Fresh Tonal Quality - Page 7

Originally posted by: madhavi_r108

CB, please read my post clearly, I never said that this is what defines Tonal quality, I said ACCORDING TO ME..

Your info is very hard to relate to the singers as its more related to musical instruments.

haan, pada thha. isliye!😉

now, what is "To define tonal quality, to me it would be based on three factors: uniqueness, freshness and power."? yaar, seems like fairly simple "english". english hee hai na? or shld i be using some special "filters"? fwiw, maybe instead of fancy terms that are not being used precisely, why not simply say "voice" can be unique, fresh, loud etc? see thoda sa EE maine bhee kiya thha, so i get thrown off when these terms are bandied about loosely.

as for "hard to relate to the singers as its more related to musical instruments", yaar, voice box or vocal chords is a musical instrument in a sense. ab gala se bhee music nikal sakte hain, nahee?

now, to your points. freshness, uniqueness? may or may not be important considerations. consider a child. their voice is unique and fresh, isnt it, but not necessarily very musical unless we somehow think of crying as musical. as for something being loud, actually the vocal chords have to strain more when we get to either extreme- try whispering and see how your voice goes for a toss.

bottom-line, the voice has to appeal. whether it's fresh or unique or loud is not necessarily material, though it can be important at times in creating that overall appeal. you can have the same elements as someone else, but just have more appeal.

and a comment on diction. sorry to burst the bubble here too. call it diction, call it a certain pathos or attitude that one acquires because of circumstances relating to one's genes or where one grows up, but it's an affliction that's very hard to get rid of.

Originally posted by: madhavi_r108

Thanks Rani ji!

I completely agree about Shaan, KK and HR. Even Kailash Kher has a fresh voice, its rustic but defn. fresh. A R Rahman is also another gud singer with a voice that is so different..same with Sukhwinder singh and Kunal. Infact singers of today sound pretty fresh.

I agree about Karunya too, but didnt mention it because wanted to stick to SRGMP contestants. Infact his freshness made him a notch above Amey who sounded great, but sounded very familiar!

Maturity plays a key and I guess we need to wait for a few years before coming to any conclusions. I like Vishwas's voice but he is very incosistent. Like the Hay Rama performance. It was a great performance wrt to EMAET but wasnt like Hemu's because he tried too hard to ape the original and in that it spoilt his performance.

haan yaar, hemu is better than vishwas isnt he? he must have registered a perfect 10 on the sur-counter, no? also, a "breath control master", no. now, who cares about diction and the rest of it?😉

Originally posted by: chatbuster

haan, pada thha. isliye!😉

now, what is "To define tonal quality, to me it would be based on three factors: uniqueness, freshness and power."? yaar, seems like fairly simple "english". english hee hai na? or shld i be using some special "filters"? fwiw, maybe instead of fancy terms that are not being used precisely, why not simply say "voice" can be unique, fresh, loud etc? see thoda sa EE maine bhee kiya thha, so i get thrown off when these terms are bandied about loosely.

as for "hard to relate to the singers as its more related to musical instruments", yaar, voice box or vocal chords is a musical instrument in a sense. ab gala se bhee music nikal sakte hain, nahee?

now, to your points. freshness, uniqueness? may or may not be important considerations. consider a child. their voice is unique and fresh, isnt it, but not necessarily very musical unless we somehow think of crying as musical. as for something being loud, actually the vocal chords have to strain more when we get to either extreme- try whispering and see how your voice goes for a toss.

bottom-line, the voice has to appeal. whether it's fresh or unique or loud is not necessarily material, though it can be important at times in creating that overall appeal. you can have the same elements as someone else, but just have more appeal.

and a comment on diction. sorry to burst the bubble here too. call it diction, call it a certain pathos or attitude that one acquires because of circumstances relating to one's genes or where one grows up, but it's an affliction that's very hard to get rid of.

