# Why do you think so many classical music lovers don't seem to like opera?



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I have 5 or 6 friends that love classical music, but opera, not.
I can get them to listen to some Wagner and R. Strauss , but that's about it.
I notice that on this forum too.

But not vice versa. Opera people seem to like other classical music.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Probably because of the use of develop sections in forms used in instrumental music, motifi developments and so on which is much less common in opera. I'm not surprised they like Wagner thoug because motific development permeates and unifies every opera he wrote. 

Also, a lot of people it know who like classical music often seem to find wobbly vocal vibrato a very ugly sound.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

The voice, as cultivated for opera singing, at least the contemporary mode, is about the most synthetic sound a singing voice can make. The vibrato, often badly exaggerated and exacerbated by even the best engineered recording, is more than off-putting. Many people will not even be able to articulate what there is about it which disturbs, my guess though, is it becomes very difficult for the uninitiated _to even be able to determine what the damned pitch they are intended to hear is_

Then again, so much opera (especially the dramatic) is _so_ over the top melodramatic, that alone is a deal breaker, outside of many people's taste parameter. If you are not a believer, much of what is happening on stage is more than vaguely ridiculous -- as lame as many a contemporary Television Soap Opera.

The first mega barrier is that operatic trained voice; it is so unlike the more 'natural' production as heard in earlier baroque and classical oratoria, or cantata, for example -- that latter type of delivery much closer to what most consider 'natural' singing.

Face it, all classical music is a highly synthetic construct at the least. Add over-the top theater, crazily synthetic and cultured for the style human voice, and you have a lot of barriers most would say are near instinctual.

Re: "Not vice versa." Not at all the case!
I've also known of too many "Only Opera Freaks" who do not listen to art song, chamber music, or any orchestral music. I think their number is a bit greater than you might like to think.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I would suggest that a great many have heard orchestral music whether in film or television and thus find this easier to appreciate. Opera... classical singing as whole... is less common outside of the classical world... and likely less accessible. How often do we have individuals who feel free to dismiss Mozart, Vivaldi, Handel... or even Schubert, who have little or no experience with those composers' vocal works? How often do we stumble upon discussions of lieder or art song? How many here are into "Early Music" (Renaissance and Medieval) which is largely vocal music?


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Apart from the reasons already mentioned, I think the fact that operas are relatively long may account for a lot of the indifference towards the genre.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Blancrocher said:


> Apart from the reasons already mentioned, I think the fact that operas are relatively long may account for a lot of the indifference towards the genre.


People regularly attend pop music concerts and pop music and jazz festivals where they are committed to listening for similar lengths of time.

Oh, and even if you wanted to check out a live opera performance? _*It's the price, dummies*_


----------



## Posie (Aug 18, 2013)

I highly doubt that it's because the voices have an unnatural sound (though that's debatable). Most contemporary pop/rock singers do not have natural sounding voices. As for the price, in my experience, being an opera fan is cheaper than trying to keep up with the times.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

It's often a matter of personality. Some people find it difficult to suspend disbelief when people sing instead of speak. Especially when a dying, consumptive heroine sings an almighty aria! There is also the problem that those with the finest voices have not always the looks that match the roles they play. As when (eg) Ben Heppner sings the starving Florestan, those with a more rational mind assume that he'd been force fed in the dungeon!


----------



## Guest (Apr 12, 2014)

marinasabina said:


> I highly doubt that it's because the voices have an unnatural sound (though that's debatable). Most contemporary pop/rock singers do not have natural sounding voices. As for the price, in my experience, being an opera fan is cheaper than trying to keep up with the times.



Whilst 'unnatural' might not be the right word, the operatic singing style is one of the main reasons I don't listen to opera. Comparison with pop/rock singers is not really valid, since they do not all sing in a similar style. Tom Waits and Thom Yorke? Stina Nordenstam and Mariah Carey? I presume if Carey or Nordenstam sang Brunnhilde in their own style, this would be unacceptable to an operatic audience. However, the voice can be an obstacle to listening to some music anyway - I don't like either Mariah Carey or Tom Waits but love Thom Yorke and Stina Nordenstam!

Price isn't an issue for me personally, though I can see it might be for some. _Cosi Fan Tutte_ at the English National Opera currently retails at between £84 and £99, whereas _King Lear_ at the National Theatre is between £24 and £50 and the World Premiere today of Gorecki's 4th Symphony at the South Bank Centre can be heard for as little as £9 (or at a premium of £65)!

The music itself is not a problem - at least, not if you're looking for great tunes and choruses.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

PetrB said:


> The voice, as cultivated for opera singing, at least the contemporary mode, is about the most synthetic sound a singing voice can make. The vibrato, often badly exaggerated and exacerbated by even the best engineered recording, is more than off-putting. Many people will not even be able to articulate what there is about it which disturbs, my guess though, is it becomes very difficult for the uninitiated _to even be able to determine what the damned pitch they are intended to hear is_
> 
> The first mega barrier is that operatic trained voice; it is so unlike the more 'natural' production as heard in earlier baroque and classical oratoria, or cantata, for example -- that latter type of delivery much closer to what most consider 'natural' singing.
> 
> Face it, all classical music is a highly synthetic construct at the least. Add over-the top theater, crazily synthetic and cultured for the style human voice, and you have a lot of barriers most would say are near instinctual.


The human voice is capable of a wide range of sounds, as exhibited throughout the world's cultures and down through the ages, and I would be more hesitant about which of them I dared to call "artificial." Given that what is considered a "singing" sound is culture-relative, I would first make the obvious point that in Italy, especially a century ago but even today, an operatic voice would not be considered "synthetic" (whatever _that_ is supposed to mean). Even in this country, up until the early twentieth century the vocal technique for singing popular music was not fundamentally different from that required by opera, and opera singers frequently performed then-popular songs on their concert programs and recordings, to the great enjoyment of listeners not necessarily interested in opera as such. Only as popular music styles have diverged farther from classical, and have developed, under the influence of jazz, gospel, rock, etc., their own vocal styles - styles neither more nor less "natural" than classical singing - has the latter come to sound strange to large numbers of people for whom it does not resemble "their" way of singing. Granted that operatic voices are, like voices in any style of music, extremely varied and not all equally agreeable even (or especially!) to devotees of classical singing, there is nothing about the fundamental principles of operatic vocal technique which requires a singer to do anything more "unnatural" than sustain a consistent musical tone with a controlled pressure of the breath, and at a volume appropriate to the music being sung and the space in which it is heard. One may argue that when the music becomes loud enough and the space large enough some voices become unpleasant. But that's a different question.

