"Traviata" recommendation
XYZ XYZ
sure that this group is just as knowledgeable. :-) I've just seen
this at the Met for the first time (and in fact, have just listened to
this for the first time) and should get a recording. Browsing through
the archives, I've seen votes for
--Moffo
--Caballe
--Callas (Giulini)
--De Los Angeles
and a few others. What's the standard recommendation these days, if
there's such a thing?
I really don't follow opera and I think that I should opt for
something other than Callas (I've the standards (50s "Tosca" and
Berlin "Lucia")). Absent any input from this group, I'm interested in
trying Caballe since her "Aida" (Muti, conductor) comes highly
recommended by Gramophone.
Thanks!
Elizabeth Hubbell
[courtesy cc of this rec.music.classical.recordings posting also sent on
to XYZ XYZ]
XYZ XYZ wrote:
I must ask yours and the board's indulgence. I'm sure I already sent on
some of my thoughts on the Traviata discography at some point late last
year or early in '03. However, I haven't had any luck (why?) finding
the URL for my previous post. Hence, I'm simply taking the liberty of
lifting a copy-and-paste here of some of my thoughts from an old file on
my hard disk. I have, though, updated this to a degree in order to
reflect more recent listening:
[encl.]
There are a plethora of Traviata recordings. But pretty much none, IMO,
convince from beginning to end in quite the way, say, that classic sets
like the Cellini or Serafin Rigolettos or the Cellini or Salzburg
Trovatores do.
Recent re-listening, FWIW, to a range of "traviate";-) has left me
pondering the field with somewhat less frustration (though only
marginally so) than I had a while ago. It may be useful to understand
the pitfalls involved in some detail before understanding my (highly
subjective?) reasons for making the recommendations I do.
If one wants (and, yes, I do!) a set with a thoroughly committed
heroine, colleagues who are at least within hailing distance of her
wavelength and her vocalism, a conductor who, at a minimum, is a viable
enough storyteller with neither a tendency to thump, to rush nor to
snooze, and sound quality that (even when monaural) at least gives a
reasonably undistorted picture of what the artists are trying to do,
then one has a long search in store.
Before singling out my two studio recommendations at the end of this
extended posting, the bad news first (and all the sets mentioned here
adopt at least two or three of the standard cuts, unfortunately, unless
otherwise specified):
The Rosa Ponselle set (a "live" broadcast from 1935 on the NAXOS label)
has inferior sound;
the Licia Albanese/Arturo Toscanini NBC b'cast on RCA lacks poetry in
Act I (IMO), partly due to Toscanini being at his most "ungenerous",
IMO, and its heroine is heard better elsewhere;
the Albanese/Toscanini dress rehearsal is preferable for both artists,
even though Albanese's command of the coloratura is still somewhat
sketchy, and this recorded souvenir also has just a bit too much of that
distracting "humming along" from the Maestro (IMO) to qualify as a
first-time set (utterly fascinating as an insight into the Maestro's
inspired phrasing, of course, and mildly endearing on occasion, but not
desirable as a constant element, as here);
vey hard to get and in fair sound only is a non-professionally recorded
broadcast from the MET with an even mellower and more affecting Albanese
and the youthful Richard Tucker's richly sympathetic Alfredo;
like Albanese, Renata Tebaldi too is challenged by the coloratura, while
her (otherwise more sumptuous) vocalism lacks Albanese's mastery of
nuance, thus failing to compensate for either the blurred passagework
or, for that matter, a tenor partner whose Alfredo is (frankly)
inadequate -- good conducting from Molinari-Pradelli, though;
Maria Callas's studio set made for Cetra has wretched colleagues;
the only decent-sounding Callas "Live" sets come from '58 where the two
choices offer either crushingly routine conducting with reasonably
assured colleagues and Callas herself in adequate enough control for her
virtues in this music to be appreciated (a "live" broadcast from Lisbon
on EMI) or Callas herself in poorer *vocal* control (at Covent Garden,
and yes, a typically insightful Callas reading with more assured
conducting and viable enough colleagues, available on specialty labels,
if one is willing to put up with Callas on one of her more uneven nights);
artistically, the finest overall Callas sets are the two "live" La Scala
broadcasts with Carlo Maria Giulini conducting, but both the '55 (on
EMI) and the '56 (on MYTO) are in fairly murky sound, with Callas in
mellower more attractive form in '56 and the preferable Alfredo of
Giuseppe Di Stefano partnering her in '55 -- while the two "live" Mexico
broadcasts ('51 and '52) get into issues of both uneven sonics and
uneven ensemble, the latter especially sloppy in '52
(on balance, the Lisbon broadcast remains the least problematic of the
Callas sets, but it's still a mere compromise, IMO);
the Victoria De Los Angeles set has an O.K.-only Alfredo and a heroine
whose undoubted musicianship does not always translate into that kind of
communicative genius that can "step outside the frame", even though she
can be appealing enough at certain points and the conducting of Tullio
Serafin is just about as fine as you'll ever hear;
the Anna Moffo set boasts a heroine with somewhat more of that kind of
communicative flair lacking in De Los Angeles, even though the riveting
spontaneity of an Albanese or a Callas sometimes eludes her, while
Richard Tucker's Alfredo, still gifted with that splendid tenor voice,
has now developed too fierce a style, IMO, for this character;
the Joan Sutherland/Carlo Bergonzi and the Montserrat Caballe/Carlo
Bergonzi sets can be taken together, since they both make their mark as
conscientious and uncut(!) (rarely the case!) versions with even a bit
of heart in the Caballe sadly offset by even *her* occasional lack of
variety and, above all, the pervasive lack of consistent "theater", so
to speak, in both sets -- of these two I still prefer the Caballe,
despite an intermittent sameness;
the "live" Beverly Sills from Naples (1970, on MELODRAM, and featuring
Alfredo Kraus as Alfredo) is utterly captivating but hobbled by strictly
fair sound, while her well-recorded studio set opposite Nicolai Gedda,
from one year later, catches her (IMO) just one year too late with her
tones significantly less responsive;
the Mirella Freni set (1973) does not have uniformly satisfying
colleagues given the questionable vocal title its Germont pere
(Bruscantini) has to this critical role (IMO);
the Ileana Cotrubas too has the same important role taken by yet another
baritone somewhat past his best, IMO, and its conductor Carlos Kleiber
has somewhat the same "ungenerous" (so to speak) problems (IMO) that
Toscanini has on the official NBC b'cast on RCA;
the second of two Renata Scotto sets is hobbled by a heroine past her
best as well as by "ungenerous" conducting from Riccardo Muti, similar
to Toscanini's and Carlos Kleiber's;
the second Sutherland with Luciano Pavarotti also catches its heroine a
bit too late (IMO) --
as does the Teresa Stratas/Placido Domingo (IMO) with some savage cuts
in the music to boot;
the Rosanna Carteri under Pierre Monteux suffers from disconcertingly
slow conducting;
the Antonietta Stella set, again with the admirable Tullio Serafin at
the podium, does not even feature as appealing a heroine as Serafin had
in De Los Angeles,
and, finally, the Angela Georghiu under Georg Solti presents a highly
tantalizing heroine but with a fundamentally unsympathetic (IMO) Alfredo.
.........and these sets are only among the most promising!
There are a fair number of others in addition that arguably pall in even
worse ways. In addition, there are some additional attractive "live"
performances with luminaries like Sayao, Novotna, Steber, Caniglia et
al. But these get into more troubling issues of uneven sound quality.
Compared with such handicapped recordings, all the other sets cited here
are not all bad, when taking into account some of the real losers out
there! And with all these handicaps, the occasional -- and welcome --
intimacy of the Caballe among uncut versions and the superb conducting
of Serafin on the otherwise respectable De Los Angeles may stand out to
a degree.
However, two sets not yet mentioned occasioned an especially pleasant
surprise for me. I am now much more drawn to the earlier Scotto
Traviata on DG (under Antonino Votto) and to the Virginia Zeani
recording on Vox (under Jean Bobescu) than I am to any of the others.
Granted, neither of these two sets may be any less uncut than most of
the others, but they successfully hold my interest in ways that the
others don't. Committed heroines, simpatico colleagues, responsive and
sensible (if not necessarily inspired) conducting, reasonably clear
sound, a direct sense of a story being told -- all these assets seem
more present than absent in both these sets.
Slightly more individual conducting, a finer Alfredo (Ion Buzea, who,
unlike Scotto's Gianni Raimondi, is allowed his "O mio rimorso") and a
stronger rapport in the crucial meeting of Germont pere (Nicolae Herlea)
and Violetta may give the Zeani set, as a whole, a slight edge. The
whole is greater than the sum of its parts -- that sums up the virtues
of this set.
But both the DG Scotto and the Zeani are strong performances, and John
Steane, in his classic book, The Grand Tradition, suggests (and I partly
agree) that the young Scotto's mastery of Violetta's many demands, both
expressive and vocal, may put her in a class by herself. What a shame
her later recording no longer has such fluency. La Scala's more
seasoned forces are also an asset here.
No, neither set has an absolutely ideal cast, neither set is uncut,
neither set plumbs all the expressive potential in the score -- but
there is relatively little to distract one from listening to a
compelling drama told clearly through inspired vocal (and orchestral)
writing -- more than one can say (IMO) of any of the others. These two
give me a feeling that I'm hearing a generally accomplished and
"lived-in" reading where there is a distinct whiff of theater, and the
experience is not being "filtered" through stopgaps for this or that, or
through the vicissitudes of amateurish recording quality or through the
necessity for applying due appreciation for high artistic intent
compromised by uneven result. Instead, one is set up with certain
expectations that are, by and large, fulfilled.
Unfortunately, so far as I know, neither set in any current edition on
CD provides a libretto/text of the opera as part of its packaging, let
alone an English translation! One would have to purchase a libretto
separately.
Finally, I've heard tantalizing things of a fairly new set on NAXOS
featuring a certain Monika Krause, conduced by Alexander Rahbari. I
only wish I could give a personal assessment.
Just as recently, I was tantalized by the "live" Stratas/Wunderlich.
I'm grateful to our Elisabetta for having once put up some extracts from
this set for us all to hear. So, I subsequently hinted my way through
at getting it for a birthday present;-) Well, Stratas may be a bit
uneven in spots, but she holds my sympathy and when she's good is very
good, IMO. Same for the Alfredo of Fritz Wunderlich. Essentially, I
like the two of them. I find that the main problem here (and it hurts
to say it, since I usually quite admire him) is Hermann Prey's Germont
pere. Despite an essentially sympathetic quality and good intentions,
he ends up sounding decidedly uncomfortable, IMO.
So there it is. If you're willing to put up with occasionally
amateurish recording quality, there are a fair number of exciting "live"
sets out there featuring justly celebrated names. If you want to learn
the score in a clear recording with a minimum of frustrations and
distractions, I'd say it comes down to the earlier Scotto and the Zeani
on DG and Vox respectively.
