Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner What makes a concert pianist?

Ryan, btb doesn't want us to continue this discussion on his thread, so you can please just send me a link that proves what you've been saying? And you are not going to take into account what's in Schonberg's book, which is where I base much of my information, along with a couple other books?

Well, Schonberg does not say that Richter started lessons at 8, and I've never read that anywhere. However, Schonberg does say that Richter's first teacher was his father and that as a child Richter could play anything. Putting two and two together, I posit that Richter's father started teaching him from a very young age, instilling in him the technique and musicianship that he would need to follow in his father's footsteps in a musical career. My belief is strengthened by the the fact that Richter could read opera scores. Ever tried to do that? You need a strong technique, and not one that comes by accident.

Re: Richter: FWIW

David Fanning writes in the latest edition of Groves:

[...] His first love was painting, which he learnt from his aunt, with whom he spent three years between the ages of four and seven,cut off from his parents by the Civil War.
On his return to Odessa in 1922 [age 7], Richter began to learn the piano and to compose, being largely self-taught in both areas. As a child he also wrote plays. His earliest musical passion was for opera. he enjoyed sight-reading from vocal scores at home, and for a while he had ambitions to become a conductor. From 1930 to 1932 he worked as accompanist at the House of Sailors in Odessa in order to supplement the family income, and then at the Odessa Philaharmonic. He made his solo debut playing Chopin at the age of 19, and in the following year became an accompanist at the Odessa Academic Opera and Ballet Theatre."

Are you a lawyer? Because you keep trying to ignore my original point that started all of this. I never said that Richter didn't have musical training as a very young person. He did. What I've been saying is that from about 8-17 he was mainly interested in opera and conducting, not giving concerts and practicing piano for 5-8 hours a day like most established pianists did. During that time he did perform as a pianist at the opera house, so I'm sure that helped. But it wasn't until 17 that he decided he wanted to pursue a career as a pianist and thus lived his life with that goal in mind...practicing night and day, going to Neuhaus, and giving his first public recital at 19.

All I'm looking at is the fact that if someone has the talent and decided to make a career in piano in their mid teens, Richter and Volodos might give them hope, when everyone else would say it's too late.

I bet if you took 10 non-musician people in a room, and asked who at one time took piano lessons in their life, probably 7 or 8 would raise their hands. The VAST majority of people I know that don't like music or piano, at one time tried piano lessons. So if one of these persons decided at 15 to be a concert pianist, maybe they would be help by those boring lessons they took briefly that they don't remember.

I'm sure Richter had very good musical education at a young age, but the bottom line I think with him is that he has "it", so it didn't really matter when he started. It would be a shame if someone that was 14, 15 years old also had "it" and wanted to be a professional pianist but was always told that they didn't start early enough.

So, the reason I am beating a dead horse is that I really do believe it is advantageous to study piano as a child, even if you drop it for a (sometimes long) period of time.

I'm sorry, but we don't have room for anymore pseudo-intellectual BS in this forum.

Bye bye now...

Richter says Richter started at 8. See Sviatoslav Richter, Notebooks and Conversations, by Bruno Monsaingeon, published by Princeton University Press.

Totally agree. Just saying that it's not a hopeless situation for 15 year olds that didn't study much as a small child if they want to become a successful pianist. Just gotta be good.

Yes, but Richter lied or stretched the truth about a great many things regarding himself. I don't believe it for a second.

You also don't believe me.

For every one that makes it there are prolly hundreds that are just as talented that will consider themselves lucky to get tenure at a half-decent (state) university. There are undoubtedly many really phenomenal musicians out there that we will never even hear of. I truly believe that.

Once talent is at a professionally proficient level it's all about who you know. Generally speaking, one with "merely sufficient" talent who has great teachers and contacts will get further than one with extraordinary talent without such conctacts. It's only what you know to an extent: beyond that it's who you know.

Despite our love, understanding, and passion for classical music, the majority of the world really isn't too interested and doesn't support it and there just isn't room for many: a few lucky ones win the lottery with a ticket their contacts buy them.