This point of urs I completely agree too. but then again appeal is a different thing..what appeals to me need not appeal to u and vice versa. This isn't about what appeals and what doesnt. Sharib doesnt appeal to me in any way. He is a good singer adn I know that, but he doesnt appeal to me what so ever. (Sorry Sharib fans..i am not commenting on him, I just dotn like him) Same thing with aishwarya, I know he can sing well but I just dont like something about him. Appeal can be because of so many factors. Hemu appeals to me because I think he luks good, he happens to be studying graphics which I really like doing in my free time and he is from Hyd like me too! Nihira appeals to me because she reminds me of my sister.. sometimes its not just about singing.

Something about Sandeep appealed to audience and thats y he won II 2, something about Rajeev and Paresh appealed to the audience and thts y they stayed so far int he competition.. this post isnt to judge appeal its to judge tonal quality.

As for ur comment about diction, I would agree its hard if a singer who is 30-40 is trying to improve coz then it is hard. But for a singer who is 17-18, its not hard.. and besides, his diction isn't abysmal(U were refering to Hemu I am sure). I've heard worse diction from some singers in Hindi cinema. I was reading a post on another forum where the author wrote that his wife started crying after hearing Hemu's Vande Mataram because he was so bad. And she kept crying for Vinit because he ws that good. With due respects, please watch the Yun Hi Chala Chal performance. Vinit goes 'Betaybi' instead of Betabi, its so different. Diction can be SO worked on, but if you keep a donkey there and say that it brays in style and give it the adulation, you cant ignore the fact that it IS a donkey and however stylish it is, it is defn. going to bray !

Rahul, Hemu isn't perfect and believe me, I am probably the first to say that. He has flaws too but in that performance he was better than Vishwas.

I know reasonable amount of hindi and I didn't think there was such a diction issue in his Hay Rama. Its talking with respect to that performance.

I am not putting down any contestant because at the end of the day, they had the guts to come up and show their talent, something I would never do!

For those of you who miss Abhi's writing, I was talking to him about this post and he sent me his comments:

Originally posted by: adwaraknath

Anyway, here's my two cents - Tonal quality is actually what we call 'timbre' and the ability of the throat to produce sound frequencies in such a way that you can distinguish each damned note clearly. And there should be a strong ring to each note, each syllable pronounced.

Of the Golden Era singers, Manna Dey and Kishore da were the only male singers who had a good tonal quality. Kishoreda had what is closest to the perfect male voice. The most powerful voice. Akin to the likes of Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Peabo Bryson etc. But KKda's voice was one in a million.

Mannada's voice was in a classical mould, and the most trained of all the Golden era singers...male or female. And classical singers by default have excellent tonal quality by sheer riyaaz and voice culture, especially Hindustani (Dr. BMK is an exception...one of the richest voices ever heard).

Rafi was the versatile genius. His voice can't be put in any mould. He was a class apart

Hemantda had the most soothing voice, but quite sharp. Salilda once said that if God sang, he'd sing in Hemantda's voice; that's how perfect his voice was.

When talking of NAFK, he was not raw. He is Ust. NAFK. A classical maestro..

Of the current crop, Udit and Shankar have the strongest voices. Sonu is again in the Rafi mould. Kumar Sanu is a soreass with a pathetic KKda imitation and that too nasal. Shaan has an interesting voice, fresh and very sharp. He's good only in his genre and range. He messes songs with even a little ups and downs or some classical nuances.

In C-2005, Rajeev had the best timbre, followed by Vishwas. Vinit was very edgy. Debojit and Hema had soft romantic voices which can explore a wide range of emotions. But timbre, not really. Debu exhibited a little bit of timbre in Ek Hasina Thi. Hema's throw was typically Carnatic styled, where voice culture is not given much importance, but he was technically the most perfect among the boys, and had the most original voice. Sharib again falls into the Qawwali singers' mould.

Originally posted by: madhavi_r108

For those of you who miss Abhi's writing, I was talking to him about this post and he sent me his comments:

Hi Madhavi - thanks for sharing your views, as well as Abhi's..

