# Rachmaninoff



## trojan-rabbit

The Champion of Romantic music


----------



## trojan-rabbit

My first experience with Rachmaninoff was about four years ago. I heard Gregory Brown playing his Moment Musicaux 16/4, and I fell in love. Since then, I slowly expanded my Rachmaninoff library (CD"s and piano music) until I knew he would be my favorite composer.

So far, I haven't learned any of his songs, but I'm working on that


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

trojan rabbit said:


> The Champion of Romantic music


Perhaps a better way of putting it would be "Champion of _fin de siècle_ Romantic music."

My involvement with Rachmaninoff dates back to the age of vinyl. I also heard live Rachmaninoff at my college... the first time was when a faculty member attempted Piano Concerto 2. It just seemed that he struggled with the ability to draw the necessary "big sounds" out of the piano when necessary. The second time was when the touring Moscow Philharmonic played Symphony 2. I still have the (decades old) program!

I've previously posted that Martha Argerich's Piano Concerto 3 is safely within my "top-20" CD list. I also have the discs of the Symphonies (Philadelphia/Ormandy), having had the vinyl for these works earlier. The set was the single most motive force behind my upgrade to a carousel CD player... ('all-those-years-ago'). [Symphony 2 is broken up between two discs.]

Yeah... thanks for the topic- and the memories. CTP


----------



## Rachovsky

I love all of his preludes, here are a few:
Prelude in C sharp minor, Op. 3, No. 2
Prelude in G Minor, Op. 23, No. 5
Prelude in B minor, Op. 32, No. 10
Prelude in B Flat, Op. 32, No. 2

Then of course I love all of his Piano Concertos. Probably his 2nd the best.
Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini is always interesting to listen to.


----------



## trojan-rabbit

I wasn't around in the vinyl era, however, I have his complete recordings remastered on CD from RCA

Definitely a great collection!


----------



## trojan-rabbit

> Then of course I love all of his Piano Concertos. Probably his 2nd the best.


Referring to hisConcertos and Symphonies, I'd say Rachmaninoff was second best.

-_-

 


> Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini is always interesting to listen to.


quite!

It's unique, and refreshing to listen to.


----------



## Lexophile

I am a Romantic fiend, so naturally I love Rachmaninoff. My uncle, (who's not a classical person), had an old Rachmaninoff LP. He let me have it, and it's one of my favourites now.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

*Red Riding Hood Etude*


----------



## Celloman

A few years ago, I was listening to his 2nd Symphony for the first time(Ormandy and the Philadelphia). Needless to say, I instanty fell in love, and have been a big fan of his works ever since.
Rachmaninoff + Dies Irae = great music!!!


----------



## World Violist

Rachmaninoff is so unique; the colors he coaxes out of instruments are astounding. He is officially one of my new favorite composers.


----------



## trojan-rabbit

I'm so glad you guys like him, his second symphony is definitely the best (in my humble, quiet opinion  )


----------



## tahnak

*The Champion of Romantic Music*



trojan-rabbit said:


> The Champion of Romantic music


Indeed! He was a true champion. I hold him very dear. 
His piano concertos send ripples in a lake on a moonlit night.
His Preludes for piano are like gems in a necklace. His Prelude in C Sharp Minor. Op.3 No.2 - I call it the Death Knoll Prelude as if bells are tolling for you.
The Isle of the Dead is a beautiful tone poem with the strings reminding you of how the dead are carried over a lake.
Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini - very few variations have been written so beautifully. The 17th being out of this world!
The Rock is a beautiful symphonic poem when the violins, flutes and piccolo remind you of the icy chill on a wintry morning atop a huge cliff with spirits hovering around you (not as sinister as the Night on a Bald Mountain - this is more serene and ethereal with Glazunovesque touches).
His symphonies are extremely personal. Second really stands out. Beautiful. Andre Previn has read it so well with the London symphony along with Yevgeny Svetlanov and the USSR Symphony.
Symphonic Dances for Orchestra is another orchestral feather in his cap. In fact it is higher than his symphonies.
My favourite composition is the Vocalise in E Minor for Soprano and Orchestra.


----------



## JTech82

His symphonies are incredible. His piano concertos are amazing. Need I say more?


----------



## Tapkaara

And he had big hands.


----------



## Rachovsky

Marfan Syndrome.


----------



## Tapkaara

Yes, I've read about Marfan, and it seems very possible that he had it.

I saw the Pacific Symphony do Racky's 2nd a few years ago, it was great.


----------



## thePianoMan

I absolutely love Rachmaninoff. I'm playing the g minor prelude now. My goal for when I'm a senior is to play his 1st piano concerto. All of his stuff is amazing in my opinion.


----------



## Rachovsky

thePianoMan said:


> I absolutely love Rachmaninoff. I'm playing the g minor prelude now. My goal for when I'm a senior is to play his 1st piano concerto. All of his stuff is amazing in my opinion.


I'm learning the G Minor prelude as well. I haven't worked no it that much though. I probably have like 10-15 measures down pat. I'm actually having a tad bit of trouble with the quick part after that first march theme.


----------



## mueske

No mention of his piano sonatas? Come on people!

Despite being a lesser known and performed work, I simply love his first piano sonata. The third movement is one of the greatest pieces written for solo piano, in my opinion at least.


----------



## Bach

Piano Sonata No. 2 - Delicious!


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

mueske said:


> Despite being a lesser known and performed work, I simply love his first piano sonata. The third movement is one of the greatest pieces written for solo piano, in my opinion at least.


What other things do you link from it?


----------



## Brian Turner

Quite agree with all that has been said. I would just add that among the host of recordings of the Piano Concertos I have to rank Zimerman with Ozawa and the Boston SO amomg my top choices - closely followed by Hough with Litton. Though having said that there are at least a dozen others that press my button. There have been several mentions of the Paganini Rhapsody - and no wonder. it's a wonderful work. But those who admire it might also want to listen to the Brahms variations on the same theme. They are remarkable and will in turn lead to a new, or heightened appreciation, of the Rachmaninov version.


----------



## mueske

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> What other things do you link from it?


Excuse me? I don't get what it is you are asking.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

mueske said:


> Excuse me? I don't get what it is you are asking.


I'm sorry, my question goes as follows:

What other things do you *like *from it?


----------



## mueske

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> I'm sorry, my question goes as follows:
> 
> What other things do you *like *from it?


I can't really describe it, but listening to the third movement gives me a feeling of a person who is fed up because of something, agitated. Also, the need to go forward, to make progress, yet, at times, held back by a great deal of nostalgia, unable to focus on what is ahead.

It's diffucult to explain really, I feel music, I can't really describe how I feel about it.


----------



## thePianoMan

Rachovsky said:


> I'm learning the G Minor prelude as well. I haven't worked no it that much though. I probably have like 10-15 measures down pat. I'm actually having a tad bit of trouble with the quick part after that first march theme.


I'm not great with the arpeggios in the left. I also have a tough time putting the left and right hands together in the middle section..


----------



## Sid James

I would also like to add his Vocalise. It's such a nostalgic piece, seems to be about yearning for the past. Alot of his music has that pensive tone, he had a gift for lyricism. Although influenced by Liszt and Tchaikovsky, he had a style that was unique and individual. This is especially apparent in his symphonies and concertos, already mentioned. One of the last great romantics.


----------



## livemylife

I love this thread!
I really love his Cello Sonata esp. mvt. 3. Vocalise is real nice as "Andre" said. 3rd mvt. of Symphony no. 2 is indescribable.


----------



## Stunt21

Nobody talked about the 3rd piano concerto!!

That was the one, I can't remember how, but it was the piece which definitively took me into Music (instead of music) some years ago...The one which opened my mind. 
I think it's a great mind-opener piece, I recommend it to the people wanting to get into this world, and they all fall in love 

Cadenza ossía, oh my god...

Greetings.


----------



## Lukecash12

Stunt21 said:


> Nobody talked about the 3rd piano concerto!!
> 
> That was the one, I can't remember how, but it was the piece which definitively took me into Music (instead of music) some years ago...The one which opened my mind.
> I think it's a great mind-opener piece, I recommend it to the people wanting to get into this world, and they all fall in love
> 
> Cadenza ossía, oh my god...
> 
> Greetings.


Once you've heard it, and talked about it, and heard rants about how great it is as many times as I have: You still love it, but it seems like overkill to get into a conversation you've already had many, many times. But yes, Rachmanninoff was one of the great masters of counterpoint and poetic phrasing.


----------



## Stunt21

I agree with you; there's a lot written about this concerto, and it's a little bit like worn away for some.

That's why I only listen to it a couple or 3 times in special occasions each year, because I love it so much!
Well...I listen to it, so does my neighbourhood, wahaha =P


----------



## David58117

He's been one of my favorite composers for quite some time now. However, I recently discovered his Vespers - some are *incredibly* hauntingly beautiful.


----------



## Lukecash12

David58117 said:


> He's been one of my favorite composers for quite some time now. However, I recently discovered his Vespers - some are *incredibly* hauntingly beautiful.


His choral works are amongst my favorites.


----------



## mueske

David58117 said:


> He's been one of my favorite composers for quite some time now. However, I recently discovered his Vespers - some are *incredibly* hauntingly beautiful.


In my opinion, he is the best romantic composer in composing for voice.


----------



## muxamed

I am not really into the romanticism but I love Rachmaninov.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Somehow his extreme emotionalism doesn't quite appeal to me, of all the Russian composers I adore, but what I really love is the Symphonic Dances. The first movement was my favorite for a while, but now I really like all the others.


----------



## Johnny

Are there any other well known pianists who had suspected/confirmed Marfan's Syndrome?


----------



## Taneyev

Maybe late Ronald Smith? He had enormous hands.


----------



## Aramis

Anyone heard his operas? I'm wondering which should I pick up first or maybe if I should pick any of them at all. They don't seem to be popular so maybe they are not too good?


----------



## Johnny

Taneyev said:


> Maybe late Ronald Smith? He had enormous hands.


Did he just have big hands? I hope it's not a thing whereby any old pianist with large hands is said to have had Marfan's Syndrome.


----------



## mueske

Aramis said:


> Anyone heard his operas? I'm wondering which should I pick up first or maybe if I should pick any of them at all. They don't seem to be popular so maybe they are not too good?


They were moderately praised during his lifetime, I'm positive they're not life changing pieces of music, but they should b worth your time. I mean, it's Rachmaninoff!

Not an opera fan, so never heard them. Though I guess listening to them could be a good introduction for me to opera...


----------



## TWhite

I love him. For a while I ran kind of hot and cold on him, but lately I'm beginning to run 'hot' again. Some very favorites of mine: 
Sonata #1 in d minor: It's huge, almost 45 minutes long, exhausting to play and fascinating to listen to. It's said that his original program for the work was based on "Faust", and the three movements represented Faust, Gretchen and The Ride To Bremen. He later discarded the 'program', but the piece remains for me, one of his most remarkable compositions. 

Symphony #1 in d minor: Most people prefer the Symphony #2, and for good reason, it's beautifully laid out, beautifully orchestrated and extremely satisfying to listen to, but I tend to go with this earlier, more terse and dramatic work, which is less about 'big themes' and more about sheer, almost apocalyptic drama. It has a dominating 'motto' theme throughout all four of the movements that sounds suspiciously close to the "Dies Irae", but is in fact a Russian Orthodox chant, and when he finally lets it blaze forth at the opening of the finale, it literally knocks you back in your seat. An extremely powerful work, but for those who are expecting the usual 'big tunes' that Rachmaninov was so expert at, you'd need to look elsewhere. 

Piano Concerto #1 in f-sharp minor: This is a 1917 revision of a student work. I've compared both scores, and the latter revision is so drastic that it really almost amounts to a completely new work. Rachmaninov revised it because he needed a good display piece for his new-found career as a concert pianist and it's sharp and witty and tremendously exciting. Also extremely difficult to play. It's not as melodic as the Second, or as well laid out as the Third, but it's got some great tunes, spectacular pianism, and a Finale that is as exciting as any in piano concerto literature. 

Vesper Mass (All-Night Vigil): One of the real masterpieces of Russian Orthodox choral literature, and one of Rachmaninov's most beautiful and personal works. This, along with his choral symphony "The Bells" shows a composer particularly attuned to choral writing. 

Symphonic Dances: His last work, and a work that seems to have taken a while to get 'into' the repertoire. His orchestral patina has thinned out, it's not as 'lush' as some of his other orchestral works, but the orchestration is masterly (his use of saxophone in the first movement is terrific!). the first movement has an infectuous 'stomping' rhythm to it--it ALMOST sounds like Stravinsky. The second movement is a subtle and occasionally ravishing "Valse Triste". The Finale uses the "Dies Irae" (one of his 'motto' themes), however it is interesting to see this theme, so popular with Rachmaninov, completely obliterated at the end by the Russian Orthodox Chant "Christ Has Risen". 

For me, his solo piano music is beautifully laid out for the keyboard, though extremely difficult. I don't think there's any really 'easy' Rachmaninoff for piano solo, even the less technically exacting ones have their musical pitfalls. My favorite of the Preludes is #10 in b minor out of op. 32--an astonishing epic in only four pages. 

His songs are among the most beautiful I've ever heard, but they're extremely difficult to accompany--not because of their technical requirements so much, but because if you're not careful, the piano can just take over and turn the works into piano solos with vocal accompaniment! They're real 'partnerships' between voice and piano, and need an extremely careful balance. But they're among the most satisfying art songs I've ever accompanied. 

So: Am I running hot on Rachmaninov again? Darned right!

Tom


----------



## Lukecash12

trojan-rabbit said:


> The Champion of Romantic music


Maybe the champion of it's death. He was the last of his kind, for a little while, that is.


----------



## handlebar

I was listening to an interview with Ben Cohen today(interview from a 1960's tape) where he related his experience in the orchestra with Mahler conducting Rachmaninov in his 3rd piano concerto(1909 ). His recollections are that Mahler was not too involved in making the work really stand out as he was going to conduct Pique Dame that night and was more focused on it.Rachmaninov later claimed it was a great performance yet Cohen remembers differently.
But what a concert that would have been nonetheless. To have two titans of music in such a concert.

Jim


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Rachovsky said:


> Marfan Syndrome.


Really? I think unlikely. He was like 6' 6", so it would makes sense that his hands were big so he would be proportionate.


----------



## Johnny

People with Marfan Syndrome are also usually tall though. Although big hands and above average height alone are pretty far from convincing. What other reasons do people have for thinking he had it?


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> People with Marfan Syndrome are also usually tall though. Although big hands and above average height alone are pretty far from convincing. What other reasons do people have for thinking he had it?


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1351877/


----------



## Johnny

Not much there other than the tallness and big hands.


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> Not much there other than the tallness and big hands.


Please read it again. I really don't want to have to copy/paste where it talks about skeletal disproportion, facial features, eye trouble...

A lot of it is just speculation, in fact the last page sums it up pretty well...


----------



## Johnny

I've read it all. As I said, it's hardly convincing. He may have had it. But based on that article, there isn't enough to say he did.


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> I've read it all. As I said, it's hardly convincing. He may have had it. But based on that article, there isn't enough to say he did.


Again - read the last page....specifically the part where the author talks about it just being a *conjecture*, and that while interesting that Rachmaninoff fits some of the "softer" features of Marfan (which the whole of the paper relies), it is not those features that diagnose Marfan syndrome.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Anyone heard his operas? I'm wondering which should I pick up first or maybe if I should pick any of them at all. They don't seem to be popular so maybe they are not too good?

Rachmaninoff's operas are most certainly not bad... but neither are they among the greatest of operas... or even among the greatest of his own oeuvre. They are all rather early works... the first, Aleko, being a graduation requirement from the Moscow Academy (winning the highest prizes). The operas are all rather brief... but they certainly have their moments:


----------



## Johnny

Yea. What's your point though? That the guy wasn't claiming to have _proven_ he had it? I never said he did.


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> Yea. What's your point though? That the guy wasn't claiming to have _proven_ he had it? I never said he did.


My mistake. When you expressed dissatisfaction that the article "is hardly convincing" and said that "there isn't enough to say" ...I kind of got the impression you expected the article to conclusively say otherwise. There's no reason to be dissatisfied with it, since it's clearly stated as just speculation.

But the initial point was to show that there's more (slightly) than just "tallness and big hands."


----------



## Johnny

There isn't really though. It's a pretty underwhelming case. IMO.


----------



## aphyrodite

Even though Rachmaninoff isn't my first preferred composer, but he's totally one of the best in the romantic era. I enjoy his preludes and the second piano concerto. His music is addicting at some point. Very captivating


----------



## Vaneyes

Santiago Rodriguez' three CDs (Elan) of Rachmaninov solo piano works should be compulsory listening.


----------



## Lisztian

Always loved his piano works, his concerti...But recently i've been listening to Isle of the Dead...which is one of my favourite symphonic poems by anyone. Simply a great composer, maybe not for everyone...but it's very rare I hear a Rachmaninoff work I don't like, and he has quite a few works up there on my personal favourites list.


----------



## violadude

Lisztian said:


> Always loved his piano works, his concerti...But recently i've been listening to Isle of the Dead...which is one of my favourite symphonic poems by anyone. Simply a great composer, maybe not for everyone...but it's very rare I hear a Rachmaninoff work I don't like, and he has quite a few works up there on my personal favourites list.


Isle of the Dead is probably my favorite piece by him. It has such an incredible build up.


----------



## itywltmt

A couple of musings I wrote this month on Rachmaninoff:

http://www.talkclassical.com/blogs/itywltmt/919-rachmaninov-pianist-youtube.html
http://www.talkclassical.com/blogs/itywltmt/926-day-music-history-16.html


----------



## DeepR

I love Rachmaninoff. I mostly like his Preludes (especially when played by Richter!!!), Piano Concerti, some Etudes, some other solo piano works and some of his choral pieces are divine!


----------



## DeepR

Here is a wonderful unique interpretation of Op. 32 No. 10


----------



## Arsakes

I just Heard his symphonies for the first time and I love his 2nd symphony.


----------



## Moira

I will be hearing the Vespers next month. Looking forward to this.

http://artscomments.wordpress.com/2...performed-at-st-marys-cathedral-johannesburg/


----------



## Polyphemus

His third piano concerto is my all time favourite, particularly Ashkenazy's first recording of it, conducted by Fistoulari in 1963.


----------



## violadude

My favorite piece by Rachmaninov


----------



## Vaneyes

VD, I think of that tune each time I float by San Michele, Venice.

Nono and Stravinsky are buried there. :angel::angel:

View attachment 5374


----------



## regressivetransphobe

I'm not gonna outright say if you don't like Rachmaninoff you don't like music, but that's true, and it probably means you're racist too.


----------



## Arsakes

regressivetransphobe said:


> I'm not gonna outright say if you don't like Rachmaninoff you don't like music, but that's true, and it probably means you're racist too.


Somewhat in agreement with you. But what's the racist part?
Do you mean Rachmaninov is from Altaic or Arab origins or is it his 'large hands'?
His hands aren't big, yours are small 

Also why do you write his name Rachmaninoff?


----------



## regressivetransphobe

I'm not saying there are studies that prove a link between Rach hate and white supremacy, but there probably are. Just sayin'.


----------



## Polyphemus

"Also why do you write his name Rachmaninoff?"

I blame the record companies.


----------



## Couchie

He's a good pre-Wagner composer. Post-Wagner I HAVE NO USE FOR HIM.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Couchie said:


> He's a good pre-Wagner composer. Post-Wagner I HAVE NO USE FOR HIM.


Wow you actually (somewhat indirectly) said that someone other than Wagner was a good composer. Surprising.


----------



## Lunasong

An anecdote from Harpo Marx, from his book _Harpo Speaks!_

Hollywood, 1931:
My little bungalow in the Garden of Allah was a peaceful retreat. It was the best place to practice (harp) I ever had--until a piano player moved into a bungalow across from mine and shattered the peace.

I was looking forward to a solid weekend of practice, without interruptions, when my new neighbor started to bang away. I couldn't hear anything below a _forte_ on the harp. There were no signs the piano banging was going to stop. It only got more overpowering. This character was warming up for a solid weekend of practice too.

I went to the office to register a complaint. One of us had to go, I said, and it wasn't going to be me because I was there first. But the management didn't see it my way. The new guest, whose playing was driving me nuts, was Sergei Rachmaninoff. They were not about to ask him to move.

I was flattered to have such a distinguished neighbor, but I still had to practice. So I got rid of him my own way.

I opened the door and all the windows in my place and began to play the first four bars of Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C-sharp Minor, over and over, _fortissimo._ Two hours later my fingers were getting numb. But I didn't let up, not until I heard a thunderous crash of notes from across the way, like the keyboard had been attacked with a pair of sledge hammers. Then there was silence.

This time it was Rachmaninoff who went to complain. He asked to be moved to another bungalow immediately, the farthest possible from that dreadful harpist. Peace returned to the Garden.

I didn't really know until much later how sharp my intuition had been. I found out the great pianist and composer detested his Prelude in C-sharp Minor. He considered it a _very _Minor piece of work. He was haunted by it everywhere he went, by students who butchered it and by audiences who clamored for it, and he wished he'd never written it. After playing the damned thing nonstop for two hours I knew exactly how he felt.


----------



## Lunasong

Arsakes said:


> Also why do you write his name Rachmaninoff?


Per IMSLP:
A more accurate transliteration of his name into English would be "Sergey Rakhmaninov", but he chose to use the French version "Sergei Rachmaninoff" after leaving Russia in 1918.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Lunasong said:


> Per IMSLP:
> A more accurate transliteration of his name into English would be "Sergey Rakhmaninov", but he chose to use the French version "Sergei Rachmaninoff" after leaving Russia in 1918.


I prefer to write it Сергей Рахманинов.


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I prefer to write it Сергей Рахманинов.


I'm sure my music teacher prefers writing it that way.


----------



## Ripvanwinkle

Polyphemus said:


> His third piano concerto is my all time favourite, particularly Ashkenazy's first recording of it, conducted by Fistoulari in 1963.


Rach is my favorite 20th century composer and the Rach 3 is my favorite work. There are many great performances out there.


----------



## powerbooks

Ripvanwinkle said:


> Rach is my favorite 20th century composer and the Rach 3 is my favorite work. There are many great performances out there.


With the risk as being corny! 

http://www.talkclassical.com/20184-cheesy-music-3.html#post324465

The Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini always has a soft spot on me!


----------



## Ripvanwinkle

powerbooks said:


> With the risk as being corny!
> 
> http://www.talkclassical.com/20184-cheesy-music-3.html#post324465
> 
> The Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini always has a soft spot on me!


Yeah, the Rhapsody is great. When folks refer to it they are usually referring to the 
variation #18 which is (as you already know) the theme to the movie "Somewhere in Time".
There is little enthusisasm for the entire piece from what I can tell. I enjoy the entire work 
with admittedly one or two exceptions.


----------



## Carpenoctem

Great composer, I like his symphonies (especially no.2), piano concertos (no.2 and no.3 are brilliant). His preludes are also great.

Along with Stravinsky and Tchaikovsky he is my favorite Russian composer.


----------



## eonbird

Carpenoctem said:


> Great composer, I like his symphonies (especially no.2), piano concertos (no.2 and no.3 are brilliant). His preludes are also great.
> 
> Along with Stravinsky and Tchaikovsky he is my favorite Russian composer.


^ I couldn't agree more with this. His piano concertos are absolutely amazing, especially.


----------



## kv466

Along with all the above mentioned, this is one of my all time favorite pieces of Rachmaninov:






Knowing and loving each note of this fairly lengthy piece, my favorite is Earl Wild's interpretation and I highly recommend it. Bolet, of course, is a master and he gets close but once you hear Maestro Wild play these notes it becomes difficult to accept hearing them any other way.


----------



## Vaneyes

View attachment 7304
View attachment 7305
View attachment 7306


----------



## Weston

Dear Mr. Rachmaninov,

Today we heard the third movement of your Symphony No. 2 on the elevator via our Muzak account. It has a very catchy melody with a lot of commercial potential. Taken out of context, we thought it sounds very much like music from the opening of a typical daytime soap opera -- not the kind of opera you're used to, we sure, but opera in a way. As we are producing a new daytime drama, "Love of Thine Enemies," a chronicle of the debauchery and dalliances of the fictitious upscale community of Landfill, we would like your blessing on the use of this music as the opening theme. Of course as it is a bit past its shelf life, we're darn well going to use it anyway, but having your endorsement could create a more marketable show for potential sponsors. Hoping to hear from you soonest.

Regards,

The production staff of the Philistine Broadcasting Network.


----------



## Celloman

My favorite Rach piece has to be Isle of the Dead. Also, his Vespers is amazing and so is his "Bells" symphony. Lesser-known works, but just as good as the more popular ones!


----------



## DeepR

Prelude Op. 32 No. 10 is one of my favorites. I posted another interpretation of this piece before, but in the end I pick Richter as my favorite one (that goes for basicly every Rachmaninoff prelude he played):






I once studied this piece, but never finished it. Someday I will. I just had too much fun with the heavy chords part.


----------



## anasazi

Lunasong said:


> An anecdote from Harpo Marx, from his book _Harpo Speaks!_
> 
> Hollywood, 1931:
> My little bungalow in the Garden of Allah was a peaceful retreat. It was the best place to practice (harp) I ever had--until a piano player moved into a bungalow across from mine and shattered the peace.
> 
> I was looking forward to a solid weekend of practice, without interruptions, when my new neighbor started to bang away. I couldn't hear anything below a _forte_ on the harp. There were no signs the piano banging was going to stop. It only got more overpowering. This character was warming up for a solid weekend of practice too.
> 
> I went to the office to register a complaint. One of us had to go, I said, and it wasn't going to be me because I was there first. But the management didn't see it my way. The new guest, whose playing was driving me nuts, was Sergei Rachmaninoff. They were not about to ask him to move.
> 
> I was flattered to have such a distinguished neighbor, but I still had to practice. So I got rid of him my own way.
> 
> I opened the door and all the windows in my place and began to play the first four bars of Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C-sharp Minor, over and over, _fortissimo._ Two hours later my fingers were getting numb. But I didn't let up, not until I heard a thunderous crash of notes from across the way, like the keyboard had been attacked with a pair of sledge hammers. Then there was silence.
> 
> This time it was Rachmaninoff who went to complain. He asked to be moved to another bungalow immediately, the farthest possible from that dreadful harpist. Peace returned to the Garden.
> 
> I didn't really know until much later how sharp my intuition had been. I found out the great pianist and composer detested his Prelude in C-sharp Minor. He considered it a _very _Minor piece of work. He was haunted by it everywhere he went, by students who butchered it and by audiences who clamored for it, and he wished he'd never written it. After playing the damned thing nonstop for two hours I knew exactly how he felt.


Good post. I really enjoyed reading this, and of course it makes perfect sense.

Well, I love Rachmaninov's music. Starting in the vinyl era. One of the very first 33 1/3 albums that
I ever bought was Philippe Entremont (piano) and Leonard Bernstein conducting the NY Philharmonic in
a performance of the second piano concerto. Naturally, it is still my favorite performance of what is now 
my favorite piano concerto.

My other really favorite Rachmaninov piece is the second symphony. I used to own a vinyl recording of
Andre Previn conducting the London Symphony that was released on two 45rpm long playing records. It
was done this way, because the 45 rpm long play format was supposed to have better sound. And, of course
each of the four movements easily would fit on one side of the album. Well, it was a fine recording, but now I
think I enjoy Previn's recording with the Royal Philharmonic on Telarc. It is just about as good.

Speaking of the Rach second, I have just begun arranging the Adagio theme (third movement) for piano solo.

And noticing as I am doing it just how gorgeous that E clarinet theme truly is, especially when the violas began 
accompanying them, a fifth down and two beats off (in canon).

Rach was still a young man when he composed his second symphony, and, frankly, it's not a perfect thing, but it
does show the composer's extreme gift for melody that, as far as I can hear, is unsurpassed.


----------



## Rehydration

I LOVE RACHMANINOV
Just saying.
His Piano Concerti are all amazing. Especially this one.


----------



## Vaneyes

Yes, but Olga could be even more amazing. Martha excepted. Drumroll, rimshot.


----------



## Vaneyes

Tom Service digests *Rachmaninov* Symphony No. 3. And mentions my favorite rec. of--St. Petersburg/Jansons. 

http://www.theguardian.com/music/tomserviceblog/2013/nov/19/symphony-guide-rachmaninov-third


----------



## Vaneyes

Russia (well, Putin's idea) wants Rachmaninov's estate in Switzerland. 

Read all about it...

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...eclaim-rachmaninoff-estate/?ref=music&_r=1&#h[PVVPVV]&pagewanted=all


----------



## EdwardBast

Not much mention of the Etudes Tableaux. The Opus 39 set is, IMO, some of his best music. The songs Op. 38 are great too. His harmonic language got more complex and a bit more adventurous in the late 1910s and these pieces show that most clearly.


----------



## Vaneyes

Symphony 2 goes under the hammer.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/20...nov-symphony-manuscript-sothebys-under-hammer


----------



## Jobis

What's the appeal of Rachmaninov?

I'm curious because I know people who hold him in high regard, but I don't yet 'get' his music. It seems to me a bit vague and impressionistic (though not in the manner of Debussy), and the piano music especially I find difficult to focus on, it being quite dense and full of big washes of moods and colours.

I hope I don't sound too clueless, but it'd be interesting to know what qualities of his music fans most like, and which are totally unique to him.


----------



## EdwardBast

Jobis said:


> What's the appeal of Rachmaninov?
> 
> I'm curious because I know people who hold him in high regard, but I don't yet 'get' his music. It seems to me a bit vague and impressionistic (though not in the manner of Debussy), and the piano music especially I find difficult to focus on, it being quite dense and full of big washes of moods and colours.
> 
> I hope I don't sound too clueless, but it'd be interesting to know what qualities of his music fans most like, and which are totally unique to him.


I would say his music is, by and large, anything but vague and impressionistic. In fact, his major works are some of the most intricately unified and carefully organized music I know. Often every idea in a movement will derive from a very small number of motives. And his finales almost always tie up every thread in the earlier movements. This aspect of his work is rarely recognized, however, because his melodies sound self-sufficient and spontaneous, even when they serve such unifying functions - they almost distract one from seeing the inner workings.

Much of his popularity is due to his melodies, which are in a Tchaikovskian vein. (Tchaikovsky was his mentor and the head of the Moscow Conservatory when Rachmaninoff studied there.) Many of them rise in successive waves and unfold over as much as two minutes.

His style is also characterized by what has been called polymelody - His textures tend to be dense, with several secondary lines having their own sense of purpose. He was accomplished at contrapuntal writing and occasionally wrote complex fugal sections (the finale of the Third Symphony, for example), or fugatos (scherzo of the 2nd symphony).

His piano miniatures (24 preludes in all keys, two sets of Etudes Tableaux, etc.) are especially good and diverse, many of them inspired by poems, pictures or natural phenomena, though he rarely indicated the sources. He wrote some excellent collections of songs as well. Far from being vague, almost every one of these little pieces has a definite high point and a clear dramatic arc.

He nearly stopped composing after 1917 (except for six opuses). The works from the 1913 on were getting more harmonically adventurous. See especially the Etudes Tableaux Op. 39 and the songs Op. 38.

To sum up: He is probably closest to Tchaikovksy, though with the added influence of Brahms and Wagner.


----------



## DeepR

Selection of the preludes played godly by Richter


----------



## Skilmarilion

London Phil's 2014/15 will be dominated by a celebration of Rachmaninov.

Tom Service has a more than interesting piece on this, and the Rach legacy.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/tomserviceblog/2014/sep/23/london-philharmonic-orchestra-rachmaninov-third-symphony


----------



## hpowders

I don't care much for Rachmaninov's music but there is one performance that I do listen to from time to time and that is the electric one by Van Cliburn/Kondrashin of the Third Piano Concerto.


----------



## MagneticGhost

Vaneyes link about Glazunov and Rachmaninov from the Spectator. 
Great little read.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/arts/musi...ninovs-career/


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

MagneticGhost said:


> Vaneyes link about Glazunov and Rachmaninov from the Spectator.
> Great little read.
> 
> http://www.spectator.co.uk/arts/musi...ninovs-career/


Careful about making enemies with the Mafia. We aren't going to be very pleased.


----------



## hpowders

Rachmaninoff Piano Sonata #2. Nice!


----------



## MagneticGhost

That saxophone solo in the first symphonic dance has to be the best use of saxophone in classical music - full stop.
Maybe even music. It knocks Baker Street into a cocked hat. Take that Bob Holness


----------



## motoboy

Voxbox has released the complete symphonies plus a lot more for $.99. Leonard Slatkin and St Louis!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00V6...&dpID=61BDab3TgAL&ref=plSrch&pi=AC_SY200_QL40


----------



## LarryShone

Good evening Rachmaninov, here's a sketch of you I made


----------



## DeepR

As posted in the photograph thread, here is, according to its description, the most complete collection of video material of the man in question. Looks like he was living the good life.


----------



## DeepR

^ He stepped out of that canoe like a boss, letting the women do all the work.


----------



## joen_cph

Update: Granddaughter interview, concerning rivalry between Russia and US about the Rachmaninov legacy & wish for re-burial:

http://www.rferl.org/content/rachmaninoff-granddaughter-legacy-russia-reburial/27205996.html


----------



## Strange Magic

In his final years in Los Angeles, Rachmaninoff would often have Vladimir Horowitz over for dinner. Then, dinner finished, the two titans of the keyboard would sit at the two grands and pound out two-piano works for hours, exulting in one another's skill and the pleasure of such close cooperation. Of course they would have played both of R's suites for two pianos, and the tremendous two-piano version of the Symphonic Dances--a joy to the ear! To have been present at such a time......


----------



## Taggart

Please avoid politics or move the discussion to the Politics and Religion in Classical Music area.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

I think its so bourgeois to go to a classical music site and to bludgeon people with politics, myself.

Don't get me wrong, politics is a blood sport that I 'love'- but there really is a time and a place for it.

Rachmaninov's a deity just for writing that middle string section of the _Isle of the Dead_ alone- and should be treated as such.


----------



## Steatopygous

Marschallin Blair said:


> I think its so bourgeois to go to a classical music site and to bludgeon people with politics, myself.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, politics is a blood sport that I 'love'- but there really is a time and a place for it.
> 
> Rachmaninov's a deity just for writing that middle string section of the _Isle of the Dead_ alone- and should be treated as such.


But ... but ... but surely most of us ARE bourgeois. We have computers and the Net and the time to deploy them and an interest in classical music.... The real proletariat usually fail at least one of these characteristics. 
Perhaps the word means something different to you than it does to me. Ditto deity, actually. But your sentiments about Rachmaninov are very just, in my view.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Steatopygous said:


> But ... but ... but surely most of us ARE bourgeois. We have computers and the Net and the time to deploy them and an interest in classical music.... The real proletariat usually fail at least one of these characteristics.
> Perhaps the word means something different to you than it does to me. Ditto deity, actually. But your sentiments about Rachmaninov are very just, in my view.


Oh 'you know' what I mean-

BAD

<and with a rolling 'R' elocution> BRREEDING.

'Bourgeois' can mean strictly 'middle class'- but it also culturally connotes philistinism, incuriosity, and of course 'bad manners'. . .

But you're right: Cheers to the Rach all the same!


----------



## Strange Magic

There are two things that stand out for me in Rachmaninoff's career that enhance the deep respect I have for him. The first is his decision to begin a career as a virtuoso pianist at the age of 45! Some people are ending their careers at 45. We know all along that he was a gifted performer, but until then, he had not relied exclusively or even importantly on playing to earn his daily bread. So it is truly remarkable that he begins his professional life as a concert pianist at that age, and becomes someone whom many place among the greatest five or so pianists who ever lived.

The second thing is that, though his compositional output after the Revolution was only a fraction of what it had been before, it included such a large proportion of excellent work: the Paganini Rhapsody, the Third Symphony, the Symphonic Dances, the Corelli Variations. While I am not a fan of the Fourth Concerto, the Corelli Variations offer much pleasure, and the Symphonic Dances point to a whole new world of musical possibilities for R, had he lived, much as the Concerto for Orchestra hinted at what more Bartok could have said.....


----------



## DavidA

Strange Magic said:


> There are two things that stand out for me in Rachmaninoff's career that enhance the deep respect I have for him. *The first is his decision to begin a career as a virtuoso pianist at the age of 45! * Some people are ending their careers at 45. We know all along that he was a gifted performer, but until then, he had not relied exclusively or even importantly on playing to earn his daily bread. So it is truly remarkable that he begins his professional life as a concert pianist at that age, and becomes someone whom many place among the greatest five or so pianists who ever lived.
> 
> The second thing is that, though his compositional output after the Revolution was only a fraction of what it had been before, it included such a large proportion of excellent work: the Paganini Rhapsody, the Third Symphony, the Symphonic Dances, the Corelli Variations. While I am not a fan of the Fourth Concerto, the Corelli Variations offer much pleasure, and the Symphonic Dances point to a whole new world of musical possibilities for R, had he lived, much as the Concerto for Orchestra hinted at what more Bartok could have said.....


Of course this decision was forced on him by circumstances. But it doesn't make his achievement any the less great.


----------



## Strange Magic

The decision to leave Russia was certainly forced upon R, but he chose the virtuoso life despite being offered lucrative conducting positions in America (he was a quite successful conductor in Russia), but turning them down. But it must have been a wrenching thing to leave a past behind him that he could never return to. Prokofiev's departure from Russia seems more like a schoolboy holiday. But that is a whole 'nother story.


----------



## EdwardBast

Strange Magic said:


> The decision to leave Russia was certainly forced upon R, but he chose the virtuoso life despite being offered lucrative conducting positions in America (he was a quite successful conductor in Russia), but turning them down. But it must have been a wrenching thing to leave a past behind him that he could never return to. Prokofiev's departure from Russia seems more like a schoolboy holiday. But that is a whole 'nother story.


Didn't the first offer to conduct the Boston Symphony come before his emigration? And I believe his longest conducting gig was with the Dresden Opera beginning in 1906(?) Anyway, I agree that beginning a new career at that age was quite remarkable. But he had done considerable public performance before that and his repertoire was always fairly narrow - which was not a drawback since what folks mostly wanted to hear him play was Rachmaninoff.


----------



## Strange Magic

My eroding memory fails to recall any details of which offers R received around the time of his exile, but I think that when he turned down Boston, he advised them to get Koussevitzky. You're right about the narrowness of his repertoire, and one wonders why that was so. He allegedly began to study the Schumann concerto late in his career, and maybe some others besides the Liszt, Tchaikovsky, etc. that comprised the vast majority of his non-R performances. A pity that he wasn't more adventurous, but he must have had his reasons.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Recently listened to his Piano Sonata No. 2 in B-Flat minor as performed by Hélène Grimaud - very impressive. I'll need to explore Rachmaninoff further.


----------



## EdwardBast

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Recently listened to his Piano Sonata No. 2 in B-Flat minor as performed by Hélène Grimaud - very impressive. I'll need to explore Rachmaninoff further.


That sonata is indeed impressive. The first sonata, in D minor, is quite discursive and probably overlong, but has some wonderful moments too. As a composer of solo piano music, many think Rachmaninoff's strongest work was as a master of miniatures, especially the 24 preludes and the two sets of Etudes Tableaux.


----------



## regenmusic

Rachmaninoff Documentary - The Harvest Of Sorrow


----------



## mstar

^^^

BBC recently made a *documentary* on him. I don't know why I saved it - I'll probably never watch it. For some reason when he's mentioned my nerves get the best of me and I stress out. I don't think I could stand an hour or so of that.


----------



## Ilarion

Jobis said:


> What's the appeal of Rachmaninov?
> 
> I'm curious because I know people who hold him in high regard, but I don't yet 'get' his music. It seems to me a bit vague and impressionistic (though not in the manner of Debussy), and the piano music especially I find difficult to focus on, it being quite dense and full of big washes of moods and colours.
> 
> I hope I don't sound too clueless, but it'd be interesting to know what qualities of his music fans most like, and which are totally unique to him.


Now in the 7th year of my life living in Russia, Rachmaninov's music imo expresses tonally the vast geography of Russia, from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok. It gives us but a rare tonal glimpse of the varied peoples and their domestic/public lives, their weltanschauung and religion. His music is a rich and widely variegated kaleidoscope of tonal textures that encapsulate all that is the Russian Culture of Music, Art, Literature, History, and so on...


----------



## CDs

Need your help. Which set should I get? Or is there a better one I should consider?


----------



## Vaneyes

CDs said:


> Need your help. Which set should I get? Or is there a better one I should consider?
> 
> View attachment 84808
> 
> 
> View attachment 84809


----------



## CDs

Thanks! I'll look into the set you mentioned.


----------



## Pugg

CDs said:


> Need your help. Which set should I get? Or is there a better one I should consider?
> 
> View attachment 84808
> 
> 
> View attachment 84809


I would go for the Askenazy.
Vaneyes choice is also good


----------



## Marinera

Mistake. thought it about piano concerts


----------



## CDs

Am I correct in assuming this set is the same recording as the Jansons set mentioned above? Just with Piano Concertos?

http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninov-C...464103192&sr=1-1&keywords=rachmaninov+jansons


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Here's a slightly off-beat Q concerning Sergei Vasilyevitch.
He is generally talked about as a Late Romantic, yearning for his lost Russian roots, nostalgic for Ivanovka and the old Russia of his childhood.
And yet... in 1930 he bought a plot of land near Lucerne and set about designing and having built a fine country villa - named 'Serna', from Sergei and Natalia [https://www.letemps.ch/culture/2014/10/17/paradis-suisse-serguei-rachmaninov]. So what sort of design did this tweedy old Russian choose? Absolutely pure, up-to-the-moment Modernism, a beautiful example of Le Corbusier-esque whiteness and rectilinearity.
How counter-intuitive is that?


----------



## Pugg

CDs said:


> Am I correct in assuming this set is the same recording as the Jansons set mentioned above? Just with Piano Concertos?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninov-C...464103192&sr=1-1&keywords=rachmaninov+jansons


Yes it is the same, different package due to Warner buying EMI


----------



## mstar

Pat Fairlea said:


> Here's a slightly off-beat Q concerning Sergei Vasilyevitch.
> He is generally talked about as *a Late Romantic, yearning for his lost Russian roots, nostalgic for Ivanovka and the old Russia of his childhood.*
> And yet... in 1930 he bought a plot of land near Lucerne and set about designing and having built a fine country villa - named 'Serna', from Sergei and Natalia [https://www.letemps.ch/culture/2014/10/17/paradis-suisse-serguei-rachmaninov]. So what sort of design did this tweedy old Russian choose? Absolutely pure, up-to-the-moment Modernism, a beautiful example of Le Corbusier-esque whiteness and rectilinearity.
> How counter-intuitive is that?


Frankly, I don't buy it either. But what else can be dramatized about his life? I mean, in comparison with Liszt, for example...


----------



## DeepR

A wonderful version of Rachmaninoff's song Floods of Spring Op. 14 No. 11 for piano and cello:


----------



## Vaneyes

JTech82 said:


> His symphonies are incredible. His piano concertos are amazing. Need I say more?


Yes, his solo piano.


----------



## MagneticGhost

> His symphonies are incredible. His piano concertos are amazing. Need I say more?





> Yes, his solo piano.


Not to mention his liturgical works - The All Night Vigil 'Vespers' and his Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. Two of the most beautiful works ever heard by human ears.


----------



## mstar

It's pretty well known that Rachmaninoff suffered recurring bouts of depression, which he publicly claimed were successfully alleviated via therapy. Nevertheless, personal letters reveal that, throughout his life, he struggled with periods of melancholy and was always extremely wary of periods of total apathy and unproductivity that would occur randomly over and over again. Rachmaninoff also had periods of intense activity, such as when he wrote one of his operas notably long before the assigned deadline, claimed the third concerto "wrote itself", and at one point wrote that he felt that a flood of musical ideas had suddenly arisen in his mind. 

All of this sounds strikingly similar to the symptoms of bipolar depression, not major depression. One of my friends is bipolar. He has mixed episodes, but he is always calm - you wouldn't guess he's bipolar unless you know him well. So Rachmaninoff's calm temperament certainly doesn't exclude the possibility of bipolar depression. 
What do you think? Was Rachmaninoff bipolar?


----------



## Flamme

I have always find it strange that Russians have so many very emotional writers, composers...I have met a fair share of Russians in my life and also my ex gf was a russian teacher who had a wide experience with Russians in Russia and abroad and considered them cold and detached...


----------



## Pat Fairlea

mstar said:


> It's pretty well known that Rachmaninoff suffered recurring bouts of depression, which he publicly claimed were successfully alleviated via therapy. Nevertheless, personal letters reveal that, throughout his life, he struggled with periods of melancholy and was always extremely wary of periods of total apathy and unproductivity that would occur randomly over and over again. Rachmaninoff also had periods of intense activity, such as when he wrote one of his operas notably long before the assigned deadline, claimed the third concerto "wrote itself", and at one point wrote that he felt that a flood of musical ideas had suddenly arisen in his mind.
> 
> All of this sounds strikingly similar to the symptoms of bipolar depression, not major depression. One of my friends is bipolar. He has mixed episodes, but he is always calm - you wouldn't guess he's bipolar unless you know him well. So Rachmaninoff's calm temperament certainly doesn't exclude the possibility of bipolar depression.
> What do you think? Was Rachmaninoff bipolar?


Interesting. I wonder if R's love of fast cars and speedboats was a reflection of his 'up' phases?


----------



## mstar

Pat Fairlea said:


> Interesting. I wonder if R's love of fast cars and speedboats was a reflection of his 'up' phases?


Maybe so - that and: 
1. His gloomy, antisocial disposition at an opera-based gathering with friends vs. his incessant chatting one night on the beach. 
2. His claims (made very soon after the symphony was premiered) that his first symphony's failure didn't hit him very hard vs. his subsequent fall into a severe depressive episode. 
3. His affinity for making practical jokes on people vs. his conservatory friends saying he was usually very quiet. 
4. His standing on the roof of a house and singing an aria vs. his sitting on the couch for long periods of time and literally doing nothing.
5. A period of time when he ate one small meal per day and just worked constantly vs. the two years after he wrote his first symphony, during which he wrote almost nothing. 
6. His second symphony vs. his third piano concerto (after which he became depressed again) and Op. 39 (with subsequent period of melancholy). 
7. His very optimistic comments that hypnosis cured his youth depression vs. his falling into depressive episodes repeatedly throughout his life. 
Etc.


----------



## gouts

My favourite works are definitely his 2 suites for 2 pianos. I'm not sure if they get the credit they deserve...


----------



## Janspe

gouts said:


> My favourite works are definitely his 2 suites for 2 pianos. I'm not sure if they get the credit they deserve...


I think the second one gets played quite often. I'm very fond of both works myself, I should listen to the first one again soon - haven't heard it in ages...


----------



## Daverk

I don't know why the first symphony was so maligned, one of my favorites


----------



## Janspe

Daverk said:


> I don't know why the first symphony was so maligned, one of my favorites


The first performance was a terrible disaster (thanks Glazunov!) and cast a nasty shadow on the work for many years to come. Luckily it gets performed and recorded quite often these days!


----------



## Lucas A

I've been coming back to Rachmaninov after years of exploring classical music - especially the 19th century music leading up to him. 

While I still love the 2nd and 3rd piano concertos, I'm finding everything else to be terribly lightweight, a sort of thicker throwback to music of the 1840s with some cognizance of Tchaikovsky and Rimsky-Korsakov. I don't know, he's just difficult to take seriously (and a little boring) when you realize that Strauss, Debussy, and Mahler largely predate him.


----------



## Tchaikov6

Rachmaninov to me is a rip-off of Tchaikovsky (sorry Rachmaninov disciples).


----------



## Merl

I Ned to revisit Rachmaninoff. Played very little recently. Been on a Schubert binge recently (apart from my usual Beethoven).


----------



## Janspe

A lot of people - Rachmaninov himself included! - are very fond of the _All-Night Vigil_ (_Всенощное бдение_) but I think the _Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom_ (_Литургия Иоанна Златоуста_) deserves praise too. I'm just listening to it and I'm stunned by its transcendental and harmonious beauty.

I feel like these two works present Rachmaninov at his most personal, they're very important works; the same goes for his numerous songs. He should get more credit for his work as a vocal composer.


----------



## R3PL4Y

Rachmaninoff's favorite works of his were the All Night Vigil and the Bells. Personally, I like the third symphony and the symphonic dances, although the Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini is very good as well.


----------



## Tchaikov6

Tchaikov6 said:


> Rachmaninov to me is a rip-off of Tchaikovsky (sorry Rachmaninov disciples).


Never mind this comment, I am really loving Rachmaninov right now. Not a great great, but he's got some great stuff.


----------



## Sonata

Daverk said:


> I don't know why the first symphony was so maligned, one of my favorites


Absolutely, the first symphony is wonderful.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Tchaikov6 said:


> Rachmaninov to me is a rip-off of Tchaikovsky (sorry Rachmaninov disciples).


Just let us know where you got whatever that stuff is that you're clearly smoking, and we'll call it quits.


----------



## EdwardBast

Sonata said:


> Absolutely, the first symphony is wonderful.


The first symphony is wonderful in conception but the orchestration is pretty bad. Horrible blats from very low horn parts, too dense, too much doubling. I imagine it takes a great deal of care to get a good effect out of it, care which was not taken at the premiere. With an unsympathetic conductor it could be, and apparently was, a mess. Rachmaninoff blamed himself, saying something like: How could I have miscalculated this badly? And weren't cuts made to the score for that performance?

As for Daverk's question of how it could be maligned: The premiere of this Muscovite composer and student of Tchaikovksy was in St. Petersburg, where the Five held sway, which meant a hostile partisan press (like the Yankees in Fenway Park). As one might expect, Cesar Cui wrote a vicious negative review of it. The deck was stacked against the work and Rachmaninoff was in fact partially to blame.


----------



## Tchaikov6

Animal the Drummer said:


> Just let us know where you got whatever that stuff is that you're clearly smoking, and we'll call it quits.


Did you not read Post 149?

"Never mind this comment, I am really loving Rachmaninov right now. Not a great great, but he's got some great stuff."


----------



## mikeh375

'The Bells' is up there for me. The soprano solo in the Wedding Bells gets me every time, as does the last bloom of melody in the final movement. Stravinsky called him a 6 foot scowl and yet he looks so happy and relaxed in private movie footage and photos.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Tchaikov6 said:


> Did you not read Post 149?
> 
> "Never mind this comment, I am really loving Rachmaninov right now. Not a great great, but he's got some great stuff."


Yes, I did and you were hedging your bets in it, as well as leaving the original post in place, so I thought a counterbalance was called for, and I stand by that.


----------



## Sonata

EdwardBast said:


> The first symphony is wonderful in conception but the orchestration is pretty bad. Horrible blats from very low horn parts, too dense, too much doubling. I imagine it takes a great deal of care to get a good effect out of it, care which was not taken at the premiere. With an unsympathetic conductor it could be, and apparently was, a mess. Rachmaninoff blamed himself, saying something like: How could I have miscalculated this badly? And weren't cuts made to the score for that performance?
> 
> As for Daverk's question of how it could be maligned: The premiere of this Muscovite composer and student of Tchaikovksy was in St. Petersburg, where the Five held sway, which meant a hostile partisan press (like the Yankees in Fenway Park). As one might expect, Cesar Cui wrote a vicious negative review of it. The deck was stacked against the work and Rachmaninoff was in fact partially to blame.


Wow, aren't you a buzzkill!


----------



## EdwardBast

Sonata said:


> Wow, aren't you a buzzkill!


I'm just saying that given a drunk, unprepared conductor, not nearly enough rehearsal time, senseless cuts to the score, the partisan city rivalry, and poor orchestration, the disastrous premiere is very easy to understand.

One of the things that's great about the work, which undoubtedly went unnoticed at the premiere, is that it was probably the most systematically unified symphony of the 19thc. The three themes of the first movement are reinterpreted in the finale, the scherzo derives from the principal exposition theme, the slow movement is built from the second theme. There is an underlying programmatic inspiration: Tolstoy's Anna Karenina.


----------



## Tchaikov6

Animal the Drummer said:


> Yes, I did and you were hedging your bets in it, as well as leaving the original post in place, so I thought a counterbalance was called for, and I stand by that.


Hedging my bets? I openly said "never mind this comment that's not what I think of it anymore." Or am I interpreting what you said wrong?


----------



## Animal the Drummer

You didn't say "that's not what I think of it any more". You said you were "loving it right now", which suggested to me that you saw this as a passing fancy and fundamentally still held the belief you posted earlier. If that's not what you meant, fair enough. Peace.


----------



## luciaspanpiano

I absolutely LOVE his 3rd piano concerto, probably my favourite piece of music. It makes me cry everytime I listen to it.
He is definitely one of my favourite composers and pianists.


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Tchaikov6 said:


> Rachmaninov to me is a rip-off of Tchaikovsky (sorry Rachmaninov disciples).


I know this post has been followed up, but it makes a good point. Early Rachmaninov picks up a lot from Tchaikovsky (unsurprisingly!) and then develops the distinctively Russian voice that Tchaikovsky in his turn developed out of Glinka. To some extent, the echoes of T in R's music is a compliment to T, whose best-known works are not his more innovative and accomplished. Try his Piano Trio or The Seasons. T offered a starting point that his successors took forward into their own musical development.

Rachmaninov wrote superbly for voice, whether en masse (Bells, Liturgy of St John) or in his many song settings (Vocalise, of course, Lilacs, Oh Cease Thy Singing...). His 'late' works, from Op.40 onwards, show a genuine development of style, even if it was not towards the fashionable modernism of the time. Personally, I think his Corelli Variations are a genuine masterpiece, however much he had doubts about the work.


----------



## Chronochromie

Tchaikov6 said:


> Rachmaninov to me is a rip-off of Tchaikovsky (sorry Rachmaninov disciples).


I've yet to find a work by Tchaikovsky that is nearly as good as Rach's best (4th PC, 3rd Symphony, Symphonic Dances, Isle of the 
Dead, The Bells, etc.)


----------



## DeepR

I just watched parts of a video of Lang Lang giving a "masterclass" on his Prelude Op. 23 No. 5... This while mr. Lang Lang himself BUTCHERS the piece. Those with morbid curiosity can find out what I mean on Youtube.

Poor Rachmaninoff must be rolling through his grave.


----------



## MusicSybarite

I hadn't been very familiar with the Symphony No. 3 in A minor (the Symphonic Dances could be very arguably his last symphony), so I decided to play it again. To be honest, the Svetlanov recording had made it an unfavorable listen, which was the first performance I ever listened to it. I thought the tempos were not the accurate, but rather slow. Now, the performance under Previn conducting the LSO was much better. I felt some straussian moments, above all from the 1st movement, something that brings out vividly its late-romantic nature. The thematic material is not overtly clear, but I could perceive some gorgeous melodies, mostly in the 2nd movement. The folksy 3rd movement is a display of the great orchestrator skills Rachmaninov had.

All in all, it was a quite nice rediscovery.


----------



## kyjo

MusicSybarite said:


> I hadn't been very familiar with the Symphony No. 3 in A minor (the Symphonic Dances could be very arguably his last symphony), so I decided to play it again. To be honest, the Svetlanov recording had made it an unfavorable listen, which was the first performance I ever listened to it. I thought the tempos were not the accurate, but rather slow. Now, the performance under Previn conducting the LSO was much better. I felt some straussian moments, above all from the 1st movement, something that brings out vividly its late-romantic nature. The thematic material is not overtly clear, but I could perceive some gorgeous melodies, mostly in the 2nd movement. The folksy 3rd movement is a display of the great orchestrator skills Rachmaninov had.
> 
> All in all, it was a quite nice rediscovery.


Currently, I don't rate the Third Symphony as highly as the first two, but it's still a fine work in its own right, demonstrating Rachmaninoff's later "international", more eclectic style. I particularly like the second movement, which opens magically with a horn solo over strumming harp chords, recalling the "legendary" atmosphere typical of Bax, of all composers! Also notable is how the second movement's structure combines slow movement and scherzo.


----------



## MusicSybarite

kyjo said:


> Currently, I don't rate the Third Symphony as highly as the first two, but it's still a fine work in its own right, demonstrating Rachmaninoff's later "international", more eclectic style. I particularly like the second movement, which opens magically with a horn solo over strumming harp chords, recalling the "legendary" atmosphere typical of Bax, of all composers! Also notable is how the second movement's structure combines slow movement and scherzo.


Overall, I prefer the No. 3 to the No. 1, being this last one my least favorite. For me, it's not completely succesful. The first 2 movements don't tell me much.

My preferences are: 2, The Bells, 3, 1


----------



## gnryan2

My first experience with Rachmaninoff was when my classical pianist Grandmother played Prelude in G minor for me as a kid. Since then, I've been absolutely enamored. I think I could sing every note of the entire melody of Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini. LOL.


----------



## flamencosketches

That's awesome. I love his preludes, including the G minor which is up there for me, but my favorite I think is the G major. I am still getting into his music and still have yet to hear some of the more famous works, such as the Paganini Rhapsody or indeed any of the piano concertos in full, but I plan to correct that all soon. 

The symphonies, too - I need to check that off my list. Who has recorded a great set of the symphonies?


----------



## mikeh375

flamencosketches said:


> The symphonies, too - I need to check that off my list. Who has recorded a great set of the symphonies?


Previn and the LSO for me, especially the 2nd Symphony.


----------



## flamencosketches

mikeh375 said:


> Previn and the LSO for me, especially the 2nd Symphony.


Thank you my friend. I'll look into it. I like what I've heard of Mr. Previn's conducting, may he rest in peace.

I listened to the Paganini Rhapsody this morning and really liked it!


----------



## DeepR

I promise these are worth your time.


----------



## DeepR

^ Somebody give Volodos a medal for that. Maybe the little bit at the end was unnecessary, but it's very easily forgiven.


----------



## SixFootScowl

My favorite is Rachmaninoff Symphony #1, then #3, and last #2.


----------



## EdwardBast

DeepR said:


> I promise these are worth your time.


I still prefer my old recording with Harvey Shapiro and Earl Wild.

WTH is that Volodos thing about?


----------



## Woodduck

EdwardBast said:


> I still prefer my old recording with Harvey Shapiro and Earl Wild.
> 
> WTH is that Volodos thing about?


I used to have the Shapiro/Wild on LP. It was my lucky introduction to the work, and it's one of the discs I regret having let go, as I haven't found a performance I like as well. Apparently it's never been transferred to CD.

The Volodos thing? Never mind. Just drop a buck into his hat.


----------



## DeepR

Haha. Well alright, I suppose that not any solo piano version would please these tough judges.


----------



## joen_cph

In a jolly mood ... !!!









(Well, of course it's edited.)


----------



## Brazealnut

Love me some Rachmaninoff! I listened to his piano concerti in order. I liked the first the best until I heard the second, the second the best until I heard the third. Years later I got around to listening to his fourth—gotta be one of my favorite piano concerti of all time! It's very unlike the other three, yet eerily similar, too, in some ways. Well worth a listen, in my opinion!


----------



## flamencosketches

Welcome, Brazealnut. I think it's badass that Rachmaninov started his career with a huge piano concerto as his op.1. The first is my favorite, but maybe I haven't given the other 4 a chance yet.


----------



## Brazealnut

Thanks for the welcome! Yeah, his first definitely has the fire and passion of young 19-year-old (or something crazy like that when he composed it, if my mind serves me right). There are so many good piano concerti to choose from, and all of Rach's easily make my top 10. The Grieg, though, is a tough one to beat.


----------



## flamencosketches

Yep Rachmaninov along with his major forerunner Tchaikovsky are masters of the form. I also think Ravel's two piano concertos are extremely hard to top. I haven't heard the Grieg, but just yesterday got a CD of it alongside Schumann's piano concerto in A minor played by Claudio Arrau, and am excited to hear both. Rachmaninov, like Liszt before him, was the ultimate "pianist-composer".

So I have not heard any of his symphonies. Are they worth checking out? Who has done well with them?


----------



## Pat Fairlea

flamencosketches said:


> Yep Rachmaninov along with his major forerunner Tchaikovsky are masters of the form. I also think Ravel's two piano concertos are extremely hard to top. I haven't heard the Grieg, but just yesterday got a CD of it alongside Schumann's piano concerto in A minor played by Claudio Arrau, and am excited to hear both. Rachmaninov, like Liszt before him, was the ultimate "pianist-composer".
> 
> So I have not heard any of his symphonies. Are they worth checking out? Who has done well with them?


LSO and Previn is still the best for SVR's 2nd symphony. For the 3rd, Petrenko and RLPO (EMI Classics) is good. There are fewer recordings of his 1st. I have Weller with the Suisse Romande, which is good. I'm sure others will have their favourites. 
But if you're getting to know Rachmaninoff, don't miss his tone poem Isle of the Dead, nor the brilliant Corelli Variations.

Oh, and while we're on the subject, my favourite of his Preludes is the Op32 B-minor.


----------



## Janspe

flamencosketches said:


> So I have not heard any of his symphonies. Are they worth checking out? Who has done well with them?


Yes, yes and once more _yes_. Absolutely essential Rachmaninov! I'd recommend the classic Ashkenazy/Concertgebouw Orchestra recording as a starting point, it's a great effort from one the foremost Rachmaninov interpreters of our time.

Something to not forget is Rachmaninov's vocal output: his countless songs, operas and _especially_ the two great a capella choral works: the _Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom_, Op. 31 and the _All-Night Vigil_, Op. 37. Some of the most sublime music ever written for sure, and they reveal a very different side to the composer (in comparison to works like the concertos or some of the piano works).


----------



## EdwardBast

Janspe said:


> Yes, yes and once more _yes_. Absolutely essential Rachmaninov! I'd recommend the classic Ashkenazy/Concertgebouw Orchestra recording as a starting point, it's a great effort from one the foremost Rachmaninov interpreters of our time.


Good recommendation. Don't forget his choral symphony, _The Bells_. It was Rachmaninoff's favorite. Interesting to hear the strong influence of Mussorgsky in the third movement.


----------



## flamencosketches

Ashkenazy it is then. I’m not familiar with his conducting, but he is an excellent pianist, especially Rachmaninov. I’ll seek it out. Thank you all.


----------



## Rogerx

*Sergej Rachmaninov April 1th*



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Rachmaninoff


----------



## Janspe

The 4th piano concerto has for years been one of my favourite Rachmaninov pieces - quite possibly my favourite of his concerti. I didn't think I could learn to love it even more, but recently I've finally gotten to know the original version of the piece and oh my god do I feel like a gushing teenager again! The more I get to know it, the more convinced I am that it's definitely superior to the revision. It just _feels_ right! I'm definitely a fan of the final version too - I grew up listening to it one billion times - but this discovery has totally forced me to adjust my thinking, in the most positive of ways.


----------



## flamencosketches

Janspe said:


> The 4th piano concerto has for years been one of my favourite Rachmaninov pieces - quite possibly my favourite of his concerti. I didn't think I could learn to love it even more, but recently I've finally gotten to know the original version of the piece and oh my god do I feel like a gushing teenager again! The more I get to know it, the more convinced I am that it's definitely superior to the revision. It just _feels_ right! I'm definitely a fan of the final version too - I grew up listening to it one billion times - but this discovery has totally forced me to adjust my thinking, in the most positive of ways.


