Posted on December 13, 2001
|
News - Views - Reviews |
|
MADRAS MUSIC MELA 2001 |
|
LAKSHMI RANGARAJAN - AMATEURISH PRESENTATION |
|
Lakshmi Rangarajan’s concert for Nada Inbam at the Raga Sudha Hall on Wednesday, December 12, was of a decent calibre. Her strong point was the selection of items, including such Kriti-s as Mundu Venuga (Durbar), Kamakshi (Varali) and Enduku Peddala (Sankarabharanam). With such a strong hand in repertoire, this reviewer felt she could have created a better concert atmosphere. Her singing leaves a faint impression of amateurishness. It is perhaps something that will be resolved with more experience, especially in raga alapana and neraval. Her swaraprastara was better in this respect. Akkarai Subbalakshmi is proving herself to be a violinist to watch out for. Her left hand technique is fairly good, and if she works more on her bowing, she could well become a force to reckon with. J Balaji on the Mridangam played well, except that the sound quality of his Mridangam came across like that of a Tavil. He maintained very good kalapramanam in his Tani Avartanam. The Raga Sudha hall is quite small, but has a number of AC outlets, leading to an uncomfortable level of coldness inside. An additional problem was contributed by a couple of audience members, who kept talking loudly intermittently throughout the concert. General remarks: Voice: Lakshmi has a
nasal voice in the upper octave and husky in the lower
and middle registers. Ratings: Sruti - 70 % Overall effect: Vocal - 60 % Estimated audience ratings: Crowd in hall - About 30 strong SUGUNA PURUSHOTTAMAN - Intellectual but low impact: Suguna Purushottaman, senior exponent of the Musiri school, presented a concert immediately after Lakshmi Rangarajan’s at the same venue. Although it was quite intellectual in its content, it failed to have a commensurate impact, largely because of her highly thin voice, along with her tendency to lapse into a crooning mode of singing. A lay listener can easily identify the composer of each song, by paying attention to her unfailing gesture of salutation when the mudra occurs in the composition. She chose to sing quality Kriti-s, but the mix and order of presentation left a little to be desired. Beginning with a rare varnam in Kambhoji (Pankajakshi), composed by Maha Vaidyanatha Sivan, she presented a Narayana Teertha Tarangam in Bilahari and Budham Asrayami in Natakurinji. Surprisingly for an artiste of her training and experience, her opening phrase in the brief outline of Natakurinji was reminiscent of Khamas. Bhuvinidasu in Sriranjani followed immediately after Natakurinji, but the common phrase n d m in both raga-s created a little conflict in her rendition. The main piece was Pakkala Nilabadi in Kharaharapriya, a raga closely allied to Sriranjani. Nagai Sriram, the accompanying violinist, perhaps felt the same discomfort as this reviewer, as his alapana in Kharaharapriya kept slipping into phrases employing m d n, which are characteristic of Sriranjani. The only composition featuring a different flavour was Durusuga (Saveri). Suguna Purushottaman however showed her prowess in the laya aspects during the swaraprastara in Kharaharapriya. K Arunprakash responded with equal gusto and enthusiasm on the Mridangam during the Tani Avartanam. The ending portion of the concert featured Pahi Rama (Yadukulakambhoji) and a Kavadichindu, pieces popularized by late Musiri Subrahmanya Iyer. Although the AC had been kept at a very high level during the first concert, it was completely turned off during Suguna Purushottaman’s concert, and the windows were left open. Mosquitoes had a field day. General remarks: Voice: Thin and lacking
in depth and weight. Ratings: Sruti: 80% Overall effect: Vocal - 50% Concert - 70% Estimated audience ratings: Crowd in hall - About 30 strong - Bharath |
|
|
|||
|
Posted on December 13, 2001 |
|||
| Lec-dem Schedule | |||
| Interviews with Awardees | |||
|
|
|||