Hardest Classical Piece?

[iroveashe]

All the parts you quoted are not statements, but possibilities regarding the way you express yourself. When I say something like "If you were smart" does not imply that you either are or are not, the same way that when I say: "if  I go to Paris I want to see the Eiffel Tower" does not deny or confirm that I will some day go to France. Now, if you choose to quote me and leave out some parts, it will sound like a statement, for example "I go to Paris".

[weissenberg2]

If you're smart, you know an IQ test is not a very good tool to measure intelligence and you wouldn't need a higher number to prove it to anyone.

please elaborate

[iroveashe]

please elaborate

My view of intelligence is that it's more dynamic and less structured than it is necessary for being measured. You might have a high IQ yet do nothing with it, if you lack for example social and/or emotional intelligence there's a chance you won't be very successful during your life. I also consider part of intelligence as the ability to think outside the box, something that might not apply on a test with right or wrong answers. Another thing is those IQ tests that have questions regarding sayings or common knowledge, for example calculate what day will it be if X days pass from the 1st of June which was Sunday; calculating it might require intelligence but if you haven't memorized how many days each month has I wouldn't think you're stupid, because not only memory does not equal intelligence, but also the fact that because you don't know how many days a month has does not mean you don't have the capability to memorize it.

On top of that I consider Nature and the animals and plants conforming it to be very intelligent.

[john11inc]

All the parts you quoted are not statements, but possibilities regarding the way you express yourself. When I say something like "If you were smart" does not imply that you either are or are not, the same way that when I say: "if  I go to Paris I want to see the Eiffel Tower" does not deny or confirm that I will some day go to France. Now, if you choose to quote me and leave out some parts, it will sound like a statement, for example "I go to Paris".

I'm done dealing with you; it's like arguing with an arrogant child.  I may be arrogant as well, but it's better to be arrogant because you're correct than be arrogant because you are incorrect.


All I have to say is that Larry David would disown you.

[iroveashe]

I'm done dealing with you; it's like arguing with an arrogant child.  I may be arrogant as well, but it's better to be arrogant because you're correct than be arrogant because you are incorrect.

I don't find myself superior to anyone.

All I have to say is that Larry David would disown you.

I doubt he has any interest in the hardest classical piece, he seems to like pretty simple and predictable music.

[pies]

Lol.  My guess is that John will be banned within a week.

[go12_3]

Lol.  My guess is that John will be banned within a week.

That's for sure   

[samjohnson]

it's better to be arrogant because you're correct than be arrogant because you are incorrect.

All I have to say is that Larry David would disown you.

I think that a reasonable measure of intelligence is one's ability to understand their own language.  

Firstly, as I am sure you realized shortly after you hit post, no one has ever been arrogant because they are wrong (and especially not in this situation!); rather, people are arrogant though they are wrong.  
Secondly, one cannot (as I'm sure you, a man of such great intelligence, understand) be disowned by someone by whom one is not owned or to whom one is not related!

Also, just to be thorough, I will point out that the nonsense statement "all I have to say" (which is here clearly not true) is never a marker of any kind of intelligence.

I know this is all ridiculous and pointless, but i suppose such exceptional people as yourself can be scrutinized, because such scrutiny will only confirm your superiority....right?

-sj

[gep]

An IQ test is a perfect way to measure intelligence. 

In the same sense as counting the amount of tools is a perfect way to measure a carpenter's skill. It's not the capacities you have, but the ones you (care to) display that count. Measured that way, I would say that "11" is a fair guess in your case...

You are beginning to sound like Hinty.

Assuming that you mean Hinton by "Hinty", I would say I fail to see such improvement...

no one has ever been arrogant because they are wrong

Oh yes there are such: the ones that never ever would admit that they are wrong (though they know they are), but start yelling as soon as they as exposed as being wrong. Listen to (just a few examples):
1) Politicians
2) Fundamentalist creationists
3) Captains of industry/bankers
4) John11IQ
But there are many more...

gep

[john11inc]

I think that a reasonable measure of intelligence is one's ability to understand their own language.

