Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Early days, but I’m sticking my neck out and saying that Bruce Liu is a once-in-a-generation talent. The technique (from my point of view) alone is worth the price of admission. What I heard was beyond belief. Gobsmacked, in fact. And I’ll go further and say that I don’t think I’ve heard a “big name” pianist on the current concert circuit with his technical prowess. A modern-day Agerich, but actually a bit cleaner, more precise.
Only time will say, but certainly IMO largely exaggerated. In fact the Chopin Competition prize winners (up to the 6th) is filled with people that were promising and never achieved any top concert carreer (by their own choice or not), or arent even remembered for having recorded a reference version of one Chopin piece, some being in the jury. They may have had a good carreer as teachers but wont leave any legacy. Of course there are also a few that did get to the top. I wish the very best to Liu, he certainy worked very hard like all the others and deserves success.
Never read more stupid thing. However, nowe of the winners of the Cliburn competition made the career so big as average Chopin winner and it looks like its competition for 2nd tier pianists. Who was 5th in warsaw was 1st in Fort Worth.
Moscow made more prominent winners than Cliburn, and Leeds and Brussels besides one or two winners are level below Warsaw. Can you face Ashkenazy, Ohlsson, Zimerman, Argerich, Pollini, Avdeeva, Seong Jin Cho, Yundi Li and Blechacz? All of them are superstars.
Years 1980-1995 were generally bad for piano and est players are like Thibaudet, Berezovsky, Lugansky Andsnes, but they are sorry not on pair with the afromentioned.
Still prize winners in 80 were Bunin, Luisada and Laforet, among other.
Never read more stupid thing. However, nowe of the winners of the Cliburn competition made the career so big as average Chopin winner and it looks like its competition for 2nd tier pianists. Who was 5th in warsaw was 1st in Fort Worth.
Moscow made more prominent winners than Cliburn, and Leeds and Brussels besides one or two winners are level below Warsaw. Can you face Ashkenazy, Ohlsson, Zimerman, Argerich, Pollini, Avdeeva, Seong Jin Cho, Yundi Li and Blechacz? All of them are superstars.
Years 1980-1995 were generally bad for piano and est players are like Thibaudet, Berezovsky, Lugansky Andsnes, but they are sorry not on pair with the afromentioned.
Still prize winners in 80 were Bunin, Luisada and Laforet, among other.
Sorry to hurt your feelings. I am not comparing between competitions. But the fact is that out of the 100+ that received a prize, only a handful got to truly international career. Though Ohlsson is a recognized musician, I dont remember that he recorded anything that is considered a reference version of a Chopin piece. Unlike Perahia who "only" won Leeds.
Who remembers of Irina Zaritskaya, Alexandre Uninski, Imre Ungár, Bolesław Kon, Abram Lufer, Louis Kentner, Leonid Sagalov, Yakov Zak, Roza Tamarkina, Witold Małcużyński, Lance Dossor, Agi Jambor, Tatiana Chebanova, Arutyun Papazyan and so many others.
That said, I do recognize that the Chopin Competition also rewarded several top pianists. My point is there is a large number of winners of various prizes that did not make a top concert carreer. That is just a fact. It does not necessarily mean that the competition is useless, but maybe that they would have made a top carreer anyway and maybe not. But that is another discussion.
Also I suggest you remain polite. If you consider people like Andsnes not at par with Cho, that is your opinion but not mine.
I'll go out on a limb and say that Cho is probably the best winner they've had in ages for the Chopin competition, likely since Zimerman. He only gets better and better and was already amazing to start with. The other winners are all great artists and top-level musicians, but they don't hold a candle to him.
Cho always sounds to me like an AI doing the average of what people consider "correct playing". The archetype competition winner kind of player. Even then he is not that polished. Recent Beethoven 3rd in Warsaw is rather stilted, for example.
Years 1980-1995 were generally bad for piano and est players are like Thibaudet, Berezovsky, Lugansky Andsnes, but they are sorry not on pair with the afromentioned.
Yet they have all had successful careers.
Quote
Still prize winners in 80 were Bunin, Luisada and Laforet, among other.
Cho always sounds to me like an AI doing the average of what people consider "correct playing". The archetype competition winner kind of player. Even then he is not that polished. Recent Beethoven 3rd in Warsaw is rather stilted, for example.
