EMOTIONAL VIDEO: Veteran Lyricist Santosh Anand ji - Page 7

Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale

You'd do it if I'd ask ya to 😆

No but in all seriousness, if I want to see a difference then I'll have to make it first.

I cannot see anyone in pain and suffering, I'd do anything. And for such legends, whose work has got me thru some tough times...you can only imagine.

Yes music can heal all wounds. It’s too bad we’re not appreciative of the musicians. I’d love to know if they have any fund I can give to

Originally posted by: surajhere

There is a difference between a poem and a song.

All aspects, including arrangers, need to come together nicely to create a good song. So all three contribute equally to a song. I doubt if anybody can imagine R.D.Burman singing Yeh Jawani Hai Dewani or Is mod se Jaate hai kuch sust kadam raste.

Some Music composers can sing and some singers can compose(Lata Mangeshkar is also a composer)but they are between far and few and even they prefer singers who are much better than them so that their song can achieve a higher level of popularity and critical acclaim.

Arrangers are to get their own share from mechanical royalties which is different from what the music director and lyricist get. Singers are supposed to get a small percentage but that's again from a different type of royalty. The main royalty according to the law belongs to the publisher and author i.e creator i.e songwriter i.e music director-lyricist.

Singers have their own chunk, but its different. And I do not think its fair to give them royalty from where the creators get their share, or divide the 50% share into 3. Simply because singers are the face of the song, their revenue generating options are much more...look at Udit, Alka and Sanu, they are earning lakhs from live shows, from someone else's creation but the creators get nothing. They are also on reality shows regularly. So if they get royalties its okay, fine, but not from the share of the ones who are responsible for the entire song.

And about singers...the film Dil's songs were originally sung by Alka Yagnik...later T Series asked music directors Anand-Milind to dub it with Anuradha Paudwal. The songs are popular irrespective of the singer. Even on reality shows, the contestants sometimes sing much more superior than the original vocalist (i am not talking about the golden era)...makes you feel that particular contestant should've sung it in the first place. Certain YouTube cover artists make you feel the same. So does it matter who sang?

The singer's contribution is there of course, but not the same as the music director and lyricist.

Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale

Arrangers are to get their own share from mechanical royalties which is different from what the music director and lyricist get. Singers are supposed to get a small percentage but that's again from a different type of royalty. The main royalty according to the law belongs to the publisher and author i.e creator i.e songwriter i.e music director-lyricist.

Singers have their own chunk, but its different. And I do not think its fair to give them royalty from where the creators get their share, or divide the 50% share into 3. Simply because singers are the face of the song, their revenue generating options are much more...look at Udit, Alka and Sanu, they are earning lakhs from live shows, from someone else's creation but the creators get nothing. They are also on reality shows regularly. So if they get royalties its okay, fine, but not from the share of the ones who are responsible for the entire song.

And about singers...the film Dil's songs were originally sung by Alka Yagnik...later T Series asked music directors Anand-Milind to dub it with Anuradha Paudwal. The songs are popular irrespective of the singer. Even on reality shows, the contestants sometimes sing much more superior than the original vocalist (i am not talking about the golden era)...makes you feel that particular contestant should've sung it in the first place. Certain YouTube cover artists make you feel the same. So does it matter who sang?

The singer's contribution is there of course, but not the same as the music director and lyricist.

The royalty should be the same either for digital medium of physical medium like the stage shows. I have already said composers and lyricist should get the royalty from stage shows too. I don't know if they do or don't.

I am not saying anything different. Be it Anuradha Paudwal or Alka Yadnik, both brought their unique talent to the song and contributed to the creation of the songs they rendered. Creating songs is a collaborative effort and all three contribute to it and they should get a royalty whenever that song is played/sang anywhere.

Singing a song that has been already sung is a different thing and actual recording is a different thing. IMO, it does matter who sang the song. That is why music composers chose different singers for different songs and those voices give that distinctness to the song.

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Yes music can heal all wounds. It’s too bad we’re not appreciative of the musicians. I’d love to know if they have any fund I can give to

It does. Music's been my best friend.

