This piece fascinates me for some reason. I know it hasn't gotten the greatest reviews for lack of structure and whatnot, but I still love it. it's different. But I do however have a question. I ordered Kalmus' edition of the piece. am usually a fan of them, still am. but, it turns out that this is the first version of the piece. Meaning that the version most people hear is the revised version that Rachmaninoff edited later around 1917 to have better harmonies and making it more virtuoso. Where can I find this version as well? a good edition of it. I like the first version of course, no complaints, besides that fact that I can't find one recording of it, anywhere. yet.

Try Schirmer's No.1.

As to the recording, it is not difficult to find at all. Many complete sets are out there. To get you started: Rafael Orozco, Ashkenazy, Bernd Glemser, and Abbey Simon, etc. I have numerous other sets. My point is you should not have much problem in locating one. Try a search on Amazon you should also have some idea.

finding the 1st version of the concerto is the problem. I've found millions of the revised version.

Schirmer...

Ghindin recorded the first first on the Ondine label, with Ashkenasky conducting. I believe it's still in print.

The well-known Russian sheet music site has the sheet to both versions.

Max Harrison's excellent book "Rachmaninoff - Life, Works, Recordings" has some interesting comments about the two versions. He also cites Martyn's book "Rachmaninoff" (which I have not seen) for a detailed listing of the differences.

As with the 4th Concerto, I would hope the earlier version eventually becomes the norm in performance and recording. After all, the issue of the cuts in the 2nd Symphony and 3rd Concerto seems to have been resolved...

You know, the differences between the two versions of the first concerto are great enough for me to regard them as seperate works that share the same thematic material -- a similar but not as extreme a case as the two versions of Brahms's B major trio. Besides, the second version of the first dates from after the third concerto (if memory serves), and the giant leap in compositional craftsmanship can readily be heard when one compares the two. The "youthful" quality that many people who haven't listened to the first version hear in the revised version is really hogwash -- the first version really qualifies as "youthful", which means "youthful foibles" more than anything else in this case.
I agree with you heartily -- some of the most intersting passages (including some riotous tuttis in the outer movements) have been left out in the revised version. However, it's not just a matter of cuts. The first version's last movement doesn't have the almost-stereotypical-Rachmaninov "apotheosis" coda that was only added in the revision. And of course the second subject of the last movement changed from a "Dies Irae" variant to those fanfare triplets, which originally acted as counterpoint to the "Dies Irae." Knowing this makes the revised version sound somewhat thin in this particular passage.
It's great that someone has taken an interest in the first concerto, which I have a weakness for (along with the first version of the fourth -- my favorite Rachmaninov concerto).

That's a good point... also interesting to remind us of the Brahms B major trio.

BTW, if you want a prime example of a revision being in every sense "superior", listen to the two versions of Sibelius 5.

Rachmaninoff's first is one of my favorite concertos. The cadenza in the first movement is one of my all-time favorite cadenzas.

I haven't heard the first version, but which one do you prefer Janus, the first or the revised?

Revised version by far, Bassio. Though admittedly none of the few recordings of the first version make the best possible case for it.