Originally posted by: madhavi_r108

Rani ji, thanks for your kind words. I was just expressing my views.

I don't think Kailash Kher sounds like NFAK just for the sole reason that NFAK's voice was very hoarse and the beauty in his voice was just the fact that it was so raw and unpolished, like Abida Parveen too.

Kailash Kher's voice isn't completely raw, its got good finese and ridiculous power. I loved his song in Dev, 'Rang Deni', so much of power and vocal control. Thats the reason I say his voice is fresh. I mean amidst Sonu, Shaan, Kunal and KK who have sweet voices, Hariharan and Shankar who have classical voices, we have a Kailash Kher whose voice stands apart.

Ya, Hemu really needs to work on his diction but I guess thats a problem which has a solution and hopefully we'll get to hear more of him. What I meant by saying that Vishwas's performance wasn't as good as Hemu's was because Vishwas tried to sound like Hariharan. It was a good performance but I would still rate his 'Hum Tum' (first performance of the gala's in which he got green) his best, just because he used his original voice which is fresh and very good. By trying to sound like another singer he lost the impact the song would have had. Hemu on the other hand, didn't try to imitate Hariharan and that gave him the edge.

Vishwas is a very good singer and I can strongly say that because I saw more of him than Hemu during C05. I started watching Hemu from the republic day episode and Vishwas from the first episode with the tie breaker with Sharib.

About Kailesh Kher, you may be right. But, I love NFK. So when I heard Kailesh Kher, I felt he sounded similar primarily for the rustic feel in his voice. But, I may need to get to know him better.

About Hemu's diction, I'm really sorry to say but his diction is very evident. My parents are both Hindi/Urdu (I am a hinglish speaker) speaking and they felt strongly that he sounds like a south indian when he sings. There were many incidents where his pronounciation was way off. Of course he does not go off sur, etc that's why I can still appreciate his singing and I'm sure in his native language he must be absolutely brilliant. You can ask a Hindi speaking person as to listen to both Vishwas and Hemu without watching the show and they will tell you that the accent is evident in Hems singing. For example, he cuts out the "h" sound when he sings. Like Khwab, he will say Kwab or Mohabbat he will say Moabbat. It may sound small to a non hindi speaker, but it is hard for a native speaker to let it go by. Karunya, being sounth indian is a lot better in this regard and you cannot tell at all that he is not singing in his native language. That being said , I still feel Hemu's young and still has a lot of time to be the next Hariharan.

I know you really love Hem and it is probably hard to notice this weakness. Anyway, the point is that Hemu is working on this and if he wants to make a place in bollywood then this is something that is very important.

I still think Vishwas is a very good singer and his voice is very mature and still fresh. I don't think Vishwas was changing his voice with the Hai Rama song, but his energy was lacking. I see that he lacks energy at times. This is his greatest weakness. When his energy is in full form, he is really excellent.

Originally posted by: ranig

About Kailesh Kher, you may be right. But, I love NFK. So when I heard
Kailesh Kher, I felt hesounded similar primarily for the rustic feel in his
voice. But, I may need to get to know him better.

About Hemu's diction, I'm really sorry to say but his diction is very
evident. My parents are both Hindi/Urdu (I am a hinglish
speaker)speaking and they felt strongly that he sounds like asouth
indian when he sings. There were many incidents where his
pronounciation was way off. Of course he does not go off sur, etc that's
why I can still appreciate his singing and I'm sure in his native language
he must be absolutely brilliant. You can ask a Hindi speaking person as to
listen to both Vishwas and Hemu without watching the show and they will
tell you thatthe accent is evident in Hems singing.For example, he cuts
out the "h" sound when he sings. Like Khwab, he will say Kwab or
Mohabbat he will say Moabbat. It may sound small to a non hindi speaker,
but it is hard for a native speaker to let it go by. Karunya, being sounth
indian is a lot better in this regard and you cannot tell at all that he is not
singing in his native language.That being said , I still feel Hemu's young
and still has a lot of time to be the next Hariharan.

