# Radvanovski and Sutherland ???



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I think others like myself might compare Joan Sutherland and Sondra Radvanovski as Sondra is probably the only singer who sings the dramatic coloratura works who also had a really big voice. Having never heard either live I can't compare on the volume. Sondra has flexible voice but in my opinion not in the same class as Sutherland and she has really spectacular sounding high Eb's. I think Sutherland had a more beautiful voice, but I know that is a matter of taste. Sondra sings some of the same repertoire as Joan, but says away from Semiramide and Lucia, which are coloratura nightmares if you don't have the right technique. What do you think? Of course early Callas excelled in these roles but didn't specialize in them.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Of course early Callas excelled in these roles but didn't specialize in them.


I feel I should correct you on one point. Callas never sang Semiramide, but Lucia played a huge part in her career, and in fact the only roles she sang more often were Norma, Violetta and Tosca. She first sang Lucia in Mexico in 1952, causing an absolute sensation, as, up until then, the role had been associated with light voiced soubrettes, Callas bringing to it a dramatic power nobody had even suspected was there. There is a story circulating that Toti Dal Monte, an erstwhile famous Lucia herself, visited Callas in her dressing room after one of her performances, tears streaming down her face and confessing she had sung the role for years without ever realising its dramatic dimension. In 1953, she sang it in Florence (where she also made her first recording of the role), Genoa, Catania and Rome. In 1954 she first sang in Karajan's production mounted specially for her at La Scala, a production which Karajan subsequently took to Berlin and Vienna. Also in 1954, she sang it in Venice, Bergamo and Chicago on the occasion of her US debut. As already mentioned she had a fabulous success in it again in Karajan's production in Berlin. 1956 saw her sing it in Naples, Vienna and at the Met. In 1957, she sang it in concert in Rome, and then in 1958 at the Met again, making her final appearances in the opera in Dallas in 1959 (in the same Zeffirelli production that had made Sutherland a star). She also made her second recording of the opera in 1959. In fact it's safe to say that, had Callas never sung the role, then Sutherland may never have attempted it. It was Callas who paved the way for larger voiced dramatic coloraturas to sing it. Unfortuately nowadays it seems again to have become the province of light-voiced sopranos.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> Unfortuately nowadays it seems again to have become the province of light-voiced sopranos.


What hasn't? "Overparted" is now more common among singers than among hairstyles.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

GregMitchell said:


> I feel I should correct you on one point. Callas never sang Semiramide, but Lucia played a huge part in her career, and in fact the only roles she sang more often were Norma, Violetta and Tosca. She first sang Lucia in Mexico in 1952, causing an absolute sensation, as, up until then, the role had been associated with light voiced soubrettes, Callas bringing to it a dramatic power nobody had even suspected was there. There is a story circulating that Toti Dal Monte, an erstwhile famous Lucia herself, visited Callas in her dressing room after one of her performances, tears streaming down her face and confessing she had sung the role for years without ever realising its dramatic dimension. In 1953, she sang it in Florence (where she also made her first recording of the role), Genoa, Catania and Rome. In 1954 she first sang in Karajan's production mounted specially for her at La Scala, a production which Karajan subsequently took to Berlin and Vienna. Also in 1954, she sang it in Venice, Bergamo and Chicago on the occasion of her US debut. As already mentioned she had a fabulous success in it again in Karajan's production in Berlin. 1956 saw her sing it in Naples, Vienna and at the Met. In 1957, she sang it in concert in Rome, and then in 1958 at the Met again, making her final appearances in the opera in Dallas in 1959 (in the same Zeffirelli production that had made Sutherland a star). She also made her second recording of the opera in 1959. In fact it's safe to say that, had Callas never sung the role, then Sutherland may never have attempted it. It was Callas who paved the way for larger voiced dramatic coloraturas to sing it. Unfortuately nowadays it seems again to have become the province of light-voiced sopranos.


