# Chopin competition



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

Are any of you watching this?
My favorite American contestant is Talon Smith.
He did a wonderful Etude in G flat major Op. 10 no 5.
Predicting Piotr Alexewicz, of Poland to win.
Your thoughts?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Oh... I watched some of the preliminaries, but I had completely forgotten about it. Now I don't know if I should go look at the past few days of presentation.

I didn't listen to all the participants, but one that had caught my attention was Kyohei Sorita.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

*Chopin competition*

*__________________________*

Hey! Sounds interesting. I should enter.

I've got a piece all picked out.

Chopin _did_ write "Chopsticks", didn't he?


----------



## gnail (Jan 5, 2021)

Kyohei Sorita is my favourite too so far. Another contestant, Shunshun Tie, played the g minor ballade almost exactly like Zimmerman’s but i am not sure whether he will be penalised for no originality (if there is ever such a thing).


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Tiresome regurgitation.

Heard and seen it all before.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Where can this be seen? I like piano competitions


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

golfer72 said:


> Where can this be seen? I like piano competitions


Youtube. In the official channel of the competition, with the same name.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

The competition's website, https://chopin2020.pl/en, has some interesting articles and other features to look at.
One is called "Chopin Courier", a daily newsletter that is printed and put out free for attendees. They also have a free version of it online for D/L.


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

Michael122 said:


> Predicting Piotr Alexewicz, of Poland to win.
> Your thoughts?


I strongly doubt he will be the winner. If I had to guess I would rather point towards one of the following four contestants: Nikolay Khozyainov (Russia), Kyohei Sorita (Japan), Eva Gevorgyan (Russia/Armenia) and Georgijs Osokins (Latvia). Also, it seems quite likely that Bruce Liu (Canada), Aimi Kobayashi (Japan) and Su Yeon Kim (South Korea) will reach the final stage. Personally, I would also like to see Viet Trung Nguyen (Vietnam/Poland) and Yasuko Furumi (Japan) among the finalists.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

One of the participants, Hayato Sumino, is quite a celebrity (he's a popular japanese youtuber) and he's really bringing the viewership. He's good too, but definitely not as good as some others, I'd say. Do you think his popularity might help him get to the final stage?


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

Livly_Station said:


> Do you think his popularity might help him get to the final stage?


I don't think so. What I mean is that if he indeed gets to the final stage it won't be because of his exceptional popularity in the Internet.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

I must agree with Mifek.
It seems doubtful that popularity would have much, if any, effect on judges.
The field is down to 45 now.
Mifek, we shall see if one of your 9 favorites makes it to finals.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

The competition should include an improvisation section & allow for custom / improvised ornamentation.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> The competition should include an improvisation section & allow for custom / improvised ornamentation.


In my opinion, a competition should not require a skill that classical players don't use in their professional life anymore.

If you think that improvisation should become important in classical music again, then first it should be reintroduced outside of competitions, like in recitals and concerts, with an interested audience, so that it becomes a desirable skill for students to pursue.

And how do judges even compare different improvisations?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Livly_Station said:


> .
> 
> And how do judges even compare different improvisations?


How do they compare different performances of, for example, a Chopin etude?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> How do they compare different performances of, for example, a Chopin etude?


While subjectivity is an inherent part of the deal of evaluating music interpretation, it's much easier to find _agreeable criteria_ to ground the comparison of different performances of the same piece than to do the same for different improvisations of music, because there are less elements/variable, thus it's a lot more simple. Or at least it's easier to establish the _biases_ of that particular competition, so it's more likely to happen an acceptable consensus inside that community -- which doesn't mean unanimity or truth, in case you're wondering.

This is not a binary thing, like all subjective comparison are equally assymmetrical.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> How do they compare different performances of, for example, a Chopin etude?


by various elements, even visual ones:


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Livly_Station said:


> If you think that improvisation should become important in classical music again


It's a no-brainer, it needs to be. It's absolutely insane to think about how many aspiring pianists at elite conservatories (anecdotally speaking) have little to no intuitive grasp of music theory, or are unable / unwilling to think critically about a piece of music beyond consideration of the performance requirements they need to fulfill. Many if not most prominent young classical pianists gain recognition primarily through their performances in competitions. I disagree with your reasoning that the problem is with the audience (I've heard many live improvised performances of classical music, e.g. cadenzas to piano concerti, which have completely captivated audiences); the problem is that students do not hone these skills because they do not need to in order to succeed professionally. Modifying the structure of competitions will help address this problem.

And improvisation IS an important skill for ANY musician in ANY genre to have, so I have to disagree with you there as well.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> It's a no-brainer, it needs to be. It's absolutely insane to think about how many aspiring pianists at elite conservatories (anecdotally speaking) have little to no intuitive grasp of music theory, or are unable / unwilling to think critically about a piece of music beyond consideration of the performance requirements they need to fulfill. Many if not most prominent young classical pianists gain recognition primarily through their performances in competitions. I disagree with your reasoning that the problem is with the audience (I've heard many live improvised performances of classical music, e.g. cadenzas to piano concerti, which have completely captivated audiences); the problem is that students do not hone these skills because they do not need to in order to succeed professionally. Modifying the structure of competitions will help address this problem.
> 
> And improvisation IS an important skill for ANY musician in ANY genre to have, so I have to disagree with you there as well.


You basically disagreed with me in things I never said. My point is _not_ that improvisation is not important, and my point is _not_ that we have the audiences to blame for that.

My point is that a young classical pianist aspiring to have a career in the 21st century, and pay the bills, doesn't have any incentive to hone their skills on improvisation *to a professional level*, because nowadays (and for the past century) nothing in their careers will demand them to do that onstage or for recordings. They will make a living by playing the repertoire, so it's in _this_ field that they're competing against each other in the real life and have to stand out above the rest.

