Interview with Van Cliburn winner, Vadym Kholodenko

[vlhorowitz]

Hi, Everyone,

Hope you're all having a great Friday Here is our latest interview with Vadym Kholodenko, winner of the latest Van Cliburn competition, and student of Vera Gornostaeva. Here, the native of Kiev shares his thoughts on Medtner, Rachmaninoff, Horowitz, and the brewing conflict in Ukraine right now. 

As always, thank you all for reading (and commenting)

https://www.examiner.com/article/interview-with-pianist-vadym-kholodenko-1

[faulty_damper]

When I first read that he had trouble with the Op. 10 Etudes, my immediate thought was that he uses his fingers excessively to depress the keys because that is almost always the technical constraint that prevents playing many of Chopin's etudes easily.  So I started watching his Van Cliburn performance...

.. and he does indeed use his fingers in great excess.  However, even with excess finger lifting, he's able to control his tone very well so that was very surprising.

[marik1]

When I first read that he had trouble with the Op. 10 Etudes

His level and ideas about "troubles" with Op.10 are very different from that of an average PS members, who between picking nose and watching Simpsons, post on PS yet another: "What is the hardest Chopin Etude".

As for the "using fingers excessively", no--he uses his fingers just right--for him it works perfectly and he has an extremely economical and efficient apparatus, with excellent alignment with the keys. Hence such a good tone and speed control. I can assure you, if he had to play entire Op.10 he'd do it... quite well...

Best, M

[faulty_damper]

And yet you provide no evidence to support your ideas.  I do not view technique in terms of the output but on the efficiency and effectiveness of the process in achieving that output.  You can very clearly see that he uses his fingers excessively.

[marik1]

And yet you provide no evidence to support your ideas.  I do not view technique in terms of the output but on the efficiency and effectiveness of the process in achieving that output.  You can very clearly see that he uses his fingers excessively.

Well, I am sorry, but this is you who do not provide any evidence to support your ideas, to start with. You can very clearly see that he uses his fingers very efficiently and effectively, hence the good quality of tone, perfect control, and quite remarkable virtuosity.

Best, M

[faulty_damper]

Again, you are only looking at the performance whereas I am looking at the method.  That kind of technique requires endless hours to maintain.  If he ever stops playing for any period of time, his technique will have literally atrophied.

[marik1]

What makes you feel you have any idea what I am looking at?
Other than that so far you did not give any evidence to any of your allegations, let alone I'd say you just got carried away as for how long it requires him to maintaing his technique and how that would get atrophied. How do you know? Any evidence? 

Best, M

[pianoman53]

Marik, don't take fauly_pamper's ideas too seriously. He also said that Yuja Wang has one of the worst techniques he'd ever seen. This, simply because he says it take much practice to maintain. His idea is that you shouldn't practice, and yet become better.

Simply the fact that he doesn't see technique as the outcome, but rather "the method of getting there" should be evidence enough that he has a no, or very small, clue of what he is talking about.

[faulty_damper]

My evidence for his flawed technique comes from his own words and video of him playing.  He said, "even the First Chopin etude is extremely difficult to play."  What?  Op.10 No.1 is difficult to play?  No, it is not at all difficult to play unless you are using a flawed technique.  This is exactly the kind of technique Chopin wrote the Etudes to address because he knew that no one would be able to play them using the finger hammering technique of his time.

As well, excess lifting and contraction of the fingers requires constant practice to maintain.  This is a fact well known if anyone has ever played Hanon exercises.  These same exercises I suspect Kholodenko has done extensively during his training.  He may have even tried balancing coins on the back of his hands while practicing as you can see he tries to maintain flat palms.  On his instruction he says that his teacher, "Gornostaeva had an enormous influence on my musical growth. I am so happy to have a small connection with that old-school world of piano-playing. It may not be the most well-polished playing, but it was always about the sound, always about the music itself."

The only evidence you cite to say the contrary is that it is your opinion.  Which isn't valid in this instance.

[marik1]

Your so called "evidence" built on two things:

1) What Kholodenko says, and
2) Your allegations and fantasies like: "that was my first thought", "I suspect", "he may have". You have a liberty to guess, how long it takes to maintain technique, etc. etc. etc. In other words, empty and unsupported guesses.

