ROOM ZERO: The Dialectical Worlds of Live Performance and the Recording Studio in Collegiate A Cappella

Mark Manley

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the Distinguished Majors Program

for the degree of

Bachelor of Arts (Music)

in The University of Virginia

2002

Thesis Committee:

Professor Kyra D. Gaunt, chair

Professor Elizabeth Hudson

“I'm rockin' the suburbs

I take the checks and face the facts

That some producer with computers

Fixes all my shitty tracks”

--Ben Folds, “Rockin the Suburbs”

This paper explores the fundamental issues that collegiate a cappella groups face in the recording studio. There is a great deal of debate-between groups, within groups, in online communities, and in the press-regarding how the human voice (the seeming essence of a cappella music) can be digitally manipulated in the recording studio. Significant changes in technology have largely rendered an area of human skill, the ability (or inability) to control pitch, to a level of incidental importance. In the last decade, the aesthetic boundaries regarding the sound of a cappella music have been increasingly challenged, especially as the sound of the singing voice has been used as a means for imitating instrumental sounds, including feedback and other “noises” found in popular music. Many have expressed a kind of cognitive dissonance over the disparity between the sound of a given groups' live performances vs. the sound of the same group's studio-recorded album, a phenomenon often reduced to an issue of money.

I plan to examine these issues through a number of overlapping frameworks. This examination is based on 1) my own experiences recording and producing AVP's most recent album, Room Zero, released in the fall of 2001; 2) an online survey I created to capture a variety of opinions that my own experience and locale could not provide; and 3) from scholarly research about recording technology and musical aesthetics. To convey my findings I willrelate a series of stories that trace the contradictions of recent developments in recording technology in the genre of collegiate a cappella.

My production experience with the a cappella group, the Academical Village People, (AVP) began in late July 2001, or at least, the tricky part did. For over a year, the group, under my direction, had recorded track after track at the local recording studio, Virginia Arts Recording. Now it was time for the next stage: mixing the tracks. The decision to take the tracks to a studio other than Virginia Arts, had been a conscience-taxing one, but it had been done. The tracks would be mixed at Bill Hare Productions outside of San Francisco, California-a facility whose advantages included not just the highly recommended skill of engineer, Bill Hare, but also the availability of some of latest recording studio technology.

Not long after the tapes of our raw recorded tracks arrived in San Francisco, I found myself driving home from a tiresome summer job in the blanket-like DC heat, singing along to the radio. While surfing the dials, I happened upon 99.1 WHFS FM, when the heard the DJ say: “Well I've got some good news out there for all you Ben Folds Five listeners-Ben's new album is coming out in September. And in even better news, we're going to go ahead and play the first single, which is the title track, 'Rockin the Suburbs.'” I'm a big Ben Folds Five fan, so I cranked up the volume and slowed the car to a crawl, so as to reduce engine noise so I could make out the words. I was able to catch, despite my broken speakers, a line or two about “producers fixing shitty tracks,” as well as the song's less than subtle message: Current artists lack musical talent and rely on experts and technology to make them sound decent.

I loved it. Not only did it make me laugh, it made me feel like I was on the right side-I got it. The song was the perfect parody of pop puree-of billion-copy-selling, talentless squads of drivel-mongers, unworthy of the title “Artist” or “Musician.” The piece had left an indelible impression on me, not simply as a great piece of satire, but as an ideological war cry. The lyrics stood for the values of authenticity, talent, and seemed wholly anti-record-industry. I felt like I was taking sidesin an ethical battle. Whatever I was thinking exactly, I recognized that my own stance on such issues would be vital to framing my thesis regarding recording technology and its ethical issues-I, too, was a participant, and not merely an objective observer. For my thesis to have any significance, I would have to take sides. But choosing one or the other would soon appear murkier than I could have imagined.

September eventually came, and on the day I had gone to buy the new Ben Folds' album “Rockin the Suburbs,” I returned to the music office to find six large, heavy boxes containing 1000 copies of AVP's new album, Room Zero, sitting on the floor. As I hauled the boxes out of the office, the lyrics to the song, “Rockin the Suburbs” were ringing in my headyet again, only this time I felt a strange uneasiness. To a significant degree, the new AVP album was guilty of using some of the same computerized techniques employed by some of the notably less-skillful groups on pop radio. We used pitch correction software on our voices; we made drum loops instead of recording all the individual notes one by one; we overdubbed our voices singing, then overdubbed again-layering the voices in duplicates, triplicates, or even quadruplicates. Did I have a right to laugh anymore?

My saving grace came later that day as I listened to the rest of the Ben Folds album. The remainder of the album was not filled with authentic, true-to-live- performance cuts. In fact, the album is characterized by the same computer-based sound editing that Ben had been parodying in “Rockin the Suburbs.” Similar to the way I had recorded a number of tracks on Room Zero that I normally did not perform in AVP's live shows, Ben had played nearly all the parts of all the instruments on his album-acting essentially as a one-man band. I heard massive overdubs using the same voice (his own), synthesized, looped drums, squeeky clean intonation-it was all there, the very things he was simultaneously poking fun at in others' music. Was Ben Folds laughing at other technologically enhanced musicians? Or was he really laughing at himself?

