One of my most favourite piano concertos, full of wonderful melodies, surprising harmonies and just splendid music in general. Thank you for sharing it, it should be performed and listened to so much more over the world, this music is superb!
Interesting - I didn't eve know Leschetizky wrote a piano concerto. But if he threw it in the fire and then regretted doing that, how come we have it now? Did he remember it and reconstruct the score again? Or did he just write a different piano concerto?
Perhaps a copyist's score was made, or orchestral parts? This is how a lot of other formerly lost pieces were recovered, such as Rachmaninoff's Symphony no. 1 and the 1872 version of Tchaikovsky's Symphony no. 2.
Evidently, he left a will to have it destroyed upon his death, and even though he told one of his students that he burned it, he never personally burned it. The manuscript we have was signed by the composer. It seems that whomever he entrusted to destroy it decided not to.
@@polishscoresThank goodness they decided not to - it would have been lost for ever. I really don't understand composers who destroy their own work, or order it destroyed after their death. More often than not. the music in question is still really good, even if it never got published, or never gained quite the same fame as their better-known work. If Chopin's wishes to have all unpublished manuscripts burned upon his death had been fulfilled, we would be without, for instance, the wonderful Nocturne no. 19 in E minor, which is one of my favourite Chopin nocturnes. Evidently it is believed to be an early work written in his teens, yet its harmony seems so subtle that for a while after I got to know it, I really believed it was a very late work, as indicated by its opus number of 72 (no. 1, I think), and its Nocturne number of 19. In contrast, Nocturne no. 20 in C# minor is obviously (to my mind) an early work, and could never be seen as late. While I don't consider it one of Chopin's better nocturnes, I would still not want it destroyed. And we can only groan over the loss of Sibelius's 8th Symphony, which Sibelius was apparently seen burning, one page after another. I bet it was simply stunning, Sibelius's own doubts notwithstanding. (It's not known if it was completed, nor how much of it had actually been written - but it does seem that at least significant portions of it had been.) I have composed music myself, and I have not been pubished, and nor am I likely ever to be. But let's just suppose I had been, and had at least something of a public reputation. I have early works composed by myself that I would never publish, yet I will not destroy them, and I don't mind if they are found after I die. Even if I had a reputation, I would not be worried about early works tarnishing it. I don't think composers need to be ashamed of their early efforts.
There was a time when I remembered this is one of the most awful piano concerto ever……until last few days when I listened again, realizing I totally wronged it.
I listened again. It is not bad, but definitely not a very good one. It is just so repetitive, and the core motive is in the silly harmonic minor I-V7-I progression.
Between the Schumann Piano Concerto on the one end and Rubinstein's 4th and the Grieg on the other, if this concerto had been published, it would have been eclipsed very quickly in spite of its merits.
Mieliśmy zdolnych kompozytorów
FINALLY SOMEONE DID THIS, THANK YOU
yw :)
One of my most favourite piano concertos, full of wonderful melodies, surprising harmonies and just splendid music in general. Thank you for sharing it, it should be performed and listened to so much more over the world, this music is superb!
'Salon music'.....Hardly....It's Great......BRAVO from Mexicy City!
Interesting - I didn't eve know Leschetizky wrote a piano concerto. But if he threw it in the fire and then regretted doing that, how come we have it now? Did he remember it and reconstruct the score again? Or did he just write a different piano concerto?
Perhaps a copyist's score was made, or orchestral parts? This is how a lot of other formerly lost pieces were recovered, such as Rachmaninoff's Symphony no. 1 and the 1872 version of Tchaikovsky's Symphony no. 2.
Evidently, he left a will to have it destroyed upon his death, and even though he told one of his students that he burned it, he never personally burned it. The manuscript we have was signed by the composer. It seems that whomever he entrusted to destroy it decided not to.
@@polishscoresThank goodness they decided not to - it would have been lost for ever. I really don't understand composers who destroy their own work, or order it destroyed after their death. More often than not. the music in question is still really good, even if it never got published, or never gained quite the same fame as their better-known work.
If Chopin's wishes to have all unpublished manuscripts burned upon his death had been fulfilled, we would be without, for instance, the wonderful Nocturne no. 19 in E minor, which is one of my favourite Chopin nocturnes. Evidently it is believed to be an early work written in his teens, yet its harmony seems so subtle that for a while after I got to know it, I really believed it was a very late work, as indicated by its opus number of 72 (no. 1, I think), and its Nocturne number of 19. In contrast, Nocturne no. 20 in C# minor is obviously (to my mind) an early work, and could never be seen as late. While I don't consider it one of Chopin's better nocturnes, I would still not want it destroyed.
And we can only groan over the loss of Sibelius's 8th Symphony, which Sibelius was apparently seen burning, one page after another. I bet it was simply stunning, Sibelius's own doubts notwithstanding. (It's not known if it was completed, nor how much of it had actually been written - but it does seem that at least significant portions of it had been.)
I have composed music myself, and I have not been pubished, and nor am I likely ever to be. But let's just suppose I had been, and had at least something of a public reputation. I have early works composed by myself that I would never publish, yet I will not destroy them, and I don't mind if they are found after I die. Even if I had a reputation, I would not be worried about early works tarnishing it. I don't think composers need to be ashamed of their early efforts.
There was a time when I remembered this is one of the most awful piano concerto ever……until last few days when I listened again, realizing I totally wronged it.
I listened again. It is not bad, but definitely not a very good one. It is just so repetitive, and the core motive is in the silly harmonic minor I-V7-I progression.
Between the Schumann Piano Concerto on the one end and Rubinstein's 4th and the Grieg on the other, if this concerto had been published, it would have been eclipsed very quickly in spite of its merits.