To me they both seem to represent a different manifestation of depression, with Pavarotti's being the more draining, miserable depression, and Lanza's being a hysterical/ mad depression.
It is very difficult to compare, in it I agree, but really I like me very much, probably I had liked, to realize this comparison, that you choose two voices that look alike in attitude and color, mario throws it was a dramatic tenor, or lyric spinto, on the other hand pavarotti was a lyric cigar, because of it it is that probably the sharp ones sound different, for the push that does lance and native and ligature of pavarotti, thank you very much for your contribution, as lyric singer that I am
I heard the big MDM sing it on you tube in his house just marking and it was amazing and emotional when he opened up--- A voice of steel, heard his Otello in 1959 in house, was amazing in the role. Big voice and like iron!!
JB in Ballo live in new orleans in 1950 on CD had some of the best low notes I ever heard from a basically lyric tenor and he takes the low ones in the di tu se aria most tenors live leave out and his low notes carried even though it was not a big voice but was even from top to bottom and hearing live is the test not by what friend's say. I trust very few people as far as voice size goes so if I didn't hear them- don't know. Lanza, I never heard but he could have gone anywhere big names say.
@fergcurrie I heard both tenors JB and Pav. live but not Lanza so don't know about him. Early Pav. was not powerful. I did hear him alright in the Balcony in the early 70's. Later in the 80's it was much larger in the opera house and for a lyric was good size in the big Chicago house. I heard Jussi in 1958 in the same house but as the Duke, it was smaller then later Pav . JB had great low notes that did carry well but Jussi's was never a powerful voice. Lanza, I never heard live.
I guess the Lanza cuts are from studio recordings with a mic rather close to him, and the Paver cuts are from concert performances with a more general miking. This has the result of making Lanza sound fuller but if you listen to the orchestra you'll hear the analogous difference there also between the two cuts.
Pavarotti could blow your ears of at 100 yards but (I might be wrong) Lanza seems to rely on the studio for that sheer power. It's sad we can't hear them under the same circumsatances.
@fergcurrie: on the contrary, I have read articles from Pavarotti's colleagues in which they stated his voice was perfectly loud out to about 25 feet, then dropped off. By contrast, Jussi Bjorling's voice was not even that powerful in the lower registers, but his high A, B, and C cut through the entire hall. The same article states that Mario Del Monaco's voice was monstrous from all distances.
Alas, it does not mention Lanza, but there is ample evidence that it was plenty powerful.
Any way, Ive listened to both singers and I have to give the thumb up to Mario. Pavarotti is amazing and his voice is perfect but Lanza very obviously loved what he did and the music seemed to flow out of him like he felt everything he sang personally. If you ever watch him sing, you see it too. I think that's where the difference lies.
I've always liked Mario Lanza's singing. It seemed he could pull off any type of music with ease, but you can tell he's a well trained opera singer before anything else. It doesnt matter that he didnt sing on an opera stage other than it was a huge shame he didnt. What a waste, I think, I would have liked to see him on stage.... If I was old enough. ..... continued
I am a die hard Pav fan, but Mario's command of the high's were just amazing... Pav made it look effortless, but I believe Mario Lanza was the greatest....... I wish we had a studio recording of Enrico to compare him......
I'm not sure how one can compare a pop singer with an opera singer. Then again, Pavarotti did follow the same path in his autumn years. Although he maintained a modicum of taste.
Oh, come on! The matter is about the voice and the singing, not about where they spent the career. Pavarotti was great, but Mario Lanza had probably the strongest, the most powerful voice in the history.
why do these comparisons bother everyone so much? why is it so painful to admit that lanza possessed the requisite talent as an interpreter of opera even though he did not pursue a career on the opera stage? it is incredible to me that even now, lanza must still be "put down". can't we all grow up?
Thank you for your kind, insightful, and educational remarks. It's so nice to hear different opinions without all the degredation that usually goes with them. What a wonderful person to put together these dueling videos. Opera has ruined me for other "regular" music, but I can still enjoy MoTown on a limited basis. I'm eventually going to get through all your videos, and felt the need to write this note of warm appreciation for all your hard work.
For Me, while I believe that Pavarotti does indeed have a clearer and stonger voice, I believe that Lanza ids far superior when its comes to transmitting emotion through his singing.
Pavarotti, while a technically precise singer, doesn not transmit as much emtion as lanza is able to.
Both of course are great singers in their own way.
If I want to be wowed my an instrument, I listen to Pavarotti.
If I want to be wowed by emotion and depth, I listen to Lanza.
Have always liked the Lanza version a lot.. But, listening to this it is crystal clear that there is no comparison. Pavarotti's voice is much silkier and he hits all the notes one can hit in this aria. Lanza version is more dramatic in a way but Pavarotti is much much better. this is my opinion anyway. Still, Mario del Monaco (primarily) and Corelli are my favourites Canios..
Il paragone non esiste : L. Pavarotti, che pure era tutto meno che un tenore drammatico - verista, lo ASFALTA. M. Lanza = pacchianata commericlae creata a tavolino dal sistema mediatico americano.
La ringrazio per il commento Sebbene io non vedo proprio il punto. Non ti piace uno dei due potrei rischiare? E Lanza era veramente di grande talento, anche se un prodotto di media è stato, in gran parte.
@31122051 Sicuramente non hai visto "Pagliacci" con Pavarotti altrimenti nn potresti dire una cosa del genere... Se nn è dramma e verità questo, nn so proprio cosa lo sia. Semplicemente commovente...
Ciel !!! Nos artistes ne sont pas des "chevaux de course" !!! Ils ont des grands et des petits moments ... Ce sont des humains, et l'homme n'est pas parfait ! De toute façon, on est là dans le "haut de gamme", pourquoi ces comparatifs ??? Le chant est débité là comme des "tranches de jambon" ...
This is a strange comparison, as Lanza and Pav are two very different kinds of tenors (Pav is a lyric tenor). Not to mention that Lanza isn't even considered an operatic tenor except by those people obsessed with making him so.
Yes, they are different types of tenors. However considering that everyone from Di Stefano to Del Monaco have sung this, comparing a lyric tenor with a less lyric tenor is not so strange.
Lanza generally IS considered an "operatic" tenor because he began his career singing opera and the technique he used was an "operatic" one. Of course, he didn't wind up making a living by singing opera in opera houses so in that sense you are correct, he wasn't an "opera singer." I acknowledge that. Thanks :)
@302MarkVII Nothing wrong with this interesting comparison. And you must know Toscanini, who heard Caruso, said Lanza was the best tenor of the 20th century. Carerras decided to become a tenor after listening to Lanza, and Domingo also said he was greatly influenced by Lanza's singing.
