Rafi versus Lata at high pitch
SRK
range as compared to even Rafi. But I recently listened to the
following two solos sung by both Rafi and Lata:
1. Aji root kar ab, kahan jaayiyega
2. Ehsaan tera hoga mujh par
I could swear that Rafi sounded at ease and vastly superior when these
songs hit high pitch, where he has comprehensively outsung Lata. It
seems to me that Lata's voice becomes thin and screechy and she is
definitely struggling at high pitch in these songs, which don't even
begin to test Rafi's formidable range. On the basis of what I heard
with these songs, I have to conclude that I would need ear-protectors
if Lata tries to sing "O duniya ke rakhwale" or several other Rafi
songs at Rafi's pitch. What do the experts think? It could be that I
am unfairly criticizing Lata for an inherent limitation of the female
voice at high pitch.
R. Srinivasan
ek bharateeya
> The almost universal opinion seems to be that Lata had the maximum
> range as compared to even Rafi. But I recently listened to the
> following two solos sung by both Rafi and Lata:
>
> 1. Aji root kar ab, kahan jaayiyega
> 2. Ehsaan tera hoga mujh par
>
> I could swear that Rafi sounded at ease and vastly superior when these
> songs hit high pitch, where he has comprehensively outsung Lata. It
> seems to me that Lata's voice becomes thin and screechy and she is
> definitely struggling at high pitch in these songs, which don't even
> begin to test Rafi's formidable range. On the basis of what I heard
> with these songs, I have to conclude that I would need ear-protectors
> if Lata tries to sing "O duniya ke rakhwale" or several other Rafi
> songs at Rafi's pitch.
right now, you need ear protectors for any song by lata! btw, she (ok,
her voice) broke down even in one of the abhimaan songs that was not
too high pitched).
> What do the experts think?
ok, i have to admit that i am no expert and hope that is not a strict
restriction.
- ek bharateeya
SRK
> >
> > I could swear that Rafi sounded at ease and vastly superior when these
> > songs hit high pitch, where he has comprehensively outsung Lata. It
> > seems to me that Lata's voice becomes thin and screechy and she is
> > definitely struggling at high pitch in these songs, which don't even
> > begin to test Rafi's formidable range. On the basis of what I heard
> > with these songs, I have to conclude that I would need ear-protectors
> > if Lata tries to sing "O duniya ke rakhwale" or several other Rafi
> > songs at Rafi's pitch.
>
> right now, you need ear protectors for any song by lata! btw, she (ok,
> her voice) broke down even in one of the abhimaan songs that was not
> too high pitched).
>
happened about two decades ago, in my opinion). But my concern here is
that even at her prime, she never did seem comfortable at high pitch,
yet the media and the pundits seldom mention this fact. I did find one
RMIM post by Arun Iyengar that makes a similar point regarding Lata's
voice at high pitch:
When talking of Lata, everyone (including the experts and especially
the music directors) call her the greatest, whereas when Rafi is
mentioned, the qualification "male singer" always follows, many times
with an explicit reference to Lata as the greater singer. No one
denies that Lata was outstanding within her range, but surely Rafi had
the greater range and could boast of being able to stand up to Lata
even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
on when it came to range?
While Rafi enjoyed tremendous popularity in the 50's and 60's, I am
deeply saddened by the terrible injustice done to the great man in the
70's and later. Sonu Nigam, in a recent interview (I forget the
reference) makes it clear that Rafi was a taboo subject in the Mumbai
filmdom and he (Sonu) was asked to sing more like Kishore. Sonu even
tries to distance himself from Rafi when the interviewer points out
the fact that a recent hit song of his sounded like a Rafi number.
Of course, India being India, one should expect
prejudice/bigotry/politics etc. to supercede merit at some stage or
the other. Btw, this happens even in the scientific field, where I am
working; especially in India, but elsewhere too. For example, in
physics, it is almost mandatory for every up-and-coming researcher to
acknowledge Einstein as the greatest and even give him credit where
none is due. If someone dares to point out that the Emperor had no
clothes on (as is becoming increasingly evident, at least to me)
he/she is branded as a crank/crackpot etc. and promptly
ex-communicated. The situation is similar in philosophy/foundations of
mathematics/logic/theoretical science (my specialities); no one can
seriously expect to get funding for research that attempts to
challenge the existing paradigms worked out by the "greats".
> > What do the experts think?
>
> ok, i have to admit that i am no expert and hope that is not a strict
> restriction.
>
Not at all, and thank you for responding.
> - ek bharateeya
>
R. Srinivasan
Chetan Vinchhi
"SRK" wrote...
>
> When talking of Lata, everyone (including the experts and especially
> the music directors) call her the greatest, whereas when Rafi is
> mentioned, the qualification "male singer" always follows, many times
> with an explicit reference to Lata as the greater singer. No one
> denies that Lata was outstanding within her range, but surely Rafi had
> the greater range and could boast of being able to stand up to Lata
> even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
> director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> on when it came to range?
This discussion has been done (and beaten to death) in the
past but...
Lata's pitch is about 2 notes lower than Rafi. Most duets
and tandem songs are composed closer to Rafi's natural pitch.
Lata had a great mandra (low) range which Rafi totally lacked.
In terms of range Lata probably had an edge over Rafi.
(At this point, some KK fans will jump in with how KK's
range was greater than Rafi's).
Finally, range is only one factor those "experts" and MDs
consider while talking about the greatness of singers.
C
Abhay Jain
"SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
>
> even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
> director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> on when it came to range?
>
Do you have any thoughts why is it so?
Is it possible that she bribed everyone
(including OPN who never used her yet claims
she is great)? May be she bribed all those
listeners in late 40s, 50s and 60s who loved
her songs. Or may be, just may be she was
really great.
One thing is certain, many mediocre
singesr who never made it found it
easy to blame Lata for their failure.
It is called victim mentality.
Abhay Jain
>
> R. Srinivasan
Shalini Razdan
> "SRK" wrote...
> >
> > When talking of Lata, everyone (including the experts and especially
> > the music directors) call her the greatest, whereas when Rafi is
> > mentioned, the qualification "male singer" always follows, many times
> > with an explicit reference to Lata as the greater singer. No one
> > denies that Lata was outstanding within her range, but surely Rafi had
> > the greater range and could boast of being able to stand up to Lata
> > even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
> > director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> > on when it came to range?
>
> This discussion has been done (and beaten to death) in the
> past but...
>
> Lata's pitch is about 2 notes lower than Rafi. Most duets
> and tandem songs are composed closer to Rafi's natural pitch.
> Lata had a great mandra (low) range which Rafi totally lacked.
> In terms of range Lata probably had an edge over Rafi.
I hate to ask such a basic question, but how are "pitch" and "range"
defined? Are they objective, measurable qualities or a matter of
subjective interpretation? Apologies, if these questions have been
asked and discussed before.
> (At this point, some KK fans will jump in with how KK's
> range was greater than Rafi's).
Was it?
> Finally, range is only one factor those "experts" and MDs
> consider while talking about the greatness of singers.
What are some of the other factors that should be considered while
evaluating a singer?
Shalini
> C
Ajit
Why is no serious film personality/music
> > director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> > on when it came to range?
>
Your statement is an exaggeration. It wasnt that she was so poor in
terms of range. It was just that she wasn't the best in this
particular aspect of singing. And even then, there are so many
high-pitched songs where Lata sounds simply fantastic: take "woh ek
nigaah kya mili" or "mhaara ri giridhar gopaal" for example.
Range is not the only thing. Amongst female singers, nobody sounds as
much as ease at higher notes as Vani perhaps. But then she doesnt have
the expressive ability of other singers such as Lata, Asha or Geeta,
and suffers from poor pronunciation.
Sanjeev Ramabhadran
>
> When talking of Lata, everyone (including the experts and especially
> the music directors) call her the greatest, whereas when Rafi is
> mentioned, the qualification "male singer" always follows, many times
> with an explicit reference to Lata as the greater singer. No one
> denies that Lata was outstanding within her range, but surely Rafi had
> the greater range and could boast of being able to stand up to Lata
> even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
> director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> on when it came to range?
As mentioned further down this thread, this discussion has been beaten
to death. On the whole, Lata wins points over Rafi for her virtuosity,
consistency, and excellent vocal judgement. Saying that makes Rafi no
less phenomenal.
> While Rafi enjoyed tremendous popularity in the 50's and 60's, I am
> deeply saddened by the terrible injustice done to the great man in the
> 70's and later. Sonu Nigam, in a recent interview (I forget the
> reference) makes it clear that Rafi was a taboo subject in the Mumbai
> filmdom and he (Sonu) was asked to sing more like Kishore. Sonu even
> tries to distance himself from Rafi when the interviewer points out
> the fact that a recent hit song of his sounded like a Rafi number.
I think you should read more of Sonu Nigam's interviews to get a more
complete picture. Mohd. Rafi is still revered as much as he ever was,
but the reference to veering towards Kishore probably has to do with a
huge prevalence of wannabe Rafis in the industry. As far as SN goes,
his wanting to distance himself is quite understandable as someone
trying to create their own space after incessant comparisons to Mohd.
Rafi - after the first ten times, the "okay-but-what-about-me"
reaction is quite understandable. IMO, it is no *disrespect* to Rafi.
I am sure that SN loves the music of Mohd. Rafi as much as he ever
did.
Sanjeev
SRK
> "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> >
>
> > even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
> > director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> > on when it came to range?
> >
>
> Do you have any thoughts why is it so?
> Is it possible that she bribed everyone
> (including OPN who never used her yet claims
> she is great)? May be she bribed all those
> listeners in late 40s, 50s and 60s who loved
> her songs. Or may be, just may be she was
> really great.
I never implied that she wasn't great. But on the other hand, that
does not mean that she was perfect. As Chetan Vinchhi has pointed out,
she did have a problem at Rafi's extremely high pitch; I will take his
word for it that she handled the low pitch better than Rafi. To answer
your question, can it be that the MD's and pundits were just too
terrified to be even mildly critical of Lata, for fear of being
shunned, and thereby having their careers destroyed? After all, she
(and her sister Asha) did have a reputation of being vindictive with
those whom she didn't like. One could argue that it is her right to
decide whom she will or will not sing with, but in my opinion, if she
made her choices using any considerations other than merit, she was
guilty of unprofessional behaviour. I have not heard this accusation
thrown at any of the male singers; but I have absolutely no idea
whether it is true or not.
>
> One thing is certain, many mediocre
> singesr who never made it found it
> easy to blame Lata for their failure.
> It is called victim mentality.
>
Again, it all boils down to one's nature. Lata could have chosen to be
more generous with those less gifted and fortunate than her, and more
encouraging of new talent. But whenever someone dared to question her
on this issue, she has responded angrily along the lines of "Asha and
myself never had it easy, so why should we make life easy for
others?". I would have preferred a more enlightened response like "We
never had it easy, and would not want new singers to suffer the way we
did". But then again, I probably wouldn't survive in the dog-eat-dog
world of filmi music even if I had the talent.
R. Srinivasan
> Abhay Jain
>
Ket...@att.net
says...
>
>"Chetan Vinchhi" <mylas...@hotmailxyz.com> wrote in message
>news:<cd5imb$9...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
>> (At this point, some KK fans will jump in with how KK's
>> range was greater than Rafi's).
>
>Was it?
You actually think you will get the truthful, unbiased answer from a Rafian? :)
Ketan
>Shalini
>
>> C
Ritu
Also, is it really fair to compare male and female voices when it
comes to taking higher pitches. It's quite obvious that the male voice
being heavier in constitution can take higher pitches better. The
female voice generally can be moer detailed. It might make more sense
to compare Lata and Asha and see how they fare if given the same high
pitches rather than compare Lata to Rafi. How would Asha have sounded
with a song like 'Ehsaan tera hoga mujhpe'?. Maybe a trifle better
because she has a richer voice but not too different. And then Lata
had her own USP.. the fineness in her voice. Measuring a singer's
virtuosity merely on the basis of range does not get one far. It's
basically an overall assesment.
Regards
Ritu
t u s e n e t @yahoo.com Loony Tunes
"Ritu" <rc0...@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
news:8777cccd.04071...@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> Also, is it really fair to compare male and female voices when it
> comes to taking higher pitches. It's quite obvious that the male voice
> being heavier in constitution can take higher pitches better. The
How would you characterize "taking higher pitches better"? Is it the
adaptability of the voice to the higher pitches? Going low to high or
sustaining a high note? IMO, that's a function largely of the "riyaaz"
rituals.
"Normally" female voices are shriller (higher pitch/frequency).
Quality/Richness (number of frequencies) is a different issue.
I think you are saying that since Male voices are heavier (meaning low
frequency/pitch - am I reading it right?), they can take it to higher
frequencies better. IMO that is not really generalizable. How high he takes
it to depends on what range he has and how well he has trained himself.
> female voice generally can be moer detailed. It might make more sense
> to compare Lata and Asha and see how they fare if given the same high
> pitches rather than compare Lata to Rafi. How would Asha have sounded
> with a song like 'Ehsaan tera hoga mujhpe'?. Maybe a trifle better
> because she has a richer voice but not too different.
Whose voice is richer? Rafi or KK.. BTW, is it really true that KK has a
greater range than Rafi ?
> And then Lata
> had her own USP.. the fineness in her voice. Measuring a singer's
> virtuosity merely on the basis of range does not get one far. It's
> basically an overall assesment.
Yup.
cheers
lt
>
> Regards
> Ritu
Afzal A. Khan
SRK wrote:
> Again, it all boils down to one's nature. Lata could have chosen to be
> more generous with those less gifted and fortunate than her, and more
> encouraging of new talent. But whenever someone dared to question her
> on this issue, she has responded angrily along the lines of "Asha and
> myself never had it easy, so why should we make life easy for
> others?". I would have preferred a more enlightened response like "We
> never had it easy, and would not want new singers to suffer the way we
> did".
>
> R. Srinivasan
I think their reply was an adroit denial, and just that.
Did they ever state : "why should we make life easy for
others ?".
Afzal
Surjit Singh
> "Chetan Vinchhi" <mylas...@hotmailxyz.com> wrote in message news:<cd5imb$9...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
>
>>"SRK" wrote...
>>
>>>When talking of Lata, everyone (including the experts and especially
>>>the music directors) call her the greatest, whereas when Rafi is
>>>mentioned, the qualification "male singer" always follows, many times
>>>with an explicit reference to Lata as the greater singer. No one
>>>denies that Lata was outstanding within her range, but surely Rafi had
>>>the greater range and could boast of being able to stand up to Lata
>>>even within her range. Why is no serious film personality/music
>>>director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
>>>on when it came to range?
