Ideal 3 pieces you'd choose to display a skilled pianist's ability?

[opus10no2]

Which 3 pieces would you choose if you were to audition or sample a pianist's playing, be they amateur or professional...think of the qualities you most admire and look for in pianism and select pieces that challenge/display them, and explain why. 

[m1469]

Assuming that the pianist has many strengths and has a large potential to display more than one kind of playing, I'd like to hear pieces which represent different qualities.  Overall, I'd be keyed into tonal pallets and emotional depth and would hope that each selection lends itself appropriately to some adequate form of that, but to get a good sense of a pianist's musicianship I'd like to hear a piece for each of following characteristics:

1.  Slow and song-like
2.  Physical power and stamina
3.  Contrapuntal Thinking
(4.  Agility) -- not necessarily less important, but since it's just supposed to be 3, I'd choose it last.

I can't say that I have a sense of ideal pieces for these quite yet, except for I'd like to hear something by Bach for number 3.

For the first one, I think this ends up saying almost the most about a person, about pianism, and musicianship.  To be able to suspend tones with interest, to be able to continue slower phrases without losing the line, these require a particular musical maturity, a particular musical interest on the part of the pianist's, and a certain knowledge or instinct about resonance.

For the second, aside from the fact that I'd like to hear the pianist's "inner roar," I'd also like to hear if/how a pianist can do this without it being a slap.  Like it just comes from deep within.

For the third, I think that this shows a very certain kind of intelligence in being able to maintain the individual musical characteristics of each line, while using the piano's tonal abilities to have these come to life, and then how to have all of this tie together to form the overall tapestry.

The fourth ... well, it can be fun, it can be kind of like lightening, but I'm especially fond of it within a musical context, particularly when its presence expresses something musically where the concept is unequaled at a slower tempo.

[opus10no2]

The only difficulty I'm having selecting them myself is choosing between allowing multifaceted longer pieces to enter the equation, or to keep it to short concise pieces.
Of course something like Godowsky's Passacaglia would cover almost everything I'd like to consider.
So maybe I'd like to modify the question to ..

Pick 1 'All Encompassing' longer piece.
and
Pick 3 Shorter pieces, each with more exacting intentions.

[m1469]

Well, my repertoire knowledge still feels a bit limited to me, though maybe it's not as much as I would think.

The Appassionata is pretty all-encompassing, though.  I'd have to think a bit on what I would personally like to hear for the smaller ones.

[opus10no2]

Sure, that's a great choice, my only reservatio being that I'm a bit of a technical completist and the Appassionata has little in the way of left hand runs, double notes, or octaves, but that's something I personally prioritise, others wont.

[mike_lang]

Assuming that the pianist has many strengths and has a large potential to display more than one kind of playing, I'd like to hear pieces which represent different qualities.  Overall, I'd be keyed into tonal pallets and emotional depth and would hope that each selection lends itself appropriately to some adequate form of that, but to get a good sense of a pianist's musicianship I'd like to hear a piece for each of following characteristics:

1.  Slow and song-like
2.  Physical power and stamina
3.  Contrapuntal Thinking
(4.  Agility) -- not necessarily less important, but since it's just supposed to be 3, I'd choose it last.

I can't say that I have a sense of ideal pieces for these quite yet, except for I'd like to hear something by Bach for number 3.

For the first one, I think this ends up saying almost the most about a person, about pianism, and musicianship.  To be able to suspend tones with interest, to be able to continue slower phrases without losing the line, these require a particular musical maturity, a particular musical interest on the part of the pianist's, and a certain knowledge or instinct about resonance.

For the second, aside from the fact that I'd like to hear the pianist's "inner roar," I'd also like to hear if/how a pianist can do this without it being a slap.  Like it just comes from deep within.

For the third, I think that this shows a very certain kind of intelligence in being able to maintain the individual musical characteristics of each line, while using the piano's tonal abilities to have these come to life, and then how to have all of this tie together to form the overall tapestry.

The fourth ... well, it can be fun, it can be kind of like lightening, but I'm especially fond of it within a musical context, particularly when its presence expresses something musically where the concept is unequaled at a slower tempo.

Great answer!  I would think that there exists many a piece that could satisfy all of these . . . in the standard repertoire, Chopin's Polonaise-Fantaisie; in the area of less standard fare, Medtner's sonata tragica. 

I think the qualities you listed are all things that we look for in a pianist, and that there are many works in the repertoire that combine power, polyphony, agility, and lyricism.

I would only add "architectural" ability to this list.  The way one would pace something on the scale of Schönberg's op. 19 is vastly different from the way one would approach Schubert's B-flat major sonata. 

Also, tonal palette: while that can be easily shown in the solo piano repertoire, I would love to hear a set of art song . . . Perhaps some Debussy, Schubert, Wolf, Ravel . . . I think that playing with others, particularly in art song, demands an greater variety of touches.

Food for thought,
Mike

[m1469]

I would only add "architectural" ability to this list.  The way one would pace something on the scale of Schönberg's op. 19 is vastly different from the way one would approach Schubert's B-flat major sonata.

Mike

Do you mean this kind of 'pace' in terms of, for example, when to use power and how much?  And, that this is paced throughout a piece so that the overall work makes sense?  Other than tempo in a kind of arbitrary sense, like "today I just feel like playing super fast" ... is it something like a runner who must run different parts of a race in different ways?  A flat out sprint is one thing, and is normally only for certain kinds of (short) runs, like the 40 yard dash.  But, if you get much longer than that, like even an entire lap, it becomes quite strategic.  One of those aspects is that, no matter what your pace throughout the run, you must have enough power within you for a 'kick' towards the end.  Is that kind of what you are talking about?  In that case, I don't know those pieces you mentioned well enough to know why you would pace it differently, but unless you have something super short and something that is supposed to be a kind of sprint, under what circumstances would a pianist ever use a different strategy for pacing?  I don't know if I am wording my question well enough!

