# Investigation into the reason for Callas' vocal decline



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

This is a topic that crops up on TC quite a lot and there have been a number of theories as to why and how Callas had a relatively short major career that have been suggested over the years.

I would like to put forward the idea that an analytical investigation into these theories to examine which of them stand up to scrutiny and to hopefully come to a conclusion of which are more likely would be a rewarding exercise.

I realise that a lot of people have their pet favourite among these and will be able to put forward reasons to support their side. However, I think it more valuable to look into each of the theories in turn, make reasoned predictions based on them and see if the evidence supports each one. There should be a number of singers that have gone through a similar decline and those would presumably show similarities with Callas'.

There have been four theories that I am aware of, but if anyone can think of any others (or would like to suggest a new one) we should include those as well.

1) The 'voice loss' was due to the famous weight loss.
2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices.
3) She suffered an early menopause.
4) She strained her voice before going to Greece singing mezzo/contralto rep whilst listening to the radio.

I would suggest starting by defining the exact nature of the vocal decline itself. What was it exactly that was lost or technically didn't work anymore?

N.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

The Conte said:


> This is a topic that crops up on TC quite a lot and there have been a number of theories as to why and how Callas had a relatively short major career that have been suggested over the years.
> 
> I would like to put forward the idea that an analytical investigation into these theories to examine which of them stand up to scrutiny and to hopefully come to a conclusion of which are more likely would be a rewarding exercise.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the interesting topic, Conte.

I have a suggestion for recordings which offer a direct comparison, if that would stimulate discussion?

Records exist of Callas singing the duet "Pur ti riveggo" from _Aida_ with, among others, Picchi, Del Monaco, Baum, Tucker, Corelli and di Stefano (the later from recital discs, not complete performance).

There will be records of 'Vissi d'arte' which possibly cover an ever longer chronology but I thought that this scene from Aida offers more opportunity for discussing the technical changes in her voice. Admittedly, this score does not showcase her coloratura ability.

1950




Starting 10:27

1953




Starting 18:51

1955





1964





1973





Personally, I would perhaps add to your list that stress/anxiety/depression seem to have been a factor since the times we are afforded a more private glimpse of her singing e.g. in rehearsal at Dallas in 1957, at Julliard in the masterclasses providing examples, and rehearsing privately even at the very end of her life she is uncharacteristically on-form.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

I find myself on the side of Revitalized Classics who mentioned stress and depression.
For me, the major reason for her decline was "The Ari Onassis Years" which, frankly destroyed all of her interest in serious singing. 
She lived for pleasing him, even to the point of his cruel insistence that she terminate the life beginning inside of her -- something she wanted so badly. 
She became a tragic and lost individual still trying to pick up the "Jackie induced" pieces while he continued to use her with his private visits to her after his marriage to Jackie. That's a pretty selfish and rotten thing to do. It destroyed her previous determination and strength and rendered her a more confused and vulnerable being. 
She became a lonely and sad soul sans friends, support or understanding.
It's no wonder she ended up a martyr and an icon to the world.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

This has long fascinated me.
1.This article put forth by Italian doctors about a degenerative disease that affected her muscles is worth considering:https://radio.wosu.org/post/maria-callass-illness#stream/0. 
2. The weight loss certainly had an effect. Yes she did some of her best singing for several years after the weight loss, still we never again hear those jaw-dropping notes like the high Eb in Aida or those astonishing D's and E's in Armida. You listen to the big aria from Armida from the opera when she was fat, and after the weight loss in the concert version. Still a great performance in the concert version, but the high notes have been greatly reduced in amplitude. In the opera version I play that last big bit over and over and over because I can't believe what I hear. The later version is nothing special. Sutherland said the entire voice was huge before the weight loss.
3.I would be really surprised if the punishing roles she sang very early in her career helped her voice. Doing that really affected Varnay's voice. Look at Suliotis.
4. I agree with the other poster: Onassis was not good for her voice or her career. He made her feel like a woman, something missing from her work, work, work years. But at what a price.


----------



## Viardots (Oct 4, 2014)

Dug out from the old and later renamed "Maria Callas' Recorded Legacy" thread, worth revisiting:

In the October 2005 issue of _Opera News_ (the fourth annual Diva issue, featuring La Divina on the cover), Renée Fleming Fleming offered her 'theory' of the causes of Callas' vocal decline:



> I have a theory about what caused her vocal decline, but it's more from watching her sing than from listening. I really think it was her weight loss that was so dramatic and so quick. It's not the weight loss per se - you know, Deborah Voigt has lost a lot of weight and still sounds glorious. But if one uses the weight for support, and then it's suddenly gone and one doesn't develop another musculature for support, it can be very hard on the voice. And you can't estimate the toll that emotional turmoil will take as well. I was told, by somebody who knew her well, that the way Callas held her arms to her solar plexus [allowed her] to push and create some kind of support. If she were a soubrette, it would never have been an issue. But she was singing the most difficult repertoire, the stuff that requires the most stamina, the most strength."


RES' response to Fleming's 'theory':



> She's somewhat right but that's not the whole story. For one thing, the weight-loss was *not* fast; that's one of those myths about Callas. She took about a year, and was cautious about the right diet and building muscle mass through exercise. Fleming is also not correct that Callas held her arms in a manner to support her diaphragm. Look at the films: she's not doing that. Only in the TROVATORE aria during the 1958 Paris Gala does it appear that she's doing it, but there, she's really cradling herself with her arms and rocking as part of the very effective characterization. With Callas, I have felt that she never gave herself time to learn how to sing in such a different body; she just jumped ahead, using the physical positions that she had learned and were natural to her as a heavy person. When these didn't work, she forced and perhaps damaged vocal muscles by misusing them. The mid 1954 thin EMI recordings like NORMA and FORZA demonstrate this and we hear the real, unsupported wobble for the first time. By the end of the year, she seems to have had it better under control, as the two recital discs show, but she never quite figured out how to use her new body. And of course, she was the personification of stress, so that must have been a key factor, as Fleming rightly states. Premature menopause in 1957 explains the really rapid decline after that; but it's not surprising in light of the fact that she also reached puberty no later than age 12 and most likely earlier (if she really was 'Nina Foresti'/'Anita Duval', she had already matured by eleven). Everything happened early with her. It's just a shame that no one knew her singing well enough for us to have recordings from the 1940-48 period.


Note: Callas' operatic career began formally in 1941 in wartime Athens at the Greek National Opera. In 1942, while still at the age of 18, she sang Tosca for the first time. In 1944, at the age of 20, she sang Fidelio, as well as another dramatic soprano role, Marta in Eugen d'Albert's _Tiefland_, in which she enjoyed a great success. She also sang several performances as Santuzza in _Cavalleria Rusticana_ (she first sang the role in 1939 in a student production mounted by the Athens Conservatory). Unfortunately, no recordings of her singing in 1940-1948 exist. Rumours of a collection of acetate recordings of Callas' practice sessions with Louise Caselotti in NY in 1947 came to nothing.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Viardots said:


> _It's not the weight loss per se - you know, Deborah Voigt has lost a lot of weight and still sounds glorious._


Maybe not the most persuasive example Renée could have chosen.


----------



## Bonetan (Dec 22, 2016)

amfortas said:


> Maybe not the most persuasive example Renée could have chosen.


Singing elders teach us to be complimentary of colleagues at all times to avoid backstage drama, but I would never be able to tell that kind of bald-faced lie :lol:


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Viardots said:


> Deborah Voigt has lost a lot of weight and still sounds glorious.


 according to Fleming.

But Seattleoperafan will tell you otherwsie.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Thanks for the responses. We now have six hypotheses (and, of course, the vocal decline could have been due to a number of contributing factors).

Here are the six hypotheses to consider:

1) The 'voice loss' was due to the famous weight loss.
2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices.
3) She suffered an early menopause.
4) She strained her voice before going to Greece singing mezzo/contralto rep whilst listening to the radio.
5) It was emotional (stress/anxiety/depression)
6) She was suffering from a disease such as dermatomyosistis.

