Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
I think, for me, I don't think of it so much as painful for me as I feel bad for the pianist. However, I would never let it show. If I were judging, I would absolutely hold a poker face and listen objectively through the entire piece no matter how poorly I thought it was being performed.
Well, it was PAINFUL for the judge to hold a poker face. Though the judge managed to hold a poker face despite the pain.
Now, assuming that it was PAINFUL what would you do?
If you were the JUDGE: Keep it as a secret till the end of your life? Reject being a judge second time without giving a reason? Talk about it with your mentor/teacher?
If you were the TEACHER: Keep it as a secret till the end of your life? Talk about it with your student?
If you were RONALDSTEINWAY: Keep it as a secret till the end of your life? Talk about it on PW forum?
Hmm.. good questions. It's extremely difficult to say, because it would require a significant change in my thinking/character. I can speculate, and say that I would hold it in forever, but I am not 100% sure with the change in thinking/character that such a statement would hold true. I'd like to think I still could, but who knows..
I do like Ronald's suggestion about teasing the judge (in a facetious way). Made me laugh.
Every day we are afforded a new chance. The problem with life is not that you run out of chances. In the end, what you run out of are days.
In the Paris competition the judges don't suffer pain from hearing such competitors. They simply ring a bell and stop the poorly performing competitor.
Other competitions are beginning to employ live video streaming, in a way to make the competitors play more carefully.
In the Paris competition the judges don't suffer pain from hearing such competitors. They simply ring a bell and stop the poorly performing competitor.
Other competitions are beginning to employ live video streaming, in a way to make the competitors play more carefully.
While I don't agree with it, I suppose if you know they're going to do it ahead of time, then you know what you're getting into. To me, that shifts the competition from a focus on the competitors to a focus on the judges, and it is very amateurish. Makes me wonder if it is supposed to be a renowned piano competition, or an updated version of the Gong Show?
Is that a professional or amateur competition?
Every day we are afforded a new chance. The problem with life is not that you run out of chances. In the end, what you run out of are days.
In the Paris competition the judges don't suffer pain from hearing such competitors. They simply ring a bell and stop the poorly performing competitor.
Do they ring a bell only when the performance is poor or also because there is only a certain amount of time to hear each competitor and they want to hear some of the other selections the competitor has prepared? Do they give each competitor the same amount of time or do they actually have some pianists stop before their allotted time is up?
I am only familiar with the IKIF competition at Mannes. I don't know if this would be considered a professional competition but it probably would be since most of the pianists are conservatory students or at least performance majors. In all but the final round, the judges often hear only parts of compositions before they ask the competitor to play something else. They signal their desire for the pianist to stop by tapping a pencil.
In the Paris competition the judges don't suffer pain from hearing such competitors. They simply ring a bell and stop the poorly performing competitor.
Dunno if you meant that seriously but....while that's sometimes said and even assumed about "the bell," from what I observed about it (having been there a few times), that's not at all how they use it. In fact, if anything it seems that they tend to allow people who are playing relatively poorly to play their whole thing in that round -- because that's all they're going to play. It has appeared to me that they use it mainly when:
-- the rest of the piece is mostly repetition, or -- they either know already that they will advance the person or at least that they're seriously considering it, and they want to get an idea of how he/she is with some of the other repertoire -- either to help them determine whether to advance the person, or, if they already know they will, to start helping them 'decide' what the person should play in the finals.
edit: I see that Plover anticipated this:
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Do they ring a bell only when the performance is poor or also because there is only a certain amount of time to hear each competitor and they want to hear some of the other selections the competitor has prepared?....
Originally Posted by Hakki
Other competitions are beginning to employ live video streaming, in a way to make the competitors play more carefully.
I don't think that's either the purpose or an effect of the streaming. People were already playing as 'carefully' as they could! But I think the prospect of people playing not-so-well is a reason that more competitions haven't done streaming.
I have been to Paris amateur competition in 2010. I have witnessed the bell being used either way. They used it to stop poor performances and also to listen to other pieces from a competitor.
I have been to Paris amateur competition in 2010. I have witnessed the bell being used either way. They used it to stop poor performances and also to listen to other pieces from a competitor.
Are you sure the "poor performances" thing was other than when the rest of the piece was mostly repetition?
BTW, off the subj but....since we're talking about the amateur competitions, I wanted to say again how much I enjoyed meeting you in Warsaw and how much I appreciate the videos from you and your wife. They are a great, great gift.
I have been to Paris amateur competition in 2010. I have witnessed the bell being used either way. They used it to stop poor performances and also to listen to other pieces from a competitor.
