Discussion:
Liszt Transcendental Etude 10
(too old to reply)
Dvorak2
2005-03-10 07:35:05 UTC
Permalink
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
jimz
2005-03-10 13:32:13 UTC
Permalink
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
Dvorak2
2005-03-10 13:50:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
IPGrunt
2005-03-10 16:53:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?

What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?

I've never been so insulted...

-- ipgrunt
Dvorak2
2005-03-10 17:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
albert landa
2005-03-10 22:28:48 UTC
Permalink
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.

Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as a
"dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in fact
that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.

But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.

Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising repertoire
that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even earlier.Even after
they have performed them in public hundreds of times/

Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.


love and kisses,

albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
Edward
2005-03-11 12:18:59 UTC
Permalink
Actually, if I can restate the question without bringing down such
opprobrium...

I am currently listening to the sainted Martha Argerich playing
Schumann's "Fantasiestuck", Ravel's "Sonatine" and "Gaspard de la
Nuit". It's not easy to play (though you might be forgiven for
thinking so in her case!)

Let's posit the question that Martha Argerich had never heard nor had
sight of Liszt Transcendental Etude 10. How long would it take her,
do you estimate, before she felt comfortable playing it in public?
Could she sight read it from scratch with no problems? Would she
require someone to listen to her play and advise on interpretation, or
would she rely on her instinct? Or record herself and listen back?
Surely it can't be true that by the time someone takes the concert
stage they have studied, in depth, all of the standard repertoire?

I have also been playing the equally sainted Angela Hewitt's rendering
of Bach's WTC I and II, and I wondered whether she had them all from
memory, or relied on the music. She could presumably sight read
Prelude No 1 in C major from Book 1 - if I can, anyone can! But the
Fugue No 18 in G sharp minor from Book 2 is very difficult, and would
require study to play well.

Edward
--
The reading group's reading group:
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as a
"dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in fact
that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.
Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising repertoire
that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even earlier.Even after
they have performed them in public hundreds of times/
Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.
love and kisses,
albert landa
Radu Focshaner
2005-03-11 12:28:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Edward
Let's posit the question that Martha Argerich had never heard nor had
sight of Liszt Transcendental Etude 10. How long would it take her,
do you estimate, before she felt comfortable playing it in public?
Argerich:
"I studied with Scaramuzza from the age of five to ten. For the next two
years, I studied with his assistant, who taught me a lot about
sight-reading, for him I had to prepare two preludes and fugues and two
Chopin Etudes a week. It was very good for me"
Edward
2005-03-11 20:47:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Radu Focshaner
Post by Edward
Let's posit the question that Martha Argerich had never heard nor had
sight of Liszt Transcendental Etude 10. How long would it take her,
do you estimate, before she felt comfortable playing it in public?
"I studied with Scaramuzza from the age of five to ten. For the next two
years, I studied with his assistant, who taught me a lot about
sight-reading, for him I had to prepare two preludes and fugues and two
Chopin Etudes a week. It was very good for me"
With that workload she'd hardly have had time for the Liszt!

Edward
Tom Shaw
2005-03-11 19:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Surely you must know that your question does not allow of any particular
answer.
I doubt that any first rate pianists will require the same time to become
comfortable with a given piece if for no other reason that their comfort
levels will vary widely. What with all the other variables involved your
question as some have already said is asinine.
You want a goddam number...I'll give you one. Two years.
TS
Post by Edward
Actually, if I can restate the question without bringing down such
opprobrium...
I am currently listening to the sainted Martha Argerich playing
Schumann's "Fantasiestuck", Ravel's "Sonatine" and "Gaspard de la
Nuit". It's not easy to play (though you might be forgiven for
thinking so in her case!)
Let's posit the question that Martha Argerich had never heard nor had
sight of Liszt Transcendental Etude 10. How long would it take her,
do you estimate, before she felt comfortable playing it in public?
Could she sight read it from scratch with no problems? Would she
require someone to listen to her play and advise on interpretation, or
would she rely on her instinct? Or record herself and listen back?
Surely it can't be true that by the time someone takes the concert
stage they have studied, in depth, all of the standard repertoire?
I have also been playing the equally sainted Angela Hewitt's rendering
of Bach's WTC I and II, and I wondered whether she had them all from
memory, or relied on the music. She could presumably sight read
Prelude No 1 in C major from Book 1 - if I can, anyone can! But the
Fugue No 18 in G sharp minor from Book 2 is very difficult, and would
require study to play well.
Edward
--
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as a
"dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in fact
that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.
Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising repertoire
that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even earlier.Even after
they have performed them in public hundreds of times/
Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.
love and kisses,
albert landa
jimz
2005-03-11 13:22:40 UTC
Permalink
My answer "Forever" was meant a little in jest.

I'm an amateur who has had a lot of fun over the years playing butchering
Chopin and
Liszt . So what ? unless you are a frustrated concert pianist as Mr. Landa
seems to be,
don't take it too seriously. Just keep in mind that there is always someone
better than
you, and the climb is what counts, not the height of the mountain.

I can't stand these super serious pianists that discourage rather than
encourage through their belittlement. I was fortunate enough
to have a piano teacher in my neighborhood who was above and beyond
any pianist I have ever heard. He got his training in Europe and could play
anything.
A true virtuoso. Above all, he was a very humble man and always encouraged
his
students. Sure he got mad and frustrated at times, but at the end of the
lesson
he always had something good to say to you.

The end result,
I'm certainly no concert pianist, but I sure have a lot of fun.


.
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as
a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.
Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising repertoire
that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even earlier.Even after
they have performed them in public hundreds of times/
Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.
love and kisses,
albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
YYZ
2005-03-11 17:41:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by jimz
My answer "Forever" was meant a little in jest.
not to worry, jimz; irony/subtlety do not always carry the day . lol .
my non-posted reply, to the amended query, was (+/-) 4 min 30 seconds.

can recall when, as young lad, i opened .my. copy of the trans etudes.
eyes and mind wide w/awe, simply could not get to piano quickly enough;
and, oh yes, the first many passes through were, hmm, heartstopping :)
too funny!
Post by jimz
The end result,
I'm certainly no concert pianist, but I sure have a lot of fun.
you had a great student/guide relationship; shines through your words.
best wishes .. (and to OP as well) ..
--
arrau / gilels / gould / richter
www.mozilla.org
Hung N
2005-03-22 19:10:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by jimz
My answer "Forever" was meant a little in jest.
I'm an amateur who has had a lot of fun over the years playing butchering
Chopin and
Liszt . So what ? unless you are a frustrated concert pianist as Mr. Landa
seems to be,
don't take it too seriously. Just keep in mind that there is always someone
better than
you, and the climb is what counts, not the height of the mountain.
I can't stand these super serious pianists that discourage rather than
encourage through their belittlement. I was fortunate enough
to have a piano teacher in my neighborhood who was above and beyond
any pianist I have ever heard. He got his training in Europe and could play
anything.
A true virtuoso. Above all, he was a very humble man and always encouraged
his
students. Sure he got mad and frustrated at times, but at the end of the
lesson
he always had something good to say to you. (snip)
This is the best thread reply I've read in weeks, on any topic, in ANY
newsgroup. You have my respect. Enlightenment of the widest possible
audience, with the least possible insult.
Mike Williams
2005-03-11 20:47:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as a
"dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in fact
that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
Ah it only takes a short moment for Albert to bring down the tone of any
newsgroup discussion with random attacks. He's so *much* faster at that
than learning a piece. I can only infer that he is the Tourretic
equivalent of teachers in the Catholic Church, brutalizing students with
insults, pedantry and low humour.

