Stage presence and audience appreciation (by the performer!)

[danthecomposer]

Hello,

My recent post, Thoughts on Piano Performers, comes after a day at the Liszt Museum in Budapest to celebrate his birthday.  The concerts were on the 18th, his birthday is course the 22nd.

I wanted to write a review, but instead, I was so disappointed that it provoked things in me which went beyond the concert hall walls, and this post was created.

"Concert pianists seem to be so unable to connect with their audiences that they may as well not even be present; just pop in a CD into a CD player and set it upon the piano with its lid closed shut.

https://piano-jazz.blogspot.hu/2014/10/thoughts-on-piano-performers.html

This should ruffle some feathers!

[j_menz]

I don't think what you say is universally true, but it's certainly true enough to be worth raising.

I'd add that instead of placing the CD on the piano at the concert as you suggest, what in fact happens is that most people put the CD on at home, and have a much better experience for way less money.

Too many concerts involve paying vast sums of money to get dressed up, sit (in dreary silence) in a hall full people who feel like they'd be more appropriately placed in a doctor's waiting room for all the coughing and sneezing, and listen to a reasonably good pianist play a piece you've got four copies of at home by truly great pianists. And people wonder why recitals are poorly attended!

Liberace may have been a second rate talent as a pianist, but he knew how to put on a show, and filled halls accordingly. Maybe not the mink stoles, but we have much to learn from that.

[pjaul]

The chief task of a musician is to find a love for the music he's playing and communicate this love/the muic to his audience.  Communication is much more important than perfection.

[faulty_damper]

The most charismatic performer of the 20th century was Vladimir Horowitz.  He smiled graciously as he greeted his audience.  He bowed toward them before and after performing.  He always gave them encores.  He wasn't the best pianist but his charisma changed perceptions.

People will always imbue positive qualities when they like you.  In psychology, it's termed the "halo effect."  Having charisma makes up for the possession of mediocre qualities.  Stage presence, in contrast, does not.

Performers are, first and foremost, actors.  They are there to provide entertainment, performing works the audience will appreciate.  Performing works only the performer likes is masturbating in front of an audience.  Very few will enjoy such a spectacle.

[dima_76557]

@ danthecomposer

Hi, Dan!

Yes and no. More no than yes.

The audience that really loves classical music knows why they go to the concert. They don't need theatrics. The tendency to adapt the scene of classical music for monetary purposes, to attract people that actually have no affinity at all with that kind of music will eventually kill the culture itself. What do you think?

[j_menz]

What do you think?

I think your music snob card just got upgraded to platinum. 

[dima_76557]

I think your music snob card just got upgraded to platinum.  

You can call that snobbism, but I think it's real and it's structural:
Orchestras' crisis outreach ruining them

Cynically led by its managerial class, the orchestra is explicitly urged to lean toward pop and make courting audiences its primary activity.

[dcstudio]

@ danthecomposer


The audience that really loves classical music knows why they go to the concert. They don't need theatrics. The tendency to adapt the scene of classical music for monetary purposes, to attract people that actually have no affinity at all with that kind of music will eventually kill the culture itself. What do you think?

maybe not kill it but force it to evolve into something that can be accepted by a wider range of listeners.   We musicians must make a living... the classical community can be so snobbish that it actually intimidates newcomers.   A bit of theatrics--or even  just turning my head and smiling at the audience once in a while really goes a long way in making them feel more comfortable.   Then again I play jazz too...  and that community is every bit as snobbish...  so what do I know.

[iansinclair]

Dan -- I really like your blog post.  Well said.  And j_menz' comments, too (no surprise).

Audience contact by the performer is absolutely critical.  Just because one is a very serious classical music performer does not mean one has to be made of stone.  Granted, Liberace is perhaps a little extreme.  Granted, the popular singer's "thank you" to the audience is a little over the top, perhaps.  But... they do get an audience, and that is the objective.  Whether you are in it for the money or just because you enjoy performing and wish to share your art, if you don't please the audience, there will no be much of an audience...

[dima_76557]

maybe not kill it but force it to evolve into something that can be accepted by a wider range of listeners.

I really don't see why that should be a requirement, really. Most of the time, when you adapt something for the masses, it loses its intrinsic values; you get fast food instead of the treats our grandmothers used to serve. The connoisseurs run away and the masses find out after some time that what they were served all the time wasn't any good anyway and start focusing on something else.

