11 old years boy plays chopin etudes, amazzing talent

[chromatickler]

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.

[henrah]

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.

[pianowelsh]

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.

[chromatickler]

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

[henrah]

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.

[thierry13]

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.

[opus10no2]

thierry

can you play the piano? 

[arensky]

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.

[webern78]

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...

[hodi]

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"

[wotgoplunk]

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.....

[steinway43]

Some of us do have natural ability. It's a fact. Deal with it.

[0range]

Ouch, anyone else cringe at his posture?

[elevateme_returns]

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 .

[stephanie-piano]

um..............

[nicco]

um..............

Good point.

[ganymed]

my thoughts exactly! 

[stephanie-piano]

Good point.

GOOD POINT?

[elevateme_returns]

um..............

um.... ? um what?

[jazzyprof]

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?

[soliloquy]

ahaha the 10-4 is pure comedic genius.  Firstly, the mei-ting ripoff ending, then the random second he threw into the bass.

[danny elfboy]

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.

[elevateme_returns]

And what is a "normal" childhood?

what does it matter ? you and i both know that he doesnt have one

[danny elfboy]

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!

[danny elfboy]

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.

[elevateme_returns]

All you have to do is ask the kid and stop assuming!

what a great idea. anyone have his number?

[danny elfboy]

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.

[elevateme_returns]

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

[danny elfboy]

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.