Ars Pro Concreta

Practical advice for the performing arts

Update and Refresh, Vol. 2: Final Draft 8? How About Something Else?

(Belated) Happy New Year, folks! (Jesus, the month of January is almost over, it’s about damn time I wished you one.)

As stated in the previous installment of this series, in this blog’s (sadly more frequent than I would like, but hey, that’s life) downtime, I’ve done a lot of re-reading, taking stock, assessing, re-calibrating even. Looking back over the past four years of its existence, there’s a lot of “practical advice” on this blog that I would not be nearly so regimented about now; on the other hand, there are a lot of ideas, specifically where my directing and business proposals are concerned, that have been refined and polished. So, I’m taking a second look at some items where my initial instincts have evolved over time and restating my thesis, as it were.

Since the last installment was about script formatting, I figured I’d stick to that general subject and talk about screenwriting software as I ease my way back into not just this blog but this series. Shall we?

Update and Refresh, Vol. 1: Formatting 101 Revisited

Hi, everybody. How ya doin’?

So… a lot has gone down since I last wrote here in [checks notes] January? (Yikes, I’ve really let cobwebs gather over here.) Among them…

  • My podcast, A Good Nightmare Comes So Rarely, which — as you may recall — concerns itself with the downfall (and possible return) of the notorious Broadway flop Dance of the Vampires, now has two episodes out, and many more to come! (On a mildly related note, the CDAN blind item is about us, but we’re not ready to comment just now.)
  • For years, many of my friends have told me that with the depth and breadth of my knowledge of certain musicals, I should write a book. Many of them particularly pestered me for a definitive study guide to Jesus Christ Superstar, not from a behind-the-scenes history perspective, but similar to the student materials that MTI and other licensing houses hand out. I resisted for a long time… until I couldn’t anymore. You can visit this link to read Impressions of a Crucifixion, an in-depth guide to JCS for performers, directors, and passionate enthusiasts. I welcome all responses – questions, critiques, comments, you name it. It feels like I’ve been writing this book for most of my life because, in a way, I have. I hope it was worth the effort!
  • On the production front, things are continuing to percolate; as of September, I’m in my 18th year of “almost fame.” Richard and I recently made a solicited Netflix submission, and we’re actively scouting financing for other projects, both stage and screen.

But more importantly, I’m returning to this blog, because in its downtime, I’ve done a lot of re-reading, taking stock, assessing, recalibrating even. Looking back over the past four years of its existence, there’s a lot of “practical advice” on this blog that I would not be nearly so regimented about now; on the other hand, there are a lot of ideas, specifically where my directing and business proposals are concerned, that have been refined and polished.

And thus, my new series: “Update and Refresh.” I’m going to take a second look at some items where my initial instincts have evolved over time and restate my thesis, as it were.

I’m starting with some low-hanging fruit: script formatting.

I Dreamed I Met a Galilean: The “Superstar” That Never Was

Hello, theater fanatics! Since my last post on this blog was, at least partially, about a revival I proposed that will likely never occur, and also since I don’t have a lot of new things to say without starting to resemble my pal the Sweaty Oracle, I thought maybe I’d share a story about another Sleepless in Seattle moment where one of my favorite shows and I passed each other like ships in the night. After over a decade of being “almost famous,” I’ve got a million of these.

If you’re a member of the Jesus Christ Superstar Zone forum, then you’ve already heard this story twice: once back in the day when our message boards ran on SMF software and we had a blog section, and then again on the new forum when I got to reminiscing about four years ago. It’s a tale I often tell because everybody can relate to the best-laid plans of mice and men going awry, and also because it illustrates a basic fact of this industry that I don’t think is going to change even with sweeping much-needed reform: you must be driven to be in the theater, it has to be the only thing you could ever choose to be in, and you’ve got to have rhinoceros skin on top of that, or else the constant rejection and the “if only” of every missed opportunity will eat away at you. But it also makes for a great story later on.

So… if you’ve read this blog, or followed my exploits both on the JCS Zone forum or on my Tumblr specifically devoted to discussing Jesus Christ Superstar, you’ve probably seen, read, or perhaps even participated in the creation of my many concepts for how I would stage a production of JCS if I was given the chance to hold the reins. But did I ever tell you I almost did? (No need to respond, that’s rhetorical.) Here’s my recollection of the chance I got to be involved in just such an opportunity…

#AttendtheTale of (Possibly) Why the Sweeney Todd Revival (Allegedly) Lacks POC Leads

Hi, gang. I’m Gibson, and today I’m here to apologize to those decrying the rumored lack of POC leads in the forthcoming Broadway revival of Sweeney Todd because… I think this is partially my fault, and it’s never fun feeling in any way responsible for establishment stupidity. (Granted, the B’way profit algorithm, attempted theft of concept, and skittish producers likely played a part in the mishegas too.) I’ll explain.

