Who Were the "Great Tenors" Before Caruso?
F R
all-time, begin with enrico caruso. surely, there were many great before
him. perhaps their discography is so limited due to the sparcity of
recordings and even the non-existence of technology to replicate their
voices.
as a favor, could some of you give me some names of 19th century
"greats" so i can google them and read about who and what they were.
thanks,
frank
edo...@gmail.com
The reason that most post about tenors begin with Caruso is that he
happened to come along with the advent of 78 recordings! He was
fortunate, and so were we.
He was the first tenor to record extensively, and certainly the most
popular ever to record, to this day. His recordings were anxiously
awaited, and even families who couldn't afford them bought them. The
were events!
Caruso made opera recordings popular, and opera recordings made Caruso
popular!!
Ed
Ken Meltzer
A few who recorded:
Fernando de Lucia (the first Fritz in l'Amico Fritz)
Francesco Tamagno (the first Otello)
Francesco Marconi
Best,
Ken
La Donna Mobile
legacy. He was the original Otello, although not of Verdi's choosing. He
recorded in 1903/4, at the end of his career. He died in 1905 aged 54.
I think the disc is worth having as a historic curiosity but I can't say
it has any other merit. It is quite painful for me to listen to; I am
banned from playing it unless I'm alone in the house, or if we have mice
to scare away.
Ken Meltzer
I'm going to have to offer a dissenting opinion. I think Tamagno's
recordings are impressive in their own right, and all the more so
considering the late stage of his life and ill health. I think you
can really get a sense of how impressive he must have been in the
theater.
I'll try to upload a sample or two, although time is very short for me
until at least Sunday.
Best,
Ken
CHSIII
> A few who recorded:
> Fernando de Lucia (the first Fritz in l'Amico Fritz)
> Francesco Tamagno (the first Otello)
> Francesco Marconi
De Lucia is certainly one of the greatest tenors, but most of his recordings
were made after the age when he started to transpose downwards - a common
enough practice in his day. Don't let that put you off - his vocalism is
astounding, if of a much older, and more inventive style.
Immediately before Caruso, the greatest reputation belonged to Jean de
Reszke - but to hear him you will have to go to the Mapleson Cylinders, and
there the only truly discernible number is "O Paradiso."
Also, don't miss hearing Emilio de Marchi - another great, but more a
contemporary of Caruso than a predecessor - and alas, also only heard on the
Mapleson Cyclinders, in Tosca, Cavalleria and Aida - but much better sound
than poor de Reszke.
And if you go to the trouble of listening to the Maplesons, don't miss
Nordica's Immolation scenes - two of them - and Sembrich's Marie in
"Daughter of the Regiment."
There are many earlier to read about: Mario, Nourrit, Rubini, etc.
Figa...@aol.com
power axis) to Caruso, and the great romantic superstar of his day
(the Edwardian era) was the Polish tenor Jean De Reszke. His brother
Edouard was equally famous in basso repertoire. Rumor hath it that
Jean recorded (at least) one side but personally destroyed the matrix
as he was displeased with how his voice sounded on disc. His voice is
very poorly preserved on some of the Mapleson Cylinders. There are a
couple of extant studio recordings of Edouard. They had a soprano
sister, Josephine, who sang briefly and successfully in public and
then retired upon her marriage. Jean and Edouard were notable, among
many other reasons, for their advocacy of Wagner. Jean, who was the
leading star tenor of his day in the Franco/Italian repertoire learned
and performed Siegfried and Tristan among other roles. This was
considered revolutionary, brave/foolhardy and astounding in his day.
Other great pre-Caruso names were Tamagno (there are recordings ---
all rather late in his career but you get a sense), Campanini and
Fernando De Lucia. Further back, and way before recordings, the great
"star" names of the 19th Century included (among others) Mario,
Rubini, Nourrit, Donzelli, Duprez and Tamberlik. These gentlemen
"created" some of the most famous tenor roles of the Rossini/Bellini/
Donizetti/Meyerbeer repertoire: Ernesto, Robert le Diable, Guillaume
Tell, Le Comte Ory, Fernando, Edgardo, Pollione, etc. Tamberlik was
Verdi's first Don Alvaro.
rmv...@gmail.com
crap posting repeating the same crap written somewhere else
rudi
Figa...@aol.com
"He [Tamagno] was the original Otello, although not of Verdi's
choosing."
=====================
If Verdi did not choose Tamagno, who did? Verdi had well-known and
well-documented serious misgivings about the suitability of Tamagno
for parts of OTELLO but the bottomline remains that, "faults",
compromises and all, Tamagno, and not some other tenor, did finally
get the nod from Verdi, who at this advanced stage of his career,
exercised great power in the Opera world and had written into his
contracts, ironclad control of virtually every aspect of the
production, casting, rehearsal and execution of a new opera.
JKH
> F R wrote:
> > it seems that most posts, when talking about the greatest tenors of
> > all-time, begin with enrico caruso. surely, there were many great before
> > him. perhaps their discography is so limited due to the sparcity of
> > recordings and even the non-existence of technology to replicate their
> > voices.
>
> > as a favor, could some of you give me some names of 19th century
> > "greats" so i can google them and read about who and what they were.
>
> > thanks,
> > frank
>
> Tamagno is the only pre-Caruso name I can think of who has a recorded
> legacy.
De Lucia - with a much larger recorded legacy than Tamagno. Although
he recorded contemporaneously with Caruso, he is undoubtedly a 'pre-
Caruso' tenor, utterly different stylistically and a glimpse into a
vocal tradition that has now utterly disappeared.
> I think the disc is worth having as a historic curiosity but I can't say
> it has any other merit. It is quite painful for me to listen to
Well, de gustibus and all that, but I doubt you will find anyone even
remotely interested in hostorical singing (both from historical and
purely musical standpoints) who will agree with you. Even from the
comparatively limited sound one can hear that this was a magnificent
voice and can hear what all the fuss was about (in contrast to, say,
Maurel, where I struggle to hear anything to convince me of his
greatness). The recent pressings issued by Historic Masters, which
I've heard but don't have, are astonishing. I really don't think one
has to make any allowances to conclude that Tamagno's recorded legacy
truly deserves to be described as great, both hsitorically and as pure
singing.
As a matter of interest, are there any singers to whom you listen
regularly who recorded in the acoustic era?
JKH
JKH
> Tamagno is the only pre-Caruso name I can think of who has a recorded
> legacy.
De Lucia has a much more extensive discography than Tamagno.
