O.T.: Traviata discography
Elizabeth Hubbell
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 Rigoletto 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.
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) 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);
like Albanese, Renata Tebaldi too is challenged by the coloratura, while
her (otherwise 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;
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, even though it's a
treat having Callas at her incandescent best with consistently worthy
colleagues -- while the two "live" Mexico broadcasts ('51 and '52) get
into issues of both uneven sonics and uneven ensemble
(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 her
Alfredo, gifted with a splendid tenor voice, adopts 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 fact, all the sets cited in the above paragraph are not all bad, when
taking into account some of the real losers out there! With all these
handicaps, the occasional -- and welcome -- intimacy of the Caballe
among uncut versions and the superb conducting of Serafin on the 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 surer 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. 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.
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Leonard Tillman
> suffers from disconcertingly slow conducting
-- But fine casting. It's one of two sets I've heard featuring the great
Germont of Leonard Warren.
The other has Tebaldi and Campora.
Leonard Tillman
Mitchell Kaufman
> 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 Rigoletto do.
Well, the Cellini Rigoletto has plenty of problems, too, but this isn't the time
or place...
> The Rosa Ponselle set (a "live" broadcast from 1935 on the NAXOS label)
> has inferior sound;
And even if it had been engineered by Decca in 1960, it's still got Ponselle's
twisted-out-of-all-recognition Violetta, and Jagel ('nuff said--*God,* I hate
Jagel). It does, however, have the best Germont imaginable in Tibbett.
> the Licia Albanese/Arturo Toscanini NBC b'cast on RCA lacks poetry in
> Act I (IMO) and its heroine is heard better elsewhere;
"Lacks poetry" is an understatement: it's fast as hell and tight-assed all the
way through (not just in Act I). Not only do the participants sound terrified,
but *I* get nervous just listening to it.
> 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, even though it's a
> treat having Callas at her incandescent best with consistently worthy
> colleagues -- while the two "live" Mexico broadcasts ('51 and '52) get
> into issues of both uneven sonics and uneven ensemble
My own preference: the Callas/Giulini is one of the greatest performances of any
opera, ever, and easily the most vivid, exciting, heart-rending Traviata in the
catalog--rotten sonics, Callas' occasionally parlous vocal estate, and
intermittently ragged stage-pit coordination (see first scene) notwithstanding.
Di Stefano and Bastianini are tremendous, and Giulini never did anything better
(cf. his bloodless studio opera sets of the '70s). One of those rare evenings
where *everything* came together, and that fine line between performance and a
plausible imitation of reality was crossed. Pure magic.
For voice, Callas in the '52 Mexico City is tops: she fulfills all the vocal
demands of the role in gripping, spectacular, throw-all-caution-to-the-winds
fashion. As for the "uneven sonics," it's a reasonably listenable pirate, and
actually a good deal more vivid than the Giulini ("officially-issued" or
otherwise). Di Stefano is in more youthful voice than for Giulini, but not quite
as into the drama. Campolonghi's Germont is not an asset, and the conducting,
smaller roles, and ensemble (all consistent black marks in these Mexico City
performances) are several steps down from the Scala. Most important reason for
owning: one cannot truly know Callas if one has only heard Lisbon or even
Scala/Giulini.
> 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 her
> Alfredo, gifted with a splendid tenor voice, adopts too fierce a style,
> IMO, for this character;
Maybe, though to my ears it's a good compromise choice for the best studio
Traviata: not-bad sound (albeit not one of the great Living Stereos: engineer
Lewis Layton consistently pushes the level into the red, and you can hear the
peak distortion in the climaxes), idiomatic if routine (in the good Italian
sense) conducting, a full-blooded Alfredo in Tucker, who gives a lesson to, say,
Domingo as to how a heavier voice can put across the role, and Merrill in prime
estate in his best part. Moffo: not a personal favorite, but her fragility and
wan-ness work somewhat more to her advantage here than elsewhere, particularly
in the later scenes: Violetta + Mimi = best Moffo parts. Compared with Callas,
however, Moffo is like 8mm black-and-white vs. 70mm Technicolor.
> 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;
Both of these are lovely in a cold, conscientious studio way (could Sutherland
in Verdi be anything but?). Total dullsville. But if you absolutely *must* have
an uncut set (I'm not going to get into that debate again)...
> the Ileana Cotrubas too has the same important role taken by yet another
> baritone somewhat past his best, IMO
Well, I heard Milnes sing a staggering Rigoletto at the Met around three or four
years after this. I think his singing was generally quite presentable up to the
time of his actual implosion. Now, as to whether it's better or worse than his
performance for Pretre, yes, it's probably worse, so I'll accept your
qualification: he was *somewhat* past his best, but not past-enough to be a
major reason not to buy the set (Domingo's beefy Alfredo, and Kleiber are reason
enough).
> 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;
Yes, to the extent "ungenerous" translates to "fast and tight-assed."
> 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,
Perhaps, but it's also got di Stefano and Gobbi, which the DLA doesn't. Good
set.
The newer recordings you can keep, to the extent I'm familiar with them.
MK
Terrymelin
>> suffers from disconcertingly slow conducting
I must agree. Monteux does not do justice to the score.
>
>-- But fine casting. It's one of two sets I've heard featuring the great
>Germont of Leonard Warren.
>
>The other has Tebaldi and Campora.
>
>Leonard Tillman
You should really hear the 1946 set with Warren, Tucker, and Sayao. Boy, that
one is fantastic.
Terry Ellsworth
Elizabeth Hubbell
Mitchell Kaufman wrote:
>
> Geoffrey Riggs <elizabet...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > The Rosa Ponselle set (a "live" broadcast from 1935 on the NAXOS label)
> > has inferior sound;
>
> And even if it had been engineered by Decca in 1960, it's still got Ponselle's
> twisted-out-of-all-recognition Violetta, and Jagel ('nuff said--*God,* I hate
> Jagel). It does, however, have the best Germont imaginable in Tibbett.
