@Ailsa72 Listen to the 1953 Lucia or 1952 Puritani or 1951 Trovatore and you wouldn't wince. Or at least you shouldn't!!! And hearing her live was an electrifying experience. I saw her in the 50s several times. Her "Medea" and "Norma" are unsurpassed to this day. Also there are roles and occasions, and parts of some roles when a harshness and sharpness in the voice is required. You can't sing "in Mia Man" or "Giudici ad Anna" with a "pretty voice" which is what some people want. It is wrong!!!
Anything Callas did was always supremely musical and expressive - BUT, if you are going to represent her with only one recording why wouldn't you choose something from when she was in her absolute prime?
She has the essential ingredient for greatness...not chops, not knowledge, or even range...she has the power to captivate. There are better singers, but no one captivates like she did. Even if I know exactly what she is going to sing, I wait for every word as if it were improvised...
Well, as Frazier said on his show, She certainly is no Tebaldi. I can understand why she is in this collection, but she is not my favorite soprano. I much prefer Sutherland's interpretation of this.
Italians call her "la divina" and i personally agree. her voice was so powerfull that could sing operas totally forgotten before her time. who can study operas like "la traviata", "lucia di lammermoor", "medea", "tosca", 'norma", "carmen", "la vestale", "la gioconda" and so on, without remembering her performances? simply impossible, because the majority are simply devine.
Maria Callas significa, no sólo la revolución en el mundo de la opera, que nunca volvería a ser lo que antes de ella (b.C.) fue, sino la capacidad de transmitir en cada nota y en cada gesto toda la carga dramática y significativa del personaje interpretado y cantado.
Es algo más que la belleza subjetiva de una voz, sin entrar en si la considero o no bella. Se trata de que en ella cobraron vida a la perfección cada uno de sus personajes, destacando sus míticas Normas, Toscas y Traviatas. Única.
I find it alarming how acrimonious and just plain vicious Callas' fans are towards anyone who dares to citicize her, or even to imply that she wasn't the greatest singer who ever lived. Virtually every comment that is even slightly critical of Callas or her singing winds up being cancelled as spam. That's censorship. I personally admire her work tremendously and couldn't imagine being without certain of her recordings, but other people are also allowed to have their opinions.
@MadonnaImperia I know that :) But hammer55292 claims that Sutherland, after hearing Callas sing "an aria", didn't want to sing it again, and I was wondering which aria that was. It sounds more like a misunderstood version of the story of Schwarzkopf giving up singing "La traviata", apparently because Callas sang it so well (but perhaps also because the critics weren't very enthusiastic about her own interpretation of it).
You can't compare Maria Callas to anyone, she was a unique phenomenon, a genius who worked very hard to express with her voice what the composer wanted to say. She will survive what other great singers won't. She is like Mozart, Bach, Neethoven, a one of a kind artist. I like her, I admire her and I know that I will be listening to her recordings as long as i live, and just the thinking of that makes me happy. God Bless Her!
Underlying all the hype, good and bad, bad press, rumors, critics, fans, etc., Callas is " The Greatest Soprano Of All Time ', the BBC, 2007. No one will ever equal this magnificent soprano sfogatto assoluta. It will not happen, because it can not happen.
Her great talent and the person she was-- was and still is the most active controversy in the world of Opera. No doubt that she held a great known reputation, and that kept her where she is then up until now. Her voice and attitude and her background gave her ways to simply outshine just about everyone who gets in her way. She is great, in many ways. Flaws are there, but still, even the littlest of that flaw got people wanting more from her!
How many of you have heard or seen Callas live? As a teenager I saw her Norma, Lucia, Traviata, Anna Bolena, and Medea. 1955 - 1959 Many of the comments posted here relate to how she sang notes. She did not sing just notes, she created the character with her voice. Harsh (to display anger), plaintive, sweet, happy, deranged, ecstatic. She moulded it to the composer's demands. As for stage presence you could not take your eyes off her. Her entrance "Io Medea" sent shivers down your spine.
I agree with most of the reviews, at this time Callas voice was clearly deteriorating. However, this recording is just the most evocative piece for consideration of the character. Dramatic to the end, their agility and were not floating or treble, lightweight, but its expression is exponentiate with perfect control of volume and range of colors. She is unique!
Her ability to COMMUNICATE sets her in a place apart- when I am not hearing her I start to doubt, but then, when I hear her, her supposed faults are part of her virtue. Simply beyond discussion. thank you!
Her 1953 Recording of this Role is much better... As Dame Joan Sutherland once said in a interview... Who only heard Callas' voice after 1955, never really read Callas' voice.
Her voice in 1959 (year of the recording on this video) was already showing signs of aging... Specially at the end of "Ardon gli incensi" ... Her 1953 recording shows a much more fresh voice, with a stronger timbre, sepcially on the higher notes, which were extremely easy for her, and on this video, its just unfair to her!
As usual with Callas, there are inimitable, revelatory moments here. However, she is definitely not at her best: the top sounds brittle, the coloratura is strained and she regrettably (or all too wisely, under the circumstances) cuts much of the cadenza, which she usually turned into a thing of transcendent, heart-breaking beauty. This is still a lovely performance, but most of her other recordings of this scene are better.
I feel a bit miserable here. I think great singers such as Erna Berger, Maria Staeder, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Lucia Popp and Erna Sack have been ignored. I also like Lily Pons and Barbara Bonney. I am a Kiwi and might include Kiri and Frances Alda for consideration also.
I honestly think that Erna Berger's singing is above some (most) of the female singers here. I am glad to see that Leontyne and Kathleen Ferrier are included.
Dommage,que le duo Mario LANZA ,Maria CALLAS = les 2 plus beaux timbres lyriques et de l'émotion dramatique,n'aient jamais pu enregister ensemble un duo.
Damage, that the duet Mario LANZA, Maria CALLAS = the 2 more beautiful lyric stamps and of the dramatic emotion, never could enregister together a duet.
Maria CALLAS in 1973, indicated that it was about sound greater regret. It was right perfectly. Guy CREQUIE
The question "Was she really that great?" would have been best answered if you had uploaded a recording from when she was in her prime. In 1959, although her musicianship was greater than ever, her voice was alas not so. You are so right that "no one can talk about singing and opera without mention(ing) her name"!
To me she was the best of all the sopranos of the 20th and even now 21st century.. She was truly a phenomenon.. And you could have picked her 53 version recorded with EMI of this aria.. it is much better vocally.. with and E flat at the end of the mad scene that is better than anyone elses ever... This stereophonic versions is very polished.. but she is not comfortable on E Flats. and you can hear it..
I simply adore her. A monster, an actress, a sorcerer, an angel, a powerful witch. The best artist. remarkable expressive talent. The one and only Maria Callas
For me Callas will always be unrivalled. Maria found such deep pathos and emotion in this charachter, that nobody else did. Sutherland never moved me, so I cant call her a great artist, but I am a fan. Callas didnt have bad trills, she could pace them however she wanted to! She is the greatest for me because she touches my soul. If music doesn't do that it has missed its point. And its not beautiful if its not moving. All the greats have said that, from Mozart Verdi to Serafin and Callas.
I'm just a fan's opera, and I'm not know much of musical things, but I know when something is spectacular and touching for me, I mind it's when I'm reading, for example, and while I reading I hear music -opera and clasical music- and it happens that I am reading, but the music makes me put away the reading and hear it. and that happened when I heard for first time Adieu notre petit table of Maria Callas or O mio Babbino Caro, great, spectacular, unique!.
but, there is a few "songs" that she aches the notes, and it doesn't sounds very well, so for me She was a great opera singer, but she isn't the better as says her fans.
I agree she must be listed in the greates. But for me the greatest is Sutherland hands down. Callas struggles with her trills and her high notes make her vibrato do that wide thing. Sutherlands Lucia, her bel canto singing, Lucrezia Borgia the list goes on, are unmatched.
I know i'm not the first one making suggestions but i'll say: Although this is my all time personal favorite 'Spargi...', to me callas could never surpass herself as Elvira in I Puritani, more specifically a 1953 studio recording of the Mad Scene. It's not only a technical jewel but also a heart-tearing rendition. It's ten minutes of striking grief followed by small coloratura party ending in one of her best Eb's. I highly recommend it. It sent me places that not even her Violeta was able to.
