Personal pet peeves with how pianists play?

[youngpianist]

Hello. I wonder if you have certain things that bother you about how some pianists play. Pet peeves, so to speak. Things that pianists do that you don't like. Personally, I'm bothered by a lot of the rubato that you hear today. It feels spasmodic instead of natural. I also don't like it when slow movements are played ultra slowly. I think the beats should be slow, but that doesn't prevent you from playing quick notes if the composer wrote quick note values over those slow beats.

[j_tour]

Legato phrasing on most everything.  No character or personality needed.  It's like smoove jazz.

The most average, middle of the road tempi, whether quick or slow.  Too often inappropriately quick.  Everyone sounds like a little kid trying to prepare for some dumb competition or exam, copying off the same youtube videos.

[lostinidlewonder]

When any pianist is so engrossed in their playing they make strange faces and movements lol.

[quantum]

No individual voice of the artist.  A lot of pianists just trying to play the same way as everyone else.  Playing a certain way because it seems to be the prevailing fashion and the unwritten rule of how it "should be done."

Boring virtuosity.  Pianists that play too fast just to show they can play too fast.  I like how j_tour put it:

Everyone sounds like a little kid trying to prepare for some dumb competition or exam, copying off the same youtube videos.

Fast playing has a place and can be musically thrilling.  However, so many pianists just sound like machines trying to one up one another in speed ratings, without any musical reasoning behind their speed. 

[ranjit]

However, so many pianists just sound like machines trying to one up one another in speed ratings, without any musical reasoning behind their speed.

I agree with this as well. As somewhat of a speed demon myself, it doesn't matter if you sound like a midi played at 2x speed. Speed is wrongly conflated with empty flashiness, when there's actually so much more expressivity that it enables. On the other hand, truly uninspiring slow playing is seen positively, as being modest.

I really like j_tour's point of having legato phrasing everywhere, it gives me something to think about.

Overall, I just find a lot of unjustified cliquishness around certain interpretational styles.

[musikalischer_wirbelwind_280]

When any pianist is so engrossed in their playing they make strange faces and movements lol.

THIS. Seconded, without the shadow of a doubt. I've always found such theatrics to be like feminist comedy: an embodiment of cringyness and dreadful taste such that I don't know whether to throw something at whoever's doing it, or go look for something heavier and throw that at them instead.

I know the OP brought this up in regard to how pianists play, but I'd still like to add that I also hate it when pianists give little to no credit to page turners. As someone who knows how hard it can be to not just properly read sheet music, but the "little" things that can go awfully wrong when turning a score's pages, as well, it always maddens me when the pianist gets to take all the clapping, cheering and beamish looks, while the page turner has to almost sidle off, the more unnoticed and unnapreciated by both the pianist and the public, the better.

[lelle]

I agree with the earlier comment on rubato. I also can't stand poor voicing, where the wrong voice is loud or everything is too loud so you can't follow the melodic line. It's like the whole point of the piece is the main voice/melody and then you drown it with loud inner voices? Come on

[thorn]

Professional performers and conservatory graduates who look down on amateurs. Spending hours and hours researching repertoire to give as authentic a performance as possible is commendable. However, amateur pianists without the slightest interest in musicology are 'allowed' to enjoy these pieces too (yes, even the advanced stuff).

[youngpianist]

Professional performers and conservatory graduates who look down on amateurs. Spending hours and hours researching repertoire to give as authentic a performance as possible is commendable. However, amateur pianists without the slightest interest in musicology are 'allowed' to enjoy these pieces too (yes, even the advanced stuff).

That's a good one. Elitism is just masked insecurity. Music is for everyone.

[quantum]

Classical musicians that look down upon improvisation.  Such people believe the score is the pinnacle of music and improvisation is a lesser art that does not deserve a place beside the scores of music in the past.  They think music needs to achieve a point of synthetic perfection only achievable through the score, in order to be considered a valid art music experience.  These people would never want to hear improvisations played in a classical music concert.  Such elitist musicians have so quickly forgotten that much of the music they idolize in score form was created by exceptional improvisers and may even had its beginnings as improvised music.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Classical musicians that look down upon improvisation.  Such people believe the score is the pinnacle of music and improvisation is a lesser art that does not deserve a place beside the scores of music in the past.  They think music needs to achieve a point of synthetic perfection only achievable through the score, in order to be considered a valid art music experience.  These people would never want to hear improvisations played in a classical music concert.  Such elitist musicians have so quickly forgotten that much of the music they idolize in score form was created by exceptional improvisers and may even had its beginnings as improvised music.

