AN HISTORICAL AND STYLISTIC EXAMINATION OF CHARLES CHAYNES’

CONCERTO POUR TROMPETTE AND DEUXIÈME CONCERTO POUR

TROMPETTE, WITH AN INTERVIEW OF THE COMPOSER

Marc Allen Reed, B.M.E., B.M., M.M.

Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

August 2007

APPROVED:

Keith Johnson, Major Professor

Eugene Corporon, Minor Professor
John Holt, Committee Member
James C. Scott, Dean of the College of Music
Sandra L. Terrell, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse
School of Graduate Studies
 Reed, Marc Allen, An historical and stylistic examination of Charles Chaynes’ Concerto

Pour Trompette and Deuxième Concerto Pour Trompette, with an interview of the composer.

Doctor of Musical Arts (Performance), August 2007, 59 pp., 46 examples, bibliography, 32

titles.

Research has been conducted on prominent mid-twentieth century French trumpet

concertos and their composers. Jolivet, Bozza, and Tomasi have all been the subject of research.

Charles Chaynes’ music is equally valuable to modern trumpet repertoire as that of Jolivet,

Bozza, and Tomasi. Chaynes’ exclusion from research leaves a void in resources available to

future trumpet students. A study of Charles Chaynes and his trumpet concertos is essential to

preserving the history of the valve trumpet’s young modern repertoire. Lack of understanding of

Chaynes’ trumpet concertos can only lead to misconceptions when interpreting these pieces.

The thirty-nine year gap between Chaynes’ Trumpet Concerto No. 1 and Trumpet

Concerto No. 2 is a remarkable time span between major compositions, and examining the works

gives insight to the evolution of the trumpet concerto throughout the twentieth century. This

project highlights Charles Chaynes’ contribution to the trumpet repertoire from both the

beginning and end of his compositional career, and fills the research gap concerning his

concertos. It includes correspondence with Charles Chaynes and others, in order to gain

information not found in common source materials. It highlights examples from each concerto

that are representative of the composer’s compositional style.

Copyright 2007

by

Marc Allen Reed

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank those who assisted me with this project: Charles Chaynes, Eva

Cochard-Henrichs, John Haynie, Richard Giangiulio, Eugene Corporon, and John Holt.

I am in debt to Keith Johnson for his selfless patience, encouragement, and interest in my

development as both a man and a musician. He is a gentleman in the truest sense of the word

and has had immeasurable influence on my life.

Thanks to my family for the support and understanding they have shown through the

years, and to the Murphy family for welcoming me into their circle.

To Michele who is the guiding light behind my thoughts and actions. This would not

have been possible without her caring, patience, and love.

Thank you.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.........................................................................................................iii

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1
Background and Significance
State of Research
Purpose
Method

CHARLES CHAYNES BIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................ 6

TRUMPET CONCERTO NO. I..................................................................................................... 9

History
Movement I
Movement II
Movement III

TRUMPET CONCERTO NO. II ................................................................................................. 25

History
Movement I
Movement II
Movement III

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................... 42

APPENDIX................................................................................................................................. 43

BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................... 57

iv
 INTRODUCTION

Background and Significance

The role of the trumpet has evolved throughout history to fit changing trends in music. In

ancient times the trumpet was used in ceremonial and militaristic ways. The trumpet was first

included in art ensembles during the renaissance period. This instrument, known today as the

natural trumpet, was limited to notes found only in the harmonic series. The natural trumpet’s

lack of pitch content in lower registers led players to aspire to perform in higher tessituras, in

order to gain diatonic scale possibilities.

The “Golden Age”1 of the natural trumpet occurred during the baroque period. Virtuoso

performers began taking the trumpet to new heights, and pedagogical methods were for the first

time written. Centers of trumpeting flourished in places like Leipzig, Bologna, and Vienna. The

trumpet was now used as a full-fledged solo instrument by Johan Sebastian Bach, Giuseppe

Torelli, and Henry Purcell.

The classical period relegated the trumpet to an ensemble role. Franz Joseph Haydn,

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and Ludwig van Beethoven all used the trumpet sparingly, perhaps

due to its non-chromatic nature. The most significant event for the trumpet in the classical

period was Anton Weidinger’s work with an instrument fitted with keys (like those on the

modern saxophone) that gave the trumpet chromatic capabilities. Haydn and Johann Nepomuk

Hummel wrote concertos for Weidinger in 1796 and 1804 respectively. The keyed trumpet was

abandoned due to poor tone quality.2

The trumpet as a solo instrument lay largely unexplored throughout the remainder of the

classical and well into the romantic periods. The invention of the valve in the early nineteenth

1
Edward Tarr, The Trumpet (London: B.T. Batsford LTD, 1988), 85.
2
Reine Dahlqvist, The Keyed Trumpet and Its Greatest Virtuoso, Anton Weidinger (Nashville, TN: The Brass Press,
1975). 21.

1
century changed the course of trumpet history. The new chromatic instrument in the form of the

valved trumpet or cornet, increasingly gained popularity throughout the 1800’s, and was sought

after by players and composers. The trumpet once more became a melodic voice in art music.

The agility and versatility of the valve trumpet spurred a rebirth of pedagogical texts intended to

develop finger dexterity along with artistic interpretation. New interest in the trumpet was a

catalyst for composers to once again write concertos and sonatas for the instrument.

The twentieth century saw a boom in music written for solo trumpet. This was especially

true in France, where cornet tradition gave players agility on the modern instrument. Trumpeters

Eugène Foveau, Raymond Sabarich, Ludovic Vaillant, and later Maurice André; all lobbied for

new trumpet pieces.3 French composers responded, and concertos were written by Henri Tomasi

(1948), André Jolivet (1948 and 1955), Eugene Bozza (1949), Jean Rivier (1955), Charles

Chaynes (1956), Alfred Désenclos (1953), and Robert Planel (1966). The concertos of Tomasi

and Jolivet are well-known in modern trumpet circles, while Chaynes’ Concerto pour Trompette4

and his later Deuxième Concerto pour Trompette have been neglected.

State of Current Research

Little has been written about Charles Chaynes or his trumpet concertos. Biographical

information on Mr. Chaynes is limited to standard reference sources. These works give only

factual information about the man and few specifics of his compositional style. Detailed

research on Chaynes’ concertos is virtually nonexistent and long overdue.

3
Tarr, Trumpet, 177.
4
For better understanding to the reader, Charles Chaynes’ 1956 Concerto pour Trompette will be referred to
throughout the rest of the document as Trumpet Concerto No. 1. This will avoid confusion when Chaynes’ 1995
Deuxième Concerto is later discussed. Likewise the Deuxième Concerto will be referred to as Trumpet Concerto
No. 2.

2
 There are several dissertations that deal with mid-twentieth century French trumpet

music: The Trumpet Music of Henri Tomasi and André Jolivet, by Jack Burt; An Analysis of

Elements of Jazz Style In Contemporary French Trumpet Literature, by William Schmid; and An

Essay On Eugène Bozza’s Published Compositions For Solo Trumpet With Piano or Orchestra

and An Analysis of Representative Compositions, by Raul Ornelas.

Chaynes’ Trumpet Concerto No.1 is briefly discussed in Stephen Garrett’s dissertation A

Discussion of the Twentieth-Century Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra; An Investigative

Study of Concertos by Alexander Arutunian, Henri Tomasi, Charles Chaynes, and André Jolivet;

and a Bibliography of Concertos for Trumpet and Orchestra Written and Published From 1904-

1983. Garrett looks at each movement of Trumpet Concerto No. 1 from a pedagogical

standpoint only; there is no historical or stylistic information given.

Trumpet Concerto No. 1 is also mentioned in Norbert Carnovale and Paul Doerksen’s

book Twentieth-Century Music for Trumpet and Orchestra, 2nd edition. This text is an all-

inclusive list of pre-1994 twentieth-century works for trumpet. Carnovale and Doerksen write

about the character of the concerto, give the range of the trumpet part, assign their own grade of

VI (the most challenging level), and give the approximate duration of the piece. There is no

historical background or stylistic information given.

Trumpet Concerto No. 1 is not discussed in any periodicals. There are two obscure

recordings of the work. The first is by French trumpeter Maurice Andrè in collaboration with the

Orchestra of Radio Luxembourg. This undated album was released on long-play record and has

yet to be re-issued on compact disc. The second recording was performed by Eric Aubier in

1995. Aubier’s recording was released on the Pierre Verany label and is currently out of print.

3
Trumpet Concerto No. 2 is not mentioned in any study, text, periodical, or online source. There

is no recording of the work in the western world and this research is the first undertaken.

Purpose

Research has been conducted on prominent mid-twentieth century French trumpet

concertos and their composers. Jolivet, Bozza, and Tomasi have all been the subject of research.

Charles Chaynes’ music is equally valuable to modern trumpet repertoire as that of Jolivet,

Bozza, and Tomasi. Chaynes’ exclusion from research leaves a void in resources available to

future trumpet students. A study of Charles Chaynes and his trumpet concertos is essential to

preserving the history of the valve trumpet’s young modern repertoire. Lack of understanding of

Chaynes’ trumpet concertos can only lead to misconceptions when interpreting these pieces.

The thirty-nine year gap between Chaynes’ Trumpet Concerto No. 1 and Trumpet

Concerto No. 2 is a remarkable time span between major compositions, and examining the works

gives insight to the evolution of the trumpet concerto throughout the twentieth century. This

project highlights Charles Chaynes’ remarkable contribution to the trumpet repertoire from both

the beginning and end of his compositional career, and fills the research gap concerning his

concertos.

