Why are some concert pianists more successful than other deserving ones?

[louispodesta]

Very well put.  And, while you or anyone else is at it, why don't you name a pianist of Pollini's generation or younger, who currently exhibits the musicality of say a Claudio Arrau.  There actually is one and her name is Barbara Nissman, who most people have never heard of.

Please don't say Argerich because she tries to play faster than her fellow student Pollini.  But then again, her royal highness has announced that she will no longer play recitals.

Between the two of these, classical pianism is on its death bed, and some people better wake up soon or it will be too late to do anything about it.

I am trying my hardest to put together several programs and many concertos to help in the matter, but it looks like it is going to take about two more years before they are ready.

[birba]

Nissman recorded most of ginastera's works.  A fine pianist.  Never heard her in anything else.

[louispodesta]

birba:

F.Y.I. re: Barbara Nissman

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=nisman#/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=barbara+nissman&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Abarbara+nissman

Or you can order practically anything from your local library (Interlibrary Loan "ILL") or also Arkive music.   They lady has played it all.

[nyiregyhazi]

Very well put.  And, while you or anyone else is at it, why don't you name a pianist of Pollini's generation or younger, who currently exhibits the musicality of say a Claudio Arrau.  There actually is one and her name is Barbara Nissman, who most people have never heard of.

Please don't say Argerich because she tries to play faster than her fellow student Pollini.  But then again, her royal highness has announced that she will no longer play recitals.

Between the two of these, classical pianism is on its death bed, and some people better wake up soon or it will be too late to do anything about it.

I am trying my hardest to put together several programs and many concertos to help in the matter, but it looks like it is going to take about two more years before they are ready.

Please don't slag off big pianists and then try to put yourself on a pedestal in which you are supposedly a hero who will save classical pianism. You do yourself absolutely no favours- especially not by starting delusional conspiracy theories that you cannot support with a shred of evidence. That comes across as deeply jealous/bitter and irrational. If you don't like someone, you shouldn't need to resort to casual fiction to discredit them. It shows deep envy.

Like yourself, I spent years bemused by the fact that virtually all big name pianists play so differently to the old masters. I wrote a masters essay some ten years ago about the fact that all evidence from Mozart about rubato is conclusively asking for supposedly "romantic" asynchronisations. I used to feel bitter about how dull most big names are. These days I scarcely give a sh*t. If someone's dull, I don't listen again. Why waste time getting angry? I scarcely bother with criticism these days, but instead devote attentions to finding those who merit attention and to exploring how I can make genuine improvement to my sound.

You seem to think you're on some kind of maverick one man crusade, but people who play old style just do so. They don't have an angry superiority complex. Look at benjamin grosvenor. He doesn't go out complaining about modern pianism. He goes and persuades people with the quality of his performances. If you want to help the situation, stop complaining and start giving musically persuasive performances. I'm sorry, but my honest opinion is that you have a substantial amount of work to do on your most basic sound production technique before you can hope to do so. In the only example on youtube, your sound is heavy handed and monochromatic compared to those I consider great artists (and also compared to artists I consider ordinary competition pros- sorry but that's the honest truth) . As a lifelong advocate of freedom and spread chords, your sound came across as boring, sorry- spreads or not. It didn't stand out from modern artists, because not landing together is just a tiny part of a great pianist's sound and art. It's a tool that can aid tonal contrast when used well- not an automatic source of interest. If it doesn't contribute to a floating melodic quality in which phrases project yet meld into long lines, it's simply nothing at all.

I've spent years exploring romantic performance styles but I'm not going to big myself up because I'm not accomplished enough to stand out as an overall artist, whether I have learned aspects of the older style or not. Aside from grosvenor, we have volodos, pletnev, hough, katsaris, gekic and a number of lesser known young pianists who are returning to romantic styles. If you think that telling people that you're more correct because you spread chords and slagging off everyone who doesn't is going to save pianism, forget it. We have both big and small names who are already doing more than you are ever likely to achieve. Stop preaching to the world about how bad everyone else is and get on with learning how to make distinctive sounds of your own, that might persuade on their own merits. Gestures are nothing. The sounds they are used to make are what define the great artists. Get on with exploring them because of a musical urge- not out of some delusion that you're the man to save modern pianism. Nobody is going to stand up and cheer because your hands didn't coincide. They'll only do so if you learn how to create a truly remarkable musical effect, that the gesture is but one aspect of.


In short, stop complaining and get on with sorting yourself out. And not out of some delusional expectation of showing everyone else up. If you don't have the intrinsic urge and ear for special qualities and colours of sound, wanting/hoping to be maverick will not compensate.

[nyiregyhazi]

Also, forget two years. If that's the time scale, you're kidding yourself. When people expect such slow progress, they're almost always hiding from lack of truly significant short term progress behind a fantasy of results magically showing up further down the line. Be brave and ask yourself serious questions about why you're not seeing the big progress right now (and why it might mysteriously arise in exactly two years, without having anything seriously outstanding to show for it in a shorter timescale).

[steinway43]

Please don't say Argerich because she tries to play faster than her fellow student Pollini. 

