Opera appreciations and discussion

[Steve5380]

4 hours ago, heman said:

Sumi Jo tackling of  the Queen of the Night is indeed one of the most splendid i heard apart from Diana Damrau. I regretted that i was unable to attend Damrau concert performance here for i was in London.😪.

 

Well... it seems that there are quite a few here going after the Queen of the Night!    Any interest for a King of the Night? 

[Steve5380]

I changed momentarily from Mozart to Alban Berg, and started watching Wozzeck for the first time. The following video is not the one I am watching but one that illustrates its operatic atmosphere.

 

 

 

The video I'm watching has also an attractive scene, although not so fantastic as in the video above.   I go little by little, feeling glad that I see it on youtube and not live,  because I can stop it at any time and change to something else.  I read that Wozzeck was banned in Germany during WWII, because the Nazi didn't tolerate the 12 tone scale...  but they loved Wagner, ha ha. I am NOT a Nazi, but I can understand.  They didn't have youtube, so they had to swallow the whole opera in one bite.

 

I find the sound of this opera quite acceptable in small increments.  It has good sound and not much music. Here I go by a definition of music from the web:

 

noun: "vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a way as to produce beauty of form, harmony and expression of emotion."

 

This definition seems to be a recent adjustment of the traditional definition of "combination of melody, harmony and rhythm",  perhaps to wiggle in some more modern music.  

 

In Berg's music I experience mostly the emotion of laughter, some transient harmony, and atonal melody. I don't find any beauty, but I also don't expect any.  So I prefer to characterize most of it as "sound".   But in a modern opera this seems to be perfectly fine.  One's attention is captured nearly all by the scene, the acting and some tones being sung.  No need to be captivated by some music.  This is also the case in movies, especially cartoons, also scenes of action and suspense.  And it works really well. Adequate sounds, or some real music, can nicely influence our emotions.  I also don't mind contemporary music in ballets, where the attention is in the dancer's movements, guided by the rhythm of the sounds.

 

It will be interesting to guess how all this will evolve.  The sky is the limit.   

.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Steve5380

[heman]

5 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Alban Berg, and started watching Wozzeck for the first time.

I been listening to Berg serialism for many years since my university days in 1980s especially his songs, his highly emotional violin concerto where he quoted Bach in its Adagio Finale and his two operas which i seen performed in Sydney and Vienna. 

His music is of different world where melody are scares. One of the most vivid melody that appeared in Wozzeck , though very momentarily , was in the "monologue" of Marie somewhere in the opera where she held her child. 

Another piece , though not completed by the composer is Schonberg's Moses and Aaron. It is not that easy for the ears and takes time to really understand the  music. 

Edited November 19, 2020 by heman

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, heman said:

 

Another piece , though not completed by the composer is Schonberg's Moses and Aaron. It is not that easy for the ears and takes time to really understand the  music. 

 

 

You mean that it is a matter of time to understand the music of Schoenberg?

It must take also some discipline to persist, and I'm not sure I have sufficient time left.  Maybe in another life   

[InBangkok]

9 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Well... it seems that there are quite a few here going after the Queen of the Night!    Any interest for a King of the Night? 

The late Peter Ustinov was a bit ahead of you. He had a concert item that featured all the people that do not appear in opera although their relatives do - King of the Night, the Feldmarshall etc. Sadly I cannot find it on youtube.

Edited November 19, 2020 by InBangkok

[InBangkok]

The UK’s Guardian newspaper has been running a series of introductions to some major composers. The last appears today and features Richard Strauss. These articles are meant for general music lovers and those wanting to dip their toes in, as it were. They are not intended for those with a great deal of knowledge.

 

What I find interesting about the Strauss article are the recordings it recommends. Almost all are from the 1950s to 1970s. It recommends “terrifying” ‘live’ recordings of Salome by Erich Leinsdorf with Caballe and Resnik and Elektra with Inge Bork and Lisa Della Casa conducted by Dmitri Mitropoulos. For Der Rosenkavalier it is the Erich Kleiber version with the wonderful Sena Jurinac rather than one by his famous son Carlos.

 

On a side note, as has been mentioned before, BBC Music Magazine polled more than 100 of the top conductors in the early 2000s to determine who was the greatest conductor of all time. The consensus by a large margin was Carlos Kleiber. Beloved by musicians, singers and audiences, it is extraordinary that in a career lasting only 40 years he conducted less than 100 concert performances and not many more than 500 opera performances, all of a limited repertoire. As his career progressed, he became increasingly erratic. Having agreed to record Tristan with his hand picked cast and the Staatskapelle Dresden, he walked out before it was completed. DGG pieced the rest from rehearsal tapes and issued it without his agreement. It is undoubtedly one of the great Tristan recordings.

 

For anyone interested, there is a splendid book by Charles Barbour - Corresponding with Carlos: A Biography of Carlos Kleiber. A conducting student, in 1989 Barbour had what others would have called the temerity to write to Kleiber for conducting tips. There then ensued a remarkable and unique 15 year correspondence which gives a remarkable insight into the elusive conductor. The two never met. It was merely a friendship by letter and email. Kleiber’s Beethoven and Mozart concerts on YouTube with the Vienna Philharmonic and Concertgebouw orchestras and his Rosenkavalier recordings along with a fascinating rehearsal video are testament to the great conductor that he was, and a sad reminder that his personal demons coupled with a supremely passionate desire for perfection resulted in such a small recorded legacy.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/nov/18/strauss-where-to-start-with-his-music-tim-ashley

[InBangkok]

5 hours ago, heman said:

I been listening to Berg serialism for many years since my university days in 1980s especially his songs, his highly emotional violin concerto where he quoted Bach in its Adagio Finale and his two operas which i seen performed in Sydney and Vienna. 

His music is of different world where melody are scares. One of the most vivid melody that appeared in Wozzeck , though very momentarily , was in the "monologue" of Marie somewhere in the opera where she held her child. 

Another piece , though not completed by the composer is Schonberg's Moses and Aaron. It is not that easy for the ears and takes time to really understand the  music. 

I was never taken by Wozzeck as an opera until I actually saw it. Then it was emotionally draining but in the best possible way. I will never forget Karl Boehm drawing out the two amazing crescendi with the Vienna Philharmonic in the pit, the second almost never ending. Extraordinary!

 

Interestingly, given my earlier post about the Kleibers, it was Erich who conducted the premiere in Germany. Perhaps surprisingly, it was Stokowski who gave the American premiere in Philadelphia. Somehow it does not seem to fit with the Philadelphia ‘sound’ that Stokowski was creating.

Edited November 19, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

Since we are talking about opera, you may be interested in the art of singing.  Here is a video about physiology of opera singing, one of several which give details of this difficult task.  I recognize items that I was taught by my teacher, but much of it is novel to me, and I find her talk interesting and informative.  Maybe you will too. 

 

 

 

[Steve5380]

15 hours ago, InBangkok said:

The late Peter Ustinov was a bit ahead of you. He had a concert item that featured all the people that do not appear in opera although their relatives do - King of the Night, the Feldmarshall etc. Sadly I cannot find it on youtube.

 

That King of the Night must have been a Basso Profondo to measure up to his wife the Soprano Coloratura 

[InBangkok]

6 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

That King of the Night must have been a Basso Profondo to measure up to his wife the Soprano Coloratura 

That would mean the opera ending up with two basses. I’d go the Britten route and have the King a counter tenor like Oberon 😆

[Steve5380]

53 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

That would mean the opera ending up with two basses. I’d go the Britten route and have the King a counter tenor like Oberon 😆

 

I think that it is more dignified for a King (of day or night) to be a basso instead of a countertenor. It's more manly!

 

As for Oberon,  I choose a thousand times to deal with this character amidst Mendelssohn's real music instead of the random sounds of Britten. 😄

[InBangkok]

31 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I think that it is more dignified for a King (of day or night) to be a basso instead of a countertenor. It's more manly!

 

As for Oberon,  I choose a thousand times to deal with this character amidst Mendelssohn's real music instead of the random sounds of Britten. 😄

The Britten is a marvelous opera.

[Steve5380]

7 hours ago, InBangkok said:

The Britten is a marvelous opera.

 

Yes, it has to be, since Shakespeare's comedy A Midsummer Night's Dream is full of marvels. 

[InBangkok]

The excellence of a play is no way guarantee its success as an opera, as many composers have discovered. Of course there are many incredibly wonderful operas based on Shakespeare plays, but surely in no way can you describe Bianchi’s La Morte de Cesare, Stanford’s Much Ado About Nothing, Bloch’s Macbeth or Reynaldo Hahn’s Le Marchand de Venise as much more than well-intentioned yet failed attempts. The same is true of Nabokov’s Love’s Labour’s Lost despite its having a libretto by W H Auden and Chester Kallman, the pair which had written the libretti for two undoubted masterpieces - Henze’s Elegy for Young Lovers and Stravinsky’s The Soldier’s Tale.

Edited November 20, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

I agree.  The element of success should not be introduced by the play, the libretto, but by the music, the singing.  The libretto is not what makes Mozart's operas successful, the same as Wagner's operas.  It is THE MUSIC AND ITS SINGING.

They would be successful even if the singers perform in street clothes on an empty stage.

 

[InBangkok]

3 hours ago, InBangkok said:

The same is true of Nabokov’s Love’s Labour’s Lost despite its having a libretto by W H Auden and Chester Kallman, the pair which had written the libretti for two undoubted masterpieces - Henze’s Elegy for Young Lovers and Stravinsky’s The Soldier’s Tale.

Apologies! The Stravinsky opera should be The Rake’s Progress and not the smaller The Soldier’s Tale.

[Steve5380]

And I will further elaborate.  The success of an opera can be limited to the success of its music and singing,  without having to be staged repeatedly.  This is the case with most of the operas from the great classical music composers. Youtube is full of videos of these full operas that only provide the sound.  It's the same as not having to have the video of the pianist, the violinist, the orchestra playing or the singer/s singing  to appreciate the musical work of art.  I still cherish my collection of albums of 33rpm disks of many classical operas, and of course, of so many other musical performances.

.

 

Edited November 20, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

56 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

And I will further elaborate.  The success of an opera can be limited to the success of its music and singing,  without having to be staged repeatedly.  This is the case with most of the operas from the great classical music composers. Youtube is full of videos of these full operas that only provide the sound.  It's the same as not having to have the video of the pianist, the violinist, the orchestra playing or the singer/s singing  to appreciate the musical work of art.  I still cherish my collection of albums of 33rpm disks of many classical operas, and of course, of so many other musical performances.

 

No! I am sure this has been said before but the success of opera can never - never - be tied to the success only of the music and the singing. Of course the musical element in opera is vital. Take that away and you do not have opera! But the drama produced by the librettist which provides the core for the music can never be dismissed.

 

Shakespeare was mentioned earlier. Otello and Falstaff, Verdi’s last two operas, are arguably his finest. A key reason for this was inevitably Shakespeare for providing the subject matter, but equally Verdi’s librettist  Boito whose very considerable paring down of the original plays provided Verdi with his true inspiration.

 

I believe this is as true in Monteverdi’s operas as in later generations of opera composers. Take Mozart. Mozart was fired by the libretti, particularly those of da Ponte. Throughout his short career he wrote some extraordinarily fine music. But the drama in the libretti inspired a different Mozart, one where emotion comes much more to the fore. Take the Terzetto from Act II of Nozze di Figaro just as the extraordinary end to that Act starts.

 

Believing the Countess to be dallying with Cherubino (which she has been!) the Count suddenly arrives. Cherubino locks himself in the dressing room and will not come out when commanded to do so. The Countess will not open the dressing room door. So the Count drags her out of her room and locks the door. When he returns with a crowbar to force open the dressing room door, he is seething with rage. In the Terzetto I believe Mozart writes the most violently angry music for the Count, music he has never written before. The downward passage with three notes repeated (starting at 0’53”) and the menacing unaccompanied “Giudicio” near the end are evidence of this. Neither he nor the Countess realise that Susanna had been in the room all along, had rushed Cherubino out of the window and placed herself in the dressing room, something the Countess had suggested all along nervously hoping her husband would believe her.

 

There are three very conflicting emotions here. One full of anger, one nervously angry and one serenely trying to calm the Countess’s fears. Without the libretto, Mozart could never have written this music. And without seeing it in a staged performance, in my view it is impossible to evaluate the emotions and what is really happening on stage, and the long extended finale that follows, one of Mozart’s finest compositions. I am fortunate to have seen probably ten productions of the opera including one with Karajan at Salzburg. This scene never fails to send a shiver down my spine.

 

I

[Steve5380]

2 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

No! I am sure this has been said before but the success of opera can never - never - be tied to the success only of the music and the singing. Of course the musical element in opera is vital. Take that away and you do not have opera! But the drama produced by the librettist which provides the core for the music can never be dismissed.

 

 

Once again you misunderstood my post.  I was not writing about what inspired the composer.  This is something personal that only he could discuss.  I was referring to what drives the success of the opera after it has been written.   And It does not need to be the libretto.  Fantastic histories like the one in The Magic Flute are abundant.  But Mozart's music is not.

 

I have had for decades an album of 3 records with Die Zuberflöte directed by Karl Böhm,  with Roberta Peters as the Königin der Nacht,  Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau as Papageno, Fritz Wunderlich as Tamino, all including Hans Hotter with good German pronunciation.  I LOVE this album and it is nearly new, because I have kept it so well.  This recording is nearly 60 years old.  Although today I prefer Damrau in the role of the Queen, because I feel that she sings more in pitch than Peters, se was not alive at the time of this recording.  This version is first class!   

 

 

 

Now I listen to this recording on Youtube, to preserve the analog disks.  It is ONLY MUSIC, no acting, no scenery.  The book (it is so thick!) which came with the records has all the text, in three languages!  I have never looked at it,  but I listen to the music.  Thank God for this music!  

.

Edited November 20, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

7 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Once again you misunderstood my post.  I was not writing about what inspired the composer.  This is something personal that only he could discuss.  I was referring to what drives the success of the opera after it has been written.   And It does not need to be the libretto.  Fantastic histories like the one in The Magic Flute are abundant.  But Mozart's music is not.

I must have missed something. Did you not just say in the immediate previous post “The success of an opera can be limited to the success of its music and singing?” I don’t quite know how to take this. Do you mean the success today of an opera? Maybe so,  but you know more than most that operatic and other music is often buried for decades - even centuries. Cosi fan tutte only returned to public favour after a very long period when it was considered lightweight and not worth performing. One of your favourite composers Mendelssohn rescued the St. Matthew Passion.

 

Your passion for the music is laudable and understandable. My comment refers to a series of comments you have made implying that it is the be all and end all. Let me just take one example. A page or two ago you quoted the  text of the complete aria Dove sono from Act III of Nozze di Figaro. You added,

 

“I have to confess that I enjoy more the operas where I don’t understand the words. My favorite The Marriage of Figaro is in Italian, and I get so emotional during its fantastic arias, without any idea of what they sing about.”

 

But I submit that that is in fact listening to opera only in two dimensions. We are clearly different. When the curtain goes up in Act II I love the aria Porgi, amor.  But as I watch the opera I want to know WHY the Countess feels as she does. After all, she sings “Either give me back my darling or at least let me die.” “Let me die???” Beyond the overall feeling of sadness the music does not tell us that. Dramatically, the later Terzetto makes that reason perfectly clear. Her feelings are then amplified in Dove sono during Act III. 

 

So it is the dramatic complications in an opera, that drama conveyed by the music inspired by the libretto that makes it more than just pure music. It makes it Opera. At least in my view.

 

I think the problem with having one or two favourite interpretations is that it closes the mind to new versions. I wonder what you think of this relatively recent recording on original instruments by Rene Jacobs? Probably not much. At least that was my early view. At the start the gut strings and original winds lack the articulation I love in later recordings and then there is the crashing tutti. But this was how Mozart heard it and I have come to love it as much as the first Figaro I purchased -the Vittorio Gui Glyndebourne recording from the early 1969s

 

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

13 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

But I submit that that is in fact listening to opera only in two dimensions. We are clearly different. When the curtain goes up in Act II I love the aria Porgi, amor.  But as I watch the opera I want to know WHY the Countess feels as she does. After all, she sings “Either give me back my darling or at least let me die.” “Let me die???” Beyond the overall feeling of sadness the music does not tell us that. Dramatically, the later Terzetto makes that reason perfectly clear. Her feelings are then amplified in Dove sono during Act III. 

 

 

We all have minor differences.  I am sure that you enjoy the music as much as I do.  However, I concentrate so much in the music that the underlying drama passes me by.   For example, in the same recording I mentioned earlier, when I listen to the aria "O Isis and Osiris" sung by Sarastro, (oh what a beautiful voice that of a basso like Frank Crass), I don't think twice about the meaning of his singing.  Only today, as we discuss this, I looked up the libretto.  And now that I know it, I don't think about it while listening!

 

 

[InBangkok]

Yes indeed - I adore much of the music.  It is clear we have two opposing views. I wonder what other posters think?

 

 

 

 

[Steve5380]

7 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Yes indeed - I adore much of the music.  It is clear we have two opposing views. I wonder what other posters think?

 

 

I wouldn't call it opposing views, but rather not fully overlapping views.

 

In the aria O Isis and Osiris I posted above,  below is a version that I like more, with Kurt Moll instead of Frank Crass.  Maybe the recording has something to do,  but Moll's voice sows a timbre and resonance that fascinates.  Sometimes I wish I had a deep voice like this,  but it would not go with my slim figure and personality,  and I'm happy to be a baritone  

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by Steve5380

[heman]

I recalled the great Gustav Mahler's approach to opera. He mentioned that he would take just an above average singer but an extremely good stage acting  for his opera productions. Listening to CDs on opera is rather anaemic to me. Years ago when i listened to The Ring for example , or even Mozart's opera on CDs or vinyl, there is a feeling of certain emptiness in me. With the arrival of DVDs and especially live performances , things changed in my full understanding of the opera. Yes singing is important but stage acting puts a lot of weight to fully understand what it is all about apart from the vocal output.

Edited November 21, 2020 by heman

[heman]

There are times when a singer needs too produce an "ugly" sound to portrait the character he or she is singing. In the final fatal act of Don Giovanni for example, an "ugly" singing is required to show his downfall into the fire. In Salome again , i felt an ugly vocal singing is important to show her demand for the decapitated head of Jokanaan. 

