# Rank these Mezzosoprani: Barbieri, Simionato, Stignani



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

These three are the most comparable singers I can think of. Please rank these three powerhouse mezzos from best to worst.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I would rank them in the order Simionato, Barbieri, Stignani, but only because I know Stignani's work less well, and then mostly from towards the end of her career - the Adalgisas with Callas, for instance. I much prefer Simionato in this role. She's terrific in the La Scala Trovatore of 1953 with Callas and does what she can with the role of the Gran Vestale in the 1954 Callas La Vestale, but these are all I really know. I know much more of Simionato's and Barbieri's work.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I would rank them in the order Simionato, Barbieri, Stignani, but only because I know Stignani's work less well, and then mostly from towards the end of her career - the Adalgisas with Callas, for instance. I much prefer Simionato in this role. She's terrific in the La Scala Trovatore of 1953 with Callas and does what she can with the role of the Gran Vestale in the 1954 Callas La Vestale, but these are all I really know. I know much more of Simionato's and Barbieri's work.


SNAP! I would add that I would distinguish between Simionato after 1960 and before, she tended to sing with more abandon in the same roles at the end of her career (although I prefer her earlier Rossini recordings to her later ones).

N.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

barbieri > simionato >>>>>> stignani


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

*Stignani* had a great voice, but it does nothing for me. When she sang Adalgisa in London in 1952, she was singled out for praise; for her even voice, her style (!), though not her stage deportment. One critic cited her "abbreviated figure," and further pronounced that few people would believe "so phlegmatic a virgin." (Oh, the English!). But the voice is solid, smooth, though it has no distinguishing characteristic that makes it memorable. Her voice has more beauty to it than the other two singers.

*Barbieri* has a more interesting voice, cruder, and a more recognizable timbre. I think I can pick her voice out in a blind test.
Interestingly, she denies ever singing in chest voice (to Stefan Zucker in an interview), though recordings show she does it liberally, especially in late career. I saw her in San Francisco as Zita in *Il trittico*; the voice was blowsy, but she made a great impression.

*Simionato* is the most familiar to me, though I have never seen her live - my impression of her is that she had a lighter voice than the other two, but she could hold her own in a competition of whom could sing louder, deeper, wilder. She astonishes as Santuzza, Carmen (albeit in Italian), Principessa de Bouillon, Adalgisa (the most fluid of the three), Azucena, Amneris.

I have to say, though, that my opinions here are strictly impressions of these singers, from recordings heard over a wide period, and not with the intention of comparing and contrasting.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

MAS said:


> *Stignani* had a great voice, but it does nothing for me. When she sang Adalgisa in London in 1952, she was singled out for praise; for her even voice, her style (!), though not her stage deportment. One critic cited her "abbreviated figure," and further pronounced that few people would believe "so phlegmatic a virgin." (Oh, the English!). But the voice is solid, smooth, though it has no distinguishing characteristic that makes it memorable. Her voice has more beauty to it than the other two singers.
> 
> *Barbieri* has a more interesting voice, cruder, and a more recognizable timbre. I think I can pick her voice out in a blind test.
> Interestingly, she denies ever singing in chest voice (to Stefan Zucker in an interview), though recordings show she does it liberally, especially in late career. I saw her in San Francisco as Zita in *Il trittico*; the voice was blowsy, but she made a great impression.
> ...


Both Simionato and Stignani in the Zucker interview denied ever using chest voice. Gencer in the same documentary says comically _Si vede che hanno la memoria corta!_ or "Obviously they have short memories!"...

My ranking: Simionato >>> Barbieri >>> Stignani.

They are all great singers but I gravitate to Simionato was vocally more secure than Barbieri, and the more exciting and intelligent to me. Barbieri and Stignani were forces of nature. Barbieri could be a bit hammy sometimes and her high notes were always a tad flat. Stignani had the best vocal endowment of the three but she could a bit detached where more _fuoco_ would have been welcome (for example, Amneris). Interestingly, Stignani lamented that she did not have the pep that Gianna Pederzini had.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Another point in Simionato's favour is her impressive top register. Callas once said it annoyed her that the critics never remarked that with Simionato, she sang the Norma/Adalgisa in the correct keys. With Stignani downward transpositions were made and Stignani still altered the vocal line so as to duck the high notes.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Another point in Simionato's favour is her impressive top register. Callas once said it annoyed her that the critics never remarked that with Simionato, she sang the Norma/Adalgisa in the correct keys. With Stignani downward transpositions were made and Stignani still altered the vocal line so as to duck the high notes.


