chopin etudes easiest to hardest

[smj9195]

can some one give me the order of chopin etudes easiest to hardes?
(both op.10 and op.25)

[stevebob]

Difficulty can refer to interpretive demands as well as technical challenges.  The degree of technical challenge can depend, among other things, on whether you aspire to the speed of a professional performance (or even the original metronome markings) or to your own conception of the verbal tempo indication (usually some variation of Allegro rather than Presto).

I think it's most useful to classify Chopin's etudes in categories.  Even if such categories overlap or blur, a general consensus is more likely to be achieved than by proposing a strictly linear ranking from easiest to hardest.

Slower Group:
10/3, 10/6, 25/7

Easier Group:
10/5, 10/9, 10/12, 25/1, 25/2, 25/9

Harder Group:
10/1, 10/2, 10/4, 10/7, 10/8, 25/3, 25/4, 25/8, 25/12

Hardest Group:
10/10, 10/11, 25/5, 25/6, 25/10, 25/11
 
This isn't meant to be anything more than my opinion; the case could definitely be made that some of the "Harder" etudes belong in the "Hardest" group and vice versa.

FWIW, I would put each of the Trois Nouvelles Etudes in the "Slower" group (though the one in D-flat major is faster and harder than the other two).

[gyzzzmo]

There's not much point in trying to say wich is easier or harder, since it all depends on the person. Each etude has its own difficulty, and how difficult that actually is depends on for example the size of hands, the way the student got taught etc.
I remember i learned etudes like 10/10 and 25/12 pretty easily, but had quite some problems perfectionizing 10/3 because my pedalling wasnt so good. So for me i have different etudes in the catagories stevebob posted above.

The only etude thats probably for most people on 'hardest', is 25/10 (winterwind) since it needs such a wide range of technique, although to my opinion its not really an etude for that reason.

Gyzzzmo

[3htohn]

Hi Smj9195

I've got no idea of the etudes your talking about but I just thought wow this thread has brought back a memory for me.

I went to a piano lesson once and another student who was just finishing off Chopin's Polonaise (the one that is usually played on the radio). And as I was waiting for my lesson I thought to myself, my G_D wow this is incredible playing, I could never do this... I still carn't. But as the student was playing, the teacher turned around to me with a disinterested look and rolled her eyes. And when he stopped playing she (the teacher) said, next week when you come back I want you to playing with a bit of feeling, THIS IS CHOPIN!, she roared.

Энтони.

[smj9195]

My favorite is the Winter wind-op.25 no.11

[orangesodaking]

It's different for each pianist.

For me, Op. 10 No. 1 and Op. 25 No. 6 are extremely difficult, and Op. 25 No. 10 and Op. 10 No. 4 is not that hard at all. For others, it could be quite the opposite.

While some etudes ARE a more difficult than some others, there's no way to literally rank them from 1 to 24. I think you can see for yourself which ones are harder and which ones are not quite as difficult.

[m]

.

[furtwaengler]

I've met one person for whom op. 10 no. 2 came naturally, and he expressed that for him it was one of the easier studies. Much more difficult for him is the other A minor study, op. 25 no. 4.

Op. 10 no. 2 does not come easily to me. Indeed it is very difficult. Some of this is relative, I guess.

[john11inc]

I'm so bored I'll actually post in this thread.

25-6
25-11
10-2
10-4
10-1
10-10
10-8
25-8
25-10
10-7
25-12
25-3
25-1
25-4
10-11
25-9
10-5
10-12
25-5
10-9
25-2
25-7
10-3
10-6

Hardest to easiest.  Randomly.  Man, I am so bored xD

[stevebob]

Hi Stevebob,

I am wondering if you play all of the Chopin etudes? The reason I am asking is while indeed, the difficulty is in the eyes of beholder, on the other hand, there are some obvious flaws in your classification. For example, you place the 10/2, 10/7, and 25/8 into the "Harder group", while 10/10, 10/11, and esp. 25/5  () into the "Hardest".

The former group should be rather in the "Hardest Group" (esp. if we are talking about op.10/2), and the last etude of your "Hardest goup" (op. 25/5) is actually should be rather in the "Slower" or "Easier Group". The 10/11 is just a matter of hand size, and the 10/10 is quite a comfortable piece, but both would not go into the "Hardest" by any stretch. The 25/12 is rather an "Easier" one and often is the first Chopin etude many students play. 

