An endless feud between the fans of Mohammed Rafi and Kishore Kumar..
Mohammed Rafi was born at Kotla Sultan Singh, near Amritsar . Rafi displayed his talent for singing at the tender age of 13. The lure of movies beckoned him to Bombay in 1944. His first hit was the Tera Khilona Toota Balak from Anmol Ghadi in 1946. India lost this jewel on July 31, 1980.
Abhas Kumar Ganguly, better known as Kishore Kumar was born on August 4, 1929 in Kandwa. Following the footsteps of his elder brother Ashok Kumar he too ventured into movies. But he soon realised that his heart was in singing. Under the patronage of RD Burman he soon flourished. He would at times compose and write songs himself. Sadly he passed away in October,1987.
The debate as to who was the greater singer carries on even today, even decades after their death. Both of them left an indelible mark in the world of Indian film music, a void that still cannot be filled today. No wonder that their fans are at constant feud with one another trying to prove that their hero was better.
It is a no secret that Mohammed Rafi was a trained classical singer and that Kishore Kumar had a natural talent. Hence Rafi’s fans feel that he was the more accomplished and skilful of the two. Kishoreda’s fans are of the opinion that though he may not have been trained, he had purity and sheer quality of voice. The fact that he wasn’t trained, and could still sing anything, both classical and non classical songs with equal magic rendered him more superior than Rafi.
Fans claim that Rafi was the most favoured singer for many veteran composers while Kishore Kumar was preferred by few and was a playback mainly for Dev Anand and later for Rajesh Khanna. Rafi on the other hand balanced his melodious voice for diverse stars like Dilip Kumar, Dev Anand, Guru Dutt, Rajendra Kumar and Shammi Kapoor.
In support of Rafi’s greatness, many of his fans say Rafi sang for Kishore Kumar in films that Kishore himself acted. They also draw the attention to Rafi’s song Darde Dil in Karz which was based on a single note and proved that he was indeed blessed with God-gifted melody. Mohammed Rafi’s fans also claim that Sonu Nigam and Udit Narayan who belong to the Rafi school are technically better than Kumar Sanu, Babul Supriyo etc.
On the other hand, Kishore Kumar’s fans remind people of songs which he sang by melodiously incorporating his inimitable yodelling. Those numbers are extremely popular even today. They further claim that in the 70’s and 80’s, it was he who sang for a number of heroes.
This debate can go on endlessly. However it must be stated that both were great singers of their times and each had his own distinctive style.
There was no feud between the two and the immense respect that Kishore Kumar had for Mohammed Rafi is clearly seen in the photo during Rafi’s funeral. A silent, sad and grief-struck Kishore in the newspapers portrayed very well that no one except him understood what an irreparable loss had taken place in Indian film music.
© Copyrighted to Yoodleeyoo.com All Rights Reserved.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:42 am
I’m going to make a few, final, concluding remarks on my behalf. This is the first time I have ever engaged in the Rafi-Kishore debate and that is why I was particularly enthusiastic. Going to the Rafi website and seeing 800+ posts - this MONUMENTAL effort from all of us to have a debate is nothing but a drop in the ocean as this debate has been going on for 30+ years and will continue.
My views:
- Mohd Rafi had without a doubt, the most melodious voice of all singers. It was also very “full” - second to none in this regard. If there was any voice close to perfect - it was his. Not too deep not too soft. Just right. It is because of this that Rafi’s voice could universally suit just about any actor and indeed he sang for dozens of actors. The only thing “missing” in his voice was barritione - but barritone closes many more doors than it opens. Additionally, he could make up for it with his modulation and amazing vocal range to amplify energy. He had the best voice overall.
- Kishore’s voice did prove superior in some specific situations - it is these specific situations that KK fans absolutel love and that is why for them KK is #1. That’s fine. Overall, however, I doubt that’d be the case and the repertoire and careers indicate who was more versatile.
- Yes, Kishore was more suited for Amitabh because barritone goes with barritone - but barritone would look silly on the dozens of other actors. While Rafi wasn’t as great of a fit for Amitabh - he still fit very well and mixed his voice very well with Amitabh in John Johnny Janardhan. Singing for Amitabh doesn’t make you the greatest - just an example to emphasize barritone.
- There were some songs that Kishore’s voice was better suited for than Rafi’s voice and there was some songs that Rafi’s voice was better suited for than Kishore’s voice (this number is much greater than the first IMO but no one COMPLETELY wins out).
- Arguing who’s voice was the best is subjective. However, I think most people from the industry, when you look at overall from late 40s to 80, when you gauge ALL KINDS of music - would say Rafi was more well rounded. You really can’t deny it by seeing career or polls from such eduated people. Arguing who was better in the limited 70s period is subjective and will lead to endless debate - but do remember the limitation here.
- Kishore was king for a specific period or genre but Rafi was king for almost 4 different periods of times. He did recover to the top with Kishore in 1980 and only someone of his greatness could have pulled off a comeback like that. Rafi had a greater career IMO with a much greater output (~6000 different songs vs ~4000 different songs). Rafi’s voice was more versatile than Kishore’s - as great as Kishore’s voice was.