God damn it, from my point of view you couldn't be farther from the truth. I absolutely love Cho's records and videos from youtube. In terms of technique, he's absolutely flawless, there's literally no part of any piece that you can ever consider hard for him judging from the way he plays it. But ofc that is not enough to call these records amazing. What absolutely bought me is the amount of resource he possessed in aspect of expression. He has a lot ideas, he can give them life without any problem, he uses wide range of dynamic and articulation and all of this is very reasonable, with very precise plan that is based on his knowledge of a piece. That's exactly what I think about Liu. Look at this: how many ideas he incorporated in concerto, these ideas were on point, didn't violate phrase structure, they were refreshing to mind, some of them were extremely hard to execute but he did almost everything flawless.
Also I have to say that outloud - Dang Thai Son is probably the best teacher of the last 50 years of piano world, and I can easily call him acomplished in every term of pianistic career. Winner of one of the most prestigous competition in the world, teacher with an absurdely huge amount of pianists that won or was awarded with other prizes in best piano competitions.
God damn it, from my point of view you couldn't be farther from the truth. I absolutely love Cho's records and videos from youtube. In terms of technique, he's absolutely flawless, there's literally no part of any piece that you can ever consider hard for him judging from the way he plays it. But ofc that is not enough to call these records amazing. What absolutely bought me is the amount of resource he possessed in aspect of expression. He has a lot ideas, he can give them life without any problem, he uses wide range of dynamic and articulation and all of this is very reasonable, with very precise plan that is based on his knowledge of a piece. That's exactly what I think about Liu. Look at this: how many ideas he incorporated in concerto, these ideas were on point, didn't violate phrase structure, they were refreshing to mind, some of them were extremely hard to execute but he did almost everything flawless.
Also I have to say that outloud - Dang Thai Son is probably the best teacher of the last 50 years of piano world, and I can easily call him acomplished in every term of pianistic career. Winner of one of the most prestigous competition in the world, teacher with an absurdely huge amount of pianists that won or was awarded with other prizes in best piano competitions.
Not so. Cho clearly struggles with Rachmaninoff 3rd and Prokofiev 2nd, and I can't ever imagine him playing Bartok 2nd. His Chopin's 3rd sonata also doesn't reflect the best of technique. Besides the technical point if you find his performances interesting that's perfectly fine. I just find others, including the new winner Bruce Liu, much more musical than him, whose playing never seems to live in the moment, but a copy of what he practiced a thousand times at home, which tends to be an average and perfectly middle of the road interpretation.
As for Dang Thai Son's teaching record—I agree with you. But Cho was not his student. For the last Chopin competition I liked Dang's students Eric Lu and Kate Liu better than Cho, although I found both of their performances also flawed.
God damn it, from my point of view you couldn't be farther from the truth. I absolutely love Cho's records and videos from youtube. In terms of technique, he's absolutely flawless, there's literally no part of any piece that you can ever consider hard for him judging from the way he plays it. But ofc that is not enough to call these records amazing. What absolutely bought me is the amount of resource he possessed in aspect of expression. He has a lot ideas, he can give them life without any problem, he uses wide range of dynamic and articulation and all of this is very reasonable, with very precise plan that is based on his knowledge of a piece. That's exactly what I think about Liu. Look at this: how many ideas he incorporated in concerto, these ideas were on point, didn't violate phrase structure, they were refreshing to mind, some of them were extremely hard to execute but he did almost everything flawless.
Also I have to say that outloud - Dang Thai Son is probably the best teacher of the last 50 years of piano world, and I can easily call him acomplished in every term of pianistic career. Winner of one of the most prestigous competition in the world, teacher with an absurdely huge amount of pianists that won or was awarded with other prizes in best piano competitions.
As for Dang Thai Son's teaching record—I agree with you. But Cho was not his student. For the last Chopin competition I liked Dang's students Eric Lu and Kate Liu better than Cho, although I found both of their performances also flawed.
Yeah I know Cho wasn't his student, but I mean in last competition it was like 3 of his students in final 6, now again 2 of his student in top 6 including gold medalist. Also his masterclass are always great experience, his preparation is constatly amazing, the way he talks about music in interviews, that is just amazing. Also how happy and humble he is, this is like really great to see, something extraordinary surrounds this guy.
Time will tell if Bruce Liu, or even Sorita or Gadjiev fulfill a promising career as solo concert pianists. Not every winner of a major competition gets a sustained concert career with a major following. Case in point are winners of the Cliburn: does anyone here collect recordings by Simone Pedroni, Andre Michel Schub or Jose Feghali? Beatrice Rana is a noted pianist on the circuit, and she finished 2nd to Vadym Kholodenko. The only noted superstar to emerge from Cliburn has been the reclusive Radu Lupu.
The Chopin Competition has a better track record on recording artists, with a bevy of names (Pollini, Argerich, Zimmerman, and yes Yundi, Blechacz and Cho. Marketing plays a big part of course, the end result is who will fill the concert halls with a paying public?
Was Kobayashi upset during the winners concert? She walked out quickly after she played.
I can't imagine why she'd be upset. She plays Op. 18 No. 24 as well as anyone in the world, and today was no exception. Plus she was smiling when she got her flowers.
PS - I loved those overhead shots of her playing the last prelude, with her left hand fully extended and see-sawing above and below the pivot notes in the middle of the figure. She has impeccable form.
When it comes to judging musicians who are already at a very top level, it is difficult to be objective. Art and music in particular is so personal that it is difficult to put aside one's personal biais. For example there is a consensus that Argerich is one of the best pianists and yet I cant stand most of what she is playing, except a few pieces. I recognize her talent and I understand that others may like her intensity, but I simply cant appreciate how she plays.
For the 20015 competition it is interesting to look at the ratings. Hamelin actually got better average than Cho in both the second and third round, Kate Liu also had a better score than Cho in the 3rd stage, though not by much, but still ....
In the final out of 10 points, Cho got once a 1 and a 6 (Harasiewicz who won first prize in front of Ashkenazy) when most others jury members gave him 10 (twice), 9, 8, .... Kate Liu got 3x10 and 4x9 and some 8s too ie at least 7 jury members considered she did a top performance and yet a well known pianist gave her a 4 ie under average with a 6 to Kobayashi who did not win anything.
So professional expert jury members cant even have a consistent appreciation. There can be differences, but to give Cho a 1 or a 6 or to give Liu a 4 when others give 9 or 10 shows how diverse an individual judgement can be, even among professionals with many years of experience. Thats why it is the average consensus of the group that decides and not the individual appreciation (unless one jury member can influence enough of his collegues).
BTW Cho got only 5 points before correction (out of 170) above Hamelin in the final which is really very little, so in effect Cho won by a (at least in the score) small margin and essentially based on the final stage. And that year the prize for concerto was not even attributed, which I assume means the jury did not consider the quality was high enough to give a prize.
I am not saying that Cho did not deserve to win, by some criteria, he did, but it wasnt an overwhelming decision and Hamelin was really close. This is unlike in 2005 where obviously there was no competition to Blechacz. Again my point is not about the rightness of the decision but simply about the fact that it is difficult to give objective ratings.
Also, I think that technique is certainly a point of interest for pros and for us in PW since we all play the piano. But honestly when I go to a concert, I dont listen to technique, just to the musical result. The technique is the business of the musician. And when I go to listen to a singer, I dont have a clue as what is a good or bad technique. I just enjoy the music (hopefully). What is important is that musicians can indeed fill the concert hall and communicate emotions. So if musicians have a great technique, good for them, what is important is what they make out of it.
Many pianists have a prefered repertoire where they excel but will be average in others, thats why comparing pianists can be very tricky. Zimerman is outstanding in the romantic music for example but not in the baroque, when other pianists can play well Bach, Mozart and Chopin. I did find Cho truly oustanding in Debussy, more than in Chopin actually, but I have not listen to him in other areas. I do prefer some of the other winners like Blechacz, Avdeeva, Triffonov or Bhozanov. But as I said this is my biais. Only collective opinion will tell in the future who will emerge in the legacy.
Was Kobayashi upset during the winners concert? She walked out quickly after she played.
I don’t think so. She is just very private. Japanese people were surprised to see her smiling with Sorita. I thought she was too serious too. No one knew she was actually warm and funny until we saw her with her childhood friend (Sorita).
Cho always sounds to me like an AI doing the average of what people consider "correct playing". The archetype competition winner kind of player. Even then he is not that polished. Recent Beethoven 3rd in Warsaw is rather stilted, for example.
Yeah, I agree. I get a little tired of the Cho worship.
Just look at the passage at 5:25, or 7:45 and try to tell me he gets it. I'm not buying it. He's a fine pianist but Chopin is largely over his head.
