Open Piano Competition, London, 2012

[ella1980]

Entries are open for a new piano competition - Open Piano Competition, to be held in London late in 2012. www.openpianocompetition.com

[richard black]

Entry fee £125.

[ella1980]

Yes, entry fee £125 (until 31 March 2012). Late entry fee for entries after 31st March 2012 until 31 May 2012 of £50 on top. Piano competition in London open to amateurs and professionals!

[asiantraveller101]

Problem is no repertoire list posted yet! How wary!

[bleicher]

Looks as though their priority is money first, music second!

[openpianocompetition]

Problem is no repertoire list posted yet! How wary!

The repertoire should be uploaded very shortly - the website has literally just been launched. Check www.openpianocompetition.com in the next few days and it should all be published.

[nyiregyhazi]

The repertoire should be uploaded very shortly - the website has literally just been launched. Check www.openpianocompetition.com in the next few days and it should all be published.

I must say that I find the idea of different ability categories pretty odd. Especially as it's not really made clear how they are defined. I think they would do well to post a great deal more information to clarify these issues.

[openpianocompetition]

I must say that I find the idea of different ability categories pretty odd. Especially as it's not really made clear how they are defined. I think they would do well to post a great deal more information to clarify these issues.

Hello nyiregyhazi,

The Open Piano Competition aims to be "open" to more than one level of ability; hence categorising pianists into three different levels. Selection for these categories will be made using the applicant's audio recording as well as competed questionnaire.

I hope this helps your understanding and aids clarification.

Marco

[nyiregyhazi]

Hello nyiregyhazi,

The Open Piano Competition aims to be "open" to more than one level of ability; hence categorising pianists into three different levels. Selection for these categories will be made using the applicant's audio recording as well as competed questionnaire.

I hope this helps your understanding and aids clarification.

Marco

Sorry to be blunt, but it doesn't clarify the first thing. In the Van Cliburn, there is an extremely clear and explicit boundary between the amateur and professional competition. Basically amateurs must earn their living in a separate field (which also prohibits music teaching).

How are three categories going to work? Is it possible that one of the less accomplished music college students might end up competing against some of the accomplished amateurs in the second category (or even third, for all we have been told)? Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through? And would the most accomplished amateurs of all perhaps end up in a no hope situation against seasoned competition circuit players in the upper category- effectively having their chances eliminated by being a little too good for an amateur?  With three categories that are as yet undefined, these are major questions. Why not just the obvious amateur and pro? An extra category makes clarification all the more necessary.

Sorry if this comes across as rude, but I find the ambiguity very curious and suspect that amateurs and pros alike would find it off-putting. To a serious competition entrant, they might be wondering how serious this competition really is. To a good amateur, do they really want to pay that money without knowing whether they're to be put in the same category as lesser college students or not? I think the failure to provide explicit separation of categories is a major mistake. A hardened cynic might even wonder if it's a bid to squeeze entry fees from no-hopers, who think that having done a grade or two may still give them a chance due to the "all abilities" tag. However, I'd imagine the lack of clarification would put off far more than it would bring in- and it also makes the competition look disorganised, frankly. Is this an "everyone's a winner" type event where people of any ability come for a very expensive pat on the back? Or is it a serious piano competition with additional categories?

[m1469]

One of the things I like about it is the non-labeling.  I even went through the questionnaire (without submitting it) to see what it was like, and I generally enjoyed my experience ... hee hee.  Personally, if I were playing at a level that could compete with players at a very high level, I would much prefer that it were in a category that didn't already favor others based on title, but rather on playing.  I thought that this was one of the main points of the "ambiguity" of the categories vs. just saying "amateurs" and "professionals."  

As a side note, while I have perused some competition guidelines over the years, I don't feel I quite belong in a particular area, still.  For one example, since I'm a music teacher, that alone eliminates me from being in certain categories of amateur - as though working at a grocery store would be less conducive to my musical growth than sitting in a room for hours trying to party 5 yr. olds into learning 7 letters of the alphabet (vs. them trying to be doing every other thing imaginable during that time), and trying to convince mom or dad to work with them during the week so we avoid months of the same lesson over and over and over again, is.  Or, as though me working 25 hours a week as a music teacher somehow gives me an edge over somebody who, say, isn't even working to bring in income at all but just practicing while being supported by somebody else  .

Did I say that out loud?  

Well, it's quarter to 5am, I've been up for over an hour after a solid 4 hours of sleep, I've had breakfast and I am sipping coffee ... time to start practicing before my students arrive for the day  .

[nyiregyhazi]

As a side note, while I have perused some competition guidelines over the years, I don't feel I quite belong in a particular area, still.  For one example, since I'm a music teacher, that alone eliminates me from being in certain categories of amateur - as though working at a grocery store would be less conducive to my musical growth than sitting in a room for hours trying to party 5 yr. olds into learning 7 letters of the alphabet (vs. them trying to be doing every other thing imaginable during that time), and trying to convince mom or dad to work with them during the week so we avoid months of the same lesson over and over and over again, is.  Or, as though me working 25 hours a week as a music teacher somehow gives me an edge over somebody who, say, isn't even working to bring in income at all but just practicing while being supported by somebody else  .

Fair points, certainly. But does the absence of information somehow suggest that this competition views it differently? In short, no. All we know as that some kind of system is going to emerge and that it IS based in some mysterious way on your CV as well as your submitted playing. We just don't know anything at all.

In particular, if it's not based on a drawn up system, how many pianists will fall through the cracks? Clearly it's not that the best of all go through. So how many pianists will be too good for one category and not good enough for another? Will some of them even "throw" the recording slightly in order to get into a lower category, only to come up with the real goods when it counts and blow everyone else out of the water? I'd rather know where I stood, if I were to pay such a large entry fee.

[m1469]

your CV

I don't know what that is!

In particular, if it's not based on a drawn up system, how many pianists will fall through the cracks? Clearly it's not that the best of all go through. So how many pianists will be too good for one category and not good enough for another? Will some of them even "throw" the recording slightly in order to get into a lower category, only to come up with the real goods when it counts and blow everyone else out of the water? I'd rather know where I stood, if I were to pay such a large entry fee.

Well, yes, I did consider that there could be hoards of applicants paying a decent fee (application fee, or entry fee?) with never a chance of being considered at all.  And, there is a question asking how many years have I (anybody) been studying for, I assume as a factor towards placement.  In my case, do I really say "well, I've been playing all my life ... had a couple of years in adolescence, but didn't really start until I got my life sorted out at the age of 22 and re-entered University, and then I was immediately set into a circumstance which deeply set me back for years after that, only to restart again since about 3 years ago" ... "so, 3-4 years of positive, guided study" or just "25 years/all my life" (I'll just pretend nobody is doing any math and that I could still be in my twenties) or "well, if you actually total up the years of deep and committed study/practicing, it's been 6-7"  ... hmmm ...

[nyiregyhazi]

"I don't know what that is!"

it's your background, basically.

"Well, yes, I did consider that there could be hoards of applicants paying a decent fee (application fee, or entry fee?) with never a chance of being considered at all."

Exactly. £125 to have someone listen to a 3 minute recording! They need a LOT more clarification if they're expecting people to want to get involved.

"And, in my case again, there is a question asking how many years have I (anybody) been studying for, as a factor towards placement.  Do I really say "well, I've been playing all my life ... had a couple of years in adolescence, but didn't really start until I got my life sorted out at the age of 22, and then I was immediately set into a circumstance which deeply set me back for years after that, only to restart again since about 3 years ago" ... "so, three years" or "25 years" (I'll just pretend nobody is doing any math and that I could still be in my twenties) or "well, if you actually total up the years of deep study, it's been 6"  ... hmmm ..."


Indeed. A proper competition needs a proper system. Anyone can lie, or more likely "bend the truth" rather selectively. If they're judging it on background, they're going to be very interested in your teacher tag- no matter how many excuses you were to make. If they're judging mostly on the playing, are we going to have the less talented college students (and indeed music teachers) unfairly put against someone who is remarkably accomplished for a true amateur- but not in the same league as the lesser students? Either way, the whole thing looks like a total mess.

[m1469]

Indeed. A proper competition needs a proper system. Anyone can lie, or more likely "bend the truth" rather selectively. If they're judging it on background, they're going to be very interested in your teacher tag- no matter how many excuses you were to make. If they're judging mostly on the playing, are we going to have the less talented college students (and indeed music teachers) unfairly put against someone who is remarkably accomplished for a true amateur- but not in the same league. Either way, the whole thing looks like a total mess.

Yes, and my point is (regardless of whatever you are aiming at, exactly, with your comments), I could possibly fall into more than one category, but where would be the fairest placement for anybody's concern, if it were not based most strictly on the playing itself?  But, maybe they have a system .  Not that me sitting here typing about it all instead of practicing is really a good choice ...  

[nyiregyhazi]

Yes, and my point is (regardless of whatever you are aiming at, exactly, with your comments), I could possibly fall into more than one category, but where would be the fairest placement for anybody's concern?  But, maybe they have a system .  Not that me sitting here typing about it all instead of practicing is really a good choice ...  

Okay, it's looking pretty clear now:

https://www.openpianocompetition.com/prizes

Note the 1st, 2nd and 3rd prizes and "special prizes" (the latter presumably being for the two lower categories). It seems pretty clear to me now that this is basically a standard elite competition complemented by a scheme to draw money from a wider pool. You wouldn't have to be too much of a cynic to read that as suggesting that what they really want to do is use the extra categories to draw in plenty of revenue from a larger number of unsuspecting no-hopers.

[m1469]

Okay, it's looking pretty clear now:

https://www.openpianocompetition.com/prizes

Note the 1st, 2nd and 3rd prizes and "special prizes" (the latter presumably being for the two lower categories). It seems pretty clear to me now that this is basically a standard elite competition complemented by a scheme to draw money from a wider pool. You wouldn't have to be too much of a cynic to read that as suggesting that what they really want to do is use the extra categories to draw in plenty of revenue from a larger number of unsuspecting no-hopers.

Well, the unchanging news for me is that, probably no matter what category I would possibly fit into, I'm not going to be heading to London anytime soon :- .  I've just got opinions and can be mighty good at playing along.

[m1469]

- no matter how many excuses you were to make.

And, anyway, *excuuuussse* me, but, while I am perfectly aware that the bottom line in this world -and as I would myself like it to be, as well- is a person's playing, and in that sense would even prefer that to be the standard on which a person is measured, I am not going to dismiss what I have in fact done to be achieving anything that I have been able to achieve.  Call it what you would like, but people boast their stories about all sorts of things, and I have my own, and have had to work very hard, beyond even just putting in hours and thought.  And, there is no way to dismiss the nature of work that my teachers in the last few years have put into me.  Most people wouldn't have any idea about that, in particular, except my teachers.  Neither one of my current teachers have had in me the average challenge of a pampered pianist, and not even the average challenge of a "late starter."  And, I've had friends who have helped me tremendously, as well, in particular PianoWolfi and Goldentone, along with some other members of the forum and the forum as a whole.  That's a reality of sorts, which is not my personal identity more than musical and personal progress themselves are, but is still not going to be dismissed - ever.

[nyiregyhazi]

And, anyway, *excuuuussse* me, but, while I am perfectly aware that the bottom line in this world -and as I would myself like it to be, as well- is a person's playing, and in that sense would even prefer that to be the standard on which a person is measured, I am not going to dismiss what I have in fact done to be achieving anything that I have been able to achieve.  Call it what you would like, but people boast their stories about all sorts of things, and I have my own, and have had to work very hard, beyond even just putting in hours and thought.  And, there is no way to dismiss the nature of work that my teachers in the last few years have put into me.  Most people wouldn't have any idea about that, in particular, except my teachers.  Neither one of my current teachers have had in me the average challenge of a pampered pianist, and not even the average challenge of a "late starter."  And, I've had friends who have helped me tremendously, as well, in particular PianoWolfi and Goldentone, along with some other members of the forum and the forum as a whole.  That's a reality of sorts, which is not my personal identity more than musical and personal progress, but is still not going to be dismissed - ever.

Really, you misunderstand. I didn't mean that in a derogatory sense. From the way you phrased it, it seemed pretty clear that your tongue was in your cheek- and that you realised that such talk would likely be read that way to a judge. I intended no insult or judgement at all.

[nyiregyhazi]

Let's face it- there would be no shortage of "excuses" as to why people feel they should not have to be judged alongside pianists who have been practising 8 hours per day for more than ten years (some of those people possibly even being pianists who have been practising 8 hours per day for more than ten years themselves!).

[m1469]

Let's face it- there would be no shortage of "excuses" as to why people feel they should not have to be judged alongside pianists who have been practising 8 hours per day for more than ten years (some of those people possibly even being pianists who have been practising 8 hours per day for more than ten years themselves!).

Well, I don't know about other people, truly!  I can say, though, eventually I'd love to be at a point of my playing being "judged" alongside anybody's!  Like from behind a curtain, where you don't see nor know the person, you just hear them playing - eventually.  And, it's not because I'd like to "win" ... it is because I'd like to be in the league.  

[openpianocompetition]

Sorry to be blunt, but it doesn't clarify the first thing. In the Van Cliburn, there is an extremely clear and explicit boundary between the amateur and professional competition. Basically amateurs must earn their living in a separate field (which also prohibits music teaching).

How are three categories going to work? Is it possible that one of the less accomplished music college students might end up competing against some of the accomplished amateurs in the second category (or even third, for all we have been told)? Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through? And would the most accomplished amateurs of all perhaps end up in a no hope situation against seasoned competition circuit players in the upper category- effectively having their chances eliminated by being a little too good for an amateur?  With three categories that are as yet undefined, these are major questions. Why not just the obvious amateur and pro? An extra category makes clarification all the more necessary.

Sorry if this comes across as rude, but I find the ambiguity very curious and suspect that amateurs and pros alike would find it off-putting. To a serious competition entrant, they might be wondering how serious this competition really is. To a good amateur, do they really want to pay that money without knowing whether they're to be put in the same category as lesser college students or not? I think the failure to provide explicit separation of categories is a major mistake. A hardened cynic might even wonder if it's a bid to squeeze entry fees from no-hopers, who think that having done a grade or two may still give them a chance due to the "all abilities" tag. However, I'd imagine the lack of clarification would put off far more than it would bring in- and it also makes the competition look disorganised, frankly. Is this an "everyone's a winner" type event where people of any ability come for a very expensive pat on the back? Or is it a serious piano competition with additional categories?

Dear nyiregyhazi

Many thanks for your critical comments. Please see my responses below:

- "In the Van Cliburn, there is an extremely clear and explicit boundary between the amateur and professional competition"

The Van Cliburn Foundation runs two separate competitions; one for professionals and one for amateurs.

- "How are three categories going to work? "

Judges assess an audio recording and categorise according to candidates' playing ability.

- "Is it possible that one of the less accomplished music college students might end up competing against some of the accomplished amateurs in the second category (or even third, for all we have been told)?"

Candidates, once allocated to a category, will have the opportunity to appeal their categorisation. We may move the candidate to a different category. This is clearly stated on our website.

-"Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through? "

Each category is judged independently until the Final, which will contain pianists chosen from all three categories.

