Garrick Ohlsson on pianos

Posted by: Rich Galassini

Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 07:36 AM

If I have posted this here before, my apologies. I cannot remember if I did and I just relistened to them myself.

Even if I did, this bears another listen - or a listen and some input from newer members. High End Piano Guy's blog is tremendous. Read through it. Believe me it is worth the time.

This post is a short series of several interviews with Garrick Ohlsson on pianos, performing, and just his feelings about music in general. It is a great insight.

Garrick Ohlsson Interviews

Anyway, I hope many take the time to listen to them. They aren't long and I would love your comments.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 08:21 AM

I'll give you a comment:

High End Piano Guy is a pretentious twit.

I ought to know...
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 09:45 AM

Originally Posted By: BoseEric
I'll give you a comment:

High End Piano Guy is a pretentious twit.

I ought to know...


Full Disclosure = BoseEric IS High End Piano Guy.

Nice job Eric, you pretentious twit. wink
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 11:00 AM

I have read most of the articles on Bosie Eric' blog. It's a perfect blog for many PW members. Not all of us are lucky enough to own a performance grade piano(especially the very costly ones in the top group), but many PW members are very interested in those pianos and they seem to get a lot of discussion on PW despite not being actually owned by that many members. It's quite amazing how much discussion there is at PW about pianos in the 75K and over range.

So thanks, Eric, for your fascinating and informative blog.
Posted by: Rickster

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 11:53 AM

Great discussions...

Of course, I would like to have heard the pianos too. smile

Rick
Posted by: ClsscLib

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 12:06 PM

Fantastic interview! Rich, thanks for posting it, and Eric, thanks for doing it!
Posted by: Robert 45

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 01:11 PM

Hi Rich,
Yes, you did post this interview here a few years ago. It is a very insightful discussion and I like his open-minded attitude in not endorsing one excellent piano brand to the exclusion of the others.
It is a refreshing approach from a highly distinguished artist who certainly can speak with experience about the instrument.

Thank you for re-posting this invaluable snippet for all piano enthusiasts,

kind regards,

Robert.
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 02:23 PM

If someone will give me a nice Steinway, Mason, Bosendorfer, and Fazioli I will be willing to post my comparison based on how well they are suited Jerry Lee Lewis' Whole Lot of Shakin Goin On.
Posted by: Norbert

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 02:35 PM

The most important sentence [in my mind..] that was said was this:

"Chopin is more important than the piano"

Couldn't agree more....

Norbert
Posted by: Robert 45

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/29/12 02:46 PM

Ditto!
Kind regards,
Robert.
Posted by: allthumbs

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/30/12 07:51 AM

Originally Posted By: Rich Galassini
Originally Posted By: BoseEric
I'll give you a comment:

High End Piano Guy is a pretentious twit.

I ought to know...


Full Disclosure = BoseEric IS High End Piano Guy.

Nice job Eric, you pretentious twit. wink


Now everyone is going to refer to him as a pretentious twit. smirk

In all seriousness, thanks Rich for the interesting series of

topics...

allthumbs
Posted by: Chopinlover49

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/30/12 09:37 AM

Great interview. Ohlsson brings up good ideas about the need to let pianos season in their venues rather than bringing them in for a concert, then shipping them back out. I am surprised that all the great halls don't do what the Boston does. Does anyone know which ones do?
Posted by: ando

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/30/12 02:39 PM

I found it interesting - though I was hoping he was going to dish some dirt about the Steinway Artists arrangements and the effect that has on the diversity of performance pianos. He's obviously decided to sidestep that topic from now on.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/30/12 03:21 PM

Originally Posted By: ando
I found it interesting - though I was hoping he was going to dish some dirt about the Steinway Artists arrangements and the effect that has on the diversity of performance pianos. He's obviously decided to sidestep that topic from now on.


ando,

Not from now on, but maybe for recorded posterity. He has been there and done that and it is all on record in the newspapers of the time. Garrick is so much more than that subject. It was ugly for the company involved, but it is over.

Incidentally, a few years ago, one day before a concert here in Philadelphia, we got a call from Ohlsson's people. He was playing here in Philly and preferred not to play on "the house" S&S. They wondered if we had a well prepared Bosie Imperial available, which we did.

BUT, instead of charging the usual $2500.00 to $3000.00 for an emergency Imperial rental, prep., and same night pick up, we asked if after his concert he could attend a reception in his honor that we put on in a hotel suite across the street from where he played. He said - keep it to 2 hours and less than 40 people and he would do it.

The evening was wonderful. I got to spend some quality time with Garrick and chatted about a variety of subjects - music, piano, opera (I am a singer). When the reception began, the Q&A session all centered around the subject you are reffering to and Mr. Ohlsson answered very frankly, but added that today, he is simply a fan of great pianos, and he played on one that evening. He got a wonderful round of applause.

At the end of the reception he signed some headshots that he had with him and gave me two - one for our store and one for me personally. This is what he signed for me:



It says - To Rich,
I wish I could sing like you.


To be clear, he has never heard me sing a note. He was just being nice guy and giving me something cool to hang over my desk. That is where it proudly hangs. thumb
Posted by: ando

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 09/30/12 05:23 PM

Hi Rich, I can certainly understand how this issue may have become very tired in your part of the world. In Australia it didn't get any coverage here at all. I've only just recently heard about it through clicking on online newspaper articles. So I'm sorry if I raised something that is irritating to you. I wasn't aware that it had become so notorious/tedious for you folks.

For what it's worth, I am full of admiration for Garrick's integrity in the way he handled that whole issue. That was the main reason I was interested to hear his comments on it. I also think it's highly relevant to the discussion about pianos in specific venues. But I'm happy to leave that hornet's nest alone.

