Alkan=Overrated Difficulty

[jericho]

Hi everyone AND happy birthday Alkan.

As anyone with sufficient knowledge of piano literature knows, Alkan wrote very demanding piano pieces. Indeed, they can be hellish but I think their difficulty is a bit overrated. Their technical demands can be equalled and surpassed by some pieces in the standard repertoire.

Is Allegreto alla Barbaresca more difficult than Scarbo? Is Scherzo Focoso more demanding than Islamey? How about any Alkan piece compared to Brahms' Paganini Variations?

Yes, Alkan pieces are terribly hard. But I don't think the great pianists avoid it because of their immense difficulty. There are a lot of virtuosi who are clearly capable of playing it but chose not to...Richter, Horowitz, Argerich, Cziffra, Hofmann, Lhevinne, Barere, Libetta, Kissin..
IMO, anyone who can manage Islamey, Gaspard de la Nuit, the Hammerklavier or even the Don Juan Fantasy and Feux Follets can also play Alkan if they choose to.

[mephisto]

I play Alkan, and I am no where close to playing Scarbo or anything else on your list.

The real technical difficulity lies in playing this music like Hamelin, wich sadly is impossible.

[tompilk]

I play Alkan, and I am no where close to playing Scarbo or anything else on your list.

The real technical difficulity lies in playing this music like Hamelin, wich sadly is impossible.

true... i can play most of Op. 39 No 2 but not scarbo...
tom

[arensky]

I play Alkan, and I am no where close to playing Scarbo or anything else on your list.

The real technical difficulity lies in playing this music like Hamelin, wich sadly is impossible.

Why? He does it... 

[bflatminor24]

You have a point, but you're also ignoring Alkan's most difficult works.

The Symphony for solo piano movements 1 and 4, along with the entire Concerto for solo piano are immensely difficult.

Not to mention pieces like Contrappunctus, the Grande Sonata, and Op. 17 Le Preux.

His Op. 76 etudes are incredibly difficult, as are his Op. 16 etudes. As with his Hexameron variations.
He also wrote very fast tempi which exacerbate the difficulty of his works.

~Max~

[jre58591]

actually, fyi, according a to a few sources, cziffra did play alkan, but none was recorded. man, he probably would have owned the op 39 etudes.

[jakev2.0]

IMO, anyone who can manage Islamey, Gaspard de la Nuit, the Hammerklavier or even the Don Juan Fantasy and Feux Follets can also play Alkan if they choose to.

I agree.

[jericho]

You have a point, but you're also ignoring Alkan's most difficult works.

The Symphony for solo piano movements 1 and 4, along with the entire Concerto for solo piano are immensely difficult.

Not to mention pieces like Contrappunctus, the Grande Sonata, and Op. 17 Le Preux.

His Op. 76 etudes are incredibly difficult, as are his Op. 16 etudes. As with his Hexameron variations.
He also wrote very fast tempi which exacerbate the difficulty of his works.

~Max~

I am aware of the difficulty of Grande Sonate or the Symphony and Concerto for solo piano. (Please take note that Allegreto Alla Barbaresca is a movement of the Concerto for solo piano).

Most people cannot play or have difficulty playing Alkan pieces because of their very fast tempi. But has anyone actually played Hammerklavier's Allegro movement or the Fugue Finale at the impossible tempi which Beethoven asked for? How about Prokofiev's Suggestion Diabolique? Even some Chopin etudes are not played at the composer's indicated tempi because very few pianists have the technique that can manage such speeds.

The bottomline of my argument, is that Alkan pieces are very demanding but there are pieces in the standard repertoire which are just as demanding or even more. However, some people argues that many pianists do not play Alkan because they cannot, which is obviously a false argument. They can but chose not to.

It can be taken as fact, that any pianist who can play Islamey, Gaspard de la Nuit, Petrushka, Feux Follets, Mazeppa, Don Juan Fantasy, the Paganini Variations, Baba Yaga(Pictures from an Exhibition),  Hammerklavier, Chopin's Ballade no.4, Suggestion Diabolique etc...can play an Alkan.

[mephisto]

Please note that Alkan wrote very beautifull easy pieces like the barcarolle wich isn't particulary difficult at all.

