There are some that feel life is too short for Riyaz and try to rationalize that with Japanese adages relating to laziness.
The Western music has notation that people have in front of them in symphonies while performing. Even in short performances or recitals the notation is right in fromt of the performer. Not so in Indian classical music.
Also to be able to play based on the notations you should know where the notes appear.
If you listened to a rendering of Violin by Yehudi Menuhin and Dr. L. Subrmaniam you would understand.
Now you are hung up on:
- too much of Riyaaz
- repetitive and monotonous nature of Riyaaz
- contribution of Riyaaz to the success of a person or more aptly 99% persipiration & 1% inspiration
It is difficult to quantify what contributes to a person's success as an artist.
Not all the sons of our maestros perform as good as their fathers. Vikku Vinayakram plays Ghatam, but his son performs on the Kanjira. Anoushka (Pt. Ravi Shankar's daughter) has a long way to go but she is not as prodigal as Zakhirji is. How about U Srinivas (Mandolin), Rimpa Shiv (Tabla). They do not have famous/ popular parents.
I can go on with examples where geneology doesn't come in with full force.
Changing the mode, western musicians are able to play with Indian musicians only if they have mastered their gig and need no notation. George Brooks (saxophonist), for instance. Also western music has a different approach.
Creativity comes only after you have attained proficiency. It does not come with inheriting a legacy.
Maybe we should quantify the level of creativity.