Admittedly his and Caruso's recording careers weere contemporaneous,
but he is undoubtedly a 'pre-Caruso' tenor in this context. His
recordings are a glimpse into an utterly vanished past in terms of
vocal art.
> I think the disc is worth having as a historic curiosity but I can't say
> it has any other merit. It is quite painful for me to listen to
Well, de gustibus and all that, but I doubt whether you'll get many
who'd agree with that assessment, especially amongst those who are
interested in historical recordings and the legacy they preserve.
Tamagno's voice is a miracle, and the recent pressings issued by
Historic Masters triumphantly bear this out. Hearing these in a fairly
large hall was an impressive and moving experience. The Pearl/Opal CD
is excellent, though better transfers can be found on Symposium.
The impression that he made in the theatre must have been phenomenal
and this is amply borne out by the recordings, in my opinion. This is
often not the case with singers of that era who ahd huge careers, but
whose recordings (often few in number and at the end of their careers,
admittedly) sometimes seem to be dramatically at odds with their
undoubted fame. Maurel, for instance - could you detect what all the
fuss was about? Edouard de Reszke is another - a huge career but with
4 very poor recordings as a legacy. Turning back to tenors, his
brother is of course the most tantalisingly 'missing' tenor on records
- a process he shunned because of the unreliability of the speed of
reproduction (and the consequent effects on perception of his voice).
The Mapleson cylinders 'reveal' a few notes of O Paradis, but one
really has to use a great deal of imagination when listening to these.
As a matter of interest, how much do you listen to, or have an
interest in, acoustic recordings of singers generally?
JKH
JKH
Seemingly ad nauseam - looks as though the first message I thought I'd
lost was actually sent. Apologies for the lengthy repetition!
JKH
La Donna Mobile
> On 10 May, 00:36, La Donna Mobile <enidlar...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> F R wrote:
>>> it seems that most posts, when talking about the greatest tenors of
>>> all-time, begin with enrico caruso. surely, there were many great before
>>> him. perhaps their discography is so limited due to the sparcity of
>>> recordings and even the non-existence of technology to replicate their
>>> voices.
>>> as a favor, could some of you give me some names of 19th century
>>> "greats" so i can google them and read about who and what they were.
>>> thanks,
>>> frank
>> Tamagno is the only pre-Caruso name I can think of who has a recorded
>> legacy.
>
> De Lucia - with a much larger recorded legacy than Tamagno. Although
> he recorded contemporaneously with Caruso, he is undoubtedly a 'pre-
> Caruso' tenor, utterly different stylistically and a glimpse into a
> vocal tradition that has now utterly disappeared.
>
>> I think the disc is worth having as a historic curiosity but I can't say
>> it has any other merit. It is quite painful for me to listen to
>
> Well, de gustibus and all that, but I doubt you will find anyone even
> remotely interested in hostorical singing (both from historical and
> purely musical standpoints) who will agree with you.
Are you saying that people will disagree that I find it painful to
listen to? How strange.
LT
> people will disagree that I find it painful to
> listen to? How strange.
Not at rmo, where there are characters who demand 'proof to support'
that you hold an opinion - not only, mind you, whether or not your
opinion is a valid one - but simply that you HAVE the opinion.
For example (paraphrased):
>'I don't like brussel sprouts'
----------------
>'Why, that can't be true; >*Everybody* likes brussel >sprouts, therefore you're >ignorant and lying!'
----------------
>'But....but.... that's simply not >true.'
----------------
>'Well, if several of us AND our >Schizophrenic Poster Git 'alters' >say it's true, then it IS true, >Bunkie!'
----------------
Ergo, they'll not only 'challenge', but decide - your, as they put it,
"opinion".
JKH
>
> Are you saying that people will disagree that I find it painful to
Not at all, I wouldn't presume to take any view on what you (or anyone
else) thought painful or pleasurable. De gustibus etc etc. Your
finding Tamagno painful to listen to is as valid a judgement as my
finding him a joy. My point was that I thought you'd not get much
agreement that Tamagno's recordings had no merit other than historical
curiosity.
JKH
edo...@gmail.com
I belive FR's listening began and ended with Bobby Darin!!! ;)
Ed
LT
No problem; I enjoyed the re-read.
Another pre-recording-age singer, not a tenor, but a basso, - who'd
have been more than interesting to hear, was Luigi LaBlache, part of
the legendary 'Puritani Quartet':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Lablache
To get an admittedly vague idea of his vocal quality, recall the
magnificent bass speaking voice of the movie-star, Stewart Granger
(originally named James Stewart, btw), - who was LaBlache's grandson,
evidently possessing some of his DNA.
>JKH
LT
LT
Ah, but at least Darin was a tenor! So are Jerry Vale, Tony Bennett,
Vic Damone, and several others of their day - a few of whom were IMO
erroneously grouped as baritones.
> Ed- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
F R
aurty and al jolson.... throughout the 50s, both early standards like
the ames brothers, patti page, theresa brewer, the 4 lads. next phase
was the doo-wop 50s, then darin, the beach boys and on through "classic
rock" such as the roling stones, Crosby still and nash, steely dan and
the eagles. i was done with contemporary music by the times the 80s
rolled around although (guilty confession) i liked disco.
now i listen to show music from the 40s, 50s, and 60s, and the "american
songbook.... sinatra, of course, but also tony bennett, steve and edie,
even louis prima and keely smith. roy orbison and ricky nelson were
faves of mine as well.
frank
and thanks to those who've mentioned 19th century singers. will give me
something to read about as i google them.
frank
edo...@gmail.com
It wasn't easy, but I did find an opera connection in this post.
Jolson was friendly with Caruso, starting in about 1910, when Jolson
starred in his first big Broadway hit. The two men admired each other,
and even shared the stage once in a while for bond drives during WW1.
Also, Jolson recorded acoustically, starting in about 1911, All of
Caruso's recordings were acoustic, since electric recordings didn't
come about until about 1925-6, and the great tenor had passed away in
1921.
Jolson is one of the few whose recordings ranged from acoustic all the
way to the advent of stereo! Gigli was another.
Ed
Abednego Schwartz
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d952ff52-2bcb-4c86...@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
Tillman will clarify and explain everything to you. He is a fatuous sack of
shit who knows it all.
Abe Schwartz
LT
Abednego Schwartz
And dipshit Tillman is erroneously grouped as a homo sapien.
Abednego Schwartz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Lablache
>JKH
LT>
"Evidently", dipshit? A grandson always gets DNA from his grandfather.
