# Final Round: Ah non giunge. Tetrazinni and Callas



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)




----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

I like was Tertazzini does with the aria in her way, but I absolutely *love *what Callas is able to do, her variety of dynamics, that spectacular _diminuendo on the _high E-Flat, the fabulous descending scale after it, the ascending _arpeggios _right after - in one breath! The single note _crescendo _that follows is almost an exhalation of relief. Her musical imagination alone makes her the most singular proponent for this aria. Astonishing!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

We can't know how near Tetrazzini's recorded performance comes to what she did in the opera house, but we can know that what Callas did at this performance was riveting and breathtaking.


----------



## Dogville (Dec 28, 2021)

I was surprised I actually liked Tetrazzini's performance considering I do not think she was all that tasteful or expressive from hearing some of her other recorded material. Some of the ornaments sound a bit bizarre and non-Bellinian but the coloratura is exquisite and the joy of the piece shines through. However, Callas easily takes this for reasons MAS stated above. No one has ever shown the virtuosic control over volume singing this aria the way Callas does here or in Edinburgh. The only issue I have is that Callas' trills by this point were not sounding as tonally accurate the way they had a few years earlier.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I'm so glad that people are enjoying Tetrazzini. Who knows what she would sound like in a good quality recording, but considering this was over 100 years ago she still sounded spectacular. Who knows if Flagstad could be heard by a crowd of 100,000 like her in SF. To come in second to Callas in this aria is really something. Callas is still spectacular all these years after her weight loss which doesn't always happen with her. I liked the beauty of Sutherland's high notes better but as beautiful as Sutherland's middle voice was I preferred Callas' voice in the middle where most of the singing occurs. Maria's Eb was jaw dropping in the middle of the aria.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Tetrazzini's technique is quite phenomenal, the accuracy of her staccati and her trills amazing, but here we have Callas live, caught on the wing and in fabulous form. That ascent to a _forte _top Eb, the _diminuendo _on it, and then that dazzlingly perfect downward scale all taken in one breath! Well wow! No wonder the audience went wild. Just before this she had sung a pathetic, amost unbearably moving _Ah non credea. _Truly, the woman was a genius.

For those who think her singing of the cabaletta a little too forceful for such a simple, gentle character, perhaps a reminder of Visconti's production would be instructive. With his designer Piero Tosi, Visconti had sought to create a picture-book, dreamlike depiction of a nineteenth century village that never existed, the villagers dressed like ladies and gentlemen, the women in shades of pink, pearl and grey, and the men in black and white. Visconti’s vision of Amina was no village girl, but the evocation of a bejewelled nineteenth-century prima donna performing the role. She was costumed to look like the nineteenth century ballerina Maria Taglioni, and PIero Tosi recalls that when she made her entrance in the first sleepwalking scene, the impression she created was of “a sylphide tripping on the moonlight.”

Though one can see what Visconti was driving at, Callas’s genius ensured that at no point did she seem to be _performing_ the role, so completely did she inhabit the character of sweet, trusting Amina. However, at the end of the opera, Visconti brought up all the lights, including La Scala’s huge central chandelier to full brilliance, and had Callas come down to the footlights, singing directly out into the audience, no longer Amina, but the great prima donna acknowledging her public.

I assume the same thing happened when the opera was performed in Cologne and Edinburgh and it helps explain the dazzling display of vocal fireworks at the end.


----------



## ALT (Mar 1, 2021)

I found Callas’ voice too unwieldy and ugly to do justice to the piece. Tetrazzini had the more flexible instrument and more congenial timbre of the two. Besides, Tetrazzini was born much closer to the composer’s time on this planet and is therefore presumably more attuned to the vocal and interpretive stylings as understood at the time of its composition. I vote for Tetrazzini. This is after all about more than looking pretty in pretty dresses.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

ALT said:


> I found Callas’ voice too unwieldy and *ugly* to do justice to the piece. Tetrazzini had the more flexible instrument and more *congenial* timbre of the two. Besides, Tetrazzini was born much closer to the composer’s time on this planet and is therefore presumably more attuned to the vocal and interpretive stylings as understood at the time of its composition. I vote for Tetrazzini. *This is after all about more than looking pretty in pretty dresses.*


Oh well. Hard as I try, I can't ignore empty snark forever.

It's perfectly legitimate to enjoy Tetrazzini more than Callas, even though neither you nor anyone else knows what her vocal timbre acually sounded like. We can tell that she was a phenomenal singer, and we can like very much what we can hear of her. I do. But, even so, your personal conceptions of what is "ugly" or "congenial" in vocal timbre are irrelevant to how well a singer meets the musical and technical demands of music. Dragging in speculation about the vocal stylings of Bellini's day, almost a century before Tetrazzini's recording, also goes nowhere. We don't even know what Tetrazzini actually sounded like, and all we have to tell us about Pasta is verbal descriptions. Interestingly, those descriptions are much more suggestive of Callas than of Tetrazzini.

It's your last sentence, an insult not only to Callas but to all the millions of appreciative listeners actually capable of appreciating her art, that gives your game away. If you don't like her for various reasons, that's fine. But do try to be at least rational and decent when you criticize.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Tetrazini, because by this time, I got used to her style to the point that I really enjoy it, but at the same time it is still a surprise.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

BBSVK said:


> Tetrazini, because by this time, I got used to her style to the point that I really enjoy it, but at the same time it is still a surprise.


I'm not nearly as knowledgeable as some of my cohorts here but I am pleased my contest introduced her to you.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Well....you KNOW!!!!!


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

If music were a religion I would be a pagan. 
Tetrazzini. 
P. S. Callas and Visconti were made for each other. It's a pity that her experience in the cinema left the only one.


----------

