about Manna Dey
Ravi Krishna
parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU (Rajan P. Parrikar):-
>Speaking of Manna Dey, I am of the opinion that he is a second-rate singer
>who merely got lucky. His classical renditions are pedestrian and in the other
>varieties he was quite inept (with some exceptions). He can best be compared
>to Jupiter, a failed star (pun unintended) and a wannabe planet. But neither
>really. Rafi's abilities in classical music are mediocre (like Manna's) but
>otherwise in the mainstream filmi genre his abilities are very superior.
Will Mr Parrikar explain on what basis he feels that MannaD's classical
renditions are pedestrian. This is the first time I am hearing this in my
life .
Thanks.
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <5nckrk$j...@drn.zippo.com>,
For a classical rendition to be called solid it must necessarily exhibit two
features: One, a strong adherance to swara (sruti-shuddha). Two, taiyyari,
which translates to preparedness, and is indicative of the musicians' technical
mastery over the idiom. Manna Dey is found wanting on both counts, although
much more on the latter than on the former. His musical development, in my
opinion, apropos of classical music, is at the stage of an intermediate
level student of any established ustad, no more.
Two examples of his classical renditions can be cited that make the point:
The first is the duet with Bhimsen Joshi in the film Basant Bahar. One might
object at the unfairness of so cockeyed a comparison. After all, one is an
alltime great. But the thing is, it is not just that Manna cannot keep up with
Bhimsen. It is that you know right away after the first few notes that he had
no business being there in recording studio in the first place. Any B-grade
AIR artist on the Bombay radio staff at the time could have filled in much
more admirably.
The second example is from Rani Roopmati composed by S.N. Tripathi. I forget
the words of the number. But Manna Dey's chickenshit taans I never will. They
still cause problems to my DNA from time to time. When I first heard them I got
the feeling of being present at the popping out of a baby at parturition, so
uncanny the resemblance was with a child's first cry.
On other occasions where he is tolerable, they are those where only a modest
degree of skill is called for.
Warm regards,
r
Amit Chatterjee
Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:
> For a classical rendition to be called solid it must necessarily exhibit two
> features: One, a strong adherance to swara (sruti-shuddha). Two, taiyyari,
> which translates to preparedness, and is indicative of the musicians' technical
> mastery over the idiom. Manna Dey is found wanting on both counts, although
> much more on the latter than on the former. His musical development, in my
> opinion, apropos of classical music, is at the stage of an intermediate
> level student of any established ustad, no more.
>
I found your observation about Manna Dey to be absolutely correct. I
would extend this further to say that this observation is true about
most of the well-known film music, light bhajan and ghazal singers (note
that when I meant light singers, I did not mean khumri and other form of
light classical music). These musicians have a pleasing voice, a good
range and reasonable good control over simple music. That is what makes
them suitable for this type of music but singing classical music
requires much more than that. To develop the above attributes stated by
you, there needs to be years of serious practice which many of the
modern singers do not bother to engage in. If they had, maybe some of
them may have turned out to be good classical musicians - not all. The
reason for saying this is that I have heard several people saying things
like "Manna is great, he would have become a Bade Ghulam Ali Khan if he
wanted to" and IMO, that is not true.
Regarding your comparison between Mohd. Rafi and Manna Dey, I think Rafi
was better when it came to classical-type songs though you cannot
compare him with any well known classical vocalists. Manna Dey does
quite well when it comes to simple music with straightforward melody. He
has a large number of very light Bengali (film) music which are very
good to listen to. They are normally better than his Hindi ventures
(probably because of the language barrier). In Bengal, raag-prodhan is a
popular form of music which is nothing but very light classical tunes
with nice Bengali lyrics and Manna Dey is not one of the prominent raag
prodhan singer and that kind of proves that classical music is not his
cup of tea.
--
/*********************************************************************
Amit Chatterjee
E-mail: a s a v @ i x . n e t c o m . c o m (remove the blank spaces)
All opinions are mine, not NORTEL's.
*********************************************************************/
Subhash Phatak
Amit Chatterjee wrote:
>
> Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:
>
> > For a classical rendition to be called solid it must necessarily exhibit two
deleted...
he stage of an intermediate
> > level student of any established ustad, no more.
> >
>
> I found your observation about Manna Dey to be absolutely correct. I
deleted..
> popular form of music which is nothing but very light classical tunes
> with nice Bengali lyrics and Manna Dey is not one of the prominent raag
> prodhan singer and that kind of proves that classical music is not his
> cup of tea.
>
>
I agree with this thread. Many if not all the classical(?) film songs
lack woefully of a male singer who can sing true to the real notes
(Swarel i.e. following the swaras"). Amongst the female singers only
Lata and Asha can perform a classical number with ease and at the same
time with sweetness of voice. But these sisters are born with that
divine gift which is not related to any training or practice. There are
many accomplished classical singers who can render the songs with equal
flexibility of notes still being within the true notes. Prabhakar
Karekar, Jitendra Abhisheki can be cited example.
You should also realise that basically a classical music is picturized
on a character who is rendering some song in a particular story
sequence. The person/actor/actress has a particular voice timber. The
playback singer has to have a voice character that is close match to
that character's. It is not necessarily a performance of a classical
music. When we listen to only the sound track, the problems become more
noticeable. But in the movie this may not be so obvious.
I have problems with movies where main character is of an accomplished
singer, like in Baiju Baawara. This situation demands proper
considerations for the selecting an expert singer as a playback artist.
A duet of Rafi and Amir Khan shows glaring difference in capabilities of
two singers.
I would like to ask both news groups about movie "Sur Sangam" I have
only heard the cassette of this movie. I do not know about the story.
All the songs are purely classical. But the male voice is totally
'Besur'. Does any body know the story of the film, who is the music
director and who is the singer? I heard that the movie is adoption of
Telgu film "Shankaraabharana".
BTW what are Yeshudas's credentials as a classical singer?
Subhash
Ravi Krishna
In article <5ndl8i$a...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU says...
>For a classical rendition to be called solid it must necessarily exhibit two
>features: One, a strong adherance to swara (sruti-shuddha). Two, taiyyari,
>which translates to preparedness, and is indicative of the musicians' technical
>mastery over the idiom. Manna Dey is found wanting on both counts, although
>much more on the latter than on the former. His musical development, in my
>opinion, apropos of classical music, is at the stage of an intermediate
>level student of any established ustad, no more.
..
>Two examples of his classical renditions can be cited that make the point:
>
Thanks for the technical info.
I think overall all film music playback singers can't rise above a particular
level , even LataM.
I am saying that bcos in india I use to listen to naatya sangeet .
Even though it is in marathi which I can barely understand I use to enjoy it.
Suresh Wadkar has attempted one naatya sangeet album and it must say it was
really really bad. Even for a unknowledgable ear like that of mine the
difference between Suresh W and other accomplished naatya sangeet singers was
too glaring.
Ravi Krishna
In article <339C76...@om.cv.hp.com>, Subhash says...
>BTW what are Yeshudas's credentials as a classical singer?
Yesudas gives lot of concerts in classical music. There are critics of him
who say that he is not that good and he only plays to the gallery and that's
why he is so popular.
Arunabha
I
>
>Regarding your comparison between Mohd. Rafi and Manna Dey, I think Rafi
>was better when it came to classical-type songs though you cannot
>compare him with any well known classical vocalists. Manna Dey does
>quite well when it comes to simple music with straightforward melody. He
>has a large number of very light Bengali (film) music which are very
>good to listen to. They are normally better than his Hindi ventures
>(probably because of the language barrier). In Bengal, raag-prodhan is a
>with nice Bengali lyrics and Manna Dey is not one of the prominent raag
>prodhan singer and that kind of proves that classical music is not his
>cup of tea.
>
HI,
Do you really think so ? Rafi was better than Manna Dey in ceratin
categories, but Manna Dey oputshone him in classical nos. It shows up in their
duets where Manna DEy does the difficult taans cnsistently, and rafi just
somehoe keeps pace. What Rafi has and Manna Dey doesn't is a more smooth
mellifluous voice. But Manna Dey's superior command over execution of difficult
parts is, I thought till today, obvious. Take Rafi's Man tarpat hari darshan ko
all is bearable till he starts his alaaps (if you can call it that) Tumhare dwaar khada yeh jogi, and then some horrible
alaap ensues- he shoots off like a rocket where he should have gone
on slowly, and the effect is jarring in its extreme form. To this ady I close
the door when someone begins to play that "classical number"
To give you a song in the same raag Malkauns to contrast, try
Manna Dey's " Radha cholechhe mukh ti ghuraaye, baaje shyamero banshori"
and you should see the difference. I don't know whether he was utilised
enough in Bangla films or not, but this piece is definitely a good song as well
as a good rendition. I don't know if Manna Dey did much of raag Prodhan but
his superiority over Rafi in terms of class. ability should not be questioned.
I don't know if you have heard enough of Manna Dey's good songs. Someone who
hears Anup Ghoshal's "Tujhse naraaz nahin zindagi " may be disappointed with him as a singer.
Someone on the ng commented sometime back that "sad to say , his knowledge
of sur and taal is hopeless" . And indeded hearing just that one song,
where he has to overcome the twin hurdle of singing in a film milieu
and singing in Hindi, the person cannot be blamed.But any Bengali who listens
to Nazrul geeti will know how ridiculous such a claim is. I am not
accusing you of being similar, it is just possible you might not have heard
Manna Dey's really good songs.
Arunabha
Arunabha
>But Manna is not alone. He has company in the form of the teary-eyed,
>perpetually-anguished, broken-hearted quivering Lallu, Talat. About the only
>interesting thing one can say about the geeser is that he has a
>palindromic name.
>
Hi Rajan and the rest,
A lot of derogatory opinions have been expressed re:
Talat and Manna Dey. I want to ask one honest question: Do you feel that any
singer dead or alive could have brought the feeling that Talat did to "Jalte
hain jiske liye " or " Humse aaya na gaya " , while simultaneously singing it
so mellifluously ? Of course , this qn. only applies if you liked these songs at all.
If you didn't then it prob. means that you do not like Talat's style at all.
I always found these two to be really good although I'm not a fan of Talat or
anything. I think Kishore, Rafi and modern singers, definitely, and prob.
even Hemanta and the Mangeshkars wuld be hard pressed rendering a song with
the emotion he did. About his quivering, I like it a lot, it enhances the
mood of the songs in my own limited :-) opinion. I think in evoking deep
emotion Saigal Hemanta and Talat had a different capability altogether, even if
they were not as versatile as the rest. I do not personally feel he is a Lallu
at all.
Re; manna Dey I think you are being a bit unfair. No one
is claiming he was uo\p there with Bhimsen J. and the rest, only it was pointed
out that he was clasically more capable of doing difficult nos. among the pack.
of male playbacks of his generation. This si def. true : in qawwalis which only
Rafi and Manna Dey were able to sing, M.D. always di the more tough parts.
Although Manna Dey was unsuited
for humorous numbers, class, numbers like "Albeli naar preetam dware", "Jhanak
jhanak tori baaje paayaliyan" "Bhay bhanjana bandana", "Sur na saje" "Hato kahe
ko jhooti banao batiyan" wer e done quite impressively by him. In fact I have a
LP of these which seems to have been sung by him at a later age (i.e. not the
film version) and he does them really well, and with feeling. - much better than
the film versions.
