Academic literature on the topic 'Symphonies (Cello with orchestra)'

LEES: Symphonies Nos. 2, 3 and 51; Etudes for piano and orchestra2. 1Staatsphilharmonie Rheinland-Pfalz c. Stephen Gunzenhauser, 2James Dick (pno), Texas Festival Orchestra c. Robert Spano. Albany TROY 564/565 (2-CDset).LEES: Passacaglia. PERSICHETTI: Symphony No 4. DAUGHERTY: Philadelphia Stories; Hell's Angels. Oregon Symphony c. James De Preist. Delos DE 3291.FLAGELLO: Symphony No. 1; Theme, Variations and Fugue; Sea Cliffs; Intermezzo. Slovak Radio Symphony Orchestra c. David Amos. Naxos 8.559148.HOVHANESS: Symphony No 22, City of Light1; Cello Concerto2. 2Janos Starker (vlc), Seattle Symphony c. 1Alan Hovhaness, 2Dennis Russell Davies. Naxos 8.559158.HOVHANESS: Symphonies: No 2, Mysterious Mountain; No 50, Mount St Helens; No 66, Hymn to Glacier Peak; Storm on Mt Wildcat, op.2 no.2. Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra c. Gerard Schwarz. Telarc CD-80604.

Fifteen years ago, Nicolas Slonimsky wrote of Benjamin Lees in Tempo: ‘At a time when so many otherwise valiant composers are star-crossed and complain of malign neglect, Benjamin Lees rises “in excelsis” in the musical firmament’. And so he has continued since, with many commissions and numerous major works to his credit, matched by frequent performances in the United States. It is a time that has seen the creation of his Fourth and Fifth Symphonies, a set of Variations for Piano and Orchestra, a Concerto for Brass Choir and Orchestra, a Double Concerto for Piano, Cello and Orchestra, at least four other orchestral compositions of substantial scale, and the Third and Fourth String Quartets. All of these have contributed to his continuing high profile in the American musical scene. When one surveys Lees's entire corpus of music over the last four decades, one sees an impressive range of works, achievements and awards. Such pieces as the Violin Concerto (1958), Third Symphony (1969) and Concerto for String Quartet and Orchestra (1965), all commercially recorded, stand out as landmarks not only of his own music but of postwar American music generally. His style has continued to evolve in recent years and whilst his hallmark is still his adherence to form and structure, he has become more concerned with orchestral sonority and, without becoming explicitly programmatic, practises his art within an ever-widening sound spectrum and colouristic palette. He has always possessed a strongly individual personality, and the ‘Lees Sound’ is unquestionably unique, even through his exposition and development of musical ideas-and the technique of continual evolution which he favours at present-derive, at source, from his most important early musical teacher: George Antheil.

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.

With the death of Joonas Kokkonen in October of 1996, Finland lost one of its most important post-World War II composers. Almost certainly, Kokkonen is most widely known outside Finland for his 1975 opera Viimeiset kiusaukset (Tlie Last Temptations). Yet his orchestral compositions such as the Cello Concerto (1969), the song cycle Lintuijen Tuonela (The Hades of the Birds, 1958–59), the Requiem (1981), the chamberorchestra work …Durch einen Spiegel… 1977), or such chamber works as the Piano Quintet (1953) or the String Quartets Nos.l (1959) and 3 (1976) demonstrate that masterpieces may be found in virtually every genre of Kokkonen's output. (Oddly, piano music represents a small and minor position in Kokkonen's oeuvre – a surprising fact given his accomplishments as a pianist.)

At the relatively young age of 43 (which his schoolboyish looks nonetheless belie), Kalevi Aho is one of the best-known of Finnish composers, with a substantial corpus of music to his credit – seven symphonies and other orchestral pieces, two operas and several smaller vocal works, three concertos (for violin, cello and for piano), and a healthy amount of chamber and instrumental music. I visited him in Helsinki last summer, in the offices of the Helsinki Festival, where he has a hand in the planning of the programmes, and remarked first on the richness and sheer vigour of Finnish musical life; anyone visiting Finland will be struck by the fact that it seems to have an awful lot of composers.