- Sometimes I do have problems with Rafi when his voice is being too soft or gets fuzzy. Listen to Dard E Dil - when he sings “kur.” Maybe he did it purposely. Rafi’s voice could have flaws at times (especially in late 80s) where his throat sounded dry. MAYBE I’m wrong and it was the equipment (very possible) or the MD direction. Nevertheless, like I said, it was the closest thing to a perfect voice for me.
- Sudip made an excellent point. I have learned something new here. As great as Rafi’s voice and singing ability was - what really made him immortal and his songs incomparably superior to others was his harkatein and taan. His great voice could be challenged by a good voice - but that element I mentioned made the 1000 fold difference.
- I always felt that under VERY LIMITED CONDITIONS (tone, type of song, etc) Udit Narayan could sing a song just as well as Rafi (and that probaby is the case - if the song is simpe enough that it doesn’t require a singer of Rafi’s monumental ability). For example, we agree that Rafi was the greatest singer but if one says Kishore could sing SOME songs better than Rafi (his voice was better suited), then one can also extend and say that Udit Narayan could sing even lesser songs just as good or better than Rafi. These instances are rare but acknowledge that one singer cannot win each and every time. Right singer for right song.
I and Manish Kumar are the same person, it is just that the debate was too boringly one - sided. I don’t think the KK fans did justice to Kishore Kumar at all and made some silly comments that was an embarassment for the great singer so I tried to step in - but I see there’s really no point. This debate will continue again and again.
My final remark is that I genuinely fear we’ll lose both Rafi & Kishore. They are eternal singers getting more popular by the day - but today’s music is utter garbage and I get depressed being exposed to it. Today’s music sells on half naked people like a MTV music video rather than the brilliant lyrics, composers, and vocalists our great country has such a rich tradition of. I hope the values of music don’t go down so much that tomorrow’s generation will not be able to appreciate Rafi and Kishore.
It was a great pleasure discussing with you guys. I really learned a lot and had to think about this stuff and gain new perspective. I don’t have the kind of knowledge that say Sudip or P Haldar have where off the top of his head he can produce a top 20 list (that is true knowledge gained with experience and time) but I’m enthusiastic. I love Rafi and I love Kishore too and other singers. I discovered a few new songs for Rafi - a few new gems that I hadn’t heard of before.
That Asha Rafi duet with Madhubala & Dev Anand (he’s crap) was lovely. Can’t believe that song was like 30 years before I was born and I loved it. Sudip also pointed out very well that somtimes a person has to listen to a song multiple times to get it and love it. I thought I was the only one.
Thanks very much, hope to discuss with you guys in the future. I don’t post very frequently but every now and then I do stop by this web page or the Rafi webpage and sometimes I post at HamaraForums under my name. However, I do sometimes start trouble at HF cause I enjoy discussion I get bored of the super polite gestures - let’s get talking.
I also do have some radical views that make me look silly. I think we should never put singers at a godly pedestal and I feel today’s two singers Alka Yagnik and Udit Narayn deserve a little more credit. Hang me, but even though Lata is greater than Alka, a handful of songs Lata could not render better such as “Tu Shayar Hai” from Saajan or “Choli Ke Peeche.”
Anyway, I hope we discuss again. I very much enjoyed it and learned a lot and have a lot more learning to do.
- Manish Kumar, Philadelphia, PA, USA
June 17th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Viswan ji….
Rafi ji has a thin and feminine voice..
By this comment - Music Lovers will only laugh and kids
below 5 years will believe it… they are making themselves
laughing stock material…. and exposing their limited knowledge
in defending the in-defensible…
So pathetic and weird their ideas are my friends….
they are like the dogs .. who bark relentlessly, when an ELEPHANT
majestically passes..
Pl. do not take them seriously… over these illiterate jokers.
IInd point: Yesudas is undoubtedly a great singer and in classicals
and semi classicals he is the best… His hindi diction is wanting
and his Mumbai tenure in late seventies witnessed limited success.
Yesudas regards rafi saab as the best singer…. and in voice quality
Kishore and Yesudas has a strong voice which they modulate
quite well…..
In fact Yesudad did a song rehearsal with rafi ji under the baton
of ravindra jain in seventies.. .. but the song was not recorded….
binu nair
June 17th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Sanjay wrote: “He’s not saying that Rafi’s voice wasn’t excelent, he’s just saying that Rafi’s ‘taan and harkatein’ was what made him inimitable. Perhaps true - even if someone had his vocals - they still couldn’t be as good as Rafi. Very credible to me. Last night I explored musicindiaonline - Sonu Nigam has a 22 volume set where he sings some famous Rafi numbers. Sonu showed good voice and ability but that ‘taan and harkatein’ was simply not there and so the songs were like cheap subsitutes for Rafi - despite the voice and ability being superb.”
