Works That Never Seem To Work (No. 3: Verdi's La Traviata)
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2023
- The opera remains a perennial favorite and never fails to tug at the heartstrings on stage, and yet you could argue convincingly that we still await the ideal recording--and the ideal soprano in the title role. What's the problem? Did Verdi create a character so rich in possibilities that no single artist has yet measured up to his demands?
- Hudba
Unattainable is the word; Brahms was once asked which performance of one of his symphonies that he had heard was his favorite, he replied “the one in my head” - perhaps that will be the fate for Violeta as well - fascinating talk as usual…
There are similar arguments for some Shakespeare, particularly King Lear, that the role is so difficult to get right that it’s almost better read than staged.
Nonsense. Paul Scofield gets it exactly right in Peter Brook's 1971 film.
@@davidblackburn3396 Okay.
@@Tolstoy111 Michael Hordern, yes. I agree. Olivier was superb as well. What I should have said was, Scofield for one got it right.
I had the luck to hear Sills in 1971 [early enough to be superb both vocally and dramatically] in a concert performance of Traviata and she was unforgettable.
My late friend Earl Chapin, who had been a busy NY horn free-lancer (including in the ASO under Stoky), told me of the curse of the Brahms 3rd -- and not the curse of lousy performances, as you've described. Music stands would topple over, strings would break, horns would become waterlogged -- it was always something. Plus the 3rd movement was often used as "trouble music" for radio stations, the piece they would go to when a live feed failed or something else snafued. So much so that when my station would go dark due to a power failure or some such disaster, his wife and he would spontaneously sing the opening tune.
Ah yes!
For me the 3rd movement of the 3rd symphony was an "ear worm" that took some time to shake.
Soap operas favored it, too.
Alright. Here's something I know a little about. As an opera conductor and coach, I can say the hardest thing musically in this opera is getting the pacing of the second act (both scenes) right. In the Violetta/Germont scene, there are many, many places where either singer wants to hold out certain hotes or overdo certain cadences. It always slows down the scene. When those singers get to the places where the real heartache could land with the audience, the scene has already gotten waterlogged. This is NOT a scene that can be played, sung or conducted "in the moment" or "organically" (which more often than not means I'm going to do whatever I want and I want you to follow me). The long scene can become episodic. The big concertante which ends the act can sound grandiose and pompous if the tempo is too slow. Toscanini maybe did certain scenes too fast in his live recording of Traviata, but he got the all important second act RIGHT. It's taut and heartbreaking. Kleiber did too, in very different ways. Yes, it's a diva opera, but the conductor MUST be in charge of the second act. End of opinion. Love the channel, love the discussions, and thank you for asking for our thoughts!
And thank you for giving us such a splendidly informed analysis!
I just finished listening to Cheryl Studer, conducted by Levine. I'm shaken and overwhelmed. I've tried so many times to get into 19th century opera-never did I think I'd be moved the way I am by Mahler and Schubert and late Beethoven and all the non-opera music so dear to me.
Given enough perspective, this recording might also fall under the curse. But for at least one new listener, it was game-changing!
Spot on, Mr. H.! It's also about having a conductor, tenor, and baritone who acquit themselves notably. Even conductors such as Toscanini and Monteux miss the mark, and all the studio recordings have some flaw. There are two or three live performances that are superior, but then one has to deal with bad recorded sound or supporting casts that are not ideal. All in all, you are 100% correct: the ideal Traviata has yet to be recorded. (Or seen by me!)
