K i m be r ly H u d s on | f lu t e
Kimberly Hudson is the Crew of
Columbia, STS-107 Endowed Principal Flute with the Lubbock Symphony Orchestra. An active freelance artist, she served three seasons as third flute/ piccolo with the Abilene Philharmonic, as well as performing with local organizations such as Ballet Lubbock, the Lubbock Chorale, and Moonlight Musicals. She has been previously featured with the LSO on J. S. Bach’s 2nd and 4th Brandenburg Concertos. Mrs. Hudson maintains a large private flute studio in Lubbock and has taught as Instructor of Flute at South Plains College, Wayland Baptist University, Lubbock Christian University, and Eastern New Mexico University. She earned the Master of Music degree in performance with Dr. Lisa Garner Santa at Texas Tech University. Mrs. Hudson won the 2003 Texas Tech University Concerto Competition and performed the first movement of Mozart’s Concerto in C Major for Flute and Harp with the TTU Symphony Orchestra. In 2004 Mrs. Hudson won the national Byron Hester Competition in Houston, Texas, and also won a performance within a masterclass for Sir James Galway hosted by the Texas Flute Society. She earned the Bachelor of Music degree in Performance from the University of Houston’s Moores School of Music with Byron Hester and Sydney Carlson. She has been inducted into the National Music Honor Society Pi Kappa Lambda. She has performed in masterclasses given by Carol Wincenc, Leone Buyse, Alexa Still, Susan Milan, Thomas Robertello, and Mike Mower. She has been a participant in the Hot Springs Music Festival, the Texas Music Festival, and has performed with the Professional Flute Choir at the National Flute Association’s Convention. While in Houston, Mrs. Hudson was an active freelance artist and teacher in the Houston metropolitan area prior to moving to Lubbock.
dr . r ac h e l M a z z uc c o | h a r p
Dr. Rachel Mazzucco is Lecturer
of Harp and Music Theory at Texas Tech University and Co-Director of the TTU String Project. She serves as the LSO’s Principal Harpist and as the Rachel Jean Armstrong Thomas Endowed Chair. She is also an active performer with Ballet Lubbock and the Amarillo Symphony (where she also serves as Principal Harpist). She holds a Ph.D. in Fine Arts with a concentration in Music Theory and an M.M. in Harp Performance from TTU, and a B.M. in Music Performance and a B.S. in Mathematics from Texas Christian University. She has studied under many renowned harpists, including Susan Pejovich of the Dallas Symphony and the late LSO Principal Harpist Gail Barber. In addition to her work as a performer and educator, Dr. Mazzucco has also presented research in local, regional, and international venues, for groups such as the American Harp Society, the American String Teacher’s Association, and the Texas Society for Music Theory.
Lu b b o c k Sy m p h on y C h a m b e r O rc h e st ra CONDUCTOR
Bass, cont.
Eric Allen, Artistic Director
Hannah McGillivray
VIOLIN I
FLUTE
Annie Chalex Boyle, Concertmaster Jones-Saathoff Family Endowed Chair Linda Lin, Associate Concertmaster Diekemper Family Foundation Endowed Chair Abi Rhoades Abreal Whitman Josenir Alves Cerqueira Junior Guillermo Uribe Laudino
Eric Leise, Principal Crew of Columbia, STS-107 Endowed Chair Spencer Hartman
VIOLIN II Evgeny Zvonnikov, Principal Justice Phil and Carla Johnson Endowed Chair Cassidy Forehand Assistant Principal Kea Beasley Grace Marín Aguilar Adan Flores Isabella Rollans
VIOLA Timothy MacDuff, Principal Mary M. Epps and Ralph E. Wallingford Endowed Chair Jordan Stubblefield Libby Herring Camellia Asadi
OBOE Susetta Rockett, Principal Lubbock Symphony Guild Endowed Chair Jordan Hastings
CLARINET David Shea, Principal Christine Polvado and John Stockdale Endowed Chair Trisha Burrell
BASSOON Ian Resurreccion, Principal Nancy and Tom Neal Endowed Chair Jake Prentice
HORN Josh Graves, Principal Anthony and Helen Brittin Endowed Chair Clark Hutchinson Or Natan
CELLO
TRUMPET
Michael Newton, Principal Mary Francis Carter Endowed Chair Danny Mar Madeline Garcia John Marshall
Gary Hudson, Principal Stacey and Robert Kollman Family Endowed Chair Nathalie Mejia-Zec
BASS Mark Morton, Principal Eugene and Covar Dabezies Endowed Chair
TIMPANI Lisa Rogers, Principal Lubbock Symphony Guild Endowed Chair
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756 – 1791) Eine kleine Nachtmusik, K. 525 I. Allegro II. Romance: Andante III. Menuetto: Allegretto IV. Finale: Rondo
(16 min)
Mozart
(30 min)
Concerto for Flute and Harp in C major, K. 299/297c I. Allegro II. Andantino III. Rondeau: Allegro
Kimberly Hudson, flute Dr. Rachel Mazzucco, harp In termis sion
Ludwig van Beethoven (1770 – 1827) Symphony No. 1 in C major, op. 21 I. Adagio molto – Allegro con brio II. Andante cantabile con moto III. Menuetto: Allegro molto e vivace IV. Adagio – Allegro molto e vivace This program is approximately 1 hr and 12 minutes.
