Piano Forum
Piano Board => Performance => Topic started by: fingersflying on February 04, 2007, 06:47:03 PM
-
-
this shows 11 year olds CAN be good pianists and prooves it IS possible for me to play like that
-
m
-
this shows 11 year olds CAN be good pianists and prooves it IS possible for me to play like that
If you are forced by your parents to practice 14 hours a day, which you aren't because you spend way too much time on this forum. You fail.
-
this shows 11 year olds CAN be good pianists and prooves it IS possible for me to play like that
Indeed, but this 11 year old posted a vid.
-
Greetings.
That is nothing short of amazing, especially for an 11 year old.
-
Great talent, but kinda annoying that he didn't seem to acknowledge the applause.
-
I feel sorry for him.
-
Some additional info from the Shenzhen Daily:
"Zhang began studying piano at the age of 3 and was soon recognized for his early talent in music. After performing works by Bach at the U.N.’s Folk Art Committee, Zhang was proclaimed “a peculiar music talent” by the U.N. officials.
At the age of 5, Zhang received high praises for his concert in Shanghai Concert Hall. At 11, he succeeded in mastering 12 demanding etudes by Frederick Chopin in 16 days. Completing a solo tour in Shenzhen, Beijing, Shenyang and Nanjing, Zhang received wide acclaim for his advanced skill and expressive performance.
In 2002, Zhang won the first prize for piano in the 4th International Tchaikovsky Competition for Young Musicians in Xiamen, capital of Southeast China’s Fujian Province. At the mere age of 12, Zhang was the youngest winner in the competition’s history.
Two years later, Zhang moved on to defeating adult opponents, winning the golden prize and three special prizes in the Chopin Piano Concerto Competition at the Asian International Chopin Competition in Japan. The win made him known as a “real talent” internationally. Many renowned pianists admitted Zhang’s true skill when he performed in the 49th Poland International Chopin Festival. The audience demanded four encores.
Last year Zhang applied to the Curtis Institute of Music, a famous music institute in the United States, and distinguished himself among 115 candidates from all over the world. Zhang was the only Chinese student admitted. He now studies under Gary Graffman, celebrated piano master, piano educator, Lang Lang’s teacher, and former president of the institute."
I think he's the real deal.
-
yep.
good playing too.
-
I feel sorry for him.
Why?
-
If you are forced by your parents to practice 14 hours a day, which you aren't because you spend way too much time on this forum. You fail.
i only practice like 4 hours a day
-
this shows 11 year olds CAN be good pianists and prooves it IS possible for me to play like that
i only practice like 4 hours a day
We shall continue to dispute your claim until you prove it. End of story.
Phil
-
TERRIBLE musicality.
Let's hope he improves.
-
TERRIBLE musicality.
Let's hope he improves.
Are you being sarcastic, because according to you there is no such thing as a "best" interpetation, and that the quality of a pianists is only determined by the speed at which he executes pieces, and what a coincidence, his Chopin's Opus 10 no2 meets that criteria.
-
Why?
Cause 11 year olds shouldnt go around acting like concert pianists.
-
He's still young, give him time and he will improve....
hopefully.
It sure is an amazing video to watch, but he probably practices 10 hours a day, minimum.
-
He's still young, give him time and he will improve....
hopefully.
It sure is an amazing video to watch, but he probably practices 10 hours a day, minimum.
what do you mean but
-
Cause 11 year olds shouldnt go around acting like concert pianists.
Why? Being a concert pianist is irrespective of age, is it not? And surely from all those competitions and recitals he is no longer 'acting' like a concert pianist, but rather he is one.
-
Why? Being a concert pianist is irrespective of age, is it not? And surely from all those competitions and recitals he is no longer 'acting' like a concert pianist, but rather he is one.
It's unnatural.
-
And going against what's natural is frowned upon? What happened to individuality and breaking the mould? We shouldn't always be conservative :)
-
Are you being sarcastic, because according to you there is no such thing as a "best" interpetation, and that the quality of a pianists is only determined by the speed at which he executes pieces, and what a coincidence, his Chopin's Opus 10 no2 meets that criteria.
Oh man, great - how true !!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
It's unnatural.
If natural means common or ordinary, yes, he is definitely unnatural. That is the reaction that prodigious talent always evokes. Too bad we can't all be that unnatural. What is natural is his total lack of mannerisms and posturing for effect. That is so refreshing.
