Very difficult music by J S Bach and others.

[Mookalafalas]

I was reading some old reviews from an ancient Hungarian critic I am very fond of and thought of this thread.  Anybody familiar with this composer or work?  Is it as tough to play as the reviewer makes it sound?

CD from Hyperion
Charles-Valentin Alkan: Concerto for solo piano, Op. 39, Nos. 8–10; Troisième recueil de chants, Op. 65. Marc-André Hamelin, piano. CDA67569 (recorded 2006, released 2007).

Alkan, a contemporary of Chopin, Liszt, and Schumann, sounds like a pastiche of all three on steroids, very intense, wayward, and crotchety. It's great stuff, but you don't have to take it too seriously if you don't want to, and it's almost impossible to play. Of course, to Marc-André Hamelin everything is possible; he sails through the fiendish passages with incredible ease and panache. The man is not only a world-class artist but possibly the greatest-ever acrobat of the keyboard. The speed, articulation, and clarity of his finger work are simply beyond belief, and at the same time the music keeps singing regardless of the complications. His playing is much more controlled and transparent than that of, say, Horowitz or anyone else. The piano recording, a UK job, is somewhat on the dry side and wonderfully clear.

[jochanaan]

Some day, when I've got an uninterrupted hour or so or whatever it takes, I do want to hear that Alkan concerto.

[kishnevi]

I was reading some old reviews from an ancient Hungarian critic I am very fond of and thought of this thread.  Anybody familiar with this composer or work?  Is it as tough to play as the reviewer makes it sound?

CD from Hyperion
Charles-Valentin Alkan: Concerto for solo piano, Op. 39, Nos. 8–10; Troisième recueil de chants, Op. 65. Marc-André Hamelin, piano. CDA67569 (recorded 2006, released 2007).

Alkan, a contemporary of Chopin, Liszt, and Schumann, sounds like a pastiche of all three on steroids, very intense, wayward, and crotchety. It's great stuff, but you don't have to take it too seriously if you don't want to, and it's almost impossible to play. Of course, to Marc-André Hamelin everything is possible; he sails through the fiendish passages with incredible ease and panache. The man is not only a world-class artist but possibly the greatest-ever acrobat of the keyboard. The speed, articulation, and clarity of his finger work are simply beyond belief, and at the same time the music keeps singing regardless of the complications. His playing is much more controlled and transparent than that of, say, Horowitz or anyone else. The piano recording, a UK job, is somewhat on the dry side and wonderfully clear.

There is or was a Youtube of Hamelin playing the Alkan concerto,  so you can see for yourself.  I know one nonGMGer who admitted to gaping astonishment and admiration after seeing it. 
I have the CD, and it is excellent.  The only reason it would not be suitable for you is the fact that it is not a box set.

[North Star]

I was reading some old reviews from an ancient Hungarian critic I am very fond of and thought of this thread.  Anybody familiar with this composer or work?  Is it as tough to play as the reviewer makes it sound?

CD from Hyperion
Charles-Valentin Alkan: Concerto for solo piano, Op. 39, Nos. 8–10; Troisième recueil de chants, Op. 65. Marc-André Hamelin, piano. CDA67569 (recorded 2006, released 2007).

Alkan, a contemporary of Chopin, Liszt, and Schumann, sounds like a pastiche of all three on steroids, very intense, wayward, and crotchety. It’s great stuff, but you don’t have to take it too seriously if you don’t want to, and it’s almost impossible to play. Of course, to Marc-André Hamelin everything is possible; he sails through the fiendish passages with incredible ease and panache. The man is not only a world-class artist but possibly the greatest-ever acrobat of the keyboard. The speed, articulation, and clarity of his finger work are simply beyond belief, and at the same time the music keeps singing regardless of the complications. His playing is much more controlled and transparent than that of, say, Horowitz or anyone else. The piano recording, a UK job, is somewhat on the dry side and wonderfully clear.

Alkan is great! Here is his thread. The Hamelin Sonatas disc and Gibbons' recording of Alkan's magnum opus, the minor key etudes, Op. 39, are brilliant.

[Ken B]

I was reading some old reviews from an ancient Hungarian critic I am very fond of and thought of this thread.  Anybody familiar with this composer or work?  Is it as tough to play as the reviewer makes it sound?

