Guys, just to make it clear for everyone this is NOT a real performance (originally played by Filipec), it's just sped up to match the original violin Paganini caprice speed
I always believed Liszt was actually the devil of piano since there's almost no one like him today (no demoralization intended), like cmon he sightread chopin op 10 how
It’s 32nd notes for those unfamiliar with BASIC music theory. The tempo isn’t presto. It’s more allegro than anything. This is perfect. It’s not impossibly fast. It wasn’t for Liszt. The tempo markings from even his manuscripts are the same. The original recording (Filipec) sounds more Lento than andante quasi allegretto. For those who would like basic help in analyzing the note value you will see in the beginning, it’s 32nd notes. Four of them equal an eighth and eight of them equal one beat. Now turn that metronome on and tell me why it’s presto. Liszt composed pieces only he himself could play. This may be a sped up performance, but let me say that this - based on my knowledge of reading and theory - is how its done. Lastly… OH MY… 1:12 I would have spent my life’s savings to see Liszt perform this.
@@Manx123 Yes. In the early period when Liszt was in his 20s and 30s, the pianos had a much lighter action. However he did get accustomed with a more weighted German piano.
@@jaiachin9579 I knew at what point in his career Liszt made this. By "for the time," I mean that for the period, since I'm convinced that the technical proficiency of professional pianists then is lower than it is now.
@@Manx123 How can you be convinced that the technical proficiencies are more complex than they have been before? Modern music such as Sorabji does not deserve to be deemed music. So if you want to claim technique being harder than what is was then, why aren’t there any classical composers now? I’ll say that in the early romantic period, pianos were still considered new and were developing rapidly. Therefore I will agree that not many people would have had the opportunity to play one or have the technique to play. So technique was “new” at the time. I’m convinced that methods have evolved into more sophisticated techniques than taught in centuries past, but the technique itself has always been there. Weighted pianos have always been there since the mid 19th century. Oh would you be even able to imagine seeing Liszt play himself. His playing was seamless. His pyrotechnics would have women and men alike in awe. Sure, not as many pianists as there were back in those days than there are now… sure. But that’s like comparing Mike to LeBron. Different eras of basketball. Different eras of music. The technique was always there and Liszt, among his other great contemporaries, reinvented technique to push piano repertoire to the brink of impossibility.
@@Manx123 people are so quick to point out how many people NOW are technically able to play… but are they really? Liszt was able to play his own pieces how HE wanted them. For example… this Etude no 4. The original version in my own opinion is too slow. Now if you want to go off of what Liszt wants for tempo, then I hope with your knowledge that you agree it’s way too Lento. He wanted this etude to be like a power walk. Not a crawl. Now who can play this piece as it’s supposed to be played? Maybe Cziffra? Even then, I’m still not sure. Liszt was a God at piano. Liszt created the most humble teachers who taught famous pianists we all know of today like Artur Rubinstein. It’s very simple. Without Liszt, technique and music would have been well behind.
I agree lmao, I based it on the original Paganini Etude No.1 speed witch would be impossibile on the piano in the 1838 version [the final version of 1851 is No.4 of the etudes (not the trascendental etudes) after La Campanella witch is No.3]
Belle illusion !!! Cet enregistrement passe en mode accéléré.Aucun pianiste au monde ne pourrait interpréter cette version de l'Étude Transcendante d'après PAGANINI à une visitesse pareille.C'est physiologiquement impossible.J'ai souvent joué cette première version de LISZT , ainsi que la seconde plus près de la partition pour violon , et à mains croisées écrite sur une seule portée.Cette seconde version , bien que très difficile , n'atteint pas les complications techniques de celle de 1838 présentée ici.Je pense qu'il faut beaucoup d'honnêteté envers les personnes qui écoutent ici et pensent qu'il n'y a aucun trucage.Hélas , je dirai que l'enregistrement présente l'Étude dans un mouvement démultiplié.Même F.LISZT n'aurait jamais pu jouer cette version à cette vitesse qui est celle d'un prestissimo.Les articulations des poignets ne pourraient résister à pareille tension plus de 4 mesures. Voilà donc encore une belle arnaque à dénoncer. Lionel VIGNERESSE.
