# Show me the way



## googlebordello (Sep 22, 2012)

I'm sure this comes up in here relatively often, so if there's a good thread I should just refer to, feel free to point me there.

So: I know a little about Wagner (from an intellectual rather than musical perspective) and I once saw Le nozze di Figaro in Berlin (had a great time), but essentially I know nothing about opera. After years of being intrigued, I was recently inspired to start listening forreal, but instead of wondering _what_ to listen to, I find myself not knowing _how_ to listen. I don't speak any of the languages, I doubt it would do much good if I did, & I have no basis for knowing what makes a great operatic vocal performance. Is it all just a matter of taste? Do you prefer listening or watching? Is it blasphemous to do one and not the other? Can I fully appreciate the intensity of the music if I'm not following the narrative? Do you usually listen to a single opera all the way through, or pick and choose your favorite pieces? (I find myself preferring the former). I feel like I need an approach.

tl;dr: Ignorant ******* references Peter Frampton and possibly overthinks opera. Tell me how to listen to a thing, you wonderful humans!


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

So yeah, for sure opera can be intimidating! Don't worry, everyone feels that way at first! But we all overcame that, so it's definitely doable 

2nd, opera is one word that covers a huuuuuuuge range of music, so recommending a place to start can be tricky. Monteverdi is completely different from Mozart who is vastly different from Wagner who is worlds away from Philip Glass.

So, I got into opera about 4 years ago. What did it for me was stumbling onto one individual performance that blew me away, despite knowing virtually nothing about the opera, the role featured, or the aria itself. (I also want to add that this is not the only way to discover opera: I know people who fell in love with the form by watching a Wagner opera as their first experience. This to me seems insane but it just shows the vast range of tastes). Anyway, I had been rewatching the movie Amadeus and had always loved all the music in it, even the opera bits, except for the one where some lady was sitting in a cloud squeaking. So I decided to look it up to see if there was something I was missing or if it was just a dumb piece of music. This is the first video I found when I looked it up:




Watch this first, then I'll continue.
So it's an astonishing performance for sure. Even without subtitles, it's an amazing, awe-inspiring display of the human voice. But not only that, there is spoken words at the beginning!? I had thought opera was non-stop singing, with plenty of fat ladies in viking hats. But this video ... this is opera??

So from there, I explored more of that singer's work (her name is Diana Damrau, a great German soprano) and from there found arias I liked and listened to other singers' versions of them, as well as other famous opera pieces that I had known about through cultural osmosis -- ones that I thought were equally as silly as a woman squeaking, like that male aria where he sings Figaro, Figaro, Figaro ... I found out it was incredible too, and not silly! It's basically a long tongue-twister of a song that displays technical prowess while the eponymous Figaro sings about what an incredible guy he is.
A version with English subtitles:





Not only are the songs catchy, but also just the incredible vocal command, the strong and secure tone, just captivated me.
I worked my way up from various arias to a full opera. My #1 recommendation for a first opera (technically an operetta but the difference is negligible for our purposes) is Orphee aux Enfers, convenientally available on Youtube, complete and with subtitles: 



I recommend waiting until you've gotten a taste for individual arias before jumping into a full opera, but as I said above everyone's different. The first half of this operetta can drag a bit at times, but the opening number is cute, the duet that follows is hilarious and fantastic, and the second half of the piece is one whiz-bang number after another, with one duet that is sure to please no matter how much one resists, and another number that will be familiar to even the most opera-sheltered person.

As to your more general questions, I tend to watch operas on dvd, particularly new pieces, with subtitles on so I can follow the story. It does divide your attention a bit, and after I become familiar with the opera and know the story well enough, the subtitles become unnecessary and one can concentrate on the music. And to be honest, the stories are usually fairly slight. As George Bernard Shaw said, '(Opera is when) a tenor and soprano want to make love, but are prevented from doing so by a baritone.' That's the general outline of a majority of operas.

I'd say try to listen to a range of arias and if there are any you particularly like, report back. There's such a huge range of musical styles and vocal classes that just saying "start with Maria Callas" might not be ideal. My personal favorite -- colortura soprano pieces from Mozart and the Bel Canto composers -- might do nothing for you.

