Can Pavarotti read music?
Ernest Jones
read music!
Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
recordings?!?!
Opinions please?
Ernest Jones
Retired Music & Cruise Crazy Brit.
on the Beach
Mary Neuhoff
. when you consider how EASY it it to read music. I could practically teach my
dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was six
years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never did, it
really IS easy).
Benjamin Maso wrote:
> Ernest Jones wrote in message
> <6732-369...@newsd-122.bryant.webtv.net>...
> Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't
> read music!
> Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
> recordings?!?!
> Opinions please?
>
> Renata Scotto, without mentioning Pavarotti's name, writes in her
> autobiography about a famous tenor, "who is no professional, who turns great
> art into a joke, who does not work", and who didn't show up at rehearsals
> for a SFO La Gioconda, because he didn't know his part. She continues: "The
> least this man could have done was to swallow his pride and come with score
> in hand to sightread at rehearsal, but it is a little-known fact that he
> can't read music very well, and he needs someone to play the lines for him
> to the memorize".
>
> Benjo Maso
Deborah Overes
Benjamin Maso wrote in message <77926d$200r$1...@beast.euro.net>...
>
>Mary Neuhoff wrote in message <36980A5F...@mediaone.net>...
>>It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non
music-reader
>. .
>>. when you consider how EASY it it to read music. I could practically
>teach my
>>dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was
>six
>>years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never
>did, it
>>really IS easy).
>
>
>Ezio Pinza couldn't read music either, and he was ashamed when he made a
>radio recording with Bing Crosby, that this "popular" singer could
sightread
>any new song with ease, while he, a classical artist, had to be coached to
>learn his part.
>Benjo Maso
I remember reading that Kiri te Kanawa is another non-reader. Her coach
puts her part on tape for her to learn.
Deborah Overes
"I think I saw him in Rent or Stomp or Clomp or SOME piece of crap"
- Homer Simpson
Richard C. Wall
later life. Ever try to teach an adult to swim? Ha!
Mary Neuhoff wrote:
>
> It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non music-reader . .
> . when you consider how EASY it it to read music. I could practically teach my
> dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was six
> years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never did, it
> really IS easy).
>
David Heimbach
> >
> >Pavarotti is not the only operasinger in history who is a non-music reader.
> >Ezio Pinza couldn't read music either, and he was ashamed when he made a
> >radio recording with Bing Crosby, that this "popular" singer could
> sightread
> >any new song with ease, while he, a classical artist, had to be coached to
> >learn his part.
>
> >Benjo Maso
>
>
> I remember reading that Kiri te Kanawa is another non-reader. Her coach
> puts her part on tape for her to learn.
>
> Deborah Overes
I'm pretty sure she can read music, as she plays the piano. When she was
learning Cappricio, her teacher put the opera on tape without her parts,
which she then had to insert. This is hard to explain and I'm not sure I'm
making sense. I've seen videos of her using scores and marking them while
working with a conductor.
Barbra
Dale Erwin
>
> In <36980A5F...@mediaone.net> Mary Neuhoff
> <jbpo...@mediaone.net> writes:
> >
> >It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non
> music-reader . .
>
> easy.
>
How true. For a singer, reading music is much more difficult
than for an instrumentalist. It is much more mechanical for the
instrumentalist to learn the names of the notes and to relate them
to certain positions and fingerings on his instrument. I don't
mean that ear training is not important for an instrumentalist--
especially strings; but it is so much more important for, and in
fact, the very core of, vocal sight reading. A singer must, at
sight, be able to recognize the interval between two notes and at
the same time know what that interval sounds like.
--
Dale Erwin
Bernard Soll
Do you mean to infer that I'm not the only retired Brit lurking in this
news group?
However, although it's true that Pavarotti cannot sight sing, i.e. he has
never managed to imprint the music intervals firmly in his mind. He can, as
Ed Rosen said earlier, follow the musical notation when it rises and falls.
This, however, has been true of many famous singers quite apart from Pinza.
Additionally, many vocal artists, eventhough reasonably proficient at sight
singing listen to tapes while preparing new roles. There are many reasons
for this. And, of course, the vast majority of singers employ the services
of a coach fundamentally to help them master musical intricacies in
addition to artistic interpretation.
Bernard Soll
Ernest Jones <mon...@webtv.net> wrote in article
<6732-369...@newsd-122.bryant.webtv.net>...
> Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't
> read music!
> Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
> recordings?!?!
> Opinions please?
>
MNockin
him how it goes.
Have you noticed that he learned any new roles lately? I haven't.
Benjamin Maso
Ernest Jones wrote in message
Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't
read music!
Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
recordings?!?!
Opinions please?
Benjamin Maso
. .
teach my
>dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was
six
>years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never
did, it
>really IS easy).
Ed Rosen
Well- I agree with you, but he did do a new role- Chenier- about two
years ago. And he did do Turandot and Fille- both relative disasters
IMO- both of which he hadn't done in 20 and 25 years respectively.
It was a well known fact that Ezio Pinza couldn't read music, but that
certainly didn't hinder his career.
In Pavarotti's case, to use Enzo in Gioconda as an example, the San
Francisco Opera, with whom he was doing his first Enzo in 1979, sent
veteran coach Otto Goote to spend the summer in Italy with Luciano to
teach him the role. This was only a partial success at best, and he
still didn't have to whole role learned at the time he arrived in SF
for rehearsals. Intensive coaching ensued, and he got the role learned
by the prima.
Best,
Ed
Ed Rosen
writes:
>
>Ernest Jones wrote in message
>
>Renata Scotto, without mentioning Pavarotti's name, writes in her
>autobiography about a famous tenor, "who is no professional, who turns
great
>art into a joke, who does not work", and who didn't show up at
rehearsals
>for a SFO La Gioconda, because he didn't know his part. She continues:
"The
>least this man could have done was to swallow his pride and come with
score
>in hand to sightread at rehearsal, but it is a little-known fact that
he
>can't read music very well, and he needs someone to play the lines for
him
>to the memorize".