I will listen to the Aida recordings later on. I know them all, but haven't compared them back to back, so it will be interesting.

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> according to Fleming.
> 
> But Seattleoperafan will tell you otherwsie.


I will second or third that assertion. I heard Voigt live in San Francisco *Ariadne auf Naxos * and *Un Ballo In Maschera* and other operas when she was fat. The voice was big, luscious, beautiful, creamy, velvety. It became an ugly voice after the surgery, lacking the creaminess and vocal weight, becoming more metallic, thinner, the tone shallower, though I only heard the post-surgery voice on the Live from the Met series. The voice if far from sounding "glorious."


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

I was thinking around "2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices."

In the main, I would think that the roles Callas performed frequently _were_ very well chosen? she triumphed as Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Tosca, Medea etc. She also knew when to drop Lucia and Violetta before the voice _really_ went...

I do note, however, the exhausting variety of new roles she tried _and then dropped_. Let's just think of the times she learned a role only to sing it for one or two runs e.g.

Il Pirata, Mefistofele, Anna Bolena, Andrea Chenier, Fedora, Alceste, Iphigenie in Tauride, Vestale, Seraglio, Butterfly, Ballo in Maschera, Don Carlo, Macbeth, Nabucco, Rigoletto, Vespri Siciliani and, Walkure. (plus, no doubt, others?)

I don't think that Callas planned this to happen - it probably depended greatly on what the theatre management wanted to book?

Whatever the reasons, though, this sounds like an absolutely _exhausting_ schedule.

Even if all these roles suited her perfectly - and some were eminently suited to her vocal and dramatic gifts - imagine if _every other run_ you did was a role debut? Only to put it on the shelf and start from scratch again and again...


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

My take on the Callas's vocal decline stems primarily from the weight loss, as most of us can tell listening to post-1953 recordings either live or in the studio sets. As RES states above, it took her some time to learn how to sing in her new body. It is my contention that she lost strength in her diaphragm once she lost the weight, and never regained that strength, thus causing the voice to waver and later, to wobble. She learnt to sing in her fat body and had to retool the voice. When she felt her voice waning (1956-60) her confidence was eroded and her insecurities compounded.

Deborah Voigt herself said, after the weight loss, she had to consciously remind herself to breathe a certain way, otherwise the breath would "stack," whatever that means. Before the weight loss, the body would automatically engage the support, as it had been taught (while she was fat).

Callas's fighting spirit, in my view, was based and relied upon her vocal health. That's one of the reasons I dislike her photos of the 1970s - to me, she looked increasingly fragile after the mid-1960s. The steeliness of her demeanor was slowly drained as the voice decreased in size, volume and steadiness. The voice, her armor, was going, as her hair was getting more voluminous - look at her interview with Mike Wallace and see how vulnerable she seems. In the early 1950s she had a combative spirit, "_I'll teach those stinkers out there" _ (I assume it was the _loggionisti_ at La Scala) and was prepared to do battle as long as she had the voice to do so.

Tito Gobbi's assertion that "she just lost confidence," is very logical - if the stories are true about her needing to be walked to the stage at every performance, her hands ice cold, in the mid to late 1960s.

Will Crutchfield, in his article "The Story Of A Voice," (The New Yorker, Nov. 13, 1995), said Callas actually lost her voice, "the most wonderfully musical voice we have ever heard." His contention was that after the weight loss, the voice was continually deteriorating, and that she continued singing the same way she always had with no regard to preserving the voice. Consider how energetically and with what intensity she sang - presumably also in rehearsals. At Juilliard, she'd exhort students to sing with "more intensity." Because that's how *she* sang.

I don't think Onassis can be blamed for the vocal decline - we can hear that decline starting as early as 1954 (*La Forza Del Destino*). There were a few recordings that may have strained the voice further, *Turandot* and *Manon Lescaut* in a year fraught with anxiety and stress. Sure, she may have decided to forgo being a singer for a while, but the period of rest should've been beneficial, instead of increasing the decline.

1957 was also the year of the presumed "early menopause," but I couldn't find and mention of it in Meneghini's book "My Wife Maria Callas." Carol Nebblett said, "A woman sings with her ovaries," regarding the menopause theory, further promoting that assumption.

No. 2 and 4 above, we can't know for sure. No. 6 seems preposterous, of someone guessing at a disease without examining the patient or her remains.

I heard Callas in 1974 - the timbre is recognizably Callas, but the voice was much reduced in volume, strength, and breadth. Her breath control was also much diminished. She and di Stefano sang one or two arias and a few duets, ecstatically applauded. The audience was there to _see her_, not expecting much. Well, we got what we came for and loved it.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Revitalized Classics said:


> I was thinking around "2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices."
> 
> In the main, I would think that the roles Callas performed frequently _were_ very well chosen? she triumphed as Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Tosca, Medea etc. She also knew when to drop Lucia and Violetta before the voice _really_ went...
> 
> ...


In the beginning of her career in Italy, think she accepted whatever role she was offered - even *Nabucco* and *Turandot*. "Abigaille has to shout," was her assessment of the role. As for Turandot, she said she dropped as soon as she could, hoping she didn't ruin her voice.

Later on, Meneghini booked her performances, money being the prime motivator, perhaps ameliorated by what Callas wanted to sing. Her reputation probably dictated what was offered her - initially dramatic soprano, then _soprano drammatico d'agilità _, then the revivals of bel canto and other novelties al La Scala, because she could.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Revitalized Classics said:


> I was thinking around "2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices."
> 
> In the main, I would think that the roles Callas performed frequently _were_ very well chosen? she triumphed as Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Tosca, Medea etc. She also knew when to drop Lucia and Violetta before the voice _really_ went...
> 
> ...


Indeed she often sang a punishing schedule, quite aside from the occasion on which she learned the role of Elvira in *I Puritani*, whilst still performing Brünnhilde in *Die Walküre*.

She made her official La Scala debut (I don't count the Aidas she sang there in 1950, when she deputised for an ailing Tebaldi) on the opening night of the season in 1951. The La Scala season starts on December 7, so let's look at each season she was part of the permanent company and beyond.

1951/52: She opened the La Scala seaons with I Vespri Siciliani (new production), then sang Norma and Constanze in Die Entführung aus dem Serail (debut role in new production, actually the first time the opera was ever performed at La Scala). During that time she was also appearing in Traviata in Bergamo, I Puritani in Florence, Traviata again in Catania, Armida (new role in new production) in Florence and I Puritani in Rome before leaving for Mexico in June, where she sang in Traviata and Tosca and debuted in Lucia and Rigoletto. On her return she sings Gioconda and Traviata in Verona and Norma in London.

1952/53: She opens the La Scala season agin in Macbeth (debut role in new production), then follows with Gioconda and Leonora in Il Trovatore. During that time she also appears in Traviata in Venice and Rome and Lucia in Florence. The rest of that year is crazy with performances all over Italy of Norma, Lucia, Il Trovatore and her role debut as Medea in Florence. She returns to London singing Aida, Norma and Leonora through the month of June and also makes recordings of Lucia, I Puritani, Cavalleria Rusticana and Tosca for EMI as well as Traviata for Cetra.

1953/54: This time she did not open the La Scala season (Tebaldi opened in La Wally) but sang the second opera of the season, which was Medea, mounted especially for her beause she had had such a success in Florence. If you look at photos of the the two productions, Florence in May, La Scala in December, you can see she has already started to lose weight. In Florence she is still quite hefty, but at La Scala she looks simply satuesque, "like one of the Greek caryatids" as Maragarita Wallmann described her. Her next production is also new, the legendary Karajan production of Lucia, which she also sang in Berlin and Vienna. Before her next new production at La Scala (Alceste in another role debut ad new production), she sings Lucia and Medea in Venice. Alceste is followed by another new role at La Scala, that of Elisabetta in Don Carlo. She sings the Forza Leonora in Ravenna, does more recording sessions for EMI (Norma, Forza, Turco in Italia and Pagliacci), with Mefistofele in Verona sandwiched inbetween. She then records her first two recital records in London, before returning to Italy to sing Lucia in Begamo and then flies to Chicago for her Amercian debut and the inauguration of the new Lyric Opera, where she sings Norma, Lucia and Traviata.

