Beginner's Concerto

I'm thinking of entering my school's Concerto/Aria competition which is set for next Spring. The requirements are either a movement from a concerto or an aria. This would be the first time I've ever attempted something major so I don't want to go in over my head. This pretty much rules out Romantic and later pieces and a lot of the very popular pieces. I'm thinking about either studying the Haydn Dmajor concerto for piano or the Bach BWV 1052. I decided against Mozart because his works would be far too familiar to the audience and they may be biased to certain interpretations.

I want to try the earlier works because a lot of students stick to the "tougher" Rachmaninoff, Bartok and the like. The Classical and Baroque are deceptively simple and so they give poor expression during recitals.

Am I going about this the right way or not?

Which should I work on?

Any suggestions? Ideas? Alternatives?

What about something by Mozart?

Depending on your chops, Kabalevsky's third is a really good piece with a catchy tune. Not too hard, either.

But don't a lot of kids play Kabalevsky?

I decided against Mozart because his works would be far too familiar to the audience and they may be biased to certain interpretations.

Mozart's music is never too familiar and by the way, that's a very horrible statement to make. You might as well just quit.

The Classical and Baroque are deceptively simple and so they give poor expression during recitals.

Such a general statement is extremely ignorant and shows you really need to learn a little bit more about Classical and Baroque music. Mozart's 9-3, 11-3, 14-3, 16-3, 19-1, 19-3, 20-3, and 24-1 are all very easy and extremely expressive. Some works definitely can be deceptively simple, but that has no effect on the expression and brilliance of the quality and beauty of the work itself. Haydn's 11th P. Cto. (Mvmt. 1) is very nice. Mvmt. 3 of 11 is also interesting, but on the whole, not the best choice.

Why not play Rachmaninov's 3rd? :P

How about Grieg's? :P

Rachmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto is nice also, I played it in Orchestra...I like it.:)

How did you play that?

He was in the orchestra, not the soloist.

Good call.

He was in the orchestra, not the soloist.

Yeah, I was not the soloist, the soloist was the Piano instructor (P.H.D in Piano) from UCLA (University of California of Los Angeles):huh:

Do you have a recording?

Do you have a recording?

NO Sorry.

I think this is the site...(PD Music) I had one where it gave you alot of PD music Free.

Free Sheet Music Downloads - Find Thousands

The Sheet Music Archive Single Listing Page

Concerto 3 and 2...and much more:)

Mozart's music is never too familiar and by the way, that's a very horrible statement to make. You might as well just quit.

Such a general statement is extremely ignorant and shows you really need to learn a little bit more about Classical and Baroque music. Mozart's 9-3, 11-3, 14-3, 16-3, 19-1, 19-3, 20-3, and 24-1 are all very easy and extremely expressive. Some works definitely can be deceptively simple, but that has no effect on the expression and brilliance of the quality and beauty of the work itself. Haydn's 11th P. Cto. (Mvmt. 1) is very nice. Mvmt. 3 of 11 is also interesting, but on the whole, not the best choice.

Why not play Rachmaninov's 3rd? :)

I think you may have misunderstood me. What I meant was not that the pieces themselves aren't expressive but it's BECAUSE they are also simple that a lot of students don't pay too much attention to them and so don't bring out the full beauty but instead giving technically perfect performances without "soul".

Also, I'm sorry but even though I thoroughly enjoy Mozart, his works are pretty much standard in competitions and to be original with Mozart as well as please the crowd may be daunting for a first timer.

How can you say that they are all simple? Such a general statement speaks of a stereotypical mind. Some baroque and classical I would consider much more challenging that most romantic. And classical and baroque can be played expressively without losing touch of what the composer wanted.

the pieces themselves aren't expressive but it's BECAUSE they are also simple

I listed some of Mozart's most complex pieces of music he wrote in the entirety of his life in my previous post and you're calling them simple? Simple and easy definitely are not the same thing. When I said easy, I just meant they we're all that challenging pianistically.

that a lot of students don't pay too much attention to them and so don't bring out the full beauty . . . without "soul" . . . to be original with Mozart as well as please the crowd may be daunting for a first timer.

You're worried too much about being perfect. You don't have to have the performance of the century to do very well and to be greatly appreciated. If there is beauty in the music and you play it well, people will try to appreciate the music, especially if they are students!. It's up to you to pick a beautiful piece and play it well. Originality is always a challenge, but as I said, if you can't handle it, you might as well just quit. You should be just as eager to play with originality your first time as your last. Of course you'll get better at it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at all.

If you're saying Mozart demands much originality, you're wrong. If you can technically master a movement of one of his piano concertos (certainly not a big deal depending on the choice), you're more than halfway there. Adding originality to Mozart is difficult considering you actually have to play your interpretation! :) --but you need to think about the music and make your interpretation away from the piano. Whatever you choose, you have to fall in love with, and play as such otherwise you'll leave with a red suit (depending on the fruits of the vendors outside :D).

oh, I see... my "simple" = your "easy"

I never expect to be perfect anyway. Memorable is better ( as long as it's a good memorable)

Play well and you'll win half of the audience's affection. Love playing and you'll get the other half as well.

Play whatever you feel suits you, not what others tell you. :huh:

again, I repeat myself so often in these posts, but...

what does your piano teacher say?

THAT should be the person who is suggesting works within your grasp.

As for the competition in which you want to participate, it also depends on the level of that competition. Is this going to be a High School orchestra? A professional orchestra?

If it's the former, well, you won't pick something like Prokoviev's 2nd concerto because, well.. they'll never be able to PLAY it anyways.

If it's the latter, then a Bach keyboard concerto is not as wise a choice. Not because it is in any way lesser music, but it's a waste of a symphony orchestra. Very rarely do finalists in competitions perform Bach keyboard concerti. It happens. But it's rare.

Pick a concerto you can PLAY.

When is this competition? in a month? a year? only your teacher knows if you have time to learn a piece in whatever time you have.

****

As for the question of "bias" and Mozart.. well, you should probably know that ALL the judges in competitions generally know ALL of the keyboard repertoire pretty well. So chances of you choosing something they are unfamiliar with are slim. Mozart isn't any better known than any other concerto.

I'm not saying that if you showed up with the Corigliano piano concerto, or Dello Joio's Fantasy and Variations, you might get a few judges who didn't know the pieces... but anything else is pretty standard.

A concerto competition generally is to select someone with technical abilities. So a Bach concerto, while not in and of itself an "easy" peice to play, isn't exactly a keyboard "showcase". The range on the instrument is more limited and dynamics and expression are also limited (by the simple fact that it's not "piano" music). Anything you do with a Bach concerto could be poorly seen as "modernized", which is MORE likely to be badly seen by judges.

Pick a piece that is actually WRITTEN FOR the piano.

What about something by Mozart?

I am not an expert by any means, but I have read and heard that many of Mozart's early works (say before he was 12) were actually variations of pieces done by lessor and unknown composers.

I am not an expert by any means, but I have read and heard that many of Mozart's early works (say before he was 12) were actually variations of pieces done by lessor and unknown composers.

I've never heard of that.....but he could always do a later piano concerto.

I am not an expert by any means, but I have read and heard that many of Mozart's early works (say before he was 12) were actually variations of pieces done by lessor and unknown composers.

Piano concerti 1-4 were not his own except for the slow movement of 1 which scholars believe is his. All the rest of his concerti are his. I wouldn't say many/most of his earlier works were variations, but there were quite a few.

Corbin, have you heard all of his (Mozart's) piano concerti?

Is the Bach D minor concerto managable for a pianists first big piece?