Debate Mansion
Debate Mansion

India-Forums

   

Singer's song should touch thy soul ?

raj5000 Moderator
raj5000
raj5000

Joined: 01 January 2006
Posts: 11737

Posted: 11 August 2008 at 9:27pm | IP Logged

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 - 11 August 2008 at 9:55pm

MrsAckles Goldie
MrsAckles
MrsAckles

Joined: 08 January 2008
Posts: 1858

Posted: 12 August 2008 at 1:32am | IP Logged
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..


nitasuni Senior Member
nitasuni
nitasuni

Joined: 08 August 2007
Posts: 850

Posted: 12 August 2008 at 5:48am | IP Logged
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 - 12 August 2008 at 6:23am
Morgoth IF-Veteran Member
Morgoth
Morgoth

--
Joined: 01 June 2004
Posts: 6832

Posted: 15 August 2008 at 4:19am | IP Logged
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.
 
raj5000 Moderator
raj5000
raj5000

Joined: 01 January 2006
Posts: 11737

Posted: 15 August 2008 at 7:47am | IP Logged
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.
 
 
raj5000 Moderator
raj5000
raj5000

Joined: 01 January 2006
Posts: 11737

Posted: 15 August 2008 at 8:31am | IP Logged
inlined in blue below. (am so :(, wrote a response to post and for some reason IE froze, rewriting..)
Originally posted by Morgoth

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.
 

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 LOLLOL)  singing is likeable to the ears and it something to look forward to every morning (strictly singingLOL) , 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.Smile
 
Gauri_3 IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006
Posts: 13617

Posted: 15 August 2008 at 12:31pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.
Morgoth IF-Veteran Member
Morgoth
Morgoth

--
Joined: 01 June 2004
Posts: 6832

Posted: 15 August 2008 at 4:21pm | IP Logged
Underlined = me
 
Originally posted by raj5000

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

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.
 

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?

 
ok, you have a point there, but to get a unanimous consensus in such scenarios is not only difficult, but impractical. even in europe, when Latin was replaced by other languages such as English, French, Spanish, the alphabet mostly remained the same - there were a few changes here and there with symbols, etc, but you get the point.
 
similarly, with music - Indian Classical has a different system and style compared to Western Classical, but the basic building blocks (notes, scales, chords, triads) remain the same. 
 
 
 
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 LOLLOL)  singing is likeable to the ears and it something to look forward to every morning (strictly singingLOL) , then should one be even bothered about the tune or no tune?
 
I can say that the sound of nails scratching blackboards is very pleasing to me, but will that be an Acceptable Standard of music? Standards were not created by an elite set of egotists. They were artists as well; they created FOR the masses. They experimented, saw what worked and what didn't, and set standards accordingly.
 
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?
 
 
remember that the masses never hear the singer's original version - they hear the polished, edited, fixed song without any technical glitches. eventually, they like the song or the singer so much that a bad live performance will not matter to them.
 
also, i am not so much of an ogre that i'll criticize a singer for going a little besura during a live performance. but if it happens too many times, or if it detracts from my enjoyment of the song, then i will judge a singer as incompetent.
 
 
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.
 
which paradigms are you referring to exactly? if it is style - i.e. classical, etc, then that would be a different debate by itself. style always evolves, but technical stuff rarely, if ever changes.
 
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.Smile
 
they are not bad singers. just singers with lack of practice. =) and in music, lack of practice can be a very dangerous thing as you lose touch VERY quickly :(
 

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
The Psychology of Touch

Author: return_to_hades   Replies: 8   Views: 1022

return_to_hades 8 1022 09 May 2008 at 10:32pm by -Believe-
Influencing your soul mate

Author: Morning_Dew   Replies: 8   Views: 763

Morning_Dew 8 763 06 December 2007 at 10:13pm by -Believe-
Mumbai schools ban girl-boy touch!?!

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Author: sohn   Replies: 78   Views: 3780

sohn 78 3780 22 June 2007 at 5:22am by Lovers Ka Love
India's Soul

Author: changabula   Replies: 6   Views: 453

changabula 6 453 10 April 2007 at 6:32pm by Gauri_3
Soul Searching...

2

Author: persistence   Replies: 13   Views: 780

persistence 13 780 06 April 2007 at 1:46pm by mermaid_QT

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index