Most difficult piece from each composer

[alpacinator1]

Yes. I know dfficulty is relative. What's hard to someone might not be to someone else, and vice versa. But just out of curiousity, what do you guys think are the hardest pieces from all the composers? (Not ALL of them, obviously, there were hundreds! But the more famous ones like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, etc.)


So...

I think the Goldberg Variations is the hardest Bach Piece. Not sure about Beethoven. Possibly Hammerklavier?

[leonidas]

More notes(including density) = harder to learn.

Faster tempo = harder to play.

[viking]

Slower tempo = more difficult to play convincingly...

[alpacinator1]

I know that. I was referring to specific compositions...

[leonidas]

Slower tempo = more difficult to play convincingly...

I'd agree, slow interpretations rarely convince me.

[dnephi]

I'd wager that Beethoven's hardest piece is the Op. 106 Sonata.
I'd wager that Chopin's is Op. 25.  
I'd wager that Rachmaninoff's is the third concerto.
I'd wager that Brahms' hardest is the second concerto.
I'd wager that Mozart's is the last D Major Sonata.
I'd wager that Liszt doesn't have one.

[clhiospzitn]

For Liszt, I'd say that either Reminiscences de Don Juan or Feux Follets are his most technically challenging pieces, but he wrote so many difficult compositions that it's hard to pick an absolute winner in this category.  Playing any song musically, whether it's his or any other composer's work, is another matter altogether.

[dnephi]

Well, in Liszt, we might argue the Berlioz Symphony transcription, the Beethoven transcriptions, the Lucrezia Borgia Fantasy, or the 1838 Etude No. 5.

However, the difficulties are so varied that there really shouldn't be one
hardest" piece.

[soliloquy]

Technically/musically:

Bach Goldberg Variations/Goldberg Variations
Mozart Sonata K.576/Sonata K. 533
Schubert Sonata D. 850/Sonata D. 960
Beethoven Diabelli Variations/Sonata Op. 109
Schumann Toccata Op. 7/Sonata No. 2
Chopin Etudes Op. 25/Piano Concerto No. 1
Alkan Trois Grandes Etudes Op. 76/Sonate Op. 33
Liszt Douze Grandes Etudes/Harmonies Poetiques et Religiouses
Rachmaninov Piano Sonata No. 1/Preludes Op. 32
Scriabin Sonata No. 8/Sonata No. 6
Debussy Etudes/Images II
Ravel Gaspard de la Nuit/Gaspard de la Nuit

[alpacinator1]

Awesome post, soliloquy!

[mcgillcomposer]

More notes(including density) = harder to learn.

Faster tempo = harder to play.

Slower tempo = more difficult to play convincingly...

Basing the level of difficulty on the tempo and quantity of notes = priceless ...


'pricelessly' stupid...

for everything else, there's MasterCard...

[leonidas]

Pieces are difficult for 2 primary reasons -

difficult for the brain to compute the information (complexity and quanitity of notes)

and the difficulty of the fingers executing them, thus making tempo an issue.

It boils down to some really simple principles.

[retrouvailles]

You forget the musical aspect of pieces, which is extremely important. Maybe not to you, but to most pianists out there.

[mephisto]

Technically/musically:

Rachmaninov Piano Sonata No. 1/Preludes Op. 32

Why do you think the 1st sonata is more difficult than Mendelssohn-Rachmaninov -  Scherzo from A Midsummer Night's dream?

And why are the Diabelli variations more difficult than Op. 106?

[leonidas]

You forget the musical aspect of pieces, which is extremely important. Maybe not to you, but to most pianists out there.

What the hell is the musical aspect?

Musical 'difficulty' is a myth perpetuated by Mozart specialists.

[mike_lang]

Musical 'difficulty' is a myth perpetuated by Mozart specialists.

And Debussy specialists...

[thalbergmad]

Thalberg - Transcription of Bellini's Sonnambula

Thal

[bob3.1415926]

Musical 'difficulty' is a myth perpetuated by Mozart specialists.

Gosh, it turns out I'm a Mozart specialist. And I haven't even learned any since Rondo alla Turca.....

