It's been discussed here, but possibly on a deleted cafe thread or something. They are sort of in order, but I guess it's whether a particular study addresses something you have a knack for or not. Some say No1 is a level 9, some say a level 3; I know it's the first one I learned, bu if you do all the muting necessary to play it well, it gets pretty tough, while merely hitting all the notes is pretty easy. No 2 and 3 are very easy, if you ask me, 4 is sort of like a harder version of 3, 5 and 6 only fractionally harder. No 9 is easier than 7 or 8 for me. I'd say that 10 and 11 are of similar difficulty, but I think 10 is harder to play well. No 12 is not all that bad at slow pace, but I could never get it up to anything like a decent speed -- not that I worked on it much. No 13 is easier than any since No 6 and remains one of my staple pieces to this day. No 14 is harder than 15, 16 is starting to get up there, and the final three are quite a bit harder than the first three, no doubt. Once upon a time, I could get through No 20 clean, but there was a lot of tension and effort and it sounded like crap -- at the time I couldn't handle No 19 at all. I still can't seem to play 19 for some reason, maybe because I've got too many neurons dedicated to doing it wrong at this point. Fortunately, my return to No 17 recently has gone a lot better.boral wrote:By progressive I meant "gradual"; from less difficult to difficultboral wrote:Are the choice of 20 etudes of Sor by Segovia arranged in a progressive way ?
More than welcome. (Hope I don't catch TOO much flak for my opinions from the real players here. ) And I never even made a serious attempt at 18 -- seems really tough.boral wrote:freestroke,
Many many thanks for your reply.
I really didn't want to jump into the etudes without some sort of explanation.
I am learning by myself and so this is valuable information.
Sorry for my bad English
For what it is worth, on another thread, it was suggested these are just Segovia's favorites. I will leave it to the experts here to extrapolate further whether or not they are progressive. They are enjoyable to play. If you are looking for progressive studies, you may want to explore Carcassi's 25 Etudes (Opus 60), I find them to be challenging, interesting and musically satisfying. IMHO.boral wrote:Are the choice of 20 etudes of Sor by Segovia arranged in a progressive way ?
WOW thanks for the british Sor websiteCuyler wrote:I would think just by looking at the list of Segovia's Sor studies, that they must not be in progressive order because they are not in the same order that Sor used. Why would Segovia come up with his own numbering?
Too bad there is no overview that explains what each piece is supposed to teach. I don't think it has been mentioned on this thread, but there is a nice website on Sor called 19-Century Guitar Performance.
Ah.. I see related discussions in these other threads:
I found the first few Sor opus 60 studies in a library book and now I want more. I tried to play the B minor Etude from Noad's Solo Guitar Playing -- it is still well beyond my capabilities, but I am not letting that discouraging me. I discovered the Opus 35 mp3's posted by Wim Hoogewerf -- they are wonderful listening and I am sure trying to learn them has great educational value.Evelyn wrote:I sight read from my book (Mel Bay's "Complete Sor Studies") every day and at the same time I look for my next victim. So many of them are truly gems. Many of them are way too hard for me! But I can tell that my reading and playing are getting much better.
Cuyler wrote:I found the first few Sor opus 60 studies in a library book and now I want more. I tried to play the B minor Etude from Noad's Solo Guitar Playing -- it is still well beyond my capabilities, but I am not letting that discouraging me. I discovered the Opus 35 mp3's posted by Wim Hoogewerf -- they are wonderful listening and I am sure trying to learn them has great educational value.Evelyn wrote:I sight read from my book (Mel Bay's "Complete Sor Studies") every day and at the same time I look for my next victim. So many of them are truly gems. Many of them are way too hard for me! But I can tell that my reading and playing are getting much better.
It isn't hard to find the complete set of studies on the Internet (and there are many of them in the Delcamp collection). So I am not sure it's necessary to buy Mel Bay's Complete Sor Studies book. There is also a Tecla version that I think is just a cleaned up facsimile of those public domain Sor scores.
However, I just discovered that Mel Bay also has a collection titled Fernando Sor: The Complete Studies for Guitar in Urtext (it is easy to find if you google "Sor utext"). I was not familiar with the term "urtext" until I looked it up on Wikipedia. At first, I thought it might mean the music is just described like "ur.. the first note is C, followed by an ur.. B and then ur.. a G".
Anyway, does anyone recommend this urtext edition of Sor's studies? It looks useful for clueless people like me because it has lots of recommendations for both left and right hand fingering. Also there are brief descriptions of the pieces. An appendix even gives a suggested grading of the pieces (a table categorizing the levels of difficulty). You can read these sections if you locate the book on that site named after a Brazilian river and do a "Search Inside This Book" for the word "grading".
There is also a Segovia edition of the Sor studies. How are they different than the real studies written by Sor? I am more inclined to get the complete set written the way the original composer intended.