Computers Replace Musicians In West End Musical

Albanach writes "The Scotsman newspaper is reporting that despite opposition from the Musician's Union, Sir Cameron Mackintosh will proceed with his plan to replace one half of the musicians in his musical Les Miserables with a computer synthesiser. The Times claims that using Sinfonia will allow the show, the third longest running musical in history, to replace 11 musicians saving 5,000 GBP ($9,450 US) per week. Sinfonia consisits of 2 PCs, one master and one backup, controlled by an trained operator using a musical keyboard."

Comments

Defeats the purpose

[mao che minh]

People go (or in my case, get dragged) to see live orchestras because it is music being played by actual musicians. That is what differentiates the experience from merely listening to the songs on a stereo.

What is the point in going to see live, but fake, music?

Re:Defeats the purpose

[Killer Napkin]

Actually, Les Miserables is a musical. The music and the story go hand in hand. To make half the experience artificial is to taint the other half, also. It's not like people aren't going to be able to tell.

Re:Defeats the purpose

[darnok]

Here goes the karma...

Unless someone's done something interesting with arrangements, the musicians playing the score for Les Mis have very little to no creative input in the music they're producing. They play what's on the score, and there's very little interaction between the cast and orchestra in a typical concert hall.

The fact that large chunks of this production of Les Mis can be played by synths tends to suggest that either the arrangements are either very straightforward or that they're particularly avant garde (i.e. it might actually be tough to find/afford musicians who can do them justice). The simple fact is (and I've been a muso in a past life so I'm gonna get beaten up if any of several people read this!) that the synths are probably *better* able to deliver the musical background that the director wants to achieve. They don't make mistakes, they don't break up with their partners just before the show, and they won't get better offers elsewhere.

Bottom line: people don't go to Les Mis to hear the orchestra play, and probably very few of them know or care whether "real" musicians are playing. They go because they think it's a good story and/or to see specific actors and/or because the director may have done something interesting with it.

Re:Defeats the purpose

[Bob Zer Fish]

There is one distinct advantage of having real musicians and that is if one of the actors or whatever makes a mistake they are much more able to deal with the problem than a computer is.

Imho, good musicians will play the music very well and will also interpret the music - that means that the score is just a guide really. An example would be to listen to a good orchestra play the pink panther and then listen to a basic orchestra that just plays the notes, without interpretation or feeling. It just sounds crap.

Re:Defeats the purpose

[NormalVisual]

Unless someone's done something interesting with arrangements, the musicians playing the score for Les Mis have very little to no creative input in the music they're producing. They play what's on the score, and there's very little interaction between the cast and orchestra in a typical concert hall.

How is this different from a symphony concert? Everyone's playing what's on the stand in front of them, with little to no creative input.

The difference is in the performance itself - the performances are a little different from night to night, and a full orchestra that's paying attention to what's happening onstage will be able to compensate seamlessly with any differences in the show from night to night (dropped line, missed coda, etc.) Up until about two years ago, I had regularly performed in a pit orchestra for about 15 years, and it *does* make a difference. It's even more of a difference for something like "Les Mis", where the music is such an integral part of the show.

Knowing that a show was sequenced/synthesized would definitely temper my enthusiasm at seeing it.

Re:Defeats the purpose

[FredFnord]

> Unless someone's done something interesting with arrangements, the musicians playing the score for Les Mis have
> very little to no creative input in the music they're producing. They play what's on the score, and there's very little interaction
> between the cast and orchestra in a typical concert hall.

I'd hate to be in any of the shows YOU'VE been in. In the shows I perform in, there is plenty of interaction between cast and orchestra. Mediated, of course, through the CONDUCTOR. That's what he's there for. And the conductor is supposed to pick up the vibe from the audience, and will if he's any good, which adds a third party into the mix.

As soon as you add a synth playing six parts at once, then your tempos can't vary, you can't easily alter dynamics from night to night (unless you want to alter them all in exactly the same way, which is a bad idea), and basically you end up with a much inferior performance. But since people don't actually know what a stage show should look like these days anyway, nobody misses anything. And hey, if people will pay just as much for an inferior performance that costs less to produce, then that's what they'll get.

-fred

Re:Defeats the purpose

[fshalor]

As someone who has more than 5 musicals in a pit playing trombone, and another one working crew including:
1. La Cage A Follies
2. Gypsy
3. Anyonw Can Whistle
4. Peter Pan
5. Scruge
6. Sunday in the park with George
7. Jekyl and Hyde.

