Home   Forum   Wiki   Notes   Register   FAQ   Sitemap   About Us   Contact Us  

WHY IR USED S.P.BALA MORE THAN OTHERS

Topic started by MATHURESHAN (@ 213.59.173.13) on Thu Jun 14 08:16:00 EDT 2001.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

HEY GUYS I HAVE SOME REASONS
=HIS BEST FRIEND
=TO SPOIL TMS MARKET(ONLY BALA CAN DO)
=HE COULD NOT FIND GOOD SINGERS,(NOW THIS IS DIFFERENT)

---

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: Nitpicking Trend (nitpicking) (@ 216.141.67.251) on: Mon Jun 25 15:25:45 EDT 2001
  
  How can two persons have the same creativity?
  he was more creative than R.D Burman and Shankar Ganesh.
  
  What do u mean by creativity?
  
  
  
• From: Trend (@ 216.68.113.230) on: Mon Jun 25 15:29:04 EDT 2001
  
  Nitpicking Trend (nitpicking),
  
  My definition is "Quality of work".
  
  
• From: Sriram Lakshman (@ 12.47.54.252) on: Mon Jun 25 15:32:58 EDT 2001
  
  Srinath, making a few negative observations should not be construed to indicate hatred for IR (which has forced rajaG and you to bring in MSV unnecessarily). I do not believe that IR's coverage was comprehensive in the 80s. If the BGMs were brilliant, the rhythm section took a beating and so did the santhams. Except for a few like 'vAnengum thanga viN meengaL', there were no santhams worthy of talking about from a composer who had the advantage of always composing the tune first.
  
  I do not agree that MSV's perceptions on music were in anyway lesser of inferior for me to consider his creativity to be 'thin' :)). Your belief that IR excelled in all genres of music itself is a mistake. I have seldom held his semi-classicals or dappangoothus in high esteen.
  
  
• From: T-in-C SL (@ 12.47.54.252) on: Mon Jun 25 15:36:49 EDT 2001
  
  rajaG, 'mahAganapathim...' has a great novelty introduced by IR ...no percussions :))
  Srinath, now I know that you visit this forum everyday :))
  
  
• From: hari aka N T(n) (@ 216.141.67.251) on: Mon Jun 25 15:42:15 EDT 2001
  
  IMVHO,
  
  There is no such thing as quality in music.
  
  There is only effort. U put in an effort that u "consciously" want to. And ur ability (function of efforts put in previously plus some inborn genetic traits) results in a creation.
  
  Quality in a filed like MUSIC is subjective. Discussing subjective things is a waste of time.
  
  A piece of C ++ code can be attributed some quality. It compiles on these operating systems, it runs without crashing my computer. It helps speed up the work that I wanted to do. It has a tangible use that we can all feel, we can understand.
  
  In the case of music - All u guys are saying is u like these songs, u dont like these songs.
  
  This guy gave "quality" output in such and such a year. Obviously this quality is greater than that etc. Everyone liked this song, so it is of a better quality. This song has been done in a raaga no one has attempted before. So it has a better "quality"....... - These are not truths IMO.
  
  The bottom line is - it appealed to "YOU" - emotionally or intellectually.
  
  Creativity and Quality are ill-defined words. I would rather not define them at all.
  
  
• From: MS (@ 129.252.222.2) on: Mon Jun 25 15:44:16 EDT 2001
  
  Had this album been released during the times of 'ThiruviLayAdal' or 'kandan karuNai' , it would have been a non-starter for sure
  
  oohh SL, for that matter the picture sindhu bhairavi itself would have gone unnoticed :-) (with all the "droooooooooooooing" sounds in every scene's closing..oo..dificult to imagine a film on classical music with SB's theme in that era..ufff ) :-)
  
  thaai mookambikai and Shree raghavendra came in 80s too. Isai arasi ennaaLum naane in thaai mookaambigai is notable.
  
