Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Interest for an amateur piano competition in San Diego, CA

What is wrong with this? People who met the criteria to be in second tier have the freedom to move to the 1st tier if they want to. But the first tier people cannot join the lower tier.

Yes, the two tier format has only two stages (play twice), prelim and semifinal. The total of performance duration (prelim_12 min+ semi 15min) = 27 min max. It is doable for most people. People with big capacity or with big desire are free to compete in the more rigorous tier, 1st tier (nobody prevents them from competing against the best).

The two tier format requires no additional accommodations, other than two announcements of the winners. There will be the same number of judges from the beg to the end, same costs etc.

No, that's one type of 2-tier thing, not an inherent aspect.

If you repeat it again, please pardon if I don't answer again.

Addressing the tier idea - I would like to see two tiers based on background like the Seattle amateur competition does. One tier is for amateurs who have a music degree and the other tier is for those who do not. IMO, many of the finalists of the last Van Cliburn were actually professionals, not amateurs. They may have had a day job but some were selling CD's and had a serious background in music education. "Amateur" should be clearly defined.

I agree with your idea that education background is an objective way to measure. However, in reality, most people who competed in amateur competitions have degree in piano performance. Therefore, if we use the educational background only as the criteria, it will leave only, maybe, 15 people in the second tier pool. I think one of the criteria should be people with master piano performance cannot compete in the second tier. People who had pursued master degree in piano performance must have had the full intention to make money in playing piano. They are good enough to get into the program etc. Therefore, they should not be considered as amateur any longer.

In addition, people who had got into final in any amateur competitions should enter the 1st tier. They had shown that they have solid piano playing ability. Getting to final is such an accomplishment.

There are many incredible pianists that have no proper "degree" in music. AND many that do have a degree but are nowhere near concert pianist level. I think with the exception of a recent Masters or Doctorate, OR a position teaching at a University or Conservatory it is irrelevant. How they are playing currently is the main thing!

The only one I know of that attempted a two-tier was Berlin. There, they had about 60 - 65 entrants in the "Gold" division, and about 25 in the "Silver" (two-round) division -- that is to say, about 90 total. This aspect is critical, IMO -- if you're talking only 20 - 30 entrants total, it's really quite silly to have two tiers. However, I have noticed that, more recently, the number of entries in the Boston and Chicago regional competitions have been much higher than that -- around 55 - 65 -- and many of the "newcomers" are just dynamite pianists. That prompted me to suggest the "two-tier" idea -- the fact that you HAVE enough entrants in both "tiers" to create this option.
I had shared the Berlin idea with Numerian on this site, shortly following the Chicago competition this past year, and I thought he provided quite a good proposition to make an idea like this work. It's somewhat detailed, and so I'll only allude to it for those interested in plumbing the Archives, but it's similar to what Ronald Steinway has posted above.

I think the key is "make a living" rather than "make money" (I am not sure though). They probably won't make a living from selling CDs. I assume that some of them probably have private students. I am not sure how this would be judged in case they do make a living from private students. Because in itself I don't think that having private students (particularly at a low or intermediate level) would make a teacher really a professional pianist?

Not necessarily going to participate even assuming it is an international competition. However, a few thoughts on things which have not been mentioned or items which I feel I can comment on:

* Practice times and performance order in each round: Pre-defined as soon as one advances to next round is more efficient than having to line up to sign up for time slots after finding out that you still have to play/practice the next day.

* Last performance of the day not being too late at night is nice. Even after waiting 1-2 hours for results after each round (and then possibly have to sign up for practice time next day etc), it is still not too late at night. Those who advance need to sleep and then wake up next day to practice/perform.

* Agree that public performance opportunities for pianists who do not advance is important and welcomed.

* Try out on the actual performance piano: What are the usual arrangements in various competitions? Try out 5-10 min before each round? or only once at the beginning before prelims and no more? Would be nice to have 5-10min before each round, particularly beneficial for folks who usually only practice on an electronic piano (Disclaimer: not me, but I know a few people who practice on electronic pianos.)

* Agree supplying page turners and rehearse or at least a discussion with the page turner prior to performance is important. Having to try one a friendly pianist to do it on the fly is tough. The person being asked, if not experienced in page-turning, would worry about stuffing it up and affecting the performance (that's how i feel when I get asked to page turn, particularly for a work which I am not familiar with).

* Chamber music finals: Love it, but I can imagine not everyone would be comfortable/happy about having it as a mandatory finals requirement. If mandatory, query what is an appropriate weighting of the solo and chamber performance in the final judgment. I assume the organiser would provide the other instrumentalists in a trio/quartet. Assuming the requirement is one movement from a Trio/Quartet/etc, personally I feel 1x 1 to 1.5 hour rehearsal is enough for me. Would be demanding to require the performance of a whole work. Repertoire selection is question mark: select from a prescribed list (as opposed to free choice) is probably easier for the purpose of arranging other instrumentalists. I feel Duo/Trios are more accessible to amateurs than quartet/quintets unless the pianist regularly plays with a chamber group.

Closing comment for the time being: West coast is soooooo much closer to fly to than east coast/Europe. So if you do arrange an event as proposed, it would be very appealing to me some time down the track lol!

