Uploaded April 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Sonata for Flute & Piano (1930)
I. Allegro moderato e con grazia
II. Adagio [5:38]
III. Allegro vivace [11:33]
Julius Baker, flute
Anthony Makas, piano
Walter Piston was one of the leading composers of the generation of American composers that came to prominence in the late 1920s and early 1930s. He was a little slower to develop than some others (such as the six-years-younger Copland), but it is with this work of 1930 that his presence began to be felt as an important voice on the American music scene.
Piston did not often stray from the sort of sonata exemplified in this early example: It is in three movements comprising a sonata form, an ABA slow movement, and a finale in sonata-rondo form. On the surface, it also seems that he adheres to the traditional tonic/ dominant-and-beyond/tonic tonal structure of the sonata form, but the fact that his melodies are generally modal, and that he boldly slips into an unexpected chromaticism gives new life to this model. In this case, a piano accompaniment that was based on a Schoenberg-like tone row. This first movement is very serious, even gruff, in tone.
The second movement is an adagio with rich counterpoint. It has an other-worldly quality, which is unusual for the usually down-to-earth Piston. It also has a serious mood.
Piston lightens up in the final movement, a piece that makes chromaticism seem funny. Light and witty rhythms deriving from mundane sources - tango, polka, and march - are common. This sonata has remained one of the most frequently played and recorded of American flute pieces. --Joseph Stevenson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flute Sonata was written in 1930 and dedicated to Georges Laurent, the long-time principal flautist of the Boston Symphony Orchestra and a legendary teacher at the New England Conservatory, who premiered it in 1931.
The work was greatly influenced by his studies of Arnold Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique, which was applied in his First Symphony (1937) as well.
In 1930, Piston was a young faculty member at Harvard University. He had recently returned from Paris (1924–1926), where he studied with Nadia Boulanger. The Sonata is a direct product of this "Boulangerie" training, emphasizing crystalline textures, formal clarity, and tonal stability. Boulanger famously obsessed over the structural continuity of a work. Upon reviewing the Sonata, she praised Piston's ability to maintain a seamless melodic arc through the flute's registers, particularly in the Adagio. She frequently used the Sonata as a teaching tool for later students, pointing to its formal proportions as an example of how to balance "academic rigor with American vitality."
Along with Aaron Copland, Piston used 1930 to define a specific American style that rejected the emotional excesses of Romanticism. The Sonata established Piston’s reputation as a "composer’s composer"—someone obsessed with craftsmanship and objective beauty. [masteringtheflute.com]
Art by Juana Valdés
Sonata for Flute & Piano (1930)
I. Allegro moderato e con grazia
II. Adagio [5:38]
III. Allegro vivace [11:33]
Julius Baker, flute
Anthony Makas, piano
Walter Piston was one of the leading composers of the generation of American composers that came to prominence in the late 1920s and early 1930s. He was a little slower to develop than some others (such as the six-years-younger Copland), but it is with this work of 1930 that his presence began to be felt as an important voice on the American music scene.
Piston did not often stray from the sort of sonata exemplified in this early example: It is in three movements comprising a sonata form, an ABA slow movement, and a finale in sonata-rondo form. On the surface, it also seems that he adheres to the traditional tonic/ dominant-and-beyond/tonic tonal structure of the sonata form, but the fact that his melodies are generally modal, and that he boldly slips into an unexpected chromaticism gives new life to this model. In this case, a piano accompaniment that was based on a Schoenberg-like tone row. This first movement is very serious, even gruff, in tone.
The second movement is an adagio with rich counterpoint. It has an other-worldly quality, which is unusual for the usually down-to-earth Piston. It also has a serious mood.
Piston lightens up in the final movement, a piece that makes chromaticism seem funny. Light and witty rhythms deriving from mundane sources - tango, polka, and march - are common. This sonata has remained one of the most frequently played and recorded of American flute pieces. --Joseph Stevenson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flute Sonata was written in 1930 and dedicated to Georges Laurent, the long-time principal flautist of the Boston Symphony Orchestra and a legendary teacher at the New England Conservatory, who premiered it in 1931.
The work was greatly influenced by his studies of Arnold Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique, which was applied in his First Symphony (1937) as well.
In 1930, Piston was a young faculty member at Harvard University. He had recently returned from Paris (1924–1926), where he studied with Nadia Boulanger. The Sonata is a direct product of this "Boulangerie" training, emphasizing crystalline textures, formal clarity, and tonal stability. Boulanger famously obsessed over the structural continuity of a work. Upon reviewing the Sonata, she praised Piston's ability to maintain a seamless melodic arc through the flute's registers, particularly in the Adagio. She frequently used the Sonata as a teaching tool for later students, pointing to its formal proportions as an example of how to balance "academic rigor with American vitality."
