Mirko wrote:
>He is intent on bringing opera to the masses. And he does it well. When
>you say he over charges, you're forgetting that Tibor Rudas is the one who
>sets the prices. Pav gets an upfront fee, and Rudas takes care of
everything
>else. And it's not as if he charges that much. I think the prices are
>worth it. Opera being expensive is an over-rated cliche. When I was in
>Vienna at the beginning of the year, I went to see Linda di Chamounix with
>Edita Gruberova at the Vienna Staadt Opera house for the equivalent of 6
>Australian dollars!!!
Mirko, I didn't complain about his price. I complained about his voice
assuming it was actually that bad as the critic said ). Regarding his
contribution to singing in the past, people are paying to hear him sing NOW,
not remember the past. That would be the same as that person who opened a
bag of chips next to you at Pav's concert say that it was no big deal, since
you could always listen to his cds!
>Rudas is the businessman, not Pav.
You mean Judas?! :-)
>If you were as wealthy as Pav, you too
>would spend your energies helping out the less fortunate.
No, I wouldn't. I'm against charity, for good salaries. Against
philanthropy, for welfare state.
Against seeing the world through colored glasses, for reality shock and
consequent action. BTW, in my ideal world, where I would be rich, of course,
I wouldn't be THAT rich anyway: in that realm of mine richness would be
highly taxed to support the welfare state. :-)
>His philadelphia
>vocal competitions are an example. The guy's not a saint, but he does help
>and crosses a lot of borders- remember, he's under no obligation whatsoever
>to help.
Have you ever heard of philanthropic marketing? Welcome on board the brave
new world, where big companies make a lot of money, create no jobs and give
a tiny bit of the extra profit to charity... Oh, they're SO concerned!!! And
don't forget, in most countries a lot of what is given by corporations and
individuals may be deducted from taxes.
>A lot opera singers i believe would be too po-faced and serious to
>sing with people like Bryan Adams and Ricky Martin. They would think it
was
>beneath them or something. I'm glad Pav sang with the spice girls. It's
>good for music.
I'm starting to think you're really candidly naive! I'll give you another
perspective: Pavarotti doesn't choose who he's going to sing with. Highly
popular pop singers are chosen in order to bring Pavarotti closer to the
young audience, a group of people who consume much more than those opera
lovers who know exactly which recording of a certain aria is the best or
worst. As a compensation, pop singers' status is upgraded, besides sharing
the charitable image. Ricky Martin, for example, can stop justifying his
sexuality ( which is none of anyone's business ) and start talking about his
charity.
>Weren't you the one who was saying Cobain lacks technique? I like a lot of
>pop singers.
>All singers have bad nights.
Yes, but I meant he lacked technique in such a way that bad nights were all
that he ever had! But if you're having good time with Cobain or the bad
'Pavarottian' nights, enjoy yourself! Just like Ricky Martin's sexuality,
it's none of my business!
Best regards,
Caio Rossi
|
|  |
