Talk:Nessun dorma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Opera (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Songs (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon

Move to "Nessun dorma"[edit]

Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 15:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Should this be merged with the Turandot article?

Kleinzach 22:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree.--FaZ72 06:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. There are a number of separate articles on various arias; and given the status of this one, I think a separate article is more than warranted. --Todeswalzer|Talk 02:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree. The article should be merged with the main opera article. It's like having an article on a chapter of a book. It's just nonsense. --Karljoos (talk) 07:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


I'm not native english, but I beleive 'Nessun dorma' should be translated with 'That no one sleeps'. Not to LET sleep would be 'lasciar dormire' ('non lasciar che alcun dorma')--FaZ72 06:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Let is also used as a modal auxiliary introducing a third-person command, and thus is equivalent to that use of the subjunctive as a command. "That no one sleeps" is not a complete sentence in English. —Tamfang 00:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I, in turn, am not happy with "None shall sleep", which is more literally equivalent to nessun dormirà. Yes, "shall" can be imperative, but not in all dialects. —Tamfang 00:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

"Nessun dorma" is an order by Turandot: "Questa notte nessun dorma in Pechino" - "This night nobody dorma in Peking." Calaf only repeat this order, since he has just listened these words. My English is too poor to try a translation, but I hope this explication could be helpful. --Al Pereira(talk) 06:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC) (from Italy)
Let no one sleep is as literal a translation as you can get in normal English. —Tamfang 00:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I have edited the article. --Al Pereira(talk) 00:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
The literal translation is not the accepted translation by the publisher. It may be more correct, but without a citation(*), it's use contradicts policy on WP:V. Mighty Antar (talk) 08:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
*Nit-picking! Try Ashbrook & Powers (Puccini's Turandot..., p76 in the paperback copy), referring to the heralds' promulgation (Cosi comanda Turandot: 'Questa notte nessun dorma in Pekino!'). And 'Let...' is the normal way of rendering the 3rd person imperative in English. Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 08:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
When we do translation (apply to all languages), we must not use the “direct translation” because every language has its own way to depict the meaning of the word. "That no one sleeps" has no meaning and it sounds a bit silly to use. Let no one sleep or None shall sleep tonight are the closest to the translation. - Jay (talk) 09:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hardly nit-picking when it's the translation given by the publisher of the opera! Nit-picking and edit wars often amount to the same thing, and I'm sure most english speaking opera fans would recognise None shall sleep tonight as the title of the work they know and love and be somewhat perplexed to find anything else. Ashbrook & Powers critical analysis of the opera is a brilliant book, but in this instance is a secondary source. The opera score is the primary source.Mighty Antar (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC) Or to pick-nits even further the published English version of the opera score is the primary source. Now boldy go and improve the article and leave debates on english usage to talk pages about english usage. Mighty Antar (talk) 10:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The only primary source surely is the Italian score published by Ricordi - my copy shows no indication on the English rendering of this little matter anyway. In that case all competent translations are on the same (albeit 'secondary') footing. Rendering a a 3rd person imperative properly in English puzzles many people, including us natives. Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 12:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC) (And behind these semantics lies an important point - out of context, badly translated, and without the preceding grimly eerie section for the heralds - Calaf's romanza can seem rather slushy.) Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 13:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Once again, you are wrong, and this talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not debates on english usage. The primary source for an english translation of the score is the english translation of the score published by Ricordi - my copy shows the translation as None shall sleep tonight as does the cover of my copy of Ricordi's vocal score for Nessun dorma.Mighty Antar (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Fully concur with Mighty Antar. Please no more amateur translations. We use the standard English translation published by Casa Ricordi, the composer's own publisher, and the form used in all English tranlations for the libretto and synopsis of Turandot. This article is not the place to conjecture about Italian usage, "improve" the standard translation, or to reinvent the wheel. Much less, referencing these attempts to Wiktionary!Voceditenore (talk) 08:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Except that the Italian word/s for "tonight" appear/s nowhere in the phrase "Nessun dorma". It used to be, and to a degree still is, common for the English versions of the names of foreign-language arias to be somewhat non-literal. Such as "On with the motley" for "Vesti la giubba", "Love and music" for "Vissi d'arte", and "You tiny hand is frozen" for "Che gelida manina". But we're not wanting some common English counterpart, but a reasonably precise translation, of "Nessun dorma", which by definition cannot include the word "tonight". -- JackofOz (talk) 07:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The current translation of the lyrics (whether "official" or not) certainly requires emendation at least in the first stanza: "Tu pure, o Principessa" should be rendered with "You too, oh Princess", because Calaf means that also Turandot will not sleep. He knows that she will be awake, "watching the stars". The current "watch" is simply out of place in this context. Moreover, the line "none will know my name!" should be "no one will know my name!", unless one changes "No one will know his name" to "None will know his name" (which is certainly less effective). HumbleEB (talk) 14:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


