Bright, easy, perfect scale. Today, most idiot teachers of singing would have tried to have her sound darker and bigger; like the singers now, she wouldn't have lasted 5 years.
In her recordings of this, Melba's treatment is more a command, an injunction, where the lightness, good fun present here is preferable. Thank you BgDragan for posting, thank you Nate for sharing!
I think the best word for her voice is "pretty"--which is a good word for her as well. OK: maybe not the sonic or emotional depth of other great divas, but can't we just appreciate her for what she was? I mean: when I eat a really great hamburger--quality meat, well seasoned, perfectly cooked--I really enjoy it, and I don't get glum with every bite as I contemplate how far short it falls of filet mignon. Some may think that Peters deserves better than the hamburger analogy; some may think that she's just a bolgna sandwich. But you'd need to have pretty bizarre taste, and ears, to think that she isn't in some way really good. And so, whatever flavor of goodness you ascribe to her, just enjoy it. There's far too little beauty in the world for us to be turning our noses up at anything that falls short of the Sistine Chapel.
Okay Rapture1987, we get it. You can't appreciate a miracle like Roberta Peters without trying to find fault or impress someone with your expertise. Why don't you just move on?
In fact, this right here to me is an example of post-20th century American musicians THINKING they got it all RIGHT - when actually, even though that may be 100% true from a strictly technical standpoint, they actually got EVERYTHING *DEAD* WRONG in terms of what the composers of the Golden Age expected in essence.
Roberta's rendition is *MEASURED*, CALCULATED and MANNERED - like the Perfect Robot! Again, her singing IS both very beautiful and most virtuosic - but it's also most robotic and PATENTLY *PRECONCEIVED*, thereby defeating the whole purpose and the very ESSENCE/SPIRIT of the song, I'd say. Melba's versions on the other hand are *BURSTING* WITH SPONTANEITY, VIGOUR and GENUINE *JOIE-DE-VIVRE* - everything that typifies the Golden Age of Singing, and everything that is *NOT** present in this case
This is interesting commentary, and I tend to agree with you, especially if one compares Melba's recordings of the song to those of Peters. However, it was Melba who was, on more than one occasion, accused by certain contemporary critics of sounding "robotic," for example, in her on-stage singing of the "Jewel Song" from Faust. And modern critics also criticize her for similar reasons with regard to her exactly same phrasing in arias she has recorded more than once, such as "Ah, fors e lui" from Traviata.
As beautiful and virtuosic as Roberta Peters' singing is here, I ALWAYS saw this performance as a *TEXTBOOK* example of how classical singing turned into something very ROBOTIC in America, in the 20th century.........in DIRECT CONTRAST to the *VERY SPONTANEOUS* way the 'Golden Age' singers performed, and MELBA of course in her 'Se Saran Rose' recordings. There is NOT A *SINGLE* SPONTANEOUS or GENUINE/AUTHENTIC moment in the Roberta Peters rendition!!
:-)
Perfect, beautiful, charming Roberta
Bright, easy, perfect scale. Today, most idiot teachers of singing would have tried to have her sound darker and bigger; like the singers now, she wouldn't have lasted 5 years.
In her recordings of this, Melba's treatment is more a command, an injunction, where the lightness, good fun present here is preferable. Thank you BgDragan for posting, thank you Nate for sharing!
Não canso de ouví-la neste trecho. Maravilha!!!!
Que técnica, bravísima!!
So charming... so beautiful... so perfect!!!
I think the best word for her voice is "pretty"--which is a good word for her as well. OK: maybe not the sonic or emotional depth of other great divas, but can't we just appreciate her for what she was? I mean: when I eat a really great hamburger--quality meat, well seasoned, perfectly cooked--I really enjoy it, and I don't get glum with every bite as I contemplate how far short it falls of filet mignon. Some may think that Peters deserves better than the hamburger analogy; some may think that she's just a bolgna sandwich. But you'd need to have pretty bizarre taste, and ears, to think that she isn't in some way really good. And so, whatever flavor of goodness you ascribe to her, just enjoy it. There's far too little beauty in the world for us to be turning our noses up at anything that falls short of the Sistine Chapel.
El gran Sex-Symbol de la Metropolitan Ópera House, además una de las voces más bellas de la historia, esto es una muestra de belleza y talento.
Something different: Teatro Rossetti - Michael Aspinall Patti Waltz :-)
Luigi Arditi : Se Saran Rose
Okay Rapture1987, we get it. You can't appreciate a miracle like Roberta Peters without trying to find fault or impress someone with your expertise. Why don't you just move on?
In fact, this right here to me is an example of post-20th century American musicians THINKING they got it all RIGHT - when actually, even though that may be 100% true from a strictly technical standpoint, they actually got EVERYTHING *DEAD* WRONG in terms of what the composers of the Golden Age expected in essence.
Roberta's rendition is *MEASURED*, CALCULATED and MANNERED - like the Perfect Robot!
Again, her singing IS both very beautiful and most virtuosic - but it's also most robotic and PATENTLY *PRECONCEIVED*, thereby defeating the whole purpose and the very ESSENCE/SPIRIT of the song, I'd say.
Melba's versions on the other hand are *BURSTING* WITH SPONTANEITY, VIGOUR and GENUINE *JOIE-DE-VIVRE* - everything that typifies the Golden Age of Singing, and everything that is *NOT** present in this case
This is interesting commentary, and I tend to agree with you, especially if one compares Melba's recordings of the song to those of Peters. However, it was Melba who was, on more than one occasion, accused by certain contemporary critics of sounding "robotic," for example, in her on-stage singing of the "Jewel Song" from Faust. And modern critics also criticize her for similar reasons with regard to her exactly same phrasing in arias she has recorded more than once, such as "Ah, fors e lui" from Traviata.
@@meltzerboy Melba’s sempre libera is the most spontaneous interpretation that I have ever heard!
As beautiful and virtuosic as Roberta Peters' singing is here, I ALWAYS saw this performance as a *TEXTBOOK* example of how classical singing turned into something very ROBOTIC in America, in the 20th century.........in DIRECT CONTRAST to the *VERY SPONTANEOUS* way the 'Golden Age' singers performed, and MELBA of course in her 'Se Saran Rose' recordings.
There is NOT A *SINGLE* SPONTANEOUS or GENUINE/AUTHENTIC moment in the Roberta Peters rendition!!