Thread: State of modern operatic singing

I have created this thread in order to have a proper discussion concerning one of the most important aspect of opera, which is singing. While some criticize, like me, the current state of operatic singing, others appreciate what they hear and are great admirers of the current stars of the operatic world. This thread is therefore a place to exchange on this subject freely and without constraint. Feel free to voice your opinion or defend your position. We are looking for an healthy exchange where arguments are thoroughly expressed and supported, when necessary, by videos or other medias. The objective is not to create animosity between forumers. So let's all be civilized and let the discussion begin!

Originally Posted by Bonetan

Are you sure you want more of this??

It's a frustrating debate if people aren't willing to do the necessary listening with a critical ear...it would be easy for us to compare videos here. Amato is not the greatest baritone of his generation, but I'd like to hear a better version from the last 50 years, let alone modern day.



The vocal freedom, dynamics, consistent vibrato and resonance, clean and consistent vowels, beautiful legato, perfectly blended registers. It's all there.

If someone prefers to listen to more modern recordings with better sound, I understand 100%. But to argue that those modern versions are better sung is going to be very difficult. I welcome the attempt.

I do want more of this I think it is important to talk about the quality of singing. I mean, apart from music, what is more important in opera than singing? Not much. And I do believe that we can have a great conversation on this matter and you started it quite beautifully with your post. I shall share some of my ideas in this thread as well but I also want people from the other side of the aisle to tell us what they think. I strongly believe that a discussion is needed on this subject.

Originally Posted by Revitalized Classics

Thanks for sharing, Bonetan.

There is a characteristic of Amato's singing which I am curious about: the lack of obvious exertion.

It is striking to me how little huffing and puffing this efficient singing entails. Brilliant!



The best almost-counts-as-modern-for-the-sake-of-conversation-version I found was Zancanaro tucked away on a live recording from Paris 37 years ago in 1983. It doesn't match Amato but it is better than any I have heard since, I think.

I wondered what you think of that performance? Any ideas what technically is going on to account for the differences with Amato?


A couple of observations:
1) I think it is typical that record companies did not grasp what they had in Zancanaro and tape this role commercially: he only made 8 studio sets including a remake of Trovatore in his entire career.

2) It is conspicuous how the audience erupt like that: even a taste of the old qualities you mentioned has the audience out of their seats

Thanks

Bravo Zancanaro.

Great observation re exertion. You can tell that Zancanaro is singing with more effort here, yes?

Listen to Amato's long lines. One consistent, uninterrupted flow. How smoothly he goes from vowel to vowel, and the consistency of the vowels. Do that and you'll notice how often Zancanaro interrupts his line with breaths that Amato doesn't take. Another thing with Z is he'll slide into some high notes. Listen for it in the section from 1:45-3:15 for A and 3:15-4:35 for Z. This is where A really separates himself imo. Check out how elegantly Amato sings this. And the high G at the end. Some great stuff there.

Originally Posted by Bonetan

Bravo Zancanaro.

Great observation re exertion. You can tell that Zancanaro is singing with more effort here, yes?

Listen to Amato's long lines. One consistent, uninterrupted flow. How smoothly he goes from vowel to vowel, and the consistency of the vowels. Do that and you'll notice how often Zancanaro interrupts his line with breaths that Amato doesn't take. Another thing with Z is he'll slide into some high notes. Listen for it in the section from 1:45-3:15 for A and 3:15-4:35 for Z. This is where A really separates himself imo. Check out how elegantly Amato sings this. And the high G at the end. Some great stuff there.

That's super: thanks for the insights!

I would say that there has most definitely been a slow decline overall in singing in the last one hundred or so years (perhaps longer, but we don't have recordings to know that and the star singers of the early 20th Century couldn't be much bettered).

There are two myths that have been brought up regarding this topic before:
If by 'today' we mean the 21st century, then we can go back thirty, forty or fifty years and find a better general standard of singing overall, so we don't have to listen to recordings in old fashioned sound to test the hypothesis that people singing today aren't as good as they were in the past. You could even compare recordings from the 50s and 60s with those made in the last twenty years.

The second 'myth' is where people have compared a small number of recordings from today verses the past. I am sure we could all find recordings that illustrate whatever our opinion on this topic, but the question is whether the standard has declined overall.

I think if anyone wants to claim that singing hasn't declined or is better today, they should post some examples of these wonderful singers with an explanation of why their singing is to be preferred or is equal to singers from the past in the same repertoire.

It might also be worthwhile defining what we mean by 'good' singing.

N.

Originally Posted by Revitalized Classics

There is a characteristic of Amato's singing which I am curious about: the lack of obvious exertion.

It is striking to me how little huffing and puffing this efficient singing entails. Brilliant!

I think that you point out what is, to me, the hallmark of truly great singing - technique that makes the singing sound "easy", even though it isn't. If one listens to the great and admired singers of the acoustic era - people like Melba, Schumann-Heink, Battistini, de Luca, Jadlowker, Plancon, Paul Franz, Lev Sibiriakov, to name just a few - it's striking that their singing always sounds effortless.

Unfortunately, over the past century, audiences have grown used to singers who make a lot of noise, and sound effortful doing so. I can't remember the last time I heard a Brunnhilde who didn't sound like she was in extremis at the beginning of Act 2 of Walkure, or at the end of Siegfried, or during virtually all of Gotterdammerung. I suspect that if Frida Leider showed up in 2020, most audience members would dismiss her as "too light".

Originally Posted by wkasimer

I think that you point out what is, to me, the hallmark of truly great singing - technique that makes the singing sound "easy", even though it isn't. If one listens to the great and admired singers of the acoustic era - people like Melba, Schumann-Heink, Battistini, de Luca, Jadlowker, Plancon, Paul Franz, Lev Sibiriakov, to name just a few - it's striking that their singing always sounds effortless.

Unfortunately, over the past century, audiences have grown used to singers who make a lot of noise, and sound effortful doing so. I can't remember the last time I heard a Brunnhilde who didn't sound like she was in extremis at the beginning of Act 2 of Walkure, or at the end of Siegfried, or during virtually all of Gotterdammerung. I suspect that if Frida Leider showed up in 2020, most audience members would dismiss her as "too light".

The other factor to consider when we listen to recordings is the quality and detail of the recording. A modern recording captures infinitely more detail than one made even as recently as the 1970s and 80s. It's quite possible that the singers who we think are effortless and lacked 'huffing and puffing' were actually 'huffing and puffing', but the recording equipment didn't capture the detail in the same manner as modern equipment. The sound systems that we listen on also make a significant difference - modern equipment is able to reproduce sound far more accurately than the systems from a few decades ago.

I find most early recordings almost unbearable, not due to the singers, but down to the abysmal reproduction of sound that was available. I have a recording of Armida with Callas that is absolutely unbearable, even the orchestral sound is uneven and the vocals are appalling. I have yet to hear a recording from the Callas era that I can really enjoy, because the deficiencies in the reproduction detract from the singing. This causes me to wonder how many of the posters on this forum were alive when Callas was at her peak and actually experienced a live performance??

As Callas died before I started school I never heard her live and can't comment on how good (or not) she was in comparison to any of the current generation due to the vastly superior recordings that we can create today.

Live performances are in short supply right now, but I've seen productions with many of the current generation (Bartoli, Fleming, Villazon, Florez, Pettibon, and others) in various venues and have not found any of them lacking in any way. All have delivered great singing and acting performances (especially Florez).