DUELING DIVAS: Melba (1904) vs. Tetrazzini (1911) in Verdi's LA TRAVIATA 

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.

Two superb performances that demonstrate the forgotten art of romantic opera singing. Incredible ornamentation, freedom and character thank you for posting!

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.

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."

Tetrazzini is supreme here, so much more feeling and a far better cabaletta and fuller top notes.

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.

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.

Even a crispy recording decayed by age can't kill a beautiful voice.

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 but la Tetrazzini is an ARTIST!

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...

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!

NICE PERFORMANCE!!! Thank you Sir Doug for sharing this with us.

We were lucky to have both, plus all the other great divas singing La Traviata!Enjoy each for their fantastic voices!

👍to 👂 these recordings,Thanks👋

Thank you ladies for your wonderful vocalising. It is a pity I cannot thank you personally but alas, it is too late.

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".

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! :-)

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.

my life she makes my day a good day when its not so good love always from ireland we all love you

Two devine aetheric voices ! Both equally beautiful !

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

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!' :)

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).

Hands down; Tetrazzini wins!

I like Galli-Curci actually.....haha! Dueling Divas should include GC. I love her duets with Tito Schipa.

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 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

I would prefer Tetrazzini although Patti sings so sweet here.

Perception is the reality... when it comes to fun & joy shall stick with Tetrazzini...

While I always thought Melba's style was the very opposite of "charmless" - her "charm" is definitely not of Galli-Curci's coquetry type; it's charm in a decorous and rather regal manner, which is why she occasionally sounds rather imperious. Galli-Curci is like a coquettish young princess and Melba is like a proper virgin queen. You actually took the words out of my mouth when you linked Melba with England and France, and Tetrazzini & Galli-Curci with Italy because I've always thought.......

Both artists can be enjoyed... for their similarites and differences... what more can be said?

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.

Seriously?? I thought Melba conveys *OODLES* of fun and joy in her 'Sempre Libera'!! So MUCH fun and joy, in fact, that I always thought she didn't NEED the High E flat at the end that so many others add (including Louisa of course), to convey Violetta's sense of merry abandon. And Melba's recordings of 'Se Saran Rose' are the DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS of fun and joy, if you ask me!!

Whether we like it or not, history cannot be changed. It would be a waste of time to deny Galli-Curci greatness. Contemporary accounts of her debut in Chicago (and descriptions of reactions to her singing in other venues) indicate that she set off a kind of madness whenever she sang (and sang well). She was second only to Caruso in record sales. However, Galli-Curci never was and never could have been as great a singer as Melba.

You said "when it comes to fun & joy shall stick with Tetrazzini" - to which I responded by saying that Melba provides tonnes of fun and joy for me, which apparently you don't get from her. Hence, you "carry on" with Tetrazzini for fun and joy, to use your words, and I'll "stick to"/"carry on" with Melba! :)

Melba hands down in my humble opinion

Rejecting the "ethereal" Melba may not "automatically place one in the embrace of" the "corporeal" Tetrazzini, but invariably, people tend to favour one over the other, depending on what their personal inclinations are! You yourself admitted that you spend far more time listening to Tetrazzini than Melba, while the complete reverse is true for me. And naturally so! You're both a husband and a father! I'm what the French call "un puceau" (the French male equivalent of a maiden). LOL. :)

For me, Tetrazzini

UK Encyclopedia: Charpoy-bashing is British army slang for a siesta. Yaar: Used in north India for "friend".

Interesting visions, provocative, conjectural wizardry....

.....I think Melba gives the Italian operas a sense of grace, dignity and purity which the Italianate sopranos don't really bring to the table. That's just me. :) And let's not forget tat Puccini called her "the Mimi of my dreams". Her Mimi and Violetta are the most sublime of all to me, and she would've made a great Countess in 'Figaro' (speaking of which, I think her "Voi che sapete" is the most beautiful of all; much TOO beautiful for Cherubino in fact, but that's her femininity for you! lol)

Are you serious? Femininity cannot comprise "aggressive energy"? Try saying that to Joan of Arc, or the goddesses Athena and Artemis! I named those three iconic female figures specifically to point out how femininity can be "pure", "chaste" and also "aggressive" - just like Melba's singing!! And you can't really pit Galli-Curci's "Je veux vivre" against Melba's, because GC was only 34 when she recorded it, while Melba was 43. But since you brought it up, I will compare the two versions.....

Both great:) One is ten years younger:)

An unfair comparison. Tetrazzini a lighter more agile coloratura while Melba was a lyric coloratura. I'm sure Melba's weight of voice would have told in an Act II or Act III comparison. Our Melba is the legend - her career is as long-lived and sensational as her life.

We are free to choose...

Just can't bring myself to like Melba. There's a flatness to certain notes and I swear an Australian inflection to certain vowels. Tetrazzini was a superb technician with a beautiful voice, a bit thin in the middle, freely produced and vibrant. You want to listen to her again. Probably more fun on stage too. Melba, well, she has a dry toast named for her that gets caught in the throat. Tetrazzini has a delicious, rich chicken dish named for her. Oh, and peche melba...feh.

One is an Apple The Other a Pear They are both delicious to my ears

Melba as feminine ideal, by any standard or cultural measure, is a bit of a stretch, and rejecting said "Victoriana", even at its ethereal, spiritual best, does not automatically place one in the embrace of the more "corporeal" Tetrazzini.

Freud would have come up with 2 new complexes - the Melba complex and the Tetrazzini complex. Depending on which singer one prefers/identifies with, he would have arrived at certain conclusion about a person's personality. :P

Тетраццини совершенна. Tetrazzini was the best.

Thank you Usually is peach Melba,but i find PEARS more delicious to my palate ,that's how Melba voice sounds to me ! CIAO.

But being "cheeky" is very acceptable.... Hindi? Nothing fancy, but I can certainly get along!

Victorians don't tolerate siestas and "slang". Hmph! But thanks for the word definitions. So do actually speak Hindi, after living in India for so long??

I'm too Victorian to watch the likes of SNL sketches! Hmph!

Tetrazzini wins.

Melba...I don't get it... even in this archaic recording.... she is constantly FLAT with colorless, singing.... yuck......sloppy coloratura and no high notes... but that is the least of it... what a good pr guy can do! .

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...

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.

With trills like Melba's, who needs a High Eb?

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.

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....

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...

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.

nessun confronto. La Tetrazzini .

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!

......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

Tetrazzini!

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 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.

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!

Melba spoils everything with her Australian accent, otherwise she's the greatest of all times.

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. ^_^

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 💓

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.

OMG... Tetrazzini

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.

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.

There is another word for Melba's voice - ethereal.

Are you kidding me?? But wait - you're an admitted Galli-Curci "fanatic", so of course you'd say that! :P I could present a number of reasons as to why Melba's take(s) on this scena are superior to Galli-Curci's, but it wouldn't make a difference because at the end of the day, everyone has their own distinct dispositions. Your heroine is Galli-Curci, and mine is Melba. :)

"... not entering into the debate." Likely a wise and safe decision! All Best. Cheers, etc. Doug --

Tettrazini! Absolutely!

Absolutely Tetrazzini!

Yes, and I choose Melba. :)

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

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......

Melba seems to throw words onto the music without much meaning. There is no duel really....

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.

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.

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

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. :)

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.

Agree Tetrazzini has an irresistable joi de vivre .... but I also like Melba's. How about a toss up??? 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".

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.

My wife leans to Tetrazzini.

I don't need Tetrazzini for fun & joy - Melba delivers both to me in VOLUMES, so I'll stick with HER. :P

@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!

What you're really dealing with is differences in INTERPRETATION. Melba learned from Gounod himself, remember, and her tempo/pace itself is much closer to the composer's intentions than Galli-Curci's slower, dreamier take on it. I must also mention at this point that Galli-Curci breaks the verb "m'enivre" from the first verse into TWO syllables, which is WRONG, but I'll overlook that as trivial in the bigger picture. I will proceed to talk about the interpretive differences instead.....