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by heman

[Steve5380]

16 minutes ago, heman said:

I recalled the great Gustav Mahler's approach to opera. He mentioned that he would take just an above average singer but an extremely good stage acting  for his opera productions. Listening to CDs on opera is rather anaemic to me. Years ago when i listened to The Ring for example , or even Mozart's opera on CDs or vinyl, there is a feeling of certain emptiness in me.

 

Good that you came to life closer to this era.  You would have been so unhappy growing up like I did!   Having been able to attend a concert or opera VERY, VERY RARELY in my childhood and younger life, all my musical input came from the classical radio station in the first place, the old 78 rpm disks, the 33 rpm analog disks later, and more recently the CDs.   Never did I find the sound of music anemic!  And so did millions of other people too.  The huge industry of vinyl and later CDs, both classical and pop, would not have been able to exist if the product wasn't attractive to so many people.  DVDs are very recent, the same as video files like the ones on youtube.  

 

Maybe the difference is that my main art form is MUSIC,  an abstract art that doesn't need to be perceived by anything else than by sound.  You may be inclined more to theater or other visual arts.

.

Edited November 21, 2020 by Steve5380

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

I

I think the problem with having one or two favourite interpretations is that it closes the mind to new versions. I wonder what you think of this relatively recent recording on original instruments by Rene Jacobs? Probably not much. At least that was my early view. At the start the gut strings and original winds lack the articulation I love in later recordings and then there is the crashing tutti. But this was how Mozart heard it and I have come to love it as much as the first Figaro I purchased -the Vittorio Gui Glyndebourne recording from the early 1969s

 

 

 

In my case, even having one or a few favorites of a composition, I keep hearing other versions, some more recent, some older, and my favorites...  wander around and change.  Often they expand, because they have different components that I find attractive.

 

In the example you posted,  Mozart's overture played on "original instruments" I find it ... (forgive me)... Horrible! Not so much for the timbre but for how seriously out of tune it is played.  The recording is from 2004, so it must not be due to being from an old record played on a turntable of the poorest quality.  Otherwise, if it would be in tune I would not mind listening to it casually, since one recognizes Mozart!

 

I am not too picky about the quality of sound, but I see no reason to go back to instruments of inferior quality. I don't care how music sounded the day it was composed.  Such a sound did vanish in thin air.  I like to listen to all works for keyboard by the baroque and early classical composers on a nice modern piano.  Bach's Italian Concerto sounds so good played by a contemporary pianist on a contemporary piano.  I wouldn't put up with it played on a harpsichord, unless it is by Wanda Landowska, and this out of admiration for her amazing playing.   

.

Edited November 21, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

32 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

In my case, even having one or a few favorites of a composition, I keep hearing other versions, some more recent, some older, and my favorites...  wander around and change.  Often they expand, because they have different components that I find attractive.

 

In the example you posted,  Mozart's overture played on "original instruments" I find it ... (forgive me)... Horrible! Not so much for the timbre but for how seriously out of tune it is played.  The recording is from 2004, so it must not be due to being from an old record played on a turntable of the poorest quality.  Otherwise, if it would be in tune I would not mind listening to it casually, since one recognizes Mozart!

Ah, but you are not listening, for it is not at all out of tune. Formerly a noted counter-tenor, Rene Jacobs is a master at original instrument recordings and it is impossible that the recording team and the excellent team of soloists would have taken part had there been any tonal imperfections. Simon Keeleyside, Angelica Kirschlager and Veronique Gens are hugely accomplished operatic singers. None would be associated with this recording had it been in any way out of tune.

 

The fact has to be that you are so used to your YouTube favourites your ears are closed to interpretations which are, certainly in this case and in every case with Jacobs, very different. If you bother to listen more, you easily accept that this is how it would have sounded in Mozart’s day. And it illustrates how the silky smooth interpretations of recent years bear little relation to what the composers themselves wrote and heard.

 

FYI this is how The Gramophone reviewer began his review.

 

“René Jacobs always brings new ideas to the operas he conducts, and even to a work as familiar as Figaro he adds something of his own. First of all – and this will be obvious to listeners from the opening bars – he offers an orchestral balance quite unlike what we are used to. Those who specially relish a Karajan or a Solti will hardly recognise the work, with its strongly wind-biased orchestral balance: you simply do not hear the violins as the ‘main line’ of the music. An excellent corrective to a tradition that was untrue to Mozart, to be sure, but possibly the pendulum has swung a little too far. For my own part, I rather enjoy it, although there are some string passages that almost get lost.”

 

that is a very fine review. In Britain’s Guardian newspaper, the reviewer goes further.

 

“This is as fine a Figaro as has appeared on disc in the past 20 years, and certainly the best of the four so far that have used period instruments. The cast has no significant weaknesses, and the playing of the Concerto Köln is alive to every nuance of the score. 

 

Most important of all, this is a version of Figaro that sounds as if it has come straight out of the theatre, as if the spontaneity of a live performance had been reconciled with the accuracy and attention to detail afforded by studio takes.”

 

I could not agree more. Although it deserves time to hear it all the way through, this is as valid and fascinating a performance as most others on disc. There is never one perfect recording, and with original instrument recordings now as recent as Brahms, a serious classical music listener has an abundance of choices that do not anchor one in any place or time.

Edited November 21, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

49 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

Ah, but you are not listening, for it is not at all out of tune. Formerly a noted counter-tenor, Rene Jacobs is a master at original instrument recordings and it is impossible that the recording team and the excellent team of soloists would have taken part had there been any tonal imperfections. Simon Keeleyside, Angelica Kirschlager and Veronique Gens are hugely accomplished operatic singers. None would be associated with this recording had it been in any way out of tune.

 

The fact has to be that you are so used to your YouTube favourites your ears are closed to interpretations which are, certainly in this case and in every case with Jacobs, very different. If you bother to listen more, you easily accept that this is how it would have sounded in Mozart’s day. And it illustrates how the silky smooth interpretations of recent years bear little relation to what the composers themselves wrote and heard.

 

FYI this is how The Gramophone reviewer began his review.

