It’s a question that’s been debated in groups, and on all of the a cappella nerd forums at some point. For those of us in our viewing audience trying to catch up, I’m talking about which skill set marks the better a cappella group; the one that can record an amazing CD, or the one that can stomp out its live competition. There are good arguments for both sides, and I plan on exploring that in 3 parts; one part discussing how recording prowess can positively define a group, one part discussing how a live show can do the same, and a third part, just trying to wrap it all up and try to form a conclusion from there. [Editor’s Note: this series applies mostly to academic groups - high school and college - though there is certainly some crossover to semi- and professional groups].
Part 3: The Wrap-Up
So what does it all come down to? Well, here’s the great part for me, where I get to tell you all my take, and then leave it to you to discuss further (because I do not think this is a debate that will go away; a cappella groups will always perform live, and groups will always make recordings, and everyone will continue to debate which one defines the group’s talent level better).
There was another thread in the RARB forums that I read awhile back, about what would be considered the greatest honor for a group. The choices were between a CARA award, a great RARB review, a win at the ICCAs or Sweeps, and compilation inclusion (BOCA, Voices Only, what have you). One poster, with the handle of “Jesse”, wrote this as their reply that question:
“I'd say none of those. Sure they're satisfying and all, but all they mean is you've managed to impress a very small (albeit talented and knowledgeable) amount of people. It'd be more of a higher achievement (for me at least) to have a large number of ticket/album sales, and be able to be credited with building a cappella awareness and popularity within your community...”
And I couldn’t agree more, though I would also add consistency to that list. A group’s ability to draw people in, and keep doing so, and to keep their name in the minds and conversations of others…that’s what makes a group great. A group that can keep on bringing their audiences to their feet, both with their shows, AND CDs that make you get up and dance - that’s the group that has achieved true greatness.
What I tried to show with my other 2 articles is that, even though there may be nay-sayers to impugn upon the importance and difficulty of impressive live performances or awesome CDs in favor of the other, that there are so many aspects that go into both, aspects that require hard work, patience/time, and practice to master. And you can’t take that away from either side, no matter how you slice it.
To me, it is impossible to say which is better, because both are far too important to cancel out the other. Flat out, if you want to be considered the best of the best, you need to master both. The group needs to be able to bring down the house, and after that, sell CDs that people will want to keep listening to until they can catch that group again. Conversely, when a group makes a great CD, they need to be able to deliver the same kind of performance when a listener finally gets to hear them live.
There are ways to support both sides, but it is almost a little, well, cocky to feel that as a group, you can focus on just one or the other and come off as “great”. You need to be able to do both, and the only way that will happen is through time, work, dedication, and even doing some homework. It’s one thing to focus on using one or the other to make a name for yourself, and then be able to deliver on the other end. It is quite another to focus on using one or the other to define yourselves as an a cappella powerhouse, and worry about the other later.
Basically? It’s not one or the other, it’s both. And neither aspect will be any good without some good, old-fashioned hard work, and time, no matter how naturally talented your group membership may be.
