This was recorded in 1961 as an appendix to Sutherland's first complete recording of "Lucia di Lammermoor". Fanny Persiani, the first Lucia, had also been the first Rosmonda and soon after the first performances of "Lucia di Lammermoor", she started singing "Perchè non ho" instead of "Regnava nel silenzio", as it showed off her technique to a greater extent. This practise became quite common, until Melba sang Lucia at Covent Garden in 1888 and reinstated "Regnava nel silenzio".
No one but young Sutherland could create such a breath-taking cascade of brilliant, secure sound. There was no one to match her for pure glory of voice.
Dame Joan takes on 4 high E by transposing the aria up. 3 of the 4 high E are sung in flights of coloratura. 1 high E she holds. The trills in this is astonishing. Sills sings this in a lower key. It's still wonderful. I think Dame Joan's voice is the epitomy of golden age coloratura when she recorded this. I was told Dame Joan had a cold during this recording section. You certainly can't tell. Her voice is as clear as a bell. I think she had the most beautiful voice in the world.
I think this is one of the early recordings that best captured her then silvery but lush voice. Amazing interpretation, so effortless, vocally seamless and full of energy and passion through the most pure vocal means.
one of my first opera LPs (long since broken) had this version on an added band. I fell in love with her voice then - the trills and breath control are simply magnificent!
la unica voz con sonido atmosferico......en todos sus tonos....................un ser unico..................una rareza en el canto.....................unica..........desde que empieza hasta que termina................no se puede con ella.......................
Sutherland sounds stunning...simply stunning! Sills has a similar rendition, and thy both bring this and many other arias to a top shelf NO ONE has ever been able to match to date! Others could only in reasonable facsimile version!
5.37 to the end is what sets Dame Joan apart from the lovely Beverly - power and virtuosity!!! At this stage in Dame Joan's career, her mezza voce and sostenuto were herbest. I agree that on the whole, Bev's mezza voce and high sostenuto were better, her "oh! quante volte" and Baby Doe surely demonstrate that!!! They are both wonderful, but for the sake of discourse, I prefer Joan's recording. As tklogan says: "Sills takes us to the moon but Sutherland takes us to another GALAXY!"
Yes! Just different voices and, including Callas, 3 of the most amazing voices we may ever hear in the same generation. How lucky we all are to have such wonderful technology for preserving them.
Glorious singing by the young Sutherland that can not be touched by anyone. In the year after her historic Lucia, her voice is at its peak in unmatched beauty. To this very day, it is untouchable. I also love the Sills' version. But Sutherland's perfect trill and huge voice really makes this the definitive "Perche non ho". I wish She had substitute this more difficult aria in her opening scene in some of her LIVE Lucia's. But we are lucky that La Stupenda recorded this in her absolute prime.
Both are stunning beyond belief in Donizetti . Ms. Sills gives the listener a bit more in vocal personality but Dame Joan is unique in opera. I love 'em both!
Ummm, supernatural? I think this is above anything possible with a natural voice. This is super difficult. And Sutherland uses a HUGE voice with perfect phrasing, trills and HIGH E NATURALS TO MAKE IT 10 times harder than Lucia's usual opening aria, I applause Sutherland to risk singing this very risky aria. She NAILS it.
Hey Lindoro, I find it strange when people fight over who is better, Sutherland or Sills, since I have always held them in equal esteem. They are different voices, but each is fantastic in their own way and the only two models I really have for my own singing.
Transposing can be important to ornamentation, and choices. For example, Beverly could trill in some areas easily enough, but not in others, so she would need to consider the key...if she wanted to include a trill at a particular point in the score. Sutherland's trill spanned an octave and a half, and though she used her trill a lot, it imposed no restraints on her choice of key.
I've often wondered why there was so much complaint about Sutherland's ornamentation. Any objective assessment of her ornamentation would show them to be rather modest and almost always tasteful. Now, if one subscribes to the belief that only faithful reproduction of the composition is allowed, I would understand the sentiment but that just ignores what Bel Canto is and what it allows.
