How good is Bernhard at piano?

[opus10no2]

Interesting question, and along the same lines, can you trust and admire a teacher who isn't a stunning player?

Of course it's possible to be the greatest preacher while also being a poor practicer 
But I guess it's psychological.

I just wouldnt accept a teacher who can't play as fast as me 
(yes, my reason for being self-taught is revealed)

[counterpoint]

If speed is your one and only goal - of course you need a teacher, who can show you how to play faster. That's plausible 

[opus10no2]

Naturally, but I'd have a minimul speed requirement for hiring them.

[zheer]

I just wouldnt accept a teacher who can't play as fast as me 
(yes, my reason for being self-taught is revealed)

     

[mike_lang]

Naturally, but I'd have a minimul speed requirement for hiring them.

Amazing.

[m1469]

Let me say what my thoughts on Bernhard's piano skills are :

I suspect that he is the type of pianist that loves to play for people primarily because it is something very special to him and he likes to share that within the right circumstances, and with the right people.  And, I think that can be heard in his playing, too -- it's a very special quality.  And, I suspect his playing is so piercing that even if you only hear but moments of it, and even if you are distracted by some other *complete* annoyance (when you would rather be listening to him play) -- your ear and heart can't help but listen and become instantly and completely intrigued.  And, no matter how brief the sound, it haunts you forever.

That's what I think, but what do I know ?

[m]

I just wouldnt accept a teacher who can't play as fast as me 

I am wondering what that  emoticon means? Do you think that your ignorance is cool and proud of it?

[thalberg]

The best teacher I ever had couldn't play nearly as fast as I can.  Since I could already play fast, why should I care if she could?

She had TONS of artistic sense.  Way more than I did.  So, I took care of the technique and she took care of the artistic expression.  We were a team.

[furtwaengler]

Let me say what my thoughts on Bernhard's piano skills are :

I suspect that he is the type of pianist that loves to play for people primarily because it is something very special to him and he likes to share that within the right circumstances, and with the right people.  And, I think that can be heard in his playing, too -- it's a very special quality.  And, I suspect his playing is so piercing that even if you only hear but moments of it, and even if you are distracted by some other *complete* annoyance (when you would rather be listening to him play) -- your ear and heart can't help but listen and become instantly and completely intrigued.  And, no matter how brief the sound, it haunts you forever.

That's what I think, but what do I know ?

Can I be Bernhard?

Seriously, what you write is amazing...the phenomenon of that undefinable sense of wonder and mystery, the love and fascination with sound. There are only a handful of people in the world who so possess music within themselves, who carry a sound, to the extent that they can even walk into a rehearsal, and an ensemble's sound will in an instant change by the force of personality...just entering a room.

Goodness, may I meet this Bernhard and hear him play!

...But to the author of this thread, regardless of whether I could match your scales or your octaves in a race, I'm not sure yours is an attitude I'd want to teach (then again, I am no teacher), and if your extraordinary velocity doesn't serve any purpose beyond the exhibition of your extraordinary velocity, I've no interest in hearing you perform either. You do like music don't you? 

(Sorry)

[m]

...But to the author of this thread, regardless of whether I could match your scales or your octaves in a race, I'm not sure yours is an attitude I'd want to teach (then again, I am no teacher), and if your extraordinary velocity doesn't serve any purpose beyond the exhibition of your extraordinary velocity, I've no interest in hearing you perform either. You do like music don't you? 

Dear Furtwaengler,

Don't let words of this particular poster fool you. We never had a chance here to experience his "legendary velocity" and heard about it only from his own words .

In fact, I was very curious and once even reduced myself to offering him a "duel", when we'd both simultaneously post ANY Chopin Etude of HIS choice, recorded in a timeframe of HIS choice--next day, next week, next month, or whatever.

Of course, predictably, he backed up with the tail between his legs, just to keep spamming this board with the talks about how good and intelligent he is, and giving his usual ignorant "insights" and opinions, sending wrong messages to less experienced folks.

I think due to some internal problems he has a need and is trying to prove himself, whatever childish, immature, and arrogant way it takes.

Keep trying , Opus!

And BTW, that would be an answer to your own question about how people perceive you, you asked in this thread:

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,26268.0.html

[opus10no2]

The best teacher I ever had couldn't play nearly as fast as I can.  Since I could already play fast, why should I care if she could?

She had TONS of artistic sense.  Way more than I did.  So, I took care of the technique and she took care of the artistic expression.  We were a team.

I see.

That's fine if you are deficient artistically.

But, with my fundamental knowledge, and my innate 'understanding' of music, I doubt any teacher could teach me better than the experience of listening to recordings and working it out for myself.

That's what I think, but what do I know ?

Interesting, but somewhat fantasy-like.

I'm not sure if it's possible to get an idea of how 'special' a pianist's musicality is by just observing their personality and getting to know their methods and ideas.

