THE PIANIST.COM - making pianists feel at home » piano

The Busoni Piano Competition – When the Jury doesn’t find the Winner…

Roberta Pili — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 23:40:11 +0000

Ferruccio Busoni / Source: Wikipedia

The 58th Ferruccio Busoni piano competition in Bozen just concluded. This was a good opportunity for me to think about different outcomes of the competition. As usual the most interesting aspect of this event was the decision of the jury. This year I noticed again that the members of the jury expressed a vote which was weird and totally out of any kind of quality, intended in both pianistic and artistic sense. Let us look more inside the competition. Antonii Barishevskyi, Anna Bulkina, Tatiana Chernichka were the three finalists of the last competition evening. By listening very carefully to their performance of piano concertos by Liszt, Rachmaninoff and Prokofieff I had enough material to be able to create a profile of each single artistic personality.

The Finalists

Antonii Barishevskyi – The young competitor from Ukraine played Liszt’s piano concerto No.1 for his first final performance with orchestra. I immediately noticed a particular artistic individuality in his playing, when performing Liszt and later also Rachmaninoff piano concerto No.3. He demonstrated to understand the polyphonic structure of the musical score, but his technical skills were not developed enough to use them with a better knowledge for the interpretation. We come to the conclusion that Barishevskyi is still looking for his own pianistic identity, but his approach to a polyphonic playing could guide him to a good development according to the good old German-Russian piano tradition.

Anna Bulkina – The young Russian lady showed her pianistic character right after performing Liszt’s piano concerto No.1. I missed a certain long-vibrating piano sound, her playing was generally too dry, nevertheless her technique could perfectly fit to Prokofieff’s concerto No.2.
Conclusion: Bulkina’s performance was too accurate, no musical shaping of the Prokofieff’s concerto, her musical expression was just based on a technical aspect. Appropriate to Prokofieff’s style, not for the other works of the wide piano literature.

Tatiana Chernichka – Clear technique, appropriate pedalizing, a good team-work with the orchestra. Chernichka performed well both with Liszt’s piano concerto No. 2 and Rachmaninoff concerto No.3. Sometimes her playing was too “nice”. Rachmaninoff Concerto No.3: her interpretation was not creative enough, her playing remained closed but not intrinsic, which is actually a demanding character particularly by Rachmaninoff.

The “other” prize winners

Three further participants were not admitted to the great final stage of the Busoni competition: Alessandro Taverna, Min Soo Hong, Sun-A Park. It was not difficult to guess their artistic profile just by listening to the orchestral performance with Liszt’s piano concertos. Each of them presented a very personal interpretation of the work, according to a romantic Franz Liszt’s style. Particularly Alessandro Taverna showed sometimes polyphonic playing.

The jury’s decision

The international jury at the last Chopin piano competition in Warsaw 2010 (Martha Argerich was joining the jury), expressed an absolutely incompetent vote by awarding Evegeni Bozhanov only fourth prize. His playing was brilliant, of a high-professional polyphonic technique and a maturity in his interpretations.
We have a similar combination at Busoni competition: the jury, with Argerich as a president and other members as Mrs. Stephanovich, showed again their limited art of voting, especially when they did not recognize the polyphonic signs in Barishevskyi’s or even Taverna’s playing. This led finally to a not-awarded first prize.
Ferruccio Busoni was acclaimed and recognized as the most polyphonic pianist all-time. Right for the Busoni competition I would have wished a jury with a deeper pianistic knowledge.

Alfred Brendel – Master of Cloning

Roberta Pili — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:51:24 +0000

Master and disciple meet together. Kit Armstrong is a Taiwanese-British young pianist. A couple of years ago he was invited to visit his mentor Alfred Brendel at his London domicile, to be introduced into the tradition of piano playing and interpretation of the masterworks of the Viennese Classicism.
The team work between Brendel and his pupil shows a totally common and non-exciting piano lesson, which is characterizing the daily routine of a pretty boring piano masterclass at the Music University in Vienna.
Both are working on a repertoire which is devotedly related to the Vienna piano tradition, that we finally should expect, of course, from a master of interpretation of the Viennese Classicism as Brendel is. Talks and questioning about Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, a little Liszt, some known works by Bach belong in conclusion to this ring of selected composers.

Brendel is talking about his young pupil as an “extraordinary talent”. He will be his mentor as long as the young man will be able to express his artistic personality and his passion in piano playing.
A quite interesting TV-documentation, yet not extended enough to discover talent and capabilities of this young pianist, which I could nevertheless recognize. Kit Armstrong’s approach to music is unprejudiced, he is open-minded for new things, his analytic thinking and artistic creativity are can be found in his already clearly expressed compositions. Maybe a new “Glenn Gould”-similar personality is arising? Yes, but his mentor should not be Alfred Brendel.

