Riverdance: say it ain't so!
MKAldin
Report: Riverdance sound is prerecorded
LONDON, May 31 (UPI) The Irish dance show Riverdance, which swept from Europe
across the Atlantic to high popularity in the United States in 1994,
acknowledged the sound of its tap dancing is prerecorded.
Riverdance Executive Producer Julian Erskine, in an interview published today
in the British newspaper The Sunday Times, says the sound for live performances
is recorded in advance "to give the audience the best possible product."
And on British radio today, he said audiences have become so demanding they
expect perfect performances every night, in large arenas where the sound of
dancing fails to reach the back seats.
He says, "We discovered that if we did not do it the audience was not happy."
Riverdance, made famous with its star Michael Flatley, became so popular after
appearances in 1994 that the company was soon playing to audiences of up to
20,000.
Flatley left the show in 1995 after a contractual disagreement and went on to
set up Lord of the Dance as a rival outfit.
The Sunday Times reports that while the dancers still perform all the
routines, only the audience in the first few rows actually hear live dancing.
Everyone else hears tapes of prerecorded taps.
Erskine also says ***much of the singing is also prerecorded.*** [my
asterisks]
He said today: "Irish dancing had never reached this sort of audience before
and the sound of shoes on a stage does not carry. We are simply into providing
quality."
The disclosure has many in the music industry commenting.
Irish Folk Dance Company choreographer Lillian Massey said, "It doesn't
surprise me that it happens, but it just shows how commercial the whole
operation has become."
Riverdance has become so successful that there are now eight versions,
official and imitation, touring the world.
Frank Krygowski
In a previous article, mka...@aol.com (MKAldin) says:
>
> Report: Riverdance sound is prerecorded
>
> LONDON, May 31 (UPI) The Irish dance show Riverdance, which swept from Europe
>across the Atlantic to high popularity in the United States in 1994,
>acknowledged the sound of its tap dancing is prerecorded.
...
> The Sunday Times reports that while the dancers still perform all the
>routines, only the audience in the first few rows actually hear live dancing.
>Everyone else hears tapes of prerecorded taps.
> Erskine also says ***much of the singing is also prerecorded.*** [my
>asterisks]
> He said today: "Irish dancing had never reached this sort of audience before
>and the sound of shoes on a stage does not carry. We are simply into providing
>quality."
I saw the show in Cleveland, OH from the very back of the auditorium.
We were seated right next to the sound men.
During the intermission, I asked them about the sound of the tapping, and
they pointed to what they called "shotgun" mikes at the edge of the stage,
which they said were aimed to skim across the stage floor. Now I suppose
they might have been directed to hush the scheme up, but I wonder.
I also thought I recalled reading somewhere about some of the stars
having their shoes miked.
I'd be amazed if pre-recorded taps would not become obviously out of synch
with the dancers' feet in a short time. However, I'd be interested in
hearing more about this.
--
Frank Krygowski ae...@yfn.ysu.edu
Dennis & Donna Francis
MKAldin wrote:
>
> Report: Riverdance sound is prerecorded
>
Riverdance: a Milli Vanilli production.
Dennis
Lanna1
>I also thought I recalled reading somewhere about some of the stars
>having their shoes miked.
>
>
Although I'm not sure if the Riverdance stars employ that particular technique,
I do know it's starting to be used more and more. While watching the Cheiftains
rehearsal before their show here in Cleveland, I saw their two dancers Cara
Butler (Jean's sister) and Donny Golden praticing with shoe mics. These mics
basically consisted of little attachments on the shoes and a cord leading up
the leg (under pantyhose or pants, depending :) to a beltpack clipped/taped on.
I can't remember whether they used floor mics as well or not, but the sound was
quite good.
Alana.
Peter Schug
Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
[snip]
> I'd be amazed if pre-recorded taps would not become obviously out of synch
> with the dancers' feet in a short time. However, I'd be interested in
> hearing more about this.
> --
Pete
Nic Caciappo
That is very funny Dennis. But then I just saw the show, for the purpose
of seeing a live show, now I feel ripped off and I would have done just
as well watching one of the two videos I own. I recall that the Electric
Light Orchestra were sued in the late 70's for pulling this kind of
stunt.
Nic
Amy Battis
In article <6kudis$302$1...@news.ysu.edu>, Frank Krygowski says...
>
>>
>I saw the show in Cleveland, OH from the very back of the auditorium.
>We were seated right next to the sound men.
>
>During the intermission, I asked them about the sound of the tapping, and
>they pointed to what they called "shotgun" mikes at the edge of the stage,
>which they said were aimed to skim across the stage floor. Now I suppose
>they might have been directed to hush the scheme up, but I wonder.
>
>having their shoes miked.
>
>with the dancers' feet in a short time. However, I'd be interested in
>hearing more about this.
>--
first 2. VERY often I noticed the sound coming out of the speakers was NOT
matching what I was seeing onstage, but I attributed it to the sound coming out
and shooting behind me, with the speed of sound slower, etc. etc. But when
you are close enough, you can see and hear the taps in time with each other
(the sound is from being close enough to hear it, not from the speakers).
To confirm what the sound guys said, there are mics on the edge of the stage
about 2 inches off the floor.