You speak of the style of singing appropriate to "baroque and classical oratoria" as being somehow more "natural" than the presumably louder and vibrato-ridden "operatic" voice. I do not agree that there is any fundamental difference here. Different periods may have favored a "cleaner" (having less conspicuous vibrato) vocal sound than may presently prevail in opera, but in all periods vibrato would have varied from singer to singer. The notion that Baroque music was sung without vibrato is a misapprehension promulgated by people who just don't know how the human voice works and what technique is required to sing the very difficult music of seventeenth and eighteenth century opera and oratorio. There exists such a wealth of first-hand information describing the vocal training, technique and prowess of the castrati, some of whom may have been the most accomplished singers of all time, that there can be no doubt that vocal technique as taught during the Baroque era was fundamentally the technique upon which great classical singing has been based ever since.

As a former singer and lover of classical singing and opera, I have been moved to contribute several posts dealing with the subject of singing. I would like to suggest to those who don't care for the operatic voice, specifically because of the vibrato, that they investigate a little further and discover that vibrato is quite a variable quantity, and that in the finest voices it is not a wobble that obscures pitch but an inner vibrancy that makes a voice exciting to hear. A lot of opera haters who have discovered in Pavarotti or other "crossover" singers what a clean, powerful classical voice could sound like have rethought their prejudices. I fear your description of Mr. Pavarotti's style of singing as "synthetic" and "unnatural" may be discouraging to such pleasant discoveries.


----------



## Alfredoz (Apr 8, 2014)

A well-trained opera singer does not have ''wobbly vocal vibrato''.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Alfredoz said:


> A well-trained opera singer does not have ''wobbly vocal vibrato''.


Concisely stated! Thank you.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

I know many Opera fans, and most (though not all) are also fans of other classical musical genres. Of course, vocal genres are more favored than purely instrumental ones, but there are quite a few Opera people loving them (the instrumental, I mean), too.

About classical music lovers don't caring for Opera, there are also many that do, to a certain extent. Of the ones that don't, I will distinguish two cases:

-. People that simply don't like vocal music, not only Opera
-. People that genuinely dislike Opera, and in this case it's almost always, in my experience, due to the drama component.


Personally, I like all genres, with no exception, and I'm also open to explore beyond the confines of classical Western music.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Renee Fleming, in a newsy promo for her anthology of pop songs album, _Dark Hope._ Along the way, she makes some very pertinent comments about the differences between singing opera and pop music, including what happens in certain ranges. (There are few pop divas who use a much wider range than usual for pop, and their vocal production then is also a bit outside of what is usually needed for most pop.) Her comments too, on what is regularly required and then done in pop music to the vocal tracks in studio, and the technology, are also worth hearing.

It is easy to conclude, for the larger and more powerful voice required for acoustic singing in opera, and 'that other sound' for lighter pop singing, that for the most part, "never the twain shall meet."


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Itullian said:


> Why do you think so many classical music lovers don't seem to like opera?


Because in case of symphonic/chamber concert, you can simply go there without wondering if orchestral players will be dressed like Nazis and if the conductor will turn the performed work upside down, because he has a vision of his own.


----------



## SilenceIsGolden (May 5, 2013)

Considering that opera is a form of drama where the primary means of expression is music, it's not surprising since many music fans don't have a particular interest or passion for the dramatic arts. And opera's blend of music of drama can create a consistent level of high-pitched, white hot liquid emotional intensity that many viewers find overwhelming, but for others it is perhaps understandably off-putting. And yes, there are sometimes scenarios and characters in operas that are unabashedly melodramatic. But the greatest operatic composers had the gift of writing music that is so compellingly effective for the theater and able to articulate so many unspeakable layers of motive, emotion, ambiguity and conflict that they were able _elevate_ the drama with a depth of feeling and humanity that's impossible in spoken drama. I think back to my first experience with _La bohème_. When I read the synopsis in preparation for listening to it, the plot and characters struck me as frightfully one-dimensional and melodramatic on the page. The last act in particular seemed contrived. However, when I was able to hear Puccini's musical genius at work, and all those themes and melodies recalling memories from previous acts are repeated as Rodolfo and Mimi sing to each other for the last time, I was overcome by a flood of emotion and couldn't help but tearing up. The possibilities latent in the art form are endless really.


----------



## BaronScarpia (Apr 2, 2014)

I think the dislike a lot of musicky (new word, don't judge) people have for opera can be summed up in the following phrasette:

"Singers and musicians"


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I've always assumed that a big reason some classical-music lovers don't like opera is because they're impatient with the visual aspect of it and want music to be an aural experience only.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

There's a question here about "what is opera?" I like Wagner and Strauss and and a whole host of others that wrote later (and even a bit of Carmen and some Gounod arias and chunks of Mozart etc) because of the strength of the music means it can stand alone. I don't feel it vital to see the action and costumes etc as I've found it won't fundamentally change my enjoyment of the music. If I like the music, then staging (or semi-staging for that matter, which allows a wider range of operas to happen because $$$$) can definitely add to the experience

But I would still say I love opera - in fact some of my favourite music is opera


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Opera doesn't lend itself at all to being background music. Most listeners to any kind of music listen to it in the background. People who sit down and focus on listening to music are in the minority. That's the only way to follow what's going on in opera.

It's possible to take excerpts... arias and small sections... and make them nice tunes. To some people, that is their relationship to opera. But opera is first and foremost drama. It's more like a movie musical than it is like pure music.

Listening to opera on CDs is like only seeing half the show. How much would you have enjoyed your favorite movie if you had your eyes closed through the whole thing?


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2014)

Bellinilover said:


> I've always assumed that a big reason some classical-music lovers don't like opera is because they're impatient with the visual aspect of it and want music to be an aural experience only.


I had assumed that the OP was talking about listening to the music, rather than attending the opera to get the full experience.



SilenceIsGolden said:


> Considering that opera is a form of drama where the primary means of expression is music, it's not surprising since many music fans don't have a particular interest or passion for the dramatic arts.


Do they not? On what do you base your assertion?


----------



## SilenceIsGolden (May 5, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Do they not? On what do you base your assertion?


