Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner 2017 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition Megathread

Spilling coffee on my computer the day the competition started and only getting it back today from the shop certainly set me way behind!

Nevertheless, from the skimming I've done (Which is really just skimming, so if you can direct me to anyone in particular I'd be interested!)...this year seems to have a lot of nice sounds and well shaped phrases, but so far I haven't seen some of the same electricity/craziness/maverik-ey stuff that was demonstrated in competitions past (I'm thinking Deljavan, Bozhanov, Sean Chen, Kern). It's not that they seem to be necessarily "playing if safe", but instead a bit hesitant to swing the pendulum any too far in one interpretive direction. (The British guy who plays Barber in the prelims kinda did).

That being said, I loved Daniel Hsu's dreamy sound and elasticity in the Schubert Impromptus. Favorin's unusually broad tempi in the Hammerklaiver was interesting and different (Though if Pressler were on the jury again, going that far away from the score indication would be cause for trouble)

I doubt it hinged on whether jury members liked the Kapustin - it was likeable and fun and DK played it well, charming the audience. And it was short. In itself, they probably liked it just fine.

More likely, if it had a negative effect on their assessment, it was because they thought it was not appropriate, especially juxtaposed between the Mendelssohn and the Schubert. It's sort of like seeing someone loaded down in millions of dollars worth of fantastic heirloom jewelry designed by the best jewelry makers the world has known, and in the middle of all that seeing one cute and cheap piece of costume jewelry made of plastic and glass. Not a great effect.

Or, to put it a more musical context, it might be like an orchestra doing a program of the Hebrides Overture and a Schubert symphony, and throwing in some Leroy Anderson bonbon in between. It's just way out of place, you know? And you'd question the judgement of the person doing the programming.

Taking the appropriateness issue a bit further - it wouldn't surprise me if some jury members would question whether a Kapustin piece was appropriate for a big competition at all. Which again, wouldn't necessarily be about whether they personally enjoy hearing some Kapustin once in a while, but because he is more like some sort of light-weight cross-over hybrid than a "real" classical composer. If I were a juror, I think "Goodness knows, there is a vast range of more appropriate stuff to play, so why choose Kapustin?"

And, of course, there's no telling of how it might play out in their markings if a juror thought Kim might somehow trying to pander to Hamelin by playing the Kapustin.

I wonder how free the free choice of concerto really is - the choices have to approved by the Cliburn, which could say no to anything. Of course, it is a smart move to play something the conductor and orchestra (and jury) know. But what if a competitor wanted to stand out by doing something really quite different that they had a strong feeling for?

I was thinking, for example, of what might happen if a competitor submitted the Ginastera 1st concerto. I know that Slatkin has conducted it in the past, so it wouldn't mean he had to learn a new concerto from complete scratch. But I understand it's pretty challenging for the orchestra, and they can't be expected to take their parts home and woodshed just one competitor's concerto, I don't think. Based on that alone, Slatkin might say "No way", even if he liked the idea.

Anyway, I suspect the free choice is not really all that free in reality.

IIRC, Sean Chen's Bartok 2 was vetoed in 2013 and he had to substitute Rachmaninov 3. Since the competitors only get an hour to put it together, more extreme concerti are at a disadvantage (not to mention how spotty the FWSO is).

Regarding Dasol and rep, I don't think that Kapustin was the issue, nor playing it between Mendelssohn and Schubert (both of which were expertly done). Teo also played Kapustin, as did Claire Huangci in 2013. Let's also not forget that some of the programming has been far more extreme (both of Favorin's Liszt selections, lots of Shostakovich). I'm honestly at a loss as to why he didn't advance.

Easy answer: one of my old teachers, when asked by students why they didn't advance in competitions would always say "because you didn't get enough votes." Harsh, but true.

I'd like to assume that - however, I don't honestly know what the "necessary steps" would be in this type of situation other than asking the juror with the "perceived" conflict to abstain from voting for the particular candidate. And it should be the juror's responsibility to raise the issue in the first place. But no matter how it was handled, what's done is done.

And he also was out. Probably it has nothing to do but I wondered if maybe some don't like Kapustin. I personally find it perfect in the middle of other pieces! But I am aware I like variety, maybe too much.

I felt that Teo had some issues in the rest of his program (particularly in the Ravel and Kapustin, the piece notwithstanding) and that the other competitors simply did better. Who knows...

I can't imagine that playing one short Kapustin piece((out of 3+hours of playing)could negatively affect a competitor. I think Kapustin is extremely popular with audiences and pianists and considered by most to be a terrific composer. Audiences, in particular, almost always seem to love a good performance of a Kapustin work and his music seems to be steadily gaining in popularity/recognition.

This.

There were two competitors playing Kapustin (Teo and DKim) but I was left with an impression that neither listened to the recordings by the composer himself.

There was excessive rubato in both, and they both lacked a sense of an ensemble: if you look at the score carefully, there are clearly delineated distinct voices that correspond to various instruments: guitar, bass, horns, etc. Both failed to articulate the colors embedded in the score.

Most disappointing was that both "corrected" jazz chords to be more "classical." The effect was somewhat akin to Prokofiev without dissonance. The rich colors from parallel chords, extended chords were absent.

Kapustin's music is wonderful, and I'm quite intimately familiar with both pieces presented. I still believe that Kapustin's music will be featured at competitions, but I find most performances to be rather half-baked.

However, I don't think they would affected the outcome much, anyway.

Intermezzo, Op.40 No.7, to me, is a burlesque show. The free but brief 4-measure piano-solo introduction prompts the previous act to clear off the stage, while waiters in the club take order for drinks. Then, the swing band joins in, and the burlesque dancer walks onto the stage. The dancer teases and seduces, and little by little, her voluptuous body is revealed. In the coda, the last piece of her outfit is removed to a raucous audience, then the dancer makes an exit.

The variations, Op.41, is a history lesson of sort. In each of the variations, it explores different styles, from swing, ballad, bebop, and everything in between. There really is no room for much rubato, since a band wouldn't do it, except in the slow ballad. The ensemble consists of a piano, electric guitar, electric bass, drums, and horns. It's not quite a big band, popular in the former Soviet Union well into the 80s, but it certainly mixes a wide range of styles, and is quite aggressive and progressive, much like the Concert Etudes, Op.40 and Sonata No.1, Op.39.

The ballad variation should evoke a smokey club, where you hear hushed whispers of the audience, and clinking of glasses and silverware. Here, the original Latvian ? tune used in Le Sacre is presented, implying nostalgia.

I don't know, these are the things that I kept in my mind.

Ken, thanks for your very interesting input. I'm not very familiar with jazz at all, so I'm curious what you mean when you say both performers used "corrected" jazz chords. What's an example of that?

Nice viola. Enormous viola!

Lovely Dvorak quintet so far. Broberg is perfectly balanced but very energetic when required. The viola and cello in particular sound great in the quartet.

An overall very reputable and enjoyable performance of the Dvorak. Excited for Favorin and Franck, my favorite quintet.

Let's see about those first movement arpeggios.

How did the arpeggios go? The stream started buffering for me right when they started.

So far Favorin sounds terrific to me. This Franck first movement is so lush and atmospheric.

He freaking nailed it. Broberg did great, but this is in a different category, IMO. Nice to see our guy benefitting from the "performer 1/performer 2" bounce.

I admire Broberg greatly, but another case of one setting up two?

Favorin was tremendous in the Franck. The jury will lap that up!

I would not be surprised at all to see split prizes this year. The standard here is just so damn high.

For some reason I could watch Anderson and Roe run through a maze and order fried pickles for hours.

Great. Some yeehaw Texan stereotypes. No wonder people abroad legitimately believe most of us ride horses around everywhere.