The top ten hardest piano pieces + Is there anything harder than La Campanella?

[frodo5]

Off doing something more interesting than trying to come up with a system to rank the difficulty of very difficult piano pieces.

   Lol.   But keep in mind - there is A LOT OF INTENSE INTEREST by some here to rank pieces by difficulty.  Not just the OP.  I guess these discussions are just for fun?  Not sure.  For me, it's fun to try to find an objective way to measure difficulty.  I guess finding an objective way is not fun for most.  But it is appropriate to discuss and consider here IMO. 

Without an objective way to measure, we are just giving opinions.
La Capanella is the hardest piece ever written.
No it's not.
Yes it is.  It is on many top 10 lists as the hardest piano piece.
You're crazy.
          

[frodo5]

I'm saying that it's possible for someone to learn Le Preux in less time than that same person did for La Campanella. In fact, it's very likely that the average person who progresses that far will have done so.

There are so many problems with this...
Just for starters, not everyone learns something at the same speed; the same person can learn two different things at completely different speeds (the classic example is Algebra vs. Geometry, but I digress). The speed at which someone learns something simply has too many confounding variables for it to be a decent measure of difficulty, not to mention that it's practically impossible to pull off in real life.

If my mental math is correct -- I am a bit rusty on my statistics, so I'm probably a bit off --, then you'd need a bare minimum of 50 to have any decent shot at a statistically significant result, and at least 250 for <50% odds of a type II error.There's only one who has the patience to respond to you...
And his patience is getting lower.

Why don't we bring this discussion to an end then?

[liszt-and-the-galops]

  Lol.   But keep in mind - there is A LOT OF INTENSE INTEREST by some here to rank pieces by difficulty.  Not just the OP.  I guess these discussions are just for fun?  Not sure.  For me, it's fun to try to find an objective way to measure difficulty.  I guess finding an objective way is not fun for most.  But it is appropriate to discuss and consider here IMO. 

There simply is no "objective" way to rank the difficulty of piano pieces, especially atonal ones.

Why don't we bring this discussion to an end then?

Absolutely.

Also, damn. Two pages on a troll thread?

[frodo5]

1) There simply is no "objective" way to rank the difficulty of piano pieces, especially atonal ones.

2) Absolutely.

1) If you say so it must be true.

2) We are in agreement then.  Maybe we can have a more civilized discussion about something else in the future.

[beebebleuga]

Isn't everything difficult to play well...
to get a good sound especially for Mozart and Bach
to nail very technically difficult etudes
and to play in front of an audience

but what is well and difficult are subjective

[liszt-and-the-galops]

1) If you say so it must be true.

Uh, no?

[essence]

Everybody has a different body and skills. - That's why we test at least 20 pianists as in my prior post.

Where are the scientifically minded people here?!?!

It depends on the question. You can rank piece difficulty for an average pianist, or you can rank it for an individual.

It is similar to the prosecutor's fallacy.

I am a scientist and statistician.

[frodo6]

It depends on the question. You can rank piece difficulty for an average pianist, or you can rank it for an individual.

It is similar to the prosecutor's fallacy.

I am a scientist and statistician.

Excellent!  I am a retired actuary of 30 years.  I am talking about coming up with an objective way to rank the difficulty of a select list of extremely difficult piano pieces as judged by the average world class pianist.  World class pianist being defined as among the top 100 of current, active performing pianists.  Let's assume we can agree on a way to pick the top 100 pianists.

Let's say the select list is:
1) Beethoven Hammerklavier sonata
2) Brahms Piano concerto #2
3) Liszt La Campanella

We could simply poll the 100 pianists to rank these 3 pieces and use the results to determine which of these 3 is the most difficult.  But we would have to DEFINE what “most difficult” is so the pianist can cast a meaningful vote.  See NOTE at the bottom of this post.

Here are two questions for you and others:

1) How would you suggest defining “most difficult”?   Here is a possible suggestion:

"Most difficult" means the most amount of preparation time is required in order to have a high probability of a successful performance.  "Preparation time" includes past time spent learning the piece. “Successful performance” means the piece was performed at world class level of accuracy, musicality and performance tempo.  We could then define "world class accuracy", "world class musicality" and "world class performance tempo" .

2) Do you have any other suggestions for an OBJECTIVE method to determine which piano piece from a select list of pieces is the most difficult as judged by the AVERAGE world class pianist? 

NOTE: I personally feel that polling the pianists is NOT an objective way to determine difficulty.  This is why I (frodo5=frodo6) proposed my method described earlier in this thread. Please comment on this if you like.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

frodo6

lmao

Excellent!  I am a retired actuary of 30 years.  I am talking about coming up with an objective way to rank the difficulty of a select list of extremely difficult piano pieces as judged by the average world class pianist.  World class pianist being defined as among the top 100 of current, active performing pianists.  Let's assume we can agree on a way to pick the top 100 pianists.

Let's say the select list is:
1) Beethoven Hammerklavier sonata
2) Brahms Piano concerto #2
3) Liszt La Campanella

We could simply poll the 100 pianists to rank these 3 pieces and use the results to determine which of these 3 is the most difficult.  But we would have to DEFINE what “most difficult” is so the pianist can cast a meaningful vote.  See NOTE at the bottom of this post.

Here are two questions for you and others:

1) How would you suggest defining “most difficult”?   Here is a possible suggestion:
"Most difficult" means the most amount of preparation time (including past time spent on the piece) is required in order to have a high probability of a successful performance.  “Successful performance” means the piece was performed at world class level of accuracy, musicality and performance tempo.  We could then define "world class accuracy", "world class musicality" and "world class performance tempo" .

2) Do you have any other suggestions on a way to come up with an OBJECTIVE way to determine which piano piece from a select list of pieces is the most difficult as judged by the AVERAGE world class pianist?

Will you ever get tired of attempting to objectively rank things that are completely impossible to objectively rank? I thought we were done with this conversation...

NOTE: I personally feel that poling the pianists is NOT a truly objective way to determine difficulty.  This is why I proposed my method described earlier in this thread. Please comment on this if you like.

Ironically, polling a group of people is the most objective way I can think of for ranking piano pieces by difficulty. I hope I don't need to elaborate on this.

[frodo6]

lmaoWill you ever get tired of attempting to objectively rank things that are completely impossible to objectively rank? I thought we were done with this conversation...Ironically, polling a group of people is the most objective way I can think of for ranking piano pieces by difficulty. I hope I don't need to elaborate on this.

I am excluding you from my conversations on this subject - AS WE PREVIOUSLY AGREED.  You may of course converse with others.  You will not get a reply from me on this matter - other than this one time exception.  Good luck to you.

[frodo6]

I understand that most if not all may not be interested in coming up an objective way to measure difficulty.  My posts on this subject are intended only for those that are interested.  No response is sufficient to show lack of interest.

Since this thread is about ranking the difficulty of pieces and MANY here are passionate about these rankings, I feel it is important to at least define what difficulty is.  Without a standard definition, how can we converse on this subject?

How would you suggest defining “most difficult”?

Oxford language: "Difficult - Needing much effort or skill to accomplish"

If we are looking only at world class pianists then skill is taken care of and this only leaves effort.  What is effort?  Effort - a vigorous or determined attempt.  Does effort include time spent to accomplish (prep time)?

Anyway, I apologize to all those that find this kind of conversation to be boring.  But this is what I get after being an actuary for 30 years.  Everything is math, logic, definitions.  But I also have a sense of humor.   

[frodo6]

It depends on the question. You can rank piece difficulty for an average pianist, or you can rank it for an individual.

It is similar to the prosecutor's fallacy.

I am a scientist and statistician.

I made the previous comment to you:"Where are the scientifically minded people here?!?!"  My apologies to essence!

This was in response to your "It's a funny thing, hardness. Very subjective. Everybody has a different body and skills. Musical? Physical?"

