Robert Horn The only thing I can say is that I envy you, even though I had the privilege of watching her ln various operas in different places, whereas this is one very spectacular occasion you lucky man have witnessed 🙏❤️👏
Yes indeed...I was lucky to be at that performance and remember saying I'd never heard Joan in better voice. God bless her for the great riches she gave us!
I am stunned. I've read about the hall's "dreaded echo" and am aware of sad modern practise of amplification. When this recording began, I wondered if they amplified in 1968! But it seems that was the natural sound in the hall, and if so I am even more astounded at that amazing voice filling that space. If there was no amplification, this may be the best live capture of her voice ever. You can hear that the recorder is sitting on someone's lap in the audience somewhere. If anyone know for sure about the amplification, I would be greatly appreciative.
I doubt it. The Albert Hall (5,000) is actually considerably more intimate than the Met (4,000), as it is a 'drum' of seating, and is a very 'live' room. I do wonder if the echo here has been added? or is perhaps a fault in the old tape? I heard the Ring there 20 years ago from standing room at the very top, and it didn't have this 'bathroom' accoustic, while all the singers were easily audible. Even from the very top all the singers were physically recognisable too, unlike being in the circle at the Met or in San Francisco or even the Bastille in Paris when they were just 'specs' in the distance.
@@alandun27 In the top level near the walls, the acoustic would be immediate with no reverberation. In the middle of this huge concert hall, there must be reverberation as the sound bounces off the walls and back to the listener. When our Sydney Town Hall was built in 1888, it was the second largest concert hall in the Empire, obviously after the Albert Hall. It is an elongated double cube, the classic acoustic shape, but so large in the middle of the hall you hear the sound twice with a long reverberation of over 1.5 seconds. It is a very rich sound, but if you sit in the front or rear you get less of the reverb. (I never saw Joan in our Town Hall but saw her many times in the Concert Hall and Opera Theatre of the Sydney Opera House, including her penultimate performance in this music in 1990.)
"Meyerbeer...but isn't he a bit boring?" once said a fellow opera aficionado to me. Given that statement true, which I don't believe is, Joan sure can make it the most exciting music one can hear!
@Daniel Hamond. Yes but the problem would be that once you've heard Sutherland (in her prime) in, say this role, anyone else is going to sound inadequate. - lol
In the 60s Dame Joan was phenomenal. To say the least. After our Maya heard her rehearsing Lucia in the 60s @ Covent Garden. She told the Director at the time " you don't need me" Our Maya was basically done with her career. But Dame Joan & Richard B. both said once you heard Callas before 1955 every role she sang was hers. What a generous from both Prima Donnas. 👑💙. Arnold Bourbon Amaral
Sutherland was always better when singing in French, perhaps because she actually had come to speak it fairly fluently while living in the French Alps. This, I think, gave her the ability to put more actual emotional meaning into the words she was singing. Of course, she never failed to sing absolutely beautifully in any language but her best performance were always in languages she actually spoke. Her rendition of Rezia's aria from Weber's "Oberon" in its original English lyric also demonstrates this.
The staccati @ 10:00 and 10:01 are high D natural...which is correct. The final note is also a D natural, which is correct. The pitch is at the very top of the note, but is definitely not an Eb. So this is very much the way she sounded.
Dame Joan sås Ones of the Greatest ever.Her voice sås so rich of over toner and so flexibel.Dame Joan had a voice of lirico spinto and the sang Wagners soprano roles well. Her coloratura was perfect.The singers today i this fach are shit.
Outstanding performance from an exceptional singer! Still, I must admit I prefer Beverly Sills's interpretation (a recording of French Arias under Jussi Jalas, 1969).
Of course I respect your opinion but against Sutherland, Sills, as good as she was, could be considered a lightweight, nothing like the power and sheer thrilling tone of Joan Sutherland in her prime.
Paul Lewis I heard both in the theater quite a number of times. On recordings, Sills’s voice does indeed sound one-dimensional, but it was really quite rounded and full in the theater. I saw both as Lucia in the mid-1970s, and I really can’t decide who was better. There really is no such thing as ‘better’ between the two. Sutherland had the fuller, smoother voice; Sills had an even greater accuracy in coloratura and was a far better actress. It’s a luxury that operagoers had two such singers at the same time.