I don't worry about the coloratura in Traviata. Singers who can handle the roulades, runs, etc. without panic, even if their execution of them is not so sharply delineated as, say, Sills or Sutherland singing that music, are doing just fine. What counts in Traviata is the MORBIDEZZA. The singer, in my book, who draws out the greatest degree of morbidezza and feeling from Violetta's music was Tebaldi. Her studio recording is intensely moving, just the most committed recording ever, ever, EVER! In the face of that tragic vision and realisation, I can do without Sutherland's precision, impressive as it is on its own terms. Tebaldi touches the heart ,more deeply than any other soprano in this role, as I see it. Tucci succeeded in the same manner, and in her case, I was at one of her live Violettas. This is what counts most optimally. My father died (at 29 years old!) of TB, and his death actually was just like Violetta's, wild swings of mood, sudden feverish hope, then, collapse and death. Verdi knew how TB takes its victimes.
The gorgeous phrasing and tonal control that Tebaldi brought are part of the secret of her artistic and dramatic success as Violetta Valéry. Her complete control of tonal emission lets her do wonders of artistic and expressive detail and realisation of dramatic insight. What art! Actually, one other singer who does all of this, with somewhat sharper, but still not quite perfect coloratura where it's needed was Victoria de Los Ángeles, whose rendition is similar to how Cortrubas handles the role so artisitically and movingly, but whose voice, in prime estate, was superiof. De Los Ángeles is also one of the immortal ones as Violetta. As for Alfredo Germont, for me Gedda (with Sills) was tge greatest of recorded tenors in that part, clolse to vocal perfection, full of youthful exuberance and dramatically keen throughout.
How many of us are left who saw Tebaldi perform? She was a fine actress, a staguesquely beautiful woman, and had a voice of incomparable warmth and beauty. She was unforgettable onstage. I especially think of her Adrianna Lecouvreur, attending which was probably the single greatest night that I ever spent in the opera house. But, she was always supreme, just unbelievably beautiful in every way and convincing.
Thanks again for repeating with a bit more added about that aspect of Tebaldi's Violetta. You know, there is a live recording of her singing the role with Serafin conducting which is even superior to the wonderful studio recording, but, alas, di Stefano is the tenor, and he was in terrible form, in the horrid decline that he suffered when his voice was intact, but his intonation and phrasing were in tatters. His Alfredo is so dreadful that he just ruins the opera, despite how Tebaldi excels any other recording of herself in the role of Violetta. Atop that, Serafin conducts with simply amazing sensitivity and depth of understanding. If only di Stefano had stayed home or at the hospital that night!!!
You know, generally back then and even now, I tend to take Callas' side over the stale and pointless Callas vs. Tebaldi feuds. However, I can tell when one or the other of these two trumps the other in some particular repertory staple, and Tebaldi, despite all of the wonderful things that Callas did and aoo of that, Tebaldi's sheer style, solid technic (meaning sound production rather than coloratura prowess per se), and sheer feminity (gawd--how utterly appealing she was!!!!) prevail over the wiles and ways of Callas. That just happened in some roles, one of them being Violetta Valéry.
@@paxpaxart4740 I agree with you completely. I was somewhat interested in that supposed "debate" because I liked both singers so much. One reason that I was not much of a partisan is that I was still a big, big fan of Zinka Milanov, a singer certainly in their own league. There were others of comparable stature, too, such as Scotto, Gencer, Stella, and Cerquetti, So, concentrating on Callas and Tebaldi that way seemed kinda pointless (and it was). Even the "Tosca" with Tebaldi, London, and Del Monaco, in my estimation was at least as thrilling as the one with Callas, di Stéfano, and Gobbi.
I saw Cotrubas at the Chicago Lyric in the early 70s in a revival of the staging originally created for Callas. She was superb and it remains one of my greatest opera experiences in more than 50 years of opera attendance.
For me there is an ideal recording, but it doesn't seem to make many lists: the Votto recording on DG, with a young Scotto, the underrated Raimondi and, of course, Bastianini. Beautifully recorded as well. But I agree that consistent recordings are few and far between!
I agree, even though I think both Callas Scala performances, One with Di Stefano and One with Raimondi, are pretty ideal if you can listen through the sound. Here in Italy Raimondi is not underrated.