I can say without a doubt that I can and will be able to tell the difference. I can also say with 100% assurance that I am not th only one who can tell te difference.

This is actually a rather interesting development. And I must add a few points.

1. Musicians are underpaid in general. The musicals I've done usually barely paid for gas. But then again, no one gets paid in this group, even though the group is very good. (One of the best in the state.)
2. Poorer groups may not be able to afford musicians. I know this one wouldn't, it there weren't enough musicians in the town willing to do the gig for peanuts, and *able* :)
3. Thus in these cases, there may be an excuse for doing "taped" runs, or better, what this article is suggesting.
4. In Jekyl and Hyde, we used a really good yamaha keyboard to cover all the uncoverable parts (ie, cello and some harpsicord and chimes parts, etc.) This was mostly due to space concerns, but MAN-O MAN; patches have came a Long way in the last 5 years.

Still, this makes me cringe that groups who CAN pay for good musicians aren't willing to anymore. To me, for a group that is in that situation, it is a cop out of sorts. It takes away one of the dangers of things falling apart. It brings the group back from that edge, and locks it into the one keyboard jocky and the computer.

Call me a nut, but some of the best moments I've ever felt in music were when things weren't going 100% the way they were rehersed. The combined human factor of 10 pit musicians relizing that Mr. Hyde was going crazy with his stuff tonight made something come alive.

I would feel bad not allowing moments like that to go to the audience.

Next up: record the whole damn thing and play it on a big screen. Oh, wait.. Ooops. Thats a movie. :)

that's too bad

[DRUNK_BEAR]

I don't mind technology easying things out or to offer a divertissement (in the form of games, etc), but when it comes to art I have a hard time with it replacing entirely humans. Art should be a form of expression, not an automated process.

Just my 0.02$

Re:that's too bad

[hcetSJ]

In an opera like Les Mis, however, people don't usually come to the performance hoping to hear the orchestra. The majority of the art is performed on stage--in the form of acting and singing. The orchestra provides accompaniment to the main attraction on stage. Also, within the orchestra certain instruments usually "take center stage" more often--the first violins, the brass, and so on--and these are likely the last to be replaced by synth. So really, what they've done here is replaced the backup voices in the accompaniment with a machine. If it keeps the show open longer, it's worth it.

I hope nobody finds out, or they're done for.

[Anonymous Coward]

The point of going to a live show is just that -- to hear live music from an orchestra of real musicians. Jean Michel Jarre, in particular, has already lost a lot of concert-goers when they found out he sometimes used pre-sequenced synths instead of using an army of keyboardists and playing the lead himself, live.

Sure, some people go to a musical just for the lights, costumes and action... but how many are there? Surely the majority go for the music?

A form of expression?

[cardpuncher]

>Art should be a form of expression, not an automated process

The average West End musical is a form of business. The main art involved is that of making a profit.

What about the other half?

[cannon_trodder]

Although he can replace half, there are still jobs that he needs real musicians for. I wonder if those musicians would boycott or try to put him under pressure to use real musicians for everything? They must still have some leverage if they are needed for the parts that computers can't do...

If the show is not making enough money then that is because it is past it's "sell-by" date. If it's just to make more money by cutting costs then it's pretty disgusting really. Yeah, he might make more money but how about putting money back into the community of musicians who made LM possible when computerisation was not an option? Guess I'm just an old softie really...

Re:What about the other half?

[weave]

This is only the beginning. One of the big reasons for a live orchestra was timing. The conductor has to ensure the music stays synced with what's happening on the stage. With a straight recording, that isn't possible. But now thanks to the ability to control the tempo of the music through a computer in real time, they really won't need ANY of them eventually.

I wonder if Sir Cameron Mackintosh has a Macintosh and recently got his copy if iLife '04 and started playing around with GarageBand or something!

Ticket Price better be cheaper

[cosmol]

When you buy a ticket to a live performance, you expect to see real live humans performing. If some of the human performers have been replaced with machines, one should expect the ticket prices to be lower.

I would gladly spend "full" price to see a performance which was originally meant to be done by machines. But if the spirit of a performance is changed solely to cut costs, the savings should be passed along to me, or I'd rather spend my money on the real thing.

Re:Did anyone notice.....

[darnok]

I think, more than anything else, the salary of an orchestral musician reflects the fact that they're generally (a) highly replaceable, and (b) not a key component of the overall package. I'm not saying they're not highly skilled, but there's an awful lot of unemployed musicians out there prepared to work for peanuts.

Exceptions obviously exist, but how often would people fork out cash to go to a play or musical because a particular musician is involved?

Well..

[RussGarrett]

Mackintosh says he's been forced to do this by moving to the smaller theatre because the pit can only accommodate 11 musicians. Where exactly does the Musicians' Union want to put the rest of the orchestra? Suspend them from the ceiling?

Reading the rather limited blurb about the Sinfonia on the manufacturer's site, it's not like the orchestra or conductor is playing to a click-track or anything, the Sinfonia is operated by someone, presumably playing along to a piano part or some other lead part under the control of the conductor, then the synths on it follow that. Which means the conductor still has overall control of the orchestra, and it seems that the Sinfonia operator can even repeat bars or whatever, in response to what's happening on stage (although in a professional musical, an actor forgetting their line is somewhat unlikely, those things run like clockwork).

Yes, there's no substitute for live musicians, but if it's a case between the show going ahead or not (such as this case on RMS's site), then the answer is obvious to me. It's rather amusing that the musicians' unions are worried, they should be comforted in the knowledge that they can do better than a synth. Indeed, RMS claim that the Sinfonia can free up room for more live musicians by reducing the need for seperate synth players.

Still, I'd like to have a play with it before I'm fully convinced :).

I go to hear EVERYTHING!

[oboist311]

Les Miserables is a musical, not a play. The music is vital for setting the mood of the piece. Each character has his or her own motif which lets gives you insight into the characters. For Wagner, this was almost more important for character development than the libretto (lyrics) itself. When I go to a musical, I pay for the best seats so I can sit close to the pit. I want to see the conductor carefully watching the actors on stage and communicating with the musicians so that everything stays together. It is truly an amazing thing to see a large group of people perform together in sync.

When I was in high school, I got to see a touring company of Les Miserables. One of the parts I looked forward to seeing the most was after the barricades fall and Jean Valjean looks through the bodies for Marius. There is a huge oboe solo that plays the melody to Jean Valjean's song, "Bring Him Home." This music conveys to the audience that although Jean Valjean knows he will lose his daughter to Marius by saving him, he knows that is what he should do. As an oboe student, I listened carefully how the musician interpreted the solo. It was a rare opportunity for me to get to hear someone else besides my teachers, and a machine simply would not have been the same.

Once in college as a music major, I got to experience the musicians' union's pettiness. Many times we had to sit in rehearsal for several minutes not allowed to rehearse because our morning rehearsal had gone over several minutes and the union members' lunch break had to be exactly sixty minutes. However when it came time to play, people would get over their egos and make music. (Musicians have always been difficult to deal with - Bach stabbed a bassoonist and Handel tried to throw a soprano out a window!).

Next month, my elementary school music students are going to get a great opportunity. The Nashville Opera company is travelling to our rural mining town and performing The Barber of Seville. The school had a choice whether to watch the performance on a live internet broadcast or have a scaled down version of the opera travel to the school. We chose to have the opera come to the school because seeing it live will engage the students better and just be more exciting for them. The children are prettty pumped about it, too.

It saddens me to think that Les Mis has to move to a smaller theater because of declining ticket sales. Perhaps it would be better to let it close with a little dignity instead of letting go on forever like Cats. But Cameron Macintosh was responsible for Cats lingering on forever too!

As a theatre professional...

[WesternActor]

I have mixed feelings about this. While I believe very strongly that live music is a vital part of the theatrical experience when attending a musical, the proliferation of poor amplification or just too much amplification reduces the orchestral accompaniment in most musicals to little more than a wall of mostly uncolored sound anyway. That, of course, is why producers can get away with this--when the sound is changed/distorted electronically, the application of virtual orchestras will make it sound just good enough to be passable. You assign the particularly lively or agile passages of the score to the live musicians and let the virtual orchestra play everything else. Why not? In most cases, the audience won't be able to tell. But I think it does truly alter the experience. I've seen performances of (professional) shows using taped/recorded music, and while this isn't exactly the same thing, the experience doesn't compare with seeing a musical with a live orchestra. And, of course, that experience doesn't compare with a full-sized orchestra unamplified with unamplified singers. That is the best, most natural way to go, but that's a battle that has mostly been lost in the professional theatre arena anyway.

