Rachmaninoff - Sonata no.1, op.28

[andhow04]

here is live audio (the video overall wasn't great) from a concert last week. it is the second time i played this huge Sonata in public, there's a few hiccups but overall i think the whole gist of the piece is there. i was asked to learn this Sonata, otherwise never would have thought about it, because it's so long and involved, it takes a lot of work to get all the details down.

i realized that rachmaninoff's technique even in the heaviest passages almost always involves intricate fingerwork, it is rarely pure arm technique as you see so often in liszt.

this Sonata is so fascinating because he wrote it for himself to play on tour in the USA in 1909, alongside the third concerto; it is musically based largely on the Dies Irae, and the climax of all three movements happens when the DIes Irae actually emerges twice in the last movement. the slow movement has some of his most intense lyrical writing, the first movement has incredible changes of texture, everything is planned and thought out, but its just so much involvement and length that it is rarely played.

howveer let it be known that this Sonata is one of rachmaninoff's all time great constructions, and the deeper you go the more rewarding it is ! the 2nd symphony, Isle of the Dead, 3rd concerto, and this Sonata were alll written in the same time frame.

[bryfarr]

How would you compare this sonata to the second?

[andhow04]

How would you compare this sonata to the second?

oh gosh, i have never played the second sonata, so i am not sure pianistically how they compare. this one is longer and doesn't have any other version to play, the one he published is the only version available. nothing can really be cut, in spite of its length, its really well constructed. i will have to haave a look at the second sonata for pianistic reasons, but this one has a bit of everything in it for sure. many passages resemble those from the 3rd concerto which he wrote at the same time

[lelle]

Well played!! I'm very impressed. I think this sonata is hugely underrated and I prefer it over the 2nd. It's large structure is one of its drawbacks, as it can be difficult to a listener to take in in one sitting.

I think your conception of the piece is excellent. I like how you give it time to breathe and make sure to contrast the big, loud with a quiet, light, fingery approach like you said in your OP. It's often played too "Rachmaninoff-heavy" all the way through, and that just makes the piece too heavy and suffocating to listen to. I think you are doing a lot to capture the different characters and demarcate the structure that I sometimes miss in the recordings made by some of the greats. There were many moments you did things I have not heard before that I thought worked really well and gave the piece some space to breathe before the big climaxes.

[transitional]

Thanks for introducing me to this amazing piece! I've never heard it before and usually prefer sonatas to other random categories (such as the frequently played moments musicaux and etudes tableaux)

[andhow04]

Well played!! I'm very impressed. I think this sonata is hugely underrated and I prefer it over the 2nd. It's large structure is one of its drawbacks, as it can be difficult to a listener to take in in one sitting.

I think your conception of the piece is excellent. I like how you give it time to breathe and make sure to contrast the big, loud with a quiet, light, fingery approach like you said in your OP. It's often played too "Rachmaninoff-heavy" all the way through, and that just makes the piece too heavy and suffocating to listen to. I think you are doing a lot to capture the different characters and demarcate the structure that I sometimes miss in the recordings made by some of the greats. There were many moments you did things I have not heard before that I thought worked really well and gave the piece some space to breathe before the big climaxes.

thanks so much for the thoughtful comments, beyond learning the insane amount of notes in this 1,000 bar sonata, the really hard thing is to plan out the form, it's so long and complicated. you start to feel esp in the first movement that you have to keep moving otherwise it will go on forever, but that's not going to work because then everything feels rushed and in the same character., so you as an interpreter really have to make choices, where you are going to breathe or hold back. i think he really leaves a lot to the interpreter, the dynamics and articulations are not always specific in my opinion, and in a way i never really hear an ideal performance. maybe not even his would be ideal. i wish we had that recording though!

[andhow04]

Thanks for introducing me to this amazing piece! I've never heard it before and usually prefer sonatas to other random categories (such as the frequently played moments musicaux and etudes tableaux)

so glad you listened, if you want to hear a really good performance i recommend a live recording by Lugansky that can be found on youtube, there are a few actually. i think one in particular is better than his studio recording. the Berezovsky recording is kind of interesting and of course has amazing pianism but is not my favorite for how the structure plays out. there are interesting live, sort of bootlegged performances of Pletnev and Trifonov on youtube that both feature some really creative interpretations. i don't enjoy the Ogdon recording. trying to think who else..

[lelle]

i think he really leaves a lot to the interpreter, the dynamics and articulations are not always specific in my opinion, and in a way i never really hear an ideal performance. maybe not even his would be ideal.

I do think this could be considered a flaw with the piece - its unwieldy length and structure. But actually that's part of what fascinates me with the sonata. It's perhaps flawed but that's what makes it interesting. You sort of want to figure out how to make it work, even if there might be no ideal solution. I've realised I don't need art to be perfect to enjoy it, just interesting.

[bryfarr]

The same could be said of Brahms' piano sonatas... very big in concept and duration.  Not everyone can hold them together.  One who can - Kissin in the 3rd sonata.  Would be curious to hear comparisons to Rach's 1st sonata and those of Brahms, from a performance standpoint.

[andhow04]

I do think this could be considered a flaw with the piece - its unwieldy length and structure. But actually that's part of what fascinates me with the sonata. It's perhaps flawed but that's what makes it interesting. You sort of want to figure out how to make it work, even if there might be no ideal solution. I've realised I don't need art to be perfect to enjoy it, just interesting.

on one hand it is unwieldly, esp. the first movement which is really clear in the development - but more crowded in the expo and recap - but on the other hand its very complete, in teh sense that there is nothing to cut really. if you are interested i wrote quite a bit about the melodic side of this sonata, though when i tried to write about the form, it kept evading me, i wrote 3000 words and scrapped them all. it's hard to put into words, because it is so layered and self-referential.. though that may be part of the design. here is the link.
https://www.nathancarterette.com/essayss/2023/9/13/rachmaninoff-sonata-no1-in-d-minor-op28

[andhow04]

The same could be said of Brahms' piano sonatas... very big in concept and duration.  Not everyone can hold them together.  One who can - Kissin in the 3rd sonata.  Would be curious to hear comparisons to Rach's 1st sonata and those of Brahms, from a performance standpoint.

i hope someone can chime in as i have never played. a Brahms sonata. 3 is probably the most interesting to me but i can only listen to it once in a blue moon somehow.. overall Brahms' form was probably more strict than Rachmaninoff, who apparently brought this Sonata to a group of critics (including Medtner) to discuss how to tighten up the sonata-allegro form. consdering that he wrote this piece in the same couple of years as Isle of the Dead, Symphony no.2 and 3rd concerto, it's clear the ideas were really overflowing

[transitional]

i hope someone can chime in as i have never played. a Brahms sonata. 3 is probably the most interesting to me but i can only listen to it once in a blue moon somehow.. overall Brahms' form was probably more strict than Rachmaninoff, who apparently brought this Sonata to a group of critics (including Medtner) to discuss how to tighten up the sonata-allegro form. consdering that he wrote this piece in the same couple of years as Isle of the Dead, Symphony no.2 and 3rd concerto, it's clear the ideas were really overflowing

I really like the brahms sonata 1, though I've never played it before. It's long and rambling but still feels coherent. The Schumann Sonata 1 is another one like this, especially in the 1st movement, where a single theme feels like it keeps coming back every minute for 10 minutes. I do think there are many ideas. But they are connected in some way that can easily unify them

[lelle]

on one hand it is unwieldly, esp. the first movement which is really clear in the development - but more crowded in the expo and recap - but on the other hand its very complete, in teh sense that there is nothing to cut really. if you are interested i wrote quite a bit about the melodic side of this sonata, though when i tried to write about the form, it kept evading me, i wrote 3000 words and scrapped them all. it's hard to put into words, because it is so layered and self-referential.. though that may be part of the design. here is the link.
https://www.nathancarterette.com/essayss/2023/9/13/rachmaninoff-sonata-no1-in-d-minor-op28

I thought your essay was interesting, thanks for the link. I agree with you that it's hard to cut anything from the form as it's laid out now, it would turn into a different piece somehow. The form just puts really heavy demands on the pianist so it doesn't become to heavy and boring.