Perhaps it's the highest of praises to say that were you to downloadfrom iTunes the tracklist of the UNC Clefhangers'Facing Clarence andlisten to it, the experience would be roughly the same as listening tothe CD. If so, then although it's true, I didn't really mean it as sucha compliment.
Stated another way, if you were virtually uninitiated to the worldof a cappella, were you not to have read the liner notes, and wereyou not really care all that much about the craft but rather focusalmost exclusively on the end product,Facing Clarence is probably amust-own.
Truth be told,Facing Clarence might very well be a must-ownanyway, but I would be remiss if I didn't report both on the enjoymentand disappointment I experienced in listening to this very well-made CD.
If you haven't understood my point yet, then let me say plainly:most of the tracks on this album are flat-out hot. They are well-sung,well-engineered, well-edited and well-mixed. The rampant VP sampling iscrisp and clean and provides a strong anchor throughout, while the rich,full, if sometimes overpowering blend is a smooth, velvety bed on topof which the talented soloists show off their vocal wares. There can belittle question that in a vacuum, it's a top-notch recording and worthyof being an addition to your collection.
That said, you may notice that I left out well-arranged from thelist of things done well. This was purposeful as the arrangements weremy single greatest source of frustration on the CD. These are slavishreplications of the originals and as such, all manner of ingenuity andcreativity for solving the challenges of rendering hip-hop or hard-corerock music a cappella has been abandoned in favor of studio wizardry andsampling. This is not just another one of my rants against studio tricksbut listen closely to the amount of actual arranging that is featuredhere and accurate or not, it *feels* like there just isn't much goingon except exceptionally well-thought out and sampled VP, a thumpingbass that is also the beneficiary of some EQ magic, and a single blockof voices singing chords or rhythm in unison (or perhaps something 2separate groups jointly forming a background). Sure there are screechingguitars when there should be screeching guitars but just because youcan replicate the sound does not mean you always should. And even moreinexcusable is that once the group has settled on the replicated soundit wants, they just don't budge. Second and third verses and chorusessound exactly the same as the first. OK, so I understand that's how thesong goes, but when a cappella arrangements like these — if you canreally call them that — bring absolutely nothing new to the table, I'drather just pop in the original and go that route instead.
In the liner notes, the Clefs loftily pronounce that since 1977,"a cappella music has evolved drastically. This album reflects thatjoint transformation through a variety of song selections, arrangingtechniques, and singing styles." To that I say: hogwash. But for 2 or3 tracks, virtually the same arranging technique is used throughoutand those don't prove much except that on the plus side, these guyssing nicely together without the gimmicks but on the down side, there'slittle substance to their arrangements without the benefit of technology(though I'll admit to a nostalgic moment hearing original House JackBrannon Wiles' 15 year-old arrangement ofCarolina In My Mind.)
One last point of honorable mention: Anoop Desai.This guy is a freshman? Look out! If he doesn't win aCARA for best soloist before hegraduates in 2008, there is no justice.
