The most difficult piece

[Triton LE 76]

Hi

I'm wondering what the most difficult piece ever made is? I wanna look at it

Thanks for answers
Joern

[BoliverAllmon]

Hi

I'm wondering what the most difficult piece ever made is? I wanna look at it

Thanks for answers
Joern

use the search button and check out the many threads dedicated to this topic.

[nanabush]

Gaaaa!  Not another one!!  OPUS CLAVICEMBALISTICUM... and I'll end it at that..

[thalbergmad]

Gaaaa!  Not another one!!  OPUS CLAVICEMBALISTICUM... and I'll end it at that..

I can't spell it and I can't play it.

[rob47]

Do you mean to most difficult piece, or the most difficult, collosal piece of garbage?

Which is what O.C. is....for the most part.  I hope Sorabji's ghost is reading this.

[Rach3]

Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto, or
Brahms' 2nd, or
Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit, or
one of the Prokofiev concerti, or
Bartok 2 (or is it the other one?) or
one of the original Liszt Paganini etudes or
Brahms Paganini variations

and there goes the 500-post barrier...

[rob47]

one of the Prokofiev concerti,

number two, arguably.

[dinosaurtales]

Gaaaa!  Not another one!!  OPUS CLAVICEMBALISTICUM... and I'll end it at that..

OK.  That's it.  I have seen this thing mentioned for the last time without asking = what the hell is it?

[nanabush]

It's an insane piece that no one will EVER play well.. I guarantee it's like 4 hours long...

And is le Gibet the easiest from Gaspard?  I saw the score and ther'es some pretty insane chords in that...

[jlh]

Many pieces by Messiaen blow all those out of the water as far as difficulty is concerned.

Another to consider... Klavierstück No. 10 (X) by Stockhausen.  I'd like to see anyone here play that one!!!!!!  It's GOT to be one of the most difficult in the repertoire (or THE most difficult)!

[steinwayguy]

Boulez 2nd Sonata is up there.

I hate responding to moronic threads like this, but I feel that should be mentioned.

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

First of all, Rob, the OC is not garbage. It is one of the most amazing pieces of music ever written. Obviously, you have neither analyzed it or heard it the way it's supposed to be played (one can only do so by hearing Mr. Jonathan Powell play it in concert). Therefore, you not only have no clue as to how great this piece is, but you also have nothing to support your opinion, which therefore makes it utter rubbish.

DinosaurTales:

The Opus Clavicembalisticum is a 4-hour piano piece by Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji. It is not only incredibly difficult technically, but musically. There are so many difficulties that is is impossible to name them all. Probably, the first to come to mind is that it's so complex, he had to write it on 3-5 staves rather than 2!

Because the only two available recordings of the work (Madge and Ogden) are so terrible, nobody truly knows what it sounds like, unless they have heard Jonathan Powell's perfomance of it, which so far, is the best. Overall, the piece is tonal, however Sorabji flirts with atonality in such a way that at times it is almost impossible to tell what key it's in.

It is loosely based on the structure of Busoni's Fantasy Contrappuntistica (he worshipped Busoni, as well as Bach). It is incredibly organized, and all of the themes that he uses show up in different movements all throughout the work. Sorabji's melodies are sometimes hard to recognize. His overall style is often like an improvisation, and sometimes unbelievable beautiful (such as his Le Jardin Parfume, or slightly simpler Fantasia Espanol).

When asked "What is the most difficult piece (ever recorded)?", Opus Clavicembalisticum is usually the standard answer, and I would tend to agree.


Information can be found on this thread I made -

https://www.pianoforum.net/smf/index.php/topic,7782.0.html


Two interviews with pianist, Michael Habermann, Sorabji Specialist -

https://www.michaelhabermann.com/sounds/_index.html


Sheetmusic for various Sorabji works-


1st Piano Sonata

https://www.gamingforce.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35130


2nd Piano Sonata

https://www.gamingforce.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=34559


3rd Piano Sonata

https://www.blaubeeri.com/temp/Sorabji%20-%20Piano%20Sonata%20No.%203.pdf

[rob47]

First of all, Rob, the OC is not garbage. It is one of the most amazing pieces of music ever written. Obviously, you have neither analyzed it or heard it the way it's supposed to be played (one can only do so by hearing Mr. Jonathan Powell play it in concert). Therefore, you not only have no clue as to how great this piece is, but you also have nothing to support your opinion, which therefore makes it utter rubbish.

