IMSLP Forums

Does anyone know anything about Rachmaninoff's fifth?

I can't seem to find any reference to it anywhere, but I hear it's now been recorded.

Grove mentions nothing - possibly someone refered to Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini as his fifth? As it does resemble a concerto of sorts.

Thanks, I have found what I was looking for.

It's actually Rachmaninoff's 2nd symphony arranged as a piano concerto by Alexander Warenberg.

see the following link for anyone else who's is interested.

http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... 26hs%3DGrf[/url]

or, if you happen to be fluent in Japanese

http://www.hmv.co.jp/news/article/802060005

No need to learn Japanese

The label Brilliantclassics is going to publish the work you are looking for in the middle of march 2008:

http://music.brilliantclassics.com/epag ... /View/8900

(March 14th 2008 according to amazon Germany).

I'm looking forward to hear it, too.

Best,
Beren Camlost

In fact it has already been recorded and published. I bought my copy on Tuesday... Very good

Rachmaninov's 5 th concert is Rapsody on a Theme paganini. I like 18 th variation in it. It's too beautiful.

Tarantella wrote:Rachmaninov's 5 th concert is Rapsody on a Theme paganini. I like 18 th variation in it. It's too beautiful.

Did you read the thread?


-Lala-

I'd like to think that Rachmaninoff's Rhapsody on a Theme by Paganini is a form of piano concerto since the piano is the soloist and takes centre stage, and I'm not very comfortable with the work being categorized as a work for piano and orchestra. There are other examples, Tchaikovsky's Variations on a Rococo Theme is a concerto for violoncello in all but the title. It can also be argued that Beethoven's Choral Fantasy for piano, orchestra and chorus can also be categorized as a form of piano concerto with chorus.

Vivaldi wrote:I'd like to think that Rachmaninoff's Rhapsody on a Theme by Paganini is a form of piano concerto since the piano is the soloist and takes centre stage, and I'm not very comfortable with the work being categorized as a work for piano and orchestra. There are other examples, Tchaikovsky's Variations on a Rococo Theme is a concerto for violoncello in all but the title. It can also be argued that Beethoven's Choral Fantasy for piano, orchestra and chorus can also be categorized as a form of piano concerto with chorus.

The Paganini Rhapsody, the Rococo Variations, and the Choral Fantasy are not concertos. They are works for a soloist and orchestra, making them at best "concerted" works, or maybe "soloistic." The performing medium does not necessarily have to explain or coincide with the genre; the genre does not necessarily have to explain or coincide with the form (which I'm using here to refer to structure).

If "center stage" status were the primary criterion to make something a concerto, then any short solo piece for soloist and orchestra (such as Tchaikovsky's "Pezzo Capriccioso" for cello and orchestra) would qualify as well. Likewise, an opera is a concerto (or a combination of several short concertos), because the solo voices take center stage over the orchestra.

Placing any given work for a soloist and orchestra into the genre of "concerto" dilutes that genre and obliterates the others, and also ignores structure (i.e., form). That's not to say that genres and forms can't be blended. It is possible to make variation structure part of a true concerto (e.g., last movements in some Mozart concertos, the 1st movement of Saint-Saens Piano Concerto No. 4, etc.), but if a composer calls his overall work "variations" (or obviously composes the work in that form and avoids the term "concerto" as a title or genre designation), then to second-guess the intentions or obvious purpose, especially with long-established genres and forms, is problematic.

I think I see what you're saying, but I'd disagree.

There's genre, and there's title. A composer can call something "fantasy for piano and orchestra" and could still be the same piece if he called it "concertino for piano and orchestra" instead.
For instance, Sibelius's 7th Symphony wouldn't be recognizable as one to Beethoven, but it's still a symphony, because it's CALLED Symphony.

There ARE certain implications to the titles, yes, but in the end it doesn't even matter all that much...

-Lala-

In response to the topic, there is no fifth concerto for piano by Rachmaninoff. The Rhapsody is in the form of a concerto and can be divided up into movement equivelents, but it isn't called a concerto even though it fits the requisites. But glad to hear you found what you were really looking for. And yeah, I believe the second symphony is quite exceptional.

When Rachmanninov died, reportedly he was working on a Concerto for Organ and Orchestra. If any of that material has survived, none of it has ever been made public -- as far as I know. (I would love to be proven wrong, here.) The idea of a Rachmanninov Organ Concerto must pique the interest of all devotees of his music.

MS

Yikes! My worst nightmare: an organ concerto by Rachmaninoff. I already find the textures of his piano concertos turgid -- too many notes, as I have argued in the now frozen "Rachmaninoff Piano Concertos, Overrated?" thread. To get equal turgidity in an organ concerto all Rachmaninoff would have to do is ask the organist to hold down all 10 fingers and both feet. He could make it even worse by directly Importing his hyperactive piano textures. This would produce an incredibly opaque and unwieldy coagulated sonic mass. However, I mentioned in that other thread that a Rachmaninoff violin concerto would be of considerable interest. By its very nature a solo violin is incapable of creating a sonic turgidity.

--Sixtus

As far as I know the first movement of a Concerto should have a sonata form, but the Rhapsody has a variation form.

As far as IMSLP genres go, we had kicked a lot of words around, and the "concertante works" designation is what fits for these, though in an earlier reply someone mentioned Beethoven's Choral Fantasy that has a piano soloist.

I would put the Rachmaninov in the Concertante Works category, but in my opinion, the Beethoven would be Symphonic Work with Soloists, much like the Mahler symphonies with vocal soloists. I think the distinction would be decided by a question like "Is the soloist the main focal point of the work?" In the Rachmaninov, yes, in the Beethoven, no. I'm sure others might disagree with the Beethoven, and also, there may be other works that are in a greyer area.