[tompilk]

Please note that Alkan wrote very beautifull easy pieces like the barcarolle wich isn't particulary difficult at all.

yes! and premier billetdoux and assez vitement from first chants recueils!
Tom

[ronde_des_sylphes]

I think that one of the significant areas of Alkan's difficulty is that (in pieces like the first and last movements of the Symphonie, for example) the music is not just technically difficult but also physically difficult. This, I find, is often not the case even in some of Liszt's more virtuosic works. However, I do agree that if someone is capable of playing the Don Juan Fantasy (for what it's worth, I think DJ is harder than Islamey) then they can probably handle Alkan.

[soliloquy]

lol


Balakirev Islamei vs. Alkan Trois Grandes Etudes Op. 76.


Hmm.  Hmm.


...


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.  Any nine year old Korean can play Islamei.  There is only a handful of people in the world that can play Alkan.  As per your original statement that ANY of the technical tour de forces in Alkan's work can be surpassed in the standard repertoire, I would request a citation of a piece in the common repertoire that has a more difficult parallel octave passage than Alkan's Etude de Concert "Le Preux" Op. 17, a piece in the common repertoire requiring more endurance than that the Solo Concerto Op. 39 or his Chemin de Fer, a piece in the common repertoire requiring more speed than his Toccatina or Comme le Vent, a piece in the common repertoire requiring more agility than the Trois Grandes Etudes Op. 76 and a piece in the common repertoire more difficult to execute musically than the Grande Sonate Op. 33 or the first movement of the Concerto pour Piano Suel.

Yes, Allegretto Barbaresca is more difficult than Scarbo from Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit.  No, Scherzo Focoso is not as difficult as Islamei, but that is certainly one of Alkan's easiest "encore" type pieces.  The Brahms Paganini Variations are not even near the top as far as difficulty goes EVEN IN THE STANDARD REPERTOIRE.  I do not know why you choose this piece, when Gaspard de la Nuit and Trois Mouvements de Petrouchka are unequivocally more difficult in nearly every respect, and I would say there are several others in the common repertoire that would be very justifiably noted as more difficult, the Barber Sonata Op. 26, the Prokofiev Sonata No. 6, the Prokofiev Piano Concerti Nos. 2 and 5, the Bartok Concerto No. 2 and several others being good candidates, along with the Beethoven Concerto No. 4, Hammerklavier and some of the modern pieces that have become repertoire staples such as the Corigliano Etude Fantasy, Dutilleux Sonate or Ligeti Etudes.

While Alkan of course did not write "the most difficult music ever", his works are certainly more difficult than anything in the standard repertoire, and are probably the most difficult works of the Romantic Era, along with some of Liszt and Busoni's less-played pieces like the Berlioz Symphony Fantastique or Beethoven Symphony No. 9 transcriptions, or the Fantasia Contrapunctista or the Meyerbeer-Liszt-Busoni respectively.

[opus10no2]

John11inch?

right.

Much of the discussion so far is by and large irrelevant with regards to difficulty.


DIFFICULTY(by and large) = FIGURATIONxSPEED

Is a sequence of 3rds more difficult than a sequence of scalar passages?

NOT NECESSARILY

Everything, when it comes down to it, depends upon the speed with which the pianistic figurations are taken, and each different type of figuration has it's own speed limit.
And of course, some pianists are more adept at some figurations than others.

This is the bigger picture.

[presto agitato]

The difficulty of Alkan´s pieces lie in their speed.

There are harder pieces by Scriabin, Brahms or Beethoven even Albeniz

[mephisto]

John11inch?

right.

Much of the discussion so far is by and large irrelevant with regards to difficulty.


DIFFICULTY(by and large) = FIGURATIONxSPEED

Is a sequence of 3rds more difficult than a sequence of scalar passages?

NOT NECESSARILY

Everything, when it comes down to it, depends upon the speed with which the pianistic figurations are taken, and each different type of figuration has it's own speed limit.
And of course, some pianists are more adept at some figurations than others.

This is the bigger picture.

Very good point.

[soliloquy]

"The difficulty of Alkan´s pieces lie in their speed."

Not always the case.  Many times it is the sheer endurance and stamina required.



