A Guide to Performance of Twentieth-Century Concerti for

A Guide to Performance of Twentieth-Century Concerti for Trumpet and Orchestra by

Karl Pilss, William Lovelock, and John Williams

Timothy Raymond Reed

BMus (Hons)

A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at

The University of Queensland in 2020

School of Music

ii

Abstract

During the mid-twentieth century, the trumpet saw a major revival in soloist

performances and a surge in virtuosic trumpet compositions was noted. Although this

developed trumpet repertoire, many of these pieces have been forgotten. This thesis studied

selected trumpet repertoire through score analysis, recordings, and literature regarding three

twentieth-century trumpet concerti by Karl Pilss, William Lovelock and John Williams. Each

of these works are significant to the trumpeting world based on the composer, the style of the

concerto, and the difficulty of the work.

This thesis combines both Music Performance Research and Artistic Research in

Music. Music Performance Research has been conducted through the compilation of

recordings, both live and studio-recorded, score analysis, and historical information relating

to the composer and the original performers. Artistic Research in music has been conducted

through the discussion of my own personal practice and performance techniques.

Outputs from this thesis include recorded performances of the works, and practice

and performance techniques utilised, to aid future players of these concerti and other

twentieth-century works. This includes practice suggestions for ways to approach technically

challenging areas containing issues including large intervallic leaps, dynamic extremes,

range, and endurance. I have also addressed musical issues, including the use of adaptive

tone, phrasing, dynamics, and character. I have also suggested techniques and exercises that I

used to overcome these difficulties while also providing information (if any) on the ways in

which other performers have approached these same problems as a performance guide.

Due to the difficulties inherent in twentieth-century works, it was necessary to

develop alternate practice techniques to help overcome the challenges within these concerti.

The skills learnt and developed while performing difficult works, such as these concerti, are

transferrable to other aspects of playing, making them extremely beneficial. Due to endurance

reasons these concerti can be difficult to find adequate time to practice them while also

maintaining the freshness of embouchure required for other rehearsals and performances. To

overcome this, I practiced most of these concerti in small segments, with clear goals set at the

beginning of each practice session on what was to be practiced and achieved. Further study of

other under-performed works would be beneficial to the trumpeting world, as the current

range of standard repertoire is severely lacking at this time.

iii

Declaration by author

This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published

or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have

clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my

thesis.

I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical

assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional

editorial advice, financial support and any other original research work used or reported in

my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the

commencement of my higher degree by research candidature and does not include a

substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree

or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of

my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award.

I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University

Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis

be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a

period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School.

I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright

holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the

copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis and have sought permission from co-

authors for any jointly authored works included in the thesis.

iv

Publications included in this thesis

No publications included

Submitted manuscripts included in this thesis

No manuscripts submitted for publication

Other publications during candidature

No other publications

Contributions by others to the thesis

No contributions by others

v

Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree

No works submitted towards another degree have been included in this thesis

Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects

No animal or human subjects were involved in this research

vi

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Warwick Potter, for his guidance, support, and belie f

in my abilities from the very beginning of my undergraduate degree.

I would like to thank my associate supervisor, Dr Mary Broughton, for all her help in

formatting and structuring my thesis.

I would like to thank my trumpet teacher, Mr Richard Madden, for helping me over the last

six years become the trumpeter that I am today.

vii

Financial support

This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program

Scholarship

Keywords

trumpet concerto, Pilss, Lovelock, Williams, practice-led research

viii

Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC)

ANZSRC code: 190407, Music Performance, 100%

Fields of Research (FoR) Classification

FoR code: 1904, Performing Arts and Creative Writing, 100%

ix

Table of Contents Page

Abstract ii

List of Examples xi

List of Abbreviations xiv

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Project Aims and Overview 1

2. Literature Review 3

2.1 Brief History of the Trumpet Concerto 3

2.1.1 The Keyed Trumpet in the Classical Era 4

2.1.2 Trumpet Concerti in the Twentieth-Century 5

2.1.3 Summary 7

2.1.4 Justification for the Trumpet Concerti Selected for the Research 7

2.2 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1934) – Karl Pilss (1902-1979) 8

2.3 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968) – William Lovelock (1899-1986) 10

2.4 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996) – John Williams (1932-) 12

2.5 Summary and Conclusions 14

3. Methodology 15

3.1 Music Performance Research 15

3.2 Artistic Research in Music 16

3.3 Summary 17

4. Analysis and Performance Guide 19

4.1 Karl Pilss Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1934) 19

4.1.1 First Movement 19

4.1.2 Second Movement 24

x

4.1.3 Third Movement 27

4.1.4 Summary 32

4.2 William Lovelock Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968) 33




4.2.4 Summary 50

4.3 John Williams Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996) 51




4.3.4 Summary 68

5. Conclusions and Recommendations 70

5.1 Conclusions 70

5.2 Recommendations 71

Reference List 72

xi

List of Examples Page

Ex. 2.1 Graph of the composition rate of trumpet concerti from 1901 to 1983, Inclusive

(Garrett, 1984, p. 148).

6

Ex. 3.1 Pitch Classification 17

Ex. 4.1 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 26-37 20







Ex. 4.8 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 19-26 24






Ex. 4.14 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 1-8 28





Ex. 4.19 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 50-53, 172-177

30



Ex. 4.22 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 25-36 34







xii



Ex. 4.31 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 1-4 40





Ex. 4.36 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 102-

111

44

Ex. 4.37 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 8-15 45






Ex. 4.43 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, cadenza 49


Ex. 4.45 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 1-4 51








Ex. 4.53 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, cadenza 56



Ex. 4.56 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 17-20 59




Ex. 4.60 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 53-55, 74-75

61

xiii



Ex. 4.63 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 105-109

63

Ex. 4.64 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 1-27 64






xiv

List of Abbreviations

ABC Australian Broadcasting Corporation

ARiM Artistic Research in Performance

BPM Beats per minute

CSO Cleveland Symphony Orchestra

Eastman Eastman School of Music

MPR Music Performance Research

RPO Rochester Philharmonic Orchestra

VPO Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra

1

Chapter 1: Introduction

During the mid-twentieth century, the trumpet saw a major revival in soloist

performances and a surge in virtuosic trumpet compositions was noted. Although this

developed trumpet repertoire, many of these pieces have been forgotten. Before the revival,

trumpeters overcame this problem by performing transcriptions. French trumpeter Maurice

André, for example, was famous for transcribing oboe and violin repertoire (Tarr, n.d.;

“Maurice André”, n.d.). Another example is Russian trumpeter Timofei Dokshizer, whose

transcriptions number over eighty (“Dokshizer”, 2010). Numerous trumpet concerti have

been composed since André and Dokshizer’s prominence, the majority of which are now

rarely performed.

The age of recording has enabled musicians with a greater awareness of an historical

and large body of works. It is often the case, however, that standard works are performed and

recorded to the exclusion of all else (Day, 2005). Professional recordings of new and

complicated pieces offer aspiring trumpeters an easier way to approach performing these

works. Many difficulties become apparent when trying to learn modern repertoire such as:

time (unusual meters and phrasing), dynamics, flexibility over rapid interval changes, range ,

and endurance (Coleman, 1965). Professional soloists are often reluctant to play new works

as significantly more practice is required to produce an adequate performance due to the high

technical difficulty when compared to standard works such as the classical concerti by Haydn

and Hummel. Cost can also be a factor, as such repertoire often require extra orchestral

rehearsals due to this difficulty. These issues are especially apparent for trumpeters when

extra consideration is needed regarding range and endurance:

The trumpet performer, by virtue of his instrumental capabilities and his own physical capabilities, is taking a great risk in performing them. The potential

for a “disaster” in a performance of one of these works (because of the unusually blatant aural effect produced when errors of accuracy occur on the trumpet) is multiplied by the demands of the physical aspects (breathing, suppleness of the lips, and endurance, e.g.) on the performer. (Hecker cited in

Garrett, 1984, p. 155)

1.1 Project Aims and Overview

This thesis studies selected trumpet repertoire through score analysis, recordings, and

literature regarding three twentieth-century trumpet concerti. Outputs from this thesis will

2

include recorded performances of the works, and practice and performance techniques

utilised, to aid future players of these concerti and other twentieth-century works.

The second chapter contains a literature review which focusses on the history of the

trumpet concerto. This includes its creation as a genre, the technological advancements made

to the trumpet and the current state of the trumpet concerto. This chapter also provides an

overview of the three works I have chosen to research and examines their significance to

trumpet players. The third chapter discusses the methodologies utilised in my research of the

three concerti. These methods include both Music Performance Research and Artistic

Research in Music. The fourth chapter contains an analysis and performance guide of the

three concerti researched. This chapter presents both the score and the stylistic differences

apparent in the current recordings of the concerti, and discusses my interpretation based on

this research. Practice techniques that I have utilised to overcome problematic areas in the

concerti are also presented. The final chapter provides a conclusion and general discussion on

the key areas addressed in the research as well as its implication for further performance and

study.

3

Chapter 2: Literature Review

This chapter examines the extant state of trumpet concerti and provides background

information on the composers and works that I plan to research. I describe the origin of the

concerto and the numerous changes it has undergone since the genre’s creation . I relate this to

the technological advances made to the trumpet and the way in which the trumpet has been

perceived through history. I also provide information specific to the three concerti that I have

chosen to analyse and perform while also stating the significance of this research.

2.1 Brief History of the Trumpet Concerto

The concerto is one of the oldest forms of composition still used. The term concerto

has an uncertain origin: it is either derived from the “…Latin concertare (to agree, act

together), the Italian concertare (to compete, contend), or the Latin consere (to consort)”

(Keefe, 2005, p. 10). The trumpet concerto originated during the mid-seventeenth century as

works for one or more trumpets and massed string ensemble. At the time these works were

named sonata or sinfonia, usually containing three movements, fast-slow-fast, with the

trumpet often tacet during the slow movement1 (Schneider, 2005; Talbot, 2005). The trumpet

continued to see success within concerti written in the pre-classical galant style. Composers

such as Johann Wilhelm Hertel and Franz Xaver Richter explored the uppermost registers of

the trumpet within their concerti2 (Härtwig, 2001; Reutter, 2001). The concerto has morphed

substantially since its origin, with composers increasing the diversity of the solo instrument,

increasing the size of the accompanying ensemble, and altering the structure of the work. The

adaptive nature of the concerto is shown through the diversity of works named concerto

throughout its four-hundred-year history (Keefe, 2005).

After its initial success during the Baroque period, the trumpet saw a decline in solo

repertoire throughout the majority of the Classical era. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, in

particular, felt great apprehension and fear towards the trumpet. Andreas Schachtner states:

“Wolfgangerl scarcely heard the blaring sound when he grew pale and began to collapse, and

if I had continued he would surely have suffered a convulsion” (cited in Deutsch, 1965, p.

1 Such works include Giuseppe Torelli’s Sinfonia in D major, G.8 and George Philipp Telemann’s

Sonata in D major, TWV 44:1 2 Such works include Hertel’s Trumpet Concerto No.1 in E-flat major and Richter’s Trumpet Concerto in D major

4

453). Suggs (1998) suggests that there is evidence that Mozart composed a trumpet concerto

in 1768, which has subsequently been lost.

2.1.1 The Keyed Trumpet in the Classical and Romantic Eras

It was not until Joseph Haydn’s Trumpet Concerto in E-flat Major, Hob. VIIe:1,

composed in 1796, that the trumpet gained a significant new work. Anton Weidinger’s new

invention, the keyed trumpet, allowed much greater control and granted chromatic access,

rather than solely relying on the harmonic overtone series3, as per the natural trumpet. Both

Haydn’s concerto and Weidinger’s virtuosity on the keyed trumpet were great successes and

subsequently led to Johann Hummel composing his Trumpet Concerto in E Major, S.49 for

Weindinger in 1803 (Tarr, 1988). Despite this initial success, there were, however, many

critics to this invention, owing to the holes detracting from the brilliant tone of the natural

trumpet (Geiringer & Geiringer, 1982).

Since Haydn and Hummel, no major composer has written a trumpet concerto. The

Romantic period lacked solo trumpet repertoire despite the piston valve trumpet being

patented in 1812. These new instruments combined both the chromatic range of the keyed

trumpet with the timbre of the natural trumpet. During the Romantic era, however, the

trumpet was regarded solely as an orchestral instrument (Suggs, 1998; Wallace, 1997), while

the concerto was generally viewed as a virtuosic composition: a piece to display the

instrumental technical prowess. The valved trumpet was almost completely disregarded

throughout the nineteenth-century, with Hector Berlioz initiating a tradition of composing

orchestral works including two cornets and two natural trumpets ca.18334 (Tarr, 1988). In an

orchestration treatise, Corder (1894) explained that “melodies on the trumpet are ‘dangerous’

and, in addition, most musical hearers are sorely offended at hearing on this instrument a

melody which departs very markedly from the natural scale” (cited in Wallace, 2011, p. 201).

3 A series of tones, fixed by nature, in which the frequency of each successive tone is a multiple of the

lowest note of the series (fundamental) (Tarr, 1988) 4 Such works include Symphony Fantastique (1830), Harold in Italy (1834), Roman Carnival Overture (1844) and The Damnation of Faust (1845)

5

2.1.2 Trumpet Concerti in the Twentieth-Century

From 1900 to 1945, the concerto developed apace. Before the First World War

concerti were usually long and grand in design, following Romantic traditions and employing

characteristics that bind them to the ‘long nineteenth century’ (Schneider, 2005). In contrast,

from 1920 to the early 1930s, concerti were shorter, scored for smaller ensembles, and

focused on rhythm over melodic content. Concerti written from mid-1930s to 1945 tended to

merge aspects of the preceding periods (Schneider, 2005).

