Ravi Shankar’s not bad, but hes a bit over rated - there have been better Indian classical musicians, and more importnatly better sitar players - he got recognised on wider level simply because he played with the beatles. His own wife was a much better musician than him. And If the talk is of Sitarists, Ustad Vilayat Khan is a superior musician - both in interpretation and technique - one of the finest, indeed to have played the instrument ever. What about Ustad Bismillah Khan who single handedly lifted a folk instrument that was formerly ostracised by classical musicians as not being a ‘proper instrument’ and turned it into a classical instrument with a legacy to live by. And if Bharat Ratnas, a civilian award as political as any, are a measure of worthiness, then he was awarded one too. Sadly, unlike Shankar, he didn’t have a very colourful life that he could reveal in an autobiography, and so died in poverty, ignored by the government and the media.

It is so pathetic that some people just cannot get over the fact that Ravi Shankar made INDIA prominent on the map of the world because he took the music of his land to every corner of the earth. For everyones information RS never played with George Harrison or any of the Beatles. True Bismillah Khan was a great musician, and he too loved and admired Rs. His wish was that he would someday play with Shankar and luckily that was granted when the Govt arranged for them to play together. The Govt did enough for Bismillah Khan and so did amember of Parliament who gave all his salary to him. The problem with Bismillah Khan is he has too many hangers on. Ravi Shankar is a musicians musician and he was the only one who took also talk in English fluently and could make people understand. At 88 he still sells out all the concert halls of the world. That does say something doesn’t it?

Lily the list is about who left the mark on the world. Not who is better.

@ Naina: I agree, but what exactly do you mean by leaving a mark on the world? do you mean they got more publicity? or do you mean they made major contributions to music?

@Jayashree: Thanx for lashing out with such flawed arguments - I love picking on such hopeless logic. Wether or not Shankar made India prominent is a moot issue - there were other Indian classical artists of great repute too - and Shankar audience often consisted of people who nothing whatsoever - as he once himslef said, his audience abroad confused his tuning for a recital. And in any case, tht is not relevant to what i ahd commented. And I never said RS wasn’t good. - look at the first sentence of my comment. All I said was tht there were better and more capable musicians. What exctly do you mean by a musician’s musician? Like I said, there were far more technically proficient and profound musicians around - whether Ustad vilayat Khan on the sitar or L. Shankar on the violin. And knowing english is no measure of how good a musician is. There lies our inferiority complex - we Indians need approval from the west to mark anything as good. And if selling out concert halls is any measure of musicianship or success in music, then Beyonce and Justin Timberlake are better musicians.