Pre-recording Vocals to be Played Back During Performance- Page 3

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 5:07am

"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.'"

Don't forget the ascension up by a *major third* from the high C natural to the high E natural, which has to be held for several seconds, at the end of POTO's title song. I asked a friend of mine who's covered the Queen of the Night at the Met and she agrees that singing in that tessitura 6-8 times a week can be punishing even for opera singers, who have it easy schedule-wise compared to musical theatre folks that do so many shows in a week. So I've no issues with Christine's vocals being prerecorded there. What bothered me was the last time I saw POTO, the Christine's mid-voice was pretty bad that she was flat in the notes sung in her middle register. That woman could have used some sweetening in the performance I saw because the awful intonation was stuck in my head for days.

More importantly, folks today no longer take an active part in listening to performers. Audiences are now so passive partly because we are so used to having everything amplified - from the sounds heard in our home entertainment and automobile audio systems to iPods cranked up etc. - and that laziness has made us just sit back and wait for the amplified sounds to hit us as we recline on our seats generally speaking.

It also doesn't help that the instruments used in a Broadway pit these days are likewise using their own amplification and there's no way the human voice can compete with that absent a microphone. It's a necessary evil in theatre today. (Though I remember reading that even back in the original production of "South Pacific," floor microphones were already in use because Hammerstein was so concerned that the audience would not be able to understand every lyric he wrote. I'd also heard stories/rumors of singers at the Met who needed to wear a microphone during performances.)

It's always a constant challenge to find the right balance between a Broadway pit's accompaniment and the singer's voice.

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 6:33am

The Queen of the Night aria goes up to a high F above high C (one note higher than Christine), but doesn't stay there, nor does she hold the note for any length of time. Mozart wasn't sadistic the way Webber is (or really the Phantom is to Christine). The Queen of the Night hits the high F staccato several times. She's singing arpeggios to get up to it and scaling notes descending from it, not sustaining the notes ever, with them all hovering around high C for 12 full bars, the way Christine Daae does. The only way to do this last section of the title song multiple times per week in performances every week and not completely ruin your voice very quickly is to pre-record it.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 10:19am

"Mozart wasn't sadistic the way Webber is"

I sang Evita six times a week and then went down to Les Mouches and did it all over again, and nobody offered me any sweetner.

--Patti Lupone

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 10:30am

I'm not taking anything away from the demands of singing Evita, but Patti didn't hit the same crazy high note for one solid minute. She would have lost her voice right then if she had. Not the same thing, as demanding as that score is.

I think that moment in Phantom of the Opera is MEANT to be sadistic. The Phantom keeps crying "sing for me!" And she goes kind of nuts with the "contortionist" high notes.

Updated On: 10/7/11 at 10:30 AM

[Mamie]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 12:42pm

I don't know if it's been mentioned but the voices of the ballet girls in "Shine" (Billy Elliot) are enhanced by the voices of 3 adult women in a sound booth under the stage. I don't know if they ever recorded this but I do know that at the beginning of the run, the additional voices were live.

[temms]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 12:46pm

There's also the fact that when Mozart composed the Queen of the Night aria, orchestras generally tuned to about A415, about 3/4 of a step lower than they tune today.

So the high Fs were really more in the Eb-E range. Today, obviously, it's generally sung in modern tuning and is a bit higher.

But no one does it 6 or 8 times a week, either. So it's really a poor comparison.

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 3:11pm

No one is doing an apples-to-apples/note-for-note analysis/comparison between the Queen of the Night's arias to the title song in POTO. The point is that there is a necessity to pre-record Christine's High C's and High E because musicals are performed 8 times a week whereas operas have a looser schedule in comparison as they are not performed as frequently and opera singers therefore have more time for vocal rest unlike their musical theatre counterparts.

Yes, today's 440 A was at least 1/2 step lower in the past. IIRC from school, instruments back then were tuned at 425 Hz, not 415 Hz, so they were at least 1/2 step lower than today's tuned instruments. But either way, a High E-flat is still difficult note to sing beautifully 8 times a week.

