Lang Lang

[Alde]

I am sick and tired of all the bad talk about Lang Lang.  I have to admit, I was sceptical at the beginning.  But I have the greatest respect for his talent.

It's like in the NBA (National Basketball Association).  When Vince Carter arrived, the media wanted to make him the next Air Jordan.  There was so much pressure for Carter to score high points and lead his team to championships.  But look what happenned....

Now for Lang Lang, there is so much controversy.  We all must admit he is a world class pianist.  We just have to give him time to grow and develop (like Kissin and all the other wunderkinds).  I guess all this talk about Lang Lang is what adds to his popularity.  Perhaps us pianists are all jealous of his easy walk to stardom.  After all, Lang Lang did not have to win a major competition to make it big.

[m]

Oh no! Please, not again!

We all must admit he is a world class pianist. 

??????
Who are all those "we all"? and why we "MUST admit"? On which basis?

We just have to give him time to grow and develop

When it happens, then we will talk. Though, I highly doubt that it'll ever happen--to grow and develop one has to have at least an ounce of brains.

Perhaps us pianists are all jealous of his easy walk to stardom.

Jealous of LL?????? That's hilarious!

After all, Lang Lang did not have to win a major competition to make it big.

Sure thing! When maestro Isaak Stern takes something in his hands, one doesn't need competitions.

[rlefebvr]

I like him and I think he is good for classical music. If you read is interviews, you come away thinking he also believes his playing has been sloppy and needs to prepare himself better.

The fact that he is only 21 means he may yet grow to become one of the great pianist of our times. I do not believe he is close to that yet, but that those make him terrible.

It will be nice to see him at 30. He may surprise the whole lot of us.....let's hope so.

[steinwaymodeld]

His sucess confuses me.

As a pianist, he has pretty much of nothingness in his music.
And worst of all, he cares nothing about the tone-color, he doesn't care about the 'sound' of his music. He was trying to achieve 'effects' in his piano playing, the climax.

But it's just like another crappy Arnold Schwarzenegger movie.
A lot of explosion, a lot of bang, a lot of unwanted heroism on a pile of crap.

I own so much materials of his, but it's because he is a Chinese pianist, and i just want to see what the fuss is about.

And i still don't see what the fuss is about. (Except he record like 10 new Concerto a year, he is doing Prokofiev, Rach2, Rach/Paganini, Chopin 1st, Bartok 2nd in the beginning of the next year as far as i know.)

[Alde]

His sucess confuses me.

As a pianist, he has pretty much of nothingness in his music.
And worst of all, he cares nothing about the tone-color, he doesn't care about the 'sound' of his music. He was trying to achieve 'effects' in his piano playing, the climax.

But it's just like another crappy Arnold Schwarzenegger movie.
A lot of explosion, a lot of bang, a lot of unwanted heroism on a pile of crap.

I own so much materials of his, but it's because he is a Chinese pianist, and i just want to see what the fuss is about.

And i still don't see what the fuss is about. (Except he record like 10 new Concerto a year, he is doing Prokofiev, Rach2, Rach/Paganini, Chopin 1st, Bartok 2nd in the beginning of the next year as far as i know.)

He's only 21 and he plays like a 21 year old.  I guess all this controversy is adding to his fame.  People come to his concerts and buy his CDs because they are curious.

I see a parallel with Van Cliburn at the start of his career.  Van Cliburn is a world class pianist who has made millions of dollars, but has never achieved "piano god" status.

[steinwaymodeld]

He's only 21 and he plays like a 21 year old.  I guess all this controversy is adding to his fame.  People come to his concerts and buy his CDs because they are curious.

I see a parallel with Van Cliburn at the start of his career.  Van Cliburn is a world class pianist who has made millions of dollars, but has never achieved "piano god" status.

Van Cliburn's sucess is quite understandable as he was the first American to win Tch competition.

(But some of Cliburn's recording are very weird too, for eg, the Hungarian Rhapsody No.2, it's so eccentric that I think he re-created the whole piece.)

But Cliburn's recording quality are much better than LL's.

And referring to the 'piano god' statement, I think it was because Cliburn quitted before he could achieve that.

[m]

He's only 21 and he plays like a 21 year old.  I guess all this controversy is adding to his fame.  People come to his concerts and buy his CDs because they are curious.

I see a parallel with Van Cliburn at the start of his career.  Van Cliburn is a world class pianist who has made millions of dollars, but has never achieved "piano god" status.

To play 150 concerts a year is exhausting, morally, emotionally, phisically, and menthally. I used to play 200 concerts a year. You don't even have time to look at yourself to understand who you are. Any growth and development is completely out of questions. After 3 years I stopped playing for a long time and never returned back on concert schedule.
It is even worse when you are that young.

I wouldn't compare Cliburn to LL, as he had completely different level of musicianship, and besides, he was much smarter person. The fact is that even he got worn out with this crazy schedule.

