Liszt's Transcendental Etude no. 1

[pianoguy]

      I am currently beginning work on Liszt's Transcendental Etude no. 1 "Preludio." I am sixteen, and I wouldn't consider myself super advanced, but my piano teacher and I both think that this piece is within my grasp (after all, it's two pages long, and it's in C), but I want to do it right. Is there anyone who has played this piece who could give me any pointers about it or warn me of any common mistakes people make while learning it? I am planning on using this as an audition piece at the college I intend to go to, and I want to do the best job I possibly can so I can recieve scholarships.

[Goldberg]

It's a good idea, PianoGuy, but I hope you plan on learning some other TE's to play with it! In fact, it would probably be better if you played a more substantial TE by itself for your audition rather than play a piece that's less than a minute long.

I say it's a good idea, however, because the "Preludio" etude is an excellent introduction, as you can imagine, to the set and to the Lisztian style in general. It is concise yet decidedly challenging and will give you plenty to "think about" while you play--a good exposition of virtuoso technique. I can't give any specific hints for you because I haven't played it, but do go for it and plan on learning some more of the etudes! I recommend, for your audition, one of the following: "Wilde Jagd" "Appassionata" "Harmonies du Soir" or "Chasse-Neige" if you are suicidal (etude no. 12, or Chasse-Neige, will most likely be completely out of your grasp even in a year's time, and I don't mean to discourage you entirely because I could be wrong---but it is certainly the most challenging etude unless you happen to be a tremelo pro). Etudes no. 10, "Appassionata" or no. 11 "Harmonies du Soir" would both be excellent choices, though.

Sorry I can't be more help! Just thought I'd toss in a few things...

[Barbosa-piano]

 I agree with Goldberg, it is a good introduction for you, when it comes to Liszt's type of virtuosismo. I've read it, and played some parts of it, but I never really "practiced" it. It seems to me that this is the easiest of all of them, and its name, Preludio, pretty much tells it is a short introduction to the rest of the Etudes. If you can play more than one piece for the audition, I would suggest this one as an opening piece to the rest, followed probably by a Chopin Etude, the Revolutionary Etude would probably be the nicest following this one. Since you are sixteen, not knowing your level, I would suggest this one as a preparatory one for the other ones. I don't think you would have any major troubles practicing this one, the only thing to worry about is the passage(s) were the two hands go up on the keyboard. I hope this was somehow helpful...

                                                  Enjoy pratice,
                                                  Mario Barbosa 

[rob47]

i agree with everyone.  You most certaily should learn one more to go with Preludio.  Any of the remaing 11 would be good.  Liszt is my FAV composer but this particular TE needs at least one more to go with it, as it is only  a "prelude" to the greater goods  that follow.  Go with Mazzeppa, it's the hardest, hahaha.


Incidentally who is it playing this piece at the beginning of Art of Piano?

[Barbosa-piano]

Incidentally who is it playing this piece at the beginning of Art of Piano?

I'm not sure, but I'll check and reply... He plays it very well, and it's funny, he has small hands... His name is probably on the Credits.

[pseudopianist]

I learned this piece around Christmas. It is really simple techniqually so it didn't take me that long to have it playable but I still work on this piece to make it sound just right. It is one of my favourit Liszt pieces, it is so short and create such a impression.

The hardest part that I think of would be the streches when you play the 16th notes at bar 6 - 8 since it goes a at reaaaallly fast pace.

[fowler]

I learned this piece around Christmas. It is really simple techniqually so it didn't take me that long to have it playable but I still work on this piece to make it sound just right. It is one of my favourit Liszt pieces, it is so short and create such a impression.

[fowler]

Nope, thats a load of rubbish, it is not really simple technically at all, you cant trust comments like that, he cant spell anyway. Its technically difficult, I know its not long but its hard to play well, its harder than the revolutionary study also. I am not saying its extremely hard to play but you cant say its simple technically, thats someone showing off and trying to make themselves look good. I wish people would not write in stupid comments that are not helpful, so dont do it, he needs useful and helpful advice.

[pianoguy]

I'm not sure I can learn it in time, but what about following it up with "Un Sospiro?"

[rjmuk]

I learned this piece a couple of months ago and have a few tips for you. First of all, listen to a decent recording of it; there are a lot of recorded versions of this available that don’t do it justice. A great performance is by the controversial Georges Cziffra who played Liszt so effortlessly. Don’t try to copy this performance but use it as a good start. Also there is a tendency to put too much concentration on the right hand, if anything the left should provide more of the volume in this piece to give to give it the punch it needs. The chromatically rising bass notes in the left hand of bar 2 need special attention in velocity. In bar 14-15 the dramatic sweeps are often lost by the most proficient pianists. They are for textural effect but make sure they are clear and defined.  Good Luck.

[stringoverstrung]

I'm not sure I can learn it in time, but what about following it up with "Un Sospiro?"

Hi pianoguy,

Congratulations with your plan to enter the audition.