Amen, especially the last sentence. And you can bet your bottom dollar that 90% of them can't improvise to save themselves.

[ted]

I agree with both of you, as you would expect, although I find the stance of those averse to improvisation both illogical and peculiar. It is peculiar because improvisation is one of the most profoundly transporting and personally rewarding musical states of mind there is. It is illogical because, at least in my experience, excluding very well known pieces, only a  few highly knowledgeable listeners are able to even hazard a guess whether someone is playing a composed piece or improvising. Even then I have had highly trained musicians insist I was playing a piece when I was improvising and, perhaps more strangely, the other way around. They just really don't know, and to base musical quality on whether or not a visual approximation exists somewhere on paper seems to me totally absurd.

I recall an interesting experiment on Pianoworld years ago (can't find it now, I expect the forum diehards deleted it) where somebody posted seven recordings in a poll and members assessed which were of composed pieces and which were improvised. Nobody had the faintest clue, but the vehemence with which the "serious" pianists and composers on the forum denounced the experiment was most revealing.

As far as actual playing goes I am not fond of "thumpers" and those with "pedalitis", and I have personally encountered numerous cases of these chronic diseases over the years. 

[lostinidlewonder]

Classical musicians that look down upon improvisation.

We should be very open as to what creativity with the piano means. Creativity doesn't require a measurement of quality to produce works of interest. Of course some works will draw the interest of more people than others but that isn't the only measurement of the worthiness of all creative output.

In my mind for something just to exist is all the worth that it needs, that it can be created is a marvel in itself. I'm terrible at drawing but I can muck around and draw patterns freely and enjoy that creative process, the result is not something most people would appreciate but for me it's an enjoyable journey. I've even had people look at things im doodling and try to explain what it is, that discussion over some creative work in itself is something of value.

The idea of what is "better" I think limits the ability to enjoy and produce creative works. We should be in a state were there is only an interest factor which may near zero but never reach it, everything is worthy. All art you see should glow with some kind of creativity no matter how faint it is, then as you survey the field you may see the great sight of the bright beacons amongst the many faint fairy lights. Everything has a glow, to deny it darkens your own creative world. /end poetic rant

[klavieronin]

Professional performers and conservatory graduates who look down on amateurs.

Elitism bothers me just as much as anyone else but I've found it to be far more prominent among amateurs (especially amateurs on the internet) than among professionals. In my experience, professional musicians (those who are confident in their own abilities) rarely feel the need to look down on anyone.

[thorn]

Elitism bothers me just as much as anyone else but I've found it to be far more prominent among amateurs (especially amateurs on the internet) than among professionals. In my experience, professional musicians (those who are confident in their own abilities) rarely feel the need to look down on anyone.

We probably need to define professional/amateur- I didn't give it much thought in my original post.

If "professional" = those making money from concerts/recordings, and "amateur" = those playing piano for fun (whether Disney songs or Liszt etudes)  then in my experience the worst are those who are in the grey area between the two (tried to go professional but didn't make it), and I agree it's absolutely a projection of confidence issues.

[klavieronin]

If "professional" = those making money from concerts/recordings, and "amateur" = those playing piano for fun (whether Disney songs or Liszt etudes)  then in my experience the worst are those who are in the grey area between the two (tried to go professional but didn't make it), and I agree it's absolutely a projection of confidence issues.

Yeah, I agree with that.

[ted]

We should be very open as to what creativity with the piano means. Creativity doesn't require a measurement of quality to produce works of interest. Of course some works will draw the interest of more people than others but that isn't the only measurement of the worthiness of all creative output.

In my mind for something just to exist is all the worth that it needs, that it can be created is a marvel in itself. I'm terrible at drawing but I can muck around and draw patterns freely and enjoy that creative process, the result is not something most people would appreciate but for me it's an enjoyable journey. I've even had people look at things im doodling and try to explain what it is, that discussion over some creative work in itself is something of value.

The idea of what is "better" I think limits the ability to enjoy and produce creative works. We should be in a state were there is only an interest factor which may near zero but never reach it, everything is worthy. All art you see should glow with some kind of creativity no matter how faint it is, then as you survey the field you may see the great sight of the bright beacons amongst the many faint fairy lights. Everything has a glow, to deny it darkens your own creative world. /end poetic rant

Far from being a rant this is a superb post and expresses a deep truth which I wish more people would perceive. Aldous Huxley repeatedly said the same thing in his writing, that the transcendence of individual consciousness, the soul if you like, through a work of art is independent of how anyone else assesses or ranks that work. It is likely what Ives meant when he said every man should be his own Beethoven. Couched in simpler fashion, the effect is a true quale, and we cannot possibly know that an ordinary man, creating his own music, might not be experiencing something much more profound than the most celebrated pianist playing for thousands.     

[lostinidlewonder]

Far from being a rant this is a superb post and expresses a deep truth which I wish more people would perceive. Aldous Huxley repeatedly said the same thing in his writing, that the transcendence of individual consciousness, the soul if you like, through a work of art is independent of how anyone else assesses or ranks that work. It is likely what Ives meant when he said every man should be his own Beethoven. Couched in simpler fashion, the effect is a true quale, and we cannot possibly know that an ordinary man, creating his own music, might not be experiencing something much more profound than the most celebrated pianist playing for thousands.   

That's really good info ted thanks for that it sounds all so wonderful to me. I remember years ago there was this artist who was captured by art children created and even with his professional artistic skills could not recreate it. Others might simply look at art children create and just see a muddled mess and novice control with artistic tools.

I can appreciate a single dot on a canvas and have but the appreciation is low for me but still there is something. All reactions to art I think are equally valid and useful. To see some art work and think it is so ridiculous and bad taste is totally fine, at least that means the work produced a reaction in you. Why does art necessarily need to produce specific emotions only from a select set of reactions?

I recently came across a composer in my city who creates music with broken pianos. I found him since I want to visit a piano graveyard near me in York Western Australia, the "Wambyn Olive Farm" ruined piano sanctuary. They have some of his pianos there.   

I responded to that video with what I felt while openly listening to the piece. It was quite a journey but I can only experience that if I quieten my mind. Quieten the mind breaks free of what one considers "good" and encourages you to simply experience, it opens you to a bright world of creative opportunity, you see illusions you would otherwise miss, emotions that simply evaporate if you were critically listening.

[timothy42b]

[quote ]
but I'd still like to add that I also hate it when pianists give little to no credit to page turners. As someone who knows how hard it can be to not just properly read sheet music, but the "little" things that can go awfully wrong when turning a score's pages,
[/quote]

I really, really hate being asked to turn pages, and before COVID it happened a lot, especially with organists.  The pressure is immense, and even though I'm following along (not always easy with one of those multistaff organ scores) I never know for sure.  His head is bobbing, did he nod?  Did he forget to nod and I need to turn now?  Oh crap, he needed one more measure. 

There's really no need, with scanned music and a Bluetooth page turn.  I am just moving that direction myself, bought a Chromebook to run MobileSheets and an Airturn.

I did sit behind the pianist doing accompaniment for a special choral presentation in a church.  She didn't have a page turner, and at one point while reaching to turn she accidentally knocked the score off the piano.  She continued playing with one hand, caught the score with the other just before it landed, and snapped it back up without a single break in the rhythm.  Impressive - but nobody even noticed!

[lelle]

I really, really hate being asked to turn pages, and before COVID it happened a lot, especially with organists.  The pressure is immense, and even though I'm following along (not always easy with one of those multistaff organ scores) I never know for sure.  His head is bobbing, did he nod?  Did he forget to nod and I need to turn now?  Oh crap, he needed one more measure. 