[mcgillcomposer]

What the hell is the musical aspect?

Musical 'difficulty' is a myth perpetuated by Mozart specialists.

Yes, because playing the piano consists of two things: finger dexterity and the ability to compute vast amounts of little dots and transform them into nerve impulses.

Clearly it has nothing to do with phrasing, articulation, sound production (other than just striking the key at random velocities), voicing of chords, choosing which contrapuntal lines to bring out, etc. This is all just a myth.

[counterpoint]

What the hell is the musical aspect?

Musical 'difficulty' is a myth perpetuated by Mozart specialists.

I would not say that playing musically is "difficult" in the same sense as playing as many notes per second as possible.

It does only sound much more pleasing.

And sometimes playing very fast can be pleasing too - if it's done musically 

[leonidas]

Yes, because playing the piano consists of two things: finger dexterity and the ability to compute vast amounts of little dots and transform them into nerve impulses.

Clearly it has nothing to do with phrasing, articulation, sound production (other than just striking the key at random velocities), voicing of chords, choosing which contrapuntal lines to bring out, etc. This is all just a myth.

This is all contained within the basic translation of dots to nerve impulses, it's still basically the same thing, more complex and longer music is harder to phrase, articulate, and voice.

It's just 'more stuff'.


All of this is very very difficult to calculate into a true objective answer of a 'most diffuclt piece'.

So in order to evaluate a pianists skill, listen to how they play, not what they play.

[mcgillcomposer]

This is all contained within the basic translation of dots to nerve impulses, it's still basically the same thing, more complex and longer music is harder to phrase, articulate, and voice.

It's just 'more stuff'.


All of this is very very difficult to calculate into a true objective answer of a 'most diffuclt piece'.

So in order to evaluate a pianists skill, listen to how they play, not what they play.

I still don't understand the 'more notes = more difficult' assertion. One could argue that the more notes being played, the more difficult it is for the listener to perceive. As such, a piece with fewer notes is more difficult to play 'well' because it is more transparent to the listener. Of course, this is only if we're considering the difficulty of communicating a work to someone else, not if we're just concerned with playing the work.

[leonidas]

I have never found that assertation anything but laughable.

A good listener can hear mistakes and discern what they think is a weak interpretation in the most complex music.

I will agree though, that playing popular music 'well' has an additional challenge if one wants to make it sound fresh.

[lau]

why are peeps saying that chopin .25 is harder than .10?

[viking]

It is obvious that in general, the more notes a piece has, the more difficult it is to memorize, and that the quicker those notes are played, the more difficult to up to tempo.  However, when playing a slow movement of a Mozart Sonata, you are working with completely different difficulties that can be equally as challenging.  Through my experiences, I find that I am able to play some very demanding concerti with reasonable ease and stability.  However, I often find myself using an equal or greater amount of concentration while playing some classical music.  I find that at a slow tempo it is very difficult to get the most precise phrasing, due to the disintegration of the sound that I am unable to control.  Surely this is obvious to all...

[mcgillcomposer]

I have never found that assertation anything but laughable.

A good listener can hear mistakes and discern what they think is a weak interpretation in the most complex music.

I will agree though, that playing popular music 'well' has an additional challenge if one wants to make it sound fresh.

I'm sorry, but no one hears a wrong note in Stockhausen...

I also don't see why the assertation is laughable - it's pretty basic neuropsychology unless there is some very distinct pattern in the denser music that somehow makes the increased number of notes as easy to perceive as the sparser textured work.

[bob3.1415926]

There are obvious exceptions to the more notes = difficult theory, even avoiding the musicality argument.

Playing 6s against 7s at a slow speed, is much much harder than blitzing up and down in scalic passages.

[teresa_b]

Oh, spare us the "this or that is difficult" stuff.  The only reason I can think of to rank things in order of difficulty is for teachers to assign students at various levels certain pieces. 

Once you get into playing at an advanced level, it's not easy to pull off convincingly no matter what it is.  (There are exceptions like 4'33"  ). 

Teresa

[mcgillcomposer]

Oh, spare us the "this or that is difficult" stuff.  The only reason I can think of to rank things in order of difficulty is for teachers to assign students at various levels certain pieces. 

Once you get into playing at an advanced level, it's not easy to pull off convincingly no matter what it is.  (There are exceptions like 4'33"  ). 

Teresa

I agree.

[leonidas]

There will always be people (like me) that like to have an objective criteria to judge and 'rank' the great pianists with.

It's different to having favourite pianists based on subjective musicality.

[gerry]

Oh, spare us the "this or that is difficult" stuff.  The only reason I can think of to rank things in order of difficulty is for teachers to assign students at various levels certain pieces. 

Once you get into playing at an advanced level, it's not easy to pull off convincingly no matter what it is.  (There are exceptions like 4'33"  ). 

Teresa

I'm still waiting for the definitive recording of 4'33"...

[bob3.1415926]

There will always be people (like me) that like to have an objective criteria to judge and 'rank' the great pianists with.

It's different to having favourite pianists based on subjective musicality.

But surely you must agree that to answer this question objectively, the respondent must have learned the entire catalogue of the composer in question. Otherwise their answer involves guesswork and assumption, neither of which are remotely objective. I doubt (m)any pianists on this board are in a position to rank any composer objectively (although I'm sure we can find a "Hi, I'm 8 and I've just finished learning S1 to S999..." type post if we try hard enough).

Given that difficulty is rather subjective anyway (different people, different strengths) I think that the only objective conclusion you're likely to come to is that you're chasing rainbows.

As for 4'33", I am the bomb at that piece, I'm so good I can play it in my sleep (providing I stop snoring for long enough.....) 

[counterpoint]

There will always be people (like me) that like to have an objective criteria to judge and 'rank' the great pianists with.

It's different to having favourite pianists based on subjective musicality.

Now let's look on how objective your "objective criteria" are.

Let's say, there are two pianists, one of them plays medium fast while 99.5 % of the notes are correct + the rhythm, the dynamics and the articulation are almost correct

The other pianist plays much faster, while only 95 % percent of the notes are correct, the rhythm, the dynamics and articulation are completely wrong.

As to your system of objectivity - which of the two pianists is the better pianist?

You see the problem?

[leonidas]

I do see the problem, but I never said it was easily.

It's not quite like the 100m race, more like gymnastics, depends on the judges 

[slobone]

And Debussy specialists...

And Chopin specialists...  And Schubert specialists... and Beethoven specialists...

I'm sorry, but if you're going to perform music by a great composer (as opposed to Liszt, Alkan, etc.) you'd better have something to say and know how to say it. Moving your fingers across the key at a rapid tempo just ain't enough.

[dnephi]

And Chopin specialists... And Schubert specialists... and Beethoven specialists...

I'm sorry, but if you're going to perform music by a great composer (as opposed to Liszt, Alkan, etc.) you'd better have something to say and know how to say it. Moving your fingers across the key at a rapid tempo just ain't enough.

I expect that someday you'll feel differently about Liszt.

[leonidas]

Alkan also, infantile.

[soliloquy]

All_thumbs, I eagerly await your Douze Etudes dans tous les Tons Mineurs No. 4.  I will give you the benefit of the doubt and ignore any missed notes; I would simply be interested in your interpretation.  Because after all it must be entirely straight-forward?

[johngoh]

Schubert - Wanderer Fantasy in C Major?

I think the 3rd and 4th movement of the piece is quite difficult due to its speed. . Also due to the large chords and sometimes the running notes are not too convenient. .

[maxy]

why are peeps saying that chopin .25 is harder than .10?

I don't know.  I say op 10 is harder than 25.   

[ctrastevere]

I'm sorry, but if you're going to perform music by a great composer (as opposed to Liszt, Alkan, etc.) you'd better have something to say and know how to say it. Moving your fingers across the key at a rapid tempo just ain't enough.

Liszt gets attacked often (which, though I don't agree with, I can understand to an extent) but Alkan? How much of his music have you heard? You should listen to either the symphony or concerto for solo piano (or both). There's much more to Alkan than "moving your fingers across the keys at a rapid tempo" as you say, and I'm sure most of the members here familiar with his music can attest to that.