Classical Music Forum banner

Who wins?

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,457 Posts
Now that plenty have left their opinions on Enkbhat I want to state that I absolutely despise his singing lol. This is the manufactured overly dark sound that has been the death of low voice singing imo. Enkbhat sounds better than his contemporaries while doing so and is enjoying success as a result, but this is not free and easy vocal production and I hope no young baritones are trying to imitate this sound.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21,867 Posts
Now that plenty have left their opinions on Enkbhat I want to state that I absolutely despise his singing lol. This is the manufactured overly dark sound that has been the death of low voice singing imo. Enkbhat sounds better than his contemporaries while doing so and is enjoying success as a result, but this is not free and easy vocal production and I hope no young baritones are trying to imitate this sound.
I believe you are right. I also suspect his voice won't last. The vibrato is already slow.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,620 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Now that plenty have left their opinions on Enkbhat I want to state that I absolutely despise his singing lol. This is the manufactured overly dark sound that has been the death of low voice singing imo. Enkbhat sounds better than his contemporaries while doing so and is enjoying success as a result, but this is not free and easy vocal production and I hope no young baritones are trying to imitate this sound.
I couldn't see you liking him. I thought you were losing it:eek:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
"Amartüvshin Enkhbatyn" (carefully copy-and-pasted) makes me wonder whether I'm looking at a language with roots common to the modern Finno-Ugric languages, Hungarian, Finnish and Turkish. I'm not expecting anyone to know the answer to this, but having Hungarian ancestry I'm curious about this odd group of languages. Maybe Mr. Enkhbat will drop by and tell us.
Hungarian and Finnish are distantly related, but that's it. Turkish is unrelated to them and to Mongolian, which is also unrelated to them. The Altaic language-family hypothesis would have Mongolic languages related to Turkic ones, but that is not bolstered by good evidence and is not accepted by the linguistic establishment in countries where linguists actually follow the scientific method. Mongolic and Turkic languages (as well as some others, most notably the Tungusic ones) show a great deal of similar features that are thought to be areal features diffused a few thousand years ago (timeline off the top of my head). For example, Tuvan, a Turkic language, shows a great deal of Mongolian influence through borrowing and shared culture over a long period, which has resulted in Tuva and Western Mongolia being the two most active modern centers of Central Asian overtone singing.

In fact, many of these typological features found in Northern Asia are also present in Uralic, but even the Altai hypothesizers don't put Uralic in there. Uralic is the language family that "Finno-Ugric" is in, but we don't really use the latter term anymore because it isn't a primary family and there isn't good evidence that the Ugric and the Finno-Permic have much in common that separates them from the Samoyedic.

So to summarize: Mongolic languages have no proven genetic relationships to any non-Mongolic languages, but they share certain features with languages in a broad belt across Northern and Central Asia that are thought to be the result of areal contact.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
Herlea is a new discovery of mine for the contest. I think you will like him. Bonetan wanted both Enkhbat and Merrill
Nicolae Herlea, Romanian baritone sings from Verdi Il trovatore aria "Il balen del suo sorriso"
Amartuvshin Enkhbat: Il balen del suo sorriso (Verdi: Il trovatore)
Il Trovatore (1990 Remastered Version) , ACT 2 Scene 2: Il balen del suo sorriso (Count di Luna) · Robert Merrill · Orchestra del Teatro dell'Opera, Roma · Thomas Schippers
What is it between this recitative and aria, that requires different skills ? Herlea was better in the recitative, Enkhbat in the proper aria. Merrill was without the recitative. Merrill was probably the smoothest, I feel like I should choose him. But I will not. Enkhbat was more fun. But the prize is for the aria, not the recitative.

Edit: Now that others are bashing Merrill, I remeber, that I eliminated him first yesterday (7 hours ago cca). But I concluded I am too tired to make sound decisions. And this morning he sounded just fine ?! Mystery.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
Hungarian and Finnish are distantly related, but that's it. Turkish is unrelated to them and to Mongolian, which is also unrelated to them. The Altaic language-family hypothesis would have Mongolic languages related to Turkic ones, but that is not bolstered by good evidence and is not accepted by the linguistic establishment in countries where linguists actually follow the scientific method. Mongolic and Turkic languages (as well as some others, most notably the Tungusic ones) show a great deal of similar features that are thought to be areal features diffused a few thousand years ago (timeline off the top of my head). For example, Tuvan, a Turkic language, shows a great deal of Mongolian influence through borrowing and shared culture over a long period, which has resulted in Tuva and Western Mongolia being the two most active modern centers of Central Asian overtone singing.

In fact, many of these typological features found in Northern Asia are also present in Uralic, but even the Altai hypothesizers don't put Uralic in there. Uralic is the language family that "Finno-Ugric" is in, but we don't really use the latter term anymore because it isn't a primary family and there isn't good evidence that the Ugric and the Finno-Permic have much in common that separates them from the Samoyedic.

So to summarize: Mongolic languages have no proven genetic relationships to any non-Mongolic languages, but they share certain features with languages in a broad belt across Northern and Central Asia that are thought to be the result of areal contact.
But what if Enkhbath family comes from Tuva ;-) ?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
First we have to figure out whether Subutai was really Tuvan or not. Then Ankle Bat.

