Which is the hardest (concerti)?

[steinwayguy]

Thoughts?

[apion]

All 3 are tremendously difficult.

Here's my ranking (toughest on top)

1. Rach 3 (see Note 1)
2. Proko 3 (see Note 2)
3. LvB 4 (see Note 3)

Note 1. The finale to Rach 3 is a knucklebuster.
Note 2. Proko 3 is nearly as tough.
Note 3. Beethoven 4 is tougher than most folks realize.

[steinwayguy]

Yes, but remember we're only talking about the first movements of these three.

[viking]

WHAT??? Only first movements, Prokofiev 3 is FAR tougher than 1st movement of Rach 3.  Rach 3 first movement isnt that tough at all, its the 3rd movement that gives the whole concerto such a difficult rep. 
SAM

[BoliverAllmon]

I guess it pays to read

[thalbergmad]

Never looked at the Prok, but surely the Henselt F Minor must rank somewhere.

[steinwayguy]

WHAT??? Only first movements, Prokofiev 3 is FAR tougher than 1st movement of Rach 3. Rach 3 first movement isnt that tough at all, its the 3rd movement that gives the whole concerto such a difficult rep.
SAM

That's what I'm saying...

[apion]

Yes, but remember we're only talking about the first movements of these three.

Oops.  New ranking:

1. Prok 3 (1st mvt)
2. Rach 3 (1st mvt)
3. Beet 4 (1st mvt)

I guess it pays to read

hehehe ........ no doubt. 

[mlsmithz]

Never looked at the Prok, but surely the Henselt F Minor must rank somewhere.

Well, yes, the Henselt is very difficult, but the question is about the Beethoven No.4, Rachmaninov No.3, and Prokofiev No.3 - I mean, I'd say the Brahms No.2 first movement or perhaps the first movement of the Alkan Concerto for Solo Piano (which, of course, has been orchestrated - first movement only, I mean) surpass those three, but that's not what the question is asking.  Anyway, I agree with the ranking from most difficult to least of Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Beethoven.  But I could certainly listen to the Prokofiev and Beethoven over and over (I'm not so fond of the Rachmaninov).

[viking]

I find it sad that 16 people find rach3 first movement more difficult than prokofiev3 first movement.  They are most likely basing their opinion on reputation, not actual experience...
SAM

[rob47]

First of all, let me tell that you've got it messed up Steinway my friend.  Prok 3 compared to Rach 3 is somewhat of a joke.  Sure Prok 3 is incredibly challenging, however if you want to relate an incredibly challenging Prok concerto to RACH3 it is defineitly Prok 2 in gminor:  As hard as the RAch 3 for sure.  Maybe harder for it's lack of obvious melodious passages.  Prok 2 is the PUSHING-THE-BARRIER-NEo_CLASSICAL concerto of the 20th centurey.  Much mroe difficult than prok3 IMHO.  And i do mean humble.

just my twenty-nine cents.

[apion]

First of all, let me tell that you've got it messed up Steinway my friend.  Prok 3 compared to Rach 3 is somewhat of a joke.  Sure Prok 3 is incredibly challenging, however if you want to relate an incredibly challenging Prok concerto to RACH3 it is defineitly Prok 2 in gminor:  As hard as the RAch 3 for sure.  Maybe harder for it's lack of obvious melodious passages.  Prok 2 is the PUSHING-THE-BARRIER-NEo_CLASSICAL concerto of the 20th centurey.  Much mroe difficult than prok3 IMHO.  And i do mean humble.

just my twenty-nine cents.

I agree that Prok 2 is clearly tougher than Prok 3, but this thread is limited in scope, and Prok 2 is not a consideration.  Moreover, this thread addresses the FIRST MOVEMENTS only; the 1st movement of Rach 3 is not the toughest movement of that concerto.

[Sergey R]

Prok 3 first movement is the hardest there.

[steinwayguy]

First of all, let me tell that you've got it messed up Steinway my friend. Prok 3 compared to Rach 3 is somewhat of a joke. Sure Prok 3 is incredibly challenging, however if you want to relate an incredibly challenging Prok concerto to RACH3 it is defineitly Prok 2 in gminor: As hard as the RAch 3 for sure. Maybe harder for it's lack of obvious melodious passages. Prok 2 is the PUSHING-THE-BARRIER-NEo_CLASSICAL concerto of the 20th centurey. Much mroe difficult than prok3 IMHO. And i do mean humble.

just my twenty-nine cents.

We're talking about the first movements, genius. So no, Prokofiev 3 compared to Rachmaninoff 3 is anything but a joke.


Keep at it, champ.

[ravel]

hmmmmmmmmm, interesting
well since i havent played them, (  at present atleast, all i can do  is dream of playing these pieces hehe),
i will base my answer on how hard the pieces sound .
rach3 ( with the longer cadenza) sounds the hardest, then prokofiev3 and then beethoven4.
i guess lots of people already have this rating.
but i feel it would have been a much more interesting pole if , the prokofiev 3 was replaced by prokofiev 2.  i mean i love prokofievs third concerto, its just awesome, but i think i love his second piano concert the most , and i think it is harder than the third one ( again on the basis of  listening).
in that case, i think there would be a tie between rach3 and prokofiev2. i think they are equally hard, or sound so.  if rach 3 is crazy hard, then so is prokofiev 2nd  ( just heard the cadenza, its sheer madness).
by the way which cadenza would be harder?? rach3 longer cadenza or the prokofiev 2nd concerto?

[steinwayguy]

hmmmmmmmmm, interesting
well since i havent played them, ( at present atleast, all i can do is dream of playing these pieces hehe),
i will base my answer on how hard the pieces sound .
rach3 ( with the longer cadenza) sounds the hardest, then prokofiev3 and then beethoven4.
i guess lots of people already have this rating.
but i feel it would have been a much more interesting pole if , the prokofiev 3 was replaced by prokofiev 2. i mean i love prokofievs third concerto, its just awesome, but i think i love his second piano concert the most , and i think it is harder than the third one ( again on the basis of listening).
in that case, i think there would be a tie between rach3 and prokofiev2. i think they are equally hard, or sound so. if rach 3 is crazy hard, then so is prokofiev 2nd ( just heard the cadenza, its sheer madness).
by the way which cadenza would be harder?? rach3 longer cadenza or the prokofiev 2nd concerto?

You are both correct and incorrect.

I'm very confident in my suspicion that the first movement of the Prokofiev 3rd is harder than the first movement of the Rachmaninoff 3rd with is harder than the first movement of Beethoven 4th. You bring an interesting point up with Prokofiev 2nd. I've heard, and am conifdent in saying that the Prokofiev 2nd is probably more difficult than the Rachmaninoff 3rd, and the first movement of Prokofiev 2nd is a lot more difficult than the first movement of the Rachmaninoff 3rd. Prokofiev 2nd is definitely harder than Prokofiev 3rd and is, arguably, the hardest concerto in the semi-standard repertoire (This excludes stuff like the Busoni or Ligeti concerti). It goes something like this-

Top tier-
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 2nd
Bartok 1st

Second Tier-
Prokofiev 3rd
Rachmaninoff 3rd
Brahms 2nd

Third Tier-
Brahms 1st
Beethoven 4th
Totentanz

etc.

[ravel]

yuppppppp,
i think i agree with a few things you said and disagree abouth other things. infact , yes, bartok 2nd  and 1st are almost as hard as prokofiev second (specially bartok2nd which ,maybe ,is just as hard as prok2), well bartok 2nd seems harder than the first. but i would still think that rach3 belongs to the first tier. and is harder than bartok 1 atleast, if not bartok2.
also, i still dont understand, what makes you think that prokofiev 3rd first movement is harder than rach3 first movement. what sections are you exactly talking about?   but yes i would say prok3 and bartok1 would be in the 2nd tier  in my opinion. and rach3, prok2 and bartok2 would be in the first tier.

[viking]

Third Tier-
Brahms 1st
Beethoven 4th
Totentanz

Ok.  Totentanz is definately not in the same league as brahms 1st.  Totentanz sounds hard on the CD, as I thought, and I wanted to learn it.  However, my teacher says its far easier than Liszt 2nd concerto, which I play.  Brahms takes oodles of maturity to play, while Totentanz is far less musically demanding.  However, your other "tiers" are understandable.  IMO tiers would be as follows.