-I agree with Sanjay just as he agrees with me. Rafi had an excellent voice that had unique abilities like huskiness, an inherent pathos, sweetness, the ability to switch scale. But when you get into a discussion of “best voice” rather than “best singer” (note the difference), it gets subjective. As Sanjay said Kishore’s voice had lot of youthfulness , energy and masculinity. Similarly, Mukesh and Jagjit had enviable basses. Bhupinder and Yesudas had good depth. You can slice and dice and debate-it is difficult to arrive at “THE VOICE”.
–Rafi’s uniqueness was in his taan and harkatein. And mind you the songs Sanjay is referring to are Rafi songs that Sonu is trying to imitate. He knows exactly what harkatein to perform, still he comes short. I was listening to a song from recent film “Hum dil de chuke sanam”- “Jhoka hawa ka aaj bhi” by Hariharan. It is very good song. I thought it is one current song that had all musical and lyrical elements of a great song, but it will just be good, never a timeless great..Rafi with his style could have made it great!
–The other point about Rafi is Rafi exudes his sweetness from the navel. This was stated by Anandji and becomes obvious if you see the live videos in youtube. When someone sings sweet (such as Sonu and Abhijeet), one usually sings from the throat. Rafi had a very profound depth which came from his gut. It is a very subtle point. That makes him sweet even in so-called “macho” songs like “Main jaat yamla”…And just like Anandji, I also think is the biggest difference between his clones and him.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Viswan ji….
Rafi ji has a thin and feminine voice..
for their comment - Music Lovers will only laugh and kids
below 5 years will believe it… they are making themselves
laughing stock material…. and exposing their limited knowledge
in defending the in-defensible…
So pathetic and weird their ideas are my friends….
they are like the dogs .. who bark relentlessly, when an ELEPHANT
passes….
Pl. do not take them seriously…
IInd point: Yesudas is undoubtedly a great singer and in classicals
and semi classicals he is the best… His hindi diction is wanting
and his Mumbai tenure in late seventies witnessed limited success.
Yesudas regards rafi saab as the best singer…. and in voice quality
Kishore and Yesudas has a strong voice which they modulate
quite well…..
In fact Yesudad did a song rehearsal with rafi ji under the baton
of ravindra jain in seventies.. .. but the song was not recorded….
binu nair
June 17th, 2007 at 12:59 am
Stupid Kishore fan, nothing Hindu-Muslim here. Are you a politician?
June 17th, 2007 at 12:54 am
to rate rafis voice as thin and femine is only intented to tarnish the reputation of agreat singer.no real music lover could say so.listen the words of kj jesudas.he consider rafi as his inspiration and greatest singer of india.ithink kj is very close to rafi as a singer with real sweet voice
June 17th, 2007 at 12:48 am
Mr. haldar, Rafiji was very popular in London also.
June 16th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
Sanjay wrote:
“That is why the historians / experts from the time always pick Rafi over Kishore. However, the people today who aren’t from the 50s or 60s but remember 70s well appreciate 70s music much more and don’t care as much for 50s and 60s (except a few Kishore numbers). And for them and their purposes - Kishore is #1.”
–This is exactly the “Recency factor” that Haldar and others mentioned earlier in the thread. There will come a time when Saigal, Rafi and Kishore will be equi-distant in terms of time. The real evaluation would start then.
I am not sure if you follow current music. Current music is trying to get out of the Sanu, Abhijeet, Vinod Rathod, Sudesh Bhosle genre- a trend of oversimplified open-throated singing started by KK. Sanu, Babul, Vinod and (to some extent) Abhijeet have been shown the door by fans.
-Most films these days have sufi style qawwalis, soft songs and some item numbers. There are very few action songs. If Kishore and Rafi (imagine at their peak) were singing today, most songs in Gangster, Kalyug, Metro, (and the Himesh, Rahman ones) compositions would go to Rafi.
-In all these films (take Gangster for example) different genres have been tried out, which kind of relates back to the 60s (take the “Hum dono” or “Mere Sanam” examples). The difference is that now 5 singers are singing the 5 different genres. In the 60s one person could sing them all-that was RAFI.
June 16th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
As in Sonu had a good voice too (not as good as Rafi’s but good) - but what made the 1000 fold difference was the taan and harkatein. That made Rafi’s version 1000X better for me.
June 16th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
P Haldar wrote:
“Sudip, I am also not sure of your evaluation of the “love” and “popularity” aspects”
—I never meant Kishore is more popular than Rafi. What I meant is I do not care for that, even if that be so. I can concede that. In ancient Greece and Rome, art was esoteric. If art is democratized, you will always get “Main bhelpuri kha raha tha” or “Mera pant bhi sexy”. By the simple 80:20 rule, 80% opinions do not count, except for the day of election. My 8-year old son thinks I am better in Math than Einstein..What does it prove? Anyway, this is my personal opinion.
Binu wrote: “And three great singers succumbed to heart attacks : Kishore
Kumar, Mukesh and Rafi saab…..
Does singing affect the heart and its working…?”