Albert: only a few posts ago you were correcting "getting raped in the
asshole" to "getting raped in the arsehole". So which is it now?
albert landa
2005-03-12 11:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Dear Tony,,

I can't keep it up.I did say I wasn't going to respond to anything you said
to or about me but I'm weak.

But I have to tell you Tony.You've given me some of the best belly laughs
I've had in ages

Look. Assholes, arseholes!What the hell.Who cares? Does it really
matter?.Sometimes you just have to get down and dirty..

But I do have to say I wouldn't even attempt to compete with Adrian's
incredible time and motion take on 'Concert Pianist's" acquiring and
maintaining repertoire except to say, and if I could for a moment bring my
huimble self into the discussion, I first performed Gaspard de la Nuit when
I was 20 after studying it for about 3 months.I wouldn't perform it now
under 6 months preparation and even then I would be scared shitless.

But to get back to the OP. I guess if you asked a roomful of "Concert
Pianists" the original question you would get a roomful of laughter and then
a whole lot of quite humorous and very creative replies.But that is just
surmise.

A couple of things Tony.

a) What is Tourretic? Is that like in Tourrettes Syndrome?
b) I was very impressed with your knowledge of the pianist Osbourne.Who is
he and why haven't I heard of him?
c) I was pleased to see you referring to pano works as pieces.Good boy!

albert landa

PS How long is a piece of string?
Post by Mike Williams
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known
as a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact
that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
Ah it only takes a short moment for Albert to bring down the tone of any
newsgroup discussion with random attacks. He's so *much* faster at that
than learning a piece. I can only infer that he is the Tourretic
equivalent of teachers in the Catholic Church, brutalizing students with
insults, pedantry and low humour.
Albert: only a few posts ago you were correcting "getting raped in the
asshole" to "getting raped in the arsehole". So which is it now?
Mike Williams
2005-03-12 12:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Dear Tony,,
I can't keep it up.I did say I wasn't going to respond to anything you said
to or about me but I'm weak.
That's the third time you've confused me with someone else in the last
few months. Can you actually comprehend newsgroup threads? Maybe you
should practice at home with some remedial reading material before
playing in public.
Radu Focshaner
2005-03-12 20:05:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Dear Tony,,
That's the third time you've confused me with someone else in the last few
months.
Love is blind....
albert landa
2005-03-12 22:38:41 UTC
Permalink
Dear Mike,

Oh God! I really AM getting old! I obviously meant YOU but mistakenly
thought I was writing to the dreadful Tony Elka.

All you have to do is substitute YOUR name whenever you see the name
Tony.Now that shouldn't be too difficult.

albert landa
Post by albert landa
Dear Tony,,
I can't keep it up.I did say I wasn't going to respond to anything you
said to or about me but I'm weak.
That's the third time you've confused me with someone else in the last few
months. Can you actually comprehend newsgroup threads? Maybe you should
practice at home with some remedial reading material before playing in
public.
Mike Williams
2005-03-12 23:28:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Dear Mike,
Oh God! I really AM getting old! I obviously meant YOU but mistakenly
thought I was writing to the dreadful Tony Elka.
All you have to do is substitute YOUR name whenever you see the name
Tony.Now that shouldn't be too difficult.
It's hard to keep up, you've confused me with 3 different people.

My name is Legion.
Nuby
2005-03-13 01:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as
a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
Moron,

The question can easily and almost certainly accurately be interpreted as
"how long would the average concert pianist require to learn this piece well
enough that they would be comfortable performing it?"

You inability to parse and / or understand this perfectly reasonable point
of curiosity, is nobody's problem but your own.
albert landa
2005-03-13 02:14:42 UTC
Permalink
No! YOU are the moron!

Don't you see that the question is NOT a reasonable question and this "point
of curiosity" is incapable of an answer for the following common-sense
reasons.

1) Every concert-pianist and that includes your "average concert-pianist" is
a completely different human-being with different capacities and differing
definitions of where the point is that they feel "comfortable" with their
differing degrees of concert readiness which of course will vary from
pianist to pianist with their feelings of home readiness, readiness for
try-outs before friends etc.

2) The point in their careers when they decide to tackle a new work will
vary and to some extent will determine the speed with which they will get
the work" in the fingers", in the mind, in the heart etc. All very
variable.Don't forget that for the average listener what will seem fantastic
to them might be far from satisfactory to a concert pianist who will
necessarily be of more perfectionist nature.

3) What is difficult for a Barenboim is not necessarily as difficult for an
Ashkenazy

4) What is a "concert-pianist'? Is a pianist who plays in public 10 times a
year, but principally earns his/her living as a teacher, coach, accompanist
etc. the same as a concert pianist who gives 200 concerts in a year?

No. As a previous poster has pointed out the question is incapable of answer
because there are just too many variables.

