and I commented on that. I have a hight threshold of tolerance buddy.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 02 Mar 2009, 23:09

Don't ask me, g_m; I'm afraid you are eating far too much of my time. It was an interesting thread.

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 03 Mar 2009, 03:30

Nick, I too thought it was an interesting thread (while it lasted). Sigh. Let me try to push the reset button.

Shivadasan, you make an interesting point that the nature of vocalists these days does not afford an opportunity for violinists to be tested in the same manner that the yesteryear violinists were. But, if you believe they're not being tested, can we really conclude anything about their ability? In relation, to what extent do you all believe that your impression of violinists these days correlates directly to the artistes they accompany and the musical capabilities of the latter?

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 03 Mar 2009, 03:42

This 'those were the days' thinking prompts me to present a cricket analogy:
Those who talk about 'those golden days' of Bradman, Sobers etc. perhaps have missed the present: we have Tendulkar, Ponting and other greats today in our midst.
Let's recognize them for their talents.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 03 Mar 2009, 05:10

I think LGJ, TNK and MSG revolutionised violin accompaniment. They played in the so called 'Golden Era of Carnatic Music' and elevated the status of the violin to make it an essential part of the concert stage. Amanda Weidman book "Singing the Classical, Voicing the Modern: The Postcolonial Politics of Music in South India" (Duke UP, 2006) has excellent commentary on the changing role of the violin in Carnatic music.

While some of the current senior violinists (such as Kanyakumari, Nagai Muralidharan, Mysore Nagaraj) are excellent in their own right, the time in history when they are prominent means that their status is looked at differently to the 'violin trinity'. It is interesting to ponder how today's top violinists would have fared in the golden era.

An analogy, but slightly different example, is the status of top vocalists like Ramnad Krishnan or Tanjavur S Kalyanaraman. During their prime they were in the shadows of the golden era musicians like Ariyakudi, Madurai Mani, Semmangudi, GNB. But if TSK or RK had lived in the current era, then they probably would be among the leading vocalists of the day.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 03 Mar 2009, 09:02

Bilahari,
A long winding detour! Hope the reset button has also enabled the 'harp'ists to stay away from the violinists

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 03 Mar 2009, 09:22

i am not able to read the posts . all broken and divided ....?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

( Mod note: You seem to be having this problem quite a lot. Post a question in the Q&A forum describing the issue, which browser you use, what platform etc. Other members may be able to provide some help. As far as we know, there are no forum wide issues ).

bilahari · Post by **bilahari** » 03 Mar 2009, 10:12

Arasi,

srikant1987 · Post by **srikant1987** » 03 Mar 2009, 10:48

I BEG YOU PEOPLE TO GO SLOW!

I don't have much Net access these days, but don't want to miss this thread!

annamalai · Post by **annamalai** » 03 Mar 2009, 11:41

ragam-talam wrote:This 'those were the days' thinking prompts me to present a cricket analogy:
Those who talk about 'those golden days' of Bradman, Sobers etc. perhaps have missed the present: we have Tendulkar, Ponting and other greats today in our midst.
Let's recognize them for their talents.

I have not seen Don's batting or Sobers' battting. But from Jack Fingleton's articles, Don was great player. No modern player has been able to match his average. Similarly, Sobers was a devastating batsman, very good bowler, and a fielder. Now there are some comparisons that Jack Kallis might be compared to Sobers - In my view, Kallis is not as a good bowler as Sobers.

Now, the quality of bowling is so weak all over the world. It is one thing to score double centuries against Bangladesh and triple against Zimbabwe. In the 1980s, WI great fast bowlers, Imran, Sarfraz, Qadir, Richard Hadlee, Lilllee, Thompson, .... The local umpires also made it difficult with their biased decisions, until we had neutral umpires. In that sense, Viv Richards or Greg Chappell are great.

In the modern generation - Brian Lara is probably one exception who was able to dominate - Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, McGrath, Warne and Muralitharan at SL.