Considering all this, it's not the role of a classical piano competition to ask from young classical pianists to perform a skill they won't use in their professional life as things stand right now, since these people are only enrolling on these competitions to start their career (even the losers get some spotlight). Don't forget that we're talking about a _competition_ here, so the judges wouldn't be merely checking if the guy/girl can handle himself at the piano, but actually measuring them against each other on the merit of their improvisation, so really demanding them to master this skill. As if it's not difficult enough for these pianists as it is, now you're demanding even more from them to fulfill your moral duty...

That's not me saying that improvisation is not an important tool for a musician. Of course it is! As you said, it's a valuable skill for any musician in any genre to have at least a little bit. HOWEVER, it's up for each person to decide to what _level of proficiency_ they want to hone this skill, which can only be pondered according to their career goals. Because one thing is to know to improvise comfortably enough for the sake of having a more complete understandment of music; another thing is to know to improvise at the level of an international competition where you'll be matched against others.

Btw, it must be said that it takes a lot of training everyday for the rest of your life to develop the required pianism in order to become a classical concertist. Likewise, it's extremely time-consuming to learn to improvise like a pro, so you can see the cost of opportunity. Therefore, if you want to see more top-tier improvisation in classical music from PERFORMERS, first you need to have a market for that, which is not the audience's fault, but just the situation at the moment.

At last, there would be the problem of how a competition can unify both the merit of interpretation and improvisation, because most likely the best at each wouldn't be the same person, so who wins?


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Improvisation is a great skill to cultivate, but personally I've noticed over time the music I favor most has little or no improvisation. There are some exceptions, but personally I find music that is composed before hand more enjoyable to listen to than improvised music.

Whether or not classical musicians should be trained more in improvisation or whether it should be included in competitions, I don't really care too much. To me it is something that can be practiced by musicians on their own and there are a fair number of classical musicians who are excellent improvisors. I believe the amount of practice time required to reach the level of professional in classical music is already higher than in other areas of music. It makes me wonder how realistic it would be to add improvisation into the curriculum. It is possible over all performance levels in terms of execution would go down a little.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

After J.S. Bach, who wrote out his compositions in more detail than most other composers of his era, improvisation went down in classical music and after Beethoven it went down even more. I think improvisation is awesome, but does anyone really improvise music that is better to listen to than music the greatest composers composed?

What I value most is listening to inspired music, whether it is made up on the spot or pre composed isn't the important question to me, unless we are just measuring a skill that doesn't have much to do with the music itself, but how quickly it was created.


----------



## gnail (Jan 5, 2021)

Not sure whether is anyone still following the competition. My favourites to win are Nehring, Pacholec, Sorita and Gagliano.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

We're down to 23 now for the semi-final round. Piotr Alexewicz still stands.
Interesting discussion on improv in the competition arena.


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

Two out of my nine early favorites did not get to the the third stage (Osokins and Nguyen), so I would now add Szymon Nehring to the remaining group of seven favorites. Thus, my updated list of predicted finalists includes Khozyainov, Sorita, Liu, Gevorgian, Furumi, Nehring, Kobayashi and Kim.


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

Khozyainov's surprising decision to play fugue in A minor in the second round turned out to be excellent choice.





After listening to the first two stages of the competition, I cannot imagine the final round without Nikolay Khozyainov, Kyohei Sorita, Eva Gevorgian or Bruce Liu. They are not only excellent pianists but also strong personalities.


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Livly_Station said:


> In my opinion, a competition should not require a skill that classical players don't use in their professional life anymore.
> 
> If you think that improvisation should become important in classical music again, then first it should be reintroduced outside of competitions, like in recitals and concerts, with an interested audience, so that it becomes a desirable skill for students to pursue.
> 
> And how do judges even compare different improvisations?


The chicken and the egg


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> It's a no-brainer, it needs to be. It's absolutely insane to think about how many aspiring pianists at elite conservatories (anecdotally speaking) have little to no intuitive grasp of music theory, or are unable / unwilling to think critically about a piece of music beyond consideration of the performance requirements they need to fulfill. Many if not most prominent young classical pianists gain recognition primarily through their performances in competitions. I disagree with your reasoning that the problem is with the audience (I've heard many live improvised performances of classical music, e.g. cadenzas to piano concerti, which have completely captivated audiences); the problem is that students do not hone these skills because they do not need to in order to succeed professionally. Modifying the structure of competitions will help address this problem.
> 
> And improvisation IS an important skill for ANY musician in ANY genre to have, so I have to disagree with you there as well.


Hurrah! Hurrah!

That is one of the best responses I've seen on this entire forum.


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Livly_Station said:


> You basically disagreed with me in things I never said. My point is _not_ that improvisation is not important, and my point is _not_ that we have the audiences to blame for that.
> 
> My point is that a young classical pianist aspiring to have a career in the 21st century, and pay the bills, doesn't have any incentive to hone their skills on improvisation *to a professional level*, because nowadays (and for the past century) nothing in their careers will demand them to do that onstage or for recordings. They will make a living by playing the repertoire, so it's in _this_ field that they're competing against each other in the real life and have to stand out above the rest.
> 
> ...


1. Improvisation is certainly a skill any professional musician will use if they are to lead a fruitful and varied working life as a musician.

To be honest, I am not entirely sure how to address your comment - though admittedly, it was not directed to me in the first place. At some points, you speak authoritatively and clearly about your views (no problem with that)...but then you contradict yourself so meekly. E.g. 1
"[improvisation] a valuable skill for any musician in any genre to have *at least a little bit*." What does that even mean? What does *"at least a little bit."* really mean.
E.g. 2 "That's not me saying that improvisation is not an important tool for a musician."

It is as if you _do_ agree that improvisation is important and that competitions would benefit from its inclusion..but you would prefer not to expose a huge weakness in Classical music.

2. It is nothing to do with a "moral duty". Again, what does that even mean.

3. It is a shame that you conflate the ideas of Classical music with ideas like "time-consuming" and marketability. That is not what this is all about. I think you have missed the point entirely. Classical music is an art.

