Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
DUELING DIVAS: Melba (1904) vs. Tetrazzini (1911) in Verdi's LA TRAVIATA
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2009
- Australian Soprano Nellie Melba (1861-1931) / Ah! fors' e lui... Follie!... Sempre libera / La Traviata (Verdi) / Recorded: March 1904 --
Italian Soprano Luisa Tetrazzini (1871- 1940) / Ah! fors' e lui... Follie!... Sempre libera / La Traviata (Verdi) / Recorded: March 6, 1911 --
*********************************************
For Maya Mikolajczyk ~ MayaTatyana
*********************************************
Tetrazzini-apart from anything else, what splendid diction, every word audible and relevant. Nothing garbled or swallowed. Even in the ultra-compressed cabaletta, and never loss of even a single word. Or note for that matter. Amen.
Thank you... CHEERS!
There is no comparison even allowing for the superior sound in the Tetrazzini recording. She is a thousand times better. I have never heard anything with Melba that impressed me while Tetrazzini is wonderful with a far more lovely sound, a superior coloratura technique and exciting top note.
For me this is an interesting survey of the general art and state of bel canto singing as the 19th century, of which Melba is one of the great exponents gave way to the values of the 20th. What catches my ear first is the strong connection to a specific vocal method by both women. They are different people with different physical and emotional makeups. They studied with different teachers. But all in all, there is a consistency of approach in both of them, and I find more commonalities...
The best comment on these two was something Vincent Sheean wrote in his biography of impresario Oscar Hammerstein. Had he been alive back then, "I would have admired Melba but spent my money on Tetrazzini."
Both divas are stupendous. Nobody comes CLOSE nowadays. Tetrazzini is marginally my favorite, with her full, chesty timbre and spirited, effortless singing. But please don't forget that at the time of these recordings Melba was rather past her prime, whilst Tetrazzini was well in it. Plus, Melba's recording is older.
Melba's messa di voce (swell) on the high C in the Sempre Libera is evidence of a formidable technique even if her diction is less than Italianate. The phrasing is sure different than one expects these days, with held notes in unexpected places.
As with Tetrazzini, we don't get all the overtones in the old recordings - their voices must have been marvellous live. So it is like looking at black and white photos of color paintings, but still better than not to have heard these songbirds at all.
Melba seems a little as if she is anxious that the wax will run out before the end - she probably had the more honeyed voice but the scales near the end do slur so that the notes are not distinguishable ( how modern !!!! ) . At the end of the piece Tetrazzini's repeated staccato is beautifully done and her voice has a little extra clarity and brilliance, perhaps the primitive recording masked the beauty of Melba's voice and Tet's brilliance survived the horn a little better. They are both a joy to hear in their own way and we are lucky to have these reminders of technique and style from singers close to the era of the composers.
I can distinguish them.
Tetrazzini is supreme here, so much more feeling and a far better cabaletta and fuller top notes.
Two totally different women... certainly able enjoy both... would I wan t to get between them? Not a chance! Thanks & Cheers!
I do agree there is more woman in Tetrazzini.
Well one was a more reserved Australian woman and the other a fiery Italian haha.
As for fuller top notes. Who is to say? The recordings are not conducive to actual vocal representation and made 7 years apart. And in the early 1900’s 7 years made a great deal of difference in terms of recording ability.
Tetrazzni’s voice is very developed! Like her entire voice is rich in overtones, ridiculously agile and top notes are easy, FULL and rich! I’ve never heard such a high voice that rich and creamy!
In her prime, Anna Moffo had a richer and creamier voice throughout her range, including her high notes: ua-cam.com/video/JBD7TJGg9IM/v-deo.html
@@luminiferous1960 Moffo’s voice is smaller. Tetra also has way more squillo in her voice aside from obvious size.
@@beachfanatic2010 True, but your statement was "I've never heard such a high voice that rich and creamy" not "that big" or "with that much squillo."
An over abundance of squillo makes high notes more resonant and penetrating, but also harder and brassier, quite the opposite of rich and creamy.
Moffo's voice is richer and creamier than Tetrazzini's precisely because Moffo's voice has way less squillo.
That deficit in squillo is a detriment to Moffo's ability to be heard over the orchestra and out to the limits of the theatre in live unamplified performances compared to Tetrazzini's ability in that department, but it makes Moffo's voice richer and creamier than Tetrazzini's as attested to by the recordings of their voices.
La Tetrazzini é inimitabile...
La Melba é brava ma la sua linea di canto é tutt'altro che impeccabile. L'intonazione vacilla ed a volta ha fiati discutibili. E spesso ha i soliti suoni fissi anglofoni....
E sia detto senza malizia, lo spartito lo aggiusta come le pare...
Tetrazzini tutta la vita....
Quanto alla Patti il suo timbro centrale era oro puro... pieno di sfumature e con un trillo magico. Spiace dirlo ma la Melba sembra un porridge incolore...
Two superb performances that demonstrate the forgotten art of romantic opera singing. Incredible ornamentation, freedom and character thank you for posting!
Melba swims through the score and at no moment bothers to give a meaning to the words but Tetrazzini at least knows what she is singing but her extra temporaue are not really in line....but wow was she a brilliant deliverer of fullblooded high notes and the agility and flexibility of her voice are amazing...her coloraturas are matchless....
Both divas had impeccable credentials; both are a joy to hear. The only true way to judge is to hear the singers live. Since that is impossible, we can only respond to the effect they leave upon us; this is individual and highly personalized. I would be delighted to feature either diva in my production of La Traviata. If pushed to make a choice, I would choose Tetrazzini since, in my opinion, her voice generates more warmth.
Shlomo Hoffert I wish that musical records have been invented earlier in history to hear more singers from previous centuries
Very unfair. Melba gets the honky-tonk piano with older technology and Tetrazzini has an orchestra + conductor + dynamically superior recording. Vocally, T shows greater precision in the coloratura, but M gives a lot more tonal colours. They’re both better than any any of the current divas.
Great fun to hear these duelling versions! Not sure it's a fair comparison -- Melba's is beautiful, but LT is such a force of nature she manages to obliterate everything in her way! Both have a lot to teach today's singers!
Lovely channel you got! I simply adore old opera recordings is wonderful to compare the technique that they use with the modern singers too bad that many people don't understand the intrinsecal beauty of the non hi-fi sound 💓
Penso che siano eccellenti entrambe con pregi totalmente diversi! La Melba ha il colore della voce ideale di Violetta in “Ah forse è lui”, anche se la cabaletta non fa affatto per lei, e la Tetrazzini è splendida nel suo fraseggio e nella sua strabordante tecnica divina e irraggiungibile
Both are wonderful but la Tetrazzini is an ARTIST!
Melba had a more perfect voice and a more perfected technique in a Germanic sense. Also this is one of her greatest early records.
Tetrazzini had a thousand times more temperament, warmth and dramatic sense, besides a fabulously brilliant, very "out there" Italian style. Just listen to her ornamentations in the word "croce".
Luckily, one doesn't have to choose. But, in Italian music, it's always Tetrazzini for me.
I have to say I prefer Chicken Tetrazzini to Peach Melba!
Both wonderful singers of course in their own very different way. I'm not entering into that debate.
With trills like Melba's, who needs a High Eb?
So let me get this straight: Tetrazzini's voice has more colour than Melba's, but Melba is better in the misterioso aspect?? Could it be because the COLOUR of her voice is naturally subtler and more veiled, more complex?
I think Melba has a plethora of fascinating colours in her tone. I just cannot resist Tetrazzini's Latin vibrancy, dramatic sense and yes, recklessness! And the tremendous acuti, let us not forget.
Both are wonderful, with an accuracy of attack and purity of tone there simply note countered anymore. Also there is a blessed lack of excess vibrato unlike todays sopranos wh seem to be trilling half the time
"... not entering into the debate."
Likely a wise and safe decision!
All Best.
Cheers, etc.
Doug --
Doug - they apparently had no use for each other. I have great respect for both of them.