 

“René Jacobs always brings new ideas to the operas he conducts, and even to a work as familiar as Figaro he adds something of his own. First of all – and this will be obvious to listeners from the opening bars – he offers an orchestral balance quite unlike what we are used to. Those who specially relish a Karajan or a Solti will hardly recognise the work, with its strongly wind-biased orchestral balance: you simply do not hear the violins as the ‘main line’ of the music. An excellent corrective to a tradition that was untrue to Mozart, to be sure, but possibly the pendulum has swung a little too far. For my own part, I rather enjoy it, although there are some string passages that almost get lost.”

 

I could not agree more. Although it deserves time to hear it all the way through, it is as valid and fascinating a performance as most others on disc.

 

Hmmm... how could I have found that this recording is out of tune if I hadn't listened to it carefully? I invite you to compare this one with others on youtube, and you will find that this one is a little flat (lower in frequency).  If this is because they tune to an older standard of A different from 440, this can explain this.  But besides the absolute, the relative pitch of the different instruments is not always in consonance.  Maybe my ear is too sensitive, I don't know.  At first hearing I found it seriously out of tune, on subsequent hearings the effect is not so large, maybe because there is some adaptation.  But I fail to see why this version is "better" in any sense than the modern ones.  A new tradition "Untrue to Mozart" ?  Nonsense!  Hardly to recognize the work ???  Is this reviewer kidding?  One recognizes the composition from its first bars.   

 

In my humble opinion, this raving over versions in "original instruments"  is pure snobbism,  like it was raving over Schoenberg's sounds when he became so famous. 

 

One humorous note:  when I first saw the image of Rene Jacobs in your video, I thought that it was that of an older woman!  

 

I have much respect for what my ear (my musical center) tells me.  And it is telling me that the following interpretation is far superior in every respect to the one from Rene Jacobs, with much more clarity and it brings out much more of the musicality in the composition.   And The Gramophone reviewer does not have to agree with me    Please compare carefully the two versions, and you may find the same.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

 

30 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Hmmm... how could I have found that this recording is out of tune if I hadn't listened to it carefully? I invite you to compare this one with others on youtube, and you will find that this one is a little flat (lower in frequency).  If this is because they tune to an older standard of A different from 440, this can explain this.  But besides the absolute, the relative pitch of the different instruments is not always in consonance.  Maybe my ear is too sensitive, I don't know.  At first hearing I found it seriously out of tune, on subsequent hearings the effect is not so large, maybe because there is some adaptation.  But I fail to see why this version is "better" in any sense than the modern ones.  A new tradition "Untrue to Mozart" ?  Nonsense!  Hardly to recognize the work ???  Is this reviewer kidding?  One recognizes the composition from its first bars.   

 

In my humble opinion, this raving over versions in "original instruments"  is pure snobbism,  like it was raving over Schoenberg's sounds when he became so famous. 

 

One humorous note:  when I first saw the image of Rene Jacobs in your video, I thought that it was that of an older woman!  

.

Baroque pitch is generally around 415 so it will certainly sound a little different. But I don’t agree with you regarding original instruments. You simply have a closed mind (nothing wrong with that, I suppose, although I hope mine is more open).
 

Would you still want a St. Matthew Passion or Messiah performed as they were 70 or so years ago - slow, lugubrious tempi, huge orchestras etc? Unlikely. The crisper, lighter, faster contemporary versions from a host of conductors like Eliot Gardiner and William Christie have blown the cobwebs from these works. Kathleen Ferrier singing “He was despised” will forever remain glorious singing and a reminder of what the world lost when she died of cancer so young. But hearing the entire work with those forces and at those tempI would bore me rigid now.

 

When I saw Giulio Cesare it was with an original instrument ensemble conducted by the excellent Emanuelle Haim. I would never wish to hear the work on modern instruments again.

 

But I do agree that Rene Jacobs could do with a makeover LOL

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

Baroque pitch is generally around 415 so it will certainly sound a little different. But I don’t agree with you regarding original instruments. You simply have a closed mind (nothing wrong with that, I suppose, although I hope mine is more open).
 

Would you still want a St. Matthew Passion or Messiah performed as they were 70 or so years ago - slow, lugubrious tempi, huge orchestras etc? Unlikely. The crisper, lighter, faster contemporary versions from a host of conductors like Eliot Gardiner and William Christie have blown the cobwebs from these works. Kathleen Ferrier singing “He was despised” will forever remain glorious singing and a reminder of what the world lost when she died of cancer so young. But hearing the entire work with those forces and at those tempI would bore me rigid now.

 

When I saw Giulio Cesare it was with an original instrument ensemble conducted by the excellent Emanuelle Haim. I would never wish to hear the work on modern instruments again.

 

But I do agree that Rene Jacobs could do with a makeover LOL

 

We can have an open mind for some things, and a close mind for others. What is nice is to be sincere in a casual conversation.  Religious people and American republicans surely think that I nave a close mind.  About music, I am open minded but opinionated.  I don't need to lie and say that I love Wozzeck.   I was just watching blissfuly the Bejart 9th when my mind opened thinking how I would feel seeing Wozzeck instead, ha ha.

 

I don't know much about changes in orchestra compositions, but if there is a gain in a smaller orchestra,  why cannot it have modern instruments too?   All I know is that I find Perahia's performance of the Goldberg Variations in a nice Steinway one of the best, a treat for the ears.  If I listen to it played by Davitt Moroney on a harpsichord,  I will find interesting the sound of plucked strings for a while, until I get bored and irritated by the scratching.

 

Maybe it is thrilling to drive a Ford T for a while,  an original model of car,  but should we prefer it to a modern sedan?

Wouldn't you rather fly in the recertified 737 MAX instead of the plane of the Wright brothers?

[InBangkok]

10 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Wouldn't you rather fly in the recertified 737 MAX instead of the plane of the Wright brothers?

Now that really is a stupid question given the subject matter and you know it. It’s not even a valid comparison. Nothing will drag me on to a 737 Max (my personal choice), an aircraft that was basically designed more than 50 years ago and uses the exact same airframe.

 

Mozart and other 18th century composers would probably be shocked at hearing their works on modern instruments. The sound is startlingly different to what they wrote. They might prefer it. They might not. We have no right to choose for them. 

 

But present day audiences thankfully have a choice. Certainly I loathe Monteverdi performed on modern instruments. I thoroughly enjoy Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven etc. on both original and modern instruments (although so far I draw the line at Wagner and Brahms). In my view there is a great deal to be said for both versions to be offered.

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

Now that really is a stupid question given the subject matter and you know it. It’s not even a valid comparison. Nothing will drag me on to a 737 Max (my personal choice), an aircraft that was basically designed more than 50 years ago and uses the exact same airframe.

 

Mozart and other 18th century composers would probably be shocked at hearing their works on modern instruments. The sound is startlingly different to what they wrote. They might prefer it. They might not. We have no right to choose for them. 

 

But present day audiences thankfully have a choice. Certainly I loathe Monteverdi performed on modern instruments. I thoroughly enjoy Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven etc. on both original and modern instruments (although so far I draw the line at Wagner and Brahms). In my view there is a great deal to be said for both versions to be offered.

 

I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to force you onto a 737 Max, it was just a comparative question. But consider, if you don't want to step onto an aircraft that was designed 50 years ago,  why would a musician want to use an instrument that was made 200 years ago, unless it is a Stradivarius?   It is much more logical to speculate that Mozart and other 18th century composers would be delighted to hear their works perform on much more refined instruments of today.  And if there is any doubt, would musicians be so stupid to give up modern instruments in favor of old ones?   The string instruments didn't evolve much although they use better strings today, but the wind instruments have evolved all along, are made with more precision, better tone and easier to use today, and keyboard instruments... no need to mention!   And musicians, singers have better training today. 

 

Over 300 years ago, Isaak Newton had to do his computations by hand.  Could someone say with a straight face that he would be "shocked" by today's computers,  and would prefer to keep doing computations with paper and pencil instead of a computer, or a calculator?   I'm sure that Bach would run to a nice Steinway to play all his Well-tempered Clavier on it, and he would be enchanted by how well tempered the Steinway is and how long it stays in tune.

 

If I had a time machine,  I would gladly offer you a ride so you can return to the days of Monteverdi and save yourself the agony of hearing all these instruments of the 20th and 21th centuries.   

.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

13 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

It is much more logical to speculate that Mozart and other 18th century composers would be delighted to hear their works perform on much more refined instruments of today. 

Not logic . As you admit, pure speculation. Besides, how does anyone know that Mozart (and others) would have written as they did had there been modern instruments available to them? Would Mozart have changed a lot of his works because he had a valve horn available? We don’t know. So there can be no discussion.

Edited November 22, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

2 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

Not logic . As you admit, pure speculation. Besides, how does anyone know that Mozart (and others) would have written as they did had there been modern instruments available to them? We don’t! So there can be no discussion.

 

It is logic, and it can be discussed, and my speculation is no more speculation than yours or that of others.  OF COURSE the composers of the past would have written their orchestral works different since there are many more instruments today that they didn't had in their times.  But this is not the issue here. We are discussing how they would like their works composed at the time, played today.  Beethoven would listen (after a successful cochlea implant or other remedies today) to his 9th symphony played today without any changes made to his original composition, and he would be enchanted.  It is hard to believe that in his days they played this music with the understanding they do today.  Maybe it was fortunate that he couldn't hear then, because it would not have reached the perfection with which he must have heard his 9th in his head. 

[InBangkok]

9 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

We are discussing how they would like their works composed at the time, played today.  Beethoven would listen (after a successful cochlea implant or other remedies today) to his 9th symphony played today without any changes made to his original composition, and he would be enchanted.

You are discussing. It is total speculation and no one has absolutely any idea how a composer would feel centuries after the fact.

[wilfgene]

21 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

You are discussing. It is total speculation and no one has absolutely any idea how a composer would feel centuries after the fact.

I think therefore I am.  Live and learn.  'There is a limit to our lifespan.  There is no limit to knowledge....'.  Steve is subtly threatening to drag in calculus.

[Steve5380]

10 hours ago, wilfgene said:

I think therefore I am.  Live and learn.  'There is a limit to our lifespan.  There is no limit to knowledge....'.  Steve is subtly threatening to drag in calculus.

 

At least, calculus is an exact science,  not some speculation some pseudo elites argue to justify dusting off ancient instruments to produce some more commercial musical material.  First they do it, then they promote it by arguing that "this is how the composers intended to have their music sound"...  as if anyone could ascertain the intentions of them 200 years after their death.  If at least they would have written down their intentions, like  "I WANT in the year 2000 that  my music be performed with the same instruments we use today" !

 

 

10 hours ago, InBangkok said:

You are discussing. It is total speculation and no one has absolutely any idea how a composer would feel centuries after the fact.

 

It is not ME who has started this speculation about the feelings of composers over the newness of the instruments. Tell this to Mr. Rene Jacobs (the guy who looks like an old woman).  I would have never imagined the old instruments in any other place than museums,  except for some exceptional string instruments. 

[Steve5380]

In the last days I got a fascination with bass voices.  A wide change from my enjoyment of coloratura sopranos, ha ha.

Here is another video with Kurt Moll singing another aria of Die Zuberflöte 

 

 

and here is Moll singing as Osim in The Abduction from the Seragio:

 

 

[InBangkok]

10 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

they promote it by arguing that "this is how the composers intended to have their music sound"...  as if anyone could ascertain the intentions of them 200 years after their death.  If at least they would have written down their intentions, like  "I WANT in the year 2000 that  my music be performed with the same instruments we use today" ?

 

It is not ME who has started this speculation about the feelings of composers over the newness of the instruments. Tell this to Mr. Rene Jacobs (the guy who looks like an old woman).  I would have never imagined the old instruments in any other place than museums,  except for some exceptional string instruments. 

Yet again you sound off on a ridiculous notion. Of course there are vast numbers of people, some academics but the huge majority ordinary music lovers, who want to hear how music sounded when it was written. How else do you account for the enormous popularity of original instrument recordings? You cannot. It’s just another of your wacky theories because you can’t expand your thinking beyond a bunch of YouTube recordings. The Academy of Ancient Music, the wonderful Freiburg Ensemble, Concerto Koln, Philippe Herreweghe and his forces from Ghent, William Christie and Les Arts Florissants - all these and many, many more may not be known in far off Houston but their discs are purchased elsewhere in their tens of millions and their tour concerts packed. I feel blessed that I have heard live performances from all the above ensembles.