>>
>>This discussion has been done (and beaten to death) in the
>>past but...
>>
>>Lata's pitch is about 2 notes lower than Rafi. Most duets
>>and tandem songs are composed closer to Rafi's natural pitch.
>>Lata had a great mandra (low) range which Rafi totally lacked.
>>In terms of range Lata probably had an edge over Rafi.
>
>
> I hate to ask such a basic question, but how are "pitch" and "range"
> defined? Are they objective, measurable qualities or a matter of
> subjective interpretation? Apologies, if these questions have been
> asked and discussed before.
Any sound or voice is a made of one or many frequencies (frequency of a
sound or any other wave is the number vibrations per second, measured in
Hertz, symbol Hz) with typically different strengths. Pitch is the
sensation of typically the dominant frequency or two or three in a human
ear. Range is the difference between the highest and the lowest frequencies.
pre-teens have high-pitched voices. (That's why Daisy Irani could pass
as a male child.) In adulthood, both voices change, both generally
moving to lower pitches, but, typically males moving to even lower
pitches than females. Famous exceptions to this rule: Usha Uthup (low)
and Peara Sahib (high).
>
>
>>(At this point, some KK fans will jump in with how KK's
>>range was greater than Rafi's).
>
>
> Was it?
>
>
>>Finally, range is only one factor those "experts" and MDs
>>consider while talking about the greatness of singers.
>
>
> What are some of the other factors that should be considered while
> evaluating a singer?
>
> Shalini
>
>
>>C
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
Visit my home page at
http://hindi-movies-songs.com/index.html
Abhay Jain
> does not mean that she was perfect.
Above use of "perfect" has been mentioned for the first time
by you in this thread.
Abhay Jain
>
> R. Srinivasan
>
ek bharateeya
for definitions of a pitch, you might want to visit rec.sport.cricket.
be warned that the stadiums where the kiwis and the desis played a
couple of years would probably defy the definitions of 'pitch'!
- ek bharateeya
Chetan Vinchhi
"SRK" wrote...
>
> As Chetan Vinchhi has pointed out,
> she did have a problem at Rafi's extremely high pitch
I just want to clarify the context of this interpretation. Lata
had problems with Rafi's pitch. Any female singer would
have problems with a male pitch, and vice versa. If you
hypothetically switch roles for a moment, Rafi would have
faced greater problems singing at Lata's pitch.
C
ps - The fact that the typical female pitch is lower than
the typical male pitch might be a cause of confusion.
Chetan Vinchhi
"Shalini Razdan" wrote...
>
> I hate to ask such a basic question, but how are "pitch" and "range"
> defined? Are they objective, measurable qualities or a matter of
> subjective interpretation?
Pitch is the fundamental frequency of the most natural voice
of a singer.
Range is the difference between the lowest and the highest
frequencies a singer can sing "comfortably". Some subjectivity
comes into this calculation. What is "comfortable"? Is a false
voice allowed? Are extreme pitches counted? And so on.
The problem of selecting your pitch correctly is a nontrivial
one. Many Hindustani vocalists will simply go by typical pitches
(black-1 for male, black-4/5 for female (*)). In the context of
Hindustani music, you might want to place your voice such
that you can go 1/2 an octave below and 1-1/2 above your
pitch (assuming a 2 octave range, which is considered baseline
for Hindstani music). This concept can be carried forward to
other forms of music as well.
(*) Note : The absolute frequency of a typical female voice
is less than twice the absolute frequency of a typical male
voice. Since musical notes have a logarithmic, periodic
structure, the female pitch appears "lower" than the male
pitch.
> > (At this point, some KK fans will jump in with how KK's
> > range was greater than Rafi's).
>
> Was it?
Do I look like a KK fan to you :)
> > Finally, range is only one factor those "experts" and MDs
> > consider while talking about the greatness of singers.
>
> What are some of the other factors that should be considered while
> evaluating a singer?
Versatility, emoting capability, ability to grasp and carry a
tune, voice quality, pronunciation, breathing technique,
sense of rhythm, registeral flexibility, ability to parse words
(not necessarily in that order) and so on.
C
SRK
> > "SRK" wrote...
> Why is no serious film personality/music
> > > director/critic willing to point out that the Empress had no clothes
> > > on when it came to range?
> >
>
> Your statement is an exaggeration. It wasnt that she was so poor in
> terms of range. It was just that she wasn't the best in this
> particular aspect of singing. And even then, there are so many
> high-pitched songs where Lata sounds simply fantastic: take "woh ek
> nigaah kya mili" or "mhaara ri giridhar gopaal" for example.
>
> Range is not the only thing. Amongst female singers, nobody sounds as
> much as ease at higher notes as Vani perhaps. But then she doesnt have
> the expressive ability of other singers such as Lata, Asha or Geeta,
> and suffers from poor pronunciation.
>
*relative* criticism of Lata with respect to Rafi, and not an absolute
critique of her range, which is indeed excellent. But it is clear from
the various responses in this thread that my viewpoint on who is the
greater singer was too one-dimensional.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
Actually I don't remember the precise wording; I do recollect the
we-were-ragged-so-we-shall-rag mentality in Lata's reply. Lata said
something to the effect that she and Asha found it equally hard when
they entered the industry (maybe with the dominance of Geeta Dutt (?)
and Shamshad Begum (?)) and that it always was a matter of the
survival of the fittest. My vague recollection is that Lata seemed to
imply that the best singers should *always* get first choice for *all*
songs composed by the top MD's. Now if I were an MD, I would find that
stifling. No doubt I would run to Lata/Asha most of the time, but I
would also want to widen my repertoire and compose in different styles
that may suit other singers better; I would want to mentor young and
upcoming singers, and so on; I certainly wouldn't have wanted to be
remembered as a one-singer MD (and also as a spineless flunkey).
What baffles me is why someone of Lata's stature should even consider
the newcomers as competition; why this insecurity? Maybe because there
wasn't enough money then in this profession? Why didn't top MD's
challenge Lata by at least letting songs for supporting actresses go
to deserving singers like, say, Suman Kalyanpur and even Geeta Dutt
(who I believe, was eventually shunned by the spineless MD's because
Lata boycotted her)?
The scenario was much better in the men's department. But I still felt
that Rafi could have lightened his workload a bit in his later years
(he probably would have lived longer too) and allowed singers like
Manna Dey and Mahendra Kapoor to sing a few of his 26000 (?) songs. Of
course in Rafi's case he probably was just fulfilling the demands made
of him as a matter of duty; I haven't heard any stories of politics
and intrigue with Rafi.
Rafi, Lata and even Asha would have been better off by being more
concerned with quality than with quantity in their later years, when
there were no financial issues or of their pre-eminence. They could
even have floated an academy to train young singers in their brand of
film music; surely they had the expertise and the clout to pull off
such a venture. Maybe their legacy would have then survived, instead
of what we are witnessing today. What is the point in mindlessly
chasing numbers, which the great ladies are *still* doing?
R. Srinivasan
>
> Afzal
rkusenet
"SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote
> > > Again, it all boils down to one's nature. Lata could have chosen to be
> > > more generous with those less gifted and fortunate than her, and more
> > > encouraging of new talent. But whenever someone dared to question her
> > > on this issue, she has responded angrily along the lines of "Asha and
> > > myself never had it easy, so why should we make life easy for
> > > others?". I would have preferred a more enlightened response like "We
> > > never had it easy, and would not want new singers to suffer the way we
> > > did".
> > >
> > > R. Srinivasan
> >
> >
> >
> > I think their reply was an adroit denial, and just that.
> > Did they ever state : "why should we make life easy for
> > others ?".
>
> Actually I don't remember the precise wording;
You don't remember because Lata never said it. The closest I could
recollect was "even myself and asha never had it easy in the
beginning".
This is a very grey area for me: To what extent should we all go
dissing competition. Based on my experience, people from all
race indulge in dissing their competitors at workplace. I take
it that it is a human instinct.
Film industry is replete with examples of
artist not taking competition sportingly. LP use to mention that
when they started their career, SJ were never supportive and
use to stop recording the moment LP use to enter the studio.
Flash forward to early 1990s. Nadeem Shravan said the same about
LP. They use to take it as an insult that LP use to recommend
NS for background music during late 1980s when they were overworked
and did not have time for BGM of a film.
At a very cheap level, KSanu never stopped taking a jab at Udit Narayan.
The one honorable exception to this was our dear RDBurman. He in fact
use to praise his competitors.
rk-
rkusenet
so unshakeable at high pitch. Till ARR came he avoided it. To his
credit, he did a good job at high pitch for some of the ARR songs.
Abhay Jain
> (who I believe, was eventually shunned by the spineless MD's because
> Lata boycotted her)?
>
You seem to be on a mission to state whatever
you can dream on. It is widely known that
Guru Dutt did not want his wife Geeta Dutt to sing except
for his own films. That caused lot of friction between
them. Guru Dutt commited suicide. Geet Dutt drank
a lot, was very unhappy and died very young.
>
> R. Srinivasan
>
SRK
Geeta Dutt suffered horrendous personal tragedies. Yes, she drank a
lot, was very unhappy and died young; are you asserting that all of
this happened *only* because of her personal tragedies and that the
work environment had nothing to do with it? Are you 100% certain of
your assertion?
Yes, I am on a mission, but not in the world of music. Being an
ex-member of the Indian scientific establishment, I have a deep
insight into what the young and promising Geeta Dutt must have felt
about the work environment; believe me, it can be very depressing. I
was fortunate enough to be one of the few who escaped from the
clutches of the petty chieftains who rule over the Indian scientific
establishment *and* continued to pursue my scientific goals *in India*
(and that too, logic and philosophy/foundations of science, in the
land of the Thackeray, the Modi, the Laloo, the Lalithaa,....). But
there are escape routes in science for the philosophical and the
strong-minded, which the unfortunate Geeta Dutt did not have in her
profession. What is my mission? Well, that is another post for another
thread in another newsgroup. Here is a hint: chieftains and warlords
of Indian science, better watch out; wounded tigers can be dangerous;
in future, you must learn how to finish the job of killing.
R. Srinivasan
Niranjan R. Pedanekar
that:
- Lata's high and Rafi's high cannot be compared in the same song
- Their respective ranges (and the tonal quality at the extremes) is
one of the good indications of their vocal abilities
That brings me to these questions:
1 What is the absolutely highest note that Lata has produced in a
song?
2 What is the absolutely highest note that Rafi has produced in a
song?
3 What is the absolutely lowest note that Lata has produced in a song?
4 What is the absolutely lowest note that Rafi has produced in a song?
5 What has been the song with the greatest range for Lata?
6 What has been the song with the greatest range for Rafi?
Obviosuly, authentic answers to these are difficult to find. But can
some knowledgable people hazard a few guesses?
I think 'jahaan pe baseraa ho' can be considered a candidate answer
for question number 1. Also, 'jaane kyaa dhuundhatii rahatii hain' is
probably a candidate for question 6.
Thanks,
Niranjan
V S Rawat
> "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
>
>> to deserving singers like, say, Suman Kalyanpur and
>> even Geeta Dutt (who I believe, was eventually shunned
>> by the spineless MD's because Lata boycotted her)?
>
> You seem to be on a mission to state whatever you can
> dream on. It is widely known that Guru Dutt did not want
> his wife Geeta Dutt to sing except for his own films.
> That caused lot of friction between them. Guru Dutt
> commited suicide.
That sounds enough melodramatic. How come a movie has not
been on their lives?
Two celebrities ended their lives on the issue of TO SING OR
NOT TO SING? Not at all believable.
Separation? Possible.
Divorce? Possible.
but deaths, that too by suicide? not believable.
> Geet Dutt drank a lot,
So did Meena Kumari.
In any case, did Geeta start indulging in liquor before or
after the departure of Guru Dutt?
> was very unhappy and died very young.
Who exactly is happy in this earth?
People don't die due to unhappiness.
>> R. Srinivasan
>>
--
Rawat
PS: Abhay should learn to sign his mails. The above is now
appearing as if Mr Srinivasan had said that.
V S Rawat
Hi Niranjan,
not contributing to your thread, but I am very much
impressed by your mail.
If people can learn to think in this logical, step-by-step.
analytical, exploring manner the way you have conceptualized
and elaborated, there will never be any flame wars among
fans of different personalities.
Keep it up.
--
Rawat
Abhay Jain
"SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> "Abhay Jain" <aba...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:<mmYJc.10794$Iz2.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> > "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> > news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > to deserving singers like, say, Suman Kalyanpur and even Geeta Dutt
> > > (who I believe, was eventually shunned by the spineless MD's because
> > > Lata boycotted her)?
> > >
> >
> > You seem to be on a mission to state whatever
> > you can dream on. It is widely known that
> > Guru Dutt did not want his wife Geeta Dutt to sing except
> > for his own films. That caused lot of friction between
> > them. Guru Dutt commited suicide. Geet Dutt drank
> > a lot, was very unhappy and died very young.
> >
> You seem to be a big fan of Lata. I am too, but only of her singing.
I am a fan of Lata's singing but I am not fanatic about her
as would be evident from my earlier post where
I had mentioned her songs of late 40s, 50s, 60s
and not of later era. She deserves a lot of criticism
for many things. It is OK to criticise regarding singing
range or when she is bad in a particular song.
But people go off on a tangent and make baseless
accusations just to vent off their personal frustrations
who did not succedd in the world of singing or otherwise.
> Geeta Dutt suffered horrendous personal tragedies. Yes, she drank a
> lot, was very unhappy and died young; are you asserting that all of
> this happened *only* because of her personal tragedies and that the
> work environment had nothing to do with it? Are you 100% certain of
> your assertion?
Guru Dutt did not let her sing because Lata and Guru Dutt had
conspired to keep Geeta Dutt out. Guru Dutt was finacially
struggling and Lata used to give him money to get by
under a deal that Geeta Dutt would be kept out.
I am as certain as your assertion that "Lata boycotted her".
>
> R. Srinivasan
Afzal A. Khan
I thought you would give us your suggested answers to
all six questions, to set the ball rolling. And then
Chetan Vinchhi, Sanjeev Ramabhadran etc. would take it
up from there.....
Afzal
Afzal A. Khan
> Rawat
Though I agree with your comments vis-a-vis Niranjan's
post, what you state later about flame wars etc. is just
wishful thinking. But no harm in being optimistic....
