Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto No. 3

[smiggy]

In the 1st movement, there is a cadenza. Rachmaninoff and Horowitz both played the second Cadenza (more toccata style), while other pianists such as Helfgott, Lang lang and others play the Ossia.
What would be better to perform?
The Ossia is harder and sounds muffled or muddy if played wrong. The toccata is fast and simple compared to the Ossia. However, there are good bits in both, would it be unprofessional to combine the two and use good bits out of both (like the beginning of the toccata and then the last part of the ossia), or would that ruin the point of the two.

[nearenough]

The lighter one is very tricky and requires a-tempo fast jumps and extreme accuracy while the ossia is ponderous and full of heavy handed chords and octaves turning out to be not quite so elegant as the first.

[smiggy]

Ah right.

[smiggy]

So could you blend the two a little. Like the beginning of the toccata, then when it gets into the scherzo, could you use the Ossia for the build up then go back into the second cadenza??

[franzliszt2]

Well you could....but it would just sound stupid! I believe Andre Watts does something like that, and it's kind of cool, but it doesn't really work.

Why on earth would you ever want to play the beginning of the toccata, then when it gets to the scherzo use the ossia to build up?? then go back into the second cadenza? The would sound absolutly riddiculous! I mean it would start of as a fast toccata, then change into chords and interlocking octaves at Fortissimo, and then instead of following through, you cut the texture and start scherzoing again, and then play the end of the cadenza, which will of course have no effect becasue you will have climaxed already. Aside from that, you will probably have to change some harmony God knows what else to actually get a smooth transition.

Why do you want to change it? I mean if you do change it, at least be a little more imaginative!

[smiggy]

Ah kk, carm down...i'll just stick with one or the other.

[aslanov]

i'd second the NOT blending. i mean the two different beginnings are written in very different ways and styles of playing, i cant think of a justification for mixing the two.

[eminemvsrach]

It seemed like Rach himself didn't like the 1st cadenza, he said that the 1st one came from nowhere and is leading nowhere either, it didn't fit the concerto. While the 2nd one has a chord progression exactly the same as part of the climax at the end of the third movement, I'm currently learning Rach 3 and I'd definitely choose the 2nd cadenza .

[general disarray]

Hey, smiggy, don't let anyone intimidate you!  Cadenza-time is YOUR time to let that light of yours shine!  Combine both cadenzas and throw in a reference to Rach's Second Sonata, while you're at it.  Be like Alkan in his cadenza to the solo transcription of Beethoven's Third Concerto!

Knock their bloody socks off! 

[avguste]

Personally I prefer the original

[perfect_pitch]

I personally like the ossia because you think about the melody used there is easier to hear than the original passage... plus at the end of the third movement the same melody is used except in double time.

Sort of unifies the two movements - bring an idea from Mov 1 into Mov 3.

[m]

Maybe that's me, but I believe if you are just about to play such thing as Rachmaninov 3rd concerto you should be able to make such decisions yourself.

Personally, I play the "big" cadenza... however lately inclined to learn the "small one", as well.

Best, M