# Lyric vs Dramatic voices: which do you prefer?



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

straightforward enough. which do you prefer to listen to?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Well I don't have enough knowledge to answer. I don't think I could tell if a soprano were lyric or dramatic.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Depends upon the aria and the drama of the piece. If push comes to shove I guess dramatic would win over lyric though. My top favorite operas mostly induce dramatic over lyric singers.


----------



## graziesignore (Mar 13, 2015)

On a related note, why is there no such term as a "spinto baritone"?


----------



## Creatio (Jul 2, 2015)

IIt depends if is an opera dramatical or not. Some roles are for dramatic voices and lyric voice can´t sings it as good as other.

But if I should choose between them, for listening I prefer lyric sopranos or tenors or roles for them. It´s becouse I am young singer probably.
But if a role is for dramatic voice, why not?


----------



## Diminuendo (May 5, 2015)

I really don't have a preference. I just love both types.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

My opinion is nearly identical to creatio's. 

Certainly I love drama and if a dramatic voice can be pulled off well I am all for it. But if I am ok sacrificing a bit of the drama for more lyrical tones.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

I tend to like medium to medium-heavy voice (ex: spinto tenor, dramatic coloratura soprano). I crave weight and creaminess in an operatic voice, but, if it becomes too heavy, the voice doesn't move as elegantly and often takes on a harsher quality (especially in the upper register).



graziesignore said:


> On a related note, why is there no such term as a "spinto baritone"?


^this (in fact, I think I am one lol)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I prefer a large voice, rich in timbre with a firm bottom, cleanly pitched with a narrow vibrato (no wobbles), able to scale down dynamically without loss of quality, and employed with a smooth legato. Caruso, Schorr, Schumann-Heink, Ponselle, Flagstad, Traubel, Farrell: lyrical dramatic voices. They don't make many of those.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

regardless of fach, I like voices which are middle-centric (most soubrettes, leggiero tenors and coloratura mezzos come off kind of empty. they are like a sweet piece of candy that leaves you still hungry for a full meal). here is an example of what I would consider ideal vocal weight: formidable, heroic, ample gravitas, but easily climbing to a brilliant, spinning upper register.





of course, I like all kinds of voices if they know how to use what they've got in a way which works for them. I often enjoy lyric voices who can sing with a bit more backbone and authority without resorting to cheap histrionics or affected vocal weight to create drama. 







Woodduck said:


> I prefer a large voice, rich in timbre with a firm bottom, cleanly pitched with a narrow vibrato (no wobbles), able to scale down dynamically without loss of quality, and employed with a smooth legato. Caruso, Schorr, Schumann-Heink, Ponselle, Flagstad, Traubel, Farrell: lyrical dramatic voices. They don't make many of those.


exactly (though imo, Caruso and Ponselle are tremendously overrated, even if the rest of your list is wonderful)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> regardless of fach, I like voices which are middle-centric (most soubrettes, leggiero tenors and coloratura mezzos come off kind of empty. they are like a sweet piece of candy that leaves you still hungry for a full meal). here is an example of what I would consider ideal vocal weight: formidable, heroic, ample gravitas, but easily climbing to a brilliant, spinning upper register.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tremendously overrated with respect to what? Vocal tone? Power? Technique? Musicality? Style? Most people seem to think they're fine in all these respects. I do.











If these are not two of the most beautiful, expressive, vocally solid, technically accomplished, and stylish pieces of lyrical singing by dramatic voices ever recorded, what are they?


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Tremendously overrated with respect to what? Vocal tone? Power? Technique? Musicality? Style? Most people seem to think they're fine in all these respects. I do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I dunno, they both just seemed kind of boring to me


----------



## Metairie Road (Apr 30, 2014)

I'm with Florestan on this one. This is all over my head. I'm at the lower left of the operatic learning curve right now, so please continue this conversation and cite some examples of just what the hell you're talking about.

Perhaps there's an 'Opera for dummies' thread I could go to? I'm cetainly a dummy in this regard (and in other regards to; but that's none of your business).

Best wishes
Metairie Road


----------



## Diminuendo (May 5, 2015)

Florestan said:


> Well I don't have enough knowledge to answer. I don't think I could tell if a soprano were lyric or dramatic.