By the way, my favorite Amartuwshin is Baasandorj, one of the best singers ever to record. But that's not the kind of classical music we do here.
Haha, I pretended to be well informed, and, as a result, do not understand your response :D
I am a fan of a late physicist Richard Feynman, and, in connection with him, I have read the book "Tuva or bust" by Ralh Leighton. I remembered, Tuvan language had some similarities to Turkish, and that they do throat singing. Is that what Baasandorj does ?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
802 Posts
It... gets... even... worse... His name is actually "Enkhbatyn Amartüvshin" although apparently he is also known as "Amartuvshin Enkhbat"...

He probably alternates them depending upon which name is written on the arrest warrant...

In this Mongolian name, the given name is Amartüvshin. Enkhbat is a patronymic, not a family name.

In Far East the family name is usually first, the given name is second. In Europe the same is accepted in Hungary.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,620 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
Hungarian and Finnish are distantly related, but that's it. Turkish is unrelated to them and to Mongolian, which is also unrelated to them. The Altaic language-family hypothesis would have Mongolic languages related to Turkic ones, but that is not bolstered by good evidence and is not accepted by the linguistic establishment in countries where linguists actually follow the scientific method. Mongolic and Turkic languages (as well as some others, most notably the Tungusic ones) show a great deal of similar features that are thought to be areal features diffused a few thousand years ago (timeline off the top of my head). For example, Tuvan, a Turkic language, shows a great deal of Mongolian influence through borrowing and shared culture over a long period, which has resulted in Tuva and Western Mongolia being the two most active modern centers of Central Asian overtone singing.

In fact, many of these typological features found in Northern Asia are also present in Uralic, but even the Altai hypothesizers don't put Uralic in there. Uralic is the language family that "Finno-Ugric" is in, but we don't really use the latter term anymore because it isn't a primary family and there isn't good evidence that the Ugric and the Finno-Permic have much in common that separates them from the Samoyedic.

So to summarize: Mongolic languages have no proven genetic relationships to any non-Mongolic languages, but they share certain features with languages in a broad belt across Northern and Central Asia that are thought to be the result of areal contact.
One of my important opera mentors who took me to a number of operas including in Santa Fe and who inspired my interest in Wagner was a world expert on Altaic languages and lectured often in Europe, especially Vienna, on the subject. He was lead professor of Asian languages at the UW. He was an authority on the Tibetan language and was used as a coder in WWII using that language. I've always known people who were much smarter than me:geek::geek::geek::geek::geek:. My gift was that I was charming having grown up in the South and I am a very gifted conversationalist :)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21,867 Posts
Slavov sounds good. His instrument seems suited to the music he's singing. Bonfanti's doesn't. The acoustics don't help, so I searched YouTube to hear what the voice sounds like close up:


Not bad, but it doesn't sound to me like a voice that should be singing leading Verdi roles. Apparently he was already singing Rigoletto and Don Carlo in Ernani ten years ago. This Rossini was posted only a year ago, so it presumably represents his present work pretty well:


I guess I'd be happy enough to hear that in a college production, assuming the acting was good, but... It's just not much of an instrument, and sound technique can't make it more than it is by nature. The tone has little depth or ring; it's the sort of colorless voice we get used to hearing in Gilbert and Sullivan operettas. If the question was who stands out among present day baritones (or, originally, who's the best in the world today), I sure hope it isn't this guy.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Slavov sounds good. His instrument seems suited to the music he's singing. Bonfanti's doesn't. The acoustics don't help, so I searched YouTube to hear what the voice sounds like close up:


Not bad, but it doesn't sound to me like a voice that should be singing leading Verdi roles. Apparently he was already singing Rigoletto and Don Carlo in Ernani ten years ago. This Rossini was posted only a year ago, so it presumably represents his present work pretty well:


I guess I'd be happy enough to hear that in a college production, assuming the acting was good, but... It's just not much of an instrument, and sound technique can't make it more than it is by nature. The tone has little depth or ring; it's the sort of colorless voice we get used to hearing in Gilbert and Sullivan operettas. If the question was who stands out among present day baritones (or, originally, who's the best in the world today), I sure hope it isn't this guy.
Lmao "a college production"

This is why singing is so terrible today. The idea that a modern baritone has to be a pushed-up bass, and a bass has to be a croaking frog. This is why nobody sings like Battistini, or Edouard de Reszke, or Armand Crabbé, or Wilhelm Strienz, or Carlo Galeffi, or Heinrich Schlusnus, or Pol Plançon. Now, is Bonfanti anywhere near as good as those guys? No. But he's a professional-level singer, the likes of which are EXTREMELY thin on the ground. His technique and interpretation are a lot like those of later Galeffi.

This is the lead baritone at La Scala:


If anyone prefers that, he has brain worms.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21,867 Posts
Lmao "a college production"

This is why singing is so terrible today. The idea that a modern baritone has to be a pushed-up bass, and a bass has to be a croaking frog. This is why nobody sings like Battistini, or Edouard de Reszke, or Armand Crabbé, or Wilhelm Strienz, or Carlo Galeffi, or Heinrich Schlusnus, or Pol Plançon. Now, is Bonfanti anywhere near as good as those guys? No. But he's a professional-level singer, the likes of which are EXTREMELY thin on the ground. His technique and interpretation are a lot like those of later Galeffi.

This is the lead baritone at La Scala:


If anyone prefers that, he has brain worms.
Much to my relief, I don't have brain worms! I certainly don't like that Salsi guy. He's a bellower, and he makes awful music. If that's what people think is good singing nowadays, if this is merely a question of technique, and if the intrinsic quality of the instrument isn't an issue, then I have no quarrel with you. Bonfanti just doesn't have a voice I care to listen to. If Salsi sang as nicely as Bonfanti he'd probably deserve his star status, if that's what he has.
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top