Ed's group vs. RMO

On Jul 11, 6:30 pm, "gerberk" <gerb... RemoveThis @live.nl> wrote:
> That is the law of these groups Sarah better get used to it my dear and this
> is a very nice group btw
>
> I see your point and you are very right
>
> A good thing is that you know ED is a nice guy which he most certainly is
>
> Just rave a little and you will be a household name in here
=====================================================================================
I think Sarah might already be a household name on rmo. Just a
different name. It's a troll posting under another address, IMO. And,
according the his/her profile, she/he has never made a post to any
group before under this e-mail address.

But thanks for you kind words, Gerberk. I appreciate it.

Best wishes,
Ed
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 12, 11:26 am, "premiereop...@aol.com" <edop....TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 11, 6:30 pm, "gerberk" <gerb....TakeThisOut@live.nl> wrote:> That is the law of these groups Sarah better get used to it my dear and this
> > is a very nice group btw
>
> > I see your point and you are very right
>
> > A good thing is that you know ED is a nice guy which he most certainly is
>
> > Just rave a little and you will be a household name in here
>
> ===========================================================================­==========
> I think Sarah might already be a household name on rmo. Just a
> different name. It's a troll posting under another address, IMO. And,
> according the his/her profile, she/he has never made a post to any
> group before under this e-mail address.
>
> But thanks for you kind words, Gerberk. I appreciate it.
>
> Best wishes,
> Ed

Absolutely not, although it's not my real name. I have never, ever
posted here, but have lurked both here and on Opera-L (where I've
never posted) for eons.

But I'd certainly be amused to see which of these clowns you think I
am.

On the other hand, I do know you, Charlie, and many others "in person"
for many years by sight and name, but not to talk to.
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 12, 11:26 am, "premiereop...@aol.com" <edop... DeleteThis @gmail.com>
wrote:


> I think Sarah might already be a household name on rmo. Just a
> different name. It's a troll posting under another address, IMO. And,
> according the his/her profile, she/he has never made a post to any
> group before under this e-mail address.



Sorry to disappoint, wrong. While I happen to know you and Handelman
by sight for many years, I've never posted here, but have lurked for
eons both here and on Opera-L, as well as that cemetery called Ed's
Opera Group. My name really is Sarah and I work at 104 Fifth Avenue,
thus the name.

I also notice you didn't bother to say that any of my points about
your forum were wrong, just tried to deflect by turning it into a
guessing game.
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

> It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
> ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
> Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?

==========
If the younger members want to hear the likes of the above, then the
video sharing sites are a treasure trove. There are so many singes
whose names I heard of when I was growing up but had no chance of
seeing or hearing live, it is a goldmine.

But we are here, decades after Warren/Milanov/Tucker stopped singing.
We have to support the present singers. There may be a lack of truly
great dramatic singers, but there is a wealth of bel canto and other
lirico-spinto performers. The heavy rep singers will return; it is
cyclical. Some may even be reading this thread. It is unfair to say
to them that "they cannot compare to the greats of the past" and
"should listen to those who had gone before"...not to mention
patronisingly offensive, as they are giving their all.
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

> I appreciate such of the great singers of the past that I know but
> they are not here to do it today. The thing that interests me is
> whether some in the audiences of the 30s and 40s for example thought:
> "Yes, it's good but it's not as good as X in 1896. Now THAT was a
> great performance."
>
> I wonder?
=======
Caruso himself suffered from a highly partisan audience from his early
audiences...who were all fans of Fernando De Lucia...particularly hard
to take when he was a son of his home city as much as FDL! . He was
hurt by this, giving rise to the famous vow (apocryphal?) that he
would only return to Naples to eat spaghetti.

I wonder if he had Caruso Sauce on it?
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?


Anyone who could make an insane staement like this is really a
pathetic case. There has NEVER been a Forza like this..and most
people..NOT opera queens (which is an insulting statement) mark this
perf.as the greatest Forza since the Caruso/Ponselle days.

BUT/./this is RMO..and you can get away with insults...but anywhere
else you would be banned..ch
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 12, 7:18?pm, Count of Warwick <raff_martin... RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> > It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
> > ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
> > Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?
>
> ==========
> If the younger members want to hear the likes of the above, then the
> video sharing sites are a treasure trove. There are so many singes
> whose names I heard of when I was growing up but had no chance of
> seeing or hearing live, it is a goldmine.
>
> But we are here, decades after Warren/Milanov/Tucker stopped singing.
> We have to support the present singers. There may be a lack of truly
> great dramatic singers, but there is a wealth of bel canto and other
> lirico-spinto performers. The heavy rep singers will return; it is
> cyclical. Some may even be reading this thread. It is unfair to say
> to them that "they cannot compare to the greats of the past" and
> "should listen to those who had gone before"...not to mention
> patronisingly offensive, as they are giving their all.

I would like to add to that I am quite certain there are outstanding
singers/interpreters/conductors/musicians all over the world - the
fact that we do not always know of them or that they are not
necessarily part of the recording industry or the "big" houses does
not mean that their talent is any the less.

The important choral singing and cameo parts in Britten's Death in
Venice (which I reported on from the Aldeburgh Festival) was
brilliantly done and I doubt any of them were older than their mid
20s.

Ditto for the orchestra who were flawless in what is a quite tricky
score. It was absolutely thrilling. I happen to think that music
(including opera) is very much alive and well.

I appreciate such of the great singers of the past that I know but
they are not here to do it today. The thing that interests me is
whether some in the audiences of the 30s and 40s for example thought:
"Yes, it's good but it's not as good as X in 1896. Now THAT was a
great performance."

I wonder?

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

Actually, I think that you can find these references in work of Herbert
Klein and Shaw, for example, though Shaw was no slave to the past alone.It's
fairly consistent in the reviewing literature, but I don't think the issue
is whether people sing better - Shaw famously said thtat 'we' sing better
than our grandparents, and in certain technical respects (eg intonation) he
was probably right.

The issue is whether one 'knows' those singers and their standards of
execution, and what they brought interpretively to roles, or whether one
doesn't. Again, I think it's not just about singing, but conducting and
dance and every other performing art - obviously only the people active at
the time can do it, but the question is whether the sophisticated audience,
the critics (for what they are worth) and the larger community of artists
has a sense of the perspective. Too much singing today isn't much more
lasting that yesterday's newspaper, though it's hyped differently. I know of
almost no one who knows older singers or conductors or dancers or actors
(live or through film) who doesn't feel that that perspective is important
and the standards, where they existed, valuable.

I frankly think that those who shortchange it either aren't curious, don't
know how to listen, or just don't know much at all, and try to make a virtue
out of a necessity. Obviously someone like you knows the history of recorded
performances and can still listen with enthusiasm to younger artists. I
think that most of the so-called opera queens have the same ability,
although they are not often as good writers, or as well trained musically or
otherwise. Again, I think it's a very small minority - the "Sarahs" and a
couple of others, who feel that they need to create a straw man to protect
their own position.

My view, at least.


<alanwatkinsuk DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184265594.891815.256710@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 12, 7:18?pm, Count of Warwick <raff_martin... DeleteThis @yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> > It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
>> > ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
>> > Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?
>>
>> ==========
>> If the younger members want to hear the likes of the above, then the
>> video sharing sites are a treasure trove. There are so many singes
>> whose names I heard of when I was growing up but had no chance of
>> seeing or hearing live, it is a goldmine.
>>
>> But we are here, decades after Warren/Milanov/Tucker stopped singing.
>> We have to support the present singers. There may be a lack of truly
>> great dramatic singers, but there is a wealth of bel canto and other
>> lirico-spinto performers. The heavy rep singers will return; it is
>> cyclical. Some may even be reading this thread. It is unfair to say
>> to them that "they cannot compare to the greats of the past" and
>> "should listen to those who had gone before"...not to mention
>> patronisingly offensive, as they are giving their all.
>
> I would like to add to that I am quite certain there are outstanding
> singers/interpreters/conductors/musicians all over the world - the
> fact that we do not always know of them or that they are not
> necessarily part of the recording industry or the "big" houses does
> not mean that their talent is any the less.
>
> The important choral singing and cameo parts in Britten's Death in
> Venice (which I reported on from the Aldeburgh Festival) was
> brilliantly done and I doubt any of them were older than their mid
> 20s.
>
> Ditto for the orchestra who were flawless in what is a quite tricky
> score. It was absolutely thrilling. I happen to think that music
> (including opera) is very much alive and well.
>
> I appreciate such of the great singers of the past that I know but
> they are not here to do it today. The thing that interests me is
> whether some in the audiences of the 30s and 40s for example thought:
> "Yes, it's good but it's not as good as X in 1896. Now THAT was a
> great performance."
>
> I wonder?
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkins
>
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

I'm a little confused. This is obviously BobM who is posting, but he seems
to be answering below as if he were Sarah.

Hmmmm....


"Bob M." <rmarkiewicz.TakeThisOut@hvc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1184261015.313785.108840@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 11:26 am, "premiereop...@aol.com" <edop....TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 11, 6:30 pm, "gerberk" <gerb....TakeThisOut@live.nl> wrote:> That is the law of
> these groups Sarah better get used to it my dear and this
> > is a very nice group btw
>
> > I see your point and you are very right
>
> > A good thing is that you know ED is a nice guy which he most certainly
> > is
>
> > Just rave a little and you will be a household name in here
>
> ===========================================================================­==========
> I think Sarah might already be a household name on rmo. Just a
> different name. It's a troll posting under another address, IMO. And,
> according the his/her profile, she/he has never made a post to any
> group before under this e-mail address.
>
> But thanks for you kind words, Gerberk. I appreciate it.
>
> Best wishes,
> Ed

Absolutely not, although it's not my real name. I have never, ever
posted here, but have lurked both here and on Opera-L (where I've
never posted) for eons.

But I'd certainly be amused to see which of these clowns you think I
am.

On the other hand, I do know you, Charlie, and many others "in person"
for many years by sight and name, but not to talk to.
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

from mark's original post to now, this thread is already 100+ long and i
have to admit it baffles me.

first of all, why is it "ed's group vs. RMO"? there are at least several
dozen opera discussion groups going, right?

ed's group is a lot more homogenius than RMO. seemingly, most
contributors are over 50 years of age (to say the least) and they choose
to talk about the opera stars of their youth. if it was not not THE
golden age, it is no doubt one of the golden ages of quality opera
singers. i think even a majority of younger posters would agree to that.
this is what many of them want to talk about, so what's the problem?.

obviously its not for everone and there is nothing wrong with that
either.

there are a few people who are "mortal enemies" here but are collegial
enough there to keep it mostly civil and entertaining to those who are
interested in reading and/or posting about what they like best about
opera.

so again, IMO its not "ed's group vs. RMO" but just another place to
discuss opera even if it more of a "niche" forum than here.

calling the people who post there "opera queens" ........ as if there
are no "opera queens" here who do not post on ed's group is senseless
and shows how desperate a few are to discredit those who post there.

i say long live both RMO for what it is and ed's group for what it is.
period. exclamation point!!!

frank
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 12, 11:56?pm, Elektra <CharlesHandel....DeleteThis@cs.com> wrote:
> It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
> ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
> Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?


You have been to every live performance (recordings don't count) of
Forza around the world, every night?

Blimey!

There was I thinking you had a medical condition which prevented you
mostly getting out of NYC.