Method

Two concertos by Charles Chaynes entitled Trumpet Concerto No. 1 and Trumpet

Concerto No. 2, are the subject of this study. A brief biographical sketch of the life of Charles

Chaynes is given from information provided by Chaynes and from sources that discuss the

composer.

4
 This study gives historical facts regarding each concerto, justifies these concerto’s places

in modern trumpet repertoire, and serves as an aide in increasing the performer’s knowledge of

these works. The document focuses on the importance of Charles Chaynes’ concertos by

discussing selected examples representative of his style. Large-scale formal and harmonic

analysis of this music is difficult due to non-traditional quartal and tertian harmonies, combined

with vertical chords containing dissonant major and minor seconds.5 Discussion of

compositional techniques is limited to its relationship to Chaynes’ compositional style. The

stylistic examination is helpful in order to better understand each concerto. The goal of this

study is a heightened awareness of this important music and its composer.

5
Norbert Carnovale and Paul Doerksen, Twentieth-Century Music for Trumpet and Orchestra (Nashville, TN: The
Brass Press, 1994), 17.

5
 CHARLES CHAYNES BIOGRAPHY

Charles Chaynes was born July 11, 1925 in Toulouse; a French city that is today best

known as an aviation hub and university center. His parents were professors at the Toulouse

Conservatory of Music where his father played and taught violin, and his mother played piano

and taught music theory. Chaynes credits his parents for sparking his interest in composing at

age fifteen and preparing him for a career as a musician.6

Chaynes enrolled in the Paris Conservatory following his studies in Toulouse. At the

conservatory he studied harmony with Jean Gallon and composition with Darius Milhaud; he

also continued to study the fugue and the violin. Several sources, including the New Grove

Dictionary of Music and Baker’s Biographical Dictionary, list Jean Rivier as one of Chaynes’

primary teachers at the conservatory. Chaynes, interestingly, says that he never studied with or

even knew Rivier, and that any comparison made between his and Rivier’s music is false.

Chaynes credits Béla Bartók, Alban Berg, and Oliver Messiaen as composers also who

influenced his style.7 Chaynes obtained first prizes in harmony, composition, fugue, and violin

at the conservatory.8

In 1951, Chaynes was awarded the first Grand Prix de Rome for his cantata Et l’homme

vit se rouvrir le portes. This afforded Chaynes the opportunity to study in Rome with funding

from the French Government; from 1952-1955 he worked at the Académie de France in Rome.9

Chaynes returned to Paris in 1956 and began working for French radio station L’ ORTF as a

producer. The composer remarks that he came to this occupation because of a simple liking for

6
Charles Chaynes, to Marc Reed, March 22 2007, translated by Eva Cochard-Henrichs, Denton, Texas.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid.

6
radio and “most of all by chance”.10 In 1960, Chaynes won the Prince Pierre de Monaco

Concours for music and in 1965, the City of Paris’ Grand Prix de Musical. Later that year, he

was named controller of the Office de la Radio et de la Télévision Francaise at ORTF, where he

began overseeing all French public television and radio on behalf of the government. Chaynes

was promoted to Head of Musical Creation at ORTF in 1975. He held that position until his

retirement from radio in 1990. Chaynes says that an understanding of the recording process had

a keen impact on his compositional style. He also remarks that retirement has allowed him to

compose more freely and write larger works (operas). He has composed three operas since

retirement: Jocaste, Cécelia, and Mi Amor.11 Charles Chaynes will always compose, saying that

writing is a normal need.12

The following is a timeline of Chaynes’ life, provided by the composer: (Translation by

Eva Cochard-Henrichs, Visiting Instructor of French at The University of North Texas, who also

assisted with background information regarding awards)

1952 to 1955: Artist in residence at the Académie de France in Rome.

1960: Award winner of the Concours musical Prince Pierre de Monaco
1965: Grand Prix Musical de la ville de Paris.
1968/70/75/81: Prix du Disque (Académie du Disque Français)
1979 : Award winner at the Tribune Internationale des Compositeurs (UNESCO,
organized by the International Music Council)
1984: Grand Prix du Disque (Académie Charles Cros) awarded for the opera
Erzsebet.
1989: Grand Prix du Disque (Académie du Disque Français) awarded for the
opera Noces De Sang
1993/1994: Creation of the opera Jocaste: Rouen Opéra, brodcasted by TF1, Radio
France and CD-recording by CD Chamade– Avant-scène Opéra.
1996: Orphée d’Or, awarded by the Académie du disque Lyrique.

10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.

7
1965 to 1975: Controller of France-Musique Channel for the ORTF
1975 to 1990: Head of the musical creation department for Radio-France
1998: Prix Cino Del Duca, awarded by Institut de France
2000: Cécilia – creation at the Monte-Carlo Opera
sponsored by TF1 – directed by Jorge Lavelli – libretto by Eduardo Manet
2003: Orphée d’Or awarded by the Académie du disque Lyrique for chants de
l’âme.
2006: Elected as a member of the Académie des Beaux-Arts
2007: Mi Amor – opera – libretto by Eduardo Manet
Creation of the Metz opera (performances: March 23rd, 25th and 27th 2007)
Officer of the Legion of Honor and of the National Order of Merit
Chevalier of Arts and Letters13

Chaynes has composed five operas, seventeen orchestral pieces, twelve works for

chamber ensemble, and six vocal pieces; saying that he is interested in all instruments.14

Chaynes has also written concertos for violin, flute, guitar, clarinet, and the two trumpet

concertos discussed here. 15 He resides in Saint Mandé, France where he was contacted

requesting information for this examination.

13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
Slonimsky, Nicolas, Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Twentieth Century Classical Musicians (New York:
Schirmer Books, 1997), 232.

8
 TRUMPET CONCERTO NO. 1

History

Trumpet Concerto No. 1 was written in 1956 by Charles Chaynes in Paris, shortly after

his return from Rome. The work is a concours piece written for the Paris Conservatory; the

cover page reads “Concours du Conservatoire National de Musique”. Chaynes wrote other

pieces for the school as well.16 The Concours de prix is a competition held at the Paris

Conservatory that students usually enter upon completion of their education. Repertoire selected

is customarily a solo work commissioned specifically for the contest. The Concours tradition

dates back to 1797; the prize has ranged anywhere from new instruments, to wreaths of laurel

branches. The current prize is the honor of winning or placing in the competition.17 The Paris

Conservatory had separate fall and spring concours for the first time in 1956 and Trumpet

Concerto No. 1 was the required piece for both the trumpet and cornet classes.18

Trumpet concour pieces used at the Paris Conservatory in the 1950’s:

1950 Quatre Variations sur un Thème de Domenico Scarlatti Marcel Bitsch

1951 Fantaisie en mi bèmol transcription par Henri Büsser Camille Saint-Saëns
1952 Capriccio Marcel Bitsch
1953 Trois Piéces Bréves Odette Gartenlaub
1954 Fanfares de Printemps Elsa Barraine
1955 Rustiques Eugéne Bozza
1956 Concerto Charles Chaynes
1957 Sonatine Jeanine Rueff
1958 Concertino Gaston Brenta
1959 Variations Henri Challan19

16
Ibid.
17
Frank Edward Romero, “Morceaux De Concours Pour Trompette Et Cornet, Contest Pieces of the Paris
Conservatory 1835-1999” (DMA diss., University of Oklahoma, 2001), 22.
18
Ibid., 81.
19
Ibid., 120-121.

9
 The first page of the concerto bears the inscription “à Messieurs E. Foveau et R.

Sabarich, Professeurs au Conservatoire National de Musique”. This implies that the work was

dedicated to the teachers at the Paris Conservatory. Raymond Sabarich was born and raised in

Toulouse, Chaynes’ birthplace, which could also suggest where the root of this dedication lies.

Chaynes states that he had to mention Foveau and Sabarich because they were professors when

he composed the piece for the conservatory, and that he had no interaction with either man.20

Maurice André, the virtuosic international soloist, gave the premier of Trumpet Concerto

No. 1 at a public concert that aired on Radio France May 13, 1958. André began studying with

Raymond Sabarich at the Paris Conservatory in 1952. He won the concours that year and again

in 1953.21 He went on to record over 250 albums and follow Sabarich as professor at the

conservatory. André was the first to record the concerto in the mid-1960’s, in collaboration with

the Luxembourg Radio Orchestra. This undated album was released on long-play record and has

yet to be re-issued on compact disc. A second recording was produced by Eric Aubier in 1995

and was released on the Pierre Verany label. Aubier’s recording is currently out of print.

Chaynes ranks André’s recording ahead of Aubier’s, but says that Aubier’s is a high quality

recording.22

Chaynes did not study any works for trumpet prior to composing Trumpet Concerto No.

1. He uses no specific compositional devices in the work, but says the chromatic nature of the

music verges on dodecaphonic influences. He also recalls employing no formal structures, and

that he wrote the piano reduction of the orchestral score personally.23

Chaynes’ erroneous connection to Jean Rivier has led some to assume that he patterned

20
Chaynes, March 22 letter to Reed.
21
Stephen Chenette, “It’s My Greatest Joy”: An Interview with Maurice André,” International Trumpet Guild
Journal 25 (March 2001): 10.
22
Chaynes, March 22 letter to Reed.
23
Ibid.

10
Trumpet Concerto No. 1 after Rivier’s 1955 Trumpet Concerto. Because Chaynes had no

association with Rivier or his work, this comparison is not relevant.24 Chaynes admits

familiarity with other mid-twentieth century trumpet concertos.25 The concertos by Tomasi,

Jolivet, Bozza, and Désenclos were all written prior to 1956.