In a lot of cases I have to agree. I recently posted that she was one of my favorites but this thread has had be going back through a lot of recordings. I was enamored with her technique when I was younger, but there are places where she plays through a melody and all you hear is jumble. A fast jumble, mind you, but a jumble nonetheless. Her finale to the Chopin third piano Sonata is not nearly as good as I used to think in my youth. My ear has become far more critical over the years and having learned it myself helps.  

Between the two of these, classical pianism is on its death bed, and some people better wake up soon or it will be too late to do anything about it.

I agree there is a dirth of depth. In part I blame the obsession with youth/image. Competitions need to cut the age limits and focus on artistry. I think Nobu has potential, but he's still green. For the most part, when I listen to all the new young kids on youtube what I hear are technical whiz kids who don't really seem to understand-in any musical sense-what they're playing. There is no communication going on. Because I'm currently learning Scriabin's third Sonata I wanted to hear someone else play it besides Kissin, just to hear another take on it. Big mistake. I bought Maria Lettberg's recording of all his solo piano works. By comparison her Scriabin third Sonata is a mess and it seems lost on her.    

And regarding cheating on recordings, nothing would surprise me.

[dima_76557]

why don't you name a pianist of Pollini's generation or younger, who currently exhibits the musicality of say a Claudio Arrau.

If one wants to appreciate the beauty of live performance, then without a doubt: Radu Lupu.

[patrickd]

Very well put.  And, while you or anyone else is at it, why don't you name a pianist of Pollini's generation or younger, who currently exhibits the musicality of say a Claudio Arrau. 

Sokolov

[j_menz]

Other than having a sworn affidavit from Gould himself, my late teacher told me in the 1970's that Gould had a very sophisticated recording studio at his estate.  What he would do is to take the right hand, and then the left hand of a multiple voice Bach piece, and then re-write each hand for two hands.

Then, after recording each part, he would mix the two together.  This is how he could attain the crystal clear voicing for which his recordings are famous.

You are obviously not familiar with how this would (or rather would not) work in practice. The voices in, say, a five part fugue could, I suppose be recorded separately and then combined with some advantage by a person who could not control 5 separate voices simultaneously. It would never be as good as a simultaneous performance simply because the interactions of the voices on each other in the very fabric of the piano would be absent, and IMO it would be very much harder to control the interrelationship between the various voices in anything but the most simplistic fashion. For a pianist who basically couldn't play a decent fugue, it might result in a better result, but for anyone else it would be markedly worse. Gould could and did play such pieces live in concert, so it is difficult to see why he would be even tempted to resort to such fakery.

The idea of simply divvying up the hands is blatant nonsense as in this sort of context it would be meaningless.

Either your, or your teacher's recollection would seem to be faulty.

[pianoman53]

You seem to think you're on some kind of maverick one man crusade

OOOH THE IRONY!!!


Anyway, there are many "musical" pianists now. My favorite is probably Radu Lupu. I don't know why he's not as big of a name as, say, Lang Lang. Marketing is probably one reason, as Birba mentioned. Another reason is probably "to give the audience what they want". Say that the audience is a few hundred people. We who know music on a high level are usually not more than 10. So when radu Lupu fills Schubert with as much poetry as possible, maybe 5 of us will be impressed. If Lang Lang will come and play flight of the bumble bee on his iPad, 100 persons will be impressed by his "imagination", and the rest will already have been impressed by the smoke coming out of the piano...
...
Maybe

[dima_76557]

My favorite is probably Radu Lupu. I don't know why he's not as big of a name as, say, Lang Lang. Marketing is probably one reason, as Birba mentioned. Another reason is probably "to give the audience what they want".

Different personalities. Radu Lupu is a shy, introvert person with a strong character who is aboslutely not interested in circus hype and is not the kind of person to live by anybody else's whims.

[ubon2010]

Different personalities. Radu Lupu is a shy, introvert person with a strong character who is aboslutely not interested in circus hype and is not the kind of person to live by anybody else's whims.

Might this not also describe Evgeny Kissin?  Yet Kissin is a huge star.

Call me naďve, but I think rapport with the audience is the difference.  You and I may not be fond of Lang Lang, but he apparently makes connection with lots of people (recital at Royal Albert Hall sold out in 48 minutes)
https://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2013/01/lang-lang-solo-recital-sells-out-uks-biggest-hall-in-48-hours.html

Kissin has that rapport.  Nobuyuki Tsujii -- though he cannot see -- holds his audience spellbound, especially in Japan. 

An audience can sense a cold fish.

[dima_76557]

Might this not also describe Evgeny Kissin?  Yet Kissin is a huge star.

Maybe, but without downplaying Kissin's achievements, when we speak about art, Radu Lupu is in an entirely different league, not for the average crowd probably.

Call me naďve, but I think rapport with the audience is the difference.  You and I may not be fond of Lang Lang, but he apparently makes connection with lots of people (recital at Royal Albert Hall sold out in 48 minutes)

My teacher/coach taught me NEVER to criticize any such people because what we get (live or through recordings) is always just a moment in time that does not give the whole picture about the person, so you will never see me participate in any Lang Lang bashing. Actually, I must admit that I really like Lang Lang's recording of the Mendelssohn concerto on YouTube. I cannot say anything about his appeal to the audience, but it surely must be a factor. Call me sexist, but whatever Yuja Wang does, for example, she has my sympathy, ALWAYS, just because I like that type of star.