Great post, Jibbers!

About this one thing on the chamber music portion that they're thinking of having:


I think it would be better to leave each judge completely free on that, because of the more general consideration that I think it's best not to dictate to them how much weighting should be given to anything. I think it's best to let each judge take anything into account in whatever weightings they see fit.

IMO the absolute worst is the competitions (very few, fortunately -- maybe only 1-2) that have done the "scoring" (actually, literal scoring) by having the judges give scorings in individual categories like "technique," "musicianship," "creativity," "stage presence" with each category having a specified number of points. That sounds like high school. The best are the competitions like the Cliburn that have each judge give a single overall score for each round, taking into account whatever they wish; or just give "yes" votes on whom they want to advance without anything more specific.

For example, on the chamber music, under such an unrestrictive system, I can well imagine judges almost completely discounting the chamber music for a given candidate for the reason you said, or, on the other hand, giving it a very high weighting for someone who did extraordinarily well.

We are still discussing in Chicago the idea of a two-tier competition. Most of our entrants would prefer not to prepare a third program when their expectation, or desire, is that they will not advance to the third round. Giving awards out to this subset of participants would recognize their skills and hard work in a way that cannot be recognized in a single tier structure. This has become more necessary as the amateur competitions have been attracting some very gifted pianists with performance backgrounds. These are the pianists who naturally gravitate toward the final round. They also lend credibility to the competition, in the sense that they can reliably be expected to play at a level that is nearly professional. This allowed us, for example, to draw some excitement from a global listening and viewing audience, it allowed us to broadcast the finals nationwide on WFMT, and it allowed us to mount a concerto competition at Orchestra Hall with respectable judges such as Marc-Andre Hamelin (who was very impressed, by the way, with the talented amateurs he heard).

With all that being the case....the bulk of our competitors, and the heart of the competition, are the people who will not be competing in the finals and probably don't even want to. Not only should the competition give them a chance to perform their complete program in a relaxed setting even if they do not advance from the preliminaries, the competition should award the best of these amateurs with every bit as much hoopla as the finalists receive (though perhaps not with as much cash, as this is not much of an incentive in amateur competitions).

The core of a successful competition is the organization behind it. You need more than a year of preparation, you need full time staff for the months leading up to the competition, you need someone media friendly and familiar with recital spaces, getting practice pianos available, arranging for lodging, dealing with judges, etc. Then you need many dedicated volunteers. The budget for these events starts around $15,000, including prize money. It is also essential to supplement your budget with sponsorships, which take months or even a year to line up in advance. Monthly planning meetings a year in advance are important, gradually morphing into weekly sessions as the competition approaches. At the time of the competition, you need as much military precision as possible for the organization so that everything appears seamless and competitors are allowed to concentrate on their practicing and performance, without worrying about problems in the hall or with the piano, for example. Make sure someone is around to take care of families attending, so that they don't feel lost or unwelcome. In a city as wonderful as San Diego, there will be so many vacation opportunities available that you should expect competitors and their families to want some time off from the competition to see the city.

San Diego would be a fantastic draw for the competition circuit and I think what you are trying to do Gorden is wonderful. Any sort of advice or help we can give you from Chicago, please ask - especially since we are probably not going to be seeing you again at our competition! (inside joke - first place winners like Gorden can't compete in the future, but we will be looking for an opportunity to get Gorden a radio recital before the next competition).

How about a large-scale piano competition with various divisions, a Junior (ages 18 and under), Senior (ages 18-30) and an Amateur. I think an amateur competition by itself will fail in San Diego, but we definitely lack quality piano competitions in this county and by adding high-level categories to the competition you're more likely to get sponsors to fund this endeavor. Also, it would be nice to have a competition for US citizens/residents only.

I would define "amateur" as anyone age 30+ who does not make a majority of their income performing. So I would allow music teachers and those who have a college degree in music. Judging in the piano world is never transparent. You would typically get 3 qualified judges and let them decide who wins with all judges' decisions being final. Many times pianists are given comment sheets from the judges.

There must be hundreds of piano competitions in the U.S. with many of them having been around for a long time and drawing competitors from around the world. Why do you think they're lacking in quality?

I do not think the second tier people expect monetary reward.
In a non tiered competition, these people do not get monetary reward anyway, because virtually none of them will place or even get into final. Therefore, the organizer does not need to worry about providing monetary reward. They just would like to be recognized for their hard work and talent among people alike (not to compete against ex-conservatory students or people who had dedicated most of their life to piano and later changed direction). If there are second tier people, very few I think, who, for any reasons, have the desire to compete against the top tier people, they should be allowed and should not be prevented from doing so.

It's not at all clear why you think that's so. Want to say more about it?

Are you sure you're not saying it mainly because you personally would prefer the other kind?

And let me also say, welcome!
That's quite a first post. You seem very knowledgeable and with strong views, and you probably do have some good basis for what you said, but I'm surprised that you would have just said such a thing without saying why. I hope you will.

There are so many piano competitions for 18 and under in California. For 18-30, there are so many competitions too around the world. The one that is lacking is 30 and above for amateur.