- "And would the most accomplished amateurs of all perhaps end up in a no hope situation against seasoned competition circuit players in the upper category - effectively having their chances eliminated by being a little too good for an amateur? "

See my previous comment.

- "With three categories that are as yet undefined, these are major questions."

We feel that the repertoire chosen for each category reflects the level of pianistic ability required for each category. We also allow candidates to make suggestions of new repertoire subject to our approval.

- "Why not just the obvious amateur and pro?"

Why not include a third category? There are varying levels of amateur. It's a subjective decision.

-"A hardened cynic might even wonder if it's a bid to squeeze entry fees from no-hopers, who think that having done a grade or two may still give them a chance due to the "all abilities" tag. "
We feel that the repertoire, clearly listed on the website, should discourage any no-hoper therefore this situation would not occur.

-"Is this an "everyone's a winner" type event where people of any ability come for a very expensive pat on the back? "

I fear repetition of my comment above: people "of any ability" will not be able to play the chosen repertoire for the competition.

- "Or is it a serious piano competition with additional categories?"

Very much so.

[openpianocompetition]

Fair points, certainly. But does the absence of information somehow suggest that this competition views it differently? In short, no. All we know as that some kind of system is going to emerge and that it IS based in some mysterious way on your CV as well as your submitted playing. We just don't know anything at all.

In particular, if it's not based on a drawn up system, how many pianists will fall through the cracks? Clearly it's not that the best of all go through. So how many pianists will be too good for one category and not good enough for another? Will some of them even "throw" the recording slightly in order to get into a lower category, only to come up with the real goods when it counts and blow everyone else out of the water? I'd rather know where I stood, if I were to pay such a large entry fee.

nyiregyhazi,

-"All we know as that some kind of system is going to emerge and that it IS based in some mysterious way on your CV as well as your submitted playing. We just don't know anything at all."

If a competition such as this one has a very clearly drawn up system, this may make it easier for professional pianists to conceal their talents in an intial audio recording only to be categorised at a level they are not satisfied with, whereupon their recategorisation to a higher category (as they will want to receive the maximum monetary award) they show their true ability and are subsequently disqualified from the competition.

We clearly state that applicants are assessed on their completed questionnaire as well as their audio recording. If an applicant has the gall and audacity to submit false information and/or a false audio recording, then they will face disqualification.

- "In particular, if it's not based on a drawn up system, how many pianists will fall through the cracks? Clearly it's not that the best of all go through."

We hope that zero pianists will fall through the cracks, however we expressly state maximum numbers allowed for each round, which is consistent with all piano competitions. We hope only to put through the best pianists, who will be assessed chosen at the judges' discretion.

-"Will some of them even "throw" the recording slightly in order to get into a lower category, only to come up with the real goods when it counts and blow everyone else out of the water?"

See my first comment on this thread.

-"I'd rather know where I stood, if I were to pay such a large entry fee."

Applicants are welcome to appeal any categorisation decision and are encouraged to correspond with the directors to such end.

[openpianocompetition]

I don't know what that is!

Well, yes, I did consider that there could be hoards of applicants paying a decent fee (application fee, or entry fee?) with never a chance of being considered at all.  And, there is a question asking how many years have I (anybody) been studying for, I assume as a factor towards placement.  In my case, do I really say "well, I've been playing all my life ... had a couple of years in adolescence, but didn't really start until I got my life sorted out at the age of 22 and re-entered University, and then I was immediately set into a circumstance which deeply set me back for years after that, only to restart again since about 3 years ago" ... "so, 3 years of positive, guided study" or just "25 years/all my life" (I'll just pretend nobody is doing any math and that I could still be in my twenties) or "well, if you actually total up the years of deep and committed study/practicing, it's been 6"  ... hmmm ...

Hi m1469,

Thank you for your support! I endeavour to answer your comments below:

-"Well, yes, I did consider that there could be hoards of applicants paying a decent fee (application fee, or entry fee?) with never a chance of being considered at all. "

Yes, it is a possibility that the competition receives a lot of entrants, as yet it is too early to say. Yes, the entry fee is larger than that of some other international piano competitions, however, London is probably one of the most expensive cities in Europe in which to host such an event and we feel that given this event is in its first edition and London does not possess a similar competition open to more than only amateur or only professional, candidates who want to be a part of it will be happy to pay.

-"In my case, do I really say "well, I've been playing all my life ... "

If you were to apply you should state the real number of years you have played for leaving other information for the "personal profile" box.

[openpianocompetition]

"I don't know what that is!"

it's your background, basically.

"Well, yes, I did consider that there could be hoards of applicants paying a decent fee (application fee, or entry fee?) with never a chance of being considered at all."

Exactly. £125 to have someone listen to a 3 minute recording! They need a LOT more clarification if they're expecting people to want to get involved.

"And, in my case again, there is a question asking how many years have I (anybody) been studying for, as a factor towards placement.  Do I really say "well, I've been playing all my life ... had a couple of years in adolescence, but didn't really start until I got my life sorted out at the age of 22, and then I was immediately set into a circumstance which deeply set me back for years after that, only to restart again since about 3 years ago" ... "so, three years" or "25 years" (I'll just pretend nobody is doing any math and that I could still be in my twenties) or "well, if you actually total up the years of deep study, it's been 6"  ... hmmm ..."


Indeed. A proper competition needs a proper system. Anyone can lie, or more likely "bend the truth" rather selectively. If they're judging it on background, they're going to be very interested in your teacher tag- no matter how many excuses you were to make. If they're judging mostly on the playing, are we going to have the less talented college students (and indeed music teachers) unfairly put against someone who is remarkably accomplished for a true amateur- but not in the same league as the lesser students? Either way, the whole thing looks like a total mess.

Please see my comments to your earlier post.

Again, I clarify that a clearly set out system may make it easier for the unscrupulous individual to misrepresent himself and undermine the competition. Again, I stress that we state in our terms and conditions that upon becoming aware of such a situation we disqualify the individual concerned. Again, the judges will judge both on the pianists' ability and on their completed questionnaire. We are not going to have anyone "put unfairly against" anyone else: categories are judged independently until the Final. In the Final selected pianists from each category compete against each other. If an applicant is not happy with this format, he or she will not enter the competition.

- "Either way, the whole thing looks like a total mess."

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Candidates, once allocated to a category, will have the opportunity to appeal their categorisation. We may move the candidate to a different category. This is clearly stated on our website."

That wasn't my point. My point is that there's no indication of how categories are defined and what standard an amateur might expect to be up against- either in the first round or in the selection process. How is an amateur pianist going to be expected to pay £125 to have a 3 minute recording listened to, when they have no idea who they are up against or how many places are in the separate contests? I think you'd be a lot wiser to have a cheaper entry fee with an additional fee for those who make round 1. With no guarantee of more, £125 for a three minute listen comes across as daylight robbery, sorry.


"Each category is judged independently until the Final, which will contain pianists chosen from all three categories."

? That has no bearing on the point you wrote it under. I said:

Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through?

How does that reflect on that? And how you can judge "independently" unless a person has submits themself to a particular category during application? You have to judge the categories for people to go into to start with so that makes no sense at all. Will some people be too good for one category but not good enough for the next? If there were two pianists of a similar background, might the better one crash out while the worse one is admitted to a lower category?

And they go head to head in the final? What the hell? 1st prize is for whoever "tries hardest"?


"Or is it a serious piano competition with additional categories?"

Very much so.

