why is rach3 hard?

[ponecorleone]

i have heard the piece, but havent seen the performance or the score, and it doesnt sound too hard. what is it that makes it so hard?!?!

[xvimbi]

It's actually not hard at all. Anybody with no more than two years of piano playing can do it.

[Skeptopotamus]

xvimbi is being stupid.  his stupidity is turning me on.  damn you and your hot and sexy childlike innocence!


anyways.... it's hard.  it is just hard.  I guess?  It's not as hard as say a prokofiev concerto, but you should probably have more than 2 years experience before attempting it.  maybe 2 and a half.  the difficulty is seriously overrated but it isnt easy.

[xvimbi]

xvimbi is being stupid.  his stupidity is turning me on.  *** you and your hot and sexy childlike innocence!

If you took this seriously, then you haven't participated in all those discussions about Rach3 that we have had on this forum, and you have no idea what I am talking about, and somebody, darn it, needs to invent an emoticon for SARCASM!

[Skeptopotamus]

i'm aware you were being sarcastic =P   couldnt you tell i was also just kidding around when i was talking about your sexy childlike innocence?  cmon.  everyone knows the source of your sexiness comes from your alpha dominance....  anyways wow i seem to be getting in alot of fights today ^^  oh hey.


i think we can use

=P

or

(sarcasm)


those work pretty well.  "i'm aware you were being sarcastic =P"  crap now it looks like i wasnt aware -.-

[mikeyg]

Wait, you find childlike innocence sexy? (calls police)

[Skeptopotamus]

childlike innocence is sexy on legals.  on children childlike innocence is annoying, and loud, and usually messy and sticky.

[mikeyg]

? 
What do you mean, "sexy on legals? (calls FBI)

The rach 3 doesn't sound hard to you? did you listen to just the first 30 seconds of it?  to me, even a low-level pianist, ii can hear the extreme difficulty of it.

[Skeptopotamus]

legals= 18+


sorry im a sicko =P

[xvimbi]

i'm aware you were being sarcastic =P   couldnt you tell i was also just kidding around when i was talking about your sexy childlike innocence?  cmon.

No I couldn't. I tried to fill in all kinds of words for your "***", but none of them sounded as if you were joking. If so, then it wasn't my kind of joking. Perhaps, we need an emoticon for JOKING too?

[Skeptopotamus]

it was a sarcastic d-amn - the -

hmmm....... maybe joking could be

=D

[Skeptopotamus]

ok check my sig.  i think we have the situation under control now. =D

[DarkWind]

Oh the Rach 3 is so easy! I like sight read it yesterday using my left ear and a spatula attached to forehead. No trouble there.

(IT'S DIFFICULT, DAMMIT)

[hodi]

i'm studying the piano for almost 2 weeks and i would like to start rach3

[Skeptopotamus]

i slipped on the sheets for it and learned it without even knowing.  i just sat down and poof.

[thierry13]

Rach 3 regroups about all the piano difficultys in one work. It is musically extremely hard, hard on emotions, and technically *** hard. It has fast thirds, chord tremolos on both hands, very fast octaves, huge chords fastly, and it's *** complicated, and it has a lot of notes. And the wide arpegios are hard to do because you really have to move your hand a lot, without passing your thumb under (not sure if you understand well). And it has big chords trills, like what chopin do in the beginning of his etude in thirds, but with bigger chords, like 5th 9th 5th 9th(repeat very fast). And it has glissandos and fast repeated notes and all. It has ANYTHING you can think of.


But, of course, everybody can play it at sight reading.   

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

https://www.piano.ru/scores/rahmaninov/concertos/rah-con-3-I.pdf

https://www.piano.ru/scores/rahmaninov/concertos/rah-con-3-II-III.pdf

Here is the sheet music. I think this should clear up all your doubts.

[musicsdarkangel]

xvimbi is being stupid.  his stupidity is turning me on.  *** you and your hot and sexy childlike innocence!


anyways.... it's hard.  it is just hard.  I guess?  It's not as hard as say a prokofiev concerto, but you should probably have more than 2 years experience before attempting it.  maybe 2 and a half.  the difficulty is seriously overrated but it isnt easy.

