Who wrote the best/hardest etudes?

[dizzyfingers]

I think we we need a new poll:

Who Cares What the "Hardest" Etude is?
(A):  Don't Care
(B):  Very Much Care

Estimated results:
(A):  89% of the piano forum readers
(B):  11%

[essence]

I would answer A.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

yes, they are all, without exception, of zero musical merit. including Alkan and Liszt. the Liszt etude is a monstrosity based on his other etude (can;t remember which one, but I love it, it starts with alternating chords). Aha transcendental etude no 10, which is highly musical in contrast.

The Liszt, I agree with. It's one of the few original versions (S. 137/140/142) that's outright inferior to the later, easier versions (S. 139, 141, 143).

But calling the Alkan Concerto -- quite possibly the greatest individual piano piece ever written -- "of zero musical merit" is absurd.

Who Cares What the "Hardest" Etude is?
(A):  Don't Care
(B):  Very Much Care

Estimated results:
(A):  89% of the piano forum readers
(B):  11%

Unfortunately I think you're underestimating how many people only care about difficulty. It'd probably be closer to 75/25.

I would answer A.

I would as well, though it does get views...

[essence]

But calling the Alkan Concerto -- quite possibly the greatest individual piano piece ever written -- "of zero musical merit" is absurd.

I realise there are Alkan fanatics, but I have yet to hear anything by him which I find of any merit. Just a personal opinion. We all have our foibles and obsessions.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Changing the subject, but I just came across this horrific Etude in thirds by Czerny:

I have no words.

Edit: another slightly less difficult one:

[lelle]

Changing the subject, but I just came across this horrific Etude in thirds by Czerny:

I have no words.

Edit: another slightly less difficult one:

I found both of those quite tasteless as pieces of music, but at the same time I wanna try them haha. Practicing the thirds one might do some good for my technique actually...

[essence]

Can you imagine the tedium writing out the Czerny study?

Even worse trying to read it. Start of second line, first set of semi quavers - is that b natural going to c flat? is that an f flat or f natural, and why is it followed by an f natural? Later there is an e sharp.

Utterly bonkers and a waste of effort and time.

[ash120]

Chopin: "Play my etudes to improve your technique!"
Alkan: "Improve your technique to play my etudes!"

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Chopin: "Play my etudes to improve your technique!"
Alkan: "Improve your technique to play my etudes!"

I've grown really tired of the "Alkan = ridiculous difficulty" stereotype.

For instance, even among Alkan's Op. 39 (his "hardest" set of Etudes), there are quite a few that are easier than the hardest ChopEts (namely nos. 2, 5, 9, and arguably 6 as well). Even among Liszt's revised (easier) Etudes, S. 139 no. 5 "Feux Follets" is harder than about 2/3rds of the Op. 39 Etudes (only nos. 1, 4, 8, and 10 are more difficult).

Plus, Alkan's difficult pieces are actually a fairly small minority of his compositions. He wrote many, many pieces that aren't virtuosic or difficult, but for some reason the "Op. 17 Le Preux"s of his oeuvre get far more attention the "Op. 31 Preludes"s.

[ash120]

I understand your perspective.
I guess Liszt would have been a better fit for this joke than Alkan? I guess I wrote down these composers because, well...they are my 2 favorites..and I didn't really think of anything else to be honest. (sorry Liszt!)

Also on your point that Alkan's etudes are a minority of his compositions - I don't disagree. I think his preludes and esquisses are quite lovely actually.
Even in the world of his etudes, many of his obscure ones are very nice as well, such as his etude sans opus (WoO etude from the Encyclopedie du Pianiste), which is one of my favorites...there's a lot more than Op. 39 and Op. 35!

[liszt-and-the-galops]

I understand your perspective.
I guess Liszt would have been a better fit for this joke than Alkan? I guess I wrote down these composers because, well...they are my 2 favorites..and I didn't really think of anything else to be honest. (sorry Liszt!)

Also on your point that Alkan's etudes are a minority of his compositions - I don't disagree. I think his preludes and esquisses are quite lovely actually.
Even in the world of his etudes, many of his obscure ones are very nice as well, such as his etude sans opus (WoO etude from the Encyclopedie du Pianiste), which is one of my favorites...there's a lot more than Op. 39 and Op. 35!

