Opera on America’s Got Talent
We’ve had a number of VERY lively discussions in the comments of previous posts about the Opera that’s being sung on America’s Got Talent. The most famous one being winner Neal E. Boyd, but also joining the discussion is Donald Braswell and last season’s Barbara Padilla.
The discussion really centers around how good the opera singers are that sing on America’s Got Talent. Many reasonably say that if they had ‘real’ opera talent they’d be singing in other places. The discussion also usually leads to pop opera versus traditional opera.
One of those opera fans pointed out to me that there will be a documentary called “The Audition” on PBS. The movie is about the semi finals and finals of the Metropolitan Opera Council Auditions – the most prestigious professional opera competition in North America. In Northern Westchester, NY (Cablevision) it’ll be on PBS on Jan 20th at 9pm.
Seeing this type of hard core opera competition might be a way for people to become more educated on the quality of the opera singers that are trying out for places like the Met. I’ll be keeping an eye out for this. It won’t have the same entertainment value as something like America’s Got Talent I’m sure, but it will have much more educational value. I’ll be keeping an eye out for it myself.
Ya now, this would be a great idea. I just in the last few days found a video on youtube by Donald Braswell…actually a couple of them promoting his new CD about to be released….The Video “Nessun Dorma” with a montage. Quite impressive. After hearing him sing that particular song and going back on youtube and listening to Neal E Boyd sing that song…There really is no comparison. I really wonder who would have won if Donald was allowed to sing what he does best…We will never know…..on the video it gives his fan club web site….I went there to find he is doing pre-orders for the CD…They will be numbered and signed by him…well the first 2000 anyway…Hope the one I ordered is one of them….I also discovered his new CD is available from Amazon.Com as a MP3 download right now…anyway…point I was trying to make here is….how wonderful this kind of a program would be…and of course wondering…if by comparing apples and apples who would have actually won Americal’s Got Talent 2008.
Beverly,
I’ve always thought that Donald was a much better singer than Neal and could’ve blown him out the water if he had sung (or were allowed to?) sing an opera aria. I found a couple of his pre-accident videos – one from Tosca and one from Gianni Schicchi when he did sing on opera stage and was impressed by both his singing and his acting ability. There is also a video of him doing Lensky aria – not sure if it is before or after his accident – which I liked as well.
But this is really not the issue. The issue with opera singing on AGT is that most viewers haven’t heard much opera singing and don’t really know what distinguishes mediocre or even bad performance of an aria from good performance of an aria from a great one. A lot of people listen to this music for the first time, are swept away by the beauty of the music itself, like the voice and think “this is the most beautiful thing I’ve heard, I don’t believe anybody can be better, here is the next Pavarotti (whom people know from his crossover concerts rather than from his performances in opera), Met is sure to call”. The movie such as this, I think, may help provide some perspective as well as some base for comparison.
What I think is interesting about this documentary as opposed to usual Great Performances at the Met broadcasts on PBS is that it shows young singers who are still trying to make it in opera rather than stars. It gives an idea of how tough the competition in opera is, what the judges are looking for, what it takes to make it.
BTW – from a quick google, it appears that it may be on January 20th at 9pm Eastern in many locations. pbs.org may have a schedule.
I also found this review of this film.
There is also the trailer from the time when it was shown in the select movie theaters as part of Met HD broadcasts.
Beverly and Kitty,
This is some great stuff. I wish I had more time in the day. I’ll see about posting some of the stuff in a future post. Oh well, I guess I need more help…lol
A couple of things I want to add:
1. In some areas this will be rebroadcast on February 7th at noon on PBS/Thirteen and where available at 3pm on WLIW (channel 21 in NY).
2. After watching it, I’d like to say I don’t find it any less interesting to watch than AGT/Idol, at least AGT after the first auditions round. Ask yourselves – what do you find most entertaining about AGT semifinals and finals: is it watching the talent or is it listening to same old sob stories repeated over and over again? Is it buzzing of bad performances or is it good performances? Would AGT judges deliberation be more or less interesting if they had been real experts and if you could here what they really thought? If contestants’ interviews contained some surprisingly open revelations about themselves without fear of losing audience votes?
There is no buzzing, contestants’ humiliations, or bad performances in “The Audition”. These are 22 people, than 11 people chosen in rounds of district and regional competitions from 1800 young opera singers or voice majors. But what you get is talents far above anything you have ever seen on AGT/BGT/Idol – voices, musicality, emotion, and acting ability. You see the backstage of the Met, you see the weak of rehearsal leading to finals when the stuff of the Met works with contestants to help them reach their highest potential. You see contestants’ openly talking about things that are important to them and you learn a little about personalities – in fact you learn more about personalities of featured contestants during this two-hours documentary than you have ever learned about personalities of any of AGT contestants. There is tension and suspense – as in AGT, you’ll get your favorites, and you’ll be worrying if they will or will not be selected as winners by the judges many of whom are artistic directors of top US opera theaters.
There are 100 or so reviews of this documentary on PBS website (search for pbs great performances at the Met The Audition), many of whom are from people who don’t even like opera. But you really don’t need to like opera to enjoy this film.
If it’s not broadcast in your area on February 7th, you can still watch it from Met website (go to met website, click on Watch and Listen, than Met Player) by either renting it from them via Met Player or signing up for Met Player trial and canceling it after watching the movie.
Kitty, I am in total agreement with everything you said. The young contestants at the Met were pure talent. I kind of enjoy the fanfare of AGT but the talent for the most part is “not talent” at all. In the years this program has been on, I believe there has been gleaned 1 real talent as a winner and another that was 4th place 2008. Aside from that it is just as you said. The PBS special was wonderful and surely worth watching.
kitty,
I think you should get a job as the PR person for the Met. They could use your passion. I just checked and it’s not on in my area. I expect it will come again. I tried the Met website, but had to give my credit card. No thanks.
I think it could be really good if done right. However, for me to enjoy it, they’ll have to do a good job pointing out the subtle differences in each person’s voice and performance. That’s why AGT is good is because amateurs can differentiate the acts. If the show can educate the viewer on the subtle differences in operatic voices to be able to differentiate the singers, then it will be really interesting.
Beverly – thanks. I thought there was some talent on AGT (mostly as you said, I might select a couple more), but at that level – probably as you said.
John — LOL. I don’t think Met/PBS would approve at postings PR at an AGT blog…. They are a bit above it, I guess. But have you ever been so touched by a performance or a movie that you really want to share it? This is a bit of where I am coming from.
You have a point about credit cards – it’s a non-issue for me because I bought tickets to the Met from that website, even won a couple of tickets at the raffle they had last year (nothing this year), so they have my credit card on file anyway, but I also don’t like free trial/having to cancel things. I haven’t registered for Met player though, if I find time to watch something, I’d probably just use one time rental.
You have a point about subtle differences but it would require a lot more than 2 hours. I am an opera fan, and to me they all sounded wonderful. You can hear a bit of it in judges deliberations e.g. them wondering if a particular contestant’s voice is strong enough to be heard at such a large theater as the Met, for example. But there is simply not enough time to do it with every performance. Still, it seems like a lot of reviewers on pbs.org selected some of the winners correctly.
“They are a bit above it, I guess.”
You’re so right. How sad is that? One of the problems with Opera. Too elitist.
” One of the problems with Opera. Too elitist.”
I don’t think “loggionisti” who boo performances in Italy would agreed with you. In Italy, for example, the poorer people who buy the cheapest tickets have always be considered the most knowledgeable… It used to be the case in the US, too. Opera isn’t really elitist, but really, I don’t expect any professional organization – be it opera, ballet, movie producers or Broadway theaters to hire people to post on blogs. Met has plenty of ads in buses in NYC….
In terms of distinguishing top operatic performances. While the differences between finalists in “The Audition” and AGT singers are quite obvious: no microphones, beatiful sound throughout not just on “most” notes, effortless no matter how difficult the passage is, more difficult selections, emotion, acting ability – the differences between finalists in “The Audition” aren’t as obvious especially as they aren’t showing complete performances (though there are blogs of people who were present at finalists’ concert in 2007 and they go into detail of strengths and weeknesses of each contestant). Whose voice is more beautiful is subjective especially considering that the voices are different. One thing the judges mention is the importance of emotion, of being able to communicate what you are singing with voice, faces and bodies. You don’t need to be an expert to see that, and make up your own mind whom you find most expressive. While nobody is perfect, even top singers, it’s difficult to notice the differences based on parts of selections that we hear; these differences are probably too subtle anyway for non-experts. One other thing, I believe, is difficult to determine unless you’ve heard many opera singers at all levels: uniqueness, recognizability i.e. something special in either the voice or communication ability that distinguishes one singer from thousands of others that also have beautiful voices and good technique.
