People need to lighten up on the person who called Sutherland's timbre as "acute". In Italian, "acuto" can mean "high-pitched". That would certainly describe Joan Sutherland's voice.
I'd give the performance an A-minus. Tecnically off a bit wih a few missed breathing cues, slightly off tone at places, chasing the high notes, etc.
The recording gets a D. It sounds like it was recorded on a Panasonic cassette recorder by someone sitting in the balcony. Echoes and audience coughs and rustelling don't do it for me.
Only time lucky enough to hear Ms. Horne was in the early 90's in The Ghosts of Versailles. She was in such magnificient voice--the sound came at you from very direction. Stentorian in volume. And what magnificient comic timing! Fleming was wonderful too, back then. Thank you so much for posting this.
I attended several of Ms Horne's last classical recitals in the late 1990s-2000 and they were by far the most amazing artistic experiences of my life. She is the only singer I have experienced who makes me feel as if she is singing directly to me.
Fleming was in a much worse voice than the one she had in the same duet in 1990! Listen to that clip (in Youtube as well),her coloratura was much better, the run was clearer. Here, she started to develop into her bad bad habits...the jazzy thing in her operatic voice which is aweful. Where has her voice in the old days gone?! With Horne, her voice was even worse under such a comparison.
I hate that jazzy thing too.. Where in the hell did she get the impression that this was correct for this style of music? If she wants to sing jazzy, then sing JAZZ
Marylin Horne is so amazing. I think her Arsace has been unrivaled for nearly 40 years. She's sang the role with all of the great divas: Sutherland, Caballe, Anderson, Fleming. It would be interesting to know which soprano she enjoyed singing with the most and who she thinks was the best Semiramide.
I guess she enjoyed singing this most with Sutherland, for obvious reasons: she was a long-time friend of hers, she had a partnership of more than 20 years with her and, quite frankly, Sutherland was the best of them all in this role. ;-)
However I must add Fleming never sang Semiramide, what is a pity IMO. Her Armida leads me to believe she could've been a great Semiramide.
the blend of tone is great, they both have a very commanding dramatic power that complement eachother very well. However, that being said, the technique does sound a bit sloppy, a lot of the little notes get lost. unfortunately im afraid it may be renne's fault here, horne was a rossini mezzo role specialist for most of her career.
I completely agree. She was good in some respect, but highly manufactured. I strongly believe that diction is part of the belcanto technique and that aiming just for a beautiful sound betrays the drama.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
¨La Stupenda¨ didn´t pronounce a single consonant. It was impossible to understand her, to catch a single word on her singing. Did anybody notice that here? Besides that, her timbre was so acute and light that was plain... silly. Did anybody notice that? There´s more than publicity and good advertising (and good coloratura, but unexpressive singing...)
Sutherland's timbre acute and light, you mean it? I'm sorry, but this is a totally wrong comment, because if there is a characteristic Sutherland never had in her voice was the lightness of a leggero soprano. It was a dense, large, rounded, darker tone. And she did pronounce, people overestimate her diction problem. I myself can understand most of what she sings, and in the 70's her diction got very acceptable. The whole world wouldn't acclaim her for nothing.
@Holderlin You need to clearly state your meaning! Sutherland's voice was NEVER light. Vocal timbre cannot be described meaningfully as "acute". Her diction was much easier to understand "live" -- I don't know what happened with records; they misrepresent her in other ways as well...
The best Fleming did (i.m.o.) was her Armida. I love this duet Sutherland and horne were magical in it. So were Anderson and Horne but one of my favourite versions has to be Devia and Podles.
Yes, we have grown accustomed to her scooping and shoving of air for "expression." Fine. IMO Fleming's deviations from the score distort the overall shape of the music.
Sutherland and Horne sang this is such harmony with each other. Fleming is just all over the place, altering the music, and making this sound really sloppy in certain places, especially toward the end.
Horne was in amazing voice here, but much as I love Fleming, why does she always alter the line of the music in such a silly and show off way. The music is perfect the way it was written. Horne voice belended so wonderfully with Sutherland in this music it is hard hearing anyone else sing it.
Fleming is not the new stupenda. Her voice is not anywhere NEAR the size of Sutherland, for one thing, so the fact that she can sing the fioritura is not all that surprising. She also sounded a LOT better in 99 than she does now. She's supposed to be tackling Norma too. Singing one scene or aria out of context and singing the entire role are entirely different. She'd better watch it or she'll ruin herself worse than she already has.
Actually I think Fleming's vocal shape is amazing for her age. No sign of decline at all can be heard in her most recent interpretations, apart from a slightly drier lower middle register. Of course she's not the new La Stupenda in exact terms, I'm quite sure fernandobicudo didn't mean it.
