Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Agree with Jason. To me, this is a romantic era piano work of the highest order. I think it's one of Liszt's most perfect compositions. None of it is less inspired than any other part, it's very tightly, masterfully constructed, and simply contains much of what makes Liszt great - but most performances i've heard don't do it justice (IMO).
You think you know more about playing this piece than most of the great pianists who have played it or have you only heard performances by really poor pianists?
Agree with Jason. To me, this is a romantic era piano work of the highest order. I think it's one of Liszt's most perfect compositions. None of it is less inspired than any other part, it's very tightly, masterfully constructed, and simply contains much of what makes Liszt great - but most performances i've heard don't do it justice (IMO).
You think you know more about playing this piece than most of the great pianists who have played it or have you only heard performances by really poor pianists?
Agree with Jason. To me, this is a romantic era piano work of the highest order. I think it's one of Liszt's most perfect compositions. None of it is less inspired than any other part, it's very tightly, masterfully constructed, and simply contains much of what makes Liszt great - but most performances i've heard don't do it justice (IMO).
You think you know more about playing this piece than most of the great pianists who have played it or have you only heard performances by really poor pianists?
Now that's not even good enough for you?
That would depend on his answer to my question.
If he's really heard many great pianists' recordings of this piece but feels they don't do it justice, he's in effect saying he understands more about how this piece should be played than many/most of the greatest pianists in history. That's far more extreme than saying he doesn't like one or two great pianists' playing of this piece. I think saying that most of the great pianists who have recorded some major work were inadequate seems wrong for almost anyone but especially a teenager. I think if even a world class pianist made such a statement, they'd be criticized.
If he's really heard many great pianists' recordings of this piece but feels they don't do it justice, he's in effect saying he understands more about how this piece should be played than many/most of the greatest pianists in history.
That is an erroneous conclusion to infer from his statement. That's a fact, IMO.
If he's really heard many great pianists' recordings of this piece but feels they don't do it justice, he's in effect saying he understands more about how this piece should be played than many/most of the greatest pianists in history.
That is an erroneous conclusion to infer from his statement. That's a fact, IMO.
So the great pianists understand as much as he does but chose not to use this understanding and to play it differently from what this understanding would dictate?
If he's really heard many great pianists' recordings of this piece but feels they don't do it justice, he's in effect saying he understands more about how this piece should be played than many/most of the greatest pianists in history.
That is an erroneous conclusion to infer from his statement. That's a fact, IMO.
So the great pianists understand as much as he does but chose not to use this understanding and to play it differently from what this understanding would dictate?
No. He said "didn't do it justice, IMO". If I were to paraphrase that I could legitimately write "didn't play it to my liking" I don't think the word "understanding" has anything to do with what Josh said.
6 October 2012 Facile Liszt is at the bottom of my barrel ... and avoid him like the plague ... so anything suggested will have been guided by a disenchanted ear ... but why break one’s fingers on Ballade 2 (which opens with a chromatic romp for the LH) ... when there are far more enchanting works by other composers to brighten the day.
Beethoven’s Pathetique is the obvious lodestar which every pianist should get under their belt in building up a grand repertoire.
I’ll go with Kreisler’s Mozart 310 and Un Sospiro (A Sigh) ... but Beethoven’s Tempest Sonata would be my bet ... for one of the most aesthetic (beautiful) architectural structures ever.
Test an opening gallop through the Liszt Ballade 2 ... and see whether your dog howls ... a sure sign of dross.
Agree with Jason. To me, this is a romantic era piano work of the highest order. I think it's one of Liszt's most perfect compositions. None of it is less inspired than any other part, it's very tightly, masterfully constructed, and simply contains much of what makes Liszt great - but most performances i've heard don't do it justice (IMO).
You think you know more about playing this piece than most of the great pianists who have played it or have you only heard performances by really poor pianists?
Pretty much what Damon said, although my opinion does seem to be a pretty common one. It is a difficult work to bring off - even for professional pianists.
Ye verily bretheren!! ... I have been besmirched by an Australian chappie with the pitch of “close-mindedness, ignorance, and prejudice†... and plead guilty on all counts regarding loopy Liszt.
