Carreras and Di Stefano
TomKauf2
During the 1950s Di Stefano was probably my favorite active lyric tenor, while
during the 1970s and 80s it was Carreras. There are strong similarities, in
that both have gorgeous, angelic voices. But there are differences as well-Di
Stefano had a much better top, but Carreras had a longer career, did not ruin
his voice as quickly, had a much more interesting repertory, and sang with
sopranos I like much better. Thus many of the Di Stefano recordings are like
roses--they have thorns--in this case Maria Callas :-) (G)--and some of the
more "interesting" works, especially the Puritani, are badly cut.
Finally, Carreras recorded some wonderful early Verdi, a Juive, a Giuramento,
(pirate only), an Elisabetta (I don't care for his Otello)--and much more,
including some real unusual arias. So I find myself playing carreras all the
time--and Di Stefano hardly ever.
I have often made negative remarks about Domingo's poor high notes--so how can
I forgive that fault in Carreras? Easy. I love his voice, and just don't care
for Domingo's--matter of taste.
I almost forgot but Carreras also sings with great dramatic involvement and
passion.
Cheers
Tom
Stregata
Hi, Tom
Di Stefano and Carreras: two of my absolute idols of all times, but I must
respectfully disgaree with some of your premises. Carreras ruined his glorious
voice more or less in the same time span as Di Stefano. They lasted (in
excellent voice both) a little more than a decade, i.e. Di Stefano from the
late 40's to late 50's and very early 60's; Carreras from early 70's to early
80's.
I usually like to think of Di Stefano and Carreras as twins: same name, same
golden voice, same passionate and ardent delivery and, same giving all of
themselves in each performance. Unfortunately, same mistakes and ill-advised
repertory. A pity that in their case lightning struck twice.
I have always had a soft and special spot in my heart for both. Maybe it is
because every time I listen to their old recordings(both live and studio) they
thrill me and move me like very few other operatic singers can. But it is also
a mixed feeling, because at the same time that I am reveling in their glorious
voices, I still lament the loss of these God-given gifts.
Stregata
>>Subject: Carreras and Di Stefano
>From: tomk...@aol.com (TomKauf2)
>Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 07:56 EST
>Message-id: <19980305125...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Cheers
Tom
>>Subject: Carreras and Di Stefano
>From: tomk...@aol.com (TomKauf2)
>Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 07:56 EST
>Message-id: <19980305125...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Brian G. Moore
This comparison between Carreras and Di Stefano is making me want to
hear more of Carreras, of whom I have heard little on recordings
besides the Three Tenors. I have the Carmen recording with Baltsa
and Carreras, and I like his voice, but it is the strangest thing
I keep *seeing* Domingo because of that wonderful movie...
Though as I understand it this recording was after his prime?
I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
--
Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
bg...@psu.edu , (814)-898-6334
GRNDPADAVE
>Subject: Re: Carreras and Di Stefano
>From: stre...@aol.com (Stregata)
>Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 15:49 EST
>Message-id: <19980305204...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>
>Hi, Tom
>
>Di Stefano and Carreras: two of my absolute idols of all times, but I must
>respectfully disgaree with some of your premises. Carreras ruined his
>glorious
>voice more or less in the same time span as Di Stefano. They lasted (in
>excellent voice both) a little more than a decade, i.e. Di Stefano from the
>late 40's to late 50's and very early 60's; Carreras from early 70's to early
>80's.
A beautifully articulated discussion centering on possessors of the great art
of legato singing.
-
In the Callas recording, the management of "O dolce mani, mansuete pura" by Di
Stefano is my touchstone for romantic tenoring. Both singers I think descend
from Gigli in being able to manage carefully graduated diminuendi.
-
It struck me as odd that both felt called upon to sing Manrico and Don Alvaro
(not that they didn't give decent accountings) but it made it harder for them
to resume the lighter roles. Each should have been a knockout as the Duke of
Mantua.
-
Now when we consider Alfredo Kraus we find a suave singer who did not stray far
from his strength and still accumulated a large repertory along the way.
-
Domingo, it seems to me, followed more along the lines of Caruso. With a
thicker and more baritonal timbre, Domingo has broken barriers that enable us
to enjoy some beautiful Wagnerian roles.
==
G/P Dave
James Kahn
>I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
>Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
>great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
His Tosca is pretty decent. In fact, that recording is pretty good on
the whole. It only sounds emotionally rather flat in comparison to
the Callas/de Sabata recording. But Carreras was in good voice for
this recording--still not what you would call powerful, but a nice
sound.
--
Jim
New York, NY
(Please remove "nospam." to get my e-mail address)
http://www.panix.com/~kahn
Hans Christian Hoff
Brian G. Moore wrote:
<snip>
> I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
> Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
> great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
>
His Adorno on the wonderful Abbado Boccanegra from 1977 is wonderfully
sung, but the part is not a big one, and its not very dramatic, either.
Much of the same may be said of Edgardo di Ravenswood in Lucia;
Carreras' Edgardo on the Lopez-Cobos Lucia (with Caballè) also from
1977 is a delight.
Manrico is much more dramatic,of course, but Carreras' Manrico in the
Davis Trovatore of 1981 seems to show that this was something he should
not have ventured.
Regards
Hans
Musipro
tomk...@aol.com wrote:
>many of the Di Stefano recordings are like
>roses--they have thorns--in this case Maria Callas :-) (G)--and some of >the
more "interesting" works, especially the Puritani, are badly cut.
Entirely typical of you, Thomas, to get in your obligatory dig at La Divina in
a thread ostensibly about tenors--not surprising coming from one who thinks
Pollione is the main reason to listen to Norma--oops, we've discussed that
topic already. :-)
Well, let me in turn take a swipe at another of your tenets and say that I
think, while many of the traditional stage cuts taken in the Callas heyday
damaged the operas, that in many instances judicious cutting can not only make
an otherwise unstageworthy opera viable, but can on occasion improve an already
musically worth work. I know I'm not necessarily in the majority here, but no
performance yet has convinced me, for example, that it is really necessary to
have both verses of Ah, for'se lui or Addio del passato in La Traviata. No need
to ask for your all's opinions--I'm sure you have them. :-)
GRNDPADAVE
>Subject: Re: Carreras and Di Stefano
>Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 16:22 EST
>Message-id: <6dn51q$s...@onsager.bd.psu.edu>
>
>
>This comparison between Carreras and Di Stefano is making me want to
>hear more of Carreras, of whom I have heard little on recordings
>besides the Three Tenors. I have the Carmen recording with Baltsa
>and Carreras, and I like his voice, but it is the strangest thing
>I keep *seeing* Domingo because of that wonderful movie...
>Though as I understand it this recording was after his prime?
>
>Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
>great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
If I had to choose only one Carreras recording it would be WERTHER with Von
Stade. There is a cool and suave beauty about this performance redolent of
that evening Garden Scene in Act I. Very poetic.
-
And another recording in which Carreras exhibits a bit of humor: LA PERICHOLE
with Teresa Berganza. Carreras gives a lovely lilt to that: "Il grandira car
il est espagnol."
-
I am not one for videos. But one I do enjoy is Carreras in LA BOHEME with
Theresa Stratas (conducted by Levine).
==G/P Dave
Joe Caporiccio
Stregata wrote:
>
> Hi, Tom
>
> Di Stefano and Carreras: two of my absolute idols of all times, but I must
> respectfully disgaree with some of your premises. Carreras ruined his glorious
> voice more or less in the same time span as Di Stefano. They lasted (in
> excellent voice both) a little more than a decade, i.e. Di Stefano from the
> late 40's to late 50's and very early 60's; Carreras from early 70's to early
> 80's.
>
> golden voice, same passionate and ardent delivery and, same giving all of
> themselves in each performance. Unfortunately, same mistakes and ill-advised
> repertory. A pity that in their case lightning struck twice.
>
> I have always had a soft and special spot in my heart for both. Maybe it is
> because every time I listen to their old recordings(both live and studio) they
> thrill me and move me like very few other operatic singers can. But it is also
> a mixed feeling, because at the same time that I am reveling in their glorious
> voices, I still lament the loss of these God-given gifts.