>
>Benjo Maso
While I like Scotto, I have always thought this book of hers was a bit
of a self serving joke. To not mention Pavarotti by name intentionally
in the entire book is perhaps as stupid as could be.
She was correct in what she said about Pavarotti concerning Gioconda,
but her way of saying it, and the vindictivness with which she said is,
is far more of a joke than Pavarotti not knowing the music in time,
IMO.
Ed
Ed Rosen
music-reader . .
Well, he was and is a non music-reader, and reading music is not too
easy.
The place where this really cost Luciano is in the area of complete
recordings.
Since it took him so very long to learn a new role, he almost never
would record a role unless he would be singing it on stage shortly
thereafter. Of course, there were some exceptions, such as Faust in
Mefistofele, and Pollione in Norma. But, generally speaking, he would
only agree to record roles that he had sung or was about to sing on
stage.
Domingo and Carreras could sight read anything, and for that reason
recorded many more rare works than Pavarotti ever did.
Best,
Ed
>
Benjamin Maso
Ed Rosen wrote in message <7793vf$9...@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>...
I always thought she did'n mention his name because she was afraid he woukl
sue him (as you know she writes a lot of funny things about him). Is there
another reason?
Benjo Maso
Ed Rosen
o
>>
>>
>>While I like Scotto, I have always thought this book of hers was a
bit
>>of a self serving joke. To not mention Pavarotti by name
intentionally
>>in the entire book is perhaps as stupid as could be.
>>
>>She was correct in what she said about Pavarotti concerning Gioconda,
>>but her way of saying it, and the vindictivness with which she said
is,
>>is far more of a joke than Pavarotti not knowing the music in time,
>>IMO.
>
>
>I always thought she did'n mention his name because she was afraid he
woukl
>sue him (as you know she writes a lot of funny things about him). Is
there
>another reason?
>
>
>Benjo Maso
>
>
in the SF Gioconda performances- in 1979.
Even the discography at the end of the book stupidly omits his name.
How dumb is it to list a Rigoletto with no Duke listed at all?
Ed
Ed Rosen
heim...@u.washington.edu (David Heimbach) writes:
>
>
>> >
>> >Pavarotti is not the only operasinger in history who is a non-music
reader.
>> >Ezio Pinza couldn't read music either, and he was ashamed when he
made a
>> >radio recording with Bing Crosby, that this "popular" singer could
>> sightread
>> >any new song with ease, while he, a classical artist, had to be
coached to
>> >learn his part.
>>
>> >Benjo Maso
>>
>>
coach
>> puts her part on tape for her to learn.
>>
>> Deborah Overes
>
>I'm pretty sure she can read music, as she plays the piano. When she
was
>learning Cappricio, her teacher put the opera on tape without her
parts,
>which she then had to insert. This is hard to explain and I'm not sure
I'm
>making sense. I've seen videos of her using scores and marking them
while
>working with a conductor.
>Barbra
Singers who cannot read music can still follow a score. All one has to
do is read the words! Also- not "reading" music doesn't usually mean
that they can't tell notes in a score. Pavarotti often uses music in
recital, etc. Even though he can't read music, he can follow, and find
his place if he has to.
Ed
emma...@hotmail.com
mon...@webtv.net (Ernest Jones) wrote:
> Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't read
music! Is this true>>
Yes. But the bigger question is can he learn music? Decca had to cancel a
Forza literally on the eve of recording it in New York a murderous cost
because Pavarotti could not get Alvaro into his head (cast was to be Voigt,
Pons, Scandiuzzi, Levine was to conduct). Apparently the sessions for the
Decca Manon Lescaut with Freni were pure chaos and also hilarious -- the
tenor could not really get any of the rhythms right and kept getting lost,
even though he had had use of a coach before the sessions. Historically, many
Italian singers have been able to read music, or have been able to do so only
in a very primetive fashion. Vocal talent isn't in the eyes, but in the brain
and the ears. Though he has kept a wonderful voice and done spectacularly
well with it, one has to wonder about Pavarotti on both counts. BTW, he often
uses the music in concert -- for the words which he generally can't remember
not the notes which he can't read and is apt to forget.
Emma Albani
Oh, Dio! Ti prego, che Tritter's Trotters rot sul Jorden McVicker e
bruciare suo fetido faccia! E Forse, forse, la vendetta sara mia. E
questo Handelgirl, uno skeletro patetico come una ratta in colla forte,
fa che lui vive per sempre uno straniero nella mondo, condannata a
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
emma...@hotmail.com
der...@ibm.net wrote:
> Ed Rosen wrote:
> >
> > In <36980A5F...@mediaone.net> Mary Neuhoff
> > <jbpo...@mediaone.net> writes:
> > >
> > >It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non
> > music-reader . .
> >
> > Well, he was and is a non music-reader, and reading music is not too
> > easy.
> >
>
than for an instrumentalist.<<<
I don't agree with either Mr. Erwin or Ms. Neuhoff. Basic music reading
skills are as easy to acquire as any other kind of reading skill. Many
studies have shown children of average intelligence learn to read music
easily and quickly. And before then, that very young children, have
remarkable innate ability to hear and repeat tones, intervals and rhythms
accurately and easily. None of the music Pav has ever sung requires even a
modicum of musical sophistication for a professional -- the technical
challenges of actually singing it well are much harder. It is still not
inevitable that Italian opera professionals are well prepared musically,
though most under forty can probably read the treble clef in a piano score --
if only to count the high notes. More to the point is how well and accurately
they hear, absorb and reproduce the music they have to sing. Domingo has said
publically that the two things he envies about Pav are his sound, and the
apparent ability to seem musically meaningful without any intellectual effort
or preparation on his part at all. Domingo is aware of the irony of singing.