Sure, that's a great choice, my only reservatio being that I'm a bit of a technical completist and the Appassionata has little in the way of left hand runs, double notes, or octaves, but that's something I personally prioritise, others wont.

I somehow doubt there is a piece of music that truly encompasses *everything* possible, though it's not entirely beyond my imagination.  I am not the type of person (yet) who can easily say ... "oh, you're looking for the most magical piece in the Universe?  Here, I happen to have the perfect selection for you in my back pocket!" ... but, I suspect there are maybe people like that.  I would think it needs to be more modern than even Beethoven, although I think the Hammerklavier is supposed to be a decent candidate for all-inclusiveness (I only know through rumor).  I don't know if it includes every technical aspect imaginable, though.  

[opus10no2]

Well, there's a difference between figuration and 'raw dexterity', there are 12 pianistic 'pistons' , ten fingers and 2 hands/wrists, all of which have different abilities to eachother.
So ideally I'd like to hear some piece showing off all 12. More simply...octaves in both hands, and runs that use inner fingers, aswell as those that use outer, both hands too.

On a purely musical level I could just choose my favourite pieces but I'm too tempted to want a technical test too.

[mike_lang]

Do you mean this kind of 'pace' in terms of, for example, when to use power and how much?  

Hi m1469,

Yes, that is one part of pacing -- deciding where to put the climax, and how much support it needs . . . Deciding what role each phrase plays overall rhetoric of the piece, and what is a suitable rubato, shaping, connection, and so forth, to create a sense of unity and direction in the whole.  I think the way Berman put it, one savors details and moments in a different way in a shorter piece such as an art song, than in a larger form such as a lengthy sonata.

Let me think a bit more about how to explain this, and get back.

Without sacrificing the family nature of this forum, I suppose one way (albeit crude and simplistic) to put it is "how not to climax early," and how to create the perfect release from that climax over the remaining portion of the music.  Another way is the running analogy: a 500-meter dash is not a 5k is not a half marathon is not a marathon -- but it is not in an athletic sense . . . it is in the use of time, texture, dynamics, direction, momentum, rubato . . . Can anyone else explain pacing in a better way, please?'

THanks,
Mike

[m1469]

Hi m1469,

Yes, that is one part of pacing -- deciding where to put the climax, and how much support it needs . . . Deciding what role each phrase plays overall rhetoric of the piece, and what is a suitable rubato, shaping, connection, and so forth, to create a sense of unity and direction in the whole.  I think the way Berman put it, one savors details and moments in a different way in a shorter piece such as an art song, than in a larger form such as a lengthy sonata.

Let me think a bit more about how to explain this, and get back.

Without sacrificing the family nature of this forum, I suppose one way (albeit crude and simplistic) to put it is "how not to climax early," and how to create the perfect release from that climax over the remaining portion of the music.  Another way is the running analogy: a 500-meter dash is not a 5k is not a half marathon is not a marathon -- but it is not in an athletic sense . . . it is in the use of time, texture, dynamics, direction, momentum, rubato . . . Can anyone else explain pacing in a better way, please?'

THanks,
Mike

Well, no, I get this.  Thanks for your explanation.  I'm aware of these things, but I think that for me right now, it's a little bit too hypothetical still and not completely demonstrated in my playing.  And, I guess for some pieces more than others.  I think I just wasn't sure if this is the kind of stuff you meant, exactly.  Your thoughts help me further clarify it though.

[iratior]

Three pieces to display a skilled pianist's ability?  Well, if I wanted to devise the shortest, meanest test, I'd have the first piece be Chopin's prelude in C-sharp minor (the one in the set of 24).  A short, mean test of skill in handling counterpoint would be the A-major fugue from WTC volume II.  Testing everything else would be Chopin Opus 25 no. 10, the etude in double octaves.  But a more serious examination would include "From the Diary of a Housefly" by Bartok.  If done best, this piece can make you feel at one with the life of the housefly, and so, with all life in the universe;  words can hardly grasp the experience.  I found that, even to begin getting this piece, I had to revolutionize the way I was fingering pieces in general.  And the piece has complex rhythms to be mastered, too, and almost omnipresent interlocks.  It may be short but the technical demands are nothing to be sneezed at.

[mike_lang]

Actually, come to think about it, Chopin's fourth ballade tells quite a lot . . .

[pianisten1989]

Hmm, I'd probably go for something lyrical.. Maybe several voices.
Chopin op 25/7 for sure! I've also started Sonetto del Petrarca 104, and think I can play that quite well (I think I could play the mephisto waltz no 1 quite well, but I don't really like it). Ah, Chopin Ballade no 1!
...
But I really like Bach as well!

Chopin Ballade no 1 and etude op 25/7
Liszt: Sonetto Del Petrarca 104 or Bach: Partita c-minor

[kelly_kelly]

The last movement of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet suite Relatively short, but says so much...

[pianisten1989]

Sorry! I completely misread the title. I though it was "3 pieces to display Your ability".

Oh... Uhm.. Well, Kind of depends what the "skilled pianist" is best at...

[nanabush]

-Bach Partita in Bb major
-Brahms Piano Quintet in F minor
-Ravel Miroirs

...first off, if anyone I knew of was playing those in concert nearby, I would pay to see it.  Secondly, the mix of musical eras, solo and chamber, and the obvious fast/slow movements would show a lot of balance.

...As an encore, I would definitely pick Liszt 'La Campanella'.  Everyone is caught up in 'oh, this piece is WAY overplayed'... BUT, someone having the guts to play that at the end of a recital, and actually playing it well (with a fresh interpretation too  ) would show a lot of skill.