# True or False: Opera Largely Is About Nostalgia For the Lost Past



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Like baseball car collectors I think this is largely true for most opera fanatics I know except for someone like Mas who got to see all those greats from SFO for decades. How is it for you? I did love going to Seattle Opera during it's heyday under Speight Jenkins but i don't go anymore at all. For me most of my great obsessions are about dead singers from long ago. The ultimate would be Sutherland's debut Alcina around ' 59 in that tiny Venice opera house with direction and sets and costumes by Zeffirelli. Overload!!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Well . . . false.

False in the sense of how other "old" music and art is regarded. We don't call it "nostalgia" when we're listening to Mozart or viewing the Mona Lisa.

Besides, "nostalgia" is the longing for something we actually LIVED through that we remember fondly. None of us were actually there when Beethoven debuted his Third Symphony, or when Monet painted some water lillies.

We may feel nostalgic for a time we never experienced, but that is often because we romanticize it, thinking only of the lovely things from that time, not the horrid living conditions and whatnot.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

pianozach said:


> Well . . . false.
> 
> False in the sense of how other "old" music and art is regarded. We don't call it "nostalgia" when we're listening to Mozart or viewing the Mona Lisa.
> 
> ...


I wish I had talked to you first  Maybe still my poor wording can get a discussion going including folks we don't normally hear from


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

There are two things here and it's important not to confuse the two.

One is the music itself (mostly by dead composers) and the other is a love of singers who are no longer singing. The second of these is exacerbated by the consensus (even if only hereabouts) that today's singers in general and overall aren't as good as those singing one hundred... seventy... or even forty years ago.

N.


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

The Conte said:


> There are two things here and it's important not to confuse the two.
> 
> One is the music itself (mostly by dead composers) and the other is a love of singers who are no longer singing. The second of these is exacerbated by the consensus (even if only hereabouts) that today's singers in general and overall aren't as good as those singing one hundred... seventy... or even forty years ago.
> 
> N.


I agree. And to be frank, I am not always happy with regietheater productions. I often think the direction hinders the quality of the singing.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Francasacchi said:


> I agree. And to be frank, I am not always happy with regietheater productions. I often think the direction hinders the quality of the singing.


Excellent point and so there is a third element as well!

N.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

I am not super young any more, but probably younger than several people on this opera forum. Born 1976 - now you know. 

I do not share the sentiment, that all contemporary singers are bad. I know Dalila (from Samson and Dalila) the way Garanca sings it and it is my preference. I simply like her best, better than the stars we had here, sorry. I wrote elsewhere, that I like Marina Rebeka. As a Norma freak, I could not avoid Callas, right ? That's what makes me feel at home here.

The contemporary music for the opera is mostly terrible. There you might call me nostalgic, but most random people in the street would tell you the same. And many of them would accept Verdi, once they got acclimated to the operatic singing style.

As for the plots - yeah, you got me there ! I pay a lot of attention to them, I am not "just listen to the music" person. They are quaint, romantic, outdated, it would be a hell to really live in the societies that have those values. Pretty as a dream, not the reality I really want.


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I wish I had talked to you first  Maybe still my poor wording can get a discussion going *including folks we don't normally hear from*


Is that my cue?

I don't know if nostalgia is the right word for me at least but when listening to recordings (opera or concert repertoire) I know that I often reach for the older recordings I judge as "classic" recordings because they have been tested by time. I'm less interested in Gergiev's Wagner, for example, than I am in Karajan's. But I'm still excited to see opera live because it's a totally different experience, and I have been thrilled to see certain performers live even though I tend to avoid their recordings. So my answer is that recorded opera can have an element of nostalgia, since we are able to hear how opera was performed by people who are no longer performing or no longer alive, but I get less of this when I go to see a performance.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Perhaps nostalgia isn't the right word but I actually love imagining what Flagstad or Ponselle or Tetrazinni would have sounded like live and what it would have been like to experience them live. Old recordings create a different world for me. Yes classical music itself is old but I never think of it as old if a great artist brings it alive for me.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BBSVK said:


> I am not super young any more, but probably younger than several people on this opera forum. Born 1976 - now you know.
> 
> I do not share the sentiment, that all contemporary singers are bad. I know Dalila (from Samson and Dalila) the way Garanca sings it and it is my preference. I simply like her best, better than the stars we had here, sorry. I wrote elsewhere, that I like Marina Rebeka. As a Norma freak, I could not avoid Callas, right ? That's what makes me feel at home here.
> 
> ...


Garanca is gorgeous and has a style of singing that is contemporary for opera today. I'd be happy to hear her in anything. Originally I said you could be my grandchild but upon reflection my lost child as even in Appalachia 20 years is a short time to produce a grandchild LOL


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Like baseball car collectors I think this is largely true for most opera fanatics I know except for someone like Mas who got to see all those greats from SFO for decades. How is it for you? I did love going to Seattle Opera during it's heyday under Speight Jenkins but i don't go anymore at all. For me most of my great obsessions are about dead singers from long ago. The ultimate would be Sutherland's debut Alcina around ' 59 in that tiny Venice opera house with direction and sets and costumes by Zeffirelli. Overload!!


Also in the last century opera singers were more like popular celebrities. The newer ones of course know they have to work social media and the like to enhance their careers, but it is as if the media machine is controlling them, not vice versa. Also I think in many cases like in other professions these days overcredentialing is hindering what I term uniqueness and charisma. It is interesting that the debut of Ponselle resembles an operatic American Idol moment while the singers of today need to have Masters degrees.


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

Not totally. There's always the hope that you'll see and hear something brilliant that's done in the present and you'll forget about things in the past for a little while.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Well, I like contemporary opera just not contemporary singers singing older repertoire. But when I'm listening to Callas singing Norma or Flagstad's Isolde the last thing on my mind is nostalgia. I'm in my early twenties and don't have any fond memories of the past myself, so while I very much enjoy those great singers I don't focus on my desire to hear them in person while listening to their records.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Op.123 said:


> Well, I like contemporary opera just not contemporary singers singing older repertoire. But when I'm listening to Callas singing Norma or Flagstad's Isolde the last thing on my mind is nostalgia. I'm in my early twenties and don't have any fond memories of the past myself, so while I very much enjoy those great singers I don't focus on my desire to hear them in person while listening to their records.


How did you get exposed to the old Italian school of singing ? My understanding was, today they teach differently.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

BBSVK said:


> How did you get exposed to the old Italian school of singing ? My understanding was, today they teach differently.


I didn't study singing, I studied composition but I think you end up discovering the old schools of singing if you really love the music. Most of the vocal students I met while studying knew Boheme and Traviata and Mozart operas, as well as some Lieder but few would have been familiar with Medea, Gioconda, Elektra etc. and their favourite singers were usually Netrebko or Garifullina or something like that, maybe they liked Callas too but that's where historical singing ended for them. They'd all been steered well away from anything resembling a developed chest voice too.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

For many of today's fans it might be about the past, but it obviously was not about the past when the operas were composed, or only rarely. Operas were often about (almost) contemporary events or about "timeless classics" (such as ancient myths), they were frequently "modernized", e.g. Don Giovanni is not trying to depict the early 17th century but the contemporary late 18th century (which becomes obvious by the music for Giovanni's dinner parties )


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I am interested in opera more than singers. If that sounds strange, let me explain. Telling story in song is my primary interest, not singing. So I can overlook aspects about singers that some here, maybe most, focus on and are preoccupied with. I am very curious about new opera - seeing what is being written, and much of it is very exciting and enjoyable.

For a long time I could not get past the audio quality in historical recordings and so missed out on hearing some great singers. But this year I managed to break through that barrier with a set of historical recordings at the Met, restored wonderfully, and truly started to "get it" about older singers compared with those of today.

The older singers seemed to produce their sound effortlessly, with not a lot of vibrato, a natural sound. Whereas today's singers seem to be working at it, and most have what I consider too much vibrato.

My answer to the OP question is false for me. I do not yearn for the past, and am very interested in the present new operas - but not so much in singers, or singing itself.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> I am interested in opera more than singers.
> ...
> I do not yearn for the past, and am very interested in the present new operas


The first is almost true for me. I remember the times, when I taped an opera from the radio and after having one recording, I considered the piece covered.

Recently I woke up and realized, I can do a youtube hopping, ftom production to production. I use it mostly to prolong the pleasure from the opera I recently discovered.

A badly sung opera, (I mean a very obvious effort and suffering of the singer, not Netrebko-like "bad") can spoil the experience for me. Also, I tend to become primed, so different tempi and different accents than I am used to also are a problem.

The present operas - they are just not pleasant for me. Still, I am going to see a very recent piece this month, foolishly hoping, this time it might be different.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> I am interested in opera more than singers. If that sounds strange, let me explain. Telling story in song is my primary interest, not singing.


Compositions and singers cannot be decoupled. Operas performed with singers unworthy of attention (because they lack some extra-ordinary quality or another) nullifies the compositions; or if not outright nullify, at least not spring them from the printed score to life or to at least something interesting. And what would singers be without such works? They wouldn’t exist, correct?


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

It may also depend on the particular opera. On the lecture series about Bellini, we were told, that he required a very emotional singing from his singers and put a lot of responsibility on human voice, where other composers would use more instrumentation. For instance, there are parts with just a pizzicato in the background. Such an opera can obviously be killed by an inappropriate singing. (Inappropriate = struggling with the technical aspects, no space for the emotional expression left). Also, some of these operas (La Sonnambula, Norma) are dubbed as "oratorial" - the chorus stands and sings. If the chorus starts moving too much and do intetesting stuff, it might actually be disturbing. So no salvaging the opera by stage directions either. The responsibility is on singing again. Our teacher likened it to a ballet. If it is well danced, it is wonderful. If the dancers are incompetent, it turns into something like a kindergarten performance.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ALT said:


> Compositions and singers cannot be decoupled. Operas performed with singers unworthy of attention (because they lack some extra-ordinary quality or another) nullifies the compositions; or if not outright nullify, at least not spring them from the printed score to life or to at least something interesting. And what would singers be without such works? They wouldn’t exist, correct?


Well, yes, operas require singers. But I have yet to hear a performance that was ruined by the singing, at least for me. But I am very forgiving since my primary focus is on the opera itself, in toto.

My main/only interest is in the art of story-telling in music and song. This includes everything from mountain ballads, to concept albums like The Red Headed Stranger (Willie Nelson), classical song cycles (Schubert, Schoeck) oratorios, musicals, and operas.

This is in contrast to those opera fans who are intimately aware of the quality of voices, nuances of singing and vocal qualities, and everything that goes into a great singer's art. I am fine with mediocre singers who are able to put across the opera. Consequently, I am not interested in singer recitals or aria recordings.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> Well, yes, operas require singers. *But I have yet to hear a performance that was ruined by the singing*, at least for me. *But I am very forgiving* since my primary focus is on the opera itself, in toto.


As forgiving as a saint!

(Although, I’ve probably sat through more ruined performances due to the conducting than the singing.) 


N.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> But I have yet to hear a performance that was ruined by the singing, at least for me.


If you put it like this, this is rare for me too. Real disasters are unusual. I just sometimes tell myself, that it wasn't worth my time, leaving the babysitting to my partner and disturbing the sleep cycle of my younger child, who still expects me next to her. And I give myself recommendations for the future, how to choose more wisely. 

Another thing - I attend the performance and enjoy myself. But it is like - wow, this opera is gorgeous, why did I not get familiar with it before ? I am soo looking forward to listen to it on youtube, without this character squeaking with high pitch and the other one barely audible. And a performance like this I actually consider as worth my time :-D


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> But I am very forgiving since my primary focus is on the opera itself, in toto.


By your criteria, then, the performance of opera is a democracy and singers are all the same and expendable, no matter. To put it differently, there should be no veneration for a Nureyev, for example, relative to the wannabe since either way you saw the ballet. Or in the even more creative realm, no difference between a Rembrandt or the freshman in art school. Because, well, you saw their works. Art, at the highest level of accomplishment, is no democracy and the notion, very much in vogue, that everything and everyone are on the same plane, everyone deserving of the exact same level of reward and admiration, is just BS.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

ALT said:


> By your criteria, then, the performance of opera is a democracy and singers are all the same and expendable, no matter. To put it differently, there should be no veneration for a Nureyev, for example, relative to the wannabe since either way you saw the ballet. Or in the even more creative realm, no difference between a Rembrandt or the freshman in art school. Because, well, you saw their works. Art, at the highest level of accomplishment, is no democracy and the notion, very much in vogue, that everything and everyone are on the same plane, everyone deserving of the exact same level of reward and admiration, is just BS.


If you didn't know Il Trovatore at all, and if you saw a bad performance, would it be a nice evening ? For some people, it could be.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

BBSVK said:


> If you didn't know Il Trovatore at all, and if you saw a bad performance, would it be a nice evening ? For some people, it could be.


I saw Il trovatore at the Royal Opera House about six years ago when I didn't really know the opera too well. It put me off of loving the opera as I do now for years. Small voices, timid conducting, strange sets. The music had little impact. It was only after discovering some historical recordings that I came to appreciate it properly.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ALT said:


> By your criteria, then, the performance of opera is a democracy and singers are all the same and expendable, no matter. To put it differently, there should be no veneration for a Nureyev, for example, relative to the wannabe since either way you saw the ballet. Or in the even more creative realm, no difference between a Rembrandt or the freshman in art school. Because, well, you saw their works. Art, at the highest level of accomplishment, is no democracy and the notion, very much in vogue, that everything and everyone are on the same plane, everyone deserving of the exact same level of reward and admiration, is just BS.


No, you are distorting what I have said. 

Of course I appreciate great singers from the golden age, and even some more recent voices. I have heard my share of great recordings and historical 78s. I certainly do not believe that all singers are the same, that would be ridiculous. 

It is just that I am _more interested_ in the creation, construction, composition of opera, and other forms of dramatic/narrative musical art, and not preoccupied with the trained classical voice.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

A part of the past loving part for me is I rarely like current singers and mostly those from the Twentieth Century. I like their sounds better as they used different techniques and there were more extraordinarily gifted singers then.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> Well, yes, operas require singers. But I have yet to hear a performance that was ruined by the singing, at least for me. But I am very forgiving since my primary focus is on the opera itself, in toto.
> 
> My main/only interest is in the art of story-telling in music and song. This includes everything from mountain ballads, to concept albums like The Red Headed Stranger (Willie Nelson), classical song cycles (Schubert, Schoeck) oratorios, musicals, and operas.
> 
> This is in contrast to those opera fans who are intimately aware of the quality of voices, nuances of singing and vocal qualities, and everything that goes into a great singer's art. I am fine with mediocre singers who are able to put across the opera. Consequently, I am not interested in singer recitals or aria recordings.


Opera is so broad that you can approach an opera from many different points of view and yours is very understandable. Some people have minds that have an affinity for narratives. I listen to either arias or one side of an lp at a time so I don't get the story unless I am at an opera which is never nowadays.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

On a societal level, this is probably true, but on a personal level, I don't think a lot about "nostalgia", at least not in the sense of something being "lost". I consume a range of books and media from all manner of cultures and time periods, because I'm searching for concepts or habits I can integrate into my own life, rather than being at the whim of my immediate cultural context. 

In the case of opera, I admire the gravitas, the dignity, craftsmanship and the free flowing melodic tendencies. In an era or awkwardness, crippling anxiety (often over...absolutely nothing), celebration of banality and nihilism and music that doesn't even have a melody 2/3 of the time, I find operatic music much more soothing and grounding.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

I think the word nostalgia is too emotional in this context. When I sometimes listen to 50-year-old recordings, it's because I think they're good, and not because I'm in any way dreaming back to the past. Even with brand new recordings, I mainly listen to the ones I think are good. So what's the difference?


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

My poorly worded question has elicited responses from a lot of people who don't usually contribute and for that it was worth it. Many of you discuss this better than I could.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I don't waste much time indulging nostalgic feelings, despite being somewhat...um...annuated. But that isn't because there's nothing to be nostalgic about, in the world of opera and in the world at large. Perhaps I resist indulging in dreams of the past because I realized at an early age that almost everything I loved already belonged to a past I never lived through. If Beethoven, Brahms and Wagner are the vital substance of your life in the present, listening to them is not a nostalgic experience. It's just life.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

pianozach said:


> Well . . . false.
> 
> False in the sense of how other "old" music and art is regarded. We don't call it "nostalgia" when we're listening to Mozart or viewing the Mona Lisa.
> 
> ...


I'm not an opera fan, so I can't speak about that specifically, but I am interested in ideas about nostalgia, which is a curious beast. I agree with pianozach mostly, but not his first point. I think that if nostalgia can apply to opera, it can just as readily apply to CM...and Elvis...and the pop of the 60s...the prog rock of the 70s...the trance of the 00s. The distance travelled in time is irrelevant. What matters for the listener is the associations and emotions connected with whatever music one is feeling nostalgic about.

But the OP's question - which they say was poorly worded...doesn't just ask whether opera lovers are nostalgic about opera, but whether opera is itself _about _nostalgia. As a non-opera lover looking in from outside, it would seem that it is - largely, as the OP says. But that may be because most of the opera-lovers I come across here (I don't know any in real life except Inspector Morse 😉 ) seem to prefer the opera of the past. Unlike the CM lovers, where there are a number of members here who love current CM, I've not noticed many lovers of current opera. That suggests to me that if that is what opera-lovers are like, then that may say something about 'Opera' itself.

How many operas are/were set in the past (in relation to the time it was written)? That might give us a clue.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Forster said:


> I'm not an opera fan, so I can't speak about that specifically, but I am interested in ideas about nostalgia, which is a curious beast. I agree with pianozach mostly, but not his first point. I think that if nostalgia can apply to opera, it can just as readily apply to CM...and Elvis...and the pop of the 60s...the prog rock of the 70s...the trance of the 00s. The distance travelled in time is irrelevant. What matters for the listener is the associations and emotions connected with whatever music one is feeling nostalgic about.
> 
> But the OP's question - which they say was poorly worded...doesn't just ask whether opera lovers are nostalgic about opera, but whether opera is itself _about _nostalgia. As a non-opera lover looking in from outside, it would seem that it is - largely, as the OP says. But that may be because most of the opera-lovers I come across here (I don't know any in real life except Inspector Morse 😉 ) seem to prefer the opera of the past. Unlike the CM lovers, where there are a number of members here who love current CM, I've not noticed many lovers of current opera. That suggests to me that if that is what opera-lovers are like, then that may say something about 'Opera' itself.
> 
> How many operas are/were set in the past (in relation to the time it was written)? That might give us a clue.


Very interesting and well written and thanks for your interest as a basically CM lover. There are many many fine current classical musicians at present, a situation many don't find in opera today. To me it is opera is ALL about the singers and for me and many connoisseurs almost all the great singers were from at least 40 years ago and often as much as 100. As per your question many popular late 19th century operas were set in the fictitious present time.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

One of the founding stories (and not entirely a myth) of opera is that the nobles, artists and intellectuals in late 16th century Florence wanted to recreate Greek tragedy and this resulted in the creation of opera. So there was a reference to a revered past art form (rather misunderstood as we now think that most of Greek tragedy was not sung) but I would not use the term nostalgia (literally homesickness) for trying to continue an art that was around 2000 years past. 
Accordingly, most operas (and virtually all non-comic ones) for almost 200 years usually had subjects from classical mythology or ancient and medieval history (the latter almost always from the stories/epics around the crusades like Orlando, Alcina, Rinaldo, Tancredi etc.). (Note that this hardly differed among Italy and France and was not affected by "reforms", the serious Gluck operas are all on classical subjects.) 
Again, I doubt that this was nostalgia in our sense but these simply were the appropriate heroic and tragic subjects. Comic opera could be contemporary but it also tended to work with traditional characters and tropes. 
This changed slightly from the late 18th century onwards with some serious operas on contemporary events/situations (such as Fidelio) and while mythology still figured to some extent, the romantics also did folksy fairy tales and especially history was now more common. Contemporary subjects were probably still the minority (La traviata or La Boheme) and there seems a correlation with verismo preferring them but I don't think there is a "system" there.
I also think it is rare and late that opera turns nostalgically upon itself; the main (and maybe only?) examples for this are by Strauss (Rosenkavalier, Ariadne, Capriccio). (Opera did treat itself as a subject before, but ironically and without nostalgia, e.g. in both pieces in the Mozart vs. Salieri "contest")


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Forster said:


> How many operas are/were set in the past (in relation to the time it was written)? That might give us a clue.


Most operas seem to be set in the past or present (the "present" at the time it was written).

I can't think of any operas that take place in the future, although there most probably are. I think that there's a *Klingon opera*, although I don't know when in their fictional history it was meant to have been fictionally composed.






Well, one second of a Youtube search yielded an excerpt from the "Klingon" opera "*u*", from the Netherlands.






Yes. Bang the drums, spit the consonants, sprinkle in plenty of open fifth intervals and flat the 2nd pitch of the scale. 

_*"It's a good day to die!"*_


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Forster said:


> But the OP's question - which they say was poorly worded...doesn't just ask whether opera lovers are nostalgic about opera, but whether opera is itself _about _nostalgia.


That's not how I read the OP's question. He did not ask whether the interest in opera as such is nostalgic. Instead, he asked whether the love of old opera recordings - from the time of the great legendary singers eg. - is nostalgic. And I don't think so, but rather it is a matter of sense of quality.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

When I first became an opera fan back in the late 1960s ( Gosh ! I'm a dinosaur compared to most people here ) as a teenager , I used to read. reviews of recordings and performances of opera performances and recordings , such as the defunct classical music magazines High Fidelity and Stereo Review , and even back then, critics were longing for the good old days, the mythical "golden age of opera " , and. often made invidious comparisons between. recordings by legendary opera stars of the past and those of the 60s and 70s . 
Back them, we had Sutherland, Nilsson, Bergonzi , Del Monaco , Jones , Corelli, Milnes, Ghiaurov, Horne, Pavarotti , Domingo, Fischer-Dieskau , Prey, Sereni, Cappucilli , Simionato , Crespin, De Los Angeles, Schwarzkopf, Vishnevskaya, Baker, Callas, Merrill , Tucker, Price , Taddei, London, King, Thomas, Hotter , Peters, Bunbry, Verrett , Paneriai, Sills , Elias, Gedda , Lear, Stewart , Windgassen , Ludwig, Berry , Di Stefano, Gobbi . Troyanos, Vickers , Krause , Soderstrom , Popp , Ryasanek , Treigle , Konya , Hines, , Janowitz , Bacquier , Carreras, Ridderbusch , Corena, Siepi , Tebaldi and others , who were them in their prime, just beginning to make a big name for themselves, or near retirement but still active . 
Many people on this forum to have heard these live and may not even be familiar with their recordings . 
And you can be absolutely certain about this 40 or 50 years from now , if the world has remained stable and opera is still performed , people will be nostalgic for today's opera stars .
The more things change . . . . . .


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

superhorn said:


> When I first became an opera fan back in the late 1960s ( Gosh ! I'm a dinosaur compared to most people here ) as a teenager , I used to read. reviews of recordings and performances of opera performances and recordings , such as the defunct classical music magazines High Fidelity and Stereo Review , and even back then, critics were longing for the good old days, the mythical "golden age of opera " , and. often made invidious comparisons between. recordings by legendary opera stars of the past and those of the 60s and 70s .
> Back them, we had Sutherland, Nilsson, Bergonzi , Del Monaco , Jones , Corelli, Milnes, Ghiaurov, Horne, Pavarotti , Domingo, Fischer-Dieskau , Prey, Sereni, Cappucilli , Simionato , Crespin, De Los Angeles, Schwarzkopf, Vishnevskaya, Baker, Callas, Merrill , Tucker, Price , Taddei, London, King, Thomas, Hotter , Peters, Bunbry, Verrett , Paneriai, Sills , Elias, Gedda , Lear, Stewart , Windgassen , Ludwig, Berry , Di Stefano, Gobbi . Troyanos, Vickers , Krause , Soderstrom , Popp , Ryasanek , Treigle , Konya , Hines, , Janowitz , Bacquier , Carreras, Ridderbusch , Corena, Siepi , Tebaldi and others , who were them in their prime, just beginning to make a big name for themselves, or near retirement but still active .
> Many people on this forum to have heard these live and may not even be familiar with their recordings .
> And you can be absolutely certain about this 40 or 50 years from now , if the world has remained stable and opera is still performed , people will be nostalgic for today's opera stars .
> The more things change . . . . . .


Nostalgia isn't necessarily a trick played on memory, or an indulgence of the old.

I'm about your age, and was similarly inspired and educated in my teen years by the fine musicians and writers who staffed High Fidelity and Stereo Review. Among those, I found Conrad L. Osborne and David Hamilton particularly knowledgeable and eloquent, but there were others who contributed to my understanding of opera and singing. I remain grateful to them for the excellence of their writings and for all I learned by reading them.

So far, so good. We share a particular background. But I came through those years with convictions the opposite of yours. Your long, yet still incomplete, list of leading singers active between the '50s and the '70s (the first decades of the great era of complete opera recordings) strikes me, not as a support for your conclusion that " if the world has remained stable and opera is still performed, people will be nostalgic for today's opera stars," but as a glaringly obvious refutation of it.

As your "and others" implies, your list of important singers of that era could be much longer. Without thinking too hard - or much beyond my own CD collection - I note the absence of Tozzi, Talvela, Christoff, Frick, Moll, Neidlinger, Waechter, Adam, Weikl, MacNeil, Warren, Allen, Shirley-Quirk, Thomas, Wunderlich, Valletti, Tagliavini, Simoneau, Pears, Madeira, Dalis, Gorr, Barbieri, Farrell, Steber, Grob-Prandl, Grummer, Della Casa, Zeani, Zylis-Gara, Caballe, Brouwenstijn, Studer and Moffo. I submit that to anyone whose experience of recent singing in the opera house is confined to the last two or three decades, the level of vocal and artistic distinction represented by the singers we've listed (and by many more) must be simply incredible.

Nostalgia for earlier times is a real phenomenon. Memory has a way of bestowing a glow on the experiences of youth. But unlike people in the postwar years who remembered hearing Caruso and Ponselle live and had only scratchy, muffled 78s as mementos, we have true and priceless documentation of the singers of the '50s, '60s and '70s. We know what they sounded like and how they performed. We have no need to rely on nostalgia for an appreciation of the singers who, during our young years, were leaving a legacy for every opera lover then living or yet to be born.

I can only say that if you are correct in predicting that in the future people will be nostalgic for today's singers, opera as a vehicle for the developed human voice will be close to death's door. Many feel that it's perilously close already.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Nostalgia isn't necessarily a trick played on memory, or an indulgence of the old.
> 
> I'm about your age, and was similarly inspired and educated in my teen years by the fine musicians and writers who staffed High Fidelity and Stereo Review. Among those, I found Conrad L. Osborne and David Hamilton particularly knowledgeable and eloquent, but there were others who contributed to my understanding of opera and singing. I remain grateful to them for the excellence of their writings and for all I learned by reading them.
> 
> ...


You are back in the plus column with me now 🤪


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> You are back in the plus column with me now 🤪


Whew! That was close!


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I absolutely agree that singers from earlier generations seemed to sing with an effortless quality which I find missing (and for some time) with newer singers. Vibratos have gotten wider, there seems to be more struggling going on to produce the sound - and performances are inconsistent and sometimes downright ugly. I noticed this recently when listening to a group of recordings put out by the Met of recordings going back to the first decade of the 20th century, and documenting singers up to the early 80s.

I sometimes have to turn off my focus on the singing in order to find something about an opera production to enjoy. But for me, so often, I will be experiencing an opera for the first time, and am more interested in learning the opera than picking apart the singers.

I am such a fan of opera, that I seek out new operas and manage to find some amazing stuff, IMO. There is a site called Experiments in Opera created by composer *Jason Cady*, but he is joined by about of dozen other participants who showcase their recent works. And I am often intrigued, entertained, and sometimes blown away.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be . . .


----------



## ScottK (Dec 23, 2021)

I agree with Woodduck’s take that actively revering and enjoying something written or performed a long time ago, in the present moment,is not in itself nostalgic. I can Continue to be enraptured with my old loves - singers or music - and I can be disappointed by that same group ....I was about to try an analogy with outgrowing my taste for candy bars but I haven’t 😂! But what springs to mind with your question John is, more than the question “do I return to opera to re-taste old delights?” Instead, the awareness that nothing keeps me going like new delights! Operas are big works of art and I am too old to regularly sit down to a brand new opera Recording but I’ll take one in the house over another Tosca most of the time. Over on the symphonic side of things I got lots of recommendations when I started last year and hit tons of pay dirt! For me, nostalgia has its place and I used to relish it more than I do today. Now I’m a little afraid of it. I love the past and the old and go there all the time as I assume most do! But I try to avoid those misty, rose colored glasses. I agree with the song... what’s too painful to remember we choose simply to forget Better to remember it all in proper proportion, I think, and that’s not nostalgia.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

superhorn said:


> When I first became an opera fan back in the late 1960s ( Gosh ! I'm a dinosaur compared to most people here ) as a teenager , I used to read. reviews of recordings and performances of opera performances and recordings , such as the defunct classical music magazines High Fidelity and Stereo Review , and even back then, critics were longing for the good old days, the mythical "golden age of opera " , and. often made invidious comparisons between. recordings by legendary opera stars of the past and those of the 60s and 70s .
> Back them, we had Sutherland, Nilsson, Bergonzi , Del Monaco , Jones , Corelli, Milnes, Ghiaurov, Horne, Pavarotti , Domingo, Fischer-Dieskau , Prey, Sereni, Cappucilli , Simionato , Crespin, De Los Angeles, Schwarzkopf, Vishnevskaya, Baker, Callas, Merrill , Tucker, Price , Taddei, London, King, Thomas, Hotter , Peters, Bunbry, Verrett , Paneriai, Sills , Elias, Gedda , Lear, Stewart , Windgassen , Ludwig, Berry , Di Stefano, Gobbi . Troyanos, Vickers , Krause , Soderstrom , Popp , Ryasanek , Treigle , Konya , Hines, , Janowitz , Bacquier , Carreras, Ridderbusch , Corena, Siepi , Tebaldi and others , who were them in their prime, just beginning to make a big name for themselves, or near retirement but still active .
> Many people on this forum to have heard these live and may not even be familiar with their recordings .
> And you can be absolutely certain about this 40 or 50 years from now , if the world has remained stable and opera is still performed , people will be nostalgic for today's opera stars .
> The more things change . . . . . .


Yes, and the book "Bluff your way in opera"


Spoiler: Bluff your way in opera



Bluff Your Way in Opera


 describes exactly this phenomenon ! Grass is always greener on the other side of your time machine :-D


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Has anybody read "Ganji Monogatari" (The tale of Ganji)? The characters, who are princes, ladies in waiting, aristocrats in Xth century Japan, often perform and discuss music. And they usually regret that big masters of the past are gone, whether contemporary virtuosi are sliding the surface without immersing in depth. Of course, they hadn't recordings, only tricky memories, mostly other people's, rarely epistolary. But it reminds how we think about Cuzzoni, Farinelli, Pasta and Malibran, for example.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Over in the thread devoted to the opera people are listening to at the moment Tsarras has mentioned how Callas was engaged to sing in I Vespri Siciliani in 1951 after he heard her earlier that year in Florence. That would be unlikely to happen today due to opera schedules being set at least three/four years in advance. I've often thought that schedules must have been more flexible and not planned so far in advance back then. One downside of casting so far in advance is that a voice may no longer suit a role five years on and that's no doubt one reason why the modern international opera factory system in the big houses doesn't lend itself to creative greatness as much as in the past.

N.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Seattleoperafan said:


> classical music itself is old


"But generally speaking, the interest in the older oratorios is waning, not only in New York but all over the country. The ears of our audiences have lost pleasure in the simpler harmonies of Handel and Haydn, and accustomed to the richer orchestration of today, find the accompaniments of the Handelian orchestra thin and archaic. Something of the simple and naïve religious faith that inspired the old oratorios has also gone, and the composer has not yet been found who can voice the faith and aspirations of today. It is a pity that the old oratorio form should therefore be neglected. I think, however, that it is not dead but only sleeps, and will awaken again." -Walter Damrosch, 1923 (from "Reviving Haydn: New Appreciations in the Twentieth Century", by Brian Proksch, P. 54)

Such is the nature of "classical music" in general today, not just opera and vocal music. There's a good reason why much of it is an "ancient relic", no longer relevant to the modern society/culture, and remains only a "niche interest" today, yet there is a tendency of the classical music fandom to deny/forget all this. People like to twist things (eg. how things were thought back in their own time) to suit themselves. It's a load of mess. (If you have sentimental feelings about the stuff personally, then good for you, but) overall, there have been way too much image-making, half-truths, myths, propaganda about them, it's hard to take anything at face value as objective truth.


hammeredklavier said:


> It says "In the 1700s, Johann Sebastian Bach, had defined the system of Western classical tonality", and then goes onto discuss Beethoven, and then jumps to Wagner - as if Weber and Spohr never existed in the history of Romantic harmonic practice. They all talk this way, unfortunately; it's always about what Bach or Mozart did. This is how we've all been educated. How can we say it was a "fair game" for all the composers from the start?





hammeredklavier said:


> It's a "myth" started by 19th century Haydn-favoring writers like C.F. Pohl. Hence the reason why there are no actual first-hand evidence or account from the 18th century (of composers, musicians, critics saying "Haydn invented things", in Haydn's own time).


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

For me it's a mixed bag.
The golden days of opera are probably my favorites because I love so many of the singers. * BUT* ... although I prefer the composers' works of the past and am not really a fan of most modern and regie opera, I most assuredly am a fan of many superb singers of today -- many who are just as fine as singers from the past. And the acting is much more sophisticated today and much less the stand and deliver variety of the past. (Who likes to watch a Corelli who is looking at the conductor and audience rather than to his lover when he tells her how much he adores her?)
My delight is in seeing my favorite singers live. I am so looking forward to Gheorghiu's 1 matinee performance at the Met in April. (I just pray she doesn't cancel). And how fortunate we are to have a Radvanovsky in our midst. Lucky us.
Opera?? It is my magnificent obsession.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

nina foresti said:


> (Who likes to watch a Corelli who is looking at the conductor and audience rather than to his lover when he tells her how much he adores her?)


Huh, did Corelli do this ?

I have seen this exact thing done by Mario del Monaco, in the Norma recorded with Elinor Ross. But I always thought, Corelli was better. I have read somewhere, that Callas was excited after she met him, that, finally, she had a proper parner for acting together ?


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Franco Corelli


Gossip! Innuendo! Anecdotal fragments from which wild conclusions have been drawn. Those are only some of the problems to be confronted when writing the story of the last great Italian heroic tenor,...



bob-opera.weebly.com





Full disclosure - I am completely out of my depth when it comes to determining the veracity of any of the statements made in this blog article but there are two sections which are of interest...

In late April Corelli returned to Lisbon for “Giulietta e Romeo” and on 21 May he and Maria Callas joined forces in an epic, legendary, and elusive revival of Giordano’s “Fedora”. It has been rumored for some forty years that the Corelli’s have a copy of that tape. I fancy that if that were true, it would have surfaced by now. But, anything is possible. In any case, it is one of the few Callas revivals at La Scala that is not documented in sound.

Corelli on Callas: “No one can imagine what it meant to me, a virtual beginner on the stage, only in my second year at La Scala, to work with Callas. I learned so much….Maria was extremely thoughtful with me and tried to make everything easy. And she did. She herself was so involved in the opera that she involved me too. I felt it a duty to respond, to work deeply, as never before, in a way I did not fully comprehend but which I strongly sensed” - Maria Callas, the woman behind the Legend. The admiration that Corelli felt for Callas and that which she manifested to him will be reviewed in a number of additional revivals that joined their unique talents; they are among the most important operatic events in the second half of this century. Mary Curtis Verna, a soprano of some repute who had a not insignificant career at the Met, attended the premiere with her husband, a noted musicologist and conductor. “The performance was likely the most thrilling event of my operatic life as an observer. One cannot imagine the chemistry of that evening unless he were to have been in the audience”. (paraphrased).

And then this one which may explain why Corelli may have wandered around the stage as if he were being hunted...

"The performances of Chenier were pretty wild, though. Corelli was at the peak of his form, but he had the worst stage fright I'd ever seen. He would show up for rehearsal and sing beautifully, then all of a sudden he'd throw up his hands and say that he was in terrible voice and couldn't go on. Singing seemed to be agony for him, and once the run begun, *I started to see why he was such a wreck. At intermission, his wife Loretta would barricade herself in his dressing room and scream at him, telling everything he'd done wrong. She didn't shut up even when we were on stage. It got so that I would try to avoid going to extreme stage left or right, no matter what the blocking called for, because Signora Corelli was always in the wings, yelling at her husband in Italian and I'd have to concentrate like crazy to stay on track.”*

These tantrums were to continue as a regular part of Corelli performances and the uproars could at times be heard in the front of the orchestra."

He wasn't watching the conductor or looking at the audience - He was probably thinking -

"Gesù, aiutami. Dov'è quella pazza puttana italiana? Non tornerò nel mio camerino. Camminerò lungo la navata principale e mi fermerò davanti al teatro... Magari una fumata... e un bicchiere di vino... forse due bicchieri... Fanculo, fanne tre..... Avrei dovuto sposare una ragazza irlandese come mia madre voleva che... donne italiane...Mi tremano le mani... Sto sudando come un maiale... È più rumorosa di Ethel Merman...Gesù, aiutami...
Cristo... Qual è la mia prossima riga? - Dimenticavo... Che atto è questo? Non so nemmeno in quale opera mi trovo..."


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

ColdGenius said:


> Has anybody read "Ganji Monogatari" (The tale of Ganji)? The characters, who are princes, ladies in waiting, aristocrats in Xth century Japan, often perform and discuss music. And they usually regret that big masters of the past are gone, whether contemporary virtuosi are sliding the surface without immersing in depth. Of course, they hadn't recordings, only tricky memories, mostly other people's, rarely epistolary. But it reminds how we think about Cuzzoni, Farinelli, Pasta and Malibran, for example.


How many of us think about Cuzzoni, Farinelli, Pasta and Malibran, or other singers from times before recording? Very few of us, I'm guessing. I know I don't. We can_ read_ about them, and refer to what we read, and speculate on how they sang, and in a few cases heed whatever advice they and their critics may have left for posterity, but that is about the extent of it. Unless we're scholars and historians they give us little of use to think about . Anyone who laments that the singers we can actually hear aren't as good as mere phantoms in history books needs to check back in with the real world. It's the recorded legacy of the 20th century that gives us material for profitable use.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Shaughnessy said:


> Franco Corelli
> 
> 
> Gossip! Innuendo! Anecdotal fragments from which wild conclusions have been drawn. Those are only some of the problems to be confronted when writing the story of the last great Italian heroic tenor,...
> ...


So exciting about his work with Callas, but his wife sounds like something out of Hitchcock. OMG. How awful. I wish I could have been there to comfort him


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

Shaughnessy said:


> Franco Corelli
> 
> 
> Gossip! Innuendo! Anecdotal fragments from which wild conclusions have been drawn. Those are only some of the problems to be confronted when writing the story of the last great Italian heroic tenor,...
> ...


Many other anecdotal sources have confirmed this behavior of Loretta in other venues. Loretta had a secondary career as a light lyric soprano and appeared in some Cetra recordings in small parts. Rumor has it that she taped the Fedora performances. And I am going to end with this comment which some may find to be a scurrilous rumor: no wonder Corelli turned to men.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> How many of us think about Cuzzoni, Farinelli, Pasta and Malibran, or other singers from times before recording? Very few of us, I'm guessing. I know I don't. We can_ read_ about them, and refer to what we read, and speculate on how they sang, and in a few cases heed whatever advice they and their critics may have left for posterity, but that is about the extent of it. Unless we're scholars and historians they give us little of use to think about . Anyone who laments that the singers we can actually hear aren't as good as mere phantoms in history books needs to check back in with the real world. It's the recorded legacy of the 20th century that gives us material for profitable use.


It was just an example how people of different cultures and epoches, divided by a millennium, use to think and feel the same.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Francasacchi said:


> Many other anecdotal sources have confirmed this behavior of Loretta in other venues. Loretta had a secondary career as a light lyric soprano and appeared in some Cetra recordings in small parts. Rumor has it that she taped the Fedora performances. And I am going to end with this comment which some may find to be a scurrilous rumor: no wonder Corelli turned to men.


Did he turn?
They lived together forty years, she stopped her carrier to manage his and (!) to be his vocal coach. But he probably needed a dominatrix and couldn't work other way. Maybe that's why he sounds so hysterical in some recordings. On the other hand there is something to tell about. 😄


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> How many of us think about Cuzzoni, Farinelli, Pasta and Malibran, or other singers from times before recording? Very few of us, I'm guessing. I know I don't. We can_ read_ about them, and refer to what we read, and speculate on how they sang, and in a few cases heed whatever advice they and their critics may have left for posterity, but that is about the extent of it. Unless we're scholars and historians they give us little of use to think about . Anyone who laments that the singers we can actually hear aren't as good as mere phantoms in history books needs to check back in with the real world. It's the recorded legacy of the 20th century that gives us material for profitable use.


I am obsessed by Norma, so Giudita Pasta occupies quite a lot of my mental space.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> I am obsessed by Norma, so Giudita Pasta occupies quite a lot of my mental space.


I hesitate to ask, but do you Skype or exchange emails?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

*LA TRAVIATA* - La Scala 1914 (Complete Opera Verdi)
Toscanini's assistant Carlo SABAJNO conducts the Orchestra and Chorus of La Scala. This is the first complete recording of La Traviata, produced in Milano 1914 for the Gramophone Company (HMV)






Margherita BEVIGNANI (1887 - 1921) - Violetta Valery
Franco TUMMINELLO (1880 - ?) - Alfredo Germont
Ernesto BADINI (1876 – 1937) - Giorgio Germont

Interesting, this complete recording appears to be the main reason the name *Margherita Bevignani* has survived. Audio quality is very good, considering, but for me the importance of this recording is to hear how this opera was sung and conducted in 1914 or 1915 (I've seen both dates).


