# Modern Pianists



## JohannesBrahms

Is it just me, or do modern pianists(Kissin, Lisitsa, Lang Lang, for example) seem to be more about technique rather than music? Their playing seems to have no soul or emotion in it. They are technical masters, no argument there, but it just seems to me like they miss the whole point. I have a book by the great Russian virtuoso Josef Lhevinne called Basic Principles in Pianoforte Playing. In the preface, written by his wife, Rosina, she says that in Russia they were taught that technique is only a means to an end, not an end in itself. However, it seems that modern pianists make technique their end instead of music. Their interpretations seem to be more about being flashy and showy rather than music. Their playing leaves me dry and unaffected. By nature I do not tend to show emotion a whole lot nor do I feel it as keenly as some people. However, I can sense emotion in music and in the older pianists, for example, Rachmaninoff and Horowitz.

Another thing I was wondering is piano tone. I have listened to older pianists and modern ones, and it seems like the newer ones have very little regard for piano tone. Argerich(yes, sorry to all the Argerich fans) is prime example in this respect. I listened to a recording of her and the very first note she hit made me literally wince with how metallic it sounded. There was no warmness in it at all, it was just bad. The older pianists(Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann) have a wonderful tone in their playing. You can't argue that it is because of the older recording technology, because I heard a recording of Rachmaninoff playing the Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini. It had been remastered wonderfully to the point where you could here the echo in the hall. It almost sounded live. It was in fact Rachmaninoff playing and not a new recording, because I compared it to the version that was not remastered. They were one and the same.

My question is, does everybody else share my sentiments when it comes to modern pianists? Please keep in mind that this is only my opinion, so don't get angry with me. I do not intend to insult any pianist.


----------



## DavidA

I must confess I do not share your opinion, certainly not of Argerich. I would say she plays with plenty of emotion and volatility. As to other modern pianists they certainly have a different style to the older masters. But I would say Lang Lang plays with plenty of emotion - he has been criticised for too much, in fact. 

of course, when we look at the greats of the past we can go back 80-100 years and hear all of them - there were many more we have not heared of So we are picking from a far larger crop.


----------



## Kazaman

Although I do not like Lang Lang's playing very much, from watching interviews it is very plain that he is a serious musician who cares very much about the music he plays. He isn't just doing it to show off his technique. Kissin and Argerich, whom I do like very much, are also serious musicians and I think they have a very good control over their tone (keep in mind that some passages call for an ugly, more percussive tone). I would ask what Argerich was playing that made you wince. 

There are plenty of other pianists out there with beautiful tone, in any case ... Grigory Sokolov, Marc-Andre Hamelin, Krystian Zimerman, Helene Grimaud, Rafal Blechacz, Mitsuko Uchida, Jean-Yves Thibaudet, Andras Schiff, Maria Joao Pires, Boris Berezovsky, Daniil Trifonov, Yundi Li, Jonathan Biss, Daniel Barenboim, Ivo Pogorelich, Radu Lupu, Piotr Anderszewski, Murrary Perahia, Angela Hewitt, Andre Laplante, Leslie Howard, Benjamin Grosvenor, Stephen Hough, Ingolf Wunder, Janina Fialkowska, Valentina Lisitsa, Maurizio Pollini, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Arcadi Volodos ... the list goes on forever.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

DavidA said:


> I must confess I do not share your opinion, certainly not of Argerich. I would say she plays with plenty of emotion and volatility. As to other modern pianists they certainly have a different style to the older masters. But I would say Lang Lang plays with plenty of emotion - he has been criticised for too much, in fact.
> 
> of course, when we look at the greats of the past we can go back 80-100 years and hear all of them - there were many more we have not heared of So we are picking from a far larger crop.


I am sorry. I should have clarified myself. I think Argerich plays with emotion and plenty of it. I was only criticizing her for her unpleasant tone. Feel perfectly free to disagree with me about that, and anything else. I have no problem with people who disagree with me, as it is only an opinion. I also must admit that I do not like her interpretations, but I can see good points in her playing. I do consider her a great pianist, even though I don't like her. I hope you can understand me, as I am not sure whether I am articulating my opinion very well.

Another thing I forgot to mention before that is related to Lang Lang. You say that he plays with emotion. I disagree in that he shows emotion, but not through his playing. Let me give you an example. Listen to a recording of Lang Lang. Not a video, just a recording, so that you can't see him playing. Tell me if you feel as much emotion as you do when you watch a video of him. I tried this, and with the recording, it was dry, but I could feel emotion when watching him play. My point is that he shows emotion through his facial expressions and gestures, not through his playing. If he showed emotion through his actual playing, you would feel it in the recordings, and the gestures would not be needed. Kissin is guilty of this as well, as is Lisitsa.

Now try something else. Go to youtube and look up Benno Moiseiwitsch playing Rachmaninoff Prelude in B Minor. It should be a video where you can see him playing. He sits very still and makes no facial expression, yet his playing is filled with emotion. I hope this demonstrates my point. Also, note his wonderful tone.

Once again, this is my opinion, though I am firmly convinced of it.


----------



## moody

All in all I agree with you---but hear Ms.Argerich live and then comment, because you have to take the recording engineering into account.


----------



## Ravndal

moody said it


----------



## JohannesBrahms

> Although I do not like Lang Lang's playing very much, from watching interviews it is very plain that he is a serious musician who cares very much about the music he plays. He isn't just doing it to show off his technique. Kissin and Argerich, whom I do like very much, are also serious musicians and I think they have a very good control over their tone (keep in mind that some passages call for an ugly, more percussive tone). I would ask what Argerich was playing that made you wince.





> All in all I agree with you---but hear Ms.Argerich live and then comment, because you have to take the recording engineering into account.


She was playing the Hungarian Rhapsody no. 6 by Franz Liszt. It was a video of her playing on television. It is on youtube, so you can check it out. When I say good tone, I mean like the tone of Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann, and Moiseiwitsch.


----------



## Kazaman

JohannesBrahms said:


> She was playing the Hungarian Rhapsody no. 6 by Franz Liszt. It was a video of her playing on television. It is on youtube, so you can check it out. When I say good tone, I mean like the tone of Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann, and Moiseiwitsch.


I've heard that recording before, yes. I don't hear anything wrong with the tone, though. The score has an accent marked in it, and the bass is supposed to be evocative of the drones and ostinati common in folk dance accompaniments.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

To my ears, her tone is much too harsh. The kind of tone that I like is as I said before, the tone of Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann, and Moiseiwitsch. If you listen them, their tone has absolutely no hardness in it. It is soft and warm, and I prefer it that way.


----------



## Kazaman

The music calls for tone which has bite in it. Listen to Argerich play a Chopin Mazurka and you'll hear a much warmer tone. Consequently, listen to Moiseiwitsch play a the second Hungarian Rhapsody and you'll hear tone with more bite to it than you will in most of his other recordings:


----------



## millionrainbows

JohannesBrahms said:


> ...Another thing I was wondering is piano tone. I have listened to older pianists and modern ones, and it seems like the newer ones have very little regard for piano tone. Argerich...is prime example in this respect. I listened to a recording of her and the very first note she hit made me literally wince with how metallic it sounded. There was no warmness in it at all, it was just bad. The older pianists (Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann) have a wonderful tone in their playing. *You can't argue that it is because of the older recording technology...*


Yes, I can! If you are listening to those "old guys" then fidelity is definitely a factor.



> My question is, does everybody else share my sentiments when it comes to modern pianists? Please keep in mind that this is only my opinion, so don't get angry with me. I do not intend to insult any pianist.


Historic recordings are like reading a book versus watching HD TV. With reading, you have to use your imagination to "fill in" information. This creates a more involving experience. This may be the real reason you like historic recordings; it's not the modern pianists who are deficient, it's a combination of sonics (less harsh treble) and how you've gotten into a "historical" mode in your mind, where there is a "Platonic ideal" you are hearing & experiencing. I like these older recordings for the same reasons.

From WIK:

"Hot" and "cool" media
In the first part of Understanding Media, McLuhan also stated that different media invite different degrees of participation on the part of a person who chooses to consume a medium. Some media, like the movies, were "hot"-that is, they enhance one single sense, in this case vision, in such a manner that a person does not need to exert much effort in filling in the details of a movie image. McLuhan contrasted this with "cool" TV, which he claimed requires more effort on the part of the viewer to determine meaning, and comics, which due to their minimal presentation of visual detail require a high degree of effort to fill in details that the cartoonist may have intended to portray. A movie is thus said by McLuhan to be "hot", intensifying one single sense "high definition", demanding a viewer's attention, and a comic book to be "cool" and "low definition", requiring much more conscious participation by the reader to extract value.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

> The music calls for tone which has bite in it. Listen to Argerich play a Chopin Mazurka and you'll hear a much warmer tone. Consequently, listen to Moiseiwitsch play a the second Hungarian Rhapsody and you'll hear tone with more bite to it than you will in most of his other recordings:


I concede the point. I hadn't heard that recording of Moiseiwitsch, so thank for telling me about it. I still hear a difference between their tones, Moiseiwitsch's seems fuller than Argerich's. I also listened to Argerich playing a Chopin Mazurka. The tone was a bit warmer, but still not how I like it. A question I have for you is in what cases do you think a pianist should play with a more biting tone? Should all of the Hungarian Rhapsodies be played like that? What about the Hungarian Dances by Johannes Brahms?



> Historic recordings are like reading a book versus watching HD TV. With reading, you have to use your imagination to :fill in" information. This creates a more involving experience. This may be the real reason you like historic recordings; it's not the modern pianists who are deficient, it's a combination of sonics (less harsh treble) and how you've gotten into a "historical" mode in your mind, where there is a "Platonic ideal" you are hearing & experiencing. I like these older recordings for the same reasons.


I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that is the case. I have heard cleaned-up recordings of older pianists, and their playing still does something for me that modern pianists don't. This is not always the case, however.


----------



## millionrainbows

JohannesBrahms said:


> I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that is the case. I have heard cleaned-up recordings of older pianists, and their playing still does something for me that modern pianists don't. This is not always the case, however.


Well, if you disagree with that, then why? Are we supposed to figure out what you think?

Maybe it's the possibility that the "old pianistic tradition" is dying. Maybe it's that most CM listeners hate the 21st century, and glorify the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe it's resentment of seeing the young inherit the reins. I dunno...what do you think? As you said in the OP, Maybe it's just you.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

millionrainbows said:


> Well, if you disagree with that, then why? Are we supposed to figure out what you think?
> 
> Maybe it's the possibility that the "old pianistic tradition" is dying. Maybe it's that most CM listeners hate the 21st century, and glorify the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe it's resentment of seeing the young inherit the reins. I dunno...what do you think? As you said in the OP, Maybe it's just you.


I don't hate the 21st century. I don't resent the young inheriting the rains. I simply don't like most of their playing. If you can have the best of something, why take something less? In my opinion, Rachmaninoff, Moiseiwitsch, Hofmann, and Lhevinne were the best pianists ever recorded, so why would I listen to "lesser" pianists(in my opinion)?


----------



## millionrainbows

So, the present-day pianists are "bad" pianists. How can anyone say that this is only opinion, when statements like this are made: "Rachmaninoff, Moiseiwitsch, Hofmann, and Lhevinne were the best pianists ever recorded, so why would I listen to "lesser" pianists?" 