Moron.


albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known
as a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
Moron,
The question can easily and almost certainly accurately be interpreted as
"how long would the average concert pianist require to learn this piece
well enough that they would be comfortable performing it?"
You inability to parse and / or understand this perfectly reasonable point
of curiosity, is nobody's problem but your own.
Nuby
2005-03-13 02:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
No! YOU are the moron!
Don't you see that the question is NOT a reasonable question and this
"point of curiosity" is incapable of an answer for the following
common-sense reasons.
1) Every concert-pianist and that includes your "average concert-pianist"
is a completely different human-being with different capacities and
differing definitions of where the point is that they feel "comfortable"
with their differing degrees of concert readiness which of course will
vary from pianist to pianist with their feelings of home readiness,
readiness for try-outs before friends etc.
2) The point in their careers when they decide to tackle a new work will
vary and to some extent will determine the speed with which they will get
the work" in the fingers", in the mind, in the heart etc. All very
variable.Don't forget that for the average listener what will seem
fantastic to them might be far from satisfactory to a concert pianist who
will necessarily be of more perfectionist nature.
3) What is difficult for a Barenboim is not necessarily as difficult for
an Ashkenazy
4) What is a "concert-pianist'? Is a pianist who plays in public 10 times
a year, but principally earns his/her living as a teacher, coach,
accompanist etc. the same as a concert pianist who gives 200 concerts in a
year?
No. As a previous poster has pointed out the question is incapable of
answer because there are just too many variables.
Moron.
albert landa
There are of course millions of variables but it doesn't stop people from
forming opinions about the answer. And, the answer of course *exists*. If
you took a random sampling of 10 concert pianists (however you wanted to
define it... just pick a definition) who didn't know a certain piece, and
told them to learn it to performance level as quickly as possible, they
would each take a certain amount of time, and there would be an average.
The experiment would be repeatable with another set of 10 concert pianists,
and I'm quite sure the averages would correlate with one another. What that
average might be is a legitimate point of curiosity, regardless of your glee
at trying to pretend that speculation is purely useless.
albert landa
2005-03-13 04:12:31 UTC
Permalink
No.I don't feel "glee" ( your speculation) at anything.I just now feel that
this speculation about "average times", "performance level" etc. etc. is
just a tiresome waste of time and energy.Incredibly boring.Much better to
spend the time studying the Transcendental Study and getting it up to
"performance level".You say it doesn't "stop people from forming opinions
about the matter" Well, I HAVE formed my opinion of both the question and
you.

So.I now approach my glorious Model B Steinway and open my Alfred Cortot
edition of the Studies and the rest is history........


albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
No! YOU are the moron!
Don't you see that the question is NOT a reasonable question and this
"point of curiosity" is incapable of an answer for the following
common-sense reasons.
1) Every concert-pianist and that includes your "average concert-pianist"
is a completely different human-being with different capacities and
differing definitions of where the point is that they feel "comfortable"
with their differing degrees of concert readiness which of course will
vary from pianist to pianist with their feelings of home readiness,
readiness for try-outs before friends etc.
2) The point in their careers when they decide to tackle a new work will
vary and to some extent will determine the speed with which they will get
the work" in the fingers", in the mind, in the heart etc. All very
variable.Don't forget that for the average listener what will seem
fantastic to them might be far from satisfactory to a concert pianist who
will necessarily be of more perfectionist nature.
3) What is difficult for a Barenboim is not necessarily as difficult for
an Ashkenazy
4) What is a "concert-pianist'? Is a pianist who plays in public 10 times
a year, but principally earns his/her living as a teacher, coach,
accompanist etc. the same as a concert pianist who gives 200 concerts in
a year?
No. As a previous poster has pointed out the question is incapable of
answer because there are just too many variables.
Moron.
albert landa
There are of course millions of variables but it doesn't stop people from
forming opinions about the answer. And, the answer of course *exists*.
If you took a random sampling of 10 concert pianists (however you wanted
to define it... just pick a definition) who didn't know a certain piece,
and told them to learn it to performance level as quickly as possible,
they would each take a certain amount of time, and there would be an
average. The experiment would be repeatable with another set of 10 concert
pianists, and I'm quite sure the averages would correlate with one
another. What that average might be is a legitimate point of curiosity,
regardless of your glee at trying to pretend that speculation is purely
useless.
Nuby
2005-03-13 04:19:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
No.I don't feel "glee" ( your speculation) at anything.I just now feel
that this speculation about "average times", "performance level" etc. etc.
is just a tiresome waste of time and energy.Incredibly boring.Much better
to spend the time studying the Transcendental Study and getting it up to
"performance level".You say it doesn't "stop people from forming opinions
about the matter" Well, I HAVE formed my opinion of both the question and
you.
AHAHAHAHAHA. You know *nothing* about why you post, moron. You are just
another neurotic jackass calling Usenet home. You lept at the chance to
"bitch slap" someone who asked a question you don't like. The question HAS
an answer and that answer is open to opinion. There is nothing you can do
about that. "The question is a waste of time so I wasted my time writing a
diatribe against it", indeed. You are a f'kin moron, believe me.
albert landa
2005-03-13 06:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer to
a question.

And, by the way what do the following mean in English?

1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin

I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.

albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
No.I don't feel "glee" ( your speculation) at anything.I just now feel
that this speculation about "average times", "performance level" etc.
etc. is just a tiresome waste of time and energy.Incredibly boring.Much
better to spend the time studying the Transcendental Study and getting it
up to "performance level".You say it doesn't "stop people from forming
opinions about the matter" Well, I HAVE formed my opinion of both the
question and you.
AHAHAHAHAHA. You know *nothing* about why you post, moron. You are just
another neurotic jackass calling Usenet home. You lept at the chance to
"bitch slap" someone who asked a question you don't like. The question
HAS an answer and that answer is open to opinion. There is nothing you
can do about that. "The question is a waste of time so I wasted my time
writing a diatribe against it", indeed. You are a f'kin moron, believe
me.
Nuby
2005-03-13 06:25:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer
to a question.
He was asking for opinions, moron. You are not doing well here.
Post by albert landa
And, by the way what do the following mean in English?
1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin
I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.
What a *total* *shock* that not only are you an anally retentive pedantic
boob, but you're also vacuous enough to counter my post with a spelling
flame (two thirds of which were obvious colloquilisms, no surprise that you
lack the ability to parse them, given your history in this thread). All
wrapped up in the irony that our conversation is in the context of you
complaining about people *wasting their time with useless posts*, AND after
you've said you were done with me. You are a real treasure, Albert. Wow.
Seek help, seriously. You *desperately* need some therapy.

Or maybe you're just a troll? Go ahead and try again, if it's good (better
than you've done) maybe I'll even grace you with another response.
albert landa
2005-03-13 07:09:00 UTC
Permalink
Another question concerning your use of English.

What exactly do you mean by the word "parse"? I dimly remember at school we
had to "parse" passages in novels etc.I wasn't too good at it then and I'm
obviously still having problems.I just have this vague feeling that you are
using it incorrectly
I think if you check the OP you will have to agree that he is asking for an
answer and not an opinion, nor an opinion about an answer.

I'm really enjoying working on the Liszt but please don't ask me how long
it's going to take to get it up to performance level.

