Academic literature on the topic 'Concertos (Violin with jazz ensemble)'

Background. Musical culture of Kharkiv has a rich history associated with the names of prominent musicians such as R. Genika, I. Slatin and others. But the creative work of our senior contemporaries, artists, who created in the second half of the XX and early XXI century, made a great influence on the formation of the modern musical face of Kharkiv, the state of professional music education, too. O. I. Litvinov, a composer, pianist (as well as accordion player, performer on wind instruments), conductor and arranger, is no doubt among those artists. However, the creativity of this outstanding musician, who was actually the founder of professional jazz education in Kharkiv, is not currently the subject of widespread discussion in contemporary Ukrainian musicology. There are few sources that would cover O. I. Litvinov’s life and career. For the first time, he is mentioned as the founder of pops’n jazz performance department in a print publication dedicated to the 85th anniversary of KhNUA named after I. P. Kotlyarevsky. In the same context, O. Litvinov’s name is found in O. Kononova’s essay on the evolution of music education in Kharkiv in the jubilee edition dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the University. There is a biographical article in this very anniversary publication. In the earlier anniversary edition “Pro Domo mea” (on the 90th anniversary of the institution) there is some information about O. Litvinov regarding the history of the jazz department creation. Basic biographical data are briefly presented in the article of I. O. Litvinova in the Encyclopedia of Modern Ukraine. A small booklet dedicated to the major milestones of O. Litvinov’s life and creative work was published in the KhNUA (then KhSUA) named after I. P. Kotliarevskyi to mark the 75th anniversary of the musician. There are also several publications devoted mainly to specific dates in the creative life of the maestro (concerts, anniversaries, etc.): by H. Derev’ianko, L. Lohvynenko, M. Dvirnyi, A. Moshna, I. Polska, and O. Sadovnikova. Among purely research works devoted to this striking personality are the Master’s work by Yu. N. Shikova, which was written under the guidance of І. І. Polska at Kharkiv State Academy of Culture. The purpose of the article is to systematize existing information on the life and creative path of the prominent Kharkiv musician, give a brief description of the main features of his performing and composing style. Methods. The work employs historicobiographical, analytical and comparative methods, as well as a genre-stylistic approach. Results. O. Litvinov was born on November 17, 1927 in Zaporozhye. He received his elementary education at a piano music school. From 1943 to 1951 he was in military service, participated in the World War II. After the war, he continued to study music at Kharkiv Music College named after B. Lyatoshynsky, later at the Composition Faculty of Kharkiv Conservatory. He was expelled from there because of his passion for jazz. From 1951 he continued his musical activity as an artist of the MIA Variety Orchestra (in Dnepropetrovsk), in 1955–1956 he was a soloist of the Sakhalin Oblast Philharmonic and Khabarovsk Regional Philharmonic. In 1956–1958 he was the leader of the variety band of the Palace of Culture for Food–Industry Workers, in 1958–1961 he was the leader of the concert band of the Palace of Culture for Builders. From 1961 to 1973, he was the director of his own collective – Honoured Variety Ensemble “Kharkivyanka” at Kharkiv Electromechanical Plant. In 1965 he received the title of Honored Artist of Ukraine, in 1978 – People’s Artist. From 1973 to 1978 – Artistic Director and Conductor of the “Donbass”, Honored Mining Ensemble in Donetsk; from 1978 to 1980 – assistant at the Department of Cultural Studies, director of the Jazz Orchestra at Kharkiv Institute of Law. Since 1980 he worked permanently at Kharkiv I. P. Kotliarevskyi State Institute of Arts: first as a senior lecturer, later as an associate professor of the Chamber Ensemble Department, then as a professor of the Orchestra Wind Instruments Department. Since 1994 he created and headed the Department of Variety Orchestra Instruments, and at the same time he directed the variety-symphony orchestra of Kharkiv State Academy of Culture, the violin ensemble of the National Academy of Law named after Yaroslav the Wise. Since 1999 O. Litvinov was a full member of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences of National Progress. In 2001 he became a diploma winner of the regional competition “Higher school of Kharkiv region – the best names” in the nomination “Head of Department”. In 2002 he was awarded the Honorary Medal of the Ministry of Culture and Arts of Ukraine. He died on March 15, 2007. O. Litvinov’s creative personality combines the image of composer, arranger, conductor, performer-multiinstrumentalist (apart from piano O. Litvinov played the accordion, organ, wind instruments, violin). O. Litvinov’s works employ the best achievements of world classics and Ukrainian academic music, in particular, the Kharkiv composition school, and embody the best features of jazz and, more broadly, variety music of the twentieth century. These stylistic origins often coexist organically in one piece by O. Litvinov. The performance style of O. Litvinov as a conductor is characterized by very clear, bright, emotional gestures, especially outstanding sounding of the orchestra, the ability to clearly show every change in the thematic development of the piece. The style of O. Litvinov’s arrangements was significantly influenced by the music of Hollywood films, the art of contemporary Soviet composers – Saulsky, Broslavsky, Pokrass, Dunaevskyi, jazz masters – Tsfasman, Utesov, Bernstein and others. Conclusions. O. Litvinov’s creative life was very bright and rich, and his musical activity was diverse and multifaceted. In the present works, the main focus is made more on the “polyphony” (according to A. Mizitova and A. Sadovnikova (2002, p. 17) of this life, its external events. Characteristics of the composer’s, performing, conducting styles of the artist are “inscribed” in this polyphony only as its “voices”. However, each of these voices needs, in our opinion, more detailed consideration. For example, O. Litvinov’s compositional heritage is very large, but only a few of his compositions are performed today and well known to the public. In fact, only one piece for violin ensemble (or for violin and piano), “Eternal Movement”, received true popularity among the performers and the public. Most other works are not published, and the fate of most scores is unclear. So, the direction of further research can be related to a more detailed study of some particular works of O. Litvinov that have survived as well as to deepening knowledge about his performing and pedagogical activity.

The concerto evidently appeals to HK Gruber, as symphonies do not. He has so far written four works that are unambiguously in this form: ‘…aus schatten duft gewebt…’, a concerto for violin and orchestra of 1977–8; the concerto for percussion and orchestra Rough Music (Rauhetöne) of 1982–3; Nebelsteinmusik, for solo violin and string orchestra, of 1988; and the Concerto for Cello and Chamber Orchestra of 1989. Ambiguous examples of the form are his early Concerto for Orchestra (1960–64) – concertos for orchestra are by definition ambiguous – and Frankenstein!!, his ‘pan–demonium’ (rather than ‘concerto’) for baritone chansonnier and orchestra (on children's rhymes by H.C. Artmann), finalized in 1977. Then there are four works which remain in manuscript (withdrawn from circulation): Concerto No. l for flute, vibraphone, xylophone and percussion (1961); Concerto No. 2 for tenor saxophone, double bass and percussion (1961); ‘furbass’ for double bass and orchestra; and an unsatisfactory forerunner of the violin concerto, Arien (1974–5). The symphony he has not touched; and one is tempted to see in this reliance on solo/ensemble confrontation an attempt to hold together the self–splintered, all too globally diversified language of the late 20th century by an eloquent soloist's sheer persuasiveness, by musical force, so to speak, the soloist being dramatized as a kind of Atlas. In the same way Gruber's recourse to popular songs and idioms of ‘light music’ in these works can seem like a desperate attempt to find a tonal prop and sanction for a language so pervasively threatened by tone–deafness and gobbledygook.

