Sitar Music Today. Part II

   

In the conclusion to Part I of this exploration, I had raised a few questions about the role of the Sitar in the emerging musical environment. 

“What, then, can be said about the much talked-about paradigm shift taking place in Sitar music? Could it be happening already, but in a territory that we do not classify as “classical” music? Could we be looking for it in the wrong place? This is a possibility considering the impenetrable wall erected by the Ravi Shankar/Vilayat Khan/ Nikhil Banerjee generation. Their yardstick of musicianship may appear, in contemporary perception, either obsolescent, dispensable or unsaleable.”

In search of an answer, I now review YouTube recordings of a few successful and emerging contemporary Sitarists. The four artists I consider are: Shujaat Khan (born:1960), Niladri Kumar (born: 1973) Anoushka Shankar (born: 1981), and Rishabh Sharma (born: 1998). 

The group of Sitarists chosen for this study is purposive, and not exhaustive of significant talent on the contemporary stage. They merit consideration because each of them has a recognizable pedigree, with which their musical orientations may be difficult to reconcile. They are analysed in sequence of their years of birth. The sequence may not, therefore, be inferred to imply their rating as musicians.

Shujaat Khan

The inclusion of Shujaat Khan in this study may seem inappropriate because he established himself as a worthy heir to the legacy of his father. Ustad Vilayat Khan between 1990 and 2000. Even during that apparently “orthodox” phase of his evolution, he exhibited a tendency towards exploration of new musical paths… tilting perhaps towards populism. 

During his interview with me on January 16, 2004, a few months before his father’s demise, Shujaat observed:

“With the passage of time, an entirely new generation of listeners has emerged. To them, Ustad Vilayat Khan or Pandit Ravi Shankar or Ustad Ali Akbar Khan  – though they are all alive – are only as real as Mahatma Gandhi or Jawaharlal Nehru.  These audiences are willing to accept me for what I am.”

Even today, Shujaat’s recent “orthodox” performances in circulation on pre-recorded media – few in number – delight admirers of his father, Ustad Vilayat Khan. However, the overwhelming majority of his recent uploads on YouTube (2015-2025) are sufficient to establish him as the forerunner of our “New Wave” Sitarists.

Shujaat’s 21st century music revolves around his competence as a singer of popular middle-brow poetry (Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi) like Ghazals, Bhajans, Chaiti-s, Thumris, Folk songs, and Sufiana Kalaam-s. The Sitar follows the vocals with charming precision, lacing the rendition occasionally with engaging melodic improvisations. Occasionally, his recordings feature additional--but subordinated -- support of a Santoor, or flute, or even a synthesizer. His vocal repertoire is largely raga-neutral, and composed mostly in medium-to-brisk tempo Keherva, but occasionally also in the common enough Jhaptala or Roopak. For rhythmic accompaniment, he routinely deploys two Tabla players, but sometimes a single Tabla player along with a Dholak player. 

This configuration of musical elements merits interpretation. (1) This music is, essentially, a vocal performance, with the Sitar functioning as melodic accompaniment, though a little more prominent than a Sarangi or Harmonium support in a Khayal performance. (2) The occasional use of additional melodic support is suggestive of “orchestral intent”. (3) The commanding musical idea of the performance is, in most cases, is not a raga, but a raga-neutral composition. (4) His choice of compositions, being set to middle-to-brisk tempo, obviates the need for slow-tempo and ultra-brisk treatment of the melodic framework, thus taking the music categorically out of the established raga-presentation protocol for the Sitar. (5) The use of multiple percussion accompaniments enhances the presence of rhythm in the totality of the musical experience far beyond the established configuration of musical elements in Sitar music.  

Randomly, I selected 15 uploads of Shujaat’s sitar performances, and 15 of him as a singer and calculated the aggregate AEF (Viewership/ Number of years since upload) separately for the two groups. The results are revealing. Shujaat, the singer, engages audiences on a massively higher scale than Shujaat, the Sitarist. The absolute numbers are not important. The orders of magnitude are convincing. (See Table)

Shujaat is a fine vocalist and a brilliant Sitarist; and, so was his father, though at a different level. With similar equipment, Shujaat has created a personal genre of “Sitar Music” unlike anything his father has rendered in his 60+ year performing career. Shujaat’s success has given younger sitarists the confidence to shape deviant “Personal Musical Statements”. 

Niladri Kumar

Niladri is the son of Kartik Kumar, a senior disciple of Ravi Shankar. In the early 2000s, he exploded upon the Sitar scene with his formidable command over the instrument. Even in his early days into the profession, performing the orthodox idiom of raga-rendition, he displayed a penchant for the kaleidoscopic and dramatic patterning of melody, and executed it with dazzling virtuosity. The success of his musical inclinations with Indian as well as foreign audiences encouraged him to explore the potential of modern sound-engineering beyond the  possibilities of the traditional acoustic Sitar (a self-resonating instrument). .  

 To unleash his musical vision, he designed an electronic instrument. His contraption, called “Zithar”, is a cross between a Sitar and an electric guitar. Its acoustic experience can be similar to that of an electric guitar, but its melodic capabilities can shame the world’s greatest guitarist because of the string-deflection facility of a Sitar. It does not have Sitar-type sympathetic strings because sound-engineering makes them redundant. As a bonus, the Zithar is also a more portable instrument for a jet-setting Sitarist than a traditional acoustic Sitar, and can be played sitting on a chair. This invention gave Niladri access to the entire power of sound-engineering, and enabled him to deliver an acoustic experience never heard before on the Sitar.

I surveyed 33 uploads of Niladri’s recordings on YouTube to understand different facets of his musicianship. Once again, I have used the AEF (Audience Engagement Factor) measure as a guide.

The greatest object of curiosity in Niladri’s music has been his invention – the Zithar. In a random sample of 33 upload recordings on YouTube, I found 25 rendered on the acoustic Sitar, and 8 performed on the Zither. The AEF numbers for Zithar recordings are substantially higher than those for acoustic Sitar recordings. (See Table).

His invention was intended to express his musical vision more convincingly, or give him access to diverse genres or audiences not addressed adequately. More specifically, the Zithar brought the universe of “Fusion” and “World Music” within easier reach. In the sample uploads, Niladri is observed performing with “multiple accompaniments” -- Synthesizer, Sarod, Mrudanga, Morsing, Guitar, and Drum-sets. No clear indication of value addition is available from the AEF data: (See Table). 

In the orthodox format (Sitar + single Tabla accompanist), Niladri appears almost as convincing as he does in the Fusion/ Semi-fusion (multiple accompanist) format. This suggests that Niladri’s style, supported by electronic wizardry, has by now cultivated a distinct constituency, which values his music equally in either category of melodic content. Support for this possibility is available from the AEF numbers. (See Table). 

Interestingly, His Raga-based content fares considerably better on the AEF measure than his Raga-neutral musical content. This may suggest that Niladri's own melodic imagination falls short of the aesthetic coherence of mature Raga-s. He finds relative safety in a few playful Raga-s, featured primarily in semi-classical music. A majority of the uploads feature popular romantic Raga-s like Jhinjhoti, Tilak Kamod, Bhairavi, and Manjh Khamaj, and are rendered mostly in medium tempo. In the sample uploads, I encountered only two recordings of relatively serious Raga-s: Shree and Kaunsi Kanada. The full-fledged orthodox Raga-presentation protocol of Sitar music is encountered only once. It therefore appears that Niladri’s music is not about what he plays, but how he engages audiences. 

