Derek Bailey Music

There wasn't anybody quite original as the late British guitarist Derek Bailey. Throughout his long career, Bailey pushed the boundaries of free-form improvisation with his unique brand of playing. Although this past Christmas Day marks two years since his untimely passing, Derek Bailey still lives on through his music and those who have kept his memory alive since then.
Bailey's most acclaimed recording came towards the very end of his life - the 2002 solo guitar classic "Ballads". This CD was a continuous 41-minute performace in which Bailey interspersed numerous jazz standards alongside his eccentric free improvisations. What few people knew at the time was that two months prior to recording "Ballads", Bailey had recorded a first attempt that was later shelved. Five years later, this shelved 'first take' of "Ballads" has finally seen the light of day under the title of "Standards".
While similar to "Ballads" inpart, the structure of the "Standards" CD is quite different. For starters, instead of being a continuous disc-long performance, there are seven separate improvisations. Also, while the "Ballads" performance found Bailey quoting a specific tune's melody immediately, on "Standards" he builds up to it with long improvised phrases. Despite the differences in feel and structure, "Standards" is still a solid piece of work from beginning to end and shows Derek Bailey at his absolute best.
"Standards" is an excellent companion to the "Ballads" disc and is full of beauty and adventure. It isn't difficult to picture Derek relaxing in a rocking chair in some cozy enviornment performing this music. It's quite intimate but at the same time, it keeps you focused with its unpredictability.
On a personal note, I find it to be interesting that the album closes with Derek saying "Happy New Year" (this was recorded in January 2002) and this being one of the very first CDs I have purchased in the new year of 2008. What a great way to start a year.
Great CD. This and "Ballads" are highly recommended!

With the passing of Derek Bailey, it seems a number of recordings, whether out of print or unreleased, seem to be coming into general availability. Perhaps the crown jewel of the posthumous material released thus far, "Standards" is in effect an early take of "Ballads". Per the liner notes, the story goes that Bailey had recorded a set of standards while in New York, but decided upon returning home to London to change his approach. The later recording was "Ballads" and this recording, released as "Standards", sat on the shelf.

In listening to the two of them together, the differences between them are clear. "Ballads" tends to state the theme then delve into brief improvisation and presents all the pieces as a continuous performance, "Standards" starts with improvisation and briefly states the melody towards the end of each piece, with the pieces tending towards longer lengths and presented as separate performances. But one thing that's certain, they're both very clearly the work of Derek Bailey-- his voice, his sound, and his unique approach to the guitar dominate the performances. This recording may be a bit more abstract (it's presentation of the theme as a coda leaves the listeners with little touchstone) and I think succeeds a bit less. The strength of "Ballads", for me at least, was that it allowed Bailey to explore a sentimentality and melancholy that he often didn't exhibit in his music. Opening with the themes of old ballads lent themselves to this-- it set up almost a schmaltz from the start. While the playing on "Standards" is staggering and intense and enormously powerful, it captures more of Bailey's manic energy and mystery than that unique sadness of "Ballads".

This isn't to say it's not a superb listen, mind you, and make no mistake, this is clearly no demo recording-- this is a complete and fully formed vision. Perhaps the biggest testament to Bailey's genius is that he could take a fine record, abandon it and outdo it. "Standards", however, provides an intriguing view into the working process and is a fine listen on its own. Recommended.

Invariably, when an artist as well respected as Derek Bailey passes away, a flood of material seems to hit the market-- planned releases, reissues cashing on the perceived short-term boost in recognition, and sessions perhaps not intended for release, but with new material at an end, suddenly seems more relevent, more critical. "To Play: The Blemish Sessions" falls into that camp-- Bailey had provided David Sylvian with a set of recordings, about 45 minutes or so released on here, primarily on acoustic guitar but with a couple pieces on electric, from which Sylvian derived three fine tracks on "Blemish". This session presents that material unedited and without Sylvian's overdubs.

While Bailey's playing throughout can be quite enjoyable, there's definitely a hole in the music-- it's clear he'd intended this to go along with a vocal. "Play 6" for example-- there's so much space hanging around in this recording that I felt myself subconsciously filling in the spaces. In it's own way, this is a fine portrait to the genius that is Derek Bailey; a view into his position in the creative process and a chance to hear him in isolation for a recording meant as part of a collective. But while the music is certainly interesting from that perspective, it does feel incomplete.