I filled in the blanks! 

First of all, Ludwig, the OC is garbage.  It is one of the most unpractical pieces of music ever written.  Obviously, you have both analyzed it as well as heard it the way it's supposed to be played (you have done so by hearing Mr. Jonathan Powell play it in concert: the only way). Therefore, I not only have no clue as to how great this piece is, but my opinion, which may or may not be utter rubbish, is unsupported. 

So.....I guess I should back up my opinion next time.  I suppose I'll need concrete evidence, a primary source,  to support my opinion (Opinion's must be proven to be considered valid:  otherwise they're just....opinions.)

The OC is a collasal piece of garbage.^1
 
1  Rob. 2005.  "Opus Clavicembalisticum and other Stupid Pieces." Journal of Rob's Thoughts and Opinions 234:1

All jokes aside.

In a letter upon completion of the massive work, Sorabji wrote to a friend of his:

With a wracking head and literally my whole body shaking as with ague I write this and tell you I have just this afternoon early finished Clavicembalisticum... The closing 4 pages are so cataclysmic and catastrophic as anything I've ever done - the harmony bites like nitric acid - the counterpoint grinds like the mills of God...

Well, his use of english is beautiful. I wonder which took him longer? Composing the OC or thinking up those clever similes?  Wow I sound like such an arrogant prick.

Ok now all jokes aside.

 I'm just looking at recital programmes of Michael Habermann, a concert pianist who was tight with Sorabji, and I'm curious if you (Ludwig or anyone), have ever heard Ravel/Sorabji: Rapsodie espagnole?  Sounds intriguing! Looks like Mr. Habermann ended a couple recitals with it.

Rob

p.s. The most difficult piece is....hmm....

[pianowelsh]

Barber sonata isnt exactly easy?!?! Horowitz only played Fantasia Baetica once and had to delay the premier because it was so hard!

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

I filled in the blanks! 

First of all, Ludwig, the OC is garbage.  It is one of the most unpractical pieces of music ever written.  Obviously, you have both analyzed it as well as heard it the way it's supposed to be played (you have done so by hearing Mr. Jonathan Powell play it in concert: the only way). Therefore, I not only have no clue as to how great this piece is, but my opinion, which may or may not be utter rubbish, is unsupported. 

So.....I guess I should back up my opinion next time.  I suppose I'll need concrete evidence, a primary source,  to support my opinion (Opinion's must be proven to be considered valid:  otherwise they're just....opinions.)

The OC is a collasal piece of garbage.^1
 
1 Kawasaki, Rob. 2005.  "Opus Clavicembalisticum and other Stupid Pieces." Journal of Rob's Thoughts and Opinions 234:1

All jokes aside.

In a letter upon completion of the massive work, Sorabji wrote to a friend of his:

With a wracking head and literally my whole body shaking as with ague I write this and tell you I have just this afternoon early finished Clavicembalisticum... The closing 4 pages are so cataclysmic and catastrophic as anything I've ever done - the harmony bites like nitric acid - the counterpoint grinds like the mills of God...

Well, his use of english is beautiful. I wonder which took him longer? Composing the OC or thinking up those clever similes?  Wow I sound like such an arrogant prick.

Ok now all jokes aside.

 I'm just looking at recital programmes of Michael Habermann, a concert pianist who was tight with Sorabji, and I'm curious if you (Ludwig or anyone), have ever heard Ravel/Sorabji: Rapsodie espagnole?  Sounds intriguing! Looks like Mr. Habermann ended a couple recitals with it.

Rob

p.s. The most difficult piece is....hmm....

You are wrong. Absolutely wrong. But I will not bother to continue this argument. I doubt we will ever see eye to eye. But... you still have not stated why you find it impractical. The length? The harmonies? The difficulty?