–Interesting.. And they dies almost at the same age.. But the Mangeskar sisters are alive.
Sanjay wrote:”However, this slow song doesn’t have a lot of energy (as designed) but plenty of emotions and depth. Without that energy, it loses the trait of being immediately appreciable for ANYONE except from that group I mentioned. This, as unfair as it is, means that the song won’t be timeless as something with immediately recognizable energy, especially from a fan of the coming generations who isn’t as familiar with the classical gems.”
–Exactly… As I said before I myself converted. I do not belong to the Rafi generation. The first Rafi song I heard at length (I had followed snippets earlier of other songs) was way after Rafi’s death. It was “Meri Kahani bhoolnewale”.
Kishore is like whisky. It immediately strikes you. Rafi is like wine..It slowly gets on you. There are so many songs which I started linking after hearing for the nth time.
Sanjay wrote: “This is a very interesting point. That is exactly my problem with Mohammed Rafi. One of my all time favorite songs (in a general category too!) is Rafi’s “Patthar Ke Sanam.”
-So we agree on the basic principle though our opinions about KK and Rafi are reverse. The two songs you picked are LP songs. LP songs are generally attractive and full of embellishments. Even Mukesh’s hit numbers from Milan and DHarti kahen pukar ke were attractive. Rafi sang lot of sad songs for LP. The few ones devoid of energy are “Woh Jab yaad aye” (but this was the first LP film-Parasmani) and “Akela hoon main” (Jaal).
June 16th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
He’s not saying that Rafi’s voice wasn’t excelent, he’s just saying that Rafi’s ‘taan and harkatein’ was what made him inimitable. Perhaps true - even if someone had his vocals - they still couldn’t be as good as Rafi. Very credible to me. Last night I explored musicindiaonline - Sonu Nigam has a 22 volume set where he sings some famous Rafi numbers. Sonu showed good voice and ability but that ‘taan and harkatein’ was simply not there and so the songs were like cheap subsitutes for Rafi - despite the voie and ability being superb.
June 16th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
The site and this subject has become a hit thanks to
Mohd Rafi in the Kishore Kumar site. In the movies, in halls
and stadiums, in the recording rooms and every where RAFI
saab was a hit..
He came as a nobody became a hero and went away as a hero…… Mumba-ites, music lovers & citizens will never forget July 31st 1980,
when the GODS called RAFI SAAB BACK…. it will be 27 years of
melody-less years.
And three great singers succumbed to heart attacks : Kishore
Kumar, Mukesh and Rafi saab…..
Does singing affect the heart and its working…?
binu nair….
June 16th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
I agree with myk on the “voice” aspect; Rafi’s voice in the 50s and 60s was a notch above everyone else’s. Also, you’ll have to realize that Rafi sung in multiple voices (Dilip Kumar, Rajendra Kumar, Shammi Kapoor, Dev Anand, Dharmendra,…), so it’s possible that you like one voice of his better than another. Kishore also had a very good voice during that period but he remained under-utilised as someone pointed out earlier. Sudip, I am also not sure of your evaluation of the “love” and “popularity” aspects. If you are talking about Kolkata, that may be true, but if you are talking about the whole world, it’s difficult to beat Rafi. One can understand Punjabis loving Rafi. But how do you explain Rafi’s popularity in places like Kerala and Andhra Pradesh? If you go to places like Birmingham and Manchester, Rafi is the favourite singer among Indians there. The Birmingham Symphony orchestra is actually recording a number of Rafi songs in the voice of Sonu. That voice is gold; I still don’t understand how anyone can call it “thin” or “feminine”. Is Sudesh Bhosle the current benchmark for a good voice?
June 16th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
That is why the historians / experts from the time always pick Rafi over Kishore. However, the people today who aren’t from the 50s or 60s but remember 70s well appreciate 70s music much more and don’t care as much for 50s and 60s (except a few Kishore numbers). And for them and their purposes - Kishore is #1.
June 16th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
MYK:
You talk about the greatness of Rafi’s voice. Of course it is GREAT. Think about it this way. A lot of Kishore fans don’t care for the kind of songs from the 50s and 60s. They only care for the kinds of songs in the 1970s and 1980s. The ones that demand a powerful barritone for strength. They care for sad and romantic songs too (we’ve seen this in the 70s) but don’t care for songs that require too much classical training.
What kind of singer would such an audience like? Kishore Kumar. Whose voice would be BEST for this kind of genre? Kishore Kumar’s (before you argue this - I want that list). If you go for OVERALL SINGING with ALL KINDS of songs than I think Rafi wins easy - but it depends on the value of the fans. Lots of fans who grew up in the 70s are enchanted with that kind of music (and remember - the 70s 80s genre is big enough that it is a world of its own). This “limitation” is very broad one.
If people don’t care for ghazals and qawwalis but are within certain limits (that are broad nevertheless) (and MILLIONS are) and it is just about voice and not training - then Kishore Kumar can truly contend to be #1 among those fans. Kishore’s setback in the early period was NEVER his amazing voice - it was training.
