The reason for the prevalence of comparisons should be obvious - it is because, unlike jazz, classical music is a realization of a score. And therefore, because the score is more or less a static thing, different performances of a single score can and will be compared. And that is as it should be - an important part of what is valued in classical music is how well and convincingly the performer does the job of translating the notation into a musical experience for the listener. And since many of us have at least a little experience with that process, and because many of us have also heard many performers' versions of a single piece, we are in a position to make some evaluations.

I also don't buy the argument that evaluation of quality doesn't happen in other art forms - it is clear that it does. The weekend watercolorist's output isn't mistaken for being major art, after all. People know their local lounge pianist is not on the level of Oscar Peterson.

Evaluation of quality certainly occurs outside of art too. I have spent many years in the classroom trying to teach my students the difference between science and pseudo-science. The average incoming college freshman has little grasp of what makes for a methodologically rigorous experiment/study. Correlational studies are often misinterpreted as supporting causal relationships between two variables. There is barely a day that passes where I fail to hear some claim made in the news (NPR, newspaper, television news) that misrepresents correlational data in this way.

I generally enjoy reading most discussions on this forum (when they turn into mean-spirited squabbles I always stop reading). I have read many things that, quite honestly, I had never thought of before when listening to a performer (I am a brand new pianist, but a life-long lover of classical music) and these new perspectives have refined my ear to a certain degree. It seems perfectly reasonable, and quite honestly, essential, that the most knowledgeable share their opinions with others. The criticism of a pianist's interpretation or technique by a good set of ears is analogous to a scientist pointing out the flawed logic in an unwarranted conclusion.

yes that's stating the obvious, but the points of comparison (around here at least; e.g. facial expressions or "not enough passion") border on the laughable and ludicrous. many of the comparisons remind me of olympic figure skating judging... everyone has a different dog in the fight and for different reasons, and many of the 'mark-down' reasons are simply capricious self importance or politically loaded. what's ironic is that controversial interpretations of the score by artists such as gould are now accepted as part of the fabric.



you'll be so kind as to point out where i made that argument. i said jazz artists are judged on their own merits, and against a score, albeit a more interpretive one. it should go without saying that there's a vast difference between the lounge pianist and oscar peterson; what you don't hear is an argument to choose between oscar and chick corea, or for all jazz pianists to have to be compared to art tatum to see if they're deemed worthwhile to express their art.

And I think it's ironic that you feel that you can judge us harshly, but on the other hand, you think we're not supposed to have any opinion regarding pianists.





Since you asked...



And it just isn't true that jazz pianists get judged against a score in any way that resembles what happens in classical music; the comparison doesn't hold. Improvising variations on a skeletal framework is not the same thing as working from a fully notated score that many others have also performed. And that's why they are evaluated differently, in a way that tends to emphasize their individual artistry. It is more like the way classical composers may get rated, rather than classical performers. Nevertheless, I've read enough jazz reviews to know that comparisons between jazz pianists do get made...

that would make a super interesting thread.

i find all pianists better than I am interesting so I'd probably not pass a test.. and you're probably right.

Katsaris said " ... I am a fan of Lang Lang. I know many people don’t like him, but I think that these people are simply jealous ..."

Yet another personal opinion. Just because Katsaris said it doesn't make it true.

Yup. Even professionals can be wrong.

And in this case, I disagree with Katsaris. I am sure not jealous of Lang Lang. Now some other pianists, maybe slightly but not him.

If you read the complete interview, he said clearly that he admires LL ability etc. So people who said bad things about LL are just have no base at all, so what is the base other than jealousy????

They don't like the sound of his playing. Simple as that.

There's no accounting for taste, he also likes Cziffra, which is beyond me. By your logic though,I would trash everybody who is better or more successful than I am. But I don't, so I guess it's not jealousy.

Who cares what Katsaris thinks? Is he the guru by which I should base my opinion? I wish I had a dollar for every time I've heard the "jealousy" argument...I might not be rich, but I'd have a nice shopping day at the music store to look forward to.