The twentieth-century also saw a progressive change in the way the trumpet was

perceived. Valved trumpets were becoming de rigueur in orchestras and composers began

writing specifically for the instrument. Barber, Bartók, Bernstein, Mahler, Strauss, and

Stravinsky all symphonically wrote challenging music for trumpet, composing virtuosic parts

and utilising the trumpet’s full range. Despite this change, none saw fit to compose a solo

work for the trumpet. This has left the trumpet with a limited diversity of solo repertoire

compared to many other instruments (Garrett, 1984; Stevens, 1976; Tarr, 1988).

The view commonly held by many, since the Romantic Period, is that the concerto is

a virtuosic piece for the soloist. Critics of this fact, such as Busoni (cited in Schneider, 2005)

stated:

With the rise of virtuosity the word [concerto] became restricted to the meaning which it still commonly has – a bravura piece for a single instrument, for the greater glory of which the orchestra . . . is subordinated.

(p. 142)

The shift, therefore, towards the reimplementation of the trumpet concerto has come from a

change in mindset. Composers of the modern era began to regard the trumpet as a virtuosic

instrument.

Ironically, one of the major influences on the trumpet’s success in the twentieth-

century were new performances and recordings of Haydn’s Trumpet Concerto in E-flat Major

(1796). Wobisch, made the first complete recording of Haydn’s Concerto in 1952. This was a

huge step forward in the revival of the trumpet as a solo instrument (Tarr, 1988). Although

Hindemith’s Sonata for Trumpet (1939) is often regarded as the birth of the modern trumpet

era, it was not until the concerti by Tomasi (1948) and Arutiunian (1950) that the trumpet

revival really began - coinciding with Wobisch’s recording (see Ex. 2.1).

6

Ex. 2.1 Graph of the composition rate of trumpet concerti from 1901 to 1983, Inclusive

(Garrett, 1984, p. 148).

Other reasons for the increase in solo trumpet repertoire during this post-war period

include technical instrumental manufacturing advances, a substantial increase in the number

of trumpeters compared to the previous era, and the continual commissioning of works by

institutions such as the Paris Conservatory (Garrett, 1984).

Although many concerti were composed during the twentieth-century, a very limited

number are now regularly performed. Through my own research of recordings in the Naxos

Music Library and other various websites I have found that f rom over 80 concerti listed in

Garrett’s survey, only four stand out as works commonly recorded: Arutiunian’s Trumpet

Concerto in A-flat Major (1950), Tomasi’s Concerto in C for Trumpet and Orchestra (1948),

Jolivet’s Trumpet Concerto No. 2 (1954), and Chaynes’ Concerto for Trumpet (1956).

Factors that contribute to this are related to the difficulty of twentieth-century works. Range

7

and endurance is a common concern, especially for students performing lengthy recitals.

Limited time with accompanists and a lack of recorded works by professional musicians also

deters students from performing these works (Garrett, 1984).

2.1.3 Summary

Since its inception in the seventeenth-century the concerto has undergone many

changes in both style and form but has continued to remain a popular genre of music.

Although technological advances have been made to the trumpet, such as the addition of keys

and valves, it has seen significantly less success through this same period. It wasn’t until the

twentieth-century and the revival of the trumpet as a virtuosic instrument that a significant

number of new concerti were composed for trumpet. Despite this increase in solo repertoire it

is now common for only a few of these concerti to be performed regularly due to several

limiting factors including range, endurance, technical difficulty, limited rehearsal time, and a

lack of available recordings. All three of the concerti that I will research contain these traits

listed.

2.1.4 Justification for the Trumpet Concerti Selected for the Research

The concerti that I will be analysing and performing are those by Karl Pilss, William

Lovelock and John Williams. Each concerto has been chosen due to the significance it has on

within the profession. Pilss’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra was chosen for its

significance as one of the only works written for trumpet in the German-Romantic Style, and

by a composer with ties to great musical figures of the era. Lovelock’s Concerto for trumpet

and Orchestra was chosen due to its significance as an Australian composition, highly

regarded piece, and difficulty to perform. Williams’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra was

chosen because he is the only major composer since Haydn and Hummel to have written a

concerto for the trumpet. The premiere of the concerto was also performed by one of

America’s greatest trumpet players and orchestra.

All three works have been largely underperformed by the trumpeting world since their

premieres. Indicative of this fact is the number of performances of these concerti listed in the

International Trumpet Guild “Trumpet and Brass Programs” supplements from 1989 -2005,

compiled and edited by Dennis Herrick and Kevin Eisensmith. Lovelock’s Concerto was

8

listed the most, with seven performances, while both the Pilss and Williams Concerti were

each listed only twice during the sixteen and nine-year timeframes respectively. These

number of performances are dwarfed by the 188 performances of Haydn’s Concerto (1796),

115 performances of Arutiunian’s Concerto (1950), and 44 performances of Tomasi’s

Concerto (1948) listed during the ten-year period between 1991-20015.

2.2 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1934) – Karl Pilss (1902-1979)

Karl Pilss (1902-1979) was a Viennese Romantic composer who studied under Franz

Schmidt at the Vienna Music Academy. While there he also studied conducting under Dirk

Fock and Robert Heger, a leading conductor of the Vienna State Opera. From 1934 to 1966

he worked as an advisor and rehearsal director of the Salzburg Music Festival. In this position

Pilss served conductors, including Boehm, Furtwangler, Karajan, Knappertsbusch, Toscanini,

and Walter. He was an assistant conductor and repetiteur for the Vienna State Opera from

1930 until 1968, and also taught at the Vienna Conservatory and the Vienna Music Academy

(Wacker, 2008).

Pilss grew up surrounded by brass music as his father was an amateur horn player.

This brass biased orientation led him to the Trompeterchor der Stadt Wien6, where he served

as both composer and conductor from 1934 until 1944. Pilss was a prolific composer and

wrote nearly 50 works for large brass ensemble. During this time he was in close contact and

influenced by Richard Strauss. A number of Strauss’ works for brass ensemble were

performed by the Trompeterchor der Stadt Wien, conducted by Pilss. Possibly the most

famous piece performed by the Trompeterchor was Strauss’ Festmusik der Stadt Wien (Adler,

2009; Suggs, 2004).

In 1939, the Trompeterchor was taken over by the Nazi Party and placed under the

control of the Office of Culture. This aided the group by giving them both governmental

support and increased exposure. The Trompeterchor, however, became a Nazi propaganda

tool, the increased exposure came with politically motivated programming. It is largely due to

this association with the Nazi Party that Pilss’ music has been widely rejected and forgotten

(Suggs, 2004). Despite this fact his Sonata for Trumpet and Piano (1935) has seen a lot of

5Eisensmith 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005; Herrick, 1990, 1991,

1992, 1993 6 Trumpet choir of the city of Vienna

9

recognition, performance, and recordings in recent years. Accompanying this is also

increased literature written to aid trumpeters playing the work. There is, by comparison,

significantly less research pertaining to his Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra7.

Written in 1934, Karl Pilss’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra is a work which

predates many of the contemporary concertos commonly performed; Hindemith’s Sonata for

Trumpet and Piano (1939) is often recognised as the first modern work for trumpet, while

Tomasi’s Trumpet Concerto (1948) is perceived as the beginning of the twentieth-century

trumpet concerto (Adler, 2009). Dedicated to Franz Dengler, then Principal Trumpet of the

Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra (VPO), Dengler was renowned for his “soft tone and melodic

style” (Tarr, 1988, p. 180) and is famed for the origin of the iconic “Vienna trumpet sound”

(Suggs, 2004, p. 13).

Pilss’ Sonata for Trumpet and Piano, written only one year later, has seen a revival in

the number of performances and recordings in recent years. This piece was composed for

Dengler’s student, Helmut Wobisch, and his VPO successor. Wobisch is famous for his

pioneering role in recording solo classical repertoire, including Haydn’s Concerto (see page

5) (Suggs, 2004; Tarr, 1988).

According to Suggs (1998) Pilss is the natural successor to the great line of

German/Viennese composers such as Bruckner, Mahler, and Strauss. Many of the early

twentieth-century solo works for trumpet are connected to the Paris Conservatory, written

with specific educational aspects in mind. It is uncommon, by comparison, to find solo

trumpet works based on the German-Romantic tradition. Pilss’ Concerto deserves to be

analysed and performed it is the closest work that trumpet players have to the German-

Romantic concerti available in abundance for other orchestral instruments.

The only recording of Pilss’ Concerto currently available is a performance of the

piano reduction, performed by Sidney Mear (trumpet) and Fred Woolston (piano) in 1938.

Mear (1918-2016) was an American trumpeter and Professor at the Eastman School of Music

(Eastman) in Rochester, New York. Mear began cornet studies with his father at a young age

before receiving lessons from Herbert L. Clarke, Frank Holton, and Bohumir Kryl. In 1936,

at the age of 18, Mear began performing with the Horace Heidt Big Band before deciding to

pursue classical music at the Eastman with Pattee Evenson of the Rochester Philharmonic

7 For examples see: Ornelas, 1986; Thornburg et al., 2002; Kilpatrick, 2003, 2006; Adler, 2009; Pilss, 2003, 2009, 2011; Buerkle, 2011; Jakuboski, 2015

10

Orchestra (RPO). In 1937, while still an undergraduate, Mear became a performer with the

RPO and started his teaching career at Eastman the year af ter (Pitcher, 2004). He became

Principal Trumpet with the RPO in 1947, remaining until 1968 and continued teaching at

Eastman for 40 years (Sidney E. Mear, 2016)). Mear has also performed as Principal Trumpet

with the Orquesta Sinfonica de Mexico (1940-1942) and performed as a soloist with both the

Bethlehem Bach Festival and Philadelphia Orchestra. He was regarded by his students and

fellow orchestra members as “a player who never, ever missed a note” (Picher, 2004, p. 31).

2.3 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968) – William Lovelock (1899-1986)

Dr William lovelock was born on March 13, 1899 in London. He began learning the

piano at six years of age and took up the organ six years later. In 1915 became an Organ

Scholar at Trinity College of Music, London. He served in World War I in 1914-1918 before

completing his Bachelor of Music in 1922, under the tutelage of Henry Geehl and C.W.

Pearce at the University of London (Lovelock, n.d.). He subsequently completed his

Doctorate in Music (composition) in 1932 at the same institution. During his years of study

Lovelock also served as a musician in multiple churches: organist at St Clements in Eastchap

from 1919-1923, Kapellmeister to Viscountess Cowdray in Aberdeenshire from 1923-1926,

and at Good Sheppard Church in Carshatton from 1928-1930 (Bebbington, 2001; Spearritt &

Boughen, 1982).

After serving on the teaching staff at Trinity College of Music for ten years, Lovelock

was appointed to the senior teaching staff in 1929. In June 1939 he was sent to India to

relieve an examiner. Due to the outbreak of World War II in September 1939 he was forced

to remain in India, becoming a supply officer in the Indian Army. In 1945, after the

conclusion of World War II, Lovelock continued his teaching and examining in both the

Trinity College of Music and London University, where he subsequently became Dean of the

Faculty of Music from 1954-1956 (Lovelock, n.d.).

In 1956 Lovelock moved to Brisbane, Australia, after he accepted the opportunity to

become the first Director of the Queensland Conservatorium of Music. He held this position

for three years, ultimately resigning due to differences with the Queensland Department of

Education. This break from formal positions allowed Lovelock more time to pursue his

private tutoring, textbook publishing, and compositional endeavours. In 1960 Lovelock

became the chief music critic for the newspaper Courier Mail, after the death of Robert

11

Dalley-Scarlett, holding the position until his return to England in 1981. It was during the

1960s and 1970s the majority of his outputs were composed. He has completed concerti for

many orchestral instruments, including flute (1961), trombone (1965), tuba (1967) and viola

(1960), all of which have been performed with Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)

symphony orchestras8 (Spearritt & Boughen, 1982).

Lovelock composed his Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra in 1968. It was

premièred in 1969 by John Robertson, accompanied by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra and

conducted by Joseph Post. This Concerto, composed in three movements, follows a

traditional fast, slow, fast structure. It is neo-romantic in nature, combining both long and

lush melodies with technical demands and chromaticism akin to that developed in solo

trumpet music in the Paris Conservatory during the mid-twentieth century (Bebbington, 2001;

Place, 2008).

In a survey conducted by Garrett (1984), professional trumpeters were asked to list

the most significant concerti of the century. From 92 respondents Lovelock’s Concerto was

ranked number five out of a list of more than 80 concerti. Despite its success however, the

Concerto has seen a small number of performances. This is most likely due to the difficulty

of performing a work that is long, technically demanding, and requires a large range to

adequately perform. There are currently no comparisons of the recordings available, nor is

there a comprehensive guide to performance. Logan Place’s 2008 DMA “An Analysis and

Performance Guide to William Lovelock’s Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra” features a

comprehensive analysis of the work, however his performance guide lacks depth and, in

some instances, directly contradicts the performance style heard in the current performances

of the work.