Who knows. I don't care so much about the tapping being pre-recorded as I
do the singing. That's egregious. I'd like to hear more about that.
Still won't stop me from going for the 7th time in October!
Amy
--
Please reply to amybatt @ shore.net.
I have set up a phony reply address to deter junk e-mail.
lraven
Pre-recorded taps would certainly make it easier on the sound techs for
that large of a production. Numerous live mikes on floor level can court
disaster for the monitor engineer. Then again, I never heard of using
shotgun mikes, which are extremely uni-directional, for that purpose. Learn
something new every day.
Lisa
Gerry Sullivan
In article <01bd9382$5b9d29e0$0b1b98d0@default>, lraven
As you have no doubt noticed from videos, there do not appear to be monitors
at floor level. They are probably hung and pointing down and will have the
soundtrack, whether live or recorded coming down. It is unlikely that the
taps would be sent to the monitors unless taped. I beleive I was told that
they used radio mikes on the shoes of the principals in the early days. The
stage could also be false. In one of the videos I have seen the camera angle
was from under the stage, therefore there could be PZM or PCC mikes (special
mikes which are omni/partially omni directional and which work in a different
way to dynamic or condenser mics, by using the whole surface of the stage as
part of the mic) in the cavity under the stage.
The mix would be preset in the desk using MIDI/computer interface and the
engineer would "step through" the scenes, just like a lighting engineer.
However, I have no authority to say so, just an informed hunch.
orra best!
--
Gerry Sullivan
PA Audio Services
Phone/Fax +44 (0)141 422 1944
I'd like to say something clever, so if any of the following makes sense I will
have achieved my ambition!!
Thought for the day.....
A conclusion is simply the place where you got
tired of thinking.
Fred Russell
For everyones information,this article is off the Samsons home page and
explains how the sound is picked up and broadcast to the audience at the
theatres.
www.samsontech.com/Wireless/press/riverdance.html
SAMSON AND "RIVERDANCE-THE SHOW" TEAM UP FOR EXTRAORDINARY THEATRICAL
PRESENTATION TOURING THE WORLD.
"Riverdance-The Show," currently on sold-out tours in the U.S.,
Great Britain and Australia with three separate productions, is using
Samson Wireless exclusively.
The three touring productions combined are currently using a total of
over 58 Samson UHF Series 4, UHF Synth Series 5 and UHF Synth Series 6
systems to mike vocals and instruments on stage as well as the taps on
the dancer's shoes using microphones embedded in the heels in
conjunction with beltpack transmitters cleverly concealed on the
dancer's bodies. All of the Samson wireless equipment was provided by
Handheld Audio in Great Britain.
Fred Russell
--
ÐÏ à¡± á
Royce Lerwick
>In article <01bd9382$5b9d29e0$0b1b98d0@default>, lraven
><URL:mailto:lra...@chatlink.com> wrote:
>> Pre-recorded taps would certainly make it easier on the sound techs for
>> that large of a production. Numerous live mikes on floor level can court
>> disaster for the monitor engineer. Then again, I never heard of using
>> shotgun mikes, which are extremely uni-directional, for that purpose. Learn
>> something new every day.
>
>As you have no doubt noticed from videos, there do not appear to be monitors
>at floor level. They are probably hung and pointing down and will have the
>soundtrack, whether live or recorded coming down.
The need for fold-back to dancers is pretty hypothetical, except for
the musical cue to maintain a downbeat. The actual noise made by a
herd of hoofers like that is pretty audible onstage, and if a dancer
can't feel his own feet hitting the stage he should get out of the
business.
>It is unlikely that the
>taps would be sent to the monitors unless taped. I beleive I was told that
>they used radio mikes on the shoes of the principals in the early days. The
>stage could also be false.
I keep hearing that and it's supposed to be in the various literature
out about the history of the troup. I find it very hard to believe
that any mic element could withstand that sort of pounding--violent,
rapid, constant pounding--without either disintigrating or at least
generating a tremendous amount of noise or breakup.
>In one of the videos I have seen the camera angle
>was from under the stage, therefore there could be PZM or PCC mikes (special
>mikes which are omni/partially omni directional and which work in a different
>way to dynamic or condenser mics, by using the whole surface of the stage as
>part of the mic) in the cavity under the stage.
In every video I've seen there seem to be arrayed at the front lip of
the stage a row of boxes/bumps/raised units that might be simple "mike
mouse" camouflage. I don't see any problem at all with a simple mike
mouse picking up the entire corps from the floor wave effect,
especially as the source of the noise is exactly on the floor. That
and a little help from glass/mylar taps in the shoes and it isn't that
hard to pull off I wouldn't think.
>The mix would be preset in the desk using MIDI/computer interface and the
>engineer would "step through" the scenes, just like a lighting engineer.
The mix of the lead dancers may be a bit more problematical, hence the
resorting to "shoe" mics and pretape. Moving through several levels of
stage and varying surfaces might make the mix uneven--though not
inaudible. But the mix is so smooth in all the videos, I wouldn't
doubt the whole thing is just prerecorded and synced to playback.
Royce
lraven
Gerry Sullivan wrote:
> > Pre-recorded taps would certainly make it easier on the sound techs for
> > that large of a production. Numerous live mikes on floor level can
court disaster for the monitor engineer. Then again, I never heard of
using shotgun mikes, which are extremely uni-directional, for that purpose.
