Is Volodos stupid ?

[daniel patschan]

Today i read an interview with him. These a the fundamental statements:

•   Don´t practice too much, it makes your playing worse.

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

•   Piano is played in the head not with the hands.

Are already 90% or only 85% of his brain destroyed by Wodka ?

[opus10no2]

The first 2 are partially correct - overpractice can be as bad as underpractice.
And he is partially true about teaching, but like other great musicians, he neglects to remember that the majority of people don't have the natural gifts of autididacticism he posesses.

And brain power governs alot to do with playing, which alot of beginners neglect to realise.

Of course, also, so called 'experienced' pianists also say the opposite and take their physical faculties for granted, piano playing is half and half, half brain, half fingers.

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

Hmmm, lets see...

Although overpracticing could result in serious conditions such as tendonitis and other ailments, overpracticing correctly will only lead to better results. A prime example of this would be Michelangeli, who practiced every little detail to perfection.

I think that there are very few that genuinly do not need a teacher and even fewer who do not need examples. Listening to others is after all a form of studying and you learn from them. A student that has no guidance whatsoever wouldn't be able to play at all since he wouldn't be able to read music.

Piano playing is in the head and not in the hands. The brain governs the actions of the hands.

[lau]

i pretty much agree with everything volodos says

[opus10no2]

Although overpracticing could result in serious conditions such as tendonitis and other ailments, overpracticing correctly will only lead to better results. A prime example of this would be Michelangeli, who practiced every little detail to perfection.

Overpracticing, as in - too many hours per day - is bad.

No matter how much economy of motion is used, the fingers will become exhausted and wont have time to recover.

They might not necessarily decline in ability, just stay at a plateau, like watering a plant too much.

[debussy symbolism]

Overpracticing, as in - too many hours per day - is bad.

No matter how much economy of motion is used, the fingers will become exhausted and wont have time to recover.

They might not necessarily decline in ability, just stay at a plateau, like watering a plant too much.

Nope. Not as long you stay tension free. If the fingers, or any part of the body except the mind gets tired, that means that you are doing something wrong such as tensing up. If one stays completely relaxed and tension free, one should be able to play for as long as possible. This is a good test actually, to see how long can one last without tension. I often do an exercise in which I do arpeggios at a fast tempo for a long time and watch for tension.

[opus10no2]

Wrong, running is tension free, why can't runners run all day? Same reason.

[debussy symbolism]

Athletes tire because they use limbs that have muscles, which in turn breakdown glucose for ATP, or energy. There are no muscles in the fingers however. There are muscles in the hand, but if the hand isn't tense there should be no exhaustion. There are more factors which contribute to playing, and I am always cautions of my posture, my legs and every other part of my body being relaxed.

[opus10no2]

Of course most of the body should be relaxed, but denying the fact the body actually moves by not contracting, is more than a little silly.

[cloches_de_geneve]

Scratch on the surface and little substance is left in these statements; so while not outright stupid, or alcoholic, he certainly seems to be somewhat of a dazzler: 

1. He is partly right about this point (dexterity often improves after a rest of 2 to 3 weeks; you can notice the difference after 2 or 3 days of resuming).

2. That's just being arrogant and presuming everybody is a genius like Liszt.

3. This statment lacks precision. What does he mean by brain? In the ultimate end everything is controlled by the brain so this statment is devoid of meaning. In technical terms, I suppose he means that the brain (qua mind) should know exactly where the fingers are to be at any time. That's like saying memory and concentration are very important. In psychological terms, you obviously need to think about interpretation and have a "vision" for a given piece. If he means THAT, I am in total agreement - but then: who would not agree with such a truism.

[pita bread]

Regarding the original post:

1. Practice is only really effective while you're concentrating. When you lose concentration you start to get caught in a loop playing stuff over and over again until you ingrain more bad habits than good.
2. At the level of Volodos, if you're still relying on a teacher to tell you what to do...
3. Your fingers, hands, and arms won't move without your brain commanding them to.

Athletes tire because they use limbs that have muscles, which in turn breakdown glucose for ATP, or energy. There are no muscles in the fingers however. There are muscles in the hand, but if the hand isn't tense there should be no exhaustion. There are more factors which contribute to playing, and I am always cautions of my posture, my legs and every other part of my body being relaxed.

