Anil Biswas's death anniversary
Neha
a year!
I have to admit that I didnt remember it, but was reminded by Shaan on
SAREGAMPA about it.
He will always live in the memory of music lovers...through his
songs..
Satish Kalra
news:9fce8da1.04053...@posting.google.com...
Good thing that Shaan at least mentioned Anil-da. I still haven't been able
to forget that Filmfare did not even mention his passing-on in any issues in
2003. Since I didn't watch the award ceremony, I don't know if they paid
any tribute to him during the function.
Anyways, the point I am going to make here is a little "hatake", in true
Bollywood parlance.
It is usually believed that Madan Mohan, Naushad, C. Ramchandra, Ghulam
Mohammed, etc., were the MDs for composing ghazals to tune in their films.
However, Anil Biswas seems to be a 'chhupaa rustom' in this regard. A
number of his songs are ghazals, though they may not appear so. Take a
look, e.g., at the following (included are some obvious ghazals,too);
1. tumhaare bulaane ko jii chaahataa hai - Ladli
2. ai jaan-e-jigar dil mein samaane aajaa - Aaraam
3. mohabbat tark kii mainne - Doraha
4. badalii terii nazar - Bari Bahoo
5. katatii hai ab to zindagi - Naaz
6. dil shaam se duubaa jaataa hai - Sanskaar
7. ruuth ke tum to chal diye - Jalti Nishani
and many, many more.
I will soon be embarking on making myself a compilation of Anil-da's ghazal
compositions. Additions to the above list are earnestly solicited and
welcomed.
--
Happy Listenings.
Satish Kalra
Ashok
>
>It is usually believed that Madan Mohan, Naushad, C. Ramchandra, Ghulam
>Mohammed, etc., were the MDs for composing ghazals to tune in their films.
>However, Anil Biswas seems to be a 'chhupaa rustom' in this regard.
>Satish Kalra
Thanks, Satish, for bringing up this very pertinent point. I would put
the blame for the lapse on our own ignorance. I believe Anil Biswas was
a scholar of Urdu poetry and has written a book in Bangla on ghazals.
How I wish the brain-dead Bong crowd on RMIM would get a jolt and wake
up and collect and translate Anil Biswas's publications into English
and/or Hindi.
That, in fact, brings another question to mind: the above-said
brain-dead crowd is ever-willing to come to fisticuffs in defense
of mediocrities, such as SD Burman, RD Burman and Hemant Kumar,
but hardly ever even raises a voice for Anil Biswas. It looks like
they have disowned him. Is that sense of mine correct and, if so,
how come?
Ashok
naniwadekar
"Satish Kalra" <Satish...@comcast.net> wrote -
>
> Additions to the above list are earnestly solicited and welcomed.
>
< list of Anilda's ghazals snipped >
Let me add a ghazal tuned by Anil Biswas which I know
you love very much :
dard-mando.n ka jahan me.n - Amirbai in 'Veena'.
- dn
Ket...@att.net
>Thanks, Satish, for bringing up this very pertinent point. I would put
>the blame for the lapse on our own ignorance. I believe Anil Biswas was
>a scholar of Urdu poetry and has written a book in Bangla on ghazals.
>
>How I wish the brain-dead Bong crowd on RMIM would get a jolt and wake
>up and collect and translate Anil Biswas's publications into English
>and/or Hindi.
>That, in fact, brings another question to mind: the above-said
>brain-dead crowd is ever-willing to come to fisticuffs in defense
>of mediocrities, such as SD Burman, RD Burman and Hemant Kumar,
>but hardly ever even raises a voice for Anil Biswas. It looks like
>they have disowned him. Is that sense of mine correct and, if so,
>how come?
Perhaps you should have asked that question to one more member of that
brain-dead Bong crowd--now of course truly Brain-Dead--Anil Biswas himself.
I am not sure if he ever came down to fisticuffs, but apparently he had no
problems yelling himself hoarse in praising "mediocrities" like RDB. Since that
info is straight from the horse's mouth, your question becomes irrelevant, since
after all the current b.d Bong crowd is only following in his footsteps.
Ketan
>Ashok
>
naniwadekar
"Ashok" <adhar...@hotmail.com> wrote -
>
> but hardly ever even raises a voice for Anil Biswas...
>
I have been checking 'google news' link every 6-7 hours
for last 25-30 hours for any mention of 'anil biswas
anniversary' but without any luck. Mohd Rafi's death
anniversary is drummed up for couple of weeks leading
to the day even after so many years. I guess an artist has
to appeal to cabals for that to happen.
Happily, wherever there is a decent percentage of people
who know what good music means, there exist groups who
value Anilda's music for its true worth and he also had the
good fortune to mix with them and bask in their gratitude.
It is certain that he must have been remembered on a fairly
big scale on his first death anniversary back home. It is not
a news-worthy or web-worthy item for powers-that-be
but that is hardly a surprise.
- dn
naniwadekar
<Ket...@att.net> wrote -
>
> I am not sure if he ever came down to fisticuffs, but
> apparently he had no > problems yelling himself hoarse
> in praising "mediocrities" like RDB. Since that
>
Hamraaz has recorded in an old Listeners' Bulletin issue
how Anil Biswas wondered why he bothered to extend
his compilation effort to 'worthless' years beyond 1965.
It is in such remarks that we find clue to what Anil Biswas
really must have felt about Punchum's noise-making.
- dn
anil11...@yahoo.com
Rafi was well known internatinal figure .
Anil Biswas is a name of the past , no one knows him .
Anil
Ritu
From the Rasikeshu series I learn that 'Beimaan tore nainwa' is also a
ghazal. Only it has been rendered in a thumri style. That one comes
way on the top of my all time favourites from Anilda.
God Bless him!
Talking of lack of media attention, I wonder why we are complaining.
Anil da stopped composing in the early 60s. That is 40 years back.
Obviously his music is outdated for a majority of people who call
shots in the media. Why don't we accept this fact rather than moan and
complain. Anil Biswas, apart from the early 40s never really had mass
appeal. You cannot really expect him to get the same media coverage as
Rafi. And again expecting a magazine of the profile of filmfare to
remember him is again asking for a little much. Anilda had a niche
market and he is very highly regarded there. Why don't we just accept
that he was not a mass-appeal artist.
And yes, our local radio station in NJ here did a commemorative on
Anilda yesterday and though the host did not get as much feedback as
he does for say a Kishore Kumar special he did have a good number of
standard faithfuls calling in with their two bits on Anilda.
So, Anilda was an exceptional artist but he unfortunately could not
incorporate mass-appeal into his songs so he will always be remembered
but by a small section of music lovers.
Let's just get that funda straight!
Regards,
Ritu
>
>
> - dn
Arunabha S Roy
> However, Anil Biswas seems to be a 'chhupaa rustom' in this regard. A
> number of his songs are ghazals, though they may not appear so. Take a
> look, e.g., at the following (included are some obvious ghazals,too);
<snipped>
Additions to the above list are earnestly solicited and
> welcomed.
Here are some candidates.
jisane bajaa_ii baa.Nsurii (Jwar Bhata ?)
Anokha Pyar:
ik dil ka lagaanaa baaqii thaa
mere liye wo Gam\-e\-intezaar chho.D gaye
Tarana:
ek main huun ek merii
Aarzoo:
kahaa.N tak ham uThaa_e.n Gam
Badi Bahu:
sitaaro chaa.Nd se kah do
Aakash:
ab is mar\-marake jiine se
Maan:
dam bhar kaa thaa daur Kushii kaa
Do Raha:
gha.Diyaa.N ginii hai.n mai.nne
Hamdard:
tere sab Gam mile mujhako
udhar terii nazar badalii
teraa haath haath me.n aa gayaa
Fareb:
husn bhii hai udaas\-udaas
Chhoti Chhoti Baatein:
zindagii kaa ajab fasaanaa hai
- Arunabha
naniwadekar
"Arunabha S Roy" <asr...@yahoo.com> wrote -
>
> jisane bajaa_ii baa.Nsurii (Jwar Bhata ?)
>
Not Jwar Bhata. Milan, I think.
