Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Unfamiliar concerto at a competition = bad idea?

I couldn't help but to notice how every finalist brings up Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, or Tchaikovsky concerti at the final rounds (Even in Tchaikovsky competition there is a great tendency towards the Tchai 1).

If I remember correctly Van Cliburn, Queen Elisabeth, and Tchaikovsky all allow the competitors to play one standard concerto of their choice. Are Rach 3 and Prok 2 really all that greater than other concertos to win a prize?

I don't devalue their aspect, of course, for Rach 3 really is one of the acmes of pianism. But what about pieces like Bartok 3 (or 2), Moszkowski E Major, Saint-Saens 5, Medtner's 3 concerti, and countless others? I can totally see Saint Saens 5 or Moszkowski working for the final rounds.

Is it 'safer' to play Rach 3? Wouldn't the contestants get recognition for their novelty and bravery of bringing an unsung masterpiece to its spotlight?

I do know of one pianist who is now preparing for the Busoni competition, with Bartok 2nd as his choice for finals. Let's hope it works out. I'm very much in favor of allowing less-heard concerti in the final rounds of competitions.

Anything that gets less young competition pianists playing Rach 3 sounds good to me.

If only more people would perform Rach 4.

Now, it's good to be aware of the challenges for everyone involved already without the 'obscure concerto' in the finals. You're already having a situation where people can pick and choose from anything from 5 to 15 concerti in normal competitions, and which concerti that end up getting played in the finals is something the orchestra and the conductor are pretty clueless about until results are announced. Just to give an example of a competition I took part in:

Quite a few semi-finalists had chosen the Mozart D minor concerto in this case. Therefore, already on the day prior to the announcements, the conductor and the orchestra had rehearsals, going through all concerti that had been picked by the semifinalists. Then there was one participant, which happens to be myself, that was the only participant that had picked an obscure and little-played concerto for the finals. What happened in the end was that none of the finalists that had picked the Mozart ended up in the finals, but my obscure concerto did...It's understood that some rehearsal time will end up being wasted as some concerti end up in the finals and others do not, but having TOO MANY obscure concertos puts an extra strain on the conductor and the orchestra. And in this case, as is the case in quite a few competitions, the finalists only got an hour of rehearsal time in total, plus a brief dress rehearsal on the day of the concert. I can see that it is easier to do a Mozart concerto than something more rare, in a situation like this. Though, I remember a friend ended up playing Brahms B flat in a competition finals, and was also given a mere hour of rehearsing time - keep in mind, the piece is about 45 minutes long!

By all means, consider doing less played concerti in the finals, but pick them wisely.

Tomorrow is the opening concert of the Oakland Municipal Band. The musicians get one hour of rehearsal for a two hour concert or 1 hour 45 minutes with intermission. This is the sort of schedule professional musicians have to deal with. You need to wash your dirty laundry at home.

In the old days, you could go to Steinway in New York, go to the basement and pick out your piano, and Rachmaninoff would be there to offer to play the orchestral part with you. We need more people like that!

Rach 3 accompaniment is no joke, if you think about it. Such a gargantuan orchestra. But I guess the conductors and the musicians alike are used to playing that compared to playing a Reinecke concerto, for example.

I don't think a Reinecke concerto (unless it's for flute ) is going to win any piano competition. Nor even those by Rimsky-Korsakov or Glazunov.

But there are lots of high-quality concertos that are hardly ever played but which will likely be appreciated by audiences - like Dvorák's and Britten's (both have been recorded by Richter); maybe even Taneyev's, Balakirev's, Paderewski's, Stenhammar's, Franck's Symphonic Variations.....

Difficulty of the orchestra parts has no connection to the size of the orchestra, AFAIK.

But you are right, familiarity with the score matters a great deal, I think. Most players in professional orchestras have played all the standard concertos multiple times, and that creates a certain ease with how the music goes, and their role in it, that won't be found with stuff they don't know as well, if at all.

But, on the other hand, some players (as well as conductors) might find it very refreshing be involved with something other than the same old same old, and that could make for a really exceptional performance. But I think it's VERY risky to go that route. Plus, it is not always easy to locate the orchestra parts or get them on hire, when going off the beaten track.

I wish they woukd ban certain concertos. Not that i have anything against them, but having all the contestants play the same ones over and over at major competitons again gets old. I'm looking at you rach 2/3, tchaikovsky 1, prokofiev 2&3, chopin 1/2... Even with the mozart concertos everyone seems to play 20,21, or 23 or with beethoven 4 and 5. Enough! Now I'm not advocating playing unfamiliar works by any means, but could we have a lesser played in competition Mozart concerto or dare I say, even the Schumann for a change? I get it though, about the technical difficulties maybe not being as great as the big warhorses, but I would think that at this point, it shouldnt really matter. Everyone who makes it to the finals can play a lot of notes very quickly.

How about Liszt 2, Mendelssohn 2 (wonderful piece), and Tchaikovsky 2? These are all wonderful piece that I think can work at a competition.

I believe you're thinking of the Tchaikovsky, Chopin, Rubinstein and Van Cliburn.

The Leeds sees pianists play stuff like Beethoven 1, 3-5, Brahms, Schumann....even Bach as well. I can't remember the last time I heard Tchaik 1.

Saint Saens 4 and 5, Liszt 2, Bartok 2, maybe Scriabin and Barber, too

Maybe the producers of the TV show Wheel of Fortune can offer some advice? Didn't they come up with a way to deal with the RSTNE problem? :-)

+1 for Schumann

I think if you actually bring an unfamiliar concerto to a competition it probably helps because the judges are less familiar with the piece. I played 1st movement of Rach 1 back in high school and no one knows what that piece sounds like, I could get tons of notes wrong and the audience would love it. Obviously, it's bit harder to get wrong notes past an actual judge but some of the weirder harmonies you can fudge a note here and there and even judges can't really tell unless they've personally played it before, which most haven't.

I definitely want to go back to Rach 1 some day because it's got that classic Rachmaninoff appeal but it's not very known. Playing all the Medtner concertos is also on my to-do-before-I-die list.

Moszkowski op. 3 !
It's probably too long but it sure deserves to be played.

I don't know, but if I ever make it to that stage in a competition, I am definitely playing Beethoven 5, because I really like it, and I think I can play it in a way that the audience will enjoy, too.

I think part of it, beyond just the orchestra rehearsal time is how the audience and even to some extent the pianist has certain "facts" ingrained.

People know the Rach 3 is difficult, they have heard it so many times, they know where the pianist might screw up. There are many concertos out there that are "better" or "harder" but they don't have the name recognition. Now one would assume in a competition these things would be known, but wouldn't the performers be picking their concertos based on what they have played? Or requested?

I also reserve the right that I may just be blowing steam from my butt.

I had mixed results with this. Some of the lesser-played concerti that I tried at competitions included Brahms 2, Ravel LH, and Barber. The trend seemed to be that the judges went for the more familiar pieces given the same standard of performance (although I did win with Brahms 2 and Barber once each). One time I lost to a really, really sub-par Tchaik because one of the judges questioned the difficulty level of the Barber Concerto (lmao) as compared to more standard repertoire. Another time, I remember that one of the judges remarked that "it's just easier for us to judge and agree upon the basics in Prokofiev, Rachmaninoff, and Tchaikovsky."

...in other words, as long as the right notes are there, it's a piece they know, and no one has to think about anything too much, you're good to go. So, yeah. This can be an issue.

I can see the Brahms 2 or Barber pulling a victory. The Barber concerto needs to be played more as is.

The Judge questioned the difficulty of the barber concerto? Did they not have eyes? or a working brain? God forbid they have to use that education.