>
> Stregata
>
> >>Subject: Carreras and Di Stefano
> >From: tomk...@aol.com (TomKauf2)
> >Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 07:56 EST
> >Message-id: <19980305125...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
>
> During the 1950s Di Stefano was probably my favorite active lyric tenor, while
> during the 1970s and 80s it was Carreras. There are strong similarities, in
> that both have gorgeous, angelic voices. But there are differences as well-Di
> Stefano had a much better top, but Carreras had a longer career, did not ruin
> his voice as quickly, had a much more interesting repertory, and sang with
> roses--they have thorns--in this case Maria Callas :-) (G)--and some of the
> more "interesting" works, especially the Puritani, are badly cut.
>
> (pirate only), an Elisabetta (I don't care for his Otello)--and much more,
> including some real unusual arias. So I find myself playing carreras all the
> time--and Di Stefano hardly ever.
>
> I have often made negative remarks about Domingo's poor high notes--so how can
> I forgive that fault in Carreras? Easy. I love his voice, and just don't care
> for Domingo's--matter of taste.
>
> I almost forgot but Carreras also sings with great dramatic involvement and
> passion.
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>
> >From: tomk...@aol.com (TomKauf2)
> >Date: Thu, Mar 5, 1998 07:56 EST
> >Message-id: <19980305125...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
I was a Big Carreras when he first started but that voice went downhill
very quickly/ It wasn't just a bad choice of repertoire. When I saw him
in Adriana Lecouvreur at the Met (not that a heavy a role or that long a
one) he was mercilessly pushing for volume even though he had no need to
do so. Listento his first recording of Tosca with Colin Davis(1976) and
then his second recording for Von Karajan(1979). The wear on the voice
injust three years time is really shocking. Already the voice sound very
strained and very gritty (I can't think of another word for it). He was
always an embarrasingly bad actor. Even a simple right turn on stage
seemed to floor him (Look at the metropolitan Gala Video from 1983 where
he does the duet from Chenier with Caballe and look at him turn at the
end of that, as if he learned how a human moves by watching a vidoe tape
on Jupiter!!!)
My favorite recording of his is the Simon Boccanegra with Abbado. Too
Bad DG screwed up the sound on both versions of the CD!
Commspkmn
<<I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.>>
Carreras is in fabulous voice in a 1975 recording of Rossini's Elisabetta,
Regina D'Inghilterra. For more standard fare, I would also recommend a Legato
Classics release of a 1976 Covent Garden L'Elisir D'Amore. Carreras is in
superb form-much better than the Philips commercial recording.
Stregata
James Kahn wrote:
>His Tosca is pretty decent. In fact, that recording is pretty good on
>the whole. It only sounds emotionally rather flat in comparison to
>the Callas/de Sabata recording. But Carreras was in good voice for
>this recording--still not what you would call powerful, but a nice
>sound.
>--
>Jim
>New York, NY
IMO, to really appreciate the young Carreras it is best to listen to his live
performances. Somehow or other his studio recordings did not capture his voice
in full bloom. There are singers who don't record well and Carreras was one of
them. However, live in the theatre and in his prime, Carreras was a prince
among tenors.
Stregata
TomKauf2
My old friend Musipro's powers of resistance are really no greater than mine
when he says
:>Entirely typical of you, Thomas, to get in your obligatory dig at La Divina
>in >a thread ostensibly about tenors--not surprising coming from one who
thinks >Pollione is the main reason to listen to Norma--oops, we've discussed
that >topic already. :-)
I guess that as long as he ignored my good natured :-) (G)--I can ignore his
But he could at least use my preferred name--the one I answer to, and always
use: Tom, not Thomas.
And by referring to her as La Divina he really gets to the core of why I just
love to take these little digs (always good natured, never any real
bashing--but still digs) at her. It's so much more fun to go against the
current, to be an iconolast, than to be with the crowd. As a kid, I used to go
up down escalators. Too old for that now--but can still have a bit of un by
having my own Gods.
As for cuts--it all depends--if it's a recording--never-- if it's a
performancee and it is Callas' part, I really see no great problem (for
me--that is)--but how about the guy in the next sea?. What if it's Rigoletto,
and someone likes Possente amor--and they cut it--horrors. Worse if it's
Hoffmann and they cut the finale to the Giulietta act, I would feel cheated.
You might feel cheated if it were Giulietta's aria. See what I mean?
Cheers-and remember--it's
Tom
Musipro
TOM (not Thomas) Kaufman wrote:
>by referring to her as La Divina he really gets to the core of why I just
>love to take these little digs (always good natured, never any real
>bashing--but still digs) at her. It's so much more fun to go against the
>current, to be an iconolast, than to be with the crowd.
It's entirely fitting that you make later reference to your childhood and
escalators, because iconoclasm for its own sake, I think, is a pretty jejune
way to determine one's tastes. BTW, I used the title because it is an easy and
recognizable way to refer to Maria Callas, not because I worship her
uncritically.
I'll guess we'll have to save a serious discussion about cuts and their pros
and cons for another thread, with other participants.
wwi...@one.net
In article <34FF236D...@online.no>,
Hans Christian Hoff <hch...@online.no> wrote:
<<<snip>>>
> Manrico is much more dramatic,of course, but Carreras' Manrico in the
> Davis Trovatore of 1981 seems to show that this was something he should
> not have ventured.
If this is the same one from which I have the highlights, this has to have
the most amazing sound of any recording I have ever heard. The cast also
includes Katia Ricciarelli, Yuri Masurok (sounding a lot like Milnes), &
Stefania Toczyska, conducted by Colin (not Andrew) Davis, with the Orchestra
& Chorus of the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. Except it says here it was
recorded in London, July 1980. In any case, I can still remember the first
time I listened to this CD, well over 10 years ago. I actually gasped out
loud at the first notes. I still think it is one of the most beautifully
engineered recordings ever. Philips 411 447-2 for the highlights. They give
the catalog numbers for the phonograph & audio cassette versions of the
complete recording here, but not for the complete CD set.
I leave it to others to say whether he was capable of this role. I don't
find fault with it. I've never listened to this & wished any of the singers
had been better.
WW
Team OS/2 Cincinnati & PROUD OF IT!
(and Cincinnati Opera subscriber & PROUD OF IT!)
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Hornymd590
As a Carreras fan, I truly regret the state of his voice nowadays. During his
prime however, he was a marvel. I reiterate the recommendations previously
made for the Philips Duo (bargain price) sets of Lucia de Lammermoor and Tosca.
What a voice! You can get both sets for under $30. Get them!!!
Dan
Michael E. Miller/Robert E. Seletsky
Hello--
Just wondering if this was a private discussion. If it is, please
forgive me for putting in my two cents. When discussing cuts in
performances and/or recordings with Callas and di Stefano, one must bear
several things in mind: (a) many of those works seldom saw the light of
day to begin with in that period, and it was always a risk to bring them
out again, so what we should feel is gratitude for their presentation,
rather than displeasure about editorialisms (b) with that in mind,
repetitious material was thought too risky to engage audiences of the
1950s and early 1960s, if such a work was to have a life beyond a single
revival (c) both of the above must be weighed against cuts that were
opened BY the Callas/di Stefano team, e.g. the cabaletta "Tu vedrai" in
Trovatore (d) if one is preparing a critical edition (I am a
musicologist), obviously, everything must be presented. But the fact is
that cuts and substitutions were made from the first day of rehearsal by
the composer himself, or with his approval, paradoxically making
critical editions of opera extremely difficult to prepare. So no one
should get too exercised about these practises being carried on in our
own epoch. In fact, presenting a note-complete opera is probably just
about the least "authentic" thing one can do. Musical and dramatic
unity are the key elements in this art form, and opera has always needed
to undergo certain re-shaping, depending on the good taste of the
performers. It is a very flexible art form, and has always been a
collaboration between composer and performer, so nothing is exactly
sacrosanct.
Finally, I know this is a tenor-related thread, but to respond to a
peripheral matter that was raised: I have trouble comprehending anyone
not being stunned by Callas as an artist, even if one hates her voice.
Robert Seletsky
JL
On 5 Mar 1998 16:22:02 -0500, mo...@onsager.bd.psu.edu (Brian G.
Moore) wrote:
>
>This comparison between Carreras and Di Stefano is making me want to
>hear more of Carreras, of whom I have heard little on recordings
>besides the Three Tenors. I have the Carmen recording with Baltsa
>and Carreras, and I like his voice, but it is the strangest thing
>I keep *seeing* Domingo because of that wonderful movie...
>Though as I understand it this recording was after his prime?