You're the first person I've seen make this comment, and I could not possibly agree more. It's one of the most astounding moments in recorded opera history.
Che pathos, che penetrazione profondissima del personaggio e come trasmette emozioni, desideri, tormenti, gioie, vita e morte...Maria sei unica, un mostro di bravura senza possibili raffronti , forse la Malibran chissà :M
In Callas one finds a truthfullness. In the vast range of expressed emotions, in all nuance which I think is the quintessence of her art. How can one protray so many layers of the emotional eb and flow of a role in musical drama/opera if one does not has what it takes to really express all these emotions to the utmost detail? But technique is of course the means to obtain it. Yet it has to be mastered, otherwise one never reaches that point. But there's also taste, what the part commands; truth
I think that Maria Callas is, among other big name who could not miss.
Putting aside subjective preferito, she brought us back the glory of many favorite opera, with its real dramatic and vocal sense.
If there is a ranking (which always will be accused of subjective and controversial), she deserves one of the first places, perhaps just below legends as Giuditta Pasta and Maria Malibran, who was heir to a mythical relic of their voices.
That's my choice anyway, and no doubts about that. This level of singing is more than about technical perfection and has to do with a certain naturalness plus a complex overlay of a whole range of emotive nuances. In this sense Callas and Caruso remain unequalled.
I love Callas, but this is not my favorite recording of her voice, nor her very best aria. THere are so many other arias recorded that are, I think, better representations of her voice and dramatic genius, maybe "Vissi D'Arte"? Everyone else seems to say this, and I agree, there simply never has been anyone quite like Maria with her heart rending intensity!
My favourit aria by Callas is Meyerbeer's "Ombra Legiera" ,from Dinorah.
I also think my last comment was misunderstood, because I really like Callas singing this role and this aria, I just think there are other recordings where she did better...
And I my word about Sutherland was also made, not with any sense of superiority, but only because when this video was made, this was the ideal aria to Joan, as Lucia is considered on of her best roles.
Of course Maria belongs in this collection, why wouldn't she. A "great" voice is far more than just the beauty of the timbre. A beautiful voice is nothing if one doesn't understand how to use it. Many people say Callas' voice was unpleasant or not beautiful; that is a matter of opinion. I actually like the sound of her voice just fine, and more importantly "how" she used it. For me, there are some operas that just do not resonate as deeply unless Maria is doing the interpreting.
It upsets me...of course, her timbre isn't as sweet as the normal soprano, but she does have one of the best voices. Flawless technique. Anyone can contradict me on that one. Her voice declined for one reason: mental distress. Mental distress (if one has personal experience with it, you can understand) destroys you physically as well as mentally.
It certainly is difficult, if even not impossible, to say who belongs to the 10 or 100 greatest singers. However, from what I have seen, names like Mario del Monaco and Franco Corelli are missing. Of course, the matter is entirely subjective.
As to Maria Callas, who slept exactly 32 years ago (on the 16th of Spt., 1977), I think she was the only soprano sfogato of the 20th century. She was able to sing everything from Mozart to Wagner and from Rossini to Verdi and Puccini. IMHO Tullio Serafin put it right: She is able to sing whatever has been written for a female voice.
"On the other hand, music critic John Ardoin has argued that Callas was the reincarnation of the Nineteenth Century soprano sfogato or "unlimited soprano", a throwback to Maria Malibran and Giuditta Pasta, for whom many of the famous bel canto operas were written." Wikipedia and not only.
As an artist alone Callas would earn a spot in the top five singers of the 20th Century. But as an influence on the art of singing she may be number one. She redefined operatic singing and interpretation, and given that may be the most important classical singer of the century.
Among all excellent singers Maria Callas will always have her own place. I remember the appearance of Sutherland's Art of the Prima Donna lp's as a kind of relief but I never will denie Callas' unique position in the world of singing.
had the voice with a drama just in a timbre. How to express with a sweet, tender, "beautiful" voice the tagedy of Lucia, Norma, especially of Medea? Therefore, why ugly?
I'm always upset, when I hear that Callas's voice is ugly. Why ugly? There are so much grief, pain, melancholy, passion, anger, etc. in her voice. I can't live without Maria's voice. I listen to it every day, it overturns my heart, brings a feeling of a bitter happiness - or a sweet suffering - I can't find a suitable words. I listen more and more and this voice seems to me the most expressive and beautiful, because it can express any deepest human experiences. Callas was a tragic actress and
@denidowi To Callas, the proper illustration of the characterization (especially in the case of Lucia) of grief or turmoil was more important than simply producing a beautiful sound. Much of the ugliness was there on purpose since, as Ewa Podles noted about her famous acting and theatricality, "It's enough just to hear her because she did everything with her voice"
@musikphantom1881 Hey, man ... we can bury inferiority behind whatever label/guise we'd like, but like many others, we are not necessarily listening to showmanship or characterization, we are listening for purity or beauty of voice and feeling
@denidowi We are tired of individuals without the least understanding of what opera is all about, making comments here that has been said over and over. Btw I saw you 2 days ago berating RenataTebaldi as inferior to Deanna Durbin and Kathryn Grayson. Sorry...but I had to be honest.
@mozzrt I say the same to you as others: Read the actual Category again: it says Zero on opera:
It speaks of the "100 Greatest Singers" ... I believe the title is: that means from ANYWHERE! [Full stop]
The prob has been that opera cons assume they hold mortgage on real singing: quite the opposite - much is terrible bellowing noise. I listen for music, not bellowing or forced voice ;)
@DjeddaPixie it isn't ugly - her instrument isn't a stradavarius - her technique is fantastic - she is like strattas and other great actresses with ability to move us because she inhabits the character - ie listen to stratas in show boat... bill, not a hard song moves you to tears...
@DavidoffGustav I'll probably disappoint you, but I don't like Teresa Stratas. First, I don't like her singing, and I don't believe her as an actress. Sorry if I gave you the unpleasant feeling.
@DjeddaPixie I quite agree, DjeddaPixie. I've never found Callas's voice ugly...quite the contrary. Out of the top 100, I'd say she's numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. There really is no close second.
Early Joan Sutherland in Meyerbeer, Handel, and other congenial composers was unequalled; her Gli Ugonotti is stupendous. She simply cannot compete with Callas as Lucia, Anna Bolena, etc. but then who can?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
poor fagot,Lohegrin's world is Maria Callas, a soprano that lived 60 years ago and was very discussed by the bad quality of her voice and her too many vocal flaws and her very short career.Lohengrin's page and favorites videos is very sad, is the mirror of a young fagot who lives in another world, very sad, pathetic
I see also that you are among the dwindling number of misguided souls who think it is still acceptable to use the word "faggot;" do you also still use the words "nigger," "spic," "wop," "chink," "kraut," "jap," and other insulting appellations?
Are you truly 52 years old? You speak and write as if your only 13, which is very sad.. If you hate Callas, go to another page then. Your the one whose pathetic
People can critique her "vocal technique" and the whose better/whatnot, but in the end its something deeper that appeals to the soul, not just technique or nice high notes. Callas was a great singer who sadly did decline, but who are you to judge her?
Are you an expert? I think not. I would love to see you sing this
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Oh noooo of course Sutherland cannot compete with Callas's Lucia missing all the Eflats and Ds since 1955, having debutes the role in 1952 lasted three years, Sutherland cannot compete having sung Lucia 225 times for three decades since 1959 to 1988
I see from your sarcasticv comment that you are one of the many fans who go to the opera only to hear high notes and judge a singer's ability based on that or how many times a singer sang a particular role; there is so much more to music than that, IMO Callas reigns supreme in musicality, musicianship, dramatic involvement, rhythmic integrity, and superb diction.
Sutherland remains for me the supreme singer of Handel and Meyerbeer, not Donizetti; her complete misunderstanding of portamento, her woofy middle voice and mushy diction and generally uninvolved or one dimensional dramatic portrayals in this repertoire rule her out IMO.
