Is Yi Chung Huang (LaDivinaFanatic) a better technician than Hamelin?

[wildman]

So I just came across this guy today:

As you can probably see, this is...superhuman.

I've seen MANY astonishingly virtuosic performances...Kissin playing Feux follets, Berezovsky, etc

But watching this guy race through these unusually difficult showpieces is a UNIQUE experience for me.

Hamelin is generally regarded to have among the best techniques ever in all of recorded piano history. How does Mr. Huang compare to him in terms of raw technique? Because right now, I think Mr. Huang is...probably a better technician than even Hamelin.

The only other pianist I have heard that struck me just as much is Alexei Grynyuk, but I think he specializes more on octaves. I would love to hear a comparison in octave technique between the two, as I think Grynyuk surpasses everyone in octave speed.

Thoughts?

[skari123]

I would say that I agree with you that this guy has better technique than Hamelin. I actually believe that many pianists have better technique than Hamelin. Looking at how this guy moves his hands and body while playing is inspiring. I recently watched a video of Hamelin breaking down 9 virtuoso pieces on the Tonebase channel. What strikes me is that he found the first page of Ondine to be terrifying, which is not that hard at all really. This suggests to me that his technique is in many ways forced, that is not natural or sustainable in the long run. A pianist with a good solid technique should not have big problems with small technical passages like the first page of Ondine. If you actually look at videos of Hamelin in his prime playing, his technique seems very effortless. But now it seems like his technique has faded and is more forced in some ways. Im not saying this to diss Hamelin or something, but I've seen pianists that have this gift of natural technique that they don't have a clue how they do the things that they do. This has often lead to them getting injured or they get older and their technique seems to fade. I believe there is a reason that Marta Argerich can play even better than she did when she was younger. It's kind of weird for me to believe that the prodigy at my school got injured and couldn't play for weeks while I have been completely fine progressing gradually without any pain or injury. Pianists should read books about technique regardless of technical capacities, like they say, knowledge is power.   

[lelle]

This guy seems to have a natural, effortless technique.

So does young Hamelin who races through monstrous difficulties like they are nothing.

What in particular about this performance makes it stand out to you compared to Hamelin?

(Not that there is a competition anyways)

[thalbergmad]

Mechanically he is exceptional, but I lost count of the wrong notes. Not many play this as musically it is not worth the effort and this chaps effort re enforces that belief.
I don't particularly care much about Hamelin, but he has played Alkan concerto for solo piano, Reger's Telemann variations along with the Busoni and Henselt piano concertos.
When this pianist has done something like that, I may appreciate his talent, but he appears to be a mechanicus.
Thal

[ahinton]

Other than the fact that I DO care for Hamelin, it's hard to disagree with most of what Thal writes here.

[wildman]

Mechanically he is exceptional, but I lost count of the wrong notes. Not many play this as musically it is not worth the effort and this chaps effort re enforces that belief.
I don't particularly care much about Hamelin, but he has played Alkan concerto for solo piano, Reger's Telemann variations along with the Busoni and Henselt piano concertos.
When this pianist has done something like that, I may appreciate his talent, but he appears to be a mechanicus.
Thal

Is not pure mechanic the main reason why Hamelin is so popular? And if we judge by pure mechanical capability, I suspect Mr. Yi is equal to if not superior to him based on the mere fact that he can even execute the piece (if imperfectly) at such a tempo.

[roboute guilliman cfa]

&t=6s
The commentary in the description clarifies things a lot. He is able to give several months to a single piece like the Spanish Rhapsody. The big recordings pianists, competition winners, do not have this incredible luxury. I would guess his available recordings are cherrypicked for his very best signature pieces, that he's taking to competitions.

If MAH spent that equivalent time on the Chopin-Godowsky etudes, proportionally, that would be literally several decades, right? He's had to learn Yi Chung Huang's lifetime repertoire in a single year, probably multiple times over in his career so far. If he can achieve these results and level of performance after working on a piece in 2 or 3 weeks then I think your claim would have some merit.