It took me time to get use to Melba's whiteish tone but now the ease of her producrion and the impeccable legato {CF to her recording of Ave Maria} and immaculate trills win me over.
Tetrazzini has one of the most spectacular upper registers ever and her ability to sing coloratura is phenomenal. The legato and middle voice not so great usually.
Both of these performances are treasures.
Thanks- John
All said and done, and while not an easy call, inclined to give Tetrazzini a majority decision (as in boxing), leaning towards what you have noted. Many thanks!
👍to 👂 these recordings,Thanks👋
We were lucky to have both, plus all the other great divas singing La Traviata!Enjoy each for their fantastic voices!
Melba would fit into the "Virgin goddess" mould - which is not to say that such a woman is LITERALLY virginal, but possesses the accompanying traits of independence, strong will, and the "fire and ice" quality that you once ascribed to Melba.
Tetrazzini and Galli-Curci would fall into the "Vulnerable goddess" category, and I think it's this type that society recognizes as 'most feminine'. They tend to fit societally sanctioned roles.
Patti would be one of the "Alchemical goddesses".
Tettrazini! Absolutely!
Galli-Curci! Absolutely!
For me tetrazini has ( the best legato was galli curci) more legato line and projection, so the voice conveys more nuances and color.On the other hand, Melba for me always had white tone, no projection and no legato...
Thank you ladies for your wonderful vocalising. It is a pity I cannot thank you personally but alas, it is too late.
I never disputed that. It's a matter of which "qualities" one favours. Melba exemplifies the pure and chaste Victorian ideal of femininity in her singing - and that's what I value most. Tetrazzini stands for the exact OPPOSITE of that model, and naturally those have less Victorian sensibilities would gravitate more towards her.
my life she makes my day a good day when its not so good love always from ireland we all love you
MARAVILLOSO
Indeed. :) :) Leoncavallo said Melba's portrayal of Nedda was the best he had seen/heard!!! And don't you wish we had a recording of Melba's "Una voce poco fa"?? I've been conjuring it up in my mind for years!! I also think the pictures of Melba as Rosina are REALLY CUTE. Plus, she would know better than anyone about being "docile" on the one hand, and turning into "una vipera" if someone crossed her, and laying down "cento trappole". lol
Tetrazzini-what force -- magnificent
I really enjoyed this wonderful collection of opera sung by two historical diva`s how different the style of singing was back then love it!!!! They both win far as i`m concerned.
There is another word for Melba's voice - ethereal.
Melba is flat a lot, presumably due to the poor recording technique. She was known for precision of pitch. 7 years later, the recording is much better and Tetrazzini is wonderful. Not sure it's a fair competition, but certainly Tetrazzini is miles better here.
And yet, with today's state of the art recording, I dare you to find a better interpretation than Ms. Tetrazzini's one 😉
This is a win-win comment: if someone gets back to me with examples of better executions I will be oh So happy !
If not, I will have the lesser joy of having the last word ;-)
michela bruzzone
Lmfao how can you have the last word when what you said is in agreement with their comment???
He said Tetrazzini sounded miles better here than Melba because of the recording ability. All he then remarked on was the inferior quality of the recording process in 1907. It had nothing to do with the voices themselves. Read and then re-read if you have that much difficulty with understanding the written word...
Probably a recording speed problem. No machine then ever ran at exactly 78 rpm.
@@MsHellblazer Anna Moffo: ua-cam.com/video/JBD7TJGg9IM/v-deo.html
Well said! For the record, I like both versions, for different reasons, and as Bivolari has pointed out, it's like comparing apples & oranges. THANK YOU!
La Tetrazzini è una Violetta superba,ha una voce magnifica e duttile,atta agli spasmi del delirio estetico del personaggio !!Straordinaria ,stupenda ,solo in pochissime lo hanno sostenuto ,avendo una difficoltà di acuti incredibile
NICE PERFORMANCE!!! Thank you Sir Doug for sharing this with us.
Great! Thank you for posting!