There's a funny accident in their Norma of 1950 in Mexico. Simionato forgets her music and at the end of their duo they both end on the High C at the end.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

simionato definitely has a better top than barbieri--sometimes I think of barbieri as an contralto, not a mezzo. it makes barbieri more imposing for the more witchy characters--azucena, ulrica, and the like. i do like simionato more when the character is supposed to be sexy, not spooky.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

As Amneris the combination of Simionato's Hollywod figure, her soaring voice and great acting and involvement would have been unbeatable. I like Barbieri in witchy roles. Both she and Stignani had humongous voices. Stignani wasn't sexy enough for Dalilah.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

VitellioScarpia said:


> Both Simionato and Stignani in the Zucker interview denied ever using chest voice. Gencer in the same documentary says comically _Si vede che hanno la memoria corta!_ or "Obviously they have short memories!"...
> 
> My ranking: Simionato >>> Barbieri >>> Stignani.
> 
> They are all great singers but I gravitate to Simionato was vocally more secure than Barbieri, and the more exciting and intelligent to me. Barbieri and Stignani were forces of nature. Barbieri could be a bit hammy sometimes and her high notes were always a tad flat. Stignani had the best vocal endowment of the three but she could a bit detached where more _fuoco_ would have been welcome (for example, Amneris). Interestingly, Stignani lamented that she did not have the pep that Gianna Pederzini had.


You mean Barbieri.

I think all the singers on the Zucker interview just had a very different definition of what they call chest voice. Everyone from Magda Olivero, Barbieri, Pobbe, Simionato, Gavazzi, etc they all denied it and said it's vulgar. They are referring to what "dramatic" singers today sound like: Voce Ingolata. When they tried to demonstrate, they mimicked a depressed larynx and a very constricted throaty vomit-y sound which is what we hear in today's lower/bigger voices.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

I tried, but it's still impossible for me to rank them. 

Stignani has the most beautiful voice of the three, and the most balanced. She can be really thrilling when she wants to (listen to her "il figlio mio! mio figlio avea bruciato!") but I don't know what exactly is wrong with her than doesn't exactly grip me. 

Simionato is the one I enjoy the most. Her chest voice is magnificent, cavernous, effortlessly huge. But sometimes the top and middle can be clearly smaller and less squillante than her lower half. 

I remember talking to an italian friend and he said about Barbieri "troppo sguaiata" (very vulgar) which kind of stuck with me. I think that makes her perfect for Azucena and Ulrica, but from what I've seen, I'm assuming he's not just referring to her singing. Her voice is incredibly rich, the epitome of Verdi Mezzo, but like many of you said, her acuti are squeezed and small compared to the rest of her voice, and she can be flat indeed. But none of that bothers me, really. She's incredibly thrilling and fun and to be honest the acuti of a mezzo and a "vulgar Azucena" are the least of my concerns. 

I think I should make this even more challenging and add Bruna Castagna, Cloé Elmo and a very underrated non-italian: Oralia Dominguez! And no, Cossotto is a smaller voice overall and doesn't really fit with these.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

I've enjoyed all three mezzo's recordings - particularly Stignani in the _Forza del Destino_ with Marinuzzi, Barbieri in _Gioconda_ with Callas and Simionato in Aida (especially the Cetra recording with Gui).

Having said that, Simionato's contribution in Gli Ugonotti is outstanding: I don't think many other mezzos have ever sounded like that


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

Tuoksu said:


> I tried, but it's still impossible for me to rank them.
> 
> Stignani has the most beautiful voice of the three, and the most balanced. She can be really thrilling when she wants to (listen to her "il figlio mio! mio figlio avea bruciato!") but I don't know what exactly is wrong with her than doesn't exactly grip me.
> 
> ...


(Yes, I had meant Barbieri in #11.)

If you add Castagna, Elmo, and Dominguez it would be really hard. I am glad to see that I am not the only one that thinks Cossotto is not in the same league!


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> You mean Barbieri.
> 
> I think all the singers on the Zucker interview just had a very different definition of what they call chest voice. Everyone from Magda Olivero, Barbieri, Pobbe, Simionato, Gavazzi, etc they all denied it and said it's vulgar. They are referring to what "dramatic" singers today sound like: Voce Ingolata. When they tried to demonstrate, they mimicked a depressed larynx and a very constricted throaty vomit-y sound which is what we hear in today's lower/bigger voices.


This must be the case. In fact, if by 'chest voice' you mean the chest register, then all singers use it! When people talk about chest voice in this context they generally mean low notes that have a full, resonant, fruity quality to them. The divas on the Zucker video are correct, the secret to singing the low notes (where the chest voice is more prevalent naturally in all voices) is not to exaggerate the chest register, but to make sure there is a huge amount of head register in the mix, thus giving the tones a full, complete bloom.

N.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

The Conte said:


> This must be the case. In fact, if by 'chest voice' you mean the chest register, then all singers use it! When people talk about chest voice in this context they generally mean low notes that have a full, resonant, fruity quality to them. The divas on the Zucker video are correct, the secret to singing the low notes (where the chest voice is more prevalent naturally in all voices) is not to exaggerate the chest register, but to make sure there is a huge amount of head register in the mix, thus giving the tones a full, complete bloom.
> 
> N.