You have to fit a singer for you purposes. Not everyone likes EVERY KIND of song. And fors specific categories - KK is #1. His voice is best. Even his limitations leave for a BIG WORLD - his great and vast career with many kinds of songs.
June 16th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
MYK:
1. “This Booming and Resounding effect is personal, I can list many songs where Rafi could sound like that. I think you haven’t listened to a lot of Rafi songs to be making such comments. Rafi has many songs in deep baritone.”
Please do! List me AS MANY songs as you can think where Rafi has something close to the POWERFUL TONE of Kishore Kumar. I’m VERY interested.
I predict you’ll give a list of strong tonal quality but it’ll never be quite as powerful as Kishore’s rendition. How can it? Barritone is a good thing and a bad thing. Someone with a baritone could never sing “Din Dhal Jaye.” Just as it allows you – it also limits you. It’s OK that Rafi didn’t have baritone. His HUSKY voice and his TONE were excellent even without.
I anxiously wait for a list – make it as long as good as you can.
2. “What modulation are you talking about?” ; “Kishore did not have a versatile voice.”
He could change his voice to mellow and smooth to suite the an emotional or heartfelt number – Chingari Koi Badkhe (Amar Prem) or Aane Wala Pal (Golmal) sound very different from his trademark booming, powerful voice from say “Apni to Jaise Taise” from Laawaris. He could change his voice to match a drunk Amitabh in Sharabi. That’s undeniable modulation and versatility, for me.
3. “Kishore did not have the range nor the voice to sing the majority types of songs.”
If Kishore didn’t have the voice – then how could he reach such heights (and ONLY HE) to contend with Rafi? You can question anything about Kishore - his career or his training - but NOT his AMAZING VOICE.
4. “If you haven’t noticed, compositions in the 70’s were not as difficult as in the 50’s or 60’s. Kishore restricted SDB’s compositional range but SD noticed that in the 70’s he didn’t have to compose songs like those in the 50’s and 60’s, the 70’s was a different period.”
True, compositions in the 50s were much more difficult. However, in an artistic sense, an easier composition is no less to me. I loved music from the 70s (and late 60s with Rafi gems – I CANNOT believe that Rafi declined in 1969 – I can think of a dozen Rafi FAVORITES from that year alone and the songs of Aradhana were different but not better). That is not entirely relevant to the value of the song.
5. “If at all there was a miss, it was SDB-Rafi in the 70’s.”
My favorite Rafi-Lata duet is actually “Teri Bindiya Re” from 1973 – the “lowest” point of Rafi’s career. There’s pure magic in his voice in that song. The story of Abhimaan was completely ruined when they choose Rafi to do playback (I thought the female voice was supposed to be better in the movie than the males – certainly not in that song).
6. “Kishore wanted to go back home in 1967, RD told him to stay back.”
That should be told to people as a motivational period. Tell people, “even the great Kishore Kumar struggled and was about to give up. He never did though – kept persisting – and see what a rich career he had from 1969-1987” think how much he’d have missed had he given up.”
7. “Yet KK would not have been able to sing the classics Rafi sang for Dev.
Yes that is true – but Kishore sang his own classics for Dev.
8. “Even SDB knew this which is why the cream of Dev came with Rafi.”
Just for my own curiosity – who sang more for Dev Anand (not that this means greatness – I don’t care for Dev Anand just curious). Rafi or Kishore?
June 16th, 2007 at 11:48 am
“Rafi can never emulate Bacchan.”
Actually, it is that Bachchan can never emulate Rafi. Anyway, for all Rafi fans out there, I’d like to hear more about the “Naseeb incident.” Amitabh and Rafi were to record the duet “Chal Mere Bhai.” I hear that both arrived around noon for recording. Both appeared restless. Amitabh said, “I couldn’t sleep last night knowing that I’d be recording with a such a legend like you.” Rafi said something like, “I couldn’t get much sleep either knowing I’d record with such a tall super star like you.” At that, Amitabh fell to Rafi’s feet.
Does anyone have more details or something to add to that anecdote. I’m very interested. I’m also interested in what Amitabh had to say of Rafi - since Amitabh was the superstar of the time and coincidentally Rafi’s “just right” voice was not perfect for Amitabh’ deep barritione (he is a lousy singer btw).
June 16th, 2007 at 11:40 am
1. “I beg to differ with you on this one. The reason why MD’s and co-singer’s opinions are important is not that they have more knowledge of music than lesser mortals like us, but because some of them had first-hand accounts of how these songs were rendered. What fans listen to is the end product of a song which could have been sung with “n” rehearsals/takes, or over “m” days or “t” tracks, with “surround” echo-aided recording. None of us are privy to what happens in the recording studio behind the microphone. SD, SJ, LP, RD or OP made judgements from there.”
I can live with that. Definitely people like SJ or Lata Mangeshkar have greater authority than a fan with these accounts. However, I’m sometimes skeptical of magazines and such because there are a lot of politics and sometimes people are biased (certainly the case with someone like Anil Biswas). I do agree with the general notion.