Movement I

Charles Chaynes’ compositional style in movement I of Trumpet Concerto No. 1 is

rhythmically and harmonically complex. This could stem from Chaynes’ studies with Darius

Milhaud26. Milhaud’s models were Serge Prokofiev, Igor Stravinsky, and Arthur Honegger.27

This influence might explain the rhythmic vitality, non-traditional compositional language, and

driving ostinati employed by Chaynes in this movement.

The rhythmic make-up of the trumpet part in the introduction (beginning- measure eight)

is an example of Chaynes’ use of complex rhythms. The trumpet enters on the second sixteenth-

note in measure two. This entrance falls on a weak beat, which is a trait shared by other

prominent twentieth-century trumpet concertos (the concertos by Arutunian and Tomasi also

start the trumpeter on weak beats). A similar offbeat entrance occurs in measure four on the

trumpet’s second entrance; here the performer begins on the second eighth-note of the measure.

In measure four, the rhythm of the trumpet moves from sixteenth-note triplets, to

sixteenth-notes, to eighth-note triplets, back to sixteenth-notes, and so on. These rhythms

coupled with various articulations, slurs, and ties; give the music rhythmic complexity that is

used throughout the remainder of the movement. The mixture of duple and triple note groupings

24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.
26
Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of 20th Century Classical Musicians, 1st ed., s.v. “Chaynes, Charles.”
27
Barbara Kelly, ‘Darius Milhaud,’ Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 15 February 2007)
<http://www.grovemusic.com>.

11
produces music that is tumultuous, and builds toward the trumpet’s climax in measure seven.

Example 1. Trumpet, measures 2-8.

Harmonic language employed in the introduction is representative of Chaynes’

chromaticism, and measure two is an example. The trumpet begins on D#1 and executes a

scaling run that encompasses an entire chromatic octave from D#1 to D2 (fourteen different

chromatic pitches with the inclusion of E2 and F2). Measures four through eight are also

chromatic, although a closer look could suggest tonal logic. The trumpet’s first two beats in

measure four, combined with the climactic B3 on beat one of measure seven, when arpeggiated,

creates a B-dominant7 sonority(B-D#-F#-A). The piano’s E-natural on the downbeat of measure

nine would then be the resolution point, with measures four through eight functioning as

dominant harmony leading in E; however, the absence of a full E-major/minor sonority in

measure nine rules out complete tonicization (refer to example 1).

Chaynes employs bi-tonal sonorities in movement I; this is best exemplified in measures

five through eight. In measure five, beats three and four, the piano plays a simultaneous Eb-

major/D-major sonority. This tonality is repeated in the next measure before shifting on the

downbeat in measure seven to a Bb-major/D-major sonority that underlays a B3 in the trumpet

part (refer to example 1).

The composer employs added-note sonorities throughout this movement; measure ninety

is an example. On beat one of the bar, the piano plays a Bb-major chord with an added C-

12
natural, and on beat four, an A major sonority with an added B-natural and G-sharp.

Example 2. Added-note chords in piano, measures 90-91.

Between measures 133 and the trumpet cadenza that begins in measure 144, Chaynes

uses additional added-note chords. In measure 133, the piano plays a series of E major sonorities

with added F and G naturals. In measure 145, a D natural is added to this E major/added-note

sonority (with F and G), making an E-dominant7 that eventually resolves to an A-natural at the

end of the movement. The entire trumpet cadenza can be viewed as dominant harmony.

Example 3. Added-note sonorities in the piano, measures 133-145.

13
 It is difficult to describe the formal make-up of movement I due to the absence of

traditional cadences and because of chromaticism. There are; however, definable episodes that

repeat in varied form throughout the movement. The following is chart of movement I’s formal

episodes:

Part Measures Character

Introduction 1-8 Chaotic
A1 9-39 Lugubrious muted trumpet chromatic melody
A2 40-60 Similar to A1. Trumpet now un-muted
B 61-96 Lyric, slow, quasi-mirror form in piano
(will be discussed below)
A3 97-120 Variation of A1. Fast chromatic scales
Transition 121-143 Piano transition to the trumpet cadenza
Trumpet Cadenza 144-158 Material from introduction and A themes
Coda 159-end Closing material in piano

Almost all thematic material in movement I is chromatic and utilizes previously

mentioned harmonic language. The B theme in the piano (measures 61 through 96) is the

exception to this statement, and seems out of place due to its slow tempo and non-chromatic

harmonic language. The B theme is similar to, but not a true palindrome; the bass is not set in

retrograde of the treble. This motive could be labeled as a quasi-mirror form as intervals

between the piano’s hands are not reproduced exactly, but do move in oblique motion when the

treble ascends and similar motion when it descends. Intervals here are comprised of the perfect

4th, perfect 5th, and major/minor 6th. These intervals, set in quasi-mirror form, create harmonic

ambiguity and give the B theme a decidedly twentieth-century flavor due to its open quality.

14
 Example 4. Quasi-mirror form, measures 61-76.

Rhythmic ostinati are common in twentieth-century French music and Chaynes uses

these in movement I of Trumpet Concerto No. 1. The composer employs an ostinato in measure

nine in the piano that provides a rhythmic motor that accompanies the trumpet’s soft chromatic

theme. This ostinato is made up of simple driving quarter-notes that are accented on beats one

and three. Harmonically, the scoring of the ostinato is comprised of paired major second

sonorities (E/F#-F/G-Gb/Ab-F/G etc.). The ostinato is a two bar repeating motive that precedes

the trumpet’s muted chromatic theme that begins in measure thirteen.

Example 5. Piano ostinato, measures 9-12.

15
 Movement II

Movement II of Trumpet Concerto No. 1 is marked Adagio, quarter-note= 69, giving the

concerto standard fast-slow-fast relationship between movements. The compositional style of

movement II is more quantifiable than in movement I. Movement II, like movement I, is highly

chromatic and contains bi-tonal sonorities. Movement II is; however, devoid of rhythmic

ostinati, complex duple verses triple rhythmic mixture, and lively interplay between the trumpet

and piano; that is found in the first movement. The absence of these devices leaves only

Chaynes’ harmonic language to form the basis of movement II.

This movement has serial qualities and there are three distinct twelve-tone collections

used. The first collection begins in measure five on the trumpet’s F#2 and does not sound its

twelfth pitch until the F2 in measure eleven. Twelve-note collection number 1 is: F#, Bb, C, E,

C#, G, B, Eb, D, A, G#, F.

Example 6. Twelve-tone collection number 1 in trumpet, measures 5-11.

The second Twelve-tone collection begins at measure twenty-five. This series starts on

C#2 in the trumpet and concludes on the last eighth-note Bb3 in measure twenty-eight. Twelve-

tone collection number 2 is given: C#, D, F, B, C, G#, A, E, G, F#, D#, Bb

Example 7. Twelve-tone collection number 2 in trumpet, measures 25-28.

16
 The third and final twelve-tone collection starts in measure thirty-nine on the trumpet’s

beat-four entrance and concludes on the D#2 on the last beat of measure forty-three.

Twelve-tone collection number 3 follows: D, G#, C#, B, A#, G, F#, A, F, C, E, D#

Example 8. Twelve-tone collection number 3 in trumpet, measures 39-43.

These three twelve-tone collections are similar to chromaticism employed in movement I,

but are built in complete twelve-tone fashion. While this makes movement II more harmonically

quantifiable, it cannot strictly fall under the guise of serialism, as there is no variation of any of

the collections through serialism’s common devices (retrograde, inversion, or inverted

retrograde). Twelve-tone collections found here are non-tonal, but are juxtaposed over chordal

accompaniment that keeps the music from sounding radically atonal. This practice is pervasive

throughout the movement.

Chordal accompaniment in movement II comes in the form of bi-tonal and added note

sonorities, similar to those in movement I. The use of bi-tonal and added-note sonorities is most

pronounced at climactic moments; the downbeat of measure thirty-one is an example. Chaynes

scores a D-major triad in the bass clef of the piano that underlays an A#-major sonority in the

treble clef and in the trumpet part. This could be labeled one of two ways: A#/D or D-

major#5#7.

17
 Example 9. Bi-tonal sonority, trumpet and piano, beats 1 and 2, measure 31.

Chaynes’ unique harmonic language is also evident in measure twenty-five. The

composer scores a series of E-major(added 4th), Bb-major, E-major, Db-major, and E-major

chords; which is a progression not traditionally employed in common practice music. In the next

measure (twenty-six), Chaynes uses bi-tonal chords, sounding an A/Bb sonority in the first half

of the measure and an A/G in the second half.

Example 10. Bi-tonal sonority in piano, measures 25 and 26.

Movement II is set in ABA form. Sections correspond with the three previously

discussed twelve-tone collections (see examples 6-8). The first A section starts in measure three

after a short two measure introduction. The introduction is heard in the piano and is an atonal

motive that begins on G, ascends up a major 7th to F#, up a diminished 7th to Eb, descends down

18
a minor 9th to D, down an augmented 4th to Ab, down a minor third to F, and down a major 3rd to

Db. This motive, transposed a half-step higher, precedes the start of the second A section at

measure thirty-eight.

Example 11. Piano motives:

Measures 3 and 4.

Measures 38 and 39.

The B section begins at measure twenty-five and contains the second twelve-tone

collection. This section’s complex rhythms and high trumpet tessitura contrasts the two outer

sections. Chaynes employs frequent use of the minor second interval here; giving the music

momentum as it builds towards the measure thirty-one climax.