Brendel’s teaching style reminds me of a typical Viennese piano lesson, hedging around interpretation of Schubert, encouraging to use more pedal for the upper voice without giving exact advice on pedalizing technique, glorification of the beautiful, rounded piano sound, as this topic would be the ultimate truth about piano playing. Why not explaining in details how a really beautiful and cultivated piano sound can be produced?

Dear Mr. Brendel, sound esthetic originates from a profound knowledge of polyphonic playing ( !!! ).
You are mentioning polyphony when teaching your pupil, but any of Your performed works in a polyphonic way is totally outside of my knowledge.
Why?

There is one question without answer:
What is “Viennese piano tradition”? What is “Viennese piano school”?

After 6 years I spent at the Wiener Musikhochschule for further musical education, at that time, I deeply regret about Viennese piano teachers as Paul Badura-Skoda, Hans Petermandl, and, last but not least, Alfred Brendel. They used a teaching method consisting in “cloning” their students.
Not even a single one has any idea about polyphony or polyphonic piano playing, let alone knowledge about the right piano technique. Last was always considered as a tabu, like topics about sex or money…
No dedication into depth, no exploring the truth in music, only a superficial imposing of a pseudo Viennese style has been done. In other words: didactic razzle-dazzle.

“Moaning” on the piano, this is the impression I immediately get when Viennese pianists play Schubert.
Or the typical textual fidelity on Beethoven-Sonatas: “Everything is written in the score, nothing more is required…”
Perhaps we will find out what real Viennese Piano tradition has once represented. But we should get back to Leschetitzky, Paderewski, Schnabel, Moiseiwitsch, Friedman…
And this is another story.

When the piano “is playing” the pianist

Roberta Pili — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:40:25 +0000

Be aware of getting a good piano for your practicing or performances. Otherwise you will be not playing the piano but the piano will be playing you! One of the essential requirements pianists should take care for is their instrument, both for practicing and performing. The well-regulated action of the piano is as important as a perfectly tuned car for a driver of Formula 1. Pianists happen to be often facing some problems with the instrument, particularly regarding the action, which can reveal unevennesses in the technical adjustment of the keyboard in relation to the other workpieces.
It is essential to recognize that the piano action is like the anatomy of the instrument, as arm, wrist, hand and fingers are the anatomy of a pianist. Both mechanisms are based on the leverage principle. Knowing how the action works on this system means understanding our own anatomy by playing.
A well-regulated action has to be sensitive and responsive in order to fit the variety of touch and technical abilities of the player. A professional piano technician usually works in direct relationship and communication with the pianist, in doing so he can operate on the action as far as the pianist is demanding this kind of technical support to meet his own needs. The further positive aspect of this work leads in a balanced tone production. The pianist can then build up his work on a perfect instrument, which is the starting point for a performance on a high artistic level.

Sometimes, having a high-developed piano technique can depend on a perfect piano action. And a perfect piano action depends on a very good technician. If we can find a good technician, we can develod our technique…

Being a competitive pianist

Roberta Pili — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:34:25 +0000

Competitions, competitions, competitions.
Almost every piano student has tried to participate at least in one piano competition during his music education.
A motivating piano teacher is mostly the first impulse to prepare a specific program of different piano works to perform in front of a jury. The more “pressure” the student is receiving from his teacher, the more he will get his adrenalin pumping for the competition. In other words preparing the program for a high-level performance will create the strong feeling of being compared with other competitors’ playing.
Setting those goals as “I want to be the best pianist” truly chracterizes the striving for a perfect performance to show the achieved abilities on the piano. It happens very often in piano competitions that not the best prepared pianist is the winner, but the one who wants to be the winner. The pianist who is able to reflect his strong winning desire through his most expressive playing and interpretation of the selected works will be probably be awarded first prize by the jury.

Do piano competitors want to simply impress the jury, or are they seeking for attention in order to get upcoming engagements through artist’s management, or do they even want to verify their level of stage-fright while performing before an audience?
Each of them will certainly have different personal purposes to decide to go to a competition.

This kind of competitive thinking can be also turned as profitable for the further development as a musician. In fact we can create our own competition in mind to spread the wings of a unique maturing process.
A concert career inevitably involves the performing pianist into a competition with other concert pianists. So we never stop to be compared with our colleagues. But who is the jury in this case? The audience, of course, and maybe the critics as well.

Finally, the true path of this challenge for pianists seems to be only one: being competitive with themselves, working every day to play better and better, searching and researching for new inspiration, improving the communication with the composer, producing an individual standard of excellence.
Pianists! Never be happy of your achievements today, but set them as the essential step to build up your mastery for tomorrow.

2008 A. Rubinstein Competition – Final Round –
Israel Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Uri Segal at Mann Auditorium in Tel Aviv, Israel –
Roman Rabinovich, pianist

Would Beethoven take care of his score?

Roberta Pili — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:31:34 +0000

Beethoven’s 32 piano sonatas represent the ultimate milestone for a pianist. Everybody knows that. Yet there are plenty of different point of views about the right interpretation of this musical testament. Since great pianists began in the nineteenth century to perform Beethoven sonatas as Hans von Bülow, Anton Rubinstein, Artur Schabel, Ferruccio Busoni, just to mention few important names, a tradition about the art of interpretation was born.
Exactly spoken two main streams of performance have been created since then: those who play with extreme fidelity to the written score and those who prefer to let play the spirit of the composer through his work.
For example Anton Rubinstein was known for his fervid playing, his purpose of deliberate piano virtuosity went beyond the score, creating a unique atmosphere for his audience. Rubinstein seemed to directly communicate with the composer while playing, establishing the connection as a re-creator of the composition and offering the completed work in its entire musical, philosophical, even spiritual dimension to the listeners. But he did not always achieve a consensus among the critics and audience of that time, probably because of his daring manner of virtuosic pianism, imposing histrionics and the power of an individual artistic expression.

On the polar side of interpretative tradition of Beethoven sonatas Hans von Bülow should be mentioned at this point. He proposed another model of recital programs, approaching the historical concerts from the intellectual structure line and defining the performance as an eloquent pianist.
Bülow strictly disapproved elementary recital programs with short piano pieces, rather he wanted to develop such an encyclopedic design of the presented works. His performance of the last five piano sonatas by Beethoven on a single concert evening produced enthusiasm and rejection at the same time. He simply caused this kind of reaction because he intended to “educate” the audience to achieve a higher intellectual perception and understanding of Beethoven’s musical message.

The quintessence of Beethoven interpretation probably remains a matter of taste. The reception of Beethoven’s music by the audience has been mostly influenced by the personality of the pianist and his own execution of the works.
Nevertheless the unavoidable question of choosing between a faithful reading of the score and a more creative, even inventive and inspiring interpretation still characterizes the main concern.

By paying attention to the concert scene, I notice that today’s concert pianists seem to follow the musical text adherence as a rule for the interpretation of Beethoven sonatas.
Text adherence does not necessary mean to express the intrinsic being of Beethoven.
The creator of a masterwork is greater than his creation, the mental form of his work contains more than the written indications using notes, dynamic instructions, pedal signs and tempi.
I truly believe that pianists who are seeking for the right interpretation of Beethoven sonatas should try to discover the truth in between the written notes. This truth may appear hidden at first glance, but understanding Beethoven is nothing but a work in progress…

Faithful pianists don’t cheat Beethoven!

Roberta Pili — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:10:51 +0000

Textual fidelity, accurate reading of the score, focussed analyzing of the notes, meticulous reproduction of the dynamic indications, objective reconstruction of the composition, parsimonious use of the pedal, keen performance…we can go on. This could be the description of the way of interpretation offered by most pianists today in matter of Beethoven piano sonatas.

“Beethoven wrote everything in the score!” – some insiders would certainly affirm that. And it is true.
But most pianists seem to forget, or at least, to let expression completely aside when playing Beethoven.
The musical power of communicating was the real language that Beethoven consequently used to express all thinkable human emotions. From anger to serenity, from sadness to happiness, from pain to freedom, from resignation to joy. Each Beethoven sonata is a reflection of his spirit at that particular time of the Opus number and year thereof. When a pianist is playing his sonatas, then he is reading his musical diary. When a pianist has understood those works, then he is experiencing Beethoven.

Meeting Beethoven means facing his spirit. This can be possible only when letting go the inspiration through the expression of his works. Interpretation is not just textual fidelity to the score, it is far more than that. It is discovering the truth between the notes, understanding the meaning of an abstract language like black lines and signs and points on the paper, it is finally enhancing the human power of expression to reach the spiritual need of the soul.
That´s Beethoven, force of spirit.

Unfortunately, most pianists are not aware of this, they prefer to stay attached to the music text, thinking this is interpretation.

Shura Cherkassky – 1909-1995

Roberta Pili — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:39:15 +0000

A terrific singing piano tone, a sublime technique, always serving the purpose of the musical message, and a perfect seducing interpretation.
Alexander Isaakovic Cherkassky, known as Shura Cherkassky, was one of the leading personalities among the generation of great pianists of the 20th century. He started his early piano education with his mother Lydia. Later on he became pupil of Jozéf Hofmann.
His concert career lasted through his long life, in fact he was actively performing until his death 1995.

