Looking back at voices of Lata and Asha
Asif
Kishore Kumar, Asha Bhosle, Lata Mangeshkar, Majrooh, Anand Bakshi,
and Gulzar in the ‘70s, I also explored the music of the ‘30s through
‘60s extensively in those days. I feel that voice quality of singers
like of K.L. Sehgal, Kanan Devi, and Devika Rani deteriorated a lot in
the ‘40s apparently because of their advancing age (40+) and ill-
health – they sound good in their songs from only the ‘30s. Plus, the
music of their songs from the ‘40s was plainly boring by itself and
decidedly inferior to those from the ‘60s and ‘70s. In the songs from
the '40s, there was no guitar, no saxophone, no accordion, and, worse,
no madal. How can anyone dislike naturally beautiful sounds emanating
from these musical instruments?
In comparison to likes of KLS and Kanan Bala, singers like Lata and
Asha maintained a good health, a supple throat, and a good, often
brilliant, voice deep into the ‘70s. Lata and Asha were 40+ in the
‘70s and still sounded great. Music in their songs from the ‘60s and
‘70s, as I said, was clearly superior and more or less complemented
their singing, e.g. songs from Woh Kaun Thi (1964), Mere Sanam (1965),
Yeh Raat Phir Na Aayegi (1966), Guide (1966), Amrapali (1966), Talash
(1969), Kati Patang (1970), Pakeezah (1972), Anamika (1973), Mehbooba
(1976), Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (1978), and Ghar (1978). Am I the only
one having this view of the overall music of the ‘30s and ‘40s versus
the ‘60s and ‘70s and not hiding behind a lame excuse of Lata’s voice
deteriorating in the ‘60s and ‘70s, or there are others too sharing my
view?
Chetan Vinchhi
> I feel that voice quality of singers
> like of K.L. Sehgal, Kanan Devi, and Devika Rani deteriorated a lot in
> the ‘40s apparently because of their advancing age (40+) and ill-
> health – they sound good in their songs from only the ‘30s.
What is the problem with Saigal's voice in, say, Shahjehan? "mere
sapano.n kii raanii" is the best of the 3 well-known songs with those
opening words and that is not because of Rafi's excellent cameo.
> Plus, the
> music of their songs from the ‘40s was plainly boring by itself and
> decidedly inferior to those from the ‘60s and ‘70s.
Huh?
> and, worse, no madal.
I am muddled. What is that?
> How can anyone dislike naturally beautiful sounds emanating
> from these musical instruments?
Actually it depends on how the sounds are used. Also, what is more
natural than a beautiful human voice such as that of Kanan Bala?
> Am I the only
> one having this view of the overall music of the ‘30s and ‘40s versus
> the ‘60s and ‘70s and not hiding behind a lame excuse of Lata’s voice
> deteriorating in the ‘60s and ‘70s, or there are others too sharing my
> view?
Oh, I am sure you are not the only one. Besides, there would be others
who think 60s and 70s were boring and the real music is the one made
in 00s.
C
Sathya Sekar
> Kishore Kumar, Asha Bhosle, Lata Mangeshkar, Majrooh, Anand Bakshi,
> and Gulzar in the ‘70s, I also explored the music of the ‘30s through
> ‘60s extensively in those days.
You have the advantage of me. While I grew up with roughly the same
crowd, I did not start exploring the earlier times till later -not
till the mid-80s in fact.
> I feel that voice quality of singers
> like of K.L. Sehgal, Kanan Devi, and Devika Rani deteriorated a lot in
> the ‘40s apparently because of their advancing age (40+) and ill-
> health – they sound good in their songs from only the ‘30s.
I do not agree. Saigal sounds as brilliant as ever in "Surdas",
"Tansen", "My sister" et al. In fact, "ae qaatibe taqadiir" is one of
my very favorite all-time songs.
I also do not agree about Lata's longevity. She was past her prime by
the mid-60s. Asha was tolerable much longer I agree.
> Plus, the
> music of their songs from the ‘40s was plainly boring by itself and
> decidedly inferior to those from the ‘60s and ‘70s.
LOL ! "decidedly" - who decided it pray? Its an extreme extrapolation
of a heavy personal bias.
How can the 40s be called boring when it had the best of Anil Biswas,
Khemchand Prakash and Ghulam Haider, when there were such great
musical landmarks from Naushad and C.Ramchandra?
The 40s had amongst the best of Saigal, Noojehan, Suraiya, Khursheed
amongst others,
I dont want to reel off a huge list of soundtracks here. But IMO, the
40s was a grand musical age.
And in my heavily biased opinion, the 0s was the first chapter in the
swift degradation of film music.
> In the songs from
> the '40s, there was no guitar, no saxophone, no accordion, and, worse,
> no madal. How can anyone dislike naturally beautiful sounds emanating
> from these musical instruments?
I completely lost you here. I am all admiration for there instruments
- but are you saying the 40s were bad because they didnt use these
instruments?
I believe orchestration is a subtle art. You do not need a 100-piece
orchestra with every possible instrument to make a great song. The
beauty of a song is all about how well it captures the mood of a song.
Consider songs like "ab vo raate.n kahaa.N" or "chaa.Nd maddham hai".
They create such magic with such minimal orchestration. They do not
use all those instruments you listed above.But none of those
instruments are needed to create the magic thee songs create. The
music makers of the times understood orchestration and its subtleties.
They knew when to not use it to elevate a song and when to use just
the right instruments. I do not look beyond Anilda and Khemchand
Prakash when it comes to brilliance of orchestration.
My chief fault with the 60s and later is that our music makers forgot
this art of subtlety. Listening to "dil ke jharoke me" during a car
drive some months back was one of the most terrible musical
experiences I have had. I had to endure it because my wife likes the
song. This is a classic example of how NOT to orchestrate. It is
Noise, not Music.Thats my heavy-duty bias of course.