It’s not impossibly fast. The tempo is Allegro. Not presto. Not even close. Liszt wrote pieces he could only play himself. Read the note values and count. Think again.
Maybe even slower than allegro if you want to get really specific. Count the 16th notes if you don’t understand 32nd notes well enough. You just need to have pyrotechnics that only Liszt, and Thalberg had. For those who think modern pianists have just as good technique as Liszt did, be ashamed.
Well he can't at least not with this speed he is a human afterall. Actually almost every classical piece became more faster nowadays. According to Liszt's pupils in 20th century weren't happy with how Liszt's pieces are being played and thought Liszt wouldn't approved. This piece has no tempo mark so it's not same as Paganini's speed 60bpm is pretty much good tempo.
@@japonoyunyapmcskojima8290you’re entitled to your opinion, but nonetheless my guy, these are 32nd notes spanning a majority of the piece. There is no tempo value, but Liszt says to play it Andante quasi Allegretto. If you set the metronome to the exact tempo to this recording, you’ll see that it’s very on point. Liszt played on much lighter action pianos in the mid 1830s among other contemporaries of that time. Besides…. None of us have any facts as to whether or not he could / did compose this and play this at this speed.
@@japonoyunyapmcskojima829060 bpm is slow. No speed marking on the piece you are right, but to think this is the only price of his etudes dedicated to paganinis caprices that has been slowed is ridicoulus. Odds are he could play this, he had enormous hands and the lever action was far lighter than it is today, not to mention he was the greatest pianist to ever live.
Потрясающе. Очень люблю Листа, он добивался оркестрового эффекта при помощи сложных аккордовых пассажей. Так какой инструмент самый сложный? Мне кажется, что всё-таки фортепиано. Пианисты, берегите пальцы!
Thanks for the video And also this is so fast and little bit hard but it s for beginners no but frl the pianist who played this is from another dimension!
@@IEEMAZ_Convoluted_14.2.8.5 I don't like Rousseau at all - for sure he is very impressive but not good. Traum style might not be my favourite but for sure is good music. I did't find any "floating hands" pianist better than Traum yet. Let's rank floating hands: Traum >>>>> Kassia >>> Rousseau >>>>>>>> Rachmaninox >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me (that's why I don't have a channel) I only listen to Traum these days. I tried to check your channel 👍 but the sound quality made it not interesting 👎 Can you rank these pianists? Any other "floating hands" I should know about?
@@antoniomonteiro3698 it doesn’t matter whether I am a good pianist or not to make this statement though… anyways back to the main topic wdym floating hands
This hyper speed (in fact sped-up) recording reminds me of myself shocked by a synthesia video of it about 10 years ago... Now it feels ridiculous in two ways: first, it's formidably difficult by itself, and second, it's absolutely no sense to play at this tempo.
We might ask ourselves why Liszt's 1838 version is 'ideal', what sense would it make in a time when music was only played live, and the timing - of travel, of anything - and even the perception of time itself was quite different from what we have today. Might there not be an explanation that would fit in with Franz Liszt's actual wishes?
That's so true. It is also one of the many reasons of why Gould's playing in general is "slower" compared to the 99% of pianists, metronome times where different since they used pendulums as well.
@@pianistwonderful364 That is, we can assume that most - if not all - composers up to and beyond the mid-19th century understood the metronome as a pendulum (as physicists understand it). An inverted pendulum, in which the number indicates the subdivision of the indicated value. Otherwise, one cannot understand how it is possible that today pianists with incredible technique cannot play the tempi indicated by the metronomes because they are too fast. In that era, ladies of the aristocracy or the bourgeoisie had those same works at home. To do what, exactly? The same applies to the Baroque, which in recent decades has accelerated a lot, reaching tempi that make me think of an athlete's skill but not of a cantabile. Tempi where in a church, in the great halls of ancient palaces, notes overlap each other. Yet many embellishments were also played in fast tempos, not just in adagios.