He can play several instruments, can sit at the piano and play accurately
from memory probably thirty or so scores, he has exceptional pitch memory (in
other words if someone else is "playing by ear" -- without a score -- but
plays a passage in the wrong key (though it sounds right) Domingo can usually
say for example, "no it's in g, you're playing it in e." But I don't know
that that makes Domingo a more treasurable singer. People who despise opera
would use this as their reason; a monkey with the right set of vocal folds
and an ability to imitate sounds (what Pav does when he is coached) and
remember them long enough to collect a fee can make it big. A brilliant
musical mind, or any kind of basic musical mind is irrelevant.
emma...@hotmail.com
rcw...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Yes, but what is easily learned at age six is quite difficult to learn in
> later life. Ever try to teach an adult to swim? Ha!<<
Again I have to disagree. One of my many jobs to get through too many years
of schooling was teaching music in hospitals to older people -- many of whom
were impaired in one way or another. I met very few who coudln't learn to
read a simple piano score; and very few, given a basic interest, who didn't
relish the challenge. The kind of physical coordination, stamina and
confidence neccessary to swim or to sing professionally for that matter,
would be very difficult for many people over a certain age. But the people
with no great intellectual backround who have learned to hack computers in
their sixties and seventies (and I know a few)are actually doing something a
lot harder, in my opinion, than reading the kind of music Pav would have had
to read to have his career. By the way, many professional singers who ARE
well trained musicians, still rely on coaches and pianists to work with them.
When they are preparing a role or a concert they need to focus on what they
will be doing vocally and interpretively. They want to be free of having to
play for themselves as well. And in a lot of difficult music two sets of ears
are better than one for rhythm and pitch accuracy.
james jorden
Scotto had the excuse of being jerked around at rehearsals and in a curtain
call! As for the rest of us, well, we don't have that excuse.
Let's stop acting like gente di merda, shall we?
Ed Rosen wrote:
--
james jorden
jjo...@ix.netcom.com
http://www.parterre.com
"Gay people not only keep opera going,
they keep plays about opera going."
--- Bette Midler
Mark D. Lew
illuminating. She seems to be saying that Pavarotti isn't very good at
sight-reading. That's rather different from what most of us think when we
see "he can't read music".
It's not all that unusual for professional singers to be not very good at
reading music. When I was in the San Francisco Symphony Chorus, one of the
other choristers I knew was friendly with the symphony's principal pianist.
She would often tell me stories about how this or that soloist was sent to
him [the pianist] for some emergency coaching because he or she [the
singer] couldn't learn the music. Makes you wonder why these singers
continue to get hired, and yet they do.
mdl
Xise
Regards,
Ximena
Donald Collup
> Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't
> read music!
> Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
> recordings?!?!
> Opinions please?
>
> Ernest Jones
> Retired Music & Cruise Crazy Brit.
> on the Beach
No.
A friend heard him "learning" Calaf, much like the process of the
production of paté fois gras.
This would be even more obvious if one was able to play all extant audios
of one all at once. You would notice that he performs the aria the same
way every time. No sponteneity at all.
Donald
Donald Collup
"Deborah Overes" <dov...@sprint.ca> wrote:
> Benjamin Maso wrote in message <77926d$200r$1...@beast.euro.net>...
> >
> >Mary Neuhoff wrote in message <36980A5F...@mediaone.net>...
> >>It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non
> music-reader
> >. .
> >>. when you consider how EASY it it to read music. I could practically
> >teach my
> >>dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was
> >six
> >>years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never
> >did, it
> >>really IS easy).
> >
> >
> >Pavarotti is not the only operasinger in history who is a non-music reader.
> >Ezio Pinza couldn't read music either, and he was ashamed when he made a
> >radio recording with Bing Crosby, that this "popular" singer could
> sightread
> >any new song with ease, while he, a classical artist, had to be coached to
> >learn his part.
>
> >Benjo Maso
>
>
> I remember reading that Kiri te Kanawa is another non-reader. Her coach
> puts her part on tape for her to learn.
>
> Deborah Overes
> "I think I saw him in Rent or Stomp or Clomp or SOME piece of crap"
> - Homer Simpson
A friend had to re-teach Kiri the Strauss when she recently did it in NY.
She had literally forgotten every single note.
Donald
Donald Collup
Also, I will never forget watching a documentary on Dave Kirii - during a
recording session, her head was buried in the score of O mio babbino
caro. Now come one, who doesn't know THAT aria by heart???
Donald
Donald Collup
mdl said:
"It's not all that unusual for professional singers to be not very good at
reading music. "
SO WHAT'S THE EXCUSE?
Why did the great composers BOTHER to write down all those little notes
for? An calligraphy exercise? And haven't you heard the insult about
musicians and singers? Geeez.
DC, a singer who can read music very well.
Mark D. Lew
daa...@ix.netcom.com (Donald Collup) wrote:
> mdl said:
>
> "It's not all that unusual for professional singers to be not very good at
> reading music. "
>
> SO WHAT'S THE EXCUSE?
>
> Why did the great composers BOTHER to write down all those little notes
> for? An calligraphy exercise? And haven't you heard the insult about
> musicians and singers? Geeez.
Well, I suppose the composer bothered to write it out so that the coaches
could read it and pass it on to the singers....
Look, I'm not the one making excuses for singers who don't read well. I'm
just stating the fact that there are many of them and they do get hired.
What's the excuse for horrible singers who get hired over and over in spite
of sounding horrible? We all know that they exist, and here in SF we've
got one coming up in this year's Ring.
