# Rachmaninoff - Piano Concerto No. 2



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

How do you rate this piece?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

It’s one of the great piano concertos. After a period of being in a composing ‘funk’, Rachmaninoff came up with this gem. It just may be part of the ultimate finale of the Romantic period and maybe even signaled the beginning of the end of the CP era. Fwiw, it figured in my entry into classical music as a young kid.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

It's the second most popular piano concerto for good reason: it's got it all. Great tunes, beautiful scoring, pianistic fireworks. Pianists I've worked with have told me that the 3rd is thought to be so difficult (there was that movie about it) but in reality the 2nd is harder to play. Whether I'm playing bassoon 1, 2 or even the cymbal part I always enjoy this work. It was also a work that I got to know early on, in my case the Earl Wild/Horenstein recording on Reader's Digest.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

mbhaub said:


> It's the second most popular piano concerto for good reason: it's got it all. Great tunes, beautiful scoring, pianistic fireworks. Pianists I've worked with have told me that the 3rd is thought to be so difficult (there was that movie about it) but in reality the 2nd is harder to play. Whether I'm playing bassoon 1, 2 or even the cymbal part I always enjoy this work. It was also a work that I got to know early on, in my case the Earl Wild/Horenstein recording on Reader's Digest.


What would be the most popular piano concerto?


----------



## SoloYH (8 mo ago)

9.9/10. I love the end of the 3rd movement, also so many good melodies thruout the whole piece. Not to mention the beginning, just wow. When they slam the bass note on the arpeggios after the chords, it's just wow.

@EvaBaron the most popular is Emperor.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

EvaBaron said:


> What would be the most popular piano concerto?


The Emperor, I think.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

For some reason I just can’t get into Rachmaninoff’s 3rd piano concerto, which is the first time I have ever not been able to get into a major repertoire work that is universally loved, so I tried the 2nd. From the moment I heard the opening I knew it was amazing and I have listened to it a lot ever since. Maybe I should try the 3rd again


----------



## SoloYH (8 mo ago)

EvaBaron said:


> For some reason I just can’t get into Rachmaninoff’s 3rd piano concerto, which is the first time I have ever not been able to get into a major repertoire work that is universally loved, so I tried the 2nd. From the moment I heard the opening I knew it was amazing and I have listened to it a lot ever since. Maybe I should try the 3rd again


Same. Something about the 3rd's melody is unappealing or very generic.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

EvaBaron said:


> What would be the most popular piano concerto?


Tchaikovsky b minor. I think this is considerably more popular than Beethoven's 5th. Another candidate would be Grieg's and maybe Mozart K 467, although the latter only for the andante used in that 1960s movie "Elvira Madigan".


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

EvaBaron said:


> What would be the most popular piano concerto?


Tchaikovsky #1. It's interesting; there were thousands of piano concertos written during the 19th c but not even two dozen remain in the repertoire. But the Big Ones remain very, very popular and no pianist can ignore them: Tchaikovsky 1, Rachmaninoff 2, Grieg, Schumann, Beethoven 3, 4, 5, Brahms 2 and not much else! None of them has been pillaged and abused as much as the Rachmaninoff.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The most striking thing is probably the obscurity of Tchaikovsky's 2nd (and fragmentary 3rd) cncertos compared to the b minor (and the violin concerto). It's easy to see that that 2nd is not as popular as the first (like with Rachmaninov 2 and 3 vs. 4) but that one is the most popular ever and the other one is almost unknown is surprising (admittedly, I personally don't care for that 2nd PIT either).


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Tchaikovsky thought the 2nd was better than the 1st! In 50+ years of going to concerts I've only encountered the 2nd twice. The 1st countless times. Same with Rachmaninoff: I've heard and played the 2nd many times. The 3rd once or twice, the Paganini Rhapsody quite a few. The 1st and 4th: never. Some orchestra in the US is doing a Rachmaninoff festival this year, hitting all the piano concertos. Can't remember which one it was (Detroit?) and at first thought that this might be worth going to, but it would be far more rewarding if they were doing the symphonies, too. But they weren't on the schedule.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

mbhaub said:


> Tchaikovsky thought the 2nd was better than the 1st! In 50+ years of going to concerts I've only encountered the 2nd twice. The 1st countless times. Same with Rachmaninoff: I've heard and played the 2nd many times. The 3rd once or twice, the Paganini Rhapsody quite a few. The 1st and 4th: never. Some orchestra in the US is doing a Rachmaninoff festival this year, hitting all the piano concertos. Can't remember which one it was (Detroit?) and at first thought that this might be worth going to, but it would be far more rewarding if they were doing the symphonies, too. But they weren't on the schedule.


