what makes for a good singer - Page 2

Created

Last reply

Replies

135

Views

11.3k

Users

27

Frequent Posters

cooldudes thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#11
Anything good and versatile sells. There is nothing like nasal is in . That is ridiculous that people like hearing nasal songs. 😆 A R Rehman is a good example of good music. He goes from western to pure Indian. I like Ismail Darbar's music too. I can never forget his Hum Dil De chuke sanam and Devdas music scores. He will always be remembered for these 2 movies and ofcourse Kisna and other future movies. HR's music is the latest craze but for younger crowd who want to dance at night clubs. It has that beat but the voice of HR is nasal and wierd. If he took some other singer the songs would have been better. Besides if every song of his has to start with "OUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU" that is so superstitious and funny. 😆 Whatever sells is in. If Aashiq Banaya and Nazar Dikhlaja is in then Rang De Basanti is also in...Hum Dil De Chhuke Sanam and Devdas music is also in as I will still like to hear those songs and Bunty aur Babli music is also in. None other music directors but HR is nasal. Now you go figure 😆
Edited by cooldudes - 19 years ago
rare2005 thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#12

my comments embdeded

Edited by rare2005 - 19 years ago
yazz80 thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#13

HI DwarkanathThanx for your comments. I see we have different opinions but I am glad we have agreements on few points. Kumar Shanu (cheap nasal Kishoreda clone...utter besura in live concerts with an attitude to boot...in an interview to a newspaper once, he said 'I am in the league of Lataji and Ashaji..so I don't feel threatened by youngers singers...sala halkat! How dare he even THINK???)I didnt know this however I too hated the fact that he was accepted with open arms by the Indian listners.He was a hit for at least 5/6 years.Once Sonu touched his feet on SRGMP stage which I hated the most as he did not deserve.I am against a person touching another person's feet.I donot know why Sonu did that? The only song I liked of Sanu was


(In fact, Sareg is absolutely right. Rafi copied Pankaj Mullick and Kishore copied...well he could copy any one) I dont thin so,
Pankaj Mallik'sstyel was poles apart from M.Rafi. Infact it was Rafi Ghaznavi who sounded similar to Rafi but was Rafi's senior. Hefaded away after very few songs the last being in Shaheed(Dilip Kumar) Where Ghazanvi and Khan Mastan were the lead singers in a gruop song where Rafi was one of the singers.When I said Rafi came in Saigals Era it was still saigals eraeven if it was 3 years later. The styel was low pitched subdued type of singing never high pitched and mostly nasal. However it was good music as the playback was evolving towards its peak. Initially music directors might have offered Rafi, songs of Saigal or Pankaj Mallik type but with 'Suhani Raat dhal chuki' he took off never to look back. Kishore was a good mimic but still never copied any one. There was one insident when Kishor could not sing a number that was to be picturised on himself and was given and recorded in Rafi's voice that song became a hit.
Rafi had a Robust (WHAT??? Rafi had one of the softest most sublime voices) , Powerful (Definitely not!) Offcourse he had s powerfull, Robust yet melodius and sublime and soft voice.Talat too had a sweet soft silken melodius voice but not powerfull or robust compare(Kaisi haseen aaj baharon ki raat hai in 'Aadmi' (Dilip and Manoj Kumar)
Once in a programme when Rafi was performing in Bangalore, power went off briefly but Rafi continued singing without mike and there was pindrop silence and yet every one could listen and at the end of that song every one stood up in thunderous clap. That is a perfest qualification of a Robust and powerfull voice. among the females Noor Jahan, Richa Sharma and Sunidhi Chauhan have a robust voices.

(he could mould it to the 'style' of any hero, not every hero. It sounds stupid to see him sing for Amitabh Bachchan). You are right Rafi could mould it to any hero, including a few mannerisms that in it self is a trait and achievement. Actually Rafi created a slightly differnt variation in voice for most heros and kept using it for them which no other singer could do . Playback singing it self is stupid as it never is the actual actors voice but a make believe thing.They some times have used different play back singers voices for the same charector such as Rafi and Mukesh or Rafi and Kishore for the same actor and in the same movie. looking back, after Sudesh Bhosle started rendering his voice to Amitabh it sounds stupid to listen to any other voice for him but Sudesh Bhosle.

Mannadey had an upperhand in classical singing but his voice was not for heroes (Oh yeah? Please explain how he's sung for most heros and delivered loads of hits?), Mukesh later on cultivated his own style which was unique and very melodius.The draw back was his voice did not suit hero's (He's sung for most heros and his Hits:releases is unsurpassed to this day) and had limited options. But whatever he sang were all master pieces and gems (100%...and to think Mannada called him Besura

Dont get me wrong I love Mukesh and Manna but their voices were so unsuitable for heros or less versatile that they got the least singing assignments. Eeven though they had long years in the field for same or even more number of ears. How come Mukesh was never offered to sing a qawwali or Manna was never offered a song like 'chahe koi mujhe jungli kahe' or 'John Jani Janardhan'

I have heard from a few other authorities on music that at times mukesh went besura.

((youkidding? Bappi Lahiri? Biggest chor of them all. Responisble for corrupting music))

You got me wrong on this buddy, Bhappi pulled the leg of Indian music to the lowest level especially when he atrted siging his own copmositions with heavy accent. This was the time when Indian music saw its lowest heights and Ghazal singing became popular even though Ghazal singing has been there for many many years. Talat, Begum Akhtar . Jagjit and others came later but when Film music was so good as late as sixties and early seventies mejority never cared for Ghazals.

Edited by yazz80 - 19 years ago
yazz80 thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#14

Ghazal...a ghazal is completely different..i don't know why people think all soft songs with a hint of poetry are Ghazals. Ghazals are just a form of poetry...they have nothing to do with music/tune etc. (It definitely isn't a Ghazal...

'Raha gardishone mein hardam mere ishq ka sitara, Kabhi dagmagayi kashti kabhi kho gaya kinara'

Koi dil ke khel dekhe ya mohabbaton ki baazi,

Woh qadam kadam pe jeete mai qadam qadam pe haara - - - -

Raha gardishon mein har dam - - - -

By definition given below the above is a ghazal. The ghazals in films are modified and adopted to suit the more visual requirements of movies. Film music is never in pure form be it ghazals or otherwise it has always elements of adaption, renovation etc

(Excerpts from Masterpieces of Urdu Ghazal - From 17th to 20th Century, by K.C. Kanda)

Ghazal originated in Iran in the 10th century A.D. It grew from the Persian qasida, which verse form had come to Iran from Arabia. The qasida was a panegyric written in praise of the emperor or his noblemen. The part of the qasida called tashbib got detached and developed in due course of time into the ghazal. Whereas the qasida sometimes ran into as many as 100 couplets or more in monorhyme, the ghazal seldom exceeded twelve, and settled down to an average of seven. Because of its comparative brevity and concentration, its thematic variety and rich suggestiveness, the ghazal soon eclipsed the qasida and became the most popular form of poetry in Iran.

The ghazal came to India with the advent and extension of the Muslim influence from the 12th century onwards. The Moghuls brought along with them Iranian culture and civilization, including Iranian poetry and literature. When Persian gave way to Urdu as the language of poetry and culture in India, the ghazal, the fruit of Indo-Iranian culture, found its opportunity to grow and develop. Although the ghazal is said to have begun with Amir Khusro (1253-1325) in Northern India, Deccan in the South was its real home in the early stages. It was nursed and trained in the courts of Golconda and Bijapur under the patronage of Muslim rulers. Mohd. Quli Qutab Shah, Wajhi, Hashmi, Nusrati and Wali may be counted among its pioneers. Of these, Wali Deccany (1667-1707) may be called the Chaucer of Urdu poetry. Wali's visit to Delhi made in 1700 acquires a historic significance. This visit was instrumental in synthesizing the poetic streams of the South and the North. Wali's poetry awakened the minds of the Persian-loving North to the beauty and richness of Urdu language, and introduced them to the true flavor of ghazal, thus encouraging its rapid growth and popularity.

In its form, the ghazal is a short poem rarely of more than a dozen couplets in the same metre. It always opens with a rhyming couplet called matla. The rhyme of the opening couplet is repeated at the end of second line in each succeeding verse, so that the rhyming pattern may be represented as AA, BA, CA, DA, and so on. In addition to the restriction of rhyme, the ghazal also observes the convention of radif. Radif demands that a portion of the first line -- comprising not more than two or three words -- immediately preceding the rhyme-word at the end, should rhyme with its counterpart in the second line of the opening couplet, and afterwards alternately throughout the poem. The opening couplet of the ghazal is always a representative couplet: it sets the mood and tone of the poem and prepares us for its proper appreciation. The last couplet of the ghazal called makta often includes the pen-name of the poet, and is more personal than general in its tone and intent. Here the poet may express his own state of mind, or describe his religious faith, or pray for his beloved, or indulge in poetic self-praise. The different couplets of the ghazal are not bound by the unity and consistency of thought. Each couplet is a self-sufficient unit, detachable and quotable, generally containing the complete expression of an idea.

