Which is more important?

[kitloong]

Which comes first?
1. Conception of the piece, Understanding of Music, Style, Inner Feeling.

or

2. Technique.

[pskim]

Without technique, you won't be able to know the Conception of the piece, Understanding of Music, Style, Inner Feeling.

As Hans von Bulow told his students, there are three things that pianist must have:
1.  technique
2.  technique
3.  TECHNIQUE!!

[eddie92099]

No.1 is infinitely more important,
Ed

[Hmoll]

Without technique, you won't be able to know the Conception of the piece, Understanding of Music, Style, Inner Feeling.

As Hans von Bulow told his students, there are three things that pianist must have:
1.  technique
2.  technique

3.  TECHNIQUE!!

Well, I rarely disagree with pskim, and I'm certainly not going to disagree with Herr von Bulow.
You can have a wonderful conception of a piece, understanding of it's style, and structure, and loads of inner feeling, but without adequate technique, you won't be able to communicate any of that.
So, technique should be a primary consideration with the following cautions:

1) Always remember that technique is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end - that end being a musical interpretation.
2) It is unwise to totally seperate the technical from the musical when learning a piece. In other words, I hear a lot of people who learn a piece fairly well technically, and then go back and work on the musical interpretive aspects as an after thought.

[pskim]

Hmoll, you are always great with words.  I really envy that.  And yes, I should have expanded my expression for why technique is important but you have already done a better job than I could have.  That is exactly what I meant by importance of technique.  I think we can be great friends.