"There are harder pieces by Scriabin, Brahms or Beethoven even Albeniz"

Um... no?  Most difficult pieces by these composers:

Scriabin:  Sonata No. 8
Brahms: Paganini Variations Op. 35
Beethoven: Sonata No. 29 Op. 106 "Hammerklavier" in Bb
Albeniz: Iberia

Sort of funny... Scriabin Sonata No. 8 is marked "Lent".  That's pretty slow.  So if the only thing that factors into difficulty is the velocity, fraid he's out.  Brahms Variations on a Theme by Paganini Op. 35 is not all that hard; hence why you see so many people playing it in piano competitions.  If all of these barely-pro pianists can play it, wouldn't it be safe to assume it's not as difficult as works that Liszt himself felt were too difficult?  Beethoven Hammerklavier is definitely the most difficult out of the above-listed pieces, due to the tempo the fugue asks for.  Now, take the length of the fugue and compare it to the fastest recording made of the piece, then take the written length of Le Preux and tell me what the fastest recording of that piece is (disregarding the pianola recording obviously) and I'm sure you'll find the time difference vs. respective lengths would tell you that people have gotten much closer to Hammerklavier than Le Preux.  Obviously the voicing in the fugue is difficult, but you just want to talk about speed so there you go.  Albeniz' Triana is not that difficult; many pianists play it at or above tempo; what makes it difficult, along with several other movements of Iberia, is that it locks the hands.


Xenakis' Evryali doesn't use anything beyond 32nd notes (check repeated notes on pages 2/3 if you're going what), and about 99/100 of the notes are only sixteenths.  Must be easy.

[presto agitato]

I forgot to mention Max Reger...crazy stuff¡¡¡

[jre58591]

I forgot to mention Max Reger...crazy stuff¡¡¡

ive seen many reger scores and it doesnt compare to alkan, for the most part. its basically like brahms on crack. also, the difficulty in alkan doesnt lie in speed. it has already been thus proven in the previous posts.

[opus10no2]

ive seen many reger scores and it doesnt compare to alkan, for the most part. its basically like brahms on crack. also, the difficulty in alkan doesnt lie in speed. it has already been thus proven in the previous posts.

Reger's Bach variations are rather insane.

"The difficulty of Alkan´s pieces lie in their speed."

Not always the case. Many times it is the sheer endurance and stamina required.

this is included in the 'speed' factor

since there would be no concern for endurance if they were played slowly.

Sort of funny... Scriabin Sonata No. 8 is marked "Lent". That's pretty slow. So if the only thing that factors into difficulty is the velocity, fraid he's out.

This is included in 'figuration', if the difficulties are based upon cross rhythms and unusual note patterns, then this is a 'co-ordinational' difficulty'.

Also, basing a piece's 'difficulty' on it's length and/or number of notes makes little sense with regards to technique, this is the realm of the brain and memorization.

[ramseytheii]

Sort of funny... Scriabin Sonata No. 8 is marked "Lent".  That's pretty slow.  So if the only thing that factors into difficulty is the velocity, fraid he's out. 

Haha.  Scriabin Sonata 8 is marked Lent for the first two pages.  After that the slowest tempo is meno mosso, and that meno refers to Allegro agitato.  At the end, the tempo accelerates faster and faster to prestissimo, like an upward spiral or a curl of incense smoke on fast-forward.

Xenakis' Evryali doesn't use anything beyond 32nd notes (check repeated notes on pages 2/3 if you're going what), and about 99/100 of the notes are only sixteenths.  Must be easy.

Glad you bothered to look at page 3 of Evryali.

Warmly,
Walter Ramsey

[soliloquy]

this is included in the 'speed' factor since there would be no concern for endurance if they were played slowly.

This is included in 'figuration', if the difficulties are based upon cross rhythms and unusual note patterns, then this is a 'co-ordinational' difficulty'.

K.  If you play the solo concerto at half-speed, you are playing solid, heavy, chords, and in the third movement you will still be playing pretty fast, for almost TWO HOURS.  So, since that wouldn't be all that fast, it wouldn't require any endurance; this is your logic if I'm not mistaken?  Now, are you saying that there are no works of Alkan that require the coordination or finger dexterity that the Brahms Paganini Variations does?  Take a look at his Etude Op. 35 in G Flat Major and tell me what you think.  Sufficiently "tricky", yes?  Anyway, if it's really necessary I could ask a few pianists who perform Alkan?

