Body mics?

[Joshua488]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 4:43pm

The body mic situation is nuts. If a show is going to use the small body mics, why not try to hide them? For example, I just saw pictures from HAIRSPRAY, and Carly Jibson had TWO mics and they were sitting right in between her eyes! Completely noticeable! Isn't the point of their small size to HIDE them?

When I see a show, I usually play a game with myself. It's called "Where Are the Microphones?" When I saw LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS, I couldn't find any. But I figured it out from looking at pictures! Audrey's was hidden behind her wavy bangs and Seymour's was taped onto his glasses. They hid them very well! I was watching the WICKED performance on the Tonys with my mom and my sister and they both said at the same time, "What is on their foreheads??" When I explained that they were mics, they asked, "Aren't they supposed to hide them?"

[divacathe]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 4:46pm

totally understand. that's one of my biggest pet pieves. I don't understand why they can't go out of their way to hide the damn things. although i can understand on the tony's. because they have a limited amnt. of time, and Idina had to get out of all of that green make-up and still look beautiful for her acceptance speech! :) so, that's understandable, but in a show where they have hours before a show to get ready it doesn't make any sense to me either!

[BWIDB Charlie]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 4:48pm

Well from what I know, its not usually about if you *can't* see them - it's only about the sound. I would assume hairspray would be much more difficult to mic Tracy, because of how much she moves in the show. Audrey, on the other hand, doesn't move all that excessively. I think the sound crew's top thought is how to best secure the equipment vs. best pickup.

But I hear your point!

Charlie

[maybethistime]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 4:53pm

This bugs me too, but I think are are reasons for why they do this. Firstly, I think they put them on foreheads/between eyes becuase any farther and you lose the sound. Also, it's hard to put them on clothes/in wigs, hats, etc. because of a limited, although big, number of mics and because it makes costume changes all the more complicated. Secondly, about the 2, I'm pretty sure they do this because mics aren't very trustworthy and give out sometimes. The second one is for protection in case something goes wrong with the first. If an actors mic gives, there no way he or she could belt it through the entire theatre. Although it was done once, long ago, and I would prefer it, its just too hard to sing THAT loud! I've never seen it happen, but my guess it that when an actors mic goes out, it ruins the whole scene or song and sometimes the whole show, if they don't have alternative/back-up mics.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 5:05pm

It's a necessary evil... Leave it at that. 90% of the audience doesn't notice it, and 99.5% doesn't care. Much time has been spent trying to determine the best placement, and the forhead/temple positions are the best. If there's a wig, generally it's easier.

Posted: 1/12/05 at 5:15pm

The only reason really you could see Idina and Kristin's mic's at the Tony awards was because the camera was right there zooming in on them. If you see Wicked on stage, you really can't see them unless you are purposely looking for them and if you are REALLY close.

[TheOneAndOnly]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 5:22pm

At Hairspray, after the show, a puzzled woman once asked,

"What was the religious significance of those things on everyone's foreheads?"

"Well, uh, those are the microphones." You almost feel bad answering the woman because you know she's going to feel so stupid for asking such a question.

hehe

[SamIAm]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 5:46pm

It is a bit annoying but it is nearly impossible to move these things every time there is a costume change and where the actor wears the mic in their hair, it can get jostled during costume changes.

I did find it annoying in the close up confines of the Vivian Beaumont to see Roger Bart's pac taped to his back above his little slave toga...but I understand why these mics are often showing.

[Joshua488]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 6:57pm

WickedIsLife: Well, duh! Of course that's why you could see it on TV. I'm not dumb. But my mom and my sister had no idea what the hell it was. What I'm saying is that you can still see them, even when you're sitting in a theater.

[jacobtsf]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:03pm

You either see the microphone, or you don't hear the actor.
Which would you rather have?

[redhotinnyc2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:13pm

I'd rather they hire actors who can project like they did in the good old days of theatre. It's one of my biggest pet peeves about theatre today.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:18pm

redhot, believe me, the mics have NOTHING to do with actors not being able to project.... a LOT of them can. yes, it evens the playing field and gives the quieter singers a chance, but even the belters have to be miced to overcome the sounds of the air-conditioners in the house, cooling fans and motors on the lights, winched and mechanics on all of the set pieces, etc.... rthere is a LOT of white noise to sing over.

[wildcat]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:19pm

It actually is possible to fill a theatre by singing unamplified, but since the introduction of miking, orchestrations have become busier and brassier, therefore not allowing the voice to be heard over the band unaided. If the accompaniament was only piano, bass and drums, I don't think you'd have trouble hearing anyone.
Except maybe Melanie Griffith.

[ProducersFan]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:24pm

When I saw the Rent tour, I was impressed at how they hid the body packs on the actors wearing skin-tight costumes. For example, Mimi had a leopard skin purse concealing it. It helped to keep the realism while allowing the actors to be miked.

~Jessica

[Mimi Imfurst]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 7:44pm

First of all who cares if you can see it? People are morons to think that the people are signing naturually over the music. I mean come on. Listen!

