Pre-recording Vocals to be Played Back During Performance- Page 2

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 4:34pm

If we're talking pit singers, let's not forget Annie Golden in Xanadu!

[shrekster224]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 4:42pm

I can definitely see Priscilla doing this. With the guys being onstage for so much of the show, so many costume changes, and tough dancing, swings or back tracks are probably added to enhance the sound.

[dreaming]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 4:44pm

Are off-stage singers credited somewhere, or just listed as chorus/company members? (I have never seen them credited in any playbill I have received, so I'm rather interested as to how they are recognized.)

[broadway_show_fan]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 4:52pm

I would have to get out my old Playbills, but I think BROOKLYN (as I mentioned before) credited their off-stage singers. They were listed as "Vocalists" - they are listed as such on the BROOKLYN IBDB page. http://www.ibdb.com/production.php?id=383057

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 7:44pm

dreaming, the OBC (and album) of COMPANY credited its pit singers as the "Vocal Minority." I've seen pit singers credited as such on other shows, I believe.

On shows like A CHORUS LINE where the pit singers appeared on stage in the opening, they were of course credited as their on stage roles.

[justoldbill]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 7:56pm

The "sweetening" in the original production of FOLLIES included the "Loveland" number (tape and chorus together, with the cavaliers certainly on tape), the intro to "Live, Laugh, Love" (to facilitate a quick change for the chorus), and (I believe) the last chorus of "Who's That Woman?". No secret here- I believe these instances are noted in the published vocal score.

In COMPANY, the male and female understudies (along with the Vocal Minority) enhanced SIDE BY SIDE BY SIDE from the pit.

Is it a surprise to anyone that this technique is used in PHANTOM OF THE OPERA?

Updated On: 10/5/11 at 07:56 PM

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 8:05pm

^Some of the Phantom stuff makes total sense to me. I can't imagine the actors playing the Phantom and Christine trying to sing the title song off stage while they're scrambling to get in the boat in the dark and their doubles are making their way across the bridge.

Other things like the Notes... I don't understand why the Phantom can't sing those live.
Updated On: 10/5/11 at 08:05 PM

[zepka102]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 8:24pm

The last time I saw Phantom, Giry had to do the whole note in the second act. There was a delay in the note, and you could see her eyeing the conductor. She did well though covering it. Oopsies! Gotta love live theater!

[inick122492]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 8:27pm

My dad knew a guy who did security for the theatre wher Phantom played on tour. So my PHANatic broth asked my dad to ask the sec. gaurd to ask the SM questions.
I remeber the SM responded that the phantom spends a lot of time getting his makeup touched up so it become difficult for the him to meet all these cues. The SM said it maid it simply easier. As for Christine, it's just vocal wear and tear.

What I wanna know, when (like with who) did they implement the Christine recording?

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 8:30pm

Christine's high E in "Phantom of the Opera" is prerecorded as was Julie Andrews's G-flat in "Victor Victoria."

[morosco]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 9:42pm

I remember that when I saw the revival of INTO THE WOODS Little Red Riding Hood's scream was pre-recorded. (Rapunzel's screams too I think.) Presumably to save wear and tear on the vocal chords. I noticed a small speaker mounted on the front edge of the stage precisely where she was blocked to stand when she let out a yell. It was fairly seamless. I doubt most people ever noticed. (I was on the front row.)

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 10:01pm

As someone who has sat in several pits (not as a musician) and worn those infamous headphones mentioned earlier in the thread, hearing exactly what the conductor hears, I just want to chime in that it is not really a clue as to whether prerecorded vocals are used and seeing "click" in a musical score doesn't indicate the usage of pre-recorded vocals either. It is LITERALLY a click.

Especially in shows that utilize keyboard synthesizers or where not all musicians are in the orchestra pit, the headphones allow the conductor to hear the full orchestra and as the audience hears it mixed together, complete with any filtered orchestral effects within the computer. Without them, the conductor wouldn't be able to get the picture. The headphones and the indication of "click" also indicate and a LITERAL click... a computerized metronome that keeps the conductor perfectly in tempo when light cues, scene changes, etc are automated and need to happen in exact sync with the music.. it keeps it all together.

The musicians also wear headphones with the click track that keep them in tempo - particularly in scenarios where the conductor also plays keyboard, and allows them to hear both what THEY are playing and how the orchestral sound is mixing.

Hairspray DID indeed use a sweetner tracks in the finale. Most productions do use them.

[BroadwayFan12]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 10:04pm

What I wanna know, when (like with who) did they implement the Christine recording?

I could be wrong, but I think it began with Brightman.

[theaterkid1015]

Posted: 10/5/11 at 10:21pm

Promises, Promises and Company have separate parts written for off-stage voices in the original score. Whether the singers also sweetened or not, I don't know, but I would imagine they did. I mean, could you do the end of "Turkey Lurkey" and stay on pitch?

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 12:22am

broadwayguy2, I may have simplified my response earlier to make my point. Yes, they are hearing an actual click and/or the orchestra as a whole (or whatever instrument they want to be pumped into their personal monitor). I know, I've used these in shows before so I know what is heard. But you can't deny that headphones are used to sync up sweetener tracks, whether vocal or instrumental. Why else would the conductor of Follies at the Marquis put on giant headphones for the small choral part of "Loveland" and then take them off after they finished singing? Also, score indications of "+Tape" or "+Click" do oftentimes refer to prerecorded tracks. As in Company during that amazingly long note in the opening number, or "Springtime for Hitler" in The Producers.

I know that the entirety of Hairspray was "done to a click," so the conductor would always hear an actual click in their headphones if not also sweetener tracks.

[EvanK]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 12:28am

So how do they perfectly line up a recorded vocal track with a live orchestra?? I have always been curious of this.

[broadway_show_fan]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 12:53am

I thought of another example. In THE WEDDING SINGER, the actress playing Holly in "Saturday Night in the City" had a pre-recorded track. In this song (the Act I finale) she is singing and dancing, then runs off-stage and re-appears on a round platform. She does a short dancing bit, then "sings" the song title, "Saturday night in the city" just before pulling a cord and being doused in water, just like in Flashdance. Since the actress got so wet, she had her regular wig and micrrophone removed, then lip-synched as the pre-recorded track was played.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 1:29am

EvanK, the recording most likely has a click built in, like a metronome tick, so the conductor conducts to the click. The click is inaudible to the audience, only pumped into the conductor/pit headphone system.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 2:57am

Yes MrMusic,
I just wanted to go a bit more in depth in your response. They are indeed used for that purpose, but a conductor wearing headphones shouldn't be thought of as indicating vocal sweetener tracks. I recall someone explaining what a scrim was on this message board several years ago, now I feel as though every discussion of a painted drop of ANY sort on here refers to them as a scrim, so.. ha ha.
I know that you speak from knowledge, so I just wanted to break it down further for other posters.

show_fan,
It would be way too involved to completely remove the Holly mic since her pack was worn in her costume, but if I remember correctly, the mic head was push up under the wig to help protect it and then, obviously, there was a second wig that was worn after that scene.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 6:09am

My initial post which started this thread reflected my dismay at the use of sweetening tapes to augment the live vocals in the original production of FOLLIES. Having just read this entire thread I can see that other ways of augmenting the live vocals are readily used today, most especially by live singers in the wings or in the orchestra pit. The use of live singers in the wings does not bother me, but the use of pre-recorded vocals does. There is something dishonest about the latter, fooling the public as it were. Ted Chapin, author of EVERYTHING WAS POSSIBLE, in his discussion of sweetening, emphasized that the audience was unaware of this practice and was none the worse off by not knowing. This use of pre-recorded vocals apparently does not bother most posters here, simply because it is so widespread. Call me naive, but aren't we talking about live theatre here, without the gimmicks, please?