There may be no muscles in the fingers but the fingers are still operated by muscles in the arm which will eventually tire.

There's also no such thing as being absolutely tension free. You'd fall off your chair if you were 100% relaxed.

[ail]

Today i read an interview with him. These a the fundamental statements:

•   Don´t practice too much, it makes your playing worse.

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

•   Piano is played in the head not with the hands.

Are already 90% or only 85% of his brain destroyed by Wodka ?

I know I'm too much of an amateur to know lots of useful things, but I have to say that I can not agree with point 3. Not completely, at least. After all, the hand must have a sufficient amount of technique to let the head think freely and decide what they have to do without worrying if they will be able to. That's like saying that fighting karate is in the head, not the body agility. It is, pretty much the same as music, but if you really can't move your body to give a good punch or an effective kick, your whole tactical reasoning will be worthless, no matter how refined it is. Same here.

I think he is speaking only for very advanced pianists, and should be read with that in mind.
Alex

[ramseytheii]

Today i read an interview with him. These a the fundamental statements:

•   Don´t practice too much, it makes your playing worse.

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

•   Piano is played in the head not with the hands.

Are already 90% or only 85% of his brain destroyed by Wodka ?

Actually it sounds like he had some bad experience with a teacher trying to tell him what to do, and now he childishly thinks that all teachers must be bad.  Bernhard effectively proved in another post (I can find it if you want) that there is no such thing as the self-taught person, that everyone starts from being taught.  We should love and listen to our teachers, because they have wisdom and experience that we don't.

Somebody posted that if you need a teacher at Volodos level it is a bad thing.  Well then why did Lang Lang take masterclasses with Barenboim?  Why did Horowitz want classes with Schnabel?  Why does Yundi Li study with Vardi?  Why did Mozart study Haydn?  Why did Beethoven study Bach?  Why did Schubert go to a theory teacher for counterpoint lessons in his late twenties? 

All these people were already famous, already succesful, alraedy independent when they decided to supplement their knowledge.  There is always something to learn, always something to discover.  Maria Callas said she can learn something from listening to any of her colleagues sing, good or bad.  Anyways - Volodos gives masterclasses in voice, from what I understand.  If his view of teachers is that they are irrelevant, he is either a hypocrite or a self-hater.

He probably doesn't practice that much.  Neither does Martha Argerich.  But - who cares?  Who cares what they are doing?  I am interested in people only who are devoted to their art and to music, not to those who are always pushing the boundaries on how lazy they can be.  The piano playing of Argerich frankly has not developed since she first came on the scene.  One loses interest eventually in those who fail to devote themselves to music, and enter deeper into that world.  That is why I get so bored when people talk about how little they practice. 

And to anyone who says, Volodos and Argerich have nothing left to improve upon, and nothing more to learn in music, please don't make me laugh, and don't insult the memory of the great masters who were improving and learning up until the day they died, people whose artistry and contributino to the world of music leaves these virtuoso charlatans in the dust and ashes.

Walter Ramsey

[franzliszt2]

I agree with a lot of what volodos says.

Don't practice too much is true. But it depends what he means by practice too much. I always work until I am satisfied with the results. This may take 2 hours, if so I'll stop. It may take 9. I think that is a bit of an empty statement by him, becasue to label any amount of practicing too little or too much is wrong. There should be no set time limit. If you play 8 hours day everyday, it's bound to effect your playing becasue you'll have nothing to express in your music except the 4 walls of a practice room, wheras the person who does 5 hours, and spends 3 hours having a good time, will have a much more balanced personality.

The 2nd statement is in some ways true and in some ways wrong., A teacher is there for guidence. Talented students will do most of the work themselves, the teacher just guides them. Most of the time when lessons go badly, it's becasue the pupil hasn't prepared. In that case what can a teacher say? People take lessons later on in life to get information, and share opinions. Lang Lang was hardly getting a stereotypical lesson off Barenboim, it was more of a musical collaboration.

Piano playing is all from the head. Thats true. The muscles and tendons etc.. work, but they can only be used correctly if the brain know's how. So many techncal problems are solved if you just sit and look at the problem, and solve it. So many people sit and thump away hopin for the fingers to strengthen and the muscles to grow. It's a simple case of thinking what do I need to do? Why are my fingers not doing that? Analsysing hand position, why the tension is there.

