Video: Composer David Amran performs at Winterfest

by |
02/14/2011 11:08 AM |
RANDEE DADDONA FILE PHOTO | Composer David Amran showed off his talents with a Winterfest performance at Castello di Borghese Vineyard & Winery in Cutchogue Sunday.

RANDEE DADDONA FILE PHOTO | Composer David Amran showed off his talents with a Winterfest performance at Castello di Borghese Vineyard & Winery in Cutchogue Sunday.

David Amran has composed more than 100 orchestral and chamber music works, written many scores for Broadway theater and film, two operas and three books.

On Sunday he showed off his talents with a Winterfest performance at Castello di Borghese Vineyard & Winery in Cutchogue.

Comments

comments

3 Comment

  • Let’s have a moratorium on all development in Riverhead! No development as of right anymore. If I live in Wading River and I can gain votes when I try to get re-elected as supervisor if I stop development in my neighborhood, then maybe I can have a sweep by stopping all development in all of Riverhead. What a great idea! It is in the works at Epcal. We have nothing there that Walter can be blamed for, no development, nothing at all that can be credited to his administration except of course another useless study funded by the taxpayers. Seanie Boy is all about politics this year, remember in November what he and the other two new members did for you last year – nothing! Enjoy your next tax bill produced by this crew.

  • Public hearings are not always so good for the public… Case in point, the recent decision by the Board to deny a permit to the security company for the dog kennel in Jamesport. A public hearing was held. Many folks opposing the initiative showed up, most of those people were misinformed and stirred up by one or two neighbors as well as the likes of Ms. Mendez and her group who basically oppose any growth at all. The security company took steps to answer the concerns of the neighbors even going to the extent of hosting a reception to explain the operation to the neighbors. Though the majority of the neighbors’ concerns were answered, the Board tried to defend their “no” vote by saying they were voting with their constituents. Really? Would that be the “constituent” that opposed the facility due to explosives (no detonators, only used for scent) kept on premises? That would be the constituent who hauls tanks and on many occasions parks a tank labeled, “Danger, Hazardous Materials” in his yard in the middle of a residential neighborhood. No regard was given to the local businesses that would’ve been positively affected by this initiative. Which begs the question, were there any other reasons for denying the permit? Could one or more Board members have had an agenda of their own? For starters, look a tax map for the surrounding area and see who owns a large percentage of the properties in and around Herricks lane…

  • David Amram, with an “m”!