My friend Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji thought very highly of Medtner - see his essays and books. He told me he once saw Medtner in a tea shop but didn't have the nerve to speak to so great a master!
Medtner Enthusiast, blessed Piano prodigy, great Pianist and alcoholic, sadly too. Tozer was just great and I am sad he died so young. What a talent, one of the best pianists ever! By the way, it was Neeme Järvi, who directed.
i hope you've all heard Medtner's Piano Concerto 2, it's been my favourite music for years. In my opinion the first is nothing to the second (or even third) concerto. To be fair, i also find the opening of this concerto brilliant. And i'm glad to see Medtner appreciated in any way, it makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
The polyphony in this piece is fantastic (for example, 11:40). The augmented and the source themes together... and all the themes lyrical, touching and alive (!!)
Joven contemporáneo de Serguéi Rajmáninov y Alexander Scriabin, escribió un gran número de composiciones en las que en todas ellas aparece el piano. Su obra se compone de 14 sonatas para piano, 3 sonatas para violín, tres obras para dos pianos, muchas piezas para piano y 108 canciones, entre las que se incluyen dos obras para vocalise (en:vocalise). Sus 38 piezas para piano, que denominó de forma particular Skazki (cuentos o cuentos de hadas), constituyen su obra más original y un preludio de sus sonatas.
The opening is indeed arresting, but the chief glory of the work is the Coda, particularly the slower section, from Lamentoso (around 29 min), a unique and most moving concerto ending. A couple of Medtner songs have found their way into the work, like "Sleepless" and "Spanish Romance".
From the back of a Hyperion CD (CDA66744), with Sihyeon's track offsets: 00:00 I. Allegro 08:50 II. Theme and Variations 24:27 III. Recapitulation 26:54 IV. Coda: Allegro molto 33:30 (End)
I think a big difference between Medtner and Rachmaninoff and why the latter is way more popular, is that Rachmaninoff leaned more into driving melodies and memorable sections such as 21:20 Imagine if this whole piece was as emotional and lyrical as that section (not saying it’s in any way inferior, just different from Rachmaninoff’s style… in a refreshing way!)
Did you mean much more restrained? But I definitely agree. And still it somehow manages to retain all of the interwoven, multi-layered melodic depth that's so representative of Medtner's music.
Christ. Greig, Rachmaninov, Mozart, Tchaikovsky and Paderewski rolled into one. Music snobs really do need to stop dismissing beautiful pieces like this.
Thematically not so much - the music is probably better than it sounds:) but there's nothing to grab your attention. I like the Toccata in the 2nd concerto a lot more.
I felt that way at first. It was a superficial initial impression that wore off with more familiarity with the music. This is about much more than immediately catchy tunes.
We're conditioned for striking themes and powerful thematic development, but Medtner is different - he has themes but it's much about harmony, texture and his sound. Forget your preconceptions and meet Medtner on his own terms - there's much to enjoy. Thankfully Tozer is unparalleled in taking us into the Medtner sound world. He's by far the best Medtner interpreter I've heard.
Describing Medtner as a mix of several composers is damaging even further his reputation as a composer. Medtner is Medtner. If you want to trace influences go be a musicologist.
I have heard their music indeed. As of now, Medtner pulls me a bit more than the others you mention. Its piano sonata is very touching just like Scriabin's and certainly contagious. Perhaps I just need to listen more of them but I doubt they will have the same shocking effect Scriabin had on me. I have heard his complete works from A to Z. Nothing is mediocre or boring to me, even his late works have something nobody before him had.
I think Medtner can be difficult to get into while Rachmaninoff is easier. Give Medtner a chance, give him repeated hearings. The rewards are there, and that's something I wouldn't have said a few years ago. Oh, and listen to the Rachmaninoff 4th piano concerto, especially the third movement, and you will hear a strong influence of Medtner. If Rachmaninoff could find good things in Medtner, maybe we could, too?
+Charles Timberlake I love Rachmaninov, and yes Medtner is harder, his "problem" is that his music has not so strong direction, it is being deep, pianistic and complicated but overall lacking the strong thematic drive which is something Rachmaninov and others did better and it is probably why they are much more popular. Medtner is very good, but his music is lacking strong thematic material and melodies. No flame intended, just my point of view.
+Jan Skácelík Exactly! Rachmaninoff could write beautiful themes that stick with you. Medtner either couldn't or chose not to. You are correct about the "problem" with Medtner. When I was a student (not piano major) at the College-Conservatory of Music a long time ago, Madame Olga Conus taught her students Medtner, and I think I heard one of her students play a sonata by him. Didn't enjoy it at the time, but might now.
I think most are put off by Medtner's solo piano pieces that are more obscure, and not so catchy as this piece. Comparable to a lot of Schumann's piano pieces, which seem to have been written more for himself than for an audience. The obscure is like a glass of whiskey.. it takes time to sink in and appreciate.
medtners piano concerto is very much like rachmaninovs in its intensity. tecnically very difficult. he is not so familiar composer. but i like very much for examples medtnes sonatas. very poetic piano music.
Fantastic concerto! But I think Zhukov's interpretation is just miles above everything else, because it is just so unbelievably energetic and badass - especially after the recapitulation. I made a sheet music video of his performance with a thematic analysis of the piece, you can check it out on my channel. (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-r3YiKbMFbAk.html)
She was a very nice lady. We didn't talk much about music, though. This was in the early 70s, and she was not young, but walked steadily the mile to the campus. I think the university did a recorded history with her. I recall a student telling me that her take on Scriabin was, "Strange young man." Probably so.
Well I don't think Medtner and R. are poles apart in style but at least R. had some memorable material to work with. To me M. is competent, totally uninspired and dull.
+peter owen No one was forcing you to hear the concerto. I guess you are right about the melodic properties of this concerto. Maybe it has other interesting features that other people liked - In the end he did spend a great deal of effort in meticulously composing it and all the musicians got together and played it so it would be a shame if it never meant anything to anyone during all that time. And now seriously - saying that something is "uninspired" is the same as saying: "I don't get it" - only it is more concieted. To tell you the truth, I didn't really get it either. I don't that qualifies me to judge Medtner - Whose compositional language I am only starting to comprehend.
Of course you have the right to judge Medtner or any other composer and if you don't "get" it it's probably the composer's, fault not yours. In what I've heard of his music I haven't found much of any harmonic, structural and especially melodic interest.
Would really like to hear this as a sort of replacement for Rach 2 in concerts. Maybe they're not totally comparable, but you've got to admit the openings are similar.
@Józef Hofmann I don't recall you saying "and more invigorating to listen to in my subjective opinion", therefore I don't feel your rebuttal to my reply is valid.
@Józef Hofmann Curiously, you did not assume the same about my reply, feeling the need to specifically point out that "that's subjective". Does that mean you take me for a fool then?
Wow.....that's a lot of that. Im afraid that after 30+ years of playing this would be near the bottom of pieces i'd want to play. No way for me to get into what i guess are melodies. A lot of noise and movement but not a whole lot of substance I;m sorry to say. Impressive performance of a technically very demanding piece though so credit there for sure. I believe this work deserves the criticism that Griegs concerto undeservedly got at the time. A few lyric pieces slapped together to create a concerto. A disjointed mess.
There are virtuoso moments on the piano utterly obliterated by the orchestra. I call that a fail. Disagree with me as you will. You know as little as I? So what? -M
