Opera: Is It Live or Is It Memorex ... er ... Blu-Ray?

[Tsaraslondon]

You see, here's the rub: I don't waste my hard earned cash on music I care nothing about. I know I don't want to see Puccini or Bizet or Verdi. I know these composers well enough to say they're not for me. For me, I don't see any logical reason why I would subject myself to music I don't enjoy. I'm simply not going to do if I have the choice which, in this case, I do.

But that's my point. I "wasted my money", as you put it, several times on operas by composers whom I thought were not for me, and often had my prejudices overturned. However if you're determined to stick with them, there's little anyone here can do. May I ask which opera composers, if any, you do like?

[Mirror Image]

But that's my point. I "wasted my money", as you put it, several times on operas by composers whom I thought were not for me, and often had my prejudices overturned. However if you're determined to stick with them, there's little anyone here can do. May I ask which opera composers, if any, you do like?

Honestly, I'm not a huge opera fan. I only dabble with opera every now and again. My preferred genres are orchestral (esp. ballets, symphonies, concerti), choral, and chamber music. My favorite opera composers are mainly Wagner and Janacek, but I also like Tippett's The Midsummer Marriage, Bartok's only opera, Debussy's Pelleas et Melisande, Ravel's L'enfant et les sortileges, both of Berg's operas, Martinu's The Greek Passion and Julietta, Shostakovich's Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk, R. Strauss' Elektra, Salome, Der Rosenkavalier, Die Frau ohne Schatten, and a few others.

[Sammy]

You see, here's the rub: I don't waste my hard earned cash on music I care nothing about. I know I don't want to see Puccini or Bizet or Verdi. I know these composers well enough to say they're not for me. For me, I don't see any logical reason why I would subject myself to music I don't enjoy. I'm simply not going to do if I have the choice which, in this case, I do.

You are a hoot!  You say that you very much want to see live opera but do nothing to make it happen and even scoff at some all-time most popular operas ever written.  You also claim to want to spend time with women but do nothing to make that happen either.  I've offered up the prospect of your getting both wants achieved on the same evening; you just blow off a great two-for-one deal.  Being perplexed, I'll start getting into my dinner plans.

MI - They're just females, humans just like you and me.

[Mirror Image]

You are a hoot!  You say that you very much want to see live opera but do nothing to make it happen and even scoff at some all-time most popular operas ever written.  You also claim to want to spend time with women but do nothing to make that happen either.  I've offered up the prospect of your getting both wants achieved on the same evening; you just blow off a great two-for-one deal.  Being perplexed, I'll start getting into my dinner plans.

MI - They're just females, humans just like you and me.

I do want to see live opera, but operas that I enjoy. Did you not read my post? People seem to not understand that I'm not going to see ANYTHING live unless it's something I'm interested in. I don't care if an opera is popular or not. A piece of music being popular is something that is irrelevant to me when it comes to music. I could care less how many tickets that opera sold or that ballet sold or what are considered the masterpieces of the genre. I either like something or I don't. Lecturing me like you're my father isn't going to score you any points with me.

[bhodges]

My question for you dedicated opera buffs is this:

What do you think about the difference between live opera and opera reproduced via media such as blu ray or webcast? And how do you compare your own experience of opera via such media with your experience of opera in the flesh?

And if you wish to comment further on future developments in opera "transmission" and their probably consequences for the art, I would love to see your thoughts!

Thanks!

Seeing opera live - or any classical music, for that matter - is a much different experience than listening at home (or elsewhere). The fact that you're hearing what the musicians are doing in the moment they're doing it is thrilling. And there is nothing like the experience of music being performed in a huge space (i.e., larger than most people's listening areas); the music sounds different.

There is also something deeply satisfying about the ritual itself, of preparing yourself mentally for a performance, entering the hall, talking with excited friends, hearing the opera (or concert) itself, and then meeting with friends afterward for a drink to discuss it all. You're very aware that whatever you're hearing is never going to be repeated in exactly the same way again.

All that said, I do think the DVD medium has been a godsend to classical music, and especially to opera - for the latter, it's perhaps the next best thing to being there. With so many operas being produced all over the world, and given that one can't be in all places simultaneously, it's great to be able to dip into productions from Vienna, Barcelona, Brussels, London, Munich, et al - a great benefit of modern-day technology.

The Met's Live in HD broadcasts (which are often then released on DVD) are loads of fun. No, they don't replace the experience of actually being in the Metropolitan Opera House - and the result is more "cinematic." And unlike being there in person, the cameras are choosing the shots for you - rather than being able to watch whatever you want at the moment. But the broadcasts definitely make the experience available to a larger number of people. It's like Great Performances on PBS; if I can't be there for the San Francisco Symphony's opening night, a live broadcast of the concert feels like "the next best thing."

--Bruce

[TheGSMoeller]

John, you're in luck (partially) The Lyric Opera of Chicago is opening with Elektra this year, the opening date is Oct. 6th, and it's streaming live on WFMT's website, I'll create a post about the date and time the closer we get. You should listen, in fact, everyone should listen!

[petrarch]

Seeing opera live - or any classical music, for that matter - is a much different experience than listening at home (or elsewhere). The fact that you're hearing what the musicians are doing in the moment they're doing it is thrilling. And there is nothing like the experience of music being performed in a huge space (i.e., larger than most people's listening areas); the music sounds different.

This.

There is, however, a subtlety that wasn't yet pointed out: Sometimes, given a good sound or home theatre system, listening or watching a CD or DVD of a top notch performance with world class musicians is much better than a live concert in subpar circumstances or with average musicians. There are aspects of the live performance that aren't reproducible in a recording; but in my experience I have gone to more than a few concerts in which what I saw and heard fell short of the CD or DVD I have at home.

[Mirror Image]

John, you're in luck (partially) The Lyric Opera of Chicago is opening with Elektra this year, the opening date is Oct. 6th, and it's streaming live on WFMT's website, I'll create a post about the date and time the closer we get. You should listen, in fact, everyone should listen!

This is good. Thanks for the information. Wish I was in Chicago for it though. Elektra is an outstanding opera.

[DavidRoss]

Just go, even if it's something you think doesn't interest you. You may be pleasantly surprised.

But it's so much more efficient to prejudge everything ... and it saves all the bother of possibly learning something!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I love opera. But conditions are such that the live experience has always been - and always will be - limited for me. Unfortunately I'm partly to blame for that as the significant others I've chosen (one ex and one soon-to-be) have expressed total disinterest in opera. And each has experienced opera live.

But I don't feel the least bit interested in flogging the subject to death in order to change someone's mind. The soon-to-be significant other is free to like what she wants and if one day she decides she'd like to partake again I'll be waiting.

I suppose I could just suck it up and attend opera alone. But the thought of that gives me hives. And with no immediate friends/relatives/family members interested in opera either I'm up against a pretty solid wall.

Fortunately for me my skills at adapting seem to be pretty solid and living life without live opera hasn't left me feeling deprived. The ritual of listening to opera in the comfort of my living room has given me much pleasure throughout the years and I have no doubts I'd be much the poorer minus the experience. As I said, I LOVE opera. Always have.

I also have no doubts I'd be much the poorer without the live experience but since that option is - practically speaking - off the table (at least for the foreseeable future) I'm not about to give up opera if I can't see it live.

One final note: I don't own a single opera on video. As much as I enjoy opera - either live or on CD - the urge has never hit me to own an opera video. Just doesn't appeal to me.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

There is, however, a subtlety that wasn't yet pointed out: Sometimes, given a good sound or home theatre system, listening or watching a CD or DVD of a top notch performance with world class musicians is much better than a live concert in subpar circumstances or with average musicians. There are aspects of the live performance that aren't reproducible in a recording; but in my experience I have gone to more than a few concerts in which what I saw and heard fell short of the CD or DVD I have at home.

Not to mention obscure - or even the semi-obscure - operas seldom get even a sniff in many opera towns. So the only way to see/hear them is through recordings.

[Mirror Image]

Not to mention obscure - or even the semi-obscure - operas seldom get even a sniff in many opera towns. So the only way to see/hear them is through recordings.

Exactly. I don't care anything about Puccini or Verdi. It's not that I'm shuttning myself off to the 'opera experience' it's that I'm not flushing money down drain on music I know I don't like. Seeing Janacek or even Strauss' Elektra is more up my alley than Carmen or Madame Butterfly as beautiful as those works maybe to many, they just aren't my cup of tea. I like more of an acidic edge in the music I listen to.

[Opus106]

Exactly. I don't care anything about Puccini or Verdi. It's not that I'm shuttning myself off to the 'opera experience' it's that I'm not flushing money down drain on music I know I don't like. Seeing Janacek or even Strauss' Elektra is more up my alley than Carmen or Madame Butterfly as beautiful as those works maybe to many, they just aren't my cup of tea. I like more of an acidic edge in the music I listen to.

Here's a brotherly challenge for you, John: Instead of purchasing the 20th version of a concerto or the 88th version of a symphony, save up some money and visit the opera. You and we know pretty well that you are not going to listen to that disc more than three or four times. So, instead of putting the money through one drain, try a new one. (Don't tell me that you have preferences in drains as well! )

[Sammy]

I do want to see live opera, but operas that I enjoy. Did you not read my post? People seem to not understand that I'm not going to see ANYTHING live unless it's something I'm interested in. I don't care if an opera is popular or not. A piece of music being popular is something that is irrelevant to me when it comes to music. I could care less how many tickets that opera sold or that ballet sold or what are considered the masterpieces of the genre. I either like something or I don't. Lecturing me like you're my father isn't going to score you any points with me.

You're hopeless.  I don't want to be your dad anymore.

[mc ukrneal]

But that's my point. I "wasted my money", as you put it, several times on operas by composers whom I thought were not for me, and often had my prejudices overturned.

Well put. The eye opening experience for me was going to see Doktor Faust by Busoni. I thought I didn't like the Faust story. I thought I disliked Busoni. I thought I disliked the music from the opera the one time I heard a small piece. But then one day, I found myself in Vienna watching this very same opera at the main opera theater. I loved it. It will never be a favorite or one I rush out to see again, but the experience in the theater made so much more of an impression. I thought I would sit and fidget for 2+ hours. And while there were moments of which I was less enamored, the time just flew by. It made a pretty big impression on me.

[knight66]

I am with those here who suggest that a good live experience cannot be replaced by a DVD. Bruce points out much about the atmosphere. The audience can be like an organism and become part of the performance. Sitting in the middle of an enthralled theatre is gripping. Live, you can sometimes observe the connection between the singers and the pit and watch it ebb and flow. There is always the possibility that anything can happen, good or bad and that what you hear is unique and never experienced in this exact way again.

The screen broadcasts in cinema felt like a very different mode of listening and watching than a DVD. I disliked the way the soundscape in the MET broadcasts were flattened and the sound was right in your face. this applied to both the orchestra and the voices, which never sounded distanced. There were elements of the experience I did enjoy. But I really disliked the consciously cinematic experience with the sound boosted to presumably make it even more exciting.

I have DVDs I would never part with, they move me and I am seeing singers I would not get to see locally in productions I would never otherwise experience. Glyndebourne's Theodora and Julius Caesar and the Met Eugene Onegin, remarkable even on the small screen and it is a wonderful legacy for future audiences and singers.

But like one or two others, sitting listening to a great performance on CD, live or studio and following it with the libretto....that opera of the mind can be as satisfying as any.

Mike

[Tsaraslondon]

But like one or two others, sitting listening to a great performance on CD, live or studio and following it with the libretto....that opera of the mind can be as satisfying as any.

Mike

I agree with you there, and my preference is for singers who can make you see as well as hear, just through the medium of sound.