I see from his bio that he has the same teacher that taught Lang Lang at Curtis. Let's hope that he doesn't pick up any of those off-putting mannerisms that makes Lang Lang so unbearable to watch.
By the way, anyone know how we can get his performance of Opus 10, No. 1? That should be quite amazing.
Rich Y
-
Oh, well...the litlle prodiges. Why so much noise about them? I never did listen to a child that convinces me musically. For five minutes at best, it's interesting to see the circus show, but then it's so boring, like many of grown up pianists, by the way.
My point is: did you ever noticed one child because of his/her playing of Chopin's Prelude 15, for instance? I used that as an example of a remarkable masterpiece, with no virtuosistic display at all. If you listen to Mrs. Argerich playing that, especially live, it is quite a rare moment of your life. Otherwise, you want to ask the pianist to shut up for the sake of the composer's memory. In the case of all prodiges I knew, beyond the fireworks, there was nothing.
Of course there are many good, very good, outstanding pianists who were prodiges, but they are what they are because of their further achievements, not because of her early days. I knew some prodiges during these years, and my feelings now about them are of preocupation. If a child is able to manage (read: his/her parents are) the joy of childhood and the earnestness of being a professional, I think there is no problem at all. The things get their worst side when either the child become a useless person or a useless pianist when grown up.
Among those I knew one, that was acclaimed as an enfant prodige by the local newspapers, did quit playing at his late teens. Now he is an engineer (and, as far I know, did never play the piano again). Once he told about his experience and its results of loneliness and sorrow to him. On the other hand, one friend of mine (that give his first recital at age 10 or so) finished it's undergraduate in piano and now is leaving for Europe to play some recitals and pursue his career. He is the first to admit that his playing in his early teens were dull at best, but also that the early starting was of great help to him.
Anyway, if you let me one more thought about the "dark side" of this, and what seems to happen with the little ones, I think that almost every child may have fun playing the piano. But about a professional career, I'm really convinced that is more about the parents and teacher wishs than the child's. Here's to me the source of preocupation: how can someone be sure that a person will not waste his/her childhood for nothing? There is no possible point of return after, if something goes wrong. It's a responsability that I never felt confortable to assume. Play the piano for fun is one thing: spend eight or more hours a day over it is a job.
Best!
-
Just one remark about my point: the greatest of all prodiges, Herr Mozart, is an example. What of his works before his twenties is really remarkable and could be considered a major contribution by him? If he did quit composing when he was fifteen, we probably never knew who he was. Perhaps, a musical curiosity of the pre-classical Vienna. Of course, I guess that the fact the he had the entire life devoted to music made a lot of difference when he was able to compose his major works, i.e., if he begun composing at age 25 certainly the results would not be the sonatas K.330's for instance.
Best!
-
And going against what's natural is frowned upon? What happened to individuality and breaking the mould? We shouldn't always be conservative :)
Its not that im amazed at his extreme talent, i just think the youth is such a wonderful time wich only comes once in life, and it should be used for other things then piano. It should be filled with playing with friends and learning about lots of different aspects of life. Not only the piano keys. This kid has been brought up since age 3 to learn piano, and while looking at him speeding away with his etudes i cant help but think about all the things he must have missed as a young(er) boy. But yeah, maybe i am too conservative ;D
-
Its not that im amazed at his extreme talent, i just think the youth is such a wonderful time wich only comes once in life, and it should be used for other things then piano. It should be filled with playing with friends and learning about lots of different aspects of life. Not only the piano keys. This kid has been brought up since age 3 to learn piano, and while looking at him speeding away with his etudes i cant help but think about all the things he must have missed as a young(er) boy. But yeah, maybe i am too conservative ;D
Then all we can do is wish that his talent came easy and not at the expense of his enjoyment of childhood. :)
-
Its not that im amazed at his extreme talent, i just think the youth is such a wonderful time wich only comes once in life, and it should be used for other things then piano. It should be filled with playing with friends and learning about lots of different aspects of life. Not only the piano keys. This kid has been brought up since age 3 to learn piano, and while looking at him speeding away with his etudes i cant help but think about all the things he must have missed as a young(er) boy. But yeah, maybe i am too conservative ;D
why must we always assume that talent/genius comes at the expense of something, rather than on top of everything?
is it not possible that BECAUSE OF HIS TALENT, he learnt a full opus of chopin etudes in a few days, performed them and then just took a magnifying glass and burnt some ants with his friends?
and why must we assume extraordinary prodigy achievements come only at the hands of a forceful parent?
in a recent masterclass Wen-Yu Shen (the 16yr old guy in the rach3 video) was asked by the father of a young student: "what should i do to beg my 5 yr old child to practise?"
