Pro or not too pro?
Wed, 18 Aug 1999, 11:03 amJoeMc6 posts in thread
Pro or not too pro?
Wed, 18 Aug 1999, 11:03 amI must preface this with a type of disclaimer and stae it 'WITHOUT PREJUDICE' to any and all associated with Mandurah Performing Arts Centre, as this is purely my view of events and it is not ment to discourge the hard work of anyone and future enjoyment of audiances and/or participants to this venue. (I am a whip and enjoy it)I received a comp ticket the other day, to see John Mac Nally at the Mandurah Performing Arts Centre. The provider was not MPAC, so to that extent I feel justified in being critical of the Centres show presentation. If they had of supplied the comp or I was a punter, I would have taken this up with them direct.John Mac Nally, is an Irish tenor - I should say was, he is more of a fiver these days - But still is a good and genuine performer, also a showman who has not forgotten his audience and gives that x-factor to his performances. I have done a couple of shows for John and found him to be a pro, unassuming and very easy to work with as far as a one show stand can be enjoyable. Sure, he is not eveyones cuppa , although he still churns out the recordings and sells them.John was not the problem, MPAC is, for sometime now there has been a lot of apparent faults with this space, which they assure me they are working on? Yes they are minor and probably picky on my part, to the extent I cringe every time I see a show there, my wife has finally said she will not go with me to anymore as I am too critical - so a BOS no more can I be, unless No! I think I have done it this time, at least till next time? - To give a run down;- The preset :- Half stage with the No 1 tabs in, no house curtain, open set.1. A baby grand (another name for flattened upright) still on its rusted truck dolly with various shades of paint - no attempt to mask it with black tats or some thing else.2. The house rag is at its out dead, the tormentor is in and past the tail of the rag - showing an uneven view of the white calico smother that backs it.3. The apron is extended covering the pit with various shades of black paint and gaffer tape on a washed out black mat masking facing the audience.4. Two boom mikes are employed to cover the sound board in the piano, with their stands against its hip and booms creating an obstacle at Johns eye height (he is not very tall).5. Lighting preset state was midnight blue and green assisted with a hint of peacock blue that added to the patch work from batten two overhead.6. Obviously two prefocused profiles specials at the centre of this batten that attempted to cross light in a up side down V on the tabs in bastard amber - all this did was create a dark shaded triangle on the uneven and badly profiled tab and brought out an its almost flat central features.7. No 1 batten was again bastard amber, with two 2k fresenels from the side in red leaving scallops of uneven light outlining the fresenel barn doors on the No 1 boarder drop8. The FOH was a number of profiles with washed out flesh pink gel (nipple pink was probably out of stock?) leaving a framed outline on the tabs where the light caught the teasers & tormentor masking.The result was almost MUD colour - these are pros, well at least they are paid. Its a pity they cant be sued for their past comments of Not another bleeding amateur show - again!". The show lighting:-1. Operation of colour change was jerky and unbalanced - manual mode.2. The illusion and support of the mood - was shot and did not recover.3. The building of light states - looked like an after thought.4. Mix and match of colour was not a "SUSANS" boutique - The "OP-SHOP" is more apt.5. When it came to creating feeling, in songs like "Danny Boy" - "On the beach" on a overcast day.6. Subtly of change and timing was snap on or off and at least 6 cues behind or advanced.7. The Dome (Lime or follow spot) had its own mind and iris out for a 7 foot performer in cold steel blue, probably because he was wearing a slate blue suit, that doubled his age and facial lines.8. Walk on pick ups from the Dome were handled well, they missed each time, showing up the leg drops that were badly bagged and hung incorrectly.9. I wont go on - as the presentation of stagecraft mise en scene was much better if you closed your eyes.Apparently the control of MPAC backstage has been handed over to a local sound company, who are quite adept at D J-ing and other rockn roll type shows. I believe it!Other wise I enjoyed John Mac Nally (I think he should have changed this to McNally) and look forward to his new show, next year, "Visions of Ireland" when he uses screen projections for journey through the history of Ireland in song. What he should include in this show is his own Lighting Director and/or Stage Manager - although they may have got the message by then? - or was this purely a one performance problems?????Joe McCabe
JoeMcWed, 18 Aug 1999, 11:03 am
