# Favorite Belcanto Composer



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

For sure, in what we are usually calling Belcanto period (meaning the first decades of the 19th century, in Italy) there are several interesting composers like Mayr, Meyerbeer, Mercadante, Pacini, Coccia, Morlacchi, Vaccai,... even the first operas of Verdi can be considered part of Belcanto.

But, clearly, the three Belcanto composers par excellence are *Gioacchino Rossini* (1792-1868), *Gaetano Donizetti* (1797-1848) and *Vincenzo Bellini* (1801-1835).

Which is our favorite Belcanto composer?. Even if I consider Rossini a genius, and enjoy many Donizzeti's operas, my favorite is Bellini.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Certainly Bellini. While remaining part of autonomic Italian school, he managed to catch up with romantic movement more fully than Donizetti and might easily stand on par with great romantic composers. In regard of what is often described as vulgarity of XIXth century Italian opera, the last of the three to be accused of it. In a way, greater composer than Verdi.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Certainly Bellini. In a way, greater composer than Verdi.


I wouldn't necessarily say that, though *Norma* is without doubt a masterpiece, and, IMO, one of the greatest operas ever written. One should remember, however, that Bellini died young. Who knows what he would have achieved if he had lived to the same age as Verdi?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

GregMitchell said:


> One should remember, however, that Bellini died young. Who knows what he would have achieved if he had lived to the same age as Verdi?


Indeed, this seems particularly meaningful when you look at Verdi's operas written up to the age in which Bellini died. With these operas only, Verdi would never achieve the status of greatest Italian opera composer and would be simply "one of the four", if not less - certainly his oevure wouldn't be equal to Bellini in quality. Another thing is that when you compare youthful compositions, like their early sinfonias, it becomes evident that Bellini was more gifted musician for whom music was natural language even before he truely mastered it. Verdi, not so much.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Indeed, this seems particularly meaningful when you look at Verdi's operas written up to the age in which Bellini died. With these operas only, Verdi would never achieve the status of greatest Italian opera composer and would be simply "one of the four", if not less - certainly his oevure wouldn't be equal to Bellini in quality. Another thing is that when you compare youthful compositions, like their early sinfonias, it becomes evident that Bellini was more gifted musician for whom music was natural language even before he truely mastered it. Verdi, not so much.


Much of what you say is true, but I feel I must stand up for Verdi, who became undoubtedly the greatest Italian opera composer of them all. In my eyes (ears?) that makes him the greatest opera composer of all time (though not without a tussle with Mozart), as I am not and never have been a big Wagner fan (the Wagner lovers will shoot me down in flames for saying that, no doubt).

Verdi was a late developer, it is true, and it took him a while to find his form, but from *Rigoletto* onwards he hardly puts a foot wrong. OK. *Les Vepres Siciliennes* dips after *La Traviata*, but, after it, he gets greater and greater. Though *Don Carlo* can be problematic, it has some of the greatest music ever written for the operatic stage, the conflict between church and state so brilliantly realised. His last three operas *Aida*, *Otello* and *Falstaff* are _all_ great, incredible masterpieces.I have heard every single one of Verdi's operas. His path may not have been always sure and he sometimes stumbles, but there is ever a sense of him moving forward, striving towards those last great masterpieces.

We can only imagine how Bellini would have developed. Fortunately, with Verdi we don't have to.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Vincenzo Bellini!

I've always thought his music absolutely sublime. I'll never forget the first time I heard "Casta diva," "Qui la voce," and "Ah, non credea mirarti."

I think of Bellini as sort of like the Harold Arlen (the Broadway and film musical composer) of opera. By that I mean that Bellini was more a "composer's composer" than a great dramatist. Of course, his melodies overflow with emotion. But as far as _musical characterization and overall effective dramatic structure_ are concerned, I would give the operas of Donizetti the edge. What I've noticed about Bellini is that his characters pretty much all "sound alike"; there doesn't seem to have been a great attempt on his part to write different kinds of melodies for different kinds of characters. I feel that Donizetti, by contrast, did have this ability; think, for example, of the tense, anxious vocal line of Enrico's aria and cabaletta in scene one of LUCIA DI LAMMERMOOR, in contrast with the schizophrenic-sounding one of Lucia's 'Regnava nel silenzio" in the subsequent scene. Bellini's arias, gorgeous as they are, seem all to be in the same elegaic mode. He was like Arlen, who always wrote songs that were superb in and of themselves but were not _theatre songs_ in the way that those of, say, Rodgers and Hammerstein were; they lacked something as far as specificity to the dramatic situation was concerned. But because I've always responded so deeply to his music, I pick Bellini as my favorite.

I love Rossini as well; in fact, he was my very first love as an opera enthusiast. No one did "comedy in music" like Rossini.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Bellinilover said:


> Vincenzo Bellini!
> 
> I've always thought his music absolutely sublime. I'll never forget the first time I heard "Casta diva," "Qui la voce," and "Ah, non credea mirarti."
> 
> I think of Bellini as sort of like the Harold Arlen (the Broadway and film musical composer) of opera. By that I mean that Bellini was more a "composer's composer" than a great dramatist. Of course, his melodies overflow with emotion. But as far as _musical characterization and overall effective dramatic structure_ are concerned, I would give the operas of Donizetti the edge. What I've noticed about Bellini is that his characters pretty much all "sound alike"; there doesn't seem to have been a great attempt on his part to write different kinds of melodies for different kinds of characters. I feel that Donizetti, by contrast, did have this ability; think, for example, of the tense, anxious vocal line of Enrico's aria and cabaletta in scene one of LUCIA DI LAMMERMOOR, in contrast with the schizophrenic-sounding one of Lucia's 'Regnava nel silenzio" in the subsequent scene. Bellini's arias, gorgeous as they are, seem all to be in the same elegaic mode.


Then, if you compare recitatives, Bellini comes off as the most dramatically true in this regard. Donizetti is still looking back to Rossini with generic model of recitative being couple of blah-blah-blah lines interrupted by Da-Dam! here and there before falling into an aria. Bellini recitatives are far more expressive than that.

I also disagree with the arias being the same for all characters. Do you think you could exchange numbers between Polline and Elvino and everything would seem alright, with our tender villager expressing his feelings after being "betrayed" with heroic music of "Me protege, me difende"?


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I hadn't considered the recitatives, but I do agree with what you say above. For instance, that one in NORMA that connects "Casta diva" with "Ah, bello a me ritorna" is great and quite complex and has always been a favorite passage of mine. It sounds so typical of Bellini.

When I said that about all of the characters having the same sort of music, I was thinking mainly of LA SONNAMBULA and I PURITANI. But you're right about Pollione; there's a lot of tension in both his aria and his cabaletta and, no, he could never be mistaken for Elvino!


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

This was the list of operas composed by Verdi up to the same age that Bellini died, as mentioned by Aramis:

Oberto, Un giorno di regno, Nabucco, I Lombardi, Ernani, I due Foscari, Giovanna d'Arco, Alzira and Attila.

Certainly some great work was already there, but nothing of the significance of _Norma_ or _Puritani_, in my view. Then again, what Bellini could have written if he would have been able to live until old age, is opera-fiction. In any case, Rossini spent the last 36 years without writing a single note for the operatic stage, and he retired while still young. So, one never knows....


