# Maria Callas vs. Leontyne Price



## Alera Marishka (Jan 7, 2017)

Who's better between these two great sopranos?


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

It depends on what you define as better. Price was not a good actress whereas Callas... it goes without saying Particularly the young Price had a more beautiful voice than Callas. The big area Price had over Callas was longevity. Price was sounding good still at her last recitals at age 70. Callas began losing her vocal quality in her early 30's and her voice was in shambles by her last recitals.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

Price can be compared to her fellow Spinto Sopranos. But she's not in Callas' league.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Leontyne Price, hands down.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Comparisons like this seem strange. The voices are so entirely different. How can one compare?
How about Lily Pons and Toti dal Monte instead?


----------



## RES (Oct 30, 2014)

Not an apt comparison. Price was a great singer with a good-sized spinto/dramatic voice but no particularly distinguishing musicianly character. Moreover, her early voice was full, clear, and ringing but with smeared articulation, and she lacked understanding of phrase and shape; a decade later, the voice itself had become dark and raspy. She didn't really have much of a top either (substituting notes in TROVATORE, for example), and her chest voice was always rather inaudible. The number of styles and roles she took on was very limited. Callas? To call her a 'singer' is very unfair: she was a total musician--arguably the greatest musician of the 20th century. She had an astonishing early career in Greece as a teenager into her early 20s; she settled in Verona in 1947. We hear the last five years of that Callas on studio and live recordings from 1949 to 1953. Her understanding of phrase, color, shape was without peer, and her voice was huge, richer and more flexible even than Ponselle's, able to articulate as cleanly as Heifetz did on the violin and give full humanity to, the most fiendishly difficult music--from low F-sharp to high E, without batting an eyelash but pouring her entire being into the execution of every note. Her chest voice was breath-taking, her middle register was velvet with all the colors of the rainbow as needed, and her top was easy and thrilling up to Eb. Her diction and expressive marriage of music and text makes her the only soprano one can follow without a libretto. Her rep spanned Gluck to Mascagni; her favorite was the expressive music of Bellini and Donizetti. She revived a repertoire that had long gone unheard. She was not a 'singing actress' as many would have it--nor an actress at all. She used the music to guide her economical physical movement as well as as her interpretation of the score. Later, she said simply: 'All one has to do is listen to the music. The composer has already seen to it. If you really listen...you will find every gesture there.' There was never anyone like her. Sadly, in 1953, she embarked on a disastrous diet which altered and weakened her voice, but until 1958, she was still vocally unchallenged and was always incomparable as the ultimate musician. Her metabolism betrayed her, bringing on early menopause in late 1957, probably from stress, which started the further decay of the voice. Beyond 1960, the voice is tattered, but the musician was still the same. Hence,we thrill to everything to be heard from 1949 to 1953, and revel in her glorious, profound interpretations and the less heavy voice through 1957. But even a few late things, like the 'Willow Song/Ave Maria' in her 1964 Verdi disc, bring us to tears as no other, despite-or perhaps because--of her now-frayed instrument; her musicianship was all the more revelatory and evident. So, comparing Price to Callas? Tebaldi to Callas, Sutherland to Callas? Caballe to Callas? Not the right questions.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The voice of the young Price (1950s and '60s) was unalloyed pleasure. Later it took on a huskiness and swoopiness that I find irritating (especially in Verdi, where she sounds like a displaced gospel singer), and her rudimentary musicianship wasn't enough to compensate. With Callas I may have to make allowances for the sound, but even in the late stages of decline her art is incomparable. Listen to them both in _Trovatore._ It's hardly the same opera.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> The voice of the young Price (1950s and '60s) was unalloyed pleasure. Later it took on a huskiness and swoopiness that I find irritating (especially in Verdi, where she sounds like a displaced gospel singer), and her rudimentary musicianship wasn't enough to compensate. With Callas I may have to make allowances for the sound, but even in the late stages of decline her art is incomparable. Listen to them both in _Trovatore._ It's hardly the same opera.


Callas' trovatore "devolution": the voice has left, the art is greater than ever.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

imo, the voices were more similar than people here let on, certainly similar enough to be comparable (Callas's voice was a hell of a lot more similar to Price's than it ever was to Sutherland's). similarities
- similar ranges, ranging from well below middle C up to the E above high C
- spinto sized soprano voices, but with a dramatic mezzo/contralto timbre
- developed a tendency toward muddiness mid-career
- drastically different timbre depending on which part of the voice was being used 
- neither sounded particularly "heroin-y". Callas sounded like a vindictive witch and Price like a matriarch. 

the biggest difference I notice is that Callas's voice had more bite to it, almost like she was snarling at you (it's been suggested that I intended this as an insult in the past. I don't. when one is in the right mood, it's an absolutely wonderful quality). Price's voice was always more rounded. the texture of a chocolate mousse, but with none of the sweetness.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

The more important question is the amount of overlap in their repertoire. I am not talking about the one-off things they did, usually for recordings, but those roles which formed a (semi-)regular part of their repertoire. In that regard, there was not much 'similarity'.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> imo, the voices were more similar than people here let on, certainly similar enough to be comparable (Callas's voice was a hell of a lot more similar to Price's than it ever was to Sutherland's). similarities
> - similar ranges, ranging from well below middle C up to the E above high C
> - spinto sized soprano voices, but with a dramatic mezzo/contralto timbre
> - developed a tendency toward muddiness mid-career
> ...