Learn something new every day.
>
> As you have no doubt noticed from videos, there do not appear to be
monitors
> at floor level. They are probably hung and pointing down and will have
the
> soundtrack, whether live or recorded coming down.
I don't have the tech info in front of me (and I'm sure it's been published
somewhere ie: Pro Sound News?), but that is something I haven't heard of.
In-ear monitors, yes, floor wedges, in this case, no, but I was thinking
about live musicians, not the dancers. The dancers don't need monitors to
hear themselves, obviously, they would need to hear the music. And since I
just read Royce's post, I needn't say more.
Lisa
TI92MAN
I just read a small article in Newsweek (I believe) telling about the talks and
how the Riverdance people admitted the whole ordeal...what is business coming
to these days?!
TI92MAN, a loyal owner of a TI-92 graphing calculator
(I also own an HP48GX)
------------------------------------------------
Uilleann Pipe addict (but not owner). Just ask me.
Les Smith
In article <3585e119...@news.wavetech.net>, pmle...@wavetech.net (Royce Lerwick) wrote:
..
>
>I think there's a lot more on tape than the taps.
>
>Royce
This past weekend, the CBC played a videotape of "The New Show".
It seemed pretty clear to me that all of the music was pre-recorded.
In particular, the solo fiddler (who showed no evidence of ever having
heard traditional music) appeared to have the ability to play with her
bow held high over her head.
Of course, this is on a videotape with post-production, so it needn't
have any relation to what happens on stage.
The "Old Show" tape had at least a little to do with Celtic music -
there was a marvelous slow air on the pipes, for example.
The "New Show" is ordinary Broadway fare.
cheers,
Les Smith
Karen Parker
Les Smith (fits...@netrover.com) wrote:
: In particular, the solo fiddler (who showed no evidence of ever having
: heard traditional music) appeared to have the ability to play with her
: bow held high over her head.
If this is the solo fiddler I *think* you're referring to, she has most
certainly heard traditional music, and plays it exceptionally! Her name
is Eileen Ivers. I admit, though, Riverdasnce is far from being her best
work.
Karen
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karen Parker | "You can't trample infidels when you're a
par...@ug.cs.dal.ca | tortoise. I mean, all you could do is give
http://ug.cs.dal.ca/~parker | them a meaningful look."
ICQ #6812361 | (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)
Lanna1
>This past weekend, the CBC played a videotape of "The New Show".
>It seemed pretty clear to me that all of the music was pre-recorded.
>heard traditional music) appeared to have the ability to play with her
>bow held high over her head.
>
>have any relation to what happens on stage.
>
>The "Old Show" tape had at least a little to do with Celtic music -
>there was a marvelous slow air on the pipes, for example.
>The "New Show" is ordinary Broadway fare.
Les, I find it very difficult to believe that Eileen Ivers would be in a show
where her performances were pre-taped. That serves absolutely no point - they
pay her big bucks to be there at every show _because_ of the spontaneity and
improv in her performances.
Also, I can't help but respond to your comment about her "never hearing
traditional music before". Eileen was taught my the great Martin Mulvihill, a
noted master of the Irish fiddle. She has won dozens of All-Ireland titles and
places, not only on fiddle(solo and slow air) but also on banjo. She has talent
out the wazoo. Wish she'd share :) Her "untraditional" solo set in Riverdance
is right on par with the rest of the show. The soundtrack is hardly pure sets
of jigs and reels - it's Whelan's own orchestral compositions. Therefore,
Eileen's performances are fittingly less than traditional, mixing trad tunes
with the percussion, and her pedals, etc.
The sort of playing she does is extremely difficult to mime - it would be
totally out of synch. I've seen Riverdance in person, and, I must admit, being
a musician watched the orchestra more than the dancers, and there wasn't any
major discrepancy between bowings and sound that i heard. I think people are
getting a bit paranoid, just because of the whole recorded tap thing... (which,
by the way, I think is totally justified. but that's a whole other post... ;)
Les also comments on the seeming lack of celtic content in the New Show, versus
the Old Show. Specifically, he sites the Old Show's showcasing of the awesome
Davy Spillane on pipes for a slow air. Eileen does a great slow air in the New
show, so you're not lacking that - it may be different than Davy's, but just as
good, IMO.
Riverdance has never been recognized for it's adherance to strict and pure
traditional roots. I don't think it was ever intended to be that. It's a
blending of the Irish traditional with other traditions - russian, spanish,
tap, etc. Irish culture and music is definitely the central focus, the theme of
the show in a way, but that in no way means that the other elements influenced
by and otherwise related to irish music need to be excluded. I thought when I
first heard it , and continue to think, that Riverdance, in all it's
untraditional glory, is a great thing. Even if the taps are recorded... ;)
Pure isn't always better. People tend to be threatened when boundaries are
blurred.
alana.
Nic Caciappo
> >This past weekend, the CBC played a videotape of "The New Show".
> >It seemed pretty clear to me that all of the music was pre-recorded.
> >In particular, the solo fiddler (who showed no evidence of ever having
> >heard traditional music) appeared to have the ability to play with her
> >bow held high over her head.
