# Piano concerto v symphony



## Owen David (May 15, 2020)

For me, piano concertos seem to reach that slightly higher level of musical expression...maybe because the piano "voice" in the overall sound stands for a human being expressing their feelings, fears, hopes etc as the piece progresses and reaching for some sort of resolution. With a full orchestra, a symphony. it feels more like a public expression of what we should believe and feel. This is most obvious in nationalistic works like Ma Vlast.

So I think maybe that's why I tend to prefer the piano concerto form - as being so much more individualistic. There the piece is saying "This is what *I *think." - with the implication there is no requirement to feel the same yourself.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Honestly, both piano concertos and symphonies seem to me to be very public-- unlike more intimate chamber music and *solo* piano.


----------



## mahlernerd (Jan 19, 2020)

Symphonies, for me. I love when different members of the orchestra interact with each other, as opposed to being mostly an accompaniment for one instrument. While the concerto point of view about expression is true, I feel that a symphony can be a personal expression. I always think of symphonies (as a joke, not really) as “conductor concertos,” where the conductor is the soloist. Therefore, I think it can be argued that symphonies can express the thoughts and feelings of one human being, that being the conductor. The conductor is the player, and the orchestra is the instrument.


----------



## leonsm (Jan 15, 2011)

Piano concerti and symphonies are like apples and oranges, respectively, they are incomparables, but I prefer oranges.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Comparing is in possible, it's as simple as that.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Symphonies for me, without a doubt. Now symphonies versus violin concertos would be more challenging (for me).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Piano concertos for me although that doesn’t stop neenjoying symphonies


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

For me, it depends on when they were written. Symphonies were the really big musical statements during the Romantic era. I can only think of very few really big and serious Romantic concertos but a huge number of big Romantic symphonies. But concertos (including piano concertos) seem to me to have grown in importance and symphonies to have become less likely to be successful major statements in the modern era. I suppose symphonies were the big statements in the Classical era, too - Haydn developed them to play that role and Mozart's later symphonies are probably among the most serious music he wrote. His wonderful piano concertos were more for display.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

Can’t separate the two in terms of preference 
Symphonies covers a great number and breadth of works so if forced I would say I get more overall pleasure from the symphony. However, as a group of works late Mozart Piano Concertos are so close to perfection to my ears and give me so much joy, it all becomes too hard to choose


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Owen David said:


> ...maybe because the piano "voice" in the overall sound stands for a human being expressing their feelings, fears, hopes etc as the piece progresses and reaching for some sort of resolution. With a full orchestra, a symphony. it feels more like a public expression of what we should believe and feel. This is most obvious in nationalistic works like Ma Vlast...


The orchestra/piano doesn't affect me like that. I really like both symphonies and (of course not only) piano concertos. I think that a lot of solo/chamber/orchestral/vocal music has the ability to express a wide range of emotions (including very intimate) and it doesn't seem to me that the piano has any advantage in this, even though I love the piano and have been playing it for many years...


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

Thankfully, a choice between is not necessary. I don't think I could choose. Prokofiev's Piano Concerto #3 is one of my all time favorites and IMHO one of the greatest works of all time. But I could never decide if I *prefer* it to say Beethoven's symphonies. I can really relate to the appeal of the concerto form though. There are a quite few Violin Concertos, Piano Concertos and of course the Concierto De Aranjuez for classical guitar that are among my all time favorite works. For me it was always the interplay between the orchestra and the solo instrument. The development of themes and harmonies passing back and forth is captivating to me.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Love both symphonies and concertos because they are all individuals so cannot prefer one to the other. 
Also what about violin, cello concertos etc? Also beautiful in their own right!


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I prefer symphonies. They are about sound blocks interacting and playing together. A piano concerto involves calling attention to one person either in addition to or playing against the ensemble, so there has to be a certain degree of showing off and, while the orchestra plays, perfunctory complex diddling. But that's just me.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Manxfeeder said:


> I prefer symphonies. They are about sound blocks interacting and playing together. A piano concerto involves calling attention to one person either in addition to or playing against the ensemble, so there has to be a certain degree of showing off and, while the orchestra plays, perfunctory complex diddling. But that's just me.


In great piano concerto performances like Gilels with Jochum or Reiner on the Brahms concerti, Uchida on Mozart, or Lipatti on Schumann and Grieg it shouldn't sound that way - the soloist and orchestra are integrated into a perfectly-tuned whole who listen to each other and create spontaneously exciting experiences. One of my favorite such recordings is the Barenboim/Barbirolli Brahms 2. Musicianship of the highest order.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

I find the opposite is true, that symphonies are a more personal and comprehensive statement from a composer. They test a composer's imaginative range, ability & skill to use a full orchestra more greatly than a piano concerto (which tests the composer's ability to write more specifically for the piano itself, as the primary focus). The orchestration of a symphony is usually more complex & varied and difficult & challenging for the composer than it is with a concerto. Piano concertos, with their cadenzas & required virtuosity from the soloist are more music that was intended to be put on display. There's a lot more showing off required from the soloist, as the central focus of the piece. 