Always. You seem to be gathering momentum. Are you planning to answer every
fucking post that shows up here? You are a total dipshit. Make that
'ignorant dipshit'.
Abe Schwartz
L T
Indeed so , - at risk of disturbing the severely disturbed, that
flatulate psychotically:
>Will he ever shut us reeking f#$ks up??
Certainly -
When said reeking f#$ks will kindly _disclose_ their 'domicile
locations'. How about it?
No?
Didn't guess so.
L T
A sweeping statement from an ignoranus hypocrite:
>A grandson always gets DNA from his >grandfather. Always.
NOT 'always' is it apparent, which is what I referred to, Boll. You,
however, being sans repro-parts, don't have to worry about it.
JKH
And Bjorling another.
Ed, your post has just reminded me of something - can anyone explain a
very specific connection between Jolson, Caruso and Puccini ?
JKH
La Donna Mobile
Well, no. I prefer to listen to recordings of operas that strive to bear
a resemble to how the composer wrote it. Most of all, and considering
that opera is a unique (maybe...!) artform that combines music and
drama, I prefer to watch and listen simultaneously to a meaningful
production. Audio only, even if reasonably good reproduction, is a poor
substitute which suffices as background, especially when on the move, or
acts as a compromise in lieu of an audio-visual representation. A poor
reproduction, be it the acoustic recordings, or indeed recent efforts
from some bloke sat in the audience with a UHER, often have a passing
interest, but when it comes to listening to opera - as opposed to
worshipping singers - audio-visual is the closest we currently have,
short of live, that emulates the composers' wishes. I just don't see
how anyone can get the richness or atmosphere of the orchestration
through these facsimiles, let alone any sense of the dramaturgy of the
opera.
To be honest I think there is a lot of pretentious macho posturing on
newsgroups such as these.
And in addition to that,I find that often, the people who are the
quickest to condemn someone for enjoying an album of arias by Jonas
Kaufmann, Anna Netrebko, Dmitri Hvorostovsky etc as being lightweight,
part-timers and noobs are often those who get all worked up over a
presentation of disembodied arias by someone who's been dead a century.
It's a form of ancestor worship coupled with a deliberate attempt to
show "Oh look at how intellectual I am," whilst often betraying a
crashing ignorance of music, orchestration and dramaturgy. I'm sure they
all claim it's about respecting history, but I'm afraid I find that a
pile of rubbish, a)because most of them don't have a clue about the
historical context of the opera's setting (oh no! someone's portrayed
the Duke of Mantua's court as debauched, may they rot in hell) and b)
many of them think that opera is something written by less than dozen
composers between about 1780 and 1925 and are entirely dismissive of
composers and their work outside those periods.
So, in a nutshell, I think that life is way too short to get exercised
about primitive recordings of a small range of arias from a small number
of operas when there are decent recordings and performances of four
centuries of opera that go undiscussed on this newsgroup (and others) or
if they are discussed it's in terms of 'how boring'. My operatic
interests stretch from 1607 (L'Orfeo) to 2008 (The Minotaur). I don't
suppose there are that many people who can honestly say that they love
operas spread over 401 years.
alanwa...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agreed. But I think you and Mrs Terfel (or whatever) have done your
fair share in crossover terms of dumping in the "Look, how
intellectual I am?" on this group: indeed did not you not set up your
own group to do so and to show how intellectual you are by doing so. I
am sure you know better to take the piss out of Jenkins and Co BECAUSE
YOU KNOW BETTER?
Fair enough. That's why I rang up Handleman and told him to fuck
off. He's bloody lucky he didn't get the full thing.
And so are you.
If you are not prepared to say to someone face to face or voice to
voice on what you post on a computer I don't think you should post
it.
If you want to continue this conversation privately, for good or bad,
I don't write under any name other than mine. The email addy is
valid.
What you see is what you get. If you don't like it, well fuck off and
hard luck.
That's life.
Try not looking for Disability Benefits (I know it's hard as it's
built in) in the case of Handelman.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
JKH
> JKH wrote:
> Well, no. I prefer to listen to recordings of operas that strive to bear
> a resemble to how the composer wrote it.
Don't we all? I know I do.
> Most of all, and considering that opera is a unique (maybe...!)
artform that combines music and
> drama, I prefer to watch and listen simultaneously to a meaningful production.
Again, I'd think that everyone would.
> Audio only, even if reasonably good reproduction, is a poor
> substitute which suffices as background, especially when on the move, or
> acts as a compromise in lieu of an audio-visual representation.
It all depends on what an audio-visual representation is representing,
though, doesn't it? Yes, I should prefer an audio-visual
representation of Caruso rather than simply the available acoustic
recordings, but if that's all that is available, then I can take
pleasure in them and not negate them simply because of the absence of
something I might regard as preferable.
A poor
> reproduction, be it the acoustic recordings, or indeed recent efforts
> from some bloke sat in the audience with a UHER, often have a passing
> interest, but when it comes to listening to opera - as opposed to
> worshipping singers - audio-visual is the closest we currently have,
> short of live, that emulates the composers' wishes.
Well that's one opinon, but how many audio visual (or live)
productions of, for example, Otello or the Ring does one see that
emulate the composer's wishes? Both have extremely precise stage
instructions and direction by the composers, but the immense (and oft
commented upon in this group) variations in production, both old and
modern, that one sees frequently and radically depart from these
wishes. That doesn't negate them in any way, but neither can one
contend that the simple fact of audio-visual production per se
emulates the composers' wishes.
>I just don't see
> how anyone can get the richness or atmosphere of the orchestration
> through these facsimiles, let alone any sense of the dramaturgy of the
> opera.
Correct, one can't get any sense of the atmosphere of the
orchestration in old acoustical recordings. But one can be immensely
moved by the singer's voice and the conveying of emotion through that
voice.
> To be honest I think there is a lot of pretentious macho posturing on
> newsgroups such as these. And in addition to that,I find that often, the people who are the
> quickest to condemn someone for enjoying an album of arias by Jonas
> Kaufmann, Anna Netrebko, Dmitri Hvorostovsky etc as being lightweight,
> part-timers and noobs
I can't recall anyone referring to any of the above as 'lightweight,
part-timers or noobs(?)'. I can't recall anyone condemnig anyone for
saying that they enjoyed any of their albums. There are a few (whose
opinions I don't share) who don't like the Kaufman album, for example.