The Riverdance show I saw about a month ago in Fresno the fiddler was
running up the stairs and never missing a note. I wondered then how that
could happen, now I know. Where do I get my refund?
Nic
Fred Russell
All of the listed solo fiddlers on all touring shows are either Irish,
Scotish or English Celtic Fiddle Champions. So I would be very
interested to know who she was.
Fred R.
Les Smith wrote:
>
> In article <3585e119...@news.wavetech.net>, pmle...@wavetech.net (Royce Lerwick) wrote:
> ..
> >
> >I think there's a lot more on tape than the taps.
> >
> >Royce
>
> This past weekend, the CBC played a videotape of "The New Show".
> It seemed pretty clear to me that all of the music was pre-recorded.
> In particular, the solo fiddler (who showed no evidence of ever having
> heard traditional music) appeared to have the ability to play with her
> bow held high over her head.
>
> Of course, this is on a videotape with post-production, so it needn't
> have any relation to what happens on stage.
>
> The "Old Show" tape had at least a little to do with Celtic music -
> there was a marvelous slow air on the pipes, for example.
> The "New Show" is ordinary Broadway fare.
>
> cheers,
> Les Smith
--
ÐÏ à¡± á
Lanna1
>The Riverdance show I saw about a month ago in Fresno the fiddler was
>running up the stairs and never missing a note. I wondered then how that
>could happen, now I know. Where do I get my refund?
>
>Nic
Please Nic, take a deep breath... This is probably exactly why it wasn't made
known earlier that the taps were recorded. People flippin' freak out,
completely ignoring the fact that it's more practical, and in fact makes a
better show! It's an aspect of show business that, while not altogether too
attractive, certainly is necessary.
As for the musicians being recorded... get real. I seriously do not believe
that that's the case. And yes, I could be wrong, but I doubt it. There's no
reason for that. It'd be like taping a musical like Rent and then just having
people act out to the audio. Completely pointless.
To your comment about the fiddler running up the stairs and not missing a note
- ever heard of Jerry Holland, Natalie McMaster, Ashley McIssac? All are
fantastic fiddlers (critically acclaimed, recorded, won contests, etc etc) who
actually step dance while fiddling. Moving and playing well at the same time
isn't anything new, and is by no means impossible. In the Suzuki classical
tradition, they actually teach kids how to march, etc, while playing.
If, for any reason, the music IS recorded though (something which i still
seriously doubt) i'll be first in line to complain.
but Nic - until you have some sort of REASON to believe that you've been
cheated, orthat your experience has somehow suffered b/c of some music
recording, or you actually have proof that you've been seeing some sort of
fakery, just calm down. Nobody needs a refund... just a reality check.
alana.
Fred Russell
Going along with this reply my daughter does this stepdance thing while
fiddling and has now learnt to do Irish dance while fiddling. Most of
the young stepdancers do this its all part of the novelty type
competition scene now. And none miss a beat all Amateurs so the pro's
should be even better.
fred R
--
ÐÏ à¡± á
Nic Caciappo
Lanna1 wrote:
> Please Nic, take a deep breath... This is probably exactly why it wasn't made
> known earlier that the taps were recorded. People flippin' freak out,
> completely ignoring the fact that it's more practical, and in fact makes a
> better show!
A better show for (perhaps) what you want. When I go to a live concert
performance for *MY* money I want a live concert performance, not tapes.
If I want tape I'll stay home and watch the video.
It's an aspect of show business that, while not altogether too
> attractive, certainly is necessary.
Not with every live show, so why this one? And why isn't there a
disclaimer in the tour book?
> As for the musicians being recorded... get real. I seriously do not believe
> that that's the case. And yes, I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
Doubt all you want. The "strings" that I hear in certain sections are
not the strings that I am familiar with coming from keyboards. Not when
they sound so seperate from the keyboards and the mix.
> To your comment about the fiddler running up the stairs and not missing a note
> - ever heard of Jerry Holland, Natalie McMaster, Ashley McIssac?
<snip of jibber jabber>
The fiddlers you mention are world class. Dancing on a flat surface is
one thing, stomping your foot/feet that's one thing, but RUNNING
upstairs and playing is a different thing all together. It just didn't
seem to me that what she was playing was what she was playing.
> but Nic - until you have some sort of REASON to believe that you've been
> cheated, orthat your experience has somehow suffered b/c of some music
> recording, or you actually have proof that you've been seeing some sort of
> fakery, just calm down. Nobody needs a refund... just a reality check.
Hey Alana, who are you? My mother? Gee... it was my money and my effort
that I spent to go see this show, NOT yours. So there's the reality of
it. Is Riverdance paying you?
You know what I'd pay money to see? I'd like to see a spoof of
Riverdance, one they would call "LiverDance" and all the musicians are
drunk and the audience gets free Guinness and everybody is falling over
themselves but the sound won't matter because it's all on tape and we'd
still have our drink!
Nic
Lanna1
>A better show for (perhaps) what you want. When I go to a live concert
>performance for *MY* money I want a live concert performance, not tapes.
>If I want tape I'll stay home and watch the video.
