Arts
Issue Arts Back Next

Arts

Wind Ensemble offers a dynamic performance

Contemporary composers the focus of the evening

by Lauren Viera

The Oberlin Wind Ensemble, led by conductor Gene Young, gave a pleasant performance for early arrivals of the Parents' Weekend crowd.

Thursday's performance featured works by two 20th century composers, Morton Gould and Colin McPhee, as well as the late-19th century composer, Emile Bernard.

The selections from Gould and McPhee-Remembrance Day: Soliloquy for a Passing Century (1995) and Concerto for Wind Orchestra(1960), respectively-were interesting selections as both were the composers' last completed work. Bernard's Divertissement pour Instruments a Vent, Op. 36 was written in 1892. Thus, the varied chronological periods added to the Ensemble's remarkable talent for diversity.

Remembrance Day started the performance, breaking the dead silence otherwise hanging in Finney Chapel. The opening was appropriate, though: Young raised his wand ever so slightly, and as quiet as the audience was, the euphonium, played by sophomore Conservatory student Ka-Yiu Ho, led its followers into a wondrous state with its soft, eerie melody.

The sound of Young's gentle page-turns of the score managed to reach the audience's ears. Shortly following, a single ring like a distant wind chime entered the piece, yielding then to clarinets, flutes and oboes, and the melody transgressed into the body of the piece, entirely enriched with the Ensemble's articulate playing.

The score developed into what may have been reminiscent of a recent suspense film. Though obviously modern and creatively crafted, Gould's work flows evenly, unlike many contemporary composer's all too abstract works. He intertwines contrasts between soft oboe and flute melodies with staccatoed horns, all the while shapen around unpredictable, but surprisingly clever rhythms.

Quiet phrases added dimension and emotion to the work, but at once, with a wave of his wand, Young just as easily led his Ensemble into full-fledged loudness and then back again. It was remarkable. The end of Remembrance Day was marked with a reintroduction of the initial euponium pattern, this time played by the xylophone. But both arrangements worked the ensemble down into a stream of low melody again, and then silence, where it had begun, 15 minutes earlier.

Divertissement pour Instruments a Vent was next, performed by only a quarter of the initial Ensemble's 40 members. Perhaps due to the standards of the time era in which it was written, or maybe following the composer's own style, Bernard's work may have been the low point of the set. However, playing a less than exuberant piece did not stop the scaled down ensemble from proving its musical talent in full color.

The entire four-part composition would have been virtually impossible to distinguish from any other late 19th century work had it not been for the intelligence in Young's conducting, and the players' prowess to perform such a basic classical work so vibrantly.

The melody started off in a standard major key whistle, almost comparable to that of an early Disney movie. Standard 16th notes attempted to lend excitement to the skeleton of the undeveloped melody, but failed, with no climatic crescendos to speak of. The first movement, Andante sostenuto, ended with no objections, in a considerably faster pace than its preceding body.

Following was the Allegro vivace portion of the work; not surprisingly, it mirrored the first movement all too well. However, near the end of the piece, almost to compensate for its blandness, Conservatory oboists junior Wendy Wilson and senior Julie Gramolini played wonderfully legato phrases of melody, accompanied by a very consistent, solid effort from the bassoon department. Had it not been for such well-planned articulation, this movement would not have been saved.

The third and fourth movements, Andante and Allegro non tropo followed through on reincorporating their predecessor's themes, successfully in slightly more enticing fashion than predicted from the earlier movements. The piece's end could not have come sooner, though; perhaps a better selection could have been made to exemplify the Ensemble's talent. However, with the given work, the small group managed to prove itself worthy of a full sound, despite the unexciting score.

At last, McPhee's Concerto for Wind Orchestra went underway following a short intermission. The piece is obviously modern, with almost jazz-like trumpet score making the initial impressions, and a standard two-tone bass line with tell-tale wind parts following. Due to the predictable elements of the previous piece, McPhee's loud clamor of percussion and minor key wails happily shook up the audience within the first minute. Unexpected syncopation and loud flurries of clarinets and flutes marked Tempo siusto, and then, it grinded to a halt.

The second movement, Lento, was marked by a solo piano pattern, leading into the addition of the full wind orchestra. Odd rhythms for tambourine and snare drum intermixed with extreme quiets and louds, but even in the slowest, most timid moments, a definite sense of musical genius shown through both Young's conducting and his Ensemble's translation.

The evening concluded with the Concerto's final Animato movement. With quick build-ups and sudden halts, the piece proceeded to rework some of the first two movements' patterns in with its own finale-like closure.

Young's jumpy conducting signaled the players to jump as well, sending their melodies into full swing rhythm and melody, finally distinguishable from the previous contemporary experimentation. A slow decline to a near whisper attempted to finished off the piece, but a loud, sharp collaboration of a final note had the last word.

This concert followed the extremely popular Sonny Rollins concert by a week but carried its weight and garnered respect. The students and conductor alike successfully demonstrated the array of talented woodwinds in the Oberlin community, despite the less-than-impressive selection of works perfomed.


Oberlin

Copyright © 1996, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 125, Number 5; October 5, 1996

Contact Review webmaster with suggestions or comments at ocreview@www.oberlin.edu.
Contact Review editorial staff at oreview@oberlin.edu.