Posted on December 15, 2001
|
News - Views - Reviews |
|
MADRAS MUSIC MELA 2001 |
|
P GANESH - NEEDS MORE ENCOURAGEMENT |
| The Narada Gana Sabha featured
a Chitravina concert by P Ganesh on December 14, 2001 in its pre-season
festival. Accompanied by B Raghavendra Rao (Violin), Neyveli Venkatesh (Mridangam)
and S N Viswanathan (Ghatam), he gave a decent account of himself.
The Chitravina is a lovely instrument with a haunting tone and is eminently suitable for Carnatic music. One only wonders why there aren't more takers for it. Ganesh, who is the cousin of Chitravina Ravikiran seems to have attained mastery over this difficult instrument. He has a natural flair for the instrument which is expressed through an attractive style, no doubt, a product of the intensive training he has received and his own assiduous practise. He could however do with more encouragement both from the listening public as well as organisers. He opened with the Saranga Varnam (Intamodi), and played it effortlessly in two speeds in the first half and in the medium tempo in the second half. This set the mood and the pace for the concert. Ennadujootuno in Kalavati (Adi, Tyagaraja) was a trifle slow, but Ganesh managed to portray its beauty fairly well. Chandrajyoti, which followed next wasn't a very good choice as the prominent p d s prayoga in this as well as the previous raga didn't offer much contrast. However, Bagayanayya was rendered well with a few rounds of imaginative kalpanaswara patterns. In fact, his kalpanaswara rendition in general, was above average. Raga alapanas were played for Kedaram (Bhajanaseyave, Roopaka), Mukhari (Enraikku sivakripai, Misra Chapu) and Kambhoji (Evarimata, Adi). One felt especially happy with Kedaram and Mukhari. They were rendered with care so as to not bring in traces of Neelambari and Bhairavi respectively. The violinist's protrayal on the other hand, had a fairly liberal dose of Neelambari in his Kedaram. Also a particular phrase in Mukhari using n d m as a jaru was played at least 30 times in his 5-minute elaboration of the raga! Both artistes could have however done much better in the Kambhoji suite, which was the main raga of the day. While Ganesh could have structured his alapana better, Raghavendra Rao could have avoided all the Harikambhoji-like phrases. Neyveli Venkatesh's experience was revealed in the mature way in which he handled himself as well as the Mridangam. His accompaniment for songs deserve special mention. S N Viswanathan was reasonably good on the Ghatam. The concert was by and large good. However, acoustics was once again a problem. Even the best voices and instruments normally don't sound too good in the Narada Gana Sabha Mini Hall. But then, in Ganesh's concert his own contact mike didn't bring out the original sound quality of the instrument either. It was tinny at times and muffled at others. However, who is to blame? In this mad mad season, where is the time for trivialities like sound checks? The first half of the concert has to be tuning time, sound-check time and warm-up time! Ratings: Fidelity to sruti - 90 % Overall ratings: Chitravina - 70 % Overall concert: 70 % Estimated audience ratings: General: - Bharath |
|
|
||
|
Posted on December 15, 2001 |
||
| Reports | ||
| Lec-dem Schedule | ||
| Interviews with Awardees | ||
|
|
|
|