If you go to Wikipedia and search for example tenor. There are same tenors that are listed by their type. If you for example compare Mario Del Monaco and Alfredo Kraus you should easily hear the difference. With sopranos maybe Nilsson and Sills. There are of course singers that are harder to figure out.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Metairie Road said:


> I'm with Florestan on this one. This is all over my head. I'm at the lower left of the operatic learning curve right now, so please continue this conversation and cite some examples of just what the hell you're talking about.
> 
> Perhaps there's an 'Opera for dummies' thread I could go to? I'm cetainly a dummy in this regard (and in other regards to; but that's none of your business).
> 
> ...


I can go into more thorough explanation later if you wish, but briefly:

the basic ranges of the human voice are:
*soprano:* medium-high or high female voice**
*mezzo soprano:* medium-low or low female voice
*contralto:* really low female voice
*counter tenor:* extremely high male voice who sings in the range of a female singer
*tenor:* high male voice
*baritone:* medium to low male voice
*bass:* really low male voice

**people generally think of sopranos as super high, bright voices, but many sopranos have dark, womanly voices and mis-classify themselves as mezzos

as for vocal weight:
*lyric: *a lighter voice. flexible, florid, often a bit brighter timbre. they can range from extremely light (Lily Pons) to more smooth and creamy (Anna Moffo)
*spinto:* in between lyric and dramatic. they have a lot of the weight and power of a dramatic voice, but move more smoothly like a lyric voice 
*dramatic:* a very heavy, booming voice, often (but not always) with a darker, slightly harsh timbre


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I can go into more thorough explanation later if you wish, but briefly:
> 
> the basic ranges of the human voice are:
> *soprano:* medium-high or high female voice**
> ...


So is alto the same as mezzosoprano?

What happened to coloratura?

I have heard sopranos that have dark, womanly voices. Perhaps Ileana Cotrubaș fits that category.

What is Waltraud Meier, a mezzo or a soprano. I thought she began as a mezzo and then I see her playing soprano roles and reviewers calling her a "pushed up mezzo."

I think I can get these categories intellectually moreso than I can actually tell the differences in all cases. Lyric vs dramatic is probably harder to differentiate than say lyric and coloratura; hence (i guess) the need for the spinto category.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Florestan said:


> So is alto the same as mezzosoprano?


"alto" is a harmonic vocal line in choral music, though it is often used colloquially to describe either a mezzo or a contralto.



> what happened to coloratura?


coloratura has two meanings 
1) rapid, elaborate vocal runs (also known as melismas)
2) a type of flexible voice specialized to sing quick coloratura, though it is generally only used to describe sopranos and mezzos. the "coloratura tenor" is referred to as the tenor leggiero. for sopranos, you have lyric coloraturas who are much lighter, more bell-like and sit very high, and dramatic coloraturas, who have a more heroic voice with a weight similar to a spinto soprano



> I have heard sopranos that have dark, womanly voices. Perhaps Ileana Cotrubaș fits that category.


yes. she is an example of a darker lyric soprano



> What is Waltraud Meier, a mezzo or a soprano. I thought she began as a mezzo and then I see her playing soprano roles and reviewers calling her a "pushed up mezzo."


I consider her a mezzo



> I think I can get these categories intellectually moreso than I can actually tell the differences in all cases. Lyric vs dramatic is probably harder to differentiate than say lyric and coloratura; hence (i guess) the need for the spinto category.


*Lyric Coloratura Soprano:* Beverly Sills, Natalie Dessay, Lily Pons, 
*Dramatic Coloratura Soprano:* Joan Sutherland, Edda Moser, Rita Shane
*Light Lyric Soprano:* Annick Massis, Dawn Upshaw, Barbara Bonney, 
*Full Lyric Soprano:* Anna Moffo, Renee Fleming, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Kiri Te Kanawa
*Spinto Soprano:* Martina Arroyo, Leontyne Price, Sondra Radvanovsky, Renata Tebaldi
*Dramatic Soprano:* Ghena Dmitrova, Kirsten Flagstad, Helen Traubel, Eva Marton

*coloratura mezzo:* Joyce di Donato, Cecilia Bartoli, Malena Ernman
*lyric mezzo:* Janet Baker, Jennifer Larmore, Elina Garanca 
*dramatic mezzo:* Elena Obraztsova, Viorica Cortez, Dolora Zajick, Milla Edelman

