Merril & Gobbi Largo al Factotum Sing-Off

[Beth29252]

For interpretation, Gobbi, for beauty of tone, Merrill, when it comes to talking about who's better. Neither performance is perfect though, Gobbi's voice sounds strained sometimes, and Merrill's ends of phrases I agree could have been done with more care. Herlea, Warren and Milnes also do great performances and interpretations, and I have to give props to Tibbett too and to Bastianini, the latter in particular for interpretation and diction.

[italy6888]

i'm not an expert but of all the 'largo al factotum'

i have listened i find robert merrill the very best!

maybe a bit too frivolous occasionally, but then

we need not forget 'the barber of seville' is a comedy

[Hannayism]

you do talk a lot of rubbish Just listen and appreciate it

[bigus]

gobbi sounds horrible here. barely hitting anything. lol its sad actually, but funny at the same time worst baritone singing i have heard. he must be ancient here or just terrible.

[Chipsmongol]

Gobbis version is superior, by far.

[77Opera]

Absolument fabuleux!!!

[Mentor504]

After making a sensational outfield catch, Willie Mays was asked if it was his greatest catch ever. Willie's response was, "I don't rate them. I just catch them."

When we experience tremendous talent, all we need do is enjoy it. It's unnecessary to choose sides or debate.

Hey, life is short. Savor it to the fullest.

[bodiloto]

+ 10 !!!! IMMORTALI !!!!!

[DinDonDan94]

Absolutely and undoubtly Robert Merril!!!!

[crstioherz]

L'interpretazione di Robert Merrill è eccellente, mi piace la sua interpretazione...

Tito Gobbi è un grande Baritono prestazioni sono eccellenti tutti ...

[goldenthroat86]

Well, Merrill has been said to be the archetypal Italiante baritone...Gorgeous sound, incredible technique. And, as baritone myself, I LOVE him. That said, his Italian is not good, and he was never known for his profundity (musically speaking). OBVIOUSLY, Gobbi is superior in these departments. Its just that his voice is SO DRY...tended to straight tone and flat up high. Figaro therefore is not an ideal role for him. WIsh his voice had more warmth and beauty to complement his intelligence.

[34fgsfgsdtu48w7qtaqt]

Gobbi!!!! Merrill è poco espressivo e pronuncia molto male l' italiano.

[34fgsfgsdtu48w7qtaqt]

Ineffetti Merrill ha la voce più bella di Gobbi. Ma Tito Gobbi per me è un grande attore, infatti la sua espressività in scena è da fuori di testa e comunque la sua tecnica e la sua tattica sono belle quanto quelle di Merrill, ma Gobbi non è solo drammatico in Verdi e Puccini, ma riesce anche a essere Fresco, Spiritoso e con voce agile, nonostante Figaro non rientri nel suo repertorio. Quindi preferisco Gobbi per la sua espressività che Merrill non ha. Il mio voto va a Tito Gobbi!!!!

[34fgsfgsdtu48w7qtaqt]

Tito Gobbi tutta la vita!!!!

[tehen162]

Merrill.

[havetohavemusic]

Apparently there was once a time when opera singers had publicity photos of themselves smoking.

[cantorandopera]

There is no question Merrill has the better sounding voice. But for enjoyment Gobbi wins hands down.  It is fun and fresh. And his voice is just fine.

[1915fas]

I had a problem with the level on the Gobbi recording since it was lower and I had to press the phones to better appreciate him. Maybe I like Merrill more because he was just easier to listen to, but his voice is so much bigger and more beautiful.

[meltzerboy]

I wouldn't exactly say Gobbi's voice was second rate. His first recording of Tosca with Maria Callas, for example, contains some beautiful as well as expressive singing. It's just that his voice did not have the natural beauty of Merrill's. But Gobbi's technique was quite good, and he was one of the greatest artists. Still, my vote goes to Merrill, for his tone, technique, and artistry.

[izar1234]

I only meant second rate as far as comparing to voices like Warren, Bastianini, Merrill, Ruffo, Stracciari, Bechi, Tibbett and the like. And I disagree about his technique. His voice above his upper passagio (E natural) was always just a straight tone shove and devoid of any beauty.

[izar1234]

Well yes, opera is a complete art. It starts with the voice however. If one doesn't have that, all else is moot. Gobbi's voice is very medicore by great operatic baritone standards. There's a reason he's never mentioned in the same breath as Ruffo, Stracciari, Tibbet, Warren, Merrill, Bastianini,  etc. as far as operatic sound. His voice was second rate.

