Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Which one?

Hello everyone! I am new here, and I wanted to present myself! My name is Jonathan, I am 20 years old and have been playing the piano since I was 15. Anyway, my first question is going to be about repertoire.. The most significant pieces I have recently played are the four Impomptus op 90 by Schubert and Chopin Nocturne op 27 no 1, and Liszt Liebestraum no 3.

Anyway, I have a wish to be able to play the Fantasie Imprompu, Pathetique, 3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata and the Italian Concerto. Do you think any of these pieces would be within my reach now or soon? If so, which one would be the most reasonable to start out with? Which is easiest and hardest? I would be very happy if someone could help me out! I have no teacher, so I have no one to get help from in real life...

Thanks

Welcome!
If you can play all those pieces pretty well, I think it's reasonable to give a try to any of those others.

I think most people might rank their difficulty like this (from easiest to hardest):
Pathetique
Italian Concerto
Fantasie Impromptu
3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata

I'd put them:
Fantasie Impromptu
Pathetique
3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata
Italian Concerto

Actually the piece I found having most trouble with was the Nocturne by Chopin.. That left hand part almost killed me, but now it's fine, and I am quite satisfied with my rendition of it.

Anyway, do you mean that the Italian Concerto is hardest according to you? I actually thought that one was the easiest.. :P Anyway, do you think it's okay to start working on Italian Concert? I am thinking that one or Fantasie Impromptu to start with..

I mostly agree with Mark_C. I would say his first list corresponds to how difficult it would be to learn the notes. His second list corresponds to how difficult it would be to get them to sound good. Also, if you are talking about playing all of the Pathetique then I would be tempted to exchange its place with the 3rd movement of the Moonlight in the second list.

Okay! Thank you guys! So this means that pathetique is the easiest(technically) and moonlight hardest? Should I start with the pathetique first then?

As I said in my first post, any of the pieces are reasonable to try.

I think the best idea is to try whichever piece you want to do the most.

Okay :P Thank you! I think I will start with the Italian Concerto!

I forgot, I was wondering about two more pieces! How about Chopin op 48 no 1 and Etude op 10 no 3?

The Opus 48 No. 1 is one of the most challenging Nocturnes - and is a hair more difficult than the Opus 27 No. 1. I'd recommend that you hold off on the Opus 48 for now.

All of the etudes are difficult - however, the Opus 10/3 is one of the easiest of the bunch - and it is probably easier than the Opus 48 No. 1.

I'd have to agree with you. I thought op 48 1 was quite a bit harder to learn than op 10 3

Thank you! Yes I figured it is.. Looks hard.. But when you say "a hair more" do you mean just a little bit more difficult or a lot more difficult? :P And also, would 10/3 be fine to start working on you think? Is it harder than 27/1?

Thanks!

The relative "difficulty" of a piece depends on the technical strengths and weaknesses of the individual player. Every person is unique. Perhaps you should give the Opus 48 No. 1 a try and see how you do with it. If it proves too much to handle, you can always revisit it in the future. The same would apply to the Opus 10 No. 3. Based on the initial selections you listed I'd recommend that you strongly consider learning the first movement of the Pathetique!!

I think the questions here are getting to where some of us think they don't make a whole lot of sense.
At least not in terms of how we think of "difficulty."

Like, take Op. 10 #3.

It's one of those pieces where I cringe when people talk about it being not that hard -- or, for that matter, when they just ask how hard it is.

Because it all depends.

Even if we're talking about it from just a "fingers" standpoint, it depends on what we think we need to try to do with that middle section. Just get the notes at all? Already that's harder than is usually imagined, provided we're talking about staying in some semblance of a rhythm and making a melody of the 'melody.' But suppose we're talking about doing what that section seems to cry out for, which is an intensification of feeling and (probably) accelerando, yet with good accuracy and reliability, and still with a sense of the 'melody'? Then it becomes just about as hard as most of the other Chopin etudes.

I cringe at talking about the difficulty of a piece like this just in terms of barely playing it, which is probably what people usually mean when they ask -- and I imagine many others here do too. Likewise with a piece like the Italian Concerto, because there also, it depends so much on what someone thinks they need to do with it. What makes questions like this hardest (IMO) is that when people ask for finer and finer rankings like this, they tend not to be viewing the pieces in anything like how those of us trying to answer the questions do.

So, what to do with all this?
When asking about relative difficulty, just realize that it depends on how one is viewing the pieces, there's no clear answer, and don't be looking for such exact answers.

I am sorry.. I am new here, all I wanted was some help to choose repertoire, since I don't have a teacher.

Hey Jontek. Did you ever have a teacher? Do you have any interest in a teacher?

When you say you've played the four Schubert Impromptus, what do you mean exactly? They are not easy pieces at all. I think if you can successfully play the Op 90 set, there is no reason you can't take on any of those pieces you're interested in.

If you can actually play Op 90 No 2, no reason you can't do the Fantaisie Impromptu.
If you can actually play Op 90 No 4, no reason you can't attempt the Moonlight.

This is all from a technical standpoint of course...

I'm curious.
How do you go about learning a new piece?
How is your sight reading ability?
Do you do technical exercises?
Do you have a set practice routine, or do you just play casually when time allows?

-Daniel

Hello! Thank you very much for you reply! I had actually a teacher during my first 2-3 years of playing.. He is a professional pianist who has worked some times with my father, and he lived very close to us. Now though, he has moved and he doesn't have time to teach me any longer, but that's alright, I feel like I can learn things on my own for now

When I learn a new piece, I usually take my time to look through the score to see how much there is to learn, looking through different patterns, structures etc.. After that I work with metronome, one measure at a time, starting slow and getting the measure up to speed, then I move to the next measure and to the same. I don't know if this is a good way of learning new pieces, I haven't tried anything else, but it feels like it has been working so far. If you know any better ways of practicing pieces I would be happy to hear, it would help me a lot!

My sight reading is okay I guess, I can absolutely work on it, but it hasn't been giving me any problems so far

As for technical exercises, I did a lot of Hanon before(never do Hanon now) and scales/arpeggios etc. I try to spend some time at technical exercises but I don't spend nearly as much time on them as I do on repertoire.. I have practice routines, and try to practice between 3-5 hours a day(have been doing this for about 6 months) and my technique has really improved lately. I usually work on 3-5 pieces a time but I don't know how much time to spend on repertoire and how much time to spend on technique though...

It's indeed true I play the Op 90 Impromptus! I play no 1, no 2 and no 3 from memory and I am working on no 4 right now I guess they are quite difficult, but I haven't found them THAT much of a technical problem for me, actually I had more problems with Chopin's Nocturne op 27 no 1.. Anyway, out of the impromptus, I probably found op 90 no 2 the hardest from a technically point of view.. But Op 90 no 1 is the one that was hardest to memorize and get all the dynamics right in and stuff..

Do you really think that Op 90 no 2 is at the same level as Fantasie Impromptu and Moonlight? It seems easier both musically and technically..

To me this is a dangerous assumption; dangerous in the sense that you could be practicing and learning bad technique. Bad technique, once learned, is terribly difficult to correct. Working too hard or too diligently - and incorrectly - on technique or repertoire that is well beyond one's scope can also lead to injury.



To me, this is a terribly inefficient and unmusical way of learning music. Another reason, I think, that anyone really wanting to learn to play (relatively) well, would do so much better under the guidance of a good teacher.

Regards,

I'd certainly agree here, and I know it's true in tennis since I taught tennis for many years and many intermediates found it difficult to undo years of practicing their less than ideal strokes. The beginners I taught could often develop textbook perfect strokes.

Well I feel like I am doing things right. My former teacher taught me many basic, important techniques that I follow for now. It does work at the moment, when I work on expanding My repertoire with pieces that are on My level technically(this is the reason I asked for pieces I am ready for. When I want to take my technique to an even higher level, I will look for a teacher.

BruceD, if my way of learning new repertoire is so bad, can't you be so kind and help me with better ways of practicing repertoire? How do you work when learning new pieces?

As you do, I first read through the score to determine a number of things : structure, thematic development, modulations and harmonic progressions, dynamics, for example.

Then, finding what appears to be the most difficult sections, technically, I devise ways of tackling the technical challenges in those sections, often even making technical exercises out of those technical challenges.

Then, dividing the work in sections, I start working on sections at a time, playing as slowly as need be to get all the notes and their relative values correct. To me, what is important here, as opposed to working a measure at a time, is that I'm also working on phrasing and musical direction at the same time as I'm working on getting the notes. I don't really believe that one can work on musicality and direction by working on one measure at a time; one has to, from the beginning, develop a sense of line and structure. I also believe that "musicianship" or "interpretation" (call it what you will) is not something that is "tacked on" after one gets the notes; it's an integral part of the process from the beginning.

When I divide a work in sections that are meaningful from the standpoint of structure (often numbering them A, B, C, etc.) I make a point of not always starting in chronological (alphabetical order). The danger that many run into is that they learn the first sections well but the last sections often less so, because they always start from the beginning. I even have a set of home-made cards, each one with a letter corresponding to a section of a piece. I will shuffle them and then practice the piece in the random order that the sections come up as dictated by the cards.

Of course, ultimately - and often - I play through the piece in order so that I make sure the transitions from section to section are smooth and make musical and structural sense and also that I continue to have in my mind a sense of the overall architecture of the piece and how I am going to realize that structure, musically.

Regards,