[Hmoll]

We just have to give him time to grow and develop (like Kissin and all the other wunderkinds).

I'm still waiting for both LL and Kissin to "grow and develop."
When that happens, I'll be first in line to buy tickets. Until then...

[galonia]

LL recently visited Australia for the first time, and after his concert (he performed Tchaikovsky concerto No. 1), a friend and I were very impressed by LL's abilities, but not the way he uses it.  My friend's description:

Lang Lang is like a young man with a very fast car who knows he is a formula
one driver, but all he really wants to do is drive it down the middle of
George St on a Saturday night honking his horn and leering at the scantily clad women.

(George St is one of the main streets in Sydney where the night life is).

[Ludvig_Van_Me]

What is he/she inplying?  that LL is a crowd pleaser?




I was just watching the Lan lang childhood promo video thingie on his website and whats the deal with his teacher ?   He says something about chemistry but whats the real reason? is there a real reason?

[brewtality]

i heard his tchaik first on the radio. It was crap

[SteinwayTony]

i heard his tchaik first on the radio. It was crap

You have no right to degrade his music like that.  I saw it live at Avery Fisher it was an absolute thrill.  So he lacks musicality.  He's young!  It isn't justified to compare it to Argerich or Janis.  The recordings you hear from them were made after they had become mature musicians!  Lang Lang is, let's face it, a PR dream.  I can testify to this because it was just astonishing watching him at Lincoln Center back in September.  Maybe all the media coverage makes your standards too high; I really don't know, because I can't speak for you.  If you don't like Lang Lang's music, that's fine, as you are most certainly entitled to your own opinion.  But give him the respect he deserves by justifying your remark and maybe even spelling out the entire name of the composer who wrote my favorite concerto.

[galonia]

I have to agree with Brewtality - LL is vulgar.

[brewtality]

You have no right to degrade his music like that.  I saw it live at Avery Fisher it was an absolute thrill.  So he lacks musicality.  He's young!  It isn't justified to compare it to Argerich or Janis.  The recordings you hear from them were made after they had become mature musicians!  Lang Lang is, let's face it, a PR dream.  I can testify to this because it was just astonishing watching him at Lincoln Center back in September.  Maybe all the media coverage makes your standards too high; I really don't know, because I can't speak for you.  If you don't like Lang Lang's music, that's fine, as you are most certainly entitled to your own opinion.  But give him the respect he deserves by justifying your remark and maybe even spelling out the entire name of the composer who wrote my favorite concerto.

 
 I have every right to say he's playing was crap because i found it to be insipid and boring. THIS IS MY OPINION.
 And im terribly sorry if i offended you by not spelling out Tchaikovsky or not giving LL the "respect he deserves". This subject has been discussed excessively and i have long grown tired of responding in full. I wasn't comparing him to anyone, did i mention Argerich or Janis? no infact i don't even really care for Argerich's performance either. I kept an open mind while listening, but his interpretation was the worst i've ever heard with the most annoying aspect being his sudden and illogical changes of volume and tempi. IMO, his performance was just not good, plain and simple.
The whole "he's young, he'll mature" argument holds no water with me. I don't care about what he might do, i care about what he does.
A PR's dream, this is how you define a great artist? *sigh*

[rachlisztchopin]

Him being young is no excuse for him lacking musicality...I am only 16 and have played piano for 2 years and I don't lack musicality (though i do lack in technique)...Lang Lang is just dull...hopefully he will grow but i don't believe him being young is an excuse

[SteinwayTony]

I wasn't comparing him to anyone, did i mention Argerich or Janis? no infact i don't even really care for Argerich's performance either. I kept an open mind while listening, but his interpretation was the worst i've ever heard with the most annoying aspect being his sudden and illogical changes of volume and tempi. IMO, his performance was just not good, plain and simple.

Baloney you weren't comparing him to anyone.  If you weren't putting him up against the greats, why do you complain about his tempi?  How do you define what is right? I find it unlikely that you bought and analyzed the score to the concerto before you ever heard a recording. 

It's no fault of yours...everyone is guilty of comparing new artists (and new composers!) with music or performances that they cherish. 

A PR's dream, this is how you define a great artist? *sigh*

You STILL think you have to be a great artist to make it big?  LMAO. 

Reality check.  Off the top of my head: Ashlee Simpson, Britney Spears, Paris Hilton (maybe not an artist but she still sits on her ass all day and people care to read about it), the Backstreet Boys, Lindsay Lohan.  In the classical realm, Evgeny Kissin was a prodigy, and made his big debut playing the exact same concerto with the Berliner Philharmoniker and von Karajan in 1988.  He was 17!  I own the DVD, and I don't much care for this performance, because I find it much too slow.  But I watch this DVD frequently because I am astonished at what his little Russian boy can do.  Sure, there were skeptics, but at this point, I believe most of his have become silenced.  His Chopin recordings are SO musical.  Not my favorite, but so delicate and lovely to listen to.