If the question was about _voce ingolata_ and _voce intubata_, they are right and so are you. But they were asked about _voce di petto_ which has been either not used correctly or avoided altogether since the mid-60s or so. As Freni says in a master class, it makes singers sound 120 years old in the lower range and _questo non serve a niente_. :lol:


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

VitellioScarpia said:


> If the question was about _voce ingolata_ and _voce intubata_, they are right and so are you. But they were asked about _voce di petto_ which has been either not used correctly or avoided altogether since the mid-60s or so. As Freni says in a master class, it makes singers sound 120 years old in the lower range and _questo non serve a niente_. :lol:


What is Freni referring to? Voce di petto or voce di petto used incorrectly?

N.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

The Conte said:


> What is Freni referring to? Voce di petto or voce di petto used incorrectly?
> 
> N.


Freni was referring to a couple of things: using head voice too low when the natural thing to do would be to use chest resonance. She was not advocating to use it incorrectly but not to use it was also a mistake which the students to make themselves heard were using a hooty sound which she labelled as _sounding a 120!_


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

Here is the very interesting Freni masterclass mentioned above by VitellioScarpia. She was referring to the lack of projection i.e ingolata. She mimicked the swallowed held-back way they sang in a hilarious way and kept demonstrating how they should just let go and sing "forward". 





Regarding the Opera Fanatic Documentary, it is very clear that they were referring to voce ingolata, otherwise Fedora "the chest" Barbieri would be either insanely delusional or out of her mind.

Marcella Pobbe went as far as saying she doesn't know what chest voice is :lol: "non so..non so cosa vuol dire 'voce di petto' ".

Simionato straight-out said "non esiste voce di petto!" and something along the line of "I challenge you to show me that it exists" :lol:

I think from their demonstrations you can tell they are taking it too literally, hence Simionato's statement. They think it's literally a voice that comes from the chest. Now try to produce that sound "with your lungs" and you'll see what I mean. It sounds like yawning (hello Anna, Jonas..etc).


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Tuoksu said:


> These three are the most comparable singers I can think of. Please rank these three powerhouse mezzos from best to worst.


ooo, that's hard
Barbieri: wonderful chest voice, not the strongest upper register
Stignani: upper register rivaling Ponselle, not the strongest lower register
Simionato: relatively strong on both, but not as strong as either with regards to their respective strengths

by a very, very thin margin, I'm going to say Simionato>Stignani>Barbieri


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

Stignani's name came up in a chapter I was reading in "Singers of the Century" by J. B. Steane:

"The whole question of Callas' voice and its production is of course material for an essay on its own. Even in 1952 the tone itself had only a compromised kind of beauty, unequal to the purity and warmth of Ebe Stignani, the Adalgisa of those Norma performances and twenty years her senior"






While I like Stignani's singing, I'm not sure I've heard her at her best...

Can anyone suggest recordings which show Stignani at her best? Any of these in good sound and give a better sense of what Steane was describing?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Revitalized Classics said:


> Stignani's name came up in a chapter I was reading in "Singers of the Century" by J. B. Steane:
> 
> "The whole question of Callas' voice and its production is of course material for an essay on its own. Even in 1952 the tone itself had only a compromised kind of beauty, unequal to the purity and warmth of Ebe Stignani, the Adalgisa of those Norma performances and twenty years her senior"
> 
> ...


I've always enjoyed her Azucena in a live recording of Il Trovatore from La Scala with Callas. (It was recorded in 1953 and the release with the clearest sound and I believe at the correct pitch was released by Myto.

N.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Revitalized Classics said:


> Stignani's name came up in a chapter I was reading in "Singers of the Century" by J. B. Steane:
> 
> "The whole question of Callas' voice and its production is of course material for an essay on its own. Even in 1952 the tone itself had only a compromised kind of beauty, unequal to the purity and warmth of Ebe Stignani, the Adalgisa of those Norma performances and twenty years her senior"
> 
> ...






 I love her singing Mon Cour. The Italian Flagstad. It was huge and even with glowing high notes. She is also impressive singing Casta Diva. She was built like a fire hydrant.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

The Conte said:


> I've always enjoyed her Azucena in a live recording of Il Trovatore from La Scala with Callas. (It was recorded in 1953 and the release with the clearest sound and I believe at the correct pitch was released by Myto.
> 
> N.


Thanks for sharing - her singing is very exciting there!


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I love her singing Mon Cour. The Italian Flagstad. It was huge and even with glowing high notes. She is also impressive singing Casta Diva. She was built like a fire hydrant.


Thanks for this. That's a lovely record.

I'm inclined to forget because she sounded so good in the fifties that her debut was way back in the twenties


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

:devil:

.,...........


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I love her singing Mon Cour. The Italian Flagstad. It was huge and even with glowing high notes. She is also impressive singing Casta Diva. She was built like a fire hydrant.


edit: I'm sorry, you meant Stignani, not Callas. I was very, very confused haha


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Revitalized Classics said:


> Can anyone suggest recordings which show Stignani at her best? Any of these in good sound and give a better sense of what Steane was describing?


I suppose the 1946 Aida with Serafin, Caniglia and Gigli or the 1939 Verdi Requiem, also with Serafin, Caniglia and Gigli.

Still pretty average in my books--a pretty enough voice in better shape than in her late Normas with Callas or the later Aida with Tebaldi, but still not exactly stirring or passionate or engaging.

eta - revisiting the act 4 duet from the 1946 Aida. I think my reaction to her is similar to my reaction to a lot of Antonietta Stella recordings. She has the perfect, ideal voice for the part, but she doesn't really do much with it, either musically or dramatically. Ultimately listening to her is a boring experience.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> ooo, that's hard
> Barbieri: wonderful chest voice, not the strongest upper register
> Stignani: upper register rivaling Ponselle, not the strongest lower register
> Simionato: relatively strong on both, but not as strong as either with regards to their respective strengths
> ...


Accurate, I'd have to say! I'm sold.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> Here is the very interesting Freni masterclass mentioned above by VitellioScarpia. She was referring to the lack of projection i.e ingolata. She mimicked the swallowed held-back way they sang in a hilarious way and kept demonstrating how they should just let go and sing "forward".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, let's get some definitions clear. I've always thought of 'chest voice' as meaning chest register. All singers use it, almost all the time. Actually almost everybody uses it because otherwise you wouldn't be able to speak. (There are a few women who don't use it at all when they speak and they have very high pitched voices.) The other register is head voice or head register. At the same time a singer also needs to use head register (sometimes referred to as blending the registers). Simionato's demonstration of good singing is exactly what I would call blending the registers, therefore she is singing with both the head and chest registers in the mix. Her demonstration of what she thinks chest voice is, is use of the chest register with practically no head register and therefore no resonance in the mask (as she correctly says). I would expect true voce ingolata to be even more swallowed and falsely dark rather than just not resonating in the mask. Had the question been what do you think about using solely chest voice, then the divas would have been correct.

I will have to see what Freni says another time as I don't have time to watch the masterclass at the moment. She is right that the head voice should lesson for a woman singing in the bottom of her range (just as chest voice should lessen for men at the top of theirs). However, there will always be _some_ chest voice/register and _some_ head voice/register for both men and women in all parts of the voice, it's the amount and proportion of each to the other that is the key to blending the registers.

N.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

howlingfantods said:


> I suppose the 1946 Aida with Serafin, Caniglia and Gigli or the 1939 Verdi Requiem, also with Serafin, Caniglia and Gigli.
> 
> Still pretty average in my books--a pretty enough voice in better shape than in her late Normas with Callas or the later Aida with Tebaldi, but still not exactly stirring or passionate or engaging.
> 
> eta - revisiting the act 4 duet from the 1946 Aida. I think my reaction to her is similar to my reaction to a lot of Antonietta Stella recordings. She has the perfect, ideal voice for the part, but she doesn't really do much with it, either musically or dramatically. Ultimately listening to her is a boring experience.


Thanks for the suggestions. I have both those sets but I can't recall anything in particular about Stignani's performances: I'll try them again. She sounds a lot more vivid in the live Trovatore set from La Scala recommended above.

Re: Stella, when I think about it I actually have heard quite a few of her recordings e.g. Don Carlo in mono then stereo, Simon Boccanegra, Traviata, Aida (Live), Trovatore, Andrea Chenier... the Aida was a much more animated and interesting performance than, say, her Elisabetta in the studio but the sound quality is ropey.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> edit: I'm sorry, you meant Stignani, not Callas. I was very, very confused haha


The last part of the quote that began about Callas was asking about good recordings of Stignani and I ran with that when I should have said it was about Stignani.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Revitalized Classics said:


> Thanks for the suggestions. I have both those sets but I can't recall anything in particular about Stignani's performances: I'll try them again. She sounds a lot more vivid in the live Trovatore set from La Scala recommended above.
> 
> Re: Stella, when I think about it I actually have heard quite a few of her recordings e.g. Don Carlo in mono then stereo, Simon Boccanegra, Traviata, Aida (Live), Trovatore, Andrea Chenier... the Aida was a much more animated and interesting performance than, say, her Elisabetta in the studio but the sound quality is ropey.


I could be wrong but I believe Stignani was from the stand and sing school of singing. This was from the time that having a voice that was both gigantic ( Italian Flagstad you know) and breathtaking in it's beauty was enough. Similar to the great Milanov. Both of these were before the heyday of Callas that upped the game for opera singers. I imagine the shear magnificence of Stignani in an opera house could overcome the visual of a fire hydrant that barely moved onstage.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

The thing that I feel was left out of this list if I had started this thread was the addition of Rise Stevens. American singers were often overlooked ( think Steber) during this era in favor of European singers, but Stevens had it all: incredible looks on stage, great acting, one of the most beautiful mezzo voices of all time and she was perhaps the greatest Carmen of all time and the singer who did the role more than any other singer in the history of the Met. She was also sensational supposedly as Dalilah. In a big discussion earlier on great Carmens that I came too late to have any impact on the discussion, I noticed in the discussion I was the only person to mention her. She is often forgotten today but I heard her as Carmen several times when I had Sirius Met Opera channel and she blew me away. 



 Here she is looking like a woman who really could drive men insane singing with her chocolaty mezzo that was without any breaks and of unearthly beauty from the bottom to the top.


----------



## Revitalized Classics (Oct 31, 2018)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I could be wrong but I believe Stignani was from the stand and sing school of singing. This was from the time that having a voice that was both gigantic ( Italian Flagstad you know) and breathtaking in it's beauty was enough. Similar to the great Milanov. Both of these were before the heyday of Callas that upped the game for opera singers. I imagine the shear magnificence of Stignani in an opera house could overcome the visual of a fire hydrant that barely moved onstage.


I find a lot of 78 recordings - so basically everything in Stignani's prime years - can sound very dry and boxy when transferred to CD, particularly when a lot of noise reduction has been applied. This really does not help singers like Stignani whose primary virtue was a refulgent voice which filled opera houses: the records like the 1946 Aida can have marvellous clarity but are nearly as dry as Toscanini's records from Studio 8-H.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Stignani was in what some consider the greatest Verdi Requiem ever recorded with Caniglia, Gigli, Stignani and Pinza from '39. There are maybe a dozen versions on Youtube and here is one:



. The only flaw in my opinion is the gorgeous voice of the soprano is often flat.


----------



## silentio (Nov 10, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Stignani was in what some consider the greatest Verdi Requiem ever recorded with Caniglia, Gigli, Stignani and Pinza from '39. There are maybe a dozen versions on Youtube and here is one:
> 
> 
> 
> . The only flaw in my opinion is the gorgeous voice of the soprano is often flat.


If the soprano had been the young Tebaldi, it will be perfect.


----------



## silentio (Nov 10, 2014)

The sound quality is poor, but enough to appreciate the instrument of Stignani. She would definitely be a great Brangäne or Ortrud.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I could be wrong but I believe Stignani was from the stand and sing school of singing. This was from the time that having a voice that was both gigantic ( Italian Flagstad you know) and breathtaking in it's beauty was enough. Similar to the great Milanov. Both of these were before the heyday of Callas that upped the game for opera singers. I imagine the shear magnificence of Stignani in an opera house could overcome the visual of a fire hydrant that barely moved onstage.


Visconti, talking about the La Scala Callas production of *La Vestale* with Stignani as the High Priestess.



> How different from contending with a singer of the old school, such as Ebe Stignani. As the High Priestess, Stignani was hopeless with her two stock gestures, worse than a scrubwoman on stage. Unbearable! She was the antithesis of Maria, who absorbed and grew from day to day. How I don't know. By some uncanny theatrical instinct, if put on the right course, she always exceeded your hopes. How beautiful she and Corelli looked during the love duet in the temple, the sacred flame flickering on the altar. Pure physical beauty, figures of neoclassicism reborn.












Corelli and Callas in the centre with Stignani to one side with the Vestals.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

silentio said:


> If the soprano had been the young Tebaldi, it will be perfect.


Tebaldi would've been 17 in 1939, too young.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> The last part of the quote that began about Callas was asking about good recordings of Stignani and I ran with that when I should have said it was about Stignani.


yeah, I was thinking "I guess he meant the equivalent of Flagstad in Italian rep rather than of Italian ethnicity. even then though...Callas never sounded remotely similar to Flagstad. you would need someone with more head voice participation. more along the lines of Anita Cerquetti, Martina Arroyo or Dusolina Giannini"


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> yeah, I was thinking "I guess he meant the equivalent of Flagstad in Italian rep rather than of Italian ethnicity. even then though...Callas never sounded remotely similar to Flagstad. you would need someone with more head voice participation. more along the lines of Anita Cerquetti, Martina Arroyo or Dusolina Giannini"


I had always heard it was Stignani that was the Italian Flagstad because of the size, beauty and evenness of her range I suppose. It was supposed to have been both gorgeous and perfectly enormous. I cannot find anything on this on the internet but I know I read it somewhere . The only place I found Callas being similar to Flagstad was this famous quote by R. Bonynge: He said of Callas"But before she slimmed down, I mean this was such a colossal voice. It just poured out of her, the way Flagstad's did.... Callas had a huge voice. When she and Stignani sang Norma, at the bottom of the range you could barely tell who was who ... Oh it was colossal. And she took the big sound right up to the top


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

The Conte said:


> So, let's get some definitions clear. I've always thought of 'chest voice' as meaning chest register. All singers use it, almost all the time. Actually almost everybody uses it because otherwise you wouldn't be able to speak. (There are a few women who don't use it at all when they speak and they have very high pitched voices.) The other register is head voice or head register. At the same time a singer also needs to use head register (sometimes referred to as blending the registers). Simionato's demonstration of good singing is exactly what I would call blending the registers, therefore she is singing with both the head and chest registers in the mix. Her demonstration of what she thinks chest voice is, is use of the chest register with practically no head register and therefore no resonance in the mask (as she correctly says). I would expect true voce ingolata to be even more swallowed and falsely dark rather than just not resonating in the mask. Had the question been what do you think about using solely chest voice, then the divas would have been correct.
> 
> N.


 I agree with you that almost everyone will be using a blend of head and chest registers almost at all times except for very annoying female voices or Morgan Freeman. (joke:lol

The terminology is quite tricky here. All registers, chest or otherwise resonate in the head, but we are not calling them all head voice. For example when Simionato gestures at her chest and tried to constrict the sound to that area as if she was singing with her lungs, she was trying to prove that a resonance in the chest is impossible which technically makes sense, because unless it resonated in the vocal tract in the head no sound whatsoever would have been produced. Hence her challenging Stefan to prove it even exists.

To me chest voice is something that happens in the throat. It's certain muscles that you engage and somehow it manipulated and positions the larynx in a way that produces that much darker and clearer sound. Some people have "lower" darker voices because of how developed these muscles are or how low their larynx naturally is. I'm not really sure about this, to be honest, I'm not an expert. But that's what I gathered from my personal experience, my sensations when I try to sing and what I've read.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> I agree with you that almost everyone will be using a blend of head and chest registers almost at all times except for very annoying female voices or Morgan Freeman. (joke:lol
> 
> The terminology is quite tricky here. All registers, chest or otherwise resonate in the head, but we are not calling them all head voice. For example when Simionato gestures at her chest and tried to constrict the sound to that area as if she was singing with her lungs, she was trying to prove that a resonance in the chest is impossible which technically makes sense, because unless it resonated in the vocal tract in the head no sound whatsoever would have been produced. Hence her challenging Stefan to prove it even exists.
> 
> To me chest voice is something that happens in the throat. It's certain muscles that you engage and somehow it manipulated and positions the larynx in a way that produces that much darker and clearer sound. Some people have "lower" darker voices because of how developed these muscles are or how low their larynx naturally is. I'm not really sure about this, to be honest, I'm not an expert. But that's what I gathered from my personal experience, my sensations when I try to sing and what I've read.


We agree 100% (Even about Morgan Freeman. :lol

I find it interesting that the first diva in the Stefan Zucker clip changes the term to _emissione di petto_ which clarifies your point that they think chest voice means chest resonance, whereas I associate it with chest register and therefore a group of sounds that relate to movements of a particular muscle group in and around the throat.

_"To me chest voice is something that happens in the throat. It's certain muscles that you engage and somehow it manipulated and positions the larynx in a way that produces that much darker and clearer sound."_

I like this description, yet I would go further. The dark nature of what you call chest voice comes from the chest register and the clearer nature comes from head register. Therefore what people tend to label chest voice (including Zucker) is actually a skillful blend of the two registers. This may partly explain why the mezzo divas misunderstand what he is talking about.

N.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

The Conte said:


> We agree 100% (Even about Morgan Freeman. :lol
> 
> I like this description, yet I would go further. The dark nature of what *you call chest voice comes from the chest register and the clearer nature comes from head register*. Therefore what people tend to label chest voice (including Zucker) is actually a skillful blend of the two registers. This may partly explain why the mezzo divas misunderstand what he is talking about.
> 
> N.


I call this chiaroscuro. It's that balance that makes a good chest voice good. the imbalance can produce two things: The first is too much chiaro and the voice is very lacking in "chest contribution" for lack of a better term and therefore is too light and overbright and "empty" like modern coloraturas (as opposed to Tetrazzini, Patti or De Hidalgo who had great chest contribution in their voices.) The other way it could go is too much scuro which is the voce ingolata, when you try to add too much chest contribution that it constricts muscles that don't need to be constricted and creates that woofy Netrebko/Kaufmann sound.


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

The Conte said:


> We agree 100% (Even about Morgan Freeman. :lol
> 
> I find it interesting that the first diva in the Stefan Zucker clip changes the term to _emissione di petto_ which clarifies your point that they think chest voice means chest resonance, whereas I associate it with chest register and therefore a group of sounds that relate to movements of a particular muscle group in and around the throat.
> 
> ...


I do not believe that they misunderstood what Zucker was asking. After the mid-sixties there was a trend in vocal coaching that use of the chest was _bad for the voice_ and they used Callas', Schwarskopf's declines (among others) as examples of misuse. Many singers avoided its use as the confusion in singing increased and created hooty and inaudible singers at the bottom of their ranges.