Since its première the piece has been recorded by Geoffrey Payne and the Melbourne

Symphony Orchestra in 1990, conducted by John Hopkins. The concerto has also been

recorded by Doc Severinsen with the Robert E. Lee High School Band, conducted by Charles

Forque. Despite Severinsen’s fame and ability as a trumpet player, it was decided that the

recording quality and quality of the band backing was not of high enough standard to warrant

a detailed review of the recording compared to that of Robertson and Payne.

8 Symphony Orchestras originally established by the ABC in each state of Australia

12

2.4 Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996) – John Williams (1932-)

John Towner Williams is one of the world’s most widely recognised composers. He

primarily forged his reputation in Hollywood, composing film scores, including Jaws (1975),

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977), Star Wars Saga (1977-), Superman (1978), and

E.T. (1982). With 23 Grammy Awards, seven BAFTA Awards9, five Academy Awards10,

and four Golden Globe Awards, Williams is one of the most successful American composers

(Sullivan, 2006 & 2007; Palmer & Marks, n.d.; “Biography”, n.d.)

Williams has also composed many orchestral and chamber works. Since 1969 he has

composed fifteen concerti, including those for alto saxophone, bassoon, clarinet, flute, French

horn, harp, oboe, tuba, viola, violin, and violoncello. His concerti use many different

compositional styles and idioms, sometimes musically expressing deep personal feelings. His

first Concerto for Violin and Orchestra (1976) was composed shortly after his wife’s death.

He invokes a love of nature in The Five Sacred Trees (1993) and TreeSong for Violin and

Orchestra (2000). Williams uses quirky and humorous development in his Concerto for Viola

and Orchestra (2009), which features a marital dispute between soloist and timpani player.

He also displays elements of instrumental historical use, such as his Concerto for Horn and

Orchestra (2003) with movements that display faraway bells, a call to battle, a hunt, and a

nocturne (Winegardner, 2011).

Williams’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996) was commissioned by the

Cleveland Symphony Orchestra (CSO) for its Principal Trumpet, Michael Sachs. The aim

was “to create a great twentieth-century American trumpet concerto – a strong piece with

tonal framework, soaring lyricism and vibrant flair, yet accessible for both the audience and

performer” (Sachs cited in Thornton, 1997, p.18). This Concerto has three movements,

employing a traditional fast, slow, fast structure. Each movement features a different style

unique to the trumpet, as well as its traditional use. The first movement displays traditional

ceremonial and militaristic qualities, opening with a fanfare featuring both the solo and

orchestral trumpets. The lyrical side of the trumpet is displayed in the second movement,

containing jazz elements and written in a style mirroring Barber and Gershwin. The finale is a

technical display, full of energy and amazing “pyrotechnics” (Davidson, 1996).

9 British Academy of Film and Television Arts 10 Also known as Oscars

13

The Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra premiered on the 26th of September 1996

and was, by all accounts, a resounding success (Thornton, 1997). Williams commented on

how unusual it is to have audience, critics and orchestra all enjoy a work. After the premiere

Davidson (1996, p.75) commented that trumpet players should “take note of…a significant

new work for our instrument. It is full of lyricism and technical flair, and it showcases all of

the trumpet’s capabilities.” Schneider has commented on the fact that for new works to

become successful they have to have some form of audience appeal (Garret, 1984). Despite

Williams’ name and compositional reputation, the Concerto has not gained much traction

within the profession.

The orchestration requires triple winds, thus the majority of student performances

would be without orchestral accompaniment. The piano reduction, printed by Hal Leonard, is

a copy of the one written by Williams, performed by Sachs three weeks prior to the orchestral

premiere. This concerto works well with piano accompaniment, but obviously loses effect in

areas, such as the trumpet ‘chase’ at the first movement’s conclusion and the various

differences in timbre and character of the cor anglais, flute, and trombone soloists in the

second movement (Thornton, 1997; Winegardner, 2011).

Apart from the original recording by Sachs and the CSO (which is currently not

available to the public), the work has been professionally recorded by two trumpeters: Arturo

Sandoval (2002, with the London Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Ronald Feldman) and

Jouko Harjanne (2013, Finnish Radio Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Dima

Slobodeniouk).

Born in Cuba in 1949, Sandoval’s reputation is predominately as a jazz artist. A

prolific artist, Sandoval has recorded multiple albums, showing a diverse array of styles and

receiving ten Grammy awards from nineteen nominations (Trujillo, 2007; Sandoval,

“Biography”). His Williams’ Concerto recording was the only recording released following

the premiere until 2013 and was the only rendition publicly available.

This Concerto requires a lot of endurance to perform due to its length, a low number

of rests, and melodies which are consistently in the upper register of the instrument. This is

where Sandoval shines, as the range that he possesses allows for a performance that never

falters from start to finish. His natural style, however, contains a quality of attack not often

heard in classical music. His stylistic performance is substantially different compared to the

performance by Harjanne.

14

Harjanne is a prominent Finnish trumpeter who has studied with Raimo Sarmas at the

Tampere Conservatoire and then both Henri Adelbracht and Timofei Dokshitser after

graduating. In addition to serving as alternate Principal Trumpet in the Tampere

Philharmonic Orchestra and playing in many chamber ensembles, such as Finnish Brass

Ensemble and the Brass Septet Imperial, he has made over thirty solo recordings. Through his

career Harjanne has been a leading figure in the recording of new and difficult works for the

trumpet. He is ranked among the elite class of international soloists by the professional music

press ("Jouko Harjanne", n.d.). His sound has been described as “silver-edged”, with

“exceptionally clean, soft tonguing…and rich liquid tone that is sweet rather than brazen and

never turn breathy or harsh” (Altena, 2011, p. 519; Calland, 1993, p. 54).

2.5 Summary and Conclusions

Despite the revival of the trumpet as a virtuosic instrument and a substantial number

of concerti composed for the instrument during the twentieth-century, many such works are

rarely performed. Most of these works are also under researched. The three works chosen to

analyse are: Karl Pilss’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1934), William Lovelock’s

Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968), and John Williams’ Concerto for Trumpet and

Orchestra (1996).

The technical difficulty of these concerti creates a barrier to potential performers, both

at the professional and student levels. Adding to the difficulty is both the limited number of

recordings and lack of research regarding these concerti to aid as guides to practice and

performance. Stylistic interpretation has also been discussed, as there is large variation

between the styles of performance in the low number of recordings available for both

Lovelock and William’s concerti. The history of the composers, their individual composition

style, and knowledge of the trumpeters they composed for provides greater understanding of

the work as a whole. This analysis serves as part of my methodology by providing a

framework of the stylistic way in which to approach these concerti, along with analysis of the

specific scores, recordings and my own practice-led research.

15

Chapter 3: Methodology

In this chapter I discuss the various ways in which research was conducted through

both Music Performance Research (MPR) and Artistic Research in Music (ARiM). The

different approaches are analysed by providing both positive and negative views on these

specific research methods and the justifications for using said view in this thesis.

3.1. Music Performance Research

Music Performance Research is an umbrella term that covers musicological-based

research specifically pertaining to performance. Three main terms are used as guides to MPR:

historically informed performance, psychology and performance, and analysis and

performance (Rink, 2004). I will be conducting research pertaining to analysis and

performance.

Analysis and performance is musicological research that focusses on score analysis.

Musicological analysts seek to inform performers of the correct way in which to interpret and

perform music based on study of score structure, including harmonic progression, voice

leading, tonal structure, tempo and dynamics (Lester, 1992). Berry (1998, pp. 217-218)

states, “the purely spontaneous, unknowing, unquestionable impulse is not enough to inspire

convincing performance…in any event intuition is inadequate to solving dilemmas or

providing justification that can be articulated”.

Analysis and performance, however, is plagued by issues such as individuals who

believe their own conceptual analysis of a piece is the only way in which it can be performed

correctly. In contrast, performers understand that it is rare that a piece will have only one

successful interpretation. Analysts can therefore lead performers to a state in which they are

alienated into a limited perspective with no room for individual interpretation or versatility in

creative output. Analysts often conceptualise scores without listening to performance as a

guide to understanding, seemingly regarding the actual performance as secondary (Lester,

1992; 1995). Fortunately this view is changing, with musicologists such as Cook (2013, p. 1),

who believes, “it is only once you think of music as performance that you can start to make

sense of the scores” and Emmerson (2009, p. 109), “the work, of course is not the score…and

so one turns to performances and recordings to gain a reasonably rich “concept” of what the

work can be”.

16

My research includes analysis and performance, the focus of which is the synthesis of

varying interpretations present in recordings compared to the written score. This has led to

my own musical and artistic interpretation of the concerti. Due to the negative views based on

one interpretation as the only way to perform, I have combined this form of research with

Artistic Research in Music.

3.2. Artistic Research in Music

Artistic Research in Music encompasses research methods relating to the way

in which insight is learned through practical means. Various terminologies include: practice-

led research, practice-based research, creative research, and practice as research. Candy

(2006) states that there is a distinct difference in practice-based research to that of practice-

led research. For her, practice-based research uses the creative work as a form of research

while practice-led research focusses on the practice, advancing knowledge within, or about,

practice. However, these terms are generally used more loosely and interchangeably for any

instance of research pertaining to creative work or output (Candy, 2006; Smith & Dean,

2009).

ARiM is often criticised by musicologists and academics and not seen as research due

to its practice-based nature rather than the traditional study of literature, scores or empirical

research methods. ARiM, however, can easily be implemented into the widely accepted

definition of research: a process which generates, or increases knowledge that can be

transferred, applied, or expanded upon. Through the training and expertise of practitioners,

creative work generates detectable research outputs and the process of practic ing “can lead to

specialised research insight which can then be generalised and written up as research” (Smith

and Dean, 2009, p. 5). Harrison (2011) argues that serious examination of the creative

process of practice plays a vital role in understanding how creativeness is formed through

“convention, compromise, and negotiation” (p. 222). In this regard the definition of practice

is both traditional practice and performance, where performance is simply an extension of

practice, as “the resistive, transcendent, and transformational possibilities of music also come

into being through performance” (Leavy, 2015, p. 128).

My inclusion of ARiM-based research primarily revolves around practice-led

research. This research will focus primarily on practice methods utilised to overcome specific

technically difficult areas within the concerti and stylistic interpretation.

17

3.3 Summary

The research that I have conducted combines that of MPR and ARiM. MPR has be

conducted through the compilation of recordings, both live and studio-recorded, score

analysis, and historical information relating to the composer and the original performers.

ARiM has be shown through discussion of my own personal practice and performance

techniques.

When discussing specific pitches, I have labelled them based on the written pitch of the

trumpet parts (Pilss’ concerto was written for Bb trumpet whereas both Lovelock and Williams’

were written for trumpet in C). This is the reference used:

Ex. 3.1 Pitch Classification

Due to the nature of this thesis revolving around student performances, and for ease of

viewing, most of the score analysis focuses on the piano reductions, as this will be the primary

means of performance. Musical examples of the reductions have been added to the text to aid

in the comprehension of analysis.

I have concurrently analysed the individual sections of the concerti, while giving

suggestion for performance technique and ways to overcome problematic areas. I have

analysed the interpretive variation within current recordings, comparing them to the score and

information given by the composers. I have also incorporated prior research regarding these

concerti and my own personal practice and performance in my guide to performance. In this

way the analysis of each concerto includes suggestions of ways in which to approach and

overcome problematic areas within the concerti as part of my own practice-led research.

Many of the problematic areas are due to the nature of twentieth-century composers

pushing the current limit of performance in new ways. This includes practice suggestions for

ways to approach technically challenging areas containing issues including large intervallic

leaps, dynamic extremes, range, and endurance. I have also addressed musical issues,

including the use of adaptive tone, phrasing, dynamics, and character. I have also suggested

techniques and exercises that I used to overcome these difficulties while also providing

18

information (if any) on the ways in which other performers have approached these same

problems as a performance guide.

In this chapter I discussed the positive and negative aspects of both MPR and ARiM

research methods. All aspects of both research methods discussed in this chapter are

combined in the analysis and performance guide of the three concerti by Pilss, Lovelock and

Williams in chapter four.

19

Chapter 4: Analysis and Performance Guide

This chapter presents both the score and the stylistic differences apparent in

recordings for each of the three concerti: Karl Pilss’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra

(1934), William Lovelock’s Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968), and John William’s

Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996). Each section is then discussed in further detail

regarding my own stylistic interpretation based on this analysis, as well as practice techniques

I have used to overcome any technically difficult areas in the music.

Each concerto has been analysed separately, and chronologically, in order to aid

readers to easily find information relating to the specific concerto that they may require.

Subheadings relating to each individual movement of the concerti have been added for

further accessibility, with a summary of the underlying themes discussed at the conclusion of

each concerto. Examples from the music also contributes to the ease of both comprehension

of analysis and finding specific sections from the concerti discussed within the paper.

4.1. Karl Pilss Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1934)

In this section Karl Pilss’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra is analysed. This

includes both analysis of score and the only available recording of the Concerto, performed

by Sidney Mear (1938). My own stylistic interpretation is discussed based on this analysis, as

well as ways in which to overcome technical challenges present within the Concerto.

4.1.1. First Movement

The first movement of Karl Pilss’ Concerto, Allegro Moderato, follows a traditional

sonata form, opening with a triumphant call from the accompaniment with the main theme of

the movement. This theme concludes abruptly in bar 10, with a silent pause, before the

introduction of the second theme in bar 11. This second theme is slower, softer, and has a

smoother melodic line. An accelerando leads back to the original tempo in bar 19 before the

solo trumpet entry at 26.

