More praise to the composers of today's classical music

[ranniks]

This thread: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=52771

Got me thinking.

The Ballade 1 composed by Chopin is considered a very technical difficult piece to play. It takes years and years of practise to be able to play the right notes, and probably even more years to get the piece 'right' in the sense that Chopin intended it to sound like. Now the masterful composer Chopin is long dead, so how he originally inteded the piece to sound like, is but a wishful thinking, or maybe not.

So what does that say about Chopin? It says, in my opinion, that he, and the other composers (Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Liszt, etc), are/were in a league of their own. Well, 'duh,' you might be thinking. True, but think about it a little bit more in depth.

It takes one years, YEARS, to just play one of their pieces; a piece that they wrote/composed. They could make a piece just as difficult, maybe even more difficult and make it sound just as great, if not better.

What does that say/make of concert pianists today? Are they but pawns in front of the kings in the chess board? The kings being the composers of the past.

It's a big accomplishment for anyone to be able to play the ballades, but the real awe is what the composers did. How mad, sickening, yet vastly intelligent must Chopin have been to come up with such technical difficult pieces?

Why aren't the piano stars/super talents like Lang Lang, Valentina Lisitsa and co composing?

It's probably because they can't compare to the composers of the past.

What does that even mean? That we will never see such greatness as Chopin again? Will we foolishly dismiss the next young composer who in 20 years might have been the next Chopin, or maybe even better, just because humanity's ego is so inflated that we can't see a seed for the giant tree that it will later become?

Not entirely sure what I want to achieve with this thread, but I had to write and post it.

[awesom_o]

I personally believe that if you do not compose and/or improvise, you are nothing more than a sophisticated human jukebox. To be a real musician you need to have your own style.

Stay tuned for my first piano sonata! It's almost done. 

[ranniks]

Stay tuned for my first piano sonata! It's almost done. 

Remember sir; rushing things, when done incorrectly, may lead to pieces that sound not so good.

I do wish to listen to what you have composed. Your latest advice to me concerning the Lydian style has helped my improvisation tremendously.

[awesom_o]

That's why the Sonata is almost done, instead of actually being complete. I take my time  I never, ever rush. I can't abide rushing.

I misplaced my good copy of Tales from the Void midway through copying the 2nd tale in ink. I never have enough time to compose because I play too many instruments and too much music.

[outin]

I personally believe that if you do not compose and/or improvise, you are nothing more than a sophisticated human jukebox. To be a real musician you need to have your own style.

I agree. But I really have nothing against human jukeboxes and would not mind being a competent one.

The paradox is that to be competent I need to learn to do things in the similar way (relatively speaking) repeatedly, which is extremely hard for me. My mind always trives for variation.

Knowing myself I am certain that if I ever really learned to play the piano as well as I would want to, I would either get bored and stop playing or start changing things/making things up myself. But I may not have enough time to get there...

[awesom_o]

You can work with the fact that your mind craves variation. Music should never be the same way twice. Every time you play something, you are just playing a variation on something. You can never play the something itself. It only ever comes out as a variation of sorts

You just need to be comfortable with all the different possible variations so that you can make one amazing variation that is as close as possible to the 'truth'

[outin]

You can work with the fact that your mind craves variation. Music should never be the same way twice. Every time you play something, you are just playing a variation on something. You can never play the something itself. It only ever comes out as a variation of sorts

You just need to be comfortable with all the different possible variations so that you can make one amazing variation that is as close as possible to the 'truth'

I have always had trouble with the idea of "truth". For me it's very flexible. I just see the world that way.

But I suddenly realize why I learn my pieces so horribly slowly. I cannot stop experimenting, either with the sound or the movements, when I am supposed to practice it the way that has already proved to work 

[awesom_o]

That's why I put 'truth' in quotes!

Don't worry about how quickly you learn pieces! Just play as many pieces as you can every day! You are only playing your version of the truth. It doesn't have to be the same as other people's versions in order to be valid.

[dima_76557]

@ ranniks

I can only give some random thoughts to help see the topic of today's lack of creativity in performers from different perspectives.

1) Composing (and exceptional improvising) is creating. Not everyone has an urge to create. It's a talent if you are really good at it. It can't really be learned, I'm pretty sure about that. Being able to apply all existing formal rules is not yet great composing. A valid alternative for both composing and improvising would be arranging an already existing melody: you don't do that on the fly at the instrument, but the end result is still more than pleasing because it's truly original.

2) Composers in old times had nothing to record what they did. Some never even  heard the end result of what they had created. We have too many opportunities and technically advanced stuff, so we are no longer really challenged to create.

3) Too many people now play the piano relatively well. Really too many. Some have never even seen a concert hall from the inside, let alone heard a life performance. What used to be a privilege for some has become commonplace. No wonder then that the standards can be no more than mediocre.

4) Nowadays, music, music theory, and playing an instrument are taught in such a way that they no longer have anything to do with each other. If people knew their theory well and in a practical way, they wouldn't need half a year or more to simply learn the notes of a "difficult" piece.

5) Nowadays, money dictates who we are going to hear from. I am convinced that we haven't heard today's greatest talents yet because they either didn't pass (or didn't want to participate in) some standard required competitions or they don't have the business qualities to manage their own careers well enough.

Hope that helps a bit.

[ranniks]

[dima_76557]

@ ranniks

One element we haven't "touched" upon and that has really nothing to do with composing as such is TOUCH. From what I heard, there are three categories of pianists:

1) The ones that organize noise (from soft to loud). These come in all categories from beginners to extremely advanced, even composers. If they are composers, they search "beauty" elsewhere, for example architectual beauty. Their mission is to reveal the structure of the work.

2) The ones that strive for a quasi-beautiful touch. These are exclusively advanced pianists, almost never composers, who have learned the trade, but haven't internalized it. Their playing has something artificial, superficial, lacking true depth. Since this type of touch can be taught and learned, it is surprising that so few actually take the trouble to strive for it if they are not "naturals". This category of performers often makes the mistake of trying to play EVERYTHING quasi-beautiful, even those passages that require a certain "ugliness", aggression, etc.

3) The ones with a natural and very beautiful, personal, internalized touch. This can NOT be taught or learned. These come in all categories from absolute beginners to extremely advanced, sometimes composers.

Another element is a psychological one, and it is very difficult to describe. The best performers (whatever their level of development) seem to be infected with a virus called music. They are obsessed with it and it shows in how their playing sounds. They seem to have a fever, and they glow and shine with the music. The music burns in them. You don't have to be a composer to have that quality. It seems to me that this can NOT be taught or learned.

P.S.: Essential, of course, is that the performer should tell something. At concerts, I usually position myself near the exit to be able to run away as fast as I can, because I get physical cramps if what the performer does is entirely beside the point. Two, three notes is enough for me to decide: stay or go away. I will never sit a concert to the end out of politeness. If it's a waste of time, it's a waste of time, whatever the name of the artist.

[ranniks]

At concerts, I usually position myself near the exit to be able to run away as fast as I can, because I get physical cramps if what the performer does is entirely beside the point. Two, three notes is enough for me to decide: stay or go away. I will never sit a concert to the end out of politeness. If it's a waste of time, it's a waste of time, whatever the name of the artist.

You must feel so proud of yourself. Well done.

Now, if you are honestly enduring physical pain, and/or distress to such a point that you experience stress; then I have understanding for what your reasoning is behind leaving during a performance that you chose to listen to.

[dima_76557]

You must feel so proud of yourself. Well done.

?

Now, if you are honestly enduring physical pain, and/or distress to such a point that you experience stress; then I have understanding for what your reasoning is behind leaving during a performance that you chose to listen to.

Real physical stress, sometimes hyperventilation. If a player sits all cramped with pain in his neck at the instrument, I feel his pain in my neck and I can't stay where I am. Performance is not only something you listen to with your ears, it is also a haptic experience that can cause all kinds of physical reactions if your are susceptible to it.

The opposite can also happen: you feel physically bad before the concert and two, three notes is enough to cheer you up because you know something is going to happen. The funny thing is that these things cannot be captured, neither with a camera, nor with a microphone.

[ranniks]

Real physical stress, sometimes hyperventilation.

Well then, you have my complete and upmost compassion, sympathy and understanding. I don't want to disclose too much, but I have had a period recently that I was hyperventilating for almost close to a week.

[indianajo]

Classical music has been hijacked by the colleges and conservatories  to include a lot of discordant ****.  So much of "new" music I hear on the radio needs to be followed by a cola chaser because the taste is so bad.  
Melodic modern music is being written, but to make money it has been coupled to peurile lyrics to sell.  Great piano composers IMHO are Elton John/Reggie Dwight, and Lennon/McCartney/Harrison, whose lyrics aren't all that bad. However, they never develop anything in the 19th century way because the customers won't pay for it, the radio won't play it  They are not trained for it either.
Recent pieces I have enjoyed on the classical station are Connie Ellisor Blackberry Winter, and Nikolai Metzner Piano Concerto #1. Richard Purvis did some fun organ stuff, particularly Four Dubious Pieces.  Miguel Blankapore did Youthful Pieces.  Scott Shuman wrote a nice orchestral New England Tryptich.  Phillip Glass is bearable but not in the least pianistic.