Chopin scherzo number 2

[psaiko]

I have played piano for 10 years. I am finish fantaisie impromptu now. I had some trouble learning this (especially the cross rythm), but after two months I now have it almost at consert level.

My question is how far above my level are the chopin scherzo no.2 or ballad no.1? Could I jump right to one of these, or should I have some more Chopin experience first? I have not played any of his etudes, any advise of (manageable) etudes to prepare me for this?

Thanks

[Kassaa]

What are the other pieces you play?

[psaiko]

What are the other pieces you play?

The most challenging other pieces are not that known. Most likely non of you here have played them:

Wedding day at Troldhaugen (Edvard Grieg)
"Kjempeviseslåtten"/Giant of revolt (Harald Sæverud, another norwegian composer from the same town as Grieg))
Notturno (Edvard Grieg)

The first two are about the same difficult level as the FI, but in different ways. The only Chopin I have played besides FI is waltz 69/1 a long time ago.

[henrah]

I don't think the Ballade will be that much trouble to you, if you are good at fast scales and arpeggios. Give it a try, you'll never really know unless you try it. But firstly, look over the score and determine which sections seem the hardest to you, and try those out. Then, when you think you would be able to play the rest from accomplishing the hard parts, try it as a whole.
Henrah

[kriskicksass]

The scherzo is easier than the ballade, but easy isn't a term you should associate with any of the ballades or scherzi. I will say this: you don't need chopin etudes under your belt to play the scherzo. 25/1 would help with the catalina, and 10/1 would help (a little) with the development, but they're not essential. Also, the ballade isn't a piece you can just 'learn.' It is astounding and prophetic (for its time) music, and although the technical difficulties aren't as horrific as some later Chopin, the ballade requires years of constant attention to grow into something meaningful. Not to say that the Scherzo doesn't require a lot of great musical work, but it's not at quite the same level as the ballade.

[henrah]

What is it about the Scherzo that denies it the same amount of musical work and growth as the Ballade?

[kriskicksass]

What is it about the Scherzo that denies it the same amount of musical work and growth as the Ballade?

Nothing other than a personal preference and maybe something to do with form. The scherzo is music of the highest calibur--there's fire, passion, and some beautiful melodies...and there's also repeats. There isn't a ton of material to work on in the b-flat minor scherzo, and even though it needs the utmost care to make it speak, there's still a somewhat limited range of emotions that needs to be conveyed.

The ballade, on the other hand, is much more natural, rhapsodic music. The emotions that come forth in that piece are like those of an entire life, and there is no way to convey those emotions other than to bring that piece with you through your life; the music is alive and it needs to feel your ups and downs and everything in between. Furthermore, no emotion (and no material!) is repeated in exactly the same way. To make each note, each phrase, and each nuance speak is truly a work of incredible artistry. If this piece isn't given years of constant attention and fine-tuning, it can be terribly flat.

Then again, I happen to feel that the Chopin ballades are in a class of music very near that of late Beethoven: learn it young, perform it old. Such music is a powerful mixture of virtuosity and soul. Take care of the virtuosity in your youth, when you're best equipped to do so, but bring the music with you through your life, for only then can you make it meaningful.

EDIT: I think I may have contradicted myself. What I should have said at the outset is that I consider a scherzo a prerequisette to a ballade. I'd encourage students to eventually learn both, but put the scherzo under your belt first. Even if you disagree with me as to which is more musically demanding, everyone will agree that the scherzo's textures are more forgiving to a student right off the FI than the Ballade's.

[psaiko]

Nothing other than a personal preference and maybe something to do with form. The scherzo is music of the highest calibur--there's fire, passion, and some beautiful melodies...and there's also repeats. There isn't a ton of material to work on in the b-flat minor scherzo, and even though it needs the utmost care to make it speak, there's still a somewhat limited range of emotions that needs to be conveyed.

The ballade, on the other hand, is much more natural, rhapsodic music. The emotions that come forth in that piece are like those of an entire life, and there is no way to convey those emotions other than to bring that piece with you through your life; the music is alive and it needs to feel your ups and downs and everything in between. Furthermore, no emotion (and no material!) is repeated in exactly the same way. To make each note, each phrase, and each nuance speak is truly a work of incredible artistry. If this piece isn't given years of constant attention and fine-tuning, it can be terribly flat.

Then again, I happen to feel that the Chopin ballades are in a class of music very near that of late Beethoven: learn it young, perform it old. Such music is a powerful mixture of virtuosity and soul. Take care of the virtuosity in your youth, when you're best equipped to do so, but bring the music with you through your life, for only then can you make it meaningful.

EDIT: I think I may have contradicted myself. What I should have said at the outset is that I consider a scherzo a prerequisette to a ballade. I'd encourage students to eventually learn both, but put the scherzo under your belt first. Even if you disagree with me as to which is more musically demanding, everyone will agree that the scherzo's textures are more forgiving to a student right off the FI than the Ballade's.

I agree with you. My fear of playing the 1st ballad is rather the musical than the technical aspect. I must say its perhaps the most beautiful piece of music I have ever heard, but I dont think I fully "understand" it yet. When I play it in my head, it tends to come out lot more "over-dramatic" or sentimental (in lack of betterwords) than it really is. That cannot be a good sign.

I think the 2nd scherzo suits me much better right now. But there are some technical issues that gets me a little worried. Either I want to play this perfectly or I dont play it. Do you think that a natural step from the FI? Also, do you think this is the easiest of the scherzi?

[avetma]

I agree with you. My fear of playing the 1st ballad is rather the musical than the technical aspect. I must say its perhaps the most beautiful piece of music I have ever heard, but I dont think I fully "understand" it yet. When I play it in my head, it tends to come out lot more "over-dramatic" or sentimental (in lack of betterwords) than it really is. That cannot be a good sign.

I think the 2nd scherzo suits me much better right now. But there are some technical issues that gets me a little worried. Either I want to play this perfectly or I dont play it. Do you think that a natural step from the FI? Also, do you think this is the easiest of the scherzi?

The easiest scherzo is first one.

[kriskicksass]

I disagree. The 2nd Scherzo is the "easy" one, but I'll say it again: easy isn't a word to be associated with the Scherzi or the Ballades.

[avetma]

I disagree. The 2nd Scherzo is the "easy" one, but I'll say it again: easy isn't a word to be associated with the Scherzi or the Ballades.

Technically, there are both on high level. But musically, there is much more job to do in second scherzo. First one is 'attractive' already by itself, but in 2nd you must have power of imagination to play it on right way.