P.S.: I think it also makes a difference whether you are a more than average pianist yourself or not. If you know from your own experience how truly difficult it can be to voice, to color, to balance, etc. then this adds a separate dimension to the listening experience that non-instrumentalists may not take into account. With that in mind, I really cannot understand why anybody would not like Pollini's rendition of the andantino (14:50) in Schubert's Sonata I gave the link to higher up. Personally, it rips my heart out to hear Schubert express his sorrow and anger about his imminent death, and Pollini got that just right. If it was actually his grandma playing the left hand in that studio recording, I couldn't care less. It's the result that counts and what it does to you, how it lifts you up. Who is to judge about that other than the listener himself?

[chopin2015]

All you guys are saying is the more famous a pianist becomes, the less musical appeal they present. Sure, makes sense. When Kissin was young, he had a raw, exciting passion. Now, am more likely to find interviews than a extra-ordinary performance. I can think of a extra-ordinary performance by argerich. I can also distinguish wnen a person plays in a bland, heartless manner or if it a question of taste and preference. Her Prok is not my preference, but I trust in her emotions. Why do I trust her? Good question! Sokolov and Pollini are examplary and are good examples of taste. Lang Lang is an Asian pianist. They have different schooling style and learning curve than europe/america. People speak different languages and they interpret competition and business differently. For Lang Lang, he is not even given a chance to sing...I feel sad for him! He has so much skill and experience! I would hate to cycle through 5 beethoven concertos in 1 night. Poor guy. Have some sense of desency as a pianist and lay off the guy who is obviously from a different culture!

[chopin2015]

Also, I am glad we are finally discrediting certain organizations and schools that "produce talent". I don't care how long a pianist has been playing. It is not right to play music because that is your job. You have a choice. Keep the warm up cycling of works at the gym. To the stage, bring your heart. It is not ok to play without mistakes but forget to sing along. I'd rather make mistakes and develop feeling than the first. It is very rare to find performers who do not make mistskes and play freely, easily, enjoyably. It is easier for schools to pressure and produce pianists that make no technical mistakes because really...feelings just get in the way. It is true that tender moments are so prone to disaster!

[ubon2010]

Actually, I must admit that I really like Lang Lang's recording of the Mendelssohn concerto on YouTube. I cannot say anything about his appeal to the audience, but it surely must be a factor. Call me sexist, but whatever Yuja Wang does, for example, she has my sympathy, ALWAYS, just because I like that type of star.

Out of curiosity, may I ask what "type of star" are you referring to?  :-)  I ask because I do wonder.  It is why I started this thread in the first place.

P.S.: I think it also makes a difference whether you are a more than average pianist yourself or not. If you know from your own experience how truly difficult it can be to voice, to color, to balance, etc. then this adds a separate dimension to the listening experience that non-instrumentalists may not take into account.

And unfortunately I suspect above-average-pianists alone do not fill concert halls.  Stephen Hough recently lamented in his blog that his master classes draw few music students.

More than anything, I value the opinions of orchestra members who perform with a pianist.

[ubon2010]

Lang Lang is an Asian pianist. They have different schooling style and learning curve than europe/america. People speak different languages and they interpret competition and business differently. For Lang Lang, he is not even given a chance to sing...I feel sad for him! He has so much skill and experience! I would hate to cycle through 5 beethoven concertos in 1 night. Poor guy. Have some sense of desency as a pianist and lay off the guy who is obviously from a different culture!

Surely you know that Lang Lang studied with American Gary Graffman?  "Gary Graffman was Lang Lang’s teacher at the Curtis Institute in Philadelphia from the time he was 14 until 19." https://www.nyconcertreview.com/blog/?p=2064  He has lived in the U.S. since at least 14 and has an apartment across the street from the Carnegie Hall.

I think you owe Asians an apology.

[dima_76557]

Out of curiosity, may I ask what "type of star" are you referring to?  :-)  I ask because I do wonder.  It is why I started this thread in the first place.

Probably the kind of woman people like to see in a Hollywood film. To me, she is attractive as a woman. If such an attractive woman can also play the piano like that... Subconsciously, it was the thumbnail with her image that made me click on one of her clips on YouTube before I had ever heard or seen her. It was her famous rendition of the Bumblebee, which did not disappoint me. I was amazed and so I wanted to hear more and clicked and searched for other clips. I have a whole list with bookmark folders per artist, and she's there, probably to stay. She's still young, so I don't require her to go just as deep as some of the males of the old school, who are, of course, also in my bookmark folders. Different age categories, different requirements. Of the women of the old school, I like Annie Fisher very much and also Tatjana Nikolajewa, but that has clearly to do with their art, not with their being women.

P.S.: One reason for popularity I just thought of may be that those contemporary "stars", "heroes", etc. personify the ambitions many initially wanted for themselves but never reached, and the actual level of artisticity does not play such an important role as it used to in earlier times when the public consisted more exclusively of real (semi-)professional musicians.

[eric0773]

Sorry if I dumb down the discussion – intermediate amateur here. A good way to acquire notoriety is to post an extensive collection of free, polished, high definition videos on YouTube, with good direction. And this is regardless of how extravert/beautiful/strange/noteworthy the pianist may look. Some of the “unfairly famous” pianists you mention have gained audience because they produce the easiest videos to watch.