 

Conductors like the distinguished Sir Charles Mackerras started the wave in the 1950s when they rebelled against the practices of music performance of the time. He was followed by Christopher Hogwood, Trevor Pinnock, Karajan’s cellist cum conductor Nikolas Harnoncourt, Sir John Eliot Gardner and others. The late, great David Munro was one of the instrumental solo leaders as was Malcolm Bilson who recorded Mozart's Concerti on the fortepiano. In song there are artists like the marvelous Dame Emma Kirkby. For her Vivaldi disc, Anne Sophie Mutter even changed the strings on her Strad to gut strings to sound more authentic.

 

Europe is far from unique. There are more than 40 professional early music ensembles in the USA. But then this is an opera forum. I have already cited the performance in Chicago of Giulio Cesare with early instruments. That same production originated at Glyndebourne and also played at the Met. Recordings with period instruments include Cecilia Bartoli in Norma and Sonnambula as well as all the Mozart operas, Gluck and many more. You will rarely see a Handel opera performed nowadays in the major Houses other than using period instruments.

 

Case closed!

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

 

Case closed!

 

Maybe it's a good time for you to close your outpour of emphasis over this temporary fixation of people with the antique and imperfect.   You can call all the personalities you want, including the most relevant figures from the Old and New Testaments.  They won't amount to even a fraction of the over 70 million people who voted for Donald Trump the other day!  Any belief in the "power in the numbers" does not change the fact that most of the 70 million votes were an aberration.

 

I myself allow me some of this nostalgia for the old by keeping my collection of 33 rpm disks from years past.  Today there are much more perfect sources of exactly the same recordings.  And I enjoy listening to these old records even if I hear scratches and other noises.  But I don't try to justify my actions claiming that they have REAL advantages over the digital records.  The digital ones are immensely better.  There are many fanatics who think that the "analog" are better because they lack the imperfection of digital steps.  These fanatics are not engineers or physicists and have no knowledge about the frequency domain, that puts such steps out of the audible range and therefore cannot be heard. 

 

It is natural that some people love the old.  There is a huge industry of "antiques",  and there are skills that create new antiques indistinguishable from the old ones, ha ha.  But these antique lovers don't usually claim that an antique is better than the modern. They simply say that they like them, maybe for some fond memories, and it stays like that. 

 

All the collection of important people involved in the industry of original instrument music production is irrelevant to me, because my Standard Of Reference,  my hearing center,  recognizes the superiority of the recordings with contemporary means.  And I judge by the quality and musical content of the sound, not by the justifications of some "experts" that try to convince that the music with original instruments is better.

.

Edited November 23, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

1 hour ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Maybe it's a good time for you to close your outpour of emphasis over this temporary fixation of people with the antique and imperfect.   You can call all the personalities you want, including the most relevant figures from the Old and New Testaments.  They won't amount to even a fraction of the over 70 million people who voted for Donald Trump the other day!  Any belief in the "power in the numbers" does not change the fact that most of the 70 million votes were an aberration.

 

“Temporary?” “Imperfect?” Yet again, as you do in other threads, you bring in the most ridiculous comments supposedly in support of a point of view. Yet you sit in your home at Houston listening to and watching your own collection of music with a very limited repertoire and have the temerity to presume that others who actually attend and have attended a far wider variety of opera performances and/or have interests that generally do not coincide with yours are therefore necessarily in the wrong. It is all so boring!

 

I guess I’m in the wrong thread. I thought this was for posters who love and attend a variety of opera performances not a constant repetition of a love of Beethoven 9 and youtube Magic Flutes.

 

I’m sorry hard pecs. I believed you had started a fascinating thread. I hope I have made some interesting contributions. Now I will depart.

[Steve5380]

11 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

“Temporary?” “Imperfect?” Yet again, as you do in other threads, you bring in the most ridiculous comments supposedly in support of a point of view. Yet you sit in your home at Houston listening to and watching your own collection of music with a very limited repertoire and have the temerity to presume that others who actually attend and have attended a far wider variety of opera performances and/or have interests that generally do not coincide with yours are therefore necessarily in the wrong. It is all so boring!

 

I guess I’m in the wrong thread. I thought this was for posters who love and attend a variety of opera performances not a constant repetition of a love of Beethoven 9 and youtube Magic Flutes.

 

I’m sorry hard pecs. I believed you had started a fascinating thread. I hope I have made some interesting contributions. Now I will depart.

 

Your "Case Closed" was short lasting!

 

I am saddened to find such anger in your post.  This is not the first time that a discussion about music ends with you getting angry.  Hopefully one day you will be able to hold discussions without ever getting upset in the least.

 

This discussion started when you asked me if I liked a Mozart overture directed by Rene Jacobs:

 

On 11/20/2020 at 8:57 PM, InBangkok said:

I wonder what you think of this relatively recent recording on original instruments by Rene Jacobs? Probably not much. At least that was my early view. At the start the gut strings and original winds lack the articulation I love in later recordings and then there is the crashing tutti. But this was how Mozart heard it and I have come to love it as much as the first Figaro I purchased -the Vittorio Gui Glyndebourne recording from the early 1969s

 

 

At first you disliked it for lack of articulation and a messy tutti.  But then you came to love it.  This is fine, it is your right to love it, and I never criticized you for that.   I answered your question with my sincere opinion, which you didn't like and you told me that I wasn't listening. Then you brought in the opinion of two reviewers, critics, that I found absurd.  From then on I criticized these reviewers and the influential musical powers, not you.  I suggested that you compare the Jacobs version with a modern one, I made some analogies, comparisons,  and you told me that I was being stupid, illogical, making pure speculations (as if I was the only one), and then "sounding off on a ridiculous speculation". 

 

And in your last post you bash me for sitting at home with my limited repertoire, while not agreeing with others who have attended a much wider variety of operas.  You have often belittled my judgment because I get my musical experiences from youtube.   But... is this a limited repertoire?  This is like bashing a literary fan for reading nearly exclusively the books in the Library of Congress!  I don't know of a larger collection of classical music online than youtube.   And, how you know what I have watched or not on youtube?  You also criticize my having favorites.  What is wrong with that?  And you could be one of my favorites if you would not get angry so easily!

