Zhang and Takács play Schumann
One of the more markable thing about the Cliburn Competition is that we get to hear many different aspects of the artists we hear. The artistry as a chamber musician is distinctly different from being a recital soloist. Also the competition’s free-choice format allows the competitors to tell a story about their relationships with their chosen repertoire.
Yet, in the chamber music programme of the competition, and the selection is more limited. I don’t think I have heard so many different readings of Schumann quintet in such a short time, and comparisons are made in different measures from the solo programmes.
Here, Zhang’s approach is polish. Rhythmically, the group takes little risks, although I found the ragged rhythm in the third movement to be somewhat relaxed than jabbed. The sounds is blended well, with the Hamburg Steinway, with Zhang’s crystalline notes placed above the warm strings. The ensemble was especially cohesive in the second movement.
However, to my now-jaded ears, I wonder whether they had provoked anything in my heart. Sure, the performance is brilliant, well polished, and very well mannered. As Zhang shakes the hands of the quartet as they leave the stage, I think there was much warm feelings among them. However, I missed the drive that I want in the last two movements.
I know James was also listening. May I pass the baton to you?
James here: not much to add; I’ve been trying to imagine how the Schumanns would have come across in a different order. I can see how Zhang suffered from appearing when he did, but such is competition life. ‘Brilliant’ is right, in the surface sense of the word. It was crisp and sparkling, also amiable and smart. It reinforced my positive feelings for Zhang, but at this point, Sunday afternoon of the semifinals, I want to be enthralled.
Ken Iisaka
May 31st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I can’t judge this performance well, having heard this 3 times already. All I can say is that it is perfectly pleasant but doesn’t add anything we haven’t heard already. I hope the judges aren’t judging it this way, but that’s the best I can muster.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:13 pm
This is my favorite performance of the Schumann, although I, too, am at the point of burnout. What’s interesting is how much of the dynamic and phrasing came from Zhang during the rehearsal. They’re not following all of it (how the quartet can keep track is beyond me), but it’s not like the other performances.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:20 pm
It’s a perfectly good performance, but I find myself wishing he had picked another instrument - this one sounds too penetrating. Also there is some disparity in the articulation of the 4th movement theme - Zhang played it more portato, and I’m not sure that was such a good idea. I have to say there were 3 other performances of Schumann I liked a good deal better - those of Vacatello, Lifits and Tsujii.
Such a nice, gracious interview with Zhang afterwards.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:24 pm
On the first night of the semifinals, I figured having a later chamber performance would be an advantage due to the quartet being more polished and having the piece fresher in their minds.
I didn’t account for how fresh the quintets would stay in my mind though, and can’t really tell if the way this performance just sort of washed over me was due to his playing or to just my own tired ears.
I’m curious how the judges can manage to judge the fourth time they hear a piece in four days (or the 7th, in the case of the White Lies for Lomax) by the same standards as the first.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I absolutely loved it — my favorite of the Schumann Quintets. For me this young man speaks to the heart, and his honest music making will stand him in good stead in the years to come. I thought he had excellent chamber music sense, and this, combined with everything else he has already shown will score big points with the jury.
He’s one of my picks for a medal.
May 31st, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I definitely agree with Prof. Nel! Every student I teach is reminded frequently that the most important characteristic of a professional is CONSISTENCY–a point that Prof. Kaplinsky also emphasized in her interview. Mr. Zhang is remarkably consistent, and at a tremendously high level! His performance of the Schumann was, in my opinion, outstanding. Indeed, a lesser pianist might have sounded unfocused after the titanic event that preceded his Schumann (Tsujii’s Hammerklavier).
Just as an aside, I would be interested in everyone’s opinion about the importance of the chamber music performance in the overall evaluative process. Obviously, it is integral to the “Chamber Music Award;” but I have never observed that a great chamber performance “catapulted” a contestant, although a wonderful solo recital has often done just that. My understanding is that the Cliburn winners’ engagements are heavily predicated on concerto appearances and solo recitals. (I’m claiming no “inside knowledge” here, but there seems to be some logic in this argument.)
May 31st, 2009 at 3:07 pm
@Alan:
That’s an interesting point. I think the chamber music counts quite a bit as a COMPONENT, but whether it will actually be the THING that advances you to the final is another matter. I think if you played poorly (e.g. Kunz, who simply didn’t know his part) that’s a big no-no. But, someone like Olga Kern who played her Schumann Quintet well, is now of course known as a solo pianist with that kind of career. Other people in the past who have won prizes and also play great chamber music, like Jeffrey Kahane, e.g. have the distinct advantage of having more WORK, and more balanced and versatile careers. From the last competition, I know that Joyce Yang often plays with the Takacs Quartet, something that would have never happened if she had not played so well with them in the competition. So, this is a little convoluted, but I think being a fine chamber musician here IS a good thing, with more subtle rewards, even if you may not advance to the final.
May 31st, 2009 at 4:22 pm
IMO, you can’t play yourself into the finals with a great chamber round, but you can play yourself out. I think Zhang H. sure did himself a great service in that regard, however.
May 31st, 2009 at 4:56 pm
As far as I can see, he is definitely in the finals. If he isn’t, then the Cliburn is a joke.
May 31st, 2009 at 5:05 pm
There are more than 6 pianists at this point I want to put at “definitely in the finals”. Clearly they can’t all make it, but that won’t make the Cliburn a joke.
May 31st, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Thanks for your opinion. If I’m allowed to, that is, I will keep mine. Zhang is clearly an extraordinary talent.
May 31st, 2009 at 6:28 pm
I agree with Maestra, it sounded a bit jilted in the 4th movement. I liked Tsujii’s rendition of it (on the mellower NY Steinway) better.
May 31st, 2009 at 7:17 pm
@Takahata is missing the reality of a juried event.
The jury asks: was I deeply moved? Am I dying to hear more? Is this an artist who really has something to say — a person who can break down boundaries, and make profound emotional connections?
A jury is generally an averaging phenomenon. Less controversial performers frequently fare better than extremists.
It’ll be interesting to see how this jury responds to Zhang. On one hand, he’s among the more remarkable prodigies to turn up in a long time: his performances have been sublime and polished, and it’s hard not to imagine him in the finals. On the other hand, his readings are uncontroversial to say the least — some will admire a performer who puts so little of his own imprimatur atop the composer’s score; others will feel unmoved, and perplexed by the personality of the performer. They may feel how young this talent is, compared to, say Tsujii.
A consideration in the minds of jurors, and it may be discussed explicitly, is: which would be more helpful to Zhang’s career — promoting him to the finals? Or dropping him, and allowing his growth to continue without the distraction of too many spotlights too soon in his musical career.
For my part, as lovely as I found his playing to be, miraculous in some ways, I was never moved. I’m not terribly interested in hearing him ripple through the Mozart and Prokofiev concerti, or the Gaspard.
Mike
May 31st, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Re:Michael Hawley: For my part, as lovely as I found his playing to be, miraculous in some ways, I was never moved.
In contrary, I found myself deeply moved by Zhang’s profound lyricism and am eagerly awaiting to hear his final repetoire.
Back to Deljavan’s Schubert.
May 31st, 2009 at 8:07 pm
I totally agree with you, Michael. I agree that Zhang is extremely talented, but his playing never moves me. I do not know why. I feel it is too artificial.It seens that he pretends he understands the depth of music he is trying too hard to play mature.. I definitely am not dying to hear him again, at this point. I am sure he will be one of the greatest in few years.
May 31st, 2009 at 8:08 pm
I agree completely with Alan and Anton. Zhang is truly a remarkable pianist and one who has a lot to say and does it exquisitely. Up to now Bozhanov, Tsuji and Haocheng Zhang.
And although I loved Lifits’ Mozart and Kunz opening Scarlatti sonatas in the preliminaries, as long as the three mentioned are in the Finals, I will be a happy lady tonight.
If the Cliburn is a competition of pianists then their sound and not their looks should be the definitive ingredient. We will see?? I am praying that those twelve will do their job and we get the greatest Finals.
Alex’s Mom
June 1st, 2009 at 1:11 pm
If Tsuji wins the top prize, it won’t only be the first for someone with a handicap. It’ll also be the first for someone whose program does not include any Bach, Mozart or Haydn or Scarlatti in recitals as well as concerti performances. Hardly anyone in the past was able to win a top prize without programming any Bach, Mozart or Haydn. My money is still on that youngster Zhang because his performances so far have been very consistent and solid and he’s able to put down his own brand of musicianship which is way ahead of his young age. It’s pianists like him who win this kind of competition.