1954/55: She again opens the La Scala season with another new role, that of Giulia in La Vestale, the first time she works with Visconti. She is now pencil thin. Following this she was supposed to be singing Leonora again, but del Monaco decided he was not well enough and suggested Andrea Chenier. She learns the role of Maddalena in a few days, though she would have been quite within her rights to stand down and let the management find someone who already knew the role. After performances of Medea in Rome, she debuts in another new role in another Visconti production, that of Amina in La Sonnambula. This is followed by Il Turco in Italia (new production by Zeffirelli) and then the famous Visconti Traviata. Recording sessions for EMI (Butterfly, Aida, and Rigoletto), the famous Berlin Lucia under Karajan and then her second Chicago season (Puritani, Trovatore and Butterfly).

1955/56: She again opens the La Scala season, this time with a new production of Norma. This is followed by a revival of Traviata, Il Barbiere di Sivigia (the only resounding flop of her La Scala years, and role debut in a new production of Fedora, with Lucia sandwiched inbetween in Naples. She sings Lucia again in the Karajan production in Vienna, then records Trovatore, Boheme and Ballo before travelling to New York for her first Met season (Norma, Tosca and Lucia).

1956/57: She doesn't open the La Scala season for once but returns to London for Norma at the beginning of 1957. While she is in London she records Barbiere with the Philharmonia. Back at La Scala she sings in a revival of Sonnambula, before recording the opera at La Scala. This is followed by the famous Visconti Anna Bolena (role debut) and Visconti's Ifigenia in Tauride (also role debut). The La Scala comopany travels to Cologne, where she has a huge success, then records Turandot (!) and Manon Lescaut. The recording session are followed by a concert in Athens and then the first major scandal of her career, when she flatly refused to sing an extra performance, for which she had not been contracted, of Sonnambula at the Edinburgh Festival. This is followed by a recording of Medea and the Dallas inaugural concert, where she sings arias from Entführung, Puritani, Macbeth, Traviata and Anna Bolena.

1957/58: Opens the La Scala season with another new production, Un Ballo in Maschera, the first time she is singing Amelia on stage, though she had recorded it the previous year. This is followed by the infamous occasion on which she walked out of a performance of Norma, which was attended by the Italian President. Though the fault lay at the door of the Rome Opera (as proved at a court case that she eventually won) the press are vicious in their condemnation and when she returns to La Scala for a revival of Anna Bolena, Ghiringhelli more or less ignores her and the pubic is hostile. At the prima of Anna Bolena, the greet her with icy silence, loudly applauding her colleagues, until she takes matters into her own hands, striding to the footlights to hurl the words "Guidice ad Anna! Giudice!" directly at the audience. She wins the audience over and has a huge success but when she returns to her villa late that night it is to find that someone has daubed the walls of her villa with excrement, spelling out the words, "Go home, Callas." After the next new production Il Pirata, at which she is singing Imogene for the first time, she severs her ties with La Scala, not returning until the opening night of Poliuto (her last new role) in 1960.

Things were never quite the same after that and I often wonder how damaging the Rome walkout and its repercussions were. Although she still has some major successes ahead of her (the Lisbon and London Traviatas, the Dallas Medea), she is doing fewer and fewer stage performances. In 1959 she mostly sings in concert, only appearing in Medea in London and Dallas, and singing her final performance of Lucia in Dallas. In 1960 she only sings in a fully staged opera once, Norma at the amphiteatre of Epidaurus in Greece.

As we can see this was an incredibly intensive schedule. What singer these days would countenance such a programme, and let's not forget that in the years after her Italian debut as Gioconda, she was packing her diary with roles such as Turandot, Brünnhilde, Isolde, Kundry and Aida, singing her first Norma at the end of 1948. There are plenty of other factors as well, as noted by others above, but is it any surpirse she burned herself out early?


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Indeed she often sang a punishing schedule, quite aside from the occasion on which she learned the role of Elvira in *I Puritani*, whilst still performing Brünnhilde in *Die Walküre*.
> 
> She made her official La Scala debut (I don't count the Aidas she sang there in 1950, when she deputised for an ailing Tebaldi) on the opening night of the season in 1951. The La Scala season starts on December 7, so let's look at each season she was part of the permanent company and beyond.
> 
> ...


Almost makes you think it's not enough to have a beautiful voice.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

MAS said:


> I don't think Onassis can be blamed for the vocal decline - we can hear that decline starting as early as 1954 (*La Forza Del Destino*).


I didn't say that Onassis was solely to blame for her decline. I said "The Onassis Years" was where you could put the blame directly on Maria who cared less about her voice or keeping it up at that point. She was only interested in being loved by someone so badly that she gave all of her musical past second shrift. It was she who was to blame for her decline. 
However, I will always be convinced that from the point where he finally gave her the shaft she never was able to recover her vitality and "kick-***" attitude and her lost years of attention to her instrument.
Before the Onassis Years, and even if her voice was never the same magnificent instrument that it was before the weight loss, she still thrilled people for many years after that and her voice certainly was still in pretty fine condition. Not so after the Onassis days. To me, that was her main downfall.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

amfortas said:


> Almost makes you think it's not enough to have a beautiful voice.


:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

nina foresti said:


> I didn't say that Onassis was solely to blame for her decline. I said "The Onassis Years" was where you could put the blame directly on Maria who cared less about her voice or keeping it up at that point. She was only interested in being loved by someone so badly that she gave all of her musical past second shrift. It was she who was to blame for her decline.
> However, I will always be convinced that from the point where he finally gave her the shaft she never was able to recover her vitality and "kick-***" attitude and her lost years of attention to her instrument.
> Before the Onassis Years, and even if her voice was never the same magnificent instrument that it was before the weight loss, she still thrilled people for many years after that and her voice certainly was still in pretty fine condition. Not so after the Onassis days. To me, that was her main downfall.


You may not, but many people do (blame Onassis). He was certainly the catalyst. There is a case to be made for Callas to want to stop singing, "retire," after the troubles in 1957, 1958, as she herself declared. The press was merciless after Edinburgh & the "Rome Walkout," and she was hounded by _paparazzi_. It is true, though, that Callas was singleminded about her career before Onassis and lost that focus when he entered the scene.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

It's great to see this has sparked a good discussion. I wonder if before investigating why her voice went, it's worth looking at what actually went.

I have listened to five recordings across Callas' career of Pur ti riveggo as suggested above and these are my findings (note, I only listened to these from a vocal technique point of view, there are many fine things when it comes to the interpretation and style, but I have put those aside as they do not count when trying to get to the bottom of what happened to Callas' voice):


1) Mexico 1951

The voice is fully supported at all times and the notes at the top of the stave and above are full and solid (I can hear that they are fully supported). The registers are mostly very well coordinated, especially in the top half of the voice.

At the beginning of the duet and at some places later on there is a lot of chest voice brought up above the passaggio, whereas phrases sitting below it have plenty of head voice in the mix, there seems to be too little of the head register just above the passaggio and in the middle of the voice. 'Fuggiam gli ardori inospiti' and 'una novella patria' are handled very well in this respect though.

In the build up to and during 'ivi nel tempio' there is too much chest voice brought up and the B flat at the end of the phrase wobbles. The B flat at the end of that passage on fuggiam, fuggiam is nicely floated in contrast.