Who plays the original version on record?


----------



## Janspe

flamencosketches said:


> Who plays the original version on record?


I've been listening to Yevgeny Sudbin on BIS - an excellent recording with Medtner's 2nd concerto as a rare coupling. But there are a few others I think, at least I know that there's a recording with Ashkenazy as the conductor.


----------



## SixFootScowl

flamencosketches said:


> Who plays the original version on record?


You mean CD? Actually these two sets may vary as I think there were some revisions the first year, but not like the later revisions.

I have this one:









Just placed an order for this one a minute ago:


----------



## flamencosketches

Sudbin/BIS and Ghindin/Ondine look like good choices. Thanks, I'll check it out.


----------



## millionrainbows

It all starts here.










Rachmaninoff: The Movie, starring Lee Marvin as Rachmaninoff.


----------



## perempe

Are there Pathetique vibes in Symphony No. 2's last movement?


----------



## advokat

Has someone listened to this edition? Are they good?


----------



## Sid James

*A Rachmaninov diary - recent listening* (Part 1 of 2)

*Capriccio on Gypsy Themes, Op. 12* (1892-4)

Unlike famous showpieces by Tchaikovsky or Rimsky-Korsakov that have capriccio in their title, Rachmaninov's effort is on the whole a sombre affair. The spare textures of the opening remind me of the bleak landscapes of Sibelius. A somewhat edgy dance, with a hint of Borodin in _Polovtsian Dances_ mode, follows.

At the heart of the work is a soulful melody, more resigned than intense, which includes an extensive solo for flute backed by harp. A wistful cello solo ushers in the earlier dance tune, which is in turns gentle, courtly and graceful. The work concludes in a festive atmosphere, with the brass and percussion in full swing.

Video: _"I have heard my inescapable piece done marvellously by some of the best pianists, and murdered cruelly by amateurs, but never was I more stirred than by the great Maestro mouse!"_ - Rachmaninov, in a letter to Walt Disney after seeing _Mickey's Opry House_, 1942.






*Fantaisie-tableaux (Suite No. 1 for two pianos), Op. 5* (1893)

In this series of musical pictures, the mood is overall nocturnal but not too dark. There is a touch of the salon in the opening *Barcarolle*, and suggestions of bird song in the succeeding *Love*. The third movement, *Tears*, bids us enter into a darker realm somewhat reminiscent of Ravel's_ Gaspard de la nuit._ Rachmaninov likened it to bells tolling for a funeral.

The finale is a brilliant rendition of the clatter and clang of bells on an entirely different occasion, *Easter*. Its motoric drive brings to mind Stravinsky's _Petrushka_ which was yet to be written. When Rimsky-Korsakov commented that the chant theme should have appeared first, Rachmaninov replied that in reality the choir and bells are heard simultaneously.

This piece was dedicated to Rachmaninov's mentor, Tchaikovsky. He heard it during rehearsal but died before its premiere.

*Vocalise, Op. 34 #14* (1912)

Composed during a rest at Ivanovka, the country estate of Rachmaninov's uncle, the famous *Vocalise* was part of a collection of songs. It is one of his most famous pieces and many arrangements of it have been made. I find that instrumental versions, particularly with solo instruments, can help bring out the poignancy of the tune in an understated way.

The recordings which I listened to:

Capriccio - Queensland SO/Vladimir Verbitsky (ABC Classics 476 3510)





Fantaisie - Howard Shelley & Hilary Macnamara, pianos (Hyperion CDH 55209)
^ Not on youtube, but I also like the recording by Vladimir Ashkenazy & Andre Previn:

















Vocalise (arr. Arthur Harris) - Isaac Stern, violin/Columbia SO/Frank Brieff (Sony SMK 64537)


----------



## Sid James

*A Rachmaninov diary - recent listening* (Part 2 of 2)

_"I feel like a ghost wandering in a world grown alien. I cannot cast out the old way of writing, and I cannot acquire the new. I have made intense efforts to feel the musical manner of today, but it will not come to me. I cannot cast out my musical gods in a moment and bend the knee to new ones. The new kind of music seems to me to come, not from the heart, but from the head. Its composers think rather than feel. They have not the capacity to make their music 'exalt' as Hans von Bulow called it. They meditate, protest, analyze, reason, calculate, and brood - but they do not exalt. It may be that they compose in the manner of the times, but it may be, too, that the spirit of the times does not call for expression in music."_
- Rachmaninov, in a statement published posthumously in _Musical Courier_, 1943.

*Symphonic Dances, Op. 45 (version for two pianos)*(1940)

Rachmaninov may have felt alienated from the latest trends in serious music, but it didn't stop his music from reflecting the jazz and popular music of his surroundings.

This was Rachmaninov's last major work, and it combines a sense of gentle nostalgia with earthy rhythms. His trademark _Dies irae_ motto appears here and there, including in the wry and somewhat sinister waltz of the middle movement. The finale brilliantly brings together the contrasting elements in a sort of jazz infused counterpoint.

Rachmaninov contacted the Broadway composer Robert Russell Bennett to get advice on the saxophone part in the orchestral version of *Symphonic Dances*. Bennett recalled how Rachmaninov "sang, whistled, stomped, rolled his chords, and otherwise conducted himself not as one would expect of so great and impeccable a virtuoso" when playing him the work on piano.

Video: "Rach 3? It's monumental." The 1996 biopic _Shine_, about pianist David Helfgott, extensively featured Rachmaninov's third concerto.






*Symphony No. 3 in A minor, Op. 33* (1936)

Initial critical opinion on this work was divided. Lawrence Gilman said it was sombre, lyrical and defiant, while John Culshaw said that it displayed bitterness and alienation, with beautiful melodies being treated in a savage way. Audiences where confused at how different it was to his previous works. Rachmaninov maintained that it was one of his best works.

I think that all of these evaluations give a hint as to why its such a unique piece. The yearning melodies are still here, but the orchestration is more pared down compared to before. The three movement format gives a sense of ideas being reduced to bare essentials.

There are many captivating moments in this symphony. Often, what is familiar sounding material has startling effect because of the way it contrasts with the overall setting of the work. The melody introduced by solo violin at the start of the second movement is one such example, it brings warmth into its otherwise somber surroundings. The _Dies irae_ motto pops up here and there in subtle ways (for example in the first movement played initially by cymbals and plucked strings then by vibes and triangle, and in the finale by snare drums backed by woodwinds and strings). The use of brass, including muted trumpets in the middle movement, is reminiscent of jazz.

I think that the work can be read, similar to Culshaw's interpretation, as a kind of struggle. The finale, with its sharp contrasts between moments of repose and high energy, brings to mind the corresponding movement of Liszt's _Faust Symphony._ Even though the symphony ends in a swirl of colour and excitement, what some might call a lifelong obsession with darker forces is there.

_Video_: Home footage of Rachmaninov taking time out to relax outdoors with family and friends.






The recordings which I listened to:

Symphonic Dances - Howard Shelley & Hilary Macnamara, pianos (Hyperion CDH 55209)
^ Not on youtube, but I also like the recording by Vladimir Ashkenazy & Andre Previn













Symphony #3 - Suisse Romande/Paul Kletzki (Eloquence 476 7692)
^ Not on youtube, but there are many others, including Concertgebouw/Ashkenazy
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lcv7km7XXT0wwW3tTcYsE9JoQUW6 dNwJU

Selected sources:

Scott, M., _Rachmaninoff_, The History Press, UK, 2008.

Liner notes to the Hyperion disc at https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/dc.asp?dc=D_CDH55209


----------



## TxllxT

https://www.rbth.com/arts/334338-sergei-rachmaninoff-piano-masterpieces Beautiful pictures and grand interpretations of Rachmaninov's music.


----------



## EdwardBast

A reminder everyone: It's Rachmaninoff with two Fs at the end, not Rachmaninov. He worked in the west for decades and spelled his name that way for all public appearances. He knew what he was doing and did it on purpose.


----------



## Rogerx

EdwardBast said:


> A reminder everyone: It's Rachmaninoff with two Fs at the end, not Rachmaninov. He worked in the west for decades and spelled his name that way for all public appearances. He knew what he was doing and did it on purpose.


Sergei Vasilyevich Rachmaninoff (Russian: Серге́й Васи́льевич Рахма́нинов; he himself wrote Sergei Rachmaninoff) (1 April 1873 - Beverly Hills, 28 March 1943) was a Russian composer, pianist, conductor and music educator.
Precisely, from wiki .


----------



## SixFootScowl

EdwardBast said:


> A reminder everyone: It's Rachmaninoff with two Fs at the end, not Rachmaninov. He worked in the west for decades and spelled his name that way for all public appearances. He knew what he was doing and did it on purpose.


Yes, that was his preferred spelling, though the other spelling is not technically incorrect. When searching for CD deals online, try with each spelling to make sure you don't miss a deal.


----------



## hammeredklavier

EdwardBast said:


> He knew what he was doing and did it on purpose.


sir gay rack man in off


----------



## Sid James

I'm not particularly bothered about the spelling, as long as we know who we're talking about, which we do. I've also seen his name spelled as Rakhmaninov. I've somehow become accustomed to spelling the name with v on the end, and its too late to change. If I did, I'd inevitably revert to my old habit anyway. In any case, its not as bad as calling Beijing Peking or Mumbai Bombay.


----------



## JTS

The largely fictional nonsense we see in Shine which seeks to portray the Rach 3 as a monster and the cause of Helfgott’s breakdown is of course a convenient invention of Hollywood. The ‘professor’ was based on Cyril Smith who of course was a friend of the composer and played the Rach 3 himself and would never have referred to it in such terms. Helfgott actually played the Rach 3 a number of times before his mental collapse which came on gradually and was probably due to genetic causes not the Rach 3


----------



## Sid James

They definitely used artistic license, but it was an inspiring story which needed to be told.

Perhaps after so many movies about troubled geniuses and the like - e.g. _Immortal Beloved, A Beautiful Mind, The Soloist, Ray, Walk The Line,_ etc. - we can be jaded about this sort of biopic. Of course, they're not documentaries, and even in those the facts can be curated to tell a story using dramatic devices (I think that_ Listen to Me Marlon_ did this brilliantly). At the same time, they serve to educate the public about important issues. Those of us who are old enough to remember will recall how _Rain Man_ made such a huge difference in raising awareness of autism.

I think David Helfgott and his family endorsed the movie, which is important. I didn't like his interpretations of Rachmaninov, but I really liked the movie. He also comes across as an interesting, generous and down to earth person in interviews (there are plenty on youtube).


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Going back a few to Sid James' earlier posting, I absolutely love the Symphonic Dances. And in both forms, orchestral and as a 2-piano work. Each has its distinctive colour, each brings out something different in the composition. Superb music.