Sills sings this with high D's. Sutherland sings this aria one full note higher than Sills. I think Sills transposed it down so she could put in more ornamentation. Sutherland has the brilliant high notes to make this better than Sills' version even though Sutherland has less ornamentation. Ending with a perfect high E is very impressive. I love Sills' too. But Sutherland's interpretation is definitely superior and more difficult .
Well, it basically is Lucia's cavatina in the French version, I don't really know how often it was used, nor would I really want it to be used instead of "Regnava" :)!
I agree, but another thing that sets them apart is the trill. Sutherland's was a natural and beautiful part of her voice, she had it as a girl, and she never needed to work on it.
I actually remember reading somewhere that the original Lucia, Tacchinardi-Persiani, asked Donizetti to include this cavatina from "Rosmonda" which she also premiered. Suprisingly, I find that this cavatina works more in the French version, rather than the Italian.
She included several trills in I Masnadieri. Several in the show piece aria " Tu del mio Carlo...Carlo Vive!" Near as I know she never trilled in the lower register, but would trill in the lower-middle register. Her trill encompassed an octave and a half for sure. Two octaves I'm not so sure about.
So sad this breath-taking example of song is marred by such irrelevant argument. Sutherland, here so young and fresh, proves that her instrument had no peers.
@OperaBR seriously, it gets on my nerves when people say that real bel canto singers "don't sing with emotion" or "don't act". it's called subtly and control. portraying emotion does not mean you need to pump chest notes, disregard technique and sing like a neurotic mess. whatever, some people just aren't sophisticated enough to appreciate Dame Joan lol
What was the trill Dame Joan used in Masnadieri? Was it an E? Knowing that she has trilled on high C many times in "Tales of Hoffman" as Olympia, and the trill on high Db in "Sempre Libera", she may well have almost a 2 octave trilling potential.
We are so fortunate that Decca/London recorded Joan Sutherland in many of her great roles when she was in her prime - by the 70's the voice had darkened and although her diction might have improved, the sheer brilliance unmatched by any other singer, probably in all history, had been compromised by a more "matronly" sound which was unsuitable for many of the roles she undertook.
Plus, to be honest, where do you exactly see "the music" in this aria? It's a classical sentimental piece, I mean even the opening recitative is a bit too sugary (and with a number of written high notes). Donizetti accomplishes much here but he was capable of so much more. Moreover, I didn't even realize that Donizetti was considered "trashy" :). A talented composer who, like any other, had his triumphs and fiascos :).
Why do people keep comparing Sutherland to Sills . Sills is just not in the same category as La Stupenda . One is a good singer the other is the greatest singer in the world. There as never been a voice as of yet to equal Sutherland.
I think it depends on exactly what you're comparing: virtuosity, technique, interpretation, diction, sheer timbre, etc. I think they aren't comparable because they have very different voices, but I understand why comparisons can be made. As a point of comparison I suppose I prefer Sutherland's technical prowess in Traviata over Sills, but one moment of watching the onstage performance of both leaves me spellbound by Sills beyond compare. Similarly, Sills' diction and pathos are often without peer (well, but then there's Callas who kind of OWNED the phrasing game).
In all Sills is always found wanting. As Placido Doming says of Sutherland in his bioghraphy "she can out sing anyone" . The great Luciano Pavarotti called Sutherland "the voice of the century" you cannot compare Sills to Sutherland. In her prime there is no one that she could not outsing.
A writer in an article in Opera News stated he thought on record Sills and Sutherland were close ( admittedly I don't agree - even on record I think Joan was vastly superior) but live Sills could not compete with Sutherland do to immense size of Joan's voice.
I've always loved Sills' voice too, but her over-orrnamentation of her bel canto roles has never impressed me. Sutherland's ornamentations were always simpler and more tasteful, IMO; we can thank Bonynge for that. Plus, Dame Joan's virtuosic technique has never been surpassed. And her voice was larger; just ask anyone who's heard them both live. I love them both, but Sutherland will always reign supreme in this repertoire.