If one desired to avoid conflict, opinion would be stated in the affirmative, not the negative, for it will be perceived as mud-slinging. 

But many people on this forum can't state opinions affirmatively, without being negative and tearing-down something in the process.

I thought that was a basic tenet of healthy psychology: that one shouldn't have to tear-down others in order to bolster one's own self-esteem. I assumed everybody's mothers taught them this.


----------



## Kazaman

JohannesBrahms said:


> I concede the point. I hadn't heard that recording of Moiseiwitsch, so thank for telling me about it. I still hear a difference between their tones, Moiseiwitsch's seems fuller than Argerich's. I also listened to Argerich playing a Chopin Mazurka. The tone was a bit warmer, but still not how I like it. A question I have for you is in what cases do you think a pianist should play with a more biting tone? Should all of the Hungarian Rhapsodies be played like that? What about the Hungarian Dances by Johannes Brahms?


The sound in old analogue recording equipment is a bit dull and unfocused compared to the digital technology used today. As for deciding on tone, a lot of it has to do with articulation indications in the score and the context in which they appear ... an off-beat accent in the bass in a forte passage of a stylised folk dance would call for a bit of bite, for example. An accent in a different passage, say a Romantic miniature like a Nocturne or Intermezzo, may call for something like added weight with a bit of lingering (almost like an emphasised tenuto) ... a pianist has to be astute, obviously.


----------



## moody

millionrainbows said:


> Well, if you disagree with that, then why? Are we supposed to figure out what you think?
> 
> Maybe it's the possibility that the "old pianistic tradition" is dying. Maybe it's that most CM listeners hate the 21st century, and glorify the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe it's resentment of seeing the young inherit the reins. I dunno...what do you think? As you said in the OP, Maybe it's just you.


This might be considered as hectoring,he's told us what he thinks.As for the rest of your post it means nothing at all that I can understand.


----------



## moody

Kazaman said:


> The sound in old analogue recording equipment is a bit dull and unfocused compared to the digital technology used today. As for deciding on tone, a lot of it has to do with articulation indications in the score and the context in which they appear ... an off-beat accent in the bass in a forte passage of a stylised folk dance would call for a bit of bite, for example. An accent in a different passage, say a Romantic miniature like a Nocturne or Intermezzo, may call for something like added weight with a bit of lingering (almost like an emphasised tenuto) ... a pianist has to be astute, obviously.


Digital technology is often harsh and unpleasant and I don't hear analogue sound as dull and unfocused in itself.
Once again it depends on the recording engineers,RCA were dreadful in their treatment of Horowitz.
On the other hand Shura Cherkassky had his wonderful tone mostly brought out well in all his recordings.
When we talk of recordings by Rachmaninoff and Lhevinne we are, however,journeying back into recording history somewhat.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

millionrainbows said:


> So, the present-day pianists are "bad" pianists. How can anyone say that this is only opinion, when statements like this are made: "Rachmaninoff, Moiseiwitsch, Hofmann, and Lhevinne were the best pianists ever recorded, so why would I listen to "lesser" pianists?"
> 
> If one desired to avoid conflict, opinion would be stated in the affirmative, not the negative, for it will be perceived as mud-slinging.
> 
> But many people on this forum can't state opinions affirmatively, without being negative and tearing-down something in the process.
> 
> I thought that was a basic tenet of healthy psychology: that one shouldn't have to tear-down others in order to bolster one's own self-esteem. I assumed everybody's mothers taught them this.


When you quote me, you left out the "in my opinion" at the beginning and end of the sentence. The way you quoted me, it sounded as if I was stating a fact instead of an opinion. The subject of who is a better pianist is subjective. What I was saying was an opinion and I knew it.

You seem to equate being a lesser pianist with being a bad pianist. This is not the case. When I said lesser, I meant that I don't like modern pianist's playing, and thus I put Rachmaninoff, Hofmann, Moiseiwitsch, and Lhevinne on a higher level, making them better in my opinion.



> Well, if you disagree with that, then why? Are we supposed to figure out what you think?
> 
> Maybe it's the possibility that the "old pianistic tradition" is dying. Maybe it's that most CM listeners hate the 21st century, and glorify the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe it's resentment of seeing the young inherit the reins. I dunno...what do you think? As you said in the OP, Maybe it's just you.


I forgot to mention before. Your comment makes it seem like you think I am an older person that grew up hearing Rachmaninoff, etc., and that I am just too stubborn to see any good in newer pianists. Whether this is what you think or not, what I say next is only to clear up any confusion. I will tell you that I have lived all but two years of my life in the 21st century. The young had inherited the reigns long before my time. When I first started listening to classical music, I listened to modern pianists. When I finally decided to listen to the older generation, my love for this music was firmly established. I sensed more emotion than I had thought was possible. I also began paying attention to tone quality.

So, all of that to say, I don't and could not resent the newer generation. I simply prefer the older generation, so when I listen to music, I listen to them.


----------



## hreichgott

How can you even tell what someone's tone is like by listening to a Youtube video?


----------



## PetrB

JohannesBrahms said:


> She was playing the Hungarian Rhapsody no. 6 by Franz Liszt. It was a video of her playing on television. It is on youtube, so you can check it out. When I say good tone, I mean like the tone of Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann, and Moiseiwitsch.


Television, some of the most horrible, least faithful audio there was, and still is, coupled with a compressed youtube video, can only exacerbate the lack of any decent fidelity in the Television audio. You cannot, and should not, judge any music coming down as filtered through the two media together, especially. Nothing like the 'audio truth' can be found there


----------



## Vaneyes

*Rafal Blechacz* update.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/a...-is-chosen-for-gilmore-artist-award.html?_r=0


----------



## Guest

These young pianists have a great mix of staggering technique and musicality: Denis Matsuev, Yvegeni Sudbin, Peter Toth, and Misha Dacic.


