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.

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.

Suggestions of different piano works for a practice session:

Begin:

• J.S.Bach, Well-Tempered Clavier Book II – Prelude and Fugue D Minor BWV 875

Connected work:

• L.v.Beethoven, Piano Sonata D Minor Op. 31 No. 2 – “The Tempest” / First movement

Related works:

• S.Rachmaninoff, Piano Concerto D Minor No.3 Op.30, First movement
• Bach-Busoni, Chaconne / First part to the begin of the D major key section (quasi Tromboni)

You can take these practicing ideas to build a large repertoire. Try this every day, rotating with other pieces and being creative in the combination of them for your session. Be sure to remain highly concentrated during the whole practice, otherwise your work will be unproductive and unreliable.
If you have any questions, don´t wait and ask for help by simply posting a comment.

What is actually the art of the motivic thorough-composition?
Developing a theme is nothing but the quintessence of the composer´s work.
How does it happen?
No matter how often, how slowly, or fast, or even loud or soft the theme is announced, this is a very personal decision of the composer. The motif could even be the emblem, which is representing the entire musical work of the author.

Let´s draw our attention to the striking theme from Beethoven´s fifth symphony:

Score picture: Beethoven – Main theme from the Symphony No.5 Op.67- Source: Wikipedia

This is doubtless one of the most important and innovative themes in the music history. Figuring the steady fight of Beethoven against the fate, this famous opening strongly influenced the further development of the traditional sonata form.
According with insiders, the sonata form represents the central point of the art of composition, especially when considering sonatas and symphonies of the 18th, 19th, and 20th century.
This musical form could be compared to a framework, in which the object is constructed and developed, in this case the musical work as the sonata or the symphony.
Let us get back to our motivic thorough-composition.
If we consider this composing technique as the composer´s logo, we could fervently be tempted to ask the question, whether the way to a successful interpretation drives us either to remaining true to the score or true to the masterwork.
In answer to this question we should remind of the issue of this essay.
The motivic thorough-composition is hearable.
To make this happen we need to apply a particular art of piano playing, which goes far beyond the usual technical abilities.
The control of the kinesthetic feeling only represents the fundamental skill to reach the effective technical abilities on the instrument.
To achieve this goal means the comprehension of accurate analysis and synthesis of the composition´s structure.
The interpreter is identifying himself with the composition and his playing is inevitably modified. Let us think again about the symphony, the motivic thorough-composition includes the complete identification with the creative thought of the composer.
So it can be affirmed that “symphonically” thinking is equal to “symphonically” feeling, and last means “symphonically” playing or reproducing.
The motivic development of a musical work is directly related to a symphonic-structrured knowledge: deeply understanding how a theme is developing and evolving through the way of polyphonic manner.
A pianist receives the basic education in polyphony studying J.S.Bach, particularly the Preludes and Fugues from the Well-tempered Clavier.

Further steps in polyphony can be pursued in the 32 piano sonatas by Beethoven.
Continuing the research of mysteries and enigmas of the polyphonic style can guide us to works by Chopin, Brahms and Rachmaninoff. When discovering Prokofieff´s music we can actually meet the union of polyphony and polyrhythm.

As a conclusion we can say that the circle always closes, in life, in the universe, as well as in music. Music is the language of universe, and universe is polyphony.
Once we understand polyphony, we even understand the motivic thorough-composition.

Thepianist.com starts with Glenn Gould, the eccentric Canadian pianist who certainly set a milestone in the history of the piano and pianists.

A large source of information has been written, spoken, broadcasted about Glenn Gould.
It will not be necessary to put more information about him, as it is already available. And everybody knows that there are controversial opinions about his interpretations.
Let us simply remember Glenn as someone who wanted to change the old patterns of classical music, to bring more life in the masterworks of great composers, to suggest new and original approaches to the score.

Glenn´s personal note was doubtless his conducting the music he was playing (when one of his hands was free, of course) and, last but not least, his permanent humming over the notes, the phrases or the bass-line, whatever he thought it was right to do.

Another personal note was also his polyphonic playing.
He perfectly understood how to study the score, how to read the voices in the context of the composition, how to analyze the structure and finally how to play like a string quartet or even an orchestra.

My personal recommendation to all pianists:
Don´t try to be a second Glenn Gould, the world has already one and he is enough. But you can take him as an example.
You can also decide to continue his purpose.
Be yourself, like Glenn was, and your style will develop in the right direction.
“Thank you Glenn, for showing us what to do, what not to do, how to do it, how not to do it.”