2022 our 25th year online!

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!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
48 members (36251, accordeur, BlackKnight, BravoRomeo, bwv872, Boboulus, anotherscott, 9 invisible), 804 guests, and 276 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 5 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
i think the winners of the biggest competitions these days are all sensationally interesting pianists

I wholeheartedly disagree, but ok.


Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,792
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,792
The OP states: Nothing currently makes my blood boil more than hearing a sentence like: "It sounded beautiful. But that's not how you play Mozart."

It sounds beautiful? Thank you. Period.

Would the OP accept "It sounded beautiful. Did you compose that?" for a work he performed that might be Bach, or Mozart, or the OP himself, who is a composer.

I would think that the OP would like to have his/her compositions recognized as belonging to them.

We hear many melodies lifted from Chopin, Bach, Ravel , Granados, and used by jazz musicians all the time without acknowledging who actually provided the inspiration.

It sounds beautiful. Period.

But knowing where it came from, and knowing that the performer also knows where it came from, hearing how the performer alters it makes the experience even better.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Some present day competitions may reward performers with conservative approaches, but I don't think this is always the case and is mostly a misconception.

Think about it. As a competitor you have to play for a large number of jurors with different personalities and preferences. As such, the more liberties you take, the more radical your interpretation becomes, and the _lesser_ the chances are that you will please the jury unanimously. Now I'm not saying that competition winners are absolute borefests, which is probably the kind of words you're trying to put in my mouth. As a contestant you do have to show interesting ideas, but the margins are rather narrow if you want such ideas to please the jurors as unanimously as possible and not polarize them. So the winners usually _do_ show interesting ideas, but they are far from being "sensationally interesting". No, the truly sensationally interesting ones rarely come out on top, for the reasons stated above, and they are usually eliminated before the finals.


Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 987
R
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
R
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 987
Originally Posted by Animisha
Originally Posted by BruceD
Originally Posted by Animisha
[...] Of course, if you are a performer, you will want to tell your audience that they will listen to a very personal interpretation. And hopefully, many will like what they hear, and you'll be acknowledged as a great musician.

Why should you need to "tell your audience" the subjective quality of the performance that they are going to hear? Should the music/performance not speak for itself?

Regards,

Bruce, just the decent thing to do. If I use a heavy metal band to accompany my rendition of Satie's Gymnopédie 1, I would like the public to have some awareness of this when they purchase a ticket to my show.
Likewise, I think performers should tell their audience of they are going to put on a boring interpretation which will put them to sleep. Sadly, most don't...

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Some present day competitions may reward performers with conservative approaches, but I don't think this is always the case and is mostly a misconception.

Think about it. As a competitor you have to play for a large number of jurors with different personalities and preferences. As such, the more liberties you take, the more radical your interpretation becomes, and the _lesser_ the chances are that you will please the jury unanimously. Now I'm not saying that competition winners are absolute borefests, which is probably the kind of words you're trying to put in my mouth. As a contestant you do have to show interesting ideas, but the margins are rather narrow if you want such ideas to please the jurors as unanimously as possible and not polarize them. So the winners usually _do_ show interesting ideas, but they are far from being "sensationally interesting". No, the truly sensationally interesting ones rarely come out on top, for the reasons stated above, and they are usually eliminated before the finals.
This is all just your personal opinion.

There are many different scoring systems in competitions, Sometimes they throw out the highest and lowest votes. Or a low score from one judge can be balanced by a high score from another judge. I think you also underestimate the judges by thinking they are not open to some new ideas provided the ideas are convincing.

Whether or not the winners of major competitions are "sensationally interesting" is completely subjective. I also think some/most of the greatest pianists, past and present, don't do anything particularly unusual in their interpretation. They just play more beautifully, more convincingly, or create a greater emotional involvement with the audience. Two examples pianists in that category are Trifonov and Perahia but I could name at least 25 more.

Joined: May 2015
Posts: 10,503
Gold Subscriber
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Gold Subscriber
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 10,503
Originally Posted by ranjit
Originally Posted by Animisha
Originally Posted by BruceD
Originally Posted by Animisha
[...] Of course, if you are a performer, you will want to tell your audience that they will listen to a very personal interpretation. And hopefully, many will like what they hear, and you'll be acknowledged as a great musician.

Why should you need to "tell your audience" the subjective quality of the performance that they are going to hear? Should the music/performance not speak for itself?

Regards,

Bruce, just the decent thing to do. If I use a heavy metal band to accompany my rendition of Satie's Gymnopédie 1, I would like the public to have some awareness of this when they purchase a ticket to my show.
Likewise, I think performers should tell their audience of they are going to put on a boring interpretation which will put them to sleep. Sadly, most don't...


I’m sure the performer doesn’t think it is boring. If they are making so many changes that the music is no longer the original, it should be billed as ‘arrangement of xxx’ or based on xxxx’. … and not just on the program notes, but in all advertising


"Music, rich, full of feeling, not soulless, is like a crystal on which the sun falls and brings forth from it a whole rainbow" - F. Chopin
"I never dreamt with my own two hands I could touch the sky" - Sappho

It's ok to be a Work In Progress
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 987
R
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
R
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 987
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
1) I am continuing to speak to a wall, despite trying my best to articulate my ideas in a clear manner. I may not be very good at expressing myself, that is true, so maybe that is the problem.
I think your points are perfectly clear. I think you've found, as have many others, that saying anything here seems to prompt excessive conservative backlash. This has been true for a long time.

I find it surprising how one can state such strong opinions as fact, where so many famous pianists throughout history have voiced similar concerns about performance traditions. It's fine if you call it a personal opinion, but the tone is always almost accusatory.

There is a very strong emphasis on playing all the right notes when it comes to competitions. I know people who have told me about being rejected for a small memory slip in a Bach fugue. And this is the norm, not the exception. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but at least it seems obvious to me that when you can't afford to screw up a few notes in a 30-minute audition, you will not take risks. It will be a particular interpretation you have refined over years, with miniscule room for error. There may be exceptions among international level artists, people who can take risks and still never miss a note, but that would require great talent both for memory and for interpretation, which is extremely rare. Everyone else is stuck playing stock standard interpretations, because it is better than the alternative of missing notes. That's what I feel is the culprit, at least.

As for how composers react to performers playing their works in their own style, I think they admire them if it's actually good. Rachmaninoff said that Horowitz played good third concerto like he would have liked to. Chopin was speechless when Liszt played his Etudes. Even listen to Rachmaninoff playing Rachmaninoff, it is quite different from standard performances, and imo very imaginative and musical.

Joined: Aug 2021
Posts: 222
M
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
M
Joined: Aug 2021
Posts: 222
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I also think some/most of the greatest pianists, past and present, don't do anything particularly unusual in their interpretation. They just play more beautifully, more convincingly, or create a greater emotional involvement with the audience. ...Trifonov....
He played Scriabin's Etude Op. 42 No. 5 in some hipster bar in Berlin all decked out in a pair of jeans, t-shirt, beanie, beard and tennis shoes. It was an incredibly moving, agitated performance of that piece unlike any I've heard, and yeah, he stayed true to the score.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I think you also underestimate the judges by thinking they are not open to some new ideas provided the ideas are convincing.

Hmm, putting words in other people's mouth again I see. I never said they are not open to some new ideas. Actually I said the opposite. Not only they are open to new ideas, but most actually _want_ to hear some new ideas. But all within a margin, as I said. One juror might find a novel idea convincing while another juror would find it unacceptable. And the more jurors you have, the less common ground you get between their preferences, and the narrower the margins for liberties. In the end, it is rewarding for competitors to show some new ideas, but only in limited doses. I'd say if performers took more liberties (provided the ideas are convincing as you said), there would be a better chance to create even more beautiful, convincing and emotionally powerful performances than what we are hearing nowadays. Yes, we would also hear some overly distorted performances here and there, but that is a price I'd be willing to pay.


Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Originally Posted by ranjit
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
1) I am continuing to speak to a wall, despite trying my best to articulate my ideas in a clear manner. I may not be very good at expressing myself, that is true, so maybe that is the problem.
I think your points are perfectly clear. I think you've found, as have many others, that saying anything here seems to prompt excessive conservative backlash. This has been true for a long time.