I mean that even this étude, which is still transcendental, difficult, if we mean that each tick of the metronome equals an octave is playable, not impossible, and logical, not crazy
It's about the speed you'd play it on a violin, the bowing necessary would actually be more difficult at a slower speed. So if you wanted to do a piano version of the violin piece I think you might call this ideal.
@@lorenzobiagini how does that explain performance times being the same length as those of today? Unless this tempi theory applies only to piano repertoire, which was written for much different pianos than today.
I have absolutely *NO* idea how difficult this piece is on piano.... I only know that on the violin the hand has to lay flat and make all sorts of strange shapes when playing at an appropriate tempo. It would be so great to know what is more difficult: the violin or piano version (by someone who's played both, and played them WELL!)
The difficulty with the piano version is that you constantly need to jump in order to hit these intervall-arpeggios, and be very accurate in those super fast jumps. and the staccato at a high tempo makes it even more difficult
@@zorm_ I was going to say: in violin, for chords you can leave down some fingers, but I'm guessing that with piano you would need to change fingers for the same note (so even though you play an E or an A three times in a row, it's a different finger each time and also you have other notes around it). I'd love to hear more about it. I know that [the great international artist] Julia Fischer plays both violin and piano phenomenally....! I think she may be one of few people who would be able to play both of these at a high standard and therefore comment on the difficulty and differences. Anyway, thanks for the reply :) All the best from Australia!
@@liamnevilleviolist1809 Nah, actually you can save many jump by using the same fingers. Take for exemple this séquence of chords : CEG, EGD. Any amateur would use the bad fingering 124, 125 instead of the more valuable 123, 235.
Legend has it that Lisztowsky was able to fit an additional melody to this piece whilst keeping the piece intact. Here's my best try. ruclips.net/video/E1PLWMLv65c/видео.html
That is true, many extremely fast-sounding passages are easier than they sound Other examples include the final recapitulation of Liszt La Campanella (revised) and Paganini's God Save the King's last variation
Guys, just to make it clear for everyone this is NOT a real performance (originally played by Filipec), it's just sped up to match the original violin Paganini caprice speed
Oh, I got it‼️👍
it was sarcasm
I can play it this fast.
It isn't human to play this piece at that speed but your idea is great. It sounds great.
@@sebastiangossio8679 honestly, for short Bursts (
A great piece to recommend to beginners
lmao
Lol 🤣
Hahahaha yes
5min Simply piano be like:
🤣🤣
In 2023, Yi Chung Huang touched at a speed close to that. Absurd and legendary
I wish it was humanly possible to play this. It sounds so much better at this tempo. It flows so very well!
Yi-Chung Huang can
Well it is 'humanly' possible to play this piece this fast but- this piece require very fast hands like the legendary Liszt, he played this piece.
@@itsTRUEtistic and he played some part with only his left hand
this pianist is SO talented
Its an AI XD
@@luisevanperezbasanez944The original recording is of Filipec but this is sped up
@@luisevanperezbasanez944 How does it sound anywhere close to an AI
I can't even form a mental image of how supposedly play this technically.
I love it at this tempo ❤️
My hands are crying and shaking rn😭
But honestly it still sounds beautiful at human speed
Liszt knew his works would be studied after his death and decided to troll everyone i guess.
good lord. Liszt was crazy. Basically a heavy metal headbanger of his day. Lol.
I always believed Liszt was actually the devil of piano since there's almost no one like him today (no demoralization intended), like cmon he sightread chopin op 10 how
@@pianistwonderful364 Yeah, thats just crazy
Yeah and even he can’t play it at this speed
@@notmusictheory74 So sad I don't even have a piano
I am not crazy
It’s 32nd notes for those unfamiliar with BASIC music theory. The tempo isn’t presto. It’s more allegro than anything. This is perfect. It’s not impossibly fast. It wasn’t for Liszt. The tempo markings from even his manuscripts are the same. The original recording (Filipec) sounds more Lento than andante quasi allegretto. For those who would like basic help in analyzing the note value you will see in the beginning, it’s 32nd notes. Four of them equal an eighth and eight of them equal one beat. Now turn that metronome on and tell me why it’s presto.
Liszt composed pieces only he himself could play. This may be a sped up performance, but let me say that this - based on my knowledge of reading and theory - is how its done.