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Andante teneramente
If you don't want Callas, there aren't many first rate alternatives
left ;-) .
The de los Angeles/Serafin Traviata is really good. De los Angeles
offers a moving portrait. She has the coloratura, but she doesn't
have the optional high notes (which doesn't bother me). You have a
very good Germont; only the Alfredo is weak. Nowadays it's on EMI
double forte, i. e. without a libretto, if that is important.
Both the Moffo/Previtali and Caballe/Pretre are complete. IMO that
is their greatest advantage. They both sound slack and even boring
to me. But if you like Caballe and maybe one of the other
protagonists (Bergonzi and Milnes) very much that might make a big
difference.
I like two "non-standard" recordings very much:
Kleiber on DG because of his élan. He turns "Traviata" into an opera
for the conductor. He gives a detailed reading full of nuances you
won't hear elsewhere. The recording is the most exiting I know,
though not idiomatic (and not everybody's cup of tea).
A live performance from Munich with Stratas, Wunderlich, Prey/Patane
(Orfeo). Surprisinly good, very emotional. It's live, mono and has
some flubs (Stratas transposes "Sempre libera" a semitone, Prey
breathes a lot...).
--
Regards
Paul Kintzele
XYZ XYZ wrote:
>
> and a few others. What's the standard recommendation these days, if
> there's such a thing?
You will no doubt be directed to several versions, all with merit, but
my particular favorite is Kleiber/DG. Cotrubas is a wonderfully
effective Violetta.
And if you do DVD/Video, be sure to seek out Solti's Traviata with the
incomparable Angela Gheorghiu. Astonishing.
Paul
EDS
news:3F9D7073...@english.upenn.edu...
>
> And if you do DVD/Video, be sure to seek out Solti's Traviata with the
> incomparable Angela Gheorghiu. Astonishing.
>
> Paul
I personally found it to be boring. The acting was non-existent. I never
felt so underwhelmed after watching an opera in my life. The only upside
was looking at Gheorghiu the whole time.
EDS
Simon Roberts
>
>Hi, I guess I should ask on rmo, but I don't feel like it, since I'm
>sure that this group is just as knowledgeable. :-) I've just seen
>this at the Met for the first time (and in fact, have just listened to
>this for the first time) and should get a recording. Browsing through
>the archives, I've seen votes for
>
>--Moffo
>--Caballe
>--Callas (Giulini)
>--De Los Angeles
>
>and a few others. What's the standard recommendation these days, if
>there's such a thing?
I bet there isn't....
>
>I really don't follow opera and I think that I should opt for
>something other than Callas (I've the standards (50s "Tosca" and
>Berlin "Lucia")). Absent any input from this group, I'm interested in
>trying Caballe since her "Aida" (Muti, conductor) comes highly
>recommended by Gramophone.
It has the virtue (if that's what it is) of being complete, but I find
everything about it rather dull (which makes the completeness rather less of a
virtue). It's main point of interest is Bergonzi, but he sounds even better on
the earlier Sutherland recording (which is also complete, rather dull but, at
least from the male principals, beautifully sung; Sutherland herself emits
lovely sounds but her diction is dreadful and nothing much happens). My
favorite among stereo studio recordings is Kleiber's, partly for him, partly for
Cotrubas's strongly characterized and affectingly sung Violetta. I'm not wild
about the men (including the extraordinary dubbed-in electronic noise that
passes for one of Domingo's high notes), but they're probably better than anyone
who's recorded their roles since. You should probably hear one of the live
Callas performances, but it's been so long since I compared them that I'll leave
a specific recommendation to someone else. If you want a quirky bargain, you
might consider the excitingly conducted and characterfully if unidiomatically
sung (the weird combination of Lorengar, Aragall and Fischer-Dieskau).
Simon
Ivailo Partchev
Far better than the Aida.
"XYZ XYZ" <cc1...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:6d2677a4.03102...@posting.google.com...
XYZ XYZ
> [from Geof. Riggs; not Eliz. H., my better half]
> There are a plethora of Traviata recordings.
Thanks for taking the time to review so many of them!
EG
conducting and Anna Rosza. The cast is all second rate singers, i.e.
second rate by the standard of the time.
The post war first rate singers are significantly inferior to the pre
war second rate.
I must admit though that I haven't heard the 1928 Molajoli recording.
If you're not used to historical recordings you may wonder why suffer
poor sound quality and noise when one can get the newest shiniest
package.
The answer, in short, is that
1. the technique of singing has vanished
2. commercial pressures produce bland uniform post ww2 performances
that lack any personality, that are all alike.
The poor sound takes time to get used to. Personally, I never liked
opera. It all sounded fake.
Until I happenned to listen to an old recording.
cc1...@hotmail.com (XYZ XYZ) wrote in message news:<6d2677a4.03102...@posting.google.com>...
XYZ XYZ
> If you don't want Callas, there aren't many first rate alternatives
> left ;-) .
Well, I'm a complete novice, so I should sit on the fence when it
comes to Callas. :-) Though I've owned the Berlin "Lucia" for years,
I only started listening to it yesterday. I think I can see why she
has her supporters and detractors. Since I own only a few complete
opera sets, it's nice to get something other than Callas, but if it
must be Callas, then Callas it is.
> The de los Angeles/Serafin Traviata is really good. De los Angeles
> offers a moving portrait. She has the coloratura, but she doesn't
> have the optional high notes (which doesn't bother me).
Well, I won't be able to tell. It's interesting to know this so
that I can pass off as knowledgeable (like knowing that Schwarzkopf
dubbed in a note (notes?) for Flagstad) though. :-) I do like DLA
in the classic Beecham "Boheme," but then that's the only "Boheme"
I've heard.
> You have a very good Germont; only the Alfredo is weak. Nowadays
> it's on EMI double forte, i. e. without a libretto, if that is
> important.
Would be nice to have a libretto. But then again, I'm *supposed* to
be consolidating and downsizing a collection, not acquiring new CDs,
so I guess this won't be terribly important. Not having a good Alfredo
is probably more of a problem though.
> Kleiber on DG because of his élan.
Interesting how one man's meat is another's poison, as usual. When
I did a search this morning, I found an old post by David Gable, who
argued cogently against this set. This is the one with Domingo, right?
Andrew T. Kay
>If you don't want Callas, there aren't many first rate alternatives
>left ;-) .
>
>The de los Angeles/Serafin Traviata is really good. De los Angeles
>offers a moving portrait. She has the coloratura, but she doesn't
>have the optional high notes (which doesn't bother me). You have a
>very good Germont; only the Alfredo is weak. Nowadays it's on EMI
>double forte, i. e. without a libretto, if that is important.
>
>Both the Moffo/Previtali and Caballe/Pretre are complete. IMO that
>is their greatest advantage. They both sound slack and even boring
>to me. But if you like Caballe and maybe one of the other
>protagonists (Bergonzi and Milnes) very much that might make a big
>difference.
>
>I like two "non-standard" recordings very much:
>
>Kleiber on DG because of his élan. He turns "Traviata" into an opera
>for the conductor. He gives a detailed reading full of nuances you
>won't hear elsewhere. The recording is the most exiting I know,
>though not idiomatic (and not everybody's cup of tea).
>
>A live performance from Munich with Stratas, Wunderlich, Prey/Patane
>(Orfeo). Surprisinly good, very emotional. It's live, mono and has
>some flubs (Stratas transposes "Sempre libera" a semitone, Prey
>breathes a lot...).
>
>--
>Regards
>
>
>
>
>
>
--Todd K
Andrew T. Kay
Andante teneramente wrote:
>Both the Moffo/Previtali and Caballe/Pretre are complete. IMO that
>is their greatest advantage. They both sound slack and even boring
>to me.
Moffo/Previtali is not complete, and in fact is cut in the usual places, so can
we agree that it has no advantage? Actually, the cuts don't bother me, but the
routine and lifeless performance does. It was the first thing to go the last
time I weeded out _Traviatae_, and I lacking in interest at every comparative
level (as well as objectionable for Tucker's hectoring, pushy Alfredo) that I
was surprised I'd kept it so long.
>Kleiber on DG because of his élan. He turns "Traviata" into an opera
>for the conductor.
For all that the conducting of opera is always important to me, an "opera for
the conductor" strikes me as exactly what this one (over and above its
companions in the middle Verdi "Big Three") should not be, and is one of my
reservations about both Kleiber's and Muti's sets. But I'll join you in
recommending Kleiber/DG, principally for Cotrubas's complex and sensitively
delineated Violetta. Milnes and Domingo are not as striking or individual as
she here -- interpretively, it just sounds like another day at the office for
this team -- but theirs are handsome voices as always, and their choices are in
good taste (not always the case with Milnes).
--Todd K
Andrew T. Kay
>the second of two Renata Scotto sets is hobbled by a heroine past her
>best as well as by "ungenerous" conducting from Riccardo Muti, similar
>to Toscanini's and Carlos Kleiber's;
Oh, I love Scotto's and Kraus's performances on that set. Obviously they're
having to manage more carefully than in the past, but they are, for me, among
the greatest Violetta/Alfredo teams on record in suggesting a true artistic
"partnership," and not just individual star singers of the day contracted for a
studio matchup. They really seem to spark, anticipate, and *respond* to one
another in their exchanges, and they have few superiors in their ability to
bring resonance to the lines of their respective solos.
I find their work here artistically resourceful, absorbing and ultimately quite
touching
My arguments against the set concern Muti (whose Verdi I've often admired, but
here I find his martinet approach too aggressive, lacking in the warmth and
affection that are essential in bringing this score to life), and Bruson, whose
singing qua singing is fine but who is artistically mismatched with these
collaborators. In the duet with Scotto, it sounds as though Violetta is
confronting some stentorian deity, and you never believe for a moment that this
Germont could be the senior of either Violetta or Alfredo.
--Todd K
David7Gable
Here's some recordings of Traviata I've liked enough to keep:
Albanese, Peerce, Merrill, Toscanini (RCA)
Although this is the worst of Toscanini's officially released Verdi opera
recordings with the NBC SO--it's way too fast much of the time and
insufficiently flexible--it's still characteristic, and even here he's a more
flexible and distinctive conductor of Verdi than his detractors give him credit
for. Nevertheless, the much more flexible and relaxed dress rehearsal is much
better. I don't have any reservations about Albanese's deeply musical and
expressive Violetta, and I love Jan Peerce's forthright and ardent Alfredo.
Not everybody likes Albanese's brittle timbre, of course. Or Peerce either.
Tebaldi, Poggi, Protti, Molinari-Pradelli (Decca)
This is the best conducted performance of Traviata I've ever heard. The
phrasing at every point is extraordinarily alert, sensitive, and distinctive.
