I am not talking about just playing the piece here, I am talking about what separates merely being able to play it from actual mastery at the Etude. The thing that separates a mere cover on YouTube to truly performing it.
I see. So you are not talking about "virtuosity" of a piece, but of the playing. This word "virtuosity" has a problem that you may not be aware of.
On the one hand there is something you might called artistry, where a musician draws things out of the music, and he employs all his understanding and craftmanship to do this. "Virtuosic" playing most often means somebody plays music which is hard to play because of how fast it is, how difficult for hands to stretch and such - something more akin to musical athleticism. I remember reading about the era where musicians such as Paganini flourished, and how in some quarters he was looked upon with disdain rather than admiration. Though I am sure that Paganini also played artistically. The piece you're featuring might often be approached in a "virtuosic" way - i.e. all those difficult notes played fast and athletically. That is not what you are after. I think you're after the artistic playing.
If I'm right about that goal, this is something that I am after too. I work with a teacher. When I was a child I was self-taught, and picked up a lot of things intuitively as I have that kind of instinct. I did not have a piano for 35 years, and restarted again a few years ago. We are choosing simpler pieces for the most part in order to get at the tools - a simple piece can actually be more challenging to make expressive and "artistic" because the bare bones are there undisguised by any flourish of notes, and you have to pour all your skills into the few notes that are there.
To get at that kind of goal, you need to develop the physical skills, as well as underlying understanding so that you know what kinds of things to play with in order to create your own interpretation - your ear develops along with this - and there is some degree of what is "inside" you as well. On your own you might listen to Sokolov or whoever, and painstakingly imitate every nuance that he makes for smaller passages, and it might have somewhat an impression of artistic playing (I'm using that word rather the "virtuosic") but something will be missing. When you have gained some understanding and skills, then you will start to hear why these pianists made the choices they made, what is inside the music, and this will also lead you toward your interpretation.
Some snippets from my own journey the past few years - in case this gives any ideas - I had a lyrical way of playing since I also sing, but was weak in underlying pulse, and also could not hear this. Going after underlying pulse created a necessary metronomic stage, which when loosened up gave something improved. Metronomic may be the wrong word, because the pulse I was missing came more from measure to measure rather than beat to beat. 2. The idea of dynamics was not new to me, but the fact that you can create an illusion of dynamics in the RH via the LH opened up new channels. 3. Expressiveness by where you place a note, via a slight delay or extension of its value, but without disturbing the pulse, and also not overdoing it, and also not doing it with the wrong notes. 4. Articulation (legato, staccato and how much, etc.) ... The wonderful pianists you hear use these kinds of things. .... While studying with my teacher, the concept may be clear intellectually, but it might take several tries, where the student thinks he/she has got it, but the teacher will point out that no, you don't have it yet. Through the whole process, your ability to hear and produce grows.
This piece of music is both "virtuosic" and "artistic". Getting those notes at that speed is the virtuosic part.
Topic: Broad Discussion and Example Recording - Chopin Etude Op. 25, No 12 in C minor