« April 2006 | Main | June 2006 »

May 30, 2006

Postcards from the Recording Booth

A few months back I wrote about a Halloween concert I attended at Milford’s Café Atlantique, featuring an impressive live set from Mike Morello, a local singer/songwriter. Recently, Mike headed back into the studio to record his second album after releasing last year’s Leisure, his first album on Carrano Records. What follows is the first in a series of email interviews which chronicle the process and offer a view into the making of an album, both from the artist’s and a producer’s perspective, as I have also been in contact with Joe Carrano, Mike’s producer. Be on the lookout for a review of Leisure and check out Mike’s website or MySpace for upcoming live gigs and more information.

?1- About this time last year I believe you were in the studio recording Leisure. This time around, are you approaching recording differently? Are you sticking to what worked last time?

This time around, I am definitely approaching recording differently. The last album came out great in my opinion and I’m really proud of it, but it took way too long to complete. The vision for it kept on changing which was good and bad. Bad in that it took so long, but good because I was able to really grow and learn about the music and about myself as a musician. That being said, I will use what I learned from the last process to make this one better. This time around, I have a clear vision for the album and a clear plan on how I want to record it. I have done a ton of preparation for the process, but, more importantly, I have left a lot of room for energy. I want to make sure that the live sound that I pride myself on comes through on this album.

?2- How has the writing process been going? Do songs come to you quickly or are they ever evolving?

Writing is an interesting topic for me to talk about. I love writing songs. It seems like I’m always doing it. There are so many ways to write a song and so many things to write about. I carry around a little notebook because all sorts of random ideas pop into my mind all the time. Sometimes, I’ll hear someone say something and I’ll like it and I’ll write it down. I only write my songs from real life. My experiences. My real feelings. Listeners can see right through fake songs. Sometimes the music comes first and other times the lyrics come first, but, at the end of the day, as long as the feeling comes through, I’m happy. Some songs come to me very quickly and others take months. For this album, “hula� was written in one night. I was driving home from a gig and the lyrics just came to me. I jotted them down on some receipt paper I had on my passenger seat and, when I got home, I pulled an all-nighter and wrote the music for it. That song hasn’t changed very much since that night. Another song on the new album, “next to you,� took me over a month to write. There are some times when the mood you’re in and the energy you have allows the song to write itself. Other times, you want each little thing to be just right and you scrutinize each lyric, each note until it fits the picture you had in your mind for it. Songs are ever-evolving in that, as I play them live, they change slightly as I become more comfortable with them, but there comes a time when I have to look at a song and say to myself, “This is done,� otherwise, I can’t move on to the next one.

?3- I know you have kept a heavy performance schedule. Have you been debuting much of the new material/works in progress? Do you ever tweak them, depending on audience response or on the actual performance? Or are you pretty confident that you've got the song where you want it to be when you perform?

I do play live quite frequently. I love it. Playing live gives me energy, gives the songs energy and is a huge testing ground for new stuff. I have been playing a few of the new songs quite frequently over the past few months like “hula� and “girl next door.� A couple of them, I’m saving as surprises for the people who pick up the album when it comes out. For me, I have to play almost everything on stage or the songs just end up seeming flat to me. Playing them live gives my songs life and, yes, I do tweak them live based on audience response, but, like I said before, there has to be a time where they kind of have to stop changing so that they can actually “be,� you know? When I do debut a new track live, I’m already pretty confident that the song is where it should be, but I’ve usually left a little room for that live energy. I have to be confident in a new track because these songs are usually pretty personal and before I let an audience into my life, I have to be sure the song is right. However, songs are living things and they need to breathe and when a song gets thrown out to the public, I need to be flexible and open to things that might need to change a little in order to give the song that final polish. Sometimes, I’m not aware of those things when I’m sitting on my couch, but when I’m out in the open, the flaws stick out and little gaps get filled in naturally.

?4- You've been writing songs and rehearsing in these past weeks in preparation for your recording sessions. Have you been listening to anything in particular that has inspired you? Are there any new artists that you've gotten into or do you tend to get back to proven favorites?

My philosophy is to expose myself to as many different types of music as possible. I have really been paying close attention to beats lately and what the major labels are doing in the mixes of songs to make them sound huge in the speakers. That is a great way to get energy across on a recording. I always listen to my old favorites like Stevie Wonder and George Benson, but I love some newer stuff just as much. Marc Broussard has huge energy and I love what he’s doing. Jack Johnson can do no wrong these days. He’s chill and he’s an amazing songwriter. I’m psyched about Mayer’s new album. It’s nice to see him break the mold and do what he’s passionate about and I love Gavin DeGraw’s voice and power. These guys are also really great live which I appreciate quite a bit. Also, some of the new R&B guys are great. I always love a great singer and guys like Anthony Hamilton, Javier and John Legend are catching my ear as well. The more I hear, the more I learn and the better my songs can be. On the flip side, I listen to as much music as I can to make certain I’m not stealing anything from anyone.

?5- I'm all about lists. If you were to make a desert island mixtape, what songs would you choose?

Hmmmmmm. That’s like making a parent choose which children to bring with them… but I’ll give it a shot. There has to be two “sides,� (can you tell I’m an 80’s baby?) The first side is the pop/rock side and the other side is the jazzy side.

Side “A�
1. The Police: “Synchronicity�
2. Stevie Wonder: “Golden Lady�
3. Jack Johnson: “Holes to Heaven�
4. The Beatles: “Can’t Buy Me Love�
5. Sting: “Fragile�
6. Michael Jackson: “Rock with You�
7. John Mayer: “Clarity�
8. Christopher Cross: “Sailin� (hey… don’t judge)
9. Van Halen: “Mean Street�
10. Stevie Ray Vaughn: “Pride and Joy�

Side “B�
1. Frank Sinatra: “New York, New York�
2. Miles Davis All Stars: “Solar�
3. Thelonius Monk: “Round Midnight�
4. Herbie Hancock: “Cantaloupe Island�
5. Lee Morgan: “The Sidewinder�
6. George Benson: “Breezin’�
7. Grant Green: “Grantstand�
8. B.B. King: “Lucille�
9. Ray Charles: “I’ve Got News for You�
10. Nat Cole: “The More I See You�

Posted by eva on 10:02 PM

May 22, 2006

Fiction: The Real Truth?

I’m going to bite the bullet and stir the pot of controversy! Frankly, people are getting a little too worked up about The Da Vinci Code. With the Vatican issuing boycotts, Opus Dei wanting to run disclaimers and protestors standing out in front of movie theaters across the nation, everyone seems to have a problem with Dan Brown’s little book. Da Vinci’s blasphemous and controversial take on the history of the Catholic Church got people reading again and raised a literary furor, and it was no surprise when the rights of the book were optioned for a movie.

As someone who has been looking forward to seeing this movie, I have been perplexed at how people are taking a piece of fiction as a historical truth. Last time I checked, fiction is defined as “a making up of imaginary happenings, feigning� and “anything made up or imagined, as a statement, story.�

Had Da Vinci Code been released and marketed as a work of Non-Fiction, I then would understand the uproar and disapproval. But it isn’t. It is FICTION! Granted it does build up an elaborate plot with coincidental historical links, but it is all a part of Dan Brown’s exposition, setting up the events of that fateful evening in Paris. Since when do people take fiction as the honest truth?

More importantly, why is the Catholic Church troubled by this one work? Are they afraid that it has the power to shake the faith built over hundreds of years? Will people take this as a true account of the Church’s history and change our opinion of Jesus Christ?

At times, we are asked to suspend belief, in order to appreciate an author’s or director’s vision. We suspend belief, for just a moment, to see things from a different angle. Does that necessarily mean we accept this new perception as truth and forget our own beliefs? Of course not!

Speaking as a Catholic who has who has both read the book and seen the movie, I can say that it has not affected my belief in my religion. I believe in the Lord, yet as a student of history, science and life, I often find myself at an awkward crossroads, trying to reconcile my faith with my education and experience. People will believe what they want to believe, so if their faith in their religion is strong, a little thing, like a movie or book, will not shatter their core values. I am in no way proselytizing, just offering a different perspective than that which has been expressed of late, and asking you to suspend your beliefs to see a different side to the story.

Posted by eva on 11:10 PM

May 16, 2006

God Save McQueen … and Burberry too!

Open since May 3, AngloMania: Tradition and Transgression in British Fashion 1976-2006 is the latest exhibit organized by the Metropolitan Museum’s Costume Institute, with sponsorship from Burberry. Mania juxtaposes historic gowns, traditions, with some of the most cutting-edge and innovative designs, transgressions, coming out of the UK by designers like Vivienne Westwood, Alexander McQueen, John Galliano and Christopher Bailey to name a few. Mannequins staged dramatically throughout the English Period Rooms in the Annie Laurie Aitken Galleries illustrate the balancing act these modern designers play, paying homage to their traditional inspirations and finding their own distinctive re-imaginings. Each room is built around a theme, like Upstairs and Downstairs, the Hunt Ball and the English Garden.

This exhibit is a must for fashionistas and anyone who is interested in different expressions of pop culture. There are a couple of pieces that should not be missed. In the Gentlemen’s Club, there is a tuxedo belonging to the Duke of Windsor standing across the way from a tartan jacket worn by Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols. In the Hunt, there are two trench coats from Burberry’s two last seasons that are magnificent, particularly the spring lilac taffeta trench with a long detailed train, exactly like the khaki colored version that is in the shop window of Burberry on East 57th Street. Not to mention the amazing black knee high boots designed by Vivienne Westwood that would be a welcome addition to the wardrobe of any dominatrix or anyone with a stiletto heel fetish.

Alas, there isn’t a proper catalogue out for the exhibit, which is on view through September 4th, but the latest issue of Vogue (Keira Knightley’s on the cover) has an article with images and iTunes has the Metropolitan Museum’s podcast for the exhibit, which features Johnny Rotten and his unique perspective on the punk movement.

Posted by eva on 10:46 PM

May 1, 2006

Only at the gym

I always manage to watch the most bizarre things at the gym. This past Sunday morning was no exception. As I was pounding away on the treadmill, on my television screen I saw three 40ish white women accompanied by a the typical buff male gym trainer, and was able to ascertain from the mangled closed captioning that they were involved in some new hip form of exercise. Just how hip, I found out quickly enough.

Suddenly, this group of women got into formation and started breaking in down, hip-hop style, the backs of their jackets emblazoned with "Momz-N-Da-Hood." It was rather painful to watch, their movements awkward, hips and booties gyrating clumsily and lacking the sharp precision of expert dancers. I give these women credit as they found this common bond of hip-hop dancing to help them get through their frustrations, and they obviously enjoy themselves immensely. Was it a pleasure to watch as an innocent bystander not so much.

As if that weren't odd enough, I suddenly thought I had entered a parallel universe, where horror of horrors, there existed not one but two Dubya's! A definite "What the @#&*!" moment. Apparently someone thought it would be funny to have the president speaking right next to a presidential impersonator at some major dining engagement. As if listening to one Elmer Fudd, now these poor dinner guests have two.

Ah well, I guess if it weren’t for these little bizarre moments, my trips to the gym would be boring.

Posted by eva on 8:18 AM