If you continue to bash Lang Lang, the only conclusion I can come to is that you are jealous of his early success.  I am, too, a little.  He's 21, and my repertory will be nowhere near his when I become his age in three years.  I just say give him time - it's worked in the past!

[willcowskitz]

If you weren't putting him up against the greats, why do you complain about his tempi?  How do you define what is right?

"...sudden and illogical changes of volume and tempi."

There's something called taste. When one has developed a personal taste in what they consider beautiful, it is no longer necessary to make references to other artists' interpretations, or the score, which you pointlessly brought up.

You STILL think you have to be a great artist to make it big?  LMAO.

Huh?
To me it sounded like s/he was just nullifying the whole existence of your remark in this reference. It is simply not important how "big" one is, not in today's world when we have TV formats like Pop Stars and Idols. End of that story.


Personally, I have no opinion on Lang Lang because I haven't listened to any of his performances. I have yet to see a pertinent opinion defending what he has to offer in form of music, contrary to the numerous complaints. Thinking that every remark about his lack of musicality is due to jealousy, is just as ridiculous as subliminally basing one's opinion on such thing as jealousy.

[SteinwayTony]

Huh?
To me it sounded like s/he was just nullifying the whole existence of your remark in this reference. It is simply not important how "big" one is, not in today's world when we have TV formats like Pop Stars and Idols. End of that story.

My point is simply that DG was intelligent in snapping him up.  They must have done this for a reason.  His very first recording was Rach 3 performed at the Proms, accompanied by a few Scriabin etudes, the interpretation of which I strongly disagreed with.  I think that was on Telarc.

One of his recordings -- I can't remember if it's his Carnegie recital or the Tchaikovsky and Mendelssohn concertos -- is on the POP list in Germany. 

Naturally DG isn't plugging his musicality, despite what they say.  It's his technical flair.  I think that Lang Lang could be the key to filling empty seats with younger audiences.   Let's face it -- if Lang Lang didn't virtually "dance" at the piano as he does, he would be no more than mediocre.  His recordings may not be up to our standards, but seeing him live is a must.  If you're a skeptic or have no opinion, check his website to see when he's performing in your area.  I know he is coming back to Avery Fisher with a Chinese orchestra to play the Paganini Rhapsody in March.  At least go and see him once, if you have the opportunity.  Keep an open mind and you'll have to admit, even if his musicality is lacking, "that's quite a pianist." 

There's something called taste. When one has developed a personal taste in what they consider beautiful, it is no longer necessary to make references to other artists' interpretations, or the score, which you pointlessly brought up.

I disagree with you; this is a concerto, a man-made work, not a sunset or a meadow.  The composer intended on sending a message and it is the artist's responsibility to bring that message out.  I do think the score matters, and I don't know about you, but when I like a piece, I go out and buy every recording there is of it, no matter how unknown the performer is.  I own two dozen copies of the Tchaikovsky because I respect other artists' interpretations. 

You seem to think that a piano concerto somehow congeals in your fingers...if you don't believe in looking at the score first, well, um...how do you know what to play?

Thinking that every remark about his lack of musicality is due to jealousy, is just as ridiculous as subliminally basing one's opinion on such thing as jealousy.

Pardon me, sir, when the only complaints I hear about Lang Lang go as follows:

- "Um, yeah, I heard his tchaik on the radio.  It was crap."
- "He isn't musical."
- "He lacks musicality."
- "he sucks."
- "I hate him."

In my opinion, the onis lies with the people who unfairly ridicule artists with such vague comments.  WHAT IS MUSICALITY?  WHAT IS CRAP? 

Nobody has ever been specific in this argument, ever!

[anda]

ok, i've heard so many things about this lang lang, i've read his bio (quite a roller-coaster...), but i don't have access to any of his recordings (i won't even mention live performances). do you know where i could download something (anything), i'm really very very curious to hear something with my own ears and can't have an opinion of my own. thanx.

[Goldberg]

In response to SteinwayTony's latest post: "Nobody has ever been specific in this argument, ever!"

https://www.chopinfiles.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=773

There's a link to my medium-length criticism of a concert he played in Houston a while ago. It's more than just "Lang Lang is crap and sucks"; in fact, I think it's quite a fair assessment of his playing based on my own opinion. I made sure to point out his strong points, acknowledged that he's a world-class pianist, and generally gave him credit where it was due...but I also came down and hit each of the pieces he played with (mostly negative, I have to admit) criticism for each one.

In *my* favour, I went to the concert without having heard any full recordings of his (with maybe two exceptions) and with a mostly open mind (I say "mostly" because I had heard several samples of his playing and realised that he might well be what the majority on the forums think he is). I was fully prepared to come back and shoot down everyone who criticised his talents, had the recital truly been mind-blowingly good. Instead, I got a rather poor feeling about it after the recital, particularly after his HR2, and I just *had* to state my feelings on the issue. It isn't all based on myth and stereotype!

