# Would Verdi, Mozart and Wagner



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

love the fact that today operas are mostly listened to than watched? With the advent of cds, ipods, mp3 players, most Operas are listened to, with watching only done in a very limited time, i.e at home with a dvd or at the concert hall once a week or once a month or once a year.
I know Wagner in his total art work view watching as important as listening. I for once prefer to listen to wagner operas, then watch it after getting to know the work totally via listening on my ipod, in the car etc.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Wagner surely wouldn't love all those CDs with famous excerpts from his operas and fact that people prefer not to listen the whole thing which was impossible back in his times.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Mozart would probably be quite surprised that his operas are still watched/listened to at all. The notion of addressing humanity as a whole and writing for posterity rather than provide material for an entertaining evening is very much a 19th century development (it perhaps started with Beethoven), as are related others such as the artist as a genius with a higher calling rather than a skilled craftsman in the service of the more valuable nobility.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

opera is meant to be watched. opera is not lieder or a song cycle. whoever only listens to opera overlooks the artform's other essential components.


----------



## Herkku (Apr 18, 2010)

I'm quite sure that the possibility to see opera on DVD has succeeded in winning new friends to the art form!


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> opera is meant to be watched. opera is not lieder or a song cycle.


Lieder wasn't meant to be listened from CD as well. Should we throw all CDs with songs by Wolf because he didn't write them with CD recordings in mind?


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Opera is meant to be watched. Opera is not lieder or a song cycle. Whoever only listens to opera overlooks the artform's other essential components.


Of course. But for me, listening & learning it in advance of seeing it either live or on DVD, enhances my enjoyment.

Today we have that advantage over contemporary audiences. I'm sure Mozart, Verdi & Wagner would love the fact that people could work out in a gym while listening to their music.


----------



## Herkku (Apr 18, 2010)

I know I'll never through away my Mörike Lieder with Fassbaender!


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Aramis said:


> Lieder wasn't meant to be listened from CD as well. Should we throw all CDs with songs by Wolf because he didn't write them with CD recordings in mind?


You know what I mean, Aramis.

I mean that while other forms of vocal classical music don't require staging, props, costumes, acting, etc, opera does, since it is musical theater, not just music.

Therefore, just *listening* to opera - be it live with the eyes closed like Bernard Shaw used to do, or on vinyl, CD, or DVD/Blu-ray with the TV off, whatever, constitutes overlooking of the other elements, and even though some people may defend this preference, I believe that it can't be denied that they *are* overlooking the other elements.

There is nothing wrong with that if that is what the listener prefers, and I don't mean to impose my preferences on anyone; I'm just stating the undeniable fact that the person *is* overlooking the other elements.

I'm not talking about the medium. The medium itself is irrelevant to what I'm saying. You can listen to Lieder with your eyes closed - be it live or on vinyl or CD - *without* missing any of the elements (provided that you understand the language, or if not, you can listen to it while reading a translation of the lyrics without missing any *other* elements).

However you *can't* listen to opera with your eyes closed without missing most of the other elements (except the libretto if you fully understand the language and can tell the words in spite of the distortions of operatic singing). You may like it this way, you may want to imagine the other elements, but you *are* missing them. That's a fact. If you are doing it while reading the libretto in original language or in translation, you're *still* missing several other elements (props, costumes, acting).

On the other hand, if you *have* seen an opera fully staged in any form (live, on a TV broadcast, on DVD, blu-ray, etc) I don't think there is any loss in listening to it again on CD, so, I wouldn't rush to the trash can with all my opera CDs. But I *do* think that at least *one* full staging per opera is required to get the full experience; preferably *several* full stagings by different companies, directors, singers/actors, etc., since the quality varies.

While someone may *like* the more limited experience of just listening to opera, the person *can't* say that he or she is getting the full experience of what opera can deliver.

Imagine a person who just eats milk chocolate. Let's say the person is turned off by the looks of white and dark chocolates and has never had them. The person may be delighted with the milk chocolate eating and I wouldn't want to impose on that person my appreciation for white, milk, *and* dark chocolates (I love all three modalities), but the person will never be able to say with accuracy that he or she has access to the full experience that chocolate eating can deliver.