"his or her"

Firstly, as I am sure you realized shortly

Split infinitive.

after you hit post,

"post"

no one has every been arrogant

ever*

because they are wrong

"he or she"

(and especially not in this situation!)

Syntax: "!" is improper.

; rather, people are arrogant though they are wrong.

They most certainly are not.  They are arrogant, (<--- COMMA) although they are wrong.

Also, yes they are.  Definition of arrogance:

"Having excessive pride in oneself" - stemmed from the delusive notion that he is marvelously jousting with me.  If you had read the posts preceding it, you would have realized that was the context.

Secondly, one cannot (as I'm sure you, a man of such great intelligence,

"such, great"  Thanks.  I wish I could reciprocate.

Also, just to be thorough, I will point out that the nonsense statement "all I have to say"

I wish you had been thorough proofreading your post.  It's illegible.  I don't understand what these quotation marks are doing in this sentence, because you're missing a comma.

(which is here clearly not true) is never a marker of any kind of intelligence.

If you want to word it that way, you need two, more commas.

I know this is all ridiculous and pointless, but i suppose

What is that word?  Are you attempting to teach me math, as well?

such exceptional people

More splicing.

as such exceptional people yourself can be scrutinized,

Improper target of reflexive structure.

superiority....right?

An ellipses contains three dots. . . all with spaces.

-sj

Abbreviations are to be capitalized.



Looks like scrutiny does confirm my superiority to you.

[john11inc]

In the same sense as counting the amount of tools is a perfect way to measure a carpenter's skill. It's not the capacities you have, but the ones you (care to) display that count. Measured that way, I would say that "11" is a fair guess in your case...

If I was so wrong and you were so right, you would have responded to any one of the  345938495438 points I've actually made instead of fixating on tiny, tangential and/or irrelevant discussions in these posts.

On this point, here is what I said yesterday:

You just say random crap that you think suits your argument at the time; I'm sure your next post will be an entirely new argument, likely contradicting the one you just proposed, as you will have no way to back up the one you just made.  You'll just keep saying new, stupid things over and over again, continuing to think you're so enlightened, even though every time I respond I will show you how wrong you are.

And:

Don't you think I can easily anticipate you?

The definition of "enlightened":

educated: characterized by full comprehension of the problem involved; "an educated guess"

It seems to me that, in this case, I am rather enlightened


Also, if you were as righteous or "socially intelligent" as you'd like to think, you would have taken my offer to stop the arguing.  Do you need me to copy/paste that for you?  Where I gave you an out?


Giving you an out shows more "social intelligence" than you failing to take it.  Looks like my IQ is higher than yours and I know how to use it; you just don't like the way I use it.  So, just what do you have left, now?

Again, I'll give you the opportunity I gave you before.  Leave, act civilly and ask me the question that, allegedly, all of your posting is about, or continue with your stupidity.  I'd like to know how the third choice is an example of your enlightenment or social intelligence, by the way.

[weissenberg2]

Being able to correct his grammar does not make you "superior", you do not know if he is a native English speaker and if so, is he obligated to respond to you in standard written English?

[john11inc]

Being able to correct his grammar does not make you "superior", you do not know if he is a native English speaker and if so, is he obligated to respond to you in standard written English?

All he was doing was correcting my grammar.  Did you like, not read his post?  Seriously, did you not even read his post?  Are you responding to things without even knowing what you're responding to?  WHO DOES THAT?!?  What is wrong with you?

I will not be held to a double-standard.

I've got one idiot correcting my grammar like it makes him god (despite his own being far, far worse), I've got another idiot yelling at me because I'm yelling at him (do you note the hypocrisy in that statement?) while I'm offering him a way out of the argument (twice), I've got people telling me this music is bad "because it is sh*t", that being the extent of their argument, I've got people yelling at me because I'm not going to explain why I like this music because they obviously don't care, and then I've got people like you who come in here for no reason other than to harass me.