Another distinguishing characteristic is probably the difficulty of chosen arias or how rare or common a particular type of voice is. “O mio babbino caro” wouldn’t fly in such a competition, nor would “Ave Maria”. One of the tenors sings “Ah mes amis” – a very difficult tenor aria that has 9 high Cs. One soprano sings Casta Diva+cabaletta from Norma which is so difficult, that when “Norma” was produced at the Met a couple of years ago, neither of two famous sopranos who sing the role could do it well. The singer who did it in The Audition was very good, at least in the part we heard. I wished she had been singing it on stage instead of a singer I heard at the Met when I heard it live. So, selections that are both difficult and that a singer can do well are important.
Looks and age plays a part too. One of the judges mentions that she is more likely to forgive mistakes to a younger singer than someone who is older and more experienced. They also touch briefly the weight issue and wether it is a problem given the type of roles a singer with the particular type of voice would be cast.
BTW – I think the reason it’s easier on AGT is because the general level is not as high so better performances stand out. (Maybe if AGT producers concentrated more on selecting talents and less on background stories) But had everyone been great, it’d be difficult on AGT as well. For example, the ballroom dancing kids on last season AGT were very good. But how would they compare to kids that performed on DWTS? Even though I had ballroom dance lessons, I loved all kids that were invited to AGT, I couldn’t really say which of these kids were better. On SYTYTD, most if top 10 seem great to me. Same would be if you saw 10 top level ballet performances or 3 best violinists: when everyone is top level, only experts can say who is better, but for most of us it’s the issue of personal preference.
kitty,
Great description of why I’m not a huge fan of Opera. So far I have yet to see someone/something that’s been able to take Opera to the masses. Maybe it never will. The Met certainly doesn’t care too much, but Opera singers should.
Why? What is in my description was that you dislike?
– the fact that at the top level, the differences are subtle? This is true for every genre e.g. watching top ballroom dancers or top ballerinas. Even for really best popular singers, wouldn’t it be the matter of individual preferences and personal opinion?
– the fact that there are no mikes in opera? Do you have a clue how beautiful the sound of unamplified operatic voice is?
– that it needs to be effortless? Do you want to feel the emotions of the character or do you want to see how difficult the passage is or worry if a singer would crack on the next note? Much like with instrumental music, technique allows performer not to worry about difficulties but concentrate on telling the story, communicating, acting. Do you want a singer to break up a phrase because she/he needs to take a breath. It’d be a bit like Hamlet monologue in “to be or not to be” movie. “To be or not to [pause while I need to catch my breath] be”.
– that emotion/expression/acting is important? Isn’t it in popular music? Opera is a drama/comedy set to music, so you do need to see the character. In fact, throughout opera history, there were singers who weren’t as perfect vocally as some others – e.g. Callas, Scotto, but who were considered great because of their ability to express.
OK: Watch this video and say how it’s too “elitist”:
kitty,
I can’t really place my finger on why. I think that you might have hit the nail on the head when you said it’s a matter of individual preferences and personal opinion. Maybe my preferences don’t just fall head over heels for opera. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t really dislike it. I still dream of seeing la traviata in Napoli, Italy one day. The atmosphere there is outstanding. The singers are also incredibly incredibly talented. Just not my thing I guess.
My only wonder is if someone could bring out the subtleties in the various singers/operas that could change my mind. Not the best example, but Steve Irwin, the crocodile hunter, took crocodiles to another level of entertainment for me. I wonder if someone with the right passion and knowledge could do the same for opera.
Isn’t everything a matter of personal preferences at least at some level? As to differences between great and good or great and mediocre, they may not be obvious the first time, but once you listen to a few great performances, the flaws in not-so-great performance become immediately noticeable. You might not even be able to understand what it is, but you’ll notice. This applies to every genre really: the more you watch/listen the more you notice.
One thing to keep in mind is that operas are all different much like songs. You may like one pop song and not like another; you may like one opera and dislike another. I am an opera fan, but there are operas and composers I totally don’t care about, there are operas I adore in their entirety, and there are operas in which I like some parts but not everything. And some are aquired taste. There are specific “operas for beginners”, I think, like La Traviata or Carmen, but some one might not like right away but like at some later point. Initially, I didn’t like Wagner (have you seen Anna Russell’s comic overview?), but when I got back to his music after many years – I shared an office with the guy who was a fan – I started to enjoy his music. My friend though still doesn’t and she is an opera fan.
Personally, my parents simply took me to opera when I was young. I didn’t appreciate first two that much, but was really hooked after the third. In the meantime I learned to love operetta which is a genre which is a bit in-between opera and musical: kind of a flightly funny musical but with operatic style of singing. Like here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz_aqefpfuI&feature=related
BTW – so do you like Antonacci’s Carmen?
Operetta looks interesting. I’d never seen that before.
I’ve never really seen Carmen. So, I guess no. Honestly, I can’t remember the last time I’ve been to a live opera. The most opera I’ve seen lately was a show on PBS before “The Audition” with some people in England or something. That was fantastic and I enjoyed it thoroughly.
John – when I said Carmen, I meant the link to Antonacci’s performance of habanera from Carmen in my previous post (#11).
Operetta is a bit European and for some reason not as popular in the US except for some older musicals (Show Boat, My fair lady) are very similar to operettas. Occasionally an opera theater would produce Lehar’s The Merry Window or Johann’ Strauss’ Die Fledermaus but that’s it.
Operetta combines features of musical and opera:
– spoken dialog, dancing, singing
– classical style of singing
– songs are called arias
– performers able to sing, dance, act, and look the part.
– usually translated into the language of the country where it is produced (except when arias are performed in concert by opera singers). In the link above, in my previous post, the original language should be German (Hungarian composer but living in Vienna), but as it is produced by Moscow Operetta Theater, it’s translated into Russian.
– Vienna is considered the “capital” of operetta; though there are versions in other countries e.g. Spanish zarzuela.
If you are interested, I could find more operetta links or you could just search for “operetta” on YouTube or simply click on some other links from the one above.
This is one in English from movie based on a famous operetta where two leads were performed by famous opera singers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZWF6yjcFLY
I actually have a DVD of this movie from amazon, but the one I have is in German with subtitles (this was an “international” movie with mixed cast, I didn’t even know they also filmed an English version…)
I also think I may have posted in the past the link to opera star Anna Netrebko singing an aria from operetta (subtitled) while dancing, walking around the hall and throwing flowers in to the male members of the audience and orchestra.
“John – when I said Carmen, I meant the link to Antonacci’s performance of habanera from Carmen in my previous post (#11)”
Oh yes, I like that quite a bit. The song has been made mainstream by TV I think.
One thing about Opera is you really need to know the story before going. Kind of like when I went to Les Miserable. My friend told me just enough story so that I could really enjoy it. Without that, I would have enjoyed the singing, but missed some of the details. I think Opera is the same.
Yes, the song has been made mainstream, but I thought the acting in this particular interpretation was something special – illustrates the difference between a theater performance and an aria out-of-context. There are stronger voices around, but she really acts it. This is another good version of a different aria from Carmen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YknotAt24dQ which features dancing as well. Carmen is actually pretty good “first time in opera, not sure like it” opera because of a good story and many famous selections.
In terms of a story, I don’t see much of a problem. First of all, every opera theater gives you the “program” – similar to Playbill you get when you go to Broadway – and it contains a page-long synopsis. You usually get there 15-30 minutes in advance which is more than enough time to sit down and read the story. This is customary for both opera and ballet as the words are often in a foreign language in former and not there in the latter. Second, there are supertitles. At the Met they are normally on the back of a chair in front of you and you can turn them on or off. In other theaters which cannot afford I guess to install complex system Met uses, they are usually broadcast above the stage. BTW – Indiana University’s school of music broadcasts it’s complete opera production of Lucia di Lammermoor over the internet tonight. Completely free, no registration, and with subtitles. It’s a pretty tuneful opera and a very proferssional production; not Met level singing but pretty good nevertheless and the sets are beautiful. There is a link there for live streaming if you want to check it out out of curiosity. http://www.music.indiana.edu/opera/lucia/
Very interesting discussion.
But this is kind of the inversion of the “Ukrainian ballet kids” discussion. I mean, these are people who’ve spent their *whole lives* practicing and learning. Isn’t that the point of the Cowell franchises: to find the diamonds in the rough who somehow didn’t make it? It’s one thing to day, “If they were any good, they’d be at the Met,” but what about, “Their basic talent is as good as anyone at the Met, but their life circumstances have gotten in the way of their ability to formally study music.
Look at Sarah Brightman. People always said, “She isn’t that great. She just got successful because Andrew Lloyd Webber pushed her career.” There’s a certain extent to which that’s true. She was classically trained growing up. She did have a decent entry-level career before ALW discovered her in the _Cats_ auditions. She’s beome increasingly successful with each decade since.
But when she did _Phantom_, she was young, with basic training (though not as advanced as those who’d spent their whole lives in the opera and/or ballet), and her voice was basically pure talent. She really *was* Christine. Contrast to Emmy Rossum, who grew up at the Met and was fully trained in opera and dance by the time she reached adulthood.
