Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Piano Concerto Grand Ranking

That gives me an emotional equivalent of nausea. I think it's one of the most annoying things I've ever heard.

Of course if I hadn't heard this over, and over, and over again in shopping centres, I probably wouldn't have any opinion one way or the other about it.

I'd bet Sviatoslav Richter probably performed maybe 3/4 of the total list

I really don't care too much for rankings of difficulty, though obviously I was interested enough to read this thread. I think more in terms of sound and thematic development. Beethoven's Op. 106 is very difficult, but I don't think it's difficulty just *for the sake of being difficult*. You can hear how themes are being developed throughout, and the final movement (to me) is a joy to hear. Maybe it's my "conservatism", but I'd still rather listen to Schumann's concerto Brahms's Second than the concertos of either Prokofiev or Bartók, regardless of relative difficulty.

Funny thing about the 'consensus' of difficulties in Beethoven. The opus 106 is always trotted out as some kind of unattainable Parnassus, but Charles Rosen -surely nobody's fool- writes that the opus 57 is at least that hard.

Some years ago I asked a professor of piano at a major university -no names- if he agreed with Rosen. It was interesting. He thought for a moment, then said "you could make a case for that".

I said it was very difficult. I think that's incontrovertible.

As far as difficulty goes, I think the Hammerklavier is on a different planet from anything else Beethoven wrote.

I think they're all difficult if you're doing 'em right...

Musically, you could make a case for pretty much any mid-to-late Beethoven sonata being as difficult as the Hammerklavier.

Now, I'm a fan of Rosen and I own much of his writing but his assertion that Op.57 is as difficult as Op.106 surely disregards the sheer discrepancies in mechanical difficulty.

Indeed. On purely musical grounds, I think many might make a case for the Diabelli Variations, although there are considerable technical challenges as well.

However, there are parts of the Hammerklavier, such as the infamous jumping trills, that verge on the unplayable as written. Still, difficulty is personal. A particular interpretive choice can make a difficult work a formidable beast.

I think this is why so many fear Op.111. While there is nothing even remotely like an easy way to play this sonata, breathing delicate life into the closing pages with an effortless lightness of touch is something that only the best of the best can manage.

True that. I think the cruelly exposed trills are what kills it for many. I've heard several live performances (not in this case by front line pianists) which were ruined by uneven or inaccurate trills at the end... a glorious journey through the Elysian fields suddenly ship wrecked on the rocks.

Some years ago I read a review of a recording of the 111 by a well recorded pianist, and the reviewer was rather incensed: why did they record this sonata if they didn't have the requisite trills? Fair enough.

Which 21st century pieces were not composed in recent memory?

Considering that I was born in 2001, anything from about 2001-2010

To make Rosen's case worse, we need only to look at the 3rd movement, which is arguably one of the most musically difficult 17 minutes in the entire Classical/Romantic era. One must have a superhuman sense of touch, phrasing, and that extra little "something" in order to not bore the audience and yourself.

Op.106 is, frankly speaking, a completely different species of difficulty compared to Op.57. Musically, and mechanically. I just don't see how anybody could think otherwise.

Op.111 is just a different species, period. It's such a strange sonata that many don't know what to do with it, and of course, it's also bloody difficult. Still doesn't hold a candle to Op.106, in my opinion.

I disagree. I think Opp. 109, 110 and 111 are Beethoven's three "greatest" sonatas, and of the three Op. 111 is the most transcendent. With Op. 106 I sometimes get the feeling that Beethoven is being difficult for the sake of being difficult. Op. 106 is still a great, awe-inspiring work though. I'd rather listen to a virtuoso play it than to try it myself. It's a workout.

I've often thought something similar about Gould's recording of Op.57. If you hate a piece, why go through the trouble of recording it? Even as a bit of satire it's a waste of time, energy and money. And frankly that's what it sounds like.

Ah, when I said "hold a candle" I did mean difficulty only. Of course there are sonatas that are on equal terms with the Op.106 when we talk musical value.

And Beethoven did indeed write the Hammerklavier to see how far he could stretch the limits of the keyboard.

Well then that's Op. 106's weakness. The totality of the work, like Liszt's Transcendental Etudes, is imposing and mighty...and kind of hard to love.

I easily "love" them - both Op. 106 and Liszt's Transcendental Etudes.

I certainly love it.

So just to clarify the parameters, you presumably know that Rosen recorded the last five Beethoven sonatas and that they were subsequently reissued on CD? You would probably admit that he clearly knows the music.

Rosen is an odd fellow. Sometimes one wonders if he is just having fun, there are numerous points in his writing wherein I get the impression he is merely toying with our preset sensibilities. His book 'The Romantic Generation' is a very provocative read, though his (deliberately) outrageous opinions can be scathing, reference Mendelssohn. But I don't believe HE believes that. The prose is eye twinkling, very clever Charles!

So yes, it seems quite obvious to us that the intellectual difficulties of Beethoven come to a head in the later sonatas, and maybe he was just joking about the Op 57. But then again, he has played them.