# Rachmaninov Piano Concerto No. 3



## merlinus

I have been listening to a number of recordings of this work. The best so far are Janis/Dorati and Ashkenazy/Previn. Others that I find to be excellent include Lisitsa/Francis, Buniatishvili/Jarvi, and of course Argerich/Chailly.

I have also auditioned versions by Trpčeski/Petrenko (mostly too cool and distant), Wang/Dudamel (too much glitz and not enough substance), Sokolov/Ollila, Sokolov/Tortelier (both lack drama and excitement, despite excellent pianism), and Hamelin/Jurowsky (clearly a mailed-in performance, and by far the worst of the lot).

I am wondering about Andsnes/Pappano, and also hope to listen to Cliburn/Kondrashin.

Any others???


----------



## Klassik

Have you tried the Horowitz/Ormandy recording? Ormandy has a reputation for being a good Rachmaninoff conductor. Some people love this recording, others hate it. The fact that it was done live probably does not help.


----------



## AfterHours

You won't top the Argerich/Chailly you mentioned. Just listen to it again, instead of looking for others 

I'm serious about that one being the very best, but half-kidding about the way I said it :lol: Listen to other renditions at your hearts content of course! Sorry, but though I like your other choices a lot too, I can't help you with topping one of the greatest renditions in recorded history :tiphat:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Greatest ever is Horowitz/Barbirolli hands down. It may be the greatest concerto recording of anything.

Janis/Dorati is my favorite in modern sound. I love that Mercury recording.


----------



## hpowders

Klassik said:


> Have you tried the Horowitz/Ormandy recording? Ormandy has a reputation for being a good Rachmaninoff conductor. Some people love this recording, others hate it. The fact that it was done live probably does not help.


I'm disappointed in Horowitz/Rachmaninov 3, whether it be the old Coates mono or the Ormandy.

Too "slapdash".


----------



## chesapeake bay

This one is worth a listen, Lukas Vondracek with the National Orchestra of Belgium, Marin Alsop conducting at the 2016 Queen Elizebeth competition


----------



## Pugg

Rachmaninov:No. 3 in D minor
Kiril Kondrashin Symphony of the Air (conductor)
[Record: May 19, 1958, Carnegie Hall] as in from the psat.
Those days I have lots likes, like Gavrilov /Leif Ove Andsnes/ Nikolai Tokarev to name a few.


----------



## merlinus

Listened to Cliburn/Kondrashin, but the sound was so bad that I could not get through it. Also Pletnev/Rostropovich, which lacked the passion and intensity I so much enjoy.


----------



## Pugg

merlinus said:


> Listened to Cliburn/Kondrashin, but the sound was so bad that I could not get through it. Also Pletnev/Rostropovich, which lacked the passion and intensity I so much enjoy.


I am speechless.


----------



## Triplets

My 2 favorites are both Conducted by Ormandy. One is with Ashkenazy and the other with the Composer at the keyboard.


----------



## Judith

My favourite piano concerto. Mine performed by Stephen Hough on a CD with four Rachmaninov CDs.


Beautiful!!


----------



## merlinus

Two more added, neither of which is anywhere close to my best selections.

Rudy/Jansons -- well played, but cool and distant, not what I want for this piece. Polar opposite of Argerich, for the most part.

Volodos/Levine -- played too fast with little emotion and not enough power, along with poor sound.


----------



## Pugg

Triplets said:


> My 2 favorites are both Conducted by Ormandy. One is with Ashkenazy and the other with the Composer at the keyboard.


I prefer his reading with Haitink.


----------



## chesapeake bay

Witold Malcuzynski with the Warsaw National Philharmonic Symphony, Rowicki conducting is another good one


----------



## Guest

My two favorites are Berman/Abbado and Matsuev/Gergiev. Daniil Trifonov is currently recording all four, so when his No.3 comes out, I'm sure it will head to the top of the list!


----------



## DavidA

Klassik said:


> *Have you tried the Horowitz/Ormandy recording? *Ormandy has a reputation for being a good Rachmaninoff conductor. Some people love this recording, others hate it. The fact that it was done live probably does not help.


It is somewhat slapdash with too many wrong notes. The Horowitz performance of this late period is with Mehta where the pianist is far more assured. Only available as video unless you but a 50 CD set of Horowitz's concert performances.


----------



## DavidA

Just listening to Volodos. The virtuosity has to heard to be believed!


