Opera --- recorded or live?

[Superhorn]

  I can enjoy opera any way, live, on CD , DVD, radio broadcasts or telecasts. 
  It's great to be there in the theater, but with DVDs or telecasts you can see the singers close up and see their facial expressions and the way they
react ot each other,something which is lost when you're at say,the Met
way up in the nosebleed section, where all of this is lost to you.
  Yes, CDs,and previously LPs are somewhat doctored, and the result of many takes, but I still think this is a legitimate way to do opera;it's different, am\nd can eliminate the flaws of live performances, such as mistakes or singers tiring .
 

[jochanaan]

First choice: Live.  I'm with Scarpia et al on this one: there are so many details, not just acoustic and visual but "other," that no recording can capture.  I am fortunate to live in Denver where we have lots of professional-quality players and singers and, now, a new opera house, the Ellie Caulkins Theater.

Second choice: DVD or other visual medium.  It's all very well to say "My imagination can trump any stage director's" , but for me, the visual dimension adds to the total experience.

Third: CD or other recording.  Of course that's now the only way to experience many historical performances such as the 1950 Furtwangler Ring cycle at La Scala, with Kirsten Flagstad as Brunnhilde and Set Svanholm as Siegfried.  And yes, I've still got a few operas on vinyl.

Never mind "Banana" or "I hate operas."

[knight66]

Wow, a whole 19 of us have bothered to vote here. Perhaps had we added a 'Mahler wrote the best ones' option, we would have garnered 100 votes, 81 of which would have been for Mahler without the voters having noticed the word 'opera'. Anyway, for those discerning few of us....

It can be memorable when it goes wrong, as it sometimes does. Also when last minute substitute singers are drawn in, which can sometimes lead to dramatic tension and a surprising inspirational result.

On one occasion a Fidelio performance I was at was late starting. After a while, an announcement was made that the substitute singer of the name had just arrived from Paris and was putting on the costume. What ensued was an edge of the seat performance with the audience willing on the singer who had seemingly been told just to do her thing and the rest of the cast would cope. It was not a memorable voice, but the acting and tension fed excitingly into the performance.

Mike

[sospiro]

I know this isn't quite what you're asking but in a CD I prefer a studio recording to a live recording. I know it's frowned on by some experts but I do most of my listening on an mp3 player & get irritated by audience noises and long applause.

To get back to your main question I adore going to see a performance of a much loved favourite but don't have enough time to see and do everything so I'm happy to listen or watch DVDs.

[Elgarian]

Must've missed this thread first time round. I voted live (on the assumption that what I'm seeing live is a good performance of a good, sympathetic production). The excitement of settling in before it starts; the buzz of being there; the intangible, indefinable communication between performers and audience; the knowledge that these are real people doing this here and now; the showing of appreciation at the end - these are non-musical reasons for my preference, but they're very important to me. It seems to become a whole-body experience, rather than just an audio one.

Next best is a CD set, preferably listened to on headphones, outdoors, on a warm sunny day in the garden, with the libretto, and a suitable supply of coffee, beer, or what-have-you. In terms of reward for the active imaginative immersion in the experience, I find it's hard to beat.

DVD is still very hit and miss, for me. There are still only a handful of DVDs that I'd be upset about if I lost them.

[bhodges]

It can be memorable when it goes wrong, as it sometimes does. Also when last minute substitute singers are drawn in, which can sometimes lead to dramatic tension and a surprising inspirational result.

The excitement of settling in before it starts; the buzz of being there; the intangible, indefinable communication between performers and audience; the knowledge that these are real people doing this here and now; the showing of appreciation at the end - these are non-musical reasons for my preference, but they're very important to me. It seems to become a whole-body experience, rather than just an audio one.

This spontaneity is exactly why I prefer live events of all kinds, including opera.  While CDs and DVDs are invaluable in making music available that would otherwise go unheard, there is nothing like being there in real time, being in the room as musicians create the magic as you watch. 

But that said, some operas (as in other genres of classical music) are just not performed that often--or ever--and recordings are really the only way of experiencing them.  Next week I'm joining a friend who is screening the DVD of Harrison Birtwistle's The Minotaur.  I heard wonderful things about it from those who went, but I wasn't able to, and I don't sense the Met is going to bite on this one very soon, so...in this case, the DVD will just have to do.   

--Bruce