Igor Grobman wrote:

>First, was Poulenc's Sonata for horn, trumpet and trombone.  The notes
>for the concert went on and on about how difficult and deep the piece
>was.  Well, the players certainly showed it.

Coincidentally, I was at a lecture on Poulenc's life and times here in
the DC area last week, during which the lecturer played two performances
of the same piano sonata -- one played by the composer, the other by a much
later performer.  The significant difference in phrasing between the two
performances prompted me to ask the question whether Poulenc gave detailed
'interpretative' instructions on his scores, in the same way that a large
number of twentieth century composers have done, or whether the performer
was left to interpret him/herself.

The answer was interesting -- yes and no (of course) -- metronome markings
were included extensively, for example.  But the lecturer gave the specific
example of the sonata quoted in Igor's post.  Apparently, each of the
three ensemble member's scores are marked very specifically with phrasing
instructions -- but they are all contradictory, so that when one is playing
staccato, another is playing legato etc.  This (I would imagine) would
contribute significantly to the confusion of the audience (not to mention
the players!) and must make the piece questionable when it comes to
programming -- from the point of view of "we want to program different
'new' non-core music that people will want to come back to.

Poulenc had a huge sense of humor and fun and perhaps the conflicting
phrasing instructions in this sonata are an example of him 'cocking a
snook' at musical orthodoxy of his day.  Whatever the case, I intend
expanding my Poulenc collection, which currently consists only of the
Gloria, the Stabat Mater and the Concerto for Two Pianos.

Tim Mahon
Alexandria, VA
[log in to unmask]