This is a long rant... but I do feel strong enough about this topic for it to have found its way into my signature...


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> You know what I mean, Aramis.
> 
> I mean that while other forms of vocal classical music don't require staging, props, costumes, acting, etc, opera does, since it is musical theater, not just music.


I know, but my comparison is still correct. Listening to opera from CD isn't compareable with anything that baroque-romantic composers could ever have in their minds and therefore saying that it's against what "it was meant" to be like is just as ridiulous as saying the same about lieder or string quartet. String quartets by Mendelssohn "were meant" to be listened at live chamber performance DON'T LISTEN TO THEM FROM CDs MENDELSSOHN DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Aramis said:


> I know, but my comparison is still correct. Listening to opera from CD isn't compareable with anything that baroque-romantic composers could ever have in their minds and therefore saying that it's against what "it was meant" to be like is just as ridiulous as saying the same about lieder or string quartet. String quartets by Mendelssohn "were meant" to be listened at live chamber performance DON'T LISTEN TO THEM FROM CDs MENDELSSOHN DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY


No, I stand behind what I said.

When the Florentine Camerata invented opera circa 1600, they *meant* to create an artform that *included* acting/staging. I was replying to the original poster. The question was, would Wagner, Mozart, and Verdi love the fact that their operas are mostly *listened to* these days, than watched? My answer is no, in my opinion they wouldn't, because they have created these works *for the stage*, as musical theater, which is what opera is in terms of gender category. They'd probably appreciate the fact that they're still relevant and remembered, and that people still care for their works in one way or the other, but they wouldn't in my opinion *love* the fact that most of the contact (assuming that what the original post said is correct) is done exclusively through listening rather than through full stagings.

I don't think Mendelssohn would be upset at someone just listening to his string quartets in some technological medium (iPod, walkman, whatever) that didn't exist at the time, because the artwork he has created is made purely of sounds, and these sounds can be reproduced by instruments on stage or in chambers, or can be recorded and played later on other media - and they are *still* purely sounds, there is no loss or limitation in terms of what his artwork is. He'd be thrilled to know that people can listen to his string quartets in several different ways.

But I'm quite sure, especially in the case of Wagner who took his concept of "complete work of art" very seriously, that he'd feel that just listening to his operas would not do justice to all that he tried to accomplish with them. He'd certainly find it interesting that nowadays the *sounds* that he created can be reproduced in a varied number of ways, but he'd still feel, in my opinion, that people should watch the staging as well.

Probably he'd love the fact that we can see a full staging of his operas on a home theater with surround sound, etc. But just listening to them? Wagner wouldn't endorse it. He was a freak regarding how his operas should be staged. He cared a lot for the staging.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> *for the stage*


EVERYTHING including large ensamble was written for the stage back then. It had do be either concert hall stage or theatrical stage. None of these two options come close to what kind of musical experience is listening to CD at home.

(I think I made this point in other thread some time ago)

It's like saying "Would Charles Martel like modern French army to use machine guns and tanks? I think not - he ordered his cavarly to carry swords... he meant French knights to cut enemies, not shoot them!"


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

When I say for the stage, I mean the staging arts, including acting, props, costumes, etc.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Aramis said:


> EVERYTHING including large ensamble was written for the stage back then. It had do be either concert hall stage or theatrical stage. None of these two options come close to what kind of musical experience is listening to CD at home.
> 
> (I think I made this point in other thread some time ago)
> 
> It's like saying "Would Charles Martel like modern French army to use machine guns and tanks? I think not - he ordered his cavarly to carry swords... he meant French knights to cut enemies, not shoot them!"


I think this is being perhaps a bit disingenuous. Symphonies, string quartets and the like had to be performed in person because that was the only way to present them. But had the performers been hidden behind a curtain, the net experience would have been very nearly the same. Opera, on the other hand, has a visual component inherent in the work that to do without would be to lessen the experience.