Nice personal story about Garrick, by the way. smile I've heard such great testimonials about you and your store, if I'm ever in your neck of the woods, I'm definitely going to pay Cunningham's a visit.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/01/12 01:26 PM

Originally Posted By: ando
Hi Rich, I can certainly understand how this issue may have become very tired in your part of the world. In Australia it didn't get any coverage here at all. I've only just recently heard about it through clicking on online newspaper articles. So I'm sorry if I raised something that is irritating to you. I wasn't aware that it had become so notorious/tedious for you folks.

For what it's worth, I am full of admiration for Garrick's integrity in the way he handled that whole issue. That was the main reason I was interested to hear his comments on it. I also think it's highly relevant to the discussion about pianos in specific venues. But I'm happy to leave that hornet's nest alone.

Nice personal story about Garrick, by the way. smile I've heard such great testimonials about you and your store, if I'm ever in your neck of the woods, I'm definitely going to pay Cunningham's a visit.


ando,

I am not tired of it personally, but I think Garrick might be. That is what I was saying in my earlier post.

I think S&S acted horribly and their tactic in this case backfired. Frankly, instead of 1 review that Mr. Ohlsson expected, the debacle wound up getting multiple reviews and articles written on it, many of which are still available online if you google a little.

This entire situation probably helped Garrick's career and certainly put the name Bosendorfer into heads that had never considered it before.

The shame of it is that this type of behavior has not stopped and may have actually escalated since then.

My 2 cents,
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/01/12 01:44 PM

Garrick Ohlssohn acted badly. It may have been unthinking, but he should not have agreed to the terms of the endorsement in the first place. Too many artists sign on to these deals without a genuine commitment to the product. They want the benefits without the responsibility.
Posted by: bennevis

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/01/12 02:07 PM

I wonder what clout the term ´´Steinway Artist´´ has outside USA. Pierre-Laurent Aimard, a SA, played a high-profile concert in London not long ago on the Yamaha CFX, which was broadcast live by the BBC on their classical radio station Radio 3 (whose announcer mentioned that in case listeners thought the piano didn´t sound like a Steinway, indeed the piano used was a ´new model by Yamaha´).

And Aimard took the starring role in what amounted to a Steinway promotional DVD just before that, in which he carefully chose the Steinway D he wanted for his recording of Bach´s The Art of Fugue. And the subsequent recording of the same works he played in that concert was on Steinway...
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/01/12 03:44 PM

Originally Posted By: BDB
Garrick Ohlssohn acted badly. It may have been unthinking, but he should not have agreed to the terms of the endorsement in the first place. Too many artists sign on to these deals without a genuine commitment to the product. They want the benefits without the responsibility.


BDB,

Please remember - there was no agreement. I won't go into the details now, but if you need me to I can.

Google Garrick Ohlsson Steinway and read the articles. He was just a young artist who liked Bosies and said so. He was not a Steinway artist.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/01/12 06:28 PM



The incident in question took place over 30 years ago. The piano world was a different place then.
Posted by: Dave B

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/02/12 11:21 PM

It's tough enough being a musician. Strong arm bully tactics are not a help.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 12:32 AM

It is tough being a musician, so musicians should recognize and appreciate what help they get.

If someone does a favor for me, I do not go around telling people that someone else is better that that person, because I would not like it if I did a favor for someone and that person ended up saying that someone who has done nothing for that person is better than me.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 05:53 AM

Originally Posted By: BDB
It is tough being a musician, so musicians should recognize and appreciate what help they get.

If someone does a favor for me, I do not go around telling people that someone else is better that that person, because I would not like it if I did a favor for someone and that person ended up saying that someone who has done nothing for that person is better than me.


This is an honest question BDB. What favor are you referring to?
Posted by: backto_study_piano

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 06:31 AM

Originally Posted By: BoseEric


The incident in question took place over 30 years ago. The piano world was a different place then.


Don't be so sure - I was shocked when a manufacturer's representative recently contacted me demanding that I remove any comments on his pianos from Piano World which were not complimentary. Interesting way of doing business. But I'm certain that I'll never again recommend friends, students or relatives consider that brand again.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 06:58 AM

So, BDB, what actually happened, in detail, since you appear to know
Posted by: ando

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 09:17 AM

Originally Posted By: backto_study_piano
Originally Posted By: BoseEric


The incident in question took place over 30 years ago. The piano world was a different place then.


Don't be so sure - I was shocked when a manufacturer's representative recently contacted me demanding that I remove any comments on his pianos from Piano World which were not complimentary. Interesting way of doing business. But I'm certain that I'll never again recommend friends, students or relatives consider that brand again.


Really? That surprises me because I really vented heavily about the same manufacturer not too long ago and I didn't receive any kind of demand.
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 09:34 AM

Originally Posted By: backto_study_piano
Originally Posted By: BoseEric


The incident in question took place over 30 years ago. The piano world was a different place then.


Don't be so sure - I was shocked when a manufacturer's representative recently contacted me demanding that I remove any comments on his pianos from Piano World which were not complimentary. Interesting way of doing business. But I'm certain that I'll never again recommend friends, students or relatives consider that brand again.


Let me understand this clearly. You are talking about a dealer, not the main company itself. Right?

Were you threatened with legal action? You are certainly under no obligation to accede to a dealer's wishes that you bowdlerize or edit your posts here.
Posted by: backto_study_piano

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 10:10 AM

Nope - the company representative in this country. Not legal action - but a "demand". So any mention of that company or it's products, whether complimentary or not have been deleted.
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 11:00 AM

The representative can make such a "demand" if they wish, but you are not obligated to comply. Your opinion is your opinion, and as long as you are not engaging in libelous behavior, I cannot see how a company can force anyone to change what they write. I seem to have missed something in your earlier thread.
Posted by: bennevis

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 11:01 AM

backto study piano,
Which company is that? (Please PM me if you prefer not to divulge it on this forum).
I have my suspicions, but I might be barking up the wrong tree, or trodding on the wrong lump of sh*t (OK, I made the latter up....).
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 11:05 AM

Quote:
Nope - the company representative in this country. Not legal action - but a "demand". So any mention of that company or it's products, whether complimentary or not have been deleted.

Ah, I see. I went back and looked at the thread in question. So you are saying that Yamaha or Kawai told you to delete your words. Interesting. Did you make the change, or did PW get threats? I realize I'm moving into dangerous territory here. Either way, we should know the rules. If a manufacturer can demand -- and get -- changes to our posts, that's interesting. We have had issues of this sort before, usually in response to threats of legal action against Piano World. But you say that you received no threat of legal consequences if you did not comply.

This seems rather OT from the Ohlsson story, I know. But I suppose the connection is the threat relationship.
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 11:58 AM

Even if there is no specific threat of a law suit made, few posters would want to take the chance of being sued. Why go through all that potential hassle and expense?

OTOH if one looks hard enough through PW posts I think one can find some negative comments about almost every make out there, so it seems strange for a company or dealer to worry about this unless they thought the the comments were egregiously incorrect or were a negative subjective opinion stated as factual.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 12:33 PM

Originally Posted By: BoseEric
So, BDB, what actually happened, in detail, since you appear to know


As I recall, Ohlssohn signed up for Steinway's artist program, which roughly says that in return for the artist's endorsement, the artist gets to use their pianos for the cost of moving and tuning. After he had done that, he picked one of their pianos for a concert in New York and it was delivered. Then he gave an interview, where the interviewer noted that he had a Bösendorfer. Ohlssohn called it the Rolls Royce of pianos in the interview. Steinway heard of that, and reclaimed the piano because he had endorsed a rival piano maker. Ohlssohn had not lived up to his side of the bargain. Had Ohlssohn paid to rent the piano, which I am pretty sure you can do, Steinway could not have reclaimed the piano without a lawsuit.

What came out of it was tighter standards for Steinway's artist program, and Ohlssohn no longer endorses pianos, something that more artists should do, in my opinion. So it is a different world today.
Posted by: Rickster

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 12:51 PM

Originally Posted By: Piano*Dad
Ah, I see. I went back and looked at the thread in question. So you are saying that Yamaha or Kawai told you to delete your words. Interesting. Did you make the change, or did PW get threats? I realize I'm moving into dangerous territory here. Either way, we should know the rules. If a manufacturer can demand -- and get -- changes to our posts, that's interesting. We have had issues of this sort before, usually in response to threats of legal action against Piano World. But you say that you received no threat of legal consequences if you did not comply.

This seems rather OT from the Ohlsson story, I know. But I suppose the connection is the threat relationship.

Piano*Dad, you are right, the content of this thread is getting OT… Regarding freedom of speech on PW, it is definitely a privilege that we have and enjoy to a great extent, and it is rarely rebuffed by Frank or the moderators.

If you go back and look at the threads in question involving backto study piano, you will find that they themselves (backto study piano) deleted their own comments. Only backto study piano knows the reason for their decision to delete their own comments; if they choose to divulge that reason here in this thread, that is their prerogative. I will say that no one here on PW twisted their arm to make them delete any comments.

Rick
Posted by: ando

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 02:56 PM

Originally Posted By: Piano*Dad
Quote:
Nope - the company representative in this country. Not legal action - but a "demand". So any mention of that company or it's products, whether complimentary or not have been deleted.

Ah, I see. I went back and looked at the thread in question. So you are saying that Yamaha or Kawai told you to delete your words. Interesting. Did you make the change, or did PW get threats? I realize I'm moving into dangerous territory here. Either way, we should know the rules. If a manufacturer can demand -- and get -- changes to our posts, that's interesting. We have had issues of this sort before, usually in response to threats of legal action against Piano World. But you say that you received no threat of legal consequences if you did not comply.

This seems rather OT from the Ohlsson story, I know. But I suppose the connection is the threat relationship.


No, not Yamaha or Kawai. It's a maker with a certain artists program - a maker with which Garrick experienced a little turbulence, you might say. So yes, it is very relevant to the Ohlsson story.
Posted by: Furtwangler

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 03:04 PM

Originally Posted By: ando
Originally Posted By: Piano*Dad
Quote:
Nope - the company representative in this country. Not legal action - but a "demand". So any mention of that company or it's products, whether complimentary or not have been deleted.

Ah, I see. I went back and looked at the thread in question. So you are saying that Yamaha or Kawai told you to delete your words. Interesting. Did you make the change, or did PW get threats? I realize I'm moving into dangerous territory here. Either way, we should know the rules. If a manufacturer can demand -- and get -- changes to our posts, that's interesting. We have had issues of this sort before, usually in response to threats of legal action against Piano World. But you say that you received no threat of legal consequences if you did not comply.

This seems rather OT from the Ohlsson story, I know. But I suppose the connection is the threat relationship.


No, not Yamaha or Kawai. It's a maker with a certain artists program - a maker with which Garrick experienced a little turbulence, you might say. So yes, it is very relevant to the Ohlsson story.


Gee, what a surprise.
Posted by: bennevis

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 04:06 PM

Originally Posted By: ando


No, not Yamaha or Kawai. It's a maker with a certain artists program - a maker with which Garrick experienced a little turbulence, you might say. So yes, it is very relevant to the Ohlsson story.


Thanks for clarifying. That´s the company I guessed it was....
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 04:36 PM

I reread the thread in question and it appeared to me (from context) that backto_study_piano was talking about a particular Asian maker. Perhaps I was wrong. If any piano maker is "threatening" people here, that is rather odd. What is said here is mostly background noise.
Posted by: Rickster

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 05:03 PM

Originally Posted By: Piano*Dad
I reread the thread in question and it appeared to me (from context) that backto_study_piano was talking about a particular Asian maker. Perhaps I was wrong. If any piano maker is "threatening" people here, that is rather odd. What is said here is mostly background noise.