Tier1
Rach 3
Brahms 2

Tier1.5
Prokofiev3, 2
Bartok1, 2
Brahms 1
Rach 1

Tier2
Liszt 1 2
Prokofiev 3
Tchaikovsky 1
Rach 2
Beethoven 3, 4


As most of us think that Bartok 1 and 2 concertos are extremely impossibe (and they are) they arent nearly as tough musically as Rach 3 and Brahms 2. 
SAM

[apion]

Tier1
Rach 3
Brahms 2

Tier1.5
Prokofiev3, 2
Bartok1, 2
Brahms 1
Rach 1

Tier2
Liszt 1 2
Prokofiev 3
Tchaikovsky 1
Rach 2
Beethoven 3, 4

Very, very good list.  I agree with everything except Beethoven 3 (I really don't think it's in the same league as Beethoven 4 ...........).     Also, you have Prok3 on two different tiers. 

[musicsdarkangel]

I don't agree with the Prok 2 being as hard as the Rach 3 (nearly), and I also own the sheet music for both, and it appears (although I've played neither but read through both) that the Rach 3 1st movement is more difficult as well.


It's a huge movement (17-18 min?) and definitely no walk in the park.

ANYWAY, for standings, i'd put it like this:

Tier 1
Rach 3
Brahms 2
Prokofiev 2 (barely)

Tier 2
Prokofiev 3
Bartok 1
Bartok 2
Tchaikovsky 1
Beethoven 4
Rach 2
Rach 1

Tier 3
Liszt 1
Liszt 2
Beethoven 3

What's insane about the Rachmaninoff is the number of notes and how many variations they come in, not to mention bringing out the melodies out of all these notes.  There are so many random technical difficulties: everything from octaves to ridiculous trills that require perfect dexterity (some trills are basically chord trills)

[apion]

I don't agree with the Prok 2 being as hard as the Rach 3 (nearly), and I also own the sheet music for both, and it appears (although I've played neither but read through both) that the Rach 3 1st movement is more difficult as well.


It's a huge movement (17-18 min?) and definitely no walk in the park.

ANYWAY, for standings, i'd put it like this:

Tier 1
Rach 3
Brahms 2
Prokofiev 2 (barely)

Tier 2
Prokofiev 3
Bartok 1
Bartok 2
Tchaikovsky 1
Beethoven 4
Rach 2
Rach 1

Tier 3
Liszt 1
Liszt 2
Beethoven 3

What's insane about the Rachmaninoff is the number of notes and how many variations they come in, not to mention bringing out the melodies out of all these notes.  There are so many random technical difficulties: everything from octaves to ridiculous trills that require perfect dexterity (some trills are basically chord trills)

I like your list too.

Yeah, both Brahms 2 and Rach 3 are insanely difficult.  As much as I love Prok 2, I have a real hard time placing it in the same league as these two masterpieces; sure, the cadenzas in the outer movements of Prok 2 are technically treacherous, as is the perpetuum mobile scherzo, but overall it is not as musically "all-encompassing" as Brahms 2 and Rach 3.

Juzt my 2 cents.   

[steinwayguy]

what? Prokofiev 2 and Bartok 2 not as hard as Rachmaninoff or Brahms? Good joke. Prokofiev 2 is at least as difficult, if not more difficult than Rachmaninoff or Brahms. Read through it and figure that out. Rachmaninoff and Brahms may be awkward, very awkward even, but Prokofiev is ridiculously awkward. I'll agree that Prokofiev 3 isn't as hard as Rachmaninoff (which is pretty much equal to Brahms 2), but Prokofiev 2 and Bartok 2 definitely are. Rachmaninoff is definitely the most emotionally difficult of the three because it's a 45 minute onslaught of heart-wrenching melodies and harmonies. Physically speaking though, it is not as hard as Prokofiev 2 or Bartok 2.

I stand by-
1st Tier
Busoni (hehe)
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 1st
Bartok 2nd

2nd Tier
Rachmaninoff 3
Brahms 2
Prokofiev 3

3rd Tier
Brahms 1
Beethoven 4
Tchaikovsky 1
Rachmaninoff Rhapsody on a Theme by Paganini

What's insane about the Rachmaninoff is the number of notes and how many variations they come in, not to mention bringing out the melodies out of all these notes. There are so many random technical difficulties: everything from octaves to ridiculous trills that require perfect dexterity (some trills are basically chord trills)

Why don't you take it from somebody who is actually playing the piece? The first movement of Rachmaninoff in particular is really not that difficult . It doesn't have anything on the first movement of Brahms 2, Prokofiev 2, 3 or Bartok 1 and 2. I'll agree, the third movement of Rachmaninoff 3rd is as hard as the most difficult movements of each of the concerti in the previous sentence, but, as a whole, it is not as difficult as Prokofiev 2 or Bartok 1 or 2.

[apion]

what? Prokofiev 2 and Bartok 2 not as hard as Rachmaninoff or Brahms? Good joke. Prokofiev 2 is at least as difficult, if not more difficult than Rachmaninoff or Brahms. Read through it and figure that out. Rachmaninoff and Brahms may be awkward, very awkward even, but Prokofiev is ridiculously awkward. I'll agree that Prokofiev 3 isn't as hard as Rachmaninoff (which is pretty much equal to Brahms 2), but Prokofiev 2 and Bartok 2 definitely are. Rachmaninoff is definitely the most emotionally difficult of the three because it's a 45 minute onslaught of heart-wrenching melodies and harmonies. Physically speaking though, it is not as hard as Prokofiev 2 or Bartok 2.

I stand by-
1st Tier
Busoni (hehe)
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 1st
Bartok 2nd

2nd Tier
Rachmaninoff 3
Brahms 2
Prokofiev 3

3rd Tier
Brahms 1
Beethoven 4
Tchaikovsky 1
Rachmaninoff Rhapsody on a Theme by Paganini


Why don't you take it from somebody who is actually playing the piece? The first movement of Rachmaninoff in particular is really not that difficult . It doesn't have anything on the first movement of Brahms 2, Prokofiev 2, 3 or Bartok 1 and 2. I'll agree, the third movement of Rachmaninoff 3rd is as hard as the most difficult movements of each of the concerti in the previous sentence, but, as a whole, it is not as difficult as Prokofiev 2 or Bartok 1 or 2.

I dare say that Busoni is not in the standard repertoire ....... (has it ever once been played at a competition?).

There's no question that Prok 2 and Bartok 2 rank tops as the most technically and physically difficult.  However, when you factor in the interpretative / musical demands of Rach 3 and Brahms 2 -- both of which seem to encompass so much of life's emotions within their 45 minutes of pianistic hell -- I still believe that, overall, they are in the top tier, if not in a league of their own.

Even if you're able to master the technical demands of Rach 3 and Brahms 2, you are still confronted with the Mount Everest task of bringing this all together with 45 minutes of hellishly challenging dialog with the orchestra in which about 1,000 different emotions and ideas are exploited.  Not for the fainthearted!

[apion]

I dare say that Busoni is not in the standard repertoire ....... (has it ever once been played at a competition?).

There's no question that Prok 2 and Bartok 2 rank tops as the most technically and physically difficult.  However, when you factor in the interpretative / musical demands of Rach 3 and Brahms 2 -- both of which seem to encompass so much of life's emotions within their 45 minutes of pianistic hell -- I still believe that, overall, they are in the top tier, if not in a league of their own.

Even if you're able to master the technical demands of Rach 3 and Brahms 2, you are still confronted with the Mount Everest task of bringing this all together with 45 minutes of hellishly challenging dialog with the orchestra in which about 1,000 different emotions and ideas are exploited.  Not for the fainthearted!

[viking]

Also, you have Prok3 on two different tiers.

Ok, ya sorry my fault.  I made a list, and then revised it.  Prok 3 was supposed to be in Tier 2 instead of Tier 1.5. 

I stand by-
1st Tier
Busoni (hehe)
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 1st
Bartok 2nd

And my friend, as tough as Bartok is, it is definately not higher than Rach 3 and Brahms 2.  IMO, the technical difficulty surpasses both, and as you said, Prok3 is extremely awkward, even moreso than Brahms2 and Rach3.  But that definately doesnt make it tougher.  Brahms is impossible to pull off in competition, given is length, and the emotion is so great in both that it takes an extremely mature player to even do justice to. 

Why don't you take it from somebody who is actually playing the piece? The first movement of Rachmaninoff in particular is really not that difficult . It doesn't have anything on the first movement of Brahms 2, Prokofiev 2, 3 or Bartok 1 and 2. I'll agree, the third movement of Rachmaninoff 3rd is as hard as the most difficult movements of each of the concerti in the previous sentence, but, as a whole, it is not as difficult as Prokofiev 2 or Bartok 1 or 2.

I agree with the fact that you said Rach3 isnt really that difficult, given your only talking about the first movement.  The first movement is really quite manageable.  However, why everybody doesnt just go ahead and learn it is because it is a musical monster.  Nobody without decades of trained musical experience has the capability of playing Rach3.  Well, that is...
SAM

[apion]

Brahms is impossible to pull off in competition, given is length, and the emotion is so great in both that it takes an extremely mature player to even do justice to. 

