Best Rach #3 Performance/Recording?

Monthly Polls will indicate which recordings will be featured here, cast your vote!
Jemvie
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:13 pm
Location: Mexico City
Contact:

Best Rach #3 Performance/Recording?

Postby Jemvie » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:21 pm

Hi!
1-First of all the Rach #3 is the best piano concert I have ever heard.
2-Rachmaninoff is my favorite pianist
3-I'd like to know what is/are the best recording and performance of the piano concert #3 a Rachmaninoff fan must own.
4-I currently only have Kissin's Rachmaninoff rach #3 with the Boston Symphony Orchesrta directed by Ozawa released in 1993 under the RCA label, which I was told by the guy at the store was his personal favorite. I like it a lot both in sound quality(DDD) and performance but I'd like to know if I'm missing something good.

Thanks!

Guest

Postby Guest » Tue Apr 19, 2005 7:59 pm

yes you are missing the essentials, dear boy.

get RACHMANINOFF'S own recording of this with the Philadelphia Orchestra.

get Horowitz with Fritz Reiner.

i'm surprised you don't have those. They are the "must-haves"!

hvete

Rachmaninoff's 3rd

Postby hvete » Mon May 16, 2005 12:20 am

I personally like Ashkenazy's recording best of those I've heard. To count as truly sophisticated, I'm supposed to like Rachmaninoff's own recording the best, but I don't quite. My vibe is that Ashkenazy is a truly deep pianist that genuinely understands Rachmaninoff. It would be too simplistic to say I have a favorite composer, but I probably listen to Rachmaninoff and Beethoven most.

RACHBOY
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:14 pm

Postby RACHBOY » Thu May 19, 2005 12:00 am

I've met mr Ashkenazy (just check the video of him in the Members section) He is a very kind, caring and interesting man.I unfortunately have seen him conduct and not play the piano. I love his recording of the Symphonic Dances with the Concertgebouw Orchestra!

studdman
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:01 am
Location: Ephrata, WA
Contact:

Best Rach 3

Postby studdman » Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:33 pm

I would strongly agree that Ashkenazy's recording of the Rach 3 is the very best!

Djusz

Postby Djusz » Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:15 pm

I'm terribly sorry I have to disagree with all of you. I'm a student at the Brussles Conservatory, Rachmaninoff is my favorite composer and the "rach 3" happens to be my favorite concerto. And I think I've heard pretty much every recording there has ever been of it and here's my rank.
1. Nicolai Lugansky with Ivan Sphiller (Russian State Orchestra)
2. Horowitz and Zubin Mehta
3 Evgeny Moguilevsky (1964 recording)
4. Pletnev

After that, there aren't many good recordings. I'm sorry Mr. Ashkenasy you play Rachmaninov very well but I didn't like your interpretation of the 3rd concerto.

RACHBOY
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:14 pm

Postby RACHBOY » Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:14 pm

Hi Djusz, thanks for your favorite 3rd Piano Concerto list. Could you please expand on whey these are your favorites, so we can discuss the recordings in more detail?

Djusz wrote:I'm terribly sorry I have to disagree with all of you. I'm a student at the Brussles Conservatory, Rachmaninoff is my favorite composer and the "rach 3" happens to be my favorite concerto. And I think I've heard pretty much every recording there has ever been of it and here's my rank.
1. Nicolai Lugansky with Ivan Sphiller (Russian State Orchestra)
2. Horowitz and Zubin Mehta
3 Evgeny Moguilevsky (1964 recording)
4. Pletnev

After that, there aren't many good recordings. I'm sorry Mr. Ashkenasy you play Rachmaninov very well but I didn't like your interpretation of the 3rd concerto.