My advice for what it’s worth is one against un sospiro because:

-   I’ve heard it a few times live (played by professional pianists and amateurs) and I must say that I did not once hear a good performance of it: they all made mistakes (which isn’t the worst thing) but after the mistakes they tensed up and it went really wrong in most cases. This doesn’t mean you can’t do it !
-   It is difficult to “score”  with this piece because it is almost too popular.
-   It is difficult to play it like a “sigh” which is what it should sound like! You need a lot of control to make it sound like that especially when played under pressure.
-   If you play preludio first then in my opinion it is better to continue with another Transcendental Etude.  I think Harmonies du Soir would be a good choice because there is a lot of music in it as well as different “types of technique” (chords, arpeggio’s). It is also a piece with many moods and I think it’s a lot easier to capture the right spirit of this piece (harmonies from/in the evening (imagine the sounds of the evening) ) then with a “sigh” (more difficult to play that on a piano don’t you think?). It is also one of the "easier" transcendental etudes. It has everything in it. I recommend listening to Harmonies du soir played by Claudio Arrau (Philips double CD) and by Lazar Berman (Live recital Budapest somewhere in the fifties (1958 I think).

Of course it’s just my advice. The most important thing is that you choose your piece yourself!

 
--------------------------------------------------
Without a home the journey is endless (Bos)

[pseudopianist]

Nope, thats a load of rubbish, it is not really simple technically at all, you cant trust comments like that, he cant spell anyway. Its technically difficult, I know its not long but its hard to play well, its harder than the revolutionary study also. I am not saying its extremely hard to play but you cant say its simple technically, thats someone showing off and trying to make themselves look good. I wish people would not write in stupid comments that are not helpful, so dont do it, he needs useful and helpful advice.

Take the word simple with a pinch of salt. The piece is a lot less difficult and what it sounds like and also depend on at what speed you play it. Playing it under one minute is really hard but I really don't think it was meant to be THAT fast. The first page just repeats itself  and does the arpeggios on the other page. It is reaaaaally short. I'm not saying it is easy but it is a lot simpler than the other etudes, even simpler than No 3 IMO.

I can't spell? Sorry for not being American, *** cunt.

[chromatickler]

Playing it under one minute is really hard but I really don't think it was meant to be THAT fast.

the prefered speed is 35-40seconds

[pseudopianist]

the prefered speed is 35-40seconds

da fastest i've heard was jeno jando at 43 but lets not forget da commes recordin

[pseudopianist]

https://dasdc.net/filez/te1.mp3

[Goldberg]

I think I was the one to say it was under a minute--that was after referencing Cziffra's recording of the piece, which slides past the finishing banner at a clean 50 seconds, and he takes it pretty moderately. Leslie Howard, playing the Grandes Etudes, takes the first one in 52 seconds...

[pseudopianist]

I think I was the one to say it was under a minute--that was after referencing Cziffra's recording of the piece, which slides past the finishing banner at a clean 50 seconds, and he takes it pretty moderately. Leslie Howard, playing the Grandes Etudes, takes the first one in 52 seconds...

Are there anything diffrent with this piece in the Grandes Etudes version?

[Goldberg]

I think the only differences are in notational features, as in how the piece looks if that makes sense (for instance, in some pieces you might find two versions, and one has a large chord written in one staff but in the other version, the chord is split between the hands--but it's the same chord). Any changes to the piece itself, however, are minute if extant at all. I'll double check during practice today and see if I'm completely wrong! Both versions are only 2 pages.

[mikeyg]

I can't spell? Sorry for not being American, *** cunt.

AHAHAHA
AHAHAHA
AHAHAHA

[pseudopianist]

I think the only differences are in notational features, as in how the piece looks if that makes sense (for instance, in some pieces you might find two versions, and one has a large chord written in one staff but in the other version, the chord is split between the hands--but it's the same chord). Any changes to the piece itself, however, are minute if extant at all. I'll double check during practice today and see if I'm completely wrong! Both versions are only 2 pages.

I've heard the grande etude in midiformat at classicalarchives.net but I didn't hear any diffrence (it was even the same midi) so if there are none I can't hear them.
Thanks in advance


mikeyg: Now, when I see your post I think Star Wars.

[Goldberg]

Ah! Looks like I lied to ya, mate. Closer scrutiny of the text has revealed some differences in the text between the Grand Etude version and the Transcendental Etude one. There are two cases where a rolled chord (in the GE version) is turned into an octave (in the TE version) in the left hand. At the very end, there is a right hand arpeggio pattern that includes second-inversion F major triads as opposed to the GE-version's single-note arps. There's even an appoggiatura at the last chord for the left hand that is not in the GE version.

...oh, and at the beginning right hand arpeggio downward (you have the BaDUM...baDAHdahdahdah and so on), the arpeggio sequence begins with C-(EC)-Bb-G-E-C and so on, where (EC) is an E with a sixth above it; in the 1st Grand Etude, the arpeggio only has single notes again.

Finally, an example of the notational differences (extreeemely small, but interesting anyway) is the first C 7th chord in the left hand. Curiously, in the first version of the etudes, the chord is notated with the "stem" on the right side and facing up; in the TE version, it's on the left side and facing down. The notes aren't different in any way, however.

It doesn't mean anything significant, of course, but I find it strange..

[pseudopianist]

Hahah very intressing post I must say. Thanks a lot for the information. Must get my hands over the sheet music one day. 

[turner]

Back to the original question at hand...

To execute TE 1 well, look at the technical/interpretive features presented in the piece and ask yourself with brutal honesty, am I proficent in that aspect of the piano playing?

For TE 1, the following features are evident by glancing at the score:

Bars 1 and 3: evenness in major-7th broken chord
Bars 5 to 8 (although introduced in the last beat of the 1st bar): clarity, evenness and steady pulse (i.e. not rushing) of the right-hand sixteenth note pattern, especially given the added interval of the fourth (the 3rd 16th note) in each beat.
Bars 9 to 11: accurate and clean attack of the chords
Bars 12 and 13: evenness in left-hand trills (I'd be very cautious with the pedalling and maintaining a steady rhythm)
etc. etc.

Many posters have written the need to pair TE1 with something else (and all the arguments are valid), but an argument could also be made that this piece, by its very brevity, allows the players to actually finish from the beginning to the end, which can be an advantage. I played Chopin's 3rd Ballade at my audition years ago (and got accepted  , and only got to play 2 or 3 pages of it.

[Goldberg]

Well, I also have kind of wondered about that as well, and although I don't think I've mentioned it thus far I will say that I think the 2nd etude in a minor would be a fantastic choice. It doesn't get a lot of attention, in fact it's probably the least-preferred in the whole set, but is a neat piece in its own right and not ruined by overplayedness. It is also agreeably short, but still not without its fair share of virtuosity (though imo it's one of the easiest in the set). Pair it up with the 1st one for a killer combo...

Hmm, that sounded like something out of Mortal Kombat...remember that game? Only I guess it would be something like "killer kombo....FATALITY!!! BWAHAHAHAHA"

Ahem.

[pianoguy]

     Well, first of all, thanks for all the advice. It's GREATLY appreciated ! I am going to follow the TE with another piece (my piano teacher wants me to do something baroque or classical so that they'll see that i'm "well rounded"). There was one thing, however... Is it really necessary that I play the whole thing REEEEEALLLY fast? I know I should play the first section as fast as I can, but at bar 14 my edition says "non troppo presto," which means "not too fast." If I play the whole final section at lightning speed, I'm afraid I'll be accused of not being musical. Should I just start that section out "not too fast" and speed WAAAYY up before the poco rallentando near the end, or should I play the whole section "not too fast?"

[Goldberg]

Which edition do you use? Mine is Dover's republication of the version editted by Busoni for the Liszt Society in Europe--I believe Busoni was its founder, but I haven't read too much into it.

Anyway, this edition, which is probably as authoritative (and cheap!) as they come, has, from bar 4 to bar 8, the instructions "poco a poco crescendo ed accelerando sempre piu forte"--at bar 12, there is a ritard with the trills and when it comes out at the 14th bar with the "non troppo presto" you mentioned, there are no other tempo markings to be seen until the second to last measure, which has in it the phrase "poco rallentando."

So, I would take the 14th bar marginally slower than the opening 8 measures, and continue so until the poco rallentando, which of course is an indication for a slower tempo. Do not do an accelerando after 14, in other words.

That's about all there is to it!

[pseudopianist]

     Well, first of all, thanks for all the advice. It's GREATLY appreciated ! I am going to follow the TE with another piece (my piano teacher wants me to do something baroque or classical so that they'll see that i'm "well rounded"). There was one thing, however... Is it really necessary that I play the whole thing REEEEEALLLY fast? I know I should play the first section as fast as I can, but at bar 14 my edition says "non troppo presto," which means "not too fast." If I play the whole final section at lightning speed, I'm afraid I'll be accused of not being musical. Should I just start that section out "not too fast" and speed WAAAYY up before the poco rallentando near the end, or should I play the whole section "not too fast?"

It all depends on how you interp the non troppo presto. I've heard people play it almost at 100 bpm. I would say that it should be played fast but not the have the feeling of presto. Maybe a tad slower than the rest of the piece, but it is all up to you.

[pianoguy]

Which edition do you use? Mine is Dover's republication of the version editted by Busoni for the Liszt Society in Europe--I believe Busoni was its founder, but I haven't read too much into it.

     I use the edition found in the sheet music archive. I don't know if it's the same one or not, but it has the same tempo markings you described, so it might be.

     The reason I asked if I should speed up was that I have heard recordings and midis where they would play the first couple of measures after the non troppo presto really slow, but would then speed up to an insane speed toward the end. I understand that I have some interpretive liberties, but I'm doing it for an audition and would like to leave an impression on the judges that looks like I know what I'm doing and not like I'm disregarding what the music says...

[pseudopianist]

Yeah that is true but just because you interpretive non troppo presto a certine way doesn't you didn't play what it said.

People play this piece so differently, make it your own and what you think fits, I think that would impress the judges