Thermal and a Quarter - Part 3

As promised, part three of my conversation with India's Thermal and a Quarter. For this final installment, I asked the band to interview each other. Thermal and a Quarter are Rajeev Rajagopal (drums), Sunil Chandy (guitars, keyboards, vocals), Rzhude David (bass, vocals, acoustic guitars), and Bruce Lee Mani (vocals, electric and acoustic guitars).

For continuity purposes, I have reposted parts 1 and 2 of the interview.

Chandy to Rajeev: What do you think is the relationship between inspiration and perspiration when it comes to making music?

Rajeev: Very strong. I doubt if many ordinary people can achieve a reasonably decent standard of musical abilities without sufficient quotients of both. By musical abilities, I mean an all-round ability to consistently produce good tracks. You could be good at coming up with licks, or grooves, or good with chops and technique or good with arrangements or lyrics; there are so many components to making music. You could get lucky and make the odd bubblegum track that makes you your first million dollars, but keeping it going like the Rolling Stones takes a lot of sweating it out. I believe that nothing comes easy, there's always a tradeoff. When you are good at one thing there will be others that you suck at. And so being inspired alone won't do the trick. Luckily for me I never run out of inspiration. I admire the abilities of smart creative people, people who bubble with energy even at the age of 60. Now that's the easy part for me. The tough part is emulating what you've been inspired by and getting as good in whatever you want to do.

Rajeev to Chandy: You've been playing various musical instruments from the age of five. Which was the hardest instrument to get the hang of and why?

Chandy: Violin. I gave up after three months of squeaking and squealing. Reason: because it requires a huge amount of patience just to produce one good note. The angle of the bow has to be right; and when you move the angle shouldn't change. The note has to be quite perfect on the fingerboard, and so on.

Chandy to Bruce: Do you feel that the order in which a song is written, i.e. music first lyrics second, lyrics first music second, gives the song a distinct difference? Does one feel more right than the other?

Bruce: I've always insisted that there are NO rules for songwriting. Things happen every which way and sometimes they feel right or 'righter' and sometimes they don't. But most songwriters are usually perceptive enough to know when the winged horse beneath them has caught a good updraft...and also when they're thrown off into a pile of horse manure. And manure, of course, is good... things grow out of manure.

Bruce to Rajeev: You were very much a hard-rockin' listener before. When, and how, did the transition to the music you listen to now happen?

Rajeev: True, I don't have the inclination to go through four Megadeth albums back to back anymore. It was daily bread and butter for a few years, and great years they were. That has definitely changed.

My change in musical choice was a market-driven thing, I think. There was no real great metal album out for many years. Megadeth's Youthanesia, Metallica's black album and GNR's Use Your Illusion I and II saw the end of any decent hard rock and heavy metal albums for me. Those three albums themselves were pretty commercial for my liking but still had some remnants of genuineness. So, I didn't have anything much to listen to. I then started picking up some great names in jazz. The problem was that all of them were supposed to be great, so I started off with compilations and soon started developing a taste for certain forms of jazz.

I've never let what I'm listening to affect my playing. 'Develop your own style' was what I heard in most instruction tapes, and from a few good drummers who I personally know, so I try my best not to associate what I'm currently listening to what I play in the band. Actually I wouldn't be able to do it even if I wanted to, because the stuff Mr. Dave Weckl does with Chick Corea is quite unreachable at this stage in my playing.

Bruce to Rajeev: How has it affected your playing?

Rajeev: Guess it's made me a lot more open to playing different styles these days.

Rajeev to Rzhude: You have great groove. Do you believe that some people (not just musicians, all people) don't have groove/feel? If yes, is there any way for such people to get groovy?

Rzhude: All people respond to music rhythmically (tapping feet at least), so the answer for me is no. I believe all people have groove, some just don't know it. The way to get groove is to relax and let the body react to rhythm rather than intellectualize the process.

If anyone were to feel the need to understand groove then an attempt to understand the science of music will be necessary - from music lessons.

Rzhude to Rajeev: Is there any such thing as original music (as opposed to inspired music)? How does music gain an identity for itself?

Rajeev: There definitely is something called original music. It's almost like a culture or sub-culture. A group of people, working together for a period in time, knowingly or unknowingly create an identity for themselves. This definitely comes through in the music. Each person's inspiration comes from different things, so there is no one single inspiration that can label your music as inspired music as opposed to original music. Maybe for a solo musician that could hold true, but in a band scenario originality has more chances of coming through. The music gains its identity through the combined energies of the members who make music using their musical expertise, influenced by their current life situation at that point and inspired by a dream to make a difference as a band.

Rzhude to Rajeev: How does a band gain or lose identity when musicians within the group collaborate or indulge in side projects?

Rajeev: A band's identity is closely linked with its musicians. A band wouldn't have a strong identity if the musicians are seen or heard playing together or separately under different band names. The band's identity gets diluted and confused.

Rajeev to Bruce: When you hear a song for the first time, what is the most important thing about that song that differentiates it from being ordinary to being something that means a lot?

Bruce: There was a time when the answer to this was simply "Wow, what an interesting 9/8!" I think it was you who pulled me up once for not liking Nirvana, and gave me a lecture on 'feel', etc., but that apart. I guess when I listen to music now, I think I'm able to tell very quickly if there is some honesty, some genuine-ness to what's coming out of the speakers. I find myself drawn to that quality. To mean a lot to me, though, a song has to work harder, get me interested from various angles, and I guess here I'm still drawn to fine musicianship, the really exciting juggle between self-indulgence and accessibility.