[steinwaymodeld]

What about this Tony:

"Lang Lang is the least convincing pianist."

[Goldberg]

Perhaps even better, "least sincere."

[steinwaymodeld]

Perhaps even better, "least sincere."

Well, u wouldn't know if he really 'sincere' or not though. (Only he does)

But he is definately 'least convincing'

[SteinwayTony]

In *my* favour, I went to the concert without having heard any full recordings of his (with maybe two exceptions) and with a mostly open mind (I say "mostly" because I had heard several samples of his playing and realised that he might well be what the majority on the forums think he is). I was fully prepared to come back and shoot down everyone who criticised his talents, had the recital truly been mind-blowingly good. Instead, I got a rather poor feeling about it after the recital, particularly after his HR2, and I just *had* to state my feelings on the issue. It isn't all based on myth and stereotype!

Unconvincing musically, I can live with.  I think that's a fair compromise. 

At least you went to the recital with an open mind.  That's a good thing.  I'm an 18-year-old college student living in Manhattan with severely limited funds.  One of my toughest financial decisions is deciding how to spend my money at Carnegie -- yes, of course, I want to hear the "greats" that I have never had a chance to see back home in Michigan, but I also want to be able to say "I saw John Doe's debut recital at Carnegie!"  Of course the problem is, no one can say which John Doe will become the next Horowitz (I know, I know) or Arrau or Hofmann. 

Two weeks ago I heard Midori, I name I did recognize.  She played Debussy, Janacek, some obscure premiere piece she had commissioned, and the Brahms D minor sonata.  The pianist was Robert McDonald, and damned if I'd ever heard that name before.  But he was okay.

Long story short, I like to take risks, at the keyboard and away from it.  It's fun!

[SteinwayTony]

ok, i've heard so many things about this lang lang, i've read his bio (quite a roller-coaster...), but i don't have access to any of his recordings (i won't even mention live performances). do you know where i could download something (anything), i'm really very very curious to hear something with my own ears and can't have an opinion of my own. thanx.

I know his website (www.langlang.com) plays Rach II in the background.  I wonder if this is the recording that will be released in early 2005?  You can also set the background music to the Paganini Rhapsody, variations 12-17.  (Click the white circle in the top-right corner).

[piano88]

Lang Lang is AWFUL! He's all technique and no heart! I hope he'll disappear soon!

[tibidi]

Lang Lang is AWFUL! He's all technique and no heart! I hope he'll disappear soon!

Awful indeed! Just listen to what he had said regarding Yundi Li. In an interview published in a Malaysia newspaper, the interviewer had asked him about Yundi Li, he said:

“ Yundi is not at the same level as me. I don’t want to attack anybody, I don’t feel like saying that I had performed in Carnegie Hall, I had worked with  Berlin phiharmonic orchestra, Viana Symphony  Orchestra,  five major America Orchestras, but Yundi hasn’t. Among the young pianists of  my age, I am the world’s best from any angle of view. You can find out for yourself if I have spoken the truth. I don’t feel like boasting because it'ss very stupid,  but since you have asked me, I have no choice but to reveal it.”

He didn’t like to compare Yundi Li with himself because  he has already surpassed all other young pianists of the same age as him. He also  reckoned that he had already surpassed all past and present Chinese pianists. Now he is trying to accomplish a challenging work - to creat a new type of classical music on the success of the giants Mozart and Tchaikovsky.

I wonder what kind of new type of classical music Lang Lang had meant. I hope he is not trying to use  improvisation or new type of classical music  to explain away his frequent distortions of the music he had played

[steinwaymodeld]

Awful indeed! Just listen to what he had said regarding Yundi Li. In an interview published in a Malaysia newspaper, the interviewer had asked him about Yundi Li, he said:

“ Yundi is not at the same level as me. I don’t want to attack anybody, I don’t feel like saying that I had performed in Carnegie Hall, I had worked with  Berlin phiharmonic orchestra, Viana Symphony  Orchestra,  five major America Orchestras, but Yundi hasn’t. Among the young pianists of  my age, I am the world’s best from any angle of view. You can find out for yourself if I have spoken the truth. I don’t feel like boasting because it'ss very stupid,  but since you have asked me, I have no choice but to reveal it.”

He didn’t like to compare Yundi Li with himself because  he has already surpassed all other young pianists of the same age as him. He also  reckoned that he had already surpassed all past and present Chinese pianists. Now he is trying to accomplish a challenging work - to creat a new type of classical music on the success of the giants Mozart and Tchaikovsky.

I wonder what kind of new type of classical music Lang Lang had meant. I hope he is not trying to use  improvisation or new type of classical music  to explain away his frequent distortions of the music he had played

Here we go again 

[willcowskitz]

I disagree with you; this is a concerto, a man-made work, not a sunset or a meadow.  The composer intended on sending a message and it is the artist's responsibility to bring that message out.  I do think the score matters, and I don't know about you, but when I like a piece, I go out and buy every recording there is of it, no matter how unknown the performer is.  I own two dozen copies of the Tchaikovsky because I respect other artists' interpretations. 