That's different from condemning someone for enjoying it, surely? You
may like to listen to Andrea Bocelli albums for all I know - it's your
choice and how could anyone possibly condemn you for it? Personally, I
think Kaufman - live and his albums - a sensation, as I do Netrebko.
> So, in a nutshell, I think that life is way too short to get exercised
> about primitive recordings of a small range of arias from a small number
> of operas when there are decent recordings and performances of four
> centuries of opera that go undiscussed on this newsgroup
Well everybody has the choice on how to spend their time - the two
aren't mutually exclusive, are they?
> I don't suppose there are that many people who can honestly say that they love
> operas spread over 401 years.
I suspect there are a lot more than you assume. There are at least two
that I know of - you and me.
JKH
LT
> If you are not prepared to say to someone face to face or voice to
> voice on what you post on a computer I don't think you should post
> it.
Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
Specimens and their associated Scum.
> What you see is what you get. If you don't like it, well fuck off and
> hard luck.
Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
Specimens and their associated Scum.
Steve Silverman
>><alanwa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:26495b3e-6837-4b0f...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> > If you are not prepared to say to someone face to face or voice to
> > voice on what you post on a computer I don't think you should post
> > it.
> Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
> VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
> each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
> Specimens and their associated Scum.
This seems like an appropriate time to remind you of your repeated refusals
to engage me in a phone call (at my expense) to discuss our differences
man-to-man. The offer remains open, by the way.
The false sense of optimism engendered by the recent bout of Tillman-free
sanity on this newgroup persuaded me to remove all my filters. As the real
Tillman has now returned, it's clearly time to reinstate them.
Steve Silverman
wkasimer
> > Jolson is one of the few whose recordings ranged from acoustic all the
> > way to the advent of stereo! Gigli was another.
>
> And Bjorling another.
Yeah, but the acoustics were recorded when he was ten years old, or
something like that.
Didn't Martinelli make one stereo record when he was nearly 80? He'd
been in retirement for ages.
Also, Melchior, whose recording career began in 1913 or so, as a
baritone, performed and recorded a quite respectable first act of
Walkure in 1960.
Flagstad recorded as early as 1914, and as late as 1960.
Bill
LT
Sniv SwillVermin farted:
> This seems like an appropriate time to remind you of what a jerkoff I am, and your just refusals
> to waste time with a phone call (at my expense) to discuss our differences, namely my shithood and your manhood,
> man-to-man.
Problem:
You're a piece of filth - hence, not a man.
Tell me, who indulges in phone contacts with psycho-dreck like
yourself, Swill? Not I!
>My lying mouth remains open, by the way.
SO we see!
>Blaaaaah
SO we hear!
Up thine, Swine.
Mark
>
> Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
> VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
> each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
> Specimens and their associated Scum.
for most of us.
Raff Martino
> very specific connection between Jolson, Caruso and Puccini ?
>
> JKH
--------
Would that be the legal case surrounding the song "Avalon"?
Raff Martino
> newsgroups such as these.
>
> And in addition to that,I find that often, the people who are the
> quickest to condemn someone for enjoying an album of arias by Jonas
> Kaufmann, Anna Netrebko, Dmitri Hvorostovsky etc as being lightweight,
> part-timers and noobs are often those who get all worked up over a
> presentation of disembodied arias by someone who's been dead a century.
With a reference to the tale end of your reply to JHK, my recorded
collection spans pretty much the entire history of recorded opera (as
I would suggest, 99.9% of members here, I reckon).
I think the accusations of being lightweight come about because the
examples you've picked are singers who do not (yet) have the vocal
weight and personality to carry off the big dramatic roles. I recall
a time when operagoers were bewailing a lack of specialist belcanto
singers and that there was a surfeit of those singing in the spinto or
dramatic repertoire; it's turned round at the moment, but to those who
miss the big powerful voices, I've been saying for as long as I've
been commenting on sites such as this that it is cyclical and the
singers capable of singing these heavy roles are starting to appear
again.
I've also commented that the lauded singers of the fifties and sixties
very often had mixed critiques, and that generation "didn't have a
patch on those of the twenties and thirties" and so on......and as for
Caruso....his fellow Neapolitans had no time for him because De Lucia
was still the big spaghetti in town!
LT
> On May 10, 7:56 pm, LT <NoCLOONARDT2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
> > VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
> > each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
> > Specimens and their associated Scum.
MucketyF%^K-head says:
>Woo woo Tillmayonnaise right from da pp.
Shut your hole, Merdy.
LT
> > If you are not prepared to say to someone face to face or voice to
> > voice on what you post on a computer I don't think you should post
> > it.
>
> Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
> VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
> each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
> Specimens and their associated Scum.
Yes, all their associated Scum.
> > What you see is what you get. If you don't like it, well fuck off and
> > hard luck.
>
> Forwarded to La Stinkie Bollmann and each of its 'alters'; to La
> VanderFaaaaaaaaaart and all ITS 'alters', and to Muck SleightTurd,
> each of its ill-played 'keyboards', and to all other RMO Scum-
> Specimens and their associated Scum.
Yes, all their associated Scum.
JKH
> On May 10, 5:42 pm, JKH <jkharn...@jkharnedy.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> > And Bjorling another.
>
> Yeah, but the acoustics were recorded when he was ten years old, or
> something like that.
True, Bill - but just as remarkable, though?
>
> Didn't Martinelli make one stereo record when he was nearly 80? He'd
> been in retirement for ages.
He certainly sang the Emperor Altuom in advanced old age - in 1969 I
think?
>
JKH
JKH
It would indeed. I once heard that the action earned more for Puccini
than Tosca ever did. Does anyone know whether this true?
JKH
jrw
I think you are wrong here, the reason being that listening to
historical voices has its place, especially in an opera newsgroup.
Singing has changed over the course of the last century, and so has,
thankfully, acting. Should it have the dominance that it has here,
then I would agree, because for the most part there is too much
sentiment fortified with nostalgia distorted by memory.
Those who go on ad infinitum about how wounderful a particular singer
was in the year dot, are in my view, the least intellectual
contributors here. If one was to tease out the many meanings that
Mozart and his librettist were trying to convey in Die Zauberflote
with out reference to a singer you would be a lone voice here except
for a notable few.
I think if you are an expert on a narrow repertoire then that would
suffice in my view. I accept that there is so much for me to discover
in this particular art form, it is part of the great adventure that is
opera.