I've done a lot of page turning, and I usually turn where I myself would have wanted to have the page turn, which is pretty much in sync with the music, maybe at or during the last bar of the page, depending on the tempo of the piece, unless something else is agreed upon or the musician clearly nods early. If you are requested to turn pages, I think you have the right to request them to nod very clearly, or that you together agree how they should nod.

[timothy42b]

I've done a lot of page turning, and I usually turn where I myself would have wanted to have the page turn, which is pretty much in sync with the music, maybe at or during the last bar of the page, depending on the tempo of the piece, unless something else is agreed upon or the musician clearly nods early. If you are requested to turn pages, I think you have the right to request them to nod very clearly, or that you together agree how they should nod.

If the music has been scanned in, there's an easy way.  I use MobileSheets but I'm sure forscore for iOS has the same feature.  You can turn just the top half of the page while leaving the bottom half in place, and then turning the bottom whenever convenient. 

[lostinidlewonder]

I guess it is a personal peeve of mine that page turners and pianists don't come up with a system which eliminates the need for the pianist to tell when to turn the page on the go. Experienced sight readers should know the exact moment when the page needs to be turned and that doesn't vary if you have practiced the piece enough. So they should simply mark on the sheet when they want it to be turned.

[owen david]

Agreed. Nearly all the great composers were also great improvisers and in the first half of the 19th century it was something audiences expected of a composer-performer.

I wrote a caprice which I was always improvising on but eventually you have to settle on something for the score...

https://owendavidmusic.org/2021/05/02/caprice-the-starlings/

Classical musicians that look down upon improvisation.  Such people believe the score is the pinnacle of music and improvisation is a lesser art that does not deserve a place beside the scores of music in the past.  They think music needs to achieve a point of synthetic perfection only achievable through the score, in order to be considered a valid art music experience.  These people would never want to hear improvisations played in a classical music concert.  Such elitist musicians have so quickly forgotten that much of the music they idolize in score form was created by exceptional improvisers and may even had its beginnings as improvised music.

[brogers70]

Speed for the sake of speed. Sometime a very fast tempo is required for the mood of the piece, but often not. Particularly with Bach, if you play it as fast as you can it's hard for me to hear all the interesting details as they fly by.

[owen david]

There's that guy Wim Winters who reckons things were actually played half speed back in the late 18th century. He has some good arguments to do with notation, metronome settings and the physical limitations of old instruments. But many of his renditions do sound too slow I think from an artistic point of view...

&t=154s

[youngpianist]

There's that guy Wim Winters who reckons things were actually played half speed back in the late 18th century. He has some good arguments to do with notation, metronome settings and the physical limitations of old instruments. But many of his renditions do sound too slow I think from an artistic point of view...

&t=154s

Unfortunately it's clear that Wim Winters went through the effort of inventing an entire bogus system he can use to claim it's legitimate for him to play pieces at half tempo, when in reality it's because he is simply not capable of playing them at the correct tempo. It's like flat earthers who are too dumb to understand science so they invent conspiracies on the earth being flat that only they are in on so that they can feel superior. Listen to pupils of Liszt and pupils of pupils of Chopin and it's clear that, if anything, people play slower today than they did back then.

[anacrusis]

Unfortunately it's clear that Wim Winters went through the effort of inventing an entire bogus system he can use to claim it's legitimate for him to play pieces at half tempo, when in reality it's because he is simply not capable of playing them at the correct tempo. It's like flat earthers who are too dumb to understand science so they invent conspiracies on the earth being flat that only they are in on so that they can feel superior. Listen to pupils of Liszt and pupils of pupils of Chopin and it's clear that, if anything, people play slower today than they did back then.

Poor Wim. I do think there is way too much evidence on the contrary to his theories for them to hold much worth, however.

[kittenyarn]

I don't know if I know enough to tell which pianists are "good" yet, but I really don't like pianists who move around too much on the chair and make faces. It looks a bit phony to me... 

[lostinidlewonder]

For your viewing pleasure It seems more disturbing to watch when the sound is off.

[musikalischer_wirbelwind_280]

For your viewing pleasure It seems more disturbing to watch when the sound is off.

Well, well, well...