Are you sure the "poor performances" thing was other than when the rest of the piece was mostly repetition?
BTW, off the subj but....since we're talking about the amateur competitions, I wanted to say again how much I enjoyed meeting you in Warsaw and how much I appreciate the videos from you and your wife. They are a great, great gift.
I think one competitor was stopped because of too many memory lapses, and another was stopped because of poor playing. If I remember correctly Daniel Chow (who won 3rd place) was interrupted by the jury to hear more of his pieces.
BTW, you are welcome, it was my pleasure to meet you in person in Warsaw.
Last week, I had a discussion with a friend of mine who is going to join an amateur piano competition. She wanted to play Chopin Nocturne Op. 48 No.1. By the way, she and I have the same teacher. Originally, our teacher allowed her to play this pieces, however, two weeks later, he said "You should not use this piece for a competition".
This post is so insulting on so many levels, the overall implication being, I suppose, that no "amateur" could possibly penetrate the profundities of Chopin's Opus 48, No. 1. Are you KIDDING me?
Or is this simply a subversive attack on the poster's friend who chose to play this Nocturne but was later betrayed and undermined by her teacher?
I mean what the heck is this post ABOUT? Other than, of course, making all amateur pianists feel they are fools and dupes at the hand of judges and teachers associated with these amateur competitions.
Whose snobbery is on display here? The "friend" of the humiliated amateur pianist who actually thinks judges with superior sensibilities are being put upon by inferior amateur performances? Or the ridiculous teacher who arbitrates repertoire as a "god" would?
Really. This is extraordinarily stupid. And cruel.
I love Chopin Op48 No1. One of the pieces that's still in my current "repertoire" (if I would even call it that). I think there could be a number of interpretations why this piece "should not" be played at a competition. Probably the least offending is that it is overplayed, and expected to be played to exact perfection. That is a tall order, and darn near impossible to surmount. So, if I were a teacher, I might coach the student that a different piece might be more appropriate, and give the student a better chance of "winning".
That said, there may be a better way to say it than was indicated, but I think there is at least room for interpretation there.
Every day we are afforded a new chance. The problem with life is not that you run out of chances. In the end, what you run out of are days.
I haven't read every post in this thread but to some extent I blame the teacher for not defending the competitors.
"Have you always had poor self-control?",would have been a good start and given the judge a bit of reason to pause for thought.
Of course we don't know all the details or the conversation verbatim, but for the teacher to capitulate just like that is pretty poor, if that is what did happen. (I wish to make it clear I would not leave the teacher for this, but I would have asked if he/she did defend competitors, it might make the teacher think a bit too)
Too often people in power abuse their position and are so arrogant and insensitive they can't even see they are doing it.
I would possibly insist that I play the Chopin as I derive pleasure from seeing other people enjoy themselves.
In life I think it is REALLY IMPORTANT to confront any situation where somebody else is trying to control me through fear, no matter who they are, I won't have it, end of story.
We are often subliminally bullied or controlled in the interests of other organisations and we don't even know it is happening.
If you are living your life and you are not harming others it is not the business of anybody else whatsoever, in this situation you are paying a person to advise you but that doesn't mean you have to listen to them....
But I understand that we all do different things different ways.
Damn the judge and play the Chopin, let him laugh all he wants, that's my attitude.
"Have you always had poor self-control?",would have been a good start and given the judge a bit of reason to pause for thought.
But the judge didn't laugh so apparently he had self control.
I didn't say he didn't have self-control, I simply said it was poor. I note he also takes it upon himself to speak for all his collegues too, very dangerous ground.
From OP
"This particular judge said "It was painful to listen to these amatuer pianists, WE often needed to control ourselves so that we would not laugh during the performances". By the way, this particular judge took lesson from my teacher. "
"Painful",.....
To my mind this judge is simply not fit for purpose and should give up, I notice he/she took lessons from the teacher he/she was speaking to, that is outrageous!
Something wrong there, there is more to this than meets the eye, the teacher should have challenged the statement and it would bother me that it appears he didn't.
Any challenge, would have given the so-called judge reason to think.
As it is he/she appears to have got away with it.
A shame. I am not surprised the student was a mite upset, so she should be.
Perhaps she could meet this judge and put them straight although wait until after the judging.....
At least if she ever becomes a judge she has the perfect example of how not to behave, as we have too, now.
but....while that's sometimes said and even assumed about "the bell," from what I observed about it (having been there a few times), that's not 
but....since we're talking about the amateur competitions, I wanted to say again how much I enjoyed meeting you in Warsaw and how much I appreciate the videos from you and your wife. 