>
>
And you got a live performance - you weren't watching a big screen showing a
video, were you? it was just one small thing - some extra tapping sounds being
added to fill out sound, so everyone could hear. would you really much rather
have been in the back not hearing any tapping, or perhaps hearing only faintly?
>> It's an aspect of show business that, while not altogether too
>> attractive, certainly is necessary.
>
>Not with every live show, so why this one? And why isn't there a
>disclaimer in the tour book?
>
Not every live show has step dancing. Enough said...
As for the second part of that, I have to agree. While I don't think taping
taps is a big deal, they still should put a disclaimer in the tour book or
something. Good point there.
>> As for the musicians being recorded... get real. I seriously do not believe
>> that that's the case. And yes, I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
>
>Doubt all you want. The "strings" that I hear in certain sections are
>not the strings that I am familiar with coming from keyboards. Not when
>they sound so seperate from the keyboards and the mix.
>
>
As far as I can tell (and please, correct me if I'm wrong) what you're saying
is that the fiddle stands out? She has her own feed - she's supposed to "lead"
in many of the numbers. As a musician (and a fiddler), I've seen the show and
didn't notice a problem - and I was looking!
> The fiddlers you mention are world class. Dancing on a flat surface is
>one thing, stomping your foot/feet that's one thing, but RUNNING
>upstairs and playing is a different thing all together. It just didn't
>seem to me that what she was playing was what she was playing
Sorry for misspelling their names, by the way.. I was typing fast... Nic, are
you a fiddler? Because perhaps you don't realize that it really is not all that
hard for a reasonably advanced fiddler to move alot while playing and not miss
a beat. And for someone of Eileen's caliber, she should be more worried about
tripping than not playing right...
>Hey Alana, who are you? My mother? Gee... it was my money and my effort
>that I spent to go see this show, NOT yours. So there's the reality of
>it. Is Riverdance paying you?
>
>
Wow Nic - maybe your mother should have taught you that's it not necessary to
attack everyone that disagrees with you. My point was to give Riverdance a
chance. People, including you, are jumping to all sorts of conclusions based on
one instance of recording. And no, of course Riverdance isn't paying me. I'm
just not as eager to think bad of everything as some people are. If you're
really that disgruntled with the mere possibility of taped music, then don't go
to the show. Of course that's your option...
>
>You know what I'd pay money to see? I'd like to see a spoof of
>Riverdance, one they would call "LiverDance" and all the musicians are
>drunk and the audience gets free Guinness and everybody is falling over
>themselves but the sound won't matter because it's all on tape and we'd
>still have our drink!
I'm sure you would...
Alana.
mgra...@hotmail.com
In article <358942...@earthlink.net>,
nic...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> You know what I'd pay money to see? I'd like to see a spoof of
> Riverdance, one they would call "LiverDance" and all the musicians are
> drunk and the audience gets free Guinness and everybody is falling over
> themselves but the sound won't matter because it's all on tape and we'd
> still have our drink!
>
>
LiverDance? At home we refer to the show as "Rip Your Pants," but that was
coined when Flatley was the principal dancer.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Chuck Boody
> Lanna1 wrote:
>
>
> The fiddlers you mention are world class. Dancing on a flat surface is
> one thing, stomping your foot/feet that's one thing, but RUNNING
> upstairs and playing is a different thing all together. It just didn't
> seem to me that what she was playing was what she was playing.
A couple of thoughts. In the performance I saw the fiddle player used two
different fiddles. One might have actually been a MIDI fiddle (or just a
differently amiplfied one). And, it can be very difficult to distinguish
in a mic what is coming from the fiddle player and what is coming from a
synth using string sounds. It is quite easy to tell them apart out of the
mix, but somehow the "real" and "fake" fiddles take on a similar cast to
our ears when they are heard together. What you heard could be affected by
either of these things.
As to running around while playing: I have seen John MacCutcheon run
through the audience, up and down stairs, through doorways, and do all
sorts of things while playing solo country fiddle through a wireless mike
setup. He never missed a thing. And, while John is a fine player I don't
believe he is nearly at the level of the woman inf Riverdance. Wouldn't
surprise me at all that it was possible.
As to what you heard nad how it matched up with what you saw I certainly
can't dispute that I wasn't there. However I have heard more than one
performance of the Pagannini Caprices where I would have sworn that the
muci couldn't have come out of one instrument but I knew it was (there was
a reason people believed Pagannini had sold his soul to the devil...).
Lanna1
>LiverDance? At home we refer to the show as "Rip Your Pants," but that was
>coined when Flatley was the principal dancer.
>
>
LOL!! Well, at least Riverdance has sparked some serious name creativity!
alana.
Lanna1
>A couple of thoughts. In the performance I saw the fiddle player used two
>different fiddles. One might have actually been a MIDI fiddle (or just a
>differently amiplfied one). And, it can be very difficult to distinguish
>in a mic what is coming from the fiddle player and what is coming from a
>synth using string sounds. It is quite easy to tell them apart out of the
>mix, but somehow the "real" and "fake" fiddles take on a similar cast to
>our ears when they are heard together. What you heard could be affected by
>either of these things.