>
>I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
>Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
>great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
>
>
>
>--
>
>Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
>bg...@psu.edu , (814)-898-6334
Lucia di Lammermoor with Caballe (his final aria has never been
more beautifully sung, and he gives us an amazing top Eflat at the end
of the duet.)
I due Foscari with Ricciarelli (her best work on disc(arguably)
Tosca , the first two of his recordings with Caballe and Ricciarelli
respectively9 the latter my absolute favorite recording of Tosca)
and finally,
a recording no lover of Verdi should be without,
Simon Boccanegra with Freni, Cappuccili, Ghiaurov, Carreras and
van Dam with Abbado conducting.
TomKauf2
Stregata wrote (with a few snips for brevity):
>. Carreras ruined his glorious
>voice more or less in the same time span as Di Stefano. They lasted (in
excellent voice both) a little more than a decade, i.e. Di Stefano from the
>late 40's to late 50's and very early 60's; Carreras from early 70's to early
>80's.
I tend to differ somewhat, in that I feel that Carreras' decline was slow and
gradual, while Di Stefano's was precipitous. Thus, Di Stefano made his debut in
1946, the entry in the Opera Grove suggests that the decline began in 1957 or
so, and that he only made sporadic appearnces during the 1960s. Opera Grove
suggests that he still was at the peak of his career in 1987 when he contracted
leukemia.
I don't agree, the decline started in the late 70s, but was very gradual--and
he still did some wonderful singing well into the 80s.
Tom
TomKauf2
There are no private discussions on r.m.o--everyone is welcome to join in. I
was delighted to see Mr. Selesky's comments, since they give me a chance to
explain my disagreement
:> When discussing cuts in performances and/or recordings with Callas and di
Stefano, one must bear several things in mind: (a) many of those works seldom
saw the light of day to begin with in that period, and it was always a risk to
bring them
>out again, so what we should feel is gratitude for their presentation,
I was fairly familiar with much of Puritani when the Di Stefano came out--and
had been looking forward to finally getting the second tenor aria: "Ad una
fonte"--Imagine my dissappoiutnment when half of it was cut. I have always been
of the school that if something is worth doing, it is worth doing right.
Of course I was grateful, but immediately dumped it when the Pavarotti came
out.
As I recall, that was the one Di Stefano I was most interested in, since I
already had the others with other tenors.
As for Callas--I love lovable sopranos--there is nothing lovable about her
voice. But don't forget, I am a tenor freak. Tenor freaks ogten (not always) do
not like Callas
Best
Tom
Klyphil
I think Carreras and DiStefano had in common their abilities to deliver texts
poetically, persuasively, and clearly. Listen to Di Stefano's exchange with
Callas in the Berlin Lucia before the duet Verrano a te. Listen to Carreras in
the narrative before Tu che in seno agli angeli. In these short excerpts they
are unparalleled.
Buoso Donati, Jr.
Klyphil
>>Domingo, it seems to me, followed more along the lines of >>Caruso. With a
thicker and more baritonal timbre, Domingo has >>broken barriers that enable us
to enjoy some beautiful >>Wagnerian roles.
I have no doubt that, had he lived, Caruso would have continued with the Wagner
roles, and perhaps some lyric baritone roles.
Buoso Donati, Jr.
Stregata
Safarmer wrote:
>Lucia di Lammermoor with Caballe (his final aria has never been
>more beautifully sung, and he gives us an amazing top Eflat at the end
>of the duet.)
>
>I due Foscari with Ricciarelli (her best work on disc(arguably)
>
>Tosca , the first two of his recordings with Caballe and Ricciarelli
>respectively9 the latter my absolute favorite recording of Tosca)
>
>and finally,
>a recording no lover of Verdi should be without,
>Simon Boccanegra with Freni, Cappuccili, Ghiaurov, Carreras and
>van Dam with Abbado conducting.
And may I add: any of his Ballo live performances. Riccardo was one of Jose's
signature roles. His recorded Ballo with Caballe does not capture his voice
as splendidly as his live Riccardo, although in the recorded version he sings
a high C at the end of "Teco io sto" which always gives me goosebumps. And
his"Si, rivederti Amelia" in the third act to me is unparalleled.
Another of Jose's signaure roles was Nemorino. Again, his recorded Elisir does
not do full justice to his voice. Jose's best Nemorino comes from the 1976
live performance at Covent Garden, issued in CD by Legato Classics. Here
Carreras gave us all a lesson in bel canto.
Musipro
TOM Kaufman wrote:
>As for Callas--I love lovable sopranos--there is nothing lovable about >her
voice. But don't forget, I am a tenor freak. Tenor freaks often (not >always)
do not like Callas.
I'm genuinely interested in this (to me) novel assertion, that people who like
tenors necessarily care only for a certain type of soprano. Care to explain
just why this might be so?
BTW, going back a ways, I was also floored by your assertion that putting a
smiley emoticon :-) after an opinion renders it immune to challenge or
argument. Would someone else comment on whether this is standard Netiquette?*
Not being sarcastic Tom, :-) I really would like to know.
*Not that standard Netiquette seems to be adhered to around here anyway :-).
TomKauf2
Some of my favorite Carreras recordings include the Roberto Devereux (with
Caballe); the Jerusalem (with Ricciarelli), the Giorno di Regno (with
Cossotto), the Macbeth (his few lines when he discovers Duncan's body are sung
with incredible passion), the Giuramento with Annabelle Bernard (Ed, if you
read this, please issue on CD), and too many more to mention.
Cheers
Tom
Lars Johansson
mo...@onsager.bd.psu.edu (Brian G. Moore) wrote:
>
>This comparison between Carreras and Di Stefano is making me want to
>hear more of Carreras, of whom I have heard little on recordings
>besides the Three Tenors. I have the Carmen recording with Baltsa
>and Carreras, and I like his voice, but it is the strangest thing
>I keep *seeing* Domingo because of that wonderful movie...
>Though as I understand it this recording was after his prime?
>
>I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
>Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
>great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
>
I love the Carreras-Caballet Cavelleria Rusticana. It might be
because the place where Caballet enters the choir outside the
church, "Inegiamo, il Signor non e' morto..." was one of the first
times an opera recording truly sent shivers down my spine
-- Lars
-------------------------------------------
To reply remove the X in the email address.
TomKauf2
Musipro raises two points:
>I'm genuinely interested in this (to me) novel assertion, that people who
>like
>tenors necessarily care only for a certain type of soprano. Care to explain
>just why this might be so?
Since this isn't what I said, I can't explain it. What I said was:
> Tenor freaks often (not >always) >do not like Callas.
This is a much less dogmatic statement, but is true for myself, and for quite a
few of my tenor freak friends. I might add (another generalization) that Callas
fans often don't like Chris Merritt. Speaking only for myself, Callas is at her
best playingwomen who are "hollering" at unfaithful lovers--e.g. Santuzza,
Norma, Medea. I identify with tenors (when they are not altogether evil--such
as the Duke or Pinkerton), or stupid (such as Don Jose)--and don't feel
comfortable when they are being castigated--although I have no trouble with the
opposite situation. e.g. Pollione's lines or Turiddu's line when they tallk
back. This is totally irrational, and I will make no attempts to justify it.
The other point:
>BTW, going back a ways, I was also floored by your assertion that putting a
>smiley emoticon :-) after an opinion renders it immune to challenge or
>argument. Would someone else comment on whether this is standard Netiquette?*
Again, speaking for myself, I interpret the smiley as an indication that it is
said in jest, to be funny, not to be taken seriously. I would think, that if I
called a stranger a bastard with a frown on my face, he or she would take
immediate unpleasant action. If I say the same thing to a good friend, with a
smile on my fac, he or she would take it in the spirit in which it was
intended.
Thus, if I refer to Callas as the thorn in the rose of the Di Stefano
recordings, and have a smiley after it--it does not mean all that much. Only
that it is a good natured way of my saying that I recognize her to be a great
artist but am not a big fan myself. Both are true. Of course, it can be
challenged--but should be challenged in the spirit in which it was intended,
(my taste, which I am entitled to)--and not an insult or suggestion that she is
not a great artist, which I am not.
Let me show you what I mean, by listing a few sopranos:
Callas--La Divina
Sutherland La Stupenda
both names are widely accepted--I just don't see anything divine about Callas.