I think that these singers jumped on the bandwagon of the times. Pobbe says "I don't even know what a it means", and Barbieri feigns innocence with a _Mai_. Simionato is showing the difference between _ingolata_ and chest resonance which is called for short hand _voce di petto_.

I am with Gencer: _Loro. Proprio loro che tutta la vita hanno usato la voce di petto!_ ("Them. Precisely them who for their whole lives have used the chest voice!"). :devil:

Everyone needs to blend chest resonance: even the coloraturas (Tetrazzini, de Hidalgo, etc.) That's what makes many singers today BORING to listen: either do not use it at all or don't know how to use it well. Yes, I am really telling you how I feel about it... :lol:


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> I call this chiaroscuro. It's that balance that makes a good chest voice good. the imbalance can produce two things: The first is too much chiaro and the voice is very lacking in "chest contribution" for lack of a better term and therefore is too light and overbright and "empty" like modern coloraturas (as opposed to Tetrazzini, Patti or De Hidalgo who had great chest contribution in their voices.) The other way it could go is too much scuro which is the voce ingolata, when you try to add too much chest contribution that it constricts muscles that don't need to be constricted and creates that woofy Netrebko/Kaufmann sound.


Yes, that's it, whilst I don't use the term chiaroscuro, your description of it is the same as what I call 'blending the registers'. This is one of the tricky things about singing technique, we are often saying the same thing but using different terms.

N.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

VitellioScarpia said:


> I do not believe that they misunderstood what Zucker was asking. After the mid-sixties there was a trend in vocal coaching that use of the chest was _bad for the voice_ and they used Callas', Schwarskopf's declines (among others) as examples of misuse. Many singers avoided its use as the confusion in singing increased and created hooty and inaudible singers at the bottom of their ranges.
> 
> I think that these singers jumped on the bandwagon of the times. Pobbe says "I don't even know what a it means", and Barbieri feigns innocence with a _Mai_. Simionato is showing the difference between _ingolata_ and chest resonance which is called for short hand _voce di petto_.
> 
> ...


:lol: Well that's a very plausible explanation. But I want to believe they're not really lying that blatantly. hahaha


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

Tuoksu said:


> :lol: Well that's a very plausible explanation. But I want to believe they're not really lying that blatantly. hahaha


No, they would _nev-ver_ lie... :tiphat:


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

VitellioScarpia said:


> No, they would _nev-ver_ lie... :tiphat:


*Barbieri voice* MAI! :lol:


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> I call this chiaroscuro. It's that balance that makes a good chest voice good. the imbalance can produce two things: The first is too much chiaro and the voice is very lacking in "chest contribution" for lack of a better term and therefore is too light and overbright and "empty" like modern coloraturas (as opposed to Tetrazzini, Patti or De Hidalgo who had great chest contribution in their voices.) The other way it could go is too much scuro which is the voce ingolata, when you try to add too much chest contribution that it constricts muscles that don't need to be constricted and creates that woofy Netrebko/Kaufmann sound.


@Tuoksu
I'm not sure about this. "Gola" in Italian means "throat," thus the "voce ingolata" means "throaty," or better, "stuck in the throat," which means to me that the voice is not free - the singer would have a constricted top, the sound cannot get out and would not resonate properly. "Chiaroscuro" means literally lightdark, and to my mind has nothing to do with chest voice or the mix of head and chest voice. Isn't the term "belt" in Broadway terms, the ability to mix head and chest resonance to propel the voice with force, resulting in the broadway belt? 
If a singer is not able or won't sing in chest he/she sounds weak. I don't think a good chest voice is mixed with the head. Look at Tosca's.....è morto, or gli perdono." If you use head voice there, she's not using the chest at all. Try singing it first in head, then in chest. Try Callas, then Nilsson, Kabaivanska, Naglestad, then Netrebko. The middle three hardly use their chest, the bookends do (I was surprised at Netrebko). 
However, I am not a singer, so my *opinion* may be compromised.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

MAS said:


> @Tuoksu
> I'm not sure about this. "Gola" in Italian means "throat," thus the "voce ingolata" means "throaty," or better, "stuck in the throat," which means to me that the voice is not free - the singer would have a constricted top, the sound cannot get out and would not resonate properly. "Chiaroscuro" means literally lightdark, and to my mind has nothing to do with chest voice or the mix of head and chest voice. Isn't the term "belt" in Broadway terms, the ability to mix head and chest resonance to propel the voice with force, resulting in the broadway belt?
> If a singer is not able or won't sing in chest he/she sounds weak. I don't think a good chest voice is mixed with the head. Look at Tosca's.....è morto, or gli perdono." If you use head voice there, she's not using the chest at all. Try singing it first in head, then in chest. Try Callas, then Nilsson, Kabaivanska, Naglestad, then Netrebko. The middle three hardly use their chest, the bookends do (I was surprised at Netrebko).
> However, I am not a singer, so my *opinion* may be compromised.