Nobody can play piano totally relaxed, it requires tension to strike a key. The thing about relaxation is to release the tension. Muscles are designed for tension. It's the releasing of tension that is important. Of course you will get tired playing piano, no matter how relaxed you are, and thats when muscles come into the equation. Pianists must have strong hands and arms, but they must not rely on them.

[counterpoint]

I can subscribe all that franzliszt2 said. I could not explain it better.

One additional comment to why practising too much can be adverse:

one disadvantage of practising much is, that your playing is in danger to become  mechanical. Then the fingers know what to do and they do it automaticly in a very foreseeable manner. The room for spontaneous changes of the interpretation gets lost. That's a bit how Michelangeli played. Complete control of sound and "technique" on one side but no surprises and no spontaneity on the other side.

[ramseytheii]

The 2nd statement is in some ways true and in some ways wrong., A teacher is there for guidence. Talented students will do most of the work themselves, the teacher just guides them. Most of the time when lessons go badly, it's becasue the pupil hasn't prepared. In that case what can a teacher say? People take lessons later on in life to get information, and share opinions. Lang Lang was hardly getting a stereotypical lesson off Barenboim, it was more of a musical collaboration.

You are right that a teacher cannot be useful if a student is useless.  But if the student is not useless, the teacher is very useful! 

Lang Lang was in fact getting a lesson from Barenboim - watch it again.  They aren't collaborating and discussing ideas, Barenboim is telling Lang Lang all the finer points which he had missed out on, right from the beginning.  AND, Barenboim himself went to lessons with Claude Frank only a few years ago in New York (I know this from inside source).  That is because studying the classics gives you endless fountains from which to renew your knowledge, not the least of which is the fountain of tradition.  Claude Frank is the torch-bearer for a very strong tradition in the classics, and it only makes sense that he would be the person to go to.  Barenboim is interested in the continuity of that tradition.

Also consider this quote from James Levine, talking about his teacher George Szell: "He's forgotten more about the classics than I will ever know."  This is the kind of humility that only comes with greatness.  These charlatans, who display more than anything else their pride ("Nobody needs a teacher,") are only showing how little dignity they have for themselves and for their art. 

When people are constantly blathering on about how little they practice, they are only degrading themselves, and trying to intimidate others - they are jealous that others can find joy in the search for knowledge, where they only find emptiness.  Therefore do not be intimitated or embarassed by those who brag only about how little work they do - rather keep the joy of the work to yourself.

Walter Ramsey

[daniel patschan]

You are right that a teacher cannot be useful if a student is useless.  But if the student is not useless, the teacher is very useful! 

Lang Lang was in fact getting a lesson from Barenboim - watch it again.  They aren't collaborating and discussing ideas, Barenboim is telling Lang Lang all the finer points which he had missed out on, right from the beginning.  AND, Barenboim himself went to lessons with Claude Frank only a few years ago in New York (I know this from inside source).  That is because studying the classics gives you endless fountains from which to renew your knowledge, not the least of which is the fountain of tradition.  Claude Frank is the torch-bearer for a very strong tradition in the classics, and it only makes sense that he would be the person to go to.  Barenboim is interested in the continuity of that tradition.

Also consider this quote from James Levine, talking about his teacher George Szell: "He's forgotten more about the classics than I will ever know."  This is the kind of humility that only comes with greatness.  These charlatans, who display more than anything else their pride ("Nobody needs a teacher,") are only showing how little dignity they have for themselves and for their art. 

When people are constantly blathering on about how little they practice, they are only degrading themselves, and trying to intimidate others - they are jealous that others can find joy in the search for knowledge, where they only find emptiness.  Therefore do not be intimitated or embarassed by those who brag only about how little work they do - rather keep the joy of the work to yourself.

Walter Ramsey

Thanks, that was my feeling anyways. 

[counterpoint]

Lang Lang was in fact getting a lesson from Barenboim - watch it again.  They aren't collaborating and discussing ideas, Barenboim is telling Lang Lang all the finer points which he had missed out on, right from the beginning.

I'm quite sure, that if Lang Lang would take  lessons regularly with Barenboim, someday he would play as boring as him   

"not so much emotion - strictly keep in time - it's classical, so it has to be all very clean and decent"

As Harnoncourt once said:

this sort of interpretation was already out of fashion in the lifetime of the composer (he talked about Mozart)

[franzliszt2]

I think Barenboim needs lessons on the appasionata

[rc]

I think he is speaking only for very advanced pianists, and should be read with that in mind.
Alex

This was the impression I got too.  I'd like to read the actual interview though...  From this summary, I'd say Volodos is too impatient to make a good teacher.

[jre58591]

I think Barenboim needs lessons

fixed.

[sevencircles]

You need to read the whole interview to understand what he means.

Please post a link if it´s online

[invictious]

The practice to every little technical detail to perfection that makes the playing worse.




Invictious.

[daniel patschan]

I can post it but it´s in German ! 

[tompilk]

i have this article too (International Piano?) and he says the cziffra trans. flight of the bumble bee is easy... erm... i wish i found it so easy to play from second hearing like volodos...
Tom

[daniel patschan]

Yes exactly, he also said Rach 3 is really easy. I must say i find him quite disrespectfull to all of us who are trying to achieve something by working hard. Maybe he should take part in the 100 meter olympic finale for men ! I will instruct him shortly before start: "You can win, it´s a brain thing, training makes you slower. If you don´t win, you do not have the tight attitude." Idiot.

[counterpoint]

"You can win, it´s a brain thing, training makes you slower. If you don´t win, you do not have the tight attitude." Idiot.

Why so rude? Playing piano seems very easy for him, so he says, it's easy. How should he know, how much work and energy we normal people (okay, we are not normal  ) put in practising Bach Preludes and Mozart Sonatas...

[tompilk]

i'll scan the interview and put it in a .pdf if any of you are interested...?
Tom

[zheer]

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

  Learning never ends, however once a pianist has learnt his craft, for example at a music school, he/she must learn to teach themselves, this could take years. Here is a simple way of knowing if one still needs a teacher, learn a number of pieces to your own satisfaction, to the best of your ability, record those pieces then put them on a CD.Now find a teacher and ask that teacher to help you with those pieces, re-record those pieces that you worked on, now compare it to your first recording you made on CD, think has it improved a lot. If yes ,then having a teacher is not sensless, if however you find that there has been no significant improvment, or that the pieces now sound worse, then having a teacher is sensless.
   

[rc]

I'd be interested if it's in english, Tompilk!

I can see some of these comments making sense, from a certain perspective, but pure nonsense if taken at face value.

Like I said, I wouldn't want to have him as a teacher, heh...  Volodos would have to learn a lot about understanding anothers situation and communication before anyone could learn much from him, hahah.

[tompilk]

Here's the interview:
https://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fastnet34/Volodos.pdf
An interesting read...
Tom

[counterpoint]

tomplik, thank you so much for uploading interview, very interesting and convincing statements, very sympathetic guy.

[maui_bandeira_]

I'm intriged

Where did u found this interview? I'd like to watch/read too

Thanks,
Maui.

[daniel patschan]

That´s not the interview i read - however it´s also interesting. Take this:

1. he doesn´t like to play the Godowsky studies because the Chopin etudes are already perfect. It clearly implies that Mozart´s turkish march is not perfect ! Otherwise there would be no need to transcribe it (as he had done) - what arrogance.

2. he didn´t understand how all these students in russia could get up early in the morning just to train over and over again some passages instead of just "closing the eyes and anticipating why something didn´t work". You see - he laughs at us. Then he mentions that Cortot and Rachmaninov are pianistic idols for him. BTW rachmaninov practiced very disciplined - until he died.

3. Cziffra´s flight of the bumblebee is easy 

[debussy symbolism]

He has a right to be arrogant. How many pianists have reached the state of virtuosity this pianist achieved?

[m]

Here's the interview:
https://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fastnet34/Volodos.pdf
An interesting read...
Tom

Thanks. Indeed, very interesting. Very nice and clever answers which BTW, explain a lot about his tremendous natural abilities.

Especially, it is so nice to see the line about "piano playing in the head" from such a great virtuoso. That in fact, is very close to what I have always been saying about technique--it is a mental process.
Unfortunately, some clowns who advocate "raw speed" don't get it.

