# Anna Netrebko



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

This is something that bothers me for some time. Anna Netrebko has sprung an industry around her. She has a very strong and loyal fan base thanks to the heavy promotion by the Met. Running the risk of upsetting her admirers, I want to rasie a few questions. 

I have three of her DVDs. In La Traviata, she is good but not out standing. There are quite a few that comes to mind that does a better job. The Lucia showed that she is not an outstanding coloratura. The I Puritani is a so so performance, and yet the interviewer Fleming made a great play on the fact that she can sing lying on her back, which I think all self respecting sorprano can do. In her discography I found three Russian works, some bel canto by Donnizetti and Bellini, a couple of Mozart and one each of Verdi and Puccini (I stand corrected if I miss out any of her important performance). She has yet to sing the great Italian heroine roles of Verdi and Puccini. and Norma. 

So the question is 'What has she done to deserve all the adoration?' Shall we reserve judement until she has proved herself? I see that she has been named by a few journals as the "a genuine superstar for the 21st century", 'Musician of the Year' for 2008, "the reigning new diva of the 21st century". And the Playboy place her on 'sexiest babes of classical music' list. But she has not won any major international music award (again I apologise if I miss out any). Are these recommendations enough to place the crown on her head? If one considers look and singing ability together, I think the other Anna (Moffo) wins hands down. Are we confusing hype for ability? 

The bombs are coming. Put on the hard hat and duck into the shelter :devil:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

You really don't understand the least thing about opera, do you? Opera is theater... musical theater. It involves the visual, the ability to act and put forth a personality as well as the ability to sing. Beginning with singing, Netrebko is far from untalented in that department. I don't get the complaint as to her not having performed any of the great Italian heroine roles of Puccini or Verdi. Perhaps you are unaware of the fact that there are other composers beyond these two... actually other operatic composers (gasp!) as good or better than those two and like most contemporary singers Netrebko has the good sense to avoid roles that she finds are unsuited to her voice and the quickest way toward damaging the voice and abruptly ending a career. Personally, I quite enjoy her voice... she has a rich, deep, sensuality quite suited to many of the seductive roles and arias that are among her finest. I find her performance of Russian romances and arias, her performance in L'Elisir d'Amore, La Traviata, I Capuleti e i Montecchi, Lucia di Lammermoor, and Manon (among others) to have been far more than adequate... and then she seems quite strong with some "lighter" operatic fare such as Massenet, Lehar, etc...

Where Netrebko shines in in her ability to act... and her ability to grab hold of the audience... in other words, "stage presence":











No matter how good a singer can sing, if she cannot command the stage in the manner in which Netrebko virtually seduces the entire audience in the videos above... then she will never be recognized as an opera star.

Again... for an singer to rise to the level of an opera star she (or he) must not only know which roles fit his or her voice... but also which roles he or she can convincingly pull off. Can one imagine, for example, Joan Sutherland and Pavarotti rolling around in bed together as in this scene?






Ultimately, the reason Netrebko is spoken of as a diva in the tradition of Callas, is that like Callas she has rejuvenated opera... not only through her own performances and her acting... but ultimately through her stage presence (and this certainly involves her appearance). Her presence in opera has led to renewed interest in the art form by those not previously interested and it has pushed other performers to compete with her in terms of acting, stage presence, and appearance. Gone are the days when we can accept a 250 pound Brunhilde... let alone Carmen, Salome, or Manon.

Of course, had this question arisen last year when our resident opera-phile (who has sense started his own opera site) and Netrebko fanatic (He actually penned her nickname, "La Bellissima") was still active, all that I have had to say would have been redundant.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

Since say that I have no knowledge of opera, then you must be an expert in this matter. The question I asked is not answered. You have simply mouthed the standard reply from her PR people. Is La Travaita, I Puritani and Lucia not Italian? How is her perforrmance compared with the pass greats? She has a light lyric voice, not suited to the heavier roles. If that why she has a not sung any of these roles? To compare her with Callas is comparing coco-cola with champagne.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Dster...you did ask for that! Yes there is a big industry round Anna Netrebko...the Music Industry, worth Billions every year. But if an artist can't cut it, the the major labels and opera housed wouldn't be interested. Netrebko is the perfect all round package. She may not be your taste but she is flavour of the month to a lot of people. Also, as big a Callas fan as I am, she isnt around any more.

PS Love that Meine Lippen vid....


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

This I understand. She is the hottest property around the opera world. But how is she measured with the greats? Quite of few like her are promoted because fat ladies 'gives the wrong image to opera'. What happened to Wagner's music if there are only thin sorpanos left in the world of opera?


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Lol! nope...plenty portly types out there for the Chubby Chasers amoung us! The fat soprano issue was always a bit of a myth and a stereotype anyway. Sopranos always came in all shapes and sizes. Today I think most professional artists realise that image is an important issue, just like Personal Health. Sometime it may seem that the Uberbabesoprano's are taking over. I wouldnt worry though!


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Dster said:


> This is something that bothers me for some time. Anna Netrebko has sprung an industry around her. She has a very strong and loyal fan base thanks to the heavy promotion by the Met. Running the risk of upsetting her admirers, I want to rasie a few questions.
> 
> I have three of her DVDs. In La Traviata, she is good but not out standing. There are quite a few that comes to mind that does a better job. The Lucia showed that she is not an outstanding coloratura. The I Puritani is a so so performance, and yet the interviewer Fleming made a great play on the fact that she can sing lying on her back, which I think all self respecting sorprano can do. In her discography I found three Russian works, some bel canto by Donnizetti and Bellini, a couple of Mozart and one each of Verdi and Puccini (I stand corrected if I miss out any of her important performance). She has yet to sing the great Italian heroine roles of Verdi and Puccini. and Norma.
> 
> ...


To hear the old stories, apparently Tetrazzini made quite a career lying on her back. 

In other news, I agree with you about Netrebko. She is not a coloratura, but she is a good actress and sings lyrical parts quite beautifully, witness the _emocionante _bits in the recent _Manon. _But coloratura? Nope. Trills? Nope. Fioritura? Nope. Sufficient high notes? No way. The Met needs to find a coloratura for coloratura roles. BTW Renee Fleming does not fill the bill either, as witness her _approximatura_ technique in Armida a couple of years ago.


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

I'm not a diehard Netrebko fan, but I think she's wonderful in the role of Anne Boleyn (I have the DVD of the Vienna _Anna Bolena_).

I was also very favorably impressed by her rendition of Leonora's aria, "_D'amor sull'ali rosee_," from _Il __Trovatore_, which she sang in a concert last summer in Berlin. (I am a diehard Jonas Kaufmann fan, and originally listened to this clip to hear him sing Manrico's lines. )


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Hah. Posts in this thread confirm my impression that opera buffs are noticeably bitchier than normal classical music appreciators.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Oh hell yes! When I first started going to Covent Garden, the bar was full of raging old Opera queens during the interval, I had hoped they all stabbed themselves to death with gramaphone needles when Joan Sutherland died!


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

I like her, but I do find she can be kind of hit or miss. I saw her in one version of La Traviata that was just amazing (prob. my favorite to date), but consequently I've also seen her do a few pretty sketchy performances as well. Nonetheless, even if you dislike her, you can't deny that she is still very talented. Plus, as someone said above, she is rather good at acting as well!


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

And not too hard on the old peepers either!


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

All the plus points about her I totally agree. My point is that opera is music plus visual entertainment. They are equally important. However the balance has swung heavily in favour visual than ability to sing well. Opera stars now are judged more by his/her outward appearance than the beauty of his/her voice.

And the trend of thin singers is an important issue. Here is what Kiri Te Kanawa has to say:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/8981973.stm

Soon miking the leading singer in an in-door auditorium is a norm.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

She may not be your taste but she is flavour of the month to a lot of people. Also, as big a Callas fan as I am, she isnt around any more.

There are any number of singers who I prefer... or rather, by whom I have more recordings. That is true of a number of living performers as well as those deceased. Honestly, the only complete opera recordings I have featuring Netrebko are Prokofiev's _The Love for Three Oranges_, and Bellini's _I Capuleti e i Montecchi_. In choosing a complete opera recording I tend to look at the entire cast as well as the orchestra and conductor. On the other hand, in the DVD format there are a number of performances featuring Netrebko which I have... or want:'
Verdi's _La Traviata_, Puccini's _La Boheme_, Donizetti's _L'elisir d'amore_, Massanet's _Manon_, Puccini's _La Boheme_, Donizetti's _Lucia di Lammermoor_, Donizetti's _Don Pasquale_, and Donizetti's _Anna Bolena_. There are also some marvelous recital videos.

Honestly, Netrebko is a star on the stage, but has yet to have produced a larger body of opera recordings that stand on their own. There is a difference between the performer who can make masterful recordings and the performer who has masterful filmed performances... and of course a few singers have achieved both. For example, if I want a recorded version of _La Traviata_ I will turn to Maria Callas, Angela Gheorghiu, or Ileana Cotrubas with Carlos Kleiber... but if I want a splendid video performance of the opera, I will turn to Teresa Stratas in the Zeffirelli followed by any number of recent performances, including those with Renee Fleming, Natalie Dessay, Angela Gheorghiu, or even Anna Netrebko. If I want Strauss' Salome there is no finer recording than that of Solti with Birgit Nillson... yet when it comes to a video performance, Nilsson is ridiculous... and certainly not believable as the great seductress. Teresa Stratas, again, owns this role, with an unrivaled suggestion of Salome's descent into madness.

She is the hottest property around the opera world. But how is she measured with the greats?

How do we measure this? She has a vast cadre of fans who love her and who love her singing. I have admitted that I am one of these. I find her voice rich and sensual. You are less than convinced. That is fine. There are many who cannot stand Maria Callas or Joan Sutherland. I lean toward Callas myself. Netrebko is clearly a product of the video age of opera. Where Callas infused opera... and often roles once considered "lightweight" with an emotional intensity unheard of, Netrebko brings a new sensuality and flirtatiousness, among other elements, to her performances. Where most of the artists of the past can only be measured by their audio recordings, performers today are judged upon their stage persona as conveyed through filmed performances... this is true whether we are speaking of Angela Gheorghiu, Renee Fleming, Anna Netrebko, Cecilia Bartoli, Natalie Dessay, the exotic and flirtatious Danielle de Niese or the quirky Patricia Petibon.

Quite of few like her are promoted because fat ladies 'gives the wrong image to opera'. What happened to Wagner's music if there are only thin sorpanos left in the world of opera?

Why do you suppose Wagner's heroines should be "fat ladies"? Really, should Brunhilde, a Valkyrie, be "fat"? Why should Sieglinde be "fat"?

Hilltroll72
Hah. Posts in this thread confirm my impression that opera buffs are noticeably bitchier than normal classical music appreciators.

That has long been true. Just go and look on any YouTube posting of this or that opera singer and there will be those calling singer X a "*****" or singer Y a "****" while others will fight you to the death if you dare to question that singer z, whose career ended in 1913 when sound recording was rather still in its infancy, was the greatest singer ever.:lol:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

All the plus points about her I totally agree. My point is that opera is music plus visual entertainment. They are equally important. However the balance has swung heavily in favour visual than ability to sing well. Opera stars now are judged more by his/her outward appearance than the beauty of his/her voice.

One need only to think of the film industry... the vast majority of film stars were/are good looking... or at least looked appropriate to the role they were playing. One would not have accepted a 350 pound Scarlett O'Hara or Juliette (in Romeo and Juliette)... and yet for a long time we have accepted such in opera... for the simple reason that it was largely experienced through audio recordings or the radio alone. But this is not how opera ever was intended to be experienced. It involves music and spoken word, costumes, stage sets, acting, lighting, etc... It is a multi-media extravaganza. That is what makes it so seductive to so many.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Dster said:


> Are we confusing hype for ability?


Well, in the cynical world that we live in today you're always bound to get the argument that someone's popularity is the result of hype. It's the chicken or the egg story, ain't it? Is someone popular because of the publicity or is the publicity the result of her being popular. I think that if people would tend to go home disappointed after a Netrebko performance that the hype would have ended a long, long time ago - or never even have started to begin with.

I must say that I consider her to be an artist with a lot of integrity. Some opera 'purists' (not necessarily you I must add) talk about her as though she's a sell-out - no doubt because she's so popular and is a beautiful woman who doesn't try to hide that fact. But they should also keep in mind that almost any other operatic singer who's reached her level of popularity these days would be trying to 'broaden her appeal' and record songbook albums with Irving Berlin and Cole Porter tunes. She'd perhaps be singing duets with pop singers or sing other crossover material. Not that I personally have a problem with classical singers doing some of that, but just for the record - Anna Netrebko has never done that and has always been strictly classical.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the good lady. I just do not find her singing satisfying, which to me is the most important element in opera. About thin ladies singing Wagner, I hope I would not be around when it happens . Can a 1.6m (5'6") man play in NBA with success?:devil:


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Dster said:


> Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the good lady. I just do not find her singing satisfying, which to me is the most important element in opera. About thin ladies singing Wagner, I hope I would not be around when it happens .*Can a 1.6m (5'6") man play in NBA with success?*:devil:


No, but a woman who doesn't look like a sumo wrestler can sing with success at the Met.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Dster said:


> Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the good lady. I just do not find her singing satisfying, which to me is the most important element in opera. About thin ladies singing Wagner, I hope I would not be around when it happens . Can a 1.6m (5'6") man play in NBA with success?:devil:


And I am completely in the same camp. In the Manon when she went into St. Sulpice in that skimpy, totally inappropriate white dress to seduce Des Grieux into coming back to her, she had two weapons on display that many a fat -- or skinny -- soprano would envy. The woman is hot, and a good actress to boot. I certainly appreciate her appeal. But I want to listen as well as look. She hits a lot of notes, but she misses too many for my taste. I am always on the edge of my seat when she sings. I want to her to succeed as well as a singer as she does as an actress. Unfortunately, far too often, that is not the case.


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

Dster said:


> About thin ladies singing Wagner, I hope I would not be around when it happens . Can a 1.6m (5'6") man play in NBA with success?:devil:


Ummm -- it already has happened. Karita Mattila, Anja Kampe, Camilla Nylund, Angela Denoke, Eva Maria Westbroek, and Nina Stemme are all slim and trim, and all sing Wagner regularly. Anne Evans and Hildegard Behrens back in the '90s weren't tubs, either.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

To sum up what was discussed, it is generally agreed that she has good look and good acting ability. To some she is not an outstanding singer, but her fans will disagree on this point. May be that is why she concentrates mostly on visual media because that is her strong point. I do not think we will ever see her as Lady Macbeth. Not only because she has the wrong voice type, but it is bad for her image to appear as an evil woman.

I watched Aida with Violeta Urmana & Dolores Zajick the other day. It was a most satisfying experience. Zajick gave a performance worthy of her frame, dispite her age and look. The audience responded to her emphatically. A good artist can transcend above outward appearance because of the beauty of human voice. That is the magic of opera. Urmana not only sings well, she looks good as well because the director left her in her natural colour rather than dyed brown as in the La Scala production. And she is *huge*, almost twice the size of Netrebko.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

jhar26 said:


> No, but a woman who doesn't look like a sumo wrestler can sing with success at the Met.


Not if she is singing Lucia when she is not a good coloratura


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Dster said:


> Not if she is singing Lucia when she is not a good coloratura


Well, if one has to be a Maria Callas or Joan Sutherland to sing Donizetti or Bellini the works of those composers are as good as buried for good because there are only a few coloratura singers of that quality around at any one time.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

Dster said:


> Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the good lady. I just do not find her singing satisfying, which to me is the most important element in opera. *About thin ladies singing Wagner*, I hope I would not be around when it happens . Can a 1.6m (5'6") man play in NBA with success?:devil:


*Where did this "myth" of fat ladies sing better come from*........you look at the top Wagner sopranos of the golden age many were normal build (astrid varnay, Flagstadt, Lotte Lehmann etc) during thier prime singing years ages 30-40. Some did add weight as they got older near end of thier career but thier best recording were made at normal weight

























Outside of Wagner the great sopranos of the 1950-1960s era were mostly normal weight:
Callas
Sutherland
Moffo
Tebaldi
Price
Freni
Schwarzkopff
etc


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I think the top Wagner ladies (Flagstad, Nilsson, Varnay) are mesomorphs. Not fat, but built like men.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Anna knows she's sexy and uses that.

And I LOVE it...................:devil:


----------



## Il_Penseroso (Nov 20, 2010)

Itullian said:


> Anna knows she's sexy and uses that.


Yes, that's the only thing she got.










If we were in 50s or 60s, then Netrebko had no place in the operatic world.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Il_Penseroso said:


> Yes, that's the only thing she got.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Man oh Man

Go Anna!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

DarkAngel said:


> *Where did this "myth" of fat ladies sing better come from*........you look at the top Wagner sopranos of the golden age many were normal build (astrid varnay, Flagstadt, Lotte Lehmann etc) during thier prime singing years ages 30-40. Some did add weight as they got older near end of thier career but thier best recording were made at normal weight
> [/IMG]


They may not be 'fat' as projected by popular mirth, but they were big sized, certainly not thin as in the present corps. One needs the muscle and the lung power to belt out the notes day in day out especially for the drammatic roles.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

Badinerie said:


> Yes there is a big industry round Anna Netrebko...the Music Industry, worth Billions every year.


So is the anti-Christ Andrea Bocelli who has under his belt complete recordings of Boheme, Tosca, Il Travatore ....


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

God Bless Andrea. he hasa beautiful voice. and those recordings are great for his fans. is he an opera singer? no

but he loves it and wants to sing it so good for him.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Il_Penseroso said:


> If we were in 50s or 60s, then Netrebko had no place in the operatic world.


Well, it's not the 50's or the 60's. Being the right man or woman at the right time is always an essential part of being a success. Some of the golden voiced sumo wrestlers of the past who moved around the stage as though they had blocks of concrete on their feet would have no place in opera today either.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

Itullian said:


> God Bless Andrea. he hasa beautiful voice. and those recordings are great for his fans. is he an opera singer? no
> 
> but he loves it and wants to sing it so good for him.


And I bet his recordings are the hottest property around, out selling with ease anything from Villizon or Florez by a wide margin.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Well a good cross over artist like Andrea can bring punters over to the real opera world, and when they get here the last thing they'll want is a Queen of the Night who would crush a tank like a Coke can!


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Dster said:


> I watched Aida with Violeta Urmana & Dolores Zajick the other day. It was a most satisfying experience. Zajick gave a performance worthy of her frame, dispite her age and look. The audience responded to her emphatically. A good artist can transcend above outward appearance because of the beauty of human voice. That is the magic of opera. Urmana not only sings well, she looks good as well because the director left her in her natural colour rather than dyed brown as in the La Scala production. And she is *huge*, almost twice the size of Netrebko.


Well there you are, it's all a question of taste. I personally found Zajick the worst Amneris I have ever seen, I thought she was bored silly and just going through the motions - she nearly singlehandedly put my kids off opera when we went to the HD broadcast of this. (Although Urmana WAS good).


----------



## Il_Penseroso (Nov 20, 2010)

jhar26 said:


> Being the right man or woman at the right time is always an essential part of being a success.


Of course! If everyone thought like a bigot, then there was no change not only in art, but anything humanly in the history; but there's a certain difference between being creative and trying to catch people by fascinate them for 'being a right person'. If you mean to be adapted with everything modish and popular by _'being a right man or woman at the right time is always an essential part of being a success'_ then I would definitely say NO! because many modern opera staging and many opera singers, which I've seen, are categorized with no doubt in the latter!



> Well, it's not the 50's or the 60's.
> 
> ...
> 
> Some of the golden voiced sumo wrestlers of the past who moved around the stage as though they had blocks of concrete on their feet would have no place in opera today either.


Well I think the past generation of opera lovers - and singers - understood it more deeply, they were more scientific and had so far high standards. When I go to an opera house or watch an opera on VHS or DVD, I expect pure music and acting, not a fashion show; though a large number of people all around the world are Netrebko's fans (which I have no problem with!) but to me she looks more like a fashion model rather than an opera singer!


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Il_Penseroso said:


> Of course! If everyone thought like a bigot, then there was no change not only in art, but anything humanly in the history; but there's a certain difference between being creative and trying to catch people by fascinate them for 'being a right person'. If you mean to be adapted with everything modish and popular by _'being a right man or woman at the right time is always an essential part of being a success'_ then I would definitely say NO! because many modern opera staging and many opera singers, which I've seen, are categorized with no doubt in the latter!
> 
> Well I think the past generation of opera lovers understood it more deeply, they were more scientific and they had so far high standards. When I go to an opera house or watch an opera on VHS or DVD, I expect pure music and acting, not a fashion show; though a large number of people all around the world are Netrebko's fans (which I have no problem with!) but to me she looks more like a fashion model rather than an opera singer!


Well, since the characters she often portrays on the stage - attractive women, royalty, etc are supposed to look more like a fashion model than the conventional idea of an opera singer anyway, so it's probably appropriate. I mean, my idea of an elegant countess or a courtesan looks a lot more like Anna Netrebko than, say, Montserrat Caballe.

Look - I have nothing but the highest regard for those singers from the past. They were fab. But their greatness is often used as an argument against the singers of today, which I personally find kind of annoying. Is Netrebko as great a singer as a Ponselle, Callas or Tebaldi? No, probably not. But circumstances have changed somewhat. Orchestras play at a higher pitch, theatres are bigger, singers travel more which is more exausting, etc. And although those oldies were great, they weren't perfect either. There's Callas' wobble and her often metallic sound which I don't find very attractive, Joan Sutherland often only seems to sing vowels, the otherwise extremely attractive Tebaldi was quite wooden onstage, and so on. At the end of the day all that doesn't really matter though because whatever their weaknesses may have been was richly compensated for by the strenghts of their artistry. Same goes as far as I'm concerned for todays singers, including Netrebko. Have we lost something over the past thirty or forty years? No doubt about it. But we have also gained something that we probably didn't have in the past and charismatic performers like Netrebko, Fleming, Gheorghiu and the other 'big guns' of today provide us with operatic experiences that may be different from those we've had in the past, but are (at least to me) extremely satisfying.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I think you've really hit the nail on the head, Gaston. Well said!:clap:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Indeed... and having read quite a bit upon the history of opera... I had to laugh at the notion that the past generations understood the art form better or in a more scientific manner with higher standards. One might almost laugh at how poorly the past generation or two "understood" the operas of Handel, Vivaldi, Alessandro Scarlatti, Monteverdi, Gluck... or in some ways, even Mozart. Does Klemperer's or Bohm's Mozart really exhibit a greater understanding of Mozart's operas than Rene Jacobs or William Christies?

my idea of an elegant countess or a courtesan looks a lot more like Anna Netrebko than, say, Montserrat Caballe.

And certainly if I envision a sexy Manon lolling in bed with Des Grieux its not Sutherland and Pavarotti that come to mind... although they might be ideal for a comic Eurotrash production.:lol:


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

mamascarlatti said:


> Well there you are, it's all a question of taste.


Yes, absolutely. Its personal. For some time I harboured some thoughts about the the way operas are staged and the singing standard. The points brought out in this discussion showed that my feeling is spot on. Acting is a more important asset to a modern opera star than the ability to sing well. Ever wonder why the modern corps of sopranos has no good chest voice?

Why bother to pay for an expansive ticket to the opera? Better acting, story lines and entertainment awaits in a musical.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

yes, you're all correct.

more pictures!!!:devil:


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I would like to see her sing Salome. I bet she could not sing Salome.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Couchie said:


> I would like to see her sing Salome. I bet she could not sing Salome.


Her "dance of the seven veils" would be the best ever though.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

jhar26 said:


> Her "dance of the seven veils" would be the best ever though.


YES SIR :guitar::guitar::guitar:


----------



## alvarro (Apr 18, 2012)

i agree mostly with your answer to oester above.... anna netrebko has that "IT" that something special that enhances her operatic work. like callas she has great acting ability that helps her singing ability... plus, she is still growing and maturing.... only your comment about there possible being better opera composers than verdi and puccini is just not true... there are, in my humble opinion, no greater operatic composers than those two, precisely for the very essence of opera as a theatrical experience than verdi (and, to a lesser degree, puccini).... no other opera composers understood the theatrical essence of opera better.... in time netrebko will and should tackle verdi and puccini roles that compliment her voice and style... we all would benefit


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

alvarro said:


> your comment about there possible being better opera composers than verdi and puccini is just not true...


All lovers are blind :lol:


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

Anna Netrebko makes the greatest impression on DVD with the volume at zero.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

i think she sings great.


----------



## wolf (May 16, 2009)

martijn said:


> Anna Netrebko makes the greatest impression on DVD with the volume at zero.


That was really cruel...but unfortunately true. I'd say that she isn't even interesting on DVD, no beauty can overtriumph"auras" so Obrastzova will always be more attractive, not only because her musicality is spectacular - not so Anna's - but because she actually is more beautiful, in my eyes.

As for Annas singing, I prefer the 'true' Muzak-singers to Anna, as she is more dangerous, the cheapness of her singing is hard to detect if one isn't a very musical person. As I am. Naturally. But those who loves Annas singing are not. Period.


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

wolf said:


> so Obrastzova will always be more attractive, not only because her musicality is spectacular - not so Anna's - but because she actually is more beautiful, in my eyes.


Well I can see that I love her voice!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

:scold:ut:ut::scold:


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Dster said:


> To sum up what was discussed, it is generally agreed that she has good look and good acting ability. To some she is not an outstanding singer, but her fans will disagree on this point. May be that is why she concentrates mostly on visual media because that is her strong point. I do not think we will ever see her as Lady Macbeth. Not only because she has the wrong voice type, but it is bad for her image to appear as an evil woman.
> 
> I watched Aida with Violeta Urmana & Dolores Zajick the other day. It was a most satisfying experience. Zajick gave a performance worthy of her frame, dispite her age and look. The audience responded to her emphatically. A good artist can transcend above outward appearance because of the beauty of human voice. That is the magic of opera. Urmana not only sings well, she looks good as well because the director left her in her natural colour rather than dyed brown as in the La Scala production. And she is *huge*, almost twice the size of Netrebko.


Dolora Zajick is Da Bomb! And she sings Amneris as well as anybody I know. I had the privilege to hold a spear in Aida many years ago with Dallas Opera when Marilyn Horne sang Amneris opposite Gilda Cruz-Romo. They both sang like dreams, and neither of them was small. No one cared in the least.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

wolf said:


> As for Annas singing, I prefer the 'true' Muzak-singers to Anna, as she is more dangerous, the cheapness of her singing is hard to detect if one isn't a very musical person. As I am. Naturally. But those who loves Annas singing are not. Period.


i guess those of us who like Anna can count themselves lucky to have someone like you in our midst to make us see the error of our ways.  But seriously - I don't know how musical you are, but I have a pretty good idea about what the size of your ego must be.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hah. Posts in this thread confirm my impression that opera buffs are noticeably bitchier than normal classical music appreciators.


Unfortunately there's some truth in that. Here people keep things relatively peaceful, but a long time ago I was a member of a yahoo-opera group and talk there was often as vile as on many a sports or political forum.


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

There's just some truth in our statements. She's not terribly bad, but she sings rather flat compared to the real artists. Her Mozart at least absolutely doesn't convince me. I think she would do a great job performing 4"33 of John Cage though.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

This is the reason why people perceive opera as too highbrow to enjoy. They get told things like "only truly MUSICAL people realise that Anna Netrebko can't sing" - or "Hvorostovsky is not a REAL Verdi baritone". Frankly I think these statements are pretty soul destroying for people who have loved a performance and and are then told basically that they are inferior for their pleasure, and also for the singers who work damn hard to provide us with these performances. It's soul-destroying and doesn't get anyone anywhere (except perhaps the speaker of the statement who presumably is left basking in their own glorious superiority). 

And you don't get real singers - as opposed to armchair critics - dissing each other in the the same way; I suppose because they realise the work and courage required to get up there and perform unamplified on a huge stage with a bloody great orchestra between you and the 4000 people come to see you, in a language which is probably not yours, all the while running around or lying down or grappling with the tenor while still getting your voice out there and trying to convince people that you are a 15-year-old in love for the first time.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

mamascarlatti said:


> This is the reason why people perceive opera as too highbrow to enjoy. They get told things like "only truly MUSICAL people realise that Anna Netrebko can't sing" - or "Hvorostovsky is not a REAL Verdi baritone". Frankly I think these statements are pretty soul destroying for people who have loved a performance and and are then told basically that they are inferior for their pleasure, and also for the singers who work damn hard to provide us with these performances. It's soul-destroying and doesn't get anyone anywhere (except perhaps the speaker of the statement who presumably is left basking in their own glorious superiority).


Yes, this may very well be the very unfortunate effect those type of comments may have on some people - especially those who only just got interested, or might potentially get interested in the genre. But on those who have been interested in opera for some time I think it has no such effect. I think that few here have a more negative opinion about Netrebko after reading the post you're referring to, although they are likely to be left with a negative opinion about the poster.


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

I don't think it necessarily has to do with being snobbish. If someone is moved to tears by Netrebko, I have no problems with that. But we have the right to dislike her. Dislike is always of course a relative thing: if she was my neighbor, I would say she's fantastic.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

martijn said:


> I don't think it necessarily has to do with being snobbish. If someone is moved to tears by Netrebko, I have no problems with that. *But we have the right to dislike her.* Dislike is always of course a relative thing: if she was my neighbor, I would say she's fantastic.


You ABSOLUTELY have the right to dislike her. And you definitely have the right to defend your side of this issue, or any other for that matter. But there's a difference between saying that you don't like a certain artist or putting your nose up into the air and basically saying (like another poster has done) that you're an oracle of wisdom when it comes to music appreciation and that those who like her are idiots when it comes to opera or music in general.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

martijn said:


> I don't think it necessarily has to do with being snobbish. If someone is moved to tears by Netrebko, I have no problems with that. But *we have the right to dislike her*. Dislike is always of course a relative thing: if she was my neighbor, I would say she's fantastic.


Absolutely. There are plenty of singers I don't enjoy much, but as jhar26 said there is a difference between expressing personal opinions of a singer, and putting people down for their enjoyment of said singer.


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

He could have expressed him in a bit more modest way, indeed. But as long as he doesn't write "compared to me, God was an amateur", in his next post, we will just assume he expressed himself in an unfortunate way.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

wolf- As for Annas singing, I prefer the 'true' Muzak-singers to Anna, as she is more dangerous, the cheapness of her singing is hard to detect if one isn't a very musical person. As I am. Naturally. But those who loves Annas singing are not. Period.

Boy... you gotta love this inflated bit of ego... by one who hasn't participated much in the opera forums (unlike Gaston and MammaScarlatti). Unfortunately criticism doesn't work this way. All opinions are subjective. Yes... some opinions hold more weight than others, but this is something earned... not something one achieves simply by declaring one's natural musicality. Others here might as easily suggest that what you deem as a natural musicality is in all actuality a natural tin ear.

MamaScarlatti- This is the reason why people perceive opera as too highbrow to enjoy. They get told things like "only truly MUSICAL people realise that Anna Netrebko can't sing" - or "Hvorostovsky is not a REAL Verdi baritone". Frankly I think these statements are pretty soul destroying for people who have loved a performance and and are then told basically that they are inferior for their pleasure, and also for the singers who work damn hard to provide us with these performances. It's soul-destroying and doesn't get anyone anywhere (except perhaps the speaker of the statement who presumably is left basking in their own glorious superiority).