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Bellini

of course, one has to accept that the 21st century has a different view of credible story lines, but giving in to the melodrama of nineteenth century Rommanticism isn't too problematical for me. 

and to poke my head above the parapet, especially with Callas singing (flaws and all - she still sends a shiver down my spine in loads of Bellini).


----------



## HumphreyAppleby (Apr 11, 2013)

I voted for Rossini. He's the recipient of a lot musical snobbery, but I find his music to be fantastic, and, a quality that is often overlooked, fun. Certainly _Il barbiere di Siviglia_ and especially _Le Comte Ory_ are comedic masterpieces. And though it is practically unsingable, _Guillaume Tell_ is a dramatic masterpiece.

Berlioz is in some ways a French bel canto composer, and is sometimes overlooked as a great opera composer. _Benvenuto Cellini_ is great, and I don't think it's nearly as "problematic" as it *always* called in reviews.

And for anybody who was going to say it, no, _Lohengrin_ is *not* a bel canto opera, and it isn't Wagner's "Italian opera" either. I don't know who started calling it that, but if I ever find out their name they'll have to go away.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

HumphreyAppleby said:


> Berlioz is in some ways a French bel canto composer


In what way? Quality aside, I think his conceptions were very far from bel canto. He was follower of Gluck.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

I'd have to dig out the book, but I'm certain Berlioz was scathingly dismissive of bel canto opera and I suspect he'd look even more defeated that he does in the famous photo if he was viewed as a neighbour of Bellini, Donizetti and Rossini


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Headphone Hermit said:


> I'd have to dig out the book, but I'm certain Berlioz was scathingly dismissive of bel canto opera and I suspect he'd look even more defeated that he does in the famous photo if he was viewed as a neighbour of Bellini, Donizetti and Rossini


From what I remember, Berlioz wrote negative review for Donizetti's _Daughter of the Regiment_ but it was more like Wagner dissin' _La Favorita_ from frustration. Another misty recollection is that he had some positive impressions on _I Capuleti e i Montecchi_?


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Bellinilover said:


> Vincenzo Bellini!
> 
> I've always thought his music absolutely sublime. I'll never forget the first time I heard "Casta diva," "Qui la voce," and "Ah, non credea mirarti."
> 
> ...


I'm afraid I have to disagree. Who but Amina could sing _Come per me sereno_ or _Ah non credea_? And how cleverly Bellni differentiates between her happiness in the former and utter despair in the latter. Even the two cabalettas have a different feel to them. Nor do I think Elvira's music would dramatically work for Amina, and certainly not for Norma. Pollione's martial music is utterly different from Elvino's or Arturo's. Even the arias for Romeo and Giulietta in _I Capuleti e i Montecchi_ are very different, Giulietta's music much more elegiac, Romeo's more forthright.

No I think Bellini was actually a very good musical dramatist. Take the tune he writes for _In mia man alfin tu sei_. Rightly admired by Verdi, this is superbly dramatic writing. One cannot imagine it being used in other circumstances in another opera. In fact Bellini's writing is much less interchangeable than Rossini's, who constantly borrowed from himself. Why even Rosina's _Io son docile_ was originally sung by the Queen of England in *Elisabetta, Regina d'Inghilterra*, yet two such different characters it seems hard to imagine.

Bellini had such a fount of endless melody, we sometimes forget how apposite those melodies are to both the character and the situation they are singing about.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Aramis said:


> From what I remember, Berlioz wrote negative review for Donizetti's _Daughter of the Regiment_ but it was more like Wagner dissin' _La Favorita_ from frustration. Another misty recollection is that he had some positive impressions on _I Capuleti e i Montecchi_?


Hi Aramis

the power of the internet leads me to this page from the Berlioz Society http://www.hberlioz.com/Italy/florence.htm with lots of examples of his poor view of contemporary Italian opera.

as it happens, I love both Berlioz and Bellini - but they are very different kettles of fish


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

*GregMitchell:* That's an excellent point about Rossini. When I was first getting interested in opera I skimmed through a book, whose title I can't now recall, wherein the author complained of a "sameness" in Bellini's vocal writing, and I think I let that color my views of Bellini too much as I started getting into his operas. I think it is true that Bellini's operas contain a _lot_ of elegiac-sounding melodies, and I tend to perceive Bellini as lacking the rhythmic impetus of Donizetti and early Verdi. But as Aramis has pointed out, Bellini _did_ write some more tense-sounding vocal lines, including the aria and cabaletta of Pollione. And yet when I think of Bellini, I think immediately of the slow and sad melodies, which I suppose are his trademark.

Edited to add: And yes, "In mia man" is magnificent, especially that part about the Romans being killed and Adalgisa perishing in the flames -- one of my favorite passages in the opera. I was just listening to it yesterday.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Borrowing for oneself has been part of the business of writing opera since Monterverdi. 

True, in some periods, like Belcanto Italian opera, it was more in use than in others, and it was easier to identify as the material was sometimes rather copied than reworked. And pasticcio was still alive, for instance Rossini had a very good one for _Ivanhoe_. It's available on youtube:






But it was something everyone did to some extent, really, not only Rossini. Just talking about Bellini and _Norma_, please listen to this at around 1:12... Sounds familiar? :lol::






Or listen to this chorus from _Bianca e Fernando_:






What's about this aria from the same opera: "Contenta appien quest'anima"?


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

schigolch said:


> Borrowing for oneself has been part of the business of writing opera since Monterverdi.
> 
> True, in some periods, like Belcanto Italian opera, it was more in use than in others, and it was easier to identify as the material was sometimes rather copied than reworked. And pasticcio was still alive, for instance Rossini had a very good one for _Ivanhoe_. It's available on youtube:
> 
> ...


Even Verdi did it. As late as the *Requiem* he uses a tune discarded from the original Paris Opera *Don Carlos* for the Lacrymosa.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

GregMitchell said:


> Even Verdi did it. As late as the *Requiem* he uses a tune discarded from the original Paris Opera *Don Carlos* for the Lacrymosa.


You can also hear _Un Giorno di Regno_ in _Il Corsaro_.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

During 2014, and according to Operabase:

Rossini - Found 597 performances of 148 productions, in 113 cities, 18 different operas

Donizetti - Found 483 performances of 122 productions, in 106 cities, 14 different operas

Bellini - Found 151 performances of 32 productions, in 30 cities, 6 different operas


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

The problem is that none of them deserve to be top dog.

This sums it up better than I ever could...
http://www.seattleoperablog.com/2010/10/how-to-distinguish-rossini-from-bellini.html


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Couac Addict said:


> This sums it up better than I ever could...
> http://www.seattleoperablog.com/2010/10/how-to-distinguish-rossini-from-bellini.html


Then you couldn't do much, this article presents no more insight than one could expect from average listener and there's lot of superficiality.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Then you couldn't do much, this article presents no more insight than one could expect from average listener and there's lot of superficiality.


And some of the reader comments are laughable.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Aramis said:


> this article presents no more insight than one could expect from average listener and there's lot of superficiality.


That's why I thought you'd like it 

Bel canto requires about as much insight as Chirpy Chirpy Cheap Cheap. Very catchy but not worthy of much praise.