Perhaps in doing
so he rises above merely singing a difficult number, as you have yourself
said that mere adherence to tune does not contribute to the whole appeak\l of the song.
I do feel that "Puchho na kaise " was not as outstanding as these others.
I thought his taans were OK, not Faiyaz
Khan's gamak taans by any measure but not chickenshit either. BTW, I wanted
to ask re: this film Rani Roopmati: I have not heard Manna Dey's song from it which you
disliked so much, but , just to get a comparison, I wanted to ask you how it
compared with lata's "Aa jaa bhanwar " which Nirupa Roy sings in court. Since I
have heard this one, it will enable me to get a feeling for whatever it was
that Manna Dey sang. Regarding some songs that sounded like children's cries
at being born, your description was so stark that it reminded me exactly of
another popular singers ranting . But that would generate another flame war, so let
that go. But I'm curious to know about the other issues and your opinion
is earnestly solicited.
Arunabha
Arunabha
Balaji A.S. Murthy
In article <5nho4a$n...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU says...
>
>But Manna is not alone. He has company in the form of the teary-eyed,
>perpetually-anguished, broken-hearted quivering Lallu, Talat. About the only
>interesting thing one can say about the geeser is that he has a
>palindromic name.
The self-styled presidents of RMIM fan clubs may be very knowledgable about
their subjects and maybe worthy of a lot of respect for that, but have a lot
to learn about decently referring to other people however deficient in (or for
that matter totally devoid of) talent in their opinions.
Regards,
- Balaji
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <5ni9po$o...@drn.zippo.com>, <Arunabha> wrote:
>Khan's gamak taans by any measure but not chickenshit either. BTW, I wanted
>to ask re: this film Rani Roopmati: I have not heard Manna Dey's song from it which you
>disliked so much, but , just to get a comparison, I wanted to ask you how it
>compared with lata's "Aa jaa bhanwar " which Nirupa Roy sings in court. Since I
Oh, Lata's "Aa jaa bhanwar" based in Raga Brindavani Sarang is a first-rate
rendition by any canon. The sweep and precision in her aalaaps and taans is
divinely luscious, to be savoured in lingering delight.
It was only for very few years that such inspirited level of technical rigour
was paired with grace in Lata's voice; the atrophy had set in by the time the
mid-1960s rolled in and the 1970s extended the decay. Today, there's very little
to distinguish her shrill outpourings from hircine bleatings; the ethic of
bowing out gracefully is a foreign idea to some people.
Manna Dey's number (I now faintly recall it as "Ud jaa something..." set in
Darbari Kanada) is a kindergarten effort, there's no comparing the two.
>have heard this one, it will enable me to get a feeling for whatever it was
>that Manna Dey sang.
Regards,
r
ps: I would prefer not to comment on Talat since that would detract from the
thread. Of course, I brought him in in the first place. Mea culpa.
Abhinav Jawadekar
Namaskar,
So much stuff going on about Manna Dey, Rafi, Talat or Lata and
Asha singing songs with classical base....
My personal feeling is that these two are completely different
disciplines. May be it is on the same lines of hardware and
software! Unfortunately not many artists, from both the
disciplines try to understand the difference. Also in the case
of "classical music based film songs" songs sung by typical
classical singers sound more classical and the once sung by
light singers sound more light and in many many cases this just
results into a disasters! (I will talk about some respectable
exceptions later.) Here I want to talk about the non-disasters
first.
1. Mana Mohana ... sung by Lata based on Jaijaiwanti.
Though based on "classical" this song can never be regarded
as a good rendering of the raga though it is a great film
song and yes, it does help to introduce one to Jaijaiwanti.
2. Yeri mai aaj shubhamangala gao... sung by Bhimsen Joshi
and Lakshmi Shankar. Though a film song this is a proper
rendering of Todi! A person not knowing that this has
been recorded for a film has no reason to feel that this is
a film song!
3. Same is the case for "Hari ke charan kamal"
4. There is the interesting case of "Hame tumse pyar kitna"
sung by Kishore Kumar and Parveen Sultana separately. The
one sung by Kishore sounds pure light where as the one sung
by Parveen sounds very very close to classical and in fact
can be considered as a good Bhairavi Thumri!
Now let me talk about some disasters!
1. Consider "Sakhi manda jhalya taraka" sung separately in
exactly same tune by Bhimsen Joshi and Sudhir Phadke. The
one sung by Sudhir Phadke is a master piece whereas Bhimsen
Joshi's attempt is a disaster!
2. I consider all the attempts of Kumar Gandharva to sing
Bhavageet as a disaster!
3. The misarable stuff, people like Jagjit Singh do by
attempting of all the things, darbari!
And of course some exceptions now!
Unfortunately I don't have too much knowledge about Hindi
film music and hence I have to talk about Marathi stuff.
I consider Pt. Vasantrao Deshpande and Manik Verma as excellent
examples of singers who could differentiate well between light
and classical music and sing both the forms in their way!
Both these people have so many of great classical renderings
that I need not talk about specific examples.
Consider "ghana neela ladiwala", "sawalach ranaga
tujha", "tya tithe palikade" or many of the songs sung by Manik
Verma which are absolutely great as Bhavgeets! Similarly
Vasantrao's "bagalyanchi mala phule ajuni ambarat", "rahile
othatlya othat wede shabda majhe" or (some natya sangeets which
are closer to Bhavgeet) "ho chhediyalya tara", "ya bhavanatil
geet purane" are also purly in the good "light" catagory.
The name of Pt. Jitendra Abhisheki has already been mentioned
during this discussion. I would not consider him as a great
singer but a great musician indeed who has a great understanding
of the difference between the two and his music direction for
many of the sangeet natakas proves this very well! We have so
many of his works like "he bandha reshamache" or "katyar kaljat
ghusli" but there he had somebody like Vasantrao to sing! But
consider something like "lekure udanda jhali" which is
absolutely great as "light music"!
Let me consider a couple of Hindi examples, but I will
restrict myself to music-directors.
Pt. Ravi Shankar's music for "Anuradha", though a very fruitful
attempt, the songs "saware saware" or "haye re wo dina kyo na
aaye" or "jane kaise sapano me kho gayee akhiya"
and other songs have "classical" tune (in fact saware
saware sounds like sitar!) but due to Lata they sound light!
Whereas Shiv-Hari's Silsila is purely light and all the
songs are purely film songs. There is no classical-light
confusion like Anuradha!
To sum up the discussion let me write about one concert of
Shri. Shriniwas Khale. This is in good old days when I was in
Ruparel College, Bombay that our "Marathi Wangmay Mandal" had
arranged Kale's concert! Let me mention that Kale is Ustad
Faiyyaz Khan's shishya, which tells enough about his classical
music background. It was evening and Kale started the concert
with a song based on Marwa. Immediately after the song one
respected professor had to pitch in, asking him about whether
he selected Marwa because it was evening and I really liked
Khale's reply...He said that there was definitely no such
connection but he felt that the lyrics of that song demanded
Marwa and it was just a matter of chance that he sang that song
in the evening. He added that one must not confuse between the
two desciplines!
I think this sums this write-up quite well.
Regards,
Abhinav Jawadekar
TK
> In article <339C76...@om.cv.hp.com>, Subhash says...
>
> >BTW what are Yeshudas's credentials as a classical singer?
>
Padmashree Dr. K.J. Yesudas learnt Carnatic music from a number of
classical musicians. His intermediate training was at the Swati Tirunal
Academy of Music run by Semmangudi, and his advanced training was under
the late Chembai Vaidyanatha Bhagavathar. Yesudas has given many
classical concerts and has several classical tapes and albums under the
Tharangini Studios (which he owns).
-TK (a big Yesu fan)
A.Pavan
In article <339C48...@nortel.ca>,
>> features: One, a strong adherance to swara (sruti-shuddha). Two, taiyyari,
>> which translates to preparedness, and is indicative of the musicians'
>> technical
>> mastery over the idiom. Manna Dey is found wanting on both counts, although
>> much more on the latter than on the former. His musical development, in my
>> opinion, apropos of classical music, is at the stage of an intermediate
>> level student of any established ustad, no more.
I think you got carried away in your assessment of Manna Dey with your exacting
standards of judgement. Surely no one is claiming tnat Manna was in the same
league as Bhimsen or Amir Khan. HE WASN'T. When it came to singing simpler
classical or semi-classical fare for movies (which are anyway low calorie
fare and time contrained, with set music) he did a halfway decent job. Please
tell me if ANY of the film world singers EVER had the kind of grounding in
music that you are referring to. NO ONE EVER DID. Not Saigal, not Pankaj
Mullick not ANYONE.
In the context of film music, if ever there were half decent singers who
sang semi-classical or Raga based stuff among males (whether by chance,
choice, luck, favoritism or whatever), then they
were definitely Manna Dey and Rafi for the most part. That was the point.
By your reasoning the same can be concluded of KK - that he got lucky when it
came to singing lighter fare. But we're not saying so.
Indeed putting Manna alonside Bhimsen for the Basant Bahaar song was a
grave mistake as it shows in the song clearly. He was certainly not Khayal
material. From time to time these two punters sang "The Filmi Chota Khayal"
with set sthayis and antaras and an orchestra to boot for the interludes. So
really these were lighter Raga songs and not serious Khayals or
Dhrupads. As for the musical development of the song, a large part of
the blame lies with the MD too.
For that matter, except for half a dozen or so punters in the real classical
music world, no one would classify under your exacting standards of tayyar
musicians.
Pavan
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Senior Research Scientist Voice mail: (612)951-7142
Honeywell Technology Center Fax : (612)951-7438
3660 Technology Dr., Lab : (612)951-7606
Mail Stop MN65-2600 Home : (612)487-1966
Minneapolis, MN 55418 email : pa...@htc.honeywell.com
Planned absence from Honeywell until June 30, 1997
Can be reached at 626-7522 OR 626-7523 during this time or via email
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A.Pavan
>I would like to ask both news groups about movie "Sur Sangam" I have
>only heard the cassette of this movie. I do not know about the story.
>All the songs are purely classical. But the male voice is totally
>'Besur'. Does any body know the story of the film, who is the music
>director and who is the singer? I heard that the movie is adoption of
>Telgu film "Shankaraabharana".
>
>
Indeed Sur Sangam was the Hindi adaptation (and a bad one at that) of the
Telugu hit Shankaraabharanam. The MD was Laxmi-Pyare (bad choice for a film
requiring classical numbers) and the singers Rajan Mishra, Sajan Mishra,
Kavita Krishnamurthy and S Janaki (from South, who rendered some of the
songs for the Telugu version). Rajan and Sajan command a fair amount of
respect in the classical music circles. Rajan Mishra being the more
"Heavyweight" singer. His classical renditions and Bhajans are quite good.
However in the movie, as you point out, he goes off key many times.
The taans are hurried through and woefully inadequate (but perhaps sufficient
to fit the motions in the scene). Laxmi-Pyare's music is gaudy at best.
In comparison the South version was more sublime even though criticism
was hurled at the choice of SPB for rendering the songs (who has little
classical training) rather than choosing a superheavyweight like
Balamurli Krishna.
Anil Hingorani
Hi Abhinav,
Great post! Would love to hear more from you.