Afzal
Archisman
> 1 What is the absolutely highest note that Lata has produced in a
> song?
> 2 What is the absolutely highest note that Rafi has produced in a
> song?
Dear Niranjan,
Lata's soprano-like performance in 'aye dil kahaan teri manzil' (Maya,
with dwijen Mukherjee) & 'woh ik nigaah kya mili' (Half Ticket, with
Kishore Kumar) might be the answers for Q1.
Rafi's 'o duniya ke rakhwaale' might be the answer for Q2.
Regards-Archisman.
Ajit
> > "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> > news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > to deserving singers like, say, Suman Kalyanpur and even Geeta Dutt
> > > (who I believe, was eventually shunned by the spineless MD's because
> > > Lata boycotted her)?
> > >
> >
> > You seem to be on a mission to state whatever
> > you can dream on. It is widely known that
> > Guru Dutt did not want his wife Geeta Dutt to sing except
> > for his own films. That caused lot of friction between
> > them. Guru Dutt commited suicide. Geet Dutt drank
> > a lot, was very unhappy and died very young.
> >
> You seem to be a big fan of Lata. I am too, but only of her singing.
> Geeta Dutt suffered horrendous personal tragedies. Yes, she drank a
> lot, was very unhappy and died young; are you asserting that all of
> this happened *only* because of her personal tragedies and that the
> work environment had nothing to do with it? Are you 100% certain of
> your assertion?
Are you certain that Geeta Dutt suffered due to Lata's so called
politics? Could you quote any particular incident or an interview
where Geeta Dutt complained that she suffered due to Lata's tactics?
Or any other reason for you to believe that Lata was one of the causes
of her mental depression?
naniwadekar
>
> Yes, I am on a mission, but not in the world of music.
>
We are all thankful for it because you seem incapable of
discussing music; I must say, though, that your enthusiasm
for music matches your ignorance about it.
> (and that too, logic and philosophy/foundations of science, in the
> land of the Thackeray, the Modi, the Laloo, the Lalithaa,....).
>
Who is this Lalitha, you fool? And 'the Modi, the Laloo'? Aargh!!
> What is my mission? Well, that is another post for another
> thread in another newsgroup. Here is a hint: chieftains and warlords
> of Indian science, better watch out ...
>
Please do carry on your mission in some other newsgroup. I have
every confidence in your ability to be as incoherent about science
as you are about music. Good luck.
- dn
Abhay Jain
"V S Rawat" <vsrawat_...@hclinfinet.com> wrote in message
news:40F91514...@hclinfinet.com...
>
> Separation? Possible.
> Divorce? Possible.
> but deaths, that too by suicide? not believable.
>
Where did you get this plural "deaths, that too by suicide?".
Abhay Jain
>
> --
> Rawat
naniwadekar
> >
> > I never implied that she wasn't great. But on the other hand, that
> > does not mean that she was perfect.
>
> Above use of "perfect" has been mentioned for the first time
> by you in this thread.
>
Actually, Lata *is* (I mean, was) perfect. But how can one
convince our scientific friend that she was? Besides, even
if one tried, he would mention some other word for the first
time in this thread and try to drag in yet another irrelevant
aspect about Lata/Einstein/Laloo/God/Devil/Lalithaa .
So far, I have learned only three things in this thread :
1) Lata was responsible for Geeta's drinking. (There is
scientific evidence behind the allegation.)
2) Every hike in the price of alcohol in the '60s was because
of Lata's machinations so that Geeta may have to spend more
and more to assuage her thirst for alcohol.
3) Once Einstein proved that e = m * (c-squared), it was
inevitable that Lata's manipulation of the price of alcohol
would succeed exponentially and now Lalitha's govt must put
in (attempt-cubed) to make India a dry region again. If she
doesn't succeed, the humanity is doomed.
- dn
SRK
> > "Abhay Jain" <aba...@aol.com> wrote in message news:<mmYJc.10794$Iz2.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> > > "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> > > news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > > >
> > > > to deserving singers like, say, Suman Kalyanpur and even Geeta Dutt
> > > > (who I believe, was eventually shunned by the spineless MD's because
> > > > Lata boycotted her)?
> > > >
> > >
> > > You seem to be on a mission to state whatever
> > > you can dream on. It is widely known that
> > > Guru Dutt did not want his wife Geeta Dutt to sing except
> > > for his own films. That caused lot of friction between
> > > them. Guru Dutt commited suicide. Geet Dutt drank
> > > a lot, was very unhappy and died very young.
> > >
> > You seem to be a big fan of Lata. I am too, but only of her singing.
> > Geeta Dutt suffered horrendous personal tragedies. Yes, she drank a
> > lot, was very unhappy and died young; are you asserting that all of
> > this happened *only* because of her personal tragedies and that the
> > work environment had nothing to do with it? Are you 100% certain of
> > your assertion?
>
> Are you certain that Geeta Dutt suffered due to Lata's so called
> politics? Could you quote any particular incident or an interview
> where Geeta Dutt complained that she suffered due to Lata's tactics?
> Or any other reason for you to believe that Lata was one of the causes
> of her mental depression?
>
Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
with her (even by her own admission):
http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
I agree with you that it would be very difficult to pin down Lata and
take her to a court of law, if that is the kind of evidence you are
looking for. Lata was very respectful to Geeta, even called her
"didi", and so on. But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha? Did Geeta Dutt get a fair
share of the songs, given her immense talent? I cannot prove to you
that this is one of the *causes* of her depression. But there is no
doubt that Geeta had no possibility of turning to work to forget her
personal traumas, and carry on with the job of supporting her kids;
that door was firmly shut on her.
Lata was a genius, and geniuses can often be flawed in some respect or
the other. One could wish: "if only Lata were like this or that", but
then Lata wouldn't be Lata and probably wouldn't have been able to
sing the way she did. The system has a duty to extract the best out of
geniuses while tolerating their eccentricities and flaws to some
extent (so that their creativity is not destroyed), and at the same
time keeping their excesses from doing harm to the system. In this
respect, I would contend that it is fairly and squarely the
responsibility of MD's (and to a lesser extent, producers) to ensure
that the composition of music and selection of singers are done in a
scrupulously fair manner, keeping in mind all the available talent,
and not be influenced by any pressure tactics. It is obvious that they
are in a position of trust and can make or break careers with their
choices; that trust should not be abused. In this respect, they should
be like journal editors; no matter how influential a scientist you
are, you cannot bully them into accepting a bad paper of yours or
rejecting a good paper of your colleague.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
> "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote
> > > > Again, it all boils down to one's nature. Lata could have chosen to be
> > > > more generous with those less gifted and fortunate than her, and more
> > > > encouraging of new talent. But whenever someone dared to question her
> > > > on this issue, she has responded angrily along the lines of "Asha and
> > > > myself never had it easy, so why should we make life easy for
> > > > others?". I would have preferred a more enlightened response like "We
> > > > never had it easy, and would not want new singers to suffer the way we
> > > > did".
> > > >
> > > > R. Srinivasan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think their reply was an adroit denial, and just that.
> > > Did they ever state : "why should we make life easy for
> > > others ?".
> >
> > Actually I don't remember the precise wording;
>
> You don't remember because Lata never said it. The closest I could
> recollect was "even myself and asha never had it easy in the
> beginning".
>
> This is a very grey area for me: To what extent should we all go
> dissing competition. Based on my experience, people from all
> race indulge in dissing their competitors at workplace. I take
> it that it is a human instinct.
True, but as I have pointed out in another post, it is the
responsibility of the system to ensure that people are by and large
only allowed to compete fairly and get pulled up when they try to
abuse the system. One excellent example is what happened with
Microsoft. I still cannot understand precisely what they did wrong,
though! But they obviously violated US standards of fair competition
and paid the price. I think we can learn a lot from the American
system here.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
> NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
> >
> > Yes, I am on a mission, but not in the world of music.
> >
>
> We are all thankful for it because you seem incapable of
> discussing music; I must say, though, that your enthusiasm
> for music matches your ignorance about it.
>
and I have as much of a right to post here as you do (and will do so
from time to time).
>
> > (and that too, logic and philosophy/foundations of science, in the
> > land of the Thackeray, the Modi, the Laloo, the Lalithaa,....).
> >
>
> Who is this Lalitha, you fool? And 'the Modi, the Laloo'? Aargh!!
>
your crass, crude behaviour, which matches that of some of the
worthies in the cited list. And, I will continue to say what I please
about them anywhere I choose to.
>
>
> > What is my mission? Well, that is another post for another
> > thread in another newsgroup. Here is a hint: chieftains and warlords
> > of Indian science, better watch out ...
> >
>
> Please do carry on your mission in some other newsgroup.
Be assured that I will.
>I have every confidence in your ability to be as incoherent about
science
> as you are about music. Good luck.
>
Ah, here you use the first person "I". Good.
Here, read some of my papers and let me know the basis of your
"confidence":
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/perl/user_eprints?username=sradhakr
The above are preprints on a new logic (and a new philosophy of
mathematical truth) that I have proposed. Before you say: "these are
unpublished preprints", here are a couple of international conference
papers based on these preprints available at:
(1)
http://alcor.concordia.ca/~scol/seminars/conference/abstracts.html
(see poster by Radhakrishnan Srinivasan titled: "Relativisitic
determinsim: the clash with logic)
(2)
http://web.unicam.it/FQI04/OralCont.htm
(Accepted oral presentation titled "Quantum superposition principle
justified in a new non-Aristotelian finitary logic")
Two more reasearch papers based on the above preprints are now under
review by high-quality international journals (and are likely to be
published). I will surely e-mail them to you if you should suddenly
develop a deep interest in logic/philosophy of science and foundations
of mathematics/theoretical physics/theoretical computer science.
So my dear friend, it looks like I am going to be a successful
researcher. The above work was done after I left the National
Aerospace Laboratories in Bangalore and joined IBM in October 2000.
Goodbye and happy reading! Please do keep in touch; I am very anxious
to keep communicating with such a highly cultured guy as you.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
> "Abhay Jain" <aba...@aol.com> wrote -
> > >
> > > I never implied that she wasn't great. But on the other hand, that
> > > does not mean that she was perfect.
> >
> > Above use of "perfect" has been mentioned for the first time
> > by you in this thread.
> >
>
> Actually, Lata *is* (I mean, was) perfect. But how can one
> convince our scientific friend that she was?
Perfect? Is this an example of knowledgable discourse about music in
RMIM? Just wondering, since you accused me of ignorance elsewhere.
>Besides, even if one tried, he would mention some other word for the
first
> time in this thread and try to drag in yet another irrelevant
> aspect about Lata/Einstein/Laloo/God/Devil/Lalithaa .
>
>
> So far, I have learned only three things in this thread :
>
> 1) Lata was responsible for Geeta's drinking. (There is
> scientific evidence behind the allegation.)
> 2) Every hike in the price of alcohol in the '60s was because
> of Lata's machinations so that Geeta may have to spend more
> and more to assuage her thirst for alcohol.
Another example of your knowledge and coherence?
> 3) Once Einstein proved that e = m * (c-squared)
Did he? I thought he didn't *prove* that. Do you know what a "proof"
is? What is e? What is m? What is c? For that matter, I doubt if you
know what "squared" is.
>it was
> inevitable that Lata's manipulation of the price of alcohol
> would succeed exponentially and now Lalitha's govt must put
> in (attempt-cubed) to make India a dry region again. If she
> doesn't succeed, the humanity is doomed.
Another example of your eloquence and knowledge about music?
R. Srinivasan
>
>
> - dn
V S Rawat
> nani3...@hotmail.com (naniwadekar) wrote in message
> news:<dd0da81c.0407...@posting.google.com>...
>
>> NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
>>
>>> Yes, I am on a mission, but not in the world of
>>> music.
>>>
>>
>> We are all thankful for it because you seem incapable
>> of discussing music; I must say, though, that your
>> enthusiasm for music matches your ignorance about it.
>>
>
> We? You and who else? I never claimed to be knowledgable
> about music and I have as much of a right to post here as
> you do (and will do so from time to time).
>
>>> (and that too, logic and philosophy/foundations of
>>> science, in the land of the Thackeray, the Modi, the
>>> Laloo, the Lalithaa,....).
>>>
>>
>> Who is this Lalitha, you fool? And 'the Modi, the
>> Laloo'? Aargh!!
>>
>
> Better you remain ignorant about this. And, I am not
> intimidated by your crass, crude behaviour, which matches
> that of some of the worthies in the cited list.
That is the ultimate insult that has ever happened on this ng.
--
Rawat
> And, I
> will continue to say what I please about them anywhere I
> choose to.
>
>>
>>> What is my mission? Well, that is another post for
>>> another thread in another newsgroup. Here is a hint:
>>> chieftains and warlords of Indian science, better
>>> watch out ...
>>>
>>
>> Please do carry on your mission in some other
>> newsgroup.
>
>
> Be assured that I will.
>
>
>> I have every confidence in your ability to be as
>> incoherent about
>
> science
>
>> as you are about music. Good luck.
>>
>
> Ah, here you use the first person "I". Good.
>
> Here, read some of my papers and let me know the basis of
> your "confidence":
>
> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/perl/user_eprints?usernam-
> e=sradhakr
>
> The above are preprints on a new logic (and a new
> philosophy of mathematical truth) that I have proposed.
> Before you say: "these are unpublished preprints", here
> are a couple of international conference papers based on
> these preprints available at:
>
> (1)
> http://alcor.concordia.ca/~scol/seminars/conference/abstr-
> acts.html (see poster by Radhakrishnan Srinivasan titled:
ek bharateeya
> V S Rawat wrote:
> >
> > Niranjan R. Pedanekar wrote:
> > > For anyone conversant with the basics of music, it is
> > > easy to note that:
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Niranjan
> >
> > Hi Niranjan,
> >
> > not contributing to your thread, but I am very much
> > impressed by your mail.
> >
> > If people can learn to think in this logical, step-by-step.
> > analytical, exploring manner the way you have conceptualized
> > and elaborated, there will never be any flame wars among
> > fans of different personalities.
>
> > Rawat
>
>
> Though I agree with your comments vis-a-vis Niranjan's
> post, what you state later about flame wars etc. is just
> wishful thinking. But no harm in being optimistic....
>
>
> Afzal
some simple mathematics that even "people" (however odd they may be) can understand:
rmim - [flame wars] <> rmim
rmim personalities - [flame wars] = [null]
- ek bharateeya
Surjit Singh
ek bharateeya wrote:
In the immortal words of the immoral mayor of Springfield USA
What that heck is that?