  I do agree with your observation that IR uses the pallavi tune in a higher scale at the end of charanam. eg..."iLamanadhu pudhu kanavu" from selvi. There had been a lot of recycling in 90s..I agree. Bot 80s..? difficult to digest since all the great albums of IR had come only then. IF u rule 80s out, then we dont have much to discuss about his works at all.
  
  It seem like statistics does not substantiate your claim very much. I just had a look at 1981 albums. Of the 32 albums (other languages included) 15 seem to be really good. (nizalgaL, thaippongal etc...). I have not looked into other 80s though.
  
  
  
• From: Srinath (@ 32.97.136.231) on: Mon Jun 25 15:52:22 EDT 2001
  
  "Your belief that IR excelled in all genres of music itself is a mistake. I have seldom held his semi-classicals or dappangoothus in high esteen."
  
  SL, just for the record, my belief is that IR has excelled in more genres of music, not all.
  
  Also, your defence of MSV's loss of creativity was in direct comparision with IR's - and favourable to MSV without context (that is, you just arbitrarily claimed that MSV was creative for a longer duration than IR without defining the environment). I just added a context that spun your statement around to show that it depends on who's saying it! No, I don't think you hate IR. It's been a long time since I have last been worried about someone not liking IR enough :-) But if I go by your statement "...If the BGMs were brilliant, the rhythm section took a beating and so did the santhams. Except for a few like 'vAnengum thanga viN meengaL', there were no santhams worthy of talking about from a composer who had the advantage of always composing the tune first..." it appears to me that you expected another MSV. When that is what you want, and that is not what you are getting, it is easy to be unfair and say that IR wasn't up to par (as is happening in the case of anti-ARR DFers, these days). See, my whole point is that to a whole lot of people IR was exactly what they wanted...and got! It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that IR's work in the 80s fetched him more fans than before or after that period. Again, the idea is not to establish that more fans = better MD. It is just that what you term as lack of creativity is the exact opposite according to others, foremost among them, myself :-) Which in turn brings me back to my original point of your elaborating exactly what I liked in IR's music :-)
  
  Yeah, I know vijay is having an aneurysm right about now ;-)
  
  
• From: Sriram Lakshman (@ 12.47.54.252) on: Mon Jun 25 15:52:38 EDT 2001
  
  MS, not ruling out 80s. But I always had a preference for his first 100 movies ... till moodupani, that's all.
  
  
• From: Trend (@ 216.68.113.230) on: Mon Jun 25 16:01:57 EDT 2001
  
  hari aka N T(n),
  
  Quality of music cannot be objectively quantified.But, a certain degree can be estimated by a consolidation of music fans' preferences and critics preferences.After all, music is created for these two class of people(barring religious music to a certain extent).
  
  
• From: hari (@ 216.141.67.251) on: Mon Jun 25 16:07:01 EDT 2001
  
  Trend,
  
  I am saying quality cannot be defined at all for music. There is no question of quantifying or estimating it. Critics and Fans are all human beings who like any piece of music "personally", thats all. Theres no such thing as "better quality". Theres only "better effort" which I respect. Listen to the songs u like (for whatever reason) and enjoy.
  
  
• From: MS (@ 129.252.222.2) on: Mon Jun 25 16:24:41 EDT 2001
  
  hari:
  
  IF there is no difference in quality, there will not be opinions/criticizms. And coming to the definition of quality : There CAN be a definition. Simplest example would be the playing of a wrong chord in place of a right one. the wrong chord is discordant and cannot IMO be of a quality better than the right one. In ICM, a play of apaswara is indeed a dilution of quality. A usage of prevalent pattern of swaras is once again a diluent. And by your arguement if people just enjoy what they want, there would not be much development in the creative arena.
  
  
• From: comment (@ 12.5.10.153) on: Mon Jun 25 16:34:38 EDT 2001
  
  Bringing in technical aspects to define qauality does not lead anywhere. an oridinary fan he does not know a chord etc. "Quality" of music is very very subjective. Depends on person to person.
  Film artists survive and pushed up the pedestal when this (quality) becomes common to a mass. This is what msv and ir and arr have achived.
  They were able to unite a group to tell their songs had some quality.
  
