# Saint Saens Piano Concerto no 1 in D Major op 17



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Cannot understand why Saint Saens piano concerto no 1 is underrated when it is so beautiful. Sublime, quirky and melodious. What do others think?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

All of the Saint-Saens piano concerts have sort of vanished; at their best (no. 2 and 5) they are pretty thin material compared to the titanic piano concertos of Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Rubinstein, Grieg, Rachmaninoff and others. They are all nice enough, certainly a challenge to pianists, but just don't have that quality of lasting value or that made audiences clamor for performances. As prolific and gifted as he was, not much of Saint-Saens music has survived, save for record collectors. Sony used to have a CD with three concertos on it: no. 2 for piano, no. 3 for violin, and no. 1 for cello, and frankly for most people that was all the concertos by SS that they would ever need.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I'm a big fan of no. 2, but the others don't do much for me.


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Yeah, he was sort of the Nepomuk Hummel of his generation—a fantastic pianist capable of producing beautiful music, occasionally flirting with greatness, but ultimately never quite exceeded the sum of its parts. The French called him the "French Beethoven", but he was really French Hummel.


----------



## Sumantra (Feb 1, 2018)

I have listened to all his piano Concertos but couldn't remember the 1st distinctively, so i listened to it again and yes, it's quite charming and beautiful, not his best piano concerto though. 

That's my thing with Saint Saens. I tend to like most of the music he made - charming, playful and highly pleasurable. Can't see anything wrong with these qualities at all. 

As far as Saint Saens' music going down in popularity is concerned, no idea really. But has it not been always the case with classical music? Many Popular names of yesterday are kind of forgotten now, and may be today we are discussing some obsolete names of tomorrow with lots of enthusiasm...


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

I believe I never listened to the first, but his other 4 piano concerti are among the best of the romantic repertoire. Easy.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Judith said:


> Cannot understand why Saint Saens piano concerto no 1 is underrated when it is so beautiful. Sublime, quirky and melodious. What do others think?


Underrated by whom, I play spin all frequently.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I think #2 is the standout being at least in a Tier 2 category. The Andante is both magnificent and sublime. At least listen at 8:15 to the end:


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I think he is a bit better than Hummel, disregarding the different focus I'd say he is the Weber of his generation. The 2nd concerto was played by many of the famous early-mid 20th century pianists. I think it is not unjustified that 2 and 4 are the most famous. 
(And if I consider what chaff Hyperion has unearthed for their series, I'd say Saint-Saens it pretty solid and often worthwhile if one likes classicist romanticism.)
My favorite of his concerti is probably the b minor violin and the cello ones are also nice in a field that is not as competitive.
He has some pieces I'd call neoclassical before there time, e.g the septet with trumpet and in a way also the ironic Carnaval of animals.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

All five are great, fun music, very well structured and with captivating melodies and textures. One shouldn't compare them to the big, serious efforts of composers working in the German tradition. His concertos follow the example of Mozart, something that Saint-Saens himself acknowledged at some point, if I remember correctly. Light, divertimento-like, but never shallow.
And let's not forget that no. 4 is a pretty serious piece that's heavily influenced by Liszt and the German tradition. It's a unique mix of french elegance and German workmanship.

All 5 are wonderful works, including #1, which is one of S-S's most delightful early works. It has all the elements of his later style already.
#3 seems underrated and underplayed too, which is surprising because it's a brilliant piece that's just as attractive as 2, 4 or 5. People criticize it for having a shallow and vulgar finale, but that didn't stop #2 from becoming the most popular of the five. Also, people who say that should stop hating fun.

#5 is probably the most sublime, mature and "deep", I think it's one of the most successful early 20th century piano concertos, and a synthesis of everything that Saint-Saens did so well.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Rogerx said:


> Underrated by whom, I play spin all frequently.


Never hear it on radio or seen it performed in concerts!


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I do know that Saint-Saens was popular in the 1970s. Vox put out these Vox boxes: The complete works for Piano and Orchestra. The complete works for Piano. The complete works for Violin and Orchestra and Cello and Cello and Orchestra. I believe these are available as MP3s on Amazon. Great value!


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

One of my still favorite vinyl discs from way back is a recording of Saint-Saens' "Egyptian" Concerto with Sviatoslav Richter:









That, I would venture, is a "classic" recording.

The following box set (released in August of this year) might interest fans of the Frenchman, one of whom is I:


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

^^^ 34 CDs of Saint-Saens!


----------



## Sumantra (Feb 1, 2018)

RobertJTh said:


> All five are great, fun music, very well structured and with captivating melodies and textures. One shouldn't compare them to the big, serious efforts of composers working in the German tradition. His concertos follow the example of Mozart, something that Saint-Saens himself acknowledged at some point, if I remember correctly. Light, divertimento-like, but never shallow.
> And let's not forget that no. 4 is a pretty serious piece that's heavily influenced by Liszt and the German tradition. It's a unique mix of french elegance and German workmanship.
> 
> All 5 are wonderful works, including #1, which is one of S-S's most delightful early works. It has all the elements of his later style already.
> ...


#5 isn't written in early 20th century, it's 1896.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Judith said:


> Never hear it on radio or seen it performed in concerts!


Come on Judith, that can´t be the reason.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

Sumantra said:


> #5 isn't written in early 20th century, it's 1896.


I stand corrected! For some reason I always associate it with his "Indian Summer" as a composer, but when he wrote it, he had still a quarter of a century to live.


----------

