The Old Master is with us again, and now in a rich variety of reproductions, for in addition to the two records listed above there is the Preiser issue, reviewed earlier in the year ((CD) 89045, 2/92). Battistini has also beeen the subject of two readers' letters (Correspondence: May and June), the first of which it is tempting to take as a basis for discussing the singer's art as heard on these recordings; but no doubt the prime necessity is to give some opinion on the relative merits of the three collections.
As to quality of transfer, they compare much as one would have expected them to. Common to all are the arias from Un ballo in maschera, and, trying these over in turn, one finds on the Preiser a very clean sound, the voice well-forward, the surface reduced but without loss of quality, while the Pearl transfers have more surface, the voice bright, full-bodied and welldefined, the whole effect being rather less smooth, less easeful for the listener. Nimbus, using a different method, produce a different sound: by a fascinating paradox it makes one aware of the experience as valuably special, peculiar to old recordings, yet also helps one to hear the singer in perspective. Listeners differ sharply in their reactions to the Nimbus sound, so I had better express my reaction, personally; the main point being that having heard him in these transfers I feel more able to understand how Battistini sounded in the opera house or the concert hall.
As to the selections, each has its merits, though there are many duplications. For instance, out of the 17 items on Preiser, five are also on Pearl and ten on Nimbus. In period of recording, Preiser is narrowest, taking all but three of its items from the excellent 1906 series; Nimbus also has nine from 1906, but includes one of the Warsaw 1902s and extends to 1913, while Pearl has three 1902s and ends in 1921. All choose well, Pearl offering the most varied repertoire, including a solo from Tannhauser. This, however, raises the question of pitch and playing-speed, the aria being reproduced at score-pitch whereas I believe Battistini sang it half-a-tone higher (as on the LP album issued by EMI—7/86, nla). Other questionable items on the Pearl are the Quo vadis? solos (I have not seen a copy of the score, but find that Battistini sounds more like himself on the EMI transfers where they too are a semitone higher); the song by Tosti, Ancora (not Ancora melodia as given in the contents), also plays here somewhat below what I take to be the correct key of E minor.
This, I'm afraid, has used up the space at my disposal but, concerning M Chuilon's May letter, which appears to have arisen out of his feeling that my review of the Preiser disc required some commentary on his part, I must say that when we review old recordings in the ''Historic'' section of the magazine we are not unaware of the ways in which they were made or of the varying effects of their reproduction: so that when I remarked on a weakness in Battistini's low notes it was in relation to other recordings of comparable singers made in that period, and the point, I think, stands. Then, if I may add a footnote to the June letter of Mr Owen, who quotes Sorabji in The Sackbut: more enlightening, I would suggest, is an article ready to hand in the second volume of that magazine (April-May 1922) where Herman Klein, having recently heard concerts by Battistini and Titta Ruffo, compares the two in detail, and very much in Battistini's favour.'