Welcome to YourClassical’s Cliburn Blog for the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition! Every four years, the classical music world turns its eyes to Fort Worth, Texas, to see which pianists from a pool of 30 can manage two-and-a-half weeks of rigorous recitals and concertos to emerge as a medal winner. Medal winners receive a cash prize in addition to a professional management contract, concert tours, and a commercial recording.
Monday, June 9
THE FINALS, Day 4 + THE WINNERS
by Joe Goetz
The last day of the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition featured the last three concertos with the Fort Worth Symphony, and then the much-anticipated awards ceremony. The trajectories of three lives and careers were altered in a tremendous way. We’ll get to who won what (which you may already know!) after a brief breakdown of the final three concerto performances.
Vitaly Starikov: Schumann – Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 54
Starikov’s performance of Chopin’s Op. 25 Etudes in the semifinal round foreshadowed his performance of Schumann in the final: uneven start, strong finish. Starikov’s opening chords, and his chosen opening tempo, seemed lethargic and plodding to me. His playing was, as expected, lyrical and flowing. But I wanted more urgency in this first movement. After the concerto’s brief slow movement, the finale begins attaca, and Starikov launched into a more conventional tempo. This movement features endless arpeggios, and any pianist who performs it runs the risk of making it sound like a Czerny exercise, but Starikov avoided that trap completely. It was a thrilling and gorgeous conclusion.
Carter Johnson: Ravel – Piano Concerto for the Left Hand
Rumors swirled in the chat that Carter Johnson was nursing a right hand injury during the competition. I never saw an official confirmation of this, and as the kids say these days, that seemed pretty ”sus.” I’m not sure how he could have gotten through an entire competition, let alone the Prokofiev 2, with a lame right hand. But I digress. His performance of Ravel’s left hand concerto was the first ever, I believe, at the Cliburn. The work’s technical demands (and obvious limitations!) aside, I was most impressed with Johnson’s playing in the tender moments of this piece. The long and flowing cadenza that leads to the work’s finale was especially sensitive and beautiful. A quirky choice, this concerto, and one that was a fitting capstone to a highly entertaining and unusually programmed Cliburn run from the American.
Philipp Lynov: Prokofiev: Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 16
If Carter Johnson’s performance of this work a few days prior was an academic reading, then Lynov’s was an exercise in brute force. I found his interpretation superior to Johnson’s in almost every way. It may not have been as note-perfect, but it was full of the vigorous anger the piece requires. The movement that gets talked about least in this concerto is its third, which isn’t a slow movement as would be traditionally the case. It’s not terribly fast, either, but the best word I can think of to describe it is “menacing,” and that’s just the vibe that Lynov brought to it. A contestant who has gotten steadily stronger through each round of the competition, he saved his best for last.
Now, onto the awards. Aside from the gold, silver, and bronze medals, a number of special awards were distributed.
Beverley Taylor Smith Awards for the Best Performance of a New Work
Yangrui Cai, China
Cash award of $5,000
Best Performance of a Mozart Concerto
Evren Ozel, United States
Cash award of $5,000
John Giordano Jury Chairman Discretionary Award
Mikhail Kambarov, Russia
Cash award of $4,000
Raymond E. Buck Jury Discretionary Award
Jonas Aumiller, Germany
Cash award of $4,000
Patricia and Neal Steffen Family Jury Discretionary Award
Alice Burla, Canada
Cash award of $4,000
Carla and Kelly Thompson Audience Award
Aristo Sham, Hong Kong China
Cash award of $2,500
As for the medalists, here they are with my thoughts about each:
BRONZE MEDAL
Evren Ozel, United States
The Minnesota resident in me, of course, is thrilled that Minneapolis native Evren Ozel won a medal. I also believe, geography notwithstanding, that Ozel was the finest overall musician among the finalists. He may not have had the technical wizardry of some of the others (or chose not to display it, at least), but his sensitivity and connection to the orchestra and his audience was undeniable. It made his more virtuosic moments that much more powerful (I’m thinking of the octaves at the end of Tchaikovsky 1st concerto, for instance). I can’t wait to see what he does next, as he’s only 26, already an Avery Fisher Career Grant recipient, and has a tremendous career ahead.
SILVER MEDAL
Vitaly Starikov, Israel/Russia
I’ve underestimated Starikov’s appeal with the judges throughout this competition and did so again when it came to the medalists. His uneven performances of certain works in each round did not derail his chances, and his performance of Bartok’s second concerto in the finals will be talked about for years to come. Keeping in mind that the judges are grading as much on career potential and marketability as much as performance in the moment, I think it was his remarkable Bartok that led him here. He wouldn’t have been my choice for silver, but I’m not upset about it, either. He also seems like just a super nice dude, one with whom I’d love to grab a beer and a burger and nerd out about music.
NANCY LEE AND PERRY R. BASS GOLD MEDAL
Aristo Sham, Hong Kong China
Aristo Sham, according to a conversation I had on Reddit with Eugene Chan, creator of those awesome Don’t Shoot the Pianist comics, is the first Cliburn gold medalist since 1977 to not play a Tchairachiev concerto in the final round (Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, or Prokofiev). He did it not by being an overpowering virtuoso or an overly sensitive interpreter, but by consistently performing very difficult works at a very high level. His Gaspard de la Nuit in the preliminary round was the best of the competition. His daring choice to do Beethoven Hammerklavier in the second round paid off. Rachmaninoff’s complete Op. 39 Etudes-Tableux in the semifinals were dazzling, if imperfect. His Mozart concerto was warm, even if not terribly personal. And his culminating Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 in the finals was the cherry on top, a tour de force that avoided sentimentality but was still a rich and full musical experience. He now has the distinct disadvantage of being The Next Person to win Cliburn gold following Yunchan Lim, a generational talent. I don’t see Sham moving the needle to that degree, but he has proven himself a worthy performer who will excel in any setting, with just about any repertoire.
Of the other three finalists, I predict that Angel Stanislav Wang will likely have the most prolific career, possibly one that eclipses at least some of the medal winners. He’s already won a silver medal at the 2023 Tchaikovsky Competition (as you may recall, Van Cliburn’s gold medal in the inaugural Tchaikovsky was the reason we’re all reading this today), in addition to dozens of other wins at other competitions. As he matures, his ability to dazzle with his prodigious technique and his willingness to wear his heart on his sleeve will be irresistible to audiences and presenters.
Carter Johnson will continue to shed light on the lesser-known parts of the repertoire. I hope he lands a recording contract somewhere, the results would be fascinating.
And Philipp Lynov is an underrated lion of the keyboard. I’m not sure how much more of him we will see in the United States, but I am sure he will be a household name in Europe and certainly his native Russia.
I’ll have one more post in a few days detailing my favorite performances from the entire competition from each finalist. For now, thanks for reading and being along with me on this journey. This is my first time covering a major competition, and it’s been a lot of fun, but also exhausting. I think my family will be thrilled for me to shut up about the Cliburn for a while, and to go back to our normal Netflix/Max/et cetera nightly routine. I hope you enjoyed the blog, and thanks to the listeners of YourClassical for their support that allowed me the space to do it!
Saturday, June 7
THE FINALS, Day 3
by Joe Goetz
The third night of final round concertos featured three audience favorites by Beethoven, Rachmaninoff, and Brahms. Everyone performed about as I expected them to, so there were no surprises. Let’s get into the details…
Evren Ozel: Beethoven - Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58
This work seemed to be tailor-made for Ozel’s sensitive playing. It’s probably the sunniest, and maybe the most romantic of Beethoven’s five piano concertos. Ozel’s personality - and his vulnerability - shone through in the work’s quiet solo opening, but for most of the first movement he was perhaps a bit…too quiet? I will say that the livestream of Ozel’s performance seemed marred by distortion, as I heard some odd digital artifacts during louder passages. Those issues seemed to clear up for the other concertos later in the evening. In any event, it took a bit for Ozel and the orchestra to lock into agreement on dynamics and balance. Once they did, Ozel’s connection with his orchestral compatriots and his audience took over, as it did during his Mozart concerto in the semifinals. The final movement featured plenty of whimsy and energy, earning Ozel a raucous ovation. On the whole, it was a very musical performance, as we’ve come to expect from Ozel, who in my opinion is the most musically sound contestant remaining in the competition. If I had one quibble at all it would be that perhaps he was too sensitive, and perhaps by extension a tad tentative. But in a competition where the impetus of many is to push the pedal to the floor, having Ozel as an antidote may pay him dividends.
Angel Stanislav Wang: Rachmaninoff - Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30
Let’s first address the elephant in the room about this concerto, and that’s the fact that anyone who chooses to play it at the Cliburn (or any competition, really) on the heels of Yunchan Lim’s performance in 2022 must have a boatload of confidence. Wang has proven time and again that he does, even when it gets him into some uncomfortable spots. He and anyone who’s been following the Cliburn knew that he needed a transcendent Rach 3 last night in order to move the needle, and I don’t think he accomplished that. It was the performance of a young man with infinite potential, but lacking the refinement necessary to jump to the level of the truly elite. Once again, like his Beethoven earlier in the finals, he seemed to ignore Marin Alsop completely. He chose the lighter of the two first movement cadenzas, which I don’t mind at all, but seemed to go against his usual take-no-prisoners musical choices. In fact, he took several of the rarely-heard (at least in modern times) cuts that Rachmaninoff himself made to the second and third movements. Some of the tempo changes and musical emphases were awkward, and the work’s mighty conclusion felt more tired than grand. All that said, i still enjoyed the heck out of watching him play. And his genuinely emotional reaction to having finished, lingering at the piano for a few moments before standing and embracing Alsop and acknowledging the crowd, was touching.
Aristo Sham: Brahms: Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 83
If we were to assign superlatives to each of Friday evening’s performers, we’d probably assign Evren Ozel “Most Musical,” Angel Wang “Most Dramatic,” and Aristo Sham “Best Execution.” Brahms 2 is a beast, there are no two ways about it. And Sham absolutely nailed every thorny passage, every double trill, every awkward leap. It was a positively Herculean effort, yet I came away from it feeling like something was missing. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there are many moments during the piece where the pianist can dial back Brahms’s ruthless precision and explore more ethereal spaces. A great example is this spot in the first movement, where the piano floats off into dreamland for a few moments before the horns, clarinets, and upper strings herald the return of the main theme.
It’s marked legato dolce, but Sham played it rather piercingly. He was able to find more sensitivity in the work’s gorgeous third movement, and playfulness in the finale, but genuine joy and personality were lacking, at least from my perspective. But at the end of the day, Aristo Sham is just too good to not medal. I’d be shocked if he received anything less than silver at this point, but we’ve been surprised by judge’s decisions plenty so far!
Three more concertos on tap this afternoon, then we’ll know the winners this evening.
Thursday, June 5
THE FINALS, Day 2
by Joe Goetz
Last night was one of the wildest and most compelling nights of Cliburn concertos I can remember. After it was over, I was trying to come up with adjectives to describe what I had just witnessed: courageous, bold, bizarre, proficient, amazing all came to mind, yet none of those words perfectly encapsulates the playing by the three pianists and the Fort Wort Symphony. Everyone rose to the moment last night!