However, I may be biased as I greatly prefer opera that has exemplary acting and very good singing to one that has poor acting and great singing. Sorry, but I'll take Natalie Dessay over Dame Joan ten times out of ten, much as I love Ms. Sutherland's voice.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

rgz said:


> I think this is being perhaps a bit disingenuous. Symphonies, string quartets and the like had to be performed in person because that was the only way to present them. But had the performers been hidden behind a curtain, the net experience would have been very nearly the same. Opera, on the other hand, has a visual component inherent in the work that to do without would be to lessen the experience.
> 
> However, I may be biased as I greatly prefer opera that has exemplary acting and very good singing to one that has poor acting and great singing. Sorry, but I'll take Natalie Dessay over Dame Joan ten times out of ten, much as I love Ms. Sutherland's voice.


Exactly!:tiphat:


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Just thought it might be worth noting that we've thrashed most of this out before, here. Personally, I'm all for a second turn on the roundabout at the fair, but some folks might want to look at the wide-ranging wisdom we collectively contributed there.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> love the fact that today operas are mostly listened to than watched? With the advent of cds, ipods, mp3 players, most Operas are listened to, with watching only done in a very limited time, i.e at home with a dvd or at the concert hall once a week or once a month or once a year.
> I know Wagner in his total art work view watching as important as listening. I for once prefer to listen to wagner operas, then watch it after getting to know the work totally via listening on my ipod, in the car etc.


Add Handel as the fourth in the four greatest operatic masters of all time. These four consistently show strong characterisation in their operas.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Elgarian said:


> Just thought it might be worth noting that we've thrashed most of this out before, here. Personally, I'm all for a second turn on the roundabout at the fair, but some folks might want to look at the wide-ranging wisdom we collectively contributed there.


Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I think a difficulty with listening to opera on disc is that I tend to skip the recitatives, and also, I cherry pick what I listen to, so I take things out of their proper order.

I don't speak Italian or German, so it takes commitment to know what they're singing about, so mainly it's about the music for me. So yes, it might be odd to the composers that technology means their music is sliced and taken out of context. Finales, in particular, are most effective when I've followed the opera through, as opposed to diving in mid-chord to where they're about to crank things up.

Having said that, if they were alive, they might like the royalties from compilations of their work, etc...:tiphat:


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Kieran said:


> I think a difficulty with listening to opera on disc is that I tend to skip the recitatives, and also, I cherry pick what I listen to, so I take things out of their proper order.
> 
> I don't speak Italian or German, so it takes commitment to know what they're singing about, so mainly it's about the music for me. So yes, it might be odd to the composers that technology means their music is sliced and taken out of context. Finales, in particular, are most effective when I've followed the opera through, as opposed to diving in mid-chord to where they're about to crank things up.
> 
> Having said that, if they were alive, they might like the royalties from compilations of their work, etc...:tiphat:


 Your points show once more why it *is* important to get the whole work in all its aspects. But yes, I bet they'd like the royalties...


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Your points show once more why it *is* important to get the whole work in all its aspects. But yes, I bet they'd like the royalties...


Exactly, though one benefit of the pick-n-mix approach to be had from CD listening is that it whets the appetite to see the full opera. Sometimes I dip into hear my favourite pieces simply because I don't have time to hear the full CD boxsets, but it's a 2 dimensional way of approaching opera, but the performers are actors too, and you can't beat seeing them on stage, and following the plot too...


----------



## BalloinMaschera (Apr 4, 2011)

Almaviva said:


> opera is meant to be watched. opera is not lieder or a song cycle. whoever only listens to opera overlooks the artform's other essential components.


While I do go to the opera often enough and I also have DVD's in my collection, for the most part, I *listen* to opera. As a matter of fact, my favorite way to listen to opera is in the dark.

I can imagine my own staging, if need be.

I realize that generally the sum is more than the mere addition of its parts... to me (and others may of course feel differently), *music* is the most important part.