*contralto:* Ewa Podles, Maureen Forrester, Kathleen Ferrier, Marian Anderson

*tenor leggiero:* Juan Diego Flores, Rockwell Blake, John McCormick
*lyric tenor:* Luciano Pavarotti, Nicolai Gedda, Giuseppe di Stefano, Jussi Bjorling
*spinto tenor:* Jonas Kaufmann, Franco Corelli, Anatoly Solovyanenko, John Alexander
*dramatic tenor:* Mario del Monaco, Giuseppe Giacomini, Enrico Caruso,

*lyric baritone:* Herman Prey, Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, Peter Mattei, Thomas Allen 
*dramatic baritone:* Tito Gobbi, Cornel Macneil, Mykola Kondratyuk, Nicolae Herlea

*bass-baritone:* Byrn Terfel, Willard White, Hans Hotter, Ilabrando D'arcangelo
*basso cantante:* Samuel Ramey, Nicolai Ghiaurov, Jerome Hines
*basso profondo:* Paul Robeson, Boris Shtokolov, Boris Christoff

there are further subdivisions (a Verdi baritone is a very high dramatic baritone, a Heldentenor is a baritonal dramatic tenor well suited for Wagner, a Falcon is a hybrid of dramatic soprano and dramatic mezzo, etc), but I think I hit most of the basics


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Florestan said:


> So is alto the same as mezzosoprano?
> 
> What happened to coloratura?
> 
> ...


Florestan, don't get hung up on these artificial categories. The more things a given voice can do the better, and voices vary infinitely in the things they can and cannot do. We humans try to limit and pigeonhole everything just because it's easier to think about things in terms of limits, but we constantly get into trouble by doing so.

People reasonably disagree about how to classify a given voice, but in the end it's all a game that doesn't amount to a hill of beans. The basic vocal categories are by vocal range, from highest to lowest: soprano, mezzo-soprano, contralto, tenor, baritone, bass - but, historically, even these divisions have not been firm, as often they are still not. The capabilities of individual singers vary enormously, with some singers able to handle a very limited range of music and others able to sing practically anything. It's fun to say "so and so is a lyrico-spinto" or a "dramatic coloratura" or a "Verdi baritone," but ultimately it says more about our thinking and our tastes than about singers, their voices and artistry, or the music they sing.

So enjoy this "fach" (subcategory) stuff with Balalaikaboy if it entertains you, but don't take it too seriously. Composers don't compose music for "fachs"; they just compose music that pleases them. And whatever sort of music a singer can sing comfortably, enjoy singing, and sound good singing, is what he ought to sing - and to hell with anyone's vocal classifications.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

How do we classify somebody like Yma Sumac? "She was able to sing notes in the low baritone register as well as notes above the range of an ordinary soprano... In 1954, classical composer Virgil Thomson described her voice as 'very low and warm, very high and birdlike', noting that her range 'is very close to five octaves, but is in no way inhuman or outlandish in sound.' " (Wiki)

Note: To my knowledge she did not sing opera.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Florestan, don't get hung up on these artificial categories. The more things a given voice can do the better, and voices vary infinitely in the things they can and cannot do. We humans try to limit and pigeonhole everything just because it's easier to think about things in terms of limits, but we constantly get into trouble by doing so.
> 
> People reasonably disagree about how to classify a given voice, but in the end it's all a game that doesn't amount to a hill of beans. The basic vocal categories are by vocal range, from highest to lowest: soprano, mezzo-soprano, contralto, tenor, baritone, bass - but, historically, even these divisions have not been firm, as often they are still not. The capabilities of individual singers vary enormously, with some singers able to handle a very limited range of music and others able to sing practically anything. It's fun to say "so and so is a lyrico-spinto" or a "dramatic coloratura" or a "Verdi baritone," but ultimately it says more about our thinking and our tastes than about singers, their voices and artistry, or the music they sing.
> 
> So enjoy this "fach" (subcategory) stuff with Balalaikaboy if it entertains you, but don't take it too seriously. Composers don't compose music for "fachs"; they just compose music that pleases them. And whatever sort of music a singer can sing comfortably, enjoy singing, and sound good singing, is what he ought to sing - and to hell with anyone's vocal classifications.


like I've said before, you can learn about the fach system without making it overly intellectual and getting into academia-esque debates over "she's a falcon." "no, she's a dramatic soprano d'aghilita", "you're all wrong! she's a soprano assoluto!" (those can be fun I'll admit, but the two are not mutually inclusive)

knows about general voice types allows people to more quickly sample and develop a sense of what their personal tastes are.


