What is the hardest one?

[jakub_eisenbruk]

Hi there.

I was just wondering: What is Sorabji's most difficult piece and what grade is it? Answers are appreciated as usual.

Jakub Eisenbruk, Mexico City.

[phil13]

Hahahahaha

There is no such thing as a grade level for these pieces. They are above that. 

Phil

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

If you are to indulge in trying to play a few of these pieces, their grades are going to be the last thing on your mind.

In all seriousness, you could pick a grade for them. You could say 11, or a 100, or 200; makes no difference.

Hope this helps.

[jre58591]

i sense that a post by mr. hinton is coming....

his most difficult pieces, so i hear, are his sonata V "opus archimagicum", sequentia cyclica super "dies irae" ex missa pro defunctis, and his symphonic variations. apparently opus clavicembalisticum is too easy to be considered in the top 3. their grades would be somewhere around 100, i would guess. but why worry about his hardest pieces, unless its out of curiosity? id try to find out what his most doable pieces are. in my mind, the pastiches and maybe the nocturne-ish pieces are most doable. ive never tried playingany sorabji, which explains why im still alive.

[ahinton]

i sense that a post by mr. hinton is coming....

his most difficult pieces, so i hear, are his sonata V "opus archimagicum", sequentia cyclica super "dies irae" ex missa pro defunctis, and his symphonic variations. apparently opus clavicembalisticum is too easy to be considered in the top 3. their grades would be somewhere around 100, i would guess. but why worry about his hardest pieces, unless its out of curiosity? id try to find out what his most doable pieces are. in my mind, the pastiches and maybe the nocturne-ish pieces are most doable. ive never tried playingany sorabji, which explains why im still alive.

You sense correctly (sigh). Rather than merely answer "here we go again - yet another thread about 'the hardest piece'", I will point out what outght to be plainly obvious - that what is especially difficult to one pianist may not necessarily be so to another, so it's an impossible question to answer definitively and unequivocally, whether the music is Sorabji's or Beethoven's. If you really want any kind of reliable answer at all, you'd be best to ask a pianist who has some of Sorabji's works in his repertoire. The most obvious choice here would be Jonathan Powell who, if his present rate of progress on these things continues for another two or three years or so, will have enough Sorabji under his fingers to occupy an entire day. I do not wish to speak for him, but I can tell you, having worked with him, that he has never once complained in my hearing about the "difficulty" of any of Sorabji's works - even the longer and most challenging ones; instead, he merely speaks of "taking abit longer" to master things and, quite simply, practising calmly until each work is learnt. His recordings speak from themselves. He's just not really interested in how "difficult" they are or are thought to be; he's interested in preparing them and communicating the results.

I hope that this helps.

Best,

Alistair

[pianowolfi]

 ive never tried playingany sorabji, which explains why im still alive.

lol

[opus10no2]

Hamelin's homage explores Sorabjian style in a short space of time.

The most offputting thing about Sorabji to most people is the length of the works.

[ahinton]

lol

If that's the ONLY reason for your continued lifelike state, I'd consult a medical practitioner pretty soon, if i were you...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

The most offputting thing about Sorabji to most people is the length of the works.

I think that, in all honesty, you'd have to mean SOME of his works, given that many of them are no longer - or not especially longer - than those of some other composers; even then, what evidence do you have that "most people" (whatever that inevitably vague phrase may mean, if anything at all) are put off Sorabji by the length of certain of his works?

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

I think that, in all honesty, you'd have to mean SOME of his works, given that many of them are no longer - or not especially longer - than those of some other composers; even then, what evidence do you have that "most people" (whatever that inevitably vague phrase may mean, if anything at all) are put off Sorabji by the length of certain of his works?

Best,

Alistair

Come, on. It is quite obvious that "opus10no2" is correct. I do personally find Sorabji a very interesting a composer and I love how diverse his style is(some pieces being very baroque-like and others being very excotic). But while being a Sorabji-fan I don't have the motivation to listen to his extremely long pieces like opus clavicembalisticum and Symphony no4(for piano). And I consider myself a very patient person. I consider the sadko pastiche a master-piece, and I love the concerto for solo piano wich lasts about the same time as a Alkan's namesake. But I  am put off by his much longer works - for no other reason than their lenght.(this may of course change).

I do howerver have NO decire at all to make his pieces shorter, just for the obvious reason that they will not sound the same if maide shorter

Consider this; a normal pop-song lasts about 3 minutes. A typical romantic short piano piece lasts about the same time. Than we have the typical sonata wich lasts about something between 15-30 minutes. Pluss we have the very long sonats of the likes of the Hammerklavier and Schubert's late sonats, they last abuut 40-50 minutes. Than we have Sorabji's opus clavicembalisticum wch lasts about 4 hours! Not to mention his twice as long dies irae variations.

The meaning of a long piece changed after I heard about Sorabji.

[ahinton]

Come, on. It is quite obvious that "opus10no2" is correct.

Not really. For one thing, if (as is indeed the case) only a relatively small proportion of Sorabji'is works are too long to be accommodated comfortably into one half of a conventional length recital, such a suggestion can only possibly be "correct" - if at all - in respect of some or all of those, rather than applicable to the composer's oeuvre in its entirety. Secondly, while "opus10no2", you and others may well be "put off" at any given time by the length of those of his pieces whose durations are extreme by usual standards, that does not of itself signify that "most people" are put off for this reason.

Best,

Alistair

[pianogeek_cz]

what is difficult to one pianist may not necessarily be so to another

I think we might want to make an acronym. Something like lol or rofl or Botbr*. WIDTOPMNNBSTA.
Or we can just refer to the ODL, the Obligatory Difficulty Line... Whatever.



__________________________________
*Bernhard ought to be right 

[ahinton]

I think we might want to make an acronym. Something like lol or rofl or Botbr*. WIDTOPMNNBSTA.
Or we can just refer to the ODL, the Obligatory Difficulty Line... Whatever.

I'm by no means sure who "we" might be in this case but, leaving that aside for a moment, do you really think that this would help? - help to answer the question, that is?...

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

Not really. For one thing, if (as is indeed the case) only a relatively small proportion of Sorabji'is works are too long to be accommodated comfortably into one half of a conventional length recital, such a suggestion can only possibly be "correct" - if at all - in respect of some or all of those, rather than applicable to the composer's oeuvre in its entirety. Secondly, while "opus10no2", you and others may well be "put off" at any given time by the length of those of his pieces whose durations are extreme by usual standards, that does not of itself signify that "most people" are put off for this reason.

Best,

Alistair

Most people don't even listen to to classical music(they are putt off by it), indeed most people are putt of by Sorabji's work for not only their musical content but very importantly for their lenght.

And I never said that most of Sorabji's pieces where long.

He was a genious, if he wanted to composer long work, why shouldn't he.

[ahinton]

Most people don't even listen to to classical music(they are putt off by it), indeed most people are putt of by Sorabji's work for not only their musical content but very importantly for their lenght.

It is unoubtedly true that "most people" don't listen to classical music. The much more specific idea that "most people" are put off by the length of Sorabji's pieces is far harder, if not actually impossible, to prove with any certainty whatsoever. Some will, for sure - but what proportion of those listeners who might like to give Sorabji a chance that they may represent is inevitably uncertain.

And I never said that most of Sorabji's pieces where long.

I know that you didn't! "Opus10no2" referred to this, not you.

He was a genious, if he wanted to composer long work, why shouldn't he.

Indeed so; he himself said that his only concern about the length of any of his works was that he got it right in terms of what each work needed - and that this applied just as much to his few-seconds-long Aphoristic Fragments as to his piano symphonies.

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

Come, on Alistair, do you really mean that most people(more than 50%) would have nothing against listening to a 4 hour long piece?

If you ask 1000 people to listen to a piece and they all answer yes. What is the probability that more than 500 of they would listen to the piece if you told them the piece wasn't something we are used to (1-60 min) but 4 hours?

[ahinton]

Come, on Alistair, do you really mean that most people(more than 50%) would have nothing against listening to a 4 hour long piece?

If you ask 1000 people to listen to a piece and they all answer yes. What is the probability that more than 500 of they would listen to the piece if you told them the piece wasn't something we are used to (1-60 min) but 4 hours?

As has already been pointed out, "most people" don't listen to "classical music" at all - or at most very rarely. In view of this, the only sensible use of "most people" when writing about the kinds of music that might put off "most people" who DO listen to classical music is when referring to "most people who regularly listen to classical music". Of that fraternity, I do not doubt that quite a high proportion may well be "put off" listening to Sorabji (long, short or in between) but then there is a high proportion that won't choose to listen much - or even at all - to quite a lot of music from the past century or so (not just Sorabji and not just very long pieces by anyone).  In view of this, it is - as I said - impossible to determine how many of those people who listen frequently to classical music might be "put off" Sorabji by the length of his largest compositions alone, as distinct from his musical language in more general terms.

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

It is obvious that even most serious listeners of contemporary music would be putt off with it.