It seems to me that things are getting all twisted up and confused here. The situation with backto study piano deleting his/her own comments in other PW threads at the requests (or demands as they put it) of a dealer (who is not a member of PW) is in no way connected to this thread. In fact, it is my understanding that the dealer in question knew backto study piano by their real name through prior contact/encounters.

This is how rumors and misinformation gets started.

Why don’t we get back on track here, if there is a track…

It’s just another good reason why we need to carefully consider and think about what we write on an international, world-wide, internet forum. Hey, that’s why it’s called Piano World! smile

Rick
Posted by: PianoWorksATL

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 05:07 PM

Originally Posted By: BDB
...the artist gets to use their pianos for the cost of moving and tuning...Had Ohlssohn paid to rent the piano, which I am pretty sure you can do, Steinway could not have reclaimed the piano without a lawsuit.
Most of the cost to rent a piano is the moving and tuning. In Atlanta, the rental fee is about 1/3 the total cost of the rental and sometimes less. It amounts to a professional courtesy discount. Other courtesies can be of different value.

Just like artists, athletes and celebrities, companies can be gracious or demanding. I remember reading a story earlier this year where a soccer player lost a $15M campaign for drinking the wrong soda at a post-game press conference.

So either an artist is directly paid to behave a certain way OR artist and company exchange favors for favorable placements. The artist's stature has a lot to do in the balance of power, but any behavior or misbehavior reflects on the attitudes of the parties involved, not the arrangement itself.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 06:26 PM

Originally Posted By: BDB
Originally Posted By: BoseEric
So, BDB, what actually happened, in detail, since you appear to know


As I recall, Ohlssohn signed up for Steinway's artist program, which roughly says that in return for the artist's endorsement, the artist gets to use their pianos for the cost of moving and tuning. After he had done that, he picked one of their pianos for a concert in New York and it was delivered. Then he gave an interview, where the interviewer noted that he had a Bösendorfer. Ohlssohn called it the Rolls Royce of pianos in the interview. Steinway heard of that, and reclaimed the piano because he had endorsed a rival piano maker. Ohlssohn had not lived up to his side of the bargain. Had Ohlssohn paid to rent the piano, which I am pretty sure you can do, Steinway could not have reclaimed the piano without a lawsuit.

What came out of it was tighter standards for Steinway's artist program, and Ohlssohn no longer endorses pianos, something that more artists should do, in my opinion. So it is a different world today.


BDB,

You have the general feel of what happened but there are some important mistakes that color the entire event. I had not started out meaning to discuss this but here goes:

Yes, Ohlsson had signed on as a Steinway Artist. However, there was no rental piano in the event in question and he was not asking anything of Steinway. The piano for his recital was "the house piano" in Tully Hall in NYC and the piano was fine in rehearsal and fine the day before the recital. However, when Ohlsson showed up the day of the recital the middle C had been removed from the piano and there was a note saying that the piano was being repaired at Steinway.

This act had nothing to do with withdrawing Artist Support. It was an act of unnecessary vindictiveness IMHO and an example of another day of artist management.

You know that his recital actually happened on a borrowed Bosendorfer.

Also, Ohlsson did not stop endorsing pianos because of this event. He was a Bosendorfer artist for many years after that.

The thought of the Artist management at the time was to crush his career by ruining his Tully recital. What happened actually gave Garrick much more publicity than he might otherwise have had and Steinway had an embarrassing time of it.

I think he currently owns a Steinway, a Mason & Hamlin, and a Bosendorfer, however he is at a point in his career now where he has no need to endorse anyone and simply endorses great pianos.

My 2 cents,
Posted by: Furtwangler

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 06:30 PM

"However, when Ohlsson showed up the day of the recital the middle C had been removed from the piano and there was a note saying that the piano was being repaired at Steinway."

Gee, what a surprise.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 07:18 PM

That account does not sound likely to me. I recall that a piano had been delivered and was taken away. If the piano was tampered with, then Ohlssohn could have initiated legal action against both the hall and Steinway.
Posted by: backto_study_piano

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 08:54 PM

Originally Posted By: Piano*Dad
Quote:
Nope - the company representative in this country. Not legal action - but a "demand". So any mention of that company or it's products, whether complimentary or not have been deleted.

Ah, I see. I went back and looked at the thread in question. So you are saying that Yamaha or Kawai told you to delete your words. Interesting. Did you make the change, or did PW get threats? I realize I'm moving into dangerous territory here. Either way, we should know the rules. If a manufacturer can demand -- and get -- changes to our posts, that's interesting. We have had issues of this sort before, usually in response to threats of legal action against Piano World. But you say that you received no threat of legal consequences if you did not comply.

This seems rather OT from the Ohlsson story, I know. But I suppose the connection is the threat relationship.


I don't want to go into the details - I only offered the comment as a warning about criticising piano companies.
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 09:18 PM

Lots of people criticize piano companies without getting ordered to retract their posts.
Posted by: Robert 45

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/03/12 11:41 PM

Originally Posted By: BDB
That account does not sound likely to me. I recall that a piano had been delivered and was taken away. If the piano was tampered with, then Ohlssohn could have initiated legal action against both the hall and Steinway.


I do not think that Mr Galassini would state anything that that was untruthful. He is among the most respected members of this forum. Thank you Richard, for clarifying this most unfortunate incident.

Kind regards,

Robert.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 01:34 AM

Ad hominem arguments do not prove anything.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 05:26 AM

Originally Posted By: BDB
That account does not sound likely to me. I recall that a piano had been delivered and was taken away. If the piano was tampered with, then Ohlssohn could have initiated legal action against both the hall and Steinway.


Yes, there was a piano removed that was on loan to the venue. Steinway does this with many venues nationally.

But the recital could have gone on using the "house piano" with no troubles. That is the piano that was being "repaired".

