Foregoing my standard form of replying to this type of stuff (since there is just so effing much of it and it's all ferociously repetitive, quote/reply is going to be too tedious), I'm just going to overview.Firstly: I am really annoyed nobody fell for my trap near the top of this thread. You people should be ashamed of yourselves for leaving me hanging like that. You know I wanted to do some philosophizing beat down. That's obviously the most glaring issue with this thread, and signaled its downfall.Second: SPAM. Both of you. Whiny spam. Take it to the pages if you're going to go on and on. And on and on and on. And on like that. Nobody really cares, especially considering you're talking about stuff in a completely separate thread.Third: Thal. Moderately funny.Fourth: That recording of Marik's 25-6 is a reason to not take his opinion seriously. It's amateur-professional, semi-professional, piano teacher (whichever way you want to put it) grade, not professional. It's just not very good. I'm not saying he hasn't uploaded good recordings here in the past, but that performance was sloppy in nearly every regard, so I really don't think it should accord any baring.Fifth: Just my opinion, but Stevebob's posts in that thread were far more civil than Marik's, and probably more respectful. Marik's posts are condescending, and listing a bunch of pianists you claim to know that all agree with you is insecure at best, god-awfully annoying and pompous at worst, not to mention reeking of ego and delusions of grandeur. I'm not saying Stevebob's opinions are more/less valid/incorrect, but his aren't full of rhetoric and patting himself on the back. By the way, an interesting little factoid about Marik's behavior you probably didn't see. That being because several of his posts in that thread were actually so ridiculous and egotistical Nils deleted them. He's not the darling, little angel Karli is making him out to be.Sixth: Karli, quit being an instigator. If anyone owes anyone an apology, you own Steve one, for making wild accusations at him, belittling his opinion, dragging him into this muck you have gone out of your way to create somewhere it doesn't belong, and doing all this under what to me looks like a glaring misinterpretation of the actual situation. Like Marik, you are also exhibiting quite the superiority complex (in this, particular case; I wouldn't normally say that about you), and you're not listing famous pianists. You're listing Marik, a complete unknown to everyone except members of this forum. Please keep in mind that Marik is not a famous pianist, and there is no reason Stevebob should assume such. Also, your argument holds no water, as it was Marik that responded to Steve, and not the other way around.Seventh: Sup Alistair?Eighth: Nobody wins this thread. Everyone loses. This thread is a huge pile of fail. However, if I was forced to choose, I'd have to give the gold medal to Thal. Although we're talking like, Special Olympics gold medal; sure you'd rather have the gold, but you should feel bad anyway.Ninth: Apparently Steve met the end of his rope and made crude comments to Karli? Well, you probably deserved it. Seriously. Don't be a baby; poke something and it will bite. Although I have to say that disappoints me in Steve (greatest irony ever?), who seems to be able to maintain his cool much better than most. I know how quickly I'd be banned if I was in Steve's shoes.Tenth, and finally: Opinions are opinions, and facts are facts. Don't mix them up just because you have a crush on Marik. Specifically, Marik's mention of 25-3 and 25-4 as the most difficult etudes of the entire set should clue you into the fact that Marik may not be the absolute end-all on this subject, seeing as the majority of his own arguments are based on the notion that everyone agrees about this matter. Seems pretty contradictory that we're supposed to believe him because everyone agrees with him while he calls two etudes usually considered in the middle range of the difficulty scale to be the absolutely most difficult.In true overview fashion, I will say that I find this whole thread completely destroyed, and while I think Stevebob is in the right in the matter that is actually being argued, nobody getting mixed up in this garbage is doing the right thing; this should have been kept respectful, this is in the wrong place, it should have been ended a long time ago, or, even better, it shouldn't have been brought up at all. There was no reason for this to start; it's not like one of you was doing something outrageous or insulting the other person, or even really saying something stupid. That's just what it suddenly exploded into, for absolutely no reason as far as I can tell, except that you (Karli) decided it was appropriate, for whatever reason, to derail a thread to try to get in a snide, little comment that has nothing to do with the thread you posted it in.
Q.F.T.
Dear Mr. Inch,One does not need to know everything within the world to be known, but to know just enough, to be capable of recognizing when words clearly reflect the untrue and unknown.
I am still amused, somebody who supports half of the messages with quotes from Wikipedia and doesn't have a first hand experience (or just one single insight) even with such a common repertoire piece as Chopin Op.25/12, starts ranking Chopin Etudes difficulties, to start with... and then gets offended ? Com'on...
No story would be a story without some kind of adversity and antagonist. The thing is, these things are formulaic, and all part of a pattern -- they are mere devices which don't necessarily achieve what the author may think they are achieving. That's the problem with uncontrolled "experiments," and when we are talking about individual beings, it's nearly impossible to truly know what's actually happening inside of them unless everybody is seeing their relation with each other in something bigger than oneself. Many teachers use the same devices in teaching, based on perhaps some yogic philosophy or psychology or some mixture of both. Personally, I can 'get' the "value" in it, and I think it may be generally one of the highest forms known to mankind so far, but something about it just doesn't sit right with me, some part of me believes there can be so, so much more. I guess it's just a matter of finding the right match.
What does that stand for.
Stevebob, I am actually being as direct as I can be.
One does not need to know everything within the world to be known, but to know just enough, to be capable of recognizing when words clearly reflect the untrue and unknown.
That's the problem with uncontrolled "experiments," and when we are talking about individual beings, it's nearly impossible to truly know what's actually happening inside of them unless everybody is seeing their relation with each other in something bigger than oneself.
That's true, and I never pretended to be one. Moreover, a few times on this board I stated I left stage long ago and was not practicing for many years. Last few years I started coming back to shape (still in the process) and sometimes play concerts for my own leisure... just for heck of it and to see if that's something what I still want to do.
I actually thought that people would be much more interested not even in my opinion, but out of curiosity ask how Gavrilov was playing them in class to show off when relaxed, or what real pianists had to say about those etudes. Was I wrong!
I am sure you realize yourself what you write here is rather a twisted way of what I posted, your interpretation to rather suit your own agenda, but it really doesn't matter...
Anyway, my main reason to answer you is actually, I wanted to thank you for uploaded on Youtube stuff of Babbitt, Finnissy, Xenakis (esp. Mists and Evryali), and Concord Sonata. Looking forward to more stuff. Particularly, I am interested in a good recording of Penderecki Piano Concerto.
Marik is obviously a very impressive pianist. He doesn't have to be famous. Just listen to his Ballade no.4 by Chopin, Scriabin sonata no 10 or Feinberg piano sonata 6.
When that is said, this thread shouldn't be about him or stevebob, it's about the Dunning-Kruger effect!
Personally I think that theories like Dunning-Kruger are at best little more that the so called geniuses affirming their own ability above those that are less capable and skilled. There are better ways of delivering advice.
It is - Australian idol is a variant... the sad part is that we don't just have painful singers auditioning - we get painful singers lacking in any talent whatsoever, believing they're full of it through the *** show all the way to the bloody finale - it's pathetic.
Fifth: Just my opinion, but Stevebob's posts in that thread were far more civil than Marik's, and probably more respectful.
Yes, now you're running out of arguments...
That would be a start.
I apologise fully and publicly in the hope that at least we can end our little dispute, and get back to the important stuff, like playing the bloody piano.
Why thank you
Would someone please enlighten me as to where all those lovely emoticons come from.Thal
Dunning-Kruger Effect: inaccurate self-assessment concerning our own competence (Read 4485 times)
