Piano Forum

I agree with Pianovlad--only those who played all the etudes can really understand and give any meaningful sense of relative difficulty of each one. Certainly, by �played�, one would assume as �brought to a concert standard��in other words, not only read through, but also have mastered them up to a reasonable performance level�up to a tempo, with reasonable accuracy, realizing all other musical/technical obvious and hidden challenges, such as musical expression, correct touch, lightness, phrasing, etc. etc. etc.

By no means I would claim I could fulfill all of those requirements, but since I played MOST of them (about 20) and on a week notice would be ready to play in concert or record any of the most demanding ones, I�d like to offer my idea about their difficulties level. Also, in that ranking I take into consideration some other facts, such successful renditions of the etudes I heard on many International Piano Competitions, as well as discussions with some rather famous pianists, who have performed them live as a set.

First of all, I would not rank them �one over another�, just because of individual hand structure--the hands size and span, as well as individual �preference� of one type of technique over another. In other words, it is obvious that for some hands (for example, mine), say, 10/11 would be very easy, while for others very difficult, not to mention for some 10/1 would feel much easier than 10/2, but for others 10/2 would feel pretty much straight forward (while 10/1 almost unplayable).

In this respect, some would find that a certain kind of technique (for example, arpeggios, rolled chords, octaves, sixths, thirds, or �weak fingers�, etc.) would feel easier and preferable over another.

Of course, here there is some common sense, for example, if any (or most) of those do not exhibit any problem, then MOST LIKELY the rest of etudes would not be a problem, either, due to a certain level the pianist has already acquired.

Another problem in such ranking is that MOST of the etudes while for the most of the part feel pretty comfortable, almost always invariably can have a couple �unplayable� spots. Again, while very valid point, that is still quite individual and cannot be put against �overall� difficulty because of too many individual variables.

So, with all that long preambula, my ranking would be very approximate and personal. As such, I would not put it into �one etude over another�, but rather gather them into four groups:

1st group: Most demanding, which require lots of stamina to withstand long going pianistic patterns, complicated by certain musical challenges�certain touch, or certain kind of technique with little, or no rest in between to �take a breath�, and quite a few individual challenging difficulties. To this group I�d put (in chronological order):

op.10 no.1, 2 and op.25 no. 6, 8, 10, 11.

2nd group: Very demanding, with lots of individual challenges, but generally, easier accessible, �easier on hands�, and �more readily performed�:

Op. 10 no.4, 7, 8, 10, 11, Op. 25 no.4.

3rd group: The ones, which usually used as �first� Chopin etudes�still challenging but with less pianistic �surprises��those, which once acquired and �sorted out�, go along pretty well:

Op. 10 no. 5, 12, Op. 25 no. 1, 2, 3, 21, 24.

4th group: �Slow� etudes�often excluded from many competitions requirements. IMHO, by no means �easier� ones and in a sense many of them exhibit much more challenging difficulties, but� slower:

Op. 10 no.3, 6, 9, Op. 25 no. 5, 7

Again, this classification is very approximate and very individual�some would swap some etudes from one group to another, however, I hope FOR THE MOST it would be AT LEAST indicative.

Moreover, if we start talking about the highest performing achievements of each of those etudes then this classification would become completely meaningless. Indeed, if we are talking about something like performance of op.10/2 on the level of V. Rudenko, Op.10/4 on the level of Richter, Op.10/7 or 12 on the level Ignaz Friedman, Op.25 no. 8 on the level of L. Berman, Op. 25 no. 10 on the level of J. Lhevinne, or ANY OTHER SINGLE etude from Op. 25 as performed by G. Sokolov, then any of those would just become unachievable life time goals (indeed, if you are on that level, you do not ask for ranking).

As a last word, just listen how Ilana Vered plays Moszkowski etudes, or Josef Lhevinne plays some Czerny (!!!) etudes to understand how silly and stupid those rankings are, to start with� it is always not about �what�, but about �how�.

Best, M