I agree Callas, compared to Sutherland, is the more complete artist. I also agree Sutherland's Handel is superb and her Huguenots quite a tour de force. Insofar as Donizetti is concerned, however, Sutherland's Lucia--particularly in the 1960's, but even in the 1970's--was a great achievement, combining splendid virtuosity and pathos. OK, the intensity is not at the level of Callas or Sills, but still exceeds that of several previous singers--Pons, Peters, D'Angelo--all of whom I like as well.
Besides, Sutherland's diction is really not so bad in the 1960's. Her Anna Bolena may not compare to Callas', but her Lucrezia Borgia is beautifully and expressively sung, within striking distance of Caballe's. With regard to Bellini, I think Sutherland's superb breath control, pure legato, florid agility, and easy high notes serve her very well in Sonnambula, Puritani, and Beatrice although her Norma--excellent as it may be--is not quite at the same exalted level as the Norma of Callas.
Unequaled understanding and singing of the Bel Canto style; her superb declamation of the text, rhythmic incisiveness, and deep and moving characterization of Lucia will never be forgotten. I'm in the minority when I say that this is her best Lucia, and best recorded too; she brings a depth to it here not found in her other performances, something deeply hurt and wounded.
The quality of the voice in this recording is great, however, that of the 1954 'studio' recording, conducted by Serafin, is just OUTSTANDING. Still until now, I think that her 'Spargi d'amari pianto' in such version is the best ever: every note is 'perfectly' placed, unusually smooth legato, incredible high E.
I can tolerate even like Callas in her vocal decline period (1960-1965) although I avoid to listen to her in that time... but I cannot tolerate even for a second Sutherland's middle voice wobble and ridiculous diction after 1976...
I hate Sutherland too, at any time, can't stand her terrible face and sounds. just sound, no artistry whatsoever. When I hear Callas in 63 sing Butterfly aria (Berlin concert) it is glory past and she is raw and more imperfections. But she goes through it with a bite, you even then feel something of her tension. It is moving in a strange way. And I love her ah non credea 1965 (France)!
-Dessay in her prime was the most fantastic coloratura soprano of the last 20 years. Incredible technique and beautiful voice plus she didnt start singing the Assoluta Roles (Bolena, Norma etc) as all coloraturas do. She was descent and musical
-Her acting is a bit dreadful though as she moves and jumps all the time more like a caricature and less like a real actress but over all her Scala Sonnambula and her Morgana are masterpieces of Coloratura singing
Acting for her, as you probably know, is the most important part of opera for Dessay. Maybe she is very or sometimes a bit too energetic. But do you think her acting is weak because it is too much accentuated or do you object to her perception of her roles, too "caracaturesque"? She is so lively and so fresh in an other perspective.
-I cannot deny her acting completely but I certainly do not agree with her and her fans presenting her acting as fantastic. She is the negative example of what Maria had said once: Never make a gesture onstage unless you actually want to say something with it (Serafin's lesson)...she is natural and genuine in comedian roles though.
In dramatic roles most of the times she is not natural, nervertheless her intentions are always sincere, the result.. hm... questionable
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It seems as Maria was such a out of this world artist, I seems Maria saw in the character of Floria a cartoon witch, for the Paris and London videos Maria left us, she performs exactly like a cartoon witch
I understand your points well and I agree, her comic side to me is so very generous and innate, but her dramatic roles tend towards being somewhat overdone, overworked. justification of a gesture in relationship to the music is wonderful, but shouldn't one also adapt gestures to one's own peronal tempo's and physical constitutions? overdone or not, it has tension and sweetness with Dessay. What do you think of her acting in the role of Ophelia? Particularly last scene.
in general and from a vocal point of view, her Ophelia was fantastic, probably the best ever, as was her Lakme (greatest Lakme ever in my opinion) but her acting in the last scene again a bit misplaced... cant help remembering her touching her breasts all the time... what did that mean? ? I mean really..
Recent news from Greece: Young doctor (Lohengrin) is dead, apparently his naked body was found in his apartment lying down with only a string in his bottom and his computer was playing "Coppia iniqua" sung by Maria Callas
@ Lohengrin: let us not forget she(Dessay) was an actress before she became a singer. That is why her ''acting'' is often disjointed from the singing. Callas' never was. Acting- singing-technique-phrasing-style all co-existed in callas' art and all at appropriate proportions. that is partially why she in unrivalled
i agree!! i liek some of her acting but god, what fuckin awesome vocalist. i dont like her bel canto roles, i much preferred her before her vocal dilemma. but sh ewas awesome in mozart handel and french roles
I do like Dessay in the bel canto roles t hat are suitable for her voice (Amina, Giuleta, the tom boy etc) which is the "bel cantian coloratura roles" but what I respect about her is that as all truly great coloraturas (with only example Gruberova) didnt start singing the Assoluta Repertoire with all the vocal compromises and transpositions and cuts with which usual coloraturas (Devia, Gruberova etc) "molest" the Assoluta Repertoire
i jsut dont like to hear her now that her voice is unraveling. i dont liek to hear any great or favourite artist of mine undergo premature or ungraceful aging in the voice. natalie dessay post 2001 does nothign for me, just like callas post 1958, gencer post 1971, and even sutherland post 1975 do nothing for me really, even if they have done some wonderful stuff after those periods.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I adore Lohengrin he is a horny gay doctor and he is outrageous quite hysterical opera lover.Lohengrin admits his adored Maria to have experienced a vocal decline in 1960/65.But Maria full opera schedule had ended in 1958 and her voice had been in decline since 1955, despite having been a too flawed voice, in her prime years that lasted only 1948/1953, she lasted 6 years.Fantastic technique!
vergoti20, your life must have been a frustration, you're a sad old man who keeps bashing people that achieved much more than you will ever achieve in your poor life. (and you also must have some sexual frustrations for calling that kind of names as insults)
Learn at least how to be polite.
Plus, even if Callas' prime time years were few, they mean much more than some artists' entire careers. And also this performance wasn't made at her prime time and its still a great one (her 1953 is better).
Lohengrin can't tolerate Joan Sutherland after 1976, just in a special time for Sutherland where she was extrainteresting and many of her greatest achievements still were having to come, Trovatore, Anna Bolena, she was going only to retire in 1990 and all the voice was still there !
Not the most beautiful voice,and not the greatest singer,but the best all around singer IMHO after Ponselle and Musio. Dramatically she had no peers. Brava! TY.
she has been called the greatest singing actress of the century. As a grown man when i first heard vissi darte from tosca on the famous de sabata recording it brought tears to my eyes. It was written during the recording session de sabata was not happy with callas with her vissi darte and had her in tears until she sang what we hear know.
Quite right: Miss Callas is absolutely everywhere in opera, even now, thirty years after her death. I had the surprising honor to meet her briefly and accidentally while she was in NYC to give a master class. She was also a great lady.
Her voice is often lacking in beauty, but that is her voice. Her skill as a vocal actress and as a singer kept her and kept opera in the public eye at a time when that was important.
For me her earlier recordings are astounding. The live ones in early 1950's . You have played other sopranos at their best. You should have included a recording of Callas at her best also. Not when she became slim but when she sang on the frame she had trained on. If you do want the thinner Callas, may I suggest the live 'La Vestale' or the live 'Andrea Chenier'
I only partly agree with you. Her voice when she was still heavier might have sounded even fuller, but later, when she became slim, she also matured as a woman and artist, even though the voice was a bit thinner than in the early 50's, it was still full-blooded and rich. I agree that she sounds better on the 1955 live Lucia, but this Mad Scene in my opinion she sings so marvellously that I seriously thought it was in 1955 before I saw otherwise.
Breathtaking - again and again..... There are so many good sopranos, but only Callas touches me so deeply. A Gruberova for instance certainly sings better in some technical way, but she leaves me totally cold...
Despite some technical flaws, I've read that her musicality was impeccable and that she was able to convey in her voice all the thrills, fiorituras and tempos written in the score. They say that she sang all that impeccably. And I agree with you about Gruberova, she leaves me cold and unmoved, while Callas moves me deeply.