@@wotan10950 IMO, it was Sutherland who could not be surpassed in coloratura accuracy. No question Sills was great, but her smaller, lighter voice and tendency to overembellish never impressed me -- and her trill was not as brilliant as Sutherland's. I own many of Sill's recordings and enjoy them immensely (in her prime a voice of great beauty and soul), but no voice in human history has ever thrilled me to the core as Sutherland's does. It had the best of everything.
@@Eiswirth1 And Sutherland could sing a Turandot to rival most dramatic sopranos. I don't think many coloratura sopranos would have tackled Esclarmonde like Joan, but Callas before 1960 could. Whenever Joan was home in Australia she was so friendly, and never arrogant about her talent. Still loved by all who met her.
I agree with your assessment, but I think the Sills recording was conducted by the late, great Sir Charles Mackerras. Maestro Jalas was the conductor of a collection of Donizetti and Bellini arias that was issued at roughly the same time.
She was a phenomen. This is just what you would expect from that incredible voice!
Sutherland at her very best.I was fortunate to be there that night.The Albert Hall was a perfect venue for that voice.Extraordinary!🤗🤗
Robert Horn The only thing I can say is that I envy you, even though I had the privilege of watching her ln various operas in different places, whereas this is one very spectacular occasion you lucky man have witnessed 🙏❤️👏
I wonder if you heard Leontyne Price in the Albert Hall also in 1968, I believe it was in June…
This could not have sung any better in the golden age.
True. I was there.
No other voice like it in human history. She was the greatest ever.
Yes indeed, I was at the performance and noticed how well her voice resonated and soared in the Albert Hall. It was wonderful!
Greatest voice in recorded history; no one else comes close.
Staggering! Exquisite beauty and poise throughout this difficult aria.
You just have to listen to the audience's reaction to know how extraordinary her performance was.
Yes indeed...I was lucky to be at that performance and remember saying I'd never heard Joan in better voice. God bless her for the great riches she gave us!
I also remember thinking that the Albert Hall actually suited her beautiful voice
Breathtaking indeed!
Splendid singing in a splendid opera by the great Dame Joan
I am stunned. I've read about the hall's "dreaded echo" and am aware of sad modern practise of amplification. When this recording began, I wondered if they amplified in 1968! But it seems that was the natural sound in the hall, and if so I am even more astounded at that amazing voice filling that space. If there was no amplification, this may be the best live capture of her voice ever. You can hear that the recorder is sitting on someone's lap in the audience somewhere. If anyone know for sure about the amplification, I would be greatly appreciative.
I doubt it. The Albert Hall (5,000) is actually considerably more intimate than the Met (4,000), as it is a 'drum' of seating, and is a very 'live' room. I do wonder if the echo here has been added? or is perhaps a fault in the old tape? I heard the Ring there 20 years ago from standing room at the very top, and it didn't have this 'bathroom' accoustic, while all the singers were easily audible. Even from the very top all the singers were physically recognisable too, unlike being in the circle at the Met or in San Francisco or even the Bastille in Paris when they were just 'specs' in the distance.
I am sure it would not have been amplified.
@@alandun27 In the top level near the walls, the acoustic would be immediate with no reverberation. In the middle of this huge concert hall, there must be reverberation as the sound bounces off the walls and back to the listener. When our Sydney Town Hall was built in 1888, it was the second largest concert hall in the Empire, obviously after the Albert Hall. It is an elongated double cube, the classic acoustic shape, but so large in the middle of the hall you hear the sound twice with a long reverberation of over 1.5 seconds. It is a very rich sound, but if you sit in the front or rear you get less of the reverb. (I never saw Joan in our Town Hall but saw her many times in the Concert Hall and Opera Theatre of the Sydney Opera House, including her penultimate performance in this music in 1990.)
It went through MAJOR acoustic changes in I believe the 80s, which significantly reduced the echo. Personally though, I enjoy it :)
"Meyerbeer...but isn't he a bit boring?" once said a fellow opera aficionado to me. Given that statement true, which I don't believe is, Joan sure can make it the most exciting music one can hear!
