Ask yourself: why did you get into music? Why are you still playing today? Were you in search of the spectacle or was there something else about music that kept you coming back for more?
Well for one reason, it's not like you're going to meet those type of people day to day. And quite frankly, I don't care that much. Of course I would love a challenge here and there but music is my passion. I play because I want to, because I LOVE to. And just because some little 5 year old or 15 year old is better than me I'm not going to stop playing.. hell.. I'll be a bit more motivated to play. At least I would have someone to look up to. Point is, there will always be someone better than you in life, no matter who you are. Even if were Vladimir Horowitz, or even Evgeny Kissin.. Just do the best you can do.
This is crazy! Why even bother trying to be a professional pianist if that's what you're up against?! I've seen a 14 year old play Petrouchka, Chopin Sonata 3, and Gaspard de la Nuit pretty well at age 14 so I know my piano teacher probably isn't making it up.
Why even try when it's gonna be super hard to get a job because of these super humans?
Bruh this was three years ago...
the dude who did it is a famous pianist but I forgot his name.Over the summer I was being coached on the Rach 2 by some dude who went to Juilliard and he sightread that sh*t full speed.Then afterwards he sightread the last movement of the first sonata and the first movement of the second sonata just slightly under tempo.These dudes are real swear to god.
how do you know he never worked on it ever before? truly sight reading something means never trying the score before. a good teacher often studies students pieces before teaching you know
if the "dude" that sight read rach 3 was famous why don't you easily google him and find it for me? the concert pianist that Rachmaninoff wrote rach 3 for didn't even play it. The best pianists in the world practice hours and hours to play Rach 3. I don't see how you can believe this statement -- its ridiculous.
That's not something you can google. What would I search? "Who was the guy who sightread the rach 3?" believe this because I've seen this type of stuff with my own eyes.
I know because he's learning the third and he told me that he should've learned the second before he started the third.He's not even my formal teacher he's just a friend
"Learned" is a broad word. This still doesn't mean he didn't work on it before. "Learned" could mean at a performance level, memorized, memorized with dynamics etc
If I heard of a pianist who sight read rach 3, I would be amazed and remember at least something significant about him/her. You have not seen this particular thing with your own eyes; you may have seen incredible feats but this particular one is ridiculous for you to say its true.
Dimitri sgouros! That's his name.Anyways, Walter Geiseking wrote a book about how he would remember and practice pieces by just looking at the score. I'm pretty sure it's not impossible. According to him he would learn pieces on the train ride to the concert venue and perform it later that afternoon. THAT I don't believe is legit because that's the only pianist I've heard of with that ability and he's the only one who says that HE can do it.But I can guarantee you ANYTHING is sightreadable at full or almost full tempo
LOL did you not read the above replies to your thread? they talked about sgouros. Yes he is an out of this world pianist but nowhere in his own bio or anywhere else does it say he was able to "sight read" rach 3. it simply says he learned it at a very young age. Well I'm glad you don't believe other stuff like Geiseking or whatever it just bothers me when people believe whatever they hear without using logic, research, or proof-- whether it be from a credible source or not. And sorry I don't believe that anything is sight readable at full or almost full tempo -- at least not at a performance level
I don't remember what people are saying THREE YEARS AGO.Just because it doesn't say it in his bio doesn't mean sh*t would you include what you're able to sightread in your bio?I don't care if it bothers you that people believe whatever they hear without proof. It's completely irrelevant in this conversation because you haven't come across anyone who thinks this way. I saw a dude sight read the Rachmaninoff sonatas and the rach 2. So that's my reason for KNOWING that sight reading the rach 3 is possible. Because the two sonatas and the second concerto aren't too far off from the third.I didn't say ANYTHING about performance level. I said sight reading at full or near full tempo.
Woah where is this burst of anger coming from? Just because its 3 years ago doesn't make this ridiculous statement you quoted any less ridiculous. how are you not able to understand one's skepticism for someone saying they are able to sight read each 3? Well okay he wouldn't include it in his bio, so the only place you hear about it is your piano teacher and you just believe it easily. I'm just saying the reason why I am debating with you about this is that people shouldn't believe whatever they hear without at least some skepticism -- so it is relevant... You don't even know if he worked on it in the past, so don't assume that truly sight reading the 3rd concerto was done by Sgouros. And sight reading at full tempo is already a huge step to playing that piece at a performance level.
Also there is a post about Sgouros from just 3 days ago. So you don't even read your own replies.
1. I'm not mad that's just how I talk2. I believed it because I had good reason to. Don't assume that I just believe everything that comes from everyone's mouths. What part of "I've seen stuff like this before' do you not understand?3. No it IS irrelevant because I DO have skepticism. Just because I believe something that you don't believe doesn't automatically make me not skeptical.If I've seen someone sightread a rach sonata they've never heard before, It's not too far fetched to believe that a probably better pianist sightread the rach 3.