[bflatminor24]

K.  If you play the solo concerto at half-speed, you are playing solid, heavy, chords, and in the third movement you will still be playing pretty fast, for almost TWO HOURS.  So, since that wouldn't be all that fast, it wouldn't require any endurance; this is your logic if I'm not mistaken?  Now, are you saying that there are no works of Alkan that require the coordination or finger dexterity that the Brahms Paganini Variations does?  Take a look at his Etude Op. 35 in G Flat Major and tell me what you think.  Sufficiently "tricky", yes?  Anyway, if it's really necessary I could ask a few pianists who perform Alkan?

Agreed. The Chant D'amour - Chant De Mort etude is a great example, likewise with Contrapunctus. It's silly to think that speed is the only factor in endurance. What about length? Concentration? Imagine a slow piece that lasts four hours. Or better yet, a piece with fast and slow sections that take extreme concentration, that also lasts four hours...like Opus clavicembalisticum for example. Any of these factors affects endurance.

Have you tried playing the Grande Sonata? I think my point is clear.

~Max~

[opus10no2]

To the above 2 posts - NONE of that is of concern to technical difficulty.

This is like saying its harder to play Comme le Vent in 2 hours, in tempo, than it is to play it in 4 minutes.

Get a grip, of something other than the obvious.

[bflatminor24]

What are you talking about? Technical difficulty encompasses dexterity, length, and concentration. Nobody here is talking about the musical difficulty of interpretation - that is another topic.

Harder to play comme le vent in 2 hours than 4 minutes? No, I'm afraid that analogy has nothing to do with anything in this thread. And apparently what I said WASN'T obvious, because several members of this forum seemed to disagree.

~Max~

[soliloquy]

What are you talking about? Technical difficulty encompasses dexterity, length, and concentration. Nobody here is talking about the musical difficulty of interpretation - that is another topic.

Harder to play comme le vent in 2 hours than 4 minutes? No, I'm afraid that analogy has nothing to do with anything in this thread. And apparently what I said WASN'T obvious, because several members of this forum seemed to disagree.

~Max~

I'm almost tempted to start disagreeing with you, despite how infallably correct you are, simply because arguing with these people is like arguing with a four year old, and presents no challenge, due to the fact that no matter how much staunch evidence you can produce they will still say they are right, not necessarily because they don't understand the things you say, but because they think they are right and are NOT going to change their minds.  I'm waiting for one of them to throw a temper tantrum, honestly.

[opus10no2]

Nobody here is talking about the musical difficulty of interpretation - that is

This blatant BS idea was concocted within the bowels of the hornblower extraodinaire - Mr. Brendel, to draw attention away from his technical inadequecies.

What are you talking about? Technical difficulty encompasses dexterity, length, and concentration.

Concentration?  what the hell is this? Irrelevant BS again.

Now LENGTH is an interesting area of contention, if taken as the length of the work in pages, not how long it takes to play, as this would involve the ugliness of slowness.

Is the Don Juan fantasy more difficult than Chopin's 10/2?

It's longer, in terms of notes, more different techniques to master, but again, it has few concentrated sections like the 10/2, it demands adequecy in a vast array of figurations.

10/2 demands peak athleticism in 1 incredibly taxing figuration for the duration of 4 pages.

In the end, I feel it is better to judge sectionally, take 4 pages from Don Juan and it just wouldn't compare.

[chromatickler]

no matter how much staunch evidence you can produce they will still say they are right

ahahahahahahah da zkep cummah!!!

[soliloquy]

Is the Don Juan fantasy more difficult than Chopin's 10/2?

It's longer, in terms of notes, more different techniques to master, but again, it has few concentrated sections like the 10/2, it demands adequecy in a vast array of figurations.

10/2 demands peak athleticism in 1 incredibly taxing figuration for the duration of 4 pages.

In the end, I feel it is better to judge sectionally, take 4 pages from Don Juan and it just wouldn't compare.