2. “And none of us know how the singers sounded really in an unaided environment.”
That is also true but I just want to add that Mohd Rafi, Kishore Kumar, and Lata Mangeshkar sound EXCELLENT when performing live – without equipment. The 1983 concert at Wembley – Lata & Kishore sang some songs even better than the studio version. Rafi’s live version song (the one you posted) – even better than the film version – love the last seconds of it (although he did do it again when a more mature singer).
3. “Most of the musicians or music arrangers (and I had the privilege of meeting a couple) who had watched Rafi from close, felt that he was the only singer who sang with “true” voice. The reason you find those minute fuzziness is that he never hid it with falsetto, it was always a true voice regardless of the range.”
I am better informed now. Good to know.
4. “Talat Mehmood perished because of #2.”
I’ve only heard one song of his – Chana Jor Gharam Babu. I liked his part of the song – but I did feel it was way too soft. Such a voice can’t thrive in the action era. Mohd Rafi’s voice could be strong if needed – it is a testament to his greatness, his ability, his versatility, his magic, that whatever the times – he was always #1 from late 1940s right till his death. NO ONE else could have done (nor did it).
5. “Because of Kishore’s deep, barritone voice he was able to overcome both the changes. The voice outpowered both instrumentation and sensitive recording instruments.”
Exactly.
6. “Sau baar janam lenge”
Incidentally, I’ve had this one my golden collection set for a long time (I have all 9 CDs of Rafi). First time I heard it. It is rendered very well. Someone who knows Hindi and is familiar with classic music will appreciate this. However, this slow song doesn’t have a lot of energy (as designed) but plenty of emotions and depth. Without that energy, it loses the trait of being immediately appreciable for ANYONE except from that group I mentioned. This, as unfair as it is, means that the song won’t be timeless as something with immediately recognizable energy, especially from a fan of the coming generations who isn’t as familiar with the classical gems.
7. “Let me make a very esoteric statement- I think if a sad song sounds “enjoyable” (observed/verified from a simple fact that such songs are played in public occasions), there has to be something wrong with the rendition.”
This is a very interesting point. That is exactly my problem with Mohammed Rafi. One of my all time favorite songs (in a general category too!) is Rafi’s “Patthar Ke Sanam.” This is one of the most PERFECTLY RENDERED songs I have ever heard. Trouble is, it is supposed to be a sad song. When I hear it, I become so elated, so impressed, so taken back by the perfection of the voice and the small details of expression (harkatein and taan) that it seems weird as to why Waheeda Rehman is crying. Yes, the voice has sadness as he sings “Patthar” but the overall superiority of the rendition overcomes that sadness.
That is a big problem with Rafi – sometimes his voice and rendition is too good for sad songs. His song “Kush Rahe Tu Sada” – again, I’m half half. He gives the right emotions of sadness, but I’m just amazed at his melody – listen to that last line of the song – how melodious his voice is! It is so impressive that you lose sadness. Same problem with “Tere Galiyon Mein” from Hawas. Right emotions – but superiority of voice and rendition make you say “wow” rather than cry.
On the other hand, Kishore’s voice is not as rich as Rafi’s. It always has that strength (baritone) but the energy can be removed as Kishore
modulates his voice to be mellow.
Mukesh is a great singer and one of my favorites – he had his niche in the industry and was irreplaceable and an all time great. However, his voice wasn’t as rich as Kishore’s and certainly not as rich as Rafi’s and that is why he was the best for sad songs. If he sang “Patthar Ke Sanam” – the song wouldn’t be nearly as good as Rafi’s – but it would do the job of making the song sad better – because his voice isn’t as rich. The saddest song I’ve ever heard was “Dost Dost Na Rahe” from Sangam, but my favorite sad song that also actually does make me sad is “O Saathi Re” and it proves that Kishore is great for sad songs when he modulates his voice.
In “O Saathi Re” Kishore maintains his voice strength (baritone naturally makes it strong) but reduces the energy by slowing down and modulating his voice to be mellow. It isn’t that same powerful voice from the songs of say, “Janemun Tum Kamal Kharti Ho” from Trishul. However, that heavy voice sounds like it is coming from a sad – HEAVY heart. It sounds like it is coming from a powerful person who is made helpless yet the strong baritone retains clarity. That depresses the hell out of me. His heavy, rough voice actually helps to make the song sad. The song DOES need a little bit of “wow” else you’ll be too bored to listen to it. It needs to be just “fun enough” that you’re all ears.
“meri Awaaz suno”
This is also in my collecton. The song is rendered very well.
June 16th, 2007 at 10:47 am
“The so called rafi fans are those who were earlier kk fans but under the pressure of Parents-remember above 45 rafi patronage have converted there innocent kids to rafi loyalist. ”
–So what happened to your parents? Or are they anonymous as well?
June 16th, 2007 at 9:51 am
>>>Kishore kumar for all those who dont know has won seven filmfare the highest among male playback singers. Rafi has won six in all. So there you go.