Les Miserables has to move out of its current theater because of renovations, and the theater they're moving into is the only one currently available. But, as it's quite a bit smaller, there's not enough room for the orchestra. But I find it odd, then, that the stage is big enough for the show (which, itself, is quite big) or the cast (which is also quite big), but the pit isn't big enough for the orchestra. And, of course, by ripping out a row or two of seats, the orchestra pit could easily be expanded. But no one wants to do that, because it would cut into the profits. The easiest thing to do for audiences who mostly don't know or care about the difference between virtual music and live music is to replace musicians. But at what point does reducing Les Miserables or any show make it no longer the same show? At a certain point during the Broadway run of the show, they just cut 15 minutes out of it to get it to run under three hours so they would have to stop paying the cast overtime. But the ticket prices, of course, didn't go down. Rest assured that audiences paying to see Les Miserables in London will not be paying less for fewer live musicians. The difference will go right into Cameron Mackintosh's pocket, as is always the case.

Personally, I think when it comes time to start cheating the audience out of the full experience of the show, as in either the current London case or the Broadway one I mentioned above, it might be best to just close the show and move on. But that's speaking from an audience member's perspective--from the perspective of someone who is something of an industry insider, sure, take the customers who don't know the difference for as much money as you can. The ones who do know the difference probably have already seen Les Miserables one or more times and have no desire to go back to see a reduced version of the show.

It really is different

[violajack]

To address a few of the concerns raised here:

Les Mis is not a play, it is a musical. In fact, there is little to no spoken word in Les Mis making it almost an opera, which would make the music quite important.

Many people seem to think that if all the musicians are doing is playing from the score, then a machine may as well be doing it. To me, that's like saying, "if all the actors are doing is reading from the script, then we may as well replace them with robots." The fact is, despite the mess of markings that is a classical score, there are many more things not on that page that musicians are expected to fill in. There is a passion and subtlety of emotion, expression, articualtion, and sound that no machine can reproduce.

As a classicaly trained musician soon to graduate with my Master's in performance, I may be a bit biased, but the majority of my training hinges on those very points. Playing the music on the page is a given, you just have to be able to do at least that. What gets you a job and makes the music worth listening to, is doing more than what's on the page.

Now admittedly, that's hard to do for a show that's been running for so long. Many people have pointed out the business end of this decission. So, lets look at this from a business point of view...If the market demand for performance of this show no longer supports it being preformed in a space big enough, then the market has no more need for this show. Maybe it's time to learn a new show.

I think that all adds up to about $.04. Thanks for reading

Why.

[Triv]

Have any of you stopped to consider WHY Cameron wants to do this and why it's a problem?

There's a musician's union for the West End. Union rules specifically state how many musicians need to be hired for any musical specifically to STOP this from happening, ie, to keep Broadway musicians employed. Believe me, if they could get away with it, pit bands would've been replaced by a CD player a long, long time ago. Broadway is exactly the same way.

McIntosh wants to replace half the orchestra, not because of artistic reasons per se, but because of practical ones - Les Mis is moving to a theater with a much, much smaller pit that simply can't accompany the number of musicians hired by the current production.

It's ALL business. Don't think art has anything to do with it. THey'd replace the actors with robots if they thought it'd make a buck and save a few more.

Triv

rap

[Heisenbug]

(FYI, the most useful definition I've heard is that rap refers to the musical form, hip hop to the culture, which also includes breakdance and grafiti art)

Rap is a drum machine and a rhyme dictionary in the same way that blues is four chords and a gravelly voice, or jazz is hitting the wrong keys and pretending you did it on purpose, or rock is two power chords and a stage show, or classical is machine-like repetition of a score. There are recordings that fit those descriptions, and before you get used to the form it might all sound like that. There's also a hell of a lot more to it -- but if you don't care to learn, more power to you, it's probably not for you anyway.

If you like rock, or blues, or jazz, or classical, though, you are hereby prohibited from making stupid generalizations about rap.

Re:In favor of Classical Music.

[Lord_Dweomer]

What a troll. "But if you want someone that really understands music, then, you need someone who actually knows how to play a real musical instrument."

Right, because I'm sure all the DJs out there have no clue how music works. Maybe you should try spinning sometime, and maybe you would how much musical understanding you really need in order to be a good DJ. Not only do you have to know a lot of musical theory in order to make a halfway decent mix that sounds concrete, you also need to be quite good at keeping track of both songs (or in some case 3, or in some case other things like a 404) because you need to be able to figure out the precise place to start mixing the two together.

Tons of people have invested just as much into being a DJ as people who play instruments do. In fact, if you want to look at it in purely financial terms instead of that and time, then I'll bet the DJ spends quite more to get their setup and records.

Your post was insulting to DJs as well as having no valid points at all.