Throughout many years I've been discussing those etudes with quite a few pianists who not only recorded them all, but also played them live and everyone tends to agree.

As a side note, in different points of my life I played ALMOST all of them and while for me the hardests are still the Op. 25/3 and Op.25/4, to play any of them in a good tempo, with a good quality and with element of WOW is quite a task.

Best, M

Marik,

Earlier, I wrote:

This isn't meant to be anything more than my opinion; the case could definitely be made that some of the "Harder" etudes belong in the "Hardest" group and vice versa.

I thought my disclaimer would be clearly understood.

I'm sorry you find my classification flawed, but your own statements of opinion seem a bit rigid and dogmatic for my tastes.  In particular, I find it hard to believe your claim that "everyone tends to agree" about the respective degrees of challenge in these pieces; in my experience, that's not true at all.  Were it so (and were it so simple to speak as authoritatively as you do about what "should be"), there would hardly be such perennial interest in discussing the etudes.

For what it's worth, I don't agree with any of your own assessments.  You're entitled to your opinions, obviously, but it's always nice to qualify them as such instead of rather emphatically implying that they are incontrovertible and have a superior basis.  Your notion that an etude marked Vivace (i.e., 25/5) could plausibly belong in the Slower category is, in my own judgment, especially nonsensical.

It would probably have been more useful for you to offer your own answer to the original question instead of appearing to attack mine (even if that wasn't your intent).  I gave a modest opinion in good faith based on my knowledge and experience (as well as what I've gleaned from my own discussions with others), and it wasn't intended to be anything more than that.

[orangesodaking]

There has been some talk in this thread over the difficulty of Op. 10 No. 2, Op. 25 No. 4, and Op. 25 No. 11.

Why not combine them all together like Marc-André Hamelin did? 

[m]

.

[stevebob]

Good on you then, Marik.

It looks like you're more interested in one-upmanship than anything else, and I'm not interested.  The best I can do at the moment is honor your own sig line, so I'm done here.

[m]

.

[pianowolfi]

This really makes me sad and angry. I understand completely that you, Marik ,are done with this forum.
It's one of these examples where 20 something year old fullofthemselves think they know everything, but everything better than anybody.

And of course I understand that somebody like Marik, who has real knowledge and experience, from which we all could learn so much during the past years, plus who has given us so much with his own wonderful recordings, has now better things to do than argueing with idiots.

I must say, Marik, I admire your patience and it's actually astonishing that you didn't quit earlier, considering this sort of reception...


(And P.S I might actually tell pianistimo.......)

[m19834]

Yes, however frustrating or unfortunate it is, let us not forget nor overlook though that this is not the *only* reception Marik has received here.  There are some forum members whom have read him with great interest and respect, have asked questions, listened intently to his recordings, and whom have even gone so far as to travel to him in person for his expertise.

Part of what is unfortunate though is that, these days, it is so popular for every pianist and their dogs and parrots to believe that they have just as much validity as pianist, teacher and general musician as anybody else ... just because they have decided it's so.  To me, Marik represents a particular art that is rooted in substantial qualities, thinking, reasoning and culture.  But, even if you take two artists raised in similar ways, Marik is still unique in many ways.  He is a profound artist and pianist, but also has the ability to think through what specifics there are to playing so as to pass on a real skill to his students, and this is evident in observing his teaching and his students.

These days, part of the popular "artistic" way is to basically somehow stand up in the heat of fire, and so many individuals enter into some kind of battle believing they have "won" simply because they didn't back down, and that somehow this is the true essence of what it means to be an artist, pianist, musician ... whatever ... and that, this is basically what "the greats" of the past have done.  Unfortunately it seems there is such a gap in fundamental knowledge along those lines that this kind of belief can go on for years, or even decades.  To me, Marik is an example of a rare individual whom can actually help sincere pianists bridge the gap between what is mere human obstinance vs. cultured and developed artistic and pianistic expression.