I will say that even among Alkan's more difficult Etudes, he still has some masterpieces. Op. 39 nos 4 and 8 as well as Op. 76 no. 2 are fantastic, if extraordinarily difficult. It's just that some of his worst pieces IMO happen to be some of his hardest and some of his most well-known: Scherzo Focoso, Op. 17 Le Preux, Op. 39 no. 10, for instance.

Though using these few lower-quality pieces to discredit the composer entirely will always be utterly ridiculous. I'd challenge anyone to name a single composer who didn't have at least a few mediocre/bad pieces.

[ash120]

I will say that even among Alkan's more difficult Etudes, he still has some masterpieces. Op. 39 nos 4 and 8 as well as Op. 76 no. 2 are fantastic, if extraordinarily difficult. It's just that some of his worst pieces IMO happen to be some of his hardest and some of his most well-known: Scherzo Focoso, Op. 17 Le Preux, Op. 39 no. 10, for instance.

For sure! And of course, this goes for every composer and artist - many times we hear a random obscure piece by a composer and fall for those works, while their canonical works make us think, "why would anyone listen to this?"
 And I think this also ties into the idea of wanting to play something hard purely to chase difficulty or clout vs. wanting to play a piece which you understand musically, regardless of the difficulty, and sometimes the delineation between the two becomes a little fuzzy and/or blend. There is a profusion of simple + beautiful pieces which we can look to (and unfortunately neglect because they're trivial technically or something or the other), and there are difficult pieces which just don't sound good.
Regarding his Op. 39 set - I personally prefer etudes Op. 39/7 and no. 10 over the others; I find them nice to listen to. I especially find them more compelling than Le Festin d'Esope and Comme Le Vent. And of course, much more Alkan music to look to than just his etudes! Different tastes, but I think we're on the same side here. What do you say?

[liszt-and-the-galops]

And I think this also ties into the idea of wanting to play something hard purely to chase difficulty or clout vs. wanting to play a piece which you understand musically, regardless of the difficulty, and sometimes the delineation between the two becomes a little fuzzy and/or blend.

Certainly doesn't help Alkan that the most well-known player of Alkan (MAH) seemingly doesn't understand the music at all and just rushes through everything. This is particularly apparent in the Op. 33 Grande Sonate mvt. 4, where he plays the movement (meant to be uncomfortably slow) at a fairly moderate tempo and completely misses the point. His fast tempos also make just about everything sound virtuosic, which furthers the "Alkan = impossible" stereotype and drives people off. I can't even blame someone for hating Alkan if Hamelin's is the only Alkan they've heard.

Regarding his Op. 39 set - I personally prefer etudes Op. 39/7 and no. 10 over the others; I find them nice to listen to. I especially find them more compelling than Le Festin d'Esope and Comme Le Vent. And of course, much more Alkan music to look to than just his etudes! Different tastes, but I think we're on the same side here. What do you say?

Funny how opinions on music can differ. 39/10 is my least favorite of the entire set by a margin, and 39/7 is pretty middle-of-the-road within the set (which would be incredible praise for most Etudes by other composers). My absolute favorites of the set are nos. 8, 11, and 12, with nos. 2, 4-6, and 9 close behind.

I haven't listened to Op. 35 enough to really form any opinions on it yet, though I find Op. 76 nos. 2 and 3 to be very good (though I do find it funny how Alkan wasn't even trying to make 76/2 physically possible). Haven't actually listened to 76/1 at all, I don't think. I need to do that, lol.

[ash120]

I haven't listened to Op. 35 enough to really form any opinions on it yet, though I find Op. 76 nos. 2 and 3 to be very good (though I do find it funny how Alkan wasn't even trying to make 76/2 physically possible). Haven't actually listened to 76/1 at all, I don't think. I need to do that, lol.

I haven't really listened to Op. 35 honestly. I'm with you on op. 76/3 - it's a very nice piece! Op. 76 no. 2 isn't bad either but I like no. 3 more.

[dnak441]

The Chopin Etudes are the hardest etudes for piano, period. They require a level of cleanliness and precision that no Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev or Scriabin etude demands.