It ain't all about taste and preference; there's good, better, best and bad. Pav is good, Caruso is much better and Lanza is best.
I will say though in some compisitions Lanza is caught singing lazily were tenors like Caruso and Gigli outclass him. But generally speaking, Lanza is in a league of his own, no one can touch his greateness. The man had the most magnificent voice in human history.
He sang "Vesti la Guibba" during a performance of "Madama Butterfly?" What a terrible opera for a tenor that is; would be extremely difficult for one to "bring a house down" as Pinkerton.
Two great tenors with differences that someone without much appreciation for opera can detect. But I agree with whomever said Pavarotti's voice is more open.
Luciano has more opened voice. Lanza takes too much closin' throat. Pavarotti is well-balanced actor-singer. Mario sings dramatically too much. He's not touchin'.
Sì, purtroppo, Lanza ha fatto poco opera "reale" e Pavarotti aveva certamente la carriera incommensurabilmente più grande in questo senso. Ma credo che sia giusto mettere a confronto le voci e personalmente penso che Lanza aveva uno maggiore. Pavarotti lo ammirava moltissimo.
Great work on this matchup. I certainly wouldn't endorse fat lucy on the grounds of acting or emotion. But that ringing tenor! Pure and unapproachable.
pav seems to me clearer and more fluid, more modern. Lanza is richer, broader, and to me more satisfying. But of course, we are talking about pure voice ... lanza was never an opera star. So sad that he got sucked into movies, but great to have the movies he made.
To hear Lanza sing Vesta la Giubba, Ave Maria, La Danza or Torna Surriento or so many others is nothing less than spiritual. I agree with operaofcalifornia. Lanza's voice is the voice of God.
Of course Pavarotti has an extraordinary voice, but truly no voice can be compared in range, emotion, sensibility, perfection of diction, beauty of tone to Lanza's
I loved hearing this. Although I absolutely love both Lanza and Pavarotti I would have to say in this recording Pavarotti sounds the better of the two.
For me it was definitely Pavarotti, and not just because of the superior recording techniques which brings out all of the voice. Pav sings like an angel. While Lanza is a good singer, I don't think that he is in Pav's class.
I never liked Pav in this role especially he is a lyric tenor and sang very well and with polish and taste but he was better in roles like Boheme and he was not sounding like an insane mad man and Like Jussi his canio was too cool, Bjorling live was better then on his record but it was in Swedish live for him. Lanza's available except on the radio show is sung in studio and the 1958 from "for the first time" film is his best for me.
technique wise pavarotti is indeed better. emotion wise i guess lanza would win it. power and beauty of voice on the other hand is too difficult to seperate!
No question! Lanza is the best ever!! His feelings are true, it comes from his heart, he f e e l s Canio`s pain, he really does. Pavarotti overdo, no sincere! Mario is Pagliacci himself, Mario felt always deep in his heart and soul, what he was singing about, that is the reason, beside his magical Voice, that he will never be forgotten, as long as love, beauty and human feelings exist on this earth Mario will live! Thanks a lot for the video.
pav. is very polished, lanza very warm with a darker voice, very different.-- the recording quality of course is better later, lanza's from the 1950's the sound is not of course as good. Pav does have fine breath control.
very interesting how similar the two were.I still maintain mario was and always will be the best tenor who ever lived.Lucianno was excellent but Mario could sing in English when called on,something Lucianno was sadly dreadful at.
No esta bien enfrentar a dos maestros como si fuesen púgiles. Las lineas de canto de ambos son extraordinarias, su interpretación de la partitúra es perfecta. Es solo cuestión de gustos. A unos les gusta el timbre de Pavarotti y a otros la coloratura del spinto, dramatica y con fuerza en los graves. Ambos eran grandes maestros y los dos han dejado un gran legado..
I go with Pav all the way. Vocal, emotional expression, and musical aspect, Pav magnifies the authenticity of how aria should be sung and Lanza lacks the refinement of authentic vocal technique and sounds rather unhealthy. One cannot be great in two different jenre and this is the reason why opera cannot be fabricate by even with great talent like Lanza.
"De gustibus non est disputandum." (There's no disputing taste. )
Lanza's Vesti here is one of the best I've heard.
Lanza had very good technique actually, he was classically trained; I agree his style could leave something to be desired on some of his operatic recordings but he did excel in opera, pop and operetta to a greater extent than anyone else I can think of, a difficult thing to do indeed as your comment indicated. Thanks for listening
I recognize the classical training he had and perhaps he received more academic and performance trainings than some of the well known singers like Di stefano,,,,,,,,,,,,etc and no question he has great talent. And Lanza should be commended for his contribution and his achievement during the WWII era.But Lanza had very little experience in performing the full production opera. Mostly he sang just arias in films and do to popularity.
And just add few words on his technique, he has perfect English diction and he does not italianate them when he sings italian arias. Because of this, his diction is clear but it causes strain in his voice and makes him sound more like a pop singer especially on middle range.
Yes but the point remains that someone who deals with betrayal and disillusionment in such an extreme and brutal manner has some very deep issues, like insecurity, extreme jealousy and uncontrolled emotions. I think Lanza portrays him perfectly. Pavarotti does well but the role technically calls for a heavier voice.
You are right for the hevier voice but in my opinion this is just becouse we are get used with this. I think that an other view point never is superfluous. This is art, not science, isn't it? I merely prefer more tender and elegant singing instead the loud and melodramatic one...
I'll say it again: I like Lanza but prefer Pvaraotti :)
Hmm, do you know which recording this is from Pavarotti?
He did the not so glorious I Pagliacci recording with Freni in 1979-ish, but had an excellent version of the aria recorded in 1973 for his World's Favourite Tenor Arias album.
Really? I just listened to a 30 second sample of "Vesti la guibba" from the "World's favourite" album you mentioned, and it sounded just like this to me. wow =P
hmm perhaps you are right but it sure sounds similar to me at first listen. but then I'm only listnening to a 30 second sample, perhaps if I heard the whole thing it would be more clear to me. =)
In response to arayshvli...are you out your mind? In this particular song, Lanza is at the very top. Other singers have good versions, but, none can compare to Lanza singing this.