Eileen Ivers, the fiddler in question, does indeed perform in the show with two
different fiddles. She has a regular old acoustic one, which she just uses a
pickup on (i believe) for the show, and she also has an electric violin. Last
time I heard, she was going back and forth between two different electrics, one
she has had for years, a blue normal-body one, and a black Zeta (?). And she's
using a wah pedal with the electric at times as well, too. So good point.
>As to what you heard nad how it matched up with what you saw I certainly
>can't dispute that I wasn't there. However I have heard more than one
>performance of the Pagannini Caprices where I would have sworn that the
>muci couldn't have come out of one instrument but I knew it was (there was
>a reason people believed Pagannini had sold his soul to the devil...).
Definitely- our eyes certainly can play tricks on us, especially when viewing a
Riverdance type show in the big halls that it is performed in, and you're
trying to match music to bowings, etc. Concert violinists scare me sometimes,
with their arms which don't even appear to be attached to their bodies they're
moving so fast...
alana.
JAMES E VENNE
Hey Lanna, I like all your response's. I would love to make it to a live
performance of riverdance. I live in mountains of Montana and never get to
see anything. But I've seen the video's of Riverdance and Lord of the
Dance. Flatley maybe arrogant little guy but he can dance. The music,
dancing all of it sends chills down my spine. I'd be hard pressed to sit
still in my seat. Tammy
Lanna1 wrote in message <199806181748...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>one thing, stomping your foot/feet that's one thing, but RUNNING
>>upstairs and playing is a different thing all together. It just didn't
>
>Sorry for misspelling their names, by the way.. I was typing fast... Nic,
are
>you a fiddler? Because perhaps you don't realize that it really is not all
that
>hard for a reasonably advanced fiddler to move alot while playing and not
miss
>a beat. And for someone of Eileen's caliber, she should be more worried
about
>tripping than not playing right...
>
>>Hey Alana, who are you? My mother? Gee... it was my money and my effort
>>that I spent to go see this show, NOT yours. So there's the reality of
>>it. Is Riverdance paying you?
>>
>>
>
>Wow Nic - maybe your mother should have taught you that's it not necessary
to
>attack everyone that disagrees with you. My point was to give Riverdance a
>chance. People, including you, are jumping to all sorts of conclusions
based on
>one instance of recording. And no, of course Riverdance isn't paying me.
I'm
>just not as eager to think bad of everything as some people are. If you're
>really that disgruntled with the mere possibility of taped music, then
don't go
>to the show. Of course that's your option...
>
>>
>>Riverdance, one they would call "LiverDance" and all the musicians are
>>drunk and the audience gets free Guinness and everybody is falling over
>>themselves but the sound won't matter because it's all on tape and we'd
>>still have our drink!
>
Nic Caciappo
Lanna1 wrote:
> And you got a live performance - you weren't watching a big screen showing a
> video, were you? it was just one small thing - some extra tapping sounds being
> added to fill out sound, so everyone could hear.
The taped tapping seems strange to me. I mean, isn't this the 1990's?
They couldn't mic the floor or dancers in some way that it wouldn't pick
up the taps? Would a cast of players of the bodhran have a similar
problem with being heard in the back rows? Gimme a break. They can mic
it and they can place a speaker system in the back area of the theaters
they are staging Riverdance. It's probably just cheaper to run the
tapes.
would you really much rather
> have been in the back not hearing any tapping, or perhaps hearing only faintly?
I was in the back. And the sound seemed out of sync.
Nic, are
> you a fiddler?
No I'm not. Dare I say that I've only learbed to play the bodhran in the
last 6 months? I've also only been interested in Irish or Celtic music
since 1994... partially because of Riverdance and Norwegian fiddlers.
Because perhaps you don't realize that it really is not all that
> hard for a reasonably advanced fiddler to move alot while playing and not miss
> a beat. And for someone of Eileen's caliber, she should be more worried about
> tripping than not playing right...
Perhaps I don't realize that. It seems amazing to me. But the fiddler
you mention, Eileen Ivers, was not the one I saw. Furthur, since were on
the subject, while she may be a good fiddler, her CD releases stink (in
my opinion of course.)
> Wow Nic - maybe your mother should have taught you that's it not necessary to
> attack everyone that disagrees with you.
I think you did first when you suggested that everbody have a reality
check. And then for you to suggest that I shouldn't feel a little
deceived by this "LIVE" Riverdance was sort of dictating how I should
feel about it.
My point was to give Riverdance a
> chance. People, including you, are jumping to all sorts of conclusions based on
> one instance of recording.
*IF* it is indeed one instance of recording. To tell you the truth, I
didn't go to Riverdance only to see (and hear) tapping. I went to hear
the music. When I heard about this news regarding the tapping I also
heard that there was a probability that other aspects of the audio were
"enhanced" for the musicians or singers. What am I supposed to think?
It's not that* important though. I think Riverdance has lost it's imapct
with me since they have "fine-tuned" it. For example I prefered the
"Lift The Wings" song by Aine Ui Cheallaigh before they turned it into
the cheesy duet it is now.
If you're
> really that disgruntled with the mere possibility of taped music, then don't go
> to the show. Of course that's your option...
The point is it wasn't an option when I was deciding to go. They didn't
make it known that there we certain "embellishments" to the audio. And I
wished I knew that the "band" was stuck up in this makeshift attic with
a screen in front of them some of the time so you could hardly make them
out most of the time. Or I would have simply watched the video and saved
a couple hundred dollars.... which is my money.