----------



## Steatopygous (Jul 5, 2015)

I like the music. Different music requires different voice types, and I like the voice-type to be right for the music. If it is, then I have no preference, but simply want to enjoy whatever it is I am listening to. This may be Wagner, Verdi, Mozart, Strauss, lieder or - as last night - Kathleen Battle singing Bach with Itzhak Perlman. Or almost anything else.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I prefer a large voice, rich in timbre with a firm bottom, cleanly pitched with a narrow vibrato (no wobbles), able to scale down dynamically without loss of quality, and employed with a smooth legato. Caruso, Schorr, Schumann-Heink, Ponselle, Flagstad, Traubel, Farrell: lyrical dramatic voices. They don't make many of those.


I know I already responded to this, but neither Schumann-Heink nor Caruso sounded particularly "lyrical" to me. elegant and subtle for sure, but not exactly "flowing" like a lyric voice (as opposed to, say, Flagstad, whose voice was as florid as any lyric soprano)
since our tastes appear similar, here's an example of a more lyrical dramatic voice you might appreciate (especially given your penchant for early 20th century singers)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I can't understand the distinctions you're making. I gave examples of powerful voices capable of both dramatic and lyrical singing. Caruso and Schumann-Heink exemplify this as much as Flagstad. You seem to be looking for some other quality which is unclear to me, or you have some definition of "lyricism" which you haven't shared with us.

Here is an example of the lyricism of Frau Schumann-Heink: 




And here, that of Signor Caruso: 




In both of these singers the melodic line is shapely and expressive, the legato seamless and unfailing, the dynamics well controlled. This lyrical foundation is not lost even in moments of expressive vehemence where the singer's dramatic capabilities are called upon. What else are you looking for? What else does "lyricism" mean?

I wouldn't put Hotter's singing in the same category, superb artist though he was. His voice hadn't the smoothness necessary for me to call him "lyrical," except perhaps very early in his career. As a dramatic bass-baritone, though, he could certainly deliver effectively the lyrical passages in the roles he sang - more, I think, through sheer musicianship than through vocal suavity.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Dramatic.
Had to add some words to the post. These are them!!


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I can't understand the distinctions you're making. I gave examples of powerful voices capable of both dramatic and lyrical singing. Caruso and Schumann-Heink exemplify this as much as Flagstad. You seem to be looking for some other quality which is unclear to me, or you have some definition of "lyricism" which you haven't shared with us.
> 
> Here is an example of the lyricism of Frau Schumann-Heink:
> 
> ...


as usual, I think we are going by slightly different definitions here (I'm going to try to explain something very subjective, so hopefully it makes sense). basically, "lyrical" to me is more stylistic than simply having legato. both the singers you listed had wonderful legato, but the vocal quality was more metallic, almost edgy in some spots. lyrical to me implies something softer**, flowing, languid, sensuous, perhaps creamier, like "rolling ocean waves" if you will.

**of course, softer doesn't have to mean lighter. it can also be luxurious and opulent a la Schwarzkopf. in fact, she's a good example of the opposite: a lyric voice with dramatic flavor, because she was able to use this sheer opulence in place of dramatic power and pull off the Verdi Requiem and bits of Wagner satisfactorily (though, more the voice itself, I think the sheer _authority_ of her temperament was the main factor making her more dramatically convincing).

@OT
here are some example of voices whom I feel have a brilliant combination of lyric and dramatic characteristics (there are examples of lyric, dramatic and spinto voices)
1) Eula Beal (Erlkonig)





2) Joan Sutherland (O Divine Redeemer)





3) Mykola Kondratyuk (Moon in the Sky, Ukrainian folk song)





4) Samuel Ramey (Mentre Gonfiarsi L'anima from Attila)





5) Kirsten Flagstad (Erbarme Dich)





6) Anatoly Solovyanenko (another Ukrainian Folk Song. something about a mountain apparently)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

KenOC said:


> How do we classify somebody like Yma Sumac? "She was able to sing notes in the low baritone register as well as notes above the range of an ordinary soprano... In 1954, classical composer Virgil Thomson described her voice as 'very low and warm, very high and birdlike', noting that her range 'is very close to five octaves, but is in no way inhuman or outlandish in sound.' " (Wiki)
> 
> Note: To my knowledge she did not sing opera.