My guess is that anyone reading this is going to purchase this regardless of what I have to say. Given this, I should state that I have no regrets about picking this up, but there's definitely a whole lot better by Bailey.

These 3 masters of spontaneous improv realize their once-in-a-nano-second dream with these stupendous performances. Not for the faint of heart...glorious to the searchers of the unexpected in the avant and free jazz music worlds.

John Stevens once coined the phrase "insect music" for the kind of free improvisation that his group, SME (the Spontaneous Music Ensemble), specialized in. The saxophonist John Butcher was a member of the last incarnation of SME before Stevens' untimely demise, a trio which also featured the fine guitarist Roger Smith. This disc, an encounter between Butcher, Derek Bailey & the tuba player Oren Marshall, might indeed be called "insect music": the volume is usually quite low, the playing concentrating on texture & interplay rather than melody. The key player here is John Butcher, an utterly astonishing saxophonist who has obviously listened closely to Evan Parker but whose use of extended techniques is unlike anyone else's. On soprano he has a light, mobile sound that bobs above the ensemble's sound; on tenor, he often favours buzzing sustained notes that split & recombine polymorphously. He rarely plays very quickly: his playing is entirely averse to conventional soloing.

One of the pleasures of this kind of music, with all three players using nonstandard ("extended") techniques on their instruments, is that the familiar sound-qualities of their instruments can be subverted, so that it becomes hard to tell reeds apart from strings, or one imagines a ghost percussionist or bass player. There are some astonishing passages where the players despite their instrumental disparities work in near-unison, as in passages towards the end of "Out of the Deep". Another pleasure of this type of music is the feeling that a particular combination of sounds is exactly right...& that you're unlikely ever to hear it again.

Fine stuff. One of the finest of Bailey's recent group recordings, along with the marvelous _One Time_, a trio with John Stevens & Kent Carter. This disc is far closer to the ethos of classic UK free improv than much of Bailey's recent work (e.g. _Daedal_ or _Mirakle_): it's almost a posthumous tribute to John Stevens.

I found this a very interesting presentation of a very popular and famous opera. Of course, we all know that Aida is to take place in Egypt, however, I wasn't sure if Egypt was the country in which the story was taking place, or exactly which time period it was taking place in. Not one bit of the costuming (or the sets) appeared Egyptian in the slightest degree, and strange as it sounds, the entire opera seemed to be more something from the "Arabian Nights" than the days of the Pharoah's. Putting that aside, visually, the opera was stunning and very beautiful. Most of the costumes did the singers proud, making them really appear glamorous. The only exception was, of course, Pavarotti, and his costume looked like it was made in "Desert Sands Tent Shop." The oriental shoulder pads did little to even out his very LARGE frame. He could have actually worn Jessye Norman's costume for Sieglinde in Walkure (done by the MET) and it would have looked almost the same, excepting it was in brown and this in blue. The basic figure was almost the same as Norman at that time.

The sound wasn't bad either, and we were not "treated" to the strange pianissimo at the end of Celeste Aida we are greeted with in the recording released on Decca of this same performance. I found the sound quite clear, and only very slightly did it seem unbalanced, and only from time to time. It was never a distraction.

The distraction was firstly the super bad acting of most of the singers, and I mean most of them. Pavarotti was his wooden self with no sense of character, or anything, for that matter. He sang well, but without anything very dramatic being conveyed. Chiara sounded actually way better in the DVD live performance recording than she did in the studio one of this same performance. There she was more than lifeless and her penetrating
high notes really were awful. Here, however, she sang quite fine, and even though those same high notes were a bit too brilliant and at times almost shrill, they were fine. The problem with her performance is she is about the most boring person I have ever seen on stage. Pavarotti can't act, but he is seldom boring (even just being himself gives an audience a lot). Her actions consisted of rising one arm, then two; in moments of high drama she would move which ever arm more quickly, but the basic movements never changed. She had what Wagner called "eternal swimming motions" which he thought were horrible. I happen to agree. She always made her stage entrances as if she were frightened we might know she were there. She reminded me of a character from Rikki Tikki Tavi who would slink around the walls of the room and never actually dare to enter the center of it. One bit of stage business that really was affective was having her enter the famous Nile Scene by boat. Here, and only here, was her "fear of being seen" affective. Other than that, it was a constant annoyance.

The other characters were completely forgettable, as they are in most every performance. Who ever remembers who plays the King, or the high priest? Few of us. However, we do appreciate when they are affective in the scenes they are in. In this case, they were affective, very affective, but like all minor roles, they were overshadowed by the leads.

And in this case, everyone was overshadowed by Ghena Dimitrova. Her Amneris was exciting and developed carefully as a character. Too often she is presented as if she is some psychic witch constantly suspicious and dying to do evil. If one reads the libretto, one really gets the feeling that she and Radames were a thing before the pretty Aida entered the picture. In the trio just after the opera starts, we are often treated to a very angry Amneris, when in reality she is only suspicious that perhaps Radames doesn't love her as he once did. We saw her doubts and fears, and her suspicions, but we were not forced to see a raving witch so early in the opera (and if the truth be told, at no time should she be presented that way). She is a princess, she is powerful, she is in love, and she is rejected. She feels jealously, even rage, but she is filled with sorrow, and anger with herself for having caught Radames betraying his country and her. Dimitrova captures all the emotions of the part, and is not the traditional raving, jealous witch we are accustomed to seeing. Her great scene is the trial scene, and we are not disappointed. Finally we have an Amneris who can manage the upper register with strength and power, which is needed. I guess I am torn between a mezzo singing the role, and a really powerful dramatic soprano with a good lower range. I found Dimitrova far more exciting than Cossotto (who is considered a legend in the part). Cossotto had the voice, but her Amneris is nothing but a jealous witch from beginning to end. There is no development and she is not a great actress either. One thing that was refreshing was seeing the person of Amneris actually listening during the trial. So often she is just counting time waiting for her next big outburst.

I enjoyed the work, but I rated it only a three because it was lacking in so many ways. Visual affects, lovely costumes (even if they suggest nothing of the era or country the story is taking place in), and good singing don't create the illusion of drama that we expect to see. So many singers now days are first rate actors, and we are getting more and more used to them. Even an opera like Aida requires them, for the show of the triumphal scene is just that, one scene. When we don't see real people and feel real emotions (both because of their voices and their actions) we miss half the story and all the character development that must be there.

The singing was wonderful, but the staging ranged from distracting to hilarious.

You like slaves? This production has them in abundance, cluttering up the action, groaning and moaning as they pull and push stones and monuments like a pack of crack-smoking ants. They were especially annoying in the triumphal scene, where the chorus could barely squeeze on stage, cowering in the background while the over-acting wretches took center stage. (Hey slaves! Triumphal celebration going on! Take five!)

It was also kind of weird in Act I, Scene II, where the rocks just popped up out of the ground, noisly banged about, and occasionally formed,one assumes, significant shapes.

Act II, Scene I was bizarre. First, there were topless women "bathing." Let me tell ya, topless women are always a distraction, except in a topless bar, and even there they distract. What was the point of them here? Second, while most ballets in this scene feature the usual gaggle of Egyptian girls "walking like an Egyptian," they changed it up a bit by having young boys--very young boys!--hopping about in thongs, while being whipped by some old dudes. (Speaking of pointless, don't miss the entrance of Radames in the Act II, Scene II, with the scantily clad young hunk standing over him, ready for action.)

Finally, Herr Pavarotti was big enough; hanging curtains on him only added to the effect. (One could almost hear the slaves lamenting, "We can pull the sphinx across the stage, but not that tenor!")

It is also noted that the once discriminating La Scala audience fell for this MTV approach like wrestling fans marking out to a Hulk Hogan pose down.

All in all, an absurd and sterile desecration of Verdi's opera.

CRITICISM:

1. If you know the opera very well and can handle the Italian, tough. There's no way to get Italian subtitles (on either the PAL or the NTSC version).

2. The "grand march" (musically intended to be the most magical moment of this opera) was inanely choreographed. According to the libretto, they're supposed to be bringing in "the spoils of war," as they dance to the music. Instead we have a bunch of guys dragging giant statues around the stage with ropes. The famous "Dance of the Moorish Slaves" was also ineptly done, but that has been adequately discussed by other reviewers.

3. Pavarotti does indeed have weight problems. He's so fat in this performance, it's distracting.

4. The quality of the audio recording, if you do yourself right with some quality headphones and listen to it carefully, is frequently poor. The attentive listener can hear pops, clunking, clanking, coughing, page turning, etc. (Of course, to be fair, this WAS recorded live.) This is something you'll want to know if you're an aural purist.

PRAISE:

1. Singingwise, the performers are at their peak.

2. With the exception of the lack of Italian, the subtitles were well brought off: accurate and literate.

3. Considering the limitations of their situation, the cameramen did an excellent job. But amazing work on their part doesn't necessarily mean it's quality viewing.

First off, I must address the reviewer who criticized the nude women in Amneris' bath scene. This production was staged in Italy, where the native population does not giggle like a schoolgirl at the sight of a woman's bare breast. The nude women, all chosen according to the model of classic female beauty, added an element of sensousness, not lewdness. If they were so lewd, why would they cover up when the group of small boys burst onto the stage?

As other reviewers have stated, this production has its ups and downs. This is the first time I have seen a taped Pavarotti stage performance, and boy, he makes Ramon Vargas look like the greatest actor alive. Once, Martina Arroyo (herself a spectacular Aida) was once asked, in an interview, if it was detrimental to have a very heavy opera singer onstage. Her response was quite intelligent; she said it depended on how the singer moved. Without mentioning names, she stated that when you see some singers, all you think is "all that weight." Well, she could well have been thinking of Pavarotti. Half the time, when the camera zooms in, we see him panting like a tired dog. It doesn't help that he licks his lips like one, a very course habit for the operatic stage.

In addition to his weight issues, Pavarotti seems to feel incredibly lost if he is onstage for more than a few seconds without singing. Just witness him during the triumphal march. As for his singing, it is good, but not heroic, and Radames calls for both.

Maria Chiara is not a first-rate Aida, but I happen to like her interpretation. For the person who likened her to a figure slithering in the shadows, think about this: You are taken captive, the daughter of a King. You wonder from day to day if it will be your last. Furthermore, you soon discover that you are at the mercy of the whims of a jealous, scorned captor. To add insult to injury, your father denounces you after he asks you to do the impossible. Well, in this light, would it have been proper for any Aida to prance regally across the stage?

As Amneris, Ghena Dimitrova looks like Cher on the Nile. Really, her makeup looks like it was applied by a drag queen, thought the effect is fabulous. Dimitrova has some patchy moments, but after a rather wooden presence in Act I, she really catches fire in Act II. The basic tone and projection is commendable for a non-Italian singer. When she experiences a metanoia in the judgment scene, we really believe it.

I also loved Juan Pons as Amonastro. We have a lot of good baritones today, but his Amonastro is polished, and again a believable character.

As for the costumes, they leave something to be desired. For such a monumental staging, they could have given us the look and feel of classic Egypt, without overdoing it. Instead, what we get is a mostly drab palatte.

A nivel general esta es una gran version de Aida, comenzando por la puesta en escena de LUCA RONCONI, bella y coherente visualmente en todo momento, sin los alardes tipicos de la obra, pero con un inteligente movimiento de figurantes.
Luego, en el apartado vocal tenemos al sobresaliente Radames de LUCIANO PAVAROTTI, en uno de sus dias de gloria, a la poderosa Amneris de GHENA DIMITROVA (sin los medios de la Zajick, pero muy notable tambien) y a esos lujos para los papeles secundarios que se llaman PAATA BURDZULADZE (Ramfis), JUAN PONS (Amonasro) y NICOLAI GHIAUROV (Rey de Egipto), todos de lujo en sus respectivas partes.
La Aida de MARIA CHIARA cumple bien, aunque no llega a arrebatar vocalmente, impone una presencia escenica bastante interesante. Aunque prefiero a Aprille Millo...
LORIN MAZZEL lleva comodamente la direccion de los cuerpos estables de la Scalla de Milan, todos ellos muy ductiles, rematando asi una version de Aida bastante interesante.

I found this a very interesting presentation of a very popular and famous opera. Of course, we all know that Aida is to take place in Egypt, however, I wasn't sure if Egypt was the country in which the story was taking place, or exactly which time period it was taking place in. Not one bit of the costuming (or the sets) appeared Egyptian in the slightest degree, and strange as it sounds, the entire opera seemed to be more something from the "Arabian Nights" than the days of the Pharoah's. Putting that aside, visually, the opera was stunning and very beautiful. Most of the costumes did the singers proud, making them really appear glamorous. The only exception was, of course, Pavarotti, and his costume looked like it was made in "Desert Sands Tent Shop." The oriental shoulder pads did little to even out his very LARGE frame. He could have actually worn Jessye Norman's costume for Sieglinde in Walkure (done by the MET) and it would have looked almost the same, excepting it was in brown and this in blue. The basic figure was almost the same as Norman at that time.

The sound wasn't bad either, and we were not "treated" to the strange pianissimo at the end of Celeste Aida we are greeted with in the recording released on Decca of this same performance. I found the sound quite clear, and only very slightly did it seem unbalanced, and only from time to time. It was never a distraction.

The distraction was firstly the super bad acting of most of the singers, and I mean most of them. Pavarotti was his wooden self with no sense of character, or anything, for that matter. He sang well, but without anything very dramatic being conveyed. Chiara sounded actually way better in the DVD live performance recording than she did in the studio one of this same performance. There she was more than lifeless and her penetrating
high notes really were awful. Here, however, she sang quite fine, and even though those same high notes were a bit too brilliant and at times almost shrill, they were fine. The problem with her performance is she is about the most boring person I have ever seen on stage. Pavarotti can't act, but he is seldom boring (even just being himself gives an audience a lot). Her actions consisted of rising one arm, then two; in moments of high drama she would move which ever arm more quickly, but the basic movements never changed. She had what Wagner called "eternal swimming motions" which he thought were horrible. I happen to agree. She always made her stage entrances as if she were frightened we might know she were there. She reminded me of a character from Rikki Tikki Tavi who would slink around the walls of the room and never actually dare to enter the center of it. One bit of stage business that really was affective was having her enter the famous Nile Scene by boat. Here, and only here, was her "fear of being seen" affective. Other than that, it was a constant annoyance.

The other characters were completely forgettable, as they are in most every performance. Who ever remembers who plays the King, or the high priest? Few of us. However, we do appreciate when they are affective in the scenes they are in. In this case, they were affective, very affective, but like all minor roles, they were overshadowed by the leads.

And in this case, everyone was overshadowed by Ghena Dimitrova. Her Amneris was exciting and developed carefully as a character. Too often she is presented as if she is some psychic witch constantly suspicious and dying to do evil. If one reads the libretto, one really gets the feeling that she and Radames were a thing before the pretty Aida entered the picture. In the trio just after the opera starts, we are often treated to a very angry Amneris, when in reality she is only suspicious that perhaps Radames doesn't love her as he once did. We saw her doubts and fears, and her suspicions, but we were not forced to see a raving witch so early in the opera (and if the truth be told, at no time should she be presented that way). She is a princess, she is powerful, she is in love, and she is rejected. She feels jealously, even rage, but she is filled with sorrow, and anger with herself for having caught Radames betraying his country and her. Dimitrova captures all the emotions of the part, and is not the traditional raving, jealous witch we are accustomed to seeing. Her great scene is the trial scene, and we are not disappointed. Finally we have an Amneris who can manage the upper register with strength and power, which is needed. I guess I am torn between a mezzo singing the role, and a really powerful dramatic soprano with a good lower range. I found Dimitrova far more exciting than Cossotto (who is considered a legend in the part). Cossotto had the voice, but her Amneris is nothing but a jealous witch from beginning to end. There is no development and she is not a great actress either. One thing that was refreshing was seeing the person of Amneris actually listening during the trial. So often she is just counting time waiting for her next big outburst.

I enjoyed the work, but I rated it only a three because it was lacking in so many ways. Visual affects, lovely costumes (even if they suggest nothing of the era or country the story is taking place in), and good singing don't create the illusion of drama that we expect to see. So many singers now days are first rate actors, and we are getting more and more used to them. Even an opera like Aida requires them, for the show of the triumphal scene is just that, one scene. When we don't see real people and feel real emotions (both because of their voices and their actions) we miss half the story and all the character development that must be there.

The singing was wonderful, but the staging ranged from distracting to hilarious.

You like slaves? This production has them in abundance, cluttering up the action, groaning and moaning as they pull and push stones and monuments like a pack of crack-smoking ants. They were especially annoying in the triumphal scene, where the chorus could barely squeeze on stage, cowering in the background while the over-acting wretches took center stage. (Hey slaves! Triumphal celebration going on! Take five!)

It was also kind of weird in Act I, Scene II, where the rocks just popped up out of the ground, noisly banged about, and occasionally formed,one assumes, significant shapes.

Act II, Scene I was bizarre. First, there were topless women "bathing." Let me tell ya, topless women are always a distraction, except in a topless bar, and even there they distract. What was the point of them here? Second, while most ballets in this scene feature the usual gaggle of Egyptian girls "walking like an Egyptian," they changed it up a bit by having young boys--very young boys!--hopping about in thongs, while being whipped by some old dudes. (Speaking of pointless, don't miss the entrance of Radames in the Act II, Scene II, with the scantily clad young hunk standing over him, ready for action.)

Finally, Herr Pavarotti was big enough; hanging curtains on him only added to the effect. (One could almost hear the slaves lamenting, "We can pull the sphinx across the stage, but not that tenor!")

It is also noted that the once discriminating La Scala audience fell for this MTV approach like wrestling fans marking out to a Hulk Hogan pose down.

All in all, an absurd and sterile desecration of Verdi's opera.

CRITICISM:

1. If you know the opera very well and can handle the Italian, tough. There's no way to get Italian subtitles (on either the PAL or the NTSC version).

2. The "grand march" (musically intended to be the most magical moment of this opera) was inanely choreographed. According to the libretto, they're supposed to be bringing in "the spoils of war," as they dance to the music. Instead we have a bunch of guys dragging giant statues around the stage with ropes. The famous "Dance of the Moorish Slaves" was also ineptly done, but that has been adequately discussed by other reviewers.

3. Pavarotti does indeed have weight problems. He's so fat in this performance, it's distracting.

4. The quality of the audio recording, if you do yourself right with some quality headphones and listen to it carefully, is frequently poor. The attentive listener can hear pops, clunking, clanking, coughing, page turning, etc. (Of course, to be fair, this WAS recorded live.) This is something you'll want to know if you're an aural purist.

PRAISE:

1. Singingwise, the performers are at their peak.

2. With the exception of the lack of Italian, the subtitles were well brought off: accurate and literate.

3. Considering the limitations of their situation, the cameramen did an excellent job. But amazing work on their part doesn't necessarily mean it's quality viewing.

First off, I must address the reviewer who criticized the nude women in Amneris' bath scene. This production was staged in Italy, where the native population does not giggle like a schoolgirl at the sight of a woman's bare breast. The nude women, all chosen according to the model of classic female beauty, added an element of sensousness, not lewdness. If they were so lewd, why would they cover up when the group of small boys burst onto the stage?

As other reviewers have stated, this production has its ups and downs. This is the first time I have seen a taped Pavarotti stage performance, and boy, he makes Ramon Vargas look like the greatest actor alive. Once, Martina Arroyo (herself a spectacular Aida) was once asked, in an interview, if it was detrimental to have a very heavy opera singer onstage. Her response was quite intelligent; she said it depended on how the singer moved. Without mentioning names, she stated that when you see some singers, all you think is "all that weight." Well, she could well have been thinking of Pavarotti. Half the time, when the camera zooms in, we see him panting like a tired dog. It doesn't help that he licks his lips like one, a very course habit for the operatic stage.

In addition to his weight issues, Pavarotti seems to feel incredibly lost if he is onstage for more than a few seconds without singing. Just witness him during the triumphal march. As for his singing, it is good, but not heroic, and Radames calls for both.

Maria Chiara is not a first-rate Aida, but I happen to like her interpretation. For the person who likened her to a figure slithering in the shadows, think about this: You are taken captive, the daughter of a King. You wonder from day to day if it will be your last. Furthermore, you soon discover that you are at the mercy of the whims of a jealous, scorned captor. To add insult to injury, your father denounces you after he asks you to do the impossible. Well, in this light, would it have been proper for any Aida to prance regally across the stage?

As Amneris, Ghena Dimitrova looks like Cher on the Nile. Really, her makeup looks like it was applied by a drag queen, thought the effect is fabulous. Dimitrova has some patchy moments, but after a rather wooden presence in Act I, she really catches fire in Act II. The basic tone and projection is commendable for a non-Italian singer. When she experiences a metanoia in the judgment scene, we really believe it.

I also loved Juan Pons as Amonastro. We have a lot of good baritones today, but his Amonastro is polished, and again a believable character.

As for the costumes, they leave something to be desired. For such a monumental staging, they could have given us the look and feel of classic Egypt, without overdoing it. Instead, what we get is a mostly drab palatte.

A nivel general esta es una gran version de Aida, comenzando por la puesta en escena de LUCA RONCONI, bella y coherente visualmente en todo momento, sin los alardes tipicos de la obra, pero con un inteligente movimiento de figurantes.
Luego, en el apartado vocal tenemos al sobresaliente Radames de LUCIANO PAVAROTTI, en uno de sus dias de gloria, a la poderosa Amneris de GHENA DIMITROVA (sin los medios de la Zajick, pero muy notable tambien) y a esos lujos para los papeles secundarios que se llaman PAATA BURDZULADZE (Ramfis), JUAN PONS (Amonasro) y NICOLAI GHIAUROV (Rey de Egipto), todos de lujo en sus respectivas partes.
La Aida de MARIA CHIARA cumple bien, aunque no llega a arrebatar vocalmente, impone una presencia escenica bastante interesante. Aunque prefiero a Aprille Millo...
LORIN MAZZEL lleva comodamente la direccion de los cuerpos estables de la Scalla de Milan, todos ellos muy ductiles, rematando asi una version de Aida bastante interesante.

I just recently bought this DVD based on the rave reviews it recieved here at amazon. And I was not dissapointed. I watched it with my family and at the end we were all in tears! I haven't been so moved by a recording since I heard the Tosca with Callas and di Stefano. Thank you Edita Gruberova for a historic performance!

This is an outstanding Traviata. Gruberova' outstanding control of her voice and her exquisite emoting make this the best Traviata I have seen. Every note from her is just pure gold. Traviata is not an easy role but it does not pose any problems for Gruberova. She is Traviata. I bet this is Gruberova at her very very best. Schicoff and Zancanaro are both very good. Schicoff's voice is kind of an acquired taste. I have followed his career for many years and this Traviata is a good representation of his artistry. His singing becomes more intense as the opera preceeds. His voice is not the most flexible but his sincerity is never in doubt. If you are looking for only one Traviata DVD in your collection, look no further.

Yes of course Mme Gruberova is fabulous; that's how she exists.

I direct your attention to Mr. Shicoff. I have been listening to and watching performances of La Traviata for approximately 50 years. I'm used to it. But I was amazed at Mr. Shicoff's acting in Act I, and blown away in Act II, Scene 1 (when I had to ask someone to bring on the Kleenex) and, at the end of Scene 2 found myself sobbing.

Mr. Shicoff is the ONLY tenor of my 50 years listening who shows any acquaintance whatsoever with the writings of Dumas Pere et Fils. He's not pretty to look at, he doesn't try to eclipse everyone within miles of his stardome - he just recreates Alfredo. And breaks one's heart, for Dumas Fils was a gentleman to his fingertips and had a heart that could break.

The only critique I have of this DVD is that Mr. Shicoff's Act II Scene 1 cavatina was cut. With an actor like him, we could have used it. Savored it. If there were more tenors around like him, but there aren't and never will be, this opera could be performed as "ALFREDO".

Mr. Shicoff is the tenor who should have shared Traviata with Mme Callas.

I don't remember being this moved by a production of La Traviata in a long time. Are you interested in FEELING the opera in addition to seeing and hearing it? Climb aboard.

The three leads are in gorgeous voice, devastatingly dramatic in their respective roles. It took me a little while to warm up to Edita Gruberova's Violetta, but by opera's end I was sold. Her Addio del passato(performed uncut) ranks with the best I've heard, and her physical performance improves over the course of the opera, culminating in a flawless rendition of the character's deterioration, redemption, death, etc. Neil Shicoff might not look the part of Alfredo(he's rather bookish for the ardent loverboy), but his voice is lovely and resounding, and one gets the feeling that if the tenor were blessed with the smoldering looks of a Placido Domingo, he would be much more well known and appreciated. Giorgio Zancanaro is perfect as the elder Germont, making the character more sympathetic than(perhaps) he has a right to be. The final scene is shattering, with both men huddled together, impotently watching Violetta fade out, coming to the realization that they have just been playing roles imposed on them by the society they live in while Violetta is the only real person among them, the only character in the drama who has truly lived, and one gets the impression that these two sad and regretful men feel unworthy to be in the same room with such a soaring free spirit. It's a magnificent bit of acting on the parts of Shicoff and Zancanaro. The fact that Gruberova's Violetta doesn't bear any grudges only reinforces her superiority, and her death is exultant, both vocally and dramatically.

The sets are beautiful, somewhat dark, less detailed and opulent than in some productions but no less effective. Carlo Rizzi's conducting is slower than the norm but rarely to the point of being plodding or distracting. There are a couple of cuts in the score, but unfortunately that's a common practice with Traviata unless the conductor is Solti or Levine. In this case, the excisions aren't damaging to the overall performance, just a little annoying.

I own two DVDs of La Traviata, this one and the Solti/Gheorghiu production. I'm not going to pick one over the other because both are wonderful. My advice: if you can only buy one Traviata, play a game of eeny meeny miny mo, if not, grab them both.

Perfect! Gruberova sings her precious heart out with control and conviction. Her agility is astounding. Shicoff is a sweatheat and I fell in love with him as Alfredo. His pain and joys are clearly felt and alomst unbearable. He is strong yet senstive. Their acting is superb, every jesture is meaningfull and beautiful. This DVD haunts me in the best possible way!

This CD is a document of a concert encounter between Derek Bailey & two percussionists of African origin--the great Louis Moholo and the less-known Thebe Lipere. The music is much less mercurial than usual for Bailey, a series of gently rhythmic, almost tranced improvisations; despite the double percussion, the music is mostly quite quiet. I like the disk very much, but have to issue a serious caveat: the recording is one of Incus's less satisfactory jobs, with the guitar disappearing for long stretches into near-inaudibility. Bailey has always avoided conventional structures of "soloist" and "accompaniment" (while he can often be abrasive & disruptive, he can just as often take a role like that of swing-era guitarists Freddie Green or Teddy Bunn, patiently filling in the background texture), but this recording's poor balance makes it hard to tell what's going on.

Hi, it's me again. I just realized that Amazon doesn't have any of the track's even listed by title. This cd is great and that's an injustice so I've decided to list the titles here, just so you can get a bit more of a feel for this cd.

Bai Ha She

Huang Qin

Zhu Ye

Ba Qing Ye

Wan Er Wan

Xiang Qing Qing

Sha Fen

Zhu Shu

Min Xiao-Fen is a Chinese master musician and she plays the pipa (Chinese lute). Derek Bailey (playing acoustic guitar here) is one of the fathers of free-improvisation. These two musicians are from different cultures, different genders, and different generations, but the improvisations contained on this cd are played by two minds that are always fully locked on to every nuance of what the other is playing.

This is one of the best free-improvisation cd's I have ever heard. Period. As much as I love Min in her other musical settings (and I do love her!) I keep hoping she will venture into the world of free-improvisation more often because she is such a force of nature in this wide open context. And as far as Derek's playing on this cd is concerned, I rank this cd up there with AIDA and WIREFORKS without hesitation!

Want a few favorite tracks? Well I'm not going to name any because this cd is consistently great, and to name my favorites would be too tough for me.