Ek Pakistani
>
> - ek bharateeya
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
http://hindi-movies-songs.com/index.html
Surjit Singh
SRK wrote:
I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper in a reputable
journal of Philosophy of Science. No implication, merely a quest for truth.
>
> R. Srinivasan
naniwadekar
> >
> >>NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
> >>
> >
> > Here, read some of my papers and let me know the basis of your
> > "confidence":
> >
> > http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/perl/user_eprints?username=sradhakr
> >
>
>
> I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper
> in a reputable journal of Philosophy of Science. No implication,
> merely a quest for truth.
>
R Srinivasan's methods confirm the suspicion caused by his
very first post in the thread : namely, that he is a fool.
For a moment, he seemed willing to admit that he did not
know what he was talking about. But then he went back to his
anti-Lata agenda soon. His latest agenda is to amuse all of us
more and more and he is succeeding admirably.
It is not enough for him that Einstein had earned respect
of his peers and even won the Nobel; but it is enough for
him to post one URL to prove that he is 'going to be'
a successful scientist. And if he doesn't, there is always
a Lata, the Modi, a Laloo or the Lalitha who can be blamed
for Srinivasan's failure.
This doesn't mean that nothing uttered by Einstein can be
questioned. But one thing is sure : scientists studying
Einstein's contribution will have to show much better mental
capacity than the illiterate and clueless Srinivasan.
- dn
ek bharateeya
> > NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
> > >
> > > Yes, I am on a mission, but not in the world of music.
> > >
> >
>
> So my dear friend, it looks like I am going to be a successful
> researcher. The above work was done after I left the National
> Aerospace Laboratories in Bangalore and joined IBM in October 2000.
>
> Goodbye and happy reading! Please do keep in touch; I am very anxious
> to keep communicating with such a highly cultured guy as you.
>
> R. Srinivasan
dude,
if you ever run into cp ravikumar, convey my best wishes!
- ek bharateeya
V S Rawat
> Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote -
>
>>>> NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
>>>>
>>>
>>> Here, read some of my papers and let me know the
>>> basis of your "confidence":
>>>
>>> ame=sradhakr
>>>
>>> R. Srinivasan
>> I would like to know if you have a single refereed
>> paper in a reputable journal of Philosophy of Science.
>> No implication, merely a quest for truth.
>
> R Srinivasan's methods confirm the suspicion caused by
> his very first post in the thread : namely, that he is a
> fool. For a moment, he seemed willing to admit that he
> did not know what he was talking about. But then he went
> back to his anti-Lata agenda soon. His latest agenda is
> to amuse all of us more and more and he is succeeding
> admirably.
>
> It is not enough for him that Einstein had earned respect
> of his peers and even won the Nobel; but it is enough
> for him to post one URL to prove that he is 'going to be'
> a successful scientist. And if he doesn't, there is
> always a Lata, the Modi, a Laloo or the Lalitha who can
> be blamed for Srinivasan's failure.
>
> This doesn't mean that nothing uttered by Einstein can be
> questioned. But one thing is sure : scientists studying
> Einstein's contribution will have to show much better
> mental capacity than the illiterate and clueless
> Srinivasan.
>
> - dn
OK.
you are the complainant, you are the advocate, you are the
judge, you are the executioner. Very Efficient. Very convenient.
he said hat he was on a mission. You are too humble to say
that but it is obvious that you also are on some mission.
RMIMERs should agree that these were enough reasons to cause
an upright member like you to mock at him, ridicule him,
call him names, question his integrity, trash his knowledge,
pelt insults on him till he said Goodbye.
How characteristically sickening of you, Mr Naniwadekar.
And Professor Singh had the sense of timing to ask his
innocent question at this very juncture, studded with due
disclaimer of "no implication", as if he had no observation
about Mr Naniwadekar's tirade and he could not see where all
this was leading to.
This is the same Professor Singh who wept tears of blood
when altercation with someone (Anil?) lead to withdrawal of
some member (KP?).
But tears of blood are for aapalaa maanus, the in-persons of
ruling elite of RMIM, and not for ordinary mortals like Mr
Srinivasan and several others whom this ruling elite have
hounded out of RMIM.
How logical. Mafia leadership is in good hands.
Have another good day all you silent spectators of RMIM when
such things keep on happening in front of youre eyes and you
all sit glued to your chairs hammering mercilessly on your
keyboards to discuss more important matters like renaming of
denver airport.
--
Rawat
Surjit Singh
V S Rawat wrote:
Somewhat irrelevantly, he claimed to have published several what looked
like conference reports, lectures and eprints in the Philosohy of
Science about which I also know a few things having studied at the
University of Pittsburgh, which is a world centre of Philosophy of
Science. I was hoping to continue the dialog by email if he really did
have something interesting to say about the matter. That's why me. Why
now? I was out shopping all day!
> about Mr Naniwadekar's tirade and he could not see where all
> this was leading to.
>
> This is the same Professor Singh who wept tears of blood
> when altercation with someone (Anil?) lead to withdrawal of
> some member (KP?).
>
> But tears of blood are for aapalaa maanus, the in-persons of
> ruling elite of RMIM, and not for ordinary mortals like Mr
> Srinivasan and several others whom this ruling elite have
> hounded out of RMIM.
>
> How logical. Mafia leadership is in good hands.
>
> Have another good day all you silent spectators of RMIM when
> such things keep on happening in front of youre eyes and you
> all sit glued to your chairs hammering mercilessly on your
> keyboards to discuss more important matters like renaming of
> denver airport.
>
--
Chetan Vinchhi
"SRK" wrote...
>
> Here is a web reference that seems to be widely cited, where Raju
> Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
> with her (even by her own admission):
>
> http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
Read it again. Raju Bharatan "vaguely remembers" something like
that. And RB being RB, even his assertions are suspect; always
to be taken with a generous helping of salt.
Okay, even if it is true, so what? Lata has been known to be
afraid of Sajjad's tunes, of appearing on stage, of listening to her
own songs and so on.
> But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
> sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha?
34 and 74 respectively. Does that tell you anything? Do share.
C
SRK
start hitting the booze and end up like poor Geeta Dutt.
This thread will not end, unless I let Mr. Paper Tiger win. But how
can a non-scientist logically refute the e-published, recorded work of
a scientist (in logic) without making a single logical argument? Yet
unless this happens, this thread will not end and RMIMers will get
bored to death. So here is the suggested scenario. The answer is: It
can happen only in India, and that too in Bollywood!
Let us make a Bollywood movie, in which Mr. Paper Tiger plays the hero
(Einstein), Lata plays the heroine (Lata), Asha is the mother of the
hero (Maaaa!), Amitabh is the Inspector of Police, Amitabh sings for
Einstein, Lata and Asha sing for themselves, and, you guessed it: R.
Srinivasan is the villain. Riddle for RMIMers: Who sings for R.S?
(Hint: MUST be a Rafi-clone).
Cut to the end of the movie. R.S's body lies vanquished in a pool of
blood, with Amitabh's foot on his chest, and with Einstein making a
long speech that starts with "Zindgi mein...", in very, very low
pitch, progressively increasing in pitch (so as to prevent the
audience from falling asleep), and, ends at the climax with a
full-throated, blood-curdling, ear-drum-piercing yell
MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! (at a much higher pitch than
Rafi SINGS RAKHWAAAAAAAALEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!).
Must confess I haven't seen a Bollywood movie for some time now, but
come to think of it: Has there been ANY Bollywood movie in which the
hero does not make a speech starting with "Zindgi mein..." and yelling
maaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! at some stage or the other?
R. Srinivasan (Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved)
>
> - dn
SRK
Fine. Not bad indeed, though could have been better. Can you do one
more piece of research and tell me: How many songs did Lata sing with
Geeta from about 1950 to 1960 (as opposed to Asha)? After 1960 or
thereabouts, I suspect Lata no longer considered the shattered Geeta
to be any threat and may not have worried about singing with her. I
understand that Geeta Dutt initially dominated from 1947 to 1949
before the rivalry with Lata heated up during that decade. During the
initial part of this decade, Geeta was still dominating over Asha
(till about 1953, think). So further yearly breakups would be
interesting. Also, I assume these are duets you are talking about. Are
statistics available for: In how many films have Lata and Geeta sung
together (duet or otherwise) as opposed to Lata and Asha, say from
1950 to 1960 (and yearwise, if available). If you feel too bored to
follow up on these questions, don't bother; I am not overly concerned
either. Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
R. Srinivasan
>
> C
Abhay Jain
news:<cdfrd7$7...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
> > "SRK" wrote...
> > >
> > > Here is a web reference that seems to be widely cited, where Raju
> > > Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
> > > with her (even by her own admission):
> > >
> > > http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
> >
> > Read it again. Raju Bharatan "vaguely remembers" something like
> > that. And RB being RB, even his assertions are suspect; always
> > to be taken with a generous helping of salt.
> >
> > Okay, even if it is true, so what? Lata has been known to be
> > afraid of Sajjad's tunes, of appearing on stage, of listening to her
> > own songs and so on.
> >
> > > But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
> > > sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha?
> >
> > 34 and 74 respectively. Does that tell you anything? Do share.
Your post is so amusing.
>
> Fine. Not bad indeed, though could have been better. Can you do one
From an absolute statement on your part based on someone's inuendo
you have come down to "it could have been better."
> more piece of research and tell me: How many songs did Lata sing with
> Geeta from about 1950 to 1960 (as opposed to Asha)? After 1960 or
> thereabouts, I suspect Lata no longer considered the shattered Geeta
Coming from a researcher who relies only on facts you
come down to "I suspect".
> to be any threat and may not have worried about singing with her. I
> understand that Geeta Dutt initially dominated from 1947 to 1949
Another funny word "I understand".
> before the rivalry with Lata heated up during that decade. During the
> initial part of this decade, Geeta was still dominating over Asha
> (till about 1953, think). So further yearly breakups would be
> interesting. Also, I assume these are duets you are talking about. Are
Another funny word "I assume".
> statistics available for: In how many films have Lata and Geeta sung
> together (duet or otherwise) as opposed to Lata and Asha, say from
> 1950 to 1960 (and yearwise, if available). If you feel too bored to
> follow up on these questions, don't bother; I am not overly concerned
> either. Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
>
> R. Srinivasan
You want others to do the research - Aren't you the researcher?
And to top that you finish by saying "facts are facts".
What are they - some inuendos, you happen to read.
You complained about scientific establishment in India.
Considering how you confuse facts from assumptions,
they proably did not err at least in your case.
Abhay Jain
Chetan Vinchhi
"SRK" wrote...
>
> Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
What "facts"? The numbers we have been talking about?
If you are interested in numbers, a search through RMIM
archives is recommended. If you are really serious, consider
buying some or all of the excellent books about film songs.
With a little bit of persistence, you can glean all the statistics
you want from these books. The fountainhead of all the
information contained in these books is the Hindi Film
Geet Kosh.
C
ps - Here's a "fact" for you. In 1954, Asha sang more
songs than Lata for the first time. AFAIK, Asha hasn't
looked back since.
pps - Don't ask me; do a google search (wouldn't this
make a nice signature :))
SRK
> I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper in a reputable
> journal of Philosophy of Science. No implication, merely a quest for truth.
Greetings, Prof. Surjit Singh. I see from your website that you are a
*real* professor with a formidable record of refereed journal
publications. Congratulations on your 9 (or is it 12) papers in Phys.
Rev. Lett., a top journal indeed. And as you pointed out in another
post, being Ph.D. from Pittsburgh would likely make you interested in
the philosophy/foundations of physics. It is nice to hear from a
mainstream physicist expressing some sort of interest in what I have
done, even if peripheral; this has happened all too rarely because of
the anti-mainstream nature of my work.
To answer your question; two of my papers are under review, and I
haven't made any attempt with philosophy journals. One is a 5-page
paper that is now under review for the proceedings of the Foundations
of Quantum Information conference that I attended in Italy (cited in a
previous post), and presented my case in front of logicians,
philsophers, etc., without being challenged. The other is a
co-authored paper on Autonomic Computing (AC) that is now under review
and focusses on how my logic NAFL handles Turing's halting problem,
with applications to AC. The two conferences cited in my previous post
are fairly reputed and prestigious, with top people like Benioff,
Zeilinger, Lov Grover, etc. attending the Quantum Information
Conference and similar top figures attending the Relativity
Conference. Note that my relativity poster cited in that conference
(International Conference on the Ontology of Spacetime) actually
states that special relativity theory can be argued to be
INCONSISTENT, even within CLASSICAL LOGIC (as opposed to my proposed
logic NAFL). So it was definitely a breakthrough of sorts to have my
poster accepted there (after about a 3-month review process), by
mainstream philosophers of physics, who are by and large
pro-relativity.
Do I have something interesting to say? You bet!! Perhaps the main
result (for a physicist) that my logic NAFL asserts is that relativity
and quantum mechanics are incompatible and that it is quantum
mechanics that must win, with relativity thrown out. Of course, it
should be stressed that NAFL only challenges relativity *theory* and
could possibly accept its results if stated in a theory of Euclidean
space and absolute time.
We can continue this discussion by email (in deference to RMIMers). I
will send you email shortly that summarizes the quantum aspects of my
proposed logic. You can contact me at my official email address,
srad...@in.ibm.com. You would have noticed that my first preprint at
the Pittsburgh Philosophy of Science Archive was in 2002. I am still
struggling to get the international academic community to respond,
which is now happening slowly. But this is only to be expected. It was
Robert Dicke, I think, who pointed out that pro-relativity papers are
accepted and published within 6 months, while anti-relativity papers
take about 7 years!!. That is just human nature.
R. Srinivasan
Surjit Singh
SRK wrote:
> "Chetan Vinchhi" <mylas...@hotmailxyz.com> wrote in message news:<cdfrd7$7...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
>
>>"SRK" wrote...
>> >
>>
>>>Here is a web reference that seems to be widely cited, where Raju
>>>Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
>>>with her (even by her own admission):
>>>
>>>http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
>>
>>Read it again. Raju Bharatan "vaguely remembers" something like
>>that. And RB being RB, even his assertions are suspect; always
>>to be taken with a generous helping of salt.
>>
>>Okay, even if it is true, so what? Lata has been known to be
>>afraid of Sajjad's tunes, of appearing on stage, of listening to her
>>own songs and so on.
>>
>>
>>>But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
>>>sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha?
>>
>>34 and 74 respectively. Does that tell you anything? Do share.
