Lang Lang

[Brian]

I'm curious because I'm listening to his new Chopin album, which is my first Lang Lang CD ever. Mostly I'm curious if there's anybody else who has taken so long to hear Lang Lang playing something.

[bhodges]

My opinion is somewhere between "Like him" and "Eh," so I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I've not heard this Chopin, nor any of his recordings so far, but I have heard him live maybe four or five times - mostly in one of the Beethoven or Chopin piano concertos. The occasions ranged from "excellent" to "what a waste," but in every case, he demonstrated that he does have considerable talent. I do think he is extraordinarily gifted, but that said, he sometimes seems bored or running on autopilot. Also, thankfully he seems to have tamed some of his body movement; that annoying "swaying-back-and-forth-and-looking-up-at-the-sky," for example, happens less frequently.

But the last time I heard him, I kept thinking that he should be commissioning some pieces - works that are too hard for anyone else to play, which would challenge him more. I think some of the things he chooses are just way too easy; he needs to ask someone like Ferneyhough to write something for him. 

--Bruce

[Lake Swan]

My opinion is somewhere between "Like him" and "Eh," so I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I've not heard this Chopin, nor any of his recordings so far, but I have heard him live maybe four or five times - mostly in one of the Beethoven or Chopin piano concertos. The occasions ranged from "excellent" to "what a waste," but in every case, he demonstrated that he does have considerable talent. I do think he is extraordinarily gifted, but that said, he sometimes seems bored or running on autopilot. Also, thankfully he seems to have tamed some of his body movement; that annoying "swaying-back-and-forth-and-looking-up-at-the-sky," for example, happens less frequently.

But the last time I heard him, I kept thinking that he should be commissioning some pieces - works that are too hard for anyone else to play, which would challenge him more. I think some of the things he chooses are just way too easy; he needs to ask someone like Ferneyhough to write something for him. 

--Bruce

Good post.

[Brian]

Thanks for the very interesting reply, Bruce! One thought; this comment -

I kept thinking that he should be commissioning some pieces - works that are too hard for anyone else to play, which would challenge him more.

- made me imagine Marc-Andre Hamelin, in a leather sheriff's vest and ten-gallon hat, with clinking boots, walking up to Lang Lang with a sheaf of impossibly hard sheet music, gritting his teeth together, and hissing out, Eastwood-style... "Pianos at dawn!"

[bhodges]

Good post.

Thanks, Dave!

Thanks for the very interesting reply, Bruce! One thought; this comment -

"I kept thinking that he should be commissioning some pieces - works that are too hard for anyone else to play, which would challenge him more."

- made me imagine Marc-Andre Hamelin, in a leather sheriff's vest and ten-gallon hat, with clinking boots, walking up to Lang Lang with a sheaf of impossibly hard sheet music, gritting his teeth together, and hissing out, Eastwood-style... "Pianos at dawn!"

Ha!

Actually the two of them should co-commission pieces, like a set of new etudes from someone - a set that might rival Ligeti's, for example.

--Bruce

[Lake Swan]

paging Henning...

[PaulSC]

But the last time I heard him, I kept thinking that he should be commissioning some pieces - works that are too hard for anyone else to play, which would challenge him more. I think some of the things he chooses are just way too easy

I've always thought of Lang Lang as a showman, and I think that's where lot of the objections to him are based: he doesn't just play impressively but plays to impress, in repertoire where other goals ought to matter. But is he really such a towering virtuoso (purely in technical terms) that he deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Hamelin? I think of H as being capable of feats that only a handful of others can manage, whereas dozens of pianists seemed to be equipped with techniques that equal LL's.

EDIT: A day later, I've realized I have no business calling LL a "showman" - I think that is blaming him unfairly for his charisma.

[Gurn Blanston]

I've heard little from him .. from what I've seen he plays rep. that's well trodden ground and that doesn't really interest me.

Ditto. Plus, his grimacing drove me nuts!

[SonicMan46]

Thanks for the very interesting reply, Bruce! One thought; this comment -

- made me imagine Marc-Andre Hamelin, in a leather sheriff's vest and ten-gallon hat, with clinking boots, walking up to Lang Lang with a sheaf of impossibly hard sheet music, gritting his teeth together, and hissing out, Eastwood-style... "Pianos at dawn!"

Brian - no comment on Lang Lang, but I have seen M-A Hamelin in concert locally (a while back) and his concert & encores were just stupendous; plus, I own a lot of Hamelin recordings - I think that Hamelin as Eastwood would easily be the winner!  Dave 

P.S. Bruce- thanks for that excellent & insightful post -

[PaulSC]

I've always thought of Lang Lang as a showman, and I think that's where lot of the objections to him are based: he doesn't just play impressively but plays to impress, in repertoire where other goals ought to matter. But is he really such a towering virtuoso (purely in technical terms) that he deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Hamelin? I think of H as being capable of feats that only a handful of others can manage, whereas dozens of pianists seemed to be equipped with techniques that equal LL's.

EDIT: A day later, I've realized I have no business calling LL a "showman" - I think that is blaming him unfairly for his charisma.

Rethinking part of my earlier post. But I do still wonder if Brewski, and others, regard LL as Hamelin's peer when it comes to technique. I've never thought of him that way, but maybe I should...

[Holden]

Rethinking part of my earlier post. But I do still wonder if Brewski, and others, regard LL as Hamelin's peer when it comes to technique. I've never thought of him that way, but maybe I should...

As LL doesn't play anything remotely challenging I don't see how people can describe him as technically gifted. (Hamelin is infinitely better in this regard). He's just another pianist but one with the whole of DGGs promotional arm directly behind him. This begs the questio, if DG hadn't taken him on then would we really know who he is today? One thing I do know is that he does not know how to play Beethoven. This was shown up in master class he did with Daniel Barenboim. You can find it on Youtube if you are interested. Jonathan Biss was also a participant.

