If you google "100 greatest piano works" you get a variety of lists. Thsi is one of them, and not a bad start:https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/piano.htm
Check out Franz Liszt's history, you'll find his teacher at one point was Carl Czerny, who took lessons from beethoven, who took lessons from haydn.. etc. etc.
Most of those pieces are outrageously overplayed...
Stupid things music snobs say No. 3:
Interesting. There are some pieces on the list that I haven't really listened to, but had I started listening to classical according to this list I would have driven away pretty soon.
Interesting. There are some pieces on the list that I haven't really listened to, but had I started listening to classical according to this list I would have driven away pretty soon. I don't hate all the pieces, but the first one that I really like is on 20th place and it doesn't get that much better I think the reason for the (alleged) decline in interest towards classical music partly is caused by this strange requirement of homogenous taste. You are expected to like something because everyone else has liked it and it has stood the time. If you don't you are just not well enough educated. No wonder people prefer listening to other genres, where you have every right to like/dislike what ever you want.People just don't hear the less popular classical music anymore to acquire a taste for it. So those who don't have a "mainstream" taste just never get into it.But what I wrote above certainly does not apply to the nice folks on this forum
Well, be that as it may, it does serve as a reasonable introduction to classical music, albeit a slightly quirkier one than many others. It's broad enough that you would pretty much be assured of finding some starting point to explore further.
If the only thing you like is chopsticks, or the relief afforded by Cage's 4'33 (both interesting inclusions) then perhaps you might conclude that your tastes well and truly lay elsewhere.
So it would be important to stress that the variation among classical pieces is huge and instead of trying to force yourself to like something by just listening even if you're bored to death , you should just explore further.
Agree entirely. I would add, though, that not all p[ieces are accessible at a first listen through and may grow on you with repeated listening. Also, with time, others may come to be more to your liking, so it's not a once and for all thing.
'Yeah man, what if Martha Argerich, Richter, and Horowitz sucked! But since you're supposed to think they're good, you kinda trick yourself into believing that they're good! Almost like you're learning to conform with society? You know what I mean?'
To add, j_menz's suggestion is great.. there's also the option of self discovery..For example, say you start with chopin.. read a bit about his life as well as listening to some of his music.. You'll find that he was friends with Franz Liszt. Check out Franz Liszt's history, you'll find his teacher at one point was Carl Czerny, who took lessons from beethoven, who took lessons from haydn.. etc. etc.
this is a pretty good list, listen to all of these and you'll be more familiar with piano lit rep than many people who claim to be, nice variety from the common practice period(s) (ie. baroque through modern)should keep anyone busy for a while, i know i'll be whittling thorugh this bit by bit....
I love the instruction "It is highly suggested that you play through the pieces in bold as a method of study"The bold list alone would keep any pianist busy for life. It's also a pretty eccentric one (as can only be expected). In the main list, "various works" is singularly unhelpful and looks like laziness, especially considering the almost comprehensive list of Schumann's piano works.
Topic: essential works/pieces to listen to as an introduction to classical music 