You seem to think that a piano concerto somehow congeals in your fingers...if you don't believe in looking at the score first, well, um...how do you know what to play?

Don't you kind of answer your own question; there are numerous interpretations of same pieces, so would these interpretations exist if every one of the musicians involved in bringing out those interpretations would have looked at the score only, following it's markings as strictly as possible? When I hear a piece, even if its a midi (and I prefer hearing music as a midi on first listening, or read it directly from the score myself, playing it even if clumsily), I create an interpretation of it in that instant. It is the notes that speak, and it is the musician who interprets the message of the tones, thank God for that, or we wouldn't have so many different wonderful perspectives on superficially identical music. Personally, I don't even look at the dynamics and tempo markings, because I might disagree with them and since I only play music for myself, I am free to interpret it in any way - emotional, rational, even irrational, if I feel like that at the moment. However I also understand that its important to respect the composers' intentions, but I believe that has got more to do with public performances and general appreciation of music as they (composers) intended it to be transmitted.

I would sure like to see Lang Lang play live, though I'd first like to hear him play on record. Even if the technical performance is fireworks, I'm not sure if I'll get any enjoyment out of it if it remains the priority. In any case, I am still open to anything.

[anda]

I know his website (www.langlang.com) plays Rach II in the background.  I wonder if this is the recording that will be released in early 2005?  You can also set the background music to the Paganini Rhapsody, variations 12-17.  (Click the white circle in the top-right corner).

thanks for the link. however, i can't hear anything - i found the white circle, checked "on" but nothing still. maybe it's my computer. thanks again

[SteinwayTony]

Don't you kind of answer your own question; there are numerous interpretations of same pieces, so would these interpretations exist if every one of the musicians involved in bringing out those interpretations would have looked at the score only, following it's markings as strictly as possible? When I hear a piece, even if its a midi (and I prefer hearing music as a midi on first listening, or read it directly from the score myself, playing it even if clumsily), I create an interpretation of it in that instant. It is the notes that speak, and it is the musician who interprets the message of the tones, thank God for that, or we wouldn't have so many different wonderful perspectives on superficially identical music. Personally, I don't even look at the dynamics and tempo markings, because I might disagree with them and since I only play music for myself, I am free to interpret it in any way - emotional, rational, even irrational, if I feel like that at the moment. However I also understand that its important to respect the composers' intentions, but I believe that has got more to do with public performances and general appreciation of music as they (composers) intended it to be transmitted.

I would sure like to see Lang Lang play live, though I'd first like to hear him play on record. Even if the technical performance is fireworks, I'm not sure if I'll get any enjoyment out of it if it remains the priority. In any case, I am still open to anything.

I guess you and I disagree on a few fundamental points.  I do like your concept of listening to a MIDI file before learning a piece, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that the notes speak for themselves.  That's like saying that individual words in a poem make it beautiful.  It's when you put the notes/words together to make larger ideas, that's when it becomes art.  Take a Chopin waltz, for example.  If you sat down at the piano at Carnegie and play a dynamic-less, rubato-less, mechanical MIDI-file rendition of the gorgeous A minor waltz, I would be repulsed.  The notes are there, of course, but they wouldn't speak to me. 

Five years ago, when I was 13, I learned and memorized Rachmaninoff's D major Prelude, Op. 23 No. 4, in a week.  I brought it to my teacher and she was impressed with how quickly I learned it, but warned me there was still much work to do.  "You have to make it musical," I recall her saying.  I think she is right.  And damned if it didn't take me five years to make that Prelude come to life.  I performed it publicly for the first time at my high school senior recital.  I had the notes, even some primitive dynamics and phrasing, down in a week's time.  But that was just the beginning.

If you disagree with dynamic markings, that is your problem.  If you think that you can use any dynamic you want, whenever you want, you are free to compose your own music.  If you're playing a Prelude & Fugue, where the urtext editions have no dynamic markings, that is one thing.  But I think the Padarewski editions of Chopin ought to be strictly respected.  The music was Chopin's conception -- not yours. 

I have no problem with numerous interpretations, because I believe they should exist, to an extent.  There are good interpreations, and then there are bad ones, and then there are ugly ones, of course.  Still, the composer's intentions should prevail.

[willcowskitz]

I guess you and I disagree on a few fundamental points.  I do like your concept of listening to a MIDI file before learning a piece, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that the notes speak for themselves.  That's like saying that individual words in a poem make it beautiful. 

This is not what I meant. My point was that I don't need anyone to tell me how to play those notes, because I possess the understanding of music that I can apply to any piece to bring out my emotions from it. On the other hand, if the music itself doesn't speak to me through the notes (alone), an interpretation from outside my own mind can help in shaping the picture closer to my subjective perspective on life, thus bringing out details that I recognize to be mutual for myself and the composer/interpreting artist.