Philipp Lynov: Liszt - Piano Concerto No. 2 in A Major
The episodic nature of this concerto was the perfect way to showcase all the things he brings to the table. Lynov has grown stronger in each round so far, and his Liszt 2 was a perfect capstone to everything he’s performed so far. Everything in his previous round performances found a home in his interpretation: the impetuousness of his Schumann sonata, the virtuosity from his Barber and Prokofiev sonatas, the tenderness of his Ravel Miroirs, and the free-wheeling fun of Rachtime all found their way into last night. Although is mannerisms and hair suggest he’s trying to be the heir apparent to Daniil Trifonov, he’s not quite at that level, but he’s proven himself ready for prime time. Top marks, all around.
Vitaly Starikov: Bartok - Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Major
Ever since seeing this concerto on his repertoire list at the beginning of the competition, I was worried. To perform such a work in a competition is almost unheard of, mainly because a) it’s so ridiculously hard, and b) turning this piece around on a tight rehearsal schedule could be a suicide mission. Yet Starikov, Marin Alsop, and the Fort Worth Symphony pulled it off and then some. I watched the beginning like I watch videos of those people that run up a greased pole, just waiting for that moment when the painful crash would happen. And it never came. The orchestra was incredible. Starikov was on point. This was the pianist I had hoped to see in the earlier rounds, and evidently the judges were able to anticipate he would meet this moment when they elevated him to the ranks of finalists. Absolute class from the entire group, and a performance that will likely be talked about for years, regardless of where Starikov finishes in the competition.
Carter Johnson: Prokofiev - Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 16
I’ve been high on Carter Johnson since his preliminary recital (which featured some solo Prokofiev), and I’m still high on him, but a few pegs lower after last night. It’s not that he didn’t play this piece well - he really did, but there seemed to be a higher gear that was missing. Usually I’m critical of pianists who overdo it on the bombast, but I felt that Carter actually needed more bombast last night. His playing was far from thin gruel, but if there was ever a concerto that begged to be absolutely rocked, this is the one. In the massive first movement cadenza, his interpretation felt more academic than ferocious. The second movement’s moto perpetuo wrist-breaking virtuosity was a highlight, as was the smaller cadenza at the end of the final movement. Look, Carter Johnson has it all, no doubt. But I just wanted more gravitas from this piece, more raw anger and passion, and I just didn’t sense that from last night. Others may disagree.
We’ve now heard concertos from all six finalists, and tonight is a much-deserved break for all. I’ll be interested to see how the each finalist’s choice of concerto factors into their evaluation by the judges. Evren Ozel and Angel Stanislav Wang are going the more traditional competition route with Beethoven (or similar) plus a big warhorse by Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff. But everyone else is going against the grain: Aristo Sham choosing Mendelssohn and Brahms yet ignoring the Russian repertoire completely, Philipp Lynov choosing two highly virtuosic works and ignoring Beethoven, Carter Johnson being kind of a hipster by pairing Prokofiev 2 with Ravel’s left hand concerto, and Vitaly Starikov pairing Bartok 2 with…Schumann? The 2025 Cliburn may not be remembered for having a generational standout talent like Yunchan Lim three years ago, but it’s definitely attained its own brand of bold, bizarre, and fascinating.
Wednesday, June 4
THE FINALS, Day 1
by Joe Goetz
Tuesday night saw the beginning of the final round of the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition. The finals are when most people really start paying attention - Bass Hall was packed, and the livestream on YouTube had about double the viewers of the previous rounds. Everyone loves a concerto! And last night, they heard three. Let’s dive in.
Aristo Sham: Mendelssohn - Piano Concerto No 1 in G minor, Op. 25
As Osip alluded to yesterday, this concerto is very much like a bottle of champagne. It was a sparkling start to the evening, as Sham’s scales, arpeggios, and octaves flew up and down the keyboard. It was nearly flawless execution, with brilliant shaping throughout. My only quibble was with the choice of the concerto itself, which, while an enjoyable listen (and a boatload of fun to play, as my 15 year-old self can attest), doesn’t really offer many opportunities to show off one’s depth of artistry. I thought Sham’s middle movement, the one long stretch to be truly expressive, to be a bit on the static side. All that aside, it was a confident performance. He’ll have a chance to explore more depth, endurance, and raw power when he tackles Brahms’s mighty second concerto on Friday night.
Angel Stanislav Wang: Beethoven - Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58
I mentioned on Monday that Wang was on my final round bubble. Spellbinding preliminary and quarterfinal recitals were followed by shakier performances in the semifinals, both for his solo recital and the Mozart concerto. That shakiness continued into the finals, where the quiet solo introduction was muddled and slow. It seemed as though conductor Marin Alsop tried to push the tempo forward a bit once the orchestra entered, but to no avail. That’s not to say there weren’t great moments in this concerto - there certainly were! His second movement was gorgeous. In general, though, I found that Angel’s performance suffered from a lack of direction and lack of partnership. I don’t think I saw him engage with Marin Alsop at any point, and given that concertos should be partnerships among soloist, conductor, and orchestra, this lack of engagement seemed to drag the energy down. Angel will have a chance to redeem himself on Friday night, where I’m guessing he’ll swing for the fences with Rachmaninoff’s epic Piano Concerto No. 3.
Evren Ozel: Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor, Op. 23
In contrast to Angel Stanislav Wang, Evren Ozel seems to thrive on communication with the musicians around him. He had already proved himself to be a more than capable soloist in his first two rounds, and then came the joy he shared with the Fort Worth Symphony and Carlos Miguel Prieto during his Mozart concerto in the semifinals. I was worried about this choice of piece for Ozel, which turned out to be a completely dumb worry on my part. His Tchaikovsky concerto was, as the late ESPN anchor Stuart Scott loved to say, “cooler than the other side of the pillow.” He avoided the rushing octaves in the middle of the first movement where many pianists look to show off. His tender opening to the second movement was exceptional, and he kept his true virtuosic powder dry until the giant octaves that lead into the work’s mighty coda. Just like in Mozart, smiles were on the menu for all, and it’s clear Ozel clearly derives great pleasure not just in his own music-making, but in sharing that music with his fellow performers and the audience. He’ll be back on Friday night as well, leading off that night’s concertos with Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 4.
I’ll be watching tonight’s concertos on delay, as my kids have a track meet. Liszt from Philipp Lynov, Bartok(!!!) from Vitaly Starikov, and Prokofiev from Carter Johnson are all on tap, and I’ll have a recap tomorrow morning.
Tuesday, June 3
Know Your Concerto!
by Osip Nikiforov
A note from Joe Goetz: I asked Osip, a fabulous concert pianist in his own right, to provide us with his analysis of the ten concertos we’ll hear in the finals of the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition. This is an essential read if you plan to watch the finals, as he points out all kinds of details he’ll be listening to, as well as the potential booby traps that might ensnare our very worthy but very exhausted six finalists. Enjoy!
Felix Mendelssohn: Piano Concerto No. 1 in G Minor, Op. 25
This lively and effervescent concerto will open the final round like a bottle of champagne. This concerto is often associated with junior piano competitions, mostly because of its length and the aforementioned liveliness, but in reality it is a technically demanding (if played in the prescribed tempos) and not so “light” piano concerto (with cascades of octaves in both hands!) that demands from the pianist a lot of ensemble work with the orchestra. Though this concerto is in three movements, they are all connected without a traditional break in between the movements. It will be very important for the pianist to start the engine right away with the first series of two-hand octaves at the very beginning of the work, as it will set the tone for the rest of the concerto. Given the blistering tempos of this concerto’s first and last movements, it will also be imperative for the pianist to listen to the winds (specifically woodwinds) very closely throughout this work, as it is typically easy to get ahead of them on the keys. I would expect the pianist to choose a lighter piano of the ones available, since this can make the pianist’s life infinitely easier particularly in this work. What a bubbly opening this one will bring!
Ludwig van Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58
Staying in the same key of G major (the Mendelssohn will end in G major despite the key of the piece), we will immerse ourselves in the world of the sumptuous Beethoven G major piano concerto twice in this final round. Since the soloist opens this concerto with a recitative-like material, it will be revealing immediately how this concerto will be interpreted. We may get a completely different outlook on the opening phrase, like what the legendary pianist Mikhail Pletnev did in his bright and spontaneous start of the concerto (you can listen to it here). In any case, we will be listening to it attentively. Beyond this, the first movement has some invisible-to-the-naked eye challenges, one of which is how convincingly the pianist finishes their solo phrases and passes them on to the orchestra. In the second movement, it will be paramount for the pianist to capture the overall somber character - the imagery of Orpheus taming the Furies – and the tightly engaged dialogue between the piano and the orchestra. A lot can be revealed about the caliber of the musician in this movement. As for the finale, the pianist will be tasked with starting it in a dance-like manner of a rondo but keep themselves in check and away from derailment in the cascading broken arpeggios that this movement is full of. I am personally looking forward to hearing this concerto in the competition!
Peter Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor, Op. 23
Although this concerto has really been overplayed in my head for some time now (mainly because of other competitions), it is not nearly as often performed at Cliburn as some of the other “workhorses”. Despite not being considered the most difficult piano concerto to perform, it is quite awkward to play pianistically and packs a number of technical traps that are at first not so obvious. For example, I will be watching for the cascading chord spots in the high register in the first movement, the nimble and swift middle part of the second movement, and the main theme of the finale, which is notoriously easy to mess up. Of course, we should not forget about the famous thunderous series of octaves that the first and last movements bring, which are perhaps the emblems of this concerto. Nor should we forget how decisive the long and multi-layered piano cadenza in the first movement can be for the whole performance effect and structure of the work. I am also curious to see if Evren Ozel will decide to not go with the interpretative clichés of this concerto, like the accelerating octaves in the middle of the finale before the orchestra’s tutti, for example. These clichés are mainly found in the tempo transitions of the concerto. This piece will bring an exciting end to the first day of the final round.
Franz Liszt: Piano Concerto No. 2 in A Major
This concerto is one of those concertos that erase the boundaries between the clear (and traditional) concerto movement setup. It is in one single movement but has six distinct sections that are centered around several themes. These sections are all connected by Liszt’s emblematic “thematic transformations”, which are basically melodic permutations. The thing to pay attention to is how the pianist’s high register material will be blending with the woodwinds – an important interacting point throughout the concerto. Just like in the Mendelssohn, there is always a danger for the pianist to get ahead in his part, be it in the octave passages or the arpeggios. I am also interested in hearing how the pedal will be used in this concerto by the pianist, since it is very easy to step on it and forget about it, creating a constant swash of sound. To me, it is perhaps one of the more personal choices in this piece. I cannot wait for the hair-raising coda at the end!
Bela Bartok: Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Major
This will be beyond interesting. Not only would you be hard-pressed to attend this piano concerto’s live performance anywhere in the world, as it is rarely done, it is quite literally “unheard of” in a competition setting. I cannot recall ever seeing it performed at any competition or even having it on a competition concerto list. In any case, it is a good bet that it will be the Cliburn’s first ever performance of it. In the world of piano concertos, this work is among the most difficult, complex, and finger-breaking piano concertos ever written. There’s a reason why no one wants to perform it in a competition, where the rehearsal time is very limited. I am not only worried about the lack of time for rehearsing this work from the soloist’s standpoint, I am a little more worried about the orchestra getting it all together in a record time, also considering that they must rehearse nine other concertos and have eleven other performances. Again, from the soloist’s point of view, this concerto presents a possible opportunity to stand out from the rest of the group by presenting something rarely played and of utmost difficulty, but it could also backfire because of the jury’s relative unfamiliarity with it, as I am quite sure only few of them know this work intimately. What should we pay attention to in this concerto? Watch the tight collaboration between the pianist and individual instruments in the orchestra. In the first movement, there will be lots of interaction between the piano and the trumpet; in the second one, there will be some between the piano and the woodwinds. Expect to be absolutely covered in cross rhythms and syncopations. There will be a lot of hand crossovers and tremolos in the piano part in the second movement and lots of leaps in the finale. At any rate, it will be fascinating to see it live at the Cliburn!