(26 min)
C L AS S I C A L I CO N S Program Notes Mozart: Serenade No. 13 for Strings in G Major, K. 525 (“Eine kleine Nachtmusik”)
Few works in the classical repertory are as immediately recognizable – or as deceptively effortless – as Mozart’s Eine kleine Nachtmusik. Its German title is usually translated as “A Little Night Music,” though “A Little Serenade” more accurately conveys its character: a graceful entertainment intended for an evening gathering. Mozart completed the work in Vienna in August 1787, while composing Don Giovanni. The circumstances of its composition and its intended occasion remain unknown. It is widely regarded as one of the most famous, most frequently performed, and most iconic pieces of classical music ever written. Some music scholars consider it the single most popular work by Mozart. It was not published until about 1827, over thirty years after Mozart’s death, by Johann André in Offenbach am Main. Mozart’s widow Constanze sold it to the publisher as part of a large bundle of her husband’s compositions. Although now performed by string orchestra, the piece was probably conceived for a small ensemble of strings. Four movements survive, though Mozart’s own catalogue suggests that the serenade originally contained an additional minuet. What remains forms an exceptionally satisfying whole. The opening Allegro begins with one of Mozart’s most recognizable melodies – a vigorous ascending theme answered by a crisp, decisive cadence. The music is buoyant and ceremonious, yet its apparent simplicity conceals Mozart’s extraordinary control of proportion, contrast, and harmonic movement. Every phrase seems inevitable, and not a note is wasted. The Romanze provides the work’s lyrical center. Its gentle melody suggests an intimate nocturnal song, poised between tenderness and formality. A darker central episode briefly disturbs the calm before the opening music returns, now sounding even more serene. The Minuet is stately rather than delicate, marked by firm rhythms and bold accents. Its contrasting Trio offers a moment of relaxation before the Minuet returns. The final Rondo restores the high spirits of the opening movement. Quick, brilliant, and impeccably balanced, it brings the serenade to a conclusion of seemingly spontaneous delight.
Eine kleine Nachtmusik is sometimes treated as merely agreeable background music, but its familiarity should not obscure its perfection. Beneath its charm lies an astonishing economy of means, a flawless sense of balance, and a vitality that has remained undiminished during the nearly two centuries since its publication. Mozart: Concerto for Flute and Harp in C Major, K. 299 (297c)
In a famous letter to his father, written in Mannheim on February 14, 1778, Mozart complained that he became “quite obtuse” when continually required to write for “an instrument that I cannot bear.” The instrument was the flute. At the time, he was struggling to complete a substantial commission for the Dutch amateur flutist Ferdinand De Jean and was under considerable pressure concerning deadlines and payment. The fairest conclusion is not necessarily that Mozart hated the flute itself, but that he disliked being obliged to write repeatedly for it under frustrating circumstances. We cannot know whether his objection was to the instrument’s sound, its technical limitations, the particular commission, or simply his own exasperation. Mozart’s Concerto for Flute and Harp is among his most elegant and immediately attractive orchestral works. Mozart composed the concerto in Paris in April 1778, about two months after writing that letter from Mannheim. It was commissioned by the aristocratic amateur flutist Adrien-Louis de Bonnières, Duke of Guînes, whose daughter was an accomplished harpist. Mozart was expected to provide a concerto that father and daughter could perform together. Whether the work was ever played by its intended soloists is uncertain, and Mozart complained that he was not properly paid for it. The concerto is scored for two oboes, two natural horns in C, solo flute, solo harp, and strings. The combination of flute and harp was unusual in Mozart’s time. The harp was still undergoing technical development and was not yet a standard orchestral instrument. Nevertheless, Mozart understood perfectly how to exploit the complementary qualities of the two soloists. The flute supplies a clear, singing line; the harp surrounds it with shimmer, delicacy, and gently articulated brilliance. Mozart treats them as conversational partners. The opening Allegro, set in traditional sonata form, begins with an orchestral exposition that introduces the primary themes. When the soloists enter, the music becomes more intimate and decorative. The harp’s flowing arpeggios support the flute’s graceful phrases, but the relationship is constantly changing: the flute may accompany the harp, the two may trade fragments of melody, or they may move together in elegant parallel motion. The writing is brilliant without being showy.