Getting back to 1). Clearly, yours "What?  Op.10 No.1 is difficult to play?  No, it is not at all difficult to play unless you are using a flawed technique" shows that you are whether an amateur pianist, or at the best, a "know it all" student. As I said, Kholodenko is a professional and his concept of "difficult" is very different from yours. One has to be on a certain level and have enough knowledge to even understand what he means. As for your second bold, try to read into it, so you might understand better what he meant.

As for 2). Just look at him playing Feux Follets, or Beethoven Sonata, to see that in fact, his fingers are super glued to the keys, moving efficiently and effortlessly, displaying good tone and flawless pianistic mechanism. What else evidence do you need?

Marik, don't take fauly_pamper's ideas too seriously. He also said that Yuja Wang has one of the worst techniques he'd ever seen. This, simply because he says it take much practice to maintain. His idea is that you shouldn't practice, and yet become better.

Simply the fact that he doesn't see technique as the outcome, but rather "the method of getting there" should be evidence enough that he has a no, or very small, clue of what he is talking about.

Yep, it is fashionable on PS to trash. Not even Kholodenko and Yuja Wang, but Horowitz, Gould, Richter, Cziffra--you name it. I guess, the bigger name you trash--the better and the more respect you get--the others might think: "Indeed, (s)he knows and understands what (s)he is talking about!!!".

Best, M

[pianoman53]

My evidence for his flawed technique comes from his own words and video of him playing.  He said, "even the First Chopin etude is extremely difficult to play."  What?  Op.10 No.1 is difficult to play?  No, it is not at all difficult to play unless you are using a flawed technique.  This is exactly the kind of technique Chopin wrote the Etudes to address because he knew that no one would be able to play them using the finger hammering technique of his time.

As well, excess lifting and contraction of the fingers requires constant practice to maintain.  This is a fact well known if anyone has ever played Hanon exercises.  These same exercises I suspect Kholodenko has done extensively during his training.  He may have even tried balancing coins on the back of his hands while practicing as you can see he tries to maintain flat palms.  On his instruction he says that his teacher, "Gornostaeva had an enormous influence on my musical growth. I am so happy to have a small connection with that old-school world of piano-playing. It may not be the most well-polished playing, but it was always about the sound, always about the music itself."

The only evidence you cite to say the contrary is that it is your opinion.  Which isn't valid in this instance.

What he says clearly shouldn't be taken like that. That he says that op 10/1 is incredibly difficult is the same thing as when Horowitz said "A c major scale is the most difficult thing there is" or when legends, who've played everything there is to play, says that a slow movement in a Mozart sonata is technically most difficult.
Their standards are so different, so when they say difficult, they don't mean what most people mean by difficult.
If you would be cultivated enough to actually listen to old recordings he's talking about, you'd understand what he meant. Their standards where so different. They went by the motto "to rather play a wrong note right, than a right note wrong", and therefore had tremendous character and color, but might hit some wrong notes.

[faulty_damper]

So now we are moving the target to his high "standards" and ad hominem attacks.  It sounds more like projection of your own technical prowess than an actual rational response.

[marik1]

So now we are moving the target to his high "standards"

No, just pointing out that it would not be correct to bring as an "evidence" his words, without understanding their context.

It sounds more like projection of your own technical prowess than an actual rational response.

Well, if according to you Kholodenko has "faulty" technique then indeed, in your eyes for sure I would not have a chance... which is OK with me.

As for the actual rational response, I have already asked you many questions, which you conveniently left without answering (each single one). I also suggested you to watch and analyze some of his particular recordings, which again, you conveniently left out, turning into unrelated (last) response. So I am yet to hear your actual rational response to support your claims and allegations.

Best, M

[j_menz]

As always, thank you all for reading (and commenting)

You may reconsider. 

For those disinclined to read the article (which you should, of course - it's interesting on a number of points), to make light of the above, here's the relevant excerpt:

EH: A question we ask every pianist - because every pianist has a slightly different hand - which is the most difficult Chopin Etude for your hand?

