# Bonus Round Panis Angelicus:Schwartzkopf, D'arkor, Pavarotti



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

My first round wasn't ideal so we are hopefully having a better round this time.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

My favorite version and the simplest and loveliest arrangement is Pav with Sting. Sting is just backup but his is the best pop collaboration Pavarotti did. If enough of you say you like it I'll put it in the final contest.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Easy peasy. The Pav man runs away with this one. 
I found the one with Sting unique and different but I would not have voted it against Pav alone.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> Easy peasy. The Pav man runs away with this one.
> I found the one with Sting unique and different but I would not have voted it against Pav alone.


This round is my Xmas present to you.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

I've known both the Schwarzkopf and Pavarotti versions for quite some time.

I dislike Schwarzkopf wholly artificial way of singing (this is a totally personal reaction, mind you, others will disagree), though she does vary the dynamics which one can't say of Pavarotti in his video. Pavarotti sings it straightforwardly, and his unvaried, but beautiful tone sounds somewhat tedious after a while.

D'Arkor sings the hymn at a measured pace and his ease of emission and varied dynamics made Luciano's version moot. I noted the French/Belgian pronouncement of the Latin _au_ makes _pauper_ sound like "pooper." I wish people would not pronounce the single "_r_" as a multiple "_rr_." _Mirabilis_, not _mirrrabilis_.

I know, nitpicking.

I'd also nix the Pav/Sting version.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

"Do I want to waste time pointing out the attractions of the two tenors when others will doubtless do it perfectly well?" the handsome Tito asks himself.

"No," he answers. 

The tenors are fine, without a doubt. Beautiful, actually. I enjoyed them both. But the soprano occupies a higher position on the Great Chain of Musical Being (yes, there is such a thing). I had Schwarzkopf's Christmas album back in my LP days. It was one of my favorite things to listen to when 'twas the season (and occasionally when 'twasn't), but I believe I've heard nothing from that collection in decades. Clearly I've missed out.

Schwarzkopf and the musicians who accompany her, singing and playing as one in a fully formed conception, find in this apparently simple music more subtleties of phrasing, dynamics and articulation than others imagine. The glowing intensity they project in the second verse is extraordinary, not least through the magical raptness of Schwarzkopf's soft singing. They had me spellbound from start to finish.

As far as Tito is concerned this round is over, but if there's more to come he'll do his duty.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Yet again, Woodduck pips me to the post and says pretty much exactly what I was going to say.

Both tenors are good, though I prefer Pavarotti without Sting and I find d'Arkor's repeated cries of "pooper" rather distracting.

Schwarzkopf, in a lovely arrangement by (and conducted by) Sir Charles Mackerras makes something wonderful and special out of it, and I don't find anything in the least bit artificial about her singing, so the choice for me was also _easy peasey_. Schwarzkopf it is.

I'd just add that it is gratifying to see I'm not the only one to think so. I was beginning to think I was the lone Schwarzkopf voice on this forum.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Yet again, Woodduck pips me to the post and says pretty much exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> Both tenors are good, though I prefer Pavarotti without Sting and I find d'Arkor's repeated cries of "pooper" rather distracting.
> 
> ...


I had forgotten how gorgeous her voice was!!!


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Yet again, Woodduck pips me to the post and says pretty much exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> Both tenors are good, though I prefer Pavarotti without Sting and I find d'Arkor's repeated cries of "pooper" rather distracting.
> 
> ...


You are definitely not alone. I've always been a fan.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

Wow, this is an interesting competition. The reactions are not only wildly different from each other, but I find myself disagreeing with people I usually agree with.

When the choir came in on Schwarzkopf's recording I went, "Oh, _that's_ the problem." She sounds like the first soprano in the choir, not a soloist. I was listening to Flagstad sing "When I am laid in earth" last night, and I guess that's still in my mind, because I could not enjoy Schwarzkopf's soft singing. There's not enough difference between it and her normal voice, and she sounds rather constricted to me. The voice narrows, it doesn't bloom, which pianos should still do. Musically, I had the same feeling I often get when listening to Fleming or atonal music: there's so much happening that there's nothing happening. I prefer Pavarotti and D'Arkor's simplicity of line.

Speaking of Pavarotti, his version is fine. I didn't get any special vibes from it though.

D'Arkor sang sensitively yet simply. He has a burnished tone with just as much brightness as Pavarotti, but more depth and more composure. He sang softly, but could expand when needed, and he achieves the combination of intimacy and grandeur that I think this piece, and any sacred music really, needs.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Yet again, Woodduck pips me to the post and says pretty much exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> Both tenors are good, though I prefer Pavarotti without Sting and I find d'Arkor's repeated cries of "pooper" rather distracting.
> 
> ...


I'd forgotten that Mackerras was her conductor. It makes sense that EMI would give her a first-rate collaborator.

_Panis Angelicus_ has a typically Franckian melody, at once fervent and constrained, like a bird that remembers flight from the confines of its cage. In most performances it exudes a tame, sweet sort of piety, redolent of Victorian hand-colored prints of poor children saying grace over their bread and water, or violets crushed and dried between the pages of the Gospel of John. One could easily listen to music like this on Sunday, feel close to Heaven's gate, and on Monday get drunk after work and come home and beat the wife and kids. Of the performances we've heard, Schwarzkopf's is the only one that breaks out of that gilded cage.

Sometimes Schwarzkopf's musical effects can seem calculated, as can Fischer-Dieskau's - Ira Siff in his character of Madame Vera refers amusingly to their "long and literary careers" - and I can understand some of the negative reaction to her work. But such striking individuality as we hear in her musical personality was exceptional in her day and seems nonexistent now. It's always good to return to one of the true, complete artists who can reveal dimensions in familiar music we didn't suspect were there. She is one of those rare singers who showed me, way back when, the real power of music through the beauty of the human voice.