I am aware of Callas's ability in these areas. She sang Armida, which is maybe more difficult than Semiramide, though she sang Bel Raggio in concert. My query was more aimed at those how heard both Sutherland and Radvanovski sing live. Finding people around who heard Callas in her prime is going to be hard outside of nursing homes, I'm afraid.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I am aware of Callas's ability in these areas. She sang Armida, which is maybe more difficult than Semiramide, though she sang Bel Raggio in concert. My query was more aimed at those how heard both Sutherland and Radvanovski sing live. Finding people around who heard Callas in her prime is going to be hard outside of nursing homes, I'm afraid.


I was merely questioning your assertion that she didn't _specialise_ in the roles of Semiramide and Lucia. Semiramide (and Armida) may not have been, but Lucia was very much a Callas _speciality_.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

GregMitchell said:


> I was merely questioning your assertion that she didn't _specialise_ in the roles of Semiramide and Lucia. Semiramide (and Armida) may not have been, but Lucia was very much a Callas _speciality_.


I was using the term as a music critic who wrote about Callas used it: Sutherland was a coloratura soprano by speciality. Callas sang coloratura roles, but sang Turandot, verismo and Wagner as well. She sang coloratura spectacularly, but was not known as a coloratura the way Sutherland was, by virtue of her career choices. I should have elaborated. No one has commented on Radvanovski yet so Sutherland's reputation must be secure.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I was using the term as a music critic who wrote about Callas used it: Sutherland was a coloratura soprano by speciality. Callas sang coloratura roles, but sang Turandot, verismo and Wagner as well. She sang coloratura spectacularly, but was not known as a coloratura the way Sutherland was, by virtue of her career choices. I should have elaborated. No one has commented on Radvanovski yet so Sutherland's reputation must be secure.


Well the studio recordings don't really give a true picture of Callas's career. She may have sung Turandot and Wagner in her youth, but she soon gave them up, and the only verismo role that was part of her regular repertoire was Tosca. Even Tosca she hardly sang during her glory days, and never at La Scala, her cultural home. She was known for resuscitating the bel canto repertoire, so yes coloratura became her speciality. Her greatest successes were Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Anna Bolena, Armida, Amina, Elvira in *I Puritani* and Imogene in *Il Pirata*, and both Sutherland and Caballé aknowledged the debt they owed her for opening up the repertoire. *Medea* and the Gluck roles stand slightly apart, but they are classical roles and still a far cry from verismo and Wagner. I'd say that made her a coloratura specialist.

As for Radvanovsky, I've never heard her live, but what little I've seen on video would confirm that she can be an appreciable Norma, though not, in my opinion, on the level of Caballé or Sutherland, let alone Callas.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I was using the term as a music critic who wrote about Callas used it: Sutherland was a coloratura soprano by speciality. Callas sang coloratura roles, but sang Turandot, verismo and Wagner as well. She sang coloratura spectacularly, but was not known as a coloratura the way Sutherland was, by virtue of her career choices. I should have elaborated. No one has commented on Radvanovski yet so Sutherland's reputation must be secure.


I heard Radvanoski in Norma. Pretty good I think. I think it was her who sang Elizabetta too. Good technique but the voice not as beautiful as Sutherland - but then not many voices were!


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

well....first off, I don't think their voices have much in common at all. Sutherlands voice is several shades brighter, with far more prevalent overtones and possesses about 10x the flexibility. imo, Radvanovsky was better in spinto rep.



> I think others like myself might compare Joan Sutherland and Sondra Radvanovski as Sondra is probably the only singer who sings the dramatic coloratura works who also had a really big voice


it's rare, but not as rare you might think. I can name you plenty of examples:
1) Callas 
2) Caballe
3) Ponselle
4) Edda Moser
5) Marisa Galvany
6) Alexandrina Pendatchanska
7) Magda Olivero
8) Klara Kolonits
9) Regina Resnik 
10) Lotte Lehmann


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Sutherland was a coloratura soprano by speciality. Callas sang coloratura roles, but sang Turandot, verismo and Wagner as well. She sang coloratura spectacularly, but was not known as a coloratura the way Sutherland was, by virtue of her career choices.


um....
while I could probably make a good argument for Callas being a coloratura specialist, perhaps actions will speak louder than words


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> well....first off, I don't think their voices have much in common at all. Sutherlands voice is several shades brighter, with far more prevalent overtones and possesses about 10x the flexibility. imo, Radvanovsky was better in spinto rep.
> 
> it's rare, but not as rare you might think. I can name you plenty of examples:
> 1) Callas
> ...


