Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Lang Lang--Hurrah!

I suppose I'm too late to throw in a Lang Lang grenade just for the heck of it?

OMG- I used to encourage my studnets to watch that because I thought it meant Math TV.

What other definition of success for a concert pianist other than money and fame?
Their two main goals to be a succesful concert pianist is to make money and to be famous from playing piano. I do not think their goal is just to play piano beautifully. If it were the case, they would have chosen other career while playing piano for fun.

That's the thing for me, though. I have listened to his playing (without watching him) while following score, and many times he was not faithful to the score. I think this, coupled with his progressive marketing techniques and style bothers many classical music conservatives/traditionalists.

I mean, he has remarkable technique... he has the ability to literally do whatever he wants. It's just I don't feel that he stays with the instructions of the score and stylistically correct.

Would you have enjoyed listening to his playing more if you were not following the score?

A few reasons besides money and fame: love of music, desire to express oneself, the feeling that this is the only thing they could possibly want to do with their life.

I'm sure the professional pianists at PW could give a better explanation. I think most pianists who want to become professionals realize that their chances of making as much money as they might in a different field are very small but choose a career in piano anyway.

I have talked to many concert pianists, fame is definitely one of their main goals. By being famous, they can have more opportunities to show their love of music. Otherwise, they will just end up playing in front of small number of audiences. In addition, if they have had enough money, they can pick and choose the program that they are interested in performing, they do not need to be dictated by others.

I understnad sodaking reasoning. But I doubt that he will enjoy any playing that stray from what prescribed in an Urtext score. I think the beauty of any performance for OSK is the ability of the pianist to stick to the score. It is not a bad thing at all, and it is very difficult to do. Some people are more lose in this criterion so that following the score is not the main criterion to enjoy the music....Personal taste, I guess.

How could what you claim as one of their main goals be reconciled with the fact that they know that only a small percentage can achieve a major solo career?

He brings in the dough, he is flashy, like a neon sign. In the end, there are just many many more pianists I would rather see. All of them have amazing technical abilities. That is what it comes down to, for me at least, that there are just too many other pianists whose work speaks to me on a personal level. Sometimes it is just difficult to tell what Lang Lang is doing.

For most composers, not following the score is more faithful to the composer's intention than following the score.

You are never too late because the LL war will never be over...

Hey! That's my line. Wait, sorry, I stole it from Brendan.

There are tons of concert pianists with varying levels, from world class to state level. Of course, not all of them have major solo career, but all of them have followed the same direction at the beginning of their career. They want to be noted (a well known pianist), just not all of them are successful to be noted. Their intent, however, is the same which is fame, and money will follow. I do not understand why it is so hard for you to see this, it is such an obvious thing.

I happen to agree with much of your theory, although we got our music on RECORDS, not CDs! But we spent hours listening to records, often the same ones over and over because there was no easy or cheap access to music. (Compared to today with YouTube and the internet.) We focused on the music and our ears became trained as we listened carefully to the different instruments, harmonic lines, etc. Of course, some of us listened to a lot of garbage, and most of us were partially distracted by the album cover art, and some of us (not me!) were stoned at the time.

Laura, still listening to my old LPs, on old stereo equipment, salvaged from the dump and repaired by my amazing husband.

Your statement assumes you're correct. I would say the opposite of what ou said is "obvious. Saying someone wants to be able to make a living from music is reasonable, but that is not" the same as saying someone chooses a career as a pianist, or any profession, for money and fame.

I'm thinking if you handed top musical critics and top pianists a CD containing performances by the best concert pianists and included Lang Lang performing at his best many would, upon hearing Lang Lang, say: Wow, whose that player?

No names on the CD just all great players so the listeners can pick the best PLAYER and NOT the "best NAME."

I really believe there is some elitist, follow the herd kind of psychology when it comes to "whose the better pianists." Same for players of other instruments too.

Shouldn't it be: Forget the looks or expressions or how many contests they've won or even what the critics say. Whose playing excites me the most? Isn't that just about all that matters? Whose playing COMMUNICATES the most to me? Expressiveness.

Bech

My 2 cents, if I may...

1) No question, LL has good technique. You can't really play the works he does without good technique. But music is not about technique. Technique is merely a tool to enable you to get to where you want to go.

2) Steinway offering a LL piano. Well, duh. Have you noticed how big the market is in China? Put that together with the godly status LL has there...what do you get? $

3) LL cops so much abuse because he popularises classical music. It appeals to the greater audience...the common person, which, in a way is great for classical music. But it's also like britney spears to a tiny extent. Heaps of people like britney. But most of us with some musical understanding would say that she couldn't sing if her life depended on it. And I do sincerely believe that if you extensively listened to all the great masters, and played some of the pieces yourself, you'd understand why the number of LL haters (read: understand the number of LL haters, not necessarily be one). I'm gonna brutally generalise and over simplify here, but LL articulates the notes for the sake of articulating them. People who don't seem to know the piece hear it and thinks he's awesome. But if you listened more carefully to someone like...oh...glenn gould playing bach....well taht's another level of articulation that goes far beyond the surface. Even experienced pianists may not immediately notice the purpose of every subtle phrase he uses, and certainly to the common man it would be much too subtle for them to notice even after multiple listens of the same track. Classical music is all about subtlety - it's not rock and roll. LL turns classical into rock and roll...sort of bastardising the beauty of what classical music is about. When you hear something played fast and clearly, certainly it's impressive. But you'd soon realise that purely being impressive on a technical scale is not music. Music is more than that, in fact, you could make a hundred mistakes and still get the message across (horowitz).

Which brings me to:
4) His outrageous expressions while playing. When you go on stage, you are performing. Everything you do, every subtle detail is PART of the performance. And in my opinion, ANYTHING that spoils the enjoyment of the performance is something that can be done better. Why do pianists bother to wear nice clothes when performing? Why not wear track suit pants and runners? that would certainly be more comfortable. Everything you do, whether it's visual or acoustic, is part of the performance. If you go to a rock concert, you expect flashy lights and loud sound. You're not there just "for the music".

I fear I may have just started a following of haters for saying the above...

@Bech So now its: 1. You either think Lang Lang is great, or 2. you are some person who doesn't listen well....? How about listening to him, and still not think he is good (or world class, might be a better word)? I listened to him enough, I have been to a performance of him, and I don't like his playing. Sue me