How does Hamelin do it?

[charmsjr94]

I'm astounded at the vastness of Marc Andre Hamelin's repertoire. Every time I look up a piece on Youtube, their is always recordings of him. It's always stuff like Alkan, Liszt, Chopin, Kapustin. It's endless.

How do you think he does it? I'm sure he practices 6-8 hours a day. I don't imagine anyone can honestly benefit from more than 8. Is it how he practices? I'm very interested.

[faulty_damper]

No, he doesn't practice that much according to him.  Also, he disdains counting practice in terms of hours.

He has better technique and musical sensibilities, though imo, his sensibilities are conservative.

[chicoscalco]

He must be a tremendous sight-reader...

[landru]

I'm recalling from an interview I once read that his father is a collector of obscure and difficult piano pieces and that Marc-Andre grew up trying them out with his father. So not only was he probably a piano technique prodigy, he also was becoming familiar with the very tough stuff (and learning how to approach playing them - a different learning technique than your standard Beethoven/Bach/Mozart the average 7 year old gets I bet) at the same time.

[ahinton]

I'm recalling from an interview I once read that his father is a collector of obscure and difficult piano pieces and that Marc-Andre grew up trying them out with his father. So not only was he probably a piano technique prodigy, he also was becoming familiar with the very tough stuff (and learning how to approach playing them - a different learning technique than your standard Beethoven/Bach/Mozart the average 7 year old gets I bet) at the same time.

Hamelin's father was certainly an early influence in the repertoire that you mention although, sadly, he died quite a few years ago.

Best,

Alistair

[austinarg]

He mastered the fundamentals at an early age, which gave him plenty of time to tackle the hardest pieces ever. I think I heard him say in an interview that he doesn't think of all the small things and nuances involved in piano technique while playing, he just does them.

There is a chinese term for this, used in martial arts: wu wei, which means that the best path of action is no-action. Which in turn means, practice until it happens by itself, without thinking about doing it. Of course, it is near impossible to apply this knowledge to everything, but if you use it on the most basic aspects of piano, everything else will seem easy.

In fact, that is the secret to being the best at everything - master the fundamentals.

[chicoscalco]

He mastered the fundamentals at an early age, which gave him plenty of time to tackle the hardest pieces ever. I think I heard him say in an interview that he doesn't think of all the small things and nuances involved in piano technique while playing, he just does them.

There is a chinese term for this, used in martial arts: wu wei, which means that the best path of action is no-action. Which in turn means, practice until it happens by itself, without thinking about doing it. Of course, it is near impossible to apply this knowledge to everything, but if you use it on the most basic aspects of piano, everything else will seem easy.

In fact, that is the secret to being the best at everything - master the fundamentals.

I may be rambling here, but can't this be one of the reasons people sometimes call him a bit too... I don't know... superficial? I don't know if this the correct word, but it is noticeable a certain lack of struggle. This non-awareness of what he does, since it's all already internalized, can maybe lead to a distance from the music. Like, yeah, he's awesome, he has played EVERYTHING, but I doubt he has really digged into each piece he played, it's impossible to do it with everything he has played.
His Alkan, for example. It's note-perfect, the tempo, tone, everything is there. Except that one thing, the "je ne sais quoi" 

[awesom_o]

He hasn't played everything.... what are you talking about?

I find his playing to be weirdly non-expressive.

[chicoscalco]

He hasn't played everything.... what are you talking about?

I find his playing to be weirdly non-expressive.

Sorry... I'm not a native speaker and sometimes these kind of things get in the way. In brazilian portuguese, it's normal to exaggerate things, saying things without meaning. It's hard for non-native speakers to understand the logic.
Well then. I meant he has played an enormous amount of music, much more than the majority of pianists. He is in fact the pianist with the largest repertoire I know.

[lostinidlewonder]

Get ready for the "Tall Poppy" responses. Hamelin is an amazing pianist because he embodies talent and discipline at its highest levels. Also realize that a lot of his recordings are done in a studio, but his live records are also quite a treat.

[chicoscalco]

Get ready for the "Tall Poppy" responses. Hamelin is an amazing pianist because he embodies talent and discipline at its highest levels. Also realize that a lot of his recordings are done in a studio, but his live records are also quite a treat.