I do want to see him at the next round of Van Cliburn/Tchaikovsky/Chopin competition. But if he's only interested in exotically difficult pieces that lack benchmark recordings so that people can't compare him to others, that's not going to happen. I think it's more impressive when someone like George Li still stands out among hundreds of legends with the Liszt HR2, La Campanella or Chopin op 10 no 2 or Dimitri Shiskin with his Mephisto Waltz, under the highest possible level of pressure at the Tchaikovsky competition.

[roboute guilliman cfa]

Also he has a pretty poor performance of the Robert le Diable Liszt transcription at the end of this video here,

. He plays the grande paganini etude after and it's messier than the one you posted, which was already not the cleanest perrformance. Everyone has off days, this is purely to show that if you cherrypick the person's best performances, you'll have an incomplete impression. This is him presumably playing something with not several hundred hours of practice.

[wildman]

&t=6s
The commentary in the description clarifies things a lot. He is able to give several months to a single piece like the Spanish Rhapsody. The big recordings pianists, competition winners, do not have this incredible luxury. I would guess his available recordings are cherrypicked for his very best signature pieces, that he's taking to competitions.

If MAH spent that equivalent time on the Chopin-Godowsky etudes, proportionally, that would be literally several decades, right? He's had to learn Yi Chung Huang's lifetime repertoire in a single year, probably multiple times over in his career so far. If he can achieve these results and level of performance after working on a piece in 2 or 3 weeks then I think your claim would have some merit.

I do want to see him at the next round of Van Cliburn/Tchaikovsky/Chopin competition. But if he's only interested in exotically difficult pieces that lack benchmark recordings so that people can't compare him to others, that's not going to happen. I think it's more impressive when someone like George Li still stands out among hundreds of legends with the Liszt HR2, La Campanella or Chopin op 10 no 2 or Dimitri Shiskin with his Mephisto Waltz, under the highest possible level of pressure at the Tchaikovsky competition.

Be that as it may, what matters in the end is how fast he is able to play such a difficult piece. And Hamelin can't seem to achieve that. He's basically a record breaker.

[roboute guilliman cfa]

You have no idea what you're talking about lol. Hamelin has never even recorded this piece, only the s141 version. You seriously can't tell these versions apart?

It does not matter if you set a record if no one else is trying to set that record or is even aware of the race. You win a race where you're the only participant - does that mean anything? How exactly does Hamelin know you want him to play this specific piece and beat this pianist he's never heard of in a speed race with no regard for hitting the right notes?

 And If he were half as good as you think he'd have played at the Chopin or Tchaikovsky or Van Cliburn or Geneva or Arthur Rubinstein or Leeds in the last year.

Any of those competitors can dig up some obscure transcription that no one else plays and then set a record. Just because no one else plays them.

Finally did your parents ever teach you about 'apples-to-apples' comparison? How much two people spent on one piece matters is the only thing that matters. If someone learns 3 things exceptionally, and someone else can learn 30 things exceptionally (in the same amount of time) that second person is the far superior technician. Imagine a teacher gives one student 3 weeks to master a Liszt opera transcription and then gives another student 8.5 months. Is that how you do things?

[wildman]

You have no idea what you're talking about lol. Hamelin has never even recorded this piece, only the s141 version. You seriously can't tell these versions apart?

It does not matter if you set a record if no one else is trying to set that record or is even aware of the race. You win a race where you're the only participant - does that mean anything? How exactly does Hamelin know you want him to play this specific piece and beat this pianist he's never heard of in a speed race with no regard for hitting the right notes?

 And If he were half as good as you think he'd have played at the Chopin or Tchaikovsky or Van Cliburn or Geneva or Arthur Rubinstein or Leeds in the last year.

Any of those competitors can dig up some obscure transcription that no one else plays and then set a record. Just because no one else plays them.

Finally did your parents ever teach you about 'apples-to-apples' comparison? How much two people spent on one piece matters is the only thing that matters. If someone learns 3 things exceptionally, and someone else can learn 30 things exceptionally (in the same amount of time) that second person is the far superior technician. Imagine a teacher gives one student 3 weeks to master a Liszt opera transcription and then gives another student 8.5 months. Is that how you do things?

It matters in the sense that it is an absurdly difficult piece which is as hard or harder than most of which Hamelin does, and Mr. Yi plays it at a superhuman speed. Whereas others have managed to play what Hamelin has played (e.g. Maltempo, Ogdon, etc.) at a similar tempo (maybe with more mistakes but almost pretty much at the same speed), watch how Petrov and Filipec tried to play Mr. Yi's piece but struggled to play it at a much slower tempo. I know what I'm talking about because I attempted to play this piece myself.

[ahinton]

Is not pure mechanic the main reason why Hamelin is so popular? And if we judge by pure mechanical capability, I suspect Mr. Yi is equal to if not superior to him based on the mere fact that he can even execute the piece (if imperfectly) at such a tempo.

The answer to your question is an emphatic "no", which should be obvious if you listen to his latest 2-CD box set of the complete Nocturnes and Barcarolles of Fauré, works which, whilst also technically challenging and demanding, are so in quite different ways to the kind of writing under considration here so far. Mr Yi's "execution" is indeed far from perfect in terms of textual accuracy, for all that his mechanism is considerable.

[mjames]

I would say that I agree with you that this guy has better technique than Hamelin. I actually believe that many pianists have better technique than Hamelin. Looking at how this guy moves his hands and body while playing is inspiring. I recently watched a video of Hamelin breaking down 9 virtuoso pieces on the Tonebase channel. What strikes me is that he found the first page of Ondine to be terrifying, which is not that hard at all really. This suggests to me that his technique is in many ways forced, that is not natural or sustainable in the long run.

Marc-Andre Hamelin is 62 years old, and is still performing and recording virtuoso works all the time. Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.

[skari123]

Marc-Andre Hamelin is 62 years old, and is still performing and recording virtuoso works all the time. Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.

First off, age has nothing to do with decline in piano technique, Martha Argerich is a prime example of this. Just because someone can hammer a difficult piece into his fingers does not make one a virtuoso. It's not that Hamelin is a bad pianist by any means, i just found it slightly alarming that the guy states that the first page of Ondine is terrifying. There are many pianists out there that play that page like drinking water. If something technically is hard for you to play means that you haven't solved that technical problem. There are fairly known pianists like Sergio Tiempo, Cyprien Katsaris that have a more effortless technique than Hamelin. The truth hurts

[ranjit]

It's not that Hamelin is a bad pianist by any means, i just found it slightly alarming that the guy states that the first page of Ondine is terrifying. There are many pianists out there that play that page like drinking water.

Every pianist has certain isolated things they find difficult, so I wouldn't go just by what he said about the piece. He may also have been trying to make a point. Every technical approach will have certain strengths and weaknesses. The perfect pianist could switch between all of them at will, but no one is perfect.

Is pure technique what makes Hamelin famous? I think it's also a certain kind of intellectual approach plus a great memory for complex contemporary repertoire. While it may not be to everyone's taste, he has recorded plenty of Godowsky, Alkan etc. and thus occupies a niche.

That said, the way he moves during fast jumps and octave/large chord playing strikes me as being more efficient than Hamelin. I personally enjoy his sense of musicality, at least in these pieces, more as well.

I still find the ultimate, technique-wise to be Cziffra. I do not see the same kinds of bursts of speed that he could achieve on occasion even with this pianist, as far as I can tell.

[skari123]

Every pianist has certain isolated things they find difficult, so I wouldn't go just by what he said about the piece. He may also have been trying to make a point. Every technical approach will have certain strengths and weaknesses. The perfect pianist could switch between all of them at will, but no one is perfect.

Is pure technique what makes Hamelin famous? I think it's also a certain kind of intellectual approach plus a great memory for complex contemporary repertoire. While it may not be to everyone's taste, he has recorded plenty of Godowsky, Alkan etc. and thus occupies a niche.

That said, the way he moves during fast jumps and octave/large chord playing strikes me as being more efficient than Hamelin. I personally enjoy his sense of musicality, at least in these pieces, more as well.

I still find the ultimate, technique-wise to be Cziffra. I do not see the same kinds of bursts of speed that he could achieve on occasion even with this pianist, as far as I can tell.