I'm sorry. I misspoke. I didn't mean to say "since", but rather "if". And that comment was made with the knowledge that an appreciation for one branch of the arts doesn't automatically carry over to all of them. It's quite understandable that someone can love film and theater but not have a strong feel for music, enjoy literature but not the visual arts, and any and every combination in between.

I know from my own experiences talking with music lovers and discussing opera with various people that many don't engage with opera as drama but simply as music. They could care less about the theatrical elements and are happy listening to it without watching it or following along with the story, and are often quite content just listening to excerpts. Whether that's because they don't have the same devotion to theater as they do to music, or because they don't like _opera_ as drama specifically, that's for each person to say individually.

Anyways, I didn't mean to imply that music fans don't have a love for drama in general, or that there is any one all-encompassing answer to the Itullian's question.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Itullian said:


> I have 5 or 6 friends that love classical music, but opera, not.
> I can get them to listen to some Wagner and R. Strauss , but that's about it.
> I notice that on this forum too.
> 
> But not vice versa. Opera people seem to like other classical music.


I like opera from time to time, but not often. It could be the time involved, but with highlights albums its not such a huge problem. It could be that I favor instrumental over vocal musics, but then again I do like choral, art-song (esp. Mahler and after), and symphonic works and chamber with vocals, and vocals in non classical.

I don't think its lack of experience because my parents listened to opera as well as other classical, and it didn't seem to have made a huge difference in what directions my taste went within classical. Not for lack of trying either, but one does get to a point where further trying is of little or no use, and its best to follow your gut instinct and go with what you like the most.

I think that opera is an acquired taste. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it, its just different to the other genres in classical. Probably does require quite a bit of effort but so too do other types of classical music, in one way or another. So ultimately this is a matter of taste, as far as I am concerned. I can't explain why it seems to be the case that more classical listeners like instrumental rather than vocal (and in terms of non classical, its the reverse, those who listen to non-classical musics prefer vocal to instrumental).


----------



## Guest (Apr 15, 2014)

SilenceIsGolden said:


> I'm sorry. I misspoke. I didn't mean to say "since", but rather "if". And that comment was made with the knowledge that an appreciation for one branch of the arts doesn't automatically carry over to all of them. It's quite understandable that someone can love film and theater but not have a strong feel for music, enjoy literature but not the visual arts, and any and every combination in between.
> 
> I know from my own experiences talking with music lovers and discussing opera with various people that many don't engage with opera as drama but simply as music. They could care less about the theatrical elements and are happy listening to it without watching it or following along with the story, and are often quite content just listening to excerpts. Whether that's because they don't have the same devotion to theater as they do to music, or because they don't like _opera_ as drama specifically, that's for each person to say individually.
> 
> Anyways, I didn't mean to imply that music fans don't have a love for drama in general, or that there is any one all-encompassing answer to the Itullian's question.


Thanks. I agree that there is no automatic carry over, but as an English/Drama graduate who likes theatre, cinema, music, art etc, I did raise an eyebrow at the idea that there might be a statistical validity to the idea that those who like the aural wouldn't also like the visual!


----------



## JCarmel (Feb 3, 2013)

I'm sorry but there's no logical reason why one wouldn't love_ all _types of music...& no excuse for not doing so, I'm very tempted to say?
But...I won't!


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Sid James said:


> I like opera from time to time, but not often. It could be the time involved, but with highlights albums its not such a huge problem.


You're approaching opera as pure music. I can understand how you'd feel like it wasn't worth the time involved to listen to complete operas when it's pure music to you. But if you approach it as drama, not just pure music, highlights albums are like favorite pages in a novel... You can't separate bits from the overall dramatic flow without losing something. Even the complete opera in a CD box set isn't giving you the whole opera... just the basic idea.

I suppose there are people who listen to soundtrack albums separate from the movies or plays they go with... Oklahoma, My Fair Lady, Sound of Music, etc... But they probably don't consider the soundtrack album to be a suitable replacement for the play or movie itself like some opera listeners do. And I doubt if anyone would be interested in just listening to a complete audio recording of My Fair Lady without the visuals that go with it.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

I'm not really a fan of musical stage works in general. I don't care for musicals, and since operas are just longer, more over the top and heavier musicals, I care even less to attend one. It's also a patience thing, I can tolerate a show up to two hours long (I think Les Miserables and Sweeney Todd are the only two exceptions), but operas that are longer than that and/or the story sludges along, I can't handle.


----------



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

bigshot said:


> Even the complete opera in a CD box set isn't giving you the whole opera... just the basic idea.




For those who truly love opera one is getting *A LOT MORE* than just "the basic idea" from audio recordings.


----------



## Guest (Apr 15, 2014)

For me, it was most certainly the length that scared me.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

arcaneholocaust said:


> For me, it was most certainly the length that scared me.


Mahler and Bruckner wrote symphonies that are longer than some operas in standard repertoire.


----------



## Guest (Apr 15, 2014)

1) Yes, and there was a reason I flocked to the shortest operas in the repertoire first, rather than the most revered. A reason why I would only touch Wagner through Das Rheingold for the longest time, etc.

2) Your point? Mahler 3 also scared the hell out of me.

I don't understand why you and PetrB are trying to deny the length factor. I just told you that it was, in fact, a factor.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Xavier said:


> [/font]For those who truly love opera one is getting *A LOT MORE* than just "the basic idea" from audio recordings.


No basic idea of the staging, and there's a lot missed in those bare bones action descriptions in the libretto that you just aren't getting. You also miss a lot of the acting, which creates the relationships between characters and drama. Seeing an opera is A LOT MORE than just hearing it.


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2014)

To "vehemently disagree" that the recorded music is not 100% of the opera basically implies that the acting/stage/etc is meaningless. Perhaps Xavier would prefer an oratorio subforum


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

bigshot said:


> You're approaching opera as pure music. I can understand how you'd feel like it wasn't worth the time involved to listen to complete operas when it's pure music to you. But if you approach it as drama, not just pure music, highlights albums are like favorite pages in a novel... You can't separate bits from the overall dramatic flow without losing something. Even the complete opera in a CD box set isn't giving you the whole opera... just the basic idea.


I agree that highlights albums have got their limitations, but the issue for me is I am happy if I can enjoy those, and some operas I have complete while others I've got the highlights. In my youth I read those condensed versions of novels, which is maybe an analogy that can be made.

I agree about what you said earlier that its not good to treat opera as background music, however I tend not to do that. I find it hard to treat any classical as background music.

