# Examples of Singers Successfully Crossing Over Into a Different Fach



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

many singers butcher their voices trying to traverse the spectrum of the human voice, but some talented singers, with caution and intelligence, are able to dip into the territories of other fachs and successfully pull them off in high quality.

I'll start with a few 
Shirley Verrett (dramatic mezzo) sings the Norma trio





Elisabeth Schwarzkopf (lyric soprano) sings Libera Me Domine from the Verdi Requiem 





Malena Ernman (lyric mezzo) sings Queen of the Night 





Kirsten Flagstad (dramatic soprano) sings Erbarme Dich


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Domingo. baritone--->tenor---->baritone.
Or just list anyone that got old.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Domingo?? I thought the title said "successful".

Violeta Urmana successfully switched from mezzo to soprano.
Bergonzi started out as a baritone.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I get the sense that Joyce Di Donato is in the process of becoming a soprano(?)


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

Bellinilover said:


> I get the sense that Joyce Di Donato is in the process of becoming a soprano(?)


She says not, in an interview that appeared in the September issue of _Das Opernglas_. She explains at some length how the role of Maria Stuarda was written to be sung by either sopranos or mezzos -- as were, apparently, Elena in _La Donna del __Lago_ and Handel's Alcina, two other roles associated with sopranos that she sings. (She also observes that orchestras were tuned lower when these operas were originally performed.) I guess time will tell if she changes her mind about this.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

MAuer said:


> She says not, in an interview that appeared in the September issue of _Das Opernglas_. She explains at some length how the role of Maria Stuarda was written to be sung by either sopranos or mezzos -- as were, apparently, Elena in _La Donna del __Lago_ and Handel's Alcina, two other roles associated with sopranos that she sings. (She also observes that orchestras were tuned lower when these operas were originally performed.) I guess time will tell if she changes her mind about this.


Thanks for the info. I was seriously wondering about that!

Anyway, here's an example of her in "soprano" territory. One must remember, of course, that the vocal categories were less sharply drawn in Handel's day:


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Set Svanholm started as a baritone.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I guess the most startling and famous instance of a singer crossing over from one genre to another is the occasion on which Callas learned and sang the role of Elvira in *I Puritani* in a few days and whilst still singing Brunnhilde in *Die Walkure*. She was phenomenal in both roles and it certainly put the world's spotlight on her. Though, given her proficiency in coloratura, it should not be so surprising. It should be easier for a large voice to scale down rather than the other way round.

An intelligent singer can sing roles that might not suit them by nature, if they know how to manage their resources. It is interesting to hear Schwarzkopf talk about the vocal adjustments she had to make for her (smallish) voice to be heard above the orchestra in Strauss and Verdi, and also when in duet with larger voiced singers. She knew what she was talking about. She had a long career, and her voice remained firm with no suspicion of wobble till the end of her career, though the range itself shrank, which of course is quite normal. On the other hand, she was also clever enough to know what was and wasn't right for her. Karajan wanted her to sing Leonore in *Fidelio*, but, after recording _Abscheulicher_ with him, she wisely decided the role was not within her capabilities.

Still, I think all this preoccupation with Fach is a bit bewildering. The question should be whether a singer sings a role well or not. I doubt composers gave "Fach" a second thought when they were actually writing the music.


----------



## Pip (Aug 16, 2013)

One of the most successful was Ramon Vinay who began as a baritone (successfully) then moved up to tenor singing Siegmund Tristan and Otello all over the world with tremendous success, at the end of the 50s he moved back down the register to baritone again, becoming at that time the only top class singer to ever have sung Otello and Iago.
His baritone self can be heard on the Philips CD of Lohengrin at Bayreuth in 1962.

Lauritz Melchior also began life as a baritone as his first 78's can testify to. 
Thankfully he decided to change to tenor. Without him the Wagner years from 1923 - 1950 would have been sadly depleted


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Pip said:


> One of the most successful was Ramon Vinay who began as a baritone (successfully) then moved up to tenor singing Siegmund Tristan and Otello all over the world with tremendous success, at the end of the 50s he moved back down the register to baritone again, becoming at that time the only top class singer to ever have sung Otello and Iago.
> His baritone self can be heard on the Philips CD of Lohengrin at Bayreuth in 1962.
> 
> Lauritz Melchior also began life as a baritone as his first 78's can testify to.
> Thankfully he decided to change to tenor. Without him the Wagner years from 1923 - 1950 would have been sadly depleted


This is true, but I was taking "Fach" to mean something other than vocal range. Vinay is certainly exceptional. I can think of no other singer who was so successful at switching ranges.

Incidentally, Bergonzi too started life as a baritone, which might account for the richness of his lower and mid register. Apparently he was a baritone who had difficulty with high Fs and Gs, until he one day found himself exercising up to Bs and Cs. It was then he decided to retrain as a tenor.

But "fach" presumably refers to voice type; dramatic, lyric and so on, though these types are by no means clearly defined, which is why this preoccupation with it is ultimately just a side issue.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Christa Ludwig defied categorization as to "fach." Though officially a mezzo-soprano in range, she sang in every range from contralto to soprano, and in a broad repertoire from Brahms and Wagner to Bach and Haydn, excelling equally in opera and song and, fortunately for us, leaving a large recorded legacy filled with superb performances. Among mezzos of recent times her range of achievement is probably equaled only by Janet Baker, another singer who reveals the limitations of the notion of "fach."


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

In Ludwig's case, it depends on the definition of "success." Listeners were unaware of any problems when she ventured into soprano territory, but she admitted in a recent interview (_Das Opernglas_) that every time she sang Leonore, she was completely hoarse the following day. She also said she knew the role was too high for her. In retrospect, she's lucky she didn't do any permanent damage to her voice by taking on roles that she probably shouldn't have sung -- however much she wanted to.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Wodduck mentions Janet Baker, who had successes in a very wide repertoire, but in roles that suited her voice. I doubt she ever asked herself what fach she was.

For instance, on the stage, she sang in operas by Monteverdi, Cavalli, Purcell, Handel and Gluck; Mozart and Donizetti; Berlioz, Richard Strauss, Britten and even Gottfried von Einem. She also sang the mezzo part in Solti's second recording of the Verdi Requiem.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Bellinilover said:


> Thanks for the info. I was seriously wondering about that!
> 
> Anyway, here's an example of her in "soprano" territory. One must remember, of course, that the vocal categories were less sharply drawn in Handel's day:


I've just watched a Giulio Cesare with la Bartoli in the Cleopatra role. A lot of fun she was having too.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> I guess the most startling and famous instance of a singer crossing over from one genre to another is the occasion on which Callas learned and sang the role of Elvira in *I Puritani* in a few days and whilst still singing Brunnhilde in *Die Walkure*. She was phenomenal in both roles and it certainly put the world's spotlight on her. *Though, given her proficiency in coloratura, it should not be so surprising. It should be easier for a large voice to scale down rather than the other way round.*


speaking as a big voice, I would have to disagree. bigger voices are, in general, just don't move the same way (well, unless you're Sutherland), and a size 10 foot isn't made for a size 3 shoe any more than a size 3 foot is made for a size 10 shoe.



> An intelligent singer can sing roles that might not suit them by nature, if they know how to manage their resources. It is interesting to hear Schwarzkopf talk about the vocal adjustments she had to make for her (smallish) voice to be heard above the orchestra in Strauss and Verdi, and also when in duet with larger voiced singers. She knew what she was talking about. She had a long career, and her voice remained firm with no suspicion of wobble till the end of her career, though the range itself shrank, which of course is quite normal. On the other hand, she was also clever enough to know what was and wasn't right for her. Karajan wanted her to sing Leonore in *Fidelio*, but, after recording _Abscheulicher_ with him, she wisely decided the role was not within her capabilities.


Schwarzkopf is a paragon of intelligent singing and vocal technique, for precisely the reasons you mentioned



> Still, I think all this preoccupation with Fach is a bit bewildering. The question should be whether a singer sings a role well or not. I doubt composers gave "Fach" a second thought when they were actually writing the music.


there's nothing bewildering about showing interest if you don't take things too seriously

@OP
mezzo/contralto Marilyn Horne sings Bel Raggio Lusinghier from Semiramide


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> speaking as a big voice, I would have to disagree. bigger voices are, in general, just don't move the same way (well, unless you're Sutherland), and a size 10 foot isn't made for a size 3 shoe any more than a size 3 foot is made for a size 10 shoe.


