I was just thinking, and I asked myself a question:
-How do we make concert program?
My question may be unclear, but for example , my concert program is:
-Sonata for violin and piano
-Bach 's mov from son. and partitas.(usually Gavotte, allemanda 1&2, chaconne , and sometimes the prelude)
I'm usually playing a hard piece(Brahms& Schumann sonatas, Well-known concertos, Bach chaconne)and playing an easy piece(Vivaldi concertos, allemanda, or harder: Schubert sonatina, Schubert trio, which is hard)
Today, the convention is that violin concertos are
While I agree with Lydia about current professional convention, one does kind of wonder what the rationale is and whether it's really justified.
I didn't know that it isn't good to put violin concerto with piano reduction.
I think the Romances would be fine as they're not classified as "concertos"
The Romances are great on recital programs. I don't know that I'd necessarily want to program both of them. Recitals tend to benefit from more variety.
I disagree with Paul: There are sound reasons not to play concertos with piano in performance.
Albrecht wrote, "A piano can not credibly substitute an orchestra, especially for romantic works with big orchestras."
Again, if the recital is for your friends, relatives, and fellow students to come and hear YOU play the VIOLIN then hire a piano accompanist and play the pieces that you think put your VIOLIN playing in the best light. If it's a recital for you to impress a gaggle of academic music snobs, then don't play anything written for violin and orchestra (or violin and harpsichord for that matter).
Christian, I disagree about the things that have an orchestra reduction. Note that Tzigane, which was in your list of examples, is normally a work with orchestra (granted, Ravel wrote a piano accompaniment before he orchestrated it). The short Saint-Saens works do show up on professional recitals -- I&RC, Havanaise, etc. As do the Sarasate works with orchestra, like Zigeunerweisen (I am not sure if Sarasate also composed the piano reduction of the orchestral part, but he did record it with piano himself).
Anne-Sophie Mutter just performed the Romance in G at Carnegie Hall, I believe. It was programmed with an orchestra so therein lies the difference, perhaps?
If the original work with orchestra has a nice dialogue between soloist and orchestra, and the piano reduction is well done, and the pianist is good, then I don't see why a nice dialogue between soloist and pianist cannot ensue. The pianist playing a piano reduction is not necessarily reduced to a mere accompanist. I can see though how such prejudices are formed; the notion of "pianist-accompanist" got ingrained in professional musicians by doing many required recitals during their student years at conservatory, where the pianists are also students or teachers who "have to" do this in addition to their many other commitments. Then, finally, to end this rant, there are very fine pianists who have specialized in accompanying singers, e.g., Schubert or Mahler songs, and, while they are truly accompanists, they are still among the finest musicians around. So even if you are an accompanist, this is nothing to be ashamed of. In conclusion, the prejudices indicated by Christian, while existing, are not very well substantiated. To put it more in Paul's terminology, let's not let snobs tell us what to do and what not. (Easier said than done when you are financially dependent on these snobs.)
The fact that we're coming to different conclusions about the Beethoven Romances than we are about concerto movements tells me that the issue is really one that boils down to tradition. If history has taught us anything, it's that tradition is usually just about the stupidest and least defensible reason for doing anything.
However a professional recital that is 4 sonatas usually is a bore.
Christian, on the contrary, you are thanked for having pitched in this discussion.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.