Thank you for your reply Ranjit. I know about this simple fact that pianists find certain technical aspects harder than other. I don't think that technique is the only thing that makes Hamelin famous and have never stated otherwise. However, this post thread is distinctly talking about pure technique so I offered my opinions on this subject. Each individual has their opinions on what pianists they find good or bad. I don't believe that every technical approach has strengths and weaknesses, although many of them do. The best approach for technique I believe is to be constantly trying to deepen your knowledge of how your hands and body work for the most efficient movement possible. While this approach will probably always leave pianists with weaknesses due to them not being able to adress them, it does not have any weaknesses in theory. The difference between that and, let's say the German school is that you cannot predetermine which weaknesses the pianist will have. The last time I checked the modern standard of teaching piano technique seems to consist of practice tips and technical exercises/etudes. Probably the reason many people struggle with technique for a long time, but that's a different topic.
Cziffra is definitely one of the greatest of all time, that's for sure

[goethefan69420]

This guys my friend. We will be doing concerts, and he is going to start doing many concerts in the US hopefully too

He is a great artist, I've heard him sightread Henselt concerto, Brahms concerto, and many other works.

He has been playing lots of Sorabji lately as wlel.

I think he is better than Hamelin, because Hamelin isn't as big of a fan of old school pianists and basically his goal is to play like Hofmann, Lhevinne, Rachmaninoff. oh ALSO HE IS SUPER BIG FAN OF YUDINA, ALSO OPERA. he Is the biggest Maria Callas fan ever, and he loves a lot of great old school condcutoirs.oirs.

 My goal is to play like Neuhaus, Paderewski, and Cortot.

We want to revive the old school style of playing and also think to be a grea tpianist you must listen to all music, and be very educated on the literature, paintings, poetry, etc.

[lostinidlewonder]

Playing technically tough works and focusing on it is NOT the best way to make a name for yourself as a performer. Some pianists are so caught up over "difficulty" and technical acrobatics they forget that those buying tickets are not pianists nor motivated to be "wowed" by technical prowess. Yoyo Ma said it very well here https://stringsmagazine.com/yo-yo-ma-on-communicating-effectively-with-your-audience/

“If it sounds at all hard, we’ve lost the music."

[roboute guilliman cfa]

He has some great gifts but is this really true, 'his goal is to play like Hofmann, Lhevinne, Rachmaninoff'? Easy to say something like that but almost everything I can find of his playing shows his biggest influence is more Simon Barere than those guys.

He seems so focused on these opera transcriptions, and apparently Sorabji now (omg why just why)? He is just not interested in the 'regular' repertoire?

[pianocomposer]

Every pianist has certain isolated things they find difficult, so I wouldn't go just by what he said about the piece. He may also have been trying to make a point. Every technical approach will have certain strengths and weaknesses. The perfect pianist could switch between all of them at will, but no one is perfect.

Is pure technique what makes Hamelin famous? I think it's also a certain kind of intellectual approach plus a great memory for complex contemporary repertoire. While it may not be to everyone's taste, he has recorded plenty of Godowsky, Alkan etc. and thus occupies a niche.

That said, the way he moves during fast jumps and octave/large chord playing strikes me as being more efficient than Hamelin. I personally enjoy his sense of musicality, at least in these pieces, more as well.

I still find the ultimate, technique-wise to be Cziffra. I do not see the same kinds of bursts of speed that he could achieve on occasion even with this pianist, as far as I can tell.

Totally Agree, Cziffra is unsurpassable, I really cannot imagine anybody in the future play that Galop chromatique or Faust waltz the way cziffra did !
If cziffra had access to the sheets of this or was challenged to play it, he would probably give a stunning account of it, as he is the good old cziffra we will always remember him to be 

[anacrusis]

He is very skilled, but I think Hamelin is a better technician still and more importantly, has more to say musically.

[wildman]

He has some great gifts but is this really true, 'his goal is to play like Hofmann, Lhevinne, Rachmaninoff'? Easy to say something like that but almost everything I can find of his playing shows his biggest influence is more Simon Barere than those guys.

He seems so focused on these opera transcriptions, and apparently Sorabji now (omg why just why)? He is just not interested in the 'regular' repertoire?

I'm kind of guilty of the same syndrome. Recently I avoid common works (why play something which has been played a thousand times already?) and go for rare romantic or late classical repertoire, usually of the highly technical kind (La Clochette, L'infatigable, Czerny op. 364, etc.).

I also find myself trying to copy pre-Horowitz pianists, particularly Cortot. Or at least, sounding a lot like them (mistakes and amateur recording quality included).

Maybe it's a trend these days? A reaction against the somewhat sterile "Chopin competition superstar" convention?

[lelle]

I also find myself trying to copy pre-Horowitz pianists, particularly Cortot. Or at least, sounding a lot like them (mistakes and amateur recording quality included).

Maybe it's a trend these days? A reaction against the somewhat sterile "Chopin competition superstar" convention?

Probably not among those who try to be "Chopin Competition superstars"

But I definitely think there are more people today who are interested in the earlier styles of pianism compared to, say, 50 years ago. I can definitely get behind borrowing stylistic elements from romantic era pianism.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

&t=6s

Yeah... no.
It is an impressive performance; heck, ANY performance of the Spanish Fantasy is impressive. That's just how hard it is.
However, there is very little musicality, and the wrong notes are far too plentiful. I'd rather listen to a MIDI recording...
Honestly, this seems to just be another one of those people who only cares about how hard the piece is, and not how good it sounds.

[snorefest]

I would say that I agree with you that this guy has better technique than Hamelin. I actually believe that many pianists have better technique than Hamelin. Looking at how this guy moves his hands and body while playing is inspiring. I recently watched a video of Hamelin breaking down 9 virtuoso pieces on the Tonebase channel. What strikes me is that he found the first page of Ondine to be terrifying, which is not that hard at all really. This suggests to me that his technique is in many ways forced, that is not natural or sustainable in the long run. A pianist with a good solid technique should not have big problems with small technical passages like the first page of Ondine. If you actually look at videos of Hamelin in his prime playing, his technique seems very effortless. But now it seems like his technique has faded and is more forced in some ways. Im not saying this to diss Hamelin or something, but I've seen pianists that have this gift of natural technique that they don't have a clue how they do the things that they do. This has often lead to them getting injured or they get older and their technique seems to fade. I believe there is a reason that Marta Argerich can play even better than she did when she was younger. It's kind of weird for me to believe that the prodigy at my school got injured and couldn't play for weeks while I have been completely fine progressing gradually without any pain or injury. Pianists should read books about technique regardless of technical capacities, like they say, knowledge is power.

Well I don't see Argerich practicing more as she's getting older. I think she's relies on her natural prowess no less than Hamelin is not more. Hamelin just play unconventional repertoire than populists like Argerich never treaded onto, which are some harder harder and more substantial.

[lelle]

Anyone who thinks Hamelin does not have fantastic technique is out of their mind. He is also in his 60s so an eventual slight physical decline compared to his 30s/40s/50s is not exactly unheard of.

[transitional]

Well I don't see Argerich practicing more as she's getting older. I think she's relies on her natural prowess no less than Hamelin is not more. Hamelin just play unconventional repertoire than populists like Argerich never treaded onto, which are some harder harder and more substantial.

I don't really think Hamelin's repertoire is extremely off the beaten path. He plays much more difficult music, but his repertoire is largely part of a broader body of well-known composers that may not be as frequently played as Chopin. Argerich definitely practices but she said herself that she doesn't spend much time on fundamentals. Hamelin says that he doesn't do anything particularly special to play extremely difficult pieces, he just eliminates current flaws, which is a reasonable approach that he simply dedicates a lot of effort towards.

[ahinton]

It is now quite some time since this subject has been addressed here, but whilst some have complained about Yi-Chung Huang's wrong notes, I am unaware that anyone has yet raised the topic of intelligibility as such, despite there having been numerous reference to the excessive tempi that he sometimes chooses to adopt. I have yet to hear a wholly satisfactory performance of Szymanowski's second piano sonata from anyone - among the greatest piano sonatas of its time - (I do so wish that I could have listened to the late Jonathan Powell in this work!), but I have heard several in which, notwithstanding certain reservations, I can at least make out all of the details in the score, which is surely an important factor?...

[dizzyfingers]

Critics! 
A great talent, a great technique should applauded and welcomed.
Even better:  Yi Chung Huang is authentic and true to his artistic vision:  he's plays fringe music, he's not selling out to what The Establishment believes is the sellable repertoire (Beethoven, Chopin, Rachmaninoff).
Check out this program:

Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji (1892 - 1988)
Opus Clavicembalisticum, KSS. 50
I. Pars Prima
i. Introito
ii. Preludio-Corale
 
Karol Szymanowski (1882 - 1937)
Sonata No. 2, Op. 21
Sonata No. 3, Op. 36
 
Samuil Feinberg (1890 - 1962)
Sonata No. 6, Op. 13
Sonata No. 3, Op. 3

[ahinton]

Oh, there's no arguing with his repertoire choices - all works that deserve to be better known - but, laudable though that is, I don't see that this aspect of the matter has been part of the discussion!

[roboute guilliman cfa]

I admire how he doesn't care about the marketability of the repertoire and does have an amazing technique. However so do all the semifinalsts/finalists/winners of the major competitions. They just don't play as fast as they humanly can like he does, they understand you can't just sacrifice tone and accuracy and then get a free pass because you picked a fast tempo. I don't know why he thinks that it works that way; all the first round exits from these random competitions should've taught this to him. A mature artist should dwell on that and learn from it, right?

If you watch Han Chen, Sergei Belyavsky play the Liszt El Contrabandista or Don Juan, Kevin Chen, they play this type of showpiece repertoire at the same level of virtuosity if not higher, but with better clarity and shaping, and less mistakes too. Can he pull off a Ravel Gaspard like Aristo Sham (in a live performance? Keep in mind that Spanish Fantasy performance he said was the best result of months of takes. If he can pull something like that off live then that would be mean a lot.)

I also think his spokerspersons are bad reflections on him. Hoffmanscores posted a compilation video of their playing on youtube and most do not play better than the average amateur. So I kind of get that they are awed by his ability to play the flashy pieces they want to learn and impress other laymen with. But.. yeah the demographic he appeals to is exactly what you'd assume it to be. Poor thinking skills, selective blinders (criticize Argerich or Pogorelich for excessive tempo but not his Lucrezia or Norma), coming up with their own fanfiction of old school pianists (Hoffman was kicked out of Curtis by conspiracy. Someone points out he was drinking heavily on the job, then that guy stopped responding). He should clean house.

The irony is he himself is moving away from the supervirtuoso Romantic era and yet his community is still in that speed monkey Liszt/Alkan kind of phase. They just take his words at face value. He talks so much about admiring opera singers but doesn't actually play like that. Look at his Norma, Robert le Diable videos. IHe namedrops some old school pianists then ignores their actual recordings. Show me one time anywhere that Cortot or Lhevinne or Sofronitsky played Chopin or Liszt smashing the keys like this. Or that Maria Callas sang like this.

But I do support him making a name for himself outside of competitions. The upcoming Sorabji Opus Archimagicum I'm looking forward. I think he has a chance to succeed without needing to go through the competition circuit and that would be a major positive success story for all young pianists and show viability of non-standard repertoire. I don't know if Sorabji is the right composer to do this with, his music is as inaccessible as it gets, but if he's the one playing it I will listen to it.

[cuberdrift]

There seems to be this strange "SDC" community obsessed with rare difficult Romantic pieces.

Nothing wrong with that, but I think Yi Chung's interpretations are way too fast.

Take Le Preux. I haven't heard a truly satisfactory recording of this. Seonyong, while I like his other renditions, is also a little too fast. The piece is not prestissimo. In Yi Chung's video I don't imagine a stately French knight - more a knight falling off his horse and tumbling down a hill for lack of care.

If Yo Chung is trully.obsessed with opera. He should record Thalberg's L'art du chant (which I believe that Singaporean lawyer did). There's no room for extremepianochannel-esque speed records there.

There is however a Japanese pianist which is superb in Alkan. I forgot his name, but he is the only one to satisfactorily record comme le vent at tempo, and still entertain my ears. He is the one I always look for in Alkan. I hope he records Le Preux.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

There is however a Japanese pianist which is superb in Alkan. I forgot his name, but he is the only one to satisfactorily record comme le vent at tempo, and still entertain my ears. He is the one I always look for in Alkan. I hope he records Le Preux.

Perhaps Yui Morishita?

I personally don't like his interpretation remotely as much as Vincenzo Maltempo's, though he is undoubtedly a great pianist. His Alkan Op. 34 Scherzo Focoso, for example, is objectively the best one ever recorded (though side note: I DESPISE that piece lol; it, Le Preux, and the third movement of the Concerto for Solo Piano are the only Alkan pieces that I dislike).

