The Rachmaninov Piano Concerto 3 Review Project

[B_cereus]

is that the live one? I can't remember who the conductor was (got it off of Operashare). It's a great performane for sure

it's the March 1949 one with Kondrashin.... i seem to remember reading a review at the time that said it was uncut. The timings are

1. 15'04
2. 10'19
3. 14'19

as opposed to the Cluytens

1. 15'08
2. 10'02
3. 13'08

and the Ormandy

1. 15'05
2. 9'00
3. 11'25

Of course timings don't necessarily prove anything...  I'll need to re-listen to the Kondrashin to check whether or not it was.

Interestingly Gilels says in his interview with Elyse Mach (Great Contemporary Pianists Speak For Themselves, vol.2):

<quote>
" Just recently I listened to an old recording I did of the Rachmaninoff Third Piano Concerto, one that I made over fifteen years ago. Then I listened to a more recent recording I did of the same work. The first was more proper musically, but it was not what I considered alive. The second recording, I feel, was much more inspired, much more imaginative."
</quote>

Hmm... i wonder if he was referring to the  Ormandy (1966) versus the Kondrashin (1949) which was "over fifteen years" before? What did he mean by "the first was more proper musically"? (... uncut?) 

[Drasko]

Do you know perhaps when that interview took place? Not sure but ...one that I made over fifteen years ago... could mean 15 years before the interview. In which case he could be comparing Kondrashin and Cluytens recordings. The one with Ormandy was off air recording (I think), never officially released (again not sure).

[Sergeant Rock]

Gieseking/Barbirolli - Music and Arts - Performed in 1939, this was done without any cuts and with the bigger first movement cadenza. When the first movement began, I was aware that this was a unique performance. The tempo was slower than I have ever heard.

Oh my...this sounds like the Grail of Rach3s I've been looking for all my life. Every recording I've ever heard has a first movement much faster than I want. I hope this is still in print. A must buy for me. Thank you, George and Ezodisy.

Sarge

[George]

Oh my...this sounds like the Grail of Rach3s I've been looking for all my life. Every recording I've ever heard has a first movement much faster than I want. I hope this is still in print. A must buy for me. Thank you, George and Ezodisy.

Sarge

Did you download the Sokolov one that I posted last night? That one is also slow, but it works much better there, IMO.

[Sergeant Rock]

Did you download the Sokolov one that I posted last night? That one is also slow, but it works much better there, IMO.

No, I haven't, not yet. I will. I did order the Gieseking.

Sarge

[B_cereus]

Do you know perhaps when that interview took place? Not sure but ...one that I made over fifteen years ago... could mean 15 years before the interview. In which case he could be comparing Kondrashin and Cluytens recordings. The one with Ormandy was off air recording (I think), never officially released (again not sure).

the Ormandy was previously released on LP, according to an old issue of International Piano Quarterly magazine, but it has never been reissued on CD

i suppose he could also be referring to private unreleased recordings in his possession.

as many of his concerts in the USSR were recorded (Gilels preferred to be recorded live, as he discusses in the Mach interview).

it doesn't say when the interview was, but from the clues within, I deduce it must have been around 1980  . ...as, in the text, Gilels says "In one of my newer recordings, I played the B minor sonata by Chopin and three of his polonaises" - so he must be referring to his 1978 DG recording of those works.

so if we say the interview was circa 1980 (1981?), then 15 years previously could be the Ormandy 1966! in which case, can we infer that Gilels is saying that there is an unreleased Rach 3 recording that is even more recent and which he seems to consider his best yet?  One for Gilelologists, i think

[George]

No, I haven't, not yet. I will. I did order the Gieseking.

Sarge

Hey Sarge, thought I'd let you know that I have found one even slower than Sokolov's (the slowest one I knew of until today) Gavrilov's EMI recording with Muti. For comparison, I will post the timings for Argerich, Sokolov and Gavrilov:

Argerich       Sokolov      Gavrilov
15:26           18:29         18:37
11:00           11:36         12:37
13:53           16:11         14:20

Haven't heard it yet, but will post my review sometime this week.

[DarkAngel]

Hey Sarge, thought I'd let you know that I have found one even slower than Sokolov's (the slowest one I knew of until today) Gavrilov's EMI recording with Muti. For comparison, I will post the timings for Argerich, Sokolov and Gavrilov:

Argerich       Sokolov      Gavrilov
15:26           18:29         18:37
11:00           11:36         12:37
13:53           16:11         14:20

Haven't heard it yet, but will post my review sometime this week.

Great job George, I love your top 3 picks ......... for my taste I would rank them in this order:
-Janis
-Argerich
-Rudy

Have you heard the Rachmaninov/Ormandy/Naxos 3rd from 1939 (Rach is playing his own concerto)
Look at his timings, very fast even compared to Argerich:
-13:51
-08:39
-11:22

Mark Obert Thorn does usual great job mastering best possible historical sound.

[George]

Great job George, I love your top 3 picks ......... for my taste I would rank them in this order:
-Janis
-Argerich
-Rudy

Sounds good to me. I wouldn't part with any of them, but if forced, I'd keep the Janis.