It's opera music for the masses. Lots of repetition so they can be cranked out at a quick pace. Simon Cowell would've loved to manage these guys back in the day.

That's doesn't men it should be snubbed. I like it. It's just formulaic like pop music. 
*

How to score a bel canto opera:*

Start with a musical flourish (Ta Dah!). It has served magicians for years - it'll work for us as well. Then break out the oompah band. Oompah Oompah Oompah. Add some hurdy-gurdy woodwinds over the top. More oompahs.

We need an aria. Quickly dismiss anyone with a hint of a chest voice. We need a melancholic long-lined melody. Now drop in the first piano theme from Chopin's 1st piano concerto. Why wasn't this guy writing opera? Stuff in some runs, trills and leaps. Call it Teneri figli. No one will notice the similarities.

Arioso. Arioso.

More oompahs and hurdy-gurdy woodwinds.

Next aria. No time for anything complex. I've got three more operas to write before Friday. Any legato will do. Throw in The Beatles' Yesterday. Ornament. Ornament. Ornament.

Arioso. Arioso.

Wagner frequently pooh-poohed bel canto but he was just a big fibber. Let's pinch something from Das Liebesverbot for the next aria. Florid melodies and chord patterns. Wagner was a wannabe Italian. Let's pinch the overture as well - even those Ring Cycle maniacs won't know it.

More oompahs. Hurdy-gurdy woodwinds.

30 minute crescendo to fool everyone into thinking this is building up to something.

Curtain. End of Act I.

For Act II, we'll do exactly the same thing but finish with 9 high Cs. The audience will go ape.

In defence of bel canto. It annoys me a bit when people say Donizetti's work, whilst catchy, is too simple, vulgar etc.
That's fine by me but in the same breath, they'll praise Mozart's Le Nozze...
I'm sorry but listen to Non piu andrai. Simple repeated phrases. Symmetrical verses. The structure is little more than a glorified Twinkle Twinkle.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

I tend to agree with Aramis.

First, about the structural aspect. Using what is called, in Italian, "la solita forma", aka the Rossini code (i.e., scena, aria=recitative+cantabile+tempo di mezzo+cabaletta,...) is just a means to tell a story. Like in Baroque Opera we had recititave to advance the action, and arias to display the emotional condition of the role(s). Conventions. Armed with this structure, one can write good and bad drama, good and bad music.

Exactly the same with continuum opera, that fetish from Romanticism some people usually take as the final product of the 'evolution' of Opera, or the 'pinnacle' of the operatic form. It's just another convention. It's a little bit obvious, but let's point out that _Wozzeck_, a number opera, was premiered in 1925. Or just look at one of the most recent opera hits, _Written on Skin_. Again, a number opera. A set of different scenes.

Because the codes for writing and performing opera change with time. That's logical, and normal. But there is nothing intrinsically better, or worse, in writing recitative+aria, closed numbers or 'endless' (except at the end of each act, that is) musical drama.

The Rossini code was not invented by Rossini only, it was rather the convention used in Italian opera during, approximately, the first half of the 19th century, to write opera. It usually involved the librettist to prepare the action, a little bit like the painter prepares a canvas, and then the composer will fill it with the music. Again, not so dissimilar, in a different scale, to the way Hollywood studios from the Golden Age worked. Yes, it was easier to produce a single opera following this schema, it could be done quickly, depending on the composer (Rossini or Donizetti were quicker than Bellini). But it could be a great work, a wonderful piece of music.

Second, about complexity. Well, there are many complex things on a Belcanto score from any of the three composers above. However, what is the goal in being more or less "complex"?. If one focuses too much in the "complex", it run the risk of getting stuck in the "complicated". Sure, from a musical point of view we can say that _Parsifal_ or _Die Frau ohne Schatten _are more 'complex' than the average Belcanto opera. But what is the point?. _Shadowtime_ is a very complex opera, probably one of the more complex operas ever written. That does means is 'better' or 'more worthy' than _Parsifal_?. I'd say that being more or less complex (musically) is simply a feature of a particular opera, and nothing else.

Third, the objective of Belcanto opera (and, indeed, of 19th and early 20th century Italian opera) is to transmit the drama by singing. The voice is paramount (to a different degree, of course, it's not the same Rossini than Puccini). You can find also some great instrumental music (like the prelude to the second act of_ Norma_, for instance), and some interesting and colourful orchestration, but the key to understand and enjoy Belcanto, is in the singing voice.

Finally, when you listen (or when you look at the score of) _Norma, Tancredi, Lucia_... this is great music, and great drama. True, for some people it won't made it. That's fine, it's impossible that everything will please everyone. But there is no need to ridicule what you don't like. Because, first, this is rather diminishing you than the object of your derision, and second, because your own tastes and aesthetical convictions can be ridiculed too.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> It's opera music for the masses.


That is exactly why in every poll about prefered opera composer, Wagner will receive twice as much votes as either Rossini/Donizetti/Bellini and remains the only opera composer widely listened by actual masses (every respectable metalhead will tell you he loves Wagner, particularly that epic song about Valkyries). The masses you're refering to seem to be rather narrow group, since R/D/B are one of the least popular classical composers, appreciated in-depth by relatively few... alas, the great unwashed seems to face extinction and the dawn of sophisticated masses is upon us. Xavier shall lead us to this bright future!


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> That's why I thought you'd like it
> 
> Bel canto requires about as much insight as Chirpy Chirpy Cheap Cheap. Very catchy but not worthy of much praise.
> 
> ...


OK you've had your fun, and I'll grant your little diatribe is quite funny and (a little bit) clever.

As a palliative, let me add two quotes.

_Bellini's music and particularly his vocal melody, has of late excited so much attention, and kindled so much enthusiasm, even in Germany, the land of the learned…Melody is in short the language in which a man should impart his musical thoughts to others, and if this be not as independently constructed and conserved as every other cultivated language should be, how shall he make himself understood?_

_We must not be ashamed to shed a tear and express emotion. It is not a crime to believe in this music. People think that I detest the entire Italian school, in particular Bellini. This is not true - a thousand times no! Bellini is my first preference, because there is strength in his vocal writing, and his music lends itself so perfectly to the original text .... Of all Bellini's operas, Norma is the one which unites the richest flow of melody with the deepest glow of truth .... I admire Norma's melodic inspiration, which joins the most intimate passion to the most profound reality; a great score that talks straight to the heart - a work of genius._

Both quotes are the words of Richard Wagner. Wagner called Bellini the "gentle Sicilian," and suggested that his flowing melodies had the unique italiante capacity for "bel canto" expressiveness.

In any case, one should remember the circumstances under which most operas were written in Italy back then. To criticise the form they followed is like criticising Handel for writing the kind of operas he wrote. The genius of these composers is in their ability to take existing forms and make them interesting. There were plenty of other Italian composers doing exactly as you say above, but their music is rarely heard, because it lacks inspiration and is full of routine.

