Talk:Josef Hofmann

Name

I think that his name is misspelled: it should be Jószef Kazimierz Hofmann.

Now is ok (Józef Kazimierz Hofmann). Gdarin | talk 20:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed name change

I've just changed most occurrences of "Josef" to "Józef", for consistency with the article title.

But I'm wondering about the spelling we should be using. In the US, other English-speaking countries, and the West generally, he was overwhelmingly known as "Josef". There's the "Josef Hofmann Piano Competition", not the "Józef Hofmann Piano Competition". I really think we should title the article "Josef Hofmann", but make reference to the original Polish orthography Józef Kazimierz Hofmann, not the other way around. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Since the name used in most English speaking contries is Josef, and this is the English Wikipedia, I concur. I'd also add that pages on two well known pianists are titled Vladimir Horowitz - not Gorovitz - and Arthur Rubinstein not Artur, so there is precedence.THD3 (talk) 19:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. (Not to undermine you, but Arthur Rubinstein was always Arthur, not Artur; from the talk page: In his memoir, Rubinstein addressed this issue. He wrote that his name was Arthur and not Artur, and that he was greatly irritated by people who insisted on calling him Artur.) Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know he preferred to be called Arthur in English speaking countries. But his birth name was Artur. That's my point: we don't always go by birth name, we use the Engish equivalent.THD3 (talk) 21:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I've followed up this question @ Talk:Arthur Rubinstein. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Now listed @ Wikipedia:Requested moves. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

German ancestry

Noted his German paternal ancestry. Antidote 07:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Good Start

This article on Hofmann is a good start, but there are a few problems. The slap at Shura Cherkassky is uncalled for (Cherkassky was one of the most beloved and inquisitive pianists of his generation).

Hofmann himself was figure of some controversy. Despite the accolades showered upon him by Rachmaninoff and others, he was known as a bitter, often nasty man.

This article reeks of POV. There isn't even any comment on how alcholism impaired his abilities during the last twenty years of his life.

Several points. It needs to be noted, because this information has been deleted from the article, that Hofmann (like Rachmaninov) was considered one of the first "modern" pianists because (compared to contemporaries such as de Pachmann and others) he remained relatively faithful to the printed score and did not embellish it in the older Romantic tradition. In fact, he was often accused of being a cold, mechanical player by the old guard. Despite such criticism, Hofmann was almost universally considered the greatest pianist of his day. Mhare40 03:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

We can cite Oscar Levant both for his ability and his alcoholism: The Unimportance of Being Oscar, Pocket Books 1969 (reprint of G.P. Putnam 1968), p. 124. ISBN 0-671-77104-3.

One of the terrible tragedies of music was the disintegration of Josef Hofmann as an artist. In his latter days he became an alcoholic. …[H]is last public concert…was an ordeal for all of us…

He then goes on to say "He was an elegant performer at the keyboard, a keyboard made especially for him because his hands were so small." His praise continues for two paragraphs, singling out his "impeccabl[e]" performance of a particularly difficult Chopin nocturne, his "ultrasensitive ear and … incredible memory, and quoting Felix Salmond as also praising him. If someone wants the passage in full but doesn't have access to the book, drop a note on my user talk page and I can quote it. - Jmabel | Talk 07:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I have to say I don't know much about Wiki, so I don't know if i'm doing the right thing. Mr. Hofmann was my great-grandfather but I don't know much about him. Could you suggest some literature that might help me learn more?

p.s The specially made keyboard made for him was REAL BELIEVE ME!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.32.32.166 (talk) 04:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

--There is a New York Times article from the 1887 archives describing the young Hofmann on his first trip to America. If he was your great-grandfather, you might find this interesting. I don't doubt that Steinway eventually made a special keyboard for him. However, the notion that his rather small hands REQUIRED this accommodation is false. I doubt that he carried this special piano around with him when he concertized. And he was playing on a conventional keyboard as a youngster, even before his hands reached full size and even before his feet could reach the pedal! Those who are interested in playing piano need not be discouraged merely because their hands are small. Remember that Hofmann, universally recognized as the greatest pianist of his day, and arguably the most technically proficient pianist ever, had small hands.98.200.153.134 (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Harold Schonberg noted in "The Great Pianists" that Hofmann could play on an ordinary sized keyboard, but that the smaller keyboard was "more comfortable."THD3 (talk) 11:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it about the same Hofman?

Hofmann's invention of pneumatic shock absorbers for cars and planes earned him a fortune in the early twentieth century. His other inventions included medical devices, a furnace that burned crude oil, automobile windscreen wipers, a device to record dynamics in reproducing piano rolls that he perfected just as the roll companies went bust, and a house that revolved with the sun. He spent his last years working on improvements in piano recording.

Is it indeed about the same Hofmann??? Can someone confirm this?83.6.223.101 01:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is the same Hofmann. Like some other highly gifted musical prodigies, Hofmann was a superb mathematician and had a good head for science. He has something like 64 patents to his credit. Mhare40 03:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hofmann and Tchaikovsky

I've just watched a DVD containing masterclasses given by Daniel Barenboim to some young pianists, included in the EMI DVD set of Barenboim's 32 Beethoven sonatas performed live in Berlin. In the portion dedicated to Saleem Ashkar, the Nazareth-born pianist fondly mentions a recording by Hofmann playing Tchaikovsky's First Piano Concerto (and Ashkar says he still has that acetate record at home). I've never heard of any such recording by Hofmann. Does anyone know anything about it ? MUSIKVEREIN (talk) 16:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Clarification

The acetate cannot be of Hofmann since, reportedly, the last he performed this piece was in year 1912 while the acetate technology came in use only in the 1930's. Apparently, that acetate is not genuine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alextierno98 (talk • contribs) 06:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Peacock

User:Alextierno98 has been doing a great deal of editing on this page recently. Many of the edits have improved the page, but there has also been a bit of peacocking going on. I have thus added the tag. Phrases like lit by incandescent pianism are not apropos to an encyclopedia article.THD3 (talk) 15:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Great pianist?

How come the assertion that "he is widely considered one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century" has been omitted when this has almost become like common knowledge to any serious classical musician?

It seems that almost every other major pianist: from Friedman to Rachmaninov, Godowsky to Arrau, Novaes to Gould, Richter to Rubinstein, Cortot to Michelangeli, Fischer to Schnabel, and Horowitz to Gilels, has some sort of "honorary" status among wikipedia articles, while equally fine pianists like Sofronitsky (whom many of the above idolized), Lhevinne, Moiseiwitsch, Rosenthal, Busoni, and Hofmann (most bizarrely, as he is often seen as one of the greatest of the bunch) get left off the boat.

This makes me question a lot of the superlatives being used on Wikipedia. Who decides if a relatively lesser-known pianist like Novaes (even though she is fantastic) is allowed to be considered "great"? Her fans? It would seem this way.

I also see that this article spends a lot of highlighting Hofmann's great technique, making him seem like some sort of mundanely perfect piano machine with controversial musicianship. But just because he may be controversial to some (who?) does not mean that he should be dismissed as the Alexander Dreyschock of his day, as he definitely is not. Almost every great pianist has received criticism, even the greatest - Gould, Busoni, von Bulow, Horowitz, Artur Rubinstein (before he became THE pianist), Richter, Yudina, Michelangeli, Cortot (not as a musician, but as a pianist) and the list goes on.

I do not feel the need to cite sources to support my entreaty here, as there are hundreds, even thousands that put him down as the "greatest pianist of the century". I believe that much of the prejudice against him comes from the quality of his later recordings, which probably do not stand up to much of his earlier work (which is still excellent)- and here Hofmann is in the same situation as pianists like d'Albert and Godowsky. I don't understand why this article tries to paint his pianism as some sort of "half white, half black" picture, as other pianists do not get this same treatment here on Wikipedia.