Kholodenko: I should say all of Opus 10. I've played the Transcendental Etudes of Liszt, but compared to the Chopin Etudes, they're nothing (laughs). This is an exaggeration, of course (laughs), but even the First Chopin etude is extremely difficult to play.

I would agree with Marik's assessment as to what he meant.

uses his fingers excessively to depress the keys

I don't see it myself, but, in any case, am more concerned by those who use their fingers excessively to depress the rest of us.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

He hits precious few wrong notes AND has excellent control of his sound, tone and voicing, both in legato and staccato passages. In my book, at least, that means he has very good technique. Out of interest, a question to faulty_damper, would you question his technique if you were only hearing him as opposed to hearing and seeing him?

[awesom_o]

a question to faulty_damper, would you question his technique if you were only hearing him as opposed to hearing and seeing him?

I also ask this question!

[faulty_damper]

I probably wouldn't considering that even with a technique that over-relies upon the use of the fingers, he still sounds very good.

However, it is still a flawed technique and I don't want students thinking that because he plays that way, they should do it, too.  Maybe they don't notice the way he moves his fingers and instead focus on his hunchback and start hunching over thinking that is what gives him such great control.  This is idol worship at its worse, like imitating Gould or Horowitz because they believe them to be genius or whatnot when in actuality, they had a severely flawed technique that prevented them from having complete control.

[j_menz]

Is there anyone who doesn't have flawed technique (besides yourself, of course)?

[faulty_damper]

This discussion isn't about me and yet some of you insist on making it so.  I am incredibly knowledgeable about technique which is why I can easily identify faults and possible corrections.  If you can't do that, then you shouldn't suggest that a poor technique is good when it is not.

[awesom_o]

  I am incredibly knowledgeable about technique which is why I can easily identify faults and possible corrections. 

  Guys trust faulty_damper.... he's incredibly knowledgeable. He says so himself. 

[faulty_damper]

Guys trust faulty_damper.... he's incredibly knowledgeable. He says so himself. 

Yes, trust me.  I've gone through so many different technical palettes that I can identify each one by sound alone.  I've gone through more than anyone so I know what works, what doesn't, and what sort of does with intensive practice.  I've done what Kholodenko uses and I know how much practice it takes to maintain, which is why I say it is flawed.  If anyone has gone through as many technical palettes as I have, you'd come to the same conclusion.  It's like growing up in different parts of the country that you can identify where they are from from their accents.

[j_menz]

This discussion isn't about me and yet some of you insist on making it so. 

Then perhaps you should answer my question. Who does have a good technique?

[faulty_damper]

Then perhaps you should answer my question. Who does have a good technique?

A good technique for what?  Some people are good at certain things and worse at others.

[j_menz]

A good technique for what?  Some people are good at certain things and worse at others.

So no-one has an overall technique you wouldn't fault at least in some regards?

[faulty_damper]

Every one of the performers that I am aware of has some kind of fault.  Some have greater faults than others.

The vast majority of people who finds something that works tends to stick with it even if it isn't the best.  It's only when they come across something that their technique fails them that they are forced to learn something new, though most will just keep on practicing thinking more hours will do the trick.  Or they simply give up on that repertoire and learn something else that suits them.

[outin]

Every one of the performers that I am aware of has some kind of fault.  Some have greater faults than others.

Now that raises a question:
Is it even possible for a human being to have a technique that is not faulty? And if not, why bother to try? Wouldn't it be better to do one's best to work well with the inevitable faults?

[faulty_damper]

I agree with this only to a certain degree.  Most people do not want to be concert pianists and are happy playing what they like.  For these people, they can do as they choose.  But for the ones who aspire to be far more, then it's vitally necessary to find the best technique to do the job easily, efficiently, and musically.

Some pianists have fundamentally flawed technique which limits them no matter what they play, even seemingly simple pieces require endless hours to work up.  I knew a number of pianists with such techniques, some of whom are in doctoral programs right now (and others whom have the doctorate.)  For them, they believe that endless hours is what makes a great pianists, but if you ever heard them play, you'd agree that they may not be the best pianists.