Lastly… OH MY… 1:12
I would have spent my life’s savings to see Liszt perform this.
Liszt (even for the time) had excellent technique, and pianos had significantly lighter action back then.
@@Manx123 Yes. In the early period when Liszt was in his 20s and 30s, the pianos had a much lighter action. However he did get accustomed with a more weighted German piano.
@@jaiachin9579 I knew at what point in his career Liszt made this. By "for the time," I mean that for the period, since I'm convinced that the technical proficiency of professional pianists then is lower than it is now.
@@Manx123 How can you be convinced that the technical proficiencies are more complex than they have been before? Modern music such as Sorabji does not deserve to be deemed music. So if you want to claim technique being harder than what is was then, why aren’t there any classical composers now?
I’ll say that in the early romantic period, pianos were still considered new and were developing rapidly. Therefore I will agree that not many people would have had the opportunity to play one or have the technique to play. So technique was “new” at the time. I’m convinced that methods have evolved into more sophisticated techniques than taught in centuries past, but the technique itself has always been there. Weighted pianos have always been there since the mid 19th century.
Oh would you be even able to imagine seeing Liszt play himself. His playing was seamless. His pyrotechnics would have women and men alike in awe. Sure, not as many pianists as there were back in those days than there are now… sure. But that’s like comparing Mike to LeBron. Different eras of basketball. Different eras of music. The technique was always there and Liszt, among his other great contemporaries, reinvented technique to push piano repertoire to the brink of impossibility.
@@Manx123 people are so quick to point out how many people NOW are technically able to play… but are they really? Liszt was able to play his own pieces how HE wanted them. For example… this Etude no 4. The original version in my own opinion is too slow. Now if you want to go off of what Liszt wants for tempo, then I hope with your knowledge that you agree it’s way too Lento. He wanted this etude to be like a power walk. Not a crawl. Now who can play this piece as it’s supposed to be played? Maybe Cziffra? Even then, I’m still not sure.
Liszt was a God at piano. Liszt created the most humble teachers who taught famous pianists we all know of today like Artur Rubinstein. It’s very simple. Without Liszt, technique and music would have been well behind.
This does not sound like "Andante quasi Allegretto", it just sounds like Prestissimo
I agree lmao, I based it on the original Paganini Etude No.1 speed witch would be impossibile on the piano in the 1838 version [the final version of 1851 is No.4 of the etudes (not the trascendental etudes) after La Campanella witch is No.3]
176 bpm, Wow
They’re 32nd notes though so that’s actually pretty accurate
It's 2/4, so it's actually Andante quasi Allegretto
Sounds like midi shit is what it sounds like
Cool video. Kudos on sharing it with the world. Some of us may have never known about it had you not uploaded it.
“Andante” 😂
I bet Yunchan Lim could play this 😊
Yes when he’s 25
Sounds like Liszt himself playing!
Liszt was an alien when playing piano back then..
Liszt played slow
Belle illusion !!! Cet enregistrement passe en mode accéléré.Aucun pianiste au monde ne pourrait interpréter cette version de l'Étude Transcendante d'après PAGANINI à une visitesse pareille.C'est physiologiquement impossible.J'ai souvent joué cette première version de LISZT , ainsi que la seconde plus près de la partition pour violon , et à mains croisées écrite sur une seule portée.Cette seconde version , bien que très difficile , n'atteint pas les complications techniques de celle de 1838 présentée ici.Je pense qu'il faut beaucoup d'honnêteté envers les personnes qui écoutent ici et pensent qu'il n'y a aucun trucage.Hélas , je dirai que l'enregistrement présente l'Étude dans un mouvement démultiplié.Même F.LISZT n'aurait jamais pu jouer cette version à cette vitesse qui est celle d'un prestissimo.Les articulations des poignets ne pourraient résister à pareille tension plus de 4 mesures.
Voilà donc encore une belle arnaque à dénoncer.
Lionel VIGNERESSE.
i play this while practicing
then i close the video and cry
Техника потрясает👏👏👏👏👏
это ускореная версия если что написали в коментарии закрепленном
Paganini 🤝 Liszt
Destroying musicians' fingers 💀💀💀
Out of this world.
Fantástico! Impresionante esta versión!
This is hilarious to hear so impossibly fast 😂
ikr 😅
It borders on the ridiculous. I slowed it down and it sounded normal.
It’s not impossibly fast. The tempo is Allegro. Not presto. Not even close. Liszt wrote pieces he could only play himself. Read the note values and count. Think again.
Maybe even slower than allegro if you want to get really specific. Count the 16th notes if you don’t understand 32nd notes well enough. You just need to have pyrotechnics that only Liszt, and Thalberg had. For those who think modern pianists have just as good technique as Liszt did, be ashamed.
@@jaiachin9579 dude.... Relax lol
You know, it's funny, I don't know how to read sheet music but I for some reason LOVE SCORE VIDEOS
I understand you completely. It's like looking at a map and not being able to read the street names. You still get the big picture.
@@bobschaaf2549 Indeed
How Liszt could play it this fast!
Liszt played some parts with only his left hand
Well he can't at least not with this speed he is a human afterall. Actually almost every classical piece became more faster nowadays. According to Liszt's pupils in 20th century weren't happy with how Liszt's pieces are being played and thought Liszt wouldn't approved. This piece has no tempo mark so it's not same as Paganini's speed 60bpm is pretty much good tempo.
@@japonoyunyapmcskojima8290you’re entitled to your opinion, but nonetheless my guy, these are 32nd notes spanning a majority of the piece. There is no tempo value, but Liszt says to play it Andante quasi Allegretto. If you set the metronome to the exact tempo to this recording, you’ll see that it’s very on point. Liszt played on much lighter action pianos in the mid 1830s among other contemporaries of that time.
Besides…. None of us have any facts as to whether or not he could / did compose this and play this at this speed.
@@japonoyunyapmcskojima8290Liszt’s skill is unmatched my anyone alive… We cannot tell. But this speed is godly to play at
@@japonoyunyapmcskojima829060 bpm is slow. No speed marking on the piece you are right, but to think this is the only price of his etudes dedicated to paganinis caprices that has been slowed is ridicoulus. Odds are he could play this, he had enormous hands and the lever action was far lighter than it is today, not to mention he was the greatest pianist to ever live.
Потрясающе. Очень люблю Листа, он добивался оркестрового эффекта при помощи сложных аккордовых пассажей. Так какой инструмент самый сложный? Мне кажется, что всё-таки фортепиано.
Пианисты, берегите пальцы!
This Piano 8 Hands literature is really starting to grow on me.
This is bonkers!!
1:26 damm
Thanks for the video
And also this is so fast and little bit hard but it s for beginners
no but frl the pianist who played this is from another dimension!
Sounds like Hamelin playing.
Volodos'd be like 😮
Average Cziffra warm up
I want Yunchan Lim play this.
Finally it sounds satisfying. 😂😂
i play this at like 70 percent speed because this is sooooo fast lol
Liszt when using 1% of his power:
listening to this video at .25 sounds so cool ...
LaDivinaFanatics interpretation is faster than the original filipec recording
traum is actually practicing the 1838 set right now, im looking forward to his take
I’m not…
@@IEEMAZ_Convoluted_14.2.8.5 oh, come Traum is ok :)
@@antoniomonteiro3698 who’s better then, Traum or Rousseau
@@IEEMAZ_Convoluted_14.2.8.5
I don't like Rousseau at all - for sure he is very impressive but not good.
Traum style might not be my favourite but for sure is good music.
I did't find any "floating hands" pianist better than Traum yet.
Let's rank floating hands: Traum >>>>> Kassia >>> Rousseau >>>>>>>> Rachmaninox >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me (that's why I don't have a channel)
I only listen to Traum these days.
I tried to check your channel 👍 but the sound quality made it not interesting 👎
Can you rank these pianists? Any other "floating hands" I should know about?
@@antoniomonteiro3698 it doesn’t matter whether I am a good pianist or not to make this statement though… anyways back to the main topic wdym floating hands
Magnifico!
60th sub!
