maybe it should be called a mister class

Well, if you are arguably the most famous pianist in the world I'm sure there will be plenty of people interested in learning from you.

Specifically, if we are just talking about his playing.. His over use of rubato, he hurts the flow of most pieces he plays. His playing feels very episodic. I love fast piano pieces, but its okay to slow somethings down. In the end that kind of stuff all the time is not my cup of tea. I would rather throw money at other performers.

A lot of people say give him time..which my response is how much time do you give someone. Lang Lang is still young, but he is far from a child and got a good leg in on adulthood, it is kind of easy to see where he is heading artistically.

That is all fine. He is selling out concert halls, and bringing kids to get exciting about classical.

It's called "marketing".

I saw another side to Lang Lang when I watched the video masterclass with Daniel Barenboim. All the participants had exaggerated facial and body expressions, and Lang Lang's didn't seem to be more than the others. I liked the way he responded to the audience questions. Lang Lang seemed genuine and sincere talking about the conservatory where he studied in China with its strengths and weaknesses. He had a interesting response about the Beethoven sonata he played in seeing it as a structure the way architect would design a building. As an organist I see the organ as a melding of architecture and music.

Regarding a question directed to Daniel Barenboim using body movements to help with the expression of the music he responded definitely not. Maestro Barenboim elaborated that the concentration should be with the sound, and how that sound is produced.

Sometimes an exaggerated body movement naturally accompanies that goal.

Anybody who thinks they are greater than the composer they're playing (such as Chopin, Beethoven, Liszt, etc) deserves to have things thrown at him/her. Like tomatoes.. or eggs.

Wouldn't that be fun?

Tasteless, maybe. Unjustified? Oh please.

What a coincidence! I just finished watching the first of the two CD's of that Barenboim master class. I found Lang Lang's deference and affection for Barenboim very touching. His enthusiasm about Barenboim's recommendations was fun to watch. The two of them got so excited about the music. It was well worth watching. (I got it from Netflix).

I also saw Lang Lang in concert in Seattle, last year I think. That night he wasn't overly dramatic and his playing was very enjoyable.

Because he doesn't want to look stupid in front of Barenboim. There are othere videos of LL playing duets with major artists(Mother Goose Suie with Argerich?) and he is far less subdued than normal. It's an act that he can turn on and off.

I see no reason personally to listen to Lang Lang when I can listen to my records of Gulda, Barenboim, Schiff etc. Maybe lang lang will get better over time, and one day may call himself indeed a 'master', but for me he just isn't there yet with the others I have named.

Agree.

A distinction has to be made, between what's easy to apprehend, and what's difficult, what's blatant and what's subtle. The vast majority of listeners will hear the easy, facile, blatant aspects of a performer's art. It takes an ear deeply accustomed to classical music to appreciate the subtle and nuanced.

More Geese than Swans now live, more Fools than Wise."

But it is ever thus.

Liszt was a master of both aspects of art. He could lay on cheap theatrics in dump truck proportions (could you imagine any performer today having an assistant to catch him as he fainted in the throes of overwhelming emotion, brought on by the music?) But he could also play to impress the cognoscenti.

Haochen Zhang was in one of his masterclasses (see picture at end of this Lang Lang blog entry). They had the same teacher, so that might be part of the reason.

http://pianistlanglang.blogspot.com/2006/06/letter-to-mom-51406.html

Open letter to his mother ? The comments on the bottom are hilarious though.

I heard LL in recital at Verizon Hall last year or the year before. He played the Wanderer Fantasy, Islamey, Chopin D-flat Nocturne, and other pieces. I thought there was some beautiful playing in the Chopin, but I really didn't care for the recital. It seemed to me that everything was calculated as a "grand gesture" to the audience. He took every opportunity to say, "Look at me. Aren't I clever? What did you think of that?" The composer's intentions did not factor into his decisions. If there was a chance to impress the audience, he took it. The rest of the audience ate it up, but I didn't like it.

I think a 22 or 23 year old is too young to give a masterclass. If someone is going to expound on the interpretation of a piece, I want it to be someone who has lived with the piece for years, whose thinking on it has evolved over the years, who has read extensively and listened to many pianists play the piece, etc.

LL played the same Nocturne in his Carnegie Hall debut. During the last few measures of ascending 6ths in the RH he closed his eyes and started leaning further and further back so that he was way past vertical at the end. Then he held that position for a long time after the piece ended.

I wanted to yell...WAKE UP!, but I didn't have the nerve.

Oh, I see. A nocturne is night music, so he went to sleep

Unbelievable... I've got the DVD of LL's Carnegie hall debut and in my opinion, you will never hear the Op 27.1 Nocturne played more beautifully, by anyone. I've also seen him live in Hamburg and his playing was wonderfully controlled and sensitive. He played Schubert's Sonata in A Major D959, Bartok's Sonata Sz 80 and the Debussy Preludes from books 1 and 2. All played with masterful maturity.

Quite frankly I'm sick of all the LL bashing. He's got his peculiar mannerisms for sure, but he will mature into a pianist who more closely matches the 'requirements' of the traditionalists amongst us, I'm sure. And let's not forget that he's introduced countless young - and older! - people to the classical piano repertoire, something I think we should, perhaps, be more appreciative of in this, the 21st century.

I'm surprised to find myself in the Lang Lang defense camp. Surprised because generally speaking, there is *nothing* I hate more, in piano interpretation, than excessive rubato and mangling of the pulse of the piece. Especially with Beethoven and Schubert. I can't even listen to my Baremboim Beethoven sonatas anymore for that reason, even though I grew up with them, and they're very dear to me.

Given Lang Lang's reputation, I originally wrote him off without even listening. Imagine my surprise when I stumbled on his Haydn (sonata 50) on YouTube. Fresh, colorful, controlled, exciting, and beautifully in time. His mannerisms added to the experience the way Gould's do.

And then I saw him in concert-- Schubert late A major sonata, some Debussy preludes, the Bartok sonata. Some of the Debussy was a little over-mannered for me, yes. But the Schubert was gorgeous-- glistening, perfectly shaped, intricately colored... and beautifully in time. And the Bartok was fierce.

So... you know... there are some of us who really like Lang Lang. Not because we're jumping on some bandwagon, but because we think he's an incredible craftsman (and, from what I see in interviews, a genuinely nice and humble guy). Please respect us.

-Jason

Why is everyone who doesn't like LL's playing immediately accused of bashing... that fan-boy kind of accusements really don't help LL's reputation.