> In comparison to likes of KLS and Kanan Bala, singers like Lata and
> Asha maintained a good health, a supple throat, and a good, often
> brilliant, voice deep into the ‘70s. Lata and Asha were 40+ in the
> ‘70s and still sounded great. Music in their songs from the ‘60s and
> ‘70s, as I said, was clearly superior and more or less complemented
> their singing, e.g. songs from Woh Kaun Thi (1964), Mere Sanam (1965),
> Yeh Raat Phir Na Aayegi (1966), Guide (1966), Amrapali (1966), Talash
> (1969), Kati Patang (1970), Pakeezah (1972), Anamika (1973), Mehbooba
> (1976), Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (1978), and Ghar (1978). Am I the only
> one having this view of the overall music of the ‘30s and ‘40s versus
> the ‘60s and ‘70s and not hiding behind a lame excuse of Lata’s voice
> deteriorating in the ‘60s and ‘70s, or there are others too sharing my
> view?
If listing soundtracks is the example to proving your point, I would
love to start doing so. But I dont believe thats the case, so I wont.
I thoroughly dislike most of the films you have listed and personally,
am dumb-founded at a few selections.Since we seem to be exist in
parallel universes, I might as well stay dumb.
Regards,
Sathya
AR
> On Jul 23, 5:48 pm, Asif <alvi.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Although I grew up on an intoxicating musical staple of R.D. Burman,
> > Kishore Kumar, Asha Bhosle, Lata Mangeshkar, Majrooh, Anand Bakshi,
> > and Gulzar in the ‘70s, I also explored the music of the ‘30s through
> > ‘60s extensively in those days.
>
> You have the advantage of me. While I grew up with roughly the same
> crowd, I did not start exploring the earlier times till later -not
> till the mid-80s in fact.
>
> > I feel that voice quality of singers
> > like of K.L. Sehgal, Kanan Devi, and Devika Rani deteriorated a lot in
> > the ‘40s apparently because of their advancing age (40+) and ill-
> > health – they sound good in their songs from only the ‘30s.
>
> I do not agree. Saigal sounds as brilliant as ever in "Surdas",
> "Tansen", "My sister" et al. In fact, "ae qaatibe taqadiir" is one of
> my very favorite all-time songs.
>
I do not agree with Asif because the question of deterioration arises
only when you are good (sufferable?) to begin with.
> I also do not agree about Lata's longevity. She was past her prime by
> the mid-60s. Asha was tolerable much longer I agree.
>
Who was more tolerable out of the two sisters is a bit besides the
point. Because they were both more tolerable than the insufferable
Hindi film singers of the 30s and early 40s. One common characteristic
of the songs of the 30s and 40s is the raw, dull singing with
*extremely* affected pronunciation. Compared to all that, give me a
"raina beeti jaaye", a "bheeni bheeni bhor aaye" or a "naam gum
jaayega" any day (and yeah, we are talking of their supposedly past-
their-prime songs here). And why stop at the 70s? Give me an A R
Rahman beauty from 1947 Earth like "ishwar allah tere jahaan mein
nafrat kyun hai jung hai kyun" or the classical-based Rangeela song
"hai rama yeh kaise hua...".
Archisman Mozumder
Dear Asif-bhai,
This topic is interesting. If I were to choose 2 decades of HFM that
gives me the greatest pleasure, it will be 1955 to 1975. I will not
slide up or down at any cost, despite some gems that are obviously
present outside this range (on both sides).
I too like the orchestration of the 60-s and 70-s very much. Thanks to
C Ramchandra, S-J, Salil C, OPN & R D Burman (and an arranger for SDB
and as a composer), our music became a melting pot of a lot of global
styles and the results were wonderful. Especially, as you said, the
advent of the brass section in the orchestration gave it a different
dimension altogether.
All IMHO.
Regards.
vrk
Dear Asif
I agree with Archisman that this is a very interesting topic. I
personally feel that every two decades threw up new artistes and new
sounds who were very popular and defined that era. the 50s and 60s was
the sj era. new mds and new singers coming together to create lasting
classics. the 70s and 80s saw lp and rd. but unfortunately no new
singers came through (unless you want to consider amit kumar, shabbir
etc). the 90s and 00s saw arr, vishal shekhar and sel come through.
but the diff now was that there was a new breed of so many very good
singers too. (the thirties I am sure had their defining set of
artistes and sounds)
when I call up cabbies - at times I hear songs like 'toone bechain
itnaa ziyaada kiyaa' or choom loon honth tere. which makes me wonder,
who can like these songs so much so as to make them ringtones. but I
guess one is always closest to songs that one heard while growing up
(school plus college). as the famous rdb song said in saagar - baaqii
bekaar hai, yaar mere.
surjit singh
Heavy orchestration and melting-potism are what I do not like about
this era and beyond. If I want to listen to orchestra, I might as
well listen to where it reached its zenith, i.e. western classical
music or opera. And as for melting pot, I would have listened to its
ingredients in original from the Mid East, or western pop or BIg Band
or Jazz or whatever. [I indeed do]
In Hindi movies, music should have remained mainly Indian, unless, of
course, the situation justifies it, as in a night club in an urban
setting. Of course, these days Hindi movies are like English movies in
every sense of the word!
People who dismiss 30s and 40s music casually need to study more. Of
course, as always de gustibus etc. or as Ameen Sayani used to say
Khyaal apnaa apnaa etc.
>
> All IMHO.
>
> Regards.
Archisman Mozumder
>
> Heavy orchestration and melting-potism are what I do not like about
> this era and beyond. If I want to listen to orchestra, I might as
> well listen to where it reached its zenith, i.e. western classical
> music or opera. And as for melting pot, I would have listened to its
> ingredients in original from the Mid East, or western pop or BIg Band
> or Jazz or whatever. [I indeed do]
>
> In Hindi movies, music should have remained mainly Indian, unless, of
> course, the situation justifies it, as in a night club in an urban
> setting. Of course, these days Hindi movies are like English movies in
> every sense of the word!
>
> People who dismiss 30s and 40s music casually need to study more. Of
> course, as always de gustibus etc. or as Ameen Sayani used to say
> Khyaal apnaa apnaa etc.
>
>
Dear Surjit-ji,
Thank you for your views. Salil Chowdhury's arrangement can never
match the Vienna Philharmonic or R D Burman's can never match Duke
Ellington's men.
Neither can K L Saigal's/Pankaj Mullick's 'aye qatib-e-taqdeer' match
the Bhairavi dadra of Faiyaaz Khan's 'banaao batiyan chalo kaahe ko
jhoothe'.
However, the beauty of HFM has been the its beautiful 'made easy'
recepies for the great forms of music. If the likes of R C Boral. Gyan
Dutt, P K Mullick imbibed the classical, folk, qawwali, ghazals and
other music forms of our country and and blended them to dish out HF
songs that were enjoyed by one and all.
