Hardest piano concerto ever written?

[the89thkey]

If you have no experience whatsoever please do not vote...
I listed a few popular options to choose from. I play all of these except the Tchaikovsky, which I'm learning.

[adari]

OK, it's not technically a piano concerto, per se, but I'm going with Alkan's Concerto for Solo Piano, Op.39/8-10.

Skip to 9:30 or 16:41 for mind-destruction.

[thalbergmad]

Schytte

[49410enrique]

alexander plinkovsky no 2 (3rd revision)

[outin]

alexander plinkovsky no 2 (3rd revision)

I'm going to learn that on my x-mas break, am I insane??!!

[thalbergmad]

I'm going to learn that on my x-mas break, am I insane??!!

Yes, you must be insane as the composer reliably advises me that it has not yet been written.

Thal

[outin]

Yes, you must be insane as the composer reliably advises me that it has not yet been written.

That's will just make it more interesting to learn! Especially since the world is coming to an end. I think I'd like it to happen while I am playing the hardest concerto ever not written!

[the89thkey]

That's will just make it more interesting to learn! Especially since the world is coming to an end. I think I'd like it to happen while I am playing the hardest concerto ever not written!

I'm going to play Tchaikovsky 1 when the world ends...if I've learned it

[celegorma]

Beethoven 4 and 5, Chopin 1 and 2, are all harder than average concertos
Liszt 1 is just as hard as the ones listed.
Schoenburg and Bartok 2 are definitely harder than the ones listed.

[blazekenny]

I say Schumann. These dialogues between piano and orchestra are just immense.
Other concertos, like Rach 3 and Brahms 2, are popular choices for the "hardest" concerto. Yet they may still be easier for a technically accomplished pianist than the Schumann.

[zezhyrule]

Bartok 2

This, this!

I must admit, I have never played or even attempted to play this piece (much less any other concerti), so I can't speak from my own experience. But! I hear it's super difficult

[rachmaninoff_forever]

come on guys, we all know it's probably from Sorajbi or some other atonal 21st century composer.

[pbryld]

Schytte

I've seen his name mentioned a few times here now.

Are people seriously referring to the Danish Ludvig Schytte?

[austinarg]

What about Busoni?

[the89thkey]

Next time I won't give the "other" option...

[thalbergmad]

Are people seriously referring to the Danish Ludvig Schytte?

Dunno about other people, but I am.

Thal

[kitty on the keys]

Any Mozart concerto.

Kitty on the Keys

[the89thkey]

Any Mozart concerto.

Kitty on the Keys

You're kidding me right? Let's see now...whose concertos are harder than Mozart? I'll just give you 10 for now because the full list would really take a while to write out.
Beethoven
Liszt
Chopin
Rachmaninov
Bach
Ravel
Mendelssohn
Bartok
Tchaikovsky
Grieg
Schumann

Yeah, that was more than 10 I think. People can add as many as they want to this list...they can't really go wrong...

[p2u_]

Any Mozart concerto.

Kitty on the Keys

You're kidding me right?

I don't think so. While easy to learn, Mozart's concertos are indeed the most difficult to play the right way, because they have to be played virtually perfectly to sound great; spoil even a minor detail and the house of cards collapses, leaving you standing naked before the audience...

Paul

[black_keys]

BUSONI piano concerto!!!!

[the89thkey]

I don't think so. While easy to learn, Mozart's concertos are indeed the most difficult to play the right way, because they have to be played virtually perfectly to sound great; spoil even a minor detail and the house of cards collapses, leaving you standing naked before the audience...

Paul

And Rachmaninov, Schumann, Beethoven, Prokofiev, and all the others you can just bang through and miss whatever notes and it'll still be great? That hardly makes sense to me...

[j_menz]

And Rachmaninov, Schumann, Beethoven, Prokofiev, and all the others you can just bang through and miss whatever notes and it'll still be great? That hardly makes sense to me...

Yet some composers manage to be more forgiving than others of slight lapses.  Not "banging through and missing notes" forgiving, but "if I misvoice this chord slightly or get the balance on this crescendo slightly wrong it will still be pretty OK" forgiving. Not perfect, but not disproportionately horrible either.

Mozart isn't like that. Surprisingly, Alkan isn't either. The effect of any lapse is magnified - even a slight one sounds far worse than the magnitude of the lapse would suggest.

[the89thkey]

Yet some composers manage to be more forgiving than others of slight lapses.  Not "banging through and missing notes" forgiving, but "if I misvoice this chord slightly or get the balance on this crescendo slightly wrong it will still be pretty OK" forgiving. Not perfect, but not disproportionately horrible either.

Mozart isn't like that. Surprisingly, Alkan isn't either. The effect of any lapse is magnified - even a slight one sounds far worse than the magnitude of the lapse would suggest.

I see what you're saying. Yes, it's true that accuracy takes a premium when playing Mozart. But that definitely doesn't make it technically or musically harder than Rachmaninov or Scriabin, to give a few examples. The score is just easier. 

[j_menz]

I see what you're saying. Yes, it's true that accuracy takes a premium when playing Mozart. But that definitely doesn't make it technically or musically harder than Rachmaninov or Scriabin, to give a few examples. The score is just easier. 