----------



## merlinus

DavidA said:


> Just listening to Volodos. The virtuosity has to heard to be believed!


Definitely virtuoso playing, but sadly inversely proportional to bringing out the nuances, depth, and feeling of most of the pieces he has recorded. Seems to be the norm with many of today's headline pianists, conductors, and other performers.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

That's too sweeping IMHO. For me he can bring out the musicality in display pieces, though I do agree that when it comes to performing works of greater substance (like the one under discussion here) he has more to learn yet.


----------



## DavidA

merlinus said:


> Definitely virtuoso playing, but sadly *inversely proportional to bringing out the nuances, depth, and feeling* of most of the pieces he has recorded. Seems to be the norm with many of today's headline pianists, conductors, and other performers.


You sure you're listening to the same pianist?


----------



## Vaneyes

The edict is known.


----------



## merlinus

DavidA said:


> You sure you're listening to the same pianist?


Most definitely!!! Reminds me of something Vladimir Horowitz once said, about being able to play all of the notes but none of the music.

Of course, as always, YMMV.


----------



## DavidA

merlinus said:


> Most definitely!!! Reminds me of something Vladimir Horowitz once said, about being able to play all of the notes but none of the music.
> 
> Of course, as always, YMMV.


I'm afraid I see the performance in far more different terms. I'm really glad I can enjoy a whole range of interpretations of this music. I listened to the aged Vlad (76) playing this concerto and it is still explosive. But Volodos is one of the best imo


----------



## DavidA

Vaneyes said:


> The edict is known.


One of the greatest performances.


----------



## DarkAngel

Vaneyes said:


> The edict is known.


Yes but look at the total package both works, far better to buy older release with equally great Tchaikovsky 1 Kondrashin performance


----------



## DarkAngel

merlinus said:


> Most definitely!!! Reminds me of something Vladimir Horowitz once said, about being able to play all of the notes but none of the music.
> 
> Of course, as always, YMMV.


There is a similar story about Schnabel, after piano recording session was asked if he wanted to do another take since there were a couple small "mistakes"......his reply I could do it again more carefully with no mistakes but it would not sound as good


----------



## DarkAngel

This Horowitz 51 Rach 3rd under Reiner recorded in very clear mono studio sound has long been a strong contender, and for Ashkenazy I like this 63 Fistoulari over the Previn Rach 3rd plus you get a great Rach 2nd under Kondrashin


----------



## DarkAngel

Byron Janis definitely a great Rach 3rd, but which is better Dorati or Munch hard to choose as both are stellar, perhaps slight edge to Dorati but RCA should remaster this classic as SACD hybrid, come on guys.......


----------



## merlinus

DarkAngel said:


> Byron Janis definitely a great Rach 3rd, but which is better Dorati or Munch hard to choose as both are stellar, perhaps slight edge to Dorati but RCA should remaster this classic as SACD hybrid, come on guys.......


Janis/Dorati and Argerich/Chailly are still at the top for me, after listening to 18 or so different versions, some of them 2 or 3 times. Ashkenazy/Previn is not far behind.


----------



## DarkAngel

merlinus said:


> I have been listening to a number of recordings of this work. The best so far are Janis/Dorati and Ashkenazy/Previn. Others that I find to be excellent include Lisitsa/Francis,* Buniatishvili/Jarvi*, and of course Argerich/Chailly.


I checked this out on Tidal, then purchased used on Amazon, nice pick-up in modern sound that will get repeated plays in the future, seems to have some artistic insight and emotional nuance behind the brilliant technical performance.......


----------



## merlinus

Having just listened to Janis/Dorati again, for me no can match this performance, not even Argerich.

The sound, playing, and ability to bring out the depths inherent in the music are quite amazing.


----------



## Konsgaard

Outstanding:
Argerich/Chailly
Volodos/Levine
Lisitsa/Francis

Also the Buniatishvilli/Jarvi mentioned above is among the great recent recordings of both the 2nd and the 3rd IMO.


----------



## Judith

Love Stephen Houghs performance!


----------



## JAS

I have a set by Howard Shelley, with Bryden Thompson conducting the SNO.


----------



## Pugg

I recently heard a recording from Nelson Freire, recorded in my home town concert hall with Edo de Waart , stunning.


----------



## JAS

What about Rachmaninov's own performances of the concertos? One would have to accept limitations in the sound, but does anyone have these recordings? (There seem to be competing sets by RCA and NAXOS.)