2) London 1953

The voice is again well supported and the register coordination is very good as before. The duet starts off better than in Mexico with better diction. A wider variety of tone colours are used here than in Mexico and 'La tra le foreste vergini' is now sung in a beguiling head voice, albeit with a little fragility. There are a couple of small wobbles on the Gs of 'la terra' in the main part of the duet, but the B flat of 'ivi nel tempio' works perfectly (whereas the one on 'fuggiam, fuggiam' has a wobble).

The voice isn't quite as solid and firm at the top of the stave as in Mexico and the head voice has weakened, making quieter passages in the higher part of the voice less secure than two years previously, but the differences here are very slight.


3) Studio 1955

Callas isn't in the best voice here and she sounds somewhat dry and raw even from the get go. The voice has lost quite a bit of its steadiness above the stave and there is less use of head voice below the passaggio than before. The voice isn't as well supported as previously in this music.

'Fuggiam gli ardori inospiti' works well as before, whereas 'La tra le forreste vergini' is better than in 1953 and is followed by some nicely firm high notes. There is a touch of wobble as in 1953 on the Gs of 'la terra' and by now there are wobbles on both B flats at 'ivi nel tempio' and 'fuggiam, fuggiam'. Even worse on the first of them the registers come completely out of coordination and the note is raw as a result.

In the stretta to the duet more head voice is used in the general mix of registers and the notes are fuller and stronger as a result.


4) Studio 1964

Interestingly there are some places in this recording where Callas is technically better than in 1955 and the opening phrases of her part are freer and sound more comfortable. However, whilst the high notes above the stave are well supported as previously, they are mostly uncoordinated and the registers don't blend in that part of her voice. The 'fuggiam gli ardori' is still handled well.

'La tra le foreste vergini' is sung in head voice again, but is thinner and more fragile than previously. The notes above the stave where there were slight wobbles previously are now totally uncoordinated and the registers come apart in most places at the top of the voice. Notes here are better when she is singing ff and are well supported when that happens.

Whilst the voice is weaker in many places, it doesn't sound like lack of support is the issue, but instead it's a lack of coordination due to the registers having come apart and no longer blending like before.


5) Studio 1973

Moving forward another 9 years and we get another huge leap in terms of how Callas copes with this music from a technical point of view. The chest voice, which I felt was used too much in the previous recordings, is used even more above the passaggio than previously and that may be a compensation for the very weak head voice that Callas has at this point. Some high notes are firmer than in 1964, but the raw sound due to uncoordinated registers is now heard in the top two thirds of the voice and her head voice has almost totally gone. There is also less support than before, but the lack of head voice seems more the issue to my ear as is demonstrated by the thin thread of raw sound that attempts 'la tra le foreste vergini'. The registers are totally separate and distinct by this stage of her singing.


I found this a fascinating comparison, especially since there were some issues with technique in 1951. My take is that it wasn't so much the support that went (although it did weaken after 1964), but rather the registers fell apart with the head register becoming gradually weaker until it had finally all but disappeared by 1972.

I think it could be interesting to compare the act one Traviata aria or the Barbiere aria to hear the evolution in the voice from 1956 to 1959 which was missing from this Aida comparison.

I would love to hear what others think about this, the more ears the better!

N.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

The Conte said:


> It's great to see this has sparked a good discussion. I wonder if before investigating why her voice went, it's worth looking at what actually went.
> 
> I have listened to five recordings across Callas' career of Pur ti riveggo as suggested above and these are my findings (note, I only listened to these from a vocal technique point of view, there are many fine things when it comes to the interpretation and style, but I have put those aside as they do not count when trying to get to the bottom of what happened to Callas' voice):
> 
> ...


Very interesting observations, Conte, and it would appear that there were problem areas even back in 1951. Michael Scott avers that she lost her voice, not her technique and that her technique was still fine even in the 1960s. Scottt reckoned that it was the voice itself that deserted her. Indeed that technique enabled her to sing, as Walter Legge once asserted, virtually any music written for the soprano voice. According to Walter Legge,



> There is hardly a bar in the whole range of ninieteenth century music for high soprano that seriously tested her powers, though she sometimes went sharp on sustained high notes and took them by force.


 _On and Off the Record: A Memoir of Walter Legge_

Her range was about three octaves, from low F# to E _in alt_ and the whole compass was displayed in the role of Elena in *I Vespri Siciliani*, when she interpolated the high E into the Act V _Siciliana_. Here is a recording, made in 1969(!), of her rehearsing _Arrrigo! ah parli a un core_ from _I Vespri Siciliani_. At the end there is a long downward scale from a top C (I think) down to low F#. Most sopranos just slither down the scale (and many don't take the low F#) with no articulation of the individual notes of the scale, but with Callas the scale is close to perfect, individual notes cleanly articulated and sung in a single breath with no hint of an aspirate. Bear in mind that this was not a take, and she marks certain passages and even misses some out. The scale passage starts at 3'49".






However her scale was never completely even and their were discernible breaks between her registers (it was often stated that she sang with three voices). This was more in evidence at the beginning and end of her career. When she was singing at her best she was quite cunning at disguising them, though they never completely disappeared and she would quite often use those breaks as a means of expression. This may be why her voice had such a range of different colours. Could a voice with a perfectly even scale ever have expressed the wide range of character and emotion that Callas expressed with hers? I doubt it.

I'd also suggest that, however great her success in *Tosca*, _verismo_ and later Verdi were more likely to demonstrate her flaws, whilst _bel canto_ played to her strengths. As Le Conte suggests, it might be interesting to compare performances of a section from her core repertoire, such as *Norma*, *Traviata* or *Lucia*.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Very interesting observations, Conte, and it would appear that there problem areas even back in 1951. Michael Scott avers that she lost her voice, not her technique and that her technique was still fine even in the 1960s. Scottt reckoned that it was the voice itself that deserted her. Indeed that technique enabled her to sing, as Walter Legge once asserted, virtually any music written for the soprano voice. According to Walter Legge,
> 
> _On and Off the Record: A Memoir of Walter Legge_
> 
> ...


"Arrigo" is one of the few late pieces by Callas that I love like her early stuff. These are interesting observations. Some of you are so much better at explaining technique than me. Thanks.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Very interesting observations, Conte, and it would appear that there were problem areas even back in 1951. Michael Scott avers that she lost her voice, not her technique and that her technique was still fine even in the 1960s. Scottt reckoned that it was the voice itself that deserted her. Indeed that technique enabled her to sing, as Walter Legge once asserted, virtually any music written for the soprano voice. According to Walter Legge,
> 
> _On and Off the Record: A Memoir of Walter Legge_


Yes, this is an excellent point. I tend to think there are two sides to technique: voice building and the use of the voice. Rossini described bel canto as being composed of building the instrument, technique or the means of using the instrument and style (taste and feeling). Taste, style, interpretation and expression all come under that third part of singing, whereas the first two are distinctly different and I agree that it was the instrument (in this case the voice) that went, the technique (as in the playing of the instrument) remained intact, as recordings show. More particularly, the recordings from the 70s show that it was specifically the head voice that went. Her chest voice seems as strong as it was previously and this is strange as you would expect the head voice to be stronger for women.



Tsaraslondon said:


> Her range was about three octaves, from low F# to E _in alt_ and the whole compass was displayed in the role of Elena in *I Vespri Siciliani*, when she interpolated the high E into the Act V _Siciliana_. Here is a recording, made in 1969(!), of her rehearsing _Arrrigo! ah parli a un core_ from _I Vespri Siciliani_. At the end there is a long downward scale from a top C (I think) down to low F#. Most sopranos just slither down the scale (and many don't take the low F#) with no articulation of the individual notes of the scale, but with Callas the scale is close to perfect, individual notes cleanly articulated and sung in a single breath with no hint of an aspirate. Bear in mind that this was not a take, and she marks certain passages and even misses some out. The scale passage starts at 3'49".
> 
> However her scale was never completely even and their were discernible breaks between her registers (it was often stated that she sang with three voices). This was more in evidence at the beginning and end of her career. When she was singing at her best she was quite cunning at disguising them, though they never completely disappeared and she would quite often use those breaks as a means of expression. This may be why her voice had such a range of different colours. Could a voice with a perfectly even scale ever have expressed the wide range of character and emotion that Callas expressed with hers? I doubt it.