Ch.-M. Widor (1844–1937) inscribed his name in the history of French music primarily as an author of organ works (10 Organ Symphonies, 1872–1900, in particular). But other genre branches of his creativity (symphonic, chamber-instrumental, chamber-vocal, operatic, choral) remains less famous for wide public. This quite vast layer is mostly not studied in musical science. However, at the recent time the interest is somewhat growing both among musicologists (A. Thomson, E. Krivitskaya, M. R. Bundy), and among the performers, which confi rms the relevance of this article. The objectives of this study are to consider compositions by Ch.-M. Widor (Piano Concerto No.1, Fantasy, Piano Concerto No.2) both in terms of features of individual creator style and context of concert branch history in France. Information about works is supplemented by the analysis of the basic musical text parameters. Ch.-M. Widor graduated the Brussels Conservatory, where he was studied from 1859 to 1863 – in classes of organ (J.-N. Lemmens) and composition (F.-J. Fetis). At 1860s, the young man was visiting Paris. Soon he was acquainted with C. Saint-Saens, which infl uenced Ch.-M. Widor not only in terms of his executive career turn, but also was etalon of instrumental writing. It seems that the writing of instrumental Concertos for violin (ор. 26, 1877), cello (ор. 41, 1877), and piano (ор. 39, 1876) in many ways is owed by C.Saint-Saens and the impulse to French music of the 1870s given by him. Piano Concerto No.1 f-moll by Ch.-M.Widor was well appreciated by the contemporaries of the composer. In fi rst movement (Allegro con fuoco) the active narrative is combining with predominantly lyrical mood. It passes in constant pulsation without any whimsical tempo deviations, as well as without cadenza using. Contemplative and philosophical meditations are concentrated at the second movement (Andante religioso). The exposition of ideas is embodied in oppositions of characters, concentrated and depth in front of light and joyous. By the way, a little similar can be found in Andante sostenuto quasi adagio of Piano Concerto No.1 (published in 1875) by C. Saint-Saens. The cycle is crowned with a lively scherzo fi nal with elegant dotted rhythm using. On the whole we can say that the Piano Сoncerto No.1 by Ch.-M. Widor purposefully continues the traditions of C. Saint-Saens. This is noticeable in the clarity of the structure, emphatic melody, and also in some specifi c features – the avoidance of long-term solo cadenzas and the absence of expanded orchestra tutti’s, as well as the laconicism of development section at the fi rst movement. Echoes of F. Liszt and C. Franck can be heard in Fantasy As-dur op. 62 for piano and orchestra (1889, dedicated to I. Philipp). Ch.-M. Widor shows interest in this genre type as many other French authors at 1880–1890s. In work there are many counterpoint and variation elements, which is due to author’s mastery of organ-polifonic writing. In our opinion, eclectic combinations of the main subject in the spirit of F. Liszt – R. Wagner with oriental saucy theme at the end of composition are quite in the style of C. Saint-Saens. Piano Concerto No.2 c-moll (1905) is standing out with its clear attachment to the late-romantic line. It is somewhat out of the general context of genre existence in France, especially when comparing with signifi cantly more traditional Piano Concertos by B. Godard (No.2, 1894), C. Saint-Saens (No.5, 1896), T. Dubois (No.2, 1897), A. Gedalge (1899), J. Massenet (1902). This manifests itself in appeal to fateful gloomy spirit, abundance of dark paints in the sound, the complication of the tonal-harmonic language, increased expressivity, psychologization. Here are found more fi ne-tooth application of timbre orchestral potential (in comparison with the Piano Concerto No.1), as well as increasing of orchestra importance upon the whole. This is paradoxical, but its performing tradition has developed not in the best way, so that nowadays this remarkable work is very rarely heard at concert halls. In our time, the author’s creativity is a real terra incognita that encompasses a lot of hidden masterpieces. Results of the research bring to light that examined works by composer are outstanding illustrations of French romantic music. Ch.-M. Widor is an example of original talent that continues the late Romanticism line in France at the end of 19th and fi rst third of the 20th century, together with other authors – L. Vierne, V. d’Indy, A. Magnard, F. Schmitt. His works for piano and orchestra quite deserve to become on a par with recognized masterpieces, included in the concert repertoire of pianists and orchestras by different countries of the world. The perspectives of the further research are defi ned in more detailed analytical labors, including the extension of analysis over Violin Concerto op. 26 and Cello Concerto op. 41 by author. The learning of these works will allow to complement the history of the concert genre of French Romanticism with new details, that will enable to see the evidence of succession and the vitality of traditions.