And you don't get real singers - as opposed to armchair critics - dissing each other in the the same way; I suppose because they realise the work and courage required to get up there and perform unamplified on a huge stage with a bloody great orchestra between you and the 4000 people come to see you, in a language which is probably not yours, all the while running around or lying down or grappling with the tenor while still getting your voice out there and trying to convince people that you are a 15-year-old in love for the first time.

Exactly. It is those with the least ability to appreciate music who gather into these packs and follow this or that dogma. There are musicians, soloists, and singers that I appreciate more than others, but I try to avoid falling into the notion that "If I love singer X, then conversely singer Y must suck." I am quite enamored of Maria Callas. I enjoy her performances far more than those of Joan Sutherland... yet I recognize that in spite of my personal opinions and pleasure, Sutherland was undoubtedly a great singer. I also recognize that while I love Callas, this does not mean that I am not able to gain great pleasure and recognize the talents of Natalie Dessay, Anna Netrebko, Cecilia Bartoli, Anne Sofie von Otter, Magdalena Kozena, Renee Fleming, Lorraine Hunt Lieberson, and any number of others.


----------



## wolf (May 16, 2009)

"As I am. Naturally. But those who loves Annas singing are not. Period."

I know that many folks that are discussing classical music isn't fond of irony. But I thought this was perhaps so heavy and exaggerated that noone could take it seriously. I am afraid that if one is chatting and socializing with ppl who has that sort of absurd sense of humour, it gets a reception that it deserves when flaunted in ppls faces, unprepared.

Can we leave it with that? Good. As for Anna, I meant that the Westerhauers and whatever those Sara Brightman-copies are called, they do not infiltrate opera. I actually mean that Anna is worse than a truly lousy opera singer,because she is NOT a bad (oh yes she doesn't sing THAT well, but many sing worse) singer, but her singing is much more empty thatn Callas at her worst.

What am I saying? That Anna does sing with herheart less than anyone I have heard. But thats MY view. I am not God. (I used to be, but left the job to some obscure spiritual giant that is bragging of that He is 'all love' etc...)


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

I would like to add this to your post, wolf: Her singing is much more empty than Callas at her worst, _except when Callas sang Mozart._ Callas was a terrible Mozart singer, no wonder, she said after all "Most of Mozart is dull".


----------



## wolf (May 16, 2009)

martijn said:


> I would like to add this to your post, wolf: Her singing is much more empty than Callas at her worst, _except when Callas sang Mozart._ Callas was a terrible Mozart singer, no wonder, she said after all "Most of Mozart is dull".


Absolutely. I found it strange that she couldn't sing Mozart at all, but since she didn't like the greatest composer that the world has ever seen, thatisnot so strange. She really sang with her heart, and her heart wasn't in it, and then...Anna has repeatedly said that she prefer rap-like music to classical. That is of course her choice and no music is 'better' than other, but I kind of understand it. Obraztsova, Nilsson etc absolutely WORSHIPPED the music that they sang...


----------



## martijn (May 4, 2011)

I think we will get along very well, so far we agree about everything ;-)


----------



## Il_Penseroso (Nov 20, 2010)

jhar26 said:


> Well, since the characters she often portrays on the stage - attractive women, royalty, etc are supposed to look more like a fashion model than the conventional idea of an opera singer anyway, so it's probably appropriate. I mean, my idea of an elegant countess or a courtesan looks a lot more like Anna Netrebko than, say, Montserrat Caballe.
> 
> Look - I have nothing but the highest regard for those singers from the past. They were fab. But their greatness is often used as an argument against the singers of today, which I personally find kind of annoying. Is Netrebko as great a singer as a Ponselle, Callas or Tebaldi? No, probably not. But circumstances have changed somewhat. Orchestras play at a higher pitch, theatres are bigger, singers travel more which is more exausting, etc. And although those oldies were great, they weren't perfect either. There's Callas' wobble and her often metallic sound which I don't find very attractive, Joan Sutherland often only seems to sing vowels, the otherwise extremely attractive Tebaldi was quite wooden onstage, and so on. At the end of the day all that doesn't really matter though because whatever their weaknesses may have been was richly compensated for by the strenghts of their artistry. Same goes as far as I'm concerned for todays singers, including Netrebko. Have we lost something over the past thirty or forty years? No doubt about it. But we have also gained something that we probably didn't have in the past and charismatic performers like Netrebko, Fleming, Gheorghiu and the other 'big guns' of today provide us with operatic experiences that may be different from those we've had in the past, but are (at least to me) extremely satisfying.


Reply: again post #36 !


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

jhar26 said:


> Unfortunately there's some truth in that. Here people keep things relatively peaceful, but a long time ago I was a member of a yahoo-opera group and talk there was often as vile as on many a sports or political forum.


Hmmmm -- let me guess: Rec.Music.Opera?


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

MAuer said:


> Hmmmm -- let me guess: Rec.Music.Opera?


parlourofoperalovers.


----------



## MattExcell (Jun 15, 2011)

Coming to the party a bit late here, but just wanted to throw my twopenneth in the pot.

I don't dislike Anna Netrebko, in fact I like her very much, but I do think that she is overrated by an opera community desperate for an eye-catching diva assoluta that we would all love to grow old with. I've long stuggled with the question of what role can it definitively be said that Anna sings it better than any of her contemporaries/competitors? Manon, perhaps? Some of the Russian repertoire? I don't believe for a second that she's he best current interpreter of Lucia, Elvira, Donna Anna or especially Violetta.

I don't think it's fair to say that we have to accept Anna in leading roles if we want to hear the bel canto masterpieces - I think this is doing a disservice to names like your Damrau's, Ciofi's, Machaidze's or my new favourite Rachele Gilmore.

I do think she has a valuable place in the repertoire and I think it's great that she's drawing in a new generation of opera lovers, but I think we should be careful not to overdo it with our praise for her.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

MattExcell said:


> I do think she has a valuable place in the repertoire and I think it's great that she's drawing in a new generation of opera lovers, but I think we should be careful not to overdo it with our praise for her.


Yes, but do the ones that praise her overdo it to compensate for the criticism that can sometimes be a bit over the top, or vice versa? Let's just say that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.


----------



## MattExcell (Jun 15, 2011)

jhar26 said:


> Yes, but do the ones that praise her overdo it to compensate for the criticism that can sometimes be a bit over the top, or vice versa? Let's just say that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.


Psssh, somewhere in the middle, somewhere in the schmiddle - that will never cause ANY arguments...


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

MattExcell said:


> ...an opera community desperate for an eye-catching diva assoluta that we would all love to grow old with...


A thought just came into my mind. I have this theory that most of the people who is not particularly impressed by Netrebko belongs to the 'older generation'. I myself will be touching three scores and ten come September . This generation grew up with and enjoyed the golden era of opera singing when most of the legendary names were active. Even the second liners of the 60s and 70s can wipe the floor with the popular singers of the modern days when it comes to vocal ability. Nobody gives a damn about the size of the singers or the stage prop, so long as the singing is glorious. After all opera sucks. The plots are archaic and confusing, fully of coincidents, stock characters. Can you imagine someone morally wounded and give a long and moving speech before expiring? It is furtherest away from the real world than any other form of entertainment. But it is the beauty of human voice that is the saving grace. Without great singing, it is my humble opinion that it is difficult to see how opera can servive in its original context for another century.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Hearing loss due to extreme age.


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

Inability to distingush between good and mediocrity due to immaturity


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

This thread is rapidly slipping into the theme of the geriatrics admonishing their heirs with the error of their ways:

"Ah! When I was a young whipper-snapper I used to have to walk 50 miles to school in three feet of snow... uphill... both ways. And damn it! we had real real singers in those days... even the second and third tier warblers could outperform the greatest stars of today... of course they all looked like Russian peasants... but hell! we didn't have no TV and the nearest opera house was a 500 mile walk (in three feet of snow... uphill) and so we just closed our eyes. But now these young-uns have come along with their TV and DVDs and YouTube and they insist (silly twits) that their Manon and Giulietta not weigh 500 pounds, look 75 years old, or have a mustache. This is undoubtedly the death of that truly beloved art form, opera. How could we have ever allowed such Philistines to have entered the temple of true beauty?"


----------



## Dster (Oct 3, 2011)

It is that one appreciates true artistic value verus those who is hoodwinked by PR


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Just call me HOODWINKED. :clap:


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Im 53 this year. I admit there are some people of my generation that seem to need an overwhelming air of formality and serious affectation to regard Opera as "True Opera" The " No pleasure without suffering" brigade You can't have "Art" in an attractive package. But Im not one of them! Im "Glad to like Glam"


----------



## MattExcell (Jun 15, 2011)

Dster said:


> A thought just came into my mind. I have this theory that most of the people who is not particularly impressed by Netrebko belongs to the 'older generation'. I myself will be touching three scores and ten come September .


God, I hope I'm not in this category yet... I'm only one score and (not even) ten


----------



## VerdiRigoletto (Dec 15, 2013)

The issue is quite simply her voice is not big enough to sing the repertoire she sings. There's a video of her singing inflammatus. Now I know there are people (I know some) who prefer Netrrebko to Tebaldi. But the fundamental question is, who let her sing inflammatus, which is totally beyond her vocal type? People go to this, they see all the trappings of success, and they think that's the way it should sound!! There are supposed to be gatekeepers in opera, conductors and critics, who should know and maintain vocal standards.



StlukesguildOhio said:


> wolf- As for Annas singing, I prefer the 'true' Muzak-singers to Anna, as she is more dangerous, the cheapness of her singing is hard to detect if one isn't a very musical person. As I am. Naturally. But those who loves Annas singing are not. Period.
> 
> Boy... you gotta love this inflated bit of ego... by one who hasn't participated much in the opera forums (unlike Gaston and MammaScarlatti). Unfortunately criticism doesn't work this way. All opinions are subjective. Yes... some opinions hold more weight than others, but this is something earned... not something one achieves simply by declaring one's natural musicality. Others here might as easily suggest that what you deem as a natural musicality is in all actuality a natural tin ear.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

As someone who doesn't really like Netrebko, I think the problem many people like myself have is that she can hog the limelight when there are many other equally (and more) proficient opera singers around who don't receive nearly as much attention.

I have no problem if she wants to sing opera but it gets tiresome hearing her compared to many greats, and I've never found her particularly charming if i'm honest.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Jobis said:


> if i'm honest.


"if", so you're not sure AHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAAA



> As someone who doesn't really like Netrebko, I think the problem many people like myself have is that she can hog the limelight when there are many other equally (and more) proficient opera singers around who don't receive nearly as much attention.


This is the "problem" of universal apply that comes out whenever a very popular singer is discussed and a person who's not really a fan pops up. You don't like famous singer -> you feel that some less famous singers should be heard more instead -> you blame the singer for being the one to "hog the limelight". I don't think Netrebko does that any more than other top singers of our time, if she doesn't record "Verdi mezzo-soprano arias" at 70+ of age, it'll be alright.


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

Aramis said:


> "if", so you're not sure AHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAAA
> 
> This is the "problem" of universal apply that comes out whenever a very popular singer is discussed and a person who's not really a fan pops up. You don't like famous singer -> you feel that some less famous singers should be heard more instead -> you blame the singer for being the one to "hog the limelight". I don't think Netrebko does that any more than other top singers of our time, if she doesn't record "Verdi mezzo-soprano arias" at 70+ of age, it'll be alright.


Sorry for phrasing it badly; I don't blame her in particular, but rather her enormous popularity is used to draw a crowd at the met and other houses, and if (like myself) you don't like her, 'well too bad' must be the standard response because we seem to be stuck with her.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I've long recognized that opera aficionados are undoubtedly the bitchiest bunch of armchair quarterbacks among the entire realm of classical music lovers. I haven't looked recently, but I do know that in the past any YouTube post featuring Anna... or Renee Fleming, Natalie Dessay, Véronique Gens, Cecilia Bartoli, or whatever somewhat well-known singer you can think of ended up with endless posts calling these women anything and everything and dismissing any possibility that they might actually have some ability that others... equally versed in opera... may actually appreciate.


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I've long recognized that opera aficionados are undoubtedly the bitchiest bunch of armchair quarterbacks among the entire realm of classical music lovers. I haven't looked recently, but I do know that in the past any YouTube post featuring Anna... or Renee Fleming, Natalie Dessay, Véronique Gens, Cecilia Bartoli, or whatever somewhat well-known singer you can think of ended up with endless posts calling these women anything and everything and dismissing any possibility that they might actually have some ability that others... equally versed in opera... may actually appreciate.


Yes its very easy to make arguments against imaginary opponents and strawmen isn't it, but it doesn't really enrich the discussion.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I have no imaginary opponents... although it seems you have decided... in your imagination... that I have denoted you as such. 

Of course I might ask just how you have brought such a depth of enrichment to the current discussion by simply stating you don't particularly like Anna Netrebko. And are we supposed to care... or more likely all agree with you? 

You feel there are many other equally (and more) talented singers who are ignored. It would seem easy to make such statements without offering examples. 

Personally I love many of the "greats" of the past myself... not that they lacked for their critics... but I also like to listen to the finest singers of here and now... including Anna.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Barelytenor said:


> [/I]But coloratura? Nope. Trills? Nope. Fioritura? Nope. Sufficient high notes? No way. The Met needs to find a coloratura for coloratura roles. BTW Renee Fleming does not fill the bill either, as witness her _approximatura_ technique in Armida a couple of years ago.


X1000. And hells yes on that Armida. Sorry, Renee, stick to Strauss.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

mamascarlatti said:


> This is the reason why people perceive opera as too highbrow to enjoy. They get told things like "only truly MUSICAL people realise that Anna Netrebko can't sing" - or "Hvorostovsky is not a REAL Verdi baritone". Frankly I think these statements are pretty soul destroying for people who have loved a performance and and are then told basically that they are inferior for their pleasure, and also for the singers who work damn hard to provide us with these performances. It's soul-destroying and doesn't get anyone anywhere (except perhaps the speaker of the statement who presumably is left basking in their own glorious superiority).
> 
> And you don't get real singers - as opposed to armchair critics - dissing each other in the the same way; I suppose because they realise the work and courage required to get up there and perform unamplified on a huge stage with a bloody great orchestra between you and the 4000 people come to see you, in a language which is probably not yours, all the while running around or lying down or grappling with the tenor while still getting your voice out there and trying to convince people that you are a 15-year-old in love for the first time.


This. This, this, this, this.

And I'd add that you can read all of the late John Steane's books on opera and singers (they include such classics as _The Grand Tradition_, _Voices: Singers and Critics_, and the _Singers of the Century_ series) and never find an arrogant-sounding, dogmatic, bitchy, inappropriately dichotomous statement of the kind I've seen far too much of on the internet. Certainly Mr. Steane had his opinions, but his critiques were always balanced, fair, open-minded, and humane, not to mention elegantly expressed. That's why he was highly respected and even loved; there has probably been no more beloved twentieth-century writer on classical singers. With all of his vast knowledge he of all people had the right to be dogmatic -- yet he never was. It's only the truly great who can be humble in this sense. And I'd go so far as to say that several people in this thread could take lessons from Steane -- not in their opinions, necessarily, but in their manner of expressing them.


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I have no imaginary opponents... although it seems you have decided... in your imagination... that I have denoted you as such.
> 
> Of course I might ask just how you have brought such a depth of enrichment to the current discussion by simply stating you don't particularly like Anna Netrebko. And are we supposed to care... or more likely all agree with you?
> 
> ...


Well I'd love you to point out the aged opera aficionados in this particular discussion who are saying unkind things about Anna.

I could name a couple of sopranos I prefer but the issue is I don't know whether they're at all well known. Angela Kloc and Heather Youngquist I particularly like and who I find far exceed Netrebko's singing ability (at least within bel canto).

I don't ask you to care, but come on, if everyone on this thread agreed about Netrebko there would be no discussion, do you really want to silence all your opponents and remove their right to post an opinion?

