I found an interesting journal article about Stephen Hough and Marc-Andre Hamelin. It takes a look at the historic composers who we know to be some of the first famous Pianist-Composers (Liszt and Thalberg, and to a lesser extent, Bach because his composition instrument wasn't soley the piano) A question from it: "will a pianist be a better player if she or he composes music?" According to Hough, the answer is a definite yes! written by Yi-Syuan Lin: http://gradworks.umi.com/1472305.pdf
I'm not completely sure....I know Grieg was a good player and of course there is Rachmaninov. Also Granados!! But I remember reading somewhere that one of the 'biggies' composed great music, but couldn't play it very well himself. I can't remember who that is now....
I totally agree with this. I think an interest in composition makes you more inclined to look at the music you're playing from two different angles - the pianistic and the compositional. I (if I may flatter myself by terming myself to some extent a composer) keep finding myself asking "why did he express it like this, not like this or this?" I really do suspect that some pianists look at a score as something to be replicated and never ask themselves "why?" MAH's a peculiar phenomenon: I just don't warm to his playing and find it a bit dry and lacking in character. However I do quite like him as a minor composer; it seems like the character and humour lacking in his piano-playing emerges in his compositions.
That's a good point. I was studying a book about Bach's 48 Preludes and Fugues and the book talked about how Bach as a younger man was looking at scores and rewriting the parts that he didn't like, or making various improvements. A shame that some pianists would just see playing as a simple job like that of a taxi driver. As long as you don't crash, you're fine :mrgreen: Yes, much more known for his technique than for his interpretiations. I also find his compositions very well written and yes, at times humorous!