----------



## Animato

Thank you for mentioning Yevgeni Sudbin, Kontrapunctus !

I'll like to vote for modern pianists. Recently I compared two recordings of Beethovens Piano Concerto (5) in E flat major : Gilels versus Sudbin. O.K. Gilels recording was a live recording: that's the reason that he missed some keys and played some bad tones. His interpretation was quite expressive sometimes even exaggerated. Never the less I was annoyed by the wrong tones.
Whereas Sudbins interpretation is smooth and very elegant. I really prefer the modern recording in this case. 

P.S.: I like Gilels' recordings of the Brahms concertos with Mr. Jochum very much.


----------



## Ravndal

My favorite living pianists who i think is top notch:

Radu Lupu, Grigory Sokolov, Krystian Zimerman, Paul Crossley, Martha Argerich, Håvard Gimse, Einar Steen-Nøkleberg,
Ivo Pogorelich, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Murray Perahia, Sigurd Slåttebrekk, Håkon Austbø, Sveinung Bjelland, Maria Pires, Daniel Barenboim, Mauritzio Pollini.


----------



## Vinyl

For such a Norwegian heavy list, the absence of Andsnes is quite telling. 
No love for the man with the mullet?


----------



## Ravndal

Not a fan. Wonderful articulation etc, but i feel like he has no expression. And if you compare him to some of the other Norwegian legends from my list, I think he is highly overrated. Some say his playing got better after he got kids, but I don't know.. I have so many other performers to chose between


----------



## ShropshireMoose

Only just read this thread, most of which dates back to those lonely days before I joined TC (!!!!), with reference to the tone the piano has on many modern recordings, it must be pointed out that a great deal of this could be as much to do with the modern piano as with the pianist. Many modern pianos tend to be brighter and harsher than they were 50 years ago. This is something that came in in the late 1970s. Many of the pianos that began to flood in from Korea and Japan were much brighter than we had been accustomed to, and many European manufacturers began brightening their pianos in an attempt to compete. Result? Now many of these pianos in modern concert halls are shrill and, if that's not the sound you like, downright unpleasant. When I started work in 1980, I was apprenticed at a piano restoration shop in Birmingham, when new Yamaha's came in, the bass strings were so shrill and well, "clangy", that we changed them as a matter of course! This stopped after a couple of years when they improved somewhat. 
However, no manufacturers are exempt from the policy of changing the sounds of their pianos. In 1991, after a very fine performance of the Grieg Piano Concerto at Symphony Hall in Birmingham, I went backstage to congratulate Moura Lympany (can you believe it, I was the only one who did!!) and initially she was extremely bothered about how her performance had actually sounded, I assured her that it was fine and that I'd enjoyed it very much, she went on to say, "the thing is, I was so bothered by the awful tone of that piano, so harsh and shrill, not my sound at all." And this was a Steinway concert grand. Methods of recording also play their part. Brendel once opined that he couldn't understand why the likes of Cortot and Edwin Fischer were given such natural sounding piano recordings in the 1930s, whereas today it sounds as though we have our ears pressed against the soundboard of the piano. Well, the simple answer there, of course, is that they often place the microphone *in* the piano, which is totally unnatural. HMV in the 30s also did many tests to see a. the best positioning for a mike, and b. which sort of piano worked best for their recordings, they used a smaller Steinway (I can't offhand remember the model) having found that a concert grand didn't record so well. With modern equipment I daresay they don't have those problems, but the modern piano may be quite another matter.


----------



## clairetask

Hi!!!!!!!!! Its me and I am pianists for over 20 years internationally successful as a pianist, accompanist, companion and in various chamber music formations. In 2008 she took up her countless contacts back to professional musicians and began to pursue a long-held dream.


----------



## Animato

millionrainbows said:


> So, the present-day pianists are "bad" pianists. How can anyone say that this is only opinion, when statements like this are made: "Rachmaninoff, Moiseiwitsch, Hofmann, and Lhevinne were the best pianists ever recorded, so why would I listen to "lesser" pianists?"
> 
> If one desired to avoid conflict, opinion would be stated in the affirmative, not the negative, for it will be perceived as mud-slinging.
> 
> But many people on this forum can't state opinions affirmatively, without being negative and tearing-down something in the process.
> 
> I thought that was a basic tenet of healthy psychology: that one shouldn't have to tear-down others in order to bolster one's own self-esteem. I assumed everybody's mothers taught them this.


I agree with you Millionrainbows.

I started a similar thread in a german forum. The users there also preferred the older pianists.
I was alone with my praise of young pianists.
But I would like to underline that THERE ARE excellent pianists of our generation:
Anna Vinnitskaya, Ingolf Wunder, Antii Siraala 
there is nothing to complain about their recordings, I think.

By the way: for me Martha Argerich is the queen of all pianists !


----------



## Vaneyes

I was impressed with Heather Conner's contribution on a recent Persichetti Violin & Piano (Naxos) release. :tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

*Yuja Wang *update.

















LA Times review, 7.19.14.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ng-hollywood-bowl-review-20140719-column.html


----------



## PetrB

JohannesBrahms said:


> She was playing the Hungarian Rhapsody no. 6 by Franz Liszt. It was a video of her playing on television. It is on youtube, so you can check it out. When I say good tone, I mean like the tone of Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann, and Moiseiwitsch.