Regarding seeking "therapy"I"m having enormous fun in this thread and that's
excellent therapy in itself. But you really are rather rude.


albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer
to a question.
He was asking for opinions, moron. You are not doing well here.
Post by albert landa
And, by the way what do the following mean in English?
1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin
I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.
What a *total* *shock* that not only are you an anally retentive pedantic
boob, but you're also vacuous enough to counter my post with a spelling
flame (two thirds of which were obvious colloquilisms, no surprise that
you lack the ability to parse them, given your history in this thread).
All wrapped up in the irony that our conversation is in the context of you
complaining about people *wasting their time with useless posts*, AND
after you've said you were done with me. You are a real treasure, Albert.
Wow. Seek help, seriously. You *desperately* need some therapy.
Or maybe you're just a troll? Go ahead and try again, if it's good
(better than you've done) maybe I'll even grace you with another response.
T.B.
2005-04-01 15:17:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Another question concerning your use of English.
What exactly do you mean by the word "parse"? I dimly remember at school we
had to "parse" passages in novels etc.I wasn't too good at it then and I'm
obviously still having problems.I just have this vague feeling that you are
using it incorrectly
I think if you check the OP you will have to agree that he is asking for an
answer and not an opinion, nor an opinion about an answer.
I'm really enjoying working on the Liszt but please don't ask me how long
it's going to take to get it up to performance level.
Regarding seeking "therapy"I"m having enormous fun in this thread and that's
excellent therapy in itself. But you really are rather rude.
I'm a little confused as to what your criteria for being rude is.
Post by albert landa
albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer
to a question.
He was asking for opinions, moron. You are not doing well here.
Post by albert landa
And, by the way what do the following mean in English?
1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin
I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.
What a *total* *shock* that not only are you an anally retentive pedantic
boob, but you're also vacuous enough to counter my post with a spelling
flame (two thirds of which were obvious colloquilisms, no surprise that
you lack the ability to parse them, given your history in this thread).
All wrapped up in the irony that our conversation is in the context of you
complaining about people *wasting their time with useless posts*, AND
after you've said you were done with me. You are a real treasure, Albert.
Wow. Seek help, seriously. You *desperately* need some therapy.
Or maybe you're just a troll? Go ahead and try again, if it's good
(better than you've done) maybe I'll even grace you with another response.
albert landa
2005-04-02 09:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Well, let's see.

How's about being described as an "anally retentive pedantic boob"? And then
there's the epithet "vacuous". And then there's a small matter of being
advised to seek help and/or therapy.And then there's being called a "moron"
And then there's being called a "f'kin moron" which I assume means "fucking
moron" And then there's being described as a "neurotic jackass" etc.

Them's my criteria for rudeness T.B. What's yours?


albert landa
Post by T.B.
Post by albert landa
Another question concerning your use of English.
What exactly do you mean by the word "parse"? I dimly remember at school we
had to "parse" passages in novels etc.I wasn't too good at it then and I'm
obviously still having problems.I just have this vague feeling that you are
using it incorrectly
I think if you check the OP you will have to agree that he is asking for an
answer and not an opinion, nor an opinion about an answer.
I'm really enjoying working on the Liszt but please don't ask me how long
it's going to take to get it up to performance level.
Regarding seeking "therapy"I"m having enormous fun in this thread and that's
excellent therapy in itself. But you really are rather rude.
I'm a little confused as to what your criteria for being rude is.
Post by albert landa
albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer
to a question.
He was asking for opinions, moron. You are not doing well here.
Post by albert landa
And, by the way what do the following mean in English?
1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin
I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.
What a *total* *shock* that not only are you an anally retentive pedantic
boob, but you're also vacuous enough to counter my post with a spelling
flame (two thirds of which were obvious colloquilisms, no surprise that
you lack the ability to parse them, given your history in this thread).
All wrapped up in the irony that our conversation is in the context of you
complaining about people *wasting their time with useless posts*, AND
after you've said you were done with me. You are a real treasure, Albert.
Wow. Seek help, seriously. You *desperately* need some therapy.
Or maybe you're just a troll? Go ahead and try again, if it's good
(better than you've done) maybe I'll even grace you with another response.
T.B.
2005-04-04 20:16:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Well, let's see.
How's about being described as an "anally retentive pedantic boob"? And then
there's the epithet "vacuous". And then there's a small matter of being
advised to seek help and/or therapy.And then there's being called a "moron"
And then there's being called a "f'kin moron" which I assume means "fucking
moron" And then there's being described as a "neurotic jackass" etc.
Them's my criteria for rudeness T.B. What's yours?
I'm pretty sure that if your delivery on your original statements in
this thread had been more respectful, you wouldn't have been called
the above names.

Assuming that your clearly "divine" knowledge and insights are the
norm, and treating those without that like they're fools. In my
opinion.
Post by albert landa
albert landa
Post by T.B.
Post by albert landa
Another question concerning your use of English.
What exactly do you mean by the word "parse"? I dimly remember at school we
had to "parse" passages in novels etc.I wasn't too good at it then and I'm
obviously still having problems.I just have this vague feeling that you are
using it incorrectly
I think if you check the OP you will have to agree that he is asking for an
answer and not an opinion, nor an opinion about an answer.
I'm really enjoying working on the Liszt but please don't ask me how long
it's going to take to get it up to performance level.
Regarding seeking "therapy"I"m having enormous fun in this thread and that's
excellent therapy in itself. But you really are rather rude.
I'm a little confused as to what your criteria for being rude is.
Post by albert landa
albert landa
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
Yes moron, but an "opinion"ABOUT an answer is not necessarily THE answer
to a question.
He was asking for opinions, moron. You are not doing well here.
Post by albert landa
And, by the way what do the following mean in English?
1) Lept
2) "bitch slap"
3) f'kin
I must say that your English does suffer when you get angry.
What a *total* *shock* that not only are you an anally retentive pedantic
boob, but you're also vacuous enough to counter my post with a spelling
flame (two thirds of which were obvious colloquilisms, no surprise that
you lack the ability to parse them, given your history in this thread).
All wrapped up in the irony that our conversation is in the context of you
complaining about people *wasting their time with useless posts*, AND
after you've said you were done with me. You are a real treasure, Albert.
Wow. Seek help, seriously. You *desperately* need some therapy.
Or maybe you're just a troll? Go ahead and try again, if it's good
(better than you've done) maybe I'll even grace you with another response.
Dvorak2
2005-03-13 14:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nuby
Post by albert landa
No! YOU are the moron!
Don't you see that the question is NOT a reasonable question and this
"point of curiosity" is incapable of an answer for the following
common-sense reasons.
1) Every concert-pianist and that includes your "average concert-pianist"
is a completely different human-being with different capacities and
differing definitions of where the point is that they feel "comfortable"
with their differing degrees of concert readiness which of course will
vary from pianist to pianist with their feelings of home readiness,
readiness for try-outs before friends etc.
2) The point in their careers when they decide to tackle a new work will
vary and to some extent will determine the speed with which they will get
the work" in the fingers", in the mind, in the heart etc. All very
variable.Don't forget that for the average listener what will seem
fantastic to them might be far from satisfactory to a concert pianist who
will necessarily be of more perfectionist nature.
3) What is difficult for a Barenboim is not necessarily as difficult for
an Ashkenazy
4) What is a "concert-pianist'? Is a pianist who plays in public 10 times
a year, but principally earns his/her living as a teacher, coach,
accompanist etc. the same as a concert pianist who gives 200 concerts in a
year?
No. As a previous poster has pointed out the question is incapable of
answer because there are just too many variables.
Moron.
albert landa
There are of course millions of variables but it doesn't stop people from
forming opinions about the answer. And, the answer of course *exists*. If
you took a random sampling of 10 concert pianists (however you wanted to
define it... just pick a definition) who didn't know a certain piece, and
told them to learn it to performance level as quickly as possible, they
would each take a certain amount of time, and there would be an average.
The experiment would be repeatable with another set of 10 concert pianists,
and I'm quite sure the averages would correlate with one another. What that
average might be is a legitimate point of curiosity, regardless of your glee
at trying to pretend that speculation is purely useless.
Thank you, Nuby. The above paragraph sums up what I meant.