Ponselle has enough of a sense of adventure and personality with this
music, not to mention an inherently intoxicating sound however much past
her best (only *somewhat* past, IMO), that I'm happy to put up with the
"twisting" (yes, transpositions included). She conveys electricity and
musicality, and I, for one, am grateful. Sadly, I couldn't agree more
re Jagel -- it HURTS to think that Crooks was scheduled that afternoon
but was indisposed.
> > 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, even though it's a
> > treat having Callas at her incandescent best with consistently worthy
> > colleagues -- while the two "live" Mexico broadcasts ('51 and '52) get
> > into issues of both uneven sonics and uneven ensemble
>
> My own preference: the Callas/Giulini is one of the greatest performances of any
> opera, ever, and easily the most vivid, exciting, heart-rending Traviata in the
> catalog--rotten sonics, Callas' occasionally parlous vocal estate, and
> intermittently ragged stage-pit coordination (see first scene) notwithstanding.
> Di Stefano and Bastianini are tremendous, and Giulini never did anything better
> (cf. his bloodless studio opera sets of the '70s). One of those rare evenings
> where *everything* came together, and that fine line between performance and a
> plausible imitation of reality was crossed. Pure magic.
Any feelings about the 1956 Visconti/Giulini on MYTO with Gianni
Raimondi?
> The newer recordings you can keep, to the extent I'm familiar with them.
Any feelings about the first Scotto on DG with G. Raimondi and
Bastianini, or the Zeani on VOX with Buzea and Herlea?
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Leonard Tillman
> featuring the great Germont of Leonard
> Warren.
>The other has Tebaldi and Campora.
>Leonard Tillman "
--------------------
>You should really hear the 1946 set with
> Warren, Tucker, and Sayao. Boy, that one is
> fantastic.
>Terry Ellsworth
With those three, and at that time, it could *only* be fantastic.
Leonard Tillman
jeff
> > Warren, Tucker, and Sayao. Boy, that one is
> > fantastic.
I've checked the Omega list and a few others and can find no listing
for a Sayao, Tucker, Warren Traviata from '46.
Kullman, yes -- Tucker, no
Terrymelin
>for a Sayao, Tucker, Warren Traviata from '46.
>Kullman, yes -- Tucker, no
>
Sorry, make that Albanese, Tucker, and Warren from March 23, 1946. Much better
than Sayao!
Terry Ellsworth
Leonard Tillman
>I've checked the Omega list and a few others
> and can find no listing for a Sayao, Tucker,
> Warren Traviata from '46. Kullman, yes --
> Tucker, no
>Sorry, make that Albanese, Tucker, and
> Warren from March 23, 1946. Much better
> than Sayao!
I'm not sure that it's humanly possible to be much better than Bidu
Sayao, -- if better at all.
Hers was one of the most uniquely gorgeous voices ever recorded, --
originally a leggiero, but more frequently deployed in the great lyric
roles for the balance of her outstanding career.
Blended with that voice, was a palpable charm that remained part of
her totality right on through the end of her long life.
Albanese was a wonderful Violetta, justly loved in this and many
other roles, in her own long career. The voice though beautiful in its
own way, was someone less so, tonally, than that of Sayao's IMO, and
seemed a bit shorter in range.
Leonard Tillman
Mitchell Kaufman
> Ponselle has enough of a sense of adventure and personality with this
> music, not to mention an inherently intoxicating sound however much past
> her best (only *somewhat* past, IMO), that I'm happy to put up with the
> "twisting" (yes, transpositions included). She conveys electricity and
> musicality, and I, for one, am grateful. Sadly, I couldn't agree more
> re Jagel -- it HURTS to think that Crooks was scheduled that afternoon
> but was indisposed.
"Musical?" Whose music? Not Verdi's. Yes, it's good to have this, but
primarily for Tibbett, and for Ponselle strictly from the historical
standpoint. There are moments of beauty later on, but the first act is a
colossal mess. Even the voice qua voice is a far cry from those Norma
and Vestale Victors of the '20s. (Is it possible that she didn't
*really* retire too soon [the lovely Villa Pace recordings
notwithstanding]?) I can't imagine that this was her part, ever.
Sorry too about that tenor situation. Anything but Frederick "I Am Not a
Crooks" Jagel.
> Any feelings about the 1956 Visconti/Giulini on MYTO with Gianni
> Raimondi?
Considering it's even dimmer in sound than the '55, and you have to give
up di Stefano for Raimondi (I wouldn't trade one di Stefano for two
Raimondis and three Roger Marises), there's no reason to prefer this
over *the* Traviata. Interesting as a "different look," but--especially
at Myto prices--for Traviata (or Callas) completists only, IMO.
> Any feelings about the first Scotto on DG with G. Raimondi and
> Bastianini, or the Zeani on VOX with Buzea and Herlea?
Scotto is an acquired taste, and I haven't acquired it (with a few
notable exceptions: the Barbirolli Butterfly, her studio Adriana and
Trittico; part of the reason for my aversion may be that I was
practically Scotto'd to death at the Met in the '70s and '80s). I don't
generally cotton to her hard, pencil-point sound; this is also my
primary objection to Raimondi--ubiquitous a tenor as he was in the '50s
and early '60s, to my ears he's still a second-teamer. (We'd probably be
talking more enthusiastically about some of those Scala/DG recordings if
they didn't always feature a Poggi or a Fernandi or a Raimondi).
Bastianini adds some welcome nuance vis-a-vis Scala '55, but the voice
qua voice isn't in quite as stunning form.