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

ColdGenius said:


> Did he turn?
> They lived together forty years, she stopped her carrier to manage his and (!) to be his vocal coach. But he probably needed a dominatrix and couldn't work other way. Maybe that's why he sounds so hysterical in some recordings. On the other hand there is something to tell about. 😄


Rumor has it he always liked men. There was an unfounded rumor that he and Bastianini were having an affair. It was an open secret that Bastianini was gay. The Franco and Loretta marriage strikes me as being what some used to call a lavender marriage.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> Huh, did Corelli do this ?
> 
> I have seen this exact thing done by Mario del Monaco, in the Norma recorded with Elinor Ross. But I always thought, Corelli was better. I have read somewhere, that Callas was excited after she met him, that, finally, she had a proper parner for acting together ?


I didn't only mean Corelli -- I meant a Corelli-type. There are dozens. I just used him as an example because I am mesmerized at watching how he does that. Just watch their eyes, that will tell the tale.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Francasacchi said:


> Rumor has it he always liked men. There was an unfounded rumor that he and Bastianini were having an affair. It was an open secret that Bastianini was gay. The Franco and Loretta marriage strikes me as being what some used to call a lavender marriage.


As a working affair it was excessively passionate too. The marriage, I mean.


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

You can just imagine Corelli being almost frozen downstage center - wild-eyed with fear - unable to move to the left or right - not knowing where his wife might be - looking around and, not seeing her, thinking that he's safe -

until he hears something above him - looks up - and there she is - perched on the catwalk hissing -

"Franco, stupido bastardo, che diavolo c'è che non va in te? Togliti quello sguardo stupido dalla faccia e canta quella dannata aria. Canta, Franco, canta o ti taglio il cuore dal petto e ti faccio vedere a te appena prima di morire!"


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I don't waste much time indulging nostalgic feelings, despite being somewhat...um...annuated. But that isn't because there's nothing to be nostalgic about, in the world of opera and in the world at large. Perhaps I resist indulging in dreams of the past because I realized at an early age that almost everything I loved already belonged to a past I never lived through. If Beethoven, Brahms and Wagner are the vital substance of your life in the present, listening to them is not a nostalgic experience. It's just life.


Put another way, if you enjoy entertainment both past and present, there is a lot more past than there is present, so "nostalgia", as it is understood by most people in practice, would result in you feeling old by like 10 years old. I'm inclined to sympathize, probably as much by virtue of having a more contemplative temperament than out of conscious choice.


----------



## FrankE (Jan 13, 2021)

I can't remember all the singers of the olden days because I wasn't around so can't be nostalgic about them. They just the singers on the operas I bought which were recommended by the friend, shopkeeper, vendor, newspaper, critic, website or person on a forum.
I do get nostalgic over an era I experienced in which it was worth producing records, so they could be produced in bulk and sold at affordable prices. Most of my friends down in that London are in the music business (production) and none of them make money from recordings.
A friend said when he started in the recording industry it was mostly tape, HDD recording was rare and expensive and most sales were in vinyl. Revenue loss due to home taping was low but now in digital he could record gigs, rip CDs and merch would sell CDs of the gig to audiences with sleeve notes on the way out of the gig. [edit: didn't finish this story: that revenue stream is gone now as complete discographies can be downloaded lossless on the Internet in less than an hour.
Sure if one is unfortunate [IMO] enough to live in a metropolitan area and can attend an opera house or theatre then opera is a visual as well as auditory art but in the sticks we have to make do with records.
It was also worth putting on performances as there was less media around. There were two or three channels on the television which shut down overnight, no domestic VCRs, no InterWeb, a few national broadcast wireless stations. There were heaps of cinemas, theatres, live music venues. All gone. Our sole independent cinema shut down the other day, BTW.
I do get nostalgic thinking back on my mum travelling all over for opera, there being visiting touring companies in our small city in the inverted rear end of the country.
Unfortunately my father wasn't nostalgic in the least and threw out her record and programme collection (many autographed) without even asking. "nae use ti me"
I do get nostalgic (maybe not te right word, but I feel sad thinking of all the singers, conductors, musicians, composers, librettists, promoters and audiences who've been and gone to keep the art tradition going. I guess that's why it's called the _western musical tradition_ to some sort of ~ologists 
That's not unique to opera, growing up watching _Dad's Army_ on a Saturday night parents would point out "he's dead, he's dead, he died recently, he died a few years ago...". Now I'm old or more experienced at being young I can't help thinking the same when watching an old film or television programme, not just of household names I grew up with but people before my time.
I don't miss being young. I'd little money. Now I'm older and less poor there's no place to spend it.
So maybe I'm nostalgic. What of it?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I had hoped that some of the more knowledgeable members would have commented on this recording and singer. Maybe because it was the last post on that page it might have been overlooked when new posts were made ... anyway, I am repeating it here.



SanAntone said:


> *LA TRAVIATA* - La Scala 1914 (Complete Opera Verdi)
> Toscanini's assistant Carlo SABAJNO conducts the Orchestra and Chorus of La Scala. This is the first complete recording of La Traviata, produced in Milano 1914 for the Gramophone Company (HMV)
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> I had hoped that some of the more knowledgeable members would have commented on this recording and singer. Maybe because it was the last post on that page it might have been overlooked when new posts were made ... anyway, I am repeating it here.


I am familiar with this recording because it was featured on one of the late Mike Richters CD Roms from the early 2000s. He took complete performances and compressed them as MP3s on a CD one could play on a computer.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> ...if you enjoy entertainment both past and present, there is a lot more past than there is present, so "nostalgia", as it is understood by most people in practice, would result in you feeling old by like 10 years old.


Unfortunately, over the years there has been rather little present-day entertainment capable of diverting and holding my attention more than momentarily. You are right about the age at which I began to see what this implies: it must have been around my tenth year when I began to understand that my contemporaries, whose music was the product of the moment, were children of the mid-20th century, while I, immersed in musical cultures long past, had no sense of where I belonged in time and space. My roots seemed to extend from the ancient world of mythology and romance to the early-modern world in which those myths and romances became the operas that filled the best hours of my life. In my most personal and essential being, and in nearly the only moments I treasured without qualification, I inhabited neither a past era nor the present one. This didn't make me feel old; there was no sense of having lived through the centuries that stretched from _Tristan et Iseult_ to _Tristan und Isolde. _It was closer to an obliteration of time, a timeless feeling of suspension between a complex, partly fictional past and an inconceivable future, with the eternal present of music and art a refuge from the intractable and baffling realities of both. With such a perspective on the "real" world - essentially, the perspective of a spectator brought willy-nilly to a theater where the only play in the repertoire has a constantly changing cast, limitless acts, and no denouement - the timeless, enchanted realm of art was the only thing like a home I could imagine, and I rarely stepped outside it except when the world's demands couldn't be denied.

It becomes harder to deny the "real" world as we grow older. Now, with the 21st century impinging on me day to day and with my professional contributions to music ended, I tend to my life's infrastructure: I maintain my home and my pickup truck, I budget my income, I pay my bills, and I bear the mysterious aches and pains of age whenever nature decides I've earned them. But I'm still just a spectator before the world's unending show, and a commentator when the play seems worth talking about. I have no illusions about the worth of what I observe or what I say - in the denouement which never comes it's all gone with the wind - but I keep busy. I won't wallow - not too often, anyway - in nostalgia for times in which I didn't live, times easy to romanticize in a precarious present, and I'll always be grateful that there are a few people here to talk with about the unrepeatable beauties of our cultural heritage. For many of us the play will soon be over, but for all of us the play must go on until la commedia è finita. E poi? E poi? La Morte è il Nulla.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Unfortunately, over the years there has been rather little present-day entertainment capable of diverting and holding my attention more than momentarily. You are right about the age at which I began to see what this implies: it must have been around my tenth year when I began to understand that my contemporaries, whose music was the product of the moment, were children of the mid-20h century, while I, immersed in musical cultures long past, had no sense of where I belonged in time and space. My roots seemed to extend from the ancient world of mythology and romance to the early-modern world in which those myths and romances became the operas that filled the best hours of my life. In my most personal and essential being, and in nearly the only moments I treasured without qualification, I inhabited neither a past era nor the present one. This didn't make me feel old; there was no sense of having lived through the centuries that stretched from _Tristan et Iseult_ to _Tristan und Isolde. _It was closer to an obliteration of time, a timeless feeling of suspension between a complex, partly fictional past and an inconceivable future, with the eternal present of music and art a refuge from the intractable and baffling realities of both. With such a perspective on the "real" world - essentially, the perspective of a spectator brought willy-nilly to a theater where the only play in the repertoire has a constantly changing cast, limitless acts, and no denouement - the timeless, enchanted realm of art was the only thing like a home I could imagine, and I rarely stepped outside it except when the world's demands couldn't be denied.
> 
> It becomes harder to deny the "real" world as we grow older. Now, with the 21st century impinging on me day to day and with my professional contributions to music ended, I tend to my life's infrastructure: I maintain my home and my pickup truck, I budget my income, I pay my bills, and I bear the mysterious aches and pains of age whenever nature decides I've earned them. But I'm still just a spectator before the world's unending show, and a commentator when the play seems worth talking about. I have no illusions about the worth of what I observe or what I say - in the denouement which never comes it's all gone with the wind - but I keep busy. I won't wallow - not too often, anyway - in nostalgia for times in which I didn't live, times easy to romanticize in a precarious present, and I'll always be grateful that there are a few people here to talk with about the unrepeatable beauties of our cultural heritage. For many of us the play will soon be over, but for all of us the play must go on until la commedia è finita. E poi? E poi? La Morte è il Nulla.


Off topic, but in the off chance you will understand this reference (or be curious enough to look into it), this is one of the most 5w4 things I've ever read (Enneagram Type 5 with a 4 wing).5s tend to be withdrawn because they're prone to feeling overwhelmed/suffocated by the external world and develop keen powers of observation and a tendency to analyze/model excessively. Each type can have a connection to either type adjacent to it called a "wing" (ex: a 2 can be a 2 with a 1 wing/2w1 or a 2 with a 3 wing/2w3). 5w6 tends to be more technical and precise, while 5w4 straddles the realm of the head and the heart: possessing a rich, melancholic inner world, but tending to go about analyzing/describing it from a more detached standpoint.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> Off topic, but in the off chance you will understand this reference (or be curious enough to look into it), this is one of the most 5w4 things I've ever read (Enneagram Type 5 with a 4 wing).5s tend to be withdrawn because they're prone to feeling overwhelmed/suffocated by the external world and develop keen powers of observation and a tendency to analyze/model excessively. Each type can have a connection to either type adjacent to it called a "wing" (ex: a 2 can be a 2 with a 1 wing/2w1 or a 2 with a 3 wing/2w3). 5w6 tends to be more technical and precise, while 5w4 straddles the realm of the head and the heart: possessing a rich, melancholic inner world, but tending to go about analyzing/describing it from a more detached standpoint.


I've never lookd into enneagrams and really don't know what they are, but I do resonate somewhat with your general analysis. That's a highly qualified remark, I know. Is taking care to qualify everything characterisic of one of those types?


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I've never lookd into enneagrams and really don't know what they are, but I do resonate somewhat with your general analysis. That's a highly qualified remark, I know. Is taking care to qualify everything characterisic of one of those types?


Absolutely. I'll try not to make this sound to horoscope-y.

5s and 4s both have a tendency to describe things with great nuance. This makes a lot of 5w4s great novelists because they enjoy fleshing out all the details of an inner world, fleshing out the motivations and emotional landscapes of various characters and describing anything from the workings of a civilization's politics, to the landscape of a mountain kingdom, to all manner of background lore about a continent's history.

5w4's emotions tend to have a "still waters run deep" quality to them. They find it puzzling that most people tend to fit themselves neatly into "logical" people vs "emotional" people, because in their own mind, the two make friends more often than not. Their main struggle in life comes from getting more in touch with their gut, interacting with the world in real time or dealing with faster-paced activities that require more present mindedness. Without time to go back to their lair and recharge, they often look a bit like ghosts just floating there until they can leave (most have a bit of an obsession with secret rooms, caves, castle ruins, etc). Once they get used to it though, they're generally logical enough to find their niche and carve out a living.

Where the 5w6 tends to be a bit more dry, technical and stereotypically "geeky", 5w4s tend to place a higher priority in aesthetics, often collecting things like exotic vases, opera recordings, Chinese or Japanese teas or vibrant looking clothing. Generally, they aren't looking to be a snob, but people can perceive them that way. In reality, they tend to like more complex crafts/artforms because it gives them the chance to comb over the same thing over and over and keep making new realizations about the same piece. 

a few examples of people I believe are 5w4s are: Franz Liszt, JRR Tolkien, Agatha Christie Will Durant, Mary Shelly and Tim Burton,


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> Absolutely. I'll try not to make this sound to horoscope-y.
> 
> 5s and 4s both have a tendency to describe things with great nuance. This makes a lot of 5w4s great novelists because they enjoy fleshing out all the details of an inner world, fleshing out the motivations and emotional landscapes of various characters and describing anything from the workings of a civilization's politics, to the landscape of a mountain kingdom, to all manner of background lore about a continent's history.
> 
> ...


I do seem pretty 5w4ish. This is fun. We had similar fun analyzing ourselves and each other with this book in the late '70s:









Please Understand Me : Character and Temperament Types: David Keirsey, Marilyn Bates: 9780935652024: Amazon.com: Books


Please Understand Me : Character and Temperament Types [David Keirsey, Marilyn Bates] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Please Understand Me : Character and Temperament Types



www.amazon.com





I'm an INT/PJ/F. Although I'm not as much inclined as I once was to look into such things systematically, it's all interesting.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> I had hoped that some of the more knowledgeable members would have commented on this recording and singer. Maybe because it was the last post on that page it might have been overlooked when new posts were made ... anyway, I am repeating it here.


San Antone, perhaps if you posted it on its own thread you might get more interest. However, from my point of view, the singers and conductor are proficient enough, but none of the voices were interesting enough for me to listen to the whole thing. The soprano has a soubrette-ish but somewhat colorless voice, not my favorite type.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Woodduck said:


> Nostalgia isn't necessarily a trick played on memory, or an indulgence of the old.
> 
> I'm about your age, and was similarly inspired and educated in my teen years by the fine musicians and writers who staffed High Fidelity and Stereo Review. Among those, I found Conrad L. Osborne and David Hamilton particularly knowledgeable and eloquent, but there were others who contributed to my understanding of opera and singing. I remain grateful to them for the excellence of their writings and for all I learned by reading them.
> 
> ...


 Actually, I did mention Talvela . The singers you mention were also outstanding artists , but I just couldn't think of them at the time . I didn't deliberately exclude them .


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> I had hoped that some of the more knowledgeable members would have commented on this recording and singer. Maybe because it was the last post on that page it might have been overlooked when new posts were made ... anyway, I am repeating it here.


I am lazy to listen to it, another La Traviatta, you know... But if I knew, what exactly is your point or your question, maybe I would.

Are you hinting that this style of singing (around 1914) was different than, e.g. Callas era ? What difference should I notice ?
Or are you asking, why those singers weren't more famous ?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

BBSVK said:


> I am lazy to listen to it, another La Traviatta, you know... But if I knew, what exactly is your point or your question, maybe I would.
> 
> Are you hinting that this style of singing (around 1914) was different than, e.g. Callas era ? What difference should I notice ?
> Or are you asking, why those singers weren't more famous ?


I was hoping for just some commentary on the singing, and overall performance including orchestral playing of the opera as represented by this 1914 recording. I think the style of singing is different than the mid-50s and later, but would not make such a claim based on this one recording; maybe someone else more knowledgeable than I could ....

I was also interested in the judgment of some of the more experienced members about the voice of the main singers.

But it's no big deal ...


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Margherita Bevignani (Soprano) (?1887 - Milano 1921)


She studied with Perilli and made her debut in 1909 at the Teatro Politeama Garibaldi of Treviso as Micaela in ‘’Carmen’’. Dur...




forgottenoperasingers.blogspot.com





Margherita Bevignani (Soprano) (?1887 - Milano 1921)










She studied with Perilli and made her debut in 1909 at the Teatro Politeama Garibaldi of Treviso as Micaela in ‘’Carmen’’. During the next years she appeared with success in Italian provincial stages, thus among other things in 1911 at the Teatro Donizetti in Bergamo as Regina in ‘’Ugonotti’’ of Meyerbeer. In 1914 she made guest appearance in Holland and had there a big success in ‘’Traviata’’. When Italy entered into the First World War, she could leave Holland only by ship. The ship was torpedoed in the English Channel by German submarines and sank and killing Rosita Cesaretti, contralto, while other artists like Attilio Salvaneschi, Giuseppe Reschiglian as well as Margherita Bevignani returned to Holland and remained there up to the end of the war. She sang in Holland untill 1918. During the big influenza epidemic of 1918 she fallen ill in Holland and after she had returned to Italy, there she was stricken from a serious attack of tuberculosis, that forced her to withdrawal from the scene.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> I was hoping for just some commentary on the singing, and overall performance including orchestral playing of the opera as represented by this 1914 recording. I think the style of singing is different than the mid-50s and later, but would not make such a claim based on this one recording; maybe someone else more knowledgeable than I could ....
> 
> I was also interested in the judgment of some of the more experienced members about the voice of the main singers.
> 
> But it's no big deal ...