Raimondi's Scarpia on the Ricciarelli "Tosca" is pretty thrilling, too. Was this the tenor named Raimondi rather than the bass of the same family name?
@@geraldparker8125 Gianni Raimondi
Thanks. I was having a mental block there! @@UlfilasNZ
Sono contento che lui non sia sottovalutato! @@giannischicchi9577
Thanks so much. Wonderful episode about a masterpiece. One of the great operatic controversies...is Violetta an impossible role and who were the best in the part. Should it be a lyric, spinto, coloratura? A spinto with flexibility? Years ago, I asked a member of an opera orchestra who was the best Violetta he ever saw. He said Greta Garbo. Ha! On commercial/studio recordings I think Renata Scotto in her first DG recording is excellent. I find Toscanini's performance of Traviata too hard-driven in many ways, but going back to listen to it, I still find Albanese's Violetta incredibly moving. A link to an earlier era too. She was born 8 years after Verdi's death. Thanks, again.
After working for 40 years as an opera stage manager, it was a well-known (and oft remarked upon!) fact amongst all my colleagues that the longest scene in the entire operatic canon is Act II, Scene 1 of La Traviata…..‘nuf said!
Evidently they never heard Act I of Parsifal
On record at least, Cotrubas had it all.
I'd certainly agree with the post that proposes the Traviata recordings with Moffo/Tucker/Previtali and Caballe/Bergonzi/Petre--they're first class right down the line (it's possible to argue, as some have, that Moffo was in fact the best Violetta of the '60s--sang it more often and more consistently and had everything the role called for). But my candidate for an all-round Traviata that "works," is the 1959 Serafin-led recording with the 36-year-old de los Angeles/Del Monte/Sereni. De los Angeles was regularly acclaimed in the role at the Met in the '50s, and for good reason. She had a lyric soprano perfectly suited for the intimate exchanges of Act II, but had the coloratura ability for Act I (she sang Rossini successfully), the power for the moments that call for passionate outbursts, and the overall sensitivity to create that special aura of fragility which a Violetta needs in Act III. Perhaps she a bit like Corbrubas in this way--both wonderfully expressive and moving singers. In any case, for me that Traviata, shaped by Serafin's humane approach and somewhat broad tempi, is definitely one that "works."
Agree
I think the problem is that Verdi wrote the role for a coloratura soprano in act 1, a dramatic soprano in act 2, and a lyric soprano in act 3. Callas came closer than anyone else to being all three, but it really isn't achievable. Maybe using three sopranos is the only way to record it properly.
@tomross5347: Based on your name I assume you never sang it, but never have I. However you are TOTALLY WRONG in describing a coloratura, dramatic and lyric soprano as the requirements. “Coloratura” is NOT a soprano but a skill set that sopranos should possess. Your use of dramatic or lyric is a poor choice because the drama requirements are reflected in the score but a good soprano should have coloratura skill and be able to darken her voice in Act 2 and lighten it in Act 3. You act as if the management of an opera house should hire three different singers instead a good one with technique and dramatic insight reflected in the voice when singing.
And no, there are equally or better singers than Callas for this role. Sutherland, Caballe, De Los Angeles, Moffo among others.
Act 2 doesn't have to be a dramatic, more spinto than heavy. "Amami Alfredo" is your heaviest moment.
It's just a damn shame EMI didn't use Callas for the 1955 recording instead of Stella. They could have gotten around the Cetra five year thing.
Any soprano who sung the three main roles of Les Contes de Hoffmann could do so. Joan Sutherland could do so and nevertheless we won´t claim that she was the definitive Traviata. So we need something more.
4:59 - "Maria Callas fans are seldom fairly logical" lmaooo
I find Lorrengar under Maazel beautiful and moving. Arragal is excellent. Fischer-Diskeau is compelling if odd. This is the one I find myself going back to. I also enjoy Gruberova and Scotto under Mutti even if the voice is sometimes not beautiful; so compelling dramatically.
