Giuliani and Sor are very different for me, or you could just say that I have a peculiar taste.
Do you mean Sonata clasica? It is an hommage of Sor. I have played it a few years ago and it wasn't bad.
Since you were at Ponce :
Great, isn't it ?
What are your favorite series of etudes, and the most beneficial in your opinion?
Not HVL (although I guess they'd be a very good workout for me at the moment if I accepted the fact that I can't master them yet or in the following months).
Because they're overplayed, and because they're concert études. IMHO if you want to really work deeply on technique, you can't really do it on a virtuoso piece unless you have an already really strong technique (I mean, really strong. The kind of technique those young competition winners have).
Sor's études are all great. The op6 and 29 can be quite difficult. The op31 is easier and the op35 is even easier (but not easy).
The Segovia selection of these etudes is used a lot but you can just sight read all of them and decide for yourself.
They're all very well written, and since Sor was a truly a quite unique genius of the guitar, there are often lots of things to work on in those pieces - but those things are not necessarily apparent. They become very interesting to work on when you're very demanding on tone, phrasing, etc. and when you want to play them with 100% accuracy and the greatest ease possible.
My teacher told me I could work on Aguado's études. They're less cute than Sor's - they sound more like études, while Sor have written some little gems. But they'll make you work on a different side of the guitar technique, since Aguado and Sor had a very different approach to the guitar.
I'd tend to say that Aguado seems more useful for the right hand (he had a very modern RH technique while Sor was still mainly using three fingers) and Sor is amazing for the left hand (particularly the etudes op 6 n3, 6 and 9, as well as op29 n13, 17, 22 and 23).
But IMO the most important thing with études, or technique in general, is the approach. Being very demanding on music and not being satisfied until all the difficulties are perfectly mastered is, IMHO, the key to true progress.
That's why I don't understand why one should work one HVL's #1 for arpeggio technique for instance. Most of the concertists can't play it properly (they miss some strings at some point, make little pauses at the beginning of every arpeggios, etc.) at the speed they want...
There are only amateur or professional-but-with-bad-quality interpretation of the most challenging Sor études on YT, apart from this one :
Last edited by Praeludium; Aug-13-2012 at 20:05.
I'll be more brief than my mate Praeludium and say...
20 Estudios Sencillos by Leo Brouwer
I stumbled upon them recently and found them to be quite interesting and rather different than the usual etudes. They are more modern, and some don't sound devoid of emotions like most etudes. Anyway, because of his etudes my question was raised.
His NUEVOS ESTUDIOS SENCILLOS are also quite interesting!
@Praeludium - Once I tried studying Sor's op. 60 progressive studies, but they were a bit too easy.
But indeed, I should try some of his that you mentioned, since I need to work on my LH a lot.
But don't you think that you can improve your technique by working on hard pieces?
Since you usually encounter the same technique taught in the etudes also in those virtuosi pieces, your way of learning it can be more enjoyable if you actually learn a piece that you want to learn, instead of playing etudes that you don't care much for.
What I meant it's that it's easier to take your time, to work properly and to be relaxed (physically and mentally) while working on a (non-concert) etude. You have more time to think about technique.
But that's maybe also because I don't do exercises, scales and arpeggios at all. I prefer working on music instead. People who practice exercises everyday might think it's not necessary to always work on some études.
Last edited by Praeludium; Aug-14-2012 at 13:00.
This is so great ! She makes me appreciate Barrios. She's clearly a lutenist playing guitar, but it just sounds amazing. What a tone ! Lutenist playing guitar often have incredible results, even though the lute technique doesn't allow them to play brilliant virtuoso pieces.
Just when I was resigned to grow up some nails in order not to be restrained in my studies and repertoire choices ): I don't know what to do. The choice is mainly about following an exotic path which will bring limitations and certainly difficulties or following the normal conservatory path which will allow me to have a broader repertoire and the certitude I won't be rejected because of a strong fundamental choice.
Last edited by Praeludium; Aug-15-2012 at 03:56.
As a classical guitarist, I find the repertoire rather unsatisfying. I wish more quality composers had written for the instrument.