Incidentally, it is also wrong to suggest that Bellini borrowed from Chopin, when actually the reverse is true. Chopin's *Nocturnes*, at least, were a direct result of his exposure to the music of Bellini. The two composers are indelibly linked and Claudio Arrau, one of the foremost interpreters of Chopin, would get his students to listen to Callas singing Bellini, as an example of how to phrase Chopin.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Aramis said:


> That is exactly why in every poll about prefered opera composer, Wagner will receive twice as much votes as either Rossini/Donizetti/Bellini and remains the only opera composer widely listened by actual masses (every respectable metalhead will tell you he loves Wagner, particularly that epic song about Valkyries). The masses you're refering to seem to be rather narrow group, since R/D/B are one of the least popular classical composers, appreciated in-depth by relatively few... alas, the great unwashed seems to face extinction and the dawn of sophisticated masses is upon us. Xavier shall lead us to this bright future!


I was referring to 19th century masses. It was all tongue in cheek (obviously) but not without a few grains of truth.
I know Wagner is popular here but surely Verdi would be leading in ticket sales. I actually think too many R/D/B operas aren't played enough. The ususal suspects are rolled out a little often. How often do you need to see Il Barbiere?

I wonder how many of the metal crowd are aware of Das Liebesverbot? It's not exactly something you can summon a demon with. 

...anyone know why bel canto gained popularity again during the mid 20th century?


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> ...anyone know why bel canto gained popularity again during the mid 20th century?


In a word Callas. With the help of a few estimable directors (Visconti and Zeffirelli among them), and conductors such as Karajan, Bernstein and Giulini, she made _bel canto_ opera dramatically viable. Whereas before they had just been the demesne of canary fanciers, and light, fluttery, bird-brained sopranos, keen to show off their high notes, Callas brought to them a dramatic power that few people suspected possible, though close inspection of the scores revealed it to have been there all along.

Where Callas led, others, notably Sutherland, Caballe, Scotto, Sills and Gencer followed and more and more of the tragic operas were revived.

If the popularity of _bel canto_ is once again in decline, it is because of the dearth of singers who can do full justice to it. *Norma* is still notoriously difficult to cast. After Callas, Sutherland and Caballe took on the mantle but I can think of no singer today who could really do it justice, certainly not Bartoli, whose recent (scholarly) recording of the opera seems to me a complete travesty.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

GregMitchell said:


> In a word Callas. With the help of a few estimable directors (Visconti and Zeffirelli among them), and conductors such as Karajan, Bernstein and Giulini, she made _bel canto_ opera dramatically viable. Whereas before they had just been the demesne of canary fanciers, and light, fluttery, bird-brained sopranos, keen to show off their high notes, Callas brought to them a dramatic power that few people suspected possible, though close inspection of the scores revealed it to have been there all along.
> 
> Where Callas led, others, notably Sutherland, Caballe, Scotto, Sills and Gencer followed and more and more of the tragic operas were revived.
> 
> If the popularity of _bel canto_ is once again in decline, it is because of the dearth of singers who can do full justice to it. *Norma* is still notoriously difficult to cast. After Callas, Sutherland and Caballe took on the mantle but I can think of no singer today who could really do it justice, certainly not Bartoli, whose recent (scholarly) recording of the opera seems to me a complete travesty.


Thanks. I wasn't certain which came first - the chicken or the egg. Also, I hadn't considered the directors. Good point.
I have to admit that I'm bored with Zeffirelli productions. Whilst no one wants Space Fidelio, you can only be thrilled so many times.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> ...anyone know why bel canto gained popularity again during the mid 20th century?


singers got better at the actual singing part  I think clever ornament and long melismas are more badarse than blow-your-toupee-off big voice shouting and I am actually a metalhead.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> Thanks. I wasn't certain which came first - the chicken or the egg. Also, I hadn't considered the directors. Good point.
> I have to admit that I'm bored with Zeffirelli productions. Whilst no one wants Space Fidelio, you can only be thrilled so many times.


Zeffirelli was a great director in his time. Maybe not quite the equal of Visconti, but he did some brilliant work. His Covent Garden *Tosca*, made in 1964 for Callas and Gobbi was only retired three or four years ago, and is still remembered as one of the greatest productions ever at Covent Garden.

I also have very fond memories of his stage production of Eduardo de Filippo's *Filumena* with Joan Plowright, which was absolutely magical. Maybe he seems a little old fashioned now. So much the worse for fashion. At least Zeffirelli understood music. Many of today's trendy producers brought in from the realms of film, tv and fashion appear not to have a musical bone in their bodies!


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

schigolch said:


> However, what is the goal in being more or less "complex"?.


pretentiousness is the goal.

in regards to Couac's naming of _Non piu andrai_ - yes, it's simple, but is it effective? reminds me of that quote from Hemingway in regards to Faulkner:

"Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words? He thinks I don't know the ten-dollar words. I know them all right. But there are older and simpler and better words, and those are the ones I use."


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I started listening to opera a Wagner fan (also fascinated by _Nixon in China_ but that's a different story) and expanded to Verdi, Berg and Shostakovich mostly ignoring Bel canto - apart from some Rossini overtures - as frivolous. I was finally seduced by seeing _La fille du régiment_ and was delighted and have dove headlong and been encouraged by every new Donizetti opera I see or hear. I especially love the large ensembles such as the act closers (though of course I know other composers do this sort of thing). He is now one of my favorite operatic composers and I have also been enjoying his many string quartets.

I have been listening to some Rossini and Bellini but they have not done as much for me, but at least I am not ignoring them. Maybe in time with the right exposure I would change my vote but for now it is Donizetti.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

The major revision of Belcanto opera in the 20th century came as the result of the so-called Rossini Renaissance. 

During many decades, only Barbiere was firmly established in the repertory, while some other buffa operas (Cenerentola, Italiana, Turco) and Guillaume Tell were given the occasional performance. The major recovery of the opera seria (and semi-seria) started in the late 1960s and was really a major thing once the Pesaro Festival was created.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

GregMitchell said:


> In a word Callas. With the help of a few estimable (...) conductors such as Karajan, Bernstein and Giulini, she made _bel canto_ opera dramatically viable.


I don't think Karajan scores for the bel canto revival. He did some Verdi and barely touched Donizetti, never was a specialist in Italian music. Bernstein even less. It's striking that you don't mention conductor whose accomplishments on this field are far greater than perhaps all of the three you mention taken together, Tullio Serafin.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

schigolch said:


> The major revision of Belcanto opera in the 20th century came as the result of the so-called Rossini Renaissance.
> 
> During many decades, only Barbiere was firmly established in the repertory, while some other buffa operas (Cenerentola, Italiana, Turco) and Guillaume Tell were given the occasional performance. The major recovery of the opera seria (and semi-seria) started in the late 1960s and was really a major thing once the Pesaro Festival was created.


But, and I repeat, none of this would have happened without Callas. Her historic importance in 20th century opera cannot be underestimated. Admittedly, the only two completely forgotten _bel canto_ operas she revived were *Anna Bolena*, and *Il Pirata*, but it was how she made people re-examine those scores that got the revival going. Both Sutherland and Caballe on many occasions talked about the debt they owed to Callas. Before Callas, *I Puritani* was considered a silly little opera with a few nice tunes and a role for a high light voiced soprano, with absolutely no dramatic interest whatsoever. Callas first sang the role of Elvira when Margareta Carosio fell ill and the management could find no replacement. She was singing Brunnhilde at the same theatre at the time and learned the role in a few days, while still singing Brunnhilde, Such a feat had never been seen in Italy since the nineteenth scenery. Not only did she sing the role with brilliance, but Elvira emerged as a real flesh and blood creature, not the painted doll that people were used to seeing.