The emotional and intellectual terrain encompassed by the Brahms 2 and Rachmaninoff 3 far surpasses that of Bartok 2 or Prokofiev 2.  When you combine that with the reality that Brahms 2 and Rach 3 are nearly as technically demanding as Bartok 2 and Prok 2, it should become clear that Brahms 2 and Rach 3 are in a league of their own ...........

[rob47]

Keep at it, champ.

I'm keeping at it alright. 

[Eusebius_dk]

Hardest in which way?

The concerto hardest to read?
The concerto hardest to memorize?
The concerto hardest from a technical point of view (pretty difficult issue since we all have different strengths and weaknesses)?
The concerto hardest to interpret?
The concerto hardest to get through without being bored to death, simply because the musical values of a given work don't match the technical difficulty? 

Isn't all this "most difficult piece" just nonsense? As Cortot writes in his "Rational Principles of Piano Technique" that "...it is not the number of notes contained in it [the piece] which constitutes its real difficulty. As far as we are concerned, we consider the execution of an andante by Mozart, or of a Bach Fugue as a higher token of virtuosity than that of a Liszt Rhapsody."

[steinwayguy]

Alright, alright. Having discussed the matter with many of my peers, I have decided . . .

First Tier (hehe)-
Busoni
Ligeti
Boulez

Second Tier (in no order)-
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 2nd
Bartok 1st
Rachmaninoff 3rd
Brahms 2nd

Third Tier -
Prokofiev 3rd
Tchaikovsky 1st
etc.

(hard to imagine the Rach 3's a second tier, eh?)

Hardest in which way?

The concerto hardest to read?
The concerto hardest to memorize?
The concerto hardest from a technical point of view (pretty difficult issue since we all have different strengths and weaknesses)?
The concerto hardest to interpret?
The concerto hardest to get through without being bored to death, simply because the musical values of a given work don't match the technical difficulty?

Isn't all this "most difficult piece" just nonsense? As Cortot writes in his "Rational Principles of Piano Technique" that "...it is not the number of notes contained in it [the piece] which constitutes its real difficulty. As far as we are concerned, we consider the execution of an andante by Mozart, or of a Bach Fugue as a higher token of virtuosity than that of a Liszt Rhapsody."

Well that would be the only instance in which Cortot is a "virtuoso".

(Don't get me wrong, he's an amazing pianist, but without an amazing technique)

[apion]

Alright, alright. Having discussed the matter with many of my peers, I have decided . . .

First Tier (hehe)-
Busoni
Ligeti
Boulez

Second Tier (in no order)-
Prokofiev 2nd
Bartok 2nd
Bartok 1st
Rachmaninoff 3rd
Brahms 2nd

Third Tier -
Prokofiev 3rd
Tchaikovsky 1st
etc.

You see, that wasn't so hard! 

(but where's Beethoven's PC 4?)

[march05]

Which part of Beethoven's 4th is comparably difficult as Rach 3?

[pianowelsh]

Busoni is extreme as is sorabji both interms of stamina!

[apion]

Busoni is extreme as is sorabji both interms of stamina!

Yes, the Busoni concerto easily wins the gold medal for endurance and stamina among concertos.  The two Brahms concerti follow a distant second.

[MattL]

WHAT??? Only first movements, Prokofiev 3 is FAR tougher than 1st movement of Rach 3.  Rach 3 first movement isnt that tough at all, its the 3rd movement that gives the whole concerto such a difficult rep. 
SAM

Not if you want to play the cadenza section like rachmaninoff plays it

https://classic.manual.ru/Rachmaninov-performer/Rach-3.html

Pick Allegro ma non tanto link

play it from minute 9:00 to 12:00 and you'll get what I mean

absolutely incredible

[steinwayguy]

Which part of Beethoven's 4th is comparably difficult as Rach 3?

Beethoven 4th is difficult in a tooootally different way than Rachmaninoff. First off, Beethoven is naked- miss a wrong note and everybody will notice. Secondly, Beethoven 4 in particular is so spiritually demanding. I almost shudder thinking about it.

[march05]

oh yes, I now see what you mean. Beethoven's 4th is very beautiful, but (i think) only when played in a more lyrical, a little vulnerable way. Many people play it just like the 5th, with powerhouse technique. The second mvt is hard to pull off touchingly enough, eh? But hey, I find the slow mvt of Mozart's concerto in A (No 23) quite a lot harder to find the poise...