I find it surprising how one can state such strong opinions as fact, where so many famous pianists throughout history have voiced similar concerns about performance traditions. It's fine if you call it a personal opinion, but the tone is always almost accusatory.

There is a very strong emphasis on playing all the right notes when it comes to competitions. I know people who have told me about being rejected for a small memory slip in a Bach fugue. And this is the norm, not the exception. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but at least it seems obvious to me that when you can't afford to screw up a few notes in a 30-minute audition, you will not take risks. It will be a particular interpretation you have refined over years, with miniscule room for error. There may be exceptions among international level artists, people who can take risks and still never miss a note, but that would require great talent both for memory and for interpretation, which is extremely rare. Everyone else is stuck playing stock standard interpretations, because it is better than the alternative of missing notes. That's what I feel is the culprit, at least.

As for how composers react to performers playing their works in their own style, I think they admire them if it's actually good. Rachmaninoff said that Horowitz played good third concerto like he would have liked to. Chopin was speechless when Liszt played his Etudes. Even listen to Rachmaninoff playing Rachmaninoff, it is quite different from standard performances, and imo very imaginative and musical.
Having an unusual interpretation has nothing to do with missing notes. Nor is having an unusual interpretation necessarily a good thing.

All pianists play music "in their own style" but performances of classical music by its nature are going to sound more similar to each other than covers of pop tunes. Composers like good performances of their works but this has little to do with the style of the performance. If Chopin admired Liszt's performance of his etudes, it was probably because of the technical skill he brought to them.

Trifonov and Perahia, to name just two of dozens of great contemporary pianists, don't do anything highly unusual in their performances. They just play more beautifully, more convincingly, and with a greater emotional connection to the audience than lesser pianists. It's a myth that one has to have some unique or unusual interpretation to be a great pianist.

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Originally Posted by ranjit
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
1) I am continuing to speak to a wall, despite trying my best to articulate my ideas in a clear manner. I may not be very good at expressing myself, that is true, so maybe that is the problem.
I think your points are perfectly clear. I think you've found, as have many others, that saying anything here seems to prompt excessive conservative backlash. This has been true for a long time.

I find it surprising how one can state such strong opinions as fact, where so many famous pianists throughout history have voiced similar concerns about performance traditions. It's fine if you call it a personal opinion, but the tone is always almost accusatory.

There is a very strong emphasis on playing all the right notes when it comes to competitions. I know people who have told me about being rejected for a small memory slip in a Bach fugue. And this is the norm, not the exception. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but at least it seems obvious to me that when you can't afford to screw up a few notes in a 30-minute audition, you will not take risks. It will be a particular interpretation you have refined over years, with miniscule room for error. There may be exceptions among international level artists, people who can take risks and still never miss a note, but that would require great talent both for memory and for interpretation, which is extremely rare. Everyone else is stuck playing stock standard interpretations, because it is better than the alternative of missing notes. That's what I feel is the culprit, at least.

As for how composers react to performers playing their works in their own style, I think they admire them if it's actually good. Rachmaninoff said that Horowitz played good third concerto like he would have liked to. Chopin was speechless when Liszt played his Etudes. Even listen to Rachmaninoff playing Rachmaninoff, it is quite different from standard performances, and imo very imaginative and musical.
Having an unusual interpretation has nothing to do with missing notes. Nor is having an unusual interpretation necessarily a good thing.

All pianists play music "in their own style" but performances of classical music by its nature are going to sound more similar to each other than covers of pop tunes. Composers like good performances of their works but this has little to do with the style of the performance. If Chopin admired Liszt's performance of his etudes, it was probably because of the technical skill he brought to them.

Trifonov and Perahia, to name just two of dozens of great contemporary pianists, don't do anything highly unusual in their performances. They just play more beautifully, more convincingly, and with a greater emotional connection to the audience than lesser pianists. It's a myth that one has to have some unique or unusual interpretation to be a great pianist.

The pianists who I personally (yes, personally, but I am amongst many who think the same) consider to be the greatest, play 1) in an unique manner, aka actually making art, not trying to copy any traditions 2) but make it sound great. The four living pianists who I can name off the top of my head that do this, are Lucas Debargue, Daniil Trifonov, Alexandre Kantorow and Vikingur Olafsson. Not Pollini, not Wang, not Lang Lang with his exaggerated interpretations... nobody else comes close, I feel. Yet of the pianists from times gone by, from whom we have recordings... Horowitz, Rubinstein, Sofronitsky, Nyiregyhazi, Cortot... I could go on and on. Yet I couldn't go on and on the same way with today's top pianists. The variety of unique (and not only unique, but also coherent) artistic expression amongst interpreters today has diminished significantly.

They all used to be unique personalities. Now, it's rare to find those.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
The pianists who I personally (yes, personally, but I am amongst many who think the same) consider to be the greatest, play 1) in an unique manner, aka actually making art, not trying to copy any traditions 2) but make it sound great. The four living pianists who I can name off the top of my head that do this, are Lucas Debargue, Daniil Trifonov, Alexandre Kantorow and Vikingur Olafsson.

I like Debargue, Trifonov and Olafsson too, but I do not find their playing to be tradition-breaking. (I haven't heard Kantorow).
Maybe we are misunderstanding your words after all. I think many here thought you were promoting an iconoclastic style (such as the current version of Pogorelich, or maybe Ozokins), which is not something I would attribute to the pianists mentioned earlier.


Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
The pianists who I personally (yes, personally, but I am amongst many who think the same) consider to be the greatest, play 1) in an unique manner, aka actually making art, not trying to copy any traditions 2) but make it sound great. The four living pianists who I can name off the top of my head that do this, are Lucas Debargue, Daniil Trifonov, Alexandre Kantorow and Vikingur Olafsson.

I like Debargue, Trifonov and Olafsson too, but I do not find their playing to be tradition-breaking. (I haven't heard Kantorow).
Maybe we are misunderstanding your words after all. I think many here thought you were promoting an iconoclastic style (such as the current version of Pogorelich, or maybe Ozokins), which is something I would not attribute to the pianists mentioned earlier.

I definitely wasn't promoting anything like that. I don't like what Pogorelich is doing right now, despite it being tradition-breaking.

I just want there to be a balance. People are either stuck between walls, or they go completely nuts and often the result sounds bad. Debargue, for example, sits in this perfect middle zone for me. I heard him live, playing Schumann and Skrjabin. What he did in the Schumann sonata made some conservatives drop their jaws and scratch their heads, yet overall, it was not taken too far and he recieved a rapturous standing ovation.

Olafsson plays Bach with a liberal, yet always tasteful use of pedal, and I love it.

Trifonov's transcendental etudes are a breath of fresh air.

I heard Kantorow live in Riga in august. I will never forget the way he played Liszt's Dante sonata. Not a single mistake, yet it sounded... personal, and full of pleasant surprises and slight eccentricities, that worked.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
The pianists who I personally (yes, personally, but I am amongst many who think the same) consider to be the greatest, play 1) in an unique manner, aka actually making art, not trying to copy any traditions 2) but make it sound great. The four living pianists who I can name off the top of my head that do this, are Lucas Debargue, Daniil Trifonov, Alexandre Kantorow and Vikingur Olafsson.

I like Debargue, Trifonov and Olafsson too, but I do not find their playing to be tradition-breaking. (I haven't heard Kantorow).
Maybe we are misunderstanding your words after all. I think many here thought you were promoting an iconoclastic style (such as the current version of Pogorelich, or maybe Ozokins), which is something I would not attribute to the pianists mentioned earlier.

I definitely wasn't promoting anything like that. I don't like what Pogorelich is doing right now, despite it being tradition-breaking.

I just want there to be a balance. People are either stuck between walls, or they go completely nuts and often the result sounds bad. Debargue, for example, sits in this perfect middle zone for me. I heard him live, playing Schumann and Skrjabin. What he did in the Schumann sonata made some conservatives drop their jaws and scratch their heads, yet overall, it was not taken too far and he recieved a rapturous standing ovation.

Olafsson plays Bach with a liberal, yet always tasteful use of pedal, and I love it.

Trifonov's transcendental etudes are a breath of fresh air.

I heard Kantorow live in Riga in august. I will never forget the way he played Liszt's Dante sonata. Not a single mistake, yet it sounded... personal, and full of pleasant surprises and slight eccentricities, that worked.