Best regards
John
jrw
Despite my obvious respect for you and your wisdom for all things
operatic I have to take exception to your rather crude response to La
Donna. One is entitled to take issue with Katherine Jenkins over her
claims that she is an opera singer, she has stated that she wants to
perform the lead role in 'Carmen', something that is entirely bogus.
Bocelli, is an outright fraud, in the sense that he also makes
unsubstantiated claims about his career choices.
Phoning up Charles to give a poor, and that is in every sense of the
word, man an earful is pretty poor show. Correspondence should remain
here unless both parties agree. I might have some sympathy for your
particular point of view when it comes to Charles, but I would never
phone the guy up to insult him, see the bigger picture, it has no real
importance.
I would advise anyone against voicing the same insults that they issue
here when they meet someone face to face. Calling someone a semi-
literate cunt after a short discussion could result in an injury, it
just might be you that is looking for disability benefits.
Why bother going down this particular path anyway, you have the
respect and the deference of most here, taking issue with Charles is a
total waste of time, best ignore him is my sage advice...
Best regards
John
LT
> > To be honest I think there is a lot of pretentious macho posturing on
> > newsgroups such as these.
>
> > And in addition to that,I find that often, the people who are the
> > quickest to condemn someone for enjoying an album of arias by Jonas
> > Kaufmann, Anna Netrebko, Dmitri Hvorostovsky etc as being lightweight,
> > part-timers and noobs are often those who get all worked up over a
> > presentation of disembodied arias by someone who's been dead a century.
>
> =========
> With a reference to the tale end of your reply to JHK, my recorded
> collection spans pretty much the entire history of recorded opera (as
> I would suggest, 99.9% of members here, I reckon).
>
> I think the accusations of being lightweight come about because the
> examples you've picked are singers who do not (yet) have the vocal
> weight and personality to carry off the big dramatic roles. I recall
> a time when operagoers were bewailing a lack of specialist belcanto
> singers and that there was a surfeit of those singing in the spinto or
> dramatic repertoire; it's turned round at the moment, but to those who
> miss the big powerful voices, I've been saying for as long as I've
> been commenting on sites such as this that it is cyclical and the
> singers capable of singing these heavy roles are starting to appear
> again.
Slowly - but surely, I'd say. Kaufmann is an example. What rep he'll
take remains to be seen.
> I've also commented that the lauded singers of the fifties and sixties
> very often had mixed critiques
Yes; that's still evident here.
> and that generation "didn't have a
> patch on those of the twenties and thirties" and so on......and as for
> Caruso....his fellow Neapolitans had no time for him because De Lucia
> was still the big spaghetti in town!
Sauce and all! When hearing De Lucia's recordings, it can be
understood why.
LT
What do you think of Martinelli's advice to his pupils, in later
years, concerning breath-support, ie, 'regarding it as a sort of
fountain, the air/"water" balancing a ball'?
Best
LT
Best
LT
La Donna Mobile
Note to self: short sentences work better.
It seems that my meaning was less than clear.
I have read in various places, probably including here, that people who
listen to aria albums are lightweight, part-timers and noobs. That isn't
suggesting that the above three singers are. I like them all
tremendously. I have aria albums by all of them. I enjoy listening to
aria albums.
LT
>[....] Bocelli, is an outright fraud, in the sense that he also makes
> unsubstantiated claims about his career >choices.
Rather decent recording of 'Boheme', some years ago, opposite
Frittoli; some 'Werther' performances, too. 'Otello' and 'Manrico',
he'd best leave for others.
> Phoning up Charles to give a poor, and that is in every sense of the
> word, man an earful is pretty poor show. Correspondence should remain
> here unless both parties agree.
I'd have to agree, here, with John - and have said so; better yet, the
correspondence might simply finish-off altogether, since endless
slanging-redundance is its only 'reward', as my 'worthy opponents'
continue demonstrating.
>I might have some sympathy for your
> particular point of view when it comes to Charles, but I would never
> phone the guy up to insult him, see the bigger picture, it has no real
> importance.
>Calling someone a semi-
> literate cunt after a short discussion >could result in an injury,
Or at the very least, an error, given that RMO's denizenry includes
many a *literate* one. Never a shortage of them, really.
La Donna Mobile
of them irreconcilable, but this post illustrates your fundamental
decency. You seem one of the few people here capable of standing up to
bullies. Too many of the rest, I think, just want to be in the right
Gang. Which is all a bit pathetic on the internet.
LT
> > Why bother going down this particular path anyway, you have the
> > respect and the deference of most here, taking issue with Charles is a
> > total waste of time, best ignore him is my sage advice...
>
> > Best regards
>
> > John
>
> Thank you for this post, John. We have our differences of opinion, some
> of them irreconcilable, but this post illustrates your fundamental
> decency. You seem one of the few people here capable of standing up to
> bullies.
>Too many of the rest, I think, just want to be in the right
> Gang. Which is all a bit pathetic on the >internet.
<Ahem!> Bingo!
And considerably more than "a bit", really.
L. 'We don' neeeeed no Steeeeeeeenin' Gang' T.
La Donna Mobile
I think to a certain extent I was being deliberately provocative and
posting an extreme position.
I think there is a some value in being aware of how singing has changed
over the past 100 years. I think there is value for in history for
history's sake. When it comes to enjoying music, getting myself to a
place where I can let it soak into me, and where I can (try to )
appreciate what is written, I like the sound to be faithful. Obviously,
the best place to do this is in an acoustically good seat in a live
performance.
Given that that isn't possible all day and every day, and given that
recordings exist, I think that the most faithful sound, and thus the one
that is closest to the composer's (or, at least, the performers')
intentions, is one where the recording is reasonably sophisticated. Part
of that experience, for me, is listening to voices that I find
beautiful. It's an extension (and expansion) of there being musical
instruments I find beautiful. I have CDs that I play on a reasonably
good Hi-Fi at home and also play on my mp3 player, compressed, with less
than ideal headphones, often with all sorts of exterior noises, and I
can really feel a difference.
I certainly agree that there are a great many DVDs that do not
faithfully produce the detail the composer would be familiar with, but I
suppose what I meant by that was that in the main, the composer intended
that the work would be performed as an acted-out partly-visual thing. I
don't really believe that this therefore makes either concert
performances or audio-only recordings invalid - and I have enough CDs
and have attended and enjoyed sufficient concert performances. But I
still contend that the more detail one gets, the truer the 'performance'.