Of course, symphonies are put on display as well, but it's a more complex and varied musical dialogue. The entire orchestra is more involved. As a result, there's a wider range of musical sounds, since the orchestration is usually denser than with a concerto: where so much of the focus is placed on the soloist, as the primary performer, while the rest of the orchestra is cast more in a secondary, supportive role. In a symphony the dialogue is more one of equality between the various sections of the orchestra; though granted some sections will get more of a workout than others, depending on the symphony & composer in question. Plus, the orchestra is usually larger in a symphony than it is for a concerto, & sometimes a lot larger, and from that standpoint, a symphony can make a greater and more varied impact on the listener. 

One aspect of a symphony that you've not taken into account is a choral symphony. Concertos pale into comparison to the overwhelming impact and greater imaginative, emotional range that can be achieved by using a full orchestra, chorus, and vocal soloists--such as, for example, in Mahler's 2nd "Resurrection" Symphony, or Beethoven's 9th (especially if you've ever heard either of those two works live in concert). There is no comparable experience in a concerto. In fact, the only example that I can come up with is Beethoven's Choral Fantasia, but I expect very few listeners will claim that Beethoven's 'choral concerto' is more impactful and overwhelming than his 9th Symphony.

In addition, the duration of a symphony often lasts longer than a concerto, and in some cases a lot longer. The symphony is usually the main event of a musical concert. It's rare to hear a concerto performed in the second half of a concert unless more than one concerto has been programmed for the evening, and that doesn't happen often.

And yet, it depends a lot on which piano concertos and symphonies are getting discussed, since there are definitely piano concertos that I'd much prefer to hear over certain symphonies, & I can't imagine others don't feel the same way. Therefore, it depends on which composers and works are being compared. 

But of course it goes without saying that I love both genres.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Enthusiast said:


> For me, it depends on when they were written. Symphonies were the really big musical statements during the Romantic era. I can only think of very few really big and serious Romantic concertos but a huge number of big Romantic symphonies. But concertos (including piano concertos) seem to me to have grown in importance and symphonies to have become less likely to be successful major statements in the modern era. I suppose symphonies were the big statements in the Classical era, too - Haydn developed them to play that role and Mozart's later symphonies are probably among the most serious music he wrote. His wonderful piano concertos were more for display.


The Hyperion Romantic Piano Concert series is now up to volume 80, and that is presumably only the "better" ones, for the most part. It might be that they were favored mostly by composers who themselves were at least proficient on piano. I suspect that the piano concerto grew in importance as the production of the instruments notably improved, and improvements were made, in part, as a reflection of increasing demands on the instruments.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

JAS said:


> The Hyperion Romantic Piano Concert series is now up to volume 80, and that is presumably only the "better" ones, for the most part. It might be that they were favored mostly by composers who themselves were at least proficient on piano. I suspect that the piano concerto grew in importance as the production of the instruments notably improved, and improvements were made, in part, as a reflection of increasing demands on the instruments.


I love that Hyperion series. There's an awful lot of gems they've uncovered - some really beautiful and exciting music. Great? Maybe not, but who cares? It's wonderfully entertaining. Decades ago Vox led the way with Michael Ponti and a bunch of 2nd and 3rd rate European orchestras, but the Hyperion series is utterly first-rate and professional. And there are still so many they haven't gotten to - maybe never will. Hard to believe they still haven't recorded the Raff works, or all of the Rubinsteins. Best of all, you can pick them up for a fraction of their original price at Berkshire.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

I suspect that they are intentionally mixing better and lesser known works, and trying to shine a light on works that have no other recordings. (Many of the "lesser" concertos really benefit from a first rate soloist and a committed performance.)


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Enthusiast said:


> For me, it depends on when they were written. Symphonies were the really big musical statements during the Romantic era. I can only think of very few really big and serious Romantic concertos but a huge number of big Romantic symphonies. But concertos (including piano concertos) seem to me to have grown in importance and symphonies to have become less likely to be successful major statements in the modern era. I suppose symphonies were the big statements in the Classical era, too - Haydn developed them to play that role and Mozart's later symphonies are probably among the most serious music he wrote. His wonderful piano concertos were more for display.


I respectfully suggest the composer himself would have seen that as a somewhat false dichotomy. He wrote to his father at least once that I can think of about some of his concertos being "for the connoisseur".


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

As much as I enjoy certain piano concertos, I prefer symphonies in the end and, if we must compare, there are simply no concertos out there that come close to the level of my favorite (= the greatest ) symphonies.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

DeepR said:


> As much as I enjoy certain piano concertos, I prefer symphonies in the end and, if we must compare, there are simply no concertos out there that come close to the level of my favorite (= the greatest ) symphonies.