[piano88]

Awful indeed! Just listen to what he had said regarding Yundi Li. In an interview published in a Malaysia newspaper, the interviewer had asked him about Yundi Li, he said:

“ Yundi is not at the same level as me. I don’t want to attack anybody, I don’t feel like saying that I had performed in Carnegie Hall, I had worked with Berlin phiharmonic orchestra, Viana Symphony Orchestra, five major America Orchestras, but Yundi hasn’t. Among the young pianists of my age, I am the world’s best from any angle of view. You can find out for yourself if I have spoken the truth. I don’t feel like boasting because it'ss very stupid, but since you have asked me, I have no choice but to reveal it.”

He didn’t like to compare Yundi Li with himself because he has already surpassed all other young pianists of the same age as him. He also reckoned that he had already surpassed all past and present Chinese pianists. Now he is trying to accomplish a challenging work - to creat a new type of classical music on the success of the giants Mozart and Tchaikovsky.

I wonder what kind of new type of classical music Lang Lang had meant. I hope he is not trying to use improvisation or new type of classical music to explain away his frequent distortions of the music he had played

Could Lang Lang be any further up his own arse?
A wonderful Argerich quote, when asked what she thought of Lang Lang's success in the USA, she simply said : "I don't understand it!" - I aint going to argue with that!
AD

[tibidi]

Could Lang Lang be any further up his own arse?
A wonderful Argerich quote, when asked what she thought of Lang Lang's success in the USA, she simply said : "I don't understand it!" - I aint going to argue with that!
AD

Argerich really said that? Haha! Very well said indeed ! But Lang Lang doesn't have to worry, many reviewers and newspapers always speak out for him.

[steinwaymodeld]

Argerich really said that? Haha! Very well said indeed ! But Lang Lang doesn't have to worry, many reviewers and newspapers always speak out for him.

She actually replied to a question during a interview

the question was 'What do u think about the sucess of Lang Lang having now?'

she answered 'I don't really understand, but people like Barenboim and XXX (forgot whom she was stating), so.....'

[tibidi]

She actually replied to a question during a interview

the question was 'What do u think about the sucess of Lang Lang having now?'

she answered 'I don't really understand, but people like Barenboim and XXX (forgot whom she was stating), so.....'

I am very reluctant to believe  you  nowadays after you had written so much nonsense about Yundi previously.

Why do some people including some music critics so fond of saying nonsense about Yundi? Even the GRAMOPHONE reviewer bryce morrison and one other music critic from BBS classical music magazine are the same. These reviewers are rather kind towards   some other pianists I don't favour. Of course, what I don't favour need not be what they don't like, but I think their views are too different from the main nstrem belief of many other respectable reviewers from the west. I had noticed that these kind of strange reviewers are either very vague in their criticisms or else they simply just wrote something exactly opposite to the actual fact.  I had complained about Bryce morrison's view recently about Yundi's scherzi   as follows:

Why did this reviewer just ignored scherzo No.2? Is it because he couldn't find anything there to criticize? Then, why not write something positive for this scherzo No.2 instead of just ignoring it entirely?

Bryce Morrison wrote:

"... they lack the sort of subtlety and engagement that make you marvel anew at chopin's originality, his revelatory scope and fervour."

Bryce Morrison  just criticized without facts. In what way has Yundi's interpretation lacking chopin's originality, his revelatory scope and fervour? There is no slightest elaboration al all. Anybody can use this sort of criticism on any other pianist if you don't feel obliged to elaborate. You play certain Chopin pieces with more subtlety while others less. Different pieces require different expressions and interpretations. I really don't understand what he was trying to say as he didn't bother to elaborate at all.

I personally feel that Bryce Morrison  should have said the opposite because you do find plenty of fresh interpretations without any distortion in Yundi's scherzi. I like Yundi's scherzi the best so far both technically and interpretation wise after having compared him with about twenty other pianists, some of them had played the complete four scherzi. You can also compare Bryce Morrison 's view with other reviewers' about Yundi's scherzi.

The reviewer wrote;

"you become aware of an almost clinical detachment, as if chopin s inner life and spirit could safely be allowed to look after themselves...fourth scherzo is notably pedestrian "

Another vague criticism. Yundi's playing is clinical? Either this reviewer has very different ears or I haven't known Yundi's music well enough at all. Fourth scherzo is notably pedestrian? No elaboration again.

I have actually learnt not to take every reviewer too seriously. Some reviewers may always like to praise certain particular musicians to sky high while suppressing some others. No wonder William Keppel used to hate some reviewers badly. Which reviewer is fair to every musician? It's all up to you to decide for yourself. I think this reviewer had criticized too vaguely, is there any slightest substantiate fact in his criticisms?