I think that's hilarious that some pianists claim the Prokofiev to be harder than the Rachmaninoff.

It is all a matter of your strengths and weaknesses.  For me, the Rach 3 is much more difficult, because the notes are everywhere, your hands need to be quite flexible, the memorization is intense, and it has pretty much every technique I can think of, from octaves to repeated notes.



The Prokofiev YES, is quite difficult, but I don't think that it is nearly as dense as the Rach 3.

I guess it all depends on the pianist though.

[apion]

I think that's hilarious that some pianists claim the Prokofiev to be harder than the Rachmaninoff.

It is all a matter of your strengths and weaknesses.  For me, the Rach 3 is much more difficult, because the notes are everywhere, your hands need to be quite flexible, the memorization is intense, and it has pretty much every technique I can think of, from octaves to repeated notes.



The Prokofiev YES, is quite difficult, but I don't think that it is nearly as dense as the Rach 3.

I guess it all depends on the pianist though.

Supposedly, Rach3 has more notes per measure than any other concerto --- so yes, it's very "dense."

Prokofiev 2 and 3 are just a smidgen less challenging than Rach3.

The only concerti that are equally difficult as Rach3 are:

Brahms #2
Bartok #2
Busoni C Major

(please correct me if I'm wrong).

[musicsdarkangel]

Supposedly, Rach3 has more notes per measure than any other concerto --- so yes, it's very "dense."

Prokofiev 2 and 3 are just a smidgen less challenging than Rach3.

The only concerti that are equally difficult as Rach3 are:

Brahms #2
Bartok #2
Busoni C Major

(please correct me if I'm wrong).

I totally agree, except IMO the Brahms 2 is a bit less challenging (still a beat though)

Bartok and Busoni are insane.  Period.  Which is why I like them.

[apion]

I totally agree, except IMO the Brahms 2 is a bit less challenging (still a beat though)

Bartok and Busoni are insane.  Period.  Which is why I like them.

Are there any concerti other than these 4 that you'd rank as the most difficult?

[jbmajor]

i'm studying the piano for almost 2 weeks and i would like to start rach3

   funniest post ever! 

....You can start it, alright....

[apion]

   funniest post ever! 

....You can start it, alright....

I had the whole thing memorized after just 8 days!    A walk in the park is more difficult! 

[Skeptopotamus]

may i?  thank you.


concertos that are harder than the Rach 3?  Now let me think for JUST a moment....

Barber
Corigliano 1968
Rautavaara (all of them)
ligeti
Busoni
NOT bartok or brahms tho
prokofiev 2 and possibly 5
most non-minimalist concertos composed after 1950 probably
ginastera MAYBE
anything by the neoromantics IE Danielpour, Finnissey, Ferneyhough, Bowen (can we count bowen as neoromantic?) etc...
just about anything by any experimental composers IE penderecki, Xenakis, Ligeti, Boulez etc...
most any 12tone concertos


rach 3 is like nothing compared to modern stuff.

[musicsdarkangel]

may i?  thank you.


concertos that are harder than the Rach 3?  Now let me think for JUST a moment....

Barber
Corigliano 1968
Rautavaara (all of them)
ligeti
Busoni
NOT bartok or brahms tho
prokofiev 2 and possibly 5
most non-minimalist concertos composed after 1950 probably
ginastera MAYBE
anything by the neoromantics IE Danielpour, Finnissey, Ferneyhough, Bowen (can we count bowen as neoromantic?) etc...
just about anything by any experimental composers IE penderecki, Xenakis, Ligeti, Boulez etc...
most any 12tone concertos


rach 3 is like nothing compared to modern stuff.

Barber and not Bartok?

You've got to be kidding........

By the way, Apion, I have listened and analyzed to several concertos, and so far, I have found nothing to be more challenging.

Really, it depends on the pianist, but this is the concerto that most say is the most difficult.

Bartok and Busoni are the only two major contenders I have found.