My comment wasn't clear, The writer's view point was that live Sills could not compete due to the "immense" (his word term) size of JS' voice. I heard them both live once but in very different theaters; Joan's voice sounded vastly bigger.
Early in the history of Lucia di Lammermoor this aria often replaced "Regnava nel silenzio" and in a translation it is this one which appears in Lucie de Lammermoor, Donizetti's french adaptation. May be you've heard the cabaletta by Lily Pons since she interpolated it in La Fille du Régiment.
I also prefer this version. To me it also seems "purer" and not done in a "show-off" mode simply to exhibit extreme talent. It is sung perfectly. (The flute part is outstanding.)
This is really impressive. Too much portamenti for my taste at times. I do prefer the Sills interpretation a bit more. Sutherland impresses me, but doesn't excite me. I am not saying that this is bad by any stretch of the imagination. I just prefer Sills here. However, as the biggest Sills fan on the planet, let's face something! As spectacular as our Bev was! She was a technical marvel. However, at her best Sutherland comes as close to technical perfection as maybe any soprano ever did.
+John Mitchell I vividly remember this aria from the LP edition of Sutherland's first Lucia. I wonder why it was removed from the CD edition, which somehow feels incomplete without it. This is first-rate singing, and sheds an interesting light on the opera's performance history.
I absolutely LOVE all her recordings and live performances ! I use them daily with my students to show them what bad diction is. Singing on ONE pseudo-fits-all vowel and ONE consonant « W » is not good singing. Of course it makes it a lot easier when you ignore the words. But it is totally unacceptable.
Sutherland's voice could be described as "covered" but Sills had a voice that was also described as "white". I would disagree that there is anything tenative about this at all...very secure and projected well.
Thank you for posting this version too. I lean towards Sills as my preferred version on this occasion, not because I don't appreciate the stunningly magnificent Sutherland in her prime, but I find that Sills offers more characterization and expression. This is not the greatest aria it is true but Sills finds a warmth which communicates to me . However I would rather not choose between them so please can I keep both? Of course you will say yes generous Lindoro!
Arguably, the part of Rosmonda is a bit of a "canary" role: composed for Tacchinardi-Persiani, it's a rather lightweight dramatically part with no real development throughout the opera, she stays an ingenue. Moreover, most of her music IS about coloratura: she spends most of the opera up the staff and in ornamentation. It's a great credit to Fleming's talent that she managed to do so much with the role but the latter isn't Andromache or Beatrice, to name just a few examples.
I like Sutherland, but the Sills version is so much lighter and more exciting. This sounds covered and tentative in comparison. The several obvious recording splices don't help.
Singers have been transposing arias to better suit their voices for centuries. Sills transposing would not effect her ornamentation. The key one sings in does not change the vocal requirements of the score. Sutherland's is only more difficult in terms of range.
Sliding around notes was just one aspect of her terrible singing technique. The term « mannered moaning » is excellent to describe her singing. Maybe « embellished gargling » would be another good one. Obviously, many people liked it since she sang for 40 years …. But unfortunately that was 30 years too many!
i challenge anyone who thinks maria callas was a "mezzo with a forced top" to listen to pre 1955 recordings. Just because callas had he amazing technical ability to project full bodied sounds, doesnt make her a Mezzo and just because she could extend these sounds throughout her register, doesnt make them forced. In her prime Callas neve had "Fluffy head tones" nor did any of her register above the high C mixe with "whistle tones" Callas never relied on those abnormalities to sing.
One could almost believe she was beautiful from this photo. (However she should never have appeared onstage later as Olympia, the 'doll'.) With regard to whom is greater, I give Sutherland and Pavarotti credit as the greatest due to their overall versatility, but I place Roberta Peters and Juan Diego Florez above all opera singers for the sheer beauty of their singing.