Some singers to look up on Youtube and listen to a few of their pieces:

Maria Callas
Natalie Dessay
Joyce DiDonato
Birgit Nilsson
Anna Netrebko
Ewa Podles
Luciano Pavarotti
Placido Domingo
Thomas Hampson
Bryn Terfel
Siegfried Jersualem
Kurt Moll

That's a mix of various vocal types and eras, with an emphasis on current singers as they are more likely to have subtitles.

One more to speed you on your way. $10 says you fall in love with the singer after watching this:


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

You say that you enjoyed Le Nozze... It's a sequel to the Barber of Seville so you may want to look into that one as well.
The previous post has already covered a lot and I'll try not to repeat too much of it.
The story in an opera is usually very basic and the audience is often very familiar with it anyway - but you still need those subtitles when you're new to it.
Unlike a musical, where the story is told through the libretto - an opera's story is told through the music. That can be a problem for new ears because you can't pick up the little subtleties. We've all been there.
So don't worry about the subtitles too much. It's just a brief outline of the story. Quite often singers are just repeating the thing same over and over with different variations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_of_music This gives very general overview of what experienced ears are picking up but you might not be. New listeners can usually identify things like melody,rhythm,tempo etc easily enough but may not understand timbre/structure/counterpoint.

When newcomers ask me to recommenced an opera, I always say _Carmen_. Very melodic. Very catchy from start to finish. It doesn't demand too much from new listeners - so it's easier for them to enjoy. It's also one of the few operas that stage directors don't fiddle with too much. Unlike Wagner, which seems to attract the craziest costumes/settings.

You mentioned that you can't tell a good vocal performance from a poor one. Don't worry, it takes a while. Familiarity will certainly help in the long-run.
Many moons ago, I managed to learn by listening to examples of good/bad performances and found that useful. I'd start with obviously poor recordings and then work up to recordings with singing/playing that is only slightly poorer.

Examples are much easier, so we need an example of poor singing. Here's an easy target...




The last 2mins of Jenkins should be enough for this example.
To 'pop music' ears - Jenkins is an opera singer.
To 'opera' ears - she's an opera student who pulled out years before her training was complete.

When she does those quick runs, you can't hear the individual notes. they're all mushed together. Some notes just go AWOL.
She gulps like a fish out of water. Her breathing technique is all over the place as she gasps during phrases that require silence.
She's very tired during the final minutes and really struggles to find the upper register. Those screams at the end aren't supposed to sound like she's being attacked.
She'd probably make a fine pop singer but she has neither the voice/stamina/technique for opera.

So what's it _supposed_ to sound like.
Try this 



 and hear the difference.

The two examples are very exaggerated (Callas was one of the best ever) but it may help towards "what to listen for".
Unfortunately, it's not something that can be summed up in a single post :lol:


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Great post by Cuoac Addict and, as said, it can be difficult at first to tell bad singing from good. When I first started getting into opera, I was blown away by this:




It's ... pretty embarrassing to admit that now 
I mean, it's cleanly sung for the most part and her voice is pretty when singing a simple line, but it's certainly not an operatic voice and definitely not secure enough in tone or technique.
The gold standard would be Joan Sutherland but every youtube vid I can find of her in this aria is of a version with a ridiculous tempo. So for a better comparison, with someone of close to equal vocal weight to Carla Maffioletti in the first video:





Note how her voice just seems to have much more depth to it, the individual notes never waver or break -- every sound is made just as she intends. Though to be fair, Ms. Serra doesn't seem to have a trill while Ms. Maffioletti does, even if a very poor one that often breaks.

For another version, and my personal favorite, we have Natalie Dessay.




Not safe for work.
Though she tends to get ahead of the music quite often, at one point quite badly, she has phenomenal control of her coloratura (the rapid and usually high pitched notes), rock solid support, incredible upper extension, and flexibility that Ms. Maffioletti can't aspire to.

It would be interesting if the OP can hear differences between such singers -- I definitely couldn't for my first several weeks or months of opera listening.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> I have no basis for knowing what makes a great operatic vocal performance. Is it all just a matter of taste?


No, of experience. It's not any rare to be impressed by mediocre, don't recognize and dislike the greatness at the beginning. Whatever. Just keep as open as possible, listen, watch, listen, watch and then learn. Learn and understand. No special effort is required - you will likely find yourself much more perceptive of vocal issues naturally, without reading any professional stuff. Vocal terminology will become familiar too, just read a review or opera forum from time to time.

So get yourself a opera newbie kit with classic performances/movie versions of great operas (there are many threads with recommendations, just look around) and get going.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

if you've already been to the opera and had a great time you're on the right track. All you need now is motivation so find something that inspires you, whether it is a heroic wall of sound a la Wagner, trills (of joy or desperation), silly and light-hearted comedy, dark (melo)drama or contemporary stuff.

after all the good advice others gave you, what I have to impart is this: *listen, listen, listen*. Individual arias is the best way to start. Don't overwhelm yourself with an entire opera unless one really catches your ear and you can't stop. So that means sure you can start listening to an entire one, but if your attention flags don't feel bad about stopping and doing other things.

others have said this but I feel it needs to be repeated: *listen to different voice types* and see if you have a preference. Then look up singers old and new in that fach and see who are your favourites. Don't worry initially whether the singers you like are not considered the best - tastes differ and tastes also change. Just get started, that's the important thing.

another thing that helped me was looking up *roles*. There's the damsel in distress, the scheming woman, the vamp, the envious male villain, the naive male hero, put-upon men/women, virtuous men/women, heroic men, enterprising women and the whole array of comedy characters etc. See what interests you and look them up for individual arias or operas where they are featured.

sometimes it's also useful to *go random* - click on the link to an aria you've never heard of/were never interested in before. You might like it. Like 



. It's not all coloratura, yanno, in spite of what this thread might lead you to believe


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

Poor Katherine Jenkins sounds like being chased by some hyenas. I can't understand why she did that. She has a nice voice, but has no school in how to use it for opera. A few times she also gets out of tune. In the second part she struggles with her breath and the voice deteriorates. She is no soprano, but yes Rossina is for mezzos. She could do it much better with the condition of enrolling in years of study. Comparing her wit Maria Callas is a bit too harsh. Compare Anna Netrebko with Maria Callas, Angela Gheorghiu, Anna Moffo, or Virginia Zeani, all in Traviata. Pick an aria and find the difference...A.N is wonderful but not good in coloratura operas.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

If I were to wildly speculate, I'd say that Katherine Jenkins was told by some instructors that it was unlikely she'd ever have a secure top and by media-savvy agent types that she was too damn gorgeous to be "wasted" in opera, so a middle-ground of opera-lite ala Andrea Bocelli seemed a likely pathway to fame and fortune.


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

Sorry for still focusing on K. Jenkins. Honestly I did not know her, and assumed she is a pop singer. But, reading about her is more disturbing. She has musical training and worked as a voice teacher. But her Una voce poco fa is too bad to be true. For me, she may be the worst crossover singer, and I would not compare her even to Bocelli, though I know he is not an operatic tenor either.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Kate is a crossover singer not a serious opera singer. In attempting the Barber aria is is woefully out of her depth, like David Helfgott attempting the Rach 3. But it's not about ability but looks, personality and publicity. Kate became the 'forces sweetheart' by entertaining troops in Iraq (a risky undertaking) so her audience is not particularly discerning. What does bug me more than Kate's success is people who criticise her for it. If someone has success with limited vocal talent then I say good luck to her. Criticism of such people is usually based on envy by people who would have not had success themselves. No doubt there are much better opera singers who look at her and wonder why it could not happen to them. But that success she enjoys in her field is hardly likely to deter success of really talented singers.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

I like how we started to go all about Jenkins in the "show me the way" thread. There is nothing more important to transmit into opera newcomer's mind than contempt for crossover singers. He may never get to hear good Traviata, but if he knows that Katherine Jenkins blows, he's all fine.


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

This thread started of really well... until Jenkis was mentioned. So let's forget about that.

I have some experience at introducing novices to opera, and classical music in general. The challenge in opera is the length and the shear overkill on music. For newbies this can be just too much. So start with the famous arias. There are lists on Youtube.

Here's something I posted earlier:

Here's an approach. Find an opera that you think is most suitable, many candidates have been mentioned here. And if you feel it's Wagner, just go for it. But, you should try some others before you decide. Find the typical highlights of this opera, sometimes seperate cd's are dedicated to highlights of a certain opera. If this appeals to you, get acquainted with it. Now you now the "soundspace" of the opera. To me this is very important.

Next step, check the libretto, the plot and the characters. Wikipedia is a good source. Now you now what ties together those highlights. There are also some good docu's available on youtube about certain opera's. Often, special editions of opera dvd's also have this. Watch them, it's a great intro to the opera.

Now go for the whole thing. The best is to get the whole experience, so DVD or youtube. If you want, you can do it in parts. You can watch the acts 1 by 1. I expect that at a certain point you will "connect" with the opera. This is when the magic starts. Look for the interaction of the characters, the acting, the staging.

Finally, watch the whole thing, preferably in a theater. Prepare for your soul to be touched.

Take the time you need. You can't force or rush this. If you take the time, say a year, chances are high you'll be hangin out in this part of the forum most of the time 

it's in this thread: http://www.talkclassical.com/26491-intro-opera-help.html


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Just to say opera highlights discs are often amazingly cheap second hand on Amazon.


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

Hit the reply button too early...

You mentioned you enjoyed a Nozze during a live performance. So why not start from that ? Spend an evening on youtube. There you can find the famous arias, a synopsis, and even some in depth documentary.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

googlebordello said:


> Show me the way


start with _Carmen_ and the rest will come of itself.


----------



## HumphreyAppleby (Apr 11, 2013)

Opera needs to be _loud_. If you can't play your opera loudly, you almost might as well not play it. Playing opera on your headphones is not particularly advisable if you want to retain your hearing into advanced age. If you cannot play it loudly enough on your stereo for whatever reason, go off into a rural area in your car, and play it loudly. Also, don't be afraid to try things that you didn't like the fist time. I hated _Cavalleria Rusticana_ the first time I heard it, except for the intermezzo, but now i love it. the first time I listened to Vissi d'arte I wondered what all the fuss was about. Now I'm gaga over that aria. I didn't like the Prelude to _Tristan und Isolde_ the first time I heard it. Now I love it (although I still have problems with a lot of the first act... it's rather boring...).


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Aramis said:


> There is nothing more important to transmit into opera newcomer's mind than contempt for crossover singers.


Mmm...not always contempt. Pavarotti was a _crossover_. Fortunately for the listener, he did so _after_ learning his craft. 

Mind you, I wasn't expecting the thread to get hijacked by Jenkins' erm.. well-wishers.
I told you she was an "easy target".


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

sabrina said:


> Comparing her wit Maria Callas is a bit too harsh. Compare Anna Netrebko with Maria Callas, Angela Gheorghiu, Anna Moffo, or Virginia Zeani, all in Traviata. Pick an aria and find the difference...A.N is wonderful but not good in coloratura operas.


I actually think that this would make an interesting thread.
What makes certain recordings or singers "gold-standard" with direct comparisons to other good (but not great) arias etc etc.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Couac Addict said:


> Pavarotti was a _crossover_


Neigh, he just unfortunately did some crossover, just like Carreras, Domingo, Flórez etc. Which doesn't make them crossover singers. More like depraved opera singers.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

just because they are excellent singers doesn't mean they're paragons of morality. Although I think that in itself is an interesting conversation (is it "immoral" for a proper opera singer to do cross-over stuff? It seems these days more and more singers do it - you forgot Fleming among many others. I admire those who don't do it, in the face of the "be more appealing to the masses" onslaught but I don't know that I feel too harshly about those who do...).


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> is it "immoral" for a proper opera singer to do cross-over stuff?


I think it is in the case of truely great singers. These people are tremendously gifted, and you can use or waste your gift. If a great tenor like Pavarotti spends considerable amount of his time entertaining people with popular stuff on large stadium, it is a waste, because a much worse singer without all the classical voice training could do the job while Pavarotti would be able to contribute with something precious to opera audiences, something only he could do. If he doesn't, his gift gets wasted upon his deliberate decision. That might be considered immoral.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

So is my Natalie immoral? She's going on a whole tour singing French "show tunes" by Michel Legrand. 
At the end, a singer has no responsibility to you or me or the public to do any one thing. Maybe it's my American viewpoint, but one's responsibility is not to do what society wants you to do, it's to make yourself happy -- no one else is going to!

Who are you to be able to tell someone what they can and can't do? That's awfully conceited, don't you think? Is posting on a web forum using your gifts to their fullest possible extent for the betterment of mankind? Or are you capable of more and should really be doing that instead of pecking away at a keyboard? See what a dangerous argument you make? 

Besides, we'd miss out on this delightful piece: 





In any event, a separate thread should probably be created to discuss this further.

For the OP, have you had a chance to read the first few replies? Any thoughts, questions, comments?


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

There's no need to worry about opera being in foreign languages such as Italian, French, German and Russian etc today .
Most, but not all complete recordings of opera on CD come with a booklet with synopsis of the plot plus the original libretto
and an English translation next to it . 
Most opera DVDs have English subtitles which you can access from the menu . Many oper houses have supertitles
where a translation appears onstage , and at the Metropolitan oper, there is an English translation running on the 
seat in front of you .
Complete operas on the major classical labels such s Decca, EMI, RCA, Sony , and DG usually have the booklets with trnslations,
but the smaller budget labels with pirated live recordings tend not to .


----------



## Antony (Nov 4, 2013)

googlebordello said:


> ...
> I once saw Le nozze di Figaro in Berlin (had a great time), but essentially I know nothing about opera.
> 
> I feel like I need an approach.


Hi Mr Googlebordello and everyone,

I posted a newbie hello in Presentation room and in -approval state-  Read this thread and posts. Learned alot from Opera pros and willing to learn more and more with you guys.

I came to Opera in a very dramatic situation: my ex brought me to -La Traviata- . After the first euphoric minutes with a scene of a party in the living room (a scene now I know -Brindisi) the rest was like tons of bricks felt on my head for the rest of the evening  Needless to tell you guys I didn't listen to opera for ...months afterward!

But later, I fall in love with it. Opera is such a delight! I try to learn (and I hope) to learn from you guys pros.!

My first experience teached me - Never, never attend whatever opera without any preparations previously at home. The 1st step is google the sypnosis (wiki is a wonderful library) to read the story of the opera and roles. Usually in the sypnosis, there are arias names of the whole opera of each role. 
Next step: from arias list, find each in youtube (is-it wonderful?) and listen to it ...until the end of the aria list.

After hours of this homework, you are good afterward to attend an opera evening. The rest is up to you to enjoy it.

Pros in here emphasize a very important work : listen, listen, listen alot. With this quality, we come to learn bit by bit.

As you, Mr Googlebordello, already attended Nozze di Figaro. You can start with it. It's such a lovely opera. With help of youtube and friends, I listened differents versions (Klemperer, Bohm, Solti, Harnoncourt,.... I came to know and love the voice of Lucia Popp, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Cecilia Bartoli, Rene Flemming, Frederica Von Stade, ...all of them

Here are arias that I like ( well, I like all of them, but to start )

Voi che Sepate by Frederica von Stade in 1973 Glynderbourne (for me, she owns the role. But Anna Moffo is very, very good too)






A very funny aria - Via resti servita - Dawn Upshawn (Susanna) & Klara Takacs (Marcellina)






Another aria : La Vendetta - Kurt Moll - Paris 1980






And this one - Non piu andrai - Ruggero Raimondo - in MET 1985






Cherubino in this version 1985 is ..the same Frederica von Stade in version 1973 and she still sang very well the aria Voi Che sepate!


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Antony said:


> Hi Mr Googlebordello and everyone,
> 
> I posted a newbie hello in Presentation room and in -approval state-  Read this thread and posts. Learned alot from Opera pros and willing to learn more and more with you guys.
> 
> ...


Very true. The more familiar you are with the opera, the more you'll enjoy it. That's often a turn-off for people new to opera but it's no different from other music really -- if you went into a concert by a band you'd never heard of you wouldn't be nearly as into it as people who knew every song by heart. If you later fell in love with that band and listened to everything they put out, you'd enjoy their next concert much more.



> As you, Mr Googlebordello, already attended Nozze di Figaro. You can start with it. It's such a lovely opera. With help of youtube and friends, I listened differents versions (Klemperer, Bohm, Solti, Harnoncourt,.... I came to know and love the voice of Lucia Popp, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Cecilia Bartoli, Rene Flemming, Frederica Von Stade, ...all of them
> 
> Here are arias that I like ( well, I like all of them, but to start )
> 
> ...


Some good choices there, but I must put in a vote for either of the Alison Hagley _Nozze_s as the definitive version; both the minimalist version with Bryn Terfel as Figaro or the more traditional production with Gerald Finley as Figaro (and Renee Fleming as the Contessa). Alison Hagley IS Susanna in my mind -- perfect voice for it, and especially in the Terfel production so looks the part of a young housemaid. Good actress too. Shame she retired fairly early and is relatively unknown besides her _Nozze_s and a _Pelleas et Melisande_


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Aramis said:


> I think it is in the case of truely great singers. These people are tremendously gifted, and you can use or waste your gift. If a great tenor like Pavarotti spends considerable amount of his time entertaining people with popular stuff on large stadium, it is a waste, because a much worse singer without all the classical voice training could do the job while Pavarotti would be able to contribute with something precious to opera audiences, something only he could do. If he doesn't, his gift gets wasted upon his deliberate decision. That might be considered immoral.


Well, with this use of the word "immoral" in this context (and this just one of many instances like, from many different sources within and without TC) we can now toss "immoral" into the trash bin of words now so devalued and given such skewed or slight dimension as to render them meaningless.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

googlebordello said:


> I'm sure this comes up in here relatively often, so if there's a good thread I should just refer to, feel free to point me there.
> 
> So: I know a little about Wagner (from an intellectual rather than musical perspective) and I once saw Le nozze di Figaro in Berlin (had a great time), but essentially I know nothing about opera. After years of being intrigued, I was recently inspired to start listening forreal, but instead of wondering _what_ to listen to, I find myself not knowing _how_ to listen. I don't speak any of the languages, I doubt it would do much good if I did, & I have no basis for knowing what makes a great operatic vocal performance. Is it all just a matter of taste? Do you prefer listening or watching? Is it blasphemous to do one and not the other? Can I fully appreciate the intensity of the music if I'm not following the narrative? Do you usually listen to a single opera all the way through, or pick and choose your favorite pieces? (I find myself preferring the former). I feel like I need an approach.


Opera is, by and large, about emotion. As noted the stories are often simple or secondary. They may involve complex plots and ridiculousness but that should not be mistaken for depth. The depth of an opera is (generally) in the emotion conveyed by the voices and the music.

I prefer watching; I do better when I can see what is going on so I can understand _why_ these characters feel the way they do. I would say that you could not "fully appreciate the intensity of the music if you're not following the narrative" but there is still a lot to love (and sometimes you realize the story is dumb or offensive so).

I started out listening to operas straight through (or in discrete chunks like acts or scenes) but I have started to search out arias. I think I started to grasp just how many amazing operas there are out there and excerpts allow you to sample a lot of different works quickly and get used to different composers and styles.

As to "how" to listen/watch more important that any of the above is that opera requires attention. Opera rewards serious, undistracted listening. This is part of the magic of the opera house; there is nothing else but the stage in front of you.

I do a lot of distracted listening just because I want to listen as much as possible (hell, I am watching a _La Boheme_ right now) but it rarely grabs me as much as when I am focused on nothing else.


----------



## Antony (Nov 4, 2013)

rgz said:


> Very true. The more familiar you are with the opera, the more you'll enjoy it. That's often a turn-off for people new to opera but it's no different from other music really -- if you went into a concert by a band you'd never heard of you wouldn't be nearly as into it as people who knew every song by heart. If you later fell in love with that band and listened to everything they put out, you'd enjoy their next concert much more.
> 
> Some good choices there, but I must put in a vote for either of the *Alison Hagley Nozzes as the definitive version; both the minimalist version with Bryn Terfel as Figaro or the more traditional production with Gerald Finley as Figaro (and Renee Fleming as the Contessa). Alison Hagley IS Susanna in my mind *-- perfect voice for it, and especially in the Terfel production so looks the part of a young housemaid. Good actress too. Shame she retired fairly early and is relatively unknown besides her _Nozze_s and a _Pelleas et Melisande_


Oh! Alison Hagley ! How could I forget her? She is definitely a -must be- Susanna. Thank you,Mr rgz !