I agree - difficulty is subjective for an individual.  But I was referring to an average of a large group of world class pianists. 

Again, my apologies.

[thorn]

How would you suggest defining “most difficult”?

Oxford language: "Difficult - Needing much effort or skill to accomplish"

I've always found this question more interesting than anything else discussed here. And I actually think you could approach this in an objective way, and if I were doing this as a research project (I'm not a scientist but I am a PhD student- history not music, mind!) it would go like this:

1. Gather as many difficulty poll threads, top 10 lists, youtube videos on the subject and so on as I could possibly find.
2. Narrow down the sample by cutting out a) pieces that don't feature on say 50% or more of threads/lists, and b) complete sets (eg. La Campanella is allowed but not Paganini Etudes as a set).
3. Interview pianists who *actually play* each piece in question (ie. have played it to a critical audience- doesn't have to be a public one, could be an end of year conservatory exam or even an audition) about what the technical difficulties are. This IS NOT to ask them about relative difficulty "are the difficulties of piece X greater/lesser than the difficulties of piece Y", but to ask "what are the technical difficulties of THIS piece".
4. Record all the data onto a spreadsheet so beside each piece, you have the aspects that make it technically difficult (and sections/page or bar number etc).
5. Create a frequency list for technical difficulties- eg. 80% of the sample pieces have leaps, 50% of them have double notes. -> This gives you as close as you can get to an objective definition of pianistic difficulty, together with what elements are more/less likely to influence how the masses rate a piece on difficulty polls. 

This would be your springboard into research about relative difficulty of individual pieces.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

2. Narrow down the sample by cutting out a) pieces that don't feature on say 50% or more of threads/lists, and b) complete sets (eg. La Campanella is allowed but not Paganini Etudes as a set).

I would actually do the opposite for b: only include the complete sets.
Also, cutting out pieces that don't feature on most lists/threads mean that you're cutting out lesser known pieces (e.g Petrushka, lesser-known Liszt pieces e.g S. 140, 137, 464, 253, all of Alkan and Mereaux, Iberia, etc.), which are far more likely to be viable answers. For example, I would consider only a few pieces (that I am aware of) to be contenders for "most difficult piece" (those being Sorabji's Opus Archimagicum, Xenakis' Synaphai, and Xenakis Evryali), and none of them would show up if you're just surveying posts and lists.

I also think that memorization challenges should be included. e.g Petrushka is more difficult to memorize than Le Preux due to Petrushka being A. longer and B. polytonal.

[essence]

yes, I am a scientist!

Of the three quoted, I play hammeklavier privayely and badly. but I have a feeling that with enough work i could play it in public. brahms 3, I have played the score since i was about 14. Much of it i can handle. But those double 4ths ? semiquavers in the first movement? No, I can;t do that at the right speed, never will be able. Graceful last movememt would be a struggle too.

La Campanella? to be honest I would never be bothered to spend enough time training my little fingers. It isn;t great music on the level of the other two..

i am absolurtely sure that there are many pianists who can do a tolerable la campanella, who would also do a dreadul slow movement of Hammerklavier.

Listening to a performance of mahler 6th as I write this.

[symphonicdance]

Not sure if the actual playing will be super difficult, but many modern works were written in a way that the scores & details look weird and complicated enough, already having headache by reading them.

[cuberdrift]

I made the previous comment to you:"Where are the scientifically minded people here?!?!"  My apologies to essence!

This was in response to your "It's a funny thing, hardness. Very subjective. Everybody has a different body and skills. Musical? Physical?"

I agree - difficulty is subjective for an individual.  But I was referring to an average of a large group of world class pianists. 

Again, my apologies.

Caleb Hu makes definitive versions of these types of difficulty lists and you can look up his channel on Youtube. Lots of other stuff like hardest pieces per composer, hardest concerti, etc.

Anyways, the hardest piano piece from the romantic period, as far as I know, is the Liszt transcription of the Beethoven 9th Symphony while the hardest relatively known piece ever composed is Sorabji's Opus Archimagum.

