Best interpreter for Rach 2?

[verywellmister]

Which performer do you think plays Rach 2 the best?  I heard this for the first time on Lisista's site and I loved it.

Is this concerto harder or easier than Prok 2?

Thank you.

[iumonito]

Rachmaninov has a recording of it, so you can't go wrong there.  I have heard that he complained that his own recording was too fast, but I have no confidence in that hearsay.

Everybody records this concerto.  The ones that have touched me include Vasary and Bolet.  Many have annoyed me, most recently Zimermann.

They have different difficulties, but I tend to think overall Prokofiev 2 is technically more demanding.

I have also heard Rachmaninov thought the second was harder than the third of his concertos.  Perhaps true from an ensamble point of view, although Rach 3 sure looks more difficult on paper.  I have only read Rach 3, so I really don't know.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

i love ashkenazy's modern approach.. my favorite recording of that concerto. as for the comparison of difficulty, i'm in no position to say coz i haven't played both.

[zheer]

Which performer do you think plays Rach 2 the best?  I heard this for the first time on Lisista's site and I loved it.

Is this concerto harder or easier than Prok 2?

Thank you.

 Rach 2 pianisticly speaking fits nicly under the hand, so possibly easier than prok 2.
A good recording would be Ashkenazy, though the best performance of it for me was by an unknown female Russian pianist who cam 4th in a international competition ,long time ago.

[dnephi]

Zimerman is total ownage. 

He's my fav.

[Kassaa]

Kapell, although I haven't compared it to much.

[kriskicksass]

Cziffra with Cziffra Jr. conducting is a titanic performance. And as for Rach 2 being pianistic...it's only pianistic for huge hands. Anything less than an octave and it may very well be impossible to play (I wouldn't know; I have a 10th, stretch an 11th).

[verywellmister]

Thanks guys.  Keep it coming.

What about the interpretational difficulties?  Which is harder?

[nicco]

Im hoping mine will be pretty good 

else i looove richter

[apion]

As to technical difficulty, Proko 2 > Rach 2.

My fav rec is Van Cliburn.

[Motrax]

From a technical standpoint, I think Prokofiev 2 is a clear head or two above Rachmaninoff's 2nd concerto; not to say the Rach is easy by any stretch of the imagination, but his piano writing is a bit more comfortable in general. Interperatively, I find every piece to be challenging in its own way, so I'm unable to comment.

Here're some recordings I own or have heard (pianist, conductor):

Julius Katchen, Geoerge Solti - 10/10 - This is by far my favorite recording, although it doesn't seem to be mentioned often. I'm not particularly fond of Katchen's playing either, so I was quite skeptical when my friend sat me down to listen to this. Katchen sings beautifully with the piano, his rubato is unimpeachable, and his is the only recording where I find pianist and orchestra to truly act as one musical entity. I would recommend this recording before any others, as I couldn't imagine a better one. Solti is a great conductor too, by the way.

Artur Rubinstein, Fritz Reiner - 9/10 - This ties with a few others for second place on my list. Rubinstien has a no-nonsense, driving approach to the first movement which I especially like. It's just a great performance, and that's that.

Sergei Rachmaninoff, Leopold Stokowski (later version) - 9/10 - Rachmaninoff's tempo is indeed quite fast (although not quite to the same degree as his 3rd concerto tempo). His playing can have a certain sarcastic bite to it at times which may bother some, but his sense of rubato is unrivaled. His phrasing is also quite beautiful. The orchestra seems to fare a little worse, although this may just be the relatively low recording quality and mono sound which couple to make the orchestra sound a little lackluster. Still a great recording, and definitely a must for those who are playing the piece.

William Kapell, Fritz Reiner - 9/10 - A different take than Rubinstein or Rachmaninoff, but absolutely marvelous nonetheless. Kapell is one of few American pianists who really plays in an "American" way; has a very solid sound and solid approach, yet is always able to achieve a most delicate sound when the music needs it most. There's a great sense of depth here, in my opinion; I often finish listening to the recording only to wonder what small musical details I must have missed, for Kapell really leaves nothing beyond his care and thought.

Rafael Orozco, Edo de Waart - 8/10 - This was my first recording of the piece, so perhaps I'm a bit partial to it. However, I do think it's quite a good performance; I like Orozco's dynamics a great deal, and he plays in a non-sentimental way which other pianists often fall prey to doing.

