What qualities make a "mature" performance/performer ?

[m19834]

Your opinion, of course.  And, if you have specific performers/performances in mind, especially if you could make comparisons, that could probably be helpful .

Thanks,
Karli

[jinfiesto]

I think what makes a mature performance, is having technique that transcends what you're performing, and then having the innate musicality to do something with what you're playing. I think a mature performer is someone who does this consistently, regardless of repertoire.

[ted]

A mature player might be reflexively defined as one who is individuated, who has "come to terms" with himself/herself in regard to music. Of course that state of mind is purely internal and might not be communicated to other people. Indeed, a happily "mature" player in this sense might seem three shingles short of a roof to other musicians. You might think of a few names but of course I couldn't possibly comment.

[counterpoint]

A mature performer is someone, who plays in a profound way 











 

[m19834]

A mature player might be reflexively defined as one who is individuated, who has "come to terms" with himself/herself in regard to music. Of course that state of mind is purely internal and might not be communicated to other people. Indeed, a happily "mature" player in this sense might seem three shingles short of a roof to other musicians. You might think of a few names but of course I couldn't possibly comment.

Thanks for your response, Ted.  I suppose maturity in playing is linked to maturity in person (though I wonder if they actually go hand-in-hand ? ).  I certainly don't mean to single out performers for the sake of singling them out, I just thought I could learn from examples of what people find to be mature or not.

If I were to try to define it, I suppose I would think of maturity in playing as being a mix of "musical maturity" as well as personal maturity.  Now, musical maturity is an odd thing (not that personal maturity is not), I think, and something that can seem (or actually be) very subjective.  I would say though, that it is linked to a basic knowledge about music and the personal ability to use that knowledge in a way that the performer decides.

For me, I think my own musical maturity is linked to knowing those things about music that I think are important to my goals as a musician.  My goal as a musician is perhaps more holistic than the idea of standing on stage just to perform, and I suppose that's a good reason I can't seem to separate myself from both singing and piano (composition and teaching, too), when many people seem to think that only one should be seriously pursued.  I think that musical maturity is linked to a holistic sense of music as well as the ability to express that sense in a personally satisfying way.  I don't think that really says anything in particular though.

Not everybody feels the need to know the names of chords, for example, yet I wouldn't necessarily rule out a performance as immature, where the function of chords is coherent (even if the names of them are not known).  And then again, I think "function" can be a limiting concept, too ! 

[m19834]

I think what makes a mature performance, is having technique that transcends what you're performing, and then having the innate musicality to do something with what you're playing. I think a mature performer is someone who does this consistently, regardless of repertoire.

jinfiesto, thanks for posting your thoughts.  I think that what you have written sounds quite good.  I like the concept, but it seems a bit vague to me.  Now, I think there is a certain level of ambiguity when it comes to the subject of music and its related conversations.  But, I wonder if you could expand on your idea of "technique that transcends what you're performing" -- what does that mean ?  How do we transcend what we're playing when what we're playing brings out what is needed within us in order to play it ?  To me, they seem linked -- do you know what I mean ?

As far as consistency regardless of repertoire, I think you are definitely on to something (that I can relate with). 

[jinfiesto]

Let's take an example karli, what I mean by technique that transcends what one is playing is that the technical difficulties are not an issue, and the only difficulties remaining are the musical ones. Basically, you can do anything you want with the piece in question, you just have to figure out what.

So an example. For me, the fantasie impromptu (sorry for such a cliche example) is easy enough that there aren't any technical challenges for me, just musical ones. Now I'm not saying that the piece has to be easy initially for you to develop a mature performance, you just have to practice until there are no technical difficulties.

Consistency to me, means that performances are consistently mature. To me, one doesn't need difficult repertoire to be a mature performer. One could in my mind, play nothing but Burgmuller, and be a mature performer, so long as the musical depth is there.