1. Range is absolutely not a criterion here. Anna Netrebko has about the same range. Doesn't mean we can compare her to Callas. 
2. Callas was not a spinto-sized voice. Callas' voice was compared to Flagstad's by Bonynge himself.So big and dramatic it left Sutherland speechless. Not to mention that a spinto is basically a lyric with some dramatic capabilities, completely different from a drammatico d'agilita. Price was a true spinto: beautiful, smooth lyric timbre, enough power to handle the dramatic outbursts. Callas was Dramatic itself. Can Price (or Sutherland) sing Medea, Norma, Abigaille or Lady Macbeth with the same hair-raising effect? Obviously no. 
3. Callas merely developed a wobble due to lack of support and the voice "thinned" and became more acid but also more feminine. She had nothing of the muffin-in-mouth effect that Price (and Netrebko) had (has). Price capitalized on her conventionally-beautiful timbre. Callas lacked that "quality" altogether. 
4. I don't know what you mean by heroin-y but I'm glad they don't sound like junkies to you.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

RES said:


> Not an apt comparison. Price was a great singer with a large, spinto/dramatic voice but no particularly distinguishing musicianly character. Moreover, her early voice was full, clear, and ringing but with smeared articulation, and she lacked understanding of phrase and shape; a decade later, the voice itself had become was dark and raspy. She didn't really have much of a top either (substituting notes in TROVATORE, for example), and her chest voice was always rather inaudible. The number of styles and roles she took on was very limited. Callas? To call her a 'singer' is very unfair: she was a total musician--arguably the greatest musician of the 20th century. She had an astonishing early career in Greece as a teenager into her early 20s; she settled in Verona in 1947. We hear the last five years of that Callas on studio and live recordings from 1949 to 1953. Her understanding of phrase, color, shape was without peer, and her voice was huge, richer and more flexible even than Ponselle's, able to articulate as cleanly as Heifetz did on the violin, and give full humanity to, the most fiendishly difficult music--from low F-sharp to high E, without batting an eyelash but pouring her entire being into the execution of every note. Her chest voice was breath-taking, her middle register was velvet had all the colors of the rainbow as needed, and her top was easy and thrilling up to Eb. Her rep spanned Gluck to Mascagni; her favorite was the expressive music of Bellini and Donizetti. She revived a repertoire that had long gone unheard. She was not a 'singing actress' as many would have it--nor an actress at all. She used the music to guide her economical physical movement as well as as her interpretation of the score. Later, she said simply: 'All one has to do is listen to the music. The composer has already seen to it. If you really listen...you will find every gesture there.' There was never anyone like her. Sadly, in 1953, she embarked on a disastrous diet which altered and weakened her voice, but until 1958, she was still vocally unchallenged and was always incomparable as the ultimate musician. Her metabolism betrayed her, bringing on early menopause in late 1957, probably from stress, which started the further decay of the voice. Beyond 1960, the voice is tattered, but the musician was still the same. Hence,we thrill to everything to be heard from 1949 to 1953, and revel in her glorious, profound interpretations and the less heavy voice through 1957. But even a few late things, like the 'Willow Song/Ave Maria' in her 1964 Verdi disc, bring us to tears as no other, despite-or perhaps because--of her now-frayed instrument; her musicianship was all the more revelatory and evident. So, comparing Price to Callas? Tebaldi to Callas, Sutherland to Callas? Caballe to Callas? Not the right questions.


That's all I ever wanted people to undestand!


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

Woodduck said:


> *The voice of the young Price (1950s and '60s) was unalloyed pleasure*. Later it took on a huskiness and swoopiness that I find irritating (especially in Verdi, where she sounds like a displaced gospel singer), and her rudimentary musicianship wasn't enough to compensate. With Callas I may have to make allowances for the sound, but even in the late stages of decline her art is incomparable. Listen to them both in _Trovatore._ It's hardly the same opera.


Price was a great singer during the early 1958-68 period, some great recordings that played into her vocal strong suite with that pure rich velvet like tone. She wisely avoided the heavy bel canto "mad scence" operas and mostly the mid period Verdi with dramatic cabalettas......she focused instead on later Verdi and Puccini works Aida, Forza, Tosca, Butterfly, Ballo, Carmen etc

That said when paired with right cast early in her career she could be very impressive in dramatic delivery, away from the studio and paired with Corelli etc the "wild side" would make a welcome appearance as in these early live Leonoras......yessssssssssss


----------



## RES (Oct 30, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> imo, the voices were more similar than people here let on, certainly similar enough to be comparable (Callas's voice was a hell of a lot more similar to Price's than it ever was to Sutherland's). similarities
> - similar ranges, ranging from well below middle C up to the E above high C
> - spinto sized soprano voices, but with a dramatic mezzo/contralto timbre
> - developed a tendency toward muddiness mid-career
> ...


In the 1949-53 period, Callas' voice was as often praised for its beauty as Tebaldi's. Go listen. And Price did not have a range to e'''; she had a c''' as her highest note. She actually ducks the written Db in her *first* TROVATORE. Before the diet, Callas's voice was enormous--according to Bonynge "you can't imagine how huge" and Sutherland who worked with her in the 1952 Covent Garden NORMA and 1953 AIDA. Even after the diet, in 1954, the voice remained quite big, though the top was less reliably steady. If you want to hear the heroic Callas, listen to the 1951 Mexico AIDA, any TROVATORE, any NORMA through 1955, FORZA, 1952 MACBETH (not a heroic character), 1949 NABUCCO, Cetra GIOCONDA, etc., etc. Your hair will blow back. Not spinto-sized like Price--good though Price could certainly be. Callas' 'muddiness' and difficulty in aligning the three registers of her voice were the result of vocal collapse owing to the issues I described earlier; nothing whatever to do with the real Callas--nor with music-making, which should be the crux of the matter. Price happily changed naturally; nothing so drastic or ruinous--her life wasn't so ridden with turmoil or illness. Callas' voice was very rounded indeed when the music called for it. If you describe Price as 'chocolate mousse' (no inadvertent racial profiling, I hope ;-) ), I think of Callas's great-period voice as liquid gold. 'Bite': that's articulation, and one needs it to illuminate the text. It could also be articulate and crisp but with a buttery quality--always as the music dictated. Price was pretty monochromatic by comparison. Again, I like Price, but this particular comparison is apples to oranges (or champagne to...).


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

> Again, I like Price, but this particular comparison is apples to oranges (or champagne to...).


AAAAAArrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhh don't say it.............:lol:


----------



## RES (Oct 30, 2014)

DarkAngel said:


> AAAAAArrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhh don't say it.............:lolCoca-Cola image)


Much as I like that one, Marianna never said it, as you probably know. And anyway, it was about Tebaldi: 'Comparing me to Tebaldi is like comparing champagne to cognac'--meaning two completely different but distinguished voices/drinks. An overly enthusiastic journalist butt in: 'No. To Coca-Cola' and the two things got conflated and attributed to Callas. People loved that 'tigress' image invented by the press after the nasty process server mess in Chicago. It's just like the story about the Met Tosca where she was supposed to have been rude to George London during rehearsal. There was some stage business where they got tangled up with the chair and table legs. The ugly, inaccurate version has her saying, angrily, 'There's too much feet here!'. In the actual version, she and George laugh and she says 'Looks like we have too many legs.' Callas was never disrespectful to good colleagues ('There are even things to learn from bit players.').


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

RES said:


> *In the 1949-53 period, Callas' voice was as often praised for its beauty as Tebaldi's. Go listen*. And Price did not have a range to e'''; she had a c''' as her highest note. She actually ducks the written Db in her *first* TROVATORE. Before the diet, Callas's voice was enormous--according to Bonynge "you can't imagine how huge" and Sutherland who worked with her in the 1952 Covent Garden NORMA and 1953 AIDA. Even after the diet, in 1954, the voice remained quite big, though the top was less reliably steady. If you want to hear the heroic Callas, listen to the 1951 Mexico AIDA, any TROVATORE, any NORMA through 1955, FORZA, 1952 MACBETH (not a heroic character), 1949 NABUCCO, Cetra GIOCONDA, etc., etc. Your hair will blow back. Not spinto-sized like Price--good though Price could certainly be. Callas' 'muddiness' and difficulty in aligning the three registers of her voice were the result of vocal collapse owing to the issues I described earlier; nothing whatever to do with the real Callas--nor with music-making, which should be the crux of the matter. Price happily changed naturally; nothing so drastic or ruinous--her life wasn't so ridden with turmoil or illness. Callas' voice was very rounded indeed when the music called for it. If you describe Price as 'chocolate mousse' (no inadvertent racial profiling, I hope ;-) ), I think of Callas's great-period voice as liquid gold..


I have. In fact, her earlier clips of Nabucco are among my favorite of all time, but honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of people bringing this up. That was _4 years_ of her career. Evaluating an opera singer based off of the amount of time people spend in high school doesn't make any sense. We need to talk about what they sounded like _on average_ to make fair comparisons, at least for a more sizable period like, say, 10-20 years.

as for Tebaldi, I never found Tebaldi's timbre particularly beautiful to begin with, so comparison doesn't mean a whole lot to me.



> Bite': that's articulation, and one needs it to illuminate the text. It could also be articulate and crisp but with a buttery quality--always as the music dictated. Price was pretty monochromatic by comparison. Again, I like Price, but this particular comparison is apples to oranges (or champagne to...)


indeed. apples and oranges are quite different. that was my point

PS: lol, no, I wasn't racially profiling  I also describe Anna Moffo's voice that way (albeit a sweeter chocolate mousse. Moffo was a seductress while Price was a matriarch).


----------



## RES (Oct 30, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> ...In fact, her earlier clips of Nabucco are among my favorite of all time, but honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of people bringing this up. That was _4 years_ of her career. Evaluating an opera singer based off of the amount of time people spend in high school doesn't make any sense. We need to talk about what they sounded like _on average_ to make fair comparisons, at least for a more sizable period like, say, 10-20 years...


Physical issues made for a short career--though not all that short. What can I say? A candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Beyond 1953, she's still astounding musically, and vocally until 1958--though certain things become inconsistent. If the vocal glitches get in your way, then maybe she's not for you. Why write about her? It seems like a frustrating waste of time if she is not going to give you what you need. She was very level-headed herself about this and said "People who don't like me just shouldn't come and hear me. When I don't like something, I just don't bother about it."


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I have. In fact, her earlier clips of Nabucco are among my favorite of all time, but honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of people bringing this up. That was _4 years_ of her career. Evaluating an opera singer based off of the amount of time people spend in high school doesn't make any sense. We need to talk about what they sounded like _on average_ to make fair comparisons, at least for a more sizable period like, say, 10-20 years.
> 
> as for Tebaldi, I never found Tebaldi's timbre particularly beautiful to begin with, so comparison doesn't mean a whole lot to me.
> 
> ...


You need to get some backbone and learn how to have a strong opinion;-) LOL


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I have. In fact, her earlier clips of Nabucco are among my favorite of all time, but honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of people bringing this up. That was _4 years_ of her career. Evaluating an opera singer based off of the amount of time people spend in high school doesn't make any sense. We need to talk about what they sounded like _on average_ to make fair comparisons, at least for a more sizable period like, say, 10-20 years.


Not when those four years represented the REAL original voice. It's not really four years. Callas has been singing with THAT voice since the 30s but we didn't get to hear it. Her big career in Italy started in 1947. It's a shame we only have the last four years of her first career to listen to. Afterwards it was a "damaged" voice. An "artificially changed" voice. It didn't change naturally as she was only 30 at that time!! Most singers today are still studying at that age! Unfortunately she went ahead and lost about 80lbs and compromised her breath support and vocal size. And let me quote Sutherland here:
_[Hearing Callas in Norma in 1952] "was a shock, a wonderful shock. You just got shivers up and down the spine. It was a bigger sound in those earlier performances, before she lost weight. I think she tried very hard to recreate the sort of "fatness" of the sound which she had when she was as fat as she was. But when she lost the weight, she couldn't seem to sustain the great sound that she had made, and the body seemed to be too frail to support that sound that she was making. Oh, but it was oh so exciting. It was thrilling. *I don't think that anyone who heard Callas after 1955 really heard the Callas voice*"
_


----------



## Tietjens Stolz (Jun 2, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I have. In fact, her earlier clips of Nabucco are among my favorite of all time, but honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of people bringing this up. That was _4 years_ of her career. Evaluating an opera singer based off of the amount of time people spend in high school doesn't make any sense. We need to talk about what they sounded like _on average_ to make fair comparisons, at least for a more sizable period like, say, 10-20 years.


Have been away from this forum for quite a long time and it seems that discussions on Callas is as hot as ever.

Callas' earlier career actually stretches back to 1939, when she sang Santuzza in Cavalleria Rusticana at the Olympia Theatre in Athens, quite a feat when still a student at the Athens Conservatory (15 years old - she was known to mature very quickly, in fact more quickly than most at her age back then)

She signed a contract with the Greek National Opera in Athens and officially started her career as a professional opera singer in 1940 (16 years old)

Her first major role at the Greek National Opera was Tosca in 1942 (18 years old)

Two further breakthroughs took place in 1944, with Fidelio and Marta in Eugen d'Abert's Tiefland (two heavy dramatic roles at the age of 20) at the Greek National Opera. Both received rave reviews in the press.

Not to mention several works from the Baroque era to the 20th-century in concerts and recitals.

Taking into account those years in Greece, her earlier career should count as 15 years (1939 - 1953), not just 4 years. It's just TOO bad that only the final 4 years of the earlier career (1949 - 1953) are documented in sound and available for posterity.

You should go and read up on Nicholas Petsalis-Diomidis's THE UNKNOWN CALLAS: THE GREEK YEARS for more details.










amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/Callas-Greek...1484056524&sr=1-1&keywords=the+unknown+callas

It's always best to do lots of homework.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Vocal purity. Leontyne Price.

Passion and convincibility. Maria Callas.

Plenty of room for both.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Alera Marishka said:


> Who's better between these two great sopranos?


It is very difficult to say. Both have very different strengths, style, diversity and abilities. One thing is sure, we do not have sopranos like these in 2017.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Price, is a great Aida, and her trovatore isn't too bad. She had an interesting voice, but she nowhere near matched Callas. What other soprano could match Callas though? Who could match her heartbreaking Violetta, which she sang along side a ferocious Medea, a divine Norma, a helpless Butterfly, a jealous Tosca or innocent Gilda? Between 1950 and 1959 Callas was unmatched. Price was certainly a great soprano but I find her voice, especially later in her career a bit odd. She had a longer career, however, to have achieved what Callas achieved in the space of nine year, from age 25 - 34 no less, is quite outstanding. For her main career her flame burnt brighter than all others.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Just to keep the balance - it's so easy not to when Callas is under discussion! - Price in her vocal prime had one of those voices that could just slay you with its radiant beauty. Her recordings of the songs of Samuel Barber, especially of "Knoxville, Summer of 1915," are superb, and essential in any collection.

The human voice at its finest has an intrinsic power to enchant and move us. The young Price, I think, had one of those voices, and in the right music (Barber, Gershwin, American music in general) she's pretty hard to beat.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

While this is not directly related to the Price/Callas comparison, it does connect with the comments about Callas' short career which, as has been noted, was actually longer than she is often credited with. While she started very young, she did have solid training and technique which helped her when the voice started having problems. Let us not forget a Callas-wannabe, Elena Suliotis, who tried to do too much, too soon, and really flamed out.

As a personal aside, while I very much enjoy singers such as Kiri Te Kanawa who had vocal beauty to burn but was a tad short in the dramatic aspect, most of my favourites are singers where the dramatic ability and vocal beauty leaned more towards the former, e.g. Anja Silja, Hildegard Behrens, Gwyneth Jones, etc.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Leontyne Price for me


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Just popped back for a moment to find the Callas controversy still raging. And it is just a moment. I have no intention of staying.

One thing has come clear to me reading this thread, though. Balalaika Boy, and some others on here, seem to spend so much time listening to voices that they never actually listen to the music. Voices never mean much to me. It's what singers do with them that interests me, hence why all my favourite singers tend also to be good musicians.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Just to keep the balance - it's so easy not to when Callas is under discussion! - Price in her vocal prime had one of those voices that could just slay you with its radiant beauty. Her recordings of the songs of Samuel Barber, especially of "Knoxville, Summer of 1915," are superb, and essential in any collection.
> 
> The human voice at its finest has an intrinsic power to enchant and move us. The young Price, I think, had one of those voices, and in the right music (Barber, Gershwin, American music in general) she's pretty hard to beat.


Wood - is the Price/Barber recording the one with Barber on piano and Thomas Schippers conducting the orchestral works?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> Wood - is the Price/Barber recording the one with Barber on piano and Thomas Schippers conducting the orchestral works?


I am not Wood but yes it is 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-l...=12734&creativeASIN=B00002MXYW&condition=used


----------



## Daniel Noynaert (Jul 19, 2017)

I agree, this kind of comparisons don't make much sense.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Daniel Noynaert said:


> I agree, this kind of comparisons don't make much sense.


What a way to make a entrance, welcome to Talk Classical :tiphat:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> Wood - is the Price/Barber recording the one with Barber on piano and Thomas Schippers conducting the orchestral works?


Yes, it is. Indispensable recording.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Pugg said:


> I am not Wood but yes it is
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-l...=12734&creativeASIN=B00002MXYW&condition=used











This is the one I was thinking it was and its the one I've ordered.


----------



## Star (May 27, 2017)

Callas was incomparable as a vocal actress in the same way as, say, Olivier. Whether you actually liked the character she drew (e.g. Butterfly) is a matter of taste. With Price there was far less character but you might just like it more as the voice was incomparably beautiful. For example I much prefer Price's Carmen to Callas' simply because by the time Callas recorded it the voice had deteriorated. However, listen to Callas' Gilda and you hear both beauty and character. Incomparable characterisation. 
To say she was the greatest musician of the 20th century is a bit sweeping when there are so many. But certainly one of the great vocal actresses.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Price did indeed have a range up to e''' even if she didn't always use it. I have a recording of her singing "Caro Nome" in the original key of E, and she handles the standard cadenza(s) with all the C-sharps and the one D-sharp quite nicely, thank you, before ending the thing on an arpeggiated E-major chord, starting with a trill on e'', then trilled G#'', trilled B, ending on the high e''' which is no more whistle-register for Price than for a thousand other sopranos who have sung up there.

She also takes the high D-flat in "Una macchia" from Macbeth. She takes the high E-flat in "Sempre Libera." It's absurd to say she couldn't sing higher than c'''.

:tiphat:

Kind regards,

George


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

In general I'd rather listen to Leontyne Price, though it's hard to deny that Callas mastered a wider repertoire and was an even keener musician than was Price.

I'm wary, however, of this sort of dichotomy I sense, where, supposedly, singers with "beautiful" voices are not good actresses/actors, whereas singers with "less beautiful" voices are "stage animals" (a phrase I can't stand, though no one's used it here). I mean, I've never actually seen Price in a role; but someone up-thread mentioned Kiri Te Kanawa, whose Desdemona (with Domingo in a Covent Garden OTELLO) I have on DVD. It's a very touchingly acted performance, particularly toward the end. Maybe she's no Callas, but she's certainly not a poor actress. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that _most_ opera singers can be and are very good actresses/actors _provided they have strong direction._


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

There are plenty of fine physical actors in opera. Callas was undoubtedly one of the finest. I never saw Price act, so I can't comment. What needs to be said is that Callas was simply the greatest _vocal_ actress we have any record of. In this art Price is not even close to being in her league. To listen to them both in any role they had in common is the sole demonstration needed.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> View attachment 96068
> 
> 
> This is the one I was thinking it was and its the one I've ordered.


Then you have to order the other one as well.....


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Pugg said:


> Then you have to order the other one as well.....