Here's my contradictory set of answers.

I've heard a few of his recordings, and watched a few of his youtube videos. They are HORRIBLE. Completely out of control. While he has a fabulous technique, there are tens of thousands of people who have a fabulous technique, and who can hit many notes loudly in a short interval. He completely lacks any self-control, and his exaggerations (in all directions, but particularly towards the loud + fast) ruin the music. The other part I've found completely lacking is a cohesive view of the whole piece; instead he is great at exaggerating 8- and 16-bar segments.

Add to that the attention-grabbing stunts (grimacing, body movement, radical clothes), and he is clearly trying to grab attention.

Having completely written him off as a child prodigy with fast fingers and too much testosterone, I was talking on the phone to a friend, who is a viola player with a major orchestra, and who recently performed Schubert's trout quintet with Lang Lang. I couldn't believe what I heard: Lang Lang didn't try to be the center of the piece, he is a great accompanist, he was delightful to work with, they had enough time to rehearse, and he was very interested in getting the 5 players to work out a cohesive plan for the whole work. I've seen videos of that concert, and can confirm that it was a wonderful performance.

I find it difficult to resolve this contradiction. Maybe, behind the brat with the fast fingers, there is a serious pianist hiding? Maybe, if we could just take away batons, youth programs, Rach 3, Liszt 2nd rhapsody, and force him to play Beethoven sonatas, Chopin nocturnes, and chamber music, we would find a great musician?

Here is a program I would like to hear him play: Start with Rachmaninoff's Corelli variations. Then do Schumann's symphonic etudes. Intermission, so he can rest his hands, and the audience can have a glass of bubbly. Afterwards, play something that's really tough: Waldstein sonata (or Liszt b minor). Not because it is technically difficult, but because it requires thinking and musicianship. If he survives that, a few showpieces for encores (in the vein of the Cziffra version of the Blue Danube, Rachmaninoff's version of Liebesfreud, or Earl Wild's Gershwin songs). Once I hear this kind of stuff (which is astronomically harder than Rach 3 or the trout), I might be willing to form an opinion.

or may be he is growing up? Based on his biography, he never had time to do much of that during the chronologically correct phases of his life. Better late than never.

I liked Lang Lang the very first time i've seen it. Yes, some faces are ridiculous...but close your eyes and listen to the music. Its beautifull.

He's already played lots of programs of this sort, including (as I mentioned earlier) Schubert's D960, which is hardly the piece to show off with. And he played it sublimely when I heard him in London last year. Not to mention programs of Beethoven Sonatas in Vienna's Musikverein, that most conservative of venues. And he's just about to embark on the complete cycle of Beethoven Piano Concertos in London - in a TV interview today, he admitted that he prepared for them by practising lots and lots of scales and other technical exercises, because of the difficulties of the works. Which other pianist would admit to that?

I also watched him play Mendelssohn, Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky trios with Vadim Repim and Misha Maisky last year, and it was obvious that they were equal partners and had great rapport with each other, Lang Lang keeping his eyes on his partners much of the time from his position at the piano behind them.

Listening to Lang Lang playing the Rach 3 PC has me
sitting up in utter awe ... I try to avoid the distractions of a video.

Sorry to resurrect this old Lang Lang thread, but I have to relate a personal incident that occurred a few years ago.

First of all, I hail from Toledo, Ohio, and surprising to most people, it has one of the finest art museums in the world, plus a first-rate symphony orchestra. No, it ain't Cleveland, Philadelphia, or New York, but for a regional orchestra, I think it's excellent.

Several years ago, my wife and I saw Lang Lang perform Mendelssohn No. 1 in Toledo, and we both thought it was outstanding. The tempo of the work dovetailed nicely with LL's sometimes frenetic playing, and after it was over, the crowd was on its feet.