Some poets including Hasrat, Iqbal and Josh have written ghazals in the style of a nazm, based on a single theme, properly developed and concluded. But such ghazals are an exception rather than a rule, and the traditional ghazal still holds sway. However, we do come across, off and on, even in the works of classical poets, ghazals exhibiting continuity of theme or, more often, a set of verses connected in theme and thought. Such a thematic group is called a qita, and is presumably resorted to when a poet is confronted with an elaborate thought difficult to be condensed in a single verse. Although the ghazal deals with the whole spectrum of human experience, its central concern is love. Ghazal is an Arabic word which literally means talking to women.

Edited by yazz80 - 19 years ago
sareg thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#15

Originally posted by: yazz80

(In fact, Sareg is absolutely right. Rafi copied Pankaj Mullick and Kishore copied...well he could copy any one) I dont thin so,
Pankaj Mallik'sstyel was poles apart from M.Rafi. Infact it was Rafi Ghaznavi who sounded similar to Rafi but was Rafi's senior.

Copying can be in two format 1. Pure mimickry 2.Take inspiration and singing style is influenced by a particular singer(and you think hey this seems exactly like such and such person, for e.g listen to Tadap Tadap from HDDS and compare it to Chadta Suraj, certain sections the dhun/singing is a exactly similar, but if a singer does that in every song, it is very obvious)

Please listen to 40's/50's songs and compare Rafi's earlier singing(first three years in particular), they followed a particular mold, but in late 40's he came into his own. Over a period of time every singer has to develop a unique style. A singer has a tough time coming into the industry with a unique voice, b'cos the industry wants the movies to be succesful and they have to take into consideration what is succesful at this moment. A fresh voice is rarely succesful right at the very first go

Rafi/Kishore/Mukesh came into the industry with one style however over a period of time they carved their own style and now when you look at their entire career you discount their earlier phases. We are seeing a live example of Sonu right now. Kumar Sanu always had the Kishore stamp on him(I attribute most of his sucess to the Kishore nostalgia effect). Just the same way Sonu had the stamp of Rafi, but he is seperating himself from the legend.

Coming back to SRGMP, without naming names, some singers tried different styles, some were successful in one, mildly successful in others, some were succesful in all, some only tried one style and over a period of time were successful but when they walk into the industry they would be called mimickry artists unless they develop their own style

Just my POV, you can have yours

Edited by sareg - 19 years ago
pj04 thumbnail
20th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#16
guys ...it is nice to see you guys discussing this in more serious vein. meanwhile i learnt something about different of forms of music (ghazals , yesteryears music )here.....keep it going members.... 👏 👏 👏
Edited by pj04 - 19 years ago
rare2005 thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#17

Originally posted by: adwarakanath



My comments emdedded too

my comments

Edited by rare2005 - 19 years ago
yazz80 thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#18
ssubhas thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#19
I take serious exception to Calling Bappi Lahiri
a very bad music director.

No one could demonstrate the creativity of
1. Chalte Chate,
2. Pag Gugroo Bandh ( Setting Darabari Kannad to fun! )
3. Sharabi ( All songs )

Watch yourself when you denegrate creativity!
Indian Music is benefitted by Bappi Lahiri.

You must understand music to be able to have an opinion.

Regards
rare2005 thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 19 years ago
#20

Originally posted by: ssubhas

I take serious exception to Calling Bappi Lahiri
a very bad music director.

No one could demonstrate the creativity of
1. Chalte Chate,
2. Pag Gugroo Bandh ( Setting Darabari Kannad to fun! )
3. Sharabi ( All songs )

Watch yourself when you denegrate creativity!
Indian Music is benefitted by Bappi Lahiri.

You must understand music to be able to have an opinion.

Regards

i would add "aangan ki kali" to your list. however i guess bappi lahiri's overall performance as a composer is not much to talk about. there are definitely bright spots as you mentioned above though.

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".