Beautifully-recorded, though: quite possibly the best-sounding Traviata
in my experience--the chorus is especially well-captured.
Zeani's I haven't heard. (When I talk about "the best in the catalog," I
refer to *my* catalog, which isn't quite as big as *the* catalog. ;-)
Again, I'm not a Zeani fan, but I'm willing to give it a go if only for
Herlea, a great and underrated baritone.
MK
Elizabeth Hubbell
Mitchell Kaufman wrote:
>
> Geoffrey Riggs <elizabet...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Any feelings about the 1956 Visconti/Giulini on MYTO with Gianni
> > Raimondi?
>
> Considering it's even dimmer in sound than the '55, and you have to give
> up di Stefano for Raimondi (I wouldn't trade one di Stefano for two
> Raimondis and three Roger Marises), there's no reason to prefer this
> over *the* Traviata. Interesting as a "different look," but--especially
> at Myto prices--for Traviata (or Callas) completists only, IMO.
I agree it's dimmer in sound than '55 -- in the first half; but at the
same time not as vivid as '55 in the second half. Overall, it isn't
even as clear as the '52/Mexico (as is the case with the '55). So yes,
it's still too muchof a compromise -- for me -- when it comes to sound
-- as a first-time set, that is.
I prize it primarily because of Callas. I find she's in easier voice in
'56 than in '55, surprisingly. There seems to be more energy and
staying power, IMO. It does not quite have the variety of '55. But
what she does still do, she does stronger here, IMO. I feel she's honed
her reading further, made it (somewhat) sparer, but more compelling as a
result. A more inward reading, but with greater strength at critical
moments, and easier on high (although still not quite so much as in
Mexico). If this were in good sound, I believe it would be easier to
appreciate this as being (for Callas herself) in a league with the
practically contemporaneous Berlin Lucia (late '55) and the Del
Monaco/Simionato/Votto Norma (Scala/Dec. 7, '55).
I realize that's saying a lot, but I regard the "live" '56 Barbiere as a
sad turning point, before which Callas had for a brief while (though
thin) the best control of her post-diet career (starting with the EMI
Rigoletto [so much securer than her Butterfly and her EMI Aida of that
year] and ending with this '56 Traviata).
> > Any feelings about the first Scotto on DG with G. Raimondi and
> > Bastianini, or the Zeani on VOX with Buzea and Herlea?
>
> Scotto is an acquired taste, and I haven't acquired it (with a few
> notable exceptions: the Barbirolli Butterfly, her studio Adriana and
> Trittico; part of the reason for my aversion may be that I was
> practically Scotto'd to death at the Met in the '70s and '80s). I don't
> generally cotton to her hard, pencil-point sound; this is also my
> primary objection to Raimondi--ubiquitous a tenor as he was in the '50s
> and early '60s, to my ears he's still a second-teamer. (We'd probably be
> talking more enthusiastically about some of those Scala/DG recordings if
> they didn't always feature a Poggi or a Fernandi or a Raimondi).
> Bastianini adds some welcome nuance vis-a-vis Scala '55, but the voice
> qua voice isn't in quite as stunning form.
>
> Beautifully-recorded, though: quite possibly the best-sounding Traviata
> in my experience--the chorus is especially well-captured.
I suppose it's partly that presence and the Scala assurance that pulls
me in here. I also find Scotto's occasionally attenuated tones less in
evidence here, where she still sounds, IMO, like a fresh-voiced
simpatico singer. I always enjoy her here (unlike her ravaged Muti!!).
I agree that G. Raimondi is a second-stringer.
> Zeani's I haven't heard. (When I talk about "the best in the catalog," I
> refer to *my* catalog, which isn't quite as big as *the* catalog. ;-)
> Again, I'm not a Zeani fan, but I'm willing to give it a go if only for
> Herlea, a great and underrated baritone.
Any preference in general betw. Scotto/Zeani as singers in general? --
given you don't necessarily cotton to either<G>! -- and haven't yet
heard Zeani's Traviata.
I usually find Zeani a warmer sound than Scotto, IMO, while being just
an inspired an actress. So I usually prefer Zeani in any case. And
she's excellent here, IMO.
There are other dividends here. Bobescu's thoroughly committed reading
of the score (compared to Votto's reasonably efficient one, but not as
inspired), Herlea's warm Germont pere, and, perhaps most surprisingly,
an Alfredo who has a strikingly plangent quality, a strong contrast to
(I agree) G. Raimondi's relatively hard sounds (though Raimondi's
technical strengths and energy are still a cut or two above ho-hum, IMO,
and certainly considerably higher than Poggi[!]). Ion Buzea's plangent
Alfredo is a distinct asset, IMO, with not only those easily produced
tones of his, but also a richly expressive reading of this sometimes
one-dimensional role. I'd really like to know more about him. He
strikes me as one of the most effective Alfredos in the catalogue. (Odd
he doesn't even sing the final "lavero" in "O mio rimorso" at all, let
alone provide the traditional top note there -- if one can talk of a
"traditional" top note in a usually omitted aria. Especially odd in
view of an exceptional top register throughout this set.)
For all these reasons, as well as the way everything seems to come
together as a whole, this is now my preferred Traviata. Perhaps, its
relatively obscure label has been a hindrance to its having acquired the
kind of reputation it really deserves in my estimation. Fortunately,
it's available today at a steal.
On other forums, posters have drawn another relative dark horse to my
attention: a certain Monika Krause, who recorded this for Naxos in the
'90s. I haven't heard it, so I can't vouch for it.
I've only heard snippets on Amazon of the "live" Stratas/Wunderlich
(where Wunderlich sounds surprisingly strenuous, IMO). And I haven't
heard a note of the "live" Scotto/Carreras from '73, when both singers
were presumably still in good shape.
