Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Boston International Piano Competition for Amateurs

I LOVE the "Old people with degrees who aren't very good". Laughed out loud actually. Some people do not take lessons as well, just an occasional coaching or discussion from the local group. That is my case, I prefer to just use my instincts and do it seat of the pants. I cannot drive for hours and spend big bucks. This is not the top priority in my current life. I love meeting so many people and the CHALLENGE. Keeps me off the street!

I still like the "two-tier" approach that Berlin provided in 2010 -- but I haven't heard what people thought of that. Personally, I would elect for the less stringent tier in a heartbeat, because I'm not interested in programming big virtuoso works, but rather piano works not heard much (if at all) that IMO deserve a hearing. A second thing I like about Berlin is that they appear to have an extensive program for the "mini-recital" -- a good 20 - 30 minute opportunity for those who don't advance to present their programs. I understand that there is a good public audience for that as well. Colorado Springs has by far done the best job in providing this type of alternative outlet, with their Penrose Library event. This is important because contestants who don't advance want to feel that they can present some or most of the material that they've worked on to an appreciative audience -- or even an alternative set of pieces. For example, I'd use the Berlin event to introduce German audiences to some American repertoire,even if I didn't program it in the lower competitive tier.

Well said, Judy! The streets of Bend, OR are mean indeed!

YES! Focusing on artistry (compositional and interpretive) rather than virtuosity! (?)

I'm loving this discussion -- maybe especially this:



(Great job, Judy and Dale!)

I'm even loving the posts that I disagree with, including from Ronald.
Maybe especially Ronald. While I don't agree with his view, he does raise good points, and he raises them well.

I'm with this thing that Dale said:


Ronald said he doesn't get what I have against the 2-tier thing. All I can say is, I did my best to explain it in an earlier post, and I can't do any better than that.

As to why they don't allow people of older ages into the professional competitions, the answer is simple: They're looking for up-and-coming GREAT pianists, and you only find those in the younger age groups. Lots of things are like that. If you were looking for up-and-coming potentially great mathematicians, or chess players.....or, for that matter, baseball players, you wouldn't look at older people either.

If there are to be two tiers, as per some of the jokes on here it's hard to know what to use as the dividing criterion. Some people think it should be "age," and at least one competition has considered allowing people over a certain age to have the choice to be considered in a separate category. I'm old enough for that, but I'd never want to opt for it. I think I'd rather die.

Ronald thinks it should be according to whether you have a piano degree. That's a reasonable thought (need I say) but I don't think that helps anything. Often Ronald qualifies it by saying it should depend on what school the degree is from -- but if you try to follow that through, you have a real total mess, and I can just about guarantee you that it's not going to happen.

Sure, there's a correlation between having a piano degree and doing well in the amateur competitions. But IMO it's not nearly a strong enough correlation for it to be made such a prominent criterion for "categories," or for not admitting people to the competitions. I'm a better pianist and performer than many people with degrees (although less often a better "musician"), as are many of the other non-degree pianists in these competitions, and to the extent that I'm not as good as many of the "degree" people, I say BRAVO -- I love being with them in these events, and wouldn't find the events nearly as interesting or appealing without them. I doubt that I would continue being interested in these events if not for their presence, or if they were in a separate category. And I'll go even further: I think an aspect of interest in these competitions is to see how the non-degree people fare against the degree people.

The different kinds of posts on this thread, and maybe especially the jokes show how hard it is to come up with definitive criteria or dividing lines. When it's that hard, I say that less is better than more.

I don't know it's true, but I think for some if not the majority of degree-holders, entering these competitions is an ego-trip. If you stratify it, they would simply stop coming. Obviously I have no data to back it up but it'll be my guess.

To some extent, maybe a big extent, it's an ego trip for most of us, degree or no degree.


They wouldn't stop at all.

Anyway I don't really understand your premise. I guess you think they get a thrill out of beating the non-degree people, which I doubt is true, but even if it is, then what about the anti-thrill that they get from being 'beaten' by fellow degree people? After all, far more people "lose" than "win." If they were ruled by feelings such as what you said, wouldn't that have kept them from ever entering?

Good Grief! I have NEVER thought I would go to BEAT someone with a degree just because I have a degree. Nor would I be miffed at having a non degree person be above me. Don't we go to hear really great music played and try to improve ourselves (which definitely does happen when you picture yourself on that stage all alone)? My son Seth has no music degree, he studied with very good teachers all along through High School and college. I don't see him all that often now that we are on opposite ends of the country but I was really blown away by his playing in Boston. A degree has nothing to do with it, he is just good! Frankly I would have not wanted to be in the finals in either the Cliburn or Boston. They are just plain at a different level and what a show it was! The semi's would be nice once in a while however.

I agree separating participants based on the music schools is impossible, there will be protests left and right. Not to mention that some people will get offended if his or her music school is classified as amateur music school.

On your second point. I still do not understand what made you think that you are not allowed to compete against the degree people. The degree category is open to anybody. The only change is that non degree people have their own sand box to play. They can compete against other non degree people, they do not need to be bullied by degree people. However, if some of the non degree people who are strong enough and want to compete against the degree people, they are welcome to do so.

Exactly. My point is, and again, it's not like I have data to back me, that if tiered, degree people would have to compete with degree people. If they want to win, wouldn't it be easier to compete outside of your own class?

My feeling in today's amateur competitions is, based on what I've learned on this forum and have read, is that there are more and more degreed people entering whereas there were fewer of them I don't know, 15 years ago? (did those competitions even exist back then?) So I'm just thinking that many of them think they have a chance at winning and entered because of it. Maybe we have already reached an "equilibrium" in terms of degreed vs non-degreed people.

So once you have a tiered system, at least some degreed people might stop showing up. Though on the other hand, I suppose those who do show up will truly do it for the love of their craft.

Yes, your son is very good, but he does not have enough endurance like most of degree people. He always falls apart in the second round, because he did not have enough training to prepare him to play consistently. If he had gone to a music school, he would have practiced consistently for four years for final exam. In addition, he would have bigger pieces to perform. Don't get me wrong I REALLY like your son's playing. I can feel his music, just if he needs to do piano marathon.....he does not have the endurance.

If you do not want to be in the final with those big guys, can you imagine people like your son who have limited repertoire. You can imagine how embarrassing to play after people who can play Islamey, Island of Joy, etc......That is why I think it is important to have two divisions so that it will prevent embarrassment. Great real amateurs are still allowed to compete against heavy duty Pro Am like Sanchez, Choi, Shih etc if they opt to enter the degree division.....

We need more nice people like you

Though I suppose if they didn't want to win they wouldn't have practiced so hard, so maybe the competitive spirit is a good thing after all. Hmm... tough as always.

Maybe they should do it American Idol style, have the audience's votes count! Even more entertainment.

I'd replace "ego-trip" with 1. opportunity to play the rep they love in front of a knowledgeable audience 2. interest in recognition, whether it's a pat on the back from a fellow contestant, or advancement to the next round. I think this is true for all participants, not just people with degrees. Where else do amateurs/semi-professionals get to show their stuff? Who among us have friends who REALLY want to hear the Brahms-Handel Variations or all movements of a late Beethoven sonata? And assuming we pry our friends with food and drinks, how many of them really appreciate what they hear? I've had more in-home recitals than I can count and have a lot of fun doing it .... highly recommended. But ... the experience of Fort Worth (I'm one of the lurkers Mark referred to) trumps my living room, fed my "ego" (I'm one of the folks with a degree, although old and not very good) and inspired me to practice even more. Great experience all around, but not for everyone.

A quick history lesson on the Amateur Competition "idea": it was started in Paris, around 1990, by a fellow named Gerard Beckerman. In 1999, Van Cliburn introduced it in the US, and several enterprising individuals liked it so much that they started regional Competitions in 2001-03: to be specific -- Phred Meller in NYC; John Gardecki in Washington DC; Robert Finley in Boston; and Chuck Cabell in Colorado Springs. The latest one has been Chicago in 2010. In Europe, Eberhard Zagrozek started one in Berlin, and there are several other new ones in various European cities. Both MarkC and I have been involved since the "early" days. The number of entries in the Chicago Competition and the quality of the entrants clearly shows that these Competitions are "catching on". The Houston event that RS alludes to I don't know much about; it sounds like a "spin-off from the "big" Cliburn event.

Oh OK.
Now I see where you were coming from.

It's not true.

I mean, in raw numbers it is, because there are more people of all kinds entering now, but I don't think the proportion of them is greater than it was before. I guess you got that from something that was said here a while back, and you assumed it was so.

Dale: Golly, I remember that we met at the competition but (sorry!) I was so preoccupied at the time that I don't remember who you are! May I beg for a little hint....

Ronald: Your analysis of Seth is completely wrong.

Judy, philosophically I'm definitely in your camp -- the "degrees" don't bother me all that much; I just get a rush listening to highly difficult material played so well. Having said that, though, I am concerned that the inclusion of so many "semi-Professionals" into the mix has the indirect effect of limiting the repertoire choices. To be clear to everybody on PW, I speak as one who DID make the Finals three separate times in various regional Competitions, but I did it more on the strength of my original programming than my virtuosic "chops". These days, I no longer feel like I can aspire to the Finals: but, as Judy indicated, I now don't feel like I have any business on that stage: the playing now is at a virtuosic level above which I could EVER aspire. So I continue to seek other "solutions" -- perhaps additional awards, as Lingvis indicated -- or the "two-tier approach" that Berlin is trying.
The best recent personal example was my experience in Boston in 2009: I was very proud to make the SemiFinal round -- and I got to present the complete repertoire I really wanted to present. I've been richly rewarded in these events, frankly; but others haven't been as fortunate.

Elaborate please since you have seen and known him...thanks in advance.

My thought about Seth is that he is very talented and very very musical. That is why I was not surprised when he got into semi in Van Cliburn in 2007. I only see that he did not have power house repertoire for semi, and he is not old enough to get preferential treatment like some other senior citizen participants (you know many of these piano competitions love dramatic life stories). Had he had strong training (piano degree), he would have made it to the final. He definitely has enough talent just not enough practice and training.

Tim: I don't really see why you feel that the high level of contestants affects repertoire choices. I don't think it does.

I think maybe you're basing it on things that have sometimes been said to you -- i.e. that maybe you'd do even better ("competitively") if you played "normal" music, and maybe once or twice it did make you try that. I think those may have been close to the only times that there has been such an effect. I certainly haven't felt or perceived such a thing.

I won't, because I think it's inappropriate and serves no purpose to focus on one person in such a way.