By the way, the Ravel/Sorabji Rapsodie Espagnole is an enjoyable piece, though I much prefer Sorabji's own Fantasia Espagnole. The themes are quite catchy at times. 

[thierry13]

Sorabji sure is hard, and is a GENIUS, is pieces are absolutely gorgeous. But I think because of it's complexity it's TECHNICAL difficulties are overrated. His first sonata is not more technically demanding than most Liszt pieces. TOUGH, it's much more complicated, harmonically, and sure, it is not overrated in terms of musical difficulties! I don't think the technical difficulties in Sorabji's music will ever be harder than his musical difficulties. But there ARE pieces technically harder than any Sorabji piece, by other modern composers. Tough sure Sorabji's pieces are up there.

Edit: I'm sure someone will take me wrong and tell me I'm bragging and saying Sorabji's pieces are easy. I just know this will happen.

[Rach3]

But I think because of it's complexity it's TECHNICAL difficulties are overrated

How can a four-hour piece of untouchable nitric acid be 'overrated' in its difficulty? What, do you thing it's easy?? People go around saying the same things over and over again about Rach 3 or Scarbo, saying things exactly like what you're saying. It's usually cause they're bragging that they could play so-and-so easily, if they wanted to. Well, you're all wrong!

-Rach3, who is having too much fun again

[jlh]

But there ARE pieces technically harder than any Sorabji piece, by other modern composers. Tough sure Sorabji's pieces are up there.

Edit: I'm sure someone will take me wrong and tell me I'm bragging and saying Sorabji's pieces are easy. I just know this will happen.

I'm tellin' ya... you haven't seen hard until you've tried to play Klavierstück No. X by Karlheinz Stockhausen.  Difficult on a mega scale and very musically satisfying at the same time.  He also used irrational rhythms and meters in his pieces... I dare anyone to try and play them correctly!

[Nightscape]

I just listened to that Stockhausen piece you mentioned.  Fascinating!  It's interesting that the performer has to wear gloves.


But I think I've just written a piece that's even more difficult than that.

I present my Latest opus: "The Misenchanted Prelude" (attached)

[pianomann1984]

Any piece I haven't studied offers it's difficulties, and while I am studying it, will probably seem like the hardest thing ever.  But I only think in terms of the time it will take me - the harder it is, the longer it will take me - nothing is impossible!  Right now, the things looking furthest in the distance are Rachmaninov's 3rd PC, Prokofiev's 2nd & 3rd PC's (Prokofiev's handshapes are so alien to me - everyone has difficulties specific to them.  Mine is Prokofiev!).  Also any Beethoven Sonata that I haven't yet studied presents major difficulties - Beethoven always throws up issues that are fundamental to technique, and I find that the most useful thing to study to progress is Beethoven in the most detail that I can.  I guess for me, Hammerklavier or Op. 111 would be the most difficult thing to achieve...*sighs* One day!

[Triton LE 76]

I just listened to that Stockhausen piece you mentioned.  Fascinating!  It's interesting that the performer has to wear gloves.


But I think I've just written a piece that's even more difficult than that.

I present my Latest opus: "The Misenchanted Prelude" (attached)

umm..you're sure fast..
didn't quite get the melody but..
nice piece

[Chrysalis]

BWHHHAHAH the misenchanted prelude ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!

[Dazzer]

Fairey's aire & death waltz.

[nanabush]

I doubt that your 'prelude' tops OC even after massacering the keyboard.  And One question... The Sorabji/Ravel Rhapsodie Espagnol, does anyone even have a portion of the sheet music?  It's the most unique piece I have ever heard! 

[thalbergmad]

I doubt that your 'prelude' tops OC even after massacering the keyboard.  And One question... The Sorabji/Ravel Rhapsodie Espagnol, does anyone even have a portion of the sheet music?  It's the most unique piece I have ever heard! 

If you PM me your e mail, i will happily send it to you.

[Nightscape]

I doubt that your 'prelude' tops OC even after massacering the keyboard.  And One question... The Sorabji/Ravel Rhapsodie Espagnol, does anyone even have a portion of the sheet music?  It's the most unique piece I have ever heard! 