There seems to be this strange "SDC" community obsessed with rare difficult Romantic pieces.

There are definitely some people who only care about difficulty and obsess over stuff like Hamelin's (very show-off-oriented and, if I'm being honest, actively harmful) Alkan performances, and Huang Yi-Chung is sort of an idol in that community I imagine, considering bullsh_t like this (skip to 5:46, the coda of Trio du Seconde Acte):

It's an utterly tasteless and MIDI-esque interpretation compared to William Wolfram's (below; skip to 7:30), who manages to make something actually beautiful out of the horrifically difficult passages -- at a much more logical tempo. Though of course playing the 10th tremolos, the massive leaps, etc. at such a ridiculous tempo that it becomes almost comical appeals to people who only care about difficulty and not the music.

Also, my impression is that LDF is apparently something of a nazi (e.g. his reddit account shows that he's active in, among other things, r/AnarchoCapitalism and r/PoliticalCompassMemes), so maybe NOT the best person to practically worship...

I suppose I'll end this post by posting some recordings of fantastic, extremely rare Romantic pieces that aren't "difficult for the sake of difficulty."

Alkan - Op. 31 Preludes (Huseyin Sermet and Laurent Martin)

Alkan - Op. 63 Esquisses (Laurent Martin)

Alkan - Op. 39 no. 11 "Ouverture" (Jack Gibbons) [I would say that this is my favorite piece for solo piano, at time of this writing]

Alkan - Op. 22 Nocturne (Jack Gibbons)

Mélanie Chasselon - Nocturne ("Gamma1734" on youtube)

Cécile Chaminade - Op. 40 Concertstück (Christina Harnisch)

Cécile Chaminade - Op. 21 Sonata (Joanne Polk)

Liszt - S. 142 Morceau de Salon (William Wolfram)

Medtner - Op. 25 no. 2 Sonata "Night Wind" (Severin Von Eckardstein) [probably the most difficult thing I'll post in this list, by a lot lol]

Medtner - Op. 27 Sonata-Ballade (four recordings, including one by Medtner himself; my favorite is Eckardstein's, which is the second and starts at 20:58)

Medtner - Op. 60 Piano Concerto no. 3 "Ballade" (Tatiana Nikolaeva) [hands down my favorite piano piece and recording of all time.]

[anacrusis]

considering bullsh_t like this

Bullsh_t? I thought it was fine. Impressive skills. What do you not like about it?

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Bullsh_t? I thought it was fine. Impressive skills. What do you not like about it?

The "bullsh_t" comment was mainly referring to the utterly absurd tempo choice. It's technically very impressive, though it really hurts the interpretation (especially compared to Wolfram's recording).

[cuberdrift]

Perhaps Yui Morishita?

I personally don't like his interpretation remotely as much as Vincenzo Maltempo's, though he is undoubtedly a great pianist. His Alkan Op. 34 Scherzo Focoso, for example, is objectively the best one ever recorded (though side note: I DESPISE that piece lol; it, Le Preux, and the third movement of the Concerto for Solo Piano are the only Alkan pieces that I dislike).

I can see why some might prefer maltempo or gibbons or Morishita. For me personally I like the "edge" and unabashed-ness he brings to Alkan. He plays like a barbarian for lack of a better word and it seems to work.

There are definitely some people who only care about difficulty and obsess over stuff like Hamelin's (very show-off-oriented and, if I'm being honest, actively harmful) Alkan performances, and Huang Yi-Chung is sort of an idol in that community I imagine, considering bullsh_t like this (skip to 5:46, the coda of Trio du Seconde Acte):

It's an utterly tasteless and MIDI-esque interpretation compared to William Wolfram's (below; skip to 7:30), who manages to make something actually beautiful out of the horrifically difficult passages -- at a much more logical tempo. Though of course playing the 10th tremolos, the massive leaps, etc. at such a ridiculous tempo that it becomes almost comical appeals to people who only care about difficulty and not the music.

I absolutely adore the Wolfram rendition. It's because of that that the Lucrezia Borgia of Liszt became my favorite romantic operatic piano transcription and I put it at just a level below the Liszt Sonata in terms of musical grandeur as far as liszt piano pieces go.