If You Think You’re Oh So Clever… (Part 3)

I hate to come back to my erstwhile blog seven months later with snark, but sometimes directors leave me no choice.

Hi, everybody! Been focused on a lot of podcast-related stuff, life-related stuff, and work-related stuff (this last is some really good news, but I’m not going to jinx it by spilling details; suffice to say that so far this good news has been overwhelmingly positive, and I hope it continues down that track), but I’m here — in short — because I attended a hot new production of Jesus Christ Superstar and remembered why I avoid most “exciting new takes.”

Gibson’s Top Secret Plan for the New Broadway of the Future

Hello, readers! It’s been a long while again, but it’s also been a long while since I had something to say here. I am fully vaccinated (yay!), work on the podcast continues at a slow but steady pace (more about that here and on Twitter), and, as you may have guessed from the title of this post, I’m still formulating post-COVID plans for my work in theater. You’ve seen two of the three I hope to execute on this blog already, and while I’m keeping the third under my hat for now, as I began plotting it out in Word just to concretize it a little on paper, I began folding other ideas into its structure that I realized had an application for the broader theater world outside of that concept. Thus, this post.

In all honesty, they were prompted to some extent by a — now-deleted, no clue why — Tweet at the end of May which posed the question “You wake up and you’re the head of Broadway, what’s the first thing you do?” (With a little sleuthing, I learned it was inspired by a similar tweet about Lucasfilm that had gone viral.) Though the “head of Broadway,” fun as it’d be, is an almost-impossible-to-exist position, I had several answers at the ready:

  • Convert all existing theaters into modular venues.
  • Institute a new hybrid model which combines live performances and streaming to increase accessibility and generate fresh revenue.
  • Create “instant recordings” of select performances as a one-of-a-kind souvenir for those who pay to see the show in person.

They sound great as sound bytes, but let’s break ’em down one by one to explain them in a little more detail, shall we?

In other news… an exciting development!

Hello, everyone! The proprietor of Ars Pro Concreta is back yet again to apologize for the effects of the COVID clock on his already much-taxed brain. We are in a new year, a new hope seems on the horizon in terms of beating this dread disease, and naturally, I’m the person who’s late to the party. What do I mean? Well… just when we’re starting to rise above the mist, and folks are envisioning a non-home-bound future in entertainment where they aren’t glued to their chairs consuming, I’m starting a podcast. Granted, podcasts existed before the pandemic and will continue to exist after it’s gone, but the chance for a captive audience has passed. Or has it? Your response to the subject of its content, something in the vein (heh) of Out for Blood‘s retrospective coverage of Carrie, will determine that answer.

Cue the pitch!

When most American theater aficionados think of Dance of the Vampires, they don’t think of a show that’s run successfully for 9,300+ performances, in 12 languages, in 14 countries, bringing in an audience of over 9.6 million. They think of its brief New York run starring Michael Crawford, which was such a critical and commercial disaster that it totally eclipsed the infamous Carrie in financial loss, set the new bar for legendary flops (at least until Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark came along), and is still widely cited as proof of the ‘wisdom’ that ‘vampire musicals don’t work on Broadway.’

20 years on, it’s time for a post-mortem. Two obsessive fans dive deep into the story behind its creation, interviewing cast, crew, creators, and detractors and fans alike who watched from the sidelines, as they recall all the gory details of the road to Manhattan, from the creation of the original Roman Polanski source film in the mid-Sixties to the present day.

Some people watch a train wreck and bemoan the loss. Others wonder how it happened. “Others” is us. If you’ve ever wondered how a Broadway show — with seemingly everything going for it — can flop, don’t miss A Good Nightmare Comes So Rarely: The Rise and Fall of Dance of the Vampires, coming soon to a podcast network near you!

Further details

Needless to say, I am one of the “two obsessive fans” mentioned in the pitch. And why not? It is no secret to anyone who knows me from any forum, or this blog, that I’m a fan (and erstwhile developer, at one point) of this “little rock musical that could” devoted to fanged creatures of the night. I might as well put this knowledge to some use and finally, after attempts as disparate as significant contributions to the show’s Wikipedia entry (including the infamous heading “Casting Crawford, 9/11, and other disasters”) and a case study on Tumblr that helped shape much of Helen Shaw’s recent overview of events in Vulture, tell the definitive version of the story for people like me who just can’t resist running into proverbial burning buildings.

My co-host is performer, dramaturg, and friend Megan Lerseth, who some of you might recognize if you’ve ever attended NYCRHPS‘ performances at Cinépolis Chelsea Cinemas or spent a modicum of time in the corner of Internet fandom devoted to AMC’s The Terror. (As she’s had significant input on my further development of the long-rumored “new English version more faithful to the European original,” that may come up as well. We’re debating whether or not it’s necessary; I think it’s a novel hook, with an interesting twist on the typical “don’t let this happen to you” shtick.)