You ought to know that someone might have a good reason for not liking her, and its very easy to accuse people of snobbery or of being grumpy old reactionaries, what is better is if you can respect the opposite opinion to your own.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Jobis said:


> You ought to know that someone might have a good reason for not liking her


I AGREE like when she didn't support gay rights when expected to DAMN THIS HATEFUL WENCH!!!!! She should be BANNED FROM SINGING because she DESTROYS FREEDOM


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

Aramis said:


> I AGREE like when she didn't support gay rights when expected to DAMN THIS HATEFUL WENCH!!!!! She should be BANNED FROM SINGING because she DESTROYS FREEDOM


When I talk of disliking her I of course mean her as an opera singer. Just in case that wasn't clear. Though now you mention it she doesn't seem like the nicest of people, but thats irrelevant to the discussion. :lol:


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

mamascarlatti said:


> And you don't get real singers - as opposed to armchair critics - dissing each other in the the same way; I suppose because they realise the work and courage required to get up there and perform


it could be that; it could also be they know it's unprofessional to diss your colleagues no matter what you might be thinking about them.

listeners' (armchair critics') raison d'etre in regards to music is to be entertained. I agree it's a very exposed job getting up on stage in front of thousands of people, but an opera singer must know what they signed up for, just as all entertainers do. You get amazing praise and support, the kind that people with regular jobs can't even begin to imagine, and you get a lot of more or less warranted criticism. If you aim to work with people's emotions you end up arousing some powerful negative ones in some of them.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I don't think StukesguildOhio is interested in silencing anyone's opinion. I think she might just be getting tired of the kinds of responses that are, in the words of a local radio host, the rhetorical equivalent of throwing a rock at a window and running away. In other words, in real criticism one-line insults are not enough; you have to explain exactly what you mean and why your opinion has validity.

I should say what I think of Anna Netrebko. I love the sound of her voice, particularly in the middle register. Her vocal timbre often reminds me of flame, and I find that this brings an unexpected and welcome "fire" to characters normally considered rather demure -- e.g. Antionia in HOFFMANN and Lucia di Lammermoor. I don't think she's the ideal coloratura soprano; I can hear how the runs, etc. are sometimes smudgey, though I question the frequent claim that she has no trill. Just now I listened to "Ah, non credea mirarti" from her 2002 aria recital, and the trill is there. I replayed the part several times to make sure it really _was_ a trill -- i.e. a rapid fluctuation between two notes -- and it's definitely that. By comparison, Renee Fleming's trill is a sort of stutter on one note, and _as far as I know_ Montserrat Caballe didn't have a trill (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) -- and yet she's a bel canto legend. So, while acknowledging that Anna is not the bel canto technician Joan Sutherland was, I enjoy her Lucia very much because I like the sound of her voice in it. For example, her smokey middle register fits the morbid aspect of Lucia's personality perfectly.

So I'd explain Anna's appeal to me as mainly a matter of vocal timbre/color and acting ability. I don't find her stage presence very _warm_ -- her recent Met Tatiana was extremely well acted but not as "personable" as Renee Fleming's, and I thought her Adina a little aloof as well -- but I think she's an exceptional actress who can really convey her characters' emotions with her face and body. And I _really_ appreciate her willingness to make eye contact with the other singers onstage. Mamascarlatti pointed this out in another thread with regard to her Elvira in I PURITANI on DVD, and I completely agree. It makes her acting so much more believable.

If anything about Anna's singing sets me on edge, it's that she can sometimes sound as though she's singing sharp. (I have a similar reaction at times to Angela Gheorghiu.) But I don't know if she's _actually_ sharp or if the very bright, almost "hard" timbre of her voice (and I don't mean "hard" in a bad way -- I mean it in the sense of "very bright and clear") just makes her _sound_ sharp. I've noticed that other Slavic singers have a certain lack of softness to their timbres, too, so maybe it's a sort of national characteristic that my ear is not used to.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on Anna. It will be interesting to see how she's viewed, say, thirty years from now. It's my very strong feeling that, if Youtube is still around then, there will be comments on the videos of all the new sopranos, saying things like, "Go and listen to Anna Netrebko if you want to hear how that aria is _supposed to be sung_..."


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Personally, I'm not interested in silencing anyone's opinion concerning Anna Netrebko or any other singer/performer... although I do question blanket statements. Is Anna the greatest living soprano. Surely not. I do think, however, that her voice has a richness and warmth that I quite enjoy. A good many of my favorite singers have been mezzos (Christa Ludwig, Waltraud Meier, Teresa Berganza, Joyce DiDonato, Cecilia Bartoli, Magdalena Kožená, Anne Sofie von Otter, Lorraine Hunt Lieberson, Kathleen Ferrier) and so I appreciate this creamy warmth and sensuality over pyrotechnical display. For example, I blasphemously prefer Bartoli's _La Sonambula_... sung as a mezzo... even to Sutherland's. Not only have I never warmed to Sutherland's voice or her miserable diction... but I simply like Bartoli's voice.

Honestly, there are sopranos that I have far more recordings of than I do of Netrebko. Lucia Popp, Dawn Upshaw, Lisa della Casa, Renée Fleming, Gundula Janowitz, Teresa Stratas, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf are but a few names who come to mind. I suspect Netrebko, however, will be remembered as one of the first great operatic performers of the age of video. Opera is not merely a musical art form but also a visual... or rather theatrical art form, and Netrebko IMO brings something special to her roles in terms of acting and personality. Stratas had a similar ability. While she might not have been able to match Birgit Nilsson, for example, purely based upon her voice... Nilsson comes off ridiculous as Salome...






... in comparison to Stratas... who absolutely owns the role:






It is not merely that Nilsson simply doesn't look like the woman who could lead men to their own destruction... she doesn't even begin to convince me as an actress in the manner in which Stratas convinces me that she truly is a woman crossing over the edge of sanity.

Anna Netrebko has impressed me repeatedly as a singer/actress/personality that I enjoy watching. Patricia Pettibon and Danielle de Niese both strike me in a similar manner... greater seen in performance than simply as singers.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

All singers, no exception, have stronger and weaker points. For instance, it has been mentioned that a legend like Montserrat Caballé couldn't trill. Well, as a matter of fact, her agilities were not technically speaking the best ones, and especially her trills were sometimes just not there, or replaced by a kind of tremolo. However, she had an amazing degree of control over her voice, and was able to produce some incredible pianissimi, her fiato was legendary, the way she was able to sing legato a marvel,... and, more importantly, she was producing wonderful performances of some Bel Canto operas: Lucrezia Borgia, Maria Stuarda, Elisabetta, Gemma de Vergy, Parisina d’Este, Alaide, Imogene, Norma,... up to the mid/late 1970s especially. She was able to reach Rossini's goal of "unveiling the drama hidden in the fioriture".


----------



## Moss (Dec 15, 2013)

This thread should be Headed : Critics Corner or The Opera Snobs Thread? What has age got to do with the likes and dislikes of the Soprano Voice? People who love classical music; and Opera Performances in particular, should have their "Glass Half Full" at all times! I go to performances with excitement; and always enjoy the singing; and appreciate the efforts of the performing artists. BTW I'm 65, years young.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Hey guys what's going on in this thread


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

jhar26 said:


> Unfortunately there's some truth in that. Here people keep things relatively peaceful, but a long time ago I was a member of a yahoo-opera group and talk there was often as vile as on many a sports or political forum.


Many posts and ''conclusions'' are nasty and some possibly entangled with jelousy of certain members on her physical appearance.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

If I were to see a Met HD Broadcast of Lucia, Netrebko or Dessay would be heavenly. Live with a time machine or on CD, in order of preference, Joan, Maria and Moffo.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

Aramis said:


> I AGREE like when she didn't support gay rights when expected to DAMN THIS HATEFUL WENCH!!!!! She should be BANNED FROM SINGING because she DESTROYS FREEDOM


LOL this post made my day!:lol:


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Who cares? A little Auto-tune and Catweezle will be singing like Caruso.


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

I really wonder why those who critique Anna's singing ability are called opera snobs…Should I try to find a crown?


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

sabrina said:


> I really wonder why those who critique Anna's singing ability are called opera snobs…Should I try to find a crown?


I must be too "thick," as the British say, to understand the meaning of your second question.

It's not snobby to critique someone's singing, and I can't see that anyone here is saying it is. It _is_ snobby to present your opinions as though they are indisputable facts _and to put someone down for his/her enjoyment of a particular artist/composer/piece of music_ -- to suggest that the person is "not musical," "has no taste," etc. I have never in my opera-going life belittled someone for liking a singer -- even a singer I don't care for myself.


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

I like Anna's middle range, but that's all. It happens I have, Traviata, Don Pasquale, I Puritani DVDs, all ruined by Anna's singing, lacking the proper technique for singing those roles.
I tend to prefer her in concerts. I consider she is a star in the same way Justin Bieber is a star in his pop business. 
Both question and explanation for my thick remark: do I qualify to be crowned a snob?


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

sabrina said:


> I like Anna's middle range, but that's all. It happens I have, Traviata, Don Pasquale, I Puritani DVDs, all ruined by Anna's singing, lacking the proper technique for singing those roles.
> I tend to prefer her in concerts. I consider she is a star in the same way Justin Bieber is a star in his pop business.
> Both question and explanation for my thick remark: do I qualify to be crowned a snob?


If you are I certainly am, but don't worry, the world needs snobs! :lol:


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

The discreet ''Aristocracy'', maybe...








Not so sure...


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

sabrina said:


> I tend to prefer her in concerts. I consider she is a star in the same way Justin Bieber is a star in his pop business.
> Both question and explanation for my thick remark: do I qualify to be crowned a snob?


I don't know about the snob-crown, but the Bieber comparison seems very far-fetched and plain ridiculous to me.

Anyway, can you explain how she ruins the Don Pasquale? I can imagine your point about Traviata and Puritani (though how could she ruin that one when it was already done by Eric Cutler) but not with Norina.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

sabrina said:


> I like Anna's middle range, but that's all. It happens I have, Traviata, Don Pasquale, I Puritani DVDs, all ruined by Anna's singing, lacking the proper technique for singing those roles.
> I tend to prefer her in concerts. I consider she is a star in the same way Justin Bieber is a star in his pop business.
> Both question and explanation for my thick remark: do I qualify to be crowned a snob?


Well, I was calling myself thick, but that's beside the point now.

It's good that you gave an explanation, unlike some people on the internet, who just "throw a rock at the window and run away." But I can't honestly say I agree with much of what you write. I gave my assessment of Anna up-thread, if you want to have a look. I stand by that.


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

Aramis said:


> Anyway, can you explain how she ruins the Don Pasquale? I can imagine your point about Traviata and Puritani (though how could she ruin that one when it was already done by Eric Cutler) but not with Norina.


I almost liked the met production, but Anna's singing was an unfortunate surprise even for my lowest expectations. Her voice was a bit darker, thicker and less agile than even her prior coloratura roles. Norina is a wonderful belcanto role, but Anna slides through most of the available intricacies and delivers a vocally deflated Norina. 
Her voice was lighter in Traviata but she was again flat, and lacked the ability to act for the tragedy of Violetta, though she is a good actor. Maybe it was just the production that contributed to this feeling…but singing was definitely worse.
Similar story for I Puritani...


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

Bellinilover said:


> Well, I was calling myself thick, but that's beside the point now.
> But I can't honestly say I agree with much of what you write. I gave my assessment of Anna up-thread, if you want to have a look. I stand by that.


I re-read your post and I loved it. I can't say the same things as you about Anna, though I agree Anna's middle range is wonderful. Unfortunately, for me that's not enough.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

#nitpicking ?:devil:


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Someone earlier in the discussion suggested that Anna Moffo was a better soprano than Netrebko. But I wonder if the poster is aware of what happened to Moffo's voice in the late 1960's. According to the book "Start-Up at the New Met," Moffo ran into serious vocal trouble in the 1968-1969 season, which culminated in a broadcast of LUCIA DI LAMMERMOOR in which she was hardly "singing" at all. I listened to an excerpt from the broadcast on Youtube and wish I hadn't. It was much, much worse than a singer simply being in poor voice or having an off-night: basically, Moffo was talking her way through the role. It was truly painful to listen to. Apparently, that season was the start of her career down-swing...and she was not even 40 years old. Netrebko is now 42, and her voice is healthy on the evidence of the recent Met EUGENE ONEGIN, which I saw, and the even more recent TROVATORE in Germany (I read a review and listened to an excerpt on Youtube). I'm not saying for a minute that Anna Moffo didn't have a beautiful voice or wasn't a great singer; I'm just suggesting that something about her technique obviously didn't serve her well in the long run, and her voice did not last into her forties as Netrebko's has. Moreover, Moffo's coloratura singing, like Netrebko's, met with mixed responses; I've read both good and bad reviews of her recorded Lucia, for instance. And I believe her trill was unreliable. I once heard the recording of RIGOLETTO she made with Robert Merrill, and though it's been years I seem to remember that she omitted the trills in "Caro nome."


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> Someone earlier in the discussion suggested that Anna Moffo was a better soprano than Netrebko. But I wonder if the poster is aware of what happened to Moffo's voice in the late 1960's. (...) and she was not even 40 years old. Netrebko is now 42, and her voice is healthy (...) I'm just suggesting that something about her technique obviously didn't serve her well in the long run, and her voice did not last into her forties as Netrebko's has.


That's very little, if anything, of an argument here. By this logic, you might also come to conclusion that Carreras wasn't greater singer than some contemporary shrimp tenor who keeps his mediocre best longer than Carreras, who started to fall apart quite early in his career, kept his.

As for Moffo's coloratura, I don't think she ever recorded a performance where she would do that kind of thing as poorly as Netrebko in Scala's _Don Giovanni_ as Donna Anna, in the fast part of _Non Mi Dir_.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

since we're comparing singers, Moffo was hotter:


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Aramis said:


> That's very little, if anything, of an argument here. By this logic, you might also come to conclusion that Carreras wasn't greater singer than some contemporary shrimp tenor who keeps his mediocre best longer than Carreras, who started to fall apart quite early in his career, kept his.
> 
> As for Moffo's coloratura, I don't think she ever recorded a performance where she would do that kind of thing as poorly as Netrebko in Scala's _Don Giovanni_ as Donna Anna, in the fast part of _Non Mi Dir_.


Regarding your first point: You talk about a singer keeping her "mediocre best" longer. So I guess the question now is, 'Is Anna Netrebko mediocre?' Some say her coloratura technique is mediocre. Is her _voice_ mediocre? Is it of lesser _quality_ than, for instance, Moffo's?

When I listen to Moffo on recordings (she was way before my time, so I never heard her live), her tone seems to me to lack something in depth, and there are times when it sounds unsupported. For me the best things about her voice are its color -- I think it was the dark color that allowed it to make an impression in spinto roles, at least on record -- and its range. Anna Netrebko, by contrast, has to my ears a fuller, more _substantial_ sound in all three registers, and I've never gotten the sense that her voice lacks a firm, basic backing in breath support. Long bel canto phrases can sometimes sound a bit short-breathed, but that's more a matter of not having "trained the breath up" to the task of sustaning those very long phrases. I just think that if someone is going to claim that Moffo had a better voice and/or was a better singer than Netrebko, then he/she has to take into account the problems Moffo encountered with her voice in her thirties, and also things like the opinion of the voice teacher Moffo went to for rehabilitation, that Moffo had never been taught proper breath support. I think this comes across to some extent in her recordings. If a singer experiences a complete deterioration of her voice during what would naturally be her prime years (her thirties), then it's clear that something about her technique was "off"; vocal problems that severe don't just come out of nowhere. On the other hand, if a voice endures -- and actually grows in power and size, as Netrebko's has -- for twenty or more years (Netrebko made her debut in 1993, I believe) -- then surely that suggets a solid technical backing. *

I can't really comment on the second point as I haven't heard Netrebko's Donna Anna, nor have I heard much of Moffo's coloratura, though as I said I do remember the Gilda as well as a recording of Verdi's Luisa Miller she made. The author of "American Opera Singers and Their Recordings" tends to compare Moffo's coloratura with Joan Sutherland's, and of course by that comparison most sopranos will come up more or less short.

