Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Himari YOSHIMURA - 7 yo Japan - 1st Grand Prize - International Grumiaux Competition 2019
479 views
Skip to first unread message
John Nguyen
Apr 17, 2019, 10:08:05 PM4/17/19
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YipD8Npugvg
It's amazing that at the age of 7 she delivered the Paganini 1st violin concerto with pose, confidence, and above all with great musicality. Her timing, phrasing, rubato are so matured beyond her years. Unbelievable!!!! She played a Paganini Caprice no. 13 as well. How can she make the tiny violin sound so good?????
It's amazing that at the age of 7 she delivered the Paganini 1st violin concerto with pose, confidence, and above all with great musicality. Her timing, phrasing, rubato are so matured beyond her years. Unbelievable!!!! She played a Paganini Caprice no. 13 as well. How can she make the tiny violin sound so good?????
tom g
Apr 18, 2019, 8:45:07 AM4/18/19
to
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 4:08:05 AM UTC+2, John Nguyen wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YipD8Npugvg
>
> It's amazing that at the age of 7 she delivered the Paganini 1st violin concerto with pose, confidence, and above all with great musicality. Her timing, phrasing, rubato are so matured beyond her years. Unbelievable!!!! She played a Paganini Caprice no. 13 as well. How can she make the tiny violin sound so good?????
The received wisdom is that prodigies lack emotional depth because they don't have enough experience of life. Simply, this is not true as this amazing little musician demonstrates. It is not only her perfect technique that amazes but also her unbelievable emotional intelligence.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YipD8Npugvg
>
> It's amazing that at the age of 7 she delivered the Paganini 1st violin concerto with pose, confidence, and above all with great musicality. Her timing, phrasing, rubato are so matured beyond her years. Unbelievable!!!! She played a Paganini Caprice no. 13 as well. How can she make the tiny violin sound so good?????
Awesome, and also a great hope for the future of humanity.
augusti...@yahoo.com
Apr 18, 2019, 11:01:38 PM4/18/19
to
tom g wrote:
> The received wisdom is that prodigies lack emotional depth because
> they don't have enough experience of life. Simply, this is not true as
> this amazing little musician demonstrates. It is not only her perfect
> technique that amazes but also her unbelievable emotional intelligence.
> Awesome, and also a great hope for the future of humanity.
Before I respond, I want to emphasize that what I’m about to say is in no way a knock against this young violinist. What she’s accomplished is amazing. She has nothing less than my profound respect.
> The received wisdom is that prodigies lack emotional depth because
> they don't have enough experience of life. Simply, this is not true as
> this amazing little musician demonstrates. It is not only her perfect
> technique that amazes but also her unbelievable emotional intelligence.
> Awesome, and also a great hope for the future of humanity.
Regarding emotional depth and life experience, playing an instrument doesn’t require all that much. Passion, yes. Hard work, yes. And it also requires an exceptional ability to listen to one’s teachers and do what they ask. Gifted children, guided by knowledgeable teachers, can mimic the musical devices that touch our emotions. They can produce, via music, a convincing illusion of emotional depth. They don’t need real depth or experience. Their ability to play an instrument at an extraordinary level will suffice.
You’ll never see a seven year old novelist, playwright, or movie maker who can match the emotional depth and life experience of the best adults. This because emotional depth and experience in writing or movie-making can’t be faked.
Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA
tom g
Apr 19, 2019, 2:08:50 AM4/19/19
to
augusti...@yahoo.com
Apr 19, 2019, 7:36:07 AM4/19/19
to
Some years ago, I knew a student who, although technically proficient, was a bland player. Then one day this student gave an intriguingly interesting performance. It was far better than I’d previously heard from this player. After the performance, I asked him if he was doing something new. He replied that his teacher had painstakingly coached him on articulation and phrasing. He added, “I don’t really like it, but I’m doing it because my teacher insists on it.”
What struck me is how effective the performance was, even though the student didn’t feel anything special was going on. He produced an effect he himself didn’t fully comprehend.