Problem statement. Conductor is considered to be one of the most prestigious occupation in musical field, so there has always been a certain interest to its history. But, despite a large amount of literature, there are no musicologist’s scientific works, with the systematized and generalized materials on training conducting staff in Ukraine in the 1920s – 1940s. This is partly due to a shortage of primary documents at a difficult historical period: most of them were destroyed by the employees of state institutions before being evacuated behind the lines during the Second World War; the other part was burned down during the hostilities; the third one was lost in the territories temporarily occupied by the fascists. The most important information was restored in the postwar years on the basis of personal documents of the musicians and memoirs of the contemporaries. The names of many other talented performers, who were not high ranked in the hierarchy of Ukraine musical culture, were forgotten. Research and publications analysis. Dealing with this article, the author relied on the research of three scientists. For example, the episode devoted to the history of the Kuban State Conservatory is based on the materials of the book by V. A. Frolkin, PhD in musicology, Professor of Piano Department of Krasnodar University of Culture and Arts. (Frolkin, 2006 : 70–89). The Kharkov period of Ya. Rosenstein’s activity is based on the article by E. M. Shchelkanovtseva, PhD in musicology, Department of Orchestral String Instrument of I. P. Kotlyarevsky Kharkov National University of Arts (Shchelkanovtseva, 1992 : 178–179), as well as the memoirs of conductor S. S. Feldman (Feldman, 2006). Ya. Rosenstein activities in T. G. Shevchenko Kiev Academic Opera and Ballet Theater of the Ukrainian SSR was described in research of Yu. A. Stanishevsky – Doctor in musicology, Professor. (Stanishevsky, 1981 : 533–534). The objective of this article is to create Ya. Rosenstein’s complete and non-biased biography, to analyze various aspects of his activity, and, as a result, to revive the name of a talented musician who was at the forefront of Ukraine musical pedagogy. This is the urgency and novelty of this study. Core material. Yakov A. Rosenstein (1887–1946) – a cello player, conductor, professor. In1907–1912 he studied at St. Petersburg Conservatory specializing in cello. Until February 1917, he had served as a cello player in the Royal orchestra of the Imperial Mariinskyi Theater. During the Civil War, he moved to Yekaterinodar (Krasnodar), where in 1918–1919 he was a director of Russian Musical Society Conservatory. October 1, 1920 witnessed the opening of Kuban State Conservatory. The university was funded from the budget of the People’s Commissariat for Education, so the training of all students was free. Ya. Rosenstein taught the cello class. But at the end of 1921, the Kuban Conservatory was deprived of state funding, and in summer of 1922 the university was reorganized into the Kuban Higher Technical School. (Frolkin, 2006 : 74–89). In autumn of 1923, Ya. Rosenstein moved to Kharkov, where he was a cello player in Russian State Opera orchestra. Later Ya. Rosenstein became a theater conductor. Also, he was engaged in pedagogical activity: in 1925 he became a dean of the instrumental faculty of Kharkov State Higher Music and Drama Courses, and in 1926 he became the head of the courses. According to E. M. Shchelkanovtseva, since 1927, Ya. Rosenstein had been teaching at the Music and Drama Institute (currently – I. P. Kotlyarevsky Kharkov National University of Arts) – Professor of cello class, chamber ensemble, orchestra class, conducting; in 1929 he became an Academic Director. (Shchelkanovtseva, 1992 : 179). Opera-symphonic conducting class at Kharkov Music and Drama Institute, which was opened in autumn of 1927, is a merit of Ya. Rosenstein. During 8 years, he had been training such conductors as: P. Ya. Balenko, M. P. Budyansky, I. I. Vymer, F. M. Dolgova, K. L. Doroshenko, D. L. Klebanov, B. T. Kozhevnikov, V. N. Nakhabin, V. S. Tolba and others. In 1926–1927, the Orchestra of Unemployed Musicians in Kharkov was transformed into the First State Symphony Orchestra of All-Ukrainian Radio Committee, which in autumn of 1929 was integrated with the Ukrainian Philharmonic. In 1929–1932 Ya. Rosenstein acted as a chief conductor. Then he was replaced by German Adler, a graduate of German Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Prague, and a world-famous conductor. In 1937, this musical group was the base for creation the State Symphony Orchestra of the Ukrainian SSR in Kiev (nowadays the National Symphony Orchestra of Ukraine). (Pluzhnikov, 2016 : 358). In 1935–1941 and 1944–1946 Ya. Rosenstein was a conductor of T. G. Shevchenko Kiev Academic Opera and Ballet Theater of the Ukrainian SSR. According to S. S. Feldman, there he brilliantly showed himself in the ballet performances “Swan Lake” and “Sleeping Beauty” by P. Tchaikovsky, “The Fountain of Bakhchisarai” and “The Prisoner of the Caucasus” by B. Asafiev, “Lilaea” by K. Dankevich and “Raymonda” by A. Glazunov (Feldman, 2009 : 102). In summer of 1941 the War began, and the theater troupe was evacuated to Ufa. In 1942–1944 the United Ukrainian State Opera and Ballet Theater was created on the basis of the Kharkov and Kiev theaters in Irkutsk. More than 650,000 people visited 785 performances conducted by N. D. Pokrovsky, Ya. A. Rosenstein and V. S. Tolba in Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk and other cities! In June 1944, the theater troupe returned to Kyiv, and in 1946 Ya. Rosenstein died. He was buried at Baykove cemetery in Kyiv. Conclusion. The creative personality of Ya. A. Rosenstein, a cello player, conductor, teacher, one of the organizers of the First State Symphony Orchestra in Ukraine and the creators of the Kharkov school of orchestra conducting, deserves more attention on behalf of the scientists, musicians and all non-indifferent people. There is hope that Ya. A. Rosenstein’s memory will not be forgotten, and the name of this talented and noble person will take its rightful place in the annals of Ukraine and Russian musical culture.

Introduction. In recent years, there has been indefatigable interest of scholars in the concerto genre, and that can be proven by constantly appearing research article and dissertation, devoted to it. For example, in 2017 and 2019 candidate dissertation [Ph. D] have been published, that illuminated previously obscure pages of, respectively, French tradition of this genre, embodied in concertos for various instruments with orchestra by C. Saint-Saëns, and AustroGerman of the first decades of XIX century (including those by J. N. Hummel, I. Moscheles, F. Ris). Expansion of the knowledge about this genre in historical aspect is accompanied by refinements and changes of viewpoints on its essence, that allows, in particular, to comprehend the phenomenon of intersection of different traits of a symphony, a concerto and an ensemble in composers’ activity of XX – beginning of XXI century. A presumption is made, that between these stated genres there is some kind of interlocutor, that is dialogism. At the same time, it is noted, that various types of a dialogue in given work do not lead inevitably to some “mix” or ambivalence, but can contribute to realisation of the potential of the concerto genre. The last one can be applied to the Piano concertos by J. Brahms. Objectives. The goal of the given article is to reveal signs of chamberness in genre-stylistic field of Piano concertos by Johannes Brahms. Results and discussion. In spite of widely disseminated opinion that they belong to predominately orchestral type or even are “symphonies with piano obligato” (Kuznetsov, 1980; Beyer, 1897), they reveal influence of another essential characteristics of the genre, including chamberness. This can be explained either by classicism of J. Brahms’s composer style, who has always orientated towards tradition of his times or by integrativity, that is an iconic trait of late-Romantic music. The examples are given of grand-scale symphonic conceptions deriving from primal ensemble ideas. It is noted, that while the understanding of the genre’s nature remains stable, in each Concerto the proportion of symphonism, concertoness and chamberness is singular due to a significant time interval passing between them and noticeable difference in level of composer’s maturity. Both Concertos reveal the following attributes of chamberness: frequent usage of separate orchestra groups, eventual appearance of “ensemble of soloists” on the background of certain groups or without any accompaniment, significant dramaturgic role played by solos of the piano either slightly supported by sparse instruments while their parts are rather scattered or absolutely unaccompanied. It is stressed that regarding playing piano one should not equate one performer with one part as there are parts of right and left hands and dialogues appearing between them (Polskaya, 2001). On the other side, mono-pianistic expression doesn’t necessarily coincide with a monologue, as self-comprehension of a personality can be marked by a significant dialogism and even conflict (Misitova, 2004). The Piano concertos by J. Brahms can serve as an example for the last observation as appearances of the soloist (chiefly, solo) create additional thread of dramaturgy, sometimes governing the development of music and its images. In the First concerto, given its allusions to the Baroque era, one can discern frequent usage of chamber, sometimes exclusively string orchestra. It is pointed out that initial image of Maestoso, that is supposed to be portrayed by sonority of the accentuated brass group as it has tremendous and formidable mood, is in fact embodied by strings with occasional illuminations of another groups. In Adagio the archi section also plays the leading role, being in dialogue with two bassoons in the first orchestral episode, later entering compassionate dialogue with the piano. In both movements the full orchestra is used only in the climactic moments, often with the soloist involved. And the Finale is the only movement where the semantics of the competition and festivities of the masses urges the composer to use entire orchestra. The logic of changes of emotional states in the solo part is quite clear. It is a personification of a “lyrical hero”, who is in a state of an inner dialogue, and that engenders a conflict situation, largely contributing to the dramatism of further events in the music. Employments of the ensemble are sporadic and are usually illuminated by a background of the orchestra. In Second concerto, while the strategy of chamberness of orchestra and raising the significance of the soloist remains stable, on the contrary, different means of ensemble communication are developed, including those involving “satellite” instruments. Their activity is revealed in the very first bars of Allegro non troppo, where French horn and piano resemble quiet and leisurely conversation. This duet in its further appearances marks the borders of large chapters of the structure, therefore acquiring compositional significance. Ensemble qualities are intrinsic for Andante from this Concerto, where another soloist appears, singled out from the group of cellos, and later oboe, clarinets make their entrance, and the score turns into sheer dialogue of soloists. Conclusions. Comparison of two Piano concertos by J. Brahms allows to state that composer simultaneously has firm understanding of this genre and favours different traits of chamberness in each of them. In the latter one “satellite” timbres are used, ensemble structures are more significant. And this paves the way for ensemble differentiation of the orchestra, that can be regarded as one of the first portents of modern understanding of concerto genre and abovementioned processes of “mixing”.