I know you really love Hem and it is probably hard to notice this
weakness. Anyway, the point is that Hemu is working on this and if he
wants to make a place in bollywood then this is something that is very
important.

I still think Vishwas is a very good singer and his voice is very mature
and still fresh.I don't think Vishwas was changing his voice with the Hai
Rama song, but his energy was lacking. I see that he lacks energy at
times.This is his greatest weakness. When his energy is in full form, he is
reallyexcellent.

I think Vishwas needs more training - -as HH said. Even in full form, he
does not have the classical base and the trianing. When I think about
Hemanchandra in the Hai Rama song -- there is no comparison. Vishwas
really copped out on so many tans. Sharib in the song after also
displayed his classical prowess and same for Hrishikesh. To me anyway,
you can really spot the well trained singers with the chances they take.

I think that ALL singers should be aware of their pronounciation. I know
that Vinit (a Hindi speaker) said khaab instead of khwab. Then there was
Twinkle with Khatooba?. I feel like that Chandu is particularly singled out
because he is South Indian. Irfan has been spared this.

Well we all hope that everyone improves and that we have our pick of
great voices.

Originally posted by: mdroy

I think Vishwas needs more training - -as HH said. Even in full form, he
does not have the classical base and the trianing. When I think about
Hemanchandra in the Hai Rama song -- there is no comparison. Vishwas
really copped out on so many tans. Sharib in the song after also
displayed his classical prowess and same for Hrishikesh. To me anyway,
you can really spot the well trained singers with the chances they take.

I think that ALL singers should be aware of their pronounciation. I know
that Vinit (a Hindi speaker) said khaab instead of khwab. Then there was
Twinkle with Khatooba?. I feel like that Chandu is particularly singled out
because he is South Indian. Irfan has been spared this.

Well we all hope that everyone improves and that we have our pick of
great voices.

arre boss, does George W pronounce every english word correctly? no naa? but still you can tell that he is an American and that too from the south, or cant you? in similar vein, so what if vinit has mispronounced a hindi word or two? even my hindi teacher who had a prabhakar in hindi might have gotten a few words wrong along the way. as usual, we are getting hung up on the lil things. yaar, aur bahut paap hain iss duniya mei- such as accent, "pathos", attitude. let's not keep looking for the proverbial tree while missing out on the forest.

Originally posted by: mdroy

I think Vishwas needs more training - -as HH said. Even in full form, he
does not have the classical base and the trianing. When I think about
Hemanchandra in the Hai Rama song -- there is no comparison. Vishwas
really copped out on so many tans. Sharib in the song after also
displayed his classical prowess and same for Hrishikesh. To me anyway,
you can really spot the well trained singers with the chances they take.

I think that ALL singers should be aware of their pronounciation. I know
that Vinit (a Hindi speaker) said khaab instead of khwab. Then there was
Twinkle with Khatooba?. I feel like that Chandu is particularly singled out
because he is South Indian. Irfan has been spared this.

Well we all hope that everyone improves and that we have our pick of
great voices.

yaar, while we are comparing the two, consider the following- hemu is neither the best stage performer nor the best playback material for hindi songs in my opinion. for stage performance, we need all those X-factors, so hopefully no one's going to be quibbling with that. as for playback, these days one needs to have a voice that appeals. a lot of other aspects they can fix such as pitch etc. Doesn't mean it's any easier for the singers. just that the criteria has changed. they're not doing a song in one take and all that jazz, so we can toss "breath control master" techniques as somewhat unimportant in today's playback world. BUT, that makes it all the more important that one does have that special voice. sorry, but hemu's diction or whatever one wants to call it gets in the way.

and tat's unfortunate because he does have the techniques nailed down. just that if we are picking one person for best english and another for best math, we'll not pick one person who is best overall. we'll simply pick the 2 people who are the best respectively in those 2 subjects. general overall talent doesnt count for much these days, u gotta be the best in your niche. and we got to understand what it is we are talking abt in the first place- stage or playback.