Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Starting to learn Liszt Hun.Rhapsody no.12 and Rach's 39/6.

Wow, it's been a long time since I last visited this forum... so hi again, those who i'm already familiar with and also those who i'm not Now on to the topic...

This is quite a leap in repertoire difficulty for me, the previous works i've studied include a couple Chopin etudes (op. 25 no. 2 and the revolutionary) the rach c# minor prelude and a couple Liszt etudes (Waldesrauschen and op. 10 no. 8 a few years ago) and of course a very large-scale and very difficult ballad-chaconne by Tubin, a composer probably unknown to you.

I'm very excited, cause these are amongst my favorite pieces for the piano; or at least, the 12th rhapsody is my favorite Liszt rhapsody and the "Red riding hood" etude is my favorite Rach etude. I'm really happy to be able to start learning them with my teacher, and happy that my teacher actually recommended we start learning them, without me even having to ask her permission to; because not many, I think, would let a 17 year old near this kind of repertoire. Or perhaps they would, I don't know, everyone's different. I have very little technical problems, though... my biggest problem is "bringing the piece together" - a sense of form, making a large-scale piece like a rhapsody sound like it's actually one whole piece, not several small pieces, so that's one reason why we're attempting it.

I would, though, purely out of curiosity, like to know from those who have studied these pieces, (and of course also the general opinions of those who have not) your opinion on them; which sections did you have most trouble with and how did you handle them, and how do you think they would compare in difficulty (both technical and musical) to the other pieces in their set; the 12th rhapsody to the other 18 rhapsodies and the 39/6 etude to the other Rach etude-tableaux's?

Thanks!

The 12th rhapsody was one of my favorites as a teenager and the first one I learned. I had the most problems with the stretta vivace up to the final FFF. Much of it I still haven't solved to my liking but I am a lazy person. I've only played two others, the 10th and the 2nd. The constant right hand tremolos in the friska of the 2nd always wore me out so in that regard it was harder for me. I'm sure I just play them with poor technique. The 12th is otherwise definitely hardest of these three.

That's interesting I fumbled my way through it already, and yes, the stretta could be a bit of a problem.

Before my teacher mentioned me the 12th, I actually favored the 6th one more... those octaves at the end... I thought it would be a great way to show off lol, since I love octaves and they come quite easily for me, but I began to like the 12th rhapsody much more now, since it offers so much more musically, and while the 6th is more of an endurance piece with the friska focusing just on octaves and leaps, the stretta vivace (and other parts) of the 12th contain so many different techniques.

I actually tried to learn a bit of the 2nd rhapsody by myself, just for fun, when I was 15 lol. Couldn't handle it ofc now I could, but it's just so overplayed that i'm not really interested in learning it Besides, a fellow pianist from my class recently learned it... barely managing it though her teacher should've known better...

Do you have any experience with the Rach etude?

I have an idea. Learn Bach and Mozart.

I have learned several pieces by both of them, including prelude and fugue in C sharp minor, G major, B major and D minor from WTC I; Partita no. 2 in c minor... and performed the first movement of Mozart's piano concerto 21. They have some interesting stuff, but to be honest, most of Bach and Mozart gets sickeningly boring once you have played through it enough times.

I have enough of a basis of classical era music already to start studying advanced pieces from the romantic and, modern era.

Do you have a problem with that? Or perhaps your technique is so poor that it only allows you to play Bach and Scarlatti, whose music of course can be very complex in structure but otherwise, especially in technique, can't compare to standard romantic repertoire?

With all due to respect to your obviously much greater experience as a pianist (at least with pre-19th century composers, as far as I can tell) than mine - I hope you are not a teacher, because judging by your repertoire suggestions, your students must be very, very bored indeed, to say the least, and each of them would probably desire nothing more but to quit playing the piano, every single day... I can just about imagine a repertoire consisting solely of Bach, Hendel, Mozart, Scarlatti, Haydn and Clementi. Oh god.

I don't think you are mature enough to tackle them ( implying your age ) i agree with polyphonist never try to run before you walk



No i don't believe you have played them enough time it's impossible to find them boring if you are true musician and musically mature enough. You are just prejudiced human being and it's quite common among immature and less experienced musicians. Also I don't think you have enough basis to tackle romantic repertoire according to your attitude and statements. Most of classical era composers way more harder to INTERPRET than romantic era composers. Do you know Liszt himself at the age of 12 had worked through the complete works of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Clementi, Hummel, Cramer for 22 months. Also do you know Chopin was playing well tempered clavier before every concert he made for days.

Ah, doesn't matter. None of you have heard me play anyway... everyone matures at their own tempo; some slower, some faster.

I will definitely upload a HD quality recording of both pieces once they're finished In about 3,5 months, before the exams. Maybe sooner, i'm not sure.

And yeah, coming back to the sentence I started this thread with:

I know the reason as to why I left for such a long time.

The reason starts with P and O and ends with I, S and T; is a nuisance; Replies to almost every thread with a completely irrelevant one-liner, because he doesn't even bother to read the thread itself.

In my opinion, for what it may be worth, I don't think that "maturity" is a necessary prerequisite for the playing of Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies. A solid technique should be the first requisite and, of course, maturity may help but not to the same degree required for Beethoven and Brahms, for example.

With obvious exceptions admitted, I think that the Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies often appeal to teen-age males, as Damon confirms. I know I went through that phase as a teenager and, to this day, more often than not when one of the Rhapsodies is on a diverse program, it's a young male who plays it.

Regards,

Is the hammerklavier sonata more difficult than Gaspard De la Nuit?
Are the goldberg variations more difficult than than the Transcendental etudes or the Don Juan fantasy? I hope that by "way more harder", you meant structural complexity, which I do agree with, for the most part. But I was referring, first and foremost, to technical difficulty.

Are you aware of the amount of piano music written by Bach, Mozart, Clementi, Hummel and Cramer? Not one living person could work through the full works of all those composers in a single lifetime. Not to mention by the age of 12. It's an insane claim; I hope you realize that.

Also - I did say that my teacher was the one who recommended we should start studying these pieces, I didn't have to ask her twice. I think she knows my abilities best... in contary to you guys, you who you haven't even heard me play.

And besides - the hungarian rhapsodies are Liszt's medium difficulty works. I'm not talking about attempting the more difficult transcendentals, the transcriptions nor the opera fantasies. I'm talking about hungarian rhapsody no. 12.

Also, Rach 39/6 is not piano concerto 3. This etude is manageable, for christ's sake - calm down.

Yes Liszt studied them for 22 months at the age of 12 not all pieces of them but the most of it and every other genius composers or pianists of romantic era did the same thing. I can't think of a pianist who haven't studied bach, mozart, clementi, scarlatti, haydn etc. I'm talking about interpretation not technical difficulty. Memorizing every note on sheet music doesn't make you musician. If you find bach and mozart boring i can't say anything besides good luck. You are just swimming in a swamp rather than ocean.

He will learn, Batuhan. At least I hope so.

I don't find Bach and Mozart boring to learn, just boring to play over and over again.

Romantic music doesn't get boring - the vast array of different techniques, effects, harmonies used...

Bach is complex, deep and interesting in a way, but texturally, it's not interesting at all. I hope you get what I mean.

To Polyphonist: I'm not as shallow a pianist as you think, even though I am just 17 years old. Your superior, cocky attitude, shown by your short, one sentence replies, is appalling. You are not Alfred Brendel. Don't think too much of yourself.

Bach is some of the most satisfying stuff to play. Not sure where it gets "boring".

Overplayed or overheard? The friska is still great for showing off to non-musical friends, particularly for my age group since we all grew up on Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, and Heckle and Jeckle.


No, I don't play any Rach.

Well, both

I have overheard it, ad nauseam...

and it's obviously overplayed by pianists, which is the second reason why I'm not particularly fond of learning it. Very difficult to produce an interpretation that people would find fresh.

Other than people trying to copy Horowitz's version, I hardly ever hear it. I still can't hear this piece where it doesn't elevate my mood. Who needs a fresh interpretation?

And a good thing, too.

Svenno: I would just try and ignore Polyphonist's comments. They are very often arrogant and rude in the extreme. Just like his curt and obnoxious comments to you and his critique of Brendel in this thread.

You are perfectly entitled to your musical likes and dislikes. Students your age often don't like Bach and Mozart that much and there is nothing wrong with that(or even not liking Bach and Mozart at a later age). A good teacher understands this and does not overdose his young students in composers that they don't like.

In one of Leonard Bernstein's lectures about Bach he describes his feeling about Bach's music as a young person, and it is similar to your view. I've attended numerous IKIF piano competitions and the pianists VERY rarely play Bach or Mozart.

I certainly think the two pieces you mentioned are very difficult, but even if you can't do them full justice I see no reason for not playing what you love, ESPECIALLY since your teacher suggested them. Some people, far too many I think, always assume that a particular piece is only suitable if it can be eventually played at a competition level.

Don't you ever get tired of using the exact same words to describe every comment you don't like?

Not really, but maybe next time I'll look up some synonyms for your comment style. Here are few I could substitute for arrogant:

haughty, conceited, self-important, egotistic, full of oneself, superior, overbearing, pompous, bumptious, presumptuous, imperious, overweening, proud, immodest, high and mighty, too big for one's britches, too big for one's boots, big-headed, puffed up