The orchestration of Chopin and Schumann

[Waldszenen]

You may not agree, but it's a general consensus that the piano concerti of Chopin and Schumann all feature pretty mediocre orchestration (they're both pianistically-trained composers, after all).

So my question is, which do you think is the worst of the three?

[mikey6]

The only thing wrong with Chopin orchestration is that it's not innovative or inventive.  His aim was to keep the piano in the spotlight and that's what he does.  Schumann's PC I think is ok, they criticise his symphonies for the continous doubling.
I realise that generally they bad-mouth the orchestration, but I think in terms of their aim, there's no problem with it. So I dunno really....

[phil13]

Well, in terms of the two Chopin concerti, I would have to say No.1 because although Chopin tried to keep the piano in the spotlight 95% of the time, the orchestra has a better part in the 2nd concerto- especially the mazurka finale.

Phil

[jam8086]

The Chopin Concertos are some of my favorite pieces ever, and I believe that they are great compositions for piano and orchestra, but I do agree that they are not good examples of piano concertos (there is a difference).  However, I do not think it is just the orchestration that makes them poor piano concertos, because you would not only have to change the orchestration, but also the material in the pieces so that the piano could have a conversation with the orchestra.  I think the orchestration is not bad at all for the material that is in the concertos.  The material is really why the concertos arent good examples of concertos.  They are amazing pieces though.

[Waldszenen]

That's very true - the music itself, otherwise, is pretty much flawless.

[brewtality]

I love the orchestral parts to these concerti! I know that Chopin's orchestration was a little threadbare but I wouldn't change a single note (listen to what Tausig did to them, terrible!!) In the Schumann, the part just before the cadenza has such a great build-up and release of tension, all with 2 notes. Delicious. Check this out in Fiorentino's recording if you have it.

[pianistimo]

quoting roeder's 'a history of the piano concerto' on page 225 (referring to chopin's concertos):

'both concertos suffer from problems.  the orchestration is generally ineffective, although there are some very nice moments, especially when bassoon, clarinet, or horn are enlivened against the piano.  later arrangers have endeavored to enliven the orchestration, but more colorful additions in solo sections seem only to detract from the piano writing.  problems of tonal organization further mar the first movements.  in the f minor concerto, the orchestra presents the second theme in the contrasting key of A major, the key in which it also appears in the solo exposition.  this creates a double exposition of the sort noted in beethoven's third pc, reducing the impact of the soloist's move to the new key, while also lessening the drama of the soloist's entry.  the problem is almost the reverse in the e minor concerto's first movemetns.  here the tonic key is maintained throughout the opening ritornello and the solo exposition, providing no relief or contrast for 350 measures.  curiously, when the second theme returns in the recapitulation, it appears in the relative major key, the key in which it would normally have appeared in the exposition.

one common solution to both the tonal and orchestrational weaknesses of the first movements has been to delete or significantly shorten the long and tedious opening tutti sections in modern performances.  this creates no grave injustice to the music, for chopin did, on occasion, play these concertos unaccompanied, indicating his own assessment of the orchestra's role as insignificant.

chopin had planned a third concerto which he began in 1830-31, but soon abandoned.  ten years later he used parts of the incomplete concerto in his allegro de concerto op. 46, which is structured like the first movements of his concertos, but calling only for a solo piano without accompaniment.'

[mike_lang]

I have heard that it was not Chopin himself who orchestrated the concerti - has anyone else heard this and found a verifiable source on the matter?

Best,
ML

[mikey6]

Just to question the innefectivemess of the orchestration - listen to Zimerman's new recording with the Polish National Orchestra and here how expressive it can be (to the point of almost overdone!) - It's also I think the longest on record - 23 minutes (1st concertos 1st mov) compared to 17 (Lipatti)

[quantum]

The Chopin orchestrations are quite appropriate for the piano material.  They are not in the style of most concertos but they do stand out as excellent music on their own.  I feel that the 2nd movement of the F minor is an extreemly effective use of orchestra. 

[pianistimo]

guess that if any of us tried to do it better - it wouldn't be better.  maybe it was chopin's familiarity with the orchestra that slightly (SLIGHTLY) hindered him?  was he as able to have access to the sounds of the instruments like modern composers today?  what if he had had access to the pallette of sounds from electronic pianos (midis, etc) and software with orchestral sounds.  he'd have gone further probably - but maybe he didn't want to.  the piano was enough.

if it wasn't access to the orchestra, perhaps it was his innate desire to have the piano sound like the piano.  he didn't try to make the piano sound like other instruments so much.  maybe tenor voice as just voice?

[sissco]

I have heard that it was not Chopin himself who orchestrated the concerti?  Has anyone else heard this and found a verifiable source on the matter?

Best,
ML

From what I have heard is that Chopin needed help to compose this pieces, so yes it could be true. But it are, with no doubt, wonderfull concertos