Originally posted by: loonytunes
Dawn, i respect your opinion.
However, Kishore Da was not trained in classical singing, that's why he was weak in classical. And that just shows how much better it is to know classical singing in order to be a singer. It allowes someone to sing any kind of song. And Kishore Da was a genius. Please don't compare him to Qazi. Mohd. Rafi, by the way, sang all kinds of songs, romantic, peppy, dance, sad. everything. He was diverse so i really don't know what comparison is being made between Kishore Da and Mohd. Rafi.
As for the show, you're right. If the audience is looking for entertainment then Qazi is good entertainment. his dialgoues, his antics, his drama, everything provides thourough entertainment for the audience. That's why they keep selecting him.
love,
LT
Looney dear I disagree again. On the Kishore Kumar and Mhd Rafi point if Mohd Rafi sang all types of songs didnt Kishore Kumar? U are surprising me I can mention one soung under every category which he sang and he was a lot versatile tooo. Think of Chatur Nar from Padosan which he and Manna Dey sang and I dont think Mohd Rafi will sound too good in "Chil Chil Chillake" from alf ticket. But let not go into all this as Qazi is no Kishore Kumar and Shamit is no Mohd Rafi.
As for the audience just think of a Ricky Martin, Michael Jackson or even normal Bollywood concert. You will see audience busy clapping and dancing with the tunes rather than concentrating on where the singers are making mistakes. SO audience definitely looks for entertainment. In fact there are section of audience u can find people clapping to Devang Patel as well as to Jagjit Singh so people liking Jagjit Singh wont go to Devang Patel shows and Vice Versa. U will always get more audience for Devang Patel type of shows than Jagjit Singh gazal concerts which only a section of the crowd understands and the voting is relfecting the same.