You’ll hear all kinds of things you may never have encountered before, such as:

  • A rare demo of “Total Eclipse of the Heart” — in very much “Totale Finsternis” form, thank you very much — by Marcus Lovett and the late Laurie Beechman.
  • New(-ish — this is Jim Steinman we’re talking about, after all) songs intended for DOTV that did not make the final cut, including yet another case of recycling and what happens when a frustrated composer is asked to write a comic number for peasants who have adjusted to their lot.
  • Just where all the recycled material, spoken and sung, had its origin. (An exercise akin to an archaeological expedition, let me tell you…)
  • The story of a high school-aged fan in Rochester, NY, who couldn’t let DOTV be the final word on Tanz and staged a more faithful variant on the sly four times (!), eventually founding a highly regarded youth arts program in the process.
  • Insider stories!
  • Tapes of music rehearsals!
  • In-depth exploration of the myriad changing versions of script and score!

And much, much more!

Any help you can offer…

As we enter active research, development, and pre-production, we’re looking for anyone connected with the show, be it overseas or on Broadway. If you saw/heard it, if you were in it, if you worked for it, we want to hear from you! Comment here or contact us on social media (@garlicgothic on Twitter) if that describes you.

Post-Pandemic Plans, Vol. 2: #TAPROOMmusicals

Hi, everybody! Has it been six months since I last wrote here? I guess it’s true what commentators have been saying lately: the coronavirus has forced many behavior changes throughout societies across the globe, including how we work, shop, and interact with others. Culturally, and economically, we’ve never seen so swift a change in our world. We are all globally on “COVID time.” Which, I suppose, is how six months can go by without an entry and it’ll seem like it wasn’t nearly that long.

When I last wrote here, I began a series where I discussed ideas for the future. I’m a young entrepreneur, I’ve got my own production arm (Hunter Arrogant Entertainment), and I have some ideas for changing the ways we think about and present live theater, even if only on a local scale. They’re all listed in brief on page 3 of my company’s mission statement (hitherto tucked away on my bio page above), but I thought I’d expand on the thoughts behind them, the better to make my intentions clear as H.A. pushes forward into the future. Plus, if my friends who believe in the power of manifestation and post about it incessantly on every social media platform in existence are anything to go by, then “speaking it into being” may help me push it that extra inch farther when the time comes, however far off in the future that may ultimately be.

The second idea I’d like to discuss… well, I’m confident enough about it to have already developed a hashtag. It’s called #TAPROOMmusicals.


I’ve always been the kind of person who looks for ways of doing theater that shake things up. So it shouldn’t be especially surprising that I stumbled across The Back Room Shakespeare Project. Their main page, to which I linked, is — as of this writing — currently (and rightfully) amplifying the Black Lives Matter cause, so I’ll give you the four basic rules of how they prepare and present Shakespeare myself: 1) serious actors, 2) no director, 3) one rehearsal, 4) performed in a bar.

To elaborate on that a bit for those of you who might be alarmed or dismiss that as a shallow approach at best, it might help if I quote from the page explaining their reason for being and how the whole thing works:

Every convention of your average modern theatre serves to cut the audience off from the play. In every way, they tell us to shut down and erase ourselves. The actors are blinded by the stage lights, barely able to see the audience sitting quietly in the darkness, turning their tickets into fifty-dollar naps.

This is madness.

Because in Shakespeare’s theatre, the audience was an unruly bunch of drunks who came for the bear-baiting and stayed to check out the tragedy. They were practically on stage, buying nuts and beer from wandering vendors all the way to the bloody end.

Shakespeare’s actors had no director. They rehearsed only the fights and dances. They got their lines and their cues, they grabbed their balls and tried to tell the truth. When they failed, they probably really bit it.

Hell of a legend, right?

The Back Room Shakespeare Project takes as much of it as seems useful. We read the play once, we memorize our parts, and we rehearse it once. We have no director, and we perform in bars, for free. For you! An unruly bunch of drunks!

We’re not trying to re-create Elizabethan London. We’re trying make a space where Shakespeare’s beautiful, bawdy and bloody plays feel at home. Where actors can be responsible for their own creative work. We’re looking for a party. A riot! A hoot! We try to turn people on, and turn nothing off – not even the cellphone. It’s storytime, not judgement day.

So. Welcome!

The bar’s in the front, the play’s in the back. Visit one and then the other – in the order and with the frequency that you see fit.

No director, one rehearsal, at a bar. We try to be as recklessly playful with it as we are deadly serious.

– “The hell is this all about?” — The Back Room Shakespeare Project

They have very specific values and goals they strive to achieve, and they’ve received a lot of raves for their work. But don’t take my word for it; check them out for yourself.