The second A section starts at measure thirty-nine, after the repetition of the introductory

motive discussed above (see example 11). This A section, like the first A, is not rhythmically

complex and retreats in both tessitura and dynamic as the trumpet descends into the lower

register beginning at measure forty-eight and continuing till the end of the movement. The

second A section only slightly resembles the first A in interval and tonal content; however, the

slow motion and rhythmic values in the second A are very similar to those found in the first.

Chaynes ends the movement on an open 5th in the piano between C and E. This conclusion is

similar to the open 5th found at the end of the first movement between pitches A and E. Chaynes

19
is perhaps punctuating the music’s intended ambiguity by ending both movements I and II on

open sonorities.

Movement III

The final movement of Trumpet Concerto No. I contains traits similar to those found in

movements I and II: chromaticism, bi-tonality, and rhythmic ingenuity. Motives play a much

larger role in movement III than in prior movements. There are also more traditional sounding

harmonies.

Chromaticism employed in movements I and II is present at the beginning of movement

III. The first two measures contain a piano run from A# to D that encompasses almost an entire

chromatic scale (F and C are excluded). This is contrary to the twelve-tone collections used in

movement II. Incomplete chromatic scales occur throughout movement III.

Example 12. Reduction of piano’s incomplete chromatic scale, measures 1 and 2.

Chromaticism in this movement is not serial. There are no twelve-tone collections;

instead, Chaynes uses chromaticism in an almost tonal manner. Chromatic scales are used to

propel the music forward; measures ninety-four and ninety-five are examples. In measure

ninety-four in the trumpet, a chromatic run starts on Ab3 as part of an F-minor sonority, and ends

on G3 as part of a G sonority.

20
 Example 13. Trumpet chromatic passage, measures 94 and 95.

Movement III is based on three rhythmic motives: three eighth-note triplets, two

sixteenth-notes, and the dotted-eighth/sixteenth. Three eighth-note triplets are first heard at the

beginning of the movement in the piano in measures one and two (see example 12) and are then

heard in the trumpet in measure three. These triplets vary throughout the movement by sounding

on repeated (example 14), scalular (example 15), and arpeggiated pitches (example 16). They

are employed primarily in the trumpet part and are frequently followed by notes of longer

duration.

Example 14. Triplets on repeated pitches in trumpet, measure 3.

Example 15. Scaling triplets in trumpet, measure 4.

Example 16. Arpeggiated triplets in trumpet, measure 14.

Two repeated sixteenth-note C#2’s are heard in the trumpet in measure five on the after

beat of beat two. This sixteenth note figure is heard more frequently as the movement

progresses, and is the rhythmic basis for measures nineteen through forty-three. The sixteenth-

21
note motive is used in three ways: direct quotation (see example 17), slight variance (see

example 18), and in scale fashion (see example 19).

Example 17. First hearing of sixteenth-note motive in trumpet, measure 5.

Example 18. Variance of sixteenth-note motive in trumpet, measure 85.

Example 19. Sixteenth-note motive in scale fashion in trumpet, measures 32-34.

The trumpet cadenza is also based around the two sixteenth-note motive. Here it is varied

relative to the down-beat, as it shifts from falling off the beat, to on the beat.

Example 20. Cadenza with sixteenth-note motive in trumpet, measure 84.

The third rhythmic motive employed in this movement is the dotted-eighth/sixteenth-note

figure. This is the last of the three motives to appear; it is first heard in measure six and is

prominent in the trumpet in measures six through eleven and twenty through twenty-three. The

trumpet plays this motive twenty times in movement III. The piano performs the dotted-

eighth/sixteenth-note motive prominently between measures twenty-six through thirty-three, and

seventy-seven through eighty-three.

22
 Example 21. Dotted-eighth/sixteenth-note figure in trumpet, measures 8-10.

Example 22. Dotted-eighth/sixteenth-note figure in piano treble, measures 29-31.

Traditional major and minor sonorities play a larger role in this movement than in the two

preceding movements; however, there are still a number of added-note, bi-tonal, and dissonant

cluster sonorities. There are few common tertian progressions or cadences that clearly define

period structure or key center. As the movement progresses, major and minor sonorities appear

more frequently. At the conclusion of the work; however, the composer writes what can almost

be categorized as a common cadence. Beginning five measures from the end of the piece,

harmonic motion begins that resembles a IV-V-I cadence in D. In this cadence, measures ninety-

five and ninety-six would be labeled i-V, ninety-seven a cluster chord built on the tonic D,

measure ninety-eight vi-V-vi, measure ninety-nine vi(continued from measure ninety-eight)-V,

and the conclusion in measure 100 to the end, tonic I in D.

The relationship between the final sonorities of each movement is noteworthy.

Movement I ends on an open 5th (A-E) that implies a key of A, movement II concludes with a

major third between C-E and if including the G in the penultimate measure, would suggest C,

and movement III ends in D. The overall relationship between the concluding sounds of each

movement is A-C-D. The tonal scheme of the work moves from A to D.

23
 Example 23. Closing progression, measures 93-end.

From a formal standpoint movement III, like movement I, is comprised of episodes that

are discernable by changes in rhythm, dynamics, or the exit/entrance of the trumpet soloist. The

following is a form chart of movement III:

Section Measures Make-up

A 1-31 Comprised of three rhythmic motives discussed above
B 32-49 Softer than A, comprised mostly of chromatic 16th notes
C 50-76 Legato in both voices, contains 8th note triplet motive
combined with lyric quarter-notes in the trumpet
A1 77-88 Incomplete A, contains all three rhythmic motives
Coda 89-end Very fast, based on the 16th-note motive, ends tonal

24
 TRUMPET CONCERTO NO. 2

History

Trumpet Concerto No. 2 was composed in 1995 and released two years later by Alphonse

Leduc, the same company that published Trumpet Concerto No. 1. This work represents

Chaynes’ mature style, given that it was composed late in the composer’s life (at age 70).

Chaynes states that he had no difficulty writing large works for trumpet after composing both

concertos.28 He also says that the difference between Trumpet Concerto No. 1 and Trumpet

Concerto No. 2 is the evolution of harmonic language, and that his two trumpet concertos rank

equal amongst his other compositions.29

Trumpet Concerto No. 2 was written at the request of French trumpeter Guy Touvron and

was the result of the composer’s desire to write for trumpet again.30 Touvron is an international

soloist who began studying at the Paris Conservatory shortly after Andrè was appointed

professor. Touvron currently teaches in Leon and the Paris Conservatory; and has recently

written an anthology of the life of Maurice Andrè entitled Une Trompette pour la renommèe. He

is the founding member of the Guy Touvron Brass Quintet and also owns his own music

publishing company.31 Touvron won the Munich, Geneva, and Prague Trumpet Competitions

and has performed with I Solisti Veneti, The English Chamber Orchestra, La Scala di Milano,

The Luzern Festival Strings, The Prague Chamber Orchestra; and French orchestras in Lyon,

Toulouse, Pays de Loire, Pays de Savoie, and Auvergne. He frequently concertizes throughout

Asia (including seven tours of Japan) and the United States, and has performed more than 3500

concerts worldwide. Touvron has recorded over seventy-five albums on the EMI, BMG, Philips,

28
Chaynes, March 22 letter to Reed.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
Richard Giangiulio, interview by author, May 30, 2007, written notes, Denton, Texas.

25
Ligia, Digital and Erato labels.32 Touvron premiered Trumpet Concerto No. 2 on April 4, 1995

in Metz with The Lorriane National Orchestra.33

Chaynes writes that the work is more free form than Trumpet Concerto No. 1, which is

representative of how his writing evolved over the years. As is the case with Trumpet Concerto

No. 1, Chaynes does not recall any specific compositional devices employed in the work. He

also states that Trumpet Concerto No. 2’s language corresponds with the evolution of his

composition ideals, and that the music of the concerto was influenced by the composer’s choice

of instruments: namely the piano and string orchestra.34

The author’s research has yielded no records of any performance of Trumpet Concerto

No. 2 in the United States. To date, no member of the International Trumpet Guild has submitted

a program containing Chaynes’ Trumpet Concerto No. 2. This is in stark contrast to the place

that Trumpet Concerto No. 1 occupies in the modern repertoire. One study surveyed 92

prominent members of the International Trumpet Guild and asked them to rank the most

significant trumpet concertos published between 1901 and 1983. In it Charles Chaynes’ Trumpet

Concerto No. 1 came in third behind the concertos of Alexander Arutunian and Henri Tomasi.35

Chaynes is aware of ten performances and only one recording of Trumpet Concerto No. 2

that was produced in Taiwan.36 The author has been unable to locate the Taiwanese recording,

as it has yet to be distributed in Europe or the United States.

32
Unknown Author, ‘Guy Touvron,’ Guy Touvron Website (Accessed 8 May 2007)<http://www.Guy-
Touvron.com>
33
Chaynes, March 22 letter to Reed.
34
Ibid.
35
Stephen Garrett, “A Discussion of the Twentieth-Century Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra; An Investigative
Study of Concertos by Alexander Arutunian, Henri Tomasi, Charles Chaynes, and André Jolivet” (DMA diss.,
University of Southern Mississippi, 1984), 285.
36
Chaynes, March 22 letter to Reed.

26
 Movement I

Movement I of Trumpet Concerto No. 2 is written using a compositional palate

comprised of modern notational, aleatoric, and harmonic styles. The 1997 publication date

suggests a work that is representative of Charles Chaynes’ mature style. Traits discussed here

are likely the result of the evolution of the composer’s musical ideals in the years preceding the

composition of the concerto.