- dn
naniwadekar
"Ritu" <rc0...@rediffmail.com> wrote -
>
>
> So, Anilda ... unfortunately could not
> incorporate mass-appeal into his songs ...
> Let's just get that funda straight!
>
What makes you think that he even tried to 'incorporate
mass-appeal' into his songs? Seeing that 'mass-appeal'
has come to mean Naushad/SJ in 50s, SJ/LP in 60s, Punchum
in 70s and other unmentionable names post 1980, I consider
'the lack of mass-appeal' in his songs to be fortunate, rather
than unfortunate. After 1960, two giants voluntarily reduced
their involvement with films since they did not approve of
the trends : Anil Biswas and Talat. It speaks volumes for
their integrity.
- dn
Rirfan6
> Anil Biswas is a name of the past , no one knows him .
No doubt Rafi (is) was a well known
international figure, but Anilda did get
a pretty long Obituary Note from
New York Times.
However it is a fact that Anilda's well of
tunes did dry out by 1953-54. But that
does not lower his stature in the field of
Film Music. The only two Composers
who kept their creativity till their death
were S.D.Burman(1906-1975) and
Khurshid Anwar(1912-1984). In fact KA
was declared Best Music Director for his
last film Mirza Jat(Punjabi) in 1982.
Regards,
Irfan
naniwadekar
"Rirfan6" <rir...@aol.com> wrote -
>
> However it is a fact that Anilda's well of
> tunes did dry out by 1953-54.
>
I am afraid your sentence does not make any sense.
Please check Anil-da's filmography. He did have
some trouble summoning inspiration for a few years
around 1955 but even then he managed to produce
quite a few tunes which are way beyond most other
composers and very little of his output is as gross as
that of Khurshid Anwar in 1960s or S D Burman in
Abhiman or Rafi's 'internationally famous' songs in Guide.
However I do agree that S D Burman deserves credit,
overall, for maintaining his class until his death.
In Jalti Nishani, Angulimal, Sautela Bhai and Chhoti Chhoti
Baaten (all post 1955), Anilda proved that form is temporary,
class permanent; then he walked away leaving the field
to pygmies. As Shirish Kanekar had commented in his small
tribute to Anil Biswas (published around 1980) : Dogs
and wolves made merry after the lion left the jungle.
- dn
Rirfan6
>quite a few tune
Kindly enlighten us with some of those
songs worthy of Anil-da's stature of 1940-
early 50s( Aaraam and Taraana).
Warm regards,
Irfan
naniwadekar
"Rirfan6" <rir...@aol.com> wrote -
>
> Kindly enlighten us with some of those
> songs worthy of Anil-da's stature of 1940-
> early 50s( Aaraam and Taraana).
>
Sautela Bhai :
rooth ke tum to chal diye
alabadro ... chaand pe baadal chhaa gayaa
Angulimal :
dheere dheere dhal re chandaa
aaii aaii basantii belaa
buddham sharanam gachchhaami
Sautela Bhai :
jaa mai.n tose naahii.n boluu.n
ab laagii naahii chhute raamaa
Chhoti Chhoti Baaten :
kuchh aur zamaanaa kahataa hai
zindagii khwaab hai .
HTH.
- dn
naniwadekar
> Sautela Bhai :
> jaa mai.n tose naahii.n boluu.n
> ab laagii naahii chhute raamaa
>
Add the amazing song by Manna Dey, Meena Kapoor
and chorus in Sautela Bhai : 'xxxx phool bagiyaa.n' .
Add the fact that some people, though not I, consider
Heer (1956) to be Anilda's best film. And that 'naa dir dim'
in Pardesi(?) is a huge favourite with many, though I don't
rank it among Anilda's best. And that Abhiman (1957),
even though a modest soundtrack overall, features some
superb touches of Anilda's artistry. And add 'rasiyaa re
man basiyaa re' in Pardesi. Others would have their own
post-1955 choices to add to my list, too.
- dn
Ritu
Nani, I don't think the issue of could or could not incorporate is
important. I refuse to believe that Anilda did not want his music to
be successful. No artist is above that desire.. esp a commercial
artist. However his music, though excellent and certainly in a class
of it's own really could not catch the imagination of the public even
in the 50s. I might be unaware but please do enlighten me of Anil
Biswas's through the roof blockbusters in the 50s. Most of his films
seem to be really obscure.
And since he never did really care for public tastes why do you, his
fan, need to scout google news for snippets on him? Since he never
catered to the masses (and as per you was too good for them) it's not
a surprise then that they have forgotton him. Right?
I don't understand this attitude, On one hand you would like to
believe that your brand of music is above the masses but on the other
side you still want them to bow their head in front of something that
is beyond them. Isn't that having your cake and eating it too?
The truth is Anil Biswas's music catered to the connoisseur and he
gets his due from those quarters.
And your point on Talat is laughable. Please do go and check out his
pathetic rendition of 'Aie sanam aaj yeh kasam khaayen'. Talat again
was a great artist but he was quite limited in his repertiore and
unlike Mukesh (who also was limited) could not adapt to changing
times. Mukesh continued to entrall music lovers with gems like 'Maine
tere liye hi' even in the 70s (though I do confess a lot of his 70s
output is insufferable). But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
because they could not adapt to changing time. MDs like Jaidev and
Roshan continued to give good music in the 60s and 70s even though
mainstream music did lose some of it's sheen.
So, Anilda was an exceptional artist but it is obvious he could not
reach out to as many people.
Regards,
Ritu
>
> - dn
Afzal A. Khan
Very well argued point.
>
> The truth is Anil Biswas's music catered to the connoisseur and he
> gets his due from those quarters.
>
> And your point on Talat is laughable. Please do go and check out his
> pathetic rendition of 'Aie sanam aaj yeh kasam khaayen'. Talat again
> was a great artist but he was quite limited in his repertiore and
> unlike Mukesh (who also was limited) could not adapt to changing
> times. Mukesh continued to entrall music lovers with gems like 'Maine
> tere liye hi' even in the 70s (though I do confess a lot of his 70s
> output is insufferable). But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
> because they could not adapt to changing time. MDs like Jaidev and
> Roshan continued to give good music in the 60s and 70s even though
> mainstream music did lose some of it's sheen.
Mukesh sang some beautiful songs even in the 70's
e.g. "Kabhie Kabhie". Also, Roshan wasn't around
in the 70's. He died in 1967, IIRC.
Afzal
> Ritu
Rirfan6
>and chorus in Sautela Bhai : 'xxxx phool bagiyaa.n' .
Thanks Nani-ji.
However, I still rank Anil-da amongst
the five GREATS of Sub-Continent Film
Music without considering these songs
having any bearing on his total out-put.
Regards,
Irfan
naniwadekar
"Ritu" <rc0...@rediffmail.com> wrote -
>
> But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
> because they could not adapt to changing time.
>
Let me get a few asides out of the way first :
It is to Talat's infinite credit that he did not show the least
desire to 'adjust his style' (read : stoop as ordered) when
assignments dried up. But the story is even better than that.
It is documented that composers had to persuade him to
accept the assignments earmarked for him and convince
him of their product's quality even during his heyday. His
songs in Jahan Ara are quite good and his singing in concerts
was also appreciated beyond 1980. Loss of ability was
seen not on his part but the industry's.
Aside # 2 (or at least a tangential point) :
>
> The truth is Anil Biswas's music catered to the connoisseur
> and he > gets his due from those quarters.
>
That Anilda's music was geared towards the connoisseur
is your mantra, not mine. I do know that
only listeners with cultivated taste listen to him but I have
no idea why this should be so. I do see why a lay listener
prefers Shivkumar Sharma's second-rate music to (say)
great singers like Khadim Hussain Khan or Gajananrao Joshi
in the classical domain. But in film domain, popularity of
noise-makers defies any attempt at rationalisation except
the reluctant admission that even if real pigs, instead of human pigs,
were listeners, noise-makers won't fly so high.
If anything, I expect every great film artist to present his
art in simple form and all true greats pass this test. It is
upto lay listeners to do some serious self-examination
as to why their taste is so atrocious.
Now to my main point :
> I don't understand this attitude, On one hand you would like to
> believe that your brand of music is above the masses but on the other
> side you still want them to bow their head in front of something that
> is beyond them. Isn't that having your cake and eating it too?
>
Actually I have only observed, to repeat myself, that masses
choose to crawl beneath most decent brands of music. But even
if I were to see things as you do, for the sake of argument, your
charge doesn't stick. It is one thing to accept that Anup Jalota's
concerts will always draw bigger crowds than Mansur's; it is
quite another to accept that prestigious awards may be allowed
to go to Jalota because he is more popular. A society reacts
to its artists in many ways and across many channels. Elites
will be elites and pigs pigs but it is these channels in the
'buffer zone' which decide which way the vast mass of
the uncommitted shall turn and it is these buffers whose
irresponsibility has helped noise-makers flourish, in a way.
I tracked google news for snippets on Anilda's first death
anniversary to see how well the buffers were working and
they were enjoying a nice vacation. This state of affairs is
sad. Protesting against it does not contradict anything
I have said in my criticisms of the masses.
- dn
Satish
below :
> And your point on Talat is laughable. Please do go and check out his
> pathetic rendition of 'Aie sanam aaj yeh kasam khaayen'. Talat again
> was a great artist but he was quite limited in his repertiore and
> unlike Mukesh (who also was limited) could not adapt to changing
> times. Mukesh continued to entrall music lovers with gems like 'Maine
> tere liye hi' even in the 70s (though I do confess a lot of his 70s
> output is insufferable).
My impression is that your listening to Talat's private songs output
in the 60s is limited. "ae sanam" is an insipid composition which
neither Talat nor Lata could rescue. I think Talat did a fair job with
the other songs in the film. And he was very effective in Jaidev's
"aa.Nsuu chupaaye aa.Nkh me" which is a 1966 release. His private
songs during this period continued to be of high standard. I
definitely agree that Talat's voice deterioated by the 60s but I would
not dismiss it as "laughable". By the same token, I can count off any
number of Mukesh and Rafi pieces which are equally terrible. Mukesh's
"barkhaa raanii" and Rafi's "kabhii hamane nahii sochaa thaa" for
example are nuclear missiles to destroy your musical peace and must be
banned from play :)
I just recentnly came to know that the magnificent "ro ro biitaa
jiivan saaraa" version which is commonly released by HMV is in fact a
1963 reprisal of the 1952 original by Talat. Dont tell me you do not
that this later version elevating !!
> But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
> because they could not adapt to changing time.
> MDs like Jaidev and
> Roshan continued to give good music in the 60s and 70s even though
> mainstream music did lose some of it's sheen.
Thats putting it rather mildly :) - but the argument is whether "they
could not adopt" or "they were unwilling to adopt". I think both these
artistes have always represented the latter. Even during the peak
52-55 period, Talat's output hardly totalled more than 50 songs a year
whereas a Rafi or an Asha were churning out songs in hundreds. Same
Anilda - I would guess his output to be about a 100 in the 51-55 phase
but SJ's might total in 500s during their peak years.
These artistes have and will always represent Quality in our film
music.
Cheers,
Satish
V S Rawat
Which are the other four?
-Rawat
V S Rawat
> "Ritu" <rc0...@rediffmail.com> wrote -
>
>> But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out because they
>> could not adapt to changing time.
>>
>
>
> Let me get a few asides out of the way first :
>
> It is to Talat's infinite credit that he did not show the
> least desire to 'adjust his style' (read : stoop as
> ordered) when assignments dried up. But the story is even
> better than that. It is documented that composers had to
> persuade him to accept the assignments earmarked for him
> and convince him of their product's quality even during
> his heyday. His songs in Jahan Ara are quite good and his
> singing in concerts was also appreciated beyond 1980.
> Loss of ability was seen not on his part but the
> industry's.
Talat had done one or two film songs in 80s. Seems you have
not listened to them hence you are bringing out the above
aside from your hat.
A society
> reacts to its artists in many ways and across many
> channels. Elites will be elites and pigs pigs but it is
> these channels in the 'buffer zone' which decide which
> way the vast mass of the uncommitted shall turn and it is
> these buffers whose irresponsibility has helped
> noise-makers flourish, in a way. I tracked google news
> for snippets on Anilda's first death anniversary to see
> how well the buffers were working and they were enjoying
> a nice vacation. This state of affairs is sad. Protesting
> against it does not contradict anything I have said in my
> criticisms of the masses.
Today was Raj Kapoor's death anniversary and no word in rmim
about him.
By your logic, people seem to have forgotten him. But music
of all his film was great and has not got forgotten with
time. He switched to LP and then to ravindra jain to adapt
to latest styles. Thus, the masses you call pigs have liked
his music since start till end. How come the piggy masses
and elitist rmimers don't write a word about him?
-Rawat
Surjit Singh
is maanas janm me.n nirvaaN praapt karane le liye
yaa bahisht kaa nazaaraa lene ke liye
Dubakii lagaaiye:
>
> -Rawat
>
>
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
Visit my home page at
http://hindi-movies-songs.com/index.html
Afzal A. Khan
V S Rawat wrote:
>
> naniwadekar wrote:
> A society
> > reacts to its artists in many ways and across many
> > channels. Elites will be elites and pigs pigs but it is
> > these channels in the 'buffer zone' which decide which
> > way the vast mass of the uncommitted shall turn and it is
> > these buffers whose irresponsibility has helped
> > noise-makers flourish, in a way. I tracked google news
> > for snippets on Anilda's first death anniversary to see
> > how well the buffers were working and they were enjoying
> > a nice vacation. This state of affairs is sad. Protesting
> > against it does not contradict anything I have said in my
> > criticisms of the masses.
>
> Today was Raj Kapoor's death anniversary and no word in rmim
> about him.
>
> By your logic, people seem to have forgotten him. But music
> of all his film was great and has not got forgotten with
> time. He switched to LP and then to ravindra jain to adapt
> to latest styles. Thus, the masses you call pigs have liked
> his music since start till end. How come the piggy masses
> and elitist rmimers don't write a word about him?
>
> -Rawat
A very valid point.
Afzal
naniwadekar
"Afzal A. Khan" <me_a...@privacy.net> wrote -
>
> >
> > Today was Raj Kapoor's death anniversary and no word in rmim
> > about him.
> >
>
>
It is an absolutely laughable point. Yesterday was Anilda's
*first* death anniversary.
- dn
Sunil Dandekar
> I agree with quite a few points put down here - my exception is to the
> below :
>
> > And your point on Talat is laughable. Please do go and check out his
> > pathetic rendition of 'Aie sanam aaj yeh kasam khaayen'. Talat again
> > was a great artist but he was quite limited in his repertiore and
> > unlike Mukesh (who also was limited) could not adapt to changing
> > times. Mukesh continued to entrall music lovers with gems like 'Maine
> > tere liye hi' even in the 70s (though I do confess a lot of his 70s
> > output is insufferable).
>
> My impression is that your listening to Talat's private songs output
> in the 60s is limited. "ae sanam" is an insipid composition which
> neither Talat nor Lata could rescue.
IMHO it is other way round. Madan Mohan's brilliant composition
exposed glaring shortcomings of Talat, let alone Lata. When the song
reaches high notes in the part of the song that ends with …..Aur
sochega khuda(?) ishque kyun paida kiya…. etc. Talat bombs
spectacularly, with Lata following suit. Any Talat lover would be
embarrassed to hear him croak there. When a singer cannot carry the
notes, it is his failure, whether the song was insipid or not is not a
defense.
> I think Talat did a fair job with
> the other songs in the film.
There is no gainsaying Talat's talent, but in Jahan Ara his voice was
so shaky and hesitant that he appears to be struggling to be true to
the tune in Main Teri najar ka suroor hoon and Teri Ankhke aasoo pi
(pee?) jaoo. Phir wohi sham however is vintage Talat in full glory.
And he was very effective in Jaidev's
> "aa.Nsuu chupaaye aa.Nkh me" which is a 1966 release. His private
> songs during this period continued to be of high standard. I
> definitely agree that Talat's voice deterioated by the 60s but I would
> not dismiss it as "laughable". By the same token, I can count off any
> number of Mukesh and Rafi pieces which are equally terrible. Mukesh's
> "barkhaa raanii" and Rafi's "kabhii hamane nahii sochaa thaa" for
> example are nuclear missiles to destroy your musical peace and must be
> banned from play :)
How odd it would have sounded if SJ had composed a nice peaceful lori
or may be a soothing bhajan when Shammikapoor was having a time of his
life on the screen. Any way Rafi still could carry off the song, high
notes and all. Which is more than what can be said about other
worthies. I wonder, is peaceful music the only good music?
> I just recentnly came to know that the magnificent "ro ro biitaa
> jiivan saaraa" version which is commonly released by HMV is in fact a
> 1963 reprisal of the 1952 original by Talat. Dont tell me you do not
> that this later version elevating !!
>
>
> > But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
> > because they could not adapt to changing time.
> > MDs like Jaidev and
> > Roshan continued to give good music in the 60s and 70s even though
> > mainstream music did lose some of it's sheen.
>
> Thats putting it rather mildly :) - but the argument is whether "they
> could not adopt" or "they were unwilling to adopt". I think both these
> artistes have always represented the latter. Even during the peak
> 52-55 period, Talat's output hardly totalled more than 50 songs a year
> whereas a Rafi or an Asha were churning out songs in hundreds.
I guess versatility of both Rafi and Asha explains the numbers. Hard
to imagin Talat singing "Saverewali gaadi se chale jayenge". Is
refusal to adopt, a pre-requisite for excellence? Or having quantity
output a handicap? By that unusual logic perhaps Lata would be the
worst singer?
> Same Anilda - I would guess his output to be about a 100 in the 51-55 phase
> but SJ's might total in 500s during their peak years.
Perhaps that's why S-J fans do not bemoan lack of attention to S-J.
> These artistes have and will always represent Quality in our film
> music.
Right Sir!!
>
>
> Cheers,
> Satish
Sunil Dandekar
> below :
>
> > And your point on Talat is laughable. Please do go and check out his
> > pathetic rendition of 'Aie sanam aaj yeh kasam khaayen'. Talat again
> > was a great artist but he was quite limited in his repertiore and
> > unlike Mukesh (who also was limited) could not adapt to changing
> > times. Mukesh continued to entrall music lovers with gems like 'Maine
> > tere liye hi' even in the 70s (though I do confess a lot of his 70s
> > output is insufferable).
>
> My impression is that your listening to Talat's private songs output
> in the 60s is limited. "ae sanam" is an insipid composition which
> neither Talat nor Lata could rescue.
IMHO it is other way round. Madan Mohan's brilliant composition
exposed glaring shortcomings of Talat, let alone Lata. When the song
reaches high notes in the part of the song that ends with …..Aur
sochega khuda(?) ishque kyun paida kiya…. etc. Talat bombs
spectacularly, with Lata following suit. Any Talat lover would be
embarrassed to hear him croak there. When a singer cannot carry the
notes, it is his failure, whether the song was insipid or not is not a
defense.
> I think Talat did a fair job with
> the other songs in the film.
There is no gainsaying Talat's talent, but in Jahan Ara his voice was
so shaky and hesitant that he appears to be struggling to be true to
the tune in Main Teri najar ka suroor hoon and Teri Ankhke aasoo pi
(pee?) jaoo. Phir wohi sham however is vintage Talat in full glory.
And he was very effective in Jaidev's
> "aa.Nsuu chupaaye aa.Nkh me" which is a 1966 release. His private
> songs during this period continued to be of high standard. I
> definitely agree that Talat's voice deterioated by the 60s but I would
> not dismiss it as "laughable". By the same token, I can count off any
> number of Mukesh and Rafi pieces which are equally terrible. Mukesh's
> "barkhaa raanii" and Rafi's "kabhii hamane nahii sochaa thaa" for
> example are nuclear missiles to destroy your musical peace and must be
> banned from play :)
How odd it would have sounded if SJ had composed a nice peaceful lori
or may be a soothing bhajan when Shammikapoor was having a time of his
life on the screen. Any way Rafi still could carry off the song, high
notes and all. Which is more than what can be said about other
worthies. I wonder, is peaceful music the only good music?
> I just recentnly came to know that the magnificent "ro ro biitaa
> jiivan saaraa" version which is commonly released by HMV is in fact a
> 1963 reprisal of the 1952 original by Talat. Dont tell me you do not
> that this later version elevating !!
>
>
> > But both Talat and Anil Biswas bowed out
> > because they could not adapt to changing time.
> > MDs like Jaidev and
> > Roshan continued to give good music in the 60s and 70s even though
> > mainstream music did lose some of it's sheen.
>
> Thats putting it rather mildly :) - but the argument is whether "they
> could not adopt" or "they were unwilling to adopt". I think both these
> artistes have always represented the latter. Even during the peak
> 52-55 period, Talat's output hardly totalled more than 50 songs a year
> whereas a Rafi or an Asha were churning out songs in hundreds.
I guess versatility of both Rafi and Asha explains the numbers. Hard
to imagin Talat singing "Saverewali gaadi se chale jayenge". Is
refusal to adopt, a pre-requisite for excellence? Or having quantity
output a handicap? By that unusual logic perhaps Lata would be the
worst singer?
> Same Anilda - I would guess his output to be about a 100 in the 51-55 phase
> but SJ's might total in 500s during their peak years.
Perhaps that's why S-J fans do not bemoan lack of attention to S-J.
> These artistes have and will always represent Quality in our film
> music.
Right Sir!!
>
>
> Cheers,
> Satish
Abhay Phadnis
news:2i461gF...@uni-berlin.de...
> Satish Kalra wrote:
>
> > However, Anil Biswas seems to be a 'chhupaa rustom' in this regard. A
> > number of his songs are ghazals, though they may not appear so. Take a
> > look, e.g., at the following (included are some obvious ghazals,too);
>
> <snipped>
>
> Additions to the above list are earnestly solicited and
> > welcomed.
> Chhoti Chhoti Baatein:
> zindagii kaa ajab fasaanaa hai
Also, 'kuchh aur zamaanaa kahataa hai'
Warm regards,
Abhay
>
> - Arunabha
>
Satish
> or may be a soothing bhajan when Shammikapoor was having a time of his
> life on the screen.
When Bhagwan was having the time of his life on the screen, CR could
do a "bholii suurat dil ke khoTe" which is tipsy and fun without ever
being loud.
So - in answer to ..
> worthies. I wonder, is peaceful music the only good music?
.. I reply No. Folks songs are not peaceful are they ? "kachii hai
umariyaa" is not quite a peaceful song. But its one of the magnificent
musical pieces in our films. Every true composer - be it Anilda or
Salilda or SDB or even Naushad - all used folk music lavishly in their
music but such an output did not make us want to run away to the
opposite end of the world with our ears closed.
An OPN with the same prancing Shammi Kapoor could produce a "diivaanaa
huaa baadal". The same Rafi in a similar theme could be in control
with a "yuu.n to hamane laakh hasiin".
But I agree that the blame does not entirely rest on Rafi - it equally
rests on SJ's bad music. Just as MM is to take his share of the blame
for "ae sanam aaj ye qasam".
> I guess versatility of both Rafi and Asha explains the numbers.Hard
> to imagin Talat singing "Saverewali gaadi se chale jayenge".
Exactly my point. Talat always recognized his niche, his limitations
and lived within those boundaries.
> Is
> refusal to adopt, a pre-requisite for excellence?
No. But the ability to recognize your place in the musical world, and
being able to choose songs such that you dont loiter that world is
definitely a sign of one.
> Or having quantity output a handicap?
If you dont have an appreciable percentage of quality in that, then
definitely a handicap.
> By that unusual logic perhaps Lata would be the worst singer?
By my above logic, she definitely would be the greatest.
> Perhaps that's why S-J fans do not bemoan lack of attention to S-J.
Yeah - even they realize the duo's true worth no doubt :))
Cheers,
Satish
Afzal A. Khan
Satish wrote:
> Exactly my point. Talat always recognized his niche, his limitations
> and lived within those boundaries.
