Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Finding That Group Sound: Rehearsal Number Seven
Today we spent some focused time on some of the group song formats that tend to appear in act one of FourPlay. As I've mentioned before, these are the most tricky numbers as they require a high level of listening, blending and teamwork - something that you can't preempt as you put together a new company (even one that is made largely from a former company!) While the solos can and typically do have a higher level of freedom, as they essentially entail close work with just the musician and the singer, the group numbers require a higher level of discipline amongst the performers. From personal experience, group songs can be problematic for a number of reasons:
1. If there are numerous improvisers on stage, the musician is often left in the lurch vamping forever if nobody steps up to get the song moving.
2. Players can tend to bail on these numbers during the initial stages by quickly throwing the lead away before the number has found its starting structure. While it seems as if they are being generous by singing the first line, a quick bail typically leaves the song without a clear drive, style or guiding voice.
3. A quick gag or lyric line (often sung with disregard to the music's organic structure) can derail the song's flow, getting a quick pay-off, but ultimately disconnecting the singers from the musician(s). This often happens on the SAK stage as a song is moving towards its ending, collapsing the song's power right when you want it to climax and resolve.
4. Similar to above, players will often take focus for a brief moment, in order to add to the story, but may then relinquish that focus without a clear "give" or offer to another to continue. As with any other improv scene, focus needs to be deliberately managed with care and finesse.
5. The nervousness of singing can lessen the level of close listening. Group songs suffer when the first singers establish a strong game, dynamic or "voice," only to have this missed by those who join later. This game may involve a lyrical style or "hook" (repeated phrase), a verse length or pattern of lyric exchanges, or a clear building dynamic centered on a particular character or singer. Once established, these choices become an improv game like any other - the joy for the audience emerges from watching the game build, continue and change from deliberate offers. While we often talk about finding the tilt or changing the game, this is less successful if the song's game hasn't been firmly established and recognized. (We've found that a musical bridge also is a natural fit for this type of choice or moment.)
To address these tendencies, we reviewed some of our more challenging song formats and introduced some new possibilities. For the purpose of our show, I distinguish between "group songs," where the inherent game usually passes the lead position to each onstage singer with some predictability, and "soloist driven" numbers, where one singer typically remains in charge of driving the number or moving focus while the remaining singers provide backup to enrich the musical sound. Generally, however, the goals are the same. The formats set a certain expectation as to what each player will contribute to the number, in addition to providing a blueprint to establish the song's pattern or game so that it will, more probably, build to a satisfying ending. For example, one format is built on the premise that each player will provide a sequential line of lyric in turn in order to create each verse. Once established, players have to commit to meeting this particular game if the song is to keep moving. That's where the discipline comes in!
It was nice to have a chance to play with the nitty-gritties (that's official Director-speak) of some of these dynamics. We also played with some bad staging tendencies that Mark had identified in an earlier rehearsal. Often, the supporting singers inadvertently took center stage, thereby forcing the soloist to upstage him/herself or work hard for focus. This was a simple observation that has opened up some interesting discoveries. Ron, with his dancing instincts, also did some nice work nudging the rest of us into some fun spontaneous choreography.
Mark and Robyn rejoin this weekend while Jay leaves us for a week or so for The Constant Wife tech week with Mad Cow. John has also finished our new show logo which I'll include here soon. Very exciting...
Your focus-fashioning Director, David C.
Today we spent some focused time on some of the group song formats that tend to appear in act one of FourPlay. As I've mentioned before, these are the most tricky numbers as they require a high level of listening, blending and teamwork - something that you can't preempt as you put together a new company (even one that is made largely from a former company!) While the solos can and typically do have a higher level of freedom, as they essentially entail close work with just the musician and the singer, the group numbers require a higher level of discipline amongst the performers. From personal experience, group songs can be problematic for a number of reasons:
1. If there are numerous improvisers on stage, the musician is often left in the lurch vamping forever if nobody steps up to get the song moving.2. Players can tend to bail on these numbers during the initial stages by quickly throwing the lead away before the number has found its starting structure. While it seems as if they are being generous by singing the first line, a quick bail typically leaves the song without a clear drive, style or guiding voice.
3. A quick gag or lyric line (often sung with disregard to the music's organic structure) can derail the song's flow, getting a quick pay-off, but ultimately disconnecting the singers from the musician(s). This often happens on the SAK stage as a song is moving towards its ending, collapsing the song's power right when you want it to climax and resolve.
4. Similar to above, players will often take focus for a brief moment, in order to add to the story, but may then relinquish that focus without a clear "give" or offer to another to continue. As with any other improv scene, focus needs to be deliberately managed with care and finesse.
5. The nervousness of singing can lessen the level of close listening. Group songs suffer when the first singers establish a strong game, dynamic or "voice," only to have this missed by those who join later. This game may involve a lyrical style or "hook" (repeated phrase), a verse length or pattern of lyric exchanges, or a clear building dynamic centered on a particular character or singer. Once established, these choices become an improv game like any other - the joy for the audience emerges from watching the game build, continue and change from deliberate offers. While we often talk about finding the tilt or changing the game, this is less successful if the song's game hasn't been firmly established and recognized. (We've found that a musical bridge also is a natural fit for this type of choice or moment.)
To address these tendencies, we reviewed some of our more challenging song formats and introduced some new possibilities. For the purpose of our show, I distinguish between "group songs," where the inherent game usually passes the lead position to each onstage singer with some predictability, and "soloist driven" numbers, where one singer typically remains in charge of driving the number or moving focus while the remaining singers provide backup to enrich the musical sound. Generally, however, the goals are the same. The formats set a certain expectation as to what each player will contribute to the number, in addition to providing a blueprint to establish the song's pattern or game so that it will, more probably, build to a satisfying ending. For example, one format is built on the premise that each player will provide a sequential line of lyric in turn in order to create each verse. Once established, players have to commit to meeting this particular game if the song is to keep moving. That's where the discipline comes in!
It was nice to have a chance to play with the nitty-gritties (that's official Director-speak) of some of these dynamics. We also played with some bad staging tendencies that Mark had identified in an earlier rehearsal. Often, the supporting singers inadvertently took center stage, thereby forcing the soloist to upstage him/herself or work hard for focus. This was a simple observation that has opened up some interesting discoveries. Ron, with his dancing instincts, also did some nice work nudging the rest of us into some fun spontaneous choreography.
Mark and Robyn rejoin this weekend while Jay leaves us for a week or so for The Constant Wife tech week with Mad Cow. John has also finished our new show logo which I'll include here soon. Very exciting...
Your focus-fashioning Director, David C.
