Kunz plays Scarlatti, Haydn, Bach-Busoni and Bach-Siloti
After the intermission, Eduard Kunz began with a set of Scarlatti sonatas. They were performed with great precision, with much sense of intimacy that brings the audience's attention to the most intricate parts of the pieces. With delicate use of the soft pedal, he brought colours reminiscent of a harpsichord with multiple dispositions, and the timing of notes and subtle rubatos were absolutely exquisite. Perhaps most revealing was that Kunz brought each one of the sonatas as if they were prayers. From the expression of his face, to his glances towards the ceiling, he was completely absorbed in the world of music. He, and all the other pianists heard today are already so capable, it almost makes one wonder why they are at a competition, instead of Carnegie Hall tonight, not to say that Bass Hall is a lesser venue. Hardly so.
During the "half time", Jade Simmons and Steve Cumming discussed that the resume of the competitors is getting more and more impressive every four years. Truly, many of the competitors in Fort Worth already have an impressive career in performance and Kunz is no exception. Given that the structure of the classical music industry has changed dramatically in the past twenty years, and that no major international recording label have an extensive library of new classical recordings, the role of competitions such as the Van Cliburn may be changing.
One thing that has not changed is that Van Cliburn Competition attracts the most talented young pianists in the world, and that the standard is getting higher and higher. For the audience, this is a very delicious proposition as we have a chance to be immersed in 17 days of world-class piano music. Before the competition began today, Richard Rodzinski even stated that these 17 days are a festival, and a competition last. If I could be in Fort Worth right now, it would be a 17 days long vacation to do what I like to do the most.
So, if competitions no longer launch new performing and recording careers for these young pianists, is there even a point of competitions, and are they even relevant today? Absolutely and categorically yes. Competitions exist to challenge the artists beyond the boundaries to which they have become accustomed, and to ensure the existence of the art form in the next generation. These performances not only showcase the finest talent that the world has ever seen, they inspire and rouse the audience into support not only the artists, but the art form itself as well. The Van Cliburn Foundation even gives a chance to those in the audience to step up onto the stage, and share their love in the form of the International Piano Competition for Outstanding Amateurs. The Van Cliburn Foundation is unparalleled in their dedication towards promotion and preservation of the art, and I was not even asked to say something like this.
Now, Kunz is performing Bach-Busoni. Here, the colours are monumental, and the sound certainly evokes the original. Unfortunately, there have been numerous blemishes while grabbing these big chords. I wonder what the jury will make of them. However, the tranquil Bach-Siloti was just the perfect dessert in this exquisite multi-course meal. Ok, if each of the recitals today were a meal, I already had six meals today, and it's not like I am going on a diet any time soon.
Oh, by the way, I can see familiar faces in the audience. Hi there, Ron! If you know him, you know who I mean.
Ken Iisaka
May 22nd, 2009 at 10:39 pm
I only saw two of the performers today (the last two), but Kunz was my favorite. They were both excellent, but Kunz did put a great deal of emotion into his playing. It doesn’t hurt that that time period in music is one of my favorites, but the audience also seemed to enjoy it greatly. I thought I heard a mistake or two. I’m no professional pianist, though I’ve been playing for years, but I was pretty sure I heard one, at least, and my mom and sister concurred. Even so, great music is not always about perfection is notes, in my humble opinion.
May 22nd, 2009 at 10:43 pm
Could you tell us the name of the Bach-Siloti piece?
May 22nd, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Kunz strikes me as an exquisite soft-pedal pianist. some of his orchestrations in the Bach-Busoni were wonderful, but the stormy passages were also wet and slippery. He seemed over-extended. I’m not a stickler for accuracy, but I grew weary of rampaging note clusters, and started to expect them.
But the audience loved him! No question that his coloration when playing miniatures is impressive.
May 22nd, 2009 at 10:46 pm
You can find all the program information at:
http://www.cliburn.org/index.php?page=cliburn_current_comp
And that was Bach-Siloti Prelude in B minor, BWV 855a.
Thanks.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Bravo…. what a joy this recital was… (enjoyed the key approach to programming)
Colors Colors Colors……
and yes… one of my first reactions was I hear a harpsichord in that piano….
Being an organist… the arranged Bach was sheer heaven… screw the wrong/slippery notes…. it was the music that made it–and what an interpretation.
Today was a grand start to the competition.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 pm
“Competitions exist to challenge the artists beyond the boundaries to which they have become accustomed, and to ensure the existence of the art form in the next generation.”
I don’t like statements such as this. Why do artists need this kind of pressure? Any sincere artist will continually challenge his/her self to achieve a more ideal result each time.
If compeititions are the only thing ensuring the existence of this kind of music for posterity, or even contribute to this with the slighests significance, then I think we’re in trouble.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:57 pm
Sorry about the grammatical/spelling mistakes in the last post, lest you think I’m an idiot.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:15 am
Well, bummer. I heard the Tierra and the wonderful Myer, but decided to go practice during the Kunz, thinking I could watch it later in the evening. They say the programs are immediately archived so people can watch them at their convenience. But I can’t find any link to such an archive. Aaarrrgghhh! And of course, I don’t know if they are there but I can’t find them, or they really are not online yet.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 am
Kunz’s performance is the worst of the first day. Hailed by many amateurs to his fake and misunderstanding of a proper interpretation, it shows how bad music education is among today’s audience.
There is a huge different between “sentiment” and “sentimentality”. Are Scarlatti sonatas meant to be over-sugared and molto dolce? The second b minor sonata that he played shows one of misconception of the style. Horowitz rendered this work as a truly polyphonic work, a rare gems that is hidden among Scarlatti’s sonatas. Pogorelich’s misconcepted rendition of the same work as a sentimental singing melody above soft carpet-like lh, loses with a knock-out!! Unfortunately, Kunz follows the bad one.
The performance of Haydn sonata is better and impressive by it’s sensitivity and heavenly tone color.
Bach-Busoni Chaconne was terrible. An extremely mediocre performance that most music student from good school play better.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:19 am
It is also as sad to hear from a professional critic a musical judgment made from looking at the performer’s facial expression and non-sense acting.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:30 am
can’t stop crying
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:02 am
IMO, his Scarlatti and Haydn were straight from heaven. Magnificent tone color and beautiful pp.
Clementi Muzio, I (friendly) disagree regarding your Scarlatti comments: You are imposing subjective views on “the” correct way to play Scarlatti on someone who obviously has different, but very valid musical ideas, including the intensive use of soft pedal. It actually reminded me a lot of Horowitz’s playing (in an original way) who also showed so much more nuances and sudden changes than others that prefer a more restrained (and more historical) style. I had thought that the days of these style debates are over and we can appreciate the different ways to approach these works as standing equally valid side by side. Regarding your comment on polyphony - these works are mostly dominated by homophonic textures, but these textures were made wonderfully clear in his Scarlatti to my ears.
I fully agree with Brad Hill regarding the Bach-Busoni. I’m also not obsessed with accuracy, but I started to feel a little bit uneasy at some times. Nevertheless, there were strong and highly intense moments in this work, too.
Despite the little shortcomings of the Bach-Busoni, and mostly for the Scarlatti, Haydn, and the Bach-Siloti, this was for me the most interesting performance of the 1st day.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:31 am
Kunz is a dilemma (though I fear he will be less so for the judges) - of the three recitals, I enjoyed it the most by far. Not just enjoyed it, but was absolutely carried away by it. Clearly the live audience felt the same way. I think this was because he played with genuine and enormous musical-emotional conviction (and I say that without seeing his face, because when the video feed started to obsess on his expressions I switched to the radio stream). This was not showmanship or self-centredness, but expressive and searching. I am so tempted to say “Oh these Russians” - but that would be such a cliche.
But… I agree with the harsh comments above. I have never heard Scarlatti played like that, and it is at odds with the intentions of the composer, no matter how brilliantly the colouring suggest the harpsuchord. If opera singers dealt with arias in the same fashion they would be subjected to derision and exiled to the outer finges (where they would find some dedicated fans. Similarly, the Bach-Busoni was a tour de force interpretatively, the final crescendo achieved with a majestic force that really did take my breath away and then made me shout out loud (and it was the middle of the night here). But oh… all those wrong notes, jumbles of chords, imprecise articulation, loss of control - and compare that with the near-perfection that Tierra achieved. If you’re going to throw open the doors and shout for joy, it’s no good tripping up like a drunk as you do so.
I went back to the video for the after performance interview - Kunz was visibly distracted. He was not interested in the questions (I was amazed how cool the others had been, frankly) and was on the point of berating himself. He complained that the keys were slippy, and then apologised for the “rubbish” of blaming the piano. He was clearly very dissatisfied with his performance, and we know why.
I can’t see the judges rewarding this sub-standard technical command, despite the superlative musicality (especially in the Bach-Busoni). If they do it will send a very unusual message. But I think Kunz expects not to progress — asked if he would change piano in the next round he clearly wanted to say “I won’t be in the next round”. But for me, he is the pianist I am most interested in, most eager to hear more of, most fascinated by as I am by the great pianists of the past. By contrast, I have not the remotest interest in Myer - a million others are the same. I agree with the discussion above and in the intermission of the level of experience of the contestants, but Kunz - for all that he is a seasoned concert performer with great orchestras and conductors - has some way to go.
May 23rd, 2009 at 5:56 am
I must say that I enjoyed all three performances!! I rank them as follows: 3, 1, 2. Kunz’s Scarlatti interpretations were unique and interesting.. His Haydn was well played. As far as the Chaconne is concerned, there were a few mistakes, but overall a good performance.. I think Kunz and the first guy will be placed in the Semi-finals…
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:08 am
I came last night and listed to the final two performers. I must say that I quite disappointed with the Kunz performance, especially his performance of the Chaconne. Kunz certainly has a big technical equipment–no one can deny that. Yet, it is unfortunate he used his equipment to undermine the greatness of this Bach composition. He played the piece way too fast apparently with the aim of using the Bach simply to impress the jury with his ability to play fast. He evoked none of the drama of the piece. He should listen to a countryman of his–the incomparable Shura Cherkassky for a far more profound interpretation of this piece. It is sad that so many interpretations of competitions these days devolve into displays of nothing more than speed and power.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:09 am
So far everyone has gotten a good review…but there’s no WAY they all played well. For example, I thought the first pianist was practically terrified and it showed in her playing. She also didn’t have the technique to pull off what she was playing. And, as C Muzio says above, Kunz’ Romantic Baroque (plus Haydn) is a very acquired taste and not for everyone.
I know it’s early but last time there were contentious reviews and comments about who will move on. I know they bothered some people but I miss them. I’d be shocked if either Kunz or Kudritskaya moved on.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:33 am
Since I’m a time zone ahead of these performers, I unfortunately didn’t get to hear Kunz yesterday. When will the archives be up on the site?
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:39 am
I was drawn in by Kunz’s Scarlatti. It oozed artistry and sensitivity. Even if it may have been different than a typical interpretation, I believe it was very heartfelt and communicative. Haydn was also wonderful, although after the Scarlatti, I started to feel that the recital program was starting to be a bit one-dimensional. For my own taste, the Bach-Busoni was slightly too direct and lacked breadth and scope, in sound and in tempi. This is a mammoth work, orchestral and organ-like in many respects. For me, it is best suited by a broad, spacious interpretation.
That being said, everyone takes their own road to arrive at their personal truth regarding the music. Although it might not be my road or your road, I certainly think it deserves our respect. I would be careful when using words like ‘worst, fake, misunderstood, misconceived, and terrible.’ First of all, no one at this level plays terribly. Secondly, if it wouldn’t be said to a competitor’s face, I believe it doesn’t deserve to be on a blog either. Thirdly, competitors are under an enormous amount of stress during these competitions. No one, other than someone who has gone through this feeling, could understand how thoroughly wrenching this feeling can be. They are giving everyone a wonderful gift by playing on such a stage, although most of these competitors will actually walk away with very little in compensation for their efforts.
While it’s fun to stand on the sidelines and nit-pick, we should all remember the enormous sacrifice each and every one of these competitors make to bring us the music.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:30 am
I listened to all three evening performances, and I have to say all three impressed me in different ways. I thought Tierra’s Liszt Ballade was wonderfully musical and the Ginastera blew me away (I was not familiar with this piece). I felt the Brahms may not have been a good choice for him musically - it just didn’t seem to work for me like his playing of the other pieces.
A for Myer, I agree with many other comments regarding his playing. His sense of style and his phrasing, as well as the clarity of his playing, are amazing. I loved the way he brought some of the voices in the Beethoven that you don’t hear in most performances. I thought the Debussy had a nice blend of impressionistic blur and clear articulation. Debussy was a composer who took great care in marking his pedalling and articulation. I thought Myer got it just right. I’ve heard the Vine Sonata several times now. Myer’s performance is one of my favorites so far. Wonderful sense of timing, and he really brought out the different muscial elements and styles.
Kunz was a bit of puzzle, and he definitely seems to be generating the most disagreement of any competitor so far. I think the audience appreciated his programming choice, as did I. From my review of the progammes, I’m glad to see we are going to a more diverse set of music in this competition than in some years past. The Scarlatti and Haydn were incredibly expressive, and you could definitely sense Kunz’s feeling for the music. People have very different opinions about how music from these earliers periods should be played, which is great, but for me, no one played Scarlatti like Horowitz, and Kunz didn’t quite do it for me. The Bach-Busoni was the most interesting. There were many errors, which in and of itself doesn’t bother me. I’ve made enought mistakes in performance to know that a few wrong notes here or there don’t ruin a performance. However, at times, Kunz seemed on the brink of disaster and I found myself feeling confused by the playing. At other times, it seemed like he rocovered and played parts of the piece beautifully.
Now the only question is, what will the jury think?
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:47 am
Wow, two comments deserve noting:
“everyone takes their own road to arrive at their personal truth regarding the music. Although it might not be my road or your road, I certainly think it deserves our respect” and “I had thought that the days of these style debates are over and we can appreciate the different ways to approach these works as standing equally valid side by side.”
Here we have the cancer of aesthetic relativism - the idea that there is not objective truth to be found in the interpretation of music. At the risk of sounding intolerant, this is manifestly false. These pieces, particularly from composers of the baroque and classical eras contain profound ideas and point to the nature of things. Given this, different approaches to the music will unlock those ideas to a greater or lesser extent. My preference for Glenn Gould over Andras Schiff is not a private subjective preference–I really think it is clear to the careful hearer that Gould plays a superior Bach, that he gets at the ideas Bach has in mind through his interpretation - that he brings out the voices Bach wants brought out and which should be brought out - that his choice is tempo best yields the true musical ideas inherent in the piece. All interpretations are not valid and all interpretations are not equal. We can judge pianists by standards other than speed and power. Let me say that technical prowess, fingerbusting speed and great sweep is impressive and important - but it is far less important than the ability to unlock the great musical ideas of the most profound works. Listen to Shura Cherkassky’s Chaconne and compare it to the vastly inferior interpretation of Kunz; or listen to Artur Schnabel’s Opus 111 and compare it to the inferior interpretation of Brendel; listen to William Kapell’s Bach 4th Partita and compare to the inferior interpretation of Angela Hewitt - there may be equality in equipment, but not in profundity.
Unfortunately, I think the jurors may be as deaf to great profundity as some who have posted here. There is a reason it was said by a competitor in the Tchaikovsky competition once: Glenn Gould would never get past the 1st round of any competition. He is probably right, not because Gould is not among the great interpretations, but because it is flash, not substance, that often wins.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:27 am
It’s always interesting how the same performance can evoke such different reactions in people.
What “Mike Q” heard in Kudritskaya’s playing as “practically terrified” I heard as “thoughtful and introspective”, and she was actually my favorite performer of the first day.
Conversely, I find it hard to agree with KERA reviewer Olin Chism’s choice of the adjective “subtlety” to describe Kunz’s Chaconne.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:28 am
This entry was removed due to copyright violation.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:51 am
Agree that Kunz will be a problem for jurors. Yes, there were marksmanship errors but with an amazing musical depth and interpretative originality. In addition to the strange interview afterward, note the amount of key wiping between selections when replays get posted. This was beyond nervious mannerism and I presumed at the time they were overly moist from some nervous pianist. Overall it’s a shame what happened in this performance. Because if he doesn’t make the cut to semi’s, is it the bad notes, (key issues?) or simply that his unique style that doesn’t fit the mold. But he’s the one I would be most curious to see in non-competitive recital setting.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:07 am
Will Geisler — all objectivity is eventually subjective. That goes for science and art. Truth, as a result of biological perception, can never be regarded as absolute by people with wide-open minds. We live an existence in which everything we know is possibly illusory, and certainly inexplicable.
Absolutism in music, which rarely even attempts to be objective, is ridiculous. Yes, there are standards, but they apply only to those who agree with them. There is discrimination; there is taste. Disagreement is welcome. But you cannot grind an axe against another person’s preferences, as a matter of principle, without seeming foolish.
I agree with you about Kunz, Gould, and Schiffra. But I disagree with your philosophy.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:09 am
I find the comments of Will Geisler and Janine very insightful (other than I feel it is less helpful to compare Kunz with Cherkassky and then compare a series of established/historic pianists). I am drawn to both - indeed, to unlock the musical meaning and discover its power to move (intellectual and emotional force) stand way beyond technical accuracy and stylistic meticulousness. The question seems to be, are there limits in all directions that counterbalance to such a degree as to negate - too great a latitude and it is a profound meaning, but is it the composers? too great a technical laxity and is it possible to remain transfigured? For all the ranges or lack of them in technique, emotional sincerity, originality, refinement, subtlety etc what seems lacking most is intellect — the ability to understand and relate, to hold in balance all the forces at play — to be a Horowitz.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:17 am
One has to warm to the Romantic Baroque sensibility to like, let alone be capitivated by, Eduard Kunz’ recital. His Scarlatti remains present with me even this morning.
He’s a vocal pianist, of which there are too few, who shapes every note in each phrase.
However, the technical speed bumps in the Chaconne were evident and surprising. We’re in a competition and flawless execution matters for advancement. Compare this, for example, Spencer Myer’s spectacular clarity in the Vine Sonata, and the smudges weaken the dramatic conception.
At this point, moving to the next rounds is relative. We have to hear more.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:44 am
I thoroughly enjoyed Kunz’s program. I LOVED Kunz’s artistry, interpretation, mistakes and ALL. He grabbed my attention throughout his performance. Would love to get a chance to see him in person one day. I would definitely be there!
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 pm
The review posted under Janine’s name above should give some sort of attribution of Olin Chism, from whose blog it was taken.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Thanks, Kevin. Indeed it is a piece written by Olin Chism. I will notify the foundation.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Briefly responding to Kevin C. - Kudritskaya WAS thoughtful and introspective. She just didn’t sound comfortable to me, especially at the beginning. And she lacked the technique for Scarbo. She’s clearly talented; I’m just not sure the big-time competition route is for her (and hey - maybe she’ll make the Finals and I’ll look like a moron).
I had to sound wishy-washy, but I do think there’s a middle road in this relativism vs. objectivism debate. I think most serious composers would allow for a lot of interpretive room…but there are limits. Playing a gentle slow movement at fff throughout would be wrong. But listen to Richter and Brendel in any single piece, and you’ll hear a lot of variation - but they each are bringing out something the other is not. With Kunz, I think the issue is somewhat different. I think the judges are simply going to feel he lacks, or is uninterested, in playing music outside of late-19-century performance practice. That’s not even a relativism vs. objectivism issue; they may feel he’s too limited to move on. Hell I may be wrong here too; I haven’t listened to everyone yet.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Is Kunz’s focus on the baroque really going to hurt him that much? Maria Mazo advanced from the preliminary round in 2005 playing just the Hammerklavier sonata.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Having now heard all the first day’s offerings, it’s Ms Kudritskaya so far for me! Not the most dazzling technique (but was that a lack of dazzle rather than a lack of technique…..), but full of eloquence and that quality (beloved of amateur listeners like me!) of “soul”. I though she was a thoroughly “Russian” player (and interestingly she was actually born in Russia, not Ukraine), in that long tradition. Perhaps a little uneasy at times in the first movement of the Chopin (perhaps that “#1 Draw” spot got to her….), she then found her feet - especially in the Marche Funebre - , refusing to be even slightly distracted in the Ravel by the audience coughing fits. I didn’t hear any technique problems in the Scarbo (but I’m no judge of technique). The little Scriabin Valsa tossed off at the end - almost as if it was an encore - was a fluent delight.
Is it just me, or have we lost the video feed of Day 2?
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
AGB: I think it’s just you. I’m listening to Varvaresos right now.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Varvaresos froze up with no sound either right after the Beethoven and won’t reconnect for me.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Thank you for the link to the program information, Mr. Iisaka.
I’m also enjoying seeing the preliminary archives.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Activity list from 8:30 to 12pm last night:
8:30 dinner ready in front of the pc and looking forward to enjoying a great evening
8:45 decided to do laundry
9:30 coming back from laundry but internet connection got interrupted for at least 5 minutes, went nuts for 10 minutes.
