I just came back from a disappointing and ironic loss, due to a crucial mistake by me.

It was actually a very small competition, with actually only 4 effective competitors in my group (the fifth didn't even bother to memorize the piece), and the required preliminary piece was Mozart's Sonata in A minor, K. 330.

The first two hammered the piece. The third one was pretty good, but I knew I could still beat him (he had some very disagreeable interpretation IMO). However, nearing the end of his performance, I realized that I didn't memorize that part! When I started, I realized that I didn't satisfactorily memorize the entire piece! I had been polishing my choice piece too much.

Netted with many, many errors, the judges still let me finish it (they stopped the first two in the middle because they had even worse interpretation). However, I still wasn't in the top two because of all my memorization problems.

The worse thing is that if I weren't a genius, I would be gifted (I never really took an IQ test, except for one, but I marked a few answers wrong on accident). I almost never forget answers to questions, and such, but to lose what I know I could win, due to one of my strongest points! I don't think I will ever make such a mistake again.

I played the K330, I believe K331 is the a minor one.

The more you join competition, the better you are in controlling your emotion.

(BTW,the A minor is actually K. 310.)

It sounds to me like you are suffering from a very bad case of overconfidence. Turn down the ego and take this as a badly needed lesson in humility. Being able to play a piece with perfection in your practice session is an entirely different thing than performing it. Has it occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, you aren't a genius afterall? Being able to remember and answer questions for a test has nothing to do with genius and intelligence. Intelligence is judgement and experience and most of all: knowing you don't know everything. You needed the lesson in humility. Learn from it.

Enter music competitions for two reasons: to get criticized and improve your playing, or to get the money. As long as you are thinking about beating the other guy, you are acting like a loser. Don't think about the other guy, think about what you have to do. The other guy will take care of himself.

Again, the only competition results that matter are money and learning. Winning is worthless, because nobody cares. (OK, If you're in the Tchaikovsky competition and you win first prize somebody cares, but you're not in the Tchaikovsky competition.)

thanks. But I meant a genius (or gifted) in study, not in music. I had lots of trouble memorizing, which was why I thought that was ironic. I have almost no trouble with my memory!

Thanks for the advice though.

When you have a really good memory, but in music it isn't working the way you hoped it would, you can probably fix that.

When you are memorizing the other things that you are really good at, what methods do you use?

The A minor is the hardest of all Mozart's sonatas. For me it's musicality is as challenging as Beethoven's Hammerklaviar. If you can play it "as it is meant to be played" I would love to hear it.

I don't understand the "genius" reference, nor what its significance is in the context of this post. Nevertheless, how much "genius" does it take to know which Sonata you had prepared for the competition? K330 is in C major;

Regards,

Really??

The A minor is indeed a gorgeous piece of music. Its interpretations can be highly variable. Mozart composed only one other sonata in a minor key (K457 in C minor, magnificent but easier to 'get through" IMHO). Check out Glenn Gould flying through the first movement in 3 minutes or so.. I find Richter's and Gulda's take on it to be the most appealing as they highlight the elegance of the first movement, actually labeled Allegro maestoso.

I find it odd your teacher didn't have you run through your program from memory to find those problems. Most students entering competitions will have their program memorized and ready to go a month or so before the performance.

I don't know that the crucial mistake was yours. Your teacher should have had you run through your program, if not in the lesson, then at least at home for family and friends.

oh well. here's to the next one.

competitions are so unsettling. ..

I did not say "technically". I said "musically". Just to be clear.....

Yes I believe the first movement should be played very fast (100-120 minim pulse maybe). I will check my speed but I finish the movement in under 5 minutes I am sure. At speed, to maintain finger dexterity bars 42-49, 70-78 and so on are particularly challenging. I still have problems with the trills MORE SO THAN WITH THE FINAL MOVEMENT OF THE HAMMERKLAVIAR!!!!!

Wow, my bad! My memory doesn't usually fail me like this!
Anyways, how do I edit? It was K.331 and it seems to be in A major.

Actually, not "seems to be;" K331 is in A major.

"Actually, not "seems to be;" K331 is in A major." - BruceD

"I played the K330, I believe K331 is the a minor one." - RonaldSteinway

That's why I put seems to be, which may not be exactly logically, correct, but I see no reason in pointing that out.

Stop being so critical please!

Perhaps if you weren't so arrogant...?

...

Philip, I've never heard you play, but I'm pretty sure you're not a genius, and you're not a prodigy. Now go practice.

Philip: The fact that you couldn't quite remember what key the piece was in, demonstrates something important.

It's like if you had to make a speech and couldn't quite remember what it was about.

brings back memories.

But the second one didn't make much sense, it's just in case I messed up again, I put "seems to be". The first one I know does.

The first what and the second what? Which two things are you referring to?

I timed a performance of the 1st movement. I played it in 3 minutes 58 seconds without repeats. 110 minim/220 crotchets is my pulse.