And I'm the jerk

[weissenberg2]

All he was doing was correcting my grammar.  Did you like, not read his post?  Seriously, did you not even read his post?  Are you responding to things without even knowing what you're responding to?  WHO DOES THAT?!?  What is wrong with you?

I will not be held to a double-standard.

I actually did not read his post, sorry, I will avoid doing that. And I did not mean to harass you.

My apologies

[john11inc]

My apologies

It's fine, I don't care.  I want to make three points, however:

1-  These people just make me upset because they ruin this sort of music for other people who might be interested in it.  Their comments are disgusting; they say it it "trash" or "useless" before they even hear it.  Seriously, most of these people were attacking the piece based solely on the sheet music, which I doubt they were playing back in their minds, so to speak.  Really, these people are disgusting.  Disreputable.  They are hurting art.  They are against art, and against having an open mind to it, even though they are ignorant to what it actually is.  Do you think any of these people could actually explain what this music is about?  I mean, Alistair didn't like it and I didn't get all over him, because he actually understands the music.  But in regard to them, of course not; they don't know what it is, so they hit it with their sticks, just like the monkeys attacking the obelisk in Kubrick's 2001.  That's the mental image I get here.  The thing is, they think they're so smart because they've figured out how to wield a bone, when they're still just monkeys.

2-  The only reason people hate me so much is because I tend to throw my intelligence around.  The thing is, I don't do this *until* somebody calls me stupid.  The simple fact of the matter is that, in most cases on here, I am smarter, I am more knowledgeable, I do know how to form an argument, unlike them.  I think that's what really upsets them.  They can't make an argument against this music on an adequate level, so they attack me instead, by calling me "stupid" in one way or another.  So excuse me if I correct you after the fact.  Emphasis on "after the fact".  It's like me calling someone a retard, them explaining that they aren't, and then me yelling at them for daring to explain that.  What sort of logic is that?  Apparently, fairly common logic around here.

3-  People accuse me of starting this stuff, but if you actually go back, you'll see I didn't start it at all.  When people started to flame this music, I was very civil, trying to explain what its meaning was.  Over the course of time, however, and as more and more of these baboons showed up, I stopped being so nice.  I think it was around the tenth time my taste and intelligence was called into question by these barking curs.  So, again, excuse me if I don't just take it like a knotted bitсh.  <--- See that?  I used a naughty word.  By the logic I deal with on here, that means that I am evil, and because they're too wimpy to do it, they're not.  That's all it is.  I say "stupid", they say "not as smart as you think you are".  Where's the difference?  There isn't one, simply.  The problem doesn't start with what I say or how I say it; it starts with the inability to understand these sorts of semantic and psychological basics of the people I'm currently being harassed by.

[jbmorel78]

"his or her"


Split infinitive.

Allow me to humbly point out that in American English, it is perfectly permissible to substitute "they/their" for the more cumbersome "him or her/his or her."

Also, the words "you realized shortly" do not constitute a split infinitive, as there is no infinitive present.  My first sentence, containing the words "to humbly point out," provides an example of a split infinitive, though the phenomenon is no longer considered grammatically incorrect in American English (you come from Birmingham, Alabama, I believe?).

Best wishes,
Jean-Baptiste Morel

[samjohnson]

Yes.  Interestingly enough (and hardly to anyone's surprise, I'm sure) Mr. John is almost entirely wrong.  We have discovered yet another subject which he hardly understands, yet in which he possesses enormous pretensions.  You show your ignorance in yet another way, my friend.   

[alysosha]

Anyone who doesn't figure out new complexity is pure cock in less than a year surely can't be considered intelligent, now, can they?

[john11inc]

Allow me to humbly point out that in American English, it is perfectly permissible to substitute "they/their" for the more cumbersome "him or her/his or her."

https://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/agcomm/ontarget/0412/grammar_trap.htm
https://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/s.html
https://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic16235.html
https://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151539

Your humility is apparently deserved.  Unless, of course, it is they who should be humble.  If that's the case, however, I have three friends you should speak to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derrida
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary

I prefer my company to yours, I must say.

