.... with apologies to a well known book series - unfortunately I don't know a thousand romantic piano concertos.... :-[
My list in no special order:
Medtner 2
Stenhammar 1
Alnaes
Röntgen 2
de Castillon
Goetz 2 (the B flat one...)
Raff
Reinecke 3
Scharwenka 4
Hahn
Couldn't bring myself to add any Rubinsteins for fear of being flamed :D
I'm no expert really - as a trombone player I seldom hear what the pianist is doing anyway!
Feel free to add and/or subtract!
As I've said before, list-making is pretty pointless. So, let's have reasons as well as suggestions, otherwise this thread will go the way of all flesh, as it were...
Despite his shortcomings, there's no risk of being flamed when mentioning Rubinstein as far as I'm concerned, and to prove it I'll add my nomination to the list: Rubinstein's Fifth Piano Concerto.
This is a big, broadly conceived work with a first movement whose craggy grandeur always reminds me of the corresponding movement of Brahms' First Piano Concerto. Rubinstein's piano writing is jaw-droppingly virtuosic, but never empty. Unlike some of his other works, he keeps the listener of the edge of his seat for the whole span of this lengthy movement and, whist I'm not comparing the two works, it's easy to see why Tchaikovsky was so influenced by this piece when writing his own B flat concerto. The other two movements aren't quite up to its standard, but are still amongst the best of Rubinstein's compositions, in my opinion. The slow movement is lyrical without ever being merely pretty and the finale is soberly joyful, if that makes sense. It's a noble, serious work, and I think it the best of his pieces for piano and orchestra, despite the preference which most people seem to have for No.4.
Alan - quite right too. Without detailing each work, the stand-out feature which all of these share (for me) is at least one drop-dead gorgeous melody. In several cases the composer lets us have several in the same work - Stenhammar 1 comes to mind (and by the way, there never seems to be a massive amount of support for him here apart from the undeniably great second symphony. Maybe I've read the wrong posts.) In addition, they are all harmonised in many places in what I call the 'goose bump' / 'shiver down the spine' way. Being an adequate trombone player but not having studied music theory very far, I don't know how to explain that very well, except that the greatest pleasure I find in romantic music is usually not the melodic invention or the development of the themes, but rather certain specific chord progressions which I recognise like old friends - that's when the spine-tingle factor kicks in. [off topic - another thing which does it is the sudden appearance of ad lib 32' organ pedals a la Elgar 2 or Enigma ;D ] You may discern therefore that I incline more to the late romantic than the early, and I guess only Reinecke 3 and Raff in my list are firmly mid-romantic. No Moscheles et al! Raff's is by no means his best work IMHO but given that I came here from reading the old Raff forum and that 'Im Walde' was what kick-started my journey, I owed it to him!
So perhaps my list should have been qualified with a requirement for a great tune and / or inventive and exciting harmony.
I'll take a flaming too. Rubinstein 4 for me. Along with Scharwenka 3 and of course, the Moszkowski. Oooops, almost forgot von Sauer's 1. There are others of course. But these come to mind. And for the same reasons listed above - lovely melodies and lovely orchestrations.......
J
Just out of my curiosity: Did anyone ever take a piece from such lists as a suggestion and really listened to it? I love those lists as well (for violin concertos of course) and mentioned a few in other forums some years ago. But I always had the impression that it just ends in name-dropping and self-portraying (me included naturally).
No offense intended, just asking.
Tobias
I cannot imagine life without the Bortkiewicz 1. It is full of instantly memorable melodies, tons of bravura pianism, lush orchestration and each movement is a masterpiece, albeit perhaps the 1st movement is so special that the other two cannot keep up the genius. Why it is not part of the standard concerto repertoire is a mystery to me.
It would be pointless me naming another 9, since my list would change almost on a daily basis. After listening to the Stavenhagen Op.4 over the weekend, I immediately proclaimed it superior to either of the Brahms, but it would gradually move down my list of 10 as I revisit other works. The Bortkiewicz is the only concerto that is firmly rooted to my personal No.1 and has been there ever since I first heard it.
I have been advised that I might change my mind if the Nikisch ever makes it to disk.
Concertingly.
Thal
I would say that Scharwenka's 4th is my favorite. Every time I listen to it I am amazed by the virtuosity, grandeur and utter beauty of this Giant! I find it baffling that it's not in the concert halls. From the Majestic 1st movement to the brilliant Tarantella finale, this concerto would bring down the house.
PS: @thalbergmad. Are you talking about Arthur Nikisch? Did he compose?
Sorry, I could have been more clear. I was referring to Mitja who was Arthur's son.
Thal
Quote from: thalbergmad on Tuesday 19 March 2013, 18:58
...
I have been advised that I might change my mind if the Nikisch ever makes it to disk.
...
Thal
What about the following link?
http://www.sedina.de/noten/mitjanikisch/mitjanikischklavierkonzertsolisthshelley.html (http://www.sedina.de/noten/mitjanikisch/mitjanikischklavierkonzertsolisthshelley.html)
Thank you so much for that, I did not think it had been recorded.
The clip sounds enchanting.
Thal
Quote from: violinconcerto on Tuesday 19 March 2013, 18:38
Just out of my curiosity: Did anyone ever take a piece from such lists as a suggestion and really listened to it?
Unless a suggestion is accompanied by reasons, I'm not interested. I like to hear
why people favour a particular piece of music - then I'll take them seriously and give their suggestions a listen...
OK, I understand that, but my experience is that my musical taste seems to be not fitting with most other people (which actually isn't very much surprising, because there's no accounting for taste). I read people describe awfully lame works as a firework of music, so how much could one get on the impression and words of someone else? I even found that works described as "sounds similar to XY" does not sound similar to XY in my ears in most cases. To say it cynical: Why taking care of the words by others?
Well, an opinion is at least a starting-point, if no more than that; as you say, one often finds that someone else's view of a piece is different (hardly surprising), even down to the matter of it apparently sounding like someone else's music (often very surprising - but then I find supposedly knowledgeable critics likening, say, Draeseke to Brahms, which really is very silly indeed, so there's ultimately no accounting for 'cloth ears', as we say in English.)
However, sometimes an informed opinion can challenge one's own prejudices and correct one's errors. For example. I'm just revisiting Stavenhagen Op.4: I don't think it's better than Brahms, but it's a lot better than I remember - if I remember it all. In fact it's a lovely romantic romp of a piece!
Presumably there is another list of ten concertos to hear after you die? Maybe lost works that exist only in Heaven?
More seriously, I would advocate Medtner 3 over Medtner 2. Reason: this is a wonderful example of a concerto that puts logical working out of material above pyrotechnic display and histrionic gestures. Starting with that wonderful theme that opens the first movement; wonderful for both its beauty and its musical potential. Medtner 3 I would rate as equal to the best of Rachmaninov.
@Gauk: Maybe. But there are so many delightful moments in No. 2 that I'd take a lot of convincing. To take one, I love the duple against triple time business which starts shortly after the beginning of the Finale. And the second subject of the First movement is to die for. Maybe I'm too easily pleased - I find the third a much more intellectual challenge....
... Which is why I find it ultimately more rewarding. But the 2nd is wonderful too, no disagreement there!
Probably depends on whether you want entertainment or stimulation. Right now at the end of a tough term I need the former because the brain is shot away. After a two week Easter holiday I'll be rejuvenated enough to tackle heartier fare - I hope! And lest we disagree at all, I really enjoy Medtner 3 too - especially the Demidenko version - his star seems to have waned since though - and Tozer is also a reliable if unexciting guide.
It's probably one of the better known unsung concerti, but I must mention the Henselt. So many great moments - an arresting piano introduction, the string interlude within the Thalbergian arpeggio section, a fine lyrical second movement that doesn't sound like a perfunctory obligatory afterthought - a common problem with virtuoso concerti imo, and an absolute barnstormer of a last movement. Everything a romantic concerto should be.