Anoushka Shankar

Anoushka is an English-American Sitarist, and daughter of the legendary Pandit Ravi Shankar, and his second wife, Sukanya Rajan. During her early years in England, she is reported to have trained in Western music, later to be groomed as a Hindustani Sitarist by her father and his disciple, Gaurav Majumdar in the US. Not surprisingly, therefore, her career as a Sitarist has flourished primarily in the US and Europe. 

I reviewed 35 uploads of her music with an average YouTube exposure life of 5 years (Range: 1-16 years) as on January 25, 2026. A majority of recordings are of live concerts in the US or Europe. A couple of uploads belong to some of the albums she has released. Based on the sample reviewed, the following observations can be made.

Her musical personality has a strong bias in favour of orchestral or duet arrangement. Her ensemble can be as small as a chamber-music suite, a quartet, or as large as a symphony orchestra.  Only 4 of the 35 reviewed uploads feature vocals as a part of orchestral presentation, with vocals provided by others. Her chamber music/ quartet format presentations frequently feature bass, flute, violin, guitar, clarinet, keyboards, xylophone, piano, sarod, cello, or shehnai for melodic/ harmonic support. Percussion support, where used, is a western drum-set, hand-pan (percussive-melodic), Tabla, Mrudangam and, occasionally, also Morsing (mouth harp).  Very few of the uploads reviewed can be considered orthodox -- Sitar accompanied by percussion (Tabla or Mridangam) accompaniment, with an optional Tanpura in the background. In a few cases, her solo renditions lack even percussion accompaniment. In almost all orchestral arrangements. which are obviously pre-composed and rehearsed to perfection, she is the lead performer, and appears to retain a semblance of freedom to improvise her sections. 

Her inclination towards collaborative music-making is understandable considering her training in Western music, and consequent comfort with Western notation systems. It is also pragmatic considering the cultural environment and the acoustic ambience in which she is pursuing her career. This pragmatism is also reflected in the titles/ themes under which Anoushka presents her items. The Raga pantheon of Hindustani music appears to guide her compositions even in orchestral presentations. However, she considers it unnecessary -- perhaps even imprudent -- to allow the uniquely Indian archetype of “Raga-ness” to erect a barrier to the acceptance of her music. Her compositions are cleverly titled. A few examples: “We return to love”, “Daybreak”, “New Dawn”, “Crossing the Rubicon”, “In the End”.  

Of the 35 uploads reviewed, as many as 24 recordings exhibit a clear presence of Raga-based melody. Admittedly, the choice of Raga-s is biased towards romanticist/ popular Raga-s like Manjh Khamaj, Bhairavi, Hansadhwani, Charukeshi, Yaman, and Jhinjhoti. She does not, however, shy away from presenting her music in more serious Raga-s like Jog, Shree or Puriya Dhanashri. Her thematic titles ensure that her music will face minimal aesthetic resistance from her audiences. 

In its totality, Anoushka’s music represents a substantial advancement towards shaping/ altering the experience of Hindustani music for global audiences. Its underlying “Indian-ness” is apparent to those who will look for it, and irrelevant to those who can engage with her music as, simply, music. 

Rishabh Rikhiram Sharma

Rishabh is a New York-based son of the Sanjay Sharma, a partner in the famous Delhi-based firm of master-luthiers, Rikhiram & Sons. Rishabh's profile on his website describes him as a Sitarist, composer and producer. Rishabh studied the Sitar from childhood under Parimal Sadaphal, a disciple of Pandit Ravi Shankar. The child’s potential was soon noticed by the legendary maestro, who admitted him formally into the Ravi Shankar lineage. Rishabh went on later to study Music Production at the City University of New York, acquiring valuable skills for a contemporary musician. 

Interestingly, Rishabh has deviated from the Indian convention of using his father’s first name (Sanjay) as his middle name. Instead, he has adopted the name of his great-grandfather, Rikhiram, who founded the firm in Lahore (now in Pakistan) before moving to Delhi after partition. The “Rikhiram” brand could have given Rishabh, a luthier’s son, easier entry into a competitive Sitar market populated by premium-commanding hereditary musicians. His talent did the rest. The astronomical viewership numbers this 28-year-old musician commands on YouTube suggest the magnitude of his following. 

I have reviewed 30 video uploads of Rishabh on YouTube. He acquits himself honourably as a Sitarist as well as a vocalist. Of these 30, 21 uploads feature him as a Sitarist, 7 feature him as a Sitarist and a vocalist, and only 2 feature him only as a  vocalist only. This ratio suggests that, despite the endearing quality of his vocalism, he has positioned himself primarily as a Sitarist who can, incidentally, also sing. 

Of his 21 Sitar-dominant recordings, most of which have a small supporting ensemble, as many as 13 recordings exhibit a clear presence of Hindustani Raga-s. The list includes Adana, Shankara, Puriya Kalyan, Tilak Kamod, Shuddha Sarang, Manjh Khamaj, Kedar, Bihag, Hameer. Khamaj, Kausi Kanada and Nat Bhairav. The remaining 8 recordings feature Raga-neutral musical content, with a populist stance. These include his own compositions, popular Indian film songs, and themes from popular international shows/films such as Harry Potter, and Game of Thrones. Amongst the “New Wave” Sitarists, Rishabh could have travelled the farthest into populism. 

In this group of 21 Sitar-dominant recordings, I found only 7 uploads featuring the orthodox format of a Sitar recital accompanied only by a Tabla, and occasional Tanpura. Most of them are recordings of live concerts performed over the years. They feature a reasonable variety of Raga-based musical content with an average duration of 17 minutes each. Stylistically, the music is thoroughbred Ravi Shankar idiom. However, none of the recordings features the complete Raga-presentation protocol covering the three-tier Alap, followed by Vilambit and Drut compositions. The telescoping of the Raga-presentation into an undemanding “capsule” could be one of the dimensions of the paradigmatic shift taking place now.

The more interesting facet of Rishabh’s musicianship are uploads which present him simultaneously as a sitarist and a vocalist, as they may hold the key to his popularity. Most of these are listed on YouTube as “Official Music Video”. In these, he demonstrates his professional competence as a music producer. These are obviously studio recordings, though some are presented as stage performances. Several of them have been shot against thematically appropriate backdrops like the river Ganga in Varanasi, or stunning images of Mount Kailasa. Some of the numbers exhibit the presence of Raga-based melody, while others are raga-neutral. These videos feature Rishabh on the sitar and vocals, accompanied by a minimal ensemble: guitar, drum-sets, flute, tabla, castanets, keyboards. In obvious awareness of the attention-span of Internet audiences, the average duration of these videos has been restricted to 3.2 minutes. 

The titles of these videos are even more interesting. Some examples: Chanakya, Kautilya, Shiva Kailasa, Rosalyn, Mata Kalika, Ranjhana, Belua (a Himachali folk song). Despite the fact that Rishabh is competing in the global Sitar market, he appears to make no attempt to conceal the essential “Indian-ness” of the music, or his own religious passion. His ethnically transparent stance becomes boldly evident in the two videos featuring him as a solo vocalist. In one of them, he is seen chanting the famous Shiva Tandava Stotram, composed by Ravana, before a delirious audience in Nepal. On another, he sings a Shiva Stuti in Raga Shankara accompanied by a flute and the Tabla.  

The “New Wave”

It is not necessary to compare the four Sitarists reviewed here on their respective approaches to musicianship or the magnitude of their success. They cannot be compared also because they belong to different generations. If 30 years constitutes a generation, the senior-most Shujaat (born: 1960) is almost the “father-generation” to the youngest Rishabh Sharma, a millennial (born:1998). Each of these musicians is a unique product of his/her background and successful with the audiences he/she addresses or confronts. What is common to them is that they are all Sitarists, and their music can indicate the direction in which Sitar music is drifting. Some tentative observations can be made on these directions. 

(a) The elaborate sophistication of the Raga-presentation protocol practiced by the Ravi Shankar/ Vilayat Khan/ Nikhil Bannerjee generation, with each Raga lasting 30-45 minutes, may be heading for extinction. Amongst the elements of the orthodox protocol, the Vilambit and Drut+Jhala may be facing faster obsolescence, leaving medium-to-brisk tempo presentation as the primary residual/ substitute. 

(b) The Sitar is no longer seen strictly as a solo instrument. It has the potential to engage with newer/ larger audiences as an orchestral instrument, accompanied by vocal renditions or Indian/western/fusion ensembles.

(c) The entry of orchestral arrangements tends to limit the degree of improvisation permissible, and to drive Sitar music towards pre-composed musical presentations. Orchestration, especially across cultural boundaries, also tends to confine compositions to the simpler Tala-s, thus draining the musical culture of the rhythmic variety available in Hindustani music. 

(d) The Raga-based ethnicity of Hindustani music is becoming increasingly irrelevant to the engagement of audiences – especially in an orchestral context -- as long as the musical experience is of high quality -- acoustic and/or visual.

(e) Maintaining high-quality musical experiences, especially within orchestral contexts, requires Sitarists to get intimately involved with sound-engineering technologies. 

(f) The Internet, but more specifically YouTube, has become the primary medium for reaching and servicing audiences. The faceless global audience accessible through YouTube constitutes a total de-contextualization of traditional art forms everywhere. This phenomenon could be driving Sitar music towards a comprehensive de-culturation.  

As anticipated by Part I of this study, and evidenced in the music reviewed here, a paradigmatic shift is on its way, and it is, indeed, emerging outside the artistic realm which can be described as "Classical Music", as hitherto understood. It is impossible to judge how transient or stable the present patterns are. The prevailing culture of any era is, after all, a manifestation of the ongoing interaction between several co-existing generations. We know that the Ravi Shankar/ Vilayat Khan/ Nikhil Bannerjee model of Sitar music has withstood at least five decades of demographic change. Our "New Wave" Sitarists are expressing and addressing the aesthetic sensibilities of an India with a median age of around 30. By 2050, the median could touch 50 -- a dramatic transformation in the nation's collective psyche. Will today’s musical tendencies remain viable for another quarter of a century? Nobody knows. 

© Deepak S. Raja 2026

Written February 1, 2026, YouTube data as on January 15, 2026. 

Jugalbandi-s in Hindustani music: Is 1+1=3?

 

During my interviews with several leading musicians – mainly instrumentalists-- I have found considerable lack of enthusiasm, sometimes even outright disdain, for the Jugalbandi format for presenting Hindustani music. They have expressed the view that the musical product of duets is inferior to the respective solo performances of the partners.  

Alongside the aesthetic aspect, and perhaps related to it, musicians also mention the financial issues surrounding Jugalbandi engagements – whether for stage appearances, or for recordings. The collaborating musicians tend to expect their normal (solo) rates, or even a premium over their normal rates, for duet engagements. As a result, the sponsor/ host often struggles to keep the economics of the event manageable. This reality could substantially explain why very few significant and durable partnerships have emerged in Hindustani music since independence. 

The economics of each Jugalbandi event will tend to be unique, and will remain opaque to the world. Audiences, however, do respond to the qualitative dimension of duet performances expecting that they will be more interesting/ enjoyable/ satisfying than either of the two participants performing solo… that 1+1=3, preferably more. Qualitative dimensions of the musical experience are not amenable to easy quantification. An attempt is, however, made here to examine if readily accessible data may reveal interesting patterns.

The data-source for analysis

In my earlier writings, I have defended the use of YouTube viewership data as displayed on the screen against each uploaded recording. The limitations of using this data for research purposes have been identified by researchers all over the world. These need not be repeated here. Despite the pitfalls, researchers are accepting it as useful at the exploratory phase stage of research. This is largely because there is no other standardized real-time global-scale monitoring of viewership available. The generators of this data (YouTube/Google) possess far more audience behaviour data than is publicly accessible. We can only attempt to persuade its transparent fraction to deliver valuable insights. 

My earlier analysis of data in public domain enabled me to define an “Audience Engagement Factor”, derived by dividing the total reported viewership of a recording (in actual numbers) by the number of weeks since the particular recording was uploaded on YouTube. Since my last research effort using this measurement tool, YouTube has changed its screen-display data policy. YouTube now displays the age of the upload in years rounded off to the nearest year—and not the precise data of the upload. And, for viewership, YouTube now displays the numbers, rounded off to the nearest thousand. Because of these changes, the Audience Engagement Factor (AEF) has to be computed as (viewership in thousands / Number of years for which the upload has been in public view). Compared to the AEF measure I have earlier used in my studies, this is admittedly a blunt tool. We accept this dilution of analytical value because we must, and without claiming conclusive authority for the results. 

Sample for the study

This study considers two categories of duet-partnerships – (1) those that have been stable over a long period and (2) those that started as duet partnerships, but were terminated by the demise of one partner, leaving the survivor to pursue a solo career thereafter. The study covers duet partnerships of instrumentalists as well as vocalists. The analysis was done using data as displayed in the last week of December 2025. 

The target was to consider data for 30 uploads of each partnership, against data for the individual partners in solo performance. The first 30 recordings surfacing in response to search within YouTube were selected for computation of AEFs. In cases, where the available uploads on YouTube were less than 30, all available uploads were included for analysis.

The results have been checked for the presence of unacceptable/ unexpected biases. Is the derived AEF measure correlated to the age of the upload on YouTube? The coefficient of correlation is -0.9891. Yes, the more recently uploaded recordings tend to deliver a higher AEF than the older uploads. This is expected because the older uploads have already been viewed or considered and ignored; recent additions will tend to attract greater interest. Second check: Could the AEF measure be correlated to the size of the sample in each case? The coefficient of correlation is 0.243004. Yes, but the tendency is very mild and not significant. Larger samples tend to deliver higher AEFs. This is also expected as the YouTube tends to receive and algorithmically prioritize recordings of highly rated artists/ duet performers more than those of relatively lower rating. The limitations of available data did not permit enlarging the target sample size beyond 30. These biases are neither unexpected, nor capable of neutralization. 

Results for stable partnerships. (See Table 1)

1. Ravi Shankar+Ali Akbar Khan: The aggregate AEF (Audience Engagement Factor) for their duet uploads is substantially higher than the solo AEF for Ali Akbar Khan, but substantially lower than the solo AEF for Ravi Shankar. 