Now, my personal list:
Callas: La orrenda :-):-) (and the smiley means it's a joke, and I do not
believe it to be true.) So the only argument can be with my not liking
her--since I consider her (in terms of the general accepted taste, not my own)
as perhaps the most important soprano of the century.
Sutherland La Stupenda
Caballe La Magnifica
Tebaldi La bellissima
Finally, my not liking Callas is my problem, no one else's. I wish I liked her.
Cheers
Tom
Musipro
tomk...@aol.com (TomKauf2)
>>Musipro raises two points:
>
>>I'm genuinely interested in this (to me) novel assertion, that people who
>>like
>>tenors necessarily care only for a certain type of soprano. Care to >>explain
>>just why this might be so?
>
>Since this isn't what I said, I can't explain it. What I said was: [snip]
What you said WAS:
>As for Callas--I love lovable sopranos--there is nothing lovable about >her
voice. But don't forget, I am a tenor freak. Tenor freaks often (not >always)
do not like Callas
i.e., I am a tenor freak ---> I love lovable sopranos -----> Callas is not
lovable -----> I do not like Callas. Certainly seems to me you could
extrapolate from this sequence the thought that, "Tenor freaks [only] love
lovable sopranos."
>if I refer to Callas as the thorn in the rose of the Di Stefano
>recordings, and have a smiley after it--it does not mean all that much. >Only
that it is a good natured way of my saying that I recognize her to be >a great
artist but am not a big fan myself. Both are true. Of course, it can >be
challenged--but should be challenged in the spirit in which it was >intended,
(my taste, which I am entitled to)
Which is exactly the spirit in which I always challenge you, Thomas, I mean,
Tom.
>Let me show you what I mean, by listing a few sopranos:
>
>Callas--La Divina
>Sutherland La Stupenda
>
>both names are widely accepted--I just don't see anything divine about
>Callas.
>
>Now, my personal list:
>
>Callas: La orrenda :-):-) (and the smiley means it's a joke, and I do not
>believe it to be true.) So the only argument can be with my not liking
>her--since I consider her (in terms of the general accepted taste, not my
>own) as perhaps the most important soprano of the century.
Clever of you to include two more hits at Callas and another nod to your own
unique taste in this bland little passage. :-)
>Finally, my not liking Callas is my problem, no one else's. I wish I liked
>her.
It is indeed your problem, and she has done quite well without you, thank you
very much.
GRNDPADAVE
The Callas timbre may not have been the sweetest. But there is such genius in
her management of voice and text.
-
Two examples:
-
In RIGOLETTO, Act II, Gilda orders Gualtier Malde to leave (but she really
doesn't want him to go). Callas' says it all in her inflection of "uscitene".
-
In TOSCA, Act II, hearing that Cavardossi has fainted, she exclaims:
"assassino !" and immediately realizes that she doesn't want to insult Scarpia
whose good graceswill be needed if Mario is to survive.
-
I am sure that readers can supply countless other manifestations of the genius
of Maria Callas. Tito Gobbi and Boris Christoff immediately come to mind as
comparable creators of operatic roles, as it were, from the inside.
-
I can understand that people may prefer other sopranos, but I always find
something in Callas' work that illuminates a role beyond the mere conveyance of
proper note values (although I know of no singer who was more attentive to the
rhythmic requirements of the composer).
==G/P Dave
Musipro
Robert E. Seletsky wrote:
>presenting a note-complete opera is probably just
>about the least "authentic" thing one can do. Musical and dramatic
>unity are the key elements in this art form, and opera has always needed
>to undergo certain re-shaping, depending on the good taste of the
>performers. It is a very flexible art form, and has always been a
>collaboration between composer and performer, so nothing is exactly
>sacrosanct.
What I'd like to discuss further is just WHY producers, directors, conductors
and performers feel the need to cut operas. A lot of it seems to have to do
with changing notions of dramatic art over the centuries. It's obvious, for
example, that eighteenth-century audiences had more tolerance for reams of
secco recitative than we do, probably because they were talking through it
anyway :-). Similarly, when improvised ornamentation and vocal virtuosity
ceased to be the raison d'etre of operatic singing in the later nineteenth
century, it probably seemed reasonable to cut second verses of arias and
cabalettas that served mainly as opportunities for decoration and display. On a
purely musical level, too, those repetitive, hectoring cadential passages in
Rossini's and Meyerbeer's finales may have been a way to whip up excitement
among contemporary audiences, but often seem merely primitive and monotonous to
us.
What causes protest among opera lovers and, indeed, all musicians, is when cuts
that can be argued as dramatically appropriate nevertheless damage the musical
and dramatic structures carefully constructed by the composer and librettist. I
would put cutting the cabaletta "Tu vedrai" in the last act of Trovatore in
this category, for example.
Also, it is depressing to note that many cuts in performances today seem driven
by nothing more significant than the inability of present-day singers to
negotiate a difficult aria, or the stranglehold of labor unions that dictate to
the minute when overtime pay kicks in.
TomKauf2
Musipro makes a number of statements, one of which I certainly agree with
:>It is indeed your problem, and she has done quite well without you, thank you
very much.
Otherwise,
>Certainly seems to me you could extrapolate from this sequence the thought
that, "Tenor freaks [only] love lovable sopranos."
I try to choose my words carefully, and try to avoid making statements that it
will be hard for me to defend (being human, I miss on occasion, and wind up
apologizing). In this case, there is a world of difference between the word
often (mine) and the word "only" (yours). As said before, I will only be held
accountable for what I say--not for what others misquote me as saying. Or their
attempts at extrapolating from my statements. That does not work, at least not
with me.
Then:
>Which is exactly the spirit in which I always challenge you, Thomas, I mean,
>Tom.
I think I have already made it clear that I dislike being called Thomas. In the
future, if you want the last word in a discussion, just call me Thomas, and
there will be no reply, except for that explanation. As for challenging my
taste, why do you bother? Do I challenge yours? Or anyone else's? What is your
motivation behind challenging my taste? Inquiring minds want to know.
Then:
>Clever of you to include two more hits at Callas and another nod to your own
>unique taste in this bland little passage. :-)
Thank you for the compliment. I pride myself in my ability to "hit" Callas in
bland, innocent sounding little passages. But seriously, my listening to Norma
for Pollione's music may be unique. My disliking Callas is far from unique.
There are many others who feel the same way (no, I will not "out" them), they
just don't want the resultant flames. Actually, I only dislike her--I know
people who hated her, even to the extent of getting tickets so that they could
boo her.
Tom
GRNDPADAVE
Regarding cuts, I do not believe that the routiniers who conducted Verdi in the
pre-Rudolf Bin era were aware of the cuts. When the musical partitions were
ordered they arrived in the cut form.
-
I remember noticing something strange when I saw my first Rudolf Bing RIGOLETTO
that the little ensemble before Monterone does his gate-crashing had an
exchange of "Si, vendetta". As the opera progressed, I was delighted to hear
Richard Tucker sing "Possente amor mi chiama".
-
The cuts were not Verdi's or he would have had Ricordi issue the score that
way. Verdi did keep changing his operas. His last change was to AÏDA in 1894
or 1895 in Paris. The choreographer asked for 12 more bars in the Triumphal
Scene's ballet. Verdi added them and then directed that Ricordi make them part
of the score (it is a tiny snippet that sounds a little like the accompaniment
to the children's chorus in OTELLO).
-
Verdi's French edition of the standard operas show him making allowances for
the French voices available, but rarely did he have Ricordi recycle these
changes into the standard editions which is why LE TROUVÈRE and IL TROVATORE
have different endings.
-
I prefer the complete LA TRAVIATA that provides a greater proportionality for
the male roles. The most regrettable cuts are in Act III, especially those
that remove Alfredo's repetitions of "Deh calmati" in the "Gran dio morir si
giovane" duet.
==G/P Dave
Musipro
Tom Kaufman wrote:
>I think I have already made it clear that I dislike being called Thomas. In
>the future, if you want the last word in a discussion, just call me >Thomas,
and there will be no reply, except for that explanation.
Oops, sorry, forgot. Will store away that bit of information though for future
reference, since getting the last word seems to be a goal of yours, at least in
our civilized little dialogues. :-)
>As for challenging my taste, why do you bother? Do I challenge yours? Or
>anyone else's? What is your motivation behind challenging my taste?
For fun, TOM, can't you see? This is one of the joys of this group--comparing,
discussing, and arguing about one's tastes. If you hold opinions that run
contrary to the majority, and moreover proclaim them often in a tone of
pride--dare I say smug self-satisfaction--in one's iconoclasm, expect to have
them challenged by perverse imps like me who can't resist pricking a tempting
balloon.
>My disliking Callas is far from unique. There are many others who feel >the
same way (no, I will not "out" them), they just don't want the >resultant
flames. Actually, I only dislike her--I know
>people who hated her, even to the extent of getting tickets so that they
>could boo her.
Actually a Callas-hater (no, I won't out him) expressed his opinion in no
uncertain terms recently in r.m.o., and was challenged in no uncertain terms,
and a stimulating dialogue resulted. I don't recall seeing a single flame, and
lots of interesting discussion of singing, acting et al. True, I can't speak
for his private e-mail--but he was hardly polite about his dislike. Whether or
not anyone changed his/her opinion is not the point--the point is there was
discussion.
As for the people whom you mention in support of your Callas-phobia, who bought
tickets so they could boo her, well, that is beneath contempt. Talk about
needing to get a life...
JL
Listen to Di Stefano's exchange with
>Callas in the Berlin Lucia before the duet Verrano a te. Listen to Carreras in
>the narrative before Tu che in seno agli angeli. In these short excerpts they
>are unparalleled.
>Buoso Donati, Jr.
my favorrite Carreras phrase comes from Lucia di Lammermoor:
just before " Tu che a Dio spiegasti l'ali "
right after "in terra piu non e"
he asks "Ella dunque....."
to hear this is to fall in love with Carreras's voice forever!
GregF NC
>Sutherland La Stupenda
>Caballe La Magnifica
>Tebaldi La bellissima
I believe Moffo was/is known as La Bellissima
Greg Fitzmaurice
Durham, NC
can...@webtv.net
re Callas' "way with words"
"Ballo" - "t'amo" in the duet "oh qual soave brivido" and the word
"miserere" in the preceding scene.
Claud H. Shirley III
And Tebaldi - La Divina - La Divina Renata!
Michael E. Miller/Robert E. Seletsky
Teddybare wrote:
>
> Callas had a quality one doesn't often come across in divas: she was
> never stingy with her voice. She never held back, saving everything
> for the great moments audiences wait for. The "great moment" was not
> her thing; from first note to last she poured out her voice
> unstintingly, never giving less than her all, even when that "all" was
> flawed. I think this is why her fans were so fervent in their
> devotion; they sensed her vocal generosity and responded in kind.
Yes, yes, and yes!
R.S.
Stregata
Claud Shirley, III wrote
>And Tebaldi - La Divina - La Divina Renata!
Claud,
I agree with you 100%, La Divina Renata, but I think we are in dangerous
waters.
Stregata
Teddybare
Ancona21
GregF NC wrote:
>
> >Sutherland La Stupenda
> >Caballe La Magnifica
> >Tebaldi La bellissima
>
> I believe Moffo was/is known as La Bellissima
>
> Greg Fitzmaurice
> Durham, NC
>And Tebaldi - La Divina - La Divina Renata!
Actually, "La Sublime."
Ancona21
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stregata
Safarmer wrote:
>my favorrite Carreras phrase comes from Lucia di Lammermoor:
>just before " Tu che a Dio spiegasti l'ali "
>right after "in terra piu non e"
>he asks "Ella dunque....."
>
>to hear this is to fall in love with Carreras's voice forever!
Ah, you are so right, it's to fall in love with his voice. And what do you say
about that particular phrase: "Lucia, piu non e," and "La mia Lucia." God,
the pathos with which Jose phrases those passages is absolutely magnificent!.
Stregata
Fred
PeteyOPMan
I have the 2 disc complete set here of Il Trovatore with Carreras and
Ricciarelli. It does indeed have some awesome sound throughout and the
voices are recorded with such a natural sound. I really appreciate the
"completeness" of this recording for all the strophes in Di Quella Pira, and
for Carreras having been captured here in such wonderful voice!
Hope you can still get the complete set because it's worth it!
Petey
PeteyOPMan
Brian G. Moore wrote in message <6dn51q$s...@onsager.bd.psu.edu>...
> (snip)
>I'm wondering if people could give some examples of some good
>Carreras on disc, especially something with a good example of the
>great "dramatic involvement" some have mentioned.
>Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
>bg...@psu.edu , (814)-898-6334
Ok! I give the good and the bad!
GREAT STUFF! BUY BUY BUY!
Zarzuela Arias - (Ensayo) - this is a serious must have! He's singing in
his native language and his way with the music is just gorgeous
Adriana Lecouvreur - Caballe, Carreras (Japan) - video or CD - this is
really great stuff!
Werther - Carreras, Von Stade - The height of Carreras' passionate sound can
be captured here! (I only wish he had done a Hoffmann!)
Manon Lescaut - Te Kanawa, Carreras - I know that he was getting a little
over the top in this recording, but he is SO expressive here in every line
he sings (this is a must-have, IMO)
Don Carlo - Carreras, Freni, Abbado - He sounds better here than in the
Karajan recording!
Romeo et Julliette - Carreras, Wise - Very passionate singing here
everywhere! It's so beautiful!
Turandot - Caballe/Carreras AND Marton/Carreras - The Caballe one captures
Carreras in the ULTIMATE VOICE for the role, when he had the breath to
handle this part and the beauty of tone (making for a very nice overall
bel-canto interpretation) - The Marton one captures Carreras in a more
"mature" sound and he is generally sounding more Wagnerian here. He is
wonderful in both versions!!
Il Trovatore - Ricciarelli - yeah, this one's great! Recorded in awesome
sound!
Stiffelio - Carreras, Sass - a gem! if you can find it!
Andrea Chenier - Carreras/Marton (video) - This is the one to get. (SPECIAL
MENTION - MET Centenary Gala - Final Duet with Caballe - Gotta have it!)
Verismo Arias - This CD has a lot of Leoncavallo and Mascagni rarities -
it's got wonderfully expressive performances!
(There are many other exemplary recordings by Carreras, but none are so
special as the ones I have already listed. His *recorded* efforts in stuff
like Aida, Cav/Pag, Ballo, Tosca, and Traviata are really his best *in
special moments* but not as complete involving, dramatic performances, as is
what you asked for; that is, he often had a tendency to give performances
when his voice was spinning wonderfully, but he wasn't captured giving
anything more than that in those cases...)
CAVEAT EMPTOR! Get them only when you're feeling rich!
La Forza del Destino - Plowright, Carreras, Bruson - He was really very
edgy-sounding everywhere here. There is no satisfaction to be found on this
recording.
Lou Salome - Carreras, Popp - Please DON'T buy this recording unless you're
ready to throw it away immediately after hearing it
Broadway Tunes - (produced by George Martin) - don't get this one!! you
will hate it!
La Boheme - Hendricks, Carreras - you will feel tremendously cheated if you
buy this one - get the Ricciarelli, Carreras one instead
FINALLY, I want to say that I enjoy Carreras' voice a great deal. Even now
there are vestiges of what greatness was once there. I enjoy all the stages
in his voice. I feel that he always had the ability to give something extra
in special moments, more than thrilling high notes.
I hope this list helps you!
Petey
John Lynch
I'll buy Musipro's whole argument, particularly the part about second
verses being used mainly for vocal display in the past. The Trovatore a
few weeks ago was a good example of why second verses might judiciously
be cut. Di quella pira was taken at such a slow speed they could have
put the entire gypsy camp to the stake before Manrico got through the
second verse and onto his horse.
Musipro wrote:
> What I'd like to discuss further is just WHY producers, directors, conductors
> and performers feel the need to cut operas. A lot of it seems to have to do
> with changing notions of dramatic art over the centuries. It's obvious, for
> example, that eighteenth-century audiences had more tolerance for reams of
> secco recitative than we do, probably because they were talking through it
> anyway :-). Similarly, when improvised ornamentation and vocal virtuosity
> ceased to be the raison d'etre of operatic singing in the later nineteenth
> century, it probably seemed reasonable to cut second verses of arias and
> cabalettas that served mainly as opportunities for decoration and display. On a
> purely musical level, too, those repetitive, hectoring cadential passages in
> Rossini's and Meyerbeer's finales may have been a way to whip up excitement
> among contemporary audiences, but often seem merely primitive and monotonous to
> us.