I would place Bozhanov in that category too. I'm ok with liberties if they serve the composer, and I find that Bozhanov does that. On the other hand I cannot suffer Lang Lang. Subjective opinions, yes.


Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Originally Posted by CianistAndPomposer
The pianists who I personally (yes, personally, but I am amongst many who think the same) consider to be the greatest, play 1) in an unique manner, aka actually making art, not trying to copy any traditions 2) but make it sound great. The four living pianists who I can name off the top of my head that do this, are Lucas Debargue, Daniil Trifonov, Alexandre Kantorow and Vikingur Olafsson. Not Pollini, not Wang, not Lang Lang with his exaggerated interpretations... nobody else comes close, I feel. Yet of the pianists from times gone by, from whom we have recordings... Horowitz, Rubinstein, Sofronitsky, Nyiregyhazi, Cortot... I could go on and on. Yet I couldn't go on and on the same way with today's top pianists. The variety of unique (and not only unique, but also coherent) artistic expression amongst interpreters today has diminished significantly.

They all used to be unique personalities. Now, it's rare to find those.
Again, your comments are totally subjective.

Phrases like "play in a unique manner", "actually making art", "not trying to copy any traditions" are totally subjective and so vague as to be basically meaningless.

Other people, including me, could find dozens of truly great pianists playing before the public today. There were many great pianists from earlier generations but there were certainly plenty of lesser pianists during that time also. Just like today.

Pianists born before 1900 or just afterward are from a different era when the pianist was placed or placed himself above the composer. So it's natural that more of them were "unique". But being unique is not something that's necessarily positive or something to be so excited about. Perahia and Freire are two pianists among dozens I could name that most would consider very great. But there's nothing majorly unique in their playing or interpretations. They just play incredibly beautifully, with flawless technique, and great musical understanding.

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I think you also underestimate the judges by thinking they are not open to some new ideas provided the ideas are convincing.
Hmm, putting words in other people's mouth again I see. I never said they are not open to some new ideas.
I never said you said that judges are not open to new ideas so how could I be putting works in your mouth? I said I think you underestimate the judges which is a far different statement.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I think you also underestimate the judges by thinking they are not open to some new ideas provided the ideas are convincing.
Hmm, putting words in other people's mouth again I see. I never said they are not open to some new ideas.
I never said you said that judges are not open to new ideas so how could I be putting works in your mouth? I said I think you underestimate the judges which is a far different statement.

You made a false statement about what I was thinking, because you misread my post. Which is another way putting words in my mouth. Try harder, ******.

Last edited by Ken Knapp; 01/18/22 08:25 PM. Reason: Meanness removed.

Soli Chopin gloria
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 32,417
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Originally Posted by Rubens
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I think you also underestimate the judges by thinking they are not open to some new ideas provided the ideas are convincing.
Hmm, putting words in other people's mouth again I see. I never said they are not open to some new ideas.
I never said you said that judges are not open to new ideas so how could I be putting works in your mouth? I said I think you underestimate the judges which is a far different statement.
You made a false statement about what I was thinking, because you misread my post. Which is another way putting words in my mouth. Try harder, pisher.
I said I THINK you....I didn't say you THINK.... You don't seem to understand the difference.

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
Pianists born before 1900 or just afterward are from a different era when the pianist was placed or placed himself above the composer.

Or on the same level, at least.

Which is what I want to come back. This is the main point of my post.

Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
R
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by pianoloverus
I said I THINK you....I didn't say you THINK.... You don't seem to understand the difference.
Bottom line, distorting the meaning of other people's statements, which is something you always do in various ways. *yawn*


Soli Chopin gloria
Page 5 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Brendan, Kreisler 

Link Copied to Clipboard
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
Piano Buyer - Read the Articles, Explore the website
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
does anyone know how tall richter was
by pablobear - 05/25/22 08:17 PM
Best piano app for android
by Kihar - 05/25/22 12:54 PM
I left my piano school today
by Animisha - 05/25/22 12:33 PM
Drummer need suggestion for piano style
by Wundebober - 05/25/22 12:08 PM
6 Pin DIN connector for Williams sustain pedal?
by emaydeoh - 05/25/22 11:18 AM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums43
Topics213,235
Posts3,194,517
Members105,374
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers

Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2022 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5