I singer who can't read music might at least sound good as an end result
after being heavily coached. So if you're a producer deciding whom to hire
perhaps it makes sense to pick someone who sounds great but doesn't read
well.
mdl
can...@webtv.net
Does a dancer need a degree in dance notation? Does a singer need to
read music?
A: No, you just gotta have heaps of talent in the performing arts.
p.s. I don't think Irving Berlin could read music either.
Donald Collup
No. Any singer who can't read music is not able to be spontaneous. So
you get the same vocal and artistic performance night after night, whether
the voice is great or not. No creating is done in a performance. I want
to go to performances that I've never heard and never will hear again.
Donald Collup
can...@webtv.net wrote:
Like watching a trained dog do tricks.
Dale Erwin
>
> No. Any singer who can't read music is not able to be spontaneous. So
> you get the same vocal and artistic performance night after night, whether
> the voice is great or not. No creating is done in a performance. I want
> to go to performances that I've never heard and never will hear again.
What a ridiculous statement. Since when does interpretation have
anything to do with the ability to read music?
--
Dale Erwin
Mary Neuhoff
Corellifan wrote:
> >>It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non music-reader .
> >.
> >.> when you consider how EASY it it to read music.
>
> >It may have been easy for you, but that doesn't mean it is for everyone. Some
> learn better by visual means (reading), some learn better by audio means
> (listening to a tape), & some learn better using a combination (watching &
> listening to someone while a skill is being explained).
You can only READ music by doing just that, READING it. You can mimic someone
else's interpretation if you can't read the music, whether you get it from a tape
or observation. But what the composer wrote is his/her blueprint for how the music
is intended to be played and/or sung. I suppose someone who can read music could
take a singer through it, bit by bit, and communicate every intended nuance of the
composer, but how hard for the singer to remember so much thus learned. It's
awfully, awfully easier to learn to read the doggone music, honest it is, and I'll
be surprised if anyone reading this who can read music will disagree.!
Ed Rosen
can...@webtv.net writes:
>
>Q: Does an actor have to know how to read?
>Does a dancer need a degree in dance notation? Does a singer need to
>read music?
>
>A: No, you just gotta have heaps of talent in the performing arts.
>
>p.s. I don't think Irving Berlin could read music either.
>
Ed
Ed Rosen
daa...@ix.netcom.com (Donald Collup) writes:
>
>No. Any singer who can't read music is not able to be spontaneous.
So
>you get the same vocal and artistic performance night after night,
whether
>the voice is great or not. No creating is done in a performance. I
want
>to go to performances that I've never heard and never will hear again.
Not true, IMO. Reading music makes it easier by far to learn a role.
However, once the role is learned, by whatever method, a singer can
still be spontaneous.
One can learn a role by rote, and still be just as spontaneous as one
who learned by reading music. One the role is learned, and performed,
it is, I believe, one and the same in the end result.
Best,
Ed
Corellifan
>years ago.
Hey Ed, didn't Pav record Chenier several years ago? He must have learned it
way back. I thought the debut a couple years ago was his debut singing it on
stage (or at the Met, or something).
Corellifan
>.
>. when you consider how EASY it it to read music.
It may have been easy for you, but that doesn't mean it is for everyone. Some
learn better by visual means (reading), some learn better by audio means
(listening to a tape), & some learn better using a combination (watching &
listening to someone while a skill is being explained). Before you ask me what
qualifies me to make these statements, let me answer: 3 hours of under
graduate child development, 3 hours of graduate child development, 3 hours of
undergraduate classes in "learning, & 3 hours of graduate "learning".
Corellifan
>reading music.
Many rock musicians can't read music. It may not always be necessary to have
the ability to read music. My kids don't read music, yet they know and can
sing numerous children's (as well as other) songs. When I was a voice student
in college I wasn't good at sight reading (still ain't), so I would check
recordings out of the library and listen to them in order to learn them faster,
rather than trying to learn them at the keyboard.
Ed Rosen
He did record Chenier, in the early 80's. So I would assume he would
have to relearn the role over 15 years later.
Ed
emma...@hotmail.com
corel...@aol.com (Corellifan) wrote:
> >Well- I agree with you, but he did do a new role- Chenier- about two
> >years ago.
>
> Hey Ed, didn't Pav record Chenier several years ago<
He did. But modern records are made in short takes with many after the fact
splicing. Serious professionals who have worked with Pav since the 80's in
the recording studio have often complained that there are holes in the
sessions where he stops singing, because he has forgotten what comes next,
but they must keep on going. He is spliced in later right after some sessions
with a coach. But if you agree there's little sponteneity and give and take
in most of his complete operas over the past 18 years, that's the reason.
When he sang Chenier on stage he was very insecure. He was staged to sit
upstage whenever possible with a book of "poetry" in front of him. Actually
it was the score with the words underlined. Even then he forgot words, notes,
and was regularly behind the beat or racing ahead when he suddenly remembered
a section. He is the only tenor I've ever heard not get an ovation after "Si,
fui soldato!" -- he just didn't know it well enough to put it across. Again
many Italian singers have historically been unable to read music. But Pav
doesn't seem to care about rote learning -- he doesn't take it seriously
enough. And one has the impression a large number of his public are there for
him, not for music.
CWhite0714
(listening to a tape), & some learn better using a combination (watching &
listening to someone while a skill is being explained).>>
Think you forgot several other learning modes: interpersonal, intrapersonal,
mathematic/spacial, kinesthetic, and natural. (I didn't mention musical; it
seemed kinda obvious, given the context.) Maybe Howard Gardner wasn't around
when you took all your courses in learning.
Remove the obvious to email me directly.