You know we can surmise about they whys and wherefores of reasons for opera's lack of popularity amongst classical fans as compared to the other genres, but I don't think we will ever get to the bottom of it.

I think that I am pretty flexible when it comes to opera, and classical music with vocals too. I have personally come across people who steer clear of classical with any vocals. They don't like symphonies with vocals, let alone choral, art song or opera. So I think that its a tall order to expect people who are generally not deeply into opera to go all the way with it. Its like I'm a chamber fan, but I do recognise its not as popular as orchestral music for various reasons. People just get into whatever music they do to whatever extent they want or can. On a side note to that I've culled a couple of hundred classical cd's over the years, and guess what? Most of them are vocal, including but not limited to opera.



> I suppose there are people who listen to soundtrack albums separate from the movies or plays they go with... Oklahoma, My Fair Lady, Sound of Music, etc... But they probably don't consider the soundtrack album to be a suitable replacement for the play or movie itself like some opera listeners do. And I doubt if anyone would be interested in just listening to a complete audio recording of My Fair Lady without the visuals that go with it.


Well I do listen to soundtracks of musicals more often than view the films, the thing is they do hold up in purely musical terms. Like opera the lyrics have to be good, and of course you've got classical techniques creeping in to musicals, have for ages (eg. leitmotif system, influence of various Modern composers, and some like Lloyd Webber's ones test the abilities of even the best singers, they border on opera, or like Jesus Christ Superstar constitute the crossover genre of rock opera). But I don't want to compare musicals to operas, since this isn't the thread to do it. Just talking to what you said above, that's all.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Andrew Lloyd Weber... ugh.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I loved and devoured classical music for a long time before loving opera; there were two main (and related) impediments: the singing and not being able to follow what's going on.

As for the singing I also avoided art songs as well. Anything with/focusing on solo vocals, though choral work was a very different thing. I am more appreciative of soloists now but I still separate out vocal music from instrumental works; I approach them differently.

As for the second point, with orchestral music you can listen somewhat more casually and still get a lot out of the experience. You can use those more casual listening times to usefully select pieces for further attention. It can be better to sit down and focus or follow a score but that isn't as necessary. With opera you have to sit down and take your time with something from the start, figure out what is going on dramatically as well as musically and see how (or if!) they work together. There are more layers to an opera. This - as opera lovers know - can be a great benefit but it also presents a higher barrier to entry.

It also presents more points for failure. How's the music? The libretto? The story? The staging? The costumes and sets? How did the orchestra sound? And of course how was the singing? The characterizations? Did everything fit together well? Problems with any of them can put a significant damper on the evening.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

mountmccabe said:


> How's the music? The libretto? The story? The staging? The costumes and sets? How did the orchestra sound? And of course how was the singing? The characterizations? Did everything fit together well? Problems with any of them can put a significant damper on the evening.


you're over-thinking it. Sit back and enjoy.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

mountmccabe said:


> I loved and devoured classical music for a long time before loving opera; there were two main (and related) impediments: the singing and not being able to follow what's going on.


Both of those impediments are overcome by the visual element of opera... Seeing the voice coming out of a human being ties it to a recognizable personality, and it's a lot easier to follow what's going on when you are watching the staging with subtitles.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

Yes, I agree! Seeing several operas in a short period of time is what really got me to be obsessed with the genre on its own, rather than just as a subset of classical music.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

deggial said:


> you're over-thinking it. Sit back and enjoy.


I was not speaking of myself. I was, per the OP's question, speculating as to the reasons why some classical music lovers do not love opera. I was coming up with reasons that one may see an opera and decide that it was not worthwhile. See a couple blah/weird performances/operas and you may decide that they just don't like opera.

Though, sure, some of that sort of evaluation is almost always going on in my head to some degree. I cannot turn that off, though it can certainly be quieted by an exceptional performance of an exceptional opera.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

mountmccabe said:


> I was, per the OP's question, speculating as to the reasons why some classical music lovers do not love opera. I was coming up with reasons that one may see an opera and decide that it was not worthwhile. See a couple blah/weird performances/operas and you may decide that they just don't like opera.


Poor quality performances reflect only on the performers themselves, not the entire genre of opera. Imagine going to a performance of Tchaikovsky's Pathetique by a very bad community orchestra led by a conductor with no sense of rhythm or balance as your first exposure to classical music... That doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with classical music as a whole.

There are excellent opera performances all the time. The Met has a whole streaming video channel devoted to that. Netflix will rent wonderful stagings by mail. There's no excuse for not seeing good performers and good stagings of good operas. In most cases, the reason that operas seem so unattractive is because the individual is approaching opera incorrectly. You have to approach opera on its own terms. You can't assume it's a subset of classical music which should be approached the same way.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Really?*

When I read threads like this I think that I must exist in an alternant reality and maybe I do not belong here.

People who like instrumental music do not like opera? Really?

In my orchestra, everyone loves opera as much as playing a Beethoven Symphony. Most of them love to play in opera orchestras. When my follow musicians learn about my animas toward Verdi, they look at me as if my mother accidently dropped my on my head when I was an infant. I remember a percussionist chiding me. He happened to be a big fan of _Othello_.

Maybe I spend to much time with other musicians.


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2014)

arpeggio said:


> When I read threads like this I think that I must exist in an alternant reality and maybe I do not belong here.
> 
> People who like instrumental music do not like opera? Really?


'Fraid so. Unless I'm in the alternate universe where the wobbly singing does exist, and round your way, it's all sweet and heavenly!


----------



## mtmailey (Oct 21, 2011)

As for opera most of it is not in english so i leave it alone also some are just violent & depressing.I rather hear music without words that is it.Now i do not hate songs though.


----------



## Nervous Gentleman (Mar 15, 2014)

I think one of the biggest impediments to expanding the popularity of opera is the modern insistence that it be sung in its original language rather than translated into the the local vernacular. I mean, really, how many of us other than those born in certain European countries can claim to speak fluent Italian or German, etc. Few of us can be bothered with reading translation of libretti, which in any case somewhat disrupts the easy enjoyment of a piece. To the great detriment of opera in the English-speaking world, English-language operas have for the most part been completely marginalised (with a few exceptions, such as Britten, Gilbert & Sullivan and a few others). This is due not so much to the innate inferiority of English-language opera in relation to its European cousins but to an age-old inferiority complex among English speakers in regards to their own musical culture (at least as far as "serious" music is concerned). More later...