I'm sure this was used in an advertising campaign for Pirelli, which I believe was aired a year or so before the 1990 World Cup; the plot involved a car with Pirelli tyres, which had to start the Earth spinning again. It would be interesting to know if the aria had any pop cultural resonance prior to the 1990 World Cup (was it selected for that competition because it was already popular, or was it the toss of a coin?). -Ashley Pomeroy 18:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It was, I remember the advert which I'm fairly sure featured a Lamborghini Diablo. I guess it depends on how you define "pop cultural resonance", the aria had long been a classical 'standard' and can be heard in numerous films e.g The Killing Fields (film) that pre-date 1990. But it was only after the World cup that most people (in the UK at least) would have been able to identify it by name. I recollect Des Lynham saying that by the end of the tournament we'd all know the words off by heart. Mighty Antar 23:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Anthony Howard wrote an article for the Pirelli Express (A one-off newsheet published for guests of Pirelli at the 1989 British Grand Prix) here which talks about the advert and a special performance by Alberto Cupido of Nessun dorma recorded for it.Mighty Antar (talk) 23:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Use in film[edit]

The entries for the song's use in film were recently deleted with the justification that they didn't belong in this article. I don't agree with this. This song has had a unique cultural impact, particularly in its use in film. In many of its film uses, it appears in a central moment in the film. This is undoubtedly because of Nessun Dorma's rich emotional impact. This article would be lacking if it didn't include both a list of films where it was used and a note about its central role in many of them, perhaps with supporting details. By analogy, if there were a film lighting technique that was a common thread in many films, I doubt that you would object to having a full, long article about that technique such as the one for Golden hour (photography). Similarly, an article about a director might have a section about his/her use of music such as the section forQuentin_Tarantino#Music. Brholden 16:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

If you insisted to add them, I would probably agree if they were placed in a separate section, probably a section calls “Adaptation” instead of adding them under the introduction. However, it must be strictly monitored or it will become “trivia” when all the unnecessary such as “song theme” for ice skating, video games, or some “funny” cartoon animation like what had happened before. It happens a lot in opera related articles, usually end up with heavy edit warring. That is what we are trying to avoid. - Jay 16:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I've just come across this discussion and would like to chip in a little. A Pavarotti version is used to good effect in The 1987 film 'The Witches of Eastwick' Witches_of_eastwickat the moment when Jack Nicholson's character, Darryl Van Horne, finally brings the three witches he has been seducing under his spell as one 'happy' family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschless (talkcontribs) 19:11, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Position of translation vs original text[edit]

In a number of other arias, under the libretto, the score is shown next to the translation into English. In this article the original text is shown instead of the translation. Wouldn't it be more useful to have a line-by-line with translation and score instead? (And have the original text displayed below or above, as the translation is positioned at present.) Jksk 14:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

2007 chart re-entry[edit]