Post Ponselle and before Callas, Norma was sung by large voiced sopranos like Cigna and Milanov, who could not do justice to its _bel canto_ demands, and Amina by light voiced soubrettes, with not an ounce of character. Both roles were written for the same singer, Guiditta Pasta, but Callas was the first singer to tackle them both since the nineteenth century. In her hands and voice, Norma once again became a Romantic heroine, rather than a classical one, and Amina took on true tragic stature.

The revolution she wrought when she sang *Lucia di Lammermoor* was even greater, especially when she sang it under the baton of Herbert von Karajan in a production that started at La Scala and traveled to Berlin and Vienna. Till then, Lucia was nothing but a canary fancier's opera. Callas and Karajan (for he produced as well) revealed the work to be a great tragic masterpiece. Without this production, Sutherland's legendary appearance in the role at Covent Garden in Zeffirelli's production, under the direction of Callas's conductor Serafin, would never have happened.

Her influence on the Rossini revival was less pronounced, but back in 1951 she did appear in a production of *Armida* at the Maggio Musicale Fiorentino. We are fortunate enough to have a recording of this, though the sound is pretty bad. There are cuts aplenty, as none of the tenors are up to the demands of their roles. Callas, however, is unbelievable. The voice is massive and freewheeling, the coloratura breathtaking in its ease (no annoying aspirates, please note). As a piece of dramatic coloratura singing it is unrivaled.

There can be no doubt that Callas was one of the most influential artists in post World War II opera. Jon Vickers equates her influence on Italian opera to that of Wieland Wagner on German opera production. You can't get much clearer than that.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

You misunderstand my point.

I mention them precisely because they were not active in _bel canto_ operas. However their two forays into the genre (Karajan in *Lucia di Lammermoor* and Bernstein in *La Sonnambula*, both with Callas) created ripples far greater than those by _bel canto_ specialists, such as Serafin.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Tullio Serafin.


with La Scala...great Norma recording if anyone is just discovering bel canto. My favourite Pollione.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> with La Scala...great Norma recording if anyone is just discovering bel canto. My favourite Pollione.


He recorded it twice in the studio (both times with Callas). The Pollione in the first is Mario Fillipeschi and the second is Franco Corelli.

There is also a Rome radio broadcast (again with Callas), on which the Pollione is Mario Del Monaco.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

GregMitchell said:


> He recorded it twice in the studio (both times with Callas). The Pollione in the first is Mario Fillipeschi and the second is Franco Corelli.
> 
> There is also a Rome radio broadcast (again with Callas), on which the Pollione is Mario Del Monaco.


Thanks. I thought I added 'Corelli'.
Isn't the audio on the Rome recording a bit iffy. There are so many, I get them confused. Between Callas/Del Monaco/Votti/La Scala/Simionato, it gets a bit crazy.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Is Norma a Romantic or a Classical heroine?. Well, that's an interesting question... My personal feeling: she is indeed a Classical heroine, trapped into the garments of an early Romantic opera.

However, about Callas's role in the fortunes of Belcanto opera in the 20th century. She was a great performer, arguably the greatest performer of roles like Norma, Lucia, Elvira, Amina,... however, the Rossini Renaissance, and the work of Rossini scholars like Philippe Gossett, Bruno Cagli or Alberto Zedda has little to do with her.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Couac Addict said:


> Thanks. I thought I added 'Corelli'.
> Isn't the audio on the Rome recording a bit iffy. There are so many, I get them confused. Between Callas/Del Monaco/Votti/La Scala/Simionato, it gets a bit crazy.


The quality is iffy, but no more than in other live things from 50's. The voices, at least, are "on the top", not drowned or distant. There are also various remasterings of that and other Callas live recordings, but you'd have to ask Dark_Angel about this.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Couac Addict said:


> Thanks. I thought I added 'Corelli'.
> Isn't the audio on the Rome recording a bit iffy. There are so many, I get them confused. Between Callas/Del Monaco/Votti/La Scala/Simionato, it gets a bit crazy.


Well it's not studio quality, but considering it's live it isn't bad. The best of all Callas's Normas is the 1955 La Scala performance (conducted by Votto) with Del Monaco and Simionato. Sound on this performance varies dramatically depending on which pressing you go for. Best by far, though also the most expensive option, is the one from Divina records http://www.divinarecords.com/dvn017/dvn017.html


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

schigolch said:


> Is Norma a Romantic or a Classical heroine?. Well, that's an interesting question... My personal feeling: she is indeed a Classical heroine, trapped into the garments of an early Romantic opera.
> 
> However, about Callas's role in the fortunes of Belcanto opera in the 20th century. She was a great performer, arguably the greatest performer of roles like Norma, Lucia, Elvira, Amina,... however, the Rossini Renaissance, and the work of Rossini scholars like Philippe Gossett, Bruno Cagli or Alberto Zedda has little to do with her.


Maybe not, but without her it might never have happened. And please remember that my response was in reply to a question about the _bel canto_ revival of the mid 20th century, not the Rossini revival that followed.

And I disagree with you about *Norma*. Pre Callas, it was often staged as a classic opera in the manner of Gluck, with singers who weren't capable of singing the role. Callas returned it to its Romantic roots. It is echt Bellini and therefore echt Romantic opera. To call Norma a Classical heroine is to completely misunderstand Bellini's music. That the story revolves round Druids and ancient Romans has absolutely nothing to do with it. If that were the criteria, one might as well call Donizetti's *Poliuto* a Classical opera, which it emphatically isn't.

Cherubini's *Medee*, which was another of Callas's great roles, though she performed it in Italian translation in an edition which used recitatives by Franz Lachner to replace the spoken dialogue, is indeed a Classical opera, and what a world of difference there is between it and Bellini's *Norma*.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

GregMitchell said:


> And I disagree with you about *Norma*. Pre Callas, it was often staged as a classic opera in the manner of Gluck, with singers who weren't capable of singing the role. Callas returned it to its Romantic roots. It is echt Bellini and therefore echt Romantic opera. To call Norma a Classical heroine is to completely misunderstand Bellini's music. That the story revolves round Druids and ancient Romans has absolutely nothing to do with it. If that were the criteria, one might as well call Donizetti's *Poliuto* a Classical opera, which it emphatically isn't.


I think you deeply misunderstand the word 'classical' which doesn't equal just to anything set in times of ancient Greece/Roman Empire. That's not the definition. Poliuto could never be taken for classical hero because he is a Christian martyr and this theme is alien to classical drama. It's also not so much about the music when the question is about Norma the heroine herself. If you take into consideration what actualy does stand for classical, Norma will have much of it. Which doesn't mean she can't be romantic as well. For me, Norma is indeed a blending of what's romantic and classical. Being fond of both, I'm far from finding it problematic.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aramis said:


> I think you deeply misunderstand the word 'classical' which doesn't equal just to anything set in times of ancient Greece/Roman Empire. That's not the definition. Poliuto could never be taken for classical hero because he is a Christian martyr and this theme is alien to classical drama. It's also not so much about the music when the question is about Norma the heroine herself. If you take into consideration what actualy does stand for classical, Norma will have much of it. Which doesn't mean she can't be romantic as well. For me, Norma is indeed a blending of what's romantic and classical. Being fond of both, I'm far from finding it problematic.


