it is still clearly a bhangra instrument

jabar makes a point, but there is also the other side of it - for example, pappi gill's "dhola" has been used by a couple of live teams in recent performances, and as far as i know, it wasnt a boli before he sang it...not sure if those performances were at competitions or not, but considering the fact that india teams use the same set for a while without much change, it seems like this was a popular song that turned into an acceptable bhangra boli (or maybe pappi gill is just trynna push his track by using it for live teams, free marketing haha)

Also...


1. In what sense is Pappi Gill "Dhola" "not Punjabi music"?


2. How would you hear dhad over the sound of dhol in bhangra? You can make it be heard with mic, but what sort of "folk" bhangra had musicians with mics on the side?


dhad = accompanies singing...narratives by dhadis that you sit your ass down and listen to.
dhol = accompanies dancing in the Great Outdoors and which contained very little "singing" while dhol was playing.
Modern recording studio you can mix whatever you want, and it may end up sounding cool...which as far as I'm concerned is legit. However, it often goes against the grain of basic cultural sensibilities. Problem is, Mr McMixymixx DJJattxwarriorx3000 guys think they are making their music more "traditional" by throwing together all the tumbis, sarangis, dhol samples they can find, when that actually comes out sounding like a bunch of nonsense to traditional ears.

No one really knows? Ancient instruments? What are you talking about? We're not talking about Martians floating down on spaceships and what hand they scratched their nuts with, we're talking about precisely those last 100 years (or a bit more). We know nothing about whether bhangra existed or not much earlier than the 1880s, so the relevant time period is since then...during which time there has never been any evidence to suggest people played dhadds along with bhangra or that they stuck Cheetos up their nose while dancing bhangra; it's perfectly reasonable to say that while both those things may be enjoyable today, they are not "traditional."


The current concepts of many people do not in fact come from the last 100yrs, they come from last few decades only, fantasies created through media and then sometimes unknowingly recreated in real life. I am putting it in perspective of the "last 100 years" (or whatever reasonable period where historical info is available), not ancient times. Sarangi is not associated with kirtan, and dhad-sarangi are not just "modernly associated" with dhadis. Tumbi is a creation of Yamla Jatt from the 1950s...tumba/king were associated especially with a distinct genre of ballad-singing. This stuff is documented. Just because we don't know every single detail of everything that ever happened, it doesn't mean we know nothing about the past.


Damn, all you have to do is listen to recordings (being made in Punjab since the 1930s) and you can see how things have developed from pre-recording pre-commercial era--"traditional" (=/= "ancient")--until recent decades...when they started mixing everything together mainly because it seemed to represent "Punjab" but it made no sense from the older musical aesthetic standpoint. It's probably because people, in modern cities and living abroad, were too distanced from those traditional aesthetics to be bothered by the clash. More important to them was that the music gives token effect of being Punjabi ("I hear a tumbi going 'twang-diddlyywang'...ah yes, brrrrrruah! it's Punjabi"). And if it is (now), then it most certainly is; if it sounds sickkkk (to someone), then it does. Hell, in California they seem to think that Ranch dressing should go on pizza. Let them enjoy it, but don't try to serve it to a New Yorker as a traditional pie.


I already acknowledged that whatever you want to do has some sort of validity. You're just dumb if you think it's traditional. And if you disingenuously pretend you don't care about what is or isn't traditional, while all the while not acknowledging that a lot of the effect the stuff has on the audience is based in their belief (or suspended disbelief) that it is traditional...then I call your bullshit and raise you.


G.S.

Wrote my dissertation on "Dhol in Punjabi Culture." Dhol/dhola refers to a lot of things, but never turned up any "dhola" dance. If you have some concrete info, I'd be happy to hear it. Dhola songs may be sung before/with dance. Jindua isn't a dance either, it's a song form. "Dhola" concept exists in a lot of cultures; Punjabi is mos def one of them.
G.S.


1. In what sense is Pappi Gill "Dhola" "not Punjabi music"?

Two of my cousins did Bhangra, one was on GGN Khalsa college Ludhiana and also represented his zone under the club name Rangla Punjab from Ludhiana and one was on Khalsa college Chandigarh who also represented his zone under the name Loke Punjabi Kala Manch, (they also represented India's folk dances on India's 50th independence day celebration in 7 African countries and Canada, with Bhangra, Jhoomer, Jindua, etc), but thats besides the point. Today's Youth Festivals in India, there is competition amongst the Bhangra teams. When I used to go to my cousins' shows, they did more exhibition acts than compete. Their performance lasted anywhere from 12-15 minutes. They started with Bhangra and ended with girl partners doing Jindua, Dhola, Vannjara, etc. I didn't do any research on the topic so i can't cite any sources, however I am sharing what I learned growing up.
....
Dhola is very similar where partners come up and the girl singing Dhola ve dhola haye dhola...doing Gidha type expressions..

The reason I said Dhola by Pappi Gill does not sound like Punjabi music is because the drum pattern. I haven't heard a Punjabi song with that type of pattern, yes instruments may sound similar, but not the composition.