More importantly, composers like Mozart cared about the voices/vocal types they wrote for and orchestrated accordingly. Orchestras in the past were not massive and did not use electronic guitars, synthesizers etc. so the balance between voice and accompaniment back in the Baroque and Classical periods was easier to achieve. Acoustics also play a big role in creating this balance.

In today's Broadway scores and shows, B12B is right because composers do have ridiculous demands of the human voice especially when they write songs/roles that have such wide-spanning ranges but singers are not allowed to sound like they are using Bel Canto technique. It also doesn't help that composers today go with orchestrations that are way too loud and have too many electronic instruments for the human voice to compete with.
Updated On: 10/7/11 at 03:11 PM

[jonartdesigns]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 3:46pm

I recently read that Chicago uses pre-recorded chorus vocals in 5 numbers.
My guesses would be;
All That Jazz
We Both Reached for the Gun
Me and My Baby

Any thoughts on the other 2?

[Gothampc]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 4:52pm

"I'm not taking anything away from the demands of singing Evita, but Patti didn't hit the same crazy high note for one solid minute."

She has claimed in the past that ALW hates women because of the music for Evita.

I think she was refering to the belting in A New Argentina - "He supports you, for he loves you, understands you..."

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 6:30pm

As a non-musician I really appreciate the clear way you guys discuss technical matters here.

You've convinced me that no actress is to blame for not being able to sing Christine multiple times every week without some recorded help.

But that doesn't excuse the composer.

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 7:06pm

Goth, Eva is only up there belting the passage you mentioned for less than 2 bars before she comes back down in the melody. Then she can rest for a few measures during the chorus. It's a hugely difficult passage, but it's not the same thing as singing continuously at the absolute top of your register for approximately 1 minute with no break and no lower notes. It's just too much of a demand all at once. That's the difference.

And Gaveston2, as far as excusing the composer ... he may have been an "early adopter" of that trend of thinking, but he's far from alone now, sadly. I think you can look at many of the shows today that require extremely high belting, especially from the female principle performers. It's what the audience wants. More than acting or star presence. They want a "high Q belted and held for six weeks." That's what they cheer about.

I'll say this much, though. Webber doesn't really care in general. I was in "Evita" back in the mid-'80s, and I'll never forget our first rehearsal when we started working on the opening Requiem. The first tenor part starts on a high C-sharp. Higher than Henrik's "B" in "Later," a part I also played. "Requiem aeternam Dona Evita." We were all laughing at that one. Not as much when we had to sing it 8 shows a week. Nothing like ripping your throat out in the very first measures of the show and then pressing on to sing the rest of it for another 90 minutes.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 7:20pm

This thread reminds me of an interview with Victoria Clark in which she talked about composers who didn't know the ranges of different voice parts, and how she didn't understand how they could be writing scores without knowing that.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 7:20pm

The tenors start on a high C-sharp?!? I'm surprised you have any voice left at all.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 7:27pm

As usual, I know exactly what you mean, Best12, about the unfortunate emphasis on vocal acrobatics nowadays. It gets really boring, if you ask me, not only in the theater but in the pop music world.

Funny how the musical theater composers we think of as truly great (Gershwin, Berlin, Porter, etc.) didn't have to resort to such tricks to sell a song.

And the thing is I think most non-musicians are like me: we hear pitch on a relative basis. So if you lowered the entire score of EVITA or POTO by a third, it would still sound just as high to us. (OK, I suppose we'd notice the lack of vocal strain in the lower keys, but basically we aren't responding to absolute pitch.)

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 8:01pm

The big difference is that the great composers wrote in the classical and jazz idioms, which relied on melody and chord structure for energy and excitement. Rock and pop may do the same, but they are a much more physical genre of music in their vocal construction, in which vocalrowess is as important as phrasing nuances.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 8:08pm

I'm sure you're right, darquegk. Unfortunately, endless melismas and vocal tricks don't do as good a job of expressing nuances of character. IMO, obviously (and, yes, I recognize the box office importance of giving the public the type of music it likes).