Definitely in my top ten concerti, never mind top ten unsung.
His piano music sharing a similar style of left hand figuration, I also adore the Liapunov 2nd concerto for its ultralush romanticism: the composer has a very interesting harmonic sense. Some of his music sounds to me like a cross-blending of Liszt and Debussy.
The problem I have with all three Medtner concertos is that he seems to be affraid to display emotion. To my ear, they seem to be over controlled, he never lets rip. I like the Romantic concertos where there is a bit of excitement. I wonder what would have happened to him if Rachmaninov had not been so supportive.
I could never limit my list to 10. But definitely among my top 10 would be the Raff and Henselt. Rubinstein 4 I'm a wobbler on, if only because I have trouble deciding whether or not it can still be numbered among the unsung. It certainly doesn't pop up here live in L.A. Scharwenka 1, 2 and 4 would definitely make my list, and certainly Rubinstein 5. Both Lyapunovs would make my top 20 list, but I'm not sure which one I prefer over the other. Considering the Paderewski and Moszkowski concertos are both wobblers for me as well regarding their unsung status, and my particular fondness for the early-Romantic works of Moscheles and Hummel, I just can't bring myself to limit my list to 10. Who can resist the glorious tutti passages of the Moscheles 4th, or the forward-looking Hummel Op. 89? And that leaves out the Hiller Op. 170, which has surpassed the Op. 69 in my estimation as my favorite Hiller work.
Liapunov 2 is a goody. I remember back in (I think) the 1970s this came out on LP (EMI?) and was rubbished by a critic in the Gramophone magazine for being "hollow" and "empty". Oof! I don't think such foolish judgements would be passed today.
If the critic didn't given reasons for his "hollow" and "empty" tags then his critique seems pretty hollow and empty itself I'd say!
Similarly, continuing to make nominations in this thread without offering any form of explanation is beginning to try the patience of this particular moderator. Let's get beyond what members like and explore the reasons why!!
Quote from: Alan Howe on Thursday 21 March 2013, 19:33
Similarly, continuing to make nominations in this thread without offering any form of explanation is beginning to try the patience of this particular moderator. Let's get beyond what members like and explore the reasons why!!
I see this as striking at the very heart of this sort of thread. Why should any piece be nominated for such a list? I can tell you that I like, oh, let's say the Fuchs Piano Concerto, and I can even give you a reason for liking it, but it isn't a reason why anyone else should like it.
So let me make an attempt to start a list that has nothing to do with liking. Very approximately chronological (i.e. I'm not bothering to check dates).
1. Any concerto by Moscheles.
Reason: Beethoven rated Moscheles's music highly, and one ought to consider his opinion to be worth something.
2. Any concerto by Herz.
Reason: Herz is rather an interesting figure. Hugely popular in his day, greatly prolific, now almost totally forgotten. His concerti are totally unpretentious - music for fun. Everyone ought to hear one and form their own opinion.
3. Reger's
Reason: For long a notorious work, forbidding for its difficulty (for the listener), now being re-assessed. One should form an opinion on this significant work.
4. Napravnik's
Reason: Any concerto that starts with an acknowledged lift from Verdi's Requiem (Yes! The Dies Irae! Wham-boom!) has to be heard to be believed.
5. Rimsky-Korsakov's
Reason: OK, Rimsky himself may not be unsung, but when did you last hear his Piano Concerto in the concert hall? Hugely innovative for its integrated one-movement structure, has been proclaimed the best of all 19th C Russian Piano Concertos.
6. Liapunov 2
Reason: Type example of the late-romantic hyper-lush apparatus. Like wallowing in a warm bath.
7. Medtner 3
Reason: Unusual in its combination of intellectual rigour with sensual beauty.
8. Busoni's
Reason: First choral piano concerto, and one of the longest (but is it unsung?).