The central slow movement shifts to F major, dropping the oboes and horns to create a warm, intimate texture restricted to strings and the soloists. The flute and harp play a series of long-breathed, lyrical melodies. Here, the harp serves a dual role: sustaining the rhythmic pulse with flowing broken-chord figures while joining the flute in expressive duets. The movement possesses a grace and beauty that make it one of the highlights of Mozart’s Paris period. The finale returns to C major in a French gavotte rhythm (2/2 meter starting on an upbeat). Structured as a classic rondo, the movement features a catchy, dance-like main theme punctuated by contrasting episodes that give both soloists opportunities for virtuosic display. The Concerto for Flute and Harp is sometimes regarded as one of Mozart’s lighter creations, but its lightness is a virtue rather than a limitation. Its refinement, balance, and melodic generosity are products of the highest craftsmanship. The music never strains for profundity, yet its slow movement possesses real tenderness, while the outer movements display grace and invention. What began as a commission for two aristocratic amateurs became an enduring masterpiece of elegance – music in which charm and artistry are perfectly joined. A note about the catalogue numbering: Ludwig von Köchel’s original 1862 catalogue assigned the concerto the number K. 299. The sixth edition of the catalogue, published in 1964, renumbered it K. 297c in an attempt to place Mozart’s works in a more accurate chronological sequence. The extensively revised 2024 edition restored the original number, K. 299, although the older dual designation K. 299/297c remains widely used. Beethoven: Symphony No. 1 in C Major, op. 21
When Ludwig van Beethoven’s First Symphony premiered at Vienna’s Imperial Burgtheater on April 2, 1800, the 29-year-old composer was already celebrated as a virtuoso pianist and brilliant improviser. The work was dedicated to his patron, Baron Gottfried van Swieten. It belongs outwardly to the classical world of Haydn and Mozart. Its proportions are balanced, its orchestra modest, and its four-movement design conventional. Yet Beethoven’s muscular sound so brilliantly exploited in his later symphonies, pervades the entire work, announcing a voice very different from those of his predecessors. It begins as if in search of an ending. A C dominant-seventh chord unexpectedly resolves to F major, making the symphony appear to begin away from its home key. The music wanders through subdominant and dominant harmonies before finally anchoring in C major as the energetic Allegro con brio takes flight. To modern ears the passage may not sound revolutionary, but to Beethoven’s first audience it must have seemed deliberately provocative. He makes striking use of the winds, often allowing them to emerge as independent voices rather
than merely reinforcing the strings. The movement remains recognizably classical, but its energy is concentrated and insistent. Rhythmic momentum matters as much as melody. Rhythmic intensity became a dominant feature of his subsequent music. Set in F major, the second movement opens gently with a fugal entry in the second violins, soon joined in counterpoint by the rest of the orchestra. Despite its elegant, songlike character, Beethoven maintains rhythmic tension through subtle dotted rhythms and a pulsing triplet motif. Notably, Beethoven employs the timpani – still unusual in a symphonic slow movement – to add a discreet triplet pulse at several points. Beethoven labels the third movement a Minuet, but it is already a scherzo in everything but name. Its tempo is too quick and its gestures too forceful for a courtly dance. The music leaps forward with syncopated accents and sudden modulations. The Trio offers contrast, but not repose; sustained wind chords are set against pulsating strings, maintaining the movement’s nervous vitality. With this movement, Beethoven effectively transforms the symphonic minuet from a social dance into a vehicle for dramatic energy. The finale begins with one of Beethoven’s most engaging jokes. After a loud introductory chord, the violins timidly attempt the first notes of a scale. They stop, try again, venture a little farther, and finally burst into the complete theme at full speed. The effect is theatrical, as though the music were gradually winding itself up. What follows is a brilliant and exuberant Allegro molto e vivace, filled with rapid scales, quick exchanges, unexpected accents, and high spirits. The movement owes much to Haydn’s wit, but Beethoven’s humor is broader and more physical. The finale drives toward its conclusion with an irrepressible momentum that seems to anticipate the composer’s later symphonies. The Unanswerable Question