Shen dismissed the question with: "at that age, i was the one who begged my father for a piano."
-
Dear Chromatickler:
why must we always assume that talent/genius comes at the expense of something, rather than on top of everything?
(...)
and why must we assume extraordinary prodigy achievements come only at the hands of a forceful parent?
(...)
Because that's the way it normally is, don't you agree? That's the rule, the rare exceptions are very fortunate ones.
Best!
-
The mechanics of the piano can be learned to a certain degree, with varying levels of exertion on the part of the student.
The musicianship & interpretative abilities required of a musician are more innate, and can be expanded to a very limited degree through study of harmony, counterpoint, the playing of others etc.
It's clear that this kid is a total anomaly in the realm of inborn mechanical proficiency. There's no denying his superior talents in this regard. He sounds like Pollini.
Musicianship and interpretation? Again, he sounds like Pollini...he has rattled of a 'garden variety' rendition of these pieces, where such a rendition is not terribly inspirational in musical terms. His value as a musician is up in the air. It's clear he has the potential to become another Yevgeny Kissin. But another Josef Hofmann? We'll just have to wait to find out the extent of his gifts.
-
I don't understand why there is such a huge association with an innability to introduce artistic ideas into pieces of music from those that offer an outstanding and extraordinarily advanced technical prowess is a given piece(s). If you haven't checked his age, it is 11. If he is able to execute such material at that age, to say nothing of the amount of time he learned it in, he is most definately able to carry out musical sense into the music, the quality of which of course will come with time. Overall I think that anyone's criticism at the lack of musicality in a performance is just another way of expressing jealously and contempt.
It's clear that this kid is a total anomaly in the realm of inborn mechanical proficiency. There's no denying his superior talents in this regard. He sounds like Pollini.
What is not an anomaly? The "normal" are those that do not want to practice, do not want to learn, and thus generally do not accomplish anything. There are those that do accomplish, so therefore they should also be anomalies. I think that here is no such thing as an anomaly. If something occurs, it is due to certain reasons and is therefore natural. This child is without a doubt amazing.
Musicianship and interpretation? Again, he sounds like Pollini...he has rattled of a 'garden variety' rendition of these pieces, where such a rendition is not terribly inspirational in musical terms. His value as a musician is up in the air. It's clear he has the potential to become another Yevgeny Kissin. But another Josef Hofmann? We'll just have to wait to find out the extent of his gifts.
His playing can indeed be compared to that of Pollini. I don't know how much more waiting you want to endure. Perhaps him being able to perform all of the etude literature in a couple of months should convince you of his talent. Seriously, if he is able to perform all of the Chopin etudes at age of 11, and learn them in only a couple of weeks, it already shows the extent of his gifts.
-
You're right that regardless of talent, a pianist who works hard at his music is generally a much better interpreter at 30 than 13.
I'm not suggesting that this precocious little dude does not have the capability to be a creative interpreter of piano music...I'm merely saying that, to my tastes and after observation of his consummate skills at the miraculous age of 11(!), he is NOT YET a creative interpreter of piano music.
My initial post intended to judge as fairly as possible where his performance stands in the scheme of things.
That is all.
-
I understand. However I think that any sort of judgement can be withheld as the boy is only 11. And more so than that, how can there be any sort of musical display in pieces that aren't technically secure. Now that he knows the pieces, he can spend more time developing them as artistic masterpieces.
-
NB: the user I responded to edited his post heavily after my reply.
There are thousands upon thousands of super-talented-bucket-loads-of-potential child-prodigies out there. Statistics alone prove that hardly any of these little guys ever make an impact on our understanding of the repertoire; therefore, it makes sense to be careful about trumpeting every prodigy that comes along as the next Josef Hofmann.