......Tetrazzini exemplifies the red-blooded, zesty sense of womanhood that is prized by Italians (vocally + personally), and Galli-Curci is also obviously as quintessentially Italian as they come, albeit in a softer, more coquettish way (in keeping with her physical comportment too I guess). Melba, on the other hand, is proper and decorous the way the English idealise femininity, replete with all the graces and airs of the French. I like her JUST as much in Italian opera as anything else since
Please would someone explain to me why most of the current sopranos don't have the "sweetness" in their voices that these two, Galli-Curci and Zinka Milanov had? Their high notes seem to be cleaner and less stressful? I know nothing about opera except that I love it and think the old composers had a gift. I think I like it even better than Rap music! :-)
It’s lack of chest voice (belting) development. The core of the sound is never established in modern singers. Their thyro-aretenoid muscles in their throats aren’t developed, and they’re all signing a concert to themselves inside their own skulls instead of sending the sound out into the audience. It’s called voce ingolata, and it’s a swallowed voice that isn’t clear, has too much weird vibrato, and eventually it starts to wobble as they age singing in this incorrect manner.
Among the many difference is that of generation. Melba sings much more in the chest, Tetrazzini showing more of the modern head tone. Opera enthusiasts and composers of ca 1900 valued the human passion of the chest tone and were willing to forego some of the dexterity and pitch definition of the head-tone technique. Later singers went even further in the the direction Tetrazzini took.
nessun confronto.
La Tetrazzini .
As you say, two very different women, singers... both thoroughly enjoyable. Thank you!
Hi Zack! I can see why Patti loved Tetrazzini - she would have seen herself in the younger soprano, because their APPROACHES to music overall were so similar. I think BOTH their styles were highly "individualized, hot-blooded and womanly", to quote another commenter from below, in contrast to what he called Melba's "chaste, girlish, virginal ideal". For that reason, I don't care WHAT Patti thought - because I'm an adherent of Melba's style :P but I guess we're talking chocolate and vanilla. :)
As I told Doug, I will always like Melba infinitely more than LT, because I'm a proponent of Melba's *ETHEREAL* style of singing, over Tetrazzini's CORPOREAL approach. That being said, I've always loved Louisa's staccati from 9:31-9:33, which was a fabulous personal touch in this aria, but if I were Alfredo, I would think Tetrazzini's Violetta was WAY too overbearing a WOMAN, whereas Melba's Violetta is an exceedingly ENCHANTING *MAIDEN*. Louisa appeals to people's senses; Melba to the spirit.
In my view, there are five supreme light sopranos on record: Patti (even in her old age), Sembrich, Melba, Tetrazzini, and Galli-Curci. Each of them has their own unique and lovely timbre, exceptional technical skills, and expressive features. Every other soprano leggero or coloratura--some of them very great indeed--take (slightly) second billing, including Abendroth, Siems, Kurz, Hempel, Ivogun, Boronat, Nezhdanova, Verlet, Scotney and, in more modern times, Pons, Streich, Peters, Sills, Battle, and several others. Sutherland, although a great singer of coloratura roles, is not, strictly speaking, a soprano leggero, so that she--as well as Callas, who is not a light soprano at all--must stand apart. More of a comparison than this I would not make here. I probably already have said too much, and will get into trouble for it! Thanks for posting, Doug.
meltzerboy A certainly fair and not unbalanced assessment, and since this is not Opera-L, trust we will not suffer any strong objections. As always, thank you, Nate!
CurzonRoad what s wonderful response.
@@-uda2672 Sutherland perhaps: she sang coloratura roles and had extraordinary agility. Yet the voice is not that of a leggiera soprano by any means. If we must categorize her, I would say dramatic soprano d'agilita. Callas is in no way a coloratura soprano. She could sing certain coloratura passages by dint of sheer effort; but the voice itself is dark in coloring and more suitable to heavier roles.