Wow. Body-shaming at its worst. Joan sang the doll better than anyone. Yes she was big with strong looks, but as Pavarotti explained she therefore had the ideal physique to sing like no one else could.
This aria is not consistently good. Great in parts, but tentative and forced in others. And what´s with that strained high note, can no one hear it? The problem I have with Sutherland is that she was so worried about producing perfect tones all the time that she rendered her singing ultimately pointless and boring. And try spotting a consonant in her singing, good luck on that one. No drama, just pretty sounds.
This was recorded in 1961 as an appendix to Sutherland's first complete recording of "Lucia di Lammermoor". Fanny Persiani, the first Lucia, had also been the first Rosmonda and soon after the first performances of "Lucia di Lammermoor", she started singing "Perchè non ho" instead of "Regnava nel silenzio", as it showed off her technique to a greater extent. This practise became quite common, until Melba sang Lucia at Covent Garden in 1888 and reinstated "Regnava nel silenzio".
No one but young Sutherland could create such a breath-taking cascade of brilliant, secure sound. There was no one to match her for pure glory of voice.
I can't fight the tears here. The beauty is too great.
That is simply the greatest voice in the world singing gloriously
Glorious in every way! george prentice
me gusta tu forma de sentir.................
Dame Joan takes on 4 high E by transposing the aria up. 3 of the 4 high E are sung in flights of coloratura. 1 high E she holds. The trills in this is astonishing. Sills sings this in a lower key. It's still wonderful. I think Dame Joan's voice is the epitomy of golden age coloratura when she recorded this. I was told Dame Joan had a cold during this recording section. You certainly can't tell. Her voice is as clear as a bell. I think she had the most beautiful voice in the world.
Couldn't agree more.
Well said and totally agree with your words.
GRANDISSIMA JOAN
I think this is one of the early recordings that best captured her then silvery but lush voice. Amazing interpretation, so effortless, vocally seamless and full of energy and passion through the most pure vocal means.
one of my first opera LPs (long since broken) had this version on an added band. I fell in love with her voice then - the trills and breath control are simply magnificent!
la unica voz con sonido atmosferico......en todos sus tonos....................un ser unico..................una rareza en el canto.....................unica..........desde que empieza hasta que termina................no se puede con ella.......................
Sutherland sounds stunning...simply stunning! Sills has a similar rendition, and thy both bring this and many other arias to a top shelf NO ONE has ever been able to match to date! Others could only in reasonable facsimile version!
5.37 to the end is what sets Dame Joan apart from the lovely Beverly - power and virtuosity!!! At this stage in Dame Joan's career, her mezza voce and sostenuto were herbest. I agree that on the whole, Bev's mezza voce and high sostenuto were better, her "oh! quante volte" and Baby Doe surely demonstrate that!!! They are both wonderful, but for the sake of discourse, I prefer Joan's recording. As tklogan says: "Sills takes us to the moon but Sutherland takes us to another GALAXY!"
Yes! Just different voices and, including Callas, 3 of the most amazing voices we may ever hear in the same generation. How lucky we all are to have such wonderful technology for preserving them.
Glorious singing by the young Sutherland that can not be touched by anyone. In the year after her historic Lucia, her voice is at its peak in unmatched beauty. To this very day, it is untouchable.
I also love the Sills' version. But Sutherland's perfect trill and huge voice really makes this the definitive "Perche non ho".
I wish She had substitute this more difficult aria in her opening scene in some of her LIVE Lucia's.
But we are lucky that La Stupenda recorded this in her absolute prime.
Simply GORGEOUS thank you
Sublime! The one and only Joan Sutherland.
Both are stunning beyond belief in Donizetti . Ms. Sills gives the listener a bit more in vocal personality but Dame Joan is unique in opera. I love 'em both!
Non sono in grado di fare paragoni, ma qui canta la Stupenda... stupendamente
Totally!!! Great analogy. Describes it perfectly :)
Amazing ! really in vocal terms who can compare with Dame Joan in her prime ...and what a fantastic career it was!
