I think all instruments are difficult to master, but some styles are more difficult than others. Piano there are so many ways to play it, classical, jazz, ragtime, boogie-woogie (the left hand alone is crazy in boogie-woogie). Then the art of improvisation, which could be anything. But Jazz seems the most difficult to improvise, a whole different way of playing chords, etc....but then you have the original classical pieces for piano that was I would assume written/improvised by the Greats, and we play what they created or least try to.

With those you have many different interpretations on how they should be played, how do we really know how they should be played. That can drive the most advanced pianist crazy too, so to sum it up. It's 88 keys and 10 fingers, it's harmony, melody, chords, intricate phrasing, etc....and for that you need a lot of time, energy, some natural ability, to truly master any instrument.

If we all had 12 hours a day to practice it does not mean we can master it, you have to have the discipline, will, and serious dedication to practice one hour a day, so 12 hours is not a walk in the park whether you want to or not.

Most masters knew they wanted to be a Master at a very young age, I remember the story of why Herbie Hancock switched to jazz. He was playing a talent show and playing classical pieces, but the piano was his thing in school and everyone knew it but one of the contestants played jazz and shined. That upset Herbie because the piano was his thing and nobody was to outshine him, so he liked what he saw and changed totally to jazz. The story goes something like that, of course he could tell you better.

So if you have to ask that question, just enjoy what you are doing because Master is a serious word.

Joe Jackson says the violin is hardest. I believe he calls it a torture instrument.

I also picked up the guitar very easily, was able to play most pop/rock songs just after a year, then went to pursue blues, and am now also learning jazz. Already playing in a band, and also teaching the guitar. For me it was incomparable much easier than the piano. I can learn most people to play most of Oasis's Wonderwall in just 2 lessons, but to learn somebody to play a pop song as it should (not an easier version) would require me much more lessons.

This is just one more thing for which it can be said that there is no problem so difficult that you cannot look at it in the right way and make it much more difficult.

Mastery is a relative concept - what we consider mastery in an instrument is whatever a player achieves with a strong musical sense, better-than-average physical coordination, at least 15 years of solid musical education (including a fine music college) and hard work. That is true of the harp, percussion, the recorder, the piano or the violin. As such, achieving 'mastery' in each is equally difficult.

Of course some people achieve it faster or slower, with or without the formal education component etc., but the benchmark is plausible.

Given the large numbers who try to achieve mastery in the violin or piano, say, you could argue that 'mastery' in those instruments is likely to be a higher musical level in absolute terms than for the harp or the bagpipes, just because of the competitive challenge, but I am not sure that argument would hold between the various main instruments.

What other instrument do you play up to 10 notes simultaneously?
How about crossing hands? (ok,drums....)
How about covering a range of 88 notes?
Or taking your hands off the instrument to make wide leaps?
Using both hands and both feet? (ok, drums again)
Frequently having to use an instrument that is "not your own"?

Organ. Several keyboards, registers, both legs, arms, hands, the whole body.

Organ is far more difficult than piano. Requires much more thinking.

Organ music is generally written in 3 parts. PIano is generally in 1-2.


Just look up Bach organ trios.


Me miss the organ....

Im currently listening to a piece by Heinrich Scheidemann, a great early organ player, of the 17th century.

I started out on organ (classical organ major in college) and then switched over to piano. While you have to use both hands and both feet to play the organ, you have no control over the dynamics from your touch.

To play the piano requires more control if you're playing with any dynamic variation.

Virtuosic piano playing makes more demands on the performer than virtuosic organ playing.

Why have organs fallen out of style? I think they're pretty cool. When I was a kid a lot of people had Lowrey's in their house. We had a Lowrey in our house when I grew up. I thought it was fun. At the time (I was a little boy, so don't slam me :o) I thought the piano was "stupid" because the notes didn't hold for long (sustain). Of course these day's I know better and love the piano. But I still think organs are cool.

Because most of the time they sound horrible, just like Harpsichords

I didn't think we were comparing difficulty of organ/harpisichord/clavichord/synth, etc. to piano as they are keyboard instruments that have more similarities than differences. I think the op was talking flute, oboe, violin, trumpet, guitar....

All instruments are more or less equally difficult to master. This is because if there were an instrument that was easier to master than others then virtuosos of that instrument would create music that requires that much more technique/musical development to play. This is analogous to the concept that computer programs will grow to fill available memory.

I think the following video says it all ...

(the good stuff starts at 1:10)

Mr. Ape has it right--the best musicians play their instruments to the limit of human capability. To put it another way, composers want the maximum capability out of all instruments so they can express their musical ideas. That which limits what composers write for any particular instrument is the ability of the best musicians to play it.