Vladimir Ashkenazy (not sure which recording) - 4/10 - I'm less of a fan of Ashkenazy than most, it seems; I find his initial tempo too slow, and the orchestra lingers on far too many notes, producing a very sappy, sugar-coated sound. Ashkenazy at times seems to be asleep at the keyboard... I simply find the entire affair quite boring, and would not recommend it. Unfortunately, I'm not quite sure which recording of this I heard; perhaps another one would be better.

Sviatislav Richter (not sure which recording) - 5/10 - As much as I love the pianist, I really don't care for the recording. The first movement is terribly melodramatic. The third movement is really great though. I've only listened once, so I can't really say much more.

In the interest of time, I'll just cut the rest short and say Graffman's pretty good, Cziffra's pretty bad, and Kissin's in between.

- M

(Oh, and Van Cliburn's is good as I recall, but I am not very familiar with it so I can't really say for sure exactly how good it is)

[Nightscape]

You can't go wrong with Stephen Hough's recording (Hyperion records) - it's my personal favorite and its been lavished with praise from critics.  The only downside, is that it is a very expensive purchase for classical (because it contains all of the concertos of Rachmaninoff on it).

[steve_m]

3

[JP]

MY fav is Weissenberg.

[letters]

the one i have fallen in love with is Askenazy.... 1983 i think?? i have the cd thing of all 4 but i havent really listened much to 1 and 4, i like 3 but not as much as 2.

[maxy]

I have also heard Rachmaninov thought the second was harder than the third of his concertos.  Perhaps true from an ensamble point of view, although Rach 3 sure looks more difficult on paper.  I have only read Rach 3, so I really don't know.

He supposedly said something like:  "3rd is the hardest but 2nd is the most difficult", whatever that could mean... 

Personally, I started to like Rach 2 when I first heard Richter.  I heard all the recs listed in this topic (except maybe for Rubinstein, I don't remember) and still find Richter is the best.

Rach playing Rach is a must, Moiseiwitsch has to be on the list too.  I did also enjoy Gieseking and Gavrilov quite a lot.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

MY fav is Weissenberg.

oh yeah, a good one too.

[jre58591]

gary graffman, stephen hough, and krystian zimerman are my favorites. they all play it differently, so i listen to someone's recording depending on my mood.

[brewtality]

For me Moiseiwitch, Kapell, Rachmaninoff. I don't like Richter's.

[avetma]

Stephen Hough is my favourite for all Rach concertos.

[arensky]

For me Moiseiwitch, Kapell, Rachmaninoff. I don't like Richter's.

These three are my favorites too, but along with Richter. Richter's is superby organized but the slow tempi make it sound almost "poppy" imo. And to these four I add Agustin Anievas; don't know if that's still in print or not, though.

[trix]

Gina Bachauer (and Rach himself)

[houseofblackleaves]

Ashk is my favorite, seeing how he was the first I listened to.  And I don't care what everyone else thinks of her, but Lisitsa's interpretation is unique, and emulates Rachmaninoff's recording to a certain point (Except at lightning speed, of course.)  Richter's is also a favorite of mine, his interpretation of the first movement was sort of... erm... weird at first, but then I realized what he was trying to acomplish, and loved it.

[brewtality]

These three are my favorites too, but along with Richter. Richter's is superby organized but the slow tempi make it sound almost "poppy" imo.

The slow tempi rub me the wrong way. I am not at all convinced by them. The second movement is too plain and not singing enough, this sort of slow playing works very well in the second movt of the 1st concerto but not here. The third movement is good though.

[Motrax]

Indeed, I liked the third movement of Richter's recording, but not the first two.

I just listened to Moisewitsch yesterday and it is quite great.

[steve jones]

I quite like Gavrilov's recording of No2. Hough for No3 definately, but I feel he is a bit hasty in No2.

SJ

[phil13]

Orozco.

Phil

[acha114]

I enjoy listening to Lang Lang's interpretation. Perhaps its because it's the first one I listened to.

[ravel]

There are many good recordings..
but overall Richter is the best on Rach 2 in my opinion...

[ralessi]

Gyorgy Cziffra under junior is the total package.....Lang Lang....well he is just Lang Lang, and Richter plays the concerto much too mechanically for my taste.  and i just hate Zimermann's recording, even though i love Zimermann with most other things....

Cheers!
Rick

[kreso]

Richter,Zimerman,Lang Lang,Kissin,Rach

but my favorite is Richter (with Svetlanov)