I'm more interested in his technical skills anyway, the ones that can actually be taught 

[counterpoint]

I see.

That's fine if you are deficient artistically.

But, with my fundamental knowledge, and my innate 'understanding' of music, I doubt any teacher could teach me better than the experience of listening to recordings and working it out for myself.

     

[opus10no2]

   

Yes.

giving his usual ignorant "insights" and opinions, sending wrong messages to less experienced folks.

Ok, well if I am ending up as a good pianist, despite my own ignorance and wrongness, does it not reveal that I have a stunning natural talent which shines through like a beautiful beam of light?

Piercing the souls of listeners with my radiant musicality.

[counterpoint]

Yes.

So you, stevie, say, thalberg is deficient artistically - in contrary to you, who has a fundamental knowledge and innate understanding of music

How are people saying... ROFLMAO 

music? you know what music is? 

[opus10no2]

HarHar.

Someone needs to be taught how to interpret a piece?

Someone just needs to experience the options available, achieve the ability to technically realise them, and play it the way it sounds best.

On the contrary, I believe that many people, unlike me, are unaware of what music is.

[counterpoint]

On the contrary, I believe that many people, unlike me, are unaware of what music is.

It seems, that you use the term "music" for something different as most people I know 

[opus10no2]

Learn from the enlightened one, for he is the purveyor of wisdom, and the enemy of ignorant swine  .

[m1469]

Can I be Bernhard?

Nope.  You get to be furtwaengler  -- isn't it nice ?

[quantum]

Can I be Bernhard?

So you are volunteering to create the Bernhard index?   

[pianogeek_cz]

Um, okay, I may be (again... I'm slowly getting used to it ) playing some devil's advocate here, but... Stevie, do I understand your thoughts correctly?
"Musicality is implicitly personal and cannot be measured, therefore, as long as he/she possesses the technical means to do so, an interpretation based on this deep and innate musicality will always be perfectly musical, even if only to the performer him-/herself?
Which leaves only one aspect of piano-playing that can be accurately measured and therefore compared. Speed."
Is that (a part of) your musical philosophy?

Honestly, it's weird. But it has a weird kind of point, too.

[opus10no2]

That's part of it.

People think I'm speed obsessed(which of course I am) at the expense of a love for music, which is false.

Simple thing is, I get sick of bickering over subjective issues, saying A is better than B.

I do like saying what I like, and discovering what others like and dislike, I just hate disrespect based on ignorance.

I get annoyed either way, I'd be annoyed if the world were all about objectively measurable things, and I'd be annoyed if everything was subjective.

On here, I notice the trend leaning one way, and I voice my opinions, which incidentally rebel against it.

[chocolatedog]

BTW has Bernhard been around recently? I haven't seen him for ages !!

[thalberg]

No he's been gone for a while.  There's a thread on it somewhere.  Some people are worried he's died, others are worried he's sick of the forum, and yet even more philosophical types have speculated that his silence is due to his having exhausted his stores of knowledge in his posts....yet others think he's undercover as someone else.

[ultraviolet]

Who is this "Bernhard" person?  An old moderator?

[cmg]

No.  He's a legend by now.  Undoubtedly, he was (is) a great teacher and probably a brilliant pianist.  Certainly a great musician. 

Ironically, the individual who brought up his name in the subject line of this thread, is not worthy to even speak his name, let alone question him.

[opus10no2]

How deliciously defiant I am 


If Bernhard practices what he preaches, he will have reached his potential in all areas but mechanique, but he might just want everyone else to have poor mechanique and save the good stuff for himself 

[pianowolfi]

I believe it is like m1469 said. He has magic in his playing. But it is actually not necessary to be an outstanding virtuoso to be a good teacher. And Bernhard somewhere said that he never performs in public, he plays just for friends and family occasionally. One of the most legendary teachers ever, Prof. Naumov, couldn't play anything at all when he once gave a master class, where I listened. He just would do occasional scetchy moves around the keyboard to demonstrate. Like glissandi instead of fast scales. But the students played WAY better after his master class.

[furtwaengler]

Having nothing to do with Bernhard, I just finished listening to a recording of a piano/chamber music recital Boris Berezovsky gave last Monday at the 27th International Piano Festival at La Roque d'Anthéron...He finished the Liszt Sonata in under 24 minutes to a most revealing ovation. Though not without artistic merit, at times it seemed he was sprinting towards a most dubious record...and rest assured, 23:47 is gonna be hard to beat!

That is, Boris Berezovsky...Why don't you look him up? You could say, "Hi, my name is opus10no2," and he could respond, "Oh, yes, I know you; I play you really fast..."

A perfect match!

(I get to be Furtwängler, and it is very nice, but I'm confused about making Bernard index...wouldn't one just look up his posts?)

