Share This Page

Review: New Music Ensemble opens season on a strong note

The 2009 season of the Pittsburgh New Music Ensemble began strongly Friday night with two works of completely contrasting nature.

Robert Paterson's Sextet opened the concert with vibrant sonorities and rhythms, compelling music that showcased the musicians' expertise.

On the other hand, while "Table Setting" by David Bithel could be considered a percussion piece, music was secondary to theater. The two characters, played by conductor Kevin Noe and percussionist David Skidmore, engaged in a contest of will and one-upmanship using small pieces of wood. It reached a climax when Skidmore played on an elaborate construction that included tiny antique cymbals and metal rods. The players were serious; the audience laughed repeatedly.

"Critical Point" by Carnegie Mellon University professor Roger Dannenberg was the most versatile of his musical computer programs that I've heard, even generating genuine contrapuntal textures with cello soloist Norbert Lewandowski.

The best part of the Triple Concerto by Alejando Vinao was the recorded music, but, oddly, the parts for the three soloists were busy without being interesting.

"L'oeil ecoute" (The Eye Listens) by Pierre Jalbert was fitting as the conclusion because it gave the audience much to think about. Like every other piece of Jalbert I've heard, "L'oeil ecoute" is a pleasure to hear because the strong profile of its materials is handled with lucidity and rhythmic vitality.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.