The Concertgebouworkest recently had Rachmaninoff’s 1st and 4th piano concerto on their program within one month of each other!


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

The 2nd concerto is a perfect thing of its kind. If you like it, it would be criminal for you not to know the Cello Sonata, which is an even better thing of that kind. What I mean by "that kind?": Fresh, youthful works that are tightly structured at the movement level, without a superfluous note, and full of wonderful melody. But the 3rd is better. It has more depth and it has long range thematic processes and an overall narrative design that make it among the most meticulously unified multimovement cycles of its era. Every theme of the finale derives from the second theme of the first movement, so that when one takes into account the reprises and quotations of the first movment's principal theme, the whole cycle deals with oppositions set up within the first few minutes. It's Rachmaninoff at his mature best.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

mbhaub said:


> Tchaikovsky #1. It's interesting; there were thousands of piano concertos written during the 19th c but not even two dozen remain in the repertoire. But the Big Ones remain very, very popular and no pianist can ignore them: Tchaikovsky 1, Rachmaninoff 2, Grieg, Schumann, Beethoven 3, 4, 5, Brahms 2 and not much else! None of them has been pillaged and abused as much as the Rachmaninoff.


Why would you neglect to mention Brahms PC 1? That is a titanic work with powerful energy. Also Saint Saens was no slouch.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I voted very good, that is for the concerto not the video. I always hesitate with " Excellent " 
Noting will ever beat the Beethoven 3 and 5 concertos , for me that is .


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

"Quite bad"


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I like Rachmaninov's 2nd concerto a lot. For me it is not one of the truly great concertos but it certainly has good tunes. The brilliance is on the surface and I don't hear anything very profound in it but it certainly has a place in my listening - I listen to it quite often.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

clavichorder said:


> Why would you neglect to mention Brahms PC 1? That is a titanic work with powerful energy. Also Saint Saens was no slouch.


The Brahms 1st, the Saint-Saens (2, 5 really), the Mendelssohns, are all good, and fairly well-known but their appearance on concerts is far less than the big ones. They are in the repertoire, just not as popular as the others and in fact wanna-be pianists can ignore Brahms 1 but not Rachmaninoff 2!


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

EdwardBast said:


> The 2nd concerto is a perfect thing of its kind. What I mean by "that kind?": Fresh, youthful works that are tightly structured at the movement level, without a superfluous note,


Wait till Heck148 comes to comment on how the orchestration is thick, murky, turgid, etc, 🤪


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

Tremendous romantic concerto - the third is even better but the second certainly does the goods. Just about every great pianist has recorded it apart from Horowitz but to hear him see his pupil Janis. Fantastic.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> The 2nd concerto is a perfect thing of its kind. If you like it, it would be criminal for you not to know the Cello Sonata, which is an even better thing of that kind...


Thanks for reminding me to check back to the Rach Cello Sonata. The Piano is given equal, if not more, attention than the Cello which Rachmaninoff apparently made a point of mentioning and, along with what you said, the Sonata came from the same ‘well’ as the PC2.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> "Quite bad"


In what sense? Technically? Aesthetically? Just curious.


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

EdwardBast said:


> In what sense? Technically? Aesthetically? Just curious.


I'm not a musician so the words I use to describe why I don't think its that good you may think are somewhat vague. I don't understand why people think its great. I don't get what they're hearing. To me its sounds a bit empty. It sounds nice but that's it. As someone else said there's no depth. I also think its quite a feminine sound. That probably wont make sense to you, but its like its overly emotional, gushy, almost too romantic.

It is not in the same league as the Mozart, Beethoven or Brahms.

Not sure if any of that helps to explain why I voted "quite bad".