I must preface this with a type of disclaimer and stae it 'WITHOUT PREJUDICE' to any and all associated with Mandurah Performing Arts Centre, as this is purely my view of events and it is not ment to discourge the hard work of anyone and future enjoyment of audiances and/or participants to this venue. (I am a whip and enjoy it)I received a comp ticket the other day, to see John Mac Nally at the Mandurah Performing Arts Centre. The provider was not MPAC, so to that extent I feel justified in being critical of the Centres show presentation. If they had of supplied the comp or I was a punter, I would have taken this up with them direct.John Mac Nally, is an Irish tenor - I should say was, he is more of a fiver these days - But still is a good and genuine performer, also a showman who has not forgotten his audience and gives that x-factor to his performances. I have done a couple of shows for John and found him to be a pro, unassuming and very easy to work with as far as a one show stand can be enjoyable. Sure, he is not eveyones cuppa , although he still churns out the recordings and sells them.John was not the problem, MPAC is, for sometime now there has been a lot of apparent faults with this space, which they assure me they are working on? Yes they are minor and probably picky on my part, to the extent I cringe every time I see a show there, my wife has finally said she will not go with me to anymore as I am too critical - so a BOS no more can I be, unless No! I think I have done it this time, at least till next time? - To give a run down;- The preset :- Half stage with the No 1 tabs in, no house curtain, open set.1. A baby grand (another name for flattened upright) still on its rusted truck dolly with various shades of paint - no attempt to mask it with black tats or some thing else.2. The house rag is at its out dead, the tormentor is in and past the tail of the rag - showing an uneven view of the white calico smother that backs it.3. The apron is extended covering the pit with various shades of black paint and gaffer tape on a washed out black mat masking facing the audience.4. Two boom mikes are employed to cover the sound board in the piano, with their stands against its hip and booms creating an obstacle at Johns eye height (he is not very tall).5. Lighting preset state was midnight blue and green assisted with a hint of peacock blue that added to the patch work from batten two overhead.6. Obviously two prefocused profiles specials at the centre of this batten that attempted to cross light in a up side down V on the tabs in bastard amber - all this did was create a dark shaded triangle on the uneven and badly profiled tab and brought out an its almost flat central features.7. No 1 batten was again bastard amber, with two 2k fresenels from the side in red leaving scallops of uneven light outlining the fresenel barn doors on the No 1 boarder drop8. The FOH was a number of profiles with washed out flesh pink gel (nipple pink was probably out of stock?) leaving a framed outline on the tabs where the light caught the teasers & tormentor masking.The result was almost MUD colour - these are pros, well at least they are paid. Its a pity they cant be sued for their past comments of Not another bleeding amateur show - again!". The show lighting:-1. Operation of colour change was jerky and unbalanced - manual mode.2. The illusion and support of the mood - was shot and did not recover.3. The building of light states - looked like an after thought.4. Mix and match of colour was not a "SUSANS" boutique - The "OP-SHOP" is more apt.5. When it came to creating feeling, in songs like "Danny Boy" - "On the beach" on a overcast day.6. Subtly of change and timing was snap on or off and at least 6 cues behind or advanced.7. The Dome (Lime or follow spot) had its own mind and iris out for a 7 foot performer in cold steel blue, probably because he was wearing a slate blue suit, that doubled his age and facial lines.8. Walk on pick ups from the Dome were handled well, they missed each time, showing up the leg drops that were badly bagged and hung incorrectly.9. I wont go on - as the presentation of stagecraft mise en scene was much better if you closed your eyes.Apparently the control of MPAC backstage has been handed over to a local sound company, who are quite adept at D J-ing and other rockn roll type shows. I believe it!Other wise I enjoyed John Mac Nally (I think he should have changed this to McNally) and look forward to his new show, next year, "Visions of Ireland" when he uses screen projections for journey through the history of Ireland in song. What he should include in this show is his own Lighting Director and/or Stage Manager - although they may have got the message by then? - or was this purely a one performance problems?????Joe McCabe
Walter PlingeWed, 18 Aug 1999, 05:16 pm
Art & The Harsh Realities of Economics
