Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner the greatest virtuosos go head to head, so who wins?

I have recently read about the concert that took place in Paris where Liszt, Chopin, Kalkbrenner, Herz, Pixis and Thalberg all performed a variation on a march from one of Bellini's opera. It was designed so that one of them could be judged as the greatest pianist in Paris.

I was wondering how much playing ability has developed over time.
Therefore if I could send them back in time, would modern pianists like Agerich, Horowitz and Lang Lang be a class above those 19th century virtuosos?
Please suggest a replacement for Lang Lang if you want - how about Pletnev?

thanks

Interesting question.

Certainly the demands on a performer have increased over the twentieth century. Rachmaninov, Prokofiev, and others have created so much more need for "virtuosity", more so than Beethoven or Mozart or Bellini.

I wonder how Argerich, Horowitz, Lang Lang, and Pletnev would fair on an old 19th century Pleyel? It would certainly be a difficult adjustment for them!

Similarly, I wonder how Liszt, Chopin, Thalberg, and Kalkbrenner would fair on a 21st century Steinway. That would be a huge adjustment for them!!

By the way, who did win that contest in Paris? Who was "the greatest pianist in Paris?"

ok let's clear some things. The so-called "Hexameron" (hex because there were six) was composed not to determine who was the "greatest pianist in Paris" or anything of the sort. It was more of an exhibition, a why-don't-you-contribute-a-little-bit.

Second, the major duel in the 19th century was between Thalberg and Liszt. There was a so-called duel between Kalkbrenner and Chopin but it was more of a revelation than a duel. Kalkbrenner gawked at Chopin's "weird" technique, yet he discovered he could not play Chopin's etudes with his own.

Now, even the duel between Thalberg and Liszt wasn't set up to be a duel. Liszt made it open that he did not desire a duel with Thalberg even though Thalberg was not opposed to such an idea. Alas, this one governess or some lady high up there forgot her name, set it up more as an exhibition to get Liszt to show up. The commonfolk and newspapers knew it only as a duel.

And, the result was, nobody won. It was basically a draw. Some newspapers announced Thalberg the winner, others announced Liszt the winner. I believe it was the hostess who said, "Thalberg is the greatest pianist, Liszt is the only one." Anyways Liszt never despised Thalberg after that, he had a lot of respect, in his later years he played some Thalberg pieces in his recitals.

But to those who knew, Liszt was the best virtuoso in the 19th century. Not only in what he could do, but also what he accomplished.

Let's take a look at a few things that Liszt accomplished:

He was the "inventor" of the solo piano recital, a term first used on his tour stop in London, England

He achieved rock star status in what was coined, "Liszt-o-Mania"

He uplifted a nation in Hungary (received a sword in honor, said it was the greatest honor he had ever received) and made Vienna upset that Hungarians were so patriotic behind Herr Liszt

He invented musical things such as "Lisztian octaves" and use of all the pedals in new, revolutionary ways

Now, let's list a few things that Liszt could do at the keyboard:

Well, we know he first composed the Rakoczy March (initial version) at the age of 10

He played a Bach Prelude and Fugue with 3 fingers of each hand

He performed a Beethoven Piano Concerto with 9 fingers (because his index finger was injured)

He performed the Hammerklavier at the age of 12 (I think, if my memory serves me right)

He dedicated the latter part of every concert, as a boy, to improvisation. He would request pieces from the audience, and he could improvise on the themes endlessly.

I mean, this barely even scratches the surface. Franz Liszt is, basically, the greatest virtuoso of all time.

The book I was reading kind of suggested Liszt won.
The Rough Guide to Classical Music (2001) pg 128. Quote:
"Liszt delivered the unexpected coup de grace in the form of a further three variations parodying the styles of Pixis, Herz and Thalberg (but sparing his former teacher Czerny and his ally Chopin)."


If I can take it further, then I would like to know which 6 pianists should contest a modern equivalent contest? And who wins?

(Although I'm not about to arrange it I would like to suggest some small criteria: all contestants must be currently active on the performing scene, that is, have played to a live audience at least once in the last 18 months - does that rule out Ashkenazy?)

thanks

I'd like to read more of these anecdotes of Liszt. More please!

If Liszt is the obvious choice for greatest virtuoso of all time then who gets second and third? I heard that Saint Saens could play any Beethoven sonata from memory at age 12!

And lastly who is the greatest virtuoso of the last 50 years?

Once I know all of these things then I can go back to practicising.

Ross

I would say Cziffra.

no modern day pianists is half as good as the prominent names from the romantic era. imagine if someone like liszt or alkahn would duel lang lang. lang lang would probably shoot himself after that

exactly, Liszt has no competition!

Which of the pianists currently playing do you think could compete with Horowitz's generation of performers?

Just out of curiostiy -

How do we know that Liszt was a greater pianist than Horowitz, or Cziffra, or Lang Lang?

None of us have heard Liszt.

Nobody who heard Liszt is still alive.

There are no recordings of Liszt.

Most pianists that we listen to were born after Liszt died, or were so young when Liszt died, that there was never any comparison.

All we know is that people during the 19th century raved about him as the greatest pianist of the 19th century.

Will we continue to call him the greatest pianist of all time, for the rest of time, and refuse to acknowledge that a better pianist may, in fact, exist, or have existed?

I really wish I could hear Liszt play. I would be curious to know just how good he was too!!

Although I heard somewhere that Brahms recorded something or other onto wax cyllinders, and then was speaking at the end of it. Horrendous sound quality, but it would be so cool, but strange to hear the voice of someone long since dead, speaking in an era when recordings weren't really made... or maybe that's just me... Anyway, that's another thing I'd love to hear.

Speaking of recordings by virtuosi, I have a CD of Rachmaninov playing his own works. It's wonderful!

Yes, I would really love to hear such a "Window in Time"

Saint-Saens made a recording or two. I don't know if they were made before Rachmaninov's, though...

Anybody know when the earliest tolerable recordings were made?

how do we know about Liszt? we know from students of students of ... of Liszt, and guess we'd have a long trace of historical records/books to prove it. as to Liszt, i wouldn't doubt anything being said about his piano techniques. btw, i wouldn't care about Brahms's recording because he was said to be just a so-so pianist.

pianojerome, you're right in a sense: we don't have any recordings of Liszt in any shape or fashion. But what we do know is what he accomplished and what others, such as his teacher Czerny, had to say about him. He performed in front of Beethoven at the age of 10, at Beethoven's then-residence, we know that too. We know that he started touring Europe at the age of 11 or 12. By that time he was already performing the hardest known pieces in the repertoire. His first tour came to a conclusion at the age of 17, around the time his father died. At that time his life was in turmoil, he abandoned the piano for stretches. Alas, we can only imagine. And that's what fuels the fire.

As far as comparisons go ... To compare Lang Lang with Liszt, that's like, not even worthy of comparison. Even comparing Lang Lang with Horowitz, that's like comparing the winner of American Idol with, say Frank Sinatra. It's not fair to Frankie

good thing he's not the winner but the runner up...I'll compare Clay Aiken to Frankie any day of the week...that kid can blow, one heck of a musician and a wonderful relief to the musically mediocre pop industry, AI can produce some good stuff after all.

by the way that's fair to Frankie, have you heard Clay's "Mack the knife" it's hot man, hot.

Clay Aiken

to

FRANK SINATRA????

someone give this man a pill

EDIT: Not to say that Clay can't sing He can certainly belt out a tune. But on the other hand, Frank Sinatra is just on another level in so many things, he's just got a leg up on Clay in a lot of areas. You can literally compare them but, figuratively, not really. Just not on the same plane. Elton John is another one of those figures.

Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly does a piano duel consist of? Do they just see who trill fastest? ^_^

Sorry but just the opposite was true. Brahms was a sensational pianist.(Check out what Dubal says in his Art of the Piano.)

Aside from that not being true, you mean you wouldn't be interested in how Brahms interpreted his own music?