4. Another example of you missing the point can be seen where you suggest there would be a logistical problem with judging improvisation at competition level. Surely you are aware that this was indeed used to happen all the time. The great composers/pianists of the past used to take part in piano improvisation duels - many of which are well documented.

All in all, I cannot see any reasonable argument to discourage improvisation at competition level.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Symphonic said:


> All in all, I cannot see any reasonable argument to discourage improvisation at competition level.


since competition as we know it implies interpretation, your argument makes no sense.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Symphonic said:


> 1. Improvisation is certainly a skill any professional musician will use if they are to lead a fruitful and varied working life as a musician.
> 
> To be honest, I am not entirely sure how to address your comment - though admittedly, it was not directed to me in the first place. At some points, you speak authoritatively and clearly about your views (no problem with that)...but then you contradict yourself so meekly. E.g. 1
> "[improvisation] a valuable skill for any musician in any genre to have *at least a little bit*." What does that even mean? What does *"at least a little bit."* really mean.
> ...


You ignored all my main arguments, and wrote an entire post with vague or misleading points. I don't know why I'm answering you, but this will be the last time.

1. Where is the contradiction? Both sentences you pointed out are in harmony with each other. Anyway, while I think that improvisation is a valuable skill for any musician to cultivate, I _never_ agreed that a competition like this one would benefit from its inclusion. You're misunderstanding something, because I was precisely arguing about the disadvantages. By the way, my concern is not the exposition of a weakness in classical music -- this is just a fallacy.

Regarding your other question: what "at least a little bit" means? It means the pianist being able to effectively improvise, keeping the beat, keeping coherence with whatever he's playing (which will depend on the style and the piece), and adding some personal skill and imagination. That's the minimum. The ceiling is infinite.

2. I don't know why this is important to my argument, but I'll answer your misdirection. I categorize this demand as a "moral duty" because you want to enforce improvisation in modern competitions (as the nobler thing to do), but disregard its practical problems, essentially throwing a shiny wrecking ball around without thinking through the details. I explained the reasons in my previous post, so unless you actually have arguments against my points, we should accept that it has more cons than pros.

Anyway, nobody here is against improvisation -- on the contrary, it should be incentivized in music school. However, there's a big jump from understanding its value and demanding its mandatory inclusion on competitions just for the sake of it. Why should it be like this? If you want to measure musicians on this particular skill, fair enough, it's not forbidden. Go ahead and start a competition which includes improvisation, and call it _The Most Virtuous Competition Which Will Not Ignore If You Can Improvise_, and at the end you can pat the winner in the back for dominating all aspects of piano playing and music making, the most extraordinary musician in classical music, who will surely become one of the Greats of the 21st century. That's fine, because competitions are arbitrary and each focus on whatever it wants. The _Chopin Piano Competition_ focus on _interpretation_, and it's important that it remains like this because it's an important gateway for new interpreters to find their audience, so everything comes together nicely.

3. This rebuttal is pure "strawman fallacy" on many levels. Where did I imply classical music is not art? And do you know what's not art? A competition, which is for horses, according to Bartok. What's a shame is that you think young musicians have infinite time to dedicate to all things at the same time, so they shouldn't worry about "pointless" things such as time management and how to go about their career. They should just be perfect and know everything, because perfect is good, and the day has 9,476,359,834 hours.

4. If you want to make a competition exclusively based on improvisation, you absolutely can. What is much more difficult is designing a competition where the participants will be judged both by improvisation _and_ interpretation of the repertoire, since the best at each will most likely be different participants, which was my point.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Livly_Station said:


> Youtube. In the official channel of the competition, with the same name.


Thank You. Ill have a look. I will definitely watch. Very annoying to see the audience all wearing face diapers though. Ill leave it at that


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

I didn't mean to derail the thread by bringing up improvisation. That's a different topic for a different thread. Please keep the discussion relevant to the OP.


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Madiel said:


> since competition as we know it implies interpretation, your argument makes no sense.


All in all, I cannot see any reasonable argument to discourage improvisation at competition level.


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Livly_Station said:


> You ignored all my main arguments, and wrote an entire post with vague or misleading points. I don't know why I'm answering you, but this will be the last time.
> 
> 1. Where is the contradiction? Both sentences you pointed out are in harmony with each other. Anyway, while I think that improvisation is a valuable skill for any musician to cultivate, I _never_ agreed that a competition like this one would benefit from its inclusion. You're misunderstanding something, because I was precisely arguing about the disadvantages. By the way, my concern is not the exposition of a weakness in classical music -- this is just a fallacy.
> 
> ...


At no point has anyone mentioned exclusively basing a competition on improvisation.

Anyway, it is clear that the art of improvisation eludes you. Which is no shame for anyone. There is nothing wrong with that.
It is simply sad to see one disregard it as if improvisation did not build the pillars of Western Classical music.

Cheerio.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Symphonic said:


> All in all, I cannot see any reasonable argument to discourage improvisation at competition level.


but it would have to be a different kind of competition than the kind we have now, improvisation is one thing, interpretation excludes it. Just like in the theater, if you go to see a play by Shakespeare you would be upset by improvisation, if you go to see a Commedia dell'Arte work than improvisation would be vital to the performance.


----------



## Symphonic (Apr 27, 2015)

Madiel said:


> but it would have to be a different kind of competition than the kind we have now, improvisation is one thing, interpretation excludes it. Just like in the theater, if you go to see a play by Shakespeare you would be upset by improvisation, if you go to see a Commedia dell'Arte work than improvisation would be vital to the performance.


Interpretation and improvisation are not mutually exclusive.
Both can, have and will exist together.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Certainly but, as Madiel says, in an appropriate setting. This would not include competitions, where faithfulness to the score is (quite rightly) required.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Symphonic said:


> Anyway, it is clear that the art of improvisation eludes you.


On the contrary, my piano teacher is a jazz improviser who I hired precisely for me to train improvisation.

The situation here is more that arguments elude you.

