In which order do you study concertos?

Edited: October 25, 2019, 4:41 PM · Hello,
My question is in the title

Just, please ,begin from Mozart 3 violin concerto to the hardest(probably Paganini n°1+Sauret Cadenza)


Replies (14)

October 25, 2019, 7:15 PM · Once you reach the "professional" repertoire, Bruch level and beyond, concertos are best thought of in tiers of difficulty rather than a sequence per se.

Dorothy DeLay's concerto sequence is a pretty good guide to the tiers.

Edited: October 25, 2019, 7:18 PM · There are lots of lists already out there if you google them. No two people will agree on the exact order. Also you can't do them all. Viotti alone wrote dozens of them.
October 26, 2019, 2:57 PM · I'd say preferably not the order in which Eric Morecambe played the Grieg.
October 26, 2019, 3:23 PM · These answers don't helped me(but it will if we tell me how Delay's concerto sequence with groups works)
Can someone tell me that ?
October 26, 2019, 3:52 PM · John, LOL thats funny ^_^
October 26, 2019, 5:48 PM · Each of the groups contains concertos in roughly ascending order of difficulty.

The student is expected to do most or all of Group I before moving to the concertos of Group II. Group III is generally only done once the student has a repertoire broad enough (i.e. most of both Group I and II) to start doing the less common 20th century works.

October 26, 2019, 8:52 PM · Here is the Sassmanshaus list:

October 27, 2019, 10:50 AM · It also depends on how young you are and how fast you learn and what your goals are. If you are wanting to go the professional route, you will want to learn all the major concertos from the DeLay list in Category I. You can skip a few (like Conus and all 3 Vieuxtemps) but you need to do most of them. My son (age 14, with professional aspirations) is on his 14th in Category 1. But others in his program do more skipping around in Category 1 because they have less time before conservatory auditions. You definitely don't want to go exactly in the listed order, though the pieces are generally listed from easiest to hardest. For example, my kids did 1 Bach, 1 Haydn, 1 Mozart, then Kabalevsky, back to the other Bach, then Mendelssohn then back to another Mozart. Sometimes my older one has gone back to pick up pieces he missed, like Mozart 3 and now Barber.

His sequence, if I remember correctly, was:

Bach a minor
Accolay (not on list)
Haydn G major
DeBeriot 9 (not on list)
Mozart 5 A major (probably should have done #3 first though)
Bach E Major
Mendelssohn E (probably played this too early)
Mozart 4 D major
Zigeunerweisen (concert piece not on list)
Intro and Rondo Capriccioso (concert piece not on list)
Wieniawski d minor
Mozart 3 (filling in skipped piece)
Saint Saens 3
Vieuxtemps 5
Tzigane (concert piece not on list)
Barber (filling in skipped piece)

October 27, 2019, 2:11 PM · Personally I think there is no specific order and it really comes down to the student's strengths and weaknesses, and what music they are motivated to play. My former teacher once had a student who played Bruch then Intro and Rondo Capricioso and then Brahms. And I remember hearing the Brahms and being shocked at how amazing it was (my professional Musician mother agreed). Look, some teachers teach Mendelssohn after Bruch or teach Lalo after Mendelssohn. Others may teach Mendelssohn after Sibelius and before Shostakovich. There is no one proven method that works. Of course it's definitely not a good idea to jump from something like conus or Bruch all the way to Brahms or Beethoven. My Personal "sequence" was :

Rieding G major
Mozart 3
Vivaldi Four seasons
De Beriot Scene de Ballet
Beethoven Romance in F
Mozart 4
Bach E Major
Viotti 22
Saint Saens 3
Scottish Fantasy
Tchaikovsky (currently polishing for college auditions)
Dvorak (currently learning)

+various bach, showpieces, modern pieces and sonatas

October 27, 2019, 3:47 PM · When I see such progress lists I have to wonder what 'I did' means? What level did the piece get to, with respect to (eg) movements, tempo, musicality, lack of errors; before you moved on to the next one.
Edited: October 27, 2019, 4:20 PM · Elise, good point. "I did" for me means being able to perform the piece for a grade examiner, before an audition panel, or an audience (doesn't matter what sort of audience, or a piano accompaniment instead of orchestra). Any of these should be pushing you to your top level, otherwise you've wasted your time. In my days as a cellist I reckon I could comfortably count the number of my "I dids" at grade 8 standard on my fingers.
October 27, 2019, 4:30 PM · Thanks for your answers
October 27, 2019, 6:22 PM · I have the same definition as Trevor Jennings. I consider a piece "played" when I've performed it to a good standard in front of an audience.

The Delay sequence is a good guide, but it doesn't account for people who didn't have expert teaching growing up, and therefore have certain weaknesses that make it hard to play certain pieces. For example I know someone who did Prokofiev 1 (and played it well!) before they learned Mendelssohn.

October 27, 2019, 6:36 PM · I did a Haydn G, Mozart 3, a whole pile of Viottis, deBeriots, and a Rode (plus lots of the intermediate showpiece type works) before finally doing Mendelssohn (just the third movement). Then Saint-Saens 3, Mozart 4, Barber (because I really wanted to play it), Prokofiev 1, and Tchaikovsky.

When I resumed playing as an adult, we did the remaining movements of Mendelssohn, Bruch, Khachaturian, Prokofiev 1 (again, as a work for a concerto competition), Lalo, Zigeunerweisen, Paganini 1 (not completed), Brahms. Plus a lot of intermediate encore-type works. This wasn't so much a deliberate pedagogical order as a filling in of repertoire I wanted to play.

On my second return, we've done Mozart 5 (just the first movement), Glazunov (with orchestra), Prokofiev 2, Beethoven, Brandenburg 5 (with orchestra) Lark Ascending (with orchestra), Dvorak, and now Shostakovich 1 and the Mozart Sinfonia Concertante (for performance with orchestra). Plus quite a lot of works for violin and piano, both virtuosic and sonatas. This has been partially pedagogical focus and partially filling in repertoire and catering to the demands/opportunities of solo chances.

Wieniawski 2, Sibelius, the Bruch Scottish Fantasy, and the remainder of Mozart 5 are on my bucket list (and I think are the three major works missing from my repertoire). I think it'd be fun to learn Kabalevsky, which I've never played and assume would probably be enjoyable to breeze through. We're not really doing the concerto repertoire very thoroughly now since I tend to have many more recital opportunities though.

This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.

Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram Email is made possible by...

Shar Music
Shar Music

Yamaha Silent Violin
Yamaha Silent Violin

Corilon Violins
Corilon Violins

Pirastro Strings
Pirastro Strings

Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases

Find an Online Music Camp
Find an Online Music Camp

Bay Fine Strings Violin Shop

Bobelock Cases


Los Angeles Violin Shop

Nazareth Gevorkian Violins

Wangbow Violin Bow Workshop

Laurie's Books

Discover the best of in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews. Interviews Volume 1 Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn Interviews Volume 2 Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine