Leonard Warren sings Prologue from Pagliacci (vaimusic.com) 

I’ll be 72 this month, but I’ve know about Warren for 50 years. You should try to find the recording of Pagliacci with him, Bjorling, De Los Angeles and Merrill. A riveting performance, and his performance of this prologue is even better than what you’re hearing hear.

At 80+, I vividly remember hearing Mr. Warren in this role on the Saturday afternoon Metropolitan Opera radio broadcasts: a performance which contributed materially both to my admiration of this magnificent artist (I developed into a bass-baritone, but never, of course, even nearly of that caliber) and a lifelong love of grand opera. And I still recall my shock and sadness on hearing of his sudden demise; but what a way to go!

You have many great thrills ahead of you! The live Met broadcasts on youtube with Warren are especially exciting!

Correct.

Α;;;

It was in better sound when you saw him and no Baritone in my time had his combo of Power and beauty to such a degree, Mac Neil had upper voice power like that also, but the beauty of Warren's voice was amazing.

Agreed!

Please, listen Ettore Bastianini, and after we talk again about...

agree😊

Sorry guys but Bastianini loses this Battle

Charles Henry I totally agree. If you ask me who the greatest tenor was, I can give you 6 or 8 names. If you ask me who the greatest baritone was, there is only one---the great Leonard Warren.

Wendell Perry That about sums it up. Many great baritones. Warren is the Empire State Building. No one can top the king.

Io non l ho mai sentito dal vivo perchè sono nato dopo....ma era quello che pensavo! La dolcezza del porgere i suoni...una cosa unica!! Note alte con morbidezza come un tenore leggero ma con un colore scuro e potente...è unico!!! Sembrw che non faccia nessuna fatica!👍👍👍

Yes I did once, that was it exactly, and of course the voice was huge but he could throttle it down to a whisper with diminuendo a tenor would envy and he had a tenor high C for sun also! RIP. Dead at age 48 on stage in 1960 sadly.

@@shicoff1398, Warren and Jan Peerce were great friends at the time of this recording. Peerce was a very good actor as well. See the sadness and disappointment in his eyes due his wife Nedda unfaithfulness, at 2:52.

@@shicoff1398 That’s fantastic! You are the envy of countless admirers who have only heard his voice on recordings. I’d love a brief comparison to the 3 other American baritones who sang this piece, namely MacNeill, Merrill and Milnes, if you’d be so kind. I’ve only heard 2 of these in the Met. Thank you in advance if you are able.

@@sw5114 well thank you, you know I had the advantage of age, where and when I worked and the interest, so in the 1960's I worked also in radio production for a music station for awhile, anyhow I hate to give my opinion as far as who is best, because it all depends on what they sang and when, as for age and what kind of voice you like, I do not get involved as you know with fanatic fans of any singer, they lose all credibility and are a waste of time, I have been in the opera house seeing Warren only once at age 17 or 18, so not as fresh in my mind as the other two you mentioned, but for me he was perhaps the greatest of his type, that said it was a different type then Merrill, but Merrill of course was the Baritone voice I saw and heard the most over many long years, I saw him in concert alone, with Tucker in opera and also in concert with Tucker and soprano's also, saw Milnes a few times, even early in his career and later and met him with his opera group in the Chicago restaurant yearly when he came to the city with his student group, and in fact talked with him a few times then and at the opera in Chicago, once even between acts of Otello he was doing at the time. Warren I only saw once, Mac Neil I saw a few times, even later, and last in 1973 at the Met. in Pagliacci. I'll give you more info perhaps tomorrow but it's just my opinion, we all hear differently, there is no right or wrong. I never met Warren or went back stage, back in the 1950's I was more into tenors mostly, but wish I had, he had an amazing voice and singer, more in a few days about them.

Tita Ruffo.

@@edwardstroud8245 Ruffo was more Italianate obviously and more of a roaring voice. Warren, on the other hand, had greater nuance, and a more impassioned and thrilling high range.

i know im asking the wrong place but does anybody know of a method to get back into an instagram account..? I was dumb forgot the password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me.

@Houston Brysen instablaster :)

@Felipe Jaxen Thanks for your reply. I got to the site through google and im in the hacking process atm. Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will get back to you later with my results.