Cheerio.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

Piotr Alexewicz resolved to present, among other selections, all the Op. 28 preludes for his semi-final round.
He was unequivocal in his performance.
Undoubtedly, pause was given by some to consider if Chopin could have done as well.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Michael122 said:


> Piotr Alexewicz resolved to present, among other selections, all the Op. 28 preludes for his semi-final round.
> He was unequivocal in his performance.
> Undoubtedly, pause was given by some to consider if Chopin could have done as well.


I was listening to it yesterday while doing some chores and it was pretty great indeed -- he's definitely a contender for 1st place. But is playing all the preludes bolder than other parts of Chopin's oeuvre? I mean, everyone has to play for 1 hour in the 3rd stage, so all of them have to memorize the same amount of music (time-wise, at least).


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

"is playing all the preludes bolder than other parts of Chopin's oeuvre?"
Clearly, there are better choices to be made, as well as more difficult.
For Mr. Alexewicz such decisions may have been based upon a couple of factors, such as:
1 - 'What hasn't been done yet?'
This can be a serious concern especially when the focus of the competition is restricted, as is the case here.
Anyone can imagine, in competition you really should avoid repeating something that has already been performed unless, of course, you're pretty darn certain you can do it MUCH better and thereby hopefully eliminating, or downgrading, a competitor; yes, competitions are cut-throat, like it or not.
2 - 'Is difficulty of the piece a graded criterion?'
Don't know if this factor is on the adjudication sheet in Warsaw {it is at the Cliburn and perhaps Leeds} but if it was Mr. Alexewicz would most likely have made a different selection, especially in a final round.
3 - 'Do what I can do well'.
Suspect, this was a governing observation for Piotr, and any number of other contestants.
Anyway, he didn't make it to finals and quite possibly we'll never know if that was due to his selection of pieces to perform.
But, he did everything he did to a degree that he has nothing to be ashamed of, can hold his head high, and should be very proud of his effort at the 18th.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Michael122 said:


> *Anyway, he didn't make it to finals* and quite possibly we'll never know if that was due to his selection of pieces to perform.
> But, he did everything he did to a degree that he has nothing to be ashamed of, can hold his head high, and should be very proud of his effort at the 18th.


That was surprising, honestly. Also, no Hayato Sumino either.

Btw, in the following link, they list the finalists from 1 to 12. Is the order "random" or is it based on their grades in the round?
https://chopin2020.pl/en/news/artic...-12-finalists-of-the-18th-chopin-competition-


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Random question: why is Gadjiev's hair so gray? He's young!


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> On the contrary, my piano teacher is a jazz improviser who I hired precisely for me to train improvisation.
> 
> The situation here is more that arguments elude you.
> 
> Cheerio.


I appreciate your comments Livly, and wish this thread hadn't gotten off track with the improvisation issue. This particular competition is about the _performance of Chopin's piano compositions_, period. Isn't that enough? It is one of the most prestigious in the world, and taken especially seriously by Poland the host nation and the homeland of Chopin. The main contestants are already professional-level classical piano soloists. Do they need to be told by the Talk Classical cognoscenti that they need an improvisation component because it will be important in their already-started careers? It's, like, rather late in the day for that. The ones who are good at improvising will do that in their careers anyway and the ones for whom it's not a strong point won't. It would be kind of like the NCAA basketball championships adding a minimal-rules sandlot basketball game requirement, which "will be important in their futures." Maybe, maybe not.

In my youth I was in the Quebec-Canadian International Stepping-Stone Competition intended for young Canadian musicians not yet ready for the international competitions. The requirements were similar to the international ones, but spread out over a period of months. At the final event there was an imposed-piece requirement, a newly-commissioned composition that you had to learn in two weeks and perform from memory, plus a concerto -- mine was Prokofiev Third. I was one of the third-prize winners, and even though I like improvising I like other contestants would have been absolutely enraged by a potentially fiasco-inducing improvisation contest. You have to understand the culture and atmosphere of these competitions to get why that would be inappropriate.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> I appreciate your comments Livly, and wish this thread hadn't gotten off track with the improvisation issue. This particular competition is about the _performance of Chopin's piano compositions_, period. Isn't that enough? It is one of the most prestigious in the world, and taken especially seriously by Poland the host nation and the homeland of Chopin. The main contestants are already professional-level classical piano soloists. Do they need to be told by the Talk Classical cognoscenti that they need an improvisation component because it will be important in their already-started careers? It's, like, rather late in the day for that. The ones who are good at improvising will do that in their careers anyway and the ones for whom it's not a strong point won't. It would be kind of like the NCAA basketball championships adding a minimal-rules sandlot basketball game requirement, which "will be important in their futures." Maybe, maybe not.
> 
> In my youth I was in the Quebec-Canadian International Stepping-Stone Competition intended for young Canadian musicians not yet ready for the international competitions. The requirements were similar to the international ones, but spread out over a period of months. At the final event there was an imposed-piece requirement, a newly-commissioned composition that you had to learn in two weeks and perform from memory, plus a concerto -- mine was Prokofiev Third. I was one of the third-prize winners, and even though I like improvising I like other contestants would have been absolutely enraged by a potentially fiasco-inducing improvisation contest. You have to understand the culture and atmosphere of these competitions to get why that would be inappropriate.


Thank you for your support. I agree with everything you said. It seems to me that people take things to a very romantic and extreme level instead of a more simple manner. We know that improvisation is valuable and should be more cultivated in music education (and there's a lack of it nowadays, which is valid criticism), but this here is "just" a competition, not an objective crowning of the greatest pianist/musician alive, or anything more pretentious. Not only can the organizers choose the rules they want, but there's nothing wrong with measuring pianists specifically for their ability to play the repertoire regardless of other skills, which can be measured in other circunstances of life or even in other competitions, for performers and public members who are invested in improvisation or any other aspect of musicianship.