I also enjoy listening to recordings of live performances where the audience is almost a palpable presence and adds to the feeling of being there. I'm thinking, for instance, of the thunderous applause that breaks out at the end of the sextet in the Callas/Karajan Lucia di Lammermoor which precipitated an encore of the piece. In the EMI transfer the applause is cut down to just a couple of seconds, when in actuality it went of for ages, making it impossible to continue. Surely this was a case, when the audience were as much part of the historical occasion as the performers, and therefore their presence should have been preserved. Another instance is the spontaneous applause and cheers that ring out after Callas makes her exit, following an unbearably intense Amami Alfredo in the La Scala/Giulini La Traviata. Though the sound is poor by today's standards on these old, often privately made recordings, I am grateful to be able to hear them. We read about the effect singers like Giuditta Pasta and Maria Malibran were able to have on their audiences, but we cannot experience it for ourselves. The advent of sound, and now video, recording, means that we, and future generations, can experience the art of great performers in our homes.

That said, as I pointed out earlier, there are no guarantees in live performance, and one cannot readily explain why one performance takes wing, whilst another remains steadfastly earthbound. Capturing for posterity those occasions when the performance really goes well is a very hit and miss affair.

[DavidW]

I do want to see live opera, but operas that I enjoy. Did you not read my post? People seem to not understand that I'm not going to see ANYTHING live unless it's something I'm interested in. I don't care if an opera is popular or not. A piece of music being popular is something that is irrelevant to me when it comes to music. I could care less how many tickets that opera sold or that ballet sold or what are considered the masterpieces of the genre. I either like something or I don't. Lecturing me like you're my father isn't going to score you any points with me.

This makes sense and is very reasonable to me.  MI prefers 20th century music, which is under-performed.  Expecting that MI should pay in both money and time to sit through say four hours of Mozart, when he wouldn't even enjoy twenty minutes of Mozart seems to me to be ridiculous expectations.  The fact of the matter is that MI will probably not see a local opera company play the stuff that he likes.  He is perfectly well suited to listening at home with cds/dvds.  Let's stop with the MI bashing.

[DavidRoss]

The Met's Live in HD broadcasts (which are often then released on DVD) are loads of fun. No, they don't replace the experience of actually being in the Metropolitan Opera House - and the result is more "cinematic." And unlike being there in person, the cameras are choosing the shots for you - rather than being able to watch whatever you want at the moment. But the broadcasts definitely make the experience available to a larger number of people. It's like Great Performances on PBS; if I can't be there for the San Francisco Symphony's opening night, a live broadcast of the concert feels like "the next best thing."

Even more than the missing frisson, the "cinematic" nature of filmed opera distinguishes it from the real thing. It's like watching baseball on TV instead of at the ballpark. You see what the camera operator, director, and editor give you--a close-up of a sweating tenor or a pitcher shaking off his catcher--not the big picture. And the two-dimensional representation of space just ain't the same as space itself.

I look forward to seeing the Met's recent ring on video. (My local stations did not broadcast PBS's recent traversal...a big disappointment.) The experience on the big screen was thoroughly enjoyable, and I can well imagine that a killer home theatre setup like Big Shot describes would replicate that remarkably well--sans the camaraderie of other opera fans gathered together to share the experience.

[DavidRoss]

There is, however, a subtlety that wasn't yet pointed out: Sometimes, given a good sound or home theatre system, listening or watching a CD or DVD of a top notch performance with world class musicians is much better than a live concert in subpar circumstances or with average musicians. There are aspects of the live performance that aren't reproducible in a recording; but in my experience I have gone to more than a few concerts in which what I saw and heard fell short of the CD or DVD I have at home.

You bet. And for those of us who are not jet-setters, opportunities to hear a variety of "world class" musicians are few and far between. But thanks to recording technology, I can hear them at home whenever I like. It's not the same experience as a live performance, of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't a damned fine experience in its own right.

And as you and others here know quite well, a good system capable of high fidelity music reproduction does an amazing job of converting pits or grooves into sound waves difficult to distinguish from the original.  When it comes to the music alone, I don't feel that I'm missing anything by hearing a recording rather than the real thing -- at least for orchestral music or solo instruments or duos. With trios or quartets in a relatively intimate setting--not a big concert hall--the sound is very different in person than when listening in stereo. Perhaps this is an instance in which "surround sound" recordings might prove superior...?