Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Luck and the concert pianist

trail of tears this subject isn't in regards to pop music. Completely different world that is.

Turtle, this subject is related to the entire music industry as a whole. He's asking why some concert pianists make it and some don't. Talent is a big part, yes, but so are looks, appeal, charisma.

You pick any musical genre, classic, jazz, pop, rock, country, rap, hip hop, and luck is a factor in why some artists become famous and others are never heard from.

Talent may have more weight in classical, but sheer marketability is a HUGE factor.

I always heard in either classical or pop two types of people get popular, the insanely beautiful or the insanely talented.

In pop music these days, it seems all you need is the "insane" part.

I always feel old when I say stuff like this, but when I was growing up in the 70's and 80's, I remember a lot more talent than today. The 70's and 80's had some really incredible talent - Eddie Van Halen, Michael Jackson, Elton and Billy, Madonna, Genesis, the Police, etc.. Sure, we had our share of fluff (Debbie Gibson, anyone?), but there were some seriously talented people in the business.

Today, there still seem to be some talented people out there - Dave Grohl and Thom Yorke come to mind, and I think Regina Spektor's first album was very interesting. But on the whole, today's headliners (Taylor Swift, Justin Bieber, Nelly, Kenny Chesney?) just don't seem to be going anywhere. Pink Floyd followed Dark Side of the Moon with Wish You Were Here. Michael Jackson had Off the Wall, Thriller, and Bad. It felt like artists those days were just that - artists, trying to say something new and interesting, developing their voices. I even applaud some hip-hop artists for doing that - Dr. Dre, Eminem, Busta Rhymes, and Queen Latifa. Even the Beastie Boys have come a long way since License to Ill.

I just don't see the same coming from the Billboard charts these days. Nor do I see as much variety. I blame the 90's, that decade was awful. What did the 90's give us? Dave Matthews and Nirvana? Really? (Okay, it gave us Radiohead, specifically OK Computer, but I still think Laurie Anderson can take 'em in a fight.)

And please don't anyone mention U2. I will never understand the popularity of U2. Or why people take Bono as seriously as they do. I mean, the Joshua Tree was a good album, but I thought Lauper's True Colors was every bit as good, and perhaps a more personal and original statement.

And these phenomenal performers that you know have they chosen, as you say, to become "top-level touring A-list performers"?

Is it related to the whole, or to whether luck is required to make it as a top tier concert pianist (which, correct me if I'm wrong, seems to me was the OP's topic that I only read a minute ago).

I think this has a lot to do with the way pop music and marketing has developed and sorted itself out in the digital era, rather than the talent of the performers. Back in the good old days you talk about, I think many of us were exposed to a much wider spectrum of pop music than is common today, and the vast number of specialized niches that characterize the current scene just didn't exist.

But I think if you really start digging, you can still find many pop musicians who are as creative as ever - but it is unlikely they will be headliners or on the cover of People (I think the fame machine has a problem with real creativity, because it is too unpredictable to market effectively over time). An interesting development is that there seem to be a good number of composers who see themselves as primarily classical, at least in their training, but who are working in areas very close to pop. And the reverse it true, too - there are people like Steve Mackey who moved from rock to classical. And none of these are doing cheesy "cross-over" stuff.

Sort of non sequitur, other than speaking of the good old days - one of the people I most admired in pop music, Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart), died last month.

Yes. Their whole life is focused upon that very elusive goal.

As some here have said, I'm sure many top flight pianists simply refuse to experience the loneliness and bother of constant travel, being away from family and friends, boring interviews that require good answers, a smiling face and sucking-up to sponsers. Some have all the money they need so don't need to be bothered with so much that is non-musical? And, they can always play their special piano rather than having to often contend with pianos that are second rate, or worse. And.... all in the comfort of their own home.

Concert pianist Di Wu speaks of sometimes having doubts about her career choice on her web site. I believe she also mentions that every line of work has some drawbacks and of course that's true.

Conversly, I'm sure some pianists experience their greatest moments of joy when they "connect" with an audience and reap thunderous applause. They are exactly where they want to be. It has to be a wonderful feeling when the pianist receives admiration and even love from thousands of music loving people throughout the world. I expect Valentina Lisitsa is experiencing this right now--and, due to considerable effort on her own part.

People are different. Some are not comfortable with strangers and unfamiliar locations while others feel "the world is their oyster" and "home is where ever they hang their hat."

A few will have found their niche in life while others will find the life of a concert pianist is not for them. Some few don't need or want the luck. Their talent, passion and persistence is all they need.


Bech

If they play as well as and in some cases better than the top tier pianists of note on today's stage, then, might I ask where they are? Major competitions? Performances?...

luck plays a very large role in being famous. You have to be born into a situation where you are given the means and opportunity to hone your craft, and then you need to meet the right people who know the right people that can further your career.

Where are they now? One is still scrambling to get there, the other has basically given up trying to get to the top, but is still playing on a local level.

ps...I will not name them, so please stop asking.

I'm not asking you to name them. I'm wondering if they've entered any major comps or are performing at all. Unfortunately, a comp win is about what it takes to kick off a career these days (and has been for a while).

I don't know all the details, except that they both pushed and pushed and tried and tried to get to the top.

Not really sure you could call the good Captain "pop"! But he is a case in point. He was inventive and original, to say the least, he chose not to be popular. With his voice he could have been a huge blues artist, but selling out wasn't his thing.

[quote=KreislerI always feel old when I say stuff like this, but when I was growing up in the 70's and 80's, I remember a lot more talent than today. The 70's and 80's had some really incredible talent - Eddie Van Halen, Michael Jackson, Elton and Billy, Madonna, Genesis, the Police, etc.. Sure, we had our share of fluff (Debbie Gibson, anyone?), but there were some seriously talented people in the business.[/quote]
It's probably true that even the standards of popular music have drastically lowered, but hasn't popular music always been geared toward an unsophisticated audience? I can't think of any pop singers who are as vocally accomplished as well-trained opera singers or any pop pianists who can compete with the likes of Horowitz, Rubinstein, or even Lang Lang.

It's probably true that even the standards of popular music have drastically lowered, but hasn't popular music always been geared toward an unsophisticated audience? I can't think of any pop singers who are as vocally accomplished as well-trained opera singers or any pop pianists who can compete with the likes of Horowitz, Rubinstein, or even Lang Lang. [/quote]

Excuse me while I step outside to , but first, let me say...let's please refrain from listing the latter pianist with the first two, ok? Thanks. (walks away and outside into the falling snow to smoke muttering "my GODDDDDDDDDDDD why must they do this to me...forever the abominations...")

Of course, I wasn't suggesting that Lang Lang is anywhere near as good as Horowitz or Rubinstein. I was merely pointing out that even someone like Lang Lang is leagues ahead of famous pop pianists.

-- !

I've been thinking about this for a while, lately: What's the big deal about fame?

I kind of think being a top-tier pianist and being famous are two different things. If fame is your motivator, then, yuck!

There is, however, something very special, indeed, when you connect with a live audience. And when you believe you have something special to give them, and actually do, it starts.

How anyone "gets to the top," and what their true motivations are, is all so incredibly complicated and idiosynchratic. Talent, work ethic, support, connections, money, politics, timing... it hurts my brain to even start thinking about it. Pardon me while I go play piano for a while to calm down.