I do prefer a live performance. Lanza was mostly a recording artist and in the studio one can do marvels. And he did. Big Pava did that on stage for decades.
This one isn't really fair, since this isn't really Pav's territory. Lanza has a tendency to oversing this one on some other versions, but he kills Pav, hands down, on any of them.
Pavarotti should not even be in the equation of who's best. He was alright for his time, but had he lived in the golden age of opera, he would have been second or even third rate.
First many thanks for this really great comparism. Great work.
I prefer Lanza because (to me) he has more soul and passion in his voice. Whenever I hear arias sung by Lanza it seems to me, that in the moment he sung he felt all actually in his heart. Pavarottis version sounds really good, but I'm missing this last touch of class. I suppose with the possibilities of modern technic Lanza would sound much better.
Lanza 100% ...there is only one tenor who could best Mario Lanza on this aria ... and that's of course ... Enrico Caruso ... no one could beat Caruso on this Aria ...
I like Lanza as well, performance and diction wise. Pavorotti had a much fuller voice (or so the acoustics make it seem) which is why people will choose Pavorotti. I like them both. but i think Placido Domingo's rendition is actually superb. his tempo, diction, and performance were all there. but i do enjoy the earlier works of Caruso as well.
Hell I heard Corelli crack twice in one opera in the early 70's not on a diminuendo though but he did crack and it was not a high note. I never heard Lanza crack in the small amont of live stuff we have but if he sang the way he did today in opera the critics would flame some of his singing and they did flame some of corelli and tucker back then. Today it would be worse. Lanza had the voice but some of his singing would be attacked by critics and some people go only by critics, like sheep.
Yes he did in his early met days he did the Diminuendo on the high B flat and cracked more then onece and I had it on tape for years but am not a Domingo fan so I never kept it, this was back in the early 70's but he sang well, as far as voice it's whatever you like. After awhile he did not bother to do it anymore. Tucker was smart and never bothered with it and Caruso did very well with out a good diminuendo also. Pertile had no High C but a GREAT B natural, SO HE ALSO DID WELL WITH OUT IT.
I have heard Corelli crack on a diminuendo live in a met brdcst. and Domingo in Aida and Bergonzi in Aida also and it is not un common but corelli did have a high C live of course but he sang the Di Quella live as a B often Most do, not pav or bjorling but later even jussi sang it as a B live. Hard to sing a C in it the way it comes. They all crack at sometime or other.
I was just listening to some of these again. It's evident that Lanza understands the emotion of this aria much more, his voice also suits it better. However, I did notice how much crisper and clearer Pavarotti's diction is than Lanza's here. Not enough to bridge the gap, Lanza's understanding of Canio makes his the better recording, but I just wanted to point out that some credit is due to Pavarotti :p.
Yes, Pavarotti always had very crisp diction. Lanza had quite good diction too though. Certainly better than, say, Corelli :P Although Corelli was almost another sort of creature entirely :P
did you get my email *bet's he got the address wrong :P*
Lanza did have very good diction, but in terms of clarity and beauty, Pavarotti and di Stefano leave the rest behind.
I did get your message, I had already heard the second and I'm preparing a message for you, I'll also post it on the Lanza forum, (once I'm signed up) as your interpretation of my words made me look a Lanza basher :P.
He he. No I know you aren't a Lanza basher :P I just didn't see on what basis you assumed he didn't have good 'piano.' As I said, he had a great one, the only area for complaint perhaps is his not utilizing more frequently. I will await your message ;-)
I said he never mastered piano singing. Mastery of piano singing to me is ability sing piano smoothly on any note in your range. Few tenors have ever completely mastered piano, di Stefano did and I think Gedda has done so. Early Pavarotti could do piano up to Bb/B, but not his C, I don't think he ever possessed mastery either. I would be very glad to admit that I'm wrong if you present me with live evidence suggesting otherwise.
Perhaps the word mastery wasn't strong enough. By mastery, I meant domination. The kind of domination di Stefano achieved. It was not at all an attempt to degrade Lanza's achievements, I had heard the Parigi o cara already, and that was sufficient proof of his ability to at least sing piano notes (and as you, say, good ones).
I understand better now. But really, I'm sure most people would not have understood that to be what you meant when you said "Lanza never mastered piano singing." Certainly he never 'mastered' it in the "domination" way you described, but as you pointed out, how many tenors really have? 1? 2? 3 maybe? Di Stefano was a freak of nature in his ability to do it, but arguably his overall technique was not good! So I'm not sure why you would point out that "flaw" in Lanza's technique. That's all. =)
I pointed it out because when a singer is as good as Lanza, Pavarotti, Tucker etc... there's not much else wrong with their technique, LOL. It's not a huge problem and doesn't detract all that much from the singer, but I was weighing up Lanza's strengths and his (few) weaknesses and thought it was necessary to point that out.
Corelli, Schipa, Gedda, Kraus, di Stefano and some others had complete mastery I think.
I've never heard Corelli diminuendo on high C (not sure about B either- the highest I can remember is Bb but maybe he could.)
Funny- the other singers you mentioned, I don't listen to very often (with the exception of Di Stefano.) I'm just not really attracted by their voices very much (as a rule) :P Someone else I would have loved to hear more piano from is Wunderlich. With that beautiful timbre, it would have been amazing. He didn't do it much though.
Perhaps Corelli couldn't do the high notes, I looked through my available collection and couldn't find anything higher than the Bb.
That's actually true for me too, Gedda and Kraus have two of the most unappealing sounds ever for my ear.
Perhaps Wunderlich was yet to develop his piano singing fully, or he did it more frequently live (not much live material available due to his early death, unfortunately).
What's interesting to note though, is that some singers don't use their piano singer later (Pavarotti substituted his perfect mezzavoce for a breathy falsetto in the '80s) and I don't *think* that Lanza used his as frequently later on. Piano singing requires alot of support and delicacy, must be taxing for a singer.
I bet all singers experimented with their voices, and then decided what was safe to use, and what was not. For instance, Pavarotti had a high E flat, but knew that his D and E flat were not reliable enough for live performance.
And as for suggestions, it would be interesting to have the 'sempre libera' duet done as you have done here. Perhaps Sutherland/Gruberova or Sutherland/Callas (hehe, imagine the bitch fights between the fans :D).
