Rachmaninoff Second Sonata

[liszmaninopin]

I'm just curious, but which version do you like better, 1913 or 1931?  I have always preferred the 1913 version, someday I intend to learn it.

[steinwaymodeld]

I'm just curious, but which version do you like better, 1913 or 1931?  I have always preferred the 1913 version, someday I intend to learn it.

1931, the one modified, and the Horowitz version.

[thracozaag]

 the 1913 version is wonderful of course, but a little overloaded (even by Rachmaninoff standards).  I prefer the Horowitz version, the 1931 is just too stripped down.

[IgnazPaderewski]

the 1913 is by far the best - Horowitz plays this but omits the more complex bits that he doesn't understand. The 1931 version removes a) 50% of the virtuoso aspect and b) many of the most beautiful sections of music. Not good. The 1913 is more difficult, but better.

[liszmaninopin]

It's a shame that Rachmaninoff never left us a recording of either of his Sonatas.  Maybe he did and I don't know about it, but I have never seen one.  Has anybody here actually played all of 1913?

[thracozaag]

It's a shame that Rachmaninoff never left us a recording of either of his Sonatas.  Maybe he did and I don't know about it, but I have never seen one.  Has anybody here actually played all of 1913?

 Yeah..it's a pain.

[liszmaninopin]

What is a pain; that he never left us a recording or that you've played the whole thing?

[chopiabin]

I can't believe someone said that Horowitz didn't understand some of Rachmaninov. How dare you?!  

Chop

[krenske]

I originally played the 1913 version (simply because all the good stuff is left out in 1931). I then swung to the Van Cliburn version - a move in the right direction I think. The problem here is that if you're going to perform a piece (be it in competition or not) and its not the composer's original, you'd want to be really personally convinced of its structure. So I learned the 1931 version and performed it until I really started missing things including that beautiful ending to the second movement. So I gave up and made my own version of all my favourite bits - ive been told that one gives the best continuity in performance. As i see it, Rach Sonata 2 is one of the only pieces in the concert repertoire where you have to find your own "solution" - and so the performer is simultaneously virtuoso and composer - which is very interesting to the audience!

[thracozaag]

What is a pain; that he never left us a recording or that you've played the whole thing?

 Both, actually.

[IgnazPaderewski]

dont tamper with Rachmaninoff's score, just play the original version complete. It has a few strange bits, but it is so much better.... Also (Im not a heathen, I love the recordings) don listen to Horowitz's recordings until you have learnt the thing properly, as Horowitz takes many liberties which are not entirely consistent with the text, so do not search after his effects in passagework because a lot of it (Ive seen the video) is a result from rearranging the notes!

[krenske]

dont tamper with Rachmaninoff's score, just play the original version complete.

Who says? Certainly not Rachmaninoff. Come to think of it, I don't think Liszt or Chopin treated their "compositions" as rigid musical bibles either. Bach probably did though. But then again he still loved the occasional cigar, and probably the odd liason with Mrs Bach too.

[liszmaninopin]

Can anybody suggest any etudes or exercises that might be especially helpful for learning this Sonata?

[IgnazPaderewski]

Yes but I would not trust myself with the responsibility of cutting and pasting a 25 minute sonata into something good. Rachmaninoff trusted Horowitz, but I am not he.

[fledermaus]

I think 1913 version is more interesting than 1931.
More difficult, but better construction indeed!

[krenske]

I think paderewski would've cut and pasted a bit. He probably would have changed the basses too.