Similarly, CR, Salil C, SJ and RD (to name just four) scouted globally
and were able to mix music from corners of the world very attractively
for the masses (and classes). I have started enjoying western
classical music and jazz (in huge moderation, of course) only after
being bred on Salil Chowdhury and R D Burman's music during my
childhood.
That said, I must hasten to add that my knowledge about cine music of
the 30-s & 40-s is very patchy, but I'm respectful about the singers
and the composers of that era. I have heard many bengali songs
(rabindrasangeet, nazrul-geeti and adhunik songs) by artists of that
era to have a very healthy respect for them.
However, the time-period that gives me the maximum pleasure is the 20
year span between 1955 to 1975. Just as an example, the use of the
glockenspiel in 'rahe na rahe hum' or the saxophone in 'duniya kare
sawaal' are so beautiful that words fail me. This from a composer who
is a Marris College student and so tellingly used traditional
classical bandishes in the early 50-s (why, even in Chitralekha in
1964).
All IMHO.
Regards.
That said
Ahmad
Hello Asif, I note that you grew up with the music of 1970 with
singers like Lata, Asha and Kishore Kumar.
You are entitled to your opinions and your views. I think you have a
lot to learn. You are out of your depth if you discuss Saigal, Kana
Bala and express the opinion that they were not good at 40+. I agree
with the views expressed by Chetan Vinchi, Atchisman Mozumder and
Surjit singh.
To even put singers like Lata, Asha, kishore Kumar in the same
Category as the great singers like Saigal and others from NewTheatres
era is an insult to the great singers of 1930-1950. You are comparing
Chalk with cheese as regards singing. Instruments are there to
support the singers. A symphony Orchestra can not help a the voice of
a poor singer.
MA
Baad-e-Siyaah
> this era and beyond. If I want to listen to orchestra, I might as
> well listen to where it reached its zenith, i.e. western classical
> music or opera. And as for melting pot, I would have listened to its
> ingredients in original from the Mid East, or western pop or BIg Band
> or Jazz or whatever. [I indeed do]
This argument is bogus. We don't stop listening to popular msic simply
because we like classical music.
> In Hindi movies, music should have remained mainly Indian, unless, of
> course, the situation justifies it, as in a night club in an urban
> setting. Of course, these days Hindi movies are like English movies in
> every sense of the word!
aa no bhadra kratvoh yaNtu vishvataH:
- Rig Veda
(let noble thoughts come to us from everyside)
This debate is destined reach a dead end. There are diehard fans on
all sides. Music is so individualistic preference and also such
compelling faith that we tend to convince others to concur with us in
reaffirmation of our own faith, much like the idea of God. It is not
enough to believe in Him but make others too believe in him as if our
own faith is on shaky ground.
In my opinion the Music of 55-65 is considered Golden age of HFM
because...
1. Scores of Composer reaching their prime.
2. Scores of high class lyricist in their prime.
3. Even though just a few hogged the singing assignments, there still
were a variety of niche singers lighting up the sky of HFM.
4. Skillful use of orchestra.
Just ask yourself how many Music Directors, Lyricists and Singers you
can recall in other periods of HFM. Ask a child if he/she has heard
'ramaiyya vastah vaiyya..." they probably have but not one will recall
any of K L Saigal song. This is not saying that songs from this period
were better than any other age, that would again be individual
preference but collectively popularity of songs of 55-65 transcends
all ages.
Abhay Jain
"Baad-e-Siyaah" <ciyah...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e2449eda-15a1-427d...@q16g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Heavy orchestration and melting-potism are what I do not like about
> can recall in other periods of HFM. Ask a child if he/she has heard
> 'ramaiyya vastah vaiyya..." they probably have but not one will recall
> any of K L Saigal song. This is not saying that songs from this period
You are absolutely correct about child not liking Saigal,
but to the same child when he/she reaches mid 40s,
Saigal sounds golden.
AJ
Abhay Jain
"Ahmad" <mah...@talktalk.net> wrote in message
news:344c789b-f4af-49f3...@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
In today's HFM, heavy orchestration is definitely supporting so so singers
who have to breathe after every line. Many times I cannot even make out
the words.
AJ
AR
That's your opinion not collective judgment. There will be people who
call your poison as meat and vice versa.
> MA
Prithviraj Dasgupta
> Ask a child if he/she has heard
> 'ramaiyya vastah vaiyya..." they probably have but not one will recall
> any of K L Saigal song.
I strongly doubt if a child - living in India, below 10 years - has
heard 'ramaiyya vasta vaiyya'. Most young people (below 20) from India
reach for the remote's channel flip button if they mistakenly end up
on a channel playing a pre-00's, or maybe at most pre-90s song.
I was talking to an Indian music shop owner while visiting Toronto a
few weeks ago. His Indian music shop has been there since 1972. We
were chatting about today's music listening trends and one of the
things we agreed on was that young people have stopped listening to
(and hence stopped appreciating) old music (old as in recorded 10-20
years before their birth). This wasn't the case with the generation
that grew up in the 70s or before.
IMO, specific musical tastes are passed on for one generation if at
all, max two in very specific cases. Saigal is now almost three
generations, while Shri 420 is two - so its highly unlikely that
today's child will hold a fascination for either of these. The music
of both KLS and 1955-SJ are alien w.r.t. today's music. In another one
or two decades, my guess is RDB will have the same 'status' as Saigal
has today and someone will be probably making a post saying how arcane
Lata/Asha's voices sound w.r.t. the present singers.
-Prithviraj
hildebrand
Individual liking and exposure decides what period one prefers
listening to. My favourite period is 1942-56 and so I may listen more
to it.
The healthy respect for the remaining period remains though and I do
indulge in the others now and then.
Discussions around the words "best" often are deeply affected by
personal exposures, likings or biases if you like to call them so.
As for the original post about comparing artists, I feel each artist
had a different environment, situation, colleagues, recording
technologies to contend with which
influenced their work and there is nothing gained by comparing artists
with each other.
All tried to make the best out of what was available.
Best Regards
Hildebrand
Sukesh
everything else (composer, singer, orchestration,....) is secondary.