Notation employed in the first movement of Trumpet Concerto No. 2, while unique when

compared to other standard large-scale works for trumpet composed in the late twentieth-

century, is not avant-garde relative to modern notational practices. A comparison of this nature

is outside the realm of this examination, but would be a worthwhile future endeavor. Notation

used in movement I effects coordination between performers, harmony, timed duration of

episodes, and variable issues involving aleatoric music.

Measure one contains several modern notations. The measure is un-metered, with the

composer giving the duration of 10 seconds to complete the bar. The movement is marked

“Robuste, quarter-note=116”. The piano’s right hand plays groupings of eighth-notes marked

“Vivacissimo”, which would suggest a tempo faster than the given 116 beats per minute. The

first note of the pianist’s right-hand eighth-note grouping is bisected by a short line at a 45-

degree angle; this indicates that the group should be played very fast.37 These vivacissimo

eighth-notes are beamed into note groupings of eight, two, three, three, six, and five. The bass

voice in the piano’s left hand contains alternating quartal clusters (Bb-Db-Eb) and open white

boxes that are beamed as eighth-notes. These boxes stretch from G to C and are performed as

37
Howard Risatti, New Music Vocabulary: A Guide to Notational Signs for Contemporary Music (Urbana:
Univeristy of Illinois Press, 1975), 9.

27
white-key clusters using the fingers, palms, or forearms.38 With this definition, the pianist strikes

white keys, playing an approximate G-A-B-C cluster. The alternation between Bb-Db-Eb and

G-A-B-C underlays the Vicacissimo right-hand, and is repeated until the treble concludes. A

bold horizontal line is also placed in this measure on C in piano bass clef that tells the performer

to repeat until the end of the episode.39 Similar notation is found throughout the movement.

Example 24. Notation in piano, measure 1.

Measure seven contains notation similar to that employed in measure one. The trumpet

enters and plays three articulated eighth-notes before an A#3, followed by a long horizontal line.

This line instructs the trumpeter to hold the pitch similar to, but not as long as a fermata. At the

end of measure seven, the trumpeter is given a group of sixteenth-notes joined by a beam which

starts as a single line and widens to a sixteenth-note beam. This instructs the performer to

accelerate through the grouping.40

The piano in measure seven contains metered open and closed boxes, similar to measure

one. A black box is found in the left-hand of the piano and instructs the pianist to play a cluster

chord of black keys below F: approximately Db-Eb-Bb.

38
Ibid., 130-131.
39
Ibid., 48.
40
Ibid., 24.

28
 Example 25. Notation in trumpet and piano, measure 7.

In measure forty-three the trumpet is given stemless note-heads. These pitches are to be

performed ad-lib, or freely, using some or all of the available time until the next event; possibly

playing the notes in any order.41 The articulation markings of this free form measure can be used

to indicate phrasing and timing. In measure forty-four the trumpet has similar stemless note

heads, with a given horizontal line and trill. This notation instructs the performer to trill and

crescendo to the resolution, which in this case is each ascending eighth-note.

Example 26. Stemless note heads in trumpet, measures 43 and 44.

A final notational aspect that should be mentioned occurs in measures eighty-three and

eighty-four. The trumpet soloist is given a C#1 under a fermata with “(flat.)” written above it.

The “flat.” refers to bending the pitch flat, and because the trumpeter is using a valve

combination where all three valves are depressed; can extend both the trumpet’s first and third

valve slides to bend the pitch lower.

41
Ibid., 63-65.

29
 Example 27. “Flat.” in trumpet, measures 83 and 84.

Movement I contains free-form sections that give the music sparse texture representative

of aleatoric music. In movement I, there are twenty-three aleatoric measures where no time

signature is given. These aleatoric events often correspond with the modern notation previously

discussed (see examples 24 through 27).

Measures 125 through 126 contain further examples of this type of writing. In measure

125, the trumpet part is given a series of three sixteenth-note groupings, the first containing

eleven notes, the second and third groupings nine. The piano accompanies the trumpet with a

series of cluster chords with skeletal rhythmic structures. The trumpeter has control over the

aleatoric aspect of the music by dictating the tempo of the sixteenth-notes. In the next measure

(126), the same is again true, as the trumpet soloist controls pacing while the piano interjects

cluster-chords.

Example 28. Aleatoric music in trumpet, measures 125 and 126.

30
 Another aleatoric example comes later in the movement as measures 133 through 135 are

likewise free and un-metered. Both the trumpet and piano are given note heads with no rhythms;

this ensures that coordination will be different each time this section is played.

Example 29. Aleatoric music in trumpet and piano, measures 133-135

The harmonic make-up of movement I of Trumpet Concerto No. 2 is ultra-chromatic but

not serial. There are several instances where all twelve chromatic tones are presented in

31
successions devoid of pre-determined serial formulas. Music in this movement centers on the

intervallic relationship between individual chords and pitches. Chaynes favors the 2nd and 4th

intervals, along with their inversions: 7th and 5th. These intervals are employed in clusters in the

case of the 2nd (7th)and symmetrical chords in the case of the 4th(5th).

These intervals are first prevalent in measures two and four, as the piano plays chords

with similar intervallic content in each hand. In the left-hand there are two perfect fourths

starting on G# that encompass a major seventh, set apart by a minor second. This is mirrored in

the right-hand beginning on a B-natural.

Example 30. Symmetrical sonorities in piano, measure 2.

Similar sonorities occur between measures thirty-two and forty-two; however, in this

instance the intervals vary between diminished fifths (C#-G), augmented fifths (G-D#),

enharmonic major seconds (D#-F), augmented fourths (F-B), and perfect fourths (B-E).

Example 31. Reduction of sonorities based on 2nds and 4ths, measures 32, 35, 39, and 42.

32
 Measures eighty-five and eighty-six contain further examples the use of 4ths and 2nds. The

intervallic relationship between the trumpet’s pitches descends a diminished fourth (F-C#),

descends a major seventh (inverted minor 2nd) (C#-D), ascends a minor sixth (D-Bb), ascends a

major seventh (Bb-A) and descends a diminished fifth (A-D#) to an enharmonic minor seventh

(inverted major 2nd).

Example 32. Use of 4ths and 2nds in the trumpet, measures 85 and 86.

Measure 133 is another example of Chaynes’ use of these intervals in melodic fashion.

The lontano pitches given to the trumpet move exclusively by 2nd (7th) and 4th (5th) in major,

minor, perfect, diminished, or augmented forms. The corresponding piano music likewise

contains similar intervals, with the exception of the sixth and seventh notes of the measure (the

major third between F# and C#).

Example 33. Use of melodic 4ths and 2nds in trumpet and piano, measure 133.

33
 Movement II

Movement II of Trumpet Concerto No. 2, is set in a slow tempo marked “Lento, quarter-

note= 52”. This slow tempo makes the movement longer in duration than the two outer

movements. The composer gives the duration of six minutes-thirty seconds, while the first and

third movements are five minutes-thirty seconds, and four minutes-fifty seconds. Chaynes’ use

of non-standard time signatures, intervallic repetition of motives, and sectional delineation are

representative of his style in movement II.

The composer uses non-traditional notation of time signatures in movement II. When a

measure contains a standard time division like 4/4, 3/4, or 2/4; the bottom number is omitted and

written as 4 (for 4/4), 3 (for 3/4), or 2 (for 2/4). Measures one through three are examples of this.

Example 34. Standard time signatures, measures 1-3.

Chaynes gives no time indication for measures that are aleatoric, instead writing “0”.

This is a clear indication to the performer that time ceases until all material in the measure is

presented. Measure thirty is an example of this.

34
 Example 35. Time signatures in aleatoric sections, measures 29 and 30.

The most unusual time signature employed in this movement is first seen in measure five,

as 4½ is the given time signature. There are nine eighth-notes in the 4½ measure, a more

conventional way to write the signature would be 9/8. Movement II contains measures grouped

in 7/8, 3/8, and 5/8. One can only speculate why these signatures were not written as 6½ (7/8),

1½ (3/8), and 3½ (5/8); as is the case with 9/8 (4 ½). The answer to this question may deal with

the internal rhythmic divisions of the 7/8, 3/8, and 5/8 measures, compared to the 4½ bars. In the

4½ measures there is no internal rhythmic division. A comparison between measures ten and

thirty-two will clarify this issue. Measure ten is written in 7/8 and beamed 2+2+3. In measure

thirty-two, there is an eighth-note triplet followed by seven eighth-notes that are all linked under

one beam.

Example 36. 7/8 measure, measure 10.

35
 Example 37. 4½ measure, measure 32.

The intervallic content of the trumpet’s first entrance at measure four is used as a

unifying device that is repeated later in the movement at the start of new phrases. The motive

begins on a Bb and descends a half-step, before ascending up a whole-step. Similar intervallic

content occurs in different rhythm in measures nineteen (in thirty-second-notes), sixty-one

(improvised aleatoric rhythm), sixty-six (in sixteenth-notes), and seventy-seven (in retrograde).

The motive is a starting point, as each hearing precedes contrasting music.

Example 38. Motive in trumpet, measure 4.

Movement II is comprised of six sections that contrast in complexity, rhythm, and

texture. The first section begins at the start of the movement and lasts eighteen measures. The

piano motive sounded in the first two beats of measure one is repeat four times throughout this

section. The motive is atonal and comprised of disjunct sixteenth notes in the right hand that are

juxtaposed over triplets in the left-hand. Section 1 is based on the minor second; frequently the

piano sounds chords that contain one, two, three, or four minor second clusters. The rhythm of

this section is fairly standard except for the previously mentioned aleatoric fourth measure. The

36
trumpet soloist performs this section entirely in cup mute, which gives the music a distant and

sorrowful quality.