[thalbergmad]

Oh gawd, not this again.
Thal

[quino-lane]

wow, reading this forum was quite entertaining. of course i'm not going to come out and harass you of your opinion, but most people would definitely agree La Campanella is not the most difficult. some pieces much, MUCH more difficult to execute would be alkan's works (concerto for solo piano), mereaux, Liszt, and many more. i am pretty confused on how you were searching for months just to come to the conclusion La Campenella was the most difficult. of course, all of this is subjective, but more or less we can general agree upon stuff like this. just watch Yi Chung Huang's rendition of Le Preux, a perfect example of a concert etude many magnitudes more difficult.

[dizzyfingers]

Oh, you sweet summer child...
First of all, welcome to forums!

well you're a lot kinder than I would have been, as a first responder.
kudos!
I really get tired of these most difficult posts .. but I know that's just me.

[pianok3ys]

10/10 ragebait

[dizzyfingers]

10/10 ragebait

Yes, but the irony is that it seemed the OP was totally sincere.

[thesixthsensemusic]

Ballade No. 1 is not the hardest of his, No. 4 is.

Disagreed, at least in terms of technical difficulty. I've learned 1, 2 and 4. 2 is, IMHO, by a considerable margin, the hardest because its coda has some of the nastiest un-ergonomical passages in any Chopin work outside of the Etudes.

No.4 is the most musically complex and is a tough nut to crack due to its size but it's also written in such a way that it's mostly lying well under the fingers. It has a very difficult coda one has to start from a stand-still but at least that coda is not un-ergonomic and can be practiced at varying tempi countless times in a row without physical strain.

Try that with the coda of no.2 and you'll develop carpal tunnel.... the only way to tackle (apart from the obvious like going phrase by phrase and hands separate) it is to practice it only a few times, take a break and work on something else, rinse and repeat several times a day for weeks.

No.2 is much more straightforward musically though, it's just a Wiegenlied and after 2 minutes Freddy Krueger walks in. Violent mood swings vs. the 4th gradually developing character.

[gasplamey]

somehone should make an actgual list of hardest pieces in common rep.
Thgat's what im gettubntg from this thread.

[dizzyfingers]

somehone should make an actgual list of hardest pieces in common rep.
Thgat's what im gettubntg from this thread.

Is that a joke?  The "hardest pieces" threads from category xyz is 90% of the threads in this forum

[dizzyfingers]

Disagreed, at least in terms of technical difficulty. I've learned 1, 2 and 4. 2 is, IMHO, by a considerable margin, the hardest because its coda has some of the nastiest un-ergonomical passages in any Chopin work outside of the Etudes.

Interesting, I find it just the opposite.  The coda of no 2 fits much better under the hand than the codas of  1 and 3. 

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Is that a joke?  The "hardest pieces" threads from category xyz is 90% of the threads in this forum

Certainly feels like that as of late, though this isn't typically the case.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

somehone should make an actgual list of hardest pieces in common rep.
Thgat's what im gettubntg from this thread.

There’s too many ‘what’s the hardest piece’, ‘what’s harder’, rank these pieces in difficulty’ threads.  And they’re the most non musical, non artistic, uninformed discussions in all
comment sections and piano forums on the internet. 

Everyone compares the same songs, then debate something that has nothing to do with the music, or something that isn’t even what people who actually play the music think is what makes the music difficult.  Only classical music is like this and I have no idea why.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Everyone compares the same songs

This part is probably because most people who engage in these discussions don't actually know much of the more obscure "difficult" pieces (if any of them at all). This is why you get stuff that's pretty difficult and -- more importantly -- pretty popular (e.g. S. 139 Feux Follets, Gaspard de la Nuit, Islamey, S. 141 La Campanella, sometimes Petrushka, Hammerklavier, and Brahms Paganini Variations), as opposed to the absurdly difficult and quite obscure stuff (e.g. S. 137 Appassionata, Liszt Spanish Fantasy, Alkan Op. 76, Czerny Sonata no. 10, Mereaux Etudes, etc.). "Uninformed" is putting it lightly IMO.

