Bob Draper wrote:

>I am steadily downgrading my opinion of Rachmaninov.  His symphonies
>aren't up to much and others on this list have said that the piano
>concertos are poorly structured.

Those "others" have likely already told us of the deficient structure of
Chopin's concertos and the one by Schumann.

Although I don't listen to Rachmaninov as often as I listen to Bach,
Handel, Mozart, Beethoven, Shostakovich, etc., I've always held
Rachmaninov's piano works in high esteem.  One can talk of structure and
other technical aspects of composition, but millions of listeners have
been enthralled by the *3* piano w/orchestra works.

Bob also mentioned the "backward looking" nature of Rachmaninov's music.
I don't dispute that, but since I love music written at least 3 centuries
ago, I never consider this a factor of significance.  This is music, not
a "think tank" for future strategies.

Lastly, I don't find Rachmaninov an "eclectic" composer; I like him too
much to put that tag on him.  Also, his music is quite distinctive, and
eclectic composers are the opposite of distinctive.  Rachmaninov's music
is, for me, late romantic to the core.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]