The trumpet opens with the first theme at a dynamic marking of piano – decidedly

different in style to the opening forte (see Ex. 4.1). The dynamic marking remains constant as

the trumpet progresses into a lyrical countermelody at bar 32. It is only with the return of the

20

main theme, and the beginning of an accelerando in bar 36, that the trumpet finally

progresses to mezzo piano. The accelerando gradually continues through until bar 41,

combined with a crescendo where the tempo reaches a new peak of 108 beats per minute

(BPM) and dynamic marking of forte. This tempo remains until a ritardando in bar 45,

resulting in a climactic finish to the opening section.

Ex. 4.1 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 26-37

In my performance I endeavour to remain consistent through this opening with both

tempo and dynamics. At the beginning of the solo it is easy to enter loudly, as has been done

previously by the accompaniment. This opening is in opposition to most trumpet concerti,

where the trumpet enters triumphantly with the main theme. I also find it important to start at

the stated tempo of 92 BPM, as this allows for an effective transition to the new tempo in bar

41 and subsequent ritardando at the conclusion of the opening. In his recording Mear

performs both the triplet quavers and semiquaver throughout the movement with a lot of

separation. This serves as a great contrast to the more lyrical sections, especially during the

opening where both sides of performance are displayed. In my recording I have followed this

style, however I lengthen the notes of the very last triplet, in bar 44, in order to provide

greater emphasis to the closing of the section, combined with both the forte and ritardando

markings (see Ex. 4.2).


21

After a short interlude the trumpet returns, now marked tranquillo. The

accompaniment plays the second theme from the opening while the solo trumpet, yet again,

performs a countermelody. The section is legato, with short phrases of arpeggiated triplets -

dolce is the new expression marking. Mear adds slight rubato through this section and a

substantial rallentando to the end of bar 65 as he passes the countermelody to the

accompaniment (see Ex. 4.3).


This lyrical idea is quickly forgotten as the piece changes suddenly to a codetta with a

12/8 feel with long semiquaver triplet passages. The accompaniment quickly joins in with its

own triplet semiquavers after two bars of soloist activity. Although this section is

immediately exciting and thrilling, I maintain a sense of control. The dynamic marking

begins at mezzo forte and decrescendos from there, eventually dropping to piano as the theme

shortens and dissolves. In my performance strict rhythmically accuracy is paramount through

these phrases. In my practice I have payed close attention to the varying lengths of rests

separating theses phrases, especially in bars 75 and 77 (see Ex. 4.4). Slow practice with a

metronome helped both the accuracy of my rhythm and notes through this section.


22

Following this sudden excitement, the accompaniment begins the development in bar

85. Here the opening motif is played in a minor key repeated, in canon to produce a

polyphonic cacophony of sound. The solo trumpet returns with its own minor mode variation

on the opening theme, once again marked piano. Variations on preceding motifs are passed

between the soloist and accompaniment, culminating in accelerated semiquaver patterns

combining arpeggios and parts of whole tone scales.

The tenutos over the notes in bar 105 are of stark contrast to the proceeding bars (see

Ex. 4.5). Mear goes so far as to crescendo these significantly into the next bar, remaining at

this new volume. I have chosen to crescendo through these notes but not as much as Mear, in

order to save the final climax for the crescendo in bar 111 and subsequent ritardando in bar

112 into the forte ending (see Ex. 4.6). I make sure to perform this ending the same way as

the end to the opening section, in bar 45, saving the majority of the crescendo for the last

three notes. The semiquaver passages are, for me, the most difficult of the movement. I

overcame this by practicing Clarke’s (1984) second study in both minor and whole tone

variations and Vizzutti’s Second and Third Technical Studies (Vizzutti, 1990).



23

Following directly from this climax the codetta suddenly returns, this time originating

in the accompaniment. Note that this reprise is even softer than the original, never reaching a

higher dynamic marking than mezzo piano. As with the previous codetta, slow practice is

key, as the notes are slightly varied this time through. There are no slurs this time around,

making performance more difficult due to the awkward tempo that doesn’t naturally suit

itself to single or triple tonguing. I found both Clarke’s one-minute tonguing exercise11 and

tonguing his second study extremely helpful for this section. I also make sure to focus on

blowing consistent air, as this helps the tongue move faster through these passages.

A more rhythmic variation of the opening theme, combined with an accelerando, is

then repeated four times before a return to piu mosso in bar 129. This results in yet another

crescendo starting at piano, which culminates in the biggest climax of the movement (bars

138-139). The conclusion of the opening theme is once again apparent, although this time the

notes are marked with accents in addition to the elevated fortissimo dynamic (see Ex. 4.7).


After the accompaniment re-performs the main theme the tranquillo section returns,

with the solo trumpet once again playing the countermelody to the second theme. Eventually

the intensity dies, with calando marked, paving the way for a soft, reflective muted repetition

of the opening theme, ending with a lengthy and dying concert B-flat from the trumpet. I

have used a metal straight mute as this produces the sound heard in Mear’s recording. The

pause is suddenly broken by forte triplets which herald the short coda at the bright tempo of

138 BPM. The movement abruptly ends with an exclamatory semiquaver scale up to concert

B-flat5.

11 Play semiquavers on G4 for one minute, breathing when needed. Start at a relaxed tempo and gradually increase the tempo over days or weeks.

24

4.1.2. Second Movement

The second movement, Largo - Allegretto Scherzando, begins with a chorale,

performed very slowly, with a metronome marking of 76 quavers per minute. The opening is

loud and dirge-like, originally orchestrated for brass, and interspersed with arpeggiated

melodies from the woodwind. At bar 13 the melody changes to a variation of the main theme

of the movement, now pulsed in crotchets. When the solo trumpet enters, in bar 19, the tempo

increases to a slightly faster crotchet at 46 BPM. Here the theme is played, this time in a

major key. This is a beautiful, long-phrased and calm melody. The part is marked both piano,

dolce, and decrescendos at the end of each phrase (see Ex. 4.8).

Ex. 4.8 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 19-26

My aim is to perform each entry as delicately as possible while still maintaining good

tone throughout. I found that a soft “da” tongue was best to produce the appropriate sound.

Solid breath control is necessary to play through these long phrases. I practiced these sections

away from the trumpet by simply blowing and tonguing, as I would with the trumpet. I would

pay attention to indicated breath marks and make sure to get a big, full, and relaxed breath at

every opportunity.

There is only one crescendo through this section. This follows as the melodic line

ascends into bar 30, however this is short-lived as the marking is immediately piano again at

the beginning of the bar. This sudden return to piano coincides with the highest note of the

passage, A-flat5 - only one tone lower than the highest note of the movement (see Ex. 4.9).

This sudden calming is very important to emphasise as it makes the change in character at bar

37 more unexpected and striking.

25


The movement takes an immediate change to allegretto scherzando and the trumpet,

now muted, performs fragmented semiquaver patterns over staccato backings. In this section

I find it important to blow through the mute as it is easy to create a sound too closed off,

compounded by the piano dynamic marking. It is also important to make clear where the

crotchets are. They have tenutos on them to make sure that it is obvious that these notes

should be the opposite of the short quavers at the end of other passages - this is made very

clear in Mear’s recording (see Ex. 4.10). Some notes are difficult to distinguish due to

reproduction problems. Of note are the E-naturals in bars 42 and 57 compared to the E-flats

in bars 43 and 58.


Although not written in the score both Mear and I rallentando over bar 77. This

serves to create a calm conclusion to the section while providing a smooth transition into the

brief lyrical accompaniment which follows (see Ex. 4.11).

26


The solo trumpet interrupts the melody in a fanfare-like manner, returning to the

semiquaver passages, this time without mute and marked at mezzo forte. This leads into a

cadenza, following the same rhythmic style, gradually becoming more lyrical and calmer as a

variation on the main theme is incorporated. I make sure to take a long pause at the caesura

27

after the fermata in bar 93. This serves as both calming before the change into tranquillo and

allows for a longer rest and better reset for my embouchure (see Ex. 4.12).


The main theme is once again restated by the orchestra and subsequently followed by

the solo trumpet. Mear crescendos to forte in bar 114 and I have followed this rendition as it

provides a strong ending which contrasts the actual conclusion to the movement fourteen bars

later. I also begin at a higher dynamic level at the re-entry in bar 125, performing at mezzo

piano instead of the marked piano in order to have more direction with the

calando/diminuendo over the last three bars (see Ex 4.13).


4.1.3. Third Movement

The final movement is marked Allegro and brings a joyfulness that has not been seen

previously in the Concerto. The opening theme primarily uses quaver/semiquaver rhythmic

patterns and is played within a simple concert B-flat major framework. Throughout the

movement there are constant changes between semiquavers and quaver triplets. I have found

it important for the difference to be heard but not overly stated, as the melody should flow

instead of being seemingly ‘halted’ by disjointed semiquavers. This is the only movement in

the Concerto where the trumpet enters with a forte dynamic marking (see Ex. 4.14).

28

Ex. 4.14 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 1-8

At bar 12 the soloist finishes the theme in time for the accompaniment to pick it up.

Just as the accompaniment begins branching into a transitional melody the trumpet re-enters

with the original theme again. This entry cuts the accompaniment short, interrupting it and

seeming a little jarring. It is necessary for the soloist to have a solid grasp of the

accompaniment as the cues given are not obvious when performed (see Ex. 4.15).


Immediately following the end of this restatement, the solo trumpet heralds a fanfare

before transitioning into a sudden reduction of tempo at bar 44. This change of pace also

brings a change in sonority as the main theme is continually modulated. Although the fanfare

is marked the same dynamic as the previous section, both the change in character and the fact

that forte is restated encourages me to bring this out more than the previous melody (see Ex.

4.16).

29



The tempo change at the meno mosso is sudden and strikingly different from the

opening. I have taken great care to make sure the accelerando does not start until bar 48 and

drops to mezzo forte (the only non-forte marking of the movement so far). This results in a

frantic charge back to the original tempo and dynamic, moving from 108 BPM to 132 BPM

over the duration of eight beats (see Ex. 4.17).

The accompaniment then takes over the melody, transitioning away from the strict

march feel in bar 61. A rallentando from bar 65 allows for further transition, seeming to die

away before the solo trumpet entry at the end of bar 68 with the second theme (see Ex. 4.18).

Although now marked at piano, this new, beautiful melody soars above the accompaniment,

with long-arching phrases. Due to both the soft dynamic and its relative position in the whole

Concerto these last lyrical sections can be tough to manage. I make sure to blow freely

through these passages, connecting the notes as much as possible with my air, especially

during the larger intervals.

30


After this lyrical theme the accompaniment returns to the first theme, this time

extending it and performing as a fugue, eventually adding the fanfare motif to the mix. The

trumpet returns in bar 141 with its own modified variant of the first theme, subsequently

followed by the original first theme in the accompaniment. The fanfare motif returns to the

solo trumpet, which then flows back to meno mosso. This return of the meno mosso section is

not the same as the first time through. The F-sharps from the previous rendition have been

changed to F-naturals in bars 171-173 and bars 174-175 have been modulated up a semitone

(see Ex. 4.19).

Ex. 4.19 Pilss, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 50-53, 172-177

The second, melodic, theme is restated first by the accompaniment and then by the

solo trumpet. This time through the intensity gradually builds with repetition, increased range

and crescendos. An animando in bar 195 combined with a forte marking and subsequent run

up to C6 further the intensity before a final climax reaching up to an E-flat6 three bars later.

31

There is no marking to indicate that the tempo should be once again reduced for the

restatement of the second theme, however the recording by Mear clearly slows just as the

trumpet enters, easing into the same tempo from before (108-116 BPM). This seems like the

right decision, as it is a repeat of the same section . In my performance I have used the

animando in bar 195 as an accelerando as a way in which to overcome the problem faced in

bars 196, 199, and 200 of hitting and remaining on both the high C6 and E-flat6 (see Ex.

4.20). As I accelerate, I reach the opening tempo of the movement, which means holding the

high notes for a much shorter time. This increase in tempo also helps ease the transition into

bar 203 as the tempo increase isn’t as severe, although still drastic enough to be immediately

noticed (a difference of 32 BPM).


The final flourish towards the end of the piece is electrifying. The first four bars of the

section are relatively simple to perform but the two bars following are harder due to

fingering, especially the middle triplets. This section should only be performed as fast as bars

207 and 208 can be played both clearly and accurately (see Ex. 4.21).


32

The ending of Mear’s recording does not have the last three bars of the trumpet solo,

instead ending with the solo piano. I am unaware if the Concerto was changed after this

recording. Performing with this current edition gives the ending a much more memorable

flair and sense of excitement as the trumpet finishes on a climactic fortissimo concert B-flat5.

4.1.4. Summary

At twenty-five minutes this Concerto is very long compared to those often performed

by trumpeters. However, Pilss has created a work with ample rests and phrases that primarily

stay within a comfortable range. Long flowing melodies juxtaposed with fast, technical

passages give the soloist an opportunity to show off many different styles of trumpet

performance. Although difficult, the work is a lot more accessible than either of the other two

concerti performed and discussed in this thesis. This is largely due to the range and endurance

needed compared to the other concerti, but also the technique required is also of a lower

standard.