It so happens my playlist largely consists of songs for the period
1949 to 1971. Of course, there are songs from either side going back
to 1932 and forward to 2001.
Stating that my favourite singer / composer is X or X is better than
the rest, is by no means an insult to the other singers and composers
of any era.
Regards
Sukesh
Archisman Mozumder
>
> Hello Asif, I note that you grew up with the music of 1970 with
> singers like Lata, Asha and Kishore Kumar.
>
> You are entitled to your opinions and your views. I think you have a
> lot to learn. You are out of your depth if you discuss Saigal, Kana
> Bala and express the opinion that they were not good at 40+. I agree
> with the views expressed by Chetan Vinchi, Atchisman Mozumder and
> Surjit singh.
> To even put singers like Lata, Asha, kishore Kumar in the same
> Category as the great singers like Saigal and others from NewTheatres
> era is an insult to the great singers of 1930-1950. You are comparing
> Chalk with cheese as regards singing. Instruments are there to
> support the singers. A symphony Orchestra can not help a the voice of
> a poor singer.
>
> MA
In my very humble opinion, the Mangeshi sisters are finest light music
(recorded) singers that India is ever privileged to have, across both
genders. Not only were they at home in any genre of light music
(romantic, sad, peppy, devotional, ghazal, qawwaali, folk, etc), they
excelled in the raag-based songs as well (khayal & thumri-based)
Any more inclination towards 'pucca gaana', the 'bai-s' step in
(Kesarbai, Moghubai, Heerabai, Gangubai, Lakshmibai, Zohrabai, etc.).
Regards.
Ahmad
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, I agree, the 2 sisters have delighted us with a huge number of
hit songs.
There are many others from earlier age in this light genre such as New
Theatres singers, NoorJehan, Suraiya and others.
After the light film music there are semi classical singers of the
past, such as Jutheeka Roy, Kamla Jharia, Akhtari Bai and others, and
then come the classical singers such as Kesar Bai Kerkar and others
that you have mentined. The Indian music heritage is huge.
Regards
MA.
surjit singh
> > Heavy orchestration and melting-potism are what I do not like about
> > this era and beyond. If I want to listen to orchestra, I might as
> > well listen to where it reached its zenith, i.e. western classical
> > music or opera. And as for melting pot, I would have listened to its
> > ingredients in original from the Mid East, or western pop or BIg Band
> > or Jazz or whatever. [I indeed do]
>
> This argument is bogus. We don't stop listening to popular msic simply
> because we like classical music.
This is not an argument, it is an opinion. Just like all the others
expressed here.
Asif
or other singers from the ‘30s and ‘40s, missed the point. I did not
compare the singers. I just compared the quality of their voices in
their own progressive years and ages. While voices of KL Saigal,
Pankaj Mullick, and others from their time definitely deteriorated and
they were undoubtedly way past their prime when they grew 40+, Lata
and Asha remained brilliant even when they were 40+. The same is true
for Kishore and Rafi too.
In old times showing respect by a singer to his/her idol or a senior
singer was a rich tradition. Whenever Lata or Asha do, or Rafi or
Kishore did, praise their idols, it never meant that these latter-day
singers could never emulate or surpass their idols. They did.
Compared to singers from the ‘30s and ‘40s, Lata, Asha, Rafi, Kishore,
and a few of their contemporaries were far more professional and
worked harder to first develop and then maintain a mastery over their
art. They all sounded much better in their advanced ages than singers
from the ‘30s and ‘40s did. These latter-day singers also perfected
the art of singing film songs – an art that was only in its infancy in
the ‘30s and ‘40s. To their credit, singers like KLS and Punkaj
Mullick did render some really timeless songs even in the ‘40s too,
but today their songs do not appeal to me at all mainly because of a
lack of exciting music as a support. But, as Ketan opined on another
thread, I do not want to compare their singing with that of Lata,
Asha, Kishore, or Rafi because the music style changed rapidly in the
intervening years.
And that’s where I compared the songs from the ‘30s and ‘40s with
those from the ‘60s and ‘70s. That’s while singers like KLS and Kanan
Devi were past their prime in the ‘40s, the attendant plain, rather
boring music in their songs did not help their songs either. An
accomplished singer like Lata, Asha, Kishore, or Rafi does not need an
accompanying orchestra to help him/her sound better, as someone might
foolishly think. Musical accompaniment in Hindi film music is simply
a medium that either uplifts a song or ruins it. Obviously, listeners
have their own preferences of how much of it they like or dislike in a
song. You cannot keep citing bad music as in ‘dil ke jharonkhon
mein’ (Brahamachari, 1968) to reject a thousand great songs from
1950-80. Be that as it may, the music of the ’50s through ‘70s was
clearly superior to that of the ‘30s and ‘40s, and added spark to the
heavenly rendition of some of the finest songs of Lata, Asha, Kishore,
Rafi, and their contemporaries. Make no mistake, the music in songs
like ‘aaja re pardesi’ (Madhumati, 1958), ‘yehi wo jagah hai’ (Yeh
Raat Phir Na Aayegi, 1966), ‘raat akeli hai’ (Jewel Thief, 1967), ‘hey
maine qasam li’ (Tere Mere Sapne, 1971), ‘guzar jaayen din din
din’ (Annadata, 1972), or ‘chura liya hai tumne’ (Yaadon Ki Baaraat,
1973) is incredibly beautiful music that must have thrilled the
singers of those songs during the recording itself and beyond. You
cannot simply dismiss it by saying it should have remained Indian for
you to enjoy it.
To put singers like KL Saigal and Kanan Devi in the same category as
the great singers like Lata, Asha, Kishore, and Rafi is an insult to
the great singers of 1950-80 - they belong to different eras of
singing styles. Instruments are there to support the singers. A
symphony orchestra can only make their singing more beautiful; it
cannot help their songs if the music director refuses to use it
because it is not Indian or simply does not know how to use it or
maybe does not even know that it exists.
Asif
surjit singh
> Those, who think that I compared Lata and Asha with KLS, Kanan Devi,
> or other singers from the ‘30s and ‘40s, missed the point. I did not
> compare the singers. I just compared the quality of their voices in
> their own progressive years and ages. While voices of KL Saigal,
> Pankaj Mullick, and others from their time definitely deteriorated and
> they were undoubtedly way past their prime when they grew 40+, Lata
> and Asha remained brilliant even when they were 40+. The same is true
> for Kishore and Rafi too.