Molinari-Pradelli breathes as one with Verdi's score. Wish I had the energy to
discuss some of his performance in more detail. My views of the singers are
not easily encapsulated, so I won't even try. I don't dismiss any of them out
of hand but for reasons that would require elaborate explanations lest I be
thought totally deranged. (I do acknowledge the validity of the usually
expressed reservations about the vocal production of the two Germonts and the
sheer quality of the sound they produce.) I don't think any of the principals
would be anybody's first choice for their roles, some Tebaldi loyalists aside.
De los Angeles, Del Monte, Sereni, Serafin (EMI)
This is another extraordinarily beautifully shaped set thanks to Serafin's
incomparable conducting. I don't share any of Mr. Riggs' reservations where
Victoria de los Angeles is concerned. She is an extremely refined and
"artless" singer, and I don't expect a Callas-like performance from her. What
she delivers is equally convincing and moving. Del Monte's not great, but he's
a fairly good Alfredo, and Mario Sereni is a surprisingly effective Germont.
He's more expressive than and a better musician than Merrill or even
Bastianini.
Scotto, Raimondi, Bastianini, Votto (DGG)
Yet another great master of the Italian opera house podium presides here.
Votto was a sensational conductor of Italian opera and is very good here, but
this is not the best performance of an opera I've ever heard from him.
Scotto's a Violetta on a par with Albanese, Callas, and de los Angeles,
although not everybody likes HER brittle timbre, either. Raimondi is an
adequate Alfredo, Bastianini a sumptuous-voiced Germont.
Callas, Francesco Albanese, Savarese, Santini (Cetra)
I keep this mainly for Callas. It's her only commercial recording and she's in
very good voice. The Alfredo and Germont are a pretty dismal pair, but I'd
rather listen to Santini conduct this than Giulini, Carlos Kleiber, Muti,
Previtali, etc.
Callas, di Stefano, Bastianini, Giulini (live)
This is the Callas set most people seem to prefer, but she is in better voice
on Cetra, and I am less enchanted by Giulini here than in some other
performances from the 50's (of Gluck, Donizetti, etc.). Not that he's
terrible. There's actually some middle ground shared by Toscanini and the
Giulini of this set, but Giulini errs by going to the opposite extreme from
Toscanini, and too often his conducting goes slack. (Serafin and
Molinari-Pradelli admit a degree of flexibility greater than Toscanini's
without ever allowing the tension to slacken.) Di Stefano is in characteristic
form and a natural as Alfredo, but, while he's still in much more than
tolerable voice here, he's no longer the possessor of the magnificent
instrument of just five years earlier.
Here's some recordings I've owned and gotten rid of:
Moffo, Tucker, Merrill, Previtali
Moffo fans are justified in admiring her here, and her performance is certainly
lovely, as is her voice, but she sang Violetta better in a live performance
I've heard, and she's not quite on a level with Albanese, de los Angeles,
Callas, and Scotto as an "interpreter." Still, it's hard not to respect her
sincere and admirable efforts. Tucker performs with gusto and ardor, but the
bloom is off his voice. Merrill sounded better under Toscanini. Previtali is
a disaster, allowing things to grind to a halt here and there as he suddenly
decides to underline a point with a big almost "Wagnerian" sound.
Cotrubas, Domingo, Milnes, Carlo Kleiber (DGG)
I still think this is the worst conducted performance of a Verdi opera I've
ever heard. Kleiber is perverse in his wrongheadedness, a martinet who makes
Muti seemed relaxed, afraid ever to give the singers their head lest he be seen
as taking Traviata less seriously than a Beethoven symphony.
Caballé, Bergonzi, Milnes, Prêtre (RCA)
This is note complete and gorgeously sung. Certainly more gorgeously sung than
the sets I prefer to this one. As sheer singing, Caballé's performance is
pretty miraculous, but she's simply not that great a vocal actress. Milnes is
about as imaginative as Merrill and no more, and Prêtre is nothing special. (I
have the theory that Caballé was capable of greater imagination musically than
she usually demonstrated, but that she was a bit lazy in that department. Her
early Verdi Rarities collection seems to support this theory. Maybe her early
Lucrezia Borgia's do, too.)
Stella, Di Stefano, Gobbi, Serafin (EMI, now on Testament)
I hoped against hope that Stella would be as good hear as in the Cetra
Boccanegra where she's more than respectable, and that Di Stefano would sound
like he did at, say, twenty. My hopes were dashed. Gobbi is pretty damned
great, unsurprisingly, but Serafin turns in a better performance with de los
Angeles.
I have always wanted to hear Virginia Zeani's recording on the strength of
Geoffrey Riggs' frequent advocacy, but I still haven't managed to do so.
Andrew Kay makes me curious to hear Scotto and Kraus together. I'm not a
particular admirer of the technically brilliant Joan Sutherland and have never
sought out either of her recordings. I have also not heard Monteux's
recording, but with Carteri, Valetti, and Warren in the cast, I can't believe I
wouldn't find things to admire in it. Haven't heard Stratas/Wundelich either,
although it looks promising enough on paper. I wish Gueden and Della Casa had
recorded Violetta complete--Gueden recorded excerpts auf Deutsch--but with so
many absolutely magnificent performances of the title already available, I'm
hardly suffering.
To sum up, the conductors I prefer are Molinari-Pradelli on Decca and Serafin
with de los Angeles. Don't ask me to choose among Albanese, Callas, de los
Angeles, and Scotto as Violetta.
-david gable
David7Gable
As sheer singing, you're probably right.
>Far better than the Aida.
She sings well as Aida but her voice is not quite right for the role. Not big
enough.
-david gable
David7Gable
Anybody heard the Decca set with Maazel, Lorengar, Aragall, and Fischer-Dieskau
lately? In a way it was Carlos Kleiber avant la lettre, but it stemmed from
live performances and I seem to recall it having a certain vitality.
I also forgot to rave sufficiently about Carlo Bergonzi's Alfredo.
-david gable
David7Gable
>to Toscanini's and Carlos Kleiber's;
I don't think this is fair to Toscanini, although I'm not all that wild about
his contribution to the NBC broadcast. It's probably unfair even to Muti,
although I don't think I ever heard Scotto-Kraus-Muti. Carlos Kleiber's
performance seems to me to have absolutely nothing in common with any
performance of Traviata I've ever heard by anybody else. It's a freak of
nature, pejorative sense.
-david gable
Andrew T. Kay
>I also forgot to rave sufficiently about Carlo Bergonzi's Alfredo.
He's all that I like about Sutherland's first recording (cond. Pritchard), and
the only reason I'm presently keeping it (for a while it was the only
"note-complete" set I had). It's a shame that some of Bergonzi's sense of
Verdian style didn't get into Sutherland, and some of his acuteness of
characterization didn't rub off on Merrill...
--Todd K
Andante teneramente
> Andante teneramente wrote:
>
>>Both the Moffo/Previtali and Caballe/Pretre are complete. IMO that
>>is their greatest advantage. They both sound slack and even boring
>>to me.
>
> Moffo/Previtali is not complete, and in fact is cut in the usual
> places, so can we agree that it has no advantage?
----snip----
Gosh, you are right. I got it mixed up.
--
Regards
Andante teneramente
> Andante teneramente <ky...@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:<Xns9421CB2...@127.0.0.1>...
----snip---
>> The de los Angeles/Serafin Traviata is really good. De los
>> Angeles offers a moving portrait. She has the coloratura, but she
>> doesn't have the optional high notes (which doesn't bother me).
>
> Well, I won't be able to tell. It's interesting to know this so
> that I can pass off as knowledgeable (like knowing that
> Schwarzkopf dubbed in a note (notes?) for Flagstad) though. :-)
---snip---
I was thinking in a different direction: Some people feel kind of
cheated if they don't get the high notes.
>> Kleiber on DG because of his élan.
>
> Interesting how one man's meat is another's poison, as usual.
> When I did a search this morning, I found an old post by David
> Gable, who argued cogently against this set.
Only one? There must be a hundred of them <g>.
> This is the one with
> Domingo, right?
Yes: Cotrubas, Domingo and Milnes.
--
Regards
Clovis Lark
Then you never heard her live. When she sang Aida at the MET, she pretty
much dwarfed the competition in volume. That goes for Vespri as well.
> -david gable
Jon A Conrad
>Anybody heard the Decca set with Maazel, Lorengar, Aragall, and Fischer-Dieskau
>lately? In a way it was Carlos Kleiber avant la lettre, but it stemmed from
>live performances and I seem to recall it having a certain vitality.
Maazel's conducting kills it. I'm surprised it doesn't head your list of
"conductors forgetting how to conduct oom-pah-pah accompaniments," because
it was one of the first and most egregious examples. Even in the prelude,
when the big tune appears in its full form, Maazel is tring to tease the
accompanying parts along, micromanaging them note by note, rather than
setting them in motion and letting them roll. I often think you divide
"then" and "now" with too broad a brush when discussingthis topic... but
then I recall this performance and must acknowledge that a change did take
place (if not universally). I got rid of it months after I bought it, and
I rarely do that.
Jon Alan Conrad
Department of Music
University of Delaware
con...@udel.edu
XYZ XYZ
the Kleiber set better than you do.
david...@aol.com (David7Gable) wrote in message news:<20031028014944...@mb-m29.aol.com>...
> Here's some recordings of Traviata I've liked enough to keep:
> Albanese, Peerce, Merrill, Toscanini (RCA)
> Tebaldi, Poggi, Protti, Molinari-Pradelli (Decca)
> De los Angeles, Del Monte, Sereni, Serafin (EMI)
> Scotto, Raimondi, Bastianini, Votto (DGG)
> Callas, Francesco Albanese, Savarese, Santini (Cetra)
> Callas, di Stefano, Bastianini, Giulini (live)
> Here's some recordings I've owned and gotten rid of:
>
> Moffo, Tucker, Merrill, Previtali
> Cotrubas, Domingo, Milnes, Carlo Kleiber (DGG)
> Caballé, Bergonzi, Milnes, Prêtre (RCA)
> Stella, Di Stefano, Gobbi, Serafin (EMI, now on Testament)
> -david gable
JJ
news:20031028015626...@mb-m29.aol.com:
It has its problems, but it's a pretty intense and dramatic performance.
Maazel's conducting is somewhat overheated, and the cast is odd but
characterful. I should add that it is beautifully recorded.
Jon
Simon Roberts
>
>
>
>Anybody heard the Decca set with Maazel, Lorengar, Aragall, and Fischer-Dieskau
>lately? In a way it was Carlos Kleiber avant la lettre, but it stemmed from
>live performances and I seem to recall it having a certain vitality.
"A certain vitality" is engaging understatement; given your reaction to
Kleiber's you'll probably hate Maazel's conducting, whose effect is enhanced
(you may think that the wrong word) by the "in your face" recorded sound. I
find it quite thrilling, but am not surprised that others don't. I rather like
Lorengar's contribution, well characterized and sung (unless you're troubled by
her constant distinctive vibrato; I suspect that, like me, you're not).
Fischer-Dieskau hardly sounds idiomatic. I used to love it until I went off
him; now I tend to hear only the flaws (the other half complains that at his
initial arrival it sounds as though there's a rabid dog at the door). Aragall
is neither here nor there - rather crude and not well enough sung.
>
>I also forgot to rave sufficiently about Carlo Bergonzi's Alfredo.
His contribution to Sutherland I is the sole reason I keep that recording; his
opening of "un di felice" there is incredibly beautiful, perhaps in a class by
itself.
Simon
Simon Roberts
>
>The only traviata I liked is the 1930 recording with Sabajno
>conducting and Anna Rosza. The cast is all second rate singers, i.e.
>second rate by the standard of the time.
>The post war first rate singers are significantly inferior to the pre
>war second rate.
>I must admit though that I haven't heard the 1928 Molajoli recording.
>
>If you're not used to historical recordings you may wonder why suffer
>poor sound quality and noise when one can get the newest shiniest
>package.
>The answer, in short, is that
>1. the technique of singing has vanished
>2. commercial pressures produce bland uniform post ww2 performances
>that lack any personality, that are all alike.
Indeed; I confuse Pritchard's and Kleiber's all the time.
Simon
Donald C. Patterson
wrote on 10/28/03 9:12 AM:
Any thoughts on the EMI Traviata with Sills? A friend (a real opera lover
if I ever saw one) recommended this to me some years ago.
--
Don Patterson
Trombonist/Music Copyist/Arranger
"The President's Own"
United States Marine Band
"Celebrating 205 years of playing America's music"
Matthew燘. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:BBC3EC76.10C07%don...@olg.com:
> in article bnltf...@drn.newsguy.com, Simon Roberts at sd...@comcast.net
> wrote on 10/28/03 9:12 AM:
>
>
> Any thoughts on the EMI Traviata with Sills? A friend (a real opera
> lover if I ever saw one) recommended this to me some years ago.
I haven't heard this, but it received a real meow-meow review in Fanfare
when originally issued. The bulk of the review dwelt at length on one
particular variant aria; the final paragraph was something like, "The
remainder of the set contains a performance of Verdi's _La Traviata_."
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
War is Peace. ** Freedom is Slavery. ** It's all Napster's fault!
Simon Roberts
>
>in article bnltf...@drn.newsguy.com, Simon Roberts at sd...@comcast.net
>wrote on 10/28/03 9:12 AM:
>
>
>Any thoughts on the EMI Traviata with Sills? A friend (a real opera lover
>if I ever saw one) recommended this to me some years ago.
I don't like it (at any rate, the last time I owned it I didn't) and haven't
kept it, and it's been so long since I last listened I can't be specific; so I'm
afraid I can't properly answer your question (to the extent you're asking me).
Simon
Mitchell Kaufman
> Hi, I guess I should ask on rmo, but I don't feel like it, since I'm
> sure that this group is just as knowledgeable. :-) I've just seen
> this at the Met for the first time (and in fact, have just listened to
> this for the first time) and should get a recording.
Sorry, but I've got to put in my standard plug here for Callas/Giuilini,
the '55 Scala live performance. It really doesn't submit to a
point-by-point analysis, so I won't try. Basically, it's just a smashing
total performance, vivid and gripping. All the principals are inspired
and intense. It's one of those rare opera performances that almost
crosses the line from play-acting to reality. (The Böhm Bayreuth Tristan
on DG would be another; also the Karajan Hänsel on EMI.)
I can't place any other Traviata recording in the class of this one.
It's like three-strip Technicolor vs. black-and-white. But if you must
have black-and-white, the Moffo/Tucker isn't awful. (Also, if you want
to hear Callas at her absolute peak, you might try the Mexico City
performance of '52 in not-bad sound on Opera d'Oro: she's tremendous,
vocally and dramatically; the rest of the performance is ho-hum.)
MK
Elizabeth Hubbell
to David Gable]
[Alas, I get too fascinated with this utter masterpiece for my own good,
and I return to its somewhat frustrating discography altogether too
often -- "kinda" like constant revisits to a sore tooth;-) At this
point, this posting of mine has gotten way ahead of me, and I must
apologize for its undue length, but a poster as interesting as Mr. Gable
always gets me thinking, and I'm grateful for this.
I fear I've really used up too much time on this already (I've got a Web
site to maintain!), and I don't now have the time left to trim this down
properly. So I'll have to zip it off in this raw -- and repetitive:-(
-- form. Mea culpa.]
David7Gable wrote:
> Here's some recordings of Traviata I've liked enough to keep:
>
> Albanese, Peerce, Merrill, Toscanini (RCA)
>
> Although this is the worst of Toscanini's officially released Verdi opera
> recordings with the NBC SO--it's way too fast much of the time and
> insufficiently flexible--it's still characteristic, and even here he's a more
> flexible and distinctive conductor of Verdi than his detractors give him credit
> for. Nevertheless, the much more flexible and relaxed dress rehearsal is much
> better. I don't have any reservations about Albanese's deeply musical and
> expressive Violetta, and I love Jan Peerce's forthright and ardent Alfredo.
> Not everybody likes Albanese's brittle timbre, of course. Or Peerce either.
Candidly, the more I listen to this one, to the Muti, or to the C.
Kleiber, the _less_ I like this or any of them. And I usually like
Carlos Kleiber! (Is middle age making me curmudgeonly?) I used to
recognize them as all representative of a distinct school that could
boast a pedigree and a confirmed tradition behind them. Well and good.
But ultimately, Verdi's delicate score is simply oceans apart from the
muscularity, IMO, of many of his other middle-period works. It is a
discrete adventure in intimacy and the "inviting drawing room", so to
speak. These three lose too much of that in the end, IMO. They apply
to Verdi's score the same insensitivity that Germont pere applies to the
love of Violetta and Alfredo. No thanks.
I make an exception for Toscanini's Dress Rehearsal, which is a
sensitive and naturally breathed reading. It is not an ideal intro to
Verdi's masterpiece, because only hopeless archivists (like me;-) can be
constantly fascinated by Toscanini's non-stop "commentary" throughout
the Rehearsal. Too distracting for someone who simply wants to absorb
the wonders of this delicate opera for the first time.
The finest example of Albanese in this role is with the underrated
Sodero at the podium, but that's almost impossible to find (I still
don't have a copy and have only heard roughly 75 or so minutes from this
one at a friend's house).
> Tebaldi, Poggi, Protti, Molinari-Pradelli (Decca)
>
> This is the best conducted performance of Traviata I've ever heard.
Not quite, IMO, although he's good. For the finest in my view, see below.
>
> De los Angeles, Del Monte, Sereni, Serafin (EMI)
>
> This is another extraordinarily beautifully shaped set thanks to Serafin's
> incomparable conducting.
Incomparable indeed. Here is where I'm willing to throw caution to
the winds. I find Serafin does with this score precisely what I dream
every maestro would. He makes this recording unique and special. Sheer
poetry, IMO. If conducting were all there was to Traviata, this set
would win, hands down. That intimacy I spoke of, that inviting drawing
room, that feeling of autumnal secrets held close within faded walls --
all of this that is manifestly in Verdi's score, IMHO -- I hear clear
and poignant in Serafin's reading. What a treasure. I have yet to hear
a reading that encompasses so much of this in scene after scene, even
Molinari-Pradelli's admittedly underrated one. Serafin plunges us into
that pastel world right away -- a sheer Bonnard -- and never loses it.
Bravo, Maestro! Bravissimo!
> I don't share any of Mr. Riggs' reservations where
> Victoria de los Angeles is concerned. She is an extremely refined and
> "artless" singer, and I don't expect a Callas-like performance from her. What
> she delivers is equally convincing and moving.
In absolute terms, De Los Angeles, for me, is still one of the finer
Violettas available. I can only say that, were I not aware of Albanese,
Callas, Scotto, Zeani, Sills, I would have to recognize that De Los
Angeles is, at least, a genuinely felt reading. And that heartfelt
quality certainly counts for something. It simply does not -- IMO --
register among the most vivid of all. Do I regard her as one of the
superior Violettas? Yes. Just not a viable candidate as one of the
most vivid of all. What distinguishes her, I feel, is that she is one
of the few Violettas who combines at least some degree of consistently
inward feeling with unequivocally luscious vocalism. A rare combo.
> Del Monte's not great, but he's
> a fairly good Alfredo, and Mario Sereni is a surprisingly effective Germont.
> He's more expressive than and a better musician than Merrill or even
> Bastianini.
I would agree that his reading is more thought-through than either
Merrill's or Bastianini's, but here I'm willing to admit that the sheer
plushness of Merrill and Bastianini leave me open-mouthed every time.
For extraordinary sound like this, I'm willing to sacrifice a certain
degree of intimacy. That said, Sereni is still deeply stirring.
> Scotto, Raimondi, Bastianini, Votto (DGG)
>
> Yet another great master of the Italian opera house podium presides here.
> Votto was a sensational conductor of Italian opera and is very good here, but
> this is not the best performance of an opera I've ever heard from him.
> Scotto's a Violetta on a par with Albanese, Callas, and de los Angeles,
> although not everybody likes HER brittle timbre, either. Raimondi is an
> adequate Alfredo, Bastianini a sumptuous-voiced Germont.
Agree with almost every word here, even though I don't always like Votto
that much -- although I certainly do here. Of course, those who have
read through this thread already know that I now find this set one of
the most satisfactory ones on offer.
> Callas, Francesco Albanese, Savarese, Santini (Cetra)
>
> I keep this mainly for Callas. It's her only commercial recording and she's in
> very good voice. The Alfredo and Germont are a pretty dismal pair, but I'd
> rather listen to Santini conduct this than Giulini, Carlos Kleiber, Muti,
> Previtali, etc.
Would agree when it comes to Kleiber and Muti. But Previtali, in his
way, is merely equally as unsatisfying, IMO, as Santini, not worse.
As for Giulini, I don't think one has really given Giulini a fair chance
until one has heard the less well-circulated '56 Traviata where Callas
gives her finest Violetta ever, IMO, and where Giulini strikes me as
really sympathetic without losing any spine (Gianni Raimondi, rather
than Di Stefano, is the Alfredo). It's been available on MYTO in fairly
poor sound, although the second half of the broadcast clears up
considerably. There's more to like than not to like in Giulini, I feel.
This '56 broadcast would be my Traviata of choice if not for the so-so
sound.
> Callas, di Stefano, Bastianini, Giulini (live)
>
> This is the Callas set most people seem to prefer, but she is in better voice
> on Cetra, and I am less enchanted by Giulini here than in some other
> performances from the 50's (of Gluck, Donizetti, etc.). Not that he's
> terrible. There's actually some middle ground shared by Toscanini and the
> Giulini of this set, but Giulini errs by going to the opposite extreme from
> Toscanini, and too often his conducting goes slack.