I love Meyerbeer...especially when combined with Sutherland's voice.
I only know Meyebeer from recordings. But I agree that it is not dull and I would love to hear one of his operas in the theatre.
@Daniel Hamond. Yes but the problem would be that once you've heard Sutherland (in her prime) in, say this role, anyone else is going to sound inadequate. - lol
of course it's boring!! it's not great music.....but sung like that!!! even we dont understand any words.....!!!!!!
In the 60s Dame Joan was phenomenal. To say the least. After our Maya heard her rehearsing Lucia in the 60s @ Covent Garden. She told the Director at the time " you don't need me" Our Maya was basically done with her career. But Dame Joan & Richard B. both said once you heard Callas before 1955 every role she sang was hers. What a generous from both Prima Donnas. 👑💙. Arnold Bourbon Amaral
OMG, I was there
THE BEST !!
Holy F*ck.
Astonishing and historic, but very close to the end of the time when she could sing like this.
Heard her 1989 still going strong. This was more than 20 year eraler!
Not her fan at all, but have to be honest - she has done some great things, and this is one of them.
I’m right with you.
Sutherland was always better when singing in French, perhaps because she actually had come to speak it fairly fluently while living in the French Alps. This, I think, gave her the ability to put more actual emotional meaning into the words she was singing. Of course, she never failed to sing absolutely beautifully in any language but her best performance were always in languages she actually spoke. Her rendition of Rezia's aria from Weber's "Oberon" in its original English lyric also demonstrates this.
@@wilsonwatt9283 Could be, indeed.
Like so many TH-cam videos, this is not being played back at the correct speed. It’s a half tone sharp. This is NOT how Joan Sutherland sounded.
The staccati @ 10:00 and 10:01 are high D natural...which is correct. The final note is also a D natural, which is correct. The pitch is at the very top of the note, but is definitely not an Eb. So this is very much the way she sounded.
Dame Joan sås Ones of the Greatest ever.Her voice sås so rich of over toner and so flexibel.Dame Joan had a voice of lirico spinto and the sang Wagners soprano roles well.
Her coloratura was perfect.The singers today i this fach are shit.
Outstanding performance from an exceptional singer! Still, I must admit I prefer Beverly Sills's interpretation (a recording of French Arias under Jussi Jalas, 1969).
Of course I respect your opinion but against Sutherland, Sills, as good as she was, could be considered a lightweight, nothing like the power and sheer thrilling tone of Joan Sutherland in her prime.
Paul Lewis I heard both in the theater quite a number of times. On recordings, Sills’s voice does indeed sound one-dimensional, but it was really quite rounded and full in the theater. I saw both as Lucia in the mid-1970s, and I really can’t decide who was better. There really is no such thing as ‘better’ between the two. Sutherland had the fuller, smoother voice; Sills had an even greater accuracy in coloratura and was a far better actress. It’s a luxury that operagoers had two such singers at the same time.
@@wotan10950 IMO, it was Sutherland who could not be surpassed in coloratura accuracy. No question Sills was great, but her smaller, lighter voice and tendency to overembellish never impressed me -- and her trill was not as brilliant as Sutherland's. I own many of Sill's recordings and enjoy them immensely (in her prime a voice of great beauty and soul), but no voice in human history has ever thrilled me to the core as Sutherland's does. It had the best of everything.
@@Eiswirth1 And Sutherland could sing a Turandot to rival most dramatic sopranos. I don't think many coloratura sopranos would have tackled Esclarmonde like Joan, but Callas before 1960 could. Whenever Joan was home in Australia she was so friendly, and never arrogant about her talent. Still loved by all who met her.
I agree with your assessment, but I think the Sills recording was conducted by the late, great Sir Charles Mackerras. Maestro Jalas was the conductor of a collection of Donizetti and Bellini arias that was issued at roughly the same time.
Helas on ne comprends pas un mot.....
operafy Malheuresement, vous avez raison!
Toujours le même commentaire... fatigant
Je comprends parfaitement chaque mot. Tu es fou.