Along with Aaron Copland, Piston used 1930 to define a specific American style that rejected the emotional excesses of Romanticism. The Sonata established Piston’s reputation as a "composer’s composer"—someone obsessed with craftsmanship and objective beauty. [masteringtheflute.com]
Art by Juana Valdés
![Egil Hovland - Lamenti for Orchestra
Lamenti for Orchestra, op. 43 (1963)
I.
II. [5:46]
III. [8:27]
Oslo Philharmonic Orchestra
Oivin Fjeldstad
«Lamenti per Orchestra», which was awarded first prize by «Ny Musikk» in their 1963 Jubilee Competition and was published by Edition Lyche in 1967, is scored for a large orchestra. The composer states: «The work consists of three movements. It is built on the following twelve-tone series, the intervals of which are the same both forwards and backwards: a - a flat - b flat - b natural - g - f sharp - c - d flat - f - e - d - e flat. In the first movement the instruments are piano, strings, trumpets, horns, timpani, and gong. The following elements are used: suspended contours of sonorities in the piano, tone-clusters and glissandi effects in the string orchestra, horizontal linear interplay. The second movement employs a large orchestral apparatus with contrasting bodies of sonorities and structurally conceived curves in the brass, wood winds, strings, and percussion. A couple of shorter sections have an improvisatory character, as the musicians are required to play in individual tempos, as rapidly as possible. The movement ends in a tissue of horizontal lines and a maximum crescendo in the entire percussion group. The third and final movement is marked Calmo (pp). The elements are: floating sonority patterns in triangle, suspended cymbals, chimes, gong, celesta, piano, and harp, an eight-part cluster in the lowest register of the double-basses, a twelve-part cluster in harmonics in the violins. A soprano voice sings vocalizations through the web of sound which gradually dies away at the end». [F 21410]
Art by Henrik Aarrestad Uldalen Egil Hovland - Lamenti for Orchestra](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wKQK65FyRhc/mqdefault.jpg)
![Juraj Hatrik - Canto responsoriale
Canto responsoriale, for double chorus and kettledrums. Words of the 1st Epistle by St. Paul to the Corinthians and on the verses by Vojtech Mihálik Krjanie of the collection Trpky (1964)
Vladimír Bittner, kettledrums
Slovak Philharmonic Chorus
Ján Maria Doborodinský
Juraj Hatrik (b. 1941 in Bratislava) has recently caught attention with two compositions: the Canto responsoriale per due chori e timpani (1964) and Waiting for Recitative and Chamber Orchestra (1965). These were preceded by instrumental compositions followed by concertante works. The Canto responsoriale combines two antagonistic streams of music entrusted to two choirs. One of these, utilizing new means of choral technique, sings of rejected love and is based on a poem by Vojtech Mihdlik, the second based on words of St. Pauls First Epistle to the Corinthians, sings, in a movement of imitation polyphony and archaic stylisation, of the ethical value of love. In the finale the two choirs join their forces for an apotheosis of love. [Supraphon 0 12 0472]
Art by Valentin de Boulogne Juraj Hatrik - Canto responsoriale](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wMcMMSLYUpw/mqdefault.jpg)
![Ivo Malec - Dahovi II
Dahovi II, for magnetic tape (1961)
Ivo Malec was born in 1925 in Zagreb, where he studied music and won several composition prizes. He continued his studies in Paris under Olivier Messiaen, and later Pierre Schaeffer, and while maintaining close connections with musical life in Yugoslavia, settled definitely in France in 1959, becoming a permanent member of the Groupe de Recherches Musicales. His works, which have earned two Grands Prix du Disque are sometimes for orchestra (Sigma, Miniatures pour Lewis Carroll, Oral), sometimes for magnetic tape (Reflets, Dahovi I et II), and sometimes for performer and tape (Cantate pour elle, Lumina).
Dahovi II dates from 1961. Sounds akin to breaths (which translates the Serbo-Croatian word dahovi) furnish the deliberately restricted basic material of this composition. The purpose, in fact, is less to bring out individual sound effects than to emphasise the play of volumes and densities which they form among themselves and which are barely underscored by a few designs of line and shading.