The way I see it, there are two points to a competition like this: a) find those who *did* have the training early on and got sidelined by life’s circumstances, or b) find those who have the natural, unrefined talent–*and train them*. I think the big mistake is saying, “I won this competition” and going right into a career, versus using the competition as a means to get the formal training one has always put off. (That would certainly be my objective if I were selected and won).
Gadfly – you make some good points.
Opera (as in real opera not popera) is very different from pop, though, as it is 1) requires training – you cannot really be “diamond in the rough” at 35 or even 30 and hope to ever get to the Met; same applies to ballet (probably any dance), classical instrumental music, circus, gymnastics 2) general public has very little exposure to opera and cannot really distinguish a mediocre performance from a great one, much less determine “diamond in the rough”. Additionally, there are about 2000 people who graduate every year with a degree in classical voice. Most of them would blow AGT/BGT audience away. But only about 200 of them manage to make a living singing opera. Yes, some of those who don’t may in fact be as talented as those who do which is where comparisons to real professionals can help.
Also, in spite of the title, Met auditions is a competition for young singers not auditions for a job at the Met: all that is promised is a prize, a chance to perform in concert at the Met for paying public, to add to one”s resume, and to show oneself to theater directors and agents. The judges look for two types of people – those who can perform at the Met tomorrow (rare) and those with potential to be able to do so in future. Some of the latter may get an invitation to a young artist development program in some opera theater in the US: there are directors among judges and the audience. If you are curious as to the requirements and prizes, check here: http://www.metoperafamily.org/metopera/auditions/national/
So in terms for looking for potential, opera competitions are very indicative of what potential means at least when we talk about adults, not teenagers.
For an example of a young not-yet-fully-trained opera singer, Nadine Sierra – you can look her up on YouTube – who won Met Council Auditions in 2009 was only 20 years old at the time, still an undergrad student.
Back to AGT: most of us including the judges aren’t really qualified to judge which people really have potential only where they are now. This applies to everything, not just opera. In this case, though, shouldn’t they at least be pretty close to the level of professionals competing for similar jobs especially given their age?
This applies, of course, to real opera. In POPera – pretty much anything goes given how even some of the best selling stars wouldn’t be able to get a job in a chorus of any reputable opera theater, and this is really the only career an AGT participation can help with. But then let’s stop calling them “opera singers”.
I think it’d be nice if people appreciated the difference at least in terms of the difference between singing an aria with a mike and singing without microphones in a 3800 seat theater with an orchestra between the singer and the audience. At the very least, it would avoid a bunch of heated arguments… So many people think that after Pavarotti has died, all opera theaters were closed until Paul Potts came along…. I find it sad really that more people today know Paul Potts or Neal Boyd than Roberto Alagna or Juan-Diego Florez. Or Lawrence Brownlee or Stephen Costello or (check out La Scala or Met programs…) I think I once mentioned the names of about half of today tenors singing leading roles in opera houses, and somebody who just claimed how Neal Boyd was the next Pavarotti, told that she is well-rounded in music and she’s never heard of any of the tenors I mentioned. I also read how someone claimed he “loved opera” and who also couldn’t say what his favorite opera is or recognize any of the names of top opera stars. This is by the way what really frustrates both opera fans and opera professionals and is the reason why we are so critical of POPera.
At the very least, the exposure to some real opera singers would make people aware of the difference. Maybe AGT should invite say Roberto Alagna or Renee Fleming as a guest artist to show how some arias should really be sung. Yes, some people simply prefer pop sounding voices to operatic voices, and it’s fine. But there are many people who get a very wrong idea about both the standards of opera, the level of talent in opera.
BTW – Phantom of the Opera is not opera, and even though Emma Rossum sang in children opera chorus as a child she is a Broadway, not an opera singer. I actually like Sarah Brightman in Broadway/pop, but she is no opera singer. Could she have been if she had trained for it? Maybe, but “could have” doesn’t really count.
OK, this is an old thread so probably nobody reads it anymore. But just in case somebody does, at least in my area PBS seem to plan to rebroadcast The Audition on March 15th at 9pm – I think it’s still before DWTS so it is a “slow tv day”. You could search pbs.org schedules for details or just go to pbs the audition website and click on check local listings.
They’ll also probably show Carmen from the Met in a couple of months. I think if any opera could change your mind about opera (in addition to La Traviata), it’s Carmen, especially with this cast.
kitty,
Thanks for pointing it out. I usually check the TV schedule most nights. So, I’ll watch for it. Although, I just checked the 15th and didn’t see it listed for Las Vegas. We shall see. I really would like to see it. I love the human element of the arts.