Full disclosure = These are the facts as I understand them from conversation with Mr. Ohlsson.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 08:08 AM

Really, BDB, a young emerging concert pianist initiating legal action against Lincoln Center and Steinway? Great way to advance a career.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 11:15 AM

Your contention is that you should not have to live up to the terms of a contract that you have made with someone that you believe has lesser status? Those are not my business ethics. I learned a long time ago that you can never tell who will turn out to be important.
Posted by: Jeff Clef

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 01:23 PM

"...Great discussions...Of course, I would like to have heard the pianos too..."

Garrick mentioned that his Arabesque sessions were no longer in release (at the time of the interview). But, they're back, in a boxed set (16 CDs) released in 2008 on the Hyperion label, SKU 03457-14351-4, entitled, "Chopin The Complete Works, Garrick Ohsson." CDS44351/66. I believe I've seen some of the discs sold as singles at Barnes.

The credits are very full, and include the pianos' make, model and serial number, the piano tech's name, the recording engineer, studio location, session date, etc.

I'm hoping that someday his recordings of the Beethoven piano sonatas will be released in a similar form.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 01:47 PM

Originally Posted By: BDB
Your contention is that you should not have to live up to the terms of a contract that you have made with someone that you believe has lesser status? Those are not my business ethics. I learned a long time ago that you can never tell who will turn out to be important.


I agree with your statement in theory BDB. It is rare that I disagree with you but in this case I do. Frankly, at the time Mr. Ohlsson had nothing barring him from saying there is another good piano besides S&S. (I do not know what the contract says today, but I imagine that loophole has been filled. I would love to hear from somebody from Steinway).

Since it was not in the terms of the contract and Steinway was not providing any piano for this performance under the terms the aforementioned contract, I strongly disagree with you.

IMHO, this is a prime example of a bully having a temper tantrum.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/04/12 02:01 PM

BDB, do not put words into my mouth. My contention is that you are espousing an opinion that is not in sync with the facts of the situation. Steinway does not need you to come to their defense. Criticizing someones ethics in a situation you don't have full knowledge of is not appropriate, professional or semi-professional.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/05/12 03:33 AM

Originally Posted By: Rich Galassini
Originally Posted By: BDB
Your contention is that you should not have to live up to the terms of a contract that you have made with someone that you believe has lesser status? Those are not my business ethics. I learned a long time ago that you can never tell who will turn out to be important.


I agree with your statement in theory BDB. It is rare that I disagree with you but in this case I do. Frankly, at the time Mr. Ohlsson had nothing barring him from saying there is another good piano besides S&S. (I do not know what the contract says today, but I imagine that loophole has been filled. I would love to hear from somebody from Steinway).

Since it was not in the terms of the contract and Steinway was not providing any piano for this performance under the terms the aforementioned contract, I strongly disagree with you.

IMHO, this is a prime example of a bully having a temper tantrum.


I am not disagreeing with you. All I was saying that if it had been agreed that the hall was to supply the piano, and the piano was not available to play, then Ohlssohn should have had legal recourse for that, and he should have pursued it.

I will also admit that my memory may not be correct. It was a long time ago. But time affects everyone's memories, even those who were closely associated with the event. All I have been talking about is my recollection and reaction.

It is, of course, a different world now. Steinway is a different corporation now, with different policies. In the interview, Ohlsson says his views on pianos have changed. The incident had an affect on both parties, who are both probably better off for it. But there are still musicians who endorse pianos merely because they want to make sure that there are pianos available for them to play, rather than because they have a preference for a particular brand, which I do not believe is ethical, nor is it healthy for the industry.
Posted by: Chopinlover49

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/05/12 09:27 AM

All of this is worrisome. I am not speaking of offensive remarks, libel, or whatever, but are we no longer allowed to even express our opinion? If my friends ask me which camera system I prefer, do I have to temper my remarks and praise the competition before stating my preference? It seems we are getting into slippery slopes here. I will go on record stating that I bought a Mason-Hamlin BB because I prefer it. I bought a Canon 7D camera system because I like it best. I bought a Lexus because I liked it best. No apologies to Nikon, Steinway, Mercedes, or whatever. Am I going to get in trouble now? (I am not referring to stars who have contracts for products, that is a little different. I am talking about PW posters who state their opinions every day, every post. No contracts or agreements.)
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/05/12 10:29 AM

Originally Posted By: Chopinlover49
All of this is worrisome. I am not speaking of offensive remarks, libel, or whatever, but are we no longer allowed to even express our opinion? If my friends ask me which camera system I prefer, do I have to temper my remarks and praise the competition before stating my preference? It seems we are getting into slippery slopes here. I will go on record stating that I bought a Mason-Hamlin BB because I prefer it. I bought a Canon 7D camera system because I like it best. I bought a Lexus because I liked it best. No apologies to Nikon, Steinway, Mercedes, or whatever. Am I going to get in trouble now? (I am not referring to stars who have contracts for products, that is a little different. I am talking about PW posters who state their opinions every day, every post. No contracts or agreements.)



The question is: "Who cares? Who is likely to be influenced?"

There's a world of difference between the paid endorsement of a working professional at the top of his game and the listing of his favorite brands by an avatar who frames his comments in a chat room with his preference for one composer at the top and the "proud owner of ......" rouiine att the bottom.

About the only similarity I can think of is that neither should be taken too seriously.
Posted by: PianoWorksATL

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/05/12 10:39 AM

Originally Posted By: BDB
All I was saying that if it had been agreed that the hall was to supply the piano, and the piano was not available to play, then Ohlssohn should have had legal recourse for that, and he should have pursued it.
I think the best outcome ultimately happened. Another piano was played and lawyers were not called.