*I know, I know -- someone is going to say that what it suggests is miking. But first of all, there's no proof that she's miked, and second of all, if she were miked her voice would merely sound _louder_, as opposed to larger and more powerful.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

deggial said:


> since we're comparing singers, Moffo was hotter:


Well that's a matter of opinion, but yes, Moffo was a beautiful woman.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Bellinilover said:


> Regarding your first point: You talk about a singer keeping her "mediocre best" longer. So I guess the question now is, 'Is Anna Netrebko mediocre?'


That's not the question, because it was not my claim - I have just brought up more radical pairing to show where I've found fault in your argumentation. I don't think that Netrebko can be summed up as mediocre at all.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Aramis said:


> That's not the question, because it was not my claim - I have just brought up more radical pairing to show where I've found fault in your argumentation. I don't think that Netrebko can be summed up as mediocre at all.


I took that the wrong way, then. I apologize.

And likewise, I don't want to give the impression that I think Moffo was in any way mediocre just because she had vocal problems. I think she had a beautiful voice and was a real artist -- I definitely don't think it was just a matter of "attractive packaging" (her looks). An example of her artistry: in _The Grand Tradition_, John Steane talks about how she was particularly good at giving an effect of greater power (as her voice was not large) through the use of dynamic contrasts. He writes that "many bigger voices give less of an effect of power [than Moffo's does]." I do find, however, that Netrebko has more depth and dimension to her sound. Apparently, the root of Moffo's vocal problems was emotional, but it seems to me that a singer with a stronger technical backing would have been able to go through emotional trouble without losing her voice so completely -- but of course I could be wrong about that.


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

Sorry but it is not good comparing such subtleties in tone on recordings. Moffo had completely other type of recording technical devices when compared to Netrebko. I consider Moffo in a different class when compared to Netrebko, but that's just what I think. I'm no guru in this business.


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

Dster said:


> Without great singing, it is my humble opinion that it is difficult to see how opera can servive in its original context for another century.


Here's my response as a newbie to opera. I believe that opera will attract new fans via Blu-ray recordings like the film adaptation of La Boheme starring Anna Netrebko and Rolando Villazon. Beautiful music, beautiful singing, great acting, and the type of cinematography that movie-goers expect. This is what got me hooked on opera. I've since branched out, I now have full season tickets to my local opera (and symphony), and I've traveled to see Anna perform La Boheme live.

The older I get the more I conclude that I'm not an expert on any topic. I've also learned that "it takes all kinds to fill the freeway" - in other words people have different tastes. I'm in the camp that loves Anna Netrebko. I think she sings beautifully, has wonderfully expressive acting, and I don't hold it against her that she looked beautiful in La Boheme. I also think she's a versatile actress; I've enjoyed her in other roles. At the same time I recognize that I'm not an expert in classical singing, and I can't critique the technical aspects of her singing - nor do I care to, because I know what I like.

Perhaps Anna belongs to a new category of performers who can combine very good classical singing with excellent acting and a stunning presence on the screen and stage. The Netrebko / Villazon film adaptation of La Boheme is one my favorite films, and includes some of the most beautiful music I've ever heard. For me, Anna owns the role of Mimi. Similarly, for me Angela Gheorgiu owns the role of Tosca in the film adaptation that includes Roberto Alagna. And - perhaps this illustrates my point of view more than any other example - for me Ying Huang owns the role of Cio-Cio-San in the film adaptation of Madame Butterfly that includes Richard Troxell. I understand from an interview that Ying Huang isn't capable of singing Madame Butterfly live, and I imagine that opera purists might dismiss her. But many novices like me simply can't accept a rotund middle aged woman playing the part of a 15 year old Japanese young woman, and I think that Ying Huang sounds good and delivers a heart breaking performance. (With that said, Maria Callas sounds more heart-breaking singing Un bel di vedremo.) FWIW, I also like Ainhoa Arteta in the DVD of the Washington National Opera's La Rondine. So, what do you call this new category of classical singers who stick to a traditional interpretation of an opera, except with "Hollywood style" screen and stage presence, and who succeed in attracting new fans to opera?


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Interesting. I don't know if it's true but I suspect that the opera DVD/video has long surpassed the opera CD when concerning sales. I dare say youtube has played a big part for casual listeners.

I tend to shy away from film productions and prefer the filmed stage productions. The latter will always be more abundant because of finances. Personally, I thought La Boheme with Netrebko et al. was some very poor film-making but the problem with these sorts of films is that the camera's eye exaggerates poor acting. There's just too much 'mugging' and overall, it was too saccharine.

However, I'm wondering if there is a preference for film productions like La Boheme.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

RobertKC said:


> But many novices like me simply can't accept a rotund middle aged woman playing the part of a 15 year old Japanese young woman,


can you accept Pavarotti as Nemorino?


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> Interesting. I don't know if it's true but I suspect that the opera DVD/video has long surpassed the opera CD when concerning sales. I dare say youtube has played a big part for casual listeners.


For me, as a beginner, yes - YouTube is very useful in exploring opera, and music of all types. I use YouTube to discover new music, and then buy high quality recordings of music that I like. I've also used Netflix and my local public library to explore opera.



Couac Addict said:


> I tend to shy away from film productions and prefer the filmed stage productions. The latter will always be more abundant because of finances. Personally, I thought La Boheme with Netrebko et al. was some very poor film-making but the problem with these sorts of films is that the camera's eye exaggerates poor acting. There's just too much 'mugging' and overall, it was too saccharine.


People have different tastes. My understanding is that the male leads in La Boheme are a bunch of young knuckleheads (perhaps late teens or early twenties?), and so it's appropriate for them to act a little goofy. And I fell for Anna's portrayal of Mimi. Again, people have different tastes, and falling in love with music and opera is very personal.



Couac Addict said:


> However, I'm wondering if there is a preference for film productions like La Boheme.


Again I'm a beginner when it comes to opera, and I can only speak for myself. I like film adaptations because they augment the beauty of the music and the story with the storytelling power of "Hollywood style" cinematography. At the same time, I like some videotaped stage productions, such as the Washington National Opera production of La Rondine that I mentioned. On one hand I like Teresa Stratas in Zeffirelli's film of La Traviata, and I like Anna in the Blu-ray recording of the live performance of La Traviata with Rolando Villazon. And recordings of opera have led me to enjoy live stage productions.


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

deggial said:


> can you accept Pavarotti as Nemorino?


Yes, though I'm not a big fan of comedic opera, I liked Pavarotti in the DVD that I saw of him in this role. In my limited experience, I think that Pavarotti was a very good comedic actor. However, it would be more difficult for me to accept Pavarotti as Lt. Pinkerton in a filmed (vs. audio-only) performance of Madame Butterfly. It's not that I couldn't overcome his appearance if he did a great job acting, but it's easier to accept a young Richard Troxell as a tall handsome young Navy officer. I think its because I grew up watching movies, not opera, and I'm used to the "Hollywood style".

Perhaps a new classification would be useful: "Cinematic Soprano", or "Cinematic Tenor". I think that classical singers who can combine beautiful singing with Hollywood cinematography make opera more accessible to people who are new to the art form. As newbies (like me) learn more about opera and their tastes evolve, they might expand their palette.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Filmed opera productions are not new, of course, but part of the business since a long time ago.

About the operas mentioned above, those are my favorites in film format:
















However, I do prefer, like I'd guess most Opera fans, staged opera videotaped. And, of course, I don't have any problem watching Mirella Freni (though she also didn't sing Cio-Cio San on stage) performing Madama Butterfly. As I don't have any problem watching Leontyne Price performing Il Trovatore, for instance. This is again something that most Opera fans don't have any problem with. For someone new to Opera, this could be, in some cases, a barrier to fully embrace the art form, but almost always it will disappear with further exposure.

However, if some seasoned Opera fan can't suspend disbelief to accept an Italian soprano singing Cio-Cio San, he can always resort to audio only, or watch Ms. Huang. (that is Chinese, not Japanese, anyway).


----------



## RobertKC (Dec 9, 2013)

schigolch said:


> About the operas mentioned above, those are my favorites in film format


Thanks for the recommendations. I'll see if I can rent these on Netflix, as soon as I renew my subscription. (I suspended my Netflix subscription because apparently they stopped buying opera, ballet, and classical recordings several years ago ...)


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

*Aida 2017*






There has been no posts here since 2013. What do you think of this Aida and her role? I really like the stage production in Act I, and I'm more convinced with Radamès than Amneris. I'm reading very negative comments in the YouTube video. I don't know what you think. Is it too risky to call Netrebko a wobbly Sutherland or a dry Callas? I think her voice will be missed from the very moment she retires. We could also talk about her Tatiana in "Eugen Onegin".

Aida: Anna Netrebko
Radamès: Francesco Meli
Amneris: Ekaterina Semenchuk
Amonasro: Luca Salsi
Il Re: Roberto Tagliavini
Ramfis: Dmitry Belosselskiy
Sacerdotissa: Benedetta Torre
Messaggero: Bror Magnus Tødenes
Konzertvereinigung Wiener Staatsopernchor
Wiener Philharmoniker
*Riccardo Muti*
Salzburg Festival 2017


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

I will pass on this one. :devil:


----------



## Lensky (May 8, 2016)

Granate said:


> What do you think of this Aida and her role?


Mi consejo: ¡ ahórrate tiempo y saca a pasear al perro!


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

Lensky said:


> Mi consejo: ¡ ahórrate tiempo y saca a pasear al perro!


1. I don't have any pets.
2. I dislike dogs. They cannot stop barking at anything new, though they are very curious.
3. Don't use Spanish with me or any other Spanish speaking member outside the Community Forum, please.
4. I suppose that I'm the only one liking her way of singing and all the negative reviews are also present in Today's Talk Classical.

Searching about Maria Callas and her 40th anniversary of passing away, I found this article from 1997 in The Guardian
Maria Callas: The truth is she was far from perfect

Why do I see some parallels?


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Granate said:


> 1. I don't have any pets.
> 2. I dislike dogs. They cannot stop barking at anything new, though they are very curious.
> 3. Don't use Spanish with me or any other Spanish speaking member outside the Community Forum, please.
> 4. I suppose that I'm the only one liking her way of singing and all the negative reviews are also present in Today's Talk Classical.
> ...


While I got into opera because of Callas, I am by no means a fanatic on the subject. These days the operas that she was best known for are not often of much interest to me. Having said that, I would point you to part of McNally's article...

_Listening to Callas is never such a passive experience. With Callas, you are there as Violetta pleads with Germont or Norma contemplates killing her children. Other sopranos only sing 'Vessi d'arte' in Tosca. Only Callas talks to God. She does this in a voice some found 'beautiful', others not. But apart from the wobble, Callas is very close to perfection. She has true legato and phrases like a master cellist. Trills and coloratura hold no terror for her. She has a voice that is unmistakable after one tone.

Today's cookie-cutter voices are not identifiable after an entire act on the radio. She was beautiful on stage. Her acting was minimal in that she did very little (has there ever been a more restrained Tosca, a stiller Norma?), but what she did was make us listen to the music with a new clarity because she made us hear it through her and the character she was playing. Callas made opera mean something again._

Netrebko may have a beautiful voice but she most definitely does not fit these criteria. I would never say that _what she did was make us listen to the music with a new clarity because she made us hear it through her and the character she was playing._


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Granate said:


> Searching about Maria Callas and her 40th anniversary of passing away, I found this article from 1997 in The Guardian
> Maria Callas: The truth is she was far from perfect
> 
> *Why do I see some parallels?*


There are no parallels between Netrebko and Callas. Netrebko is a lovely woman with a fine voice a bit past its best, a good if not complete vocal technique, and an attractive if not remarkable stage presence. Some like her voice, some don't, and that can be said of any singer. Callas was like nothing ever seen or heard - before, since, or in the future. Her art makes our liking or disliking irrelevant. Netrebko should say what Caballe said: "That I am compared with Callas is something I never dared to dream. It is not right. I am much smaller than Callas."


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

---------Deleted post ---------


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

Granate said:


> There has been no posts here since 2013. What do you think of this Aida and her role? I really like the stage production in Act I, and I'm more convinced with Radamès than Amneris. I'm reading very negative comments in the YouTube video. I don't know what you think. Is it too risky to call Netrebko a wobbly Sutherland or a dry Callas? I think her voice will be missed from the very moment she retires. We could also talk about her Tatiana in "Eugen Onegin".
> 
> Aida: Anna Netrebko
> Radamès: Francesco Meli
> ...


I highly recommend the Met DVD with Millo, Domingo, Zajick and Milnes under James Levine. You'll see that this travesty with Netrebko (just like pretty much anything with her) is not worth a minute of your time.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Tuoksu said:


> I highly recommend the Met DVD with Millo, Domingo, Zajick and Milnes under James Levine. You'll see that this travesty with Netrebko (just like pretty much anything with her) is not worth a minute of your time.


I second this, even this alternative makes you feel happy:
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Decca/0743428


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

she's fine in the right repertoire, but I find many of her choices of repertoire to range from inappropriate to straight up arrogant. she's a great example of why the fach system is still important and that singers should play to their strengths, particularly when they have the position to be choosy about repertoire.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

Anna Netrebko was a beautiful woman and could be an alluring singer. Unfortunately, the hype around her has been such that she's becoming a caricature of a diva and of a musician. One has give it to her: she's a show woman and she can allure her audience to believe there is more artistry there than reality. She is a sopranino. However, she should not push the atrocity of a tenor that she married appearances as he ruins the minimal pleasure one could derive from her shows.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> she's fine in the right repertoire, but I find many of her choices of repertoire to range from inappropriate to straight up arrogant. she's a great example of why the fach system is still important and that singers should play to their strengths, particularly when they have the position to be choosy about repertoire.


I agree, but which roles do you think she should be singing? Which ten operas would you suggest for her staples?

(I wonder if we agree).

N.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

She is fine but not a favourite.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

Been reading some reviews mentioning Frau Netrebko which made me want to revive this thread. As we now stand in 2020 how does she stack up against divas of the past & present?


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

In here own dream perhaps. Never liked here, never will.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I like her a lot in this one:









Pretty good here too:


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Fritz Kobus said:


> I like her a lot in this one:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Spot on! I also like her Tatyana in Eugene Onegin. I think she was superb in Russian repertoire and never understood how bel canto became her calling card in the West. Whilst she can be very exciting live I haven't quite been convinced that she suits the roles she has taken on: Violetta, Manon, Aida, Adriana Lecouvreur, Lady Macbeth and the Forza Leonora. She would have made an excellent Liza in Queen of Spades, but she isn't keen on the part.

She's worth seeing, but I don't think she has lived up to her potential.

N.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

I liked her in Traviata although I thought she was probably mic'd a little poorly, to pick up all her inhalations so loudly--since I don't hear her gasping for breath in any of her other recordings, I think it's reasonable to blame the engineers on that recording. I think she was also quite good in Mozart earlier in her career--she has a very good Donna Anna and a superb Susanna on video.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

What are the thoughts about the upcoming Turandot?


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Becca said:


> What are the thoughts about the upcoming Turandot?


Certainly a terrible idea, but she's 48 years old and is at the stage of her career where I don't criticize singers too harshly for taking any roles they like, no matter the results.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

howlingfantods said:


> I liked her in Traviata although I thought she was probably mic'd a little poorly, to pick up all her inhalations so loudly--since I don't hear her gasping for breath in any of her other recordings, I think it's reasonable to blame the engineers on that recording. I think she was also quite good in Mozart earlier in her career--she has a very good Donna Anna and a superb Susanna on video.


I don't like that Susanna, mainly because I can't get my head around someone with a 'Countess' voice undertaking the role. I know they exchange clothes at the end, but...

N.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

The Conte said:


> I don't like that Susanna, mainly because I can't get my head around someone with a 'Countess' voice undertaking the role. I know they exchange clothes at the end, but...
> 
> N.


