super all-star competition

[practicingnow]

OK...

The requirements are:
Bach - 1 Prelude and Fugue
Any classical sonata
Any romantic work
One Etude by either Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninoff or Debussy
One Modern work

Only 8 pianists are participating

The participants are:  Cziffra, Horowitz, Rubinstein, Perahia, Kissin, Richter, Cliburn, Argerich

Who wins and why?

[nanabush]

Does 20th century count as modern?  If not then where's that time period?

[prometheus]

How can one know? This question is pointless.

[stevie]

cziffra.

nuff said.

[BoliverAllmon]

horowitz wins.

[stevie]

horowitz wins.

unlikely

[BoliverAllmon]

unlikely

why not?

[grazioso]

It depends who the judges are!

[practicingnow]

Does 20th century count as modern?  If not then where's that time period?

Yes, modern is 20th century, as usual

[prometheus]

why not?

Because 1 in 8 is a unlikely chance?


If they all play a Bach P&F, then I guess... Bach wins...

[arensky]

I'm biased, but I believe Horowitz would win through sheer force of personality and style.

A colleague once tried to provoke me by calling Horowitz the "Ronald Reagan" of the piano. Maybe so, but being a "great communicator" counts for a lot. Rubinstein was an even greater communicator, but I believe Horowitz would really pull it together for such a joust. Rubinstein is the only one who might be able to steal his thunder...

[brokenagraffe]

absurd.

Richter would own all.

[mcgillcomposer]

Because 1 in 8 is a unlikely chance?


If they all play a Bach P&F, then I guess... Bach wins...

I like the cut of your jig haha  Yay Bach!

[viking]

absurd.

Richter would own all.

I second Richter. 
SAM

[Antnee]

What exactly is the point of this thread??

[lostinidlewonder]

I think the adjudicators at this competition would commit suicide.

[practicingnow]

After thinking about it, I think Horowitz would win, because...
I really do think he was the best overall...
Imagine his program - Maybe the Bb minor P&F from BK 1, a Mozart Sonata, Schumann Kreisleriana, Rach 2nd Sonata, and an Etude Tableau...
The tone, the eveness, the clarity, the personality, excitement, intelligence, and of course technique - I don't see any of them matching him back to back...

Yikes - what was I thinking?!   

I think the real contest would be for second place - hmmm...   

[prometheus]

I think music critics will be more biased against Horowitz because the audience is positively biased against him.

But this is stupid. Surely Kissing plays better than Howoritz dug up remains. So which Horowitz, Cziffra, Rubinstein and Richer are we talking about? Maybe Cziffra can't play because he had a broken hand at some time in history. Who are the jury? The audience? Music critics? The candidates themselves, you, me? What will they play? How can we know either of the pianist doesn't have a big off day during this competition. So will the jury base their descision of this one performance and not on the reputation and previous accomlishments?  If so, how can we assume the jury won't fail?

[perfect_pitch]

I would be on Horowitz, and then an incredibly close second would be Cziffra.

Howoritz, truly got into the music emotionally deep and precise. He became 1 with the music

(I know that sounds bull-shittish...) but hey - it's true.

[shoenberg3]

Cziffra, Horowitz, Rubinstein, Perahia, Kissin, Richter, Cliburn, Argerich

Round of 8

Cziffra Cliburn Rubinstein Kissin eliminated

Cziffra because too wild for judge's tastes. Cliburn because he is just bit umm... . Rubinstein because his interpretations are too "romantic" and his technique isn't as solid as others'. Kissin because he is all fingers and no music.

Semi finals

Perahia and Richter eliminated

Perahia because he is just bit dull compared to others. Richter because he makes too many mistakes (for competition purpose)

Final

Close call, and I will just say, two first prizes given. If there can only be one winner, then probably Horowitz, only because Argerich sometimes maybe too "wild" for the judges.   

[brewtality]

Rubinstein because his interpretations are too "romantic" and his technique isn't as solid as others'.

That's not the impression I've gotten from listening to his recordings.

Cliburn in his youth was obviously a proven winner as was Perahia and Argerich, so I reckon they'd probably battle it out for the title. If i were the judge, however, Horowitz would win with Cziffra second.

[nicolaievich]

I just don't imagine who could judge this competition 

[arensky]

I just don't imagine who could judge this competition 

                                                           Me!   

[rohansahai]

Gold Medal: Horowitz
Silver Medal: Richter
Bronze Medal: Argerich
Best performance of a romantic work: Rubinstein
Best performance of a modern work: Richter's prokofiev
Best performance of etude: Cziffra
Honourable mentions: Cliburn, Perahia
Scholarship award to study with teacher of your choice: Kissin 

[arensky]

Scholarship award to study with teacher of your choice: Kissin 

MEOWW!!!!! scratch, scratch.... u r very mean! 

[pianowelsh]

First prize - Not awarded.

They are all fantastic and have great strengths it would be impossible to find an overall winner without being completely prejudice.

[arensky]

First prize - Not awarded.

They are all fantastic and have great strengths it would be impossible to find an overall winner without being completely prejudice.

AW, come on pianowelsh; whose YOUR winner? A jury 'o one, just you.. it's only hypothetical....

[musicsdarkangel]

Although he's not my favorite of them, Richter would definitely win.

[pianowelsh]

I would be stuck between Perhia and Argerich (incidentally both of Latin origin). Simply because i love the fire and imagination with which they come to everything and if i had to give a mark on whole programme i feel that they would best capture my attention across all the genres - even if i didnt agree with them. I cannot stand pure technical perfection - i want people to speak to me and show me something deep from inside themselves. i feel i would get this best from the above mentioned pianists even if not all the notes were perfectly placed and even if there were perhaps unorthadox tempi/interpretations i would feel i was in the present of people creating something in a very spontaneous and 'real' way - for me! Wish asa an 'All-Star jury panel' member is of course what i want because i know they can play every note perfectly if they want - but they wantto go beyond the notes and are not going to compromise on that. in essence they are musicians of complete integrity.

[lisztwasgod]

I like the cut of your jig haha  Yay Bach!

I believe the correct saying is "i like the cut of your jib"....plus, liszt would win in this competition; if it were one of the artists given...easily cziffra (he was easily th most virtuosic of the eight, and he was raised on technique and perfection...there is no way hed let himself lose...)

[jehangircama]

who would win if you put liszt, rachmaninov, beethoven, chopin, mozart, bach and tchaikowsky in the competition also?

[frederic]

haha Tchaikovsky - because he doesn't play piano

[jehangircama]

WHAT??? I never knew that . thanks

[frederic]

lol well now you do. Remember how his First Concerto was considered unplayable and unpianistic by Nicolai Rubinstein? And the opening chords were orginally near-impossible spread chords. Someone suggested they be solid chords.

And it would be unorthodox to compare Bach's playing with Rachmaninoff's. Because technical standards are generally increasing through time due to the increasing demands in the pieces written.

[jehangircama]

oh yeah. if i remember correctly they had a major fight about the concerto, rubinstein saying it was unplayable. then tchaik changed the 2nd mvt.

And it would be unorthodox to compare Bach's playing with Rachmaninoff's. Because technical standards are generally increasing through time due to the increasing demands in the pieces written.

i know, i just wanted to see peoples' opinions on this. u cannot really compare them.