 

I don't mind @hard pecs having started this thread, even when calling opera fans "queens".  But "fascinating"? I exchanged some posts with him, the last one with questions, which he didn't have the courtesy to answer.  I remember the initial attempts to snubb me out of this thread.   Instead, is it you who is leaving this thread in anger ?

.

 

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by Steve5380

[Steve5380]

For us lovers of Opera music, there is a great joy in listening to the Overture of Wagner's Tannhauser.  Here I found an interesting version on piano, transcription by Liszt.  Magnificently played by a Liszt specialist Jorge Bolet.  Although I prefer the orchestral version, not too much is lost here.  Ten fingers on a piano dare to emulate the might of the huge Wagner orchestra!  Instead of the impressive Wagner winds, Bolet plays with aplomb and much emotion, which brought me the emotion this Overture always draws.  Looking at the photos of the young Bolet, I find that he was very handsome, looking nearly identical to my uncle Werner when young, a champion with the women.  But Bolet was more into men, which contributed to his demise at 75 years old.

 

 

 

Next our attention shifts to another interpretation of this wonderful adaptation by Liszt, this time played by the famous pianist George Cziffra.  I am astound of the clarity with which the piano conveys the harmonic genius of Wagner, something that is more diffuse in the orchestral version.

 

Looking at the initial notes it seems easy.  I could play this music with my limited technique say, up to the "Allegro" at its 5 minutes, and have this marvelous sound under my fingers.  But the whole work requires the virtuosity of a Cziffra.  It is impressive here what monumental sound can be made with one simple piano, by a man who knows how to do it. 

 

We can thank Opera, with its Overtures, for the epic experiences of listening to music like this. 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

For those interested in what could be a superb AIDA and the chance to hear great voices - Jessye Norman, Kathleen Battle, Tatiana Trojanos and James King - The Met streams this at 7:30 pm New York time on Saturday 5 December. The performance was conducted by Levine and recorded in April 1988.

[InBangkok]

Info about this week’s streaming from the Vienna Staatsoper. Performances start at 19:00 Austria time.

 

2 La Boheme
4 Pelleas et Melisande

5 Fanciulla del West

6 Samson et Dalila

[Steve5380]

19 hours ago, InBangkok said:

For those interested in what could be a superb AIDA and the chance to hear great voices - Jessye Norman, Kathleen Battle, Tatiana Trojanos and James King - The Met streams this at 7:30 pm New York time on Saturday 5 December. The performance was conducted by Levine and recorded in April 1988.

 

I try to imagine how can be different a performance of AIDA recorded in 1988 streamed by the Met, from similar performances one can watch from youtube or listen from spotify.

 

Something comparable to this video from youtube, for example,  a staging with Pavarotti and Margaret Price? :

 

 

Margaret Price's singing in this aria "O patria mia" at 1:34 is fantastic!

.

Edited December 1, 2020 by Steve5380

[hard pecs]

Aida. I still have a heavily marked up copy of the operatic score at home. Having performed Aida a few times on the concert stage, one learns a lot about Verdi's use of language and the subtlety of his orchestration. Even in the big choruses, lots goes on in the orchestral underlay. I count myself privileged to have that deeper level appreciation of Verdi's music. 

[InBangkok]

I attended what on paper was a stunning new production of Aida at the Royal Opera House towards the end of the 1980s. Mehta conducting, Jean Pierre Ponnelle producing with a cast including Pavarotti, Ricciarelli, Toczyska and the superb Georgian bass Paata Burchuladze making his House debut.
 

The performance was jinxed from the start. Clearly Ponnelle had overspent the budget and the ROH would provide no more funds. So there was no Grand March. Instead a pair of trumpets came in at each side of the stage and Mehta played it all as an orchestral piece. Although it was played very well, never outside Italy have I heard such a chorus of “Boos” and “rubbish” raining down from the amphitheater. 
 

That was not the start of the problems. At the premiere Pavarotti was not in good voice. Again the “boos” were in evidence. He cancelled the second. I was at the third. Pavarotti was back and as we sat in the auditorium we had no idea what to expect from him. The relief on his face after “Celeste Aida” was very obvious. It’s really tough on tenors to open with that difficult aria and he did sing it very well. But Ricciarelli was very much under par singing under the note for most of the evening. The revelation was Burchladze, surely one of the greatest bass singers since the late great Gottlob Frick.

 

The audience clearly disliked the overall production. Although it was supposed to remain in the repertoire for revivals over at least a 20 year period, all the investment was wasted when the ROH decided just to scrap it. 
 

This has been virtually the only disappointment in my all my long Opera going experience. Even so, there is something fascinating sitting in a glorious opera theatre seeing a disaster unfold before you. I would not have missed it - but I would not want such an experience again!

[wilfgene]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

I attended what on paper was a stunning new production of Aida at the Royal Opera House towards the end of the 1980s. Mehta conducting, Jean Pierre Ponnelle producing with a cast including Pavarotti, Ricciarelli, Toczyska and the superb Georgian bass Paata Burchuladze making his House debut.
 

The performance was jinxed from the start. Clearly Ponnelle had overspent the budget and the ROH would provide no more funds. So there was no Grand March. Instead a pair of trumpets came in at each side of the stage and Mehta played it all as an orchestral piece. Although it was played very well, never outside Italy have I heard such a chorus of “Boos” and “rubbish” raining down from the amphitheater. 
 

That was not the start of the problems. At the premiere Pavarotti was not in good voice. Again the “boos” were in evidence. He cancelled the second. I was at the third. Pavarotti was back and as we sat in the auditorium we had no idea what to expect from him. The relief on his face after “Celeste Aida” was very obvious. It’s really tough on tenors to open with that difficult aria and he did sing it very well. But Ricciarelli was very much under par singing under the note for most of the evening. The revelation was Burchladze, surely one of the greatest bass singers since the late great Gottlob Frick.

 

The audience clearly disliked the overall production. Although it was supposed to remain in the repertoire for revivals over at least a 20 year period, all the investment was wasted when the ROH decided just to scrap it. 
 

This has been virtually the only disappointment in my all my long Opera going experience. Even so, there is something fascinating sitting in a glorious opera theatre seeing a disaster unfold before you. I would not have missed it - but I would not want such an experience again!

Sill hurts to see so much efforts by so many people go to waste.  Can't bring myself to Robinson.