As I say, check out the rarely heard '56.
> (Serafin and
> Molinari-Pradelli admit a degree of flexibility greater than Toscanini's
> without ever allowing the tension to slacken.)
Couldn't agree more. But honestly, I feel that Giulini in '56 is pretty
much in the Molinari-Pradelli class, if not the Serafin -- who is GOD!;-)
> Di Stefano is in characteristic
> form and a natural as Alfredo, but, while he's still in much more than
> tolerable voice here, he's no longer the possessor of the magnificent
> instrument of just five years earlier.
I don't feel his voice itself is necessarily a problem here. He is
indeed unsettled in the way he delivers some of the music. But that's a
little different from voice per se. And in addition, so many other
stretches seem truly inspired, IMO, and there is, more often than not,
that characteristically engaging and simpatico projection of the role.
I feel he ends up as more a plus than a minus -- and, in fact, I regret
his absence in the '56 (he apparently walked out of the production in a
huff following its prima in '55).
> Here's some recordings I've owned and gotten rid of:
>
> Moffo, Tucker, Merrill, Previtali
>
> Moffo fans are justified in admiring her here, and her performance is certainly
> lovely, as is her voice, but she sang Violetta better in a live performance
> I've heard, and she's not quite on a level with Albanese, de los Angeles,
> Callas, and Scotto as an "interpreter." Still, it's hard not to respect her
> sincere and admirable efforts. Tucker performs with gusto and ardor, but the
> bloom is off his voice. Merrill sounded better under Toscanini. Previtali is
> a disaster, allowing things to grind to a halt here and there as he suddenly
> decides to underline a point with a big almost "Wagnerian" sound.
Funny. I find Moffo marginally more vivid than De Los Angeles, although
De Los Angeles is arguably the more nuanced. I agree that, "live",
Moffo gave a lot more, although I was only able to experience her fully
developed interpretation after her voice was already on the skids. (To
me, she is in usually fine voice up through most of '63, with the first
signs of trouble evident in the '63/'64 season; then a zigzaggy pattern
emerges up through '66, with her occasionally in sovereign control [that
incandescent Luisa Miller] and occasionally off-form -- after '66, it's
basically the Titanic, IMHO.) And I'd agree, BTW, that Albanese (even
when in very rough voice), Callas (ditto) and Scotto (ditto) are indeed
finer interpreters than Moffo. To those three, FWIW, I'd add Zeani and
Sills ("live" with Kraus).
Tucker's voice is still basically healthy, IMO; it's his approach that
tends to be a bit fierce here, as I've already said elsewhere,
so.......... To sample Tucker's Alfredo at its simpatico best, the
elusive Sodero performance is the way to go, IMO.
> Cotrubas, Domingo, Milnes, Carlo Kleiber (DGG)
>
> I still think this is the worst conducted performance of a Verdi opera I've
> ever heard. Kleiber is perverse in his wrongheadedness, a martinet who makes
> Muti seemed relaxed, afraid ever to give the singers their head lest he be seen
> as taking Traviata less seriously than a Beethoven symphony.
I don't feel this is necessarily worse than Muti. But repeated hearings
have made this set pall for me more and more.
> Caballé, Bergonzi, Milnes, Prêtre (RCA)
>
> This is note complete and gorgeously sung. Certainly more gorgeously sung than
> the sets I prefer to this one. As sheer singing, Caballé's performance is
> pretty miraculous, but she's simply not that great a vocal actress.
Well, to an extent, I agree. But I have heard Caballe act up a storm
when she wants to -- her Orange Norma opposite the wonderfully demented
Vickers<G>, for example. Also, when it comes to the uncut sets (like
this one), the choice, essentially, is between Sutherland and Caballe.
In this comparison, Caballe actually emerges as a marginally more
effective interpreter. And since I would want at least one set that
would give me Verdi's score neat, I value this set as being worthwhile.
> Milnes is
> about as imaginative as Merrill and no more, and Prêtre is nothing special. (I
> have the theory that Caballé was capable of greater imagination musically than
> she usually demonstrated, but that she was a bit lazy in that department. Her
> early Verdi Rarities collection seems to support this theory. Maybe her early
> Lucrezia Borgia's do, too.)
In fact, that "live" Carnegie Hall Borgia is hairraising!!!!!!!
> Stella, Di Stefano, Gobbi, Serafin (EMI, now on Testament)
>
> I hoped against hope that Stella would be as good hear as in the Cetra
> Boccanegra where she's more than respectable, and that Di Stefano would sound
> like he did at, say, twenty. My hopes were dashed.
Having finally heard sections -- though not all of it -- I would agree
when it comes to Stella. But -- as in the Giulini -- I feel that you're
a little hard on Di Stefano. Remember, in any case, that '55 is the
same year as his inspired Nemorino recording for DECCA/LONDON. Nothing
wrong with his voice there!<G> And, frankly, I do hear some of that
liquidness in this Alfredo. No, it's not as good as the Nemorino. But
the essential vocal quality -- if not its musical control -- is still
fine, IMO.
> Gobbi is pretty damned
> great, unsurprisingly, but Serafin turns in a better performance with de los
> Angeles.
And I would suggest that one reason for that (and I agree he's better on
the later one) is that he was inspired by the presence of a more
simpatico heroine. After all, here we have a slightly younger,
presumably more authoritative(?), conductor, a better Alfredo than Del
Monte, IMO, a better Germont pere than Sereni, IMO, and a better
orchestra than the De Los Angeles one, IMO. Yet Serafin is unique,
inspired on the later one. Why? The only variable that can explain this
seems to be De Los Angeles -- unless Serafin became enthused at doing
this in stereo. But that's probably unlikely.
> I have always wanted to hear Virginia Zeani's recording on the strength of
> Geoffrey Riggs' frequent advocacy, but I still haven't managed to do so.
This set is, yes, a favorite of mine. To amplify a bit, it complements
the Scotto/Votto set in that, assured as Votto is, the little-known
Bobescu captures somewhat more of that Bonnard quality, albeit with less
disciplined forces than Votto's, that is so savaged by the Kleibers, the
Mutis and their ilk.
You can obtain this on line at
> Andrew Kay makes me curious to hear Scotto and Kraus together.
He is a keen listener on this forum, and one has to respect what he
says. Personally, though, not only do Scotto's troubles -- however keen
her brilliant interpretation -- place this a rung or so below top-tier
-- for me. I also find myself in sympathy with Ethan Mordden, who
remarks of Muti -- with justice, IMO -- that he "grandstands, the
guests' exit in Act One suggesting a flight of disaster victims". For
me, frankly, that remark epitomizes the entire reading.
Look, I'm not necessarily trying to discourage anyone's listening to it
for themselves. I'm delighted that Andrew Kay has managed to savor,
despite the handicaps, an undeniably sensitive reading from both Scotto
and Kraus. They do indeed relate well, and each one's understanding of
their role is on a high level. I only wish I could get past the other
hurdles in this set as easily.
> I'm not a
> particular admirer of the technically brilliant Joan Sutherland and have never
> sought out either of her recordings.
The first Sutherland set, with Bergonzi and Merrill, is easily the most
sumptuously vocalized set anywhere. Except for Bergonzi, though, the
interpretation is pretty generalized. I'm also not much of a fan of
Pritchard's conducting. (Incidentally, I find Merrill an engaged,
interesting Germont when he's with Toscanini in the Dress Rehearsal; but
not here.) The over-reverberant sonics, IMO, don't help much either.
>I have also not heard Monteux's
> recording, but with Carteri, Valetti, and Warren in the cast, I can't believe I
> wouldn't find things to admire in it.
Although I once found Monteux's conducting insufferably slow, that was
many years ago, and perhaps I should give this another chance. It does
appear to be quite pricey, though.
> Haven't heard Stratas/Wundelich either,
> although it looks promising enough on paper. I wish Gueden and Della Casa had
> recorded Violetta complete--Gueden recorded excerpts auf Deutsch--but with so
> many absolutely magnificent performances of the title already available, I'm
> hardly suffering.
>
> To sum up, the conductors I prefer are Molinari-Pradelli on Decca and Serafin
> with de los Angeles. Don't ask me to choose among Albanese, Callas, de los
> Angeles, and Scotto as Violetta.
My order of preference -- for today;-)
Violetta: Scotto (on DG)
Callas (in '56)
Zeani
Sills ("live" at Naples)
Callas (on Cetra)
Callas (at Lisbon)
Callas (in '55)
Stratas
Cotrubas
Albanese (at the Rehearsal and with Sodero)
Moffo
De Los Angeles
Caballe
Sills (in the recording studio)
Sutherland (on the Pritchard)
Callas (at Covent Garden)
Scotto (with Muti)
Sutherland (with Bonynge)
Carteri
Albanese (in the official b'cast)
Tebaldi
Stella
Conductors: Serafin
Giulini ('56)
Molinari-Pradelli
Patane (on the Stratas)
Toscanini (in the Rehearsal)
Sodero
Giulini ('55)
Rescigno
Bobescu
Votto
Pretre
Toscanini (in the b'cast)
Ghione
Previtali
Santini
C. Kleiber
Pritchard
Muti
Bonynge
Monteux
Ceccato
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Jon A Conrad
>Any thoughts on the EMI Traviata with Sills? A friend (a real opera lover
>if I ever saw one) recommended this to me some years ago.
Sills was in the line of truly great Violettas in live performance, so
I've always been disappointed that her recording represents less than her
best for the role. It's not that the voice is out of the question for the
part by this point (though the date is late-ish for her), but she's
ill-served by her conductor (Aldo Ceccato, who turned up on a number of
Sills projects around this time, to deadening effect) and her partnership
with Gedda, who *is* sounding his age and more by this point. Too bad; are
there any live Sills Traviatas floating around? (I believe she seldom if
ever sang the role at NYCO, as it was primarily the domain of Patricia
Brooks there -- also a genuinely great Violetta, who ought to have been
given a chance to record it. Her recorded legacy is so small... the
smaller Beethoven mass and a bit in Handel's SOLOMON and that may be it.)
I saw Sills do the role in concert at Grant Park (Chicago), summer of
1968, and was mightily impressed. The recording, when it came, was much
less distinctive.
Elizabeth Hubbell
Simon Roberts wrote:
L O L !!!!!!!!!!!!
That just made my day. Thanks!
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Ramon Khalona
*extensive Traviata survey snipped*
>
> Here's some recordings I've owned and gotten rid of:
>
> Cotrubas, Domingo, Milnes, Carlo Kleiber (DGG)
>
> I still think this is the worst conducted performance of a Verdi opera I've
> ever heard. Kleiber is perverse in his wrongheadedness, a martinet who makes
> Muti seemed relaxed, afraid ever to give the singers their head lest he be seen
> as taking Traviata less seriously than a Beethoven symphony.
