Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Should I learn Liszt's 2nd ballade before Chopin's 4th?

This summer I've been given a choice between the two pieces to work on. I love both pieces, and they are both notoriously demanding technically and musically. The Liszt has a lot of scaly runs, along with those relentlessly nasty left hand broken octaves. There are a lot of Beethovenesque tremolo chords on the right hand.
The 4th ballade also contains fast chromatic runs. But on the other hand, the spectrum of technical issues in Chopin's 4th include semiquaver sixths, fast chromatic thirds, counterpoint, and and many cross rhythms.

Both pieces are certainly not easy, but the Liszt 2nd ballade looks a bit more straightforward with mostly octave passages and the technical concepts repeat quite a bit. However, I (and I'm sure the rest of us) love the Chopin 4th so much, and so its certainly a matter of heart vs brain for me.

Your thoughts?

I like the Liszt ballade better, so you should play the Liszt!

I like the Chopin ballade better, so you should play the Chopin!

In the spirit of reconciliation, I vote playing the main part of the Chopin, but substitute its notorious coda for that in the Liszt.

That way, you have the best of both worlds (or both composers).

But hang on, wasn't there a parable in the Good Book about such division?

Life is short. If you think you can handle the Chopin, follow your heart.

Heresy! You can't destroy the Chopin piece like that!

Play the Grieg Ballade or Ballad pour Adelaine if you have a white piano. With almost 10 million YouTube hits, the latter is probably the best of them all.

If you have the ability to play either piece, this thread can only be a thread on opinions of others

Therefore,

Play the Liszt. The Liszt Ballade consistently brings me to tears and is one of the pieces of music most dear to my heart. The only reason I'm not playing it now is because I've decided to hold off for as long as I am able, till I know I can do the piece complete justice. The Chopin is fantastic, but to me it can not even hold a candle to the glory of the Liszt Ballade.

But, like I said, that's just an opinion.

Like others have said though, follow your heart.

Both are amazing pieces, I've played the Liszt a lot, and it's really a piece that brings tears to your eyes. And the Chopin, also fantastic. I'm to learn that next. I'd start with Liszt, as it's more straightforward. And don't do the big cadenza that finishes loud. It doesn't suit the piece IMO.and there is this wonderful melody near the end.

But that's just my opinion, to do the Liszt. Both pieces are equally great. Have fun!

If you're a champ at alternating chords, and brutal alternating octaves in the left hand, the Liszt is a good fit. Also if you're good at tackling pieces which are very grand in scope - it's a very extroverted piece and requires a good understanding of the whole in order to do justice to it.

If you're better at more finger-ish stuff, like double notes, then the Chopin is easier technically. It's trickier, and possibly a bit more risky, because you need to get the details right. Again, you need to understand the big picture in order to play it well, but here, the devil is in the details.

Overall, I'd say that the Liszt Ballade is significantly easier, especially if you have good bravura technique. It's actually not all that technically difficult...just again, a good musical understanding is required to make it sound coherent. The Chopin has its tricky moments, but again, it's not all that technically difficult, but mostly requires musical maturity to pull off a compelling and successful performance.

It certainly is an opinion, and it goes to show you how subjective things like this are!
I completely agree with you, however.







(Just switch the words Chopin and Liszt. )

Oy


Double oy.

This is simply false -- unless you mean "not counting the hard parts," which are a goodly portion of the piece. (And of course the 'easy' parts are even harder but that's not what we're talking about here.)

And please I don't want to hear about how 'the same things aren't hard for everyone.' There isn't anyone for whom this piece isn't technically hard, unless you aren't caring about exactly how well it's played.

Maybe, if you play it like a chump.

@Joel - Sorry, I've played it, recorded it, posted it here, and you're free to bash my recording and my opinion too, but only after you've listened to my performance okay? Don't be rude.

And @Mark - if you mean technique for the sake of serving the music, it is very difficult. However, in terms of hitting notes...there are harder pieces out there. The majority of the work for the 4rd ballade lies after getting the notes down, putting the phrasing together, and constructing the music. The notes are not the issue.

I'd say 'Not that many,' but even if so, that's pretty far from how you put it before. It's very, very hard -- just technically, even before we get to musically.


You're wrong that "the notes" aren't an issue. Sure, perhaps the greater challenge is with 'the music' -- but again, that's very different from the piece being "not that technically hard." "The notes" are very much an issue (ALSO), except for the very very most skilled players -- and even for them, it's still simply false to say that it's "not all that technically difficult."

My reaction when people say stuff like that is exactly what Joel said. I don't recall your recording of it -- pardon if I actually heard it and just don't remember. Are you saying that we wouldn't find anything in it that challenged you very much technically, and that you played it like something that's "not all that technically difficult"?


P.S. I found it, and I'm gonna go listen, but won't say anything about it unless you say "yes" to the above.

Here's a more concise way of thinking at it.

With a difficult etude, say Chopin's op.10 no.4, I'd have to put a lot of keyboard time into it. Phrasing is not as much of an issue. Clarity, speed, and temperment are the most important aspects and the MECHANICAL issue s most important.

With the 4th ballade, I put more work into the piece away from the piano, studying the score, voicing, phrasing, thinking of shaping, building of musical climaxes, tempo relationships, polyphonic treatment, variation in the first three pages, treatment of voicing in the coda, balancing the textures in the first part of the coda so the harmonic rhythm wasn't chaotic, treatment of "your favourite two bars in the entire piano literature", the climax close to the end, figuring out how to build from the "ocean etude-like" section to those chords, voicing of those soft chords....

The point is, that's all musical difficulty which I spent a lot of time dreaming about while walking around, in class, or with a score in hand. What did I do while practicing? Well I put a lot of work into those thirds in the coda, the sixths in the middle, and the polyphonic treatment of the first theme. Those sections carry the most risk in a performance. However, other things sorted themselves more easily. I didn't have to spend excessive time trying to get things into my hands compared to working on an etude.

Long story short: technically difficult pieces need a lot of time at the keyboard. Ballade 4 took a lot of work away from the piano, because the notes worked out more quickly.

Sorry, didn't mean to offend. And if definitely wasn't directed at you personally. I meant that anything his hard to play WELL. Even the simplest pieces out there require a lot of work to make sound fantastic, let alone the 4th ballade. gulp

Kuan: You're changing it.

I have no problem with anything you've been saying, except that the piece isn't that technically difficult, and that "the notes" aren't an issue.

Adding to this: the benefit of working on larger pieces (like the two ballades) are that technical mishaps don't break the performance. There is time to ease into the music, and to get warmed up. If you screwed up a section, it's okay, because the whole may survive.

Compared to a shorter etude or something along those lines, if you mess up a section, then you're pretty much toast, since that's most of the piece right there. Sure, if you smudge the coda of the 4th ballade, or mess up the alternating chords in the Liszt, it's not the best, but if you do the same in a smaller piece then that's it.

I've played Liszt's 2nd Ballade, and it doesn't seem technically difficult until you start working on it , but the Chopin is a devil in difficulty. I would say learn the Liszt now to get used to playing a long emotional piece. It'll help you pull off the Chopin in the future.