in my proposed theory, the ossia cadenza is associated with mediocre, obscure pianists and their mediocre renditions of the concerto and the little one is associated with the legends (Horowitz, Gilels, Rachmaninoff himself, etc. all used the little one) and those who care about the music rather than being a showman (Rachmaninoff wrote the little one to replace the ossia which he thought didn't fit (I only partially agree with him there))
if you are playing the ossia just because you like it, there's always going to be the people who are thinking, "Ugh, he's so overblown and disregarding of Rachmaninoff's wishes!" And if you do the little one there will be the ones who think you're a wimp but also the ones who are thinking that you care more about the music than showing off. Note that this is just my theory supported with only some evidence. So do you think this is a valid commercial tactic? Or just useless due to how much audiences seem to love the ossia?
So do you think this is a valid commercial tactic? Or just useless due to how much audiences seem to love the ossia?
Lazar Berman, Olga Kern, yefim Bronfman, Evgeny kissin, Arcadi Volodos, Rafael Orcozo, Glemser, etc. are not mediocre. I don't like the way they all play the Cadenza, but they all have passages that are sooooooooooo good! I don't think it's used for showmanship like Lang Lang, I just think that the majority pianists prefer the Ossia cadenza which is perhaps why the ossia cadenza is victim to more mediocre pianists, IF it is. I personally prefer the Ossia cadenza.
Well if Rachmaninoff didn't want the Ossia to be played, he wouldn't have even published it. And he ignored some of his own markings as well, so there are many ways of interpreting it and there's nothing wrong with that. Despite the fact that Rachmaninoff is my favorite composer, I couldn't care less which cadenza he wanted preformed. I'll play what I think sounds best. And if I do something that Rachmaninoff didn't do, what's he going to do? Rise from the grave?! And to answer your question, I have no idea if it's a valid commercial tactic. But if it is, wouldn't you be contradicting yourself? You want people to think that you're more of an artist by getting them to think that you care more about the music than showing off, but you say that you want to play the Tocatta to convey that, so isn't that showing off? Shouldn't you should just play what YOU think sounds best?AND you said that the Tocatta would make people think that you care more about the music than showing off? Are you implying that the Tocatta is better than the Ossia? Music is music.The Tocatta is harder anyways, so wouldn't playing that be more show offy than the Ossia?
And if I do something that Rachmaninoff didn't do, what's he going to do? Rise from the grave?!
My assumption about people saying the toccata means you care more about music is supported by how Rachmaninoff has a fairly publicized saying where he said the toccata fits better with the concerto, and thus the audience, if they know that, that may cross their mind. And with the toccata being more show-offy, it typically would not be thought of that by and audience full of those who have never attempted either cadenza, so generally, being showy is attributed more to the ossia due to the heavy dynamics, brilliant style, and large chords. What I'm trying to say it that i don't think of the ossia as being more showy in regards to difficulty but in terms of the music it makes.
There are other reasons not to play the "small" cadenza. For example the standard other great pianists have already set for it that cannot be improved. [Just imagine all those people in the audience waiting for you to flunk the challenge]. And as for the extreme: Sviatoslav Richter decided not to play the concerto at all, because he thought the Horowitz rendition was so good, he (Sviatoslav Teofilovich) would never be able to say anything new or do anything better.Paul
That's not what I heard. Do you have any references to it?AFAIK, that was about Beethoven 5th and Neuhaus.
That's not what I heard. Do you have any references to it?AFAIK, that was about Beethoven 5th and Neuhaus.What I heard about why Richter did not play Rachmaninov 3rd is he believed that the 3rd movement is not up to standards of the 1st and is way too long and stretched (BTW, the reason why Horowitz and some others chose to make cuts--something Richter would not do).
Richter did record the Emperor, though. DG label. I have it. It's fantastic!
He also refused to play some other concertos he thought were already played to perfection by either his teacher Neuhaus or Gilels.
Are you sure we are talking about Sviatoslav Teofilovich Richter and not about Hans Richter-Haaser? I have trouble believing that...
Are you sure we are talking about Sviatoslav Teofilovich Richter and not about Hans Richter-Haaser? I have trouble believing that because I thought I was VERY well aware of what S. Richter ever did or didn't do.Paul
With Neuhaus, yes, but I very much doubt that was the case with Gilels. His relationship with Gilels was very difficult, to say the least. It's been noticed numerous times whenever Gilels would come to town to play a recital, if Richter was following he'd chose the same program. He was very much concerned to show the world "who is who" in case with Gilels.
"Horowitz is weightless, he’s like a bird. No one can play Scarlatti like him, with such flitting virtuosity. See, I never play Scarlatti," said Richter.
Richter’s approach to music is best illustrated by the enormous range of his repertoire. In recital and on recordings he played everything from Bach to Stravinsky and George Gershwin. But he was also very selective. For example, he never played the Third Piano Concerto of Rachmaninoff or the Fifth Concerto of Beethoven. In both cases he felt that others had played these pieces so well that he had nothing else to say. He did not play all of the Beethoven Sonatas or all the Chopin Etudes or Rachmaninoff Preludes. At the same time, he was a champion of unpopular works that he felt deserved attention. Perhaps the best examples are the Schubert Sonatas. Richter performed most of these at a time when few pianists did. He also played many of the Sonatas of Josef Haydn, works not commonly heard, to the surprise and delight of his audience.
By the way, you may not have heard this radio program (13+ minutes) with Richter (it's in Russian) where he speaks about art. He mentions the second concerto as his favorite (among others). If you haven't heard it before, consider this as a gift: Richter: Art is always unexpected.
Topic: Rachmaninoff Concerto 3 commerical tactic 