>
>
> Fine. Not bad indeed, though could have been better. Can you do one
> more piece of research and tell me: How many songs did Lata sing with
> Geeta from about 1950 to 1960 (as opposed to Asha)? After 1960 or
So, you have been making wild generalizations without hard data? YOu did
not even try to get some basic info that is commonly available. tsk,
tsk, tsk.
> thereabouts, I suspect Lata no longer considered the shattered Geeta
> to be any threat and may not have worried about singing with her. I
> understand that Geeta Dutt initially dominated from 1947 to 1949
> before the rivalry with Lata heated up during that decade. During the
> initial part of this decade, Geeta was still dominating over Asha
> (till about 1953, think). So further yearly breakups would be
> interesting. Also, I assume these are duets you are talking about. Are
> statistics available for: In how many films have Lata and Geeta sung
> together (duet or otherwise) as opposed to Lata and Asha, say from
> 1950 to 1960 (and yearwise, if available). If you feel too bored to
> follow up on these questions, don't bother; I am not overly concerned
> either. Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
>
> R. Srinivasan
>
>
>>C
--
Surjit Singh
SRK wrote:
No, no, no. Please don't. I ma sorry I asked. I can see where this is
going :)
> will send you email shortly that summarizes the quantum aspects of my
> proposed logic. You can contact me at my official email address,
> srad...@in.ibm.com. You would have noticed that my first preprint at
> the Pittsburgh Philosophy of Science Archive was in 2002. I am still
> struggling to get the international academic community to respond,
> which is now happening slowly. But this is only to be expected. It was
> Robert Dicke, I think, who pointed out that pro-relativity papers are
> accepted and published within 6 months, while anti-relativity papers
> take about 7 years!!. That is just human nature.
>
> R. Srinivasan
--
SRK
> "SRK" <NS...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0f6e65.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > "Chetan Vinchhi" <mylas...@hotmailxyz.com> wrote in message
> news:<cdfrd7$7...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
> > > "SRK" wrote...
> > > >
> > > > Here is a web reference that seems to be widely cited, where Raju
> > > > Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
> > > > with her (even by her own admission):
> > > >
> > > > http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
> > >
> > > Read it again. Raju Bharatan "vaguely remembers" something like
> > > that. And RB being RB, even his assertions are suspect; always
> > > to be taken with a generous helping of salt.
> > >
> > > Okay, even if it is true, so what? Lata has been known to be
> > > afraid of Sajjad's tunes, of appearing on stage, of listening to her
> > > own songs and so on.
> > >
> > > > But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
> > > > sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha?
> > >
> > > 34 and 74 respectively. Does that tell you anything? Do share.
>
> Your post is so amusing.
Glad you're amused, as opposed to suffering from hyper-tension, such
as our friend Naniwadekar.
>
> >
> > Fine. Not bad indeed, though could have been better. Can you do one
>
> From an absolute statement on your part based on someone's inuendo
> you have come down to "it could have been better."
It is a widely cited web reference by a very respected journalist. I
could have cited web references that make many more nasty allegations
about Lata with respect to Geeta, but did not. Of course it could have
been better; what do you find wrong with that assertion? Are you
saying that Geeta Dutt was not a deserving case?
>
> > more piece of research and tell me: How many songs did Lata sing with
> > Geeta from about 1950 to 1960 (as opposed to Asha)? After 1960 or
> > thereabouts, I suspect Lata no longer considered the shattered Geeta
>
> Coming from a researcher who relies only on facts you
> come down to "I suspect".
Do you expect me to read someone's mind? Sorry, even a researcher
can't do that. One can have a reasonable suspicion and then
investigate the facts to see if that suspicion was justified.
>
> > to be any threat and may not have worried about singing with her. I
> > understand that Geeta Dutt initially dominated from 1947 to 1949
>
> Another funny word "I understand".
You seem to be easily amused. Why am I not laughing?
>
> > before the rivalry with Lata heated up during that decade. During the
> > initial part of this decade, Geeta was still dominating over Asha
> > (till about 1953, think). So further yearly breakups would be
> > interesting. Also, I assume these are duets you are talking about. Are
>
> Another funny word "I assume".
>
Ditto.
> > statistics available for: In how many films have Lata and Geeta sung
> > together (duet or otherwise) as opposed to Lata and Asha, say from
> > 1950 to 1960 (and yearwise, if available). If you feel too bored to
> > follow up on these questions, don't bother; I am not overly concerned
> > either. Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
> >
> > R. Srinivasan
>
> You want others to do the research - Aren't you the researcher?
Yes, but in my areas. Chetan Vinchii is apparently someone with more
knowledge about music and is better equipped to do research in this
area.
> And to top that you finish by saying "facts are facts".
> What are they - some inuendos, you happen to read.
Wrong again. Raju Bharatan is a respected source. And if you claim he
is wrong about what he said, the onus is on you to refute him; please
contact Lata and check whether Raju Bharatan's "vague recollection" is
right or wrong. The onus is on Lata to refute such widely cited
allegations by respected journalists and there must surely be a record
of her 1972 speech somewhere. If RB was wrong, he should be sued in a
court of law for defaming Lata.
When I said "facts are facts" I meant that I am willing to accept
whatever conclusion Chetan Vinchii states from his research of the
facts and that I am not about to argue with facts or with him.
But let me state the following. It is surprising that Lata has only 74
songs with Asha and 34 with Geeta, the two leading singers after Lata
(these are presumably lifetime figures). That suggests that most
movies were one-singer affairs as far as female singers are concerned
(or there were very few female duets). So these statistics are limited
to investigating the allegation that Lata boycotted Geeta, as opposed
to whether justice was done to Geeta with respect to the number of
assignments she got. But then again, it is true that in the market
place, it is a survival of the fittest; the line between fair and
unfair competetion is very thin.
>
> You complained about scientific establishment in India.
> Considering how you confuse facts from assumptions,
> they proably did not err at least in your case.
Here is a published journal paper of mine in fluid mechanics, which I
pursued in NAL Bangalore (a national R&D Lab), before joining IBM in
October 2000:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/102521481/ABSTRACT
You will notice that my address here is the IBM address. The reason is
as follows. This paper was on a joint project between NAL and ISRO
which was started in the year 1999. I was put on this project with
others, but I was denied facilities and told that my ideas on this
project were worthless. When I joined IBM, they found my ideas to be
excellent, allowed me to pursue this research, which I did, published
it (as you can see) and filed a patent application as well on the fuel
flow algorithm. ISRO people have accepted that this is outstanding
work.
For most of the 11 years that I was at NAL, I was denied access to a
PC in my office and denied official projects and funding. I had to
travel 6 kms to access PC's, which were virus-ridden and used by
trainees. And I had to wait my turn with trainees to get access to a
PC and had to get up when trainees of important "scientists" wanted to
use the PC.
R. Srinivasan
>
> Abhay Jain
Pradeep
All rights reserved!!! For the very *knowledgeable* posts you are
making here, and the arguments that you have been putting forth, no
one dare steal your rights, sir!!!
...Pradeep
Ritu
> to be any threat and may not have worried about singing with her. I
> understand that Geeta Dutt initially dominated from 1947 to 1949
> before the rivalry with Lata heated up during that decade. During the
> initial part of this decade, Geeta was still dominating over Asha
> (till about 1953, think). So further yearly breakups would be
> interesting. Also, I assume these are duets you are talking about. Are
> statistics available for: In how many films have Lata and Geeta sung
> together (duet or otherwise) as opposed to Lata and Asha, say from
> 1950 to 1960 (and yearwise, if available). If you feel too bored to
> follow up on these questions, don't bother; I am not overly concerned
> either. Of course, facts are facts and cannot be argued with.
I am not sure of the facts from which you draw the conclusion of Lata
ousting Geeta. While the Mangeshkar monopoly has been around without
doubt, Geeta Dutt, as per informal sources was more of a victim of the
younger Mangeshkar sister's ambition than the elder. That ofcourse is
if we really want to go into the coffee-house gossip realm and make
such extrapolations.
Before we go into that territory, first let's just look at musical
prowess. Both Lata and Asha were technically superior singers than
Geeta Dutt there is little doubt about that. They could attempt much
more. So they definitely did have an edge thanks to their inherent
technical virtuosity. Over and above that they also had a much
stronger command over Hindi. Geeta Dutt can easily be excluded from
the ghazal genre right-away thanks to her heavy Bengali accent. Thus,
by that yardstick, Lata and Asha cornering a larger market share is
not surprising. They had some inherent qualities that caused this
effect.
Furthermore, Geeta Dutt had her personal problems(which are
well-documented) due to which she could not devote time to her career.
She had a family and children which slowed her down. She was not
readily available for rehearsals, which made composers like SDB shy
away from her. She (and her husband) were responsible in a big way for
her career taking a back seat.
Yes, when she did want to make a comeback she did not have any takers.
But blaming Lata for that is a very long shot. One has to remember
that in the first place, the Geeta-centric composers did not gravitate
towards Lata, they gravitated towards Asha. Why did SD Burman relegate
Geeta Dutt to sing for the side characters and Asha for the heroine in
his late 50s films like 'Sujata', 'Lajwanti', 'Insaan Jaag utha'?
Geeta was very close to SDB and Asha was not. Yet he felt Asha was
more suited for the heroine. OPN did the same with her in films like
'Howrah Bridge' (the fact that Geeta stole the limelight with her
infectiously upbeat 'Mera naam chin chin choo' is a tribute to her
sadly under-utilised talent)
OPN has gone on record to say he was unfair to Geeta Dutt because of
the pressure Asha Bhosle exerted on him. So if fingers have to be
pointed at all for Geeta Dutt's decline then it is Guru Dutt and Asha
Bhosle not Lata.
Ofcourse at the end of the day, I just feel it was destiny for her. It
is sad that someone who was so spontaneously joyous, cheerful and
upbeat would die as a broken alcoholic. There are a lot of other
artists who have died the way Geeta Dutt did, but her story always
brings a lump to the throat.
Regards,
Ritu
UVR
>
> It is a widely cited web reference by a very respected journalist.
And therein lies the rub.
I don't think you'll find too many people agreeing with the
description of Raju Bharatan as a journalist, let alone "a
very respected" one. At least not on RMIM. If you spend a
few minutes reviewing RMIM's Google archives, you will see
why.
Any member of the scientific establishment knows full well
that any argument proffering questionable "facts" as evidence
is dubious at best, however cogently it may have been
presented. I, for one, am not surprised, therefore, at the
reaction your statements have received. Perhaps you should
present cogent and believable statistics in support of your
position re: Lata and Geeta Dutt if you want your position
to receive more respect than it has received thus far.
Chetan started you off with some statistics. He also
pointed you at other sources of information.
You could begin there.
-UVR.
Satish Kalra
the hard numbers. Let the readers make their own conclusions. My own views
are, of course, included.
Given below is a table of songs sung by the prominent female singers of
Hindi film songs for the period 1961 - 1970, when accusations
of "monopolistic" behaviour began to be made against Lata Mangeshkar.
The total number of all songs during 1961-70 is approximately 7,000 and it
includes some Bhojpuri and Rajasthani film songs.
Female songs account for a little over 4,220 songs. It includes male/female
and female female duets and/or choruses. The exact number is not calculable
since some of the songs are uncredited to the singers.
Geeta Dutt sang 77 songs during this period - of these, only 13 were from
1966 to 1970. Obvioulsy, it is safe to assume that she minimized her
singing after Guru Dutt's death in 1964. (I am putting her numbers separate
from the list below.)
Some other numbers (singers listed in alphabetical order):
Kamal Barot 108 songs.
Meenu Purushottam 25
Mubarak Begum 50
Sharada 38
Sudha Malhotra 29
Suman Kalyanpur 470
All other female singers 628
(These indlude Arti Mukherji, Usha Khanna, Hemlata, Krishna Kalle, Meena
Kapoor, Usha Timothi, Shamshad Begum, Usha Mangeshkar, Sulakshana Pandit,
and others.)
Total 1348
During this decade, Asha Bhosle sang 1,596 songs, Vs. Lata's 1,199. The
numbers include unreleased film songs from that period. Together, they
account for about 2,800 songs, or about 66% of the total. Formidable as the
numbers may look, but one cfannot overlook the fact also that other female
singers got whatever fair share they could get. Even Sudha Malhotra, who
had started her singing career in the late 40's has 29 songs. Suman
Kalyanpur accounts for over 11% of the total. Her numbers would have been
lesser if Lata had not stopped singing duets with Rafi for nearly a three
year period from 1962/3 to 1965/6.
Going by the sheer number of songs, it is Asha Bhosle who should have been
the accused of 'monopolistic activities'.
{I am also aware that numbers can be interpreted in any number of ways, to
suit one's objective.}
If Lata were to act monopolistically, the object would have been to
corner all the female songs that are to be rendered in any film. One major
way of accomplishing that objective would have been to keep the price per
song to be such that is affordable by all film producers. It is clear that
she did not do that, as she sang only about 1200 songs out of the 4000+
female songs, averaging about 120 songs a year in that decade. 1968 was the
year with only 84 songs by her, the lowest number for any year in that time
span.
Any 'monopolistic' minded singer would be averse to singing female/female
songs with other competitiors. Lata and Asha sang such songs in ample
numbers, including a Lata duet with Suman Kalyanpur, her nearest rival in
those days. Her songs with Meenu Purushottam or Mubarak Begum or Sudha
Malhotra or Kamal Barot speak about her openmindedness in such matters.
Other techniques would have been not to discriminate for/against
any type of song to be rendered, or to sing for all music composers, etc.
Lata is known to have never sung for O.P. Nayyar; and also known for having
had tiffs with S.D. Burman and C. Ramchandra for the periods from 1957/58 to
1962/63.
The more acceptable reasoning for Lata and Asha getting a high number of
songs is simply that they were the best singers available in the market, and
in the dog eat dog film industry, it is nothing but popularity and
saleability, i.e., simple economics, that prevails. According to one of the
other singers in the list above, " jitane achhe gaane hote the vo Lataji ko
milate the, usake baad Ashaji ko. Jo bach jaate the, vo ham sab (baakii)
gaanevaalon ke hisse mein aate the..". {Singer's identity withheld, on her
request.}
What is implied in the above quote is that it was the music directors that
decided who sang what song, etc. Take Madan Mohan, or S.D. Burman, for
whom the first choice was always Lata. Or even Shanker-Jaikishan, until
Shanker began promoting Sharada.
