Well that explains why I can't get any video stream.

PLUS

Poland is 6 hours ahead of the US not 8. So 2 pm your time is 8 pm theirs. 8 pm is 20:00 in military time

Thank you. I'll get this straight eventually.

If my math is correct then the performances started at around 2am eastern standard time. Which means tomorrow they'll start while I'm asleep.

I keep forgetting how many hours of time difference there is between places, so usually just go the easy route, which is to google "time" + "city name". As in "time Warsaw", which will tell you the local time in Warsaw. From that, it's easy to figure out how many hours difference there is between that place and where I am sitting.

For those having to calculate time differences, maybe I will be of little help. Today's auditions will start in a minute, it's 9:45 here.

It's now 4:49 on USA east coast, and I am watching Hélène Tysman playing Chopin Nocturne.

Only in preliminary and the hall is almost full.

Hey, I know that announcer!!!

Really?

// Anna Fedorova is now blowing my socks off - she's really beating the hell out of the piano in 25/10 etude

Anna Fedorova seems to play very well everything from Nocturne to Etudes and now Ballade. Oops! some wrong notes there.

That's an awesome performance!

Hey Mati, did I hear the interviewer spoke to Anna in Polish and she replied in English?

I missed that part, I went to the kitchen straight afterwards It's quite possible though.

Her performance was really, really solid - those wrong notes didn't take from it for me.

I'd give that performance a vote for advancing into semi.

Me to. By the way, have you noticed there will be 4 rounds this year?

Side note: I am quite surprised that, considering the size of our forum, there is very little discussion on the subject.

I wasn't too impressed with Leonora Armellini's performance. There wasn't enough energy.

I liked her 10/4 C# minor etude, even though the studio commentary was not very fond of it. Overall she was just relatively good, but nothing special.

Mati
What do they discuss after the performances?? do they comment specifically on the contestants' playing?

They are really going at it right now

CLaire Huangci starting

Claire Huangci starts with 10/2.

I think she was very good, but not amazing. There is something about the interpretation that didn't quite move me.


I wish I can understand what the commentators say about the 10/5.

I felt the same way about Huangci. I am not listening with very good speakers but I also did not like her sound esp. in the ballade. Very little singing.. the piano , imo , did not sound terrific for her (yamaha)

For the most part - yes, but they try not to get too technical in their comments so the broader audience can understand their points. They often try to explain what they liked or disliked in the very descriptive way.

Things often mentioned are left/right hand balance, legato playing, dynamic contrast, quality of sound (often commented alongside the choice of a particular piano for the performance), control, the amount of emotion (and sometimes overexpressing it) shown.

Sometimes they play back again the same piece played by two pianists to comment and contrast the interpretations and talk about strong points of each.

Unfortunately just before Claire I had a guest and I didn't listen much, but I catched up while they commented on Fei-Fei Dong. She was compared to a lovely little bird singing beautifully with joy and charm.

Right now, Claire has just finished.

To give you a glimpse, some comments from the studio after the performances I am listening to right now:

Claire: quite cold, they didn't like the lyrical parts, saying they were too metronomic. They wondered whether Chopin is her favourite composer and wished they could hear her in Bartok or Prokofiev. For them the etudes were the best, being technically well executed, but lacked emotional depth and musicality a bit.

Then they commented on 10/5 etude by Katada and Huangci commenting on the use of rubato, exposing the left hand theme and charm found in Katada's performance not found in Huangci's playing.

After that they commented on Fantasie in F minor by Katada, that she didn't quite feel the phrases and the theme movement which exposed the steady "mechanical" rhythm of left hand chords not well balanced with right hand melody that should grasp the heart diverting the mind from this rhytmical monotony. After all they complimented on her playing saying that she had many interesting ideas in this piece and that she has great potential.

After all they loved Fei-Fei Dong audition the most, pointing out the textual error in the Scherzo saying it was surely due to great emotion put into this piece. They clearly said it couldn't have been a pure technical error. "Technical perfection is not the goal, it's just a path to attain a goal", mentioning that the emotions evoked in the listener are the most important thing in music making, even when some slips can happen and wondering how the jury will think of this particular mistake.

Mati
You are very sweet. Thanks very much for taking the time to write all that down. Very interesting.
I had a feeling that they comment a bit more liberally and specifically than we are accustomed to here. Are the discussants pianists or other musicians? well-known in Poland?
I think the organization is doing a great job so far.

For the most part they are piano teachers from our conservatoires, but I can't say I know them well. I believe at least some of them have some kind of concert career, but not big enough to be heard of by a guy like me.

The hosts (sitting at the left side of the table) are tv or radio journalists specialized in music.


M.

So far, it seems that we all draw the same conclusion about each contestants as the commentators do.

Is there a post made for the 2005 international chopin competition like this?

Da Sol Kim is playing some fierce etudes right now - the first audition in the afternoon session.

That was one of the best Chopin Ballade No 4 performances I've ever heard.

I enjoyed it a lot too. He showed great passion, dynamic contrast and easy to follow direction in his very coherent interpretation. That's why I'm even more curious what the commentators meant saying he had great technical ability and the performace was top notch, but they found several pianistic flaws in his interpretation. They are going to discuss it during the break, I will try to do a short transcript and post it here.

This scherzo no 4 is a really weird piece.