But the difference between the OC and my prelude is that the OC is playable - it's been recorded after all.  But there are notes in my prelude that aren't even on a real piano, and no human hands can play 128th notes 500 beats to the whole note.  That's over 4000 notes a second.  In fact, no piano action can play notes that quickly!

My point is, is that there is no "most difficult" piece because there is an infinite number of ways to make something harder.  You could probably even write something a computer can't play.

[Nightscape]

Actually, here's something for you to chew on.

[rob47]

Actually, here's something for you to chew on.

ya I hate playing 28 against 17 in 10ths.  Especially 64th note 10ths.

[tocca]

Surely some composer has written a piece, just to irritate people if nothing else, that is simply impossible to play?
I haven't examined if it's true, but it must be. Writing something that's impossible is a piece of cake! I can do it right now, in two minutes! 

So asking what's the most difficult piece ever written is a rather useless question. Maybe: "What's the most difficult piece ever played" would be a better question, it will never be answered correctly though, because it will always be an opinion.

[musicsdarkangel]

LOL, with care?  hah i love that.

[lostinidlewonder]

The OC isn't garbage as a few of you keep saying and in previous posts people say the same thing. It is a brilliant piece of work, it captivates a unique sound. Get the music and have a try of playing it, listening to it wont tell you anything about it really because it is presented differently all the time. There are lots of errors which then call upon the pianist to make the decision upon what is right and wrong depending on their musical experience. It is a very hard piece to play in its entirity but if you play sections of it doesn't offer a great difficulty. It is like climbing a small part of everest, doing the whole thing is damn hard yes, but a bit of it, not really.

And i dont know why people think speed = difficultly. More it is, producing the desired sound which is hard! If you write something with 500 notes a second in it, it sounds $hit, how hard is it to make $hit sound $hit? very easy.
But play something very slow, or very few notes, it can be immensly hard. MILLIONS OF examples.

[Nightscape]

The OC isn't garbage as a few of you keep saying and in previous posts people say the same thing. It is a brilliant piece of work, it captivates a unique sound. Get the music and have a try of playing it, listening to it wont tell you anything about it really because it is presented differently all the time. There are lots of errors which then call upon the pianist to make the decision upon what is right and wrong depending on their musical experience. It is a very hard piece to play in its entirity but if you play sections of it doesn't offer a great difficulty. It is like climbing a small part of everest, doing the whole thing is *** hard yes, but a bit of it, not really.

And i dont know why people think speed = difficultly. More it is, producing the desired sound which is hard! If you write something with 500 notes a second in it, it sounds $hit, how hard is it to make $hit sound $hit? very easy.
But play something very slow, or very few notes, it can be immensly hard. MILLIONS OF examples.

[sarcasm]Why do I have the strange feeling you're criticizing my prelude?  Obviously, you simply lack the musical mind to appreciate music of this complexity.  My prelude is a brilliant piece of work, and captivates a unique sound.[/sarcasm]

And besides, my work didn't have 500 notes a second in it.  It had 4000 notes a second.  And if 500 notes = $hit, then 4000 notes = sheer kick-ass brilliance.

[steinwayguy]

And besides, my work didn't have 500 notes a second in it.  It had 4000 notes a second.  And if 500 notes = $hit, then 4000 notes = sheer kick-ass brilliance.

Ha ha ha. Beautiful.

[lostinidlewonder]

That is just illogical. The more notes you have the more difficult it is to distinguish what effect each note has. So as you increase the amount you are just going into the unobservable range. If i where to take away one note you wouldn't notice it, even if i where to add lets say 55 to your ridiculous 2000, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Since there is such a lee way for error in the number of notes what you write will end up just being Krap. So the more notes you add to an unlistenaable speed, the KRAPPER IT gets.

[Toivot]

You don't understand the OC!

You have to listen to the notes that aren't played and play the notes that you can't listen to 

It's quite easy 

[Nightscape]

That is just illogical. The more notes you have the more difficult it is to distinguish what effect each note has. So as you increase the amount you are just going into the unobservable range. If i where to take away one note you wouldn't notice it, even if i where to add lets say 55 to your ridiculous 2000, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Since there is such a lee way for error in the number of notes what you write will end up just being Krap. So the more notes you add to an unlistenaable speed, the KRAPPER IT gets.