2.Vilayat Khan+Bismillah Khan: The aggregate AEF for their duet uploads is substantially higher than that of Vilayat Khan’s solo uploads and substantially lower than Bismillah Khan’s solo uploads. 

3. Vilayat Khan+Imrat Khan: The aggregate AEF for their duet uploads is substantially lower than the solo AEF for Vilayat Khan, and approximately on par with Imrat Khan’s solo uploads. 

4. Shivkumar Sharma+Hariprasad Chaurasia: The aggregate AEF for their duet uploads is substantially lower than that of Sharma’s solo AEF as well as Chaurasia’s solo AEF. 

5. Shujaat Khan+Tejendra Majumdar: They emerged as a promising duet pair during the last decade of the 20th century. Their aggregate AEF for duet uploads is, once again, lower than the solo AEFs for Shujaat as well as Tejendra.

The pattern suggests that in the first three cases, the AEF for duet performances is uplifted substantially by on one of the partners, with the other partner being a net gainer in terms of audience involvement. Interestingly, all these partnerships cultivated their constituencies as duet artistes over four or more decades on the concert platform as well in the recorded media. 

The 4th and 5th cases are of relatively recent arrivals on the Jugalbandi scene. In the 4th case (Shivkumar Sharma & Hariprasad Chaurasia), the partners have acquired so large a following as solo performers globally, and also outside the classical music world, that their duet performances appear to fall short on public interest. The 5th case (Shujaat and Tejendra) is, strictly not comparable to the first four because of its most recent   emergence. As soloists, they have established themselves with audiences, but have not been long enough in limelight to invite discovery of their talent as duet-partners. As a purely statistical observation on the sample uploads, we may say that, for stable partnerships (instrumental), 1+1 does not appear to add up to even 2. 

Broken partnerships (See Table 2)

1. Nasir Ameenuddin Dagar+Nasir Moinuddin Dagar: They spearheaded the revival of the mediaeval Dhrupad genre after independence, by which time it had been described as a “Museum Piece”.  Nasir Moinuddin died in 1966, leaving behind Nasir Ameenuddin to pursue a career as a solo vocalist. Recordings of the brothers in duet performances, and of Ameenuddin in solo performance are both available on YouTube for study. The survivor, Nasir Ameenuddin (died: 2000), performing solo, appears to command about half the AEF that the two brothers could command when performing together. 

2. Faiyaz Ahmed+Niyaz Ahmed Khan: In the 1970s, the two brothers emerged as significant duet artists in the Khayal genre of vocal music. Faiyaz Ahmed died in 1989, leaving behind Niyaz Ahmed (died: 2003) to continue performing as a solo vocalist. As a soloist, Niyaz Ahmed appears to command about half the AEF the two could command performing together as duet artists. 

3. Salamat Ali+Nazakat Ali Khan: The Khayal vocalist duo from the Shyam Chaurasi gharana of Pakistan acquired considerable popularity in Pakistan and in India in the 1970s. Nazakat Ali Khan died in 1983, leaving behind Salamat Ali (died: 2001) to continue performing as a soloist. The survivor, Salamat Ali appears to have achieved about three times the AEF values that the duo could elicit as duet performers. 

4. Amanat Ali+Fateh Ali Khan: The Khayal vocalist brothers representing the Pakistan wing of the Patiala gharana acquired a substantial following in Pakistan as well as India in the late 1960s. Amanat Ali died in 1974, while the survivor, Fateh Ali (died: 2017) continued to perform as a soloist for a couple of decades thereafter. Fateh Ali, performing as a soloist appears to clock only about half of the AEF that he could command when performing duets with his departed brother.

5. Note 1: The terminated partnership of Ramakant and Umakant Gundecha (brothers), Dhrupad vocalists, has not been included in this study. This is because, after the demise of Ramakant Gundecha in 2019, Umakant has been assisted often by his nephew, Anant Gundecha, rather than perform solo. In historical context, the data on the available uploads of this duo is inadequate and inconsistent with other duos considered here.  

6. Note 2: The partnership of Khayal vocalists, Rajan & Sajan Mishra (Brothers), terminated by the death of Rajan in April 2021, is partially a similar case. After Rajan Mishra’s demise, Sajan Mishra began performing as a soloist, occasionally assisted by a nephew. The duration of his solo career is too short, and available recordings are too few, for the survivor’s viewership record to be considered. 

Except in the case of Salamat Ali Khan, the termination of duet partnership of vocalists appears to have imposed a considerable price on the survivor in terms of audience engagement. The arithmetic of these cases seems to suggest that 2-1=0.5 or less. 

The bigger picture (See Table 3)

We may now consider a bigger/ more generalized picture of the Jugalbandi’s audience engagement propensity relative to that of solo performances by the very artists who have performed in both formats. To state it bluntly, we may wish to assess whether  1+1=3 is a reasonable expectation from duets.

 We have AEF results for 9 duet partnerships, and corresponding solo AEFs for 13 musicians. Five of the partnerships are stable, and are all of instrumentalists. Four of the partnerships were terminated by death, and are all of vocalists. We may therefore view the results on both dimensions – stability as well as idiom. 

Aggregate results for stable partnerships (instrumental) suggest that duets manage only about 20% of The AEF relative to solo performances by the very same partnering musicians. A similar estimate for broken partnerships (vocal) suggests that duets can deliver about 80% of the AEF relative to the solo AEFs of the surviving partner. 

When both categories of partnerships are considered together, duet AEFs of the same artists who have performed in both formats, appear to be only about 22% as engaging as their solo appearances. 

To put it simply, these 13 musicians, can/could claim, on an average, the attention of 9500 listers each in a year through their duet performances. In comparison,  in the same period of a year, they can/could  have engaged the attention, on an average, of 42000 listeners through their solo performances. The reality of the music-making and audience-engagement process is, admittedly, too complex to be reflected in such measurements. But, the orders of magnitude are such, that the results of this study may be considered persuasive. 

These indications support the view that, in Hindustani music, the Jugalbandi format imposes a substantial surrender of artistic autonomy on both partners and delivers less engaging music. Despite all the planning and preparatory effort that duets demand, a truly synergistic musical experience is apparently not reasonable to expect. 

In this respect, duets among vocalists may fare better than duets between instrumentalists. The key to this difference may lie in the fact that the vocalist duet performers considered here are/were all, without exception, brothers who have grown up together and studied music with the same Guru. Synergy had a better chance. On the instrumental (stable partnerships) side, this is true only of  Vilayat Khan and Imrat Khan (brothers) and partially of Ravi Shankar and Ali Akbar (disciples of the same Guru).

To conclude: The Jugalbandi format in Hindustani music could be falling short of enhanced audience expectations, and may be relying substantially, if not entirely, on the opaque economics of event management for its survival. 

 Written: January 6, 2026 

© Deepak Raja, 2026

 

Sitar Music Today. Part I

 On January 16, 2004, two months before his father Ustad Vilayat Khan’s demise, I was talking to Ustad Shujaat Khan about his perceptions of his life in music. He had, by then, achieved considerable success as a performing musician in the US, and had begun to make his presence felt in the Indian market. During our conversations, he made some interesting observations. 

“Having achieved prior success abroad has helped me immensely in dealing with the Indian market. Whatever success I have in India today has been achieved with my self-esteem intact… Having done well abroad has also helped me musically -- allowed me the time to liberate my Indian presence from the towering shadow of Ustad Vilayat Khan’s music. Had I been more dependent on Indian audiences for my livelihood, the market may have forced me to become a Vilayat Khan clone… I cannot cease to be Vilayat Khan’s son and disciple any more than I can cease to be myself. But, I don’t want to be coerced into reaffirming my lineage at every concert, and in every raga. 

“With the passage of time, of course, an entirely new generation of listeners has emerged. To them, Ustad Vilayat Khan or Pandit Ravi Shankar or Ustad Ali Akbar Khan  – though they are all alive – are only as real as Mahatma Gandhi or Jawaharlal Nehru.  These audiences are willing to accept me for what I am. So, from every angle, my prior success abroad has worked well for me.”

Two points merit highlighting. First, that he was facing two distinct generations of audiences – the established Vilayat Khan audience, and the emerging audience which did not relate to Vilayat Khan’s idiom. Second, that he could build a successful career in India only by liberating his music from the Vilayat Khan idiom, and addressing the nascent generation of music lovers. 

Young India

At the time when these observations were made, Shujaat’s remarks were astute. (See Graph). In the year 2005, the median (average) age of India’s population was 23.8 years. Half of India’s population was below 24 years of age. Though no longer getting younger, even today India is a young nation, and the proportion of youth is large enough to attract a musician.  

Over the years, his efforts helped him build a successful contemporary idiom upon the foundations of Vilayat Khan’s musical language.  A few others of his own generation, and the next have also made apparently successful departures – though stylistically different -- from the orthodox (early 20th century) idiom. 

Their deviant/ revisionist idioms have their own generational logic, and their success validates it. But, the other half of the population, which their music perhaps excludes, has neither disappeared, nor is it likely to disappear. In fact, India is now ageing at the rate of about 3.5 years every decade. This has implications for the musical culture because culture is the product of a complex interaction between  co-existing generations. 

These interactions are changing society constantly, and music is also changing in response to them. The changes remain imperceptible for long periods, until society has changed substantially enough to demand newer modes of cultural expression. When such visibly new modes appear, and replace older modes, they are described as “Paradigm Shifts”. 

Interpreting the generational logic

To understand how this generational logic has worked in the Sitar world, I selected 24 significant Sitarists, and estimated their appeal for present-day (as in May 2021) YouTube audiences. The sample of 24 musicians used for this study is listed – by the year of their birth – in Table 1 at the end of this study. The sample covers a wide spectrum of gharana styles, and a span of 60 years. Pandit Ravi Shankar (born: 1920) to Niladri Kumar (born: 1979). 

I have written extensively on the limitations and usefulness of publicly displayed YouTube audience measurements for research purposes. I use the data because it is better than nothing, and I interpret it as being indicative rather than authoritative. The usable indicator derived from this data is “Views per month”. Because of the question mark hanging over data quality, I call this an “Audience Engagement Factor” (AEF). This AEF can be computed for each published recording or for aggregates of recordings grouped together/ classified on different parameters. 

The Audience Engagement Factors have been computed for the selected 24 Sitarists, using their top-35 YouTube uploads by accumulated viewership, as in the first week of May, 2021. The sample is limited to Sitarists above 40 as on the date of study. Only recordings of Raga-based music (along with accepted semi-classical and light music) in the solo performance format have been considered. Duets and orchestral presentations have been excluded.  

Shujaat’s observations, which triggered off this enquiry, make our focus amply clear. We are attempting here to understand a historical process, and not to rate individual Sitarists. Individuals are merely observable manifestations of history.

For this purpose, we are using a data source and a measurement tool that is far from perfect. The computations themselves are a snapshot of a historical process as viewed on a particular day and, therefore, unstable. The personalities in the snapshot and their relative significance can change dramatically within a short time. But, our reading of the historical process may be more stable.  (See graph)

This graph plots the Audience Engagement Factors for 24 Sitarists against their year of birth. The plot shows that contemporary audiences have a high preference for the music of Sitarists born between 1960 and 1980. But, the highest preference belongs to a Sitarist born in 1920, with Sitarists born in 1924 and 1930 also commanding sizeable audiences. From this, we may infer that though newer modes of expression have attained a substantial following, they have not yet re-invented the Sitar idiom sufficiently to render the older modes obsolete or irrelevant. 

Aesthetic obsolescence is built into the character of Hindustani music. If an art-form is vibrant, it will tend to reinvent itself constantly/ repeatedly/ periodically to retain or enlarge its audience. Though statistically insignificant, the slope of the trend line in the above graph may seem unhealthy to some. The phenomenon warrants a finer view. 

The Sitar audience cannot be viewed as an undifferentiated homogenous mass, especially because the instrument has a large international following. So, it may be reasonable to interpret this graph as a picture of three co-existing audiences which may, or may not, represent different generations. One is the audience of Ravi Shankar/ Vilayat/ Nikhil (born: 1920-1930). The second is the audience of Shahid/Shujaat (born: 1958-1960), and the third, on the horizon, is the audience of Niladri Kumar (born: 1979). 

Our “landmark” musicians highlighted on the graph, and named above, represent different generations. The method of the generations is a useful tool for understanding cultural change and paradigm shifts. 

Philosophers and economists have contributed to the idea that the periodicity of paradigm shifts in all fields is closely linked with generational transitions. Economic conditions are important because they affect the prevailing worldview in a society. I have detailed a few relevant contributions to this field in my earlier essays. I summarize the gist of the most important contributions here as a backdrop to the analysis of the data compiled for the present essay. 

The method of the generations

In his epic work, “Man and Crisis”, the influential Spanish philosopher, Jose Ortega Y Gassett, defines a generation as a “Community of date and space”, which signifies the sharing of an essential destiny. 

“A generation is an integrated manner of existence or, if you prefer, a fashion of living, which fixes itself indelibly on the individual… The concept of age is not the stuff of mathematics, but of life. Age, then, is not a date, but a zone of dates”. 

This forms the basis of his division of individual life-spans into distinct phases of interaction with the world, and of history as the “dynamic system of attractions and repulsions, of agreements and controversy” between the various co-existing generations. 

The sum total of Ortega’s argument is as follows: Human life is meaningfully divided into five stages of 15 years each. As a reflection of this, the face of the world changes in some ways every fifteen years. The 30-year period between 30 and 60 is the historically most significant period in the life of each generation. Hence, he regards a period of 30 years as constituting a generation. This seems reasonable because, by the age of 30, a person has almost certainly become a parent. According to him, historic (paradigmatic) changes can be expected to surface every 60 years, because the conditions governing the lives of the grand-child generation have almost nothing in common with those governing the grand-parent generation. 

Based on the Ortega argument, it appears reasonable to look for significant changes in any field of human activity at intervals of 15, 30, and 60 years. Economists, looking at the cyclicity of business activity from various angles, have come to broadly similar conclusions. 

Amongst various reputed formulations of economic cycles, the Nikolai Kondratieff formulation (1925) is considered the most authoritative because of its multi-dimensional perspective and statistical validation, and most useful from the cultural angle. His formulation is based on a comprehensive analysis of economic, demographic, monetary, technological and political factors between 1790 and 1920. Kondratieff has estimated an expansion-contraction cycle of 50-60 years, which subsumes three sub-cycles of 17-20 years each. 