Whatever the case, it was comforting for me to see another person out there in the big bad world of recording production who was attempting to reconcile himself with the discomfort that comes with choosing between a record's listenability over its live-performance authenticity, production over talent, technological innovation over tradition, and studio sound versus performance sound. I couldn't help but think back to myprevious-held opinions about recording, and how much they'd changed since I first joined AVP.

In the fall of 1998, AVP was made up of fifteen guys who came together multiple times a week to perform a variety of mostly Top 40/Pop tunes a cappella -using just their voices and bodies. AVP's strength had always laid in its energetic, performance-based, live shows that fused terrific singing with humorous, albeit sometimes distracting, stage antics. I remember wanting to join the group primarily because itshirked the trappings of the a cappella stereotype in nearly all respects-it was more like a rock band than any sort of choir or glee club. The first performance I saw was AVP's version of “Sweet Child O Mine” by Guns N Roses-which featured both a tongue-in-cheek Axl Rose impression by the soloist and a surprisingly accurate duet that emulated the song's incredible guitar melody by splitting the difficult interval jumps among two voices. Next was a group-composed parody of “Maneater” by Hall and Oates that poked fun at the Lewinsky scandal and John Wayne Bobbitt among others. Clad in blue-collar, working class “garage” shirts complete with personalized name tags, AVP's attire represented the perfect counterpart to the elitist, southern, traditional look of white-collared shirts and bow ties that all the guys in my dorm seemed be sporting-a homogeneity to which I didn't subscribe. As I watched dormmates become involved with various Greek fraternities, AVP ultimately became my own kind of fraternity, an organization that afforded me a means to thrive simultaneously within and apart from the everyday guy culture at UVA.

Before a month had passed, I learned that AVP would soon be heading into a recording studio to lay down tracks for the new album. It was my first real experience in a professional recording studio-and I sang, as many first-timers do, with a timid and inexperienced sound. A number of my parts were subsequently overdubbed by other singers in the group, who were much more capable than I was at that time. Thus, I spent a good bit of time in the control booth, listening to the older and more experienced members lay down track after track. There were flashing lights and little metal boxes, and an enormous mixing board. All kinds of technologicaldevices were involved which seemed to work in tandem like a living organism. Yet, for me, one form of studio technology stood apart from the rest. Just to the right of the Paul Brier, the studio engineer, sat the pitch corrector. This machine was constantly being fiddled with like a car engine by a mechanic-knobs turned, buttons pressed, LCD display rotating. Often it would produce ornery and warbled results-other times it could perform seemingly magical feats of vocal brilliance. High notes that were normally wild and difficult to control were put at bay with slightly alarming perfection. The machine seemed to de-humanize the voices coming through it-a quality no other machine in the room possessed.

Like other a cappella groups at colleges nationwide, AVP decided to record the bulk of the music by isolating voice parts on distinct tracks-which meant that at any given moment in our recording session it was far more likely that I would be found sitting outside the booth reading a book or observing things in the control room than actually singing for the record. This sounds problematic, but this experience sounds perfectly familiar to many a cappella members involved with studio recordings.

Eventually I was doing more than my fair share of the singingon subsequent recordings. Having taken over as music director in the fall of my second year, I was a more confident singer. By fall of 2000, I was playing a dominant role in the decision making process that producing an AVP album entails. While creatingan album was ultimately a group effort, the music director spearheaded the important questions: What would our conceptual and stylistic approach be for the upcoming album? How were we to make it better and distinct from our last effort? What kinds of limitations did we have relative to sound, money, and technologically, and how were we to get around them?

David Theberge wrote there is a “growing awareness among many musicians that artistic practice has become deeply implicated with a particular version of the notion of technological 'progress', and that along with this ideology comes a number of disturbing musical [and] economic…dilemmas (1997, 4-5).” As music director, I bought a number of acclaimed collegiate and professional a cappella albums, including Iowa State Shaggy Boys: “Take Luck”, Tufts Beelzebubs: “Next” and “Infinity”, and Five O'Clock Shadow, “Wonders of the World” (Hot Lips Records, 2000), that I felt embodied this new relationship to technology and carved out a unique path in the negotiation of the aforementioned dilemma and played them for the group. Despite the somewhat mixed reactions to the sounds they'd never before associated with a cappella (e.g. distorted guitar solos, perfectly cropped cut-offs, looped vocal percussion), the group seemed in favor of trying a digital approach for our upcoming album.

As mentioned previously, the decision to take the tracks to Bill Hare Productions rather than to Virginia Arts was, ultimately, a decision regarding what kind of recording technology we wanted to use. At Bill Hare's studio, we would have the opportunity to utilize digital sound editing software (namely, ProTools), whereas at Virginia Arts we would not. ProTools is becoming, if not already, the “industry standard” Eskow, Gary Mix, Sept. 1, 2000. “NY Metro Report” p218 in recording studios globally. By representing the sound as a visual waveform on a computer screen, a mixing engineer is afforded greater control over the audio that is captured on tape. The advantages of such technology have been widely discussed. The particular sentiment expressed by engineer John Hanti represents the views of an increasing majority in the recording business: “You can work very affordably in Pro Tools, and it offers ease of use and tremendous editing capabilities.” ibid. The first advantage I saw to the digital system was superior capability, ease, and cost-efficiency of fixing mistakes-something AVP, like most collegiate a cappella groups, would have plenty of. Second, ProTools makes the manipulation of a vocal with effects (such as distortion) easier, and can allow for the creation of new timbres Taylor, Chuck. “Do Vocal Effects Go Too Far?” in Billboard, Dec 30, 2000 v112 i53 p5. The utilization of a ProTools mixing facility became a paramount concern as we embarked on this new project.

