a superb review on Mr.Rahman the King!! one correction - kehna hai kya was sung by chitra and on vocals by Rahman and not Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan Saheb.
On Nov 9, 2007 10:42 PM, Hari N Iyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > http://musicandnoise.blogspot.com/2006/09/rahman-i-and-sound-of-music_22.html > > > Rahman & His Tunes > > I started humming the tunes of Roja, the moment I stepped out of the > theatre. The tunes had a great recall value and despite that, I discovered > in some time that humming these tunes was not so enjoyable. I did not give > it much thought then, but later when Bombay released, and the same > phenomenon was repeated, I was curious. In both cases, I had loved the > music. It had excited me. And yet humming it was not enjoyable. It was when > I was going through an economics book and came across Alfred Marshall's Law > of Diminishing Marginal Utility when I broke the `Rahman' code, and like > Perry Mason, I kicked my leg for not getting the solution earlier. Strange? > But the truth, no less! Alfred Marshall's law of economics stating that as a > person increases consumption of a product - while keeping consumption of > other products constant - there is a decline in the marginal utility that > person derives from consuming each additional unit of that product. So how > does it fit into Rahman's composition? It is a technique invented by > Illayaraja. I often wondered how I could memorise Illayaraja's tunes so > quickly in spite of not understanding the language. And I must confess to > having an extremely bad memory when it came to remembering tunes. Using > Illayaraja's technique of composition, Rahman's standard composition was > broken into short musical phrases which were repeated in different words. > Take for example: > Dil hai Chhota sa, > (Repeat with a minor change) Chhoti si Aasha > (Repeat the same phrase) Masti bhari Man ki > Bholi si Aasha > > Now what has happened here is that you have already heard the complete > phrase twice. The same formula is repeated throughout the song. Now, what > happens in effect is that we are hearing the song twice or thrice in one go! > You can compare it to a Salil Chowdhari's song for instance – `Tasveer teri > dil mein'. You'll notice that all the musical phrases in the sign line > (dhruvapad) are different. Illayaraja, and later, Rahman used this new > technique of composition. It gave a recall value to the tune but also > ensured that its shelf life was shorter. Slowly but surely all music > directors in the Hindi film industry also started using the same technique. > It was a very foolproof technique and you could see that in songs of Anu > Malik and Anand-Milind, whenever they were not lifting a composition in > toto! But nobody could do it like Rahman and that is what differentiated him > from the pack. It is not enough to just have short, repetitive phrases – > they also needed to be consistently melodious and this is what Rahman did > the best. > I also noticed that Rahman in Tamil was a different person as compared to > Rahman in Hindi. The language of music was the same, but I have always > thought Rahman was more at home with Tamil than in Hindi which was obvious. > I remember an incident narrated by Mahalaxmi Iyer. She was recording for a > song in `Dil Se'. The words were `Paakhi Paakhi Pardesi'. Rahman kept > pronouncing it as `Paaki'. Of course, merely wrong pronunciation does not > reflect a sense of discomfort with the language. Now, Tamil has many > syllables which end on very staccato notes. Hindi doesn't. In Hindi, there > is an unwritten halant on each ending consonant. Rahman's composition is > very staccato even in Hindi. The merit in this is that the composition > sounds different and fresh because nobody composes it like that in the Hindi > idiom. The down side is that lyric takes the back seat. Although the feeling > and the mood in the song are conveyed, the subtler nuances of the language > evaporate. > > What makes Rahman, Rahman > I have always maintained, and I have no doubt that I am in the minority, > that Rahman is more a technocrat than a composer. This opinion was formed > mainly because I could trace the origins of his composing techniques to > Illayaraja, with whom Rahman worked as a keyboardist. But my opinion cannot > be permanent because, Rahman being an intelligent musician, keeps evolving > and growing with each film. For example, in The Legend of Bhagat Singh, he > had composed the song Mera Rang De Basanti Chola. The composition was so > Southern that one could not identify it with the Sikh freedom fighter at > all. But in Lagaan and then in Rang De Basanti, one hardly sees the