If I spot any fund raising on Twitter I shall let you know 😊

Originally posted by: surajhere

The royalty should be the same either for digital medium of physical medium like the stage shows. I have already said composers and lyricist should get the royalty from stage shows too. I don't know if they do or don't.

I am not saying anything different. Be it Anuradha Paudwal or Alka Yadnik, both brought their unique talent to the song and contributed to the creation of the songs they rendered. Creating songs is a collaborative effort and all three contribute to it and they should get a royalty whenever that song is played/sang anywhere.

Singing a song that has been already sung is a different thing and actual recording is a different thing. IMO, it does matter who sang the song. That is why music composers chose different singers for different songs and those voices give that distinctness to the song.

See physical and digital medium royalty does differ. Because you need to buy the physical copy, pay for all songs on that CD, but for digital medium you can listen and chose to like or dislike it. A song could be played on YouTube or Gaana for free but if you don't like it, you change it. That way physical and digital sales (thus royalties) can never be the same.

Music directors and lyricists don't get royalties yet from stage shows...there seems to be some improvement and IPRS has managed to release some funds in the right direction as of now.

The singer is the last one at the scene of the song and its proven even recently about their contributions. Like Bekhayali from Kabir Singh...sung by Arijit and another by Sachet himself. Arijit is considered a benchmark by many, yet Sachet's version did better. So did it matter whether or not Arijit sang it?

I've already mentioned singers get a nominal portion from a different set of royalty but their share will remain lesser than those of the creators of the song. It is how it is, that is the law after all points, mediums of royalty generation, aspects of music making considered. The music director and lyricist will always have a bigger say, simply because its their creation.

Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale

See physical and digital medium royalty does differ. Because you need to buy the physical copy, pay for all songs on that CD, but for digital medium you can listen and chose to like or dislike it. A song could be played on YouTube or Gaana for free but if you don't like it, you change it. That way physical and digital sales (thus royalties) can never be the same.

Music directors and lyricists don't get royalties yet from stage shows...there seems to be some improvement and IPRS has managed to release some funds in the right direction as of now.

The singer is the last one at the scene of the song and its proven even recently about their contributions. Like Bekhayali from Kabir Singh...sung by Arijit and another by Sachet himself. Arijit is considered a benchmark by many, yet Sachet's version did better. So did it matter whether or not Arijit sang it?

I've already mentioned singers get a nominal portion from a different set of royalty but their share will remain lesser than those of the creators of the song. It is how it is, that is the law after all points, mediums of royalty generation, aspects of music making considered. The music director and lyricist will always have a bigger say, simply because its their creation.

So singers do get theirs but other musicians fall below the way side

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

So singers do get theirs but other musicians fall below the way side

I didn't get u 😆

Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale

I didn't get u 😆

Singers do get a gif amount of $$

But other contributors of songs not so much ? Would you say lyricists have it worse ?

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Singers do get a gif amount of $$

But other contributors of songs not so much ? Would you say lyricists have it worse ?

Yes singers get paid for the shows by organisers or by the channel they are appearing on. But music directors and lyricists aren't a part of the show so they rely on royalties...which they don't get. Now imagine if the royalty generated is three lakh rupees and the singer has charged 1 lakh rupees for the show...just giving easier figures to explain. If the royalty gets divided equally three way, the music director and lyricist end up with 1 lakh each (in some cases the MD gets 50000 each coz we have many duos) while the singer has earned 2 lakhs...why? You have had the last bit contribution why are u enjoying more money?

Take a film counterpart, who earns the profits and royalties from streaming, satellite rights etc...its the producer and in some cases the director too...because at the end of the day its their product...actors now demand a piece of the pie but would it be fair for them to ask for equal chunks? No, because actors earn from events, performances in award shows, become brand ambassadors etc.

Other contributors deserve more money and as of now they aren't getting their share while singers are earning from shows. Lyricists do have it worse...because music directors can sing so they perform on stage...but what about the lyricist? There is one Javed Akhtar (who is also a screenwriter btw) and one Sameer Anjaan but the rest do suffer. In todays times Manoj Muntashir appears on reality shows but he cannot perform his own songs if he can't sing. So yes, lyricists to have it worse than composers.

https://youtu.be/Lfy0BbSOeTE