----------



## merlinus

JAS said:


> What about Rachmaninov's own performances of the concertos? One would have to accept limitations in the sound, but does anyone have these recordings? (There seem to be competing sets by RCA and NAXOS.)


I have the naxos version, and indeed, the sound is horrific. It therefore cannot bring out the nuances of the piece, but Sergei's chops are something to behold!


----------



## Star

merlinus said:


> I have the naxos version, and indeed, the sound is horrific. It therefore cannot bring out the nuances of the piece, but Sergei's chops are something to behold!


Rach imposed cuts on his version which might have been to limit the number of pressings of shellac. The tempi are fast - also a result of recording conditions? Of course he played it like no-one else but the sound is not good.
For a modern version Volodos is superb


----------



## DarkAngel

Rachmaninoff and Horowitz first meetings and rehearsal's together in NYC, and how Horowitz became early master of Rach 3rd

http://www.steinway-piano.com/stein...chmaninoff-arrived-together-at-steinway-hall/

Rach recognized the mastery of Horowitz and their shared personal history of the motherland, but also reminded him of the emotional sweep and magic moments like jasmine scent in an evening breeze that are also part of rach 3rd..............



> For Rachmaninoff, Horowitz was a champion of both his solo works and his Third Concerto, about which Rachmaninoff remarked publicly after the performance that "This is the way I always dreamed my concerto should be played, but I never expected to hear it that way on Earth."


----------



## DarkAngel

There is no doubt that Argerich has the Rach 3rd to beat as I listen again this time as part of this wonderful 2CD set. There is just no weak spot for another to claim the crown, technical bravura in most dramatic exciting fashion, colorful fantasy elements and sweeping emotional arcs beautifully caught so naturally, never sounds forced just seeming effortless flowing motion others can only approximate at best, Chailly offers brilliant orchestral backing.......we search only for best alternates here


----------



## Star

Listened to Berman / Abbado again yesterday. Titanic performance. Plays the big cadenza.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Greatest ever is Horowitz/Barbirolli hands down. It may be the greatest concerto recording of anything.
> 
> Janis/Dorati is my favorite in modern sound. I love that Mercury recording.


The Mercury Janis/Dorati has been my favorite Rachmaninoff 3rd for well over a half century. I haven't discovered any other performance of this work that brings to bear this duo's marvelously expressed qualities of sensitivity and excitement.


----------



## stejo

Have you seen this listening guide for the concert
https://www.philharmonia.co.uk/explore/films/284/listening_guide_rachmaninovs_piano_concerto_no_3


----------



## merlinus

I have completed my survey of about 15 versions of Rach 3. I listened to many of them 2 or even 3 times.

My preference is Janis/Dorati, closely followed by Ashkenazy/Previn. Runners-up include Lisitsa/Francis, Argerich/Chailly, and Buniatishvili/Jarvi.

Rachmaninoff and Horowitz are certainly superior playing, but the sound makes them unlistenable.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

merlinus said:


> I have completed my survey of about 15 versions of Rach 3. I listened to many of them 2 or even 3 times.
> 
> My preference is Janis/Dorati, closely followed by Ashkenazy/Previn. Runners-up include Lisitsa/Francis, Argerich/Chailly, and Buniatishvili/Jarvi.
> 
> Rachmaninoff and Horowitz are certainly superior playing, but the sound makes them unlistenable.


I think you made the right choice---it *is* a stunning performance.


----------



## hpowders

merlinus said:


> I have completed my survey of about 15 versions of Rach 3. I listened to many of them 2 or even 3 times.
> 
> My preference is Janis/Dorati, closely followed by Ashkenazy/Previn. Runners-up include Lisitsa/Francis, Argerich/Chailly, and Buniatishvili/Jarvi.
> 
> Rachmaninoff and Horowitz are certainly superior playing, but the sound makes them unlistenable.


So should I wrap up the Cliburn or would you prefer we mail it to you?


----------



## Vaneyes

merlinus said:


> Having just listened to Janis/Dorati again, for me no can match this performance, not even Argerich.
> 
> The sound, playing, and ability to bring out the depths inherent in the music are quite amazing.


I respect your Janis preference, which is my preference (w. Kondrashin, 1962) for No. 1. :tiphat:


----------



## Isiah Thanu

Maybe it doesn't qualify as it strictly isn't a commercial recording AFAIK. But Olga Kern at the Cliburn comp. is absolutely magnificent and I haven't heard anything better yet.
Just thought her name deserves to be in this list.


----------



## Holden4th

Nobody has mentioned my favourite, Gilels with Cluytens on Testament


----------



## Larkenfield

Klassik said:


> Have you tried the Horowitz/Ormandy recording? Ormandy has a reputation for being a good Rachmaninoff conductor. Some people love this recording, others hate it. The fact that it was done live probably does not help.


Very exciting performance. There are however a number of studio splices in it.

If people are going to talk about _poor_ sound in recordings, they need to say what that is. Sound that is not necessarily modern does not necessarily mean poor sound to some listeners. There is a difference. And some will sacrifice great performances because they're spoiled by modern sound.


----------



## DavidA

Holden4th said:


> Nobody has mentioned my favourite, Gilels with Cluytens on Testament


Great performance

The fact is there are so many really great performances of this concerto. I know some people are snooty about it but to me it is one of the great - if not the greatest - romantic concerto. Nothing like the finale to bring the house down as it should be!


----------



## DavidA

Just a list some of the versions I have which come to mind:

Rachmaninoff / Ormandy - truly authoritative but it is cut and the sound is bad
Horowitz / Barbirolli - incredible playing at white hot intensity but awful sound
Horowitz / Reiner - perhaps the best of Horowitz performances all round with the great man still in total control and it sounded not bad for its age
Horowitz / Ormandy - the performance was the first time Horowitz had played it for many years and there are a lot of slips. A much better performance is later one with Mehta but it is only available as part of a large boxed set
Janis / Dorati - simply superb playing from a master romantic pianist
Volodos / Levine - incredible virtuosity
Gilles / Cluytons - good as you would expect from a master
Good performances too from Berman and Andsnes 
The best all round? For me Argerich is fantastic - the one to beat.


----------



## paulolivetti

AfterHours said:


> You won't top the Argerich/Chailly you mentioned. Just listen to it again, instead of looking for others
> 
> I'm serious about that one being the very best, but half-kidding about the way I said it :lol: Listen to other renditions at your hearts content of course! Sorry, but though I like your other choices a lot too, I can't help you with topping one of the greatest renditions in recorded history :tiphat:


Boy I think Argerich is terrible at this (love her Bach). She literally can't even play in time with the orchestra in the easiest part of the whole concerto (the beginning).

As a professional pianist myself I find this lack of sensitivity on her part appalling for someone of her ability.


----------



## paulolivetti

Rachmaninoff's own version is by far the best, imho.


----------



## flamencosketches

I just bought Argerich's recording of this concerto with Chailly and I forget the orchestra, RCO maybe? I'm a huge fan of Martha so I look forward to hearing it. Looks like this recording has its detractors here, no? I have never heard her play Rachmaninov. 

I like Rachmaninov's own recording, but the audio is rough.


----------



## Geoff48

Back in the good old days the authoritative Record Guide was very impressed with Moura Lympanyk and Anthony Collins on Decca. Lympany was known as a Rachmaninov pianist and one who specialised in the romantic sweep of the music. It has been remastered and is included in the Decca Sound mono anthology. It’s also in the 10 cd membran set but the sound there is slightly inferior although the cheap cost is some considerable compensation. Well worth listening to, Lympany was a fine musician.
I note many people like Ashkenazy and assume they are recommending the Version recorded with Andre Previn. However there is an earlier stereo with Anatole Fistoulari being part of the 50 cd Decca set. And it seems slightly less constrained than the later version.
I know that there has been discussion elsewhere on site about the value of these multi disc anthologies. For me it is the opportunity of hearing performances one might not normally purchase like this Ashkenazy. I had the Previn and the Janis/Dorati, another great version, but I wouldn’t have bought the Fistoulari version. And now it is my favourite.


----------



## DavidA

flamencosketches said:


> I just bought Argerich's recording of this concerto with Chailly and I forget the orchestra, RCO maybe? I'm a huge fan of Martha so I look forward to hearing it. Looks like this recording has its detractors here, no? I have never heard her play Rachmaninov.
> 
> I like Rachmaninov's own recording, but the audio is rough.


Argerich is phenomenal.


