Andrea Lam plays Haydn, Brahms, Stravinsky, Bates and Ginastera
In comments during the prelims, someone mentioned that all the Haydn sonatas sounded like mid-period Beethoven (and I heard the same in a couple of the recitals). But what does Haydn really sound like? As Mike H pointed out, Haydn spent a long time in the Austro-Hungarian wilderness, after which he was among the first composers to break free of the church/nobility patronage system and then go on to celebrity, in England. Depending on the interpreter, his sonatas should sound like (some ideal of) Mozart, or maybe they sound like (some ideal of) Beethoven. Lam’s Haydn was neither or a little of both: tight, colorful, clear, individual, smart. The Brahms I’m still savoring. She’s mostly mesmerizing but there were a couple of hesitant moments; more later, but the commentariat urges, and deserves, a Wu-dedicated post.
UPDATE: With works of five composers, including three sets of bite-sized pieces, Lam set a high bar for maintaining interest and didn’t quite clear it. The Brahms was drawn-out on the whole; the Stravinsky sounded out of focus (and she looked unhappy about it); the Bates was fine, but she didn’t look or sound as though she was having much fun with it. She rallied for the Ginastera, giving a soulful and rhythmically incisive reading, but it wasn’t enough to tie up all the loose ends of the program. I’ve come to like her quite a bit–she seems smart, and tough, and a free spirit, all of which comes through in her playing–and I’m hoping that her chamber performance can carry her into the finals. Because barring equally problematic performances from her fellow semifinalists, this recital won’t.
James McQuillen
May 28th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
@Cliburnadmin:
Can you transfer the Lam comments from the Kunz posts to this one?
May 28th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
What a lovely program!
I hadn’t really known the Stravinsky studies; they’re coolissimo. And being so early, they come from a familiar place, and followed the intimate Brahms with a little bite. And of course, the Bates piece was a perfect slice to program between the Stravinsky and the Ginastera.
She’s super. Full of character, sensitivity, charisma.
– MH
May 28th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
I continue to find Lam beguiling, but I’m now worried about her. I don’t believe that recital was a categorical success.
The main problem was with the Stravinsky. Programming those etudes is daring, and knocking them off successfully is an accomplishment that could help advance any contestant. Lam was evidently unhappy with how they came out, and it’s clear why. Rather than make an impressive statement, I fear that the etudes served mainly to reveal weak spots in Lam’s arsenal — specifically lack of power and articulation in the RH. (The fourth had very bad problems.) I think anyone who knows the pieces well and has listened to many recordings might agree. And remember that the judges will be comparing her to Nakamatsu’s crystalline readings in 1997.
The Brahms was very good, notably the exceptionally poetic 118/2. You couldn’t ask for anything more. But the G minor ballade (118/3) was not quite locked in. And unfortunately Lam succumbed to the main danger in playing the entire 118 set: cumulative murkiness. She is an atmospheric artist to start, and much as I’m rooting for her, I started to tire of the unrelenting gauziness. And again, that right hand could not contribute shafts of clear light glinting off the thick leaves.
At this stage, you have to worry about whether you’ve given the judges any reason to eliminate you. They are looking for reasons; reasons make their job easier. Andrea Lam gave them reasons. I hope for the best.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Great idea and request Roger. Again, she was great despite some mistakes in the Stravinski and the Bates not being as good imo as Evgeni’s interpretation.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
I still find her playing captivating. The Haydn was really sparkling and playful and suited her really well. The Brahms a little less so, though I thought see did a wonderful job with #4, which is so difficult to interpret. I wanted more drama in #2 and #6. I had never heard the Stravinsky before, but again she forced me to listen and the last two pieces seemed to suit her well. She has an ability to grab your attention and the small split notes that pop up don’t distract from the overall affect - though might prevent her from the final round.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
James McQ-Thanks for the threads. I appreciate some of historical context that you offer in your entries. Same with MH.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Di Wu is SO much more into this Dvorak than what I heard earlier. Is it my imagination or is the Quartet even picking up on her energy and playing even better for her?
May 28th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Ms. Lam is another wonderful pianist, and I especially enjoyed her preliminary recital. Tonight it seemed as if there were TWO recitals, the first (Haydn and Brahms) well-paced, colorful, relatively precise and effective without eccentricity; and the second (the rest) somehow out of focus. I heard the brief interview after the recital when she said she played “music (she) loved.” Actually there’s quite a lot of music I love that doesn’t suit me very well pianistically so I leave it for others to play and for me to enjoy. We’re blessed with such a huge literature that there is plenty suited to every individual. Of course, these are real people, not “playing machines,” and I don’t believe that live performance–no matter how risky–will ever be completely replaced by even the most sophisticated technology.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
I have no right to speak up in such a knowledgeable group - but she is one of my favorites. I enjoyed the Bates and enjoyed it more than the first competitor. Felt it just danced and sparkled more. The lightness suited my sensibilities more. Then again I only heard Evengi’s on headphones at my office. I wish the best for Andrea.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Di Wu seems comparatively forgotten here and she shouldn’t be. That was some Ravel she played. If she keeps it up she has a great chance to continue.