>
> 1. Mana Mohana ... sung by Lata based on Jaijaiwanti.
> Though based on "classical" this song can never be regarded
> as a good rendering of the raga though it is a great film
> song and yes, it does help to introduce one to Jaijaiwanti.
Agree with you here. However, Sudhir Phadke's far superior
(jaijaiwanti based) 'bandh preeti phool dor..' sung by Lata is a
much better rendering. Also, his 'jyoti kalash chaleke...', again
sung by Lata, is also very close to boopali, unlike most classical
film songs.
> Now let me talk about some disasters!
>
> 1. Consider "Sakhi manda jhalya taraka" sung separately in
> exactly same tune by Bhimsen Joshi and Sudhir Phadke. The
> one sung by Sudhir Phadke is a master piece whereas Bhimsen
> Joshi's attempt is a disaster!
>
This I would like to hear! Pt. Joshi's singing a disaster!:-)
Any info. on how I can get hold of these.
>
> Pt. Ravi Shankar's music for "Anuradha", though a very fruitful
> attempt, the songs "saware saware" or "haye re wo dina kyo na
> aaye" or "jane kaise sapano me kho gayee akhiya"
> and other songs have "classical" tune (in fact saware
> saware sounds like sitar!) but due to Lata they sound light!
>
Agree here too. But as classical based film songs go, these three
along with 'kaise din beete...' are right up there amongst the best.
> Whereas Shiv-Hari's Silsila is purely light and all the
> songs are purely film songs. There is no classical-light
> confusion like Anuradha!
>
I am always surprised by this MD pair. Being classical music performers
themselves, their compositions for films always fell short of my
expectations. But then maybe my expectations were/are too high....
Thanks,
Anil
Rajan P. Parrikar
>I think you got carried away in your assessment of Manna Dey with your exacting
>standards of judgement. Surely no one is claiming tnat Manna was in the same
<deleted>
>For that matter, except for half a dozen or so punters in the real classical
>music world, no one would classify under your exacting standards of tayyar
>musicians.
I have not much to add to this thread which is quickly moving to the
point of diminishing returns in terms of content. The only thing left
to be said is:
I apologize deeply for expecting "exacting standards" of people who are
purportedly the best in their terrain in a nation of 900 million, who are
players in the game at the highest level in the land, and whose fulltime
job and profession it is (and who get compensated handsomely in the bargain)
to do music. I should hereon be sanguine and feel a warm fizz in my heart
everytime someone does a "halfway decent job." For the great truth is
that a demand for "exacting standards" is a sign of exclusiveness,
intellectual snobbery, a narrow mind and bespeaks a lack of values of universal
brotherhood. Henceforth no effort will be spared to accomodate every
'humble' and 'simple' Dickbert who is known to have done a "halfway decent
job." An avowed commitment to mediocrity will be encouraged and no artist
will be criticised; this will ensure that all the people whose day job it
is to be offended at the drop of a hat will be out of work. Confidence-boosting
bon mots ("Good job man, good job") will also be the order of the day.
Finally, we will strive to say things that are agreeable to everybody at
all times so that we too will be deluged with 100 emails that read "I agree
100% with everything you said. Great job man. Keep it up." But mind you,
occasionally we will use language that is simultaneously pompous, convoluted
and un-understandable so that we too may be included among the ranks of
the "knowledgeable."
Warm regards,
r
A.Pavan
In article <5ni3eo$9...@drn.zippo.com>,
>
>who say that he is not that good and he only plays to the gallery and that's
>why he is so popular.
Yesudas, while good, cannot be placed in the same league as Semmangudi,
Balamurali and other pillars of Carnatic music.
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <5nne4j$a...@fido.asd.sgi.com>,
Dr. Prince Kohli <pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com> interjects:
>parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU (Rajan P. Parrikar) writes:
|>
|> I apologize deeply for expecting "exacting standards" of people who are
|> purportedly the best in their terrain in a nation of 900 million, who are
|> players in the game at the highest level in the land, and whose fulltime
|> job and profession it is (and who get compensated handsomely in the bargain)
|> to do music. I should hereon be sanguine and feel a warm fizz in my heart
>
>Let me be the one to point out the obvious flaw in your argument - Manna De is
>not competing with the Bhimsens of this world nor has he made any claims as to
>his being a classical vocal messiah.
Since no such thing was implied it must have taken some work with your unusually
well-developed logical skills (no sarcasm here) to notice this fly in the
ointment.
>He sings extremely well, he has a certain
>amount of grounding in classical music which he seems to use to his advantage
>in singing certain types of songs, and his songs show zest and feeling. If
>the issue here is that of Manna De being a great classical singer, then you
>are right in debunking the belief. However, if the argument is that Manna De
>is among the "best in his terrain (filmi music) in a nation of 900 million,"
>and he can sing better classical than most other contemporary
>male playback singers, then the answer should be easy to figure out.
>
>Manna De is no Kishore or Rafi. However, he is still a very good singer. Thus,
>in his "fulltime job and profession," he has done extremely well. You believe his
>classical-based songs suck. From the classical purist's point of view, maybe.
>However, from the film perspective, they do not. Why judge him by the rules
>of a contest he has not entered? In the competition he is in, he is one of the
>tops (which is the whole point), and that takes skill and talent.
I have a yawning difference of opinion and have stated it - Manna Dey's singing
is arrant mediocrity masquerading as respectable sometimes under a pseudo-classical
cloak.
>Being a martry does not suit the KKKlan prez, Rajan :-) Nor are you the type
>to be one for long. So let us get down to the basics - which one of the following
>are you trying to prove?
>
>1) That Manna De was a bad film singer?
>3) that he was a bad classical singer? Or
>2) that he was worse than some other singer(s)?
Again I am simply restating from earlier posts:
(a) Manna was not a bad film singer; he was a pathetic film singer. In both
streams: mainstream film and classical-based film compositions.
(b) Manna never attained even baseline capabilities as a classical singer and
therefore further qualification in this department is unnecessary.
>If we can understand the question, it might be easier making sense of your
>answer.
I hope I have now adequately dusted off the cobwebs in the garret of your mind.
Warm regards,
r
Prince Kohli
parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU (Dr. Rajan P. Parrikar) argues:
|> >not competing with the Bhimsens of this world nor has he made any claims as to
|> >his being a classical vocal messiah.
|>
|> Since no such thing was implied it must have taken some work with your unusually
|> well-developed logical skills (no sarcasm here) to notice this fly in the
|> ointment.
You claimed Manna De sings bad classical, and that his songs should have been
sung by an accomplished classical singer. You also claimed that compared to
one of the latter, the former is worse off. Thus, you _are_ comparing Manna
with the Bhimsens of this world. It does not take too much analysis, even for
someone devoid of my unusually well-developed logical skills, to come to that
conclusion.
|> >Manna De is no Kishore or Rafi. However, he is still a very good singer. Thus,
|> >in his "fulltime job and profession," he has done extremely well. You believe his
|> >classical-based songs suck. From the classical purist's point of view, maybe.
|> >However, from the film perspective, they do not. Why judge him by the rules
|> >of a contest he has not entered? In the competition he is in, he is one of the
|> >tops (which is the whole point), and that takes skill and talent.
|>
|> I have a yawning difference of opinion and have stated it - Manna Dey's singing
|> is arrant mediocrity masquerading as respectable sometimes under a pseudo-classical
|> cloak.
Manna Dey is a good singer. He also sings classical-based songs better than most other
male singers of his time. That is the claim I make. There is no implication of him
masquerading as a classical singer and there never was. That is a convenient
intrepretation that you made.
Also, I can keep on saying he is a good singer and you can go on denying the truth :-)
However, that does not prove anything to anybody. And before you come up again with
his non-expertise in classical-based songs as proof, please re-read my post and the
claims therein.
|> (a) Manna was not a bad film singer; he was a pathetic film singer. In both
|> streams: mainstream film and classical-based film compositions.
Would you happen to have any facts to support that argument? If you wish to take
resort in the oft-used my-opinion-is-subjective claim, that is fine by me.
(Now for a thought experiment - Kishore Kumar was no where near the best in singing
quawwaalis, ghazals or classical-based film songs. There is no quality in him that
you can place your finger on and say that is was the tops in the nation of 900 million
in that area. Does that make him a "pathetic film singer?" If not, why not? And
whatever reasoning you give, apply it back to Manna Dey being a good film singer
too and let us see what you come up with.)
|> (b) Manna never attained even baseline capabilities as a classical singer and
|> therefore further qualification in this department is unnecessary.
Since that was never the issue, this is, as you have put it before, a red herring.
|> >If we can understand the question, it might be easier making sense of your
|> >answer.
|>
|> I hope I have now adequately dusted off the cobwebs in the garret of your mind.
No need. The non-cobwebbed part of my mind is enough to handle this discussion.
-Prince
Anil Hingorani
Hi Abhinav,
Abhinav Jawadekar wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> Unfortunately I don't recall the Jaijaiwanti stuff that you are
> talking about. About "jyoti kalash jhalake".... Well it still
> fits into this catagory of light songs with classical base and
> not an acceptable rendering of the raga.
>
Maybe I missed your point, but I do not understand why if the Raag
is adhered to, as it is in classical performances, then why can't it
be considered an acceptable rendering of that raag - whether it is
used in films or otherwise?
The only difference I can see is that of time. A classical
performer takes appropriate time to develop and unfold a raag
with all its intricacies. However, in films that luxury is not
afforded to the singer. But, given the time alloted, if the raag is
sung in the exact melodic scale, then I think it still brings out
the emotions attributed to that raag quite well and can be considered
an acceptable rendering.
As far as your point about the film singers making the rendering
'light' - I will accept that point. They are not, so to say, "pucca"
singers and they are not meant to be. These are two different "ball
games" and need two separate sets of skills. It is pointless to
compare a Kishori Amonkar with a Lata or a Manna Dey to Pt. Joshi:-)
>
> Though a very good musical work, these songs
> don't fit into the regular "film-music" catagory. They sound
> different! One automatically gets the background of the MD
> by listening to any of these songs. These songs were not
> "required to be" classical based. They are so close to
> classical music just because Ravi Shankar was the MD (observe
> even the tals of the songs)! Some other MD for the same
> situations in the movie may have tuned the same songs
> to not-so-classical tunes and it would have been quite fine.
>
I don't know if there is any rule that says film songs cannot be
classical based! Those songs would have been fine if they were not
so classical, but Ravi Shankar thought it appropriate to make them
classical and that was his preogative (spelling?). This also fit in
very well in the movie. I think the songs turned out just fabulous
and it makes me happy and proud that Hindi film music can boast of
such compositions!
>
> I won't agree with this. Especially the Silsila stuff
> is a great work of art and it has got the fame that it deserved.
> Shiv-Hari don't have the limitation that is seen of Ravi Shankar
> as a MD! All the songs in Silsila are pure film songs and not
> modified bandishes, thumries or dhuns (unlike Anuradha songs)!
> This "feel" in difference is what I am trying to point out!
>
As good as Silsila is, I expect more "classical" based output from
them. I do get your point about the 'feel' but I do not concur with
what you seem to be saying - that classical stuff does not belong
in films and should be kept out. I think there is enough room and
the decision should be left to the composer's imagination and
creativity.