But she did this





:lol:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> as usual, I think we are going by slightly different definitions here (I'm going to try to explain something very subjective, so hopefully it makes sense). basically, "lyrical" to me is more stylistic than simply having legato. both the singers you listed had wonderful legato, but the vocal quality was more metallic, almost edgy in some spots. lyrical to me implies something softer**, flowing, languid, sensuous, perhaps creamier, like "rolling ocean waves" if you will.
> 
> **of course, softer doesn't have to mean lighter. it can also be luxurious and opulent a la Schwarzkopf. in fact, she's a good example of the opposite: a lyric voice with dramatic flavor, because she was able to use this sheer opulence in place of dramatic power and pull off the Verdi Requiem and bits of Wagner satisfactorily (though, more the voice itself, I think the sheer _authority_ of her temperament was the main factor making her more dramatically convincing).
> 
> ...


Changing the subject, it's good to hear that Flagstad recording again. She was in her sixties when it was made, and just listen to that breath control, after decades of Isoldes and Brunnhildes! No one would drag the music out to this tempo nowadays - not at all "authentic," most would opine - but who could begrudge this sublime voice one millisecond of it?


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Woodduck said:


> Florestan, don't get hung up on these artificial categories. The more things a given voice can do the better, and voices vary infinitely in the things they can and cannot do. We humans try to limit and pigeonhole everything just because it's easier to think about things in terms of limits, but we constantly get into trouble by doing so.
> 
> People reasonably disagree about how to classify a given voice, but in the end it's all a game that doesn't amount to a hill of beans. The basic vocal categories are by vocal range, from highest to lowest: soprano, mezzo-soprano, contralto, tenor, baritone, bass - but, historically, even these divisions have not been firm, as often they are still not. The capabilities of individual singers vary enormously, with some singers able to handle a very limited range of music and others able to sing practically anything. It's fun to say "so and so is a lyrico-spinto" or a "dramatic coloratura" or a "Verdi baritone," but ultimately it says more about our thinking and our tastes than about singers, their voices and artistry, or the music they sing.
> 
> So enjoy this "fach" (subcategory) stuff with Balalaikaboy if it entertains you, but don't take it too seriously. Composers don't compose music for "fachs"; they just compose music that pleases them. And whatever sort of music a singer can sing comfortably, enjoy singing, and sound good singing, is what he ought to sing - and to hell with anyone's vocal classifications.


So basically you don't give a flying fach about all these subcategories?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Dim7 said:


> So basically you don't give a flying fach about all these subcategories?


Actually I've never given a flying fach about anything, and now I'm probably too old. Have I missed out?


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Changing the subject, it's good to hear that Flagstad recording again. She was in her sixties when it was made, and just listen to that breath control, after decades of Isoldes and Brunnhildes!


that's exactly what I was thinking.



> No one would drag the music out to this tempo nowadays - not at all "authentic," most would opine - but who could begrudge this sublime voice one millisecond of it?


honestly, I like it at that tempo. the text is about death the guilt that comes with "I'm about to die! I have mercy on me, Lord!", so a more dramatic tempo makes perfect sense.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Woodduck said:


> Actually I've never given a flying fach about anything, and now I'm probably too old. Have I missed out?


I tried telling you that aging is a bad idea, but you just didn't listen, now did you...


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Dim7 said:


> I tried telling you that aging is a bad idea, but you just didn't listen, now did you...


Eh? Eh? What's that, sonny?


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

some more examples
1) Elisabeth Schwarzkopf (Dich, teure Halle' from Tannhäuser)





2) Hilary Summers (But who may abide the day of His coming)





3) Frida Leider (O Patria Mia) so much dynamic control for a Wagner soprano! her high notes are as delicate as a boy soprano





4) Martina Arroyo (Vissi D'arte)