southern > touch. There is a conscious effort to keep the North Indian flavour. > But where Rahman can be considered a path-breaker is the manner in which he > revolutionised the sound of music. And he changed the way his contemporaries > looked at the concept of sound. He makes even ordinary compositions `sound' > extraordinary by using instruments and synthesised music to great effect. A > criticism has been that Rahman uses synthesised music in excess. But Rahman > has recognised correctly the places in which the aesthetics of synthesised > music lie. Right from Kalyanji Anandji to Bhappi Lahiri music directors have > used the synthesiser and other electronic music but Rahman has been > successful in refining the synthesised sound. It would not be an > exaggeration to say that Rahman demonstrated how the synthesised sound > should be used. Prior to Rahman's entry on the film scene, music directors > harmonised the song with only the string section. Rahman introduced the > synthetic pads and created a different effect for different songs with a > different sound as harmony. Notice the sound of the pads in Roja, for > instance; it created a warmth and also gave a big-screen feel to the sound. > Among other things, Rahman's music is really BIG. It justifies the > Cinemascope screen. The use of available technology was always there. When > microphones and sound recording on tape was latest technology it was also > used widely. In fact, commercial music has to be credited with making the > optimum use of technology in music. So, the accusation that Rahman uses > excess of technology does not really hold water. He rides technology; he > makes sure that technology doesn't ride him. > The other accusation against Rahman was that he did not use enough acoustic > instruments. Rahman himself once admitted that his music was getting too > repetitive and dance oriented, probably because of the type of films he was > doing. But Rahman redeemed himself by doing a lot of films which had a folk > or an Indian flavour to it. In 1999, the Tamil film Sangamam was released. > It was a low budget movie and Rahman used a lot of traditional instruments. > The entire was score was based on folk and classical music. In Zubeidaa > also, the soundtrack has more acoustic instruments. > Rahman has awarded the instrumentalists in his films a status that no music > composer before him had done. Siva Mani, the noted drummer and percussionist > said, "The recognition that I enjoy today is because of Rahman. There are so > many talented people behind a film music score. I played for Illayaraja for > very long, but my name never figured on the screen or the cassette cover. > Rahman changed it all. He gives credit to every single member of his team > for whatever part they play, big or small. That makes him really special. > People came to know about me only because of him. I thank him for that." Lot > of musicians like – Naveen (flute), Clinton Cerejo (backup vocals), Sivamani > (percussions) – became household names with their credits appearing on the > sleeves of inlay cards. Not only on the screen (in terms of credits), but > even on the sound track (in terms of sound) Rahman made his instrumentalists > stand out. How can one forget the sound of the Shehnai in the title song of > Swades? Or the sound of the raw flute in `Chinamma' from the film Meenaxi – > A Tale of Three Cities? So, however grudgingly, I had to forgive my flautist > friend for his outburst. Rahman's understanding of the timbre of an > instrument and how to give old sounds new nuances is without parallel. Also, > in case of the flute in Chinamma, he reintroduced an old sound which > technology had made us forget. It was like meeting a long lost old > acquaintance. A keyboardist friend of mine pointed out how Illayaraja and > Rahman had used the higher octave flute for sad pieces, when in Hindi films > sad pieces on flute necessarily meant the lower octave. > The rhythm that Rahman used was also unconventional to say the least. He > could be modern without being western in his approach of treating rhythm > which I feel is one of his extraordinary qualities. The song in Bombay – > `Kucchi Kucchi Rakkamma' is a good illustration of this quality. The rhythm > is essentially ethnic and yet it is modern. There will always be surprises > but rarely will they let you down. Sometimes for a song of a slow pace, he > will use a rhythm that runs in double the speed. It has a strange but a > dramatic effect on the outcome of the song. Two cases in point here are > `Saawariya' from Swades and `Tu Bin Bataaye' from Rang De Basanti. In > Chhainyya Chhainyya, he used the rhythm instruments to create the movement > of running