This Concerto is a significant resource as it is one of the only traditionally romantic

concerti that trumpeters can choose to perform. As the piece was written in a romantic style

and for Franz Dengler, performers should keep in mind his style of performance when

playing this Concerto. It has been noted many times throughout this analysis that there are

numerous instances where the trumpet is marked at a softer dynamic than in more common

concerti. This is attributed to the character that Pilss was trying to evoke, combined with

Dengler’s traditional Viennese playing style in mind. Performers should also be aware that

the original instrument that this Concerto was written for was a rotary trumpet. Rotaries do

not portray the natural flair that modern-day piston trumpets do. In the technically

challenging sections, the performer must remember to find the musicality rather than solely

focussing on the technical side of performance.

33

4.2. William Lovelock Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1968)

This section discusses my research findings regarding William Lovelock’s Concerto

for Trumpet and Orchestra. Both the score and recordings by John Robertson (1969) and

Geoff Payne (1990) are analysed. My own stylistic interpretation is discussed based on this

analysis, as well as ways in which to overcome technical challenges present within the

Concerto.

4.2.1. First Movement

The first movement of Lovelock’s Concerto, Allegro, contains all the sections of a traditional

sonata form with an additional introduction and codetta. The Concerto opens with triumphant

timpani downbeat, immediately followed by a two-bar semiquaver passage ascending in the

strings before the flute and clarinets enter with a hint of the main theme to come. This

fractured melody is passed between the woodwinds and strings several times before the

opening two bars are repeated, allowing for the heraldic arrival of the solo trumpet. With a

tempo of only 108 BPM, the marking ‘allegro’ seems misplaced. It is made clear from the

beginning, however, that although the tempo is on the slower side of allegro, the constant

semiquaver melodic line throughout most of the movement provide a ‘fast and lively’ feel.

The trumpet enters with a dynamic marking of forte, in a fanfare-like manner,

performing the full version of the melody hinted at previously in the strings and woodwinds.

Lovelock has been very clear with his desired articulation and dynamics throughout.

Staccatos are denoted on most of the notes in this main theme. Place (2008) advocates

ignoring these markings, instead of playing these notes short, he favours a “sharp tongue” (p.

34). Based on the recordings of both Robertson and Payne, however, I perform this section

with a detached style throughout, as both performers play in this style, with Robertson also

adding a harsher ‘sharp tongue’. My main concern through this passage is landing on each of

the accented notes and following all dynamic markings as closely as possible in order to

create large contrasts, such as at bar 33 (see Ex. 4.22).

34

Ex. 4.22 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 25-36

In bar 36 Payne plays with the rhythmic line by performing the G-sharp, C-sharp, and

D-sharp as a triplet pattern. This serves to create further excitement and is possibly used to

foreshadow the coming transition theme and development. Robertson’s rendition, in

comparison, stays true to the rhythm notated. I also follow the written notation as I believe

this is concluding the main theme and should remain separate to the later sections of the

movement.

The transitional section which begins at bar 41 (and returns later in the movement) is,

for me, the most difficult of the movement. Careful attention of notes and dynamic markings

is required to perform these sections. I have utilised multiple practice techniques to aid in

these difficult passages including wind patterning12, fingering without playing, slow practice,

and playing the patterns with different rhythms. I use the hairpin markings to aid in leaping

up to both the E-flat and the C in bars 42 and 50 respectively. Most of this section is centred

around a piano dynamic marking. I always make sure that I constantly drop back to this quiet

dynamic and leave my crescendos late, such as in bars 47-48 (see Ex. 4.23).

12Using the breath to play through a passage away from the trumpet, focusing on the wind pattern required.

35


At bar 54 a second transition section is introduced. This is a direct contrast to the

previous transitional section as it contains large intervallic leaps and dynamic markings

ranging from forte to fortissimo compared to the previous intervallic step-like patterns and

subdued dynamics. In this section I aim to make the contrast between the triplet semiquavers

and non-triplet semiquavers as noticeable as possible. I do this by strongly articulating each

of the first three notes of the bar and slightly crushing the triplets. I make sure, however, to

make each note speak as clearly as possible throughout (see Ex. 4.24).


36

This extended transition section ends with two bars of quietening ascending triplet

runs from the solo trumpet. An abrupt change in style occurs when the clarinet enters with a

short melodic line that is quickly overshadowed by a restatement of this melody by the

trumpet. This lyrical theme is performed slower than the rest of the movement, with a

marking of poco meno mosso. Place (2008) states that, “particular attention should be paid to

the breath markings since they show the correct phrasing of the lyrical line” (p. 35). In the

recordings by Robertson and Payne, however, both performers seem to prefer to follow the

lyrical line set out by the slurs, rather than paying particular attention to the breath marks.

This is clear in Payne’s rendition when analysing how he performs bars 66 -69. Payne takes a

breath after the B-flat in bar 66, instead choosing to hold the B-flat in bar 67 (where the

breath mark is notated). He then takes a subsequent breath after the G in bar 69 (see Ex.

4.25).


While I do perform with a breath at this notated spot in the phrase, it can be difficult

to make it through the rest of the phrase with that single breath. I believe it is more important

to have a clear understanding of the phrases and to add in breaths that don’t compromise the

lyrical line. In bar 82, for example, I find it redundant to take a breath where it is marked , and

instead allow a slight pause, subsequently taking a breath in bar 84 where the passage is

repeated where no breath is indicated (see Ex. 4.26).

37


A seven-bar transition follows as the orchestra concludes the lyrical section, leading

into a sudden and explosive development of the first theme at bar 96, marked imperioso. In

both renditions by Robertson and Payne the semiquaver triplets in bars 96 and 101 are

performed as non-triplets, starting a semiquaver earlier. I have followed this rhythm in my

performance as it allows for much more clarity of notes, especially the second time through

as it reaches up to the C-sharp6. This rhythmic change also fits within the context of the

previous transition section and the slower speed allows for greater forcefulness to more easily

portray the imperious sound desired (see Ex. 4.27).


For me, the section from bars 104-112 are cheeky in nature. This passage draws upon

and extends that originally portrayed in bars 26-27. I make sure to follow the extremes in

dynamics as they are written in order to show this different nature of the movement (see Ex.

4.28)

38


The orchestra then performs a nine-bar variation on the second theme before the

trumpet returns with the recapitulation at bar 121. Unlike traditional sonata form, this

recapitulation begins with a reduced version of the second theme instead of returning to the

first theme. This time there is no ritardando marked leading into the second theme, making

the sudden change in tempo slightly jarring. This transition should therefore be rehearsed

carefully with an accompanist (or orchestra) before performance (see Ex. 4.29).


Following this, variations on both transitional melodies are performed before a

climactic leap to E-flat6 and the subsequent restatement of the original theme and codetta to

finish the movement. The E-flat6 is the highest note reached in any of the concerti covered in

39

this thesis and is required near the end of a physically taxing movement containing no

extended rest periods. To aid in performing this note I play the accent and staccato written

and slam it out, while simultaneously throwing it away as quickly as possible - I set this style

up with the triplet B and C in the preceding bar.

The restatement of the main theme is now with heightened dynamic markings. I make

sure to bring this out further, while still following the subsequent reduced dynamic markings,

as previously discussed. The final 12-bar codetta is slightly faster, marked poco piu mosso,

and delivers even more energy and excitement. In a further show of brilliance, the

semiquavers of the second transitional theme have been changed to triplets in bars 174-175 -

as they also were in the bars leading to the E-flat6. This time, however, they have been

marked fortissimo and serve to aid in the frantic conclusion of the movement, finally leaping

up to a held C6 before dropping two octaves to C4. I make sure to retain the intensity of

sound from the C6 while playing the final C4’s of the movement (see Ex. 4 .30).



The second movement, Moderato, is in the style of a folksong, likely drawn from

Lovelock’s English Heritage. The movement contains three main themes, followed by a

conclusion which encompasses fragments of each of these themes. Strings begin with an

ostinato which becomes a recurring accompaniment theme throughout the movement (see Ex.

4.31). A long and slow melody is passed between the horns, oboe and clarinet before a slight

indication of the trumpet melody to come is played in the strings.

40

Ex. 4.31 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 1-4

When the trumpet enters with the first theme at bar 19 the orchestra drops out

completely for a bar and a half, allowing the trumpet to creep in at the piano dynamic listed,

with a slight crescendo. This silence from the orchestra is repeated when the opening line is

again performed by the trumpet two bars later (see Ex 4.32 )


During the second theme the trumpet enters at mezzo piano and crescendos to mezzo

forte. For me, the entire piece contains one giant overarching hairpin crescendo and

decrescendo that climaxes during the third theme. It is important that I remember this as I am

playing this first theme, making sure that my crescendos are only slight and as delicate as

possible while still maintaining a lush core sound.

41

The first theme concludes as softly as it started, allowing the clarinet to cut through

the end of the fading melody with the new theme. This melody is passed along to the oboe,

and then again to the violins where it is developed further before the trumpet restates this

second theme in its entirety. As previously stated, when the trumpet enters with this second

theme it is at one dynamic level higher, yet I endeavour to retain all the qualities strived for

during the first theme (see Ex. 4.33).


The violins introduce the third theme before the trumpet once again plays the same

from the beginning, again extending on the melody the violins introduced. This theme, again,

starts at another dynamic level higher than the previous section – mezzo forte. As stated

earlier, this is also the theme that contains the main climax of the movement, as it soars all

the way to a fortissimo marking in bar 63. As I crescendo through this theme I make sure to

retain enough dynamic room to allow me to give a final push higher at the climax in bars 63-

64 (see Ex. 4.34).


42

Although this section reaches to a B5 while at a fortissimo dynamic, with accent, I try

to maintain an open sound as much as I can to keep in line with the rest of the movement's

folk-like quality. After reaching this climax I make sure to pull away in both dynamic and

intensity as quickly as possible, as directed by the diminuendo molto in bar 65.

The final sections of the second movement combine fragments of the previous three

themes, while also further interweaving the melodies between soloist and orchestra. A

thorough understanding of the way in which the melody is traded through the orchestra is

required to produce a smooth and coherent performance (see Ex. 4.35). During the muted

sections I, along with both Robertson and Payne, use a cup mute to produce a more lyrical

and folk-like quality than a straight mute could produce.

43


Throughout this movement both Robertson and Payne use a large amount of rubato.

Both performers systematically begin each phrase slower, slightly increasing in tempo as they

approach the climax. In Payne’s recording, throughout the movement, the tempo gradually

increases from as low as 55 BPM at the start, to over 70 BPM at the height of the third theme.

After this substantial increase in tempo it wanes during the following phrases, yet never

returns to the stillness of the original 55 BPM opening. Robertson’s recording, in contrast,

finishes at a substantially slower tempo than the opening. This is due, in part, to the large

amount of time taken to accommodate the numerous breath marks notated and the calando

44

effect that Robertson has chosen to interpret from the final diminuendos (see Ex. 4.36). I

believe both interpretations are valid, while choosing to follow Robertson’s in my own

performance.



The third movement, Allegro, is in rondo form with an additional introduction and

cadenza. The movement opens with strings playing short, percussive chords under a triplet

melody performed by a horn. The solo trumpet quickly enters with a 9/8, triplet version of the

first theme from the first movement. Unlike the first movement, however, this entry is

marked piano and slowly crescendos through the phrase, finally reaching forte 12 bars into

the melody, at bar 16. I make sure to enter quietly to create a greater contrast with the

crescendo to forte and to also make a point of difference when the refrain returns at a louder

dynamic later in the movement. Under the soloist’s melody the strings constantly change

between triple and duple rhythms. This can be off-putting if the soloist is not aware, or ready,

for such rhythmic cohesion (see Ex. 4.37).

45

Ex. 4.37 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 8-15

Although the movement is marked at 120 BPM both Robertson and Payne

substantially exceed this tempo, performing between 140-150 BPM. This increased tempo

produces a more exciting rendition, while also making endurance easier. The tempo set,

however, must not be too fast as to forgo accuracy of notes, as there are several tricky

technical passages and large intervallic leaps. Performers must be wary of all these aspects

before attempting the movement at a faster tempo than indicated.

Once again, mirroring the first movement, Lovelock suddenly drops the dynamic

levels before quickly rising again multiple times, such as from bars 14-30 (see Ex. 4.38). The

climax of this first refrain is reached in bar 29 - a variation of the same climax reached in the

first movement in bar 30. Again, as was the case in the first movement, this leads directly into

a transitional section. This short-lived transition contains fragments of melody heard in the

first theme, along with new motifs from the new theme.

46


In bar 38 the meter changes to 3/4, with the arrival of the first episode three bars later

in the solo trumpet. This new melody is reminiscent of the first transitional theme in the first

movement – and takes place in a similar location within this movement. Once again I make

sure to follow the hairpin dynamics, using the crescendos to help reach the higher notes. As

with the first transition theme in the first movement this section is technically challenging,

especially in bars 50-53 (see Ex. 4.39). I have utilised all the same techniques for this passage

as I did with those previous passages (see page 33).


From bar 55 the oboe begins the transition back to the refrain, with the trumpet

entering in bar 61, coinciding with a return to 9/8. This repeat of the first theme is now

47

suddenly marked forte and much more fanfare-like, with accents replacing tenutos - as it was

in the first movement. The woodwinds, and then strings, continue this theme until the trumpet

re-enters to conclude this section with a final statement marked imperiosio (see Ex. 4.40).


