# Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No 2



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Been listening to this one a lot recently and saw it performed live at weekend by Peter Donohoe and St Petersburg Symphony Orchestra.

The second movement sounds more like a "piano trio" with intermittent orchestation due to violin and cello being prominent with piano.

What does anyone else think?


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

I've never been keen on the work and am allergic to concertos where another instrument suddenly appears and starts to take over the solo role. I understand that I'm not in the majority and lots of Tchaikovsky experts rate the piece highly. What I do like is the 3rd Piano Concerto with movements completed by Taneyev. Fabulous!


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

I'm quite fond of the work, albeit cautiously. I like the full version, with no cuts added to the second movement. It's not a concerto for very regular listening, I really need to be in the mood for it in order to appreciate it - but when I am, it's a lot of fun. I mean, the finale is such a riot!


----------



## pokeefe0001 (Jan 15, 2017)

I'm not a big fan of Tchaikovsky - at least his orchestral works - but find his 2nd piano concerto thoroughly enjoyable. I prefer Tchaikovsky's chamber music to his orchestral music and that 2nd movement often feels more like his chamber works than a concerto.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I enjoy this a lot. Got to know it in the cut, Siloti edition with Graffman/Ormandy. Now there are so many fine versions - complete, too! Not too common in concert - and it is quite long. But such a welcome relief from the ubiquitous First.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

David Phillips said:


> I've never been keen on the work and am allergic to concertos where another instrument suddenly appears and starts to take over the solo role. I understand that I'm not in the majority and lots of Tchaikovsky experts rate the piece highly. What I do like is the 3rd Piano Concerto with movements completed by Taneyev. Fabulous!


Does that knock the Brahms Violin Concerto out of consideration for you?


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

I love it, and I find it better than his Piano Concerto I. This is mature Tchaikovsky, with the fecundity that is admirable and enjoyable. This interchange among cello, violin, and piano in the second movement, for instance, is vintage Tchaikovsky, and it has a nice balletic feel to it. 

Genius. 

The finale, however, feels a tad thin as far as ideas and inspiration are concerned (when comparing it with the previous two movements). But there are glorious moments even there that even the somewhat flat ideas do not distract much from the overall appeal of the work, which I find very high indeed.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Orfeo said:


> I love it, and I find it better than his Piano Concerto I. This is mature Tchaikovsky, with the fecundity that is admirable and enjoyable. This interchange among cello, violin, and piano in the second movement, for instance, is vintage Tchaikovsky, and it has a nice balletic feel to it.
> 
> Genius.
> 
> The finale, however, feels a tad thin as far as ideas and inspiration are concerned (when comparing it with the previous two movements). But there are glorious moments even there that even the somewhat flat ideas do not distract much from the overall appeal of the work, which I find very high indeed.


I too love it. Has more "bite" than the first and is challenging, but who says I don't like a challenge????


----------



## T Son of Ander (Aug 25, 2015)

I prefer the 2nd to the 1st; it is an excellent work, and it's among my favorites in the genre. The past few years, I've been sort of collecting them. Only the uncut version, though. There is nothing wrong with other instruments joining the party and turning it into a trio at times. That middle movement is one of my all-time favorite slow movements. As for the work as a whole, it seems to get more cohesive as it goes on. The first movement is kind of piano *vs.* orchestra; in the second, the violin and cello grab the piano and make part of an ensemble; and the rollicking finale is more piano *and* orchestra. I wish this were performed more.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

I'm a fan of Tchaikovsky's 2nd piano ever since seeing it played live in concert by Shura Cherkassky at the Fairfield Hall, Croydon. I can't recall the orchestra or conductor, but needless to say it has stayed in the memory as I was sitting about 3 metres away from Cherkassky, and can still see the concentration on his face as he spun through the 3rd movement to a standing ovation.


----------



## Pesaro (Oct 4, 2017)

I absolutely adore the slow movement, especially the cello and violin solos. The first movement is a little long and repetitive but that seems to be a 19th century characteristic of concertos. The finale is much better. Despite the 1st movement weakness, I much prefer this concerto to the overplayed 1st. 

I neglected to mention the infamous Siloti edition which cuts out most of the great string solos in the slow movement. It is the worst piece of musical surgery that I personally know of. Fortunately, nobody as far as I know, uses it any longer.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

This concerto is not a patch on the first and the first movement tends to be rather four-square. It appears that the composer could never reproduce his genius on the 'high metalled piano' after his revolutionary first concerto. However the second is not at all bad music and is fun to listen to. I cannot comment on how difficult compared with the first it is as it is way beyond my pianistic capabilities. Perhaps someone would comment on that better qualified than me.

Of the versions I have:

Graffmann gives a white-hot version of the Siloti version

Donohoe gives it uncut in an excellent performance which won a Gramophone award

Perhaps best of all is Pletnev whose imperious performance is slightly cut but incredibly played.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I have Pletnev too and he makes a good case for the piece (which, like you, I find nowhere near as compelling as its predecessor), but the Virgin recording - at least in the pressing I have - is terribly dim.


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2017)

I like it very much, especially the Matsuev/Gergiev recording.


----------