With the system for the final, it sure as hell does not sound that way. Even with that put aside, you could sell yourself a lot better. Stating that music college students are not permitted in the lowest category, say, would make amateurs much more inclined to apply without expecting to throw £125 away for 3 minutes of somebody's time. Also, you give no indication of how many people are in each category. Is it an even split? Or will there be a main competition with a couple of side-lines? As it is, you're greatly devaluing the impression of the main competition, while simultaneously making it look highly suspect to an enthusiastic amateur. Above all, you're not giving anybody the first idea about who they are up against (and importantly who they would not have to compete against).

[nyiregyhazi]

"If a competition such as this one has a very clearly drawn up system, this may make it easier for professional pianists to conceal their talents in an intial audio recording only to be categorised at a level they are not satisfied with, whereupon their recategorisation to a higher category (as they will want to receive the maximum monetary award) they show their true ability and are subsequently disqualified from the competition."

Separate categories wouldn't make more sense? Also, this suggests that college students can go in any category as long as not overly good? This sounds ridiculous. Why should a relatively bad student be up against an outstanding amateur. It makes a mockery of the whole system.

"We hope that zero pianists will fall through the cracks, however we expressly state maximum numbers allowed for each round, which is consistent with all piano competitions. We hope only to put through the best pianists, who will be assessed chosen at the judges' discretion."

? So why the labelling about all abilities? If you get too many entries from students, it's "goodbye amateurs"? Which of those conflicting claims is true? This is just riddled with problems. For God's sake put a proper system in place! 

[m1469]

Thanks for answering so many questions, Marco!

Nyzi, what in the world are you going on and on about?  If somebody can play to a certain standard, why can't they compete with other people of similar ability regardless of labeling?  Just suck it up and start planning your repertoire  .  

[nyiregyhazi]

One additional point, if a person has no idea what category they will be in how the hell do they know what repertoire to learn? And the 2nd movement of the Rachmaninoff 2nd sonata alone? It doesn't even have an ending! It simply leaves the music hanging in preparation for the connected 3rd movement!

Sorry, but this currently shambolic. I'd take the website offline for now, have a major rethink and do some serious research. Who is going to pay £125 to enter a competition that discloses no venues, no judges, no affiliations/patrons and which has all of these gaping problems in the system? While I sincerely hopes it's not a full on con, I certainly wouldn't feel secure paying such a mighty fee to a mysterious new internet organisation. If you're in this for real, pull the whole thing for now and have a rethink. Going public before having a slick system is a BIG mistake, if this is supposed to look professional and organised.

[nyiregyhazi]

Thanks for answering so many questions, Marco!

Nyzi, what in the world are you going on and on about?  If somebody can play to a certain standard, why can't they compete with other people of similar ability regardless of labeling?  Just suck it up and start planning your repertoire  .  

Because it makes a mockery of the all-abilities concept. Why should an ultra-talented amateur who barely has time to practise have to compete with a student who is relatively unremarkable but practises 8 hours per day? If there's more than one category then it needs to attempt to put like against like. Not the averagely talented but circumstantially advantaged against the talented but circumstantially disadvantaged. If college students and pros aren't going to simply knock all the amateurs out at the outset, there's not the slightest clarification of how they are organising it in order to be fair to mixed abilities. These things need at least SOME clarification of a system. £125 fee to someone whose idea of organisation is to say "we'll figure something out at the time in some sort of way"? Not a chance!

[openpianocompetition]

One additional point, if a person has no idea what category they will be in how the hell do they know what repertoire to learn? And the 2nd movement of the Rachmaninoff 2nd sonata alone? It doesn't even have an ending! It simply leaves the music hanging in preparation for the connected 3rd movement!

Sorry, but this currently shambolic. I'd take the website offline for now, have a major rethink and do some serious research. Who is going to pay £125 to enter a competition that discloses no venues, no judges, no affiliations/patrons and which has all of these gaping problems in the system? While I sincerely hopes it's not a full on con, I certainly wouldn't feel secure paying such a mighty fee to a mysterious new internet organisation. If you're in this for real, pull the whole thing for now and have a rethink. Going public before having a slick system is a BIG mistake, if this is supposed to look professional and organised.

-"One additional point, if a person has no idea what category they will be in how the hell do they know what repertoire to learn?"

An applicant will be notified of the category shortly after the deadline for applications passes. Any serious applicant will study the repertoire and should have a good idea in any event of what music they can and cannot play before considering submitting an application.

-"And the 2nd movement of the Rachmaninoff 2nd sonata alone? It doesn't even have an ending! It simply leaves the music hanging in preparation for the connected 3rd movement! "

The "Non allegro" movement of this piano sonata ends in a dotted semi-breve with a pause; the perfect ending. All of this before a compete key change and "attacca subito" for the 3rd movement. In our opinion the second movement of this sonata is entirely apt for competition repertoire.

[nyiregyhazi]

"An applicant will be notified of the category shortly after the deadline for applications passes. Any serious applicant will study the repertoire and should have a good idea in any event of what music they can and cannot play before considering submitting an application. "

So they should learn repertoire off every list, just in case? Sorry, but this is VERY badly thought out. These issue urgently need to be ironed out if this is to look like a properly organised competition. If it's for amateurs they ought to know what will be expected long before that stage. Why don't you let people choose to enter for a specific category and define them properly? Why all this mystery? Sorry, but I'm only the messenger when I say that it just looks ill-prepared. I like the concept but it isn't going to appeal unless you define it better. £125 for an amateur to have his three minute recording potentially judged alongside a crowd of music college students is NOT going to appeal. You need to specifically separate at least one category, if you're serious about involving amateurs. Why not have a middle category that overlaps amateurs and pros but designate one class for amateurs alone? Surely it would just be plain ridiculous to entertain the notion that this category would involve students of the big colleges? So why not rule it out and give the amateurs some assurance? The students could still take part in two categories and everybody would know where they stand. What is the problem with this rather obvious step?


Also, the repertoire is very poorly organised- seemingly chosen randomly much of the time. Why only the 4th movement of the Beethoven E flat alongside complete sonatas? It's not even a substantial movement- perhaps the worst of all to stand alone. Why this bizarre exception to having whole sonatas? And you can choose either a half hour Kreisleriana (actually it typically takes rather longer- hence exceeding the 30 minute limit for the final!!!) or a single Scriabin Etude? And any Liszt rhapsody for intermediate? There is little sense of logic to it at all. Look through some established competition repertoire guides. You'll typically find logically structured requirements such as a modern piece and an advanced Etude. Sorry, but the repertoire lists look almost random here, with no sense of system or guiding logic. It just looks sloppy and thrown together in a hurry.


"The "Non allegro" movement of this piano sonata ends in a dotted semi-breve with a pause; the perfect ending."

A secondary dominant left hanging is a "perfect ending"? It has no sense of closure whatsoever- leaving nothing but harmonic instability and anticipation.

[openpianocompetition]

"Candidates, once allocated to a category, will have the opportunity to appeal their categorisation. We may move the candidate to a different category. This is clearly stated on our website."

That wasn't my point. My point is that there's no indication of how categories are defined and what standard an amateur might expect to be up against- either in the first round or in the selection process. How is an amateur pianist going to be expected to pay £125 to have a 3 minute recording listened to, when they have no idea who they are up against or how many places are in the separate contests? I think you'd be a lot wiser to have a cheaper entry fee with an additional fee for those who make round 1. With no guarantee of more, £125 for a three minute listen comes across as daylight robbery, sorry.


"Each category is judged independently until the Final, which will contain pianists chosen from all three categories."

? That has no bearing on the point you wrote it under. I said:

Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through?

How does that reflect on that? And how you can judge "independently" unless a person has submits themself to a particular category during application? You have to judge the categories for people to go into to start with so that makes no sense at all. Will some people be too good for one category but not good enough for the next? If there were two pianists of a similar background, might the better one crash out while the worse one is admitted to a lower category?