Thanks, once again, for a nice and relevant post.
Cheers,
Anil
Abhinav Jawadekar
In article <33A03E10...@etsd.ml.com>, Anil says...
>
>Maybe I missed your point, but I do not understand why if the Raag
>is adhered to, as it is in classical performances, then why can't it
>be considered an acceptable rendering of that raag - whether it is
>used in films or otherwise?
>
Please refer to an earlier post of mine!
>As far as your point about the film singers making the rendering
>'light' - I will accept that point. They are not, so to say, "pucca"
>singers and they are not meant to be. These are two different "ball
>games" and need two separate sets of skills. It is pointless to
>compare a Kishori Amonkar with a Lata or a Manna Dey to Pt. Joshi:-)
>
Sure. I am not trying to! In fact I am just saying that these
people belong to different classes and there are very few who
are masters of both but there are a few who consider that
they are the masters of both or they don't consider these
to be two different classes and they just claim to be "the masters".
My objection is to these claims!
>>
>> Though a very good musical work, these songs
>> don't fit into the regular "film-music" catagory. They sound
>> different! One automatically gets the background of the MD
>> by listening to any of these songs. These songs were not
>> "required to be" classical based. They are so close to
>> classical music just because Ravi Shankar was the MD (observe
>> even the tals of the songs)! Some other MD for the same
>> situations in the movie may have tuned the same songs
>> to not-so-classical tunes and it would have been quite fine.
>>
>
>I don't know if there is any rule that says film songs cannot be
>classical based! Those songs would have been fine if they were not
>so classical, but Ravi Shankar thought it appropriate to make them
>classical and that was his preogative (spelling?). This also fit in
>very well in the movie. I think the songs turned out just fabulous
>and it makes me happy and proud that Hindi film music can boast of
>such compositions!
>
Let me first re-state that the Anuradha songs are excellent ones
using any standards. Include me in the set of happy and proud
people!
In film music there is a lot more than just the "classical base".
I expect film music directors to use this extra freedom that they
have got. Shiv-Hari have used this extra freedom successfully,
Ravi Shankar has not bothered about it at all!
>
>As good as Silsila is, I expect more "classical" based output from
>them. I do get your point about the 'feel' but I do not concur with
>what you seem to be saying - that classical stuff does not belong
>in films and should be kept out.
Again....No I am not saying so! I just want people -listeners like
you and me, singers and music directors- to keep this distinction
in mind!
Regards,
Abhinav Jawadekar
Abhinav Jawadekar
(I think there was some problem when I posted it in the morning. Hence
this post again!)
In article <8660750...@dejanews.com>, hsuv...@adobe.com says...
>
>In article <5njv9k$d...@drn.zippo.com>,
> Abhinav Jawadekar <abh...@teil.soft.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> 1. Mana Mohana ... sung by Lata based on Jaijaiwanti.
>> Though based on "classical" this song can never be regarded
>> as a good rendering of the raga though it is a great film
>> song and yes, it does help to introduce one to Jaijaiwanti.
>>
>
>Normally the songs in film need tobe finished in 3-5 mins which is
>very short time to do sanchaar/vistaar of the raaga. The other thing
>is that the film songs contain lot of lyrics unlike the typical
>hindustaani classical singing where aalaaps are more. Hence the word
>semi-classical/light classical is appropriate for film songs.
>Basically one must not get mistaken that 'classicals' are not
>sung as 'classicals' in films and crib in a high-fundaa-way,
>but should think that 'light-classicals/semi-classicals' are sung as
>'light-classicals/semi-classicals'.
>
I am not cribbing! Please note my words "great film song"
Secondly there is a real lot of hard-core classical
stuff, sung on the good old 78RPM records by many a masters.
I am not saying that the kind of music "mana mohana" falls
into is something bad. But I definitely object when it is
called "classical music". My whole point is to discuss the
difference between these two types of music.
>However, If we take the bhanjans of Shri DV Paluskar
>
This also is a semi-classical or light-classical stuff.
>Thumaki Chalata Ramachandra
>Thakur tum sharanaayo
>Kahan se patik
>paayo re man ram...
>
>the fuziness between classical/light increases. Panditji takes away
>my rationale when my mind tries to draw a line between these two.
>I am not sure.
>
The line IS fuzzy and hence this discussion. If the distinction
was too obvious there was no point in discussing this stuff at all.
>
>> 3. Same is the case for "Hari ke charan kamal"
It is recorded as a duet by Amir Khan and DVP for Baiju Bawara (not
too sure about the film).
>
>Which film has this?
>
>> 4. There is the interesting case of "Hame tumse pyar kitna"
>> sung by Kishore Kumar and Parveen Sultana separately. The
>> one sung by Kishore sounds pure light where as the one sung
>> by Parveen sounds very very close to classical and in fact
>> can be considered as a good Bhairavi Thumri!
>>
>
>when do you say that a song is classical? is the criteria
>
>a) lot of alaaps
>b) singing same line multiple times in different tunes
>
No way. I am talking about getting a "feel" for classical music.
I have talked about "Yeri mai aaj" or "hari ke charan kamal" which
is basically classical stuff taken more or less as it is in
movies. This is not the case of Mana mohana or something like that.
Many classical musicians even today sing these songs/bandishes in
pure classical music concerts and there is nothing wrong with that.
I would certainly object if somebody starts singing "mana mohana"
instead.
The case of "Hame Tumse Pyar" is a bit different and I consider
the classical component of Parvin Sultana's version is definitely
heavier than the light one and it can be very easily seen when
compared to KK's version of the same song. Of course both songs
are good in their own manner. (...see no cribbing!)
>just like Shri DVP 'mira ke prabhu , meera ke prabhu, meera......'
>('thaare rahiyon oh bakkae raat re-paakizaa has this
>'jaage na koi.... ' beautifully executed by LM).
>
Well, it could be my personal dislike but the composer of
this stuff, so called "Naushad the great", can be applied with
the same arguments that are going on against Manna Dey in a
different thread in this news-group.
>and what else?
>
There are a lot of things that make this "line" even fuzzier. Let me
give some examples -
1. Gazals by Begum Akhatar
2. Gazals by Mehdi Hassan
3. Marathi Natyasangeet
Regards,
Abhinav Jawadekar
Arunabha
Hi,
Prince, you echoed my views exctly: every point that I wanted to bring out, you
did, much better than i would have. I concur exactly with you re: why Manna Dey
should be at least judged by the same standards as used when KK and rafi are. I
think every one realises that Lata's , Asha's , Rafi's Manna Dey's renditions of
classical based melodies are not standard alaap based expositions of class.
music . Still, one does (in a country of Nine hundred million) accord them film
status. Rajan, I cannot follow why you do not like Manna Dey's expositions if
you enjoy Lata's " Aa jaa bhanwar" (which, btw, I thoroughly enjoyed). I'm sure
there you did not demand any class. puritanism, and enjoyed it just for the
beautiful voice and taans she came up with. (If not, feel free to correct me) .
If KK can be appreciated (rightfully) despite his total lack of classical
expertise , by placing him in the right category as a fankaar, so also, IMHO can
Manna Dey if we choose to look at classical songs from films. There are cases
where classical singers sang for films _ I'll just cite one
example : Kishori Amonkar's "Geet gaaya pattharon ne" . One came away
appreciating her dashing taans, but the song was neither A+ in the pure filmi
song category, nor A+ in the filmi class. category(IMHO) , nor A+ as a pure
classical exposition (by dint of all the attributes that you have clearly
outlined). So, it is neither here nor there, to use Somerset Maugham's phrase.
On the other hand, one does like Lata's Sunio ji without such professed
orthodoxy; that's all. If you do not like his voice or style of singing, you are
by all means free to do so, but do not do this by bashing his class. ability;
since he was never competing in this field. If someone DOES go to the extent of
claiming "he could have become Bhimsen" your comments are germane, but not in
this. context . There too, you said that he was at the level of an intermediate
.. something student learning Music: well: I would add: a good student, and who
knows what he could have done if he went on. It's just that he didn't , that's
all. Let people who enjoy his and your Lallu's voice appreciate them in the same
way as people can like KK the star without alluding to class. music. ( I am
secifically addressing this comment to you because you are considered the Music
Expert of sorts on this NG, so your projected opinions have value.)
So, like Prince, I'll request you not to fall into the trap of the "MY opinion
is
the gospel truth" fallacy. I'm sure there are others beside me who like MD's and
your Lallu's songs.
After having preached so much, let me add: I do not consider manna Dey an
overall great- but he had his great songs in certain ctaegories, like any other
singer. So do not consider these as ravings of some fanatic.
Regards,
Arunabha.
PS: Even though the contents of yours (Rajan's) mails are contrary to my opinion
often, they are a pleasure in terms of the high sounding language. Keep posting.
:-)
Pradeep Dubey
Abhinav wrote:
> Well, it could be my personal dislike but the composer of
> this stuff, so called "Naushad the great", can be applied with
> the same arguments that are going on against Manna Dey in a
> different thread in this news-group.
kyaa kaha aapne? maine nahin sunaa, zaraa zor se kaho :-)
Pradeep
A.Pavan
In article <33A198...@malkauns.csd.sgi.com>,
Vandana Vidwans <van...@malkauns.csd.sgi.com> wrote:
>> >Which film has this?
>> >
>> >> 4. There is the interesting case of "Hame tumse pyar kitna"
>> >> sung by Kishore Kumar and Parveen Sultana separately. The
>> >> one sung by Kishore sounds pure light where as the one sung
>> >> by Parveen sounds very very close to classical and in fact
>> >> can be considered as a good Bhairavi Thumri!
>> >>
>
> music concert, it doesn't have any emotions. Where it appears that
> KK sings with lot of emotions in his voice. Anybody feel that he
> means what he sings.
DUH !!
It appears that whenever someone sings in "classical style" it becomes
an "emotionless" rendering ! Parveen gives a rather nice interpretation to
an otherwise unremarkable song (that KK did an excellent job in the lighter
version is well agreed upon - I'm just talking about Parveen's rendering
of the same song). Musically the song is quite unremarkable (as composed
by the music director). It was left to the talent of KK and Parveen to give
their own interpretation to that number both of which have their place
in conveying emotions, though perhaps a tad different.
I don't know what you mean by saying "like she is singing in a classical
music concert - it doesn't have any emotions". Perhaps you have never been
to a classical music concert eh ? Again, the idea here is that anything
more technically complex is devoid of emotion. Or perhaps you meant "that
she is Parveen Sultana - therefore it was necessarily emotionless". On both
counts you are ways off.
Siddhartha Duttagupta
In article <5no5gi$p...@lace.colorado.edu>,
Rajan P. Parrikar <parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
>In article <5nne4j$a...@fido.asd.sgi.com>,
>|>
>|> I apologize deeply for expecting "exacting standards" of people who are
>|> purportedly the best in their terrain in a nation of 900 million, who are
>>
>>not competing with the Bhimsens of this world nor has he made any claims as to
>>his being a classical vocal messiah.
Dear Rajan,
you may be right that Manna Dey was a "pathetic singer".
you may be right to expect the best classical musicians to
be singing in hindi movies.
guess what "REAL" classical musicians think hindi movie songs are
pathetic.
so you are stuck with people singing like Manna Dey.
Or worse.