I'm going to listen to it a little later. But I found a Wikipedia article about Margherita Bevignani. Little is known about her, especially about her background, but her fate was dramatic. She made her debut early enough. At thirty her carrier was interrupted by tuberculosis, which finally killed her at just 34.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

superhorn said:


> Actually, I did mention Talvela . The singers you mention were also outstanding artists , but I just couldn't think of them at the time . I didn't deliberately exclude them .


I know. You didn't need to list everyone. Someone else - or we ourselves - could think of even more fine singers from the postwar decades. No comparable list could be drawn up for the last thirty years.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

SanAntone said:


> I had hoped that some of the more knowledgeable members would have commented on this recording and singer. Maybe because it was the last post on that page it might have been overlooked when new posts were made ... anyway, I am repeating it here.







This recording, to which I'm listening right now, seems to me interesting and impressive enough to warrant a thread of its own, where it might provoke some discussion. Would you like to do that, or should I?


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

Twenty years from now, some may be nostalgic for singers of the present. But two hundred years from now, if humanity survives that long, and if there are still people who care enough about meaning and beauty to listen to opera's recorded history, and when everyone involved is dead and they have the space for a more objective view, they will judge today's singers, and tomorrow's, as vastly inferior to those of the first half of the 20th century. It's not about the good old days, it's about observable phenomena: steadiness of tone and ease of emission, vibrato, use of registration, legato, chiaroscuro etc.. We can't know exactly what these singers sounded like in the hall, but we can know a lot, including these things. And by these metrics of good singing, which I think most singers and voice teachers today would agree to if you didn't tell them you were about to compare them with singers of the past, today's singers fall far short. That isn't to say there's not good singing, it's to say there's less than we'd like and there's almost no great singing.
Take this recording:
Eugenio Giraldoni: "Per me giunto è il dì supremo", Gramophone & Typewriter 52404 - YouTube
This is, sonically, not a great recording. There's noise and it's acoustic, with all the limitations that brings. You can't hear what Giraldoni sounded like live, but you can hear perfect steadiness of tone and ease of emission, perfect vibrato, beautiful and sensitive use of registration, intelligent and musical legato line, a voice combining roundness and steeliness. And what I can hear, without any special pleading or imagining what it might have sounded like, just what I actually hear, sounds beautiful to me. That isn't nostalgia. It's an aesthetic judgment made knowing the limitations of the evidence and after careful scrutiny of my own biases and predilections, as well as extensive engagement with many recordings across the decades from Giraldoni to the present day. If I'm wrong, as I always say, show me the evidence: show me the recording of that aria from the present that displays the same ease, that has the same idiomatic flair, that includes a trill thrown off as though it's nothing with such accuracy and taste...
Aside from the singing itself, I think opera is, at its best, a classical art form, meaning one that deals with fundamental problems and passions, with human nature. It is especially good at delving into human emotion, and in showing the nobility and folly with which human beings suffer against and from their misguided passions. That is something that is relevant and interesting in all times and places, and the great operas are "classics" in that sense, as well as being perpetually enjoyable and moving works of music.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

"During the big influenza epidemic of 1918 she fallen ill in Holland and after she had returned to Italy, there she was stricken from a serious attack of tuberculosis, that forced her to withdrawal from the scene."

So she had an equivalent of Covid19 and post Covid infection.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Many of the Lebendige Vergangenheit (Living Past) recordings from Preiser Records are available on YouTube. Some great historical singers documented.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> Many of the Lebendige Vergangenheit (Living Past) recordings from Preiser Records are available on YouTube. Some great historical singers documented.


I use many in my contests from Preiser.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> *LA TRAVIATA* - La Scala 1914 (Complete Opera Verdi)
> Toscanini's assistant Carlo SABAJNO conducts the Orchestra and Chorus of La Scala. This is the first complete recording of La Traviata, produced in Milano 1914 for the Gramophone Company (HMV)
> 
> 
> ...


I've listened to it. Thank you, SanAntone, that you've digged it out. I liked Margherita Bevignani. She has a little "childish" timbre, at least in parts of her range. Something like that I noticed in Desirée Rancatore and Marina Rebeka, but not always, and it's widespread among sopranos of the time. Maybe it's a technical result of a recording. I read that such voices are not popular now, I don't know why. Her performance seemed to me heartfelt, recitatives and a letter especially.
The baritone Ernesto Badini sounded light and young, although sang well. And he hasn't made the main mistake: he didn't try to oppress Violetta in an act 2, but showed some compassion.
The tenor (I must confess, tenors aren't my leading interest almost in any opera, especially in Traviata) sang well enough, at least he didn't howl in croooce e delizia. My ears to music doesn't permit me to distinguish vibrato and wobble, maybe someone more knowledgeable would explain. For me his singing had sheepish or goatish quality sometimes.
I'm too ignorant to assess a conductor. I think everything was alright. The fact we have a full (with some cuts) recording of 1914 in a good quality is precious.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Double


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Woodduck said:


> ... But I'm still just a spectator before the world's unending show, and a commentator when the play seems worth talking about. I have no illusions about the worth of what I observe or what I say - in the denouement which never comes it's all gone with the wind - but I keep busy. ...


Woodduck, I think the sense of "timelessness" that you have mentioned is a factor in peoples' dedication to classical music's ongoing existence, which has already far exceeded the length of a single human lifespan. For example much music from the 11th-18th centuries was effectively lost to humanity until the labors of musicology brought it back in publications, performances, and recordings. And people really want that music! So who can predict what will happen in the future with 19th- or 20th-century music? This includes commentary as well as music. Anyway your contributions on what I believe is the world's largest classical music discussion site are invaluable, both in knowledge and in principled debate. No one can know the extent of their influence and inspiration.


----------



## John O (Jan 16, 2021)

pianozach said:


> Besides, "nostalgia" is the longing for something we actually LIVED through that we remember fondly. None of us were actually there when Beethoven debuted his Third Symphony, or when Monet painted some water lillies.


Unless you are Elina Makropulos


----------



## Ulalume!Ulalume! (6 mo ago)

Nostos means homecoming. And algos means grief or anguish. Thus nostalgia, literally, is the agony one feels upon the realisation that we are incapable of returning home. We wish to dwell forever in a moment of history that the seas of time ceaselessly sweep us further and further away from, until one day it dissolves upon the horizon. We can never return. We can merely take solace in the momentos and memories we cling to which will assuredly vanish from the earth along with our bones before long!


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Roger Knox said:


> For example much music from the 11th-18th centuries was effectively lost to humanity until the labors of musicology brought it back in publications, performances, and recordings.


Apparently, Mozart also began to be "popular" only a few decades ago according to statistics of number of newspaper mentions per period, Browse Newspapers - Newspapers.com— Mozart is mentioned often since the 1980s. Before that composers of the Romantic period are dominating compared to those of the Classical and earlier periods. For example, "Richard Wagner" has 18,222 mentions in the 1910s, while "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" has 224. Wagner has 30,323 mentions in the 1950s, while Mozart has 2,739. Wagner has 28,540 mentions in the 1990s while Mozart has 22,409.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> Apparently, Mozart also only has got "popular" a few decades ago according to statistics of number of newspaper mentions per period, Browse Newspapers - Newspapers.com— Mozart is mentioned often since the 1980s. Before that composers of the Romantic period are dominating compared to those of the Classical and earlier periods. For example, "Richard Wagner" has 18,222 mentions in the 1910s, while "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" has 224. Wagner has 30,323 mentions in the 1950s, while Mozart has 2,739. Wagner has 28,540 mentions in the 1990s while Mozart has 22,409.


Fascinating! We have now the operatic version of the Guiness Book of World Records thanks to your operatic trivia knowledge!!! Pavarotti, and Netrebko and possibly Callas likely lead the pack for opera star name dropping in this century.


----------



## Syphilology (16 d ago)

Seattleoperafan said:


> Like baseball car collectors I think this is largely true for most opera fanatics I know except for someone like Mas who got to see all those greats from SFO for decades. How is it for you? I did love going to Seattle Opera during it's heyday under Speight Jenkins but i don't go anymore at all. For me most of my great obsessions are about dead singers from long ago. The ultimate would be Sutherland's debut Alcina around ' 59 in that tiny Venice opera house with direction and sets and costumes by Zeffirelli. Overload!!


I don't agree with you. There are a lot of young but amazing opera artists I saw during visiting opera theaters all over the world. I even found my girlfriend at such a concert. I can agree only with the point that in the modern world we got more sounds and ways to get them but no one forgets about opera. I think it's intersectionality in some way. I researched this theme a lot as a sociology student so you might find here https://samplius.com/free-essay-examples/intersectionality/ some useful info about it. You can't understand how the person or field might be on oppression if you look at the situation only from one side.


----------