Congratulations - but who cares?

You opened your trap, no? But on the serious side there was a reference to a Glenn Gould performance earlier. Dear Glenn is long dead. I am not.

The A minor sonata is not even the piece we're talking about.

That's right. i mentioned Gould earlier.
PP, I for one would like to hear you playing it. I can definitely hum.

Took me too long to get that one.

Note Mr Lu's 2nd paragraph of his post.

"It was actually a very small competition, with actually only 4 effective competitors in my group (the fifth didn't even bother to memorize the piece), and the required preliminary piece was Mozart's Sonata in A minor, K. 330."

Are you are the same page brother?

I am going to make a run of recordings soon. Mozart's A minor is one of the ear-marked pieces.

He later revealed that he did not actually have any idea what key his piece was in, and then after some more back-and-forth discovered that it was in A major.

But K330 is not the A minor sonata, is it.

In context, genius clearly doesn't refer to my musical skills, as I have already explained.

Did I say I wasn't going to practice? I posted this to show that it is always better to fully memorize a competition piece because the nerves will probably cause your memory and concentration to weaken.

DavidA:

First Post:
"I don't understand the "genius" reference, nor what its significance is in the context of this post. Nevertheless, how much "genius" does it take to know which Sonata you had prepared for the competition? K330 is in C major"

Second post: "Actually, not "seems to be;" K331 is in A major." -BruceD

Now that I read it, I think you meant the first post all along, my mistake.

"When you are memorizing the other things that you are really good at, what methods do you use?"

Actually, I use none. I think memorizing music takes a lot more than memorizing, say battles of the Civil War. Memorized music needs to be recalled immediately and played immediately. If I forgot what the Battle of Vicksburg was, I could spend about a minute or so on the test and still have plenty of time left. If someone thought a minute or so before playing a note!

This quote might be interesting, my band teacher said to us: "You're a really smart band, I'd put your AP scores up against any other band. But the problem with being smart is that you get to used to everything being easy and you get lazy," but that doesn't work in music. (he said something about muscle memory, which means practice is necessary, but I think it is better if it just says overall, as intelligence and musical ability does not have a strong connection).

"I find it odd your teacher didn't have you run through your program from memory to find those problems. Most students entering competitions will have their program memorized and ready to go a month or so before the performance."

Ugh, I haven't had a teacher in one and a half years because my parents won't get me one . They say my grades are too low. (Out of two semesters last year, I actually only ended up with one B!)

Oh yea, again my bad about the A minor thing, but I'm okay having someone hijack this thread.

The competitions that my son does best are ones in which he uses "old friends" as his competition pieces. Old friends are pieces that he knows so thoroughly that the chance of making a big error are quite small. The goal is to practice pieces not to the point that you finally play them right for once, but to the point that you almost can't conceive of ever playing them incorrectly.

If you cannot do this, your chances of finishing 'in the money' in any serious competition is quite small. When I say serious competition I don't mean Van Cliburn. I mean competitions that are local or regional draws for the best students in the area. For my son that means high school kids. These competitions usually have prize money attached ($100 at the low end, perhaps 3-5K at the higher end). And they often have additional prizes of playing in master classes with great teachers. When that kind of money and exposure is on the line, all the best teachers send their best young players. Its a blast to watch and hear them. If you do your best and you don't finish in the money, that's OK. You've worked with the best and you've given it your best shot. It you do happen to make it onto the podium, what a thrill.

Oh, and it does put some money in the bank account for the kid. He really likes that.

Such sage advice that it bears repeating. Thank you!

Regards,

just an anecdote..

i won my first competition at age 11. kind of blew the final chord at the performance concert but oh well. My dad was a humorist. He told me quite seriously "you ought to quit while you're ahead".. I never entered another competition. I don't know if my dad had anything to do with that course of events.

Perhaps... I know that my practicing drove him bats.

I sometimes wonder if wisdom and sagesse are not a tad overrated especially when they (re)state the obvious. I think that people, young and old, are entitled to some bold foolishness especially when nobody's life is in danger. What's the worse thing that could happen here? a temporarily bruised ego?

Well, obviously you do have a method (or methods), because otherwise you'd forget. I'll ask the question differently, assuming you're pretty good at history because you mentioned it.

When you're told you're going to have a history test, how do you get ready for it? Do you just read the textbook and nothing else? Do you take notes in class and then review them? Maybe you do lots of things - but I'm sure you don't skip all your classes, and not read the book either, and just show up for the exam at the end.

Well, to be practical, most teachers would be happy _if_ a piece reaches performance level. It's hard enough to find time to practice piano, with so many distractions out there (movies, TV, internet, games), not to mention [gasp!] homework.

So how did this thread get derailed...interesting topic...

Well, AZN, you know I think I may have convinced my son to devote four hours to piano on weekends and days off. He realizes that he can play piano for four hours, horn for one hour, and still have lots of time for those silly video games he loves. What I might think silly reflects my own preferences, but I must acknowledge that his preferences are important too.