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I am partial to larger voices. I love the thrill of being pushed back in your seat by a big voice. I really admire singers who bridge the categories. A singer who fit in both categories to me was Alessandra Marc. Not a perfect voice, but to my ears insanely beautiful, jawdroppingly HUGE high notes, but in the Verdi Requiem, which I heard her in 15 years ago, she was capable of singing with amazing lyric beauty and tenderness. Another singer who surprisingly bridged both categories was Nilsson, who did not just sing loudly, but had amazing control and could sing ppp high notes that could nevertheless fill a house. Of course Caballe must fall in this category as well as Milanov.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I am partial to larger voices. I love the thrill of being pushed back in your seat by a big voice. I really admire singers who bridge the categories. A singer who fit in both categories to me was Alessandra Marc. Not a perfect voice, but to my ears insanely beautiful, jawdroppingly HUGE high notes, but in the Verdi Requiem, which I heard her in 15 years ago, she was capable of singing with amazing lyric beauty and tenderness.* Another singer who surprisingly bridged both categories was Nilsson*, who did not just sing loudly, but had amazing control and could sing ppp high notes that could nevertheless fill a house. Of course Caballe must fall in this category as well as Milanov.


absolutely! while it wasn't exactly her specialty, Nilsson was a superb Verdian with surprising versatility of dynamics. honestly, the mechanism is something akin to what I would imagine Sutherland to have sounded like had she continued along the footsteps of Kirsten Flagstad, but with a somewhat colder timbre (ice blue as compared to Sutherland's silvery white). her versality is extremely unusual among Wagnerians, at times jumping up clear to the other end of the soprano spectrum and sounding like a straight up _lyric_ coloratura. for example:










Caballe also fits well into this category. not the best at everything she did, but respectable in almost all of her versatile repertoire (not many full lyric/light spinto sopranos can sing a respectable Turandot)


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

another dramatic mezzo with a smooth, luxurious vocal line (she sings both opera and symphonic metal).


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> absolutely! while it wasn't exactly her specialty, Nilsson was a superb Verdian with surprising versatility of dynamics. honestly, the mechanism is something akin to what I would imagine Sutherland to have sounded like had she continued along the footsteps of Kirsten Flagstad, but with a somewhat colder timbre (ice blue as compared to Sutherland's silvery white). her versality is extremely unusual among Wagnerians, at times jumping up clear to the other end of the soprano spectrum and sounding like a straight up _lyric_ coloratura. for example:


Lyric coloratura?  Nilsson never sounded like any kind of coloratura. Her voice was inherently inflexible, her passage work tending to be smeary and approximate, aspirated, and often out of tune. Even the scaling down of dynamics could betray effort. Watch her mouth in the "Inflammatus": she's working hard to make the little notes happen, but it's like knitting with railroad spikes. Give her big phrases with long notes, words to declaim forcefully, or high C's out of the blue, and she can knock you over. But the Italianate line and the quickness, the light and shade, the morbidezza, the warmth of bel canto? No cigar. Here she is in Nabucco:






We can give her credit for a sincere effort here, and had she had the flexibility for it the role of Abigaille might have been at least a credible one for her (I don't think she ever sang it). I actually rather enjoy this bit from Lady Macbeth, a part she did sing; that lip-synching, that headgear, and those Turandot eyelashes are fabulous camp. But the coloratura in both arias is left largely to our imaginations, and the tone is, as always with her, relentlessly bright.






Sutherland's voice was totally dissimilar; it was naturally flexible, and wouldn't have had these deficiencies even if she had continued to sing Wagner. As she said when asked about her trill, "I can't remember a time when I didn't trill."

Mind, you, I like Nilsson in the right repertoire. She's a born valkyrie and a killer Elektra. But I think she had a pretty small "right repertoire."


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Nilsson's unusual voice recorded less than true on most occasions as the miking was too close. In live recordings where the mic was further out and the voice was allowed to expand in the house, her voice was not so cold and had much darker, even warmer overtones that was much less icy and more beautiful. I hear such an effect in this video of a live recording of Gotterdammerung. She has never looked lovelier than here IMHO. You don't have to be a fatty to sing Wagner effectively as she proved.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Nilsson's unusual voice recorded less than true on most occasions as the miking was too close. In live recordings where the mic was further out and the voice was allowed to expand in the house, her voice was not so cold and had much darker, even warmer overtones that was much less icy and more beautiful. I hear such an effect in this video of a live recording of Gotterdammerung. She has never looked lovelier than here IMHO. You don't have to be a fatty to sing Wagner effectively as she proved.