And we can't blame the organizers for their choice, since the success of these competitions attract many of the best upcoming pianists in the classical world who are looking for a career in interpretation (a totally valid choice!), and honing their skills in it, which is one of the main roles in the classical world. Not surprisingly, many of the winners and runner-ups of these big competitons become international stars, which shows that this system is working just fine despite some inner flaws. Dare I say, the only reason this competition is famous -- and being discussed here in the forum -- is precisely because it's a contest of interpretation.

All in all, it's not the competitions' obligation to fix the fact that many students don't focus enough time in learning to improvise. In fact, its sudden mandatory inclusion in competitions would be a really awkward way to fix the problem, since a competition exists at the end of the formation process of the musician, not at the beginning. As you mentioned, such decision would alienate many potential contestants who are not focused on improvisation because it's not their choice of career, and it doesn't need to be (beyond the minimum) if they have other life plans.


----------



## hawgdriver (Nov 11, 2011)

Anyone have a favorite performance of one piece from any Chopin competition? Maybe my absolute favorite is Kate Liu's Andante Spianato & GP. Pogorelich's performance of the 2d sonata is a bit wild but that's how Chopin should be I think. I also really really like how well Ingolf Wunder performed the 1st piano concerto. I could listen to the rondo on repeat for hours I think.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Same concerto, different recording (not a criticism of Wunder's recording, which I haven't heard) - the 18 year old Pollini's miraculous account with the Philharmonia under Kletzki which he set down immediately after winning the competition in the 1960s. It isn't his actual competition performance (though I believe a live recording of that is out there somewhere) but it was recorded in the slipstream of that, and it's absolutely wonderful.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

hawgdriver said:


> Anyone have a favorite performance of one piece from any Chopin competition?


Hmm, I never considered that. I eventually come back to some of the performances from the last 2 competitions, especially the ones by Cho, Liu, Trifonov and Geniusas.

Of the oldschool winners, I love many of them, but I listen more to what came after their participation in the competition.


----------



## hawgdriver (Nov 11, 2011)

Animal the Drummer said:


> Same concerto, different recording (not a criticism of Wunder's recording, which I haven't heard) - the 18 year old Pollini's miraculous account with the Philharmonia under Kletzki which he set down immediately after winning the competition in the 1960s. It isn't his actual competition performance (though I believe a live recording of that is out there somewhere) but it was recorded in the slipstream of that, and it's absolutely wonderful.


I have to hear this. Pollini is one of those artists that every now and then renders an interpretation that blows every other interpretation out of the water. In fact, his Wanderer Fantasy is what drove me to obsessively learn the piano (haha I started with that piece, derp).


----------



## hawgdriver (Nov 11, 2011)

Livly_Station said:


> Hmm, I never considered that. I eventually come back to some of the performances from the last 2 competitions, especially the ones by Cho, Liu, Trifonov and Geniusas.
> 
> Of the oldschool winners, I love many of them, but I listen more to what came after their participation in the competition.


Cho and Trifonov would have been the next names. Any particular performance come to mind?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

hawgdriver said:


> Cho and Trifonov would have been the next names. Any particular performance come to mind?


I think all of their main performances of the ballades and other works of the same stature are quite good, so I just listen to the piece I want to hear at the time.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

The 12 finalists are: 
*Leonora Armelini; JJ Jun Li Bui; Alexander Gadjiev; Martin Garcia Garcia; Eva Gevorgyan; Aimi Kobayashi; Jakub Kuszlik; Hyuk Lee; Bruce (Xiaoyu) Liu; Kamil Pcholec: Hao Rao; Kyohei Sorita.*

The final round competition pieces are: 
_Chopin -- Piano Concerto No. 1 in E Minor_
or 
_Chopin -- Piano Concerto No. 2 in F Minor_


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

I've always detested the format of the final. These pieces are already stale enough after one hearing; why do we need 12?

Sorita has been sounding great.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Mifek said:


> If I had to guess I would rather point towards one of the following four contestants: Nikolay Khozyainov (Russia), Kyohei Sorita (Japan), Eva Gevorgyan (Russia/Armenia) and Georgijs Osokins (Latvia). Also, it seems quite likely that Bruce Liu (Canada), Aimi Kobayashi (Japan) and Su Yeon Kim (South Korea) will reach the final stage. Personally, I would also like to see Viet Trung Nguyen (Vietnam/Poland) and Yasuko Furumi (Japan) among the finalists.


From the above: *Sorita, Gevorgyan, B. Liu* and *Kobayashi* are among the 12 finalists.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> I think all of their main performances of the ballades and other works of the same stature are quite good, so I just listen to the piece I want to hear at the time.


Livly_Station: Oops, see you had already posted the link to the 12 finalists in post 43.

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist: *Sorita* is in the final. Wouldn't recommend listening to all 12 finalists, because 12 x (E- or F- Concerto) = Too Much! As a grad student I attended a competition where the Schumann Concerto, 1st movement, was played by twenty (20) pianists in a row. What a cattle call -- brutal for the listener! Hearing a concerto played by 2 contestants would be my max.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

I never understood how they rehearse the Concertos. How do they align their interpretation with the orchestra?


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> I never understood how they rehearse the Concertos. How do they align their interpretation with the orchestra?


I don't see that as a problem. Polish conductors and professional orchestral musicians know these concerto accompaniments like the backs of their hands. Anyway, Chopin wrote these works as soloist's concertos. For example the orchestra might hold a chord while the soloist plays rubato at will. Maybe the conductor would receive in advance any "special requests" from individual soloists concerning rehearsing certain parts, otherwise a run-through is enough.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> I don't see that as a problem. Polish conductors and professional orchestral musicians know these concerto accompaniments like the backs of their hands. Anyway, Chopin wrote these works as soloist's concertos. For example the orchestra might hold a chord while the soloist plays rubato at will. Maybe the conductor would receive in advance any "special requests" from individual soloists concerning rehearsing certain parts, otherwise a run-through is enough.