Relating data to theory

Considering the high-points on our graph, it becomes evident that (i) Shahid Parvez and Shujaat Khan are born, respectively, 38 and 40 years after Pt. Ravi Shankar, (ii) Niladri Kumar is born 19 years after Shujaat Khan, and almost 60 years after Pt. Ravi Shankar. This study is intended as a study of generations, and not of individual Sitarists. The named personages are only data-points on a graph. These data-points are neither intended, nor sufficient, for identifying the named Sitarists as historic personalities. 

Our data broadly confirms a long cycle of 50-60 years, and sub-cycles of 17-20 years. Our data-set itself covers a period of only 60 years, or one mega-cycle as postulated by theorists of history. This obliges us to look at shorter durations (sub-cycles) for interpreting our Audience Engagement results. 

The analysis of the sample by dates of birth reveals a mean of 1950, with a standard deviation of 17 years. The sample allows us to consider 5 sub-cycles (half-generations) of 17 years each. Considering the various theoretical constructs, this is a defensible way of looking at Audience Engagement Factors. 

The analysis of AEF numbers by 17-year half-generations does show (healthy) signs of aesthetic obsolescence. The farther we go back in history, the music appears to be less and less appealing to present-day listeners. The decline is steady, until the numbers hit the final barrier – Ravi Shankar, Vilayat Khan, and Nikhil Banerjee. Their aggregate audience engagement score is more than three times the score achieved by the youngest half-generation of sitarists. 

What, then, can be said about the much talked-about paradigm shift taking place in Sitar music? The final barrier will be crossed either when two generations of listeners who grew up with Ravi Shankar/Vilayat Khan/Nikhil music depart, or a new generation of Sitarists demonstrates a substantive enough re-invention of the Sitar's musical potential to push the present Gods of Sitar into history. 

Sixty years have passed between the arrivals of Ravi Shankar and Niladri Kumar, and it appears that the validation of Sitar music still derives from idioms shaped almost three generations ago. Is it possible that the paradigm shift in Sitar music is already happening, but in a territory that we do not classify as “classical” music? Do we need a different data-set to understand the situation? Do we need a better way of interpreting the same data? Or, do we need better theory? 

This study was done in May 2021 using data in the public domain. It is difficult to judge if finer analytics (available only to YouTube managers) would paint a clearer picture. The logic of the trends evident in 2021 suggests that a major re-invention of the Sitar has not yet emerged, but may be on its way. 

(C) Deepak S. Raja 2025

© Deepak S. Raja, May 2021

Briefs on Hindustani musical instruments

 

The classification of instruments: Around 3000 BC, the Chinese are known to have classified musical instruments based on the material from which they were made. Stone, wood, leather, bamboo, copper, silk etc. This classification reflected the crafts that were involved in making/ repairing/ maintaining them. 

Around 200 BC, the Natyashastra written by Bharata classified them in the basis of the principle of sound production. (i) Tata = string activation instruments (ii) Susheera = wind activated instruments (iii) Ghana = activated by vibration of solid materials (iv) Avanaddha = activated by vibration of leather cladding. In the 17^th century, scholars recognized the emergence of new instruments, and introduced a fifth category: Tat-avanaddha = activated by vibration of strings, and also supported by a leather cladding. 

In the 20^th century, organologists (scholars who study musical instruments) adopted the Natyashastra framework and classified instruments into (i) Chordophones = string instruments (ii) Aerophones = wind instruments (iii) Ideophones = solid resonators (iv) Membranophones = membrane clad instruments, and (v) Electrophones = electrically activated resonators. 

Bansuri (Transverse bamboo flute): The emergence of the Bansuri as a major instrument in Hindustani music is entirely a 20^th century phenomenon. Until the arrival of Pannalal Ghosh (1911-1960), there existed a multitude of bamboo flutes in India, none of which was suitable for performing Raga-based Hindustani music in the post-amplification acoustic environment. After extensive experimentation, Ghosh designed the Classical Bansuri which remains, to this day, the standard design for classical music performance. As a flautist, Ghosh brought to the instrument his training in various genres under the redoubtable Guru, Allauddin Khan. The rich repertoire he performed on the Bansuri ensured  a durable future  in Hindustani music for the instrument.

Harmonium : A member of the keyboard based family of free-reed aerophones. Although such instruments have existed in India and other parts of Asia for centuries, Christian missionaries probably introduced the Harmonium to India in the eighteenth century, as accompaniment for choirs in Churches. The original import was a platform mounted pedal-primed version which was later replaced with a portable hand-pumped variant with 37 keys to suit Indian requirements. Despite the incompatibility of its tempered scale with Indian intonation practices, the instrument is now the most widely used melodic accompaniment to all genres of vocal music (other than dhrupad/dhamàra) and has replaced the Sarangi in this role. Attempts to establish it as a solo instrument have met with only limited success.

Indian classical guitar/Hindustani slide guitar : The Indian classical guitar/Hindustani slide guitar is an adaptation of the Western F-Hole guitar, modified to meet the requirements of Hindustani [north Indian] art music. The instrument was introduced to Hindustani music in the 1960s by Pandit Brijbhushan Kabra,  a disciple of the Sarod maestro, Ustad Ali Akbar Khan. In terms of technique of melodic execution, the Indian classical guitar and the Hawaiian guitar are both heirs to the ancient Indian fretless stick-zithers, the Ekatantri Veena, the Ghoshaka, and the Vichitra Veena. 

According to some accounts, the technique of these ancient instruments traveled to Hawaii with one Gabriel Davion, kidnapped from India to Honolulu by a sea captain in the nineteenth century. The technique gave birth to the Hawaiian guitar, which returned to India before Second World War through the recordings of American guitarists, Sol Hoopii and Joe Kaipo. The instrument was first adopted by bands in Calcutta, entered film music thereafter, and finally entered classical music  in the 1960s. 

 Jala Taranga : The word is derived from Sanskrit jala = water + taranga = waves. The term describes an ancient Indian polychord of the struck variety, consisting of 12/15 china-clay bowls of different sizes, which are tuned to a ràga-scale by filling them with appropriate quantities of water. Sound activation is done by beating the cups with sticks akin to sticks used for drums used in popular Western music. The instrument receives mention in musicological texts only from the late seventeenth century and is now nearly extinct, appearing occasionally in orchestral ensembles.

Kashta Taranga : The word is derived from Sanskrit kashta = wood + taranga = waves. The term describes an ancient polychord of the struck variety, an Indian version of a xylophone. Sound activation is done by impacting wooden strips of different sizes with sticks with rounded heads. The instrument is nearly extinct, now encountered occasionally in orchestral ensembles.

 Kinnari/Kinnari Veena : The word kinnari is an adjective derived from the Sanskrit kinnara, meaning a category of celestial being. Kinnara also denotes a community of professional musicians. The word kinnari may be construed either as an adjective derived from kinnara, or translated as as female kinnara. In the present context, it refers to an ancient instrument, a member of the fretted stick-zither family, which is considered the ancestor of the Rudra Veena. Kinnari Veena were of two varieties: the Brihat [great/major] kinnari which had three gourds (chamber resonators), and the laghu [small/minor] kinnari, which had only two. The laghu kinnari is believed to be the direct parent of the Rudra Veena.