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 13, 12:22?am, "REG" <Richer....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, I think that you can find these references in work of Herbert
> Klein and Shaw, for example, though Shaw was no slave to the past alone.It's
> fairly consistent in the reviewing literature, but I don't think the issue
> is whether people sing better - Shaw famously said thtat 'we' sing better
> than our grandparents, and in certain technical respects (eg intonation) he
> was probably right.
>
> The issue is whether one 'knows' those singers and their standards of
> execution, and what they brought interpretively to roles, or whether one
> doesn't. Again, I think it's not just about singing, but conducting and
> dance and every other performing art - obviously only the people active at
> the time can do it, but the question is whether the sophisticated audience,
> the critics (for what they are worth) and the larger community of artists
> has a sense of the perspective. Too much singing today isn't much more
> lasting that yesterday's newspaper, though it's hyped differently. I know of
> almost no one who knows older singers or conductors or dancers or actors
> (live or through film) who doesn't feel that that perspective is important
> and the standards, where they existed, valuable.
>
> I frankly think that those who shortchange it either aren't curious, don't
> know how to listen, or just don't know much at all, and try to make a virtue
> out of a necessity. Obviously someone like you knows the history of recorded
> performances and can still listen with enthusiasm to younger artists. I
> think that most of the so-called opera queens have the same ability,
> although they are not often as good writers, or as well trained musically or
> otherwise. Again, I think it's a very small minority - the "Sarahs" and a
> couple of others, who feel that they need to create a straw man to protect
> their own position.
>
> My view, at least.
>
> <alanwatkin....TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1184265594.891815.256710@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jul 12, 7:18?pm, Count of Warwick <raff_martin....TakeThisOut@yahoo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >> > It's the same half dozen old opera queens writing the same ol', same
> >> > ol'. As someone suggested here, how many times can you post about a
> >> > Zinka-Richard-Warren Forza?
>
> >> ==========
> >> If the younger members want to hear the likes of the above, then the
> >> video sharing sites are a treasure trove. There are so many singes
> >> whose names I heard of when I was growing up but had no chance of
> >> seeing or hearing live, it is a goldmine.
>
> >> But we are here, decades after Warren/Milanov/Tucker stopped singing.
> >> We have to support the present singers. There may be a lack of truly
> >> great dramatic singers, but there is a wealth of bel canto and other
> >> lirico-spinto performers. The heavy rep singers will return; it is
> >> cyclical. Some may even be reading this thread. It is unfair to say
> >> to them that "they cannot compare to the greats of the past" and
> >> "should listen to those who had gone before"...not to mention
> >> patronisingly offensive, as they are giving their all.
>
> > I would like to add to that I am quite certain there are outstanding
> > singers/interpreters/conductors/musicians all over the world - the
> > fact that we do not always know of them or that they are not
> > necessarily part of the recording industry or the "big" houses does
> > not mean that their talent is any the less.
>
> > The important choral singing and cameo parts in Britten's Death in
> > Venice (which I reported on from the Aldeburgh Festival) was
> > brilliantly done and I doubt any of them were older than their mid
> > 20s.
>
> > Ditto for the orchestra who were flawless in what is a quite tricky
> > score. It was absolutely thrilling. I happen to think that music
> > (including opera) is very much alive and well.
>
> > I appreciate such of the great singers of the past that I know but
> > they are not here to do it today. The thing that interests me is
> > whether some in the audiences of the 30s and 40s for example thought:
> > "Yes, it's good but it's not as good as X in 1896. Now THAT was a
> > great performance."
>
> > I wonder?
>
> > Kind regards,
> > Alan M. Watkins- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I am a simplistic old soul. I'm waiting for Mr Handelman to post on
Janacek.

I did ask but nothing happened.

I may start a thread myself.

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO 

On Jul 12, 1:28 pm, sarahch....RemoveThis@aol.com wrote:
> On Jul 12, 11:26 am, "premiereop...@aol.com" <edop....RemoveThis@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think Sarah might already be a household name on rmo. Just a
> > different name. It's a troll posting under another address, IMO. And,
> > according the his/her profile, she/he has never made a post to any
> > group before under this e-mail address.
>
> Sorry to disappoint, wrong. While I happen to know you and Handelman
> by sight for many years, I've never posted here, but have lurked for
> eons both here and on Opera-L, as well as that cemetery called Ed's
> Opera Group. My name really is Sarah and I work at 104 Fifth Avenue,
> thus the name.
>
> I also notice you didn't bother to say that any of my points about
> your forum were wrong, just tried to deflect by turning it into a
> guessing game.

Ok. Your "points" about my forum are wrong. Happy? You now sound like
Jakedrake.

Ed
 >> Stay informed about: Ed's group vs. RMO