(In case you’re still a little skeptical, I also highly recommend reading co-founder Samuel McClure Taylor’s books on what he calls “old-school Shakespeare,” which can be purchased at this link. He explains all of it — and lays out how to achieve similar results — far better than I can.)

If nothing else, The Back Room Shakespeare Project takes a hammer to the notion that art is an elitist activity for an elite audience, a myth that I have been trying to dispel almost since I entered the business. This is, at the very least, a gross misconception. Art is not (only) dilettantes racking up student loans on a useless major defiantly showing off their skills in a plea for attention. Art is a medium to convey non-conformist messages, spread social awareness, construct safe spaces for conversation, and challenge hegemony in traditional communities. And yet people often get intimidated even to enter a theater. Breaking down any barrier to enjoying art, by any means, is most welcome indeed. I’ve crossed swords with Grammy-winning songwriter/producer Jim Steinman many times over the years, and for good reason, but you’ve got to give a broken clock credit for being right twice a day, if nothing else, and he couldn’t have put it better when he said, “It’s all art, all theater, all show business, all music. In the end, there shouldn’t be boundaries, fences, labels, or limits. It should be obvious to any enlightened person that it’s valid to place Salome next to West Side Story next to Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band. They all serve the same function, to amplify and clarify existence. They inspire and make the heart beat faster — the soul richer!”

But I don’t do Shakespeare. (Or, at least, not very often.) I primarily do musicals. Almost any musical involves large casts. It’s more like directing an army than the scope of a small situation involving few people, toward which something as adaptable as Shakespeare is certainly more open. So where do I come in?


That, folks, is what #TAPROOMmusicals is all about. It’s a workshop inspired by The Back Room Shakespeare Project, which will test their methodology, objectives, and principles on book musicals, proving — if nothing else — there’s nothing like a good might-crash-and-burn-might-be-amazing experiment.

This is not The Reduced Shakespeare Company or anything like that; it’s not goofy already bar-friendly theater at a Chuck E. Cheese for adults. (Although admittedly it’ll probably start that way, to a certain extent at least; #TAPROOMmusicals is an easy place to stick a backdoor pilot for another notion of mine, Ocean State Rock Opera, devoted to presenting live performances of rock operas — both classics of the genre and original material by local New England based talent — as well as album and artist tributes, primarily as nightclub concert events. Shows like Jesus Christ Superstar, The Who’s TOMMY, and American Idiot are very easy to mount in such a context.) I want to tackle more difficult territory.

Like what, you say? Well, let’s consider… I dunno… Camelot. That show doesn’t scream #TAPROOMmusicals. Elaborate dances, costume parades, a production that cost over a million dollars in 1960. The original overpriced fairy tale of chivalry, right? Well, crack open a copy of the script — it’s not hard to find if you know where to look, and frankly, any version will do — and turn on the news while you’re doing that. Skip the mishegas, and focus on what you see… and how much the news and the script have in common. Sex, violence, betrayal, death, and a scandal-ridden government, are among many extremely heavy issues that are all still relevant, and at its core, just three people. Real people with real feelings, real insecurities, real contradictions. Complicated, flawed, fascinating people, experiencing fiery, tragic, thought-provoking events, in a muscular, aggressive, confrontational world.

Do you think somebody sitting in a bar in 2020 (well, 2022-ish, if we’re being realistic) won’t understand a politician, experienced or otherwise, who continually refuses to face the obvious dangers lurking around every corner? (Shit, looking at the election results, they probably even voted for the dumb bastard, whomever you think that description fits.) There’s no chance someone ordering a round will relate to a woman with the gentlest, most caring husband in the world who leaves him for another man, or even the guy who bones his best friend’s wife? And anyone in a bar who gets maudlin-drunk and waxes passionate could connect to Arthur’s passion for the philosophy of law and for changing the world, Guenevere’s passion for life and romance, Lancelot’s passion for Arthur’s dream and Guenevere’s love.

Whatever else it would be, it’s a safe bet that a #TAPROOMmusicals Camelot would be intimate, close-up, psychological, and personal. Maybe even funny. Sexy. Sad. You trim it, of course; you slice to the bone, center on the most important, provocative moments, and get it down to a good 90 minutes, which is about the most attention span you can expect in a tap room if you’re lucky. (It’s a tall order, but it’s not impossible.) You lose all the unnecessary trappings that have nothing to do with the story; there’s no room for them anyway. Most importantly, you dive into one of the greatest legends of the western world, plunge into the dark world of Arthur, King of the Britons, and his knights of the Round Table, and you give it all the power and depth of understanding that you can.

It might crash and burn. But it might be amazing.


Well, that’s all I have for now. Tune in soon for my next post-pandemic plan!