Let me explain a concept to you.  It's called sarcasm.  Basically, it's what I'm doing right now.

[thierry13]

How can a four-hour piece of untouchable nitric acid be 'overrated' in its difficulty? What, do you thing it's easy?? People go around saying the same things over and over again about Rach 3 or Scarbo, saying things exactly like what you're saying. It's usually cause they're bragging that they could play so-and-so easily, if they wanted to. Well, you're all wrong!

-Rach3, who is having too much fun again

I precised in my post the exact opposite of what you interpreted of my post. I could definately not play it. The fact that it is four hours long is for me more of a musical difficulty than a technical difficulty. It is why I think it is much more hard musically than technically. Technically I don't think it's harder than rach 3 or scarbo. But OC is **** more complex and musically demanding.

[lostinidlewonder]

Let me explain a concept to you. It's called sarcasm. Basically, it's what I'm doing right now.

So how did you explain what sarcasm is? What are you doing right now?? Do we want to know?   I really dont know what it means.

But really, what is written up there is a mess and to play a mess is easy because it has no musical sound that anyone would remember.  More notes doesnt always mean harder, that is the point I try to make. The more notes written that need to be expressed in a musical way is when things get hard. When the notes have a reason and objective, not just to sound like a mess or a little "chunk" of sound.

Piano music where the person has to mash keys and play with elbows, gliss here and there,  people think is hard, but it isn't, that is just bs-ing around. What is the difficulty is the musical value we have to attach to our playing and to the score.

Technically I don't think it's harder than rach 3 or scarbo.

Technically, if you are talking about the physical action required to play, OC is much harder than anything rach or ravel wrote for piano. The OC has a lot more unpianistic movements that are very unnatural for the hand to control but produce the particular musical "colour and shades" of Sorabji. Ravel has fantastic form, it feels very natural to the hands even if the music is rapid and and across the entire keyboard. The OC has insane passages which can be very unnatural at first and i reckon require a lot more time to be absorbed if you wanted to play it from memory. You are right about it being musically harder, I would think after hearing Rach or Ravel 20 times you would be able to hum the entire piece, but OC?

[Nightscape]

But really, what is written up there is a mess and to play a mess is easy because it has no musical sound that anyone would remember.  More notes doesnt always mean harder, that is the point I try to make. The more notes written that need to be expressed in a musical way is when things get hard. When the notes have a reason and objective, not just to sound like a mess or a little "chunk" of sound.

Piano music where the person has to mash keys and play with elbows, gliss here and there,  people think is hard, but it isn't, that is just bs-ing around. What is the difficulty is the musical value we have to attach to our playing and to the score.

But aren't you making a subjective judgement about what a "mess" is and what isn't?  Obviously, lots of people on this forum think that the OC is a "mess", and fragments of the score posted certainly do look like a mess on the surface.

And certainly most people would hear the OC and hear a mess - and thus would remember it as so.

Also, wouldn't it require incredible skill on the part of the performer to play the "mess" I posted above and make it sound convincing for an audience?  It would require enormous, even superman, musicality on the part of the performer to pull that off.

True, to play a mess is easy, but to make a mess into music is next to impossible.

[lostinidlewonder]

The human ear can't distinguish the individual sound of 1/512 notes played presto, so pushing it even further than that is just useless i reckon. You could sustitute the impossible "Exact" mess into playable very similar sounding mess.

OC isnt regarded mess because one can observe all the notes being played. I think mess comes into it when you are playing something that is not controllable and unobservable to the human ear, because music is after all music which can be OBSERVED by the human ear.

It would be useless to write a concerto for Dog whistle for instance, so why write something for piano which goes into the unobservable range and then throw your hands up and say, it is hard!

[Nightscape]

The human ear can't distinguish the individual sound of 1/512 notes played presto, so pushing it even further than that is just useless i reckon. You could sustitute the impossible "Exact" mess into playable very similar sounding mess.

OC isnt regarded mess because one can observe all the notes being played. I think mess comes into it when you are playing something that is not controllable and unobservable to the human ear, because music is after all music which can be OBSERVED by the human ear.

It would be useless to write a concerto for Dog whistle for instance, so why write something for piano which goes into the unobservable range and then throw your hands up and say, it is hard!

Even though the human ear may not be able to follow of line of 1/512 notes played presto, it certainly can hear the overrall effect created.  Even something less quickly, say parts of the Rach 3.  There are many parts of the Rach 3 (and pieces of similar difficulty) where there are so many notes going on at once, and so many voices at once, that the ear may hear only a dominate line and a lot of "accompaniment" underneath it.  While you may not be able to go to a piano and pick out the accompaniment parts like you can the main melody, nonetheless the accompaniment creates a general sound world that transcends that of individual notes.

And who said music was just for humans?  I think a concerto for dog whistle is a fine idea.

[lostinidlewonder]

Even though the human ear may not be able to follow of line of 1/512 notes played presto, it certainly can hear the overrall effect created.  Even something less quickly, say parts of the Rach 3.  There are many parts of the Rach 3 (and pieces of similar difficulty) where there are so many notes going on at once, and so many voices at once, that the ear may hear only a dominate line and a lot of "accompaniment" underneath it.  While you may not be able to go to a piano and pick out the accompaniment parts like you can the main melody, nonetheless the accompaniment creates a general sound world that transcends that of individual notes.

And who said music was just for humans?  I think a concerto for dog whistle is a fine idea.

Are you on drugs?

[musicsdarkangel]

I believe that every note in the Rach 3 surves it's purpose.

[Nightscape]

I believe that every note in the Rach 3 surves it's purpose.

lol, how could any note not serve its purpose?

Even if we were talking about some flashy, shallow piece, all of the notes in that piece have a purpose, namely to make it flashy and shallow.

If a note has no purpose in a piece, it won't be in it!

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

lol, how could any note not serve its purpose?

Even if we were talking about some flashy, shallow piece, all of the notes in that piece have a purpose, namely to make it flashy and shallow.

If a note has no purpose in a piece, it won't be in it!

Not true. I can name quite a few experimental/avant-garde composers who often did not intend the notes they wrote to have a purpose. Look at Xenakis. Now I suppose if his purpose with his music was to give people a headache (either from the music itself or from the intellectual rubbish behind it) then he succeeded. However, I don't really consider that a purpose. This applies to most music from that period of time, in my opinion. "The Age of the Intellectuals" as I prefer to call it.

But, Sorabji often referred to so-called intellectuals as "people who are educated beyond their intelligence", and frankly, I could not agree with him more.

(By the way, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I'm open to many ideas. Remember, I have based my opinion on my experience with this type of music so far in my life, with has not been much. So please, if I'm just not getting it, explain it to me.)

[Nightscape]

Not true. I can name quite a few experimental/avant-garde composers who often did not intend the notes they wrote to have a purpose. Look at Xenakis. Now I suppose if his purpose with his music was to give people a headache (either from the music itself or from the intellectual rubbish behind it) then he succeeded. However, I don't really consider that a purpose. This applies to most music from that period of time, in my opinion. "The Age of the Intellectuals" as I prefer to call it.

But, Sorabji often referred to so-called intellectuals as "people who are educated beyond their intelligence", and frankly, I could not agree with him more.

(By the way, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I'm open to many ideas. Remember, I have based my opinion on my experience with this type of music so far in my life, with has not been much. So please, if I'm just not getting it, explain it to me.)

But say Xenakis did write to give people a headache - that was his purpose, and thus the notes he use have the same purpose.   Even a "bad" purpose is a purpose.

Even composers who say that their notes have no purpose (as Ravel said of his Bolero), they are deluding themselves.  Would Bolero be Bolero if it did not have its notes?

And of course, there is the avant-garde concept of aleatory music.  But say a pianist is just "randomly" hitting notes.  Some would argue that because the performer/composer does not know what notes he is using, that the notes could not have a predetermined purpose.  Even in that case, the purpose of the notes is "to be as random sounding as possible" and the fact that the notes themselves create sounds gives them purpose.