>
> What causes protest among opera lovers and, indeed, all musicians, is when cuts
> that can be argued as dramatically appropriate nevertheless damage the musical
> and dramatic structures carefully constructed by the composer and librettist. I
> would put cutting the cabaletta "Tu vedrai" in the last act of Trovatore in
> this category, for example.
>
> Also, it is depressing to note that many cuts in performances today seem driven
> by nothing more significant than the inability of present-day singers to
> negotiate a difficult aria, or the stranglehold of labor unions that dictate to
> the minute when overtime pay kicks in.
--
John Lynch
Joe Caporiccio
I am a Carreras fan, but you think he's in wonderful voice on the
Trovatore. Everyone is pretty bad on that recording and Colin Davis
conducting is wayoff the mark.
TomKauf2
It's absolutely true that second verses (especially of cabalettas) were for
ornamentation. However, there are many occasions when it is actually the first
verse that ids cut, and the second one (with the ornamentation) that iss ung.
No--I can't think of a single example.
I also think there is a big difference between a) a performance of a repertory
opera, b) a performance of an unusual opera which is likely to be recorded, and
c) a studio recording.
In situation A) I really don't care--loads of people want to get home early and
have work next day. No big deal.
In situation B), my feeling is that if it's worth doing, and will wind up as a
historical document, do it right. Do it complete.
And in situation C) the words "note complete" are a nice selling point. Let's
say someone did a rare Pacini opera, that I didn't have. I would run, not walk,
to the nearest CD store to get it. If it has a good cast, and is complete,
that's it. Another work scratched off my list of things to get. But otherwise,
I will still want the real (complete) thing.
But, of course, other folks might rather squeeze it on 2 CDs than have to get
3.
Cheers
Tom
Edward A. Cowan
JL wrote:
>
> Lucia di Lammermoor with Caballe (his final aria has never been
> more beautifully sung, and he gives us an amazing top Eflat at the end
> of the duet.)
>
> I due Foscari with Ricciarelli (her best work on disc(arguably)
>
> Tosca , the first two of his recordings with Caballe and Ricciarelli
> respectively9 the latter my absolute favorite recording of Tosca)
>
> and finally,
> a recording no lover of Verdi should be without,
> Simon Boccanegra with Freni, Cappuccili, Ghiaurov, Carreras and
> van Dam with Abbado conducting.
As it happens, yesterday morning I listened to some parts of the Philips set
of Verdi's _La battaglia di Legnano_ (Carreras, Ricciarelli, Manuguerra, et
al., cond. Gardelli), in which Carreras' singing is remarkable indeed. The
1970s were apparently prime years for him. I first became aware of his decline
when I heard a broadcast tape of an appearance by him with the Philadelphia
Orchestra some time after 1980, in which his singing was stylistically
appalling (scoops, sobs, the whole Franco Corelli _shtick_) and vocally in
dangerous condition. This was before his temporary retirement to fight
leukemia. I'm glad he "won" that one, but he hasn't been at all since that
time the way he was when I first heard him in Dallas (a Dallas Opera _Lucrezia
Borgia_, a Met tour _Traviata_) in the 1970s. --E.A.C.
GregF NC
I just bought the Caballe/Carreras Lucia on the strength of the discussions in
this newsgroup. I've only listened to about half of it so far, but, while
Carreras is good, he certainly doesn't eclipse Bergonzi or Pavarotti in the
part. Caballe is another story, I wish someone had told me that this set could
be subtitled "Aida sings Lucia".
Greg Fitzmaurice
Durham, NC
Michael E. Miller/Robert E. Seletsky
Musipro wrote:
> It's obvious, for
> example, that eighteenth-century audiences had more tolerance for reams of
I don't think they had any more tolerance for it than we do, hence Gluck
early on trying to do away with recitativo secco. On the other hand, if
it's performed as good theatre (I hate to keep harping on this, but
listen to Callas), why cut it? I'm sure that was common sense at all
periods.
> Similarly, when improvised ornamentation and vocal virtuosity
> ceased to be the raison d'etre of operatic singing in the later nineteenth
> century, it probably seemed reasonable to cut second verses of arias and
> cabalettas that served mainly as opportunities for decoration and display. On a
> purely musical level, too, those repetitive, hectoring cadential passages ... often seem merely primitive and monotonous to
> us.
Extreme over-embellishment was never the raison d'etre for anything that
was considered good taste, from the 17th century on, and performers were
constantly being castigated for this brand of stupidity. Second verses
are there because the text is there: they can be even sung straight, and
many people did. Or you can cut them if they don't work dramatically in
a particular production. That too is perfectly "authentic." The same
goes for extensive cadential sections. It's a matter of _le bon gout_,
and always has been.
> What causes protest among opera lovers and, indeed, all musicians, is when cuts
> that can be argued as dramatically appropriate nevertheless damage the musical
> and dramatic structures carefully constructed by the composer and librettist... the cabaletta "Tu vedrai" in the last act of Trovatore...
> for example.
> Also, it is depressing to note that many cuts in performances today seem driven
> by nothing more significant than the inability of present-day singers...
I agree, but again point out that opera = music + text + human beings.
Tastes change over time, and must be accommodated, if archaic art-forms,
like all western art music, are to survive. This attitude is at least
as old as the 18th century: e.g., violinists played Corelli's Violin
Sonatas of 1700 for 100 years, keeping them current with personal
ornamentation in their own style. And so-called "purism," unless it is
accompanied by genuine artistic dynamism, isn't realistic, because the
only other option is for the music to die out altogether.
The question that must be asked by those involved in opera production
is, "What is our purpose?" The attitude toward cuts varies with the
response: (a) are we attempting to re-create a specific historical
performance? (b) do we want to restore music that the composer never
heard, or perhaps didn't want to hear after the first rehearsal? (c) do
we want a cohesive performance based on our current vision? All of the
above are valid, given the fluid quality of opera. But cutting,
substituting sections, changing keys, etc., to keep specific singers
happy, were all real-life peformance options that the composers would
have dealt with, whether they--or we--like it or not. My personal
feeling is that we should leave in as much music as possible as long as
it doesn't show the work or the performers in a compromised light,
either musically or dramatically.
Bob Seletsky
Enrique Eskenazi
In article <19980308203...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
gre...@aol.com (GregF NC) wrote:
>I just bought the Caballe/Carreras Lucia on the strength of the
discussions in
>this newsgroup. I've only listened to about half of it so far, but,
while
>Carreras is good, he certainly doesn't eclipse Bergonzi or Pavarotti in
the
>part.
Not to mention Alfredo Kraus!
---
Enrique
eske...@mail.sendanet.es
Io chi sono? Eh, non lo so.
-Nol sapete?
Quasi no.
Musipro
Bob Seletsky wrote, about secco recitative:
>if it's performed as good theatre (I hate to keep harping on this, but
>listen to Callas), why cut it? I'm sure that was common sense at all
>periods.
Contemporary eighteenth-century accounts of opera audiences in, for example,
Handel's time suggest that attempting to perform secco recitative with dramatic
conviction would have been a waste of time and energy, since nobody listened.
He also wrote:
>Tastes change over time, and must be accommodated, if archaic art->forms, like
all western art music, are to survive.[snip] so-called >"purism," unless it is
accompanied by genuine artistic dynamism, isn't >realistic, because the only
other option is for the music to die out >altogether.
But isn't it also true, as I suggested, that many traditional cuts are hardly
motivated by "artistic dynamism," but rather by laziness and the ease of
following tradition--in the words of Toscanini, "the last bad performance."
>cutting, substituting sections, changing keys, etc., to keep specific >singers
happy, were all real-life peformance options that the composers >would have
dealt with, whether they--or we--like it or not.
True, but just because a composer consented to change or cut his work doesn't
mean that he (or she) necessarily thought the result was an artistic
improvement. Might it not be an actual service to a composer's vision to
restore "authentic" cuts that were made out of expediency, or simply to get the
work performed?
>My personal feeling is that we should leave in as much music as possible >as
long as it doesn't show the work or the performers in a compromised >light,
either musically or dramatically.
True, though this can mean leaving out great music that simply can't be managed
by most singers who essay a particular role. On the other hand, a cut version
of a work might be preferable to not performing it at all. No easy answers,
here, of course, but endless room for artistic choice.
Michael E. Miller/Robert E. Seletsky
Musipro wrote:
> Contemporary eighteenth-century accounts of opera audiences in, for example,
> Handel's time suggest that attempting to perform secco recitative with dramatic
> conviction would have been a waste of time and energy, since nobody listened.