Section II begins in measure nineteen and lasts through bar thirty-one. Here the trumpet

performs the most rapid figures found in the movement. The piano repeats a motive of three

sixteenth-notes that fall on and off the beat in ostinato-like fashion. The trumpet and piano play

in unison for the first time in the movement, beginning in measure twenty-six. The end of

section II is delineated by diminishing dynamics that leads to the trumpet’s fermata at measure

thirty-one.

Section III (measures thirty-two through forty-two) is a dialogue between trumpet and

piano. It begins with a one measure atonal statement by the piano that ends on a cluster-chord.

The trumpeter performs an aleatoric pianissimo call in cup-mute marked “Improvisando (quasi

impalable)” that is echoed by the piano. This formula of piano for one measure, then trumpet for

one measure, repeats three times with each hearing increasing in volume.

Section IV (measures forty-three through forty-five) is marked “Libre, agitato” and

contains music reminiscent of the first movement. This is the shortest of the six sections, as it is

only four written measures long; however, the free-form nature of the section gives it longer

duration. The piano plays ostinati in both hands and is non-responsive when compared to the

trumpet soloist. The trumpet performs a series of variable disjunct motives that increase in both

tessitura and volume. Section IV can almost be labeled as a transition rather than an independent

section.

The fifth section (measures forty-six through sixty) is again characterized by contrast

between trumpet and piano. The piano begins with a thirty-second note ostinato that melds to a

series of eighth-note secundal clusters. The call and response nature of section III is evident

37
here, as the piano interjects between the trumpet’s disjunct and leaping material. The trumpet

performs treacherous arpeggiating sixteenth-note triplets throughout this section.

The final section begins at measure sixty-one and concludes at the end of the work. It

begins with a series of improvisatory and un-metered pitches in trumpet and piano. This section,

like section III, alternates between metered and un-metered music in both instruments.

Harmonically section VI, while still atonal, has a quasi-jazz influence because of the extended

voicings of the piano chords. Between measures sixty-six and seventy-two, there are instances

where the piano plays various major chords with an added #7 and b9. This is a common sound

in modern jazz harmonic vocabulary.

Movement III

Movement III of Charles Chaynes’ Trumpet Concerto No. 2 contains similarities and

differences from the two preceding movements. Bold harmonies, driving rhythms, and formless

episodes found in movements I and II are present. In movement III, Chaynes employs repetitive

motives, intervallic melodic sequencing, modern notation, and dodecaphony. These combine to

form a closing movement that is vibrant, driving, and musically fulfilling.

Movement III is rife with cluster chords, and measure one is an example. Measure one

contains a series of eighth-note clusters. These crunching sonorities are scored using three notes,

each set one half-step apart. The first cluster is comprised of B-B#-C#, the second B#-C#-D.

These clusters reappear in exact or varied form throughout the movement as a unifying device.

Eighth-note clusters occur in measures three, seven, twenty, twenty-three, twenty-eight, seventy-

two, seventy-seven, seventy-nine, and in longer form in the last measure of the work.

38
 Example 39. Piano clusters, measure 1.

Along with minor-second clusters, Chaynes bases motives on various other intervallic

relationships. The piano music in measure ten contains the pitches G-C#-D-Eb-Ab, or 1-b2-2-

b5-5 in C#. Three measures later the trumpet sounds the same pitches at a different key level.

The trumpet plays F#-F-C#-C-B, which if in B would have the same 1-b2-2-b5-5 make-up as the

piano ostinato in measure ten.

Example 40. 1, b2, 2, b5, 5 intervallic motive in piano, measure 10.

Example 41. 1, b2, 2, b5, 5, intervallic motive in trumpet, measure 13.

Chaynes employs modern notation in this movement similar to that found in preceding

movements, as well one that is not. At measure fifty-six and fifty-seven in the piano, Chaynes

uses closed triangles as note-heads with rhythmic beams of quarter and eighth-notes. In the

treble, these arrows point up, in the bass they point down. The composer writes “mini clusters

39
glissés” under the measure. This symbol is defined as going to the highest or lowest pitch

possible depending on the direction the arrow is pointing.42 For example, the first glissando in

the right-hand of the piano in measure fifty-six is placed on what appears to be a B; the pianist

should execute a glissando ascending up the keyboard starting on B. The second glissando,

which falls on the up-beat of beat two, is placed on D; the pianist should perform a glissando

starting on D and ascending up. These figures occur later in measures sixty, seventy-eight,

eighty, and between measures 111 and 114.

Example 42. Mini glissandos in piano, measures 56 and 57.

Movement III contains music that is chromatic and twelve-tone. Chaynes is very

deliberate about his use of dodecaphony, as twelve-tone passages are aleatoric and exclusive to

the trumpet. The first free-form twelve-tone collection occurs in measure nine: B, Bb, A, G, C,

E, F#, Ab, Eb, D, F, C#.

Example 43. Trumpet twelve-tone collection, measure 9.

In measure 110, Chaynes gives the trumpet an entire twelve-tone collection that contains

no duplicate pitches. Just as in measure nine, the trumpet sounds these tones in aleatoric fashion.

The collection is as follows: B, C, G#, D#, C#, F, F#, D, G, E, A, Bb.

42
Risatti, Guide to Notational Signs, 9.

40
 Example 44. Trumpet twelve-tone collection, measure 110.

There are two instances of near twelve-tone that occur in measures 114 and 116. In

measure 114, Chaynes gives the trumpeter ten of twelve chromatic pitches, omitting D# and F-

natural. The music is chromatic and comes in the same unmetered form that the two previous

twelve-tone episodes appeared in. The same is true of measure 116, where ten of twelve pitches

are given with the same omission of D# and F-natural.

Example 45. Near twelve-tone collection in trumpet, measure 114.

Example 46. Near twelve-tone collection in trumpet, measure 116.

41
 CONCLUSION

It is the my hope that this examination will spark increased interest in Charles Chaynes’

contribution to the trumpet repertoire. This heightened awareness should solidify the place of

Chaynes’ concertos on the short list of twentieth-century masterworks for trumpet. While

Trumpet Concerto No.1 has gained a position in the repertoire, only time will tell what place

Trumpet Concerto No. 2 will occupy.

Both concertos are filled with compositional devices not readily found in works for solo

trumpet. These devices, coupled with the extreme physical demands placed on the performer,

could explain why trumpeters have overlooked these exciting works. As new virtuosos arrive,

perhaps they will seek out underappreciated and unheard works. A high quality recording of

Trumpet Concerto No. 2 by an established recording artist would spark interest and perhaps lead

to more performances of the concerto.

The most remarkable aspect of this study is Charles Chaynes’ participation in it. There is

a lack of direct source material regarding many prominent works for solo trumpet. Chaynes was

extremely cooperative throughout my correspondence with him. This examination now fills the

gap of direct source material regarding his two concertos and gives insight into the composer’s

unique life.

42
 APPENDIX

CORRESPONDENCE WITH CHARLES CHAYNES IN BOTH ENGLISH

AND FRENCH VERSIONS

43
February 15, 2007

Mister Charles Chaynes

42, rue du Commandant Mouchotte
94160 Saint-Mandè, France

Dear Mr. Chaynes,

My name is Marc Reed, and I am a graduate student majoring in trumpet performance at the
University of North Texas in Denton, Texas USA. I am in the process of completing the final
requirements for my doctorate degree. I am working on a lecture-recital project and have chosen
to use your trumpet concertos as my topic.

I recently spoke with Mr. John Haynie, Professor of Trumpet Emeritus from the University of
North Texas, who suggested I contact you. He recalls corresponding with you in the late 1950’s
and says that your input was highly valuable in preparing the performance of your first trumpet
concerto.

I have long been familiar with your wonderful first trumpet concerto, and am now enjoying
adding your excellent second concerto to my repertoire. The purpose of my study is to gain
insight into the history and compositional make-up of these two concertos.

I received your mailing address from Mr. Jean Leduc, and I am writing to ask for your help.
Would you be kind enough to allow me to send you questions about your life, career, thoughts
on music, compositional style, and your trumpet concertos?

I feel that your concertos are great assets to the modern trumpet repertoire; it is my hope that this
project will give future trumpeters a better understanding of your music. I would be most
grateful if you could find time to assist me in my research.

Best wishes,

Marc Reed
Doctoral Trumpet Teaching Fellow
The University of North Texas
2110 Stella St Apt 4
Denton, TX 76201
940-367-9243
[email protected]

44
23/02/2007

CHARLES CHAYNES
MEMBRE DE L’INSTITUT

Dear M. Reed,

I was pleased to receive your letter relative to my two trumpet

concertos.

I will be glad to answer your questions. Nevertheless, I will be away

until March 28th, due to the presentation of my fifth opera in Metz
(away from Paris).

I will thus be unable to answer your questions for a month!

Thanks for the interest you show for my work and… We will be in
touch in April for the rest.

Kind regards,

C. Chaynes

45
Charles Chaynes
42, rue du Commandant Mouchotte
94160 Saint Mandé
Tel : 01.43.28.48.08

Marc Reed
University of North Texas
2110 Stella St Apt. 4
Denton, TX 76201
U.S.A.

2007-04-13

Dear M. Reed,

Thank you for all the work you have done around my trumpet concertos and my career.
I chose to answer directly on the questionnaire, which appeared to me both clearer and more
efficient. I hope that you will be satisfied.
All of your questions were relevant and I took pleasure answering them.

I consider that I have answered your questions in detail and that I have been thorough with
regards to the trumpet…

With all my thanks, kind regards.

Ch. Chaynes.

46
Note of the translator: Since M. Chaynes answered in handwriting on the previous letter, I have
used bold characters to insert his answers in a distinctive way.

