Pieces that sound difficult but are easy

[slurred_beat]

Do you know any pieces that sound difficult but are easy (or atleast not hard)? I want to have some things to play that sound impressive

I have played recently:
Schubert impromptu e flat op 90
Rachmaninoff prelude c sharp minor

Thank you for your tips 

[hbowden]

Hi, my first post here!

One suggestion is the Toccata by Khachaturian - it's not as difficult as it sounds! 

[visitor]

Not not to say it's easy breezy but it not difficult and easier than it sounds or looks at first ,j
(Score looks intimidating but a read through will show how well it's laid )  just not as difficult as it sounds assuming you have played enough pieces that have many of the piano wrtiting devices used, especially chopin c minor etude from op 10, that piece is probably foundational to being able to effectively  knock this out at tempo

[anacrusis]

Some ideas off the top of my head:

Debussy: Clair de lune
Debussy: Arabesque no 1
Grieg: Wedding day at Troldhaugen
Chopin: Raindrop Prelude (Op. 28 no  15). It's a slow piece but the middle section is very sonorous and audiences love it.
Chopin: Nocturne in c sharp minor op. posth.

[j_tour]

That's so subjective, I don't have "the perfect" answer.

The Brahms B-minor Rhapsody could count....except that it's pretty long and the reprise/development of the main theme can be confusing to keep in memory, at least for me.  The other Rhapsody from that Opus (79?) isn't so bad, though:  it can pretty much be read right off the page.

I will tell you that when I heard a classic jazz tune called "Bud on Bach," where he plays the CPE Bach "Solfeggietto" straight before going into a little improvisation, I was impressed and learned it.  I was shocked it was not more difficult, and for me, was pretty easy to memorize.  Of course, played as fast as possible, just for the fun of it! 

The Beethoven Bagatelles from Op. 126, the one in G minor (#2) and in B minor (#4) are rather quick (Allegro and Presto, respectively), but not that difficult.  In addition, both those are very interesting musically, as are the rest of the pieces from that set.

I'd like to say the Precipitato (final movement) of Prokofiev's 7th Piano Sonata....but I still can't get the rhythmic pattern, in seven, over two bars repeating.  If you can get that engrained in your head, though, it's really not a bad piece at all (provided you can hit in the RH just a bit beyond an octave, like a m7th-->the octave on top IIRC.  That, the rhythm, and sheer unrelenting stamina seem to be the requirements when I play around with it.

I don't know if the aggressive, mechanical theme of the piece would be impressive to people or not, though.  I like it it, though, to the extent of being a bit pissed off that I can't get the rhythm down, and it really isn't that difficult if you've ever played, you know, a boogie woogie something percussive and fast like that.

For something different, Eubie Blake's "Charleston Rag" is very far from a difficult stride/ragtime piece, and would surely sound impressive to the layperson.  It was almost certainly composed to be a kind of showpiece for piano, as sort of "party music," I suppose.  Zez Confrey's "Kitten on the Keys" would work as well (hey, Marc-André played it as an encore at least once, so, you know, it's got that going for it, which is nice).  It has some kind of cracked atonal elements at places, but if you can power through those, it's not that difficult, either.

The prélude from Bach's WTC.I in Bb is not difficult, but probably sounds that way to some people.  Just some slightly twisted scalar passages and partial broken chords in the RH, played breathtakingly fast but with a very light touch. The fugue is not too bad, but it's not really a flashy piece of music, really.

I guess it just depends on your audience and your own abilities.

 

[thalbergmad]

The Schubert/Tausig Military March sounds horrific, but fits under the hand very nicely.

[lelle]

I'd like to say the Precipitato (final movement) of Prokofiev's 7th Piano Sonata....but I still can't get the rhythmic pattern, in seven, over two bars repeating.  If you can get that engrained in your head, though, it's really not a bad piece at all (provided you can hit in the RH just a bit beyond an octave, like a m7th-->the octave on top IIRC.  That, the rhythm, and sheer unrelenting stamina seem to be the requirements when I play around with it.
 

