Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner 16th Tchaikovsky Competition

I agree that more contemporary music would be welcome, but there is actually a nice range of underplayed repertoire in the next round (as far as competitions go, at least): Medtner Night Wind, Boulez Incises, Bach Art of Fuge, Rach Chopin, some rare transcriptions (Grieg Peer Gynt??!???), and some Scriabin miniatures. I remember one of the candidates in 2015 played Messiaen, not to mention Debargue's Medtner.

That's all great, to see that rep getting played, just saying that comparatively speaking, this competition overall has much smaller representation of lesser-performed or modern stuff. You could find two or three competitors from the last Cliburn who had more new/obscure rep than from all of these semifinalists. Then again, given that this competition is celebrating Tchaikovsky and his legacy, it's nothing strange that we're getting all of these familiar Russian war horses. It's funny how many of us perhaps aren't necessarily that crazy about Tchaik 1st concerto, yet here we are, following the competition that is guaranteed to give us more performances of it than is healthy to listen to in two days.

My quibble starts when programs end up too one-sided - Tarasevich-Nikolaev's semi program for ex consists of Rach op 16, one Etudes-Tableau, and Prokofiev 6th sonata.

I really enjoy listening to Yemelyanov. Hope he can make the finals.

Someone should make statistics on how often early-day performers pass vs evening performers. I've done that for other competitions and have often found that early-day performers were less likely to pass overall.

I'm reminded by studies done in court cases where more severe punishments were given out if decisions were made right before lunch and not after lunch. Hungry, impatient jurors make different decisions than content ones, I suppose.

I'm also reminded by a study made with, I believe, jurors from the Chopin competition, who were asked to listen to ten recordings of a Chopin mazurka and rank them. Except, there was one recording that was played twice. Not only did no juror notice, but they also gave different scores to the two identical performances!

Things to keep in mind perhaps, when considering the subjective business of judging a music competition.

Emelyanov didn't seem to be playing at his full capacities, at least in Tchaik-Feinberg which is frightenly difficult to pull off. Corelli sounded better from what I heard. I wonder how much sleep he had last night...

Does the hall lack air conditioning? I vaguely remember someone telling me that none of the halls in Russia have AC but I'm not sure if that's correct or why it's so. So many of the contestants look like their taking a shower during their performance.

Shiskin playing Chopin Mazurkas and Scherzo. I would prefer more creative programming.

The Mazurka set didn't really speak to me at all, I think they're overall more intimate pieces than exemplified in this reading. And the so-called "countess scherzo" feels a bit out of place here to me here. I understand the need to include rep from previous competitions, in this case the last Chopin comp, but it's refreshing to see that quite a few pianists actively avoided it. Broberg isn't playing any rep he did at either Cliburn or SIPCA from what I can see, same goes for some other frequent competition-goers.

I liked his Chopin, actually. It's refreshingly to have somehing aside from etudes. As for Broberg, much of his semis programis from Cliburn - Bach and Barber, not to mention Rach Paganini in the finals. I don't think anyone here is playing something publicly for the first time.

Will watch Yemelyanov later today.

My bad on Broberg, hadn't looked carefully enough. Gugnin does no rep from his last competition, so that would've served as a better example. Of course, most people play things they've done for years (though I was told of one competitor who was out in the first round who learned most of his rep in the months before the competition - didn't work in his favour, obviously), but some avoid repeating rep from previous competitions more than others.

Shishkin is doing great things in Rach. Not liking all of the mannerisms, but great control overall. Good that opinions differ about his Chopin! I just find the Scherzo rather uncomplicated interpretatively/musically, compared to so many other things.

The hall was renovated about 10 years ago. My understanding is that it has some sort of ventilation system of holes in the floor under each seat on the orchestra level.

p. 354, left column
http://www.akutek.info/Papers/NGK_AYL_HM_Moscow_State_Conservatory.pdf

Overall very strong performance by Shishkin. Those who go earlier in the prelims are usually at an advantage since they can just get it done and prepare for the next round, versus those who go at the end and have only a day or two to get ready for the next concert (in addition to keeping their prelims program warm). The etudes and the Sonata were the best, IMO. My issue with the sonata had to do more with the piece than his performance - with the cuts, it doesn't make too much sense (particularly the last movement), but in the full version it makes sense as a terrible piece. I dunno.

An is doing great on the etudes so far. Curious to hear Rach-Chopin, which I've actually never heard live.

Excellent performance of the variations - a somewhat strange piece. I'm reminded of Rach's story of leaving out variations if he felt the audience wasn't into it. Seems that the audience doesn't really care for the piece, several are nodding off.

This piano sounds extremely brittle in the upper register.

Gugnin is dragging one of Chopin's finest melodies in the first mvt of 3rd Sonata. Other than that it is a good performance.

2nd mvt middle part gets the same dragging. Let's see how the jury will react.

You'll never know if the jury agrees or disagrees with you. If they don't pass him to the next round it could be for many different reasons, and if they pass him to the next round it could still be they agree with you.

That Chopin sonata...while it took a while to get used to the dragging, I'd just say that it came across as a completely individual reading, whereas oftentimes when I hear it at, say, the Chopin competition, some performances are hard to distinguish from others. Not here. Moreover, the contrapuntal clarity, though sometimes overdone on expense of the longer line, was almost unrivalled in any live performance I've heard. Late Chopin is generally full of counterpoint, but much of it gets blurred out by excessive pedal use, etc. Found things to disagree with in this performance, but overall it was super insightful to listen to.

Gugnin was the best of the first session today, IMO - perfect repertoire choices (not oppressively Russian like some of the other ones coming up), nice contrasts, and everything was masterfully played. I share Martin's reaction about the Chopin and feel that way about the Prokofiev, too - he had a unique reading of both sonatas and owned it. Huge improvement over the prelims, so hopefully the concertmaster and principal cellist will actually learn the solos in the slow movement of Tchaikovsky Second if he makes it to the finals...

An spent way too much time on a quite simply inferior piece and the Brahms seemed tedious and a little mechanical thereafter. Shishkin was probably the most consistent of the group notewise, but I might have liked a little more warmth overall. He's still one of my favorites, though.

"Oppressively Russian", haha, suitable terminology in this context. Very much hoping to hear some Tchaik 2 in the finals!

Interesting fact:

All except two in the 24-and-under group were cut.

All except two in the 25-and-over group passed.

Babayan told a friend that he didn't even start marking the semis of big competitions until he was 24-25, so it makes sense. That's kind of the sweet spot unless you're insanely gifted.