Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies

[mikeyg]

Why is it that the most famous of these works are the worst of the group?  I mean, 2 and 6 are nothing compared to some of the other ones.  I mean, out of the first 9 (that's the only cd I have with me right now) I preder!, 7, 8, and 9 over them.  Their themes are much more developed (and more interesting) and they have more of that Hungarian feel (which is awesome).

So basically, what is it that makes a piece famous, even though there is far greater works out there that it (i.e. Fantasie Inpromptue)?

[paris]

i'm playing rhapsody n.8 , awesome piece, i like it more than n.6.  but n.2 is truly gorgeus, you can't say it isn't. but overplayed.  spanish rhapsody is also fantastic, and very rarely played.

[decadent]

no.11 is a little gem. i think no.2 deserves to be famous, a little hackneyd maybe, and its musical contents borders on circus material, but i dont think its suppose to be profound, its a super entertaining piece.

no.12 is great, no.10 quite effective in concert.

[rob47]

So basically, what is it that makes a piece famous, even though there is far greater works out there that it (i.e. Fantasie Inpromptue)?

I don't agree with you there, But with the exceptions of no.'s 3,7,8, and 16-18 I have pretty much played or read through them all.  However, having grown out of that phase and onto the Italian Opera Transcriptions Book phase I can say the ones that still have meaning to me and I will always listen to are 2 (I learned it as prodigious adolescent), 9 (i learned it as a fading child prodigy), and the Horowitz version of 19 (I learned to show off when I realized how good the rest of the world is at Piano).  But I'd say Horowitz's arrgt. of 19 should be mad* famous as it is awesome and really adds alot to a relatively unknown piece. And i prefer 4 to 6, although if it's cziffra's recording of 6 with the smashing bass octaves at the end I prefer that.

What was the question?

Rob.

*that's right 'mad famous'

[Goldberg]

The question, I think, is why "crappy" (relatively) pieces like Fantasie-Impromptu and, I'll add my own, La Campanella get the spotlight more than their related neighbour pieces, i.e. the other Chopin impromptus, which are gorgeous, or the 5 "other" Paganini studies that, although perhaps equally as creative as La Campanella, are more interesting musically than the 3rd etude.

Then there's HR2...

Recently I've spent a lot of time listening to the Hungarian Rhapsodies and I have to say they're all fine pieces of music minus, in my opinion, 2, 14 and 15 (14 is ONLY there because it is much better as the Hungarian Fantasy. It is much too expansive for piano alone--of course Liszt was right on in realising that). So far I've only played no. 6, which is one of my favourite encore pieces, but plan on doing a large amount of other rhapsodies, if not all of them, in the next couple of years. No.'s 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 19 are all tops on my list.

As far as the question is concerned, I think it's rather obvious that pieces like HR2, HR6, FI, and LC (which are all, incidentally, so bloody well-known they have their own universal abbreviations) are more famous than there usually more musical and scholarly neighbours because of the extroverted technical flashiness of each. FI and LC in particular are known to be much more difficult than they sound, and that technical display (or at least the imagined difficulty in the audience) tends to impress listeners. Pianists, I think, feel pressured to play the most popular of different sets because 1) they have to compete with others who can play the pieces and 2) they have to play things the audience knows and enjoys, or that have been "traditional" recital pieces for decades.

[Bouter Boogie]

I play no. 10, it's great 
But technically hard too.. Any advice? It's the first Rhapsody me's playing 
Anyway, I like no. 12 too!!

[apion]

HRs 2 and 6 are overall the most compelling, and I adore them both very much.    There are many other Liszt HR gems, but these two are spectacular showpieces for all audience types, and they seem particularly well designed as competition pieces.   Very few pieces will garner more oohs and aahs (if that's what you're after).   

[nanabush]

Which one would you say is the easiest, because I have the second HR in a book, and find one section of the 'friska' very difficult.  If you know the part where you play lower notes followed by a high C sharp every second note in the right hand, that is the hardest part throughout that piece.  I have heard this HR was one of the easiest, but is there one that is easier than the others?

[thalbergmad]

There were 2 pieces that Liszt refused to be played in his masterclasses and the 2nd Rhapsody was one of them. I don't think he could understand the popularity either.

[nanabush]

Ok... Which one would you consider the easiest of the set?

[musicsdarkangel]

Ok... Which one would you consider the easiest of the set?

possibly 11, but it isn't easy at all.

[thalbergmad]

I learnt number 3 first. If i remember it was not really difficult.

[Goldberg]

There were 2 pieces that Liszt refused to be played in his masterclasses and the 2nd Rhapsody was one of them. I don't think he could understand the popularity either.

I may be wrong, but for those interested I do believe the 2nd piece was Chopin's 2nd Scherzo. As you mentioned, he didn't like that both pieces were so overwhelmingly popular and--I guess--he assumed there was really very little, especially about the HR2, that could actually be taught about them.

I wouldn't really consider the 11th rhapsody to be the easiest, by the way. It's one of my favourites, but I haven't spent an excessive amount of time with it so I could be wrong; however, the tremelo/cimbalom effects at the beginning seem to be quite tricky, and afterwards there are some relatively complex finger runs, complex even as far as Hungarian Rhapsodies go, from the looks of it.

But I know you (musicdarkangel) did say it wasn't "easy" per se...nevertheless, I might submit no.'s 3, 4, 5, and 7 to be amongst the easier ones of the set. But, again, I haven't played all of them--in fact, so far I've only done half of 4 and all of 6 and 14. I actually believe that no. 4 would make the perfect beginner rhapsody, given that it introduces the typical fast run technique found in most other rhapsodies, only with relatively simplistic patterns, and also has a terrific octave section that's comparable to the 6th Rhapsody in feel but not in difficulty. The piece itself easily contains some of my favourite music of the entire cycle, as well, though that is purely my opinion (as is everything).

[nanabush]

O wow, there are way more Cadenza sections throughout the 4th than the second, but it is more than twice as short.  What's that?..... THIRDS?!?!?! AAAA, I can never play them fast enough!!

[thalbergmad]

Spot on Goldberg, it was scherzo no 2. Liszt didn't care for it.

[musicsdarkangel]

I may be wrong, but for those interested I do believe the 2nd piece was Chopin's 2nd Scherzo. As you mentioned, he didn't like that both pieces were so overwhelmingly popular and--I guess--he assumed there was really very little, especially about the HR2, that could actually be taught about them.

I wouldn't really consider the 11th rhapsody to be the easiest, by the way. It's one of my favourites, but I haven't spent an excessive amount of time with it so I could be wrong; however, the tremelo/cimbalom effects at the beginning seem to be quite tricky, and afterwards there are some relatively complex finger runs, complex even as far as Hungarian Rhapsodies go, from the looks of it.

But I know you (musicdarkangel) did say it wasn't "easy" per se...nevertheless, I might submit no.'s 3, 4, 5, and 7 to be amongst the easier ones of the set. But, again, I haven't played all of them--in fact, so far I've only done half of 4 and all of 6 and 14. I actually believe that no. 4 would make the perfect beginner rhapsody, given that it introduces the typical fast run technique found in most other rhapsodies, only with relatively simplistic patterns, and also has a terrific octave section that's comparable to the 6th Rhapsody in feel but not in difficulty. The piece itself easily contains some of my favourite music of the entire cycle, as well, though that is purely my opinion (as is everything).

Yeah, all of those Rhapsodies are beasts for the most part.  I would definitely put 3 and 5 with the easiest (agree).

I'd have to see the sheet music to know about 4 and 7.

No worries, 11 is a beast as they all are : ) you'll get it eventually.