If thats how you talk you should talk in a new way that implies you're not angry then. You've seen amazing things but this feat is ridiculous. There is no "good reason" to believe that he sight read rach 3, you're just hearing this dramatization of a rumor and spreading it. A 14 year old playing petrusha is not the same as someone sight reading rach 3. And it is relevant to our conversation because I was explaining why I am debating with you. You said it was from 3 years ago and it wasn't. which means you didn't read your own replies. you are too stubborn to admit it
I don't talk in way that implies I'm mad, I can talk to people just fine. So I'm not gonna change the way I talk. You can't tell the inflections of my voice via text so of course it's easy for anyone to get confused.Bruh I've said this like 10 times. If someone can sightread a rach sonata they've never heard before, then I'm pretty sure it's possible to sightread the rach 3. Then the reason why you're debating me is stupid. I already said that I am skeptical of what I hear so that means that you should stop talking.I on't care if it's from a day ago, if I don't remember the pianist, I don't remember the pianist. Someone mentioning him might help me remember, but in this case I didn't anyways.
Are you kidding me? read when you were capitalizing your words for emphasis and saying you don't care this and that. It's common knowledge to assume you are angry when you write text like this. Look, you obviously are ignoring what I say and just keep repeating the same phrases over and over. I just told you before that you don't even know if they worked on the sonata/concerto before even though he said he never "learned" it. My point is you said it was 3 years ago that someone mentioned his name and someone mentioned it 3 days ago. Therefore, you are wrong and you don't read your own replies. I'm astounded at how you just keep repeating the same things over and over and never seem to really read my arguments.
1. I use caps for emphasis. If I was trying to sound mad I would USE ALL CAPS THE WHOLE TIME LIKE THIS. When I say I don't care, it means I don't care. Nothing more nothing less. My honesty doesn't mean that I'm mad.2. No I have acknowledged everything you said and responded to everything. YOU are the one who can't read. I told you that he never even heard of the rach sonata before. So I KNOW he actually sightread it. I was talking to him the whole time about how amazing it was that he was able to sightread it and not once did he say that he's played some of it or looked at it before. 3. FALSE. I read everyone else's replies but skimmed his cause his was like a book long and it's been three years since someone commented on this. You're just being stupid now. If I'm replying to you then obviously I'm reading my replies. Even if I didn't read it, it's completely irrelevant to the pointless reason of why you're trying to argue with me. You're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm actually not astounded that you'll probably ignore this sentence and everything I said in no. 2
1. who cares if you use the caps lock for emphasis. whether you were trying to or not, you sounded mad. It may not mean youre actually mad but you implied you were mad.2. You have not acknowledged everything I said. Look at you now just reversing it back at me saying I don't read what you say. How could he have not heard of the rach sonata ? He didn't say he did, but he could've worked on it before. 3. LOL you're not reading all your replies. okay now you're just lying. Well the internet is known for that after all. I'm arguing at this fact because it proves you never admit you are wrong when you are wrong. you did not read everyone's replies, you didn't even know that sgouros was being discussed 3 years ago either. And now you're calling me stupid for pointing out something that you're wrong about? Look, there is a reason you got owned 3 years ago previously by fellow piano street members for assuming there was no point in pursuing a career in piano because of prodigies. What a simple minded way of thinking
rachmaninoff_forever you can be forgiven to feel that that there are unique people out there can cold read (sight read on first go) everything, even JS Bach thought so until he was proven wrong when a friend of his handed a work Mr Bach himself could not read straight away. It is not a reality and if I met anyone who admitted they did it with Rach 3 I will laugh in their face. Your teacher is probably testing your mettle.
I met a dude who could do it on the rach 2 and his first sonata . So I don't think the third is a long shot.
Sorry I dont believe him, he fooled you good. How do you know it was his first read? You just have to trust him right.
This is how the convo went...Me: Yo have you heard the first sonata?Him: I've Heard OF it but not itI start reading some of the last movement but then I'm likeMe: here you're a better sight reader than meHim: okaySo he sightreads it at like 80% tempoAnd I'm like Bruh this is ridiculous and he's like Naah Naah1. Why would he lie about it if he's a 60 year old successful pianist2. I didn't even ask him to sightread it in the first place so why would you lie about not knowing a piece in the first place. Afterwards I game him a bunch of random stuff (Prokofiev 5th concerto, Tchaikovsky transcriptions, Scriabin sonatas) and he could read EVERYTHING no problem. Stone cold killer
Cool story bro.
I'm not flipping it around. You're actually not reading what I said.What would a 60 year old accomplish by lying about not having heard a rach sonata. The FIRST sonata isn't that famous of a piece. Lots of people haven't heard it.no I'm calling you stupid because you ARE stupid. You started this whole thing just because you wanted to start some bullshit with someone online. You go from "sight reading rach 3 is impossible" to "you don't read your replies". Yes I did read everyone's replies. Why would I remember random sh*t THREE YEARS AGO. Sure maybe they did mention the dude, but I just didn't remember the name. How in the world do you make the conclusion that I don't read replies from me not remembering someone's name previously mentioned in the thread. Simple minded way of thinking? I posted the thread in the first place to ask how do people deal with pursuing s professional career knowing that people like this exist. I was pursuing the career anyways. Besides people drop out of the career all the time for that reason. My former teacher was a professional until he retired at 25 cause he couldn't keep up. My class of music majors was cut in half largely for the same reason. That's not a simple minded way of thinking, it's a realistic way of thinking. And you're just dumb. Unlike you on the other hand, you just like to start sh*t up for no reason.Seriously, although I like the general public pianostreet is littered with losers like you just trying to start sh*t about nothing. Stop. You said you were trying to achieve some goal or prove some point by trying to argue with me, but you didn't. Not even close. How old are you even? 12?
What the heck is this even possible?! Why even try?! (Sorry accidentally repost (Read 3801 times)
