# On Anna Netrebko’s new album



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

_The soprano *Anna Netrebko* has always been more satisfying in person - her voice blooms in the vast space of an opera house - than on recordings, where her *super-wide vibrato* feels, in close-up, less expressive than unsteady. On her new solo album she *struggles to sustain the long, lush lines* of "Es gibt ein Reich," from "Ariadne auf Naxos"; *soft phrases waver* in "Ritorna vincitor" ("Aida") and "When I am laid in earth" ("Dido and Aeneas"); "Un bel dì," from "Madama Butterfly," is *shaky from start to finish*; *high notes are difficult throughout*. She *endures* "Einsam in trüben Tagen" ("Lohengrin") with steely determination, and the exuberant "Dich, teure Halle" ("Tannhäuser") similarly seems to *press her to her limits*.

But there is still time for Netrebko, 50, to do a staged "Queen of Spades," excerpted with focused passion here. And the "Liebestod" from "Tristan und Isolde," while *audibly challenging for her*, is movingly - and, at moments, ecstatically - negotiated. Given a meaty stretch to shine in the "Tristan" prelude, the orchestra of the Teatro alla Scala, under its music director, Riccardo Chailly, is otherwise mellow and very much in the background. "Sola, perduta, abbandonata" ("Manon Lescaut") and especially "Tu che le vanità" ("Don Carlo") convey, with generous, fiery, largely secure singing, the urgency of Netrebko's best live performances. *ZACHARY WOOLFE*

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/23/arts/music/classical-music-recordings.html_

Ouch!


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

She should have never touched Wagner.
Hell, even Manon Lescaut isn't for every light-voiced soprano out there: you can do okay in the first two acts, but by the Act IV the demands are those of a full dramatic voice.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I remember her saying that she wouldn't sing Liza in Queen of Spades because it is too heavy for her, then soon went on to sing Tosca...

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The descriptors in the review sound about right for Netrebko's recent vocal estate.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Wasn’t the CD published months ago? It wasn’t very good then, has anything changed?


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

MAS said:


> Wasn't the CD published months ago? It wasn't very good then, has anything changed?


No, not yet. Available early December. But since recordings no longer sell, the record label has been slowly dripping tracks on YouTube, for free listening, obviously. That's what labels have been doing in recent times ahead of new releases and even long after recordings are released since, as I said, they don't sell. In any case, the new Netrebko album is an abject disaster that should have never seen the light of day.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

If anyone actually wants to listen to an aria, and I really advise against it, I YouTubed one and this was the top result.






It's honestly kind of embarrassing that what many consider the leading soprano of our times would even listen to this and think that she wants her name on it. I don't really know how else to describe it. The commonest on YouTube on a video to hyper the album are even generally negative.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

ALT said:


> _The soprano *Anna Netrebko* has always been more satisfying in person - her voice blooms in the vast space of an opera house - than on recordings, where her *super-wide vibrato* feels, in close-up, less expressive than unsteady. On her new solo album she *struggles to sustain the long, lush lines* of "Es gibt ein Reich," from "Ariadne auf Naxos"; *soft phrases waver* in "Ritorna vincitor" ("Aida") and "When I am laid in earth" ("Dido and Aeneas"); "Un bel dì," from "Madama Butterfly," is *shaky from start to finish*; *high notes are difficult throughout*. She *endures* "Einsam in trüben Tagen" ("Lohengrin") with steely determination, and the exuberant "Dich, teure Halle" ("Tannhäuser") similarly seems to *press her to her limits*.
> 
> But there is still time for Netrebko, 50, to do a staged "Queen of Spades," excerpted with focused passion here. And the "Liebestod" from "Tristan und Isolde," while *audibly challenging for her*, is movingly - and, at moments, ecstatically - negotiated. Given a meaty stretch to shine in the "Tristan" prelude, the orchestra of the Teatro alla Scala, under its music director, Riccardo Chailly, is otherwise mellow and very much in the background. "Sola, perduta, abbandonata" ("Manon Lescaut") and especially "Tu che le vanità" ("Don Carlo") convey, with generous, fiery, largely secure singing, the urgency of Netrebko's best live performances. *ZACHARY WOOLFE*
> 
> ...


Ouch you say? Well the way you bolded it, no wonder!
I can play that game too.

1. *The soprano Anna Netrebko has always been more satisfying in person -- her voice blooms in the vast spaces of an opera house *-- than on recordings.
2*....and the "Liebestod" from "Tristan and Isolde"* while audibly challenging for her, *is movingly -- and, at moments ,ecstatically -- negotiated.*
3. *"Sola, perduta, abbandonata" (Manon Lescaut") and especially "Tu che le vanita" ("Don Carlo") convey with generous, fiery,largely secure singing, the urgency of Netrebko's best live performances."*


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

nina foresti said:


> I can play that game too.


Game ends when you start listening to actual performances. I do not know what you hear but the above video speaks for itself: the recitative is so horrible there's no reason to continue the torture. Audible (and mostly unsuccessful) attempts at darkening the voice, vibrato flaps all over the place, diction is a foreign concept, acting is artificial...



nina foresti said:


> especially "Tu che le vanita" ("Don Carlo") convey with generous, fiery,largely secure singing







A "generous" and "largely secure" singing? It's ridiculous.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I've never heard from anyone who has heard Netrebko live since she began these bigger roles to see if the voice is large enough to adequately sing them. We know Christine Goerke went from lyric to dramatic but it rarely happens . Flagstad went from larger lyric roles to maybe the biggest dramatic soprano voice of all time but we don't really know what she sounded like in the theater in Oslo. Perhaps she needed a huge house like the Met to allow the voice to fully expand. For her first decade in Wagner she sounded like a lyric with a mic in her throat often. Just speculating here.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

nina foresti said:


> Ouch you say? Well the way you bolded it, no wonder!
> I can play that game too.
> 
> 1. *The soprano Anna Netrebko has always been more satisfying in person -- her voice blooms in the vast spaces of an opera house *-- than on recordings.
> ...


Yes, "Ouch!" is exactly what I said. Azol has explained it quite well. You should be angry at Zach Woolfe of the New York Times since he authored those words I highlighted. In short, you are barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Never mind, who cares?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Netrebko was the primary soprano at The Met during the 2000s and early 2010s and sang the major roles of the productions The Met staged.

Title roles in: Iolanta, Manon, Anna Bolena, Lucia di Lammermoor, and Tosca

Tatiana in Eugene Onegin
Leonora in Il Trovatore 
Lady Macbeth in Macbeth
Adina in L'Elisir d'Amore
Norina in Don Pasquale
Antonia in Les Contes d'Hoffmann
Juliette in Roméo and Juliette
Elvira in I Puritani
Gilda in Rigoletto
Musetta and Mimì in La Bohème
Zerlina and Donna Anna in Don Giovanni

Her wide vibrato grew tiresome, but - she is a _very good dramatic singer/actress_ and looks great in the roles. I don't often listen to recital CDs preferring to watch/listen to the singers on stage in a complete operatic production.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> Netrebko was the primary soprano at The Met during the 2000s and early 2010s and sang the major roles of the productions The Met staged.
> 
> Title roles in: Iolanta, Manon, Anna Bolena, Lucia di Lammermoor, and Tosca
> 
> ...


Opera singers are singers first and actors/actresses second. Ann Netrebko was fine earlier in her career see, for example, this





but now that the singing is terrible, it doesn't matter if she can act. Plus, although she was very beautiful earlier in her career, she no longer really looks great on stage.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

BachIsBest said:


> Opera singers are singers first and actors/actresses second. Ann Netrebko was fine earlier in her career but now that the singing is terrible, it doesn't matter if she can act. Plus, although she was very beautiful earlier in her career, she no longer really looks great on stage.


That may be your opinion, but I consider it one dimensional and entirely diminishes the unique place opera holds in the musical landscape. Opera is a dramatic art, and the singing is just one aspect; an important aspect I grant you - but still one aspect.

Productions with singers who are good singers as well as actors, and whose appearance is believable in the role are far superior to productions where they are excellent singers, but are overweight, too old, or simply unsuited for the demands of the role.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> That may be your opinion, but I consider it one dimensional and entirely diminishes the unique place opera holds in the musical landscape. Opera is a dramatic art, and the singing is just one aspect; an important aspect I grant you - but still one aspect.
> 
> Productions with singers who are good singers as well as actors, and whose appearance is believable in the role are far superior to productions where they are excellent singers, but are overweight, too old, or simply unsuited for the demands of the role.


I don't disagree that acting and looks are important, I'm just saying singing is more important. Having reasonably good singers is a prerequisite for having even a decent production; if the singing is bad nothing else can save the production.

