Lang Lang's concert review in Rome - Let's tell it all

Thank you Simone, because you are a pianist and you confirm what I, as a non-pianist, thought while listening to him and watching him on TV.

Ultimately, I think that as Maurizio Pollini said - and as Sandro Capelletto recalled at one time or another during the concert - there can be two ways to interpret music pianistically: the first serves to show how beautiful this music is, the second how good this pianist is. Lang Lang belongs to this second category of pianists.

This masterclass by Rubinstein, now elderly, is illuminating; he can no longer see well but continues to give powerful emotions. Lang Lang in his concert does exactly the opposite of what Rubinstein tries to communicate in this masterclass. Watch it all, it is very engaging. In this video are hidden the convictions that I expressed in my review.

Part 1

Part 2

Listen to the great master in the second part from 7:13... The essence is all right here! This makes the difference between the classical performer and the showman.

@Daniele

Thank you for your input. I am glad that I am not the only one who thinks these things; in my solitude, it makes me feel less alone...

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

I haven't listened to the concert link yet, nor the videos of Rubinstein's masterclass (but I will).

For now, I just wanted to justify my like by saying that I appreciate your freedom of thought and the correctness of your criticism.

I was in the hall. In the fifth row of the stalls. ....Many things were not heard. I have already shared my and Simone's impressions with him privately. Certainly, we are facing a great keyboard virtuoso and a great Architect. What to do? Someone who was with me challenged me as a "contrarian"... you know...."the fox and the grapes"... and so on. ....This is certainly no excuse to speak ill of a person who is experiencing great success and has sold several million records....

The fact is that we all, small and large, have the duty to respect the intention and the precise idea of the Author. This even while being willing to renounce any display of skill. In my opinion, as early as the study period, the Teacher must instill in the student the sense of renouncing useless virtuosity. If it is written presto... it is not prestissimo. If it is written allegretto, it is not presto, and so on. I reserve the right to listen to the concert again through a recording, but from what I was able to hear in the hall, this respect was not there at all. I also want to emphasize that, in my conviction, the tempo should even be interpreted within the context of the era. Think about what reference for "presto" one could have had in Mozart's time: perhaps the speed of a carriage. Today we might refer to the takeoff of an airplane. Therefore: the presto of Mozart's time should result in being more moderate than a presto from the 2000s!

Aside from that,,, who says Mozart was not expressive? Quite the contrary! But... expressive in his style... not like that of the Romantics, ...as we heard in the second movement of K 310!

In Chopin, as hard as it is to believe, "a piacere" expressiveness is completely out of style. This was misinterpreted during the Art Nouveau period where many pianists interpreted Chopin by letting themselves go to sugary sentimentality. We know how Rubinstein and Pollini set things right, providing a Chopin reading adhering to his "classical vein" that Cortot speaks of in his book "Some Aspects of Chopin."

In the case of the young, famous Chinese virtuoso, we have gone backward. Also a bit "badly." The "rubato," unique in the Author's style, was not present in the right way in the Ballades and crossed into the ridiculous in the encore of the waltz op.18. And what can be said about the "Turkish" [march]? We know how Mozart was a provocateur and a conspirator against the "fine manners" of his Era and how he knew how to mock his Society by hiding coals under the ashes. At that time, wealthy Austrians competed to purchase those small pianos that came from Turkey and were complete with percussion, cymbals, and funny effects. He hid this ironic mockery of these instruments in an "allegretto" that contains sudden, brilliant embellishments, imitating those ingenious and ridiculous devilries. An "Allegretto"!! Genius!! Why transform it into a "presto con bravura"?

Utilis ubi utar [Use it where you use it]. And it is useful where it is needed. So then, welcome the studies of Liszt or the extremely difficult and fast ones by Alkan, of which the young pianist would make a masterpiece. I am therefore in agreement with Simone"

I do not doubt his technique, but regarding musical maturity I propose this video to you:

Obviously everyone makes mistakes, but every time I listen to a Lang Lang performance, I take it with a grain of salt because I was truly astonished by how he handled this étude in a live performance, among other things, without the slightest bit of "spiritual" preparation for the execution.. he drops the microphone and takes off like a train (playing?)

as if he were in his own house... alone...

PS: This video supports Simone's thesis, imho

Open content (youtube)

Knowing how to renounce instead of showing off bravura. Renouncing useless virtuosity. Getting used to this already during the study period.

Now I say: it is typical of boys (youngsters) to show you how strong they are. And you gladly allow them to do so. "I know, boys!" one says kindly in these cases.

But Lang is no longer a boy: he has been around for a while. Certain things we shouldn't have to hear from someone of his technical level.

Even "free" expressivity is something you wouldn't expect from a professional.

You can forgive it in an amateur. I'll give an example regarding myself. I was, and still am, an amateur of technically medium-low level. When twenty years ago I played Beethoven's Sonata Op. 49 No. 2, in the first movement, deep down, I couldn't wait to reach those few bars of development (in D minor!)... I would play with all my might as if I were in the densest parts of the Appassionata... But that was a true case of 'sour grapes': I had the Beethoven of the great sonatas in my ears, but not being able to practice them, as soon as I had something slightly more... veiled under my fingers. I would play too intensely!!! (I don't do those things anymore).

In short... he should still be attending masterclasses instead of giving them.

And then - excuse me - long live listening to the radio! I would have spared myself that mimicry of someone who knows (and enjoys) being filmed/recorded. Cloying.