I do not have access to YouTube right now, but if my memory serves me well Libetta only has a couple videos there – and not necessarily in high quality. Listisa has tons of videos, all in HD, and wonderfully staged. This is not “marketing” (nobody is selling soaps here) – it is simply making presentation efforts to appeal the audience.

All of this may not increase your reputation amongst your fellow professional pianists and critiques, but will certainly make you more visible – to newcomers and trained ears alike. It will also give recognition to the pieces you play.

Some contemporary pianists should definitely make more presentation and recording availability efforts. Maintaining a quality presence on the Internet does not necessarily make you an attention-seeking buffoon.

[nyiregyhazi]

You are obviously not familiar with how this would (or rather would not) work in practice. The voices in, say, a five part fugue could, I suppose be recorded separately and then combined with some advantage by a person who could not control 5 separate voices simultaneously. It would never be as good as a simultaneous performance simply because the interactions of the voices on each other in the very fabric of the piano would be absent, and IMO it would be very much harder to control the interrelationship between the various voices in anything but the most simplistic fashion. For a pianist who basically couldn't play a decent fugue, it might result in a better result, but for anyone else it would be markedly worse. Gould could and did play such pieces live in concert, so it is difficult to see why he would be even tempted to resort to such fakery.

The idea of simply divvying up the hands is blatant nonsense as in this sort of context it would be meaningless.

Either your, or your teacher's recollection would seem to be faulty.

There is evidence that gould did something a bit like this in a few passages of the Beethoven /Liszt 5th (because he felt it was possible to execute the notes as written but impossible to make them musically controlled). However, I know of no evidence that he did it elsewhere. It's plain silly to claim he got his sound in general from this and especially to claim that Michelangeli was doing it.

[chopin2015]

Surely you know that Lang Lang studied with American Gary Graffman?  "Gary Graffman was Lang Lang’s teacher at the Curtis Institute in Philadelphia from the time he was 14 until 19." https://www.nyconcertreview.com/blog/?p=2064  He has lived in the U.S. since at least 14 and has an apartment across the street from the Carnegie Hall.

I think you owe Asians an apology.

Yo, tone it down. I didn't say anything negative about him or Asians. You're still wrong. I've been studying in the US since I was 9, but I am still Russian and I take more interest in Russian pianist's achievents and would rather follow that model because of my nationality. So does Lang Lang.

[ubon2010]

Yo, tone it down. I didn't say anything negative about him or Asians.

You may not be aware of it, but in your previous post you did a disservice to Asian pianists by  perpetuating a stereotype of them: great technique, hard working, but cannot "sing" (which I take to mean their performance lacks expression).

The Asian pianists these days: Mitsuko Uchida, Lang Lang, Yundi, Wang, Nobuyuki Tsujii, Yeol Yum Son etc., have different backgrounds, training, and orientation.  One size does not fit all.

[chopin2015]

No, that is what you guys were saying. I am saying that without being stereotypical, draw the line. His career probably does not allow him to play sweetly as often because of other demands that crush musical spirit...you guys are the ones saying Lang lang can't sing or play with feeling but has great technique. I said that asian piano culture is...let me clarify...its a sport. People do think asian pianists have good technique, but that is not a bad stereotype. The bad stereotype is saying asian pianists cannot play with "singing" but I never said that. I said the career is to blame, not the musician and certainly not lang lang. I think you misunderstood the point of me addressing Lang lang as an asian pianist. People do go to see him firstly for his great technique. If you want to hear someone play with feeling, well the only one I can think of is Horowitz. Lol

But I think lang lang is greatly misunderstood. I think he embraces his good technique as a marketing point to pianists, something we instead criticize him for. Also, lisitsa, lang lang and kussin are still younger than some of the greatest recordings by rubenstein, when he was much older. It takes a certain type of maturity to look past great technique and say it is not enough, personally. Anyone can say that to such a tough person like a performing pianist/professional, but it will not mean as much as saying it to yourself. But then actually expressing musical feeling...that is the hardest technique of all and takes...60 years? Heh

But also, as far as asian pianists, i am just saying, look at all the young pianists who play. Firstly, they are out there because their technique is great where I just do not see many russian kids being showcased like that. They have a culture of setting high learning curves in studies such as math. I see physics being more creative than math, but that comes later. Piano is studied vigorously over there than elsewhere because i see asian pianists becoming performers at a younger age.
In general,  young performers develop a stage style that is different from someone who lives in private study. Private study is a priviledge, a freedom. That's where music grows and is most tender rather than rough, dry, starved and parched, nerve wreck life....lisitsa said so herself...competition can make music dirty. You gotta not care about winning, or money, etc. That's why it is a priviledge to have private music studies, everything payed for, no stress of average life. Must be nice!

[ubon2010]

Maintaining a quality presence on the Internet does not necessarily make you an attention-seeking buffoon.

I respect your thoughtful comment, and I agree with you that skillful presentation on the web seems effective, judging from what I have read on this thread alone.  And perhaps now that there are subscription channels on YouTube, these artists can thrive on their web presence alone.