Voce ingolata in my opinion happens when certain muscles are deliberately engaged way too much which shouldn't be engaged in the first place, which creates that constriction preventing the voice from being completely free, along with trying to project "lower" (like in Simionato's example of "bad chest voice") which creates the woofy swallowed sound.

I'm using Franco Tenelli's definition of Chiaroscuro, which I guess can be a bit confusing.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tuoksu said:


> Voce ingolata in my opinion happens when certain muscles are deliberately engaged way too much which shouldn't be engaged in the first place, which creates that constriction preventing the voice from being completely free, along with trying to project "lower" (like in Simionato's example of "bad chest voice") which creates the woofy swallowed sound.
> 
> I'm using Franco Tenelli's definition of Chiaroscuro, which I guess can be a bit confusing.


Sorry, I was totally confused by Mr. Tenelli's explanation of Chiaroscuro, as I was by your description of _voce ingolata_. It sounds like the singer is *deliberately* producing a constricted voice! To my mind, the voce ingolata is a failure of technique, or the wrong technique for producing the voice.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I've never really heard of the term "voce ingolata", but rather the shorter 'ingolata' which quite simply means 'swallowed'. Italians who I studied with would use it for a singer whose vowels aren't pure and sit at the back of the throat rather than having a forward placement. They wouldn't use it for voice that is merely falsely dark by the larynx being too low or there being too much chest voice in the mix (of chiaroscuro).

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

I've bern confused by using the term *chiaroscuro* for anything but the visual arts, painting or photography, but thanks to the posts above, I've done some research and found that, indeed, the term is used in operatic singing as well, as part of the *bel canto* technique.

In essence, it is a brilliant sound (_squillo_) coupled with a dark timbre (_scuro_) (see Franco Corelli).

Which brings me to a question: do mezzos have _squillo_?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

MAS said:


> I've bern confused by using the term *chiaroscuro* for anything but the visual arts, painting or photography, but thanks to the posts above, I've done some research and found that, indeed, the term is used in operatic singing as well, as part of the *bel canto* technique.
> 
> In essence, it is a brilliant sound (_squillo_) coupled with a dark timbre (_scuro_) (see Franco Corelli).
> 
> Which brings me to a question: do mezzos have _squillo_?


It depends what you mean by _squillo_. When it comes to bel canto technique there are two distinct sets of muscles that govern the vocal chords. Each muscle group relates to what has been termed a register by the old school. They are named chest register and head register which unfortunately is confusing as if other parts of the body were involved other than the vocal chords. (The reason for these names is that the sound each register makes can seem to resonate in those areas to the listener.)

All singers must use both registers efficiently to have a good technique. This blend of the registers is called chiaroscuro to some and therefore if _squillo_ is the sound resulting from a correct use of the head register (blended in with the chest register) then use all singers (including mezzos) should have it. However, I can see a case for saying that _squillo_ is a particular type of ringing, bronzey sound that you get when tenors use head voice efficiently. In which case mezzos wouldn't have it.

So it all depends on your definition of _squillo_ in the first place. I have never heard a teacher use the term chiaroscuro, nor have I come across it in a book. Blend of the registers is the term I am familiar with.

N.


----------



## Tuoksu (Sep 3, 2015)

MAS said:


> I've bern confused by using the term *chiaroscuro* for anything but the visual arts, painting or photography, but thanks to the posts above, I've done some research and found that, indeed, the term is used in operatic singing as well, as part of the *bel canto* technique.
> 
> In essence, it is a brilliant sound (_squillo_) coupled with a dark timbre (_scuro_) (see Franco Corelli).
> 
> Which brings me to a question:* do mezzos have squillo?*


Of course they do! All voices do. Squillo, that trumpet-like quality, happens when you incorporate the clarity and power of chest voice with the brightness of the head voice. If you don't, the voice will sound dull and hollow like Anita in the example below. Her middle and top are hollow, weak and collapsed because she's muffled (ingolata) and not using enough "correct scuro". On the other hand, Oralia sounds like thunder and laser beams!


----------



## VitellioScarpia (Aug 27, 2017)

Tuoksu said:


> Of course they do! All voices do. Squillo, that trumpet-like quality, happens when you incorporate the clarity and power of chest voice with the brightness of the head voice. If you don't, the voice will sound dull and hollow like Anita in the example below. Her middle and top are hollow, weak and collapsed because she's muffled (ingolata) and not using enough "correct scuro". On the other hand, Oralia sounds like thunder and laser beams!


Oralia sounds like she could have subdued the Ethiopian army with the final _Empia Razza! Anatema su voi!_ at 8:18.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Stignani certainly had squillo. There is only a note and a half difference in how high she sings and sopranos such as Tebaldi, Nilsson and Callas sang with incredible squillo. Her top is just as bright.


----------



## SanyiKocka (May 6, 2020)

Barbieri, I think, is more contralto than mezzo. Her Carmen sounds a little weird to me , but her Azucena and Madam Arfvidson(Ulrica) always rank the first on my list.


----------