When you get close enough to the top to taste success, the extra work becomes more palatable. If you can barely get a piece to performance level, what are you doing in competitions? This is what I would ask the OP here.

Philip, could you tell us a bit more about what is motivating you to seek out the competitive "thrill?"

You know, I think this is wise advice (about overrated wisdom ) . But I would add something. Bruised egos often lead people down the wrong path. A little forethought about motives and a little afterthought about how things might have gone differently can help people take the right messages from their brave failures instead of the wrong ones that often lead them to clam up.

I am shocked. That's revolting.





That too. It seems to me idiotic, send the kid winner to a session with a "great teacher", and send the other kids to the dugout, as if they couldn't benefit as well, perhaps even more.



"Best" teachers, maybe, but jerks as well, if it is true that this is their motivation.

What is your problem?

Here is an example of 'competition.'

VCU PianoFest

If you don't like these events, that's your issue, but your derisive tone is frankly offputting.

These are often wonderful ways to showcase the hard work of lots of students.

Here's another one sponsored by the Williamsburg Music Club in my own town. This is an organization of mostly elderly people who love music and who come together to pool resources to provide aid for students who study music. They give out annually something like 6-10 thousand dollars in cash and one or more scholarships to Interlochen.

williamsburg Music Club

If you think that handing out prizes to a dozen or more students to help defray their lesson costs is shameful, then I think you need an attitude adjustment.

If you remove the odd sentence near the end the OP just sounds like a young person, upset and cross with himself letting off steam to some (possibly) sympathetic ears. He wrote so quickly that the sonata details are incorrect, and the offending sentence never even made sense to me.

Philip
I reckon you did pretty well to come third especially not having a teacher for a so long. And yes it must have been frustrating to find your usually excellent memory failed you for music *this* time.

You might know this stuff anyway, but to remember music well you use
- muscle memory
- being able to play the sound of the whole piece in your head
- visual memory of the pages
- theoretical understanding of the parts - study piece away from the piano, get out your coloured pencils (I do
- memory of how your hands look on the keyboard

The other thing that's good to do is to remember very well some crucial bars as signposts. Be able to confidently begin at any of these signposts. Others can tell you a lot more about all this. Also memory is laid down with associated emotion, which is why we tend to forget when the emotional state is different from when we did the memorising. So some practise performances would be crucial.

It's great that you're still playing, hope you're back to enjoying it soon.

Piano*Dad, how does your link tell us anything about the advantages and disadvantages of competitions. I would be interested in how such things would affect a student's development into an artist, how it might affect how that student will eventually relate to an audience. Is there a difference between how a frequent competition attendant (including winners) relates to pieces, and those who see performance as a communication of a piece to an audience? Does it matter? Will the student end up playing pieces that impress judges, in the way that impresses judges, and choose their pieces accordingly? Will skills needed for competitions be favoured over those needed to round out the future artist? How do these competitions affect the student?

These are they types of questions I would ask, and none of them are contained in that link. What is it you would like us to see?

KS

I have no idea how these things translate into anything as complex as how one develops into an artist, and I don't think anyone else here does either. What is increasingly annoying me is the harsh anti-elitism I see along with the notion that incentives somehow don't matter at all, that everything comes from within the student in some ineffable way. Also, I resent the idea that participating in these sorts of events marks you as some sort of snob, and a simple mercenary one to boot.

Piano lessons are expensive. Should we give the prizes to the people who can barely bark out Mozart 545 with continuing memory problems while a kid with genuine skill, drive, inner love for music and a joy in public performance gets nothing? Yes, I have just constructed a straw man, but I do think there is mileage in rewarding better work as opposed to pure egalitarianism.

These festivals are not simply cutthroat. For the most part they are celebrations of what every student brings to the table. They are ways to show lots of kids that they are part of a larger group that thinks music is important. Piano is often a solitary activity, and one that many of their peers look down upon as geeky. There is also mileage in letting marginal players see what is possible with real effort. Indeed it might turn off some students, but it might also motivate others. The latter is exactly what happened to my son and now he can compete at a very high level with kids who are on the Juilliard track. He himself is not, but that doesn't matter. His enjoyment of music is growing by leaps and bounds as he begins to see that the top level repertoire is actually coming closer to his reach.

That is a bit of wisdom even I would have to agree with.
There is nothing wrong with selecting the best, warts of competition politics and all. I think PD has written about this in the past. But a key element is the personality and willingness of the contestant. Competitions are not for everyone. But that does not mean that those who choose not to participate are incompetent pianists. As long as the take on competition results is tempered (by humility or good sportsmanship depending on the outcome, the contestant stands to benefit from the exposure, the high expectations, the preparation and the camaraderie. Alternatively he or she may decide that the competition ambience does not suit their style..
How they develop is another matter and is not necessarily linearly related to their competition results.