I won't deny it reminds me of some cheesy "18+" flicks I would sometimes watch in my young days, certainly makes me cringe just as much, but with a key difference being that this doesn't make me feel good in any way whatsoever to compensate for that, quite the opposite, actually.

[lostinidlewonder]

Well, well, well...

I won't deny it reminds me of some cheesy "18+" flicks I would sometimes watch in my young days, certainly makes me cringe just as much, but with a key difference being that this doesn't make me feel good in any way whatsoever to compensate for that, quite the opposite, actually.

AHAHAH hilarious Certainly feels like we've accidentally stumbled into some compromising situation. lol.

[timothy42b]

I don't know exactly what the neurological connection may be, but playing some instruments generates facial movements.

I knew a clarinet specialist that started playing cello (work related requirement for professional development credits). 

When playing cello his lips would make sideways chewing motions that interfered with his embouchure control on clarinet - it turned out he couldn't do both anywhere near the same time. 

[lelle]

I don't know exactly what the neurological connection may be, but playing some instruments generates facial movements.

I knew a clarinet specialist that started playing cello (work related requirement for professional development credits). 

When playing cello his lips would make sideways chewing motions that interfered with his embouchure control on clarinet - it turned out he couldn't do both anywhere near the same time.

For the piano that sounds like an excuse/cop out to me. I think you can learn to not make faces if you put your mind to it. But I assume the pianists who make faces are not bothered by them, else they would work to undo the habit, no?

[timothy42b]

For the piano that sounds like an excuse/cop out to me. I think you can learn to not make faces if you put your mind to it. But I assume the pianists who make faces are not bothered by them, else they would work to undo the habit, no?

I dunno.  Maybe.  But if you're trying to express an emotion, say maybe deep sorrow, and convey it through the music, do you have to feel it internally?  And will that register on your face? 

(and vice versa - maybe the face feeds back into the emotion too)

[lelle]

I dunno.  Maybe.  But if you're trying to express an emotion, say maybe deep sorrow, and convey it through the music, do you have to feel it internally?  And will that register on your face? 

(and vice versa - maybe the face feeds back into the emotion too)

I think I could feel the deepest sorrow with a fairly neutral face. Like when you are in a meditative state, you can watch all sorts of emotions pass through you but you don't twist and mug with your face like a bad actor chewing the scenery. I think feeling and expressing the feeling with movement are separate activities that often come together but are not necessarily intrinsically linked. Think of the relatively peaceful posture of Horowitz as he produces what pretty much amounts to explosions of electrifying emotion.

[ranjit]

I dunno.  Maybe.  But if you're trying to express an emotion, say maybe deep sorrow, and convey it through the music, do you have to feel it internally?  And will that register on your face? 

(and vice versa - maybe the face feeds back into the emotion too)

If someone is actually experiencing deep emotion, their face does express it, but it's subtle. Certainly nothing like Lang Lang

[lostinidlewonder]

It's all crocodile tears if they really were so emotional they should be crying lol.

[timothy42b]

To play well requires hours per day.

I weep to think how painful his old age will be, after years of playing, sitting many hours per day with rounded spine and chin on his chest. 

[ranjit]

It's all crocodile tears if they really were so emotional they should be crying lol.

The pianist is blind, so I definitely don't think he's making facial expressions for show.

[nightwindsonata]

There's a certain kind of rubato that really gets under my skin--it's hard to pinpoint, but it's usually in a slow piece, and an some melodic figure is made to lean so hard that it (in my mind) completely distorts the phrase--and even many great pianists I have heard will do this, and for some reason it's an instant turn-off for me. It's the same kind of thing as in the 18th variation of the Paganini Rhapsody, with that iconic sixteenth-note phrase that everyone has taken to playing with a very heavily-leaning rubato. In this case, it works just fine, but this sort of thing working out to my liking is very rare. Don't get me wrong, I love rubato and romantic melodies and all of that, but it should be pretty restrained most of the time, with only one or two especially poignant phrases in a piece that are the pinnacle of the musical story. I don't know if this makes sense or not. Perhaps it's my teacher's influence; he always insists I use rubato sparingly (and sometimes in complete contradiction with my other teacher, talking about a similar passage).