I think this is true for the most successful ("greatest?") symphonies--that they can deliver more than can a concerto. But once that reservoir of such symphonies is exhausted and we are now on a lower but broader plateau of selection, a concerto begins to outweigh (for me) any number of humdrum symphonies. Tchaikovsky would be an example.


----------



## Owen David (May 15, 2020)

I love symphonies as well! Just indicating which form I prefer and why. 

Of course, all forms of music have the capability to communicate meaning and emotion...could just be a solo guitar player in a bar.

Doesn't have to be orchestral...But clearly, since it is used so much in advertising and cinema, the full orchestral sound is kind of guaranteed to reach our emotions. 

I think we are discussing here subtle areas of expression - does the piano add to or subtract from the overall impact? For me, no doubt because I love the piano so much, it clearly adds to the impact, if properly orchestrated.


----------



## TMHeimer (Dec 19, 2019)

In the '70s I played clarinet in the local symphony when we did one of the Rachmaninoff piano concertos. Great experience. When I hear it I think of that night.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Alas … I wish more composers wrote Concertos for Orchestra -- best of both worlds.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Okay. .


----------



## Isaac Blackburn (Feb 26, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> I think this is true for the most successful ("greatest?") symphonies--that they can deliver more than can a concerto. But once that reservoir of such symphonies is exhausted and we are now on a lower but broader plateau of selection, a concerto begins to outweigh (for me) any number of humdrum symphonies. Tchaikovsky would be an example.


I agree. Mahler and Bruckner trump any concerto, but I prefer the piano concertos of Rachmaninoff, Mozart, Tchaikovsky, and Brahms to their respective symphonies (as well as those of Dvorak, Schumann, etc.) There seems to be a more personal narrative in the concertos, as other posters have said.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Mahler and Bruckner "trump any concerto" for you maybe, and that's fine, but an objective statement it is not. Those piano concertos which you (rightly IMHO) find so rewarding are all, every single one of them, more meaningful and enjoyable to me than anything Bruckner and especially Mahler ever wrote. I admire the craft in their symphonies, but as musical experiences they generally leave me cold.


----------



## Isaac Blackburn (Feb 26, 2020)

Animal the Drummer said:


> Mahler and Bruckner "trump any concerto" for you maybe, and that's fine, but an objective statement it is not. Those piano concertos which you (rightly IMHO) find so rewarding are all, every single one of them, more meaningful and enjoyable to me than anything Bruckner and especially Mahler ever wrote. I admire the craft in their symphonies, but as musical experiences they generally leave me cold.


I don't know about this. While music is a subjective experience, there is a certain level of objectivity to comparisons. I can say, for example, that the Mahler 5 is a larger and more varied emotional canvas than the Tchaikovsky 2, a claim which emerges out of the number and character of different movements. And I doubt that one would have objective grounds to claim the opposite.

The great piano concertos are very meaningful and cathartic experiences. It is just that the symphonies, free from the fetters of a solo part, are more conducive to great statements. Done poorly, these great statements become monotone, blunt and bland. Done well, they are unparalleled.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I agree in part with both Isaac Blackburn's and Animal the Drummer's posts above. The devil is in the details of the output of any given composer--the degree to which we are moved by the specific pieces considered. The point, though, about the concerto being a more personal voice or narrative for a composer is well taken. In the case of Brahms, I am at a loss to select between the symphonies and the concertos. With Tchaikovsky as I mentioned, and also Dvořák, Rachmaninoff, maybe Prokofiev, and some others I'll think about later, the concertos have it.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Animal the Drummer said:


> I respectfully suggest the composer himself would have seen that as a somewhat false dichotomy. He wrote to his father at least once that I can think of about some of his concertos being "for the connoisseur".


I do not think that is a disagreement on Mozart's part. But the later symphonies involved a lot more rigorous, innovative and worked through writing and are clearly (surely?) bigger statements than his concertos.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

JAS said:


> The Hyperion Romantic Piano Concert series is now up to volume 80, and that is presumably only the "better" ones, for the most part. It might be that they were favored mostly by composers who themselves were at least proficient on piano. I suspect that the piano concerto grew in importance as the production of the instruments notably improved, and improvements were made, in part, as a reflection of increasing demands on the instruments.


I know the series and have heard a good number of them. Some of them are excellent but I don't think I have heard many that are as great as better known works from the period. OK, why should they be? The point for me is that, although I can understand and appreciate the appeal, I can get music that I value more by going back in time to before the Baroque and forward in time to contemporary music ... . There will never be enough time to hear all the music I would love.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

SONNET CLV said:


> Alas … I wish more composers wrote Concertos for Orchestra -- best of both worlds.


I remembered this post as I was listening to Martinů's excellent and dramatic Concerto for Double String Orchestra, Piano and Timpani. Indeed the best of both worlds, doubled!


----------