You can express your opinions all you want, but when talking about
KLS, PM and Kanan, you have to do your homework.
Saigal (b 1904) sang from 1933 to 1947, age 29 - 43
PM (b. 1905) mostly sang from 1933 to 1941, age 28 - 36
Kanan (b. 1916), sang from 1937 to 1948, age 21 - 33
Abhay Phadnis
> Those, who think that I compared Lata and Asha with KLS, Kanan Devi,
> or other singers from the ‘30s and ‘40s, missed the point. I did not
> compare the singers. I just compared the quality of their voices in
> their own progressive years and ages. While voices of KL Saigal,
> Pankaj Mullick, and others from their time definitely deteriorated and
> they were undoubtedly way past their prime when they grew 40+, Lata
> and Asha remained brilliant even when they were 40+. The same is true
> for Kishore and Rafi too.
Lata entered her forties in 1969. Is it your case that her voice in
the 1970s - especially in the later half of that decade - is not
inferior to *her own voice* in the 1950s and early 1960s? If so, we
clearly have different yardsticks for measuring "deterioration" of a
voice. To my ears, the voices of the Lata and Rafi started
deteriorating in the late 1960s, while the voices of Asha and Kishore
started deteriorating in the mid-1970s.
Surjit Singh has already pointed out the fallacy of your argument that
the voices of KLS, PM, and Kanan Devi deteriorated "when they gew
40+". But I am curious: can you point out any specific songs of these
singers that you feel exhibit this "deterioration"? Especially for
Saigal: I find his voice and his singing in "Shahjahan" and "Parwana"
to be as compelling as in "Devdas" or "Street Singer".
> To put singers like KL Saigal and Kanan Devi in the same category as
> the great singers like Lata, Asha, Kishore, and Rafi is an insult to
> the great singers of 1950-80 - they belong to different eras of
> singing styles.
The second part of this sentence doesn't tally with the first: if your
difficulty (in clubbing the two groups together as great singers) is
that they "belong to different eras of singing styles", the comparison
is, at most, inapt - how does it become "insulting"? The comparison
can be "insulting" only if you believe that the latter group of
singers is way superior to the former *in absolute terms*, in which
case the point about their belonging to different eras is a red
herring.
Warm regards,
Abhay
Prithviraj Dasgupta
> PM (b. 1905) mostly sang from 1933 to 1941, age 28 - 36
> Kanan (b. 1916), sang from 1937 to 1948, age 21 - 33
Both PM and Kanan were active in Bengali quite a while after this.
Kanan had a major singing hit (4 solos) in Bengali in 1951 titled
"Mejdidi" (=HrishikeshM's Majhli Didi). PM enthusiastically committed
himself to promoting Rabindrasangeet through singing, recording and
teaching (on radio ) from mid-40s till the early 60s.
While we are on this topic, an interesting Hindi song "piya bin nisdin
rooun saheli" by a 61-year old PM from a Bengali film called
"Monihar" (1966) is at the link below. What makes it interesting is
the combination of the singer-actor-MD...PM singing for Pahari Sanyal
under Hemant's music direction. PM, despite being 61 in 1966, delivers
with reasonable brilliance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRPMMj--EMg
-Prithviraj
Sunil Dandekar
>
> - Show quoted text -
My choice of decades would be almost same, 50-70. From the old era,
except for Saigal saab can't suffer through many gems. Simplistic
tunes, nasal singing, artificial voices and amateurish orchestration.
Compared to the sophistication in composing and recording post 50s,
most of the songs of pre-50 era sound like college projects to me.
Saigal saab is of an altogether different stature for him. Sheer voice
quality took many of his songs from pedestrian to sublime. I some
times try to imagine say Kumar Sanu singing some of those songs.
Those who think that I will need lot of homework, may also be in need
of some homework on the modern songs.
Even if I prefer 50-70 songs, I do find some extremely good work post
2000. Kahane ko jashne bahara hai is extremely good song.
I enjoy these debates. Nobody is going to convert anybody, Gives us
yet another opportunity to dust up some old memories. Somebody
mentioned a Saigal song in the thread and for few moments I could once
again hear that song in my mind.
There are fewer and fewer people who share my interest in HFM, so in
spite of as many opinions as the posters I enjoy shooting breeze here.
Reminds me of our hot debates on SJ vs MM or X vs Y on the college
katta.
regards,
Sunil
Sunil Dandekar
I prefer to eat the bhel-puri puri in the bhel-puri. Would hesitate to
compare that to kheer-puri that I get at say Ghasitaram.
> In Hindi movies, music should have remained mainly Indian, unless, of
> course, the situation justifies it, as in a night club in an urban
> setting. Of course, these days Hindi movies are like English movies in
> every sense of the word!
>
> People who dismiss 30s and 40s music casually need to study more. Of
> course, as always de gustibus etc. or as Ameen Sayani used to say
> Khyaal apnaa apnaa etc.
>
>
>
>
>
> > All IMHO.
>
> > Regards.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Prithviraj Dasgupta
> Saigal saab is of an altogether different stature for him. Sheer voice
> quality took many of his songs from pedestrian to sublime. I some
> times try to imagine say Kumar Sanu singing some of those songs.
>
You don't need to try to imagine. KS has actually re-sung some of
KLS's hits, in Bengali though, around 1991. I guess your imagination
must have already told you that you're better off not hearing KS's
versions.
-pdg/
surjit singh
> On Jul 27, 9:53 pm, surjit singh <surjitsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > PM (b. 1905) mostly sang from 1933 to 1941, age 28 - 36
> > Kanan (b. 1916), sang from 1937 to 1948, age 21 - 33
>
> Both PM and Kanan were active in Bengali quite a while after this.
> Kanan had a major singing hit (4 solos) in Bengali in 1951 titled
I know but I am curious to know how many of those Asif has listened to
form his opinions.
Asif
Ah, so their voices started deteriorating when they were much
younger! Thanks for telling me their ages.
Asif
>
> > To put singers like KL Saigal and Kanan Devi in the same category as
> > the great singers like Lata, Asha, Kishore, and Rafi is an insult to
> > the great singers of 1950-80 - they belong to different eras of
> > singing styles.