At bar 83 the time signature reverts again to 3/4, coinciding with the beginning of the

second episode. This is a slower part of the movement, yet it is marked gicoso e leggieroi,

pulling away from the heaviness that was just introduced with the imperioso marking. This

episode has the feel of a waltz and draws from some of the idea presented in the second

movement. This is especially apparent when comparing bars 98-102 to the third theme of the

second movement (see Ex. 4.34). I believe it is important to remain as light as possible

through this episode. To aid in the playful, waltz-like nature, I slow down the quavers leading

into both bars 90 and 92 as Payne does in his recording (see Ex. 4.41).


At the conclusion of the second episode the piece returns to the refrain and 9/8 feel,

once again marked forte when the trumpet enters. The final bars of this refrain change, again

48

incorporating rhythmic motifs introduced in the first movement, before reaching up to a

sustained E-flat6 and subsequent cadenza (see Ex. 4.42).


Regarding endurance, this is the hardest part of the entire Concerto, additionally

occurring right at the end of the work. The cadenza is 47 bars in length and contains the most

consistent use of extended range in the Concerto. It also includes many technically

challenging fast rhythmic passages with numerous, large intervallic leaps. Place (2008) states

that, “The material of the cadenza is nothing Lovelock has used before in the concerto. The

cadenza is the weakest part of the piece…each brief phrase comes across as nothing more

than technical challenges” (p. 30). While I agree with this opinion, it is my assertion that this

means it is up to the performer to create musicality in this otherwise technically flashy

segment of the Concerto. Both Robertson and Payne perform this same cadenza with

different interpretations with the use of varied rubato, durations of rests between new

phrases, dynamics and articulations. Both performers deliver successful and musical

performances of the cadenza in their own unique way. Although there are not many

opportunities to do so, I find sections in the cadenza where I can take small breaks to help

reset and relax my embouchure, such as the quaver rest in example 4.43.

Ex. 4.43 Lovelock, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, cadenza

49

At the conclusion of the cadenza the violins immediately start a frantic semiquaver

passage in 2/4, marked presto. A flute takes over the melody before the trumpet repeats this

same passage. The tempo marking set is 144 BPM, however, as with the rest of the

movement, both Robertson and Payne exceed this, with Payne reaching over 160 BPM. The

piece ends in a flash of excitement as the trumpet performs a two-octave, chromatic scale

ending on a sustained C6 before falling two octaves to a C4, mirroring the end of the first

movement (see Ex. 4.30, Ex. 4.44).


This whole section of the movement, from the lead up to the cadenza to the end of the

Concerto, is one extended display of technicality and overall trumpet mastery. To be played

effectively it requires use of both double and triple tonguing, fast finger work, soft lyrical

playing, forceful playing, and a range up to a concert E-flat6. Although made more difficult

to perform as it is placed at the end of the Concerto this also means that everything that is left

can be used on this final section of the piece. By the conclusion of the Concerto I have given

everything I can to create a successful performance - an extremely rewarding and exhilarating

experience.

50

4.2.4. Summary

This Concerto is the shortest in length of the three researched in this thesis, however,

due to a lack of extended rests, long phrases and extremes in both range and dynamics, it is

one of the most difficult to endure. Numerous technically challenging passages also add to

the piece’s difficulty in both practice and performance. With careful and smart practice,

however, this can be a very rewarding piece to both learn and perform. The neo-romantic

style in which it is written provides a genre that is severely lacking within the normal trumpet

repertoire. With its recurring themes, beautiful, soaring melodies, and lively and exclamatory

passages, the piece is easy to listen to from an audience perspective. All three movements tie

together in some form, with the first and third movements drawing heavily from the same

themes and the second movement showing through their slower passages. The large rests,

slower tempo, and less range required in the second movement makes it a welcome reprise in

between the franticness of the first and third movements of the Concerto. The movement

alone can also work well in a recital situation if the whole work is too difficult to manage as

it is very accessible for most tertiary student abilities.

51

4.3. John Williams Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (1996)

This section discusses my research findings regarding John Williams’ Concerto for Trumpet

and Orchestra. Both the score and the two available recordings by Arturo Sandoval (2002)

and Jouko Harjanne (2013) are analysed. My own stylistic interpretation is discussed based

on this analysis, as well as ways in which to overcome technical challenges present within the

Concerto.

4.3.1 First Movement

John Williams’ Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra opens with a fanfare, militaristic

in nature, characterized by the semiquaver/dotted quaver rhythm and the Maestoso marking.

This opening precludes the accompaniment by a full bar before the entry of sustained notes

with staggered entries. Through this section the accompaniment plays simply as backing to

the herald of the trumpet fanfare. It isn’t until the repeat of the opening from the solo trumpet

in the eighth bar that the piano starts to play a more prominent role in the rhythmic function,

by continually repeating the semiquaver/dotted quaver rhythm. Williams sets the framework

for the piece, containing a myriad of large intervallic leaps and octave displacements. This is

evident in the third bar, where more than two octaves are covered, from G3 to A5 (see Ex.

4.45).

Ex. 4.45 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, bars 1-4

It is clear from the recordings of this opening that Sandoval and Harjanne perform

with very different styles, particularly regarding articulation. Sandoval performs with accents

on almost every note of the first four bars and articulates the first semiquaver in bar one as a

staccato. Harjanne comparatively opens in a much subtler manner, only placing any form of

emphasis on the notes with marcato accents over them – these notes are also played staccato.

The quintuplets in the second bar are performed by Harjanne evenly, whereas Sandoval slows

over the last three notes while emphasising them further by playing the staccatos extremely

short. As the opening section is marked marcato, in my recording I have followed the style of

52

Sandoval for the opening bar, however I perform the quintuplets in the same manner as

Harjanne in order to maintain strict adherence to the tempo, in a march-like fashion.

The opening trumpet melody is then repeated once again in bar 13, this time a third

higher than the original and offset from original meter, as note lengths have been varied from

that of the original. This opening culminates in a series of leaps from B-flat5 to F5 over three

bars, with a slight rallentando into the new section, marked risoluto (see Ex. 4.46).


The beginning of the risoluto immediately changes in tempo to 118 BPM. The

militaristic nature of the movement is further solidified through the continued use of the

dotted quaver/semiquaver rhythm – a reversal of the original semiquaver/dotted quaver. The

trumpet melody in this section is relatively simple rhythmically yet contains a lot of large

intervallic leaps. These leaps are difficult to ‘hear’ internally, meaning that both a solid grasp

of the sound of the intervals used and lip flexibility is required. Adding to the difficulty is that

there are two phrases that end on a sustained A5 (bars 28 and 30) followed by a sudden reset

over an octave and a half lower. The section also ends shortly after three bars of a sustained

G5, including an octave jump and a sudden drop from forte to subito piano and back to forte

again within the space of two bars (see Ex. 4.47). Between the opening and the risoluto there

are only 10 beats in which to prepare for the new section, offering little respite for the

performer (see Ex. 4.23). It is clear from these opening sections that both flexibility and

endurance play a large role in the performance of this Concerto.

53


As the melody is only marked mezzo forte, I let it rise out from the preceding sound,

as the accompaniment fades away over the first half of bar 25. It seems as if the harshness

and rigid formality has abated in lieu of a more melodic line. The last semiquaver in bar 26 is

marked forte, I make this as startling as possible in comparison, as the mood suddenly reverts

to the militaristic style. This whole passage seems to bounce between different ideas and

serves as a foreshadowing of what is to come throughout the rest of the movement (the legato

line in bar 35, for example, is repeated and expanded upon in bars 137-143) (see Ex. 4.48)).

Williams’ is very clear to indicate the sudden changes in character through articulation and

dynamic markings. This is one occasion where both soloists perform in a similar way

throughout, clearly stating the need for strict adherence to the score.


54

The solo trumpet once again resumes in bar 61 the same way as the previous section,

although this time marked forte. After two bars, however, the character changes, this time to

a more lyrical style. Cantabile is marked in the trumpet part while the orchestra has the

marking “warmly”. There are no longer any staccatos and far fewer accents marked than the

sections previous.

Throughout the movement Williams plays with meter, making distinguishing the beat

difficult for the listener. Although Williams changes the time signature to 3/4 there are

numerous bars which subvert the marking, written in a 6/8 fashion such as bars 63, 65 , and 67

(see Ex. 4.49). The solo trumpet also performs a four-over-three rhythm in bar 78. The

combination of these factors adds to the difficulty of the section, as rhythmic accuracy is

extremely important for a cohesive performance. The hidden meter makes it easy to mistake

rhythms, such as in bar 85 where Harjanne cuts the F4 short by a whole beat. To overcome

this, I have conducted extensive practice with a metronome and listened to recordings of

myself practicing the section.


Octave displacement are also used to an even greater degree in this section, with

examples in bars 73, 75, 77, 79, and 81 (see Ex. 4.50). This once again tests endurance and

flexibility while also making distinguishing melodic themes more difficult due its disjointed

nature.


55

In bar 82 the accompaniment resumes the incessant dotted quaver/semiquaver rhythm

and on cue at the end of bar 83 the trumpet answers with an octave ‘call’. Immediately the

change is apparent, with a staccato on the very first note. At the beginning of bar 86 there is a

subito piano, which paves the way for a crescendo to mezzo forte over two bars and then

another crescendo drawn out from bar 93 to a fortissimo marking at bar 97. This is the biggest

dynamic variation of the Concerto so far and continues further, as the phrase ends with a

crescendo towards the last note (see Ex. 4.51). I make sure to exaggerate the staccatos to

emphasis the return of the militaristic and march-like style of the opening. I also bring out the

ending of the section in order to make the audience aware that the current climax of the

movement has arrived.


After a long orchestral interlude, the trumpet re-enters similarly to the beginning of

the risoluto – the first four notes and rhythms are the same in both bars however the D, C,

and F are displaced down an octave (see Ex. 4.24). This phrase combines themes heard prior

in the movement, juxtaposing the rigidness and lyrical style over two bar phrases before

culminating back to maestoso at bar 149 which leads quickly into the cadenza at bar 154.

Both recordings make big effect of the rallentando in bar 146, however they differ in 148

with the ritardando. Harjanne accelerates slightly into the new maestoso tempo, while

Sandoval slows further. In my recording I follow the marking by Williams and Sandoval’s

recording, drawing out the final quavers of bar 148 in order to give greater emphasis to the

return of the maestoso (see Ex. 4.52).

56


The cadenza is marked ‘freely’, thus allowing the soloist free reign over the tempo,

style, and phrasing. The cadenza is challenging technically, with continued emphasis on large

intervallic leaps, combined with fast passages. Most of the body of the cadenza stays within

or below the staff, making it relatively easily conquered with slow practice. The ending,

however, is as taxing for endurance as it started, with a bar of B5’s interspersed by C6’s

before a final B-flat5 pause (see Ex. 4.53). It is important to practice the pacing of the

cadenza so that these last few bars remain strong. I make use of both the fermata rests and the

breath mark at the beginning to briefly take the trumpet off my lips and reset. Keeping the

dynamics subdued for as long as possible also helps with endurance through all the leaping

phrases, with the big crescendo delayed until closer to the end of the cadenza.

Ex. 4.53 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, First Movement, cadenza

A brilliant transition follows, where the orchestral trumpets compete with the soloist

in a flurry of semiquaver runs over one another (see Ex. 4.54). This is the one area where

William’s has specifically stated that the piano reduction loses the original desired effect

(Thornton, 1997). I believe that, due to this fact, it is extremely important that the soloist is

able to perform this section with technical ease, as there are no other trumpets to compete

with and cover the sound.

57


At the conclusion of the ‘competition’ the trumpets briefly join to play the main

orchestral theme that has been a common occurrence during the soloist rests. The movement

then ends with a coda section that slowly fades away. I found counting these last seven bars

rest particularly difficult due to the offbeat rhythms in bar 173 and the change in pulse from

the semiquavers in 3/8 at bar 176 to those in 3/4 at bar 177 (see Ex. 4.55). As is the case

58

throughout the whole movement it is very important to have a solid grasp of the

accompaniment at all times.



The first movement segues directly into the second movement, Slowly, flowing from

the tranquillity produced at the conclusion. The introduction to this movement features the

cor anglais, flute, and trombone along with the solo trumpet. In an interview with

Winegardner (2011, p. 205) Sachs stated that Williams had these partnerships in mind from

the beginning of the compositional process. The trombone was used as it is the “closest

partner in the orchestra” to the trumpet, the cor angalias was the trumpet’s partner in

Copland’s Quiet City, and finally, the flute was used because it “gives the trumpet

opportunity to show a very different quieter intimate side.”

59

This introduction contains a lot of repetition, playing off the other solo instruments

and picking up where another trails away. Bar 17 is one such example, as the trombone plays

triplets, followed immediately by the solo trumpet (see Ex. 4.56). Williams has again used a

large range of the trumpet, beginning on A3 and slowly moving through to A5 before a

sudden leap back down to G4 to finish at bar 20.


Through this section Williams has once again concealed the meter, with solos often

beginning off the beat. It is extremely important for the soloist to understand the parts that are

being played around them so as not to become lost within the ambiguity of both the melodies

and harmony. This is made harder when performing with piano as, unlike an orchestra

performance, the timbre is unchanged throughout the varying instrumental solos. Regarding

this ambiguity Sandoval’s performance doesn’t exactly match the written notation. This is

especially apparent in bar 13, where he enters almost a quaver earlier than that written in the

score. He is also slightly ahead of the trombone in bar 10 where both instruments have the

same rhythm (see Ex. 4.57). This is in stark contrast to Harjanne, who performs with strict

rhythmic accuracy. This may be an effect utilised by Sandoval to further the ambiguousness

of the beat. Due to no indications by the composer to play in this style, my own performance

follows that of Harjanne with the aim of performing as rhythmically accurate as possible.