The star of every good opera, is ...at the end of the day... the composer.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

I agree with Alma that I am indeed overlooking some elements because I simply do not enjoy watching it as much as I do listening...never have and it is my choice to do this...I respect anyone who appreciates it as a whole...all I can be thankful for is that at least I am able to enjoy fully the musical aspect of opera, as it is something truly marvelous


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Listening to a CD is a time when I can give all my attention to the music, but I like to have watched a DVD first so I have a good idea of what is happening, because it helps me understand in what way the music is bringing out (or not) the action, character's emotions etc.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

mamascarlatti said:


> Listening to a CD is a time when I can give all my attention to the music, but I like to have watched a DVD first so I have a good idea of what is happening, because it helps me understand in what way the music is bringing out (or not) the action, character's emotions etc.


I agree. I am quite a novice, but the first couple of operas I bought I listened to only on CD. A lot. Then I watched a DVD of La Traviata before buying the CD. I seemed to 'latch on' to the music much more easily when I had watched the DVD first. I would also emphatically support the idea that opera is only one half aural and one half visual. Without the visual element, you do somehow miss part of the work as it was intended. Saying that, the music is still superb on its own and I would listen to the audio alone many times more than watch the DVD.


----------



## Sieglinde (Oct 25, 2009)

If only Wagner knew I like to listen Rheingold's finale while ironing...  And Immolation Scene while walking.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

BalloinMaschera said:


> While I do go to the opera often enough and I also have DVD's in my collection, for the most part, I *listen* to opera. As a matter of fact, my favorite way to listen to opera is in the dark.
> 
> I can imagine my own staging, if need be.


Do you imagine watching the staging, or do you imagine _being_ the staging? When I listen to CD opera I like to actually become each of the characters in my own staging. If I am alone, this is usually accompanied with me flailing my hands around in the air like an idiot and mouthing the words. I prefer to be introduced to new Operas through DVDs, as they're simply easier to digest without having to pour over a libretto. After I 'know' a work though, I prefer listening to it, no stage production comes close to your imagination.


----------



## BalloinMaschera (Apr 4, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Do you imagine watching the staging, or do you imagine _being_ the staging? When I listen to CD opera I like to actually become each of the characters in my own staging. If I am alone, this is usually accompanied with me flailing my hands around in the air like an idiot and mouthing the words. I prefer to be introduced to new Operas through DVDs, as they're simply easier to digest without having to pour over a libretto. After I 'know' a work though, I prefer listening to it, no stage production comes close to your imagination.


I suppose what I do (sometimes) is that I become the director, and imagine what would be going on , on stage... all the information I need is in the music.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

With the rise of opera DVDs in recent years, I'm not sure I agree with your premise.
More and more people are seeing a wider variety of operas every year this way.
It's a great way to experience opera ; unlike a large opera house where you may be too
far away from the singers to observe their facial expressions etc, the close up perspective
of DVDs allows you to really get involved in the action .
I still enjoy opera on CD,however, and if you already know the standard operas backward
and forward they way I do as a veteran of more than 40 years as an opera fan since I was a teenager, there is still an amazing number of interesting obscure operas you would have almost no0 chance of ever seeing live. But DVDs are catching up in this respect,
Recently, I've seen DVDs of such rarities as Salieri's Falstaff, Pergolesi's Lo Frate Nnamorato, Zoroastre by Rameau, Nielsen's Maskarade, Schubert's Fierrabras,
asnd Rossini's La Donna Del Lago, Le Comte Ory, and Maometto Secondo,
and Verdi's Giovanna D'Arco. Cool ! It's great to get beyond La Traviata,Rigoletto,
La Boheme,Carmen, Faust, Cavalleria Rusticana, Pagliacci, and all those standard operas I've heard for the zillionth time.


----------



## Grosse Fugue (Mar 3, 2010)

Couchie said:


> Do you imagine watching the staging, or do you imagine _being_ the staging? When I listen to CD opera I like to actually become each of the characters in my own staging. If I am alone, this is usually accompanied with me flailing my hands around in the air like an idiot and mouthing the words. I prefer to be introduced to new Operas through DVDs, as they're simply easier to digest without having to pour over a libretto. After I 'know' a work though, I prefer listening to it, no stage production comes close to your imagination.


I do this as well.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Aramis said:


> Wagner surely wouldn't love all those CDs with famous excerpts from his operas and fact that people prefer not to listen the whole thing which was impossible back in his times.