And finally there are those who would point to John Cage's 4'33''.  But since the score contains no notes, it is a "noteless" piece, it does not require notes to have its effect.  Thus, since it has no notes, there is no point in discussing if those notes have any purpose, because there are no notes.

[sznitzeln]

True, to play a mess is easy, but to make a mess into music is next to impossible.

A mess cant be made into music. It can only be music if it only seems to be a mess, but really isnt.

Your prelude didnt have any intended ideas, but of course it is POSSIBLE that there exists some strange aliens in the universe that would have musical ideas like this. But you know yourself that no human will appreciate this musically. Perhaps they will get a laugh of it.
Or someone can appreciate it as the mess it is

[Nightscape]

A mess cant be made into music. It can only be music if it only seems to be a mess, but really isnt.

Music = organized sound.  Listen to my prelude again - you'll find repetition, scalar patterns, even a short melody.  True, it may not be the best musical organization there ever was, but it still is music.  It would be a hard task indeed to create "disorganized sound" using a notated music score.  Even if you were to simply randomly pick say 1000 different notes and throw them together in a seemingly random fashion in a score, they would still be organized, because the notes would bound together in the score.  Thus, you could play the score and achieve the same audio result time after time.  That in itself indicates organization.

Let's take a look at your statement again:

A mess cant be made into music. It can only be music if it only seems to be a mess, but really isnt.

Another way of looking at "disorganization" is simply saying that whatever appears to be "disorganized" is just really, really complex - so complex in fact, that no percievable organization can be heard.  The OC for example, is extremely complex.  It's so complex, that to most people it just sounds plain like a mess.

Here's a simple way of looking at things.  The more disorganized something appears to sound, the more complex the music is.  And the more complex the music is, the more difficult the task for the performer.  Thus if you followed this to its conclusion, if you were to present a piece to a performer that was truly 100% disorganized, the piece would then be infinitely difficult to perform and enjoy (the performer might have the technical facilities to play it, but musically it would be infinitely difficult to play).

I guess that answers the question then.  The most difficult piece is any piece that is completely 100% disorganized.  But since any notated piece contains some degree of organization, it would have to be an improvisation.  But since all pianists have their own personal musical preferences and since hands and fingers tend to gravitate towards certain figurations, it would be impossible for a human to improvise such a piece.  Even the random number generators in computers are not truly 100% random (they're just so complex, that they appear to be random), so even a computer could not be programmed to create such a piece.  In short, we do not currently have the technology or understanding to create, perform, or enjoy the most difficult piece.

[sznitzeln]

Well improvisations can indeed be organized.

Ok this is a meaningless discussion, but lets continiue anyway

If one were to play a completely 100% disorganized "piece"...
It wouldnt be hard to perform it musically, because its just random, it has nothing that has to be expressed.

Its much more difficult to play even simple music, musically. But not technically.

I didnt listen to your prelude before I posted the other post, it seemed to me from the discussion in the forum that it was completely random banging.

I agree that it is music, and that its not the best composition in the world

Have you got any more serious compositions that we can listen to?

Nice talking to you

[Nightscape]

Well improvisations can indeed be organized.

Ok this is a meaningless discussion, but lets continiue anyway

If one were to play a completely 100% disorganized "piece"...
It wouldnt be hard to perform it musically, because its just random, it has nothing that has to be expressed.

Its much more difficult to play even simple music, musically. But not technically.

I didnt listen to your prelude before I posted the other post, it seemed to me from the discussion in the forum that it was completely random banging.

I agree that it is music, and that its not the best composition in the world

Have you got any more serious compositions that we can listen to?

Nice talking to you

But since a totally disorganized piece has nothing to express..... it becomes infinitely difficult to give it musical expression.  So it's not easy, it's the exact opposite.  It would be easy to make it sound disorganized, but it would be impossibly difficult to make it sound organized.

(Oh and I do have real compositions for piano posted in the audition room, but they're probably at the bottom of the list.)