Pity the Aussies can’t play cricket ... getting bombed out by the West Indies yesterday in the semi-final of the T20 ... losing by a massive 78 runs.
SA rugby beat the island-buggers by 31-8 last Saturday ... today (at home) we take on the mighty All Blacks ... I’m betting a modest sum on the Boks to win ... no ways would I venture my paid-up house!!
when there are far more enchanting works by other composers to brighten the day.
That's only your opinion.
Originally Posted by btb
a sure sign of dross.
The only dross, the only facile thing here, is your post. Calling Liszt these things now only speaks to close-mindedness, ignorance, and prejudice.
He just has a different opinion about Liszt or this particular piece than you do. Just like you have your opinion about Liszt's music. You may be a Liszt fanatic but that doesn't mean it makes sense to call someone with a different opinion "prejudiced".
I know professional musicians of the highest caliber who don't rate Liszt very highly and dislike his music in general. Personally, I do like quite a bit of Liszt's music but I don't think he's anywhere near the level of those I'd consider as the very greatest composers.
Even is someone expressed dislike for composers like Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin, I don't think calling them close minded or ignorant make much sense.
You also seemed to have overlooked some of the intended humor in btb's post and general posting style.
when there are far more enchanting works by other composers to brighten the day.
That's only your opinion.
Originally Posted by btb
a sure sign of dross.
The only dross, the only facile thing here, is your post. Calling Liszt these things now only speaks to close-mindedness, ignorance, and prejudice.
He just has a different opinion about Liszt or this particular piece than you do. Just like you have your opinion about Liszt's music. Becaue your a Liszt fanatic you should describe someone with a different opinion as prejudiced?
It's not so much that. Rather the fact that he comes into this thread, made by a guy who is clearly enthusiastic about this piece, and goes on to talk about how Liszt is facile and this music dross, apparently for no real reason. I'm probably over-reacting, it's just that, as a Liszt fan, so much rubbish gets said about him over time it gets hard to take - especially when, as they say, ones taste in music is part of who they are.
And as for the humour in his post, well i've seen him make similar posts before with regards to Liszt - without the intended humour. Let us love this composer without having highly questionable opinions, communicated in condescending, 'factual' statements, being thrown in our faces - no one ever does this sort of thing with most of the other great composers.
It's not so much that. Rather the fact that he comes into this thread, made by a guy who is clearly enthusiastic about this piece, and goes on to talk about how Liszt is facile and this music dross, apparently for no real reason. I'm probably over-reacting, it's just that, as a Liszt fan, so much rubbish gets said about him over time it gets hard to take - especially when, as they say, ones taste in music is part of who they are.
And as for the humour in his post, well i've seen him make similar posts before with regards to Liszt - without the intended humour. Let us love this composer without having highly questionable opinions, communicated in condescending, 'factual' statements, being thrown in our faces - no one ever does this sort of thing with most of the other great composers.
There certainly have been PW posts where the poster expressed dislike for even the greatest composers, i.e. those composers who a big majority rank at the very top.
When you say "so much rubbish gets expressed" that's how you feel about those statements. They may well be the honest opinions of those who say them. Just the fact the "so much" gets expressed means that more than a couple of people don't agree with you on your evaluation of Liszt.
That the opinions are "highly questionable" is also just your view. I didn't find btb's post condescending at all. It was clearly meant to be partly humorous as are almost all of his posts. Do you think anyone with that writing style is trying to be totally serious?
I certainly agree that you were "probably over-reacting". Being a big fan of Liszt doesn't mean you have to take any criticism of him personally and respond by calling his detractors "prejudiced, close minded, and ignorant" or saying their(to you) bad taste is part of who they are.
And as for the humour in his post, well I've seen him make similar posts before with regards to Liszt - without the intended humour. Let us love this composer without having highly questionable opinions, communicated in condescending, 'factual' statements, being thrown in our faces - no one ever does this sort of thing with most of the other great composers.
I wouldn't worry about it, Josh. btb isn't online with Liszt as we are, who cares really, but btb's experiences in London (before we were born) are always of interest to me- and he is a cool guy.
