Rachmaninoff piano concerto No. 3

[Skybird]

Some years ago I already had posted this concerto, but then it was in parts crippled and it was a three parts video at youtube. I just found out that somebody meanwhile has uploaded the full concerto in one piece, in HQ sound. Therefor I post it again, because this concerto is one of the most breathtaking, romantic, emotional pieces of music that I know of - and Martha Argerich, to quote one critic, jumped onto it and totally consumed it like an infuriated hungry Tiger.

Decembre 1982, Berlin Philharmonic Hall. The orchestra was the Radio Symphony Orchestra Berlin (RSO), which meanwhile has been renamed in German Symphony Orchestra (DSO) when Vladimiar Ashkenazy for some years became chief director, before Kent Nagano. The director was Riccardo Chailly. The pianist, as said, was Martha Argerich - and a VERY hungry Martha Argerich. She played like ol' devil himself, and with totally full risk, all engines 110%, warp-speed-now-scotty!

There are some recordings as fast, but weith more faults by the pianist, and less variance in tempi, volume and expression. To me, this one always has been the very best of them all.

I admit that also is because I was sitting in the audience back then.

My father played one of the bassoons, and he, like many of his collegaues back then, has marked this concerto as one of the event highlights in his career.

The critics back then were stellar, many consider this old recording as maybe the best interpretation ever of this concerto.

Record it, pump up the volume and listen, then get ready for liftoff. If this leaves you untouched and your blood not going heavy, then consider yourself to be probably dead already. This is Russian and romanticism and drama in their best meanings. I know this one inside out, and I do not know how often I have listened to it by now. Very, very often. And still it lights my candle, and sometimes it still wets my eyes in disbelief and emotional overload. It sometimes is just too much to bear, and then a security valve opens so that I must not explode in overjoy.

Hope you enjoy!

P.S.
Available on CD as well, for even better sound quality.

[Tchocky]

I am a #2 man myself. My favourite would be Tamas Vasary with the LSO

Crappy Youtube link -

Although now that you've mentioned it I'll dig out #3

[Oberon]

Aaaah, Rachmaninov. This link will be going in my youtube favourites later I think. My favourite is Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor.

Here's something a little special, the man himself (supposedly) at the keys:



Beautiful.

[Tchocky]

*furious air conducting*

[Skybird]

2nd concerto always reminds me of a soundtrack from some black-white movie from the 40s or 50s.

It seems that somehow my CD of the 2nd has gone amiss. So I have just ordered a set of all four "Rachies" played by Ashkenazy. Good artist, very good pianist, unfortunately a sub-optimal conductor, to put it mildly. But here, he just plays the piano, accompanied by the London Symphony Orchestra directed by Pervin. Not so speed-obsessed his interpretations are. Most players either are fast, or subtle, bot rarely both. Ashkenazy does these concertos relatively subtle, with relaxed speed. Argerich did the 3rd both subtle and furious. Horowitz did the 3rd fast, but cold and with the charme of a robot, without emotional depth.

A concerto is not just a concerto. Players, orchestras, directors preparing the music, can make so much of a difference. During the concerto, directors are not that important, and are doing more show than useful things. Their work has been done during preparation time, when the interpretation was studied in.

Of Ashkenazy I know this story, that many musicians preferred to not watch at him when performing - his directing was technically that way that he added more to confusion and desynchronizing than keeping grip of the overall synchronicity. His strength was to study the artistic interpretation, his technical style of directing was/is his great archilles heel. But to play well by itself and do a classy performance even without a conductor - that is where the really high class orchestras get separated from just good or mediocre ones. But okay, Ashkenazy is a very decent piano player, really. Many of his recordings are considered to be of very high standard. I once had a tape (from radio) with him playing Debussy - second best interpretation of Debussy I ever heared. My Debussy benchmark pianist is Thiollier, however.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Rachmaninoff is great. love his work.

but here's something pretty incredible:
Toccata and fugue in D minor but played on glass



and Fur Elise

[Gerald]

Rachmaninoff is Number one!

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

Toccata and fugue in D minor but played on glass

There's a substantial amount of doubt as to whether 565 (the BWV number that is associated with the work) was actually written by Bach. The use of an exact modern subdominant answer in the exposition, parallel octaves, a plagal cadence and the use of neopolitan harmony (6ths and 3rds, depending on inversion) suggest that it was someone acquainted with the stile galant of the so-callled Rococo period that was fashionable for a few decades in the mid-to-late 18th century that was the composer. Some suggest that is was Johann Peter Kellner, who did have at least social ties to the Bach family, although it is not clear if Kellner ever studied with Bach. I myself am not certain, but I do share the belief that it was not J. S. Bach that wrote the work. The evidence against his authorship seems too weighty.

In terms of Rachmaninoff, I could take or leave him. I was never particularly interested in the Russian sphere to begin with, and as a late holdover from the mid-Romantic, I find his works to be terribly old-fashioned when placed in the context of his contemporaries. I think that has always hindered my enjoyment of his works. One of the downsides of the profession, I suppose.

[Jimbuna]

Always preferred Tchaikovsky or Chopin myself.

[Egan]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Always preferred Tchaikovsky or Chopin myself.

Prokofiev and Stravinsky for me. To be honest, though, I've never really listened to much Rachmaninoff. I don't know why. I'll give this a listen, though. Thanks for the link, Skybird.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Always preferred Tchaikovsky or Chopin myself.

They are on my preference list too, plus Grieg, Ravel, Mozart, Bach, Dvorak, some of Resphigi, some of Janacek, some of Scriabin, some of Puccini, some of Sibelius, some of Liszt, some of Prokofiev, and finally very few of Schreker, Ligeti. Beethoven, well, The Emperor, and that'S it for me regarding Beethoven. Some of the fragile, quiet pieces by Wagner. Oh, and for background yodeling, Vivaldi, Albinoni.

But classical music, it comes and goes in phases, for some months I listen to it quite much, for some months I avoid it completely.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

There's a substantial amount of doubt as to whether 565 (the BWV number that is associated with the work) was actually written by Bach.

OF COURSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY BACH! YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO RUIN MY ENJOYMENT OF THE MUSIC!

Sorry, I don't know what came over me. I have an extensive Bach collection and 565 is hardly my favorite. I actually love the discussions of who may have written what. Another difficulty is that there is no extant copy autographed by Bach himself, and there are autographs of a large part of his work.

I'm currently getting a kick out of music much older than Bach. I now have a lot of Medieval and Renaissance music, and listen to some first thing every morning.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

OF COURSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY BACH! YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO RUIN MY ENJOYMENT OF THE MUSIC!

Sorry, I don't know what came over me. I have an extensive Bach collection and 565 is hardly my favorite. I actually love the discussions of who may have written what. Another difficulty is that there is no extant copy autographed by Bach himself, and there are autographs of a large part of his work.

I'm currently getting a kick out of music much older than Bach. I now have a lot of Medieval and Renaissance music, and listen to some first thing every morning.

Behave yersel

[Sailor Steve]

Thanks...I needed that.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

OF COURSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY BACH! YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO RUIN MY ENJOYMENT OF THE MUSIC!

I know you're joking, but it is the reason that I try to avoid talking about music on the boards. One's own artistic preference and experience is a deeply personal thing, and I think nothing ruins it faster than having some subject matter expert come along and lecturing on the factuality and relevence of said art. The academic arts are something of a four letter word in the US, and they need all the friends and appreciators as they can get. What they don't need are more loudmouth experts insisting that either you appreciate the art as they do or not at all.