For me, and I know I am not alone, an early primitive recording of
excerpts is so far removed from how that opera would come over in the
theatre, it's almost a different creature. Otello is an unfortunate
choice for illustrative purposes as far as I'm concerned, but if I was
given a situation where I had to listen to one version of Otello (but
not allowed to choose any with Placido in) I am pretty certain that I
would choose a live performance with say Jose Cura (pending Jonas
Kaufmann taking on the role), and failing that, a DVD with say Cura,
before I would choose an audio-only, be it with Cura or del Monaco.
Highlights from Tamagno would be probably way down the bottom
Ken Meltzer
I think Martinelli sang Altoum a few years before that. He died in
February of 1969.
Martinelli made several recordings in the last years of his life. One
that is often discussed is his recording of Dick Johnson's Act II aria
from Fanciulla. The date listed on the Martinelli set from which I've
taken this excerpt is 1968-one year before his death. I seem to
recall that the recording was made a few years earlier. But in any
event, the authority and fearlessness of his singing is really quite
amazing.
I've uploaded the excerpt to "Opera Clips Ancora".
Best,
Ken
Ancona21
> What do you think of Martinelli's advice to his pupils, in later
> years, concerning breath-support, ie, 'regarding it as a sort of
> fountain, the air/"water" balancing a ball'?
>
> Best
> LT
>
Much more important is what do _you_ think of it TillyBird? Didn't
Madame Ma Kettle teach you that it is arrant nonsense? Please reply in
English.
Ancona21
Abednego Schwartz
Best
LT>
More crapola from dipshit Tillman.
Abe Schwartz
LT
overdue, aneurism, albeit a brainless, genderless quim.
wkasimer
> Martinellimade several recordings in the last years of his life. One
> that is often discussed is his recording of Dick Johnson's Act II aria
> from Fanciulla. The date listed on theMartinelliset from which I've
> taken this excerpt is 1968-one year before his death. I seem to
> recall that the recording was made a few years earlier.
Hi, Ken -
That's the recording I was thinking of - it was on an Italian RCA LP,
and 1962 is rattling around my cranium...
Bill
Ken Meltzer
Hi Bill-
Yes, I have that LP as well, the one that includes a spoken
introduction by Martinelli.
Best,
Ken
Shiral
wrote:
> On May 10, 11:18�pm, La Donna Mobile <enidlar...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
> > that opera is a unique (maybe...!) artform that combines music and
> > drama, I prefer to watch and listen simultaneously to a meaningful
> > substitute which suffices as background, especially when on the move, or
> > reproduction, be it the acoustic recordings, or indeed recent efforts
> > from some bloke sat in the audience with a UHER, often have a passing
> > interest, but when it comes to listening to opera - as opposed to
> > worshipping singers - audio-visual is the closest we currently have,
> > how anyone can get the richness or atmosphere of the orchestration
> > through these facsimiles, let alone any sense of the dramaturgy of the
> > opera.
>
> > newsgroups such as these.
>
> > And in addition to that,I find that often, the people who are the
> > quickest to condemn someone for enjoying an album of arias by Jonas
> > Kaufmann, Anna Netrebko, Dmitri Hvorostovsky etc as being lightweight,
> > presentation of disembodied arias by someone who's been dead a century.
> > show "Oh look at how intellectual I am," whilst often betraying a
> > crashing ignorance of music, orchestration and dramaturgy. I'm sure they
> > all claim it's about respecting history, but I'm afraid I find that a
> > pile of rubbish, a)because most of them don't have a clue about �the
> > historical context of the opera's setting (oh no! someone's portrayed
> > the Duke of Mantua's court as debauched, may they rot in hell) and b)
> > many of them think that opera is something written by less than �dozen
> > composers between about 1780 and 1925 and are entirely dismissive of
> > composers and their work outside those periods.
>
> > So, in a nutshell, I think that life is way too short to get exercised
> > about primitive recordings of a small range of arias from a small number
> > of operas when there are decent recordings and performances of four
> > if they are discussed it's in terms of 'how boring'. My operatic
> > interests stretch from 1607 (L'Orfeo) to 2008 (The Minotaur). I don't
> > suppose there are that many people who can honestly say that they love
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Agreed. But I think you and Mrs Terfel (or whatever) have done your
> fair share in crossover terms of dumping in the "Look, how
> intellectual I am?" on this group: indeed did not you not set up your
> own group to do so and to show how intellectual you are by doing so. I
> am sure you know better to take the piss out of Jenkins and Co BECAUSE
> YOU KNOW BETTER?
>
> Fair enough. That's why I rang up Handleman and told him to fuck
> off. He's bloody lucky he didn't get the full thing.
>
> And so are you.
>
> If you are not prepared to say to someone face to face or voice to
> voice on what you post on a computer I don't think you should post
> it.
>
> I don't write under any name other than mine. The email addy is
> valid.
>
> What you see is what you get. If you don't like it, well fuck off and
> hard luck.
>
>
> Try not looking for Disability Benefits (I know it's hard as it's
> built in) in the case of Handelman.
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkins- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's bad enough to insult other people on usenet. It's really ugly and
bullying to threaten to call them up and threaten and insult them
further. Turn off your computer and take a long walk, take a cold
shower, wait twenty-four hours to answer, ask yourself if you'd speak
to someone sitting in your livingroom that way. Whatever you have to
do to calm down.
As for Bocelli and Katherine Jenkins, each of them can sing an
operatic aria here and there into a microphone when they're backed
up by a sound system. If each of them stuck to that, I'd have no
quarrel with them, even if I didn't become a fan of theirs. But if you
were to put either of them in costume and push them onstage to sing a
full length operatic performance without a microphone in sight, they'd
both come to grief long before the final curtain, assuming they'd
actually memorized the part in the first place. Until and unless they
reach a technical level that allows them to do that and live to take
their bows, they do not have the right to call themselves opera
singers.
Melissa
LT
>It's bad enough to insult other people on usenet. It's really ugly and
> bullying to threaten to call them up and threaten and insult them
> further.
A similar but plainly contrived, ergo despicable, version of it, the
practice of some, is to 'goad' *others* to make calls that will
obviously result in nothing but further hostilities, and then play
'victim', after themselves hoping for that exact outcome.
Fortunately, no one's very likely to fall for the scam, nor have they
done so, afaik.
Silverfin
Seconded.
