OURCHOPIN FORUM
June 20, 2013, 08:14:25 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Virtuoso  (Read 9591 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
wanderer
Elite member
***
Posts: 89


View Profile
« on: September 29, 2006, 01:29:57 pm »

Liszt is more virtuosic than Chopin, right? Is this because Chopin didn't want to show off?
Logged
lol_nl
Guest
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2006, 03:40:50 pm »

In his compositions, yes.

In his playing, we don't know. Liszt himself was very impressed by Chopin's playing, not only by its charm but also by its virtuosity. The reason Liszt is a famous concert pianist is not because Chopin didn't want to show off, but because Chopin didn't like performing. He got nervous every time he had to perform. In total he performed less than 30 concerts in his whole life. He was better at playing in fairs in Paris, for the rich ladies Smiley.
Logged
wanderer
Elite member
***
Posts: 89


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2006, 05:57:26 pm »

Maybe his fragile health affected Chopin's style and performance? although Liszt also had a lot of piano works in Chopin's style.
Logged
MorrisseyMan
Junior member
*
Posts: 16



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2006, 09:32:32 am »

Because of Chopin's physical weekness, the sound of the piano was drowned out in the concert hall. I read somewhere that, towards the end of his life (his 30s), he became so week that he always played piano and pianissimo, just different shades of the two. This sound didn't even reach the back of a concert hall designed to carry the sound from the stage. If you can imagine this, imagine adding an orchestra on top of this. Apparently, an un-accompanied version of his F minor concerto was more popular then one with an orchestra, because you could barely hear the piano.
Logged
wanderer
Elite member
***
Posts: 89


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2006, 02:06:37 pm »

Quote from: "MorrisseyMan"
Because of Chopin's physical weekness, the sound of the piano was drowned out in the concert hall. I read somewhere that, towards the end of his life (his 30s), he became so week that he always played piano and pianissimo, just different shades of the two. This sound didn't even reach the back of a concert hall designed to carry the sound from the stage. If you can imagine this, imagine adding an orchestra on top of this. Apparently, an un-accompanied version of his F minor concerto was more popular then one with an orchestra, because you could barely hear the piano.


I don't know about the unaccompanied version of the concerto. There are versions for 2 pianos in the market. I still prefer the original ones.
Logged
enchantedpianist
Moderator
Senior member
*****
Posts: 49



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2006, 10:57:36 pm »

Quote from: "MorrisseyMan"
Because of Chopin's physical weekness, the sound of the piano was drowned out in the concert hall. I read somewhere that, towards the end of his life (his 30s), he became so week that he always played piano and pianissimo, just different shades of the two. This sound didn't even reach the back of a concert hall designed to carry the sound from the stage. If you can imagine this, imagine adding an orchestra on top of this. Apparently, an un-accompanied version of his F minor concerto was more popular then one with an orchestra, because you could barely hear the piano.


Is that reflected in his late compositions? Are most of them soft?
Logged
wanderer
Elite member
***
Posts: 89


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2006, 05:51:16 am »

Not all of them are soft but the tendency seems to suggest so. The mazurkas toward the end of his life is very very soft. The final year works sound more melancholic and hopeless...
Logged
Pianoman1992
Elite member
***
Posts: 71


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2006, 10:26:16 pm »

I think that they both were equally good at playing the piano. However, as you all have said, Chopin didn't really want to "show off" and use speed in his compositions for the sake of speed. A common impression among people who aren't really into classical music is that the faster and louder a piece is, the better it is. This could be why Liszt is usually thought of a virtuoso moreso than our dear Chopin.
Logged
wanderer
Elite member
***
Posts: 89


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2006, 01:37:10 pm »

Well, Chopin dedicated his first etude set to Liszt since he thought only Liszt could play it effectively. I can infer that Chopin admitted that Liszt's technique was superior than his. I don't know if Chopin really played all of his etudes. Even the great Horowitz could not play all of them.
Logged
enchantedpianist
Moderator
Senior member
*****
Posts: 49



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2007, 12:03:33 pm »

Well, after Liszt met Chopin, Liszt somehow changed his composition style from virtuosic exposition to meditation and simplicity. I may infer that Liszt realized that involving brilliant technique didn't make a composition a masterpiece.  :twisted:
Logged
nocturne
Senior member
**
Posts: 26



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 16, 2007, 02:22:07 pm »

Quote from: "lol_nl"
In his compositions, yes.