[Sergeant Rock]

Hey Sarge, thought I'd let you know that I have found one even slower than Sokolov's (the slowest one I knew of until today) Gavrilov's EMI recording with Muti. For comparison, I will post the timings for Argerich, Sokolov and Gavrilov:

Argerich       Sokolov      Gavrilov
15:26           18:29         18:37
11:00           11:36         12:37
13:53           16:11         14:20

Haven't heard it yet, but will post my review sometime this week.

Thanks, George 

Sarge

[George]

Thanks, George 

Sarge

I listened to the first movement of PC 3 last night and it sounds great! I intended only to sample it, but was swept away by the playing. Based on this and the great Moments Musicaux in the same set, I'd say that the EMI budget two-fer by the pianist of his Rachmaninoff recordings is a no-brainer:

[Novi]

Have you heard the Rachmaninov/Ormandy/Naxos 3rd from 1939 (Rach is playing his own concerto)
Look at his timings, very fast even compared to Argerich:
-13:51
-08:39
-11:22

That's a great recording; I think the timings reflect the cuts though.

[George]

As a matter of bookkeeping, I am posting this list so that I can keep track of what I have left to cover: 

1. Gilels Rach 3 on Testament - will listen to it soon and post some thoughts here. I remember that the EMI was clearly filtered, so I hope that the Testament is better.

2. Gavrilov on EMI

3. Horowitz/Barbirolli on APR

[George]

Have you heard the Rachmaninov/Ormandy/Naxos 3rd from 1939 (Rach is playing his own concerto)
Look at his timings, very fast even compared to Argerich:
-13:51
-08:39
-11:22

I just realized that I did write a review of this already.

BTW, I plan to start Rachmaninoff PC 1, PC 2 and Paganini threads soon. That way I review different works and keep the listening fresh. As before, I hope that others feel free to post their own reviews/impressions/thoughts of the Rachmaninoff recordings in their collection. 

[George]

Gavrilov/Muti - Now available on a budget EMI Gemini two-fer, this performance was digitally recorded. From the start, it is clear that this is a lavishly romantic reading, something that works well for me, at least at first. The pianist and conductor are very much of one mind in this conception and the first movement comes off remarkably well. Gavrilov supplies a dark poetic touch when appropriate, but also has more than enough technique and muscle when called for. His treatment of the cadenza (he plays the less popular one that Rachmaninoff himself recorded) in the first movement was powerful and impressive. However, the climaxes in the first movement seemed to just appear out of nowhere, rather than grow organically out of the music as it did in other readings, such as Janis/Dorati. Muti seemed to be the one to blame for this aspect. Still, it was an excellent first movement.

The slow movement sounded too slow to me. Sometimes a slower tempo can emphasize things, other times it can drag the performance down, which is what it does here. Since there was some tension missing in the first movement, this slowing down does not come off well here, as it strips the movement of it's drama, having a slow-motion type of effect. Also, the huge dynamic shifts started to come across as schmaltzy and over the top to me. At this point, I thought it would take a brilliant finale to save this performance.

Unfortunately, that didn't happen. Though played fairly well and at a nice quick tempo, there just wasn't anything special about the performance. Moreover, some of the issues that plagued the earlier movements persisted here. So, overall this is not a terrible performance, but not one that I recommend either, not with the superb Janis/Dorati, Argerich/Chially and Rudy/Jansons recordings still in print and readily available. For a much more successful take along the lines of Gavrilov, I recommend the Sokolov performance that I reviewed in one of my first few posts. You can still download the performance using the link contained in the review. 

[George]

Berman/Abbado LSO - I found this one online recently and had to give it a try for this survey. I had read bad things, mostly that it lacked tension and excitement, but I had to hear for myself. It began slowly, quietly, gently with very refined playing. The music seems to be coming from a place too far away, suggesting that the microphones were too recessed during the recording. I also noticed that the piano tone sounded thin and that when the music was supposed to pick up, move forward or explode in climax it either didn't happen at all or it was significantly muted. Unexciting Rachmaninov is not something anyone should have to hear. Berman played all the notes and did not have any technical issues, yet this performance failed to move me at all. It was like Rachmaninov on Valium. Ironically, the only real excitement to be found came in the second movement. The finale was far too slow, plodding along without any apparent effort to generate some forward momentum or at least some fireworks. Not recommended.   

[George]

As a matter of bookkeeping, I am posting this list so that I can keep track of what I have left to cover: 

1. Gilels Rach 3 on Testament - will listen to it soon and post some thoughts here. I remember that the EMI was clearly filtered, so I hope that the Testament is better.

2. Gavrilov on EMI

3. Horowitz/Barbirolli on APR

I still need to listen to and review these.

[George]

I still need to listen to and review these.

And Santiago Rodriguez's recording as well. You heard that one yet, Sarge? Is it in the Brilliant box?

[Sergeant Rock]

And Santiago Rodriguez's recording as well. You heard that one yet, Sarge? Is it in the Brilliant box?

No, I haven't heard it. The Wild/Horenstein and Horowitz/Coates performances are in the big box.

Sarge

[George]

No, I haven't heard it. The Wild/Horenstein and Horowitz/Coates performances are in the big box.

Sarge

Gotcha! Haven't heard the Horowitz/Coates yet, but if it's half as good as his recording with Barbirolli, you are in for a special treat.