Donald Collup
Rosen) wrote:
Sorry, I disagree. When you can't read music, you don't know your
boundaries (dynamics, note values, etc.) as well as when you can.
BTW, still waiting, Ed.
Donald
Corellifan
>mathematic/spacial, kinesthetic, and natural. (I didn't mention musical; it
>seemed kinda obvious, given the context.) Maybe Howard Gardner wasn't around
>when you took all your courses in learning.
>
>
I was attempting to keep it as uncomplicated as possible. Many of the forms
you mention involve visual or audio learning (intrapersonal, spacial, etc.).
Nope, don't remember Gardner's name. Who is he?
james_...@smtplink.mssm.edu
> suo fetido faccia!
Stop me if I'm wrong here, but "faccia" is feminine, which surely should
change the gender of those two modifiers.
jj
james_...@smtplink.mssm.edu
> Irving Berlin didn't have to read music. He only had to write it!
Noel Coward could neither read nor write musical notation either.
Dale Erwin
> Sorry, I disagree. When you can't read music, you don't know your
> boundaries (dynamics, note values, etc.) as well as when you can.
>
> BTW, still waiting, Ed.
>
> Donald
That's a bunch of crap! You might not be able to recognize them
in the printed notation, but there's a lot more than that involved.
I've known singers who could read music quite well, but were still
poor at expressing dynamics and/or couldn't count the rhythms so
note values didn't matter anyway.
Most interpretation comes from deviating from the preciseness of the
printed notation. Otherwise, all performances would sound exactly
the same and there would be no interpretation. At least insofar as
note values is concerned. I admit that the dynamic markings are a
little less precise and leave room for interpretation within the
limits of what is written--but that still doesn't mean these nuances
cannot be achieved without the ability to read music.
Having said that, I do feel that anyone who can't read music would
have a much more difficult task in learning new music and his own
interpretation of the music would involve much more tedium. The
ability to read music is an asset to any singer.
--
Dale Erwin
Doug McDonald
>
> Having said that, I do feel that anyone who can't read music would
> have a much more difficult task in learning new music and his own
> interpretation of the music would involve much more tedium. The
> ability to read music is an asset to any singer.
I find it hard to believe that any musician cannot at least
more or less read music! Maybe a singer can't read the music
and get the pitch right. Transposing pitch to the voice
is not like to a mechanical instrument, even a violin
or trombone. But how hard is to learn how to read the
note lengths, speed markings, accents, dynamics, etc. This
seems to me to be trivial.
There are degrees of reading. I failed at learning the piano because
I never got to read and convert to my fingers immediately
all the notes at one time. I have no difficulty, however,
playing the violin or oboe. I can **follow** more or less
full scores along with performances, but I simply cannot in
any fashion "hear in my head" what a score might sound like.
My ability to hear in my head, from the printed page,
what one part might sound like is not all that great either,
though I sure can tell if I am playing it in tune.
Doug McDonald
Donald Collup
> Donald Collup wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I disagree. When you can't read music, you don't know your
> > boundaries (dynamics, note values, etc.) as well as when you can.
> >
> > BTW, still waiting, Ed.
> >
> > Donald
>
> That's a bunch of crap! You might not be able to recognize them
> in the printed notation, but there's a lot more than that involved.
> I've known singers who could read music quite well, but were still
> poor at expressing dynamics and/or couldn't count the rhythms so
> note values didn't matter anyway.
>
> Most interpretation comes from deviating from the preciseness of the
> printed notation. Otherwise, all performances would sound exactly
> the same and there would be no interpretation. At least insofar as
> note values is concerned. I admit that the dynamic markings are a
> little less precise and leave room for interpretation within the
> limits of what is written--but that still doesn't mean these nuances
> cannot be achieved without the ability to read music.
>
> Having said that, I do feel that anyone who can't read music would
> have a much more difficult task in learning new music and his own
> interpretation of the music would involve much more tedium. The
> ability to read music is an asset to any singer.
No. I'm not saying there's only one way to "interpret" a role. It's just
that if their coach teaches them to do it his/her way, that's what the
audience gets; IOW, not Pavarottie's Rudolfo but Tonini's Rudolfo as sung
by Pavarotti. He doesn't have the wherewithall to make artistic decisions
for himself.
Dale Erwin
>
> No. I'm not saying there's only one way to "interpret" a role. It's just
> that if their coach teaches them to do it his/her way, that's what the
> audience gets; IOW, not Pavarottie's Rudolfo but Tonini's Rudolfo as sung
> by Pavarotti. He doesn't have the wherewithall to make artistic decisions
> for himself.
OK, I admit that when the role is first learned it would most probably
be colored by the coach's interpretation. However, I believe this is
true
also if the person reads music very well. Very few singers, in fact I
know none although I understand they exist, do not employ coaches. In
time, the singer's own interpretation will emerge.
When I first began studying, I could not read music. I found very soon
that it was easy to look at the notes on the page and get a good visual
approximation and the accompaniment provided the chord structure to
assist
in finding the proper pitch. Before long, I could learn music quite
easily this way. Many observers thought I could read music. I did
learn
to read music quite well as a music major in college. I just can't see
how it has affected in any way my interpretations of the music once
learned.
Another observation I would like to make has to do with
instrumentalists.
I also took up the violin halfway through my second year of college. I
find it hard to fathom how anyone could even learn to play, much less
interpret, music on the violin without the ability to read music.
However,
I am aware that the Suzuki method has produced some pretty good
violinists.
They also must endure this same criticism of not being able to inflect
their
own interpretations until they finally (though many never do) learn to
read
music; and, believe it or not, this makes sense to me. Talk about a
dual
standard, huh!?!? It just makes me wonder if those here making such
claims
are not looking at it from an instrumentalists viewpoint....