[pita bread]

Yes exactly, he also said Rach 3 is really easy. I must say i find him quite disrespectfull to all of us who are trying to achieve something by working hard. Maybe he should take part in the 100 meter olympic finale for men ! I will instruct him shortly before start: "You can win, it´s a brain thing, training makes you slower. If you don´t win, you do not have the tight attitude." Idiot.

So what if he finds something easy?

You must be jealous.

[jakev2.0]

Volodos is very talented - he has a natural grasp of the mechanics of the piano, a phenomenal memory, and heaps of creativity and improvisatory ability.  Still, he's quite arrogant and obnoxious to give advice based on the absurd and seemingly affected stance that all piano students are as talented as he is!

He certainly has the potential to be a very significant artist, but talent is no guarantee of future success.

I wish him luck, but also hope that he takes his head out of his ass. 

[m]

Volodos is very talented - he has a natural grasp of the mechanics of the piano, a phenomenal memory, and heaps of creativity and improvisatory ability.  Still, he's quite arrogant and obnoxious to give advice based on the absurd and seemingly affected stance that all piano students are as talented as he is!

Why everybody thinks he gives advice  

He does not! HE MERELY ANSWERS PERSONAL QUESTIONS. And indeed, when you listen to his Rachmaninov 3, you hear in every note that it is easy for him. Or does he anyway need to say that for him it is difficult because somebody expects him to say so?
What's the problem?

[mephisto]

His playing seams SO natural, it is almost scary Not only in speed, but in tonal-colours. I am sure he knows exactly what he is doing.

[opus10no2]

Unfortunately, some clowns who advocate "raw speed" don't get it.

Tech is in the head, Mech is in the fingers.

[sevencircles]

Why isn´t Volodos playing things that even he may find demanding like Sorabji´s hardest works for instance?

It seems like almost every student plays Rach 3 these days and that  is not easy. No one is gonna tell me that it´s easy

Marc-André Hamelin said this in the Supervirtuoso Documentary

[clavicembalisticum]

Why isn´t Volodos playing things that even he may find demanding like Sorabji´s hardest works for instance?

"Demanding" is a subjective word. Question is, would the market "demand" these works as well? Yet again, subjective. In the ear of the beholder I guess. I would not say in the "hands of the performer". Ogdon proved that.

[rc]

Tech is in the head, Mech is in the fingers.

I like the seperation of mech, but I view mech as an aspect under the umbrella of tech (as opposed to two seperate things).

Thanks for the interview BTW Tompilk!

[opus10no2]

Of course, in the way we pianists use the word technique, we include mechanique.
But the dictionary definition of technique is completely different, technique is the skills you learn to coordinate, mechanique is the raw physical facility with which technique is concerned utilising efficiently.

[rc]

I'd say the dictionary definition works with how we use the word.

Anyways, it's good to have terms like this.  I'd only heard the word 'mechanique' a few days ago.  The distinction could prevent a lot of misunderstandings.

[clavicembalisticum]

Yes exactly, he also said Rach 3 is really easy. I must say i find him quite disrespectfull to all of us who are trying to achieve something by working hard. Maybe he should take part in the 100 meter olympic finale for men ! I will instruct him shortly before start: "You can win, it´s a brain thing, training makes you slower. If you don´t win, you do not have the tight attitude." Idiot.

Somebody said that it is a piece for elephants, was he an idiot too ?

[jonze701]

Today i read an interview with him. These a the fundamental statements:

•   Don´t practice too much, it makes your playing worse.

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

•   Piano is played in the head not with the hands.

Are already 90% or only 85% of his brain destroyed by Wodka ?

•   You don´t need a teacher. What can he do ? You must know yourself where to go. Teaching is senseless.

hes right, i am never have a teacher, and i am played all the hard pieces.

[sevencircles]

hes right, i am never have a teacher, and i am played all the hard pieces.

I agree

Many people do a lot better without a teacher.

Both Art Tatum and Godowsky said that the few lessons they had were completely unimportant if I am not completely wrong.

[clavicembalisticum]

Marc-André Hamelin said this in the Supervirtuoso Documentary.

Which one?