As far as my somewhat petulant response to the ratings of wisdom, I think that a permanently bruised ego or clamming up following failure at a competition is a good indicator of incompatibility with this activity. If the contestant enters of his own will as the OP suggests, then it is Ok if he gets to deal with the consequences..
"What does not kill you makes you stronger" is not quote I often use, but here is an opportunity..

Clealry all of us PW chatters today are not involved in turkey cooking... just getting ready for the big eat-out.
Except that I am (supposed to be) cooking.. and I hate turkey..I might just have to order in for my unlucky guests (only 2 folks!!)..

If it were linearly related to competition results I probably would have steered my son into anything BUT competitions.

My own experiences with them were very humbling. I won some spots at master classes, but I was clearly outclassed by kids much younger than I was. The lesson that I took from this was that I had not appreciated the connection between effort and results at an earlier enough age. After one particular experience I switched teachers and began working with a top professor at a good university music school (University of Miami). The two years that I spent under her tutelage repaired many of the defects in my technique and taught me to some extent how to teach myself. I brought that experience to my son, but within the confines of an understanding that his personality and mine were not necessarily the same.

Yet when I saw him advance in six weeks more than many kids advance in two years I thought I had something to work with. You go with what your kid shows you and you try to avoid making stupid mistakes with them. He loved to compete. That's just him.

DavidA: I read the book once, I do the homework, and I listen to the lecture, if that's what you mean.

PianoDad:
"Philip, could you tell us a bit more about what is motivating you to seek out the competitive "thrill?""

In context, I am really lazy, and I'm trying to correct that. I actually waited until almost the last day to submit my choice (if that is the right word) piece, because I knew that I would have to work hard to get both done. However, I procrastinated until the last week, and by then, it was too late.

Out of context, I think competition is a good way to listen to others at the same level (as it can give insight about errors you might have), I like competition to a certain extent (I think my extremely competitive brother put some of this into me), and I also want to know how good I am compared to others (this might fit into the second reason, competitiveness again).

PianoDad, thanks for the advice to others on the kind of advice they should give, which I think led to Canonie's post, which is the best advice I've gotten in this thread so far. I was rushed as my friends were waiting on me to play games (I didn't know they'd be so fast, I think they have it opened 24/7), and I think I was venting. Sympathy? Maybe I was looking for some, though I know it's not very useful. What people think of me? Might be useful, but I definitely was not looking for that. Advice? Though I wasn't initially looking for that, I think that is the most useful.

...says the one living in a tax haven.

I agree with this... Music is not a sport. Competitions take away music's true point and meaning, and all you hear nowadays are 8 year old Korean pianists that hate what they do and play with no feeling, yet play the hardest repetoire, because they are convinced by our society nowadays that you have to be better than everyone else. Competitions are very much the reason for this (not to mention that the higher level competitions are often rigged, racist, prejudice, etc.)... How can that be music??

If that's all you hear, then you're not listening. P*D's son - hope he doesn't mind being used as an example - is not Korean (what does that have to do with anything, anyway??), plays musically, and loves the piano. If you listen to competitions, instead of generalizing about them, you will hear some excellent playing from similar players. Like PD said, it's good for some, but not for everyone.

How is it good for anyone? To be able to show-off?

I guess I minus well hijack my own thread!

If some people want music to be a sport, can't it still be meaningful? Of course, I can tell that it will probably indirectly affect you, but how much enjoyment do they get in the absence of yours?

Being rigged does not necessarily mean that it should be destroyed, maybe changed or fixed (wordplay!).

I do competitions. I do them because they're a chance to play, a chance to be heard, a chance to receive criticism, and a great goal to work towards. Not to mention, they can be a great chance to network with other young pianists (my fellow competitors). I've won some, I've lost a lot more, but they've always been productive. Quit being so presumptuous.

Why are you so unable to get beyond your own biases and preconceived notions? Is it that hard actually to listen to what others say and engage in meaningful discussion? So be it. You are entitled to whatever opinions you choose to hold. But I think you will find that you cannot convince anyone who does not already hold exactly your own biases.

Bingo! +1

Says the person who has just as strong an opinion, and has done nothing but shoot down other people's opinions and not admitted wrong to anything? Just because my opinion is different than yours does not mean I am biased and have preconceived notions. I have played in competitions before, and I have my own opinion. You have not convinced anyone anymore than I have, so maybe you can stop being so arrogant and biased before telling me that I can't have my own opinion?

My son recently finished third in a competition. The first two got money prizes and a master class. He got the honorable mention and a pat on the back. Disappointment? Yeah, a little. But he played his piece better than I have ever heard him play it before. He knew it, and I let him know just how proud of him I was. That kind of disappointment disappears in a flash. He got to work with kids who are striving to be the next major artists. Watching them was a pleasure and a learning experience. And you know, I thought he should have finished second. So what. Big deal. It was a great day.