>
<<taking Traviata less seriously than a Beethoven symphony.>>
I must say this is O.K. with me. :-)
RK
Elizabeth Hubbell
[Geof. Riggs] wrote:
> My order of preference -- for today;-)
>
> Violetta: Scotto (on DG)
> Callas (in '56)
> Zeani
> Sills ("live" at Naples)
> Callas (on Cetra)
> Callas (at Lisbon)
> Callas (in '55)
> Stratas
> Cotrubas
> Albanese (at the Rehearsal and with Sodero)
> Moffo
Although Mr. Gable did not discuss her, it would probably be at this
point that I'd slot in Mirella Freni.
> De Los Angeles
> Caballe
> Sills (in the recording studio)
> Sutherland (on the Pritchard)
> Callas (at Covent Garden)
> Scotto (with Muti)
> Sutherland (with Bonynge)
> Carteri
> Albanese (in the official b'cast)
> Tebaldi
> Stella
>
> Conductors: Serafin
> Giulini ('56)
> Molinari-Pradelli
> Patane (on the Stratas)
> Toscanini (in the Rehearsal)
> Sodero
> Giulini ('55)
> Rescigno
> Bobescu
And it would probably be at this point that I'd slot in Freni's
conductor, Lamberto Gardelli.
David7Gable
>much dwarfed the competition in volume. That goes for Vespri as well.
>
I have heard her live.
-david gable
Elizabeth Hubbell
Jon A Conrad wrote:
(I've already covered some of this in my monster post earlier in this
thread. But to be more user-friendly -- and to facilitate Professor
Conrad's not having to plough his way through the previous posting --
here's my personal take -- and info -- on Sills.)
I agree that Ceccato ruins the EMI set. In fact, it may be one of the
worst-conducted sets in the catalogue. Sills is imaginative, ever alert
to the music and the words, a sensitive portrayal. But Ceccato is a
real problem. And in fact, I even find that Sills herself does not give
everything she can to this role.
That last remark is based on having heard the recording of her
incandescent "live" reading at the Teatro San Carlo for her debut there
(yes, it exists!). Coming from January of 1970 (the EMI is from 1971, I
believe?), Sills here turns in easily one of her most stunning
performances ever preserved. It shows definitively that her Violetta at
its best was fully the equal of her Manon, her Cleopatra, her Baby Doe,
her Olympia and Antonia (never liked her Giulietta, frankly), and so on.
This is a heartbreaking, mercurial, riveting interpretation from
beginning to end. I'm glad MELODRAM released it.
There always has to be a con or two, though. In this case, it's chiefly
the sound: noisy, somewhat distant (though not prohibitively so, IMO),
and so on. It was recorded from an audience perspective. Not always a
bad thing, but probably disorienting for someone being introduced to the
score for the first time. Hence, not a good first choice.
In addition, we're stuck with Ceccato again. Somehow, Sills surmounts
his proclivities better "live" than in the studio (sheer adrenalin,
probably). But one does regret his presence whenever Zanasi (the
Germont pere here) is winding his way around Ceccato's so-called phrasing.
Finally, in the good-news dept., Sills's partner at Naples, Alfredo
Kraus, also manages to surmount Ceccato's conducting fairly
successfully. I've never been much enamored of Kraus's voice, frankly.
But he is in strong shape here and sustains character and buoyancy of
line against the various hurdles Ceccato throws his way with more
success than Gedda has in the EMI. (And, all things being equal, I
happen to prefer Gedda to Kraus in most things, BTW.)
If Professor Conrad wants to recapture what so mightily impressed him at
Grant Park, I'd say this Naples performance is the way to go.
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
David7Gable
>Kleiber, the _less_ I like this or any of them.
I haven't heard Muti (either on EMI or live on Sony) so I can't say. But
Toscanini is less excessively fast, less of a strait jacket, more breathing,
more distincitively shaped than Carlos Kleiber. Which is hardly a ringing
endorsement. What wouldn't be? Still a far cry from the dress rehearsal the
day before. (And in all fairness to Toscanini, he initially opposed the
commercial release of the Traviata broadcast for the same reason you don't like
it.)
>The finest example of Albanese in this role is with the underrated
>Sodero at the podium
Tell me more.
>That intimacy I spoke of, that inviting drawing
>room, that feeling of autumnal secrets held close within faded walls --
>all of this that is manifestly in Verdi's score, IMHO -- I hear clear
>and poignant in Serafin's reading.
Go listen again to the prelude to the last act in Molinari-Pradelli's
performance. He has a kind of relaxed but total control over every note in
every phrase. It's one of the finest pieces of conducting of anything by
anybody I've ever heard. And the whole performance is pretty much like that.
>Agree with almost every word here, even though I don't always like Votto
>that much
Other performances from Votto I really like, both live Scala performances: the
Fanciulla with Frazzoni and Corelli and the Vestale with Callas and Corelli.
In both cases, I prefer Votto to everybody else. Just compare the intense
shaping of the throbbing rising accompanimental figures that accompany
Licinio's solo in the opening of the duet for Julia and Licinio in Act II of
Vestale to absolutely anybody else but especially to Muti live. In Muti they
pass for nothing. And Votto always supplies plenty of energy and backbone,
too.
>But Previtali, in his
>way, is merely equally as unsatisfying, IMO, as Santini, not worse.
I don't think Santini's that bad and I find Previtali much worse. Santini is
much more consistent, a lesser example of the tradition that produced Serafin
and Molinari-Pradelli, Previtali much more oddly perverse. (If I still had the
Moffo Traviata I'd find a couple examples of what I mean.)
>I don't feel his voice itself is necessarily a problem here.
But what I'd really like is a di Stefano Alfredo where he sounds as fresh as in
the early recording of "De miei bollenti spiriti." I can't stop myself from
being comparatively disappointed.
>[that
>incandescent Luisa Miller]
Moffo's greatest performance.
>and
>Sills ("live" with Kraus).
I'd love to be proven wrong, but nothing I've ever heard in any Sills
performance of anything makes me think I'd like her Violetta as much as
Albanese's, Scotto's, Callas's, or de los Angeles'.
>Tucker's voice is still basically healthy, IMO
But not as fresh as ten years earlier. (As it probably is for Sodero.)
>And, frankly, I do hear some of that
>liquidness in this Alfredo. No, it's not as good as the Nemorino. But
>the essential vocal quality -- if not its musical control -- is still
>fine, IMO.
I hear some of the liquidness, too. But if you'd bought the Testament Traviata
hoping to find Di Stefano in the full flush of youth, as I did, you'd be
disappointed.
-david gable
David7Gable
>"conductors forgetting how to conduct oom-pah-pah accompaniments," because
>it was one of the first and most egregious examples.
That wouldn't surprise me. Haven't heard it in two decades.
-david gable
David7Gable
All of Sills' EMI recordings were made after her very best days were past. She
was certainly never a snooze like Sutherland, and she was always involved in
her performances, although I'm afraid I don't think she was ever capable of
artistry on the level of a de los Angeles or Callas. When she was in her
prime, her singing was pretty unbelievable.
-david gable
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:bnm9mh$133$1...@copland.udel.edu:
She would have had to have been considerably more impressive than she was
the one time I saw her, a few years later in San Francisco. The diva-ish
attitude (and I mean that in a nice way, adding to her theatricality) was
certainly still there, but the voice and its control were not so great.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
War is Peace. ** Freedom is Slavery. ** It's all Napster's Fault!
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in
For me, what kills it is Lorengar's vibrato.
Matthew B. Tepper
Matthew B. Tepper
I am certain that the one time I heard her was much past her prime. Maybe
I should move those "Three Queens" to the top of my to-buy list.
XYZ XYZ
this is on NYTO. Which label is this? And would you know if Tower
carries it? I doubt it, if it's rare.
And I guess I can't help but be amazed by people who've listened to
so many "Traviata"s (or insert your favorite work, at least two hours
long) and intelligently comment on them. :-)
Elizabeth Hubbell <elizabet...@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<3F9EA844...@verizon.net>...
> [from Geof. Riggs; not Eliz. H., my better half]
[snipped]
> Callas (in '56)
XYZ XYZ
white" in a bedroom. But it'd be quite impolite to discuss the precise
circumstances leading to this comment in the g-rated rmcr. :-) It shocked
me a little, so I remembered it.
I guess I'll have to investigate a Callas recording. I'll need to see what's
available at Tower and/or J&R in NYC of course. The Scotto and the DLA all
sound interesting (and I haven't heard anything by Scotto (!)).
forg...@iaint.disclosinit (Mitchell Kaufman) wrote in message news:<1g3jei8.n64q1gfx1u68N%forg...@iaint.disclosinit>...
David7Gable
>this is on NYTO.
Not NYTO, MYTO, which is Italian for "Myth," as in mythic performances. Not
every Myto recording is readily available in the States but most of them are
available from MDT Mail Order in Britain. Myto releases are full price at
best, but they also make a genuine effort to get tapes from the best sources.
(You can't say the same thing about EMI, unfortunately. For example, the Opera
d'Oro release of a live La Scala Anna Bolena with Callas is in sound far
superior to what EMI got its hands on.)
-david gable
David7Gable
>sound interesting (and I haven't heard anything by Scotto (!)).
Try Allegro Imports online for the de los Angeles set: join and you'll get it
at a discount (and it's already cheap). As for Scotto, bear in mind that
there's the DGG recording made fairly early in her career and the EMI made
after the voice was in parlous condition. I have no doubt her artistry is
intact in both.
-david gable
Clovis Lark
And you think the voice was SMALL???!!!
> -david gable
David7Gable
I didn't say it was small in absolute terms. I said it was a bit too small for
Aida. And even when somebody says that Mme. X has a voice too small for role
Y, it usually means that there are parts of role Y for which X's is voice is
not large enough. The fact is that as Caballé branched out and began singing
heavier roles in the 70's, forcing in the process, some of the extraordinary
beauty characteristic of her voice in the 60's went out of it. By the time she
got around to recording Puritani with Muti for EMI, she even forces in the loud
bits there (e.g., her interjections during the tenor's "A te, o, cara.")
-david gable
Richard Bernas
> at a discount (and it's already cheap). As for Scotto, bear in mind that
> there's the DGG recording made fairly early in her career and the EMI made
> after the voice was in parlous condition. I have no doubt her artistry is
> intact in both.
>
> -david gable
I haven't heard the DG but know that most of the EMI was dubbed later
because of huge vocal problems in the studio. It was, I think, her
last recording with Muti, and with reason.
Richard
Richard Bernas
> Sorry, but I've got to put in my standard plug here for Callas/Giuilini,
> the '55 Scala live performance. It really doesn't submit to a
> point-by-point analysis, so I won't try. Basically, it's just a smashing
> total performance, vivid and gripping. All the principals are inspired
> and intense. It's one of those rare opera performances that almost
> crosses the line from play-acting to reality. (The Böhm Bayreuth Tristan
> on DG would be another; also the Karajan Hänsel on EMI.)