Most of my classmates in music school stopped playing the piano after they graduated.  While they could afford to practice endless hours during schooling, real life doesn't afford the luxury of time.  I'm sure they somehow managed to do a cost-benefit analysis of their time and effort versus repertoire output.  So they stopped because they no longer had the hours necessary to acquire and maintain their technique.  The ones who continue to play are the ones with the best techniques, the ones who could sightread through Beethoven sonatas and Chopin Etudes like they were easy.

[marik1]

The ones who continue to play are the ones with the best techniques, the ones who could sightread through Beethoven sonatas and Chopin Etudes like they were easy.

Wow--that's impressive! Just out of curiosity, what school is that, where students sightread through Chopin Etudes like they were easy, if you could reveal? I have to admit, in the school I was studying I remember only one student who could sightread anything like that (ironically, he did not have the best technique, but indeed, had phenomenal sight reading talent). Others had to actually practice Chopin Etudes for many hours to polish them for a level of concert performance and making them look easy...

Best, M

[faulty_damper]

It was a state school with a lot of international students from Asia.  The American's did not do very well.

[pianoman53]

Convincing as always, Mr. Faulty!

[faulty_damper]

Convincing as always, Mr. Faulty!

It's wise to acknowledge ones own shortcomings in various areas of life's endeavors.  It's what allows you to see reality more objectively.  Otherwise, you become blinded by those same shortcomings which you may be parsed to belie upon which you have stated so here in this thread.

[lostinidlewonder]

Come now, let's not be silly people can play the piano however they like we don't all have to conform to one model. If that was the case every single pianist would look the same while they play the same piece.

Whoever says they can sight read an advanced piece at concert level on first reading (or 2nd or 3rd for that matter!) is a liar.

[faulty_damper]

Do not believe that just because you can't, others can't, either.  That is an egocentric fallacy.

[marik1]

It was a state school with a lot of international students from Asia.  The American's did not do very well.

Well, if those students (plural) coming from your state school are so good that they could sightread Chopin Etudes flawlessly as the easiest things, as you say, then indeed, they are so good that should've won some major competitions and have worldwide career as concertizing pianists. By any chance, could you give some noticeable names, or at least competitions they've won?

Thanks, M

[faulty_damper]

You make too many assumptions.  I never said they could do so flawlessly, only that they could do so easily. Do not assume that because they could sightread through these etudes (they aren't that hard to sightread to begin with) that they wanted to win competitions or have a concertizing career.  They played the piano not for extrinsic goals but because they enjoyed playing.

[outin]

You make too many assumptions.  I never said they could do so flawlessly, only that they could do so easily. Do not assume that because they could sightread through these etudes (they aren't that hard to sightread to begin with) that they wanted to win competitions or have a concertizing career.  They played the piano not for extrinsic goals but because they enjoyed playing.

Asian students?   

[marik1]

You make too many assumptions.  I never said they could do so flawlessly, only that they could do so easily. Do not assume that because they could sightread through these etudes (they aren't that hard to sightread to begin with) that they wanted to win competitions or have a concertizing career.  They played the piano not for extrinsic goals but because they enjoyed playing.

I do not make any assumptions. In my life I saw only two people who were able to sightread Chopin Etudes (or for that matter, anything), as if they were easy. One of them was my undergrad teacher, who was a unique sightreader and who also could learn Brahms 3rd sonata before his recital in 2 days Another was M. Pletnev, who could sit down and in a lesson accompany Brahms 2nd Concerto from a full orchestra score. Both of those cases are quite unique. So speaking of your passage about students (note plural) sightreading Chopin Etudes reveals 1) whether those students played those Etudes before (indeed, many Asians tend to go through a lot of piano repertoire very early), 2) the standards of "easy" are vague, or 3) I just... agree with Lostinidle.

You know something, Faulty, I knew a lot of pianists. Some of them were phenomenal--really! Some are major stars with Tchaikowski, Rubinstein, Leeds, Queen Elizabeth competitions prizes. I also knew a few who performed in recitals entire sets of Chopin Etudes. In many years I never heard from ANY of them such an utter nonsense as Chopin Etudes are easy. Moreover, I never heard if one says "Chopin Etudes are difficult" then that would be a reason to diminish their technique. You just never hear such thing from a professional...