Dvorak2
lcm
2005-03-16 01:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Mr. Landa, I'm genuinley curious why you feel inclined to respond in such a
way to an innocent question on the usenet. There's plenty of ugliness in the
world already. Why add to it?
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known as
a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.
Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising repertoire
that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even earlier.Even after
they have performed them in public hundreds of times/
Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.
love and kisses,
albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
albert landa
2005-03-16 05:39:32 UTC
Permalink
It wasn't an "innocent "question. It was a dumb-ass question.


albert landa
Post by lcm
Mr. Landa, I'm genuinley curious why you feel inclined to respond in such
a way to an innocent question on the usenet. There's plenty of ugliness in
the world already. Why add to it?
Post by albert landa
You don't understand so I will attempt to explain.It's like this , you see.
Your question concerning the "average concert pianist" is what is known
as a "dumb ass question" In your case incredibly dumb ass..So dumb ass in
fact that only a Tony Elka or a Mike Williams could do it justice.
But I will try to help you in your state of bewilderment.
Just try to accept at its face value the original answer of 'Forever" as
the only possible answer for your incredibly dumb ass question. Concert
pianists, even 'average" concert pianists NEVER stop practising
repertoire that they have possibly learnt in their teens and even
earlier.Even after they have performed them in public hundreds of times/
Does that make your confusion and bewilderment feel better.
love and kisses,
albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
Mike Williams
2005-03-16 06:35:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by lcm
Mr. Landa, I'm genuinley curious why you feel inclined to respond in such a
way to an innocent question on the usenet. There's plenty of ugliness in the
world already. Why add to it?
I have made a provisional diagnosis of Tourette's, and/or he believes it
is essential for all piano teachers to be abusive.
IPGrunt
2005-03-11 20:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dvorak2
Post by IPGrunt
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to
study
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Post by Dvorak2
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
You don't quit, do you?
What makes you think that we are only "average" concert pianists?
I've never been so insulted...
-- ipgrunt
I don't understand...
That makes two of us.

Bolet plays these pieces very well, and it took him about 65 minutes.
adrian
2005-03-11 10:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Dvorak2,

Your question, which seems a perfectably reasonable one to me, is difficult
to answer in that the time any pianist would take to bring a piece of music
from scratch to a level where he would be prepared to perform it in public
is dependent on many factors: the pianists ability - and this varies greatly
even among professional pianists and the piece's inate 'difficulty' and
length - this latter varies considerably.

However it is possible to make an estimate of at least the maximum time
required by a professional pianist to 'master' a piece. If you search for
'pianist and repertoire' you will find the biographies of many well-known
and perhaps not so well-known players. As an example Steven Osbourne is
34years old and lists about 42 items as his 'repertoire' and who, whilst a
'good' pianist, is by no means exceptional.

If we make the, I hope not unreasonable, assumption that the majority of
these pieces have been tackled since the age of 13 then that would be 42 in
21 years = 2 per year. However a rough estimate of his concert commitments
is 100 days of the year playing or travelling or renewing familiarity with
existing repetoire and perhaps we should allow another 80 for days off! This
leaves 180 days per year for practising new works. So an average of one
piece in 90 days practise. ( Not necessarily successive days!)

However this I feel is very much an overestimate. Looking further at the
biog it's clear that firstly many more pieces have been tackled and secondly
that the work commitments are probably much higher (you don't get paid for
practising new pieces!) If we estimate both number of the pieces learnt and
the work commitments as 50% higher then this would result in about 40 days
per piece.

This estimate takes no account of the difference in length or inate
difficulty of pieces; learning a Chopin study which is technically difficult
but only 3 or 4 pages in length is going to be much quicker than, say,
Rachmaninov's 3rd concerto. As the repertoire used above included many
concertos it's likely that the time taken for shorter pieces is considerably
less than the 40 days.

So to answer your original question my estimate would be of the order of 10
to 40 days for a professional pianist to bring a Liszt study to performance
standard - although I would qualify this with by saying the days taken would
probably be spread over a much longer period and that other pieces are
probably being learnt in tandem.