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Nervous Gentleman said:


> I think one of the biggest impediments to expanding the popularity of opera is the modern insistence that it it be sung in its original language rather than translated into the the local vernacular. ..... Few of us can be bothered with reading translation of libretti


if you really cannot cope unless its in English, Chandos released a large selection of operas in English (and many of the performances are very good too)


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

To those who don't accept that instrumental (esp. orchestral) is more popular amongst classical listeners I offer this post (my last substantive post on this thread).

Here there's considerable debate on how staging of opera takes away a lot of the funding put into classical music, because in comparison to orchestral the audiences of opera are small. Yet due to all the costs involved, opera takes more money to do. There was an article here on it published by a prominent musician, that was a while back, but I desisted from putting it on this forum as of course anything like that is prone to incite a fair amount of vitriol and I don't like to do threads risking that kind of response. Through experience on this forum, I have learnt by implication more than anything, there are certain opinions on this forum that are better kept under wraps.

Even though there is that overall preference, it doesn't mean that those in this majority cohort within classical entirely don't like music with vocals, including opera to whatever extent. As this forum shows (esp. on current listening thread) fans of classical can be very eclectic too. I'd point out though that most people there listen to things other than opera. This is not me gloating, its fact. Sometimes facts like that can be discomfiting, but as long as they're conveyed without any agenda or malice attached, what's the big deal? As I said I love chamber music but I don't balk when given the fact that less people like it compared to orchestral. So what? Do people want answers to this, or do they just want the "right" answers. "Right" of course according to their own viewpoint. What's the point if not to discuss our differing opinions here?


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

arpeggio said:


> In my orchestra, everyone loves opera as much as playing a Beethoven Symphony. Most of them love to play in opera orchestras. When my follow musicians learn about my animas toward Verdi, they look at me as if my mother accidently dropped my on my head when I was an infant. I remember a percussionist chiding me. He happened to be a big fan of _Othello_.
> 
> Maybe I spend too much time with other musicians.


You are lucky. Through my children I spend a lot of time with music teachers / orchestra musisicans and I am yet to meet one who actually likes opera.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

It's not easy coming from the pop/movie world where everyone is gorgeous to all of a sudden be expected to suspend belief when a 300 pound lady is singing the part of a supposed to be young desirable girl, Gilda.

The singing may be saying "yes" to them, but their eyes are saying "no".


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

hpowders said:


> It's not easy coming from the pop/movie world where everyone is gorgeous to all of a sudden be expected to suspend belief when a 300 pound lady is singing the part of a supposed to be young desirable girl, Gilda.


I saw lots of Rigolettos but I'm yet to see 300 pound lady in the role of Gilda.

But, of course, if you think that this is gorgerous (as I'm led to believe by quoted sentence), most sopranos and their ways on stage will not be to your liking:


----------



## Nervous Gentleman (Mar 15, 2014)

> Originally Posted by *Headphone Hermit*
> if you really cannot cope unless its in English, Chandos released a large selection of operas in English (and many of the performances are very good too)


I can "cope" just fine, thanks. The point I wish to make is that opera is a form of musical theatre: it is meant to be both simultaneously heard and understand, preferably without the distraction of reading a translation. Yes, there will inevitably be some distortion when performing an opera in translation, but certainly no less than if one were depending upon a prose translation of the libretto for comprehension. I think that this insistence in English-speaking countries on operas being performed in their original language is actually quite ridiculous and is a major reason that opera is perceived as elitist. While it is arguable the the "sound" of the original language is integral to the piece, how much more so is the comprehension of what is being sung, preferably _as_ it is being sung.

In answer to the original question posed by this thread, I think that one important reason that so many classical music fans dislike opera (at least in the English-speaking world) is because few people understand the languages in which most operas are sung! This is especially so as the vast majority of "canonical" works are in languages other than English. For the average non-European, unless you are conversant in multiple languages, or are watching a video or live performance with subs, or sitting in an armchair with a translation before you, opera (which by its very nature is heavily dependant on text) sounds like complete gibberish. Can you imagine a theatre full of Londoners watching a production of Schiller's "Don Carlos" in the original German whilst simultaneously reading a translation into English? Or a theatre full of Muscovites attending a performance of Shakespeare in English, while struggling to keep one eye on the stage and the other on Russian captions? The idea is absurd. And yet that is exactly what is done is most modern productions of opera, despite the fact that opera is so largely dependant upon the _immediate_ interplay of music and text (as opposed to hearing a vocal line that sounds like @$%!&@%!$ to a non-polyglot).


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

^ I've been to operas in English. I still referred to surtitles  it's not like there's such a pace to the proceedings on stage that glancing at the surtitles is a bother.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I'm on both sides of the opera-in-the-vernacular debate. Up until the mid-20th century it was still usual to hear Italian operas sung in German in Germany and German operas sung in Italian in Italy. When Wagner was discussing performing _Tristan_ in Italy he asked who would do the translation. Opera in the vernacular was simply the norm, and composers (we presume) did not object that their works were being aesthetically compromised. Of course there _is_ a real compromise, and if one understands the words in the original language one naturally wants to hear those words with the music written for them. There should be room for both original-language and translated productions. I don't have any theories about how best to handle this, but I agree with those who think that the opportunity to hear great operas in the language of the audience would help people realize what an exciting art form opera can be by removing a very real barrier to that realization.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I like instrumental music. Music is inherently Gebrauchsmusik for me: I have it on in my home while I am reading, surfing the web, posting on TC, washing the dishes, daydreaming, actively listening to music... Singing is intrusive. It distracts from what I am into. I can't concentrate when someone is singing (or talking).

Unlike most people, however, since I am a classical fan, I am open to opera, operatic music and lieder, but I rarely have time for them (see above). They demand that I make special time for them, that I put down all of my interests and concerns. I rarely have that much time to offer. Also, the shrieking sopranos and the singing in general is difficult to take for long periods. It is taxing and I don't find it relaxing at all. Once in a while, I will lay aside myself and give an opera it's due. I am lucky that I speak German and French, but I confess that I am rarely able to understand more than a word or a phrase when it is sung in operas and lieder, so I have to follow along in the libretto like everyone else.


----------



## SilenceIsGolden (May 5, 2013)

I agree that language is just another barrier for some people, just like there are movie goers out there who will never appreciate the genius of a Fellini or a Bergman because they can't stand foreign films. And for those people, opera in translation might be of real benefit to them. Though like I've said before, from my own personal experience I usually can't understand all the words being sung even when I listen to an English language opera without the assistance of a libretto or surtitles.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

bigshot said:


> Andrew Lloyd Weber... ugh.