Accusations can be made anytime, against anyone. It then is the
responsibility of the accuser to prove the allegations. Simply saying "I
vaguely recollect...." is not enough. Over the years, Lata has chosen not
to respond to such accusations speaks about her ability to ignore such talk
and let her work speak for itself (good or bad). {I am reminded of a
particular stanza that refers to the caravan keeping moving, from a Mukesh
song "nahiin kiyaa to kar ke dekh" from Char Dil Char Raahen. :-) }
Raju Bharatan used to be a good and respected journalist, but not after his
biographical write up of Lata. What starts as a decent attempt at the
evolution of the so-called "most recorded" artist in the world, quickly
turns into blowing his own trumpets of capabilities in remembering cricket
and music trivia. Using an oft used phrase, I "suspect" that Raju Bharatan,
when he found out that Harish Bhimani was writing a book on Lata, tried to
do one-up by coming up with his own in a span of less than a month, so as to
get it in the market before Bhimani's. And the book shows his lack-lustre
effort.
We may all like to wish that Lata or Asha are/should have been
the most decent persons on this planet. It may stem from our own desire/s
of the world being a perfect one. But it is not, and to survive in such an
imperfect world, one has to adjust. That Lata and Asha conquered over
personal tragedies and made adjustments so as to make it to the top of
their chosen professions is no mean an achievement.
--
Happy Listenings.
Satish Kalra
rkusenet
"UVR" <u...@hotmail.com> wrote
> I don't think you'll find too many people agreeing with the
> description of Raju Bharatan as a journalist, let alone "a
> very respected" one. At least not on RMIM.
And not in rec.sport.cricket either. Most of the indians there
trash him left-and-right.
rk- [ RB is just about OK ]
t u s e n e t @yahoo.com Loony Tunes
"Satish Kalra" <Satish...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ZqadnZ3tR-Y...@comcast.com...
Firstly, thanks for the excellent write up and the stats. I guess, I am
finally going to bug Professor sahab for a copy of HFGK.
>
> The more acceptable reasoning for Lata and Asha getting a high number of
> songs is simply that they were the best singers available in the market,
and
> in the dog eat dog film industry, it is nothing but popularity and
> saleability, i.e., simple economics, that prevails. According to one of
the
You nailed it here. There can be no other justification to their success,
but that they were the most saleable voices.
> What is implied in the above quote is that it was the music directors that
> decided who sang what song, etc. Take Madan Mohan, or S.D. Burman, for
> whom the first choice was always Lata. Or even Shanker-Jaikishan, until
> Shanker began promoting Sharada.
I used a similar argument in a different thread. I think anything beyond
this would be speculative.
Whether the singer influenced the MD or the movie maker to compose
specifically for him/her is very debatable. One only brings in a lot of
subjective interpretations at that point.
> Raju Bharatan used to be a good and respected journalist, but not after
his
> biographical write up of Lata. What starts as a decent attempt at the
> evolution of the so-called "most recorded" artist in the world, quickly
> turns into blowing his own trumpets of capabilities in remembering cricket
> and music trivia. Using an oft used phrase, I "suspect" that Raju
Bharatan,
> when he found out that Harish Bhimani was writing a book on Lata, tried to
> do one-up by coming up with his own in a span of less than a month, so as
to
> get it in the market before Bhimani's. And the book shows his lack-lustre
> effort.
I have to read this one by RB, but I dont want to buy it. Can somebody loan
a copy for some time (pls consider this a public request)? I doubt if it
will be there in the local public library.
> We may all like to wish that Lata or Asha are/should have been
> the most decent persons on this planet. It may stem from our own desire/s
> of the world being a perfect one. But it is not, and to survive in such
an
> imperfect world, one has to adjust. That Lata and Asha conquered over
> personal tragedies and made adjustments so as to make it to the top of
> their chosen professions is no mean an achievement.
Very true.
lt
SRK
reviewing my work, and the accepted paper will be posted to the
PhilSci Archive. My work is not going to go away if you choose not to
look at it.
R. Srinivasan
t u s e n e t @yahoo.com Loony Tunes
"Loony Tunes" <l t u s e n e t @ y a h o o . c o m> wrote in message
news:2m2f0uF...@uni-berlin.de...
> You nailed it here. There can be no other justification to their success,
> but that they were the most saleable voices.
plus they were the best of the crop available.
lt
SRK
> SRK wrote:
> > "Chetan Vinchhi" <mylas...@hotmailxyz.com> wrote in message news:<cdfrd7$7...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>...
> >
> >>"SRK" wrote...
> >> >
>
> >>>Here is a web reference that seems to be widely cited, where Raju
> >>>Bharatan states that Lata feared Geeta and possibly avoided singing
> >>>with her (even by her own admission):
> >>>
> >>>http://www.upperstall.com/people/geetadutt.html
> >>
> >>Read it again. Raju Bharatan "vaguely remembers" something like
> >>that. And RB being RB, even his assertions are suspect; always
> >>to be taken with a generous helping of salt.
> >>
> >>Okay, even if it is true, so what? Lata has been known to be
> >>afraid of Sajjad's tunes, of appearing on stage, of listening to her
> >>own songs and so on.
> >>
> >>
> >>>But the bottom line is: how many songs did Lata
> >>>sing with Geeta, as opposed to, say, Asha?
> >>
> >>34 and 74 respectively. Does that tell you anything? Do share.
> >
> >
> > Fine. Not bad indeed, though could have been better. Can you do one
> > more piece of research and tell me: How many songs did Lata sing with
> > Geeta from about 1950 to 1960 (as opposed to Asha)? After 1960 or
>
> So, you have been making wild generalizations without hard data? YOu did
> not even try to get some basic info that is commonly available. tsk,
> tsk, tsk.
>
not overly impressed with your attitude either, especially to my work.
But the people who matter will look at my work when the time comes and
give it its due. I did not make any wild generalization; I cited a
respected source and assumed it is true. But of course, as a
scientist, if facts prove that source wrong, I will retract what I
said. I have no ego problems. But note that the number of Lata/Geeta
duets is not the only criterion for judging possible bias against
Geeta as I pointed out to Abhay Jain. All I can say is that I wouldn't
be too surprised if such bias did exist.
R. Srinivasan
Satish Kalra
news:2m2f0uF...@uni-berlin.de...
>
> > Raju Bharatan used to be a good and respected journalist, but not after
> his
> > biographical write up of Lata. What starts as a decent attempt at the
> > evolution of the so-called "most recorded" artist in the world, quickly
> > turns into blowing his own trumpets of capabilities in remembering
cricket
> > and music trivia. Using an oft used phrase, I "suspect" that Raju
> Bharatan,
> > when he found out that Harish Bhimani was writing a book on Lata, tried
to
> > do one-up by coming up with his own in a span of less than a month, so
as
> to
> > get it in the market before Bhimani's. And the book shows his
lack-lustre
> > effort.
>
> I have to read this one by RB, but I dont want to buy it. Can somebody
loan
> a copy for some time (pls consider this a public request)? I doubt if it
> will be there in the local public library.
You may ask your local/college/university library to order the book for you.
Alternatively, you can order it from Amazon or Barnes & Noble, read it and
then put it up for sale.
Better yet, plan to come and attend the Denver meet in September, and if you
can finish the book during the weekend, I'll make sure I bring it with me.
:-)
t u s e n e t @yahoo.com Loony Tunes
>
> You may ask your local/college/university library to order the book for
you.
I wouldnt be comfortable doing that.
> Alternatively, you can order it from Amazon or Barnes & Noble, read it and
> then put it up for sale.
I have thought about this as an option. I might find it in B&N. An afternoon
plus coffee..sounds like a plan.
>
> Better yet, plan to come and attend the Denver meet in September, and if
you
> can finish the book during the weekend, I'll make sure I bring it with me.
> :-)
I will email you later about that.
lt
Surjit Singh
Aha, another modern-day Galileo!
I did not make any wild generalization; I cited a
> respected source and assumed it is true. But of course, as a
> scientist, if facts prove that source wrong, I will retract what I
> said. I have no ego problems. But note that the number of Lata/Geeta
Good. Ask the local library to get the Hindi Film Geet Kosh and the two
books on Lata and Asha by Nerurkar. They have good data for making and
testing hypotheses about lata, asha and others.
> duets is not the only criterion for judging possible bias against
> Geeta as I pointed out to Abhay Jain. All I can say is that I wouldn't
> be too surprised if such bias did exist.
>
> R. Srinivasan
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
Visit my home page at
http://hindi-movies-songs.com/index.html
Ritu
> > I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper in a reputable
> > journal of Philosophy of Science. No implication, merely a quest for truth.
>
> Greetings, Prof. Surjit Singh. I see from your website that you are a
> *real* professor with a formidable record of refereed journal
> publications. Congratulations on your 9 (or is it 12) papers in Phys.
> Rev. Lett., a top journal indeed. And as you pointed out in another
Could you please take this offline? With due respect to your talents
in Philosophy of Science (or whatever it is). It has no remote
connection to music and does not even provide humour or material of
general interest other off-topic posts do. It would be nice if you
could streamline your posts to Lata and Geeta rather than your own
personal talents.
Regards,
Ritu
P.S Where is Ketan now??
Ajit
> > Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote -
> > > >
> > > >>NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Here, read some of my papers and let me know the basis of your
> > > > "confidence":
> > > >
> > > > http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/perl/user_eprints?username=sradhakr
> > > >
> > > > R. Srinivasan
> > >
> > >
> > > I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper
> > > in a reputable journal of Philosophy of Science. No implication,
> > > merely a quest for truth.
> > >
> >
> > R Srinivasan's methods confirm the suspicion caused by his
> > very first post in the thread : namely, that he is a fool.
> > For a moment, he seemed willing to admit that he did not
>
> > questioned. But one thing is sure : scientists studying
> > Einstein's contribution will have to show much better mental
> > capacity than the illiterate and clueless Srinivasan.
> >
> Nani, old boy, relax! Take it easy! I am concerned you may develop bp,
> start hitting the booze and end up like poor Geeta Dutt.
>
> This thread will not end, unless I let Mr. Paper Tiger win. But how
> can a non-scientist logically refute the e-published, recorded work of
> a scientist (in logic) without making a single logical argument? Yet
> unless this happens, this thread will not end and RMIMers will get
> bored to death. So here is the suggested scenario. The answer is: It
> can happen only in India, and that too in Bollywood!
>
Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn!
> Let us make a Bollywood movie, in which Mr. Paper Tiger plays the hero
> (Einstein), Lata plays the heroine (Lata), Asha is the mother of the
> hero (Maaaa!), Amitabh is the Inspector of Police, Amitabh sings for
> Einstein, Lata and Asha sing for themselves, and, you guessed it: R.
> Srinivasan is the villain. Riddle for RMIMers: Who sings for R.S?
> (Hint: MUST be a Rafi-clone).
>
> Cut to the end of the movie. R.S's body lies vanquished in a pool of
> blood, with Amitabh's foot on his chest, and with Einstein making a
> long speech that starts with "Zindgi mein...", in very, very low
> pitch, progressively increasing in pitch (so as to prevent the
> audience from falling asleep), and, ends at the climax with a
> full-throated, blood-curdling, ear-drum-piercing yell
> MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! (at a much higher pitch than
> Rafi SINGS RAKHWAAAAAAAALEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!).
>
> Must confess I haven't seen a Bollywood movie for some time now, but
> come to think of it: Has there been ANY Bollywood movie in which the
> hero does not make a speech starting with "Zindgi mein..." and yelling
> maaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! at some stage or the other?
>
Yet another yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn!
Manohar Bodas
> naniwadekar wrote:
This coolie from Santra Market is the most shameless person on the
planet.
He has posted so many stupid and lied on and on. Continue Dhenuvallbh
you are entertaining us a lot.
MB
SRK
I stand firmly and squarely ticked off. Guilty as charged! I
especially liked your "or whatever it is". Will not make any more
off-topic digressions, except for this last one.
Today, the boss of my Research Unit at IBM, Dr. Uday Shukla passed
away, at age 50 or thereabouts. Dr. Shukla did not have the research
credentials of the various characters I have run into in National
Aerospace Laboratories and elsewhere, i.e., he did not have an FRS,
hundreds of publications, etc. But he could have taught them a lesson
in professionalism and ethics; in this domain, he could have "given
them ten" and comprehensively thrashed them. I will miss him, and so
will all of us here at IBM India Software Labs.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
> naniwadekar wrote:
> >
> >>>> NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote -
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Here, read some of my papers and let me know the
> >>> basis of your "confidence":
> >>>
> >>> ame=sradhakr
> >>>
> >>> R. Srinivasan
>
> >> I would like to know if you have a single refereed
> >> paper in a reputable journal of Philosophy of Science.
> >> No implication, merely a quest for truth.
> >
> > his very first post in the thread : namely, that he is a
> > fool. For a moment, he seemed willing to admit that he
> > back to his anti-Lata agenda soon. His latest agenda is
> > to amuse all of us more and more and he is succeeding
> > admirably.
> >
> > It is not enough for him that Einstein had earned respect
> > of his peers and even won the Nobel; but it is enough
> > for him to post one URL to prove that he is 'going to be'
> > a successful scientist. And if he doesn't, there is
> > always a Lata, the Modi, a Laloo or the Lalitha who can
> > be blamed for Srinivasan's failure.
> >
> > questioned. But one thing is sure : scientists studying
> > Einstein's contribution will have to show much better
> > mental capacity than the illiterate and clueless
> > Srinivasan.
> >
>
> OK.
>
> you are the complainant, you are the advocate, you are the
> judge, you are the executioner. Very Efficient. Very convenient.
>
> he said hat he was on a mission. You are too humble to say
> that but it is obvious that you also are on some mission.
>
> RMIMERs should agree that these were enough reasons to cause
> an upright member like you to mock at him, ridicule him,
> call him names, question his integrity, trash his knowledge,
> pelt insults on him till he said Goodbye.
>
> How characteristically sickening of you, Mr Naniwadekar.
>
> And Professor Singh had the sense of timing to ask his
> innocent question at this very juncture, studded with due
> disclaimer of "no implication", as if he had no observation
> about Mr Naniwadekar's tirade and he could not see where all
> this was leading to.
>
> This is the same Professor Singh who wept tears of blood
> when altercation with someone (Anil?) lead to withdrawal of
> some member (KP?).
>
> But tears of blood are for aapalaa maanus, the in-persons of
> ruling elite of RMIM, and not for ordinary mortals like Mr
> Srinivasan and several others whom this ruling elite have
> hounded out of RMIM.
>
> How logical. Mafia leadership is in good hands.