So that is only eight, but it is all I can think of for now. One should add maybe:
9. First use of four-movement structure in a piano concerto (which?).
10. Reputedly most difficult to play (which?).
Since some of us have to read every post, I can assure members that virtually any form of sensible explanation as to why a particular work is favoured adds immeasurably to the value of the opinion offered. We certainly have no intention of allowing the mere swapping of lists to blight this site in the way that it does certain others. It's informed debate and the exchange of views that we are looking for here,
Quote8. Busoni's
Reason: First choral piano concerto, and one of the longest (but is it unsung?).
Certainly is. There was a debate in another thread about the man on the Clapham Omnibus. Not only has he not heard of it, but 95% of the concert-going public have not even heard of Busoni. Sad but true.
@Alan Thanks for trying to introduce some rigour into a thread which I started and which I almost immediately realised would cause trouble because of its lack of focus. However, it has still generated a lot of comments which I have found stimulating despite that. I'll try to do better next time...
No problem. It's actually been great to read some very interesting opinions in this thread.
I agree with Arpeggio about Henselt, the deep bass notes in the slow movement reverberate with my music-soul like something spiritual, and he ties the beginning and end together so well. Rheinberger's also has some of the same qualities I love, especially bringing it all together in the end. And I believe I have tooted my horn for the Marie Jaell's before, not being musically schooled, again, I can only say the reason I like them is that every phrase sounds like it could not have been any different than it is.
Is Busoni PC unsung? Yes, but (forgive my simplicity) less than others named in this thread (nothwistanding the enormous difficulty of the solo part, the length -and therefore risk of less than full audience-, the intervention of a male chorus just for a few minutes).
There are several recordings (since the Newton-Wood-Beecham).
I attended to two actual performances ( one of rhe Reger, one of the Rimsky, none of the others named).
Last summer Garrick Ohlsson, Gianandrea Noseda and the European Community Youth Orchestra (plus a male chorus) toured the Busoni P.C. through several cities in Europe (the coupling was generally R.Strauss "Also Sprach Zarathustra"), alternating with an "easier" program.
That was just to make an example of an unsung somewhat sorting from his status.
Quote from: giles.enders on Thursday 21 March 2013, 11:45
The problem I have with all three Medtner concertos is that he seems to be affraid to display emotion. To my ear, they seem to be over controlled, he never lets rip. I like the Romantic concertos where there is a bit of excitement. I wonder what would have happened to him if Rachmaninov had not been so supportive.
The problem you face could be because you look at Medtner's music as the poor man's Rachmaninov [
as someone once said!]. Medtner's musical idiom is completely different from Rachmaninov's. To compare them would be like starting a toxic discussion like "Who is better - Mozart or Haydn". While Rachmaninov's music has a heart on the sleeve quality, Medtner is more intospective. The next time you listen to Medtner's concertos try to not find Rachmaninovian overtones. [
Medtner needs no apology...]. You WILL be vastly rewarded! :)
That's a very good corrective - and one can generalise from it to argue that, tempting though it is to view a less well-known composer in terms of a better-known one, the result is to begin listening to the former with expectations that cannot be met instead of taking him on his own terms.
Quote from: Gauk on Friday 22 March 2013, 21:18
8. Busoni's
Reason: First choral piano concerto
I feel Steibelt and Herz rather got there first.
Thal
Quote from: thalbergmad on Saturday 23 March 2013, 15:10
I feel Steibelt and Herz rather got there first.
I stand corrected - but one could still include Busoni for its sheer scale.
Quote from: Gauk on Saturday 23 March 2013, 17:01
Quote from: thalbergmad on Saturday 23 March 2013, 15:10
I feel Steibelt and Herz rather got there first.
I stand corrected - but one could still include Busoni for its sheer scale.
OK. First
REALLY BIG choral piano concerto.