>
> The second part of this sentence doesn't tally with the first: if your
> difficulty (in clubbing the two groups together as great singers) is
> that they "belong to different eras of singing styles", the comparison
> is, at most, inapt - how does it become "insulting"? The comparison
> can be "insulting" only if you believe that the latter group of
> singers is way superior to the former *in absolute terms*, in which
> case the point about their belonging to different eras is a red
> herring.
>
> Warm regards,
> Abhay
It becomes insulting to both groups when you club singers from one era
with those from another when their singing styles were different. If
you put KLS in the same league as, say, Kishore Kumar, just because he
sang 'mere sapnon ki raani' (Shahjahan, 1946) well, would be insulting
to Kishore Kumar. KK sang his 'mere sapnon ki rani' (Aradhana, 1969)
'differently' and, I dare to say, much better, and would have hated it
if you compared him to KLS anyway. KK had the advantage of witnessing
the era before him and changing the existing tradition for the better
- which he did. Same goes for Lata and Asha versus Kanan Devi and
Devika Rani, etc.
Chetan Vinchhi
>
> KK ... would have hated it
> if you compared him to KLS anyway.
Agreed. He would have baulked at the idea of someone comparing him to
his idol.
C
Baad-e-Siyaah
> the 1970s - especially in the later half of that decade - is not
> inferior to *her own voice* in the 1950s and early 1960s? If so, we
> clearly have different yardsticks for measuring "deterioration" of a
> voice. To my ears, the voices of the Lata and Rafi started
> deteriorating in the late 1960s, while the voices of Asha and Kishore
> started deteriorating in the mid-1970s.
Shouldn't we be using the words 'her voice changed’ rather than
deteriorated? Quite clearly her voice had innocent tinge of a teenager
in early days but maturity in later years. Her voice truly
deteriorated in eighties/nineties when it began to crack.
The change may not be liked by many due to familiarity perspective but
it is still a subjective view. There may be a few who may not have
heard her in early days therefore perhaps consider maturity in her
voice better.
Ahmad
We are all born with different talents. Some become
artists,engineers,sportsmen, musicians and so on.
Some enjoy listening to music and many don't. My father did not
listen to music and was happy without a gramophone, many of my
relatives did the same. Among my brothers and sisters one of my
brother was interested and one sister could distinguish a great singer
from a good singer. Among those who listen to music there are several
categories of listeners. Some can listen to popular music but not go
beyond this and not acquire a gramaophone/record player. Some are
happy listening to catchy tunes and that is the extent of their
listening. some are keen listeners who after many years of listening
can tell the difference between a great singer and a good singer, a
great voice from a good voice,
This applies universally. Some never progress above a basic level.
It is a bit like sport or game of football. There is a premier
league, first second and third division. Among music listeners i
think there are similar divisions.
When I listen to Desert Island Discs about once a week in UK, I hear
these personalities choose their 8 records. Some have not progressed
beyond Jazz and this is their choice category. Some others would
display great musical appreciation picking great singers, instrumental
music and Opera. But this group is in minority, most are happy
listening to ballads. So in my opinion people are born with a talent
who can appreciate and distinguish between great and good.
KL Saigal was arguably the greatest male vocal artist of light and
semi classical music that India produced, and this not just my
opinion.
If people can not tell the difference between great and good voices
and singing, then this is their misfortune. Nature did not bless them
with this talent.
Arrogance will get you nowhere.
Regards
M Ahmad
Anant Rege
>
> M Ahmad
said earlier
"To even put singers like Lata, Asha, kishore Kumar in the same
Category as the great singers like Saigal and others from NewTheatres
era is an insult to the great singers of 1930-1950. You are comparing
Chalk with cheese as regards singing. "
and followed up with
" If people can not tell the difference between great and good voices
and singing, then this is their misfortune. Nature did not bless
them
with this talent.
Arrogance will get you nowhere."
It may be a bit late in life but I think Mr. Ahmad you are finally
coming to terms with your limitations.
Anant
Ahmad
Thnks for this. If you have any comments about music, singers and
their voices, we would like to hear these.
Regards.
MA
dhruvstar
>
> > How can anyone dislike naturally beautiful sounds emanating
> > from these musical instruments?
>
> Actually it depends on how the sounds are used. Also, what is more
> natural than a beautiful human voice such as that of Kanan Bala?
and Lata is an android.
> C
R. Srinivasan
> On Jul 24, 7:41 pm, Ahmad <mahm...@talktalk.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello Asif, I note that you grew up with the music of 1970 with
> > singers like Lata, Asha and Kishore Kumar.
>
> > You are entitled to your opinions and your views. I think you have a
> > lot to learn. You are out of your depth if you discuss Saigal, Kana
> > Bala and express the opinion that they were not good at 40+. I agree
> > with the views expressed by Chetan Vinchi, Atchisman Mozumder and
> > Surjit singh.
> > To even put singers like Lata, Asha, kishore Kumar in the same
> > Category as the great singers like Saigal and others from NewTheatres
> > era is an insult to the great singers of 1930-1950. You are comparing
> > Chalk with cheese as regards singing. Instruments are there to
> > support the singers. A symphony Orchestra can not help a the voice of
> > a poor singer.
>
> > MA
>
> In my very humble opinion, the Mangeshi sisters are finest light music
> (recorded) singers that India is ever privileged to have, across both
> genders.
>
>
the greatest playback singer India was ever privileged to have, across
both genders. In his prime (which I would say, is up to around 1970)
he was several notches above both Lata and Asha.
There are many examples of Rafi's obvious superiority to these two
ladies as a singer. "Ehsaan tera hoga..." from Junglee, where Rafi
sings superbly, while Lata screeches her way through at high pitch, is
just one example. This song does not even begin to test the limits of
Rafi's voice, though. Another similar example is Lata's "Aji rooth kar
ab.." versus Rafi's "Aji hamse bachkar..." from the film Arzoo. And at
low pitch, Rafi matched these two ladies note for note. Take any
number of duets sung by Rafi and Asha and try to come to an objective
conclusion as to who was the superior singer.
Tomorrow is Rafi sahab's death anniversary and I have just heard some
of his best songs from All India Radio (100.7 FM). A genuine maestro,
and truly immortal.
Where Lata and Asha scored over Rafi sahab is in playing politics and
in the numbers game. Who cares? The verdict of history will catch up
and no amount of manipulation and wheeling-and-dealing can change
that.