>
Don't apologise! I for one agree completely. It is a brilliantly acted
and sung performance. The rude good health of Di Stefano's Alfredo and
the hectoring bluster of Bastianini contrast with Callas' pallor so
forcefully. Giulini's conducting is harder to hear well, but when you
focus on it it's a marvel of internal balance (each and every "common
chord" perfectly weighted and voiced) and dramatic involvement. The
only apologies that need be made are for the sound.
Richard
Clovis Lark
I'm telling you, her voice was NOT small or forced. I saw her do a bundle
of Aidas, Vespris, Normas, even a Boheme gala where she sang Musetta
(there's a tape in my jumble of junk somewhere) and at the end of the
second act she drowned out everyone (Neblett was Mimi and the joke was
Caballe had had enough of listening to that Mimi...). She had made a
reputation for singing the exquisite pianissimi, especially at the high
end of phrases. This she was still able to do ad lib right through the
70's. Lest you think I'm recalling 1 or 2 performances, I saw Caballe at
the MET from 74 on in multiple performances of Ariadne, Vespri, Aida,
Boheme, Norma, Tosca. I also recall that she sang Salome as well.
Stereotyping her voice as too small or forced for Aida, a role that even
Freni sang successfully, is like characterizing Boulez as a robot.
> -david gable
Simon Roberts
>
>I'm telling you, her voice was NOT small or forced. I saw her do a bundle
>of Aidas, Vespris, Normas, even a Boheme gala where she sang Musetta
>(there's a tape in my jumble of junk somewhere) and at the end of the
>second act she drowned out everyone (Neblett was Mimi and the joke was
>Caballe had had enough of listening to that Mimi...). She had made a
>reputation for singing the exquisite pianissimi, especially at the high
>end of phrases. This she was still able to do ad lib right through the
>70's. Lest you think I'm recalling 1 or 2 performances, I saw Caballe at
>the MET from 74 on in multiple performances of Ariadne, Vespri, Aida,
>Boheme, Norma, Tosca. I also recall that she sang Salome as well.
>Stereotyping her voice as too small or forced for Aida, a role that even
>Freni sang successfully, is like characterizing Boulez as a robot.
Perhaps the issue is not so much size as her manner/style, which can be
soft-edged rather than incisive and thus can end up seeming relatively gentle,
which in turn gives the impression of relative quietness (I had a similar
impression, only more so, when I saw Sutherland live - it took me a while to
realize just how big the sound she made actually was).
Simon
David7Gable
With all due respect, I don't need for you to tell me anything.
>Stereotyping her voice as too small or forced for Aida, a role that even
>Freni sang successfully
Freni did not sing Aida successfully, a role she was unwise to take on. (She
only took it on, so far as I'm aware, because Karajan asked her to.) Caballé
did force. I've heard her force. She forces in the passage from Puritani I
already mentioned. And while her EMI Aida is a very impressive piece of
singing, inappropriate spun-sugar high notes and all, the voice is not really
the right size and weight for the role. Margaret Price recorded Tristan with
Carlos Kleiber. An ability to sing all the notes in a role doesn't
automatically mean the voice is exactly the right size for the role, and
Price's Isolde will always sound somehow wrong. To a far lesser extent,
Caballé's Aida will always sound wrong at certain points to me. Fortunately,
there's less forcing there than in the later Puritani.
-david gable
Elizabeth Hubbell
[courtesy cc of this rec.music.classical.recordings posting also sent on
to David Gable]
David7Gable wrote:
> [Geof. Riggs] wrote:
>>The finest example of Albanese in this role is with the underrated
>>Sodero at the podium
>
>
> Tell me more.
That's a MET performance from 1946 that, as I briefly mentioned, I've
only heard snatches from at a fellow record collector's place. I
believe my wife Liz has heard a few excerpts from this as well.
Albanese's considerably more relaxed here and has the opportunity to
make certain phrases tell in a more inward way than with "Maestro". She
is, though, still sketchy with the coloratura, admittedly. Sodero's
naturalness here is what I prize so very much. Tucker too is at his
considerable lyrical best, and Warren -- as I seem to recall, though
I've heard relatively little of him in this performance -- is somewhat
more intimate than in the Monteux (of which I also have an admittedly
general, not specific, recollection).
If you wish to "peg" Sodero a bit more, he also conducts the "live"
Warren/Sayao/Bjoerling Rigoletto from 1945.
Among other places, this 1946 MET broadcast is available on line through
Omega Opera at
http://www.operaphile.com/omega.html
This address lists the Sodero Traviata as #137.
>
>>That intimacy I spoke of, that inviting drawing
>>room, that feeling of autumnal secrets held close within faded walls --
>>all of this that is manifestly in Verdi's score, IMHO -- I hear clear
>>and poignant in Serafin's reading.
>
>
> Go listen again to the prelude to the last act in Molinari-Pradelli's
> performance. He has a kind of relaxed but total control over every note in
> every phrase. It's one of the finest pieces of conducting of anything by
> anybody I've ever heard. And the whole performance is pretty much like that.
Alas, I was so bitterly disappointed with the sameness, IMO, of
Tebaldi's recorded Violetta many years ago (and I usually enjoyed her
whenever I got to hear her in person) that I gave the set away. I can't
say that Poggi's ATROCIOUS Alfredo, IMO, was much of an inducement for
me to keep it either.
I suppose -- if I have the time, AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH ;-) -- I
might take a listen at the Lincoln Center library, though.
FWIW, I freely grant that the most positive memory I have of this set
was definitely its fine conducting. It's hard to define "natural".
(That's what makes Sodero so good.) But "natural" is simply one of
those things that one knows when one hears it. And Molinari-Pradelli on
that set I distinctly recall as defining "natural".
>
>
>>Agree with almost every word here, even though I don't always like Votto
>>that much
>
>
> Other performances from Votto I really like, both live Scala performances: the
> Fanciulla with Frazzoni and Corelli and the Vestale with Callas and Corelli.
The sound on my Vestale pressing is so abrasive that I've found it hard
to concentrate on intimate details of the conducting, since I'm so busy
trying to make out what the singers are doing. On paper, the cast
looked sumptuous, but Corelli's vowels are still somewhat too occluded
here, IMO, and Callas, although I've heard her far worse, is sounding
more unsettled here than, for instance, in her "live" Scala Norma of
exactly a year later (superb in every way, IMO). I expected both Callas
and Corelli to sound fresh and wonderful in '54. So the letdown from
that, and the poor sonics, has made me concentrate less than I should on
other details.
The Fanciulla is another matter. It's admittedly not exactly
state-of-the-art sound, but it's perfectly listenable. And the
performance..........
Incredible. Amazing from beginning to end. And, I agree, Votto has a
great deal to do with that. Also, I feel it's a shame that we don't
have more of Frazzoni elsewhere. Yes, I have her studio Tosca for
Cetra, and I'm very glad I do. But there should have been more. Here
is the kind of vivid imagination and colorful sound one wants for a
verismo masterpiece like Fanciulla (or Tosca, for that matter).
Ironic. I got this performance only for Corelli and Gobbi (both in
exciting form here, IMO). But what I got was more than that: a unified,
riveting interpretation of one of Puccini's most fascinating scores,
featuring a trio of principals that are all just as gripping as
interpreters as they are giving as vocalists. Votto's leadership shapes
a performance that lets Puccini tell his story with tension, drive and
soul throughout.
This has now become my Fanciulla of choice, with Corelli and Gobbi
merely the icing on the cake. What an evening!
One of the reasons why I continue to (partly) look askance at Votto --
and it's possibly unfair of me to do so for a reason like this -- is his
studio Ballo with Di Stefano and Callas. I simply find it tame. My
failing? Honestly, when I hear the same two principals with Gavazzeni a
year later, it's like another world, IMO. Sure, there may be certain
aspects that are a bit wild and wooly in the Gavazzeni, but not
prohibitively so. Above all, the spark and the line are there in
abundance, IMO. This is Verdian phrasing with true slancio (almost)
throughout. In any case, whatever his occasional eccentricities, I have
always been a Gavazzeni fan and remain one.
For Votto at his most imaginative, my vote would go to two striking
performances with La Scala on tour at Cologne in the summer of 1957.
These are revelatory. There may be more items extant from that same
tour, but the two I've heard are a Sonnambula with Callas and Monti and
a Forza del destino with Gencer and Di Stefano. These are both triumphs
in sheer poetic instinct, IMO. An inner world is summoned forth from
these scores reflecting admirable subtlety with energy throughout. A
rare and welcome combination.
>>[that
>>incandescent Luisa Miller]
>
>
> Moffo's greatest performance.
Of course, we've discussed this before. As you may recall, I'd tie this
with her Gilda for Solti in '63. In a way, the Gilda is especially
remarkable, because she doesn't seem (IMO) to get much help from Solti,
and yet she still achieves greatness, IMO, whereas Cleva truly makes
that Luisa Miller special -- and admirably collaborative in phrasing,
dynamics, etc. He and Moffo seem to be on the same wavelength, making
it easier for Moffo to be inspired throughout. The Gilda, OTOH, is a
personal triumph of artistic will and sheer musical grit. Brava!
>>and
>>Sills ("live" with Kraus).
>
>
> I'd love to be proven wrong, but nothing I've ever heard in any Sills
> performance of anything makes me think I'd like her Violetta as much as
> Albanese's, Scotto's, Callas's, or de los Angeles'.
If you've already heard her Cleopatra, her Baby Doe, her Manon, her
"live" New Orleans Antonia (c. 1965), her La Scala Siege of Corinth
("live", 1969) -- these are incandescent, IMO, both in terms of sheer
imagination and of vocal mastery as well -- then I'd say you've given
her a fair shot. But if not, start -- don't end -- with this
Naples/Kraus Traviata from Jan. '70. It practically sweeps me off my
feet every time. If the sound wasn't reflective of a typically noisy
(though reasonably clear) in-house recording, I'd slot this set as
practically up there with the first Scotto and the Zeani. (True,
Ceccato's conducting is distinctly ho-hum, but there's so much
excitement from everyone else here that he doesn't drag it down the way
he does his studio recording.)
>
>>Tucker's voice is still basically healthy, IMO
>
>
> But not as fresh as ten years earlier. (As it probably is for Sodero.)
And how!!!!
>
>
>>And, frankly, I do hear some of that
>>liquidness in this Alfredo. No, it's not as good as the Nemorino. But
>>the essential vocal quality -- if not its musical control -- is still
>>fine, IMO.
>
>
> I hear some of the liquidness, too. But if you'd bought the Testament Traviata
> hoping to find Di Stefano in the full flush of youth, as I did, you'd be
> disappointed.
And perhaps, that reflects the general disappointment I felt with much
of the Votto/Callas/Corelli Vestale.