--
Dale Erwin
Mark D. Lew
> OK, I admit that when the role is first learned it would most probably
> be colored by the coach's interpretation. However, I believe this is
> true
> also if the person reads music very well. Very few singers, in fact I
> know none although I understand they exist, do not employ coaches. In
> time, the singer's own interpretation will emerge.
Almost every serious singer uses a coach, but there's a wide range of what
the coach is used for. A singer who doesn't read well might get low-level
coaching to help learn the notes and rhythms, along with rudimentary
phrasing, dynamics, etc. A far more musically inclined singer will already
know all that and more, but will see a top-notch to add even more nuance
and insight to his or her interpretation.
As a general rule, I think the singers who are very musical to begin with
also have a strong interest in becoming even more musical -- with the end
result that singers at every level of musical talent use coaches to push a
little further than where they are on their own.
Regarding Donald Collup's comment:
> No. I'm not saying there's only one way to "interpret" a role. It's just
> that if their coach teaches them to do it his/her way, that's what the
> audience gets; IOW, not Pavarottie's Rudolfo but Tonini's Rudolfo as sung
> by Pavarotti. He doesn't have the wherewithall to make artistic decisions
> for himself.
I don't think it's nearly so simple as one man's interpretation vs the
other. But to the extent that it is, I don't see why we shouldn't prefer
the coach's interpretation. If it's true that the singer doesn't read or
interpret music well, than surely the coach's way will be better.
With this reasoning, the next step is to say that a recording is inferior
because the singer employed some engineer to do the mixing and balancing
and whatever else those guys do with all the switches on the board, rather
than do it himself.
mdl
Luca Logi
> >It's not all that unusual for professional singers to be not very good at
> >reading music.
>
> Many rock musicians can't read music. It may not always be necessary to have
> the ability to read music.
The irony in all this is that when Pavarotti was a operatic tenor he
could rely on a restricted repertory he could sing (very well indeed) by
heart.
Now that he is a rock star (or so he pretends) it would be very useful
for him to read music in order to quickly learn his new repertory.
Actually Bocelli was 'discovered' in a strange manner. When Zucchero
Fornaciari (an Italian rock star) had to do a duet with Pavarotti, the
only way to teach the new song to the tenorissimo was to let him listen
a demo tape. A very young Bocelli (at the time he was an unknown singer
touring small venues) was chosen to record the Pavarotti part on the
demo tape (BTW, this is the demonstration that it is easier to teach new
songs to the blind Bocelli than to Pavarotti).
Pavarotti did like the Bocelli sound ('You do not have to change the
tenor on this tape') and a new star was born.
--
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy
ll...@dada.it
Musipro
>Another observation I would like to make has to do with
instrumentalists.
>I also took up the violin halfway through my second year of college. I
find it hard to fathom how anyone could even learn to play, much less
>interpret, music on the violin without the ability to read music.
This is decidedly a function of age. The violin is perhaps one of the most
difficult of instruments to take up in adulthood. Suzuki's philosophy--that
music learning is parallel to learning a language--is valid in that application
of his method has shown time and again that small children find easy what
adults struggle with.
However,
>I am aware that the Suzuki method has produced some pretty good
violinists.
It has produced not only some "pretty good" violinists, but professional
symphony musicians and concert soloists.
>They also must endure this same criticism of not being able to inflect
their
>own interpretations until they finally (though many never do) learn to
read
music.
The criticism that Suzuki children are mechanical, mindless robots--"trained
monkeys" among other descriptions--is frequently less a function of a reasoned
critical evaluation of their playing than a reflection of the personal
prejudices of the critic. After all, few children below a certain age play with
artistic expression no matter how they've learned their music.
Christina West
james_...@smtplink.mssm.edu wrote:
> emma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > suo fetido faccia!
> Stop me if I'm wrong here, but "faccia" is feminine, which surely
> should change the gender of those two modifiers.
Indeed - or in typical Italian librettese, "la fetida sua faccia" -
cf. Gioconda's "qui riveder l'orribile sua faccia"
Similarly...
> > skeletro
Nope, 'scheletro', and
> > uno straniero nella mondo, condannata a
A 'straniero' would be 'condannato', not 'condannata', and since
'mondo' is masculine, 'nella mondo' should be 'nel mondo'.
Linguaphone strikes again... :)
--
Christina West
xina on IRC
Email: xi...@argonet.co.uk
Web: www.argonet.co.uk/users/xina/
HelenMynrd
>Fornaciari (an Italian rock star) had to do a duet with Pavarotti, the
>only way to teach the new song to the tenorissimo was to let him listen
>a demo tape. A very young Bocelli (at the time he was an unknown singer
>touring small venues) was chosen to record the Pavarotti part on the
>demo tape (BTW, this is the demonstration that it is easier to teach new
>songs to the blind Bocelli than to Pavarotti).
>Pavarotti did like the Bocelli sound ('You do not have to change the
>tenor on this tape') and a new star was born.
>
>--
>Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy
>ll...@dada.it
>
'very young'...but more like 34 or 35 at the time Zucchero took him on
tour....Bocelli spent a week or so at Pavarotti's home, coaching, etc, I
understand....Anyway...glad to see someone writing Bocelli's name here.....and
I really couldn't care less that people can't read music...some of my best
students (I am a voice teacher) have to struggle mightily with reading.....but
learn instantly, it seems, with a tape.....I do appreciate being able to sight
read anything (as I can) but some of my students may not be able to and still
sound wonderfully inventive and completely 'with it' on stage...so...Why do
posters carry on so.....Keep singing...Lv HelenM.
>
>
>
>
LuciaMim
>Dale Erwin (der...@ibm.net) wrote:
>
>>Another observation I would like to make has to do with
>instrumentalists.