EDIT:
I understand. However I think that any sort of judgement can be withheld as the boy is only 11. And more so than that, how can there be any sort of musical display in pieces that aren't technically secure. Now that he knows the pieces, he can spend more time developing them as artistic masterpieces.
That's a totally valid opinion. For his sake (and ours), I hope that he is able to turn them into artistic masterpieces. :)
-
I see. Perhaps not every prodigy makes a true impact of our preconceived ideas concerning the musicality of certain pieces, but surely claiming such prodigies as "empty" or "dull" isn't really auspicious as clearly their talent suggests otherwise. However I see why you would say that he may not be the next super artist, despite his technique. Its always fascinating however to see such outstanding accomplishments.
-
1. Great ability doesn't guarantee great art.
2. having preconceived notions about the interpretation of a certain piece in no way precludes being totally enraptured by a totally original interpretation. to my taste, ths playing was not original (and so was not great interpretation).
-
1. Great ability doesn't guarantee great art.
True, it certainly makes it alot easier though.
2. having preconceived notions about the interpretation of a certain piece in no way precludes being totally enraptured by a totally original interpretation. to my taste, ths playing was not original (and so was not great interpretation).
Yeah I guess you are right. Not every interpretation has to be completely unique.
-
is it not possible that BECAUSE OF HIS TALENT, he learnt a full opus of chopin etudes in a few days, performed them and then just took a magnifying glass and burnt some ants with his friends?
To me, these two things dont go together. I should be careful saying anything about this kid since i dont know anything about him personally, but when reading about his past it just seems it has always been piano for him. No matter what, talent alone cant make you learn chopin op.10 in 16 days, you have to have a background of much hard work and countless hours of practice.
Unless he is superman.
-
No matter what, talent alone cant make you learn chopin op.10 in 16 days, you have to have a background of much hard work and countless hours of practice.
Okay, but that sounds, as if practising piano could not be fun. I can't agree with that.
Practising piano, especially when I got new sheet music, was one of the best fun, I could think of. If you can learn and play Chopin Etudes like this genious kid, what fun must that be!!! I don't think, that he is taken away joy of living because of his talent, but that he has extraordinary joy and fun - compared to "normal" kids.
Assuming, that he is not forced to sit at the piano because his parents are that ambitious.
But in this case, he never would be able to play as natural and convincing as he does.
-
Superboy, possibly 8)
-
if he did learn all of op10 and 25 plus the 3 additional etudes in 16 days, which i doubt, i think he very well might make a large impact on the world stage. i really liked his performance, and, if i stopped myself from having any pre-concocted notions about the playings of a 11 yr old, and changed to another window, i could imagine an adult professional concert pianist at least.
his 10/5 is especially impressive to me, even if it has little originality.
as to why i doubt he could do it... well thats 27 etudes in 16 days :o what can a professional manage? probably could do one a week. just.
-
Okay, but that sounds, as if practising piano could not be fun. I can't agree with that.
Practising piano, especially when I got new sheet music, was one of the best fun, I could think of. If you can learn and play Chopin Etudes like this genious kid, what fun must that be!!! I don't think, that he is taken away joy of living because of his talent, but that he has extraordinary joy and fun - compared to "normal" kids.
Assuming, that he is not forced to sit at the piano because his parents are that ambitious.
But in this case, he never would be able to play as natural and convincing as he does.
Of course practicing can be fun. But a child needs variation. If the only thing you think about when you are that young is 88 black and white keys, then i feel something is not right.
-
How do you know he hasn't taken a vacation right after the performance? He might not even work all day to achieve such standart. I think practicing 16 hours a day is highly unrealistic. I have a hard time getting it above 7 hours a day and I am 18, and can surely say that practicing piano is the most enjoying thing I do. I spent a lot of time on exercises and etudes and am not bothered by the notion that they are not aesthetically fun. Spending a full day on the piano for an 11 year old is unrealistic, as at that age he would probably revolt and not practice at all. Therefore he must be practicing only a few hours a day, maybe more. He probably is taking a vacation right after the performance so I doubt he is feeling much stress.
-
Dear DS:
(...) Overall I think that anyone's criticism at the lack of musicality in a performance is just another way of expressing jealously and contempt.
(...)