Nagàrà/ Nakkara : The nagàrà belongs to the family of indigenous kettle-drums used as rhythmic accompaniment to the Shehnai. The shell of these drums was originally formed on a potter's wheel, but later cast in metal -- mainly copper or a copper alloy. The drums come in pairs of pan-like vessels, covered with a membrane of goat skin. Though their sound is atonal, one is a bass drum, while the other - the smaller - is a treble drum. They are struck with sticks.

Different sizes of Nagara pairs are known to be in use, the choice being dictated by the need for the volume of the output. In addition to their role as accompaniment to the Shehnai, they have also enjoyed an independent adrenalin-pumping and heralding function in military ceremonies of the feudal era, either on their own, or in conjunction with other ceremonial instruments. Though played with sticks, the nagàrà has evolved a sophisticated idiom, which has also influenced the idiom of the Tabla, an instrument of far superior musical capability.

Pakhàwaj : [also called Mrudanga]: The name derives from the Sanskrit : Paksha = sides + vàdya = a musical instrument, which dates back to the pre-Christian era, with its origins shrouded in mythology. The pakhàwaj, a horizontal two-faced tapering cylindrical drum, was the principal percussion instrument of the Hindustani [North Indian] art music tradition, until the advent of the tablà. Both sides of the Pakhawaj are covered with goat-skin and tuned, at each performance, by laying, in the centre of each face, a fresh paste of wheat-flour. This coating regulates its acoustic output. The instrument emits an atonal, bass sound. It remains, to this day, the standard rhythmic accompaniment to performances of the dhrupad/dhamàra genre, but has no presence in the modern genres of art music. 

Other two-faced barrel drums descended from the pakhàwaj are, however, still used in popular and folk music. The pakhàwaj of the Hindustani [north Indian] tradition corresponds to the mrudangam in the Carnatic [south Indian] tradition, though the two differ in construction and design, and substantially in idiom.

Rabab : The Rabab is an instrument of the short-necked fretless lute family, played by plucking. It has a carved wooden body, with the lower half covered by goat-skin, and the upper half with a wooden finger board. It uses catgut strings and is plucked with a triangular plectrum. The Rabab came to India from two sources. The first Rabab, a larger instrument, came from Persia with conquering armies around the eleventh century. The second, a smaller instrument of similar construction, came from Afghanistan with soldiers in the employ of early Moguls. 

The Persian Rabab became a significant performer of the dhrupad genre during the Mogul period, while the Afghan Rabab participated in the evolution of post-dhrupad genres during the nineteenth century. Though no longer performed in Hindustani music, the two Rababs are significant because they are the ancestors of the contemporary sarod, and have had a lasting influence on its idiom.

Rudra Veena : [Also called Been]. A member of the fretted stick-zither family of plucked instruments. A revered instrument with strong mythological and mystical associations. Evolved around the thirteenth century when frets were added to a fretless predecessor. The instrument is associated with the mediaeval dhrupad/dhamàr genre of music. It was originally used as accompaniment to vocal performances, but later acquired its independent performing domain.  The Rudra Veena has been the principal inspiration -acoustic as well as stylistic - for the evolution of the plucked instruments performed in contemporary Hindustani [north Indian] art music. 

As dhrupad receded from centre-stage of art music, the Rudra Veena surrendered its place to modern instruments which were ergonomically more efficient, and could adapt themselves to the contemporary acoustic and stylistic environment. The Dhrupad revival, which began in the 1960s, gave the instrument a fresh lease of life on the concert platform.  

Santoor: A member of the box-polychord family of struck instruments, and related to the hammered dulcimer/cimbalom family of instruments found in several parts of Asia and Europe. Originated most likely in India as Shtatantri Shata = 100 + Tantri = strings +  Veena = a stringed instrument] or in Persia as Santoor [san/sad = 100 + toor= strings]. It was traditionally performed only in the Kashmir valley in India as accompaniment for religious chants of the Islamic Sufi sects. In the latter half of the twentieth century, it was re-engineered and elevated to the concert platform as a solo instrument by Pandit Shivkumar Sharma.

Sarangi : A member of the short-necked lute family of bowed instruments. An instrument of considerable antiquity and almost certainly of Indian origin. For centuries, the instrument (known by several names, and in several forms) has been used by bards and roving minstrels for accompanying themselves. It entered art music around the seventeenth century, and has been an accompaniment to the modern genres of vocal music – Thumree and the allied romanticist genres, Tappa, and the mainstream Khayàl. 

Though once also accepted as an accompanist also to Dhrupad vocalism, the Sarangi has lost favour with Dhrupad establishment in recent years. The Sarangi is also emerging as a solo instrument, and acquiring an international following. The number of Sarangi exponents is, however, shrinking since the emergence of the harmonium as the dominant accompaniment to almost all genres of vocal music.

Sarasvati Veena : The name derives from Sarasvati, the Hindu goddess of learning and the fine arts, whose iconographic representation invariably shows her holding a long-necked fretted lute. The term Sarasvati Veena refers to the fretted lute popular in Carnatic [south Indian] tradition of art music. At one stage, the Hindustani [north Indian] Rudra Veena (organologically, a stick-zither) was also occasionally called a Sarasvati Veena. However, the two instruments are now clearly distinguished by their respective names and association with different deities. The two instruments differ in design and construction, but have near-identical histories, and are of comparable antiquity. Both started as accompaniment to vocal music, and later also acquired solo performance status.

Sarod : A member of the short-necked fretless lute family of plucked instruments. The Sarod has two identifiable ancestors - a Persian instrument called Rabab which came to India around the eleventh century, and the Kàbuli [Afghan] Rabab, which came to India around the thirteenth century. The art of the Rabab received great support from the Mogul court [fifteenth-eighteenth centuries]. The present physical form of the Sarod evolved from the Rabab in the early years of the twentieth century, but gave birth to two different designs of the instrument, attributable broadly to its two distinct ancestors.

Shankha: Shankha is Sanskrit for a large conch shell. It is a horn, which cannot produce any melody and emits only a single tone unique to its acoustic properties. It is generally blown either as an offering to God accompanying the signing of prayers and drums, or at the beginning and end of religious ceremonies. Mythological references also associate the instrument with the declaration of war in the battlefield.

Shehnai: The word probably derives from Persian Shah = king + nai = pipe. The instrument played in India is, however, almost certainly of Indian origin. The instrument belongs to the oboe family of beating-reed aerophones. The Carnatic tradition hosts a near-identical instrument, Nagaswaram, which is also primarily a ceremonial instrument. Both enjoy the status of the most preferred instrument at religious ceremonies and public celebrations. As such, this family could be the single most widely heard instrument in India. 

In its traditional role, the Shehnai addresses involuntary audiences of indeterminate aesthetic cultivation. Consequently, its traditional repertoire has been dominated by regional and folk genres of music. In the latter half of the twentieth century, Bismillah Khan elevated the instrument to the art music platform. The instrument is heading for extinction, as its traditional ceremonial clientele moves towards pre-recorded music, brass-bands and orchestral ensembles, and the film/popular music industry (once its major client) goes electronic.