Not exactly. It depended who was on stage, and where you were. In
France, recit. was the most important thing. The London and Naples
audience were pigs. Also, secco recit. is a prosaic version of the
wonderful recit/arioso which makes up all 17th-century opera (listen to
a good Monteverdi's "Poppea"; wow!). If not for that, there'd be no
opera.
Robert Seletsky wrote:
> >Tastes change over time, and must be accommodated, if archaic art-forms, like
> > all western art music, are to survive.[snip] so-called "purism," unless it is
> > accompanied by genuine artistic dynamism, isn't realistic, because the only
> > other option is for the music to die out altogether.
Musipro wrote:
> But isn't it also true, as I suggested, that many traditional cuts are hardly
> motivated by "artistic dynamism," but rather by laziness and the ease of
> following tradition--in the words of Toscanini, "the last bad performance."
Indeed, but putting in every scrap of material just to be
"more-authentic-than-thou" can be just as unappealing and unartistic.
As I said, to quote the 17th and 18th century thinkers, it comes down to
"le bon gout".
Robert Seletsky wrote:
> >cutting, substituting sections, changing keys, etc., to keep specific >singers
> > happy, were all real-life peformance options that the composers would have
> > dealt with, whether they--or we--like it or not.
Musipro wrote:
> True, but just because a composer consented to change or cut his work doesn't
> mean that he (or she) necessarily thought the result was an artistic
> improvement. Might it not be an actual service to a composer's vision to
> restore "authentic" cuts that were made out of expediency, or simply to get the
> work performed?
One person's expediency is another's good taste, and that applies to the
composer too. We have a strange problem these days--the opposite of the
attitude in the past: we restore music that the composer didn't like,
and actually crossed out or pasted over. That doesn't do him justice;
it just satisfies our morbid curisosity, and gives us more control than
the composer. (It's like EMI issuing all those things that Callas would
never, in a thousand years, have approved for release; is that kind to
her?)
Robert Seletsky wrote:
> >My personal feeling is that we should leave in as much music as possible as
> > long as it doesn't show the work or the performers in a compromised > > light, either musically or dramatically.
Musipro wrote:
> True, though this can mean leaving out great music that simply can't be managed
> by most singers who essay a particular role.
But if people can't sing it, you can't force them to do so; you have to
cut it, and just wait for the next performance with singers who can.
Musipro wrote:
> On the other hand, a cut version
> of a work might be preferable to not performing it at all. No easy answers,
> here, of course, but endless room for artistic choice.
Not easy at all. Thanks.
Best,
Bob Seletsky
David Scott Marley
There are other reasons you might take a cut in a performed opera besides
the desire of some audience members to get home early. A performance is the
melding of a great many people's talents, and they're not all going to have
the same agendas nor are any of them likely to be magically ideal for their
part. You tailor the performance to make everyone look good and make the
entire work satisfying. Maybe the original aria was written specifically to
show off the spectacular voice of someone the composer knew would be
creating that part, and you don't have a spectacular voice available, just a
good voice. (Or the spectacular voice is available but costs so much that
you can have that one aria well sung only at the cost of having the rest of
the opera sung amateurishly. It's rare that budgets don't have to be dealt
with.) If that's the case, an aria that goes on for longer than it needs to
dramatically might be trimmed, even though it was worth listening to in its
entirety when the spectacular voice was singing it. Or a moment, or maybe
the whole work, is overlong and you have the choice of producing a complete
historical document with generous longueurs or an evening of good theater.
You shouldn't always make the same decision in those cases.
There's not a pat answer that works for all operas, or even all
productions of a particular opera. In general you have to consider whether
your audience will favor the museum-piece approach or whether you want a
lively piece of theater; this affects everything down the line. Both
approaches are absolutely valid, and we should have opportunities to see our
favorite operas done both ways--but they can result in different approaches
to cuts.
Nor does a more theatrical approach necessarily mean taking cuts. When
we did The Elixir of Love we actually opened back up a traditional cut of
some 25 or 30 measures, purely because we thought it helped the comedy.
There was nothing of value musically in the material we put back (it was all
recitative) but we thought that dramatically it was more effective to linger
over the moment a bit. I imagine this cut is opened up on most recordings
(though I really couldn't tell you, as I've listened to very few; Donizetti
is not one of my favorite composers), but it's omitted in most performances.
If you're doing some unknown work and presenting it as a historical
document, sure, it would be better to do the work as written, for better or
worse. But really, how often are you doing that? More often you're doing the
umpteenth Marriage of Figaro or La Boheme. And even with a less familiar
work, do you want to always take the museum-piece approach at the price of
having the audience think, well, that was really interesting but dull.
Sometimes you want to make the case that an unfamiliar work, with the right
cuts, can be as exciting as anything in the repertory. We should have the
opportunity to hear operas done in as many interpretations as they will
bear, as museum pieces and as living theater. Opera isn't, or at least
shouldn't be, treated like sacred text, and a work shouldn't always be done
just like the last time you saw it.
David Scott Marley
Dramaturge, Berkeley Opera
http://www.berkeleyopera.com
David Scott Marley
GRNDPADAVE
>Subject: Re: Stage cuts
>From: "David Scott Marley" <dsma...@dnai.com>
>Date: Mon, Mar 23, 1998 15:20 EST
>Message-id: <6f6gj7$dvv$1...@castor.dnai.com>
As far as I am concerned, I would not haver any editor or director or conductor
cut a measure out of Beethoven's Eroica Symphony -- or out of any musical art
work.
-
If Verdi wrote it and left it in after many rounds of his own revisions, then
I want to hear it. The same applies to Puccini and Wagner, as far as I am
concerned.
-
When it comes to Donizetti or Bellini or Rossini, I think there may be a case
for cutting since in all likelihood a definitive score can no longer be found.
But I would always err on the side of completeness.
-
That's just my opinion.
==G/P Dave
Mike Richter
GRNDPADAVE wrote:
> ===========================
> As far as I am concerned, I would not haver any editor or director or conductor
> cut a measure out of Beethoven's Eroica Symphony -- or out of any musical art
> work.
> -
> If Verdi wrote it and left it in after many rounds of his own revisions, then
> I want to hear it. The same applies to Puccini and Wagner, as far as I am
> concerned.
> -
> When it comes to Donizetti or Bellini or Rossini, I think there may be a case
> for cutting since in all likelihood a definitive score can no longer be found.
> But I would always err on the side of completeness.
> -
> That's just my opinion.
> ==G/P Dave
In part, I agree - but some room must be left for the performers. Until
at least middle Verdi, composers altered scores to fit performance
conditions. And, unfortunately, Verdi did not revise all of his
compositions for later performance after his skills had fully developed.
We seem today to have fewer problems with *additions* to the scores than
with deletions. I am not speaking of the lesson scene in Barber, but of
items like Zeffirelli's banquet scene in Act I of Otello; many bemoan
the loss of the Willow Song in that film, but I have seen few objections
to the addition.
Some of Verdi's cabaletta's (heresy alert!) are detrimental to the flow
of the opera. Germont's is a nice bit of bravura, but dramatically I
prefer to get on to the party. Possente amor doesn't do much for the
Duke, either; he's already had his say in Ella mi fu rapita and it's
time for the jester to take over. OTOH, on a recording, inclusion is a
plus; Possente amor is hard to excise on playback, but most of them can
be dropped with one push on the remote. I found that harder in the
house. :-)
Mike
--
mric...@mindspring.com
http://mrichter.simplenet.com
CD-R http://resource.simplenet.com
Juan I. Cahis
Dear Friends:
Mike Richter <mric...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>GRNDPADAVE wrote:
>
>> As far as I am concerned, I would not haver any editor or director or conductor
>> cut a measure out of Beethoven's Eroica Symphony -- or out of any musical art
>> work.
>In part, I agree - but some room must be left for the performers.
>
>Some of Verdi's cabaletta's (heresy alert!) are detrimental to the flow
>of the opera. Germont's is a nice bit of bravura, but dramatically I
>prefer to get on to the party.
Sorry, but I disagree. Works of art are made by humans, and as a
result of that, they are far from perfect, but this fact doesn't allow
us to change the final manuscript of the composer at our will.