Of course they can be more approachable than other etudes, especially for students, but to play them at the highest level of pianism, there's really nothing that comes close.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

The Chopin Etudes are the hardest etudes for piano, period. They require a level of cleanliness and precision that no Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev or Scriabin etude demands.

That's simply false. For example, Saint-Saëns - Op. 111 no. 1 is incredibly similar to Chopin - Op. 25 no. 6, and it is objectively vastly more difficult both musically and technically.

Similarly, Brahms wrote a study that is literally Chopin - Op. 25 no. 2 except the right hand is in legato thirds and sixths.

Another example is Alkan - Op. 39 no. 8 (Concerto for Solo Piano mvt. 1), which is 30 minutes of extraordinarily difficult technique combined with extreme musical challenges.

There's also Etudes like Méreaux - Op. 63 no. 45 "Scherzo alla Napolitana" and Alkan - Op. 76 no. 2, which are physically impossible to play (at tempo for the Méreaux, and at all for the Alkan).

I'll end with Godowsky's "Triple Etude," a merger of Chopin's Op. 10 no. 2, Op. 25 no. 4, and Op. 25 no. 11. Here's a MIDI butchering it completely because there are no human recordings.

[dizzyfingers]

The Chopin Etudes are the hardest etudes for piano, period. They require a level of cleanliness and precision that no Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev or Scriabin etude demands.

There's no arguing with a FANBOY.

[kosulin]

Chopin etudes are greatest.
Godowsky are hardest of those still musical IMO. But built on Chopin, i.e. not completely authentic.
Liszt etudes are not to my taste, extreme technicality with no musical value IMHO.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Liszt etudes are not to my taste, extreme technicality with no musical value IMHO.

Funny. I've begun to feel this way about many of the ChopEts (10/2, 10/4, 10/7, 25/4, 25/6, 25/8, 25/11). Maybe I've just grown sick and tired of them?

By contrast, most of Liszt's Etudes range from good to fantastic musically IMO. S. 137 nos. 1, 4, 12, S. 138, S. 139 nos. 1, 4, 7-12, S. 140 nos. 3, 4a (NOT 4b), 6, S. 141 no. 5, S. 142, S. 143, S. 144 nos. 1-3, S. 145 nos. 1-2.

[thorn]

Funny. I've begun to feel this way about many of the ChopEts (10/2, 10/4, 10/7, 25/4, 25/6, 25/8, 25/11). Maybe I've just grown sick and tired of them?

I can totally relate. I feel I 'grew out of' Chopin's etudes. In fairness I can say the same for most of Liszt's- exceptions are Transcendentals no.3,9,11,12 and Waldesrauschen. That's not to question their quality, btw.

On the flip side I had to 'grow into' Debussy's set. He's been my favourite composer for 20+ years but I struggled to listen to the etudes for a long time.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

On the flip side I had to 'grow into' Debussy's set. He's been my favourite composer for 20+ years but I struggled to listen to the etudes for a long time.

Funny how experiences can differ. I "got" Debussy's Etudes almost immediately and they've been one of my favorite Etude sets (along with Liszt S. 139, 140, Alkan Op. 39, Chaminade Op. 35, and Saint-Saëns Op. 111) practically since my first listen. They're also one of the most consistently high-quality IMO; there isn't a single one that I dislike.

[thorn]

Funny how experiences can differ. I "got" Debussy's Etudes almost immediately and they've been one of my favorite Etude sets (along with Liszt S. 139, 140, Alkan Op. 39, Chaminade Op. 35, and Saint-Saëns Op. 111) practically since my first listen. They're also one of the most consistently high-quality IMO; there isn't a single one that I dislike.

Was there a particular recording that sold them to you? For me it was a lecture-recital- Paul Roberts talked about each one and Noriko Ogawa was the pianist. Her recorded version is in my top 3 alongside Uchida and Aimard. And I agree about consistency in quality of each etude, even if you don't like them I don't think you could argue there's a weak one.

Edit: The lecture-recital wasn't recorded but this live recording is from the same year/city so she must have had a few concerts there

i=DeldX0lBAI4wHWFV

[dnak441]

There's no arguing with a FANBOY.