train without using the sound of the train. Rahman is gifted with > the quality of saying things between the lines with the use of > orchestration. > > > Rahman and his singers > > I don't think any other music composer can boast of introducing or working > with so many singers as Rahman has. Just to list off hand – P. Unnikrishnan, > Anuradha Sriram, Minmini, Chitra, S. P. Balasubramanium, Hariharan, > Srinivas, Naresh Iyer, Kunal Gaanjawala, Mahalaxmi Iyer, Shankar Mahadevan, > Shoma Bannerjee, Richa Sharma, Sonu Nigam, Sukhvindara, Alka Yagnik, Sadhana > Sargam, Baba Sehgal, Adnan Sami, Daler Mehdi, Apache Indian, Michael > Jackson, Remo, Shwetha Shetty, Sanjeevani Bhelande, Vaishali Samant, Nusrat > Fateh Ali Khan, Kailash Kher… It just goes on… And this is just a peek into > the vast spectrum of usual and unusual names that Rahman has worked with. > Even in a single film, we were used to see only three to four names in the > singers' credits. A standard Rahman film boasts of at least half a dozen > singers. Rahman's own justification for this is, "I do it for variety. > Otherwise things would get monotonous. There was a time when the album of a > film would have only two voices. Today different singers sing for the same > character. The times have changed. The attention span of the average > listener has decreased and his geographical purview has broadened. The > listeners no longer think in terms of perfect or imperfect. They want > different voices, standards be damned." > As a music composer, I don't necessarily subscribe to this view. You don't > always give people what they ask for. (Like you don't give a chocolate to a > child just because the child wants it!) And although it may be the right > commercial move it could have a damaging effect on the song more often than > not. > Rahman was actually criticised for using singers without judging their > ability to articulate language specific nuances. He was pulled up for using > Udit Narayan for Tamil songs and Rahman conceded by saying that he would not > use Hindi singers for Tamil songs. But he justifies using new and sometimes > untrained voices for playback by saying that it is not necessary that all > actors must have perfect voices like S. P. Balasubramanium or Chitra, or > Hariharan. > I once asked a singer friend of mine, why all singers had this incredible > urge of singing for Rahman. She said that it is what he does to your voice. > You wouldn't believe that it was your own voice when it comes out as a > finished product. He brings out the best tonal quality in you. It was > somewhat like what Gautam Rajadhyaksha does with his camera! > He has used voices in very unconventional manner to great effect and there > are lot of times when voices play roles of instruments rather than conveying > poetry of the song. Some examples of having used voices in a very different > manner are Shankar Mahadevan in Urvashi (Kadhalan) or Kay Sera Sera (Pukar), > Vasundhara Das in O Ri Chhori (Lagaan), Baba Sehgal and Shwetha Shetty in > Rukmini Rukmini (Roja). > I am, sometimes, confused with choice of singers that Rahman casts for > playback. I have, somehow, never been convinced with Asha Bhosale for Urmila > Matondkar in Rangeela; or for that matter Lata Mangeshkar for Priety Zinta > in Dil Se. In the Tamil version of the film also, he used S. Janaki who > sounds as old as Lata Mangeshkar for the twenty something Priety! When a > character synchronises his/ her lips on screen with the song, `people want > it' sounds like a feeble justification for a loose casting. After all, just > because people want, Mani Rathnam couldn't have cast Jaya Prada in the young > bride's role! > > Rahman & his Background Scores > > Personally, I feel that Rahman's real forte is his background scores. Right > from Roja to Rang De Basanti, some of the marvellous background scores have > come from under his mantle. His precise understanding of the mood of the > scene and his irreverent and yet highly appropriate use of instruments is a > delight to watch and hear. In Rang De Basanti, during the chase of > Chandrashekhar Azad, one expects the sound of strings or brass section but > what we get to hear is the wild strumming of the guitars! Totally unexpected > and yet it fits the scene like a glove. This irreverence of his reminds me > of the chase sequence in Sholay, where R. D. Burman got Pt. Samata Prasad to > play a rela on the tabla. The concept here was the same, only times have > changed. > > And in the end… Rahman & I > > It is impossible to stay in music industry and ignore Rahman. One just > cannot. Producers keep saying – `Rahman jaisa sound chahiye!' Journalists > keep comparing your music with his. I