@Felipe Jaxen It did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I am so happy:D Thank you so much, you saved my ass :D

@Houston Brysen you are welcome :)

I like Warren as much as the next man-but these hyperbolic statements always get on my nerves. You point out many other great baritones, each with remarkable qualities and timbres. You strangely leave out MacNeil who had a top every bit as great as Warrens, and IMO was a better Rigoletto. Also, Mac and others top always sounded more baritonal to me-Warrens' great as it is always sounds more like a tenor. People always forget how great Tibbett was, speaking of American baritones. Many of the names you mentioned had a more equalized sound through the range, with better lower voice without that woofy sound Warren could get. (frankly if we are talking voice-qua voice-what is Wixell doing in the mix-even Gobbi?)And of course we're leaving out the great historic voices. If I take your phrase "timbre and quality without equal" it is without doubt the true king of Verdi baritones-also a great interpreter-Titta Ruffo

Labienus Concerning Wixell, Gobbi and Milnes, I was speaking to their individuality, their uniqueness and not their greatness. I don't consider those three "great" baritones. Good, yes. IMO MacNeil was the one of the top baritones in the early 60's to early 70's. He started shouting in his upper register, a la di Stefano, in his later years which lessened my opinion of him. Gobbi had a very dry sound which I did not find appealing. You talk of woofy sound, that describes Milnes to a T. Ruffo was king in his day. One can tell even with his recordings that he was incredible. My grandfather heard the golden age singers and all the greats up to the late 60's and told me that Ruffo was the greatest baritone he ever heard, followed by Warren, who he said was more versatile in interpretation, then Merrill. He also said that Caruso's voice was the greatest followed by Bjorling. I could go on and on but space and time limit my post. Lab, there is no accounting for taste and one does not need to defend their taste in singers. Superlatives are subjective and also warrant no defense. Suffice it to say that it is great to debate and discuss. There are many wonderful singers.

Campuscoll It's refreshing to be able to say something and not have the person get all angry and worked up. I don't know if voice lovers are worse than others, but too often it deteriorates rapidly if a favorite is challenged. With your final words,first-yes there is no accounting for taste, but it should be based on some reasons-otherwise it's like preferring one flavor of ice cream over another-and I at least think it there should be more to it. Yes, people don't have to defend their favorites-they can say whatever they want-but that and superlatives should be a cause for justification and discussion-though I don't know if a debate is necessary. But finally there are many great singers, and in different ways, sometimes in different roles, they have varying qualities that excel.So again why I prefer to skip the super, superlatives when you're on this plateau of quality. Well that's a first for me-I never heard anyone who knew someone who heard Ruffo. (Not having heard even Bjorling live, but most of the important tenors after him-from recordings (who doesn't like Bjorling) he's far from my favorite tenor-and I had my uncle who heard everyone from the 30's on-would always remind me that Borlings voice in person was rather small) For the big voiced, heroic sounding baritones, I've never heard better than Ruffo-but it was also his color and effortless quality-the gradations of tone that were amazing, A great favorite of mine is Stracciari-who had a voice probably as naturally beautiful as Merrill's-who had the perfect voice-but so often didn't use it in an interesting way. On a different scale was de Luca-who was a great, elegant singer. With Mac-yes the later years were more inconsistent-I don't remember the shouting as much a the wobble-but even beyond the years you mention-if you caught him on the right night he could still be amazing. There seems to be a get Milnes campaign out there-which is unfortunate. It's true that after 14 years or so he started having problems, but I wouldn't describe his voice as woofy-whereas the lower part of Warrens' voice was "muddy" I heard Milnes live many times in the 70's, and there hasn't but a big voiced, canon firing high note baritone since then. I do think Milnes had a real case of Warrenitis, which may have led to problems, The early Gobbi had more of a voice, but in later years-essentially as Scarpia which I saw-he almost didn't need much voice, he was so compelling.

@@Labienus There's this massive clique of online weirdoes nowadays who obsessively point out Bjoerling's voice size whenever he's brought up as an all-time great. He sang absolutely anywhere he wanted whenever he wanted during his career. He was the biggest singer in the world. Almost nobody was bitching about his voice size. It's this weird thing that everyone today has to bring up, as if that matters at all on record. It's supposed to be some sort of disqualifying trump card, like there's this secret terrible quality that doesn't show up on record but we still have to accept that it makes him inferior in some way. It's a bunch of baloney. There are dozens of live recordings of his voice. It's never drowned out, ever, by anything.

@@Labienus And fundamentally, the way Warren, Milnes, Cappuccilli, Bastianini. etc. sang was just wrong. It was a radical departure from the previous generation, all of whom were better in every way. They started singing with this awful, woofy quality that dampened the vowels and gave them wobbly voices. Baritones earlier had pure tones and ringing tops, without wobbles are woofiness. A much better example from their generation would be Weede. Merrill had some overdarkening problems, but still at least produced a normal, consistent, bright tone. He was the last one to do so...maybe Rawnsley for a bit. Battistini, Ruffo, Stracciari, Tibbett, Schlusnus, Pacini, Ancona, Giraldoni, Bellantoni, Galeffi, Urbano, Milani, Albinolo, Formichi, De Luca, Amato, Basiola, Magini-Coletti, Inghilleri, Danise, Crabbé, Noté, Tilkin-Servais, Cambon, Renaud, Endrèze, Stamler, Karakash, Albers, Maksakov, Duhan, Schwarz, Zakharov, Sarobe, Della Torre, Segura-Tallien, etc. were all way, way, way better.

Sadly so. If you don’t mind telling why the differences between MacNeill and Merrill and Milnes. I never really cared for the Russian, although a good actor.

Good answer, I never saw Tibbett of course, that is the best way to know a voice, but for me Merrill for great tonal beauty, a voice of tremendous beauty, golden in tone in house like no other and Warren for dramatic passion, rich power, emotion and his warmth, two of the greatest and up there with the great Italian artists of the past , just an opinion, both these Americans are different, both superb in their best roles .

Warren was throaty and wobbly. You people don't know the first thing about technique.

I think you're confusing Warren with Lawrence Tibbett.

May be you have heard a guy called Ettore Bastianini?

@@bastiatintheandes4958 Good question !! I had to laugh about your expression "a guy called E.B."haha.

@@bastiatintheandes4958, I love Bastianini, but his Prologue is not the best. At 2:56 Leonard Warren is a vocal King.

Are you aware of the Italian Zancanaro? If so, how does he compare?

Warren and Cappuccilli aren't in the top 50.

bodiloto mi scusi se le scrivo qui. Mi hanno riferito che Lei ha ricevuto delle minaccie sotto il mio nome. Ebbene non sono stato io. Sono stato vittima di uno hacker che vuole infastidirmi ed ha usato il mio profilo per minacciata e così facendo, mi sta creando dei problemi. Mi dispiace di quanto le è stato detto, ma Lei capisce che sono vittima di uno squilibrato. Spero che LEi possa capire questo messaggio. Le auguro buone cose e buona musica. Sarò lieto di ricevere una sua risposta. Cordialmente, Raffaele

orribile. ingolata

Onstage at the old Met, no less, after singing "Urna fatale"

MrGer2295 j

Eu traduzi, mas muitos no Brasil não infelizmente

De la douceur dans ces chants avec un aigüe exceptionnel.

YES! A thousand times YES!!!

Its not arguing. Its opera talk. Its what we do!

@@jefolson6989 Oh, please. Don't act like a large portion of opera fans in these comment sections don't ARGUE over who is the best. Everyone finds a way to put down the other person's favorite singer. This is probably the most toxic music community I've ever been a part of.

@@bharp4390 new to the world of serious opera fans? Its what we do. Its always been thus.i hope you arent turned off by what is just an expression of deep interest.I know many opera buffs who travel the world attending opera. To hear them talk, they hate all of it. The comment section is tame compared to Opera-l for example which isn't for the squimish. Opera is a sport, as well as an art. Its always been the culture and its a good thing. I think it all reads more combative than it is. Even when we trash each others favorites Strong opinions are evidence that there is a passion which is the very soul of opera. Once its all sweet and nice, and everyone agrees, everyone will sound the same and this artform will die. Besides, I 'm one of nice one!

If you like Ruffo but also find Terfel acceptable, then something is seriously wrong with your ear. "If I like great singing, why not also terrible singing?" It just doesn't make sense. It makes you entirely indiscriminate.

Amen.

