 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
50.143.230.223
I've heard it's such a crowd-pleaser, but got a bit bored with this one, found my ears yearning for a bit more chromaticism and orchestral color.
My first Verdi was the Requiem, (Ormandy), and that one still gets my heart racing.
La Traviata works for me; love the melodies.
Still have not sat down and listed to Verdi's Falstaff, which is supposed to be a masterpiece.
Follow Ups:
I also first started to 'get' Verdi with the Requiem. However, when I first heard Toscanini do it in the 1950's in MONO...it was POWERFUL and GRAND....I can't listen to any other version now.
Marty N.
,
Which performance? Are you just listening to audio? Or are you watching a DVD/BluRay?
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
,
Opera is theater with music and sung rather than spoken dialogue. Just listening to the audio reduces by half the total experience of any opera.
Aida is one of those operas that really does benefit from the sets, costumes and staging. I'm not saying it is the greatest opera ever written, but it is far from boring when presented as a whole (with visual).
There are several good video releases. I'm not crazy about any of the bluray releases, but the DVD of the Met performance featuring Placido Domingo with Levine conducting is a good one despite its age.
Aida
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
R Strauss' operatic exotica was bit of a let-down.
I know what you mean, and I also find Verdi to be rather conservative. But, we approach masterpieces for what they bring to us, rather than what we wish they were.
Yes, of course, after listening to Strauss any earlier composers will sound less extravagent. Particularly after Strauss. But, that's not a fair comparison. Strauss was of the generation that followed the mid-19th century Romantics such as Verdi. His generation was the one that ushered in the 20th century. Keep in mind that furthermore, Strauss was a considered to be a revolutionary in his time; a radical even. He paid the price by being hounded and ridiculed by critics for his radical harmonic procedures; the very ones for which we so enjoy Strauss.
I'm struck by your post and your call for chromatisism. It's that chromatisim that makes all of the great musics of the very late 19th century and early 20th century come alive, and makes it my ultra favorite period of music. So, it's particularly ironic, even stingingly so, that those academics are always ripping the late Romantics for using chromatisism. They rip Mahler, Strauss, Holst and all of that group apart for the very thing that we love in their music. What a bunch of twits. I once had a spat with Stereophile critic Richard Lennart over his ravaging of Strauss's chromatisism. Of course, Lennart's mostly a pop/rock dude who happened to wander into the dark waters of classical music, so he doesn't know what he's talking about. But, he was aping the undigested crapola he'd read from the critic hard liners.
For Strauss, incidentally, irony came to roost. Having suffer the slings and arrows in his prime for being a musical radical, he then became considered an arch conservative; a figure representing the dying tonal post Romantic style [the so-called late 19th century style] in the face of 20th century radicalism espoused by such new radicals as Arnold Schoenberg, Igor Stravinsky, Iannis Xenaksis, and the like.
.
1. Del Monaco/Tebaldi/Karajan
2. Vickers/Rysanek/Serafin
The Serafin has Gobbi as well, although a bit late in his career, while the Karajan has Protti. Karajan's later Otello is not as good, and he also tended to encourage the crooning side of Vickers.
Not everyone likes Mario del Monaco, but he had a splendid voice, and Otello was his signature role. He was also good in his recorded Forza, IMO.
The Serafin recording is underrated, in my view. I have the Soria edition on LP - truly a beautiful set.
,
Oh, I forgot. You don't like Wagner.
Burned a lot of fat.I don't like Wagner? News to me! : )
Edits: 01/20/16
Oh, I guess I didn't figure you for a Wagnerian for some strange reason. Anyway, forget about the special diet. I just found out it is a hoax.
Sorry to hear about your back problems, though. I hope you'll be feeling better soon...
I recently mentioned that I'm having a hard time warming up to Parsifal ,
Great melodies, as you say. I think of Aida as a grand spectacle that works best when it's seen.
IMHO, Verdi was not a natural comedian, and Falstaff, to me, is an opera that I respect without loving it. Otello is far better, again IMHO. I also have a great deal of love for Don Carlo, even with the substandard ending, Ballo, and Simone Boccanegra, all of which I have seen live. I have seen Falstaff live twice, by the way.
I think much of the last act of Falstaff is hilarious when well done.
I think Falstaff is the next greatest opera after the big Mozarts.
Toscanini's performance, of course.
Jeremy
Interesting take.
Aida has lots of exotic intervals, the ballets, for instance. But, that's O.K.
I find Otello the masterpiece rather than Falstaff.
Yes, Traviata is marvelous.
Have trouble with the Requiem. Too much fire and brimstone for me.
Now, Don Carlo .............
"If people don't want to come, nothing will stop them" - Sol Hurok
While I don't understand why you thought Aida lacks orchestral color, I would encourage you to check out Falstaff! Even in mono, the Toscanini recording is outstanding, and there are some good versions in stereo.
Oh, and while you're on the way to Falstaff, don't miss Otello.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