Regardless, Netrebko is "overweight, too old, _and_ simply unsuited for the demands of the role" in a lot of the productions she's in now.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Netrebko isn't even in my peripheral awareness except when someone feels compelled to bring her up. I prefer to remember (and even revisit) the young lyric soprano, especially her work in Russian opera, and simply ignore what's become of her in the last decade. She has her die-hard fans among opera-goers, some of whom probably haven't heard enough great - or even good - singing (God knows it can be hard to find lately) to realize that what's coming out of her now is simply bad - almost a caricature of "operatic" singing. Others probably just stick with her out of loyalty, as fans will, and pretend to themselves that nothing has changed, or that if anything has it doesn't matter. That's fine for them, but it isn't fine for opera that her forced, occluded wobbling is placed on the stages of major houses in some of the most vocally demanding roles in opera, roles she should never have contemplated singing, and the decadent and abnormal current state of singing is thus sanctioned and encouraged. The world is no doubt full of Mimis who want to offer us the Turandots they are in their dreams. They should be discouraged, and if that means we have to wait awhile before seeing another _Turandot_ there's no dearth of material recorded in better days to tide us over.

Even if Netrebko came to her senses today it's almost certainly too late to correct what she's done to her voice. Sic transit.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

The problem with the NYT review is that the wording contain some praise and some critique carefully interspersed the way you don't even get the impression the author has made more of a diplomatical statement than a real analysis of the recording.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

BachIsBest said:


> I don't disagree that acting and looks are important, I'm just saying singing is more important. Having reasonably good singers is a prerequisite for having even a decent production; if the singing is bad nothing else can save the production.
> 
> Regardless, Netrebko is "overweight, too old, _and_ simply unsuited for the demands of the role" in a lot of the productions she's in now.


I agree, and have never argued otherwise, that good singing is the starting point. I am just arguing against such a focus on the singing that the other aspects of a staging are left to be mediocre or even bad. All the aspects should be, at least, good.

I look for a production of Der Ring with a sexy Freia, Fricka as an icey princess, a terrifying Wotan, a charismatically intelligent but evil Alberich, a handsome and fit Siegfried, a beautiful and tender Sieglinde, a strong silent type Siegmund, and an athletic Brünnhilde. What I usually get are productions with overweight women and effeminate men in these roles. Oh sure they (or some of them) often have great voices, but they are not believable and the drama suffers.

What I am saying is that the best productions feature _good_ singing along with good acting, appearance/suitability, and staging (sets, costumes, period) as opposed to great singing and the rest merely window dressing.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> I agree, and have never argued otherwise, that good singing is the starting point. I am just arguing against such a focus on the singing that the other aspects of a staging are left to be mediocre or even bad. All the aspects should be, at least, good.
> 
> I look for a production of Der Ring with a sexy Freia, Fricka as an icey princess, a terrifying Wotan, a charismatically intelligent but evil Alberich, a handsome and fit Siegfried, a beautiful and tender Sieglinde, a strong silent type Siegmund, and an athletic Brünnhilde. What I usually get are productions with overweight women and effeminate men in these roles. Oh sure they (or some of them) often have great voices, but they are not believable and the drama suffers.
> 
> What I am saying is that the best productions feature _good_ singing along with good acting, appearance/suitability, and staging (sets, costumes, period) as opposed to great singing and the rest merely window dressing.


"Effeminate men in these roles"? Do you mean Alberich, Wotan, Siegmund and Siegfried? Which singers of these roles have you seen/heard?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

MAS said:


> "Effeminate men in these roles"? Do you mean Alberich, Wotan, Siegmund and Siegfried? Which singers of these roles have you seen/heard?


Jonas Kaufmann as Siegmund was who I was thinking of, but there have been others that I'd have to look up.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> Jonas Kaufmann as Siegmund was who I was thinking of, but there have been others that I'd have to look up.


Jonas Kaufmann effeminate? No, not at all. I don't care one bit for JK's voice and singing but it would never occur to me to characterize him as girly-man.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ALT said:


> Jonas Kaufmann effeminate? No, not at all. I don't care one bit for JK's voice and singing but it would never occur to me to characterize him as girly-man.