Nae so sure about _that_.

Wagner was willing to conduct _his own_ opera excerpts in concert settings (especially if he perceived the price was right!) I suspect he would object to OTHERS doing so. However, if he lived in the age of recording- and could arrange for some pecuniary consideration in return for having "official Richard Wagner" recordings, I believe that he would embrace the idea, and offer some retro-fit justification arguing for the legitimacy of absorbing the operas through THESE particular recordings.

I think that, in their innermost thoughts, Mozart, Verdi, and Wagner would be more troubled by the ready-access of their works having an adverse effect on the focus of the listeners. If you're seeing 'Aïda' and considering the possibility that you might not ever encounter it again (as was likely the case for many of the listeners of Verdi's era), then there's a HUGE incentive not to blink, or to have your attention flag. I think we lose a little of that intensity in today's world.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> then there's a HUGE incentive not to blink, or to have your attention flag. I think we lose a little of that intensity in today's world.


 I don't blink when I watch Anna Netrebko La Bellissima!


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

I like to listen to opera a lot and also to watch operas but I don´t want to have my eyes concentrated on one thing too much sometimes I have other things to do as to read posts on talkclassical.com. It is true that opera is supposed to be seen but opera contains a lot of good music and singing that can be enjoyed only listened to. I also think there is more music from operas that I enjoy listening to than music from cantatas, song cycles, lieder and oratorios.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Although I have DVDs I do tend to listen more to opera. Wagner takes up so much time in watches no and just listening not you can go and do something else while the dull bits are on. Also Wagner the s so difficult to stage there are anomalies. But having ng bought the Ring on DVD I'll see if I can't persuade myself to watch it. Already done the first.
With Verdi the works are more manageable. The one I'll be glued always to is Falstaff
With Mozart the operas are so well formed that words and music are moulded with a skill Wagner could not have imagined. So for watching generally Wolfie


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Although I have DVDs I do tend to listen more to opera. Wagner takes up so much time in watches no and just listening not *you can go and do something else while* the dull bits are on.[/B] Also Wagner the s so difficult to stage there are anomalies. But having ng bought the Ring on DVD I'll see if I can't persuade myself to watch it. Already done the first.
> With Verdi the works are more manageable. The one I'll be glued always to is Falstaff
> *With Mozart the operas are so well formed that words and music are moulded with a skill Wagner could not have imagined.* So for watching generally Wolfie


Just can't resist slamming Wagner, can you? I know that if I'm just patient enough and keep an eye out, you'll do it again. Inevitable as death and taxes. Not that it really matters to me or to history, but your statement is as silly as it is gratuitous. It is also vague enough to be meaningless as anything but a putdown. Responsible and measured criticism is one thing; hyperbolic "my composer is way greater than your composer" stuff is another.

Mozart is a great enough artist that he does not need or profit from foolish comparisons with composers whose aesthetics are completely different from his. Wagner had profound admiration for Mozart, as he should have - but he was doing something new in his own work, using dramatic material, new concepts of musical structure, and resources of harmony and orchestration Mozart did not utilize and "could not have imagined," which is of course no insult at all to him.

How about trying on a little aesthetic and historical perspective, a touch of caution, and a even a little humility, when discussing the works of artists whose greatness you cannot ever truly comprehend? That is my practice. Most of the time it keeps me from saying absurd and annoying things.

P.S. _You_ - meaning not "one," but _you_, DavidA - can go and do something else. Many of us like "the dull bits." Many of us also find dull bits in Mozart, but we use the first person when speaking about them.

P.P.S. I know from past experience it will make no difference to speak to you about your negativity toward Wagner and your need to deliver provocative digs whenever his name appears in a thread. You will never leave off doing it. I'm really speaking to those who may or may not have noticed your game.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

From Wiki.........

*Both Wagner's libretto style and music *were also profoundly influential on the Symbolist poets of the late 19th century and early 20th century.[2]


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Itullian said:


> From Wiki.........
> 
> *Both Wagner's libretto style and music *were also profoundly influential on the Symbolist poets of the late 19th century and early 20th century.[2]


They were indeed.