All these female singers, in their wide diversity, have objective and subjective virtues that make them great. But it is striking that in the enumeration of best light sopranos on record not a single one of the Spanish coloraturas from the three first decades of the XIX Century is mentioned, neither in the "top five" nor among the remaining others. And not because of their nationality, but their proximity to the school, temperament and style of some of those top listed and the scope of the career, both in theaters and studios, of some of them. Although of course, in the preference lists (be they operatic preferences or Santa gift list) there is no higher court than that of affinity or tastes.
@@manuelmanzanero5057 An oversight on my part with regard to great Spanish coloratura sopranos. I would include in that list Pareto, Barrientos, Hidalgo, Galvany, and Huguet.
@daphnebeloved
Interesting points... and always fun to compare. IMHO these are two totally different singers, like apples and oranges, both good, great in their own ways. Thank you!
I said Melba looked up to Patti because Patti was much senior AND a living legend. Neither Nilsson nor Albani enjoyed quite the same status as Patti, who Verdi claimed was possibly the best singer ever. And Melba saying she could sing "as well as" Nilsson only means she thought she was at the same level, not "superior". :) As for Albani, critics were talking about her VOCAL *DECLINE* towards the end of her Covent Garden days, so Melba had valid reason to say she could sing "better".
OMG... Tetrazzini
WE had in Soviet Russia a singer - Viktoria Ivanova - I remember her to have an angelic voice like that of Mrs. Melba. One can hear VIktoria Ivanova to probably get some hint to what Mrs Melba used to be as a voice.
Melba spoils everything with her Australian accent, otherwise she's the greatest of all times.
Mon arrière-grand'tante, Carlotta Leria (à l'époque, soliste du Teatro alla Scala de Milan), a eu aussi une sorte de duel avec la Melba: à Londres, dans Donizetti.Fini à égalité.
À de pareilles altitudes, cela revient à juger quelle est la plus difficile à escalader des six montagnes de plus de 8000 m, que l'on peut voir simultanément si on se trouve à un certain endroit de l'Himalaya.
🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀
Absolutely Tetrazzini!
Bravo! Well said... Tet truly is a "force of nature"! Thank you. Cheers. Doug --
Tetrazzini only would hope to have Melba’s marvelous timber and brilliance. People who heard Melba’s singing in theatre,said that when she sang,the silvery stars were shining around them, I don’t think Tetrazzini had that glamour and elegance! Some singers are born for theatre and some for recordings, i believe that Gali-Curci is for recording, while Melba is theatrical one, reason why people cannot distinguish her brilliance is because her voice isn’t for that and also bad recording system! You can listen to her last recordings and everything will be clear! Someone mentioned Patti, no one can deny that her impressario determined her career, but,of course, she had ,,Voix d’or”- brilliant voice. Patti was also always afraid of high notes and was unable to make stacati or trill in high tones! Melba is really outstanding and her artistry,brilliance and versatility never will be heard anymore!
Both very great singers, Melba´s voice was lovely, but Luisa sang with more power and feeling, not that I think power means beautiful, or that her voice is powerful at all, but in the aria Sempre Libera, that´s something that really gives it it´s feeling.
Hands down; Tetrazzini wins!
For me, Tetrazzini is definitely at the top. However, Melba was also great! Just a matter of personal taste. Much like Callas vs. Tebaldi (I prefer Callas).
Contessa Puppi - such joy to hear a voice of reason amidst the clamour of ignorance. Perhaps the only indication we have of the earlier Melba voice is in the Ophelie sound tests she made, to check on blasting. Birgit Nilsson actually made a recording on the old pre-acoustic wax process and was horrified at her constant attack from below the note and not from the correct, slightly above the note. She was even more horrified by how small the voice seemed! Think Nordica! Then, in the days of Melba and Patti, there was no editing so they couldn't do a Schwarzkopf and revise every bar, every note. BUT, warts and all, what personality and, yes, glory shines through.
To follow-up, Melba has always sounded ultra-feminine in the idealized sense to me, and Tetrazzini sounds practically coarse by contrast while Galli-Curci often sounds silly (to me). Melba uses portamento only when it suits the 'character', and always with impeccable taste, unlike some. And I think the "deliciously rounded" sounds represent the "sensuous" kind of femininity that I never admired. THOSE sopranos belong to fallen humanity, while Melba is the stuff that FAIRY TALES are made of. ^_^
Tetrazzini!
Yes, like a miracle... thank you!
Yes, and I choose Melba. :)
Thank you for comparing two great voices, but Melba finds mysterious depths in E fors e' lui that no other singer has ever equalled.
I am puzzled by the comments that try to make national or even psychological-national readings of a technical subjects such as vocal school or its particular development through the cognitive and vocal organs of a certain singer. I have never understood very well that of linking nationality to styles or, more exactly, to psychological appreciations such as "singing out there" / "singing in there", "extrovert" / "introvert singing", Galli Curci is like a coquette and Melba like a virgin queen... it is a mere psychologist reductionism. In videos like this we constantly find comments such as "Tetrazzini's temperamental and outgoing singing, Galli Curci & c. is very Italian, very Mediterranean", or "Melba is very Anglo-Saxon, very ethereal, very Victorian". What does it mean, in singing temperament, to be "very Italian" or "very Victorian"? As if in each vocal type & school and each nationality we could not find endless temperaments. In Italy you can find both temperamental (Tetrazzini) and sparkling voices (Galli Curci) as melancholic and "introverted" ones (Storchio). And the same in Spain (Galvany vs Pareto), in the Anglosphere (Farrar vs Melba) and anywhere else.
With regard to the verb "m'enivre", what I meant is that Galli-Curci BREATHES IN THE *MIDDLE* of that word, and thereby BREAKS it into TWO SEPARATE SYLLABLES, almost as though it were TWO DISTINCT WORDS. What she does is "m'en" BREAK "ivre". That is like breaking one of the most rudimentary Singing 101 rules!! Maybe she never took French lessons......
There is no contest. Melba's voice is thin and sharp, while Tetrazzini voice is filled with warmth and
colour.
What a Wow for Lusia.
Now I will put the cat amongst the Pigeons, just to get a few facts straight, Melba was taught by Italian Maestro so, so much for saying that either was better than one another, Melba & Tetrazzini, , if you listen to each Lady Carefully , it will stand out that Melba voice was smooth & more rounded & very clear , what a Beautiful voice, now on the other Hand Tetrazzini her voice was not as smooth & Rounded as Melba , in fact scratchy at the end of her performance in high C , both Artist were just fantastic giving that the recordings were over a hundred years ago, for me Melba stands out like Enrico Caruso, one of a Kind,
Age & Recording has much to do with sounding, so I went back to the recordings of both Ladies, Melba still had that beautiful smooth & rounded voice, and the recordings were much older, on the other hand Luisa Tetrazzini voice was not as rounded & smooth, to my conclusion, was as the same as I first concluded Melba was just that much better, but Luisa Tetrazzinni was a little out of balance in High C , remember Melba sang with Enrico Caruso, . Regards & Best Wishes, Trevor.W.Bacelli Biloela Qld Australia.
meltzerboy
Tetrazzini's legato here is very good. I might have been too harsh as I just listed to Melba first. Galli-Curci combines the best of both - great line and coloratura with a voice of incredible beauty. GC studied piano and her singing is musically imaginative. Would like to hear all of them today.
Regards -John
Galli-Curci had an extremely beautiful voice. Very clean and pure. I have a CD of hers. I read that someone said her voice wasn’t powerful enough but there is a recording of her singing with Gigli and others in a quintet (?) memory is on the blink, and her voice soars above the other voices. It’s quite stunning.
Does anyone know why CD players would all stop reading CDs? Do the CDs deteriorate?
And Melba was also gifted pianist and organist,too.😁
I'm Australian and Tetrazzini wins. Hits the high note at the finish and Melba can't keep up in the 'Sempre'...Either we miss a lot in the old recordings or Melba wasn't what she was cracked up to be..
I sort of lean to Tetrazzini but it's awfully close - really quite difficult to judge because of the sound quality of the recording technology those days.