[j_menz]

Most of the time, when you adapt something for the masses, it loses its intrinsic values; you get fast food instead of the treats our grandmothers used to serve.

Or you get Liszt instead of Schoenberg.

[dima_76557]

Or you get Liszt instead of Schoenberg.

I think Liszt was and is greatly misunderstood by many. Yes, he could put up a show, but never at the expense of Music itself.

[j_menz]

Liszt ... could put up a show, but never at the expense of Music itself.

Which highlights the point of the topic.  He could, and did, do both.

He did it in an age when exceptional piano playing could only be heard live, unlike today where the best can be heard anywhere, anytime.

I have never suggested performers should compromise the music, merely that they need to incorporate the idea of a show. All add, no subtraction.

[dima_76557]

Which highlights the point of the topic.  He could, and did, do both.

He did it in an age when exceptional piano playing could only be heard live, unlike today where the best can be heard anywhere, anytime.

I have never suggested performers should compromise the music, merely that they need to incorporate the idea of a show. All add, no subtraction.

If the approach leads to MUCH better quality, then I'm all for it. I am highly sceptical, though, because most of what we are served in terms of artistic quality nowadays is not worth paying for. The managers, who see art merely as a commodity, don't understand this and try to compensate with "show" to monetize their offerings.

[faulty_damper]

Reminds me of an interview with Marc-Andre Hamelin when, after a recital, a woman came up to him and said he played wonderfully, but... he made it look too easy.  At the time, Hamelin was of the belief that, as the performer, he was not the spectacle.  The music is.  In recent years, it appears that he has since changed his mind somewhat as he no longer just sits there but visually expresses emotional affect.  I think he is a much more successful performer now than ever before.

[dima_76557]

Reminds me of an interview with Marc-Andre Hamelin when, after a recital, a woman came up to him and said he played wonderfully, but... he made it look too easy.  At the time, Hamelin was of the belief that, as the performer, he was not the spectacle.  The music is.  In recent years, it appears that he has since changed his mind somewhat as he no longer just sits there but visually expresses emotional affect.  I think he is a much more successful performer now than ever before.

Maybe he adapts according to what audience he is playing for? We had him here last year in Moscow. He simply concentrated on the music without any noticeable external elements. Maybe because he knows that the adience here doesn't care for pretty-pretty gestures; you have to penetrate their souls, and that is something which he certainly did!

[andreslr6]

@ danthecomposer

Hi, Dan!

Yes and no. More no than yes.

The audience that really loves classical music knows why they go to the concert. They don't need theatrics. The tendency to adapt the scene of classical music for monetary purposes, to attract people that actually have no affinity at all with that kind of music will eventually kill the culture itself. What do you think?

I often find myself sharing the same thoughts as you..

Iīm a classical pianist because I love music and I love making music, not because I want to make money... of course, if I can make a living out of it I will, but selling is not the point of music, selling is a secondary thing; music, the sound, is the number one priority and is the protagonist of this profession. And people who really enjoy music as an art, not entertainment, will always buy tickets and LISTEN, Iīve never understood whatīs so important about "Seeing" someone perform, itīs morbid.

[bronnestam]

Once I joked a bit over one of Sweden's most famous pianists because he looks a bit too calm when he is playing - like he was emailing or something.    No, I don't need a Jerry Lee Lewis in speed mode in order to be "entertained" when I go to recitals, but I still think the contact with the audience is essential.

Here my own pianist favourite (mentioned a few times before, ehhrm ...)
https://www.gsoplay.se/sv/video/tengstrand-extranummer-grieg

doing an encore at a concert in Gothenburg this spring. In this clip he says "I have played this encore shamefully many times by now, but as I have not been at this particular venue in 11 years, I thought I could do it here as well".
I was not there myself at this moment, but once when I was, and he played this piece, he pointed at me afterwards and said, with a broad grin, "I don't even dare to think of how many times SHE has heard me playing this ..."  (And now I've got the scores. I'll take my revenge one day, hah.)


But what I really like with this guy is not just his perfect touch at the piano, but also his emotional language when he is playing and, yes, his way of always giving the audience a reason to smile, to feel like friends - not just money cows that pay his salary. Or some Untermenschen who should be just grateful because they are given the opportunity to listen. I mean, some pianists have the unfortunate ability to communicate that to their audience. I suppose some really are divas, but most of them are probably just shy. Or don't like performing.
A good pianist performer has this ability to make the audience feel welcome and comfortable. A good pianist always also gives his/her best, of course, out of respect for the audience and the composer. But it goes with the picture to be a bit humble, and to be humble means that you treat the audience in a relaxed, friendly way. When you are friendly you don't pretend people are not there, or are totally insignificant. You open your mouth and say something - yes, they are there for the music, but if you give them a few words about the music you are going to play, it will be highly appreciated.

Music is an art, yes, but it is not sacred in any way and most of all: the listeners are never inferiors. They should be treated with respect. The piano is a dead thing, the composer is often that too if it is classical music; the audience is not! And the pianist has worked awfully hard with his/her preparations, but still it is just one human being entertaining some other fellow human beings, so let's not pretend that anyone is something else than that. A stiff atmosphere is not comfortable to anyone.

[iansinclair]

... And people who really enjoy music as an art, not entertainment, will always buy tickets and LISTEN, Iīve never understood whatīs so important about "Seeing" someone perform, itīs morbid.

I beg to differ in part.  I, at least, like to think that I enjoy music as an art.  But there are two parts to that art.  One is the sound -- the aural experience.  That is, most often, what I am interested in.  If that is really what I am interested in at the time, bluntly, I won't pay a day's wages for a concert ticket to get it.  I'll spend an hour's wages instead for a fine recording of the work by an artist or orchestra/chorus/whatever whose heart and soul are in the performance and listen to it when and as I wish, in the comfort and quiet of my home.

There are only two reasons why I will spend a fortune, a lot of time, and a lot of hassle to attend a concert: one, the artist or artists in question really put on a show (which, Dima, does not mean any reduction in the quality of the art -- not by any means!).  Not only a great performance for the ears, but a great performance for the eyes and rest of the senses as well.  The other is when for various reasons I may wish to make an occasion for myself out of the concert and the associated time -- the travel, the setting, the friends or family I'm with, the dinner, the whole thing.

Do I miss things that way?  Indeed I do, I'm sure, and once or twice over the last seven decades or so I've managed to be at a live performance where everything came together in a spectacular way, and I'm very glad I was there to be part of the audience.

Andres hopes that people who really enjoy music as an art, not entertainment, will always buy tickets and listen.  I admire the optimism -- but seriously doubt the reality.

[j_menz]

people who really enjoy music as an art, not entertainment, will always buy tickets and LISTEN, Iīve never understood whatīs so important about "Seeing" someone perform, itīs morbid.

Tickets? Why? Wouldn't they just buy the CD, and listen without all that bloody coughing? At leisure, and repeatable at whim.

[dima_76557]

Tickets? Why? Wouldn't they just buy the CD, and listen without all that bloody coughing? At leisure, and repeatable at whim.

One thing our recording techniques do not catch quite well is how accoustics work and how they enhance the experience. Even the coughing sounds beautiful in a good hall.

[dcstudio]

... but selling is not the point of music, selling is a secondary thing; music, the sound, is the number one priority and is the protagonist of this profession. And people who really enjoy music as an art, not entertainment, will always buy tickets and LISTEN, Iīve never understood whatīs so important about "Seeing" someone perform, itīs morbid.

hmmm morbid? that's a very interesting word choice... as is the "protagonist of this profession" --but enough of that...

I really admire your conviction...and there was a time when I shared your views.

now.... I also enjoy making a living.   

I am really not as cynical as I sound...  I just was forced to give up those lofty ideals I picked up from my  teachers and professors.    I was no concert pianist which is why I learned jazz, too ...  most of those amazing pianists from my university who showed such promise are now teaching and rarely perform--several of them have left the business altogether because they just couldn't make it financially.

as for me--I just love to play-- so that's what I do. 

[timothy42b]

The most charismatic performer of the 20th century was Vladimir Horowitz.  He smiled graciously as he greeted his audience.  He bowed toward them before and after performing.  He always gave them encores.  He wasn't the best pianist but his charisma changed perceptions.

What??

NO WAY!!!!!!

Two words, Victor Borge. 

I rest my case.