Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Helen Grimaud

Saw her play in chicago the schumann concerto. It was pretty underwhelming.

I apologize, but reading this, it almost sounded like. Passionate people, don't get passionate. I think it is silly to say good musicians don't get worked up.

Her hands move like crabs at the piano. I find her textures and colouring inferior to that of other pianists with her level of career success. I find her musicality bland, middle-of-the-road, often oversentamentalized, and thus greatly exaggerated by her brilliant marketing.

Look, don't let me stop you from enjoying her recordings-like I said, somebody's gotta buy them.... but don't you 'sour grapes' me.... I do not resent the success of others as long as they deserve it according to my perspective.

She did not start out as a child prodigy. That is what her marketing machine would have you believe. Prodigies are people like Haochen Zhang-people whose Chopin etudes sound world-class already at the age of 11 or 12. Those people and places she has performed are all thanks to her undoubtedly powerful connections in the music world, her looks, and her story.

Besides things in France, tell me.... what international competitions did she win?

According to a New York Times article earlier this year, in addition to "her recent recovery from a series of dire illnesses — pneumonia, leading to chronic fatigue syndrome and an infection that spread from her lungs to her heart" Grimaud has also had to deal with "another, unrelated series of dire medical issues — a tumor discovered to be stomach cancer, leading, after a delay caused by a bronchial infection, to surgery and chemotherapy". It hardly seems as if her cancelled appearances are the direct result of being underprepared.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/28/arts/music/28helene.html

JAP, feel free to dislike the playing but please behave towards a colleague in a professional manner.
Entering the Conservatoire de Paris at the age of 13 is not due to her connections (who? she comes from a modest family) or her looks. (That bit is very demeaning actually). As for competitions, puhleeease.. Is this how you judge pianists now??? Her recording of Rachmaninoff's sonata No 2 won some prize, which is more telling than some competition if you ask me.. Many excellent pianists never entered competitions..

nycplayer.. Thanks for finding that. I knew I read something more dire about her health but could not locate it..

I'm still waiting for Pogo to return and elaborate.

Otherwise, aside from YT stuff, I've never heard her live, nor do I own any of her CDs.

Interestingly, the February Gramophone (a magazine with reviewers I respect) compared two new DVD releases by Grimaud and Argerich. Here is a quote from the review:

The Ravel [G major concerto] is common to both discs...Grimaud's take on it is more matter-of-fact and almost mechanical. While she is Argerich's equal in dexterity, her more glacial tone, most noticable in the slow movement solo, ultimately fails to engage in the same way.

No, that is definitely NOT how I judge pianists at this point in time. I use my ears.

Look, I'm sorry for her ill-health and am willing to recind the underprepared comment-I was not aware of these circumstances.... but I stand by my opinion of her playing 100%.

As to how things work at the Paris Conservatoire... I have it on very good authority that strange things go on at that place. I will say no more on this subject.

Other than Richard Clayderman is a graduate? (That just beggars belief, but I will say no more.)

Folks, to get into the conservatory at 13, it can't possibly be that she is still in the Method Books.. The antipathy is overwhelming really.. Just because she also happens to be a pretty girl???
As for dubious graduates, well the world is chock full of them, coming out of the Big J no less.
I am not shy about disliking the output of some pretty huge names, but I protest the dismissive and harsh remarks that are not based on any factual data.

Here is a more dispassionate review of a recent concert:

(Ivan Hewett, The Guardian, Nov 2010)

It’s a long lonely walk from the side of the Festival Hall stage to the grand piano squatting at the centre, but some pianists make the journey expressive in itself. Think of Barenboim, stalking towards the beast like a toreador, or Maurizio Pollini’s shambling eagerness.

Hélène Grimaud’s journey gave nothing away. She loped towards the piano with a perfectly neutral elegance, in black Chinese silk, flashing us an enigmatic smile. If this expressed anything, it was steely control. So it came as quite a shock when she plunged into Mozart’s A minor sonata with wild intensity. This great sonata is like a great tragic monologue out of Racine, and most performers limn its pathos with classical dignity. Grimaud made it seem unhinged. The slow movement was in startling contrast, languorous and slow, the ornaments at the start of each phrase curling upwards with cat-like luxuriance. The Finale was an extraordinary pianistic feat, rushing on tip-toe like someone fleeing from a bad dream.

All mightily impressive — but a million miles from Mozart. In Berg’s early sonata Grimaud’s uncanny sort of intensity brought out something in the music that was truly there already. Berg’s sonata lives on the cusp between romanticism and modernism, and some pianists relish the nostalgic glow that steals over it. Grimaud made the whole thing take place in bright daylight, in the here and now.

What this pointed to is the steely undertow in Grimaud’s playing. Her technique is unbeatable, the detail in the inner parts crystal clear. She’s a risk-taker too, as the performance of Liszt’s great B minor sonata showed. In the furious opening section, she accelerated the tempo to a dangerous frenzy, but the bass note at the end of each precipitous plunging phrase was rock-solid. The double-octaves towards the end were even riskier, but they never escaped her grasp.

Again, it was hugely impressive, and often thrilling too — especially the climactic Fugue, which I don’t think I’ve heard better played. But in the end, there’s something curiously unlovable about Grimaud’s playing. She has little feeling for the soft chiaroscuro piano sound that is such an essential part of romantic music. The long musing central section of the Liszt sonata was frustratingly lacking in poetry. Music which is fierce and brightly coloured suits her best; which is why Bartok’s charming Rumanian folk dances, the slightest thing on the programme, actually came off best.