As I mentioned before, there were also great violinists before the so the called trinity - Rajamanickam Pillai or Govindaraja Pillai and others.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 03 Mar 2009, 11:45

I use Vista. and the slimbrowser.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 03 Mar 2009, 13:20

(No technical problems at all with the site, here. XP and Firefox)

This is a digression, perhaps so basic as to cause groans <Blush> but I have never understood why the mentioned names have entirely stopped accompanying. Even I have seen MSG accompany just once, with TVS. TVS is still performing; he is not considered worthy of a great and senior violinist any longer? Of course, I understand that many of the great names of the past mentioned are now names of the past, but still there are vocalists of the same generation alive and kicking (err, singing).

I also understand that, as the passing of the years cannot be stopped, this question itself becomes historical. I think that TNK is the only one now giving regular concerts? But others, as mentioned, such as MC and VVS, continue to accompany.

Is it just that, as they feel able to give lesser number of concerts, they wish to maximise their exposure (and, of course, remuneration) by taking the prime spot when they do?

Of course, I understand that any answers forthcoming are our surmises, and that the people to ask would have to be the concerned individuals themselves --- but many of our group have been lucky enough to be close to, even members of, the music world, and their 'guesses' may be very well informed.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 03 Mar 2009, 15:07

Nick - I guess that some of the senior violinists rightly think they are good enough to be main artistes (in a solo/duet/trio concert) rather than accompanists.

Shivadasan · Post by **Shivadasan** » 03 Mar 2009, 16:13

Bilhari wrote
Shivadasan, you make an interesting point that the nature of vocalists these days does not afford an opportunity for violinists to be tested in the same manner that the yesteryear violinists were. But, if you believe they're not being tested, can we really conclude anything about their ability?
In those days the musicians were very senior and the violinists , just obedient lads. The vocalists probed the caliber of the youngsters by throwing challenges. The audience too loved the repartees. Today that age difference is not there and even if it was there the youngsters would be in no mood to submit themselves to the challenge. This is just a surmise because I have not done any analysis. But the past is clear to me and why the three were given a special place by the audience.
Chandrasekar was a prodigy, but a decade younger than the trio. Even though he is exteremely talented with a very fine tchnique, somhow vocalists did not favour him. That was unfortunate. He was not provided with similar opportunities that the trio had.

Purist · Post by **Purist** » 03 Mar 2009, 18:25

Bilahari and Shivadasan - you have made interesting obersvations.

One important reason why a special place was given by the audience to the golden trio
was that they were simply superb in captruing and reflecting the vocalists style/bani. For instance LGJ playing for Madurai Mani, Semmangudi or Madurai Somu would sound unique to the vocalist yet carry Lalgudi stamp. MSG would sometimes add exquisite icings which many a time prompted the vocalist
to give more. From what I have noticed amongst the current genre is they have their individual
unique styles but when it comes reflecting the vocalist in their playing they are a bit short of the golden trio. (this is in no way a derogatory remark but only highlight the possible difference )

coolkarni · Post by **coolkarni** » 03 Mar 2009, 19:33

srikant1987 · Post by **srikant1987** » 03 Mar 2009, 19:46

Well, since LGJ has stopped performing and TNK and MSG don't accompaniment any more, accompaniment wise there's a perceived void. But MC continues to accompany and I think RK Shriram Kumar accompanies superbly. I haven't heard much of Varadarajan, but he's very good too.

I think the problem is that there are too many concerts these days, and we can't have MC, RKSK and SV accompany everywhere like LGJ, TNK and MSG seem to have done! Not even every celebrated vocalist's concert. TVS doesn't get these people, for example.

The change perhaps is not so much in the talent pool among violinists, but things like the roles of accompanists, length of concerts (in short concerts, they can get really marginalised).

Oh yes - short concerts. The are even concerts lasting an hour. And I feel way too many songs are being packed into concerts, thanks to the frenzy for reportoire.