You're absolutely right about Melba's introductory verses of Juliette's waltz sounding "intentionally breathless". That's what I was alluding to when I said she was "hushed or subdued" there, in contrast to Galli-Curci. Hushed and subdued in the sense of EXHALING QUIETLY AND RAPIDLY and virtually saying - 'Let me catch my breath! The reverie is so intense!' :)
I like Galli-Curci actually.....haha! Dueling Divas should include GC. I love her duets with Tito Schipa.
That's probably because Galli-Curci was the GREATEST FEMALE SINGER OF ALL TIME. Otherwise, both Melba and Tetrazzini were certainly outstanding in their own right.
Two devine aetheric voices ! Both equally beautiful !
You started it! lol. And if I were being supercilious, I wouldn't have ended all my posts with smiley faces. :) means a smile. But whatever! You're primarily a Tetrazzini fan, and I'm first and foremost a Melba fan, so maybe the spirit of the Duelling Divas extends to their fans too. lol. :) (another smiley face)
By far, Luisa Tetrazzini!!!!
I would prefer Tetrazzini although Patti sings so sweet here.
I think you mean Melba 😝
My wife leans to Tetrazzini.
While certain details are arguably missing in the earlier acoustic process, since we are able to focus on the voice, effectively diminishing if not totally eliminating the surface noise, the rewards indeed remain very special. Thank you!
I think rather than compare voices , we are comparing recordings. 1904 recording far more primitive than 1911 unsurprisingly , so unfair to judge! Wonderful to have recordings of great singers from so long ago - a real privilege!
Melba is my favorite! ❤
I don't need Tetrazzini for fun & joy - Melba delivers both to me in VOLUMES, so I'll stick with HER. :P
Can't disagree with your well chosen words. Both are different in the manners and qualities you describe, Melba conveying vulnerability & refinement, Tetrazzini of a more "red meat variety" (I like that!). To settle matters... I shall take both! Thank you... and BTW, I'm running out of pictures! Cheers, etc. Doug --
I totally agree with everything you said, old friend, except for your final remarks about Patti, of course. lol. I always liked Melba exceedingly more so than Patti, and never believed that Patti was "better" than her in any way, but again, it boils down to 'individual preference' as I was discussing with Doug, because their voices and approaches are so different. Patti was the epitome of boldness, both vocally and stylistically, while Melba was the epitome of demureness. :)
Melba had her moments. b performances were of the more mechanical type. Listen to the joy and immersion of Tetrazzini versus Melba. Tetrazzini reigned supreme for over 25 years. Melba descended to making cheap cracks about Tetrazzinis weighr.
Melba was a bigger star than Tetrazzini ever was, and sang into her sixties.
Perception is the reality... when it comes to fun & joy shall stick with Tetrazzini...
Yup. You carry on with Tetrazzini, and I'll carry on with Melba! :)
I think Melba just is not captured in any way shape or form. The way she was described by contemporaries makes me think that those high notes that sound unsupported are probably extremely well supported floating notes that are just lost to the microphone. I think there is a little early Sutherland in the voice if you heard it live. And the trill was fantastic. Tetrazzini's lower voice is lost to the microphone as well. But her top notes are so brilliant and it is a decade later so the recording technology was far superior.
Thanks John & Nate: Wonderful commentary! I like both versions, for different reasons. While Tetrazzini knows how to communicate joy, Melba is.... what can I say? other than that she is Melba! While Galli-Curci is wonderful in her own right, again have a problem seeing her as the courtesan! Cheers, etc. Doug --
Agree Tetrazzini has an irresistable joi de vivre .... but I also like Melba's. How about a toss up??? THANK YOU!
Two very different phenomena! Melba has more voice and a proper Victorian fierceness about her. Tetrazzini has a higher voice and a very Italian joi de vivre about her. But are very capable swinging into each others territory. Both do amazing things with their voices. But, ultimately it's really comparing apples and oranges. Long may they both be remembered.
Brawississimo ! Beside Dammen sind mit gotliche Stimme und interpretieren wunderschone diese musik ! Brawississimo !
Großartig!
Las dos son divinas..!!!