Singer's song should touch thy soul ?

Page

Next Last

raj5000

@raj5000

IF-Sizzlerz

Posted: 15 years ago

Too many controversies (Atif Aslam and likes) going around shows like ek sey bhadhkar ek / Sa re ga ma regarding technicality of singers, makes me raise a point without focusing on a particular show.

If a singer without being technically/mechanically/etc correct touches one's / current masses soul consistently by his singing deserves to be acknowledge and appraised as compared to singer who being Mr. right from olden days music norms can?t appeal the masses? Or no who is right per technicality is winner in long term, soul touches are short termers (they will come and go) ?

Technicalities created in past were based on what was right then, not essentially the mantra of music in today?s generation, what say?

Edited by raj5000 - 15 years ago

Quote

Frequent Posters

338121

Posted: 15 years ago

I think a lot of so called self proclaimed connoisseurs of Hindi film music have a really narrow minded view in music. Oh gawd i get a headache when these people go on and on with their self indulgent rants about "sur", "taal" and other words they learn just to shove their views on others..

music isn't something that has rules.. there are different styles and different tastes..

I think Atif is great, he sings with a lot of soul and his voice is lovely and soothing and manly .. there are a lot of male singers whose voice i can't tell apart, they all sound like they came from a clone factory.. so what if they sing in "sur" and do their "riyaaz 10 hours a day"..

also i think its really weird how indian singers are giving interviews dissing on Atif and his so called "besura-ness"... they are just making themselves sound petty.. hating on Atif and letting the whole world know about your views on him is in fashion i suppose..

Quote

sunitha pillai

@nitasuni

Senior Member

Posted: 15 years ago

If a person sing a song without "sur" or "tal", then it is "apasur", it is not a song atal. .

A good song will elevate our mind and it convey the feelings as well. That doesn't related to the popularity of the singer but the ability of the singer and sweetnes of his/her voice plus the feelings he/she could convey

Edited by nitasuni - 15 years ago

Quote

223

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

Originally posted by: raj5000

Technicalities created in past were based on what was right then, not essentially the mantra of music in today?s generation, what say?

This statement is the same as saying the alphabet was right when English was invented and now we need to substitute it with something else - like numbers.

A singer who sings with soul is always appreciated; no doubt about that. However, even your next door bathroom singer may sing with soul - does that mean he's singing in tune or that you can identify what he's singing?

Technique consists of the very basic building blocks from which music was created. A singer who does not sing in tune (sur), follow a basic rhythm (taal) or maintain tempo (laya) is weak, no matter how much soul he/she puts into the song.

If Technique was not important, why would composers "fix" the pitch after a singer finished? Why use fancy equipment to staple a song together, remove breath problems, etc? Why not use the original recording?

Atif, Shaan, Alka Yagnik - all of them have good voice qualities, and all of them go besura when performing Live.

Quote

raj5000

@raj5000

IF-Sizzlerz

Posted: 15 years ago

Originally posted by: MrsAckles
I think a lot of so called self proclaimed connoisseurs of Hindi film music have a really narrow minded view in music. Oh gawd i get a headache when these people go on and on with their self indulgent rants about "sur", "taal" and other words they learn just to shove their views on others..

music isn't something that has rules.. there are different styles and different tastes..

I think Atif is great, he sings with a lot of soul and his voice is lovely and soothing and manly .. there are a lot of male singers whose voice i can't tell apart, they all sound like they came from a clone factory.. so what if they sing in "sur" and do their "riyaaz 10 hours a day"..

also i think its really weird how indian singers are giving interviews dissing on Atif and his so called "besura-ness"... they are just making themselves sound petty.. hating on Atif and letting the whole world know about your views on him is in fashion i suppose..

@bold - IMO sur / taal are good to know but not necessity to define a song good or bad. I agree music is all about different styles and tastes.

Quote

raj5000

@raj5000

IF-Sizzlerz

Posted: 15 years ago

inlined in blue below. (am so :(, wrote a response to post and for some reason IE froze, rewriting..)

Originally posted by: Morgoth

This statement is the same as saying the alphabet was right when English was invented and now we need to substitute it with something else - like numbers.

I won't compare alphabets analogy here, but since you mentioned. We should consider changing if the need to substitute the alphabet is unanimous and for a reason. Another tangent here, Can an illiterate person deliver a HEADS ONN / Motivating speech?

A singer who sings with soul is always appreciated; no doubt about that. However, even your next door bathroom singer may sing with soul - does that mean he's singing in tune or that you can identify what he's singing?

Good Point! OK! If her (he's ki bathroom singing, aur kuch kaam nahi hai kya mere ko 😆😆) singing is likeable to the ears and it something to look forward to every morning (strictly singing😆) , then should one be even bothered about the tune or no tune?

Technique consists of the very basic building blocks from which music was created. A singer who does not sing in tune (sur), follow a basic rhythm (taal) or maintain tempo (laya) is weak, no matter how much soul he/she puts into the song.

Thats the whole point and WHO created those basic building blocks and more importantly based on what?? Probably likeability or what touched thier hearts / mind then. Don't get me wrong please, am not totally against sur/taal concept, but trying to point out that even after 3-4 up and down of so called surs if the singing is loved by masses, isn't this something to think about before passing judgement to term someone incompetant singer?

If Technique was not important, why would composers "fix" the pitch after a singer finished? Why use fancy equipment to staple a song together, remove breath problems, etc? Why not use the original recording?

Is the technique 100% flawless and ensure 100% success? They should use the original recording if thats what the current generation likes or whats, why stick to manupilation based on paradigms of past that might not be very much applicable in today's time.

Atif, Shaan, Alka Yagnik - all of them have good voice qualities, and all of them go besura when performing Live.

I still would regard them as good singers. OMG even Shaan and Alka ji, for that matter apart from Lataji, I havn't heard anyone who hasn't gone besurra once in thier life time. Hey, I do respect sur/taal, again don't get me wrong, just some friday brain stroming.😊

Quote

200467

Posted: 15 years ago

I feel the technically sound singers (read "clasiccaly trained") are lambi race key ghodey/ghodiyan. The ones whose singing catches masses' fancy due to tecno-music and other hi-fi gadgets are uaually flash successes. They come as a fad and then fade away as fast as they topped the charts initially. Sustainability naheen hoti unn mein.

If past "technicalities" do not hold true in today's time then how would you explain the ever-green demand for songs of golden era and MDs still creating soul touching numbers? Kuchh cheezey sadabahaar rehti hain. Achha sangeet unn mein sey ek hai. Baki sab aataa jata rehta hai😊

[quote=raj5000]

(he's ki bathroom singing, aur kuch kaam nahi hai kya mere ko 😆😆)

[/quote]

🤣🤣 this is too funny🤣

Quote

223

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

Underlined = me

Originally posted by: raj5000

inlined in blue below. (am so :(, wrote a response to post and for some reason IE froze, rewriting..)

Quote

223

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

Moreover, note that technically good singers from reality shows such as Nihira, Hemachandra are getting more work - mostly because its less of a hassle for the composer to edit their stuff.

Only established singers, or very very popular (and lucky) singers have the luxury of a composer waiting for them/editing their songs without complaint.

Quote

52071

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

Originally posted by: Morgoth
Moreover, note that technically good singers from reality shows such as Nihira, Hemachandra are getting more work - mostly because its less of a hassle for the composer to edit their stuff.

Only established singers, or very very popular (and lucky) singers have the luxury of a composer waiting for them/editing their songs without complaint.

You have said all I wanted to say.. So, I will better leave you to debate here 😆 The reason why MDs are preferring certain singers is becaue of the hit charts.. Now Atif is popular and is liked by many.. Though he maybe not technically good, his voice texture is liked by people and so they are being carry forwarded in various other songs as well.. If Atif's songs were not liked by people, he wouldn't have been called by Pritam as he will have to work a lot on his songs...

Technicality along with emotions are important.. They both go hand in hand.. You dont need emotions to sing a classical and you need emotions to sing a film song.. But what to do by having emotions in voice without proper harkatein... There is no use of it... You will never be called a good singer!!

Quote

1 2