CD from Hyperion
Charles-Valentin Alkan: Concerto for solo piano, Op. 39, Nos. 8–10; Troisième recueil de chants, Op. 65. Marc-André Hamelin, piano. CDA67569 (recorded 2006, released 2007).

Alkan, a contemporary of Chopin, Liszt, and Schumann, sounds like a pastiche of all three on steroids, very intense, wayward, and crotchety. It's great stuff, but you don't have to take it too seriously if you don't want to, and it's almost impossible to play. Of course, to Marc-André Hamelin everything is possible; he sails through the fiendish passages with incredible ease and panache. The man is not only a world-class artist but possibly the greatest-ever acrobat of the keyboard. The speed, articulation, and clarity of his finger work are simply beyond belief, and at the same time the music keeps singing regardless of the complications. His playing is much more controlled and transparent than that of, say, Horowitz or anyone else. The piano recording, a UK job, is somewhat on the dry side and wonderfully clear.

Precis version: he's Canadian. We all know that betokens supreme excellence! 

[amw]

The Concerto for Solo Piano is actually a great work precisely because it contains no extraneous virtuosity. It is exactly as difficult as it needs to be in order to encompass the forces of piano and orchestra in a single instrument. The length is similarly not excessive when you compare it to the other most ambitious concertos-with-orchestra of the Romantic era, with which it rightfully belongs rather than considered as a solo piano work: Brahms 1 & 2, Beethoven's Emperor, Schumann, Tchaikovsky 1 & 2. Consider it in that light and it should make a lot more sense.

Hamelin pulls it off pretty well in contrasting the 'solo' and 'tutti' passages, and convincingly conveys the sense of the instrument straining against its bonds that is essential to the work.

[Ken B]

Hamelin pulls it off pretty well in contrasting the 'solo' and 'tutti' passages, and convincingly conveys the sense of the instrument straining against its bonds that is essential to the work.

Yet some people agree with Busoni in thinking that very feeling marks a failure in Bach's chaconne for violin.

[amw]

Yet some people agree with Busoni in thinking that very feeling marks a failure in Bach's chaconne for violin.

Indeed. They also thought it marked a failure in Alkan, Beethoven (etc). One of those people was Karl Klindworth who arranged the Concerto for Solo Piano for piano and orchestra. It's rather inferior to the original, but you can hear it on Naxos, I think. Weingartner's Hammerklavier-for-orchestra has been mentioned already, not to mention the significantly-more-tasteful-than-Busoni-but-still-missing-the-point arrangement of the Bach Chaconne for violin and piano by Schumann.

It is worth hearing these things, but ultimately, all music is constructed out of various forms of constraint. The possibilities and limitations of these constraints are what inspired the music to be created in the first place—the extent to which an instrument can be used or not used, the possibilities inherent in a tonal system or lack of one, strict formal structures etc, etc. Everything that tries to take preexisting material and force it within a different set of constraints is, essentially, a different inspiration. Often a more conventional one, for better or worse.

[Ken B]

The Concerto for Solo Piano is actually a great work precisely because it contains no extraneous virtuosity. It is exactly as difficult as it needs to be in order to encompass the forces of piano and orchestra in a single instrument. The length is similarly not excessive when you compare it to the other most ambitious concertos-with-orchestra of the Romantic era, with which it rightfully belongs rather than considered as a solo piano work: Brahms 1 & 2, Beethoven's Emperor, Schumann, Tchaikovsky 1 & 2. Consider it in that light and it should make a lot more sense.

Hamelin pulls it off pretty well in contrasting the 'solo' and 'tutti' passages, and convincingly conveys the sense of the instrument straining against its bonds that is essential to the work.

Now I am very intrigued. I have Smith's recording buried somewhere. I have no real memory of it. Is it any good?

[amw]

I have never heard his performance so can't tell you. Hope so!

[The Six]

This may not be very difficult to play but the harmonies within the first minute of this one are rather extreme for the Baroque period.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDG3JTWlzz4

[North Star]

...but the harmonies within the first minute of this one are rather extreme for the Baroque period.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDG3JTWlzz4

And then there's this. 
https://www.youtube.com/v/iwpwr0MYNWc