Otherwise we will end, in the public concerts, with performances of
arrangements of any composed music (including Beethoven of course, as
it was posted before), or with the mess that some "good friends" did
in the scores of Bruckner's Symphonies in the 19th century.
Thanks
Juan I. Cahis
Santiago de Chile (South America)
Email: jic...@ibm.net.nospam jic...@reuna.cl.nospam
To send me Email, please remove ".nospam" from my Email address
Note: Please forgive me for my bad English, I am trying to improve it!
Falparsi
Juan I. Cahis wrote:
> Works of art are made by humans, and as a
> result of that, they are far from perfect, but this fact doesn't allow
> us to change the final manuscript of the composer at our will.
I wonder what rmo regulars would think about cutting
the overture to La Cenerentola to save some time. This
actually happened to me at a performance in Columbus, OH
recently. A bad idea? I had heartburn for the rest of
the performance wondering what directorial whimsy had
decreed for the placement of this wonderful piece. It
never showed up! Since many newbies come to opera out of
curiosity about the overtures they have heard on the radio
or at symphony concerts, they would be at a loss to know
what was going on. SInce Opera Columbus was not able to
assure me by phone that the overture to Mozart's Abducion
from the Seraglio would not be cut next month, I decided
not to attend.
Jim Dunphy
Jack Johnson
JDavis6627 wrote in message
>The Met regularly cut the overture to LA GIOCONDA when they performed the
opera
>on tour. And most of us remember the "great scenes" edition of FORZA that
used
>to be peformed before the late '70s.
The "great scenes" version of FORZA? I think that's a great idea since the
opera is, dramatically, so boring and full of nonsense. In fact, how 'bout
I just step back some 30 years and watch L. Price and Corelli sing arias
from it? That would be more than adequate.
David Scott Marley
I don't think we're talking about taking cuts in the original manuscript.
We're just talking about taking cuts in performances of them. The original
manuscript is still there and everyone is free to do more productions of it,
uncut or not as they prefer. I don't think if we cut La Traviata in one
production for practical reasons, it's going to keep anyone else from doing
it uncut if they want to.
If doing everything uncut were any kind of guarantee of quality, I would be
more sympathetic. But it isn't. I've sat through plenty of uncut operas that
had no life to them. Better a trimmed La Forza that has a spark to it than a
four-hour uncut La Forza that's a pedantic bore to sit through. Whether cuts
are taken generally has very little to do with it. Those who want this or
that opera uncut will get what they want soon enough. (Though in my
experience such people are at home listening to their recordings, not going
to a live performance. A live performance can't be perfect enough for them,
so they don't bother making the effort. Why hear it live when they've got it
on CD just the way they want it, and with their choice of casts? Even
international houses can only give them a sufficiently stellar cast every so
often.)
JDavis6627
>I wonder what rmo regulars would think about cutting
>the overture to La Cenerentola to save some time.
The Met regularly cut the overture to LA GIOCONDA when they performed the opera
on tour. And most of us remember the "great scenes" edition of FORZA that used
to be peformed before the late '70s.
Jon Davis
"Living well is the best revenge"
Oscar Wilde
GRNDPADAVE
>Message-id: <6f9uie$ffg$1...@castor.dnai.com>
I have a 1950s FORZA DEL DESTINO in which the overture is played AFTER Act I.
Act II Scene 1 is altogether omitted.
-
It is sumptuously sung by Milanov, Tucker, Warren, Siepi. Cuts are not limited
to whole scenes, but a few bars here and several measures there. It is not
cut, it is mutiliated.
-
I have the Schippers, Levine, Gardelli and Sinopoli recordings note complete
(plus two recordings of the St. Petersburg -- 1862 -- version).
-
I find not a single boring bar in this opera which with its four tenor /
baritone duets, soaring soprano melodies, tarantella ballet, is my favorite of
all Verdi's operas. The scene at the Inn at Hornachuelos when the pilgrims
suddenly are heard outside is as stunning as a similar effect produces by
Ingmar Bergman in one of his films.
-
I want Verdi's vision not that of some vandal who fancies himself a producer.
== G/P Dave
Juan I. Cahis
"David Scott Marley" <dsma...@dnai.com> wrote:
>I don't think we're talking about taking cuts in the original manuscript.
>We're just talking about taking cuts in performances of them. The original
>manuscript is still there and everyone is free to do more productions of it,
>uncut or not as they prefer. I don't think if we cut La Traviata in one
>production for practical reasons, it's going to keep anyone else from doing
>it uncut if they want to.
Ok, but in my opinion, it should be clearly stated in advance if the
performance or the recording will be complete or cut, specially in the
case of recordings. I find very frustrating when you buy a CD box of
an Opera (which normally aren't cheap) and you detect, when you hear
it at home, that some twenty minutes (or maybe more, compare some
Donizzeti's Lucias, for example) of music is missing, when it is
supposed that you paid for all of them. In many cases, the only hint
that you can detect about that in the box is a warning for a "live
performance".
I think this is an unfair relationship from the CD producers to their
customers, but maybe I am wrong, am I?
Falparsi
JDavis6627 wrote:
>
> >I wonder what rmo regulars would think about cutting
> >the overture to La Cenerentola to save some time.
>
> The Met regularly cut the overture to LA GIOCONDA when they performed the opera
> on tour.
Yes, but did they cut the Dance of the Hours? When was the last time
you heard the overture to LaGioconda played at a concert (even a Pops
concert) or included in a "great overtures" album?
And most of us remember the "great scenes" edition of FORZA that used
> to be peformed before the late '70s.
Was this the version in which the first scene was played Before the
overture which was then played to cover the scene change?
Jim Dunphy
>
David Scott Marley
What Juan Cahis has to say about warnings on recordings is hard to dispute.
But I was only talking about live performances, as I think I said. You
really shouldn't compare recordings and live performances, as they are two
quite different things (though that doesn't stop some music critics).
David Scott Marley
I can't imagine doing La Gioconda and cutting Dance of the Hours, but even
if somebody was silly enough to do that, that doesn't seem like it would be
an argument against *all* cuts in *every* production of *every* opera.
That's like saying you should never eat any vegetables because once someone
in Venezuela died after eating a radish.
Edward A. Cowan
JDavis6627 wrote:
>
> >I wonder what rmo regulars would think about cutting
> >the overture to La Cenerentola to save some time.
>
> The Met regularly cut the overture to LA GIOCONDA when they performed
> the opera
> that used
> to be peformed before the late '70s.
I saw one of those at the Met itself (broadcast matinée of 1968). Later, when
the Met brought _Forza_ to Dallas on tour, the costumes were completely
different, although the sets (great ones, by Eugene Berman) were the same,
with the addition of the scene at the Inn in Hornachuelos!
I can recall seeing a Met tour _Carmen_ in Dallas in which the children's
march in Act 1 offered only the orchestral portion, not the singing! And,
worst of all, a tour performance of _Die Meistersinger_, cond. Rosenstock, in
which the entire Stolzing/David sequence of Act 1 was cut. (I can still see
Rosenstock turning an enormous sheaf of score at his desk when that
occurred!). Once, in Philadelphia, a Met tour performance of _Lohengrin_
offered a very cut version, much in the Bodanzky vein, in the same season in
which Böhm had conducted the work in NYC with only the one cut in Act 3.
This matter of severely cutting Met tour performances when the NYC
performances had been substantially complete, became a sore point in several
of the cities on the tour and quite possibly led to the Met's decision not to
tour any more. --E.A.C.
MarkDLew
Grandpa Dave wrote:
<< I want Verdi's vision, not that of some vandal who fancies himself a
producer >>
It's worth mentioning that not all composers object to having their works
"vandalized". Some composers I know actually like the idea that people would
take their work and do something creative with it. (I can't say whether Verdi
was one of them.)
Another point: Among today's successful opera composers (insofar as anyone can
be successful writing opera today) a point which is frequently stressed is that
it's crucial for the composer to be flexible during the first production -- to
interact with the performers and directors in a cooperative way, rather than be
a tyrant with a vision that might not make sense in the real world.
mdl
Juan I. Cahis
Dear Friends:
"David Scott Marley" <dsma...@dnai.com> wrote:
I fully agree with you, the problem is when you buy a recording of a
"public performance" of an Opera. I don't know if you have realized
it, or if I am wrong, but due of the very high quality of the new
technologies to do live recordings, most of the new Opera recordings
are live. So, a hint for the buyers about cuts should be convenient.