I must say that it's not. I don't speak for anybody else, but to myself this lack of musicality is annoying, and it really exists. Yourself said that he "is only 11" and that's the point: he's a child, acts like a child, thinks like a child, and - surprise! - performs like a child. Jake compared his interpretation to Pollini's, and I think that is the major problem with the prodiges: you can learn to move fast your fingers and do some tricks in a short span of time if you have the gift, as the case with this younger. However, it's impossible to acquire a deep knowledge of music and art is the same time. In my first post in this thread, I said that this sort of performance is not interesting as much as it happens with adult pianists. I really think that the battle "musicianship x techinique" is non-sense, because one can't go on without the other.
Let's exit the "prodige field" for a while. The incapacity to communicate is a lack of a great number of musicians, professionals included. The incapacity to render a score in a proper and creative way also is. And, last but not least, the incapacity to have significant insights about the composer and his/her music.
Furthermore, you have the market as it is. Let's suppose two situations: a professional pianist with brilliant technique, able to manage the Chopin studies with bravura, but with an interpretation that bring nothing new, surprising or interesting. Most of people will shout out loud their bravo, and s/he'll probably have positive critiques. In the other hand, a pianist playing the same studies and sounding full of proper ideas and proposing a fresh version, but with flaws and nothing out of ordinary about his/her technique. The people will probably want their money back.
I have no interest in both. We have so many good players of the standard repertory that another one, especially when it's just an "echo" of great recordings, is useless.
About this particular young talent, that's just and precise what he is: a talent. Perhaps in ten or fifteen years we will be commenting his outstanding level of performance and musicianship. Unfortunately, is much more probable that he will either don't get there or have a nervous breakdown, or both, as happened with so many prodiges before. In the case he became a professional, there is a high probability that his interpretation don't change so much. It's just to look around in the competitions: lots of talents and so few interesting performances.
A remark about his parents: is almost certain that they promote his career with personal interests. That's the way it is. Furthermore, he's chinese, doesn't he? The cultural and social aspects of youth there are very different from what we know in the western world. To be honest, I don't know if in China things are exactly the way they are in Japan, but in this country, it's not unnusual to a person grow from his/her early childhood "to be something", and when it fails, it's the end. Literally.
(...)
Therefore he must be practicing only a few hours a day, maybe more. He probably is taking a vacation right after the performance so I doubt he is feeling much stress.
Excuse me, but I think you're too optimist. Unless he is a remarkable exception: 1) he is playing several hours a day, probably with a direct and close supervision; 2) he doesn't have much time to do whatever else, due to the combination of formal education and piano study; 3) he is taking a rehearsal to be prepared to the next recital, since it is probably part of the family's budget.
Finally, I know that there are these "remarkable exceptions" but they are very few, and - again - are only young talents.
Best!
-
Yes desorde, i feel the same way, and you put it so nicely in words ;)
-
The difficult thing to tell with this kind of prodigy is - where does the potential end and end product begin.
Is he a shower or a grower?
Will his (admittedly impressive) flaccid member really make any increase in propotion upon arousal?
Too many people listen to prodigies and think 'wow, I wonder how good he'll be in 10 years time'.
I'd estimate that in most cases, their technical abilities are around 95% developed and a plateau will be reached.
-
Perhaps it would help to state upfront which standard you are adhering to when assessing a performance: age-relevant or age-irrelevant. It seems that much of the discussion pertains to holding this performance to professional standards (age-irrelevant), all the while considering the young age as somewhat a handicap. In other words, if you are ready to use a professional performance yardstick, do not bring age into the equation.
On a separate note, I have yet to hear a wholly satisfying performance of Op. 10 no. 3 ......
-
Too many people listen to prodigies and think 'wow, I wonder how good he'll be in 10 years time'.
I'd estimate that in most cases, their technical abilities are around 95% developed and a plateau will be reached.
I agree with that. I think he will "grow" more in a musical way than in a technical way. I do think this kid will have a repertoire list to be scared of, in a few years (especially regarding the fact that he learned the Chopin Etudes in 16 days).
-
i think that what nicco is trying to say is that his future has been decided for him, before he can even decide for himself. and he may well be saying right now "yes, i want to be a concert pianist". this may be the very thing he does want to do, but he may discover later (when it's too late to turn back to something else) that he doesnt want to go through with it and all the other things he may have wanted to do in his youth will have just passed away.
i personally dont think he will know what he really wants to do in life until he has experienced life properly or reached a certain age.
the other side of the argument is that he may well only be practicing some 3 or 4 hours a day and still enjoying the fruits of life in different ways. who knows?...