>>I also took up the violin halfway through my second year of college. I
>find it hard to fathom how anyone could even learn to play, much less
>>interpret, music on the violin without the ability to read music.
>
>This is decidedly a function of age. The violin is perhaps one of the most
>difficult of instruments to take up in adulthood. Suzuki's philosophy--that
>music learning is parallel to learning a language--is valid in that
>application
>of his method has shown time and again that small children find easy what
>adults struggle with.
>
HI!
I decided to take up the violin more than a couple of years after college (It
was my Father's favorite instrument). I had the most difficult time finding a
teacher in the entire Chicago area - including "conservatories" colleges, etc.
Finally, managed to find someone (quite good, by the way). She told me that
most teachers don't want to teach anyone over 15 because of the "stiffness" or
lack of flexibility of the hands and fingers and thus difficulty in properly
handling both the violin and the bow. Since I was pretty proficient at the
piano and organ (besides having studied Voice), I couldn't understand this.
She said she didn't agree, but that's how most violin teachers are and that's
why the Suzuki method has become so popular. I relate this because I would
have thought in a city (and suburbs) the size of Chicago, someone would have
been glad to take my money off my hands - but no such luck, until I came across
this young lady. Seems to be some sort of conspiracy, doesn't it?
Don't mind me. I just have a severe case of cabinfever!
Mimi (Snowbound and paranoid in Chicago)
Luca Logi
>Why do
> posters carry on so.....Keep singing...Lv HelenM.
Two reasons about the posters carrying on so:
1. Schadenfreude
2. If you cannot read and you learn by heart, with time a lot of small
errors will creep into your interpretation. (e.g. I have observed some
years ago that Pavarotti seemed to have learned 'Ah, si, ben mio con
l'essere' in Trovatore with the first note too short, so he tries to
sing it in 5/8 instead of 3/4).
It is unlikely, also, that your interpretation will really grow with
time. You will be afraid to deviate too much from an original you know
superficially.
Of course this is much more true for a classical singer - usually asked
to sing the notes as the composer wrote them.
Deborah Overes
Luca Logi wrote in message <199901121...@dadovago1119.dada.it>...
>2. If you cannot read and you learn by heart, with time a lot of small
>errors will creep into your interpretation. (e.g. I have observed some
>years ago that Pavarotti seemed to have learned 'Ah, si, ben mio con
>l'essere' in Trovatore with the first note too short, so he tries to
>sing it in 5/8 instead of 3/4).
>It is unlikely, also, that your interpretation will really grow with
>time. You will be afraid to deviate too much from an original you know
>superficially.
Another thing to consider is that most singers will NOT become rich and
famous. Especially when one is starting out, the cost of having to pay
someone to teach you your part is prohibitive, especially since one probably
is getting paid all that much for any particular gig. If you spend any time
in an opera chorus, you will definitely want to be able to read music. At
the Canadian Opera we spend the first week or less on straight music
rehearsals. By the end of this time you are expected to have both operas
memorised (we do two operas in alternating performances each contract) and
be ready to start staging. Changes will be made on the spot such as asking
the second altos to drop to the tenor line in a particular section and you
have to be able to do it immediately.
Yes, it is possible to make a career without reading music but why on earth
would you handicap yourself in that way? Basic music reading skills are not
that difficult to learn. Notice, I am not talking about the ability to
sight read which is another skill altogether and is more complicated.
However, if you can read music the sight reading will come almost by
osmosis. Get a church job where you are required to act as section leader
with new music every week (a popular source of extra income for students
especially) and you will be sight reading in no time.
Pavarotti may have made a career without reading music, but if you ain't a
Pavarotti you should maximise your resources.
Just my opinion, of course.
Deborah Overes
"I think I saw him in Rent or Stomp or Clomp or SOME piece of crap"
- Homer Simpson
Mel
>>When Zucchero
>>Fornaciari (an Italian rock star) had to do a duet with Pavarotti, the
>>only way to teach the new song to the tenorissimo was to let him listen
>>a demo tape. A very young Bocelli (at the time he was an unknown singer
>>touring small venues) was chosen to record the Pavarotti part on the
>>demo tape (BTW, this is the demonstration that it is easier to teach new
>>songs to the blind Bocelli than to Pavarotti).
>>Pavarotti did like the Bocelli sound ('You do not have to change the
>>tenor on this tape') and a new star was born.
>>
> From what I understand Pavarotti does read music, how well is anyone's guess. It was Sinatra who admitted that after decades of singing he still couldn't read a note. Go figure.
Mel
Donald Collup
"Deborah Overes" <dov...@sprint.ca> wrote:
Very well said. Thanks!
Donald
Mark D. Lew
> famous. Especially when one is starting out, the cost of having to pay
> someone to teach you your part is prohibitive, especially since one probably
> is getting paid all that much for any particular gig. If you spend any time
> in an opera chorus, you will definitely want to be able to read music. At
> the Canadian Opera we spend the first week or less on straight music
> rehearsals. By the end of this time you are expected to have both operas
> memorised (we do two operas in alternating performances each contract) and
> be ready to start staging. Changes will be made on the spot such as asking
> the second altos to drop to the tenor line in a particular section and you
> have to be able to do it immediately.
It's definitely very important to be able to read music for professional
chorus work. It's not impossible for a non-reader, but, unless blessed
with a perfect memory, he or she would have to put in a lot of work at
home.
For a poor reader, hiring a coach to teach you one's music will cost money
but it needn't be prohibitive. The problem is that not much attention is
paid to the difference between high-level and low-level coaching. If all
you want is someone to teach you the notes, you really don't need someone
with all the expertise of a good vocal coach.