By the way, I'll say it again: I really want to make more of these dueling tenor things (see how they prompt discussion? :P) But I would like people's ideas on arias, duets, singers to use. So if you have any, *please* let me know. Otherwise I will be forced to keep using Lanza, who is probably getting tired by now. :P
I decided to respond here, I haven't gone quite in to the depths I was going to go into in my message, but I hope I have presented you with ample defence of my words :D.
Lanza was 37 here if it was the recording from his last movie. I actually don't think this was a great role for Pav. his voice was so lyric, like Bjorling in that way. Tucker, Domingo, Del Monaco where more dramatic for this and Lanza with his lyric spinto would have been a good Canio had he sung it in opera but we will never know.
Felicito por tan bien video; las comparaciones son odiosas, dice un viejo dicho. En lo particular, considero que Lanza fue insuperable en la interpretación de esta aria, y eso no desmerece en nada la magnífica permormance del gran Pavarotti en el rol de Canio.
I have no experience in listening to opera what so ever, and no dog in the fight.
But I prefer Pavarotti better, because I like the more intense/loud notes.
Mario sounds softer with more finesse.
Either way, they're both great. now I am hooked on opera.
gynecolog1st 3 hours ago
To me they both seem to represent a different manifestation of depression, with Pavarotti's being the more draining, miserable depression, and Lanza's being a hysterical/ mad depression.
lyon1535 1 month ago
To close to call, both versions are great!
gragrn 2 months ago
It is very difficult to compare, in it I agree, but really I like me very much, probably I had liked, to realize this comparison, that you choose two voices that look alike in attitude and color, mario throws it was a dramatic tenor, or lyric spinto, on the other hand pavarotti was a lyric cigar, because of it it is that probably the sharp ones sound different, for the push that does lance and native and ligature of pavarotti, thank you very much for your contribution, as lyric singer that I am
GeronteDiRavoir 6 months ago
I heard the big MDM sing it on you tube in his house just marking and it was amazing and emotional when he opened up--- A voice of steel, heard his Otello in 1959 in house, was amazing in the role. Big voice and like iron!!
SHICOFF1 7 months ago
JB in Ballo live in new orleans in 1950 on CD had some of the best low notes I ever heard from a basically lyric tenor and he takes the low ones in the di tu se aria most tenors live leave out and his low notes carried even though it was not a big voice but was even from top to bottom and hearing live is the test not by what friend's say. I trust very few people as far as voice size goes so if I didn't hear them- don't know. Lanza, I never heard but he could have gone anywhere big names say.
SHICOFF1 7 months ago
@fergcurrie I heard both tenors JB and Pav. live but not Lanza so don't know about him. Early Pav. was not powerful. I did hear him alright in the Balcony in the early 70's. Later in the 80's it was much larger in the opera house and for a lyric was good size in the big Chicago house. I heard Jussi in 1958 in the same house but as the Duke, it was smaller then later Pav . JB had great low notes that did carry well but Jussi's was never a powerful voice. Lanza, I never heard live.
SHICOFF1 7 months ago
Mario del Monaco.
prog112 9 months ago
@prog112 a perfectly valid opinion. :) he was a beast
ShawDAMAN 9 months ago
I guess the Lanza cuts are from studio recordings with a mic rather close to him, and the Paver cuts are from concert performances with a more general miking. This has the result of making Lanza sound fuller but if you listen to the orchestra you'll hear the analogous difference there also between the two cuts.
Pavarotti could blow your ears of at 100 yards but (I might be wrong) Lanza seems to rely on the studio for that sheer power. It's sad we can't hear them under the same circumsatances.
fergcurrie 9 months ago
@fergcurrie: on the contrary, I have read articles from Pavarotti's colleagues in which they stated his voice was perfectly loud out to about 25 feet, then dropped off. By contrast, Jussi Bjorling's voice was not even that powerful in the lower registers, but his high A, B, and C cut through the entire hall. The same article states that Mario Del Monaco's voice was monstrous from all distances.
Alas, it does not mention Lanza, but there is ample evidence that it was plenty powerful.
badpdx 9 months ago
Both renditions are amazing! Bravo!
gallantentry 9 months ago
wow - interesting :-O
:-)
Drakonurion 10 months ago
Any way, Ive listened to both singers and I have to give the thumb up to Mario. Pavarotti is amazing and his voice is perfect but Lanza very obviously loved what he did and the music seemed to flow out of him like he felt everything he sang personally. If you ever watch him sing, you see it too. I think that's where the difference lies.
dragontooth81 10 months ago
I've always liked Mario Lanza's singing. It seemed he could pull off any type of music with ease, but you can tell he's a well trained opera singer before anything else. It doesnt matter that he didnt sing on an opera stage other than it was a huge shame he didnt. What a waste, I think, I would have liked to see him on stage.... If I was old enough. ..... continued
dragontooth81 10 months ago
Lanza, hands down.
barryoderfer 11 months ago
eso de que lanza no fue tenor de opera si no al wikipedia.saludos
franjmm1 11 months ago
I am a die hard Pav fan, but Mario's command of the high's were just amazing... Pav made it look effortless, but I believe Mario Lanza was the greatest....... I wish we had a studio recording of Enrico to compare him......
HawaiianRedsFan 1 year ago
Pavaroti is great but Lanza is a legend
Kenshin22able 1 year ago
I'm not sure how one can compare a pop singer with an opera singer. Then again, Pavarotti did follow the same path in his autumn years. Although he maintained a modicum of taste.
nicksum29 1 year ago
Oh, come on! The matter is about the voice and the singing, not about where they spent the career. Pavarotti was great, but Mario Lanza had probably the strongest, the most powerful voice in the history.
heartsarrows 1 year ago
pav
lexie33023 1 year ago
pav > lanza always imo
bigus 1 year ago
why do these comparisons bother everyone so much? why is it so painful to admit that lanza possessed the requisite talent as an interpreter of opera even though he did not pursue a career on the opera stage? it is incredible to me that even now, lanza must still be "put down". can't we all grow up?
jgraif 1 year ago 11
Pavarotti is unbeatable.
MQ1611 1 year ago
Oh HO, very nicely arranged, sir. I was wondering how one would be able to set this up.
Veggieman87 1 year ago
of course pav is best !
yahm1000 1 year ago
Both perfect!
HenryMuldrow 1 year ago
ShawDAMAN -
Thank you for your kind, insightful, and educational remarks. It's so nice to hear different opinions without all the degredation that usually goes with them. What a wonderful person to put together these dueling videos. Opera has ruined me for other "regular" music, but I can still enjoy MoTown on a limited basis. I'm eventually going to get through all your videos, and felt the need to write this note of warm appreciation for all your hard work.