remember being upset because a > journalist had written a review about a Marathi song of mine saying that it > sounded like a Rahman composition. If in those days you used a reverberated > aalaap you were accused of copying Rahman! On another occasion a journalist > friend of mine had said: "If Rahman can create such a refined sound, why > can't you?" I had replied, "I will, if you pay me a crore for a movie." My > reaction was not at all against Rahman. It was a serious observation. At > that time were doing entire Marathi albums at 1/20th the cost of one Rahman > song. But Rahman changed things even for people like us. He made us aware of > the concept of having a new sound. And he made producers aware that money > spent on the product delivered good results! > Sometimes, I wonder what Rahman is without all the paraphernalia. I don't > believe that as a composer of tunes Rahman is extraordinary. Where I find > him extraordinary is in his understanding and expression of the idiom of > sound. Technology being available to you also matters a lot. And Rahman also > hasn't had it coming for free. There has been toil and hard work for him. > Rahman started working as a musician at the age of 12 when his father > expired. He signed Roja when he was 26. So he smiles when people call him an > overnight success. > Also, it is a great experience to evaluate Rahman as a music director. He > gives a lot of food for thought in one song. > I think where Rahman lacks is in his understanding of language. But one must > give him the benefit of doubt for Hindi as in Tamil his lyricist, Vairamuthu > won National Awards repeatedly for songs set to tune by Rahman, namely for > 'Roja', 'Pavithra', 'Kadhalan' and 'Minsara Kanavu'. Rahman himself insists > on good poetry for his songs, "Lyrics lend immortality to a melody. The > eternal, evergreen hit songs are always the ones with profound lyrics; > lyrics that remain true and meaningful even after years." > After Rahman's third film, his critics said he won't be around for long. > Fourteen years later, he is still here and is growing as a cult figure. The > success of Rang De Basanti only strengthens his case. He is the face of > Indian commercial music abroad. He is not without his flaws, but then nobody > is. Rahman is said to be a very spiritual person. A quote that is attributed > to him has found a permanent place in my head: "I am a strong believer in > destiny. I also believe that destiny can be changed by prayers." Rahman will > be around till he keeps reinventing himself and at least for now, he's doing > just that. > > A few years back I was recording some instrumental pieces for a tele-serial. > I was working out a few pieces with an exceptionally talented flautist. I > was looking out for a particular tone of the flute which I was somehow not > getting. The excessive sound of the breath was making me uncomfortable. I > told the flautist twice or thrice that I did not want the sound of breath, > but the sound persisted. I could see that if I told him one more time, he > was bound to get irritated with my suggestion. But the musician in me could > not bear the little deviation from my idea of the musical piece. Finally, > softly, I told him that I was not getting the sound that I wanted and the > sound of the breath refused to go away. As I had expected, he flared up. > "What's your problem?" he asked me. "Even Rahman likes the sound of the > breath. He insists on it." > "Then play for Rahman." I quipped, even my temper rising a little. "What are > you doing here?" > It was a reaction that I had to give but I was aware all the time about the > degree of influence Rahman commanded when it came to the `sound' of music. > It was as if people, and more particularly musicians, were under a hypnotic > spell of the music of this man from the land of filter coffee. Everybody was > talking only about Rahman. Musicians swore by his sense of sound production. > It was not just `Rahman – the musician'; it was `Rahman – the magician' It > was not as if there was no other side... there was... and they were equally > ferocious in their criticism of Rahman. > "He's getting predictable-" was a reaction that started with his third film. > The people who dismissed Rahman were mostly seen to be from the earlier > generation. But again these people could not tolerate the music of Anu Malik > either. The magic of yesteryear songs was still prevalent among this > generation. I had also seen and heard film musicians of the earlier era not > being so impressed with Rahman. So where was I in this milieu and how do I > see myself as contemporary of A. R. Rahman? > The story starts in 1992, with the release of the film Roja in