[ChiChi]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 9:45pm

When Tommy toured originally I was invited as part of a pre matinee lunch and tour of the show. The sound designer who was leading the event mentioned that on Broadway there was a string quartet in a room somewhere upstairs and that their part was ommitted entirely from the tour score.

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 10:57pm

Women are asked to do ridiculous things with their voices, yes, but male roles today also ask way too much of performers in terms of vocal ranges. It's not even singing anymore or belting that's being asked of these guys. It's amounting to shouting and blowing your vocal folds out. The rock musicals demand that men pretty much yell their way through performances and hit notes like male high C's and higher without resorting to classical technique and sounding operatic, which technically can help preserve the voice more compared to singing notes so openly and uncovered as required by shows like "Chess," "Rent," "Aida," "Jesus Christ Superstar" etc. At least in musicals like "A Little Night Music" there's some leeway for the men with respect to what vocal technique to employ, which is one reason that this particular show has been performed by both musical theatre and opera companies.

The pop operas too have done their bit to damage voices esp. young male voices. Chris in "Miss Saigon" is an example. I remember reading Steven Pasquale commenting on how that particular show has destroyed many a young man's singing voice because of the range of the songs/recitative passages for Chris is written.

[ChiChi]

Posted: 10/7/11 at 11:22pm

Well if you watch the making of Miss Saigon, you can see them with the Kim hopefuls standing there during the auditions saying "push PUSH!" and then later when you see them discussing the people they'd seen earlier than the day they say stuff like "Well, she has a nice voice, but I'm afraid whatever voice she has will be shot in six months." Exactly, because they are asking them to do something that isn't exactly human. There is a reason for vocal training.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 1:07am

See, I step away for a day and this thread gets exciting. I LOVE the technical turn this has taken.

To chime in on transposing scores, to be basic and frank, melody is all about the relativity of the notes. That has nothing to do with being a musicians or not.

We also can't forget to mention, when discussing sustaining the voice, audiences listening, etc that modern theatrical design uses a LOT of mechanical elements that create a base of white noise that actors and music must overcome in order to be audible and understandable. Successful Broadway shows over the years, in general (not always) tend to be written either in the popular music idiom of the day or with the musical influence of the day... in modern music, that DOES involve digital technology - keyboards, guitars. New orchestrations of older shows, even if they do not use 'modern' instruments, will still be orchestrated with the influence of the modern sound and with the knowledge that every sound will be fed through a board and mixed. Those elements alone make it more difficult to sing even Rodgers and Hammerstein on stage than it would have been 35 years ago.

The vocal acrobatics today, as has been discussed, also cause problem. Audiences are trained to like power and acrobatics from growing up and listening to pop music that has been edited, recorded over time, tweaked, etc to the point that it has no connection to the live performance of a song. They now expect that when seeing something live. The expect the human voice - in a 3 minute song - to sound like the consolidation and digitizing of 8 hours of recordings. When it doesn't, they are disappointed..

[gypsy4]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 1:26am

Proof of a Click Track!

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 2:11am

"Well if you watch the making of Miss Saigon, you can see them with the Kim hopefuls standing there during the auditions saying 'push PUSH!' and then later when you see them discussing the people they'd seen earlier than the day they say stuff like 'Well, she has a nice voice, but I'm afraid whatever voice she has will be shot in six months.' Exactly, because they are asking them to do something that isn't exactly human. There is a reason for vocal training."

I remember that. Lea Salonga had little training when she opened the show in London when she was 18 and she almost destroyed her voice after doing "Saigon" 8x a week. She sustained damage to her vocal folds, had to take a leave of absence, undergo surgery, recover and then undertake extensive vocal training with Mary Hammond so she could do the show 6x a week. As a result, there's a huge difference in the sound of her singing voice from when the OLC was recorded by the time she opened "Saigon" in New York. Her voice became much more resonant compared to how she sounded in the OLC.