Hope that's of interest, Adrian
Post by Dvorak2
Post by jimz
Forever
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
Sorry. I meant how long does it take the average concert pianist to
play the piece reasonably well. But you knew what I meant.
YYZ
2005-03-11 11:50:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by adrian
Dvorak2,
Your question, which seems a perfectably reasonable one to me, is difficult
to answer in that the time any pianist would take to bring a piece of music
from scratch to a level where he would be prepared to perform it in public
is dependent on many factors: the pianists ability - and this varies greatly
even among professional pianists and the piece's inate 'difficulty' and
length - this latter varies considerably.
However it is possible to make an estimate of at least the maximum time
required by a professional pianist to 'master' a piece. If you search for
'pianist and repertoire' you will find the biographies of many well-known
and perhaps not so well-known players. As an example Steven Osbourne is
34years old and lists about 42 items as his 'repertoire' and who, whilst a
'good' pianist, is by no means exceptional.
adrian: you are mis-interpreting the meaning of repertoire as applies.
"concert repertoire" indicates to booking agents etc his comfort zone;
nb: "* denotes preferred concerti for 2000/1"
it in no way indicates the totality of works laying w/i the fingers -
best wishes ..
--
arrau / gilels / gould / richter
www.mozilla.org
YYZ
2005-03-11 12:15:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by YYZ
Post by adrian
Dvorak2,
Your question, which seems a perfectably reasonable one to me, is difficult
to answer in that the time any pianist would take to bring a piece of music
from scratch to a level where he would be prepared to perform it in public
is dependent on many factors: the pianists ability - and this varies greatly
even among professional pianists and the piece's inate 'difficulty' and
length - this latter varies considerably.
However it is possible to make an estimate of at least the maximum time
required by a professional pianist to 'master' a piece. If you search for
'pianist and repertoire' you will find the biographies of many well-known
and perhaps not so well-known players. As an example Steven Osbourne is
34years old and lists about 42 items as his 'repertoire' and who, whilst a
'good' pianist, is by no means exceptional.
adrian: you are mis-interpreting the meaning of repertoire as applies.
"concert repertoire" indicates to booking agents etc his comfort zone;
nb: "* denotes preferred concerti for 2000/1"
it in no way indicates the totality of works laying w/i the fingers -
best wishes ..
-> http://www.stevenosborne.co.uk/
--
arrau / gilels / gould / richter
www.mozilla.org
Mike Williams
2005-03-11 21:26:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by YYZ
Post by YYZ
adrian: you are mis-interpreting the meaning of repertoire as applies.
"concert repertoire" indicates to booking agents etc his comfort zone;
nb: "* denotes preferred concerti for 2000/1"
it in no way indicates the totality of works laying w/i the fingers -
best wishes ..
-> http://www.stevenosborne.co.uk/
Yes, exactly. It lists Osborne's concerto repertoire, and "Sample
Recital Programmes". The latter notably omits repertoire that he has
previously recorded such as Messiaen and Ravel, or pieces by Alkan,
Kapustin etc not listed as samples. I'm also hazarding a guess that he
has more than one Bach Prelude & Fugue under his fingertips, and could
even conjure up Fur Elise at gunpoint :-).
adrian
2005-03-12 09:28:11 UTC
Permalink
YYZ,
You miss the point of my argument. You are quite correct that he probably
doesn't know at any one time all these pieces (and perhaps never has and
perhaps never will). But that's irrelevant to my calculation which is only
dependent on the fact that at times in the past he must have brought each of
these pieces to an acceptable playing standard. A number of pieces
'mastered' (for want of a better word) in a given time leads to a calculable
'average' learning time per piece.
It clearly would be a super pianist indeed that could faultlessly play
pieces not attempted for years without the need for some revision practise.
Adrian
Post by YYZ
Post by adrian
Dvorak2,
Your question, which seems a perfectably reasonable one to me, is difficult
to answer in that the time any pianist would take to bring a piece of music
from scratch to a level where he would be prepared to perform it in public
is dependent on many factors: the pianists ability - and this varies greatly
even among professional pianists and the piece's inate 'difficulty' and
length - this latter varies considerably.
However it is possible to make an estimate of at least the maximum time
required by a professional pianist to 'master' a piece. If you search for
'pianist and repertoire' you will find the biographies of many well-known
and perhaps not so well-known players. As an example Steven Osbourne is
34years old and lists about 42 items as his 'repertoire' and who, whilst a
'good' pianist, is by no means exceptional.
adrian: you are mis-interpreting the meaning of repertoire as applies.
"concert repertoire" indicates to booking agents etc his comfort zone;
nb: "* denotes preferred concerti for 2000/1"
it in no way indicates the totality of works laying w/i the fingers -
best wishes ..
--
arrau / gilels / gould / richter
www.mozilla.org
YYZ
2005-03-13 05:48:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by adrian
YYZ,
You miss the point of my argument.
actually, no, i do not - the only person 'missing' anything is you :)
underlying premise is flawed; thus any substantive reasoning the same.
Post by adrian
You are quite correct that he probably
doesn't know at any one time all these pieces (and perhaps never has and
perhaps never will).
at no point did i, nor would i, infer such a position; do read me again.
how & why are you seeing words & meanings which clearly are not present?
Post by adrian
But that's irrelevant to my calculation
time required for you to respond .may. have seen the etude played once!
Post by adrian
which is only
dependent on the fact that at times in the past he must have brought each of
these pieces to an acceptable playing standard. A number of pieces
'mastered' (for want of a better word) in a given time leads to a calculable
'average' learning time per piece.
then you go ahead and impress yourself w/such silly exercizes, adrian;
as for me, i'd much rather spend precious time more constructively :)
Post by adrian
It clearly would be a super pianist indeed that could faultlessly play
pieces not attempted for years without the need for some revision practise.
adrian: what works are on your present > daily < practice list? curious;
if .your. approach consists of but one work, well, good luck .. lol ..

can think of many works to round out the f minor etude practice time/s;
most sincerely hope OP has quite a number included on OP's studylist :)
Post by adrian
Adrian
TID = Thread Is Dead, AFAIAC.
best wishes ..
--
arrau / gilels / gould / richter
www.mozilla.org
albert landa
2005-03-12 05:18:16 UTC
Permalink
How long is a piece of string?


albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
adrian
2005-03-12 17:05:41 UTC
Permalink
Albert ,
The piece of string in my pocket is 18.5cms long. But I don't understand why
you would want to know that.
Adrian
Post by albert landa
How long is a piece of string?
albert landa
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
sonarrat
2005-03-12 19:24:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dvorak2
Does anyone know how long it takes an average concert pianist to study
this piece?
Study, or play? Might take 3-4 hours to analyze the harmonies. Takes
about 4 minutes to play at full speed. How long it would take you to
get it up to concert tempo is dependant on how creative you are at
figuring out fingerings and proper hand positions, because the
hand-crossing in this piece is a bitch, and how good you are at memorizing.

I don't think Liszt is as difficult to memorize as Chopin, in general.
There's far less chromaticism, there are fewer strange, unpredictable
yet poignant turns, and the structures are more predictable. There's
also a kind of instant comfort level, at least in some spots, which is
utterly absent Chopin etudes, which never cease to twist and torment
fingers, even for a moment. On the other hand, the Liszt etudes are, by
and large, far longer than the Chopins. I think it's a wash in the end.

-Sonarrat.
Radu Focshaner
2005-03-12 19:58:24 UTC
Permalink
the Liszt etudes are, by and large, far longer than the Chopins.
De profundis !

The great Jeff Jones strikes again !
sonarrat
2005-03-12 20:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Radu Focshaner
the Liszt etudes are, by and large, far longer than the Chopins.
De profundis !
The great Jeff Jones strikes again !
Heh heh heh.

I just got banned from a message board, so I'll be posting here more
often...