Although John Pickard's music has received a good many performances and radio broadcasts over the past decade, it was the relay of his dazzling orchestral tone poem The Flight of Icarus (1990) during the 1996 Proms1 which brought him to the notice of the wider concert–going and –listening public. There is some justice in that piece attracting such attention, as it is one of his most immediate in impact, while completely representative of his output at large. That output to date encompasses three symphonies (1983–4, 1985–7, 1995–6) and five other orchestral works, three string quartets (1991, 1993, 1994; a fourth in progress), a piano trio (1990), sonatas for piano (1987) and cello and piano (1994–5), vocal and choral works, pieces for orchestral brass (Vortex, 1984–5) and brass band – the exhilarating Wildfire (1991), which crackles, hisses and spits in ferocious near–onomatopoeia, and suite Men of Stone (1995), celebrating four of the most impressive megalithic sites in Britain, one to each season of the year. There are other works for a variety of solo instruments and chamber ensembles, such as the intriguing grouping of flute, clarinet, harpsichord and piano trio in Nocturne in Black and Gold (1983) and the large–scale Serenata Concertante for flute and six instruments of a year later. Still in his mid-thirties – he was born in Burnley in 1963 – Pickard has already made almost all the principal musical forms of the Western Classical tradition his own, with only opera, ballet and the concerto as yet untackled.