The piece is a result of a successful collaboration of the composer with the director Piotr Kamler on the short film Structures. By making subtle changes to the film score, Malec created a separate work, highlighting in the commentary of his first original record from 1969: The primary intention of this music is to change white noise (more in a poetic sense than an acoustic one). [cantus-ansambl.com]
Art by Paul Gustave Fischer Ivo Malec - Dahovi II](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNfLaO7EUug/mqdefault.jpg)



![Stefan Wolpe - String Quartet
String Quartet (1969)
I. ♩ = 92
II. ♩ = 144 [8:08]
Curtis Macomber, violin
Theodore Arm, violin
Toby Appel, viola
Fred Sherry, cello
In today’s aesthetics, brilliantly managed densities weigh a great deal. The use of densities means the opening of sources hidden in the material. One must purge oneself of certain aspects of contemporary writing which have been used so much that they have lost their significance and exploitability. This means, for instance, that in the composition of my String Quartet (1969) the elimination of simultaneities of movement became an open problem to work at. Everything multiple had to be put under control. Movement and directions of the multiple layers of language had to be re-engaged with the new control. Stefan Wolpe
Art by Emmi Whitehorse Stefan Wolpe - String Quartet](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xUebYeq43GE/mqdefault.jpg)


![Edward MacDowell - Piano Concerto No. 2
Piano Concerto No. 2, op. 23 (1885)
I. Larghetto Calmato
II. Presto Giocoso [13:15]
III. Largo-Molto Allegro [18:12]
Eugene List, piano
Vienna State Opera Orchestra
Carlos Chávez
MacDowells Second Piano Concerto was composed in Wiesbaden, Germany between 1884 and 1885 and was dedicated to the Venezuelan pianist Teresa Carreno. The American premiere was in New York on March 5, 1889 with the composer as soloist. The same concert included the American premier of Tchaikovsky’s Fifth Symphony. Critics decided then and there that MacDowell’s was the superior work! On March 13, 1889, the Musical Courier stated, “In the Tchaikovsky Fifth Symphony. One vainly sought for coherency and homogeneousness.” Regarding the MacDowell Concerto, The New York Tribune wrote, “It is a splendid composition, so full of poetry, so full of vigor as to temp the assertion that it must be placed at the head of all works of its kind produced by either a native or an adopted citizen of America.” In Europe, however, critics complained that the work was “too Lisztian.” Liszt had been the composer’s friend and a strong promoter of his music. Their admiration was mutual.
In 1888, MacDowell and his wife Marian Nevins, a former piano student, decided to return to the United States to live in Boston. Two years previously, he and his wife had bought a summer home, Hillcrest Farm, in Peterborough, New Hampshire. In 1896, he became the first chairman of the Music Department at Columbia University until 1904. In 1907, Marian established the MacDowell Colony for artists, composers and writers, deeding Hillcrest Farm for this purpose. The Colony became a huge success thanks to Andrew Carnegie, J.P Morgan, Grover Cleveland, and many donors who supported its mission, a blending of artistic talents. There are now dozens of buildings in the colony on 450 acres, and it is on the National Register of Historical Landmarks.
Opus 23 is built in traditional sonata-allegro structure but unusual in that its tempo marking Larghetto calmato indicated that a slow pace came first. A dreamlike, nostalgic theme begins immediately in the violins followed by horns. When the soloist enters with a stunning, extensive cadenza, it is clear that the composer has big ideas on hand for the pianist. Eventually, this melts into a slow recall of the main idea from violins, flute and horns with pizzicato celli. Again, the pianist re-enters with another massive display and amplification of preceding themes, exciting the orchestra into a brilliant response. With its soaring lyricism, magnificent coloration, and alluring passion, the opening movement is clearly committed to romantic ideals, drama, power, and exuberance. In its dream-like passages, it also speaks to the Romantic ideals of intimacy and tenderness.
For his second movement, MacDowell produces a presto giocoso (fast moving) dazzling scherzo in rondo form. It contains three themes, which had been destined for a symphonic poem about Beatrice and Benedict, referencing Shakespeare’s Much Ado about Nothing, the first Shakespeare play the composer and his wife had seen in England. According to his wife, “He favored the mischievous demons or elves that fly in clouds through the air like pixies they were light gossamer nothings, delicate as a feather, wafted by swift March breezes.”
MacDowell’s friend and pupil, Mr. T.P. Currier, noted, “his finger velocity was the most striking characteristic of his playing… he took to prestissimo like a duck to water… One of his ever present fears was that his fingers would run away with him!” This movement demands formidable technique, strength, and crisp articulations. The closing marked piu mosso (faster) is definitely pixie-like: marked ppp, the pianist plays a passage of light broken chords, capped by two swift little arpeggios and a light staccato chord over pizzicato strings: the movement simply disappears.
The final movement opens slowly, marked Largo. Low strings preface the soloist’s quiet response. The two forces blend in before the pianist delivers the massive first theme. After spinning trills, the music shifts to a jolly, faster pace (molto allegro) expanding the ideas into dramatic relief. The main theme of the first movement returns for a final bow before three faster ideas are introduced. Midpoint, the music moves into a thoughtful lento segment, but with the soloist leading the way, MacDowell ignites the last section into huge orchestral climaxes, pianistic fireworks, galloping toward a massive closing chord. Marianne Williams Tobias
Art by Felix Vallotton Edward MacDowell - Piano Concerto No. 2](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ygg7MQ6WC6c/mqdefault.jpg)