I have no problem with people who are ignorant and/or incompetent in
given areas of knowledge or skill (musical or otherwise). Do we not
each have areas in which we are ignorant and/or incompetent? Not
through any deficiency, but because we all have to prioritise the use
of our time and energy. The problem I have is with those people who
claim knowledge/ understanding/ skill/ experience/ etc. which they do
not have. (This applies both to slebs and the rest of us.) Or those
who place great weight on their own areas of knowledge/skill and none
on their areas of ignorance, while failing to respect other people's
differing priorities.
On the topic of early recordings, I can see where the different POVs
are coming from, I think. Personally, I am very glad that these early
acoustic recordings exist, and glad for the many people who genuinely
enjoy listening to them. Personally, I'm with LDM, though; I dislike
the sound of early recordings. Those that I have heard* have a narrow
range of frequencies reproduced so the vocals sound flat (of tone, not
pitch), dynamics and balance are limited, and the orchestra a single
mush where you can barely pick out the different instruments. I can
suggest a couple of psychoacoustic reasons for why this sort of thing
bothers some people and not others.
(1) The brain can 'hear' things that aren't there. If you were at a
particular performance, or knew the sound of a particular artist very
well, then on hearing a bad recording, your brain would 'fill in the
cracks' from memory. This
enables you to hear the music in a way quite different from someone
who had never heard the artist or the piece before.
(2) The brain cannot 'hear' things that are there. Everyone's past
listening experiences prime them for what they hear in the future.
Some people's brains are remarkably good at filtering out unwanted
background noise, or picking out the aspects of an audio experience
that they are attuned to, while ignoring aspects that do not interest
them.
(3) People's ears are physically different. Particularly in the
ability to register very high frequencies, i.e. the harmonics
(partials to Americans?) that give a tone much of its colour. Age
generally plays a part in this; no idea how relevant that is here,
though.
Incidentally, the majority of my opera intake is audio-only
recordings, in which I have a general idea of what they're singing
about, but don't understand the words very well. Not that I don't like
watching opera too, or understand that it's a visual and linguistic
art form, but I can enjoy it very much as a pure audio experience.
It's probably the coming from an symphonic/instrumental background
that does it - I get all wrapped up in the music and forget that
there's words and a story too. I quite understand that many people
will think this is very odd, but hopefully accept it as just one of
those differences, de gustibus and all that.
Silverfin
* I am _always_ willing to listen to recordings posted by people who
wish to convince me that my opinions are poorly-founded. Sometimes I
am convinced.
LT
My POV:
Were your and Melissa's POVs more prevalent, how infinitely finer, not
only this group, but anyplace, would be.
Best,
LT
> watching ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Samurai
that are virtually unknown nationally but are better than some people
singing big roles at the Met. I also know that very, very few opera
singers ever make commercial recordings. Imagine, then, how few
singers left samples of their singing from early in the century. Many
of those whom I have heard had thin, trembling, piercing voices, and
eccentric musicianship. Caruso set the standard for the modern tenor
although few have measured up. His records give us a burnished, dark
sound with little vibrato, and no nasality, combined with power,
brilliant ring, and strong emotion. He was also a careful, polished
musician after his early years. Martinelli had great technique but
didn't have a Caruso quality voice. Gigli had a much lighter voice
than Caruso and relied more on head voice and dynamic variety. But
there are similarities to Caruso in balance of resonance, covered high
notes, and minimal vibrato. Some of the pre-Caruso tenors and
contemporaries may have had easy high notes at C and above, as well as
great ability in florid singing, skills which may have become more
rare in the era of Puccini and heavy orchestration. Overall, we can
only guess about the general standards of vocalism prevailing before
WWI, especially for female voices, which seem to have recorded poorly
at that time.
Samurai
Silverfin
<snipped>
> Overall, we can
> only guess about the general standards of vocalism prevailing before
> WWI, especially for female voices, which seem to have recorded poorly
> at that time.
>
That would fit with my suggestion of high frequencies not being picked
up so well by early recording equipment. Flute recordings from that
period sound pretty bad to me too.
Silverfin
Faye xx
> >
> It's bad enough to insult other people on usenet. It's really ugly and
> bullying to threaten to call them up and threaten and insult them
> further. Turn off your computer and take a long walk, take a cold
> shower, wait twenty-four hours to answer, ask yourself if you'd speak
> to someone sitting in your livingroom that way. Whatever you have to
> do to calm down.
>
I agree entirely. We all have our differences of opinion but is it
really necessary to sink to such a level and resort to threats and
intimidation towards those we disagree with? One of the reasons I
don't post on RMO as often as I used to is because all this nastiness
gets in the way of having decent discussions about opera - and I'm
sure this puts lots of other people off too.
> As for Bocelli and Katherine Jenkins, each of them can sing an
> operatic aria here and there into a microphone when they're backed
> up by a sound system. If each of them stuck to that, I'd have no
> quarrel with them, even if I didn't become a fan of theirs. But if you
> were to put either of them in costume and push them onstage to sing a
> full length operatic performance without a microphone in sight, they'd
> both come to grief long before the final curtain, assuming they'd
> actually memorized the part in the first place. Until and unless they
> reach a technical level that allows them to do that and live to take
> their bows, they do not have the right to call themselves opera
> singers.
>
As I've mentioned several times before, as soon as KJ stops
inaccurately claiming to be an opera singer and writing things on her
official website dissing other opera singers as being stereotypically
frumpy, overweight and aloof then I'll stop taking the piss out of
her.
Faye (former Mrs T xx)
LT
La Diqface VanDerFruit, aka 'Up-the-Bum', puked:
>)(*&^%$
Seems that Ol' Ped-Agog hasn't a mouth, but two rectums, the upper of
which is heard from on the 'net.
> > What do you think of Martinelli's advice to his pupils, in later
> > years, concerning breath-support, ie, 'regarding it as a sort of
> > fountain, the air/"water" balancing a ball'?
>
> > Best
> > LT
>
> Much more important is what.....
To me, what's important is what I asked, you effeminate old psychotic.
> Madame Ma Kettle
What has Marjorie Main to do with this discussion, VandDerGargoyle?
Percy Kilbride would have beaten the crap out of you in an instance;
result? The VanderVanishing! Gone - the VanDerDreck, once and for
all.
> English VanDerDreck
Sounds more like Quasi-Dutch VanDerDreck to us.
LT
Could you quit providing such straight lines?
JKH
> La Donna Mobile wrote:
>Note to self: short sentences work better.
>
> It seems that my meaning was less than clear.
>
> I have read in various places, probably including here, that people who
> listen to aria albums are lightweight, part-timers and noobs.
Well more fool them, I say. It's their loss if they shun aria albums.
It reminds me of the sort of pseudo one all too frequently encounters
at operas and concerts here in the UK - and I assume worldwide. I
remember one ghastly woman at a Ruggiero Raimondi concert some years
ago. At the end, after a wonderful evening, I overheard her saying
that it was allright, but what ruined it for her was (wait for it)
"All those musical illiterates who were tapping their feet to the
music".
> That isn't suggesting that the above three singers are. I like them all
> tremendously. I have aria albums by all of them. I enjoy listening to
> aria albums.-
Snap - less so perhaps with Hvorotsovsky who is not at the top of my
list of baritones, but with whom I've never been less than pleased
when I've seen him.
JKH
JKH
> I think to a certain extent I was being deliberately provocative and posting an extreme position
I shouldn't be too worried about that - with the plethora of nutters
who contribute to this group a post which only said "I like opera"
would be provocative.
> I think that the most faithful sound, and thus the one
> that is closest to the composer's (or, at least, the performers')
> intentions, is one where the recording is reasonably sophisticated. Part
> of that experience, for me, is listening to voices that I find
> beautiful. It's an extension (and expansion) of there being musical
> instruments I find beautiful. I have CDs that I play on a reasonably
> good Hi-Fi at home and also play on my mp3 player, compressed, with less
> than ideal headphones, often with all sorts of exterior noises, and I
> can really feel a difference.
>
> I certainly agree that there are a great many DVDs that do not
> faithfully produce the detail the composer would be familiar with, but I
> suppose what I meant by that was that in the main, the composer intended
> that the work would be performed as an acted-out partly-visual thing. I
> don't really believe that this therefore makes either concert
> performances or audio-only recordings invalid - and I have enough CDs
> and have attended and enjoyed sufficient concert performances. But I
> still contend that the more detail one gets, the truer the 'performance'.
I understand perfectly what you mean. Indeed I think that every
recorded performance of whatever description is a compromise - it's
the degree of that compromise and its realtion to individual taste and
prefences which makes it more (or less) acceptable. And without
getting too Platonist about it, the 'true' or 'ideal' performance can
perhaps only exist in the 'mind's ear'. Your point about recording
quality/fidelity is a very interesting one in relation to this, and
coincidentally something that I've been thinking about recently in
relation to the following two examples.
The first is the opening of Don Carlo in the Muti/Scala recording with
Pavarotti/Ramey et al. I have it both on DVD and CD and recently was
very struck by the Friar, sung by Antonio Silvestrelli. I was very
impressed with his voice and almost played the DVD to death. Switching
to the CD, with a different recording/remastering etc, the voice did
not seem anywhere near as impressive. What was the truth? I don't
know.
The other is the opening bars of Rheingold, up to Alberich's entrance.
I did a comparative listen to a few recordings the other day - Solti,
Goodall, Furtwangler, Bohm, Levine, Janowski etc. Not an exhaustive
survey obviously, but each one sounded remarkably different - so much
so that I'm sure I could have convinced myself that they were playing
different scores. Recorded balance, internal balancing in the
orchestra by the conductor, venue, acoustics etc (even leaving aside
tempo considerations) all combine to differing effect - but the truth?
I'm sure I'm not the only one whose 'truth' in this context changes
from day to day.
>
> For me, and I know I am not alone, an early primitive recording of
> excerpts is so far removed from how that opera would come over in the
> theatre, it's almost a different creature.
You're certainly not alone. My partner (who is a keen opera and
concert goer, loves singing) doesn't get what she refers to as
'scratchy tenors'. I think it's also very easy to be so wedded to, or
obsessed with, historical recordings that one can be self-deluding and
think that the rare 1903 G&T of Sgr Piccalilli (or whoever) singing
'Donald where's yr troosers' has immense musical merit when it
actually unlistenable rubbish. A quick skim through the first volume
of The Record of Singing will reveal a number of candidates. But when
a voice is something special, then even those primitive recordings I
find revealing of truth - whatever one's personal definition of that
might be.
>...if I was given a situation where I had to listen to one version of Otello (but not allowed to choose any with Placido in) I am pretty certain that I
> would choose a live performance with say Jose Cura (pending Jonas Kaufmann taking on the role),
In my opinion Kaufman already knocks spots off Cura, and that spot-kn
ocking can only increase. I look forward to his eventual Otello
immensely.
> Highlights from Tamagno would be probably way down the bottom
Tamagno wouldn't be my first choice if I wanted to listen to a
performance (I'd probably opt for Vinay) but I'd ceratinly be using
his recotdings as a reference point and something to take pleasure in
in their own right.
JKH
LT
I'd add to that, Manrico, Alvaro, and Radames.
> > Highlights from Tamagno would be probably way down the bottom
>
> Tamagno wouldn't be my first choice if I wanted to listen to a
> performance (I'd probably opt for Vinay) but I'd ceratinly be using
> his recotdings as a reference point and something to take pleasure in
> in their own right.
Aside from the obvious lament that Corelli's rep didn't include
Otello, I'd want to have heard Lauri-Volpi, judging from several
excerpts he recorded. He seemed a forerunner of Corelli, style-wise.
>
> JKH- Hide quoted text -
Shiral
In her book _My Memoirs in Pictures_ Birgit Nilsson, whom I and many
other people, count as one of the greats of the twentieth century,
wrote the following under a photo of herself singing into an antique
recording device looking like a huge funnel. She says and I quote: " A
guessing game was arranged during a weekend broadcast from the
Met...in which leading music critics were asked to guess the identity
of a singer based on a clip of Sieglinde's role from Die Walkure. (Ms
Nilsson had sung that excerpt herself with the old equipment.) And
none of the critics guessed it was I. One of them said that whoever
the voice belonged to, she could never have been an important singer.
Ever since, I have been much more careful about criticizing past
artists on the basis of old recordings."
Considering recording technology was in it's infancy at the start of
the twentieth century, it seems a miracle we have any idea what the
great singers from that era truly sounded like. It's a pity we can
bring them forward and record them properly with the technology now
and see if our impressions of them, both positive and negative, remain
the same.
Melissa
Ortrud Jones
Listen, bitch - it appears that more than one poster misconstrues the
intent of your posts, yet you like to demean or insult the people who
don't. You are a pathetic, pretentious, horrid little person. Oh yes,
and I almost fell asleep reading your "blog" Fuck you.
-OK-J
PS: and go brush your teeth. We all know how Brits avoid dental
hygiene until the teeth rot and fall out.