Suppose Mozart had lived as long as Beethoven – almost 57 years. Mozart at 57 would have died in 1813, by which time he could have known Beethoven’s Eroica, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Symphonies, the Appassionata Sonata, the “Razumovsky” Quartets, the Emperor Concerto, and probably the Seventh Symphony. He would not have heard Beethoven’s Ninth or the late quartets – the works most radically unlike eighteenth-century music – but he would have encountered enough mature Beethoven to recognize that the boundaries of the classical style had been permanently enlarged. Speculating about a world in which Mozart died in 1813 instead of 1791 is one of the most intoxicating “what-ifs” in musical history. Mozart would probably have reacted to Beethoven with a mixture of admiration, surprise, and criticism. He would have recognized at once
Beethoven’s extraordinary power, originality, and command of large musical structures, while perhaps finding some of the music excessively forceful, repetitive, or lacking in vocal grace. Yet Beethoven’s mature works would likely have fascinated him and encouraged him to enlarge his own symphonic forms, intensify his harmonic language, and pursue the darker, more dramatic tendencies already apparent in his late works – without sacrificing the elegance, lyricism, and transparency that were central to his style. Beethoven, confronted with a still-living and still-creative Mozart, would probably have responded with profound reverence complicated by rivalry. Mozart would no longer have been merely an idealized master of the recent past, but a formidable contemporary whose effortless melody, dramatic instinct, and contrapuntal fluency might have challenged Beethoven’s own methods. Beethoven might have sought Mozart’s approval while fiercely defending his independence, and the continuing presence of Mozart could have pushed him toward greater refinement, vocal expressiveness, and theatrical flexibility, just as Beethoven’s boldness might have encouraged Mozart toward greater scale and structural daring. Since we can never know, no answer can be more than informed speculation. As T. S. Eliot wrote in Burnt Norton (the first of his Four Quartets):
“What might have been is an abstraction, Remaining a perpetual possibility Only in a world of speculation.” Program Notes by Dr. Neil Kurtzman
dr . e r ic a l l e n | c on duc t or
Dr. Eric Allen has led the Lubbock
Symphony Chamber Orchestra (LSCO) in engaging performances of diverse repertoire, including symphonic masterworks, choral collaborations, and works featuring soloists. He led the orchestra in a recording of DJ Sparr’s Through Every Gust of Wind: Four Haiku, featured on Sparr’s album Hard Metal Cantus, released on the Innova label. Dr. Allen also serves as Director of Traditional Music Ministries at First United Methodist Church in Lubbock. In addition to his responsibilities with LSCO and FUMC, Dr. Allen serves as Professor of Music and Associate Director of Bands at Texas Tech University. His responsibilities include conducting the Symphonic Band, directing the Contemporary Music Ensemble, teaching conducting, and assisting with the direction of the Goin’ Band from Raiderland. Under Allen’s direction, the Texas Tech Symphonic Band has presented engaging performances featuring repertoire spanning nearly two centuries. The ensemble has also collaborated extensively with faculty soloists and received praise in Fanfare Magazine for its accompaniment on the MSR Classics release of Andrew Stetson’s solo album, Rise Above. The ensemble was also selected by jury to perform at the 2016 and 2020 CBDNA Southwestern Division Conferences in Boulder, Colorado. Allen conducted the Texas Tech Contemporary Music Ensemble on its album Shifting Direction, released on the Navona label and earning critical acclaim from Fanfare and Gramophone. He also served on the team that led the Goin’ Band from Raiderland in its appearance at the 2023 Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.