[pianowolfi]

Very true words, Karli. However, I am sad, because to me it seems not only symptomatic for a part of this forum, but even to a whole part of the world, that those who have real knowledge, experience, have something to say, and are, as you rightly say, in all humility true artists, get often sort of crucified by others. As if some people could not stand the fact that somebody knows more than them.

As if the small horizon of an "educated" young person would serve as benchmark for all knowledge: "Nobody can know more than myself, it's not possible"....


Argh....

[m19834]

Very true words, Karli. However, I am sad, because to me it seems not only symptomatic for a part of this forum, but even to a whole part of the world, that those who have real knowledge, experience, have something to say, and are, as you rightly say, in all humility true artists, get often sort of crucified by others. As if some people could not stand the fact that somebody knows more than them.

As if the small horizon of an "educated" young person would serve as benchmark for all knowledge: "Nobody can know more than myself, it's not possible"....


Argh....

Yes, well it is seemingly a pretty confusing world, at the very least .  On the one hand, there is some push in the world and even by respected teachers and artists to "just believe in yourself" yet, at the same time, know when to bend to what is an outstanding knowledge and opinion outside of oneself.  And, it seems sometimes that almost everybody is afraid of something on some deep level ...

In any respect, I do adhere at the time to the fundamental belief that the right fit is the right fit.  That a true musicianship and musical interaction can be built on mutual respect and a common truth, and that there can be a mutual appreciation which helps to bind that which needs to be concrete.

I think Marik is owed at least two apologies.

[ahinton]

There has been some talk in this thread over the difficulty of Op. 10 No. 2, Op. 25 No. 4, and Op. 25 No. 11.

Why not combine them all together like Marc-André Hamelin did? 

And he's not the only guilty party here, or so I understand...

Best,

Alistair

[nanabush]

Can we just agree that they're all hellishly difficult? 

If you suck at thirds, Op 25 #6 will be tough; if you have zero musicality, the slow ones (and any other of them) will be tough.  If you suck at octaves, the octave study will be hard.

If you simply don't have the technique to play them, they will clearly seem hard at sight (which is what I think a lot of people have based their 'lists' on).

The lists are fun to compare (which is why I always end up poking around through these ranking threads), but there's ALWAYS an argument somewhere down the thread!  And I would like to add that the etudes that had me stumped after a page or less (I've sat and tried them all, and I've learned four of them now) were the Op 10 #2, 7, 11, and Op 25 #3 and 8.  So, I'd obviously say those would probably be the toughest for me.  I've seen so many pieces with thirds that they don't even scare me anymore... not saying I'm ready for Op 25 #6, but it's just not the most intimidating (nor is the winter wind) in my view.

[m19834]

Can we just agree that they're all hellishly difficult?

If you suck at thirds, Op 25 #6 will be tough; if you have zero musicality, the slow ones (and any other of them) will be tough.  If you suck at octaves, the octave study will be hard.

Well, what would be the point in starting a thread where a person is wondering what the difficulty of the etudes are, if the 'pat' answer should just be that it's all subjective and that they are all tricky in their own particular ways ?  Even if one could eventually interpret it that way, I think that if it were me whom started the thread and I were sincerely interested in answers, I would find it interesting as to whom thinks what is difficult and why, even beyond what you wrote just above.

If you simply don't have the technique to play them, they will clearly seem hard at sight (which is what I think a lot of people have based their 'lists' on).

This is a deeper problem than I can even begin to properly respond to, but will say thank goodness for somebody like Marik, whom has actual expertise in many ways on the subject and whom is willing to teach those whom are in earnest and in need of his expertise.  And, too bad for those whose egos are either too small or too big and prevent them from listening to him.

The lists are fun to compare (which is why I always end up poking around through these ranking threads), but there's ALWAYS an argument somewhere down the thread!  And I would like to add that the etudes that had me stumped after a page or less (I've sat and tried them all, and I've learned four of them now) were the Op 10 #2, 7, 11, and Op 25 #3 and 8.  So, I'd obviously say those would probably be the toughest for me.  I've seen so many pieces with thirds that they don't even scare me anymore... not saying I'm ready for Op 25 #6, but it's just not the most intimidating (nor is the winter wind) in my view.