Well, I don't have any personal experience with this, so maybe I'm just tripping here and it's just expected for things to match together well between the soloist and the orchestra regardless of rehearsal together, and your point about these Chopin's concertos is true.

Btw, I'm listening to Hao Rao now and I'm loving his interpretation of the 1st concerto. I missed the guy that came before, but I'll watch Sorita next.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Kyohei Sorita just finished playing the 1st Concerto and his interpretation sounded quite original to me. The first movement fast, the second rather slow, and the third super colorful. Not perfect in any way, but fun, dynamic and engaging. The audience was very supportive at the end, and they looked to have had a blast.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> Kyohei Sorita just finished playing the 1st Concerto and his interpretation sounded quite original to me. The first movement fast, the second rather slow, and the third super colorful. Not perfect in any way, but fun, dynamic and engaging. The audience was very supportive at the end, and they looked to have had a blast.


Thanks for bringing Kyohei Sorita's E Minor Concerto to my attention! Yes, I think he has the right stuff and agree with nearly all of your observations.

When you say "Not perfect ... " -- a few missed left hand notes but he covered for them well. Technically secure, rhythmically strong, lots of variety in dynamics including figuration ranging from pp to f. Interpretively confident, with touches I like including bringing out an inner voice with the left thumb. In pedaling he's always conscious of the harmony including consonant-dissonant notes and bass line. This is IMO a "concerto with arias," which does require taking interpretive risks like a tenor or soprano would -- he maintained singing tone and "put on a clinic" in shaping and ornamenting a melodic line. By definition, some would say, "That's not the way _I_ would do it," -- but so what? The melodies are exquisite and playing like this renews their appeal.

Facial expressions may be more acceptable than they used to be, but I felt there was too much "signaling" of his interpretation (yes, we hear it, you don't have to grimace). He had great communication while playing, though gesturing to orchestra soloists was a bit much for me. Interesting that he does _discrete_ "breaking of the hands" where the right hand melody note is played slightly after the left hand bass note for expressive reasons. That's a 19th-century pianistic practice that we were told to avoid when I was young, but it's come back with some pianists and he did it well. Super performance.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> Thanks for bringing Kyohei Sorita's E Minor Concerto to my attention! Yes, I think he has the right stuff and agree with nearly all of your observations.
> 
> When you say "Not perfect ... " -- a few missed left hand notes but he covered for them well. Technically secure, rhythmically strong, lots of variety in dynamics including figuration ranging from pp to f. Interpretively confident, with touches I like including bringing out an inner voice with the left thumb. In pedaling he's always conscious of the harmony including consonant-dissonant notes and bass line. This is IMO a "concerto with arias," which does require taking interpretive risks like a tenor or soprano would -- he maintained singing tone and "put on a clinic" in shaping and ornamenting a melodic line. By definition, some would say, "That's not the way _I_ would do it," -- but so what? The melodies are exquisite and playing like this renews their appeal.
> 
> Facial expressions may be more acceptable than they used to be, but I felt there was too much "signaling" of his interpretation (yes, we hear it, you don't have to grimace). He had great communication while playing, though gesturing to orchestra soloists was a bit much for me. Interesting that he does _discrete_ "breaking of the hands" where the right hand melody note is played slightly after the left hand bass note for expressive reasons. That's a 19th-century pianistic practice that we were told to avoid when I was young, but it's come back with some pianists and he did it well. Super performance.


If I were to add any criticism, I felt that he missed the thread a little bit in a second or another, but that's more nitpicking than anything, because I was captivated all the way through by his narrative vision and attention to detail. The orchestra could have done a little better too, but that's not his problem, of course.

I like his maneirism, and I generally am not against such things. If it's completely spontaneous, we can never know, but his gestures are charismatic, in my opinion. I also enjoyed to see him guiding the orchestra (and the conductor didn't look bothered by it). After a little research, it came to my attention that Sorita currently studies in Warsaw and has already played with the Warsaw Philarmonic Orchestra, so it's no surprise that he feels comfortable to play and communicate with them.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> If I were to add any criticism, I felt that he missed the thread a little bit in a second or another,


I like your comments, especially mentioning Sorita's "narrative vision," except I don't understand what you mean above. Since my previous post I've listened to Rao's first movement of the E Minor -- it is a more "classical" Chopin than Sorita's. Rao is strong technically, he also plays the second theme well; towards the end of the first movement I find it étude-like. That's a legitimate approach (and Chopin did write an étude or two!) but it's not my favourite. Like his calm demeanor, seems young and has a bright future.

I also listened to Garcia's F Minor Concerto. It's good but I'd be surprised if he wins. He missed a few right hand melody notes early on (nerves), and they stick out more than left hand errors. Plays well with a more straight-ahead approach than Sorita, perhaps "rhetorical" (Lisztian) compared to "poetic" (Chopin.) But lots of fine things; he really settled in the third movement and captured its spirit perfectly.

Don't agree with the posters who are, ho-hum, bored with all this. All contestants are worth hearing and they bring their own personalities and strengths to Chopin -- wonderful!


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> I like your comments, especially mentioning Sorita's "narrative vision," except I don't understand what you mean above.


I'd have to relisten to the performance to give you examples, but it's more of a subjective feeling that sometimes the transition from one mood to the next didn't feel perfectly eloquent, even if I enjoyed the change of colors and the sense of journey. It's one of the difficulties of a bold interpretation that's not monotonous or straightforward. But that's worthy risk, of course, and I'm happy for it. As I said, it's just nitpicking, not my main impression of the performance, which was extremely positive.



> Since my previous post I've listened to Rao's first movement of the E Minor -- it is a more "classical" Chopin than Sorita's. Rao is strong technically, he also plays the second theme well; towards the end of the first movement I find it étude-like. That's a legitimate approach (and Chopin did write an étude or two!) but it's not my favourite. Like his calm demeanor, seems young and has a bright future.


That's what I thought too, but there were moments that I truly loved his articulation. Very good performance, in my opinion, but less engaging than Sorita.



