No need to dizcuss no.1.
Have been going listening to the Concert Fantasy and no.3. Surprised the concert fantasy is as neglected as it is. It has a few big Tchaik tunes and great pianistic display (I think the longest cadenza in the rep?). The tambourine transition in the last mov is genius.
3 I’m less convinced by. Not particularly memorable and quite repetitive as if he’s improvising an idea at the piano but get’s stuck.
I do think 2 would be a nice every now and again alternative to 1 in concert (If they can get past the somewhat banal opening tune).
Brew and I talked about 3 a couple of months ago. It’s my favourite Tchai PC, thanks to 
Not familiar with the Concert Fantasy, and I can’t stand 2!
Jebus, I just realised that emoticon is da gav.
Just listened to Mewton Wood and Pletnev playing 3. There’s some gorgeous stuff from each, but the material seems weak to me. However, I’ll give a go.
Is the Taneyev ‘completion’ worth a hearing?
Tchaik should have called the Concert Fantasy a piano concerto, it would have gotten played more. Same thing with Debussy’s Fantasie. They are no less a concerto than Liszt’s second, for example.
I don’t know what it is with Gavrilov, but it just clicked when I first heard it. My introduction to the piece was otherwise Pletnev as well. I think it’s that Gavrilov is so intense musically and precise pianistically. He commands attention, as it were.
Yes, publius is surely right about the CF. I have heard it, but don’t remember anything from it. I suppose it’s one of those pieces in hibernation still waiting for me to discover it, like PC3 was until a few years ago. Some day my prince will come?
Really? I tend to think people are off put by generic names. Like Haydn names symphonies vs not.
Perhaps today. But I think in years past, these pieces would have had a better chance of entering the active repertoire, which then impacts the present times. Stuff gets played now because it’s been played before. The impact is especially pronounced on layman audiences. People like the warhorses, and to get that status it needs to have been played a lot. Quality is important, so is the perception of the piece. Imagine advertising a concert leading off with Debussy’s Piano Concerto no. 1. The same thing with symphonies and tone poems, or piano sonatas and whatever. Some of Beethoven’s solo non-“sonata” works are much better than some of the canonical 32, yet because it’s a “sonata” by Beethoven it gets programmed and recorded as part of a cycle, whereas a work like the Fantasia much less so. Not that I know better than Beethoven, but it’s more a comment about un-nuanced audiences (and performers).
I really like the Debussy Fantasie, even if he didn’t. I heard Andsnes play it live recently, and definitely think more pianists should take it up. As for the Tchaik concerti, I think the 2nd and 3rd should definitely be played more, but honestly I’d rather see pianists take up either the Rubinstein 3rd or 4th instead.
Agreed, those two Rubinsteins are excellent concertos. Hofmann naturally shines here, but I don’t think I’ve heard a bad performance of either of them. That fifth concerto, though. I dunno. I wish there were a first rate pianist who played that work so I could better judge it.
Da RUB 5 randomly dedick8ed to da 
But zlitely sheeyat 