Never underestimate the value of good coaching.
What struck me is how effective the performance was, even though the student didn’t feel anything special was going on. He produced an effect he himself didn’t fully comprehend.
Never underestimate the value of good coaching.
John Nguyen
Apr 19, 2019, 11:30:06 AM4/19/19
to
>Some years ago, I knew a student who, although technically proficient, was a bland player. Then one day this student gave an intriguingly interesting performance. It >was far better than I’d previously heard from this player. After the performance, I asked him if he was doing something new. He replied that his teacher had >painstakingly coached him on articulation and phrasing. He added, “I don’t really like it, but I’m doing it because my teacher insists on it.”
>What struck me is how effective the performance was, even though the student didn’t feel anything special was going on. He produced an effect he himself didn’t fully >comprehend.
>Never underestimate the value of good coaching.
I have no doubt that good coaching is very valuable. But in my mind, effective coaching is a two-way process where how well it is given and taken have equal importance. Let's look at how well it is taken in this case. Can the effectiveness be delivered to everyone to achieve this level? In this performance, we have to give a lot of credits to this young child to absorb the teaching/coaching from the teacher(s) and internalized to make it her own presentation. It is fairly easy to tell the difference from "canned" performance and true spontaneous presentation. In my opinion, the latter one fits well to this phenomenal presentation by a 7 year-old child.
>What struck me is how effective the performance was, even though the student didn’t feel anything special was going on. He produced an effect he himself didn’t fully >comprehend.
>Never underestimate the value of good coaching.
augusti...@yahoo.com
Apr 19, 2019, 1:03:05 PM4/19/19
to
You’re overlooking a crucial distinction. Much of the emotional depth and life experience you’re praising in this performance is supplied by the music itself. The performer didn’t compose the music—Paganini did. The performer obviously does an exemplary job of getting it right. That’s no small achievement, and she deserves tremendous respect. But she’s not creating the emotional depth. Rather, she’s recreating depth that’s already there.
Again, I point out that you won’t hear a profound novel, play, movie, or symphony written by a seven year old. Creating great art is different from performing it. It requires something more than a young child can be realistically expected to have.
I recall a famous conductor receiving a standing ovation after directing a performance of a Beethoven symphony. As the ovation continued, he held up the score as if to say “here’s who truly deserves your applause.”
The piano has not written the concerto. Self-aware performers know that.
Again, I point out that you won’t hear a profound novel, play, movie, or symphony written by a seven year old. Creating great art is different from performing it. It requires something more than a young child can be realistically expected to have.
I recall a famous conductor receiving a standing ovation after directing a performance of a Beethoven symphony. As the ovation continued, he held up the score as if to say “here’s who truly deserves your applause.”
The piano has not written the concerto. Self-aware performers know that.
tom g
Apr 19, 2019, 1:20:32 PM4/19/19
to
John Nguyen
Apr 19, 2019, 2:14:00 PM4/19/19
to
I think good/great music is part of the equation here. Don’t you agree that without a good interpreter the performance may not be as enjoyable? The fact that the performer can bring music back to life with his or her own emotional interpretation should not be overlooked. I think we have seen enough of comparison between good and mediocre performers on the same piece of music. I’m pretty sure everyone has his/her preference on a certain conductor from the same symphony/concerti, and that’s I can only attribute to the individual interpretation that somehow resonate well compared to others. Cheers!
Andrew Schulman
Apr 20, 2019, 5:15:03 PM4/20/19
to
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 2:14:00 PM UTC-4, John Nguyen wrote:
> I think good/great music is part of the equation here. Don’t you agree that without a good interpreter the performance may not be as enjoyable? The fact that the performer can bring music back to life with his or her own emotional interpretation should not be overlooked. I think we have seen enough of comparison between good and mediocre performers on the same piece of music. I’m pretty sure everyone has his/her preference on a certain conductor from the same symphony/concerti, and that’s I can only attribute to the individual interpretation that somehow resonate well compared to others. Cheers!