60


The next section, ‘tenderly’, is marked only two beats faster than the opening

‘slowly’. Here the accompaniment is reduced to a simple crotchet/minim ostinato and reduces

the dynamic to pianissimo. A slight swell before the entry of the trumpet helps introduce it as

the solo voice of the new section. The sound of the trumpet pushes through the decreasing

dynamic of the accompaniment and further crescendos for the duration of the phrase before

descending in pitch to a low F-sharp3.

The next phrase, beginning in bar 35, becomes more texturally complex as the

accompaniment, once again, plays a larger role. The soloist must be careful to clearly

distinguish between triplets, quavers and semiquavers and accurately play triplets over

quavers such as in bars 39-40. The music also swells at this point, reaching forte at the end of

the phrase and adds semiquaver/dotted quaver rhythms, reminiscent of the fanfare in the first

movement (see Ex. 4.58).


61

Bar 43 marks a substantial change in the movement as the accompaniment moves to a

quicker semiquaver rhythmic ostinato, with a much more dense harmonic texture. When the

trumpet re-enters in bar 47 it is with a quintuplet pattern, followed later (in bar 49) by a three-

note semiquaver pattern – both themes repeat in varying forms throughout the remainder of

the movement. I make sure to play through the quintuplet without a clear sense of pulse, as

the emphasis should be on the accent on the last beat of the bar. This is the case whenever

this pattern repeats, so it is important to set this up from the beginning to remain consistent

(see Ex. 4.59).


This section ends with a soaring lyrical melody in bar 53. This is not the case in

Sandoval’s recording, however, where the bar continues with a held D5. Sachs has stated that

this version was the same as the original première, presuming that the change was made by

Williams to add greater embellishment to the music (cited in. Winegardner, 2011, p. 209). It

should be noted that a similar difference in performance is also heard later, in bar 75, where

Sandoval plays repeated D5’s instead of the cantabile line notated. If a player wishes to

perform the Concerto true to the original première, they should transcribe these bars as

performed by Sandoval – these bars are both simpler and easier in their original form. They

must also remove bars 56-63 as these were also added later (see Ex. 4.60). This extended

addition allows for further statement of the quintuplet and semiquaver motifs before the

change in style marked ‘declamatory’.

Ex. 4.60 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Second Movement, bars 53-55, 74-

75

The following run up to the D6 can be extremely taxing and difficult to execute. In

my performance, and practice, I use the G5 in bar 64 as preparation for the following run,

62

mentally and physically keeping my embouchure secure until the end of the phrase (see Ex.

4.61).


From bar 72 the three semiquaver/quintuplet motifs are further developed, repeating

on varying notes and intervals, occasionally in a different style such as the cantabile in bar

82. This time it is very subdued compared to the style of that previous. The other solo

instruments return throughout this section, most notably the flute. The soloist should know

the flute melody to fit with, and play against, their part – especially during the rubato from

bars 89-93 (see Ex. 4.62).


63

The final part of the movement returns to the “tenderly” tempo and theme before leading into

a small cadenza at bar 105. Once again, the cadenza is up to the performer to interpret, with

the only major direction from Williams as “not fast”. I perform as if calando is marked

during the last four quavers leading towards the fermata, before the sudden rise and fall in

dynamics during the next bar. The accompaniment returns for the final four bars of the piece

before dying away once more (see Ex. 4.63).


Although this movement provides several opportunities for rest, its slow tempo, large

intervals, and use of prolonged, extended range makes endurance difficult. Additionally,

many of the intervals used are awkward and hard to internalise, making it easy to accidentally

play incorrect notes. Repeated listening to recordings and slow practice are important to

building solid concepts of the melodic motifs. A lot of flexibility and endurance is required.

To help prepare for performance, warmups that include Schlossberg, Bai Lin , and Arban

interval studies are extremely beneficial.

64


As stated by Williams, the third movement of the Concerto, Allegro Deciso, is “a

technical showpiece with dramatic double and triple tonguing, scales arpeggios, leaps, and all

the great theatrics a great trumpeter can provide” (cited in Thornton, 1997, p. 20). The

trumpet enters with a fast passage full of meter changes and sudden explosive dynamic

variance, full of precise articulations. Williams has been exacting with all aspects of

dynamics and articulation and it is important not to overlook any of these features when

performing. Care should be taken to plan out how each segment will end regarding the

crescendos and subsequent return to piano (see Ex. 4.64).

Ex. 4.64 Williams, Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra, Third Movement, bars 1-27

Harjanne seems to crescendo to mezzo piano in bars 19, 21, and 23 and to mezzo forte

in bar 25 – elevating one dynamic marking for each crescendo. Sandoval’s recording,

however, seems to have less structure. There is a slight change in dynamics during the

crescendos but there is no clear pattern discernible. The crescendos seem to only emanate

based on the accents in bars 19 and 21, but changes to a crescendo over the whole bar in bars

23 and 25.

Sandoval ignores the slurs at the end of bars 18, 22, 42, and 44, this may be due to

changes in editions from the première or simply a difference in interpretation. Sandoval does

however follow the tenuto markings such as in bars 38 and 41, where Harjanne does not.

Instead Harjanne chooses to play each of the quavers the same length. This is in opposition

the way he previously played the same articulation markings in bar 31.

65

The next section, starting in bar 73, is for me, one of the most difficult of the entire

Concerto. It requires extremely fast finger and tonguing ability, combined with the endurance

to last more than 30 bars without break spanning over two octaves, ending on a high D6.

Again, Sandoval adds a few slurs, in bars 77 and 80, and removes a slur in both bars 79 and

100. In comparison to Sandoval’s performance Harjanne follow the articulations almost

perfectly.

Both players execute the poco meno well and the sudden change in character to a

cantabile style is immediately apparent yet not jarring. Repetitive slow practice is needed to

execute the following runs fluently. These runs are made harder to play with the fact that

none follow any normal scalic pattern, nor do they repeat themselves. They also constantly

shift between tongued and slurred, which means double-tonguing exercises from books such

as Arban and Vizzutti are helpful practice tools. Adding each of these runs, played slowly, in

warmup routines is a significant help as it makes the fingering more natural. I also practiced

the fingering with a copy of these away from the trumpet so that I would not fatigue myself

when I had to be in top condition for other practices and performances (see Ex. 4.65).


66

A short orchestral interlude suddenly changes the character once more, introducing

arpeggiated legato quavers. When the solo trumpet re-emerges, it plays against these triplets

with sustained notes using duple subdivisions. Although constantly ascending, this new

melody seems dark and foreboding, acting as the opposite to the rest of the movement (see

Ex. 4.66).

Once again, the passage ends with multiple bars above the staff, mostly B’s in this

case. Even though this melody from bar 115 is disjointed by large intervallic leaps, the jumps

should be as smooth and seamless as possible. Lip flexibility is required to perform this

accurately, with the ability to move between octaves as smoothly as possible, keeping the

same tone throughout. Bai lin, Schlossberg, Stamp, and Vizzutti exercises were again great

ways for me to increase lip flexibility for this Concerto.


A theme similar to the opening of the movement is then presented after a short re-

continuation of the previous section. This passage is difficult due to its varying meter and

note lengths. Looking specif ically at bars 170 and 171 it is important to hear the distinction

67

between the dotted quaver/dotted quaver and the quaver/crotchet in the bar following (see Ex.

4.67).


It is also easy to mistake crotchet rests with dotted crotchet rest, or simply hold a rest

too long, as is the case with Sandoval’s recording at the beginning of bar 181. Sandoval , once

again, adds a different articulation to that which is written, slurring the staccato notes in bar

161. The remainder of the section is played according to the markings by both performers.

Note that this time through Harjanne also plays every tenuto/staccato quaver pattern as

written, contrasting the way he previously performed the opening of the movement.

In bar 242 the trumpet is marked mezzo piano, a significantly large change in dynamic

from the previous forte crescendo. Where Harjanne follows this marking Sandoval does not,

continuing instead to perform at forte, not dropping back in volume until bar 244 with the

mezzo forte marking before quickly returning to forte in the following bar. The way Harjanne

performs this serves to add a greater feel of franticness to the ending of the piece and is

therefore how I also approach this section (see Ex. 4.68).


Following a substantial semiquaver run to B-flat5 in bar 249, a short passage is heard

in bars 250 and 251. This is a very rare instance in the Concerto that combines both orchestra

and soloist together (see Ex. 4.69). The phrase is difficult both melodically and rhythmically,

combining large intervallic leaps and awkwardly changing rhythms. It is important to practice

these bars slowly and accurately so that when performed with accompaniment it is

68

completely together. This produces a powerful phrase which adds to the overall

spectacularity of the final passages of the Concerto.


The final section of this movement contains the most difficult technical passages

required in the whole Concerto. Just like in the section starting in bar 73, a lot of slow

practice is needed to adequately perform this ending. Adding to the difficulty is the factor of

endurance. Williams’ Concerto is both long and involves extended range requirements.

Compounding this is the fact that the movement allows little time for rest and ends every

section above the staff. Sachs has stated that the biggest issue facing new players of the work

is “getting into overall shape for this, but also cultivating the flexibility and nuance to

navigate the piece well musically – not just physically” (cited in Winegardner, 2011, p. 206).

4.3.4. Summary

Not only does the Concerto challenge endurance and range but Williams also forces

the player to be aware of a myriad of different aspects in order to portray a well-polished

performance of the piece. It is critical that the performer have a solid understanding of the

accompaniment to allow seamless transitions between sections and coherence of

performance. This is especially apparent during the beginning of the second and third

movements. Due to the complexity of the piano accompaniment it is not possible for a pianist

to portray every harmonic and melodic line present within the orchestral score. Williams has

been extremely clear with the use of articulation and dynamic markings. In order to produce a

rendition that complies with Williams’ composition every effort should be made by the

69

soloist to follow each piece of information displayed on the score. Further, they should have

an understanding as to why they are there and what is to be achieved in each instance.

70

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations

This chapter restates the research’s relevance, the aim of the thesis, and the

conclusion to the research findings. Recommendations for future study are then discussed.

5.1 Conclusions

Since its inception, the trumpet concerto has seen numerous changes in both form and

style. Though the popularity of the instrument waned during the Romantic Era, the addition

of valves in the twentieth-century allowed for much greater virtuosity. This paved the way for

numerous new works written for the trumpet, including over 80 concerti. Despite this large

number of new concerti only a few of these works are now regularly performed. Many factors

are attributed to this, including difficulties such as range, endurance, technical difficulty,

limited rehearsal time, and a lack of available recordings.

The concerti that I have analysed and performed by Karl Pilss, William Lovelock , and

John Williams are all significant to the trumpet world. Pilss’ work is one of very few written

for trumpet in the German-Romantic Style and by a composer with ties to the great musical

figures of the era. Lovelock’s Concerto is significant as it is a highly regarded Australian

work, with extreme difficulties, particularly regarding range, endurance, and technique.

William’s Concerto was chosen due to his world-renown fame as a composer, with this work

being the only concerto composed for trumpet by a major composer since Haydn and

Hummel.

Through my analysis and performances of these concerti I have studied both score

and current available recordings by professional trumpet players as well as my own personal

practice and performance techniques, combining both MPR and ARiM. I have combined

these different facets of research to produce a performance guide for each of the three

concerti in order to aid trumpet players wishing to extend their playing into the world of the

twentieth-century concerti.

Due to the difficulties listed, it may be necessary to develop alternate practice

techniques to help overcome the challenges within these concerti. The skills learnt and

developed while performing difficult works, such as these concerti, are transferrable to other

aspects of playing, making them extremely beneficial. Due to endurance reasons these

concerti can be difficult to find adequate time to practice them while also maintaining the

71

freshness of embouchure required for other rehearsals and performances. To overcome this, I

practiced most of these concerti in small segments, with clear goals set at the beginning of

each practice session on what was to be practiced and achieved.

There were also periods of time where I found little to no time to practice these

concerti while playing other performances and preparing for auditions, this is why it is also

important to start early on pieces with both technical and endurance difficulties, as they can

be mentally practiced over a longer period of time away from the trumpet. Although difficult,

the exhilaration that comes from performing these works is a wonderful experience and the

aim of this thesis is to bring these concerti, and other twentieth-century works, to the

forefront for both professionals and students alike.

5.2 Recommendations for Future Study

With over 80 concerti composed during the twentieth-century, and only four

now regularly performed, there is a large quantity of trumpet concerti currently

underperformed. As the aim of this thesis is to bring little-known, and underperformed, works

to the forefront of trumpeter’s minds, further study of other works would be beneficial to the

trumpeting world to provide an even greater choice for performance. With a list, and basic

information, of all works composed for trumpet and orchestra in the twentieth-century,

Carnovale and Doerksen’s Twentieth Century Music for Trumpet and Orchestra (1994) is a

great resource for initial study of other contemporary works. Adding such pieces to the

standard repertoire would increase the scope of trumpet tutelage, and performance, with the

wide variety of pieces currently available yet under-performed.