You take four random pages from Brahms Paganini Variations and then four random pages from Alkan's Le Preux Op. 17 or Etude Op. 76 No. 2 or Etude Op. 39 No. 10 or Etude Op. 39 No. 7 and I can ASSURE you that they also wouldn't compare.  Are you going to disagree?  If you do, I will then post four pages from each and show you how ridiculously wrong you are.  If you don't, then you've just admitted everything you said previously is BS.  Take your pick.

ahahahahahahah da zkep cummah!!!

ahahahahahhahaha dat zkep!

[opus10no2]

You take four random pages from Brahms Paganini Variations and then four random pages from Alkan's Le Preux Op. 17 or Etude Op. 76 No. 2 or Etude Op. 39 No. 10 or Etude Op. 39 No. 7 and I can ASSURE you that they also wouldn't compare.  Are you going to disagree?  If you do, I will then post four pages from each and show you how ridiculously wrong you are.  If you don't, then you've just admitted everything you said previously is BS.  Take your pick.

I think you have missed the point.

I would not contend that the Brahms is harder.

I would, however, contend and assert with thrust and vigour, that playing the Brahms accurately at a stunning tempo is much harder than playing the whole Alkan concerto passably.

[bflatminor24]

Opus 10no.2 -

You dismiss concentration as BS? I'm trying to explain that playing scales up and down the piano at fast speeds doesn't make a piece difficult because it's a mental hibernation for the pianist. There is no intellectual vigor thus the piece takes not one iota of concentration. Is that difficult to understand? or is it just BS?

I don't know why you feel compelled to insult Alfred Brendel - I've never heard him make any excuses for his technical mistakes. Why don't you stay focused?

Nobody is comparing the Don Juan to Chopin's 10/2...why do you feel a comparison is necessary? They are difficult in different ways.

Is steering a boat harder than driving a speed bike?

You aren't making any point here... seems like you want someone to argue with. So far you have shown ZERO reasons why Brahms Paganini variations are more difficult than "anything Alkan ever wrote." And I'm not going to take your word for it, because you haven't played "everything Alkan ever wrote." That's like taking a course in algebra and claiming it's harder than anything in multi-variable calculus.

But hey, if you say so, it MUST be true. Right?

~Max~

[soliloquy]

I think you have missed the point.

I would not contend that the Brahms is harder.

I would, however, contend and assert with thrust and vigour, that playing the Brahms accurately at a stunning tempo is much harder than playing the whole Alkan concerto passably.

No I think you have missed the point of this entire thread.  What everyone else is debating is whether or not staple repertoire pieces like Brahms Variations on a Theme by Paganini Op. 35 or Beethoven Sonata No. 29 Op. 106 "Hammerklavier" are more TECHNICALLY difficult than any work of Alkan.  Also, you need to pick one side and stay on it; not change every time it seems like it might suit your argument, whatever exactly your "argument" is.  First musicality isn't a factor, then speed isn't a factor, then coordination isn't a factor.  And at some point, according to you, speed is the ONLY factor, coordination is the ONLY factor, making a "perfect" performance is the ONLY factor.  Choose one or shut up.  The fact is, we're talking, AND PAY ATTENTION TO THIS, the technical difficulty of properly executing the notes of a piece in the notated rhythms and tempi.  I can say "ohhh... Mozart Sonata K. 545 is harder than Finnissy Solo Concerto No. 4 because it would require perfection!"  Well *** that- you go and perfect your Finnissy Solo Concerto No. 4 more easily than you perfect your Mozart and then you can tell me that Finnissy is easier.  No sliding scales.


So, you go PERFECT Alkan Solo Concerto Op. 39 with more ease than Brahms Paganini Variations.  Good luck pal.

[opus10no2]

You aren't making any point here... seems like you want someone to argue with. So far you have shown ZERO reasons why Brahms Paganini variations are more difficult than "anything Alkan ever wrote."

~Max~

when did I say this?

The point I make is that there are NO ABSOLUTE answers to 'which is a more difficult piece' unless conditions regarding the speed/tempo are pertained to.

Opus 10no.2 -

You dismiss concentration as BS? I'm trying to explain that playing scales up and down the piano at fast speeds doesn't make a piece difficult because it's a mental hibernation for the pianist. There is no intellectual vigor thus the piece takes not one iota of concentration. Is that difficult to understand? or is it just BS?

This is along the same lines as the difficulty of memorization.

I stated previously that I don't consider that a true area of PIANISTIC difficulty.