I'm just wondering why this got reverted? I thought that it was a useful addition to show how popular Pavarotti and the song remains after his death, and other song articles mention re-entries to the chart so I'm not sure why it's not wanted here. BillyH 13:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The article is for the aria, not for the individual and it is sang by many other tenors. To opera fans, the aria has and will always be popular even before Pavarotti's death, as a matter of fact, even before Pavarotti starts singing it. - Jay 13:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. BillyH 16:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Issues[edit]

Note that the libretto of Turandot is still in copyright, held by BMG Riccordi S.p.A. Unlike Puccini's earlier works, Turandot is not in the public domain in the US - it was published in 1926 with the copyright renewed in 1954. Nor is it in the public domain in countries which are signatories to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Under fair use, the quotation of some key lines is allowed, provided it is accompanied by at least some commentary, but reprinting of the aria's complete text and translation (a derivative work, also covered by copyright) is not allowed without the permission of the copyright holder. Note that there are links in "Sources" to the complete text and translation. Best, Voceditenore 06:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Lyrics (after reverting)[edit]

Please, don't be creative. The verses are printed on the libretto. The text on the score. That's all. Nobody can create verses that don't exist anywhere. --Al Pereira(talk) 09:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

It was not a question of 'creativity', or 'vandalism' by previous editors (as you put in the edit summary). The text is still in copyright (see above) and was reduced from the full aria to quoted lines with commentary as in this version to comply with 'fair use' as per this discussion on the Opera Project Talk Page. I'm not going to remove the complete aria text again. If the Wikipedia 'copyright patrol' removes it, so be it. Best, Voceditenore 11:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Do you think that the score isn't in copyright? In this case, we could copy the text from the score, but without the division in verses which can be taken only from the libretto. This is my point. --Al Pereira(talk) 13:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Both the score and the libretto are in copyright. All text, whether it is laid out in verses as in the libretto or laid out as it is in a performing score is also in copyright and will remain so until at least 2021. Technically, even the right to translate it is covered by copyright, as a translation is considered a derivative work. You can find out more about US copyright law and public domain (which is the one Wikipedia in English must adhere to) here. But as I said, I didn't create the article. If you want to leave the whole text up (whether it's from the score or the libretto or both), I'm not going to change it back to the fair use version. All the Best Voceditenore 16:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, but now we have the wrong lyrics again! Why the article must have fake verses? And why these fake verses, which are actually the words used in the score, are not in copyright? I see only two options: either to delete the text or to restore the correct verses. --Al Pereira(talk) 19:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
These were not restored by me. However, they are not 'fake verses', they are quotes. The quotation of a limited number of lines (not the entire aria) from copyright material, provided it is accompanied by some commentary is allowable under fair use. I've now altered the format to staight quote format, and removed any indication of versification. If you continue to have objections, simply remove it all. However, please do not restore the complete lyrics as you did before, the administrators will remove them, as they did yesterday. I would suggest you bring this topic to the Opera Project Talk Page if you want further opinions. Best, Voceditenore 08:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I didn't tell these were restored by you, btw. Now it is the text from the score, which can be ok. I don't enter in copyright problems since don't know US law, I just wanted to avoid an "original" (actually fake) versification. --Al Pereira(talk) 14:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
To me it is better to have something than nothing at all, that is why I restored Voceditenore version (after the whole thing was deleted by the admin)taken from the date before the whole aria was restored again. I actually prefer to have the whole aria like before, but since it is still under copyright, I think Voceditenore version is good enough for the article - Jay 09:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Still at the same point.... the text based on false verses :( no way to understand something so easy? --Al Pereira(talk) 05:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It was changed to the non-verse version back in October [1], and it lasted for quite a while. But unfortunately other editors keep coming in and changing it back, without reading the discussion on the talk page. They also keep adding the extra text to complete the entire aria which should not be done due to copyright restrictions. Sigh. I'll have another go at reverting it. Voceditenore (talk) 13:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

5 Dec 2007: vandalism reverts by User talk:[edit]

He/she/it keeps making a minor word change as follows:

"Il nome suo nessun saprà... E noi dovrem, ahimè, morir, morir!"