> Satish
I think a major portion of the credit for this should belong
to the Music Directors who didn't allot "out of bound" songs
to Talat.
Afzal
Robin
(and other music) listening..
All this stuff about music being appreciable/catered to/best meant
for/geared towards/etc. etc. for music director X for the connoisseurs
and for music director Y for the front-benchers/zopadpattiwaalas, is
nuts. Elitist, self-aggrandizing, self-justifying and overly zealous -
not referring to Ritu here, (with whom I have exchanged many friendly
debates on other subjects :), but to many other non-Internet folks I
do happen to know first hand.
Music is music - gander for one will be goose for another, prasad for
one will be poison for the next.
There are songs of Anil Biswas which are boring to me and songs of
Bappi Lahiri which sizzle. Could fall asleep on some of the reaaaallly
slow Talat numbers and enjoy immensely more the better songs of Udit
Narayan. And when I do listen to Biswas and Khemchand Prakash and the
rest of those times, at least I don't think - 'oh, here's a great song
made for the connoissuer'.. (sounds comical to even think that way!)
Obviously, the legacy of the Biswas is generally considered to be far
greater than that of Lahiri (though that too depends on time, place
and person) but to generalize, in this example, that Bappi was for the
masses and Biswas for those specially endowed with sensory powers of a
higher plane of musical understanding and appeciation is, to me at
least, laughably pompous.
So, all generalizations, (inluding this one) are, after a point,
meaningless.
Music is music. Best enjoyed without too much 'magaj-maari'.
Regards...Robin
"naniwadekar" <nani3...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2i5epnF...@uni-berlin.de>...
Ket...@att.net
Quite apt for certain RMIMers who pretend to be "connoisseurs" but in reality
are nothing more than vulgar "snobs". Not that this will stop AB's flock of
sheep from behaving like monkeys the next time around.
Ketan
Surjit Singh
>
> Obviously, the legacy of the Biswas is generally considered to be far
> greater than that of Lahiri (though that too depends on time, place
> and person) but to generalize, in this example, that Bappi was for the
> masses and Biswas for those specially endowed with sensory powers of a
I have always wondered how these MDs whose fans say that they are for
the masses lose their touch sometimes.
Did they just have a limited set of tunes in their piTaaraa?
Did they lose their creativity?
> higher plane of musical understanding and appeciation is, to me at
> least, laughably pompous.
Satish
> to the Music Directors who didn't allot "out of bound" songs
> to Talat.
Then isnt the contrary also true ? That the Music Directors should
take a major portion of the blame for a colorless rendition by the
singer ?
Cheers,
Satish
Afzal A. Khan
Not necessarily. For a colourless rendition, I think the
singer alone is to be blamed. The MD should be held
accountable for allotting the song to a singer who cannot
do justice to it. And these two processes need not coincide.
Of course, the choice of singers can be restricted due to
availability problems. That is how we have songs that are
first "dubbed" by someone and then rendered by the actual
chosen singer later.
But these "blame departments" need not be too "compartment-
alized". And I did say "a major portion", implying that a
little of the credit may also go the concerned singer.
BTW, I have not heard any story where a singer has declined
a song because he thought he won't be able to do full justice
to it !
Afzal
Sunil Dandekar
> > or may be a soothing bhajan when Shammikapoor was having a time of his
> > life on the screen.
>
> When Bhagwan was having the time of his life on the screen, CR could
> do a "bholii suurat dil ke khoTe" which is tipsy and fun without ever
> being loud.
>
> So - in answer to ..
>
> > worthies. I wonder, is peaceful music the only good music?
>
> .. I reply No. Folks songs are not peaceful are they ? "kachii hai
> umariyaa" is not quite a peaceful song. But its one of the magnificent
> musical pieces in our films. Every true composer - be it Anilda or
> Salilda or SDB or even Naushad - all used folk music lavishly in their
> music but such an output did not make us want to run away to the
> opposite end of the world with our ears closed.
>
> An OPN with the same prancing Shammi Kapoor could produce a "diivaanaa
> huaa baadal". The same Rafi in a similar theme could be in control
> with a "yuu.n to hamane laakh hasiin".
>
Selective data can support any conclusion. For same Shammikapoor S-J
also composed Raat ke hamsafar, Akele Akele..
For the record - To each his own.
Unless one is conditioned to chant "pre-50 good and post-50 bad" or
'AV good S-J bad" a la Animal Farm, I guess no period, no MD, no
singer had monopoly on good music. It is possible to like both "Man me
kisiki preet basake" and "Aasmaan se aaya Pharishta..". "Chupkese lag
ja gale" can not be bad just because it is by ARR and post 2000.
<begin preach>
The 'noise' in the post 60 songs is liked by many because of the
Harmonic effects of a large orchestra. It is possible to understand
the beauty of these songs by informed listening, but it is understood
better if we play them on keyboard or guitar with chords. When you
hear the chord accompaniment on guitar, simple sounding songs of S-J
and RDB are revealed to be complex arrangements. Many songs of S-J,
RDB ; few songs of L-P and ARR display this richness.
(I have adequate insurance..so with my heart in my mouth...)
Even some of the new music directors like Nadeem-Shravan have some
excellent compositions. Tum dil ki dhadkan ho is really rich.
(there..it was easy.. wasn't it?)
</end preach>
> But I agree that the blame does not entirely rest on Rafi - it equally
> rests on SJ's bad music. Just as MM is to take his share of the blame
> for "ae sanam aaj ye qasam".
>
>
> > I guess versatility of both Rafi and Asha explains the numbers.Hard
> > to imagin Talat singing "Saverewali gaadi se chale jayenge".
>
> Exactly my point. Talat always recognized his niche, his limitations
> and lived within those boundaries.
I thought the point was, AV and TM were better because they resisted
the temptation to adopt and did not have 100s of songs like Rafi and
Asha.
>
>
>
> > Is
> > refusal to adopt, a pre-requisite for excellence?
>
> No. But the ability to recognize your place in the musical world, and
> being able to choose songs such that you dont loiter that world is
> definitely a sign of one.
>
I recognize my place in the world as a very incompetent singer. So I
choose no songs to sing ( and litter the world of music.) Therefore I
am an excellent singer. Wow! that sure makes me feel good.
>
> > Or having quantity output a handicap?
>
> If you dont have an appreciable percentage of quality in that, then
> definitely a handicap.
>
>
> > By that unusual logic perhaps Lata would be the worst singer?
>
> By my above logic, she definitely would be the greatest.
>
>
> > Perhaps that's why S-J fans do not bemoan lack of attention to S-J.
>
> Yeah - even they realize the duo's true worth no doubt :))
The way I meant it was S-J fans do not have to complain, because S-J
still keep on getting attention and appreciation. Sorry to have caused
a confusion ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> Satish
regards,
Sunil Dandekar
Afzal A. Khan
It seems all the posts in this thread are using the
word "adopt". Should it not be "adapt" ? My idea is
not to point out any spelling mistake as such. This
comment is because other responders may get a different
(wrong ?) sense out of these posts.
Afzal
Surjit Singh
> <begin preach>
>
> The 'noise' in the post 60 songs is liked by many because of the
> Harmonic effects of a large orchestra. It is possible to understand
> the beauty of these songs by informed listening, but it is understood
> better if we play them on keyboard or guitar with chords. When you
So now I have to be able to play these songs to make it possible to
understand the beauty of these songs and to understand them better. Wow!
Listening to post-1960 music is becoming like theoretical physics!
Cause that's exactly what I tell my students, i.e. you won't understand
the beauty of quantum mechanics unless you solve the one-dimensional
harmonic oscillator problem by the Dirac-Heisenberg method all by yourself!
Long for the good old days (1969). Put a borrowed tape in a cheap Sears
tape player and enjoy Saigal or Noor Jehan.
> hear the chord accompaniment on guitar, simple sounding songs of S-J
> and RDB are revealed to be complex arrangements. Many songs of S-J,
> RDB ; few songs of L-P and ARR display this richness.
