Tuesday, November 21
Who Does It Better? (The Proch Variations)
I'd like to start a sporadically ongoing series of MP3 posts wherein two recordings of the same aria are available for download.
Lately I've been interested in sorting through all the comments on various opera blog posts and YouTube videos, trying to find all references to a "Golden Age" or to anyone saying Singer X stays true to the composer's intentions or to historicity of the music. What does this even mean? I think that a great many opera fanatics have a contorted idea of how operatic music was sung or presented. It is fashionable now for singers and conductors to exaggerate the emotive qualities of opera, evidenced by the severe overuse of and misinterpretation of rubato, the inexactness of rhythm and articulation, and the protraction of tempi.
Of course, this is just another view—mine. But I wish to investigate alternate interpretations (sometimes by barely-known or unknown singers) of works that are not particularly familiar, and if they are, they generally belong quite firmly in a certain singer's recorded legacy.
In this case, I'd like you to have a listen to these two versions of "Deh! torna mio bene," also known as the Proch Variations. One is what is probably the most rendition—Callas's 1951 RAI broadcast. The recording is in poor sound, but it's worth listening to for the sheer athleticism of Callas's performance. I find it a tad muscular for the music, but this perhaps a greater case for her abilities—that the voice was still in prime condition at this point in her career; she pulls the whole thing off despite her timbral and functional choices. Listen for those trills turned out so perfectly that I every time I hear them I get the faintest impression of perfume in the air, and goddamn, that penultimate high E-flat. It's incredibly dangerous, as she takes a lot of weight up to it, rather than leaping into a easier flute tone. It was decisions like this that wore her voice ragged and hollow but also that made her voice thrilling and interesting.
The second recording is from the stunning and all-but-ignored coloratura soprano Beverly Hoch. The interpretation and voice are wholly different; Hoch's tone is more compact, more essentially clair in quality, and this is largely because Hoch merely allows the voice to function without any overt dramatic or timbral overlay. While it may be more "boring" to some listeners, to me it belies a courageous placidity and an ease of character. The tempi are noticeably faster, and consequently so are Hoch's articulations of the rapid passages. But the most outstanding feature of her voice and this recording is the interpolation of a penultimate A-flat above high C. Normally, this is the domain of singers like Mado Robin and Mariah Carey, but while their voices use the whistle tones like a freakish tack on a fairly unraveled spool of modal and head voice, Hoch's whistle note is integrated, strong, and even, and it falls off easily to tonic high D-flat.
So, seriously—who does it better? Let me know in the comments.
Comments
It's quite impossible to compare those two recordings. The audio on the Callas is so impossibly bad one simply cannot hear "through it."
ACD
Hello Nick,
Long time, no trrill. I have heard enough Callas recordings to listen through the bad audio, and for me the choice is easy: Hoch. With Callas there is the sense of conquest, of achieving the impossible. This can be very moving. With Hoch, there is such ease and joy coming across, and that delights me. I prefer to be delighted rather than relieved and shocked. One interesting thing to note is that if you cut the applause out of the Callas recording, the Hoch only takes a few seconds less time, but in the listening the Hoch flew by while with the Callas this resident sense of discomfort made it seem twice as long. I'm not saying I don't like to hear Callas do this stuff, but like you, I hear faulty vocal function being made to do absurdly difficult things. That in itself is disturbing, apart from the visceral excitement. With Callas I listen and think "how long was this before she was ruined" and with Hoch I think "I want to hear more." Actually I heard Hoch live at Iowa State University in 1981 when she was very young and had just won Young Concert Artists. Being curious, I have just searched on the web and found that most references to her consist of very old reviews from the 80's and early 90's. Now she is on the adjunct faculty of Texas Woman's University. Does she sing anymore?
You're right; Callas voice is downright brawny. Those "perfumed" trills are even a bit Old Spice for me. But then Hoch's recording (high note aside) is like catching a lazy eye; seems to me you never really know where she's headed with a note and the orchestra doesn't help with its mushy synth sound. I guess I prefer Callas for putting the foot on the gas.