Afterward the head of the piano department at the university came up to him and essentially said that Anthony would have a large music scholarship or a complete free ride waiting at that university if he wanted to attend. He's unlikely to want to do that, but do you know what that sort of complement means to someone .... who finished third.

Sam,

If you think competitions are stupid, just stop doing them.

And that is good reasoning! I think that is a valid point; however, "in my opinion", competitions do more harm than good for the most part. That is just what I think

Why piano competitions are good:

1) Students learn to set goals and meet deadlines.

2) Students get to hear their peers at the highest level of proficiency.

3) Students have the opportunity to share what they've learned.

4) Students get feedback from other musicians, such as judges or other teachers.

If you can't enter competitions with the correct attitude, then don't do competitions. One of my students who got 3rd place last summer told me later, "I've never gotten third in anything." Which means it was a good, humbling experience for her to realize that she can't always get first or second in everything she does. Was her ego destroyed? No. Did she get a beneficial life lesson? Yes. When students can get something out of competitions--other than being placed or receiving a cash prize--then they've approached competitions with the correct attitude.

Sam,

Let me bury the hatchet with you, but please let me also explain why I was a bit peeved. I always recognize people who teach me things. I quoted Adromaque at length because she taught me something about overrated wisdom. I deal respectfully with Keystring, for instance, even though she often disagrees with me, because she is so polite in her disagreements.

Then in response to what I think are measured and responsible posts I get lines like,

"that's revolting" or "it seems to me idiotic," or "Best teachers, maybe, but jerks as well, if it is true that this is their motivation."

or in your case,

"How is it good for anyone? To be able to show-off?"

I don't find these to be arguments. They are emotive assertions that don't deserve a reasoned response. And I think an awful lot of other people -- Phlebas, AZNpiano, BruceD, and CherryCoke, among others, likely agree.

The issue of competitions is incredibly complex. Let us each express our fears about them, our hopes for them, our understanding of them, but do it respectfully.

An attitude adjustment! Really!

I stand by what I said.



I don't care, I'm not trying to convince anyone. I say nothing about the principle of piano competitions, I'm just commenting on what you wrote.

Using sums of money like that several thousands of dollars, to motivate children, I find scandalous.

If any teacher did something like that with my daughter, they'd hear a less polite reaction from me than I have written here.

All of this said with no rancour.

Clever, but I don't see the point.

The fact that you find it scandalous that a group of elderly music lovers collect thousands of dollars to support the musical education of the next generation of American youth says much about your attitudes.

And the fact that you find no role for small incentives is so utopian.

I guess that the attitude adjustment will take care of that.



3 to 5 thousand is small incentives? So small, we abbreviate it to 3-5 k.

Do you have a point?

One competition that I refer to gives out around six thousand dollars among perhaps 15 students. This supports their tuition. Music lessons are expensive. Another competition sponsored by the Lions clubs of Virginia (a group who support sight for people who cannot easily afford expensive vision care) has a four round competition (local, regional, district, and state) that gives a grand prize of about three thousand for the state level winner. The money is to be used for their musical training. At each level (local on up) the individual Lions clubs reward their local youth with exposure and small awards and lots of praise, no matter how well or poorly the individual students actually happen to play that day. I guess Europeans have real problems with all this volunteerism bubbling up from below beneath the radar screen of governments that must protect us from all the bad incentives out there. Give me a break. You know so little about what you are talking about.

Ah, so that's what the "American youth" thing was about.

Why are you so interested in one line zingers, but so uninterested in reaching out to understand why so many of us see some virtue in the process of piano competitions. I don't expect you to change your view and want to rush your child into intense competition. But the fact that all you do is push one-liners at us that distort the points we are making seems disingenuous at best and simply trollish at worst.

Why don't you take AZNpiano's last post and go point by point refuting him and calling his opinions idiotic for good measure.

While this sounds good in theory, it doesn't always work out like this. Usually in a competition, there is either a 1st place or a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place. On top of this, there can be anywhere from 10 to a couple hundred people entered in the competition. This means that while either one or three people can get an ego boost and be rewarded for their hard work, MANY more than 3 people are going to potentially be discouraged and intimidated... And you can't say "well that's what the winners get for their hard work". Music is one of the most talent-based activities on the planet, and sure, hard work is necessary to be good; however, sheer talent will always trump someone that loves what they do but do not have the musical talent for it. Because of this, more often than not, the most talented kids will win, which is very discouraging to the many kids that put in hundreds of hours of work to come away empty handed and ignored. I have participated in a number of competitions, and often the critique from the judges towards the kids that did not do well is very harsh and mean, further discouraging them. If students need feedback about their pieces from an outside source other than their teachers, they probably need a new teacher

xtraheat,

Why do you presume that parents are incapable of helping their children to understand the competition process and to use it to best advantage? Did you read my earlier post about my own son's 'failure' to do well.