Djusz

Postby Djusz » Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:11 pm

Well, my dear rachboy, first I'll have to ask you if you ever heard the Lugansky interpretation. Just listen to the first notes, he puts a certain rythmic aspect to that first melody, which no one else does. And the Cadenza is so perfect I just don't have words for it. And the Finale is just amazing. I'm sorry, I'm not very good with explaining why he's the best, he just is. If I had to play the 3rd concerto, I'd be affraid to ruin it in comparison to Lugansky. I don't know if you know of this recording, if you don't have it, I can just send it to you by email or something, you just ask. Then Horowitz, well...Horowitz is off course a far better pianist than Lugansky in overall, but Lugansky is just unbeatable when it comes to rachmaninoff. This is probably the most famous recording of all times though (horowitz-mehta), and I think that probably justifies it's position in the top three. Then, Moguilevsky, it's very hard to find this recording these days. Moguilevsky won the Queen elisabeth contest in 1964 with the rach3, it's very special in it's own way: you can easily detect the same russian technique Horowitz uses, but it's quite different anyway (I have this one too if you want it). Then finally, Pletnev. Well, pletnev is the rachmaninoff of our time. I mean, he's a pianist (probably the best one alive), a very good conductor, and one of the last post-romantic composers, he almost impersefies Rachmaninoff, so it's logical that his version is a very good one. So, I hope you're happy with my explenation. Which recording is the best according to you?

Sasha
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:47 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sasha » Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:44 am

Very very educational!

I've got to get those CDs you guys are talking about.
I just realized that one of Rach3 I have is played by Ashkenazy.
How about the guy who played for the move "Shine" I don't remeber his name... Martin or Mark something. What do you guys think of him?

Thanks :D

RACHBOY
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:14 pm

Postby RACHBOY » Tue Sep 20, 2005 11:12 pm

Hi Djusz,

thanks very much for your reply! It is very difficult selecting favorites, mostly I like one movement from one performer best idem second and third movement from yet another pianist. That is the case with for instance Tzimon Barto, Feltsman, Volodos. But for total performances I like Lugansky a lot (but more with the solo works) but I do not think he is amongst my all time favorites in the 3rd concerto.

Top for me are: Rachmaninoff's own recording (of course) because it gives me a total different and authentic feel to the concerto that no-one after that has ever given me. special Tempi (beginning!), emotional content, introspective elements and virtuoso piano playing without being "showy" (cadenza 1st movement!). super!
Furthermore Horowitz with Albert Coates is still a version where heart starts running faster. Explanation: Horowitz always makes me feel he want to go somewhere in a hurry and that combined with the historical significance of the recording and superb piano playing does it for me every time.
In a special bracket for me is Gieseking's recording (1939). He does amazing things here (and makes amazing mistakes as well) but tries to put emotion and takes risks in every single bar which I admire and adore very much which he combines with excellent long musical lines. He goes through the 1st movement cadenza like a madman in a good sense of the word. And listen how he starts the 1st movement extremely slowly and then picks up the tempo without you noticing,amazing!

more later....

Do you know if Moguilevsky's version is out on cd? I've heard it on LP and it was superb!

Djusz wrote:Well, my dear rachboy, first I'll have to ask you if you ever heard the Lugansky interpretation. Just listen to the first notes, he puts a certain rythmic aspect to that first melody, which no one else does. And the Cadenza is so perfect I just don't have words for it. And the Finale is just amazing. I'm sorry, I'm not very good with explaining why he's the best, he just is. If I had to play the 3rd concerto, I'd be affraid to ruin it in comparison to Lugansky. I don't know if you know of this recording, if you don't have it, I can just send it to you by email or something, you just ask. Then Horowitz, well...Horowitz is off course a far better pianist than Lugansky in overall, but Lugansky is just unbeatable when it comes to rachmaninoff. This is probably the most famous recording of all times though (horowitz-mehta), and I think that probably justifies it's position in the top three. Then, Moguilevsky, it's very hard to find this recording these days. Moguilevsky won the Queen elisabeth contest in 1964 with the rach3, it's very special in it's own way: you can easily detect the same russian technique Horowitz uses, but it's quite different anyway (I have this one too if you want it). Then finally, Pletnev. Well, pletnev is the rachmaninoff of our time. I mean, he's a pianist (probably the best one alive), a very good conductor, and one of the last post-romantic composers, he almost impersefies Rachmaninoff, so it's logical that his version is a very good one. So, I hope you're happy with my explenation. Which recording is the best according to you?

Guest

Postby Guest » Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:44 pm

RACHBOY wrote:Hi Djusz,

thanks very much for your reply! It is very difficult selecting favorites, mostly I like one movement from one performer best idem second and third movement from yet another pianist. That is the case with for instance Tzimon Barto, Feltsman, Volodos. But for total performances I like Lugansky a lot (but more with the solo works) but I do not think he is amongst my all time favorites in the 3rd concerto.

Top for me are: Rachmaninoff's own recording (of course) because it gives me a total different and authentic feel to the concerto that no-one after that has ever given me. special Tempi (beginning!), emotional content, introspective elements and virtuoso piano playing without being "showy" (cadenza 1st movement!). super!
Furthermore Horowitz with Albert Coates is still a version where heart starts running faster. Explanation: Horowitz always makes me feel he want to go somewhere in a hurry and that combined with the historical significance of the recording and superb piano playing does it for me every time.
In a special bracket for me is Gieseking's recording (1939). He does amazing things here (and makes amazing mistakes as well) but tries to put emotion and takes risks in every single bar which I admire and adore very much which he combines with excellent long musical lines. He goes through the 1st movement cadenza like a madman in a good sense of the word. And listen how he starts the 1st movement extremely slowly and then picks up the tempo without you noticing,amazing!

more later....

Do you know if Moguilevsky's version is out on cd? I've heard it on LP and it was superb!

Djusz wrote:Well, my dear rachboy, first I'll have to ask you if you ever heard the Lugansky interpretation. Just listen to the first notes, he puts a certain rythmic aspect to that first melody, which no one else does. And the Cadenza is so perfect I just don't have words for it. And the Finale is just amazing. I'm sorry, I'm not very good with explaining why he's the best, he just is. If I had to play the 3rd concerto, I'd be affraid to ruin it in comparison to Lugansky. I don't know if you know of this recording, if you don't have it, I can just send it to you by email or something, you just ask. Then Horowitz, well...Horowitz is off course a far better pianist than Lugansky in overall, but Lugansky is just unbeatable when it comes to rachmaninoff. This is probably the most famous recording of all times though (horowitz-mehta), and I think that probably justifies it's position in the top three. Then, Moguilevsky, it's very hard to find this recording these days. Moguilevsky won the Queen elisabeth contest in 1964 with the rach3, it's very special in it's own way: you can easily detect the same russian technique Horowitz uses, but it's quite different anyway (I have this one too if you want it). Then finally, Pletnev. Well, pletnev is the rachmaninoff of our time. I mean, he's a pianist (probably the best one alive), a very good conductor, and one of the last post-romantic composers, he almost impersefies Rachmaninoff, so it's logical that his version is a very good one. So, I hope you're happy with my explenation. Which recording is the best according to you?


do you know that rachmaninoff made a vieuw mistakes in his own compistion;) just play your rach 3 recorded bij rachmaninoff self and close your eyes.

Guest

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:05 am

my comments may or may not please some folk but here goes.

Rach's own recording: Although (sadly) cut, it is a must and probably needs a number of sittings to really appreciate the man's clarity and musicianship. He did not "sell" this piece unlike Horowitz because he was an understated player who made the extraordinarily difficult sound easy.

Horowitz: the earlier recordings are they best. in both the Coates recording and the live (Barbarolli) recording, his playing is unaffected and justify his reputation in this piece. dislike the Reiner recording, as his playing is more affected by then and the recording was v unbalanced. he was undoubtedly one of the great pianists of the 20th century but I am not convinced that he was a comparable musician.

Cliburn: a more measured but grand interpreter but in the recording with Kondrashin he makes a clear case.

Gieseking: i like his live recording with Barbarolli. he is clearly his own man and his view of th piece is different to the accepted one at the time. he is enough of a musician to put his view across.

