"You are awful...but I like you"

I searched for this recording on Amazon's Japan website but coudn't find it. A friend of mine who has it on LP loves this recording. He is very astute about wahat constitutes a fine opera recording and despite what I have read about this version it must have its merits.

Hi Caballe. I assume that your post was in relation to the "awful" Norma.  it's available here: http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=UCCD-3328# or on vinyl here: http://www.priceminister.com/offer/buy/89623117/vincenzo-bellini-norma-elena-suliotis-del-monaco-silvio-varviso-33-tours.html

Enjoy. 

Martin

Thank-you Martin. I have just placed an order. It was quite expensive so I really hope I like it.

The recording of Carmen with Regine Resnik and Mario del Monaco is one I enjoy a great deal - it has been somewhat overshadowed by the Leontyne Price/ Franco Corelli set with Karajan but that is rather unfair I think. The Beecham Messiah is another favourite - it's inauthentic but intense and enjoyable for all that and Vickers especially is wonderful.

I have heard some of the Philips Callas/Di Stefano duets from the early 70s on youtube and found them absolutely fascinating - many of the vocal flaws of both protagonists are evident but not as bad as you might imagine I think - indeed there are insights as Desdemona and Otello which are excellent and their Forza duet is full of fire. I cannot help but love how they phrase Verdi and just the excitement they create together. The Donizetti Elisir duet has 'spark' with very good timing and lots of character. They may not be perfect but compared to some of the cds which HAVE been published e.g. Di Stefano's duets from the 70s with Montserrat Caballe or Callas' mozart recital in the 1960s these are superior with a deal more passion and style than many modern performances, vocally flawed though they are. I think there is a case for publishing these tracks 'officially' - remastered and rebalanced I think they fill a much needed 'gap' in the official discography of they two fine artists. Their Don Carlo duet is really enjoyable. Fears that publishing the records would 'tarnish' the name of the singers seems rather preposterous given the esteem they enjoy - one recital disc is not going to change that.

Like some of the other replies I have enjoyed Elena Souliotis' records especially her Cavalleria (again with Del Monaco) and her part in the Freni/ Bartoletti Suor Angelica from the early nineties which is absolutely riveting I think - her mighty vocal flaws combined with her dramatic insights are astonishing; hear her phrase 'Nel silenzio..." it is just chilling and mesmerising - rather like watching a train wreck but she pulls it off with that grand manner she seemed to have by nature - even her recordings from her twenties have such 'presence' which evidently had not diminished in the intervening decades.

David

Just finished listening to the Schippers recording of Carmen. It is nowhere near as awful as I was led to believe. The Decca engineers certainly attempted to create a genuine theatrical experience and the cast is certainly committed. OK - it's not what I'm used to but so what. Mario del Monaco certainly provides the thrills as Don Jose and occasionally he sings mezza voce. Resnik is hardly seductive but is not someone to be messed with and Sutherland was singing in understandable French.

I find the nature of your complaint puzzling on two counts 1)Personally I want critics to have strong aesthetic biases and agendas. It is what makes a critic worth reading. Critics (as opposed to simple reviewers) are always at their most useful when they promote certain ideals or values; think of the great critics of the past (in various fields), Ruskin, Shaw, Greenberg, Adorno, Keller and so forth. One of the reasons for reading them is because they have an agenda that renders things problematic, questions ones assumptions and promotes certain ideas. One doesn't have to agree with them, but surely reading them is more stimulating and rewarding than a critic who tries to please all agendas and ends up saying nothing at all. The worst thing of all I think is to read only those critics one knows in advance will be promoting ideas you are already comfortable with. 2) I think that at the end of your post you give the game away: what you really mean is you want critics whose aesthetic values are the same as yours. Your complaint really is that some critics have the temerity to have a set of values that differs from yours. Would you be so critical if they were promoting aesthetic values that agreed with yours? I very much doubt it. 

The point with criticism is surely to accept that the critic has an agenda and to read their criticism accordingly. All criticism has an agenda it is just that certain of those agendas have with time and familiarity become opaque. The values you promote in your post are not neutral or natural despite the implicit reification in the way you state them; they are a priori ideological.