Interesting. I actually think the opera’s questionable on stage because the libretto is well short on substance, although the general arc of the story is otherwise compelling, and the then-contemporary setting of the story is obviously noteworthy. The opera’s not problematic at all, musically, of course-it’s a gem. So I prefer it as a recorded work, although I see your point there too. That said, I quite like the later Scotto / Muti recording; it’s my favorite among the handful I know (and three I own).
Orfeo recorded a 1971 performance with Cotrubas. Very hard to find in physical product land, but usually available to stream. Would be great if Orfeo re-released it on CD...
An interesting comment I read somewhere is that Verdi wrote uninteresting music for Alfredo because he disdained his character. True, that unless the role is a true villain, such as Iago, effective music can only aggrandize the character with the audience. Alfredo, who's basically callow, can't afford to show much spine or depth. He has to actually watch Violetta expire to learn his lesson (presuming he does.)
You nailed it. I made do with Cotrubas (too maudlin in ACT III) and Sutherland I (not idiomatic, no consonants), having backed of Moffo and Caballe and the whole the Callas controversy. Until Ralph Moore (the only opera CD critic to hold a candle to Robert Levine) got me interested in Freni under Gardelli.
How was Freni. ? I haven't heard her do this?
Great! Bruscantini is a bit stodgy as I recall but otherwise no weak links (as Dave would say).@@sanfordpress8943
Don't forget, though, the great Conrad L. Osborn(e?), an exceedingly perceptive opera recordings critic,, my favourite of those years, at that.
The point about Callas is a good one, although I think the logic of the “what if she hadn’t recorded it for Cetra and was available instead of Stella” makes some sense, as it would’ve been recorded in the same year as her famous performance with Giulini and Visconti. (She is fantastic all around there, but I get that the sound in even recent improved remasterings might be too much for some to bear.) But of course that’s all “in hindsight.” In terms of the studio recordings where the Violetta is both in relatively good voice and musically mature - and where the Germont an Alfredo are up to par - the first recording with Votto on DG and the rare recording with Zeani are quite fine. Even Freni is very nice and sensitive, although perhaps not as detailed as the kunst types.
I believe however that Verdi CAN be blamed for a part of the "La Traviata Curse" because he forces the spectator to give in to a puritan-Victorian plot development in act two, which leaves a sour taste in ones mouth as it deprives us the satisfaction of experiencing Violetta and Alfredo defying moral standards and give a damn about Pappa´s plea with a too-little-too-late final act reconciliation which borders somewhere between tragicomical and self-mockery. This casts (at least for me) a shadow over the work as a whole.
Verdi might have felt unable to do otherwise libretto-wise considering the unavoidable censorship and what comes to mind here is Donizettï´s "Linda di Chamounix" from ten years earlier, which could have been a (much more) gripping soul wretcher of an opera gem if it was not for Donizettï´s considerations towards the snarky Viennese censorship. Anyway, Verdi´s music is sublime....
You mistake the story for the composer's endorsement of the moral and cultural context in which it occurs, and so your accusation of "hypocrisy" (however you spell it) is misplaced.
Good grief @@ER1CwC botchering Puccini because of possible Chinese (but not likely to occur) insultedness - all while the Chinese watching a production of Turandot in China probably takes delight in watching and listening to the same three characters and would, if by anything, be insulted (with a good reason) to see them renamed all´americana 🙄
Was Turandot renamed Turandello at the same occasion?
I count the minutes before Monostatos is removed entirely from Zauberflöte - but he can of course be renamed Jeffrey (like Epstein) with look alike makeup!
I don't think you realized that La Traviata is as faithful an adaptation as possible by Verdi and Francesco Maria Piave of the play by Alexandre Dumas Jr. It´s not an original story or an attempt at a Victorian moral lesson on the part of the two Italian writers. Simply a magnificent musical adaptation of the original Dumas that respects by far the language and social uses described by the playwright. Also should be take into account that the censorship in Venice was probably the softest in Italy. Nothing to do with the South.