The score certainly appears easier.  But there is more to technique than just getting the notes out. And if Mozart was as easier as you suggest, the standard or performance of Mozart at the big competitions would be rather less apalling than it generally is, given the standard of performance of the composers you mention (and the others you allude to).

[the89thkey]

The score certainly appears easier.  But there is more to technique than just getting the notes out. And if Mozart was as easier as you suggest, the standard or performance of Mozart at the big competitions would be rather less apalling than it generally is, given the standard of performance of the composers you mention (and the others you allude to).

The standard of performance of the composers I mention/allude to is pretty horrific, I'd have to say. However, I think the main reason that juniors and amateurs butcher Mozart so badly is more a misunderstanding of the score than lack of mastery of the required technique, while with Rachmaninov technical failings are more common, but this doesn't mean musical ones have less of an importance.

[brendan765]

I'll make some concertos sometime in the next few years, the way I write my music...It will be tecnically hard as hell to play (espicially musically), but the hardest...no Liszt wrote much harder in his later years...perhaps I will be able to express perfect harmonies and melodies as with wider chords and arpegios for a more beutiful, whole hearted experience...ahh I love composing.

[canada100]

All four of these concerti are very difficult in their own ways.

The Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff require a world-class top level technique to pull off successfully. These are some of the best-written concerti ever! They are the pieces people play in the finals of important competitions such as the Van Cliburn or the Tchaikovsky. In fact, the Tchaikovsky Competition REQUIRES the Tchaikovsky 1 in the finals, in addition to a concerto of the contestant's choice. Rach 3 is also immensely difficult.

Brahms concerti are extremely long and difficult, technically and musically. The Prokofiev 2 is also extremely difficult, and is also a frequently heard concerto in the major competitions.

[kakeithewolf]

Most people you ask would say Rach 3. However, knowing Sorabji, I'm sure he made a piano concerto at one point, and he would have probably made it unspeakably difficult as he is so notorious for doing.

[flashyfingers]

Bartok?

[thalbergmad]

However, knowing Sorabji, I'm sure he made a piano concerto at one point, and he would have probably made it unspeakably difficult as he is so notorious for doing.

I think there are 8 numbered concerti plus 3 other works for piano & orchestra. The Symphonic variations required no less than 544 pages of manuscript.

I expect Sorabji's stationers retired as millionaires.

Thal

[kakeithewolf]

I think there are 8 numbered concerti plus 3 other works for piano & orchestra. The Symphonic variations required no less than 544 pages of manuscript.

I expect Sorabji's stationers retired as millionaires.

Thal

Good chance one of those has a decent claim to being the most difficult piano concerto.

[thalbergmad]

Good chance one of those has a decent claim to being the most difficult piano concerto.

No doubt there exists some worthless modern bollocks that would be in contention.

Thal

[ahinton]

come on guys, we all know it's probably from Sorajbi or some other atonal 21st century composer.

I've never heard of Sorajbi but, if you mean Sorabji, I can only say that it would be very difficult for a tonal composer such as he was to merit the description "some other atonal 21st century composer", especially as he made the careless mistake of dying in 1988...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I think there are 8 numbered concerti plus 3 other works for piano & orchestra. The Symphonic variations required no less than 544 pages of manuscript.

All true, except that the Symphonic Variations in its version for piano and orchestra occupies 540, not 544, pages of ms. (the other 4 pages being title, &c.); this score now also exists in a fully typeset edition whose music occupies 519 pages and it became available from us just a few months ago. Then there's also the composer's first orchestral symphony completed in 1922 which has a very important part for an almost never silent piano.

I expect Sorabji's stationers retired as millionaires.

His archivist hasn't.

Best,

Alistair

[khantallis123]

Well its not considered usually but Chopin Variations Op.2

[thalbergmad]

It is usually not considered as a hard piano concerto because it is not actually a piano concerto .

Thal

[lostinidlewonder]

"Most difficult" questions are mindless and useless when it comes to art. Do we appreciate a painted picture then wonder which one was more difficult to paint? It's simply missing the point u less you want to talk about stupid things.

[muntjack]

I mostly agree with your sentiment, but we're not trying to create our own interpretations of those paintings.  While difficulty is incredibly subjective, these discussions could theoretically help a pianist decide what pieces are in reach.

[coda_colossale]

I mostly agree with your sentiment, but we're not trying to create our own interpretations of those paintings.  While difficulty is incredibly subjective, these discussions could theoretically help a pianist decide what pieces are in reach.

People considering playing the aforementioned concerti would hardly need our humble opinions, no? Such thrash in this forum are caused by the childish fascination of less mature pianists with virtuosity. I'm referring solely to the "most difficult blah blah" sh*t, and not people asking for comparisons, which may be as you have said, helpful. But I definitely don't agree with the idea that performing a piece of music is by any means similar to painting. There is some athletic point in music after all.

[lostinidlewonder]

You appreciate art, you dont consider its difficulty, if you do you are missing the point. Oh i love lollies, i wonder if the people that manufacture the wrappers use the most difficult printing technology? Oh i love tennis, i wonder if the racket manufacturers car parks were made with the best asphault?

[thalbergmad]

haha, that is funny

[coda_colossale]

Well, I would care if I was a lolly wrapper producer