Most of the truly absurd pieces out there (even pre-Sorabji) are also frankly sh_t, lmao. Mereaux's Etudes, Czerny Op. 380, Alkan Le Preux, Liszt S. 137 nos. 8 and 10 and S. 253 Spanish Fantasy are all pretty mediocre (or outright bad) as compositions. The only pieces that I would consider both "impossibly difficult" and "worth listening to" are Alkan's Etudes (Op. 39 and Op. 76 specifically), Liszt/Beethoven Symphony Transcriptions (some of them, at least), Cziffra improvs/arrangements (e.g. the Fantasy/Improv on William Tell), Liszt S. 140 (though no. 4b is the hardest in this set and is frankly awful), and maybe a few others that I'm not thinking of/not aware of. Certainly not many.

[essence]

Where would you put Iberia and Vingt Regards? They are both monumental to play as a whole in recital.

Aha - I see they have both been mentioned.

[thorn]

Where would you put Iberia and Vingt Regards? They are both monumental to play as a whole in recital.

Aha - I see they have both been mentioned.

As someone who loves Spanish repertoire and regularly tries to throw it into threads here, the bottom line is people aren't interested. This goes right back too- Horowitz said he didn't play Iberia because he wasn't a Spanish gypsy (though not being a Hungarian gypsy didn't stop him playing Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies), Richter said he had everything he needed in French repertoire (I think also in reference to Iberia, can't find the quote). It's a shame it's considered some lesser French derivative because the French masters loved it- Debussy said El Albaicin was the perfect piece of music, Ravel wanted to orchestrate it but Albeniz already gave the rights to his mate (one of the great tragedies of classical music), and Messiaen said he learned all he knew about the piano from Iberia.

And as for Vingt Regards, it's too modern for most people. When people talk about "underrated" or "unpopular" or "niche" pieces, they 99% mean 18/9th century stuff (I mean the main difficulty contest here limits to pieces before 1925).

[essence]

They do appear regularly in higher board examinations, but much more rarely in competitions.

I have played in amateur public many of the vingt regards, but I cannot imagine playing them all from memory in a concert. Heard all of iberia once at Royal Festival Hall by Alicia de Larrocha

[rachmaninoff_forever]

This part is probably because most people who engage in these discussions don't actually know much of the more obscure "difficult" pieces (if any of them at all). This is why you get stuff that's pretty difficult and -- more importantly -- pretty popular (e.g. S. 139 Feux Follets, Gaspard de la Nuit, Islamey, S. 141 La Campanella, sometimes Petrushka, Hammerklavier, and Brahms Paganini Variations), as opposed to the absurdly difficult and quite obscure stuff (e.g. S. 137 Appassionata, Liszt Spanish Fantasy, Alkan Op. 76, Czerny Sonata no. 10, Mereaux Etudes, etc.). "Uninformed" is putting it lightly IMO.

Most of the truly absurd pieces out there (even pre-Sorabji) are also frankly sh_t, lmao. Mereaux's Etudes, Czerny Op. 380, Alkan Le Preux, Liszt S. 137 nos. 8 and 10 and S. 253 Spanish Fantasy are all pretty mediocre (or outright bad) as compositions. The only pieces that I would consider both "impossibly difficult" and "worth listening to" are Alkan's Etudes (Op. 39 and Op. 76 specifically), Liszt/Beethoven Symphony Transcriptions (some of them, at least), Cziffra improvs/arrangements (e.g. the Fantasy/Improv on William Tell), Liszt S. 140 (though no. 4b is the hardest in this set and is frankly awful), and maybe a few others that I'm not thinking of/not aware of. Certainly not many.

I saw a flyer for a recital recently titled “world’s hardest piano piece”.  It’s some Sorabji thing and has TWO INTERMISSIONS what a waste of time.  Your average listener can’t tell the difference between that or most other songs and fantasy impromptu.