I think Pogorelich is using her "passion" in a negative way is what I meant. Most of her posts are bad language, know-it-all, and angry. And from the successful musicians I've been around and known, they were/are passionate, but not rude, dismissive, or so negative, in an almost juvenile-like fashion. It's normal to be passionate, but to say a she "sucks" is well...It's does smell of sour grapes to me and says a lot more about the poster than the pianist in question. It's OK to have different tastes and not like someone, but until YOU have accomplished something somewhere NEAR that level, it's all empty talk to me.

Hmm, crab-like hands, eh? What do you say about Horowitz's flat-fingered style, or Pogorelich's snake-like curled fingers followed by a sudden flick?

Did Evgeny Kissin win any international competitions?
At least Grimaud tested herself at the Tchaikovsky when she was all of 15 (but no prodigy she) and got a Merit, I believe. And she recorded Rachmaninov's Etude-tableaux and 2nd Sonata when she was 16 (but no prodigy she) - fabulously mature and exciting playing.

I wasn t replying to you. But i read the "does not deserve" bit in another post. I don t specially like her playing, but my teacher , for example , loves her Bach. Ok, she ´s not Richter , but to demean her achievements like that. Also, after reading this thread, it looks like she s nopt afraid of tackling any kind of repertoire .... Bach, Rach, Berg ...

Really, is that why her parents paid orchestras to play with her when she was younger?

Come on, can you people really not hear it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4ZQpNgmqPM

Alexb, I'm not even going to acknowledge your feeble attacks on me - I'm allowed an opinion and I'm allowed to be passionate about it. Do you want me to be apologetic for caring about what I've been doing my whole life? Go to heck.

Actually I will tell you one thing, alexb. Of course part of me is angry. How can I not be? I have seen and heard so many musicians who are worth listening to (take our own JustAnotherPianist for a direct example), play with such a beautiful heart, actual artistic vision, intelligent interpretation - which always comes through, you can't hide yourself, your playing will always show what kind of person you are - and work like insane every day, yet they make peanuts compared to people like her, and here is someone like Grimaud who sucks to say the least (I much, MUCH prefer mr. LL), has nothing to say, and is incredibly mediocre and yet she performs all the time. How can you not care? Do you have no heart? Maybe playing piano for one year, you can't really know what it's like. So before you go on to judge me... just don't. I have every right to be passionate about what I do.

I compared her Brahms 119-4 Rhapsody with a few others, Rubinstein included, and personally liked hers the best -- in particular, I thought she set up the harmonic shifts leading into the final climactic statement just beautifully, and everything throughout was bold and controlled. I also thought her rendition of Beethoven's "Tempest Sonata" (31-2) -- particularly the slow movement -- was intelligently paced and argued throughout. So, from what I've heard, I regard her as a formidable pianist both technically and musically.
Physically, of course, she's drop-dead gorgeous -- and that of course doesn't hurt -- but I respect her musicality, from the little bit I've heard.

Pianists are different, she doesn't have the outgoing Lang Lang approach but she has a lot of positive qualities too. Yes, she could be more sensitive, but I appreciate pianists who don't try to personalize everything they play. In playing style, she reminds me somewhat of Cherkassky - no orchestra can overwhelm her, and she plays with a clear logic that lets the strength of the music come through.

I've seen her live twice, and tried to listen to recordings to understand why she's so well known and I just can't. Maybe it's just different opinion. It's very shallow playing, I can never hear a coherent line or even basic phrasing and it doesn't speak anything to me (and not just me...), her sound is pretty harsh. I heard her play the Mozart a minor sonata, and sound-wise it sounded like what Prokofiev could be. Nothing intelligent, hammered out, as much un-Mozartian as you can get. Her Brahms 2 sounded as if she was drunk - she barely survived it, both technically and musically. Etc.

Sure she can play notes, but what's so exciting about that?

What am I missing?

You can be passionate all you want, and you don't have to be apologetic for anything. But you need to tone it down a bit and be a bit more mature. She certainly does NOT suck. You may not like her, whatever. Fine. While there ARE talented musicians that never see the light of day, those at the very top are there for more reasons than you acknowledge or care to understand. It's not just pretty looks, connections, and "sucky" talent. It's not that simple. Not in music or in any field. I know some think it, but it's not so. LL, Grimaud, (stick the name of a player you "hate" in here that "sucks"), can play circles around most anyone. How they perform is a different side. I guarantee you that. When at the top, people are easy targets. Critics need to say things - bad things too. Tall trees experience the hardest winds and all that the saying goes..

I think you have some good things to say, but to be honest many times you come across as super-opinionated and angry. Not to mention insults and swearing. So whatever your intentions may be - good ones let's say - the way your posts are make them seem less so.

I don't care how it seems, I'm just trying to make a point. There's nothing great about being passive about these things. Just because someone is a famous performer doesn't make them good. I know how these things work, it's a business and most often than not artistry has nothing to do with it. It's to sell numbers and get $$. I know many pianists who can play circles, as you used the term, around Grimaud.

I don't need YOU to tell me how I should behave or talk, I understand where you're coming from but I'm not going to change.

Did her parents really do that?