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
P.S.: BTW, with reference to another thread some while back, I don't
know when I'll have the time, but I hope eventually to give a
blow-by-blow of what I hear that's so atypically disengaged in the first
act of the E. Kleiber Nozze di Figaro.
Clovis Lark
>>I'm telling you, her voice was NOT small or forced.
> With all due respect, I don't need for you to tell me anything.
>>Stereotyping her voice as too small or forced for Aida, a role that even
>>Freni sang successfully
> Freni did not sing Aida successfully, a role she was unwise to take on. (She
> only took it on, so far as I'm aware, because Karajan asked her to.) Caballé
Well, I have live performance showing she did it and did so well. I also
saw her do Elizabeth and the Requiem live and she was spot on.
> did force. I've heard her force. She forces in the passage from Puritani I
> already mentioned. And while her EMI Aida is a very impressive piece of
> singing, inappropriate spun-sugar high notes and all, the voice is not really
> the right size and weight for the role. Margaret Price recorded Tristan with
> Carlos Kleiber. An ability to sing all the notes in a role doesn't
> automatically mean the voice is exactly the right size for the role, and
> Price's Isolde will always sound somehow wrong. To a far lesser extent,
> Caballé's Aida will always sound wrong at certain points to me. Fortunately,
> there's less forcing there than in the later Puritani.
Sometimes one should go to other sources than recordings before assuming
the size of voices?
> -david gable
EG
> In article <7c2a720b.0310...@posting.google.com>, EG says...
> >
> >The only traviata I liked is the 1930 recording with Sabajno
> >conducting and Anna Rosza. The cast is all second rate singers, i.e.
> >second rate by the standard of the time.
> >The post war first rate singers are significantly inferior to the pre
> >war second rate.
> >I must admit though that I haven't heard the 1928 Molajoli recording.
> >
> >If you're not used to historical recordings you may wonder why suffer
> >poor sound quality and noise when one can get the newest shiniest
> >package.
> >The answer, in short, is that
> >1. the technique of singing has vanished
> >2. commercial pressures produce bland uniform post ww2 performances
> >that lack any personality, that are all alike.
>
> Indeed; I confuse Pritchard's and Kleiber's all the time.
>
Indeed, you deserve it, if you can listen to Moan Sutherland.
David7Gable
>the size of voices?
I have two answers to this question.
(1) I've heard Caballé live both in person and in recordings of live
performances. Nevertheless, I am less absolutely certain than you are that I
can remember in specific detail exactly what Miss Caballé sounded like in every
single measure of Met performances I heard in the 1970's when I was in my late
teens and early 20's. (I've heard both Solti and Boulez in interviews remark
on the unreliability of memory in the case of musical performances. Solti told
of being shocked to hear a Toscanini Magic Flute for which he had been the
rehearsal pianist early in his career: it wasn't at all like what he
remembered. Most of us have experienced the lesser shock of listening to a
recording we haven't heard in many years and discovering that it doesn't sound
quite like what we remembered. I know that my own discrimination of pitch
improved drastically in my teens, because singers I admired at 10 or 12 I could
no longer stand at 16 or 18.)
(2) Even singers with very large voices sometimes make the mistake of resorting
to forcing, and you can hear Caballé forcing at points in her Puritani
recording. An effect of "sounding as if she were forcing" was not added by the
engineers to sabotage the performance. Her vibrato increases in width under
pressure and the timbre slightly coarsens. There is no question in my mind
that you could hear this yourself if you had a copy of the set. (I feel it
"sympathetically" in my own throat when a singer forces.) The singing of all
singers declines in time as do all things depending on our physical nature.
Erna Berger may still have sounded as if she were 16 at age 50, but even she
eventually died, and while Caballé was still capable of some very respectable
singing when she got around to recording Puritani, she was no longer quite the
same spectacular singer she was when she made her New York debut in 1965.
Sadly, I am so insensitive and so unfamiliar with operatic singing that there
is nothing you can do or say that will make me change my mind. I still think
Caballé's voice is a bit too small for the heavier moments in Aida, and even
where the role calls for soft unaccompanied singing, I'm not always convinced
her "fil di voce" approach is right for the role. (That, I think, is what
Simon was talking about.) Nevertheless, even these reservations are
insufficient to make me dismiss her singing in the Muti Aida on EMI out of
hand. It's very easy for me to see what others admire in her performance. Not
one in a thousand of us can sing that well, and it's a few years earlier than
the Puritani. Why, I myself am a great admirer of certain of Caballé's Verdi
and Donizetti performances, live and studio, from the 1960's.
-david gable
Clovis Lark
>>Sometimes one should go to other sources than recordings before assuming
>>the size of voices?
> I have two answers to this question.
> (1) I've heard Caballé live both in person and in recordings of live
> performances. Nevertheless, I am less absolutely certain than you are that I
> can remember in specific detail exactly what Miss Caballé sounded like in every
> single measure of Met performances I heard in the 1970's when I was in my late
> teens and early 20's. (I've heard both Solti and Boulez in interviews remark
> on the unreliability of memory in the case of musical performances. Solti told
> of being shocked to hear a Toscanini Magic Flute for which he had been the
> rehearsal pianist early in his career: it wasn't at all like what he
> remembered. Most of us have experienced the lesser shock of listening to a
> recording we haven't heard in many years and discovering that it doesn't sound
> quite like what we remembered. I know that my own discrimination of pitch
> improved drastically in my teens, because singers I admired at 10 or 12 I could
> no longer stand at 16 or 18.)
Regarding reliability of memory: It is true it is unreliable. But when I
am able to go back and listen to a live performance to confirm that
memory, I"happy to stand on the recollection.
> (2) Even singers with very large voices sometimes make the mistake of resorting
> to forcing, and you can hear Caballé forcing at points in her Puritani
> recording. An effect of "sounding as if she were forcing" was not added by the
> engineers to sabotage the performance. Her vibrato increases in width under
> pressure and the timbre slightly coarsens. There is no question in my mind
> that you could hear this yourself if you had a copy of the set. (I feel it
> "sympathetically" in my own throat when a singer forces.) The singing of all
> singers declines in time as do all things depending on our physical nature.
I don't have Caballe's Puritani, never liked her Bellini, but I've enough
of her work across the spectrum (Salome, Verdi, William Tell, etc.) to say
that if there is forcing in it, it certainly isn't representative of her
work. By the way, I've heard Birgit Nilsson sound "forced" at times and
it certainly wasn't her inabilities, it was simply an off day or week.
> Erna Berger may still have sounded as if she were 16 at age 50, but even she
> eventually died, and while Caballé was still capable of some very respectable
> singing when she got around to recording Puritani, she was no longer quite the
> same spectacular singer she was when she made her New York debut in 1965.
> Sadly, I am so insensitive and so unfamiliar with operatic singing that there
> is nothing you can do or say that will make me change my mind.
David, a disagreement is not a personal attack. You needn't riposte with
such a remark.
Margaret Mikulska
> Moffo/Previtali is not complete, and in fact is cut in the usual places, so can
> we agree that it has no advantage? Actually, the cuts don't bother me, but the
> routine and lifeless performance does. It was the first thing to go the last
> time I weeded out _Traviatae_, [...]
Since Daniels missed that, I have to step in. Una traviata, due [etc.]
traviate (not traviatae). It's Italian, not Latin.
-MM
Manilov
>
> >I have also not heard Monteux's
> > recording, but with Carteri, Valetti, and Warren in the cast, I can't believe I
> > wouldn't find things to admire in it.
>
> Although I once found Monteux's conducting insufferably slow, that was
> many years ago, and perhaps I should give this another chance. It does
> appear to be quite pricey, though.
>
I just wanted belatedly to thank you for the survey, but also to
praise the Monteux version, which is one of the best Traviata's I've
heard. (I confess to having heard far fewer than you or David Gable,
though). Perhaps I was just influenced by Conrad L. Osborne, whose
high praise of this recording got me to try it many years ago, but I
must say that I find myself turning to it (along with Callas, for
different reasons) when I wish to hear the work.
While there are many places where Monteux is slow, imo his performance
ever droops. Indeed there are a number of important moments where he
is actually sharper and more taut than most of the rivals with which
I'm familiar. And in general, Monteux is idiomatic, delivering a
nuanced, finely shaped reading that I think works entirely
convincingly. Not only does he allow singers to breathe and articulate
in a way that e.g. Kleiber does not, he also offers a specificity
lacking in the conductinf of certain of the Italians (Votto, for one)
who must have led the piece 10-fold more times than Monteux. I grant
that there is more elegance than brilliance and power, but isn't that
in keeping with Traviata's character? Equally, his work is perfectly
in keeping with the conceptions of Carteri and Valletti, whose voices
are on a smaller scale than many others, but whose portrayals are
vivid and compelling. Carteri occasionally becomes a bit steely, but
her vocalism is effective and her involvement with the role, uh,
complete. Valletti is also excellent.(I have some reservations about
Warren, but overall, I think this is one of his better outings.)
So I'm very glad the Monteux is now available on cd. Yes, Myto isn't
cheap, but at least they took it upon themselves to issue the
performance, while RCA let it languish!
P Manilov
David7Gable
Monsieur Manilov:
Thanks for the interesting comments on the Monteux Traviata, which I've only
now stumbled across. Unfortunately, you've renewed my interest in hearing it,
and I don't need another Traviata! (In defense of my good buddy, Antonino
Votto, he was capable of more distinctive performances than the one enshrined
on DGG.)
-david gable
Elizabeth Hubbell
I know you don't need more "Traviate";-), but I'm still keen on knowing
your take -- if and when you hear it -- on the Bobescu set with Zeani:
Hint, hint..............
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
P.S.: I, too, hope to relisten to the Monteux at some point in the near
future.
Ed Dente
:>
:>The only traviata I liked is the 1930 recording with Sabajno
:>conducting and Anna Rosza. The cast is all second rate singers, i.e.
:>second rate by the standard of the time.
:>The post war first rate singers are significantly inferior to the pre
:>war second rate.
:>I must admit though that I haven't heard the 1928 Molajoli recording.
:>
:>If you're not used to historical recordings you may wonder why suffer
:>poor sound quality and noise when one can get the newest shiniest
:>package.
:>The answer, in short, is that
:>1. the technique of singing has vanished
:>2. commercial pressures produce bland uniform post ww2 performances
:>that lack any personality, that are all alike.
I have the Ponselle Traviata, and wonder if anyone else has heard it. No
one else seems to have mentioned it on this thread.
Also, I came in late on this thread and only saw the last 30 or so
responses, but in those no one has mentioned the Gheorghiu-Solti
Traviata. I expected great things after reading the Gramophone reviews,
but was sorely disappointed by her performance. Others feel the same?
(But I am enthralled by her recent Carmen. Does the role fit her
style and voice better?)
Ed