Secondly, we can't expect actors to sing the kind of shows that are written today. Anything written after the 70s was pretty much written to by electrified. Try singing over a live rock band. My number one pet pieves is when people do shows that require miking and they don't. If you can't afford to buy mics when you do a rock musical and u still excpect to have a full band, don't do the show. its that simple.

[gravity87]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 8:27pm

Ok shoot me for being a moron but. Tose little tiny mics, like the ones on the fore heads of the former wicked witches, how are they atached, and just how exactly do they project. becase all you see is the little blob on the head, no wires etc.

Speaking from personal experience, Body mics are a paion in the a$$ during changes. Last year I was Billy Crocker in anything goes and there are some really really fast, like 5 second changes and often I would have the wire outside my coustume because there was no other option. So a little thing on a forehead vs, a black wire going from thenick to waist. which is worse?

[CatieElphie1]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 8:46pm

I am one of those people who are bugged by body mikes like you wouldn't believe. My favorite thing to see (ha) is the brittany spears wire side mikes. I saw those on the cast of The Music Man in Iowa City one time...that was SO annoying.
However...at my school, if you are one of the few who gets to wear a body mike, you are the "elite"...so I'm always rediculously happy when I wear one...

Posted: 1/12/05 at 10:13pm

ive never really been bothered by seeing the mic on the forehead. I thought it was pretty smart to put it there, its always the same distance from your mouth and if youve got bangs or whatever, itll be covered. totally saw the reason for TWO at Wicked last night when Shosh's mic went dead while she was Defying Gravity!

[Joshua488]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 10:31pm

jacobtsf: That is not true. They can definitely hide the microphone. It's been done. I play my game of "Where Are the Microphones?" a lot, and sometimes, the mics are nowhere to be found. So it is definitely possible.

[morosco]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 10:52pm

Body mics are at their best when placed as close as possible to the mouth. That way the relationship between the two remains fixed throughout the performance. Hiding mics in clothing can cause problems because the fabric can rustle against it. (Remember "Singing in the Rain" as they tried in vain to hide that huge microphone?)
The most amazing use of body mics has to be the recent revival of 42ND STREET. If you sat close enough to the stage you would have noticed a mic wire running down the back of each leg of Peggy Sawyer (and no they weren't period stocking seams, the seams were there too). She had mics in her shoes!

[centerstage]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:09pm

not only did peggy sawyer have mics running down her legs, everyone in tap shoes had them too. At first i thought it was a stocking seam that was done crooked to emphasize the point the point that the kids were poor, but when my lil sis pointed out that the taps were WAY louder than normal, even with all the dancers 20 ft away.

Body mics arnt really all that annoying...once i notice them thats the end, it doesnt really phase me,i understand the need for them as well...i have a question tho, was anyone close enough at la cage to see if the mics were visable or not? i would think that they wouldnt be for at least La Cagelles, with the extravagent costumes and all.

[LoudIrishGirl]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:40pm

If the body mics are a personal pet-peeve of yours, then fine. I have no problem with that and I think it's great that some productions cater to others with such peeves as yours and try to hide their mics.

But, as many people have stated, the demands on the actors themselves are much greater than in the "good old days" and therefore merely belting out does not suffice. Body mics are necessary in the modern world of theatre. Accept that and move on.

Then, the fact that some productions don't spend much time (as it seems to YOU) on hiding the mics doesn't mean they don't care. It means that a) they tried, and nothing else works within the confines of that show (ie lots of quick costume changes, etc). b) they tried several other things and this was merely the easiest or best way to do it. c) they have about 50 million different little things to worry about and this just isn't one of their top priorities. In such a technical show as WICKED, I doubt they have the time to worry all that much about the mics locations. If they found a place where it works, then it works and they move on. As was said above, you are a minority in the theatre audience. That's not a good nor bad thing, it is merely a fact. And because of that, until better mics or mic-ing systems are produced (as I am sure it is an ever evolving technology), some shows are going to accept the fact they can't hide their body-mics THAT WELL and are going to leave it at that. It's sad, but not that big in the grand scheme of things.

And as was said, given the choice, would you prefer to see the mic or hear the singer?

[Dreamcatcher]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 2:13am

Hahaha I know they look like pimples when they arent hidden well. If they are going to just tape them to their foreheads and call it a night they might as well just go back to using microphones and those ones that look like telephone headsets.

[IMsooHyprToday]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 3:12am

My thought to all of this is that the sound people on broadway are professionals in the highest form, so when it comes down to it, they know what they are doing. I know that from a view of a techie, not being noticed is a BIG deal... So if they had the option of not hiding a mic or hidding a mic, the latter would be chosen.

Does anyone know how they mic guys (or girls?) who have their shirts off (or are very scantily clad...) I cant help thinking of the shirtless, well built men from the tour of Mama Mia who only wore tiny swim trunks.

Posted: 1/13/05 at 3:33am

id say... carefully.

jonathan sharp kept him mic pack in an interesting spot during atleast one particular Rocky Horror scene.