-
Yes he's ok for his age but really why is there always a major fuss everytime someone posts the chopin etudes. That an 11 year old can play them all isnt uncommon. In the world of professional piano thats very average!! He'd usually be expected to polish off a good number of liszt ones at this stage too and have at least half the beethoven sonatas learnt.
-
Yes he's ok for his age but really why is there always a major fuss everytime someone posts the chopin etudes. That an 11 year old can play them all isnt uncommon. In the world of professional piano thats very average!! He'd usually be expected to polish off a good number of liszt ones at this stage too and have at least half the beethoven sonatas learnt.
Some one who can learn JUST the opus 10#2 up to performance level in 2 weeks (let alone the other 23 etudes) should be able to EASILY SIGHTREAD the complete beethoven sonatas as well as the complete Liszt Etudes with the exception of feux follets.
-
Learning works up to performance level in a short period of time and easy sightreading are completely unrelated. One can learn a work up to performance level in a short time without the ability to read music, and one can easily sightread a piece but not necessarily learn it to performance level. They are completely unrelated.
-
well said henrah. And dont forget, Beethoven and Chopin are totally different styles of writing - its like moving form one local dialect to another. Fluency across the board comes with age and maturity..which is why so few recordings of prodigies ever survive! Most admit to being embarresed by their early atempts at repertoire in their youth - with odd notable exceptions.
-
Learning works up to performance level in a short period of time and easy sightreading are completely unrelated. One can learn a work up to performance level in a short time without the ability to read music, and one can easily sightread a piece but not necessarily learn it to performance level. They are completely unrelated.
If you were actually bold enough to assume he learnt the chopin etudes in that amount of time WITHOUT SHEETMUSIC then in turn he would not need sheet music to 'sightread' the complete beethoven sonatas and liszt etudes, and likely ON FIRST HEARING in this case.
otherwise my statement holds true
-
The former comment of mine was intended to be exaggerated (not falsely) and at the complete other end of the spectrum in comparison to my latter comment, simply for emphasis.
What I'm trying to say is that the ability to learn a work in a small period of time is not directly linked to the ability to sightread well. I myself can learn a passage or two in one practice session lasting no longer than 20-30mins of a Rachmaninov prelude (32/12 recently - not a whole work, I have yet to train myself to do that), and my sightreading skills are worse than poor. I rely on note visualisation and what my hands do and where they go. I read a passage, play it slowly making sure I play the correct notes, then from there I can remember the notes I played and can practice it without the music until I get it correct.
That's not to say that a quick learning ability and a good sightreading ability help each other (a great pianist would be good in both areas), it's saying that they are unrelated and don't rely on each other. Without one, a pianist can still learn, play and perform.
-
You guys give him too much credit. In the quote about him, it says he learnt chopin 12 studies in 16 days, not the complete studies, but the complete op.10 studies. Still amazing, but possible.
-
thierry
can you play the piano? :)
-
why must we always assume that talent/genius comes at the expense of something, rather than on top of everything?
is it not possible that BECAUSE OF HIS TALENT, he learnt a full opus of chopin etudes in a few days, performed them and then just took a magnifying glass and burnt some ants with his friends?
and why must we assume extraordinary prodigy achievements come only at the hands of a forceful parent?
in a recent masterclass Wen-Yu Shen (the 16yr old guy in the rach3 video) was asked by the father of a young student: "what should i do to beg my 5 yr old child to practise?"
Shen dismissed the question with: "at that age, i was the one who begged my father for a piano."
Well said.
I don't think he's forced to play, he's too good. He loves it. If you can't hear that...
He's amazing and the naysayers should get over it.
-
He's actually very good. Clean and fluid, with nothing fancy. I think that's as good as you could expect by somebody so young.
As for being 'forced' to play, as if kids knew any better? What's the alternative, having him fall for mass corporate brainwashing? I will never understand why people today think kids should have the right to choose their own path, when it's clear they are too immature and ignorant to make any kind of decision. Our modern liberal society is turning parenting into a nightmare...