Verdi undertook the Traviata project, after seeing the play in Paris. Next to him in the performance he attended was his life-long companion, the great singer, and even more amazing woman, called Giuseppina Strepponi. She had two children out of wedlock, and was a stage artist, therefore a "painted woman." Far too "sullied," by that age's standards, to be seen kindly (at least when she was off stage) by Verdi's contemporaries. He (only circumstantially, of course, but quite thoroughly) owed his first success to her championing him and the opera he had composed for her: Nabucco. It is a very hard (even harsh) opera for the soprano, and one which actually helped wreck her voice. He owed her a lot and they loved each other profoundly. But his small-town friends and adoptive family didn't forgive her past. The population of his hometown were cruel to her, and snubbed her, even in church. He actually wrote the opera as an exposé of society's (and its men's) hypocritical treatment of women they themselves have contributed to lead astray ("traviare" in Italian, hence the title; it's meant as an irony). It's the only opera that he insisted on performing in contemporary costume, so that the audience could see itself reflected on the stage. You misunderstand one of the capital pieces of the operatic repertory, I am afraid.
Thank you for contexualizing and referring to the situation around Verdi's relationship with Strepponi which I was not unaware of@@circiter. It is however not a matter of misunderstanding but an, admitted, irrational stance towards Verdi that he favoured the classical opera seria libretti that almost always, save for Un giorno di regno, (Attila), Alzira, Stiffelio/Aroldo Simon Boccanegra and Falstaff had the conventional "death triumphing over love" endings. Of course I cannot wish for Verdi to be more radical than he ready had been by adapting a novel that is set in his own times.
Hi David!
Hypothetical question: You say that the fault lies not with the composer of Traviata, but with "humanity." And I do find that sentiment to be very poetic indeed-not to mention largely truthful. But still...Is it perhaps possible that at least a kernel of blame goes to the composer for such a predicament? Among those who comment here, there seems to be a common argument to the effect of Violetta being a rather prohibitively difficult role to get right, and for reasons that don't appear to be exclusive to the medium of recording (or at least too broad to be?). I mean, if it IS true that "Verdi create[d] a character so rich in possibilities that no single artist has yet measured up to his demands," would that point to at least SOME lack of pragmatism on his own part, in the construction of the character and the dramatic/musical demands attatched? I mean, taking this quote at face-value, one would have to consider that such a conundrum might even exist, in some small way, in an actual stage production, but that live performance being a more "forgiving" medium than recording, is able to absorb such sticky issues more easily? Is THAT the real reason why stage productions fare better, in the end?
So, to put an even finer point on it, my question is: If the end game for an opera is to move beyond the lofty metaphysical workings of the composer's imagination and go forth and exist in *the real world*-for us, the people to experience wholly and authentically, then how much responsibility does the composer himself carry towards this end? Is it reasonable to expect a certain amount of pragmatism of a Verdi or Wagner, when creating something that outside forces then have to take and properly realize? Or must we sometimes end up with something akin to the legend (among instrumental music nerds) of, "The mysterious epic sonata that is universally admired, but that nobody can actually play"?
Hope this doesn't come off as the selling of my own opinion; because it really it isn't. Some presentations/discussions, etc., end up leaving behind as many questions as they answer. This, for me is one such case. And so, here, I play the devil's advocate. Anyway, thanks again for all you do~peace!
I think you're right--the "humanity" necessarily involves the technical aspects of singing, and as others have pointed out here, the role requires a very demanding quality of voice (or voices)--almost a different timbre or skill set for each act. Of course such singers exist, but they are rare, and either they have what it takes or they don't. This is indeed the composer's "fault," but not in the sense of error I think--maybe a question of practicality more than anything else.
So what is a couple of recordings you do love. Moffo? I always learn from you and enjoy your channel.