In this 1994 version, Alison Hagley with Gerald Finchley in the first duet - Cinque, Dieci, venti






However, Cotrubas and Knut Skram in 1973 version are really good too


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

rgz said:


> ....but I must put in a vote for either of the Alison Hagley _Nozze_s as the definitive version; both the minimalist version with Bryn Terfel as Figaro or the more traditional production with Gerald Finley as Figaro (and Renee Fleming as the Contessa). Alison Hagley IS Susanna in my mind -- perfect voice for it, and especially in the Terfel production so looks the part of a young housemaid. Good actress too. Shame she retired fairly early and is relatively unknown besides her _Nozze_s and a _Pelleas et Melisande_


Yes I fully agree with you on Hagley. The Nozze with her singing Susanna and Gardiner conducting is still my rereference (although Jacobs is getting close). I also like the Glyndebourne version (it has the wonderful Haitink conducting) but I don't like the Contessa very much.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Dongiovanni said:


> Yes I fully agree with you on Hagley. The Nozze with her singing Susanna and Gardiner conducting is still my rereference (although Jacobs is getting close). I also like the Glyndebourne version (it has the wonderful Haitink conducting) but I don't like the Contessa very much.


The Glyndebourne is the one with Fleming as the Contessa. You don't like her?

(confession: In general, I don't much either. She's one of the two "big name" singers who I've never really liked, the other being Sills)


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

I've never got the appeal of Sills either. Fleming seems to me like one of those overwhelming personalities who you either take on her own terms or the whole grandeur becomes off-putting. With Sills I mostly didn't like her approach.


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

rgz said:


> The Glyndebourne is the one with Fleming as the Contessa. You don't like her?
> 
> (confession: In general, I don't much either. She's one of the two "big name" singers who I've never really liked, the other being Sills)


No, I don't like her. I don't know much about Sills, let me check on that...


----------



## googlebordello (Sep 22, 2012)

Wow. Really didn't mean to disappear from this thread, y'all, it's just been one of those months, but I gotta say, you've all re-defined awesome in my absence. Thank you from the bottom of my little opera-craving heart. Great stuff. I found the comparison pieces especially and incredibly helpful, & ya I can hear the difference. Though for now it's probably mostly due to the excellent introductions and discussion you all provided. And possibly the fact that Katherine Jenkins, even to my layman's ears, redefines the phrase "easy target." 

deggial, you gave me Saint François d'Assise! Messiaen is totally fascinating but I had no idea how fascinating until now. Birdcalls! Synesthesia! I have no idea why I haven't listened to him more. 

To everyone who suggested I start with Le Nozze, that proved an entertaining suggestion. Antony, I agree Frederica von Stade owns Cherubino, there's just something about watching her sing that aria that gets me in the heart. 

rgz, I also love Amadeus and enjoyed watching Diana Damrau so much I ended up getting curious and listening to that aria over and over again. I listened to Natalie Dessay, Lucia Popp, Luciana Serra, and June Anderson, but the one who really blew me away was Edda Moser.

More to come!


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

I, in general dont like to watch ''classical'' music but rather enjoy the sound and make my own story in my head...


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

googlebordello said:


> rgz, I also love Amadeus and enjoyed watching Diana Damrau so much I ended up getting curious and listening to that aria over and over again. I listened to Natalie Dessay, Lucia Popp, Luciana Serra, and June Anderson, but the one who really blew me away was Edda Moser.


So you enjoy fierce soprano performing fierce, virtuoso aria. MY MAN. Here's some other aria by Mozart you might like then:











If you feel yourself drawn to such combination of virtuosic brilliance and fiery dramaticism, you should try some Italian music from first half of XIXth century, often referred to as "bel canto" (though it's better not to call it this way, as it's not really legitimate name of composer's style or period, rather a quality present in their music) performed by truely dramatic singers. The composers include Rossini (prelude), Donizetti and Bellini (the core) and Verdi (the postlude). Samples? Here you go, two of the most fierce sopranos ever doing Verdi:


----------