(English translation: "No one will knows his name... and we must, alas, die, die!")

Viva-Verdi (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

13/2/2008: Range of the aria[edit]

There have been two subsequent edits of the information on the highest note in the aria, one correcting from B5 to B4, and me correcting from B4 to B3, so this subject needs clarification. Information about the aria's range can be found (for example) here: [2]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

B4 is in accord with the article on Scientific pitch notation (not the only convention there is; my piano tuner would call it B5, the fifth B on the piano); I couldnt begin to guess where Opera-kareoke gets their information. Sparafucil (talk) 00:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
It seems everyone counts octaves differently. I withdraw my corrections, I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Why B5? If we consider middle C to be C4, then the high notes are B4 and A4. I'm not editing it in the page, please may someone who knows how Wikipedia works do that? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Paul Potts and this article: recent reverts[edit]

I support the removal of the reference to Potts. We seems to be dangerously close to edit wars here.Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Same here. I smiled when I read Voceditenore's comment "remv reference to Paul Potts. 'Nessun dorma' may be highly relevant to his article, but this fact about him is irrelevant to *this* article". :)) - Jay (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about edit wars. These additions do happen sporadically. Both of the recent Pott-o-philes are anonymous IPs. is based in Santa Clara, California and was blocked for 24 hours for vandalism yesterday. is from Toronto and the Potts business seems to have been their only edits. I doubt they'll return in the near future. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
See my response to that blocking on my talk page. I'm no vandal.
The fact is, Paul Pott's recording of Nessun Dorma is one of the best-selling of all time, and he's been responsible for a massive increase in interest in this aria. He comes second only to Pavarotti in popularizing this song. It's certainly as significant as any of the film-score inclusions mentioned above.
Whatever reason you have for disliking Paul Potts, try to be objective about it. Millions of people first heard Nessun Dorma because of his appearance on that show, and more people have viewed the YouTube video of his appearance than ever bought one of Pavarotti's recordings of it. (talk) 21:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
YOU SAID, Paul Pott's recording of Nessun Dorma is one of the best-selling of all time, and he's been responsible for a massive increase in interest in this aria. He comes second only to Pavarotti in popularizing this song. Millions of people first heard Nessun Dorma because of his appearance on that show..
I like to be very sincere with you here. Even how rude it may sound to you, your statement above is the most pathetic and ignorant that I have ever seen in Wiki talkpage ever (though this is the second after “Pagliacci”. I just wonder why pop culture fan always love to create their very own statistics which is truly insulting! - Jay (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoa! Jay, and User:Viva-Verdi, while I share your views regarding the relevance of Paul Potts to this article, I have to say that your comments here, on User talk:, and in the edit summaries are not at all helpful to a civil discussion and certainly do not advance your position:

  1. It is wrong to call a legitimate content dispute like this "spam" or "vandalism". It is neither, and you both know that. And it was even more wrong to add a level 4 vandalism warning to's talk page.[3]
  2. Please refrain from using ALL CAPITAL LETTERS in edit summaries. There's no need to shout. It's uncivil and counter-productive.
  3. I personally find the comment: "your statement above is the most pathetic and ignorant that I have ever seen in Wiki talkpage ever" quite rude, I'm afraid.
  4. For the record,, I consider your statistics quite wrong, but I'm not remotely insulted by them.;-) However, you do yourself no favours by calling those who disagree with you "snobs".