Without the larger public scrutiny, who has more to lose? The then emerging career of an individual in a highly competitive field with replacements lined up and dying for the same audiences or a company that tried to influence an artists statements and went too far? The great "Steinway" didn't have a board meeting and decide to punish him, some middle manager went on a power trip emboldened by a corporate culture of superiority and business dominance. The hope is cooler heads could have prevailed, but the truth is few things make the papers. Arrogance happens in almost any industry-leading corporation. And even the most experience of sponsored pros occasionally have foot-in-mouth disease.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 07:22 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoWorksATL
The great "Steinway" didn't have a board meeting and decide to punish him, some middle manager went on a power trip emboldened by a corporate culture of superiority and business dominance. The hope is cooler heads could have prevailed, but the truth is few things make the papers. Arrogance happens in almost any industry-leading corporation. And even the most experience of sponsored pros occasionally have foot-in-mouth disease.


Sam,

While it is true that the board did not formally punish Ohlsson, it is a corporate policy of thiers to do whatever can be done to bring on new artists and to give disadvantages to artists who choose not to jump on board.

One example from a New York Times article:

Valentina Lisitsa, a Ukrainian-born pianist who prefers Bösendorfers, said she had encountered roadblocks to playing one at some of her American concerts. ''They created all kinds of difficulties,'' Ms. Lisitsa said of the response to her insistence on playing a Bösendorfer with the Atlanta Symphony in October. ''Steinway tried everything to get me to play Steinway, including some Steinway representative waiting for me in my dressing room right before the concert and asking me in not a very polite way why would I choose to play another piano.''
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 10:08 AM

''Steinway tried everything to get me to play Steinway, including some Steinway representative waiting for me in my dressing room right before the concert and asking me in not a very polite way why would I choose to play another piano.''



One reason she could provide is that she has her own endorsement deal with a rival company. I doubt that she shows up at music trade show booths simply because she happens to be in the neighborhood buying groceries. In bucking the trend and attempting to displace the usual brand house piano, she must assume the burden of some difficulties as a touring artist.

I thought this thread was about the mature views of Mr. Olsson, who is heard to say more than once in the interviews that these days he aims to be everyone's friend and not truck in a piano if he finds the one already in place to be perfectly satisfactory.
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 12:28 PM

... and that is indeed a very mature attitude. In any case, since touring schedules are planned way in advance, most of the piano scheduling can also be planned way in advance too. If a pianist has a preference for a certain brand, that preference can probably be accommodated. And if it can't be accommodated at reasonable expense, then a good substitute should fill the bill nicely. If you're a big enough name, I guess you can tour with your own piano (hoping it isn't seized at customs .... ).
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 12:40 PM

It all becomes a question of money, something that a lot of pianists seem not understand well, and audiences understand even less.

Eugene Istomin used to travel in a truck with his own piano. Few people do that sort of thing these days.
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 01:56 PM

Originally Posted By: turandot
''Steinway tried everything to get me to play Steinway, including some Steinway representative waiting for me in my dressing room right before the concert and asking me in not a very polite way why would I choose to play another piano.''

One reason she could provide is that she has her own endorsement deal with a rival company. I doubt that she shows up at music trade show booths simply because she happens to be in the neighborhood buying groceries. In bucking the trend and attempting to displace the usual brand house piano, she must assume the burden of some difficulties as a touring artist.
Are you saying that Lisitsa's apparent treatment by Steinway is justified by her endorsement of another company?
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 05:06 PM

Originally Posted By: pianoloverus
Originally Posted By: turandot
''Steinway tried everything to get me to play Steinway, including some Steinway representative waiting for me in my dressing room right before the concert and asking me in not a very polite way why would I choose to play another piano.''

One reason she could provide is that she has her own endorsement deal with a rival company. I doubt that she shows up at music trade show booths simply because she happens to be in the neighborhood buying groceries. In bucking the trend and attempting to displace the usual brand house piano, she must assume the burden of some difficulties as a touring artist.
Are you saying that Lisitsa's apparent treatment by Steinway is justified by her endorsement of another company?


No.

I'm giving an opinion that......

1) if the artist in question was asked bluntly by a business representative of Steinway why she would choose to play another piano, she could state bluntly that she represents the maker of a rival piano.

2) if the artist in question feels that such a question is inappropriate, she should understand that the piano biz is a competitive enterprise and that her endorsement deal exposes her to the realities of the competition.

The case was made here that Ohllson was a naive emerging artist when he ran afoul of Steinway. It would be a big stretch to say the same about the artist in question here. If she cannot accept the unwanted attention given her by Steinway in any other way, she can attirubte it to her stature as a performing artist.

I agree very much with the opinions expressed by the mature Mr. Ohlsson here in the sound clips. From a professional and business perspective, it's smart for a performing artist to remain contractually independent in terms of instruments.
Posted by: Minnesota Marty

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 05:21 PM

Maybe, Turandot, you should offer your advice to Ms. Lisitsa directly. Since she is still considered an emerging artist, as was Mr. Ohlsson at the time of his incident, I have no doubt she would appreciate your intervention.
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 05:35 PM

Originally Posted By: turandot


I'm giving an opinion that......

1) if the artist in question was asked bluntly by a business representative of Steinway why she would choose to play another piano, she could state bluntly that she represents the maker of a rival piano.

2) if the artist in question feels that such a question is inappropriate, she should understand that the piano biz is a competitive enterprise and that her endorsement deal exposes her to the realities of the competition.
The Steinway rep obviously already knew she endorsed another piano.

I'm sure Lisitsa already understands your second point.

None of this means what the Steinway rep did was appropriate, which was the point of her statement.
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 05:59 PM

Originally Posted By: pianoloverus

None of this means what the Steinway rep did was appropriate, which was the point of her statement.


plover,

I'm not into judging the appropriateness of something which may or may not have even happened, and if it did happen, may have happened in several different ways. You are referring to a NY Times article about a concert in Atlanta. It is alleged that the artist in question found a Steinway guy inside her dressing room when she arrived. Is that in fact how it went down?

The artist felt the approach was impolite. Was it? I don't know. Do you?

Did a Steinway guy secure the key to the dressing room and implore her on folded knee while extending a bouquet of rose? Maybe not.

Did he cuss her out? Probably not.