Filmfare awards don’t make a singer better than the other. Madan Mohan hardly got any awards, are you going to tell me Nadeem Shravan who have won more awards are better than him ?.
So we all know who is the best. Common dont say that he won four after rafi passed away. That would be a lame excuse.
Maybe lame to you but indeed the truth. Kishore had no competition after 1980.
>>>If you claim him to be the best, then your records should speak for it.
In terms of civilian awards, LM has won Bharat Ratna but rafi had to settle for much less. So he again fared second best. So sad even the govt did not consider him so special as our rafian think him to be.
LOL and where is Kishore in all this. The government hasn’t even considered Kishore for a Padma Shree, so where are you getting with this argument of yours ?. Its totally bogus. Awards don’t speak about talent.
>>>Kishore kumar is to playback singing what AB is to bollywood and Tendulkar is to cricket “simply uncomparable”.
Really ?. I don’t think this is the view of the majority of musicians and industry insiders. AB is overhyped big time, no big deal.
>>>The reason kk is compared to tendulkar is coz to have a voice like kk is god gifted. All the sur-taal of rafi can be learnt. Remember Manna dey was anyday a better classical singer than rafi.
Not really, Rafi could sing classical songs as good and even better than Manna owing to his pure range. All the sur and taal of rafi cannot be learnt, it is as you put it, “God Gifted”, sorry to say Kishore is miles behind in this aspect.
Rafi is to playback singing what Dilip kumar is to bollywood and Rahul Dravid is to cricket. Both Dilip kumar and Dravid are highly technically skills, are trained but ask any true cricket lover who does he prefer to watch dravid or tendulkar.
Wrong comparison buddy, Dilip is regarded as the Icon of Acting even by the overhyped Amitabh, none is comparable to him just as none is comparable to Rafi in playback singing. Show me a list of genres that Kishore has truly covered, I am sure you’ll have a tough time coming up with it.
>>>The answer would be Tendulkar and similarly for the sheer pleasure of listening it would be kishore kumar anyday over rafi.
This is truly subjective, you’re not proving anything.
>>>The so called rafi fans are those who were earlier kk fans but under the pressure of Parents-remember above 45 rafi patronage have converted there innocent kids to rafi loyalist. This is simple conditioning and brain washing of innocent kids (rafians).
LOL and you are getting this info from ?. Do you speak for these people, are you their PR man ?.
>>>To sum up, anyone can become a rafi but none can become KK.
Really, you must be kidding me truly, I really have doubts about your musical background.
June 16th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Anonymous : U are expressing a very sectarian view ..
but I agree that u have a right to say it ; just as we have
the right to say : Mohd Rafi - is the most influential playback
of our time…. No singer alike his capacity or ability has surfaced
so far … and will never surface …. is my guess…..
We can have many Kishore Kumars - for his songs were very
easy and a large number of people can sing it….
on the contrary, even trained singers find it difficult to sing
RAFI songs.. and they come somewhere near to 60% only I guess..
However , we love Kishore Kumar songs - the number of these
does’nt matter …
binu nair…
June 16th, 2007 at 6:19 am
Sanjay wrote:
“>>> Binuji – I don’t need an Outlook Survey to tell me, and millions of free spirited music lovers what to like and what not to like. I don’t need to read a newspaper to know who the top singer is. Music is free for all – a fan’s opinion – be it of any fan (devoid of ignorance) is just as great as another’s. Those reviews mean little to me and I could counter your reviews, I am sure, with many that have Kishore Kumar as the voice of the millennium.”
–Sanjay: I beg to differ with you on this one. The reason why MD’s and co-singer’s opinions are important is not that they have more knowledge of music than lesser mortals like us, but because some of them had first-hand accounts of how these songs were rendered. What fans listen to is the end product of a song which could have been sung with “n” rehearsals/takes, or over “m” days or “t” tracks, with “surround” echo-aided recording. None of us are privy to what happens in the recording studio behind the microphone. SD, SJ, LP, RD or OP made judgements from there. And none of us know how the singers sounded really in an unaided environment.
Most of the musicians or music arrangers (and I had the privilege of meeting a couple) who had watched Rafi from close, felt that he was the only singer who sang with “true” voice. The reason you find those minute fuzziness is that he never hid it with falsetto, it was always a true voice regardless of the range.
–Talking of technicalities, Kishore’s rise owed as much to technology as to the Burmans. Towards the end of the 60’s two things happened on the technology front. 1. More instrumentation owing to Western influence 2. Introduction of a more sensitive recording systems, that would capture every breath and accentuate every ups or downs. I learnt from Manna De’s account that Talat Mehmood perished because of #2. Talat’s quivering voice was over-accentuated by the sensitive recording equipment, so much so, that he had to leave the playback singing scene entirely. Everyone struggled other than Kishore. Because of Kishore’s deep, barritone voice he was able to overcome both the changes. The voice outpowered both instrumentation and sensitive recording instruments. Manna also mentioned that despite initial struggles, Rafi was able to adapt to it thanks to his relentless “riyaz”.