I have not yet listened to Huang's version.

Also, my impression is that LDF is apparently something of a nazi (e.g. his reddit account shows that he's active in, among other things, r/AnarchoCapitalism and r/PoliticalCompassMemes), so maybe NOT the best person to practically worship...

To be fair, I suppose the typical 19th C. virtuoso composer didn't uncommonly hold edgy sociopolitical views as well.

I suppose I'll end this post by posting some recordings of fantastic, extremely rare Romantic pieces that aren't "difficult for the sake of difficulty."

Alkan - Op. 31 Preludes (Huseyin Sermet and Laurent Martin)

Alkan - Op. 63 Esquisses (Laurent Martin)

Alkan - Op. 39 no. 11 "Ouverture" (Jack Gibbons) [I would say that this is my favorite piece for solo piano, at time of this writing]

Alkan - Op. 22 Nocturne (Jack Gibbons)

Mélanie Chasselon - Nocturne ("Gamma1734" on youtube)

Cécile Chaminade - Op. 40 Concertstück (Christina Harnisch)

Cécile Chaminade - Op. 21 Sonata (Joanne Polk)

Liszt - S. 142 Morceau de Salon (William Wolfram)

Medtner - Op. 25 no. 2 Sonata "Night Wind" (Severin Von Eckardstein) [probably the most difficult thing I'll post in this list, by a lot lol]

Medtner - Op. 27 Sonata-Ballade (four recordings, including one by Medtner himself; my favorite is Eckardstein's, which is the second and starts at 20:58)

Medtner - Op. 60 Piano Concerto no. 3 "Ballade" (Tatiana Nikolaeva) [hands down my favorite piano piece and recording of all time.]

Thanks for that list!

I would not normally describe Alkan, Chaminade, or Medtner as "extremely rare". I have my own rough ranking which goes like -

A+ overlplayed
A Standard rep.
B+ Semi-standard rep. (Scarlatti, MacDowell, Chopin allegro de concert, Albeniz, etc.)
B Uncommon rep. (Clementi sonatas, Alkan, Thalberg fantasies, Chaminade, etc.)
C Rare rep. (Stephen Heller, Cramer Sonatas, Döhler, Tellefsen, etc.)
D Obscure rep. (Composers who were not too popular even in their own time)
F Never-heard rep.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

I absolutely adore the Wolfram rendition. It's because of that that the Lucrezia Borgia of Liszt became my favorite romantic operatic piano transcription and I put it at just a level below the Liszt Sonata in terms of musical grandeur as far as liszt piano pieces go.

I wouldn't quite put it quite so high, though it is one of my favorites among Liszt's operatic paraphrases (favorite is S. 393iii Sonnambula de Bellini, by quite a margin).

I have not yet listened to Huang's version.

Admittedly, I haven't even listened to the second section of his performance at all; I knew from the Trio that I wouldn't like it.

I would not normally describe Alkan, Chaminade, or Medtner as "extremely rare". I have my own rough ranking which goes like -

A+ overlplayed
A Standard rep.
B+ Semi-standard rep. (Scarlatti, MacDowell, Chopin allegro de concert, Albeniz, etc.)
B Uncommon rep. (Clementi sonatas, Alkan, Thalberg fantasies, Chaminade, etc.)
C Rare rep. (Stephen Heller, Cramer Sonatas, Döhler, Tellefsen, etc.)
D Obscure rep. (Composers who were not too popular even in their own time)
F Never-heard rep.

I feel like Alkan (outside of a few select pieces, mostly his etudes and Op. 33) and Chaminade (barring Op. 107 Flute Concertino) are programmed much less than "uncommon" would imply. Chasselon would undoubtedly be hovering around D or F depending on the composition, though; even IMSLP "needs more information" on her lmao.

[thalbergmad]

If Yo Chung is trully.obsessed with opera. He should record Thalberg's L'art du chant (which I believe that Singaporean lawyer did). There's no room for extremepianochannel-esque speed records there.

I assume you are referring to Paul Wee who did record this. It is a different kind of virtuosity that requires an exquisite touch, a million shades of pianissimo and perfect pedal timing. This is real piano playing. Speed in itself is a circus stunt.
Thal