I agree that her tone was warmer (if not _really_ warm) in the house. I heard her Isolde and Brunnhilde at the Met and noted the difference immediately. That _Tristan_ night was so unfortunate. Leinsdorf conducted prosaically, Helge Brilioth ran out of voice completely and shouted and sputtered his way through act 3, Nilsson herself was phlegmatic if professional (quite unlike her passionate performances at Bayreuth), and the standard cuts were made, no doubt to make it all less embarrassing for the Tristan. My best memory of it was of the way her voice warmed up over the course of the night and sounded fresher at the end than at the beginning. A fabulous freak of nature, was she!

She does look good in that clip. What year was it? Apparently it's a lip-synch (out of synch!) to the Solti recording. She was in top form on that recording. Stunning vocalism. (Flagstad wasn't fat either, btw, though they both put on weight in later years.)


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> I agree that her tone was warmer (if not _really_ warm) in the house. I heard her Isolde and Brunnhilde at the Met and noted the difference immediately. That _Tristan_ night was so unfortunate. Leinsdorf conducted prosaically, Helge Brilioth ran out of voice completely and shouted and sputtered his way through act 3, Nilsson herself was phlegmatic if professional (quite unlike her passionate performances at Bayreuth), and the standard cuts were made, no doubt to make it all less embarrassing for the Tristan. My best memory of it was of the way her voice warmed up over the course of the night and sounded fresher at the end than at the beginning. A fabulous freak of nature, was she!
> 
> She does look good in that clip. What year was it? Apparently it's a lip-synch (out of synch!) to the Solti recording. She was in top form on that recording. Stunning vocalism. (Flagstad wasn't fat either, btw, though they both put on weight in later years.)


Same thing about being a normal sized body went for Varnay, who was mistaken for Nilsson at Bayreuth. They all put on weight after 45 to 50.


----------



## BelCantoGuy (Jul 20, 2015)

I enjoy both. Callas and Sutherland are wonderful in their own way.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

BelCantoGuy said:


> I enjoy both. Callas and Sutherland are wonderful in their own way.


both Sutherland and Callas were dramatic voices (though you could argue Sutherland was more "spinto" and Callas more overtly dramatic). who are some lyric signers you enjoy?


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Nilsson's unusual voice recorded less than true on most occasions as the miking was too close. In live recordings where the mic was further out and the voice was allowed to expand in the house, her voice was not so cold and had much darker, even warmer overtones that was much less icy and more beautiful. I hear such an effect in this video of a live recording of Gotterdammerung. She has never looked lovelier than here IMHO. You don't have to be a fatty to sing Wagner effectively as she proved.


wow, the difference is more noticeable than I would have expected (just just warmer, but also more _feminine_. she actually sounds like the female heroine she's portraying rather than a curtain of iron).


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I


Seattleoperafan said:


> Nilsson's unusual voice recorded less than true on most occasions as the miking was too close. In live recordings where the mic was further out and the voice was allowed to expand in the house, her voice was not so cold and had much darker, even warmer overtones that was much less icy and more beautiful. I hear such an effect in this video of a live recording of Gotterdammerung. She has never looked lovelier than here IMHO. You don't have to be a fatty to sing Wagner effectively as she proved.


This doesn't look live. It looks badly lip-synced. And like most of the other commentators I think it sounds like the Solti soundtrack too. It's definitely not from Bayreuth. The costumes are all wrong for those productions.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> I
> 
> This doesn't look live. It looks badly lip-synced. And like most of the other commentators I think it sounds like the Solti soundtrack too. It's definitely not from Bayreuth. The costumes are all wrong for those productions.


It's definitely the Solti, recorded in 1964. Nilsson was vocally at her best, as she was in her Elektra a couple of years later. I think these two recordings are the best studio-made representations of her voice, as well as superb performances.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> It's definitely the Solti, recorded in 1964. Nilsson was vocally at her best, as she was in her Elektra a couple of years later. I think these two recordings are the best studio-made representations of her voice, as well as superb performances.


And not too shabby as Salome either.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> And not too shabby as Salome either.