I like to appreciate every singer for what they have to offer in their own right and my all time favourite will always be Christa Ludwig, but I am firmly convinced, especially after listening to all the Juliard Masterclasses, that Callas was probably the greatest musical genius of this century as far as opera goes.
Sutherland admitted in interviews that before starting blurring her diction her legato was flawed she also said her chest voice was'nt developted properly.Her middle voice was not very solid after 1962 it became covered and colorless.Beauty of tone,eveness of registers,trills and staccati have nothing to do with musicallity it's about vocal technique. For example,Schipa's vocal quality was poor but he was a much better musician than Gigli and Pavarotti.
Technique is not all there is to musicianship; however, a singer with an excellent technique has at least better potential in expressing herself musically than a singer with poor technique. As Galli-Curci stated "If you have technique, you have the power to express provided you don't take technique as an ends but as a means to an ends." Legato and chest voice are also part of technique. While Sutherland may have believed cultivating the vowel would improve her legato, her legato was not faulty.
Continued--Schipa's vocal quality was not poor. True, his voice was small and he did not have a wide range or ringing high notes, but his scale was well equalized and balanced, his tone was deeply colored, flexible, and beautiful, his diction was very clear, his sense of rhythm was precise, and he had taste and charm. Some of these attributes reflect technique rather than musicality, but my point is one cannot totally separate the two. The same applies to McCormack and Tauber.
Schipa's taste,rhtytm and his charm is totally irrelevant to the quality of his voice it's about the way he used his voice.His legato was beautiful,his diction clear but his scale was not equialised properly since his low notes were atrophical and the high notes were strained he also lacked a trill.
Schipa had a limited range, but what he had I think was well equalized in that there was no change in the quality of tone from top to bottom of his scale. He would not often attempt a fortissimo high note but his piano high notes were quite lovely. I suppose he lacked a trill but many great tenors did not have a good trill. Bjorling perhaps, McCormack, yes but not Gigli and not Caruso. Even some great sopranos lacked a trill, such as Muzio, or had a weak trill, such as Caballe.
Caruso had a trill (check his ombra mai fu) so did Gigli(in Verdi requiem he sang some trills) McCormack and Bjorling .Although his piani where great technically there weren't flute tones like Gigli's and Gedda's.
I recalled Caruso's trill in this aria after I wrote my comment, and I think it was a good one too. I don't recall Gigli's trills but will listen to the Verdi requiem again. Thanks for pointing this out.
Continued--Perhaps Schipa was overall a better musician than Gigli or Pavarotti, more restrained, more elegant, less melodramatic, yet expressive and passionate. But the other tenors still had musicianship. I'm not saying Sutherland was the best interpreter of the text or the most expressive or refined artist, but she still conveyed pathos, joy, and indignation in her singing, and used her superb technical skills to enhance her delivery. She was a tasteful singer as well and excelled in comedy.
I almost think I like her voice and then something goes wrong and I wince.
Ailsa72 1 month ago
@Ailsa72 Listen to the 1953 Lucia or 1952 Puritani or 1951 Trovatore and you wouldn't wince. Or at least you shouldn't!!! And hearing her live was an electrifying experience. I saw her in the 50s several times. Her "Medea" and "Norma" are unsurpassed to this day. Also there are roles and occasions, and parts of some roles when a harshness and sharpness in the voice is required. You can't sing "in Mia Man" or "Giudici ad Anna" with a "pretty voice" which is what some people want. It is wrong!!!
Ariadne7710 1 month ago
I'd have killed you if you hadn't put her on the list d:
LacrimaLunaMortua 1 month ago
Anything Callas did was always supremely musical and expressive - BUT, if you are going to represent her with only one recording why wouldn't you choose something from when she was in her absolute prime?
troppofiato1 1 month ago
¡Ella canta con tanta emoción!
IOUIOUIUOUIOUIIOUIOU 4 months ago
She has the essential ingredient for greatness...not chops, not knowledge, or even range...she has the power to captivate. There are better singers, but no one captivates like she did. Even if I know exactly what she is going to sing, I wait for every word as if it were improvised...
Khalilullah 4 months ago
Well, as Frazier said on his show, She certainly is no Tebaldi. I can understand why she is in this collection, but she is not my favorite soprano. I much prefer Sutherland's interpretation of this.
dickshouse1 6 months ago
Italians call her "la divina" and i personally agree. her voice was so powerfull that could sing operas totally forgotten before her time. who can study operas like "la traviata", "lucia di lammermoor", "medea", "tosca", 'norma", "carmen", "la vestale", "la gioconda" and so on, without remembering her performances? simply impossible, because the majority are simply devine.
houhoug79 6 months ago
Maria Callas significa, no sólo la revolución en el mundo de la opera, que nunca volvería a ser lo que antes de ella (b.C.) fue, sino la capacidad de transmitir en cada nota y en cada gesto toda la carga dramática y significativa del personaje interpretado y cantado.
Es algo más que la belleza subjetiva de una voz, sin entrar en si la considero o no bella. Se trata de que en ella cobraron vida a la perfección cada uno de sus personajes, destacando sus míticas Normas, Toscas y Traviatas. Única.
ubedajils 6 months ago 3
I find it alarming how acrimonious and just plain vicious Callas' fans are towards anyone who dares to citicize her, or even to imply that she wasn't the greatest singer who ever lived. Virtually every comment that is even slightly critical of Callas or her singing winds up being cancelled as spam. That's censorship. I personally admire her work tremendously and couldn't imagine being without certain of her recordings, but other people are also allowed to have their opinions.
assindiastignani 7 months ago 2
@hammer55292 which aria was that?
MadonnaImperia 7 months ago
@MadonnaImperia This is the second scene of the 1st part of the Mad Scene and called:" Ardon gl`incensi"
MariaCallasLegend 7 months ago
@MadonnaImperia I know that :) But hammer55292 claims that Sutherland, after hearing Callas sing "an aria", didn't want to sing it again, and I was wondering which aria that was. It sounds more like a misunderstood version of the story of Schwarzkopf giving up singing "La traviata", apparently because Callas sang it so well (but perhaps also because the critics weren't very enthusiastic about her own interpretation of it).
MadonnaImperia 7 months ago
"What do you think of Maria Callas in this collection?" - I think the collection wouldn't be complete without her :)
MadonnaImperia 7 months ago
shes beautiful a voice from god cant live without her voive
callasfan100 8 months ago
what year is this from ?
babs22hh 8 months ago
@babs22hh 1959
MariaCallasLegend 7 months ago
She was a witch who could mix potions of magic in every role she sang.
Qbendanny 8 months ago
You can't compare Maria Callas to anyone, she was a unique phenomenon, a genius who worked very hard to express with her voice what the composer wanted to say. She will survive what other great singers won't. She is like Mozart, Bach, Neethoven, a one of a kind artist. I like her, I admire her and I know that I will be listening to her recordings as long as i live, and just the thinking of that makes me happy. God Bless Her!
PureSoapCleans 9 months ago
Underlying all the hype, good and bad, bad press, rumors, critics, fans, etc., Callas is " The Greatest Soprano Of All Time ', the BBC, 2007. No one will ever equal this magnificent soprano sfogatto assoluta. It will not happen, because it can not happen.
hammer555551 9 months ago
Callas... well... impossible to describe what she is really... pure beauty!
arthur17252859 9 months ago
Her great talent and the person she was-- was and still is the most active controversy in the world of Opera. No doubt that she held a great known reputation, and that kept her where she is then up until now. Her voice and attitude and her background gave her ways to simply outshine just about everyone who gets in her way. She is great, in many ways. Flaws are there, but still, even the littlest of that flaw got people wanting more from her!
oPeRa1923 11 months ago
How many of you have heard or seen Callas live? As a teenager I saw her Norma, Lucia, Traviata, Anna Bolena, and Medea. 1955 - 1959 Many of the comments posted here relate to how she sang notes. She did not sing just notes, she created the character with her voice. Harsh (to display anger), plaintive, sweet, happy, deranged, ecstatic. She moulded it to the composer's demands. As for stage presence you could not take your eyes off her. Her entrance "Io Medea" sent shivers down your spine.