[timothy42b]

Would any of you like to have a golf lesson from Tiger Woods?

I suspect most of you would say yes.

I would prefer to have a lesson from Butch Harmon, who taught Tiger.  He can't hit the ball like Tiger nor win tournaments like Tiger.  But apparently he can teach. 

[counterpoint]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Music does not have to be understood, it has to be listened to." - Hermann Scherchen

Interesting tagline! This is true for the people in the audience. But for the musicians themselves: they have to understand the music - otherwise there would be nothing to listen to.

[opus10no2]

Interesting tagline! This is true for the people in the audience. But for the musicians themselves: they have to understand the music - otherwise there would be nothing to listen to.

No, I think you misunderstand it.

I've said similar things, basically it means that music is not at all intellectual, it's sensual.

Any intellectual elements percieved or intended are extramusical.

Understanding music is different to our common idea of understanding.

Music is primarily about relations of pitch and time, and the more a person can consume a work, the more it consumes them, and they can perform the music as 'deeply' as can be.

This is the reason, musically, a 10 year old mongolian can concievably perform Beethoven's op111 and other 'profound' works stunningly.

[m]

I voice my opinions, which incidentally rebel against it.

Opinions should be based on knowledge or at least be supported in practice. So far you've failed to show evidence of either.

[opus10no2]

Have a little respect, you're talking to a self-appointed king of legendary legends here 

[ultraviolet]

No, I think you misunderstand it.

I've said similar things, basically it means that music is not at all intellectual, it's sensual.

Any intellectual elements percieved or intended are extramusical.

Understanding music is different to our common idea of understanding.

Music is primarily about relations of pitch and time, and the more a person can consume a work, the more it consumes them, and they can perform the music as 'deeply' as can be.

This is the reason, musically, a 10 year old mongolian can concievably perform Beethoven's op111 and other 'profound' works stunningly.

LOL who are you?

[opus10no2]

[jakev2.0]

A teacher who has not mastered the piano is more properly called an "impostor".

[jinfiesto]

Honestly Op. 10 2 I think your obsession with speed is a sign of musical immaturity. I may be wrong, but the overwhelming desire to play unremittently fast and loud is the hallmark of musical immaturity. Most people get over it at one point or another. Some apparently do not.  As for Bernhard, I think he was a great musician, and while I do disagree with some of his ideas about playing the piano, it's clear that he's thought everything out and come to his own conclusions about things. Music by the way, at least not for the performer is not sensual. It's intellectual. If you don't think about what you want to do, what you mean to achieve with a piece of music, how can you achieve anything but garbage? Look at it in this context. A painter paints with an idea in mind, how can his painting be purely a sensual experience? A painter's painting is an intellectual experience. The audience however, experiences the painting on a sensual level, maybe an intellectual one. And to say that because someone can't play faster than you means that they have nothing to teach you is idiocy. It's immature above all else. I think it's kind of arrogant to presume that because you play faster you are better. That's not true. It just means you play faster. And has it ever occurred to you that other pianists might not be playing faster than you because they don't want to? Speed is secondary to musicality. I'm not suggesting that you're not musical, honestly I don't know, but a lot of evidence seems to point that way. At any rate, if speed is all you're interested in, you may as well give up playing the piano and pick up typing instead. I mean a monkey can press keys, but it takes a musician to make music.

[opus10no2]

Disagree.

Music is not inherently 'intellectual', we just think that way because it can be complex and architectural in scope.

Painting is different, if it is supposed to be a very literal and simply pretty image, then it's purely sensual, but to paint something thought provoking, indeed - something intellectual must go into it.

If we are to attach any intellectual importance to music, we are dealing with extramusical associations.
They can end up focussing an intepretation to tell a 'story', or something more literal than the intentionally vague traditional art of music.

My passion for speed does in no way negate my passion for music, I just consider them seperate issues in many ways(though not all...).

Anyway, my statement about teachers was based on my idea that music cannot be taught in any traditional sense.

Technique and the mechanics of reading and playing music are essential, and these are skills which must be learnt in a more traditional way, either by discovery or teaching.

My idea about learning music, is that everyone who listens to music is learning it.

The experience of listening reveals everything we would ever need to know about music.

If we decide to be a musician, we must learn to either dictate our own imagination, or learn to play it on an instrument.

I mean, there are 2 things that piano teachers seem to teach - music and piano playing.

The former is absolutely uneccesary. 

[counterpoint]

I mean, there are 2 things that piano teachers seem to teach - music and piano playing.

The former is absolutely uneccesary. 

For getting good in pressing keys very fast, you don't need a teacher.

You need a teacher for understanding music.

What's music? Intervals, scales, chords, rhythm, musical forms and styles, music notation (the meaning of all sorts of signs and musical terms that you need to know)

Music is not something nebulous (as you seem to think - btw. as many people seem to think). There are thousands of (concrete!) things you need to know, otherwise you're just pressing keys slow or fast without knowing what you do.

