I don't think it's a dumb question. Of course Les didn't imply that one is unconditionally better than the other - it is an interesting question about group dynamics and how you arrange music and layer sounds.

I used to sing in a quartet which is now a trio. There are pros and cons, but the bottom line is, we couldn't find the ideal 'fourth person', so we remain a trio until that day.

The Pros: It's easier to learn new material It's easier to blend three voices than four It's easier to hear everyone, and therefore easier to achieve a higher musical standard faster It's easier to organise rehearsals It's easier to reach concensus It lends itself more to have a soloist on a song and two minor parts You need fewer mikes on stage It might be difficult to find 3 people of like mind, but imagine how much harder it is to find 4 people!

The trio can work if you arrange the music properly - ie, have a 'bottom end' sound, a middle and a top line, which is usually but not always the solo line. I've heard trios that were too bottom heavy - cello, low voice and low percussion - and it just sounded wrong.

The Cons:

some songs just NEED that fourth line to get the complexities in there. We need to import a fourth person from time to time. If you're strictly a vocal group, the existing (mainly pre-20th century) repertoire is limited. Trios can be tricky in a personal sense, although they are not always. Alliances form and tend to leave one person out a bit, and it's usually unintentional. A quartet - although just one person more - can often avoid the 2 vs 1 syndrome (although that's a generalisation).

Callie