Rach 3

Title

Although really cool, this feels like a series of disconnected virtuosic and showy passages with the only thing tieing them together into a coherent whole being the well known Rachmaninoff melody.  You seem to have an aptitude for theme and variations much like myself!  I love writing in the theme and variations form, but I often forget that theme and variations is actually just a compositional process and doesn't actually dictate any particular form besides just what the composer wants to imbue into it.  If the composer doesn't imbue their theme and variations piece with ideas that tie the piece together formally, such as having an introduction or a rondo type of structure with built-in recapitulations, then the piece can feel like a series of sparsely connected ideas.  Still, you're clearly a talented pianist-composer and I enjoy listening to your music!  Thanks for sharing.

Hello @Willy Didier,

Would you also provide the pdf score so that we can look into the details attentively to review more deeply?

I agree with @PeterthePapercomPoser that the piece is virtuosic but disconnected. For me theme and variation is not just a theme and its variations. The arrangement of the chronological order of the variations should be organic and the order should be meaningful. What is your intention of arranging the variations in this order? For me I feel like the variations are more or less arbitrarily arranged since it's called a Rhapsody anyway. It can be less meaningful if the order is carefully arranged.

I really love 1:53 with the lovely melody! I love your key change here and the Db major here reminds me of Rach's inversion treatment of Paganini's Caprice which is also in Db major.

I think the gap in 7:04 is too long though. The section following it does remind me the thick texture of Rach! 

Thx for sharing!

Henry

Hi Willy,

15 hours ago, Willy Didier said:

This 3 is my masterpieces and favorites...

I know your feeling, but even the great composers are criticized with their masterpieces. Beethoven's late quartets were deemed "indecipherable, uncorrected horrors" by Spohr. Wolf criticized Brahms that his melodies were banal. Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto was considered "long and pretentious". It's hard for others to have less positive views towards your own music, but I think that's a way for progress? Even if my view can be personal, I can say I'm honest and I hope it may help stimulate your thoughts!

15 hours ago, Willy Didier said:

"...Composed in 1879, when Brahms was 46, his two piano Rhapsodies are works of virtuosic drama and passion. Both fully illustrate the spontaneous and improvisatory character of the Rhapsody genre..."

I have played the two pieces before. Although there are indeed spontaneous and improvisatory character, Brahms definitely plans with great care, as you can see with the developing variations and use of motives in both of the pieces. At least to my understanding both of his rhapsodies are in extended ternary form (and I'm checking the edition PETERs version on IMSLP right now and confirm it) They are indeed masterpieces full of virtuosic drama and passion, but they are treated under great care and planning, as Brahms is probably the composer care for cohesion more than any other composer.

I love your piece, but it doesn't mean that I have to love it wholeheartedly and blindly, right? Beethoven's op,131 quartet is my all time favourite, but I can still find spots I don't agree on.

Henry

where da song