I read Mr McCabe's massive missive with great interest and felt it was worth responding to. Not that I have anything to do with the Mandurah Performing Arts Centre (I confess that I am yet to see a show there), and I speak on noone's behalf but my own, but some salient points can be drawn.First let us remember no money changed hands: this was a comp ticket- from whom is not stated, and perhaps irrelevant. Nor does this excuse a shoddy show, but the point being "Caveat Emptor", "never look a gift horse etc" and many others. Ya gets wot ya pays fer. How much was that comp again?? ;-)Second. Mr McCabe reveals that the lack of quality of the presentation was not a one-off for this particular venue. He has gone as far to engage in correspondence with the venue management on this issue. Perhaps Mr MCabe's background in professional theatre makes him a sucker for "spotting the gaffa", or whether the venue has chosen a #4 Pink Gel as opposed to the customary #5, or whatever the case may be. Others are not blessed with such gifts, and the quality of the show would be unimpeded because of Natural Theatrical Selection.(I've just re-read that bit and it makes no sense...)Much is made of the various technical failings of the presentation, but I too could wax equally unenthusiastic about the amount of crap sound in theatres, and bore the populace into a coma. For example: "Why did they use an American dial tone (three seconds of continuous ring) instead of the Australian 'ring-ring-pause-pause-pause' cycle?". Or: "A Telefunken U47 will always kick seven shades of shoeshine out of a Shure SM57... if you can find one...". See? You've all gone to sleep on me. Expertise in one's chosen field can become train-spotting to others.The bottom line is the bottom line: MONEY!! I would imagine that whoever is/was organizing this artist's tour booked this venue for its capacity, which I am led to believe is rather mondo. Most likely, so is the rent of the place, and "Good Luck" if you can't sell the tickets. As it's likely this artist is in the middle of a worldwide tour, the extra cost of a couple of extra crewmembers who a) have rehearsed the changes for more than 15 minutes, and b) actually give a damn about doing the gig well, becomes prohibitive (hotel bills, food, etc.). This happens all the time in talkshow bands. The Guest Singer gets one hour to pick a song that all the bandmembers know, run it a couple of times, and get his/her lily-white into makeup before the masses are dragged into the studio kicking, farting and retching.So to cut costs (Time IS Money, remember) sacrifices are made to the detriment of the production, and audience enjoyment thereof.Money and art are like Brake Fluid and Pool Chlorine: good on their own, but an explosive combination.That's my rant on this subject. Miss Carson... you're NEXT!!!Yours screaming blue murder and profanity from the Rooftops,El
Walter PlingeThu, 19 Aug 1999, 07:51 am
Re: Art & The Harsh Realities of Economics
Thank you E"SL"McC, but I think I'll leave this one alone. It's getting a bit too specific/technical for me. General ranting is more my forte.LCC
Grant MalcolmThu, 19 Aug 1999, 02:50 pm
Re: Art & The Harsh Realities of Economics
> I read Mr McCabe's massive missive with great interest and felt> it was worth responding to.ditto that for both McCann's and McCabe's contributions :)> First let us remember no money changed hands: this was a comp> ticket- from whom is not stated, and perhaps irrelevant. Nor does> this excuse a shoddy show, but the point being "Caveat Emptor",> "never look a gift horse etc" and many others. Ya gets wot> ya pays fer. How much was that comp again?? ;-)If all the tickets were complimetary and this were a free concert, your point might carry some relevance. Apart from some mythical notion that handing out comps entitles the holders to be more cynical about what they see, i can't see that the price he did or did not pay has any bearing on the validity of McCabe's comments.> Second. Mr McCabe reveals that the lack of quality of the presentation> was not a one-off for this particular venue. He has gone as far to> engage in correspondence with the venue management on this issue.> Perhaps Mr MCabe's background in professional theatre makes him a> sucker for "spotting the gaffa", or whether the venue has> chosen a #4 Pink Gel as opposed to the customary #5, or whatever the> case may be. Others are not blessed with such gifts, and the quality> of the show would be unimpeded because of Natural Theatrical Selection.er..> (I've just re-read that bit and it makes no sense...)hehe it does, sort of.i'd like to credit audiences with a bit more sense. i'm sure you're quite right about gel numbers and Telefunkens etc. - is that guitar amps and speakers? 99% of your audience will not be in a position to either present or appreciate a detailed technical critique. However, present them the same show a second time on a well dressed stage with competent lighting and sound (telefunkens and all) and i'm willing to bet that they can tell you which was better even if they can't explain why. I don't need a degree in audio engineering to tell the difference between a bose speaker and a ghetto blaster - although there's a certain mayor who needs his hearing tested, eh Eliot? ;)Regardless, most of your audience, with any luck, will probably tell you that both shows were "absolutely fabulous" and they "really, truly enjoyed it". While they might recognise that one performance was better than the other, they will probably report positively on both. It's easy to develop the belief that the great unwashed are utterly undiscerning, don't know their armpits from their navels and would be just at happy at home watching Melrose Place.In reality, they do judge. While they might praise the show Joe has commented on and claim to have had an enjoyable time. When it comes time to part with the hard-earned for tickets to see another show, they might not feel so bad about giving it a miss if there is something better on telly. On the other hand if they saw the second show - the one with wizzbang LX, SFX and straight curtains - they'll be queueing up for tickets to see whatever is coming up next.> The bottom line is the bottom line: MONEY!! I would imagine that> whoever is/was organizing this artist's tour booked this venue for> its capacity, which I am led to believe is rather mondo. Most likely,> so is the rent of the place, and "Good Luck" if you can't> sell the tickets. As it's likely this artist is in the middle of a> worldwide tour, the extra cost of a couple of extra crewmembers who> a) have rehearsed the changes for more than 15 minutes, and b) actually> give a damn about doing the gig well, becomes prohibitive (hotel bills,> food, etc.). This happens all the time in talkshow bands. The Guest> Singer gets one hour to pick a song that all the bandmembers know,> run it a couple of times, and get his/her lily-white into makeup before> the masses are dragged into the studio kicking, farting and retching.That bottom line sounds more like a quick buck. In the long run we are talking false economy, declining audiences, smaller profits and dark theatres. But, ain't that just economic irrationalism all over?> Money and art are like Brake Fluid and Pool Chlorine: good on> their own, but an explosive combination.hehehe lurve your style, El! But i think i'd be talking omelets and eggs myself.> That's my rant on this subject. Miss Carson... you're NEXT!!!dang these queue jumpers!CheersGrant
JoeMcFri, 20 Aug 1999, 12:51 pm
Re: Art & The Harsh Realities of Economics
Thank you all.I have put a damper on my expectations of what the audiance, paying or not, should expect in a pro venue.The piont was not the fact I paid or snuck in the exit, it is I doubt that this would have have been the level of pro-ism of a venue I have worked in or been a punter.When a one night stand comes to a venue, even on world tours, they do not usually have technical staff - this depends upon the complexity of the show, even with specaily rigged lighting and loads of cue's, the tendance now is to forward a full performance on disk and include focusing or specail information in their specs.Then they turn up at a venue, taking the punt, with their Agent (driver/minder come stage manager, if they know more than just picking up the money and selling the CD's & tapes), pianist (come Musical Director &/or manadory Australian content)and them selves. Rely upon the capabilities of the crew on hand, after a sound and a possible cue check or they leave it all in the crews hands.This is economical performance as the content demands.This is not the piont I vented - it was the comments that comes from pro venues, when you do a community show there, "not another bleeding amatuer lot".I have seen better technical performances from amatuers, where the expectations should be lower - who use their resources and do the best with less - every thing I commented on was within the centres resources and is capable of. As I believe was received in other venues on the tour - Burswood for one!I wonder if I had of slated the performance, acting, direction, singing or music - this would be more in line with the normal crit and reviews, should not the technical part be aforded the same? Or is this the domain reserved purely for acting, with the odd mise en scene mention to pad it out.When I make a contract, by receiving or purchasing a ticket, I have a level of expectations that I want to be apart of the audiance, or I would refuse the offer, or not buy it in the first place. This is a chioce made up of various things, including but not limited to, previous shows of the performers, standard or reputation and/or promotional advertisement, whatever ..... When this falls short, there is, with me, a feeling of frustrations that I can't do anything about it at the time - either that or I would not bother next time.My God - I waffle on,is this hole getting deeper or did i forget the light bill? But I thank you for your input, you are correct, but I feel I did not explain the thing properly in the beginning or to that extent probably not now?Joe McCabe
Grant MalcolmSat, 21 Aug 1999, 09:46 pm
Re: Art & The Harsh Realities of Economics
> Thank you all.hehe you've managed to stir things up a bit again, Joe. Well done.> I have put a damper on my expectations of what the audiance,> paying or not, should expect in a pro venue.i, for one, was certainly not encouraging you to do that. more power to you and i hops someone, somewhere sits up and takes notice.*snip*> This is not the piont I vented - it was the comments that comes> from pro venues, when you do a community show there, "not another> bleeding amatuer lot".i've heard it too - but very rarely from people i consider to be "real pro's" - if there are such things> I have seen better technical performances from amatuers,*waits**watches*just checking to see if anyone registers any surprise at this fact ;)*snip*> My God - I waffle on,is this hole getting deeper or did i forget> the light bill?staring upward into sharply focussed overhead profile with steel blue?CheersGrant