Have you _seen_ him or just listened to him? I saw the Met production from 2011 and effeminate was the first thing I thought of.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Netrebko isn't even in my peripheral awareness except when someone feels compelled to bring her up. I prefer to remember (and even revisit) the young lyric soprano, especially her work in Russian opera, and simply ignore what's become of her in the last decade. She has her die-hard fans among opera-goers, some of whom probably haven't heard enough great - or even good - singing (God knows it can be hard to find lately) to realize that what's coming out of her now is simply bad - almost a caricature of "operatic" singing. Others probably just stick with her out of loyalty, as fans will, and pretend to themselves that nothing has changed, or that if anything has it doesn't matter. That's fine for them, but it isn't fine for opera that her forced, occluded wobbling is placed on the stages of major houses in some of the most vocally demanding roles in opera, roles she should never have contemplated singing, and the decadent and abnormal current state of singing is thus sanctioned and encouraged. The world is no doubt full of Mimis who want to offer us the Turandots they are in their dreams. They should be discouraged, and if that means we have to wait awhile before seeing another _Turandot_ there's no dearth of material recorded in better days to tide us over.
> 
> Even if Netrebko came to her senses today it's almost certainly too late to correct what she's done to her voice. Sic transit.


Much as it pains me to admit it, she has seen her glory days. When she was young and new and beautiful she was a stand-out.
I feel the same way about her that I do about Callas at the end.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

SanAntone said:


> Have you _seen_ him or just listened to him? I saw the Met production from 2011 and effeminate was the first thing I thought of.


Good lord! I have seen anything and everything he did at the Met including You-tube offerings, and let me tell you that ain't no effeminate man! No way, Jose. 
I don't happen to prefer his tenor sound -- I am a spinto lover and he's too throaty for me -- but other than that, this guy's the whole package. Good singer, committed actor, built like a..., handsome as the devil, and well spoken to boot.
Effeminite? Mmmwahahahaha!


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

nina foresti said:


> Good lord! I have seen anything and everything he did at the Met including You-tube offerings, and let me tell you that ain't no effeminate man! No way, Jose.
> I don't happen to prefer his tenor sound -- I am a spinto lover and he's too throaty for me -- but other than that, this guy's the whole package. Good singer, committed actor, built like a..., handsome as the devil, and well spoken to boot.
> Effeminite? Mmmwahahahaha!


In his "forest" outfit he made me think of Peter Pan. Oh well ....


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> Have you _seen_ him or just listened to him? I saw the Met production from 2011 and effeminate was the first thing I thought of.


Lord knows what you would think of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chiffon doesn't spill out of my mouth when I talk but I'm definitely gay. You'd likely leave the room as soon as possible if you met me. LOL Jonas Kaufmann is very straight man butch to me.Of course Continental straight men aren't as jockish as you often get in the US.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Lord knows what you would think of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chiffon doesn't spill out of my mouth when I talk but I'm definitely gay. You'd likely leave the room as soon as possible if you met me. LOL Jonas Kaufmann is very straight man butch to me.Of course Continental straight men aren't as jockish as you often get in the US.


LOL - I wouldn't leave the room, I don't have any issue with gays - I am speaking specifically about how a singer comes across on stage. If the role is supposed to be a "hero" or at least physically intimidating to Hunding (also needs a type), then I want the actor to portray that convincingly. Not all singers can pull it off, and IMO Kaufmann does not.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> LOL - I wouldn't leave the room, I don't have any issue with gays - I am speaking specifically about how a singer comes across on stage. If the role is supposed to be a "hero" or at least physically intimidating to Hunding (also needs a type), then I want the actor to portray that convincingly. Not all singers can pull it off, and IMO Kaufmann does not.


You must be super _macho_ yourself to ascribe effeminacy to another man who isn't! :lol:
I am assuming you're male, of course.


----------



## JTS (Sep 26, 2021)

Nebs is a terrific stage presence and I have enjoyed many of her performances even of the heavier roles though I would agree she is basically a lightish soprano. However, when you take away the stage presence the faults in the voice become apparent, just like when you have an overweight singer with a great voice pretending to be a consumptive heroine - especially in DVD. I remember Pavorotti and Scotto performing at the Met in Boheme to great acclaim. Singing was great as long as you shut your eyes.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

JTS said:


> Nebs is a terrific stage presence and I have enjoyed many of her performances even of the heavier roles though I would agree she is basically a lightish soprano. However, when you take away the stage presence the faults in the voice become apparent, just like when you have an overweight singer with a great voice pretending to be a consumptive heroine - especially in DVD. I remember Pavorotti and Scotto performing at the Met in Boheme to great acclaim. Singing was great as long as you shut your eyes.


You are the first person to admit she sings the bigger roles with a lighter voice. Interesting.


----------



## JTS (Sep 26, 2021)

Seattleoperafan said:


> You are the first person to admit she sings the bigger roles with a lighter voice. Interesting.


I would have thought that was obvious. But she is not alone in that. Think of Freni? Ricciarilli? Etc..


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> LOL - I wouldn't leave the room, I don't have any issue with gays - I am speaking specifically about how a singer comes across on stage. If the role is supposed to be a "hero" or at least physically intimidating to Hunding (also needs a type), then I want the actor to portray that convincingly. Not all singers can pull it off, and IMO Kaufmann does not.


But seriously. This is the first time I've ever heard anyone describe Kaufmann as being less than masculine! Perhaps it's your definition of masucline which needs adressing.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

JTS said:


> I would have thought that was obvious. But she is not alone in that. Think of Freni? Ricciarilli? Etc..


Not really. You can't really tell how big a voice is from a recording or even at a live Met broadcast. Goerke's voice really tripled in size but I know that from reading ear witnesse accounts so it could have happened to Netrebko. Franco Fagioli sounds huge on recordings but finally someone on here heard him live at Covent Garden and said it isn't such a big sound in a theater. Flagstad sounds big in recordings but when you read reports of people in the audience they said she sounded like she was standing in front of you where ever you were in the house... no recording can capture that. So much of opera is how a voice reacts to singing in a big space. We need witnesses to give us a full picture of what a singer really sounds like.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Please do not speculate in a thread whether or not one of the Talk Classical members has the same identity as someone else here - the string of posts on this topic has been deleted. If you have such suspicions, please PM one of the moderators (or report a post of that individual) with the reasons why you think so. We have taken notes of the discussion, so no need to report further now on the matter discussed.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

JTS said:


> I would have thought that was obvious. But she is not alone in that. Think of Freni? Ricciarilli? Etc..


JTS:
Being a Netrebko-ite for many years, I have to admit that the time has come when that appealing voice has suddenly dissipated with her no longer youthful sound. So, no, I don't believe that she still has that lighter sound she once had and certainly not in the bigger roles. Not only that but she seems to have lost some of her appeal due to pitch problems which seem to be getting stronger now. I see her traveling the route to the Wagner area -- a space that does not necessarily encourage excitement in singing for me. (well, maybe a "ho jo to ho" here and there)


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

At least Freni had the sense not to try Isolde or Turandot. But imo Freni also ruined her voice by darkening to produce a hollower, but more ostensibly "dramatic" sound. Ricciarelli didn't do that, she just sang with what she had and ruined it straight out.

Netrebko obviously has a charisma that doesn't translate to occasional casual viewings on YouTube or into her current vocal recordings. I find nothing endearing about her singing in those mediums. At this point her voice is at best bearable.

On the subject of singing vs. acting, obviously both are important. If I'm watching a video or at a live performance, I don't want to choose. But if I had to, I would choose singing. My reasoning is that, for me, mediocre acting makes a performance a bit boring, but mediocre singing makes it unendurable. The acting would have to be uniquely bad to rise to that level. The Met's recent _Turandot_ live stream with Goerke and Eyvazov was fine visually, but the wobbly, harsh, out of tune voices obliterated my nervous system. (I was forced by the circumstances to listen to the entire thing.) Others may have different preferences, but I've always felt that it is the operatic voice that makes opera unique and important, and as we can hear, the great music that is the other principal joy of opera does not work on substandard instruments.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

vivalagentenuova said:


> At least Freni had the sense not to try Isolde or Turandot. But imo Freni also ruined her voice by darkening to produce a hollower, but more ostensibly "dramatic" sound. Ricciarelli didn't do that, she just sang with what she had and ruined it straight out.
> 
> Netrebko obviously has a charisma that doesn't translate to occasional casual viewings on YouTube or into her current vocal recordings. I find nothing endearing about her singing in those mediums. At this point her voice is at best bearable.
> 
> On the subject of singing vs. acting, obviously both are important. If I'm watching a video or at a live performance, I don't want to choose. But if I had to, I would choose singing. My reasoning is that, for me, mediocre acting makes a performance a bit boring, but mediocre singing makes it unendurable. The acting would have to be uniquely bad to rise to that level. The Met's recent _Turandot_ live stream with Goerke and Eyvazov was fine visually, but the wobbly, harsh, out of tune voices obliterated my nervous system. (I was forced by the circumstances to listen to the entire thing.) Others may have different preferences, but I've always felt that it is the operatic voice that makes opera unique and important, and as we can hear, the great music that is the other principal joy of opera does not work on substandard instruments.


Since I am not a trained singer, and in fact am not a huge fan of the classically trained voice, my interest lies only in the production and the performance of the drama. I consider opera a dramatic art; not a singing festival, and expect the same from a opera as I do from a straight play.