Post-Pandemic Plans, Vol. 1: The Stepford Clones

Hi, everyone! In case you’ve been living under a rock, stuff has more or less ground to a halt in the traditional entertainment world (at the time of writing, he said hopefully) due to a horrifying pandemic. I feel for you and for all of us who appreciate the role that theater plays in enriching our lives.

I’m blessed to live in Rhode Island, which seems (again, at the time of writing, he said hopefully) to be weathering the proverbial storm well, and I’m also blessed — realizing I speak from a position of privilege here — that pandemic living wasn’t much of a change from regular living for me. I was always more of a takeout-and-delivery kind of guy, and frankly rather comfortable on the couch as opposed to in a crowd; my social life was thriving, but one of punctuated equilibrium rather than endless adventures with friends 24/7. Not a world of difference to someone like me.

Having said that, I know some people have it much harder than I do. To those of you really in the thick of it who are theater fans, and don’t have that source to which to turn to ease some of the pain of living, I share with you my philosophy on that count: everything we hold important to us, whatever it is, will be enriched and enhanced even more when we’re able to gather freely again. In the meantime, keep those special experiences alive — watch whatever shows, movies, etc., are available; listen to whatever recordings you have (yes, even the bootlegs); take stock of your swag, Playbills, ticket stubs, and so forth. Try to remember how that show or moment made you feel. By the time things have returned to something resembling normal, it’ll all mean even more.

I hope that, by that same time, some ideas I’ve been cooking up will come to fruition as well. They’re all listed in brief on page 3 of my company’s mission statement (hitherto tucked away on my bio page above), but I thought I’d expand on the thoughts behind them, the better to make my intentions clear as Hunter Arrogant Entertainment pushes forward into the future. Plus, if my friends who believe in the power of manifestation and post about it incessantly on every social media platform in existence are anything to go by, then “speaking it into being” may help me push it that extra inch farther when the time comes.

I’ll begin, as the title suggests, with The Stepford Clones.


In practical terms, as the description in the mission statement suggests, The Stepford Clones would be a resident company of performers designed to be the backbone of H.A.’s many projects in development. But they’d also be a sort of “island of misfit toys.” How so? I’ll explain.

I’ve recently noticed a phenomenon on Broadway that puzzles me to no end. Back in the day, there used to be tons of shows, be they musical or not, where the cast made it special, not the directing or the material. I remember seeing so many great performances in crappy shows over the years and thinking, “Wow! I don’t know how (insert actor name here) got out of this piece of shit unscathed, but they gave it their all and I couldn’t take my eyes off them the entire time.” (Sometimes being so convincing that I didn’t realize it was a piece of shit — and I have decent radar — until, much later on, I bought the album, read the script, or both, and thought, “…what the hell was so great about this?”)

Simply put: those days are gone. Now, if I see a show with shoddy writing or a bad directorial concept, the cast will usually come out of it looking equally inept, even when I’ve seen them shine elsewhere. I began to wonder why, to question what had happened to performers who could rise above a terrible show, and transcend the mundane. It’s so rare a phenomenon these days that when it does happen, it stands out. (In my opinion, Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire was one such occasion. The direction and the script were merely competent; the actors made that movie.)

As I began observing acting classes, forming many of the opinions that served as the basis for Acting 101 (For Broke People) (link is to that post), I started to figure out why. In addition to essentially training people for film and not grounding them in stage technique, arts educators had become good at cookie-cutter “one size fits all” teaching, most of which is pseudo-psychology that has placed a few such teachers on my shit list.

These days, the importance of being a “triple threat” has been stressed so much that it makes everyone bland — adequate singers, adequate dancers, adequate actors, nothing more. There’s no room for anyone who’s incredibly talented in just one or even two of those areas. Instead of focusing on specialized and individual performances, every actor is expected to be as averagely talented as the next. There’s no space for personality or unique talent; they haven’t done their apparent job if you haven’t been loaded down with study and had all the quirks pulled out of you.

In a single class, I witnessed two examples of this:

