Ang Li performs Brahms, Debussy and Bowen
Good evening.
Now, it is an interesting case of how two pianists project drastic different sound on the same piano.
Ang Li is performing on the same New York Steinway (the shiny one) as the previous competitor, Ilya Rashkovskiy. I wrote that I felt Rashkovskiy was not taking advantage of the wide gamut of colours that exists in the piano. Li’s Brahms is a fine example. She brings out depth and textures that I felt I wanted to hear in the earlier reading of Chopin and Rachmaninoff.
Within the black box, there exist many consonants and vowels hidden. The way you can bring them out is very complex as it involves many dimensions. The obvious one is the velocity with which you strike the keyboard. No matter if your teacher may have told you to caress, or jab, or whatever to the keyboard, the simple physics of it is that you only control one parameter: the velocity of the hammer when it strikes the string. Colours and textures are brought out in other dimensions: how you pedal, how you use the soft pedal, how you dampen the strings, and most importantly, how each notes relate to each other.
Think that every note produces a consonant and a vowel. Even a simple C-major triad can be played in at least 7 different ways for the given dynamic level. Then, think that that the chord forms a word, as it would contain different consonants and vowels to form different words. Now, add the complexity of dynamic levels, and the use of pedals, and other factors, there are literally limitless number of ways to play a simple C-major triad. Then it’s up to the pianists to carefully sculpt each note, chord, phrase… to tell the story using the vocabulary not written or specified in the score.
Here, Li brings out the colours and the witty dry humour contained in the score of Debussy Préludes. In the Bowen Toccata which I am hearing for the very first time, which sounds like a Debussy Prélude on steroids, is a great vehicle for showing off the wide gamut of colours and textures Li possesses.
Still, the generosity can over saturate one’s senses. That might have happened in Brahms, where one would have to save one’s ears for its grand form. There ARE times that the richness of the colours can be tiresome too. Sometimes, it’s ok to have pasta and cheese.
Ken Iisaka
May 25th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Oh my - this Brahms is not a good performance……. she’s in way over her head.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
OMG — I didn’t expect to say this ever during the competition, but Ang Li should not be here. (Based on this one piece, anyway.) Am I hearing things, or was that shockingly bad?
Onward to the Debussy. Maybe the Brahms was just a nervousness dispersement vehicle.
(Ken, much appreciate you posting an entry for comments at the start of each performance.)
May 25th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
It’s a massive work that needs an extremely keen sense of cohesive architecture as well as total command of an orchestral sound from the keyboard. I’m not sure why she felt she could play this work. She was obviously struggling, especially in the final movement - almost sounded like she was improvising a couple of lines of music at one point…..
May 25th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
It’s a pity, because she has a lovely palette of colors (witness the slow movement of the Brahms and especially the Debussy Minstrels). I liked the effect her lack of pedal in the Minstrels brought to the piece.
It just feels like the Brahms Sonata was exactly the wrong piece to show off what she has to bring to the table.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
This is a sadly off night for Ang Li. This couldn’t have been the level of her performances for the screening jury. In the right hands, the Brahms f minor can put a performer heads above the crowd.
Hearing the Bowen, one can understand why she’s here.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I thought she used pedal in all the wrong places in Minstrels. Blurred staccato endings, but was dry in other areas when some pedal would have provided some colour and contrast.
I’m not sure why anyone would program the Brahm’s. Nearly impossible for anyone to look good.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
For comparison, her 2005 Cliburn program consisted mostly of miniatures (The Haydn C major sonata followed by 3 Debussy Preludes, 3 Granados Spanish Dances, and a Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody), and was one of my favorite performances of nonadvancing competitors.
Whatever you may think of her Brahms, she’s a fantastic miniaturist.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Things improved. Don’t think she can advance, though. But I have thought that while observing other competitions, only to be left agape at the jury decisions….
May 25th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Sadly am having to find myself agreeing with the comments on the Brahms. She did very little to improve upon this too often meandering work. At least there was some excitement for us in the Bowen to help us forget the boring Brahms which perhaps should be off competition programs for a while. Though of course it would be disrespectful and unacceptable to do so, the Brahms is one piece that I often feel could use some reduction or cuts to make it more digestable.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
The MC had never heard of him, but York Bowen isn’t that unknown. He’s not contemporary, either, but I figured that some people would have known him.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Not every composition, even by Brahms, is well-suited for a big-hall competition.
I enjoyed the Bowen.
Let’s hope they fixed that camera at the foot of the stage. It was unusual to see the audience upside-down!
May 25th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Li is also a Kaplinsky student - as many of the competitors are. I wonder if she’s refraining from voting on any pianists with whom she’s worked?
May 25th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
competitor like this makes the rest of gazillion pianists wonder, “what did she play in the screening round? entire Chopin etudes backwards?”
No further comment.
May 25th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
I happen to love this Brahms Sonata. I was excited to see Ms. Li performing again that another Cliburn competition. But i notice, that there are quite a few players who have returned again. It’s like being given a golden opportunity twice.
May 25th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Tom: assuming they haven’t changed the procedures since 2005 (not necessarily a safe assumption), votes from juror-teachers are not counted and the computer rebalances the remaining results. I won’t pretend to know how that works - I’m a computer science major, not a statistics major.
May 26th, 2009 at 12:35 am
I heard Li at the1 TCU screening. She actually played better tonight, but not the same repertoire. I was dismayed that she made the final cut to the competition. Several others who were much better missed the cut. I was furious at the time. Come on, teachers of contestants should have NO PART in the competion other than preparing their student(s). Yaplenski is a screener as well as a judge. That’s a double whammy! She may be the fairest and most knowledgeable judge on the jury, but she should not be there with a student in the race. Integrity is utmost in a contest! (By the way, Li is not her only student in the competitiion!! )
May 26th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
recording is messed up. Why is there such low volume for Ang li’s archive performance? I am trying to see what you guys are talking about but I can’t believe you commented so negatively on something you can’t hear… I mean, do compare the applauses between hers and others at the beginnings of the recitals. She sounded phenomenal from the bits I could hear!
May 26th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Li’s piano playing was wonderful! I love it. She plays with the best sound that I’ve never heard since the competition stared. I enjoy her Brahms the best, I can’t believe that beantiful playing was from a 24 year old girl.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Recording is messed up. Why is there such low volume for Ang li’s archive performance?? I’m trying to see what you guys are talking about, but I can’t believe you commented so negatively on something you can’t hear… I mean, do compare the applauses between hers and others at the beginnings of the recitals. She sounded phenomenal from the bits I could hear!