# Third Round:Ma dall'arido stelo. Callas, Callas, Burzio



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

It is important to read the notes below to make an informed decision


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I had the brilliant idea to pit Callas only against herself as she is so hard to defeat. Then Shaafee introduced me to Eugenia Burzio who was the leading prima donna at La Scala in the first decade of the twentieth century. She so impressed me and had such a unique take on this aria in this surprisingly good sounding recording that I thought to myself that perhaps she has a chance to steal a few votes away from Maria's early and late recordings. Let me know what you think.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

OK. Well Burzio's performance isn't really comparable as she sings less than half the full aria and is accompanied only on the piano. The voice is certainly impressive, but I don't really like the way she overdoes the _rubati_, which stretch the phrases out of shape. Her legato isn't as good as Callas's either. She observes the _tenuti_ on the phrases _che ti resta, perduta amor_ and _o finisci di battere e muor_ but isn't able to bind them into a single phrase as Callas does.

And so on to the two performances by Callas. Strangely enough the 1957 performance represents the first time Callas ever sang the role of Amelia on stage, though she had recorded the opera in the studio the previous year. The 1951 performance is from a concert in San Remo. Her voice sounds absolutely massive, secure up to the top C climax and with thrilling lower notes and chest tones. That said, the 1957 performance also finds her in pretty stunning voice, probably the last time we hear her singing with such power and security. Her next performances were to be the Normas in Rome in front of the President of Italy when she was unable to finish the performance due to ill health. The walk-out caused a huge scandal and the press were merciless. It also resulted in her severing her ties with La Scala. Though there were still some marvellous performances ahead of her (the *Traviatas* in Lisbon and London, the Dallas *Medea*) we find her having more and more vocal problems and she soon started to curtail her appearances.

Howver there is precious little evidence of any vocal problems in this La Scala performance of 1957 and I find it very hard to choose between it and the 1951 concert performance. In general I prefer Gavazzeni's more propulsive tempo for the opening section at La Scala, meaning that this section seeths with drama and excitement. On the other hand, the sheer scale of the singing in 1951 is pretty irresistible. I prefer that she does the written ending in the 1957 performance, though. Gosh this is difficult.

I will say that I prefer both Callas's performances to any of the others we've compared so far. I'm going to vote for 1957 (the better sound helps) though tomorrow, or even later this evening I could vote for 1951. Both performances are stupendous.


----------



## ScottK (Dec 23, 2021)

She does indeed have a remarkable voice and Callas '51 sounded like it was recorded around the same time as Burzio '05, so good call. '
I thought Callas '51 was just going to sweep away all competition but '57 was pretty fantastic too. Burzio sounded even better but the rhythmic freedom, I guess appropriate for the day, took away drama for me. And again, listening to these singers in a quantity that I haven't for a long time (you're all turning me into a delinquent!) I'm struck repeatedly that the staying on the musical line, with a feel for phrase, generates an even more satisfying feeling of beauty than the presence of a remarkable timbre.

And someone tell me if I'm wrong but...does Callas '51 go into chest for that low miserere near the end but not go into chest on '57? Right or wrong my vote is for '51


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

What? Do you think I'm going to vote for anyone else if Callas is involved? Not on your life!

The 1951 Martini & Rossi concert also included Proch's *Variations*, a piece for mindless _soprano leggiero_ in such bad sound that Ardoin suggested it was a "modern day Mapleson." I wish had been better recorded.

Fortunately, the *Ballo* aria is in comparatively better sound and you can hear that voice that was conquering Italy one fabulous performance at a time. She is in fantastic voice here, able to do whatever she wished. I'm a great proponent of the fat Callas voice. While the later performance has everything in place and is better recorded, the 1951 stunning rendition sweeps all before it. She ends with the higher variant, as befits a concert version.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Well seems to me this has got to be a contest between two and not 3 voices because as unique and heartbreaking as the 3rd voice was, not only can I not hear the last notes which are imperative in my final decision but the sound is so difficult that it doesn't seem fair to her. I would love to hear her sing with more modern equipment because I think her voice is wonderful.
Now to Maria.
There is no comparison between the two for me. I clearly prefer the 1st recording even though it is certainly lacking soundwise musically.
Although they were both superb, there was something incredibly delicate and sensitive that I picked up in the first that I felt was lacking in the second. It was that vulnerable voice of Callas that I prefer to the more secure and practiced one.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I'm decidedly unorthodox and likely unlike most of you a factor in appreciating opera is imagination. I use imagination to try to pretend to hear what voices must have sounded like in a theater. I also use imagination to mentally reconstitute what singers from the age of 78's and older sounded like in person. All of this factors in in my appreciation for Burzio. Of course no one stands a chance against Maria in our forum Which is why I will be handling contests with Callas differently than other contests.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I should add that my slight preference for the 1957 Callas performance could also stem from the fact that it is part of a complete performance of the opera rather than a concert where she is simply standing on stage. Here she is in a fully staged performance in costume. She has already made her first appearance and she is thoroughly inside the role of Amelia. Though Callas had an uncanny ability to create theatre of the mind even in concert, her true medium was the theatre and I find her just that bit more involved here.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Callas may be in slightly better voice in 1951, but with such abysmal sound who can say for sure? It's fair warning to anyone who would pronounce firm judgments on the vocal timbres that emerge from ancient recordings. All I could say after hearing the 1957 performance was "Wow!" Folks, it doesn't get any better. This is what musical and dramatic greatness sound like. Even the high note that begins the cadenza, hard for almost any soprano to manage well, is surprisingly firm (one is always in suspense with Callas), and I appreciate her adherence to the written ending. High rewrites are gratuitous and spoil the atmosphere of this, one of Verdi's most haunting scenes.