[thorn]

They do appear regularly in higher board examinations, but much more rarely in competitions.

I have played in amateur public many of the vingt regards, but I cannot imagine playing them all from memory in a concert. Heard all of iberia once at Royal Festival Hall by Alicia de Larrocha

Oh wow, I'm incredibly jealous you heard Larrocha play Iberia in person! And I know they're on diploma lists but no idea how many actually program them. I've played several in amateur music festivals.

And I haven't properly studied any of the Vingt Regards but know them pretty well as a listener. 10 and 15 are on my bucket list, doubt I'll ever manage 10 but hope to work on 15 at some point.

[lelle]

I saw a flyer for a recital recently titled “world’s hardest piano piece”.  It’s some Sorabji thing and has TWO INTERMISSIONS what a waste of time.  Your average listener can’t tell the difference between that or most other songs and fantasy impromptu.

Not a Sorabji fan, huh?

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Not a Sorabji fan, huh?

Nah I’m just not a gimmicky bad recital program fan lol

If your main selling point for the recital is that it’s hard and it’s so long that it requires two intermissions then it’s not a good recital.  I can’t even sit down that long for stuff that I like

[liszt-and-the-galops]

As someone who loves Spanish repertoire and regularly tries to throw it into threads here, the bottom line is people aren't interested. This goes right back too- Horowitz said he didn't play Iberia because he wasn't a Spanish gypsy (though not being a Hungarian gypsy didn't stop him playing Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies), Richter said he had everything he needed in French repertoire (I think also in reference to Iberia, can't find the quote). It's a shame it's considered some lesser French derivative because the French masters loved it- Debussy said El Albaicin was the perfect piece of music, Ravel wanted to orchestrate it but Albeniz already gave the rights to his mate (one of the great tragedies of classical music), and Messiaen said he learned all he knew about the piano from Iberia.

And as for Vingt Regards, it's too modern for most people. When people talk about "underrated" or "unpopular" or "niche" pieces, they 99% mean 18/9th century stuff (I mean the main difficulty contest here limits to pieces before 1925).

Iberia is fantastic and I don't know why so few people appreciate it.

In regards to the "before 1925" thing, it was originally to safeguard against e.g. Sorabji Opus Archimagicum and Xenakis Evryali, since around 1925 is when the repertoire started getting a lot more difficult. Stuff like Vingt Regards/Catalogue d'Oiseaux, Saariaho, and Cziffra transcriptions were unfortunately caught in the net as well. In hindsight though, considering that there's already a (rough) limit on how difficult pieces are allowed to be to be in the tournament, this honestly doesn't make sense. I'm planning on cutting that rule for 2026, if for nothing else to include some Cziffra transcriptions and Saariaho. Messiaen will probably also be included, though I'm not remotely familiar enough with his pieces to know what should and shouldn't be included, so it'll probably come from suggestions.

I saw a flyer for a recital recently titled “world’s hardest piano piece”.  It’s some Sorabji thing and has TWO INTERMISSIONS what a waste of time.

If it was "Sonata no. 5 'Opus Archimagicum,'" then the flyer probably wasn't exaggerating lmao. Though without further context I'd wager it's Sonata no. 4, which is much easier and (IMO) much worse.

The "two intermissions" thing isn't really something to complain about, honestly. Vincenzo Maltempo's live performance of Alkan's complete Op. 39 had two intermissions for a little over two hours of music. I imagine that the Sorabji is even longer, though apparently it has the same amount of intermissions.

[essence]

I've played a few of the Vingt Regards in an amateur public performance, with music. In my youth.

1. Regard du pere
2 Regard de l'etoile
4 Regard de la Vierge
11  Premiere communion de la vierge
15  Le baiser de l'enfant Jesus
19 Je dors mais mon coeur veille
20 Regards de l'eglise d'amour.

I chose this subset as they were more accessible and/or possible, although 20 needed a lot of practice.
Some of these I find very romantic, almost erotic, particularly 15 and 19. Finding a woman who shares this sense of the erotic is a bit more difficult.

