Do you find Sonu Nigam overrated? - Page 5

Originally posted by: DriftInfinitely

Udit and Sonu have different voice types, so their voices suit different kinds of songs.

I guess in the 90s, Suraj Hua Madham would have gone to someone like Kumar Sanu, as his voice is softer. Sanu didn't sing that much after 2000; not sure why.

Originally posted by: DriftInfinitely

^^Was Dhadkan a Nadeem-Shravan album?

Wondering when they had a fallout, because in 2000, I guess Sanu was singing for them.

Yes, his soft voice seemed forced a lot of times, but music directors loved to use his voice in the 90s for all soft songs. :/

Originally posted by: iambest

thin voice doesnt mean bad voice ..Muhammad rafi is also a thin voice yet he is God of all singers...its his signature style ...he has been blessed with soft voice the softness he put in songs no other singers can do it as soft as him i call him velvety voice or the makhmali voice in hindi/urdu which is more romantic and melodic...in india no singer has been gifted with such melodious as sonu nigam have not even my other fav beautiful voice of udit narayan , udit sound dry in some songs perhaps thats the reason karan johar asked for sonu to sing suraj huwa madham which required hardcore soft texture which was suppose to sing by udit narayan ...although sonu can change his voice to any sound he can sing heavy like adnan sami but his natural texture is soft .

this much softness only he can sing

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tod5rT9jMm4[/YOUTUBE]

Originally posted by: awsome.moments

No. It really doesn't mean a bad voice. But I'm just saying that some people might not like the texture so much. But that's neither here nor there. You are blessed with a voice you can't change. And this post really isn't about voice tone. It's about his singing prowess. People call him the best singer of current generation and lord of chords. Just wanted to know if you guys agree and feel the same or feel it's over exaggeration

Originally posted by: awsome.moments

No. It really doesn't mean a bad voice. But I'm just saying that some people might not like the texture so much. But that's neither here nor there. You are blessed with a voice you can't change. And this post really isn't about voice tone. It's about his singing prowess. People call him the best singer of current generation and lord of chords. Just wanted to know if you guys agree and feel the same or feel it's over exaggeration

Originally posted by: iambest

yap dharkan is nadeem shravan music , and mostly shanu songs of 2000 had nadeem sharavan as music director be it haan maine bhi pyar kiya hai , dil ka rishta , hum ho gaye apke , yeh dil aashiqna ...besides nadeem sharavan no one used him much ...

Originally posted by: iambest

kumar sanu had a heavy voice like kishore kumar and was nasal too he used to make soft by putting extra efforts in some songs , yeah kumar sanu never sang for big films in 2000 i guess downfall of nadeem sharavan caused that. kumar sanu was highly dependent on nadeem sharavan songs

Originally posted by: DriftInfinitely

I won't comment on who is the best singer because that is a subjective thing.😃

But yes, even though I'm not a huge fan of his voice type/texture, I do agree that his vocal abilities are very impressive.