Ariadne7710 11 months ago 2
I agree with most of the reviews, at this time Callas voice was clearly deteriorating. However, this recording is just the most evocative piece for consideration of the character. Dramatic to the end, their agility and were not floating or treble, lightweight, but its expression is exponentiate with perfect control of volume and range of colors. She is unique!
Alleeexoscm 1 year ago
Comment removed
Alleeexoscm 1 year ago
Her ability to COMMUNICATE sets her in a place apart- when I am not hearing her I start to doubt, but then, when I hear her, her supposed faults are part of her virtue. Simply beyond discussion. thank you!
baltoman24 1 year ago
I wish you had used the 1952 studio recording or the 55 live recording with Karajan. When she was at her very best.
aavauxhall 1 year ago
Her 1953 Recording of this Role is much better... As Dame Joan Sutherland once said in a interview... Who only heard Callas' voice after 1955, never really read Callas' voice.
Her voice in 1959 (year of the recording on this video) was already showing signs of aging... Specially at the end of "Ardon gli incensi" ... Her 1953 recording shows a much more fresh voice, with a stronger timbre, sepcially on the higher notes, which were extremely easy for her, and on this video, its just unfair to her!
soundslikeblue 1 year ago
Who conducted, Tullio Serafin?
Congratulations, Mike, on your choice of this recording to honor Callas.
minnie888444 1 year ago
She's unique. She's a genius. Uber musicality.
anthonela1 1 year ago
I am hilarious to see the closing of the 2010 with the exceptional arias of La Callas.
She has been dead for decades; time has not waned her beauty. To me, sopranos
like Joan Sutherland, Anna Moffo and Beverly Sills are luxurious hotel suite rooms.
La Callas is a cozy home where I can get relaxed--I always come back to her at last.
Bluejeans0701 1 year ago
As usual with Callas, there are inimitable, revelatory moments here. However, she is definitely not at her best: the top sounds brittle, the coloratura is strained and she regrettably (or all too wisely, under the circumstances) cuts much of the cadenza, which she usually turned into a thing of transcendent, heart-breaking beauty. This is still a lovely performance, but most of her other recordings of this scene are better.
Matt75003 1 year ago
Not commentable. It would be fair to every human singer, tha She'd be ou of the race.
Vendimi3 1 year ago
Why is it every time I click on Lucia Di Lammermoor Mad Scene, I never hear "Il Dolce Suono"? They always cut off that part it seems
dangmills 1 year ago
I feel a bit miserable here. I think great singers such as Erna Berger, Maria Staeder, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, Lucia Popp and Erna Sack have been ignored. I also like Lily Pons and Barbara Bonney. I am a Kiwi and might include Kiri and Frances Alda for consideration also.
I honestly think that Erna Berger's singing is above some (most) of the female singers here. I am glad to see that Leontyne and Kathleen Ferrier are included.
Maybe I am out of touch with the fashion now. :(
osinging 1 year ago
Comment removed
Elisabetha611 1 year ago
Maria you are the standard in opera. Respected by virtually all. The Queen of opera whose throne will never be graced again.
You are amazing, you turned opera into a something that breathed life, you showed that music can live and die.
Yet, even though you died, your music lives forever.
CyprusHot 1 year ago
@CyprusHot
Standard in italian opera ... or rather what remained of it.
She's the POPERA-QUEEN of opera-light!!
Elisabetha611 1 year ago
She is the only singer that can put tears in this grown mans eyes!!!
citrussorbet 1 year ago
Dommage,que le duo Mario LANZA ,Maria CALLAS = les 2 plus beaux timbres lyriques et de l'émotion dramatique,n'aient jamais pu enregister ensemble un duo.
Damage, that the duet Mario LANZA, Maria CALLAS = the 2 more beautiful lyric stamps and of the dramatic emotion, never could enregister together a duet.
Maria CALLAS in 1973, indicated that it was about sound greater regret. It was right perfectly. Guy CREQUIE
CREQUIE 1 year ago
Only love for this voice in my heart.
Sadiesexy 1 year ago
The question "Was she really that great?" would have been best answered if you had uploaded a recording from when she was in her prime. In 1959, although her musicianship was greater than ever, her voice was alas not so. You are so right that "no one can talk about singing and opera without mention(ing) her name"!
troppofiato 1 year ago
thank you GOD for this woman.
amen
deepplots 1 year ago
To me she was the best of all the sopranos of the 20th and even now 21st century.. She was truly a phenomenon.. And you could have picked her 53 version recorded with EMI of this aria.. it is much better vocally.. with and E flat at the end of the mad scene that is better than anyone elses ever... This stereophonic versions is very polished.. but she is not comfortable on E Flats. and you can hear it..
kgarmaker123 1 year ago 10
this was not the aria to pick. habanera, vissi d'arte or suicidio would have been much better
raigekimaru 1 year ago
I simply adore her. A monster, an actress, a sorcerer, an angel, a powerful witch. The best artist. remarkable expressive talent. The one and only Maria Callas
Marianofrv 1 year ago 4
The true Queen of Opera...
lipera 1 year ago 4
For me Callas will always be unrivalled. Maria found such deep pathos and emotion in this charachter, that nobody else did. Sutherland never moved me, so I cant call her a great artist, but I am a fan. Callas didnt have bad trills, she could pace them however she wanted to! She is the greatest for me because she touches my soul. If music doesn't do that it has missed its point. And its not beautiful if its not moving. All the greats have said that, from Mozart Verdi to Serafin and Callas.
AOG93 1 year ago 2
No, you cannot say, she was not the best soprano ever. She is beyond competition... There was La Callas and all the others...
doktordrakator 1 year ago 16
i.love.her.voice.its.perfection
jimjam88 1 year ago 2
I am a devoted Callas-fan. Why? Because I can't live without her voice!
Dankbarkeit1980 1 year ago 5
I'm just a fan's opera, and I'm not know much of musical things, but I know when something is spectacular and touching for me, I mind it's when I'm reading, for example, and while I reading I hear music -opera and clasical music- and it happens that I am reading, but the music makes me put away the reading and hear it. and that happened when I heard for first time Adieu notre petit table of Maria Callas or O mio Babbino Caro, great, spectacular, unique!.
peque1204 1 year ago 3
but, there is a few "songs" that she aches the notes, and it doesn't sounds very well, so for me She was a great opera singer, but she isn't the better as says her fans.
peque1204 1 year ago
I agree she must be listed in the greates. But for me the greatest is Sutherland hands down. Callas struggles with her trills and her high notes make her vibrato do that wide thing. Sutherlands Lucia, her bel canto singing, Lucrezia Borgia the list goes on, are unmatched.
spizzell1 1 year ago
@spizzell1 In Sutherland's own words she said she would never again sing an aria that she heard Callas sing, because, " Callas sang it perfectly " .
hammer55292 8 months ago
now I can turn my pc off. Thanks Maria
happelleppah 1 year ago 3
amazing
shipcomesin 1 year ago
I know i'm not the first one making suggestions but i'll say: Although this is my all time personal favorite 'Spargi...', to me callas could never surpass herself as Elvira in I Puritani, more specifically a 1953 studio recording of the Mad Scene. It's not only a technical jewel but also a heart-tearing rendition. It's ten minutes of striking grief followed by small coloratura party ending in one of her best Eb's. I highly recommend it. It sent me places that not even her Violeta was able to.
tneprescintr 2 years ago 2
You're the first person I've seen make this comment, and I could not possibly agree more. It's one of the most astounding moments in recorded opera history.
Andante735 1 year ago
I'm glad. :-)
tneprescintr 1 year ago
Che pathos, che penetrazione profondissima del personaggio e come trasmette emozioni, desideri, tormenti, gioie, vita e morte...Maria sei unica, un mostro di bravura senza possibili raffronti , forse la Malibran chissà :M
federricoilgrande 2 years ago
In Callas one finds a truthfullness. In the vast range of expressed emotions, in all nuance which I think is the quintessence of her art. How can one protray so many layers of the emotional eb and flow of a role in musical drama/opera if one does not has what it takes to really express all these emotions to the utmost detail? But technique is of course the means to obtain it. Yet it has to be mastered, otherwise one never reaches that point. But there's also taste, what the part commands; truth
dajohnthomas69 2 years ago 2
Fantastic project and very good quality.
I think that Maria Callas is, among other big name who could not miss.
Putting aside subjective preferito, she brought us back the glory of many favorite opera, with its real dramatic and vocal sense.
If there is a ranking (which always will be accused of subjective and controversial), she deserves one of the first places, perhaps just below legends as Giuditta Pasta and Maria Malibran, who was heir to a mythical relic of their voices.
Alleeexoscm 2 years ago
Should have used a recording of her in the early 50's. Those are in my view a just representation of the Callas vocal genious
DanyelHawkes 2 years ago
33 years since Marias death and yet the support, passion. love and appreciation has not died. Look at how many hits alone on youtube.
I think that says it all really.
flickfi 2 years ago 4
Greatest female singer - MARIA CALLAS
Greatest male singer - ENRICO CARUSO
That's my choice anyway, and no doubts about that. This level of singing is more than about technical perfection and has to do with a certain naturalness plus a complex overlay of a whole range of emotive nuances. In this sense Callas and Caruso remain unequalled.
2notes3heartbeats 2 years ago 5
that's what Pavarotti used to say.
yglofmi 2 years ago
If you think her 1954 Lucia was amazing listen to her 1955 Berlin live recording. Most singers can't sing it as good as this in a studio.
juanjoauyanet 2 years ago 5
I love Callas, but this is not my favorite recording of her voice, nor her very best aria. THere are so many other arias recorded that are, I think, better representations of her voice and dramatic genius, maybe "Vissi D'Arte"? Everyone else seems to say this, and I agree, there simply never has been anyone quite like Maria with her heart rending intensity!
anoldnightengale 2 years ago 3
My favourit aria by Callas is Meyerbeer's "Ombra Legiera" ,from Dinorah.
I also think my last comment was misunderstood, because I really like Callas singing this role and this aria, I just think there are other recordings where she did better...
And I my word about Sutherland was also made, not with any sense of superiority, but only because when this video was made, this was the ideal aria to Joan, as Lucia is considered on of her best roles.
In Fact, Joan and Maria are Both my favourits!
soundslikeblue 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Unique! She's my favorite to listen to.
herring508 2 years ago 3
Of course Maria belongs in this collection, why wouldn't she. A "great" voice is far more than just the beauty of the timbre. A beautiful voice is nothing if one doesn't understand how to use it. Many people say Callas' voice was unpleasant or not beautiful; that is a matter of opinion. I actually like the sound of her voice just fine, and more importantly "how" she used it. For me, there are some operas that just do not resonate as deeply unless Maria is doing the interpreting.
Redboy4 2 years ago 6
It upsets me...of course, her timbre isn't as sweet as the normal soprano, but she does have one of the best voices. Flawless technique. Anyone can contradict me on that one. Her voice declined for one reason: mental distress. Mental distress (if one has personal experience with it, you can understand) destroys you physically as well as mentally.
CatalinaDM56 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I see all the thumbs down in my comment. But I honestly think she's one of the great opera singers ever but She's not one of the best voices!
yodavidnavarro 2 years ago
She should be no 1 of all time !!!
mr200club 2 years ago 3
Yes!
herring508 2 years ago
Thank God for Maria Callas!
Nikki6571 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
May she rest in peace. Pace, Maria.
gondorado1 2 years ago 4
It certainly is difficult, if even not impossible, to say who belongs to the 10 or 100 greatest singers. However, from what I have seen, names like Mario del Monaco and Franco Corelli are missing. Of course, the matter is entirely subjective.
Aetion 2 years ago 6
As to Maria Callas, who slept exactly 32 years ago (on the 16th of Spt., 1977), I think she was the only soprano sfogato of the 20th century. She was able to sing everything from Mozart to Wagner and from Rossini to Verdi and Puccini. IMHO Tullio Serafin put it right: She is able to sing whatever has been written for a female voice.
Aetion 2 years ago 43
There was no Sfogato voice of the 20 century. Callas remains the greatest soprano of the 20th century, nevertheless.
AuthenticFeirce 2 years ago
"On the other hand, music critic John Ardoin has argued that Callas was the reincarnation of the Nineteenth Century soprano sfogato or "unlimited soprano", a throwback to Maria Malibran and Giuditta Pasta, for whom many of the famous bel canto operas were written." Wikipedia and not only.
Aetion 2 years ago 6
@Aetion Wrong
AuthenticFeirce 1 year ago
@AuthenticFeirce What's wrong?
Aetion 1 year ago
@Aetion Sorry ! I was being stupid
AuthenticFeirce 1 year ago
I agree wholeheartedly... the exclusion of a name like Corelli from this list was nothing short of criminal.
Caribman123 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Her sound was world recognized. But Birgit N. was #1.
ManagerGuy1 2 years ago
I love Birgit, she had excellent technique, and a fantastic musician...but she had a weird lip tension going on.
CatalinaDM56 2 years ago
Nice and comprehensive of her representative pieces
akis1948 2 years ago
As an artist alone Callas would earn a spot in the top five singers of the 20th Century. But as an influence on the art of singing she may be number one. She redefined operatic singing and interpretation, and given that may be the most important classical singer of the century.
markhh 2 years ago 6
Among all excellent singers Maria Callas will always have her own place. I remember the appearance of Sutherland's Art of the Prima Donna lp's as a kind of relief but I never will denie Callas' unique position in the world of singing.
flon5flon 2 years ago
had the voice with a drama just in a timbre. How to express with a sweet, tender, "beautiful" voice the tagedy of Lucia, Norma, especially of Medea? Therefore, why ugly?
DjeddaPixie 2 years ago 6
I'm always upset, when I hear that Callas's voice is ugly. Why ugly? There are so much grief, pain, melancholy, passion, anger, etc. in her voice. I can't live without Maria's voice. I listen to it every day, it overturns my heart, brings a feeling of a bitter happiness - or a sweet suffering - I can't find a suitable words. I listen more and more and this voice seems to me the most expressive and beautiful, because it can express any deepest human experiences. Callas was a tragic actress and
DjeddaPixie 2 years ago 48
@DjeddaPixie I believe there are elements of harshness in this sound - her style and vibrato are inconsistent, and some sounds are even terrible!
Sorry ... but I had to be honest.
denidowi 1 year ago
@denidowi To Callas, the proper illustration of the characterization (especially in the case of Lucia) of grief or turmoil was more important than simply producing a beautiful sound. Much of the ugliness was there on purpose since, as Ewa Podles noted about her famous acting and theatricality, "It's enough just to hear her because she did everything with her voice"
musikphantom1881 1 year ago
@musikphantom1881 Hey, man ... we can bury inferiority behind whatever label/guise we'd like, but like many others, we are not necessarily listening to showmanship or characterization, we are listening for purity or beauty of voice and feeling
denidowi 1 year ago
@denidowi We are tired of individuals without the least understanding of what opera is all about, making comments here that has been said over and over. Btw I saw you 2 days ago berating RenataTebaldi as inferior to Deanna Durbin and Kathryn Grayson. Sorry...but I had to be honest.
mozzrt 1 year ago
@mozzrt AND ... ??
BTW, if you find yourself "tired of" life, goto bed ;)
denidowi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mozzrt I say the same to you as others: Read the actual Category again: it says Zero on opera:
It speaks of the "100 Greatest Singers" ... I believe the title is: that means from ANYWHERE! [Full stop]
The prob has been that opera cons assume they hold mortgage on real singing: quite the opposite - much is terrible bellowing noise. I listen for music, not bellowing or forced voice ;)
denidowi 1 year ago
@denidowi I suggest you pierce your eardrums as I think its full of cerumen n if you don't know what cerumen is then that's your problem1
ctogarrick 1 year ago
@ctogarrick Give me the cue : will you??
You know ... when do I laugh?
denidowi 1 year ago
@DjeddaPixie it isn't ugly - her instrument isn't a stradavarius - her technique is fantastic - she is like strattas and other great actresses with ability to move us because she inhabits the character - ie listen to stratas in show boat... bill, not a hard song moves you to tears...
DavidoffGustav 1 year ago
@DavidoffGustav I'll probably disappoint you, but I don't like Teresa Stratas. First, I don't like her singing, and I don't believe her as an actress. Sorry if I gave you the unpleasant feeling.
DjeddaPixie 1 year ago
@DjeddaPixie Well stated.I feel the same way!
citrussorbet 1 year ago
@DjeddaPixie Just ignore the idiots. Your comments and perceptions of Maria's voice are dead on. I agree fully. Bravo to you and Brava to Maria!
htshoward 1 year ago
@DjeddaPixie I quite agree, DjeddaPixie. I've never found Callas's voice ugly...quite the contrary. Out of the top 100, I'd say she's numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. There really is no close second.
ian1856 8 months ago
Comment removed
DjeddaPixie 2 years ago
Comment removed
DjeddaPixie 2 years ago
i absolutely adore her!
and for me, her and sills are my favorite lucias.
bbmt7dh7 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
dickshouse1 2 years ago
Early Joan Sutherland in Meyerbeer, Handel, and other congenial composers was unequalled; her Gli Ugonotti is stupendous. She simply cannot compete with Callas as Lucia, Anna Bolena, etc. but then who can?
billyguns2 2 years ago
nobody can compete with Callas in these roles :)
Lohengrin 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
poor fagot,Lohegrin's world is Maria Callas, a soprano that lived 60 years ago and was very discussed by the bad quality of her voice and her too many vocal flaws and her very short career.Lohengrin's page and favorites videos is very sad, is the mirror of a young fagot who lives in another world, very sad, pathetic
vergoti20 2 years ago
I see also that you are among the dwindling number of misguided souls who think it is still acceptable to use the word "faggot;" do you also still use the words "nigger," "spic," "wop," "chink," "kraut," "jap," and other insulting appellations?
billyguns2 2 years ago 6
Vergoti20:
Are you truly 52 years old? You speak and write as if your only 13, which is very sad.. If you hate Callas, go to another page then. Your the one whose pathetic
People can critique her "vocal technique" and the whose better/whatnot, but in the end its something deeper that appeals to the soul, not just technique or nice high notes. Callas was a great singer who sadly did decline, but who are you to judge her?
Are you an expert? I think not. I would love to see you sing this
CarmenMirandasHat 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oh noooo of course Sutherland cannot compete with Callas's Lucia missing all the Eflats and Ds since 1955, having debutes the role in 1952 lasted three years, Sutherland cannot compete having sung Lucia 225 times for three decades since 1959 to 1988
vergoti20 2 years ago
I see from your sarcasticv comment that you are one of the many fans who go to the opera only to hear high notes and judge a singer's ability based on that or how many times a singer sang a particular role; there is so much more to music than that, IMO Callas reigns supreme in musicality, musicianship, dramatic involvement, rhythmic integrity, and superb diction.
billyguns2 2 years ago 4
Sutherland remains for me the supreme singer of Handel and Meyerbeer, not Donizetti; her complete misunderstanding of portamento, her woofy middle voice and mushy diction and generally uninvolved or one dimensional dramatic portrayals in this repertoire rule her out IMO.
billyguns2 2 years ago
I agree Callas, compared to Sutherland, is the more complete artist. I also agree Sutherland's Handel is superb and her Huguenots quite a tour de force. Insofar as Donizetti is concerned, however, Sutherland's Lucia--particularly in the 1960's, but even in the 1970's--was a great achievement, combining splendid virtuosity and pathos. OK, the intensity is not at the level of Callas or Sills, but still exceeds that of several previous singers--Pons, Peters, D'Angelo--all of whom I like as well.
meltzerboy 2 years ago 2
Besides, Sutherland's diction is really not so bad in the 1960's. Her Anna Bolena may not compare to Callas', but her Lucrezia Borgia is beautifully and expressively sung, within striking distance of Caballe's. With regard to Bellini, I think Sutherland's superb breath control, pure legato, florid agility, and easy high notes serve her very well in Sonnambula, Puritani, and Beatrice although her Norma--excellent as it may be--is not quite at the same exalted level as the Norma of Callas.
meltzerboy 2 years ago
Unequaled understanding and singing of the Bel Canto style; her superb declamation of the text, rhythmic incisiveness, and deep and moving characterization of Lucia will never be forgotten. I'm in the minority when I say that this is her best Lucia, and best recorded too; she brings a depth to it here not found in her other performances, something deeply hurt and wounded.
billyguns2 2 years ago
The quality of the voice in this recording is great, however, that of the 1954 'studio' recording, conducted by Serafin, is just OUTSTANDING. Still until now, I think that her 'Spargi d'amari pianto' in such version is the best ever: every note is 'perfectly' placed, unusually smooth legato, incredible high E.
manyhernandez16 2 years ago
Callas was a great servant to the music she sang...she was a selfless artist...that's in part what makes her great.
Operafiend22 2 years ago
In her prime, she defined greatness in opera like none other.
chowds64 2 years ago
what 'in her prime'? greatness in opera is mental more than vocal.
velazquez2009 2 years ago
I can tolerate even like Callas in her vocal decline period (1960-1965) although I avoid to listen to her in that time... but I cannot tolerate even for a second Sutherland's middle voice wobble and ridiculous diction after 1976...
Lohengrin 2 years ago
I hate Sutherland too, at any time, can't stand her terrible face and sounds. just sound, no artistry whatsoever. When I hear Callas in 63 sing Butterfly aria (Berlin concert) it is glory past and she is raw and more imperfections. But she goes through it with a bite, you even then feel something of her tension. It is moving in a strange way. And I love her ah non credea 1965 (France)!
velazquez2009 2 years ago
what do you think of Natalie Dessay Lohengrin? Her Oh quante volte, Sonnambula or Handel?
velazquez2009 2 years ago
- I do love early Sutherland
-Dessay in her prime was the most fantastic coloratura soprano of the last 20 years. Incredible technique and beautiful voice plus she didnt start singing the Assoluta Roles (Bolena, Norma etc) as all coloraturas do. She was descent and musical
-Her acting is a bit dreadful though as she moves and jumps all the time more like a caricature and less like a real actress but over all her Scala Sonnambula and her Morgana are masterpieces of Coloratura singing
Lohengrin 2 years ago
Acting for her, as you probably know, is the most important part of opera for Dessay. Maybe she is very or sometimes a bit too energetic. But do you think her acting is weak because it is too much accentuated or do you object to her perception of her roles, too "caracaturesque"? She is so lively and so fresh in an other perspective.
velazquez2009 2 years ago
-I cannot deny her acting completely but I certainly do not agree with her and her fans presenting her acting as fantastic. She is the negative example of what Maria had said once: Never make a gesture onstage unless you actually want to say something with it (Serafin's lesson)...she is natural and genuine in comedian roles though.
In dramatic roles most of the times she is not natural, nervertheless her intentions are always sincere, the result.. hm... questionable
Lohengrin 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It seems as Maria was such a out of this world artist, I seems Maria saw in the character of Floria a cartoon witch, for the Paris and London videos Maria left us, she performs exactly like a cartoon witch
vergoti20 2 years ago
Ygor or brother of Ygor stop hiding your malice behind nicknames... we all have understood what you really are ;)
Lohengrin 2 years ago
I understand your points well and I agree, her comic side to me is so very generous and innate, but her dramatic roles tend towards being somewhat overdone, overworked. justification of a gesture in relationship to the music is wonderful, but shouldn't one also adapt gestures to one's own peronal tempo's and physical constitutions? overdone or not, it has tension and sweetness with Dessay. What do you think of her acting in the role of Ophelia? Particularly last scene.
velazquez2009 2 years ago
in general and from a vocal point of view, her Ophelia was fantastic, probably the best ever, as was her Lakme (greatest Lakme ever in my opinion) but her acting in the last scene again a bit misplaced... cant help remembering her touching her breasts all the time... what did that mean? ? I mean really..
Lohengrin 2 years ago
don't you understand the terribilità of love and the catastrophe of desintegration?
velazquez2009 2 years ago
i understand that a 19th century heroine is a romantic figure ;)
Lohengrin 2 years ago 2
yes, so well done Dessay! in all her "pazzia",
but glory to sublime, Romantic, ravishingly great Callas.
Callas' musicality is so highly sophisticated.
velazquez2009 2 years ago 2
Recent news from Greece: Young doctor (Lohengrin) is dead, apparently his naked body was found in his apartment lying down with only a string in his bottom and his computer was playing "Coppia iniqua" sung by Maria Callas
bonanplu 2 years ago
@ Lohengrin: let us not forget she(Dessay) was an actress before she became a singer. That is why her ''acting'' is often disjointed from the singing. Callas' never was. Acting- singing-technique-phrasing-style all co-existed in callas' art and all at appropriate proportions. that is partially why she in unrivalled
DanyelHawkes 1 year ago
i agree!! i liek some of her acting but god, what fuckin awesome vocalist. i dont like her bel canto roles, i much preferred her before her vocal dilemma. but sh ewas awesome in mozart handel and french roles
moghedien13 2 years ago
I do like Dessay in the bel canto roles t hat are suitable for her voice (Amina, Giuleta, the tom boy etc) which is the "bel cantian coloratura roles" but what I respect about her is that as all truly great coloraturas (with only example Gruberova) didnt start singing the Assoluta Repertoire with all the vocal compromises and transpositions and cuts with which usual coloraturas (Devia, Gruberova etc) "molest" the Assoluta Repertoire
Lohengrin 2 years ago
i jsut dont like to hear her now that her voice is unraveling. i dont liek to hear any great or favourite artist of mine undergo premature or ungraceful aging in the voice. natalie dessay post 2001 does nothign for me, just like callas post 1958, gencer post 1971, and even sutherland post 1975 do nothing for me really, even if they have done some wonderful stuff after those periods.
moghedien13 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I adore Lohengrin he is a horny gay doctor and he is outrageous quite hysterical opera lover.Lohengrin admits his adored Maria to have experienced a vocal decline in 1960/65.But Maria full opera schedule had ended in 1958 and her voice had been in decline since 1955, despite having been a too flawed voice, in her prime years that lasted only 1948/1953, she lasted 6 years.Fantastic technique!
vergoti20 2 years ago
vergoti20, your life must have been a frustration, you're a sad old man who keeps bashing people that achieved much more than you will ever achieve in your poor life. (and you also must have some sexual frustrations for calling that kind of names as insults)
Learn at least how to be polite.
Plus, even if Callas' prime time years were few, they mean much more than some artists' entire careers. And also this performance wasn't made at her prime time and its still a great one (her 1953 is better).
musicredshoes 2 years ago 7
Lohengrin can't tolerate Joan Sutherland after 1976, just in a special time for Sutherland where she was extrainteresting and many of her greatest achievements still were having to come, Trovatore, Anna Bolena, she was going only to retire in 1990 and all the voice was still there !
vergoti20 2 years ago
Not the most beautiful voice,and not the greatest singer,but the best all around singer IMHO after Ponselle and Musio. Dramatically she had no peers. Brava! TY.
paulostroff99 2 years ago
BRAVA!
jayala818 2 years ago
she has been called the greatest singing actress of the century. As a grown man when i first heard vissi darte from tosca on the famous de sabata recording it brought tears to my eyes. It was written during the recording session de sabata was not happy with callas with her vissi darte and had her in tears until she sang what we hear know.
citrussorbet 2 years ago 3
Quite right: Miss Callas is absolutely everywhere in opera, even now, thirty years after her death. I had the surprising honor to meet her briefly and accidentally while she was in NYC to give a master class. She was also a great lady.
Her voice is often lacking in beauty, but that is her voice. Her skill as a vocal actress and as a singer kept her and kept opera in the public eye at a time when that was important.
Dionaysia 2 years ago 8
Wow...you met her? I'm so jealous lol.
yumlemonjuice 2 years ago 2
For me her earlier recordings are astounding. The live ones in early 1950's . You have played other sopranos at their best. You should have included a recording of Callas at her best also. Not when she became slim but when she sang on the frame she had trained on. If you do want the thinner Callas, may I suggest the live 'La Vestale' or the live 'Andrea Chenier'
rorycampbell40 3 years ago 2
I only partly agree with you. Her voice when she was still heavier might have sounded even fuller, but later, when she became slim, she also matured as a woman and artist, even though the voice was a bit thinner than in the early 50's, it was still full-blooded and rich. I agree that she sounds better on the 1955 live Lucia, but this Mad Scene in my opinion she sings so marvellously that I seriously thought it was in 1955 before I saw otherwise.
corellithebest 2 years ago
Breathtaking - again and again..... There are so many good sopranos, but only Callas touches me so deeply. A Gruberova for instance certainly sings better in some technical way, but she leaves me totally cold...
andrecardi 3 years ago 4
Despite some technical flaws, I've read that her musicality was impeccable and that she was able to convey in her voice all the thrills, fiorituras and tempos written in the score. They say that she sang all that impeccably. And I agree with you about Gruberova, she leaves me cold and unmoved, while Callas moves me deeply.
corellithebest 2 years ago 3
I like to appreciate every singer for what they have to offer in their own right and my all time favourite will always be Christa Ludwig, but I am firmly convinced, especially after listening to all the Juliard Masterclasses, that Callas was probably the greatest musical genius of this century as far as opera goes.
moghedien13 3 years ago 4
Sutherland admitted in interviews that before starting blurring her diction her legato was flawed she also said her chest voice was'nt developted properly.Her middle voice was not very solid after 1962 it became covered and colorless.Beauty of tone,eveness of registers,trills and staccati have nothing to do with musicallity it's about vocal technique. For example,Schipa's vocal quality was poor but he was a much better musician than Gigli and Pavarotti.
cer1n 3 years ago
Technique is not all there is to musicianship; however, a singer with an excellent technique has at least better potential in expressing herself musically than a singer with poor technique. As Galli-Curci stated "If you have technique, you have the power to express provided you don't take technique as an ends but as a means to an ends." Legato and chest voice are also part of technique. While Sutherland may have believed cultivating the vowel would improve her legato, her legato was not faulty.
meltzerboy 3 years ago
Continued--Schipa's vocal quality was not poor. True, his voice was small and he did not have a wide range or ringing high notes, but his scale was well equalized and balanced, his tone was deeply colored, flexible, and beautiful, his diction was very clear, his sense of rhythm was precise, and he had taste and charm. Some of these attributes reflect technique rather than musicality, but my point is one cannot totally separate the two. The same applies to McCormack and Tauber.
meltzerboy 3 years ago
Schipa's taste,rhtytm and his charm is totally irrelevant to the quality of his voice it's about the way he used his voice.His legato was beautiful,his diction clear but his scale was not equialised properly since his low notes were atrophical and the high notes were strained he also lacked a trill.
cer1n 3 years ago
Schipa had a limited range, but what he had I think was well equalized in that there was no change in the quality of tone from top to bottom of his scale. He would not often attempt a fortissimo high note but his piano high notes were quite lovely. I suppose he lacked a trill but many great tenors did not have a good trill. Bjorling perhaps, McCormack, yes but not Gigli and not Caruso. Even some great sopranos lacked a trill, such as Muzio, or had a weak trill, such as Caballe.
meltzerboy 3 years ago
Caruso had a trill (check his ombra mai fu) so did Gigli(in Verdi requiem he sang some trills) McCormack and Bjorling .Although his piani where great technically there weren't flute tones like Gigli's and Gedda's.
quis178 3 years ago
I recalled Caruso's trill in this aria after I wrote my comment, and I think it was a good one too. I don't recall Gigli's trills but will listen to the Verdi requiem again. Thanks for pointing this out.
meltzerboy 3 years ago
Continued--Perhaps Schipa was overall a better musician than Gigli or Pavarotti, more restrained, more elegant, less melodramatic, yet expressive and passionate. But the other tenors still had musicianship. I'm not saying Sutherland was the best interpreter of the text or the most expressive or refined artist, but she still conveyed pathos, joy, and indignation in her singing, and used her superb technical skills to enhance her delivery. She was a tasteful singer as well and excelled in comedy.
meltzerboy 3 years ago