Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner America's Got Talent--Black Key Etude

Anyone who thinks M.A.H has anything on Horowitz in terms of technique has MUCH to learn about technique and sound production at the piano.

Hamelin is not a particularly clean player. I've seen him live three times now. Anyway, cleanliness in playing has little to do with technique-much more to do with being cautious vs. taking risks.

Piano technique is much more to do with control of textures, balance, and quality of sound. In these areas, Hamelin is quite unremarkable. Horowitz was quite a legend.

As I have said before on this forum-most of Hamelin's fans are teenagers madly in love with Alkan.

I don't even know why I'm posting this-Hamelin and Horowitz do not belong in the same post!

richter started pretty late.

If you think the only ones who are able to play virtuosic works are Horowitz and child prodigies-turned-professional-pianists, you're wrong. There are amateurs who can play just as well, at a lower standard due to lack of practice time, less talent, etc, but they CAN do it. If only Horowitz can play Rach 3, then how come there are many students, amateurs who can also play it as well? Granted it's not at the same level, but you know what I mean. Pogorelich is learning the Liszt sonata, and plays Rach 2 and his second sonata, as well as stuff like the Chopin concerto no. 2 and will probably deny that she was a prodigy. She's just one example (sorry if you didn't wanted to be used!! ><), but if you look around Pianoworld, there are many many many more pianists, who were not child prodigies, but have the chops to play some of the most difficult pieces out there.

Seriously, if you only hear of professors who can't play well, and your idea of a prodigy is a 16 year old playing a chopin etude, and all of your ideas about virtuosity come from Horowitz as well as reading others opinions...doesn't that make it painfully obvious that you don't know enough about "virtuosic technique" or how common it is to even comment on it?

His grandad was a piano maker, dad an organist, composer and teacher. He started at 8 - just inside the wire.

What do his relatives have to do with it? The point is he started later than 6, so Schoenberg was obviously not right about every single person.

Ps the dad was also a pianist

J.A.P. Alkan is more than fast notes. My favorite Alkan works are works Hamelin hasn't recorded yet... And even so, he does works like "Super Flumina Babylonis" and the Op. 65 Chants very beautifully.

Obviously! Go stand in the corner Mr Schonberg! (there's no e after the o)

You should have capitalized the "T" in "there's."

Either way, Richter was AWESOME. How about Harold Bauer? Did he not start playing piano until later? How much did being a violinist affect his ability to grow as a pianist?

Without a period it's not a sentence - so no! Harry may have switched but when did he start piano?

Stores, I had assumed that one should gain his or her musical education/knowledge from those who are successful professionals in the field. After all, one must learn from someone. That is why I have taken to heart the opinions of teachers who had graduated from prestigious conservatories and renowned authors such as Dubal and Schonberg. How would you suggest making musical judgments? Should you only base them on your own personal experience and never on appeals to authority? In some cases, I may not have sufficient experience to judge certain issues solely from my own perspective (e.g. I have never done a study of how young you have to start in order to be a virtuoso.); thus I was hoping that by reading and listening to noted experts in the music field, I can increase my knowledge.

Kuanpiano, Horowitz isn't the only virtuoso that I have listened to. I have listened many renowned pianists, including but not limited to Rubinstein, Hofmann, Rachmaninov, Lhévinne, Argerich, Pollini, Cliburn, Richter, Gilels, Ashkenazy, Berman, Serkin, Arrau, Bolet, Volodos, et al. I know that only a select few pianists could possibly compete with the level of technical precision that Horowitz offered.

Just as a matter of interest, a large number of sources state that Liszt began taking piano lessons from his father when he was seven years old (others I can find mostly say six).

For example, Wiki: "At age six, Franz Liszt began listening attentively to his father's piano playing as well as to show an interest in both sacred and Romani music. Adam began teaching him the piano at age seven, and Franz Liszt began composing in an elementary manner when he was eight."

Things I have learned from this thread.

1. No matter how good you are, you still suck.

2. I had no interest in Julliard and therefore screwed for life.

3. 16 year old know everything, and us old 23 year old should just get out of the way as the old generations should.

4. This thread was much more entertaining last night when I got to enjoy a few shots of Vodka.

I do take offense to the university students not as good as conservatory students. I know as a university student there are a few advantages I have. For one, my debt is not going to be as large, and in some cases I feel the education available to me is good. I get a lot of time and attention from 3 different piano profs out here. My main teacher, one for accompanying, and a retired prof who I take Keyboard literature. I feel myself growing faster here then I ever did when I was at the Chicago College of the Performing Arts, which was also a fine school, and a conservatory.

When I was there, i was a later starter, and got lost in the fray pretty fast in favor of younger pianists. Did that mean I was less of a pianist...in the end no, after getting some great teaching away from there, I feel like I could compete with the other conservatory students.

My point is that one shouldn't base one's knowledge on any one opinion/thought/idea alone. Do the homework and form YOUR own opinion based on as much hard FACT as you can find. You're on the right track by listening (which is a sadly forgotten art) and reading and asking questions. There is no definitive answer about such things as "the best", etc., because it boils down to opinion. There is no definitive answer on how young a person must be to begin in order to become a virtuoso, because there are far too many varying factors to consider and also because of individuality/personality.
It's much like when a student brings a work to me and plays with a certain articulation, phrasing, etc. I ask them why they're doing certain things. "Because I heard Horowitz play it that way", is not an acceptable answer. Give me a reason for the choices you've made and be able to back those choices up with more than "so and so plays it that way."

Regina - Stores has hit the nail on the head here. I do hope you'll take his comments to heart.

Yes, I do think that stores is right. For the record, I do try to read/obtain many different views and then decide what makes the most sense to me. Of course, if my personal observation/judgment contradicts what someone says, then that is not necessarily cause to mistrust my own perceptions.

Lol at semifinals, such a shame on Judges ignorance towards talent, dedication and hard work!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_2z3JveTec

Bui actually played Bumble Boogie better than the Black Key Etude...but then BB is not as difficult as the Etude. Seems like this thread has come full circle.

I liked that video for what it's worth. I mean, I prefer listening to classical music, but for an audience, and a show like this, this seems more like what should be played.

By the way, he does the boogie pattern the same way Trans-Siberian Orchestra does their "A Last Illusion" (starts with Mozart Sonata K. 545 but goes into bumblebee after that). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_Qc5YYp4Cg

Although Sharon is definitely incorrect about Flight of the Bumblebee it being the most difficult piece, lol!

The trans-siberian orchestra I like . Though most of their Beethoven cd was kind of whack, I really liked their christmas cd's.