Rzhude to Bruce: In the context of the Lennon-McCartney v/s McCartney-Lennon debate, do you believe that any of the music written in the collaboration would have been possible under different circumstances? What do you see as the solution to musical ownership in collaboration? (Who really owns all that music - Michael J or the people who still believe in the music?)

Bruce: This is a very grey area for me. I think the Lennon-McCartney thing is silly, especially after all these years. 'Lennon-McCartney' even sounds better, is alphabetically correct, and, aw shucks. If songwriters work together and something really magical happens, the whole is much more than the sum of the parts. The muse works in all of us, and I don't know if we really write all the songs we claim to write or are they written through us and so on. This can't be sorted out legally. You bring lawyers and 'mine, mine, mine' into it, and the magic is gone. Gone.

Rzhude to Bruce: Should circumstances and situations be credited for a musical creation rather than an individual's creativity/ego? Would the world be a better place if there were no such thing as copyright law?

Bruce: The musician for me is the lens, through which the 'circumstance/situation' can be focused, its raw material bent, and if the final light hits the right spot, there is greatness. Some lenses are clearer, some are foggy, and everything is possible. Copyright law, like all the laws around civilization, is probably a necessary part of keeping the same civilization out of chaos, though even that is a moot point.

Bruce to Rzhude: What is your songwriting process? You've been writing music for commercials for sometime now - how is that process different?

Rzhude: For me the song writing process has to start with an idea. One that is strong enough to go on to become an entity on its own. The idea itself can be musical or lyrical. Musical ideas show up in the form of a chord progression or a set of notes that are interesting enough to stick in my head and then see itself to completion. I do believe that I am just the instrument, a sort of receiver, if you will, that has the ability to 'hear' these ideas and 'receive' them and transform them into complete 'songs'.
The more emotional the idea is, i.e. personal and involved within the sentiments that move me, the greater the chance of a song that I will remember and feel like working on more. There are those that just fade away and that is the benchmark for a song that 'has it'. Songwriting here is an inspired process with the luxury of time, experimentation with instrumentation and arrangements, and finally the live situation to see if it really works. If it doesn't work on stage, first from me and then the audience, it will fast fade away.

As for commercial songwriting, I look at it as a set of restrictions or conditions given as limits that have to be pushed - 30 seconds, a marketing brief with a specific target audience, words written by a stressed-out copywriter, or worse, by a client (or his wife), are just some of the conditions apart from a deadline that make the end result appear. The fact that I've been conditioned by some 15 years in the biz experience to do this gives me the confidence to do it over again. Sound design and sonic identity (audio logos) is as big a field as graphic and advertising design. The parallels exist both in the creative challenges it presents and the commercial aspect. Digital workstations make the jingle-writing process a lot easier, given that deadlines are always tight. The process is oriented toward creating memorable hooks that stick right away which is not the case at all with song writing for one's pleasure. Writing songs for a pop chart is something I've not done...yet!

Bruce to Chandy: Do you believe in 'confessional' songwriting, or do you think that the songwriter must always distance himself from his art?

'Confessional' has various connotations to it. If we are meaning the core beliefs that we hold, then yes. Not that the songs are essentially creedal statements but more that your core beliefs are part of the context of the songs written. A songwriter might be distant if it's his or her job to write a song. But I think that lacks some integrity in the songwriting context at least. But feeding stomachs wise, it makes total sense! The other concept of distance could be just plain ignorance. I can't write a song about the Native American peoples because I don't really know about them and their struggles. So I would veer towards 'confessional,' but again with honesty and love being the two core values attached to it

Chandy to Rzhude: Some people say that music is a window to our soul. Do you believe that to be true in any sense?

Rzhude: Music can be defined as man's conscious development of a natural phenomenon (sound) into an art and science. Soul can be defined as the spirit, the force that enables life itself and that part of a person that houses emotion.

I believe it is possible that a window exists between the two. When I create music, the material is drawn from this emotional well. When I listen to music, if it has to touch me, then it has to reach the same emotional source for it to mean anything to me.
In a word - yes.

Rzhude to Sunil: How do you relate music with spirituality? How does one distinguish between music for God and music for the self? If music is God's gift, then how can we justify a living by selling it?

Sunil: Relating music with spirituality would have its own nuances according to the type of spirituality that one talks about. Washing plates is a spiritual exercise for me. It teaches patience and forces you to accept the joy of the small things that God has given. It's still quite a hard lesson to learn. So, I would say from the spirituality I love and follow, that it encompasses every part of life, whether it's changing nappies (diapers) or making beautiful music. They are part of the tapestry of life God has given. I don't see a 'special' connect as such. I see that music does have various effects that aren't easily explained but I see music as a human activity. All humans do it. I don't go with the philosophy of music being divine as such. I think it's God's gift to humans.

I don't see any distinguishing factor between music for God and self as long as it is done with honesty, integrity and most importantly love. Examples are the Psalms, of which many are songs of introspection, complaint, curses and other very personal emotions. These songs of the 'self' were meant to be sung by the whole community as part of their spiritual expression. So I see my contribution in TAAQ, in whatever small amounts that is, as my music for God.

Everyone makes money out of God's gifts! Because I would see intelligence, smartness and other things in life and life itself as God's gift. But the issue, I guess, is: what place does money have in one's life?

Click here for Thermal and a Quarter's website.
Click here for TAAQ's Yahoo group.
Click here to check out TAAQ on NPR.