But we should praise her performance more than create polemics with comparisons with Sutherland, who obviously can't be substituted by anyone. ;-)
Right, but my point is that maybe she's taking things on that are...beyond her, a la Netrebko. Semiramide and Norma are not for the fainthearted. Norma in particular needs a voice with more than substantial size to be effective, which is why singers like Callas and Sutherland did it so well. BOTH roles could easily ruin a voice built like anything less than a tank.
A few months ago Fleming realized that she can't sing Norma. I just found out recently (I'm a little behind). I was kind of disappointed because I wanted to hear her take on the role, for better or for worse.
She's wise not to take on Norma. She is just not suitable for the role even with her good voice in the old days. With her current voice, she could not sing such a demanding role.
Horne, however, is AMAZING. I saw her in concert around this time, and she was amazing. She still had technique to BURN, and the voice was DAMN BIG, which made it all the more amazing that she could do what she did. What a GODDESS.
People need to lighten up on the person who called Sutherland's timbre as "acute". In Italian, "acuto" can mean "high-pitched". That would certainly describe Joan Sutherland's voice.
bjmiceli 5 months ago
I'd give the performance an A-minus. Tecnically off a bit wih a few missed breathing cues, slightly off tone at places, chasing the high notes, etc.
The recording gets a D. It sounds like it was recorded on a Panasonic cassette recorder by someone sitting in the balcony. Echoes and audience coughs and rustelling don't do it for me.
dhy5342 2 years ago
wonderful music, weird ass libretto
raigekimaru 2 years ago 4
You are correct, because the fiorture in this is a mess! This is awful! Fleming should be ashamed.
kgarmaker123 3 years ago
Only time lucky enough to hear Ms. Horne was in the early 90's in The Ghosts of Versailles. She was in such magnificient voice--the sound came at you from very direction. Stentorian in volume. And what magnificient comic timing! Fleming was wonderful too, back then. Thank you so much for posting this.
dolcefico 3 years ago 3
Thank you so much for posting this!
I attended several of Ms Horne's last classical recitals in the late 1990s-2000 and they were by far the most amazing artistic experiences of my life. She is the only singer I have experienced who makes me feel as if she is singing directly to me.
Brava General Horne!
baritonebynight 3 years ago 7
Ahhhh, a Fleming recording which doesn't make me cringe! Where did her wonderful voice go? Horne is a true grand master of opera. bravo "Mr" Horne :)
Operaphile 3 years ago
Fleming was in a much worse voice than the one she had in the same duet in 1990! Listen to that clip (in Youtube as well),her coloratura was much better, the run was clearer. Here, she started to develop into her bad bad habits...the jazzy thing in her operatic voice which is aweful. Where has her voice in the old days gone?! With Horne, her voice was even worse under such a comparison.
g420730a 3 years ago
I hate that jazzy thing too.. Where in the hell did she get the impression that this was correct for this style of music? If she wants to sing jazzy, then sing JAZZ
kgarmaker123 3 years ago 3
Marylin Horne is so amazing. I think her Arsace has been unrivaled for nearly 40 years. She's sang the role with all of the great divas: Sutherland, Caballe, Anderson, Fleming. It would be interesting to know which soprano she enjoyed singing with the most and who she thinks was the best Semiramide.
spsp2sp3sp3dsp3d2 3 years ago 2
I guess she enjoyed singing this most with Sutherland, for obvious reasons: she was a long-time friend of hers, she had a partnership of more than 20 years with her and, quite frankly, Sutherland was the best of them all in this role. ;-)
However I must add Fleming never sang Semiramide, what is a pity IMO. Her Armida leads me to believe she could've been a great Semiramide.
Homoclassicus 3 years ago 2
@Homoclassicus I don't think I can agree - her Semiramide with Caballe was absolute magic - they complimented each other perfectly.
gustopheles 4 months ago
the blend of tone is great, they both have a very commanding dramatic power that complement eachother very well. However, that being said, the technique does sound a bit sloppy, a lot of the little notes get lost. unfortunately im afraid it may be renne's fault here, horne was a rossini mezzo role specialist for most of her career.
skitzo429 3 years ago
I completely agree. She was good in some respect, but highly manufactured. I strongly believe that diction is part of the belcanto technique and that aiming just for a beautiful sound betrays the drama.
sevoflurane 3 years ago
A surprising recording in many respects. Fleming's agility of the voice has dissapeared, and
many ornamented notes are regrettably not clear, though
she sang Rossini's Armida some ten years ago, which
impressed me with her technique she possesed at that
time. As for Horne, it is quite miraculous that she should
be able to sing this role, with some defects, considering
her age. Since Horne, I've never met another Arsace
overshadowing her.
makoto174 3 years ago
Indeed, Horne and Sutherland do the trick. This is, don't know just not the same at all
zodiak899 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
¨La Stupenda¨ didn´t pronounce a single consonant. It was impossible to understand her, to catch a single word on her singing. Did anybody notice that here? Besides that, her timbre was so acute and light that was plain... silly. Did anybody notice that? There´s more than publicity and good advertising (and good coloratura, but unexpressive singing...)
