# Single Round: Arrigo! ah, parli a un core. Callas, Radvanovsky



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Can anyone sing an aria the equal of or better than Maria Callas? If anyone can, Radvanovsky, would be my bet in this aria from I Vespri Siciliani. I rarely love late Callas but I think she is fabulous in this aria, so Sondra would be competing against a wonderful performance by Maria







. Let me know what you think? Sondra is ON FIRE in this aria. I can't make up my mind on this one.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

I first heard this aria when EMI published one of the versions Callas recorded in the 1960s. It was on an LP called *Callas - By Request*, which I played to death. The tempo here is faster than on that release, I think, and sounds rather hurried. Callas's voice sounds a bit lighter than I remember on the LP, and in better shape. But I can't be sure.

The tempo in Radvanovsky's version would put Arrigo to sleep, and the last few measures are altered from Callas's version (I know no others). She does a nice job, but there's no comparison for me. Yawn.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

MAS said:


> I first heard this aria when EMI published one of the versions Callas recorded in the 1960s. It was on an LP called *Callas - By Request*, which I played to death. The tempo here is faster than on that release, I think, and sounds rather hurried. Callas's voice sounds a bit lighter than I remember on the LP, and in better shape. But I can't be sure.
> 
> The tempo in Radvanovsky's version would put Arrigo to sleep, and the last few measures are altered from Callas's version (I know no others). She does a nice job, but there's no comparison for me. Yawn.


I knew how you would vote , but I ask this out of ignorance: is the tempo that a singer performs an aria in her fault or the conductor's. Probably an artist of Callas' stature could set a tempo but unless a singer is with her accompanist or on a recital album I didn't think most singers could influence the tempo and were stuck with what the boss dealt out. 
I ask another question: in a bel canto aria like this doesn't the singer have some latitude in ornamentation for instance at the end of the piece? I've heard Martina Arroyo sing this ( beautifully but boringly) and she alters the end of the piece so that she avoids low notes she lacks. I have also heard considerable variations in the big soprano Bel Canto arias from Il Trovatore by different artists.
Sorry this wasn't the perfect Callas version. This is what Youtube brought up for me and I was only aware of one version by Callas and it was this one I have heard for years.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Jumping Jehoshaphat! What on earth is Radvanovsky's conductor doing? A ritard in every measure? Even before the singer enters? It isn't just a matter of a slow tempo, but of a tempo that keeps dying and reviving again, with the result that there is no actual tempo at all. In this style of music it's the singer's prerogative to play with rhythm, and the conductor's job to accommodate her expressive choices. This is called accompanying, and it's an art that opera conductors must master. Did this guy think he was doing that? Did Radvanovsky demand, suggest, or approve this weirdness? Was it a conspiracy? Whatever it was, shame on both of them, and on an audience that yells its approval while Verdi is murdered.

As far as the singing goes, Radvanovsky is obviously more vocally secure than Callas was at that stage. But if she were half the musician that Callas was she would have refused to perform with the goofball on the podium, whom a little research reveals to have been one Frederic Chaslin. It seems fair that I've never encountered him, and will be fair if I never do again. I hope Serafin and de Sabata weren't listening from wherever they were at the time. Underground, I guess.

With a diminished voice and an upper range that she can barely manage, Callas shows how to sing this. No contest.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Seattleoperafan said:


> I knew how you would vote , but I ask this out of ignorance: is the tempo that a singer performs an aria in her fault or the conductor's. Probably an artist of Callas' stature could set a tempo but unless a singer is with her accompanist or on a recital album I didn't think most singers could influence the tempo and were stuck with what the boss dealt out. I ask another question: in a bel canto aria like this doesn't the singer have some latitude in ornamentation for instance at the end of the piece? I've heard Martina Arroyo sing this ( beautifully but boringly) and she alters the end of the piece so that she avoids low notes she lacks. Does that invalidate her performance?
> Sorry this wasn't the perfect Callas version. This is what Youtube brought up for me and I was only aware of one version by Callas and it was this one I have heard for years.


The tempo is usually set by the conductor in a performance. In the studio, there might be a collaboration if it's a singer's aria album. Callas was usually cooperative as she was a professional and relished challenges - but she sometimes disagreed with conductors, usually lousy ones, like some of the Mexico City ones she worked with.