When I was listening to the Aida duet recordings I was aware that some choices of register may have been due to Callas choosing a particular colour for the sake of expression. According to the early voice teachers having a wide variety of colours was a hallmark of a fine technique, but taking Ponselle (who shared much repertoire with Callas and was an example of a singer with very good, solid technique), she didn't engage in as varied a range of colours as Callas and especially if we think of the way that Callas changed the overall colour of her voice for some roles (her Gilda and Butterfly have a totally different complexion to her Norma or Giulia, not to mention her Santuzza and Medea). Could her use of colours have been too broad for her natural voice?



Tsaraslondon said:


> I'd also suggest that, however great her success in *Tosca*, _verismo_ and later Verdi were more likely to demonstrate her flaws, whilst _bel canto_ played to her strengths. As Le Conte suggests, it might be interesting to compare performances of a section from her core repertoire, such as *Norma*, *Traviata* or *Lucia*.


Yes, I'm interested in the period between 1956 and 1959 and Traviata and Lucia comparisons would reveal the progression of the voice in that period. There is also the Dallas rehearsal that may shed some light on what changed when she was singing in more relaxed circumstances.

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

The Conte said:


> Yes, I'm interested in the period between 1956 and 1959 and Traviata and Lucia comparisons would reveal the progression of the voice in that period. There is also the Dallas rehearsal that may shed some light on what changed when she was singing in more relaxed circumstances.
> 
> N.


As related by Rescigno, her voice in the 1957 "Dallas Rehearsal" was so unsteady on the sustained notes in _Tutte le torture _ that they had to increase the tempo, and while she easily emits the high E-Flat in *I Puritani* it is not very steady either. In fact, the voice that day sounds worn out, tremulous throughout and acidulous in _forte_ high notes. While her singing is miraculous, the state of the voice isn't.

Addition: 
The year 1957 was a difficult year, which might account for the state of her voice in November:
15 January Concert in Chicago
2 February *Norma* at Covent Garden (2 performances)
7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 February Recording *Barbiere* in London
2 March *Sonnambula* at La Scala
3,4,5,6,8,9 March Recording *Sonnambula* Milan
7,10,12, 17, 20 March *Sonnambula* at La Scala 
14, 17, 20, 24, 27, 30 April *Anna Bolena* at La Scala
5 May *Anna Bolena* at La Scala
1, 3, 5, 10 June *Ifigenia* at La Scala 
19 June Concert in Zürich
26 June *Lucia* RAI Rome
4, 6 July *Sonnambula* Köln
9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 July Recording *Turandot* Milan
18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27 Recording *Manon Lescaut*
5 August Concert Athens
19, 21, 26, 29 *Sonnambula* Edinburgh
3 September Concert Venice
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 September Recording *Medea* Milan
*
20 November Rehearsal Dallas

* Callas was contracted to open the season at the San Francisco Opera but asked for a postponement of her appearance there due to exhaustion but was refused.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

MAS said:


> As related by Rescigno, her voice in the 1957 "Dallas Rehearsal" was so unsteady on the sustained notes in _Tutte le torture _ that they had to increase the tempo, and while she easily emits the high E-Flat in *I Puritani* it is not very steady either. In fact, the voice that day sounds worn out, tremulous throughout and acidulous in _forte_ high notes. While her singing is miraculous, the state of the voice isn't.


I'm afraid I don't agree at all with this assessment, and I'm not alone. Michael Scott states that "the Dallas rehearsal shows her off at her best," and Ardoin says, "She had obviously had sufficient rest after the ordeal of Edinburgh and she is _in gamba_ (in fine fettle), with her voice firm and ringing yet with ample caress."

I don't recall any interview with Rescigno where he talks about her being "so unsteady on the high notes" though we can hear a couple of problems for ourselves. The recalcitrant top C in the _Tutte le torture_ (never one of Callas's favouite notes) is indeed solved by a quickening of the tempo. The final set of rising scales was also a problem, which Callas repeats three times (this is, after all, a rehearsal). It is a very long phrase, which she sings in one breath. Rescigno remarks, "Long breath, huh?" before she tries again, but by the third try she manages it fine.

Scott also coments on her free, easy high Eb in the *Puritani* aria and notes that "she manages [the *Anna Bolena* scene] more easily and more effortlessly than she would in the EMI recording the following summer."

To my ears, she sounds in much better voice than she did in the recording of *Manon Lescaut*, the Edinburgh *Sonnambula* or the recording of *Medea*.

She is also in much better form for the prima of *Un Ballo in Maschera* at La Scala, though this performance is probably the last time we hear her singing with such freedom and security. It was followed by the Rome walkout, an event that I believe had a cataclysmic effect. From then on the number of her performances started to decline. Considering the dreadful press she was getting after this, it's no wonder she was so easily seduced by Onassis and the glitterati.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Sorry, I am misremembering that Rescigno actually spoke about the unsteadiness, but in rehearsal he and Masiello discuss the "C" in particular and, when he returns to the aria, the tempo was faster.

I don't care what Scott or Ardoin say, just _listen_ to the tape or CD. The excerpt here does not include the conversation, but the CD does.






BTW, you need not "defend" her to me. I'm not bashing her, I'm a fan!


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I don't recall any interview with Rescigno where he talks about her being "so unsteady on the high notes" though we can hear a couple of problems for ourselves. The recalcitrant top C in the _Tutte le torture_ (never one of Callas's favouite notes) is indeed solved by a quickening of the tempo.
> Scott also coments on her free, easy high Eb in the *Puritani* aria ....


While the E-flat does sound free, it is also not steady.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I don't recall any interview with Rescigno where he talks about her being "so unsteady on the high notes" though we can hear a couple of problems for ourselves. The recalcitrant top C in the _Tutte le torture_ (never one of Callas's favouite notes) is indeed solved by a quickening of the tempo.
> Scott also coments on her free, easy high Eb in the *Puritani* aria ....


While the E-flat does sound free, it is also not steady.






Listen to the note about 9:50.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I thought it worth listening to a number of examples of Callas singing Sempre libera including the one from the Dallas rehearsal.

*Mexico 1952*
All the examples I listened to were superbly sung with the tricky coloratura challenges in the aria posing no problems for Callas. Where there are technical issues are with some of the high notes (high Cs and D flats, not to mention the interpolated E flat at the end). In this first example there is a beat (not quite a wobble, but the notes aren't as solid as they should be) on most of the high Cs and higher notes. The repeated high Cs towards the end come off much better and they are sung with more head voice in the mix, which leads me to wonder whether the earlier high notes didn't quite work as there was too much chest voice in the mix.

*Cetra Studio 1953*
This was the best of the recordings from a technical viewpoint. There is less chest voice in the mix on the first high C and it is better in Mexico as a result. There is a certain amount of beat on the high D flat, but the second high C is perfectly coordinated. The repeated Cs work well again, but the final E flat isn't as full as in Mexico.

*La Scala 1955*
This is very similar to the performance of the aria in Mexico in 1952, but the flaws on the high notes are more apparent. Except for the final E flat which is better than both preceding versions.

*Dallas rehearsal 1957*
Callas marks the cabaletta here, singing in half voice and only hints at the high notes or transposes them downward. No conclusions can be drawn from this.

*Lisbon 1958*
There are similar issues here on high notes as before, although the first high C is handled better than in the previous recordings. The high D flat wobbles badly and the second high C is totally uncoordinated and sounds raw as well as wobbling. The voice sounds raw in general in this recording and it was the worst from a technical point of view out of those I listened to. Even the repeated high Cs go raw towards the end and the high E flat at the end is in uncoordinated head voice and therefore quite sour as a result.

*London 1958*
John Ardoin felt that Callas was in better voice in Lisbon than in London, but the London Sempre libera shows her in better shape than the Lisbon one. Callas uses more head voice above the stave than before and there is more variety of light and shade as a result. The high Cs and Ds have less wobble than in Lisbon and the repeated high Cs work again. The high E flat at the end is ear splittingly uncoordinated though.

What's clear from these examples is that the issues up to 1958 only concerned high notes (C and above) and not the rest of the voice. There were issues with a lack of coordination and wobbles on some high notes at some times and issues that she had in the first part of the 50s were sometimes resolved later on, so the chronology of her flaws isn't really exact. What isn't clear from this series of listening is whether these flaws had anything to do with the vocal decline or whether that was due to something else.

N.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

MAS said:


> While the E-flat does sound free, it is also not steady.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nobody's claimng that she sounds as good as she did in the studio recording of 1953, but she sounds a lot more comfortable here than on either of the Ebs in the Lisbon and Covent Garden Traviatas the following year. She also sounds in better vocal health here than she did in Edinburgh earlier in the year.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

MAS said:


> Sorry, I am misremembering that Rescigno actually spoke about the unsteadiness, but in rehearsal he and Masiello discuss the "C" in particular and, when he returns to the aria, the tempo was faster.
> 
> I don't care what Scott or Ardoin say, just _listen_ to the tape or CD. The excerpt here does not include the conversation, but the CD does.
> 
> ...


All I was clearing up was that, as far as I knew, Rescigno never said anything in interview about her voice being so unsteady that they had to increase the tempo, even if we can hear that this was used as a solution to the problem.

I agree it is clear from the recording that the sustained C causes her a problem. (It's actually the only really sour note in her earlier recording of the piece, which means it was also a problem in 1954). This being a rehearsal, we hear both the problem and discussion of the solution.

I also remember Rescigno talking about how uncompromising she would be in her pursuit of musical truth. For instance, she woould sing the final note of _Addio del passato_ with such a thread of voice that it tended to crack. Rescigno suggested that she gave it a bit more power so as to avoid it happening, but she just wouldn't do it as it would have broken the mood she was trying to create.

I'm sorry, I'm not just trying to be argumentative. I know you are a fan. I was just questioning your statement about what Rescigno said in interview, which sounded like something he wouldn't say in front of her. All I have to go on is the recorded evidence of the rehearsal itself,


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I'd like to start the investigation into Callas' vocal decline with the suggestion that the wobble (one of the key problems with her voice throughout her career) was caused by Callas lowering her voice and darkening her tone when singing pieces that were outside her range when she was growing up in New York. Whilst it may not have been suggested that this ultimately led to Callas' vocal decline and was its main cause, it is at least implied.

What do others think about this. Can we disprove this hypothesis?

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

The Conte said:


> I'd like to start the investigation into Callas' vocal decline with the suggestion that the wobble (one of the key problems with her voice throughout her career) was caused by Callas lowering her voice and darkening her tone when singing pieces that were outside her range when she was growing up in New York. Whilst it may not have been suggested that this ultimately led to Callas' vocal decline and was its main cause, it is at least implied.
> 
> What do others think about this. Can we disprove this hypothesis?
> 
> N.


I'm not sure we can actually prove this theory. I don't remember Mary Ann ever having an official teacher in NY, nor do I recall any of the biographers mention this kind of detail. It's possible I never paid attention to this period which is, I suspect, full of conjecture.
I don't know if Evangelia wrote about this period, but I'd not take her word on anything.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> All I was clearing up was that, as far as I knew, Rescigno never said anything in interview about her voice being so unsteady that they had to increase the tempo, even if we can hear that this was used as a solution to the problem.
> 
> I agree it is clear from the recording that the sustained C causes her a problem. (It's actually the only really sour note in her earlier recording of the piece, which means it was also a problem in 1954). This being a rehearsal, we hear both the problem and discussion of the solution.
> 
> ...


Tsaras,

Whether Rescigno said something specific or not in an interview is debatable (or is it a faulty memory), but there's no question that Callas's voice in that aria is quite unsteady even in the first sustained note (middle C ?) that mirrors the phrase with the high C.

It is possible she wasn't warmed up, so the exposure of the _sostenuti_ was exaggerated. (Here I am making up an excuse.

Anyway, even though I seem argumentative, I don't want to be!


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

MAS said:


> I'm not sure we can actually prove this theory. I don't remember Mary Ann ever having an official teacher in NY, nor do I recall any of the biographers mention this kind of detail. It's possible I never paid attention to this period which is, I suspect, full of conjecture.
> I don't know if Evangelia wrote about this period, but I'd not take her word on anything.


I don't think we can _prove_ any of the theories that have been put forward over the years, but we might be able to disprove or reason that some of them are unlikely. She did have a couple of teachers in NY, but they weren't proper singing teachers from what I recall and in any case I believe she just studied piano with one and then her second piano teacher also taught her "singing", but that probably wasn't anything like formal vocal training would have been.

The suggestion with this theory is that Callas sang too much before her studies in Greece. (She used to sing along to the Met broadcasts and imitate her pet canary.) I don't support this theory. Had Callas damaged her voice in NY, how would she have been able to train as she did in Greece and sustain an international operatic career at the highest level for as long as she did?

I'm going to give my copy of Jerome Hines' Great Singers on Great Singing a peruse, because I remember him and many other singers talking about how they sang from a young age. If singing as the wrong voice type in childhood or singing operatic repertoire as a child is likely to lead to vocal flaws, then you would expect it to have happened to a number of singers and not just Callas.

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

The Conte said:


> I don't think we can _prove_ any of the theories that have been put forward over the years, but we might be able to disprove or reason that some of them are unlikely. She did have a couple of teachers in NY, but they weren't proper singing teachers from what I recall and in any case I believe she just studied piano with one and then her second piano teacher also taught her "singing", but that probably wasn't anything like formal vocal training would have been.
> 
> The suggestion with this theory is that Callas sang too much before her studies in Greece. (She used to sing along to the Met broadcasts and imitate her pet canary.) I don't support this theory. Had Callas damaged her voice in NY, how would she have been able to train as she did in Greece and sustain an international operatic career at the highest level for as long as she did?
> 
> ...


I can recall little of the pre-Greece days. All stands out, besides what you say above, us that she sang _"La Paloma"_ many times out the window in Washington Heights, and the Major Bowes story, hardly things to ruin one's voice over. Though it is astonishing that a young girl would be allowed to sing an aria from *Madama Butterfly* however truncated.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

MAS said:


> I can recall little of the pre-Greece days. All stands out, besides what you say above, us that she sang _"La Paloma"_ many times out the window in Washington Heights, and the Major Bowes story, hardly things to ruin one's voice over. Though it is astonishing that a young girl would be allowed to sing an aria from *Madama Butterfly* however truncated.


It's still happening today


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

We don't know that 'Nina Foresti' _was_ Callas and the evidence points to it most likely not having been her. Whilst we can't know what Callas was singing at home as a child (none of us were there), how likely is it that her singing soprano rep transposed downwards caused her wobble?

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> It's still happening today


The poor child no doubt will grow up to be a tenor and hate her mother or parents?
:lol:


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Respectfully I think the theory that damage to her voice happened after she was trained by taking on huge dramatic soprano roles early in her career has more credibility than singing the wrong way as a child or early teen. There are too many instances of other singers taking on huge roles early on the created problems later. Of course Ponselle started with Forza at around 22 and went onto other big Verdi parts early on without any issues developing later, so there are holes in my theory, but Ponselle was a freak and she had a grown woman's voice as a child. I might have missed this being discussed at lenght earlier.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Respectfully I think the theory that damage to her voice happened after she was trained by taking on huge dramatic soprano roles early in her career has more credibility than singing the wrong way as a child or early teen. There are too many instances of other singers taking on huge roles early on the created problems later. Of course Ponselle started with Forza at around 22 and went onto other big Verdi parts early on without any issues developing later, so there are holes in my theory, but Ponselle was a freak and she had a grown woman's voice as a child. I might have missed this being discussed at lenght earlier.


