Keith Emerson’s Piano Concerto

Keith Emerson composed and performed an actual classical Piano Concerto in the 1977 album Works Vol. I, heavily influenced by his favourite 20th century classical composers, such as Prokofiev and Bartok, what do you think about ?

It was a great idea or a silly attempt to explore forbidden (for him) territories ?

ita_prog_fan wrote:   If you compare his composition to the concerts of the musicians who inspired him, honestly the work appears to be puerile (the orchestration was made by a exeperienced conductor because he was not able to make it by himself), but if you consider that Keith Emerson is not a classical pianist and doesn't have the long ad hard studies needed i think he should be praised for his courage. Seen by the side of prog rock he made a good job. If he's really working on a second concert (considering all the years passed by), maybe it will be better than the first... i'd like to listen to it !

Okay, I'll take the bait...What makes Keith's concerto "puerile"? I've heard the classic composers pieces (granted I didn't formally study them) and they don't sound any more "mature" or "non-puerile" than Keith's. So please, educate me, what am I not hearing that makes it substandard?

Here's a recent performance of Emerson's Piano Concerto

BTW Carl Palmer had written a percussion concerto for the Works project, but was never released at the time. It eventually emerged on Palmers retrospective "Do ya wanna play Carl?" album. I love it!!!!!!!

Well evidently some think its rateable.. the Australian Symphony Orchestra in Adelaide performed it as part of their program last year.  And I listened to their version.. and that made me cringe... so I'd much rather hear Keith do it.... a million times more.

He's been writing the second piano concerto for over 15 years now... don't doubt that its not finished... he's just having a few problems lately with sharing... 

Okay, I'll take the bait...What makes Keith's concerto "puerile"? I've heard the classic composers pieces (granted I didn't formally study them) and they don't sound any more "mature" or "non-puerile" than Keith's. So please, educate me, what am I not hearing that makes it substandard?

I really dont' want to educate you... or anyone else.

But if you want some details... here they are !

Style is incertain; themes are poorly developed or not developed at all (in some section is resembles Mozart's Musical Joke in F maj. dedicated to improvised composers); some musical gestures has been taken as they are form the composers i named before and simply put in the concert...

But, as i said before, Keith is NOT a classical composer either a classical painist, so it was good enough.

ita_prog_fan wrote: Okay, I'll take the bait...What makes Keith's concerto "puerile"? I've heard the classic composers pieces (granted I didn't formally study them) and they don't sound any more "mature" or "non-puerile" than Keith's. So please, educate me, what am I not hearing that makes it substandard? I really dont' want to educate you... or anyone else. But if you want some details... here they are ! Style is incertain; themes are poorly developed or not developed at all (in some section is resembles Mozart's Musical Joke in F maj. dedicated to improvised composers); some musical gestures has been taken as they are form the composers i named before and simply put in the concert... But, as i said before, Keith is NOT a classical composer either a classical painist, so it was good enough.

Again, who are you to say it was poorly developed or not developed at all... it not your taste that Keith set out to appease... it was his own!  He thought it was grand... and we all thought it was marvelous and completed,  By the way, I found no relation in sound or gesture to Mozart... and you didn't recognize Copland.... so I'm not impressed by your comments...

Just MHO...

thank you

and i've never said i don't like it !!!!!!!!!!