Raff may have called his Die Tageszeiten of 1877 a Concertante, but it is well over 40 minutes long, employs a piano, orchestra and chorus throughout and the piano part itself is much more than merely concertante. I'm not sure where "big" shades into "really big", but I'd say that Raff's piece is a contender...
I think Harty's Piano Concerto in Bm is worth its weight in gold, especially the 3rd movement, Con brio e vivace. I almost hate comparing it but it has an expansiveness and explosiveness that reminds me of Rachmaninov's 2nd.
Incidentally, any nominations for the most difficult solo part in a non-standard-repertoire romantic concerto?
Well, the Henselt is jolly difficult - and difficult in ways which are not always apparent as difficult to the listener. Busoni's PC is extremely taxing. Rubinstein 5 is no breeze either.
Incidentally, Mark knows that I agree with him wholeheartedly about Raff's Die Tageszeiten.
Marx - Romantisches Klavierkonzert.
PS: Not about difficulty.. but I have a soft spot for the Thuille Piano concerto.
Quote from: FBerwald on Monday 25 March 2013, 07:48
...but I have a soft spot for the Thuille Piano concerto.
Can you tell us
why?
Quote from: Gauk on Sunday 24 March 2013, 22:13
Incidentally, any nominations for the most difficult solo part in a non-standard-repertoire romantic concerto?
Oleg Marshev, who has a large amount of romantic piano concertos under his belt said the most difficult was the Schytte.
Thal
Quote from: Alan Howe on Monday 25 March 2013, 07:57
Quote from: FBerwald on Monday 25 March 2013, 07:48
...but I have a soft spot for the Thuille Piano concerto.
Can you tell us why?
Because it is gorgeous! A sort of Schumann mixed with Brahms feel. Although the finale could be played a bit faster [just a personal opinion!] just like I prefer Parry's Piano Concerto 1st movement to be played faster than on the existing record!
QuoteOleg Marshev, who has a large amount of romantic piano concertos under his belt said the most difficult was the Schytte.
That I can believe. It certainly
sounds a tough cookie.
Huge thanks to mjkFendrich for pointing me in the direction of a recording of the Nikisch Piano Concerto. I will be amazed if I hear a better work this year.
A thoroughly morbid and melancholy work with only a brief glimpse of daylight before returning to darkness. Even the scherzo was depressing, but this is fascinating music. A touch of the Spellbound concerto mixed with a bit of Bloch.
Thal
Quote from: thalbergmad on Sunday 28 April 2013, 11:58
Huge thanks to mjkFendrich for pointing me in the direction of a recording of the Nikisch Piano Concerto. I will be amazed if I hear a better work this year.
And this would be where, exactly?
http://www.sedina.de/assets/s2dmain.html?http://www.sedina.de/noten/mitjanikisch/mitjanikischklavierkonzertsolisthshelley.html (http://www.sedina.de/assets/s2dmain.html?http://www.sedina.de/noten/mitjanikisch/mitjanikischklavierkonzertsolisthshelley.html)
Here is the link as given on page 1 of this thread.
Thal
Ralph Vaughn Williams - Concerto for 2 Pianos
I am interested in buying the CD of the Mitja Nikisch PC available from Sedina.de as per link provided by MjkFendrich/thalbergmad. I have done some research on this company and am unsure about the site i.e. is it safe to buy from them? Has any member bought a CD from this company? The CD of the Nikisch PC does not seem to be available from anyone else.
The Nikisch piano concerto is also available from Amazon.de - I have just obtained my copy from them!
I am well into double figures with listening to this now and each time I am more impressed and depressed.
Amazing what a man can produce on his deathbed.
Thal
Thank you Martin for letting me know the Nikisch PC is available from Amazon.de. I have just put in my order. Strange that the Cd was not mentioned on either Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.com. Must be a German thing! Thanks again.
Ilmari Hannikainen's piano concerto (1919) is also one to listen. It is sad that there is still not a decent recording of the piece. All the performances make some cuts, the most complete one is the latest one from 2004, Juhani Lagerspetz as a soloist and Helsinki Philharmonic conducted by Tuomas Hannikainen. I think this concerto could be one for the Hyperion's The Romantic Piano Concertos series.
