Verdi vs. Wagner

Despite the fact I know this will start a flame war, it is not my intention. Totally.

Well, here are their pros and cons, in my honest opinion:

ORCHESTRATION:
Wagner - Very complex: extended the orchestra up to the point of having an instrument invented on purpose for him (the Wagner tuba.) Made opera singers and the orchestra equals, thus demanding more power and volume from singers. Hector Berlioz's influence, however, is undeniable.

Verdi - Typically simple in his first 20 or so operas, though never crude. Never more important than the singers: sometimes accused of being just a giant guitar. However, it could be extremely effective while subtle and sometimes extremely innovative, like the description of the stormy weather in Rigoletto, which predicted Debussy by 50 years. Became increasingly complex and by the time of Aïda and especially Otello, it had equaled Wagner's.

VOCAL WRITING:
Wagner - Demanded greater power from singers in order to equal the orchestra in volume: extremely long roles were and are very taxing on singers, who need to be specialized. However, he understood the human voice extremely well and this is evident in his vocal parts. He didn't favor personal displays of virtuosity and no singer should take liberties with his music.

Verdi - Gradually ended the old belcanto tradition of embelishments of the vocal line, changing it so it required more stamina and less agility. He very much followed the italian tradition of the singers' opera for years, but he never let it interfere with the drama or purpose of the music. With time, vocal writing reflexed evolution within a character over the course of a work (Violetta, in la Traviata, begins as a shallow party loving woman, singing corolatura and embelishments, but as her emotions develop her vocal line becomes simpler, more direct and more affected, and by Act III is reduced, in a number, to a heartbreaking spoken part.)

THE DRAMA:
Wagner - When it comes to this field, probably the greatest operatic revolutionary to have ever lived. He represent deeply philosophical tales, with profound meaning, beyond simple human passions, effectively changing the entire face of opera. His unique views of the universe completely changed the art form and opened ways for every single artist that followed him. However, his music dramas are extremely long winded, and if he had a knack for sorting out the effectiveness and pace of scenes and situations, he didn't use it.

Verdi - Unlike previous composers, often more concerned with what would most impress the public or allow the prima donna to shine, Verdi would be picky about operatic subjects, and even pickier about what libretto came of it. He wanted nothing but dramatically meaningful scenes that would always keep the audience paying attention - one of the reasons he was incapable of ever writing a dull page. He was above all a dramatist of human passions, and his music was so fittingly made for this purpose that unrealistic plots completely made sense with his scores set to them. He was concerned with the human condition and with the experiences of human life. He was never philosophical or religious, neither did he have Wagner's desire of innovation. When Verdi made new things, it was because he felt they were fitting, not because he tried to be innovative on purpose. His characters were vehicles for humanity and not for idealism or the expression of something larger. Above all, he was never concerned with an intellectual message. He considered art to be spontaneous, natural and simple, or otherwise it wouldn't be art. Like with Wagner, love and death are important themes in Verdi's operas. Gilda, Leonore, Violetta, Aida, Desdemona... like Isolde and Brunhilde, these are women who love and sacrifice themselves as well. But unlike Wagner, Verdi never wrote symbolic or mythical deaths. His characters are human and, as human, perfectly believable.

THE MUSIC IN GENERAL:
Wagner - After receiving harmony lessons from Liszt, Wagner expanded the hungarian pianist's view on musical innovation even further. Wagner's music is deeply chromatic and complex, using harmonies rarely, if ever, before seen, and expanding the concept of the leitmotif to new heights. Every single composer that followed him, up to the avant-garde spirit of the 20th century, was in some way influenced by him, and the whole of musical europe was divided between wagnerians and non-wagnerians. Wagner represent the climax of the romantic tradition and would gradually lead it to post-romanticism, with the goal of ending any superficiality in music.

Verdi - Up until his late career he remained free of Wagner's influence (and when he was finally influenced by him, it happened neither directly nor on purpose) and his music remained diatonic. Simplicity was his most valued ideal, musically and dramatically. He continued the italian cantilena tradition of the belcantist, but brought it to new expressive heights. His music is often accused of vulgarity, which is many times true. But it must be seen that vulgarity isn't a synonym of poor quality. Beethoven himself was vulgar at times: there is such a thing as the vulgarity of greatness. The means he used to achieve his goals, unlike Wagner's, were simple. While Wagner needed an entirely new instrument in order to perfectly describe his dramatic situation, Verdi used the old traditions and old standards in new unique ways that were never used by anyone else, and up to today remain his signature moves. The vulgar oom-pah-pah accompainment he was so often accused of using balanced his inspired melodies perfectly - not Wagner's endless morphing melodies, but extremely simple diatonic melodies that, if banal in a concert context, sound extremely effective on the stage with the careful dramatic construction he made. By the time of Otello, his orchestration had equaled Wagner's in complexity: the oom-pah-pahs were long gone and so was his almost steoreotypical diatonalism, but simplicity remained his key word, even when it was achieved by entirely new ways, such as the four solo cellos in Gia Nella Notte Densa (Otello) or the organ pedal note that begins the same opera and lasts for hundreds of bars. In Otello, Verdi wrote for an heldentenor voice for the first time.

I concur with everything you said, but I didn't know Wagner had formal harmony lessons with Liszt, as opposed to just generally sharing ideas? I thought he learned from a local cantor.

*quickly saves a copy of Tomas's deep analysis*

Bravo!

Verdi, influenced by Wagner?!?

Say what you want, but if you told him that he would've gotten really angry ...

Otherwise, great post !

Maybe this could be turned into a YC Music Article?

Just a suggestion.

Why, I'm flattered by everyone's reception, particularly Wagner, who I thought would be more than hostile with my accusations against Richard

And in response to him, I always read that Wagner had a few lessons with Liszt, though Liszt by no means considered himself a superior to Wagner and in a real teacher-pupil relationship. They mostly just shared ideas, like you said.

Originally Posted by Verdi_Lver

Verdi, influenced by Wagner?!?

Say what you want, but if you told him that he would've gotten really angry ...

Otherwise, great post !

You must understand, my fellow Lusitan, that Wagner eventually influenced everyone, even those who despised him - that's how enormous he was. As time passed, the ideas he had introduced or developed became so natural that everyone used them. Verdi evolved in a completely independent way from Wagner, but eventually reached, in some areas, the same conclusions Wagner did, especially in orchestration and sometimes in harmony. It is a myth that Verdi and Wagner had no kind words for each other: Verdi said he was "positively terrified" by Tristan und Isolde, and Wagner thought Verdi's Requiem so impressive he was left speechless by it. It's a shame Richard never heard Otello. I think he would have finally been friends with Giuseppe

btw, if people won't argue about the two, this could always serve as thread to comment on the two guys' works, describe them, recommend recordings, etc. I figure it might be useful.

When it comes to Verdi, there are three words I should stress: Callas, Callas and Callas. She was arguably the 20th century's greatest operatic actress, and though her voice was hardly the best, it was extremely expressive thanks to her acting skills. By chronological order, I recommend her in Macbeth, Rigoletto (with Gobbi as another treasure - he is, IMO, completely superior to any other Rigolettos), *La Traviata* (some would say her greatest role ever. It WILL make you cry if you have a heart in there somewhere. She has three Traviatas: 1953, 1955 and 1958. 1953 is a studio recording and a very fine one, but although her acting skills are already consolidated, I find that as time progresses, her voice gets worse and her dramatic skills get better. The 1958 one live at the São Carlos theatre in Lisbon I consider to be the best dramatically, although she has some poor vocal moments. The 1955 La Scala one has a great balance of the two, musicality and drama, but the sound quality isn't very good.) Her Trovatore is also to be admired, though Di Stefano is a turn off as Manrico, and her Un Ballo is awesome since Amelia is a part that sounds as if it was written for her. Her Aïda is also very good, but take a look at Leontyne Price's as well. Callas has no Desdemona (in Otello) that I am aware of, so I would recommend the Vickers/Gobbi one (Vickers is Otello, Gobbi is Iago.) Despite Placido Domingo's numerous and excellent Otellos, I find Vickers' to be supreme, and Gobbi comes off as an amazing Iago as well.

As to Wagner, the word I must stress is Nillson. I've only heard parts of her Isolde, but DAMN :-P. I own the Flagstad recording, which I value mostly for Furtwangler's conducting. She was way past her prime by then. I also heard Domingo's Tristan is quite good (and he was 60 when he recorded it!) But that his Isolde doesn't manage to equal him. When it comes to complete Rings, I'd take Bohm's over Solti's from what I've been able to hear. Better stuff all around, IMO. I only own the Dvorankova Tanhauser, and while it's good, I find nothing extraordinary about it. My two cents.

Originally Posted by M_is_D

As to Wagner, the word I must stress is Nillson. I've only heard parts of her Isolde, but DAMN :-P.

Nilsson. Please
Nilsson's Isolde is fantastic. Some people say that she's not sensitive enough, but I think she's just the best - as Isolde, Bruennhilde, Turandot (and maybe many others, which I haven't listen). Recording with Nilsson from 1966 owns also truly wonderful Tristan - Wolfgang Wingassen (my favourite singer; he sings III. Act with such energy, sensitivity, sense of theatre and dramatic situation) and great Brangaene by Christa Ludwig (My God, I will hear her this Saturday as Narrator in Schoenberg's "Gurrelieder"!).

Very interesting topic. I've also written something about Verdi vs. Wagner, but it's in Polish and it isn't good enough to translate it Verdi is great composer, sure, but I prefer Wagner: his stories are better (and with complex, symbolical characters), his life and personality are more fascinating and, well, his music is just more moving and beautiful for me; last but not least, his operas are in German (which is - besides Polish, of course - my favourite language) and he's often quoted by Thomas Mann, my favourite writer
What a pity that we have very little of Wagner's music in Warsaw - I must write a petition or something like that.

Verdi and that's all there is to it

My brain hurts after reading all of that! Good job!