I have no doubt that the vocally superb Signora Burzio had audiences in the palm of her hand, and it's always great to discover another excellent singer, yet more evidence of how glittering the Golden Age was. It's an old refrain by now, but they just don't sing like this any more. That said, this is only a fragment, and we don't know how she'd have done the whole scene. Like Tsaraslondon, I'm not pleased by the overextended tenuti.

Callas '57.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

i like including golden age singers in my contests but should I cease and desist because they often do partial scenes? At present maybe a third of my contestants are golden age performers like Tetrazinni and Bastianini ( sp) . I don't always know if a scene is complete or not to be honest. You've disqualified a contestant before for this. I got enough from Burzio to make a judgement but apparently none of you did in her aria. Time limited their recordings. Should I go through and purge my contests? My most thrilling discoveries in Bonetan's contests were historic singers. These contests are for you. You will just have many less contestants. Ponselle's Casta Diva leaves stuff out but it is still my personal favorite. If I spend the hours eliminating the golden age singers in the contests I've created at what year should I use as a cut off?1920. 1915. No Caruso? No Schumann-Heink?


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

Burzio is out of the running for the reasons Tsaraslondon explained. So it’s between Callas ‘51 and ‘57. I voted for ‘57 bc of her intensity and abandon. In ‘51 she seemed a bit reserved and straitjacketed. About her ‘57, it struck me how “modern” she sang and sounded (for good or bad, depending on individual, subjective preferences) as if taped last week with a different singer. In any case, my preference still resides with those in the first round: Arangi-Lombardi and Boninsegna.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Seattleoperafan said:


> i like including golden age singers in my contests but should I cease and desist because they often do partial scenes? At present maybe a third of my contestants are golden age performers like Tetrazinni and Bastianini ( sp) . I don't always know if a scene is complete or not to be honest. You've disqualified a contestant before for this. I got enough from Burzio to make a judgement but apparently none of you did in her aria. Time limited their recordings. Should I go through and purge my contests? My most thrilling discoveries in Bonetan's contests were historic singers. These contests are for you. You will just have many less contestants. Ponselle's Casta Diva leaves stuff out but it is still my personal favorite. If I spend the hours eliminating the golden age singers in the contests I've created at what year should I use as a cut off?1920. 1915. No Caruso.


I vote for not leaving the Golden Age singers out. It's always instructive to hear them, regardless of who we vote for.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MAS said:


> I vote for not leaving the Golden Age singers out. It's always instructive to hear them, regardless of who we vote for.


Agree. We aren't betting on the horses.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

No, you shouldn’t exclude golden age singers. But maybe try to curate their selections to more closely match the silver or bronze age’s  Things like orchestral accompaniment with same, piano accompaniment with same, complete aria/scene with same and so forth. This will of course limit your choices. That said, there is so much of Caruso but so relatively little of Schumann-Heink.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

ALT said:


> No, you shouldn't exclude golden age singers. But maybe try to curate their selections to more closely match the silver or bronze age's  Things like orchestral accompaniment with same, piano accompaniment with same, complete aria/scene with same and so forth. This will of course limit your choices. That said, there is so much of Caruso but so relatively little of Schumann-Heink.


Good suggestion but it is just too much work for me. In the future if a contestant is disqualified I will not take it as a judgement on me. It shouldn't happen too often. If a scene is decidedly shorter than other artists scenes then that is worth me looking at. I will go through and take a peak at that soon. I will mess up a bit but you should still have fun.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

Never take it as a judgement on you.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Good suggestion but it is just too much work for me. In the future if a contestant is disqualified I will not take it as a judgement on me. It shouldn't happen too often.* If a scene is decidedly shorter than other artists scenes then that is worth me looking at.* I will go through and take a peak at that soon. I will mess up a bit but you should still have fun.


Looking at the timing is the simplest way of ensuring that we're going to hear the same music. In some cases an extra couple of minutes means only that a recitative has been included with the aria. There are also instances of a different tempo adding a full minute or two to a performance.


----------



## ScottK (Dec 23, 2021)

Seattleoperafan said:


> *Good suggestion... In the future ...you should still have fun*.


That's what I got and we follow instructions!!! You can see we ALWAYS have fun with your contests!!!