–Talking of voice, you did mention the energy in Kishore’s voice which is undeniable. But you forgot (or you do not care for) the natural HUSKINESS in Rafi’s voice that makes it seductive and haunting. Kishore could have well sung “Sau baar janam lenge”, but he would never have the huskiness that makes the song mystic and haunting..That was natural in Rafi. Kishore’s voice was drier, with less drama in it.
–The other aspect of Kishore’s voice was that because of the power and energy it lacked the melancholy that sad songs needed. The richness in the voice was so much (I hold the same opinion about Asha Bhosle) that it would never make one depressed. Let me make a very esoteric statement- I think if a sad song sounds “enjoyable” (observed/verified from a simple fact that such songs are played in public occasions), there has to be something wrong with the rendition. A sad song is NOT supposed to raise a “WOW!!!”, it is supposed to make depressed over days. A sad song should have ZERO embellishments and should soak the listener in misery. That’s what Mukesh was so good at. If you listen to the “Do Badan” songs (which is possibly the only film with 4 sad songs), you feel sad. None of the songs have any energy, nor any glamor…While I would rarely repeat those songs on my stereo (other than Raha Gardishon Mein Hardam), there lies the real success in their rendition. Sounds paradoxical?? It is like a villain. A villain should make you hate him. Similarly a sad song should make you hate it! Rafi goes very close (to me, higher than) Mukesh in achieving that. Kishore puts a lot of feeling in those songs, and leaks the voice once in a while to make it sound good, but I doubt he really depresses anyone. If I had to commit suicide I would possibly listen to Rafi’s “meri Awaaz suno” before hanging myself-so depressing, so much pathos!!
June 16th, 2007 at 3:32 am
Sudip,
Agree with your comments however I feel one of Rafi’s most strongest points was definitely his voice. It was so unique, no rough edges, no shrillness, not alot of bass and not too thin, just perfect with the ability to modulate for each and every actor. Add to this the melody and sweetness factor and there hasn’t been a better voice in the industry than his. You cannot compare his voice to that of anyone else’s, its out of reach.
Rafi would have definitely got alot more songs for Amitabh had he lived in the 80’s. Really though, singing for Amitabh doesn’t make you the greatest singer.
June 15th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
I am glad that someone else has pointed out “Nain Lad Jai Hain”. It’s so pure that you’d think that a Bhojpuri folk singer is singing it. Naushad never compromised and ultimately paid a heavy price. There’s another Rafi song in that genre that most of you may not have even heard. It’s “Pipara ke patwa” composed by Pt. Ravi Shankar for Godaan, based on Munshi Premchand’s famous short story. I didn’t find it on youtube or musicindiaonline, otherwise I’d have sent you the link. Another beautiful song in this genre is Manna’s “Chalat musafir” from Teesri Kasam, composed by Shankar.
In folk, my favourite MDs are SD, SJ, Salil, Naushad, OP and RD. While Naushad was influenced by the folk music of UP and Bihar, OP brought bhangra and punjabi rhythm to the fore. Salil, SD and RD were all influenced by the folk music of the northeast (Assam, Manipur, Sikkim, Nepal) but SD had the added advantage of himself being an exponent of bhatiyali (Bengal’s boatman song). From where Shankar (a Punjabi who grew up in AP) and Jaikishan (a Gujarati) received their influences, I’m not sure; all I can say is that right from Barsaat all the way down to Mera Naam Joker, they produced magic. But never discount Raj Kapoor’s influence; that man undestood music.
June 15th, 2007 at 11:48 pm
Kishore kumar for all those who dont know has won seven filmfare the highest among male playback singers. Rafi has won six in all. So there you go.
So we all know who is the best. Common dont say that he won four after rafi passed away. That would be a lame excuse. Statistics dont lie.
If you claim him to be the best, then your records should speak for it.
In terms of civilian awards, LM has won Bharat Ratna but rafi had to settle for much less. So he again fared second best. So sad even the govt did not consider him so special as our rafian think him to be.
Kishore kumar is to playback singing what AB is to bollywood and Tendulkar is to cricket “simply uncomparable”.
The reason kk is compared to tendulkar is coz to have a voice like kk is god gifted. All the sur-taal of rafi can be learnt. Remember Manna dey was anyday a better classical singer than rafi.
Rafi is to playback singing what Dilip kumar is to bollywood and Rahul Dravid is to cricket. Both Dilip kumar and Dravid are highly technically skills, are trained but ask any true cricket lover who does he prefer to watch dravid or tendulkar. The answer would be Tendulkar and similarly for the sheer pleasure of listening it would be kishore kumar anyday over rafi.
The so called rafi fans are those who were earlier kk fans but under the pressure of Parents-remember above 45 rafi patronage have converted there innocent kids to rafi loyalist. This is simple conditioning and brain washing of innocent kids (rafians).
To sum up, anyone can become a rafi but none can become KK.