God bless her.
Ummm, supernatural? I think this is above anything possible with a natural voice.
This is super difficult. And Sutherland uses a HUGE voice with perfect phrasing, trills and HIGH E NATURALS TO MAKE IT 10 times harder than Lucia's usual opening aria,
I applause Sutherland to risk singing this very risky aria. She NAILS it.
Magnificent.
Hey Lindoro, I find it strange when people fight over who is better, Sutherland or Sills, since I have always held them in equal esteem. They are different voices, but each is fantastic in their own way and the only two models I really have for my own singing.
THe greatest!
divina.
Transposing can be important to ornamentation, and choices. For example, Beverly could trill in some areas easily enough, but not in others, so she would need to consider the key...if she wanted to include a trill at a particular point in the score. Sutherland's trill spanned an octave and a half, and though she used her trill a lot, it imposed no restraints on her choice of key.
ottima.
Brava
I've often wondered why there was so much complaint about Sutherland's ornamentation. Any objective assessment of her ornamentation would show them to be rather modest and almost always tasteful. Now, if one subscribes to the belief that only faithful reproduction of the composition is allowed, I would understand the sentiment but that just ignores what Bel Canto is and what it allows.
Sills sings this with high D's. Sutherland sings this aria one full note higher than Sills.
I think Sills transposed it down so she could put in more ornamentation.
Sutherland has the brilliant high notes to make this better than Sills' version even though Sutherland has less ornamentation.
Ending with a perfect high E is very impressive. I love Sills' too. But Sutherland's interpretation is definitely superior and more difficult .
Well, it basically is Lucia's cavatina in the French version, I don't really know how often it was used, nor would I really want it to be used instead of "Regnava" :)!
I agree, but another thing that sets them apart is the trill. Sutherland's was a natural and beautiful part of her voice, she had it as a girl, and she never needed to work on it.
What an unusual recording.
There may be a more beautiful sound in heaven, but not on this earth.
Hako2004 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Well said.
I actually remember reading somewhere that the original Lucia, Tacchinardi-Persiani, asked Donizetti to include this cavatina from "Rosmonda" which she also premiered. Suprisingly, I find that this cavatina works more in the French version, rather than the Italian.
La Stupenda ! Sublime
Para este repertorio era única. Una de las grandes del siglo XX.
If you'll notice, I was talking about the role of Rosmonda itself, rather than belcanto in general.
increíble................pero cierto gracias a todo el universo
Bloody brilliant! But THIS replaced 'Regnava nel silenzio'?
She included several trills in I Masnadieri. Several in the show piece aria " Tu del mio Carlo...Carlo Vive!" Near as I know she never trilled in the lower register, but would trill in the lower-middle register. Her trill encompassed an octave and a half for sure. Two octaves I'm not so sure about.
So sad this breath-taking example of song is marred by such irrelevant argument. Sutherland, here so young and fresh, proves that her instrument had no peers.
what is the orginal key of this aria and cabelleta because sills had the high ds ringing through out this
@OperaBR
seriously, it gets on my nerves when people say that real bel canto singers "don't sing with emotion" or "don't act". it's called subtly and control. portraying emotion does not mean you need to pump chest notes, disregard technique and sing like a neurotic mess. whatever, some people just aren't sophisticated enough to appreciate Dame Joan lol
Assurda❤❤❤❤❤❤
What was the trill Dame Joan used in Masnadieri? Was it an E? Knowing that she has trilled on high C many times in "Tales of Hoffman" as Olympia, and the trill on high Db in "Sempre Libera", she may well have almost a 2 octave trilling potential.
We are so fortunate that Decca/London recorded Joan Sutherland in many of her great roles when she was in her prime - by the 70's the voice had darkened and although her diction might have improved, the sheer brilliance unmatched by any other singer, probably in all history, had been compromised by a more "matronly" sound which was unsuitable for many of the roles she undertook.