It was then time for intermission, after which the orchestra was to finish off the night with a large symphony. Might have been Mahler or Shostakovich, I can't recall. Anyway, just as the lights are dimming for the 2nd half, this rather tall, but crouching figure scoots to an aisle seat, in the row immediately in front of us. It was Lang Lang, sporting a casual shirt and slacks. He slid down in his seat a couple of inches, as if wishing to avoid being noticed. And since the lights were down, I would've never noticed him except for the fact he sat right in front of us, but to our left by a couple of seats.

I always imagine most soloists who visit Toledo are running to their airport limos as soon as the final strains of applause die down. As I said, Toledo ain't New York. But on this night, Lang Lang looked like an excited little boy ready to witness something profound. He sat in absolute rapt attention for nearly an hour, often swaying his head from side to side with the music. And as soon as the final notes were sounded, he leapt to his feet, ahead of everyone else, and continued applauding until the final bows were taken. Then, along with everyone else, he stood, stretched, and quietly headed for the nearest exit, without fanfare and completely unnoticed. He was simply another concertgoer.

I only relate this incident because I found it both poignant and revealing. Despite the withering criticism he's received over the years, that he is simply a self-absorbed, pyrotechnical machine, I'm convinced that his love of music runs deep and is absolutely genuine. He seemed that evening to be completely unpretentious, completely unconcerned with himself, and completely absorbed in the music-making of an equally unpretentious orchestra.

I too have had to avert my eyes at times from his seeming affectations and his hyper-active playing, yet I never cease to be amazed by his prodigious technical gifts. Lang Lang is yet a couple of months shy of his 30th birthday. To dismiss him as beyond redemption at such a tender age is to dismiss a formidable talent who simply needs to settle down and focus on the music. I'm not ready to buy his CDs, nor do I follow his touring schedule, but as he matures, I'm perfectly willing to check in on him from time to time because he has the makings of a great artist.

He'll ultimately move in the direction of either Horowitz or Liberace. And I'm still betting it'll be the former.

Wait until you hear him play Schubert in recital. I've heard both the late A major and the Bb sonatas. Almost all between pp and mf, an intense, hour-long enchantment. You won't breathe.

-J

More performers than you think actually stick around for the rest of the programme and if you're lucky you'll spot them in the crowd. It is not all that unusual.

I view Lang Lang as a wonderful pianist, and add to that the piano's great international ambassador.

I guess that would make sense in larger venues, with well-known orchestras, but I didn't think it would happen in Toledo. But who knows?

I love Katsaris playing--as well as the late Cziffra.

I think K. is so right about Lang Lang's greatness.

I am so tired of hearing about facial gestures, and not about LL's wondrous imagination, beautiful singing tone and absolutely incredible technique.

I've been to Toledo many times for concerts and have performed there myself. Toledo does have a great art museum and a few good venues for performance. Unfortunately, I haven't been there for a few years and last heard Lortie with the Emperor, which was phenomenal.

I once had stage seats for an orchestra performance of the Tchaikovsky Fourth, Christoph Eschenbach conducting the Chicago Symphony. When he reached the pizzicato third movement, Eschenbach set down his baton, kept his hands at his sides, and conducted the entire movement with his eyebrows. I couldn't tell if this was an affectation or conductorial tour de force, but the orchestra was professional in any event and went along by putting on an excellent performance. Watching it as audience members, my wife and I had to squeeze our hands to prevent us from laughing out loud, it looked so ludicrous. The audience out in the hall seemed to have no idea what was going on and were able to judge the performance simply on musical standards.

That taught me that sometimes you don't want to watch the sausage being made. Television performances of great pianists were not that frequent in the past (being very expensive), and you didn't get facial close-ups as a rule. Mr. Lang, and we along with him, live in a time when the camera loves to zoom in on every eye tic, and now with HDTV we get to see every pore and freckle. No one is going to benefit from this, least of all Mr. Lang, who goes so over the top with his mooning about on the seat and his ballet hands pretending to be in Swan Lake.

