Options

A couple of weeks ago the lovely Victoria Saxton commented on a NY Times article in which West Side Story lead violinist Paul Woodiel lamented the loss of half the string section from the show's pit.

Such is progress, I thought.  I saw essentially the same article today on news24.com, and while the headline may be a little misleading ('Synthesisers Invade Broadway': Well, for a start they've been on Broadway a long time, and secondly this headline conjures up images of an army of Nord and Yamaha keyboards relentlessly swaggering up the Great White Way, zapping tourists with a general midi banjo here, a warm pad there....) I thought, 'huh, what exactly does this mean?'.  I know, deep right?

The was a hullaballoo in the West End back in 2004, when producers wanted to replace half of the orchestra of Les Mis with virtual musicians. The Musician's Union wanted every member playing in a pit to go on strike, with the intention of crippling the West End.  Unfortunately, since union fees are so high all the musicians chose to carry on working and the producers got their way.  I think.... (don't quote me on that)

As a working composer I can't afford to hire session musicians every time I do a track, so I have at my disposal a bunch of toys that replicate (to a certain extent) the sounds I need.  They could never replace the feel or sound of a real player but I have to be realistic when it comes to income-generation.  So I totally understand the need to replace real musicians with more affordable (and oftentimes, reliable) electronic counterparts.  It's not an uncommon practice among media composers.

And following that train of thought, if the only way producers can afford to run a show is to have a smaller, partly virtual orchestra isn't that better than not having a show at all?  So five string players are dropped; 46 cast members are still picking up a paycheck, not to mention the behind the scenes peeps.  

Then take into account the advances in technology that allow smaller theaters and companies to mount shows with difficult scores or impractical orchestra sizes that would otherwise be impossible to produce.  Suddenly it's possible to do that show you didn't think you'd find/afford an orchestra for, and you can bring the magic of the musical to outback Australia.

On the other hand, shouldn't the Broadway experience be all about the pizazz of the art?  If punters are paying upwards of $100 a seat, shouldn't they experience the musical as it truly was intended to be heard?  Broadway is glitz and glamour; why reduce the scores to little boxes (although it is somewhat fitting, given the plastic nature of food served in the Times Square area...)

A small community theater in Arkansas utilizing technology to recreate the sound of an 80-piece orchestra to support a rousing production of Les Mis is one thing - given that the theater would probably struggle to find enough musicians of a suitable caliber who were all available at the same time, let alone pay them, why not use a computer to give the audience's ear drums an awesome experience?  But in the city there's no shortage of good musicians. The question comes down to affordability; does the producer really need to make the cuts, or are they upping the profitability of the show?  A quick glance at the show's grosses should be a good indicator of how much money is coming in; what's going out relies a little more on guesswork.  

If the show is truly struggling, and the entire company, orchestra, and creative team feel strongly about the authenticity of real players, how about funding the extra musicians through voluntary cuts (including the producer's share)?  What?  Sorry?  Oh right, didn't think so....  After all $1700 a week must be tricky to live on.

Replacing musicians with software is happening, and will continue to happen. If you want to object with your feet, fine, but there'll be someone right behind you, with less scruples, ready to take your job, which is pretty much what happened in the West End in 2004. The problem won't go away overnight. As the next generation of producers is nurtured, musicians (and composers!) need to establish relationships with them and start a dialogue with the aim of educating and building trust between the parties. Maybe this way there's a hope of finding some middle ground when the going gets tough.  

Finally, and perhaps this is the most pertinent point of this longer-than-anticipated blog.  Musicians aren't being replaced by synthesizers.  Synthesizers make sound by creating waveforms which are then processed and combined. The software that's replacing live players is sample-based. Most 'synths' are actually sample based. If we're going to throw our arms about and make a hoo-hah, let's at least make sure we're using the correct terminology...