Well, actually in fact, looking back I did hear  three times that Chopin etudes are easy--mind you, one was from a person who could play in the same concert Chopin 24 Etudes and 48 Chopin--Godowski, another one from a person who played them all at the tender age of 11 (i.e. by the age of 20 he already did not know what is hard and what is easy), and the third one is the person who learned entire Op. 25 just in two months before winning a major competition.

And now Faulty, just make a simple thinking whom I'd trust--some major artists, professionals, whose names knows entire musical world, or some anonimous member on PS from who-knows-where, trashing Kholodenko, Horowitz, Gould?

To be honest, you lost any credibility not even in this thread, but in another one, with your passage "It's a lot easier to play like Horowitz if you played on his piano". Sorry, it just shows that you are just a dilettante and reveals your total ignorance in understanding the essence of Piano Performing Art.

Indeed, no any assumptions are made--your words speak for themselves.
Educate yourself.

Best, M

[faulty_damper]

Yes, you made assumptions; just go back and read what those are.  You also assume that because you can't do it yourself that no one else is capable of it... unless they are some grand superstar of the piano world.  This is a pedestal fallacy that you subscribe to.   The etudes are either easy or impossible depending on the technique you use.  If you've been trained with a poor technique it'll be impossible for it to be easy.  If you learned the right technique from the start, it will be a breeze.

It seems you're only using this thread to trash me because you didn't like what I wrote in this and other threads.  Maybe you have a vendetta against me simply because you hold differing beliefs.  That's fine.  Even the Church kicked off many Crusades to become the dominant religious organization around the world so you are not alone in your bigotry.

[pianoman53]

Faulty: How can one not play something flawlessly, yet make it sound easy?

[marik1]

Yes, you made assumptions

So far you did not give any evidence to support your claims. What assumption should be made?
But lets see:

You also assume that because you can't do it yourself that no one else is capable of it...

Why would you assume that I cannot do it?

unless they are some grand superstar of the piano world.  

I never said anything like this. Why would you assume I did? Please re-read the context, instead of reading what you want to read and assuming what you'd like to assume.

This is a pedestal fallacy that you subscribe to.

How do you know what I subscribe to? Yet another assumption of yours?

The etudes are either easy or impossible depending on the technique you use.  If you've been trained with a poor technique it'll be impossible for it to be easy.  If you learned the right technique from the start, it will be a breeze.

Even if it is a breeze, still, it takes lots of time to polish Chopin Etudes for a concert performance. This is their main difficulty and that's what professionals mean by that.

It seems you're only using this thread to trash me because you didn't like what I wrote in this and other threads.

Indeed, I do not really appreciate when some anonimous internet "piano technique expert" trashes some phenomenal virtuosi, without any idea what he is talking about, and without bringing any credible evidence. You don't even have enough knowledge to understand how... unthoughtful your phrase "Horowitz had bad technique" sounds and then assume yourself a Crusade, who will save the world from bigots. Are you serious?

Maybe you have a vendetta against me simply because you hold differing beliefs.  That's fine.  Even the Church kicked off many Crusades to become the dominant religious organization around the world so you are not alone in your bigotry.

No, I do not have any vendetta against you and no need to play a victim of my so called "bigotry". Just support your ideas instead of getting back with lowish arguments like: "Because you cannot do it". You have no idea what I can do and what I cannot, so please, don't assume.

Best, M

[pianoman53]

Even the Church kicked off many Crusades to become the dominant religious organization around the world so you are not alone in your bigotry.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH! Someone has maybe slightly too high thoughts about himself, no?

[maxy]

Is this some sort of joke topic? Interesting interview, great video, BTW.

Kholodenko may say he finds Chopin's whole op. 10 challenging, but that's pretty much a lie. It is quite obvious he could play any combination of "chopets", including the whole 24 in one sitting, fairly easily...

I've rarely seen anyone make Petrouchka sound so easy. Considering that his overall musicianship is at an elite level, I don't see the point in trying to find technical flaws in his playing.

I guess some people could complain that he makes funny faces, but do we really care?