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I don't much care for the pieces but I voted "good". It's a very well done late romantic potboiler and I think I understand why people like it. I prefer the 3rd that has a bit more variety and not quite as obvious crowdpleasing features, compare the bombastic beginning of the 2nd and the almost understated of the 3rd. My favorite is the Paganini Rhapsody, though. And Tchaikovsky's b minor, regardless of being absurdly overplayed is far more fresh and colorful to me than any Rachmaninoff.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

It is a work a like very much, but honestly I prefer Rachmaninoff's piano miniatures to any of his full length work, Symphonic Dances excepted.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

SVR's 2nd PC is a work that I go for months without listening to, instead turning to the 3rd or 4th. Then I come back to it and realise what a gem it really can be in the right hands. The best performance I can recall hearing was Weissenberg back in the 1970s. He had a clear grasp of the overall shape of the piece and that's what it needs. It is not a piece for a virtuoso show-off.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

clavichorder said:


> It is a work a like very much, but honestly I prefer Rachmaninoff's piano miniatures to any of his full length work, Symphonic Dances excepted.


Me too … but without exception.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Personally I prefer the 3rd, the 2nd is a little mushy for me. But the 2nd is still excellent.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

clavichorder said:


> It is a work a like very much, but honestly I prefer Rachmaninoff's piano miniatures to any of his full length work, Symphonic Dances excepted.


Yes, Symphonic Dances are his best "symphony" and the Paganini my favorite "concerto"


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

I voted "good". I much prefer the 3rd. I find the second movement, despite its beautiful main theme, rather dull. I like the 1st movement the best.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

Rach 2 is one of the great Romantic Piano Concertos; so is the 3rd as well as the less popular 4th (the 1st PC is a bit long and rambling). In my mind Rachmaninoff's endless supply of melodies and sad, sentimental, Russian soul, makes him Tchaikovsky's worthy successor.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

clavichorder said:


> It is a work a like very much, but honestly I prefer Rachmaninoff's piano miniatures to any of his full length work, Symphonic Dances excepted.


What is a miniature?


----------



## Xenophiliu (Jan 2, 2022)

HansZimmer said:


> What is a miniature?


Miniature (Music)


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> I'm not a musician so the words I use to describe why I don't think its that good you may think are somewhat vague. I don't understand why people think its great. I don't get what they're hearing. To me its sounds a bit empty. It sounds nice but that's it. As someone else said there's no depth. I also think its quite a feminine sound. That probably wont make sense to you, but its like its overly emotional, gushy, almost too romantic.
> 
> It is not in the same league as the Mozart, Beethoven or Brahms.
> 
> Not sure if any of that helps to explain why I voted "quite bad".


I want to take this back. I only posted this over a couple of weeks ago but I realise I like every "classical" composer and their music.


----------



## Scherzi Cat (8 mo ago)

I rate the "piece" as certainly one of the greatest piano concertos of all time. I'm glad you did not ask me to rate the recording that you used in the example.


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

Funny, that back in the 60's and 70's the 2nd was held up as a masterpiece. Then came along Shine, and everyone scrambled to the 3rd.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Excellent, my favorite of all piano concertos at the moment. To me, a 9.0 out of 10. My go-to performance is Bernstein/Graffman/NYPO.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

But "Shine" already assumed the dubious premiss that "Rach 3" was the greatest and/or most difficult piano concerto (or in any case somehow superspecial). I think this is BS but apparently it was common enough an idea to serve as backdrop for that movie. Nevertheless, I also think that #2 might still be a bit more popular (and clearly was until the 1970s or so).


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

PeterKC said:


> Funny, that back in the 60's and 70's the 2nd was held up as a masterpiece. Then came along Shine, and everyone scrambled to the 3rd.


That did happen to many more pieces , in the Netherlands we had a movie call The IJssalon, used a part of Mahler 4 
All suppliers where sold out, shops made overtime...( as a matter of speaking)
O Fortuna, also such public seller and not to forget ................... Ride of the Valkyries.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

EvaBaron said:


> For some reason I just can’t get into* Rachmaninoff’s 3rd piano concerto*, which is the first time I have ever not been able to get into a major repertoire work that is universally loved, so I tried the 2nd. From the moment I heard the opening I knew it was amazing and I have listened to it a lot ever since. Maybe I should try the 3rd again


Hearing the Lugansky/Shpiller recording of the 3rd on Brilliant Classics recently, I was surprised how it managed to change my percpetion of the work somewhat, adding a lot of extremely melodious, very 'Russian' ebb-and flow effects to that work. Recommended; it is now among my favourites (I own between 25-30 recordings). Another alternative reading, unusually slow, clear and majestic in the first movement, and thus peculiarly effectful, is Ashkenazy/Previn, different from Ashkenazy's other ones.


----------

