Which Chopin Ballade to start with?

[philb]

I was wondering what would be the best Chopin ballade to start with.

I have been looking over the third Ballade, and it seems a lot easier than the other 3. Musically it is a different story I would think. The second Ballade seems alright as well, but the finale with the double notes seems a bit scary.

If you guys could give me some input, I would be thankful.

[pytheamateur]

Yes, the Third Ballade is considered to be the least difficult.  The most difficult one is the Fourth.

[scott13]

Yes, the Third Ballade is considered to be the least difficult.  The most difficult one is the Fourth.

I would argue technically the most difficult is the 1st. The 4th however, is musically the most difficult.

Personally, I would advise you to start with the second, as it is often underplayed and you will gain the same benefits from it as you would from any of the other 3, whilst allowing you to tackle the harder Ballades in the future.

Just my .02c

[starstruck5]

I would say that if you can play any one of them well, you are technically capable of playing all of them. The 4th would require more dedication and time to perfect, but you would be rewarded by being able to play one of the most sublime pieces ever written.   

[philb]

I would say that if you can play any one of them well, you are technically capable of playing all of them. The 4th would require more dedication and time to perfect, but you would be rewarded by being able to play one of the most sublime pieces ever written.  

The 4th is really dense and complex though, a lot of lines that need to be voiced properly. I don't think it would be a great place to start. And yes, it is probably one of the most majestic pieces of romantic music. One of my favorites next to liszt ballade no. 2.

[philb]

Sorry, Double posted 

[amelialw]

no.1,2 or 3. No.3 is technically the easiest like what everyone here has voiced but it has alot in terms of musical content. No.1 is the one that everyone wants to learn, there's no denying that you will learn alot from it. Same here, was terrified of the double notes in no.2....still am

[jmanpno]

Something that is always important to keep in mind is your background.  Although there are some givens (Rach 3 is "harder" than a Bach 2-part Invention) the vast majority of other questions come down to personal details... what else have you played, how did it sound, what recordings/concerts have you listened to, what sort of condition is your technique in.

That being said, what other Chopin have you played?  The Ballades contain the most poetically inspired writing by Chopin.  Have you played the Waltzes?  Mazurkas? Polonaises?  These are your training pieces for the Ballades.  Once you have answered this, I will feel better making a suggestion.

[benechan]

If you choose to study the 1st Ballade, check out the Piano Sage Blog's article -
Chopin Ballade No.1 in G Minor Tips, Resources, Tutorials, and Masterclasses (how to play) Opus 23
https://pianosage.blogspot.com/2011/08/chopin-ballade-no1-in-g-minor-tips.html

[fftransform]

The Chopin Ballades are sort of big enough pieces to where you wouldn't learn one just to "be able to play the others."  If you have the technique to play Nos. 2 or 4, and those are the ones that you really want to learn, then learn them.  If you don't have the technique for them, then learn one of the others.  Talking about "musicality" is total, subjective BS; if you're just asking about technical difficulty, they're (easiest to hardest) 3-1-2-4.  Anybody who says otherwise hasn't played them, period, and is just posturing.  If you plan to learn them all over the next year or two, you might learn them in the 3-1-2-4 order.  Otherwise, just learn whichever one you think that you understand the best, if you just can't make up your mind.

[scott13]

The Chopin Ballades are sort of big enough pieces to where you wouldn't learn one just to "be able to play the others."  If you have the technique to play Nos. 2 or 4, and those are the ones that you really want to learn, then learn them.  If you don't have the technique for them, then learn one of the others.  Talking about "musicality" is total, subjective BS; if you're just asking about technical difficulty, they're (easiest to hardest) 3-1-2-4.  Anybody who says otherwise hasn't played them, period, and is just posturing.  If you plan to learn them all over the next year or two, you might learn them in the 3-1-2-4 order.  Otherwise, just learn whichever one you think that you understand the best, if you just can't make up your mind.

You sir are an idiot. Why is talking about musicality and difficulty with interpretation bullshit? The 4th is universally regarded as being the most difficult, as to truly master it, requires a great amount of musical maturity, something that is not as important in the more virtuoso works of Chopin's youth such as Ballades 1 and 2.

The 4th Ballade also presents, in my opinion, one of the greatest tests of voicing and phrasing in all of Chopin's works. A piece all to often performed badly due to the players playing the work without the required sensitivity and maturity. Another point to consider is the nature of the 4th Ballade. This is arguably Chopin's most intimate and tender composition and to convey these emotions to the listener requires a profound level of maturity. All these points fall under musicality, and for you to dismiss it as "bullshit" only seeks to make yourself look like an idiot.

Lastly, the double note section at the end of Ballade No 2, is not as technically difficult as the coda in Ballade No 1. So I fail to see why you rank the difficulty the way you do. In fact I would wager few professionals consider No 2, more technically demanding than No 1.

[fftransform]

You sir are an idiot.

no u.  ohhhhhhhhh burnz0rz!

Why is talking about musicality and difficulty with interpretation bullshit?

I dunno.  Let's find out together.

