RACH2 vs RACH3

[jhon]

IMO, Rach2 can be easily appreciated at the moment one first hear it - even non classical people.  On the other hand, you should listen to Rach3 somewhat repeatedly and understand its deep technical and musical elements before you could appreciate it.  I myself had a good "first impression" for Rach2 when I first heard it.  But for Rach3, I didn't like it at al the first I heard to it as it's too COMPLEX to understand in just one listening.  As we all know, Rach3 is VERY difficult and you just can't help to get more bombarded by its technicality (than musicality) the moment you hear it the 1st time.  SO what I did was to listen to it repeatedly every day so that I can unveil and uncover its technicalities after about a week, I already figured out its musicality and was surprised taht I liked it more than Rach2!  And thanks to that great Rach3 recording by Zoltan Kocsis under Edo deVart with the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra. 

In conclusion, the IRONY of it is that Rach2 is "more popular" but Rach3 is "more perfect". 

What do you guys think?  Please feel free to disagree if you wish... 

[hodi]

i agree that rach3 is more deep and difficult to understand than rach2
but KOCSIS PLAYING RACH3 IS AWFUL!!

arcadi volodos' recording is much better.

[vladhorwz]

KOCSIS PLAYING RACH3 IS AWFUL!!

Thank you, I didn't want to be the one to have to say it!!!!!!

[thalbergmad]

Rach 2 is for listeners, Rach 3 is for pianists.

[tompilk]

Rach3 is bigger and better in my opinion, although Rach2 is more attainable for people like me...

[jhon]

Rach 2 is for listeners, Rach 3 is for pianists.

exactly.  in analogy, its like ballade1 vs ballade 4....

[musicsdarkangel]

I think that the Volodos is terrible as well, musically speaking.

Technically it's quite impressive.

Van Cliburn!!!

Van Cliburn!!!

alright i'll stop hehe

[ralessi]

I think that the Volodos is terrible as well, musically speaking.

Technically it's quite impressive.

Van Cliburn!!!

Van Cliburn!!!

alright i'll stop hehe

.........you're kidding right? i cannot stand listening to Van Cliburn playing this piece....

[apion]

In a contest of which is the greatest:

Rach 2 vs. Rach 3 = tie
Beet 4 vs. Beet 5 = tie
Brahms 1 vs. Brahms 2 => tie
Mozart 20 vs. Mozart 24 => tie
Chopin 1 vs. Chopin 2 => tie
Liszt 1 vs. Liszt 2 => tie
Bartok 1 vs. Bartok 2 => tie

OTOH:

Mendelssohn 1 vs. Mendelssohn 2 => #1 wins
Bach d minor vs. Bach's other keyboard concerti => Bach d minor wins
Prokofiev 2 vs. Prokofiev 3 => #3 wins
Saint-Saens 2 vs. Saint-Saens 4 => #2 wins
Tchaikovsky 1 vs. Tchaikovsky 2 => #1 wins

[aaron_banks]

Rach 2 is based on form and also a bit less tricky technically. It's easier to get together when playing with orchestra as the meter is the driving force. Rach3 brings on huge demands technically and requires a enormous sense for ensemble playing with new unexpected things happening in the moment throughout. I find Gavriluk/Concertgebouw amazing.

[anacrusis]

Probably an unpopular opinion but I do not particularly like either of these concertos as a whole  They feel a bit too grandiose and overwrought for my taste.