Fair, I did think it was a little surprising she did Susanna instead of the Countess, but it did result in a lovely Deh vieni.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

From a 2017 review written by a Nick Perdian who writes for Seen & Heard:

_Not since Marlene Dietrich has a singer looked as alluring as Netrebko does in a military cap. Even in rather plain attire, Netrebko radiated the same aura of glamour, mystery and intrigue as did Dietrich in her great film roles. It just comes naturally to her. She exhibited those same qualities some 15 years ago when I first heard her at New York's Metropolitan Opera in Prokofiev's War and Peace. The New York Times reported then that she had a 'clear, ample, cool Nordic voice'. These days it is more often described as smoldering.

I am not sure which adjectives to use, but suffice to say Netrebko's Leonora was pretty spectacular. She managed to keep all of that star mega wattage and smoldering sensuality in check, and her Leonora was all the more effective for it. The bottom of her voice has become richer with time, but the top has lost none of its fullness or beauty. She can float breathtaking pianissimos, pop out dazzlingly coloratura and turn a delicate trill, all the while sculpting musical lines of absolute beauty. I live in the present, not the past. So go ahead, name a soprano who can even approach her in the role nowadays._

Is this crazy talk??


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Bonetan said:


> From a 2017 review written by a Nick Perdian who writes for Seen & Heard:
> 
> _Not since Marlene Dietrich has a singer looked as alluring as Netrebko does in a military cap. Even in rather plain attire, Netrebko radiated the same aura of glamour, mystery and intrigue as did Dietrich in her great film roles. It just comes naturally to her. She exhibited those same qualities some 15 years ago when I first heard her at New York's Metropolitan Opera in Prokofiev's War and Peace. The New York Times reported then that she had a 'clear, ample, cool Nordic voice'. These days it is more often described as smoldering.
> 
> ...


Well, he does say he lives in the present, not the past. Not me. I need the past in order to have some reason to get up in the morning.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Here's a clip from last year -






Sounds pretty good to me honestly. I'd say it's an exaggeration to say Netrebko's top has lost none of the beauty and fullness -- her high notes are notably thinner and less beautiful than it was a decade earlier: 



. Still, noting that someone's voice at 48 is not what it was at 39 is hardly a major revelation.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

howlingfantods said:


> Here's a clip from last year -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Whatever the state of her voice, I have to say that that is the most rhythmically flabby, self-indulgent performance I've ever heard. Even worse than late Caballe. Does she think that's expressive? It isn't the voice it once was, but I could deal with that if she'd really sing the music.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

Becca said:


> What are the thoughts about the upcoming Turandot?


Apparently she did well...

https://seenandheard-international....n-munich-in-her-debut-as-turandot/#more-92957


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Whatever the state of her voice, I have to say that that is the most rhythmically flabby, self-indulgent performance I've ever heard. Even worse than late Caballe. Does she think that's expressive? It isn't the voice it once was, but I could deal with that if she'd really sing the music.


Caballe is an interesting comparison actually. For me, they're roughly equivalent--lovely voices, not the most interesting or musical singers but not terribly boring like a Ricciarelli. When I see their names on a CD or DVD sleeve, I'm neither excited nor repelled.

Which is why I'm always surprised both by the Caballe love around here and the Netrebko hate--neither seem very justified to me, and I don't understand those who love the one and detest the other.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

LIke you, I neither love Caballe nor loathe Netrebko. In both I enjoy their early work the most, and I'd put Caballe a notch above Netrebko, finding her more convincing in a broad repertoire. She became self-indulgent as her voice lost its bloom, overusing her pianissimi and milking phrases. I've never been interested enough in Netrebko to seek out her work, and the only recording I've ever owned is a very nice Russian recital, made back when her voice was fresh. I imagine she's an asset to recordings of Russian opera made back then.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I have to wonder if much of the opinion about Netrebko has as much to do with her uber-diva personality as it does with her vocal abilities.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

Caballe is a much greater singer than Netrebko. Caballe has a properly developed chest register that she uses frequently, and a beautiful middle. Her upper register is more complicated, her forte notes sometimes being a little screechy but her pianissimo being justly famous. She never had anything approaching the vibrato problems Netrebko has, or the extreme constriction/collapsed top. Netrebko has a lot of natural talent, but she can not use it well because of the current pedagogical insanity. Even young Netrebko, who was much, much, much better than current Netrebko, did not reach this level:





The chest in the first phrase here, In mia man alfin tu sei, is more dramatic than any sound I've ever heard Netrebko make.





Even in her later career, she was capable of some very fine singing, though it was admittedly less common than in her young days.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

vivalagentenuova said:


> Caballe is a much greater singer than Netrebko. Caballe has a properly developed chest register that she uses frequently, and a beautiful middle. Her upper register is more complicated, her forte notes sometimes being a little screechy but her pianissimo being justly famous. She never had anything approaching the vibrato problems Netrebko has, or the extreme constriction/collapsed top. Netrebko has a lot of natural talent, but she can not use it well because of the current pedagogical insanity. Even young Netrebko, who was much, much, much better than current Netrebko, did not reach this level:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Perhaps I dislike Caballe more than I thought, if these are the best examples you can find of Caballe's art. The first is pretty but boring, the second seems like Caballe is trying very hard to be dramatic which is only fitfully successful and sounds forced--intonation problems, register breaks, lots of hard unpleasant sounds. I don't find Caballe's attempts at Norma at all to my liking, either the studio recording or this Orange performance.


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

I'm not really a fan of 19th century opera, except Wagner. But I've never understood the fascination with Anna Netrebko, try as I might. She appeared at the Vienna State Opera Ball in 2019 dressed up like a trussed turkey and standing beside a husband who looked like a waxwork of an opera singer. I had to laugh because when she was interviewed about "the stress" of singing at the Opera Ball she said when she came to "be-form" at this venue it put her under additional pressure. "Be-form"!!

Here she is with uber-beautiful Dmitri (taken from us much too early) singing in Moscow; this is one I can enjoy - but Anna's voice is weak here. Dmitri had such a wonderful, wide smile and happy nature that it's no wonder everybody loved him:


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Christabel said:


> I'm not really a fan of 19th century opera, except Wagner. But I've never understood the fascination with Anna Netrebko, try as I might. She appeared at the Vienna State Opera Ball in 2019 dressed up like a trussed turkey and standing beside a husband who looked like a waxwork of an opera singer. I had to laugh because when she was interviewed about "the stress" of singing at the Opera Ball she said when she came to "be-form" at this venue it put her under additional pressure. "Be-form"!!
> 
> Here she is with uber-beautiful Dmitri (taken from us much too early) singing in Moscow; this is one I can enjoy - but Anna's voice is weak here. Dmitri had such a wonderful, wide smile and happy nature that it's no wonder everybody loved him:


*"She appeared at the Vienna State Opera Ball in 2019 dressed up like a trussed turkey..."*

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

See for yourself from 10 minutes here. "Be-form"


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I’m always amused by these negative comments about current singers like Netrebko as it takes me back about 55 years or more to when I was a lad and started reading the Gramophone. Hey presto, the same sort of negative comments made about singers then, only they were called Sutherland, callas et al. Of course now they are out the way they are elevated to god-like status! It seems to be sport, however, among some, to pick them apart while they are alive. I have even seen Anna blasted for wearing darkish makeup to sing Aida. What is she supposed to wear? It’s usually done by people with no talent themselves who want to set themselves up as some sort of experts. For me, I have enjoyed Anna’s performances in spite of (or even because of) the constant negative sniping by the no-talent brigade. Just like I enjoyed Caballe, Sutherland eat al, and all the wonderful singers including Anna who I have had the privilege of listening to.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Christabel said:


> See for yourself from 10 minutes here. "Be-form"


I must say that the dress isn't at all flattering. It really does make her look like this...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Red Terror said:


> I must say that the dress isn't at all flattering. It really does make her look like this...


Oh the dress now! Thought she was a singer! :lol:


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

DavidA said:


> Oh the dress now! Thought she was a singer! :lol:


...Yes, she's a singer wearing a dress that makes her look "like a trussed turkey." What's your point?

FYI: I can't comment on her talent as I don't own any of her recordings, but the word on the street is that her voice is "just okay".


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Red Terror said:


> ...Yes, she's a singer wearing a dress that makes her look "like a trussed turkey." What's your point?
> 
> FYI: I can't comment on her talent as I don't own any of her recordings, but the word on the street is that her voice is "just okay".


I just wondered what your point was as she's a singer not a model


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

DavidA said:


> I just wondered what your point was as she's a singer not a model


How about we just turn this into a *Barbara Hannigan* thread:


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I'm always amused by these negative comments about current singers like Netrebko as it takes me back about 55 years or more to when I was a lad and started reading the Gramophone. Hey presto, the same sort of negative comments made about singers then, only they were called Sutherland, callas et al. Of course now they are out the way they are elevated to god-like status! It seems to be sport, however, among some, to pick them apart while they are alive. I have even seen Anna blasted for wearing darkish makeup to sing Aida. What is she supposed to wear? It's usually done by people with no talent themselves who want to set themselves up as some sort of experts. For me, I have enjoyed Anna's performances in spite of (or even because of) the constant negative sniping by the no-talent brigade. Just like I enjoyed Caballe, Sutherland eat al, and all the wonderful singers including Anna who I have had the privilege of listening to.


Oh yes, I've got no talent and no money and I need to snipe about Anna because it makes me feel better. Sure. I was commenting on how Ms. Netrebko is so terribly over-rated and it's just so easy to have a bit of fun when she also has no dress sense. I had no love for Joan (I-can't-hear-a-single-word-you're-singing) Sutherland either. I actually regarded her as a parody of herself in the finish.

Ah (long sigh); I feel better now with my own self-esteem back on top!! :lol:


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I just wondered what your point was as she's a singer not a model


Clearly your feelings are hurt because we've had a bit of fun!! Lighten up, old chap.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Christabel said:


> Clearly your feelings are hurt because we've had a bit of fun!! Lighten up, old chap.


I assure you my friend my feelings have not been hurt at all. Maybe yours but not mine!


----------



## Phantoms of the Opera (Feb 5, 2020)

DavidA said:


> Oh the dress now! Thought she was a singer! :lol:


I think it is fair to discuss her appearance and wardrobe as she has built her reputation on it. The press love to talk about her supposed glamour and beauty. In my opinion, she does not merit the comparisons to stars of the golden age of Hollywood. She does not move with grace on stage or off. She had a good voice when she began but she would never have been a great singer because she is lazy, and now has no incentive to improve, as she is already right where she wants to be.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Phantoms of the Opera said:


> I think it is fair to discuss her appearance and wardrobe as she has built her reputation on it. The press love to talk about her supposed glamour and beauty. In my opinion, she does not merit the comparisons to stars of the golden age of Hollywood. She does not move with grace on stage or off. She had a good voice when she began but she would never have been a great singer because she is lazy, and now has no incentive to improve, as she is already right where she wants to be.


Interesting, I never knew any of this. I have just seen her on stage. Of course, they said the same about Callas. Where does your information come from? Accredited sources or gossip columns?


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I assure you my friend my feelings have not been hurt at all. Maybe yours but not mine!


No worries. I guess we have to stick to the script when talking about music; no deviation allowed.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Interesting, I never knew any of this. I have just seen her on stage. Of course, they said the same about Callas. Where does your information come from? Accredited sources or gossip columns?


I assure you nobody ever said Callas did not move with grace, nor did anyone ever call Callas, the consummate professional and renowned hard worker, lazy. All the conductors and producers she worked with praised her work ethic, saying she was often the first to arrive at rehearsal and the last to leave.

Poeple may have carped about the quaility of her actual voice, but there was little disagreement about her professionalism and dedication to her craft. The capricious prima donna character was largely a tabloid invention.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I assure you nobody ever said Callas did not move with grace, nor did anyone ever call Callas, the consummate professional and renowned hard worker, lazy. All the conductors and producers she worked with praised her work ethic, saying she was often the first to arrive at rehearsal and the last to leave.
> 
> Poeple may have carped about the quaility of her actual voice, but there was little disagreement about her professionalism and dedication to her craft. The capricious prima donna character was largely a tabloid invention.


That is exactly what I said. The gossip columnist and the tabloid journalist had a field day but of course she did neglect her voice when she went off with with a tycoon. Oh I can remember all sorts of things that were said about Callas from her being overweight to her slimming to her affair. The fact is when you're in the public eye lesson talented people will want to spit at you because of envy. The6 are all gossiping about Netrebko now because she has committed the sin of being successful


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

DavidA said:


> That is exactly what I said. The gossip columnist and the tabloid journalist had a field day but of course she did neglect her voice when she went off with with a tycoon. Oh I can remember all sorts of things that were said about Callas from her being overweight to her slimming to her affair. The fact is when you're in the public eye lesson talented people will want to spit at you because of envy. The6 are all gossiping about Netrebko now because she has committed the sin of being successful


No, it is not _exactl_y what you said. Your response was to Phantoms of the Opera's statement that Netrebko


> does not move with grace on stage or off. She had a good voice when she began but she would never have been a great singer because she is lazy, and now has no incentive to improve, as she is already right where she wants to be.


 and you said,


> Of course, they said the same about Callas.


Whatever the gossip columnists said about Callas, they never said such things about her. And actually it's wrong to suggest Callas neglected her voice when she went off with Onassis. It's not actually that simple (these things rarely are). She had started to have vocal problems before she met Onassis, which were probably exacerbated by the sudden reduction in the amount of her public performances. She didn't just become lazy. Quite the reverse, she actually sought help again from her original teacher, Elvira de Hidalgo. I could write pages about the possible causes and reasons for her vocal decline, as there are almost as many theories about it as there are "fake news" stories about her private life, but this is not the place to do so. However, whatever happened to her voice Callas was an artist down to her very fingertips till the day she died, even in those last sad concerts with Di Stefano, when the voice was little better than a ruin. Personally, I don't think the same is true of Netrebko.


----------



## Phantoms of the Opera (Feb 5, 2020)

Well, to start with, there is a quote from an article above, posted by *Bonetan*, comparing her to Marlene Dietrich, waxing lyrical about her "smouldering sensuality", "allure", "glamour", etc., Here is Classic FM quoting her being described as "Audrey Hepburn with a voice": https://www.classicfm.com/artists/anna-netrebko/anna-netrebko-russian-operatic-soprano/

For a less 'accredited source', here is a French site which has named her the most sexy female opera singer: http://www.classique-c-cool.com/dossiers/chanteurs-opera-sexy

Finally, I wanted to quote this New York Times article, but every paragraph is a gem, from the writer upgrading her from Audrey Hepburn to Sophia Loren; descriptions of her diamond-encrusted watch and head-turning miniskirt, and the head of the Met at the time saying how her "being great-looking" has helped her career. So here it is in full. Keep reading for the mention of her pole-dancing! 
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/magazine/02netrebko-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2

Callas made her reputation before she became glamorous, based on her singing, not her looks. My point is that Netrebko would not have got where she is if she wasn't "beautiful for a soprano", to quote Lauritz Melchior in 'Two Sisters From Boston'!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Tsaraslondon said:


> No, it is not _exactl_y what you said. Your response was to Phantoms of the Opera's statement that Netrebko and you said,
> 
> Whatever the gossip columnists said about Callas, they never said such things about her. And actually it's wrong to suggest Callas neglected her voice when she went off with Onassis. It's not actually that simple (these things rarely are). She had started to have vocal problems before she met Onassis, which were probably exacerbated by the sudden reduction in the amount of her public performances. She didn't just become lazy. Quite the reverse, she actually sought help again from her original teacher, Elvira de Hidalgo. I could write pages about the possible causes and reasons for her vocal decline, as there are almost as many theories about it as there are "fake news" stories about her private life, but this is not the place to do so. However, whatever happened to her voice Callas was an artist down to her very fingertips till the day she died, even in those last sad concerts with Di Stefano, when the voice was little better than a ruin. Personally, I don't think the same is true of Netrebko.