Sitar : A member of the long-necked fretted lute family of plucked instruments. The theory crediting its evolution from a Persian instrument called “Sehtar” [lit: three strings] in the thirteenth century by Ameer Khusro, now stand discredited. Instruments of this variety have existed all over India for centuries before Ameer Khusro. Recent research attributes the systematic development of the instrument to Fakir Khusro Khan [eighteenth century], the brother of Niamat Khan Sadarang, a landmark figure in the evolution of the khayàl genre of vocalism. In three centuries since its entry into the mainstream, the Sitar has become the most popular instrument performed in Hindustani music.  

Sur-Shehnai : A member of the beating-reed Oboe family of instruments. It is used as a drone accompaniment to a Shehnai recital, either along with a Tanpura or even exclusively. In design and construction, it is identical to the Shehnai, the only difference being it has only one hole punched into its stem for delivering a single svara/tone/pitch, which is the tonic to which the lead-Shehnai player's instrument is tuned.

Surbahar: A member of the long-necked fretted lute family of plucked instruments. The Surbahar is a bass-Sitar, near-identical in construction to the Sitar, though enlarged to scale. The invention of the Surbahar, around 1825, is attributed variously to Sahebdad Khan, (great grandfather of the 20^th century Sitar maestro, Vilayat Khan), and to a lesser-known sitàrist, Ghulam Mohammed. Scholarly opinion favors the latter attribution. 

In the early years of the Sitar’s evolution, Sitàrists conceived the Surbahar as a specialist instrument for presenting the prefatory àlàp-jod-jhàlà movements, derived from the idiom of the rudra veena [Been]. Twenitieth century improvements in the acoustic and melodic capabilities of the Sitar have driven the Surbahar towards extinction.

Sur Singar : Sursingar is a member of the short-necked fretless lute family of plucked instruments. It represents a short-lived late-nineteenth century attempt at driving the acoustic and melodic capabilities of the Afghan Rabab closer to that of the rudra veena. The most significant version of the instrument was a quaint hybrid -- it grafted a Surbahar-style chamber-resonator at the bottom, to a Rabab-style fingerboard, along with a rudra veena type chamber-resonator at the top. It was a cumbersome instrument to play and was suited, like the Surbahar, only for prefatory movements. Mid-20^th century re-engineering of the Sarod for superior melodic delivery, robbed the Sursingar of its relevance.

Swaramandal : The instrument is a member of the harp family and belongs to the box-polychord variety of plucked instruments. Its origins are traced to an ancient Indian instrument, the Mattakokila (Sanskrit for an inebriated Cuckoo), used for accompanying the chanting of vedic hymns. It is now used primarily as an accompaniment to vocal renditions of the khayàla and Thumree genres. Unlike the Sarangi or the harmonium, on which melody is executed, the Swaramandal is only strummed intermittently as a filler of silences. The strumming is done bi-directionally with grown finger nails, or guitar-style metallic or plastic picks. 

The instrument is not a replacement for a Tanpura, and may be used either in addition to a melodic accompaniment, or exclusively. The Swaramandal is, however, not as universally used for vocal accompaniment as is the Tanpura. For some inexplicable reason, Swaramandal accompaniment is much more popular among Pakistani vocalists than Indian vocalists. Attempts at establishing it as a solo instrument for formal Raga rendition have been isolated and futile. 

Tabla: The Tabla is a pair of vertical drums, of which the treble drum is struck with the right hand, and the bass drum is struck with the left hand. Even though the name resembles that of a Persian drum called “Tabl’”, the instrument is considered to be of Indian origin. It could have evolved from one of the many vertical drum-pairs of different sizes and constructions, performed since ancient times in different parts of the country.  

The Tabla gained prominence during the 15^th century at the dawn of the modern era in Hindustani music. The Khayal was emerging as a challenger to Dhrupad supremacy, followed later by lighter vocal genres like the Thumree. Soon thereafter, the sprightly Sitar eroded the turf of the ponderous Rudra Veena in instrumental music. Hindustani music now needed a percussion partner of greater agility, delicate playing technique, and softer output than the ancient Pakhawaj. A sophisticated Tabla idiom emerged at the court of Emperor Muhammad Shah II (1719-1748), which was also host to the launch of the Sitar, and the maturation of Khayal vocalism. The Tabla steadily enlarged its role thereafter to finally replace the Pakhawaj.

Tabla Tarang : The term is derived by linking two words : Tabla = the treble drum of the Tabla  pair + taranga = waves. The word describes a polychord of the struck variety, consisting of 12-15 treble drums, each tuned to a different tone/svara of the ràga scale. It is the only Indian instrument to deploy a percussion instrument, or a part of it, to produce melody. Unlike other struck polychords, the tabla tarang is struck with the bare hands rather than mallets or sticks. The instrument has been heard only rarely – either in film or orchestral music -- but is otherwise extinct.

Tanpura : The word derives from Hindi tàna =  a musical phrase/melodic line + Sanskrit Poorak = filler/supplement. This etymology defines its function in Hindustani music. It supplements the aural experience and supports the musician's creative effort.  It performs primarily a drone function as standard accompaniment to vocal music, but is optional in instrumental music. The instrument is a member of the long-necked family of fretless plucked lutes, and acquired a significant presence in Hindustani music from the seventeenth century. Its design may have been inspired by a Persian instrument, called the "Tambour".  The instrument has four, five, or six strings tuned to the middle octave and lower-octave tonic chosen by the musician, along with supplementary strings tuned to corresponding/dominant pitches as permitted by ràga grammar. 

Unlike the Swaramandal, which is strummed only intermittently, the Tanpura is plucked continuously during a performance. However, like the Swaramandal, the Tanpura does not execute melody. Both are designed for a tonally blurred acoustic output, which shapes the acoustic ambience. The Tanpura is, however, valued more for its psycho-acoustic influence on the creative processes of the musician, than for the enrichment of the aural experience for listeners.

Vàna Veena : A member of the box-polychord variety of struck instruments. It is an Indian instrument with a hundred strings, whose description in ancient texts matches descriptions of the Shatatantri Veena and the contemporary Santoor.

Vichitra Veena : A member of the fretless stick-zither family, on which melody is executed by sliding a piece of rounded glass, akin to a paper-weight, along the strings. This instrument is a successor to the ancient ekatantri veena, and a precursor of the Hawaiian slide- guitar. The vichitra veena of the Hindustani [north Indian] tradition is identical to the gottuvadyam of the Carnatic [south Indian] tradition, now renamed chitra veena.

Violin: The Violin entered Hindustani music in the 1930s, almost a century after Baluswamy Dikshitar (1786-1858) had discovered its value as an accompanist to vocal music in the Carnatic tradition. The value of a fretless and bowed instrument for accompanying vocal music had, by then, already been established in Hindustani music by the Sarangi. 

At a time when the Harmonium was pushing the Sarangi off centre stage,  influential leaders of the Hindustani music renaissance – Allauddin Khan, Vishnu Digambar Paluskar, Gajananrao Joshi and SN Ratanjankar – saw merit in introducing the violin to Hindustani music. The instrument has, however, followed different paths in the two traditions. The violin has evolved into a major accompanist as well as a soloist in the Carnatic tradition, while it has remained primarily a solo instrument in the Hindustani tradition.

 (c) Deepak S. Raja, December 2021