Background. The French composers’ creativity of the late XIX – first third of XX centuries is the admirable treasury of the world musical art. It is worth mentioning such remarkable and original artists as C. Debussy and M. Emmanuel, P. Dukas and E. Satie, A.Roussel and M.Ravel. The name of G. Pierné (1863–1937) can surely be added to this series of authors. But his oeuvre is still terra incognita for us. The thorough considerable researches about the author are not numerous. The monograph “Gabriel Pierné: musicien lorrain” by G. Masson was created in 1987, and the publication of the composer’s letters named as “Correspondance romaine” was published in 2005. In the 2000s, a lot of audio recordings of his best works were published, which testifies to the relevance of the author’s heritage and confirms the urgency of present topic of article. Objectives of this study is to focus researchers on G. Pierné’s personality and art, to consider his works for piano and symphonic orchestra – Fantasy-Ballet, Piano Concerto, Scherzo-Caprice, Symphonic Poem. Methods. The research is based on the historical biographical, the intonational, the comparative research methods. Results. C. Debussy, M. Ravel and composers of “Les Six” at their time outshined Pierné’s work. But years have passed and interest in the personality of this author has appeared. During his training in Paris Conservatory (1871–1882), G. Pierné achieved excellent results, having won in many student competitions. He studied composition in the class of J. Massenet (together with E. Chausson, G. Charpentier, G. Ropartz). Having won the competition for the Prix de Rome (1882), the young author was given the opportunity to live at Villa Medici (1883–1885). Spent time in Rome was one of the best episodes of his life. The first concert work by G. Pierné – Fantasy-Ballet (1885) for piano and orchestra was written there. The composition is based on the sequence of contrasting dancing episodes in the character of march, gallop, waltz, tarantella. It is significant that the ballet genre took pride of place in the work of G. Pierné later. The composer’s staying in Italy caused visibility, colorfulness, cheerfulness, feed activity, energy of images, using of genre motifs in FantasyBallet. The series of various episodes conveys a whimsical change of mood and resembles a sketches of impression. Returning to Paris in 1885, G. Pierné sought to strengthen his reputation as a soloist by entering the salon circles. At this time, he created many piano works, including the three-movement Piano Concerto c-moll (1886). This composition contains many dramatic moments which concentrated in the first and third movements of the cycle. However, as is often the case with French Romantic composers, such using of dramatic elements has a somewhat superficial, rhetorical character. The first movement is written in sonata form. The theme of the main subject (in c-moll), expounded by the piano octaves, is active and boisterous. And the secondary Es-dur subject is peaceful and lucid. There is the same entrancing serenity as in the lyrical theme of the E. Grieg’s Piano Concerto finale. In the first movement, the development is very short, and the recapitulation is abridged. It should be noted that G. Pierné refused to use the cadence of the soloist. The second movement is written in a three-part form with elements of variation and rondo. This light scherzo takes the listener away from the anxieties of previous movement. Every bar of this music, in which everything is made with elegant French taste, caresses the ear. The main theme, including the dotted rhythm, serves as a refrain that permeates the entire movement. The finale is distinguished by its developmental forcefulness and truly symphonic reach. So, the continuation of C. Saint-Saëns’s covenants is in the concentration of thematic material, the observableness of form, the rhetorical syllable, and rhythmic activity at the Pierné’s Piano Concerto. Scherzo-Caprice (1890) enriched the French miniature line. The image sphere of this opus is lucid lyrics, good-gentle jocosity, and solemnity. The melodic talent of the composer proved itself very convincing here. The theme of the waltz echoes the waltz episode from the Fantasy-Ballet in some details. Being written also in A-dur, it contains the upward melody moves with a passing VI# (fisis), and also diversions into the minor (cis-moll in Scherzo-Caprice, fis-moll in Fantasy-Ballet). At the turn of the century, the influence of C. Franck’s music was produced on the G. Pierné’s style. This is reflected in such works as the Symphonic Poem “L’An Mil” (1897), Violin Sonata (1900), oratorio “Saint François d’Assise” (1912), and Cello Sonata (1919). An appeal to the Symphonic Poem for piano and orchestra (1903) is also a clear sign of rapprochement with the late romantic branch (C. Franck, E. Сhausson). Here we see a departure of G. Pierné from the C. Saint-Saëns’s concert traditions, which he held before. In the Poem, such qualities as virtuosity, concert brilliance, and representativeness are somewhat leveled, which is caused with the narrative character of this work. Conclusions. During the “Renovation period” of French music, the piano and orchestra compositions experienced a real upsurge in its development. Composers began to turn more often not only to the Piano Concerto genre, but also to non-cyclic works – Fantasies, Poems, Rhapsodies, etc. G. Pierné contributed much to this branch along with C. Saint-Saëns, B. Godard, Ch.-M. Widor. In his Fantasy-Ballet, Piano Concerto, Scherzo-Caprice, we find the continuation of C. Saint-Saëns’s instrumental traditions. This is manifested in the moderation of the musical language, the normative character of harmonious thinking, the absolute clarity of discourse, concern for the relief of the melodic line. In the Symphonic Poem, contiguity with the musical aesthetics of С. Franck is revealed, which is reflected in harmony modulation shifts, appeal to polyphonic technique, differentiated and more powerful orchestration.