>
> Have another good day all you silent spectators of RMIM when
> such things keep on happening in front of youre eyes and you
> all sit glued to your chairs hammering mercilessly on your
> keyboards to discuss more important matters like renaming of
> denver airport.
Mr. Rawat is a gentleman and it is a pleasure to see his posts in
RMIM. For the same reason, the Rawats of this world will have a tough
time with the Naniwadekars.
R. Srinivasan
V S Rawat
> Could you please take this offline? With due respect to
> your talents in Philosophy of Science (or whatever it
> is). It has no remote connection to music and does not
> even provide humour or material of general interest other
> off-topic posts do. It would be nice if you could
> streamline your posts to Lata and Geeta rather than your
> own personal talents.
>
> Regards, Ritu
>
> P.S Where is Ketan now??
poor ketan. Seems that Ms Ritu is likely to get you sacked
from the post of MAFIA's gatekeeper and hatchet man.
---------------
The new person who has decided to come out of closet to
reveal her true mafia color is MS Ritu.
RMIMers! please look into the modus operandi of RMIM MAFIA.
In whichever style he is used to, Mr Shrinivasan was
discussing music.
Then, Comerade Mr Abhay Jain plants a bait:
>> You seem to be on a mission to state whatever you can
>> dream on.
---------------
Mr Srinivasan takes it sportingly, thinking that it is a
honest, innocent query, and bares his heart by writing:
>> Yes, I am on a mission,
---------------
Comerade Mr Abhay Jain gets amused at the post of SRK.
> Your post is so amusing.
> From an absolute statement on your part based on
> someone's inuendo you have come down to "it could have
> been better."
> Coming from a researcher who relies only on facts you
> come down to "I suspect".
> Another funny word "I understand".
> Another funny word "I assume".
> You want others to do the research - Aren't you the
> researcher? And to top that you finish by saying "facts
> are facts". What are they - some inuendos, you happen to
> read.
> You complained about scientific establishment in India.
> Considering how you confuse facts from assumptions, they
> proably did not err at least in your case.
What was music in this post? only Ms Ritu will know why she
did not call Ketan to ask Mr Jain to take away this
discussion to some other place.
---------------
See the last statement. Mr Jain has verified that SRK
desereved whatever troubles, if any, he had in his life.
Mr SRK replied to the above.
> Here is a published journal paper of mine in fluid
> mechanics,
------------
Professor Singh laments that SRK did not actually pass the
enterance exam for RMIM, or probably cheated in it:
> So, you have been making wild generalizations without
> hard data? YOu did not even try to get some basic info
> that is commonly available. tsk, tsk, tsk.
what a lovely "tsk, tsk, tsk."
--------------
Comerade Mr Naniwadekar takes over.
> I have every confidence in your ability to be as
> incoherent about science as you are about music
------------
To which SRK humbly said:
> I never claimed to be knowledgable about music
but he fell for the bait with paa.Ncho.n ungaliyaa.N
ka.Daahii me.n aur sar chuulhe me.n
> Here, read some of my papers and let me know the basis of
> your "confidence":
---------------
MAFIA SUPREMO professor Singh further prompts.
> I would like to know if you have a single refereed paper
> in a reputable journal of Philosophy of Science. No
> implication, merely a quest for truth.
-----------------
Comerade Mr Naniwadekar writes, not addressing to SRK, but
to general public of RMIM. probaly he also saw himself on
some high stage with a mike in his hand and millions of
people waiting to savour his words. He closes the case with:
> R Srinivasan's methods confirm the suspicion caused by
> his very first post in the thread : namely, that he is a
> fool.
WOW! so Mr Naniwadekar gives the verdict, with due saboots,
that SRK is a fool.
Mr Naniwadekar continues:
> His latest agenda is to amuse all of us more and more
and wields the final fatal stroke of his talwaar with:
> to show much better mental capacity than the illiterate
and clueless Srinivasan.
----------
SRK did offer:
> We can continue this discussion by email (in deference to
> RMIMers).
only to be replied with:
> No, no, no. Please don't. I ma sorry I asked. I can see
> where this is going :)
=================
Mr Pradeep has not participated in the thread as long as it
was about music. But now he finds a non music issue he was
looking for so that he can also contribute something and
score some points in MAFIA.
> For the very *knowledgeable* posts you are making here,
> and the arguments that you have been putting forth, no
> one dare steal your rights, sir!!!
------------
Maybe some direct mails went across to MS RITU defining what
she should do, probably the text (dialogues) were also
dictated.
Thus, Time for Ms Ritu to make a filmi entry of the annoyed
lady asking SRK to take discussion ELSEWHERE.
Ms RITU conveniently feigned not seeing that SRK had NOT
started writing about his work on his own. He wrote it when
he was explicitly prompted to write about it by people and
when or his credentials were doubted and ridiculed.
She ignored that SRK had simpy fell for MAFIA's well
orchestrated baits like several other members had in past.
Ms RITU is a very effective puppet of MAFIA.
---
It can be seen that Chetan, RKUSENET, Ajit and UVR, etc.
also participated in the thread, but they did remain
confined only to music related issues and not were puppets
of MAFIA to further its bait-and-beat policy.
-------------------
So RMIMers!
Congratulations to all of you.
You must be happy that this is the RMIM you all have made.
A member joins RMIM to be called a "fool", "illiterate",
"clueless", "incoherent", "amusing", to be dogged by a well
coordinated mafia, to be baited again and again and then
killed when he take a bite.
Is this what you all had set out to do?
whoever had declared that "saahitya sa.ngiit kalaa-vihiinaa"
vyakti puruSH nahii.n pashu hai
here we have everything on "saahitya sa.ngiit kalaa" but
members are still no less dumb than pashu.
Congratulations again and again.
--
Rawat
V S Rawat
Are you the same Pradeep (Shah?) who had joined the list
some two years ago and had been dogged by Mr Naniwadekar,
and had probably quit the ng on that account.
If so, the wheel has come full circle for you that you have
now graduated to bash the newcomers the way you had got
bashed as a newcomer.
If you are not, apologies for mixing up the identities.
--
Rawat
Surjit Singh
Ket...@att.net wrote:
> In article <8777cccd.04071...@posting.google.com>, Ritu says...
>
>>NS...@netscape.net (SRK) wrote in message
>
>
>>Could you please take this offline? With due respect to your talents
>>in Philosophy of Science (or whatever it is). It has no remote
>>connection to music and does not even provide humour or material of
>>general interest other off-topic posts do. It would be nice if you
>>could streamline your posts to Lata and Geeta rather than your own
>>personal talents.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Ritu
>>
>>P.S Where is Ketan now??
>
>
> Not been reading RMIM for 4-5 days. Infact I was catching up on all the posts
> from last week, today, and from the looks of it, I didn't miss much. Your
> question seems to indicate that you expect me to jump in, everytime someone goes
> off-topic. You must be kidding. The only person who seems to have the time to
> sit and criticize off-topic posts is Surjit Singh. But I have yet to hear of a
> criminal being appointed judge. :)
>
> And what should I criticize RS or his posts for? a) For him blowing his own
> trumpet? b) For his somewhat off-topic posts?
>
> If a) RMIM would be dead if we banned that.
> If b) He might be off-topic but by and large he is arguing a case relevant to
> HFM in this newsgroup in most of his posts. That's a lot more than most people
> do on here. It is up to RMIMers to decide if they want to take him seriously or
> not. They are free to dismiss his Lata-Geeta theory and ignore his posts. So he
> talks of himself more than he should, does not do his research before posting,
> and argues without purpose at times. There are scores of RMIMers on here who do
But they are mafia members! To them all is forgiven :)
> worse. Why don't you step in at those times? Why now?
>
>
> Ketan
>
--
Surjit Singh, a diehard movie fan(atic), period.
Ket...@att.net
Clarifying my own post before someone pounces.
>If b) He might be off-topic but by and large he is arguing a case relevant to
^^^
please insert: "in some parts" above.
>HFM in this newsgroup in most of his posts. That's a lot more than most people
Ketan
SRK
You don't get it, do you?
R. Srinivasan
SRK
Geeta Dutt's voice had a unique quality that made her worthy of being
in the same league as Lata and Asha, even if she did not have their
technical prowess. But I strongly suspect that Geeta was one of those
people who badly needed a manager or mentor who could have helped her
survive in the real world; here she was no match for Lata or Asha.
Guru Dutt could have been that person, but he let her down.
R. Srinivasan
Niranjan R. Pedanekar
> niranjan_...@yahoo.com (Niranjan R. Pedanekar) wrote in message news
>
> > 1 What is the absolutely highest note that Lata has produced in a
> > song?
> > 2 What is the absolutely highest note that Rafi has produced in a
> > song?
>
> Dear Niranjan,
>
> Lata's soprano-like performance in 'aye dil kahaan teri manzil' (Maya,
> with dwijen Mukherjee) & 'woh ik nigaah kya mili' (Half Ticket, with
> Kishore Kumar) might be the answers for Q1.
>
> Rafi's 'o duniya ke rakhwaale' might be the answer for Q2.
>
> Regards-Archisman.
Thanks! I had almost forgotten about the 'aa-haa-haa' stuff from Maya.
Though it is a valid answer to Q1, it is, IMO, in a falsetto voice
(That would make Kishore's 'aake siidhii lagii' (Half-Ticket, again)
much higher-pitched than any of Rafi's songs ;-)))
For Q2: 'o duniyaa ke rakhavaale' or 'o duur ke musaafir'?
Thanks,
Niranjan
Niranjan R. Pedanekar
> Niranjan R. Pedanekar wrote:
> > For anyone conversant with the basics of music, it is
> > easy to note that:
> >
> > - Lata's high and Rafi's high cannot be compared in the
> > same song - Their respective ranges (and the tonal
> > quality at the extremes) is one of the good indications
> > of their vocal abilities
> >
> > That brings me to these questions:
> >
> > 1 What is the absolutely highest note that Lata has
> > produced in a song? 2 What is the absolutely highest note
> > absolutely lowest note that Lata has produced in a song?
> > 4 What is the absolutely lowest note that Rafi has
> > produced in a song? 5 What has been the song with the
> > greatest range for Lata? 6 What has been the song with
> > the greatest range for Rafi?
> >
> > Obviosuly, authentic answers to these are difficult to
> > find. But can some knowledgable people hazard a few
> > guesses?
> >
> > I think 'jahaan pe baseraa ho' can be considered a
> > candidate answer for question number 1. Also, 'jaane kyaa
> > dhuundhatii rahatii hain' is probably a candidate for
> > question 6.
> >
> > Thanks, Niranjan
>
> Hi Niranjan,
>
> not contributing to your thread, but I am very much
> impressed by your mail.
>
> If people can learn to think in this logical, step-by-step.
> analytical, exploring manner the way you have conceptualized
> and elaborated, there will never be any flame wars among
> fans of different personalities.
>
> Keep it up.
Thanks, Rawat saab. You are too kind with your words.
Let me make a confession though. These hands, which have keyed in the
'immaculate logic' that you refer to, have also thrown Molotov
cocktails in some not-so-polite flame-wars in not-so-distant
past...;-))))
Thanks,
Niranjan
SRK
These figures are stunning. Only 77 songs out of 4220 in an entire
decade and only 64 over a six-year period from 1960 to 1966 for Geeta
Dutt, when Lata and Asha sang several hundreds? Whatever the reason
for the discrepancy, that doesn't do justice to her talent, which was
superior to that of the other female singers on the above list, except
Lata and Asha. Can the discrepancy be attributed only to her personal
problems, including lack of proper working relationships with MD's?
Note that your argument that "other singers got their fair share" does
not prove that there was a lack of systematic bias against Geeta.
Thanks for the analysis; by and large agree with you.
R. Srinivasan
Sunil Dandekar
> naniwadekar wrote:
> > Surjit Singh <surjit...@yahoo.com> wrote -
..snipped...
I am planning to get a doctorate. I think RMIM is the perfect forum to
discuss my aspirations, my achievements, talk about my appointment as
member of PTA in my son's school, and boil on my nose.
Patna is where I would get my doctorate from. The proposition I am
putting forth in my thesis is that Darwin was right after all. The
proof? Similarity of the behavior between our animal friends and few
prolific RMIMers. My thesis will be a serious blow to creationists.
Darwin will live easier in heaven.
In case, you believe me not. Here are few ideas that I am going to
expound in the thesis.
Vultures-RMIMers: Sit quietly for a long discussion thread time to
sense as to who is going to be dead meat and then pounce with their
long beaks of rude language. They usually enter at the end of any
discussion thread. Behind the outward bluster, they are cowards. They
fly away when somebody who has even a fouler beak, or is more
aggressive, confronts them. Vultures prefer a 60-year-old carcass than
one merely 30 years old. They also are totally at loss to understand
why nobody enjoys putrefied meat as they do.
Mad dogs-RMIMers: They are characterized by random vicious attacks.
They have no friends. Men climb Everest because it is there. Mad dogs
chomp on the butt because it is there. Being half out of their minds,
they cannot be burdened with logic.
Normal dogs-RMIMer: They are famous for cocking their legs at every
lamppost they come across, irrespective of whether they have anything
to offer or not. A drop squirted a thread, keeps the boredom away.
Owl-RMIMers: They are revered for their wisdom. They are peering out
of the hole in the tree. Their viewpoint is constricted by the hole.
It becomes narrower and narrower as they burrow deeper and deeper.
Being myopic they believe only what they see. They pore over the dim
markings on the tree and spout forth umm… facts and figures like year
when sombody far--, errr belched in the party thrown by AV.
Peacock-RMIMers: The peacocks have only one thing going for them. They
preen their feathers of their single achievement on every occasion,
whether it is called for or not. They do not care whether the feathers
are germane to the discussion or not. They also forget what is
displayed when they spread the feathers.
Crow-RMIMers: They are on look out for holes to poke their beaks into,
and enlarge it. Semantics and syntax is their lifeblood. Sometimes the
hole they make is bigger than the object that the hole is in. No worm
is small enough and no issue is insignificant enough for these happy
scavangers.
Jackal-RMIMers: They live on the prey hunted by the bigger predators.
These little things pester rather than kill the pray. They are careful
not to get into argument with the bigger animals.
Curious symbiotic relations between the animals of different species
is a topic for another theis I suppose.
I would be obliged if others point out few more similarities. I will
gratefully and humbly EXCLUDE their names from acknowledgement section
of my thesis.
regards,
Sunil Dandekar
SRK
So what?