Oooof I played that Precipitato last movement some 6 years ago and I remember it as being really difficult, especially the continuous leaps at the end. It's not a piece I would put in the "easy" category!

Solfeggietto is a good suggestion though, I remember that as being popular when I was a kid and went to my local music school, many people wanted to play that because it sounded impressive... including me

Fur Elise is of course a given, if you haven't played that already. If you can play the "middle sections" people who don't know much about piano will think you are a God!

[lostinidlewonder]

What about something from Heller? His etudes are lovely and musical and not too difficult.

I find these ones pretty exciting:
Étude No. 4 - Allegro vivo
Étude No. 14 - Allegretto con moto
Étude No. 23 - Allegro non troppo
Étude No. 24 - Allegro con brio
Étude No. 26 - Allegro risoluto
Étude No. 28 - Allegro non troppo

[slurred_beat]

Thank you all for the tips. I didnt know heller etudes they are nice. But maybe I like composers that are famous more Do you have more tips from famous composers?

[j_tour]

Thank you all for the tips. I didnt know heller etudes they are nice. But maybe I like composers that are famous more Do you have more tips from famous composers?

Well, I can't really guess your "level" of ability.

Why not just the D minor fantasia of Mozart?  You know, play it really well, and add a bunch of energy to the D major section at the end.

Either of the Beethoven bagatelles from Op. 126 cited above.

What, exactly, are you trying to gain, and who are you trying to impress, exactly?  If you played the B minor Beethoven Op 126 bagatelle, who exactly would not think "yeah, that kid can play that!"  It's not that difficult, IMO.  The Gm from the set is more difficult, as is the last piece of the set.  And there are any number of fragments or entire movements from Beethoven sonatas that you could use.

There's a lot of music out there, and what I think sounds fancy may not sound impressive, or it may not be capable for you.

Do the Mozart, the CPE Bach, and the Beethoven. 

If you can't play those, then, I'm sorry, but you can't play anything else that I can suggest.  Certainly not Brahms or Prokofiev.  Probably not even the Bb Bach WTCI prélude.  Which sounds sick, BTW, played right.

There's an entire set of posts above with plenty of suggestions.  I like the gigue from the Schönberg Op. 25 as well.  The final prélude from Scriabin's Op. 74 is not very difficult, mechanically.  The first prélude from Chopin's Op. 28. 

Not really a joke.  The Schönberg might be a bit of a stretch, but either of the Chopin or Scriabin are fairly brief and can be learned.  If I can play those, I'm pretty sure hope is not lost for some rando.

Or the Bach E-minor fugue from WTC.I:  not difficult.  I think it sounds cool, played at full speed.  For that matter, the two-part invention of Bach in C (played at maximum speed, as fast possible), backed with the C Chopin prélude:  back to back, as quickly as possible, that would impress me.

Hyppytyynytyydytys.



edited:  Any piece can sound impressive when done well.  The Scarlatti K1, or the Bach 2-part invention in C, or his sinfonia in the same key.

I don't mean to sound like a guru, but I have a fairly dim opinion of audiences:  they can be fooled by anything. 

So, it depends on your intention and your authority as an artist.  You're driving the show, and it's really up to you.  Glenn Gould playing the little A minor two-part invention at about Mach 3 million:  yeah.  People will dig that and be like "Yo, that kid can play!" 

I don't mean to sound cynical, but a good musician can make anything sound impressive.

If it's a matter of establishing your "bona fides," when addressing the keyboard, just learn some little flourish based on diminished chord, scales and fast arpeggios, and then play music like how you want.

Trust me, audiences are generally stupid, and even when they're not, a little flourish or several puts them at ease that their ears are not being abused.  Hell, the first Liszt Transcendental étude in C.  All kinds of  options

Then you can play what you want.