Holderlin 4 years ago
Sutherland's timbre acute and light, you mean it? I'm sorry, but this is a totally wrong comment, because if there is a characteristic Sutherland never had in her voice was the lightness of a leggero soprano. It was a dense, large, rounded, darker tone. And she did pronounce, people overestimate her diction problem. I myself can understand most of what she sings, and in the 70's her diction got very acceptable. The whole world wouldn't acclaim her for nothing.
Homoclassicus 4 years ago
@Holderlin You need to clearly state your meaning! Sutherland's voice was NEVER light. Vocal timbre cannot be described meaningfully as "acute". Her diction was much easier to understand "live" -- I don't know what happened with records; they misrepresent her in other ways as well...
Randidan 1 year ago
A fine piece of Rossini singing.
The best Fleming did (i.m.o.) was her Armida. I love this duet Sutherland and horne were magical in it. So were Anderson and Horne but one of my favourite versions has to be Devia and Podles.
angelus2002 4 years ago
Yes, we have grown accustomed to her scooping and shoving of air for "expression." Fine. IMO Fleming's deviations from the score distort the overall shape of the music.
Gobbi2007 4 years ago 2
This video leaves a bitter aftertaste: It's like this music can't be sung by no one else but Horne and Sutherland.
nilsuthor 4 years ago 3
Sutherland and Horne sang this is such harmony with each other. Fleming is just all over the place, altering the music, and making this sound really sloppy in certain places, especially toward the end.
zacharybr 4 years ago
@nilsuthor
Please listen to Devia/Podles.
adballet 2 years ago
Horne was in amazing voice here, but much as I love Fleming, why does she always alter the line of the music in such a silly and show off way. The music is perfect the way it was written. Horne voice belended so wonderfully with Sutherland in this music it is hard hearing anyone else sing it.
mrrk 4 years ago 3
la fleming non potrai mai neanche avvicinarsi a quello che è stata la STUPENDA
niobe4 4 years ago 3
Didn't know Fleming could do that with her voice. I love her more and more each day.
fuzmiq 4 years ago
Marilyn Horne, at 65, can still deliver her fabulous singing.
Renée Fleming is the new "Stupenda" !!!
I wish she can perform the complete opera one this days...
fernandobicudo 4 years ago
I am told she will be doing it at the Met in the next couple of years. a revival of the production they have.
altodivo 4 years ago
Comment removed
BeauTenor 4 years ago 2
Fleming is not the new stupenda. Her voice is not anywhere NEAR the size of Sutherland, for one thing, so the fact that she can sing the fioritura is not all that surprising. She also sounded a LOT better in 99 than she does now. She's supposed to be tackling Norma too. Singing one scene or aria out of context and singing the entire role are entirely different. She'd better watch it or she'll ruin herself worse than she already has.
BeauTenor 4 years ago
Actually I think Fleming's vocal shape is amazing for her age. No sign of decline at all can be heard in her most recent interpretations, apart from a slightly drier lower middle register. Of course she's not the new La Stupenda in exact terms, I'm quite sure fernandobicudo didn't mean it.
But we should praise her performance more than create polemics with comparisons with Sutherland, who obviously can't be substituted by anyone. ;-)
Homoclassicus 4 years ago
Right, but my point is that maybe she's taking things on that are...beyond her, a la Netrebko. Semiramide and Norma are not for the fainthearted. Norma in particular needs a voice with more than substantial size to be effective, which is why singers like Callas and Sutherland did it so well. BOTH roles could easily ruin a voice built like anything less than a tank.
BeauTenor 4 years ago
A few months ago Fleming realized that she can't sing Norma. I just found out recently (I'm a little behind). I was kind of disappointed because I wanted to hear her take on the role, for better or for worse.
spsp2sp3sp3dsp3d2 3 years ago
She's wise not to take on Norma. She is just not suitable for the role even with her good voice in the old days. With her current voice, she could not sing such a demanding role.
g420730a 3 years ago
Well, I've heard her Casta Diva, but that's it. Anyway, she's not going to do it so she probably agrees with you.
spsp2sp3sp3dsp3d2 3 years ago
Horne, however, is AMAZING. I saw her in concert around this time, and she was amazing. She still had technique to BURN, and the voice was DAMN BIG, which made it all the more amazing that she could do what she did. What a GODDESS.
BeauTenor 4 years ago 3