Met L'Elisir on Arizona PBS Friday evening

[EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)]

Wow, talk about "Eurotrash"!!!! Seems as though the Met is trying to
outdo its continental cousins. (I've seen my share of the genre in
Europe, but this really outdid itself in crapiness - the singing was
nothing to get excited about, either.)

[DLU]

Maybe you need to get a new TV and some decent speakers.
Looks like there is noting you have anything good to say about any
performances.

It was excellent. It was a digital broadcast to theaters a few weeks
ago. Entertaining, well acted, good voices.


--
***************************************
* This is the Spammish Inquisition *
* Not Lumber Cartel Unit 75 [TINLC] *
* I am not SPEWS.ORG *
***************************************

[EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)]

DLU wrote:
> On 1/19/2013 11:01, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
>> Wow, talk about "Eurotrash"!!!! Seems as though the Met is trying to
>> outdo its continental cousins. (I've seen my share of the genre in
>> Europe, but this really outdid itself in crapiness - the singing was
>> nothing to get excited about, either.)
>
> Maybe you need to get a new TV and some decent speakers.
> Looks like there is noting you have anything good to say about any
> performances.

I already have both, thank you. (Perhaps my standards are higher than
yours - I can remember when singers could SING and sets did not resemble
a low-budget high school production in the American Midwest.)

>
> It was excellent. It was a digital broadcast to theaters a few weeks
> ago. Entertaining, well acted, good voices.

Clearly you are used to expecting the sub-standard in Met performances -
I am not!


>
>

[DLU]

Well I first heard opera at the met in 1956 when we used to get free
tickets at the USO. I first heard opera at the SF Opera in 1946, so I
have no idea what your "standards" are whatever that means.

If you are such an expert critic, how come you do not seem to be known
anywhere except on USENET? As for the sets, so what? How much do you
donate to the Met every year? What operas have you sponsored?

[Ricky Jimenez]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:56:17 -0800, DLU <da...@justthe.net> wrote:

>On 1/20/2013 14:18, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
>>
>>
>> DLU wrote:
>>> On 1/19/2013 11:01, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
>>>> Wow, talk about "Eurotrash"!!!! Seems as though the Met is trying to
>>>> outdo its continental cousins. (I've seen my share of the genre in
>>>> Europe, but this really outdid itself in crapiness - the singing was
>>>> nothing to get excited about, either.)
>>>
>>> Maybe you need to get a new TV and some decent speakers.
>>> Looks like there is noting you have anything good to say about any
>>> performances.
>>
>> I already have both, thank you. (Perhaps my standards are higher than
>> yours - I can remember when singers could SING and sets did not resemble
>> a low-budget high school production in the American Midwest.)
>>>
>>> It was excellent. It was a digital broadcast to theaters a few weeks
>>> ago. Entertaining, well acted, good voices.
>>
>> Clearly you are used to expecting the sub-standard in Met performances -
>> I am not!
>>
>Well I first heard opera at the met in 1956 when we used to get free
>tickets at the USO. I first heard opera at the SF Opera in 1946, so I
>have no idea what your "standards" are whatever that means.
>
>If you are such an expert critic, how come you do not seem to be known
>anywhere except on USENET? As for the sets, so what? How much do you
>donate to the Met every year? What operas have you sponsored?

I am at a loss to understand the OP's "Eurotrash" characterization.
The setting was approximately at the time the opera was written, the
1830s. The libretto specifies end of the 18th century in Basque
country so no big difference. The Dulcamara could sing (and act) his
part as well as anybody. I would like to see how sets and costumes of
previous eras compare to those of this production. Anybody have links
to such pictures?

[Peter]

There is a DVD available of the previous Met L'Elisir with Villazon and
Netrebko which IMHO is much better than the new production.

What do you think?

[Ricky Jimenez]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:50:40 -0800, "Peter" <reply to newsgroup only>
wrote:

>There is a DVD available of the previous Met L'Elisir with Villazon and
>Netrebko which IMHO is much better than the new production.
>
>What do you think?

I think you are referring to a Virgin Classics DVD from the Vienna
State Opera. I don't think it is much better than the current Met
production. I have a recollection of a 1981 Met production with
Pavarotti and Blegen in which Dulcamara descended from a balloon. I I
see it is available on a Decca DVD.

[EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)]

IMO, nothing could be much WORSE than the new production! (Despite the
ignorant replies to my comments on the broadcast on Arizona PBS.)

[DLU]

Since yo are such an expert, and the rest of us are ignorant, why is it,
that we have not heard of you except on USENET. Since you likes and
dislikes are so superior to ours, I guess you will just have to live in
you own little world, while the rest of us enjoy these awful productions.

Next time you are on the lecture circuit please let us know so we can
avoid it. I hear there is an opening at Atascadero for those with your
expertise.

[Ato Z]

If I may interject a bit of balance into this discussion:
While I disagree that the Met production qualifies as 'Euro-' or
'Ameritrash', (in which case it would have been set with nudes inside a
giant bleeding brain or something) and personally found it viewable and
fairly enjoyable; Evelyn did state (with rather unnecessary vehemence,
I thought) that her standards are apparently higher than some others;
which is obviously true, as others were satisfied with the production.
I think it's fair to state that there *have* been finer singers in the
role, and more opulent or at least more aesthetically pleasing sets -
the latter being a subjective matter, of course.
I'm not sure of just how many "recognized" critics we have here; but one
does not have to be an "expert" to know what he likes or dislikes.
To each his own.

[wagnerfan]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:55:30 -0600, moonen...@webtv.net (Ato Z)
wrote:

Yes but that doesn't mean her standards are "higher - it means they
are different/ Wagner fan

[EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)]

DLU wrote:
> On 1/25/2013 09:35, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
>>
>>
>> Peter wrote:
>>> There is a DVD available of the previous Met L'Elisir with Villazon
>>> and Netrebko which IMHO is much better than the new production.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> IMO, nothing could be much WORSE than the new production! (Despite the
>> ignorant replies to my comments on the broadcast on Arizona PBS.)
>
> Since yo are such an expert, and the rest of us are ignorant, why is it,
> that we have not heard of you except on USENET.

Perhaps because I have better things to do with my time than spend it on
the internet 24/7?

[DLU]

Oh yeah, you sound like a real fun girl, just out clubbing and playing
around in Cancun no doubt.
No doubt you are in demand for your wit and smiling personality.

[Ato Z]

I'm having flashbacks to the rmo of 9 or 10 years ago when the place
was pretty vicious - but considerably more interesting...

[EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)]

Ato Z wrote:
> I'm having flashbacks to the rmo of 9 or 10 years ago when the place
> was pretty vicious - but considerably more interesting...
>

That's because we had more members who knew something about opera! (And
there were more "opera singers" who could really SING, and stage
directors who could read a libretto and considered the composer's
intention of more importance than their own egos.)

[Steve Silverman]

Oh, the nostalgia!

Steve Silverman

[Ricky Jimenez]

I'll accept that maybe the singers of yesteryear might have been
better, but why is that true? Nobody says that orchestral playing had
also deterioated, in fact, just the opposite.

[Steve Silverman]

On Monday, 4 February 2013 15:25:00 UTC, Ricky Jimenez wrote:
>
>
> I'll accept that maybe the singers of yesteryear might have been
>
> better, but why is that true? Nobody says that orchestral playing had
>
> also deterioated, in fact, just the opposite.

They weren't better in general, just different. For example,Verdi and Wagner may well have been better served fifty years ago (although even that is subjective), while Rossini, Bellini and Donizetti are better served today. I think it's also fare to say that, in general, singers' musicianship and acting ability is much higher than it was five or six decades ago. If someone tells you that the standard of singing in opera has declined, you really need to consider it in the context of his specific likes and dislikes.

Steve Silverman

[wagnerfan]

Oh I don't think its all that subjective that the singers of
Wagnerfrom about 1925-1945 were better than they are today, not only
in quality but in quantity. For some reason during that period there
were a very large number of singers in that repertory that really
dwarf what we have been hearing for along time. I won't even discuss
Wagner heroic tenors since even during that Golden period there were
not that many (of course the work of one specific singer in that
repertory made up for alot of problems elsewhere.) but there were many
more sopranos and lower range voices back then - one only has to
listen to the many recorordings both studio and live to hear the
difference. Wagner fan