re: Microphones!!

[Choirkid]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:14pm

I'm doing an assignment at school and I would love some imput!

The Microphone killed musical theatre...agree or disagree??

Also, if anyone has read any books on the topic please let me know!

[KQuill]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:33pm

I wouldn't say that "the mic killed musical theater", but if you want to make that part of how technology in general has killed the intimacy of theater, you could definitly cite the microphone as a good example.

In RESPECT FOR ACTING, Uta Hagen briefly touches on this.
Updated On: 11/15/06 at 09:33 PM

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:43pm

Mark N. Grant's book The Rise and Fall of the Broadway Musical has a chapter on this. The book has some big problems (lots of factual errors and some really illogical thinking) but it also has some brilliant stuff.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:50pm

microphones only kill musical theatre when they malfunction or when you have incompetent or inexperienced techies which, in my experience, is usually the issue and not the fault of the microphone. it's nice to be able to comfortably hear every performer on stage from anywhere in the house, but it is true that they sometimes seem to be more trouble than they are worth.

[TickTickAdam]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:55pm

If you mean they killed musical theatre in the sense that actors and actresses no longer needed to be able to project then yes, mics changed musical theater.

Also, It's not the techs fault if the performers can't sing enough to fill the theater.

[KQuill]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 9:59pm

I just think it goes right along with the fact that Broadway shows are becoming more and more of a spectacle. The orchestra is mic'd too, so i dont think its about projection so much as a) making the show more exciting and b) being able to control volume and reverb levels.

[temms]

Posted: 11/15/06 at 11:18pm

I think it's a massive oversimplification to say that amplification, or any one thing, has "killed" musical theatre. Seems to me that there are still new shows being produced at all levels of theatre - Broadway, off-, off-off-, regional, local, etc. A few of them are still even hits, and go to play around the world. So I don't know how you can consider the musical having been "killed" - merely having changed forms.

Plus, microphones have been in use in musicals since around the '40s, when there were foot mics at the front of the stage. At that time, the sets were also constructed with acoustically reflective material and frequently shaped in such a way to act as a sound reflector, so that if the actor were facing downstage they'd be picked up by the floor mic, and facing upstage would be aided with the acoustically-designed set.

Theatres, too, were optimized for acoustic performances. Sit in the back rows of some old houses for vaudeville and summer stock (Ogunquit Playhouse in Maine is one example) - the sound is amazingly crisp without any microphones.

Unfortunately, theatres aren't being designed for sound anymore, since everyone knows they will be mic'd. Orchestras are now frequently covered completely or in another room, meaning that the entire orchestral sound is amplified. Plus, the use of electronic instruments in the pit means that acoustic voices will not be heard over them.

Plus, the silence in theatres is not as silent as it once was. Every piece of equipment - every light, every board, everything that has an electrical current running through it - makes noise. It's not a lot of noise, but the cumulative noise of hundreds of whirring electrical devices means that you already have a noise floor that is pretty noisy.

So to recap - you have theatres that are not acoustically optimized, sets that are not helping acoustically, amplified and electronic instruments, plus exponentially more individual electronic components that all make a small amount of noise that, together, adds up to a considerable whirr.

Much more has changed in theatre than simply "actors no longer learn how to project."

[theaterdude87]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 12:14am

I think mic's have helped at many times. I hate when you see a production even in High school and cannot hear anyone. My school has a great system so we usually do not have problems...but at schools that I have seen...if it backfires the audience cringes.

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 1:59am

"The Microphone killed musical theatre...agree or disagree??"

Gee, I didn't even know musical theater was sick.

Of course "The Microphone" didn't kill musical theater. I will admit that there have been instances of musical theater being made severely ill by trying too hard to compete with blockbuster motion pictures. The symptoms of this aren't just microphones, but include acoustically isolated pits, synthesizer driven orchestrations, multi million dollar automated sets and productions that put far more energy into visual spectacle than story telling.

In spite of all this, musical theater is nowhere near dead.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 2:14am

Another vote for Mark N. Grant's book The Rise and Fall of the Broadway Musical -- it's problematic and his opinions are often bothersome (and inaccurate), but the chapter on the history of sound technology on Broadway would be a valuable resource for your paper.

Microphones didn't kill Broadway, but it certainly changed certain basic elements of live performance -- and not for the better, in many ways. But then audiences have come to expect overamplification in the last couple of decades and there's no going back. Audiences have trouble simply sitting back, being QUIET, and listening and understanding and enjoying sound that is purely acoustical and not electronically enhanced (except perhaps in opera and in certain concert houses, such as Carnegie Hall).