Also, the words "you realized shortly" do not constitute a split infinitive, as there is no infinitive present.  My first sentence, containing the words "to humbly point out," provides an example of a split infinitive, though the phenomenon is no longer considered grammatically incorrect in American English

Interesting; you just said something that is partially correct.  The phrase "you realized shortly" does not constitute a split infinitive.  That is correct.  However, let's take a look at the entire fragment:

as I am sure you realized shortly after you hit post

I simply didn't want to quote this whole thing and note that it is a compound split infinitive, because I didn't want to have to explain what that meant, assuming someone bothered to ask.  Surely someone such as yourself is aware of what that is, although if you need me to explain it to you, I'll be more than happy to oblige.  If you need me to explain why that is applicable to this syntax fragment, I can do that as well.  If you'd be so kind as to save us the time, I'd be more than happy to concede to you.

However, this fragment is still an example of improper subordination in an adverbial clause.  But I think that might be a bit, too much.

However, split infinitives, as abundant as they are in the works of Shakespeare and Joyce, are grammatically incorrect.  I use them all the time, though.  They read well and sound well.  Despite this, they are still incorrect.  Do you require me to post a bunch of links to verify that as well, or would you prefer to fail at finding ones that counter such?  I would normally never bother to attack a split infinitive; however, it is something that should be avoided when attempting to attack someone's grammar. [And yes, that is meant to be irony.]

(you come from Alabama, I believe?).

Yes.  As did Harper Lee and Truman Capote.  Again, I don't mind my company.

Yes.  Interestingly enough (and hardly to anyone's surprise, I'm sure) Mr. John is almost entirely wrong.  We have discovered yet another subject which he hardly understands, yet in which he possesses enormous pretensions.  You show your ignorance in yet another way, my friend.  

Entirely wrong, in that he challenged two of my claims (out of eighteen), and was incorrect on both counts?  Well, one and a half counts.  So, instead of 18 errors, he has left you with 17.5.  And we all know the cut-off for being an idiot is 18.  Looks like you really dodged a bullet, there.

I'd also like to know what the first subject is.  By the way, you should be careful with the word "yet".  Don't want to leave any more participles dangling

Anyone who doesn't figure out new complexity is pure cock in less than a year surely can't be considered intelligent, now, can they?

Why is it such?  I would love to see any argument.  I double-dog-dare you.

[jbmorel78]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary

I don't wish to start a link-war, but here is an alternative point of few, under the usage heading: https://m-w.com/dictionary/they

Yes.  As did Harper Lee and Truman Capote.  Again, I don't mind my company.

Please do not think that I had any intention to offend, or that there was any implication by my observation - I was merely noting that you come from the United States.  Perhaps it would have been more polite to have said that?

My apologies,

Best wishes,
Jean-Baptiste Morel

[john11inc]

I don't wish to start a link-war, but here is an alternative point of few, under the usage heading: https://m-w.com/dictionary/they

Please do not think that I had any intention to offend, or that there was any implication by my observation - I was merely noting that you come from the United States.  Perhaps it would have been more polite to have said that?

My apologies,

Best wishes,
Jean-Baptiste Morel

My apologies for assuming you meant offense.  However, his/her/him/her vs. they/their/them, just as with the split infinitives, is something that is perfectly acceptable in every form except technical, and when one is dealing with morphology and syntax, technical is the form one must assume.  There are also the semantic implications (as per the noting of Wittgenstein and Derrida) to consider.

Also, I am from Philadelphia.

I'd like to add that, while I mean no disrespect towards you (because you have not presented any towards me), I invite you to challenge:

However, this fragment is still an example of improper subordination in an adverbial clause.

Merely due to the fact that Mr. Johnson has suddenly assumed an aura of invincible infallibility in his grammar, due to you noting the poorly quoted example of infinitive abuse and the argument against "their" as a third gender singular (two out of eighteen errors).

[jbmorel78]

I'd like to add that, while I mean no disrespect towards you (because you have not presented any towards me), I invite you to challenge:

I don't challenge that, nor do I deny that it is a terribly awkward construction...