Plus, to be honest, where do you exactly see "the music" in this aria? It's a classical sentimental piece, I mean even the opening recitative is a bit too sugary (and with a number of written high notes). Donizetti accomplishes much here but he was capable of so much more. Moreover, I didn't even realize that Donizetti was considered "trashy" :). A talented composer who, like any other, had his triumphs and fiascos :).
Interesante
Interessante
I meant: "I wouldn't call it". Damn typos :P!
and no, my previous comment has NOTHING TO DO WITH JOAN OR THIS VIDEO. Concerning the vid, i think Joan sang very well here lol 5 stars for sure
@DanyelHawkes Nothing abnormal about whistle register.
Listening to it for the 4th time in 4 days .. so was the rest of ROSAMONDA so awful that we don't have it nowadays?
Kurt Ganzl I believe the complete opera is on TH-cam sung by another great Australian having much success in particular, Europe: Jessica Pratt.
Why do people keep comparing Sutherland to Sills . Sills is just not in the same category as La Stupenda . One is a good singer the other is the greatest singer in the world. There as never been a voice as of yet to equal Sutherland.
I think it depends on exactly what you're comparing: virtuosity, technique, interpretation, diction, sheer timbre, etc. I think they aren't comparable because they have very different voices, but I understand why comparisons can be made. As a point of comparison I suppose I prefer Sutherland's technical prowess in Traviata over Sills, but one moment of watching the onstage performance of both leaves me spellbound by Sills beyond compare. Similarly, Sills' diction and pathos are often without peer (well, but then there's Callas who kind of OWNED the phrasing game).
In all Sills is always found wanting. As Placido Doming says of Sutherland in his bioghraphy "she can out
sing anyone" . The great Luciano Pavarotti called Sutherland "the voice of the century" you cannot compare Sills to Sutherland. In her prime there is no one that she could not outsing.
A writer in an article in Opera News stated he thought on record Sills and Sutherland were close ( admittedly I don't agree - even on record I think Joan was vastly superior) but live Sills could not compete with Sutherland do to immense size of Joan's voice.
I've always loved Sills' voice too, but her over-orrnamentation of her bel canto roles has never impressed me. Sutherland's ornamentations were always simpler and more tasteful, IMO; we can thank Bonynge for that. Plus, Dame Joan's virtuosic technique has never been surpassed. And her voice was larger; just ask anyone who's heard them both live. I love them both, but Sutherland will always reign supreme in this repertoire.
My comment wasn't clear, The writer's view point was that live Sills could not compete due to the "immense" (his word term) size of JS' voice. I heard them both live once but in very different theaters; Joan's voice sounded vastly bigger.
Why is the cabaletta so immediately recognizable when the opera is so obscure, did he use the tune in another opera?
Early in the history of Lucia di Lammermoor this aria often replaced "Regnava nel silenzio" and in a translation it is this one which appears in Lucie de Lammermoor, Donizetti's french adaptation. May be you've heard the cabaletta by Lily Pons since she interpolated it in La Fille du Régiment.
Is this Lucia's alternative aria in act I
in Lucia di Lammermoor?
I also prefer this version. To me it also seems "purer" and not done in a "show-off" mode simply to exhibit extreme talent. It is sung perfectly. (The flute part is outstanding.)
This is really impressive. Too much portamenti for my taste at times. I do prefer the Sills interpretation a bit more. Sutherland impresses me, but doesn't excite me. I am not saying that this is bad by any stretch of the imagination. I just prefer Sills here. However, as the biggest Sills fan on the planet, let's face something! As spectacular as our Bev was! She was a technical marvel. However, at her best Sutherland comes as close to technical perfection as maybe any soprano ever did.
Is this the performance which was included as a bonus on her first 'Lucia' recording?
+John Mitchell Yes, it is a bonus that Joan sang in her first full studio recording of Lucia.