The 4th is universally regarded as being the most difficult, as to truly master it, requires a great amount of musical maturity, something that is not as important in the more virtuoso works of Chopin's youth such as Ballades 1 and 2.

Excuse me, but I'm confused.  The Ballade No. 4 is the most technically difficult one.  Ballade No. 4 is the virtuoso work, in comparison to Nos. 1 and 2.  So there's that.

Having "musical maturity" is not a "difficulty."  It's not something that one "overcomes" while working on a "maturity-related difficult(??)" piece.  It is a state that a pianist is in.  One either does or does not understand the piece of music.  Also, having "musical maturity" is meaningless.  Understanding the piece well enough to be aware of the nuances of one's interpretation is what has value.  What you mean to say is, "this person agrees with me, or some people I arbitrarily choose, when it comes to the interpretation of the work, one which a group of people have decided is "mature" due to it falling under this random, strict set of guidelines arbitrarily laid out for different pieces, composers and eras which we, the interpretation police, then decide is or is not mature, based on our checklist we have.  Oh, and that checklist seems to change depending on what country you're playing in, and what decade it is."  That has nothing to do with "musical maturity."  I don't think people would say that Kissin, Lang Lang or Hamelin are "musically mature" by the garbage definition you use; if somebody wanted to bash those pianists, that's probably the first little turdnugget they'd talk about.  "Oh, he's sooo immature.  He played that passage at 142, when the maturity police deigned almost three years ago that 135 is the max.  Sooo immature."  I'm not sure if the pretentious douche-bag accent is coming through in the writing.  But here's me telling you that it's there.  I don't like Hamelin, Kissin or Lang Lang, but they are "mature," in the only sense that actually matters: they understand enough to get the piece to sound exactly the way they want it to, and they can tell when that isn't happening.  What it is that they "want it to sound like" is, as I said earlier, total, subjective BS.  It is blatantly so.

The 4th Ballade also presents, in my opinion, one of the greatest tests of voicing and phrasing in all of Chopin's works.

You honestly don't play the piano, do you?  I'm serious.  Bringing out a voice in a piece is technique.  It is something that is taught.  Sure it can sometimes be a bit tricky to see which you want to emphasize, but any competent piano teacher can simply point to a series of notes and say, "those ones."  It's not like Roslavets.  It's just Chopin.  You're not doing number theory to figure this stuff out; you really like to whine and make this stuff sound harder than it is.  I bet your imaginary piano teacher just loves you.  Anyone with an ear can figure that sort of stuff out, given enough time, and that falls into my definition of maturity.

By the way, can you show us some of these passages that you think are the most difficult, in terms of phrasing and voicing?  I'd really like to see what your opinion on the matter is.  Just give us some measure numbers; you've played the piece, so I'm sure it won't take you too long to recall.  Also, I couldn't help but notice something in your post.  "In my opinion."  That means, "subjective."

A piece all to often performed badly due to the players playing the work without the required sensitivity and maturity. Another point to consider is the nature of the 4th Ballade. This is arguably Chopin's most intimate and tender composition and to convey these emotions to the listener requires a profound level of maturity.

The required sensitivity?  Is there a lightness of touch that you require in a performance?  Because that's also technique.  As well, maybe I don't personally like a light touch in the piece.  Seems like it's subjective, after all!  Damn, you're on a roll with being wrong.  Define "sensitivity" quantitatively, lest it be more of that "subjective bullshit."  Go ahead and define what "tenderness" and "intimate" mean in terms of piano-produced sound.  Quantitatively.  Because, as you claim, it's not subjective.  This is empirical stuff, according to you.  If you're using these terms, then you know what they mean.  And if they're not being used subjectively, then they're being used objectively.  So tell us what they mean.  Not what they mean to you.  What they mean objectively, i.e. what their rigid definition is, in the context of performance of music.  Could you link me to some scientific studies about harmonic analysis on tenderness and intimation?

What about "profound"?  Is this a subjective or objective term?  Must be objective, since you're arguing with me about how I said everything that would come out of your mouth is subjective.  So can you please give me a cut-off for profound?  like, explain it to me.  Is it a hierarchical system?  What's directly beneath "profound" and what's directly above it, assuming anything?  Is there a "super-profound"?  Or is it just "profound" and "not profound"?  Sort of binary.  Like, there isn't an "almost profound"?

All these points fall under musicality, and for you to dismiss it as "bullshit" only seeks to make yourself look like an idiot.

I just made your "bullshit" make you look like an idiot.

Lastly, the double note section at the end of Ballade No 2, is not as technically difficult as the coda in Ballade No 1. So I fail to see why you rank the difficulty the way you do. In fact I would wager few professionals consider No 2, more technically demanding than No 1.

You would lose money on that one, but considering the fact that you're obviously a child, and therefore don't have a bank account, it's not worth taking your bet, because I'm too lazy for anything besides paypal.  You should spend the money on a helmet, instead.  Better yet, a vasectomy.

[pytheamateur]

Both the First and Second Ballades are listed on LRSM, LLCM and LTCL syllabuses.  Also, both are classified as being "moderately difficult" in Maurice Hinson's Guide to the Pianist's Repertoire.