Now... Instead of tossing insults and unsupported statistics back and forth, let's argue this more calmly and objectively:

  1. "It's certainly as significant as any of the film-score inclusions mentioned above.". In fact, I'm going to prune the film mentions too. As usual, they have got out of hand thanks to 'drive by' editors.
  2. Yes, there are 24 million hits for Paul Potts singing 'Nessun dorma' on YouTube.[4] And his album One Chance (on which he sings the aria along with various non-operatic ballads) has sold around 560,000 copies. But that doesn't come near to Pavarotti. At the time of his death, the total sales of his albums on the Decca label alone stood at over 100 million. [5]. The Three Tenors Rome 1990 CD, which by 1999, had sold an estimated 13 million copies, was the best-selling (and fastest selling) classical recording of all time. [Guinness World Records 2000 Millennium Edition ISBN 0851120989]. The Three Tenors Los Angeles 1994 concert (in which Pavarotti once again sang 'Nessun dorma' was broadcast on television to 1.3 billion people around the world.[6]
  3. The assertions about Paul Potts' significance in popularizing this aria and being responsible for "millions of people hearing it for the first time" are over-stated. His relevance to an article on this aria is both ephemeral and tenuous compared to that of Pavarotti, and he is certainly not the only, or even the first, vocalist outside the opera world who has made a 'splash' with this aria in one way or another, e.g. Russell Watson, Aretha Franklin (who sang it on the nationally televised Grammy Awards in the US), Michael Bolton, etc. (each of whom has sold more albums that Paul Potts). I would also say that the career of Aretha Franklin is far more distinguished and noteworthy than that of Paul Potts, albeit in another genre.

I would like to suggest a compromise. Adding something like this at the end of the article:

For renditions of this aria by vocalists outside the opera world see: The Voice (Russell Watson), One Chance (Paul Potts), Jewels in the Crown (Aretha Franklin), The Winner's Journey (Damien Leith), and My Secret Passion (Michael Bolton).

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Line dance[edit]

Voceditenore, you can either gain satisfaction at your attempt to control and limit the content of the article, or you can let other people add information to it. In Europe Kempe's version was notable (and with the exception of a middle section, it's almost exactly the same as the aria), and of course many people in the US know the song not as an opera but as a popular line dance - thousands of people have danced to it. -- kosboot (talk) 17:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Please provide evidence from reliable independent sources as to the notability of the song/line dance Vincero. This (which you added to the article) is not a reliable source, nor does it establish notability. Note that Fredrik Kempe's article is completely devoid of references as well. If you can provide proper references supporting the claims about the notability of Vincero, I have no objections at all to the information appearing in the article. Incidentally, I was one of the editors who 'fought' to keep the 'cultural resonance' section in Nessun dorma, in the first place. [7], and in a similar vein re The Barber of Seville. [8] Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I'll locate some references. Meanwhile, I believe the proper etiquette is to simply indicate the reference is wanting/needed, not to erase the information altogether. If that was the case, then you should delete the Kempe article. -- kosboot (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I've now found references for the line dance, including one from a news archive that I have a subscription to, as well as an NYT ref for the Manowar version. I've now restored the mention of these. I do have a question about the line dance, though. The really popular and 'referenceable' version using Vincero (at least in the US and UK) seems to be Trust me choreographed by Geri Morrison, not the Ingemar Kardeskog choreography. So I've used that instead. Presumably that's OK?
Re removal of unreferenced additions to the 'Cultural resonance...' section - these kinds of sections are very prone to fan/list cruft, spamming, and original research which can swamp the main subject matter of the article. This was not the case with your additions, I emphasise. Neverthless, as a general rule, we remove unreferenced additions to sections like that from classical music and opera articles until references can be provided to establish the notability of use in other genres.
As for the Fredrik Kempe article, I've tagged it as {{Unreferenced}}, which hopefully will flag up the problem to people who are more familiar with subject. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Heh, just as I was getting down to work - you've done it all. And yeah, Trust Me is the better known one. I think I can dig up an indication of how popular it was (i.e. how many times it was taught during a period of time). Many Wikipedia articles have a section called "In Popular Culture" which may resonate better than "outside of opera" - but I'll not touch that one. Back to the aria itself, I notice that it is the climax of Pavarotti's Hollywood movie Yes, Giorgio, although there's no Wikipedia entry for it. You may want to add it to the films listed earlier in the article. Again, thanks for your consideration. -- kosboot (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Use in films - update[edit]