+John Mitchell I vividly remember this aria from the LP edition of Sutherland's first Lucia. I wonder why it was removed from the CD edition, which somehow feels incomplete without it. This is first-rate singing, and sheds an interesting light on the opera's performance history.
Wow, I would exactly call the present aria that easy :), but it does say a lot about Persiani's stamina.
I absolutely LOVE all her recordings and live performances ! I use them daily with my students to show them what bad diction is. Singing on ONE pseudo-fits-all vowel and ONE consonant « W » is not good singing. Of course it makes it a lot easier when you ignore the words. But it is totally unacceptable.
Cabaletta!
Sutherland's voice could be described as "covered" but Sills had a voice that was also described as "white". I would disagree that there is anything tenative about this at all...very secure and projected well.
Thank you for posting this version too. I lean towards Sills as my preferred version on this occasion, not because I don't appreciate the stunningly magnificent Sutherland in her prime, but I find that Sills offers more characterization and expression. This is not the greatest aria it is true but Sills finds a warmth which communicates to me . However I would rather not choose between them so please can I keep both? Of course you will say yes generous Lindoro!
Arguably, the part of Rosmonda is a bit of a "canary" role: composed for Tacchinardi-Persiani, it's a rather lightweight dramatically part with no real development throughout the opera, she stays an ingenue. Moreover, most of her music IS about coloratura: she spends most of the opera up the staff and in ornamentation. It's a great credit to Fleming's talent that she managed to do so much with the role but the latter isn't Andromache or Beatrice, to name just a few examples.
Full of nice trills but I much prefer Cuberli and Sills!
I like Sutherland, but the Sills version is so much lighter and more exciting. This sounds covered and tentative in comparison. The several obvious recording splices don't help.
NO SE A QUE CUENTO VIENEN LOS COMENTARIOS.....SOBRE SILLS..........PORQUE PARA NADA LE LLEGA A LOS TALONES.....
La Sutherland come sempre in questi ruoli è perfetta se non fosse per i troppi abbellimenti che (con licenza ) inserisce
Singers have been transposing arias to better suit their voices for centuries.
Sills transposing would not effect her ornamentation. The key one sings in does not change the vocal requirements of the score.
Sutherland's is only more difficult in terms of range.
Doesn't Joan slide around on the notes a lot? Someone once referred to her 'mannered moanings'. I prefer crisp and steady attack.
Sliding around notes was just one aspect of her terrible singing technique. The term « mannered moaning » is excellent to describe her singing. Maybe « embellished gargling » would be another good one. Obviously, many people liked it since she sang for 40 years …. But unfortunately that was 30 years too many!
i challenge anyone who thinks maria callas was a "mezzo with a forced top" to listen to pre 1955 recordings. Just because callas had he amazing technical ability to project full bodied sounds, doesnt make her a Mezzo and just because she could extend these sounds throughout her register, doesnt make them forced. In her prime Callas neve had "Fluffy head tones" nor did any of her register above the high C mixe with "whistle tones" Callas never relied on those abnormalities to sing.
Shame, Lohengrin :-(
One could almost believe she was beautiful from this photo. (However she should never have appeared onstage later as Olympia, the 'doll'.) With regard to whom is greater, I give Sutherland and Pavarotti credit as the greatest due to their overall versatility, but I place Roberta Peters and Juan Diego Florez above all opera singers for the sheer beauty of their singing.
Roger Propes Roberta peters was mediocre at best.
Lol, Florez...
Wow. Body-shaming at its worst. Joan sang the doll better than anyone. Yes she was big with strong looks, but as Pavarotti explained she therefore had the ideal physique to sing like no one else could.
This aria is not consistently good. Great in parts, but tentative and forced in others. And what´s with that strained high note, can no one hear it? The problem I have with Sutherland is that she was so worried about producing perfect tones all the time that she rendered her singing ultimately pointless and boring. And try spotting a consonant in her singing, good luck on that one. No drama, just pretty sounds.
Brava
Magnificent.