Dave you spoke about works that are cursed. Is it true that Schuman's Piano concerto is one of these?
Not that I've noticed!
Has anyone heard newish Traviata with Lisette Oropesa? She's at least younger. Just wondering if makes any impression on folks. I liked the Cotrubas/Domingo/Milnes one with Kleiber from awhile back, but admit I haven't heard it now in many years.
She's very good, but the rest of the cast is not at her level.
You didn‘t tell us what‘s wrong with the Kleiber! I think it‘s perfect on disc. Thanks for the video, Harry
He resents Kleibermaniacs it seems buy in a different video Dave praised Kleiber as an opera conductor. Well, he did get a gazillion rehearsals so...
Domingo's interpolated high C is inexcusable, and personally I never liked his Alfredo.
And it's appallingly edited in by pre-digital DG engineers from a 'Top C bank' Domingo must have put down on a very 'good' day! It's like the ghastly top Cs in the Mehta Trovatore which also sound like they got stuck into the master tape with a bit of Band-Aid@@xxsaruman82xx87
Conversely I think Trovatore works on disc but never much works on stage. On stage a lot of music belies the emotional situation whereas on disc we forgive a grief stricken diva singing of dire predicament with a jolly old rumpty tum tum tune. In performance, I find myself laughing at the weird dynamic between the situation and the inappropriate music behind it. On disc, no problem!
Dave, is there a video where you talk about the difference between live performance and (studio) recording? I would love to hear your perspective on that.
By the way, I ironically always thought about Joan Sutherland as a kunst-diva and not a stimm-diva 😂 so I might have been very wrong about her... But I still think her voice doesn't sound beautiful, so there's that 🙈
Sutherland's voice quality aside, how could she be a Kunst-diva when you can rarely understand the words coming out of her mouth?
@@poturbg8698 you're right of course... It was just a conception I formed in my youth and never quite reflected upon until now
Scotto is nearly ideal in her first recording (1962 under Votto). But her partners aren't top-notch: Gianni Raimondi sounds a little bit strained. Ettore Bastianini has a wonderful voice, of course, but his portait of Giorgio Germont is rather dull. The best recordings (for my taste) are Kleiber, Prêtre (Caballé is stunning, Bergonzi quite wonderful) and Previtali with Moffo, Tucker and Merrill. Moffo is still in good voice and while her portrait might not be as refined as Callas' oder Scotto's, she is better than many others.
Moffo had a glorious voice around 1962
The Cotrubas recording is also marred by some audio issues. The recording itself just feels too "close," and Domingo has at one point the worst audio tape-splice that I have heard other than Te Kanawa's right before the final note of the Salammbo aria from "Citizen Kane."
Perhaps the record producers failed to realize that Violetta has nothing in common with Mimì other than her profession. Mimì is pretty clueless, though no one can compete with Mélisande, of course. Violetta, on the other hand, is one of the most intelligent women ever to have lived. There have been many Mimí's, but there is only one Violetta. On stage, I think she was Callas. On record, I think she is Cotrubas.
Obviously, you're not familiar with the RAI recording with Maria Callas.
That’s the studio one we’re all talking about as being deficient. A poor Alfredo and Germont, and the sound isn’t good. The deficiencies are WHY we’re all looking for the later callas traviata where the rest of the singers are closer to her level but the sound is a mess.
That’s literally what we’re all talking about.
We’re all familiar with the recording.
Dave did cover the 1953 Cetra Traviata in a video upload. Just look for it under this channel.
@@djquinn4212 I must beg to differ. The tenor and baritone in the Traviata of 1953, turn in poignant and vital work. The only drawback is the Flora who sounds old & squally.
@@basilmanolakos4926 They’re not better than the other singers on the famous live performances Callas gave of Traviata and the sound renders the recording uncompetitive.