There's just so much music that can be (i) played by regular people and (ii) would make most audiences be like "what?  Is that a witchcraft or sorcery?"

But, one must know one's audience.

Trust me, if you can't play the Heller or the Mozart, Beethoven, CPE Bach, JS Bach, Chopin, Liszt, and the rest, you're not going to be setting the world on fire. 

I can't play a lot of Liszt, much of Debussy, much Chopin, or lots of stuff.  But, I know what I can play and know how to learn what's needed and somehow it's all right.  Not a world catastrophe. 

Maybe just work on being a good musician.  I like to show off as well, if necessary, even for the practical necessity of reassuring the audience that there's an "actual card-carrying musician" on stage, but I actually know how to play Heller and all of the above (with maybe the exception of the Prokofiev...that is a ball-buster, if one is not used to using the piano as a percussion instrument, but I still say say it's not that difficult, aside from the strange rhythm).

Ei kysyvä tieltä eksy.

[lostinidlewonder]

Thank you all for the tips. I didnt know heller etudes they are nice. But maybe I like composers that are famous more Do you have more tips from famous composers?

Heller not famous enough?? Do you realize he wrote exclusively for piano? That is something worth looking into. Why do you want to play the most famous composers and then perhaps pieces which have been overplayed? I know lots of pieces but it's really just a waste of time listing them out so Heller is all I wanted to contribute

[ranjit]

I don't mean to sound like a guru, but I have a fairly dim opinion of audiences:  they can be fooled by anything. 
!" 

I don't mean to sound cynical, but a good musician can make anything sound impressive.

If it's a matter of establishing your "bona fides," when addressing the keyboard, just learn some little flourish based on diminished chord, scales and fast arpeggios, and then play music like how you want.

Trust me, audiences are generally stupid, and even when they're not, a little flourish or several puts them at ease that their ears are not being abused.  Hell, the first Liszt Transcendental étude in C.  All kinds of  options

Interesting. I think that is easy enough to impress most layman audiences at least. Although I have more respect for the sensibilities of people when it comes to music -- I find that when you are able to profoundly touch someone emotionally by a new piece of music (if they already have prior emotional experiences with it, that's a different matter entirely), that's hard to do and a sign that you're really doing something right. I mean most people will intellectually or for courtesy sake say that they liked a performance, but that subconscious doesn't lie when someone truly finds a piece of music which moves them imo.

[j_tour]

Interesting. I think that is easy enough to impress most layman audiences at least. Although I have more respect for the sensibilities of people when it comes to music -- I find that when you are able to profoundly touch someone emotionally by a new piece of music (if they already have prior emotional experiences with it, that's a different matter entirely), that's hard to do and a sign that you're really doing something right. I mean most people will intellectually or for courtesy sake say that they liked a performance, but that subconscious doesn't lie when someone truly finds a piece of music which moves them imo.

Well, you're a better person than I:  I like to think I can "read the room" and gauge peoples' moods, but in my experience, "people" want to (i) know that they're being "served" quality music by professionals and (ii) they secondarily, and very rarely, can be transported by that illusion.

I don't know how to get from (i) to (ii), but I suspect it's some kind of psychological buffer or "safety zone" on the part of audiences, in general. 

Maybe that's the key to being a great artist vs. a mere entertainer.  I don't know:  people are strange, I suppose.

[dogperson]

Well, you're a better person than I:  I like to think I can "read the room" and gauge peoples' moods, but in my experience, "people" want to (i) know that they're being "served" quality music by professionals and (ii) they secondarily, and very rarely, can be transported by that illusion.

I don't know how to get from (i) to (ii), but I suspect it's some kind of psychological buffer or "safety zone" on the part of audiences, in general. 

Maybe that's the key to being a great artist vs. a mere entertainer.  I don't know:  people are strange, I suppose.

Ranjit appears to have performance experiences that are not frequently had by others... but that we dream of having. 

[j_tour]

Ranjit appears to have performance experiences that are not frequently had by others... but that we dream of having.

