INDIAN MUSIC FORUMS

Sign up Calendar Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Kirya

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 740
Reply with quote  #1 
Does anybody know what the difference is between the different Barun Roy models? #1 # 2 and #3

I know that a #3 is much cheaper but what is the reason? What are the compromises?

I am most interested in the fidelity and quality of the sound and less interested in the cosmetics and decoration, and am willing to pay more for the best sound but not as much for the decoration though it is nice if you have both.

So if a #2 and #3 are equal in sound quality and playability I would opt for #3 if the key difference was the greater extent of decorations on #2.

Any comments that others may have would be appreciated if you have any insight into how this is determined.

When I was at RikhiRam I found that I actually preferred the playability and tone of one of his standard sitars to one of his signature sitars so I wonder sometimes how this is determined. The signature sitar in his case has much more ornate decoration and had teak instead of tun. I actually prefer tun though I am told that teak might age better.

Any feedback would be appreciated.

__________________
Kirya
Los Angeles, CA
0
povster

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,487
Reply with quote  #2 
I have tried several Barun #2 and #3 sitars over the years. Never owned one but spent maybe 30 minutes to an hour each on them. Both grades can produce some really excellent instruments. The carving is definitely simpler on the #3, as one would expect.

My suspicion is the tabli is a little thicker on the #2 based on the tone. The #2s tend a smidge more to the #1s in sound/tone. They have that sound/feel like it is not quite there yet but, after some playing over time, will develop very fully which can be typical of a thicker tabli. Even my now 13 or 14 years old Barun #1 (I got it new and unplayed about 6 years after it was made) started out feeling good but sounding a little dull. After being played on regularly it developed to an amazing degree, in both tone and action, and remains tied as my most favorite sitar. The other is a mid-60s Hiren #1 still owned by my teacher.

The #3s I've tried all seem to share a more immediately louder sound with more of Barun's characteristic "woody tone" which I really love.

All of Barun's instruments have smooth action (his action tends to be a titch high, which I favor) and are well fitted. His decoration may not be the pinnacle of perfection, but the way his instruments perform override, in my opinion, any small cosmetic lacking.

I think the key difference is that over time the #2 will mature and develop more than the #3: that is, the #3 represents a good deal of how it will ultimately sound already, while the #2 represents a real potential for development.

Just my opinion based on playing them. Hopefully someone with more intimate knowledge will chime in more on the construction etc.

__________________
...Michael
Dasani - the official bottled water of ICM
Panini - the official bread of ICM
0
Lars

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,442
Reply with quote  #3 
The lower HR models are good, but the materials are less expensive which means the wood might not be as aged, etc. I don't carry the #2, I think he mainly makes them for AACM as I don't think I've ever seen any at his place. The #2 is a step up, a little more inlay, rose pegs, etc. There is not a template for thickness, depends on the wood and how old it is, etc. So no two would ever be exactly the same, the familiarity would be in the fitting which would be simlar. The #3 is generally a little to a lot smaller than the #1.


My 2 cents....

Lars

__________________
http://www.raincitymusic.com
0
nicneufeld

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,564
Reply with quote  #4 
Are the number designations restricted to KP style sitars, and if so, how do his GP sitars compare?
0
Lars

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,442
Reply with quote  #5 
I think the numbers were originally used by AACM for the KP, only one type of GP model and from experience the uglier they are the better they play and sound! Go figure....

Lars

__________________
http://www.raincitymusic.com
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.