But I cherish live performances above recordings - it is a completely different experience.
To quote Italian pianist Francesco Libetta, whose interview got me started on this thread in the first place https://getclassical.blogspot.com/2012/05/francesco-libetta-italian-piano-artist.html 
“When Yuja Wang recently performed Bartok’s Second Piano Concerto ... it was broadcast on Radio. The director, a friend of mine, asked me how I enjoyed it and I told him that even though I did enjoy her – she was very good – in the live performance she did not have enough sound. That’s one of the problems of giving live concerts. You have to be able to adjust your dynamics. In a big hall that requires a lot of sound, but, with compressed sound bites on YouTube, it is not necessary. Therefore, if you just play fast enough you will sound great on YouTube, but it takes a different kind of musician to perform on stage."
I agree with him completely.

[perprocrastinate]

Is this thread really not asking any more than why do other people have different taste than me?

QFT

[j_menz]

QFT

Thanks. 

Though I had to look that up. 

[birba]

Quite fun, though.

[louispodesta]

There have been volumes written on the differences between the Asian and Occidental mindsets.  Per this discussion, specifically Lang Lang, I would like to focus on what some have described as the Asian (Chinese) concept of the individual existing for the good of the whole.

After roughly 5000 years, where is the great individual creativity of the Chinese composers.  You would think that after all that time the world would be flooded with their musical art.  It ain't.

Next, as I have pointed out in another thread on Lang Lang, he is a copyist.  This means that he finds a favorite recording of a piece, and then he mimicks it.  That is why when you hear this man in recital, it sounds like there are six or seven different pianists onstage.  He does not speak with one musical voice.

When he played the Chopin 1st with Lorin Maazel, I thought the conductor was going to throw the baton at him.  That piece is known for its highly improvisational somewhat saccharine nature, and that is not the way he played it at all!

It was very dry, and somewhat germanic in nature.  Those trills and those scale runs are supposed to be milked for all they are worth.

And on point, why is he the most successful pianist of the last 30 years?  Quite simply because every piece of general press that comes out on the guy says he is.

You can't find one late night talk show host or news anchor that hasn't raved about the man.  Why?  Because, like someone who posted above, they would be criticized/ostracized for being anti-Aisian.

Most of you are too young to remember the last famous pianist, a man by the name of David Heflgott, who the movie "Shine" was made about.

David Helfgott is a spastic lunatic who cannot even play a scale without being on his meds.  This nut job went out on tour, charging $50 a ticket for his recitals, and wherever he performed about half of the audience got up and walked out.  There isn't a major conductor on earth who will perform with this man.

Yet, he sold two million albums and was interviewed by every major media person in the U.S. 

It is all hype, and that is why some pianists today are more successful than others.  They have better Hype!

[thalbergmad]

Well said that man.

Thal

[eric0773]

Very interesting post, Louis, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

The Chinese pianist you mention immensely benefits from the controvery that surrounds him. He owes as much of his success to his fans than to his detractors.

At the end of the day, some pianists make a better conversation topic than other (to amateurs and advanced players alike), either because of positive/negative anecdotes (ex: leaving on stage), or because of their noticeable personality (again, for the better or the worse).

Many pianists are brilliant, but there isn't one single funny/interesting thing to say about them to someone that does not know them yet. They pay the price of their discretion/humility... sad.

Maybe it was different 50 years ago. Don't know, wasn't there :-)

[nyiregyhazi]

After roughly 5000 years, where is the great individual creativity of the Chinese composers.  You would think that after all that time the world would be flooded with their musical art.  It ain't.

Why? They didn't write in Western forms. Is the world flooded with individual Indian composers? No- because western ears don't listen to music in that style with open ear and because composers are only recently beginning to merge the musical traditions of the culture with Western forms. That's a really short-sighted (not to mention xenophobic) argument. They often refer to it as WESTERN art music for the reason that it has come from west. However, lately Takemitsu made a big name, hailing from Japan and I don't doubt that there are plenty of accomplished Chinese composers too.

Next, as I have pointed out in another thread on Lang Lang, he is a copyist.  This means that he finds a favorite recording of a piece, and then he mimicks it.  That is why when you hear this man in recital, it sounds like there are six or seven different pianists onstage.  He does not speak with one musical voice.

An extremely dubious argument, when made without a single reference. Assuming you're not throwing together facts virtually at random for the sake of trying to prove a prejudiced assumption please list the specific influences for a recording. We've already seen what erroneous nonsense you casually state as if it were fact about Gould and Michelangeli. You were unwilling/unable to provide any substance to the hot air about them, but perhaps you'd like to put some meat behind that casual assertion?

It was very dry, and somewhat germanic in nature.  Those trills and those scale runs are supposed to be milked for all they are worth.

Says who? You must despise the playing of Josef Hofman. He's exceedingly dry and literal compared to how Lang Lang plays runs.  

You can't find one late night talk show host or news anchor that hasn't raved about the man.  Why?  Because, like someone who posted above, they would be criticized/ostracized for being anti-Aisian.

Um, yeah. Or maybe it's because they don't know enough about classical music to have an opinon. Do you think they're secretly dying to pass advanced analysis on his approach to harmonic suspensions? Or maybe they're not- seeing as they know sod-all about analysis of classical piano.

David Helfgott is a spastic lunatic who cannot even play a scale without being on his meds.  This nut job went out on tour, charging $50 a ticket for his recitals, and wherever he performed about half of the audience got up and walked out.  There isn't a major conductor on earth who will perform with this man.

Yet, he sold two million albums and was interviewed by every major media person in the U.S.  

It is all hype, and that is why some pianists today are more successful than others.  They have better Hype!

Yes, it's hype. But does that justify the appalling tone you take in the first paragraph? I'm honestly disgusted to see such bitterness in the vile language. If you feel resentment, try reserving it for the people who have exploited him- rather than aiming at the poor mentally-ill man himself.

That's a terrible way to speak about a person with psychiatric issues and you must be a deeply angry and bitter individual to do so. If you want to be seen as a free-thinker rather than as an exceedingly bitter and envious crank, you'd do well to behave with some dignity. I doubt if there's a person here who doesn't know that Helfgott was not a good pianist, but such awful language conveys nothing except how resentful and jealous you are. I'd advise counselling.
  

[ubon2010]

There have been volumes written on the differences between the Asian and Occidental mindsets.  Per this discussion, specifically Lang Lang, I would like to focus on what some have described as the Asian (Chinese) concept of the individual existing for the good of the whole.

After roughly 5000 years, where is the great individual creativity of the Chinese composers.  You would think that after all that time the world would be flooded with their musical art.  It ain't.

I respect some of what you wrote on this thread, but I am compelled to agree with nyiregyhazi that you have gone too far.
Asians did not have the concept of "marketing" or "hyping" -- or mass media, for that matter -- to promote arts.  In the past, composers of music were unnamed.  
Asians have caught on, though, in a big way.  With their rise in economic clout and technology, a day may yet come when "the world would be flooded with their music art."

As the one who started this thread, I am saddened that the tone of this discussion has deteriorated.   I admit that I initiated the thread to implicitly voice my resentment towards the hyping that has brought (what I perceive as unjust) fame to some undeserving concert pianists.   I have learned a lot from the comments that you shared, thank you.

By chance, as I was about to write this reply, a 2012 Piano Street blog post was displayed on top of the page
https://www.pianostreet.com/blog/articles/the-battle-between-il-penseroso-and-the-old-arpeggio-4945/  
about a famous piano duel held between Franz Liszt and Sigismond Thalberg ... in 1838.

I had to laugh as I read it.  The article addresses so well what was eating at me.  Back in those days, people listened to piano music in live performances and compared notes afterwards, and on this occasion the two men (Liszt and Thaberg) performed in a duel, which supposedly ended in a draw.  Reading the opinions expressed by Chopin and Clara Schumann on Thalberg's playing, I am reminded of our discussion here on various pianists.

Now, almost two centuries later, the fame of one of them is undiminished, while that of the other has fallen into oblivion.  

So be it.  With time, things will be sorted out.  
But ... those were the days!

[thalbergmad]

Now, almost two centuries later, the fame of one of them is undiminished, while that of the other has fallen into oblivion. 

Well, I would not say he has fallen into oblivion, but nowhere near as well known as Liszt.

It was interesting today to see some of the debates starting on forums as David Beckham has just announced his retirement. I cannot but help compare Beckham with Lang Lang, as Beckham is the most hyped footballer in history, but such is the vastness of his limitations, that only people who know nothing about football or the incurably insane would recognise him as one of the great players.

Thal

[birba]

Well, I would not say he has fallen into oblivion, but nowhere near as well known as Liszt.

It was interesting today to see some of the debates starting on forums as David Beckham has just announced his retirement. I cannot but help compare Beckham with Lang Lang, as Beckham is the most hyped footballer in history, but such is the vastness of his limitations, that only people who know nothing about football or the incurably insane would recognise him as one of the great players.

Thal

i wonder if this means we we can hope to not be assaulted everyday with victoria's   "adventures".  She's become more famous then he.  Puke...

[piano6888]

The best pianists are not necessarily the best businessmen/women. Being a performer also is not something learned sitting at the piano, if the general audience finds you a boring performer then they generally wont really care how well you play. Piano solo concerts are also not that popular compared to the rest of the music world, professional pianists who rely on their fame to sell tickets will often not sell as much  as someone who promotes and manages the business of concert selling at a professional level.

Does this mean that someone (excluding JB, RB, and a few other pop artists) who isn't talented, but just mediocre can easily make it to the top or at least be very reknowned? If so, then that's quite disgusting and a huge slap in the face for those that worked to hard as hell to death and be as close to perfect as possible!  It feels like the ones that DO deserve it have just wasted their time and energy into perfecting something that ends up in a dead end!  This is coming from someone who has studied classical music for 9 years and still study music on his free time. 

Personally I don't think that I am even in their league (I'm just an amateur pianist), but nowadays most celebrities are OVERRATED and there are some people that aren't very good that make it to the top (not naming those though).  

When Kern won the Cliburn I was a bit ticked off. I will have to admit I didn't hear every note played by every contestant, but from what I did hear she was not the best, not at all. But she's pretty and fills a bra nicely, doesn't she? Looks matter. That and likeability.

When a few of us hot shots were told at university that we couldn't compete because we didn't look good one of the other victims of this told me she went to a lot of competitions and saw that the best pianists almost never won because top prize was given for looks. And trust me she would know.