Sergei Rachmaninoff: Piano Concerto No. 3 in D Minor, Op. 30
The Cliburn Competition would not be the Cliburn if it didn’t feature at least once the awe-provoking, magisterial, and show-stopping concerto of all piano concertos (pardon my hyperbole). The expectations will be sky-high for this one because of the last edition’s winner’s triumph with this work and the standard that he set for this piece. This, however, should not be on the performer’s mind when he is on the stage on the third day of the finals. What will we be watching for in this behemoth of a concerto? There will be a lot of things. Perhaps, the most important one will be regarding the pianist’s interaction with the orchestra and the interpretation matching between the soloist and the conductor. Will the pianist choose the short or long cadenza in the first movement? This will significantly impact the impression of the concerto’s form perception. Also, it will be interesting to see what tempo the performer will elect for the first movement and particularly the finale. Will this be on the slower, more controlled side, or will the tempo be revved up? We will have to wait to find out. Regardless of the tempo, it will be a workout for the pianist who in different moments has to stay flexible to accompany and follow the orchestra and at the same time very firm to lead and even push it. With this concerto, however, lots of excitement is guaranteed.
Johannes Brahms: Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 83
This is another behemoth of piano concertos that firmly sits in the Romantic repertoire of the 19th century and is one of the longest concertos ever written, taking about 50 minutes to complete. Although it will not be nearly as difficult to rehearse as the Bartok Piano Concerto No. 2, the soloist will still find himself pressed for rehearsal time and will have to be very purposeful about which spots to focus his most attention on, since it is, perhaps, the most “chamber-music-like” concerto in the final round. As my teacher, Yefim Bronfman, would say “once you’re done with the first two movements, you are in the clear for the rest”, this paints you the structure that this concerto has. It is almost as if this concerto was composed backwards in terms of heaviness of each movement – both in difficulty and scope. The things to watch out in the first movement will be the octave and chord jumps in both hands, occurring separately, that will be mixed with single notes in between- a notoriously difficult spot in the concerto that comes twice in the movement. As for the second movement, all I can say is that it is a left-hand workout in terms of transitions between the lowest register and the middle part of the keyboard. These have to be done fast, even if the soloist plays in the most “musical” manner, therefore, allowing a little more time for those jumps. The chamber-like quality of this concerto is in full display in the third movement, but watch out for the series of tightly composed chords in both hands in the piano part that are unexpectedly confusing to play for the pianist. After that, enjoy the dance-like finale. I am ecstatic that we will hear this concerto in the final round!
Robert Schumann: Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op 54
Although, this is a staple in the Romantic piano concerto repertoire, it is not as often heard in piano competitions. It is certainly a very “musical” choice from the competitor to select this work. The first movement will explore the musical contrast of the conflict between the passionate Florestan and the introspective Eusebius – the two characters that Schumann often self-associates in his music. There is also a very expressive cadenza near the end of the movement that acts as a grand culmination. Watch for a lot of eye contact between the soloist and the solo lines of the orchestral instruments in the second movement. Also, prepare for the smooth and seamless transition into the finale, which is full of colorful weaving lines and vivacious character. This will be a fitting work to start the last day of performances at the Cliburn!
Maurice Ravel: Piano Concerto for the Left Hand in D Major
Another very unusual selection for any piano competition would be this concerto. This is certainly because a competitor usually wants to demonstrate their ability to perform a piano concerto with two hands, so it has nothing to do with the quality of music of this work. The central question for this work is (perhaps amusingly), will the pianist rest his right hand on the lap or on the lid area? We shall see. As for the layout of this concerto, it is in one movement but displays an unusual structure within having a perceived slow-fast-slow section layout. Expect an intentional ambiguity between the duple and triple rhythms throughout this concerto and, of course, lots of arpeggios in the left hand as one of the primary devices in the solo part. I am not sure if the pianist is left-handed, but if he is, it will be a good advantage to possess!
Sergei Prokofiev Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16
We will also be hearing two contestants play this work in the final round – one of them finishing the last day of the final round performances. This is one of the piano concerto behemoths in the piano repertoire. Having played this concerto on numerous occasions, I know firsthand that the pianist must have 100% focus throughout the concerto, as there is no slow movement, per se, where the pianist can take a breather. One of the unique features of this concerto is the ginormous cadenza in the first movement that takes half of it. It’s no doubt the most experimental and wild cadenza written for a piano concerto by a composer in the tonal language. That being said, it may not be the most difficult part of the concerto. The second movement is, in a way, more challenging because of its awkward and angular two-hand unison perpetual motion passages in a blazing fast tempo. The third movement is where the pianist can technically “recalibrate”, although it is not so straightforward to do, since the movement is full of hand crossovers and occasional chord leaps over the whole keyboard. Speaking of really wide leaps, you will be witnessing a plethora of them from the get-go in the finale. Given that this work is the last work (a heavy one!) on the contestants’ long program menu in the competition, perhaps don’t expect them to nail every leap in this treacherous movement. I will also be listening to the cadenza that comes near the end of the last movement as well as to the returning of the intro material at the very end that almost acts as a coda – this is the place where it is easy to lose focus after such a long journey. If this is your first time listening to this concerto, buckle up, as we will be experiencing a wild rollercoaster of a piece!
Monday, June 2
Semifinals, Day Five + The Finalists are Revealed
by Joe Goetz
Sunday was the last day of the Cliburn semifinals, and with the Mozart concertos all done, all that remained were four solo recitals. Of these four remaining pianists, only one moved on to the finals, and it was not at all who I expected. More on the finalists after the recap…
Semifinal Recitals, Sunday afternoon
Philipp Lynov opened the afternoon with two giants works: Ravel’s Miroirs and Prokofiev’s Piano Sonata No. 8. Lynov’s full range of colors was on display during the Ravel, a work that while less difficult than the more often played Gaspard de la Nuit, still requires pianists to summon just about every skill in their toolkit. I was especially struck by the soundscape Lynov created in the work’s final movement, La vallée des cloches. Lynov opted for another “second place in the popularity contest” selection with his Prokofiev. Longer than the more popular 7th sonata, it’s every bit as difficult. Its rollicking coda in B-flat major was Lynov’s strongest performance in the competition to date, and as it turned out, it propelled him to the final round.
Up next, Chaeyoung Park explored the sacred and the profane with a fascinating musical journey that began with Myra Hess’s famous transcription of Bach’s Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring and culminated with Beethoven’s monstrous Hammerklavier Sonata. The serenity and godliness of the Bach was followed without pause by the twisted sound world of Scriabin’s Piano Sonata No. 9 , Op. 68 ‘Black Mass.’ What a stunning segue that was, and with a commanding performance of the Beethoven to close out her recital, I thought she was a lock for the finals. She…was not, I’m afraid. More on that later.
Semifinal recitals, Sunday evening
Poland’s Piotr Alexewicz, fresh off his triumphant Mozart concerto a few nights prior, opted to begin his recital with Schumann’s intimate Fantasie in C Major, Op. 17. Almost a sonata in disguise, Piotr really shone in the work’s second section, an exuberant quais-march in E-flat major, and faked out the audience with that section’s apparently culmination of the entire work, only to bring everyone back to earth with a gorgeous actual conclusion. Judging by the live chat on the YouTube stream, everyone was very excited to hear Chopin’s Piano Sonata No. 2 played by a Polish contestant. Alas, I found his performance of the work to be lackluster. The scherzo and famous funeral march were marred by a lack of forward momentum, and the mysterious finale lacked shape. On the surface, that last movement looks like a cacophony of whirling notes, but deep within it there’s a harmonic structure that should be pronounced. It also needs menace, which I thought Piotr lacked. In any event, he shifted gears delightfully for his ending, George Gershwin’s Three Preludes. What a fun way to go out! He won’t be in the finals, but he’s to be a contestant in this fall’s Chopin Competition in Warsaw, where he’ll surely be a local favorite.
Finally, Yangrui Cai offered some Prokofiev that wasn’t one of the famous War Sonatas. Ten Pieces from Romeo and Juliet, Op. 75 started his recital off with an entertaining spark, as over the course of a little over thirty minutes we were treated to all the characters and drama of Shakespeare’s play through Prokofiev’s own piano arrangement of his ballet. My wife, who was busy preparing materials for her fifth grade classroom while we watched, said “this is a bop.” I agree! Up next, Thomas Ades’s Darknesse Visible, based on lute music by John Dowland, was a fitting prelude to Ravel’s Gaspard de la Nuit. Cai’s mastery of repeated notes in the Ades was on full display, as the volume and timbre of each set of repeated notes was different – some requiring a delicate touch, others needing more aggression and percussiveness. In Gaspard, the shimmering quavers in Ondine were not as coolly executed as Evren Ozel, nor was his Le Gibet as viscerally creepy, but Cai provided one of the best Scarbo interpretations of the competition. Unfortunately, and surprisingly, he was not picked to go to the finals.
After a 40 minute wait, the six finalists were announced:
Carter Johnson, Canada/United States
Philipp Lynov, Russia
Evren Ozel, United States
Aristo Sham, Hong Kong China
Vitaly Starikov, Israel/Russia
Angel Stanislav Wang, United States
My prediction during the interlude included Johnson, Ozel, and Sham, but the other three ranged from understanding to complete surprise. Wang was on my bubble. There’s no denying his ability to communicate with an audience and bring the bravura, but I just wasn’t sure if his shaky semifinal performances might cost him a finals appearance. Evidently the judges let him through based on aptitude more than actual results, which I think is fair. Lynov I have never been totally sold on, but his semifinal recital was revelatory, and upon reflection I think he deserves his spot. Starikov is the only finalist I’m not so sure about. I thought his Mozart concerto was underwhelming and his semifinal recital was uneven, particularly his Chopin etudes. But his spot in the finals means we’re going to see a Bartok Piano Concerto No. 2 at the Cliburn, which is quite something! Good luck to the orchestra getting that prepared on a tight schedule…!
Let’s also address the elephant in the room, and that is the fact that all six finalists are male. Only 4 of the 28 performers invited to Fort Worth were female to begin with, but all four were fabulous performers. We’ve already talked about Magdelene Ho’s apparent snub after the preliminary round. Alice Burla was a borderline case, but I would’ve loved to see her make it to the semifinals at least. Yanjun Chen was, as I’ve written about, a compelling musician but likely too unseasoned to warrant a finals appearance. But Chaeyoung Park – man, I don’t quite get her exclusion from the finals. I thought her Hammerklavier was a step up from Aristo Sham’s, and her Mozart concerto was sublime. We don’t know how the judges came to these decisions, and we have to respect their process, but I can’t help but wonder about the optics of an all-male final round.
Speaking of the finals, they begin Tuesday night, and run through Saturday (with an off day on Thursday, presumably to give everyone a slight breather). Tomorrow we’ll have a look at all ten concertos the six performers will bring to the stage, courtesy of Osip Nikiforov, who’s played most of them himself! It’ll be a fascinating finals: only ONE Rachmaninoff and ONE Tchaikovsky, plus some oddball competition choices like Bartok 2, Ravel’s Left Hand Concerto, Schumann, and Mendelssohn are all coming up. More to come!
Sunday, June 1
Semifinals, Day Four
by Joe Goetz
Semifinal recitals, Saturday afternoon
Up first on Saturday was Vitaly Starikov, who opened with an uneven account of Chopin’s Twelve Etudes, Op. 25. I’m not sure if it was the microphone placement or a conscious choice on Starikov’s part, but I found the melody in the first etude to be buried in the sea of cascading arpeggios. In general, Starikov seemed to approach most of the etudes with caution, but also with a keen sense of narrative. It wasn’t until he arrived at the final three etudes that he unleashed more firepower, which is essential to get through them. I did, however, find the last etude to be too fast, as if Starikov was trying to prove something that wasn’t necessary to be proven. After a short Schubert-Liszt transcription, he closed with Prokofiev’s Piano Sonata No. 7, which had me concerned given the rather tentative performance of the Chopin that preceded it. But Starikov proved up to the task, opting for less than breakneck speed in the finale but still plenty of momentum. Enough for him to make the finals? My sense is no, but we’ll see.
Carter Johnson was next, and most of his hour was devoted to the Schumann at his most wild and bizarre in the Davidsbundlertanze, Op. 6. Eighteen vignettes depicting Schumann’s opposing personalities, Florestan and Eusebius, it can cause whiplash for the listener if not performed well, and thankfully Johnson saved everyone’s necks. Schumann still confuses the heck out of me sometimes, but it was an enjoyable account. After Scriabin’s bizarrely colorful Five preludes, Op. 74, he closed with a piece that was new to me, Paul Hindemith’s Piano Sonata No. 3. I had no idea what to expect, having very limited knowledge of Hindemith’s piano music, but I loved it. The best way I could describe it is if Brahms and Scriabin decided to combine their powers. It was yet another example of the vivid programming mind Carter Johnson possesses, and I would be shocked if he’s not a finalist.
Semifinal concertos, Saturday night
I said in my previous update that I couldn’t’ imagine Friday evening’s concertos being topped, and I was right. Saturday’s slate was a downgrade overall, but each performer had their moments. And one in particular stood head and shoulders above all the Mozart in the entire competition. The power rankings are thus:
No. 4: Yanjun Chen, Piano Concerto No. 23 in A Major, K. 488
Yanjun had to come through in a big way following the disappointment of her semifinal recital, and I don’t think her Mozart concerto did the trick. Odd voicing and phrasing, an aggressive first entrance, and some occasional sloppiness did her no favors. That said, I still admire the heck out of her as an artist. She marches to the beat of her own drummer, and even though I doubt she’ll make the finals, she’s going to be fun to watch as she continues her career.
No. 3: Jonas Aumiller, Piano Concerto No. 27 in B-flat Major, K. 595
Jonas Aumiller continues to churn out nearly note-perfect and painstakingly well-thought-out performances, but in this case it felt more as if I was reading a textbook about Mozart’s 27th concerto than actually listening to it. I didn’t sense the same deep level of engagement with the orchestra and the varieties of color that Piotr Alexewicz provided the night before, and even the orchestra didn’t seem to be as excited about it. For the opposite take, please check out Jed Distler’s Cliburn Blog, as he makes the case for Aumiller over Alexewicz. Chacun son gout!
No. 2: Angel Stanislav Wang, Piano Concerto No. 20 in D Minor, K. 466
Angel Stanislav Wang’s take-no-prisoners style is the perfect match for the darkness and drama in Mozart’s D Minor Concerto. At the risk of tooting my own horn, I was struck by how much he played it like I did (or how I wish I had, ha) back when I was in college a million years ago. He even flubbed the same passages in the development section that I did, and used the same well-loved Beethoven cadenzas. At the very end, he inexplicably accelerated, causing a brief moment of humorous chaos with the orchestra. Wang has big feelings when he plays, and when it works, it’s amazing. When it doesn’t, though, he gets into trouble. He’s on my final round bubble for now…we’ll see.
No. 1: Evren Ozel, Piano Concerto No. 25 in C Major, K. 503
I was waiting all week for this one. Having watched Evren’s previous rounds, I could think of no better concerto for him to tackle in the Mozart phase than this exact one. And he delivered 100% and then some. Smiles were on his menu, which were shared by conductor Carlos Miguel Prieto, and most of the members of the orchestra whose faces were visible to the livestream cameras. Ozel wrote his own cadenza for the first movement, which was magnificent. His ovation was the loudest of the entire Mozart portion of the competition, and he just may have punched his ticket to the finals.
It's Sunday evening and I’m about to sit down to watch the last of the semifinal recitals. More on those, plus a list of the six finalists, coming tomorrow.
Saturday, May 31
Semifinals, Day Three
by Joe Goetz
Day Three of the Cliburn semifinals featured two more solo recitals and then a set of Mozart piano concertos that is going to be hard to top. Of course, I say this now, early on a Saturday morning, and I suppose tonight’s slate of concertos could be even better, but that would be a very tall order.
Semifinal recitals, Friday afternoon
Yanjun Chen of China was the afternoon’s first competitor, opening with the Ballade No. 2 in F, Op. 38 by Frederic Chopin. Now, before I say anything else, I will say that Yanjun has been one of the most fiery players in the competition this far. She amps everything up to the max, and until this point, it has paid dividends, as it’s been pretty apparent she’s an audience favorite. Unfortunately, after taking corners on two wheels, she lost control of the car during this Chopin. Her Ballade was off the rails, and although she was able to rein it back in a bit during the beautiful Etude Op. 10, No. 3, the damage had been done. I could see the look of weary disappointment on her face before she did quite the job recombobulating herself for Schumann’s epic Kreisleriana. The Schumann was outstanding by comparison, full of the wild emotional swings that make his music so enchanting. He and Yanjun would’ve gotten along quite well, I think. She concluded with another Chopin etude, bowed to her adoring audience, and walked off stage looking forlorn. She’s a hell of a compelling artist, but I’m not sure she’ll make it to the finals after all those unforced errors.
Evren Ozel, YourClassical’s hometown guy, was next. After a colorful Les jeux d’eaux à la Ville d’Este by Franz Liszt, Evren stayed in the water for Ravel’s Gaspard de la Nuit. The opening movement, Ondine (the water sprite), was a masterclass in quiet control, and the second movement, Le gibet, was the most creepily haunting version in the competition so far. Scarbo, however, was a different story. Now, I should be clear that we’re talking about one of the most difficult pieces for the piano ever written, but Evren never looked quite comfortable with it. A few flubbed notes and muddy repeated notes at the outset threatened to derail his performance, but he recovered admirably as the movement went on. His strongest part of the recital was yet to come, Beethoven’s monumental Piano Sonata No. 32 in C Minor, Op. 111. This piece is pure ahead-of-his-time late Beethoven, and Evren was in his element. The variations in the work’s final movement steal the show, and Evren took some pretty brisk tempos (especially in the “boogie woogie” variation, as I like to call it), but at no point were any of his tempo choices in poor taste. The whole performance was clear, cool, and calculated. If Evren moves on to the final round, I would guess that Beethoven is his ticket.
Semifinal concertos, Friday night
We were treated to a smorgasbord of Mozart last night: four concertos in about two and a half hours, and everyone was on their game. That includes the amazing Fort Worth Symphony conducted by Carlos Miguel Prieto, who seemed to be having more fun than anyone else. I think what made the evening so special is that each pianist seemed to pick a concerto that was a perfect match for their personalities and musical strengths. Let’s get into these concertos, using the same Power Ranking format from the last recap.
No. 4: Elia Cecino, Piano Concerto No. 24 in C Minor, K. 491
Elia was the second pianist of the evening’s concerto wave, and although he’s last in my power rankings, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t good. It’s just a reflection of how amazing the night was overall. Elia’s performance was full of brawn, which is just what’s required of this concerto, the only one of Mozart’s piano concertos to feature the full complement of winds as well as timpani. It’s a precursor to Beethoven, and Elia treated it as such. At times it seemed like he got a little ahead of the orchestra, but I’m willing to let that slide given the compressed rehearsal schedule of the competition.
No. 3: Aristo Sham, Piano Concerto No. 23 in A Major, K. 488
I have in my notes from Aristo’s performance just one word: “perfect.” So what’s he doing third in the rankings? Well, I had no idea how awesome the rest of the night would be. And Sham’s performance was pretty darn perfect, with gorgeous articulation and phrasing througout, soulful mourning in the slow movement, and just the right amount of opera buffa in the finale. It would’ve been the best part of the night in any other situation, but everyone last night was just that good.
No. 2: Yangrui Cai, Piano Concerto No. 25 in C major, K. 503
It is truly a tossup between Yangrui Cai and Aristo Sham, but I have to give Yangrui the slightest of edges just because the technical demands of Mozart’s 25th concerto are just that much higher than those in the 23rd. His performance was declarative from the get-go, and he earned few bonus points with the Cliburn faithful by choosing cadenzas by 2017 Cliburn silver medalist Kenny Broberg.
No. 1: Piotr Alexewicz, Piano Concerto No. 27 in B-flat major, K. 595
Words escape me in attempting to describe this transcendent performance. Written five years (or more) after the other Mozart concertos heard to this point, there’s a more romantic sensibility and lush veneer to the piece than its predecessors, even though the size of the orchestra is smaller than, say, the very large 24th concerto. Mozart’s harmonic language is also far more complex, as he explores keys far distant from the home key of B-flat major. Piotr reveled in all of this, and as a Chopin pianist at heart, completely leaned into the textures that, had Mozart lived longer, might have evolved into a more Chopinesque sound. This was a performance I and others won’t soon forget. Bravo.
Friday, May 30
Semifinals, Day Two
by Joe Goetz
Day Two of the Cliburn semifinals featured two more solo recitals plus our first Mozart concertos of the competition – which gives me the chance to shout out the heroic Fort Worth Symphony. My goodness, those folks are incredible. Rehearsing multiple Mozart concerti, in a slimmed down chamber version of themselves, and performing live on a worldwide web stream…that is pressure! Next week will be even more nuts for the orchestra. Hats off to them!
Semifinal recitals, Thursday afternoon
The two solo recitals from yesterday were a study in polar opposite styles. Up first was Angel Stanislav Wang, who opened with a ferocious performance of Beethoven’s Appassionata Sonata. I got the sense quite early in this piece that it wasn’t really in his wheelhouse, but he sure sold it, as imperfect as his performance was. I truly hate being a rookie officer in the Wrong Note Police, but there were lots of them. Will his tenacious interpretation overcome his wildness to impress the judges? We won’t know until Sunday night. After Beethoven were some Bolcom etudes that didn’t keep my attention, followed by a complete Pictures at an Exhibition by Modest Mussorgsky. Wang approached the stately Promenade with the same aggressiveness that he brought to the Beethoven, but he left room for fun and whimsy, especially in the Ballet of the Unhatched Chicks, which was delightful. All in all, it was a convincing survey of Pictures, albeit risky like the Beethoven, so we’ll see if he makes it to the finals.
Germany’s Jonas Aumiller was next, and it was immediately apparent that his style is the anti-Wang. He opened with the Bach-Busoni Organ prelude and Fugue in D, BWV 532, and I was impressed with his control of the cascading left hand octaves that masked just how virtuosic the piece truly is. The six Klavierstucke, Op. 118 of Brahms were next, and Aumiller’s ability to shift deftly from the rhapsodic A major Intermezzo (No. 2) to the brittle intensity of the G minor Ballade (No. 3) was captivating. The Romanze in F major (No. 5) I’d add to our Sleep Stream (shameless plug!) in a heartbeat. After the last work, an Intermezzo in E-flat minor, Aumiller moved on without pause to Chopin’s Impromptu No. 2 in F-sharp major, Op. 36. Aha, another perfect key signature segue for your boy here (F-sharp major is de facto the relative major of E-flat minor, please music theory nerds don’t bother me about the enharmonic details I’m leaving out). Aumiller closed his recital with his own transcription of Liszt’s symphonic poem Les Preludes. Aumiller’s mimicry of Liszt’s piano techniques was spot on, down to the uber-cool octave glissandos in both hands. I just wish he had chosen one of Liszt’s more interesting symphonic poems to transcribe, as I have always found Les Preludes to be a fantastically mundane piece of music. Thankfully Aumiller’s performance of it was anything but sedate.
As the field will be cut in half prior to the finals, I have to wonder which of these two the judges would choose. Both offer world class virtuosity, one with high-wire drama and action, the other with refined restraint. I should clarify that thought, however - the judges will cut the whole field in half, not every pair of hour-long recitals each day. So they both might make it, or they both might not. We’ll have to wait and see.
Semifinal Concertos, Thursday night
Let’s try something a little different for these, rather than a straight recap. I’m going to offer my Mozart Concerto Power Rankings for the four pianists who performed last night, in order from my least favorite to most. It’s important to note, though, that a) all four pianists were outstanding, and b) their performances are even more remarkable given the relative lack of rehearsal time. Such is the nature of big competitions…
No. 4: Philipp Lynov, Piano Concerto No. 9 in E-flat, K. 271
This is one of Mozart’s more unusual piano concertos in that the piano enters only a bar into the piece. Although brief orchestra tutti is marked forte, there’s not a specific dynamic marking for this piano entrance, which is usually played assertively, yet delicately. Lynov opted for the assertive side of the spectrum with his entrance, which startled me a bit. The rest of his performance was milk-and-potatoes Mozart through and through – nothing remarkable, nothing negative.
No. 3: Vitaliy Starikov, Piano Concerto No. 23 in A, K. 488
One of the most popular Mozart concertos, K. 488 is a roller coaster of drama and humor. Its opening movement unfolds unsurprisingly, but the Adagio in the middle is full of despair. The third movement, however, is a comic opera masquerading as a piano concerto. Starikov captured the emotional essences of these movements with aplomb, and his occasional smiles throughout conveyed an infectious enjoyment. His articulation was superb, almost to a fault. I found his phrasing to be a tad brittle, especially in moments that were supposed to be more bel canto. But it was still a spirited account of one of my favorites.
No. 2: Chaeyoung Park, Piano Concerto No. 20 in D minor, K. 466
My absolute favorite Mozart concerto (and the only one I’ve ever played myself, so I’m likely very biased), Park gave a positively operatic account of one of only two concertos Mozart wrote in a minor key. Liberal use of pedal, freedom with tempos, long and flowing phrases, and her usage of cadenzas by Robert Levin may not have appealed to all, but they aligned with my own conception of the piece. I only wish I could’ve played it as well as she did.
No. 1: Carter Johnson, Piano Concerto No. 22 in E-flat, K. 482
Before we get to Carter, I have to talk up the winds in the Fort Worth Symphony in this performance. Stellar work, folks. Just beautiful. As for Carter, he showed yet another side of his mature musicianship. After early round recitals featuring Bartok and Prokofiev, hearing his Mozart was a revelation. It was the perfect marriage of classical sensibility and romantic drama. I loved his ornaments, and his milking of the final movement’s drama (it contains a quasi-slow movement with it) was boatloads of fun to watch. High marks alla round.
More solo recitals, and four more concertos, coming later today! Recap tomorrow.
Thursday, May 29
The Semifinals are Underway
by Joe Goetz
Last night, the semifinals of the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition began with just two pianists giving their solo recitals. The next four days will be a LOT busier, with recitals each afternoon, then Mozart concertos with the Forth Worth Symphony in the evening. For this round, the twelve remaining pianists will perform an hour-long solo recital, as well as a Mozart concerto from a list curated by the Cliburn. Let’s get to a recap of last night’s relatively brief session:
Up first was Hong Kong’s Aristo Sham, who took a big risk in the quarterfinals with Beethoven’s Hammerklavier Sonata. Aristo began his semifinal recital with Rachmaninoff’s arrangement of several movements from Bach’s Violin Partita No. 3. The voicing of counterpoint in the opening Preludio was exquisite, as were the sparkling leaps in the Gavotte, and the perfectly even runs in the Giga. After a trill-filled and rather spacy (but that’s the point!) Piano Sonata No. 10 by Alexander Scriabin, Aristo returned to long-form programming with a complete survey of Rachmaninoff’s nine Etudes-Tableaux, Op. 39. The challenge with these works is to not simply treat them as exercises (hence the “Etudes” part of the title), but to also paint pictures with the music. In fact, at least two of these works are directly inspired by paintings. Aristo accomplished this quite well, although I did have one minor quibble about dynamics. I felt that at times his soft parts were not soft enough, making the many climaxes in these works less effective. In the middle of the 5th Etude-Tableau, there’s a quiet and foreboding stretch that I personally love to hear as quiet as possible, which makes the thunderous chromatic ascent back to the giant dominant seventh heralding the return of the main theme much more powerful. Aristo seemed to keep this section at more of a mezzo piano, which didn’t allow him enough room to grow. Similarly, the march-like final Etude-tableau has a pretty long build-up to its final flourish, and I thought Aristo began this part too loudly, which made him really push hard at the end, resulting in a rather obvious (but forgivable) sour note in the work’s final bars. But, again, these are minor quibbles, and his spirited performance will likely be a highlight of this round.
Going next (and last) was Italy’s Elia Cecino. I’ve had my doubts about Elia, but he’s gotten stronger each round, and that trend continued last night. A placid Tchaikovsky nocturne opened his program, followed by another sonata in the key of F-sharp minor. In the previous round, Cecino played Scriabin’s Piano Sonata No. 3, and in this round he chose Schumann’s Piano Sonata No. 1. Aside from their shared key signature, I couldn’t help but contemplate the connections between these two otherwise disparate composers. Both explored wildly opposing personalities in their music, and both were often misunderstood by their contemporaries and by subsequent generations of musicians. Cecino’s performance of this sprawling sonata by Schumann was full of personality, though I admit I still have a very hard time understanding the work. I actually pulled out the score and was looking at it in bed last night (my wife thought I was nuts), and it’s even wilder than I remember the last time I looked at it. Anyway, after the Schumann, Cecino offered one of the most perfect programmatic choices of the competition so far, playing Sofia Gubaidulina’s Toccata-troncata as a prelude, without pause, to Prokofiev’s Piano Sonata No. 7. What can be said about this incredible work, Prokofiev’s de facto middle finger to Stalin, that hasn’t already been written? His performance built in energy and anger, sweat pouring off his brow, bringing the work’s final movement (marked Precipitato) to a thrilling conclusion.
If last night was any indication, the judges are going to have a nearly impossible task cutting the current field in half. Every remaining competitor is world-class, so there will be plenty of heartbreak to go with the jubilation. More later!
Tuesday, May 27
Listen to a Teenaged Evren Ozel!
by Joe Goetz
As I mentioned in a previous post, we at YourClassical are based in Minnesota, thus we’re all very excited about Minneapolis native Evren Ozel’s participation in the 2025 Cliburn and his ascent to the ranks of the semifinalists. Let’s turn the clock back eleven years to 2014, when a 15-year-old Ozel was a participant in MPR’s Minnesota Varsity, showcasing young musical talent from across the state. On an April afternoon that year, he wowed the audience at the Fitzgerald Theater (and the thousands listening to their radios to the live broadcast) with this performance of Prokofiev. Enjoy!
Monday, May 26
Quarterfinals + Looking Ahead to the Semis
by Joe Goetz and Osip Nikiforov
It was a weekend to remember at the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition. A surprise withdrawal, some controversial decisions, and of course, a boatload of stellar playing leaves us a LOT to talk about on this Memorial Day. The quarterfinals offer competitors a simple choice: Do they use their next 40-minute recital to double down on the types of music and performances that earned them their spot, or do they switch gears and try to show the judges (and the audience) a different side of themselves? There’s no right or wrong answer to this question. Big thanks to my intern Osip Nikiforov for writing up the Sunday morning and Sunday afternoon recitals, as I was taking a much-needed Cliburn break on the golf course, soaking in the absolutely perfect 72-degree Minnesota sunshine, and taking some much-needed dollars off my buddies (sorry, guys, better luck next time). Anyway, let’s get into it!
Quarterfinal Recital No. 1, Saturday afternoon
(recap from Joe)
The quarterfinals began, quite literally, in fantasyland, with Shangru Du of China. Beethoven’s Fantasia, Op. 77 and Scriabin’s Fantasy in B Minor were followed by Rachmaninoff’s Polichinelle from the Morceaux de Fantasie, Op. 3. Wrapping up his program was what has apparently become this Cliburn’s “gotta do it” selection, Liszt’s Dante Sonata. The Beethoven and Scriabin were solid, but things started to go off the rails with several imprecise moments in the Rachmaninoff. Du’s Liszt was similarly plagued, and when combined with his conservative approach to the piece, it left me concerned about his chances. Those concerns ended up being well-founded, as Du was not one of the 12 contestants moving on to the semifinals.
Up next was one of the more shocking moments I’ve witnessed in a major music competition. Xiaofu Ju, also from China, took the stage and sat at the piano. He then looked deeply at his hands, got up, took a bow, and left the stage as the concerned audience murmured anxiously. The competition would soon announce Ju’s withdrawal, citing “health concerns.” No details were ever provided beyond that, and it was a heartbreaking end of Ju’s competition. We wish him well!
Carter Johnson, representing Canada and the United States, then took the stage after an hour break (the schedule had assumed Ju would do a 40-minute recital, plus a 20-minute recess following). He was one of my favorites from the first round, and in his second round he reminded me why, choosing the “double down” approach to his programming. Four selections from Brahms’s Klavierstucke, Op. 76 were placed between two sets of preludes by Dmitri Shostakovich. He concluded his recital with the otherworldly Piano Sonata by Bela Bartok. The thing with Bartok is that you either love him or hate him, and though I admit this sonata is not the kind of music I’d listen to for pleasure (or likely ever program for the radio), the colors and timbres Johnson produced were undeniably compelling. I was transfixed, and I was both unsurprised and elated to see his name called as a semifinalist late on Sunday evening.
I didn’t think Johnson could be topped, but then I heard David Khrikuli of Georgia. More Brahms was on his menu, the complete Fantasien, Op. 116, followed by yet another Liszt Dante Sonata. Khrikuli immediately reminded me, just by his manner onstage, let alone his playing, of the “old school” of Russian pianists. I texted Osip and said, “This guy is downright Gilelsian.” His Brahms opened with a remarkable depth of sonority, but then I also said to myself “What is he going to do with the E major Op. 116/4?” I wasn’t disappointed, as he ascended from the depths of what had come before into an unbelievably peaceful and heavenly calm. His Liszt that followed set the standard, as far as I was concerned, for that piece and its place in this competition. He was a shoe-in for the semifinals — or so I thought. More on that later.
