The problem with Grieg's Concerto

[rubinsteinmad]

OK, jk, there's no problem. But still.

Why do people think lower in level of the Grieg Concerto than, for example, the Chopin Concerti or the Liszt Concerti or Rachmaninoff 2?

I can see why Chopin is thought of as higher level, because his concerti are uglier (except for his Concerto #2 ), but why Liszt? Why Rachmaninoff?     

Is it really easier, or is it just way too famous, so it's played by way too many lil' kids?

[visitor]

problem w/ the G is it's boring. it's only mildly less dreadful than the Schumann.

if one wants to see why it doesn't compare well to other better 'truer' romantics, just listen the overlooked works, gosh even Tchaikovsky concert Fantasy (and Tchaikovsky didn't even like writtin for piano and orchestra, he preferred piano or ochestra/orchestra + other) , or any of the Mednter concerti, or (on and one with example after example of better pieces).
*ie
Btw has one of the most magnificent written out solo/cadenza interludes of almost anything in the genra imho

[stevensk]

problem w/ the G is it's boring. it's only mildly less dreadful than the Schumann.

-No no no. Griegs concerto is absolutely not boring to play and even more absolutely  not boring to listen to. Tchaikovsky´s  Piano Concerto 1 is extremely boring and bombastic and even more so to listen to.

[visitor]

-No no no. Griegs concerto is absolutely not boring to play and even more absolutely  not boring to listen to. Tchaikovsky´s  Piano Concerto 1 is extremely boring and bombastic and even more so to listen to.

ok. chill. you can like a boring concerto. no big deal. we don't have to agree. you can enjoy it all you like. i sometimes have no choice but to listen to it if on the radio but usually i am napping so it doesn't bother me much if i sleep through it. when i actively listen, i go for other stuff.
agian, more power to you.

**not sure where people's need to 'be right' comes from. makes no difference to me if you like something or not. 

[stevensk]

ok. chill. you can like a boring concerto. no big deal. we don't have to agree. you can enjoy it all you like. i sometimes have no choice but to listen to it if on the radio but usually i am napping so it doesn't bother me much if i sleep through it. when i actively listen, i go for other stuff.
agian, more power to you.

**not sure where people's need to 'be right' comes from. makes no difference to me if you like something or not. 

-No, I dont want to enjoy or listen to a piece that is not acclaimed by a trusted musically or aesthetic  authority. That would be a total waste of time. There must be some kind of aesthetic  law and order here.

[thalbergmad]

The problem with the Grieg is that it has been hacked to death by hundreds of pianists ever since the dawn of the recording age and unfortunately it is often coupled with the even more tiresome effort by Schumann.

It is neither melodic enough or powerfull enough to be justify this attention and one has to question the listening habits of anyone who considers its numerous performances to be worthwhile.

Thal

[rubinsteinmad]

I kind of like the Grieg Concerto, though. It's just I have a personal connection with Grieg, which I am unwilling to share (No, I'm not Norweigian, and no, I'm not descended from Europeans). Before this, I also didn't really like the Grieg Concerto. But now, things've changed. I still dislike the Schumann, though   I still need to hear a Schumann piece written well The Abbeg Variations are OK, as long as you play it really really really well.

[stevensk]

The problem with the Grieg is that it has been hacked to death by hundreds of pianists ever since the dawn of the recording age and unfortunately it is often coupled with the even more tiresome effort by Schumann.

It is neither melodic enough or powerfull enough to be justify this attention and one has to question the listening habits of anyone who considers its numerous performances to be worthwhile.

Thal

-Its obviously sufficiently powerfull to motivate hundreds of pianists to play it
-Once again, its all about taste.  Thats the hardest thing to grab for all of us

[thalbergmad]

-Its obviously sufficiently powerfull to motivate hundreds of pianists to play it

If that is their motivation then yes. Or might it be because they think it will sell/put bums on seats. Or, might it be because they have yet to hear another piano concerto in A minor op.16 that is plainly superior.

Thal

[stevensk]

If that is their motivation then yes. Or might it be because they think it will sell/put bums on seats. Or, might it be because they have yet to hear another piano concerto in A minor op.16 that is plainly superior.

Thal

-Well, a combination. Its beautiful music, its public desired, its "company desired", pianists round the world seem to like it. What else can we expects?

[thalbergmad]

What else can we expects?

The same old crap i suppose.

Thal

[visitor]

*Suddenly, a wild [proper] concerto appears!

[stevensk]

The same old crap i suppose.

Thal

..and again and again,  its all about taste.  Thats the hardest thing to grab for all of us.

[rubinsteinmad]

*Suddenly, a wild [proper] concerto appears!

I don't understand. Do you mean wild, as in ugly?

I agree, then. I'm sure most people prefer the Grieg

[visitor]

I don't understand. Do you mean wild, as in ugly?

and another superior concerto appears

[outin]

If that is their motivation then yes. Or might it be because they think it will sell/put bums on seats. Or, might it be because they have yet to hear another piano concerto in A minor op.16 that is plainly superior.

Thal

I'm confused...what could it be...isn't the paderewsky op. 17?

Clara's isn't op 16 either

[rubinsteinmad]

and another superior concerto appears

How is that superior?

[rubinsteinmad]

I'm confused...what could it be...isn't the paderewsky op. 17?

Clara's isn't op 16 either

Even if they were, they are still worse than the Grieg.

BTW I prefer Rach2, Liszt 1, & Mendelssohn 1 over Grieg, but still.....

[visitor]

How is that superior?

it's superior when the audio plays. i mean superior in the sense of scale and cohesiveness of the form for something so grand (the excerpt is just the first mvmnt), melodic transformation, thematic development. You're right though, it's not better until i actually listen it. the image of that little bit of score is sort of underwhelming, but i have the score. the whole thing is totally jiggy.

[thalbergmad]

I'm confused...what could it be...isn't the paderewsky op. 17?

Clara's isn't op 16 either
[/quoti was referring to Winding old chap.

Thal

[outin]

quoti was referring to Winding old chap.

Oh, you managed to dig out another one I didn't hear before...

I do prefer Paderewsky though...this one is not really to my taste.