----------



## Parsifal98 (Apr 29, 2020)

vivalagentenuova said:


> Wow, this is an interesting competition. The reactions are not only wildly different from each other, but I find myself disagreeing with people I usually agree with.
> 
> When the choir came in on Schwarzkopf's recording I went, "Oh, _that's_ the problem." She sounds like the first soprano in the choir, not a soloist. I was listening to Flagstad sing "When I am laid in earth" last night, and I guess that's still in my mind, because I could not enjoy Schwarzkopf's soft singing. There's not enough difference between it and her normal voice, and *she sounds rather constricted to me*. *The voice narrows, it doesn't bloom, which pianos should still do.* Musically, I had the same feeling I often get when listening to Fleming or atonal music: there's so much happening that there's nothing happening. I prefer Pavarotti and D'Arkor's simplicity of line.
> 
> ...


This is one thing I've realised with Schwarzkopf and that has changed my appreciation of her: the voice never really _blooms_ or _spins_. She always sounds quite constricted, which is even more apparent when singing forte, for the voice sounds stretched. The vibrato also sounds affected. A great artist nonetheless, but her intellect clearly got in the way of letting her instrument shine. She had great foundations, but ended up singing _dans le masque_.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

vivalagentenuova said:


> D'Arkor sang sensitively yet simply. He has a burnished tone with just as much brightness as Pavarotti, but more depth and more composure. He sang softly, but could expand when needed, and he achieves the combination of intimacy and grandeur that I think this piece, and any sacred music really, needs.


He has composure, all right. He's so composed that I might fall asleep before the sermon (and I'm the organist). I detect neither intimacy nor grandeur, nor any other quality except relaxation, in his approach to the music. This simple melody might not require more than straightforward simplicity in its delivery, and if we think it doesn't then D'Arkor's gentleness and ease might fill the bill. But why should that be what "any sacred music really needs"? It makes me think of a friend's description of heaven:"Not much to do there, I guess. Nothing but memories." I'll take Gigli's weepiness over this (and over most people's unimaginative renditions) any day. At least he has blood in his veins.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

Schwarzkopf was near perfect. I'd elucidate more, but other members have alleviated me of that task.


----------



## JanacekTheGreat (Feb 26, 2021)

Parsifal98 said:


> This is one thing I've realised with Schwarzkopf and that has changed my appreciation of her: the voice never really _blooms_ or _spins_. She always sounds quite constricted, which is even more apparent when singing forte, for the voice sounds stretched. The vibrato also sounds affected. A great artist nonetheless, but her intellect clearly got in the way of letting her instrument shine. She had great foundations, but ended up singing _dans le masque_.


I don't quite enjoy her in Italian opera either, especially in later (post-1960) recordings due to the reasons you listed, although I still find her very effective in the lieder of Wolf and Strauss.

Here is an early recording of her. The sound does spin and bloom - at least compared to the current HIPsters. It is indeed a very nice piece of Baroque singing:


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

JanacekTheGreat said:


> I don't quite enjoy her in Italian opera either, especially in later (post-1960) recordings due to the reasons you listed, although I still find her very effective in the lieder of Wolf and Strauss.
> 
> Here is an early recording of her. The sound does spin and bloom - at least compared to the current HIPsters. It is indeed a very nice piece of Baroque singing:


A lovely recording.

I suppose Schwarzkopf continues to be a controversial singer, but when I first began to appreciate opera in my teens, it was Callas and Schwarzkopf who had the voices that really _spoke_ to me. Callas introduced me to Italian opera and Schwarzkopf to the operas of Strauss, Mozart and Operetta, where she is still my preferred choice for those roles she sang. I also love her joyfully flirtatious Alice on the Karajan *Falstaff* and her contribution to the Giulini Verdi *Requiem*.

Recently I acquired the box set of historical performances of Verdi, _Les Introuvables du chant Verdien_, and was incredibly impressed by her Violetta in the Act II duet with Rolando Panerai's Germont. She may have given up the role after hearing Callas sing it, but it shows that she was also a superb Violetta.

Here she is in a rare recording of Marietta's Lied from *Die tote Stadt*. I'd say the voice certainly "blooms and spins" here.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

JanacekTheGreat said:


> I don't quite enjoy her in Italian opera either, especially in later (post-1960) recordings due to the reasons you listed, although I still find her very effective in the lieder of Wolf and Strauss.
> 
> Here is an early recording of her. The sound does spin and bloom - at least compared to the current HIPsters. It is indeed a very nice piece of Baroque singing:


I love this piece, but much prefer this version


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Oh this one is truly difficult. Schwarzkopf's stylish, gemutlich charm or Pavarotti's vocal sumptiuousness?

Is this a scmaltzy, Christmas hit (Pavarotti) or an intimate, religious art song (Schwarzkopf). Why can't I have both? (and in my CD collection, I, of course, do).

No vote from me this time.

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Here she is in a rare recording of Marietta's Lied from *Die tote Stadt*. I'd say the voice certainly "blooms and spins" here.


Magical. Her singing here, exquisitely controlled and soaring, brings to mind her first recording of Strauss's _Four Last Songs_, recorded in 1953 with Otto Ackermann. I think I may prefer that performance to her 1964 version with Szell despite a few more interpretive nuances in the later recording, at least where the music calls for high, vaulting phrases such as we also hear in the Korngold.

Schwarzkopf is one of those rare singers who can make every moment count. She draws you in and doesn't let you go. In the right music - German lyric repertoire and lieder - I think she has few equals.


----------