Quarterfinal Recital No. 2, Saturday evening
(recap from Joe)
There are many kinds of courage: jumping out an an airplane, speaking truth to power, and — maybe the most courageous of all — playing Beethoven’s Hammerklavier Sonata in the second round of a major international piano competition (wink wink). Aristo Sham of Hong Kong, China, did just that. It’s a monumental feat of strength and endurance to get through this work, and Sham didn’t just get through it, he actually seemed to build strength throughout it. The centerpiece of the work is its third movement, Adagio sostenuto, which the writer Wilhelm von Lenz called “a mausoleum of collective sorrow.” Sham took his time through this movement, so much time that I was concerned he would go over the 40-minute mark. But no worries — he launched into the sonata’s closing fugue with raw firepower, plowing through it while maintaining its elaborate structure. At the end, he looked weary? Relieved? Likely both. He’s moving on to the semis.
The stage was then set for American Angel Stanislav Wang, who brought a whole other kind of firepower (literally). After opening with a work that more traditionally closes many recitals, Ravel’s La Valse, Wang spent his next 15 minutes or so exploring seemingly all the colorful possibilities the modern piano can offer through a set of Debussy preludes. The last of these was the explosive Feux d’artifice (“Fireworks”), which was a fitting segue into his grand finale, Guido Agosti’s transcription of Igor Stravinsky’s ballet The Firebird. I had never seen this performed live before, and it was jaw-dropping. After its conclusion, as the audience in Fort Worth was giving Wang a raucous ovation, my son who was sitting next to me on the couch simply said “How…?” I don’t know, buddy, but I do know now that Wang is on to the semifinals.
Finally, Philipp Lynov of Russia offered us a taste of his homeland with the Prelude and Fugue in G-sharp Minor, Op. 29 by Sergei Taneyev. Do yourself a favor and read about Taneyev’s relationship with Tchaikovsky; it’s fascinating. Anyway, this thick, complex music was well executed in Lynov’s hands, but I can’t say the same for his Piano Sonata No. 1 in F-sharp Minor, Op. 11 by Robert Schumann. Schumann is always problematic, as his music doesn’t always feel organic to the hands, and even if you are able to untangle the technical challenges, you then have to figure out how to interpret it. There were some unfortunate errors in Lynov’s performance, but I think he handled it as well as could be expected. He’ll be moving on, although I have some thoughts about that later.
Quarterfinal Recital No. 3, Sunday morning
(recap from Osip)
Sunday morning’s session was opened by Jonas Aumiller, Germany. His thunderous yet poetic Liszt’s Saint François de Paule marchant sur les flots was just what the doctor ordered on a crisp Sunday morning. It was also the first time this work was heard at the competition. As we started immersing ourselves in Debussy’s Feux d'artifice from Préludes, Book II, maybe because of the complete musical language change, I didn’t quite feel enough that we were in the sumptuous world of the impressionist master composer. Beethoven’s monumental last piano sonata followed, bringing the pianist back to his element. While it was very well executed, I felt this sonata lacked the exact monumentality that it is all about. Overall, a very solid performance by Jonas.
Up next, Mikhail Kambarov, Russia, took the stage. It was certainly a bold choice of programming that caught my eye. Le baiser de l'Enfant-Jésus from Vingt Regards sur l'Enfant-Jésus by Messiaen is very rarely programmed in competitions. It was quite the spiritual experience hearing this work on a Sunday morning, and though Mikhail played it beautifully, I am just not sure if this was a wise programming choice for the quarterfinals. The same Beethoven sonata was played back to back — this time opening with much more gravitas, setting up the pulse of the work from the get-go. After hearing Mikhail play this work, I couldn’t stop thinking how the spirituality of this work was indeed well transferred from the Messiaen, perhaps, after all making the whole round’s program very organic.
After the brief intermission, Piotr Alexewicz, Poland, started his quarterfinal round with the famed Pour le piano by Debussy, bringing different tone qualities and their respective colors, which this work is full of, with a wonderful sense of musical “time”. His Six Pieces for Piano by Ottorino Respighi was equally convincing with elaborate voicing and beautiful touch. The same personal sense of musical “time” was fully on display here as well. As musical as the Prokofiev Piano Sonata No. 3 was, I personally thought it lacked a bit of a bite and angularity (in a good sense of the word) that this work is full of. That being said, he strongly placed (or should I say played) himself into the contention for the semis.
The last competitor of the morning session, Alice Burla of Canada, took the stage with the self-asserting Sonata in G Minor, H. 47 by C.P.E. Bach. Generally speaking, C.P.E. Bach is one of those composers who needs special interpretive powers from the performer to make his music truly make sense or even be cohesive. I think Alice succeeded in that by bringing the needed improvisational freedom needed in this sonata. A very lovely contrast of Nocturne No. 6 in D-flat Major by Fauré followed, which felt to me like very personal storytelling. As interesting as the Variations on a Polish Folk Theme by Szymanowski were, from my own competition experience, I felt the program needed something a little more “known”, considering the previous two works. This all could prove to be a stepping stone, though, I hope to be wrong.
Quarterfinal Recital No. 4, Sunday afternoon
(recap from Osip)
The afternoon session was opened by Yanjun Chen of China, with Mozart’s Sonata No. 10 in C Major. I could tell she was enjoying herself very much in this work, and it showed — beautifully shaped lines, an array of varying articulation, and tons of playfulness visually and audibly. That feeling of “planned” spontaneity transferred to Debussy with a wide palette of colors in spades. Her last piece on the program, Medtner’s Sonata tragica, though played very energetically — “turning it up” as described by the Cliburn commentators — some sections were taken, perhaps, a tad bit too fast, resulting in evoking some imagery other than “tragic”. Nevertheless, Yanjun will always have a following, regardless of how this competition unfolds for her.
Next, American Jonathan Mamora, whom I personally know very well, took the stage with a palate cleanser in the form of Mozart’s Adagio in B minor, which was played soulfully and delicately. The next piece — Liszt’s Sonata in B minor — although written in the same key of B minor, started, of course, with the famous two G’s, from which Jonathan was completely immersed in the world of Faust and Mephistopheles. As he went on, I felt that the majority of the sonata lacked the overall dramaticism in the dark Mephistopheles-esque parts. That being said, I did enjoy his recitatives and more reflective parts of the sonata. A performance of this sonata at a competition of any level is always a feat, and I respect and admire him for bringing this sonata to this edition of the Cliburn.
For the last batch of the afternoon session performers, it was a nice warm feeling to see the Minnesota native, Evren Ozel, come onto the stage and begin his recital with a very bouncy and dance-like Bartok Out of Doors, including lots of nature sound effects in “The Night Music.” It was very captivating! The main fare in his program, though, was Schumann’s Humoreske — a piece that is loaded with traps both interpretational, conceptual, as well as purely technical (I can personally attest to that, having performed that piece myself many times). Evren handled this piece with mastery and confidence of a seasoned performer, which he certainly is. I loved how he managed to hold this piece all tight together despite its very nature of sectionality.
Chaeyoung Park, South Korea, wrapped up the afternoon session starting with Stravinsky-Agosti’s Firebird, and oh boy, was that bird on fire! Debussy’s Général Lavine – eccentric was played very convincingly and wittily. Le baiser de l'Enfant-Jésus by Messiaen, although another piece by a French composer of the 20th century, felt more organic and “at home” for the pianist in my opinion. The final course in an already heavy meal was none other than Brahms’s Variations on a theme of Paganini, Book II. This was played with a boldness and drive this music deserves yet still elegant and musical. This was a very fitting end to the afternoon session.
Quarterfinal Recital No. 5, Sunday evening
(recap from Joe)
Elia Cecino of Italy led off the last of the quarterfinal recitals with Joseph Haydn’s Sonata in E Minor, Hob. XVI:34. It was a spirited performance, but something about it nagged at me, like Cecino didn’t actually enjoy it himself. Mendelssohn’s Variations sérieuses, op. 54 followed, one of my favorites. Yet Cecino seemed tentative in his performance, and I felt that he missed a lot of the work’s dramatic arc. He then switched gears to Scriabin, with the rarely heard Sonata No. 3 in F-Sharp minor, Op. 23. From the first notes, it was if the weight of the world was lifted from Cecino’s shoulders, as if this was what he was meant to play all along. It started wobbly to my ears, but quickly he found his stride, and by the end I was very impressed. He’s moving on, and I have to guess it’s solely on the basis of that Scriabin, and not the two works that came before it.
China’s Yangrui Cai was next, offering us more Scriabin (the Fantasy in B minor again), then Liszt’s Bénédiction de Dieu dans la solitude, which is one of the most personal offerings the great piano master left us. Cai played it beautifully, although a bit impersonally (to me). Just a matter of taste is all. Anyway, he concluded with Three Movements from Petruskha by Igor Stravinsky, always a wild crowd-pleaser, and he seemed right at home with its constant barrage of leaps, repeated notes, and shifting colors. He’s a semifinalist.
Finally, Vitaly Starikov served up a Mozart Allegro, which was the perfect warmup for Liszt’s Les jeux d'eaux à la Villa d'Este. I have rarely heard such quiet precision in the high-register filigrees in the right hand. Starikov wrapped his recital with Schumann’s Symphonic Etudes, which is basically a glorified set of variations on a brooding chorale theme. That brooding turns to unbridled exuberance in the finale, and the whole journey was flawless from start to finish. Vitaly is also a semifinalist.
We only had to wait about 35 minutes for the jury to announce the complete list of semifinalists:
Piotr Alexewicz, Poland
Jonas Aumiller, Germany
Yangrui Cai, China
Elia Cecino, Italy
Yanjun Chen, China
Carter Johnson, Canada/United States
Philipp Lynov, Russia
Evren Ozel, United States
Chaeyoung Park, South Korea
Aristo Sham, Hong Kong China
Vitaly Starikov, Israel/Russia
Angel Stanislav Wang, United States
Now, about David Khrikuli. I was not alone in my shock to see his name left off this list. His performances were more than solid, full of brains, brawn, and heart. And they all had a level of technical mastery that was, in my opinion, at the high end of the spectrum we’ve seen so far in the competition. Alice Burla is another name I am surprised to see omitted. Perhaps her imaginative programming (Haydn/Ligeti/Barer in the first round, C.P.E. Bach/Faure/Szymanowski in the quarters) was just too out there for the judges? We may never know. I told myself when I started this blog that I’d try to refrain from anything that smacks of “I would’ve done this” or “I wouldn’t have done that,” but given the uneven performances of Elia Cecino and Philipp Lynov, I have a hard time understanding why they get to move on and David and Alice do not. BUT — at the end of the day — every one of these people are fantastic pianists, and no matter the result, they should hold their heads high. At the very least, we now know their names, and we can follow them and support them no matter what happens next.
What happens next at the Cliburn are the semifinals, which begin on Wednesday evening. Each of the remaining performers will play one hourlong recital, plus a Mozart piano concerto with the Fort Worth Symphony as the competition changes venues to Bass Hall, the Symphony’s home. Until then, enjoy the last hours of Memorial Day weekend.