I occasionally do low-level coaching for some of my colleagues. Each of my
"students" has a regular coach whom she sees when she's ready to really
polish a piece. I am of course well aware that the other coaches have
expertise that I don't have, and I'm happy to send my singers on after I've
given them as much as I have to offer, but for the early stages of working
out a basic interpretation it makes more sense for them to pay me $20/hr
than pay someone else $40 to do essentially the same thing. The same logic
could apply to even lower levels. What I do goes well beyond just plunking
out the notes on the piano and repeating it until you get it right. I
should think you could get someone to do that for you for $10/hr.
Incidentally, in the course of this discussion there have been frequent
hints that a coach tells the singer how to do it. In my experience -- from
both sides of the coach-singer relationship -- that's not how it works. A
coaching session is about the singer developing his or her own
interpretation; the coach is there to offer guidance in helping to find it.
I know that sounds rather cliché, but that really is how it's done, and I
think it's true at all levels.
mdl
HelenMynrd
infer that it was not important...(some students are just able to do pretty
good imitations of great artists..just by listening.) However...I have to tell
you that I encourage all.....ALL...my students and have for years....to take a
year of piano or a sight singing class if possible if they are serious about
singing...
I certainly wish they all heeded my advice....It has been a great advantage to
be able to sight read and play the piano for my students all these years....But
I hear some pretty wild and wonderful singers who claim not to read music....
So, I am all for it....all fer it...all fur it...!!!!!!!!!!!
love and keep singing and get to a sight singing class if you can't
read...OK???? HelenM
Alan Portigal
Donald Collup wrote in message ...
>In article <8VLm2.79042$c8.38...@hme2.newscontent-01.sprint.ca>,
>"Deborah Overes" <dov...@sprint.ca> wrote:
>
>> Luca Logi wrote in message <199901121...@dadovago1119.dada.it>...
>> >2. If you cannot read and you learn by heart, with time a lot of small
>> >errors will creep into your interpretation. (e.g. I have observed some
>> >years ago that Pavarotti seemed to have learned 'Ah, si, ben mio con
>> >l'essere' in Trovatore with the first note too short, so he tries to
>> >sing it in 5/8 instead of 3/4).
>> >It is unlikely, also, that your interpretation will really grow with
>> >time. You will be afraid to deviate too much from an original you know
>> >superficially.
>>
>>
>> famous. Especially when one is starting out, the cost of having to pay
>> someone to teach you your part is prohibitive, especially since one
probably
>> is getting paid all that much for any particular gig. If you spend any
time
>> in an opera chorus, you will definitely want to be able to read music.
At
>> the Canadian Opera we spend the first week or less on straight music
>> rehearsals. By the end of this time you are expected to have both operas
>> memorised (we do two operas in alternating performances each contract)
and
>> be ready to start staging. Changes will be made on the spot such as
asking
>> the second altos to drop to the tenor line in a particular section and
you
>> have to be able to do it immediately.
>>
earth
>> would you handicap yourself in that way? Basic music reading skills are
not
>> that difficult to learn. Notice, I am not talking about the ability to
>> sight read which is another skill altogether and is more complicated.
>> However, if you can read music the sight reading will come almost by
>> osmosis. Get a church job where you are required to act as section
leader
>> with new music every week (a popular source of extra income for students
>> especially) and you will be sight reading in no time.
>>
>> Pavarotti may have made a career without reading music, but if you ain't
a
>> Pavarotti you should maximise your resources.
>>
>> Just my opinion, of course.
>>
>> Deborah Overes
>> "I think I saw him in Rent or Stomp or Clomp or SOME piece of crap"
>> - Homer Simpson
>
>Very well said. Thanks!
>
>Donald
I wonder if our problem isn't the distinction between reading and
sight-reading music.
Cheers,
Alan
Hornymd590
Everything was wrong...wrong words, wrong tempo, wrong notes! Even with the
music right in front of his nose!
Either he really can't read music, or is too lazy to do it properly. I tend to
think the latter is the case. He has never been one to take the initiative to
learn new roles (or languages for that matter), and his acting in the theater
has never made much of an impact IMHO.
Dan
CSquillace
fit. Either it works or it doesn't. No one should be concerned over correctness
of the written score. I'm sure you wouldn't critcise Sinatra for his ease with
rhythms.
meyers...@gmail.com
Richmond Kotei
> Hoelteroff in her book Cinderella & Co. alleges that Pavarotti can't
> read music!
> Is this true? How does he learn a new role? Listening to other tenors
> recordings?!?!
> Opinions please?
>
> Ernest Jones
> Retired Music & Cruise Crazy Brit.
> on the Beach
But since he can deliver ...... That should be fair enough...
a...@catsup.co.uk
(Pierro Cappuccilli had exactly the same effect as Pavarotti on me and unfortunately for me, often used to record with Carreras. Many baritone roles remained tuneless to me until I heard another baritone sing them!)
gggg...@gmail.com
> Benjamin Maso wrote in message <77926d$200r$1...@beast.euro.net>...
> >
> >Mary Neuhoff wrote in message <36980A5F...@mediaone.net>...
> >>It seems near unbelievable to me that Pavarotti could be a non
> music-reader
> >. .
> >>. when you consider how EASY it it to read music. I could practically
> >teach my
> >>dogs to read music. Yegods! (P.S. I am no genius. I learned when I was
> >six
> >>years old, as many of you probably did . . . for those of you that never
> >did, it
> >>really IS easy).
> >
> >
> >Pavarotti is not the only operasinger in history who is a non-music reader.
> >Ezio Pinza couldn't read music either, and he was ashamed when he made a
> >radio recording with Bing Crosby, that this "popular" singer could
> sightread
> >any new song with ease, while he, a classical artist, had to be coached to
> >learn his part.
The following on Youtube may be of interest:
Old Met Opera Stars: Melchior-Rethberg-Pinza 1938 soundfilm.