parterre box

85 comments

• 21
  flamingopera says:

  February 9, 2010 at 7:58 AM

  I dont really like Netrebko. Theres something in her signing that I dislike. I dont know how to describe it. She’s like signing in a lower range (?) but hits the right notes.

  Shes not a very good actress neither. She’s not communicating with the eyes and when shes in an HD transmission, its not convincing me.
  • 21.1
    MontyNostry says:

    February 9, 2010 at 12:31 PM

    I haven’t heard Nebs live — it is presumably quite a house-filling sound — but there is a throaty coarseness in her timbre that bothers me, and her diction is mealy-mouthed (even, as far as I can tell, in Russian). The top notes are impressive, though.
    • 21.1.1
      javier says:

      February 10, 2010 at 11:36 AM

      I haven’t heard Netrebko live either. Her voice is really thick and if she doesn’t attend to the phrasing all I hear is a big wall of chunky sound. But in some videos I have seen, for instance, I Capuleti with Di Donato, the voice is gorgeous and she’s very attentive to the words. She also has an amazing trill but since her voice is so thick (not the best word to describe it) I think it’s hard for her to produce it. Unlike Sutherland who had a huge voice, but the trill always came easily.
      

      
      Anyway, she has a gorgeous middle voice and occasionally when the top is reliable it unfolds brilliantly.

      I think she’s well suited to bel canto, despite what most say. I’ve said it before, but Bolena will be a hit for her if she can sing the way she does in the clip above.
      • 21.1.1.1
        pernille says:

        February 10, 2010 at 9:11 PM

        Thank you so much for posting this.
        I have heard her live on three occasions, and each time she gave a moving performance. Hope you get to hear her in person one day!
• 22
  BETSY_ANN_BOBOLINK says:

  February 9, 2010 at 1:23 PM

  Now THIS is getting embarrassing. Look, I rather like both Ira’s and Will’s “on-air persona.” If either were to start getting all Percy Dovetonsils-ish , with a lot of “FAAAA – byu – luhss” or even “You go, girl” being thrown in every ten seconds, I might personally question how well it was playing in Peoria, but I would leave it to the unfailing wisdom of the Met PR department to decide. I was referring to an instance the first season — I recorded it but it would be a labour of Hercules to dig it out now — in which Will and some guest very palpably “got it on.” At least, so it seemed to me.
  Lemme go “If” right now. IF — Renee were interviewing Teddy Tahu Rhodes, say, and suddenly started purring like a ‘94 Ferrari, the Phlegmophobes on this site would be all over her like coyotes on road kill.
  Well, during that first season, Will would occasionally let his off-air person intrude on his “on-air persona.” At that one point, it got slightly — for want of a better word — predatory. My immediate reaction was “You’ve gone too far, Will” and I admit that is homophobic because I don’t mind when Margaret talks about her husband or her mother or her early singing lessons. Hell, truth be known, I’d love it if Ira could talk about HIS husband or HIS mother or even bring Madame Vera in for an interview — wait, he DID do that. Well, good on him. And good on Will for his knowledge and his organisational skills — it’s just that for a period of maybe a month, he let the line get blurred. Then the one instance where he crossed over and then it stopped. I suspect Mary Jo Heath gave him a gentle reminder, and for someone that intelligent that would be all that would be needed.
  So that is the context for “embarrassing” and that is the context for “toned it down.” I see now I must ask to rescind my use of the word “fruity.” I do so.
  • 22.1
    Harry says:

    February 10, 2010 at 12:22 PM

    Adding on to BETTY_ANN BOBOLINK’s comments: I once heard an interview ‘on air’ from a public community radio station where a totally stupid elderly announcer had an interview with some young girl that had appeared in some local amateur theatrical show.

    At one stance, he allowed the interview to be – where he was – in fact – also being interviewed. Then it careened downwards and free-wheeled : where they were discussing the gir;s family background ….when he made a throwaway suggestion about ” I bet there is a ‘#*gger’ (GULP!!) in the wood pile somewhere….” inferring some ‘hazy past family lineage . Totally oblivious to the absolutely ‘racist outrage’ that he had just committed, in the choice of words he had used. Someone had the tape of the interview and upon listening to it repeatedly, it was plain by the tone of his voice – he was creaming in his pants over the girl. ‘Something went hard and the blood flow to the brain went therefore deficient’. Yet incredibly he was allowed to continue broadcasting, for a while after that, till complaints piled up.

    The point is : A person interviewing should never start getting ‘over familiar’ in any way with the interviewed person. Stick to the matter of what the interview was intended for.. Otherwise all sorts of consequences can quickly form.
• 23
  Ruxton says:

  February 10, 2010 at 4:15 AM

  Just done a count up on this thread- there are 25 negative or nasty comments, 10 indifferent ones, 13 observational ones and 4 only positive ones. Seems Parterre is tracking normally- although a name change to Parterre Bitch could always be a viable alternative
  • 23.1
    armerjacquino says:

    February 10, 2010 at 7:28 AM

    There are negative comments and negative comments, of course. To say ’such and such a singer had his or her moments, but maybe this role in this house at this time wasn’t a great idea’ is one thing. Sadly, there are some posters who seem only to be happy with schadenfreude, whether retrospective (’Of course I ADORE Steber, but sadly she was a drunk who couldn’t sing’) or current (’That was the worst singing I’ve ever heard since the last time somebody did the worst singing I’ve ever heard’). Both varieties are depressing and revelatory.
  • 23.2
    Harry says:

    February 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM

    It is not whether a comment is deemed nasty, positive, or whatever …the important judgmental point: ‘is it accurate or fair in the circumstances?’ In some cases, this is ably and clearly demonstated with video clip, HD transmissions,reference to recordings, or from a formed consensus from those that attended a live performance.

    Yet you want ‘for people to Be fair’ : virtually pleading against such available democratic debate process, above-mentioned. A person’s reaction upon reading someone’s else’s contribution here / and then counter comments in many cases, is the reason, parterre exists. Out of which, each reader may already have their unshakeable opinion or form their own final conclusions.

    To start implying by hints/ or then further interpret the motivations WHY someone made a particular comment is a added distortion of any construction, you first made. It becomes pure conjecture. In the middle of the slipstream of bitchy comments made: always lies the real truth somewhere!
    It is up to each one of us to find it.
    • 23.2.1
      Harry says:

      February 10, 2010 at 10:55 AM

      Just Ruxton morphing Edna Everage: ‘about everybody should appear to so nice, saying something nice about being nice to other people, who should be nice to nice peope like them’
• 24
  Ruxton says:

  February 10, 2010 at 5:37 PM

  Trust you Harry you old bag- typical of you to give me two for one- I was expecting it- even waiting for it from you. I wasn’t making a judgement- I was only giving an annalysis anyhow hehehe. Dame Edna? …dream on.
• 25
  Harry says:

  February 11, 2010 at 4:34 PM

  To think Ruxton YOU were waiting for my ‘call’! I better lie down. The shock of it all!!!!
• 26
  Ruxton says:

  February 11, 2010 at 8:11 PM

  Yes Harry- I’ve been waiting for you in the same way that one takes sennapods and then waits for the deluge.
  • 26.1
    mrmyster says:

    February 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM

    You boys are really so naughty! I think Agatha Christie should
    put you in one of her set-in-a-country-house novels.
    The denouement should be really entertaining!
• 27
  mrmyster says:

  February 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM

  “Hercule Poirot goes to the Opera!”