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

You are going to say positive things about him, aren't you? If you are going to say negative things, I do understand it is not appropriate.

Tim, if you do not have a piano degree and you got into semi, you basically had won the competition As I said many times, it is possible but very very difficult for non degree people. Especially now, when degree people play Chopin 4th Ballad in the prelim, and they play well too.

Tim,
I just want to interject that I thought your playing in the Chicago competition last year was extremely thoughtful, patient, lyrical and fully engaging. I was there as an audience member for all of Friday, Saturday and Sunday (sorry, Thursday folks! If I'd have know what I was in for, I wouldn't have missed it!) It was my first experience with anything having to do with piano competitions. Since that time, I have wondered if it would ever be possible for a pianist to make it to the finals without playing some kind of big crash piece.

I think it will be hard to get into final without big crash pieces. It is like man figure skating, no quad, no win.....The industry has moved to different dimension. So many Pro Am enter these so called amateur competitions. As my teacher said it is virtually impossible for a real amateur to be able to play those kind of pieces well, only Pro Am can do this, and most Pro Ams have piano degree(s) or went to conservatory in the past but changed their mind to pursue other things.

Dale, This is the heart of it, for sure! My impression at the Chicago competition (especially with some of the preliminary round performers) was that there were some contestants who were showing off to the detriment of their playing (cf. the thread, "Why do pianists look up?," as in, why do they swoon and then miss the very next phrase when they come around for another doh-see-doh with rapture? I mean, if you're going to have fun riding the merry-go-round while you play piano, you better hang on to the notes!) But the greater majority of contestants were there to share their work, just as you say--to play to a knowledgeable audience and to have their work be recognized and appreciated by people who can recognize and appreciate it at the level with which the work was carefully prepared and offered.

By the way, I understand what you mean about your friends. My wife's comment to me the other day was, "Gurlitt/Schabel, Mozart/Bach... What's the difference? They all wrote music and you play it. Ho-hum." She is one who would definitely need to be pried out of her preference zone to listen to a piano concert. Dale, forgive my joke, but are your friends like my wife so that you need to pry them, or do you perhaps mean that you "ply" them with food and drink? (Hee-hee. inb4BruceD!)

Thanks for un-lurking, Dale!
--Andy

Exactly the analogy I was thinking of, Ronald! And my point is, could one of these (or other) contestants play a program of NON-crash pieces with such finesse and conviction that he or she could advance to the finals and win? This is a question of "what if"--an exercise in imagination, not an assessment of "what is." Can anyone here imagine it happening? What would it take for that to happen?

The non big crash pieces must be played extremely well, and needs some help from a dramatic life story. With these two ingredients, one may make to the semi final, but to advance to final or win is different story. Because there are many people who can play big crash pieces VERY well these days....not like in the early 2000.

I can tell you that Seth had very little time to practice before Boston this year. He went to a meeting the week before and had only touched a keyboard a couple of times. His work and family are his main priority, that has nothing to do with his "endurance". As for the Cliburn in 2007 he was unbelievably nervous, had not slept, practiced too much (Mark, Robin Green and I know the feeling!) It was also his first outing in years. Believe me he is far better off doing what he is doing (Molecular Biophysicist, Rockefeller) then having been a music major and teaching at a Jr. College. I think the time and energy one has to put into it most certainly has a great deal to do with it. People's lives change, perhaps in the future he can be more dedicated.

I'm surprised this person is considered an amateur:

Angela Lee Tien

Winchester, Mass.

When Angela Lee Tien performs Tuesday, it will be for the joy of playing the piano. But to find that joy, she had to stop playing for 13 years.

Tien, 40, was 4 when she started piano lessons with her mother, who saw immediately that she had talent and put her on track to become a serious pianist.

At 9, she was performing with the Boston Pops and the Boston Symphony Orchestra. After high school, she earned a degree from Juilliard and a master's from the New England Conservatory. She studied with sought-after teachers. Her friends were musicians. Her free time was spent alone in practice rooms. Music was her whole world.

"It was just momentum," Tien says now. "I didn't really think about what else I would be doing. I just did it."

It wasn't until she'd almost reached the end of her education that Tien began to question whether she wanted to become a professional musician at all.

"I can't say there was ever really a time that I felt like, yes, I want to be doing this for myself," she says. "It was just expected of me."

So, as she finished her master's degree, she began to think about whether she wanted -- and could afford -- to spend the next several years struggling, entering competitions and trying to build a career in the cutthroat performing world. The answer was no. She'd had enough, and she walked away.

"It was a bit of rebellion" against her parents for pushing her so hard, Tien says. "I'm sure they were disappointed."

She, meanwhile, felt liberated. For several years, she didn't touch a piano at all. She married in 2000 and had three sons.

But Tien's break with the piano didn't last forever. In the summer of '09, she and her husband were buying a car and Tien struck up a conversation with the salesman, who had a degree in drama but was working at the dealership to support himself.

"It stirred something in me, reminded me of myself," Tien says.

She suddenly realized: She wanted to play again.

The next day, Tien called the New England Conservatory and enrolled in the school's continuing education program. She has been working with a teacher since then, practicing late at night after her kids go to bed.

Of course she wants to do well at the Cliburn. But ultimately, Tien says, "I want to be able to enjoy being up there, enjoy what I'm doing, enjoy the music I'm going to make."

Don't be surprised though, because this is the official definition of amateur according to VC Amateur Piano competition organizer:

The Van Cliburn Foundation will host its sixth International Piano Competition for Outstanding Amateurs™ May 23–29, 2011 in Fort Worth, TX. Our definition of an "amateur" is one who says he or she is an amateur...

So basically, anybody can join.

Mark, I think you're correct in stating that limited repertoire has not in fact been a problem in these Competitions to date. I guess I'm more antsy about the threat of this happening more in future Competitions. I tend to agree with RonaldS that to advance to a Final round now, one must program a "big Crash" piece to prove one's mettle, and this of course has to programmed in a Preliminary or SemiFinal round -- thus indirectly limiting the literature choices. And the judges in general haven't helped -- as you indicated, and I agree, programming Scarlatti, Bach, and Schubert is just the kiss of death for potential advancement. So I continue to plump for some enrichment of "non-virtuosic" incentives.

What I meant was, I'm surprised that they came up with a definition that allows people like these to participate in amateur competitions. The term "amateur" is a redefined term when it comes to piano competitions. It isn't used in the usual sense of the word.

Well, for many dozens of years, the Olympics are reserved for "amateurs", not professionals.

Which obviously translates into many medals for countries like Soviet Union and East Germany.

Even today, many athletes are technically "amateurs", not professionals.

And surely, they are world-class.

So no, I don't think it's reserved for just piano.

You can be an amateur and still be the best in the world at something.

Good catch!! Definitely "ply". "Pry" conjures up all sorts of awkward images.

We met in the aisle of the auditorium, I think just before they announced the finalists. I introduced myself to you and your wife. I mentioned your thread re. two wonderful measures in the 4th Ballade and our brief exchange here on PW. Does that help? There was a lot going on that evening, so no worries that you don't remember. I also think I remember you from a Leschetizky student-artist recital at Klavierhaus in NYC in Feb 2008 (or 2007). Did you play Scriabin in that event?

Yes, I did play the Scriabin at that thing (it was Jan. '08). And actually I did remember all that you just added about when and how we met at the Cliburn -- I remembered it vividly. But I was begging for an extra hint, however tiny it might be....I think that's all that it would take.

Apologies .... I thought you didn't remember the conversation. I'm Martha.

THANK YOU!!!!

I absolutely did remember having met you (I mean the actual person that you are) but, what threw me off from realizing that you were "Dale" is that I wrongly assumed Dale must be a male! (You don't have to tell me that Dale is also a woman's name, nor that user names don't necessarily have anything to do with who the person is.)

BTW: You extremely underrated your playing in the earlier post! You are terrific.

You're kind. Thanks.

I don't agree at all.

I can see how the impression came about: those are the pieces that are played by MOST of the people who do advance furthest. But IMO it's not because you have to; it's that the more subtle pieces require more subtle ability -- which is rarer. For example, Clark Griffith has advanced very nicely in two Cliburn competitions without "big crash" pieces.

A few years ago, there was a somewhat-well-known instance (I'm going to try to avoid saying who) where someone who played a Mozart sonata in the semi-final of one of the "major" amateur competitions bitched about how maybe it was a mistake to play the piece because you can't make it with that -- obviously thinking/assuming that there was nothing wrong with the performance and that in fact it was excellent. IMO (and in the view of at least some others who were there) the person was very mistaken -- but often such stories get around whether they're true or not. If the performance of the Mozart sonata had been excellent, the person would have had as good a chance as anyone to advance further.

Maybe another way of putting this is that stuff like Mozart is just HARDER. This is often said, and is perhaps viewed by many as being silly. But IMO it's completely true. The music requires a finer and more subtle ability, and it exposes flaws more starkly.

Oh.....in case you're wondering, what about non-"big-crash" pieces by Romantic or modern composers? Maybe I don't know exactly what y'all mean by "big-crash".....I assume you mean pieces that are technically impressive. So, what about Romantic pieces that aren't technically impressive (like, for example, Schumann's Arabesque)? For the most part, those just don't give as much opportunity to show what one can do -- and that would be the problem with them.

But a non "big crash" piece by Mozart?? Play it, nail it, and I can just about promise that you'll do great in these competitions. (Chris Shih did -- Mozart's Sonata in D, K. 311, was what got him into the finals in his first amateur competition.)

P.S. I also ought to mention.....people who play big-crash pieces with nothing but "big-crash" don't fare well in the competitions, except in events that have a weak field, which is becoming rarer and rarer.