I expect the staging to be well thought out, with tasteful choices about the setting, the same for the costumes, the blocking, and primarily the acting. Singing is of course a part of opera, but for me it is merely another aspect.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

I believe that the greatest part of being an opera is that we are watching a drama being played out before our eyes _through the art of beautiful music and singing_ instead of words spoken. However, it is an art medium that calls for both to make it a true success. ("Drama per musica")

I say this being a theatre person first and foremost. It was my living.
But without the singers, acting means nothing, whereas, with a mediocre actor, the beauty of the music and the singer can override some poor acting even though it is not what I look for when I go to an opera today.

My first requisite is, "who is singing?" If the answer is a mediocre singer but a decent actor, I will likely pass. I know the good singers today who also know how to emote well and that's the most important thing for me. I want both.
However, if I have heard about a new singer who is getting a lot of press, I might want to see him or her without knowing if they are consummate actors as well as fine singers.
Bottom line for me: Singing is first in opera -- acting is a very close second -- but both are necessary for a truly enjoyable performance to take place.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

nina foresti said:


> I believe that the greatest part of being an opera is that we are watching a drama being played out before our eyes _through the art of beautiful music and singing_ instead of words spoken. However, it is an art medium that calls for both to make it a true success. ("Drama per musica")
> 
> I say this being a theatre person first and foremost. It was my living.
> But without the singers, acting means nothing, whereas, with a mediocre actor, the beauty of the music and the singer can override some poor acting even though it is not what I look for when I go to an opera today.
> ...


Looks like the main difference between us (because I generally agree with everything in this post) is that I can more readily tolerate merely competent singing + good acting more so than great singing + lousy acting or unsuitability for role (appearance, age, ethnicity).

Also, a large part of my enjoyment of a production rests with the staging. If I love the singing, acting, and other cast related aspects, but find the sets, costumes, or period setting, in bad taste it is a huge distraction.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

I hate admitting it (here come the brickbats) but my own personal problem is trying to get involved with a character, no matter how good the voice, who does not look the part (it IS a visual medium you know). If the soprano is carrying much avoirdupois but is supposed to be a frail slip of a girl, it distracts from her singing. I know that sounds very non PC but there you have it!
(I will slither back to my corner now)


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

nina foresti said:


> I hate admitting it (here come the brickbats) but my own personal problem is trying to get involved with a character, no matter how good the voice, who does not look the part (it IS a visual medium you know). If the soprano is carrying much avoirdupois but is supposed to be a frail slip of a girl, it distracts from her singing. I know that sounds very non PC but there you have it!
> (I will slither back to my corner now)


I agree with you 100%. I brought this up a few pages back vis a vis some Wagnerians and was tarred and feathered.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

SanAntone said:


> Looks like the main difference between us (because I generally agree with everything in this post) is that I can more readily tolerate merely competent singing + good acting more so than great singing + lousy acting or unsuitability for role (appearance, age, ethnicity).
> 
> Also, a large part of my enjoyment of a production rests with the staging. If I love the singing, acting, and other cast related aspects, but find the sets, costumes, or period setting, in bad taste it is a huge distraction.


Although I'm a former singer and probably as critical of mediocre singing as anyone (at least I hope so ), I agree in wanting the other aspects of opera production to be convincing. But for me, as for most people whose experience of opera has been primarily musical through recordings, the quality of musical execution is necessarily the thing that makes or breaks the experience of a work. Had I grown up attending performances in the theater, or even watching films and videos, I might feel somewhat differently - but only somewhat.

Naturally we'll all have our own ideas about what good production entails. What, e.g., is good acting in opera? People singing elaborate and physically demanding music can't be expected to move exactly as they would in spoken drama or in offstage life (even in spoken drama acting styles differ across space and time). We all want what greets our eyes to engage and make sense to us, but what makes dramatic sense in sung drama may differ significantly from what does so in straight theater. In any case, I'll point out that we identify operas by their composers, and there's a good reason for that. Music is opera's primary medium through which a work says whatever it says, and it's the music of an opera that establishes its artistic identity and validity. The other arts involved in opera production make their contributions best to the extent that they acknowledge the music's style and expressive import. A work may be less than effectively staged and still be itself, but if the music is not rendered with skill and insight we don't really have the work no matter how it's acted or what directors and stage designers do with it.

Nowadays, sadly, we can easily find at major venues theatrically sophisticated performances that purport to be particular operas by particular composers, but give us little to convey what the composer felt about his subject or how he tried to express it in music.


----------