[daveydaveybaby]

Gobbi hands down. Found myself yawning during merrill's dire effort, thats not to say he doesn't have a great voice. Opera is a complete art, you need the whole package to be truly great, and Merrill, unlike Gobbi, didn't have that.

[izar1234]

I agree with Bradleyjenks. Some might prefer Gobbi's interpretation, but his voice AND technique are far inferior to Merrill's, especially above the high passagio, which is E natural for both baritones.

[bradleyjenks]

Yeah...ummm.... no contest. Merrill sings it better. Better voice, way better technique. What Gobbi lacks in voice and technique he makes up for in fluency and playfulness. Merrill could be a bit dull sometimes. Rolling out gorgeous sound but not being completely invested. Gobbi was more 'present' but simply didn't have half the voice or vocal security that Merrill had.

[mcgvideo]

If Gobbi is better than Merril, will someone PLEASE explain to me WHY the New York Metropolitan Opera opted to cast Merril in the role of the Barber?  Next, will someone PLEASE explain to me WHY RCA (probably the premier recording company of Merril's day) opted to record Merril's version of the Barber (used brilliant Met Orchestera conductor Eric Leinsdorf as well), rather than someone else? Can't explain it? I can. Merril is simply a better tenor. PERIOD. The Met knew it. RCA knew it.

[thebaron43]

HOW DOES IT HAPPEN that someone expresses a judgement on the art of two brilliant singers but mistakes their voice register confusing baritones with tenors ???!!! ? Leaving aside the Met choices of cast that certainly took into account a high number of variables, record companies at the time imposed to the artists exclusivity contracts and used the artists they had signed: That's why Tebaldi, Del Monaco - to say a few - records are Decca while Callas, Gobbi, Di Stefano are HMV/EMI.

[1915fas]

I have the RCA Red Seal 1954 recording with Merrill, Stevens, Pierce, et al.. It includes the libretto and one of my vocal ambitions is to learn this aria.

[Fozzymaple]

I must agree with the two posters who preceded me in commenting on this video, Gobbi is better by a landslide,however I personally prefer the version of this aria which he performed in the 1946 film/movie of Il Barbiere di Siviglia, when Gobbi was 33 years old, I think that performance was even better than this one.

[Franklessly]

You have to go with Gobbi. Merril overacts the part and seems to struggle with phrasing and tempo. Gobbi is fluent and has a better sense of his subject.

[wysiwyg248]

My vote goes to Gobbi without hesitation. Regardless of Merrill's high G's, I personally don't like the way he handles the ends of some of his phrasing. In addition, Gobbi had all of the atributes: stage presence, great acting and impeccable interpretation that make for the overall singer.

[Iareto]

They make for an overall performer. Vocally you can't even begin to say that Gobbi is as secure as Merrill. I'd take Merrill anyday (mind you he's my favorite baritone, ever so I'd basically take him over any other baritone).

[wysiwyg248]

Fair comment Lareto,

However, Opera is not just singing, it is interpretation and acting too. I've seen Gobbi performing (Merril only on Video) and there is no comparison. Check Herlea singing this piece, it is brilliant too. But when you watch it on stage, is like a tree or a post standing there. Take care

[Iareto]

Your comment is just as valid, but I disagree. The music must be served first before the dramatic side can be brought out. This is why students of opera study voice for years without doing any professional performing. They must be able to sing well. That said, Gobbi does sing passably. I do respect your opinion however and I actually do really enjoy Gobbi in Tosca! Best Wishes.

Iareto

[AlexSuciu]

now go listen to Herlea's largo al factotum ;).....still can't find a greater voice than his ;)

[stebro555]

wouldn't like to say one was better than the other. Both great but different!

[PromMex]

Both were great!

[izar1234]

Merrill in a landslide. His high G's are gorgeous, easy, round and big as a house and the entire range is very well produced. It sounds easy because it's the culmination of dedicated study. Gobbi might have been a fine actor and interpreter, but from a vocal standpoint, he's not in the same league as Merrill, Warren, Bastianini, Herlea, etc.

[blakemooney]

Merrill has a beautiful voice. He is straightforward, a highly professional singer. His sound is what captivates so many of his followers as it is pure and delicate, some may even say simple.

Gobbi, on the other hand, was immensely popular, a perfectionist, an operatic historian, indeed, a scholar as well as a teachers of talented and professional singers late in his career.

But I must go with Merrill, a man with just as many laudatory charms and skills and an edge with "sound."