Nic
Lanna1
>The taped tapping seems strange to me. I mean, isn't this the 1990's?
>They couldn't mic the floor or dancers in some way that it wouldn't pick
>up the taps? Would a cast of players of the bodhran have a similar
>problem with being heard in the back rows? Gimme a break. They can mic
>it and they can place a speaker system in the back area of the theaters
>they are staging Riverdance. It's probably just cheaper to run the
>tapes.
>
>
Yeah, it seems a bit strange to me as well that there was no feasible way for
them to provide decent pure live sound - but the price range really might have
just been unmanageable. I don't know about the feasibility of placing speakers
in the back (it would annoy me to hear sound coming from behind me when the
show was in front of me, however), but you can't just turn tapping sounds up -
you of course risk blowing away the front row, and feedback, and all that, but
I know you recognize that already, so moot point :)
In regards to your bodhran comment, i'm not sure i follow... It's much easier
to capture bodhran on mic than dancers feet..
.> would you really much rather
>> have been in the back not hearing any tapping, or perhaps hearing only
>faintly?
>
>I was in the back. And the sound seemed out of sync.
>
>
Well, being in the back, the lack of synchronation could have been that you
were hearing sound bouncing off the back walls, and sound/light delay and all.
I did experience some sound irritations here in Cleve when I saw the show, but
by listening carefully, it was an obvious problem with the sound bouncing, not
anything with musicians not playing, or anything...
>Nic, are
>> you a fiddler?
>
>No I'm not. Dare I say that I've only learbed to play the bodhran in the
>last 6 months? I've also only been interested in Irish or Celtic music
>since 1994... partially because of Riverdance and Norwegian fiddlers.
Oh, rut ro, Nic :) I don't think we can talk anymore... lol. No really... Now,
not to sound insulting or anything - but it is quite possible that you simply
can't match the bowings (i'm using bowings just as an example here, because
it's what i know) with the music? Like I said, I'm a fiddler, and I can tell
Eileen Ivers is playing the music, not air playing. It's completely obvious.
Maybe, not being a melody player, it's just not apparent to you? Again, not
trying to be insulting...!
>t really is not all that
>> hard for a reasonably advanced fiddler to move alot while playing and not
>miss
>> a beat. And for someone of Eileen's caliber, she should be more worried
>about
>> tripping than not playing right...
>
>Perhaps I don't realize that. It seems amazing to me. But the fiddler
>you mention, Eileen Ivers, was not the one I saw. Furthur, since were on
>the subject, while she may be a good fiddler, her CD releases stink (in
>my opinion of course.)
>
Oh - I guess I had assumed you saw Eileen, for some reason. Where and when did
you see the show, and who was doing the fiddle part? As for Eileen's cds..... I
think you're dead wrong, but I'd be interested in hearing you're reasoning -
too non-trad for you?
>I think you did first when you suggested that everbody have a reality
>check. And then for you to suggest that I shouldn't feel a little
>deceived by this "LIVE" Riverdance was sort of dictating how I should
>feel about it.
I certainly didn't mean to imply that you had no right to be irked about the
taped taping. Bothers me a little, actually. But I also realize the
difficulties in mic'ing stepdancing (though i recognize that it is possible!).
I just think that people's indignation, how ever rightfully felt, is starting
to snowball, and there are assumptions being made about fake music and such. As
a musician, I would be pretty insulted if someone were to suggest that my music
was recorded. I know that the Riverdance band (at least the one doing the
NAmerica tour, the only one i'm really familiar with) works their butts off to
perform to the best of their ability and put on a fantastic show, and it's a
goal i think they reach and indeed surpass. Regardless of whether one likes the
show as an entity or not, i think it's nearly impossible not to recognize that
talent the Riverdance is helping to showcase.
>*IF* it is indeed one instance of recording. To tell you the truth, I
>didn't go to Riverdance only to see (and hear) tapping. I went to hear
>the music. When I heard about this news regarding the tapping I also
>heard that there was a probability that other aspects of the audio were
>"enhanced" for the musicians or singers. What am I supposed to think?
I think that "enhanced" is a far cry from playing to a recording. But I'm not
sure what they meant by enhanced, either.....what article was this?
The only other similar thing I've heard was that the drummers (the ones that
stand on the side of the stage for a few numbers and hold those big arsed
drums) were playing
to click tracks, but I certainly don't know the validity of that...
>I think Riverdance has lost it's imapct
>with me since they have "fine-tuned" it. For example I prefered the
>"Lift The Wings" song by Aine Ui Cheallaigh before they turned it into
>the cheesy duet it is now.
Oh geez... don't get me started on that. I hadn't seen the video of the New
Show before I saw Riverdance live (still haven't, actually), but in comparing
the Old Show video to what I saw myself, I found that duet to be just
incredibly corny, despite the nice voices sported by both parties, and was in
no way an improvement on Aine Ui Cheallaigh's version. The duet just seemed
like such... broadway fluff to me, for lack of better words....
>The point is it wasn't an option when I was deciding to go. They didn't
>make it known that there we certain "embellishments" to the audio.