The argument is actually very deep, at least what it points to is.  In this thread, we are not talking about an argument between two persons in the case of the blind leading the blind.  In comparing lists, there is a huge chasm between somebody's thoughts who has honestly mastered them, has discussed them with and listened to them (live) from some of the most accomplished, masterful and artistic pianistic minds in the world vs. an individual's list made out of boredom (or mere perusal, or even relatively light study (by comparison)).  Sure, anybody can type up a list and post it, but if I were the one whom started the thread, it is obvious whose thoughts on the matter I would be most interested in reading and in a public setting like this forum, more than just the original poster can potentially benefit from what is shared.

In reading back through the thread a bit, I'm sorry to say that complete disrespect was shown to one of the most brilliant teachers in any subject that I have ever met, and that is just a bit embarrassing, actually.  Again, I think at least two apologies are in order.

[stevebob]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who (pronoun)#Rules_for_determining_who_vs._whom_in_traditional_usage

[john11inc]

I'm sorry you find my classification flawed, but your own statements of opinion seem a bit rigid and dogmatic for my tastes.  In particular, I find it hard to believe your claim that "everyone tends to agree" about the respective degrees of challenge in these pieces; in my experience, that's not true at all.

There is absolutely nothing rigid or dogmatic about his commentary; it is self-contradictory, and what is certainly the most sad thing in this thread is how people seem to love to stick their faces in his crap and call it a rose garden, like a bunch of little fan girls shrieking for their pop star.  He contradicts himself by basically stating two things:

1- Opinions do not differ on this matter
2- My opinions differ on etudes [x, y, z]

Obviously he didn't make the insane comment that there is literally no variance in opinion, but these two statements still contradict one another, due to the fact that, if we are to give validity to one, the other is useless.  Either the great majority of these supposedly identical opinions matter, or his opinions on the various, specific etudes he mentioned are valid.  Therefore, to call his opinion either rigid or dogmatic is certainly a misnomer of the most absolutely basic proportions: his commentary is thus worthless, as he proposes an innate dichotomy (I am right vs. they are right: read the second as "I am not right, as my opinion is different"), and takes both sides.  Obviously he does not propose any alternative in which he can be incorrect, instead thinking the arguments that are in complete opposition with his own somehow support each other.

Personally, I can't think of anything more boarish than listing the names of a bunch of people he allegedly knows that allegedly agree with him.  If I cared, I'm sure more pianists I spoke to would agree with the standard notions of which etudes are more difficult than would agree with the ideas Marik has proposed (for the person who started this thread, I can guarantee the list I posted is going to be pretty close to most lists proposed by professional pianists, with the exception of 10-7 and probably 25-8 being shoved up a couple places).  In fact, I'll even take that challenge if he really wants me to.

But back to the subject of this pointless fanboyism, I'm not shocked people are wooing and swooning over his posts in this thread, despite them being self-contradictory and consisting of little more than truisms nobody would argue with, as well as the failed attempts at belittling you and myself (sadly, that little repartee was deleted; I went into much, much, much further detail about how wrong nearly everything he's written here is).  It's very difficult not to insult the boy here when speaking about why there's no reason to take his opinion more seriously than many others', so I'll just leave it to the readers to hopefully figure out why.

[rachfan]

Given the lack of comity and civility here, I'm very troubled by marik's felt-need to depart from Piano Street.  He's an extraordinary artist.  His being driven out reflects very poorly on this forum in my opinion.  It would seem that members could disagree without being disagreeable, but evidently not.

David

[gyzzzmo]

I think everybody gets tired of a forum at a certain moment, because of the childish behaviour thats sometimes just too annoying to ignore. But thats how forums, and the internet, works.

[stevebob]

Given the lack of comity and civility here, I'm very troubled by marik's felt-need to depart from Piano Street.  He's an extraordinary artist.  His being driven out reflects very poorly on this forum in my opinion.  It would seem that members could disagree without being disagreeable, but evidently not.

David

In my opinion, and that of at least two other members here, it was he who couldn't disagree without being disagreeable.  He chose to leave, and nobody drove him out.

[charles-piano]

As others have said, it's different for everyone. I personally find thirds (25 6) very easy, while others claim it's the hardest. It wouldn't really work to list out all of them from easiest to hardest, but I think most would agree that 10 6 and 25 1 are easier, as well as 10 9 if you have a reasonably large left hand. Most people would also agree that 25 11 and 10 1 are some of the hardest. Everything in between is very debated.

[ranjit]

Very interesting, can you explain how you go about thirds? I have found octaves to be very natural, but I think most people find thirds awkward. I'm curious why you found op 25 no 6 easy.

[lelle]

That's curious that many people find Op 25 no 11 among the hardest. It's difficult, but I find many of the other ones to be much harder. Op 10 no 1, no 2 and no 7, and Op 25 no 6, no 8 and no 10 all come to mind.

[getsiegs]

Very interesting, can you explain how you go about thirds? I have found octaves to be very natural, but I think most people find thirds awkward. I'm curious why you found op 25 no 6 easy.

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'm also in the I-find-25/6-pretty-easy camp. I think it's largely due to my small hands; I can go a fairly long time with my wrist high and my fingers all cramped together without getting super uncomfortable. By contrast, I'd rather die than start learning 10/1 or 10/11

My rule of thumb for starting Op. 25/6 was to start once you can fairly comfortably play the RH on the first page close to tempo. I would often just play around with those opening third trills as a warmup, between pieces, or whenever it popped into my head. Once I felt comfortable with that and actually started the whole thing, I think the most important tip for me was to experiment with fingering. There are so many ways you can play each phrase, and the score includes multiple methods in several spots (I also vaguely remember Josh Wright mentioning inverted fingerings in his video about this etude). Even a few months into learning this etude I was finding new ways to work around the trickiest passages.

[j_tour]

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'm also in the I-find-25/6-pretty-easy camp. I think it's largely due to my small hands; I can go a fairly long time with my wrist high and my fingers all cramped together without getting super uncomfortable. By contrast, I'd rather die than start learning 10/1 or 10/11

That does give some nourishment for the thought.  I finally bought hardcopies of the Cortot student editions of Chop. Op. 10 and 25.

Thirds are brutal for me:  not in small sections, after all, one does one what must.  But having fairly broad hands, it's a challenge to compress the hand.

As one must, but the intuitive way of cramping the hand up is clearly not the way. 

It's similar to Scarlatti or a number of keyboardists where it can be best played by rotating the forearm and learning the correct angle relative to the keyboard.

FWIW, I've always enjoyed Cortot's preliminary exercises for the Chopin Préludes, and these are no exception:  he had some strange but somehow reasonable suggestions.

No, Op. 10/2, not for me.  Yeah, I'll fool around with it (with Chopin's fingerings) like I always have but it's so strange and has few applications outside this étude, IMHO.

[lelle]

No, Op. 10/2, not for me.  Yeah, I'll fool around with it (with Chopin's fingerings) like I always have but it's so strange and has few applications outside this étude, IMHO.

I think that one is really valuable. The pattern is not used outside of it, but basically to be able to play the pattern comfortably you have to learn how to be so damn loose and relaxed in your fingers hands and wrists. So its value is that it forces you to discover a more relaxed technique or else it is just impossible.

[ranjit]

One or two days of trying my hand at the op 10 no 2 had a noticeable effect on chromatic octaves for me.

[j_tour]

So its value is that it forces you to discover a more relaxed technique or else it is just impossible.

Yes, I can see that. 

Certainly Cortot seems to have agreed, in his preparatory exercises for many of the études and préludes:  he's always, it seems, "forcing" the LH or RH into doing a bunch of strange crossings (as in the Op. 10/2).

Yes, I can manage Chopin's fingerings in the RH, but not at the tempo required.  I suppose despite the greater sense of accomplishment upon "arriving" at the piece, I'd rather put my efforts elsewhere.

But I think the information you gave will be useful for anyone, I should think.
 

One or two days of trying my hand at the op 10 no 2 had a noticeable effect on chromatic octaves for me.

That's kind of interesting.  I suspect you might be talking about alternating fingers 4 and 5, in, say, a RH passage.  Or perhaps not.

[ranjit]

That's kind of interesting.  I suspect you might be talking about alternating fingers 4 and 5, in, say, a RH passage.  Or perhaps not.

Pretty much. It allowed me to do a one-octave chromatic octave scale at 120 bpm. It helped with "walking" using 4 and 5.