No, 1-4, 2-5 is the optimal way to attack this part - try it on the piano. It is much harder to play B-D#, C#-E with 1-3, 2-4. Btw, this was initially posted in 2003 and its now 2004- still haven't worked this study out yet! Crazy... perhaps I can blame it on my Kawai's action being to stiff? (seriously)
you HAVE to listen to Cziffra's recording of that etude....it will blow your mind
It's actually kind of disappointing (and I worship Cziffra). The three best performances of this etude I've heard are Lhevinne's, Friedmann's and Ashkenazy's (the first set he recorded when he was 19).
How would they stack up against Cortot/Browning?
I just looked at my book of Chopin Etudes. It is some strange version--hold on and I'll look--it's the E. Robert Schmitz. The fingerings are quite odd in this book. In the first 3 measures, it is suggested to use 1-4 and 2-5 for this trill-like passage. I would think that 1-3 and 2-4 would be better. I don't know what other editions say. (Bernhard--are you familiar with E. Robert Schmitz's editions?)
When trilling in thirds I almost always use 1-3 and 2-4 or 2-4 and 3-5....
I just told you they're the three best, right? (Browning commented that once he heard Ashkenazy's Thirds Etude at the Queen Elizabeth....he knew it was all over).koji
How did this topic go from August 2, 2003, to August 2, 2004?
but I think if you're going to go through hell to be able to play that etude, you might as well go through the deepest depths and play it with 1-3&2-4
Well, I mean how far behind are they. Because Browning's verision is .. impressive. And it seems hard to believe that Browning would have been humbled by Ashkenazy!Cool huh? It's the natural, yearly interest in thirds.But that's simply inefficient. Why would you try to make a Chopin etude harder (pass it on to Godowsky) - it is best to have as little extraneous problems as possible.
You're a sucker for punishment aren't you? I guess I'm just a coward. At my age (40++) I don't have too much time to lose doing all the gung-ho stuff. I just want to acquire as much repertoire as possible.TTFN (Ta Ta For Now),dennis lee
Have you learned op. 10 n 2 first ?I think it is beneficial to do that one before the thirds study.
Heh. Funny, in every other aspect of life I'm for total simplicity-minimalist decor, simple meals, simple schedule, but when it comes to piano I do tend to make things....overly complex. Oh the joys of OCD.
OCD = Obsessive Compulsive Disorder(goes off to wash hands after touching this filthy keyboard, but checks to make sure the windows are still locked and is careful not to step on any cracks in the floorboards. And then does that all over again)
I personally find 10/2 more difficult to play.koji (STSD)
I play this piece very often. It's an excellent finger exercise for the right hand and played nicely (no brute force virtuosity) is delicate, mysterious and beautiful in its effect.Thirds and other double notes are not things I find difficult, I think because I drilled them on my practice clavier for years when I was young. I actually do everything wrong in this piece according to modern ideas. I play the lot using almost pure finger strokes. As to fingering, I really think that beyond a certain common sense, each player must work out his own optimal positions.Musically, I find it possible to play this piece in all sorts of valid and interesting ways. New things occur to me every time I play it. The ebb and flow of the phrasing, in particular, makes it come alive - but not in the same way each time. I don't like the way several famous pianists play it in a torrent of uniform ninety-miles-an-hour virtuosity. Then again, perhaps my interpretation is as wrong as my technical approach ! I know I enjoy it though - it's beautiful physically and musically - everything a study should be.
Topic: THIRDS of DEATH 