[bhodges]

Replying to SonicMan46 (Dave), PaulSC, and Holden, I do think Hamelin is considerably more gifted than Lang Lang - and in repertoire choice there is just no comparison (to date). Hamelin has been called (perhaps with a bit of hyperbole) a "supervirtuoso," which may be overstatement but his playing is often right in line with that assessment. (He also has a great sense of humor - something Lang Lang might want to cultivate at some point.) I've heard Hamelin even more often live; those experiences have often been extraordinary. And if you compare his discography with Lang Lang's, the difference is immediately apparent.

--Bruce

[PaulSC]

As LL doesn't play anything remotely challenging I don't see how people can describe him as technically gifted. (Hamelin is infinitely better in this regard). He's just another pianist but one with the whole of DGGs promotional arm directly behind him. This begs the questio, if DG hadn't taken him on then would we really know who he is today? One thing I do know is that he does not know how to play Beethoven. This was shown up in master class he did with Daniel Barenboim. You can find it on Youtube if you are interested. Jonathan Biss was also a participant.

I've seen most of those Barenboim master classes on Youtube, including the ones with Biss and LL. And I agree, LL is unimpressive in the Apassionata. I do enjoy Barenboim's coaching, a lot of which emphasizes thinking orchestrally - not surprisingly in light of his extensive experience as a conductor.

[Mirror Image]

Perhaps we should have a poll for Hamelin too? I'm not sure if he's better or worse than LL .. sure he's a superb technician, but often .. from what I've heard, a) his choice of rep. isn't that interesting & b) it's not that musical or terribly distinctive, it's more technically accomplished over all else, and appeal in that wears out fast .. perhaps I've heard the wrong stuff? And is Barenboim really that fantastic a pianist either? I mean really .. most of what I have heard from him on that end is just sub-par stuff.

I highly disagree with what I bolded above. What he chooses to perform may not be interesting to you, but I've found many of the works he performed to be fantastic, including the Shostakovich PCs, the Busoni PC, the Reger PC, Bernstein's Age of Anxiety (a work that doesn't get enough performances), among others. I also think he plays with much emotion. He's not a technician, although he has plenty of virtuosity. Anyway, I've enjoyed his performances and think he brings a much needed clarity to a lot of the music he performs, especially to the denser works.

[DavidA]

As LL doesn't play anything remotely challenging I don't see how people can describe him as technically gifted. (Hamelin is infinitely better in this regard). He's just another pianist but one with the whole of DGGs promotional arm directly behind him. This begs the questio, if DG hadn't taken him on then would we really know who he is today? One thing I do know is that he does not know how to play Beethoven. This was shown up in master class he did with Daniel Barenboim. You can find it on Youtube if you are interested. Jonathan Biss was also a participant.

Not remotely challenging? In what way do you mean?

I also thought the object of attending classes was to learn how to play, not be because you are the finished article!

[DavidA]

It is a lots of stuff we talk about Lang Lang which comes from people who don't like success. Yes he is a showman but then so was Liszt and people criticised him for it. An awful lot of people come to hear Lang Lang play including probably quite a number of young people who would not otherwise listen to classical music. So good luck to him I say. He's certainly not my favourite pianist but I certainly will not be carping about his success as he has worked very hard on his technique and his playing. So good luck to him.

[dyn]

Perhaps we should have a poll for Hamelin too? I'm not sure if he's better or worse than LL .. sure he's a superb technician, but often .. from what I've heard, a) his choice of rep. isn't that interesting & b) it's not that musical or terribly distinctive, it's more technically accomplished over all else, and appeal in that wears out fast .. perhaps I've heard the wrong stuff?

hamelin has always struck me as somewhat light on warmth & humanity in spite of his impressive technique, but perhaps that's just a consequence of e.g. Alkan not quite measuring up to Chopin as a composer etc.

i haven't heard any of the orchestral recordings mirror image recommends except the Busoni concerto, which while impressive enough feels like it contains a lot of musical "filler"... for an hour-long piece it gives the impression of easily being able to fit into thirty minutes

And is Barenboim really that fantastic a pianist either? I mean really .. most of what I have heard from him on that end is just sub-par stuff.[/font]

in general i like his earlier recordings (some of which i have on LP) better than more recent stuff


i've never heard Lang Lang play so i can't comment on him either way, but i voted against him on principle cos too mainstream

[DavidA]

Some of the comments here are a bit nonsensical. Hamelin is a tremendous technician but he also plays other works - eg Haydn sonatas really well. LL is far more mainstream but why not? How does that disqualify his playing? I know Fanny Waterman said about him that he was a showman in her opinion but she wouldn't mind having his pair of hands! Why can't we just appreciate pianists for what they are and what they do without these interminable comparisons?

[Opus106]

Some of the comments here are a bit nonsensical. Hamelin is a tremendous technician but he also plays other works - eg Haydn sonatas really well. LL is far more mainstream but why not? How does that disqualify his playing? I know Fanny Waterman said about him that he was a showman in her opinion but she wouldn't mind having his pair of hands! Why can't we just appreciate pianists for what they are and what they do without these interminable comparisons?

But then, what will set me apart as apart as connoisseur of classical music if I like the same thing (person) that a larger section of the general public does?

[dyn]

Some of the comments here are a bit nonsensical. Hamelin is a tremendous technician but he also plays other works - eg Haydn sonatas really well. LL is far more mainstream but why not? How does that disqualify his playing?

Pianists are only cool if they're really obscure. It's like, an unwritten law or something.