Rachmaninov Concerti

[arensky]

Here it is, the Poll of Polls!

I wish I could tell you how I think this wil turn out, but then the cranks would vote another way just to prove me wrong; anyway...

Favorite and hated recordings and performances.....

Sick of that one? Don't hear that one enough? Type away, sound off!

[presto agitato]

Op 30 with Volodos

Please also mention your favorite recording.

[arensky]

My favorite is the 4th Concerto, my favorite recording of it is Michelangeli's

My favorite recording of the 3rd is a live recording with bad sound quality from the 40's; Kapell with the Toronto Symphony

Of the 2sd and the Rhapsody, again Kapell with the Robin Hood Dell Orchestra(Phladelphia Orch in the summer). Rubinstein runs a close second with his 1956 recording of both these pieces.

For the 1st, Rachmaninov himself. and Richter's incredible too.

I feel that Kapell understood Rachmaninov better than anyone, including Rachmaninov himself. I wonder if Rachmaninov ever heard young William Kapell, and what he thought of him. He hated Rubinstein....

[pianistimo]

rhapsody on a theme of paganini.  don't know who i would wish to play it. 

[Waldszenen]

No. 2 is my favourite


No. 1 with Janis
No. 2 with Cziffra
No. 3 with 1978 Horowitz, Pletnev and 1961 Janis
No. 4 I've never heard (shoot me)
Paganini with Pletnev and Rubinstein

[shasta]

Ashkenazy's Paganini that he did under Previn's baton.  Breathtaking.

[musicsdarkangel]

no 1 - Ashkenazy
no 2 - Van Cliburn
no 3 - Van Cliburn
no 4 - Michelangeli
Rhapsody on a theme by Pagannini - Ashkenazy


I do feel that Ashkenazy owns the rhapsody.

[pseudopianist]

Rap,1,2,4,3

[pita bread]

Paganini Rhapsody

[Lebenssturme]

Iam playing now paganini rhapsody and its a delicious challenge to me!
But my favourite, really favourite concert is the 2nd one, played by Sviatoslav Richter!
Soon in the begining, the great chords as imponent bells...WOW!

[maul]

I really like the first movement of #2, but overall, I enjoy #3 the most.

[thierry13]

I feel that Kapell understood Rachmaninov better than anyone, including Rachmaninov himself. I wonder if Rachmaninov ever heard young William Kapell, and what he thought of him. He hated Rubinstein....

You may like kapell more than rachmaninoff, he can't understand rachmaninoff more than him himself. Rachmaninoff is, for sure, the closest to what he tought was the piece.

[ralessi]

Where are the Corelli Variations?!??!?!?! anyways, the first movement of 2 is F**KING GENIUS! (quoting a teacher) and the 3rd movement is so awesome, and exciting.  but the 3rd movement of 3, d minor is ABSOLUTELY BREATHTAKING! espceially! with Volodos playing.  Van Cliburn is ewwwwwww..imo of course. 

1.  Dont listen to many recordings of it..not one his best works....imo
2.  Bronfman is excellent! but DOES NOT COMPARE to Cziffra.  Nobody plays like that anymore.....
3.  Horowitz 78 horowitz is also excellent but does not compare to Volodos' recording...played with such passion, not to mention absolute perfection (and live)
4.  The only recording i have heard is John Lill, he is also the ONLY recording i would like to hear..horrid piece. 
Paganini.  Im going to have to say Bill Murray. 
Corelli.  I do like John Lill playing that one. 

as for LEAST liked recordings.....
1.   Dont remember....
2.  Zoltan! *makes z shape with hands* (dude wheres my car?? ok im done..)
3.  Van Cliburn...1958 at carnegie under Kondrashin
4.  John Lill
Paganini.  Only listened to a few recordings but Ashkenazy seemed to play it pretty well...i think..
Corelli.  Only heard Lill playing it...

[viking]

I love them all, except maybe the 4th, but the 4th is still a masterpiece.  I would most like to be able to play the 1st and 3rd.  However, I love listening to the Rhapsody more than all of them.  1st concerto is an extremely close second.
SAM

[arensky]

You may like kapell more than rachmaninoff, he can't understand rachmaninoff more than him himself. Rachmaninoff is, for sure, the closest to what he tought was the piece.

Do you compose? It's startling to hear something conceived in your own mind interpreted by another person, (hopefully well)  and also very illuminating. Composers are often too close to the piece to view it objectively; an interpreter may shed light on or reveal something in a piece that the composer didn't notice, as Ravel, Copland and Berio have pointed out, and I have experienced for myself. In the case of Rachmaninov, who was one of the great pianists of all time and the last great pianist/composer, it is the same; he preferred the Rachmaninov playing of Moisewitsch and Horowitz to his own, great though his playing was.  What I mean is that Kapell (for me) is the pianist who can best "illuminate "Rachmaninov's music.  For you it may be someone else who is best at this.  The composer is not nessacarily the best interpreter of his/her own music; our peers appear to back me up on this; in this thread, it seems that most of us find Ashkenazy to have the greatest understanding of Rachmaninov; so far only I have mentioned one of Rachmaninov's recordings in my favorites list. And of course his recordings of his works should be required listening for anyone studying them becuse they're astonoishing . But some others are even more astonishing....

[pianiststrongbad]

Richter for no. 2 is my absolute favourite.

[arensky]

Where are the Corelli Variations?!??!?!?! 

This is a Concerto thread! The Corelli Variations are somewhere else!!!

They are extraordinary, I've heard the Ashkenazy recording and heard Anthony DiBonaventura play them in Boston when I was in college. An underplayed work, should be played more.

[ahinton]

In a consideraton of recordings of Rakhmaninov's works for piano and orchestra, would it not be a good idea if at lest some commentary and opinions embrace both versions of the first and fourth concerti now that these are available? - no one seems to have done so yet...

Best,

Alistair

[brewtality]

The First is my favourite piece, however there are some parts of the originial that I prefer. Such as the arps towards the end of the cadenza. I'm sick of listening to the 2nd and 3rd.

[arensky]

TI'm sick of listening to the 2nd and 3rd.

Me with 3 too brew, but 2 is still cool. Would like to hear more 4, and 1 is fun.

Time foe bed, my brain is dead....

[thierry13]

Do you compose? It's startling to hear something conceived in your own mind interpreted by another person, (hopefully well)  and also very illuminating. Composers are often too close to the piece to view it objectively; an interpreter may shed light on or reveal something in a piece that the composer didn't notice, as Ravel, Copland and Berio have pointed out, and I have experienced for myself. In the case of Rachmaninov, who was one of the great pianists of all time and the last great pianist/composer, it is the same; he preferred the Rachmaninov playing of Moisewitsch and Horowitz to his own, great though his playing was.  What I mean is that Kapell (for me) is the pianist who can best "illuminate "Rachmaninov's music.  For you it may be someone else who is best at this.  The composer is not nessacarily the best interpreter of his/her own music; our peers appear to back me up on this; in this thread, it seems that most of us find Ashkenazy to have the greatest understanding of Rachmaninov; so far only I have mentioned one of Rachmaninov's recordings in my favorites list. And of course his recordings of his works should be required listening for anyone studying them becuse they're astonoishing . But some others are even more astonishing....

They offer him some OTHER insights, even he didn't tought of when composing the piece. Like horowitz's version of the 2nd sonata. He agreed with it. Those are compositional additions. But to what he tought the piece FIRST, he is the closest. Tough, he likes and others inspire him in how he could have built the piece a bit differently.

[pseudopianist]

Paganini.  Im going to have to say Bill Murray. 
Corelli.  I do like John Lill playing that one. 

?