Ashkenazy: Rachmaninoff's music clearly courses thru this man's veins. a go-to man nowadays as an accompanist (conductor). obviously loves this piece and has recorded it 5 times yet arguably did not make it "his" unlike no.2. of his recordings, I actually prefer his first with Fistoulari in 1963. all the others have their merits and supporters.

Argerich: some rave about her live recording with Chailly, yet it leaves me cold. one clearly admires he painism but I am not convinced or her musicality in this. I don't mind a fast tempo but her's at time is somewhat manic.

Pletnev: always an interesting interpreter and his recording was one I sought out avidly. he is very much his owm man and his interpretation is individual. i like his recording

rachmaninoff fan
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 4:11 pm
Contact:

Postby rachmaninoff fan » Tue Sep 27, 2005 2:22 pm

Anonymous wrote:Horowitz: the earlier recordings are they best. in both the Coates recording and the live (Barbarolli) recording, his playing is unaffected and justify his reputation in this piece. dislike the Reiner recording, as his playing is more affected by then and the recording was v unbalanced. he was undoubtedly one of the great pianists of the 20th century but I am not convinced that he was a comparable musician.


I got a recording of horowitz playing the rachmaninoff 3 on video but when you are looking en hearing good you can see and heare very much folds in the peace :(

horowitz is/was very good but I think he still need(ed) to study on the rachmaninoff 3

Amphissa
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 5:00 am
Location: Mount Parnassus

Postby Amphissa » Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:08 pm

Rachboy, the Mogilevsky recording of the 3rd piano concerto is available on CD. Melodiya label. MEL CD 10 00656

I you do not have a local source, you can purchase from RussianDVD online here http://www.russiandvd.com/store/product.asp?sku=37363&genreid=
"Life without music is a mistake." Nietzsche

Guest

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:13 pm

Anonymous wrote:my comments may or may not please some folk but here goes.

Rach's own recording: Although (sadly) cut, it is a must and probably needs a number of sittings to really appreciate the man's clarity and musicianship. He did not "sell" this piece unlike Horowitz because he was an understated player who made the extraordinarily difficult sound easy.

Horowitz: the earlier recordings are they best. in both the Coates recording and the live (Barbarolli) recording, his playing is unaffected and justify his reputation in this piece. dislike the Reiner recording, as his playing is more affected by then and the recording was v unbalanced. he was undoubtedly one of the great pianists of the 20th century but I am not convinced that he was a comparable musician.

Cliburn: a more measured but grand interpreter but in the recording with Kondrashin he makes a clear case.

Gieseking: i like his live recording with Barbarolli. he is clearly his own man and his view of th piece is different to the accepted one at the time. he is enough of a musician to put his view across.

Ashkenazy: Rachmaninoff's music clearly courses thru this man's veins. a go-to man nowadays as an accompanist (conductor). obviously loves this piece and has recorded it 5 times yet arguably did not make it "his" unlike no.2. of his recordings, I actually prefer his first with Fistoulari in 1963. all the others have their merits and supporters.

Argerich: some rave about her live recording with Chailly, yet it leaves me cold. one clearly admires he painism but I am not convinced or her musicality in this. I don't mind a fast tempo but her's at time is somewhat manic.

Pletnev: always an interesting interpreter and his recording was one I sought out avidly. he is very much his owm man and his interpretation is individual. i like his recording



I strongly disagree, ashkenazy doesn't have rachmaninov in him, he doesn't express the essential "russian soul". Horowitz, on the contrary, does have it in him. Just because he makes a few mistakes now and then doesn't mean he plays it less well. Since when is technique the mane criteria for pianoplaying.
PS: Rachboy, I'm sorry I didn't answer your question. I didn't know if moguilevsky's recording was on the market. He personally gave me the cd (he's my teacher), so I now it exists, I just don't know where you can get it. But anyway, it seems you got the answer anyway.


Return to “Best Recordings”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests