I just finished the new book about Pressler(written by one of his students)and about his teaching. I only heard him perform once. It was his Carnegie Hall debut in around 1996, but I can't remember much although he may have played the Chopin Preludes.

I am curious about other peoples' impressions of him as a pianist(live or recordings), chamber music player, and teacher(master classes or private). I think he comes off as a little bit nasty in the book although the former pupil who wrote it obviously adored him.

Thanks.

I still remember some of his particularly nasty quips during master classes as a kid.

I did my undergrad at IU, where he still teaches. I was never his student, but what I know of him is a great pianist with many incredible students (across several generations) who speak of him very fondly. The few times I've spoken with him, he's been friendly and conversational. He's a very eloquent speaker.

His reach is very far--3 out of the past 4 teachers I've had were at some point in their lives students of Pressler.

I understand that he is indeed quite tough; but that his attacks are never personal, and the rewards for having a thick skin under him are worth it.

I have some of the older Beaux Arts Trio recordings (Schubert and Haydn) and like them very much. Better than some of the newer trios touring these days (Ahn and Eroica), but perhaps not quite as sublime as Istomin-Stern-Rose (whose recordings are some of the favorites in my collection.)

I had the great good fortune to tune the pianos (and attend the recording sessions) for many of the Beaux Arts Trio recordings in the '70s. Menahem Pressler is an exceptionally gifted musician and probably one of the most seriously under-rated pianists of his generation. As to his personality...I never observed any nastiness on his part. He was always the consumate professional. Maybe he showed a different side of himself to his pupils, that could well be. But, I'm sure if he was ever nasty to anyone, they truly deserved it.

Well, maybe you can take some comfort in knowing that according to the book, Pressler was toughest with the pupils he thought were most talented and far less tough(nasty)with those he thought were not talented.

Still, I'm not sure what people on this thread or those quoted in the book mean when they say to not take things personally. It seems possible for a teacher to say the same thing about the music a student plays in a non nasty way and with as much directness as in a possibly hurtful way.

I once coached a talented high school student in tennis. I met him quite a few years after he graduated. By this time he was good looking, successful lawyer and eventually on the board of trustees of the school where I taught. He was very friendly but he did memtion some incident(that I didn't even remember)where I had been critical of him and apparently hurt his feelings.
Teachers are sometimes more powerful than they may realize.

He sure got lousy reviews the last time he played here; but then, our critics don't like anybody...

My , do I get tired of hearing that one.. So a talented student is or should be immune to nastiness, as opposed to a less talented person? This (? myth) is repeated across many fields other than music too. Does anyone really think it is true?

I certainly don't think it's true. I was just passing along what the book says and about which the book makes no judgement. The author of the book, William Brown, is so in awe of Pressler that he is never critical of anything Prelssler does.

From what I observed, Pressler just seemed to randomly pick one person every day to really put the screws to, sometimes it was a very talented student, other times not.

I think it says something rather bad about the field of music teaching that "tough" and "nasty" are considered synonymous and "nasty" is described as "deserved."

It has, in my opinion, created an atmosphere where the ones who "make it" are often the ones who have the thickest skin (or the most blind arrogance.) It's not that nice guys finish last, it's that the nice guys (and gals!) often choose not to deal with the b******t and stay out of the limelight.

(Sorry for the implied profanity, but it's the only word that perfectly captures what I want to say!)

This is why some of the best teachers and performers I know work at smaller schools and concertize less frequently, and explains why some of the most mediocre musicians seem to have very successful careers.

Oh, and all this goes triple for conductors. They're the WORST. Having worked with a dozen or so, there's only one who I actually thought was a good person and a good musician. (And oddly enough, he gets criticized for being too nice, probably because most orchestral musicians equate mean with good.)

There was a study done where they took the same wine and put different labels and price tags on it. People enjoyed the more expensive label more, even though it was the same wine.

I think many musicians have been similarly brainwashed. They've come to believe that mean = demanding and tough. I've actually had students quit because I was "too nice." Most of them ended up with the "tougher" teacher in town, only to quit a year later because they weren't learning as much. (Which, of course, they ascribed to the fact that they couldn't live up to her demands, even though their progress with me was fine.)

This is tangential to Pressler. I've never seen him perform or teach.

I've seen a couple masterclasses with him, and you're lucky if he's in a good mood. I remember he said to my friend once "No that's ugly, how can you phrase it like that?" Great musician, though. I like him as a chamber player.

Too bad your friend couldn't say "like your face?" or "like your personality?" or "I like to follow the score".

Where were he master classes?

This thread brings many things to mind.

First, with regard to criticism (or nastiness, if that's the form the criticism is perceived as taking): One of the three greatest teachers (not piano) I've ever had said, at the beginning of the course, "Please try to remember, that when I criticize your work, that doesn't mean I'm criticizing YOU."

Pressler as a teacher: I saw a few master classes he gave at Ravinia, I think in the 80s. He was a very effective teacher, superbly communicative on a musical level. He was generous enough to point out, once, "What I tell you here you would eventually discover on your own. I can just save you time." This is not the position of someone who say, "I'm the master musician, and better than you," rather one who looks at the student as a fellow searcher for musical mastery. I've certainly seen teachers on the stage who were nowhere near so considerate.

Also, he was obviously familiar with pieces in the piano canon that one would not have expected him to know. He gave a marvelously revealing lesson on Scarbo, and showed during the course of that, that he definitely could play it*.

I've heard him half a dozen times in recital with the Beaux Arts Trio, and they were very musical performances, with the piano blending in perfectly with the strings. I noticed during one performance that he spent more time with the una corda pedal depressed than not.

I heard him only once as a solo pianist, when he played the Chopin Op. 24 preludes. I don't remember much of that event.

*Reminds me of Clifford Curzon's comment that Schnabel could give as good a lesson on the Liszt B minor sonata as anyone.

Toronto music festival last year. Really interesting year....

It's all about how the criticism is expressed. It can be nasty or not and say/accomplish the same thing.

I don't see the point of saying "when I criticize your work, that doesn't mean I'm criticizing YOU". What does that mean? The teacher isn't criticizing the personal qualities of the performer? You can't play the piano but you're a nice person?

When I read stories of Pressler indicating in a master class that a performance of a trio made him want to throw up, I find that inappropriate for any reason.

I've seen master classes where the teacher mentioned tons of things that were wrong with a perfomance but did it in a way that was not nasty.

I don't have much respect for people who give "Naster" classes.

I thought the greatest trio of that era was the Suk Trio.

One of the outstanding concerts I heard this year was the Tilden Trio. Watch for them.

Pressler is an extraordinary pianist and chamber musician. I heard him with the Beaux Trio in Tanglewood during the years I attended Merrywood music camp in Lenox.
His tone is beautiful, and he has an immense dynamic range. This is an artist who cultivates a bel canto approach to music making. More music lovers should be made aware of his very special musicianship. Another artist whom I revere is Murray Perahia, who happened to be a classmate at the NYC HS of Performing Arts. Both Pressler and Perahia are in a league of unique pianists.

Yes, Istomin, Stern, Rose was another remarkable trio. Interesting that there is a You tube of Piatogorsky, Heifetz, Rubinstein playing the Mendelssohn trio in d minor. I was never a big fan of Heifetz.. From my perspective he was
the epitome of great technical prowess, but hadn't the emotional impact of David Oistrakh.
There is fascinating You Tube of Rubinstein performing De Falla's Ritual Fire Dance.
For Chopin, I favor Rubenstein across the board. He had the most tasteful rubato I have ever heard.

Another great teacher and player in the mold of Pressler is Georgy Sebok. Heard his masterclasses at Oberlin Conservatory. Like Brendel, he is very focused on tone production. Brendel's classes were also magnificent.

As far as teachers being nasty or not, it troubles me that anyone passing on the muse, would
get personal about the process of teaching and learning. I have a low threshold or patience for those in my profession who yell at students or denigrate them.

I observed several of Pressler's master classes. One of my friends was playing for him in front of a crowd. He tried to correct her rhythm in one passage that required a big leap. She tried to fix it, but made the same mistake again. Then Pressler impatiently yelled, "no...no...NO!!!!!!!!!" My friend was traumatized, literally. By then, I pretty much lost my respect for him.

By the end of that master class, he went on to make a remark that Beethoven was the "most difficult" composer because Beethoven "made such demands on the performer." I couldn't disagree more.

Please post your recording of Op. 106 so that we could all admire your clearly superior technical skills and artistry. Should be a piece of cake for you.

Your friend was traumatized because someone said "no!"? Jeez, get a backbone. :rolleyes:

I don't know. From what I read it wasn't just "someone" "saying" "no." It was a well known influential performer/teacher who yelled "NO!" several times in a masterclass in front of peers and teachers. That's tough for anyone's backbone.

Exactly. In front of an audience that's just plain rude and obnoxious on Pressler's part.

And I certainly find it equally as nasty when I see someone like Feltsman shake his head disgustedly during a student's performance even though the student can't see him doing it.

Has anyone ever seen or heard of a student telling the master class giver "where to go" during a masterclass or is that just impossible because of the politics and career goals invilved?

I've seen Feltsman murder Beethoven's 'Emperor'. Unbelievably crass. No Feltsman fan here.

Dunno, shortly after uni (when I had given up and switched to church music), I played Liszt's 6th Rhapsody in a master class given by a semi well known pianist. It was my choice; I elected to play this piece. (Okay, pressure from friends.)

But you know? I was given more loving encouragement than I had ever experienced at uni. Go figure...

Even if Feltsman had given the greatest performace of the Emperor in the history of music it wouldn't excuse nasty behavior at a master class.

To me the whole thing is something like what happened around 25 years ago with a certain tennis player who became famous for his nastiness to umpires("you're the pits of the earth"). Since he was one of the best tennis players in the world, tournaments couldn't really afford to default him for his behavior.

In the same way, audiences or the student can't really risk the consequences of telling off the "naster class" giver .

I dunno, I guess I just feel differently about it. I've been heavily berated in masterclass settings before. I've also been generously praised in other masterclass settings. Certainly the former feels far less pleasant than the latter, but letting either go to your head for more than a day or two seems a little silly.

Then that's your reaction. Other students react differently. That's why it is neither wise, or the role of masterclass teachers to berate students.

What is accomplished by that? 1) Bad experience that some people get over in a day or so. 2) Humiliation that does more harm than good other - more sensitive - students.

Berating and excessive praise is the province of a student's main studio teacher. A masterclass teacher is basically a hired gen who knows nothing of the background, competency, strengths, weaknesses, etc. of the student. Their role is - IMO - to point out some specific technical/musical improvements to the student and audience on specific pieces, as well as impart some of their wisdom and best practices. The best masterclasses I've attended, and been a part of, were ones where the teacher pretty much stuck to that.

whoops dp