Will Kodak Develop as a Sound Venue?

The Kodak Theatre’s introduction to most of the world Sunday during the 74th Academy Awards makes its debut something of a Cinderella story. But what happens after the clock strikes 12?

Once the Oscar ceremony fades to black, the glossy new facility certainly won’t turn into a pumpkin, but will become the site of periodic pop and rock concerts, entertainment industry private functions, television and video broadcasts and tapings, and possibly a few big-bang theatrical shows.

But questions about Kodak’s ability not just to look great on camera but to sound good in person raise another question: As a live entertainment venue, is Kodak shaping up as Staples Center Jr.?

The parallels go beyond the fact that both were built by Canada’s TrizecHahn Development Corp. and are operated by Denver-based Anschutz Entertainment Group.

There have also been similarities--good and bad--between their experiences out of the gate, especially how they handle anything besides their primary functions as, respectively, a sports arena and the home of the annual Academy Awards.

Initial concerts at both venues drew big names: Bruce Springsteen at Staples, pop-classical tenor Russell Watson at Kodak.

And both quickly suffered the slings and arrows of some outraged fans and critics over the sound quality. Daily Variety said that “the string sound was abrasive and tinny” during Watson’s theater-opening concert in November, and that “the amplification made it impossible to determine [Watson’s] true vocal power.” Times music critic Mark Swed suggested “one would have to go back to the beginning of sound reproduction to find such a primitive representation of an orchestra.”

Just as Staples’ sound problems continued when Bette Midler followed Springsteen, another Daily Variety reviewer complained of “brittle sound” during Melissa Etheridge’s solo performance at the Kodak in December, while The Times called the sound “a muddled mess” at Barry Manilow’s show in January.

When American Ballet Theatre came to the Kodak for performances of “The Nutcracker” in December, ABT artistic director Kevin McKenzie said it was “the first time we’ve had to amplify an orchestra in a theater,” but added, “I thought the sound was very good.”

For those watching the Kodak closely, the situation has the ring of deja vu. Only unlike Staples, which has three professional sports franchises to fill the bulk of its winter and spring calendar, Kodak will be more dependent on entertainment bookings because the Academy Awards come but once a year.

“Anybody who’s been in the business for a while realizes that for the first few shows that go into any new building, adjustments have to be made in the acoustics and/or sound amplification before it’s optimized,” says Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert-industry tracking publication Pollstar. “That’s not unusual. Conseco Fieldhouse [in Chicago] had its sound problems when it opened. So did Staples with those Springsteen shows. But I haven’t heard anything bad about Staples Center since those first few shows.”

What’s happening at Kodak is fairly typical: A new building means a new acoustical space, new sound systems and new users of both who need time to figure them out. In the meantime, glitches happen.

“There is certainly a break-in period,” says Robert F. Mahoney, the Boulder, Colo., acoustician who engineered the Kodak’s acoustic properties at the behest of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. “As a rule, you need about a year before you really get to know how the space works.”

Mahoney said primary design consideration was given to amplified performances, which expect to make up the bulk of the theater’s activity between Oscar nights. That means even orchestras will be amplified, because the Kodak’s acoustics were designed to be dry, some call it “dead,” rather than lively and reverberant, to better accommodate the variety of uses expected.

“Would it be my first choice as a venue for symphonic music? Absolutely not,” says Tom Sorce, who ran the sound for Watson’s concert, during which the 76-piece orchestra backing the singer was loudly amplified. “But I think the design and the theater sound system will work very well with a lot of [other] applications.”

Sorce, who has engineered the sound for 20 years for performances from Broadway shows and symphonic-pop concerts to such rock and pop acts as Aerosmith, Van Halen and Matchbox Twenty, adds: “If you’re a classical guy and you walk in there and see a 76-piece orchestra and a tenor, in your mind’s eye, you’re thinking, ‘Ahh, symphonic music.’ But [Watson’s concert] was not a classic symphony show. He’s got a beautiful tenor voice and is singing with an orchestra at pop [volume] levels, and that’s his choice artistically.”

Etheridge’s sound engineer, however, found himself hurriedly compensating for the room’s lack of natural reverberation when the curtain went up on her show.

“It sounds better empty than full, and usually it’s the opposite” said Steve Folsom, Etheridge’s sound engineer for 13 years. “It was a surprise to me on the first song when all of a sudden, what I was hearing wasn’t close to what I’d been hearing during our afternoon sound check. So I had to scramble on that first song....But I wasn’t unhappy with the results at all. At least, I didn’t get any complaints to my face. But it’s definitely more challenging than one would hope in a new room.”

Few Pop Pros Know the

House Sound System

Another issue is that the house sound system, by Berkeley-based Meyer Sound, also is causing some sound crews difficulties at first sight.

“A lot of Broadway-type theaters use that equipment, but for pop or rock tours, oh man, maybe only 10% [of sound engineers] have run into that,” says Ken Newman, Manilow’s sound engineer for the last decade. “It’s considered the cream of the crop and very high-tech, but it’s a different kind of good than most people are used to.”

In terms of size, the Kodak’s 3,500-seat capacity represents an attractive niche in the pop concert market between facilities such as the 2,200-seat Wiltern Theatre and the 6,000-capacity Greek Theatre and Universal Amphitheatre.

“Especially in a market the size of L.A.,” Bongiovanni says, “there should be a lot of artists who in other cities might play 2,000-seat theaters that can do 3,500 seats in L.A., and then step up from there to something like the Universal Amphitheatre.

“We held our annual concert industry awards there on Feb. 9,” Bongiovanni says, “and the buzz was really positive.”

By comparison, a 3,500-seat house is gargantuan in the world of theater, severely limiting the number of shows likely to fill it for extended runs.

Kodak Theatre Lacks

a Subscriber Base

Indeed, a touring stage version of “The Full Monty” will play the Ahmanson Theatre next month instead of the originally announced Kodak, as the show’s producers cited both the Ahmanson’s smaller size--2,200 seats--as well as the Ahmanson’s 35,000-strong subscriber base the Kodak lacks.

“For shows that want an intimate feel, that may not be best choice,” Sorce says. “But something like ‘Dreamgirls,’ ‘Phantom of the Opera’ or ‘Les Miserables’ could do very, very well in a house like that, and be able to take advantage of its unusual architectural design.

“You also have to consider how the theater fits into the design element of the show: Does the particular size and shape of the theater dovetail with the design element of that type of project? I would say [for the Kodak] that’s probably a minority of shows.”

As for any sound problems, few in or out of the theater expect them to continue once performers and their sound crews get used to it.

“Think how long it takes you to learn a new word processor and cube it,” acoustician Mahoney says. “But even as people are learning the capabilities of a new theater, it’s like you’ve got someone looking over your shoulder when you’re using that word processor for the first time....But that’s the thrill of being in the performing arts. You’ve got to roll with the punches.”