Review: Ion Sound Project bursting with renewal
Every piece on Ion Sound Project's new-music concert Sunday evening was a rewarding experience that contributed to the ecological sensibility of the group's thematic season, "Reduce, Renew, Recycle." The concert at Bellefield Hall of the University of Pittsburgh in Oakland, focused on renewal, with musical agitation yielded to a nurturing sensibility and hope.
Pianist Rob Frankenberry provided the spirit that lived up to the title of Libby Larsen's "Firebrand," but the more dulcet ideas originating in the flute, violin and cello carried the day. Michael Torke's "After the Forest Fire" reached the warmest conclusion, with Eliseo Real's beautiful marimba playing provided a gentle sonority that supported Peggy Yoo's sensuous flute and Elisa Kohanski's ardent cello.
The five sections of Orianna Webb's "Sequence Dreams" were delightfully varied, with excellent rhythmic and melodic shape. The writing gave violinist Laura Motchalov plenty of opportunity to show her range, with the marimba part a strongly supporting second. The flutist, cellist and pianist in this piece played only glass instruments, including tuned glasses played by rubbing the rim with a moistened finger. Tuned beer bottles, played by blowing across the lip of the bottle, provided a droll accompaniment for the "Village Dance" movement.
The world premiere of Jonathan Kolm's Terra Secundum was the gratifying conclusion, fluent in its diversity and persuasive in its concluding "Equilibium."
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 â 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.