  • Guy #1 (who I’ll call “The Male Thelma Ritter,” or “Thelma” for short) was someone you might classify as a traditional character actor or even “second banana”; no way he’d play Romeo or any typical leading man convincingly. They didn’t know what to do with him, even when it was right in front of them; they gave him one Felix Unger scene, and he landed every Neil Simon joke like it was second nature, but it was summarily dismissed other than a perfunctory note of praise. And heaven forbid they let him blossom at it either; when Thelma got comfortable enough to try adding a bit of shtick, they told him he was mugging and that there was “no room for Nathan Lane in this exercise.” If it had been distracting from another person who was supposed to be in the spotlight at that moment, then criticism would’ve been warranted, but this was just a comic actor being creative. (For the record, the business he added was hysterical. Would’ve fit in perfectly on, say, the original Will and Grace.) Supporting roles are built in such a way now that they’re considered second leads by many, and the people who used to get supporting roles — the quirky, usually shorter, “character” guys — are being passed over for the androids. Further, any creativity that didn’t emanate from the leader (be it the director, a teacher, etc.) is stamped out, often simply because they didn’t think of it themselves. Talk about a horrible work environment for the actors. That’d make me phone in a performance, too.
  • Guy #2 (I’ll call him “Trad Dad”) is my favorite type of performer: striking, tall-ish, excellent body, quirky but attractive face, and can act and sing his ass off, with a phenomenal, loud, powerful baritone voice like a classic male musical theater star (think if Robert Preston could sing like Robert Goulet). No dancer, but someone your eyes just gravitate to when he’s on stage. Always on time, great to work with, personable, etc. Easily way more talent, and far more interesting, than most of the people on Broadway these days. If he’d come around in the Fifties or Sixties, a good casting director would’ve known what to do with him; he’d have never been out of work! They put him in a workshop for a new musical (one of the teachers, if I remember correctly, fancied herself a writer and decided she’d use the class as an inexpensive development lab). Trad Dad played a supporting role, pivotal but not the male lead, and so, somehow, despite being what he is, nobody thought he’d pull focus. I knew better, but I kept my mouth shut because I felt it’d be instructive to observe. Sure enough, after the show, his most frequent comment from audience members was “I couldn’t take my eyes off you.” Given the opportunity, personality and unique talent shined through after all. But that was a rare occasion. (And the attention he pulled was so lopsided that the role was re-conceived and he was not asked to return at the next phase of development. He dodged a bullet if you ask me, but I digress.) Other than that workshop, unless it’s a revival of a pre-Nineties show, it’s all about the nasal high tenor rock voices for the guys and shrieky mixed belts for the women (sopranos get a little bit more to do, but they, too, are under-utilized).

It became very clear that performers weren’t rising above mediocre material because naturally talented actors without a pedigree don’t get a chance anymore. Today the vast majority come out of “the schools,” to a point that if you don’t get into one of “the schools,” it’s a good idea to major in something else or double major. And if they come through “the schools,” any uniqueness has been bred out of them. It’s like Broadway only has room for Stepford clones. They’ve taken over.

The saddest part is, I honestly don’t think a gifted, unique performer could succeed on Broadway today. If you can stomach the notion, picture what might’ve happened if yesterday’s legends came along in today’s environment, the same as what made them famous. Take Carol Channing, for example; hilarious, interesting, oozing star power, but no passable tap skills or high belt. She’d be typed out at most auditions, and maybe if she was lucky, she could turn that voice and personality into a steady role on Saturday Night Live, assuming a classmate didn’t get the gig, and create a character based on her first. If she went to one of those schools, Mary Martin would’ve been belittled for all the quirkiness that made her a star; she’d have been limited to a mix of Kate MacKinnon and Stephanie Beatriz parts, with a twist of Megan Mullally if she was lucky, and that’s no knock on any of the three of them, but it’s not what she was. Ethel Merman would probably be in opera; nobody else could get a comic operetta role in her range in a 100-mile radius. And who wants to imagine Julie Andrews being happy, even thankful, to maintain a simple singing waitress gig in Midtown?

Well, in the words of Rob Brydon, I’m simply not having it! I want unique personalities that can carry a show. I want the people who slipped through the cracks. I want rustlers, cutthroats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperadoes, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, horn-swogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers, and Methodists. (…sorry, got a bit carried away and crossed wires with Blazing Saddles for a sec. Where was I? Ah, yes…) I want the kind of stand-outs who can’t even get arrested for cruise ship and theme park jobs, to give them an excellent start to their groundwork. And I want to call the troupe something that thumbs its nose at all the Broadway “cookie cutter” types that held them back.

Thus — I hope — The Stepford Clones.

Don’t get me wrong; as with any new idea, there are bound to be issues. For example, that mission statement is going to attract a lot of self-aware character actors and types who only think they’re quirky. Indeed, it has the potential to become a breeding ground for a bunch of self-consciously “quirky” sociopaths. I’ve seen a few job spaces that prioritized getting performers on that kind of basis, and it was its own nightmare. There’s also a bit of worry about potentially offending people sought out for The Stepford Clones who don’t see themselves as that type. But as the proverb says, “You gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet.” Trial and error will hopefully yield a harvest.


Well, that’s all I have for now. Tune in soon for my next post-pandemic plan!

Fan Cast Recordings: A Quick Tutorial

Hello, everyone! Sorry I haven’t posted here lately except to slag others off. I feel bad about being this negative so often in a public venue, especially as there’s an overload of negativity in the world and the news today, so I felt that I’d wait to post until I had a topic we could all unite around more positively.