Did he strongarm her physically or verbally? You tell me.

Did he threaten to remove the middle C from her delivered Bosie? Unlikely.

Was the NY Times reporter a witness to the scene? I kind of doubt it, but maybe he got a key to the dressing room too.

I made my point. I clarified it just for you. I have no wish to participate in the Forum For Ethical Outrage and Self-Righteous Indignation. I don't have the chops.
Posted by: pianoloverus

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 06:15 PM

Originally Posted By: turandot
Originally Posted By: pianoloverus

None of this means what the Steinway rep did was appropriate, which was the point of her statement.


plover,

I'm not into judging the appropriateness of something which may or may not have even happened, and if it did happen, may have happened in several different ways. You are referring to a NY Times article about a concert in Atlanta. It is alleged that the artist in question found a Steinway guy inside her dressing room when she arrived. Is that in fact how it went down?

The artist felt the approach was impolite. Was it? I don't know. Do you?

Did a Steinway guy secure the key to the dressing room and implore her on folded knee while extending a bouquet of rose? Maybe not.

Did he cuss her out? Probably not.

Did he strongarm her physically or verbally? You tell me.

Did he threaten to remove the middle C from her delivered Bosie? Unlikely.

Was the NY Times reporter a witness to the scene? I kind of doubt it, but maybe he got a key to the dressing room too.

I made my point. I clarified it just for you. I have no wish to participate in the Forum For Ethical Outrage and Self-Righteous Indignation. I don't have the chops.
??? One can require video tape proof for every event discussed(and video tape proof for the video tape) or one can just be reasonable.
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 06:32 PM

One positive outcome of the "piano wars" of the 80's and early 90's is that the average house piano is in better condition then it was then. Yes, I'm speaking in generalities but, if I can be blunt, I know because I was there. I think that development has made it easier for certain artists to remain independent. This positive development in the overall piano world has been a detriment to piano manufacturers as it has taken some of the urgency away from the discussion.

I'm pretty sure the conversation with the Steinway rep happened and I'm pretty sure I know who it was. I'm also quite sure it was a much more civil and light handed discussion then would have been had 10, 15 or 20 years earlier.

I can't fault him or her because I've done that too! This is what reps are supposed to do, sell their brand and get converts! Of course my special brand of charm, style and rugged good looks made my dressing room visits the stuff of legend...
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 07:27 PM

Originally Posted By: BoseEric

I can't fault him or her because I've done that too! This is what reps are supposed to do, sell their brand and get converts!


And presumably, as an endorsing artist of another maker, she did her job as well.
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 09:46 PM

Why would one approach a pianist who has already endorsed another brand in anything other than a very indirect way? "In your face" doesn't see likely to be a winning tactic. Perhaps over drinks in a social setting? Perhaps a standing invitation to try a nicely prepped D whenever you want? Perhaps a standing invitation to use your brand in a pinch? Honey instead of vinegar. Oh, never mind ...
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 09:56 PM

Dad, I can tell you from experience, it doesn't work. However, pressure can come down in a variety of ways, and as Mr. Todd said, "desperate times call for desperate measures". That is a comment on my experience, not that of anyone else.
Posted by: Rich Galassini

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 09:58 PM

Originally Posted By: BoseEric
Of course my special brand of charm, style and rugged good looks made my dressing room visits the stuff of legend...


Sometimes it is too easy. wink
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 10:12 PM

Eric,

What doesn't work? The indirect and polite offer to be helpful?

Well, the alternative is not likely to work well either if that alternative is heavy-handed intimidation. Steinway may have certain size advantages, but I suspect they are not substantial enough to make totalitarian tactics particularly productive.

I'll stipulate that I don't know the true facts about either the Ohlsson case or the Lisitsa situation, so my thinking is not a direct response to either. I'm just thinking out loud about general human responses to pressure tactics.
Posted by: BDB

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 10:34 PM

When I have talked to major artists or their representatives about endorsements, it seems it has been less about the piano than the service that they get, which just reenforces what I say, that at some point, the piano is less important than the person who services it.
Posted by: PianoWorksATL

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 10:40 PM

Originally Posted By: turandot
In bucking the trend and attempting to displace the usual brand house piano, she must assume the burden of some difficulties as a touring artist.
The house didn't create a problem, they were very accommodating to their visiting performer. A guest at the ASO who happened to be the Steinway rep named in the article, made his way backstage. "Assuming the burden" may extend to putting up with a certain, afore mentioned, charming backstage visitor (don't go expecting me to call you rugged anything), but in this case, I liken the experience described to parking your car beside a street, having someone crash into it and drive way, and then "assuming" the insurance deductible. You assume the risk, but it's still lousy.

Having the privilege to know Valentina, I can safely say she is very engaging and personable. It would take some effort to make her feel uncomfortable.

Okay, here is backstory. The Steinway rep was previously a Bosendorfer rep. Not successful with Bosie (Bosie way underperformed in the US with that team), he found employment with Steinway. Perhaps his heart was there anyway. The following Bosendorfer team improved US sales by almost 2000% in just a few years.

The performance took place during a weekend Symphony sale by the Atlanta Steinway dealer. So the basement was full of Steinways for sale but there was a Bosendorfer on stage with the rest of the orchestra. This happened again either 1 or 2 years later. Timing can make for beautiful irony.

Does that make it better or worse? Reflecting of company policy or a local decision by an individual at a local event? More or less true as reported? Denied because it was embarrassing, inappropriate or because there is even a chance it didn't happen?
Posted by: BoseEric

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/08/12 10:59 PM

Sorry for the confusion, Dad. In my experience the "in your face" approach doesn't work.
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 12:51 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoWorksATL
Originally Posted By: turandot
In bucking the trend and attempting to displace the usual brand house piano, she must assume the burden of some difficulties as a touring artist.