Anne
anneza5 1 year ago
@anneza5 :) thanks a lot
ShawDAMAN 1 year ago
Gentelmen, comparing again? Doesn't it belong to highschool years??
chaiter1 1 year ago
Pavarotti is the best. No question.
87165nick 1 year ago
pavs vesti is so so..carusos was a great vesti.marios vesti stands number 1
dmar5143 1 year ago
For Me, while I believe that Pavarotti does indeed have a clearer and stonger voice, I believe that Lanza ids far superior when its comes to transmitting emotion through his singing.
Pavarotti, while a technically precise singer, doesn not transmit as much emtion as lanza is able to.
Both of course are great singers in their own way.
If I want to be wowed my an instrument, I listen to Pavarotti.
If I want to be wowed by emotion and depth, I listen to Lanza.
Thank you for posting this video.
guardianr4 1 year ago
Mario, but you probably can't count my vote lol. South Philly here....very faithful to him and his music.
Romanini43047 1 year ago
Pav hits the notes far better and with power but Lanza carries the feeling.
DURound 1 year ago
Have always liked the Lanza version a lot.. But, listening to this it is crystal clear that there is no comparison. Pavarotti's voice is much silkier and he hits all the notes one can hit in this aria. Lanza version is more dramatic in a way but Pavarotti is much much better. this is my opinion anyway. Still, Mario del Monaco (primarily) and Corelli are my favourites Canios..
charmand79 1 year ago
First Lanza, then Pavarotti, repeatable
charmand79 1 year ago
Here's a sacrilegious suggestion: add an arrow pointing to which tenor is singing, while he is singing.
We're not all experts, and we'd like to learn.
Better yet: add english and italian subtitles, it will help more people appreciate the music.
Thanks for posting this and going to the trouble of editing the music.
chakani0001 1 year ago
Two GREAT ARTISTS ...
lukehusky 1 year ago
Il paragone non esiste : L. Pavarotti, che pure era tutto meno che un tenore drammatico - verista, lo ASFALTA. M. Lanza = pacchianata commericlae creata a tavolino dal sistema mediatico americano.
31122051 2 years ago 3
La ringrazio per il commento Sebbene io non vedo proprio il punto. Non ti piace uno dei due potrei rischiare? E Lanza era veramente di grande talento, anche se un prodotto di media è stato, in gran parte.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
capisci poco veramente
andyroma72 1 year ago
@31122051 Sicuramente non hai visto "Pagliacci" con Pavarotti altrimenti nn potresti dire una cosa del genere... Se nn è dramma e verità questo, nn so proprio cosa lo sia. Semplicemente commovente...
LedZeppelinFever 1 year ago
@31122051 LO ASFALTA!!!! Grande Luciano
MinialbertoRP 5 months ago
Ciel !!! Nos artistes ne sont pas des "chevaux de course" !!! Ils ont des grands et des petits moments ... Ce sont des humains, et l'homme n'est pas parfait ! De toute façon, on est là dans le "haut de gamme", pourquoi ces comparatifs ??? Le chant est débité là comme des "tranches de jambon" ...
Amitiés à tous ...
Francesca ...
francesca7564 2 years ago
voci fuori repertorio .
bodiloto 2 years ago 11
meglio lanza
andyroma72 1 year ago
There is an outstanding video of Pav doing this, can't be beaten!
Joncooke11 2 years ago
This is a strange comparison, as Lanza and Pav are two very different kinds of tenors (Pav is a lyric tenor). Not to mention that Lanza isn't even considered an operatic tenor except by those people obsessed with making him so.
302MarkVII 2 years ago
Yes, they are different types of tenors. However considering that everyone from Di Stefano to Del Monaco have sung this, comparing a lyric tenor with a less lyric tenor is not so strange.
Lanza generally IS considered an "operatic" tenor because he began his career singing opera and the technique he used was an "operatic" one. Of course, he didn't wind up making a living by singing opera in opera houses so in that sense you are correct, he wasn't an "opera singer." I acknowledge that. Thanks :)
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
@302MarkVII Nothing wrong with this interesting comparison. And you must know Toscanini, who heard Caruso, said Lanza was the best tenor of the 20th century. Carerras decided to become a tenor after listening to Lanza, and Domingo also said he was greatly influenced by Lanza's singing.
jhyounyo 1 year ago
Lanza is better!
AnryK2690 2 years ago
It ain't all about taste and preference; there's good, better, best and bad. Pav is good, Caruso is much better and Lanza is best.
I will say though in some compisitions Lanza is caught singing lazily were tenors like Caruso and Gigli outclass him. But generally speaking, Lanza is in a league of his own, no one can touch his greateness. The man had the most magnificent voice in human history.
crapfacejoe 2 years ago
It's funny because 30 years ago the comparison was "Caruso-Lanza" the latter having the advantage of the more modern recording methods.
I have to say that I love them all for their unique deliveries, and it's simply a matter of taste and preference.
HOUNDDAWG 2 years ago 3
Lanza without a doubt...sheeeer power, pure brutality ...Pav is just a pussy...
gobitz 2 years ago
Pav's voice is weak, again he fails to capture the passion in this composition.
Lanza brings the house down, nuff said.
crapfacejoe 2 years ago 2
Well not really; Lanza never had the opportunity to "bring a house down."
AUDIOPHlLE 2 years ago
Yes he did, at least twice.... he did do two "Madama Butterfly" performances in New Orleans.... haha.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
He sang "Vesti la Guibba" during a performance of "Madama Butterfly?" What a terrible opera for a tenor that is; would be extremely difficult for one to "bring a house down" as Pinkerton.
AUDIOPHlLE 2 years ago
LOL, true.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
Two great tenors with differences that someone without much appreciation for opera can detect. But I agree with whomever said Pavarotti's voice is more open.
brelfan 2 years ago
Comment removed
StrangerWithGuitar 2 years ago
Luciano has more opened voice. Lanza takes too much closin' throat. Pavarotti is well-balanced actor-singer. Mario sings dramatically too much. He's not touchin'.
StrangerWithGuitar 2 years ago
Very true davidcraig99, `Lanza`s voice is the voice of God`! I can only add Amen.
zsazsamario 2 years ago
Sì, purtroppo, Lanza ha fatto poco opera "reale" e Pavarotti aveva certamente la carriera incommensurabilmente più grande in questo senso. Ma credo che sia giusto mettere a confronto le voci e personalmente penso che Lanza aveva uno maggiore. Pavarotti lo ammirava moltissimo.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
... volevo dire " nonostante."