Saturday, May 24
Preliminary Round, Day 3 + Who’s Moving On
by Joe Goetz
I’ve got to keep this update as brief as possible today due to various weekend plans, including a honey-do list that’s a mile long. We’ll take a look at the last recitals of the preliminary round and reveal who’s moving on (and who isn’t) to the quarterfinals, which begin in a very short time this afternoon.
Preliminary Recital No. 7
First up on Friday morning was Evren Ozel. Full disclosure: I and others at YourClassical are quietly rooting for Evren because we are based in Minnesota, and Evren grew up in Minneapolis. The last Minnesota contestant in the Cliburn was Kenny Broberg in 2017, and he went on to medal. In any event, my potential bias aside, Evren showed up with a near-perfect Partita No. 5 by J.S. Bach, the required Montero, and a masterfully controlled Rachmaninoff Corelli Variations. He’ll be moving on, unlike the Timberwolves, who seem to be done for. Up next was South Korea’s Sung Ho Yoo, who I thought brought the best Rachmaninoff Piano Sonata No. 2 the competition had seen so far, but he was one of the unfortunate 10 voted off Cliburn Island at the end of the night. Another South Korean, Chaeyoung Park, wrapped up the morning’s recitals with the quietest opening we’ve heard so far, Rachmaninoff’s G Major prelude, and ended with a frenzy in Prokofiev’s Piano Sonata No. 8. I was a little surprised to see such a large work in the competition’s opening round, and it seemed like a boom-or-bust proposition, but it turned out to be a boom. She’s moving on.
Preliminary Recital No. 8
The midafternoon action began with Spain’s Pedro Lopez Salas, who provided a daring opening work in Mozart’s Piano Sonata No. 10, K. 330. I don’t consider this to be a competition piece, but I have fond memories of my father playing through this work when I was younger, especially its tender slow movement. Perhaps Salas was paying homage to his fellow Spaniard Alicia de Larrocha (who recorded Mozart oh-so-brilliantly back in the day)? In any event, it was just fine, and he followed it after Rachtime with, as they’d say on Monty Python, something completely different: Alberto Ginastera’s Piano Sonata No. 1. The crowd loved it, but it wasn’t enough to move Salas to the next round.
Next, Japan’s Kotaro Shigemori opened with the late Chopin Nocturne in E, Op. 62/2, followed without pause by Scriabin’s Sonata No. 2. I’m a sucker for programming pieces linked together via harmony, and the E major to G-sharp minor transition made my music-theory heart sing. After Rachtime, Shigemori ended with Liszt’s Dante Sonata, which I found to be far more emotionally effective and technically sound than Piotr Alexewicz’s performance of the same work the previous day, but evidently the judges disagreed. Shigemori goes home, Alexewicz moves on.
Finally, Italy’s lone representative in the competition, Elia Cecino, began with a lighthearted Prelude and Fugue by Dmitri Shostakovich, and a similarly lighthearted Beethoven Piano Sonata No. 16 in G, Op. 31/1. I don’t follow the competition circuit regularly, but I can’t imagine this particular Beethoven sonata making regular appearances. Cecino played it well, then concluded with the Gounod-Liszt Faust Waltz. The gold standard for this piece, in my biased ears, is my buddy Di Wu’s performance from the 2009 Cliburn, and Cecino fell short of that. It seemed as if the sudden shift from the lighter fare with which he began threw him off balance a bit, but it was enough for him to move on to the next round, where apparently we’ll get to hear him play Prokofiev’s Piano Sonata No. 7. Just a bit different from Beethoven…!
Preliminary Recital No. 9
Just two pianists in the evening wave. First up, China’s Yangrui Kai, who opened with Bach’s Toccata in D, BWV 912. I found the opening of this toccata to be a tad syrupy, with liberal use of pedal and lots of romantic-style liberties with phrasing and tempo. But in the back end, Kai deftly shifted gears into a much more “traditional” Bach sound, which by extension shifted my reaction from perplexed to delighted. After some bagatelles by the contemporary composer Carl Vine, Kai’s main event was the Liszt arrangement of the overture to Richard Wagner’s Tannhäuser. A tour de force of virtuosity, Kai thundered through it, perhaps getting a little too bangy at times for my liking, but his chops were undeniable. He’s moving on.
Finally, Vitaly Starikov, representing both Russia and Israel, opened with a rather watered-down version of Bach’s Toccata in F-sharp Minor, BWV 910. Usually this is my favorite of Bach’s toccatas, but the note I have written for myself is “meh.” Thankfully, that “meh” feeling quickly faded away with a spritely rendition of Chopin’s Scherzo No. 4 in E, Op. 54. The lightest of Chopin’s four scherzi, and the only one in a major key, Starikov brought whimsy to its outer sections and just the right amount of tender melancholy to the middle. Spot on. After Rachtime, Starikov brought us another Shostakovich Piano Sonata No. 1. I’ll admit my first thought was “Oh, no, not again,” but after hearing it in his hands, I found myself in a Brennan and Dale situation from the movie Stepbrothers: Did we just become best friends?? YUP! OK, so maybe I am still not in love with the piece, but Starikov’s excellent account of it changed my feelings quite a bit on it, which is the sure sign of a great artist. He’s moving on.
About an hour after the conclusion of the evening’s recitals, the 18 pianists moving on to the quarterfinals were announced:
Piotr Alexewicz, Poland
Jonas Aumiller, Germany
Alice Burla, Canada
Yangrui Cai, China
Elia Cecino, Italy
Yanjun Chen, China
Shangru Du, China
Carter Johnson, Canada/United States
Xiaofu Ju, China
Mikhail Kambarov, Russia
David Khrikuli, Georgia
Philipp Lynov, Russia
Jonathan Mamora, United States
Evren Ozel, United States
Chaeyoung Park, South Korea
Aristo Sham, Hong Kong China
Vitaly Starikov, Israel/Russia
Angel Stanislav Wang, United States
As with all competitions, there are great contestants that for, one reason or another, don’t move on. The big surprise for me (and others, judging by online comments and private correspondence I’ve had with those in the know) was the elimination of Malaysia’s Magdalene Ho. I just can’t understand it. I thought she was far more worthy than some others who moved on. Jed Distler, writing his own very excellent blog for Grammophone magazine, described his feelings on the issue as “enraging.” Jed and I chatted a bit this morning, and while I wouldn’t go as far as feeling enraged, I certainly understand the sentiment. Ho is only 21, and she can give the Cliburn another shot in four years, but this one still stings. I was also mildly surprised to see that Sung Ho Yoo didn’t make it, either. He brought so much poise and vigor to his Friday morning performance. But I’m not a judge (thankfully!).
Quarterfinals begin a few hours from this post (which is occurring around midday on Saturday). No posts until Monday, after the quarterfinals are over and the 12 semifinalists are announced. I’m just too busy this weekend to get a mid-round Sunday post done, and I’ll actually be having some help this weekend from my intern, Osip Nikiforov. Osip is a damn fine pianist (he wanted to audition for the Cliburn himself this year but barely missed the maximum age requirement) and a veteran of many international competitions himself, so I look forward to his perspective on some of Sunday’s performances, which I’ll have to miss due to [he says sheepishly] a golf outing. So, until Monday, have a great Memorial Day weekend. So much for brevity…!
Friday, May 23
Preliminary Round, Day 2
by Joe Goetz
Day 2 of the competition was a study in contrasts; several contestants chose programs that showcased wildly different sides of their musical personalities, and differences in interpretation among contestants choosing the same (or very similar) pieces made for fascinating viewing. On the whole, I found Day 2 to be a step down from Day 1 in terms of overall quality of playing and programming, but I suppose you could chalk that up to viewer fatigue. There were, however, lots of great moments to talk about, so let’s dive in.
Preliminary Recital No. 4
The morning began with German pianist Jonas Aumiller. The first word that pops to mind about his performance, to me, was “safe.” Or, perhaps, now that I’ve typed this, “restrained.” Aumiller began with the gorgeous Scriabin Fantasy, but his restraint seemed to temper the impulsiveness normally associated with Scriabin’s music. A solid Bach toccata and Chopin’s Barcarolle followed the Scriabin, and then his best performance was of Schumann’s rarely-heard Presto passionato, which seemed to best represent Aumiller’s style. Will Aumiller’s rejection of real bravura in his first round cost him? I have no idea.
Up next was Malaysian Magdalene Ho, who offered a much more colorful Bach toccata than Aumiller, followed by the intense and dark Prelude, Chorale, and Fugue by Cesar Franck. Her ability to shift emphasis deftly among the inner voices of both these works put her on plane above Aumiller, and her closing with Saint-Saens’ Étude en forme de valse was a playfully raucous taste of bravura that was just perfect. It may be premature, but I’ve got her on my Finals radar already.
Finally, Ukrainian Roman Fediurko opened his recital with some fairly pedestrian Bach, but after Gabriela Montero’s Rachtime, Fediurko decided it was, indeed, time to Rach, first with the Elegie from the composer’s youthful Morceaux de fantaisie, Op. 3, and then the epic Piano Sonata No. 2. Fediurko may be only 20, but he’s got that “Rachmaninoff sound,” a deep sonority that rumbles deep in your belly. I’m not sure if it’s enough for him, but even if it’s not, he’s got time to build on his experience at his age.
Preliminary Recital No. 5
My afternoon viewing was, admittedly, a bit distracted, as I was trying to do work at the same time. Russian Mikhail Kambarov played it safe with Chopin and Scarlatti, ending with a solid performance of Rachmaninoff’s Corelli Variations. Nothing stood out to me about his performance, either positive or negative.
British contestant Callum McLachlan was next, and he opted to begin his program with Schumann’s Waldszenen, an interesting choice for a competition. But his performance was more than worthy, especially the mysterious and lilting seventh movement, Prophetic Bird. He concluded with the second Samuel Barber sonata we’ve heard so far in the preliminary round, offering a more introspective interpretation than the brute force virtuosity we heard from Philipp Lynov the previous evening.
Following McLachlan was the day’s most (and I say this with no malice) bizarre recital, performed by Jiarui Cheng of China. As I said at the beginning of this update, today was a day of contrasts, and hoo boy, did Cheng’s program have plenty of those. After a Bach toccata to begin, he launched into the whiz-bang virtuosity of Vladimir Horowitz’s arrangement of Franz Liszt’s arrangement (yes, you read this right) of Saint-Saens’ Danse macabre. It’s a piece that exists solely for the purpose of wowing an audience, and Cheng certainly succeeded at doing just that. The musical whiplash continued with a Brahms Intermezzo in A, Op. 118/2. One of the last utterances of an aging and reluctant composer, I wanted to hear more vulnerability, but it felt wholly clinical in Cheng’s hands. Scriabin’s Piano Sonata No. 5 and Montero’s Rachtime rounded out his program, and Cheng seemed compelled to go for broke with both of them, amping the virtuosity up to 11, but I couldn’t help but feel a sense of emptiness from his playing, despite his obvious technical prowess.
Finally, Polish pianist Piotr Alexewicz offered us Brahms and Medtner before tackling Liszt’s Après une lecture du Dante, which started out great!...and then towards the end it felt as if he ran out of gas. Some pretty glaring errors occurred, as well as some muddy tremolo playing in the quieter moments, may have sunk his chances of advancing.