Tamil. I was > such an avid fan of Mani Rathnam after Nayakan that I had made the brave > attempt of seeing Dalapathy in Tamil, a language that was way beyond my > comprehension. My attempt did not go unrewarded and I was completely taken > in by the manner of story-telling of Mani Rathnam. I had also become an avid > fan of Illayaraja, whose many Tamil cassettes I bought and heard again and > again. So when I heard that a Mani Rathnam film called Roja was being > screened, I went immediately to Aurora, a theatre at King's Circle. I was a > little disappointed that Mani Rathnam's usual music composer, Illayraja, had > been replaced by a newcomer called Rahman. My doubts about A. R. Rahman were > razed to the ground the moment I heard the first note of the background > score play. This sound was BIG… and it was definitely different. Not just > different, it was drastically different. Then the first song came - `Chinna > Chinna Asai'. The effect of the song, together with Mani Rathnam's > visualisation, Santosh Sivan's brilliant cinematography, and Rahman's music > was pure alchemy. And how could one forget the background score of the > movie? I was so hypnotised by the movie's background score that I went back > to Aurora again the following week, just to hear the background score. I > think it must have been the first (and perhaps the only) instance where a > Marathi youth went twice for a Tamil film without subtitles to a theatre! > At that time Rahman was not known much in North India, but the music was a > rage in South India. Roja was followed by Shankar's Gentleman and then Mani > Rathnam's Thiruda Thiruda. K. Balachander's Duet was another film that was > released during this period. The way Rahman had explored Kadhari Gopalnath's > saxophone in the film was phenomenal. I used to go to Matunga and buy these > cassettes, because Rahman's sound excited me no end. The score of Thiruda > Thiruda, I remember, was a culture shock for me and I grudgingly nodded to > the beat of the music. It was shockingly western, but there was an Indian > soul lurking behind those harmonies. I later came to know through some > Tamilian friends that although Thiruda Thiruda didn't do too well, the music > was given stupendous reviews. > In 1994, Roja was released in Hindi and A. R. Rahman became a household name > in India. The magic had spread to the entire nation. This was followed by > the film Kadhalan directed by the whiz kid Shankar. Songs like `Muqabla' and > `Urvashi' made everybody tap their feet while the song 'Ennavale Adi > Ennavale' won the National Award for the Carnatic vocalist, P. Unnikrishnan > who made a debut in film singing with this song, and also hearts of those > who loved melodious tunes more than foot-tapping ones. (The song is known to > Hindi listeners as `Sun Ri Sakhi Meri Pyari Sakhi'.) > Now, doyens of Hindi film industry were running to Chennai to meet and work > with Rahman. He signed Shikhar with Subhash Ghai and Droh-kaal with Govind > Nihalani. But as fate would have it, Shikhar was shelved and Rahman lost all > the tracks of Droh-kaal due to a computer crash. And so, Rahman's first > original Hindi film was Ram Gopal Varma's Rangeela and that marked Rahman's > definite foray into Hindi music. Mani Rathnam's Bombay saw Rahman singing > playback for the first time in `Humma Humma'. The Hindi version had Remo > singing the song. While `Kehna hi Kya' became a big hit with Chitra and > Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan singing, even the title track of Bombay caught the > imagination of his fans. Not since R. D. Burman had any composer been > successful in popularising the instrumental title track of a movie. From > then on, we all know the journey of A. R. Rahman to the dizzying heights of > fame and popularity. From then to the music of Swades and finally Rang De > Basanti Rahman has entertained, enthralled, excited, captivated, mystified, > bamboozled, and very rarely but surely disappointed his fans. What excites > me about Rahman as a musician is that his music is multi-layered, both in > the physical and abstract senses. He appeals to emotion or intellect and > sometimes – both. As a musician and as a public figure, he is mysterious and > is more fun to unravel than simply sit back and enjoy. > Are you searching for a reason, to be kind? <b> Explore, Experience, Enjoy A.R.Rahman - The Man, The Music, The Magic. Only at arrahmanfans.com - The definitive A.R.Rahman e-community. Homepage: http://www.arrahmanfans.com Admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/arrahmanfans/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/arrahmanfans/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