>
> > Let us make a Bollywood movie, in which Mr. Paper Tiger plays the hero
> > (Einstein), Lata plays the heroine (Lata), Asha is the mother of the
> > hero (Maaaa!), Amitabh is the Inspector of Police, Amitabh sings for
> > Einstein, Lata and Asha sing for themselves, and, you guessed it: R.
> > Srinivasan is the villain. Riddle for RMIMers: Who sings for R.S?
> > (Hint: MUST be a Rafi-clone).
> >
> > Cut to the end of the movie. R.S's body lies vanquished in a pool of
> > blood, with Amitabh's foot on his chest, and with Einstein making a
> > long speech that starts with "Zindgi mein...", in very, very low
> > pitch, progressively increasing in pitch (so as to prevent the
> > audience from falling asleep), and, ends at the climax with a
> > full-throated, blood-curdling, ear-drum-piercing yell
> > MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! (at a much higher pitch than
> > Rafi SINGS RAKHWAAAAAAAALEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!).
> >
> > Must confess I haven't seen a Bollywood movie for some time now, but
> > come to think of it: Has there been ANY Bollywood movie in which the
> > hero does not make a speech starting with "Zindgi mein..." and yelling
> > maaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! at some stage or the other?
> >
>
> Yet another yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn!
An even bigger contortion of your mouth. So what?
R. Srinivasan
SRK
Mr. Rawat,
Don't take Usenet so seriously! Its all in the game. No one really
cares who says what on Usenet. I just got in here to test out some pet
theories of mine, mainly because of the nerve-wracking wait for
journals to reply to my submissions. Not really all that bothered
about anything that goes on here. More serious discussions probably
take place on moderated ngs.
R. Srinivasan
SRK
along, you wouldn't recognize him. Hope you are not on the editorial
boards or referee's panels of worthwhile journals.
R. Srinivasan
Loony Tunes
"Niranjan R. Pedanekar" <niranjan_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2665227a.04071...@posting.google.com...
>
> That brings me to these questions:
>
> 1 What is the absolutely highest note that Lata has produced in a
> song?
> 2 What is the absolutely highest note that Rafi has produced in a
> song?
> 3 What is the absolutely lowest note that Lata has produced in a song?
> 4 What is the absolutely lowest note that Rafi has produced in a song?
> 5 What has been the song with the greatest range for Lata?
> 6 What has been the song with the greatest range for Rafi?
>
> Obviosuly, authentic answers to these are difficult to find. But can
> some knowledgable people hazard a few guesses?
At the risk of sounding a bit technical, I can suggest a methodology that I
myself am working on....
- Take a sampling of songs (on either side of the spectrum) of the singers
and do a frequency content examination. That way, you can get an
approximation to the highest, lowest frequencies. It might be hard to come
up with the right song that had the absolute min/max (as we might never know
which one it was), but this way you can stay around the ball-park.
cheers
lt
SRK
> >in Philosophy of Science (or whatever it is). It has no remote
> >connection to music and does not even provide humour or material of
> >general interest other off-topic posts do. It would be nice if you
> >could streamline your posts to Lata and Geeta rather than your own
> >personal talents.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Ritu
> >
> >P.S Where is Ketan now??
>
> from last week, today, and from the looks of it, I didn't miss much. Your
> question seems to indicate that you expect me to jump in, everytime someone goes
> off-topic. You must be kidding. The only person who seems to have the time to
> sit and criticize off-topic posts is Surjit Singh. But I have yet to hear of a
> criminal being appointed judge. :)
>
> And what should I criticize RS or his posts for? a) For him blowing his own
> trumpet? b) For his somewhat off-topic posts?
>
> If a) RMIM would be dead if we banned that.
> not. They are free to dismiss his Lata-Geeta theory and ignore his posts. So he
> talks of himself more than he should, does not do his research before posting,
> and argues without purpose at times. There are scores of RMIMers on here who do
>
>
> Ketan
Probably guilty of everything you say. Thanks for not being too harsh
on me. Actually I have shot my bolt as far as my theories and music
are concerned. The after-burners are firing for my exit from
RMIM....fired a few flames today...the work front is heating up
anyway...a few more flames perhaps, and I'm out of here. Long live
RMIM. Long live Usenet.
R. Srinivasan
Chetan Vinchhi
"Loony Tunes" wrote...
>
> At the risk of sounding a bit technical, I can suggest a methodology that
I
> myself am working on....
>
> - Take a sampling of songs (on either side of the spectrum) of the singers
> and do a frequency content examination.
Can you briefly talk about your methodology? (Are you using or planning
to use a software tool? Developing your own? What type of tool/s?)
C
ps - When will you give us a chance to say "Finally a name"? :)
t u s e n e t @yahoo.com Loony Tunes
>
> Can you briefly talk about your methodology? (Are you using or planning
> to use a software tool? Developing your own? What type of tool/s?)
I wont call it a software tool. It is more of using some existing DSP
algorithms in some well-known analysis software. I was using Matlab with its
DSP toolbox. The problem I am facing is that with the number of clips I have
(gleaned from Indianscreen, personal collection, borrowed collections), I
have different audio formats. This causes a problem in standardization as I
am not sure if I would retain the "original quality" by converting all of
them to a standard format. MP3 is a popular "clip-size-minimizing" option,
but different MP3 clips have different compression. Some are as low as 16
bit on Indianscreen. So, my "takshana kartavyam" (immediate duty) is to
figure out a way to convert different formats to a standard with minimal
loss in "quality".
Also, I wonder if stripping the songs of the music is necessary. It is a
good feature to have..(you can then have karaoke on the original music
:-))). If it is necessary, I dont have a clean way of doing it. It is a hack
prone to a lot of errors.
All this might be futile, but I am doing it for myself. I am definitely
learning along the way.
cheers
lt
Pradeep
> some two years ago and had been dogged by Mr Naniwadekar,
> and had probably quit the ng on that account.
>
> If so, the wheel has come full circle for you that you have
> now graduated to bash the newcomers the way you had got
> bashed as a newcomer.
>
> If you are not, apologies for mixing up the identities.
Apologies accepted.
....Pradeep
Pradeep
> RMIM. For the same reason,
This is the biggest insult to Rawat on RMIM!
....Pradeep (not Shah)
Surjit Singh
Good luck with the doctorate!
Sunil Dandekar wrote:
--
Ritu
> especially liked your "or whatever it is". Will not make any more
> off-topic digressions, except for this last one.
Thanks for your consideration. Will be glad to get back to music.
>
> Today, the boss of my Research Unit at IBM, Dr. Uday Shukla passed
> away, at age 50 or thereabouts. Dr. Shukla did not have the research
> credentials of the various characters I have run into in National
> Aerospace Laboratories and elsewhere, i.e., he did not have an FRS,
> hundreds of publications, etc. But he could have taught them a lesson
> in professionalism and ethics; in this domain, he could have "given
> them ten" and comprehensively thrashed them. I will miss him, and so
> will all of us here at IBM India Software Labs.
Please do accept my condolences for Dr Shulka. May his soul rest in peace.
Regards,
Ritu
Ritu
>
> And what should I criticize RS or his posts for? a) For him blowing his own
> trumpet? b) For his somewhat off-topic posts?
>
> If a) RMIM would be dead if we banned that.
> If b) He might be off-topic but by and large he is arguing a case relevant to
> HFM in this newsgroup in most of his posts. That's a lot more than most people
> do on here. It is up to RMIMers to decide if they want to take him seriously or
> not.
Oh come on Ketan, for someone who reacts to even a slight digression
such as that from music to cinema or grammer (which IMO is a pretty
natural since these topics are very closely related to music) thinks
that it is OK if someone waxes eloquent endlessly about the their work
related issues? Maybe I should too start talking about the extreme
challenges I am facing these days trying to design a mechanism that
allows me to seperate middleware COM+ environment from the web tier
using SOAP services. The problem is because we are using VMWare slices
you see. Ofcourse the porject manager like all PMs is totally clueless
and makes things tougher. I can get into the niity gritties if you
like. I am frustated enough to write 10 pages on it. Let's see you
letting me get away with that!
Your attempts to contain off-topic posts in the past have been quite
consistent and quite rightly you first contain the people who have
been here longer. And I also understand your not reacting to this post
(that P.S was just a joke btw). But after reacting to it, your
justification of the off-topic stuff is not consistent to your
previous stand on the issue.
>They are free to dismiss his Lata-Geeta theory and ignore his posts.
So he
> talks of himself more than he should, does not do his research before posting,
> and argues without purpose at times. There are scores of RMIMers on here who do
> worse. Why don't you step in at those times? Why now?
>
I am not against his theories on Lata and Geeta. That is an issue of
debate and Dr Srinivasan is free to his opinions liek everyone else is
to theirs. One can argue, debate and continue to do so on those
topics. That's the basic purpose of this newsgroup. I am just reacting
to the long monologues on his work-related issues. Yes, the RMIMers
are eqaully guilty of reacting to it.
But anyway, Dr Srinivasan has agreed to focus on music so hopefully
this issue ends here.
Regards
Ritu
Ritu
> reveal her true mafia color is MS Ritu.
>
> RMIMers! please look into the modus operandi of RMIM MAFIA.
>
<Rest of the hallucinatory drivel trashed>
Rawat Saab,
Whatever made you think I am a *closet* Mafia member? After having
attended 3-4 RMIM Meets and hobnobbed with the top brass, it is not
possible to remain a closet member you see. I was brain-washed in the
first meet itself. Bekar mein you wasted so much time and space to
prove Ms Ritu to be a mafia member. She already is!!
Anyway, I suggest you find a shrink really fast. For now I have just
one thing to say to you.
BUZZ OFF!!!
Ritu
Surjit Singh
Ritu wrote:
> V S Rawat <vsrawat_...@hclinfinet.com> wrote in message news:<40FCA765...@hclinfinet.com>...
>
>
>>The new person who has decided to come out of closet to
>>reveal her true mafia color is MS Ritu.
>>
>>RMIMers! please look into the modus operandi of RMIM MAFIA.
>>
>
>
> <Rest of the hallucinatory drivel trashed>
>
> Rawat Saab,
>
> Whatever made you think I am a *closet* Mafia member? After having
> attended 3-4 RMIM Meets and hobnobbed with the top brass, it is not
> possible to remain a closet member you see. I was brain-washed in the
> first meet itself. Bekar mein you wasted so much time and space to
> prove Ms Ritu to be a mafia member. She already is!!
Actually, he doth protest too much! Having contributed to a genuine bona
fide RMIM meet release by providing rare songs from Indore, he is also a
gang menmber.
>
> Anyway, I suggest you find a shrink really fast. For now I have just
> one thing to say to you.
>
> BUZZ OFF!!!
>
> Ritu
--
Anant Rege
"Ritu" <rc0...@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
news:8777cccd.04072...@posting.google.com...
> challenges I am facing these days trying to design a mechanism that
> allows me to seperate middleware COM+ environment from the web tier
> using SOAP services. The problem is because we are using VMWare slices
> you see. Ofcourse the porject manager like all PMs is totally clueless
> and makes things tougher. I can get into the niity gritties if you
> like. I am frustated enough to write 10 pages on it. Let's see you
> letting me get away with that!
>
thread. See if only you had attended the meet, we could have had some
meaningful conversation. Otherwise we just had same boring musical
discussions.
Anant
Regards
> Ritu
Narayanan
>
> "Shalini Razdan" wrote...
> >
> > I hate to ask such a basic question, but how are "pitch" and "range"
> > defined? Are they objective, measurable qualities or a matter of
> > subjective interpretation?
>
> Pitch is the fundamental frequency of the most natural voice
> of a singer.
>
> Range is the difference between the lowest and the highest
> frequencies a singer can sing "comfortably".
I am a late entrant in this thread. I think range should be defined
as the it be its logarithm of ratio of the highest to the lowest
(to the base 2). One typically looks at how many octaves a person can
sing (2.5 or 3 octave is the range). 3 octaves means log(highest/lowest) = 3.
Someone who has lowest 100 and highest 800, has a higher range than
someone who has lowest 800 and highest 1600. The latter is just one
octave. Former is 3 octaves. But the difference is higher in the case of
latter.
N-
V S Rawat
>
> (that P.S was just a joke btw).
Everybody understood that.
But it did reveal a state of mind.
> But after reacting to it, your justification of the
> off-topic stuff is not consistent to your previous stand
> on the issue.
Oh RMIMers!
Today seems to be her day of not-seeing? Let me try again.
MS RITU JI!
Ketan has NOT NOT NOT justified off-topic stuffs.
He has only said that there should be CONISISTENCY in
dealing with ALL off topic mails by everyone.
KETAN asked MS RITU JI:
>> There are scores of RMIMers on here who do worse. Why
>> don't you step in at those times? Why now?
MS RITU JI replies:
> I am not against his theories on Lata and Geeta.
She sidetracks the question and talks about something else.
MS RITU JI:
Let me repeat the question:
"Why don't you step in at those times? Why now?"
> That is an issue of debate and Dr Srinivasan is free to
> his opinions liek everyone else is to theirs. One can
> argue, debate and continue to do so on those topics.
> That's the
> basic purpose of this newsgroup.
Your did not feel any problem when someone gets called a
"fool", "illiterate", "clueless", "incoherent", "amusing".
But you had started having problems when someone describes
his papers on being prompted by other members to do so.
And then you talk about -
"basic purpose of this newsgroup."
"BASIC PURPOSE OF THIS NEWSGROUP".
B A S I C P U R P O S E O F T H I S N E W S G R O U P
How does all this and your own role fit in your
understanding of "B A S I C P U R P O S E O F T H I S N
E W S G R O U P"?
> I am just reacting to the long monologues on his
> work-related issues.
She is impossible.
One can show something to a person who is ready to see.
One can open the eyes of some person who has closed her eyes.
But how to make a person understand who has closed her mind.
She is continuing with her theory.
Could someone please take the matter in his/her hand and
explain to Ms RITU that SRK was prompted again and again by
three persons to write about these things. He did not start
writing about it on his own.
> Yes, the RMIMers are eqaully guilty of reacting to it.
good. and Thanks.
Just a few timely postings of such sentences is enough to
state that you are unbiassed.
> But anyway, Dr Srinivasan has agreed to focus on music so
> hopefully this issue ends here.
you really need to get some time off from your SOAP services
and soap operas to read some classics like
kabiraa dhaagaa prem kaa mat to.Dyo chaTakaay
jo.De se phir naa ju.De, ju.De gaa.nTh pa.D jaaye.
>
> Regards Ritu
--
Rawat