Thank you for the support
thank You for making awsome content of the best copys I could find (:
LDF played it as close to this as i i think anyone is realistically going to ever get.
This hyper speed (in fact sped-up) recording reminds me of myself shocked by a synthesia video of it about 10 years ago... Now it feels ridiculous in two ways: first, it's formidably difficult by itself, and second, it's absolutely no sense to play at this tempo.
So did I back then x0
Obviously....
ギリギリ一人で鳴らせる限界に限りなく近い譜面か？！
this speed is impossible normally
I think Cziffra would could play this at this tempo haha)
Brilliant!!! Bravo!!! Love it sooo much!!! 👏👏👏❤️❤️❤️🎶🎵🎶🎵🎶🎵🎶🎵🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹😇😇😇
It's way too fast. It's kind of just aesthetic we get, the music is a bit blurred. But then again it is an etude
Just founded audiorecording by Liszt playing himself
WHERE
bravura Liszt was something else
英文の固定コメントをお読みください。
｢実際にこのテンポでは弾いていません｣と説明を書き加えて下さっています。
One of Ling Ling's warm up pieces
We might ask ourselves why Liszt's 1838 version is 'ideal', what sense would it make in a time when music was only played live, and the timing - of travel, of anything - and even the perception of time itself was quite different from what we have today. Might there not be an explanation that would fit in with Franz Liszt's actual wishes?
That's so true. It is also one of the many reasons of why Gould's playing in general is "slower" compared to the 99% of pianists, metronome times where different since they used pendulums as well.
@@pianistwonderful364 That is, we can assume that most - if not all - composers up to and beyond the mid-19th century understood the metronome as a pendulum (as physicists understand it). An inverted pendulum, in which the number indicates the subdivision of the indicated value. Otherwise, one cannot understand how it is possible that today pianists with incredible technique cannot play the tempi indicated by the metronomes because they are too fast. In that era, ladies of the aristocracy or the bourgeoisie had those same works at home. To do what, exactly? The same applies to the Baroque, which in recent decades has accelerated a lot, reaching tempi that make me think of an athlete's skill but not of a cantabile. Tempi where in a church, in the great halls of ancient palaces, notes overlap each other. Yet many embellishments were also played in fast tempos, not just in adagios.
I mean that even this étude, which is still transcendental, difficult, if we mean that each tick of the metronome equals an octave is playable, not impossible, and logical, not crazy
It's about the speed you'd play it on a violin, the bowing necessary would actually be more difficult at a slower speed. So if you wanted to do a piano version of the violin piece I think you might call this ideal.
@@lorenzobiagini how does that explain performance times being the same length as those of today? Unless this tempi theory applies only to piano repertoire, which was written for much different pianos than today.
I believe this has been sped up artificially, because the sound quality is a bit weird.
That's because it is.
Very good!
I see the player looking like he's having a seizure while playing this piece.
Ah yes this piece is definitely "Andante" 💀
No it’s Andante quasi allegretto
Thought the video was set on higher speed when it started ... apparently not
Then fun part is how it's "Andante."
I have absolutely *NO* idea how difficult this piece is on piano.... I only know that on the violin the hand has to lay flat and make all sorts of strange shapes when playing at an appropriate tempo. It would be so great to know what is more difficult: the violin or piano version (by someone who's played both, and played them WELL!)
The difficulty with the piano version is that you constantly need to jump in order to hit these intervall-arpeggios, and be very accurate in those super fast jumps. and the staccato at a high tempo makes it even more difficult
@@zorm_ I was going to say: in violin, for chords you can leave down some fingers, but I'm guessing that with piano you would need to change fingers for the same note (so even though you play an E or an A three times in a row, it's a different finger each time and also you have other notes around it). I'd love to hear more about it.
I know that [the great international artist] Julia Fischer plays both violin and piano phenomenally....! I think she may be one of few people who would be able to play both of these at a high standard and therefore comment on the difficulty and differences.
Anyway, thanks for the reply :) All the best from Australia!
@@liamnevilleviolist1809 Nah, actually you can save many jump by using the same fingers. Take for exemple this séquence of chords : CEG, EGD. Any amateur would use the bad fingering 124, 125 instead of the more valuable 123, 235.