-
You guys give him too much credit. In the quote about him, it says he learnt chopin 12 studies in 16 days, not the complete studies, but the complete op.10 studies. Still amazing, but possible.
thierry , just **** *** **** **.
you are here for years, and still haven't posted any video or recording of your "prodigious abilities"
-
I feel sorry for him.
I completely agree. To be able to play at this level, the poor kid must have been practising almost all day. At age 11 (If he is actually 11) and practising that much, he probably has no other hobbies, no social life, and very oppressing parents.
Also, all his staccatos are played from the air and generate surface noise, a fairly basic error. Hmm.....
-
Some of us do have natural ability. It's a fact. Deal with it.
-
Ouch, anyone else cringe at his posture?
-
omg here we go again.
another asian prodigy.
its always the same story, and hardly any of them turn out to be huge stars.
"started lessons at 6 months... first recital at age 3.. . then played islamey at age 7... does 12 hours practice a day... doesnt have a social life... accepted into chinese school of music age 9"
why is this guy any different to all the other asian prodigies that go round playing chopin studies? his playing is completely robotic, you can hear that the musicality does not come from inside.
a real prodigy is someone that is really musical at a very young age. technique can be learnt, it doesnt take a lot of talent, just discipline. and clearly this boy practices a great number of hours every day, and has done since a very early age.
to be honest, he's lucky that he has the technical facility to play these pieces at his age.
but at the same time i feel sorry for him because he's missing out on leading a normal childhood .
-
um..............
-
um..............
Good point.
-
my thoughts exactly! :P
-
Good point.
GOOD POINT?
-
um..............
um.... ? um what?
-
but at the same time i feel sorry for him because he's missing out on leading a normal childhood .
And what is a "normal" childhood?
-
ahaha the 10-4 is pure comedic genius. Firstly, the mei-ting ripoff ending, then the random second he threw into the bass.
-
Okay, but that sounds, as if practising piano could not be fun. I can't agree with that.
Practising piano, especially when I got new sheet music, was one of the best fun, I could think of. If you can learn and play Chopin Etudes like this genious kid, what fun must that be!!! I don't think, that he is taken away joy of living because of his talent, but that he has extraordinary joy and fun - compared to "normal" kids.
I agree totally with counterpoint!
And don't agree with any of you condescending oppressors.
The concept is what makes you happy.
You're assuming, ignorantly I must add, that fun is determined by age so that certain things are fun for everyone at a certain age and others are fun for everyone at another age.
Typical modern and inhumane thinking, what nonsense life would be if that was true.
But the point is that fun is relative and we have different ideas of what fun and meaningful activities are.
For example my cousin said that his friend never go at parties and he is always in the room reading something so they was trying to convince my friend to finally have fun.
Turned it out that reading is the quintessence of fun for that guy and going at parties is the quintessence of boredome. My cousin in trying to project his idea of fun on this guy was actually try to bore him and disrupt his fun.
This guy is having his fun and what other kids may find fun is just boredome for him.
I can relate with this well, I remember when I was that age and I remember each of us classmates had different ideas of fun. I loved listening to radio, I had a passion for radios and spent a lot of time with it. At the same time I hated other things that other boys found fun.
This applies to everyone. Dancers, athletes, singers, actors ... it doesn't make a difference what their age is. They have a passion and the greatest joy of life is spending the most time possible with their passion. If some busy-bodies like those in this forum would, in the name of letting him have a normal kid life (whatever this nonsense means), preventing him from spending as much time as possible with his/her passion you would not really have saved him from an abuse, you were abusing him in the worst way possible.
After all the road to hell is always paved with good intentions.
I believe there's nothing "normal" in the life that parents nowadays want their children to live. My father got more from his life by growing in a time when you needed to get responsible soon and make a lot of experiences since a young age including poverty, death and rearing your young sibling. John Holt called the way children live nowadays a "prison garden".
I would add a prison garden of mediocrity when you're expected to live in chronic triviality and banality and be treathened if you attempt to make your existence less bland and pointless, even at such young age.
-
And what is a "normal" childhood?
what does it matter ? you and i both know that he doesnt have one
-
what does it matter ? you and i both know that he doesnt have one
There's no such a thing as a "normal childhood" because there are only individual childhoods, actually individual lives from birth to death. Any attempt to call a way to live abnormal compared to other individual standards is just pathetic.