Arguing that since we have 900 million people we should
statistically have great hindi film singers is like
saying that we should see India winning a few olympic
gold medals (oops, bronze will do) in our lifetime.
sound logic but removed from reality.
actually,we have a better chance on sports because you
don't have "accent barriers" and "lower sport/higher sport" snobbery.
Enjoy the reality that Indians don't conform
to the bell curve. We ARE special;))))
regards, siddhartha
Rajan P. Parrikar
pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com ("Stud-e-Dil" Prince Kohli) writes:
<Deleted>
I have enumerated my views on this matter in the earlier posts and will
prefer to not repeat them.
>(Now for a thought experiment - Kishore Kumar was no where near the best in singing
>quawwaalis, ghazals or classical-based film songs. There is no quality in him that
>you can place your finger on and say that is was the tops in the nation of 900 million
>in that area. Does that make him a "pathetic film singer?" If not, why not? And
>whatever reasoning you give, apply it back to Manna Dey being a good film singer
>too and let us see what you come up with.)
This is a tired old topic now. About how Kishore couldn't sing this and that,
how his songs were "technically easy" and so on and so forth. We have in the
past confronted these effete objections and set them right. We don't do that
anymore. Our current position is as follows:
We do not argue with the critic who tells us that Kishore's songs lack rigour,
are technically easy etc; we simply tell him to go and find someone who can
sing them better. (*)
>|> (b) Manna never attained even baseline capabilities as a classical singer and
>|> therefore further qualification in this department is unnecessary.
>Since that was never the issue, this is, as you have put it before, a red herring.
You should remember what you write, Janaab. Here is a part of your original post.
Look at option #3. I was addressing your question. And now you call it a "red
herring"?
-----
>>So let us get down to the basics - which one of the following
>>are you trying to prove?
>>
>>1) That Manna De was a bad film singer?
>>3) that he was a bad classical singer? Or
>>2) that he was worse than some other singer(s)?
-----
(*) We have borrowed this line of argument from the great British astronomer and
theoretician Arthur Eddington. In the 1920s Eddington made a brilliant and inspired
guess that the Sun is essentially a nuclear fusion reactor. The idea was met with
criticism from two-bit wimpolas objecting that the stellar cores were not hot enough
for fusion to take place. Eddington's classic and forceful response to them was:
"We do not argue with the critic who urges that the stars are not hot enough for
this process; we tell him to go and find a hotter place." Eddington was to be proven
right which is the only point we need remember for our current purpose:-).
Warm regards,
r
ps: To Siddhartha Duttagupta - my mention of the 900 million was incidental
and no statistical argument was invoked or implied as you and Prince seem
to suggest. Just drop the "900 million" bit and read it afresh. Also, "REAL
classical musicians" have had a long and healthy association with film music
(particularly of the 40s, 50s and 60s), so your assertion of their disdain
for it is puzzling. But that's another topic altogether.
Prince Kohli
Dr. Rajan P. Parrikar <parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU> re-writes:
>pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com ("Stud-e-Dil" Prince Kohli) writes:
>
>>(Now for a thought experiment - Kishore Kumar was no where near the best in singing
>>quawwaalis, ghazals or classical-based film songs. There is no quality in him that
>>you can place your finger on and say that is was the tops in the nation of 900 million
>>in that area. Does that make him a "pathetic film singer?" If not, why not? And
>>whatever reasoning you give, apply it back to Manna Dey being a good film singer
>>too and let us see what you come up with.)
>
>This is a tired old topic now. About how Kishore couldn't sing this and that,
>how his songs were "technically easy" and so on and so forth. We have in the
If you peruse what I wrote carefully, you will realize that I am in
no way downgrading Kishore. OTOH, I am using his greatness to prove
thats Manna Dey was a very good singer too.
>past confronted these effete objections and set them right. We don't do that
>anymore. Our current position is as follows:
>
>We do not argue with the critic who tells us that Kishore's songs lack rigour,
>are technically easy etc; we simply tell him to go and find someone who can
>sing them better. (*)
Since you did not quite do what I had asked, let me take up the baton -
apply the "logic" above to Manna not being a good singer, about how Manna
could not sing this or that, how his songs were technically not done
justice to etc. If you are not yet satisfied, "we" simply tell you to
go find someone who can sing them better.
>this process; we tell him to go and find a hotter place." Eddington was to be proven
>right which is the only point we need remember for our current purpose:-).
Using quotes to try to prove one's point demonstrates a lack of original thought :-)
besides not really proving anything any way.
>ps: To Siddhartha Duttagupta - my mention of the 900 million was incidental
>and no statistical argument was invoked or implied as you and Prince seem
It was implied and invoked. You might want to go read what you wrote, afresh.
-Prince
>to suggest. Just drop the "900 million" bit and read it afresh. Also, "REAL
p.s. Just saw this response - sorry for the succinct reply but I am on a slow
link from Tokyo.
Prince Kohli
Prince Kohli <pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
>
>>ps: To Siddhartha Duttagupta - my mention of the 900 million was incidental
>>and no statistical argument was invoked or implied as you and Prince seem
>
>It was implied and invoked. You might want to go read what you wrote, afresh.
I take that comment back - it was a needless and silly diversion.
Siddhartha Duttagupta
In article <5o2637$q...@lace.colorado.edu>,
Rajan P. Parrikar <parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
>
>ps: To Siddhartha Duttagupta - my mention of the 900 million was incidental
>and no statistical argument was invoked or implied as you and Prince seem
>(particularly of the 40s, 50s and 60s), so your assertion of their disdain
>for it is puzzling. But that's another topic altogether.
>
My apologies, I thought we were talking about modern times.
I thought you had secret information about Kumar Shanu doing
a "Valmiki act" and reincarnating as a classical musician;)).
Now that you compare everybody on the standards of 40s-60s I
understand (though not share) your comment about Manna Dey being
pathetic.
I respectfully suggest that the decade should be mentioned
in these discussions at all times. After all Lata1960 and
Lata1990 are not the same as you have also mentioned.
So seriously on a 1-10 scale what does "pathetic" imply?
(I assume you have KK1970 as 10)
How do you place HemantKumar1960( (who had serious pronounciation
problems) and Geeta Dut1950
The reason why I am asking you this is because I have my own
ratings of these people from their bengali songs, so it
would be interesting to compare with their hindi ratings.
Also if we can get similar data about Yesudas and SPB
and others I think we can
quantify an "accent barrier" factor that puts non-hindi speaking
singers at a disadvantage while evaluating their absolute
merits from their hindi songs. (now you know my hidden agenda;)))
regards, siddhartha
Rajan P. Parrikar
Ensconced amid a bevy of killer geishas
<pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com> Kohli-saan expatiates:
>Since you did not quite do what I had asked, let me take up the baton -
>apply the "logic" above to Manna not being a good singer, about how Manna
>could not sing this or that, how his songs were technically not done
>justice to etc. If you are not yet satisfied, "we" simply tell you to
>go find someone who can sing them better.
Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
Manna's renditions of classical-based film songs. It takes only a modest amount
of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
far better done justice to by either Rafi, Mukesh or Kishore, depending on the
nature of the number. The whole point is, the same CANNOT be said wrt Kishore.
I'm surprised you didn't see this coming. But you have been uncharacteristically
sloppy and made one to many booboos on this thread.
Sayonara, Kohli-saan.
r
Rajan P. Parrikar
Namashkar.
A somewhat related question:
Who is Manna Dey's co-singer in the dhrupad composition from "Sangeet
Samrat Tansen" (music by SN Tripathi): Sapt suran teen grAma?
Is it Krishnarao Chonkar? It should have been sung by that dude entirely.
r
Balaji A.S. Murthy
In article <5o2k56$6...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU says...
>
>
>Ensconced amid a bevy of killer geishas
><pri...@viman.engr.sgi.com> Kohli-saan expatiates:
>
>>Since you did not quite do what I had asked, let me take up the baton -
>>apply the "logic" above to Manna not being a good singer, about how Manna
>>could not sing this or that, how his songs were technically not done
>>justice to etc. If you are not yet satisfied, "we" simply tell you to
>>go find someone who can sing them better.
>
>Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
>Manna's renditions of classical-based film songs. It takes only a modest amount
>of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
>far better done justice to by either Rafi, Mukesh or Kishore, depending on the
>nature of the number. The whole point is, the same CANNOT be said wrt Kishore.
Which probably means that in the absence of any "B-grade level artist on AIR",
Manna Dey was better qualified than most other singers in the film industry to
sing the "classical-based songs"?
Let me ask a question to the experts here. What does one mean when one says
"classical-based songs"? Is there a set of rules using which one can
empirically validate a song to be classical based? Depending on who classifies,
vastly different sets of songs turn up in such a list.
Regards,
- Balaji
Madhusudan
Ensconced amid a bevy of killer Software Professionals,
Dr. Parrikar lucubrates:
>Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
>Manna's renditions of classical-based film songs. It takes only a modest amount
>of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
I tried to imagine, and whenever I think of "aye meri zohra jabeen.." only
Manna De comes to mind. Its hard to comment on what would have happened if any
other singer would have sung it (since there is no way to know), but its a
good song in Manna's voice!
About Manna's numbers being bettered by other singers, that holds true for
any other singer as well. If one tries to look enough, one can always come
up with a list of Rafi songs that could have been bettered by Kishore or
Mukesh songs which could have been bettered by Rafi and all such combinations.
But, that would be solely one's "imagination" as you said :-)
>far better done justice to by either Rafi, Mukesh or Kishore, depending on the
>nature of the number. The whole point is, the same CANNOT be said wrt Kishore.
And thus, using the ancient technique of "proof by intimidation", we conclude
that Manna De was a pathetic singer. Rite ? :-))
-Madhusudan
KK
In article <5o426t$b...@drn.zippo.com>, ma...@csl.sri.com says...
>
>
>Ensconced amid a bevy of killer Software Professionals,
>Dr. Parrikar lucubrates:
>
>>Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
>>Manna's renditions of classical-based film songs. It takes only a modest
amount
>>of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
>
>I tried to imagine, and whenever I think of "aye meri zohra jabeen.." only
>Manna De comes to mind. Its hard to comment on what would have happened if any
>other singer would have sung it (since there is no way to know), but its a
>good song in Manna's voice!
>
>About Manna's numbers being bettered by other singers, that holds true for
>any other singer as well. If one tries to look enough, one can always come
>up with a list of Rafi songs that could have been bettered by Kishore or
>Mukesh songs which could have been bettered by Rafi and all such combinations.
>But, that would be solely one's "imagination" as you said :-)
Despair not, O Manna fan! Manna Dey's near-unanimous recognition as one of the
greatest Hindi film singers won't be affected by one or two accusations.
In fact even on occasional reading of rec.music.indian.classical (RMIC,
where lots of gurus and guru-wannabes of classical music lurk) one can see
that eminent artists like Pt. V.G. Jog, Balamurali Krishna, Pt Jasraj etc
have been dismissed as pathetic, bullshit, too old to sing etc by the
gurus there. So criticism of Manna Dey's classical singing abilities shouldn't
come as a surprise. Besides we are rating Manna Dey as a film singer and not
as a classical singer.
Besides most of Manna Dey's film songs are not classical-based. And no less
than Lata has admitted that classical practice hurts her ability to do justice
to filmi songs.