Folding the clothes with Chopin Barcarolle.
Came back to pc for Vine Sonata.
10:40 woke up from real world, stuck with pc with the sound of Scarlatti.
Turned the volume down when Bach-Busoni flashed through.
Couldn’t help tears for Bach-Siloti. First time thought being a musician was worth a lifetime in poverty.
12:15 looking online how to get the score for that last piece and info. of the Russian dude.
12:30 was grateful to hear a performance that moved me since a long time, went to bed.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
After reading most all of the 2009 competition blog the Kunz recital seems to have elicited the most polarizing comments. I noticed one of the people who thought it was the worst performance of the 1st day in contrast to the glowing reviews many were giving it wrote the line- “it shows how bad music education is among today’s audience.” As a pianist and life-long music lover who has sometimes found myself caught in the very middle of “informed” music criticism that is completely at odds over a given performance and in great disagreement, might I suggest that just possibly it shows how DIFFERENT music education is among today’s audience. The word “Bad” itself can be a very subjective term, and just because one school of interpretive thought is opposed to or differs from another does not necessarily make one “bad” and the other “good”. Did we not see even in the Jury videos the discussion of how some of these renowned jury members completely disagreed with each other concerning the auditions, some hating a particular interpretation, while others admiring the performance. Some giving the same performance a 0 while others gave it a 3.
Those who say Kutz’s interpretation of the Scarlatti is at odds with the composer’s intentions are in many respects correct imo. However, what beautiful music-making n’est pas? Some of it truly was like a prayer and most seem to think there was great musical conviction in the interpretation even if one disagreed with it.
The Haydn for me was possibly the best of the 3 offerings because it was both great music making and a very good interpretation. The Bach-Busoni I have a problem with not so much for the many wrong notes, but for the harshness and heavy-handedness that came across to me on my computer. Maybe things were different sounding in the hall, but I must say having heard some great performances of it, the nobility and breadth of architecture was lacking in the big passages which diminished the music’s potential. Sorry, but imo it was a bit of mess. I heard this piece at an Intl. Piano competition in MN a few years back, and the performance of it there made this one actually seem like from an amateur, which clearly Kutz is not.
And this leads finally to the issue of Kutz saying he felt like he was “fighting” the piano in this performance. To me this manifested itself most clearly in the Bach-Busoni and if by then the keys were overly sweat-laden maybe without me trying to make excuses for him this accounts for some of the wrong notes and an interpretation that was less than Kutz was looking to give.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:57 pm
It’s Kunz not Kutz, Dave.
May 23rd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Let me first off say that I am enjoying this blog and everyone’s comments very much. I normally simply like to read everyone’s comments (as everyone is entitled to their own opinion and they are all valid)…however I just had to write this…
Regarding Mr. Kunz’s statement as though he felt as though he was “fighting” the piano — I can’t help but feel as though he was simply making excuses for an unconvincing performance. If you’ve watched the recent video vignettes, you’ll notice how he comments on how the Cliburn has provided the contestants with 3 ‘marvelous’ instruments. Then, what does he do? He blames the instrument (the one which he chose himself none the less) for his inaccuracies in performance. Don’t get me wrong with the last comment regarding notes ….the Cliburn is seeking (at least I hope) true ‘artists’ and note accuracy should be the least of worries. I can’t help but feel however that if you’re programming mostly only music from the Baroque period (especially Scarlatti), you are obviously trying to make a statement and better be able to nail it spotlessly. Kunz’s was far from spotless…and his performance also lacked conviction, character, and authenticity as far as I was concerned. Have a listen to Maria Tipo if anyone is interested in wonderful Scarlatti.
I believe I read in another blog post that Kunz will be a difficult choice for the jury. I don’t feel as though he will be a tough choice for the jurors at all. I think they will have no problem in eliminating him. This is all however, just one persons opinion and like previously stated, everyone is entitled to their own.
Robert Lee, Vancouver
May 23rd, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Well done, Robert!
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IehdpI3wFkU
May 26th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
I loved Kunz’s recital! It was the most artistic playing I have heard so far. So what if there is one or two wrong notes. Music isn’t about counting wrong notes. According to Clementi Kunz followed the wrong interpretation. Mr. Clementi, have you spoken with Domenico Scarlatti lately? Did he tell you how to interpret his sonatas?