Singers can often adjust some music that lies uncomfortably for their voices - since I don't have a score I can't tell whether Sondra sang hers according to the score, or altered it to suit herself. I know that Callas was a stickler to the composer's wishes so I suspect she sang it as written.

The tempo in Radvanovsky's video seems awfully slow, so much so that the orchestra seems uncertain.

As far as ornamentation, it's to the conductor's discretion but the singer may have more say in it depending on their capabilities.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

How to murder Verdi in one easy lesson. What on earth are Radvanovsky and her conductor doing here? The aria loses any sense of flow at this funereal tempo. It's almost twice as long as the Callas version. Incidentally the final cadenza is written out by Verdi and it's the one Callas sings. In fact I've never heard another soprano sing such a perfect chain of pearls scale at the end (mind you, something of a Callas speciality). Radvanovsky's instrument is obviously in better shape than late Callas, but, though the top register is a good deal more secure, I don't find the middle and lower registers perceptibly more beautiful than Callas's.

This is actually one of several versions set down by Callas in the 1960s, one of them as late as 1969, and I'm not sure which one this is. In the middle and lower register, the voice sounds in pretty good shape actually and the top, though frail and insecure, is less strident than it often could be at this time. In any case, Callas's supreme musicality, her sense of natural rubato and the flow of the music, win the day. For all the frailty of her top register, I find this very beautiful.

Out of interest, here she is singing the aria in Florence in 1951 under Erich Kleiber. Kleiber takes the intro a little fast and when Callas enters, she slows him down a little by adopting a slower attitude within that tempo. He also gives her room to shape the music and apply her own rubato, but the aria never loses its shape or its natural flow. She again sings the descending scale at the end, but the low F# doesn't really sound here. Maybe it was just outside her range at that time. Her top is of course a lot more secure, but I'm not sure I prefer this to the later one.


----------



## niknik (Oct 4, 2014)

This is from 1964/65 recording session. There is also the 1960 essay under Tonini which find her in more secure voice throughout the tessitura.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

niknik said:


> This is from 1964/65 recording session. There is also the 1960 essay under Tonini which find her in more secure voice throughout the tessitura.


Indeed. One should also note that only one of these versions was approved for release by Callas, and it is the 1964 version under Rescigno. The 1960 and 1969 versions surfaced after she died.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Without having read anyone's posts to sway me, I have to go with Maria simply because the tempo was more to my liking and she seemed smoother throughout. I thought Sondra did a beautiful heartfelt job but it seemed that the tempos were off or too slow. I love them both and think they are examples of opera as opera should be sung.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> How to murder Verdi in one easy lesson. What on earth are Radvanovsky and her conductor doing here? The aria loses any sense of flow at this funereal tempo. It's almost twice as long as the Callas version. Incidentally the final cadenza is written out by Verdi and it's the one Callas sings. In fact I've never heard another soprano sing such a perfect chain of pearls scale at the end (mind you, something of a Callas speciality). Radvanovsky's instrument is obviously in better shape than late Callas, but, though the top register is a good deal more secure, I don't find the middle and lower registers perceptibly more beautiful than Callas's.
> 
> This is actually one of several versions set down by Callas in the 1960s, one of them as late as 1969, and I'm not sure which one this is. In the middle and lower register, the voice sounds in pretty good shape actually and the top, though frail and insecure, is less strident than it often could be at this time. In any case, Callas's supreme musicality, her sense of natural rubato and the flow of the music, win the day. For all the frailty of her top register, I find this very beautiful.
> 
> Out of interest, here she is singing the aria in Florence in 1951 under Erich Kleiber. Kleiber takes the intro a little fast and when Callas enters, she slows him down a little by adopting a slower attitude within that tempo. He also gives her room to shape the music and apply her own rubato, but the aria never loses its shape or its natural flow. She again sings the descending scale at the end, but the low F# doesn't really sound here. Maybe it was just outside her range at that time. Her top is of course a lot more secure, but I'm not sure I prefer this to the later one.


Interesting to hear how she refined her interpretation over the years. The early performance is one of the rare times when I find her expressive gestures laid on more heavily than necessary. 1951? Maybe she had just finished singing Kundry.


----------