So hard it can't be played
Mostly because at 1:28 ur suposed to do all chords with the left hand
LOL this has to be some sort of computer simulation.
I bet Liszt would have played this at 1.25x speed. And yes, i did watch it at 1.25 speed and its *FAST*
Alkan reply: they can also play it only with the left foot bandaged
Bravíssimo!
I love the caption 😂
ling ling play this when 1 minute old, lah
Isn't Ling Ling a violinist?
lingling knew violin at 40 second old...
I'm going to do it. It is possible at this tempo.
"Andante quasi Allegretto" whereas the Paganini's сaprice is "Andante". So Liszt wanted it to be played faster than the Paganini's сaprice.
Its so so hrad
Beautimous!
Legend has it that Lisztowsky was able to fit an additional melody to this piece whilst keeping the piece intact. Here's my best try.
ruclips.net/video/E1PLWMLv65c/видео.html
Too slow, but sounds okay.
@@Constitution1789 That’s probably because you’re used to listening to the piece around 2x of that video
@@ValkyRiver I prefer it at a faster tempo. Sounds more lively, virtuosic.
@@Constitution1789I wonder if you can make a video and show us how you would play it 😂😂
@@BH-2 Your anger and ignorance are amusing. I'm honored the truth of my comment triggered you to reply.
✘ Andante quasi Allegretto
✔ MOLTO VIVO
ikr 😅
This song require at least eight fingers on each hand, making sixteen.
Or 3 mini-fingers on one finger xD
Andrei Gavrilov plays Bach's WTC the same way. Weird but interesting 🤔
Apparently, I can't play piano very well.
IMPOSSIBILE
Sounds like motorcycle engine
1オクターヴ以上の音域がある4和音を、連続で、かつ高速で弾けるはずがない。
こんな超人が実在するのだから信じられん。
やっぱりリアルに弾いてるわけじゃなかった😅
リストの演奏会で失神した客がいたの、本当だったんやな
Insane !
I think this is too fast.
Real performance is about 60bpm, and I think 75~80bpm would be right tempo.
If you go to the real version and speed it up 1.5 times you'll get this .but speeding it up to 1.25 times is perfect
Wait is this just the original put on double speed, no wonder it sounds sooooooooooooooooooooo fast
Not quite double speed
But even playing it slowly is extremely difficult, much more than it sounds
Why is it by paganini tho
someone just let off a machine gun
これ弾けるの宇宙人ですか？
凄すぎる☆🎶
It's not me playing it
このテンポで弾ける人は見たことないですね。
@@しがないクラブ
英文の固定コメントをお読みください。
｢実際にこのテンポでは弾いていません｣と説明を書き加えて下さっています。
@@Taka-Musics-Labo
知ってます笑
早送りされてるのは承知です。
丁寧にありがとうございます。
day 3 of Simply piano
is it me or is the recapitulation with larger chords easier than the very beginning
I actually thought of that too 😅👍
That is true, many extremely fast-sounding passages are easier than they sound
Other examples include the final recapitulation of Liszt La Campanella (revised) and Paganini's God Save the King's last variation
anyone please ask lang lang to play this
1:53
had to check if my youtube playback speed was on 2x
it was not...
wow
i dont think langlang can play the piece without mistakes.
Is this a Nikolai Petrov playing sped up?
Со стороны Листа это просто гениальное издевательство над простыми смерными.
MAMMA MIAAAAAAAAAAA !!!!!!!!!!
Is this played by human hands?
I don’t think so. It is impossible playing double notes in this speed.
yes and no at the same time 😅
Это дисклавир))
not everyone can play this piece, it requires extraordinary skill
Now try Mereaux's Etude 25 Toccata in C major like this
I will lol
where is the human version?
ruclips.net/video/HRFZvFRufBg/видео.html click its the versionn
ruclips.net/video/qVuhHb_oZXo/видео.html here
I hate piano. Every time I think I'm getting good youtube just has to ruin my day.
That's the mood of every musician 🥲 I can feel that...
I think you just need motivation to practice
how liszt playing this etude🤔
Silent-movie chase scene "music"