No I do not. I am talking about Classical and Romantc _music_. Like it or not, Bellini is a Romantic composer. None of his operas can be called Classical by any stretch of the imagination. It is you who misunderstands the term.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

GregMitchell said:


> I am talking about Classical and Romantc _music_


Then I suppose that you have misunderstood the question, which was _Is Norma a Romantic or a Classical heroine?_, not _Is Norma an opera with Romantic or Classical music?_


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

About the Rossini Renaissance, I think it's very clear: if Maria Callas wouldn't have sing a note in her life, we will still have the movement, because their roots have nothing to do with her, but with the work of musicians and scholars, that went there put on stage by a generation of great singers (not Maria Callas, that was already retired).

About Norma, what do you mean "pre-Callas"?.

Certainly not Milanov or Cigna, that were not singing the Belcanto (or anything remotely approaching Gluck) style, but rather using a Verismo approach.

But Ponselle, for instance, was also conducted in her Norma by Serafin, that preferred her to Callas. Also by the same period we have singers like Raisa or Arangi-Lombardi. But only in fragments, there is no complete recording. If we go one generation before, we had some great Normas that are even less well recorded (also fragments, and when they were already almost retired) like Lehmann or Sembrich (that were madly celebrated Normas). Before that, nothing apart from reviews, of course, not a single recorded note.

So, we simply don't know how the vast majority of the "pre-Callas" singers tackled the role, right?. Sure, we can learn and read about Giuditta Pasta, and we can think (I do think, at least) that Callas voice was probably a goot match for hers... but in the end, we can't know for certain.

What we know very well is how the "post-Callas" singers have tackled the role. And we know also that the approach of Tulio Serafin, based on the performance tradition of Italian opera, was challenged by musicologist approaches, looking at the score as the first source of information. And then we had the Bonynge/Sutherland recordings, the recordings with two sopranos, with Polliones trying to sing Belcanto instead of shouting the role,... and now, in the 21st century, with versions like the one from the Biondi brothers.

And of course _Norma_ is a Romantic opera. But the role of the priestess herself, I think it transcends Romanticism, and the music of Bellini (his contemporaries called the music of Bellini, 'musica filosofica', certainly something Donizetti's or Verdi's will *never* being called), and the drama of Romani, have a classical flavour, that made the opera very different from a Lucia, or an early Verdi piece. In fact, I think the role of Norma has more in common with Medea than with Lucia.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Then I suppose that you have misunderstood the question, which was _Is Norma a Romantic or a Classical heroine?_, not _Is Norma an opera with Romantic or Classical music?_


You are determined to be right. Actually, others brought in the question as to whether Norma was a Classical or Romantic _heroine_. Maybe they misunderstood me, because at no point was I talking about anything other than the music (that is, after all, what this forum is concerned with), and any singer playing the role should take their lead from the _music_.

It reminds me of something that Visconti said about producing *Anna Bolena* at La Scala. He said that people thought the designs were authentic Tudor, but he revealed that they were not in the least. They were Tudor as seen through the eyes of Romanticism because Donizetti was a Romantic composer. By the same token , Callas said she read all sorts of history books about Anne Boleyn, when she knew she was due to play the role, and then rejected all that she read, for the character could only come from the music and how Anna is characterised by Donizetti.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

schigolch said:


> About the Rossini Renaissance, I think it's very clear: if Maria Callas wouldn't have sing a note in her life, we will still have the movement, because their roots have nothing to do with her, but with the work of musicians and scholars, that went there put on stage by a generation of great singers (not Maria Callas, that was already retired).
> 
> About Norma, what do you mean "pre-Callas"?.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry. I obviously was not making myself clear. Well I guess that when I said pre- Callas, I meant those singers who came after Ponselle and before Callas. There is no doubt that Callas's singing of the role came as a revelation. Some, more used to the straightforwardly solid production and sketchy coloratura of a voice like Cigna's didn't like, but maybe that is because they had never heard it sung correctly. Ponselle, on the other hand, was undoubtedly a great Norma, though we only have a couple of excerpts to prove it, whereas we have many recordings of Callas in the role at various stages in her career, from the clarion voiced early years to the faltering performances in Paris in 1964 and 1965. Even then, with limited vocal ability, she is able to draw a Bellinian _cantilena_ like few others. Her experience in the role was prodigious.

She sang the role more than any other in her repertoire. In my opinion, nobody who came after, not even Sutherland and Caballe can approach her instinctive feel for the music, though Caballe comes pretty close in the DVD of the Orange production.

As to the latest _authentic _ recording with Bartoli, well I refuse to accept it as a valid way of performing the role. The opera emerges as a small scale domestic drama, not the great tragedy Bellini imagined. A greater authenticity lies in the singing of Callas, Sutherland and Caballe, and blow what edition they are using.



schigolch said:


> And of course _Norma_ is a Romantic opera. But the role of the priestess herself, I think it transcends Romanticism, and the music of Bellini (his contemporaries called the music of Bellini, 'musica filosofica', certainly something Donizetti's or Verdi's will *never* being called), and the drama of Romani, have a classical flavour, that made the opera very different from a Lucia, or an early Verdi piece. In fact, I think the role of Norma has more in common with Medea than with Lucia.


I take your point. I still aver that _musically_ at least *Norma* has a lot more in common with *Lucia* than it does with *Medea*.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Well, I also think Callas's rendition of the role is simply great, I just love many of her recordings of _Norma_. Actually, the first time I fell in love with an operatic recording was indeed listening to Callas's Norma.

About Ms. Bartoli, certainly I was not referring to her when I talked about 21st century approaches. 

Rather, I was thinking about this:






Or even this:


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I need to spend a bit more time watching and listening, but both productions seem pretty traditional to me (not that there is anything wrong with that), and there is still a mezzo Adalgisa in the performance with Anderson (I had no idea she was still singing, by the way).


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Well, I don't care at all for productions in _Norma_. 

The first one was using the new critical edition of the score by the Biondi brothers, and also a period instruments orchestra. It's fascinating hearing for the Norma aficionado (well, this Norma aficionado at least!). It's from Parma, in 2001. Anderson sings reasonably well (at the end of the opera, she is rather tired), and Barcellona is her usual solid self (not the voice I would cast for Adalgisa, clearly, but this is my take), then the rest of the cast is below average. What is most interesting here is the orchestra, the way the orchestra is blending with the singers, and some small arrangements in the score. There are other versions (partially) available on youtube of this critical edition.

The second one is the recent _Norma_, sung in Bologna, by the great Belcanto specialist Mariella Devia, with the soprano Carmela Remigio in the role of Adalgisa. Also a very nice performance, and very interesting for the fan of Norma. It's not (I think) complete in youtube, but it's relatively easy to get the recording available in usergroups and the like. By the way, in homage to the bicentennial of Wagner, instead of singing "Ah! del Tebro al giogo indegno", they used the aria written by Wagner for Oroveso, "Norma il predisse, o druidi". Because, yes, as mentioned before in the thread, Richard Wagner did love Bellini's music, and _Norma_ :


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Thank you for bringing them to my attention. Once I have the time, I will give them my proper consideration.