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> i like including golden age singers in my contests but should I cease and desist because they often do partial scenes? At present maybe a third of my contestants are golden age performers like Tetrazinni and Bastianini ( sp) . I don't always know if a scene is complete or not to be honest. You've disqualified a contestant before for this. I got enough from Burzio to make a judgement but apparently none of you did in her aria. Time limited their recordings. Should I go through and purge my contests? My most thrilling discoveries in Bonetan's contests were historic singers. These contests are for you. You will just have many less contestants. Ponselle's Casta Diva leaves stuff out but it is still my personal favorite. If I spend the hours eliminating the golden age singers in the contests I've created at what year should I use as a cut off?1920. 1915. No Caruso? No Schumann-Heink?


John:
I's no biggie. Perhaps if you could just see that no matter how you decide to present them, if you could just make sure they all end up on the same notes at the end, that would reallly be sufficient.
We're big kids -- we can decide how much or how llittle we want to hear.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> John:
> I's no biggie. Perhaps if you could just see that no matter how you decide to present them, if you could just make sure they all end up on the same notes at the end, that would reallly be sufficient.
> We're big kids -- we can decide how much or how llittle we want to hear.


Ya'll are easy to play with.


----------



## Shaafee Shameem (Aug 4, 2021)

Here is a more complete recording of Burzio, minus the opening recitative. Although the tempo is quite slow, she sings with pathos, and phrases naturally, if with a little exaggerated rubato. Her lower register which she uses liberally is excellent. The tenuto in "che ti resta" seems fine to me, if not as elegant as Callas'. In the following section, Burzio gives a truly dramatic reading. Particularly, the notes marked 'con dolore' are attacked vehemently and full of angst. Her 'E m'affisa truly sounds suffocated. She lightens the tone for the closing phrases, which are sung very tenderly. A wonderful soprano, who is unfortunately forgotten today.

Coming to Callas, it's interesting to hear the differences. Her voice sounds richer in 1951, but apart from a slight harshness her voice is in great condition in 1957, her 7th and last La Scala season before she withdrew. Many claim that her interpretations grew only after the weight loss, but there are many similarities between the two readings, and one hears that the dramatic instincts were there from the very beginning. In both versions, she sings the opening cantabile phrases with perfect legato, particularly observed in how she phrases through the high note in "Quell'eterea" and the tenuto in "che it resta" with ease and elegance. This is a voice truly schooled in the bel canto tradition! Her phrasing, as always, is so spontaneous and inward! In the following section too, the accents on certain notes are similar, but due to Gavazzeni's conducting, 1957 is even more dramatic and tender, particularly "O finisci di battere e muor". Afterwards, in the line "Ha negli occhi…" has anyone sounded as agitated and terrified as Callas? She too like Burzio sounds suffocated in "e m'affisa" but Callas carries the effect further to the low A as well. The closing phrases are sung with desperation in both versions, and the C is secure in both instances, though the vulnerability in 1957 is even greater. Close, but I will go with 1957 for the slightly more dramatic reading, whilst noting the sheer impressiveness of the instrument itself in 1951 in addition to the supreme artistry of Callas which was always there.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I might also add that in 1957 (and in the studio recording of 1956) Callas phrases onwards and through the top C climax, which I prefer to her taking a breath after the top C in 1951, which is what almost all other sopranos do. It makes for a much more musical phrase.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Shaafee Shameem said:


> Here is a more complete recording of Burzio, minus the opening recitative. Although the tempo is quite slow, she sings with pathos, and phrases naturally, if with a little exaggerated rubato. Her lower register which she uses liberally is excellent. The tenuto in "che ti resta" seems fine to me, if not as elegant as Callas'. In the following section, Burzio gives a truly dramatic reading. Particularly, the notes marked 'con dolore' are attacked vehemently and full of angst. Her 'E m'affisa truly sounds suffocated. She lightens the tone for the closing phrases, which are sung very tenderly. A wonderful soprano, who is unfortunately forgotten today.


Wonderful indeed. I didn't even much mind the long-held notes once I knew to expect them; onstage acting can make more sense of such liberties, and her singing exudes theater. I do prefer Verdi's own ending, but then it was common practice to take an improvisational approach to cadenzas.

Wiki notes: "While many music critics found her interpretations imaginative and exciting, others criticized her for the unevenness of her voice and other technical shortcomings." Not many shortcomings evident here, whatever they might have been. Wiki goes on: "Burzio cut a number of frequently gripping 78-rpm gramophone recordings in Milan between 1905 and 1916. Towards the end of her career, however, she suffered from a nervous disorder and general ill-health. She made her final stage appearance in 1919, in Ponchielli's Marion Delorme. Burzio died at Milan, three years later, aged 40, of kidney failure."

In a newspaper interview Burzio stated "A verismo role is bound to produce a melodramatic performance and artificial elation, and it's artificial because it isn't always a musical approach and when you are young, you don't know the correct approach. This can lead to strain on the nervous system. Nervous exhaustion is more damaging to the voice than the difficulty or length of the role". (The Levik memoirs, page 117)


----------