I have already stopped reading this GRAMOPHONE. BBC classical maqgazine is not any better. They are too commercialized. I would say the world of classical music is better without these publications if they continue to mislead us. Who is the real loser if you pay too much attention to this sort of publications? It's the consumers of course. Who still care about classical music in this world? Not too many nowadays.

[tibidi]

Correction:

main stream belief.

[thracozaag]

  Are you just completely obsessed with Yundi?  SMD was talking about LL, not Yundi.  Critics are what they are, no more, no less.  It is a shame that so many of them wield so much power.  However Mr. Morrison, who I know, is an able musician and usually spot-on in his assessments.

koji (STSD)

[tibidi]

  Are you just completely obsessed with Yundi?  SMD was talking about LL, not Yundi.  Critics are what they are, no more, no less.  It is a shame that so many of them wield so much power.  However Mr. Morrison, who I know, is an able musician and usually spot-on in his assessments.

koji (STSD)

Me? Haha! I think Lang Lang is even more obsessed with Yundi Li as you can tell from his reaction whenever he was asked about Yundi Li by some reporters. Yundi's reaction has been very different whenever a similar question was asked by reporters about Lang Lang. Yundi had always tried to evade the question without giving any unfavourable comments about Lang Lang. That is the way an artist should be.

I only know  that  Morrison's review for Yundi's scherzi is very very vague and incorrect. I also know that I  don't like what he wrote for some other pianists. Yundi has received very favourable reviews for his scherzi from countries like UK, New Zealand, Irland, Germany. It will be released in US  sometimes in Jan 2005 . I am not surprised if those US respectable critics will be very fair to Yundi again.  Try to compare what Morrison wrote with others and you will undersatand what I mean.

[anda]

i will first say i never heard lang lang or yundi li with my own ears, so i do not have a personal opinion on their performances. what i want to say is something of a more general nature (and bears no reference to these pianists - whom i still wish i could get some way to hear)

1st. lang lang is 22, yundi li is 19, mei ting is 23 (or something like this, i'm sure i'm aproximately right). can you name me a pianist over 40 years old becoming well known - good pianist, i mean? or without winning this or that competition? probably not.

i'm not saying that competitions are wrong, or that people winning competitions are worthless (i know argerich won several, and same goes for many others whom i profoundly respect). but why can't you make it unless you're a child prodigy and win chopin competition at 18 and leeds at 22? gieseking started touring when he was 25 and never took part in any piano competition; rubinstein, richter, cortot and so many others whom we now name "the great pianists of the 20th century" never entered competitions. so, why do we need competitions now?

2nd. what's the rush with the repertory these days? i read over the web the "repertory" page of some of the young prodigies that emerged during the past few years. come on! kreisleriana at 21, brahms 2nd at 19, and so on - the sky's the limit! and truth is, based on what i've heard/read, that the mentality has changed during the past 1-2 decades: now, the mentality is "if you're technically good enough to pull this through, then go ahead and play it!". look on this forum: tips needed for scales, finger agility, "i need to play faster", "i need to play louder", "why do my hands hurt" (this one usually comes from those who didn't read the posts under "playing faster and louder"). nobody asks "how should i see this passage", "why is this work considered complex", "how should i teach my hands to differentiate the colors",etc. WHY?

i happen to know a pianist - i've heard him live a few times during the past 2-3 years. he is absolutely awsome, better that tones of records i've ever heard. but (he tells me) he wasn't much of a deal in his 20s, so he never won a big competition. Now his in his mid-40s, he is indeed great and he is know here. why isn't a pianist like him known all over the world, but others (that shall remain unnamed here) are?

[tibidi]

I think you are trying to say that there are many pianists who are good and talented but they had never participated in any competition. Although this is true, but the converse of this statement is not true. That is, if a pianist has won some competition, he is necessarily not good, or if a pianist has never taken part in any competition, he is necessarily good. Competiton is just one of the way to dig out talented people. Those who had won some prestigious competitions, some have become true artists while some others may just disappear altogether from the world scene.

So Lang Lang hasn’t won the prestigious Chopin competition, but that doesn't mean that he is as good as Kissin or Horowitz. In fact, Lang Lang belongs to a class of his own, weird! How to expect him to play classical music artistically if he is able to feel only rhythm  from the music he plays? Classical music is a lot more than just pure technique.

In fact, during this interview published in this Malaysia newspaper, Lang Lang had mentioned about some co-operation with Hans Zimmer to produce background music for some Hollywood films. They both could co-operate to produce a new type of clsssical music. Hans Zimmer shall compose some pieces specially for Lang Lang. There will be some very nice melodies, there will also be some Chinese music. When the time has come, he will reduce the number of concert performing around the world to about sixty a year. He said he feels so much safer doing sixty performance a year while trying out something new with Hans Zimmer at the same time.