I answered your reply to the best of my ability, validated some of your points that I agreed with, and spent a good amount of time composing my post in reply back to you. That's all I can do, but it would be good to have some sort of conversation about that here, but I think its not going to happen. But I did all I could, that's it.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I'm on both sides of the opera-in-the-vernacular debate. Up until the mid-20th century it was still usual to hear Italian operas sung in German in Germany and German operas sung in Italian in Italy. When Wagner was discussing performing _Tristan_ in Italy he asked who would do the translation. Opera in the vernacular was simply the norm, and composers (we presume) did not object that their works were being aesthetically compromised. Of course there _is_ a real compromise, and if one understands the words in the original language one naturally wants to hear those words with the music written for them. There should be room for both original-language and translated productions. I don't have any theories about how best to handle this, but I agree with those who think that the opportunity to hear great operas in the language of the audience would help people realize what an exciting art form opera can be by removing a very real barrier to that realization.


--
I'm latitudinarian on this, Switzerland in fact. People can do what they want; yes, certainly. For the most part though, I can't abide translations from the original. The cadence and emotional feel of how each and every word-note works with the score becomes botched and bungled.

Week-before-last, I was listening to a December '38 Stuttgart Keilberth _Turandot_ with Maria Cebotari. . . sung in German.

No, I can't say that not even Keilberth's conducting could save this performance for me.

_Ah! Per l'ultima volta!_-- is right.


----------



## Guest (Apr 17, 2014)

Aramis said:


> I saw lots of Rigolettos but I'm yet to see 300 pound lady in the role of Gilda.
> 
> But, of course, if you think that this is gorgerous (as I'm led to believe by quoted sentence), most sopranos and their ways on stage will not be to your liking:


A puzzling post. Why the (allegedly) controversial Miley Cyrus video?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

MacLeod said:


> A puzzling post. Why the (allegedly) controversial Miley Cyrus video?


What difference does it make - after all, isn't it "from pop/movie world where *everyone* is gorgeous"?


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Sid James said:


> To those who don't accept that instrumental (esp. orchestral) is more popular amongst classical listeners I offer this post (my last substantive post on this thread).
> 
> Here there's considerable debate on how staging of opera takes away a lot of the funding put into classical music, because in comparison to orchestral the audiences of opera are small. Yet due to all the costs involved, opera takes more money to do. There was an article here on it published by a prominent musician, that was a while back, but I desisted from putting it on this forum as of course anything like that is prone to incite a fair amount of vitriol and I don't like to do threads risking that kind of response. Through experience on this forum, I have learnt by implication more than anything, there are certain opinions on this forum that are better kept under wraps.
> 
> Even though there is that overall preference, it doesn't mean that those in this majority cohort within classical entirely don't like music with vocals, including opera to whatever extent. As this forum shows (esp. on current listening thread) fans of classical can be very eclectic too. I'd point out though that most people there listen to things other than opera. This is not me gloating, its fact. Sometimes facts like that can be discomfiting, but as long as they're conveyed without any agenda or malice attached, what's the big deal? As I said I love chamber music but I don't balk when given the fact that less people like it compared to orchestral. So what? Do people want answers to this, or do they just want the "right" answers. "Right" of course according to their own viewpoint. What's the point if not to discuss our differing opinions here?


 [/QUOTE]
--
The point of any intellectually-invigorating forum is to coddle people's emotions and to tell them how uniquely brilliant they are. I know that's why I joined. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Look, in my area the opera audiences are reasonably OK and the company scrapes by (I know, I used to look at its books). Truth is, most/many (I don't have a statistical breakdown but I'm guessing it's about 50% having talked to punters and promoters extensively) people go to the opera for non-musical reasons. People go to the opera cos its "the Opera" rather than because they love Verdi or Mozart or Beat Furrer (oh hold on - great opera composer, but people are probably there for the music on that one). Nearly everybody at "symphony hall" is there for musical reasons

Interesting point: semi-staged opera -proves quite popular! You can do a night or two of Bluebeard's Castle or Parsifal or Wozzeck or Katya Kabanova and it doesn't cost the earth and people come and are blown away. Could it be the way of the future for concert hall and allowing more opera than endless DG and Trav? I think so - but that's by the by


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

dgee said:


> Truth is, most/many (I don't have a statistical breakdown but I'm guessing it's about 50% having talked to punters and promoters extensively) people go to the opera for non-musical reasons.


someone's going to have to buy the £100-200 tickets, eh? that's why you need promoters in the first place. The cheap seats sell themselves. Since we're talking personal experiences, I know plenty people who go to the symphony hall because it's "a classy thing to do".


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

deggial said:


> someone's going to have to buy the £100-200 tickets, eh? that's why you need promoters in the first place. The cheap seats sell themselves. Since we're talking personal experiences, I know plenty people who go to the symphony hall because it's "a classy thing to do".


I'm sure you do - but I've attended both regularly in a work capacity and taken notes: and, in my neck of the woods, the opera is way more attractive of the "it's a wonderful occasion" ticket buyer than the orchestra. Heck, I've never had to stand back at the orchestra to let the "local celebs" through so they can get first dibs at the after-match bubbles and snacks (hint - many of them didn't attend the performance). The opera also does better with money from the sponsors too usually - better bang for buck in terms of a night out cos of the theatre aspect. Note: brings them in but doesn't necessarily woo them - usually the sponsors area is noisy, messy drunks after half time at the opera. Dates are all ready to go for the real business and still so much to sit through! Tend to act a bit better at the concert hall

Who knows what this means for classical music but i do know it's an undifferentiated night out at the oper more often than it is at the symphony - which is why the old favs reign supreme!


----------



## atmplayspiano (Apr 12, 2014)

I think that most people find opera too "fancy," whatever that means. Most of my friends thought that it is nothing but fat women screaming to orchestral accompaniment until I brought them to see one for the first time. Usually the drama is actually fun for the average person, which is likely why it was so popular in the 18th and 19th centuries.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Opera is music and if one is a 'classical' fan why wouldn't one enjoy it?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Opera is music and if one is a 'classical' fan why wouldn't one enjoy it?


Well, it's like Debussy said. "In opera, there is always too much singing."


