Who can get angrier than a music critic?

A retired music critic, of course.

And thus, the Ottawa Citizen's Jacob Siskind unpacks in today's book
section on Stelios Galatopoulos' `Maria Callas:  Sacred Monster' under
the headline:

`The Saddest Song:  Digital tampering betrays Maria Callas' artistic
integrity.'

Harrump!

Strangely enough, when you hear what he has to say, chances are you will
get mad too.  If you care, that is.

The burden of the article:

   `The discography at the end of this otherwise excellent new biography
   is shocking.  Checking the items listed against the 164 entries in
   my Callas CD collection, it was appalling to be confronted with
   comments on the most recent "digitally enhanced reissues" of this
   material.

   `In the 1953 "Puritani" recording, the "wayward high D is steadier";
   in the 1960 "Norma," "Callas' slight wobble has all be disappeared."
   In the 1958 "Butterfly," digital remastering has all but smoothed
   out Butterfly's high D." In the 1955 "Aida," the "much publicized
   unsteadiness in `O patria mia' has ben all but rectified." And so it
   goes, on and on.

   Callas was painfully aware of her vocal problems but she was too
   honest an artist to have sanctioned these "improvement." She wanted
   to be loved and appreciated for what she achieved, warts and all,
   not for what some merchandisers and technicians have simulated in
   their imaginings of a more palatable, sanitized truth.

   Now, with an audience that has never heard her live creating a a
   possible new market for Callas recordings, it seems the spin doctors
   and digital technicians have taken over with a vengeance.  But today's
   listeners, with no previous experience of Callas, may well wonder
   what all the fuss was about.  If there is justice in this world, this
   crassly commercial scheme will backfire.'

[log in to unmask]
in Ottawa to 5/8