TOSCANINI. UN MALEDUCATO CAFONE COME POCHI. SE QUESTO È UN "DIO"DELLA MUSICA PER MOLTI. ........ALLORA ...POVERA MUSICA.MEGLIO IL SILENZIO. COMUNQUE RIP.
It would be really dangerous game for Corelli to sing Arnoldo on the stage!! This extremely high tessitura could kill forever his tipically baritonal by nature tenor! Corelli's brilliant powerful voice sometimes sounds too forced even in verist tenor parts...
@ZENOBIAmusic's comment written three months ago and showing up right under this comment of mine caught my eye when I sorted the comments in chronological order, newest first. It is almost word for word a comment she wrote in reply to me. I find amusing she calls other people disingenuous when her behaviour is rather underhand. If she saw it fit to write her comment again as standalone comment I don't see why I shouldn't do the same with my reply. A few requests to Zenobia's: 1. Provide proof Nourrit used to sing his high notes in falsetto instead of voix mixte, backed up by citations from the period. Provide proof their understanding of falsetto is the same as yours, whatever yours might be. Giving you fair warning I have read Quicherat's book 2. Proof with citations that orchestra pitch was much lower in Paris at the time Guillaume Tell premiered. Again giving you fair warning I know orchestra pitches were inconsistent all over Europe at the time. Also giving you fair warning that 432 Hz (one example of many) is by no means much lower than orchestra pitch today, it's less than half a semitone. 3. Not interested in modern Fach labels for tenors (like spinto) who sing Guillaume tell, they are wrong 4. I agree Guillaume Tell was not meant for Corelli's voice, or rather, Corelli's poor technique & style wasn't meant for Guillaume Tell. If so, why does your comment read like an apology? It isn't the first time you do this. We actually agree about this point, so why does it rankle you Corelli was totally wrong about his ability to sing Guillaume Tell, and we have audio proof of how wrong he was? He was wrong, he put the brakes on it when he realized he was wrong, or other people took him aside and told him he was wrong, or other people with more common sense than he put the brakes on the project irrespective of what he thought. Why does this matter so much to you to the extend you are prepared to wad through all these comments and write replies? This must be the third or fourth reply to me alone (though I wouldn't swear they were all on this video), I'm not going to waste my time scanning other comments, there are almost 200, to see whether you replied to other people as well. So, WHY? Why these never ending apologies? Why this "Yes he wasn't a good fit for Arnold BUT" But what? her wasn't a good fit, period. In addition to what I wrote above, I let Zenobia know following: 5. All tenors in the 1820s were expected to have agility, period. There were no coloratura tenors, as there were no coloratura sopranos. Zenobia's problem stems from the fact that she thinks in modern Fach labels. Having a low pitched voice was no excuse for lacking agility in the time of Rossini. 6. Arnold was one of Tamagno's bread-and-butter roles. Tamagno was the first Verdi Otello. Perhaps Tamagno's voice sounds lyric in Zenobia's ear? There's no accounting for perceptions but this would be the first time I hear Tamagno described as lyric tenor. And no, he didn't sing in the 1920-1930 when, according to Zenobia, steel strings were introduced in orchestras, requiring heavier voices, also according to Zenobia. Lauri Volpi however used to sing in the 1930s and he was a lyric tenor according to Zenobia, so I wonder how he managed? According to Zenobia he should have failed, he being a lyric tenor singing against larger orchestras with steels and raised pitch. All those critics who wrote he was great must have been mistaken. Filippeschi sang the role in the 1950s and he too was a lyric according to Zenobia, and had to fight those pesky steel strings as well. He should have failed too but, there are those critics again of a different opinion than Zenobia. 7. If Zenobia doesn't like someone's opinion, it doesn't follow that that opinion is a disingenuous assessment, nor does it follow that that person is a purist. It is very possible that that person actually knows more than Zenobia. The funny thing is that Zenobia herself agrees that Corelli was no good whatever in Guillaume Tell, but apparently only Zenobia herself is allowed to say this, everyone else who is of the same opinion but brings in far more arguments than Zenobia could ever think of, is called a purist 😁
Aragal voce bellissima , dizione impeccabile uno dei 3 tenori che possono interpretare questa parte. J.D.Florez e Kraus. Altri non ne ho ascoltati. Bravo Aragal.
La Barcaccia ha rovinato la dignità dei cantanti Lirici. Se si ride delle sventure altrui, tra l'altro provocate dalla malattia, c'è poco da divertirsi o da parlare. È stata una grande artista e voi invece cosa siete?????? Due poverini. Vergognatevi
Mi pare di comprendere che Lei ritenga che Toscanini sia "ampiamente superato" (se ho mal compreso, mi scuso, e ritenga come non scritto il seguito). Se posso: cosa intende per "superato"? e da chi? grazie.
@@koaisan il merito di Toscanini è stato quello di attenersi alla stesura del compositore, su questo sta la grandezza del direttore, detto questo tutto si evolve, non penserà mica che direttori come il nostro Claudio Abato per esempio abbiano niente da invidiare a Toscanini. Quelli erano tempi che si creavano facilmente dei miti come Caroso, Rodolfo Valentino, ecc., grandi a quei tempi ma io preferisco Mario del Monaco a Caruso quantomeno per l'interpretazione. Se lo immagina Valentino recitare ora?
bonisolli sparava acuti senza neanche rendere l idea di ciò che cantava, la pira o o muto asil non c era l idea di come si raggiungevano gli acuti a secondo dell autore e dell' intenzione del brano. Corelli invece dava la giusta connotazione ad ogni parola cantata e in più con il doppio del volume e squillo
When I heard this the first time, I felt so bad. I was so embarassed: the marvellous voice of Anna Moffo in a despicable state. Shame on those who aired it.
Se si vuole imparare bisogna seguire gli insegnanti veramente tali,ossia in grado di insegnare e bravi.Lui lo era perché analizzate bene ciò che è riuscito a tirare fuori da se stesso.Non c'è altro da dire perché è già tanto e tutto ciò che c'è da dire...Bravissimo Maestro e poi so questo con cognizione di causa..
Existen muchos defensores de Domingo que confunden el marketing y la popularidad con el arte del canto y no salen del espectáculo circense de los tres tenores. Eso no es opera, es un espectáculo masivo cantado con micrófono si el mayor rigor técnico.
Domingo avrà partecipato pure all operazione di marketing dei tre tenori per la pecunia ,ma rimane un cantate eccezionale ,nonché un musicista completo essendo anche un direttore d'orchestra e avendo studiato composizione.
@@Kia-mf3bo Eso se llama aprendiz de todo y maestro de nada. Si se refiere a que para continuar su carrera se pasó a la cuerda de Barítono sin serlo, ya que perdió los pocos agudos que tenía no me vale. Domingo lleva muchos años arrastrándose por los escenarios. Es un osado por querer cantarlo todo. Está obsesionado con engrosar su número de roles sin el mínimo criterio musical. Eso para el público inexperto les vale, para el que entiende un mínimo de lo que es el arte del canto es una estafa.
Quello che dice a proposito della nota acuta del primo atto della Tosca è verissimo. Danise insegnava la stessa cosa a Valdengo. Molti hanno una concezione sbagliata del suono coperto e di come superare il cosiddetto passaggio. Coprono nella gola e il suono va indietro...
Lucrezia Borgia is one of the few recordings Sutherland and Bonynge made during her peak (which I would say was mid-sixties to late seventies, but YMMV) that did not have Pavarotti as lead tenor. And for that we are very very lucky.