I would make him play Chopin's Prelude Op. 28 No. 7 until he can do it with the right measure and musicality.

Best wishes.

Many people speak of Lang as if he were a God; I have never liked him. Simone is right, he saves himself in piano and orchestra concerts where he remains chained to the tracks of the conductor and the orchestra, but in solo piano performance, he still demonstrates his interpretative immaturity. I listened to his concert at the posted link and I must say in all honesty that I was disappointed by my expectations. Very good technically, but perhaps his is a choice for the audience. As we know, putting on a show attracts more people, but how can someone who uses great authors for their own economic return and fame call themselves an artist?

Luca's intervention was charming... and Stefanus's was fair and measured. I agree. A funny episode from when I used to do Theater came back to mind. A certain Maggi always used to come to the dressing room, an old seasoned actor who had known the Greats. He wanted to stay backstage and in the dressing rooms, where he had lived. Sometimes he would sit and read a newspaper. Then he would watch, yes, the show too, but he loved to recall episodes that he would "pass on" to us as messages. Once he told us that he had the opportunity to act with the Great Gasmann (Vittorio). He was supposed to make a very small appearance... today one would call it a "cameo". He had to deliver a letter and say one line. He couldn't wait to go on stage and "show off" those few syllables. After the performance, Gasmann called him and said: "well done Maggi... but what is all this emphasis and sonority?!! - you just have to deliver a letter and that's it..."

In Music, sometimes one simply delivers a letter and that's it. It is useless to find emphasis and/or deep meaning where there is none. Music expresses itself and, I believe, one must be very careful and control excessive "expressions" that invite us to over-personalize the precise idea of the Author.

I heard Lang Lang on TV playing various pieces by Chopin..... I didn't like it at all, but not being a pianist, I cried out in scandal within myself, thinking I was very presumptuous for not liking such a great virtuoso as Lang Lang... and perhaps I needed to re-examine my way of understanding Chopin... perhaps I had gotten everything wrong... perhaps Chopin didn't mean that thing in that specific way as I had always thought certain phrasings to be. I thank Simone who, with his intervention, clarified many things for me. First of all, that I was not mistaken: the Chopin I understand is like the one Simone has in mind. I also perfectly agree that to be great musicians, it is not enough to be great athletes. Regarding this, a phrase from our Chopin comes to mind, addressed to one of his students after she had reported her impressions of hearing a Liszt concert: "the final goal is simplicity. After having exhausted all difficulties, after having played an immense quantity of notes and more notes, what emerges as the ultimate seal of art is simplicity with all its charm. He who wants to get there immediately will never arrive; one cannot start from the end. To reach this goal, one must have studied a lot, even immensely; it is not an easy thing"...

I have reflected a lot on great performers and I have understood one thing. The virtuoso performer, if not controlled, runs a great risk. Having reached an extremely high level of technique puts you in a position to "paraphrase" extreme technique even where it is actually not needed. I have some recordings from when I used to play virtuoso composers: I remember Liszt's second rhapsody, concert studies 1 and 3. When you set aside the Romantic repertoire to dedicate yourself entirely to that which is more purely virtuosic, it may seem absurd, but it then becomes very difficult to return to the Romantic or Classical without putting residues of virtuosity into it. The great performers of the past became great precisely because they succeeded, through experience and musical sense, in overcoming this barrier. Probably Lang Lang, who is nonetheless a great pianist, will manage to break down this wall with maturity and will be a complete artist. Of course, there are other artists less quoted and less visible than Lang who are nonetheless monsters of technique but who succeeded before him in breaking down these barriers. An example is Yuja Wang.

Here he plays a version of Cziffra's Flight of the Bumblebee, if I'm not mistaken (practically unplayable)

e here Chopin (listen to how he manages to set aside virtuosity; the tempos are right, the musical phrasing is correct. In this case, as I said before, the music is in the performer's first thought).

So the question is this: "What is the evaluation criterion that makes one artist more prominent than another at a media level? Because at the current state of affairs, it would seem that being hyped yields more results".

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

I more or less agree with everyone... except for the fact that I have never liked Lang Lang....

When I listen to Lang Lang, I instinctively perceive a different cultural background. I believe the spirit of the score is inaccessible to him because he was not formed in the West, just as Oriental music is difficult for us to understand. In his biography, he recounts being subjected to exhausting piano exercises from a very young age; I don't think he had sensitive teachers... at least during the first phase of his training. He uses his fantasy and his taste; it is probably what we would do if we had to interpret Oriental music.

Gianni22 wrote:

When I listen to Lang Lang, I instinctively perceive a different cultural background. I believe the spirit of the score is inaccessible to him because he was not formed in the West, just as Oriental music is difficult for us to understand.
In his biography, he recounts being subjected to exhausting piano exercises from his earliest age; I do not believe he had sensitive teachers...... at least during the first phase of his training. He uses his fantasy and his taste; it is probably what we would do if we had to interpret Oriental music.

What you are saying is correct, but we would probably occupy the headlines of the front pages of newspapers, certainly not in a positive sense, as is instead the case for him...

I have always maintained that Lang Lang is a "circus" pianist, great technique but it ends there........he is the Liberace of classical music:)

The fact is that even two years after he gave that concert in Rome, he continues on that path... if he were to reach the artistic maturity mentioned above, it would be beautiful to hear... with those technical abilities and focused on the music rather than on himself.

I have to tell the truth, I haven't heard much about it like before.