----------



## Bardamu (Dec 12, 2011)

It's like asking to choose between your first, second and third son.
I simply cannot do it and I don't even have children yet 

Instead I throw in the lesser known Alessandro Nini.
His La marescialla d'Ancrè was a pleasant surprise to me a few months ago.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Bardamu said:


> Instead I throw in the lesser known Alessandro Nini.


Lesser? More like least known. There's not one sample of his music on YouTube and apparently only one recording of his opera, the one you mention (on Bongiovanni). Pacini seems to be richly represented composer in comparison.


----------



## Bardamu (Dec 12, 2011)

Aramis said:


> Lesser? More like least known. There's not one sample of his music on YouTube and apparently only one recording of his opera, the one you mention (on Bongiovanni). Pacini seems to be richly represented composer in comparison.


Well yes 
As I said it was a pleasant surprise.

Mind you I'm not saying Nini is better (or really anywhere near) the big three cited in the OP but that I thought his almost unknown La marescalla d'Ancrè was a interesting belcanto opera.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

The current TC vote tally: 

Bellini - 13
Rossini - 10
Donizetti - 4

is just about the same as my personal view on the three composers. 

Bellini somehow transcends Belcanto with his personal brand of music, and his gift for capturing emotions and moods in melody. Rossini was a great innovator, and the perfect bridge between Italian 18th century tradition and Romanticism. Donizzeti a brilliant composer for the theater.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

schigolch said:


> The current TC vote tally:
> 
> Bellini - 13
> Rossini - 10
> ...


Not so much with mine, I'd rather see couple of more votes for the poor Donizetti (though I didn't give him mine). It seems as he would be considered inferior with these results and I don't think he really is.


----------



## HumphreyAppleby (Apr 11, 2013)

Aramis said:


> In what way? Quality aside, I think his conceptions were very far from bel canto. He was follower of Gluck.


Okay, I admit to being 99% wrong here. I would however point to some stylistic similarities, including the predominance of vocal melody, the translucence of his orchestrations, and the "lightness" of much of his music in general. These things are at least superficially similar. Beyond that, I acknowledge my wrongness.

Also, to comment on some of the later discussion, I don't think that the fact that a composer criticizes a group of of other artists means that he or she is necessarily free from comparison to that group. Look at Wagner, who took the mickey out of poor Meyerbeer, yet who wrote the grandest of the grand operas. Of course there were many _profound _differences, just as there are between Berlioz and the Bel Canto composers, but there are also similarities strong enough to promote comparison.


----------



## HumphreyAppleby (Apr 11, 2013)

Aramis said:


> Not so much with mine, I'd rather see couple of more votes for the poor Donizetti (though I didn't give him mine). It seems as he would be considered inferior with these results and I don't think he really is.


I voted for Rossini, but I'm starting to question that judgment. I have certain moods where only Donizetti will do. Then again, sometimes he bores me to death. I think that kind of experience demonstrates some of the problems with these exercises.


----------



## Bardamu (Dec 12, 2011)

Recently listened to Mercadante's Il bravo.
Very good, bravo Saverio.


----------



## messadivoce (Apr 18, 2014)

It looks like this just became a discussion of Callas' Norma  Well I voted for Bellini because I really like all of I puritani and arias and duets from his other operas like Vi ravviso and Prendi l'anel ti dono from La sonnambula and Casta Diva and Mira, o Norma from Norma. Bellini has some nice flowing melodies. I also like those extreme high notes like the F's in Credasi misera and in Ascolta, o padre, i gemiti.


----------



## messadivoce (Apr 18, 2014)

I'm also surprised Bellini is in the lead. I thought it would be in last place and that Rossini would be in front. As much as I love Rossini, Donizetti would probably be my second choice. Rossini and Donizetti have so many works its hard to judge them just off of the few I actually have listened to thoroughly


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> I wouldn't necessarily say that, though *Norma* is without doubt a masterpiece, and, IMO, one of the greatest operas ever written. One should remember, however, that Bellini died young. Who knows what he would have achieved if he had lived to the same age as Verdi?


Immature artists immitate, mature artists steal. Who knows?-- had Bellini lived longer, he could have been a second-rate Verdi. I love Bellini's vocal writing, but he's no Verdi.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Marschallin Blair said:


> I love Bellini's vocal writing, but he's no Verdi.


He isn't second to him in any way you can imagine.

The only attributes that Verdi's LATE operas posess and which are lacking in Bellini are things that came with general progress of music over time and which Verdi simply embraced, not invented. Calling Verdi greater composer because of, for example, some advanced harmony or more fluid drama he put into his later works would be like calling Napoleon greater commander than Julius Caesar, because the latter didn't know how to use powder and cannons.

I think I might have written this before in this thread, but comparing early, pre-operatic works of Bellini and Verdi can prove beyond and doubt that Bellini had considerably more natural musical talent than Verdi whose youthful instrumental works reveal great problems he had with learning pure basics of form and development.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Aramis said:


> The only attributes that Verdi's LATE operas posess and which are lacking in Bellini are things that came with general progress of music over time and which Verdi simply embraced, not invented. Calling Verdi greater composer because of, for example, some advanced harmony or more fluid drama he put into his later works would be like calling Napoleon greater commander than Julius Caesar, because the latter didn't know how to use powder and cannons.


I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous dismissal of a great composer's achievement.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous dismissal of a great composer's achievement.


Of Verdi or Bellini? Ha. Ha. Ha.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Aramis said:


> He isn't second to him in any way you can imagine.
> 
> The only attributes that Verdi's LATE operas posess and which are lacking in Bellini are things that came with general progress of music over time and which Verdi simply embraced, not invented. Calling Verdi greater composer because of, for example, some advanced harmony or more fluid drama he put into his later works would be like calling Napoleon greater commander than Julius Caesar, because the latter didn't know how to use powder and cannons.
> 
> I think I might have written this before in this thread, but comparing early, pre-operatic works of Bellini and Verdi can prove beyond and doubt that Bellini had considerably more natural musical talent than Verdi whose youthful instrumental works reveal great problems he had with learning pure basics of form and development.


---
Fair shooting. . . But I'm merely going on the evidentiary record of what _is_; and not what conceivably and conjecturally _may__ have been_.

If Korngold died at fifteen, I'm sure there are people who would say that he would have been a more versatile composer than Strauss; but Korngold lived, and Strauss outperformed them all.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Woodduck said:


> I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous *dismissal of a great composer's achievement*.


I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous misinterpretation of my post.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Aramis said:


> I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous misinterpretation of my post.


-- I thought it was you.

Whhhhhhew. Good.

I wouldn't want to have to face the heavy armor of the Duck Regiment.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Marschallin Blair said:


> I wouldn't want to have to face the heavy armor of the Duck Regiment.


It's a wood duck, they make their armor from what's avaiable to them... wood. Not that heavy.


----------



## Revenant (Aug 27, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> I don't think I have ever read a more frivolous dismissal of a great composer's achievement.


That's gap is easily filled by reading through some old posts. Or just wait for new ones. Fasten safety belts.