Merely due to the fact that Mr. Johnson has suddenly assumed an aura of invincible infallibility in his grammar, due to you noting the poorly quoted example of infinitive abuse and the argument against "their" as a third gender singular (two out of eighteen errors).

Perhaps he has, but what does it matter if a fool thinks himself a sage, if it makes him happy?

Best wishes,
Jean-Baptiste Morel

[john11inc]

Perhaps he has, but what does it matter if a fool thinks himself a sage, if it makes him happy?

The only thing keeping my life enjoyable, according to most here

[samjohnson]

My friend, a participle is a verbal adjective; if you knew this, you would have refrained from accusing me of leaving any dangling.

The definition of 'though' as a conjunction is even if
In that context, 'though' and 'although' are synonyms.

'Such' is an adjective.  In strings of only two adjectives, a comma is inappropriate. 

I don't consider myself in any way superior to anyone.  But I am confident of the fact the John is extremely pretentious, not particularly bright, and of much less value than he considers himself to be.  Also, I have no interest in responding to his grammatical arguments anymore.  Frankly, anyone with any sense can see that he is wrong, despite his complex and often misused terminology. 

Also, an infinitive in English is the part of the verb preceded by the word 'to'.  A split infinitive would be "to truly realize"; the phrase "you truly realize" is not a split infinitive because there is no infinitive present.  This idea was introduced into English by Latinists because, in Latin, the infinitive is one word, and cannot be split.  There are, however, personal pronouns corresponding to those in English which can be employed, though they are unnecessary.  Indeed, in Latin, the personal pronoun typically comes at the beginning of the sentence and the verb at the end, so splitting the two with an adverb was extremely common.  Those who decided to prohibit split infinitives in English knew this, and formed their rule accordingly.  That is a fact. 

-sj

[john11inc]

But I am confident of the fact the John is extremely pretentious, not particularly bright, and of much less value than he considers himself to be.

The psychological implications of you now refusing to refer to me in the first person are immense!

Which reason is it?  Is it because I intimidate you so much, or is it because you are not speaking to me any more?  If so, that means you are speaking to an audience!  I don't think I need to explain how that makes you an outstanding hypocrite.

But I would personally guess it's a little bit of both.


Either way, at this point I'm merely going to refer to the eighteen errors you made, seeing as how you wish to ignore all of your own failings, yet insist I discuss mine (or, in every case thus far, what you view to be my failings, due to your ignorance).  As I said, I will not be held to a double-standard by a hypocrite far more pretentious than me.  I could go on to note the inanity of the large paragraph you posted and how it is not relevant to the argument, or how everything else you wrote is incorrect (or in the case of the usage of "yet", how you are apparently looking at the word "yet", and not how using it ruined the poorly constructed sentences thrown around it, like sh*t slung by a monkey).  But I'll get to all of that when you make even the slightest effort to admit you are fallible, something even I do on occasion.  Because it is a waste of my time if you think you are God!  And, if you think I think I'm God, then you are wasting your own time!  Someone as smart as you say you are should have been able to realize this a long time ago.

[pianisten1989]

This thread always reminds me about Kafka's novel The Castle. Everyone's arguing about rather unimportant matters, and at some point there's a sudden turning-point. The discussion is no more about the accual thread, but about you telling the other that they've misunderstood you, and that they are, more or less, idiots.

It's rather entertaining

[thalbergmad]

A Battle of the Big Heads is usually amusing.

Thal

[richard black]

Just to bring this thread, briefly, back to the original topic - I had a philosophical brainwave and realised that there is no 'hardest' piece because pieces exist that are simply unplayable. There can be no harder than that, even if the unplayable passage is brief and surrounded by Grade 3 material. One example I can cite off the top of my head (full of unplayable stuff, actually) is the double fugue by Havergal Brian.

[pies]

I have just composed the hardest classical piece I can think of.  The piece consists of playing everything that has ever been composed for the piano without pause or interruption.  Does this settle the debate?  I think it should.

[mikey6]

One example I can cite off the top of my head (full of unplayable stuff, actually) is the double fugue by Havergal Brian.

in Eb?  I just had a glance through it - doesn't seem that horrible, voice leading problems and the usual stretches...is it more uncomfortable to play than it looks?

[richard black]

in Eb?  I just had a glance through it - doesn't seem that horrible, voice leading problems and the usual stretches...is it more uncomfortable to play than it looks?

Assuming you've got the same edition as me (complete piano works), look at page 53 - you need at least three hands for most of that page! It simply isn't physically possible to play all the chords with two. OK, you can spread them and jump around, but as printed it's full-on impossible.

[ahinton]

"his or her"

"one's", surely?

I wish you had been thorough proofreading your post.  It's illegible.  I don't understand what these quotation marks are doing in this sentence, because you're missing a comma.

Inappropriate use or full-blown misuse of punctuation hardly of itself constitues "illegibility"; compromised intelligibility, perhaps, but...

An ellipses contains three dots. . . all with spaces.

"Ellipses contain" or "An ellipsis contains", surely?...

Abbreviations are to be capitalized.

I'm not sure that the arguably Marxist-fundamentalist Mr Downie (he's mentioned in this thread somewhere, I seem to remember) would necessarily agree with that principle!

Looks like scrutiny does confirm my superiority to you.

At least I am mercifully and blissfully exempt from all risk that anyone might be sufficiently rash and tasteless as to seek to lay claim to my (alleged - if so) "superiority" to anyone else!...

By the way, it might be said that accidentally enunciating a C together with an adjacent D in English Country-Tunes could constitute a split in Finnissy, but never mind - worse things have probably happened at C...

Best,

Alistair

[simonjp90]

By the way, it might be said that accidentally enunciating a C together with an adjacent D in English Country-Tunes could constitute a split in Finnissy, but never mind - worse things have probably happened at C...

Best,

Alistair

oh dear...

[ahinton]

oh dear...

Indeed so; took you long enough, though, didn't it?!...

Best,

Alistair

[scottmcc]

I noticed that same terrible pun, but I was hoping that by ignoring it actively, it would somehow cease to be.  alas, I was mistaken.

[ahinton]

I noticed that same terrible pun, but I was hoping that by ignoring it actively, it would somehow cease to be.  alas, I was mistaken.

Don't blame me for its apparent absence of cessation; I only wrote it!

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Quote from: john11inch on December 31, 2009, 02:20:16 PM
Looks like scrutiny does confirm my superiority to you.

People obsessed with their sense of superiority usually suffer from a sense of inferiority. Itbseems here we have a case of marginally sub-lethal size...

[magio]

Barlow Cogluotobusletismesi
Barlow Ludus Ragalus
Barrett Tract
Bussotti Pour Clavier
Cage Etudes Australes
Diaz-Infante Solus
Dillon The Books of Elements
Ferneyhough Opus-Contra-Naturam
Finnissy all.fall.down.
Finnissy Folklore
Finnissy History of Photography in Sound
Finnissy Solo Concerto No. 4
Flynn Trinity
Furrer Phasma
Globokar Notes
Heyn "203"
Hoban When the Panting STARTS
Kampela Nosturnos
Martino Pianississimo
Otte Das Buch der Klange
Rzewski The Road
Scelsi Action Music
Skalkottas 32 Piano Pieces
Sorabji Opus Archimagicum
Sorabji Sequentia Cyclica Super "Dies Irae" ex Missa pro Defunctis
Sorabji Symphonic Variations
Stockhausen Klavierstuck VI
Stockhausen Klavierstuck X
Xenakis Eonta
Xenakis Erikhthon
Xenakis Evryali
Xenakis "Herma"- Musique Symbolique
Xenakis Synaphai
Yim :[ten]dril
Zimmermann Wustenwanderung
plus
Hamelin-circus gallop(incredible and insane!)
Alkan-Tran. Etudes (needs perfect technique)
Sorabji-Nocturne Djami(i don't feel comfortable when i play it!)
Villa Lobos-Rudepoema(Very few pianists in the whole world can play it)
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,