Dvorak's Piano Concerto - a case of just neglect?

[Stanfordian]

I attended a concert last May at the Dresden Music Festival at the Semper Opera House played by the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra under Ingo Metzmacher. Martin Stadtfeld was the splendid soloist in the Dvořák piano concerto. I know the work from my recordings but I really enjoyed the opportunity of hearing this attractive score live in concert. But when compared with the excellent concertos from Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Grieg, Schumann, Chopin, Rachmaninov No's 2/3, Tchaikovsky No. 1, Prokofiev No. 3; its no wonder the Dvořák takes a back seat.

[teamsaint]

- a similar thought occured to me, too.

Have you people NEVER stood in a record shop, heard something playing loudly, and thought " This sounds great, I'll find out what it is and buy it "? Of course you then get home and discover it's not quite as hot as you thought.

No.....oh dear, just me then.

Oh and thanks to Bryn. I had no idea the Dvorak has a truncated version.
Anyway, I think its a perfectly ok way to spend half an hour. (or possibly 40 mins). Not the best, but ok.

[Bryn]

Actually, "severely cut" was a misrepresentation of the situation. What Firkusny played on the Vox recording found in the Brilliant Classics box uses his own adaptation of the piano part, based on that popularised by Vilem Kurz. Both arrangements aimed to clarifying the piano's contribution to performances of the work. It has been suggested the Richter was mainly responsible for restoring Dvorak's original piano part to the performance tradition. I don't have the Richter recording. The one using Dvorak's original that I have is the live Aimard/RCO/Harnoncourt, though I also have the Brilliant Classics set.

Dvorak himself recognised the work's 'weaknesses' as a concerto, and is said to have regarded it more as a symphonic work in which the piano contributes significantly to the orchestral part. The Kurz and Firkusny adaptations make no alteration to the other orchestra parts, as far as I am aware.

[salymap]

I haven't had a chance to listen to my recording of the piano concerto but it works out at just under 37 minutes. Is that the complete work,does anyone know?.

[Bryn]

I haven't had a chance to listen to my recording of the piano concerto but it works out at just under 37 minutes. Is that the complete work,does anyone know?

It's the full original orchestral score, but with Firkusny's own adaptation of the piano part.

[Barbirollians]

teamsaint - no I understand hence my point . Sometimes lesser works just make more impact when played loud !

[teamsaint]

teamsaint - no I understand hence my point . Sometimes lesser works just make more impact when played loud !

Yep, you did make the point, fair comment.

[visualnickmos]

Just got round to looking in Dvorak box. Mine is Rudolph Firkusny/St Louis SO/Walter Susskind.

This is an all-round excellent double CD set IMHO.

[Richard Tarleton]

On my Southwold trawl the other day I also picked up a Regis disc coupling the Rostropovich/Talich CzechPO cello concerto with the piano concerto by Frantisek Maxian/Talich/CPO. There is no date for the recording, or any information at all about the artist. Poor sound quality.

To my ear the piano concerto sounds a bit of a rag bag of styles, before Dvorak had found his distinctive voice. The central movement has its moments, but a lot of sub-Brahmsian rumty-tumpty in the first.

Also I was interested to hear this Rostropovich not having heard it before, but it is not going to displace Karajan or Boult, or Tortelier/Previn, for regular listening.

[Nick Armstrong]

I'm going to stick up for this piece!

Dvorak was capable of writing music that leaves me cold - some of the chamber music, and that dreadful 'Stabat Mater'...

... but in the same CD Review as the latter was featured in BAL (22.6.13), AMcG played the slow movement from a new recording of the concerto, with Francesco Piemontesi (piano), BBC Symphony Orchestra, Jiri Belohlavek (conductor) - and I remembered how appealing that slow movement is.

I've listened today to one of my two CDs of the piece, Andras Schiff with the Vienna Phil under Dohnanyi. There is some rather stale passage-work in the first movement, it's true (it could lose 5 minutes with no difficulty) - but I think the slow movement is as engaging as much of the best Dvorak, and the last movement is a good romp without being hackneyed.

I think I'd rather hear Dvorak's piano concerto than Chopin's "No 2".

The Schiff disc is coupled with a gorgeous Schumann 'Introduction and Allegro Appassionato"

[Hornspieler]

I think we played Dvorak's piano concerto with Peter Frankl as soloist, but I don't remember much about it.

We played several works with Peter Frankl (Hungarian as I recall and one of Silvestri's favourites).

I would certainly be interested to hear it again.

I'm inclined to agree with Caliban about the Chopin concertos. He should have settled for that in which he was supreme - his solo piano etudes and waltzes.

HS

[Sir Velo]

I'm inclined to agree with Caliban about the Chopin concertos. He should have settled for that in which he was supreme - his solo piano etudes and waltzes.

HS

Bit tricky that, given the piano concertos were composed before the etudes and the waltzes!

Personally, I think they're wonderfully fresh pieces, remarkable given they were composed by a teenager.

[Hornspieler]

Bit tricky that, given the piano concertos were composed before the etudes and the waltzes!

Personally, I think they're wonderfully fresh pieces, remarkable given they were composed by a teenager.

A specious argument, Sir Velo.

They are either good or not so good. The age of the creator or performer is irrelevent. From what you say, Chopin himself realised where his true talents laid.

How many child prodigies, pushed by their parents and lauded by the critics suddenly find themselves in their twenties "....in with the big boys now, and competing on a level basis* ..."?

But if you enjoy those piano concertos - and many people do, why not?

I quite like them myself, but not to compare with Grieg or Liszt or Saint-Saens

* The late Ralph Holmes said that to me. He said "... I realise that I have so much to learn before I can go any further."

HS

[verismissimo]

... The late Ralph Holmes said that to me. He said "... I realise that I have so much to learn before I can go any further."

HS

That's me, HS. That's me.

[Sir Velo]

A specious argument, Sir Velo.

They are either good or not so good. The age of the creator or performer is irrelevent. From what you say, Chopin himself realised where his true talents laid.

How many child prodigies, pushed by their parents and lauded by the critics suddenly find themselves in their twenties "....in with the big boys now, and competing on a level basis* ..."?

But if you enjoy those piano concertos - and many people do, why not?

I quite like them myself, but not to compare with Grieg or Liszt or Saint-Saens

* The late Ralph Holmes said that to me. He said "... I realise that I have so much to learn before I can go any further."

HS

HS, no more specious surely than saying he should have stuck to waltzes and etudes when the piano concertos were composed first, IWHT. Would you have said the same thing about Beethoven if he had stopped after his second piano concerto? Who knows what Chopin would have done if he had had a few more years? It's hardly his fault that the musical public has shown with their wallet that these pieces are perennially fresh, if not on the exalted level of later work.

Nevertheless, leaving that aside, I would personally rate the mazurkas, ballades, third sonata, fantasy, preludes and polonaises on a higher level than the waltzes. Whichever way you look at it, in every genre, everything Chopin did he had the gift of alchemy, transforming base metal into musical gold.