Repertoire from the Gillet-Fox Competition and its Importance to the Basoon Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gillet-Fox International Competition, sponsored by the International Double Reed Society, is one of the most prestigious and renowned international competitions held for double reeds. The first competition was held in Lubbock, Texas, in 198 1 .Every year more than thirty competitors enter the preliminary round by sending their tapes. Up to five finalists are selected by the competition committee. The final round is judged in a public concert by a distinguished panel of judges from many countries. Former winners and finalists of the competition have enjoyed illustrious careers as world-class artists. Examples include David McGill, principal bassoon of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, who was a recipient of the 2001 Grammy Award for Best Instrumental Soloist; Ludovic Tissus who serves as second bassoon of the National Opera of Paris. The repertoire is chosen by a committee that ensures the pieces are highly challenging and have the qualities appropriate for an international competition. Each year of the competition the selected works represent a variety of stylistic genres, musical periods and nationalities, and include at least one major concerto, as well as a contemporary work. In choosing the works for this performance project, diversity was the aim in selecting works from the competition dating from 1994 to the present. The nationalities of the composers span several countries - Canada, France, USA, Australia, Sweden and Uruguay. Technically and stylistically, each work showcases particular challenges for the performer. Eight contemporary pieces were selected for this project. These pieces include single movements selected by the competition committee from works for bassoon and orchestra. In addition, my repertoire includes one work each from the Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, and Romantic periods. The Renaissance is represented by the first work from of a set of bassoon sonatas by Bertoli. The selected Baroque piece is Bach's Cello Suite No.2. This is the first transcription to be used in the competition. From the Classical period, I selected Sonata KV 292 for bassoon and cello. The edition for bassoon and piano was used here just as it was in the competition. Benvald's Concert Piece is a brilliant example of the technical and sentimental show pieces typical of the Romantic period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".