This kid has a totally normal childhood (assuming what he is doing is his choices and not coercion), HIS childhood ... just like you had mine and you had yours. All the rest, as I already said, is mental masturbation of the worst kind from the worst kind of busybodies.
I don't regret having spent my childhood spending much of the time with my passions and hobbies for how strange or weird they might have seemed. I don't regret the loneliness either. In fact that was my idea of having fun and living my life at its best and anyone forcing me to give that up and do "normal activities that normal kids do" (a ridicolous pathetic concept in itself) would have actually destroyed my fun and ruined my childhood.
All you have to do is ask the kid and stop assuming!
-
As for being 'forced' to play, as if kids knew any better? What's the alternative, having him fall for mass corporate brainwashing? I will never understand why people today think kids should have the right to choose their own path, when it's clear they are too immature and ignorant to make any kind of decision. Our modern liberal society is turning parenting into a nightmare...
That is the most creepy thing I have read in a while.
If a parent believe a child choice is not being in his best interest then they should discuss it. And after all only the individual can know what his in his best intention.
Remember the road to hell is paved with good intention.
But brainwashing and total coercion is never good at any age.
Ironically with your comment you show to be way more naive and immature than those kids you talk about, not matter your age.
You naively assume that a parent will always choose what's best for the child.
But how can a parent know what path is the best for the child, only the child can know.
The majority of artists did that against the wills of their parents, and if it wasn't for their sense of free-will they would have never been in such a career.
Parents have the bad habit of trying to turn their children into creepy clone of themselves.
That's why you see parents forcing their ideas and ideals and career on their children.
That's also one of the reason you see such an high suicide rate.
But the very naive aspect of your comment is that a parent will force also ideas and ideals (without leaving the kid the freedom to look for alternative ways) such a racism, sexism, antisemitism. Most kids learn their disturbing ethics from their parents and in turn becomes parents that will teach those creept ethics to their children and so on and on and only the free kids are saved by this. The nazi regimen knew well that unidirection coerced education was the best way to grow young nazi that would have accepted the dogma as the right thing and would have never questioned it. Mature and responsible parents have mature and responsible kids, immature and ignorant kids have immature and ignorant parents.
It's also worth mentioning that abuses and violences rate from foreign people are very very very low when compared to the rate of the same from parents. Parents should be empower their kids not make them ignorant and immature, and remember that kids are immature and ignorant only as long as they're taught to be and can't choose to be otherwise. Even 35 years old black people 70 years ago were as immature as 4 years old because their level of maturity was determined by their slavers keeping information and experience from them the would have empowered and matured them. Many lawyers nowadays accept in many cases that age can't be considered a criteria for maturity and the individual case and person should be analyzed (that's why sometimes they let the parents choose in a divorce who the child will live with while in other cases, once determined a good level of maturity, the lawyers give the child total freedom in the choice even if that means living with the aunt and no parents)
The best way to provide protection is freedom (to choose your circumstances) and varied information (to make the best informed choice in each circumstance). The coercion and brainwashing you promote is the best way to endanger whatever individual and turn him a subservient puppet for his whole life, a life he didn't even shape or chose ... made of beliefs, facts and information selected by someone else who prevented him to know there can exist many alternative views and ideas to explore.
-
All you have to do is ask the kid and stop assuming!
what a great idea. anyone have his number?
-
what a great idea. anyone have his number?
Post a message on youtube and ask whether piano is his passion or whether his parents chose for him and he actually doesn't like it (unfortunately this happens too)
He will read the message in youtube and will answer.
-
i was being sarcastic. if you truly honestly believe that a boy of age 11 that can play all of chopin op 10 has a normal childhood, then i really cant be bothered to argue
-
i was being sarcastic. if you truly honestly believe that a boy of age 11 that can play all of chopin op 10 has a normal childhood, then i really cant be bothered to argue
Suit yourself.
There's not such a thing as "normal childhood".
The very idea is just egocentric presumption from your part, believing that you hold "universal" ethic and criteria and you can apply your criteria to others.
There's only one type of childhood: "your childhood". And if you get to fill it with the things you passionally love and want to be involved with it is also a great childhood.
Whatever else is just creepy busybodies trying to apply their biased and personal standards to others that hold completely different and individual standards.