March 22, 2007

Mister Charles Chaynes

42, rue du Commandant Mouchotte
94160 Saint-Mandè, France

Dear Mr. Chaynes,

Thank you for your quick response to my first letter. I was unsure if you would write me back
and was thrilled to find your response in my mailbox! I hope you had a nice trip and that your
opera was well received. I trust that corresponding via postal mail is convenient for you. I am
not fluent in French, so I am writing my letters in English and having a professor in the French
Department translate them. I hope this is alright with you. I have a lot of questions and hope
you do not feel bombarded by large number of them.
I would like to start by asking some questions about your life and career.
1) Your parents were musicians who taught at the Conservatory in Toulouse. What
instruments did they play and what subjects did they teach? Were you expected to
choose music as your profession?

father: played and taught violin

mother: piano and organ, taught music theory
They prepared me for a career as a musician

2) Your early training was on violin. How and when did you first become interested in
composition?
When I was 15, first with my parents’ help.

3) You studied with Jean and Nöel Gallon, Jean Rivier, and Darius Milhaud. Which of these
individuals influenced you the most? Are any of this person’s traits evident in you
compositional style?
Jean Gallon (harmony). More than anyone Darius Milhaud but not as far as my style is
concerned.

4) Is there any other composer that influenced your writing style?

Béla Bartók, Berg, Messiaen.

5) In 1956 you began a career in radio, what led you to this occupation? Had you worked in
radio prior to 1956?
A liking for radio, and most of all chance!

6) How did your work in radio impact your compositional style?

knowing how recording studios operate

47
 7) Your catalogue is quite extensive and varied, and you have won several prestigious
awards. What musical settings and/or ensembles are you most comfortable composing
for? Which do you enjoy writing the least for?
I am interested in all instruments

8) How do your works come about; are most of you compositions commissions, do they
originate at the request of your publishers, or do they begin with a desired sound in your
mind?
nearly always requests, but also often an attraction, a liking for a form rarely employed.

9) Do you feel it is more difficult to write for strings or winds? Why?

Nothing is difficult; I know the variety of possibilities for all instruments

10) How, if any, has your compositional style evolved throughout your career? Would you
say that your compositional styles characterized by time periods?
No.

11) Has your compositional output increased since your retirement?

No, but I can compose more freely.
For instance: three operas written which were long pieces of work.

12) Do you think you will reach a point where you cease composing?
No
I don’t think about it for now: writing is a normal need

The next series of questions deal more directly with your trumpet concertos.
1) What do you feel is most difficult aspect about writing large works for solo trumpet?
Nothing really difficult

2) You composed a collection of etudes for trumpet in 1959. How did that come about? Are
there any similarities between the etudes and Concerto Pour Trompette?
At a publisher’s request
No, except for technique

3) Are there any similarities or differences between the two trumpet concertos?
Yes, the evolution of the harmonic language.

4) Are you familiar with any of the other great twentieth-century French trumpet concertos?
(Tomasi, Jolivet, Bozza, Planel, Desenclos)
Yes, of course

5) Where would you rank your trumpet concertos compared to your other compositions?
as a normal evolution

48
These questions deal with Concerto Pour Trompette.
1) The work is dedicated to Eugéne Foveau and Raymond Sabarich. What role did they play
in the composition of the work?
None. I had to mention their names since they were professors.

2) Mr. Sabarich was born in your hometown of Toulouse. Did he have any interactions with
your parents? No.
Did you know Sabarich before you began your studies in Paris? No.

3) Who gave the premier performance of the work? Where and when did this take place?
Maurice André. Public concert for Radio France, 05/13/1958

4) Did you write the piano reduction of the orchestral score yourself?
Yes

5) Rivier wrote a trumpet concerto in 1955; did this influence your decision to compose the
piece?
Not at all. I didn’t know him.

6) Did you study any works for trumpet before composing this concerto?
No

7) Do you recall any specific compositional devices employed in the piece? No

8) The concerto is chromatic. Is that representative of the music you were composing in the
late 1950’s?
Yes, verging on dodecaphonic influences

9) Have you heard Maurice André or Eric Aubier’s recording of the concerto? If so, do you
feel the recording(s) captures the essence of the work?
1st. Maurice André
2nd. Eric Aubier (for the high quality of the recording)

10) Did you compose any parts of the work with a specific formal structure in mind?
Not really

11) You lived in Rome in the years directly preceding the composition of the concerto. Did
this experience influence the genesis of the concerto?
All of the music I have written was influenced by the freedom I experienced while living in
Rome.

12) Was the concerto a concour piece at the Paris Conservatory? Did you compose any
other concour pieces?
Yes. (Other pieces for the Paris Conservatory)

49
The following questions deal your Deuxiéme Concerto Pour Trompette:
1) The forty year gap between your first and second concertos is remarkable. What led you
to compose the second concerto?
Desire to work with trumpets again and most of all at the request of Guy Touvron

2) Who gave the premier of the piece? Where and when?

Guy Touvron. Metz: Lorraine’s national orchestra. 04/15/1995

3) The music in this concerto appears to be more free form than in your first concerto. Is
this representative of how your compositional style changed throughout your career?
Absolutely. It follows the evolution of my career (of my language)

4) Do you recall any specific compositional devices employed in the piece?

No

5) Are you aware of any recordings of the work?

Yes, in Taiwan. Not distributed in Europe.

6) What influenced the specific music in the piece?

Instrumentation / the choice of instruments: piano and string orchestra.

7) How many performances of the piece are you aware of?

10.

Thank you so much for your time. I am anxiously awaiting your reply. I am sure your responses
to this letter will spark more questions; can I continue to write you?
It appears to me to be quite comprehensive!!...

Sincerely,

Marc Reed

50
 Charles CHAYNES

Charles Chaynes was born in Toulouse in 1925. His parents were musicians, professors at the
conservatory in this city.

He started to study music with his parents at an early age, and attended classes at the
Conservatoire in Toulouse.

Later on, he furthered his education at the Conservatoire National in Paris where he worked on
harmony, composition, studied the fugue and the violin.

He obtained First Prizes in these subjects and in 1951 was awarded the first Grand Prix de Rome
in 1951 (pupil of Darius Milhaud).
1952 to 1955: Artist in residence at the Académie de France in Rome43.
1965: Grand Prix Musical de la ville de Paris44.
1960: Award winner of the Concours musical Prince Pierre de Monaco
1968/70/75/81: Prix du Disque (Académie du Disque Français)
1979 : Award winner at the Tribune Internationale des Compositeurs
(UNESCO)45
1984: Grand Prix du Disque (Académie Charles Cros) awarded for his opera
« ERZSEBET. »
1989: Grand Prix du Disque (Académie du Disque Français) awarded for his
opera « NOCES DE SANG »
1993/1994: Creation of the opera « Jocaste »: Rouen Opéra, brodcasted by TF1, Radio
France and CD-recording by CD Chamade – Avant-scène Opéra.
1996: Orphée d’Or awarded by the Académie du disque Lyrique.
1965 to 1975: Controller of France-Musique Channel for the ORTF46
1975 to 1990: Head of the musical creation department for Radio-France
1998: Prix Cino Del Duca awarded by the Institut de France
2000: Cécilia – creation at the Monte-Carlo Opera
sponsored by TF1 – directed by Jorge Lavelli – libretto by Eduardo
MANET
2003: Orphée d’Or awarded by the Académie du disque Lyrique for “chants de
l’âme.”

Notes of the Translator:

43
Grant including lodging awarded by the French government (usually at the Villa Médicis in Rome)
44
Prize awarded by the city of Paris
45
Organized by the International Music Council
46
Office de la Radio et de la Télévision Française : Public bureau which organized all public French television and
radio (i.e. all television and radio channels at this time) on behalf of the government until 1975.

51
2007: MI AMOR – opera – libretto by Eduardo MANET
Creation of the Metz opera (performances: March 23rd, 25th and 27th 2007)
2006: elected as a member of the Académie des Beaux-Arts
Officer of the Legion of Honor and of the National Order of Merit

52
53
M. Marc Reed
Doctorant trompettiste
Chargé de TD
The University of North Texas
2110 Stella St. Apt. 4
Denton, TX 76201 (U.S.A.)
940-367-9243
[email protected]
M. Charles Chaynes
42, rue du commandant Mouchotte
94 160 Saint-Mandé (France)

Denton, le 22 mars 2007,

Monsieur,

Je vous remercie de votre prompte réponse à mon premier courrier. Je n’était pas sur que vous me
répondriez et j’étais enchanté de trouver votre lettre dans ma boite aux lettres ! J’espère que votre voyage s’est bien
déroulé et que votre opéra a été bien accueilli. J’ai cru comprendre que correspondre par courrier postal est ce qui
vous est le plus pratique. Je ne parle pas couramment français et j’écris en anglais : je recours ensuite aux services
d’une enseignante du département de français pour en effectuer la traduction. J’espère que cela vous convient. J’ai
beaucoup de questions et j’espère que vous ne vous sentirez pas bombardé par le nombre.

J’aimerais commencer par quelques questions relatives à votre vie et à votre carrière.

1) Vos parents étaient musiciens et enseignaient aux Conservatoire de Toulouse. De quels instruments
jouaient-ils et quelles disciplines enseignaient-ils ? Attendait-on de vous que vous choisissiez de faire
carrière dans la musique ?

2) Vous avez d’abord appris le violon. Comment et quand avez-vous commencé à vous intéresser à la
composition ?

3) Vous avez étudié avec Jean et Noël Gallon, Jean Rivier et Darius Milhaud. Quelle personne vous a
influencé le plus ? Est-ce que certains traits caractéristiques de l’une de ces personnes se retrouvent
dans votre style compositionnel ?

4) Y a-t-il un autre compositeur qui ait influencé votre style d’écriture ?

5) En 1956, vous avez commencé une carrière radiophonique. Qu’est-ce qui vous a mené à cette
profession ? Aviez-vous travaillé à la radio avant 1956 ?

6) Quel impact votre travail à la radio a-t-il eu sur votre style compositionnel ?

7) L’ensemble de vos oeuvres est très étendu et varié, et vous avez remporté de nombreux prix
prestigieux. Pour quelles formes et/ou quels ensembles musicaux vous est-il le plus naturel de
composer ? pour lesquels appréciez-vous le moins de composer ?

8) Comment naissent vos œuvres : la majorité de vos compositions sont-elles des commandes,
répondent-elles à des requêtes de la part de vos éditeurs, ou émanent-elles de l’image mentale d’un
son que vous désirez créer ?

54
9) Trouvez-vous plus difficile d’écrire pour les instruments à cordes ou les instruments à vent ? Pourquoi ?

10) Comment, si c’est le cas, a évolué votre style compositionnel au cours de votre carrière ? Diriez-vous
que vos compositions peuvent être caractérisées selon des phases chronologiques ?

11) Composez-vous davantage depuis que vous êtes à la retraite ?

12) Pensez-vous un jour atteindre un point où vous cesserez de composer ?

La série de questions suivante traite plus précisément de vos concertos pour trompette :

1) Que ressentez-vous comme l’aspect le plus difficile dans le fait d’écrire des oeuvres longues pour des
solos de trompette ?

2) Vous avez composé une série d’études pour trompette en 1959. Comment ce travail est-il né ? Existe-t-
il des similarités entre ces études et le Concerto pour trompette ?

3) Y a-t-il des similarités ou des différences entre les deux concertos pour trompette ?

4) Connaissez-vous bien les autres grands concertos pour trompette français du vingtième siècle ?
(Tomasi, Jolivet, Bozza, Planel, Desenclos)

5) Comment situeriez-vous vos concertos pour trompette par rapport à vos autres compositions ?

Ces questions s’adressent à votre Concerto pour trompette.

1) L’œuvre est dédiée à Eugène Foveau et Raymond Sabarich. Quel rôle ont-ils joués dans la
composition de l’œuvre ?

2) M. Sabarich est né dans votre ville d’origine, Toulouse. Etait-il en contact avec vos parents ?
Connaissiez-vous M. Sabarich avant de commencer vos études à Paris ?

3) Qui a donné la première représentation de l’œuvre ? Où et quand cela a-t-il pris place ?

4) Avez-vous écrit l’arrangement pour piano de la partition vous-même ?

5) Rivier a écrit un concerto pour trompette en 1955 ; cela vous a-t-il influencé lorsque vous avez décidé
de composer ce morceau ?

6) Avez-vous étudié d’autres œuvres pour trompette avant de composer ce concerto ?

7) Vous souvenez-vous avoir utilisé des outils compositionnels spécifiques pour composer ce morceau ?

8) Ce concerto est chromatique. Est-ce représentatif de la musique que vous composiez à la fin des
années 50 ?

9) Avez-vous écouté les enregistrements du concerto effectués par Maurice André ou Eric Aubier ? Si oui,
quel enregistrement capture le mieux l’essence de l’œuvre à votre avis ?

55
 10) Avez-vous composé certaines des parties de l’œuvre avec une structure formelle particulière à l’esprit ?

11) Vous viviez à Rome dans les années qui précédaient directement la composition du concerto. Cette
expérience a-t-elle influencé la genèse du concerto ?

12) Le concerto était-il un morceau destiné au concours du Conservatoire de Paris ? Avez-vous composé
d’autres morceaux pour les concours ?

Les questions suivantes s’intéressent à votre Deuxième Concerto Pour Trompette.

1) L’intervalle de quarante ans qui sépare le premier et le deuxième concerto est considérable. Qu’est-ce
qui vous a amené à composer le second concerto ?

2) Qui a donné la première de l’œuvre ? Où et quand ?

3) La musique de ce concerto apparaît être d’une forme plus libre que celle du premier concerto. Est-ce
représentatif de l’évolution de votre style compositionnel au cours de votre carrière ?

4) Vous souvenez-vous avoir employé des outils compositionnels particuliers pour ce morceau ?

5) A votre connaissance, existe-t-il des enregistrements de cette œuvre ?

6) Qu’est-ce qui a influencé la musique spécifique de ce morceau ?

7) A votre connaissance, combien de fois ce morceau a-t-il été représenté ?

Je vous remercie de me consacrer un peu de votre temps. J’attends votre réponse avec impatience. Je suis
sûr que vos réponses à mes questions donneront naissances à davantage de questions : puis-je continuer à vous
écrire ?

Je vous prie de croire, Monsieur, en l'expression de mes salutations les plus respectueuses.

M. Marc Reed

* Traduction effectuée par Mme Eva Cochard-Henrichs, Chargée de TD dans le département de français à l’Université de
North Texas et professeur certifiée d’anglais dans l’éducation nationale française.

56
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Baines, Anthony. Brass Instruments: Their History and Development. New York: Dover, 1993.

Bate, Philip. The Trumpet and Trombone: An Outline of Their History, Development and
Construction. New York: W.W. Norton, 1972.

Carnovale, Norbert, and Paul Doerksen. Twentieth Century Music for Trumpet and Orchestra 2nd
ed. Nashville: Brass Press, 1994.

Dahlvquist, Reine. The Keyed Trumpet and Its Greatest Virtuoso, Anton Weidinger. Nashville:
Brass Press, 1975.

Herbert, Trevor, and John Wallace, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Brass Instruments.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Lowrey, Alvin. Lowery’s International Trumpet Discography Volume I & II. Columbia, South
Carolina: Camden House, 1990.

Smithers, Don L. The Music and History of the Baroque Trumpet Before 1721. London: J.M.
Dent and Sons, 1973.

Risatti, Howard. New Music Vocabulary: A Guide to Notational Signs for Contemporary Music.
Urbana: Univeristy of Illinois Press, 1975.

Tarr, Edward. The Trumpet. Portland, Oregon: Amadeus Press, 1988.

Winter, James H. The Brass Instruments. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1964.

Dissertations

Burt, Jack. “The Trumpet Music of Henri Tomasi and André Jolivet.” D.M.A. diss., University
of Houston, 1995.

Garrett, Stephen. “A Discussion of the Twentieth-Century Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra:
An Investigative Study of Concertos by Alexander Arutunian, Henri Tomasi, Charles
Chaynes, and André Jolivet; and a Bibliography of Concertos for Trumpet and Orchestra
Written and Published From 1904 to 1983.” D.M.A. diss., University of Southern
Mississippi, 1984.

Romero, Frank. “Morceaux De Concours Pour Trompette Et Cornet, Contest Pieces of the Paris
Conservatory 1835-1999.” DMA diss., University of Oklahoma, 2001..

57
Raul, Ornelas. “An Essay on Eugene Bozza’s Published Compositions for Solo Trumpet with
Piano or Orchestra and an Analysis of Representative Compositions.” D.M.A. diss.,
University of Southern Mississippi, 1986.

Schmid, William. “An Analysis of Jazz Style in Contemporary French Trumpet Literature.”
D.M.A. diss., University of North Texas, 1991.

Shipman, Daniel. “The Henri Tomasi Trumpet Concerto: A Musical Score Analysis.” D.M.A.
diss., University of Houston, 2003.

Watson, Anthony Scott. “Concerto for Trumpet and Orchestra” D.M.A. diss., Temple
University, 1999.

Interviews

Giangiulio, Richard, Telephone interview by Marc Reed, May 30 2007. Denton, Texas.

Haynie, John, Telephone interview by Marc Reed, February 9 2007. Denton, Texas.

Periodicals
Chenette, Stephen. “It’s My Greatest Joy: An Interview with Maurice André.” International
Trumpet Guild Journal vol. 25, no. 3 (March 2002): 8-19.

Laplace, Michael. “Introduction to the French Trumpet Stars: Part I.” International Trumpet
Guild Journal vol. 3, no. 2 (Feb. 1977): 4-6.

________. “Introduction to the French Trumpet Starts: Part II.” International Trumpet Guild
Journal vol. 3, no. 3 (May 1977): 13-14.

________. "Masters of the Twentieth Century: Roger Delmotte.” International Trumpet Guild
Journal vol. 8, no. 4 (May 1984): 12-15.

Letters

Chaynes, Charles, to Marc Reed, 23 February 2007. Translated by Eva Cochard-Henrichs.

Denton, Texas.

________, to Marc Reed, 13 April 2007. Translated by Eva Chochard-Henrichs. Denton, Texas.

Reed, Marc, to Charles Chaynes, 15 February 2007. Translated by Eva Cochard-Henrichs.

Denton, Texas.

58
________, to Charles Chaynes, 22 March 2007. Translated by Eva Cochard-Henrichs. Denton,
Texas.

Scores

Chaynes, Charles. Concerto pour Trompette. 1956. Paris: Alphonse Leduc.

________. Deuxiéme Concerto pour Trompette.. 1997. Paris: Alphonse Leduc.

________. Quinze Études pour Trompette. 1959. Paris: Alphonse Leduc.

Recordings

Aubier, Eric. French Trumpet Concertos. Pierre Verany, 1995. Compact Disc.

Andre, Maurice. Music of Our Time. Musical Heritage Society, Inc., undated. LP album.

59