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Elizabeth Hubbell
OOPS ============================>
Elizabeth Hubbell wrote:
>
> [from Geof. Riggs; not Eliz. H., my better half]
>
> Mitchell Kaufman wrote:
> >
> > Geoffrey Riggs <elizabet...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Any feelings about the 1956 Visconti/Giulini on MYTO with Gianni
> > > Raimondi?
> >
> > Considering it's even dimmer in sound than the '55, and you have to give
> > up di Stefano for Raimondi (I wouldn't trade one di Stefano for two
> > Raimondis and three Roger Marises), there's no reason to prefer this
> > over *the* Traviata. Interesting as a "different look," but--especially
> > at Myto prices--for Traviata (or Callas) completists only, IMO.
>
> I agree it's dimmer in sound than '55 -- in the first half; but at the
> same time not as vivid as '55 in the second half.
OOPS! -- INSTEAD, READ: "but at the same time it has *more* vivid sound
than '55 in the second half!" <shaking my head in consternation over
this snafoo>
Terrymelin
>Sayao, -- if better at all.
>
> Hers was one of the most uniquely gorgeous voices ever recorded, --
>originally a leggiero, but more frequently deployed in the great lyric
>roles for the balance of her outstanding career.
>
> Blended with that voice, was a palpable charm that remained part of
>her totality right on through the end of her long life.
>
> Albanese was a wonderful Violetta, justly loved in this and many
>other roles, in her own long career. The voice though beautiful in its
>own way, was someone less so, tonally, than that of Sayao's IMO, and
>seemed a bit shorter in range.
>
I don't competely disagree with you. I wouldn't be without either of these
treasured artists. But I like Albanese's Violetta on this broadcast better than
the Sayao's versions out there. It's not "better" I just like it better. She
just breathes the role for me.
Terry Ellsworth
Terrymelin
the uglier the sound gets. I much prefer her earlier especially in Mexico City
in 51 or 52.
Terry Ellsworth
Parterrebox
goes
the uglier the sound gets
How could you know that without listening? Or maybe you should start using
more accurately descriptive language than the meaningless "unlistenable."
M. Slater
aldebaren
(countered by 'expressivity'). A better trade-off IMHO is the live 65
Stratas and Wunderlich.
"Terrymelin" <terry...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030422125952...@mb-m06.aol.com...
Leonard Tillman
>Isn't '58 the year of the notorious Lisbon
> Traviata?
Si, Principessina, "is varrry trrrue"...
But all seriousness aside, it wasn't too shabby a performance.
Though the Callas sound is an acquired taste, Kraus was his typically
excellent self, and Mario Sereni was a fine Germont, a bit more intense
than on his recording with de los Angeles, and the adequate but bland
del Monte.
Leonard Tillman
Leonard Tillman
>I don't competely disagree with you. I wouldn't
> be without either of these treasured artists.
> But I like Albanese's Violetta on this
> broadcast better than the Sayao's versions
> out there. It's not "better" I just like it better.
That's probably the most realistic way to put it. It's what most
feel, when experiencing virtually anything of a subjective nature.
> She just breathes the role for me.
>Terry Ellsworth
In countless ways, I've always loved her interpretation too.
Leonard Tillman
Leonard Tillman
> ugly voice (countered by 'expressivity'). A
> better trade-off IMHO is the live 65 Stratas
> and Wunderlich.
I couldn't consider that a trade-off, as I like Stratas' sound and
interpretation.
Wunderlich and Prey (IMO, the King of Germany's baritones, past and
present), also make this set one of the better choices.
Leonard Tillman
Terrymelin
>more accurately descriptive language than the meaningless "unlistenable."
Because I have the 1958 recording and I've compared it. Simple as that.
Terry Ellsworth
Terrymelin
>
>
>Mark
I believe so. And she's just so wonderful in Acts 2 and 3 -- it's just the
coloratura of Act 1 that bothers me. The sound she produces is just so ugly.
Terry Ellsworth
M. Slater
Dan
formulated an opinion. Right off the bat I'll say that the Kleiber is my
favourite by far and the one I most listen to. I've never heard the Callas
recordings because they're not available at the library and I never bothered
to buy them given the bad sound and the fact that I didn't get accustomed to
her voice until recently.
> the Licia Albanese/Arturo Toscanini NBC b'cast on RCA lacks poetry in
> Act I (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);
I never really liked Albanese's interpretation of this. It may be because of
the live broadcast but it seems to be like she never has her voice under
control. I'm sorry to say but the allegations that Toscanini took Sempre
libera too fast are ridiculous. She just couldn't keep up and perhaps the
argument should be made that the conductor should have been accomodating,
but I don't agree. A slow Sempre libera isn't my idea of Violetta and
Albanese doesn't sing the high Eb which I love, regadless of the fact that
it's not written in. I think a fantastic rendition of the aria doesn't
necessarily require the Eb but Albanese isn't secure enough to make a good
version. Peerce is a terrible Alfredo. If you think Domingo sounds thick in
the role listen to this, or Tucker for that matter...
> like Albanese, Renata Tebaldi too is challenged by the coloratura, while
> her (otherwise 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;
>
Tebaldi is no Violetta. She's much too grand for the role and act one is
quite bad overall similar to Albanese's. I don't much care for Tebaldi in
Verdi roles, especially early/middle Verdi but I do liker her as Aida and
Leonora in Froza. To me she'll always be a Puccini singer. Her Tosca,
Cio-cio San and Minnie are all fantastic.
> 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;
I don't necessarily agree about Serafin. He's good, and better than others
definitely, but not the best conducting of Traviata out there. De Los
Angeles though is MUCH better than both Albanese and Tebaldi in this.
