Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Lang Lang

Has anyone heard him play either solo or with orchestra? I heard him play at Carnegie Hall this evening. But since he played the Mendelssohn 1st Concerto about all I could tell is that he is fleet fingered and enthusiastic.

Happy Holidays!

Pianoloverus Pianoloverus

I have not sen him live, but I have heard him in a few recordings. My thoughts, as are the thoughts of many critics and piano enthusiasts alike agree that he definatly does have technihal virtuosity, but his maturity and emotional range falls short. He may be able to dazzle, but he doesn't have the color palatte of a Horowitz or Rubenstein.
Just my $0.02

saw him live, doing Rachmaninov's 2nd Concerto. not very good, though technically quite impressive, emotionally lacking. some exhilaration at times, created by the sheer speed at which he plays, a bit like Argerich but much worse.

thankfully Yundi Li isn't in the same vein.

I have seen Lang Lang play many times when he was a student at Curtis. I go often to the student recitals given there. He has (as many of those students do) a wonderful facility at the keyboard, but something is missing. I think these young super kids are pushed through a little too quickly and don't have time to mature. Lets face it, there's money to be made by managers marketing these kids. Gary Graffman recently wrote an article in the Curtis newsletter in which he addressed how these young musicians need to learn how to listen. Not just to others who play their respective instrument, but to listen to other instruments and music in general. He also went on to say they are the most technically gifted players ever. They just keep getting better and younger. But, that only goes so for. Then they need to learn how to be an artist, not just a good player. I've been playing piano for many years and I only recently am learning how to listen. Now all I need to do is learn how to play!

Don't you all think it's a bit unfair to criticize Lang Lang (or any other young pianist) because they lack the emotional depth of Rubinstein or Horowitz?

I'm not disagreeing with the comments here (I think his virtuosity and speed far outweigh his interpretations today), but I also do believe that emotional maturity and expression do tend to develop later than the technical stuff. I have no scientific reason for believing this, I just do... :rolleyes:

I think it will be interesting to follow L2 and the other young wunderkinds for a decade or so and see how they mature.

Nina

I'll let you know my opinion after I see Lang Lang on the 18th in San Francisco with Michael Tilson Thomas conducting.

Nina,

I think it is quite fair. I mean, the guy is a performer, he puts himself up for criticism. If you think that he will develop musically in the future, then perhaps he should wait till he develops to perform. Perhaps he'll receive better criticism. Anyway, not all young pianists lack such emotional depth.

Agree 100% with you magnezium. I go to a concert to experience something specical, not to see a wiz kid impress me with keyboard acrobatics. There is a young pianist named Lipschitz(sp?) who played, and I think recorded the Goldberg variations at the age of 16. He plays with the maturity of a true artist. Wonderful pianist, and so young. I hate him !!!!!!!!!!

I've heard Lang Lang's recording of the Rachmaninoff Third coupled with selected Scriabin Etudes. Lang has formidable mechanical ability (in other words, he can put the right finger in the right place at the right time), but the Rachmaninoff lacked narrative direction and the Scriabin was devoid of color. I do not think it is unfair to call a spade a spade and point out that Mr. Lang needs much more development.

However, he is very young and will hopefully mature over time. We shall see.

Ralph, is that Konstantin Lifschitz? gave a recital here two years ago, but I didn't have enough $$ at the time to catch it...

Yes, I think that's him. I can't remember his first name, but that's his last name. I never heard him live, but I have heard several recordings, some of which were live. He plays a lot of Frescobaldi of all things. They are really wonderful pieces. His playing is truely special. If you get a chance to see him, don't pass it up. His Goldberg is also very good and available on CD. I'm not sure if he's even twenty years old yet.

What about Kissin, for comparison's sake? His best recording was his first (both Chopin Concerti), and it's been all downhill from there as he's "tried" to mature.

VERY true, Brendan. Evgeny Kissin is the perfect example of artistic shrinkage. His playing has lost its naturalness and become full of portent, pretense, and posturing. Wonder what Kissin's playing will be like when he's forty--if he doesn't burn out first, ala Van Cliburn.

Interesting Kissen was brought up. I was thinking the same thing troughout this thread. I was never a huge fan of his, although I do apreciate his playing. Maybe his trend has something to do with the Russian type training?? What do you think? Does the Russian school tend to stress certain thinks in order to "guarantee" success? My teacher, who I work with on and off, was taught by one of the old Russian style teachers (Madam Levine) when he was in Julliard. He has some interesting stories about his experience.

Well, I think the distinction has to be made between Russian training and Soviet training. Pianists such as Hoffman, Rachmaninoff, Horowitz and Sofronitsky were taught in the Russian school, as established by Anton Rubinstein which emphasised tone, solid technique, phrasing, flexibility in tempo, and individual interpretation.