Fine performance as Salome, but Decca hadn't yet learned how to record her to best advantage. The worst recording of all may be the Solti _Tristan_, with the singers sounding small and distant behind Solti's screaming wall of sound. Decca was rationalizing it as "opera house perspective," oblivious to the disparity between the way the ear hears in a live space and what it hears coming out of a loudspeaker (rather comparable to the way the brain processes visual perspective versus what a camera captures). Nilsson herself complained that recordings didn't do her justice, and she was right.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Fine performance as Salome, but Decca hadn't yet learned how to record her to best advantage. The worst recording of all may be the Solti _Tristan_, with the singers sounding small and distant behind Solti's screaming wall of sound. Decca was rationalizing it as "opera house perspective," oblivious to the disparity between the way the ear hears in a live space and what it hears coming out of a loudspeaker (rather comparable to the way the brain processes visual perspective versus what a camera captures). Nilsson herself complained that recordings didn't do her justice, and she was right.


There are some great quotes from her about that in Culshaw's Ring Resounding although I understand she may not have been listening on the best equipment, that is according to Culshaw.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I don't know whether I prefer lyric or dramatic, but I do know that I tend not to like it when a voice is too "soft-grained." In other words, I like voices -- even so-called lyric voices -- to be a bit "steely" so that they have a certain "cutting" quality to them. I'm not talking here about harshness, but about incisiveness or an ability to _penetrate_ the orchestra. A good example of what I mean would be Anna Netrebko's voice; another would be Sherrill Milnes'. So maybe you could say I like voices to have both lyric and dramatic qualities.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

All of my favorite voices are large: Flagstad, Traubel,Sutherland, Milanov, Tebaldi, Nilsson, Podles, Barton, Goerke, Ludwig, Varnay, early G.Jones, Norman, , Early Callas, Horne, Forrester, Ferrier, Vickers, Hepner, early Eaglen, Ponselle, Stignani, Corelli, A. Marc, Farrell


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> absolutely! while it wasn't exactly her specialty, Nilsson was a superb Verdian with surprising versatility of dynamics. honestly, the mechanism is something akin to what I would imagine Sutherland to have sounded like had she continued along the footsteps of Kirsten Flagstad, but with a somewhat colder timbre (ice blue as compared to Sutherland's silvery white). her versality is extremely unusual among Wagnerians, at times jumping up clear to the other end of the soprano spectrum and sounding like a straight up _lyric_ coloratura. for example:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I had never seen that second video of Nilsson singing Rossini's Stabat Mater. Other than the last note she sang all the rest like a lyric soprano with decent coloratura. She was fully capable of being heard at half voice over a big choir just because of perfect projection. If you watch her, she is shooting that sound up into her mask like crazy. Nilsson was completely self taught as a vocalist as everything her several teacher's taught her was unusable, according to her biography.
.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Lyric coloratura?  Nilsson never sounded like any kind of coloratura. Her voice was inherently inflexible, her passage work tending to be smeary and approximate, aspirated, and often out of tune. Even the scaling down of dynamics could betray effort. Watch her mouth in the "Inflammatus": she's working hard to make the little notes happen, but it's like knitting with railroad spikes. Give her big phrases with long notes, words to declaim forcefully, or high C's out of the blue, and she can knock you over. But the Italianate line and the quickness, the light and shade, the morbidezza, the warmth of bel canto? No cigar. Here she is in Nabucco:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Woodduck you made some good points. Nilsson IMHO had some of the best piano high notes around. She did not excel at Bel Canto/ Verdi singing, but I think she was wise to keep that repertoire in her arsenal as it kept her voice healthy for a long time and kept it from growing too heavy. She wasn't the perfect Aida, but her singing in the Nile Scene and in the Triumphal March scene was quite wonderful IHMO. I am not so wild about her Tosca. Turandot was perfect!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Pretty much agree. I don't know her Tosca recording, but do remember her from the Met broadcast in 1968 in which Placido Domingo made his Met debut as Cavaradossi. That was quite an occasion, odd pairing notwithstanding, and the young Domingo sounded fantastic and gave me hope for the future of tenors. Was that hope justified? I ain't sayin.'


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Woodduck you made some good points. Nilsson IMHO had some of the best piano high notes around. She did not excel at Bel Canto/ Verdi singing, but I think she was wise to keep that repertoire in her arsenal as it kept her voice healthy for a long time and kept it from growing too heavy. She wasn't the perfect Aida, but her singing in the Nile Scene and in the Triumphal March scene was quite wonderful IHMO. I am not so wild about her Tosca. Turandot was perfect!


That Tosca sucks, by very disappointing conducting by Maazel , no feeling for tension / emotion's


----------