I can't see why we must become so touchy about Callas. The fact is she left her career because she said 'I want to be a woman' or words to that effect. That was her choice. The voice was neglected in those years. Fact! She didn't sing. She may have sought help but the fact was that she never recovered her voice. Why can't we realise she was a woman - and a not very happy one at that - off the stage instead of some sort of goddess? As Andre Previn said once about a certain violinist, "Mr Heifetz was a lot less godlike when he put his violin down." Sad to say that often the greatest artists are not the most successful people. Look at Beethoven!


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

DavidA said:


> I can't see why we must become so touchy about Callas. The fact is she left her career because she said 'I want to be a woman' or words to that effect. That was her choice. The voice was neglected in those years. Fact! She didn't sing. She may have sought help but the fact was that she never recovered her voice. Why can't we realise she was a woman - and a not very happy one at that - off the stage instead of some sort of goddess? As Andre Previn said once about a certain violinist, "Mr Heifetz was a lot less godlike when he put his violin down." Sad to say that often the greatest artists are not the most successful people. Look at Beethoven!


I am not getting touchy about Callas at all. If I'm getting touchy at all, it's more about your refusal to acknowledge any of the points I made, your habit of continually contradicting yourself, and your insistence on missing the point.

But there, I should have known better even to engage.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

howlingfantods said:


> Perhaps I dislike Caballe more than I thought, if these are the best examples you can find of Caballe's art. The first is pretty but boring, the second seems like Caballe is trying very hard to be dramatic which is only fitfully successful and sounds forced--intonation problems, register breaks, lots of hard unpleasant sounds. I don't find Caballe's attempts at Norma at all to my liking, either the studio recording or this Orange performance.


Not necessarily the best, but two that show that she can do two things well that are beyond the ability of any modern soprano, including Netrebko: spin long, legato lines of great beauty with excellent breath control, and use chest voice properly. I would far prefer an audible break than the hollow, constricted sounds Netrebko produces. Also, cannot agree that the first one is at all boring. In the second, yes, there are some unpleasant sounds, especially in high forte passages. But getting 70% of an aria good, real operatic sound is better than Netrebko can offer, which is the issue here.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> LIke you, I neither love Caballe nor loathe Netrebko. In both I enjoy their early work the most, and I'd put Caballe a notch above Netrebko, finding her more convincing in a broad repertoire. She became self-indulgent as her voice lost its bloom, overusing her pianissimi and milking phrases. I've never been interested enough in Netrebko to seek out her work, and the only recording I've ever owned is a very nice Russian recital, made back when her voice was fresh. I imagine she's an asset to recordings of Russian opera made back then.


Indeed she is. I have her Ruslan and Lyudmila (both on CD and DVD), which I believe was the first time she was seen in the west as it was shown on TV. Another role that really works for her is Tatiana in Onegin which is available on blu-ray (I saw the Met HD). There is also a disc of Russian arias which is superb, but I haven't been that impressed with her in most of her other rep.

As for Caballe I can only concur. Whilst she too sang things that she wasn't particularly suited for, most of her rep she shone in. I love her in Verdi (and Bel Canto, of course!) She's a singer I've gradually warmed to over the years and I've grown into quite the fan. I prefer her to the other sopranos of her generation (Price would be my joint top choice for sopranos from 60s/70s/80s.)

N.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

howlingfantods said:


> I don't find Caballe's attempts at Norma at all to my liking, either the studio recording or this Orange performance.


Funnily enough, Caballé's Orange Norma is just about the only one I can play without constantly wishing it were Callas. The excerpt here is of course live and towards the end of a very long evening. It makes complete dramatic sense when seen from the perspective of the whole performance. Earlier in the evening she had sung one of the most ravishing _Casta diva_s I've ever heard.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Christabel said:


> See for yourself from 10 minutes here. "Be-form"


One thing I'm totally not bothered about re Netrebko is that English isn't her mother tongue. I'm not bothered about what she chooses to wear to the Wiener Opernball either. My beef with her is that she has sung far too much that she wasn't suited to and so the results have been very mixed across a rather strange career.

N.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

DavidA said:


> I'm always amused by these negative comments about current singers like Netrebko as it takes me back about 55 years or more to when I was a lad and started reading the Gramophone. Hey presto, the same sort of negative comments made about singers then, only they were called Sutherland, callas et al. Of course now they are out the way they are elevated to god-like status! It seems to be sport, however, among some, to pick them apart while they are alive. I have even seen Anna blasted for wearing darkish makeup to sing Aida. What is she supposed to wear? It's usually done by people with no talent themselves who want to set themselves up as some sort of experts. For me, I have enjoyed Anna's performances in spite of (or even because of) the constant negative sniping by the no-talent brigade. Just like I enjoyed Caballe, Sutherland eat al, and all the wonderful singers including Anna who I have had the privilege of listening to.


Yes, we know you love all opera singers/composers/conductors etc. equally and never have a critical word to say about them. Please forgive the rest of us who don't share your positive attitude.

N.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Funnily enough, Caballé's Orange Norma is just about the only one I can play without constantly wishing it were Callas. The excerpt here is of course live and towards the end of a very long evening. It makes complete dramatic sense when seen from the perspective of the whole performance. Earlier in the evening she had sung one of the most ravishing _Casta diva_s I've ever heard.


I've only watched that DVD once and all I remember is the Orange signature wind! I must watch it again.

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Interesting, I never knew any of this. I have just seen her on stage. Of course, they said the same about Callas. Where does your information come from? Accredited sources or gossip columns?


Where does your information about Callas come from? The same "accredited sources" where you get your information about Wagner?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

The Conte said:


> Yes, we know you love all opera singers/composers/conductors etc. equally and never have a critical word to say about them. Please forgive the rest of us who don't share your positive attitude.
> 
> N.


Don't worry, you are absolved! :lol:


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Red Terror said:


> FYI: I can't comment on her talent as I don't own any of her recordings, but the word on the street is that her voice is "just okay".


You can judge for yourself but I think her voice is outstanding. What I think we're arguing about is whether her singing is as outstanding as her instrument--I think it's decent to good, at least in some of the examples I've heard, but others obviously disagree.






That's not the greatest Deh Vieni I've heard but it's a very good one.



The Conte said:


> As for Caballe I can only concur. Whilst she too sang things that she wasn't particularly suited for, most of her rep she shone in. I love her in Verdi (and Bel Canto, of course!) She's a singer I've gradually warmed to over the years and I've grown into quite the fan. I prefer her to the other sopranos of her generation (Price would be my joint top choice for sopranos from 60s/70s/80s.)
> 
> N.


I'd take Freni, Arroyo, Scotto and Margaret Price over Caballe any day. Sutherland, too, although I'm not much of a Sutherland fan. Leontyne Price for me is actually the best example of wonderful voice married to a singing approach that doesn't do much for me. Maybe the greatest voice ever but I never really want to listen to her recordings more than a few times.



Tsaraslondon said:


> Funnily enough, Caballé's Orange Norma is just about the only one I can play without constantly wishing it were Callas. The excerpt here is of course live and towards the end of a very long evening. It makes complete dramatic sense when seen from the perspective of the whole performance. Earlier in the evening she had sung one of the most ravishing _Casta diva_s I've ever heard.


I'm not much of a Norma fan, but I have 3 Callas, 2 Sutherlands, a Cerquetti, a Gencer and the Caballe studio, and the Caballe is the one I find least satisfying in the title role by a sizable margin. I like her as Adalgisa in the Bonynge Sutherland though.

I think ultimately she's a lirico who tried to do a lot of spinto and dramatic roles, and she just doesn't have the edge to pull it off. It's one of the reasons I find the Muti Aida and Giulini Don Carlo so unsatisfying. I do like her Violetta though.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

That Netrebko Deh vieni is obviously vastly better than what she currently puts out:




This Ritorna vincitor is unlistenable. Deh vieni might be much better, but it's still not great, not even close. Even when young she has a wobble, produces collapsed tones in her middle and high notes, and becomes inaudible in her low notes.





Now this is a great Deh vieni non tardar. Netrebko has never in her life been that good. She perhaps had the potential to be, but we'll never know because she never got training that could produce that kind of voice.

To be fair, Caballe was not on Rethberg's level either. Rethberg's voice is much smoother on average, is even more solid, and she is impeccably stylish. But Caballe did not have a wobble, did not produce collapsed tones, and had very audible, clear low notes.

I must say I don't understand how you can (rightfully) criticize Caballe for ugly or shrill sounds and then say you prefer Scotto. Scotto, like Netrebko, was never a great signer even when she was young, and had a wobble and thin, shrill top notes. And not just any old shrill. Her high C at the end of the Butterfly love duet with Bergonzi for Barbirolli, a famous recording from her very early career, is blood curdling. It's hardly an exception. The entrance aria high d-flat could skin a cat. Above, middle C, Scotto's voice is ugly more often than not.

Like Caballe, Freni was great until about 1975. After that it a pretty hard and unpleasant sound. Leontyne Price most certainly did not have the greatest voice ever, not even close. She had about 3 great years, and after that mostly sand in collapsed head voice that was harsh and unpleasant. Caballe was one of the better sopranos of the 70s, but by that point there were none on par with even just one generation before.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

vivalagentenuova said:


> That Netrebko Deh vieni is obviously vastly better than what she currently puts out


I think it's pretty obviously going to be the case that most sopranos aren't as good at the age of 48 than at the age of 34. I judge singers by their peaks, not their declines. 48 for Callas and Tebaldi would have been around 1970 or 1971 and most opera fans wouldn't judge their abilities based on a snapshot of their 1970s work, right?

I hear what you're saying about Scotto, she's got a lot of flaws and I only barely prefer her to Caballe. But she had a nice stretch in the 70s where she put out some quite lovely recordings albeit with some flaws--the Adriana Lecouvreur, the Andrea Chenier, the Otello--I like those better than many of the Caballe recordings I have, despite the more significant and obvious vocal problems, since at least she makes me feel something when I listen to her.

I totally disagree on Freni though--to me, her voice got better and more interesting as it grew darker and larger. In fact, of the 6 Don Carlos I have with Freni stretching from 1975 to 1983, I think easily the best performance she gave was the last one on a Met Opera DVD. It may be her best performance of any role I've heard, come to think of it.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

Yes, but Netrebko's problems are not the result of age. We know that because they are mostly present in the earlier recording, just not as bad. It's like saying I'm unfairly judging someone for burning down a whole house when all they did was set a small fire. 

The same is not true of Tebaldi. Her vocal problems were new and introduced by changing her technique based on bad advice. Her early technique was perfect. Netrebko's was not good, but balanced out by natural talent. In that sense, it sounds better overall, but is still not great.


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2020)

Totally agree with that. And I admired Callas as I felt she was a true artist - she could sing (not the most glorious voice; true) but she could act and that was never in doubt. But since her repertoire is one which doesn't really interest me I've not been exposed to as much of it as those commenting here. I prefer Renee Fleming to Anna Netrebko though, of course, she's past her prime now. Renee was not only beautiful and talented but fluently multi-lingual and highly intelligent; I've found those latter things absent in Netrebko. The late, great Jessye Norman had a fabulous voice but, at times, I felt it was too powerful (if that makes sense). She overwhelmed the music some of the time. Netrebko should never be in fear of that!!!


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I like Netrebko's voice, but in some ways that's why I don't like her Susanna. She had a Countess voice back then. (Now her voice has developed and I'm not sure any Mozart would work for her.) I'm nowhere near as critical as some here about her voice or her singing (although, whilst I often enjoy the dramatic aspects of her singing, her technique, diction and musicianship are often wanting). My main problem is that she doesn't convince me because she sings far too many roles that don't suit her.

I wouldn't say her voice is outstanding, but I would say that it is an important voice, so no it's not the voice I don't like, it's almost everything else.


N.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

vivalagentenuova said:


> Yes, but Netrebko's problems are not the result of age. We know that because they are mostly present in the earlier recording, just not as bad.


But that's true of every singer--their bad flaws in their declines are like their minor flaws at their peaks, magnified.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

The Conte said:


> I like Netrebko's voice, but in some ways that's why I don't like her Susanna. She had a Countess voice back then. (Now her voice has developed and I'm not sure any Mozart would work for her.) I'm nowhere near as critical as some here about her voice or her singing (although, whilst I often enjoy the dramatic aspects of her singing, her technique, diction and musicianship are often wanting). My main problem is that she doesn't convince me because she sings far too many roles that don't suit her.
> 
> I wouldn't say her voice is outstanding, but I would say that it is an important voice, so no it's not the voice I don't like, it's almost everything else.
> 
> N.


I wondered what roles Netrebko has sung since that Susanna. So far, and I will have missed some, they apparently include

Elvira (Puritani), Mimi (Boheme), Massenet's Manon, Giulietta (Capuleti), Lucia di Lammermoor, Norina (Don Pasquale), Anna Bolena, Donna Anna (Don Giovanni), Iolanta, Leonora (Trovatore), Tatyana (Onegin), Giovanna d'Arco, Lady Macbeth, Puccini's Manon Lescaut, Elsa (Lohengrin), Adriana Lecouvreur, Aida, Maddalena (Andrea Chenier), Leonora (Forza), Tosca and now Turandot.

It is reminiscent of Scotto who started the 70s singing Giulietta (Capuleti), Lucia and Adina and within a decade recording or performing Abigaille, Norma, Elisabetta, Gioconda, Tosca and Lady Macbeth.

I do appreciate that Donna Anna would be a better fit than Zerlina for Netrebko, and if we hear anything from, say, Ballo in Maschera, you would expect Amelia rather than Oscar. But Turandot rather than Liu? Before cancelling it was to sing Norma not Adalgisa.

You might liken it to starting the decade as Roberta Peters and deciding to finish it as Leonie Rysanek. Beverly Sills morphing into Ghena Dimitrova?


----------



## Phantoms of the Opera (Feb 5, 2020)

Dear DavidA, I don’t want you to think I haven’t responded to your request for sources. I wrote a post with links yesterday and received a message saying it had to be approved by moderators. It still hasn’t appeared, but I hope you can be patient to receive your answer. I’m new here, so I don’t understand what has prompted this need for approval on three of my posts now. I hope they will all be visible soon!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

vivalagentenuova said:


> Yes, but Netrebko's problems are not the result of age. We know that because they are mostly present in the earlier recording, just not as bad. It's like saying I'm unfairly judging someone for burning down a whole house when all they did was set a small fire.
> 
> The same is not true of Tebaldi. Her vocal problems were new and introduced by changing her technique based on bad advice. Her early technique was perfect. Netrebko's was not good, but balanced out by natural talent. In that sense, it sounds better overall, but is still not great.


I find it strange when you talk about these singers 'problems' when they both had absolutely singing careers (one still has) that most people would envy and were adored at the major opera houses. But maybe if they had had you to advise them....?.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> I find it strange when you talk about these singers 'problems' when they both had absolutely singing careers (one still has) that most people would envy and were adored at the major opera houses. *But maybe if they had had you to advise them....?.*


Most singers have faults as well as virtues. If you don't want to discuss them, just stay away. Those who do enjoy dicussing the qualities of singers will not miss your snarky superiority. _We do not need you to advise us._


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

howlingfantods said:


> I hear what you're saying about Scotto, she's got a lot of flaws and I only barely prefer her to Caballe. But she had a nice stretch in the 70s where she put out some quite lovely recordings albeit with some flaws--the Adriana Lecouvreur, the Andrea Chenier, the Otello--I like those better than many of the Caballe recordings I have, despite the more significant and obvious vocal problems, since at least she makes me feel something when I listen to her.
> 
> I totally disagree on Freni though--to me, her voice got better and more interesting as it grew darker and larger. In fact, of the 6 Don Carlos I have with Freni stretching from 1975 to 1983, I think easily the best performance she gave was the last one on a Met Opera DVD. It may be her best performance of any role I've heard, come to think of it.