On what grounds am I a "fanboy"? Chopin Etudes are harder mainly because there is a higher expectation for the performer. Once you are considering learning an opus of etudes technique is merely a means to an end. You can mention Godowsky etudes all you want but they are not serious pieces. They fall more so in the realm of exercises than a piece you present in front of an audience. And in that sense, getting a satisfactory performance out of the Chopin etudes live is probably one of the hardest feats in piano.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

On what grounds am I a "fanboy"? Chopin Etudes are harder mainly because there is a higher expectation for the performer. Once you are considering learning an opus of etudes technique is merely a means to an end. You can mention Godowsky etudes all you want but they are not serious pieces. They fall more so in the realm of exercises than a piece you present in front of an audience. And in that sense, getting a satisfactory performance out of the Chopin etudes live is probably one of the hardest feats in piano.

In that case, Fur Elise is objectively the hardest piano piece. :P

Also, plenty of people consider the Godowsky Etudes "pieces that you present in front of an audience." MAH and Emanuele Delucchi have recorded the entire set (I think others have as well), and Delucchi even performed the full set live in concert.

Also, I'll go ahead and re-post my earlier message, since you seem to have missed it.

That's simply false. For example, Saint-Saëns - Op. 111 no. 1 is incredibly similar to Chopin - Op. 25 no. 6, and it is objectively vastly more difficult both musically and technically.

Similarly, Brahms wrote a study that is literally Chopin - Op. 25 no. 2 except the right hand is in legato thirds and sixths.

Another example is Alkan - Op. 39 no. 8 (Concerto for Solo Piano mvt. 1), which is 30 minutes of extraordinarily difficult technique combined with extreme musical challenges.

There's also Etudes like Méreaux - Op. 63 no. 45 "Scherzo alla Napolitana" and Alkan - Op. 76 no. 2, which are physically impossible to play (at tempo for the Méreaux, and at all for the Alkan).

I'll end with Godowsky's "Triple Etude," a merger of Chopin's Op. 10 no. 2, Op. 25 no. 4, and Op. 25 no. 11. Here's a MIDI butchering it completely because there are no human recordings.

Was there a particular recording that sold them to you?

Jean-Efflam Bavouzet's is the full set that I listen to most often (along with others for specific Etudes, e.g. Christinia McMaster for no. 12), though I don't remember what the first recording I listened to was.

[thorn]

Jean-Efflam Bavouzet's is the full set that I listen to most often (along with others for specific Etudes, e.g. Christinia McMaster for no. 12), though I don't remember what the first recording I listened to was.

I haven't listened to that set, I'll check it out!

[liszt-and-the-galops]

I haven't listened to that set, I'll check it out!

It was posted on youtube relatively recently (2021). Here's an embedded version that shouldn't have ads. :)

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Currently listening to these Transcendental Etudes by Lyapunov for Musical Madness, though they just as easily compete for the title of "best" IMO, at least so far. Apparently they were written as a completion of Liszt's own TEs, of which he originally intended to write 24 (one in each key).

[thorn]

I don't think this composer has been listed yet.  This set of etudes popped up on YT
Einojuhani Rautavaara, etudes, composed in 1969.
I enjoyed them, would listen to them again.

I was going to share these but checked first to see if someone else had. I enjoyed them too. It's not an etude but I love his Fire Sermon sonata too- the first of his compositions I heard.

[cuberdrift]

Not an Etude, but IMO Czerny's best piece is the Op. 268 Sonata no. 10, which is unfortunate because it's next to unplayable at-tempo (especially the 4th movement).

I believe both of them can be considered études as the designation is in their full titles.

By the way, given that I am quite fond of the Op. 369, there needs to be some research on its possible connection to Liszt's S. 137 études.

IMSLP lists the Czerny as having been published in 1835, a couple of years before the Liszt. From what I can remember, about a year after that, Liszt wrote about a "plan to revise my études" (presumably the 12 Exercises).

The Grand études were also written a short time after Czerny visited Liszt in Paris, which iirc was the only time the two met in person after Liszt left him in Vienna as a prodigy.

I speak of this because I feel there are actually many similarities between the two works. Listen carefully to the techniques Czerny puts there, you'll find them in several of the S. 137 ones, and up to that point, Liszt hadn't yet quite come up with those techniques (even in some of his earlier super-works such as the La Clochette fantasy, Tyrolienne, etc.)

I think it's possible either Liszt took direct inspiration from this piece, or they had some kind of correspondence which resulted in a kind of cross-pollinaton of "uber virtuosity" (for the time) in making super études.

The S. 137 was, finally, specifically dedicated to Czerny.

[dizzyfingers]

I think the above post deserves a video:

[thorn]

Just came across these which are really nice

i=Gz7tzV8v9pfvsjf5

(1st of 4, see the channel for the other 3)

i=7FbgbcnPIHAe7ite

[thorn]

And these which are even better!

i=eHrXKofTmbl2isvS

[dizzyfingers]

And these which are even better!

Nice find!!  I subscribed to his YT channel.  These compositions are very well done - new concepts of piano sound and still musically interesting.  Definitely going to explore this composer.
Thanks.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

And these which are even better!

i=eHrXKofTmbl2isvS

Honestly I've never really liked Viner's compositions. This isn't an exception (though the fourth is solid).

Edit: somehow I'd mixed up Viner with Carl Vine; Vine is the one who I dislike, Viner is lovely lol. Still don't like the first three etudes, though :/.

Also, recently stumbled upon these, which seem to be Brahms' version of Liszt S. 146 Technical Studies. This is also the only recording, as far as I know. Certainly not a contender for the "best" category (or even hardest, because of their length), but I guess worth mentioning.

Speaking of Viner, he also has this great etude on Carol of the Bells, which is (IIRC) how I found out about him.

[dizzyfingers]

Also, recently stumbled upon these, which seem to be Brahms' version of Liszt S. 146 Technical Studies.

It is highly unlikely that Brahms owned a copy of Liszt S.146 and may have not been aware of them, he was uninterested at best and openly critical (at worst) of Liszt's piano style.

Brahms's exercises were created over decades as solutions to specific technical challenges in his compositions , for his own use and his students.  Clara Schumann urged him to publish them, and they were published late in his career (1893).

This opus consists of Exercises, not pieces, not concert etudes, they are only of interest to pianists and teachers.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

It is highly unlikely that Brahms owned a copy of Liszt S.146 and may have not been aware of them, he was uninterested at best and openly critical (at worst) of Liszt's piano style.

Brahms's exercises were created over decades as solutions to specific technical challenges in his compositions , for his own use and his students.  Clara Schumann urged him to publish them, and they were published late in his career (1893).

This opus consists of Exercises, not pieces, not concert etudes, they are only of interest to pianists and teachers.

Hence why I described them as Brahms' version of S. 146, rather than something like his "response to" S. 146.

The reason I brought it up at all is because both sets are similar in concept: a huge set of studies designed exclusively for improving technique rather than as pieces of music.

[ash120]

Hence why I described them as Brahms' version of S. 146, rather than something like his "response to" S. 146.
Do u like the Liszt or Brahms version better?
The reason I brought it up at all is because both sets are similar in concept: a huge set of studies designed exclusively for improving technique rather than as pieces of music.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Do u like the Liszt or Brahms version better?

As music? Neither lol, they're both garbage because they weren't even meant as music.

As technical exercises? I think Liszt probably has more variety, though the Brahms is seemingly more concise. Don't really have a preference.

[thorn]

Another I've recently listened to. It's technically a set of 5 but intended to be played as one piece.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Just came across this set of Etudes by Moscheles (early Romantic composer who Chopin "stole" from quite often). Only listened to the first and last so far, but they seem solid.

Also, this great set of four Concert Etudes by the same composer.

[thorn]

Another 20c set. I really like this one:

[1972dd]

Best is subjective. I dont play piano so no idea on hardest. My favorite ( not "best") sets are Liszt , Debussy and Lyapunov

[dizzyfingers]

I saw these Busoni etudes (1883) mentioned on another post, specifically no 5, which is a fugue.  You can hear some of  Brahms' fugue from the Handel Variations in it (1861).

Nothing really stands out in these etudes, for me, but a list is a list.