Preliminary Recital No. 6
The evening began with one of my favorite recitals so far. Canadian Alice Burla began with a sparkling Haydn sonata, which she followed with Ligeti’s fourth etude, “Fanfares.” Yes, our first Ligeti of the competition! A masterful bit of programming there, as the perpetual motion sparks of the Ligeti mirrored the crispness of her Haydn to absolute perfection. I did find her performance of Rachtime to be a bit on the uneasy side, but my reservations melted away quickly with her closing work, yet another interpretation of Samuel Barber’s sonata. This was the best of the bunch to date, as she allowed herself the room to build to the work’s many climaxes, making them even more powerful. I really hope she makes a deep run in the competition.
After Burla came Yanjun Chen of China, who also opened with Haydn, but she chose a sonata that didn’t really excite me. Its final movement, at least, had some Roma-flavored fun and games, but on the whole I thought it was kind of a throwaway selection. In contrast, her next piece, Medtner’s Canzona serenata, was absolutely gorgeous, as if she decided to bare her soul to the whole world. Chen’s next selection, the first sonata by Shostakovich, was just too much for me. As with everything I write here, your mileage may vary, but I just do not enjoy that piece, at all. She rocked it, but I just can’t. I’m sorry! In any event, I don’t quite know what to make of her chances of advancement, but at the very least she established herself as one of the more eclectic performers in the field.
Finally, American Jonathan Mamora, an enormous fellow who could easily stay in the Fort Worth area and walk into Cowboys training camp in a few months without anyone noticing, brought something completely new to the stage by opening with four etudes by contemporary composer David Onac. These etudes were a requirement from another competition he had attended, and he loved them enough to bring them to the Cliburn. Very cool. After some sensitive and contemplative Bach, and a spirited Rachtime, Mamora brought the thunder with Scriabin’s Piano Sonata No. 5. There was a sense of spirituality that permeated each of Mamora’s performances, which makes sense given his background as a church musician. While I’m not sure he has a great chance of advancing deep in the competition, he proved, along with everyone else in the field, his worthiness.
That’s it for now. One more day of prelims ahead (they’ve actually begun already as I finish typing this), and the next round begins over the weekend.
Thursday, May 22
Preliminary Round, Day One
by Joe Goetz
The first day of the 2025 Van Cliburn International Piano Competition is in the books, and already there have been some transcendent performances. I wasn’t able to watch all of the day’s recitals due to personal commitments, but I saw a good deal of it, so let’s dive into what stood out.
The crux of my job at YourClassical is overseeing the music selections that are heard on the radio and our various on-demand streams, so I’m always fascinated to see how each contestant arranges their recital programs. Obviously programming music for radio/on-demand is a whole other ballgame compared to programming for a competition in front of a worldwide live audience, but that doesn’t take away from my intrigue.
At the Cliburn, there are certain works that seem to be “competition favorites,” which multiple contestants choose. For example, both Ravel’s Gaspard de la Nuit and Liszt’s Réminiscences de Don Juan appeared several times on Day One alone. These selections aren’t surprising, as they’re both powerhouses of virtuosity that are sure to please when executed well. What interests me more, however, are two things: a) which works contestants choose to surround these big powerhouses; and b) recital programs that include the unexpected. On Day One, several contestants did one or both of those things with aplomb.
Preliminary Recital No. 1
It seemed fitting to me that the very first contestant on Wednesday morning began his program with a world premiere. As I mentioned in the introduction to the competition, each preliminary round recital must contain the specially commissioned work, Rachtime, written by Gabriela Montero. Chinese pianist Xuanxiang Lu opted to open his recital, and by extension the entire competition, with this work! I wasn’t able to see it live, but I plan to go back and watch when I have time. I was able to tune in for the second pianist of the morning, Shangru Du, also from China. He immediately warmed my nerdy music programmer’s heart with his first two selections, Tchaikovsky’s Nocturne in C-sharp minor, Op 19 No. 4, followed by the aforementioned Ravel Gaspard de la Nuit. He played these two selections without pause, to great effect, as the quiet C-sharp minor close of the Tchaikovsky dovetailed perfectly with the D-flat major quiet quavers that begin the Ravel. That programming sensitivity scored points with me, for sure, although I’m not the one who needs to be impressed.
Preliminary Recital No. 2
In the second batch of recitals during the afternoon, Ryota Yamazaki of Japan opted for a bold beginning to his competition, starting with Busoni’s transcription of Bach’s Nunn komm, der Heiden Heiland, followed immediately by Mozart’s 18th piano sonata. The Busoni is not one of his more overtly virtuosic Bach transcriptions, of which he wrote several, and Mozart is … well, Mozart. Not easy, but not a virtuoso work by any stretch. In a competition where first impressions are incredibly important, I found these choices to be quite a statement. However, we didn’t have to wait long for the virtuosity to begin, as Yamazaki concluded his opening round with a thrilling and nearly flawless performance of Liszt’s fiendishly difficult Réminiscences de Norma.
The biggest highlight of the afternoon, however, was the Canadian-American pianist Carter Johnson. No stranger to big competitions, having earned a silver medal at the 2024 Gina Bachauer International Piano Competition, I’d bet pretty good money on him making a deep run in the Cliburn as well. He began his preliminary round with Bach’s sublime Capriccio in B-flat Major, BWV 992 "On the Departure of a Beloved Brother,” which livestream host Buddy Bray speculated was the first time it had ever been played at the Cliburn. After a playful rendition of Montero’s Rachtime, Johnson turned to Clementi, whose piano sonatinas are a staple for budding young pianists, and whose more mature piano sonatas are actually very difficult. Johnson’s performance of Clementi’s Sonata in F-sharp Minor, Op. 25, No. 5 carried lots of gravitas, and paved the way for the heavy-metal virtuosity required for a collection of short Prokofiev pieces that had me on the edge of my very uncomfortable couch.
Preliminary Recital No. 3
The three evening recitals each began in ways that didn’t particularly wow me, but each ended dazzlingly. Aristo Sham of Hong Kong began with the Bach-Busoni Chaconne, always a competition staple. His interpretation, while executed well, seemed a little too aggressive for my taste (again, these are my own personal preferences — your mileage may vary), but his aggressiveness paid dividends in Ravel’s Gaspard de la Nuit.
American pianist Angel Stanislav Wang begin with Beethoven’s quirky G Minor Fantasy, which has never been one of my favorites, but then close with the second Liszt Réminiscences de Don Juan of the day, and boy oh boy, did he milk it for all its worth. I had never heard some of his tempo and dynamic changes before, and they were extremely effective, and at times downright humorous — not to mention his superb technical prowess.
Finally, Russian contestant Philipp Lynov opened with yet another Bach Capriccio in B-flat Major, BWV 992 "On the Departure of a Beloved Brother,” which, while not as strong as Carter Johnson earlier in the day, was followed by Samuel Barber’s monumental Piano Sonata. This work, so difficult that Barber himself was unable to play it, concludes with a movement that is half blues, half toccata, half fugue, and half scherzo. Is that four halves? Indeed it is, because it feels like you need two superhuman pianists to pull it off, and Lynov did just that, eliciting some of the most raucous applause of the day to send everyone home (or in my case, to bed) on a high note. I also award some unofficial bonus programming points to Lynov for bookending his program with Bach and Barber!
If the first day of competition was any indication, the field this year is stronger than ever, and we’re going to be in for a treat for the next few weeks. I look forward to what the next two days of the preliminary round have to offer!
Tuesday, May 20
The Van Cliburn International Piano Competition: The Basics
by Joe Goetz
Before the competition begins, we thought we’d provide this FAQ to help set the stage for what’s to come.
Who was Van Cliburn?
Van Cliburn (1934 – 2013) was an American concert pianist who burst onto the world stage in 1958 by winning the inaugural International Tchaikovsky Competition in Moscow. The judges in the competition reportedly had to ask Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev for his blessing before awarding him the prize. “Is he the best?” Khrushchev asked. When the judges confirmed that he was, Khrushchev responded, “Then give him the prize.”
Cliburn returned home as a Cold War hero to a ticker-tape parade in New York City. To this day, he remains the only American pianist to win the International Tchaikovsky Competition’s top prize.
When did the Van Cliburn International Piano Competition begin?
Following Cliburn’s triumph in Russia, the National Guild of Piano Teachers capitalized on his newfound celebrity to secure funding for a brand-new piano competition named in his honor. The first-ever Van Cliburn International Piano Competition was held in 1962, and it has been held, generally, every four years since. The 2021 competition was delayed one year due to the COVID-19 pandemic, hence this year’s competition coming only three years following the 2022 competition.
Who has won the Van Cliburn International Piano Competition?
Many great pianists have entered the competition, yet did not win a prize. Conversely, there are many Cliburn prizewinners who have, despite their initial burst of fame, not become household names. Some notable medalists include Radu Lupu (gold medal, 1966), Christian Zacharias (silver medal, 1973), Barry Douglas (bronze medal, 1985), Jon Nakamatsu (gold medal, 1997), Olga Kern (gold medal, 2001), and Haochen Zhang (gold medal, 2009).
More recent winners have found great success, but it’s still too soon to say for sure whether their careers will have the staying power of their predecessors.
What is the format of the competition?
The competition begins with online video submissions, of which this year the committee received 340, representing 45 nations. Of those submissions, 30 were invited to perform in the “main event,” so to speak, which begins this week. That number has since shrunk by one following the late withdrawal of Russian entrant Anatasia Vorotnaya due to health reasons.
The competitors must come prepared for four rounds of recitals and concertos, with each round becoming progressively more complex. The first two rounds are solo recitals, and competitors may choose their own programs. In the first round, however, each competitor MUST include a newly commissioned work written especially for the competition. This year, that work is called “Rachtime,” written by pianist, composer, and jury member Gabriela Montero.
After the first two rounds, the field is whittled down by roughly a third each time, leaving a dozen or so contestants for the semifinals. In the semifinals, each pianist must perform a 60-minute solo recital plus a Mozart piano concerto of their choosing, accompanied by the Fort Worth Symphony.
The final round usually features six remaining pianists, each of whom must perform TWO concertos: one of their choosing (usually a virtuosic warhorse by Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, or Prokofiev), plus another from a list provided by the competition. You can find that list of concertos at the bottom of the Van Cliburn competition’s schedule page.
Who are the favorites to win this year’s competition?
It’s nearly impossible to say! Handicapping a group of 28 pianists who are not widely known is an exercise in futility, but that’s what makes watching the Cliburn so much fun!
In the preliminary rounds, you might encounter a pianist whose playing and/or program choices you find to be extraordinary, but perhaps the judges prefer another. Usually, though, by the semifinal round, favorites begin to emerge. In the 2022 competition, eventual gold medalist Yunchan Lim wowed audiences in Fort Worth and across the world with his stunning performance of Franz Liszt’s complete Transcendental Etudes.
I remember thinking there wasn’t much of a question, at that point, who would go on to win! We’ll see if any pianist rises to the top this year in the early rounds, or if there is lots of parity. Either way, it’s bound to be exciting.
Be sure to check back to this page throughout the competition. I’ll be watching as much as I can, recapping daily programs as much as possible, and offering my opinions on who I think has the best chance of winning. The competition’s media folks will also be sending YourClassical audio of each round, so expect some highlights on the radio as well.
Happy Cliburn Season to all who celebrate!
Love the music?
Show your support by making a gift to YourClassical.
Each day, we’re here for you with thoughtful streams that set the tone for your day – not to mention the stories and programs that inspire you to new discovery and help you explore the music you love.
YourClassical is available for free, because we are listener-supported public media. Take a moment to make your gift today.