Heh.

Yeah,  but leave the kid alone!  He seems to be doing OK.  Plus, he's a young kid and has some repertoire.  As well as his improvisations.

No, it's a good time to be a young musician:  the whole CV thing, not much competition.  I say go for it.

[ranjit]

Ranjit appears to have performance experiences that are not frequently had by others... but that we dream of having.

LOL.
I'd say context matters. I was the only person who really played the piano in college, for about two years.  I used to play on a common (digital) piano for a few hours a day, so maybe over a hundred people had heard my playing. I was playing stuff pretty much everyone else had only heard in recordings. I would take requests if someone came by and watched me play and I would play pretty much any popular song on the spot, from a variety of styles (as long as there weren't too many chords), and come up with my own variations. I would often play my own covers or improvisations of possibly hundreds of popular songs. I would also engage the few theory nerds out there because I had read up on a lot of stuff. And I had listened to thousands of recordings, so I could constantly show people interesting music which they had never heard before.

in my experience, "people" want to (i) know that they're being "served" quality music by professionals and (ii) they secondarily, and very rarely, can be transported by that illusion.

I don't know how to get from (i) to (ii), but I suspect it's some kind of psychological buffer or "safety zone" on the part of audiences, in general. 

I was mostly playing for friends, or in college. That makes a huge difference, because it's not a paying audience, so people weren't really thinking of me as a "professional". My strategy would typically be to start from where they were at, playing pieces or arranging on the spot music they knew and liked, and then segueing into my own ideas and improvisations.

Piano playing and arranging of that kind was something most of those there had never heard live in their lifetime.

In short, it actually was a dream scenario, one I will probably never experience again.

[slurred_beat]

I forgot to reply to this topic LOL. Thank you all for the tips I have tried some of your tips and they are good! If you can post more tips, please post them, and I can try them! Thank you all 

[j_tour]

I forgot to reply to this topic LOL. Thank you all for the tips I have tried some of your tips and they are good! If you can post more tips, please post them, and I can try them! Thank you all 

Out of curiosity, can I know which ones?

If I sounded a bit brusque earlier, well, that was my intention, but it's just my manner.

[getsiegs]

I have a suggestion - Schumann-Liszt Widmung.

It's a lovely song and transcription, very melodic, tonal, chordal, pretty easy to read, etc. The end has some flashy arpeggios and chords that look quite impressive but aren't terribly challenging in reality. It only took me about a week to learn and another week to polish it. Highly recommend!

[j_tour]

I have a suggestion - Schumann-Liszt Widmung.

Very good choice!  I didn't know this arrangement.  I'll look forward to reading through this at the keyboard, so thanks.

I haven't printed out and read through it, but your comments seem spot on, after listening to the piece. 

I'm not sure it's a "holy sh*t, that pregnant cat can play the lights out!" but, again, played well, maybe 5 or 10 percent of a given audience would think very highly of the pianist.

I still think the Gm Op. 126 Beethoven bagatelle can't go wrong:  it takes a few minutes of deciding how to perform it, but it's kind of got something for everybody.

In the same vein, depending on the audience, how about the Liszt arrangement of « La Marseillaise »?  That's fun to play:  lots of octaves in the LH.  Sort of a boogie-woogie piece, and very much designed to be a show-off, rabble-rousing piece, I'd suppose.

[getsiegs]

I'm not sure it's a "holy sh*t, that pregnant cat can play the lights out!" but, again, played well, maybe 5 or 10 percent of a given audience would think very highly of the pianist.

No, it's definitely not but most audiences probably don't know too much about technique and I'd imagine those arpeggios might knock at least a few pairs of socks off.

In the same vein, depending on the audience, how about the Liszt arrangement of « La Marseillaise »?  That's fun to play:  lots of octaves in the LH.  Sort of a boogie-woogie piece, and very much designed to be a show-off, rabble-rousing piece, I'd suppose.

I guess we both learned something today; I didn't know this arrangement at all either! It definitely has a more fun, encore-ish style (Widmung is certainly sappier) but it might not be as accessible for the audience or the pianist. It's mostly just octaves, I know, but for more beginners it's probably quite taxing on the wrists especially the triplet LH section. I'd still agree it's a good suggestion though!

[j_tour]

No, it's definitely not but most audiences probably don't know too much about technique and I'd imagine those arpeggios might knock at least a few pairs of socks off.

Well, it's a beautiful arrangement, and I'll put it on the stacks of music to read through.

I guess we both learned something today; I didn't know this arrangement at all either! It definitely has a more fun, encore-ish style (Widmung is certainly sappier) but it might not be as accessible for the audience or the pianist. It's mostly just octaves, I know, but for more beginners it's probably quite taxing on the wrists especially the triplet LH section. I'd still agree it's a good suggestion though!

Indeed!  It's not one I've read at the keyboard more than two or three times.  I don't think it would go over that well with Anglophile Canadians/Commonwealth or British folks, but I don't remember it being very difficult.  Except, yes, it could kill one's wrists if not careful.

I'm still not sure why a few of the Op. 126 Beethoven bagatelles are not being played:  no, none of them are exactly "easy," but they are each brief and just to show off, any one or two should be a minimal effort for someone who knows how to play a bit.

Or the Chopin Op. 28 no. 1:  I'm not claiming it's an easy prélude, but it is short and can be played.

Or the Bach WTC1 E minor fugue:  not difficult, but is fun to play and would surely impress some people when played fast and well.

Here's Brendel at the Op. 126:  the G minor (second) bagatelle at 44:41.  I actually use Brendel's edition of all the Beethoven bagatelles, publihed by Wiener Urtext, but a while ago I just decided to do the opening statement in one hand alone.  Using two hands does give a bit of added texture, but it's not worth the extra effort to me, and I like it better my way.

Dig Brendel's very smooth major thirds after the "A" section, though:  very nice.  Not much pedal, either.

Although in third Op. 126 bagatelle, I do have to blame Brendel for including all those damned ledger lines way up in the treble of the piano.  Yeah, I can recognize from experience a lot of those, but, c'mon!  That's just plain sadistic!  And I like de Sade!

=2688

EDIT:  This is not probably in the OP's wheelhouse, but after having heard numerous renditions of Liszt's Grand galop chromatique, I'm really starting to like this piece.  No, it's neither easy nor particularly brief, but I like it and I can play it with (some, perhaps a lot) of practice.  I'll never be able to memorize it, and it's long enough that it will be a PITA to read at tempo off the page.

[edvond]

Judging from your current repertoire, here are some pieces I would recommend:
Alexandrov.--Romantic Episode Op. 88/10 in B flat. A little awkward in spots but well worth the effort. Has same effect as Rachmaninoff B flat Prelude but much, much easier.
Bilotti. The Firefly. Easy, flashy, Impressionistic
Balakirev-Glinka. The Lark. Easy, pianistic cadenzas all over the keyboard.
Berkovich. C major Toccata; Variations on a theme by Paganini -- anything by Berkovich is accessible, pianistic and impressive.
Liszt. Op. 1 Etude D minor; Etude in B flat minor. (Precursors of his Trans. Etudes. Flashy and not difficult.)
Schmoll. Etude in E minor from Etudes moyennes No. 51 "Les Vagues" Brilliant and lies easily in the fingers.
Jon Schmidt. All of Me. Fast, jazzy, impressive and very pianistic (in D flat). Great encore.
Schytte. Albumblatt Op. 54/5. Well written, easy and impressive.
Silvansky. Torrent Etude and Blizzard Prelude. Easy, Russian and flashy.

A ton of Russian era music fits the bill for you. A lot is out of print but it is starting to reappear. 

[lelle]

Some of that seems pretty obscure. I think I have only heard the Balakirev and Liszt