31122051 2 years ago
Great work on this matchup. I certainly wouldn't endorse fat lucy on the grounds of acting or emotion. But that ringing tenor! Pure and unapproachable.
ohstanmoore 2 years ago
Lanza is unmatched with emotion and deep expression.
babystinky 2 years ago 3
Lanza for sure.
FuckinJai 2 years ago
pav seems to me clearer and more fluid, more modern. Lanza is richer, broader, and to me more satisfying. But of course, we are talking about pure voice ... lanza was never an opera star. So sad that he got sucked into movies, but great to have the movies he made.
mmmichael333333 2 years ago
agreed on all points
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
pavarotti for me :O)
pianosauce 2 years ago
To hear Lanza sing Vesta la Giubba, Ave Maria, La Danza or Torna Surriento or so many others is nothing less than spiritual. I agree with operaofcalifornia. Lanza's voice is the voice of God.
davidcraig99 2 years ago
Of course Pavarotti has an extraordinary voice, but truly no voice can be compared in range, emotion, sensibility, perfection of diction, beauty of tone to Lanza's
pianist527 2 years ago
I think that this song is more fit for Lanza because this aria is made for spinto tenors. Although Pav is also good, but Mario wins this time.
AZo9jojo 2 years ago 2
I loved hearing this. Although I absolutely love both Lanza and Pavarotti I would have to say in this recording Pavarotti sounds the better of the two.
SuzettePSmith 2 years ago
magnificent editing!
ruffomaldito 2 years ago
Pav was great but no match for the Great Lanza. Lanza's voice was the voice of God.
operaofcalifornia 2 years ago 2
Oh please. Lanza wasn't a live singer. It's not even right to compare them.
Nater389 2 years ago
Comment removed
bodiloto 2 years ago
This is great. Both masters together. Unbelieveable. I LOVE IT.
amicushumanigeneris 2 years ago
For me it was definitely Pavarotti, and not just because of the superior recording techniques which brings out all of the voice. Pav sings like an angel. While Lanza is a good singer, I don't think that he is in Pav's class.
luvmuzik4me 2 years ago
you can really feel the pain and emotion in Mario"s voice. Pavarotti is amazing, but Lanza wins this time.
quietgirl77 2 years ago
Pavarotti all the way. Crisp, technical, emotional. Lanza is not as technical, somewhat screaming, almost hysterical.
Rokkoko 2 years ago
no contest you can hear the real emotion in lanza the feeling and passion makes me want to cry
tracieluvsg 2 years ago
I never liked Pav in this role especially he is a lyric tenor and sang very well and with polish and taste but he was better in roles like Boheme and he was not sounding like an insane mad man and Like Jussi his canio was too cool, Bjorling live was better then on his record but it was in Swedish live for him. Lanza's available except on the radio show is sung in studio and the 1958 from "for the first time" film is his best for me.
halavey 2 years ago 2
even pav would say, lanza thats because he knew lanza was the voice........
rouman7 2 years ago
HA meastro pavarotti but Lanza this time wins.
cbh66 2 years ago
technique wise pavarotti is indeed better. emotion wise i guess lanza would win it. power and beauty of voice on the other hand is too difficult to seperate!
TombstonedM 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
Swany243 2 years ago
No question! Lanza is the best ever!! His feelings are true, it comes from his heart, he f e e l s Canio`s pain, he really does. Pavarotti overdo, no sincere! Mario is Pagliacci himself, Mario felt always deep in his heart and soul, what he was singing about, that is the reason, beside his magical Voice, that he will never be forgotten, as long as love, beauty and human feelings exist on this earth Mario will live! Thanks a lot for the video.
zsazsamario 2 years ago 3
no! Lanza is the best. when he is singing, i start crying. nobody will sing like Mario. he is the best. even Pavarotti can't sing as Mario.
so much emotions, so much feelings, so much destiny in Lanza's voice... it's excellent!
LISUNIA17 2 years ago 3
pav. is very polished, lanza very warm with a darker voice, very different.-- the recording quality of course is better later, lanza's from the 1950's the sound is not of course as good. Pav does have fine breath control.
halavey 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
according to me here pav is still the best !!!!! as usual
thomassmile 2 years ago
very interesting how similar the two were.I still maintain mario was and always will be the best tenor who ever lived.Lucianno was excellent but Mario could sing in English when called on,something Lucianno was sadly dreadful at.
doug666stingray 2 years ago 3
Pavarotti.
Nater389 2 years ago
En cuanto al montaje de video diré, que está muy bien hecho y felicito al autor.
dppk68 2 years ago
Si ambos son maestros, sólo diferente. Gracias por ver y por su elogio. =)
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
No esta bien enfrentar a dos maestros como si fuesen púgiles. Las lineas de canto de ambos son extraordinarias, su interpretación de la partitúra es perfecta. Es solo cuestión de gustos. A unos les gusta el timbre de Pavarotti y a otros la coloratura del spinto, dramatica y con fuerza en los graves. Ambos eran grandes maestros y los dos han dejado un gran legado..
dppk68 2 years ago
I have always prefered Mario,s version, saying that i am a pavarotti fan and like most things he done.
Aneurin1 2 years ago 2
Lanza... Reason? More emotion. Which, to the best of my knowledge, is required for this aria.
likeprestige 2 years ago 3
Yes, Lanza brings emotions but you should listen to internal emotions from Pav, not just external.
steakopera 2 years ago
Luciano Pavarotti is the best, no one is like him, sharp and brilliance. perfect.
loveluciano1 2 years ago
I go with Pav all the way. Vocal, emotional expression, and musical aspect, Pav magnifies the authenticity of how aria should be sung and Lanza lacks the refinement of authentic vocal technique and sounds rather unhealthy. One cannot be great in two different jenre and this is the reason why opera cannot be fabricate by even with great talent like Lanza.
steakopera 2 years ago
"De gustibus non est disputandum." (There's no disputing taste. )
Lanza's Vesti here is one of the best I've heard.
Lanza had very good technique actually, he was classically trained; I agree his style could leave something to be desired on some of his operatic recordings but he did excel in opera, pop and operetta to a greater extent than anyone else I can think of, a difficult thing to do indeed as your comment indicated. Thanks for listening
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
I recognize the classical training he had and perhaps he received more academic and performance trainings than some of the well known singers like Di stefano,,,,,,,,,,,,etc and no question he has great talent. And Lanza should be commended for his contribution and his achievement during the WWII era.But Lanza had very little experience in performing the full production opera. Mostly he sang just arias in films and do to popularity.
steakopera 2 years ago
And just add few words on his technique, he has perfect English diction and he does not italianate them when he sings italian arias. Because of this, his diction is clear but it causes strain in his voice and makes him sound more like a pop singer especially on middle range.
steakopera 2 years ago
Mario is the BEST - what HE can express with his voice is amazing!!!!!! Mario evil??? Hey come on..........
Zibanejad 2 years ago 3
Prefer Lanza hands down, sorry pavlova.
likeprestige 2 years ago 3
Yes, but Canio does this not becouse he is bad but 'cose he is disillusioned and feels betrayed.
TraVoiBelle 2 years ago
Yes but the point remains that someone who deals with betrayal and disillusionment in such an extreme and brutal manner has some very deep issues, like insecurity, extreme jealousy and uncontrolled emotions. I think Lanza portrays him perfectly. Pavarotti does well but the role technically calls for a heavier voice.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
You are right for the hevier voice but in my opinion this is just becouse we are get used with this. I think that an other view point never is superfluous. This is art, not science, isn't it? I merely prefer more tender and elegant singing instead the loud and melodramatic one...
I'll say it again: I like Lanza but prefer Pvaraotti :)
TraVoiBelle 2 years ago
Exactely my opinion!!!! Pavarotti´s interpretation is okay, but Mario´s is JUST PERFECT.... JUST PERFECT !!!!!!
Zibanejad 2 years ago
I prefer Pvarotti... for me Lanza is so evil, while Pavarotti looks like realy suffering and sad.
TraVoiBelle 2 years ago
Lanza evil? Heh. Well I wouldn't say a character who commits a double murder is exactly sweet.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
Hmm, do you know which recording this is from Pavarotti?
He did the not so glorious I Pagliacci recording with Freni in 1979-ish, but had an excellent version of the aria recorded in 1973 for his World's Favourite Tenor Arias album.
I think this is the former?
Mooorhe 2 years ago
I believe it is the latter, actually. Correct me if I'm wrong.
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
I checked, definitely the former, although I don't actually own the Decca I Pagliacci, it isn't the same as the the 1973 version.
Mooorhe 2 years ago
Really? I just listened to a 30 second sample of "Vesti la guibba" from the "World's favourite" album you mentioned, and it sounded just like this to me. wow =P
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
Are you sure?
Listen carefully, in the 1973 one, he phrases differently and has a more ringing sound.
Mooorhe 2 years ago
hmm perhaps you are right but it sure sounds similar to me at first listen. but then I'm only listnening to a 30 second sample, perhaps if I heard the whole thing it would be more clear to me. =)
ShawDAMAN 2 years ago
In response to TheInquisitive4ever...I do understand your preference for a live stage performance, but, for me, I guess
it's just the voice that I need to hear. Barry Oderfer.
barryoderfer 2 years ago
Firstly im a pavarotti fan, but i have always prefered mario lanza singing this.
Aneurin1 2 years ago 4
lanza's recording is verry bad.
arayishvili 2 years ago
In response to arayshvli...are you out your mind? In this particular song, Lanza is at the very top. Other singers have good versions, but, none can compare to Lanza singing this.
barryoderfer 2 years ago 3
I do prefer a live performance. Lanza was mostly a recording artist and in the studio one can do marvels. And he did. Big Pava did that on stage for decades.
TheInquisitive4Ever 2 years ago
Dificil elección, ambos son magníficos, pero me inclino a Lanza.
marcoabv77 2 years ago
I think Pav's voice is really not suited to this repertoire at all.
LetItBe920 3 years ago
This is no contest whatsoever. Lanza, Lanza, Lanza!
LetItBe920 3 years ago 4
This one isn't really fair, since this isn't really Pav's territory. Lanza has a tendency to oversing this one on some other versions, but he kills Pav, hands down, on any of them.
badpdx 3 years ago 2
Pavarotti should not even be in the equation of who's best. He was alright for his time, but had he lived in the golden age of opera, he would have been second or even third rate.
crapfacejoe 3 years ago
And what evidence can you give to back up that claim?
Mooorhe 3 years ago
I suppose you know better than diStefano. What an idiot.
TheInquisitive4Ever 2 years ago
It is a shame that I only had the chance to see Pav sing live>I wish I could hear that others
daboasie 3 years ago
First many thanks for this really great comparism. Great work.
I prefer Lanza because (to me) he has more soul and passion in his voice. Whenever I hear arias sung by Lanza it seems to me, that in the moment he sung he felt all actually in his heart. Pavarottis version sounds really good, but I'm missing this last touch of class. I suppose with the possibilities of modern technic Lanza would sound much better.
Thicklizzie 3 years ago
Pavarotti's version is the best
darkboymircea 3 years ago
Lanza 100% ...there is only one tenor who could best Mario Lanza on this aria ... and that's of course ... Enrico Caruso ... no one could beat Caruso on this Aria ...
RobertoCruzMX 3 years ago
thanks for listening =)
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
I like Lanza as well, performance and diction wise. Pavorotti had a much fuller voice (or so the acoustics make it seem) which is why people will choose Pavorotti. I like them both. but i think Placido Domingo's rendition is actually superb. his tempo, diction, and performance were all there. but i do enjoy the earlier works of Caruso as well.
dormson310 3 years ago
Caruso was a baritone
aldo778899 3 years ago
Diction, power, integrity.
CLARKPEST 3 years ago
Lanza winner hands down.
CLARKPEST 3 years ago
lanza was 37 in 1958 after jan.
pearlmuth3 3 years ago
Hell I heard Corelli crack twice in one opera in the early 70's not on a diminuendo though but he did crack and it was not a high note. I never heard Lanza crack in the small amont of live stuff we have but if he sang the way he did today in opera the critics would flame some of his singing and they did flame some of corelli and tucker back then. Today it would be worse. Lanza had the voice but some of his singing would be attacked by critics and some people go only by critics, like sheep.
pearlmuth3 3 years ago
Yes he did in his early met days he did the Diminuendo on the high B flat and cracked more then onece and I had it on tape for years but am not a Domingo fan so I never kept it, this was back in the early 70's but he sang well, as far as voice it's whatever you like. After awhile he did not bother to do it anymore. Tucker was smart and never bothered with it and Caruso did very well with out a good diminuendo also. Pertile had no High C but a GREAT B natural, SO HE ALSO DID WELL WITH OUT IT.
pearlmuth3 3 years ago
Must have been the broadcast of 1976?
Mooorhe 3 years ago
I have heard Corelli crack on a diminuendo live in a met brdcst. and Domingo in Aida and Bergonzi in Aida also and it is not un common but corelli did have a high C live of course but he sang the Di Quella live as a B often Most do, not pav or bjorling but later even jussi sang it as a B live. Hard to sing a C in it the way it comes. They all crack at sometime or other.
pearlmuth3 3 years ago
Did Domingo crack trying to diminuendo the Bb?
Mooorhe 3 years ago
You should be asking if Mingo ever attempted a diminuendo. And last time I checked Pava did sing Di Quella Pira with a top C on stage.
TheInquisitive4Ever 2 years ago
I was just listening to some of these again. It's evident that Lanza understands the emotion of this aria much more, his voice also suits it better. However, I did notice how much crisper and clearer Pavarotti's diction is than Lanza's here. Not enough to bridge the gap, Lanza's understanding of Canio makes his the better recording, but I just wanted to point out that some credit is due to Pavarotti :p.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
Yes, Pavarotti always had very crisp diction. Lanza had quite good diction too though. Certainly better than, say, Corelli :P Although Corelli was almost another sort of creature entirely :P
did you get my email *bet's he got the address wrong :P*
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
Lanza did have very good diction, but in terms of clarity and beauty, Pavarotti and di Stefano leave the rest behind.
I did get your message, I had already heard the second and I'm preparing a message for you, I'll also post it on the Lanza forum, (once I'm signed up) as your interpretation of my words made me look a Lanza basher :P.
You got the address right.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
He he. No I know you aren't a Lanza basher :P I just didn't see on what basis you assumed he didn't have good 'piano.' As I said, he had a great one, the only area for complaint perhaps is his not utilizing more frequently. I will await your message ;-)
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
I said he never mastered piano singing. Mastery of piano singing to me is ability sing piano smoothly on any note in your range. Few tenors have ever completely mastered piano, di Stefano did and I think Gedda has done so. Early Pavarotti could do piano up to Bb/B, but not his C, I don't think he ever possessed mastery either. I would be very glad to admit that I'm wrong if you present me with live evidence suggesting otherwise.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
Perhaps the word mastery wasn't strong enough. By mastery, I meant domination. The kind of domination di Stefano achieved. It was not at all an attempt to degrade Lanza's achievements, I had heard the Parigi o cara already, and that was sufficient proof of his ability to at least sing piano notes (and as you, say, good ones).
Mooorhe 3 years ago
I understand better now. But really, I'm sure most people would not have understood that to be what you meant when you said "Lanza never mastered piano singing." Certainly he never 'mastered' it in the "domination" way you described, but as you pointed out, how many tenors really have? 1? 2? 3 maybe? Di Stefano was a freak of nature in his ability to do it, but arguably his overall technique was not good! So I'm not sure why you would point out that "flaw" in Lanza's technique. That's all. =)
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
I pointed it out because when a singer is as good as Lanza, Pavarotti, Tucker etc... there's not much else wrong with their technique, LOL. It's not a huge problem and doesn't detract all that much from the singer, but I was weighing up Lanza's strengths and his (few) weaknesses and thought it was necessary to point that out.
Corelli, Schipa, Gedda, Kraus, di Stefano and some others had complete mastery I think.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
I've never heard Corelli diminuendo on high C (not sure about B either- the highest I can remember is Bb but maybe he could.)
Funny- the other singers you mentioned, I don't listen to very often (with the exception of Di Stefano.) I'm just not really attracted by their voices very much (as a rule) :P Someone else I would have loved to hear more piano from is Wunderlich. With that beautiful timbre, it would have been amazing. He didn't do it much though.
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
Perhaps Corelli couldn't do the high notes, I looked through my available collection and couldn't find anything higher than the Bb.
That's actually true for me too, Gedda and Kraus have two of the most unappealing sounds ever for my ear.
Perhaps Wunderlich was yet to develop his piano singing fully, or he did it more frequently live (not much live material available due to his early death, unfortunately).
Mooorhe 3 years ago
What's interesting to note though, is that some singers don't use their piano singer later (Pavarotti substituted his perfect mezzavoce for a breathy falsetto in the '80s) and I don't *think* that Lanza used his as frequently later on. Piano singing requires alot of support and delicacy, must be taxing for a singer.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
I wonder if Lanza ever even tried to sing his top notes piano. Who knows...
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
I bet all singers experimented with their voices, and then decided what was safe to use, and what was not. For instance, Pavarotti had a high E flat, but knew that his D and E flat were not reliable enough for live performance.
And as for suggestions, it would be interesting to have the 'sempre libera' duet done as you have done here. Perhaps Sutherland/Gruberova or Sutherland/Callas (hehe, imagine the bitch fights between the fans :D).
Mooorhe 3 years ago
Oooh! I just might do that. ;-) Yeah, that would be sure to start some fires :-o :P
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
By the way, I'll say it again: I really want to make more of these dueling tenor things (see how they prompt discussion? :P) But I would like people's ideas on arias, duets, singers to use. So if you have any, *please* let me know. Otherwise I will be forced to keep using Lanza, who is probably getting tired by now. :P
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
I decided to respond here, I haven't gone quite in to the depths I was going to go into in my message, but I hope I have presented you with ample defence of my words :D.
Mooorhe 3 years ago
Lanza was 37 here if it was the recording from his last movie. I actually don't think this was a great role for Pav. his voice was so lyric, like Bjorling in that way. Tucker, Domingo, Del Monaco where more dramatic for this and Lanza with his lyric spinto would have been a good Canio had he sung it in opera but we will never know.
pearlmuth3 3 years ago
pavarotti was older than lanza by recording this aria.
the role recommends an "old" voice.
flimi 3 years ago
Perhaps he was older but not much older I don't think. Lanza was 38, pav may have been in his 40's.
ShawDAMAN 3 years ago
Felicito por tan bien video; las comparaciones son odiosas, dice un viejo dicho. En lo particular, considero que Lanza fue insuperable en la interpretación de esta aria, y eso no desmerece en nada la magnífica permormance del gran Pavarotti en el rol de Canio.
miradormex 3 years ago