He has actually had some truly catastrophic competitions in the past. At one, he completely froze up in one spot in a piece. He failed to get any award and left the stage in tears. That was a real learning moment for him. A parent's love in that situation can help a child understand how that sort of thing happens and how to avoid it in the future. It's the situation that if overcome properly gives a child a sense of confidence that they can overcome adversity. That is an important life lesson.

You may notice that I have said nothing against competitions in general. I have nothing against the Lions Club. It is your earlier post which astounded me, and still does.

I have no problem with what AZNpiano wrote.

As for "simply trollish", I have only expressed my thoughts. If that for you is being a troll, too bad.

Enough said.

Why do you presume that parents have any idea what happens/cares in competitions? You are a pianist yourself, so you are more knowledgeable about the subject and you can help your son out. Most parents would not know enough about this or care enough about this to do that. Also, younger children are very emotional, and it often wouldn't matter what their parents would tell them.

This "competition thing" is most certainly a question that has no one right answer - there are too many right answers that all conflict with each other to some degree. The argument is unwinnable by any side, because at its root it's about holding one important value higher than another - much the same mechanism as in other divisive and unresolvable arguments that go on in society at large. In addition, nearly everyone is of the firm belief that they have already won the argument, because it's clear to them that the value they hold higher is the correct one. I am no different in this regard.

I'm going to add something from another angle. I refuse to judge even little local competitions, because I think the presence of a judge implies that fine distinctions between performances can be reliably discerned and quantified, and I don't wish to support that implication. I guess it's a futile stance, because someone else will always be available to do the judging - just the way I think about it.

Perhaps this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't think the fact that I play the piano is very relevant. A parent's love and understanding of their child, and of his or her emotions and desires, that is not driven by the parent's musical experiences. Perhaps it can help in the training the child receives, but the emotional support a parent can offer can be quite independent of that training. Many a young talent has parents who cannot play the instrument.

david_a,

I think you are right. This is an unwinnable argument. But I think a number of us have not been trying to win it. We have been trying to resist claims that competition is somehow awful, harmful, crassly motivated and even idiotic. I respect your refusal to judge and I understand your issues with attempting to quantify something as difficult as musical efforts. Competition is not for everyone. Those of us who have allowed our children to participate in these endeavors have had long discussions with them about what can be gained by hard effort, what can be expected of such subjective things, and how to handle both joy and disappointment. Life is a complex mix of things. Best not to make a black and white of it.

There are in my experience very few teenage pianists who would continue in competitions without continued parental support.

There are in my experience very few teenage pianists who would continue in competitions without continued parental coercion.

Both equally valid and correct. Positive and negative views of the same thing.

It seems you are astounded that prizes are offered, that master classes can be earned, and that teachers of good students seek out these opportunities for them. I'm astounded that you think these incentives are odd or immoral.

I have patiently tried to explain how many organizations of music lovers try to spread a little community wealth around in order to help the music education of children in their communities. We're not talking just Juilliard bait kind of students. My son certainly isn't. He has no expectation of winning when he enters. These community groups offer small stipends to decent kids who work hard. Some of these events are sponsored by local universities to advertise their programs to area music students. This isn't such a heinous crime.

Are you also opposed to scholarships for students who achieve academic excellence, or scholarships for student athletes, or students who achieve a high level of community service? Many deserving applicants will not receive these scholarships, and a select few will. and unfortunately not everyone who deserves will receive a reward. Doesn't mean we should do away with scholarship and "prizes" in general.

Read my post again. I didn't say it was good for anyone. It's good for some people, but not for all.
For some people it's an opportunity to work hard, play for a jury, meet other pianists, get feedback, etc.
I'm not sure what you mean by "to be able to show off," and how that relates to competitions vs. other types of performances. If you're predisposed to "show off," you'll do that anyway - regardless of whether the venue is a competition or the yearly studio recital.

Not clever at all. Fairly obvious.
You begrudge the fact that some organizations freely donate money to better music education of kids by providing a few hundred or a few thousand dollars in prize money. At the same time, you live in an extremely capitalist economy where every dime that pays for the education of kids comes directly from tourists and tax cheats. More power to you. Go for it. But don't get all high and mighty about how other people do things.

But it is precisely all those things, when viewed through my values. Not through yours, and of course that's how values go. But you're still trying to win an argument right now, even if you disingenuously claim not to be.

Me, l'Andorrano, begrudge money for music education? You've got to be kidding.

In the post Piano*Dad said nothing about music education. He wrote about money, money in the bank for his son.

As for Andorra, maybe you are right, every dime for education comes from tax cheats and tourists. In the United States, every dime for education is taken away and given to tax cheats.

Patiently? Really!

As for master classes. At thirteen, or fifteen, to say to two kids, both of whom have worked hard, both of whom want to learn: you can come in, you can't, yes I find that idiotic. Brutal. I suppose that it is the same here, in my Pyrenneen country, but that is equally idiotic. You speak of decent kids who wark hard, but surely many of those excluded are decent and work hard. I am surprised you so energetically support this unfair treatment. I am surprised that you sweep away what xtraheat has to say, even after "burying the hatchet".

I suppose you find it brutal that one country wins the world cup and another loses. Oh well.

In any case Andorra's chances are always rather low.

Yes indeed, I did mention money in my son's pocket. That was partly in jest, but you don't seem to have much of a sense of humor. And in any case, there is nothing wrong with a child getting a few bucks to spend after working hundreds of hours to perfect his craft. Why do so many people view a couple of dollars as such a corruption of the human spirit? Give me a break.

David_a,

Why must you use terms like 'disingenuous' when you refer to my arguments? Pardon me for taking some exception to your turning back my open and friendly agreement with some of your points by insulting me.

Do you not see that when someone terms another's views 'idiotic' that this disrespect brooks no compromise or meeting of the minds. This I find objectionable. Why do you presume that my attempt to explain why I think my view's aren't idiotic marks me as trying to win in a 'beat you down' kind of sense?

On another issue that I chose to ignore at the time, you claim that it's just a semantic difference between parents who 'support' and parents who 'coerce.' Sorry, I don't buy it. I don't think this is a brilliant and obvious turn of phrase that ends the discussion.

You present the claim as though it fully accounts for all the alternatives. It doesn't. Parents and children can be partners in life.' Sometimes a child needs to be pushed. You may term this 'coercion.' But I'll warrant that any parent who has had a child understands that sometimes a work ethic has to be developed. It's not always innate in all situations. Sometimes a parent needs to console when disappointment is the child's dominant emotion. This is support. A good parent can go from one to the other without undergoing a personality transplant from meanness to gentleness.

In the end, the fact that there is a parent behind a successful child is not a condemnation of the parent or of the relationship. There is nothing necessarily superior about a child who pulls themselves up by their proverbial bootstraps in comparison with one who is nurtured by a long and loving relationship with a parent.

A 12 or 15 year-old student being kept out of a master class is compared with losing the world cup.

Give me a break.

Piano*Dad, we ought to agree to disagree, so to speak, and leave things there, don't you think? I give you the opportunity to get the last word in, if you like.

You provided a link to a description of two festivals, so you wanted members to notice something. That is why I asked:

You were trying to make a point and I didn't catch that point through the link.

The rest of the fluff I put in is simply what we saw as the purpose of lessons. Therefore any activity was chosen according to those priorities. It was to get the ball rolling. If you have different purposes, then that is fine. I was wondering whether the competitions helped toward those purposes. Or no - what the links told.

But generally speaking, since you linked to a description of two competitions in order for us to see something, what is it that you wanted to be noticed.

I have not expressed sentiments for or against. It is a question.

Landorrano,

Time is scarce. A master class can only be offered to one or two students. Some decision rule must be followed.

That doesn't make any sense, since we both know that money is spent on education in the US. Actually, the GDP per capita is about the same for Andorra and the US, but the US spends more than twice as much for education as a percent of GDP than Andorra spends, so your statement fall flat.
I'm glad you agree with my characterization of Andorra, though.
Since this is way off topic, I'm going to let you have whatever last word you want.

WHAT AN AWESOME THREAD!!!!!!

Wow, you sure know a lot, can't get anything by you.

As far as last words go, I'd just like to say that you have overlooked (or maybe it's the wikipedia entry that has overlooked) another economic activity of Andorrans: tobacco smuggling.

Also, all of this sort of spirited economic initiative, contraband, money laundering, ripping off tourists, well, it's true that in the international community it doesn't look good. So we are trying to diversify into more acceptable lines, like financial derivatives. Anybody want to buy some, at the insiders price? Just have a look at my website.

Keystring,

The two links that I put up just happened to be the first two that I thought of because my son has participated in each. The PianoFest at VCU is conducted by the music department there. It's a nice way to have a bunch of area young people play for each other, watch a master class, hear the faculty play for them, see some of the current music students play. It's a day long music festival. In previous years they have divided the students into groups based on interests, i.e. some have done an improv session with a jazz instructor. All of this is, of course, advertising for their program. But you can do good and do well at the same time. I have no problem with VCU advertising their wares while providing a fun musical experience for lots of kids.

The second one is the Williamsburg Music Club Auditions. This is the one sponsored by our area music club. They allow up to 40 young people from elementary age to high school age to audition before a panel of judges and an audience made up of very appreciative and supportive music club members. Each child is warmly greeted and warmly treated. They tend to give out many levels of awards. A quick perusal of the winners will show you that they give lots of awards as well, ranging from $100 to $1000. And they break the group into junior and senior levels so the eleven year olds aren't going up against the sixteen year olds.

Indeed, not everyone gets an award. If you are an absolute egalitarian you will take umbrage. OK, so be it. I'm not. I have no problem with better performers getting better results. My son has 'failed' at this audition in the past, and he has done wonderfully (like taking a first level award last year). Alpha and Omega, he has experienced both scenarios. Life is rich with that.

Your argument is of the "boo-hoo there are winners and losers" type. That's life, man. If a teenager can't handle being passed over for a prize or a masterclass, that teenager has some serious growing up to do. I'm not just talking piano here, I'm talking about life in general. This article comes to mind: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117702894815776259.html

Music competitions make sense in exactly the same way as sex competitions. What's actually good and actually important about both music and sex, can't be judged. So the judges (who in each case should be ashamed of themselves for pretending to truly be able to judge) are reduced to cataloging measurable but ultimately secondary things such as attractiveness of the participants, speed, smooth action, and loudness.

I guess we will agree to disagree, and I will try to avoid using language like telling people they should be ashamed of themselves ... unless provoked by people who call me an idiot.

Sex competitions??? To me that says a lot about where you find your entertainment. I'll stick with piano competitions when I want to watch competitions, thank you very much!

What exactly is a sex competition? lol!

< insert comment >

Well you do have to admit this thread sucks....in every sense of the word.

EVERY sense?

Judging by the recent turn of conversation, yes.

Of course the crazy example of sex competitions is a sick joke and they don't really exist. (At least I sincerely hope not.) But the validity of the judging in those imaginary situations is precisely equal to that actually found in music competitions. Not because the judges are arrogant or bad - on the contrary, they are often some of the best musicians alive, placed in a ridiculous situation and having few alternatives. Only the relatively-inconsequential surface details of a musical performance are quantifiable for a judge. Students are thereby led to miss the point of performing, and persuaded instead to dedicate all their time to perfecting the surface details of their performances.

Judging from the kind of ecstatic mugging one sees—more suitable for the bedroom than the piano bench—in certain performers, it's become possible to mistake a piano competition for a sex competition.

Steven

Ok, let's run with this analogy of sex competitions: Are some people not better at sex than others? Sure, one partner might be of particular appeal to one "judge" more than another, but in the end, there are undoubtedly some people who will be better at it than others. Sure, it doesn't really "matter" to most of us, since most of us aren't trying to make a career out of sex; the same way competition is unnecessary for a pianist who only wishes to play for family and friends in the comfort of their own home.

I'm being silly, but I really have a point: it's not an "imaginary situation" as you describe it, for those of us who aspire to be professional musicians. If someday you want a career, it's important to be able to play, under pressure, in front of a critical audience. And you WILL be compared to others in your field, like it or not, officially or unofficially. This is not unique to the music industry, either. This plumber's work will be compared to that plumber's work, and if Plumber A doesn't measure up to Plumber B, Plumber A will not get the work. Who makes the best burger in town? Which neuro-surgeon is at the top of his her or her field? Competition is not a bad thing, my friends.

And lets also realize something else. We're not all talking about Van Cliburn level competitions here in which everybody is a spectacular talent. Most reasonable judges can tell the difference between a teen who has followed the score of his or her Beethoven sonata with good attention to nuance and detail and someone who has not, or between someone who has significant memory slips and someone who has it down well.

I wouldn't agree with most of the above. Since piano playing is an art, the judges don't always agree. For similar reasons most things about playing piano aren't precisely "quantifiable" like the 100 meter dash.

But I don't think many people would have difficulty deciding who was better between me and Yundi Li. I think judging a piano competition is similar except the differnces between the contestants is more subtle and less than me and Yundi.

Hopefully the judges have great musical experience ability, taste, and knowledge. (If they don't or are are motivated by non musical motives that's a different problem.)

To summarize, I think judging a piano performance is both subjective and objective.

It isn't a question of whether a youngster can handle it or not. Your "boo-hoo" thing misses the point, man.

Then what is the question?

And the top 3 get to participate in a master class and get 3 to 5 k for their, ahem, education. (Of couse, some youngsters will sagely put this money in the bank.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117702894815776259.html

Well, that is an interesting link. Perhaps someone needs to create the "you are special red piano" to match the "you are special red dinner plate" they mention in the article.
It would be fun to have someone throw confetti when I finally get some of my pieces right. Hope it doesn't affect the piano action.

This discussion gives new meaning to the term sextet.

I guess something has to lighten things up ....

landorrano,

There are always cuts, where winners get prizes and others get nothing in the real world. Either competitions, auditions, entrance exams..ect. Wait, actually losers get something precious, too IF you have positive attitudes.

Kids are more resilient than parents think. They should be, right? Do you realize that no one wins all the time? I recommend you watch Jon Nakamatsu's "welcome to losers club" speech on Youtube. It's such a great lecture for everyone.


David a,

It seems that you made a wise choice that you don't judge competitions since you don't know what to look for! In competitions, aren't judges supposed to check basics like tempo, phrasing, dynamic, balance between two hands, note accuracy, pedaling etc (besides artistic parts)?

What do you do if your students want to do competitions? Do you send them to another teacher? What if your child wants to do it? Do you discourage them just because YOU don't like it?