Rachmaninoff’s Preludes

[etlx]

Recently I’ve been interested in his sets of preludes - I am more familiar with his Etudes-Tableaux, and have played only a few of the Op. 23 preludes.
               
Does anyone know which, if any, of them focus on a particular technic or etude-like problem which might make them more beneficial to study / learn?
         
Also, are there certain preludes which are more related to one another - as in they share similar figurations or performance characteristics -that would make learning them in a particular order a more logical choice?

I’m trying to determine which one(s) to chose, and am not currently learning towards any certain one, so any response / advice would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

[pianoamit]

Apart from the obvious 4, 5,and 6 (which are all simply beautiful - 5 has technically difficult moments):

No. 2 is definitely a good study for rolling figurations in the LH.
No. 3 is a good study in articulations and voicing.
No. 9 is a very good exercise for agility and flexibility in the RH.

[etlx]

Thank you -- Do you mean those from the Op.23 or Op.32?

[pianoamit]

Op. 23. I had understood that that is the opus in which you were primarily interested.

[etlx]

Ah, sorry about that. I'm looking into both sets because I've only played a few from the Op.23

[nanabush]

About 2 years ago I was completely obsessed with the Etudes Tableaux and the Preludes.

This is what I'd say about the more technical preludes:

Op 23:

#2 - The obvious arpeggios and clunky chords.  There's another part that (when looking through for fun, and comparing with a recording by Ashkenazy) where the off-beat strong notes look very problematic.  After the chordy section halfway down page two, when the alternating double notes come in for right hand, the octaves sound through, but are on the 'and' of the each beat (1 and 2 and 3 and, etc)... that part didn't sit right for me. 

#8 - the same broken four note chord figure goes on for 8 pages.  That seems pretty etude-like.

#9 - seems more of an etude than any of his actual etudes.  The fingering works, but it's so damn fast.

Op 32:

#4 - Everything.  Jumps, octaves, chords, double notes, rhythms, finger independence.  This and #9 from Op 23 are pretty insane technique-wise.

#5 - Triplet melody over quintuplets.  Some other weird rhythm stuff going on in this too.

#6 - reminds me of his Eb minor etude Op 33.  Not a lot of melody like some of his other preludes, but very chaotic and technical.

#8 - this one is pretty good for quick finger switching.  Bringing the thumb down as if starting a new pattern in the middle of a sixteenth-run is a little jarring, but comes up quite a bit for example.

#13 - the last three measures (heehee), it'll stretch your hands nicely.


All of his preludes have recurring material (like chopin's preludes) that could make them etude like.  I'm not sure of the "musicality etude" quality of the slower preludes, but I'm sure someone could find something in them.

[etlx]

Thanks for the suggestions, I think I’ll give Op.23 No.9 a shot. I played sight-reading through it the other day and it seemed fairly manageable, although I’d guess getting it up to speed will probably be the most difficult part. If anyone who has learned this is willing to give any advice I’d gladly take it.