You're thinking of Lilli Lehmann, the most celebrated Norma of her day. That was when almost everyone had the technique for coloratura. It's instructive to listen to the _Norma_ excerpts Lehmann recorded at the age of 59, having made a career singing everything from the Queen of the Night to Isolde. The sound is primitive, the tempos pushy as so often on 78s, but you can tell that 90% of the voice is still there, the tone full and clean, the technique confident, and not a trace of a wobble. Clearly she had a right to write that book, "How to Sing."






Frida Leider, best known to us as a Wagnerian soprano, sang Norma too, but I don't think we have any recordings. Too bad, as her coloratura on other recordings is excellent.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Before her weight loss Callas sang lots and lots of Wagner and many, many Turandots. It was before she was well known like she became after she became opera's Audrey Hepburn. After the weight loss, when she was famous, she never sang any of those roles again, ever.People forget. 
About Sondra, I didn't think she could come close to Sutherland or Callas, but how many could in the dramatic coloratura repertoir.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> You're thinking of Lilli Lehmann, the most celebrated Norma of her day. That was when almost everyone had the technique for coloratura. It's instructive to listen to the _Norma_ excerpts Lehmann recorded at the age of 59, having made a career singing everything from the Queen of the Night to Isolde. The sound is primitive, the tempos pushy as so often on 78s, but you can tell that 90% of the voice is still there, the tone full and clean, the technique confident, and not a trace of a wobble. Clearly she had a right to write that book, "How to Sing."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ah, yes. thank you.

btw, you told me awhile ago that if I kept listening to Rosa Ponselle that I'd eventually develop a taste for her. This is your chance to say I told you so (esp. that CHEST VOICE! omg! <3 ).

By and large, I prefer the greater reliance on chest voice of the Golden Age singers, before the obsession with "blending" the registers gained popularity and virtually killed all the power and support in the bottom 1/3 of the voice.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

GregMitchell said:


> Unfortuately nowadays it seems again to have become the province of light-voiced sopranos.


Why unfortunately?

If they have the technique to sing the role, musicality, an understanding of Donizetti's style and dramatic commitment why does it ultimately matter how weighty the voice is? After all there are a number of roles that you could argue Callas' voice was too heavy for and yet her artistry meant that she did them justice. Why I agree that we have had a number of sopranos (Natalie Dessay and Diana Damrau spring to mind) who are wonderful in Donizetti comedy, but don't have the _gravitas_ to make a convincing Lucia, Lisette Oropesa, who sang the role at the last Covent Garden revival, was superb.

N.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Before her weight loss Callas sang lots and lots of Wagner and many, many Turandots. It was before she was well known like she became after she became opera's Audrey Hepburn. After the weight loss, when she was famous, she never sang any of those roles again, ever.People forget.
> About Sondra, I didn't think she could come close to Sutherland or Callas, but how many could in the dramatic coloratura repertoir.


Acrtually Callas had started to give up the Wagner and heavy roles _before_ the weight loss, not as a a consequence. She sang her last Turandot in 1949, her last Wagner role (Kundry) in 1950. She didn't start losing weight until 1953, when her roles were Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Armida, Elvira in *I Puritani*, Elena in *I Vespri Sicilliani*, Constanze in *Die Entfuhrung aus dem Serail*, Gilda and Leonora in *Il Trovatore*, Tosca. It is quite wrong to suggest that the wieght loss precipated her moving towards bel canto, though it probably did have an effect on the roles she chose from a physical point of view. For instance she had refused to sing Butterfly when she was fat, but did sing it in Chicago in 1955.

And actually when she arriived in Italy in 1947, she was stauesque rather than fat. She started putting on weight around 1950/1951 and it was the increase in her weight, and the consequent health problems, that made her start to lose the weight in 1953. When she sang Alceste in 1954, she looked amazing, but she kept going, having a burning desire to look like Audrey Hepburn. Maybe if she'd stopped at the Alceste weight, it wouldn't have had such a detrimental efftect on her voice.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I think others like myself might compare Joan Sutherland and Sondra Radvanovski


Champagne and Coca Cola come to mind... :devil:

I can't see the comparison myself. After making Sutherland they broke the mold, she was a one off. Sutherland had a huge voice that allowed her to make a convincing studio Turandot and yet she had the high notes to sing Queen of the Night. Few sopranos can sing Turandot AND Marie in Fille du Regiment! Sutherland in her prime had crystal clear coloratura and a wonderful combination of power and agility.

Radvanovski is a decent singer with a good career in her stead, but I don't see her as a phenomenon, which is what Sutherland was.

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> ah, yes. thank you.
> 
> btw, you told me awhile ago that if I kept listening to Rosa Ponselle that I'd eventually develop a taste for her. This is your chance to say I told you so (esp. that CHEST VOICE! omg! <3 ).
> 
> By and large, I prefer the greater reliance on chest voice of the Golden Age singers, before the obsession with "blending" the registers gained popularity and virtually killed all the power and support in the bottom 1/3 of the voice.


I'm not sure about "blending," but Ponselle was one of those sopranos whose voice was so full and equalized throughout its range, and so seamless in its lack of audible shifts in tone, much less breaks, that the very concept of registers seems irrelevant. Apparently this came naturally to her since, I gather, she had little formal vocal training. Flagstad was another big-voiced soprano with a perfectly equalized scale that sounds as if it was a natural endowment, though I'm not sure about that.

Singers with distinct timbral differences between registers may have an expressive advantage over those with more "perfect" voices, but only if they know how to draw on their potential for tone color. Callas would certainly be Exhibit A.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

The Conte said:


> Why unfortunately?
> 
> If they have the technique to sing the role, musicality, an understanding of Donizetti's style and dramatic commitment why does it ultimately matter how weighty the voice is? After all there are a number of roles that you could argue Callas' voice was too heavy for and yet her artistry meant that she did them justice. Why I agree that we have had a number of sopranos (Natalie Dessay and Diana Damrau spring to mind) who are wonderful in Donizetti comedy, but don't have the _gravitas_ to make a convincing Lucia, Lisette Oropesa, who sang the role at the last Covent Garden revival, was superb.
> 
> N.


But it's not just about technique, is it? Before Callas sang Lucia, nobody really took it seriously. It was just a silly Italian opera in which some bird brained soprano showed of her flexibility and top notes. Callas changed all that, and people started taking the opera serioously again. I doubt Karajan would ever have touched it without Callas.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

GregMitchell said:


> *But it#snoy just about technique, is it?*Before Callas sang Lucia, nobody really took it seriously. It was just a silly Italian opera in which some bird brained soprano showed of her flexibility and top notes. Callas changed all that, and people started taking the opera serioously again. I doubt Karajan would ever have touched it without Callas.


Absolutely, which is why I wrote "If they have the technique to sing the role, musicality, an understanding of Donizetti's style and dramatic commitment..."

Lucia is one of those roles that can be successfully sung by both light and weighty voices provided that the soprano understands the dramatic potential of the part.

N.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

The Conte said:


> Absolutely, which is why I wrote "If they have the technique to sing the role, musicality, an understanding of Donizetti's style and dramatic commitment..."
> 
> Lucia is one of those roles that can be successfully sung by both light and weighty voices provided that the soprano understands the dramatic potential of the part.
> 
> N.


If anything, I _prefer_ a lighter voice singing Lucia. Lucia is young and innocent. There needs to be a sweetness and vulnerability to the voice. It kinda throws me off when it's sung by a dark, formidable, womanly voice which makes her sound like Boadicea defending Britain from the Romans.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> If anything, I _prefer_ a lighter voice singing Lucia. Lucia is young and innocent. There needs to be a sweetness and vulnerability to the voice. It kinda throws me off when it's sung by a dark, formidable, womanly voice which makes her sound like Boadicea defending Britain from the Romans.


There's _light_ as opposed to *dark* and there's light vs heavy. I'm thinking more of the weight of the voice rather than the colour. Whilst I agree that a dark voice isn't right for the part (after all it isn't a mezzo role), if the soprano singing the role can bring some darker tonal colouring into play in the right places it fleshes out the character (which is more complex than a young, innocent girl - see Greg's comment above). The only sopranos I know who have been able to do that to any satisfactory degree are Callas and Oropesa.

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The Conte said:


> There's _light_ as opposed to *dark* and there's light vs heavy. I'm thinking more of the weight of the voice rather than the colour. Whilst I agree that a dark voice isn't right for the part (after all it isn't a mezzo role), if the soprano singing the role can bring some darker tonal colouring into play in the right places it fleshes out the character (which is more complex than a young, innocent girl - see Greg's comment above). The only sopranos I know who have been able to do that to any satisfactory degree are Callas and Oropesa.
> 
> N.


Callas is interesting in that with her tonal coloring works the other way, from a naturally darkish timbre to a lighter, sweeter tone she uses to suggest youth and innocence. As far as Lucia goes, I think her timbre, allied to her sensitivity to color, is ideal for the role. It's a gloomy tale set in a gloomy place - if I had to live in a stone castle on the Scottish moors I'd be suicidal in a month - and Donizetti sets the melancholy tone in his introduction and elsewhere. Callas may be the only singer I've heard in the part whose very voice seems to distill the melancholy essence of her setting and situation.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I'm not sure about "blending," but Ponselle was one of those sopranos whose voice was so full and equalized throughout its range, and so seamless in its lack of audible shifts in tone, much less breaks, that the very concept of registers seems irrelevant. Apparently this came naturally to her since, I gather, she had little formal vocal training. Flagstad was another big-voiced soprano with a perfectly equalized scale that sounds as if it was a natural endowment, though I'm not sure about that.
> 
> Singers with distinct timbral differences between registers may have an expressive advantage over those with more "perfect" voices, but only if they know how to draw on their potential for tone color. Callas would certainly be Exhibit A.


I definitely hear a shift in quality here when singing in the bottom 1/3 of the range. It's seemless in terms of the shift, but it's not consistent in terms of timbre by any means. The lower voice possesses a strong, chesty quality which was far more common among golden age singers than singers today who try to drag the middle register down as far as possible out of paranoia that full chest voice singing will damage the voice.

You can see what I mean here. Evenness of tone does not mean consistency of timbre.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I definitely hear a shift in quality here when singing in the bottom 1/3 of the range. It's seemless in terms of the shift, but it's not consistent in terms of timbre by any means. The lower voice possesses a strong, chesty quality which was far more common among golden age singers than singers today who try to drag the middle register down as far as possible out of paranoia that full chest voice singing will damage the voice.
> 
> You can see what I mean here. Evenness of tone does not mean consistency of timbre.


Your examples show her using that "chesty" quality for dramatic effect, but she can soften it too, as the Russian song shows. I didn't mean to imply that she is trapped in a single tonal quality. Is that even possible for a human voice?


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I appreciate the reports on Radvanovski. Voices often sound different live. It was supposed to be huge, but I didn't know if her high notes were the events Sutherland's were. I like her voice but not enough to buy a recording like I have for Sutherland and Callas.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I appreciate the reports on Radvanovski. Voices often sound different live. It was supposed to be huge, but I didn't know if her high notes were the events Sutherland's were. I like her voice but not enough to buy a recording like I have for Sutherland and Callas.


I like her voice too, I just think she's singing the wrong music.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I like her voice too, I just think she's singing the wrong music.


Do you really think she shouldn't sing Donizetti's Tudor queens? You're hard, balalaika man! She may not be Callas, but by that standard hardly anyone should sing anything. I'm a crusty old skeptic when it comes to singers, and I didn't initially like Radvanovsky's timbre, but when I heard her do those roles on the radio I was moved to something like provisional semi-enthusiasm. I discovered the sound of one hand clapping.

Life's a bitch these days, balalaika man. Be grateful. Maybe the next Callas or Caballe or Sutherland is being born somewhere right now. Of course she'll probably go into politics instead of music, but we need that too. _Vive les femmes._


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

How did this thread suddenly become a debate on Callas and the roles she played pre and post weight loss?

OP was about Sutherland and Radvanovski, was it not?

This is almost like a Wagner thread!!

Apologies. I see we're back on track!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> How did this thread suddenly become a debate on Callas and the roles she played pre and post weight loss?
> 
> OP was about Sutherland and Radvanovski, was it not?
> 
> ...


Don't worry, Bluebeard. Sutherland and Radvanovsky are both fully resigned to the fate of all who dare to encroach upon the sacred precincts of the One and Only. We too must bow to the inevitable odious comparison. _Pace, t'imploro._

But speaking of Wagner...


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Do you really think she shouldn't sing Donizetti's Tudor queens? You're hard, balalaika man! She may not be Callas, but by that standard hardly anyone should sing anything. I'm a crusty old skeptic when it comes to singers, and I didn't initially like Radvanovsky's timbre, but when I heard her do those roles on the radio I was moved to something like provisional semi-enthusiasm. I discovered the sound of one hand clapping.
> 
> Life's a bitch these days, balalaika man. Be grateful. Maybe the next Callas or Caballe or Sutherland is being born somewhere right now. Of course she'll probably go into politics instead of music, but we need that too. _Vive les femmes._


I hate to say it**, but much of my contention with modern opera is that it's had to become more capitalistic to survive. As it relates to this topic, I think the ideal is for an opera house to find good singers first, then put on productions based on the vocal capabilities they have available. as it tends, it's more "people want to sing Turandot, guess we'll throw in our medium-weight Verdi soprano cuz no one around is powerful enough", or "___ is a superstar! people will come to hear her in anything!"

Bottom line is: her coloratura is not good at all. nice voice, and a respectable singer in other respects, but I expect the voice to match the music, and when it doesn't the difference is obvious.

**the reason I hate to say it is because I'm normally a very capitalist person. I love money lol


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I hate to say it**, but much of my contention with modern opera is that it's had to become more capitalistic to survive. As it relates to this topic, I think the ideal is for an opera house to find good singers first, then put on productions based on the vocal capabilities they have available. as it tends, it's more "people want to sing Turandot, guess we'll throw in our medium-weight Verdi soprano cuz no one around is powerful enough", or "___ is a superstar! people will come to hear her in anything!"
> 
> Bottom line is: her coloratura is not good at all. nice voice, and a respectable singer in other respects, but I expect the voice to match the music, and when it doesn't the difference is obvious.
> 
> **the reason I hate to say it is because I'm normally a very capitalist person. I love money lol


I think it's always been like that, maybe in the past even more so, when opera houses weren't likely to be in receipt of government grants.

When it comes to the Donizetti queens, I think she sings them as well as anyone else around at the moment, maybe even better, but, I agree, her coloratura leaves a bit to be desired, especially in comparison to some of the bel canto specialists of the past.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> I think it's always been like that, maybe in the past even more so, when opera houses weren't likely to be in receipt of government grants.
> 
> When it comes to the Donizetti queens, I think she sings them as well as anyone else around at the moment, maybe even better, but, I agree, her coloratura leaves a bit to be desired, especially in comparison to some of the bel canto specialists of the past.


If you can't sing at least half-way respectable coloratura, you can't respectably sing music which requires so much of it. That's like saying "I'm a basso profondo, but my low notes aren't all the great"


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

GregMitchell said:


> I think it's always been like that, maybe in the past even more so, when opera houses weren't likely to be in receipt of government grants.
> 
> When it comes to the Donizetti queens, I think she sings them as well as anyone else around at the moment, maybe even better, but, I agree, her coloratura leaves a bit to be desired, especially in comparison to some of the bel canto specialists of the past.


This is what I suspected. I am curious as to the size. I heard Goerke as Norma over 15 years ago but her voice was not as big then as it has become. Goerke had a great high D... enormous. Some of her other high notes was of suspect pitch, though.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Sutherland's tops cannot be touched. Simply stupendous - she wasn't called La Stupenda for nothing.
She also has a beautiful sound, particularly in the higher register where she doesn't tend to get mushy middles.

But Sondra's voice, though not the most beautiful in the sound category, (but then either was Callas'), has one of the most gorgeous (can you say Milanov, Caballe, Olivero) pianissimi on record today. Yet both had something even more important -- a natural understanding of the sound of the music and how it should go.

Also, as for sheer power, didn't anyone mention Renata Tebaldi? That lady could shake the rafters.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I am always a bit late to the party, but I am watching the live stream of Norma and I think Radvanovski is pretty spectacular. She sang the cabaletta following Casta Diva among the best I've ever heard. Perhaps the best high notes there. She was a good actress and the voice seems to be quite huge, which you need for Norma. She has a good solid high D for the duet, but I think her money notes are B and C. With Sutherland D WAS her money note... of truly astonishing size, perhaps only equaled by Maria Callas. I would not buy a Radvanovski audio recording after hearing Sutherland, Callas and Caballe. BUT she was magnificent as a video Norma. She was attractive, involved in the part and sang really really well IMHO. She was very acceptable at the coloratura, but no equal to Sutherland and Callas. The whole Met production was beautiful and Joyce Didonato was really spectacular as Adalgisa, so it would be a great Norma to own.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I am always a bit late to the party, but I am watching the live stream of Norma and I think Radvanovski is pretty spectacular. She sang the cabaletta following Casta Diva among the best I've ever heard. Perhaps the best high notes there. She was a good actress and the voice seems to be quite huge, which you need for Norma. She has a good solid high D for the duet, but I think her money notes are B and C. With Sutherland D WAS her money note... of truly astonishing size, perhaps only equaled by Maria Callas. I would not buy a Radvanovski audio recording after hearing Sutherland, Callas and Caballe. BUT she was magnificent as a video Norma. She was attractive, involved in the part and sang really really well IMHO. She was very acceptable at the coloratura, but no equal to Sutherland and Callas. The whole Met production was beautiful and Joyce Didonato was really spectacular as Adalgisa, so it would be a great Norma to own.


Aha! So you finally found Sondra!! (And it's RadvanovskY- not i)
And yes her Norma is right up there at the top along with Donizetti's 3 Queens.
It has been said by some of her colleagues that her voice is so powerful that it is painful to stand right next to her.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> Aha! So you finally found Sondra!! (And it's RadvanovskY- not i)
> And yes her Norma is right up there at the top along with Donizetti's 3 Queens.
> It has been said by some of her colleagues that her voice is so powerful that it is painful to stand right next to her.


OOPS. Sorry about the name but that is an interesting comment about her voice. That was what I was looking for initially was a report on what she was like live. I wish I had heard her Anna Bolena. I only heard her do Roberto D., which is not nearly as impressive a role as Norma was.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Years ago my DH and I drove all the way up to Toronto where she was singing Aida in a disgusting Eurotrash production but her character shined above all even back then when she was being criticized for off key singing. We had faith in her then and she turned it all around and proved herself.
Today she is a much sought after singer -- and well deserved.
Her last rehearsal of _Il pirata_ which sadly could not go on because of the coronavirus is on you tube for all to see, compliments of Sondra and the producer. She and Michael Spyres are superb.


----------