My suspicion is that of the three composers, Verdi would find it most odd should people desire to just listen. Mozart, after all, wrote concert arias which could easily have been lifted out of operas; many of his opera melodies were adapted and arranged by other composers just for listening; and the alternation of recitative and aria in his operas lends itself well to excerpting: fifty minutes of _Don Giovanni_ or _Flute_ makes for very pleasant listening, with no need for all the chatter which carries the action onstage but isn't needed while we're driving or doing the dishes. Wagner, though he can't be cut up in the same way, has long stretches of music, ranging from orchestral preludes and interludes to whole scenes and acts, that make satisfying entities for concert or home listening purposes - and, as has been pointed out, he sanctioned and himself presented concert performances of such excerpts. Verdi, in his earlier "numbers" works, can be excerpted in the same way as Mozart, and his later works are not so easily carved up; but in either case I suspect that, perhaps more for cultural reasons than musical, he would be surprised that anyone might prefer simply to hear his music than to experience a performance in the theater.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> They were indeed.
> 
> My suspicion is that of the three composers, Verdi would find it most odd should people desire to just listen. Mozart, after all, wrote concert arias which could easily have been lifted out of operas; many of his opera melodies were adapted and arranged by other composers just for listening; and the alternation of recitative and aria in his operas lends itself well to excerpting: fifty minutes of _Don Giovanni_ or _Flute_ makes for very pleasant listening, with no need for all the chatter which carries the action onstage but isn't needed while we're driving or doing the dishes. Wagner, though he can't be cut up in the same way, has long stretches of music, ranging from orchestral preludes and interludes to whole scenes and acts, that make satisfying entities for concert or home listening purposes - and, as has been pointed out, he sanctioned and himself presented concert performances of such excerpts. Verdi, in his earlier "numbers" works, can be excerpted in the same way as Mozart, and his later works are not so easily carved up; but in either case I suspect that, perhaps more for cultural reasons than musical, he would be surprised that anyone might prefer simply to hear his music than to experience a performance in the theater.


I find it difficult to imagine living in a world were there is no recorded music and it must have been more difficult or impossible to imagine recorded music when there is no. Music from Verdi´s operas were recorded during his lifetime so are there any known commentaries from Verdi himself about having his music recorded or any use of it?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Sloe said:


> I find it difficult to imagine living in a world were there is no recorded music and it must have been more difficult or impossible to imagine recorded music when there is no. Music from Verdi´s operas were recorded during his lifetime so are there any known commentaries from Verdi himself about having his music recorded or any use of it?


Verdi died (aged 87) in 1900 and the earliest recordings of his music date from 1902.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Verdi died (aged 87) in 1900 and the earliest recordings of his music date from 1902.


This page lists over 30 recordings of music by Verdi from when he was still alive.
And they are only American:

http://adp.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/talent/detail/30071/Verdi_Giuseppe_composer


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Sloe said:


> This page lists over 30 recordings of music by Verdi from when he was still alive.
> And they are only American:
> 
> http://adp.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/talent/detail/30071/Verdi_Giuseppe_composer


I stand corrected! Thanks for the info.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Whatever the composers would have thought, I find I prefer earlier styles of opera - Baroque and Classical - in the theater or on film, since I find most rectitative tiresome for pure listening; its main purpose is to propel the action along, and no matter how skillfully a Handel or a Mozart may pace it, it is rarely of much musical interest, or even intended to be. I exempt Monteverdi from this, since he composes mainly in "arioso" possessing constant melodic and harmonic interest; I suspect he would have found secco recitative pretty dry (which is what "secco" means). Interestingly, "through-composed" opera often approximates to the early Baroque arioso style, and so I can find Romantic and modern opera, along with Monteverdi and Gluck, satisfying just for listening.