I actually like Scotto quite a lot. She was a most intelligent and musical singer. Yes, the top could turn squally under pressure, but her characterisations are always well thought out, if occasionally lacking in spontaneity. Her Barbirolli *Madama Butterfly* is a favourite of mine, and then when she re-emerged as a recording artist in the 1970s, I was impressed by her Desedemona, her Adrianna Lecouvreur (though I don't much like the opera), her contribution to the Muti Verdi Requiem, her Suor Angelica, her Maddalena and a couple of recital discs she did in the early 70s of Verdi and verismo.

Freni also had a long career and was still singing well at the age of 59 when I heard at the Royal Opera House in *Fedora*. People often said her voice lost its individuality when she moved to heavier roles, but I rather like her Aida and Elisabetta for Karajan. She is always a musical singer, but I find her a little anonymous and her Aida lacks Price's opulence, Callas's dramatic fire and Caballé's arresting beauty of tone.

Another singer from the same period who has grown on me in recent years is Katia Ricciarelli. More vocally fallible than Freni or Caballé, she was none the less a most affecting performer and second to none in the right role. I actually prefer her Luisa Miller to both Caballé and Moffo.

It might also be added that one of the pleasures of hearing Freni, Scotto or Ricciarelli was to hear the Italian language so clearly and naturally enunciated.

Admittedly I seem to have gone off topic, but my post is a rather long-winded way of saying I would take any of the aforementioned sopranos over Netrebko in any of the roles that they shared.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

DavidA said:


> I find it strange when you talk about these singers 'problems' when they both had absolutely singing careers (one still has) that most people would envy and were adored at the major opera houses. But maybe if they had had you to advise them....?.


Why do you think its strange to critique famous singers? I see it no differently than pointing out the strengths & weaknesses of a great athlete. Lebron James is a legendary basketball player, but his game has weaknesses. Do you think its strange for a fan to point them out? Or to compare his game to greats of the past?

I apologize for the analogy, but sports is my wheel house lol


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Best and most beloved ... BUT ...

Corelli - lisp
Bergonzi - shush sound
Fleming - swoops and breathy
Pertile - nasal in the mask
Bjoerling - inner sob
Olivero - glottal attacks
Callas - wobbles on the highs
Domingo - short highs
Milanov - short highs; strident
Lanza - off-key highs*
Tebaldi - off key lows*
Del Monaco - off key lows*
Sutherland - mushy middles
Price - swoops
Bartoli - aspirations
Gencer - glottal attacks
Pavarotti - nyaah sound

*off key lows: can't quite reach the high note square on
*off key highs: goes a bit above the high note


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

nina foresti said:


> Best and most beloved ... BUT ...
> 
> Corelli - lisp
> Bergonzi - shush sound
> ...


Nice list. I should file it somewhere I can find it for future reference. Would be quite fun to get them all together on one recording, if it weren't for the deceased nature of many of them.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

DavidA said:


> I find it strange when you talk about these singers 'problems' when they both had absolutely singing careers (one still has) that most people would envy and were adored at the major opera houses. But maybe if they had had you to advise them....?.


I find it strange that you are a member of a forum the purpose of which is to discuss and give opinions about opera and opera singers, and instead of responding to the substance of what members say you spend all your time saying that they don't have the right to have opinions. If you disagree with me, fine. I disagreed with howlingfantods, and we had a discussion on the substance in good faith. I would think that's what a classical music discussion forum is for.

So stop the trolling with the argument from authority or argumentum ad populam.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Admittedly I seem to have gone off topic, but my post is a rather long-winded way of saying I would take any of the aforementioned sopranos over Netrebko in any of the roles that they shared.


Well, yes, so would I. That's the whole point I was making--Netrebko is for me roughly equivalent to Caballe--lovely voice, decent but not great singing, not the worst but not the best. I then listed off a number of people of Caballe's era that I prefer over her--Freni, M Price, Scotto, Arroyo--so since I rank Netrebko and Caballe about equally in my personal rankings, it's also the case that I prefer these ladies over Netrebko as well....

Totally disagree about Ricciarelli though. I was listening to her early duets disc with Domingo a few days ago and thinking about how incredibly boring I find singers who sing everything at the same volume, and reflecting on how little I understand HIPsters who prefer listening to keyboard music played on instruments with no dynamic range. It's just such a fundamental flaw in music making. That's how boring I found Ricciarelli's singing--it made me think of other times I've been as bored.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I actually like Scotto quite a lot. She was a most intelligent and musical singer. Yes, the top could turn squally under pressure, but her characterisations are always well thought out, if occasionally lacking in spontaneity. Her Barbirolli *Madama Butterfly* is a favourite of mine, and then when she re-emerged as a recording artist in the 1970s, I was impressed by her Desedemona, her Adrianna Lecouvreur (though I don't much like the opera), her contribution to the Muti Verdi Requiem, her Suor Angelica, her Maddalena and a couple of recital discs she did in the early 70s of Verdi and verismo.
> 
> Freni also had a long career and was still singing well at the age of 59 when I heard at the Royal Opera House in *Fedora*. People often said her voice lost its individuality when she moved to heavier roles, but I rather like her Aida and Elisabetta for Karajan. She is always a musical singer, but I find her a little anonymous and her Aida lacks Price's opulence, Callas's dramatic fire and Caballé's arresting beauty of tone.
> 
> ...


For me the voice comes before interpretation. It's the same problem I have with mid-late Callas. I can't really even pay attention to the interpretation because I'm constantly going, "Oh no, there's a high note coming, prepare to duck and cover." I also place a lot of weight on the quality of the voice itself. That to me is usually more expressive than most attempts at interpretation. The greatest singers do both, of course. So I'm not much of a fan of Scotto, Ricciarelli, L. Price, or Netrebko. Young Freni and Caballe are to me more expressive and more beautiful voices.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

vivalagentenuova said:


> For me the voice comes before interpretation. It's the same problem I have with mid-late Callas. I can't really even pay attention to the interpretation because I'm constantly going, "Oh no, there's a high note coming, prepare to duck and cover." I also place a lot of weight on the quality of the voice itself. That to me is usually more expressive than most attempts at interpretation. The greatest singers do both, of course. So I'm not much of a fan of Scotto, Ricciarelli, L. Price, or Netrebko. Young Freni and Caballe are to me more expressive and more beautiful voices.


How interesting that we all require different tastes in singers to float our boats.
For me it is exactly the opposite. My favorites lean on the side of interpretation first and I can forgive certain flaws in singers' voices as long as the right interpretation and feeling are there.
I get bored quicker with "perfect and beautiful voices" who neglect depth, stand and deliver, and just go through the lines that the composer set out for them.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

howlingfantods said:


> Well, yes, so would I. That's the whole point I was making--Netrebko is for me roughly equivalent to Caballe--lovely voice, decent but not great singing, not the worst but not the best. I then listed off a number of people of Caballe's era that I prefer over her--Freni, M Price, Scotto, Arroyo--so since I rank Netrebko and Caballe about equally in my personal rankings, it's also the case that I prefer these ladies over Netrebko as well....
> 
> Totally disagree about Ricciarelli though. I was listening to her early duets disc with Domingo a few days ago and thinking about how incredibly boring I find singers who sing everything at the same volume, and reflecting on how little I understand HIPsters who prefer listening to keyboard music played on instruments with no dynamic range. It's just such a fundamental flaw in music making. That's how boring I found Ricciarelli's singing--it made me think of other times I've been as bored.


Well you and I also disagree about Caballé, who I think is in an altogther higher and greater class than Netrebko. Netrebko shouldn't realy have been allowed anywhere near a _bel canto_ opera, as she simply doesn't have the technique to do them justice. Caballé's coloratra may not be quite in the Sutherland or Callas class, but her voice had a great deal more natural flexibility and mobility up and down the stave. I realise of course that people these days no longer seem to think that singing the notes the composer wrote a necessity.

I don't find Ricciarelli boring at all. Her Anna Bolena is the best I've heard after Callas, her Luisa a lot more involved and involving than Moffo's (who is nonetheless still one of my favrouite Luisas), and even her Turandot, though patently the wrong voice for the role, is intelligently and interestingly sung. I'd have to listen to that duet recital again, but I certainly don't remember Ricciarelli sounding monotonous. I heard her live quite a few times too, and she was always interesting, always alive to the drama.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> How interesting that we all require different tastes in singers to float our boats.
> For me it is exactly the opposite. My favorites lean on the side of interpretation first and I can forgive certain flaws in singers' voices as long as the right interpretation and feeling are there.
> I get bored quicker with "perfect and beautiful voices" who neglect depth, stand and deliver, and just go through the lines that the composer set out for them.


I'm the same as you. I always prefer singing that is beautifully _expressed_ rather than merely beautiful. I don't care how beautiful the voice of the soprano singing Violetta is. If she's not tearing my heart out by the end, then she isn't doing her job.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Well you and I also disagree about Caballé, who I think is in an altogther higher and greater class than Netrebko. Netrebko shouldn't realy have been allowed anywhere near a _bel canto_ opera, as she simply doesn't have the technique to do them justice. Caballé's coloratra may not be quite in the Sutherland or Callas class, but her voice had a great deal more natural flexibility and mobility up and down the stave. I realise of course that people these days no longer seem to think that singing the notes the composer wrote a necessity.
> 
> I don't find Ricciarelli boring at all. Her Anna Bolena is the best I've heard after Callas, her Luisa a lot more involved and involving than Moffo's (who is nonetheless still one of my favrouite Luisas), and even her Turandot, though patently the wrong voice for the role, is intelligently and interestingly sung. I'd have to listen to that duet recital again, but I certainly don't remember Ricciarelli sounding monotonous. I heard her live quite a few times too, and she was always interesting, always alive to the drama.


I have no real opinion on Caballe vs Netrebko when it comes to bel canto--I'm not much of a bel canto fan and I'm not sure I've even heard Netrebko in anything other than Mozart, Verdi and Tchaikovsky. I've not heard Caballe in any bel canto other than Norma either, so I'm willing to believe you about the merits of both in that rep.

Ricciarelli did get better--she's a better, more interesting singer in for instance the 1980 Ballo with Abbado and Domingo than she was in the 1972 duets disc, but her voice is in worse shape. And at any rate, "better and more interesting" when compared to herself--hers is still one of my least favorite performances of Amelia I have of the 15'ish versions I have, a real fly in the ointment since that recording would be a real contender otherwise.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

vivalagentenuova said:


> For me the voice comes before interpretation. It's the same problem I have with mid-late Callas. I can't really even pay attention to the interpretation because I'm constantly going, "Oh no, there's a high note coming, prepare to duck and cover." I also place a lot of weight on the quality of the voice itself. That to me is usually more expressive than most attempts at interpretation. The greatest singers do both, of course. So I'm not much of a fan of Scotto, Ricciarelli, L. Price, or Netrebko. Young Freni and Caballe are to me more expressive and more beautiful voices.


That's certainly a legitimate point of view, one which my own experience as a singer leads me to share much of the time. As one sensitive to the fine points of vocal production, I find myself constantly bothered by audible indications of vocal dysfunction, and the number of well-known and highly touted singers I find difficult to listen to is large. However, as a musician (piano, organ, voice, composition) and creative artist (painting) in search of the expressive potential of the arts in which I've worked, I'm always hoping to encounter vocal artists capable of using their voices to remarkable musical ends, regardless of natural endowment or technical accomplishment. A lack of musical refinement, insight and imagination is as offputting to me as poor vocalism, and in the end probably more so: nothing is less worth my time than music-making that bores me with its blandness or annoys me with its vulgarity. If a singer is interesting enough musically or dramatically I'll put up with sounds I find less than pleasant. I don't find many singers in the latter category - singers like Callas, Olivero or Gobbi, who can keep me riveted and leave me deeply moved even with vocal instruments exhibiting technical flaws or less than beautiful tone. In a choice between a beautiful but droopy, cotton-mouthed Sutherland, a beautiful but mannered, self-indulgent Fleming, a beautiful but generic Price, and an occasionally raw and wobbly Callas who maintains the music's tensile strength, illuminates every word and phrase, and makes me feel as if I've never heard the music before, Callas wins the prize, and my willing ear, nine times out of ten.

That said, when a singer like Battistini, Caruso, Ponselle, Muzio or Baker marries vocal perfection with superior artistry, I am in singer's heaven, and wouldn't dream of leaving earth for the other heaven unless those people are there to sing for me.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

She will receive this years polar music prize:

https://polarmusicprize.org/announcement/


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

vivalagentenuova said:


> I find it strange that you are a member of a forum the purpose of which is to discuss and give opinions about opera and opera singers, and instead of responding to the substance of what members say you spend all your time saying that they don't have the right to have opinions. If you disagree with me, fine. I disagreed with howlingfantods, and we had a discussion on the substance in good faith. I would think that's what a classical music discussion forum is for.
> 
> So stop the trolling with the argument from authority or argumentum ad populam.


I am always interested when people use the word trolling which generally means they come up against an argumentthe6 don't agree with. I've no problem with you disagreeing with my argument but your whole attempt to shut down free speech by designating it 'trolling' is somewhat disagreeable. Politeness is something which I always advise in discussion groups and you would be well advised to take it on board.
Actually it is not the fact you are criticising a singer but the way in which you are doing it as if you are some expert who has had a stellar career themselves. Can I ask you, what are your qualifications for singing? Are you a qualified singer yourself? A teacher with students? Maybe in which case I will be interested to hear your diagnosis.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bonetan said:


> Why do you think its strange to critique famous singers? I see it no differently than pointing out the strengths & weaknesses of a great athlete. Lebron James is a legendary basketball player, but his game has weaknesses. Do you think its strange for a fan to point them out? Or to compare his game to greats of the past?
> 
> I apologize for the analogy, but sports is my wheel house lol


Yes I do understand that you don't have to be a shoemaker to know that your shoes don't fit and that they an ill made pair. Yes I am a rugby fan and obviously we all like to give our opinion and say whether Barry John was better than Owen Farrell or Johnny Wilkinson. But we all know that from an armchair is very easy to see the faults of the England rugby team and to criticise. However, when I actually was playing rugby one realises that when you have a 20 stone forward to running at you it is an entirely different matter from sitting in an armchair! Similarly it is an entirely different matter performing as I know to sitting in an armchair listening . I have not done much performing but I have done directing and when you put your cast out there I think it's harder for the director sometimes than those on stage.
I suppose it's just because I know I'm a musical layman (and admit it) then when someone posts in a way that implies expertise I like to know what qualifies them. Like beyond a healthy music library like I have. Are they themselves a singer to any level? Do they teach? To me it's not a matter of just saying 'I'm an expert'. I mean, I am a pianist of sorts (very limited sorts these days I'm afraid) but would not go into the matter of discussing technique. I tend to leave that to those who know a lot more about it. If someone really is an expert and has taught or sung to any real level I would be very interested to hear them and their views, that is a fact.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I actually enjoyed her Lady Macbeth over the weekend on the Met free streaming, but for some reason I want a more beautiful voice for Aida and she doesn't quite make the cut here. She can sing it, but I don't think Price, Milanov or Callas have anything to worry about being upstaged by her. I want more lyricism and the big parts seem forced to me. Just my take.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Tuoksu said:


> I highly recommend the Met DVD with Millo, Domingo, Zajick and Milnes under James Levine. You'll see that this travesty with Netrebko (just like pretty much anything with her) is not worth a minute of your time.


Millo is reminiscent of Tebaldi, but certainly didn't have Tebaldi's outsized voice that could be heard around the block. Millo and Zajick were both really wonderful.What was particularly exciting about Millo here is she takes the optional Eb at the end of the Triumphal Scene, which very few singers do.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

Nothing against Netrebko, and I wish her a speedy and full recovery, but I have to chuckle when people downplay covid and then contract it...

https://www.classicfm.com/artists/anna-netrebko/hospitalised-covid-19/


----------