Cheers,
KK, A Manna Dey fan
Dr. Surjit Singh, a CALTECH dad
> We do not argue with the critic who tells us that Kishore's songs lack rigour,
> are technically easy etc; we simply tell him to go and find someone who can
> sing them better. (*)
>
><deleted>
> (*) We have borrowed this line of argument from the great British astronomer and
> theoretician Arthur Eddington. In the 1920s Eddington made a brilliant and inspired
> guess that the Sun is essentially a nuclear fusion reactor. The idea was met with
> criticism from two-bit wimpolas objecting that the stellar cores were not hot enough
> for fusion to take place. Eddington's classic and forceful response to them was:
> "We do not argue with the critic who urges that the stars are not hot enough for
> this process; we tell him to go and find a hotter place." Eddington was to be proven
> right which is the only point we need remember for our current purpose:-).
>
> Warm regards,
>
> r
It is interesting that r should bring in Eddington's quotation.
He was probably the most famous astronomer of his day, but very nasty
and short-sighted in other ways. Let me quote from a biography of
S. Chandrasekhar, the brilliant theorist of Indian origin (born in
Lahore).
The author, K. C. Wali is discussing how Eddington, who was one of the
very
few who understood Relativity, failed to see the essential validity and
fundamental importance of Chandrasekhar's work on the fate of stars.
"... no sooner had Chandra presented his paper than Eddington began to
ridicule the whole idea before the scientific community... he made it
look as though Chandra understood neither relativity nor quantum
mechanics ... The whole affair was tantamount to public humiliation. ...
Eddington's authority, prestige, and fame prevailed. More than twenty
years passed before the Chandrasekhar limit became an established fact
and assumed its important role in astrophysical research."
It is also worth mentioning that Eddington never got the nobel prize,
whereas
Chandra was one of the few 900 millions who did."
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period and also a fan of
Chandra.
Rajan P. Parrikar
Dear Surjit and others:
Fortunately this is not Cambridge of the 1920s where authority, prestige
and fame could prevail and silence the likes of Chandra. Rmic/rmim is
nobody's fiefdom. I have as much freedom here to state my opinions as you.
I have said what I had to on this topic. If you have something to add
or comment re. Manna Dey please do so. Disagreement on issues and diversity
of viewpoints, particularly on passion-stirring topics such as those found
in musical appreciation, make for an interesting world.
Warm regards,
r
ps: Being "wrong" in science is nothing to be ashamed of. It is never
given to anyone to be always right. Even non-nasty and gentler folks
(eg. Einstein) have been wrong on some major issues. Btw, as far as I
recall, Eddington's attack on Chandra wasn't ad hominen. He was genuinely
convinced that Nature behaved differently. I think even Chandra has admitted
to this aspect of Eddington, which is why C till the end retained personal
warmth and affection for Eddington.
guri
Vo kyaa kehtay haiN: khisiyaani billee...!! :))))
Rajan P. Parrikar aakhree dam tak koshish jaaree rakhtay huye:
(khambaa nochanay waali baateN haTaa kar)
> Disagreement on issues and diversity
> of viewpoints, particularly on passion-stirring topics such as those found
> in musical appreciation, make for an interesting world.
Notwithstanding the kalaakaaree of above words, I have yet to see *one*
post from anyone other than my friend Dr. rpp that talks about Mr. Dey
in ways even close to his.
> If you have something to add
> or comment re. Manna Dey please do so.
Some more examples of Manna Dey's appeal to everyone else on this
nwsgrp:
Jhula/Salil/RKrishan/... ek samay par do barsaateN
Dekh Kabira Roya/MadMohan/RKrishan/... kaun aayaa mere man ke dwaaray
Dil Hi To Hai/Roshan/Sahir/... laagaa chunaree meiN daagH
Talash/SDB/Majrooh/... tere nainaa talaash kareN jise
Anubhav/Kanu Roy/KapilKr/... phir kahiN koyi phool khilaa
Sangeet Samrat Tansen/SNTripathi/SwamiHaridas/... sapta suran teen
graam
chhoR do ab raajan, ghar lauT aao beTaa :)
guri
deepak raag
Can you both please go and find some hotter place to discuss this rmic
unrelated stuff? :-)
Very warm regards,
--deepak eh eh eh
In article <33A60B...@ttacs.ttu.edu>, du...@ttacs.ttu.edu wrote:
Pavan Kumar Desikan
Poor Mannadey. He has been branded a "classical singer" against his
wishes. And moreover people seem to derive some kind of pleasure in
attacking him as a classical musician :(
Mannadey never considered himself to be a classical singer. He said so
himself in a (not so) recent interview. He is film singer and a good one at
that. Why, in fact the number of his delightful "non-classical" songs are
more than the so called classical numbers. If you are unable to recollect
them here are a few of them
chali radhe raani
pyaar huaa ikraar huaa hai
ye raat bheegii bheegiii
aa jaa sanam
aan milo aan milo shaam saanvare
ae mere zohre jabiin
Besides he stands on firm ground in the company of "stalwarts" in teh
Barsaat ki raat qawwali's and in "ek chatur naar" from Padosan. He does not
sink in quicksand in these songs as some would like us to believe.
And now coming back to the issue of Manna and classical based film
songs.
- Manna was always fighting to be "not" branded as a classical singer.
- Hindi Song enthusiasts listen to the few classical based songs of his.
- They brand him a "classical singer" and love the songs that he sings.
This somehow seems to suggest to me that Manna was indeed a great singer of
Classical Music based film songs. Don't you think so?
--
Pavan Kumar Desikan
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~pkd
Any man who goes to the psychiatrist ought to have his head examined.
- Samuel Goldwyn
Prince Kohli
parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU (Dr. Rajan P. Parrikar) exults:
|>
|> Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
|> of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
|> nature of the number. The whole point is, the same CANNOT be said wrt Kishore.
Since we have hashed it out on email, let me just restate it here and see if I
can outline the issue clearly:
You believe that Manna was a bad singer, period. It has nothing to do with his
classical ability or lack of it. I, on the other hand, believe that he was a very
good film singer. Unlike you, I am also confident that his songs could not have
been bettered by anyone else, be it KK, Rafi or Mukesh, or some "proper" classical
exponent. I would not care to listen to a re-interpretation of his songs sung by
artist AIR-B, as I would not like to listen to someone else doing Rafi's Pyaasa
songs or KK's Padosan songs. Each singer has his or her own style and it appeals
to each person differently.
|> I'm surprised you didn't see this coming. But you have been uncharacteristically
|> sloppy and made one to many booboos on this thread.
I did not think you would take the seemingly-simple way out, Rajan, and
I do hope you realize what you had to give up for it - you are now committed to
hating each and every song of Manna Dey for the rest of your life :-)
("every Manna Dey's number could have been far better done justice to by either ..."
- need to remember this one for future use).
-Prince
A.Pavan
>> (*) We have borrowed this line of argument from the great British astronomer and
>> theoretician Arthur Eddington. In the 1920s Eddington made a brilliant and inspired
>> guess that the Sun is essentially a nuclear fusion reactor. The idea was met with
>> criticism from two-bit wimpolas objecting that the stellar cores were not hot enough
>> for fusion to take place. Eddington's classic and forceful response to them was:
>> "We do not argue with the critic who urges that the stars are not hot enough for
>> this process; we tell him to go and find a hotter place." Eddington was to be proven
>> right which is the only point we need remember for our current purpose:-).
>>
>> Warm regards,
>>
>> r
>
>It is interesting that r should bring in Eddington's quotation.
>He was probably the most famous astronomer of his day, but very nasty
>and short-sighted in other ways. Let me quote from a biography of
>S. Chandrasekhar, the brilliant theorist of Indian origin (born in
>Lahore).
>The author, K. C. Wali is discussing how Eddington, who was one of the
>very
>few who understood Relativity, failed to see the essential validity and
>fundamental importance of Chandrasekhar's work on the fate of stars.
I don't know what Eddington's answer above (as quoted by RajanP) proves but
the following excerpt from Chandra's bio does show Eddinton was full of hot
air. Perhaps it was the core of his (Eddington's) stellar mind that he needed
to examine !! :-)
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <deepak-ya0234800...@news.pathcom.com>,
deepak raag <dee...@pathway1.pathcom.com> wrote:
>
>Can you both please go and find some hotter place to discuss this rmic
>unrelated stuff? :-)
I have kept my posts music-related all along, so please save this homily
for some other time. Occasionally (remember, occasionally) it happens that
issues not strictly related to classical music are brought up as adjunct
material. In all these years it has never been a problem with the readers.
Besides, on this thread, the issues discussed have been relevant to rmic.
You have a good day,
r
Kalpataru Barman
Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:
> Tch tch tch. Nearly every B-grade level artist on AIR could be found to better
> Manna's renditions of classical-based film songs. It takes only a modest amount
So you mean, Manna Dey was like a 'C' grade AIR artist !
> of imagination to realize that all the rest of Manna's numbers could have been
> far better done justice to by either Rafi, Mukesh or Kishore, depending on the
> nature of the number. The whole point is, the same CANNOT be said wrt Kishore.
And you mean, 'Jindegi kaisi paheli... Anand..Salil.C' would have been a
better
one by Rafi/Mukesh/KK. Or say, 'E bhai jara dekh ke
chalo....Mera.Naam.Joker' !
>
> I'm surprised you didn't see this coming.
It is surprising to see your ratings on Manna Dey !
Rajan P. Parrikar
guri <bu...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>Notwithstanding the kalaakaaree of above words, I have yet to see *one*
>post from anyone other than my friend Dr. rpp that talks about Mr. Dey
>in ways even close to his.
Thank you for recognizing that I don't seek strength in numbers in forming
an opinion. Now, do you have devices for yourself other than counting how
many posts are for and against an idea before deciding which side of the
fence you wish to park on?
As an aside, for nearly 2000 years Aristotle's teachings held sway in the
western world, not *one* saw the need to question them, or if they did it
was heretical to demur in public. He was, alas, badly wrong on vital matters
but it was the en bloc herd-think that kept his ideas going.
>Some more examples of Manna Dey's appeal to everyone else on this
>nwsgrp:
You have merely supplied a Manna Dey hit parade. At issue is not whether some
of his songs attained popularity. To be sure, they did. We are here concerned
with Manna Dey's merit - or the lack of it - as a singer.
I am very fond of some of the songs cited by you (are you listening, Prince?).
Not because of Manna Dey but inspite of him. There are several reasons for
liking a song - the lyrical appeal, the compositional value, the delivery,
the orchestration and so on. Many Indians weaned on the music of the 50s
and 60s find that the popular numbers of the time have worked themselves
into their subcutaneous regions by a process of cultural osmosis. However, it
is not common for most people to critically examine the source of their likes
and dislikes. I contend that Manna's contribution to most of his songs is
negligible and inconsequential, that he was a mediocre artiste, who was
lucky to play in the big league; I will amplify below my reasons for thinking
so. But first, some prefatory remarks:
It is not (has never been) my intent to diminish Manna Dey for the purpose
of elevating Kishore Kumar as some folks seem to have incorrectly assumed.
If I bring in Kishore or someone else into the discussion it is to underscore
or contrast a particular set of skills or attributes.