The section on cultural resonance had become filled with name after name of films allegedly using the aria, all but one completely unreferenced, and even that one referenced simply to the IMDb. I have now re-written that segment to specify films where Nessun dorma is a significant aspect of the soundtrack. I have also pruned the number of films mentioned to those where that is actually the case, and referenced them, each to a review or article about the film which discusses Nessun dorma in the context of that film. In future, I propose to remove any additions to that section, unless they are accompanied by similar references which verify that the aria plays a significant role in the soundtrack and why. A link to IMDb (or other database) which merely lists the aria in the sound track is not enough. Voceditenore (talk) 12:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Hear, hear! Totally agree with you. Viva-Verdi (talk) 00:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm also glad to see this. I've not seen all the films, but in "Bend it Like Beckham" it really is a significant part of the soundtrack - at the key moment of the film. I had originally added "Bend it ..." to the list, and I'm glad to see it included in this newer and better form. Cheers! -D —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:53, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Use in advertising may be trivial, but Kia's automobile commerical in the 2014 Superbowl of US football was watched by 111.5 million people. John Kimberling of the Los Angeles Opera Company voiced Nessun dorma for the lip-synching actor Lawrence Fishburne. This presentation may be the most widely heard performance to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

The usual rules apply: if reliable sources indicate the significance of "Nessun dorma" for that ad, it can be mentioned, although preferrably at Super Bowl XLVIII#Advertising. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Spelling of "nessun"[edit]

Since "nessun" isn't a word in Italian, but here a contraction of "nessuno", I thought the title of the aria was spelt "nessun' dorma".Janko (talk) 10:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

In poetic Italian it is quite common to delete final vowels, especially if the preceding consonant is sonorant, i.e. /l/, /r/, /m/, or /n/. This is not, strictly speaking, a contraction and is never punctuated as such in poetic texts. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

standard name[edit]

I disagree with "I'm sure most english speaking opera fans would recognise None shall sleep tonight as the title of the work they know and love". All the English-speaking opera fans I know call it by its original-language title, Nessun Dorma. That's the general custom for opera, in America at least, except for unfamiliar languages like Boris Godunov's Russian. CharlesTheBold (talk) 01:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome to disagree, it's not pertinent to the article. I obviously know different English-speaking opera fans and I made my comment only in the context of the English title for the work. I had in mind English-speaking people who were familiar with the aria before 1990 and probably first read the title on a Gramophone record or heard it on the radio. I don't know them all however, so I perhaps its not wise to vouch for general customs.Mighty Antar (talk) 09:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Translation is one thing, the "incipit" in the English language score is another thing. The best thing would be literally translating the title and then specifying what is the incipit in the English language score (in bold characters). Anyway, why "None shall sleep tonight" instead of "None shall sleep"? --Al Pereira(talk) 14:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Casa Ricordi call it "None shall sleep tonight" instead of "None shall sleep" in their english translation. They are the authority for the title (the only thing I changed) although you can of course provide sourced alternatives. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "incipit", but if you mean the nuance of the Lyrics, then I agree with you - Ricordi would probably have been aiming for something that could be sung in English not an exact translation.Mighty Antar (talk) 19:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
As for the incipit, see the article. What I don't understand (I don't own the English language edition) is where do you find the "title" of the romanza. In the Italian (both vocal and full) score, there aren't titles, as the index says only "act I - scene I; act I - scene II etc". Al Pereira(talk) 19:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
The Ricordi score I've cited as a reference in the article shows the title in the index thus:
ACT III Scene 1 – - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 285
PRINCE "Nessun dorma„ (None shall sleep to-night!) - 291
The sheet music for the aria: OCLC 18501372 has almost the same, but omits quotation marks: Nessun dorma (None shall sleep to-night!)
Just for the record, the full score also states "all rights to...translation...are strictly reserved. Mighty Antar (talk) 23:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, this is interesting: unlike the Italian edition, the English edition use a index, like if Turandot would be an early 19th Century opera! Anyway, I point it out in the article. --Al Pereira(talk) 03:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have also changed the number of page, since from your answer I see that it's p. 291, not pp. 287-290. --Al Pereira(talk) 03:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, pg 287-290 is where the chorus sing Nessun dorma prior to the Prince's aria.Mighty Antar (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of referenced, relevant text[edit]

