Concerto? Rach 3?

[viking]

Alright, so this is just a quick question out to all ya Pianoforum members; I'm thinking about learning the Rach 3. 

For those who haven't heard me, I just finished playing Prokofiev 2nd concerto at my local concerto competition, and I got 2nd to a violinist playing the Khachaturian concerto.  I'm 19 (just) and thinking this might be a good time to start this piece.  However, basically everyone plays it, hence my reason for learning the Prokofiev 2nd.  The Judges at the competition said they wanted me to play something more lyrical, like Rach pag, but I think that's crap.  Pretty much, I'm looking for suggestions for other concerti to play instead of the hideously overplayed Rach 3.  I was thinking about Bartok 2, which my teacher has approved, but that would be my third 20th Century concerto.  I've got a few on my "hit list", such as the Barber, Corigliano, Ravel LH, and Saint-Saens 5.  Anyway, just thought I'd throw it out there, as there are many accomplished pianists out there.
Fire away.

Sam

[thalberg]

Take a look at the MacDowell concerto.  It's really a great piece, and it's not overplayed.  It's not even half as hard as Bartok 2 though.

[thierry13]

How about scriabin ... underplayed and not so 20th century ... it's pretty romantic.

[dnephi]

OK:

Bertkiewicz 3.

Brahms 2- is this a possibility?

Saint-Saens 5 has some good moments, but overall not good enough quality imo.

Reger

There is Rachmaninoff's First Concerto, which I like more than the 2nd.  The 3rd is my favorite, but it is played very often.

You've already mentioned the great Barber and Corigliano concerti, which I heartily endorse.

Personally... 

I'd say go for Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto.  It's one of my very favorites and really deserves all the attention it gets. 

I hope you enjoy whatever you do, and look forward to hearing more.

[invictious]

Scriabin's Concerto. See, he is god in piano, but no one plays his Concerto...

[viking]

Thanks for all the suggestions so far.

Brahms 2:  I'll probably only do this piece justice in like 5 years...I cant wait
Bortkiewicz 3:  Never heard it
Rocky 1:  Love it to death
Reger:  Too loosy goosy.  Is it really something substantial that would win a competition, let alone be allowed in one?  I would like to read it through though sometime...
MacDowell:  Actually I really like this one too.  It's probably one I'll do over the summer sometime though.
Scriabin:  Not the hugest fan of this piece.  It has beautiful moments, but as a whole it just doesn't cut it.


I used to love the Liebermann 2nd, but i'm so sick of it now.  It would probably be good to learn, but I'd puke if I had to practise it every single day.  It's  probably between Bartok 2, and Rocky 3.  Damn I really dont want to do Rocky....  

Thanks for all the input.  Keep it coming...

Sam

[faustsaccomplice]

you know, you'll probably love the rachmaninoff when you are working on it.

you'll probably have to learn it some day, and when you do, you'll have to live up to the many great performances of it, so it's better to learn it early. 

that's my two cents for you.

[viking]

Yeah, you're probably right...
it's sad...

[retrouvailles]

I'll second both the Barber and Corigliano concertos. I want to do one or the other someday. Both are really great fun. Also, how obscure do you want the concerto? Obscurity is my specialty, as are concertos in general (thal can attest to that).

[viking]

Well, I'm pretty into obscure things too.  However, I'm not going to, nor would be capable of learning something like the Xenakis Synaphai (sp?).  I really thought that the Prokofiev 2nd was one of the best decisions I've ever made concerning the pick of a concerto, and I guess I'd maybe be looking for something similar in difficulty, hence the mention of Bartok No.2.  Something like the Reger also really interests me, but I just wish it was a more likeable piece!  Anyway, I'm open to all suggestions, and I'll probably learn both the Corigliano and Barber in the near future.  They kick ass!

Sam

[rallestar]

I'm no concerto-expert, but I do know this: If you are going to start working on Rach 3, you better not feel "sad" about it already. I would play the Ravel if I were you - But that's because I like it so much 


I guess you don't want another Prokofiev, but his 3rd concerto is so great, it's my favourite of his. The 3rd movement is incredibly beautiful/amazing 

[retrouvailles]

What would you rather have: something hackneyed and overplayed, something in the middle, or something off the beaten path? And what period? That should make things specific. I would stay away from Bartσk 2 or the Reger in the meantime, simply because both, in my opinion, are much more trouble than they are worth, especially the Reger, which says so much and gets so little done (at least I feel like that in places).

And, if you want something really off the beaten path, you can't go wrong with any of the Bortkiewicz concertos (I can post all 3 on da sdc if you want). They're all masterpieces (and the 2nd is for the left hand alone).

[teresa_b]

Are you wedded to Romantic/ 20th Century?  And is "lyrical" one of your criteria, or just the judges' recommendation for next time? 

How about Beethoven 4?  Not as technically difficult as Rach 3, and I suppose overplayed, but beautiful nevertheless, and challenging in its own right.

In the end, do one you love, overplayed or not.

Teresa

[franzliszt2]

I would learn Rcah 3. It comes in very handy. I havn't learnt it properly, but I have went through random phases of learning it. It's very nice to practice, it fits so nicely under the hand. The only problem is the sheer amount of notes. I would learn Rach 3 whilst you are young if you have the technique (which I am sure you do!). You will learn a lot from it.

[viking]

Dont get me wrong, Rach 3 would probably be really fun to learn as I've wanted to play the piece ever since I saw shine in my younger youth.  I just think that other repertoire deserves to be played instead.   I suppose I'm probably limited to romantic/20th century, but I would love to look at beethoven 4 someday.  However, unlike most Liszt concerti, I would really like to wait even a more more years before learning it just to make sure I have the time to do it right.  And true, I think every pianist should play Prokofiev 3

retrouvailles:
Could you please post the Bortkiewicz concerti on DaSDC?  I know what you mean about the Bartok and Reger being almost a waste of time.  I think the Bartok is a much better piece, but I doubt many orchestras would trust the solo part to a student.  And I suppose the period I'm looking for is late 1800s to mid 1900s. 

Thanks so much for everyone's responses!!



Sam

[retrouvailles]

retrouvailles:
Could you please post the Bortkiewicz concerti on DaSDC?

Done.

Dont get me wrong, Rach 3 would probably be really fun to learn as I've wanted to play the piece ever since I saw shine in my younger youth.  I just think that other repertoire deserves to be played instead.

I totally agree. It seems that every student plays that piece and no one does justice to it. It's better to go after less played repertoire, at least from my experience. Recently, I played Arensky's Fantasia on Russian  Folksongs with an orchestra, and it did a lot of good for me.

[jakev2.0]

EVERY new student learns the Rachmaninoff third concerto. And that's not EASY. You're not going to sit there and tell me that's easy.

Are all your friends perfect?

[dnephi]

If all your friends were named Cliff would you jump off them? 

But seriously, might I propose Beethoven 3 with the Alkan Cadenza?

[jakev2.0]

I love Alkan, but that's a stupid suggestion.

[rob47]

Beethoven 3 with the Beethoven cadenza is incredible

especially played by Annie

all the rach's are awesome and you should at least consider #4

[dnephi]

I love Alkan, but that's a stupid suggestion.

And why might that be? 

[retrouvailles]

The Alkan Chamber Concertos actually might work, especially the 1st.

[c0nfused]

I would suggest Henselt concerto, which is one of my current favourites. It's a great concerto, much underplayed and very difficult. You should check it out, if you haven't already

[general disarray]

Hey, Viking, do one of your Nordic brothers a favor he deserves and learn the Stenhammar Second Piano Concerto.

Great, great piece.

Also, you want lyrical with lots of flash?  How about Dohnanyi's Second piano concerto?  Another great and overlooked piece.

[retrouvailles]

The Henselt concerto is incredibly hard, which is why it's underplayed. I think you might want to wait a few years before tacking that monster. The Stenhammar 2nd concerto is actually very good. The Dohnαnyi 2nd is excellent. I would do that one.

[indutrial]

I would vote to play something that doesn't get a lot of love these days. Why expend the time and technique required to play the Rach 3 on the Rach 3. Too many people do that and it's frankly a tired piece (which is not to say it's unimportant, just a wee bit overemphasized in programmes).

A few suggestions that I'll throw out:

Poulenc's Concerto in C# minor (lots of fun)

or...Go further into the 20th century and play Andre Jolivet's Concerto (although this is probably too much of a chore for the orchestra). This piece has an earth-cracking primal energy that could send chills up somebody's spine if handled properly.