>
> (I have adequate insurance..so with my heart in my mouth...)
>
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
Sunil Dandekar
> Sunil Dandekar wrote:
>
> > <begin preach>
> >
> > The 'noise' in the post 60 songs is liked by many because of the
> > Harmonic effects of a large orchestra. It is possible to understand
> > the beauty of these songs by informed listening, but it is understood
> > better if we play them on keyboard or guitar with chords. When you
>
> So now I have to be able to play these songs to make it possible to
> understand the beauty of these songs and to understand them better. Wow!
> Listening to post-1960 music is becoming like theoretical physics!
I repeat.
It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
LISTENING, but it is understood BETTER if we play them on keyboard or
guitar with chords.
And add.
I do believe that being able to play an instrument DOES lead to better
appreciation of music. I do not understand Theoretical Physics, so
would not know about that.
>
> Cause that's exactly what I tell my students, i.e. you won't understand
> the beauty of quantum mechanics unless you solve the one-dimensional
> harmonic oscillator problem by the Dirac-Heisenberg method all by yourself!
>
Now I wonder why do you tell them that. One could understand Newtonian
physics only by reading. Are you implying that post-60 music is to
pre-60 music what Quantum Mechanics is to Newtonian physics? :-)
> Long for the good old days (1969). Put a borrowed tape in a cheap Sears
> tape player and enjoy Saigal or Noor Jehan.
>
Right, not much of a difference between noise and signal during those
good old days.
Ket...@att.net
> Not necessarily. For a colourless rendition, I think the
> singer alone is to be blamed. The MD should be held
> accountable for allotting the song to a singer who cannot
> do justice to it. And these two processes need not coincide.
The MD can and should be held accountable for a colourless rendition not only
for giving it to the singer, but then persisting with the bad recording and not
having it re-recorded by another singer. Knowing someone/something is bad and
sticking to it shows as much if not more lack of judgement.
> BTW, I have not heard any story where a singer has declined
> a song because he thought he won't be able to do full justice
> to it !
There are stories of Kishore telling K-A to give "Kasme vaade pyaar wafa" to
Manna when K-A first approached him to sing it. Mukesh liked Manhar's dubbing
for "Loote koi man ka nagar" from Abhimaan and told SDB to stick to that
version.
Ketan
Surjit Singh
> Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<2iajnbF...@uni-berlin.de>...
>
>>Sunil Dandekar wrote:
>>
>>
>>><begin preach>
>>>
>>>The 'noise' in the post 60 songs is liked by many because of the
>>>Harmonic effects of a large orchestra. It is possible to understand
>>>the beauty of these songs by informed listening, but it is understood
>>>better if we play them on keyboard or guitar with chords. When you
>>
>>So now I have to be able to play these songs to make it possible to
>>understand the beauty of these songs and to understand them better. Wow!
>>Listening to post-1960 music is becoming like theoretical physics!
>
>
> I repeat.
>
> It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
> LISTENING, but it is understood BETTER if we play them on keyboard or
Please (don't) tell me about INFORMED LISTENING. What kind of beast is
that? Are you a classical music person or something. Cause I am not. I
am a man-in-the-street.
> guitar with chords.
>
> And add.
>
> I do believe that being able to play an instrument DOES lead to better
> appreciation of music. I do not understand Theoretical Physics, so
> would not know about that.
>
>
>
>>Cause that's exactly what I tell my students, i.e. you won't understand
>>the beauty of quantum mechanics unless you solve the one-dimensional
>>harmonic oscillator problem by the Dirac-Heisenberg method all by yourself!
>>
>
> Now I wonder why do you tell them that. One could understand Newtonian
> physics only by reading. Are you implying that post-60 music is to
> pre-60 music what Quantum Mechanics is to Newtonian physics? :-)
'
No. In Newtonian Physics, I ask them to derive Kepler's laws from
Newton's laws. But my point is that this technique does not necessarily
apply in Hindi Film Music.
>
>
>>Long for the good old days (1969). Put a borrowed tape in a cheap Sears
>>tape player and enjoy Saigal or Noor Jehan.
>>
>
> Right, not much of a difference between noise and signal during those
> good old days.
>
Not true. However, these days the noise is so loud you cannot even hear
the vocals! And lyrics, sheer pleasure to make fun of! Jai jai Mahakavi
Anand Bakshi. At least Gulzar and Javed are published poets.
>
>>>hear the chord accompaniment on guitar, simple sounding songs of S-J
>>>and RDB are revealed to be complex arrangements. Many songs of S-J,
>>>RDB ; few songs of L-P and ARR display this richness.
>>>
>>>(I have adequate insurance..so with my heart in my mouth...)
>>>
--
naniwadekar
"Sunil Dandekar" <sunnyd...@yahoo.com> wrote -
>
> Right, not much of a difference between noise and signal
> during those good old days.
>
Right, right, right.
>
> It is possible to understand the beauty of these (post-1970)
> songs BY INFORMED LISTENING,
>
> I do believe that being able to play an instrument DOES lead
> to better > appreciation of music.
>
I agree. This clears all confusion now. As I had argued, there is
nothing elitist about Anilda's music. Even Lata, who can't play
any instrument, can appreciate it. She doesn't like post-1970 music
but can she play any instrument? Is she an informed listener?
In short, post-1970 music is elitist. You must know how to
play an instrument (like Shiv and Harry) or be an informed
listener (like Rawat).
Hey, but a wait a minute. Pu La Deshpande had once complained
that modern (noisy) music made him feel 'irrelevant'. Same with
Sajjad. And both of them *could* play instrument, no?
So maybe it is not enough to be able to play an instrument
and you must be a really, really, really informed listener to
appreciate post-1970 music?
- dn
Birbal
> Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<2iajnbF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> > Sunil Dandekar wrote:
> >
> It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
> LISTENING,
That is one of the most bogus statements I have read in a long time.
May be ever.. If it does not appeal to your heart why waste any more
time doing its analytical disection? Its like trying to fall in love
by studying the resume of a person.. It does not work that way... you
either fall in love or you don't.
I think its true that the music in 60s began losing the innocense,
originality, honesty and the quality of literature it had in 30s, 40s
and 50s. Lets just accept it. As someone who gre up with 80s and 90s
music, I feel bad that our generation did not produce anythitn even
remotely as great as that in 30s to 60s. But thats just a fact.. we
can always listen to their stuff ;)
You might be able to find out a few more drops of water from this
barren landscape.. but stop saying that you could make one believe
that its same as the rainforest..by doing these intellectual
acrobatics. Its either a rainforest or not... its either good music or
not.. and the music past 60's, *AS A GENERALIZATION* is NOT. There
were a few great songs... but the drop in the % is quite obvious.
but it is understood BETTER if we play them on keyboard or
> guitar with chords.
>
OK.. This at least has some merit... yes the people who could play or
perform have a different kind of insight and possibly appreciate finer
aspects of the technicalities in the music. But again this is *REALLY*
not going to help you if the song itself is bad.
Thats life.
Abhay Jain
<Ket...@att.net> wrote in message news:c9psk...@drn.newsguy.com...
to
> Manna when K-A first approached him to sing it. Mukesh liked Manhar's
dubbing
> for "Loote koi man ka nagar" from Abhimaan and told SDB to stick to that
> version.
You mean Manhar was reduced to dubbing by Abhimman time?
Abhay Jain
>
> Ketan
>
Abhay Jain
>
> > Not necessarily. For a colourless rendition, I think the
> > singer alone is to be blamed. The MD should be held
> > accountable for allotting the song to a singer who cannot
> > do justice to it. And these two processes need not coincide.
>
> The MD can and should be held accountable for a colourless rendition not
only
> for giving it to the singer, but then persisting with the bad recording
and not
> having it re-recorded by another singer. Knowing someone/something is bad
and
> sticking to it shows as much if not more lack of judgement.
>
In Bhabhi, Chitragupt realized bad job by Talat
for the song "Chal Ud Ja Re" and got it resung by Rafi.
I have heard the Talat version. Rafi is superb.
MD should share some blame for bad singing.
Abhay Jain
> Ketan
>
Abhay Jain
"Sunil Dandekar" <sunnyd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1f851c34.04060...@posting.google.com...
>
>
> I do believe that being able to play an instrument DOES lead to better
> appreciation of music.
>
I don't play any instrument but have a good appreciation
of music (40s till today's). Again, how does one
define an instrument. If radio, CD player, tape player
qualify as an instrument, then your premise is correct
as far as I am concerned.
Abhay Jain
Shalini Razdan
"Birbal" <bir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e64647f9.04060...@posting.google.com...
> sunnyd...@yahoo.com (Sunil Dandekar) wrote in message
news:<1f851c34.04060...@posting.google.com>...
> > Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<2iajnbF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > Sunil Dandekar wrote:
> > >
>
> > It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
> > LISTENING,
>
> That is one of the most bogus statements I have read in a long time.
> May be ever.. If it does not appeal to your heart why waste any more
> time doing its analytical disection? Its like trying to fall in love
> by studying the resume of a person.. It does not work that way... you
> either fall in love or you don't.
>
> I think its true that the music in 60s began losing the innocense,
> originality, honesty and the quality of literature it had in 30s, 40s
> and 50s. Lets just accept it. As someone who gre up with 80s and 90s
> music, I feel bad that our generation did not produce anythitn even
> remotely as great as that in 30s to 60s. But thats just a fact.. we
> can always listen to their stuff ;)
>
> You might be able to find out a few more drops of water from this
> barren landscape.. but stop saying that you could make one believe
> that its same as the rainforest..by doing these intellectual
> acrobatics. Its either a rainforest or not... its either good music or
> not.. and the music past 60's, *AS A GENERALIZATION* is NOT. There
> were a few great songs... but the drop in the % is quite obvious.
I know this will fall on deaf ears, but I like banging my head on a brick
wall occasionally, so let me give it a shot.:-) What you have claimed above
regarding the quality of pre and post-60s music is merely an opinion. There
is no objective or factual basis for your statements because fundamentally
you cannot PROVE that song X from era A is better than song Y from era B.
All you can do is opine, and you are perfectly free to do so, as long as you
recognize that you are simply expressing YOUR thoughts and not giving voice
to some incontrovertible TRUTH.
Shalini
Ket...@att.net
>> It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
>> LISTENING,
>
>That is one of the most bogus statements I have read in a long time.
>May be ever.. If it does not appeal to your heart why waste any more
>time doing its analytical disection? Its like trying to fall in love
Oh I am not so sure it is bogus. Statements like this have been made by people
to justify why they like pre-60s songs. They have rubbished those who dared to
say the opposite as cretins who did not understand music. Forget pre-60s. If you
don't like the music of Anil Biswas, or Khemchand Prakash or RC Boral....you are
immediately asked to do some INFORMED LISTENING. So, what's good for the
goose.....
>but it is understood BETTER if we play them on keyboard or
>> guitar with chords.
>OK.. This at least has some merit... yes the people who could play or
>perform have a different kind of insight and possibly appreciate finer
>aspects of the technicalities in the music. But again this is *REALLY*
>not going to help you if the song itself is bad.
Not always true. There are MDs like SalilC, Hridaynath, RDB, Ilaiyaraja and ARR,
whose musical thinking and craftsmanship is revealed when you play their songs
on the keyboard, even if the song in question is horrid. I am sure this would
hold true for other MDs.
Ketan
Afzal A. Khan
I find this logic pretty strange. What percentage of
the average music-listening public can play a musical
instrument ? When MDs, lyricists and film-makers in
general compose and release a musical film, they expect
the music/songs to be appreciated (or otherwise) by
themselves, not on the basis of whether they sound better
when played by the listener on a musical instrument.
Most people are hardly in a position to pay the price of
becoming "informed listeners".
And it isn't as if there are no takers for relatively
modern music. For every Nani, there is a Ketan.
And those who CAN play some instrument, can always play
some pre-1960 songs. If I knew how to play the Piano,
I would much prefer to play "Man men kisi ki preet
basaale".
Afzal
Birbal
OK.. Fair enough.. it is my opinion... however to be fair you should
reconginze that I have clearly said that if one was to GENERALIZE, the
% of good songs has gone down post 60's.
I have also, clearly said that there were a few great songs in 60s too
(and even later). But the % went down and they were few anf far
between (as compared to the 50s)
Birbal
> In article <e64647f9.04060...@posting.google.com>, Birbal says...
> >
> >sunnyd...@yahoo.com (Sunil Dandekar) wrote in message
>
> >> It is possible to understand the beauty of these songs BY INFORMED
> >> LISTENING,
> >
> >That is one of the most bogus statements I have read in a long time.
> >May be ever.. If it does not appeal to your heart why waste any more
> >time doing its analytical disection? Its like trying to fall in love
>
> Oh I am not so sure it is bogus. Statements like this have been made by people
> to justify why they like pre-60s songs. They have rubbished those who dared to
> say the opposite as cretins who did not understand music. Forget pre-60s. If you
> don't like the music of Anil Biswas, or Khemchand Prakash or RC Boral....you are
> immediately asked to do some INFORMED LISTENING. So, what's good for the
> goose.....
>
OK.. the argument.. at least the one I was making... was that if the
song does not appeal to one's heart, any amount of intellectual
analysis is not going to do the trick.
The selection of the pre-60s music as an example for this s my opinion
and may be subjective but real point was *NOT* what year you draw the
line. It was spending cycles on trying to *intellectually* appreciate
an ordinary song and claiming that that exercise might turn it into a
good song!
> >but it is understood BETTER if we play them on keyboard or
> >> guitar with chords.
>
> >OK.. This at least has some merit... yes the people who could play or
> >perform have a different kind of insight and possibly appreciate finer
> >aspects of the technicalities in the music. But again this is *REALLY*
> >not going to help you if the song itself is bad.
>
> Not always true. There are MDs like SalilC, Hridaynath, RDB, Ilaiyaraja and ARR,
> whose musical thinking and craftsmanship is revealed when you play their songs
> on the keyboard, even if the song in question is horrid. I am sure this would
> hold true for other MDs.
>
>
Pretty much the same argument as above. It might create some
intellectual appreciation about it but its not the same thing. Its
like studying grammar of Ghalib... sure it would develop your
knowledge a little further but is it necessary to appreciate the
poetry? I don't think so. Neither are you likely to like a bad poem
written by someone just because you happen to understand all its
grammatical and other mechanics. Its not the matter of Brain but that
of Heart... at least IMHO and it should be... also IMHO.
> Ketan
Shalini Razdan
I fear you have missed my point. You are operating on the false premise
that there is universal, or even general, agreement on what constitutes a
"good" song versus a "bad" one. What value or relevance can such
generalizations have when their very basis is subjective?
Shalini
Shalini Razdan
"Afzal A. Khan" <me_a...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:40C15CA2...@privacy.net...
If you are talking about the listening habits and musical tastes of just
RMIMers, then I think you are right. But, if you go outside of RMIM, then
my guess is that both Nani and Ketan represent minority opinions. I think
in reality the majority of Hindi Film music listeners like contemporary
music, and only a minority prefers the old music of the 50s or the
"relatively modern music" of the 70s.
Shalini
> Afzal
naniwadekar
"Shalini Razdan" wrote -
>
> You are operating on the false premise that there is
> universal, or even general, agreement on what constitutes a
> "good" song versus a "bad" one. What value or relevance can such
> generalizations have when their very basis is subjective?
>
If any opinion about music is intrinsically value-less since
its very basis is subjective, why did you post the URL
to Kalra-ji's article in Screen yesterday?
- dn
V S Rawat
Bishwas in PiTaaraa during 4:00 - 5:00 PM.
Several songs, anecdots, facts about him, opinions of some
other personalities (khayyam, Sudha Malhotra, Sardar Malik)
about him and his music, even part of his and meena kapoor's
interview recorded in 97 was aired.
He and Meena sang one line each of gulo.n me.n ra.ng bhare
baad e naubahaar chale.
Sudha sang some 'jhuum rahii hai.n something" mukha.Daa.
It was a very lovely program. I am waiting for its details
in RADIOana.
--------------
Some people will feel relieved that he has not been forgotten.
Some of them will further say, why today, why not on THE day.
maybe, because in piTaaraa, today is the day of saragam ke
sitaare.
-Rawat
Shalini Razdan
With all due respect, your question is such a non-sequitur that I don't
think there is any point in my answering it.
Shalini
> - dn
>
>
>
V S Rawat
Whenever some fellow list member achieves something, it is
good that information about it is shared with others who may
not come to know of it by other sources.
Hence, I think, the sharing information on printing of Kalra
ji's article, or Abhay's program, or news on professor's
Rafi scheme etc. are relevant.
I am sure when your articles had got printed in listeners'
bulletin, people would have given details on the ng. I came
to know of that much later when I got the entire set and
looked into it.
Of course, only some people are sharing and appreciating
such information. Most other people are good only for
criticising on the smallest pretext, and there heart pains
like anu malik's if they come across some remarkable thing
done by someone. If they at all appreciate, it is only about
their friends and acquantance whom they have come to know
through rmim meet or other modes. It is actually a polishing
or maintaining the relationship, and not much to do with
real worth of the activity.
That is why RMIM is more a place of querreling and
undermining, and not where talents and interests get
cultivated. You are an alam-baradaar of that gang.
-Rawat
naniwadekar
"V S Rawat" <vsr...@hclinfinet.com> wrote -
>
> Whenever some fellow list member achieves something, it is
> good that information about it is shared with others who may
> not come to know of it by other sources.
>
> Hence, I think, the sharing information on printing of Kalra
> ji's article, or Abhay's program, or news on professor's
> Rafi scheme etc. are relevant.
>
> I am sure when your articles had got printed in listeners'
> bulletin, people would have given details on the ng. I came
> to know of that much later when I got the entire set and
> looked into it.
>
Rawat : I have not written any article for Listeners' Bulletin.
I had emailed some stats corrections to Hamraaz and he had
mentioned them in an LB issue quoting my name.
- dn
Afzal A. Khan
"With all due respect".... to Kalra-ji, I hope and
presume !
Afzal
Afzal A. Khan
> That is why RMIM is more a place of querreling and
> undermining, and not where talents and interests get
> cultivated. You are an alam-baradaar of that gang.
>
> -Rawat
The mafia at work, once again !!
Afzal
anil11...@yahoo.com
You seem to have a full breakfast with hot Jilebi and badaam doodh .
Anil
V S Rawat
though the above is used more for poor writing, I think it
can also fit if the content of what you write are beyond
human comprehension.
Are you saying that Hamraz ji transcended his authority and
printed something without taking your express consent?
If so, he did a good thing with good intentions of sharing a
good piece with hundreds of his readers and music lovers.
Why have you written the above line in a complaining manner?
And why have you written the above as if offerring some
explanation or excuse at having done something wrong for
which you are feeling guilty?
Writing is a good thing.
Sharing information is a good thing.
Getting printed, getting broadcast, getting telecast are
good things, whether it is by Kalra ji, Abhay, Professor,
Nani or anybody else.
They should keep on doing it. You should keep on doing it.
All others should start doing it.
Especially you can start a regular column for LB because the
era you are treading in will be loved by LB readership. Even
if you share the prefaces you are writing in your
giitaanjali posts it will be a worthy thing.
If you could find some common element in several posts, like
your "THE OTHER _____" series in giitaanjali, that will be
further liked as people like a common concept running
through different parts.
Think about it.
but it will take some self-discipline that you should be
able to regularly provide the article whenever LB is due for
printing. Do you have that self-discipline or the company of
your best friend UVR has made you like him; shrugging
responsibility, not upholding long term commitments,
writing just on the spur of moment and then forgetting all
about it, playing twenty questions in the name of helping.
-Rawat
UVR
>
> Think about it.
>
> but it will take some self-discipline that you should be
> able to regularly provide the article whenever LB is due for
> printing. Do you have that self-discipline or the company of
> your best friend UVR has made you like him; shrugging
"your best friend ... like him" is inaccurate. No comments
on the rest of the id10t-ic rant.
-UVR.
Sunil Dandekar
> "Sunil Dandekar" <sunnyd...@yahoo.com> wrote -
> >
> > Right, not much of a difference between noise and signal
> > during those good old days.
> >
>
> Right, right, right.
>
>
> >
> > It is possible to understand the beauty of these (post-1970)
> > songs BY INFORMED LISTENING,
> >
> > I do believe that being able to play an instrument DOES lead
> > to better > appreciation of music.
> >
>
> I agree. This clears all confusion now. As I had argued, there is
> nothing elitist about Anilda's music. Even Lata, who can't play
> any instrument, can appreciate it. She doesn't like post-1970 music
> but can she play any instrument? Is she an informed listener?
Do you think she is not? Do you think it is possible to reach where
she is without being an informed listener? She has appreciated works
of MDs upto and including ARR. AFAIK she has not made any uncharitable
remark about any MD or style or period.
On one hand there is a belief that good music is liked without any
formal training, and on the other hand is this tendency to sneer at
the popular music directors like S-J,RDB et el. Their tunes are liked
by the masses. Who is elitist?
> In short, post-1970 music is elitist. You must know how to
> play an instrument (like Shiv and Harry) or be an informed
> listener (like Rawat).
For the umpteenth time, ability to play an instrument is not a
pre-requisite to enjoy music. It is an added advantage.
I am sharing personal experience to elaborate what I meant.
"Likhe jo khat tujhe" is a fairly well known song so I am taking that
as an example. The song is in C minor (depending on the source it can
be half note up or down). At the end of each line of Mukhada, there is
a broken C minor chord. On a good system, an informed listener can
spot this which enhances the listening experience.
I was not able to appreciate this because I was not aware of what to
listen for. More often than not the listener gets engrossed in the
main tune and the words. After I started learning to play an
instrument I understood not only the beauty of the broken chord but
also experienced how dull the song sounds without it.
pre-50 songs are based pre-dominantly on Indian music. Indian music
does not have concept of harmony. The accompaniment follows the main
tune. Usually the songs were dominated by the singer's voice. Post 50,
the songs started getting influenced by the western style of
compositions. The songs become multilayered. Any average song would
have a rhythm , chords accompaniment , main tune and then contra
melodies. (I do not imply that none of the pre-50 songs had these
attributes and all post-50 songs had them.) When I became sensitized
to these details, It became difficult to write off any song casually.
I used to think that "Inteha ho gayee" was a 'noisy' song. But after
the sensitization, I was amazed by richness of the orchestration.
Needless to say this experience is personal, but so are all the
opinions and remarks by all eminent contributors to the RMIM.
>
>
> Hey, but a wait a minute. Pu La Deshpande had once complained
> that modern (noisy) music made him feel 'irrelevant'. Same with
> Sajjad. And both of them *could* play instrument, no?
This is excellent example of anecdotal evidence.
> So maybe it is not enough to be able to play an instrument
> and you must be a really, really, really informed listener to
> appreciate post-1970 music?
I agree. An open mind perhaps?
>
>
> - dn
Birbal
<<snipped>>
> > I have also, clearly said that there were a few great songs in 60s too
> > (and even later). But the % went down and they were few anf far
> > between (as compared to the 50s)
>
> I fear you have missed my point. You are operating on the false premise
> that there is universal, or even general, agreement on what constitutes a
> "good" song versus a "bad" one. What value or relevance can such
> generalizations have when their very basis is subjective?
>
> Shalini
I don't think so. I was not trying to make you accept that the your
definition of a good song should be same as mine.
The point I was making was "I strongly believe that if a song does not
appeal to your heart after listening to it, no amount of detailed
analysis, disection, intellectual acrobatics, informed listening or
worse will not help you.
The reference to falling in love by reading a resume was in this
context.
Now, in my case, I feel that the number of such songs began to go down
in 60s and the post 60s music has a substantially smaller number of
songs that appeal to *ME*. You could draw that line in 1970, 1980,
2000 or 2070.. its your choice. That was not my point.
naniwadekar
> remark about any MD or style or period.
>
You cannot be serious.
- dn