Considering the above, I'd say that of the three composers mentioned in the OP, I definitely want to see Mozart (except in "highlights" form), can enjoy hearing and seeing Verdi about equally, and can be quite happy just listening to Wagner, for two main reasons: his music is so atmospheric and visually evocative that it creates its own mise-en-scene in my imagination, and contemporary stagings tend to be so absurd that the farther from them I can keep myself the better.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Sloe said:


> This page lists over 30 recordings of music by Verdi from when he was still alive.
> And they are only American:
> 
> http://adp.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/talent/detail/30071/Verdi_Giuseppe_composer


Great link, thank you!

Ferruccio Giannini, a real early adopter of the new medium, recording in America in the late 1890s:









More from Alberto del Campo, recorded in NYC in 1898 (not Verdi in this example, but it's interesting):





Hermann Winkelmann, the first Parsifal, sings 'Deserto sulla terra' in Vienna, 1900:





Perhaps best of all for those interested in Verdi recordings made in the composer's lifetime, the great tenor Leopoldo Signoretti made some records for Zonophone in Milan in 1901 (not sure of the exact date, maybe later in that year than Verdi's death) which are fascinating and should be listened to by anyone interested in the history of singing. They are in fairly good sound apart from some occasional speed fluctuations affecting the pitch. This is, to the best of my limited knowledge, a tenor of the front rank (or pretty close to it) of the generation of Masini and Stagno. This is probably the best of his records, 'Solingo, errante e misero' from Ernani:





And in 'Quando le sere al placido' from Luisa Miller:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Figleaf said:


> Great link, thank you!
> 
> Ferruccio Giannini, a real early adopter of the new medium, recording in America in the late 1890s:
> 
> ...


I think we can trust that if Wagner chose Winkelmann to create Parsifal his voice was in better shape 15 years earlier!


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I think we can trust that if Wagner chose Winkelmann to create Parsifal his voice was in better shape 15 years earlier!


I think it was still a beautiful voice, even if it was showing some wear- and a moving performance, if possibly not his best record. He'd have been 50 or 51 when that record was made, which must be quite ancient in Heldentenor years! He lasted longer than Schnorr von Carolsfeld anyway-I wonder what_ he_ sounded like.

Winkelmann was in better voice when he re-recorded the aria for G&T in 1904, and the recording itself is much better too. I think _this_ 'Deserto sulla terra' is his best recording, alongside the aria from Dalibor perhaps.






Nothing from Parsifal, for some reason.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

At home, I prefer to listen to good recordings of concert pieces, operas and instrumental recitals; never DVD's.

For one, I find there are many more fine audio recording choices than on DVD.

Secondly, I find viewing at home on DVD distracting, especially orchestral concerts and instrumental recitals.

Once I've viewed an opera or ballet DVD a few times, the thrill is gone (if there ever was one) as I can now anticipate every move of the production.

No doubt about it, give me audio only, every time.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Figleaf said:


> I think it was still a beautiful voice, even if it was showing some wear- and a moving performance, if possibly not his best record. He'd have been 50 or 51 when that record was made, which must be quite ancient in Heldentenor years! He lasted longer than Schnorr von Carolsfeld anyway-I wonder what_ he_ sounded like.
> 
> Winkelmann was in better voice when he re-recorded the aria for G&T in 1904, and the recording itself is much better too. I think _this_ 'Deserto sulla terra' is his best recording, alongside the aria from Dalibor perhaps.
> 
> ...


Winkelmann can't seem to sing more than a couple of words before he needs another breath. In fact I could swear that at one point he even breathes between syllables! The tempo is halting, the phrasing is broken-backed. The voice is strained, and he even cracks at the ends of notes. He sounds like an old man with emphysema. Manrico is a troubador; singing is his job. This guy would be pelted with eggs by the townspeople. No singer should be in this condition at age 50. Too much Wagner on stage, not enough Mozart at home!

If you must have this in German, Peter Anders is incomparably better:





Joseph Schmidt even interpolates a couple of trills:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

To me Mozart was the great writer of recitatives. In the da Ponte operas at least they are full of life and take the action on vividly. You can see the difference when you listen to La Clemenza de Tito where the recits were penned by Sussmayr, as Mozart was so pushed for time. Tito is therefore like a great torso with the recits generally lacking Mozart's genius. This is the one mature Mozart opera which is better heard in highlights.


----------