Being an organist, the sound world was very familiar.

I recommend them. I wouldn't have worked on them if I didn't have a very close affinity.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

The "two intermissions" thing isn't really something to complain about, honestly. Vincenzo Maltempo's live performance of Alkan's complete Op. 39 had two intermissions for a little over two hours of music. I imagine that the Sorabji is even longer, though apparently it has the same amount of intermissions.

A two hour recital of one instrument, one composer, and one style of composition is too long

[essence]

Hmmm

just got half way through XX from Vingt Regards, and decided to take a pause before i do serious injury to my wrists..

Haven't played it for maybe 50 years.

[thorn]

I've played a few of the Vingt Regards in an amateur public performance, with music. In my youth.

1. Regard du pere
2 Regard de l'etoile
4 Regard de la Vierge
11  Premiere communion de la vierge
15  Le baiser de l'enfant Jesus
19 Je dors mais mon coeur veille
20 Regards de l'eglise d'amour.

I love number 1 though never felt inclined to learn it. Didn't really warm to 2. 4, 11, and 15 are wonderful. I don't know 19 and 20 very well, though 20 looks very difficult and I'm impressed you performed it!

And I'm glad someone mentioned Catalogue d'oiseaux too! It's specialist stuff though, not sure most audiences would thank you for programming the longer ones. I've dabbled with a few of them (4-6, and 11-13) and each piece can be structurally broken down into landscape, time of day, birdsong (and their repetitions). The passages representing landscape and time of day are the easiest parts, and the birdsong is of course the most difficult. So I'd say the most difficult piece(s) of the set are those with the most bird species because they will have the most technical variation vs. "if you just learn these couple of birds you can play the whole piece" which is the case in no.6.

[thorn]

-

[dizzyfingers]

Love it !
We've gone from "Is there anything harder than La Campanella?"
To Messiaen Vingt Regards and Catalogue d'oiseaux

[essence]

#1 of course sets the scene.
#2 is maybe less intense so fits the sequence, plus it is not amongst the hardest
#4 has a wonderful melody at the tres modere sections.
#20 falls under the hands in many places. Some resemblence to organ music such as Dieu parmi nous. But the vif sections are brutal to play. I maybe played 90% of the rh notes, and a general rumbling in the lh ! 

A lot of the issues are not so much playing the notes, but playing them with the right touch and smoothly.         l

John Ogdon did a great recording. Here are two of his Regards.

i=BsK5EZfYOTWMfkLX

i=gf4Jg6BK-s7vKiuk

The impossible passages are from 0:20 and 4:20. Ogdon makes them seem easy - they are not!

In general Ogdon has fairly moderate tempi. e.g. from 5:00. but probably fairly close to the marking of quaver = 84.

From 7:00 it is just fun to play. But the constant fff and ffff does require some wrist strengthening beforehand.

[essence]

What is maybe illuminating is that I was prepared to put many months work into Messiaen, but wouldn't bother with more than an hour for La Campanella. Partly because I know my RH 4/5 fingers are not suited to it, and would drop off. Partly because I know there would be thousands of better performances out there.

In short, I would get bored. Nothing to say to a potential audience.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

Love it !
We've gone from "Is there anything harder than La Campanella?"
To Messiaen Vingt Regards and Catalogue d'oiseaux

Is there anything out there that's more difficult than Liszt - S. 420 Grande Fantaisie de Bravoure sur la Clochette? I've been searching for years but can't find anything. /j

[pianok3ys]

Is there anything out there that's more difficult than Liszt - S. 420 Grande Fantaisie de Bravoure sur la Clochette? I've been searching for years but can't find anything. /j

liszt spanish fantasy, but there are a lot of harder piece imo

[liszt-and-the-galops]

liszt spanish fantasy, but there are a lot of harder piece imo

And plenty of other pieces, with at least five by Liszt. The "/j" was there to indicate that I was joking, though clearly it didn't indicate it well enough, lol.