[Skeptopotamus]

so you're saying the rach 3 is harder than the ligeti?

[tds]

Beethoven 4th?


one could certainly feel he/she owns the world after giving a series of Rach 3 performances, and conquering every city one has his/her butts on. HOWEVER, does one feels the darn genuine anxiety before a concert of Beethoven 4th? or worse, perhaps a feeling of owing a whole world, plus morale, while handshaken backstage? maybe technique is not the only thing to gauge level of difficulty. just a thought. best, tds.

[Skeptopotamus]

aww you're getting too complicated.  but i think barber is harder than bartok and i stick by that.

[Motrax]

I only browsed the score for a few minutes (so I don't really know it well), but Henselt's concerto sounds and looked very difficult (and I'm gonna just stick with more romantic concertos). The handspan required to play it is pretty big - there are a number of 10th interval runs, and chords spanning 12 or even 14 notes. It seemed like quite an awkward mess, where Rachmaninoff's concerto is written more kindly for the pianist. There are a few other obscure concerti of the romantic era that might come close or surpass Rachmaninoff's (perhaps Rubinstein or Moszkowski?), but I'm not really an expert on the matter. Medtner's concerti also seem pretty difficult with the double-note runs, complicated rhythm and voicing, and interperetation (making the same recurring theme interesting after it repeats for the 20th time, 'specially in the 1st concerto  ).

[lostinidlewonder]

The more modern concerto are harder imo, to memorise and understand. The Rach is written very logically/traditionally, and how the sound moves is obvious and not too tough to accept, but listen to more modern stuff, you personally have to listen to it and play over sections many more times to really be revealed "the way" to play/interpret.

Rach is a good composer for piano, a lot of his stuff is very pianistic to play (feels right on the hands, naturally alteres in volume/tempo through the notes), and progressions throughout the concerto are routine if you have played a number of piano solos from Rach. I think Rach 3 is way too overestimated for the difficulty it presents, there is nothing really shocking in it that isn't found in other piano solo compositions of his. It is just big and full of content, but just because it has lots in it does that means its hard? No, the question for difficulty must come from the pianistic elements of the composition, how well does it fit for playing on the piano. The rach 3 just feels fantastic on the hands, and has a lot of logical form, this makes it just that little easier to learn. There is nothing in that that should absolutely baffle you if you are confident with your technique. 

I think if you are still doing grades for your pianio its impossible to learn this , rach concert should be played once you really know your stuff, then you will realise its not too hard as most people say. It is very hard if you haven't filled in all your techniqcal gaps because you have to support quite a lot, any small deficiency will collapse your peformance (you cant get away with decieving playing thats for sure, eg, skipping/mumbling notes, neglecting dynamics etc). Lots more concertos i prefer tough, like Ravels LH one, or the Gershwin in F *drool* lol.

[steinwayguy]

Brahms 2, Prokofiev 2 and Bartok 2 are as equally difficult as Rachmaninoff 3. Prokofiev 3 and Beethoven 4 are close behind.

[Waldszenen]

The Rach 2 is also extremely difficult.

[apion]

concertos that are harder than the Rach 3?  Now let me think for JUST a moment....

Barber
Corigliano 1968
Rautavaara (all of them)
ligeti
Busoni
NOT bartok or brahms tho
prokofiev 2 and possibly 5
most non-minimalist concertos composed after 1950 probably
ginastera MAYBE
anything by the neoromantics IE Danielpour, Finnissey, Ferneyhough, Bowen (can we count bowen as neoromantic?) etc...
just about anything by any experimental composers IE penderecki, Xenakis, Ligeti, Boulez etc...
most any 12tone concertos


rach 3 is like nothing compared to modern stuff.

I think we must distinguish between those pieces which are in the "standard repertoire," and those that have yet to prove themselves.  Most major international piano competitions will accept only concerti that are in the standard repertoire ....... several  of Skeptopotamus's concerti would not fall within that ambit.

[tds]

aww you're getting too complicated......

"he who values simplicity more than anything under the stars never discounts the existence of its twin brother, complexity." OTD

best, tds