RS
Chetan Vinchhi
???
Sukesh
Applause.
Regards
Sukesh
AR
I'll tell you about the numbers games played by Rafi: his claim (to
the Guinness Book people) of having sung 28000 songs (when in reality
he has never crossed even the 5000 mark). Rafi also seems to have cast
some sort of magic spell which made his fans lose their brains - so
many Rafi fans still claim that he has sung 28000 songs and no amount
of evidence to the contrary seems to convince them!
Source:
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Rafi
"After Rafi's death, in its 1984 edition, the Guinness Book of Word
Records stated Lata Mangeshkar's name for the "Most Recordings" but
also stated: "Mohammad Rafi (d 1 Aug 1980) [sic] claimed to have
recorded 28,000 songs in 11 Indian languages between 1944 and April
1980.".[15] Many fans of Rafi state that he has sung over 28,000
songs. However, according to the available figures, Rafi has sung
4,516 Hindi film songs, 112 non-Hindi film songs, and 328 private (non-
film) songs from 1945 to 1980.[15]"
* http://specials.rediff.com/movies/2006/aug/23sld7.htm (by Raju
Bharatan)
Should Rafi, therefore, have disputed the Lata Mangeshkar tally so
stridently? Losing sight of the vital fact that Lata herself had never
laid any claim to any record?
"I don't know anything about it," Lata is on record as saying. "I
don't know how my name appeared in the Guinness Book, or where they
got their information from. Certainly I didn't supply it. I don't keep
a record of the number of songs I have sung."
>
> RS
Mokammel Karim
> On Jul 30, 2:04 am, "R. Srinivasan" <sradh...@in.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 25, 2:13 pm, Archisman Mozumder <archi...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>
> > Where Lata and Asha scored over Rafi sahab is in playing politics and
> > in the numbers game.
>
> I'll tell you about the numbers games played by Rafi: his claim (to
> the Guinness Book people) of having sung 28000 songs (when in reality
> he has never crossed even the 5000 mark). Rafi also seems to have cast
> some sort of magic spell which made his fans lose their brains - so
> many Rafi fans still claim that he has sung 28000 songs and no amount
> of evidence to the contrary seems to convince them!
>
> Source:
> "After Rafi's death, in its 1984 edition, the Guinness Book of Word
> Records stated Lata Mangeshkar's name for the "Most Recordings" but
> also stated: "Mohammad Rafi (d 1 Aug 1980) [sic] claimed to have
> recorded 28,000 songs in 11 Indian languages between 1944 and April
> 1980.".[15] Many fans of Rafi state that he has sung over 28,000
> songs. However, according to the available figures, Rafi has sung
> 4,516 Hindi film songs, 112 non-Hindi film songs, and 328 private (non-
> film) songs from 1945 to 1980.[15]"
>
> Bharatan)
>
> Should Rafi, therefore, have disputed the Lata Mangeshkar tally so
> stridently? Losing sight of the vital fact that Lata herself had never
> laid any claim to any record?
> "I don't know anything about it," Lata is on record as saying. "I
> don't know how my name appeared in the Guinness Book, or where they
> got their information from. Certainly I didn't supply it. I don't keep
> a record of the number of songs I have sung."
>
>
>
> > RS
Great way to remember the greatest male playback singer on the eve of
his 30th death anniversary !! This is the kind of games rafi-haters
have been playing for years.
* On Saigal's death anniversary, we will talk about his alcohol
consumption
* For Lata and Asha it would be dirty politics
* Kishore : how he beat up on madhubala
* Naushad: GM and Shafi and other people composed all his songs
* Anil : how he fled home and deserted his fellow freedom-fighters
* Salil: how he ended up in jail
* SJ: infighting
* AR : ????
Archisman Mozumder
Dear Mr. Srinivasan,
My comments in praise of the two sisters is devoid of any unpleasant
remarks about any other singer (especially on non-singing traits, that
you concluded your post with).
Regards.
AR
I am not a Rafi hater to begin with (I wonder how you thought so).
In any event, I would like to sincerely apologize for having raised
this unpleasant issue a day before his death anniversary (albeit
inadvertently). I know RS did mention about his death anniversary in
his post, but I missed that part. Apologies again.
AR
Shakes
It is one thing if you say that you "prefer" or "like" Rafi's version
of those songs. Personally, I prefer Rafi's versions too (esp. in
"Ehsaan Tera Hoga"). It is also easily acceptable if you like Rafi
more than any other singer, male or female.
However, it is an entirely different matter if you claim Rafi to be a
better singer, in technical terms, than the sisters. And I don't think
you will find many learned musicians who agrees with that view.
I have heard most of their songs, duets, solos, and tandems. And, IMO,
the sisters are clearly a notch above all their male counterparts. And
I am talking only about their singing skills. I don't care about their
off-mic activities.
R. Srinivasan
entitled.
Here is Lata's own opinion (taken from the thread "Tribute to Rafi" by
Mokammel Karim):
http://www.hindu.com/mag/2010/07/25/stories/2010072550090200.htm
Quoting Lata:
"Rafi bhaiya was not only India's greatest playback singer but also a
wonderful person."
".....He was one singer whose vocal range could outclass any other
singer, whether it was me, Asha, Mannada or Kishore bhaiya. Yet, he
never believed in dominating the scene."
I am assuming that Lata means what she says here.
RS
kcp
> KK sang his 'mere sapnon ki rani' (Aradhana, 1969)
> 'differently' and, I dare to say, much better,
I do not agree ! How much ever I like the KK version, I simply adore
the KLS version. It is very well sung by KLS, devoid of any tiredness
or deterioration of voice quality.
Manish
ladies as a singer. "Ehsaan tera hoga..." from Junglee, where Rafi
sings superbly, while Lata screeches her way through at high pitch, is
just one example. This song does not even begin to test the limits of
Rafi's voice, though. Another similar example is Lata's "Aji rooth kar
ab.." versus Rafi's "Aji hamse bachkar..." from the film Arzoo."
It's not fair to go by the duets or tandem solos because they were
composed at the male singer's comfortable scale. It is amazing that
Lata was able to sing the song from Arzoo so well at a super-humanly
high scale for a female singer.
"I'll tell you about the numbers games played by Rafi: his claim (to
the Guinness Book people) of having sung 28000 songs (when in reality
he has never crossed even the 5000 mark). Rafi also seems to have cast
some sort of magic spell which made his fans lose their brains - so
many Rafi fans still claim that he has sung 28000 songs and no amount
of evidence to the contrary seems to convince them!"
There are so many Rafi fans that it is very easy to inaccurately
generalize them like you have. A lot of Rafi fans do in fact don't
care and realize that he didn't sing that many. He could have sung
only 500 songs and it would not have made him any lesser of a great.
"Should Rafi, therefore, have disputed the Lata Mangeshkar tally so
stridently?"
Rafi was given bad advice. To this day, some Indians have a
fascination with being accepted by the Western mainstream. Classic
example is Dev Anand making the English version of Guide (which no one
ever cared for) and then ignoring his brother's excellent direction in
the Hindi version. Anyhow, Naushad thought that the Guiness Records
(British) were a big deal. So he pressed Rafi to press this. Rafi is
responsible for his actions. It's no big deal at all. They are all
human beings and to err is human. It was a misunderstanding. Lata had
plenty of that herself too so she she did well to let it go.
"My comments in praise of the two sisters is devoid of any unpleasant"
Absolutely, and your opinion is perfectly understandable.
"However, it is an entirely different matter if you claim Rafi to be a
better singer, in technical terms, than the sisters. And I don't think
you will find many learned musicians who agrees with that view"
Mohammed Rafi was technically proficient that he was rarely limited to
sing his film songs. After this point, I'm more concerned with
expression of emotions, voice quality, versatility, etc. and taking
them all together, he was peerless!
I'm sure you've seen this youtube clip of Rafi, Asha, and OP
recording. Look at Rafi's expressions. The expressions come naturally
to him. He is gifted. He sings straight from the heart in his
inimitable way. Asha's stoic expression is a sharp contrast. For her
it is a task. She's doing homework. She's artificially putting in
whatever she can to wrap up this song and move to the next. Luckily
her feminine voice was very sweet to compensate.
Manish
probably seen.
Shakes
I don't know exactly what Lata means by "vocal range". If she means
range in terms of octaves, I think she has a point. Rafi probably has
one of the widest range in pitch across both genders.
Also, it's not just my opinion. It's the opinion of all who learned
classical music to some degree of expertise. Lata and Asha's command
over the semi-classical idiom is unmatched by any of their male
counterparts. And that is a fact. There are many examples. Manna Dey,
Rafi, KK could never match their razor-sharp timing of taans, murkis,
or their command over the taal/laya.
Shakes
> "However, it is an entirely different matter if you claim Rafi to be a
> better singer, in technical terms, than the sisters. And I don't think
> you will find many learned musicians who agrees with that view"
>
> Mohammed Rafi was technically proficient that he was rarely limited to
> sing his film songs. After this point, I'm more concerned with
> expression of emotions, voice quality, versatility, etc. and taking
> them all together, he was peerless!
>
He was peerless among the male singers in the post-Saigal era as far
as his artistic impact is considered. However, Kishore was no less
versatile or lacking in voice quality, emotive quality, expression,
spontaneity, energy and verve. Even Manna Dey was close to Rafi as far
as versatility was concerned, except that he lacked the voice quality
of Rafi and Kishore.
Since I am a KK fan, I could say the same about Kishore. His singing
elevated even simple songs and pedestrian tunes to the state of high
art. And Kishore didn't yield much ground to Rafi in the vocal skills
department either.
> I'm sure you've seen this youtube clip of Rafi, Asha, and OP
> recording. Look at Rafi's expressions. The expressions come naturally
> to him. He is gifted. He sings straight from the heart in his
> inimitable way. Asha's stoic expression is a sharp contrast. For her
> it is a task. She's doing homework. She's artificially putting in
> whatever she can to wrap up this song and move to the next. Luckily
> her feminine voice was very sweet to compensate.
Yes, I noticed the same thing. Rafi was enjoying the song. In fact,
Rafi was the ultimate for the frothy songs - light and mischievous.
For me, it was in the serious songs that he sounded laboured and to be
"doing his homework". But then, that is my opinion. And since music is
subjective, I can live with being disagreed.
Manish
> He was peerless among the male singers in the post-Saigal era as far
> as his artistic impact is considered. However, Kishore was no less
> versatile or lacking in voice quality, emotive quality, expression,
> spontaneity, energy and verve. Even Manna Dey was close to Rafi as far
> as versatility was concerned, except that he lacked the voice quality
> of Rafi and Kishore.
that's an understandable point of view. my original point was simply
that technical ability comes first (as you suggested) but after a
certain level of proficiency you consider other factors. is asha
technically any better than rafi in "aaye hain door se milne huzoor
se"? no because both are very proficient for what that particular song
demands. these are some of the songs that defined rafi & asha. i give
greatest weight to the songs that defined these singers rather than
select examples. i value kishore for "mere mehboob quayamat hogi" and
rafi for "ab kya misaal doon" and NOT "nothing is impossible".
>For me, it was in the serious songs that he sounded laboured and to be
> "doing his homework". But then, that is my opinion. And since music is
> subjective, I can live with being disagreed.
fair enough. these singers were human. i remember lata saying that she
didn't like listening to her old songs because she'd realize how she
could have bettered them. i'm sure that out of 5000+ songs, we can
find several where the singers could have bettered. even those will
have different interpretations. i'm more a fan of the pleasant,
romantic, happy, fast songs rather than the serious stuff so i'm not
familiar with too many serious songs. in some serious songs, aren't
you supposed to sound "labored"? in the tumsa nahin dekha song, asha
appears labored for a romantic song! that's a big discrepancy. rafi
sounds labored and beaten in "din dhal jaye" as does kishore in "o
saathi re"...aren't they supposed to for the sake of the character?
kcp
> To this day, some Indians have a
> fascination with being accepted by the Western mainstream. Classic
> example is Dev Anand making the English version of Guide (which no one
> ever cared for) and then ignoring his brother's excellent direction in
> the Hindi version.
Yes but it is to Goldie's excellent negotiation skills, that he
convinced Dev that the English & Hindi versions cannot be shot
simultaneously. He said that after the English version, he will do the
Hindi version in half the time that is required. Dev , in fact,
agreed !
Goldie planned it in that way and bloody well executed it.