  
  
  
• From: hihi:-) (@ 134.124.160.10) on: Mon Jun 25 16:51:24 EDT 2001
  
  SL: the way MSV and IR work (think) are different. you seem to have a liking for the monophonic indian style of music (which is has its own greatness). from the way you have "described" 1000s of ir's compositions, i can't even imagine to gauge the headache you would get by listening to what the snobbish westerners called great music (like the sonatas and concertos). :-))) (vudu jUt :-) )
  
  
• From: Velaiyaththavan (@ 129.252.222.2) on: Mon Jun 25 16:52:58 EDT 2001
  
  sonata is like parOtta ?
  
  
• From: vijay (@ 129.252.222.2) on: Mon Jun 25 17:09:28 EDT 2001
  
  SL and Karthi, thanks for the good humour :-)) Really enjoyed it..:-))
  
  
• From: hihi:-) (@ 134.124.160.10) on: Mon Jun 25 17:15:33 EDT 2001
  
  MS: parOttA is good; not parATTA :-))) (imf, lv, ... engE?)
  
  
• From: Sriram Lakshman (@ 12.64.36.245) on: Mon Jun 25 21:33:35 EDT 2001
  
  hihi:-) I aware of that, but unable to digest songs for harmony alone. enna seivathu ?:-)
  
  Vijay, glad to note that you finally realised what I laugh at :))
  
  
• From: hari (@ 66.68.101.152) on: Mon Jun 25 21:45:37 EDT 2001
  
  MS -
  
  apsawara is a dilution of quality in ICM.... hmm.
  
  Let me draw an analogy to WCM (becuase u mentioned chords.. which is not ICM anyways)-
  
  Im not a great listener of WCM, but Ive heard people talk abt Stravinsky's music being "apaswara" - polytonal, which is against WCM rules or traditions.... So does it automatically become "bad quality"?
  
  If u ask me even the Major Seventh chord or Minor ninth are apaswarish because they have successive tones. (I believe this is against wcm rules). Still for me, these two chords are the sweetest sounding in so many songs Ive heard. (eg - Minor 9th - raaja magaL pallavi tune, or the first chord of nalam vAzha.. countless examples)
  
  "If people just enjoy what they want, there would not be much development in the creative arena."
  
  People - are of various types : musicians, rasikas and then the others :-)
  
  Forget the others.
  
  I am talking abt fans (includes critics - who get money for their opinions). Fans have minimal contribution to the creative arena. (whatever creative means, but I get ur point :-) If selling his/her music for money is the aim of a musician, it is a sensible musician'sresponsibility to find out if the majority like his creation. Here, fans opinions is useful and a discussion contributes to the channelisation of the musician's effort. Again , its just a simple question - do YOU like the song or not?ONLY THIS OPINION OF THE FAN IS USEFUL for anything at all.
  
  If the musician has no such "societal" use for his chosen profession (music) , say like Thyagaraja, he cares a damn abt fans. He does music for whatever personal reason he has, or maybe simply because he is bored and has nothing else to do :-)
  
  
• From: y ?? (@ 148.87.1.170) on: Mon Jun 25 21:56:05 EDT 2001
  
  MS,
  
  very interesting def'n for quality there ... who is to decide what is 'wrong' or 'right'. isn't it highly context sensitive ? and as many people ahve been pointing out, very personal? your quality def'n gets restricted to the ambit of WCM, and ICM .. but is that all ? Infact, even within the four walls of these traditions, as hari mentioned above, a slight 'wrong' variation can still strike the 'right' chords in me ...
  
  I don't thjink u can ever give a generic def'n to quality .. else, it has to be ISO approved later winning the Deming award.:)
  
  

---

List all pages of this thread

Post comments