studying Czerny's 'studies' (etudes) and Catharsis, any other easy contemporary studies?

Several studies from Clementi's Gradus ad Parnassum are available; obviously, I am not referring to the collection of 23 that pianists usually prepare, but to the entire work from the 100

In reality, there are also preludes and exercises, truly lovely... these are much easier.

yes, something by Clementi; I started playing it almost immediately a few years ago, I think it is quite similar to Czerny, which at the moment I find quite easy..... more than anything else, I want to play as many 'little things' as possible precisely to learn many fingering combinations.

I believe Mikrokosmos would appeal to me a lot, and for a few years now I have written several nice modal little pieces (I am speaking in a 'pop' context), so I believe that Bartok's material will expand my knowledge of modes even more, truly interesting. I propose to you a piece by Catarsi, in my opinion a truly very versatile pianist and composer; I am learning many of his pieces and even the easier ones are always very interesting.... from what I have understood so far, he uses classical harmony mixed with more 'crossover' styles, but never too commercial like Einaudi, in short, I never find that excessive 'commercialism' like Einaudi or David Lanz, for example, he very often uses dominants with the diminished fifth, interesting things. I think Catarsi is also very influenced by theater music. Well, these are just my impressions. A very solid and truly very versatile pianist, in my opinion. I hope you like it

http://www.catarsi.it/index.php?b=46

Are we sure that Clementi's gradus is easy enough...? It seems to me that various (student) pianists have problems with these studies... see ex-eighth.

Then there are also those of Chopin, Brahms, etc.

Well, the studies of Chopin and Brahms are truly on another planet compared to Clementi's gradus. The point of comparison is like comparing university to elementary school...

That's exactly why I was suggesting them, if the Gradus is easy...

To tell you the truth, there are also those by Liszt; Clementi probably turned out to be easy, Chopin/Brahms will turn out to be intermediate... and what the hell... something a bit challenging, precisely, Liszt.

Or even better, the difficult one is the Grandes Études, medium difficulty are the Transcendental Études, and among the simplest are the Op. 1 Studies

It's not even worth wasting time on Czerny...

TheSimon wrote:

Well, the studies of Chopin and Brahms are truly on another planet compared to Clementi's gradus. The point of comparison is like comparing university to elementary school...

I am pleased to know that 2 years after graduation... one is still in elementary school

TheSimon wrote:

Sono d'accordo con te....... in genere la musica del periodo classico non ha molto a che fare con quella del periodo romantico....da quello che ne so io, quella del periodo romantico e' in genere parecchio piu' complessa, ci sono abbellimenti che nella classica non usavano, accordi piu' sofisticati, modulazioni molto piu' remote, ecc....nella classica c'erano ancora molti residui del periodo barocco: parti piu' scalari, sequenze, ecc... piu' linearita' e prevedibilita'. Ma questo non significa che Chopin o Brahms siano 'migliori', ma sono piu' complessi.

I agree with you....... generally music from the classical period has not much to do with that of the romantic period....from what I know, romantic period music is generally quite more complex, there are embellishments that they didn't use in the classical era, more sophisticated chords, much more remote modulations, etc....in the classical era there were still many residues of the baroque period: more scalar parts, sequences, etc... more linearity and predictability. But this doesn't mean that Chopin or Brahms are 'better', but they are more complex.

Stellina wrote:

I am pleased to know that 2 years after the diploma... one is still in elementary school

in my opinion, it makes no sense at all. I always play what I like, not what is considered easier or harder. Because, if Clementi isn't Chopin, then he is worth nothing? Who said that? I play Czerny because I like the music.... I like his studies because I learn them quickly and yet I am always learning something, even on a compositional level (a very important point for me, in fact, for me playing the piano comes after writing music).

If you have obtained your piano diploma, instead of feeling down, you should be happy.....if you fill a glass halfway, is it half empty or half full?

Stellina wrote:

I am pleased to know that 2 years after graduation... one is still in elementary school

Well, my message was directed at the technical difficulty and not the artistic aspect, which is subjective. Subjectively, I find much more art in Chopin's studies than in "Gradus ad parnassum," but this is just my opinion; perhaps some people prefer Clementi's Gradus more. I don't think the latter is technically difficult. It was a cross for the eighth [grade], as TTW says, because 23 studies had to be performed, one of which was drawn by lot from numbers 2, 5, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 26, 30, 32, 36, 44, 47, 58, 63, 65, 78, 86, 87, 88, 95, 96, which according to those who selected them were the most significant, both technically and artistically... However, Chopin's studies also appear in the fifth group.

can anyone tell me the order of difficulty for ALL of Czerny's studies? (I mean the various opus numbers, not individual exercises, of course). I am about to leave op. 599 because there are too many exercises in the same key, even though what I have already done has been very useful to me (which in truth I think was a bit too easy for me, but I wanted to 'step back' a bit because I skipped quite a few things during my learning) and I am thinking of starting op. 821, which in my opinion is truly great; they are miniature pieces (actually periods and phrases of 8 bars, I would say this is intermediate-advanced, especially after the first exercises), here is a good copyright-free video to give an idea. As for a piece, I will stick with Czerny studies for classical music because I really like it, in my opinion it has nothing to envy from the other greats. Can anyone tell me if there is a collection of Czerny that lies BETWEEN op. 599 and op. 821? Thanks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPqCI-1NDSI

Open content (youtube)

Regarding the discussion on difficulty, here you find all of Czerny's educational works

http://it.wikipedia....iki/Carl_Czerny

I do not know all the works, so honestly I wouldn't know how to put them all in order of difficulty... which ones are you interested in? That way I can see if they are the same ones I know?

My modest opinion, while maintaining that Czerny's studies are wonderful, is that one should not stay too long on the "study" composition.

The study, although extremely useful, insists on the repetition of a technical difficulty, perhaps skillfully "seasoned" with good Music. Sometimes, as in the case of Chopin, Liszt, and Debussy, studies become concert pieces and mandatory piano "passages." However, it is appropriate to soon venture into other compositions, whether structured or not, where the Author combines various rhythmic and melodic figures, varies the rhythm, enriches agogic indications, etc. In the book "Principi di tecnica pianistica" (Principles of Piano Technique) by A. Cortot, at the end, there is a good classification of the most famous piano compositions according to difficulty and their belonging to the sections into which the book of the great Author and Pianist—a student of a student of Chopin (Matthias)—is divided. Anyway, dear London-based D38, you may have already made these considerations. Bye, Paolo

Thank you Paolo for the interesting considerations, and excuse me but I only saw your response today. I remember that you have often mentioned Cortot's book but I don't know it, so I will see to finding it; the classification of the most famous piano compositions according to difficulty is very interesting; indeed, as a almost total self-taught player, I often choose new pieces to learn based only on the impact of listening to the melody and harmony, without taking too much account of the level of difficulty, so that some turn out much easier, others much more difficult.

In a certain sense, I understand what you mean about the fact that studies, however, lack things that are only found in larger-scale structures; I imagine you are referring especially to the 'development' sections which, in the context of more extended pieces, require more 'remote' contrasts, more distant modulations, etc.

In reality, I am starting to practice pieces that are not studies as well; for me, studies are a bit like a 'magic potion' to go beyond the beginner-intermediate level, in short.

Curiously..... I have been living in England for quite a while and here there are fairly precise systems to 'verify' a pianist's level, for example the ABRSM system; you start from Grade 1 up to Grade 8, the maximum (then after, I think comes the concert pianist level, I am not sure. Unfortunately, I don't know how it works in Italy).

Well, two years ago I decided to take lessons at a school, for the first time because, in effect, by doing it alone I think I have done everything I could. Incredibly, at the audition, while playing half of Mozart's Rondo alla Turca, they passed me to Grade 6. I couldn't believe it.

This piece was the first piece I began to learn (I did everything in reverse), but I didn't even know how to play the final part. I think they were impressed by the fact that I played the first half of the piece quite well.

To say..... for me Grade 6 is completely undeserved, I feel like a 4, yes or no. I think I will have to write a new topic about it. Thank you Paolo for your good advice and thank you anyway to everyone. Long live music

Dear PianistamaggiorenneDi38,

Paolo said something important regarding studies. Except for concert performances, in which precision, especially in studies, is a "Must", in the case of piano technique, studying even an etude by another author should not take more than a few weeks from the pianist. If one then wishes to present a particular study in concert, then certainly one must revisit it and get back to work to clean up all the passages. I believe that, for the purposes of piano technique, it is mentally important to "understand" the study and the specific gesture attached to that type of study.

Regarding the London school, I remember it many years ago; I was about 13 years old, when I went to Ealing Broadway (about 40 minutes from London) to the home of relatives of one of my dearest friends. Two of his cousins had been studying piano for a few years longer than me and they also spoke to me about this graded method. I remember that after they had performed, I sat at the piano and left nothing but ruins in their consciences to the point that they didn't want to play anymore. Not because I was a phenomenon, but because their level was truly poor... I don't remember if they were at grade 5, perhaps.

I don't believe much in this scale of levels, of the sort: "If you play this, you are promoted to level x; if you play that, you are at level y; if you pass the last level, you are a pianist".

Instead, I believe in the journey within a musical path, which starts from the basics and introduces most of the most significant authors in music history, which values the musician and allows them to grow alongside their musical thought. I am in favor of a preparation that is deeper than that of milestones. I am happy for you, that you have decided to live music regardless of those rules in London that I don't like at all and which I even find misleading.