In the ruminations below you will not find "proofs" since I don't intend to
"prove" anything. Those who have a pathological need for "proofs" are
requested not to read any further. I will, however, freely quote wherever
and whenever possible. I believe that quotes and other deus ex machina can
embellish a post and make it interesting, by bringing in a pertinent or
surprising observation or recounting an amusing anecdote. Many of the issues
discussed in relation to music are not novel, far more superior minds than
mine have addressed them and quoting them is worthwhile. It also sometimes
provokes the alert reader into expanding his ambit of reading options.
Therefore, I am convinced that the benefits of quoting override the risk
we run of inviting an illiterate remark from an incontinent pococurante in
Minneapolis or elsewhere.
The art of music criticism is unlike pure mathematics where one starts off
with sufficiently well-stated premises and then uses the tools of deductive
logic to draw inferences. Such an approach is ill-advised in music and will
get us nowhere since the basic premises themselves are not so precise and
cannot be agreed upon generally. All of us, however, unconsciously use
induction at some level to arrive at our respective opinions. Relegation of
the deductive method does not mean that our discussion and pronouncements have
to be directionless and arbitrary, although in matters of individual taste
that is allowed too WITHIN BOUNDS. I cannot call you "wrong" because you
like someone or something and you have not much 'reasoning' to show for
it (*), so long as we are not contesting verifiable, established elements
such as the grammar and technique. Music registers on the heart as well as on
the mind. The mind reads its intellectual component whereas the heart
senses its character. Both need to be trained and exercised for the fullest
experience.
(*) This license is often taken by some to forever wallow in ignorance. This
is the dude or dudette who frequently declares "I-know-what-I-like." It is the
most effective way of sounding intelligent on a topic when one is, in fact,
not. But of course, none of you, dear readers, on rmic and rmim falls in
this category of the blighted (bwahahahahahahahaha).
> Jhula/Salil/RKrishan/... ek samay par do barsaateN
> Dekh Kabira Roya/MadMohan/RKrishan/... kaun aayaa mere man ke dwaaray
> Dil Hi To Hai/Roshan/Sahir/... laagaa chunaree meiN daagH
> Talash/SDB/Majrooh/... tere nainaa talaash kareN jise
> Anubhav/Kanu Roy/KapilKr/... phir kahiN koyi phool khilaa
> Sangeet Samrat Tansen/SNTripathi/SwamiHaridas/... sapta suran teen
> graam
Of these, only the number from Anubhav is reasonably well-rendered. The
rather limited and meagre talents of Manna are showcased in the last number
above, "sapta suran teen graama." It furnishes a whole catalogue of points
on how not to sing and splendidly makes the case why Manna should have been
protected not just from classical-based music but from all music. This is a
stupid list, btw, and I wish Guri had put mind to matter before sticking
digit to keyboard.
Let us take a closer look at "sapta suran." It is a beautiful dhrupad
composition which does not draw upon any special training or skills in
classical music. Manna defaults on the very opening syllable of "sapta" by
a laboured elongation of the word, then immediately chokes on "koTi."
This has the summary effect of divesting the refrain of all its grace
and dignity. Fortunately, you don't have to take my word for it, for
the co-singer repeats the same line rather beautifully in a clean, clear
exposition without the hitch that plagues Manna (is he Krishnarao Chonkar?).
With the ready contrast available, it is very easy to descry the lack of
'safaaie' in Manna's intonation: his voice just doesn't 'stick' and falters
both in volume and texture. Throughout the composition his hold on the
swara is just nominally acceptable, degrading in the passages involving
the lower register and during the sargam. He is a man in a hurry with no
time for punctuation of any sort. Part of this is a consequence of his very
poor breathing technique. He treats the sargam notes as if they are flies
to be swatted. Even a bright opportunity such as the invocation to the three
gurus, Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh, is laid waste with an impotent, bewailed
utterance. You might imagine that all this is nitpicking in hindsight. Not
so. The harakiri stares you in the face. Manna's shortcomings in both
technique and aesthetic are writ large all over this piece. They are stamped
over most of his work. And there is nothing original about him in the sense
that there is no one quality that can be uniquely identified as Manna
Dey's own.
The essence of a good rendition of a film song, over and above technique
(by which I mean a strong adherence to swara, and in which Manna is found
wanting) is the delineation of the emotional content. There is here an
interplay of both verse and music, the latter serving to aggravate the idea
and feeling contained in the former. A bare tune can be likened to a bare
path running through a nature park. You can drive through it in and out plain
which is the equivalent of what Manna typically does. A great artiste, OTOH,
treats it like an adventure and has you share in the drama, stopping about
to take in the panaroma, pointing to the great peaks, the verdant valleys,
the cascades and other quaint sights. This latter approach is what we mean by
ornamentation and nuance in music. They have elements such as inflection of
the voice, change in its texture, punctuation which involves proper placement
of gaps in adjacent words, tailing off of the tone and so on. The best men
of music display all these skills to a very high degree, so much so that
their mere speech can assume a musical temper. Men like K.L. Saigal and
Kishore Kumar were abundantly blessed with these gifts by which they could
elevate even the most pedestrian of tunes and lyrics to the status of high
art. The simple was made extraordinary by their natural ingenuity.
It is not just "light" musicians that have use for such ornamentation and
it is worthwhile to mention Ali Akbar Khan in this context. Anyone who
has heard him speak recognises that his voice sounds like that of a frog
with a sore throat. But if you have the opportunity to hear that same
voice demonstrate a bandish without the aid of any accompaniment and you are
not moved to a state of wonder, you have no soul. One sees in a great master
such as this the wholeness of music. All the elements listed above flow and
converge most effortlessly. It looks deceptively easy, but reproduction is
hard (as even a phenomenal talent like Asha Bhonsle, for instance,
quickly found out). When Ali Akbar Khan
vocalises, one gets the feeling that this is not just a great way to treat
the bandish but that it is the ONLY way to do it. The voice at times squeaks,
breaks and even goes off-key, but it matters not a whit. One comes to see
beyond mere technique here, to experience the non-measurable in music. I do
not mean to suggest that only the naturally gifted possess these skills. Most
of the accomplished masters are not as naturally gifted but acquire it
through keen observation and hard work.
The above detours were taken to outline what it is that separates a Manna
from the high priests. In a word, it is the delivery. The bare tune has
to emerge embodied and enriched from the hands of an artiste, embossed with
an original personality. The artiste has to add to the skeletal tune and pass
on more than what was received from the composer. Mere technique can never
substitute for it. One has to supply a lot of musical imagination.
Manna Dey rarely raised a tune beyond its basic datum
level, in most cases he subtracted from it. In the classical realm we have
a respectable number of musicians today who display great technical power
on the instrument or with their voice but who lack or are indifferent to the
essential aesthetic spirit.
En passant, we will end with this:
Manna Dey had only one musical vice, namely that he had zero musical virtue.
Warm regards,
r
ps: We would have like to comment on the quivering Lallu (aka Talatiya),
the doyen of ronaa-dhonaa brigade, but this has gotten longer than intended.
Shashank N. Shah
Rajan P. Parrikar <parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote in article
<5oqr9t$8...@lace.colorado.edu>...
>
> guri <bu...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> I am very fond of some of the songs cited by you (are you listening,
Prince?).
> Not because of Manna Dey but inspite of him. There are several reasons
for
> liking a song - the lyrical appeal, the compositional value, the
delivery,
> the orchestration and so on. Many Indians weaned on the music of the 50s
> and 60s find that the popular numbers of the time have worked themselves
> into their subcutaneous regions by a process of cultural osmosis.
However, it
> is not common for most people to critically examine the source of their
likes
> and dislikes. I contend that Manna's contribution to most of his songs is
> negligible and inconsequential, that he was a mediocre artiste, who was
> lucky to play in the big league; I will amplify below my reasons for
thinking
Cant help agreeing with you wholeheartedly. I have watched Manna in a live
performance and could not believe how besur he could be. Practically no
clue of where he was.
I always wondered what was his virtue and thought I must be missing
something. Like you, I thought he was worst when he was singing so called
classical - that is supposed to be his forte! Actually, I find him more
enjoyable in numbers llike "Aao twist karen.." or "Dil ka haal sune
dilwala.." or other Raj Kapoor movies.
Kishore fan that you are, is there somewhere you have ranted over the Rafi
- Kishore argument. Would enjoy reading it.
Shashank
Anand Tiwari
In article , "Shashank says...
>
>
>Cant help agreeing with you wholeheartedly. I have watched Manna in a live
>performance and could not believe how besur he could be. Practically no
>clue of where he was.
What else are we going to hear about Manna Babu? I think "besur"
is enough.
regards
Anand
PS: Rajan's posts on KK are archived at
http://www.lehigh.edu/sm0e/public/www-data/sami.html
(This includes the KK/Rafi war post too)
Rajeev Kapoor
n article <5oqr9t$8...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU
(Rajan P.
Parrikar) writes.
|>
|> Let us take a closer look at "sapta suran." It is a beautiful
dhrupad
|> composition which does not draw upon any special training or
skills in
|> classical music. Manna defaults on the very opening syllable of
"sapta" by
|> a laboured elongation of the word, then immediately chokes on
"koTi."
|> This has the summary effect of divesting the refrain of all its
grace
|> and dignity. Fortunately, you don't have to take my word for it,
for
|> the co-singer repeats the same line rather beautifully in a
clean, clear
|> exposition without the hitch that plagues Manna (is he Krishnarao
Chonkar?).
|> With the ready contrast available, it is very easy to descry the
lack of
|> 'safaaie' in Manna's intonation: his voice just doesn't 'stick'
and falters
|> both in volume and texture. Throughout the composition his hold
on the
I heard this song and as far as I can say I could not find any
extra elongation of sapta or a choking on koti. Either this is
your imagination or my lack of knowledge in the rigors of classical
music. What I am saying is that if not told that there was a
choking on koti, it is definately not noticable, if at all it
exists.
|>
|> The essence of a good rendition of a film song, over and above
technique
|> (by which I mean a strong adherence to swara, and in which Manna
is found
|> wanting) is the delineation of the emotional content. There is
here an
|> interplay of both verse and music, the latter serving to
aggravate the idea
|> and feeling contained in the former. A bare tune can be likened
to a bare
|> path running through a nature park. You can drive through it in
and out plain
|> which is the equivalent of what Manna typically does. A great
artiste, OTOH,
|> treats it like an adventure and has you share in the drama,
stopping about
|> to take in the panaroma, pointing to the great peaks, the verdant
valleys,
|> the cascades and other quaint sights. This latter approach is
what we mean by
|> ornamentation and nuance in music. They have elements such as
inflection of
|> the voice, change in its texture, punctuation which involves
proper placement
Here again I beg to differ. As you had mentioned, liking or
disliking a certain style of singing is totally subjective no proof
can be placed down with firmness. As you so much dislike his style,
his voice his lack of singing abilities, I, OTOH, like his style his
voice his rendering of the music given to him. This is a subjective
matter and no one can be said as right or wrong. In fact he does
take one on an adventurous nature trail, and does very well to point
out all the peaks, valeeys, waterfalls,rivers streams and what
not...
I strongly feel that his songs carry all what is required and more.
Tremendous feelings of the situation placed by the song. Some time
back a posting on RMIM said this...
During the recording of the song from "Kabuliwaala", 'ae mere
pyaare watan', Manna started singing the song in a very low voice
and producing a hollow effect in his voice; esp. in the lines
"tuu hii merii aarazuu, tuu hii merii aabaruu". Salil immediate-
ly stopped recording and asked him "What happened to your voice?
If you are not well we can record later." But Manna convinced
Salil that this song needs to be recorded that way. Salil
agreed. That rendering went very well with the desert scene pic-
turization and the mood of the song in the film. And this song
was rated on RMIM to be a very difficult number to vocally repro-
duce because of the emotion-filled rendering by Manna Dey.
Also in the song "chalat musafir moh liya re", Manna sings with all
his heart letting out the correct zest and enthu found in a street
singer (as in the picturization). probabaly this song could have
only been sung as well by kishore kumar. But there is no point in
saying that this song is sung better by so and so, because that can
be true for any singer and most songs.
The song "ae maeri zohra zabeen", was in my opinion, very well sung
by Manna. Again there can be no proof of such statements, as the
feeling of what is sung well or not lies in the ears of the
listener. I really cannot pin point what I found great in his style
of singing, but I did find it great. And that is apart from the
music or the lyrics. The song itself was well sung.
There is this song from Boot Polish, which has something like this
in on of the parts ..."sir ki kheti sookh rahi hai...panghat se
bhar la o bajarwa, pangghat se bhar la....and something" dont
remember. But IMO that is very well sung and a great offbeat song.
(details anyone).
Rajeev
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <5ou6o4$2au$1...@soenews.ucsd.edu>,
Rajeev Kapoor <rka...@bernoulli.ucsd.edu> wrote:
> I heard this song and as far as I can say I could not find any
>extra elongation of sapta or a choking on koti.
>Either this is
>your imagination or my lack of knowledge in the rigors of classical
>music. What I am saying is that if not told that there was a
>choking on koti, it is definately not noticable, if at all it
>exists.
It could also be your lack of imagination and sensitivity. Just
a thought.
Notice how the other singer elucidates this same line and you'll
see what I mean by "choked on koTi."
The rest of your opinions I have no wish in countering.
Regards,
r
Shashank N. Shah
> >
> >Kishore fan that you are, is there somewhere you have ranted over the
Rafi
> >- Kishore argument. Would enjoy reading it.
>
>
I am sure Dr. Parrikar enjoyed ranting Manna De.... I enjoy ranting KK. It
is the thrill of analysis, reduction and conclusion....
thanks for the pointer..
Shashank
Shashank N. Shah
Anand Tiwari <an...@cegt201.bradley.edu> wrote in article
<5os5e1$p...@drn.zippo.com>...
> What else are we going to hear about Manna Babu? I think "besur"
> is enough.
>
Uh-Oh! Is "besur" such a terrible thing? I am besur all the time. To
paraphrase Rajan, Manna Dey's gifts were not so distant from average. So,
its okay. Does any one know if Manna was related to the blind singer of
the past - K C De?
Thanks for the pointer. I read and enjoyed the debate and am
contemplating putting together my own opinions.....
Shashank
Kalyan
In article <5oqr9t$8...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU says...
>
>
>Thank you for recognizing that I don't seek strength in numbers in forming
>an opinion. Now, do you have devices for yourself other than counting how
>many posts are for and against an idea before deciding which side of the
>fence you wish to park on?
>
>As an aside, for nearly 2000 years Aristotle's teachings held sway in the
>western world, not *one* saw the need to question them, or if they did it
Fortunately in RMIM (and usenet) things are a lot different and ordinary
people are not afraid to disagree with an opinion even if it comes from a
guru.
>In the ruminations below you will not find "proofs" since I don't intend to
>"prove" anything. Those who have a pathological need for "proofs" are
I agree everybody has a right to express their opinion. But in the abscence
of any substantiation or proof it is merely an opinion and IMHO is no
different from the "pathetic Kishore" opinion. Both of these opinions do not
come with much of justification/substantiation (except references to one or two
songs) and an overwhelming majority of RMIMers seem to disagree with both
of the statements.
>induction at some level to arrive at our respective opinions. Relegation of
>the deductive method does not mean that our discussion and pronouncements have
>to be directionless and arbitrary, although in matters of individual taste
>that is allowed too WITHIN BOUNDS. I cannot call you "wrong" because you
>like someone or something and you have not much 'reasoning' to show for
>it (*), so long as we are not contesting verifiable, established elements
>such as the grammar and technique.
Is the implication that one can arrive at the merit of Manna's technique
by deductive methods? I am not sure if that is meant but I'll go on.
Since I have little or no classical knowledge I contacted a couple of
eminent RMIMers knowledgable in classical music and they both told me
that they like Manna Dey's classical singing a lot and they find nothing
wrong with his technique. I wish they would have said so in RMIM but
maybe are busy or may not want to get into these arguments or may not
consider the accusations against Manna Dey worthy of response.
What I'm driving at is that though classical theory may be scientific
but a singers technique is a highly subjective issue. That can be
seen looking at RMIC. While some people consider an artist to be a genius
others might consider him pathetic.
Though this thread has been going on for long there has hardly been
any substance (sp against Manna :) and it has merely been an exchange
of opinions and a vocabulary contest :)
Regards,
Kalyan
Amit Chatterjee
Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:
>
<Details of R's observation of Manna Dey's gayaki snipped in order to
keep it short>
> The essence of a good rendition of a film song, over and above technique
> (by which I mean a strong adherence to swara, and in which Manna is found
> wanting) is the delineation of the emotional content. There is here an
> interplay of both verse and music, the latter serving to aggravate the idea
> and feeling contained in the former. A bare tune can be likened to a bare
> path running through a nature park. You can drive through it in and out plain
> which is the equivalent of what Manna typically does. A great artiste, OTOH,
> treats it like an adventure and has you share in the drama, stopping about
> to take in the panaroma, pointing to the great peaks, the verdant valleys,
> the cascades and other quaint sights. This latter approach is what we mean by
> ornamentation and nuance in music. They have elements such as inflection of
> the voice, change in its texture, punctuation which involves proper placement
> of gaps in adjacent words, tailing off of the tone and so on. The best men
> of music display all these skills to a very high degree, so much so that
> their mere speech can assume a musical temper. Men like K.L. Saigal and
> Kishore Kumar were abundantly blessed with these gifts by which they could
> elevate even the most pedestrian of tunes and lyrics to the status of high
> art. The simple was made extraordinary by their natural ingenuity.
>
Very accurate observation indeed. The way I look at Manna's music is
like this - the music director gives him the notes and the lyrics for a
song. He takes a day or two to get a hang of it and then reproduces it
fairly well in terms of the melody but somewhat mechanicaly and devoid
of much emotions. Basically, he does not add much to the music as Rajan
points out. When the music director does a good job of the composition,
the songs sounds good but when there is nothing great in the
composition, it sounds "very ordinary". When the melody is fairly simple
(read non-classical) and the mood of the song is very light, he gets
away with it but his shortcomings become very apparent on
classical-based songs and emotional songs. I have heard that most of the
well-known musicians go through the film story in depth to understand
the mood and significance of the song (very new film songs seems to have
none anyway), to me it look like Manna does not care too much about it.
--
/*********************************************************************
Amit Chatterjee
E-mail: a s a v @ i x . n e t c o m . c o m (remove the blank spaces)
All opinions are mine, not NORTEL's.
*********************************************************************/
Rajan P. Parrikar
In article <01bc825d$fbff1920$7848...@SHAHSN.apci.com>,
Shashank N. Shah <sha...@apci.com> wrote:
>its okay. Does any one know if Manna was related to the blind singer of
>the past - K C De?
KC Dey was Manna's uncle. See the article posted by Ajay Nerurkar in
the rmim automailer facility.
r
Rajan P. Parrikar
Kalyan writes:
>In article <5oqr9t$8...@lace.colorado.edu>, parr...@spot.Colorado.EDU says...
>>As an aside, for nearly 2000 years Aristotle's teachings held sway in the
>>western world, not *one* saw the need to question them, or if they did it
>Fortunately in RMIM (and usenet) things are a lot different and ordinary
>people are not afraid to disagree with an opinion even if it comes from a
>guru.
In my post last week I have said exactly the same thing. You seem to be agreeing
with me rather vehemently. Also, I have not called myself a guru nor asked
anyone to call me one, so the latter part of your sentence is nonsense, to say
the least.
>>In the ruminations below you will not find "proofs" since I don't intend to
>>"prove" anything. Those who have a pathological need for "proofs" are
>I agree everybody has a right to express their opinion. But in the abscence
>of any substantiation or proof it is merely an opinion and IMHO is no
>different from the "pathetic Kishore" opinion. Both of these opinions do not
>come with much of justification/substantiation (except references to one or two
You must go back to kindergarten and learn to read. You have completely ignored
the bulk of my post where I provide justification for my opinions on Manna Dey.
One may not agree with that justification, but I have provided it and it is
there for all to see. Why do you have this compulsion to look so silly in a
public forum?
>songs) and an overwhelming majority of RMIMers seem to disagree with both
>of the statements.
>>induction at some level to arrive at our respective opinions. Relegation of
>>the deductive method does not mean that our discussion and pronouncements have
>>to be directionless and arbitrary, although in matters of individual taste
>>that is allowed too WITHIN BOUNDS. I cannot call you "wrong" because you
>>like someone or something and you have not much 'reasoning' to show for
>>it (*), so long as we are not contesting verifiable, established elements
>>such as the grammar and technique.
>Is the implication that one can arrive at the merit of Manna's technique
>by deductive methods? I am not sure if that is meant but I'll go on.
>Since I have little or no classical knowledge I contacted a couple of
>eminent RMIMers knowledgable in classical music and they both told me
>that they like Manna Dey's classical singing a lot and they find nothing
>wrong with his technique. I wish they would have said so in RMIM but
>maybe are busy or may not want to get into these arguments or may not
>consider the accusations against Manna Dey worthy of response.
Up until now, all of the postings on this long thread have had one thing in
commo: the opinions expressed therein were the opinions of the respective
posters, their OWN opinions, wherever they may have lain on the spectrum.
Kalyan has added NOTHING to the musical content of this thread and all he has
done is hidden behind the opinions of others, NOT for the purpose of
furthering dialogue on the music but for the sole purpose of raking dirt in
response to my posting. Such malevolent traits are exhibited by only the most
pathetic, contemptible, pusillanimous weasel.
Regards,
r
Pankaj Kakkar
Kalyan wrote:
> Though this thread has been going on for long there has hardly been
> any substance (sp against Manna :) and it has merely been an exchange
> of opinions and a vocabulary contest :)
Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:
> response to my posting. Such malevolent traits are exhibited by only the most
> pathetic, contemptible, pusillanimous weasel.
I can see what he meant by the vocab.! Seriously DOCTOR Rajan, with your
vocab., you might have found some less arrogant sounding words, or am I
wrong?
--
Pankaj Kakkar http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~pankaj
--------------------------------------------------------
Office: Home:
PhD Student 2211 Walnut St
CIS Dept., Apt No 7
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania, PA 19104 PA 19103
USA. USA
(215) 898 8116 (215) 564 5298
English has no future. Believe me.
(If that disturbs you, talk to me :-))(Hint:It has to do with 'tense'!)