I’ve seen a few people mention this one: the DG Scotto Traviata is so incredibly underrated. I’ve seen some people trash Gianni Raimondi, I don’t know why. He’s a solid, incredibly gifted, lyric tenor who sings the duets well with her. Bastianini had a glorious sound and sings the act 2 scene beautifully with Scotto.
Votto’s conducting okay fine it’s a little dry, but the drama keeps moving.
This is the most underrated Traviata out there, as good as Moffo/Tucker/Merrill, and to my ear it’s better than the famous Kleiber DG; Domingo is disqualified for the worst ever high C splice at the end of O mio Rimorso. Milnes isn’t at his best, and they mic’ed Cotrubas too closely and every single breath is audible in a way that it distracts me from the performance.
The DG Scotto Traviata may have been underrated by many, but not really so with John B. Steane. In his book, THE GRAND TRADITION, Steane in fact singled it out as “the most generally satisfying of all [recordings of Traviata at the time of the book’s publication (1974)]”. Where Scotto is concerned, however, I personally prefer the live video recording of a performance in Tokyo in 1973 with a young and ardent Jose Carreras and the dry-voiced yet fatherly and sympathetic Sesto Bruscantini as the Germonts and Nino Verchi, a conductor fully supportive of the singers yet managing deftly to keep things moving. It’s on VAI.
Gianni Raimondi was a fine singer. These erudite music critics are dissatisfied by everything.
@@basilmanolakos4926 one of the first (maybe the first?) tenors to sing Che gelida at the Met in the original key after Caruso started the trend of transposing it as well.
Do Carmen have the same problem?
No.
Haha I’m not sure about that
Carmen is an opera with such musical substance, melodic distinction, and dramatic clout, that I never can quite decide which recording I love most. So many approaches work more or less equally fine. If really hard pressed, of studio recordings, I would go first for the opéra-comique (sticking to publisher Choudens' final performing edition without the many further amplifications) first of all. The cast was very Gallic and authentic sounding, usually much more than that, and the conducting was simply incomparable. Nobody even approached André Cluytens as conductor of this music. His verve and unflagging vitality in the music just has not quite been equalled since 1950. Of the grand opera version, with Guiraud's recitatives, I think that I would opt for Karjan's 1963 recording with Price and Corelli; those two were so dramatically acute, vocallly thrilling, and all the rest, that they are irresistible as the two lovers. On the other hand, also of blazing intensity is the thrilling recording that the ever excitable Thomas Schippers made, with Resnick and del Monaco, a blazingly exciting performance. For the best option among recordings that offer a lot more of the music than either standard opéra-comique or grand opera version do in the standard performing versions of yore, I still think that Bumbry and Vickers, under the direction of Frühbeck de Burgos offers the most to the lister, with excellent cast and musical distinction and excitement, not perfect, but a more satisfying whole as an interpretation than the others, whatever their scholarly credentials. AND that cast can be seen on DVD, which is an equally great pleasure to experience. @@murraylow4523
Very interesting but I wish you defined terms the less astute amongst us are unfamiliar with. If you defined, or at least spelled out what a “kunst “ ? Or “Shstim” diva is for us non Germans (assuming they’re German) we’d have some idea what you’re talking about. I tried googling them as they sounded but got nowhere. A simple definition at the bottom or top of the screen would help the ignorant. Thank you.
Artist (dramatic expression/interpretation) diva vs voice (even/pretty tone/technique) diva.
@@hrvoje14 not very enlightening I’m sorry. Please write the words Kunst (?) and Schtim (?) and their definitions. I’m trying to learn here.
@@gaynomadic Kunst = art in German; stimme = voice in German
@@hrvoje14 well thank you but I’m not much wiser. You talked of kunst divas, as opposed to stimme divas. Please elaborate a little.
@@hrvoje14 I appreciate that, thank you. If you could define such terms during your presentations, it would help those of us, like me, who are not as musically or linguistically informed as you. Might just expand your audience.