> Don't agree with the posters who are, ho-hum, bored with all this. All contestants are worth hearing and they bring their own personalities and strengths to Chopin -- wonderful!


I agree. I'm not listening to everything (which may lead to fatigue), but I'm enjoying all that I'm hearing.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> I also listened to Garcia's F Minor Concerto. It's good but I'd be surprised if he wins. He missed a few right hand melody notes early on (nerves), and they stick out more than left hand errors. Plays well with a more straight-ahead approach than Sorita, perhaps "rhetorical" (Lisztian) compared to "poetic" (Chopin.) But lots of fine things; he really settled in the third movement and captured its spirit perfectly.


I hadn't listened to yesterday's performances yet, but opened the video and saw many people raving about Garcia's in the comment section. Thought it was really, really good.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> I hadn't listened to yesterday's performances yet, but opened the video and saw many people raving about Garcia's in the comment section. Thought it was really, really good.


Maybe now it's me being too picky about Garcia's F Minor Concerto. To compare in that work, last night I listened to Alexander Gadjieff -- thought he was excellent interpretively, held my attention throughout. Overall wasn't as clean as I had hoped, though. Have no time for this today.


----------



## Bruxo (Oct 20, 2021)

I'm not an expert, buy I believe the winner will be either Gadjev, Sorita or Armellini. They've been playing exquisetely. My personal choice would be Gadjev, loved his Sonata.


----------



## Hunt Stromberg (Sep 6, 2021)

Livly_Station said:


> I hadn't listened to yesterday's performances yet, but opened the video and saw many people raving about Garcia's in the comment section. Thought it was really, really good.


He's the audience choice, but I don't think he'll be the winner. Probably Sorita? Garcia engages in too many histrionics at the piano.


----------



## Hunt Stromberg (Sep 6, 2021)

hawgdriver said:


> Cho and Trifonov would have been the next names. Any particular performance come to mind?


I have found Seong-Jin Cho a rather dull performer.


----------



## Hunt Stromberg (Sep 6, 2021)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I've always detested the format of the final. These pieces are already stale enough after one hearing; why do we need 12?
> 
> Sorita has been sounding great.


Couldn't agree more with this.


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Do these contests mean that much? I'm not knocking them, but does winning them get someone a career? Some past winners are pretty obscure to me.

A casual listen of this year's crop and I heard a lot of performances to admire, hard to eliminate people.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Open Book said:


> Do these contests mean that much? I'm not knocking them, but does winning them get someone a career? Some past winners are pretty obscure to me.
> 
> A casual listen of this year's crop and I heard a lot of performances to admire, hard to eliminate people.


Some competitions are more important than others for careers. The Chopin Competition is a major one. Among the winners who went on to major careers:

Bella Davidovich
Maurizio Pollini
Martha Argerich
Garrick Ohlsson
Kristian Zimmerman
Rafal Blechacz
Yulianna Avdeeva
Seong Jin Cho

Ivo Pogorelich's career had a great boost when he did _not_ win this competition and Marta Argerich resigned from the jury in protest.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Performances are done. Now awaiting the results of the 18th Chopin Piano Competition.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Open Book said:


> Do these contests mean that much? I'm not knocking them, but does winning them get someone a career? Some past winners are pretty obscure to me.


What? They've been consistently awarding people who became superstars, and some of the runner-ups are just as famous as some of the winners. And it certainly helps most of the participants to get contracts for recording and live performances.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Bruce Liu won. Have to admit I haven't listened to a single presentation by him, so I'll have to look back.

Edit:

1º Bruce (Xiaoyu) Liu
2º Kyohei Sorita // Alexander Gadjiev
3º Martin Garcia Garcia
4º Aimi Kobayashi // Jakub Kuszlik
5º Leonora Armellini
6º J J Jun Li Bui

The others were not awarded.

Extra awards:
- Gadjiev was awarded for the prize for best sonata.
- Garcia Garcia was awarded the prize for best concerto.
- Kuszlik was awarded the prize for best mazurkas.

Link: https://chopin2020.pl/en/news/article/437/the-winner-of-the-18th-chopin-competition!


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> Bruce Liu won. Have to admit I haven't listened to a single presentation by him, so I'll have to look back.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> ...


Thanks Livly_Station. Interesting to chat and think about your observations. As it turns out I heard both 2nd's and the 3rd, but not the others. My bad missing both Bruce Liu (1st) and Jun Li Bui (6th) who are Canadian; more about that perhaps in another post. It seems to me the judges rewarded interpretive artistry more than technical prowess, which for Chopin is fine by me.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

Congrats to the winner.
This was yet another excellent competition and platform for Chopin's music.
Many, many fine performances and interpretations and well worth the time to watch.
Seems a shame we have to wait 5 years for the next one.


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

Congrats to the winner! I haven`t watched the previous rounds very much but his final performance was very _Chopinesque_ so I`m not surprised he was awarded the first place. However, amongst the finalists, only Sorita really excited me and I`m sure he can show his prowess with many different composers at the same level as he did with Chopin. The only other contestant that excited me was Hao Rao, I was very impressed with his sheer power but perhaps Chopin is not his thing.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Highwayman, I agree with your remarks.

After a number of decades these works still speak to me. In brief, Chopin is an extraordinary genius living with a body-wracking disease that kills him (at 38) as he knows it will. For me what lives is his incredible spirit that propels his work into the future. Barely able to play, he knows his compositions can grant what illness and death prevent. Alan Walker's biography of Chopin points up how much Amantine Dupin (pen name George Sand) and others nurtured that spirit despite all the disasters. 

In my piano studies what was emphasized was not performing so much as re-creation. In Poland every 4-5 years the Chopin Competition provides an opportunity for the best young pianists to recreate the music and renew classical piano with audiences worldwide.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Highwayman said:


> Congrats to the winner! I haven`t watched the previous rounds very much but his final performance was very _Chopinesque_ so I`m not surprised he was awarded the first place.


I've seen people describing Liu's playing as... _lisztian_!


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> I've seen people describing Liu's playing as... _lisztian_!


Oh-oh, to me that's a no-no for Chopin. I'll have to give Liu a liszten!


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Livly_Station said:


> I've seen people describing Liu's playing as... _lisztian_!


It's Liuxian (his name is Xiaoyu Liu)



Roger Knox said:


> I'll have to give Liu a liszten!


He'll be on my playliszt


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Finally listened to Bruce Liu in the E minor concerto and, yes, he "nailed it." Cleanest playing of the ones I heard. Caught the style of each movement, the second a nocturne and the finale a joyful _krakowiak_ (Polish folk dance). I noticed the leader of the strings getting into it and that is a good sign. Seriously, this one is ready for the recording studio. Montreal has a strong record in classical piano and with Bruce Liu the tradition continues.

P.S. If Liu has an "inner Liszt," it was otherwise engaged on this occasion and he was a true "Chopinzee."


----------



## elgarsecret (Oct 11, 2021)

Roger Knox said:


> Some competitions are more important than others for careers. The Chopin Competition is a major one. Among the winners who went on to major careers:
> 
> Bella Davidovich
> Maurizio Pollini
> ...


Even the past laureates/finalists went on to very distinguished careers, some that surpassed the winners of their respective competition:

- Dmitri Shostakovich (HM, 1927)
- Vladimir Ashkenazy (2nd, 1955)
- Fou Ts'ong (3rd, 1955)
- Tamas Vasary (HM, 1955)
- Mitsuko Uchida (2nd, 1970)
- Emmanuel Ax (HM, 1970)
- Angela Hewitt (HM, 1980)
- Ivo Pogorelic (HM, 1980)
- Jean-Marc Luisada (5th, 1985)
- Daniil Trifonov (3rd, 2010)
- Ingolf Wunder (2nd, 2010)


----------



## elgarsecret (Oct 11, 2021)

Whether you felt Liu was deserving or not, we can all agree this dude will have a dazzling career...but the way I see it right now, he's once-in-a-generation pianist simply because his repertoire is super-broad, like this is comparable to Marc-Andre Hamelin winning the Chopin. And he's got a name that any idiot can remember.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Roger Knox said:


> P.S. If Liu has an "inner Liszt," it was otherwise engaged on this occasion and he was a true "Chopinzee."


To be honest, I don't understand why people were calling him "lisztian", but I should add that I've also seen folks complimenting his playing of Chopin's Op. 2 in the 3rd round, which is immensely difficult and virtuosistic, so maybe that's the reason. I'm not a fan of the piece though.

Btw, I don't think the adjetive "lisztian" is just for showing off, because I see Liszt as a poet too.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

elgarsecret said:


> And he's got a name that any idiot can remember.


What's really funny is that he looks like Bruce Lee.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Btw, in one of the interviews they were doing in the last days they interviewed one of the finalists who said he was training in IMPROVISATION, but I forgot who it was.


----------



## elgarsecret (Oct 11, 2021)

Livly_Station said:


> What's really funny is that he looks like Bruce Lee.


Imagine his debut album cover, in black and white with the martial arts attire, guaranteed to launch to #1 in sales. With a clever title "Bruce Liu - Tao of Chopin", I can imagine one reviewer "True to his name, he kicks the competition out."


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

elgarsecret said:


> Imagine his debut album cover, in black and white with the martial arts attire, guaranteed to launch to #1 in sales. With a clever title "Bruce Liu - Tao of Chopin", I can imagine one reviewer "True to his name, he kicks the competition out."


We have found our superstar, no doubt.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Ok ...

Why are people repeating the "Grave" section of Chopin's second sonata? Apparently there are 2 versions, 1 with the repeat marked after the Grave and one without. Slow introductions are almost never repeated in sonata form movements (e.g. Mozart symphonies 36, 38, 39, Beethoven Pathetique, op. 111 (which served as inspiration for the opening of this sonata), symphony 2, trio op 70 no 2, Haydn symphonies 100, 104, etc etc). Harmonically, it makes almost no sense to repeat the "Grave" section (the F in the A-flat13 chord disallows it from resolving to D-flat minor), but it makes perfect sense to repeat from the fast section (giving you a deceptive cadence). Rosen's arguments are nonsensical. So why do people do it?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Ok ...
> 
> Why are people repeating the "Grave" section of Chopin's second sonata? Apparently there are 2 versions, 1 with the repeat marked after the Grave and one without. Slow introductions are almost never repeated in sonata form movements (e.g. Mozart symphonies 36, 38, 39, Beethoven Pathetique, op. 111 (which served as inspiration for the opening of this sonata), symphony 2, trio op 70 no 2, Haydn symphonies 100, 104, etc etc). Harmonically, it makes almost no sense to repeat the "Grave" section (the F in the A-flat13 chord disallows it from resolving to D-flat minor), but it makes perfect sense to repeat from the fast section (giving you a deceptive cadence). Rosen's arguments are nonsensical. So why do people do it?


I can't give you the right answer, but I do know that the Chopin Piano Competition incentivizes the participants to play a specific edition of Chopin's oeuvre (don't remember which), so maybe this edition reinforces the need to repeat that section.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> Btw, I don't think the adjetive "lisztian" is just for showing off, because I see Liszt as a poet too.


Yes I think so too. "Lisztian" shouldn't mean "technician."


----------



## hawgdriver (Nov 11, 2011)

Hunt Stromberg said:


> I have found Seong-Jin Cho a rather dull performer.


That's too bad. But I'm sure you have other favorites?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Roger Knox said:


> Yes I think so too. "Lisztian" shouldn't mean "technician."


It shouldn't mean this either:


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> It shouldn't mean this either:


Tedious, these guys aren't exactly the Fab Four ..


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

I've had a lot of fun with this song in parties. I get nostalgic just hearing the first notes.


----------