-Sonarrat.
Radu Focshaner
2005-03-12 20:41:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by sonarrat
I just got banned from a message board, so I'll be posting here more
often...
Why.... ? You are young and there is a real world out there...just for you
to grab ! And... why waste precious practice time ?
fyo
2005-03-13 07:50:35 UTC
Permalink
I've had loads of fun reading this hilarious thread.

I am a pianist and I guess that it is common, if 2 successful pianists
can be put into the same room without killing each other(!), that we
do ask each other this type of question.

From my experience all pianists have aspects they have more problems
with - this is usually memorizing so that memory can be relied upon
during a stressful, nerve-filled performance. AND of course technical
and others...

This Etude would take me, based on 1 hour spent on it every day, 1
month to be able to play it in a no pressure date and not really know
how it's going to go; 2 months to play it well (under little pressure)
and then I'd allow 6 for a TV live broadcast or 2000+ seat venue in
home city.

I memorize reasonably quickly and technically get over stuff pretty
quickly. I have a friend who learnt an incredibly hard concerto in 2
days when Brendel cancelled and he said he'd need 5 days to play it, 2
months to play well and 1 year for the high pressure date. Another
friend said they'd give it 6 months before they'd risk performing it
but would be confident of playing it well by that time.

John Ogden probably would have needed about 2 minutes - incredible
instant technique and photographic memory...

I think you can break it down first of all to technique. Most pianists
would need a while to learn this simply because of the power involved.
I think most pianists find their accuracy goes when you up dynamics -
i.e. you'd definitely need to in a large (2000 seat) concert venue.
This piece is fast and loud and in an awkward key - I can't imagine
even the fastest learners getting the technical side up in less than 2
weeks doing 2-3 hours a day. I'd never spend so long as it increases
injury - i.e. if you're playing large venue concerts every 2 days you
can't afford to hurt your hands!

Memory-wise it's not too hard, and it's short, so I'd say the same 2
weeks except I know people who could memorize it in 2 days but not
neccessarily play it.


Hope this provides some sort of answer...
albert landa
2005-03-13 11:49:00 UTC
Permalink
This was a very interesting post,fyo. Just out of curiosity, what was the
particular concerto that your friend learnt in 2 days?
Also, I wasn't quite clear as to whether your friend DID the performance in
2, 5 days or a year or at all. Could you clarify?Your friend who said he
needed 6 months.Would that 6 months be devoted exclusively to that concerto
or would it be part of a wider practice programme?And was it an entirely NEW
work or was he bringing back an "old" work?

When I was 18 I learnt and performed the Khatchaturian Concerto in 5 weeks
but that is really not all that difficult.Not compared to the Prokofiev 3rd
which took me 6 months and that was working 4-6 hours a day/.And the
Rach/Pag Variations a year!

Glad you're enjoying this thread It's hilarious isn't it.


albert landa
Post by fyo
I've had loads of fun reading this hilarious thread.
I am a pianist and I guess that it is common, if 2 successful pianists
can be put into the same room without killing each other(!), that we
do ask each other this type of question.
From my experience all pianists have aspects they have more problems
with - this is usually memorizing so that memory can be relied upon
during a stressful, nerve-filled performance. AND of course technical
and others...
This Etude would take me, based on 1 hour spent on it every day, 1
month to be able to play it in a no pressure date and not really know
how it's going to go; 2 months to play it well (under little pressure)
and then I'd allow 6 for a TV live broadcast or 2000+ seat venue in
home city.
I memorize reasonably quickly and technically get over stuff pretty
quickly. I have a friend who learnt an incredibly hard concerto in 2
days when Brendel cancelled and he said he'd need 5 days to play it, 2
months to play well and 1 year for the high pressure date. Another
friend said they'd give it 6 months before they'd risk performing it
but would be confident of playing it well by that time.
John Ogden probably would have needed about 2 minutes - incredible
instant technique and photographic memory...
I think you can break it down first of all to technique. Most pianists
would need a while to learn this simply because of the power involved.
I think most pianists find their accuracy goes when you up dynamics -
i.e. you'd definitely need to in a large (2000 seat) concert venue.
This piece is fast and loud and in an awkward key - I can't imagine
even the fastest learners getting the technical side up in less than 2
weeks doing 2-3 hours a day. I'd never spend so long as it increases
injury - i.e. if you're playing large venue concerts every 2 days you
can't afford to hurt your hands!
Memory-wise it's not too hard, and it's short, so I'd say the same 2
weeks except I know people who could memorize it in 2 days but not
neccessarily play it.
Hope this provides some sort of answer...
fyo
2005-03-13 16:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
This was a very interesting post,fyo. Just out of curiosity, what was the
particular concerto that your friend learnt in 2 days?
Don't want to give exact details as don't want to give him away but
can say it was written after 1930, it's completely atonal and it's
very HARD!!
Post by albert landa
Also, I wasn't quite clear as to whether your friend DID the performance in
2, 5 days or a year or at all.
All I meant by this is that it's commonplace to discuss how long a
person might need to play something. i.e. these are times we would
give to ourselves if it was a new piece. If you mean the concerto -
yes he did. Don't know how it went.

Could you clarify?Your friend who said he
Post by albert landa
needed 6 months.Would that 6 months be devoted exclusively to that concerto
or would it be part of a wider practice programme?And was it an entirely NEW
work or was he bringing back an "old" work?
I meant 6 months for the piece based on it being brand new. As long as
it's not a 4-hour long concerto or something then you can easily
divide a practise day to include several works.
Post by albert landa
When I was 18 I learnt and performed the Khatchaturian Concerto in 5 weeks
but that is really not all that difficult.Not compared to the Prokofiev 3rd
which took me 6 months and that was working 4-6 hours a day/.And the
Rach/Pag Variations a year!
Glad you're enjoying this thread It's hilarious isn't it.
albert landa
t***@hotmail.com
2005-03-14 20:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
This was a very interesting post,fyo. Just out of curiosity, what was the
particular concerto that your friend learnt in 2 days?
Also, I wasn't quite clear as to whether your friend DID the
performance in
Post by albert landa
2, 5 days or a year or at all. Could you clarify?Your friend who said he
needed 6 months.Would that 6 months be devoted exclusively to that concerto
or would it be part of a wider practice programme?And was it an entirely NEW
work or was he bringing back an "old" work?
When I was 18 I learnt and performed the Khatchaturian Concerto in 5 weeks
but that is really not all that difficult.Not compared to the
Prokofiev 3rd
Post by albert landa
which took me 6 months and that was working 4-6 hours a day/.And the
Rach/Pag Variations a year!
Ah, Prokoviev 3 - my favourite of all concerti. Of course, I will
NEVER have the ability to play it, so may ask a question about it?

