Thursday, July 31. 2008
Whilst the Sydney International Piano Competition is close to completion and, no matter who wins it or how good they are, people will have varying opinions about the real value of such competitions to the competitors as distinct from the organisers and sponsors, there have come to my attention some questions as to why the Stuart piano, being of course Australian, is not an option for the use of the competitors.
It is of interest to the readers of this blog to contemplate the commercial and real imperatives that confront any piano maker who might decide:
a) to offer a piano
b) to be accepted, and
c) to invest in the logistics and requirements of the organisers who run these so called piano competitions.
Competitions need money to operate and it is not too surprising that piano makers are seen as a possible source of funds. They also need instruments for the incessant practice and, of course, for the performance stage but they really only want one! The right one that everyone believes is the best one or that everyone is used to playing; too many different pianos will only confuse the agenda.
When the first Sydney International Piano Competition was held in 1977 there were six different piano makers represented and seven pianos (two Steinways) which caused logistical chaos on stage and also in the minds of the competitors. In all reality it was difficult to really assess the performances as the variables were enormous. Indeed, Kawai was not at the first competition as it was thought by the dealers (Elvy's) not to be of the necessary standard. Ever since then there has been a thinning on the ground of the number and the brands of instruments presenting. I can’t remember whether was the last competition or the one before it, but there was then only a choice of Yamaha or Steinway. The addition of a Kawai is more recent.
Now for the back stage hurdles piano makers have to negotiate just to be considered to participate in the Sydney show. The organisers require not just the piano on stage, but a bevy of instruments small and large for practice purposes and also sponsorship contributions. All of this adds up to a significant financial commitment and, as most corporate expenditure must be justified, it is very difficult to find valid reasons why any maker would enter such an unpredictable and potentially damaging arena. For the ‘right’ maker winning or losing this war will have no material impact on their position in the piano hierarchy. As for the ladies left in waiting, it will be reduced to scrambling for the discount crumbs which are already being advertised as great deals, ex Sydney International Piano Competition pianos only played by competitors, pristine and virginal!
Cheap! cheap! cheap!
So much for a piano as investment, but of course the manufacturers may well get a taxation benefit from the write-down of such stock. Now I know for a fact that Stuart pianos are never discounted. A seven year old 2.9 metre grand was sent to England for evaluation purposes and ended up being sold for more than its original contract price, and no Stuart piano has yet been onsold for less than its original purchase price. Now that is an investment, I think most people would agree.
But what if your brand of piano is not used by the competitors, or more people choose Brand X over Brand Y? Imagine a piano quietly and patiently waiting for a player who never came to tickle its fancy. Such manufacturers share this cruel and unfair damnation without recourse or justification. The pianos, like sitting ducks, await their fate. What a hideous scenario for an instrument maker.
So, it really boils down to simple cash and deal that determines who supplies the pianos. Then there is the fear of the pianists, frightened out of their wits, who run the gauntlet along the line of least resistance from piano to performance in the vain hope of being recognised above the one that came before as the one that comes after is of no consequence!
If there is a question why piano makers would present for selection in such circumstances, I cannot but wonder why companies like Steinway bother at all. It has won its place long ago and what possible advantage would there be for them to be exposed to the vagaries of a competition whose viewers and listeners seem hell-bent on the juvenile business of ranking everything from the castors to the nail polish?! Such exposition can only leave an honoured maker diminished in the same heinous ranking system which is naively portrayed with the proclamation of 9 to Steinway, 8 to Yamaha and 3 to Kawai. Save us from this tedious and potentially malicious boredom!
Now in my view the answer to whether a Stuart piano should have been in the competition is, from a musical point of view, definitely yes but with the proviso that no other piano should have been allowed. That would have made the competition a genuinely Australian one instead of an imitation of countless other competitions, and provided a level playing field for all competitors to be judged. But, equally so, there is no doubt that the cost of such would have been enormous, I doubt that sufficient pianos would have been available and I’m sure that no discount deals would have been done to sell the pianos afterwards.
So on balance I’m glad that Stuart pianos were not involved, and I don’t doubt that Wayne is as well.
Sunday, July 20. 2008
… is now in full swing. This is the ninth such competition, and I well remember the first in 1977 since my mother organised and I hosted a ‘rehearsal’ concert in Sydney for three of the Australian competitors.
I had a conversation with a musical friend of mine a day or so ago and he took pains to complain about the competition since he became so engrossed in listening to it that he wasn’t getting any other work done. His view was that the standard of the competition was very high, and that I can well believe.
I was sitting in my car this afternoon waiting to pick up my son from his participation in the 500,000 or so strong Mass celebrated by the Pope at Randwick Racecourse. Whilst I was waiting I took the opportunity to tune in, as it were, to the live broadcast of the competition. I must admit my thoughts were somewhat mixed.
I heard two pianists, both technically excellent as you would expect. The first, an American, played La Cathédrale Engloutie, to me a very dull and emotionally bereft performance which displayed none of the grandeur and power of the piece. He then played two mazurkas by Symanovski (a bit weird my taste but good nonetheless) and then Liszt’s Rhapsodie Espanole, for which he was in total command. The second pianist, from South Korea, played another Debussy Prelude, the Brahms A major Intermezzo and G minor Rhapsodie from Op118, and then finished off with Balakirev’s Islamey – an enormously difficult piece technically which seemed to lose its way a bit structurally towards the end – even though the notes were pretty much spot on.
But what really concerned me was the sound of the piano. Both played a Yamaha (interestingly with a Steinway stool) rather than the available Steinway and Kawai (what happened to the Stuart I wonder?) but the sound to me was thin and very sharp – there didn’t appear to be much warmth, particularly with the Brahms Intermezzo, although the more bravura pieces came over much better.
Not I may be biased and am certainly used to the sound of my Stuart (indeed I’ve told Wayne that the sound of my piano is at least as good as and in many cases better than the other Stuart pianos I’ve tried) but having played both La Cathédrale Engloutie and the Brahms Intermezzo on my piano the sound to me is much better and certainly more musically sensitive.
Now I know that the broadcast sound may not be as good as the auditorium sound, but even taking that into account I really felt that the Yamaha as played by these pianists did not come up to scratch. It was certainly bright enough for the pyrotechnics, but the attack sounded very harsh and it seemed as though the sustain was very short.
I’m certainly nowhere near these pianists in terms of technique, but there is no doubt in my mind that the Stuart piano in their hands (and allowing for their need to play the Stuart the way it should be played, as I’ve noted before) would produce much better results both tone wise and emotionally.
Saturday, July 19. 2008
I haven’t posted anything for a while, but that doesn’t mean that I’ve been idle. As I write this, we’re in the middle of World Youth Day and I’ve been helping my son in a number of musical activities that have gone off very well, and I’m very pleased (and proud, too, of course) about how his music has improved quite dramatically over the past couple of years.
A couple of nights ago he was part of the band (playing saxophone) for a function for Youth for Christ at St Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in Paddington here in Sydney. Now this is a lovely old church, great acoustics, and built in the traditional shape of the cross. As its name suggests, it is run by the Franciscan order and has one of the best, if not the best, classical church choirs in Sydney, rivaled only by that at St Mary’s Cathedral.
So playing modern church music with electric guitars, bass, drums and saxophone (playing into our Rode shotgun microphone) and a packed audience of around two to three hundred youth all singing and having a great time was something of an experience for the priests – I’m not sure that anything like that has ever happened in that church before.
I must admit it is not my ‘scene’ – but nonetheless you have to admire the commitment and the principles of all those involved – and I did enjoy the experience overall and David showed he could mix it musically with the best of them.
My eye is now much better, and I only have a small residual gas bubble now which should disappear totally within the next few days. I saw my surgeon again yesterday and once again he is very pleased with the progress. It will still be a few weeks before we really know how good the eye will be, but even at this stage its looking good, if readers can excuse the pun.
So my piano work continues apace and I’m close to the stage, despite the eye, where I can start recording again. Additionally, I have finally been able to get some time to start practicing the oboe and cor anglais again, and I must admit I’ve managed to get my embouchure much better this time around. So the sounds that are coming out are now much more musical and I’m beginning to think that I can start playing the oboe a bit when I help David in some of his mass singing.
|