Background. In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in research of global and pivotal changes of world’s sound image in musical art, this shift being incarnated in a tendency towards conception of new sound images of music instruments, which would be simultaneously relevant to new sound realm and being capable of “encapsulating” culture’s memory and experience. The domra, which is one of the carriers of this cultural memory, has its sound image transfigured in dimensions of academic, folklore, jazz and stage types of performance traditions in the works by V. Solomin. The objectives of this study to reveal ways of creative self-identification of V. Solomin as well as of conception of domra’s new sound image in his works. The complex of the analytical methods (analysis, synthesis, comparative studies), as well as the historical-typological approach was used in this research. Results of the research. Specific of world’s modern sound image is marked by conceptualization of a sound, destruction of established hierarchy of means of musical expression and new understanding of statuses of musical instruments. These features transpire in creation of new sonic images of musical instruments, including the domra, whose evolution during XX century was connected with the academic tradition of music. On the verge of XX–XXI centuries ample transformations of instrument’s sound image, related to diffusion, intertextuality and plurality of modern culture, are stamped in the creativity of those connected to the Ukrainian domra art. In V. Solomin’s creativity the sound image of the domra is characterized by universality, as in different forms of performance (such as solo, ensemble, orchestral) this instrument appeals to stylistic layers of folklore, classical academic heritage of various cultural epochs as well as to new kinds of art, the one of stage and jazz. Classical musical pieces being interpreted for the domra by V. Solomin allow to broaden vistas of perception of this instrument since they represent “known” content in new and somewhat unexpected timbre variant, thus creating re-intonation and re-semantization of content. Personal re-intonation and re-semantization in the interpretation of J. S. Bach’s works, carried out by V. Solomin, relies on modification of articulation and new understanding of source’s timbre characteristics; it is a complex intertwining of pre-Baroque, Baroque and modern performance art, as well as of lute, violin and domra traditions, and of modern and academic layers of musical performing. Innovation of domra’s sound image implies accretion of its repertoire with “modern classics” as well. V. Solomin’s interpretation of A. Schnittke’s “Suite in Old Style” might be seen as “condensed” reincarnation of spiritual values, manipulation with signs of the Past (for instance, Baroque era), crucial for postmodern culture. Another aspect of innovation of the domra’s sound image lies in the fact that V. Solomin adds to its repertoire pieces, not quite traditional for its national and stylistic appeal. In this regard, interpretation of I. Albéniz’s “Asturias” becomes multi-layered combination of signs, typical for different cultures. This transcription manifests stylistic mobility of domra’s sound image as well as its capability to adapt to technical devices, stemming from other instruments. The fact that V. Solomin created two bands, “Solominband” (2004) and “DomRa” (2009), proves ability of the domra’s sound image to undergo drastic stylistic modifications. The activity of “Solominband” (including a project in partnership with the singer Katia Chilly) and “DomRa” demonstrated author’s intentional orientation towards synthesis of authentic tradition and jazz, desire to reveal timbre colors of the domra, special attention to the sound as a carrier of intonation sense, understanding of the domra’s leading role in the context of ensemble performance while simultaneously proclaiming “performer’s equality”, its reflexivity and co-dependence from other participants of the ensemble. Expansion of timbre, articulatory, dynamical and technical “aura” of the domra, achieved by usage of its electric variant, allowed the author to create large-scaled multi-layered synthesis of cultures: authentic (Ukrainian, Celtic, Latin-American), academic, jazz and rock. Electric variant of the domra enriched expressive and technical possibilities of the domra art with now ways of playing, while also added variety to timbre-sonic layers of modern jazz and rock, thus becoming a basis for new stylistic mixes. As an example of such mix, we can regard V. Solomin’s versions of modern pop-music. Program “The Rain”, based on interpretations of songs by Sting (G. M. T. Sumner) is marked by synthesis of folklore, jazz and pop-music (which is relevant to pluralistic foundations of modern multi-culture); by representation of sound image of the domra as of the instrument, capable of recreation of vocal cantilena; by rich palette of technical and expressive devices; by functional versatility of the domra, acquiring both solo and accompaniment roles, as well as status of bearer of a melodic line and stimulus of intonation and rhythmic movement, instigator of jazz-like “improvisatory competition” etc. Conclusions. The present results are significant in understanding that creativity of V. Solomin foreshadows new vectors of the domra art’s evolution and re-semantization of its sound image. The domra’s modulation into spheres of academic musical art, pop and rock culture, authentic performance and jazz results in new, culturally polyphonic sound image of this instrument and its new status of the poly-functional multi-stylistic mediator between cultural dimensions, of concentrated, timbre-sonic expressive, and conceptually flexible carrier of cultural memory. Perspectives of further research lie in examination of features, characteristic for interpretations of the domra’s innovative sound image by Ukrainian musicians who work in the sphere of the domra music, including jazz, pop and rock music.

This article explores the features of the mutual influence of musical and verbal texts in the works of Dina Rubina, the features of their interaction, the system of key-notes in various works and its functions. The principle of the influence of musical form on the compositional structure of a verbal text is disclosed. From these positions, the novel “Parsley Syndrome” is analyzed and a hypothesis is put forward on the reasons for choosing Jango Reinhardt’s jazz composition “Minor Swing” as the leitmotif of the novel. Also, the intersection points of the two texts are indicated both in the symbolic, and in the ideological and artistic part. The figurative structure of the novel and the similarity of the fate of the central characters with the fate of the author of “Minor Swing” are considered. The development of one of the main themes of Dina Rubina is shown: the continuity of the fate of the family and the clan, the mystical connection of the past and the present, the fatal inevitability of the logic of fate belonging to one genus, the talent and fortitude of the heroes of the novel, which allows one to overcome the vicissitudes of fate. The theme “doll-man” is highlighted, relevant for the novel “Parsley Syndrome”, its variations and forms. Keywords: musical text, verbal text, jazz, ensemble, big band, chamber ensemble, violin, guitar, literature, book, leitmotif, system of characters, theatre, puppet, marionette, animate-inanimate, symbolism of a puppet

Thesis (Ph. D.--Music)--University of California, San Diego, 2003.
Vita. For flute and violin with ensemble of clarinet, violin, viola, violoncello, piano, oboe, bassoon, and double bass. Performance instructions precede score.

As Capellmeister, Bach was in charge of all musical matters at the court of Cöthen. Although the prince’s Reformed religious faith ruled out the performance of church cantatas, Bach did compose occasional vocal works for special occasions. His chief works of this period, however, were suites, sonatas, and concertos for the court instrumental ensemble, as well as keyboard music for his family and pupils. Among the famous compositions composed or completed at Cöthen and discussed in this chapter are the inventions, Well-Tempered Clavier, organ sonatas, cello suites, sonatas and partitas for violin and flute, and Brandenburg Concertos.