What made his approach to the piano that singular?
He was able to focus on the keys with astonishing concentrating power, his interpretations were full of inventive musical atmosphere, he always created inspiring piano recitals for the audience.
Shura never played the same piece the same way. Spontaneity and freshness characterized his playing, the purpose of creating the music in every single moment drove this excellent artist to the highest level of musicianship.

One of the best recordings of Shura Cherkassky to be absolutely mentioned is Tschaikovsky Piano Concerto No.1 B-Flat minor. The best Maestoso of this concerto ( first movement ) ever played.
No other other pianist could reach this peak in this particular piece like Shura Cherkassky. Hard to believe, but true.

A tribute to his teacher Hofmann: Kaleidoscope

“Pardon me for sitting down while I play…”

Roberta Pili — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:24:54 +0000

This week our cover story is dedicated to a wonderful pianist, who actually was more a fantastic entertainer: Danish pianist, conductor and comedian Victor Borge.
His funny point about famous piano pieces and telling several music jokes have been characterizing his performances.
It is interesting to notice that Victor Borge enjoyed the best music education when he was a child, his teachers were Liszt´s student Frederic Lamond and Busoni´s pupil Egon Petri.
But he discovered quite early that he didn´t really like the serious concert business, so he rather took the more funny path of a music career.
As he said, “Laughter is the shortest distance between two people”.
If you look at his videos, you will certainly not be able to contain your laughter…Victor Borge was right!
In music it´s often about fun…

2010 – Schumann meets Chopin

Roberta Pili — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:50:53 +0000

Next year 2010 two great romantic composers share the celebration of their year of birth, obviously 200 years later.
Robert Alexander Schumann ( June 8th, 1810 ) and Frédéric François Chopin ( March 1st, 1810 ) marked the Romanticism in its musical and mostly piano tradition for a couple of decades in the middle of the 19th century.
Both defined a very personal style of musical expression.

Schumann’s art of composing was focused on the strong character of German cultural influence “Sturm und Drang”, perpetuating Beethoven’s message of a universal impact of music. Due to his early education, Schumann further developed a more personal style between literary ideas and musical representation. This can be heard in his pieces Papillons Op.2 and mostly in the Carnaval Op.9.
Pianists have generally a problem by interpreting Schumann, especially when they have to follow the indications of Tempi in his piano works. Schumann also characterized his state of mind by regularly changing the speed related to the different thematic expositions. In fact this was the way how the composer perfectly reflected his tormented soul. The pianist should be able to immerge in Schumann’s divided psyche, otherwise the execution of his works will remain nothing but a distorted interpretation which is dispraising the author’s intention.

Chopin was the eternal romantic poet of the black and white keys.
His entire inner being was dedicated to his instrument, the piano. His style is particularly known for the rubato (Italian stolen time ), a special feeling by playing musical phrases in the balance between speeding up and slowing down the tempo.
Chopin’s nature was introverted. Like Schumann he also perfectly reflected this character into his music, creating a very personal and unique art of musical painting.
Chopin was definitely inspired by Bach and Mozart. Bach delivered him the understanding of polyphony and motivic thorough-composition, instead Mozart offered him the simplicity and clarity of a melodic line. Nevertheless Chopin was able to be idiosyncratic enough to personalize his compositions.

Many pianists will get their hands full next year with these two masters.
A question still remains: who will be finally able to pay the most respectful interpretative tribute to Schumann and Chopin?
We will listen full of expectation…

Adiós Alicia

Roberta Pili — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:01:33 +0000

One of the last great personalities of the piano history left us: Spanish pianist Alicia de Larrocha.
I remember very well that I had the pleasure to attend one of her recitals in Vienna about 20 years ago. A little woman came on stage, but a big sound came out of the piano.
She had an incredible charisma and a powerful way of communicating with the audience. Her gesture at the instrument was not that kind of visual flashy demonstration of flying hands over the keyboard, rather a perfect choreography of well-thought movements.
Her playing reminds us of the great old piano tradition, as pianists like Josef Hofmann, Benno Moiseiwitsch, Shura Cherkassky, Vladimir Horowitz, Rosalyn Tureck belong to it.
This tradition was characterized by a charming piano sound, full of color and vibrating nuances, letting sing the instrument as the human voice, expressing all emotions of the music and perfectly translating the composer’s message.
The Grande Dame of the piano, Alicia de Larrocha died on September 25, 2009.
It seems to be a strange but curious coincidence, that she passed away on the same day Glenn Gould would be celebrating his birthday if he still lived…maybe she has been invited to celebrate with him and his / her old piano friends on another world…

The old piano tradition has now definately reached an end. Unfortunately.
Who knows, a new Renaissance will come?