[viking]

Ahh I LOOOVE the Poulenc Concerto.  However, it's probably a little bit too easy, but I'll most likely learn it anyway in the near future!  And what about this Stenhammar concerto - I've never heard that.  I have actually sightread the Henselt Concerto as I own a very nice edition of it...well 5 copies actually.  I love the piece too, I just think I need slightly bigger hands than what I have, and I can reach an 11th!  Anyway, thanks for uploading the Bortkiewicz on DaSDC - I'll definitely give them a listen tonight at home.  And I remember listening to the Dohnanyi and sortof liking them, but they didn't really jump out at me.  Who knows, maybe I'll give them another listen...

Thanks for all the input,

Sam

[pita bread]

What is this concerto for? Competitions?

[viking]

Probably.... aren't they all when you're a student?

Sam

[imbetter]

the Ravel G major is great.

[pita bread]

Probably.... aren't they all when you're a student?

Sam

Stick with something more standard then. In the end, I doubt that you'd regret learning the Mach 3, but if really don't want to deal with the fact that it's overplayed, do the Ravel Lefty or the Barber.

[minor9th]

I'd suggest Alberto Ginastera's 1st or 2nd Conerto, or Hans Werner Henze's 2nd (45 min--might be a bit long, though).

Hey, "lyrical" is a matter of perception!

[retrouvailles]

Hehe, I was going to suggest the Ginasteras (I love them), but I wasn't sure if that is what you are looking for. The Henze is a bit hard for me to enjoy though. Also, an early concerto of Ginastera is about to be published (Concierto Argentino). It's much in the same manner as the Danzas Argentinas, so that might be something to look into.

[pita bread]

Someone needs to make an orchestral reduction for the Ginastera 2.

[retrouvailles]

Someone needs to make an orchestral reduction for the Ginastera 2.

I do not think it is possible to do it for two pianos. Maybe for a chamber ensemble with a percussion section, but not two pianos.

[pita bread]

I do not think it is possible to do it for two pianos. Maybe for a chamber ensemble with a percussion section, but not two pianos.

I never said it had to be a good reduction... something austere like the Ravel G reduction part just for competition purposes.

[retrouvailles]

I never said it had to be a good reduction... something austere like the Ravel G reduction part just for competition purposes.

Perhaps. Maybe if there were extended techniques like knocking under  the keyboard, beating the bass strings with your palms, <insert something George Crumb or Frederic Rzewski would do>, etc. That would possibly work.

[jlh]

Here's an idea that hasn't been thrown out yet... what about Busoni?

[retrouvailles]

Here's an idea that hasn't been thrown out yet... what about Busoni?

Haha, very funny. However, his concerto for piano and strings in d minor or his Konzertstόck would work nicely.

[franzliszt2]

I personally think you should avoid all the uncommon repertoire for now. Do all teh standard rep first. It won't take long...only a few years 1 every 2 months. Nobody will ever trust a 19 year old student with an unknown concerto, they all want Tchaik, Rach Grieg etc... and they are fantastic pieces if played properly. You would learn much more from them as well, and approach the unknown rep differently. They key to playing unknown stuff is to understand the well known stuff deeply. There is reasons why the Chopin concerto is more popular than the Henselt concerto, even though the styles are so similar. However I would rather learn Henselt concerto!

[mcgillcomposer]

I would vote to play something that doesn't get a lot of love these days. Why expend the time and technique required to play the Rach 3 on the Rach 3. Too many people do that and it's frankly a tired piece (which is not to say it's unimportant, just a wee bit overemphasized in programmes).

I am not disagreeing with you, but I'm curious to know what your criteria are that result in this work being 'unimportant'. I am sure a large number of composers living today would be quite happy if they could write half as well as Rachmaninoff. One thing I will say, is that he definitely has a recognizable sound - you know it's Rach after just a few measures. This is an achievement in itself.

[viking]

I personally think you should avoid all the uncommon repertoire for now. Do all teh standard rep first. It won't take long...only a few years 1 every 2 months. Nobody will ever trust a 19 year old student with an unknown concerto, they all want Tchaik, Rach Grieg etc... and they are fantastic pieces if played properly. You would learn much more from them as well, and approach the unknown rep differently. They key to playing unknown stuff is to understand the well known stuff deeply. There is reasons why the Chopin concerto is more popular than the Henselt concerto, even though the styles are so similar. However I would rather learn Henselt concerto!

You know, I was just talking to my MOMMY about this the other night.  I just might keep up the Prok2, using it for all my competitions while learning pieces I've wanted to learn over the years that are a little easier, such as S-S5, Poulenc, Grieg, Schumann, Mozart 9, etc...

As for the Busoni, I've actually sightread the first movement and it's definitely not as terribly difficult as, say the Prok 2.  However, it being over 70 minutes long, and with that KILLER 4th movement, I'll probably decline learning this for now hahaha.

Sam

[jlh]

As for the Busoni, I've actually sightread the first movement and it's definitely not as terribly difficult as, say the Prok 2.  However, it being over 70 minutes long, and with that KILLER 4th movement, I'll probably decline learning this for now hahaha.

haha, yes the tarantella is a killer...  the piece as a whole is not really as lyrical as, say, the Rach is.  The piano seems to take on more of an accompanying role than in other concertos if I remember correctly.

[jlh]

Haha, very funny.

haha hey someone had to throw it out there! 

[indutrial]

I am not disagreeing with you, but I'm curious to know what your criteria are that result in this work being 'unimportant'. I am sure a large number of composers living today would be quite happy if they could write half as well as Rachmaninoff. One thing I will say, is that he definitely has a recognizable sound - you know it's Rach after just a few measures. This is an achievement in itself.

I wasn't saying that the Rachmaninov pieces are unimportant. Quite the opposite. I just think that their importance is pretty much set in stone and that it's time to be more liberal about what gets included in the repertoire. A lot of pieces that are quite deserving are treated as "unimportant" because composers like Rachmaninov and Grieg are granted such a monolithic status. Basically what I'm saying is that the pedestals the greats are on really don't require more reinforcement. We all know Rachmaninov is great just like we know Chopin was great. It would be nice to see a neglected work with the same challenges and difficulties brought to the fore, no matter what some group of under-sexed, over-conservative judges think. Piano performance is not the Olympics or the NBA, yet this makes it seem like it is. I've always had a lot of respect for a pianist who's willing to be more than just another impressive pianist and is interested in acting as a music historian (of sorts) as well. As an example (though it's not a concerto) it would be nice to see even just one pianist perform Lutoslawski's piano sonata, which somehow has never been released on a CD. There are surely many concertos like this that are virtually in the dark that are surely brilliant works that would present strong rewards to the pianist and, hopefully, open-minded audience members. The Jolivet is a good example.

[general disarray]

I totally agree.

But, here's the rub.  A young pianist breaking into the marketplace will be expected to know the so-called "standard repertoire."  That's what audiences want to hear.  It's ridiculous and unfair, I know, but that's the way it is and the Way It Is dictates economics.

Usually, performances of new works are brought to us by established artists with solid careers.

So, reconsidering, I think Viking should tackle the Rach 3 or Saint-Saens Fifth.  He'll need both to build a career with the staples as part of his package.  And pieces this hard should be learned when we're young anyway.

But, yeah, I'd love to here him play the Stenhammar Second.  But fat chance . . . in this conservative world.

[rallestar]

*** off talking about conservatism, you know sh*t. Pieces are played because they are liked.

[indutrial]

*** off talking about conservatism, you know sh*t. Pieces are played because they are liked.

Nice rationalization. It couldn't possibly be because people have a tendency to institutionalize everything, including piano repertoire. God forbid some of the privileged music brats out there tried something they didn't like (or something they didn't know) for a change.

[pita bread]

*** off talking about conservatism, you know sh*t. Pieces are played because they are liked.

You sound like some teenage punk. Get a grip on how the real world works.

[rallestar]

Yeah, being conservative and teenage punk is practically the same thing.
te
I get your logic - Anything you ever dislike, you call conservative.

pita bread, if I sound like a teenage punk, I wonder what that makes you, considering that you have to resort to namecalling in order to debate with me.

I'm not so much pissed about the fact that you just think the repertoire is wrong, as the fact that you seem to believe that conservatism has anything to do with it.

If anything, conservatism tells us that tradition has arisen for a reason. In this case, the pieces being better is one of them, of course there are many other, industrial - I didn't feel like writing an essay, but that's obviously required in order to have a say in the debate here. Unless we're talking modern and unknown pieces of course, then it's fine to have no arguments at all.

God forbid that we sit down and listen to the music that we find beautiful, let's rather just point out how stupid people are for liking pieces that are well-known. After all, they must only be well-known because the conservative people decided to make a list of pieces they wanted to be well-known.