----------



## Kreisler jr

SixFootScowl said:


> Yes, that was his preferred spelling, though the other spelling is not technically incorrect. When searching for CD deals online, try with each spelling to make sure you don't miss a deal.


-off was the most common transliteration in French, -ow was sometimes used in German and these were usually preferred as French and German were the most frequent second/third languages in Russia (and many Russians ended up in Berlin and Paris after 1917). 
But nowadays the -ov variant is internationally the standard for this ending.


----------



## EdwardBast

Kreisler jr said:


> -off was the most common transliteration in French, -ow was sometimes used in German and these were usually preferred as French and German were the most frequent second/third languages in Russia (and many Russians ended up in Berlin and Paris after 1917).
> But nowadays the -ov variant is internationally the standard for this ending.


There's no reason to transliterate his name and international standards have nothing to do with it. Rachmaninoff chose a spelling for use in the west and it's insulting to disregard his wishes. It was his legal name. He used that spelling for his first foreign tours as an accompanist to some string player whose name I've forgotten, in promoting his second concerto and other early works, in his first long term foreign employment as conductor of the Dresden Opera in 1905-07(?), and in his hundreds of appearances as a pianist after this.


----------



## Kreisler jr

What I wrote was merely an explanation, feel free to be o-c about the spelling, but as someone else pointed out above, one is bound to miss search results if one insists on it. Because of some re-shelving my Rachmaninov/ff CDs are at hand and it's ca. 10 - 3 in favor of "-ov"...
Of course the standard spelling for Russian other languages has something to to with the prevalence of Rachmaninov. You cannot seriously believe that people do it to posthumeously insult the composer.

Mozart almost never used "Amadeus" (sometimes jokingly), usually only "Amadé" when signing himself and going by the baptism register, it should be the Greek form Theophilus. But he has basically been "Wolfgang Amadeus" since his passing.


----------



## JTS

Sid James said:


> They definitely used artistic license, but it was an inspiring story which needed to be told.
> 
> Perhaps after so many movies about troubled geniuses and the like - e.g. _Immortal Beloved, A Beautiful Mind, The Soloist, Ray, Walk The Line,_ etc. - we can be jaded about this sort of biopic. Of course, they're not documentaries, and even in those the facts can be curated to tell a story using dramatic devices (I think that_ Listen to Me Marlon_ did this brilliantly). At the same time, they serve to educate the public about important issues. Those of us who are old enough to remember will recall how _Rain Man_ made such a huge difference in raising awareness of autism.
> 
> I think David Helfgott and his family endorsed the movie, which is important. I didn't like his interpretations of Rachmaninov, but I really liked the movie. He also comes across as an interesting, generous and down to earth person in interviews (there are plenty on youtube).


The problem was that the Helfgott family were absolutely opposed to the movie Shine as were most people who knew the facts. Members of the Helfgott family have disputed the accuracy of a number of scenes in the film, charging The director with manipulating the facts to create dramatically satisfying scenes moviegoers will assume are factual.
Helfgott's sister Margaret has called the film's portrayal of the relationship between David, her younger brother, and their father a travesty. "Shine," she wrote in a letter to the London Observer, contains "totally fictitious scenes created to show my father as an unfeeling and brutal man who, by his actions, drove David insane." The father was in fact a caring man who wanted to protect his mentally fragile son. Isaac Stern was apparent annoyed at the implication he's offered David a scholarship in America. Nothing of the kind was said. 
David Helfgott did not, in fact, suffer a mental breakdown after a performance of the Rachmaninoff Third Piano Concerto (the "Rach 3" in the parlance of the film) while a conservatory student in London. The truth was that his collapse came several years later, perhaps partly as a result of his unhappy first marriage.
Director Hicks has defended his distortions in the name of poetic license and contends that Helfgott authorized the portrayal of himself in "Shine." What the director could not explain was how much the pianist understands and how susceptible he is to the influence of his wife and the other handlers who stand to make millions off his misfortune.
Sadly the family's voice which is contained in the book, 'Out of Tune' by Margaret Helfgott stand little chance of being heard amid the dazzle dazzle of Hollywood. Of course, artistic license is permitted but not when it comes to the character assassination of a man who was obviously a good and caring father for the benefit of making money. The movie is an absolute travesty.


----------



## Sid James

I knew it was controversial, but I didn't know that level of detail about the film, including Margaret's book. It sounds similar to other biopics where family members disputed the portrayal of the subject. One which comes to mind is _Lawrence of Arabia_. Lawrence's brother said it portrayed him as being a completely different person to what he was like in reality. Having studied modern India, I'm aware of some of the detail of what happened on the road to independence and Gandhi's role in it, and how this at least in some respects differs to how it was portrayed in Richard Attenborough's biopic.

At the same time, I think that whatever artistic license is used, films like this bring these stories to a mass audience. Its inevitable that something is lost in the process of translating a person's life story into a movie.



Pat Fairlea said:


> Going back a few to Sid James' earlier posting, I absolutely love the Symphonic Dances. And in both forms, orchestral and as a 2-piano work. Each has its distinctive colour, each brings out something different in the composition. Superb music.


Yes it is superb, and colourful is the word. It not only includes those distinctive choir and bell harmonies, but also those jazzy rhythms. I think this and other late works show how Rachmaninov still had new things to say after he'd left Russia. He was impacted by his new surroundings and as a musician felt he had to respond.

As an exile he was forced to earn his bread and butter as a concert pianist. He worked through the season and then used his annual vacation to learn new repertoire, spend time with family and compose. It would have been easy for him to simply keep writing music in his earlier more overtly romantic style which was popular with audiences. I admire how he avoided predictability yet still retained the trademarks of his style.

He's one of my favourite composers, and I especially enjoy his late works.


----------



## JTS

Sid James said:


> I knew it was controversial, but I didn't know that level of detail about the film, including Margaret's book. It sounds similar to other biopics where family members disputed the portrayal of the subject. One which comes to mind is _Lawrence of Arabia_. Lawrence's brother said it portrayed him as being a completely different person to what he was like in reality. Having studied modern India, I'm aware of some of the detail of what happened on the road to independence and Gandhi's role in it, and how this at least in some respects differs to how it was portrayed in Richard Attenborough's biopic.
> 
> At the same time, I think that whatever artistic license is used, films like this bring these stories to a mass audience. Its inevitable that something is lost in the process of translating a person's life story into a movie.
> 
> .


I have no problem with using artistic license especially if things happened a long time ago. For example the film chariots of Fire used artistic license in telling the story but kept to the basic facts and characters. What many people felt disturbing about Shine who knew the facts was the character assassination of his father based on the story made up by a woman who never knew him. This caused great hurt to the family who obviously remembered him as a caring man. The fact they portrayed him with a German accent when he spoke with an Australian accent shows how far they went to portray the man as a villain. Most of the film was a load of tosh. It doesn't matter so much in the film like Amadeus when the characters are long dead but it did in Shine. Still, money was made and that's all that was, apparently, important. Who cares about the truth when money is involved?


----------



## hammeredklavier

Kreisler jr said:


> Mozart almost never used "Amadeus" (sometimes jokingly), usually only "Amadé" when signing himself and going by the baptism register, it should be the Greek form Theophilus. But he has basically been "Wolfgang Amadeus" since his passing.


In his lifetime, he usually used it in its German form, Gottlieb. But I think he would have approved of Constanze's decision to market it as Amadeus.


----------



## Kreisler jr

I have never seen any signature with "Gottlieb". It was used but rarely and mostly by others. His family used mostly Wolfgang only (or Wolferl).
An East German musicologist, Georg Knepler, titled a book "Wolfgang Amadé Mozart" because this was by far the most frequent form by Mozart himself and during his lifetime (and Knepler disliked the mythology around "Amadeus" and the movie of the name).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozart's_name

Anyway, the point was that international celebrities always better get used to different spellings/forms of their names than their preferred ones, not only C. PAXMAHNHOB. 
I am not a celebrity but had myself to deal with the nuisance of having documents with different spellings of my last name because th US official who issued a state ID didn't understand German umlauts.


----------



## EdwardBast

Kreisler jr said:


> You cannot seriously believe that people do it to posthumeously insult the composer.


With internet searches all bets are off -- or ov?  Otherwise it's just as easy to respect his choice. Unlike Mozart, Rachmaninoff traveled across continents using a single spelling for legal and professional documents. And in modern times names tend to be standardized.


----------



## tdc

EdwardBast has a point, but I've always preferred to spell it Rachmaninov. It seems more aesthetically pleasing than Rachmaninoff. The former seems sylvan and beautiful somehow to me where the latter recalls beef stroganoff.


----------



## EdwardBast

tdc said:


> EdwardBast has a point, but I've always preferred to spell it Rachmaninov. It seems more aesthetically pleasing than Rachmaninoff. The former seems sylvan and beautiful somehow to me where the latter recalls beef stroganoff.


In the U.S., once someone from abroad has become a citizen or permanent resident and has settled on a spelling of their name, we don't generally retransliterate it for them to suit our preferences. I wouldn't do this to a neighbor or acquaintance, for obvious reasons. Why insist on doing it for Rachmaninoff? Because he was famous? It's just an odd, impertinent thing to do.


----------



## Janspe

Listening to the original version of the 1926 version as I write this (Sudbin/Llewellyn). The more I delve into this version, the more I think that it's the superior version of the piece and should be played more - a lot of the stuff that feels quite random in the revision make so much sense in the original! I really love the final revision that everybody plays (including Rachmaninov himself) but this original is something else...


----------



## EdwardBast

Janspe said:


> Listening to the original version of the 1926 version as I write this (Sudbin/Llewellyn). The more I delve into this version, the more I think that it's the superior version of the piece and should be played more - a lot of the stuff that feels quite random in the revision make so much sense in the original! I really love the final revision that everybody plays (including Rachmaninov himself) but this original is something else...


What work are you referring to?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Janspe said:


> Listening to the original version of the 1926 version as I write this (Sudbin/Llewellyn). The more I delve into this version, the more I think that it's the superior version of the piece and should be played more - a lot of the stuff that feels quite random in the revision make so much sense in the original! I really love the final revision that everybody plays (including Rachmaninov himself) but this original is something else...


That would be Piano Concerto #4, completed in 1926. There is a 1928 revision, and then a major revision published in 1941. The 1941 is the one on most recordings.

Rachmaninoff also has an original version of Piano Concerto #1 from 1891, but the revised version of 1917 is the one typically on recordings.


----------



## Janspe

EdwardBast said:


> What work are you referring to?


Can't believe I didn't mention the work I was talking about! Quite funny. But yes, as SixFootScowl already said, the work is indeed the 4th piano concerto, Op. 40!


----------