*Never, ever, take any Television audio at all seriously, 
or as any real indication whatsoever about any musician's tone, 
regardless of instrument, and that includes voice.*


----------



## stevens

1) I doubt anyone could distinguish between a pianist of the old golden age and a modern pianists in a blindtest. Such a test would be interesting

2) When people say "He or she (usually she)...leaves me cold" or " He/She leaves me dry", I cant resist the thought that it could be this person who utter the opinion who is cold and dry. -Even before he (always a he) heard the piece of music. Well, that is maybe to go a little too far. But, nevertheless, feelings of "cold" and "dry" does not nessesarily say something about the pianist heard

3) Different persons has different taste. If you gets cold or dry, others get warm and ...wet. Why cant people accept that? 

4) Has anyone who criticize a pianists "tone" (metallic sounding) ever thought it could be the piano itself. It could be something wrong whith modern pianos (or older piano sounding to muddy). Or recording equipments which PetrB has pointed out. Why always blame the pianist?

5) Pianists were better in the old golden age. Havnt we heard that in all ages? And by the way, do you really think that Franz Liszt wasnt interested and engaged in fancy performances and blending technique??


----------



## Vaneyes

stevens said:


> 1) I doubt anyone could distinguish between a pianist of the old golden age and a modern pianists in a blindtest. Such a test would be interesting
> 
> 2) When people say "He or she (usually she)...leaves me cold" or " He/She leaves me dry", I cant resist the thought that it could be this person who utter the opinion who is cold and dry. -Even before he (always a he) heard the piece of music. Well, that is maybe to go a little too far. But, nevertheless, feelings of "cold" and "dry" does not nessesarily say something about the pianist heard
> 
> 3) Different persons has different taste. If you gets cold or dry, others get warm and ...wet. Why cant people accept that?
> 
> 4) Has anyone who criticize a pianists "tone" (metallic sounding) ever thought it could be the piano itself. It could be something wrong whith modern pianos (or older piano sounding to muddy). Or recording equipments which PetrB has pointed out. Why always blame the pianist?
> 
> 5) Pianists were better in the old golden age. Havnt we heard that in all ages? And by the way, do you really think that Franz Liszt wasnt interested and engaged in fancy performances and blending technique??


Re 1, it's not too difficult in some cases, as with the violin. Many of the oldsters put great faith in virtuosity, or shall we say, "showing off".

Re 2, often it means without color...which is usually driven home in masterclasses.

Re 3, I think beyond a certain proficiency, it boils down to interpretation.

Re 4, the pianist can fairly be blamed, because it is ultimately he or she that's responsible for chosing a decent sounding instrument on which to perform. ABM was notorious for cancelling concerts up to the last minute, because he wasn't satisfied with his instrument. Perhaps some of the new breed don't have this meticulous standard. If so, then they should be blamed, as well as the recording producers.

Re 5, greats are present in most, if not every era. Some perhaps haven't got the credit they deserve, but that's life...and personalities...and showbiz, etc.


----------



## Guest

Vaneyes said:


> *Yuja Wang *update.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA Times review, 7.19.14.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ng-hollywood-bowl-review-20140719-column.html


I find that more disgusting than sexy. Artists should look attractive but not like $2 whores.


----------



## Bulldog

Kontrapunctus said:


> I find that more disgusting than sexy. Artists should look attractive but not like $2 whores.


My two cents worth - I don't find these photos disgusting; she looks attractive and sexy. If anything's disgusting, it's your demeaning comment about Yuja Wang's appearance.

Lately, a puritanical mind-set has infiltrated the board. What's all that about?


----------



## KenOC

Kontrapunctus said:


> I find that more disgusting than sexy. Artists should look attractive but not like $2 whores.





Bulldog said:


> Lately, a puritanical mind-set has infiltrated the board. What's all that about?


Well, the Philadelphia Enquirer once referred to her performance there as a "****walk." Sadly, I didn't have tickets!


----------



## Itullian

What happened to class.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Itullian said:


> What happened to class.


-- Or taste, intelligence, and judgement.


----------



## Bulldog

Itullian said:


> What happened to class.


First, I didn't realize that "class" has anything to do with a musical performance. Second, I think Wang exhibits plenty of class. Of course, the term itself has subjectivity written all over it.


----------



## dgee

Exactly bulldog. Some of you gents appear to have some serious problems with how women dress. Please sort it out as it's unpleasant - nobody deserves to see rank mysogyny cropping up in their feed


----------



## KenOC

Bulldog said:


> First, I didn't realize that "class" has anything to do with a musical performance. Second, I think Wang exhibits plenty of class. Of course, the term itself has subjectivity written all over it.


The way Yuja Wang dresses is show biz, pure and simple. And within her repertoire, she is absolutely at the top if her class!


----------



## Itullian

Bulldog said:


> First, I didn't realize *that "class" has anything to do with a musical performance. * Second, I think Wang exhibits plenty of class. Of course, the term itself has subjectivity written all over it.


Right, everyone in shorts and tank tops!!!!!!!!!!!!
YAYYYYYYYYYYYY


----------



## Marschallin Blair

> Originally Posted by Bulldog
> 
> First, I didn't realize that "class" has anything to do with a musical performance. Second, I think Wang exhibits plenty of class. Of course, the term itself has subjectivity written all over it.





Itullian said:


> Right, everyone in shorts and tank tops!!!!!!!!!!!!YAYYYYYYYYYYYY


-- and rape whistles; to _protect_ themselves from those who can't _help_ themselves.


----------



## Itullian

Marschallin Blair said:


> -- and rape whistles; to _protect_ themselves from those who can't _help_ themselves.


For the men too.


----------



## Bulldog

Itullian said:


> Right, everyone in shorts and tank tops!!!!!!!!!!!!
> YAYYYYYYYYYYYY


The music will sound the same no matter what clothing is used.


----------



## KenOC

Marschallin Blair said:


> -- and rape whistles; to _protect_ themselves from those who can't _help_ themselves.


A handgun would be better, and might make the concert more exciting.


----------



## Blancrocher

Bulldog said:


> The music will sound the same no matter what clothing is used.


The last time I went to the opera, I wore jeans and a sweater. I was worried I looked a bit too casual, but I think you're right that the performance wasn't adversely affected.

I credit the professionalism of the singers for not being distracted by it.


----------



## Headphone Hermit

Bulldog said:


> The music will sound the same no matter what clothing is used.


For those close enough to visit it, there is a fantastic exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool by Grayson Perry entitled 'All in the best possible taste' which comprises of six very large tapestries that question the relationship between social class and 'style'. It really IS worth a visit.









The relevance for this thread? Clothing is a reflection of style and style is a reflection of taste. Whether I like a pianist's clothing (or not) should be immaterial for him or her (excuse the pun!)


----------



## Bulldog

KenOC said:


> A handgun would be better, and might make the concert more exciting.


Handguns at concerts? Not a bad idea. Inconsiderate attendees - shoot them all. Don't like the first violinist? Gun him down before he plays another note. Very exciting - make sure there are plenty of docs and body bags.


----------



## KenOC

Bulldog said:


> Handguns at concerts? Not a bad idea. Inconsiderate attendees - shoot them all. Don't like the first violinist? Gun him down before he plays another note. Very exciting - make sure there are plenty of docs and body bags.


We are, after all, classical music listeners. We can exercise restraint. We will only shoot those who need shooting.

But if things get too dull, management can send vendors through the crowd selling hard liquor. Get folks right and proper riled up.

At the very least, people may be more attentive to making sure those cell phones are turned off.


----------



## hpowders

JohannesBrahms said:


> Is it just me, or do modern pianists(Kissin, Lisitsa, Lang Lang, for example) seem to be more about technique rather than music? Their playing seems to have no soul or emotion in it. They are technical masters, no argument there, but it just seems to me like they miss the whole point. I have a book by the great Russian virtuoso Josef Lhevinne called Basic Principles in Pianoforte Playing. In the preface, written by his wife, Rosina, she says that in Russia they were taught that technique is only a means to an end, not an end in itself. However, it seems that modern pianists make technique their end instead of music. Their interpretations seem to be more about being flashy and showy rather than music. Their playing leaves me dry and unaffected. By nature I do not tend to show emotion a whole lot nor do I feel it as keenly as some people. However, I can sense emotion in music and in the older pianists, for example, Rachmaninoff and Horowitz.
> 
> Another thing I was wondering is piano tone. I have listened to older pianists and modern ones, and it seems like the newer ones have very little regard for piano tone. Argerich(yes, sorry to all the Argerich fans) is prime example in this respect. I listened to a recording of her and the very first note she hit made me literally wince with how metallic it sounded. There was no warmness in it at all, it was just bad. The older pianists(Rachmaninoff, Lhevinne, Hofmann) have a wonderful tone in their playing. You can't argue that it is because of the older recording technology, because I heard a recording of Rachmaninoff playing the Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini. It had been remastered wonderfully to the point where you could here the echo in the hall. It almost sounded live. It was in fact Rachmaninoff playing and not a new recording, because I compared it to the version that was not remastered. They were one and the same.
> 
> My question is, does everybody else share my sentiments when it comes to modern pianists? Please keep in mind that this is only my opinion, so don't get angry with me. I do not intend to insult any pianist.


Not only pianists; young violinists too. They all have fabulous techniques, but have little personality, the ones I've heard, anyway.

I've been writing about this often. Folks on TC think I'm nuts, but I will continue to call 'em like I hear 'em.

So, it's not just you. Count me among you!


----------



## Bulldog

hpowders said:


> Not only pianists; young violinists too. They all have fabulous techniques, but have little personality, the ones I've heard, anyway.
> 
> I've been writing about this often. Folks on TC think I'm nuts, but I will continue to call 'em like I hear 'em.
> 
> So, it's not just you. Count me among you!


I think it's important to keep in mind that when we listen to "historical" pianists we're listening to the absolute cream of the crop. When we listen to modern pianists, we pretty much hear all of them that get recorded. A hundred years from now, the only modern pianists we will hear will be that cream of the crop.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

> Originally Posted by Marschallin Blair View Post
> 
> -- and rape whistles; to protect themselves from those who can't help themselves.
> 
> Itullian: For the men too.


To warn who, the rapist? _;D_


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Bulldog said:


> Handguns at concerts? Not a bad idea. Inconsiderate attendees - shoot them all. Don't like the first violinist? Gun him down before he plays another note. Very exciting - make sure there are plenty of docs and body bags.


You've got to be careful with all this police state behavior though. In so doing, people might think you're a legitimate government.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

KenOC said:


> A handgun would be better, and might make the concert more exciting.


SIG Sauer, Baby. . . and don't call me 'baby.'

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Hunt-_ed_ becomes hunt-_ress_.

_Absolutely. _


----------



## Headphone Hermit

Bulldog said:


> I think it's important to keep in mind that when we listen to "historical" pianists we're listening to the absolute cream of the crop. When we listen to modern pianists, we pretty much hear all of them that get recorded. A hundred years from now, the only modern pianists we will hear will be that cream of the crop.


its not just cream that floats on the top .... to paraphrase a football chant from when I was a kid _"<insert name of footballer> walks on water - everyone knows that dogsh*t floats"!_


----------



## Guest

Marschallin Blair said:


> -- Or taste, intelligence, and judgement.


Exactly! I wasn't being "puritanical"--I just see a lack of taste in Yuja's outfits. To me, this outfit is more appropriate concert attire:


----------



## Blancrocher

Kontrapunctus said:


> Exactly! I wasn't being "puritanical"--I just see a lack of taste in Yuja's outfits. To me, this outfit is more appropriate concert attire


As they say, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do." When in LA...


----------



## Bulldog

Kontrapunctus said:


> Exactly! I wasn't being "puritanical"--I just see a lack of taste in Yuja's outfits. To me, this outfit is more appropriate concert attire:


That might be more appropriate if there was a cold breeze hitting her legs. Otherwise, I think it's just a lot of extra material.


----------



## Vaneyes

Kontrapunctus said:


> I find that more disgusting than sexy. Artists should look attractive but not like $2 whores.


$2? She was getting far more than that in the meet 'n greet.


----------



## Vaneyes

Kontrapunctus said:


> Exactly! I wasn't being "puritanical"--I just see a lack of taste in Yuja's outfits. To me, this outfit is more appropriate concert attire:


I want what she wears with her wolves.


----------



## Vaneyes

Blancrocher said:


> The last time I went to the opera, I wore jeans and a sweater. I was worried I looked a bit too casual, but I think you're right that the performance wasn't adversely affected.
> 
> *I credit the professionalism of the singers for not being distracted by it*.


I'll say. And you're not fooling anyone. I located a pic of what you wore on that occasion.


----------



## Guest

Vaneyes said:


> I want what she wears with her wolves.


This?










or this?


----------



## thebakerman

i'm sorry if this is unpopular opinion, but lang lang is pretty bad sometimes i don't even . there are many pianists today who have great technique and play musically. volodos for example his technique is crazy good and he's very expressive


----------



## thebakerman

*don't even recognize what he is supposed to be playing*


----------



## Alvis

Hi, perhaps this performance is to your liking:






Tatia is still a student, but in my opinion shows great promise and passion in her music. This is our latest recording made this weekend. Her channel also has Haydn and Bach: https://www.youtube.com/user/TatiaChikovani

Enjoy!
-Alvis


----------



## Mahlerian

thebakerman said:


> i'm sorry if this is unpopular opinion, but lang lang is pretty bad sometimes i don't even .


Not around here it ain't! Many here think Lang Lang's interpretations are quite poor.


----------



## stevens

Mahlerian said:


> Not around here it ain't! Many here think Lang Lang's interpretations are quite poor.


-Yes, and thats pretty tiresome. I think its a very childish and undeveloped way to rate music. I love to hear a diverse way to play the piano and to interpret music.


----------



## Guest

_The Guardian_ has an editorial on the subject:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2002/sep/05/classicalmusicandopera.artsfeatures


----------



## transparently

What are your opinions on some of the younger pianists, such as Benjamin Grosvenor, Daniil Trifonov and Jan Lisiecki?


----------



## Vaneyes

*Rafal Blechacz* update...going nowhere fast.

http://www.musicaltoronto.org/2014/10/20/concert-review-rafal-blechacz-gold-but-not-burnished/


----------



## WJM

Vaneyes said:


> *Rafal Blechacz* update...going nowhere fast.
> 
> http://www.musicaltoronto.org/2014/10/20/concert-review-rafal-blechacz-gold-but-not-burnished/


Hasn't he already went somewhere?


----------



## iwys

Daniil Trifonov is the most exciting young pianist I have seen in recent years.


----------



## Guest

Perhaps not the most exciting, but Igor Levit seems to be very promising based on his two recent Sony recordings of Beethoven's Late Sonatas and Bach's Partitas.


----------



## Kobak

I was lucky enough to have been to the recitals of both Berezovsky and Kissin, and no they are not only about technique at all. They played with passion and brought the best out of the pieces (Berezovsky was playing a Beethoven sonata + Chopin waltzes + transcendental etudes, Kissin played a Schubert sonata, Scriabin etudes and the Sonata Fantasie). It was stunning.


----------



## DavidA

there are some fine pianists around of the younger generation. there just happen to be more of them today with a stupendous technique! As for personality, when we do get someone with real personality like Lang Lang he upsets people because he rolls his eyes and plays differently amid clouds of dry ice. Or Yuja Wang who wears miniskirts. Now you can't have it both ways! Either we have personality or not!


----------



## PeteW

DavidA said:


> there are some fine pianists around of the younger generation. there just happen to be more of them today with a stupendous technique! As for personality, when we do get someone with real personality like Lang Lang he upsets people because he rolls his eyes and plays differently amid clouds of dry ice. Or Yuja Wang who wears miniskirts. Now you can't have it both ways! Either we have personality or not!


Yes, I can't claim to be a Lang Lang fan, I'm not into the dry ice and all that, too much theatre for my personal taste. For me Maurizio Pollini conveys tremendous emotion in his playing without any unnecessary theatre. 
The short dresses/skirts of Yuja Wang do seem a little odd in the concert setting, but notwithstanding her dress, this didn't seem relevant at her superb performance of Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini (on YouTube).


----------



## aajj

Marc Andre-Hamelin has built an impressive repertoire of great diversity. I especially enjoy his work on modern pieces by Ives (Concord sonata), janacek (Overgrown Path), Scriabin (sonatas) and Schnittke (concerto for piano & strings).


----------



## hpowders

aajj said:


> Marc Andre-Hamelin has built an impressive repertoire of great diversity. I especially enjoy his work on modern pieces by Ives (Concord sonata), janacek (Overgrown Path), Scriabin (sonatas) and Schnittke (concerto for piano & strings).


His Concord Sonata is fine. If you haven't already, try and hear the Easley Blackwood performance. Even better.


----------



## aajj

Thanks, i have not heard Blackwood's performance and will seek it out. 
Aside from Andre-Hamelin, i have heard John Kirkpatrick's.


----------



## PeteW

hpowders said:


> His Concord Sonata is fine. If you haven't already, try and hear the Easley Blackwood performance. Even better.


Thanks, and I would also recommend Marc Andre-Hamelin's performance of Liszt's Un Sospiro (on YouTube and CD/iTunes).


----------



## hpowders

Un Sospiro? 

Sigh!  If you insist!


----------



## aajj

I am not thrilled with younger pianists such as Lang Lang and Yuja Wang and agree with others who complain they are technicians and little more. But they should be given more time - at least until they are well into their 30s - before the final judgment is spoken. 

Not that I am terribly confident they will ever attain the heights of the elder statesmen/women. Wang's recording of Petrushka's piano arrangement left me cold and while she was roughly in her mid 20s at the time, Pollini was only in his early 30s for his landmark recordings in the 1970s. Come to think of it, Argerich was barely in her 20s when she recorded her great 'Debut Recital' album for DG, eons stronger than anything I've heard from Wang. 

As for Lang Lang, all the hype about his Mozart collaboration with Harnoncourt, including a Gramophone cover, and he did not come close to living up to it.


----------



## Vaneyes

aajj said:


> I am not thrilled with younger pianists such as Lang Lang and Yuja Wang and agree with others who complain they are technicians and little more. But they should be given more time - at least until they are well into their 30s - before the final judgment is spoken.
> 
> Not that I am terribly confident they will ever attain the heights of the elder statesmen/women. Wang's recording of Petrushka's piano arrangement left me cold and while she was roughly in her mid 20s at the time, Pollini was only in his early 30s for his landmark recordings in the 1970s. Come to think of it, Argerich was barely in her 20s when she recorded her great 'Debut Recital' album for DG, eons stronger than anything I've heard from Wang.
> 
> As for Lang Lang, all the hype about his Mozart collaboration with Harnoncourt, including a Gramophone cover, and he did not come close to living up to it.


You don't hafta like them, and that's okay. Not my favorites, either, but Big Picture says they're selling tons of recordings and bringing people into the concert halls. CM needs those shots.

PEE-ESS: Bang Bang's Mozart is pretty good.


----------



## aajj

Vaneyes said:


> You don't hafta like them, and that's okay. Not my favorites, either, but *Big Picture says they're selling tons of recordings and bringing people into the concert halls. CM needs those shots*.


Good point and it reminded me that Gustavo Dudamel is doing the same on the baton side.


----------



## PeteW

and for 5 minutes of calm and tranquility listen to Debussy's Reverie played by Noriko Ogawa. Heard on the radio last Friday. Have heard other pianists au this but she did seem to do something special with it.


----------



## PeteW

Spellbinding performance by Katya Apekisheva of Scarlatti F minor Sonata K466. (BBC Radio 3 lunchtime concert today).


----------



## Skilmarilion

Vaneyes said:


> You don't hafta like them, and that's okay. Not my favorites, either, but Big Picture says they're selling tons of recordings and bringing people into the concert halls. CM needs those shots.
> 
> PEE-ESS: Bang Bang's Mozart is pretty good.


Yaa, although I've read some really bad stuff (to put it mildly) re: Lang's latest Mozart album with Harnoncourt!

I think Lisitsa serves a good purpose too as one of the first 'youtube sensations', so to speak.

Though a tad older than the youngest gen, I enjoy Matsuev, Grimaud and Berezovsky a great deal, as well as the dreamy Alice Sara Ott. :tiphat:


----------



## Mandryka

What do you piano pundits think of Daniel-Ben Pienaar? I've been listening to both the Gibbons and the Diabelli Variations and I am impressed by the distinctive silvery tone, the ideas about articulation, and the way he can communicate real love for the music he's playing.

What a bold thing to do, to make the first recording of Gibbon's complete keyboard music, and to use a modern piano for the job!


----------



## Vaneyes

Skilmarilion said:


> ....as well as the dreamy Alice Sara Ott. :tiphat:


Makes a man say, "Damn!"


----------



## Guest

I'd say that Daniil Trifonov is someone to watch. At age 24, he's garnering ecstatic praise, particularly his concerts. I bought his Tchaikovsky Concerto No.1 and was a bit disappointed by its lack of intensity, but his new disc from DG is very good, as is a live recital on Medici TV.


----------



## DavidA

aajj said:


> I am not thrilled with younger pianists such as Lang Lang and Yuja Wang and agree with others who complain they are technicians and little more. But they should be given more time - at least until they are well into their 30s - before the final judgment is spoken.
> 
> Not that I am terribly confident they will ever attain the heights of the elder statesmen/women. Wang's recording of Petrushka's piano arrangement left me cold and while she was roughly in her mid 20s at the time, Pollini was only in his early 30s for his landmark recordings in the 1970s. Come to think of it, Argerich was barely in her 20s when she recorded her great 'Debut Recital' album for DG, eons stronger than anything I've heard from Wang.
> 
> As for Lang Lang, all the hype about his Mozart collaboration with Harnoncourt, including a Gramophone cover, and he did not come close to living up to it.


One problem with the younger generation of pianists is that they are coming into the business with huge competition from the older generation, many of whom are dead but all of whom can be heard on record. Both Wang and Lang Lang are students of Graffmann and have a huge following. Many people listen to them playing classical music which is what it is all about, isn't it? It is terribly easy to despise a younger generation as we are so saturated with pianists from the past. But I believe these two have something to say which is well worth hearing. One of the charges levelled against Pollini (still is) by certain critics is that he was just a fabulous technician nothing more!


----------