[arensky]

They offer him some OTHER insights, even he didn't tought of when composing the piece. Like horowitz's version of the 2nd sonata. He agreed with it. Those are compositional additions. But to what he tought the piece FIRST, he is the closest. Tough, he likes and others inspire him in how he could have built the piece a bit differently.

I agree, but once the piece is done and others are playing it it's an open forum. It was big of him to let Horowitz revise Sonata #2, most composers would get all huffy! I believe Horowiz' Sonata #2 is a combination of the published version, parts Rachmaninov took out and Horowitz' own thing. Clearly, Horowitz had a better understanding of the piece than Rachmaninov, by Rachmaninov's own tacit admission. But you are right perhaps, the composer is first. Ah, you play La Campanella, or so I've read in this forum! Who has a better understanding of this, Paganini or Liszt? Yes, it is completely different for piano, but who understands the tune better, Paganini (composer) or Liszt (arranger) ? Hmmm.... What about Liszt of the 1830's (original version) and Liszt of the 1850's (revised), who had better understanding, the young virtuoso or the "mature"musician? It's not an easy topic, but fun..everybody in the pool!

We're seeing the same thing now (original unedited version)with the 4th Concerto, which I've heard about but not heard, and the 1st Concerto, which I've just heard about here. What is definitive anyway?

[pianogeek_cz]

No. 2 is my favourite

No. 2 with Cziffra

Definitely.

[stevie]

In a consideraton of recordings of Rakhmaninov's works for piano and orchestra, would it not be a good idea if at lest some commentary and opinions embrace both versions of the first and fourth concerti now that these are available? - no one seems to have done so yet...

Best,

Alistair

very few people have heard them,  and im not one of those.

id like to hear them, rachmaninov was too self-critical and the unrevised(uncut) versions are mostly better IMO

[ralessi]

This is a Concerto thread! The Corelli Variations are somewhere else!!!

Well the Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini isnt REALLY a concerto...its known as one though! Just like the Liszt totentanz and HUngarian fantasy...they're both known as Liszt Concerti...but not really concerti...and! The corelli variations are on some of the cd's with Rach Concerti..... Hope all is well with everyones' studies!

Cheers!
Ricky

[brewtality]

id like to hear them, rachmaninov was too self-critical and the unrevised(uncut) versions are mostly better IMO

What do you mean by that?

The First is charming in its own way, it has most of the same thematic materials but different textures. The cadenza, however, is completely different and doesn't compare to the revised but is interesting to hear nonetheless. I can't really comment on the Fourth since I'm not all that familiar with either version.

[lisztwasgod]

Favorite concerto? its a tie between the first movements of the first and third concertos and the third movement of the second...go figure

fav recordings: 1 -- Hough

2 -- Ashkenazy

3 -- Ashkenazy

LIke many diehard rach fans....im not a huge fan of the fourth c

[Bouter Boogie]

I can't choose between the 2nd and 3rd one

[chopiabin]

I know some people are going to kill me for this, but I think Argerich's 3rd is pretty bad. She tries to impress by playing so fast that she often completely fails to bring out important melodies.

[brewtality]

I know some people are going to kill me for this, but I think Argerich's 3rd is pretty bad. She tries to impress by playing so fast that she often completely fails to bring out important melodies.

why would anyone kill you? its true 
She is quite lacking in the details department imo, I didn't find the recording to be terribly exciting either.

Btw, I can understand why people are initially drawn to the 2nd and 3rd but I found that after listening to them 50+ times they get boring (particularly the second), while I can listen to the First hundreds of times and not get sick of it.   

[Waldszenen]

why would anyone kill you? its true 
She is quite lacking in the details department imo, I didn't find the recording to be terribly exciting either.

Btw, I can understand why people are initially drawn to the 2nd and 3rd but I found that after listening to them 50+ times they get boring (particularly the second), while I can listen to the First hundreds of times and not get sick of it.   