You might consider mentioning the "Broadway Unplugged" concert series in your paper. Every year, several major Broadway names do a concert of songs from musicals with no amplification whatsoever and they have been quite successful (the latest one happened just a couple of nights ago). Google for info on that and you might also google (or perhaps email) Patti LuPone for her feelings on the subject. She has long been a critic of the amount of amplification used in live events and has been known to perform portions of her concerts without a mic. Contact her through her website, and I bet she could give you quite a quote or two for your paper.

[StarStruckGB]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 2:30am

Make sure in this assignment you include something about the whole Broadway Unplugged concept,
That we actually make it a point to showcase performers as they actually are without interferences of technology.

Microphones in general though, when you get really deep into it they've really been a dramatic change in theatre.
But think about it, now no matter where you can afford to sit when you see a Broadway show, you'll be able to hear what they're saying clearly. If someone were to hear "Dad eats bread" instead of "God is dead." Well, that would certainly change they're experience of professional theatre now wouldn't it? and all because they couldn't afford to be center within 10 rows orchestra seating.

Updated On: 11/16/06 at 02:30 AM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 2:37am

"Sit in the back rows of some old houses for vaudeville and summer stock (Ogunquit Playhouse in Maine is one example) - the sound is amazingly crisp without any microphones."

Unfortunatly, they mic all of their shows as well.

Working there this summer, Andrea McArdle told me they didn't use body mics when she did Annie at all. That wasn't all THAT long ago.

[ICEcreamAssassin]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 5:17am

margo-I was going to mention patti lupone as well.
Choirkid- in the documentary Broadway The golden age, Patti lupone remarks about this exact subject. You may want to rent it and reference it as part of your paper. I know she has actually made statements in other interviews so you might want to google it.

[Choirkid]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 9:21am

Thanks so much for all the info! The actual quote came from Harold Prince...but I haven't been able to find where he actually said it!

I agree with everyone's point, and I'm glad I wasn't too far off base. My question now is what came first? The Changes in audience's expectations, larger houses, etc....OR the microphone?

[BruceWayne5148]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 10:27am

i think they help the longevity of the performing life of musical theatre actors

[Horton]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 10:41am

I think that microphones have changed musical theater deffinately, In a way I feel that if you are not using a "pure voice" then how is "live theater" any different than listening to a CD in your bedroom. But I do think that this is a major delemma, and I think that we are just in a great change now in what we percieve musical theater to be, for example when Ethel Merman did Gypsy she did it for all practicle purposes without a Mic, and that is looked on as one of the greatest performances of all time in musical theater, because she did it for so long I think that it is fair to say that she was not distroying her voice, or harming it she was just a person geared for live performance, and therefore I think that microphones have had a negative impat on our musicals,

[ken8631]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 10:55am

Was just at Broadway Unplugged. It was excellent, but Scott Siegel mentioned they can't do it in modern theatres since they aren't built for non-amplified performances.

[Choirkid]

Posted: 11/19/06 at 6:34pm

Thanks again for all the comments!

One more question: There is a Forbidden Broadway song that pokes fun at the whole microphone situation...or at least there is a line about it! Does anyone know what song it is, and what edition it's from??? Thanks in advance.

[theaterdude87]

Posted: 11/19/06 at 6:39pm

I forget the actual title but it has to do with Sunset Blvd. and then Ethel Merman comes in.

[TomMonster]

Posted: 11/19/06 at 6:48pm

I love the Unplugged concerts. Last week's was wonderful.

Floor mics were introduced in 1949 by Rodgers and Hammerstein. Ironically, in order for "softer" pharses to be sung. According to Siegel, the first body mics were worn by Carol Channing in Hello Dolly, but I've heard other shows had introduced them first.

Union rules now, require mics if any instruments in the pit are amplified. And, nowadays, most musicals use synths...

Also, many performers aren't trained to be heard in the back row anymore.

After the Unplugged concert, though, it's nice to hear that there are plenty of singers out there who can be heard in the back row!

[Dover]

Posted: 11/19/06 at 7:05pm

While in some ways mics have allowed performers with mediocre voices to "cheat" by not having to develop the skills and stamina to project, I think they have freed up actors and directors artistically -- no longer does an actor have to face downstage in order to be heard clearly, and it allows actors a broader range of vocal choices, actually being able to whisper or speak or sing quietly instead of a stage whisper.

It's not the best thing that's happened to theatre, especially when done badly, but not the worst either.

[Phantom487]

Posted: 11/20/06 at 2:23am

Is this what you were talking about from "Forbidden Broadway"...

ETHEL MERMAN: What's that black growth on your forehead? Oh, its that new Andrew Lloyd Webber desease I've heard so much about! Ugh!

She goes on to sing:

You don't need amplifyin'
You'll be loud as a lion
Be like me, use your diaphram!
Take that thing off your forhead
It looks like a nuke warhead
And you sound sheepish as a lamb!
If today I got hired,
I would sweat when I'm wired
Causing some electronic zing!
Come on, kid, and get some class
Take that mic our of your ass
And admit ya just can't sing!

[MaronaDavies]

Posted: 11/20/06 at 3:36am

I don't think mics have killed musical theatre at all. I have seen some shows where they have been sorely misused--for instance when I saw Rent, the mics were pushed to 11 and the actors were screaming over them, which made them very difficult to hear clearly.

I'd argue that mics, set at an appropriate level, help audiences by allowing them to clearly hear everything that's happening onstage. Even if the actors project, sometimes without mics there are issues of acoustics, street noise and sirens, etc.

I'd also argue that, as BruceWayne said above, the mics help actors have longer careers and save their voices somewhat. Yes, they need to know correct placement and projection. If they don't, they will eventually destroy their vocal cords with or without mics. The mics just might help them preserve those pipes for a little longer, though.

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 11/20/06 at 9:32am

Overamplification has certainly had some very negative effects, but overamplification is related to many other issues.

As already stated, Rodgers and Hammerstein were great fans of amplification and were sort of pioneers in its use on Broadway, though its use, if Grant is correct, goes back to Du Barry Was a Lady in 1939, ironically a show that starred Merman, but with brass heavy orchestrations, probably because much of it took place in a burlesque house. But I can't imagine that Rodgers and Hammerstein would be too pleased with what we get nowadays.

Actually, a Rodgers show was probably the first Broadway musical to be miked, Jumbo in 1935, but that was a special case since it was in the Hippodrome.

Of course, floor mikes were used in Gypsy. OTOH, Merman was the only Broadway Dolly not to wear a body mike and it was great to hear her completely unmiked on the runway.

It's not really correct that theatres have gotten bigger since the introduction of mikes. Plenty of big theatres predate microphones on Broadway.

That mention in Grant that Channing in Dolly! was the first person on Broadway to have been body miked seems pretty definitely wrong. At least Anna Maria Alberghetti in Carnival! preceded her, and perhaps Helen Traubel in Pipe Dream as well.

I have been to a few unmiked concerts of Broadway material, but none of the Broadway Unplugged concerts. Friends who went to the most recent one did feel that some people really couldn't be heard. I know that most people online raved about it, but my friends had much more mixed feelings about the results.

Perhaps ironically, I do think that belters are often the most difficult to be heard without mikes. Not many women singing that low have much power and many belters sing with such a constricted technique that they don't have much power in their upper register either. Belters who are miked sometimes give the impression that they're singing loudly, but take away their mikes and they really can't be heard.

Updated On: 11/20/06 at 09:32 AM

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 11/20/06 at 10:09am

I would agree that Mark N. Grant's book--The Rise and Fall of the Broadway Musical--would be a worthwhile source for writing a paper on this subject.

I would question temms' assertion that in the past sets were accoustically made to help with voice projection. I have just finished reading "Mielziner--Master of Modern Stage Design" by Mary C. Henderson which discusses the career of scenic designer Jo Mielziner who designed the sets and lighting for over 300 Broadway productions from the late 1920's to the Mid 1970's, including CAROUSEL, SOUTH PACIFIC, GUYS AND DOLLS, THE KING AND I, and GYPSY and nowhere does the concept of accoustical scenery get a mention. And, as for the acoustics of Broadway theatres, the vast majority were built from the early 1900's to the 1920's; they have the materials of wood and ornamentation which help with the projection of sound throughout the theatre, unlike the more modern theatres.

I would also agree with Horton's entry about Ethel Merman's ability to project, without a body mike, to the back of the house. And, I would add, the audience needed to listen attentively during the "Golden Years" of the 1940's, 1950's and early 1960's, and it was rewarded by the ability of the actors to project in both their speaking and especially their singing by hearing a natural sound that was so much more pleasing than today's heavily amplified sound. Today's audiences are lazy and the younger theatregoers are used to a heavily miked sound.

On a personal level, the over amplification of today's musicals has spoiled the theatrical experience for me. I remember sitting in the 5th row of the orchestra at the Winter Garden for 42ND STREET in 1980 and being able to hear the pit orchestra AND the actors directly, not through speakers, and the experience was wonderful. The most recent musical I have been to was DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS, sitting in the right rear orchestra and EVERY sound came through a tinny sounding speaker mounted on the ceiling of the balcony. It ruined my enjoyment.
Since there is no turning back, I would plead with the sound designers to at the very least install high quality speakers, such as those made by BOSE. Next month I will be seeing 3 musicals, sitting in the balcony for THE APPLE TREE and in the center orchestra for THE COLOR PURPLE and GREY GARDENS. Here's hoping that the shows will be carefully amplified, otherwise I am going to stop going to musicals altogether.

Updated On: 11/20/06 at 10:09 AM