(Liszt's Douze Grandes Etudes)

btw, ARE THEY? Is that really an alternate name for what's being called here the "TE's"?

That's a stupid remark -- Beethoven could almost certainly not have played his Violin Concerto, Mozart his Clarinet Concerto, Brahms his String Quartets (any instruments). Beethoven could not have played any of the wind parts in his symphonies. A good composer learns to write for instruments which he cannot play. This is quite common knowledge.

Yes, actually. Cannot remember her name (Joyce something... not Hatto) but long OOP. Doesn't come up on Amazon or Archiv, but I think it came out in the early '90's. I'm sure I heard it as a student, that was enough.

Ah. I just remembered. (Came to me first thing this morning.)

Janice Weber.

Ah. I just remembered. (Came to me first thing this morning.)

Janice Weber.

- While a fine and capable pianist, I think it is fairly safe to assume that Chopin was NOT a thunder-storming virtuoso on the level of Liszt, Rachmaninoff, or Paganini....

And as a final side note, I believe it is PERFECTLY realistic that somebody can write something they are unable to play.

One other thing to consider regarding Chopin and his etudes. Don't forget that he wrote them. That means that they were the product of his brain, and, perhaps, his fingers. I think that in hundreds of little ways that are hard to pin down, this makes his music "in sync" with his muscular, neurological, and musical essence.

Dismiss this theory right away if you want ....

One other thing to consider regarding Chopin and his etudes. Don't forget that he wrote them. That means that they were the product of his brain, and, perhaps, his fingers. I think that in hundreds of little ways that are hard to pin down, this makes his music "in sync" with his muscular, neurological, and musical essence
-J

+1

I think the important point is that Chopin's technique was different. That he says in a letter he'd like to rob Liszt of his way of playing his etudes is a clue. In another letter (not to hand) he says he knows something about the piano that the other 'greats' don't.

This thread is an interesting read.

It's slightly off topic but I recently watched this interview with Horowitz who briefly talks about Chopin and Liszt and what they would sound like on record (after a joke about his nose).

Starts around 8:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4OJoAI5d5Y

Sorry!
I knew that it was mainly Liszt's etudes that were being discussed at that point, but I didn't know that any of his etude sets were called by that name.

btw, ARE THEY? Is that really an alternate name for what's being called here the "TE's"?

Which BTW is another 'name' I wouldn't usually recognize, but I had an easier time with that than with "Douze Grandes Etudes."

To me, the term has always meant just Chopin.

Excellent comment: "Everything is invented ... nobody knows what is right and what is wrong, because it's conception."

I like the surreptitious "Don't like staying in America".

Liszt and Chopin's technique wouldn't stand up to today's instruments and conservatory kids (and many before conservatory age) now possess technique that would run circles around not only Liszt and Chopin, but anyone they'd have been familiar with. This is not a knock against Franz, or Fred, nor is it blasphemy... it's just a simple fact.

....how can you be certain that Liszt's technique was inferior to that of modern conservatory students?....

....We do have recordings of Rosenthal, and his technique could rival Hofmann or Rachmaninov. Isn't it possible that Liszt the teacher had at least as good- if not better- technique than Rosenthal?

.....The average conservatory student is certainly not capable of the manual dexterity that was displayed by someone like Josef Lhévinne (just listen to his "Double Thirds" Etude).

....is Lhevinne's recordings of the Schulz-Evler Blue Danube.

Back to the discussion about Chopin... I think it is important to bear in mind that Chopin was never 'taught' the piano as such. He was first introduced to the piano at the age of 4 by his mother and he was noted to be able to play pieces of reasonable difficulty by the age of six, however we don't know the extent of 'reasonable difficulty'. At this point he began taking 'lessons' with his father's friend, a music teacher called Wojciech Zywny whose shortcoming's as a teacher were more beneficial to Chopin than anything else. Recognising that he couldn't really teach Chopin anything more about the conventional piano technique he decided simply to work through the works of earlier composers (Bach, Chopin, Haydn and Hummel mostly; he didn't like Beethoven's music) and so Chopin was left to develop his own technique entirely placing whichever finger he wanted on the notes and moving his hand in any way he wanted...
On 24th February 1818 (at the age of either 7 or 8 depending on which of his two given birthdays is correct) he took place in a concert for the Warsaw Benevolent Society in which he performed a concerto by Czech composer Adalbert Gyrowetz, indicating that his technique by this point was very advanced. After this concert, his fame spread very quickly through Warsaw and he became haled as the greatest pianist in the city; he was summoned to Belvedere Palace to play for Grand Duke Constantine. Chopin completed lessons with Zywny in 1821 or 1822, as the latter knew that there was absolutely nothing more that he could do to help the young pianist.
Based on his earlier published compositions (and reviews of their performances), it cannot be denied that he was an incredible pianist with astonishing technique... His Variations on La ci darem la mano (Op. 2) are incredibly challenging and the audience was obviously pleased with this work, as Chopin wrote in a letter to his parents: "everyone clapped so loudly after each variation that I had difficulty hearing the orchestral tutti". From the age of about 22, we see that Chopin started to lose interest in the 'stile brillante' and
his compositions generally were not as technically challenging from this point onward.
It is unfair to say that Chopin had poor technique based on unfavourable reviews from the time... many critics were overly negative about his playing as it did not necessarily fit in with the bombastic Lisztian octaves which seemed to transcend the repertoire of the virtuoso pianist of the day; Chopin was a poet of the piano who strove to make the piano sing, whereas Liszt simply played the instrument percussively and supposedly often worked his way through two or more pianos per concert as strings broke during his performances.
As for the Erards and Pleyels of Chopin's time, I have played on both and am in possession of an Erard concert grand from this period. The action is very different to that of today, and we must remember that prior to 1841 Chopin was also playing on the single escapement action which is completely alien to us today and which most pianists would take some time to adapt to. In many ways, the pianos then were more difficult to play than the pianos today (that makes sense, as piano makers wouldn't go out of their way to make instruments MORE difficult to play but would actually do the opposite...) so I'm not so sure that Chopin and Liszt would have great difficulty adapting to modern pianos... It is also said that Chopin chose Pleyel pianos over Erard, because on an Erard everything came 'too easily' to his fingertips and he preferred to have to work harder to produce the tone he truly wanted, which would be elicited from the Pleyel but not entirely from the Erard.
All in all, we can not know entirely how good Chopin's technique was, but it is undeniable that it was truly brilliant and that he too would have been capable of playing works much more difficult than even the most difficult of his own (the 24 Etudes played as a set, the two concerti, the allegro de concert). My following point does not apply as much to Chopin as to Liszt, as Chopin was more famous for his compositions than his performances (largely/entirely due to the fact that he performed so rarely in public), but I think it is unfair to say that most conservatoire graduates have a technique which would trounce that of Liszt/Chopin. We must remember that Liszt in particular was a world famous virtuoso pianist and was undoubtedly one of the greatest pianists (technically) alive in his day, if not THE greatest and so a technique like that would still far surpass that of the vast majority of conservatoire graduates around the world today. It is true that the development of the piano has allowed for more technical aspects of piano playing to be improved, however the worlds best of 1850 would surpass almost all of the world today.
Perhaps it would be fair to say that if the greatest technical wizard of today was to go head to head in competition with Liszt on an Erard from the 1840s or 1850s, it would most probably be Liszt that would come out victorious.