I don't quite like Argerich's either. It's fun to listen to but the playing is way too superficial.

[arensky]

No one's getting killed, we're online; now if we were in person! Interesting, I enjoy her 3rd, she takes the bull by the horns and throws it clear out of the bullring! Yes, her lovely phrasing is not present in this recording but the tempermant! It's unbelievable...check out Kapell live, it's even better, and the details are all there, despite bad sound quality...

[mozoot]

By no way is the 4th the best, but try to find the recording of Jean Yves Thibaudet playing the 4th Concerto, the 2nd Sonata and the Corelli Variations.  It's some of the best Rachmaninov i've heard in a while.

[tompilk]

Please can somebody tell me what to think of the fourth Piano Concerto? I've heard it a million times and absolutely love listening to it - but when listened after Rach 3 ( or 2 or 1) it is somehow dwarfed. I want to love it and do when I'm in the mood - but not always and it is  a dissapointment. It doesn't always make sense and I think that the orchestra plays maybe too much of a role over the piano parts... I don't know. Can someone tell me exactly what I should think and why?!?!?!? Thanks,
Tom Pilkington
 

[Motrax]

I can't say which is definitively my favorite, but I voted for the 4th since nobody else ever likes it. It took me a lot of listens before I even began to tolerate the piece, but there was one evening when I came to really understand it as I do now. I was driving my car in the middle of a thunderstorm with the windows open (I always have the windows open ), and I decided to give the concerto another try. With the storm literally raging around me, the piece suddenly took a new meaning. I'd had quite a number of interesting events occur that night, besides the storm, so I was in a rather evil, brooding mood. Generally, I appreciate music more when it comes to me at more emotional, unique times of my life, and I randomly chose to listen to Rach 4 at the perfect moment. So it's my favorite concerto now.

As far as approaching the piece, goes, my method surely doesn't work for everyone. Try listening to the piece as if it were Bach, by "catching on" to the different melodies and voices as they come, rather than trying to follow a single distinct melodic line for a while. The melodies in the piece are complex and fade in and out of importance. Also keep in mind that the piano is not used as the "primary instrument" in this piece - rather, equal attention is given to both piano and orchestra. I hope this helps - it'd be nice if more people appreciated the piece.

(Oh, I also dislike Argerich's 3rd concerto.  )

[arensky]

Please can somebody tell me what to think of the fourth Piano Concerto? I've heard it a million times and absolutely love listening to it - but when listened after Rach 3 ( or 2 or 1) it is somehow dwarfed. I want to love it and do when I'm in the mood - but not always and it is a dissapointment. It doesn't always make sense and I think that the orchestra plays maybe too much of a role over the piano parts... I don't know. Can someone tell me exactly what I should think and why?!?!?!? Thanks,
Tom Pilkington
 

I think you know what you think, I think...   You can divide Rachmaninov's work into two groups, works composed In Russia and those written in the USA. Concertos 1,2 and 3 are Russian and 4 and the Paganini Rhapsody are American. Rachmaninov felt dislocated after coming to post WWI  USA, and devoted himself to concertizing as a pianist (he turned down lucrative offers to conduct the Boston and Cincinatti Symphony Orchestras, saying conducting would ruin his piano playing) Except for his cadenza to Liszt's 2nd Rhapsody(1919) he wrote nothing between 1917 and 1926 when he wrote the 4th Concerto to be premiered with Stowkowski and the Philadelphia Orchestra. It was a complete failure; Rachmaninov never performed the work again until he recorded it in 1941. In fact, his entire public concerto rep consisted of Concerto#2, Pag Rhapsody, Schumann Concerto And Beethoven Concerto#1!