Of course one may argue that that does not necessarily mean they are of the same level of difficulty.  However, on the other hand, one might question how meaningful it actually is as an exercise to analyse which Grade 8 pieces are harder for example.  A lot will depend on the individual, his preferences, technical strengths, etc so there may never been an objective answer.

This exercise will not certainly get easier with words like "bullshit" and "idea" being bandied about.   

[teccomin]

To add to the argument about "technique". Yes, it requires technique to execute "lightness in touch" and "voicing and phrasing" etc but it requires musical maturity to know when to apply these techniques. Not all people possess both the technique and the musical awareness, therefore it is reasonable to make a distinction here.

[cmg]

I would say that if you can play any one of them well, you are technically capable of playing all of them. The 4th would require more dedication and time to perfect, but you would be rewarded by being able to play one of the most sublime pieces ever written.   

My money is on your assessment, star.  And my experience, too. The Fourth is the pinnacle of a pretty lofty artistic mountain range. 

[pbryld]

Take the 3rd. It's the easiest and the most beautiful. Seems like a nobrainer to me.

[teccomin]

Take the 3rd. It's the easiest and the most beautiful. Seems like a nobrainer to me.

Its also the only ballade with a Major key. Chopin wrote many great pieces in A-flat major, including the polonaise-fantasy. Its my favourite key. The 3rd ballade is playful and fun to play. Its short but end very strong, audience love it:)

[philb]

Actually, my teacher has advised me to hold off on the Ballade's until I have played a bit more of Chopin. I suggested instead an "easier" Liszt transcription and she agreed. I would still like to keep this thread going, because it is an interesting point of discussion.

[scott13]

Actually, my teacher has advised me to hold off on the Ballade's until I have played a bit more of Chopin. I suggested instead an "easier" Liszt transcription and she agreed. I would still like to keep this thread going, because it is an interesting point of discussion.

Not a bad idea at all. Depending on what Ballade you plan to study first, you can normally match it to several of the Etudes, which will give you the requisite technique to approach the Ballade you chose. Best of luck

[jlskiles]

Definitely don't start with the first or fourth ballades. The fourth is the most difficult but the first is the most commonly played, so, if you intend to compete, it will be judged more harshly. The second and third have different challenges, so I would suggest you read through the more difficult parts of each one and choose the one with the more familiar technique to you.

[amytsuda]

What is the goal of learning Chopin Ballade? Is it to use in the college application, competition, public performance or simply to learn? Since I am an old amateur, I have no idea about audition, competition, performance, etc.

I only have an idea how I choose a piece to learn, and I have no idea if it's right way or not, since I am not well-trained. I actually skimmed all first three when I was a kid. I played them again after I came back to piano, particularly spent a lot of time on No 1. The way I choose a piece is purely based on what is inspiring me to play. Sometimes a piece gets stuck in my mind and I hear it and see images constantly. I may even wake up hearing it. Then, I just have to learn it and I can learn it a lot better than when I am not inspired.

So my recommendation is just listen to all four of them many times, and see which one sticks to your mind. Which one you have the most things to say about. Since I don't have good technique, often, I can not express anything I want to say. But because I have things I want to say about, I don't mind keep learning techniques to achieve it. For example, even though people say No 3 is easier, I never click with it hence it feels like labour. I love No 4, but I could never put together pictures. It's only last half year, I start seeing fragments of No 4, so I am tinkering on those fragments and I am waiting for the day I feel like I see the whole picture. After a trip to Poland 2 years ago, I got whole slide shows in my head for No 1, and spent several months on it and still come back to it now and then. When I was 15/16, I was inspired by No 2 for a novel I read, which is still inspiring me today. 

I am not really helping. But my point is since it takes enormous efforts and time (life time!) to work on Chopin Ballade disregarding which one it is, you should choose the one that inspires you the most. But then, it's good that you are going to work on your technique first with Liszt. I wish I had good technical training...obviously for everyone else, I am hearing something else in my head from what they can hear from me! 

[maxy]

Topic created in 2011  TC had more than enough time to learn the 4 ballades.

Personally, I find that #3 is the hardest because I simply don't like it enough to bother spending hours on it.   

I find that #4 is simply beyond perfection, really fun to play!

[jlskiles]

I find that #4 is simply beyond perfection, really fun to play!

best thing I've read on hear yet. I completely agree.

[pencilart3]

Hello everyone, I was just reading this, and I thought I would say that if I were a newcomer to piano, after reading this I may think that #3 was a "piece-o-cake". Well, I'm 15, been playing for 9 years, and this darn thing took me 3 months to get to concert level.   I'm not trying to discourage anyone from playing this excellent, beautiful piece, but don't go into it thinking it's a "one-weeker".

[chopincat]

I don't think that anyone was suggesting that it was a "one-weeker" or even easy. People were just commenting the in terms of technique, it's the least difficult of the ballades, which is true. To me, 3 months seems like a relatively short time to spend on a piece of this level and musical depth.