So I went back to my roots to try to figure out what to talk about, and was reminded of a phenomenon that was popular in my youth: the “fan cast recording.” Now this, I felt, was a topic that would connect directly to fandom. I’ve seen many of them rise and fall, and thought I’d compile some ground rules that could work for your effort if you’re so inclined.


A Brief Overview Before We Begin

As you all may or may not know, a cast recording is a recording of a stage musical that is intended to document the songs as they were performed in the show and experienced by the audience. An original cast recording (or OCR), as the name implies, features the voices of the show’s original cast.

Sometimes, fans are so enthusiastic about the show they love and brimming with enthusiasm and (occasionally) talent, that they decide to band together and record a version of their own. Some fan cast recordings are simple, with people picking the roles they’d like to play and proceeding to do it; others are more elaborate, with an “audition process” open to the public to draw in more bodies from the broad fandom than the small circle of friends that may have originated it.

Attempted fan cast recordings of CarrieHamiltonHeathersJesus Christ SuperstarLes MisérablesNewsiesThe Phantom of the OperaSpamalot, and Tanz der Vampire, among others, litter the web. (And that’s just what I could find from being part of two of those, and Google searching the rest. There are many more lost to the mists of time, like when the forum at CompulsiveBowlers.org [RIP] attempted Rent.) The phenomenon is almost as old as fan communities first gathering on the Internet.

Trial and error, and misguided ambition, have laid bare many of the rookie mistakes one can make. I’m here to give a few tips to ensure a fan-made cast recording of your favorite musical might be finished to completion, and make it clear what this process entails if you want to do it well, even on $3.99 and a catnip mouse.


The Tips

Preparation

  1. Have a solid backing track in place. I mean, it’s rare to attempt a fan cast recording with musicians and vocals at the same time, but I still must warn against it. You don’t want to cut both live. Even if it’s one person on piano, a really good karaoke or instrumental collection, or you’ve engineered a piece of sheet music (via notation programs and manual adjustment in recording software) to sound somewhat like a real orchestra, you don’t want to be playing at the same time as the person singing live in (what amounts to) your studio, because if the singer screws up, you have to go back and play it all over again. As for attempting a recording without a backing track, I suppose you could, but that’s a quick way to be branded as sounding amateurish and having more ambition than skills.
  2. Use higher-quality recording software than the basic package on your computer. This doesn’t have to break the bank or your machine. Some decent possibilities include Adobe Audition, GoldWave, and Audacity. (The last one in particular is free, available for both PC and Mac, and has a Wiki and a robust user base to help with any questions you may have.)
  3. Have someone reasonably skilled with recording software (an “engineer” type) involved. You’ll need somebody to piece the raw materials together, fine-tune them, and give you something polished. Even someone with a lot of spare time (can’t stress that enough) who’s eager to learn and can Google a solution is better than roughing it.
  4. Have at least one leader/boss person. Somebody to make tough decisions, set deadlines, keep you on task, and guide the artistic direction of the recording is important. If you’re not comfortable trusting a single person with this task, then maybe a committee of some kind would work, as long as rules are in place and everybody agrees to them.

Recording

Microphone advice
  1. Try to get a separate USB microphone. I don’t recommend using a built-in mic on your machine; it’s generally rougher than something you can control.
  2. Always use a stand for your microphone if possible. Even if that means you’re just taping the mic to something. No matter how careful you are, the “engineer” person might have to clean out a lot of mic noise from even the smallest movements.
  3. Some DIY may be required for optimal sound. For example, most microphones these days ship with windscreens, which are quite inexpensive and do wonders in eliminating background noise, especially wind (hence the name). Using one makes a world of difference. But, costs being what they are, you may have to improvise and build a windscreen of your own. Luckily, this is simple: take a coat hanger and make a circle of it (I like doing it this way because you can use the stem to hang it from a stand, if necessary), or use a cross-stitch fabric holder; get a pair of hose that is in good shape (from a mom, a girlfriend, your collection — I don’t judge), and wash them (because who needs foot stank in their nostrils when they sing); stretch the hose — one leg is plenty — over the circle fairly tightly and tie it off, giving you two layers that aren’t too dense; and mount it to your stand, thread it under your mic through the stand clip, mount it to your desk, etc., whatever works for your situation.
  4. Stand a good six to twelve inches away from the microphone when recording. This affects what some call the vocal’s “presence.” While you sometimes want that up-close sound, and other times want a farther-away sound, 6″ – 12″ is a good average. You may think that it makes for a more uneven recording, but so long as you have a quiet room to record in, it allows you to tape a little bit hotter with a more even overall sound. A good “sound” person who is either talented or great at Googling and seeking advice can compress your track and make it sound right, but if you eat the mic, they can’t make you blend into the music as well.
General recording tips
  1. Do not record your vocals without headphones (or at least earbuds). I speak from personal experience on this one. It’s much harder to work with your vocals if there’s a track bleeding in on them. You want to be able to manipulate each element in isolation from the other, and you can’t do that if you just plug in a mic and start singing along to the track. (I don’t recommend using a built-in mic on your machine; it’s generally rougher than something you can control.)
  2. Use the fact of number 1 to your advantage. Have you ever been listening to music in headphones while trying to talk to someone, and they’re like “You don’t have to yell, I’m standing right here!?!” Well, it works for recording, too. If you’re having problems achieving a softer vocal tone for a certain piece, turn your vocal up in your headphones. Your brain will force you to sing softer. Likewise, if you need a louder, stronger tone and are having trouble, turn your vocal down in your headphones. You will, by necessity, sing louder and stronger. (It could also work the opposite way. Adapt the trick to your particular idiosyncrasies.)
  3. Be aware of your software’s limitations, and adjust accordingly. For example, a frequent problem is that someone’s vocals can distort and sound too loud in their recording, and the software may not seem to have a way to turn down your recording level. Check carefully first, but if it doesn’t, you may have to use the audio controls (system mixer) built into your computer’s operating system. (It’s up to you to look up how to do that; I can’t do all your homework for you!)
  4. Exaggerate your performance as necessary. Don’t forget that you’re not participating in a real production. People aren’t seeing you do this; they’re listening to it. Don’t overwhelm the listener with all the theatrics you might apply to a live performance, but bear in mind to adjust your delivery to the nature of a recording and play it for the ear alone. They’ve got to feel the joy, or despair, or anger, without being able to see it, and that means you might need to push. You have plenty of time to take breaks, recover, etc., in between takes that they will never know about.
  5. A rule of thumb when recording solo vocals: four takes of every song, straight through, no stopping. That’s all you need to start with; there are not that many ways to style a line when singing it, and a person doesn’t mess up a lyric or note in the same spot every time. If you’re lucky enough to be able to get people together, then the same rule with two or three people would be three takes where each sings solo and one where they’re all in the room at the same time. Three are for insurance, the fourth is for atmosphere and natural interplay. (This does not apply to the ensemble, which I’ll define as more than three people. Don’t over-exert yourself, cut the vocals separately and balance them later.)
  6. The better material you start with, the better your end product. Try to export your raw work in WAV files; they’re one of the simplest digital audio file formats, and they are also lossless, uncompressed, and broadcast/CD quality. If you want your final recording to sound great, it’s imperative to start with the best possible sound at each phase of production.
  7. That work should be raw. Don’t be self-conscious and try to apply fixes before you send your work to the “engineer” person. Their job is to prep and mix everyone to sound as similar in recording quality as possible (EQ, compression, and so forth), and that will mean combining the best of multiple takes (more about that below). Give them your raw vocal tracks with confidence.

Post-Production

  1. The “engineer’s” best friend: the “comp” vocal. Make careful note of the best moments from each take, and assemble them into a “comp” vocal (i.e., one master take, compiled from multiple versions). With a backing track already in place, all you’re doing is editing together the best vocal, and it won’t affect anything else that’s been recorded. For the best possible results, poll anyone whose opinion can be reasonably trusted, especially the “boss” person(s). Find out what they think are the best moments. Where they agree, make the edit agreed upon; where they disagree, weigh each option and make your own decision. Be prepared to do this more than once, but that’s okay because recording software in the digital age makes this much easier than tape splicing. (What you didn’t get in four takes, you can always fix at this point. Got an agreeable “comp” vocal, but one line is only the best you could get out of four takes and not the best? Have the singer re-cut just that line.)
  2. Only deploy a “bag of tricks” at this point. “Engineers,” whatever you think a voice needs — reverb, EQ, light tuning if needed — do it only after you’ve already cut together the “comp” vocal. Don’t do it to every take and then try to cut it together. It’ll never work; too many artifacts unique to each take. (Those of you who have any degree of skill probably already know or assumed this; this advice is recorded purely for the total amateurs.)
  3. Once it’s as mixed as possible, it’s time to master it, if you want it to sound good. Mastering dependably makes your mixes sound better, “engineers,” and in the professional world, mastering engineers specialize in standardizing and refining the dynamics, loudness, consistency, and timing of your tracks. They’re experts at applying complementary levels of EQ and compression, helping each element of your music sound clearer and smoother (they use the kind of top-flight equipment most of us can only dream of putting our mixes through!). There are affordable mastering engineers with great reputations online to whom you can send your stuff for a reasonable per-song fee (anywhere from $40 – $75 U.S.), but if your resources, as I said above, are $3.99 and a catnip mouse, you might consider trying it yourself with some of these tips from another blog.

And there you have it! You won’t be able to pull off everything, but if you can accomplish more than one of the items above, then you might have something.

Page 1 of 6

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén