The Beatles had three lead singers but only two vocal mics on stage.
It wasn’t because they couldn’t afford a third mic.
And It wasn’t because the road manager always forgot to ask the production crew to set up a third mic.
It was because for them two mics told a clearer, truer story than three mics
They didn’t NEED to share mics, but they did. Why?
With only two mics we got to see them be in very close proximity to each other, play off each other, smile, and have different visual combinations: Paul w. George and John solo, John w. George and Paul solo, Paul solo and John solo, etc, etc.
The audience in the 60’s (and all of us today) wanted to see them as a band, a gang, that they were very close with one another while each having his own personality. And with the close physical proximity it highlighted in great detail the similarities and differences of each of them.
That visual is incredibly powerful for how we perceive people.
And that was a big part of their magnetism. That they had this chemistry that we could SEE…and they made sure we didn’t miss it.
You don’t need anyone’s permission to take this idea and apply it to how you tell your story on stage. You could even start right now.
p.s. Notice…They didn’t share amps…the audience wouldn’t have been able to experience that sharing. It would have gone un-noticed…and the sound would have been even worse :)
p.p.s. It’s also interesting that the front center of the stage was rarely filled. THAT’s maybe the most impressive part…as front center of the stage is thought of as the most powerful place…an idea that I agree with moooooooost of the time.
p.p.p.s. I haven’t forgotten about Ringo. I’m actually quite a Ringo fan. And he had a vocal mic, but only when needed for a special lead vocal…which, we can all agree, was the right call.
Don’t miss a post. Sign up for free.
I’m always interested in your perspective, whether affirming or dissenting. Continue the conversation anytime: gabethebassplayer@gmail.com