He is one of those artists hard to appreciate without your eyes closed, and at least for me, only then can I enjoy the subtleties of his touch and the beauty of his tone. Nor is there denying that his past is littered with trashy performances, which are sadly and to his discredit now permanently on YouTube (don't ask for proof or I will have to post his infamous version of the 2nd Hungarian Rhapsody). This makes it harder to realize that he has been improving over the years in very noticeable ways, and which have been spelled out here by many members. In fact I can't think of any major artist who has improved so substantially as an artist. Usually concert artists tend to come fully formed, and improve somewhat on the margins in terms of interpretation and expansion of their repertoire. With Mr. Lang, it has been a wholesale transformation, at least in the sense that the trashy touches are gone, and even the gesticulations are being toned down.

It takes conscientiousness and courage for an artist to make such changes in the public eye, so bravo to Mr. Lang for that. And through it all, from what people who have worked with him tell me, he has remained ingenuous and unassuming in his professional demeanor. We tend to forget that the people we are allowed to see on the concert stage are usually not the ones who are demanding, petty, or rude. Maybe some great artists in the past could be that way, but even in the notorious world of opera prima donnas, times are changing and audiences are shrinking. Brute behavior doesn't cut it anymore.

Besides, if there is one person in the classical piano scene who could get away with that behavior, it is Mr. Lang. He has the one quality that matters above all others to booking agents and concert hall managers - he brings in the audience. Which is why Mr. Lang should not worry overmuch whether we here on the Forum like him or not - plenty of people do and they are willing to spend money to prove it. Thank goodness, then, that this fact has not turned his head and corrupted him, and that he is indeed listening to some of his critics about his mannerisms and his style of play.

Maybe he'll listen to the advice given here about taking up a career as a conductor. I wouldn't be surprised. I'd love to see how he handles the Tchaikovsky Fourth.

I've heard Lang Lang a couple of times here in Singapore. The memorable performance was the Tchaikovsky 1 with Eschenbach. Totally stunning!!!
Regardless of his physical mannerisms, and I believe there were few that night, I think he is an amazing pianist and becoming a very fine musician.

It's funny how he exacts such polarising opinions from people - and it's also interesting that some of us have worked through our opinions and even "admitted" to a contradictory destination.

I finally went and listened to his HR2 - and I loved it.
Brash, indulgent, show-off, at one point I think he channelled Liberace(!), but for this particular piece, I think it was superb.
One thing that crossed my mind was, why the diatribe towards him, when Marc-Andre Hamelin was "allowed" to play his own cadenza? It seems a touch hypocritical.

Also, the HRs are, in essence, free-form pieces based on Magyar folk tunes. These tunes, themselves, are already improvisations which Liszt notated as best he could.
Coupled with the mind-set of Liszt at the time, (his show-off virtuoso phase), and a YouTube segment from a HR12 Hough masterclass, where he says there's room for "manoeuvre" in the set - but not the Sonata - then I believe Lang Lang is justified in his interpretation.

Once again, brash and indulgent from Lang Lang? Yes! Can it be justified? Yes, I believe it can. The HRs are fun and lively pieces - mostly - and certain liberties can be taken.

This is why I think his HR is fun.

Obviously, with Bach, Mozart, Beethoven et al, we need a different approach, but I find his Liszt to be thoroughly enjoyable - even if I have to close my eyes.

It's not "a touch hypocritical" at all, since the score explicitly invites the performer to add their own cadenza.

Ah - ok.
I didn't notice that in my score.
I'll go check again.
Thanks for that.

Edit - just checked and forgot the "cadenza ad lib" notation.
I can see that it makes my Hamelin comparison difficult to defend, but I will stand by my earlier thoughts.
I believe in the context of the HRs, Lang Lang's interpretation remains valid.

wonderful post Old Man.. you were lucky

What do you believe in?

Lang Lang = good