But would you classify him as one of the greats? If not, why?

[j_menz]

But would you classify him as one of the greats? If not, why?

No. He's still alive.

In legal parlance, one could only become an authority once one was dead. That is no longer quite the case, but the idea seems to have transferred to pianists (and composers).

[lostinidlewonder]

chicoscalco Hamelin is one of the greatest pianists alive today, anyone who denies that is a jealous bastard.

[chicoscalco]

Maybe it's me, but I DO sense a lack of purpose in his playing... He is incredible, I love his performances, but for me there is something that just isn't there.
But J_menz is probably right, it's hard to judge pianists who are still alive and performing, evolving. I'll have a stronger opinion in 50 years 

[thalbergmad]

chicoscalco Hamelin is one of the greatest pianists alive today, anyone who denies that is a jealous bastard.

If you want all fingers and no soul, Hamelin is your man. I am not in the slightest bit jealous of his mind numbingly boring rendition of the Reger-Telemann variations. His Scharwenka 4 was even worse.

In 50 years time, will he be recognised of one of the greats??. Almost certainly not. He will only be of interest to the "difficulty brigade" and morons that are impressed most with mechanical proficiency.

Thal

[pianoman53]

I don't know if I'd say that is only fingers and no soul, but he certainly fits better with the virtuoso repertoire than with the more poetic, for my taste. Gaspard is a perfect example; the first and second movement left me with nothing, while the third was very exciting. Ironically, he was the one that made me interested in playing Haydn.

[thalbergmad]

His Haydn recordings that I have heard were superb, It is the recordings of romantic repertoire that leave me cold.

Thal

[chicoscalco]

What do you guys think of his Bach?

[ahinton]

His Haydn recordings that I have heard were superb, It is the recordings of romantic repertoire that leave me cold.

It's good to hear your comments about his Haydn, to which he had been committed for a long time before embarking on that extensive project. I wonder, though, how recent are the recordings of later repertoire that you've heard from him. The charge of superficiality - which I know would upset him greatly, because he's never had the kind of mind to be satisfied with anything that doesn't at least seem to make appropriate efforts to delve beneath the surface - has been made on a number of occasions by a number of critics, but I do wonder sometimes if what I'd call his vulnerability to "Richard Strauss syndrome" - i.e. everything happening to come to him just too easily - has become a thing of the past. It does not occur to me, for example, that anyone willing to provide an impression that physical / mechanical pyrotechnics is a principal priority would want to be bothere to record the Medtner sonatas or even the Chopin/Godowsky studies which are far more difficult than any kind of surface glitter presentation would suggest (in other words many people listening wouldn't appreciate just how difficult some of Hamelin's reportoire is, either on its own terms of reference or because of Hamelin's disinterest in "showing off" his physical brilliance at the keyboard). Try his Albéniz discs and the Godowsky "waltz time" one that has LG's three Symphonic Metamorphoses on Strauss waltzes at its heart.

Best,

Alistair

[lostinidlewonder]

If you want all fingers and no soul, Hamelin is your man. I am not in the slightest bit jealous of his mind numbingly boring rendition of the Reger-Telemann variations. His Scharwenka 4 was even worse.

In 50 years time, will he be recognised of one of the greats??. Almost certainly not. He will only be of interest to the "difficulty brigade" and morons that are impressed most with mechanical proficiency.

Thal

So jealous

[haydnseeker]

I heard him live for the first time at London's Wigmore Hall last month.

It was no surprise that he gave a stunning performance of Medtner's longest and most complex sonata ("The Night Wind", Op. 25/2). He also played Gaspard de la nuit and a new piece of his own.

Besides those, he included a selection from Janáček's On an Overgrown Path - pieces we can all play!  The delicate touch he showed in music that doesn't have zillions of notes was an unexpected delight.

[charmsjr94]

I feel bad for starting a discussion and then leaving it until days after it's over! I apologize.