I might have to run that past my better half!:lol:


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Star said:


> Callas was incomparable as a vocal actress in the same way as, say, Olivier. Whether you actually liked the character she drew (e.g. Butterfly) is a matter of taste. With Price there was far less character but you might just like it more as the voice was incomparably beautiful. For example I much prefer Price's Carmen to Callas' simply because by the time Callas recorded it the voice had deteriorated. However, listen to Callas' Gilda and you hear both beauty and character. Incomparable characterisation.
> To say she was the greatest musician of the 20th century is a bit sweeping when there are so many. But certainly one of the great vocal actresses.


Particularly in her first 5 years or so Price had such a gorgeous, luscious voice!!!! She had tons of stage presence but wasn't much of an actress .
Callas sang a lot of the big Verdi roles early in her career, but was never identified with Verdi the way Price was. Price sang a marvelous Tosca, but only trotted it out early in her career. I just don't think you can compare them for the most part.


----------



## Rossiniano (Jul 28, 2017)

I did not read any of the other responses in this thread as I did not want to be influenced by the opinions of others. 

Price was great and special in a certain way. In her prime there was a beautiful richness to her voice.

Callas was unique. Her voice might be described as being beautiful in her prime, possibly! I say yes, but others might disagree. No singer is perfect, and Callas was less perfect than most...BUT... and you just knew that there was going to be a BUT!

She was unique and in a way that can't readily be described in words. However, you recognize it when you hear it! One could write a thesis on her uniqueness and indeed she has been the subject of countless books! 

Perhaps only the likes of a Pasta and Grisi can be uttered in the same breath as Callas. The following quote regarding Pasta as Anna Bolena past her prime applies to Callas as well: "It is like the Cenacolo of Da Vinci (The Last Supper) – a wreck of a picture, but the picture is the greatest picture in the world.”

I am new here, so for better or worse there's one more in the Callas camp. However, I appreciate Sutherland and countless others as well... Plus, we all hear differently (one person's wobble is another's vibrato!) so Please be assured that I will always respect the opinions of others!


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Particularly in her first 5 years or so Price had such a gorgeous, luscious voice!!!! She had tons of stage presence but wasn't much of an actress .
> Callas sang a lot of the big Verdi roles early in her career, but was never identified with Verdi the way Price was. Price sang a marvelous Tosca, but only trotted it out early in her career. I just don't think you can compare them for the most part.


OK I've popped in again to reply to this statement, because, to my thinking, it stems from an erroneous idea of what a Verdi soprano is. Verdi wrote a great many operas, the soprano roles having a great many differing requirements. As far as I'm aware, the Verdi roles in Price's repertoire were Aida, both Leonoras, Elvira in *Ernani* (I don't know if she ever played it on stage), the Requiem, Amelia in *Un Ballo in Maschera* and that's about it. These are all roles of a certain type. Price could never have sung Gilda or Violetta, and I doubt very much Lady Macbeth and Abigaille would have suited her.

Callas sang (all on stage, not just in the studio) Abigaille (Naples 1949), Lady Macbeth (La Scala 1952), Gilda (Mexico 1952 and recording 1955), Leonora in *La Forza del Destino* (Trieste 1948, Ravenna 1954 and recording 1954), Leonora in *Il Trovatore* (Mexico 1950, Naples 1951, La Scala 1953, Covent Garden 1953, Verona 1953, Rome 1953, Chicago 1955 and recording 1956 - "a miracle", according to Schwarzkopf, "perfection" according to Bjoerling), Violetta (a role she sang more often than any except Norma, with performances all over Italy, in the US, Lisbon and London between 1951 and 1958), Elena in *I Vespri Siciliani* (Florence and La Scala 1951), Elisabetta in *Don Carlo* (La Scala 1954), and Aida (all over Italy, Mexico, London and Brazil between 1948 and 1953, making a recording of the role in 1955). I have no doubt she could have sung any of Verdi's early operas had the Verdi revival started earlier. She could no doubt also, to judge from her late recording of the _Willow Song_ and _Ave Maria_, have made an interesting Desdemona, though I doubt the role, one of the least vocally challenging in all of Verdi, would have interested her much.

I have always contested this idea of the "Verdi soprano" being someone like Price or Tebaldi, who were successful in only a small range of Verdi roles. In Verdi's day, it was not unusual to find the same soprano singing Gilda and Lady Macbeth, as Callas did in hers. If there is such a thing as a Verdi soprano, surely it would have to be a soprano who could sing all Verdi roles. Callas may not have sung them all, but she demonstrated, with the range of roles she sang, that she could have.

I would agree that Price is particularly identified with Aida, but Callas is equally, perhaps more so, with Violetta, and she was at least _as_ identified with the *Trovatore* Leonora and Amelia as Price was.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> OK I've popped in again to reply to this statement, because, to my thinking, it stems from an erroneous idea of what a Verdi soprano is. Verdi wrote a great many operas, the soprano roles having a great many differing requirements. As far as I'm aware, the Verdi roles in Price's repertoire were Aida, both Leonoras, Elvira in *Ernani* (I don't know if she ever played it on stage), the Requiem, Amelia in *Un Ballo in Maschera* and that's about it. These are all roles of a certain type. Price could never have sung Gilda or Violetta, and I doubt very much Lady Macbeth and Abigaille would have suited her.
> 
> Callas sang (all on stage, not just in the studio) Abigaille (Naples 1949), Lady Macbeth (La Scala 1952), Gilda (Mexico 1952 and recording 1955), Leonora in *La Forza del Destino* (Trieste 1948, Ravenna 1954 and recording 1954), Leonora in *Il Trovatore* (Mexico 1950, Naples 1951, La Scala 1953, Covent Garden 1953, Verona 1953, Rome 1953, Chicago 1955 and recording 1956 - "a miracle", according to Schwarzkopf, "perfection" according to Bjoerling), Violetta (a role she sang more often than any except Norma, with performances all over Italy in the US, Lisbon and London between 1951 and 1958), Elena in *I Vespri Siciliani* (Florence and La Scala 1951), Elisabetta in *Don Carlo* (La Scala 1954), and Aida (all over Italy, Mexico, London and Brazil between 1948 and 1953, making a recording of the role in 1955). I have no doubt she could have sung any of Verdi's early operas had the Verdi revival started earlier. She could no doubt also, to judge from her late recording of the _Willow Song_ and _Ave Maria_, have made an interesting Desdemona, though I doubt the role, one of the least vocally challenging in all of Verdi, would have interested her much.
> 
> ...


It does indeed seem that Price's reputation as a Verdi singer is based on a mere handful of roles in which she was admittedly very good. I must even wonder whether it was mainly Aida that's responsible for this, given that she was a beautiful black woman with a beautiful voice who must have seemed the perfect embodiment of a Nubian princess.

The whole idea of a "Verdi soprano" or a "Wagnerian soprano" or a "Verdi baritone" has always annoyed me. It's all right to use these phrases if we're just talking about a general suitability for certain repertoire - no one is equally suitable for every role or kind of music - but the fact is that most roles have been sung well by a variety of voices. Mattia Battistini and Leonard Warren are very different singers, and Warren may fit a common stereotype of a "Verdi baritone" better than Battistini, but its impossible to listen to them singing the same Verdi arias and not experience the breakdown, or at least the enlargement, of that notion. In that respect, nobody broke down stereotypes better than Callas.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

One of the interesting things about Callas is the way her fans flip the narrative we use for every other singer when discussing her. This is a singer who was born five years after Birgit Nilsson, but who had thoroughly destroyed her instrument by the time Nilsson started getting international attention. 

She entered her 30s with an incredibly beautiful (albeit slightly unusual) voice, and exited her 30s with permanent vocal problems--wobbles, excruciating high notes, awful runs and trills, dry uneven spots all over her range especially her top, completely separate vocal registers. 

Some blame her weight loss, but I would think the very normal and standard culprits of overwork and saying yes to every role no matter how unsuitable have to be major factors. I know her reputation is a giant voiced goddess, but when I listen to her, I hear a medium sized voice who compensates (gloriously at first, but unsuccessfully later) with her absolute commitment and artistry in roles she shouldn't be singing.

But instead of using that as a cautionary tale for singers the way we do with anyone else who burned out by 40, Callas fans praise her for singing everything.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

howlingfantods said:


> One of the interesting things about Callas is the way her fans flip the narrative we use for every other singer when discussing her. This is a singer who was born five years after Birgit Nilsson, but who had thoroughly destroyed her instrument by the time Nilsson started getting international attention.
> 
> She entered her 30s with an incredibly beautiful (albeit slightly unusual) voice, and exited her 30s with permanent vocal problems--wobbles, excruciating high notes, awful runs and trills, dry uneven spots all over her range especially her top, completely separate vocal registers.
> 
> ...


I wasn't aware I was flipping any narrative. I was just questioning the whole idea of a Verdi soprano. What most people think of as a Verdi soprano is actually an Aida soprano, but the majority of great Aidas aren't much good at any early or middle period Verdi.

By the way, this middle-sized voice that you hear, both Sutherland and Bonynge described as colossal, so maybe your ears deceive you.

Also, she matured very early. She may have made her Italian debut in 1947, but she had already been singing major roles in Greece since 1939.

But, thank you, you have reminded me why I left TC. You have turned my post on Verdi sopranos into an attack on Callas fans. I won't be back. I'm still trying to find a way to delete my profile, but don't seem to be able to find one.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

GregMitchell said:


> an attack on Callas fans


Sensitive aren't we? If my post was an attack, I wonder what you think a calm discussion looks like.

eta - I fail to see why stating that Callas started her performance career earlier contradicts my point that she wrecked her voice most likely through overuse and inapt roles. Jussi Bjorling was born 12 years earlier than Callas, started singing professionally at the age of 5 and ,made his operatic debut at 19, and was still singing with an almost flawless voice when Callas's voice was already in precipitous decline.

Your point appears to be that SOF pointing out the very banal fact that Price was more associated with Verdi than Callas was wrong wrong wrong because Callas sang more Verdi roles than Price, as if that creates some objective proof she's a better Verdian. Praising her for singing everything always strikes me as odd for the reasons I stated above.

I think your overly defensive and self-righteous reaction to my post is ridiculous particularly considering how you address pretty much everyone else you disagree with. Look at how you have to answer SOP's libel about, you know, people thinking of Verdi when thinking Price versus people probably thinking of bel canto first when thinking Callas.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

howlingfantods said:


> Sensitive aren't we? If my post was an attack, I wonder what you think a calm discussion looks like.


Not at all. But you changed the tenor of the discussion. Instead of responding to my point about whether there is such a thing as a Verdi soprano, you decided to make a little swipe at Callas fans, and then at Callas herself.

Oh well. Some things never change, it would seem.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

GregMitchell said:


> Not at all. But you changed the tenor of the discussion. Instead of responding to my point about whether there is such a thing as a Verdi soprano, you decided to make a little swipe at Callas fans, and then at Callas herself.
> 
> Oh well. Some things never change, it would seem.


Yes, my "swipe" at Callas, calling her natural singing voice incredibly beautiful and remarking on her artistry and commitment. What a hater I must be.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

howlingfantods said:


> One of the interesting things about Callas is the way her fans flip the narrative we use for every other singer when discussing her.
> 
> She entered her 30s with an incredibly beautiful (albeit slightly unusual) voice, and exited her 30s with permanent vocal problems--wobbles, excruciating high notes, awful runs and trills, dry uneven spots all over her range especially her top, completely separate vocal registers.
> 
> ...


Callas fans come in a variety of colors, like fans in general. Some are more insightful about what it is they're fans of. Greg Mitchell is as insightful as any I know. I don't see him as praising Callas for "singing everything," but for having the voice and technique to sing practically anything written for the soprano voice, and later on some mezzo repertoire as well. The reasons for her vocal decline are and will remain subjects of debate, but I don't see much general agreement about which of her major roles she shouldn't have been singing. It appears to me that she gave up a few less suitable roles (Turandot, maybe Wagner) early on, before her decline, and that the repertoire she continued to sing suited her vocal size and technical powers very well. I wonder which of those roles you believe she shouldn't have been singing.

I don't hear those "awful runs and trills." Her coloratura was excellent and her trill exceptional in consisting of an alternation of distinct pitches, as opposed to the somewhat vague flutter we get from most singers.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Callas fans come in a variety of colors, like fans in general. Some are more insightful about what it is they're fans of. Greg Mitchell is as insightful as any I know. I don't see him as praising Callas for "singing everything," but for having the voice and technique to sing practically anything written for the soprano voice, and later on some mezzo repertoire as well. The reasons for her vocal decline are and will remain subjects of debate, but I don't see much general agreement about which of her major roles she shouldn't have been singing. It appears to me that she gave up a few less suitable roles (Turandot, maybe Wagner) early on, before her decline, and that the repertoire she continued to sing suited her vocal size and technical powers very well. I wonder which of those roles you believe she shouldn't have been singing.
> 
> I don't hear those "awful runs and trills." Her coloratura was excellent and her trill exceptional in consisting of an alternation of distinct pitches, as opposed to the somewhat vague flutter we get from most singers.


I'm not sure I see a difference between "praising Callas for 'singing everything,'" and praising her for "having the voice and technique to sing practically anything written for the soprano voice".

Her coloratura and trill _were _exceptional--incomparable, really. But starting in the late 50s, that was increasingly untrue.

I don't know what she shouldn't have been singing. But I think the dramatic and shocking vocal decline even from 1953 to 1958 or 1959 or so when she was still in her mid 30's is pretty definitive evidence she was doing things she shouldn't have been doing with her voice.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

> I don't know what she shouldn't have been singing. But I think the dramatic and shocking vocal decline even from 1953 to 1958 or 1959 or so when she was still in her mid 30's is pretty definitive evidence she was doing things she shouldn't have been doing with her voice.


Callas was still capable of great performances even in 1959-60 as evidenced by her great stereo 60 Norma, but personal issues are what really ended her opera run. By 1960 her marriage had ended and she was jet setting with Onassis and star entourage, she was tired of work and wanted to enjoy life for extended break....when she did attempt a comeback with a few performances in 1964-65 there were noticeable vocal problems and Maria recognized this and decided to retire

I would not want Maria to change anything about her daring bravura style and swagger, the mad scences and cabalettas are unforgetable, her climatic high notes are like no other maintaining size and amplitude all the way up the scale creating a devastating thrilling effect......

If Maria's goal was to have a long career she probably could have added years by not taking so many roles and recordings each year, it was a very tough grueling schedule, but no Callas did not play it safe.....for that we thank the opera gods


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Particularly in her first 5 years or so Price had such a gorgeous, luscious voice!!!! She had tons of stage presence but wasn't much of an actress .
> Callas sang a lot of the big Verdi roles early in her career, but was never identified with Verdi the way Price was. Price sang a marvelous Tosca, but only trotted it out early in her career. I just don't think you can compare them for the most part.


I concede my errors in the Verdi discussion. I was blanking on Traviata completely, and thinking more of Forza, Ballo, Trovatore and Aida. Sorry. I love Callas' Trovatore.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I concede my errors in the Verdi discussion. I was blanking on Traviata completely, and thinking more of Forza, Ballo, Trovatore and Aida. Sorry. I love Callas' Trovatore.


Before I'm gone for good, I just wanted to say, gracious as always.

Greg


----------