> 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 her
> Alfredo, gifted with a splendid tenor voice, adopts too fierce a style,
> IMO, for this character;
I'm sorry I will never like Tucker. Maybe it's because I never heard him
live, but he sounds just misplaced in this Traviata. Moffo, however is
great.
> 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;
Caballe is much better than Sutherland as Violetta. Neither recording isn't
too well conducted and it's a little spiritless or lacking "theater" as you
say. I heartily dislike Sutherland's Violetta. She's just horribly unsuited
to it. She sounded too matronly in the role even when she was young as in
the Pritchard recording. Caballe is a bit boring and a bit sour in tone for
my taste, but she has some meltingly beautiful scenes and she does have a
great voice. She's a little bland and Pretre isn't great, as usual. Still,
the recording is worth getting for the fact that it's uncut and the
performers are pretty good to say the least. Bergonzi is wonderful in both
recordings, the best Alfredo by far.
> 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;
Sills sounds too air-headed for Violetta. It works in the first act but it
gets really annoying later on. I think there's something about the way she
pronounces words, not incorrectly, but there's a bit of a lisp. It's not
really a lisp but I can't put my finger on it, maybe a Brooklyn accent (lol)
I'm not sure. And it's true the studio set isn't completely flattering to
her abilities.
> 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);
And it has awful sound, at least the transfer I heard. I couldn't tell it
was Freni at first. Karajan conducting Traviata, now THAT was weird!
> 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;
Cotrubas has the perfect timbre for Violetta. She's vulnerable, sounds sick
but at the same time powerful in the upper register, and moves you to tears.
Maybe she breathes a little heavily (due to the close miking, though she did
always breathe havily) but in this role it's all right by me and she nails
the notes and the coloratura, in character and with meaning. The death scene
is better than Callas'. This is my favourite set and perhaps Domingo is not
perfect as Alfredo (had Bergonzi recorded this...) and Milnes maybe is a bit
past his prime (but not THAT much, I mean this was 1977 when he recorded
Trovatore and Forza, not cited for bad singing from him). As for Kleiber, I
fell in love with his conducting from the first minute. The orchestra is
absolutely brilliant and the first act bubbles like champagne. Kleiber's is
the best first act of any recording by far. His tight grip gets a little
annoying in the last act and Addio del passato could definitely use a little
slower tempo. The gambling scene is my favourite thing Kleiber does because
there is so much tension and the playing is razor sharp. Yes he does slacken
the tempo for Violetta, but I love it and I know lots of people here don't
like it, or the fast party music. Toscanini was also fast, and driven, but
Kleiber is more light and buoyant so the speed is not a problem, the
orchestra is like quicksilver, but warm antique quicksilver at that. (I
can't wait to see what Gergiev does with this one! *shudder*) Besides
Bonynge and Solti conduct the opening just as fast if not faster.
> 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;
Agree about Scotto. She's MUCH better on the earlier set as you mention
later, but Votto is boring and the sound isn't great.
> the second Sutherland with Luciano Pavarotti also catches its heroine a
> bit too late (IMO) --
This sounds like a Sutherland/Pavarotti aria concert/fest and not the real
opera at all.
> as does the Teresa Stratas/Placido Domingo (IMO) with some savage cuts
> in the music to boot;
The movie is fabulous but oh that Sempre libera...
> and, finally, the Angela Georghiu under Georg Solti presents a highly
> tantalizing heroine but with a fundamentally unsympathetic (IMO)
> Alfredo.
Ugh Lopardo is the worst "criticall acclaimed" Alfredo I've ever heard (or
seen on the DVD). If Tucker sounds misplaced, then he sounds like he should
be changing oil at the corner Midas. I thought he was doing the third act
party scene over and over again the way he yelled, brayed and barked through
the music all the time. Parigi o cara was just hilarious, I thought he was
giving Violetta a bear hug instead of an embrace and perhaps a few slaps
also.
Gheorghiu is too mannered as far as I can tell, and the voice isn't too
cleanly produced, at least in the recording, she has a bit too much vibrato
from what I noticed and her high notes are strident. I don't think she has
the stage presence or the charisma to pull off the first act without being
mannered (she may look good but she looks awkward on stage). I would have
liked to see or hear her paired up with Alanga, as funny as that sounds.
>
> Slightly surer 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. La Scala's
> more seasoned forces are also an asset here.
I agree about the Zeani set. Truly a classic performance from her. Ahh those
Romanians...
Unfortunately you forgot to mention two "classic" sets. One is Dame Kiri's
superb account on Phillips and the other Pavarotti recording with Studer on
DG... And then there was Cura's spectacular rendition of Alfredo...Wow,
how's that for an end to the post?
Dan
TsatskeMitGroysseTsitskes
mention the Maazel/Lorengar Traviata on Decca. It was my first on 2 LP's.
Some of the cuts are open, but it is not complete (Aragall sings one verse
of Alfredo's cabaletta in Act II and ends with a dazzling high C). When it
came out I vaguely recall that the Penguin guide gave it 3 stars, describing
Maazel as trying to "Over-Toscanini Toscanini" and reported that Lorengar's
big voice, pitch and/or piercing high notes presented the sound engineers
with problems (what a gorgeous D flat!) and she had to be recorded further
away from the mics than the others. Maazel is rigid and his tempi are
hair-raising, but he holds the performance together with tightrope tension
that creates the equivalent of a live performance. The 68 Decca sound has a
lot of atmosphere and air around the voices.
The mics exaggerate Lorengar's vibrato. Some dramatic intensity is missing
but the vulnerability comes across, almost in a pathetic way.
Aragall's baritonal's tenor is very accurately produced, with good command
of the legato and absolutely superb diction, but no acting (in the voice
production). It is a very virile and appealing Alfredo, no histrionics, a
little obtuse, occasionally bland.
Reactions to FiDi's Germont depend on party affiliation - I love the way he
uses song mode here.
TsatskeMitKeinTsitskes
Elizabeth Hubbell
Dan wrote:
>
> [Geof. Riggs wrote:]
> > 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;
>
> I don't necessarily agree about Serafin. He's good, and better than others
> definitely, but not the best conducting of Traviata out there.
FWIW, I've noticed (and perhaps now that I'm pointing this out, someone
will come along to disprove this;-) that those who admire Serafin here
tend not to take to Carlos Kleiber and vice versa. It seems a holdover
from a kind of sometimes-conscious-sometimes-unconscious tug between
"Serafinists" and "Toscaninists", so to speak.
I sincerely believe there is a distinct portion both of the pastoral and
of the conversational about this piece. Kind of a
stop-and-smell-the-roses quality, I suppose (although that's putting it
rather crudely, I admit), which I feel the best conductors successfully
capture. Serafin gives me more of that, IMO. (There are limits, I
confess: for instance, the slow Monteux <roll eyes>!) Toscanini,
sometimes inspired (the Dress Rehearsal), simply gives me less of that,
and that translates into my being less taken with both Carlos Kleiber
and Muti as well.
> > 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);
>
> And it has awful sound, at least the transfer I heard. I couldn't tell it
> was Freni at first. Karajan conducting Traviata, now THAT was weird!
You're referring to a "live" performance from the '60s with Renato Cioni
as Alfredo (1964 [Dec. 15] Freni, Cioni, Sereni, Orch. e Coro del Teatro
alla Scala, Karajan). I agree that Karajan's conducting "doesn't
compute" here, IMO.
The Freni Traviata I'm referring to is a commercially released recording
that was made ca. '73, where Freni seems somewhat surer in the part,
IMO, and has a more simpatico, if less individual, conductor, Lamberto
Gardelli. Franco Bonisolli sings Alfredo in rather disciplined style --
for him -- while Sesto Bruscantini's Germont pere sounds vocally
uncomfortable, IMO.
I too like Cotrubas very much. Even Domingo is acceptable here, IMO,
although I agree that Bergonzi is superior: he brings more variety and
suppleness to the music. My problem with Milnes comes down to one
thing, frankly: Pitch. He really seems to edge downward on certain
higher phrases. Not as severely as he did later, but I already hear
signs of that problem in this set. The instrument itself is still
puissant, round and richly expressive, but the Germont pere he offers on
the Caballe set is so much easier and more cleanly delivered, IMO.
As for Carlos Kleiber, it again comes down to the "Serafinists" and the
"Toscaninists"<G>. With a fine interpreter like Cotrubas, I find it
hard to excuse what Kleiber does with the last scene. Not just "Addio
del passato", although I do feel that's especially offensive (sorry),
but far too much else in that scene is stripped of its essential
delicacy and poignancy. Truth-in-Advertising here: the measured
phrasing and tempi in Claudia Muzio's Letter Scene have made an
indelible effect on me, and, while I understand that Cotrubas's
intrinsic instrument does not have the same depth as Muzio's, I feel an
important opportunity for Cotrubas to work some kind of magic of her own
as well was lost by hustling this moment (and others) so. I admit I'm
prejudiced.
> > 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;
>
> Agree about Scotto. She's MUCH better on the earlier set as you mention
> later, but Votto is boring and the sound isn't great.
Agree about Votto. Unfortunate. I don't believe he necessarily spoils
things, but the special things here are definitely the principals and
the general polish in the chorus and orchestra independent of the man at
the podium.
> > and, finally, the Angela Georghiu under Georg Solti presents a highly
> > tantalizing heroine but with a fundamentally unsympathetic (IMO)
> > Alfredo.
>
> Ugh Lopardo is the worst "criticall acclaimed" Alfredo I've ever heard (or
> seen on the DVD). If Tucker sounds misplaced, then he sounds like he should
> be changing oil at the corner Midas. I thought he was doing the third act
> party scene over and over again the way he yelled, brayed and barked through
> the music all the time. Parigi o cara was just hilarious, I thought he was
> giving Violetta a bear hug instead of an embrace and perhaps a few slaps
> also.
> Gheorghiu is too mannered as far as I can tell, and the voice isn't too
> cleanly produced, at least in the recording, she has a bit too much vibrato
> from what I noticed and her high notes are strident. I don't think she has
> the stage presence or the charisma to pull off the first act without being
> mannered (she may look good but she looks awkward on stage). I would have
> liked to see or hear her paired up with Alanga, as funny as that sounds.
It's still interesting hearing such an individual personality as
Georghiu in this music these days, and, IMO, I frankly believe that that
individuality does extend to an imaginative musicality as well.
> > Slightly surer 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. La Scala's
> > more seasoned forces are also an asset here.
>
> I agree about the Zeani set. Truly a classic performance from her. Ahh those
> Romanians...
......and in fact even more recent rehearings have gotten me
increasingly fascinated with everyone in this set. I've found myself
increasingly visualizing all these artists as the characters they play
rather than simply inspired artists. Repeated hearings show how well
this set fits together as a whole. Now I'm getting curious about other
recorded examples of not just the fine Alfredo, Ion Buzea, but the
surprisingly assured conductor, Jean Bobescu, as well. Please?
> Unfortunately you forgot to mention two "classic" sets. One is Dame Kiri's
> superb account on Phillips and the other Pavarotti recording with Studer on
> DG...
Te Kanawa is lovely at certain moments. But, in the end, I find she
lacks the kind of mercurial variety I generally prefer. As for Studer,
I always admired her in the non-Italian repertoire that she started out
in. Here, though, her command of the coloratura, while arguably
superior to both Albanese's and Tebaldi's, for instance, still seems
insufficient, IMO.
> And then there was Cura's spectacular rendition of Alfredo...Wow,
> how's that for an end to the post?
Cura has a fine instrument, but not, IMO, the requisite suppleness or
variety of a Bergonzi, say -- or even a Buzea, for that matter. The
chief problem here, though, is, IMO, a faceless Violetta. Cura would
just about pass muster, IMO, if his Violetta were only a little more
interesting.
Someone else here mentioned the Lorengar set. My regrets, but while
there are certain sopranos with a distinctive vibrato whom I can really
admire (BTW, Leider just happens to be my favorite of all!), Lorengar's
vibrato is simply too pronounced for me. I know it's just me, but I've
never really enjoyed her because of that.
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
GRNDPADAVE
Pavarotti's superb Alfredo.
His high C is stunning at the end of "O mio rimorso" even ifthe note is
unwritten.
Much as I love Bergonzi's recordings, the absence of a terminating high C is a
disappointment for me. Alfredo *is* posturing. The naive lad hasjust
discoveredthat it costs money to diddle away at Passy and that Violetta has
been subsidizing the idyll.
The cabaletta is premonition of the subsequent insult: "Ogni sua aver tal
femmina!"
I think thisa wonderful cabaletta, the suppression of which is nthing lesss
than a mutilation of Verdi's masterpiece.
Now as for Violettas, I do like Cotrubas' vulnerability (which she makes plain
by her breathiness -- she alwaysseems to be panting), but for a fuller
realization of Verdi's score I prefer Caballé.
No conductor has achieved a full realization. I don't know why there are so
many excellent recordings of BALLO and only fair-to-middling of TRAVIATA.
I find Prêtre the least obtrusive. I would say that an opera recording becomes
less treasurable to the extent that one is made aware of the conductor.
Maazel, for example, is much too emphatic when it comes to *marcato* taking on
the aspect of a bandmaster. Carlos Kleiber is also too emphatic at times (not
to mention Von Karajan).
I'd have liked to have heard a Leinsdorf TRAVIATA (based on his underpraised
LUCIA).
But for now I'll have to settle for Prêtre.
==G/P Dave
Dan
approaches to the music.
I must say that what I really like is a conductor who makes the music sound
sparkling, bright and dazzling in the first act. In the second, one who
brings out the vocal lines without letting them sag in the Violetta-Germont
section and brings a lot of tension to the encounters in Scene 2. In the
third act he has get the orchestra to be frail, fragile, brittle almost. In
a word, he has to echo Violetta throughout while maintaining a chamber-music
like delicacy. But to me the most important is a razor-sharp in their attack
in the strings, no mushy sound.
Kleiber wins because he has 2 of the 3 acts nailed as far as I'm concerned.
He loses in the last act because he's just too fast. He does make the
orchestra sound brittle, etc, and is very dramatic at the close, moreso than
most other recordings I know; the crashing chords are devastating.
Most other conductors make it too heavyhanded and lush and that just adds to
the melodramatic mush and sappiness that Traviata can become (ie. Giulini's
Callas rendition, from I hear) I tend to think of Traviata as being almost a
contemporary opera, in that it sounds modern compared to Trovatore (even if
Traviata is just as structured, aria-caballeta wise, it's not episodic like
Trovatore in that sense - the music seems to flow naturally, no stop and
sing) and it can be updated anywhere without losing out. Verdi originally
set it in the 18th century (or was it 17th) but almost always it's set in
the 19th nowadays. It simply is not "baroque" and it certainly does not
benefit from a Rigoletto or Forza lush, dark approach. It works best I find
if it's taken like Falstaff, quicksilverily, which Verdi emphasized by the
reduced orchestration. It has to be intimate, poetic but also refreshing and
spirited. I think that way the drama works better at the end. Otherwise
we're crying in act 1 already and by the third it's a little much.
>
> The Freni Traviata I'm referring to is a commercially released recording
> that was made ca. '73, where Freni seems somewhat surer in the part,
> IMO, and has a more simpatico, if less individual, conductor, Lamberto
> Gardelli. Franco Bonisolli sings Alfredo in rather disciplined style --
> for him -- while Sesto Bruscantini's Germont pere sounds vocally
> uncomfortable, IMO.
I have never seen or heard about this recording. What label is it on? Off
the bad I'd say it were EMI just based on the pairing of Freni, Bonisolli
and Gardelli. Was this ever on CD even? When I heard the 60s Traviata with
Freni I thought that it was the only time she ever sang it and never did it
again. This was truly a surprise to hear she made a studio recording of it
10 years later. I am intrigued and want to listen to it now.
> ......and in fact even more recent rehearings have gotten me
> increasingly fascinated with everyone in this set. I've found myself
> increasingly visualizing all these artists as the characters they play
> rather than simply inspired artists. Repeated hearings show how well
> this set fits together as a whole. Now I'm getting curious about other
> recorded examples of not just the fine Alfredo, Ion Buzea, but the
> surprisingly assured conductor, Jean Bobescu, as well. Please?
I believe that there are a whole host of Romanian-recorded operas. I saw a
box set of about 12 or so including the aforementioned Traviata, Tosca,
Cavalleria, Forza, etc. I am not sure whether the performers were the same
in all of them (and think not) but I'm sure Zeani, Buzea and Bobescu appear
all over the place. Herlea (the prime baritone from Romania) is the Scarpia
on the Tosca set I am sure. I was stupid enough not to get it at the
super-low price it was offered (like $30).
> > Unfortunately you forgot to mention two "classic" sets. One is Dame
Kiri's
> > superb account on Phillips and the other Pavarotti recording with Studer
on
> > DG...
> Te Kanawa is lovely at certain moments. But, in the end, I find she
> lacks the kind of mercurial variety I generally prefer. As for Studer,
> I always admired her in the non-Italian repertoire that she started out
> in. Here, though, her command of the coloratura, while arguably
> superior to both Albanese's and Tebaldi's, for instance, still seems
> insufficient, IMO.
I was joking with both of these. Kiri I always thought fine in most roles
where people found her boring or uninvolved. I love her voice, but Kraus is
so old-sounding and she doesn't sound very young either. Hvorostovsky was no
Germont at the time and Mehta is terrible.
Whereas Studer/Pavarotti catches Pavarotti past his best. Studer always
sounds nice to me, she has the right vulnerability in her tone for Violetta
and it's just another record and I don't think anybody ever considers it as
serious competition.
> > And then there was Cura's spectacular rendition of Alfredo...Wow,
> > how's that for an end to the post?
>
> Cura has a fine instrument, but not, IMO, the requisite suppleness or
> variety of a Bergonzi, say -- or even a Buzea, for that matter. The
> chief problem here, though, is, IMO, a faceless Violetta. Cura would
> just about pass muster, IMO, if his Violetta were only a little more
> interesting.
This was also a joke. That filmed version from Paris was awful. Cura should
have been singing Turriddu in a bad production of Cavalleria. Gvezava (if
that's how you spell it) seemed promising but I haven't heard anything of
her again. She had a slavic accent which detracted and I also thought
Panerai was unlistenably blustery.
Dan
Elizabeth Hubbell
Dan wrote:
>
> [Geof. Riggs wrote:]
> >
> > The Freni Traviata I'm referring to is a commercially released recording
> > that was made ca. '73, where Freni seems somewhat surer in the part,
> > IMO, and has a more simpatico, if less individual, conductor, Lamberto
> > Gardelli. Franco Bonisolli sings Alfredo in rather disciplined style --
> > for him -- while Sesto Bruscantini's Germont pere sounds vocally
> > uncomfortable, IMO.
>
> I have never seen or heard about this recording. What label is it on? Off
> the bad I'd say it were EMI just based on the pairing of Freni, Bonisolli
> and Gardelli. Was this ever on CD even? When I heard the 60s Traviata with
> Freni I thought that it was the only time she ever sang it and never did it
> again. This was truly a surprise to hear she made a studio recording of it
> 10 years later. I am intrigued and want to listen to it now.
It's an Acanta CD (Acanta CD-41644 [2CD]).
Personally, I cannot vouch for its quality, since I have the original
LP. But the LP is in good sound. It was the soundtrack of a filmed
version (made in a studio in 1973) that I've found impossible to track
down in its original form. Only this soundtrack seems to be around now
(I'd love to be proved wrong).
If not for Bruscantini, this could be one of the finest sets around,
IMO. I certainly admire Bruscantini in many other things, but not here,
unfortunately. Everyone else here comes off quite well, IMO, and I feel
that Freni became one of the truly fine Violettas with this recording.
I too am curious as to whether or not she ever did it on stage again
after Karajan (which apparently turned into a bit of a debacle, I
gather). Going by this Violetta with Gardelli, she had become capable,
at that time, of being much more effective with it than she had been in
'64. A shame if she never seized the opportunity again to do it on
stage, but she may very well not have.
I know of four opera films that she made in the early '70s: an Otello
with Vickers and Karajan, a L'Elisir with Bruscantini (who was really
wonderful in the second-act "Briconcella" duet with Adina), this
Traviata from '73, and a Massenet Manon. Sadly, I recall no one else in
the Manon, but I will never forget Freni in the Saint-Sulpice scene.
She was hair-raising. It was some of the finest acting I've ever seen
her do -- and she was in glowing voice throughout.
As I recall, the values of both the Elisir and Manon films were
considerably poorer than the Otello. I never got to see the Traviata at
all.
Unfortunately, only the Otello seems to be around now, and I've found
none of the others. The Traviata CD is probably still available on the
Net, though I wouldn't swear to that.
> > > Unfortunately you forgot to mention two "classic" sets. One is Dame
> Kiri's
> > > superb account on Phillips and the other Pavarotti recording with Studer
> on
> > > DG...
>
> I was joking with both of these.
Sorry. Me duh...................
Cheers,
Geoffrey Riggs
www.operacast.com
Mitchell Kaufman
> I know of four opera films that she made in the early '70s: an Otello
> with Vickers and Karajan, a L'Elisir with Bruscantini (who was really
> wonderful in the second-act "Briconcella" duet with Adina), this
> Traviata from '73, and a Massenet Manon. Sadly, I recall no one else in
> the Manon, but I will never forget Freni in the Saint-Sulpice scene.
> She was hair-raising. It was some of the finest acting I've ever seen
> her do -- and she was in glowing voice throughout.
There was also the Karajan Butterfly. Supposedly the soundtrack is
identical to the Decca recording (I haven't personally done an A-B
comparison), but with Pavarotti's Pinkerton re-dubbed by Domingo. In the
late '60s, there was also the Karajan Carmen w/Bumbry and Vickers.
MK
Dan
I ever heard of that record label. I would certainly LOVE to see both the
Elisir and the Manon and DEFINIETLY the Traviata. Freni was exquisite in
pretty much everything she did. Let's not forget her Susanna in Ponnelle's
Nozze di Figaro alongside an equally wonderful Hermann Prey.
There seem to be so many opera films that were made but are now nowhere to
be found. For example how is it possible that there be no filmed version of
Faust on the market apart from a pretty mediocre performance with Kraus (in
ghastly picture)? I'm pretty sure there was one made starring Ghiaurov as
Mephisto.
Dan
"Elizabeth Hubbell" <elizabet...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3EAD7C40...@verizon.net...