I hear this phrase over and over and over in reviews. What does that mean exactly? Is it purely subjective or are there elements of Rahman's best works that can be operationalized? If ARR is a progressive artist who doesn't stick to formulas, what exactly are his standards that people expect him to adhere to album after album?
I think it's the same dilemma for all suuccessful artists. You take rock bands from the west, you hear so many comments about how their earlier works outshine later works. "Oh, this group's music back in the 70s was so much better than their work now". Their own success haunts them down the road, if they let it. Let's take JA. If you want to compare elements of JA to his most highly rated soundtracks of the past, there is good melody, amazing musicianship, crystal clear sound, beautiful ornamentation and attention to musical detail, haunting chords ahd harmonies, catchy rhythms, and innovativeness. So, what's the problem? I get the feeling that no matter how objectively good an ARR soundtrack will be, there will ALWAYS be folks who say the phrase above. And I guarantee you that these same folks would say he is repetitive if Rahman were indeed to go back to the Dil Se or Taal mode or whatever mode they wish for.