In his playing, we don't know. Liszt himself was very impressed by Chopin's playing, not only by its charm but also by its virtuosity. The reason Liszt is a famous concert pianist is not because Chopin didn't want to show off, but because Chopin didn't like performing. He got nervous every time he had to perform. In total he performed less than 30 concerts in his whole life. He was better at playing in fairs in Paris, for the rich ladies Smiley.


HAHAHA It's true Liszt was maybe a "ladies man" in concerts, but Chopin was a RICH lady's man  :lol:
Logged

None Sine Sole Iris~
nocturne
Senior member
**
Posts: 26



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: July 16, 2007, 02:23:42 pm »

Quote from: "wanderer"
Well, Chopin dedicated his first etude set to Liszt since he thought only Liszt could play it effectively. I can infer that Chopin admitted that Liszt's technique was superior than his. I don't know if Chopin really played all of his etudes. Even the great Horowitz could not play all of them.


WAS Chopin's technique weak?  His thumb was malformed or something, which apparently aided him to reach larger intervals despite his hand size.  Something like that.  Hmm...is this true?
Logged

None Sine Sole Iris~
Fantasy
Junior member
*
Posts: 10


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: August 13, 2008, 01:28:44 am »

Chopin had stage fright, and smaller hands, and was physically weaker.
Logged
Tmoica
Senior member
**
Posts: 25


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2009, 11:37:20 pm »

I didn't know Chopin performed less than 30 concertos in his whole life but from what I've read, I got an impression he performed more. Did You mean on great concertos for wide or famous audience? I don't want to opose You but I would just like to know how do You mean. Well, I am a bit confused by that information and I would like to know about it Smiley

From what I've understood (maybe I didn't understand well) in the book I just read, Chopin traveled a lot while he lived in Poland and performed a lot of concertos in a whole country. On those travelings, he listened the music which was coming to him from a country. He listened the melodies people singed. He was seing beautifull parts of Poland. In the end, all those pictures and hearings made him compose the music like mazurkas, for instance. I read in some of his letters he was sometimes very busy by preparing himself for performing.
When he was 7 years old, he already composed his first work and performed concertos. When he was 10 years old, he got a present from singer Catalani, as a sign of respect and admiration towards his musical talent. In those times, when he was practically I child, there was also written a newspapers article about him which claimed that the genious Chopin performs the hardest figures with unusual easiness and taste and that many musicians were impressed with the pieces he composed then. From that, I concluded he was able to play hard pieces already then and that he performed a lot, since he got such praises.

Interesting is one letter I found in that book I've read. He wrote he had performed on some concerto where his playing was silent, because of the type of the piano. After that, he had second concerto where he played on a different piano which was making a sounds that were more loud. On first concerto people weren't really amazed because they didn't like the silence of Chopin's sound. On second concerto people were really amazed. What I find interesting here is that Chopin wrote in that letter that he liked the sound of his playing on first concerto more.

I guess that can prove he didn't really care about showing off. But still, Chopin's performances were great and people truly admired to him, respected him and he always earned a place in people's heart.

I believe that even those works of Chopin that may seem to be virtuoso weren't composed without a reason that came up from Chopin's heart. I may be wrong but let's take Revolutionary Etude for example. As You may know, it's the 12th piece of opus 10. Chopin composed it while he was in Stuttgart. There, he was being told about the fall of Warsaw. That must have been really painfull for him. I believe he felt a deep sadness and grief, inner chaos, big tension and anger towards that merciless fate that happened to Warsaw, where his family and friends were. I see the right hand as his crying, painfull screams and I see the anger and inner chaos in the left hand. I don't know how to describe this better, since my English is bad.

Liszt's music was just focused on virtuoso. In that book, the author said that in the Liszt's eyes the Chopin's music was a discovery of new parts of music. Liszt believed Chopin music requires new technical methods and reveals new types of musical issues. He was amazed by Chopin's music. I also read he closed himself for a couple of weeks to learn Chopin's etudes opus 10 and that he performed them better than Chopin.

Liszt was a truly great performer but I also read something interesting that again proves the greatness of Chopin's music. Seems that Liszt said he would need to spend 4 years of his life to compose a work such as Chopin's Etude in E - major.

What I want to say is that, even when Chopin's music is fast and when we hear some rush in it, it has a soul. His music always comes from his heart and it is always a pure expression of his feelings. I guess he didn't care about performing and taking people's breathe away like Liszt did. I guess he was more interested in that beauty of the music, which he formed so honestly and faithfully in his music. That makes a greatest artists.

That's how I see it. That's how I understood the book I read these days. I just wanted to share that with You since I think it would be also usefull for this topic. Maybe I understood something wrong? If I did, please say and correct me.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!