As I agreed with you before, I do think a disclaimer is a good idea. Not like
there's many potential attendees who don't know the situation by now...
> And I
>wished I knew that the "band" was stuck up in this makeshift attic with
>a screen in front of them some of the time so you could hardly make them
>out most of the time.
Wow. Didn't experience that. Now I'm _really_ interested in knowing
where/when/what company you saw. The band at my show sat on a sort mini wing to
the left of the stage, quite viewable, actually, for the most part. Wish I
could've gotten orchestra seats though, or that lady with the huge 80's hair
hadn't sat in front of me... :/
alana.
Frank Krygowski
In a previous article, lan...@aol.com (Lanna1) says:
>Well, being in the back, the lack of synchronation could have been that you
>were hearing sound bouncing off the back walls, and sound/light delay and all.
>I did experience some sound irritations here in Cleve when I saw the show, but
>by listening carefully, it was an obvious problem with the sound bouncing, not
>anything with musicians not playing, or anything...
...
>
>The only other similar thing I've heard was that the drummers (the ones that
>stand on the side of the stage for a few numbers and hold those big arsed
>drums) were playing
>to click tracks, but I certainly don't know the validity of that...
...
>> And I
>>wished I knew that the "band" was stuck up in this makeshift attic with
>>a screen in front of them some of the time so you could hardly make them
>>out most of the time.
>
>Wow. Didn't experience that. Now I'm _really_ interested in knowing
>where/when/what company you saw. The band at my show sat on a sort mini wing to
>the left of the stage, quite viewable, actually, for the most part....
I too saw Riverdance in Cleveland. My observations:
The band was clearly visible. I (and some of my friends) spent some time
watching them through binoculars. If they were faking, I'll eat my fiddle.
Likewise, the rock-duet between Eileen Ivers and the drummer (as one
example) was absolutely live and very spontaneous. Either that, or
the two have spent years in rehearsing how to fool the crowd with perfectly
timed bow strokes, percussion hits, facial expressions, body language
etc. Sorry, I'm betting they've been playing music. It's easier.
If the drummers played to click tracks - is that a problem? I've done
recording work in a studio just twice, but both times I found it helpful
to have an electronic metronome silently showing me the beat. I'd
say that, or the click track, is no more objectionable than an orchestra
conductor waving his baton - and nobody considers _that_ cheating.
I've seen Ashley MacIsaac stepdance rapidly while fiddling furiously.
I've seen it in a small venue - there was no virtual reality involved.
It sounds to me that Riverdance is what it seems, except for some
of the tap noise.
--
Frank Krygowski ae...@yfn.ysu.edu
Lanna1
>I too saw Riverdance in Cleveland. My observations:
>
>
Woo hoo! Another Clevelander!
>The band was clearly visible. I (and some of my friends) spent some time
>watching them through binoculars. If they were faking, I'll eat my fiddle.
Defnitiely. They aren't going to put a miming band right up front for all to
see.
>Likewise, the rock-duet between Eileen Ivers and the drummer (as one
>example) was absolutely live and very spontaneous. Either that, or
>the two have spent years in rehearsing how to fool the crowd with perfectly
>timed bow strokes, percussion hits, facial expressions, body language
>etc. Sorry, I'm betting they've been playing music. It's easier.
>
>
Yup - my point exactly. That was awesome too, wasn't it?
>If the drummers played to click tracks - is that a problem? I've done
>recording work in a studio just twice, but both times I found it helpful
>to have an electronic metronome silently showing me the beat. I'd
>say that, or the click track, is no more objectionable than an orchestra
>conductor waving his baton - and nobody considers _that_ cheating.
>
>
I don't think that's a problem at all. The way the drummers were separated
across the stage, it makes sense. Lots of people, including ceili bands, use
metronomes when recording and stuff, so perfectly legitimate.
>I've seen Ashley MacIsaac stepdance rapidly while fiddling furiously.
>I've seen it in a small venue - there was no virtual reality involved.
>It sounds to me that Riverdance is what it seems, except for some
>of the tap noise.
>
>--
Thanks Frank. I completely agree.
alana.
Lanna1
>Hey Lanna, I like all your response's. I would love to make it to a live
>performance of riverdance. I live in mountains of Montana and never get to
>see anything. But I've seen the video's of Riverdance and Lord of the
>Dance. Flatley maybe arrogant little guy but he can dance. The music,
>dancing all of it sends chills down my spine. I'd be hard pressed to sit
>still in my seat. Tammy
Hey Tammy - thanks :)
That's too bad that you haven't had a chance to see Riverdance, because of your
location and all. Maybe next time through your neck of the woods?
I vastly prefer Riverdance to LOTD. Flately's show is just too..... shall we
say slutty? Not to mention of lower quality altogether. Actually, I think the
dancers in LOTD are more disciplined, and make fewer mistakes (although the RD
crew aren't exactly prone to mistakes themselves!), but the musicianship is
just... eek. Frightens me :) I don't know if they're better outside the show,
but geez... ;) The music and musician in RD is a hundred times better, really.
IMO, of course...
And yes, Flatley is beyond talented, ego or not. And you know, what he says is
right - until someone can out-dance or out-tap him, he is the best in that
respect, immodest or no.
alana.