[etudes]

Having nothing to do with Bernhard, I just finished listening to a recording of a piano/chamber music recital Boris Berezovsky gave last Monday at the 27th International Piano Festival at La Roque d'Anthéron...He finished the Liszt Sonata in under 24 minutes to a most revealing ovation. Though not without artistic merit, at times it seemed he was sprinting towards a most dubious record...and rest assured, 23:47 is gonna be hard to beat!

That is, Boris Berezovsky...Why don't you look him up? You could say, "Hi, my name is opus10no2," and he could respond, "Oh, yes, I know you; I play you really fast..."

A perfect match!

(I get to be Furtwängler, and it is very nice, but I'm confused about making Bernard index...wouldn't one just look up his posts?)

it is actually even easy to play liszt sonata under 20 mins...but what for? I guess to play a good,solid 30 mins liszt sonata is better than rushing through 20 mins liszt sonata...  btw my friend did a speed trial for liszt sonata and actually he fits the whole sonata in 17 mins...so 20 mins is very possible!

[opus10no2]

For getting good in pressing keys very fast, you don't need a teacher.

You need a teacher for understanding music.

What's music? Intervals, scales, chords, rhythm, musical forms and styles, music notation (the meaning of all sorts of signs and musical terms that you need to know)

Music is not something nebulous (as you seem to think - btw. as many people seem to think). There are thousands of (concrete!) things you need to know, otherwise you're just pressing keys slow or fast without knowing what you do.

This isn't learning music.

This is learning theory, intellectually, and of course it should be learnt to a degree, to understand musical notation, which isn't the same as 'understanding' music!

And no, you don't need a teacher for it, I learnt it all on my lonesome.

[counterpoint]

This isn't learning music.

This is learning theory, intellectually, and of course it should be learnt to a degree, to understand musical notation, which isn't the same as 'understanding' music!

This is what I call "understanding  music".

What you are talking about is "getting taken away by music". That's possible without knowing anything about music, absolutely true!

(It would be very interesting for me, if you could write down the melody of the first page of the ocean etude?)

[opus10no2]

Music is all about pitch and time relations, this is a process which takes place in the aural cortex, and any traditional definition of 'understanding' and 'intellect' doesn't come into it.

Think of it like language without meaning.

Strings of sounds coming from a human mouth, pretty patterns.

Music is so beautiful because technically, it means nothing, but to us - it means everything.

[m]

Think of it like language without meaning.

That's the core of our disagreement. I think of music as a language with deep meaning behind every note. If there was no meaning, why to bother?

[opus10no2]

Sorry, I didn't mean it that way 

I meant that music has no teachable meaning, and no meaning in any traditional sense.

Does playing to bring out the 'emotional meaning' piece produce a different result than playing it for purely musical pleasure?

The former is not necessary for a great performance, our reaction may be emotional even if the performer feels nothing. The one rule for a great musical performance is that the pianist must play the music how they , at that moment, think it would sound best.

You can think of emotion and meaning as a cause and/or a result, but great music always demands an interesting musicality.

[m]

I meant that music has no teachable meaning, and no meaning in any traditional sense.

Actually, as I stated above, it does.

[opus10no2]

Why can't everything in music itself be learnt just by listening?

Unlike language, in which people need to know definitions, music can be expressed and appreciated without any consultation or teaching.

[m]

Why can't everything in music itself be learnt just by listening?

Is it possible to learn to play chess or tennis just by watching the games? Is it possible to learn a foreign language from ears, just by listening to it?
Sure, theoretically it is. I am sure there are even some examples in the world, when people have reached a high degree of mastery or proficiency.

How practical it is? How high is probability that maybe one out of THOUSANDS would reach more or less accomplished level?

Hopefully it answers your question.

[opus10no2]

I mean everything musical in music.

I don't mean people shouldn't learn how to sight-read.

But much of sight-reading skill has little to do with music, and more with motion and pattern recognition.

My basic idea is that interpretation doesn't need to be taught.

A pianist should explore the possibilities, hear others' ideas in the form of recordings, and then do what sounds best.

So this is why I think it's more valuable to learn and teach technical matters.

[m]

I mean everything musical in music.

I don't mean people shouldn't learn how to sight-read. But much of sight-reading skill has little to do with music, and more with motion and pattern recognition.

Did I say something about sight reading?

My basic idea is that interpretation doesn't need to be taught. A pianist should explore the possibilities, hear others' ideas in the form of recordings, and then do what sounds best.

Your basic idea is wrong. I just wrote a reply to that idea. Have you read it?

So this is why I think it's more valuable to learn and teach technical matters.

Obviously, we have a very different pick on technical matters, so let's not go there.