Rachmaninov's (1873-1943) first symphony was doomed to failure. Composed in 1895, its premiere two years later began well enough, with the choice of Glazunov as its conductor. The concert though proved a catastrophe. The composer and critic, Cesar Cui, wrote that the symphony was like a programme piece depicting the seven plagues that befell Egypt. Other critics expressed similar opinions. Rachmaninov blamed Glazunov. “It's is astonishing how such a talented person as Glazunov could conduct my symphony so poorly. I'm not talking about his stick technique, but his musicality. He feels nothing when he conducts. It is as though he understood nothing from it at all.” A year later, Rachmaninov's wife recalled that Glazunov was drunk on the day of the concert. The failure so traumatised Rachmaninov that for three years, he barely set pen to compositional paper, and was tortured by such depression that he had to turn to medical help. His recovery was characterised by a flow of majestic works, among them the 2nd Suite (op 17) for two pianos, the G minor cello sonata (op 19) and of course, the 2nd piano concerto, op. 18) Years later, Rachmaninov blamed himself for the failure of the First Symphony. He called it “week, childish. patchy and bombastic.” These days, it is viewed more sympathetically. We find many original strokes in the composition. Its brutal gestures, the unstoppable flow of expression (especially in the Finale) are unprecedented in Russian music of the time. True, it occasionally strays from the point and is at times rather inflated. But its flexible rhythms, lyricism and economic exploitation of thematic material – which Cui characterised as the meaningless repetitions of insignificant ideas – prophesises Rachmaninov's later refinement of style and personality.