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 differs from all others, and remains 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. Only a fraction of the data available with its generators may be in public domain. Even that small fraction can be persuaded 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 the only 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