I heard a radio programme about the concerto a few years ago and they
were discussing the third movement. One of those present said that
Prokoviev had written chords containing more notes than there were
fingers on two hands, but some notes were contingent, so the only
approach was to play two notes with a single finger.

Is this true? If so, is it common in the higher reaches of the
repertoire to have to sound a more than one note with one finger? And
here I am struggling with Myra Hess' arrangement of "Jesu Joy Of Man's
Desiring"!

Edward
Tom Shaw
2005-03-14 22:12:18 UTC
Permalink
I dont know how common it is but it is true.
TS
Post by albert landa
Post by albert landa
This was a very interesting post,fyo. Just out of curiosity, what was
the
Post by albert landa
particular concerto that your friend learnt in 2 days?
Also, I wasn't quite clear as to whether your friend DID the
performance in
Post by albert landa
2, 5 days or a year or at all. Could you clarify?Your friend who
said he
Post by albert landa
needed 6 months.Would that 6 months be devoted exclusively to that
concerto
Post by albert landa
or would it be part of a wider practice programme?And was it an
entirely NEW
Post by albert landa
work or was he bringing back an "old" work?
When I was 18 I learnt and performed the Khatchaturian Concerto in 5
weeks
Post by albert landa
but that is really not all that difficult.Not compared to the
Prokofiev 3rd
Post by albert landa
which took me 6 months and that was working 4-6 hours a day/.And the
Rach/Pag Variations a year!
Ah, Prokoviev 3 - my favourite of all concerti. Of course, I will
NEVER have the ability to play it, so may ask a question about it?
I heard a radio programme about the concerto a few years ago and they
were discussing the third movement. One of those present said that
Prokoviev had written chords containing more notes than there were
fingers on two hands, but some notes were contingent, so the only
approach was to play two notes with a single finger.
Is this true? If so, is it common in the higher reaches of the
repertoire to have to sound a more than one note with one finger? And
here I am struggling with Myra Hess' arrangement of "Jesu Joy Of Man's
Desiring"!
Edward
albert landa
2005-03-14 22:28:53 UTC
Permalink
Edward,

Yes. It is true that in the last movement of the Prokofiev 3 you have to
play two notes with one finger at very fast speed.It sounds like a scale in
seconds or almost a glissando.If I remember correctly, and it's a long time
since I performed it, it's all on the white notes and so it's not at all
impossible. But Prokofiev was a phenominal pianist and he knew what he was
doing.
Also in Scarbo from Ravel's "Gaspard de la Nuit" there is a passage where
you have to play two notes with one finger.If I remember correctly it's only
the thumb.

These are the only works in my experience that deliberately call for this
technique.There are probably more instances of which I am unaware

However there are many chords which can be facilitated by playing two notes
with the thumb.E.G. in the right hand the chord (from the bottom) CD F# A
D( the C and D are taken with the thumb) and conversely in the left hand
the chord
C F# A CD (the C and D are again taken with the thumb) For the average hand
these chords are impossible otherwise.

Good luck with the Bach/Hesse. Glorious piece. I used to use it as an
encore.It is not easy and I think I read somewhere that Dinu Lipatti took
three years to get a perfect recording of it! So, don't be prematurely
dispirited.


albert landa








<***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:***@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com..

.
Post by albert landa
Post by albert landa
This was a very interesting post,fyo. Just out of curiosity, what was
the
Post by albert landa
particular concerto that your friend learnt in 2 days?
Also, I wasn't quite clear as to whether your friend DID the
performance in
Post by albert landa
2, 5 days or a year or at all. Could you clarify?Your friend who
said he
Post by albert landa
needed 6 months.Would that 6 months be devoted exclusively to that
concerto
Post by albert landa
or would it be part of a wider practice programme?And was it an
entirely NEW
Post by albert landa
work or was he bringing back an "old" work?
When I was 18 I learnt and performed the Khatchaturian Concerto in 5
weeks
Post by albert landa
but that is really not all that difficult.Not compared to the
Prokofiev 3rd
Post by albert landa
which took me 6 months and that was working 4-6 hours a day/.And the
Rach/Pag Variations a year!
Ah, Prokoviev 3 - my favourite of all concerti. Of course, I will
NEVER have the ability to play it, so may ask a question about it?
I heard a radio programme about the concerto a few years ago and they
were discussing the third movement. One of those present said that
Prokoviev had written chords containing more notes than there were
fingers on two hands, but some notes were contingent, so the only
approach was to play two notes with a single finger.
Is this true? If so, is it common in the higher reaches of the
repertoire to have to sound a more than one note with one finger? And
here I am struggling with Myra Hess' arrangement of "Jesu Joy Of Man's
Desiring"!
Edward
Thomas F. Unke
2005-03-15 15:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by albert landa
Good luck with the Bach/Hesse. Glorious piece. I used to use it as
an encore.It is not easy and I think I read somewhere that Dinu
Lipatti took three years to get a perfect recording of it! So, don't
be prematurely dispirited.
Good to hear that. I'm also practising it and with the recording by
Lipatti in mind, my results are quite mediocre. Probably most innocent
listeners would believe that this is an easy piece - it is not!

But then, if Lipatti needed 3 years for that, I can even need more
without feeling ashamed.
Edward
2005-03-15 16:57:30 UTC
Permalink
"albert landa" <***@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<42361032$0$29449$***@news.optusnet.com.au>...
[snip]

Thanks for the information - very interesting.
Post by albert landa
Good luck with the Bach/Hesse. Glorious piece. I used to use it as an
encore.It is not easy and I think I read somewhere that Dinu Lipatti took
three years to get a perfect recording of it! So, don't be prematurely
dispirited.
That's the thing with Bach - it sometimes looks easy on the page, but beware!

Edward
albert landa
2005-03-15 22:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Edward,

Bach is the hardest of all composers. Both technically and musically.

The 'Jesu" is terribly difficult because the triplet descant in the right
hand has to be so smooth, so quiet, so beautifully shapely.It has to weave
and undulate like a bird gliding high on a thermal And then the Chorale has
to sing through this texture.It has to be calm, simple and noble, full of
faith all the while the triplet descant continues like a great river flowing
to the sea.And then by the third page it rises to a mighty climax which has
to be so well judged and then subsides again,

But, just continue to work at it with humility and devotion.

regards,


albert landa
Post by Edward
[snip]
Thanks for the information - very interesting.
Post by albert landa
Good luck with the Bach/Hesse. Glorious piece. I used to use it as an
encore.It is not easy and I think I read somewhere that Dinu Lipatti took
three years to get a perfect recording of it! So, don't be prematurely
dispirited.
That's the thing with Bach - it sometimes looks easy on the page, but beware!
Edward
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...