:guitar:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Revenant said:


> That's gap is easily filled by reading through some old posts. Or just wait for new ones. Fasten safety belts.
> 
> :guitar:


Dear Tito G.:

You're scaring me.

Regards,

Tito S.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Let's look at this the other way around.

If Verdi would have died at Bellini's age, this is the list of works by him available for the posterity:

Oberto, Un giorno di regno, Nabucco, I Lombardi, Ernani, I due Foscari, Giovanna d'Arco, Alzira and Attila.

Some great stuff above, sure. But I don't think Verdi's reputation will be closer to the one he (deservedly) enjoys today. So who can know what Bellini would have written, or not?. Fortunately we have the music he did write, and this is enough for me, and I'm very grateful for that.

The rest is personal taste. For instance, I prefer Korngold's "Die Tote Stadt" to any opera written by Strauss (not that I don't like Strauss, simply I like a lot Korngold), but I understand if could be otherwise for other people.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Dear Tito G.:
> 
> You're scaring me.
> 
> ...


--
Tito S. is waiting. . . "Challenge?-- _accepted_."






(Woodduck wouldn't approve of the metaphor but I give it my blessing; and in Panther pink too. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.)


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

schigolch said:


> The rest is personal taste.


Quite so - whenever I read about supposed superiority of Verdi over bel canto trinity composers, it's either not supported with arguments (the author taking it for granted that people agree) or supported by listing subjective preferences and impressions. I love Verdi and no dismissal of his output is to be expected from me, it's only that I hate portraying him as a genius at the expense of his predecessors, particularly Bellini.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Marschallin Blair said:


> --
> Tito S. is waiting. . . "Challenge?-- _accepted_."
> 
> 
> ...


The metaphor is a bit obscure. Or my coffee hasn't kicked in yet.  Probably the latter.

Now, as to bel canto...


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> The metaphor is a bit obscure. Or my coffee hasn't kicked in yet.  Probably the latter.
> 
> Now, as to bel canto...


You're armed-and-dangerous; ready to take pink slips; and to argumentatively own, own, own. . . or so I gather.


----------



## Revenant (Aug 27, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Dear Tito G.:
> 
> You're scaring me.
> 
> ...


Tito: I merely show you the times.

Signed,
Tito


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

schigolch said:


> Let's look at this the other way around.
> 
> If Verdi would have died at Bellini's age, this is the list of works by him available for the posterity:
> 
> ...


Yeah, I never lose sleep over it. I have both; cherish both; and bask in the glory of both. . .

As far as Korngold goes, I absolutely_ love _his stuff. I have pretty much everything by him; orchestral, operatic, and film score-- that is.

Strauss is still dearer to me though by an order of magnitude. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.


----------



## Signor Crescendo (May 8, 2014)

Unquestionably Rossini. (Surprise!) A wise man once remarked that life's unfailing pick-me-ups are champagne, the works of P.G. Wodehouse, and Rossini. Rossini's music is so exhilarating and full of life; it's the musical equivalent of a shot of endorphins. And what a wealth of music! I love those whizzing, whirling ensembles in which everyone's singing ninety to the dozen, and the Haydnesque sense of rhythm - genuinely witty, life-enhancing music.
I've downloaded a lot of (productions of) his operas from Youtube in the last month - hurrah for modern technology!

I like Donizetti, but he wrote far, far too much. _Not_ a genius (as he himself admitted, speaking of Verdi), but a hack, albeit a talented one, and one who developed as he matured. (I'm thinking of things like _L'esule di Roma_ or _Maria di Rudenz_, which aren't very memorable.) Arguably more sense of theatre than either Bellini or Rossini, but not as good a musician as the former. His best operas are from the later part of his career, when he's writing for Paris and Vienna, rather than Italy, so are more sophisticated. Musically, I like best the prayer in _Maria Stuarda_/_Linda di Chamounix_, and the tremendously exciting overture to _Rosmonda d'Inghilterra_: 



, full of brio and crescendi (like Suppé).

OH! And pretty much all of his operas are up on Youtube. You're safer with recordings than with videos; a lot of the videos are filmed live, so are very poor quality.

I've never really warmed to Bellini. I've heard most of his operas - _Norma_, _Sonnambula_, _Puritani_, _Beatrice di Tenda_, _Pirata_, _Straniera_, _Capuleti e i Montecchi_ - and the only one I like is _I puritani_, which is excellent - full of good tunes. The others just seem a slog, or musically bland. Bellini reminds me of Keats - that air of melancholic introspection. (I much prefer Byron.) I'd say "emo", if the two biggest emo operas weren't _Tristan und Isolde_ (all that stuff about suicide, spurting blood, and love-death) and _Elektra_ (teenage wangst, with BLOOD!).
But I'll watch some of the operas on Youtube, and see whether I like him any better.

Since you mentioned Meyerbeer - _Margherita d'Anjou_ and _Il crociato in Egitto_ are both excellent. _Margherita _ has one of the best Act I finales since Mozart, full of interesting textures; and in Act II a trio that's a real ear-worm ("Pensa e guarda, amico, all'erta!"), and a rousing sextet. _Il crociato_ is a terrific score, and (judging by the DVD) can hold the stage: the arrival of the Crusaders; "Queste destre"; the trio "Giovinetti Cavalier"; the Act I finale; the quintet "Ah! Questo è l'ultimo"; and "Suono funereo" - all good!

I like what little I've heard of Mercadante; there's a great Opera Rara CD, _Mercadante Rediscovered_. The best part is the Giuramento from _Orazi e Curiazi_.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

GregMitchell said:


> Well it's not studio quality, but considering it's live it isn't bad. The best of all Callas's Normas is the 1955 La Scala performance (conducted by Votto) with Del Monaco and Simionato. Sound on this performance varies dramatically depending on which pressing you go for. Best by far, though also the most expensive option, is the one from Divina records http://www.divinarecords.com/dvn017/dvn017.html


*Divina label *is a great resource for Callas remasters especially with large media file of photos etc included with each opera, but even better sound quality is *Pristine XR remasters *done by Andrew Rose, the 1955 La Scala Norma is stunning improvement in sound quality!



Check the website and extended sound sample for Norma (right above blue order CD button)

http://www.pristineclassical.com/paco083.html


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

DarkAngel said:


> *Divina label *is a great resource for Callas remasters especially with large media file of photos etc included with each opera, but even better sound quality is *Pristine XR remasters *done by Andrew Rose, the 1955 La Scala Norma is stunning improvement in sound quality!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But why the pic of Callas as Medea on the cover?


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> But why the pics of Callas as Medea on the cover?


The '53 Callas Florence _Medea_ should be _every_ cover.





















. . . even if it's the '53 La Scala one.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> The '53 Callas Florence _Medea_ should be _every_ cover.
> 
> View attachment 41596
> View attachment 41597
> ...


I think EMI actually got it right in this instance, and the pic on the left is indeed from the Bernstein conducted Scala performance.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

> _Originally Posted by Marschallin Blair
> The '53 Callas Florence Medea should be every cover.
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I got a shirt of it made.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Yeah, I got a shirt of it made.


Actually Dolce and Gabbana did indeed produce t-shirts with Callas's image on them a few years ago. They were _very_ expensive.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

I love DG polos. But_ that _shirt?-- no.

My 'MB' original shreds it.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.


----------