Keeping up with technology had been a particular concern for me, in the wake of regrets I had following the completion of the AVP's previous album I'd helped produce. While our fourth album,Gracias, Por Favor! featured, arguably, some of the best, most charismatic, and energetic singing of any AVP recording to date, there were a number of mixing decisions made by myself and others that resulted in a less-than optimal sound. Essentially, we embodied Theberge's notion that “technological innovation is not only a response to musicians' needs,” such as pitch correction hardware (which we did not hesitate to use), “but also a driving force with which musicians must contend (1995, 3).” Our contention was in part a reaction to what we feared was a growing trend in collegiate a cappella albums toward the use-or, as we believed at the time, overuse-of the heavierside of vocal effects. We wanted to stay true to the sound of live human voices as possible by keeping a very low bass mix, remaining free of bass octavizers a bass octavizer (or, octaver) acts as a simultaneous dropping of a singer's voice an octave below the sung pitch, often resulting in a very thick, bass-guitar-like sound, looping or sampling of vocal percussion A practice facilitated by ProTools (or any similar software) of either cutting and pasting one or a few bars of recorded vocal percussion-creating, in essence a drum loop; or the practice of isolating each vocal percussion “drum” sound individually and programming in , and shying away from distortion or other conspicuous effects.

In no way was Gracias, Por Favor! a failure. In fact, quite the opposite. The intonation is excellent, the energy and blend consistently strong, and the quality of the soloists comparable to the level of any of the best collegiate albums up tothat point. Yet, every time I listened to the album since its release in April 2001, it was hard to ignore the lack of depth-the thin, choir-trying-to-sound-like-a-band effect (a sound prevalent in the majority of collegiate a cappella) that characterized many of the tracks. Most tracks lacked a thick, loud bass presence, which resulted in a textual imbalance-especially when compared to the original instrumental songs we were emulating, such as “All Mixed Up” by 311. My sentiments were shared by others in the group and were later echoed by Jonathan Sears, a reviewer for the Recorded A Cappella Review Board (RARB). In his review of Gracias, he pointed to a “lack of a studio bass effect in most tracks,” [emph. added]. He felt “only able to discern a true bass presence on a select few of the tracks on this album.” These days, an album full of a cappella pop covers that seeks to do justice to the original works often requires the technological deepening of a bass voice in order to compete with the bass-line heavy mixes of much of today's guitar-based pop, hip-hop, and R&B music-the primary source of material for collegiate a cappella The claim that a cappella groups have, since 1990 or so, gravitated towards a repertoire of exclusively popular music like that found on the current radio-as opposedto the pre-90s normative mix of glee/classical, barbershop, oldies, and doo-wop, with the occasional popular radio hit-was solidified in the survey. In checking off the primary stylistic sources of their group's repertoire, nearly 90% (87 of the 98) of collegiate respondents indicated “Pop/Top 40”, while a mere 5% claimed to perform “Barbershop.” Most groups up to and before 1990 or so performed at least one or two Doo-Wop songs. Only 14% of the collegiate respondents indicated that Doo-wop was a primary source of their material. Vocal Jazz, another example of pre-1990s typical collegiate a cappella material, was claimed by only 2% of respondents.. Increasingly, critics and fans of pop-repertoire a cappella have come to expect a bass-heavy mix Specifically, survey results indicated greater approval of bass octavizers than disapproval. Question 2.09: “In a cappella, the use of a bass octavizer (to deepen and thicken the tone of a bass voice) is cheating. [Pick One:Definitely Yes, Yes, Neutral, No, Definitely Not]” The majority, 49%, indicated either No, or Definitely No, while 32% indicated Yes, or Definitely Yes.. On a larger scale, the early '90s mix Sears described on Gracias would seem to indict any pop-oriented collegiate album lacking such effects as anachronistic.

The Gracias review did not come into play during the planning stages of “Room Zero.” The review was published on August 22, 2001-practically the same day we received the final CD master of Room Zero for approval before sending it to be pressed and packaged. Long before the review was ever published, we realized that extensive multi-tracking was not enough to create the “studio sound” we were looking for. We would need the audible presence of studio effects that would help to create a greater variety of sounds for the album as a whole-making each track more distinct from the other. Yet, the question remained: Exactly how far should we take it?

AVP was by no means alone in grappling with such aesthetic decisions, nor were we the first. Since the inception of the a cappella newsgroup online, rec.music.a-cappella (or RMAC) years ago, there has been a steady flow of threads discussing, but more often than not, debating issues endemic to a cappella recording practices. Like any genre of music, the key questions have attempted to define the authentic boundaries of the aesthetic. How many computer-generated effects andloops does a recording have to have before it ceases to “be a cappella”? Issues of agency-who's producing the types of sound heard on a given recording? Was a machine pulling more than its fair share of the weight?

Disagreement with the community regarding questions of authenticity and live performance integrity abound to this day. While many in a RMAC posting, or even in casual conversation, have discussed the trend towards technology in a cappella recording, to a large degree it has been difficult todiscern clearly just how this trend has unfolded. I speculated that, perhaps, this trend was a myth-after all, the vast majority of songs on a given BOCA (Best of College A Capella) CD have always remained fairly “natural” or minimally effected by technology. There was a widely held assumption that most collegiate groups were spending more and more money each year in producing albums. Was this true? If so, to what end?

Facing a dearth of quantitative data, as well as a lack of publications regarding trends in collegiate a cappella recording, I created a survey in January 2002 in order to approximate people's views in the online a cappella community regarding a cappella's relationship with technology. In addition to posting a message on rec.music.a-cappella containing a URL Link to the survey site, I individually emailed about one hundred collegiate a cappella groups-groups from a wide range national recognition and experience. The survey was taken by 151 respondents from the national a cappella community, 98 of whom identified themselves as currently singing with a collegiate a cappella group. These 98 collegiate respondents represented 59 different groups Of the respondents currently singing with a collegiate collegiate group, 44% sing with all-male groups, 16% from all-female, and 40% from mixed gender groups. . While answers in the survey reflected significant areas of consensus, the issues of how much money is spent on recording, the emulation of instrumental effects by man and machine, and the use of pitch correction software, reflected dissent.

******

MONEY

In the first section of my survey, Question 1.10: Did your group spend more or less or the same amount on your most recent album than on your previous one? was addressed by 82 respondents currently in collegiate a cappella groups. Sixty-three percent (52) indicated that they spent more on their latest album than the previous one. Only 7% percent (6) indicated that their group had spent less, while 15% (12) spent the same and the remaining 15% (12) did not know. These numbers appear to confirm the widely held belief that many collegiate a cappella groups are spending more time and money in producing their albums. This trend reflects my experience with AVP. Following our first album, Hoos Your Daddy? (1995), each successive album had cost the group more money to produce. By our third album, Calabash!, it had become acceptable for us to spend more than the average collegiate group on all aspects of production-laying down tracks, mixing, mastering, printing and packaging In producing an album, many groups spend just as much money, if not more, than many amateur bands or artists who make high-quality demo albums or songs. Of the 94 respondents who opted to answer the question of “how much did your group typically spend on total recordings costs for your last album?” the largest percentage (25%)was indicated that their groups spent between $6000 and $10000 on their last album. Another 25% indicated that their group spent over $10000 (7% over $20000). The remaining 40% spent less than $6000 on the last album, with the majority of this group averaging about $3000 per album.. As we began Room Zero, I suggested to the group that if we were to spend an extra few thousand dollars in recording time that wecould create a substantially more professional sounding product, which would, by virtue of being a better listen, sell more copies.

Most respondents were reluctant to accept the notion that more money spent in the studio was necessarily tantamount to a better sound. This came as no surprise, since singers, like the majority of musicians, find it disconcerting to think that talent can be fabricated in a studio setting, if enough money is thrown in. Of the 151 survey respondents who answered Question 2.18: The more money a group spends producing their CD, the more it will necessarily sound better. [Select one: Always, Most of the Time, Sometimes, Rarely, Never], the majority (50%) responded “Sometimes.” A comparable percentage (44%) felt that more money spent produced a better sound “most of the time,” reflecting a split among the respondents. Many readers will find it interesting to note that a cappella guru and recently-retired President and Founder of the Contemporary A Cappella Society of America (CASA), Deke Sharon, was the only respondent who said that it is “always” the case that the more money a group spends on an album, the better it will sound.

Regardless of how much or how little money a group spends, there will still remain those who contend that often an expensively produced recording “[does] not necessarily reflect the musical talents of the group but rather their bank accounts.” Kolko, Valerie. Response to Question 3.01. However, it is far easier for a group with a terrific live sound to cheaply record a CD than a group with a poorlive sound to expensively record themselves into a dramatically better sound. While there exist a number of collegiate groups that receive external sources of funding, the primary method groups generate money is through live performances. Any group thatlacks a sizeable audience base as the result of either being new to the scene or being poor in performance will lack cash flow from ticket sales and paid gigs, which will, in turn, deprive the group of extra money for recording time. Ultimately, as survey respondent David Kang, who sings with Virginia Tech's Juxtaposition, so candidly stated, “if your group sucks live there is a good possibility you won't sell many CD's even if its great…That's their first impression its doubtful they will shell out money for your CD.” Kang, David. Response to Question 3.01 As fall approached, and with it the possibility for making new fans, the group became more steadfast in its resolve to sound better-for we knew that Room Zero could not possibly sell itself without the support of an excellent live show. Ironically, by investing more money in our recording, we improved our live performance immeasurably.

*****

EFFECTS

For me, spending more money didn't seem the lone solution to AVP's challenge of how to make a different and better album. Having grown accustomed to the wide variety of effects I'd heard used on albums by professional a cappella groups, as well as a few other collegiate groups, Am referring specifically to pro albums by Five O'Clock Shadow: Wonders of the World; Cadence: Frost-Free; Housejacks: Drive. Collegiate: Iowa State Shaggy Boys: Take Luck. USC Sirens: Surreal I began to feel as though some of the heavier effects would bring new life to AVP's recording endeavors. An album with lots of effects would be the first of its kind at UVA, and it would create a buzz within and beyond the a cappella community at school. The idea of creating controversy was as much about the sound as it was about a marketing strategy. What was ultimately important to the group was putting out an album that sounded distinct from the previous one-that didn't sound similar to albums produced by the two other all-male a cappella groups at our school The Hullabahoos and Virginia Gentlemen are also all-male a cappella groups at UVA.. We had come to the realization as a group that, while AVP had always prided itself on its unique stage presence that seemed to separate its live performances from other groups, the group's recordings had yet to reflect the group's idiosyncratic quality.

I also had very personal reasons for wanting to take a different approach. In the year following the release of Gracias, I'd undergone a seismic change in attitude regarding the way a cappella should (or could) sound. When BOCA 2001 was released in late winter/early spring of 2001, I had taken major issue with one particular selection-a version of Eve 6's “Inside Out” by the University of Illinois Xtension Chords This song is featured on their album, XAppeal. A clip is available online at http://www.vocomotion.com/xtension1.phtml. The song featured particularly thick vocal effects-a human voice was hard to discern amid the effects akin to distorted guitars. Aside from the soloist, it was difficult to describe anything about the song's overall sound as characteristically “a cappella” in any way. Admittedly, compounding my frustration was the fact that the song appeared to have beat my own solo, “Wicked Game,” which had been selected for the initial short list of twenty-one songs for BOCA 2001. I was hardly alone in my disgust. I remember feeling relieved when I read RARB reviewer Jonathan Sears' critical comments regarding “Inside Out” which seemed to validate my extremely biased opinions at the time:

The Xtension Chords fall flat on their face with Inside Out. Aside from the soloist, this track is extremely obnoxious and unpleasant, a quick fast forward for this reviewer. When you imitate a guitar sound in the future, please take the time to study the instrument so that you eliminate the sloppy notes and amateur feel. It's not enough to just make a bunch of sounds and then distort them with software to develop a guitar sound; you need to stylistically perform the part. Oh, and don't put it so far out in the mix that it covers everything else in the song. Sears, Jonathan. RARB review. Apr 25, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/215.html

A few months later, in his review of BOCA 2001 RARB Reviewer, Chris Sauliner, expressed a similar concern about, as he termed it, the “plugged-in” sound of some of the tracks on the album, exemplified in the Xtension Chords' track:

They use effects that are not available for most college groups to use live, creating an extremely distorted background. If you listen closely, you'll hear that it is done to hide a weak arrangement. This type of track always make [sic] me wonder what the group does with the song live. I would much rather hear tracks like Happy Together that present a more honest collegiate sound. Sauliner, Chris. RARB review. July 9, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/236.html

Sauliner's last comment made me wonder about the nature of an “honest collegiate sound.” After all, the use of milder effects such as reverb and chorus are not a part of any group's natural live sound, unless each performance is amplified by microphones, or the group restricts itself to performing in particularly resonant locations. The issue was addressed in a number of questions in my survey. For example, the results from Question 2.7: In a cappella, the use of very conspicuous studio effects (e.g., guitar-like distortion, wah-wah, heavy flange) is cheating. [Pick one: Definitely Yes, Yes, Neutral, No, Definitely Not], indicated No, or Definitely No from nearly half of all respondents (49%), while Yes, or Definitely Yes was indicated by slightly over one-third (32%). These numbers suggest that, while distortion and other heavy effects may be represent an a cappella archetype (i.e. an “honest collegiate sound”), a majority do not consider it “cheating.”

My perception of “Inside Out” changed dramatically the more I listened other songs on BOCA 2001. As each track rolled by, characterized by sounds easily distinguishable as voices, the more I found myself looking forward to the change in timbre the song afforded. After an album full of “oohs” and “aahs” the heavy distortion present on “Inside Out” track (and, to a lesser degree, on “Owner of a Lonely Heart” by Iowa State Shaggy Boys) was a welcome break from the sameness a cappella groups produce. Admittedly, I wouldn't want to hear an entire a cappella album full of songs that sound exactly like “Inside Out”-but, then again, neither would I want to hear an album that contained a set of songs with the exact same mix and sonic atmosphere.

Ultimately, I share the opinions expressed by Bob McSwain in his review of BOCA 2001:

I'm sure we all realize thatthere is only so much that the human voice can do, even when modestly embellished by electronics. What can the new millennium offer us that the previous one has not already presented? … [BOCA 2001] demonstrates that each year the college scene is moving forward. McSwain, Bob. RARB review. July 9, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/236.html

I've come to believe productions such as “Inside Out” will be what saves a cappella from its sameness of sound; it will be the very thing that allows recorded a cappella albums to thrive with a wide variety of songs that utilize as-yet-untapped tunes-songs that are often said “cannot be done a cappella” due to the presence of distorted guitars or other inimitable sounds. Such limitations present a double bind for repertoire decisions by collegiate a cappella groups. On one hand, groups are often criticized for the inclusion of redundant, tiresome renditions of often-covered material. Elie Landau wrote in his review of the Virginia Gentlemen's Bizzaro World, “Why do we need yet another version of With or Without You and Mercy Street?” Landau, Elie. RARB review. March 22, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/206.html Yet, simultaneously, groups are discouraged (as exemplified by opinions of “Inside Out”) from performing songs that are characterized by sounds endemic to hard rock, grunge or punk-unless created, often poorly, by vocal imitations free of effects. Even Bobby McFerrin, one of the most innovative a cappella artists known for his fantastic imitations of instruments without the use of technology, can be heard using a distortion effect in his guitar solo on “Sunshine of Your Love” from the album Simple Pleasures (EMI, Manhattan Records; 1988) Knave, Brian. “Hella A Cappella.” Article in Electronic Musician. Sept 1, 1999..

Experimenting with effects is a solution to the problematic sameness of collegiate a cappella recordings. Groups can take their sound in new directions. They can go beyond the claim that most college recordings are “valuable because [they are] unique to that group at that university.” Martin, Greg. Response to Question 2.11 As noted previously, the music usually covered by collegiate a cappella groups has tended towards pop music, usually Top 40-from the past two decades. Groups are no longer tackling choral arrangements. Instead, they engage in the imitation of loud rock bands, ultra-famous artists backed by big-time hit-making producers, highly percussive beats with looped accompaniment, music that features samples, multiple overdubs upon multiple overdubs. It would follow that it the creation of collegiate a cappella recordings should be based on a pop music sensibility versus classic sensibility. As Steve Jones points out in Rock Formation (1992), “mixing…is what distinguishes popular music from classical music.” Chanan, Michael. “Repeated Takes: A Short History of Recording and its Effects on Music.” Verso, London. 1995. Lastly, effects allow for a cappella to escape from the mostly inarguable claim that, as Mike Sugarbaker points out in his a cappella diatribe, “A Cappella Hell” (1996), the average song is not “immeasurably improved when transposed from standard rock instrumentation to the sound of a bunch of white kids going 'doo', 'doo', 'doo'.” Sugarbaker, Mike “Tales from the dork side (A Cappella Hell).” http://www.gibberish.com/tales/100596.html

******

PITCH CORRECTION

One of the main problems that crop up for collegiate a cappella groups-or for that matter, any music that contains vocals-is the inevitability of errors in pitch. It is difficult to deny; because singers are only human, there is often a “fine line between the qualities (including “flaws”) that make can make a track warm and soulful and those that are just plain wrong.” Darling, David. “Hands On: Auto-Tune 3 - The Pitch Doctor is in.” in Home Recording, Jan. 2002, p44 A capella music, like barbershop before it, or even earlier, the monophonic religious chants performed by monks “in the style of the chapel” (from which a cappella gets its name Bloom, Warren. Response to Question 2.11) requires intense control of pitch on the part of the singer. As anyone with a decent ear will attest, hearing voices that are out of tune-even for a moment, is an unpleasant and aggravating experience.

Just how much is pitch the paramount concern in a cappella music? Of all the answers to the open-ended Question 3.3: Think of one of your LEAST favorite recordings/albums of collegiate a cappella you've heard. Why do you think you find it so distasteful? resulted in 39 mentions of mentions of “pitch problems”, “out-of-tune singing” or something to that effect-more than double the next-most frequently mentioned symptom (nineteen respondents mentioned “Too Boring/Too Busy Arrangements”). For a given singer, being able to sing in tune is of fundamental importance. As survey respondent and aforementioned RARB reviewer, Bob McSwain emphasized in his answer to Question 2.01: “If you can't sing on pitch, match a pitch, tune to a'physics of harmony' tone, please find a new hobby. We all stray from the tonal center, but if you are consistently flat or sharp, singing may not be where you need to be.” McSwain, Bob. Question 2.01 - see appendix

These days it is extremely rare to hear a song on the radio with even one out-of-tune pitch. This phenomenon is reflective of the ability singers to create perfect performances in the recording studio, by method of performing multiple takes, punching in at problematic spots on the tape and fixing those particular areas, or through digital pitch-correction (real-time or otherwise). Regarding this last method, we're brought back to the previous discussion of ProTools or similar software. Matt Serletic, Grammy-winning producer of Matchbox Twenty and Carlos Santana, discussed both sides to the technology, saying, it's no longer necessary to “ask [a vocalist] to pound out a vocal 15 times. With vocal processing, you can get the passion and then fix something. But on the bad side it is possible to allow less-than-sufficient musical ability to pass. That's the danger.” Today's technology allows singers who “can't sing a note to save their lives” to “sound like they can.” Taylor, p5

However, when it comes to collegiate acappella groups laying down tracks, the increasing use of such technology has created an ethical divide that has virtually split the collective opinion. One side represents a purist argument, most bluntly phrased by survey respondent, Charles Meininger,who currently sings with Wake Forest University's Temporary Repreive: “If you can't sing on pitch, what the HELL are you doing making an a cappella CD?” Charles Meininger, response to Question 2.10. The other side takes into account the amateur aspect of collegiate a cappella, as well as the need to sound comparable to current pop recordings. Deke Sharon says, “College singers are amateurs. Few are even music students. At best, they spend a handful of hours rehearsing each week. To make a recording that is of the same general quality as the music they listen to on the radio, they need to use professional studio technology, including pitch correction and multitracking.” Deke Sharon, response to Question 3.01 The results from Question 2.05: In a cappella, the use of pitch-correction software (e.g. Auto-Tune, VocAlign) or hardware is cheating. [Pick one: Definitely Yes, Yes, Neutral, No, Definitely No, suggest that both sides have practically equal support. A slim majority of 42% indicated No, or Definitely No, while 39% said Yes, or Definitely Yes. These numbers indicated a strong split on the issue of pitch correction software.

Beneath this debate, lies a fundamental problem. There's a sense that the software creates an unbridgeable gap between a “perfect” studio recording and a song's live performance. It's an assumption that the easeof cosmetic correction afforded by new recording technology will invariably result in shoddy and out-of-tune performances outside of the studio. Few, if any, have mentioned or acknowledged the beneficial aspects that studio pitch correction can have on a live performance, and the subsequent improvements it can engender in performers. In order to show how such improvements are possible, I now turn back to AVP.

About one month ago, AVP received the news that one of our top soloists, Mike Daguiso, had won a Contemporary A Cappella Recording Award (CARA) for Best Male Collegiate Soloist for his rendition of “I Want You Back” which was one of the premiere tracks on Room Zero. It was both a cause for celebration and, for me, a moment of realization regarding just how far Daguiso's solo had come since the first time he and AVP began performing the song over a year and a half ago.

To say that Mike can sing high requires an intensification of the word understatement. Mikey (as AVP likes to call him) is thehighest of tenors, able to hit notes in his chest voice that virtually no one else in AVP can squeak out in falsetto. He is also a terrific dancer, as was apparent in his audition for AVP. The combination of the two made him ideal for some sort of performance-based, dance song. Additionally, Mikey stands at around 5' 4”, which, in a group stacked with tall guys, made him resemble a young Michael Jackson in stature (despite the fact that he's Filipino). The Jackson Five's “I Want You Back” seemed like it would be well suited to his voice and stage persona. It would be his first AVP solo.

Before he was selected as soloist, a number of guys expressed some concern following the audition that he'd missed too many notes. Truthfully, this was the case-Mikey's voice had the capacity to reach those extremely high melodic lines, but not in a consistent fashion. Further, he'd been trying to dance while singing, which certainly didn't help matters. The guys insisted that someone work with him on honing his solo.

It didn't happen. After a few shows-and in spite of occasional missed pitches in the solo-it became clear that we had a hit in “I Want You Back.” It seemed that at every single gig, as the song began, the mostly female audience would invariably cheer and scream at the mere sight of Mikey dancing his way to the front of the arc, rendering the first few bars of the song inaudible, drowned out by the noise of the crowd. When Mikey's first soaring notes finally came out, audiences would cheer in shock and surprise. Everyone in the crowd seemed to understand the immense challenge that the imitation of the song presented-especially for an adult male attempting, in his chest voice, to perform a solo meant for a twelve year-old singer. Compounding his challenge, Mikey would perform the choreography of Michael Jackson dance steps to a tee. The result was an electrifying performance that rained cheers down on Mikey whenever and wherever it was performed-despite his acknowledged problems hitting certain notes.

When it came time to record “I Want You Back” we began to wonder whether or not it would be possible for Mikey to deliver the solo with enough accuracy to make the song not just bearable, but excellent. AVP acknowledged the existence of a different set of standards at play between a live performance and a studio recording. As Steve Lund, Vice President of Jive Records Jive Records produces such artists as N'Sync, Britney Spears, and the Backstreet Boys. admits, “Onstage, I think that every artist is judged on the full package…I don't think the audience gives a shit if the vocals are perfect. A concert is a one-off scenario, so it doesn't matter. But on a CD, where it's repeated listens, the audience expects perfection.” Taylor, p5 When Mikey recorded “I Want You Back,” it was his first time performing a solo in the studio, yet his performance had all the qualities of his live show-attitude, energy, emotion-elements that cannot be fabricated As survey respondent, Renner Vaughn, of the UNC Clefhangers put it: “Good singin is hard to fake, especially when it comes to lead vocals…Autotune can only do so much.” . We had heard him sing the song perfectly before, but it was inconsistent. Though his best take on this day was approaching perfect, it wasn't enough-we needed an absolutely perfect one. Further, it was our last scheduled day in the studio, so it was impossible to simply give him a day to rest his voice and try it again.

Our studio engineer, Bill Hare, was able to tune the problematic sections of his lead vocal track using Auto-Tune “Auto-Tune”-a pitch correction software plug-in made by Antares.. The result was a magnificent lead-vocal that sounds doctored only to those who have the ears to detect it. As a result of Mikey's solo, “I Want You Back” became one of Room Zero's best tracks. When the album was released in September 2001, the song received critical praise from our online distributing site, Mainely A Cappella (www.a-cappella.com), which posted a very enthusiastic review-rare for collegiate albums: “Their take on the Jackson Five's "I Want You Back" is so good it's scary!” “Mainely A Cappella: UVA Academical Village People. Mainely A Cappella Carries.” http://mac3.a-cappella.com/shop/product_information.asp?number=2573CBut what was really fabulous about the recording was the effect it had on Mikey's subsequent live performance.

Due to the seemingly flawless quality of his recorded solo, it became imperative for Mikey to sound as good live as he had on record. Over the course of the semester, he practiced his solo (outside of rehearsal time) more often; he modified certain choreographed movements so that he wouldn't be in mid-air or performing a difficult step while trying to hit the most difficult notes; most importantly, he had a recording of his own voice achieving its ideal, from which he was better able to model his live performances-a process more easily imitable than the recordings of the original song itself.

If Mikey needed further proof of his capabilities, he got it. By the following semester, he'd become so solid and consistent on “I Want You Back” that we decided to make it a part of our competition set-which we had been initially reluctant to do. Our decision to put faith in his voice was a good one. Mikey was awarded Best Soloist at the Second Round of the ICCA (International Collegiate A Cappella Competition). As evidenced by his aforementioned CARA Award not long afterward, it proved to Mikey that his abilities in the studio and in live performance had become equally matched. Could he have improved so dramatically without the drive to live up to his perfected recording? In Mikey's own words: “I'm inclined to say that recording the track has helped my [live] performance. I would be curious to see how I would be performing it now had it not been fixed up in the studio. Personal Communication, May 3, 2002.”

******

The album title, Room Zero, derives its name from an echoey hallway that connects Wilson and Cabell Hall at UVA, as described in the liner notes. AVP goes to Room Zero to sing whenever senses that it needs a boost in confidence. Practice rooms tend to be austere, unforgiving places where blend and pitch mistakes stick out like sore thumbs (not unlike the experience of hearing yourself on tape playback in a recording studio, I might add). The passageway has the effect of making us seem thirty times larger than we are, it adds color to our sound, and brings life to the musical moment in ways impossible to achieve in most other rehearsal spaces.

Ultimately, the decision to spend more money, or to utilize effects or pitch correction software, comes down to the type of sound a group wants to make on a given recording. In the case of Room Zero, we wanted an album that would reflect the way technology has the ability to bring the overall group sound to a fuller, more robust level-not unlike the effect produced by singing in the actual “Room Zero.” However, just as AVP does not record albums in its echoless practice rooms, neither does the group delude itself by practicing exclusively in the passageway we call “Room Zero.” This reflects the increasingly popular attitude among collegiate a cappella groups in the studio that live performances and studio recordings are two different beasts. “Groups are learning to use studios to augment their live sound,” says Greg“Lyric” Stoneham, of the Johns Hopkins Mental Notes. He goes on to point out “[recording studios and live performances] are completely different.” Groups should feel free to use studio technology because ultimately, “a live sound doesn't always translate well to disc.” Stoneham, Greg. Response to Question 3.01 Paradoxically, the desire to use more studio-wizardy is often a product of recording technology's inability to thoroughly capture a group's live sound or performance.

While attention to live performances will always be crucial to any collegiate a cappella group's existence, there remains a relatively uncharted frontier for growth in the studio. Despite all the complaints about the disparity between live performances and studio recordings, there has yet to be released even one collegiate album that features songs that are wholly irreproducible in the live setting-songs that were never a part of a group's regular live repertoire. This begs the question, when will the genre see its landmark album, if ever? If so, will such a recording necessarily be a function of its live irreproducibility? Undeniably, many of the most innovate and seminal pop/rock music albums were the only possible as a result of the latest recording technology of its time. As Bill Hare asks rhetorically, “Could the Beatles even try to perform Sgt. Pepper?” Hare, Bill. Response to Question 2.14

As Chad Rowland of Clemson's Tigeroar said, “[collegiate] a cappella is not going to change the world. It's just something a bunch of guys get together to do for fun. Plus the girls love it. Cha ching.” Rowland, Chad Rivers. Response to Question 3.01 While I agree with his first sentence, I wish to flip his comment around. It has been valuable to explore how the technological world is changing collegiate a cappella.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chanan, Michael. “Repeated Takes: A Short History of Recording and its Effects on Music.” Verso, London. 1995.

Darling, David. “Hands On: Auto-Tune 3 - The Pitch Doctor is in.” in Home Recording, Jan. 2002, p44

Eskow, Gary “NY Metro Report.” Mix, Sept. 1, 2000. p218

Knave, Brian. “Recording Musician: Hella A Cappella.” Electronic Musician. Sept 1, 1999. p100

Taylor, Chuck. “Do Vocal Effects Go Too Far?” Billboard, Dec 30, 2000. p5

Theberge, David. Any Sound You Can Imagine. Hanover. University of New England Press. 1997

Electronic Sources:

Feldman, Freddie. “Vocomotion.” http://www.vocomotion.com/xtension1.phtml

Landau, Elie. RARB review. March 22, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/206.html

McSwain, Bob. RARB review. July 9, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/236.html

Sauliner, Chris. RARB review. July 9, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/236.html

Sears, Jonathan. RARB review. Apr 25, 2001. http://www.rarb.org/reviews/215.html

Sugarbaker, Mike “Tales from the dork side (A Cappella Hell).” http://www.gibberish.com/tales/100596.html

“Mainely A Cappella: UVA Academical Village People. Mainely A Cappella Carries.” http://mac3.a-cappella.com/shop/product_information.asp?number=2573C

APPENDIX

The remaining nine pages is copy of the online survey, “Issues in Collegiate A Cappella Recording Survey.” The survey was developed using University of Virginia's SurveySuite technology, available at http://intercom.virginia.edu.

The raw data survey results can be found online: http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem3z.