Thank you UC for mentioning Mitja Nikisch's piano concerto. I obtained my copy from Amazon.de and have since listened to it quite a few times now. The music is indeed very beautiful, especially the first movement, which, as is mentioned in the liner notes, owes a huge debt to Rachmaninov. I can see why some members of the forum have spoken in glowing terms about this PC. I too rate this PC highly.
The Nikisch has haunted me since I first heard it and its effect on me has not diminished since.
Perhaps a fresh recording might bring it to the fore. Anyone who loves Rachmaninoff will love this, although it is somewhat darker.
Thal
I cannot imagine life without the Bortkiewicz either, his solo piano is also outstanding
Sorry, old thread, but I couldn't help it:
Atterberg
Bortkiewicz 1
Alnaes
Medtner 2
Scharwenka 4
Marx Romantisches Klavierkonzert
Rozycki 1
Palmgren 2
Giannini
Hannikainen
I love all these concertos for basically the same reason: they are lush, richly tuneful, and emotionally melancholy which are all influenced by Rachmaninov to differing degrees. For example, the big-boned Giannini PC has the Russian master's name written all over it, while the Marx is more eclectic and boasts some colorful orchestration more akin to Respighi or Scriabin than Rach. Had I been allowed to include a dozen concertos, I would have added Mathieu's Fourth and von Dohnanyi's Second.
I see the recording of the Nikisch is coupled with a symphony by Graunke. What is this piece like, please? Is is Romantic and tonal or is it the sort of stuff we on this forum are unlikely to enjoy?
Quote from: Gareth Vaughan on Monday 23 December 2013, 09:29
I see the recording of the Nikisch is coupled with a symphony by Graunke. What is this piece like, please? Is is Romantic and tonal or is it the sort of stuff we on this forum are unlikely to enjoy?
I've heard Graunke's Symphony no. 9 on YouTube and it is definitely
not "romantic" in any way.
P.S. I enjoy a lot of modern music, so am I in the minority here (according to your generalization)?
I worry about opening up such a thread, myself, given some of the side responses and swipes it already opens from time to time (though yes, I do. And the fact that the kinds of shifts that 20th-century music underwent were often unprecedented doesn't change the fact that the kinds of responses they invoked were, well, often oddly similar to those that were heard from composers, musicians and critics 2 centuries ago for whom the same Romanticism we celebrate here and now, was an attack on a dear Classicism rather than a continuation of its and music's life. But then, those are arguments that won't be anywhere near to settled here, of course...)
How about William Sterndale Bennett's 4th Piano Concerto? I'd also like to hear his No 6 before I die, but I very much doubt if that will ever happen. :(
Stig Westerberg knew how to bring out the best in Stenhammar's music. In his 1974 recording of Stenhammar's Piano Concerto 2 with Janos Solyam at the keyboard, the music simply bursts out of the speakers as one the most original and remarkable of all romantic piano concertos. It doesn't try to go where Rachmaninov's Concerto 2 (another most original and remarkable work) takes you. But if you are open to other kinds of musical landscapes, I heartily recommend this performance.
Indeed, Westerberg makes Stenhammar out to be a master composer in his recordings. His overwhelming, almost Brucknerian rendition of Stenhammar's Symphony no. 2 makes Jarvi's BIS recording pale in comparison.
The Busoni PC has already been mentioned in this thread. I regard it as the ultimate piano concerto. Apart from the reasons already mentioned, for me it is the superb build-up of tension leading to climaxes in many places in the concerto, the sheer length, and especially the fact that the piano is treated to a large extent as the ultimate percussion instrument.
The Busoni's become less unsung over the years, of course.
Yes, but it's certainly not featured with any regularity on concert programs, probably because of its unwieldy length. It sure would be a spectacle to see live!
The two statements aren't mutually exclusive...