We are both very fond of the music of Eric Coates, and he has hands on experience with what this music meant at the time. That directly mirrors what my grandmother told me, if btb is certainly younger than she is.
[/quote]There certainly have been PW posts where the poster expressed dislike for even the greatest composers, i.e. those composers who a big majority rank at the very top.
When you say "so much rubbish gets expressed" that's how you feel about those statements. They may well be the honest opinions of those who say them. Just the fact the "so much" gets expressed means that more than a couple of people don't agree with you on your evaluation of Liszt.
That the opinions are "highly questionable" is also just your view. I didn't find btb's post condescending at all. It was clearly meant to be partly humorous as are almost all of his posts. Do you think anyone with that writing style is trying to be totally serious?
I certainly agree that you were "probably over-reacting". Being a big fan of Liszt doesn't mean you have to take any criticism of him personally and respond by calling his detractors "prejudiced, close minded, and ignorant" or saying their(to you) bad taste is part of who they are.[/quote]
I agree with some of what you're saying and disagree with some other parts...But I guess, overall, my view on Liszt based on what i've read from both his detractors - professional and non professional, and his supporters - again professional and non professional, and my subsequent listening to his music, is that there is absolutely no question Liszt is a great composer and that anyone who denies that is the one with the problem, and not Liszt himself. With Liszt the case is magnified because there has been, yes, rubbish written about him since he was alive. If you look back to the inital reception of the Sonata, to Donald Francis Tovey's remarkable oversites in regards to the tone poems, Ernest Newman's book full of complete falsehoods (yes, actually false, as recent Liszt biographers have made clear)...it goes on, it spreads, and IMO it leads to prejudice and misunderstanding. I believe that people don't give Liszt a fair chance as they do most of the other great composers in regards to listening in-depth to his output, trying to understand his music, and his place in history, because it's easy to fall onto those old prejudices if you don't immediately understand what you're hearing and Liszt is certainly an acquired taste, also full of symbolism, extra-musical references, etc. If they do this i'm certain they won't think him any less than a great composer even if he's not to their taste. Of course this is a controversial view and you won't agree with me, and maybe it will change over time, but this is the view I hold.
I agree with some of what you're saying and disagree with some other parts...But I guess, overall, my view on Liszt based on what i've read from both his detractors - professional and non professional, and his supporters - again professional and non professional, and my subsequent listening to his music, is that there is absolutely no question Liszt is a great composer and that anyone who denies that is the one with the problem, and not Liszt himself. With Liszt the case is magnified because there has been, yes, rubbish written about him since he was alive. If you look back to the inital reception of the Sonata, to Donald Francis Tovey's remarkable oversites in regards to the tone poems, Ernest Newman's book full of complete falsehoods (yes, actually false, as recent Liszt biographers have made clear)...it goes on, it spreads, and IMO it leads to prejudice and misunderstanding. I believe that people don't give Liszt a fair chance as they do most of the other great composers in regards to listening in-depth to his output, trying to understand his music, and his place in history, because it's easy to fall onto those old prejudices if you don't immediately understand what you're hearing and Liszt is certainly an acquired taste, also full of symbolism, extra-musical references, etc. If they do this i'm certain they won't think him any less than a great composer even if he's not to their taste. Of course this is a controversial view and you won't agree with me, and maybe it will change over time, but this is the view I hold.
If someone doesn't like a composer...any composer, they don't have a "problem"...they just have a musical opinion. In fact, the huge majority of people on the planet not only don't like Liszt, they don't like any classical composers.
[/quote]If someone doesn't like a composer...any composer, they don't have a problem...they just have a musical opinion. [/quote]
I guess it depends. I think it is a problem for them if they don't get to understand and appreciate art that has brought so much to so many people. That's how I view it anyway. If there's a great composer who I don't like I think it's a deficiency on my part, and I ought to try to lose that deficiency. Maybe it will never happen, but it does for the majority of people who give an honest effort. Besides it wasn't about not liking Liszt, it was about objectively considering him to be a great composer. You can consider a composer to be great without liking them.