As for Lam I fear I’m missing something. She’s certainly a fine player but I’m not finding her terribly distinctive or compelling. My loss it seems.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Apologies for the posting lag, folks. I’ll update the Lam post, but at the moment we’re on to Wu Di (or Di Wu, as we westerners put it). There’s a new post up, and here’s a preview: she rocks.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
I love Lam …yet, perhaps, she’s a bit too underspoken.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Unfortunatly i think Stravinsky can sent Lam off. We all remember Nakamatso on the etudes…
But Lam had some fine momentes. For me it was just “perfect” Haydn. Much brighter, elegant and sparkling then Vacatelo in the prelim… Even so were two beatiful performances.
For me Brahms was good but it missed me a little more “Fat sound”, but she took it like a real champ!
Let`s wait for her chamber work…
May 28th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
Andrea Lam as quoted in the Star Telegram blog about her performance:
“It just completely died,” she told her host family afterward. “In the Stravinsky, my fingers weren’t even moving — well, not in exactly the places they should.”
and
“I’m pretty beat,” Lam said. “I kind of abused my arms yesterday practicing.”
May 28th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
@ Kevin C: Link, please? I’d love to read that…
May 28th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Thanks Kevin for the Lam quotes. Very eye-opening comments from her. I wonder how many hours she pracitised yesterday, or if it was just that she worked too hard at it for the time she spent at the keyboard.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
I felt that Andrea’s recital was good…but nothing special. I think she is charming and seems of genuine character, but those Stravinsky Etudes were definitely not at a performance level of at a potential 2009 Cliburn finalist. Her technical limitations and struggles were too apparent, probably as well as her fatigue. Preparing such daunting hours of repertoire is tough - but at such a high level of competition, you need to show that you’re an artist ready and capable to give 50+ concerts/tours after the competition is over. Unfortunately, even if she gives an inspiring chamber music performance, I’m betting that we won’t see her in the finals…But of course, that’s also relative to how everyone else performs. We shall see!
May 28th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Found it:
http://startelegram.typepad.com/notes_from_the_cliburn/2009/05/andrea-lam-im-pretty-beat.html
I wasn”t even following the Star Telegram’s side of things - I like how they’re into the details more so than here, it’s quite interesting.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
So I’m reading the blogs and they’re mentioning that the prolific video-recording is for the documentary? I thought they weren’t doing one this year due to budgetary issues?
May 28th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Lam plays like someone from Manhattan School. I hope no one from there sees my blog. Manhattan students always come to Juilliard to play in Dubal’s class–they are just not the same. Juilliard really has it’s own tradition. I detected her weakness from her Fantasiestucke and offended one of her die hard fan by commenting, “Lam is not even that good a pianist.” I understand her fans, after all, the jury chose her over Lukas, Zou, Stephen and Spencer (what a shame!!). Her music is competent but not her overall pianistic abilities. She may be too tired from practicing but it is not the fundamental issue–She doesn’t have the fingers!–How come I was the only one detected it from the start of her first round. What were these jury members doing?
May 28th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Can the Cliburn “not award” a first place like the Chopin competitions do…?
May 28th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
@Takahata: according to the jury handbook, no. There must be a minimum of one and a maximum of two gold medals awarded.
Lam had been one of my favourites from the preliminaries, but although her semifinal round was decent, it clearly wasn’t of the same quality. Brad’s comments, IMO, summarize her recital best.
May 29th, 2009 at 12:02 am
If Lam does make the finals, she’ll be performing the following recital:
Corigliano Etude Fantasy
Prokofiev Sonata No. 6 in A major, Op. 82.
I guess that’ll answer a lot of people’s questions about her one way or the other.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:21 am
As one of my favorites from the preliminaries, Andrea did not disappoint in overall energy and lively portrayal of characters throughout her playing. However, she obviously was suffering from over-practicing (thanks for the article, Kevin!) and no, I don’t believe she has the technique of the other competitors. I’m thrilled she made it this far but I don’t believe we’ll be seeing her in the finals.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:25 am
I still have nothing but love for her though! I could listen to her play all day with no problem.
May 29th, 2009 at 7:16 am
@Nick: “Lam plays like someone from Manhattan School. I hope no one from there sees my blog.”
Ha! I’m from there, but many years ago.
May 29th, 2009 at 7:48 am
@Brad: Oops, I am glad you are cool about it. Oxana Mikhailoff is a phenomenal pianist who is from Manhattan School but before that she was from Moscow Conservatory. She was eliminated first round in last Cliburn. Now I know why—the contestants are too strong.
May 29th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
@Roger Tillotson-
Regrettably, the blog software doesn’t allow us to transfer a comment to a different post. I did, however, send a note to all the bloggers, asking them to please open a new spud at opening of a new performance. Hope that helps for future commentary!
- Emily at the Press office