There are a lot of valid points that people made. I wonder how many aspiring pianists out there would take his tremendous technique and ability to quickly learn pieces over something like expressiveness and really learning a piece thoroughly.  I wouldn't say he's the driest pianist out there in terms of emotion; I feel like a lot of his repertoire almost doesn't allow extreme expressive playing (the stuff with a million 32nd notes) but I have heard his Gaspard and some of his Debussy and would agree that the listener could be left missing a certain something...

[faulty_damper]

He doesn't do expression very well.  He doesn't climb as the melody climbs and come down as the melody falls.  It tends to be rather flat.  Thus, as many people have observed, it sounds like this lack of expression makes him sound more like a technically gifted pianist than a superb musician.

[awesom_o]

He doesn't do expression very well.  He doesn't climb as the melody climbs and come down as the melody falls.  It tends to be rather flat.  Thus, as many people have observed, it sounds like this lack of expression makes him sound more like a technically gifted pianist than a superb musician.

I would agree with this assessment overall. There is something very monochrome about his playing, that I can't quite put my finger on.

[faulty_damper]

I have his recent Chopin sonatas CD.  Listen to the funeral march movement and he does exactly what I described.  Where every other pianist would increase dynamics as the melody rises, he remains flat and reserved.

[thalbergmad]

flat and reserved.

Could not have put it better myself, but perhaps one could add the word "dry".

I will not be wasting any more money on Hamelin CD's.

Thal

[faulty_damper]

Another reason I won't be buying another Hamelin CD is that the sound engineering is horrid.  I've already started a thread about the horrible sound by engineer Simon Eadon.  He ruined the Chopin Sonatas, the Godowsky Strauss, Stephen Hough's Debussy Preludes, and a whole bunch of others.  Yes, Tony Faulkner was really expensive, but he was able to capture the tone that best represented the music.

I should have sent Hyperion an email years ago about the horrible sound quality of Simon Eadon but I think I'll just vote with my wallet. If anyone wants to send Hyperion an email telling the producer to stop using Eadon, go ahead.

[ahinton]

Another reason I won't be buying another Hamelin CD is that the sound engineering is horrid.  I've already started a thread about the horrible sound by engineer Simon Eadon.  He ruined the Chopin Sonatas, the Godowsky Strauss, Stephen Hough's Debussy Preludes, and a whole bunch of others.  Yes, Tony Faulkner was really expensive, but he was able to capture the tone that best represented the music.

I should have sent Hyperion an email years ago about the horrible sound quality of Simon Eadon but I think I'll just vote with my wallet. If anyone wants to send Hyperion an email telling the producer to stop using Eadon, go ahead.

I cannot vouch for the cost of Tony Faulkner but I certainly can do so for his brilliance as a recording engineer; one of the very best, indeed.

Best

Alistair

[charliefreak]

If you want all fingers and no soul, Hamelin is your man. I am not in the slightest bit jealous of his mind numbingly boring rendition of the Reger-Telemann variations. His Scharwenka 4 was even worse.

In 50 years time, will he be recognised of one of the greats??. Almost certainly not. He will only be of interest to the "difficulty brigade" and morons that are impressed most with mechanical proficiency.

Thal

For goodness sakes.  This sort of mean-spirited pianist bashing says a lot more about you, than it does about Hamelin.

Regardless, I'm a big fan of Hamelin.  I'm thrilled by the very precise nature of his playing.  It appeals to me.  Even in the most difficult passages, I never get yanked out of the mood of the music by a feeling that the pianist is playing at the very limits of his technical abilities, and it could fall apart at any moment. Sloppy playing shouldn't be confused with soul.

[ahinton]

For goodness sakes.  This sort of mean-spirited pianist bashing says a lot more about you, than it does about Hamelin.

I have to agree with you. I have observed Hamelin's playing develop over more than a quarter century and can vouch for the fact that he has never had any interest in virtuosic displays of digital dexterity or playing to the gallery for its own sake; I don't think that some of his earlier recordings as recordings do him as much good as they might (that of Sorabji's first piano sonata being a notable exception) and perhaps at times the fact of what I might call his affliction with "Richard Strauss syndrome" - i.e. certain things coming much more easily to him than to most (albeit not without as much practice as anyone else does) - might have contributed to some degree to masking his ability to project what he thinks and feels about some of the music that he plays.

Unlike most pianists, Hamelin has always composed and, like most of those others who do or did compose - Dinu Lipatti, John Ogdon, Ronald Stevenson, Stephen Hough, Jonathan Powell, for example - the act of composition is an essential aspect of the art of playing (that said, Stevenson is more widely regarded as a composer than as a pianist, although that's largely because he has never sought to pursue any kind of international career as a performer despite being one of the finest players of his time - and Artur Schnabel, on the other hand, being far better known as a pianist than as a composer, seems to have lived two entirely separate lives in the two professions, in that his largely atonal music might seem to some to be at odds with the repertoire that he performed).

The best of Hamelin's music, whilst by no means "ground-breaking", can be engaging and is not short of its own challenges.

I note that most of the more carping criticisms of him rest on his playing alone, which might itself seem somewhat questionable.

I also note with more than passing interest Thal's praise for his Haydn playing as opposed to his way with the Romantic repertoire for which he was far better known before he made the Haydn CDs (and probaly still is, for that matter); I wonder how he or anyone else that takes a similar view might account for why they believe this to be a fact.

It has come as no pleasure at all to Hamelin to be associated in certain people's minds with the work of the kinds of empty virtuoso trickster that have not much more going for them that their trickstership; indeed, the last time he alluded to this was in a conversation less than 24 hours ago...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I'm thrilled by the very precise nature of his playing.  It appeals to me. 

I think that says as much about you as it does about Hamelin.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

indeed, the last time he alluded to this was in a conversation less than 24 hours ago...

I hope you told him to keep away from Scharwenka.

Thal

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Even in the most difficult passages, I never get yanked out of the mood of the music by a feeling that the pianist is playing at the very limits of his technical abilities, and it could fall apart at any moment.

Actually, I think that feeling is important to exciting performances - imo the some of the greatest virtuosi have been able to impart that feeling even when in reality it's an illusion.

[ahinton]

I hope you told him to keep away from Scharwenka.

I didn't tell him to keep away from anything - not even you!

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I think that says as much about you as it does about Hamelin.

Would you advocate - or at least be prepared to put up with - sloppiness, then?...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Would you advocate - or at least be prepared to put up with - sloppiness, then?...

I would accept occasional sloppiness for a tiny bit of humanity and individual playing.

Until he can do that in romantic works, he should stick to Haydn and semi plinkers.

Thal

[ahinton]

I would accept occasional sloppiness for a tiny bit of humanity and individual playing.

Until he can do that in romantic works, he should stick to Haydn

OK, but if you believe - as seems to be the case - that humanity and individuality in Hamelin's playing is noticeable only when he plays Haydn, then I can only assume that we'll simply hve to agree to disagree (although I admire his Haydn playing as much as you do).

and semi plinkers.

Since no amount of encouragement over quite some time has yet persuaded you to offer a definition of "plinkers", one might suppose that having one for the "semi" variety thereof would sadly be too much to ask; ah, well...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

OK, but if you believe - as seems to be the case - that humanity and individuality in Hamelin's playing is noticeable only when he plays Haydn, then I can only assume that we'll simply hve to agree to disagree

Well, Haydn doesn't really require any individuality so it rather suits his bland but exact style of playing.

He is at his least offensive in works which could be played equally well by a cyborg.

Thal

[ahinton]

Well, Haydn doesn't really require any individuality

...hole...dig...deeper...

If only John McCabe were in far better health than he so very sadly is and has been for some time, I wouldn't give a whole lot for your chances in a few rounds with him (and by rounds I do not mean either canons or drinks)...

He is at his least offensive in works which could be played equally well by a cyborg.

Even though I've never knowingly heard a piano work played by a cyborg (have you? - perhaps you have - after all, as you've evidently witnessed at first hand and ear the compromises in dynamics in Chopin's playing and have gone up in a balloon over a field full of Steinways, one might suppose that you've experienced pretty much everything that there is to experience where pianos and piano playing are concerned), I have no idea what works could be played well by one in the first place, so I cannot take your observation any more seriously than it merits.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Even though I've never knowingly heard a piano work played by a cyborg have you?

Er yes, here it is:

I think this was probably a Hamelin recording though.

Thal

[ahinton]

Er yes, here it is:

I think this was probably a Hamelin recording though.

You "think"? I'm sure that you do on other occasions, but your thinking powers, motivation and/or whatever else have evidently deserted you on this occasion. You're sure it wasn't Thalbergmad himself playing a show pan knock turn? Joke attempt failure here, methinks.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

then I can only assume that we'll simply hve to agree to disagree

Indeed, we will hve to.

You really must learn not to switch off your critical senses when commenting on someone who happens to be a personal friend.

Thal

[ahinton]

Indeed, we will hve to.

You really must learn not to switch off your critical senses when commenting on someone who happens to be a personal friend.

That remark is, if I may say so, entirely uncalled for, as such critical senses as I possess are entirely unaffected by whether anyone on whose work I might comment is either a personal friend or the very reverse thereof.

We will nonetheless "hve to" if you say so, I guess...

Best,

Alistair

[faulty_damper]

About the 7/9 video, that was just a midi recording, wasn't it?  That was horrendous, even for a cyborg.

[faulty_damper]

That remark is, if I may say so, entirely uncalled for, as such critical senses as I possess are entirely unaffected by whether anyone on whose work I might comment is either a personal friend or the very reverse thereof.

It's hard for us not to view your comments as unbiased considering the relationship you have.  And you have, in the past, defended certain pianists whose skills were god-awful just because he played your works.  Anyone with a functioning pair of ears knows it didn't sound like music and yet you praised these performances.  I don't want to dig up those threads.

[thalbergmad]

That remark is, if I may say so, entirely uncalled for, as such critical senses as I possess are entirely unaffected by whether anyone on whose work I might comment is either a personal friend or the very reverse thereof.

Now you really are talking out of your arse. You might not realise you are affected, but you almost certainly on occasion are affected.

I doubt if there are many on this forum who have not stood up for friends even if they did play like a gibbon.

Thal

[ahinton]

It's hard for us not to view your comments as unbiased considering the relationship you have.

I don't know who "us" might be, but it's not my fault if some people can't appreciate and/or recognise the ability to divorce personal and professional associations from views held.

And you have, in the past, defended certain pianists whose skills were god-awful just because he played your works.  Anyone with a functioning pair of ears knows it didn't sound like music and yet you praised these performances.  I don't want to dig up those threads.

I won't ask you who on earth you're referring to here by expecting you to declare his identity in this or any other thread here but you most certainly owe it to me to explain yourself in a PM, otherwise your remarks will and should be be treated with the utter contempt which they deserve; for the record, I have less than no idea what you're on about.

Oh and, by the way, just for the record, Hamelin has yet to play a note of mine...

Best,

Alistair

[faulty_damper]

By "us", I mean those who think Hamelin sounds flat and unexpressive.
For the record, I learned the most important thing about piano playing from him: playing is easy.  It is this realization that made me admire him for many years and deafened to his unexpressivity in certain (but not all) kinds of music.

Alistair, you defended J. Powell for his atrocious renderings of Sorabji's works.  I don't know if he did ever play your works but since you are the curator of the Sorabji Archive... well, I don't blame you for being biased.  Don't bite the hand that feeds, I guess.

[thalbergmad]

Alistair, you defended J. Powell for his atrocious renderings of Sorabji's works. 

Oh dear, that one will get a response I feel.

I do remember a few years ago when Hinty was going through a Powell phase, but that does appeared to have died down now, as do the constant almost messianic hope of a new Opiss Crappycembulum recording.

However, I must add that J Powell is one pianist that I have completely changed my views on over the years. His Medins CD is beyond beautiful.

Thal

[ahinton]

Now you really are talking out of your arse. You might not realise you are affected, but you almost certainly on occasion are affected.

I doubt if there are many on this forum who have not stood up for friends even if they did play like a gibbon.

Garbage. I use the same orifice as most other people out of whihc to speak - and, for the record, Jack Gibbons has never played anything of mine either. You really are letting yourself down here.

Best,

Alistair