Y et another instrumental duo-turned-vocalists, Akkarai Sisters, S. Subhalakshmi and S. Sornalatha, did prove their mettle. If they continue in the same tenor, they could go places. They would be well advised to restrict the use of brigas. Subhalakshmi in particular, was accurate in her briga-oriented exposition of ragas. Most were adaptation of nagaswaram-style phrases. The person handling sound was oblivious to the fact that the mridangam and ghatam were loud on the ears and this marred the pleasure of enjoying the concert .
The sisters began with Tyagaraja’s ‘Meru Samana.’ The niraval and swaras for this Mayamalavagowla kriti were fluent. Sornalatha, the younger of the two, has a powerful voice with a tinge of bass. Subbalakshmi’s voice is contrastingly different. When the duo’s voices combined the effect was pleasing. Sornalatha’s Dhanyasi was built on traditional lines. Her alapanas in the mandara sthayi were striking. The gamakas brimmed with Dhanyasi raga rasa. It was heartening to hear. Tiruvananthapuram Sampath (violin) was in no hurry. Each of his phrases was expressive that earned him appreciation from the audience. Subbalakshmi’s brief raga forays in between pallavi, anupallavi and charanam lines of Mayurnatham showed her strong classical moorings. The speedy ‘Sharanabhava’ (Pasupathypriya-Harikesanallur Muthiah Bhagavatar) preceded the evening’s main Shanmukhapriya.
Subhalakshmi drew attention with her bhava-filled approach. She showed no strain in traversing up to the panchamam of tara sthayi and staying there. The duo began with the anupallavi lines ‘Saarva Bhowmanay Shankaranay’ while executing Sivan’s ‘Parvathy Nayakanay’. The niraval for the lines ‘Nee Maravadenaiyaal Jegadeesha’ proved their ability to interpret the raga rhythmically. The kalpanaswaras led to an enlivening tani by R. Sankaranarayanan ( mridangam) and S. Karthik( ghatam).
