HOW to sing Opera!

Yes, that was à catcher. ;)

Nowadays we are blessed with YouTube, iTunes, you name it. I have it too! And we have the blessing to be able not only to hear, but see, actually watch closely to tv recordings dating back to late 70ies from famous events in a polished, digitally remastered almost perfect version.
We are also therefore blessed wit hundreds of people, not only giving "but demanding to accept" their opinion. From opera singers, opera teachers to opera lovers and - haters.

Well... I am an opera conaisseur to a sertain level. I have worked in opera since my 12th. As a child like beeing over 100 times the Duke Of Brabant in Antwerp(until they really couldn't add more lengt on costume and sleves after 5 years and as a dancer, choreographer and lighting designer (to a name a few things) execept singing, I cannot. (see my curriculum vitae on Facebook or elders for more)

My "pick-up" Lenco turntable has broken down a few years ago and thus all those 33 rpm Long Play records are waiting. But I still have an authentic 75 rpm, manually, iron needled Grammophone and original, early 20th century records. The real Decca, Deutsche Grammopfone, La Voix de Son Maitre =His Masters Voice, and other very breakable stuff, in good condition. You actually had to replace the needle after 2 sides to keep the disc in good condition. Of course, almost none did that and I also bought some 2nd hand ones and found some who are really worn out.
But... Opera discs were not played 5 times a day and clearly treated with much care and attention. Just like my 33 rpm opera LPs compared with pop songs. So, without to much distracting noise, you can actually hear clearly how opera was sung in those days.

No way to tell how Wagners works were sung in his days, nor Rossini, nor Mozart nor any composers works in his days. But! To have a mechanically recording with Bell's or later devices, you HAD to sing differently! Even nowadays it does make a difference when you sing in a medium size European Opera house or in a studio or on a film set or live on stage but amplified! It still does make a difference even now! Nowadays the recording technician can level the gain (how much the micropgone has going to receive) even almost automatically. But! In the old mechanical days, and even with the first generations of microphones, there was *absolutely* no way to controll the gain with an opera (or any) performance! When you hear a live performance recording in the early days, piano and pianissimo is hardly to hear. A real forte or fortissimo is disturbed. Thus: what have opera singers learned to do ever since the early days of recording: furst to pronunciate as clear as possible and second but as important: to sing everything with nearly the same volume level!!!
And... when people had first bought and heard a Grammophone record, they were likely somewhat dissapointed that they had to really listen very sharp to hear softer or soto voce sounds. I have no daubs at all - even when I cannot prove it - that both factors influenced the way opera was sung until the late 60-, early 70-ies when microphone and recording technique was able to controll low / soft as wel as high / laud.

That means that due to Hi-Fi recordings, the taste began to reverse! Why am I so sure about that? Many reasons! But after the fact that as a theater technician in the years 81-90 , at De Meervaart in Amsterdam, even as the Lights Man, I HAD to learn about dinamincs, microphone and gain controll for the final Public Addres in the house since I sometimes had to replace my colleague sound technician. But, we had since mid seventies a lot of opera singers (and directors) on the house. Some even staying with us for weeks. Of course, my collection of genuin old recordings and "newly" remastered Hi-Fi discs were always interesting for them. And yes, I do have a lot of Wagner! The whole Ring in versions from 1938 to Karrayan's in the seventies and also excerpts by you name it. One newley remastered version of Lohengrin in New York 1946 was - after I had mention it - a must hear for a tenor who was staying with us . And eh... You can guess, singing Lohengrin in many - mainly German - oper houses.
I won't say or tell any names! But "Our" Lohengrin could not believe his ears! "??? But he is not singing this...that's called barking!!! No way! If I would sing it that way... I wouldn't get the contract at first but would be Booo-ed away on stage by the public!" He was REALLY flabbergasted. But yes, he knew that "that " was often referred as the best Heldentenor ever and, the best post WW2 performance. So he wondered why? Not a bad possibility: "Becaurse Lohengrin wasn't performed anymore in those years! It was the first time - at least with BIG names and orchestra - people heard it (or again)! Or?"
But then I played other recordings from pre/during/post WW2 and from other composers and other singers too. Again, he was flabbergasted. He knew some of the recordings with Di Monaco and the NBC Radio philharmonic and disliked them thinking it was just Mario Del Monaco. No, not just M.Del Monaco, and yes all live recordings and yes, that's almost how it sounded in the house too.
At least until the mid fifties when gain control became more and more controllable. (Btw: I have also a NEWELY remastered CD from the 80-ies with highlights of Del Monaco! Guess what? He isn't barking anymore! But yes sure, it's the same original recording! But Digitally remastering isn't just cutting out scratch sounds anymore! Even when a note was originally REALLY out of tune, you can crank it up or down without even needing ton-loads of audio equipment! Even with an IPad or other app you can do it nowadays!

Pavarotti in his early years = first live on stage recordings, sounds like every great singer with a voice that is flowing like a waterfall. But he learned the same as Carousso and al previous stars: it sound beautifully in the rehearsel room and opera house, but NOT on the recording. Best Pavarotti example is Donnizetti's Una Furtiva! The first recording (64 Amsterdam???) is beautiful!!! But not at all how he sung it later for recordings or amplified performances! The second recording is very differend! I wasn't pressent but i am sure that he or the records management were not satisfied of the recording result! So, just like Carousso and there's, he learned to sing for a recording! I am really sure! And, I was in SoBe Miami in 1994 where he sung it as an encore live (amplified) on the beach during the ehhh what was it... World Championship Soccer=Football. Or Uefa or so. I wasn't impressed by the whole show with other "Stars" at all! It was just a "making money" , big shit, big names, for the "really big spenders SoBe Yet-Set" performance. (Don't recall the SEATED ticked prices but it was just unbelievable!!! But after row 50 or so it was for thousands for free!) And many already had left or on the way while his fans kept on screaming: " Furtiva, Furtiva, Furtiva, ... " for I-don't-know-how long. The orchestra was dismissed, so we were also on or way out when a cheer madness broke out and Pavarotti came back on stage with (Mutti?) and just half (?) of the orchestra without scores. Those who were still nearby rushed forward to come closer (myself included) and after a few minutes of talk like before a rehearsal, the harpist began. That was the ABSOLUTE BEST EVER Furtiva!!! Even my Hans who actually had MORe than enough of the BIG SHIT performance, got in tears. (oops... I got in tears! But Hans will at least agree that it was just unbelievable; I hope) It was so intens, so Italian with the RIGHT intonation of every note, so gentle but STRAIGT to every note, like a Heldentenor, so flowing and ever lasting without a touch of forced act... So Pavarotti like in his young years but with the professional KNOWLEDGE and vocal technique ... That's "A" perfect way of HOW TO SING OPERA in 1994 on the beach!

Nowadays we have Florez and (had?) Dillazon to compare and "look" back among other also great singers. Singing it THEIR way and very likely "also" influenced again by recording techniques! Coincidence or not, those singers hear and see nowadays their RECORDING results back! Now you can sing things very softly and still recordable without surrounding noise due to opener gain. And yes, like 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 20 years ago and in the future, adapting to the limits of vocal and recording techniques whom will create a generation that will be used to "that" way, disliking the old way OR others disliking the new way. So... Anyhow, that's really "the way you have to sing opera": YOUR WAY and in YOUR TIME. :) Of course, on tune, with tallent etc etc... ;)

P.S. This is not a scientific research but a recall written in just a few hours, hopefully with not to many errors and typos! :) The newest here does a good job to correct and not replace into other words. (in English) :)

De beste stuurlui staan aan de wal

Naar aanleidng van een stuk in de Volkskrant vandaag: "Voor Groen Links geld nu de wet van Murphy" en natuurlijk de commentaren, effe mijn opinie!

De beste stuurlui staan weer aan de wal. En Ja, ironisch maar waar als je van de wal toekijkt naar een schijnbaar stuurloos of losgeslagen schip. Dat de partij behoorlijk aan stemmen moet inboeten is m.i. niet zozeer Sap's leiding, mismanagement of slechte communicatie; maar de erfenis uit het verleden.
Door de fusie van PSP en CPN ontstond er een soort nieuw links. En, met het spreekwoordelijke "aandeel " Groen ook een potentiële kiezerstrekker van sympathisanten van GreanPeace, Wereld Natuur Fonds en van organisaties als Wakker dier e.d. Maar deze sympathisanten zijn vaak ook Tros kijkers en Telegraaflezers die ergens bewust of onbewust zich liever niet links noemen. Aan de andere kant van het kiezerspotentiaal zitten de ex communisten die nu een goed alternatief hebben: de SP. Daartussenin zit natuurlijk een deel Pacifisten en Groenen die bijv. in Duitsland en Oostenrijk maar ook in België , zowel GROEN als de Franstalige ECOLO, die weliswaar verkiezingsprogramma's hebben die ook alle onderwerpen behandelen, voornamelijk Groene, diervriendelijke en pacifistische motieven hebben. Als dat de onderwerpen zijn waar een Nederlandse kiezer belangstelling voor heeft, kan hij strikt genomen beter op de Partij voor de Dieren stemmen.
Het Kunduz akkoord is wel -in mijn perceptie- een foute beslissing geweest. Niet dat ik rabiaat tegen was, maar het zat mij en natuurlijk de PSP-ers op zijn minst niet lekker. Noem het maar links onderbuikgevoel.
En dan is er natuurlijk ook de D66 twijfelaar, progressief-liberaal-democraat. Waarschijnlijk net als ik eigenlijk Hans van Miero "fans". En hoewel Alexander Pechthold een heel andere toon voert dan van Mierloo, hij staat best zijn mannetje! Dat is denk ik allemaal pech voor GL.

Natuurlijk zijn gemor in een partij en de toch beetje CPN aanpak met Tofic Dibie geen zaken om over te pronken. Dat zal ongetwijfeld van invloed zijn. Maar in de afweging waarom zou ik lid van GL worden c.q. Op GL stemmen is het nu makkelijker om een afweging te maken in het nadeel van GL. Zelfs al is een compromispartij eigenlijk op zich een pré, bij zoveel onduidelijke tegenstellingen kan je dus gemakkelijker voor één van die andere partijen kiezen. Dan weet je ongeveer waarvoor je gestemd hebt. En voor wie toch een wat breder spectrum wenst, compromissen bereid, staat nu de PvdA weer klaar.