----------



## Svelte Silhouette (Nov 7, 2013)

is this about lovers of classical music or about lovers who love classical music

if the latter that's easy as Bolero is more than enough time

if the former then I blame the big W as the Ring on successive nights is a kill or cure

I survived so like opera


----------



## Posie (Aug 18, 2013)

I can't help but wonder if many people, including classical music lovers, psychologically block themselves from enjoying opera because they're afraid of opera-poisoning (symptoms of which include snobbery and neuroticism).

I have just purchased an mp3 album called "100 Must-Have Dinner Classics". It was 100 classical pieces for $1, so I couldn't resist. It has lots of great stuff, but all of the opera arias are watered-down instrumental versions. Oh, well.


----------



## Dustin (Mar 30, 2012)

I have no good answer for this question. The voice is only another instrument and a beautiful one at that. Maybe it's the recitative slowing things down or maybe the idea of opera and the extreme negative connotation it has in society that scares away even people who like classical music. I'll admit this was my mistake before I stopped being ignorant and ridiculous and gave the stuff a chance.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2014)

So, any conclusions reached?

Reviewing the first couple of pages, I note the more 'thanked' posts are those that seem to say either "I don't know why" or "Whatever, they're wrong." Those who love opera don't seem to be able to understand why others don't.

But then, I can't understand why some people don't like Shostakovich, even though they have explained their reasons. It just goes to show that whilst some things can be explained and understood (intellectually)...they nevertheless can't be 'understood' (emotionally).


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

marinasabina said:


> but all of the opera arias are watered-down instrumental versions. Oh, well.


they were _dinner _classics


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Does anyone actually listen to music while having dinner? I prefer silence and can only concentrate on one thing at a time. In general, we humans aren't very good at multitasking.


----------



## Posie (Aug 18, 2013)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Does anyone actually listen to music while having dinner? I prefer silence and can only concentrate on one thing at a time. In general, we humans aren't very good at multitasking.


Maybe I'm in the minority. Opera helps me to regulate my adrenalin levels for when down-time is over.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Does anyone actually listen to music while having dinner?


it's like eating whilst watching a film. I also play video games/do chores/walk/shop/do artwork/write whilst listening to opera


----------



## Dustin (Mar 30, 2012)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Does anyone actually listen to music while having dinner? I prefer silence and can only concentrate on one thing at a time. In general, we humans aren't very good at multitasking.


Dinner and good music is like milk and cookies for me. They complement each other and make them better than each one could be alone.


----------



## JCarmel (Feb 3, 2013)

I almost always listen to music whilst eating meals...the trouble is that I eat much too quickly, so it's a bit of a waste of time putting it on in the first place. But then...music is usually on anyway, in the first place! But if it isn't...I'll put it on so that the pleasure is doubled, just like Dustin suggests.
Chopin's Minute Waltz...& I'm ready for my Pud!


----------



## Philmwri (Apr 8, 2011)

You're so right. People think it's all the same. There's comic, romantic, contemporary, baroque and many other style of operas. Have you seen most opera singers today? Very few of them are fat and most look like pop singers and models. People often think it's for rich snobby white people. As a person of color people always look at me in disbelief when I say that I listen to classical music.

Actually unless you go to a major theater opera tickets are quite often cheaper than buying tickets to non-classical events. Many people also don't know that there have been English language operas since the 1650's.


----------



## KYGray (Mar 14, 2014)

I think it’s fairly simple... it’s a language barrier. While anyone can listen to and understand an orchestral piece, it becomes more difficult to interpret an aria written in German when one's native language is English.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Philmwri said:


> You're so right. People think it's all the same. There's comic, romantic, contemporary, baroque and many other style of operas. Have you seen most opera singers today? Very few of them are fat and most look like pop singers and models. People often think it's for rich snobby white people. As a person of color people always look at me in disbelief when I say that I listen to classical music.
> 
> Actually unless you go to a major theater opera tickets are quite often cheaper than buying tickets to non-classical events. Many people also don't know that there have been English language operas since the 1650's.


This is one thing many people seem to think opera is opera but there are many sorts of different operas just as there are many different kinds of films. I would not say opera singers look like pop stars they look like people do mostly some are slim and some are fat. Some are good looking and some are not.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Nervous Gentleman said:


> I think one of the biggest impediments to expanding the popularity of opera is the modern insistence that it be sung in its original language rather than translated into the the local vernacular. I mean, really, how many of us other than those born in certain European countries can claim to speak fluent Italian or German, etc. Few of us can be bothered with reading translation of libretti, which in any case somewhat disrupts the easy enjoyment of a piece. To the great detriment of opera in the English-speaking world, English-language operas have for the most part been completely marginalised (with a few exceptions, such as Britten, Gilbert & Sullivan and a few others). This is due not so much to the innate inferiority of English-language opera in relation to its European cousins but to an age-old inferiority complex among English speakers in regards to their own musical culture (at least as far as "serious" music is concerned). More later...


I can say I prefer when operas are translated to my own language.
When it comes to contemporary opera is English certainly dominating.
Even some operas by composers from non English speaking countries are in English such as the operas by Somtow or Unsuk Chin´s Alice in Wonderland.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

For 40+ years of listening to classical music, I would on occasion listen to an opera and loved Wagner's Ring, but it was always such a pain in the *** to change LP sides or CDs that I never was able to do it enough to enjoy it or develop any sense of the work as a whole. Invariably, I'd get interrupted and there I was with a third of an opera.

That all changed when my wonderful wife got me an iPod Classic a couple years ago. Now I can start an opera and just let it run all the way through. As a result, I'm going wild with opera and having all kinds of fun that I never would have before. So in my case, it's purely practical: the damned things are too long and unwieldy under the old technology.


----------



## Tedski (Jul 8, 2015)

My sister is/was an opera singer and has performed professionally. She admits she enjoys singing and performing, but rarely listens to it for enjoyment. Go figure.

When she was in college, I enjoyed watching the performances, particularly the comic operas. These days, a live opera performance is about a once a decade thing for me.


----------



## Tedski (Jul 8, 2015)

JCarmel said:


> Chopin's Minute Waltz...& I'm ready for my Pud!


I guess one would need to be well-versed in American vernacular to appreciate the humor in this statement.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

gardibolt said:


> For 40+ years of listening to classical music, I would on occasion listen to an opera and loved Wagner's Ring, but it was always such a pain in the *** to change LP sides or CDs that I never was able to do it enough to enjoy it or develop any sense of the work as a whole. Invariably, I'd get interrupted and there I was with a third of an opera.
> 
> That all changed when my wonderful wife got me an iPod Classic a couple years ago. Now I can start an opera and just let it run all the way through. As a result, I'm going wild with opera and having all kinds of fun that I never would have before. So in my case, it's purely practical: the damned things are too long and unwieldy under the old technology.


When old people who remember the 78rpm shellac disc are told that having an opera divided into three CDs imposes too much labor on the young, they will reflect that death is not far off and that when they get to the next place God will explain what went wrong on the sixth day and why Donald Trump is ahead in the polls.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

gardibolt said:


> For 40+ years of listening to classical music, I would on occasion listen to an opera and loved Wagner's Ring, but it was always such a pain in the *** to change LP sides or CDs that I never was able to do it enough to enjoy it or develop any sense of the work as a whole. Invariably, I'd get interrupted and there I was with a third of an opera.
> 
> That all changed when my wonderful wife got me an iPod Classic a couple years ago. Now I can start an opera and just let it run all the way through. As a result, I'm going wild with opera and having all kinds of fun that I never would have before. So in my case, it's purely practical: the damned things are too long and unwieldy under the old technology.


Interesting how we are different. When listening to opera I welcome a side break to stretch my legs, go to the loo and make a cup of tea!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Interesting how we are different. When listening to opera I welcome a side break to stretch my legs, go to the loo and make a cup of tea!


Apparently youngsters nowadays do not pee. Perhaps you're drinking too much tea.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Woodduck said:


> Apparently youngsters nowadays do not pee. Perhaps you're drinking too much tea.


I find a full bladder detrimental to the enjoyment of opera! Mind you, most youngsters these days can't sit through half an hour of a teen movie without texting someone on their phones!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

DavidA said:


> I find a full bladder detrimental to the enjoyment of opera! Mind you, most youngsters these days can't sit through half an hour of a teen movie without texting someone on their phones!


Mind you, from what I have heard is going on at Bayreuth these days with these lunatic Casdorf productions, any length of interval might be welcome to reset one's mind from the idiocy going on on stage!


----------



## gHeadphone (Mar 30, 2015)

As ive said on other threads I started listening to classical music a year ago, this was inspired by seeing Ennio Morricone and orchestra up close.

I love the variety of sounds that an orchestra can produce and started with the classics Beethoven, Mahler, Bach etc. I got into some chamber music a few months later when i bought Schuberts Trout Quintet, this was my gateway piece.

I couldn't get Opera initially, even though i would have heard snippets through the Essential Classics podcast from the BBC (where i get a lot of recommendations).

My gateway was the Ring and Das Rhiengold. I bought it because Soltis Ring it was recommended as the no 1 essential classical album to won on the BBC list (www.classical-music.com/article/50-greatest-recordings-all-time). However id already heard The Ring without words so this was an easier transition for me, some of the tunes were somewhat familiar.

I keep an eye on this sites most recommended Opera CDs thread and saw a copy of Mozarts Magic Flute with Klemperer and bought it after liking the Wagner (knowing it would be quite different). Ive been playing it non stop for weeks, i even heard the tunes when i wake up in the morning which have been playing in my head.

Funnily enough this has been the gateway to Mozart who i hadnt really enjoyed in the same way as Beethoven etc

Might be a case of finding the right gateway opera which fits with the current listening patterns of the classical fan.


----------



## Steatopygous (Jul 5, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Apparently youngsters nowadays do not pee. Perhaps you're drinking too much tea.


Come on grandpa! You just keep your Ipod playing when you are at the loo. After all, you're not really listening.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> When old people who remember the 78rpm shellac disc are told that having an opera divided into three CDs imposes too much labor on the young, they will reflect that death is not far off and that when they get to the next place God will explain what went wrong on the sixth day and why Donald Trump is ahead in the polls.


The problem is that I'm one of the old people who remember 78rpm shellac discs too!!!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Steatopygous said:


> Come on grandpa! You just keep your Ipod playing when you are at the loo. After all, you're not really listening.


take care not to drop it down the loo like someone I knew did!


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

gardibolt said:


> The problem is that I'm one of the old people who remember 78rpm shellac discs too!!!


I remember 78 shellac records as a kid at my grandmother's house in Iowa. They were heavy and hard, not flexible at all. Then when I got older, I got a real shellacking from one of the tough kids in the neighborhood.  Little did I know that it was preparing me to be on the World Wide Web.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

gardibolt said:


> The problem is that I'm one of the old people who remember 78rpm shellac discs too!!!


I remember 78 shellac records as a kid at my grandmother's house in Iowa. They were heavy and hard, not flexible at all. When I got older, I got a real shellacking from one of the tough kids in the neighborhood, an entirely different matter.  Little did I know that it was preparing me to be on the World Wide Web... But those 78s... I couldn't believe how fast they turned and I thought they sounded great, especially Spike Jones and his City Slickers.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

They have no soul!

:devil:

Next question?

N.


----------



## Sieglinde (Oct 25, 2009)

Well, I mostly don't care about non-opera classical unless there is singing (Requiems, some oratorio and song cycles can stay).


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I like both sung and instrumental music of all sorts (not that keen on rap or hip hop, although I like a bit of Spaghetti Funk now and again).

I have my favourites, but music's music.

N.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

It starts like this:
---best performances are in foreign languages
_so, once you do understand...._
---bad writing, like a cheap TV show
_and..._
---visually a poor choice of actors for the roles
_ok, let's focus on the music then..._
---cannonfire of vocal music
_Ok, it is anooying, but it isn't so bad. I can withstand it for a while..._
---2 hours later
_Please, no more! What's wrong with this genre?_

For the record, I like a couple of operas: Herculanum, Rheingold, Die Tote Stadt, Fidelio, Le roi d'Ys...


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Very simply, I would guess it is because they don't go for melodrama with their music.


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

Fabulin said:


> ---best performances are in foreign languages
> _so, once you do understand...._
> ---bad writing, like a cheap TV show


had it been so, then opera would be all over TV.



Fabulin said:


> ---visually a poor choice of actors for the roles
> _ok, let's focus on the music then..._
> ---cannonfire of vocal music


but cannon fire's good, very good, is it not?



Fabulin said:


> _Please, no more! What's wrong with this genre?_


that might apply to literally anything in this life.



Fabulin said:


> For the record, I like a couple of operas:


'like' does not mean 'understand'.


----------