72

Reference List

Adler, J. (2009). Expanding the trumpet repertoire: A pedagogical exploration of four

diverse works for trumpet by bertold hummel, james miley, karl pilss, and joseph

turrin (Order No. 3376000). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Retrieved from

https://search-proquest-

com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/docview/304928464?accountid=14723

Altena, J. (2011). Hindemith Trumpet Sonata. Ewazen Trumpet Sonata. Stephenson Trumpet

Sonata. Pilss Trumpet Sonata [review]. Fanfare - The Magazine for Serious Record

Collectors, 34(4), 518–519. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/859517218/

Bebbington, W. (2001). Lovelock, William. Grove Music Online. Ed. Retrieved August 7,

2017, from

http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/grovemusic/view/10.10

93/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000047744

Berry, W. (1989). Musical structure and performance. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Buerkle, B. (2011). Collections: Jonathan freeman-attwood and daniel-ben pienaar -

"romantic trumpet sonatas" [review]. American Record Guide, 74, 239-240. Retrieved

from https://search-proquest-


Calland, D. (1993). “Finnish Trumpet Concertos”. Harri Wessman: Trumpet Concerto; Jukka

Linkola: Trumpet Concerto; Teppo Hauta-Aho: Fantasy for Trumpet and Orchestra;

Leif Segerstam: Trumpet Concerto No.2 (So It Feels) [Review]. Tempo, (184), 53-54.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/946149

Candy, L. (2006). Practice based research: A guide. Creativity and Cognition Studies.

Sydney: U of Technology. Retrieved from

http://www.creativityandcognition.com/resources/PBR%20Guide-1.1-2006.pdf

Carnovale, N., & Doerksen, P. (1994). Twentieth-century music for trumpet and orchestra.

2nd ed. Nashville: Brass Press.

Clarke, H. (1984). Technical studies for the cornet. New York: C. Fischer.

73

Coleman, J. (1965). The Trumpet: Its Use In Selected Works Of Stravinsky, Hindemith,

Shostakovich, And Copland (Order No. 6512257). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses

Global. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-


Cook, N. (2013). Beyond the score: Music as performance. New York, NY: Oxford

University Press

Davidson, T. (1996). “Michael Sachs Premieres John Williams Trumpet Concerto,”

International Trumpet Guild Journal 21(2), 75.

Day, T. (2005). The concerto in the age of recording. In S. Keefe (Ed.), The Cambridge

Companion to the Concerto (Cambridge Companions to Music, pp. 247-260).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521834834.015

Deutsch, O., Blom, E., Branscombe, P., Noble, J., & Mozart, W. (1965). Mozart. A

documentary biography ... Translated by Eric Blom, Peter Branscombe and Jeremy

Noble. Adam & Charles Black: London.

Dokshizer. (2010). Abel.hive.no. Retrieved September 1, 2020, from

http://www.dokshizer.com/eindex.html/

Eisensmith, K. (Ed.). (1994). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1993-1994. Columbia, SC:

International Trumpet Guild

———. (Ed.). (1995). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1994-1995. Columbia, SC: International

Trumpet Guild.

———. (Ed.). (1996). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1995-1996. Clearwater, FL:

International Trumpet Guild.

———. (Ed.). (1997). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1996-1997. Clearwater, Fl: International

Trumpet Guild.

———. (Ed.). (1998). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1997-1998. Clearwater, FL:


———. (Ed.). (1999). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1998-1999. Seattle, WA: International

Trumpet Guild.

74

———. (Ed.). (2000). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1999-2000. Federal Way, WA:


———. (Ed.). (2001). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1999-2001. Manhattan, KS:










Emmerson, S. (2009). Evoking Spring in Winter: Some personal reflections on returning to

Schubert’s cycle. In B Bartleet & C, Ellis (Eds.). Music autoethnographies: Making

autoethnography sing / making music personal (pp. 101-120). Bowen Hills, Qld:

Australian Academic Press.

Garrett, S. (1984). A Comprehensive Performance Project in Trumpet Repertoire; A

Discussion of the Twentieth-Century Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra; An

Investigative Study of Concertos by Alexander Arutunian, Henry Tomasi, Charles

Chaynes, and Andre Jolivet; and a Bibliography of Concertos for Trumpet and

Orchestra Written and Published from 1904 to 1983 . ProQuest Dissertations

Publishing. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/303331218/

Geiringer, K., & Geiringer, I. (1982). Haydn: a creative life in music (3rd rev. and exp. ed..).

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Harrison, A. K. (2011). “We’re talking about practice(-based research)”: Serious play and

serious performance in the practice of popular music ethnography: We’re talking

about practice(-based research). Journal of Popular Music Studies, 23(2), 221-228.

DOI:10.1111/j.1533-1598.2011.01284.x

Harjanne, J. (n.d). Trumpet music straight from the heart. Retrieved November 2, 2017, from

http://joukoharjanne.com/

75

Härtwig, D. (2001). Hertel family. Grove Music Online. Retrieved September 3, 2020, from

https://www-oxfordmusiconline-

com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0

001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000012904.

Herrick, D. (Ed.). (1990). Trumpet and Brass Programs 1989-1990. Columbia, SC:



Trumpet Guild.


Trumpet Guild.


Trumpet Guild.

Jakuboski, E. (2015). An examination of style in the development of the Sonata for Trumpet

and Piano: 1903 - 2010. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from


Keefe, S. (2005). Theories of the concerto from the eighteenth century to the present day. In

S. Keefe (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Concerto (Cambridge Companions

to Music, pp. 5-18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521834834.003

Kilpatrick, B. (2003). Scott thornburg, trumpet [review]. American Record Guide, 66, 202.

Retrieved from https://search-proquest-


———. (2006). Trumpet masterpieces [review]. American Record Guide, 69(4), 193.

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/952288/

Leavy, P. (2015). Method meets art: Arts-based research practice (Second ed.). New York,

London: The Guilford Press.

Lester, J. (1992). Musical structure and performance. Wallace berry. Music Theory

Spectrum, 14(1), 75-81. DOI:10.1525/mts.1992.14.1.02a00050

76

_______. (1995). Performance and analysis: Interaction and interpretation. In J. Rink (Ed.),

The practice of performance: Studies in musical interpretation (pp. 197-216).

Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Lovelock, G. (n.d.) “William Lovelock (1899-1986): Represented Artist.” Australian Music

Centre. Retrieved December 3, 2018, from

http://www.amcoz.com.au/composers/composer.asp?id=225

Lovelock, W. (1969). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (piano reduction) [Musical

Score]. New York: Peer Music.

_______. (1969). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra [Recorded by John Robertson and

Sydney Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Joseph Post; LP Record]. On New

Concertos for Trumpet. Victrola Stereo Records VICS-1437.

_______. (2010). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra [Recorded by Geoffrey Payne and

Melbourne Symphony Orchestra, conducted by John Hopkins; CD]. On The Essential

Trumpet – Bright, Bold and Beautiful. ABC Classics, 8.770017. Retrieved from

Spotify

_______. (2017). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra [Recorded by Doc Severinsen and

Robert E. Lee High School Band, conducted by Charles Forque; Video File].

Retrieved November 15, 2017, from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_rguyNozHo

Maurice André. (n.d.). Abel.hive.no. Retrieved November 10, 2017, from

http://abel.hive.no/trumpet/andre/

Ornelas, R. (1986). A Comprehensive Performance Project in Trumpet Repertoire; An Essay

on Eugene Bozza's Published Compositions for Solo Trumpet with Piano or

Orchestra and an Analysis of Representative Compositions. ProQuest Dissertations

Publishing. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/303522596/

Palmer, C. & Marks, M. (n.d.). Williams, John (iii). Grove Music Online. Retrieved August

22, 2017, from

http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/subscriber/article_citati

ons/grove/music/30353

Picher, W. (2004). “A Life of Excellence in Playing and Teaching: An Interview with Sidney

Mear,” International Trumpet Guild Journal, 28(2), 25-31.

77

Pilss, K. (1938). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra. [Recorded by Sidney Mear and Fred

Woolsten]. Retrieved July 3, 2017, from

https://archive.org/details/PilssConcertoForTrumpet

_______. (1973). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra (piano reduction) [Musical Score].

Paris: Alphonse Leduc.

_______. (2003). Trumpet Sonata [Recorded by Scott Thornburg and Silvia Roederer; CD].

On Music for Trumpet and Piano. Baton Rouge, LA: Centaur Records.

_______. (2009). Trumpet Sonata [Recorded by Jouko Harjanne and Karri Harinnen; CD] On

Trumpet Recital: The Great Trumpet Sonatas. Tampere, Finland: Alba. Retrieved

from Naxos Music Library

_______. (2011). Trumpet Sonata [Recorded by Hans Peter Schuh and Kazue Kojima; CD].

On Hindemith and Pilss Trumpet Sonatas. Hong Kong: Octavia Records. Retrieved

from Naxos Music Library

Place, L. (2008). An analysis and performance guide to William Lovelock's Concerto for

Trumpet and Orchestra. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from


Reutter, J. (2001). Richter, Franz Xaver. Grove Music Online. Retrieved September 3, 2020,

from https://www-oxfordmusiconline-

com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0

001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000023401.

Rink, J. (2004). The state of play in performance studies. In J. W. Davidson & H. Eiholzer

(Eds.). The music practitioner: Research for the music performer, teacher, and

listener (pp. 37-51). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

Sandoval, A (n.d). “Biography.” Arturo Sandoval Official Site. Retrieved August 7, 2017,

from http://www.arturosandoval.com/

Schneider, D. (2005). Contrasts and common concerns in the concerto 1900–1945. In S.

Keefe (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Concerto (Cambridge Companions to

Music, pp. 139-160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521834834.010

Sidney E. Mear. (2016). Democrat and Chronicle. Retrieved March 10, 2019, from

https://obits.democratandchronicle.com/

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/democratandchronicle/obituary.aspx?pid=178077619

78

Siegel, S. (2017). "A Performer's Guide to Works for Trumpet and Synthesizer by Meg

Bowles" Theses and Dissertations--Music.85. Retrieved August 7, 2017, from

http://uknowledge.uky.edu/music_etds/85

Smith, H., & Dean, R. T. (2009). Practice-led research, research-led practice in the creative

arts. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Sony Music Entertainment. (n.d.). “Biography,” John Williams Fan Network. Retrieved

August 22, 2017, from

http://www.jwfan.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=808&Itemid=

63

Spearritt, G., & Boughen, M. (1982). Dr. William Lovelock: Aspects of Australian Music in

Retrospect. The Australian Journal of Music Education 31: 39-41

Stevens, T. (1976). “New Trumpet Music: Basic Performance Elements,” International

Trumpet Guild Journal, 1(1), 24-27.

Suggs, R. (1998). Karl pilss: Late romantic heir to the viennese tradition of trumpet and brass

ensemble music (Order No. 9836510). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

(304418707). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-


_______. (2004). “Brilliant Music for a Dark Era: Karl Pilss, Helmut Wobisch, and the

Trumpeterchor der Stadt Wein," International Trumpet Guild Journal, 28(2): 12-16.

Sullivan, J. (2007). “Conversations with John Williams,” Chronicle of Higher Education

53(19), B12-B13.

_______. (2006). “John Williams: Close Encounters with a Modest Icon.” American Record

Guide 69(4): 30-31.

Talbot, M. (2005). The Italian concerto in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.

In S. Keefe (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Concerto (Cambridge

Companions to Music, pp. 33-52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521834834.005

Tarr, E. (n.d.) "André, Maurice." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. Oxford

University Press. Web. Retrieved November 13, 2017, from

79

http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/subscriber/article/grove

/music/00876

_______. (1988). The Trumpet. Translated by S. E. Plank and E. H. Tarr. Portland, Oregon:

Amadeus Press.

Thornton, M. (1997). The Trumpet Concerto of John Williams: From Commission to

Concert, International Trumpet Guild Journal, 21(4): 18-21

Trujillo, L. F. (2007). Virtuoso trumpet technique and the art of transcription (Order No.

3272326). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304879531). Retrieved from

https://search-proquest-


Vizzutti, A. (1990). The Allen Vizzutti trumpet method book 1 technical studies an

intermediate/advanced method in three books. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Pub.

Wacker, J. (2008) An examination of the influence of selected works of Franz Schmidt on the

Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra and the Sonata for Trumpet and Piano by Karl

Pilss. Dissertation. U of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library. Retrieved from

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc9015/

Wallace, J. (1997). Brass solo and chamber music from 1800. In T. Herbert & J. Wallace

(Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Brass Instruments (Cambridge Companions to

Music, pp. 236-254). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521563437.019

Wallace, J., & McGrattan, A. (2011). The trumpet and its players in the nineteenth and early

twentieth centuries. In The Trumpet (pp. 194-224). Yale University Press. Retrieved

from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npt7w.16

Williams, J. (1996). Concerto for trumpet and orchestra (piano reduction) [Musical Score].

Milwaukee, WI: H. Leonard Corp.

_______. (2002). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra [Recorded by Arturo Sandoval and

London Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Ronald Feldman; CD]. On A Long Way.

Boston: Denouement Records. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btQ3wvtAeLY

80

_______. (2014). Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra [Recorded by Jouko Harjanne and

Finish Radio Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Dima Slobodeniouk; CD]. On

Concertos for Trumpet and Orchestra. Joensuu, Finland: Pilfink Records. Retrieved

from Spotify

Winegardner, B. J. (2011). A performer's guide to concertos for trumpet and orchestra by

lowell liebermann and john williams (Order No. 3456374). Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (871631301). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-


Documents

A Guide to Performance of Twentieth-Century Concerti for