But Steven Pasquale was the first guy I knew of who had played Chris who talked about how demanding the score was for the men in "Saigon" just as it is for whomever sings Kim.

And I couldn't agree more with broadwayguy2. As I mentioned earlier, audiences today are lazier and then we have the issues that broadwayguy2 discussed. These are unrealistic expectations of musical theatre singers of today and that's part of the reason why pre-recorded vocals in certain shows are almost a must. A lot of musical theatre singers find a way to preserve their instruments while doing a run. It remains to be seen, however, what long-term impacts doing these kinds of shows will have on their voices when they get older. Lots of variables will be in play of course such as genetics, lifestyle etc. but constantly singing the types of scores that audiences seem to gravitate toward these days and are supplied by today's composers isn't doing any favors for the vocal health of today's musical theatre performers.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 8:12am

See, Gypsy4! "Click tracks" are not nearly as exciting and scandalous as some people would like to think.. just literal clicking.

Thank you so much for posting that video! I was on YouTube trying to track down those videos and could not for the life of me remember what they were posted under and they perfectly illustrate the use of the click track at certain moments in the show to establish tempo and keep it steady enough to sync with automated scenic and lighting cues.

Since you posted a video with the use of the click track track, I will respond with another video, taken from the show's final performance, where you see Motormouth kids ensemble backstage providing live sweetening for "I Can hear the Bells".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4FF00_BjmI


jsg,
I always compare it to teachers in a classroom. Each of the automated fixtures and winches and the theatre's a/c system are like individual students whispering. Each individual is quiet enough for the teacher to speak over, so if one or two are whispering, there is no problem and it is still quiet enough to be heard. When they entire lot of them are whispering, that quiet din is enough to drown out the teacher's voice to where it is inaudible.

Once again, we still can not forget, composers aside, the other HUGE "offenders" creating a need for vocal sweetening - choreographers and cast breakdowns!

In the days of the original production of Carousel, Oklahoma! and the like, casts were able to be quite large and you could have two separate ensembles. A singing ensemble and a dancing ensemble. You could send the dancing ensemble out for a big dance sequence, and then you had the separate singing ensemble members for when the vocals resumed. Then you have the musicals of today where economics, union rules about space backstage and the exploding quantity of scenery and equipment backstage all contribute to a shrinking of cast size, the integration of the singing and dancing ensembles and therefore, the necessity of the triple threat, and choreographers create increasingly more complicated, dynamic, demanding and flat out exhausted dance sequences in shows. "Jellicle Ball" from Cats anyone? They now expect performers to go out and dance a 12 sequence of such intensity and with the skill of the Met's corps de ballet and then IMMEDIATELY begin to sing in perfect split harmonies while still panting? Do you really want to know how awful that would sound without sweetening?

Once again, it is all about maintaining the illusion.

[LegallyBroadway2]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 9:28am

Billy Elliot uses a pre recorded track during Solidarity- during the hat pass. Its only because the mics are fitted into the hats, so the sound of the miners and police force is woven in. Its moments like that where pre recorded vocals are important, its not like the actors are lip synching, just singing along with louder vocals to match the orchestra, and doesn't last too long.

[Donthatecongratulate]

Posted: 10/8/11 at 10:36am

I remember seeing performers who had appeared on stage singing off-stage at Spring Awakening. And I'm pretty sure they used pre-recorded vocals for In The Heights because a lot of the ensemble dancers from the original Broadway show aren't good singers.

I think it's fine if shows use this method, but I think that Tony voters should have this in mind come nomination time. Shows should be rewarded for their creativity using the performers that they cast to be on stage and said performers' hard work, and that should be weighed against big lush shows using tools such as pre-recorded tracks and off stage singers to enhance the look and sound as opposed to the actual work of the actors onstage.