----------



## DavidA

Geoff48 said:


> Back in the good old days the authoritative Record Guide was very impressed with Moura Lympanyk and Anthony Collins on Decca. Lympany was known as a Rachmaninov pianist and one who specialised in the romantic sweep of the music. It has been remastered and is included in the Decca Sound mono anthology. It's also in the 10 cd membran set but the sound there is slightly inferior although the cheap cost is some considerable compensation. Well worth listening to, Lympany was a fine musician.
> I note many people like Ashkenazy and assume they are recommending the Version recorded with Andre Previn. However there is an earlier stereo with Anatole Fistoulari being part of the 50 cd Decca set. And it seems slightly less constrained than the later version.
> I know that there has been discussion elsewhere on site about the value of these multi disc anthologies. For me it is the opportunity of hearing performances one might not normally purchase like this Ashkenazy. I had the Previn and the Janis/Dorati, another great version, but I wouldn't have bought the Fistoulari version. And now it is my favourite.


Heard Lympany play the Second when I was a lad. She was a good pianist but I think the version has been exceeded both in performance and in sound. Janis is superb and don't forget van Cliburn. But there are some really tremendous performances of this concerto including the composers but the sound on that is of course very limited but well worth hearing for a master pianist


----------



## Geoff48

DavidA said:


> Heard Lympany play the Second when I was a lad. She was a good pianist but I think the version has been exceeded both in performance and in sound. Janis is superb and don't forget van Cliburn. But there are some really tremendous performances of this concerto including the composers but the sound on that is of course very limited but well worth hearing for a master pianist


Actually she recorded it twice. Her second version was in stereo and she was accompanied by Sir Malcolm Sargent. It was a perfectly acceptable version though nothing special.
However she also recorded it in mono with Nicolai Malko on HMV plum label. This had an exceptionally warm sound and for some reason it wasn't recut when it was reissued on Music for pleasure. And whilst Sargent was rarely less than competent Malko could be inspired in Russian Music. The Malko was the first I bought and then I exchanged it for the Sargent - a big mistake.
Rachmaninov is obviously unequalled in his own music but the recording is elderly, and sounds it, and is also cut. Horowitz was his favourite interpreter but is subject to RCA sound in his best version with Reiner. Janis was his pupil and was superb with Dorati, I haven't heard the Munch. And as I've said I like Ashkenazy with Fistoulari, a much underestimated conductor especially in ballet and Russian Music. And I think that Ashkenazy was one of those pianists who became a little more polished but lost his spontaneity somewhat as his career progressed.


----------



## brunumb

DavidA said:


> Janis is superb and don't forget van Cliburn.


Cliburn. Harvey Lavan "*Van*" Cliburn Jr. So many people refer to him as van Cliburn like it is his surname, when Van is actually his 'first' name. Just sayin'.


----------



## flamencosketches

brunumb said:


> Cliburn. Harvey Lavan "*Van*" Cliburn Jr. So many people refer to him as van Cliburn like it is his surname, when Van is actually his 'first' name. Just sayin'.


I am sure you're just correcting a typo rather than telling the guy anything he doesn't know. 



DavidA said:


> Argerich is phenomenal.


Agreed, I love that recording now.


----------



## DavidA

brunumb said:


> Cliburn. Harvey Lavan "*Van*" Cliburn Jr. So many people refer to him as van Cliburn like it is his surname, when Van is actually his 'first' name. Just sayin'.


It's interesting that no-one ever appears to refer to him as Cliburn.


----------



## brunumb

flamencosketches said:


> I am sure you're just correcting a typo rather than telling the guy anything he doesn't know.


That's what a guy on Amazon said, but in every review where he referred to Cliburn he apparently made the same 'typo'.


----------



## 444mil

merlinus said:


> Volodos/Levine -- played too fast with little emotion and not enough power, along with poor sound.


Sir, are you deaf?


----------



## marlow

Byron Janis made two recordings of the Rach 3 - with Munch and then with Dorati. Both are very fine indeed. I have the both and for the life of me cannot make up my mind which I prefer.


----------



## rich-mel

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Greatest ever is Horowitz/Barbirolli hands down. It may be the greatest concerto recording of anything.
> 
> Janis/Dorati is my favorite in modern sound. I love that Mercury recording.


YES about the Barbirolli. Greatest recording of anything I have ever heard in 60 years of classical listening.


----------



## Rogerx

rich-mel said:


> YES about the Barbirolli. Greatest recording of anything I have ever heard in 60 years of classical listening.


Ferm statement, always good to know one's opinion .
Welcome to the site by the way .


----------