John,
> I think good/great music is part of the equation here. Don’t you agree that without a good interpreter the performance may not be as enjoyable? The fact that the performer can bring music back to life with his or her own emotional interpretation should not be overlooked. I think we have seen enough of comparison between good and mediocre performers on the same piece of music. I’m pretty sure everyone has his/her preference on a certain conductor from the same symphony/concerti, and that’s I can only attribute to the individual interpretation that somehow resonate well compared to others. Cheers!
Well, yeah!
Andrew
Steven Bornfeld
Apr 22, 2019, 11:58:41 AM4/22/19
to
is the nomenclature. A 7-year old won't write the great novel because
he/she has not lived. I think there's a perception that a child cannot
produce a great musical performance merely by copying what they see and
hear in others--but I don't know how that could be established, much
less ruled out. Perhaps the term "emotional maturity" should not be
applied here--it is too easily conflated with the ability to have
insight into human nature that (here we assume) can only be achieved by
having lived and interacted with others over an extended period of time.
tom g
Apr 22, 2019, 1:19:59 PM4/22/19
to
Instead, we could propose the possibility simply of a state of pure feeling that some prodigies are able to access, although, of course we cannot call this "emotional maturity".
Great musicians do not think of life experiences when they play. They simply access pure feeling by responding to the music.
Steven Bornfeld
Apr 22, 2019, 2:16:29 PM4/22/19
to
augusti...@yahoo.com
Apr 22, 2019, 2:19:32 PM4/22/19
to
We might also consider the accompanist, who does an excellent job. He deserves some credit for the quality of this performance.
tom g wrote:
> It can be that the idea that experience of life is necessary for a
> great performance is greatly overestimated. Can it be just our
> projection as listeners when a performance moves us deeply?
I agree. I’ve heard computer generated music that moved me deeply. But I wouldn’t attribute my emotional response to the computer’s life experience.
In fact, much of what moves us in a musical performance can be credited to clean playing, beautiful sound, and tasteful articulation. To be sure, these require hard work and intelligence. But they don’t require life experience and emotional commitment. And as I’ve said before, much of the credit should go to the music itself. In a great performance, it’s the composer’s life experience we’re hearing, not the performer’s. I’m reminded of Sviatoslav Richter’s assertion: “The interpreter is really an executant, carrying out the composer’s intentions to the letter. He doesn’t add anything that isn’t already in the work.”
Not sure I completely agree. But he has a point.
To be clear once more, my opinion in no way slights the accomplishment of a child who can give a virtuoso performance. That’s something for which I have the highest respect. But in passing, allow me to note that I’m ambivalent about prodigies. The classical music industry churns them out by the truckload. Few prodigies pan out in later years, and they’re casually discarded as the spotlight flits to the newest prodigy. There’s something unseemly about this. Personally, I’d rather that gifted children be spared the spotlight. Let them grow in their own way and time. If they’re to become concert artists, there’ll be plenty of time to fête them when they’re older.
tom g wrote:
> It can be that the idea that experience of life is necessary for a
> great performance is greatly overestimated. Can it be just our
> projection as listeners when a performance moves us deeply?
In fact, much of what moves us in a musical performance can be credited to clean playing, beautiful sound, and tasteful articulation. To be sure, these require hard work and intelligence. But they don’t require life experience and emotional commitment. And as I’ve said before, much of the credit should go to the music itself. In a great performance, it’s the composer’s life experience we’re hearing, not the performer’s. I’m reminded of Sviatoslav Richter’s assertion: “The interpreter is really an executant, carrying out the composer’s intentions to the letter. He doesn’t add anything that isn’t already in the work.”
Not sure I completely agree. But he has a point.
To be clear once more, my opinion in no way slights the accomplishment of a child who can give a virtuoso performance. That’s something for which I have the highest respect. But in passing, allow me to note that I’m ambivalent about prodigies. The classical music industry churns them out by the truckload. Few prodigies pan out in later years, and they’re casually discarded as the spotlight flits to the newest prodigy. There’s something unseemly about this. Personally, I’d rather that gifted children be spared the spotlight. Let them grow in their own way and time. If they’re to become concert artists, there’ll be plenty of time to fête them when they’re older.
John Nguyen
Apr 22, 2019, 8:44:33 PM4/22/19
to
In classical music field, my impression is that a majority of the famous ones were child prodigies. The rare breed was the one who made a name without having been a prodigy. It's just the nature of the field that required good training at a young age in addition to showing huge potential in learning and performing. To name a few, there are John Williams, Kazuhito Yamashita, Sviatoslav Richter, Mstislav Rostropovich, Itzhak Perlman, Daniel Barenboim, Yo-Yo Ma, and in younger generation Xuefei Yang, Su Meng, Wang Yameng, Lang Lang, Evgeny Kissin, Sarah Chang, Midori Goto, Hilary Hahn, .... and the list goes on even with my very spotty memory.
One interesting aspects among Asian parents is that 9 out of 10 don't want their kids to be a professional musician, no matter how gifted the child is. It has a deep root in the past where the profession was extremely hard to make a living, and even one who succeeded the life wasn't as stable - very gross generation here, but that how it was thought of. Actually there is nothing wrong with that view, as I knew a few kids who were really good at music when they performed with famous orchestras when they were pre-teen or teenagers. Now they still play music with each others as a hobby and occasionally at some events, having side jobs as doctors, engineers, financiers. Not a bad move, I may say :-)
One interesting aspects among Asian parents is that 9 out of 10 don't want their kids to be a professional musician, no matter how gifted the child is. It has a deep root in the past where the profession was extremely hard to make a living, and even one who succeeded the life wasn't as stable - very gross generation here, but that how it was thought of. Actually there is nothing wrong with that view, as I knew a few kids who were really good at music when they performed with famous orchestras when they were pre-teen or teenagers. Now they still play music with each others as a hobby and occasionally at some events, having side jobs as doctors, engineers, financiers. Not a bad move, I may say :-)
danm...@gmail.com
Apr 23, 2019, 11:27:19 AM4/23/19
to
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 11:01:38 PM UTC-4, augusti...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Regarding emotional depth and life experience, playing an instrument doesn’t require all that much. Passion, yes. Hard work, yes. And it also requires an exceptional ability to listen to one’s teachers and do what they ask. Gifted children, guided by knowledgeable teachers, can mimic the musical devices that touch our emotions...…"
Back in the 1970s I remember reading the words of some white acoustic blues guitarist (it may have been John Miller) who played in the tradition of the 1930s/1940s African-American players. He was responding to the oft-heard idea "you've got to suffer if you want to sing the Blues." He wrote something like, "the life you've led has nothing to do with your ability to create a melodic line." I'm not sure that 100% true, but it's definitely more than 50% true.
> Regarding emotional depth and life experience, playing an instrument doesn’t require all that much. Passion, yes. Hard work, yes. And it also requires an exceptional ability to listen to one’s teachers and do what they ask. Gifted children, guided by knowledgeable teachers, can mimic the musical devices that touch our emotions...…"
Back in the 1970s I remember reading the words of some white acoustic blues guitarist (it may have been John Miller) who played in the tradition of the 1930s/1940s African-American players. He was responding to the oft-heard idea "you've got to suffer if you want to sing the Blues." He wrote something like, "the life you've led has nothing to do with your ability to create a melodic line." I'm not sure that 100% true, but it's definitely more than 50% true.
John Nguyen
May 15, 2019, 11:58:54 PM5/15/19
to
>Again, I point out that you won’t hear a profound novel, play, movie, or symphony written by a seven year old. Creating great art is different from performing it. It requires something more than >a young child can be realistically expected to have.
-Quote-
Stepanek was a poet and speaker, penning six volumes of bestselling Heartsongs poetry books, and a collection of peace essays that also became a bestseller. He was the lyricist for Music Through Heartsongs.[7] The album was produced by Sony, was released in 2003 and performed by Billy Gilman, and which debuted at number 109 on the Billboard 200 and at number 15 on Hot Country Songs.
-Unquote-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattie_Stepanek
Cheers!
tom g
May 16, 2019, 9:02:58 AM5/16/19
to
Message has been deleted
tom g
May 16, 2019, 2:31:20 PM5/16/19
to
On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 5:59:26 PM UTC+2, Matt Faunce wrote:
> I don't know. Phenoms like Himari Yoshimura make me think that some effects
> of life experience are passed down, biologically, from parents to children,
> and that's what makes evolutionary progress. Some people get more of what
> adds up to emotional maturity and some people get less. So, if this is
> true, it's not so much a matter of one person's life experience which makes
> emotional maturity but how much was passed down plus how much was gathered
> in one's own life. For Himari it might be 100+7=107, where 100 is what's
> passed down to her, 7 is what she gathered herself, and 107 is the sum
> which is in her at age seven. For those immature sixty-year-olds the
> equation might look more like 7+60=67.
>
> --
> Matt
This is similar to the British scientist Rupert Sheldrake's theory of "morphic resonance", for the which he was rejected by orthodox science.
> of life experience are passed down, biologically, from parents to children,
> and that's what makes evolutionary progress. Some people get more of what
> adds up to emotional maturity and some people get less. So, if this is
> true, it's not so much a matter of one person's life experience which makes
> emotional maturity but how much was passed down plus how much was gathered
> in one's own life. For Himari it might be 100+7=107, where 100 is what's
> passed down to her, 7 is what she gathered herself, and 107 is the sum
> which is in her at age seven. For those immature sixty-year-olds the
> equation might look more like 7+60=67.
>
> --
> Matt
This is similar to the British scientist Rupert Sheldrake's theory of "morphic resonance", for the which he was rejected by orthodox science.
dsi1
May 16, 2019, 2:55:59 PM5/16/19
to
On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 5:59:26 AM UTC-10, Matt Faunce wrote:
> I don't know. Phenoms like Himari Yoshimura make me think that some effects
> of life experience are passed down, biologically, from parents to children,
> and that's what makes evolutionary progress. Some people get more of what
> adds up to emotional maturity and some people get less. So, if this is
> true, it's not so much a matter of one person's life experience which makes
> emotional maturity but how much was passed down plus how much was gathered
> in one's own life. For Himari it might be 100+7=107, where 100 is what's
> passed down to her, 7 is what she gathered herself, and 107 is the sum
> which is in her at age seven. For those immature sixty-year-olds the
> equation might look more like 7+60=67.
>
> --
> Matt
That's an interesting theory - that's just crazy enough to be true. As it goes, the best way to evaluate music is to know nothing about the player or music on first hearing. It's the only way to hear music without prejudice, preconceived notions, and outta be's.
> of life experience are passed down, biologically, from parents to children,
> and that's what makes evolutionary progress. Some people get more of what
> adds up to emotional maturity and some people get less. So, if this is
> true, it's not so much a matter of one person's life experience which makes
> emotional maturity but how much was passed down plus how much was gathered
> in one's own life. For Himari it might be 100+7=107, where 100 is what's
> passed down to her, 7 is what she gathered herself, and 107 is the sum
> which is in her at age seven. For those immature sixty-year-olds the
> equation might look more like 7+60=67.
>
> --
> Matt
Message has been deleted
Steven Bornfeld
May 16, 2019, 4:00:55 PM5/16/19
to
On 5/16/2019 2:31 PM, tom g wrote:
> On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 5:59:26 PM UTC+2, Matt Faunce wrote:
>
> This is similar to the British scientist Rupert Sheldrake's theory of "morphic resonance", for the which he was rejected by orthodox science.
>
Hadn't heard of him. I was OK until he got up to the "rats in London" bit.
> On Thursday, May 16, 2019 at 5:59:26 PM UTC+2, Matt Faunce wrote:
>
> This is similar to the British scientist Rupert Sheldrake's theory of "morphic resonance", for the which he was rejected by orthodox science.
>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_RGEpJSr6s
Steve
0 new messages