I have restored the following:

Adaptations of the aria to other musical genres include a heavy metal version by Manowar in their album, Warriors of the World,[16] and Vincero an opera/disco fusion by Fredrik Kempe. Kempe's Vincero is also used for the popular line dance, Trust me!.[17][18]

If you want to argue that the ways in which a piece of classical music has been adapted to other genres is "irrelevant" to this article. Fine, although I disagree with that contention, but please discuss it here before removing referenced material again, especially since its addition has already been discussed above and it has been in the article for six months. Thanks.Voceditenore (talk) 12:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Context and musical analysis[edit]

I removed the word "musical." There really is no musical analysis in this section. As a matter of fact, it would be good for someone who knows what they're doing to o ahead and add a musical analysis. As it is at present, the article is rather disappointing because of the lack of anything but a cursory musical examination. Gingermint (talk) 22:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Roy Orbison's use of the melody[edit]

An anonymous editor has added the following statement:

Puccini's soaring theme was also nicked by Roy Orbison and Jeff Lynne for the song "A Love So Beautiful" which appears on Orbison's 1989 album Mystery Girl.

I, in turn have added [citation needed] to the statement (and changed "nicked" to "used"). If a reliable, published source verifying this is not produced within 48 hours, it will be removed from the article. Please do not add items to the Cultural resonance outside opera section unless you are prepared to provide proper references. Thanks. Voceditenore (talk) 21:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Although Pavarotti was too heavy to sustain the role of Calaf on stage...

Don't you mean that 'although the role of Calaf was too heavy for Pavaraotti to sustain on stage...' or is this a fat joke? Just wondering? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

length of note[edit]

Currently we have: "In performance, the final "Vincerò!" features a sustained B4,[3] followed by the final note, an A4 sustained even longer—although Puccini's score did not explicitly specify that either note be sustained". This is nonsense: the second half of the bar before rehearsal mark 6 is marked "poco allargando". Given that in Puccini's notation tenuto, poco rit, rit, sostenuto etc are all expressions of slowing up, "poco allargando" indicates that a fairly comprehensive hauling back of the tempo is called for almost-instinct 18:09, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

But allargando does not imply sustaining the B for at least the length of a semibreve, which is how it is sung. (talk) 14:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Cultural references - additonal[edit]

On the Britcom 'Drop the Dead Donkey', 'The office had a "Nessun Dorma" box for anyone humming the catchy opera tune that became the unofficial theme of the Italia '90 World Cup Tournament.' Grandma Roses (talk) 12:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

This is really extremely trivial, and sourced to another wiki. If this were such an important "trope", there would be something written about it in reliable sources. It doesn't seem to be sufficiently important to be mentioned in the articles on Drop the Dead Donkey or List of Drop the Dead Donkey episodes, where it belongs, if anywhere. Voceditenore (talk) 13:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, to tell you the truth, I find most cultural references on Wiki to be extremely trivial, especially those that reference American animated television shows. If you don't dump on them, don't dump on mine. Grandma Roses (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


I went to see this opera up in Nashville last night. It was amazing. Especially because we got to see it live!!Claire Anemone (talk) 13:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Antonio Cortis - 1929 recording[edit]

Although Francesco Merli's recording in 1937 followed the Puccini score as close as possible, Antonio Cortis recorded his version in 1929 also following Puccini's score closely. Could Cortis be the first person to record Nessun Dorma?

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nessun dorma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)