It was hard for Rachmaninov to compose away from Russia, he admitted that to close friends; I think the 4th Concerto is his first attempt to be "modern", to fit in with the musical culture of his new world.  It has echoes of Jazz, Ravel,  Debussy and Respighi but is Rachmaninov through and through. I think it was panned because it was not another 2nd Concerto, which is what the audieneces wanted and the critics expected. Guess what folks; we evolve, if we stand still we atrophy. Obviously Rachmaninov's later attempts at modernity, the Pag Rhapsody and the Symphonic Dances are more successful, at least to the majority of listeners. I have always liked this Concerto the most of Rachmaninov's although the 2nd is clearly the best; but this is about favorites, not the best!!!

You're right about the orchestration, it's overdone but if you were commisioned to write for the 1920's Philadelphia Orchestra you might go overboard too! (what a band...)It's interesting to compare it to his Russian/Tchaikovsky style of orchestration and how he arrived at the perfect new style of the Pag Rhapsody and the Symphonic Dances, and there's a Symphony in there too in the USA period. I won't tell you what to think(although others will) but I hope my marathon essay helps YOU to decide what to think about Rachmanonov's op.40!!

I can't say which is definitively my favorite, but I voted for the 4th since nobody else ever likes it. It took me a lot of listens before I even began to tolerate the piece, but there was one evening when I came to really understand it as I do now. I was driving my car in the middle of a thunderstorm with the windows open (I always have the windows open ), and I decided to give the concerto another try. With the storm literally raging around me, the piece suddenly took a new meaning. I'd had quite a number of interesting events occur that night, besides the storm, so I was in a rather evil, brooding mood. Generally, I appreciate music more when it comes to me at more emotional, unique times of my life, and I randomly chose to listen to Rach 4 at the perfect moment. So it's my favorite concerto now.

As far as approaching the piece, goes, my method surely doesn't work for everyone. Try listening to the piece as if it were Bach, by "catching on" to the different melodies and voices as they come, rather than trying to follow a single distinct melodic line for a while. The melodies in the piece are complex and fade in and out of importance. Also keep in mind that the piano is not used as the "primary instrument" in this piece - rather, equal attention is given to both piano and orchestra. I hope this helps - it'd be nice if more people appreciated the piece.

(Oh, I also dislike Argerich's 3rd concerto. )

Very cool Motrax! I think this unsettled Concerto, which is never quite sure of itself(reflecting the "stranger in a strange land" that Rachmaninov felt himself to be...?) revealed itself to you when you were perhaps in an unsettled frame of mind yourself, and you found a catharsis in it. This is what art is for, emotional catharsis.
Your comment about Bach is interesting; I was at a masterclass given by Anthony DiBonaventura some years ago, at which someone played the first movement of the 3rd Concerto(I was at the second piano playing the orchestral part). He evantually brought his comments from the pianist(there was little to criticize, she was and still is extraordinary!) to the music itself; he advanced his opinion that Rachmaninov's music was the perfect fusion of Romantic and Classical/Baroque styles and pointed out his skillful use of counterpoint in the movement. And then he dropped the bomb; "Rachmaninov is the Bach of the 20th Century" There were snickers from some but I was almost convinced, having just been inside the piece. Most people only hear the pretty melodies and dramatic moments in Rachmaninov, but (like Medtner) he uses them contrapuntally, it's very subtle and not obvious at first hearing.

Thank you Motrax and Tom for giving me this excellent springboard to this topic (Rachmaninov's op.40) I love so much.

[arensky]

This poll has been up for about a week now and 37 votes have been cast. Some results I expected, but some are surprising! The tally for FAVORITE Rachmaninov Concerto  is currently;

Concerto #1 op.1              7 votes  18.9%         3rd place   
Concerto #2 op.18           13 votes 35.1%         1st place   
Concerto #3 op.30           11 votes 29.7%         2nd place   
Concerto #4 op.40               2 votes 5.4%          5th place 
Paganini Rhapsody op.43      4 votes 10.8%        4th place   

I am listening to Rachmaninov play his Op.1 as I write this...

I expected that the 2nd and 3rd Concerti would be competing for first place, and I thought that the 2nd would prevail, but I was not sure by how much. It's pretty close right now! The big surprise; I expected the positions of the 1st Concerto and the Paganini Rhapsody to be reversed, and 20 years ago I think they would have been; times and tastes change. I knew the 4th Concerto(my own favorite) would come in dead last, it always has. Oh well, more of it for me!

[arensky]

DEAD HEAT ! DEAD HEAT!! DEAD HEAT!!!

This poll has been open for over three weeks now and Concerto #2 in C minor op.18 and Concerto #3 in D minor ARE IN A DEAD HEAT WITH 14 VOTES EACH!!!!! I can barely watch, oh the humanity.....

(calm again.. ) Concerto #1 is solidly in 2nd place with 8 votes, the Paganini Rhapsody and the 4th Concerto are fighting for 3rd place with 4 votes and 3 votes respectively out of a total of 43 votes cast this far...

COME ON!!! VOTE!!!! Vote in love or vote in spite, hate that wussy 2nd Concerto? Hate that overbearing brutal macho 3rd Concerto? MAKE IT LOSE!!! You really want to see that Concerto win!? No you don't! TAKE BACK YOUR REPERTOIRE!!! VOTE NOW!!!!!

or just vote for the one you like.... BUT VOTE NOW!!! NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT!!!!!!

(or vote for the 4th Concerto, arensky sneaky hee hee hee hee hee HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE  HAH!!! 

              Why we hate politics....

[sergei r]

Wow...don't get too excited there. Although it would be nice if we could get 100 votes to accurately show this.

1: Ashkenazy
2: Ashkenazy
3: Ashkenazy
4: Hmm...I wish I could appreciate this one. Listening to it and hopefuilly I will soon. I've heard Michelangeli played this well so I'm listening to that.
Paganini Rhapsody: Ashkenazy

Seriously people, Ashkenazy rocks! Listen to him, and appreciate him. As for my favourite, I'm still really stuck between two and three...still need to decide.

[brewtality]

I absolutely detest the Ashkenazy/Previn Rach concerti. 

[Waldszenen]

I absolutely detest the Ashkenazy/Previn Rach concerti. 

You're not the only one. His two other Rach 3s with Haitink and Fistoulari are a lot better.

[brewtality]

I agree with you. Although I'm not all that fond of the Haitink, it's certainly better than the Previn version. The Fistoulari is his best recording of the piece.

[arensky]

Why is the Paganini Rhapsody not so popular? Couldn't get away from it in the 70's...any thoughts?

[avetma]

My favourite concerto is no2. But I think that no3 is absolute masterpiece. Especially 3rd movement.

I like Stephen Hough playing every of them. Especially no2. He is so different than others. He studies Rach's music and trying to find some hidden rach thoughts that makes concerto sound better. Like that brisk and almost hasty begining. And without any special accents in piece. Like that 'glissando' in beginig of third stave. There is no accent on the highest note. Little weird, but it sounds powerfull to me. Only first and second note in passage are tonic.

[arensky]

OK, this poll has been open for a month and a day, 51 votes have been cast and....

Concerto #3 in D minor op. 30 has 18 and 35.3% of the votes
Conerto #2 in C mnor op.18 has 17 and 33.3% of the votes
Concerto #1 in F#  minor op.1 has 8 and 15.7% of the votes
Concerto #4 op.40 and the Paganini Rhapsody op.43 both have 4 votes and 7.8% of the votes

[arensky]

                                             bumpage....

[sergei r]

After much thought, I finally voted for Op. 30. The second is really great and memorable, but the third is definitely a masterpiece.

[la_leggierezza]

the concert no 2 in C minor op.18 is my favourite! I like concert no 3 very much too so it was a difficult choice!

i think that sviatoslav richterīs performance of this concert is absolutly fabulous!! itīs my favourite

[tolkien]

I voted for no.4. Now, if it was Michelangeli's favourite, who am I to argue?