In general maybe they don't, but Callas's did and there are any number of recordings, both live and in the studio, to prove you wrong. This was what amazed people at the time; that a great Brunnhilde could sing Elvira's florid music, not only with such accuracy, but could bring to it a dramatic power and validity that nobody suspected was there.

I've just been listening to her recording of Rosina in *Il Barbiere di Siviglia*. She sings with more accuracy than many of the lighter sopranos who misappropriated the role of Rosina for years. Admittedly she sings in the mezzo keys, but she sings upward derivatives when the line takes her too low and adds a clear and firm top D to the end of the duet with Figaro. Not only is her singing technically finished, but her Rosina is no doll, but a characterful, minx-like young woman with a mind of her own.

Let me quote Walter Legge, speaking about Callas after her death. It's safe to say that, as her record producer for over 10 years, he knew a lot more about her voice and technique than you do.

_Even in the most difficult fioriture there were no musical or tehcnical difficulties ... which she could not execute with astonishing, unostentatious ease. Her chromatic runs, particularly downwards, were beautifully smooth and staccatos almost unfailingly accurate, even in the trickiest intervals. There is hardly a bar in the whole range of nineteenth century music for high soprano that seriously tested her powers._

Large voices can have flexibility and indeed _all_ singers in the previous century would train that way. When Frida Leider sings Brunnhilde, you can hear the trills Wagner wrote into his score, though most singers today ignore them.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> *Large voices can have flexibility and indeed all singers in the previous century would train that way. **When Frida Leider sings Brunnhilde, you can hear the trills Wagner wrote into his score, though most singers today ignore them.[/QUOTE*]
> 
> Indeed. I often wonder what has happened to that training. I know that Jane Eaglen, whose voice was (is?) quite large and could fill out the big Wagner parts, sang Norma with fair vocal success and recorded some bel canto arias. But specialization seems as much the rule in opera as in other fields now, and I can't think of many examples of "dramatic" singers since the early twentieth century who've shown much facility in florid writing. Who is our Leider now, our Ponselle? Listen to Caruso, even in his later recordings when the voice was heavier, singing florid cadenzas with ease, and producing a perfect trill in "Ombra mai fu." And try Jon Vickers in Beecham's recording of _Messiah_, ripping splendidly through "Ev'ry valley." That one just blew me away.
> 
> Is it that singers, once they've been assigned to a certain "fach," no longer want to have to be bothered with learning the skills their fach will seldom or never require of them? Is it "Who cares whether Brunnhilde can trill? Most people don't even know she's supposed to?" The sad thing, from a vocal standpoint, is that vocal skills are interdependent: if you can do the hard stuff, the "easy" stuff is likely to work better too, and if your training is incomplete, you're likely to lack more than just trills. Certainly, not every voice can do everything - the Lilli Lehmanns and Ponselles were probably never common - but what is expected of a singer ought not to be predicated on how loud they are.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> GregMitchell said:
> 
> 
> > *Large voices can have flexibility and indeed all singers in the previous century would train that way. **When Frida Leider sings Brunnhilde, you can hear the trills Wagner wrote into his score, though most singers today ignore them.[/QUOTE*]
> ...


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> In general maybe they don't, but Callas's did and there are any number of recordings, both live and in the studio, to prove you wrong. This was what amazed people at the time; that a great Brunnhilde could sing Elvira's florid music, not only with such accuracy, but could bring to it a dramatic power and validity that nobody suspected was there.
> 
> I've just been listening to her recording of Rosina in *Il Barbiere di Siviglia*. She sings with more accuracy than many of the lighter sopranos who misappropriated the role of Rosina for years. Admittedly she sings in the mezzo keys, but she sings upward derivatives when the line takes her too low and adds a clear and firm top D to the end of the duet with Figaro. Not only is her singing technically finished, but her Rosina is no doll, but a characterful, minx-like young woman with a mind of her own.
> 
> ...


Scintillating post.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> Woodduck said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not sure I quite agree about Eaglen. She sang Norma and recorded it with Muti, but the coloratura aspects of the role don't come that easily. She gets round the notes up to a point, but not with the ease of a Ponselle.
> ...


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Martha Mödl is an example of a singer with a very long career (she started in 1942, singing Hänsel, and her last role was as Kseniya's nurse in _Boris Godunov_, in May, 2001, just a few month before she died) and, during these almost sixty years, she tackled a lof of different roles, in different fachs.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

schigolch said:


> Martha Mödl is an example of a singer with a very long career (she started in 1942, singing Hänsel, and her last role was as Kseniya's nurse in _Boris Godunov_, in May, 2001, just a few month before she died) and, during these almost sixty years, she tackled a lof of different roles, in different fachs.


Modl was an intelligent and expressive artist who did sing for a long time, moving from soprano down to mezzo. I always found something odd and baffling about her vocal production - it sounded squeezed out somehow, with no sense of "float" whatsoever - and I wonder how she kept going for so long. I have to say I find her recordings a bit of a trial. She and Astrid Varnay both represent to me the sort of heavy, sluggish dramatic soprano, limited by a rudimentary technique to music requiring little flexibility, and increasingly wobbly with age, who stands at the opposite pole from the Gadskis and Leiders and Ponselles of earlier years.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Modl was an intelligent and expressive artist who did sing for a long time, moving from soprano down to mezzo. I always found something odd and baffling about her vocal production - it sounded squeezed out somehow, with no sense of "float" whatsoever - and I wonder how she kept going for so long. I have to say I find her recordings a bit of a trial. She and Astrid Varnay both represent to me the sort of heavy, sluggish dramatic soprano, limited by a rudimentary technique to music requiring little flexibility, and increasingly wobbly with age, who stands at the opposite pole from the Gadskis and Leiders and Ponselles of earlier years.


basically my thoughts, but better articulated. *schigolch* recently introduced me to the wonderful English dramatic soprano Pauline Tinsley in the "Great Female Singers of the Past" thread



> The only thought I would add is that this notion of "fach" strikes me as not only overdone but positively pernicious if it ends up giving singers an excuse to neglect the refinements of their craft. The pronouncement "you are going to be a dramatic soprano" should never be taken to imply "you won't need to work much on rapid passagework and trills." On the contrary, I think it should be taken to imply "if you're going to sing heavy parts you'll need to work especially hard on keeping your voice light and flexible so that it doesn't become unbalanced, sluggish, unwieldy, and wobbly" - which, alas, is what happens to far too many dramatic voices, as well as the multitude of lighter voices forced into heavy roles with the result that they end up having none of the desirable qualities of any "fach."


I kind of agree, but I think sometimes the cause is not _enough_ emphasis on fach rather than too much. for example "you are a coloratura soprano. clean vocal runs are not a nice to have. they are _necessary_ if you want to sing that repertoire successfully" (the current trend of people not hitting 50% of the notes in a given coloratura passage being acceptable disgusts me. Sutherland is probably turning in her grave)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> basically my thoughts, but better articulated. *schigolch* recently introduced me to the wonderful English dramatic soprano Pauline Tinsley in the "Great Female Singers of the Past" thread
> 
> I kind of agree, but I think sometimes the cause is not _enough_ emphasis on fach rather than too much. for example "you are a coloratura soprano. clean vocal runs are not a nice to have. they are _necessary_ if you want to sing that repertoire successfully" (the current trend of people not hitting 50% of the notes in a given coloratura passage being acceptable disgusts me. Sutherland is probably turning in her grave)


I consider a lack of clean runs a defect of technique for any singer, "coloratura" or not. An aspiring singer already knows clean runs are important for singers performing coloratura music. That's what coloratura _is_. Not every singer will be equally capable of running a two-octave chromatic scale at high speed, but "fach" is neither a reason to practice it nor a reason not to practice it. The closer you can come to doing it accurately, the better singer you are. Period. It's only after we see how well you learn to do it that we'll know exactly what fach you belong in.

Callas could do it well, by the way. Yet some deny that she was "really" a coloratura soprano. Presumably they would have told the young Maria "Coloratura is not your fach. Don't waste your time trying to perform accurate scales. Here. Try 'O rest in the Lord' from _Elijah_. It'll fit your voice like a glove."

Yawn.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Callas could do it well, by the way. Yet some deny that she was "really" a coloratura soprano. Presumably they would have told the young Maria "Coloratura is not your fach. Don't waste your time trying to perform accurate scales. Here. Try 'O rest in the Lord' from _Elijah_. It'll fit your voice like a glove."
> 
> Yawn.


And just in case anyone has any doubt about Callas's technical prowess, then this video, posted by Dark Angel in the Callas Remastered thread, should dispel any doubts.






Mind boggling!

When Tullio Serafin said, "This woman can sing anything written for the female voice," I doubt he was thinking of "fachs". Indeed the opposite is true. It was he who encouraged her to sing Elvira in *I Puritani*, whilst still performing Brunnhilde in *Die Walkure*. Callas demurred saying her voice was too dark, but he insisted, and the rest, as they say, is history!


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Rose Bampton began as a soprano, had laryngitis and transitioned to mezzo. She later moved back into soprano parts. She was very beautiful and had a lovely voice.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Rose Bampton began as a soprano, had laryngitis and transitioned to mezzo. She later moved back into soprano parts. She was very beautiful and had a lovely voice.


Indeed. Just listen to Bampton in live performance:






No HIP squeaker there, eh? Someone call the fire department!


----------



## silentio (Nov 10, 2014)

*Elizabeth Schwarzkopf * has been mentioned earlier. Here is another example of her unleashing all of the powers. This piece is just monstrous:


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

silentio said:


> *Elizabeth Schwarzkopf * has been mentioned earlier. Here is another example of her unleashing all of the powers. This piece is just monstrous:


Right on.

One of my all time favorite Sibelius pieces by one of my all time favorite singers.

Counterintuitively enough though, my favorite singing and performance of _Luonnotar _is still Phyllis Bryn-Julson with Alexander Gibson and the Royal Scottish National Orchestra on Chandos.










Bryn-Julson has a much smoother legato and silvery-delicate touch to this than does Schwarzkopf; I can't believe I'm saying this, but its true. Schwarzkopf approaches the tone poem like its _Die Walkure_. She could no doubt have sang the piece any way she wanted, but she (uncharacteristically) took the stentorian-declamation approach.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Right on.
> 
> One of my all time favorite Sibelius pieces by one of my all time favorite singers.
> 
> ...


I never knew Schwarzkopf sang this. From your description I'm not sure I'd like her way with it. It needs mystery above all.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I never knew Schwarzkopf sang this. From your description I'm not sure I'd like her way with it. It needs mystery above all.


Oh, the Bryn-Julson is_ pure_ feminine delicacy and mystery-- in spades. A friend of mine got the Segerstam/Helsinki_ Luonnotar_ with Soile Isokoski. I told him that I really liked the dash and the drama of Segerstam's rubato when approaching the two climactic parts--- and the playing was great-- only the _soloist_ was too raw and steely and heavy in intonation for me to like the performance. He couldn't understand that. I told him the Bryn-Julson was my standard-- but he kept on talking about the virtues of Segerstam's conducting.

-- So I know what you mean about how important some of us take the singing. For me, and especially in this, it really is everything.

Gibson, incidentally, does the most powerful and majestic _Luonnotar_ I've heard as well. It wins in orchestral response, it wins in reading, and it wins in singing and in engineering--yet so few people seem to know of it.

I absolutely cherish it.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Right on.
> 
> One of my all time favorite Sibelius pieces by one of my all time favorite singers.
> 
> ...


Can't believe I'm saying this, but I listened to both the Schwarzkopf and Bryn-Julson versions on youtube, and also prefer Bryn-Julson's more ethereal singing.

Schwarzkopf takes quite a different approach. She is in impressive vocal form, darkens her naturally bright sound considerably and sounds almost like a dramatic soprano. It could be a different work.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Oh, the Bryn-Julson is_ pure_ feminine delicacy and mystery-- in spades. A friend of mine got the Segerstam/Helsinki_ Luonnotar_ with Soile Isokoski. I told him that I really liked the dash and the drama of Segerstam's rubato when approaching the two climactic parts--- and the playing was great-- only the _soloist_ was too raw and steely and heavy in intonation for me to like the performance. He couldn't understand that. I told him the Bryn-Julson was my standard-- but he kept on talking about the virtues of Segerstam's conducting.
> 
> -- So I know what you mean about how important some of us take the singing. For me, and especially in this, it really is everything.
> 
> ...


I did a bit of digging, and found that Schwarzkopf herself was rather pleased with this live performance of _Luonnatar_, and, contrary to popular belief, she wasn't often than pleased with herself, so I listened to it again.

She presents a completely contrary view from Bryn-Julson, and I think I'd have to really look at the text to know which was the most valid. She is in fantastic voice, by the way. I enjoyed them both very much in very different ways.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Regina Resnik started her career as a soprano, succesfully tackling the replacement of Zinka Milanov as Leonora at the MET, and roles like Aida, Tosca, Musetta... In her early thirties she considered her voice had evolved, and was actually better suited to a mezzo repertoire. During nearly forty years, she was singing Carmen, Amneris, Ulrica... and also a lot of contemporary opera: Poulenc, Britten, Menotti, von Einem, Barber...

Let's listen to Ms. Resnik singing (with Rosalind Elias) the lovey Barber's opera, _Vanessa_:


----------



## silentio (Nov 10, 2014)

I decided to revisit this thread after accidentally discovering the live 1954 _Pelléas et Mélisande_ with Ernst Haefliger, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Michel Roux under Karajan. She is _supposed_ to be terribly miscasted in this difficult French role. But no! Here we get a Schwarzkopf in unexpectedly fresh voice, almost free of the vowel distortions and the "hooty" sounds that annoy her detractors to death (though such idiosyncrasies still work well in German under her magic). Her French is surprisingly good to my ears. And what characterizations! There are plenty of thrilling moments I didn't encounter in other Mélisandes. What impressed me the most is well captured in this excerpt:






When Goulad strikes Pelleas, Melisande runs into the forest and cries out _"Oh, oh! Je n'ai pas de courage...Je n'ai pas de courage!"_ (_"Oh, I don't have the courage, I don't have the courage!"_). I have never heard that heartfelt and horrific moment done more convincing than here. And not to mention the voice-acting through the death scene of Melisande.

This is _the_ role that invites fierce scrutinization from francophile. But I guess Dame Elizabeth just had the _courage_ to do it, and she triumphed! At least for me, she has become the most memorable Melisande after the iconic Irene Joachim.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

silentio said:


> I decided to revisit this thread after accidentally discovering the live 1954 _Pelléas et Mélisande_ with Ernst Haefliger, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Michel Roux under Karajan. She is _supposed_ to be terribly miscasted in this difficult French role. But no! Here we get a Schwarzkopf in unexpectedly fresh voice, almost free of the vowel distortions and the "hooty" sounds that annoy her detractors to death (though such idiosyncrasies still work well in German under her magic). Her French is surprisingly good to my ears. And what characterizations! There are plenty of thrilling moments I didn't encounter in other Mélisandes. What impressed me the most is well captured in this excerpt:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd always dismissed this performance of the opera, assuming that Schwarzkopf (whom I love by the way) would be all wrong in the role, but this clip certainly makes me want to hear the whole thing. I found Haefliger very impressive too.

I would just add though that "hooty" is the very last word I'd use for the singing of Schwarzkopf throughout her career. Right up until her very last recording (made for Decca) Schwarzkopf's tone remained admirably pure and firm, though of course the range and volume shrank, not that it was ever a very large voice. "Hooty" is the word often used to describe the singing of Dame Clara Butt. Schwarzkopf's singing couldn't any more different. I suppose I might accept the charge of occasional distorted vowel sounds, but then that is a charge one could lay at the door of most singers, particularly sopranos.


----------