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 7:17am

When I saw Phantom of the Opera on Broadway about 10 years ago, it bothered me just as much to hear 80 strings coming out of a pit orchestra with 12 musicians in it. I knew something was up instrumentally as well. (Yes, I'm exaggerating the numbers slightly, but not by much.)

Everything is enhanced by technology these days. The singing, the instrumentation, the amplification ... it's all a regular part of Broadway now.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 8:00am

Gypsy,

Theatre is about illusion illuminating truth.

Isn't illusion, by it's nature "fooling"? Are you not "fooling" an audience into believing that the 30 year old actor is a 16 year old/ Are you not "fooling" the audience into believing that they are in the streets of 16th Century Paris or a crumbling theater in 1971? Are you not "fooling" the audience into believing that it is 100% natural to suddenly go from spoken word or thought into a musical number or dance when the emotion is too much to contain?

By the presented logic, is it not dishonest that Dorothy's Ruby Slippers are not genuine ruby? That Cinderella's slipper's are not genuine gold and glass? Isn't dishonest for Peter to be flown by a wire?

While I can understand your sentiment, you seem to be mingling lip syncing and sweetening, which are VERY different things. Christine lip syncing the title song in Phantom is a rare exception to the rule.. AEA doesn't approve of it's members lip syncing. Sweetening is nothing scandalous. The vocals are recorded by the original cast of the production you are seeing and the cast on stage is singing live at all times (unless there is a lazy ensemble member skirting the rules - I am looking at you, Mamma Mia). All it does is thicken the sound so that you don't hear huffing and puffing.. it isn't replacing a thing. It isn't compensating, it isn't 'tricking'..

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 8:44am

I am not mingling lip synching with sweetening. You are obviously unbothered by sweetening the live vocals and I am not. Of course all of theatre is an illusion, but please don't put ruby slippers in the same category as sweetening. The fact that the very cast members who are singing live also RECORDED the vocals does not, IMO, give them immunity from putting one over on the audience. Peter Pan is flying on a wire because there is no other way to have him fly. But, singers can or should be able to sing their vocals without sweetening. I realize that I am going to have to accept sweetening but I don't have to like it.

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 9:04am

As far as the title song for Phantom, it didn't bother me at all that they were lip-syncing, since it's part of the illusion while they use body doubles, etc. to descend into the underground lair of the Phantom. The voices can't be detectable as coming from the actual "bodies" on stage, or the visual trick wouldn't work to have them go through the floor and descend from the fly space above, a second later. As for Christine's high notes at the end of that song being pre-recorded, it also doesn't bother me. Webber wrote it in a merciless way for a soprano. She stays up around high C, singing all those "ahs" for about 12 bars, which would kill any soprano anywhere. I'd rather hear a pre-record than listen to a performer completely wreck her voice. She turns upstage for it anyway. I thought it was very effective, not as singing, but as a "special effect."

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 10/6/11 at 12:39pm

I'm not fond of lip-synching in live theater, but most of the recording in the 1971 production of FOLLIES strikes me as more "special effect" than cheat. WONDERFUL TOWN uses a lion's roar and I suspect no one over the age of 6 believes they have a real lion in the theater, but I doubt Gypsy9 or I feel cheated.

But funny Best12 should mention the Phantom and Christine's descent into the lair. I thought that was the moment when Prince's desire to make the stage imitate cinema went too far. Because when the characters drop into the floor and then immediately appear 50 feet in the air I'm immediately aware that the Phantom and Christine on high aren't the same people that just descended into the stage floor.

So they're using doubles. And if they're using doubles, who is singing? And is anyone singing or is that all a recording? These and similar thoughts are what I am thinking for the rest of the evening instead of following the story of the play. (And that was before I learned Christine lip-synchs an entire number!)