Certain pianists, such as Richter and Gilels, were essentially taught in the old-Russian manner, even though the Soviets were in power at the time.

Kissin was really the last prominent pianist to be taught in the Soviet manner, which emphasised technical accuracy, a more uniform performing style which leaned toward "normalcy," de-emphasised individuality, and whose primary goal was winning competitions to demonstrate the cultural superiority of the Soviet system.

Kissin seems to have been trying to break from the restrictions of that school, and I think that (and the fact he still works with his Soviet-era teacher) is part of the reason for the increasing encroachment of mannerisms in his playing. But, I may be wrong, I'm just playing armchair analyst here.

For what it's worth, I thought Kissin's first recording (of the Chopin) was poor. I own it, but never listen to it (I like the cover photo more than his playing.) He "does battle" with the orchestra, as if they couldn't hear each other half the time, and the playing is almost wholly devoid of nuance. I think he has done much better things since, though he still wouldn't be counted among my favorite pianists.

As for the Mazurkas on that same recording - I knew no fewer than 3 pianists of the same age (12-13) living in Seattle who could play them better than he did. I actually heard them play the same Mazurkas.

Kissin became famous because virtually all the fine Russian musicians of the 80s had left the Soviet Union, and he was all they had left to promote. Yes -- I wish I could play as well as he did -- but as Russian "professionals" go, he was the bottom of the barrel. (But he did get better teaching once he came to New York, and some of the recordings, though not all, show it.)

Well Hank, I think your right on the money. I was tring to provoke a discussion comparing the old russian teaching of last century to the new or next school, that is, the chinese or oriental school. As I said before, I go often to Curtis in Phili to the student recitals. I am amazed at how many are oriental students there are. I mean really born in China and moved here to study western music without even knowing english. Not Chinese-Americans. That's what Lang did. He lived in Phili with an American family and came directly from China. I see the Chinese pianists as very motivated people with a work ethic that is second to none. But, the emphises is not always on the sound, but rather the notes. I really admire these individuals who embrace a culture that is totally different from theirs with such vigor. It's a good thing somebody is. Certainly the American people aren't doing it. Anyway, the Russians and the Orientals alike seem to approach music as if it were an Olympic event. Any takers for this topic??? :p

Soviet and Chinese training of Olympic gymnasts is also very similar. (Not 100% sure, but I believe the Chinese borrowed the Soviet system in this respect.)

Well, I sell pianos for a living. I hope my post is not mistaken for ethnic stereotyping, but here goes...

The number of people I sell pianos to who are Asian, usually of Japanese or Chinese ancestry, occasionally Korean, far outstrips their percentage of the population in these parts. Some were born in America, some recently arrived.
Just yesterday I had a Japanese couple here with the most adorable little girls playing the pianos here.

Another group which seems interested in musically educating their children are those of Jewish heritage. This is not surprisig when one considers the large numbers of Classical musicians who were Jewish: Horowitz, Rubinstein, Heifetz, Perlman, Bernstein, Schnabel, the list goes on and on...

A third group is those who home-school their children. Naturally, all these parents have read the latest literature which seems to connect musical education with success in other kinds of learning, so most of their kids take piano lessons, and lemme tell you, these kids are GOOD! The interesting thing is that the parents are not interested in making their child into the next Kissin, they only want their kids to have the most diverse education possible. They believe, quite rightly, that a broadly educated child will grow into a well rounded adult. Sadly, it seems that true music education is mostly dead in the public schools, a victim of the misguided "back to basics" movement.

As a "professional homeschooler" -- with two kids who ended up as serious musicians (which definitely WASN'T part of the plan -- the instruments have cost me a small fortune!), I can tell you that it is only partly a matter of educating our children to become well-rounded adults. It is also about allowing our children -- from the earliest age possible -- to follow their passions, wherever they may lead.

I would venture to say that, in the early days, the homeschooling audience virtually made Hilary Hahn's (she is the wonderful homeschooled violinist) career. Of course, she doesn't need us anymore -- but she continues to do programs and open dress rehearsals with kids (often to the chagrin of the local symphony!), and makes it a point to ensure that the homeschooling groups are notified.

The other thing that the homeschooling world in the U.S. is doing is shifting the geographical balance for fine music making. There are not large concentrations of homeschoolers around New York City, nor around Philadelphia. But you'll find them in Charlotte, North Carolina or Olympia, Washington, or Provo, Utah. Homeschool bands, little music schools, and the like are springing up all over the place -- and many former homeschoolers are (at least where I live) taking places in local community symphonies. My piano tech homeschools his three kids, and the number of music teachers who are now homeschooling their own kids is far above what might otherwise be expected.

The colleges are noticing, too. This year's valedictorian at Princeton, a mathematician going to Cambridge next year, was a homeschooler, and an award-winning violnist. I personally know of homeschooled musicians at Brown, Harvard, Williams, and Bard (just for a small sampling.)