BTW, the piece is hilareous...it's the kind of sound Gwen Stefani will be stealing once she wears out The Sound of Music.
Try Milza Korjus
Callas was terrible in something like this that is all
about technique and nothing else.
Callas was always a bad "singer" but a great artist
I saw her many times and as time went on ,one
had to cringe more and more and forgive more and more .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2qbGFBXULE
Peter can't be serious ..........
I thought someone stepped on a cats' tail
and talk about pitch .....
It's the first time a family member asked
to turn off the cat . The poor lady is
totally out of her depth even with score adjustments
and the orchestra or conductor or both are 2nd, rate .
I guess it depends on my mood. If upset, or stressed, and feel the need to conquer, then Callas' approach with better sound q would be nice. Most nights I would prefer the explore-as-i-go Hoch. I have not heard much Hoch, so that was nice just to hear her.
Even allowing for the indifferent sound quality of Callas recording, Hoch. No contest. Callas sounds like a car engine going up a steep hill. The engine is hot but it's low on oil. The parts feel metal to metal. Hoch is smooth, effortless, no hill is too steep for her to climb! I wonder too of the comparison in their private lives. We all know Maria's story.
Now where to find some Beverly Koch CDs?
Wait, are you people really classifying Proch variations without mentioning Edita Gruberova? Shame!!!!!!
Both are quite impressive. But, I prefer Callas, she seems to bring the intent of the lyrics and music front. For Hoch it seems to be more of a vocal exploration. As in a, "See what I can do!" Callas's is more an exploration of the song.... But, that was Callas, and it isn't always what you wanted....
It seems like this aria was meant to be shown off and I think they both do it well. I like Callas' better because it is in that old style that does this music more justice (not that there is much to do) than Hoch's whose singing while charming had questionable legato.The biggest problems with Callas' version is the terrible sound and the really powerful high notes - exciting but a bit too much for a song this unimportant.
There are so many good singers who do this piece well. The one that convinced me first when I was a very young boy was the soprano Ingeborg Hallstein. The great Calles; can one more, the just show all the versatility. Ok, it might not be the best but can one imagine any of the others do Lady MacBeth! Already mentioned Gruberova is the the almighty whne it come to agility, fun and ease. Also do not for get Natelie Dessay. They are all fantastic!
Although Callas absolutely goes for it she is screaming a lot at the top. Granted she pulls off the final 2 high notes well but other times when she nips up there on a staccato figure, she yelps!! Hoch however does the piece justice. While you imagine Callas with a war-like grimace on her face like she were singing a battlecry, you see Hoch with a show-offy half smile as she effortlessly throws off the different variations! And she sings that high Ab which really is fantastic and caps off the showpiece nature of the aria. This piece is for encores and so is purely to show off the voice, and whoever does that better (Hoch!) is the better performer of it.
Although why is there no mention of Edita Gruberova or Mado Robin?? Both were fantastic interpreters of the aria, especially the latter!
Frankly, I wish you'd put on the old Victor 78 of Amelita Galli-Curci singing this piece since I think she blows both Callas and Hoch away on it. I played this right after having listened to a recital tape of Hoch from San Diego in 1995 and I'm impressed with the lightness and flexibility of her voice — and the recital program she sang on my tape only included one coloratura showpiece, Delibes' "Les Filles de Cadiz." Most of the rest were songs by Rachmaninoff, Richard Strauss, Debussy and Poulenc, and a version of Villa-Lobos' "Bachianas Brasilieras No. 5" with the full eight-cello accompaniment. Hoch's Proch is solidly sung but a bit on the bland side; Callas gets through the piece on grim determination even though it's ill-suited to her voice and style; Galli-Curci was born with a voice for this music in an era in which great voices capable of handling the technical demands of this piece were far more common than they are now.