[anda]

I think you are trying to say that there are many pianists who are good and talented but they had never participated in any competition. Although this is true, but the converse of this statement is not true. That is, if a pianist has won some competition, he is necessarily not good, or if a pianist has never taken part in any competition, he is necessarily good. Competiton is just one of the way to dig out talented people. Those who had won some prestigious competitions, some have become true artists while some others may just disappear altogether from the world scene.

i already said in my previous post that i have nothing against competitions - i even encourage and help my students take part in competitions.

but why is this the only way to dig up talents? there are pianists who can't perform in competitions (very sensitive people who need a warm audience) - and some of them might be more then "talented": some of them might be truly accomplished pianists. what about them? am i (music lover, dying to hear anything well played by anyone) to never hear of them, to never hear them playing?

because if they never "make it", they get another job, a family, a life, and move on (some of them) playing for themselves, playing locally where they're known and loved. but we are deprived of ever hearing a great pianist. imagine how your life would be if your favourite pianist (richter, horowitz, argerich, whatever) would have never recorded a single work. now think about how many never did. and how many of them must have been talented, or even great.

[tibidi]

but why is this the only way to dig up talents?

No, I wrote that competition is only one of the way to dig out talented people.

I agree that there are people who are also talented but they have never been given a chance to reveal their talent to the world. Yes, this world hasn't been fair to too many people,  I agree. It has something to do with our human being's nature. 

[xvimbi]

but why is this the only way to dig up talents? there are pianists who can't perform in competitions (very sensitive people who need a warm audience) - and some of them might be more then "talented": some of them might be truly accomplished pianists. what about them? am i (music lover, dying to hear anything well played by anyone) to never hear of them, to never hear them playing?

because if they never "make it", they get another job, a family, a life, and move on (some of them) playing for themselves, playing locally where they're known and loved. but we are deprived of ever hearing a great pianist. imagine how your life would be if your favourite pianist (richter, horowitz, argerich, whatever) would have never recorded a single work. now think about how many never did. and how many of them must have been talented, or even great.

Competitions inthe Arts are of course highly subjective. In any case, I believe the purpose of such competitions is:

- they make the competitors feel special and important
- they make the judges feel special and important
- they make the media feel special and important
- they make the audience feel special and important
- they tell the public, who don't know squat, which CDs to buy and what concerts to attend
- they tell the music directors, who are indifferent, who to invite
- they tell the record companies, which are indifferent, who to offer contracts to
- they tell the agents, who don't know squat, who to promote
- they are good for the local economy
- they are sometimes exciting
- they make good topics on discussion forums
 

[piano88]

She actually replied to a question during a interview

the question was 'What do u think about the sucess of Lang Lang having now?'

she answered 'I don't really understand, but people like Barenboim and XXX (forgot whom she was stating), so.....'

Please check your facts first....
Sorry, but you've misquoted here - I don't want confusion to arise over Argerich's comments. She actually said, when asked "What do you think for instance of the success of Lang Lang in the United States?"

"I don’t understand.  But conductors such as Christoph Eschenbach and Yuri Termikanov are positive, so…."

Certainly nothing about Baremboim here.......I actually believe she's quoted as having great respect for Baremboim.
Heres the article from Le Monde de la Musique
https://www.andrys.com/argerich/ar-monde04.html
You should all read this anyway, its fascinating.

[tibidi]

Competitions inthe Arts are of course highly subjective. In any case, I believe the purpose of such competitions is:

- they make the competitors feel special and important
- they make the judges feel special and important
- they make the media feel special and important
- they make the audience feel special and important
- they tell the public, who don't know squat, which CDs to buy and what concerts to attend
- they tell the music directors, who are indifferent, who to invite
- they tell the record companies, which are indifferent, who to offer contracts to
- they tell the agents, who don't know squat, who to promote
- they are good for the local economy
- they are sometimes exciting
- they make good topics on discussion forums
 

Don't forget that Dang Thai Son and Stanislav Bunin had both won first prize in Chopin competition, but they are no more active on performing stage.

[anda]

Don't forget that Dang Thai Son and Stanislav Bunin had both won first prize in Chopin competition, but they are no more active on performing stage.

just think how many competitions take place every year - that means dozens of pianists winning more or less important competitions. so what?

[tibidi]

just think how many competitions take place every year - that means dozens of pianists winning more or less important competitions. so what?

Some competitions are more prestigious, some are less.

Some have more number of judges, some have less.

Some winners are really talented, some are not.

Some judges are fair, some are not.

So what?

[anda]

So what?

yeah, i know, life's not fair. but seeing all this makes me feel like i'm just realizing how unfair it is.

but aren't we supposed to make a change? do we leave things be the same - do we just say "life's not fair, so what"?

no offense to anyone around here. i'm just sad about this. 

[tibidi]

yeah, i know, life's not fair. but seeing all this makes me feel like i'm just realizing how unfair it is.

but aren't we supposed to make a change? do we leave things be the same - do we just say "life's not fair, so what"?

no offense to anyone around here. i'm just sad about this. 

MONEY MONEY MONEY, that is the whole trouble.