I agree. I'm not at all convinced by the idea that Callas strained her voice as a child because she was singing in a key more suited to a contralto. The only evidence put forward to back this up is that Callas presented herself as a mezzo/contralto when she first studied in Greece and that her family said that she sang operatic arias as a child.

N.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

If Nicholas Petsalis-Diomidis' hypothesis that the wobble in Callas' voice was due to her singing very difficult soprano arias transposed downwards into a key more suited to a contralto was to hold water, we would expect there to be other examples of this in the history of singing. However, the opposite is true. In Jerome Hines' book Great Singers on Great Singing almost all the singers interviewed for the book mention that they sang from a young child. This was mostly in church choirs and so wouldn't have been operatic repertoire, but there are some examples in the book that I think disprove this hypothesis as far as is reasonably possible.

Firstly we have the example of Placido Domingo who started singing in his parents opera company at around age sixteen as a baritone. He soon moved into tenor roles, but his starting as a baritone (and he had been singing for quite some time before that professional debut) didn't seem to cause a wobble in his voice.

Even more interesting is Zinka Milanov's testimony, "I was born in Zagreb, Yugoslavia and I sang as long as I can remember. When I was eight years old I had a beautiful contralto." And, "When other children were playing, I went on the balcony and sang for hours. Whatever my brother played for me, I sang."

Joan Sutherland started singing by imitating her mezzo-soprano mother and used to sing her exercises whilst she vocalised and so this is another example of a famous singer who sang in a lower key as a child than that which they would sing in as an adult. In addition, Magda Olivero mentions that she sang operatic arias at age eight or nine and performed as a child.

None of these singers had a wobble in their voices in their prime from my knowledge. I would suggest we rule out the strained the voice in childhood hypothesis and move onto another one.

N.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

The Conte said:


> This is a topic that crops up on TC quite a lot and there have been a number of theories as to why and how Callas had a relatively short major career that have been suggested over the years.
> 
> I would like to put forward the idea that an analytical investigation into these theories to examine which of them stand up to scrutiny and to hopefully come to a conclusion of which are more likely would be a rewarding exercise.
> 
> ...


I might add a #5: Disinterest in giving the necessary attention to her craft once Onassis came into her life.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> I might add a #5: Disinterest in giving the necessary attention to her craft once Onassis came into her life.


Whatever the reason, she greatly reduced her performances when Onassis came on the scene. From a personal point of view she had worked hard hard hard since a teenager and for the first time she had real romance and with the most powerful man in the world, so I can understand why she withdrew from most of her professional commitments, aside from any vocal difficulty. There is talk of a degenerative illness . She had not been unusually heavy until the early 50's, but when she lost weight she became almost model thin, so it had to affect how her diaphragm worked. It is not one thing but likely a mosaic of causes as to her vocal decline. The huge high notes went after 52 but her voice held together really well otherwise till around 57.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

The Conte said:


> If Nicholas Petsalis-Diomidis' hypothesis that the wobble in Callas' voice was due to her singing very difficult soprano arias transposed downwards into a key more suited to a contralto was to hold water, we would expect there to be other examples of this in the history of singing. However, the opposite is true. In Jerome Hines' book Great Singers on Great Singing almost all the singers interviewed for the book mention that they sang from a young child. This was mostly in church choirs and so wouldn't have been operatic repertoire, but there are some examples in the book that I think disprove this hypothesis as far as is reasonably possible.
> 
> Firstly we have the example of Placido Domingo who started singing in his parents opera company at around age sixteen as a baritone. He soon moved into tenor roles, but his starting as a baritone (and he had been singing for quite some time before that professional debut) didn't seem to cause a wobble in his voice.
> 
> ...


I recall Birgit Nilsson saying she sung so much she was told she would ruin her voice and the result ended up being one of the most robust soprano instruments in history.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

MAS said:


> The poor child no doubt will grow up to be a tenor and hate her mother or parents?
> :lol:


Nah! She'll end up a suburban wife with adorable children and a pretty voice that she'll sing with around the house.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

nina foresti said:


> I might add a #5: Disinterest in giving the necessary attention to her craft once Onassis came into her life.


I think it was Heifetz who said, 'If I don't practice for a day I notice it. If not for a week everyone else notices it!' Callas simply neglected her craft when she fell for this awful man.
Of course there may have been others to do with her own physiology. It is pretty useless comparing her with other people as we are all different. Solti recounts the young Anna Silja auditioning with arias from The magic flute, Cosey Fan Tutti and Tristan. You cannot make a rule of it although it appears that the preferred route is to sing low when younger and then raise the voice,


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

marlow said:


> I think it was Heifetz who said, 'If I don't practice for a day I notice it. If not for a week everyone else notices it!'


Not Heifetz but Artur Rubinstein. I believe it went something like this: 'If I don't practice for a day I notice it. If I don't for two days, my wife does. If I don't for three days, the audience does.'


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Whatever the reason, she greatly reduced her performances when Onassis came on the scene. From a personal point of view she had worked hard hard hard since a teenager and for the first time she had real romance and with the most powerful man in the world, so I can understand why she withdrew from most of her professional commitments, aside from any vocal difficulty. There is talk of a degenerative illness . She had not been unusually heavy until the early 50's, but when she lost weight she became almost model thin, so it had to affect how her diaphragm worked. It is not one thing but likely a mosaic of causes as to her vocal decline. The huge high notes went after 52 but her voice held together really well otherwise till around 57.


By 1958, Callas had broken with La Scala, the Metropolitan Opera and Rome Opera, so there was no sustained period of performances. In 1958, Callas appeared in concerts throughout the United States. In December, she appeared in 
Paris, giving a monster concert.

The liaison with Onassis happened sometime in 1959. So the reduced performances were as a result of the breaks with La Scala, The Met, etc., not because of Onassis, or not just because of Onassis. It just made the Onassis connection more sensational for the gutter press, and the legend was more interesting than the reality.


----------



## khalid (11 mo ago)

Revitalized Classics said:


> I was thinking around "2) It was due to inappropriate repertoire choices."
> 
> In the main, I would think that the roles Callas performed frequently _were_ very well chosen? she triumphed as Norma, Lucia, Violetta, Tosca, Medea etc. She also knew when to drop Lucia and Violetta before the voice _really_ went...
> 
> ...


I think this reason was made up by the so called Verdian or Verismo sopranos who make a career with 2-3 roles they excel in. Callas was not the only soprano with that wide repertoire. Lehmann, Leider, Stolz, the first Isolde and first Brünnhilde etc. all had wide repertoires from Gluck, Mozart, Bellini, Donizetti, Meyerbeer, to Verdi and Wagner. Especially that Callas had the proper heft and technique, she didn't lose her voice after dozens of Turandots, Isoldas, and Brünnhildes. It's a hard thing, that's what made her the legend she is, however I don't think it's wrong per se, it's like painting a different picture with the same set of colours.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

MAS said:


> By 1958, Callas had broken with La Scala, the Metropolitan Opera and Rome Opera, so there was no sustained period of performances. In 1958, Callas appeared in concerts throughout the United States. In December, she appeared in
> Paris, giving a monster concert.
> 
> The liaison with Onassis happened sometime in 1959. So the reduced performances were as a result of the breaks with La Scala, The Met, etc., not because of Onassis, or not just because of Onassis. It just made the Onassis connection more sensational for the gutter press, and the legend was more interesting than the reality.


I still maintain that the rot set in after the Rome walk out, when the press were abslutely merciless and the Rome Opera, who were clearly at fault, refused to support her. Her mistake was in agreeing to attempt to sing in the first place when she knew she wasn't ill enough. After the walk out the Rome Opera cancelled her contract for the remaining performances. She did sue them for breach of contract, a case she eventually won, but by the time it had dragged on her career was virtually over and the press had lost interest. It didn't help that Ghiringhelli also refused to support her when she returned to La Scala later that year and made it clear that they would not be offering her a contract for the following season. Ghiringhelli had tried to trick her into an extra uncontracted performance of *La Sonnambula*, but Callas, already exhausted from her schedule and suffering from a cold in the damp Edinburgh climate, simply left the city, assuming she had fulfilled her contractual obligations. Apparently Ghiringhelli promised the Edinburgh Festival committee an extra performance without her agreement and it had already been advertised without her consent. No doubt, in retrospect she should have just agreed to sing, but she could be extremely stubborn, especially when she thought she was in the right, which she was.

By the time she met Onassis, every performance and the attendant publicity was turning each one into a battle. She also no doubt felt her voice was slipping away from her. Even as early as 1955, she omits one of the Ebs from the Mad Scene in the Berlin *Lucia di Lammermoor*. She sang them both in the first performances of the production at La Scala, so I don't think this was an artistic decision, though I do actually prefer it. Her life from her early teens until then was constant work. Is it any surprise that when she met Onassis and he started lavishing so much attention on her, making her feel for once like a woman rather than a product, that she decided it was time she had some fun? She may have felt she needed a well-earned rest, but unfortunately too much rest and no practice just exacerbated the problems.

We should also remember just how famous she became. There is nothing like it in opera today. She was as famous as a rock star or a film star. Fonteyn and Nureyev also achieved the same kind of fame. Though I was too young to hear Callas on stage, I do remember news footage of her arriving at airports besieged by reporters. Who creates that kind of furore now?

We should also remember that the theories about Callas's rapid vocal decline are just that - theories. Nobody knows for sure what happened or why and no doubt all these various theories have an element of truth in them.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

ALT said:


> Not Heifetz but Artur Rubinstein. I believe it went something like this: 'If I don't practice for a day I notice it. If I don't for two days, my wife does. If I don't for three days, the audience does.'


The quote by Heifetz:









No doubt Rubenstein said something similar although he wasn't a great one for practising apparently


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> All I was clearing up was that, as far as I knew, Rescigno never said anything in interview about her voice being so unsteady that they had to increase the tempo, even if we can hear that this was used as a solution to the problem.
> 
> I agree it is clear from the recording that the sustained C causes her a problem. (It's actually the only really sour note in her earlier recording of the piece, which means it was also a problem in 1954). This being a rehearsal, we hear both the problem and discussion of the solution.
> 
> ...


Remember when I mentioned that Schuyler Chapin -- GM of the Met when Goran Gentele met with his car crash death -- had suggested similar words from the sentence above but she balked at doing it? 
Well I now realize it was rightly attributed to Resigno, and I am reading it right now from Scott's book(p.211):
"In the last act a problem arose as the conductor, Resigno, remembers. 'At the end of _Addio del passato_ the high A she would shade away to the point that it would crack. I kept on telling her to sing it just a little bit louder, then she could diminish it. She said yes, but she never did, still she cracked, she just wouldn't compromise.'"
I remember seeing this in a Callas documentary years ago and it stuck with me because at that time I recall her excusing her action by saying that this woman is dying so she doesn't have to sing out (or words to that effect).
I imagine it was her way of saving face from realizing that it would be a difficult feat for her to accomplish well.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

nina foresti said:


> Remember when I mentioned that Schuyler Chapin -- GM of the Met when Goran Gentele met with his car crash death -- had suggested similar words from the sentence above but she balked at doing it?
> Well I now realize it was rightly attributed to Resigno, and I am reading it right now from Scott's book(p.211):
> "In the last act a problem arose as the conductor, Resigno, remembers. 'At the end of _Addio del passato_ the high A she would shade away to the point that it would crack. I kept on telling her to sing it just a little bit louder, then she could diminish it. She said yes, but she never did, still she cracked, she just wouldn't compromise.'"
> I remember seeing this in a Callas documentary years ago and it stuck with me because at that time I recall her excusing her action by saying that this woman is dying so she doesn't have to sing out (or words to that effect).
> I imagine it was her way of saving face from realizing that it would be a difficult feat for her to accomplish well.


Many sopranos sing that final high A on a pure, spun out pianissimo, but, however beautiful it is, it doesn't move me in the same way. It's just a soprano singing a beautiful high A, not the dying Violetta. Elsewhere people are discussing drama or beauty. I suppose that puts me on the drama side of the debate, but, like Keats, I think truth is beauty, so maybe it's truth I go for.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Unlike Stignani, Callas was a beautiful, charismatic woman but I still think about what Stignani said when she went to a party. It was something like they are only interested in The Voice. This had to be at play when Onassis entered her life who likely wasn't a big opera fan. She thought he wanted her for herself.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Unlike Stignani, Callas was a beautiful, charismatic woman but I still think about what Stignani said when she went to a party. It was something like they are only interested in The Voice. This had to be at play when Onassis entered her life who likely wasn't a big opera fan. She thought he wanted her for herself.


All Onassis wanted was to collect beautiful women like trophies.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

marlow said:


> All Onassis wanted was to collect beautiful women like trophies.


And famous ones that increased his prestige.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Nevermind.........


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Why Callas lost that voice
A doctor who examined Maria Callas in 1975 says disease, not heartbreak, caused the diva's legendary voice to go into a decline.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/why-callas-lost-that-voice-20021015-gdfq38.html


----------



## Shaafee Shameem (Aug 4, 2021)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Yes, but she didn't know that at first. She likely thought he wanted her as a beautiful lover. We deceive ourselves in love. He was reputed to be a remarkable lover, so that sure can fool you. After Covid, I wouldn't mind someone fooling me a bit LOL


It is unlikely that she didn't know. He had many liaisons before Callas, one with the other La Divina, Claudia Muzio too.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Shaafee Shameem said:


> It is unlikely that she didn't know. He had many liaisons before Callas, one with the other La Divina, Claudia Muzio too.


All we can do is conjecture - she fell for him regardless.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

MAS said:


> And famous ones that increased his prestige.


Of course. The man was bursting with ego.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Unlike Stignani, Callas was a beautiful, charismatic woman but I still think about what Stignani said when she went to a party. It was something like they are only interested in The Voice. This had to be at play when Onassis entered her life who likely wasn't a big opera fan. She thought he wanted her for herself.


Though I can't prove it, I have a feeling her marriage to Meneghini was a fairly sexless affair, based on deep affection and gratitude, on her part at least. Legge recalls being summoned to the Meneghini's hotel room once, to find them already in bed at 11pm, airtex vests peeping out from under their nightwear. Her transformation from the large, heavy set woman she was in 1953 to the elegant, extravagantly beautiful woman she became when she lost weight must have changed the way she felt about herself. Onassis no doubt made her feel for the first time like a desirable woman, and however much he was captivated by her fame he was also attracted to her for the way she looked. It was no doubt a relief that he knew nothing about singing or opera. I honestly think that in her French recital of 1961, when she sings arias for Dalila and Carmen, you can hear a new sexiness in her sound. Was Onassis the first man to give her an orgasm? It's more than likely.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Though I can't prove it, I have a feeling her marriage to Meneghini was a fairly sexless affair, based on deep affection and gratitude, on her part at least. Legge recalls being summoned to the Meneghini's hotel room once, to find them already in bed at 11pm, airtex vests peeping out from under their nightwear…Was Onassis the first man to give her an orgasm? It's more than likely.


I don't think Meneghini, who was known as a ladies man who liked Rubenesque women, would've settled for a sexless marriage; the episode Legge remembered should be tempered with the fact that Callas and Battista were _expecting_ him. They would hardly be going at it while expecting company! But I do think that Onassis awakened a passion in her that Meneghini didn't begin to understand.


----------