Titta Ruffo is the best

@@user-zw6od7wc2q is it a competition tho

Lisent, plis to Gustavo Escudero in this rol, he is quite good... (Barítono Gustavo Escudero: Teatro Calderón Guadalajara Jalisco, México).

@@user-zw6od7wc2q maybe louder. More Italianate. Better? Warren is the one I’d rather hear over and over.

My God you left out MacNeil!

There was no one more powerful. Recordings dont capture the overtones. On records he often sounds "blousy", over rich, and unwieldy.

@@jefolson6989 Your personal opinion isn't relevant in this measurable specific attribute. It's not like quality, where only the individual can decide which timbre appeals. Decibels can be measured. No witness at the time of his career ever claimed that Warren possessed anything like the most powerful baritone, because it simply & demonstrably wasn't. Warren was absolutely not the most powerful baritone voice by any stretch. Ruffo was far bigger, so was Bechi, so was Amato, so was Tibbett. Warren had a large melliflouous voice that was a product of a lowered larynx technique. It was extremely well produced & had an extensive top to high C. He could have been a heldentenor, but played it safely as baritone. Both in film footage of live performance, & on record, the voice lacked squillo. It wasn't that type of vocal production. He specialized in a rounded, sonorous elegiac uniform quality over which he had superb control of dynamics. It was most certainly a very large & generous voice, but its actual power has never been its primary outstanding characteristic for me. I have no problem if you prefer any other of his characteristics however. Apart from range & power, everything else is down to personal preference.

@@hiyadroogs what are the decibel numbers for Warren? that will be interesting.I didnt know anyone measured that. Would have to always be from the same exact spot to compare I guess. I never heard Ruffo or Tibbet. They were a previous generations. I didnt say he had the biggest voice I ever heard.(but he is in the top 5 ) and anyone who heard him live that Ive talked to would describe him as 'powerful'. I suspect you mean it lacked squillo, which is more true on records than live. The high notes had plenty. But its a unique sound. How he projected it was a mystery, especially his soft singing. I havent read the contemporary accounts you have, in which they mention a lack of power, but I would like to . Can you give me the info or links,? Thank you!

​@@jefolson6989 Decibel meters didn't exist at the time of Warren, as far as I am aware, let alone Ruffo, Bechi, Protti, Tibbett etc. I didn't say, nor imply that Warren's was not a powerful voice. It very obviously was. But the degree of power is relative against other voices. It is generally accepted that Ruffo's was perhaps the biggest male voice in recorded history among the baritones. But it is also true that with the biggest voices in recorded history, there wouldn't be a great difference in amplitude. One wouldn't bury the other if they sang together. Warren used a lowered larynx technique, but allowed the voice to lighten as he ascended toward the engagement of his head register. This is the bel canto technique. He didn't attempt to sustain heavy thick chest register tones above the passaggio, nor did he fall into the trap of most large voices, of striving for power by athleticism. Using his head register lightly & correctly, enabled his voice to thin out as it ascended, which gave him facility to fine the tone away to nothing at will, or to ascend to high C, because the voice wasn't being driven,, but floated. Most great voices do this at debut, it is the teachers job to instill this in the student, but there is a hidden trap for the unwary, & it is this: The bel canto technique allows functional freedom, & easy flowing cantilena. Because power through freedom & natural resonance come so easily, it can delude the singer into thinking that the voice has more to give. The occasional foray to full power for effect, then becomes habitual in the technique. Functional freedom gives way to strenuous athleticism. The singer loses perspective, that the very resonance & freedom that he enjoyed, came from floating the voice & using it with respect. Once athleticism is engaged, the previous freedom & easy natural resonance is lost forever, replaced by force. A perfect register balance, resonance position & appropriate support allows the voice to attain its full potential. Anything that moves away from that is a compromise, with the attendant loss of beauty, power, range & control. The dramatic tenor Francesco Tamagno was once asked by another tenor how he, Tamagno, had kept his voice Youthful & fresh, after 30 years singing the heaviest Italian repertoire, while he had long since lost his own voice. Tamagno replied "Because I sang on my interest, while you sang on your capital!" Ruffo possessed a gigantic voice, but abused the privilege by giving the audience what they craved. Full power all the time. By the end of a relatively short career, he had blown the guts out of the voice.

@@jefolson6989 Ruffo: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-t6Z0O90DNco.html

...talvez esteja escrevendo em portuguès!