And they go head to head in the final? What the hell? 1st prize is for whoever "tries hardest"?


"Or is it a serious piano competition with additional categories?"

Very much so.

With the system for the final, it sure as hell does not sound that way. Even with that put aside, you could sell yourself a lot better. Stating that music college students are not permitted in the lowest category, say, would make amateurs much more inclined to apply without expecting to throw £125 away for 3 minutes of somebody's time. Also, you give no indication of how many people are in each category. Is it an even split? Or will there be a main competition with a couple of side-lines? As it is, you're greatly devaluing the impression of the main competition, while simultaneously making it look highly suspect to an enthusiastic amateur. Above all, you're not giving anybody the first idea about who they are up against (and importantly who they would not have to compete against).

Thank you again for your questions, comments, judgements and opinions. I respond as follows:

"My point is that there's no indication of how categories are defined and what standard an amateur might expect to be up against- either in the first round or in the selection process."

I repeat, we do not wish to have a clearly defined category as we risk unscrupulous submissions. We are an "open" competition with as little restrictions as possible. An amateur should realise the  potential level of competition from the repertoire.

-"How is an amateur pianist going to be expected to pay £125 to have a 3 minute recording listened to, when they have no idea who they are up against or how many places are in the separate contests?"

An amateur, if he does not want to pay this amount, will not enter the competition. Simple. The audio recording is three to five minutes, and in any case we may amend this to be longer if we feel it necessary to reflect an applicant's talents accurately. I urge you to read the contents of the website fully before posting more questions; we clearly state (at https://www.openpianocompetition.com/application-instructions) how many applicants proceed from initial selection audio recording to round one, how many proceed to round two and how many proceed to the final.

-" I think you'd be a lot wiser to have a cheaper entry fee with an additional fee for those who make round 1. With no guarantee of more, £125 for a three minute listen comes across as daylight robbery, sorry."

Given that this is the competition's first edition, and given it will be held in London, we feel that the fee is appropriate at this time. Again, a serious pianist who is aware of his/her talents will be able to make that judgement.

-"Whereas some more accomplished students might be too good for that category but not good enough for the first one- crashing out where their less accomplished colleagues go through?"

Perhaps I used the word "independently" incorrectly as well as possibly misunderstanding the meaning of the phrase "crash out" (not in UK English as far as I am aware). Candidates in category one will be assessed against others in category one, the same for category two and three, until the final round, where we will end up with the best of categories one, two and three competing against each other.

-"And they go head to head in the final? What the hell? 1st prize is for whoever "tries hardest"?"

Yes, they go head to head in the final. First prize is at the discretion of the judges and based on all of the factors that comprise a good performance as well as the information on the candidates' questionnaires. Surely you have, as a child/adolescent, competed in the "gala night" in the local or national music festival where the winners of classes ages 14-16 compete in the same competition as those ages 16-18 at the end of the festival, for a prize awarded on the best overall musical performance? If not, perhaps you are a little misinformed?

-"Stating that music college students are not permitted in the lowest category, say, would make amateurs much more inclined to apply without expecting to throw £125 away for 3 minutes of somebody's time."

Why should we place restrictions on our competition just as others have done? This closed type of competition is not the type of competition we are aiming for. what we are aiming for. In any event, an excellent amateur may produce a better performance than a music college graduate.  

-"Also, you give no indication of how many people are in each category. Is it an even split? Or will there be a main competition with a couple of side-lines? "

Please read the application instructions page of the website where this information is clearly stated: https://www.openpianocompetition.com/application-instructions

-"Above all, you're not giving anybody the first idea about who they are up against (and importantly who they would not have to compete against)."

You are totally missing the point of this competition. It is "open".
Furthermore, given a little more time (we only launched the site on Saturday night) and complete registrations and entry submissions, a newsletter will circulate detailing fellow competitors, their categorisations and a little on their profile.

Thank you again for your critique.

[nyiregyhazi]

"I repeat, we do not wish to have a clearly defined category as we risk unscrupulous submissions. We are an "open" competition with as little restrictions as possible. An amateur should realise the  potential level of competition from the repertoire."

So you're not actually wanting to open the net wide at all? Are you looking to draw amateurs in or not? If so, why not protect their category? If not, what the hell is the point in having three different ability levels? Some of the categories are for people that study seriously but aren't all that good? Why should the lower scoring music college students be patronised with a chance to win a "special" competition? It makes sense with amateurs who have little practise time but I am absolutely baffled by the concept of making special categories for those who study hard but are nothing special. The winner is going to be the best of the not all that good? It sounds like trying to define the "tallest dwarf" in the world.

"I urge you to read the contents of the website fully before posting more questions; we clearly state (at https://www.openpianocompetition.com/application-instructions) how many applicants proceed from initial selection audio recording to round one, how many proceed to round two and how many proceed to the final."

In total. There's no clarification about in each category. Not even a rough idea.

"Candidates in category one will be assessed against others in category one, the same for category two and three, until the final round, where we will end up with the best of categories one, two and three competing against each other. "

You haven't defined what puts them in each category. That was my point and you have not addressed it. This is so disorganised, I'm not sure if this gaping issue has even occurred to you yet...

"Yes, they go head to head in the final. First prize is at the discretion of the judges and based on all of the factors that comprise a good performance as well as the information on the candidates' questionnaires. Surely you have, as a child/adolescent, competed in the "gala night" in the local or national music festival where the winners of classes ages 14-16 compete in the same competition as those ages 16-18 at the end of the festival, for a prize awarded on the best overall musical performance?"

That is not a competition final. It's primarily a concert- in which a prize is also awarded. Is this a serious ADULT piano competition final or not? I'm almost wondering if there will also be a kid blowing on a kazoo between competitors.

"Why should we place restrictions on our competition just as others have done? This closed type of competition is not the type of competition we are aiming for. what we are aiming for. In any event, an excellent amateur may produce a better performance than a music college graduate."

Likewise in any competition. Virtually every piano competition is "open" anyway. There's no ban for not being a music college student. Why are you making a big deal of this in yours? Your stance seems to keep changing. Is your competition actually geared towards amateurs having a chance to thrive or are you just making them have to compete head with students of major colleges (as they would in any competition)? If it's not the former, your website is VERY misleading.

"You are totally missing the point of this competition."

Indeed, I cannot even begin to fathom it. What serious competition has different categories for ability levels- except where amateurs are judged separately. I've never heard of it anywhere and neither do I see what purpose it serves.

[openpianocompetition]

"An applicant will be notified of the category shortly after the deadline for applications passes. Any serious applicant will study the repertoire and should have a good idea in any event of what music they can and cannot play before considering submitting an application. "

So they should learn repertoire off every list, just in case? Sorry, but this is VERY badly thought out. These issue urgently need to be ironed out if this is to look like a properly organised competition. If it's for amateurs they ought to know what will be expected long before that stage. Why don't you let people choose to enter for a specific category and define them properly? Why all this mystery? Sorry, but I'm only the messenger when I say that it just looks ill-prepared. I like the concept but it isn't going to appeal unless you define it better. £125 for an amateur to have his three minute recording potentially judged alongside a crowd of music college students is NOT going to appeal. You need to specifically separate at least one category, if you're serious about involving amateurs. Why not have a middle category that overlaps amateurs and pros but designate one class for amateurs alone? Surely it would just be plain ridiculous to entertain the notion that this category would involve students of the big colleges? So why not rule it out and give the amateurs some assurance? The students could still take part in two categories and everybody would know where they stand. What is the problem with this rather obvious step?


Also, the repertoire is very poorly organised- seemingly chosen randomly much of the time. Why only the 4th movement of the Beethoven E flat alongside complete sonatas? It's not even a substantial movement- perhaps the worst of all to stand alone. Why this bizarre exception to having whole sonatas? And you can choose either a half hour Kreisleriana (actually it typically takes rather longer- hence exceeding the 30 minute limit for the final!!!) or a single Scriabin Etude? And any Liszt rhapsody for intermediate? There is little sense of logic to it at all. Look through some established competition repertoire guides. You'll typically find logically structured requirements such as a modern piece and an advanced Etude. Sorry, but the repertoire lists look almost random here, with no sense of system or guiding logic. It just looks sloppy and thrown together in a hurry.


"The "Non allegro" movement of this piano sonata ends in a dotted semi-breve with a pause; the perfect ending."

A secondary dominant left hanging is a "perfect ending"? It has no sense of closure whatsoever- leaving nothing but harmonic instability and anticipation.

nyiregyhazi, IF you are to enter the competition (which I sincerely doubt) then we will respect whatever suggestions for repertoire you may throw our way. In the meantime, you are entitled to your opinion. Thank you for pointing out the Kreisleriana issue; this is a typo and should state only the third part rather than the entire work.

[nyiregyhazi]

nyiregyhazi, IF you are to enter the competition (which I sincerely doubt) then we will respect whatever suggestions for repertoire you may throw our way. In the meantime, you are entitled to your opinion. Thank you for pointing out the Kreisleriana issue; this is a typo and should state only the third part rather than the entire work.

how about fixing all the others? Such as the insubstantial 4th movement of the Beethoven E flat put alongside a number of whole sonatas? And having to choose one work off a list that puts the Franck Prelude Chorale and Fugue alongside the Fantasy Impromptu!!!

I can see you're not interested in my criticism, but I hope you'll think seriously about making some major improvements. I shouldn't have to be raising these staggeringly big issues at all. These should have been thought about a long time before you even considered opening the website. A professional competition needs professional organisation and a professional image.

[openpianocompetition]

how about fixing all the others? Such as the insubstantial 4th movement of the Beethoven E flat put alongside a number of whole sonatas? And having to choose one work off a list that puts the Franck Prelude Chorale and Fugue alongside the Fantasy Impromptu!!!

I can see you're not interested in my criticism, but I hope you'll think seriously about making some major improvements. I shouldn't have to be raising these staggeringly big issues at all. These should have been thought about a long time before you even considered opening the website. A professional competition needs professional organisation and a professional image.

We are interested in and appreciate all criticism. We are very well placed to sort out any teething problems with the competition before the start date and deadlines.

Many thanks for the interest you have expressed in the competition.

[nyiregyhazi]

We are interested in and appreciate all criticism. We are very well placed to sort out any teething problems with the competition before the start date and deadlines.

Many thanks for the interest you have expressed in the competition.

Can I just ask for your response to this particular paragraph from before:

So you're not actually wanting to open the net wide at all? Are you looking to draw amateurs in or not? If so, why not protect their category? If not, what the hell is the point in having three different ability levels? Some of the categories are for people that study seriously but aren't all that good? Why should the lower scoring music college students be patronised with a chance to win a "special" competition? It makes sense with amateurs who have little practise time but I am absolutely baffled by the concept of making special categories for those who study hard but are nothing special. The winner is going to be the best of the not all that good? It sounds like trying to define the "tallest dwarf" in the world.

I'm trying to understand but I just cannot see what your purpose is, or what is going to be achieved by the three categories. In short, the winner of the second and third categories is going to be defined by where the boundaries are drawn. Were they placed higher, the winner would be beaten by a superior contender. So, what kind of achievement is that supposed to be- unless these categories are specifically for the amateur? I cannot get to grips with the concept. The winner cannot be too good, too bad or too mediocre. They will be defined by whether their ability happens to lie just under where one of the two artificial thresholds is placed. It's just like the accolade of the world's tallest dwarf. He would neither impress with the extent of his dwarfism, nor impress with height. His sole achievement is to come as close as possible to an arbitrarily chosen upper height limit for a dwarf, without exceeding it. You're left with a guy who's so rubbish as a dwarf that he only just qualifies as being one, yet who is even more rubbish as a tall guy. Who wants to hear two category "winners" that are selected on such a bizarre basis- especially if there is nothing whatsoever in place to stop them coming from the advantageous position of being engaged in serious full-time study?

The reason the Van Cliburn amateur competition is so popular is because nobody has to compete against students or performing artists. It's a whole different field. Would there be any real interest if the competition eliminated current Julliard and Curtis students for playing "too well", but allowed current 2nd tier music college entrants? No. People are interested BECAUSE they're amateurs. Not because the general standard is lower than the primary event.

[openpianocompetition]

Can I just ask for your response to this particular paragraph from before:

So you're not actually wanting to open the net wide at all? Are you looking to draw amateurs in or not? If so, why not protect their category? If not, what the hell is the point in having three different ability levels? Some of the categories are for people that study seriously but aren't all that good? Why should the lower scoring music college students be patronised with a chance to win a "special" competition? It makes sense with amateurs who have little practise time but I am absolutely baffled by the concept of making special categories for those who study hard but are nothing special. The winner is going to be the best of the not all that good? It sounds like trying to define the "tallest dwarf" in the world.

I'm trying to understand but I just cannot see what your purpose is, or what is going to be achieved by the three categories. In short, the winner of the second and third categories is going to be defined by where the boundaries are drawn. Were they placed higher, the winner would be beaten by a superior contender. So, what kind of achievement is that supposed to be- unless these categories are specifically for the amateur? I cannot get to grips with the concept. The winner cannot be too good, too bad or too mediocre. They will be defined by whether their ability happens to lie just under where one of the two artificial thresholds is placed. It's just like the accolade of the world's tallest dwarf. He would neither impress with the extent of his dwarfism, nor impress with height. His sole achievement is to come as close as possible to an arbitrarily chosen upper height limit for a dwarf, without exceeding it. You're left with a guy who's so rubbish as a dwarf that he only just qualifies as being one, yet who is even more rubbish as a tall guy. Who wants to hear two category "winners" that are selected on such a bizarre basis- especially if there is nothing whatsoever in place to stop them coming from the advantageous position of being engaged in serious full-time study?

The reason the Van Cliburn amateur competition is so popular is because nobody has to compete against students or performing artists. It's a whole different field. Would there be any real interest if the competition eliminated current Julliard and Curtis students for playing "too well", but allowed current 2nd tier music college entrants? No. People are interested BECAUSE they're amateurs. Not because the general standard is lower than the primary event.

Happy to reply.

There are thousands of competitions wordwide on all fields that divide competitors into categories based on actual or expected capability. In sport some divide by age, by previous results but others, like motorsports or sailing, divide in classes that follow yet a different logic. The aim of categorisation is to create more homogeneous groups, to give a competitor a chance to progress to the final. We feel a line that distinguishes between amateur an professional is just as limited and really not as clear as it seems. There will be people falling clearly into one or the other, however others will be borderline.

Our point is not how much money you earn out of playing piano, rather, how much, for example, your studies, profession or circumstances have allowed you to play and currently allow you to practice. We don't feel a mother of three who won a competition in her 20s but currently juggles family and a job should initially compete against a current fresh faced concert pianist although they share the same backgound on paper. This is obviously a made up example.

The fact that the repertoire lists have increasing levels of difficulty allow a less experienced pianist to perform, own and wow the audience with a simpler piece whereas the more experienced pianist will have to shine above this with the added challenge of a more difficult piece.

[nyiregyhazi]

"There are thousands of competitions wordwide on all fields that divide competitors into categories based on actual or expected capability. In sport some divide by age, by previous results but others, like motorsports or sailing, divide in classes that follow yet a different logic."

Could you mention a prestigious contest that divides by ability or puts grown ADULTS into age groups (other than seniors events- the entry requirements of which are specifically defined)? To differentiate by category is not to have "ability" groups. You have different sizes and engines powers etc. Not groups where the difference is less talented competitors. And the groups don't go head to head in a final. Can you name some prestigious events with different ability categories?

"The aim of categorisation is to create more homogeneous groups, to give a competitor a chance to progress to the final. We feel a line that distinguishes between amateur an professional is just as limited and really not as clear as it seems."

Well, in many cases it is. If someone has been studying full time, clearly they have an edge over an amateur. Almost, any piano competition is "open" anyway. It's just that few amateurs would stand a chance against the competition. All you have to do is designate that the lower category is not open to those currently engaged in full time study, or a few clauses like that. Why do you not want to to limit the possibility of an untalented but highly advantaged student blowing some very talented amateurs out of the water- potentially even in the bottom category?!!! That doesn't improve the odds for amateurs. It reduces them. Why should it even be possible for a current full-time student to be considered alongside them in the bottom group? Some clear distinctions to clarify that this could not happen would drastically improve the appeal of the contest to an amateur.

"Our point is not how much money you earn out of playing piano, rather, how much, for example, your studies, profession or circumstances have allowed you to play and currently allow you to practice. We don't feel a mother of three who won a competition in her 20s but currently juggles family and a job should initially compete against a current fresh faced concert pianist although they share the same backgound on paper."

Exactly! So why the hell are you not taking steps both to make it clear that this will not happen and that you are protecting amateurs against this possibility?!!! I am baffled. If they play to a fairly similar level, you CURRENT system is what exactly what makes them most likely to go to head to head!!! At present you have done nothing to prevent it! All it takes is a little thought- eg. to state that anyone who studied in a college within the last x number of years cannot compete in the lower category and mention such things as whether they get income from performance. Clearly they don't share the same background on paper anyway. The mother has a job? Is the concert pianist also working in the local chippie or something? SOME level of protection and clarification is blatantly needed, even if you also intend to use discretion later.  Perhaps you feel it's simply easier to figure out later? The problem is that this just makes it look disorganised and inadequately planned- which is not a good look if this is supposed to be a respectable competition (that merits a £125 with no guarantee of anything but a judge who listens to a 3 minute tape).

"The fact that the repertoire lists have increasing levels of difficulty allow a less experienced pianist to perform, own and wow the audience with a simpler piece whereas the more experienced pianist will have to shine above this with the added challenge of a more difficult piece."

Yeah, if they know what pieces to learn, despite having zero information that might clue them up about what category they can expect to be in. Is one of the more "difficult pieces" (of which they only need one) the Fantasy Impromptu? What a tester that is- to put alongside the Corelli Variations and other large scale works (while the mid category has any Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody)...


Anyway, you scarcely responded to my point at all. To be quite honest, I don't think you're really listening to the simple logic about what makes a protected amateur category both prestigious and appealing, where lower ability categories that may allow entry to serious students are not. Are the categories defined primarily by ability or circumstance? Above all:


Who decides where the arbitrary line is drawn between being too good for a category and good enough to be the winner?

Assuming that you will be getting some proper judges in for this, how on earth do you expect to prep them on how to operate if you don't have no defined system and no current clue yourself? A serious adjudicator with experience of competitions will be as perplexed as I am, without doubt. And what kind of worthless achievement is "winning" lower categories going to be, if those who are engaged in serious study but relatively untalented could quite possibly take the prize? Congratulations go to student X for not being talented enough for the elite category that his peers were all in (despite his daily 8 hours work), which allowed him to beat a load of amateurs with no practice time? Is that supposed to sound like a piano competition that can be taken seriously? They'd probably be too embarrassed to collect the prize! Can you imagine anyone wanting that on their CV? An award for beating only amateurs and those students who were not good enough to compete at a high level? These issues leave great uncertainty for amateurs (about whether they will be judged separately from such students, as they rightfully should) and demeans the whole thing for pros. If you don't sort these things out early on, it could end up being a complete farce.

[m1469]

Almost, any piano competition is "open" anyway. It's just that few amateurs would stand a chance against the competition.

Personally I find it interesting the number of competitions sprouting up around the world who are deciding that there is more than one kind of possibility in terms of there being an artist in the world.  Yes, I think numbers of people are also realizing "hey, there are thousands of wanna be pianists in the world who missed the boat and would probably gladly pay for some kind of potential competition win next to their name.  Let's make some money!"  

BUT - for me, personally, my goal is not to be an amateur, and I recognize that in the real world there is all sorts of competition, those who are circumstantially advantaged or not.  And, I guess that's a difference.  Now, circumstantially advantaged only happens truly when you are a kid, or perhaps a college/conservatory student, or some adult who is being supported by others.  AND, IF some of those people being supported by others suddenly weren't, that would change their own force of competitiveness a bit and in that sense, the "real world" would be a bit different - meaning, if somebody is career oriented, I think the goal is to start that career before they run out of time to practice and be all lathered up in financial support.  

From my perspective, if I am competing for furthering opportunity to play and not just in isolated instances where I might earn a medal (though, *perhaps* a medal *could* help to validate a person to some audiences, though I'm sure there are plenty of people who would gladly argue the validity of all of it, since it's departing from tradition, etc.), I have to be ready to go "up against" anybody else who could just as well play the same recital.  So, I guess it depends on what a person's goals are.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Yes, I think numbers of people are also realizing "hey, there are thousands of wanna be pianists in the world who missed the boat and would probably gladly pay for some kind of potential competition win next to their name.  Let's make some money!"  "

Maybe. If that's the case here, they're not going about it wisely by not offering assurance that they will be up against those with like circumstances- without current students being able to compete. However, I think many of these attract genuine interest. People feel inspired by seeing what people who cannot practise hard achieve and raise their own aspirations- even if the standard is not fully professional. The problem with the present competition is that nobody is attracted to lower standard events except when the circumstances reflect it. Either you want hear the elite or be inspired by what an amateur/child etc. has achieved. Who cares about the best of the 2nd raters who practise as hard as the elite? If there's no triumph over circumstance it's just a 2nd rater- not a "winner" (especially if they beat true amateurs).

"since it's departing from tradition, etc.), I have to be ready to go "up against" anybody else who could just as well play the same recital.  So, I guess it depends on what a person's goals are."

Isn't that what normal contests are for? Where's the appeal in going up against those who are specifically selected for being beneath the best who enter? Can't see how this would satisfy that attitude unless someone who thinks that way hit the top tier.

[m1469]

Isn't that what normal contests are for? Where's the appeal in going up against those who are specifically selected for being beneath the best who enter? Can't see how this would satisfy that attitude unless someone who thinks that way hit the top tier.

Well, to me it seems you have a personal and specific beef with this all.  While it might be one thing to "argue" for the sake of reasoning things out, I can't say I understand exactly why it matters so much to you, specifically?  I mean, there are tons of other contests which specify as you are saying, so why is it *so* important that you get this one to conform?  Does it somehow make you feel left out or something?  I honestly just don't quite understand.

Personally, I have never seen another competition, amateur or otherwise, that I could completely honestly qualify for - except for maybe the Richter (and I would need to read that again).  So, I have felt a bit left out of the hypothetical possibility that I would enter a competition and be an actual competitor.  I feel like a competition certainly wouldn't be my last stop, and I start to think that maybe this is a different attitude than how you see competitions.  For me, it would be a stepping stone, it seems to you it's an end in and of itself.  

[nyiregyhazi]

"Well, to me it seems you have a personal and specific beef with this all.  While it might be one thing to "argue" for the sake of reasoning things out, I can't say I understand exactly why it matters so much to you, specifically?"

I have no "beef" with anything. Rather I'm concerned that despite good sentiments, the attempt to blend the two will simply compromise the whole idea and make for a complete joke event. Combining categories for the final could easily drage the professional contest into looking less respectable yet the whole thing could potentially leave few chances for true amateurs anyway- seeing as there's no guarantee that they will not be blown out by relatively unremarkable students. if the best of the elite category goes up against a relatively unremarkable student and an amateur in the final and wins, what prestige is really to be taken? Far from being a glittering and nail-biting finish, it would be a total anti-climax. Worse still, a vastly less talented player wins first prize (based on circumstance above playing) and cheapens any potential significance attached to the prize further still. There's good reason why other contests have separate prizes that don't mix. This could easily be a farce unless they stop to think it through with some basic common sense. What has been explained thus far sounds ludicrous and self-defeating in every respect.

"Does it somehow make you feel left out or something?  I honestly just don't quite understand."

Why should it be anything personal? I'm not interested in entering competitions. I have a few wins to my name from music college competitions. Nothing major certainly, but enough to give me a more than acceptable enough CV without need to enter any contests. My concern is that despite good sentiments, there are a lot of holes in this concept that need serious ironing out.

 "For me, it would be a stepping stone, it seems to you it's an end in and of itself."

It wouldn't be an end at all. I'm not interested in entering competitions. I'm just concerned that the lack of organisation and the "wait and see" attitude could be disastrous for them. A successful competition depends on a serious image and a clear sense of organisation. It might be new, but you cannot afford to wing it in a system that has so much room for problems.    

[m1469]

Well, there's plenty of room for problems in other systems, too!  One being in the standard "amateur" competitions, as I mentioned earlier on, that you could have a person working 25 hours a week as a music teacher and another being completely supported by somebody else, with plenty of time to practice all day long, and the first not qualify for the competition because being a music teacher would supposedly give that person an edge over the other?  It's just that perhaps you don't see that as a problem!

Fundamentally, I think the world needs *some* kind of formal recognition that music is ageless, learning is ageless, and that the world NEEDS ageless musicians and artists truly from all walks of life.  That truly anybody can enter!  Will there be problems? Sure, just like with anything else.  I'm curious anyway how "amateur" competitions even ever got started?  Probably as a result of some problem in holding only "professional" competitions or whatnot.  I can't say that I understand your reasoning, exactly, yet, in what the problems would be and I accept that I probably just don't see the bigger picture.  But, that doesn't mean the concept of an open competition is a bad one.  In any event, I don't feel it's my job to manage you, and the fact that you feel it's your job to manage this competition is just going to have to be between you and whether or not the competition people want to take it up!

*time to practice*

[nyiregyhazi]

"Well, there's plenty of room for problems in other systems, too!  One being in the standard "amateur" competitions, as I mentioned earlier on, that you could have a person working 25 hours a week as a music teacher and another being completely supported by somebody else, with plenty of time to practice all day long, and the first not qualify for the competition because being a music teacher would supposedly give that person an edge over the other?  It's just that perhaps you don't see that as a problem!"

I didn't say that. Note that I suggested some clear guidelines such as "nobody who has studied in a music college in the last x years" is permitted entry to the bottom category. That does not rule out additional discretion. It provides a basic level of assurance to those who are thinking about paying £125 for what might potentially be nothing but an undisclosed judging hearing a 3 minute tape. To do anything less than that is simply amounts to a reckless level of disregard for basic procedure. Without such a clause, it's simply lunacy for the category to even exist. Roll up, roll up! Come and hear  music college students who practise hard but who were selected for being third-rate compete against amateurs who have little time? What kind of contest is that supposed to be?  

While separations do not necessarily make for a perfect situation, what they do ensure that the main competition retains a level of prestige. And that the amateurs are protected to at least SOME degree. No guidelines gives zero assurance that unfair clashes will not occur. SOME guidelines provides assurance and RETAINS the option of using additional discretion.

"I can't say that I understand your reasoning, exactly, yet, in what the problems would be and I accept that I probably just don't see the bigger picture.  But, that doesn't mean the concept of an open competition is a bad one."

Neither do I. But it needs a hell of lot of planning and thought if it's not going to be an outright disaster.

[m1469]

Well, I suppose I do see your reasoning, but that is coming strictly from a particular standpoint.

haha ... I am reminded of a time I was personally asked to completely organize a competition from scratch, involving basically anybody in the area you could *possibly* imagine, for free, for several extremely disorganized individuals, mainly because somebody in particular needed a competition win on their CV.  But, I was not supposed to understand that and I was actually supposed to feel honored, I think, by this request. 

me ran away as fast as possible.

[nyiregyhazi]

Well, I suppose I do see your reasoning, but that is coming strictly from a particular standpoint.

haha ... I am reminded of a time I was personally asked to completely organize a competition from scratch, involving basically anybody in the area you could *possibly* imagine, for free, for several extremely disorganized individuals, mainly because somebody in particular needed a competition win on their CV.  But, I was not supposed to understand that and I was actually supposed to feel honored, I think, by this request.  

me ran away as fast as possible.

Sounds almost bizarre as this! You know, I just checked on the page and apparently 4 contenders from each category will be in the final. In other words, it's a 6 hour event before you include breaks. Let's say (and hope) that amateurs manage to fill the third category (rather than third rate students/pros with no circumstances that would even justify their being there). Even assuming that people want to hear two hours of amateurs (and that they will play creditably rather then offer embarrassing interludes between the elite) what happens in category two?

If that's all amateurs, we now have 4 hours of amateurs + 2 hours of the elite. Do people want that much? It could be seriously off-putting to some- potentially being nothing more than a distraction from the best. Now let's say that it is some/all music college students in category two. Why are they in the final? Assuming the elite group truly stood out, what hope in hell do any pros deemed inferior enough to start in group 2 have of winning? Their circumstances are the same as the elite (hence no reason why they should be favoured despite a lesser standard). So (unless they're going to raise their game like crazy) why are they wasting everybody's time in a final that is clearly too long? Amateurs and elite make sense. But why are the second-rate non-amateurs up against the elite when a number far better pianists who qualified for the elite group have by definition been eliminated long ago? Aside from that bizarre injustice, to say that they're simply filling up the numbers (in a final of over 6 hours!!!) would be an understatement. What does this category really serve? It's basically a guaranteed "tallest dwarf" award that contributes nothing to a serious event.

Sorry if this comes across as being unpleasant, but I'm developing a kind of fascination with quite how little thought has gone into this- and quite how terrible the result will be if it goes ahead as currently described. Really, it's time to go back to the drawing board and think how the basic idea could be realised in a way that could actually work. This is just a disaster waiting to happen- and I really hope they'll use the countless issues I've pointed out to prevent it and come up with something workable. With no venues/sponsors/judges etc. listed, I'm also wondering if these issues might be nothing but the tip of the iceberg.

[m1469]

*insert wise, granny accent*

Well, I'll tell ya, sonny, the only thing that has ever made sense to me about being a musician is making music, by gum!  

*and a granny wink and a satisfied rocking in chair, while humming quietly and looking out the window to far off lands* 

[m1469]

*and a little knitting to keep the hands busy and organized*

[nyiregyhazi]

*insert wise, granny accent*

Well, I'll tell ya, sonny, the only thing that has ever made sense to me about being a musician is making music, by gum!  

*and a granny wink and a satisfied rocking in chair, while humming quietly and looking out the window to far off lands* 

Absolutely. That's what I find sad here. Clearly a large part of the driving force behind this is to help amateurs get the opportunity to do so. But unless they think things through properly, there are going to be a hell of a lot of extra-musical issues getting in the way.