1 score (xvii, 233 p.)<br>Throughout history, wondrous discoveries of science, like great pieces of music, have often come about through extraordinary feats of creativity, informed by deep rational thought yet not limited by it. Like science, music composition requires a mastery of its own technical features (instrumentation, orchestration, harmony, counterpoint, etc.), but neither music nor science can flourish when too much emphasis is placed upon the mechanical and not enough on the imagination. Composers have sometimes turned to mathematics as a tool for generating art though the systematization of musical elements. However, music often suffers from the conscious attempt by composers to bring it closer to the world of science and math through the serialization of musical material. This does not mean that mathematics and science do not play an important part in music of great expression. To be sure, composers have used simple mathematical concepts to discuss, analyze, and create music at every stage, whether consciously or unconsciously, since the beginning of Western music. These ideas are at the very heart of the great music of previous centuries, even if we celebrate those works more for their intrinsic beauty than their rational mechanics. It is the inventiveness and creativity that we find easy to value in music, but the science behind it also makes its creation possible. My symphony pays tribute to the marriage of creativity, not process, in scientific and musical thought, using the words of scientists and mathematicians as poetic texts, which generate musical imagery. I have chosen a series of quotations by notable scientists and mathematicians throughout history, which serve as textual introductions for each movement of the six-movement, approximately forty-five minute orchestral symphony. Each quotation makes reference to a specific scientific or mathematical discovery of its writer, or displays an aspect of his philosophy. The ideas expressed in the quotations serve as abstract inspiration and suggest musical imagery for each respective movement.<br>Committee in Charge: Dr. Robert Kyr, Chair; Dr. David Crumb; Dr. Jack Boss; Dr. Marilyn Linton

This thesis consists of a large composition for violoncello and orchestra, together with an analytical paper in which I discuss my compositional techniques and some of their historical antecedents. The composition draws on the genres of imaginary musical theater, the symphonic poem, and the concerto. It was also inspired by the story of Hermes, the messenger god from Greek mythology. While the myth partially informs the compositional structure, the work is ultimately meant to showcase the versatility of the cello, the coloristic range of the orchestra (in some cases emulating the orchestral styles of previous composers), the balance of cello and orchestra together, and the eclectic invocation of many compositional techniques separately and simultaneously. These techniques encompass set theory (the use of unordered pitch collections), polytonality, and serialism. It is composed in a post-romantic style.

Symphony No. 1 "Concertante" is a work of approximately twenty-two minutes duration for chamber orchestra. The work is scored for flute (doubling piccolo), oboe (doubling English horn), B-flat clarinet, bassoon, trumpet, F horn, trombone, tuba, percussion, harp, piano (doubling celesta), solo violin, solo viola, solo cello, solo double bass, and strings.The percussion battery, which is to be played by one performer, includes three timpani, vibraphone, orchestra bells, xylophone, chimes, suspended cymbal, bass drum, snare drum, and two triangles. One group of instruments, including the eight winds, percussion, and the four solo strings, is treated primarily in a soloistic manner although it also functions as a part of the ensemble. The remaining group, piano, harp, and strings, functions primarily as an accompanying group although it does get some soloistic treatment. The work is in four movements, each of which uses the traditional symphonic form. Movement I is in sonata-allegro form, movement II a simple ternary "song" form, movement III a scherzo and trio, and the final movement is a theme and variations. These traditional forms apply only to thematic use and development, however, for the tonal scheme is developed in a broader design which unfolds throughout the course of the four movements. All important melodic ideas are based on the same pitch set that serves as the basis for the tonal scheme.

The Czech composer Paul Wranitzky (1756–1808) worked primarily in Vienna during the height of musical Classicism. He was well-respected among the higher artistic circles during his day as a composer, violinist, and conductor. His excellence in conducting was recognized by Haydn and Beethoven. His compositions were favored by Empress Marie Therese. Despite his contemporary fame and esteem, his works are relatively unknown today. His works are being revived today, bringing these once popular compositions back to the public. This thesis presents a critical edition of Wranitzky's cello concerto in C Major, appearing for the first time in a scholarly edition. This will allow for its study and performance, and allow musicologists to determine Wranitzky's influence on Viennese string and orchestral music.

1 score (x, 113 p.)<br>The implementation of an informed cross-relationship between two independent art forms has often been a source of inspiration for artists throughout the millennia. However, in the late 19th century, both Russian and French thinkers and artists began to build upon this notion by creatively considering the intermingling of sensory experiences as well. The resulting artwork from this temporally specific era was described as being "Symbolist," referencing both the intermedial and multi-sensory processes involved and/or considered in creating the respective work. My personal penchant to explore this artistic approach has resulted in a symphony that was inspired by, and intimately considers, five individual pieces of French "Symbolist" art, poetry, and sculpture. Each movement specifically focuses upon one of the five human senses. The respective works are: the sculpture "Le baiser" by Auguste Rodin (touch), "Parfum exotique" from Les fleurs du mal by Charles Baudelaire (smell), "Tristesse d'été" by Stèphane Mallarmé (taste) as published in Du parnasse contemporain, the painting "Hina tefatou" by Paul Gauguin (sight/insight), and "Chanson d'automne" from Poèmes saturniens by Paul Verlaine (hearing/listening).<br>Committee in charge: Dr. David Crumb Chairperson, Advisor， Dr. Robert Kyr， Member； Dr. Jack Boss， Member； Dr. Jenifer Craig， Outside Member

Sacred Symphony is a work for orchestra, chorus and 8 soloists. It is scored for three horns in F, three trumpets in B flat (1st doubling trumpet in C), tenor trombone, bass trombone, percussion, celesta, piano and strings. The percussion consists of suspended cymbal, glockenspiel, vibraphone, marimba, bass marimba, tenor drum, snare drum, bass drum, two slit drums (4 tom-toms if unavailable), small triangle, and finger cymbals. The work is in three movements: Sanctus, Beatitudes (Matt. 5: 3-12) and Gloria. The Sanctus primarily gives glory to God the Father while the Beatitudes are Christ's own words. The Gloria acts as a culmination of the previous two movements because it gives glory to both the Father and the Son.

The Cello Concerto in B-flat major, G.482, by Italian composer Luigi Boccherini (1743-1805), is the composer's most beloved work for the instrument, as well as one of the most performed pieces in the Classical concerto repertoire. Historically, cellists performing this work have used an edition prepared by German cellist Friedrich Grützmacher (1832-1903). However, an 'original' version that was discovered in 1949 is significantly different from that of Grützmacher. A comparison of both editions has revealed that Grützmacher in fact made considerable modifications to Boccherini's 'original.' Along with the issue of having two editions, cellists that have played the 'original' edition have noted that there are certain practical and interpretative matters that are not favorable to the cellist, particularly in terms of the way the music is notated and how it lacks many details. This dissertation provides clarity to these issues by undertaking a comprehensive analysis of both editions in order to make cellists become aware of the differences between both editions by comparing musical elements from a performance practice viewpoint. In addition, I discuss relevant issues that are present in the 'original' version, ultimately providing an alternative performance edition to this score that is based on historically informed performance (HIP) practices. Finally, I hope to draw attention on how a performance edition like this can be useful as a rare critical source to one of the major works from the eighteenth-century cello repertoire.

Playing the cello has built my confidence. It gives me a passion, something that I can go to when I’m sad or stressed. Joining a musical community allowed me to broaden my view on how I see music. Getting to play in a string orchestra let me meet new people that I now love. Overall, I’m grateful that my parents decided to put me into classical music at age three, because it empowers me; it gives me a voice....

After his discharge from the Army, Barber continued work with the Office of War Information but was able to work at home. He received a commission from John Nicholas Brown for a Cello Concerto for the Boston Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Serge Koussevitzky. Written to include the strengths and predilections of cellist Raya Garbousova, the concerto is considered one of the most challenging contemporary works of the genre and won Barber the Fifth Annual Award of the Music Critics Circle of New York. Reputedly one of the most promising American composers of his time, Barber also composed music for Martha Graham’s ballet about Medea, Cave of the Heart. In 1947, under the shadow of his father’s deteriorating health and Louise Homer’s impending death, Barber composed his most “American work,” Knoxville: Summer of 1915, for voice and orchestra. It is set to a nostalgic prose-poem by James Agee and was premiered by the Boston Symphony with Eleanor Steber as soloist. Following this, Barber composed a piano sonata for Vladimir Horowitz, a work that had the most stunning impact on the American musical world.

With an offer from the London FFRR label to conduct and record his works, including the Medea Suite and the Cello Concerto with Zara Nelsova, Barber studied conducting with Nicolai Malko in Denmark. He bravely took the challenge and was well accepted. Rehearsals proceeded well, and eventually he was invited to Berlin to conduct his Violin Concerto with Charles Turner as soloist. After answering an invitation by Charles Munch to conduct his Second Symphony with the Boston Symphony Orchestra, Barber decided he was “tired of rehearsing his own music.” He believed that good composers did not make good conductors, and he decided to devote all his energy toward his primary creative passion: composing music.