Image is everything to a lot of people. Someone mentioned first impressions, and that's definitely true, but looks can even affect how a brain interprets aural information. There are some for whom the stage is where the halo effect collides with the McGurk effect. It's not a comfortable subject to approach but it's there and it's real and it's very sad. You can talk about the exceptions to this but you all know that on the whole I'm right. And I've seen this over and over again, good looking people given credentials in piano who CANNOT PLAY, and accompanists called brilliant who SUCK and play wrong notes all over the place but look like models. Madness.

If you ask me, Lang Lang skates on his image and his ridiculous overacting at the keyboard. I've never heard him give what I would call a great performance. And I heard a recording of him playing the Tchaikowsky first with the LA Phil that was so bad, that if I'd been the conductor I would have stopped the orchestra mid-first movement to demand his removal from the stage with an apology to the audience. It was unconscionable. He couldn't do the alternating octave passages evenly to save his life, at least on that night, and that's the easiest part of the whole damn thing. Still the audience eats him up.

I wasn't aware of the anti-American bias but now that you mention it I can see it. I'm gob smacked about Juilliard. One American pianist admitted? That's outrageous. They should be ashamed.

Marketing? Sure, a factor. Personality? Yes, but there is also luck and politics. In any field if you piss off the wrong person it can be deadly. And let's not forget all the competition out there and the insatiable desire for the latest wunderkind.

  What a world.  

I agree, this world has gone to the point where talented people are not getting enough credit (due to market driven demand, brainwashing of the masses, failed societal values, etc.) and some untalented people that either has something that the sheeple wants, gets more exposure than they deserve.  This isn't even the end of things, and I'm not even going to go on about the problems of Youtube that is another mountainous rant.  

[avguste]

Success depends on the person you talk to.

to answer your question, success depends on many factors. But the 2 most important are name recognition and direct marketing.

[lostinidlewonder]

Does this mean that someone (excluding JB, RB, and a few other pop artists) who isn't talented, but just mediocre can easily make it to the top or at least be very reknowned?

Remove the word "easily" from your sentence and I would agree.

If so, then that's quite disgusting and a huge slap in the face for those that worked to hard as hell to death and be as close to perfect as possible! 

Those that try to achieve in this manner are stuck inside their little box and they deserve all the failure that comes to them. You need to look outside of merely being able to play well, you need to know how to run a business just as well. Unfortunately many talented musicians are terrible people persons and useless with business management.

It feels like the ones that DO deserve it have just wasted their time and energy into perfecting something that ends up in a dead end!

Why does someone deserve fame and fortune just because they worked hard? Thomas Edison failed thousands of times, I could rattle off countless more examples of people who worked hard but got no where for a long time. You need to be able to sell your product, if you can't then you get no where, those that rely on others to make their fame and fortune are simply hoping that it strikes them out of the blue or they win a major competition to propel their career etc, they will most probably end up not doing any of that at all no matter how much they practice on the piano as a recluse.

[j_menz]

Thomas Edison failed thousands of times, 

No. In his own words, he didn't fail thousands of times, he just found thousands of ways that didn't work.

[kriatina]

The public (including myself) have unfortunately been left feeling confused about this question for a long time...

"In the old days" the pianists best known to the public were usually the pianists who still were really able to convey their own thoughts/interpretations/feelings about composers and their compositions... (I have collected many recordings by pianists from ~1900 onwards to prove my point...)

....Unfortunately these days many pianists are usually promoted by a "money-making-music-industry" and when the music-lover falls for this new kind of music-promotion, they end up feeling exploited by paying lots of money for one of those pianists who are only willing "tools" of the music industry... but their playing the piano during such a concert sounds like only "well rehearsed" and well studied, but without any feelings and without any thoughts... many of these promoted pianists  almost appear to the listener like "robots" of the music industry and they seem mainly "cheered-on" by their "hangers-on" (paid for by the music industry ? )... but their playing the piano leaves the listener feel exploited, empty... and very dissappointed...in short, many music-lovers feel they have wasted their time going to such a concert in the first place...

... As a result of having attended too many of such concerts in the past  - I don't read or listen now to any promoted pianists because I feel very strongly that I can't afford to waste my time on a "willingly promoted robot-product" of the music industry any longer...

... To come across a pianist these days who has an ability to convey a feeling for music of a composer - or to come across a pianist with an ability to convey their love of music or their feeling for music/interpretations/composers has unfortunately become a real rarity these days...

Another point I would like to make is that I have also noticed that some of the male/female pianists these days try ever so hard to make up for their lack of feeling whilst playing the piano by trying to sell us their body into the bargain ... during the concert... and this has no appeal to me whatsoever ... it "cheapens" in my opinion the conception of what music really stands for...

I have no explanation but many enthusiastic music lovers (including myself) have stopped a long time ago to attend any of these "promoted concerts" any longer... their love of music has unfortunately been exploited in the past by the music industry too often... and as a natural result of their terrible experiences they don't fall for such promotions any longer...

[lostinidlewonder]

No. In his own words, he didn't fail thousands of times, he just found thousands of ways that didn't work.

That's the right attitude!

The public (including myself) have unfortunately been left feeling confused about this question for a long time...

Most public that I know who attend piano solo concerts do NOT have any expectations of what makes a famous/popular pianists. Maybe that is because a piano solo concert is not a common public event where I live.

"In the old days" the pianists best known to the public were usually the pianists who still were really able to convey their own thoughts/interpretations/feelings about composers and their compositions... (I have collected many recordings by pianists from ~1900 onwards to prove my point...)

Yet someone like Chopin made losses when he did piano solo concert and thus history does not really remember him as performer but much more so as a composer.

....Unfortunately these days many pianists are usually promoted by a "money-making-music-industry" .... As a result of having attended too many of such concerts in the past  - I don't read or listen now to any promoted pianists because I feel very strongly that I can't afford to waste my time on a "willingly promoted robot-product" of the music industry any longer...

Where do you live? I haven't seen a mass flow of promoted pianists concerting around my area. A Piano solo concert is a rather rare thing in Australia by comparison to all the other performances that are on sale.

... To come across a pianist these days who has an ability to convey a feeling for music of a composer - or to come across a pianist with an ability to convey their love of music or their feeling for music/interpretations/composers has unfortunately become a real rarity these days...

Personally I think that more performers are starting to talk to an audience, more so than in the past. In the past performers were more of a mystery that a human being! They would not talk to the audience and merely play. In the information age we live in now people appreciate being educated listeners and this trend is starting to become more common and it helps an audience connect to the music more readily.

[kriatina]

Hello, lostinidlewonder,

I have read that Chopin suffered great financial losses as a result of his suffering from flare-ups of Emphysema, which made him deteriorate very quickly and as a consequence this chronic disease made him often too weak to earn money and play the piano in concerts...  Chopin therefore relied on George Sand for financial support... Chopin also had to cancel many concerts and his Emphysema made him regularly be confined to his bed for many weeks... and as a result the public knew his compositions mainly through the publications of his works...

I live in London and there is always a chance to attend a piano solo concert...any day of the week. ..and as a result of that, the public is faced with lots of promotion...any day of the week...

It is true that performers have now started to talk to their audience...  one pianist who really made a great impression on me, not only with his playing the piano but also with his very intelligent thoughts was Leslie Howard when he explained to his audience “Discovering Liszt”...
I am still very impressed by his explanation of the music and work of Liszt and I am very grateful that he shared his vast knowledge with the audience... But, as I have mentioned before, such wonderful treats are ever so rare to come by...

Best wishes from Kristina.

[chopin2015]

That's a terrible way to speak about a person with psychiatric issues and you must be a deeply angry and bitter individual to do so. If you want to be seen as a free-thinker rather than as an exceedingly bitter and envious crank, you'd do well to behave with some dignity. I doubt if there's a person here who doesn't know that Helfgott was not a good pianist, but such awful language conveys nothing except how resentful and jealous you are. I'd advise counselling.
  

It takes a very big person with a big heart to care for someone who they know they will never understand. Only a loving person can refrain from saying...hey, I think that person is crazy...obviously! But why is that your business?!

[birba]

Yes,  i thought his reply was out of place, too.  There's  always so much bitterness in his comments.  But you're asking for touble if you dare to contradict him! 

[thalbergmad]

But you're asking for touble if you dare to contradict him! 

Indeed, about 3 pages of it.

Thal

[nyiregyhazi]

It takes a very big person with a big heart to care for someone who they know they will never understand. Only a loving person can refrain from saying...hey, I think that person is crazy...obviously! But why is that your business?!

Perhaps you're fine with people throwing around such language as "lunatic spastic" at the mentally ill, as part of a hateful rant not against the industry but against a childlike mentally ill man. I'm not- particularly when the argument extends to allegations that he's secretly cognisant enough to be perpetrating a knowing fraud. And where are we going to draw the line? Is it also none of my business if people start using equally vile language in reference to race or sexuality? Leave them to get on with their prejudiced hateful speech?

[andreslr6]

man, I need to catch up on this thread, but I have class, maybe later ... interesting arguments...

[chopin2015]

Oh man, I thought of something the other day but It slips my mind at this moment....will come back to it.

Oh, yes! Chopin. He had many things to say about performances. He actually relied on other people to take care of him because he was too ill to do anything other than write music in terms of physical labor....very sheltered person. He could not physically handle much stress and people who do handle stress well are probably a much different personality, maybe less sensitive and creative. Idk, just a thought. People also tend to have a power to drain the energy from others, and that happens in performances to artists.

[marik1]

The single word answer is marketing.

That is why average pianists like Lang Lang & Lisitsa make the dough.

Thal

The word of wisdom from somebody who knows bank business!

Best, M

[birba]

But you have to hand it to lisitsa(?)  for being one of the first to take full advantage of youtube.  She was making the rounds of the competitions here in italy years ago and getting nowhere.

[marik1]

But you have to hand it to lisitsa(?)  for being one of the first to take full advantage of youtube.  

Isn't it what marketing is? Exactly what Thal is saying...

She was making the rounds of the competitions here in italy years ago and getting nowhere.

Common, 500+ (or even more) comps in Italy mean nothing. The only one of stature I can say from top of my head is Bolzano, but then... still no any weight...

Take geniously gifted Igor Kamentz, who is BY FAR superior and more interesting pianist than Listisa. Somebody who played for Brezhnev when he was 11 and studied with Chelibidache for many years (just to give an idea of his music intellect). He has about 40 only 1st (!!!) prizes in Italy, so what? No marketing, no career. End of the story...

Best, M