"Assuming the burden" may extend to putting up with a certain, afore mentioned, charming backstage visitor (don't go expecting me to call you rugged anything), but in this case, I liken the experience described to parking your car beside a street, having someone crash into it and drive way, and then "assuming" the insurance deductible. You assume the risk, but it's still lousy.



From this parallel I assume you are claiming that the artist in question and/or her chosen instrument suffered damages that were real and measurable.


If that's the case, then it's not a matter of simply being pestered by a competitor of the brand one endorses. If it's not the case, then it's an inappropriate parallel.
Posted by: PianoWorksATL

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 02:13 AM

My parallel was very deliberate. In my example, would you choose to just walk as a result? expend your energy trying to locate a witness? simply drive the car damaged? Or pay the deductible, move one, perhaps complain to your family/friends about what happened to you, and never really feel the same about parking along that same street? Getting past something is not the same as it never happening or not having a cost.

No one argues that the top level of athletic performance is largely mental because the physically unprepared are removed from competition at the lower levels. I would argue the same point for top musicians. Before a performance, its not like offering a business opportunity, its like having a trainer from another team in the locker room to mess with your head.
Posted by: turandot

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 10:05 AM

Originally Posted By: PianoWorksATL
My parallel was very deliberate. In my example, would you choose to just walk as a result? expend your energy trying to locate a witness? simply drive the car damaged? Or pay the deductible, move one, perhaps complain to your family/friends about what happened to you, and never really feel the same about parking along that same street? Getting past something is not the same as it never happening or not having a cost.

No one argues that the top level of athletic performance is largely mental because the physically unprepared are removed from competition at the lower levels. I would argue the same point for top musicians. Before a performance, its not like offering a business opportunity, its like having a trainer from another team in the locker room to mess with your head.


So the artist is the runner whose Sauconys weree stolen from her feet by the Nike guy as she crouched in the blocks at the Olympic trials. grin

With all due respect Sam (and I mean that), I think your parallel is inappropriate even if i is deliberate. A victim of a hit-and-run driver who leaves behind a damaged car is different from an artist who endorses one brand of instrument being pestered by a representative of another.

This thread was ostensibly begun by Rich to draw attention to the thoughts of Mr. Ohllson as expressed in an interview with Eric Johnson. None of those thoughts expressed the view that Steinway bullies artists due to the arrogance of its corporate culture. The interviewer has made his own opinion clear by stating here that a rep who tries to win over an influential artist representing another brand is simply doing his job.

With the Ohllson trail going cold, Rich has introduced another episode to bolster his case that Steinway is a bully, and now we have your car-srash hit-and-run parallel intended to portray this artist as someone who has sustained an injury to her sensitive artistic temperament -- a temperament that is apparently unaffected by her business decision to promote a piano brand, a brand which of course you and Rich are also involved in promoting.

I would suggest to both you and Rich that if you want to highlight what you both feel is a bullying attitude by Steinway toward artists who have signed on with another brand, you should not use Mr. Ohlsson and Mr. Johnson as props for your agenda. It would seem that neither has an axe to grind in this matter.
Posted by: LoPresti

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 10:23 AM

Hey Rich,

Your PM is "ready".

Ed
Posted by: Piano*Dad

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 11:22 AM

Where did this notion arise that Lisitsa's piano was damaged? I didn't see that in the story I read.

On the other hand, I find the analogy of the opposition trainer getting into the athlete's head quite plausible. If a Steinway representative approached her backstage right before her performance, then disrupting her concentration could indeed have been a result, and even a goal.

But no one outside of the participants can say that for sure.

In any case, if the rep actually did approach her backstage I consider that simply rude, whatever the intention.
Posted by: PianoWorksATL

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 11:58 AM

The point of the NYTimes article was to talk about aggressive incidents as it relates to brand wars. They don't report and by filling pages with benign conversations. Artists get approached in a variety of ways. Sometimes it is aggressive to the point of threatening. It's pretty rare that it makes the news. It's up to the individual artist to decide how to react.
Posted by: bennevis

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 12:08 PM

For Lisitsa fans here, you might be interested in what she told me when I met her at a Yamaha showroom in London prior to her Royal Albert Hall concert in London a few months ago (now available on CD and DVD). The Bösendorfer Imperial she played at the concert was shipped over specially from Hannover, Germany, but she practised on a 'lovely' C.Bechstein in her rented apartment in London while preparing for the concert.

On that day, however, she made full use of the three Bösendorfer grands at the showroom (but didn't play any of the Yamahas there), treating the audience to a 3 hour concert - all the pieces she played a few days later at the concert, plus a few there was no time for, like Liszt's Un sospiro and Liebesträume No.3 and Beethoven's Für Elise (though she recorded them specially for the CD; the DVD has the complete live concert). And also spent time chatting to everyone who attended.

I asked her about her choice of pianos, and she simply said she loved the sound of Bösendorfer, but at no time did she denigrate Steinway or any other brand. She really is a warm person who loves playing for an audience. And if you look at her Youtube recordings, some are played on Steinway.
Posted by: Plowboy

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 01:33 PM

Originally Posted By: PianoWorksATL
Artists get approached in a variety of ways. Sometimes it is aggressive to the point of threatening.


New York can be a rough town.

Nunzio from Steinway: "So, Miss Lisitsa, dat's a nice little piano you gots dere. It'd be a real shame if sumtin were to happen to it, y'know what I mean?"

The scene shifts to Bosendorfer artists nervously checking under their pianos before playing a note...
Posted by: Jeff Clef

Re: Garrick Ohlsson on pianos - 10/09/12 06:58 PM

"...For Lisitsa fans here, you might be interested in what she told me when I met her..."

Oh, I am. Thanks so much for sharing this, bennevis. I've been a big fan since I was seated barely 25 feet from her, in a performance at a local hall--- one of those bolts of lightning that strikes from the stage.

Wish I had been there with you, but your story made me feel almost that I had. We did not get to speak that night; she let the piano do all the talking.