It's coming up to school production time again, and to try and avoid the issues I had last year with numerous wireless mics and feedback, I am going to take the advice of those helpful folk on here who advised me about 31 channel EQ's and ringing out the room. I feel a lot more prepared than I did last year (that being my first time with theatre sound).

So, a question which I think I know the answer to, but just want to double check...

where in the signal chain does the EQ go?

I have the Yamaha 16/6 c mixer

thanks

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

the EQ would normally go on the outputs of the mixer. between the mixer and the speaker-management/amps.

You can either use the inserts on the mixer outputs if your mixer has them, or just plug the mixer outputs into the EQ, and then the outputs of the EQ into your speaker management processor, or directly into the amps if you don't use a speaker management processor.

btw, its not a 32 channel EQ, its a 30 (or 31) band EQ, or 3rd Octave EQ.

--------------------
www.Lozjackson.com

If you're ringing out the FOH you have two options:
1. Connect your mixers L-R outputs to the EQ, then send its outputs back to your multicore
2. If your mixer has it, use two Insert cables and use the Mix Insert points

If you have the option to use the Inserts, I'd go for it as it means two things:
1. You won't need 4 XLR patch cords to go Mixer-EQ-Multicore, just two inserts
2. If something goes wrong you can just pull out the EQ inserts, rather than having to re-patch your main outputs

--------------------
Joel Nichols - Owner and Director - Revolution Audio
www.revolutionaudio.co.uk

Quote Joel Nichols:

---

If you have the option to use the Inserts, I'd go for it as it means two things:
1. You won't need 4 XLR patch cords to go Mixer-EQ-Multicore, just two inserts
2. If something goes wrong you can just pull out the EQ inserts, rather than having to re-patch your main outputs

---

.. and 3. the meters on your mixer will show the post-EQ levels

--------------------
www.Lozjackson.com

Quote Bossman:

---

the EQ would normally go on the outputs of the mixer. between the mixer and the speaker-management/amps.

You can either use the inserts on the mixer outputs if your mixer has them, or just plug the mixer outputs into the EQ, and then the outputs of the EQ into your speaker management processor, or directly into the amps if you don't use a speaker management processor.

btw, its not a 32 channel EQ, its a 30 (or 31) band EQ, or 3rd Octave EQ.

---

thanks bossman - and I noticed afterwards I had put 32 in the title, 31 in the question and channel instead of band!

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Quote Joel Nichols:

---

If you're ringing out the FOH you have two options:
1. Connect your mixers L-R outputs to the EQ, then send its outputs back to your multicore
2. If your mixer has it, use two Insert cables and use the Mix Insert points

If you have the option to use the Inserts, I'd go for it as it means two things:
1. You won't need 4 XLR patch cords to go Mixer-EQ-Multicore, just two inserts
2. If something goes wrong you can just pull out the EQ inserts, rather than having to re-patch your main outputs

---

fantastic - thank you

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Does your mixer have groups and group inserts?

If so an alternative solution would be to send your vocal mics to the group and put the EQ across the group insert, this would enable you to deal with vocal feedback issues more aggressively without destroying the music accompaniment, assuming that your system is sounding reasonable in the first place.

I'll often have a parametric EQ across the vocal group and then graphic EQ across the main outs.

Seablade will be along shortly with a few gems as he specializes in this sort of thing.

Bob

--------------------
www.bickerton.co.nz

Quote geefunk:

---

It's coming up to school production time again, and to try and avoid the issues I had last year with numerous wireless mics and feedback, I am going to take the advice of those helpful folk on here who advised me about 31 channel EQ's and ringing out the room. I feel a lot more prepared than I did last year (that being my first time with theatre sound).

So, a question which I think I know the answer to, but just want to double check...

where in the signal chain does the EQ go?

I have the Yamaha 16/6 c mixer

thanks

---

With today's head-worn wireless mics there shouldn't really be feedback issues unless you're trying to run ridiculously high sound levels (is there an out-of-control live band?) Even then, I'm not sure a single static eq is going to help much.

What are you doing about stage monitors? This is where feedback typically happens.

One, possibly related, thought. Putting a couple of speakers at the back of the hall (ideally with appropriate delay, but that isn't difficult or expensive to arrange) allows the "main" speakers to be softer.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

With today's head-worn wireless mics there shouldn't really be feedback issues unless you're trying to run ridiculously high sound levels (is there an out-of-control live band?) Even then, I'm not sure a single static eq is going to help much.

What are you doing about stage monitors? This is where feedback typically happens.

One, possibly related, thought. Putting a couple of speakers at the back of the hall (ideally with appropriate delay, but that isn't difficult or expensive to arrange) allows the "main" speakers to be softer.

---

thanks Wombat - last year we did have a band who were out of control - particularly the drummer. He won't be coming back this year as his attitude simply was that he couldn't play quietly. I am also a musician, so understand the issues, but despite offering him brushes and Hotrods, he wouldn't use them. the situation wasn't helped by the band being positioned right next to one side of the audience, so the FOH needed to compensate for that.
I'm having the band behind the audience this year, so that should help.


It was mostly the stage monitors that fedback, but it wasn't helped by cheap AKG mics. Again, we won't be getting them again as the company themselves admitted they were to be binned as they had so many issues with them.

I had only been in the school a couple of months, so all of these things were out of my control. I will be ordering the mics this year, and will go for Sennheisers.

I don't have enough of a budget to hire anymore speakers for the back of the hall, but good thought though, cheers.

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Quote Bob Bickerton:

---

Does your mixer have groups and group inserts?

If so an alternative solution would be to send your vocal mics to the group and put the EQ across the group insert, this would enable you to deal with vocal feedback issues more aggressively without destroying the music accompaniment, assuming that your system is sounding reasonable in the first place.

I'll often have a parametric EQ across the vocal group and then graphic EQ across the main outs.

Seablade will be along shortly with a few gems as he specializes in this sort of thing.

Bob

---

hmmm, will have to check the mixer for groups - but my gut says yes.
thanks, will give that some thought too....

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Quote geefunk:

---

I'm having the band behind the audience this year, so that should help.

---

Behind the AUDIENCE? Novel idea! Both they and the stage performance will be VERY dependent on monitoring. It can get complicated.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote geefunk:

---

I'm having the band behind the audience this year, so that should help.

---

Behind the AUDIENCE? Novel idea! Both they and the stage performance will be VERY dependent on monitoring. It can get complicated.

---

Likely a very bad idea to be honest. The people in the back will hear far more of the band, the people in the front far more of the stage hopefully, so maybe 1/3 of your audience will get decent sound without a good strong reinforcement system(Which it doesn't sound like that is the case here sorry.)

Will come back to other points in a moment...

Seablade

Quote Bob Bickerton:

---

Does your mixer have groups and group inserts?

If so an alternative solution would be to send your vocal mics to the group and put the EQ across the group insert, this would enable you to deal with vocal feedback issues more aggressively without destroying the music accompaniment, assuming that your system is sounding reasonable in the first place.

I'll often have a parametric EQ across the vocal group and then graphic EQ across the main outs.

Seablade will be along shortly with a few gems as he specializes in this sort of thing.

Bob

---

Bob hit it pretty well, a 4 band eq on the group inserts can be pretty handy(Especially as you can then use groups for processing all your men, all your women, people with hats, etc. once instead of on each channel, though if you have the channels splitting channels is useful as well), however the Yamaha 16/6, without going and looking at my MG upstairs, as I recall has no insert points on any output. As a result, your best bet is going to be to go from your Main Outs, into the EQ, and out of the EQ to your amps.

When you ring out the system, you will be aiming primarily, first and foremost, to get as even a response(Meaning all frequencies reproduced equally) across your entire listening area. If you need information on how to do this go ahead and ask, there are a couple methods that can be used, but it is a post in itself.

Quote:

---

With today's head-worn wireless mics there shouldn't really be feedback issues unless you're trying to run ridiculously high sound levels

---

Depends. I have seen far to many spaces with a combination of several problems... one is the producer for the event wants levels to loud obviously, but also the main reinforcement I have seen far to often be placed back over the stage instead of on the front edge with a front fill system, which you can get away with in concert systems much easier than in theatrical where you are most likely to be using Omni mics for various reasons. As a result feedback in those types of spaces comes very easily.

Quote:

---

What are you doing about stage monitors? This is where feedback typically happens.

---

Generally I will not put vocals in the stage monitors unless absolutely needed, especially not with a console like what was described where my ability to control them is a bit more limited than I would like. As a result feedback shouldn't be to much of an issue from monitors. Especially in theater if you start from the stance of, vocals aren't going in the monitors, and don't draw attention to it(In other words don't mention it unless it is brought up) in about 90-95% of cases I have been involved with I haven't needed to put them in the monitors and it allowed me to keep monitor levels sensible as well much easier and gave the performers a reason to sing out to hear themselves.

Quote:

---

One, possibly related, thought. Putting a couple of speakers at the back of the hall (ideally with appropriate delay, but that isn't difficult or expensive to arrange) allows the "main" speakers to be softer.

---

Just to clarify, you are referring to placing them to COVER the back of the hall, not placed on the back walls facing forwards right? If it is the latter PLEASE NO! I have seen it far to often, it never works well in my opinion.(Ill save the technical reasons why this is a bad idea and won't work for a different thread) The former however is very common in theater, but considering a 31 band EQ sounds like an investment, chances are at this stage of the game I would bet delays are not available to do this properly.

Quote:

---

thanks Wombat - last year we did have a band who were out of control - particularly the drummer. He won't be coming back this year as his attitude simply was that he couldn't play quietly. I am also a musician, so understand the issues, but despite offering him brushes and Hotrods, he wouldn't use them. the situation wasn't helped by the band being positioned right next to one side of the audience, so the FOH needed to compensate for that.

---

Yes getting musicians that know how to play well at all dynamics is important. I work with a lot of drummers(And musicians) and there are some I will use in a heartbeat for concerts, but not theater, and some I will use in a heartbeat for theater. It requires a bit of a different skillset to be able to accommodate not only what you need for the music, but what is happening on stage and the actor's performance.

Two alternatives for you to placing the band in the back of the house. The first one I would suggest considering is placing the band at the back of the stage. This depends on your scenic design obviously, but is a far better option and even helps make monitoring easier if done correctly with skilled musicians. Be careful of blocking of singers near the band in this case.

Another option that REQUIRES strong monitoring, so I don't suspect it to be an option in your case but maybe I am wrong, is to place the band in a different room if all else fails. This is a practice becoming more common, not one I am particularly a fan of, but can help in situations where you have run out of other options. I would certainly do it over putting them at the back of the house myself.

Obviously the standard of the front of the house in a pit is always there, and at the very least using drum shields and instrument shields, and gobos to help control as much of the acoustic sound as needed is always recommended.

For feedback, remember only open up the mics being used at that time. If someone is on stage and not talking their mic doesn't need to be open. The faders on the MG aren't the nicest granted, but you should still be able to line by line mix with them in this manner and for every mic that is open on stage your overall gain before feedback will drop by about 3dB, so close whatever you don't need.

Hope this helps.

Seablade

Seablade, thank you. Taking the time to share your knowledge is so appreciated.

I'm liking your idea of keeping the vocals out of the stage monitors - I hadn't really thought about that being an option.

I have gone over as many of the options open to me in regards the band placement, and behind the audience seems like the best of a bad bunch. We have limited space and the area is still used throughout the day for normal school lessons - BUT, I have just had a meeting with the drama and music tutors and have suggested having the band on stage, behind the main performers, and we are going to try and do it. there are so many problems with it in regards the set and exit/entrance but we are really going to try and sort it out this way.

I am reading up as much as I can about ringing out, so thank you for your offer of extra advice. Only post if you have the time - I don't want to take up too much of it, I may need more advice come the performance!

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

I always find that with school age performers, not all can speak or sing at a decent level, so feedback can occur just trying to make some of them audible. The best solution is to make sure that the director knows to keep pushing them to sing out and project their lines as if the mics weren't there. The earlier in the rehearsal process they can get into the performance space and practice the better.

Depending on the production, having the band on stage can be a great option. I have played like that and it was a great addition to the action on stage. Drums/ drummers are always an issue though. Have you thought about using an electronic kit?

--------------------
http://www.theregularjoes.com
http://www.kmusic.co.uk/the-regular-joes/

Quote Geoff Westgate:

---

I always find that with school age performers, not all can speak or sing at a decent level, so feedback can occur just trying to make some of them audible. The best solution is to make sure that the director knows to keep pushing them to sing out and project their lines as if the mics weren't there. The earlier in the rehearsal process they can get into the performance space and practice the better.

Depending on the production, having the band on stage can be a great option. I have played like that and it was a great addition to the action on stage. Drums/ drummers are always an issue though. Have you thought about using an electronic kit?

---

thanks Geoff. We tried so hard last year to get them to project, and the more confident singers were fine, but the majority weren't.
An electronic kit could be an option - we do have one.....

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

An electronic kit can be an option, but not one I depend on. Most drummers don't like playing on them, even decent ones, and certainly not crappy ones. However a skilled drummer that knows how to control his volume at an acoustic kit can be much more effective on occasion. You won't necessarily have to amplify them at all, and might still want a drum shield depending on your circumstances (If you have spare velour to hang around the drummer this is a good thing) but the key is making sure you have a skilled drummer that can control their dynamics. This will be true no matter where you put the band.

Seablade

Quote geefunk:

---

I'm liking your idea of keeping the vocals out of the stage monitors - I hadn't really thought about that being an option.

---

It's an option. But the better the performers, the more they'll hate it. It's easy for a sound guy to say "you just sing into nothing, I'll take care of balance". It's a certain recipe for vocal strain, as the performers struggle to hear themselves. Particularly ones who have learnt to balance their performance with what's around them.

But is very, very standard in a lot of smaller musical theater, this is not a studio or live gig situation.

Full on headset mics do allow vocals in the monitors (side fill at least) but only really suit the look of WWRY, for almost anything else they are just wrong.

You also need to look at the orchestration, more recent work tends to be written assuming both good singers and very good reinforcement both of which are often lacking in a school context, go back to say south pacific or before and you start getting into things orchestrated for unamplified singers (granted with scary good tubes) which may work better for poor singers with some amplification, too late for this year, but something to talk to the department heads about.

Regards, Dan.

--------------------
Audiophiles use phono leads because they are unbalanced people!

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote geefunk:

---

I'm liking your idea of keeping the vocals out of the stage monitors - I hadn't really thought about that being an option.

---

It's an option. But the better the performers, the more they'll hate it. It's easy for a sound guy to say "you just sing into nothing, I'll take care of balance". It's a certain recipe for vocal strain, as the performers struggle to hear themselves. Particularly ones who have learnt to balance their performance with what's around them.

---

Actually if they are struggling to hear themselves then your stage volume is likely to loud IMO. Th ink about it, if they cant hear themselves over the stage volume, how is their mic going to pick them up effectively over the monitors, especially as in theater you are dealing with omnibus mice and the only thing that helps isolate the voice from the unwanted signal is the inverse square law, and you are effectively negating it having the stage volume over them.

it may be of use to note that some EQ devices also incorporate delay lines suitable for setting up secondary speaker positions...


a few years ago i found it was possible to do some clever stuff on a budget using a Samson Digital EQ .... which had delay settings in small enough steps to make it feasible....


also to note that reinforcement for theatre productions is often a radically different in approach to "band PA" productions.....



where a "rock n roll" live music event , the PA is inherently central to the sound, in the theatre event , it is often more about unobtrusive support of the acoustic performance, not entirely replacing it.....


it's a bit like the difference between the electric bass, and electric guitar, on the surface they're very similar, but they are actually different beasties and need rather different playing approaches and amplification.

oh, and band behind the audience is a truly bad idea.....

not only will much of the audience suffer from an unbalanced sound, but the delay time issue will affect the vocal performers as well if the monitoring isn't bang up to scratch...




one of my least fond memories is working with a relatively inexperienced large choir and an orchestra, in a large venue..... the choir listened to the orchestra instead of watching the conductor, and as a result, were at least 2/3 beats behind the music...... sometimes more..... what was even more distracting, was the choir listening to itself, in some pieces, where no orchestra, or very little, was playing.... given that the choir was quite wide, you could get a 2 beat delay between sides.... almost like a long slap back....



granted you;re not dealing with that here, but the cause and effect ought to be in mind when setting out the performance plan....

You are going to get weak singers in school productions and you are also likely to get producers who think that they will be heard if they're dancing around the stage at the same time. My own preference in this situation is for a few of the better singers to have their choreography altered so they can get nearer to mics (and to the front of stage) and give the music a chance to be heard. It doesn't look like professional stage productions with a load of good singers/dancers audible from wherever they are but it does work and with a bit of forethought can be made into a feature, not a defect.

It's very easy to spend a lot of time and effort amplifying nothing more than footfalls! Not sure how this all fits in when the band's at the back of the stage, but I thought I'd mention it.

Quote seablade:

---

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote geefunk:

---

I'm liking your idea of keeping the vocals out of the stage monitors - I hadn't really thought about that being an option.

---

It's an option. But the better the performers, the more they'll hate it. It's easy for a sound guy to say "you just sing into nothing, I'll take care of balance". It's a certain recipe for vocal strain, as the performers struggle to hear themselves. Particularly ones who have learnt to balance their performance with what's around them.

---

Actually if they are struggling to hear themselves then your stage volume is likely to loud IMO. Th ink about it, if they cant hear themselves over the stage volume, how is their mic going to pick them up effectively over the monitors, especially as in theater you are dealing with omnibus mice and the only thing that helps isolate the voice from the unwanted signal is the inverse square law, and you are effectively negating it having the stage volume over them.

---

I LOVE "omnibus mice"! Curse of the spell-checker? :-)

A head mic will probably be omni, yes. But it's an inch from the mouth, for goodness' sake!

All I can say is - "get on that stage yourself and try performing to bad monitors!" And share my personal experience that good monitoring, where the performers hear the music AND themselves, IS possible, and is regularly achieved without particularly esoteric equipment. The only problems come with attempting to run the show too loud.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

I LOVE "omnibus mice"! Curse of the spell-checker? :-)

A head mic will probably be omni, yes. But it's an inch from the mouth, for goodness' sake!

All I can say is - "get on that stage yourself and try performing to bad monitors!" And share my personal experience that good monitoring, where the performers hear the music AND themselves, IS possible, and is regularly achieved without particularly esoteric equipment. The only problems come with attempting to run the show too loud.

---

Yea typing on my tablet, is it obvious?

Actually I do go out on stage every time I dial in basic levels on my monitors for shows I design, and any time I suspect there may be a problem with them and sing with them myself to ensure that I can do it. If I can't there is a problem most likely, if I can and I feel comfortable then it is a different story.

Also keep in mind there are two different styles of mica used in theater, yes the boom style will be right next to the mouth and yes you can feed vocalist into monitors much easier with these. But forehead mounted and behind the ear are exceedingly popular for theater where you you don't want to see the mics, and in those cases the mic is either the same approximate distance or even sfarther away from your mouth than your ear which is what you are trying to balance with the monitors.

ok, band at the back of the audience is out. Thanks for the persuasion

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Quote seablade:

---

Also keep in mind there are two different styles of mica used in theater, yes the boom style will be right next to the mouth and yes you can feed vocalist into monitors much easier with these. But forehead mounted and behind the ear are exceedingly popular for theater where you you don't want to see the mics, and in those cases the mic is either the same approximate distance or even sfarther away from your mouth than your ear which is what you are trying to balance with the monitors.

---

You've lost me there! What do distances between mic, ear and mouth have to do with the price of fish? Even in the hairline, the mic will be enormously closer to the performer's mouth than to the foldback speakers.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote seablade:

---

Also keep in mind there are two different styles of mica used in theater, yes the boom style will be right next to the mouth and yes you can feed vocalist into monitors much easier with these. But forehead mounted and behind the ear are exceedingly popular for theater where you you don't want to see the mics, and in those cases the mic is either the same approximate distance or even sfarther away from your mouth than your ear which is what you are trying to balance with the monitors.

---

You've lost me there! What do distances between mic, ear and mouth have to do with the price of fish? Even in the hairline, the mic will be enormously closer to the performer's mouth than to the foldback speakers.

---

Makes a huge difference whether the mic is 2cm away from the mouth compared to 10cm, inverse square law, as you well know.

And no they're not related to the price of fish.

My experience suggests that when working with school groups, even reasonable ones, it's enough of a challenge to get reasonable vocal level out front, without considering monitors, and that's assuming a well behaved band. Generally speaking, unless the school owns the radio mics, the performers are used to rehearsing without monitoring anyway.

My advice would be to steer clear of putting vocals through monitors.

Bob

--------------------
www.bickerton.co.nz

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote seablade:

---

Also keep in mind there are two different styles of mica used in theater, yes the boom style will be right next to the mouth and yes you can feed vocalist into monitors much easier with these. But forehead mounted and behind the ear are exceedingly popular for theater where you you don't want to see the mics, and in those cases the mic is either the same approximate distance or even sfarther away from your mouth than your ear which is what you are trying to balance with the monitors.

---

You've lost me there! What do distances between mic, ear and mouth have to do with the price of fish? Even in the hairline, the mic will be enormously closer to the performer's mouth than to the foldback speakers.

---

If your ears can hear your monitors clearly and effectively so can your mic which is gained up to the eyeballs to pick up a distant voice - hence salmon.

--------------------
Ohm's Law states, "Your PA isn't as powerful as you think it is".

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

You've lost me there! What do distances between mic, ear and mouth have to do with the price of fish? Even in the hairline, the mic will be enormously closer to the performer's mouth than to the foldback speakers.

---

Bob and Shufflebeat both hit it pretty well, but now that I am on an actual computer instead of my tablet lets see if I can clarify a bit more. Sorry I wasn't very specific in my description earlier just because I didn't feel like typing it out on a tablet.

Here is the basic idea. You are using monitors to provide sounds your ear can't hear very well. If the mic is the same distance from your mouth as your ear, that means your mic is going to pick up a similar mix. So if you are hearing the monitors louder than your voice, your mic is going to pick up a very similar sound and you will hear more monitors than voice in the mix. Obviously, even a trained performer, will only be able to up their own volume so much without risking doing damage to their voice, so the answer is that you will likely need to lower your overall stage volume, as raising the voice in the monitors will only cause feedback and phasing.

On the other hand a boom mic only an inch away from the mouth, via inverse square law, will mean that it picks up the sound from your voice much stronger than your ear does, especially when compared to the sound of the monitors, and as such you can have more volume on stage with less feedback due to not needing as much gain on the mic. Also as such putting voices into the monitors with less problems due to phasing and feedback becomes much more possible as you would need much stronger mic levels in the monitors to cause feedback as less gain is applied to the mic.

Now all this is tempered slightly in reality compared to pure theory thankfully, for instance when placing the mic by the ear we tend to cheat it forward a little and place it on the nice resonant cheekbone, but the basic concepts still apply and reality carries out the basic theory quite well in general(Meaning instead of straight 6dB difference per doubling of distance you end up in a little better shape, but not to much, especially when discussing higher frequencies as needed by consonants to understand what is being sung).

That clarify a little?

Seablade

EDIT: For the sake of clarity, I will state again that this really only applies in theater where omni mics are in constant use, in concerts we rarely use omni mics on a stage, so the above is even less of an issue despite generally the voice or source also being only a few inches at most from the mic.

What puzzles me is why isn't it common practice to run a signal from the mic into a headphone amp? It seems like a fairly obvious answer but I see different versions of this problem from time to time.

--------------------
Ohm's Law states, "Your PA isn't as powerful as you think it is".

Quote shufflebeat:

---

What puzzles me is why isn't it common practice to run a signal from the mic into a headphone amp? It seems like a fairly obvious answer but I see different versions of this problem from time to time.

---

I am missing what exactly you are trying to solve with this?

Seablade

The "more me" issue. I've wondered about it for some time but then was only using wired dynamics on stands. I did (played) some gigs with a flute player using a mini boom headmic and we discussed this over shandies one night. It seemed obvious then but that might have been the shandies

I don't work in theatre or with headmics so am quite prepared to hear 21 very good reasons why it's a very bad idea but I'd be inclined to try a basic mix in monitors leaving everyone to "more me" themselves if the kit existed (with limiters).

--------------------
Ohm's Law states, "Your PA isn't as powerful as you think it is".

Quote shufflebeat:

---

The "more me" issue. I've wondered about it for some time but then was only using wired dynamics on stands. I did (played) some gigs with a flute player using a mini boom headmic and we discussed this over shandies one night. It seemed obvious then but that might have been the shandies

I don't work in theatre or with headmics so am quite prepared to hear 21 very good reasons why it's a very bad idea but I'd be inclined to try a basic mix in monitors leaving everyone to "more me" themselves if the kit existed (with limiters).

---

Ok so you are asking why not have a headphone amp on the performer with their mic going into it and a basic mix going into it?

Well several simple reasons, one most headphone amps aren't wireless and need external power, two many don't have mixing capabilities, three you would still need to get the general mix to the performer.

What you are describing is really the use case for wireless IEMs. In fact if you look at Lectrosonics' recent addition in this space, as well as to a lesser extent Shure, you will see options similar to where you are going, but much more feasible. They essentially will send multiple mixes to the receivers (Which are obviously wireless and battery powered) and the performer can 'mix' between them. This has existed in basic forms for some time, for instance I used to use the PSM-600 some time ago which were 'stereo' so to speak but you could mix between the two channels allowing you to send a mono mix and themselves for example. Maybe not common on the lower end IEMs but have been in the higher end for some time.

However this increases cost greatly and performers have to be trained to use IEMs, as it sounds very different to them compared to listening to open air and monitor systems. As a result for many people it just isn't an effective option. Combine this on top of, you won't see a performer reach around to adjust their mix in theater, as the receiver would be under layers of costume most likely and not easily accessible, and most performers (Correctly) won't break character to do this, they will just rip out the earpiece first the mixing yourself just isn't as powerful a tool as a result in theater. It is far more important to get the mix right at the console.

And of course you have another wire to hide on the head, which no A2 really wants;)

Seablade

ok, well this helps a lot. Last year I had an over enthusiastic band mixed with under confident performers. Plus I put the vocals through the monitors. At any one time there were 8 mics on stage at once, all competing for space and all trying to be heard and every sound source bouncing around a large atrium and being picked up by every mic....it's no wonder I had issues with feedback!

So I will try to have the band behind the performers. they can (hopefully) play quieter. I will provide vocals in the bands monitor, but not for the performers.

In theory, if the band is behind them the performers, will they even need a monitor?

thanks

--------------------
I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over
Twitter

Quote geefunk:

---

ok, well this helps a lot. Last year I had an over enthusiastic band mixed with under confident performers. Plus I put the vocals through the monitors. At any one time there were 8 mics on stage at once, all competing for space and all trying to be heard and every sound source bouncing around a large atrium and being picked up by every mic....it's no wonder I had issues with feedback!

So I will try to have the band behind the performers. they can (hopefully) play quieter. I will provide vocals in the bands monitor, but not for the performers.

In theory, if the band is behind them the performers, will they even need a monitor?

thanks

---

Side fill might still be a good idea to create a better mix for singing to (more piano?) and because it might seem strange to have the band coming from behind the singers (from the singers point of view).

Bob

--------------------
www.bickerton.co.nz

Quote geefunk:

---

In theory, if the band is behind them the performers, will they even need a monitor?

thanks

---

All depends actually. For example if using a digital keyboard, they will likely need some method of hearing that, as more often than not that is where they will be listening for their notes.

Of course as I said, this all depends, I recently did a show on a 3/4 thrust stage where the band was behind the 'proscenium' and had the FOH coverage start at the 'proscenium' so I actually designed the stereo speakers for the band coverage FOH to also cover the thrust where 95% of the acting was taking place and as a result didn't need much in the way of monitoring. Note that these speakers didn't have the vocals in them, those were in a seperate set of speakers that didn't cover the stage to help keep feedback to a minimum, and I was also using boom mics so inverse square worked in my favor a bit more there.

Making decisions like this in the realm of theater is the reason why sound designers exist, even in musicals. In a musical a theatrical sound designer is the person responsible for designing the reproduction system and ensuring proper coverage, monitoring, etc. They may or may not be mixing as well(Depends on the size of the place really whether they will have a separate engineer or even department).

Of course I am up right now preparing my syllabus for teaching a class on this very topic as well;)

Seablade

Quote Bob Bickerton:

---

Side fill might still be a good idea to create a better mix for singing to (more piano?) and because it might seem strange to have the band coming from behind the singers (from the singers point of view).

Bob

---

Side fills are common on a theater stage to help keep them out of sight and a good solution. In as far as it seeming strange for the band to be behind the singer, not sure why you would think that to be honest, but I can assure you it is a non issue for anyone I have ever worked with. If you think about it the band behind the vocalist is what happens in concert music anyways, so I think I am misunderstanding what you think is strange there.

Seablade

Quote seablade:

---

Quote shufflebeat:

---

The "more me" issue. I've wondered about it for some time but then was only using wired dynamics on stands. I did (played) some gigs with a flute player using a mini boom headmic and we discussed this over shandies one night. It seemed obvious then but that might have been the shandies

I don't work in theatre or with headmics so am quite prepared to hear 21 very good reasons why it's a very bad idea but I'd be inclined to try a basic mix in monitors leaving everyone to "more me" themselves if the kit existed (with limiters).

---

Ok so you are asking why not have a headphone amp on the performer with their mic going into it and a basic mix going into it?

Well several simple reasons, one most headphone amps aren't wireless and need external power, two many don't have mixing capabilities, three you would still need to get the general mix to the performer.

What you are describing is really the use case for wireless IEMs. In fact if you look at Lectrosonics' recent addition in this space, as well as to a lesser extent Shure, you will see options similar to where you are going, but much more feasible. They essentially will send multiple mixes to the receivers (Which are obviously wireless and battery powered) and the performer can 'mix' between them. This has existed in basic forms for some time, for instance I used to use the PSM-600 some time ago which were 'stereo' so to speak but you could mix between the two channels allowing you to send a mono mix and themselves for example. Maybe not common on the lower end IEMs but have been in the higher end for some time.

However this increases cost greatly and performers have to be trained to use IEMs, as it sounds very different to them compared to listening to open air and monitor systems. As a result for many people it just isn't an effective option. Combine this on top of, you won't see a performer reach around to adjust their mix in theater, as the receiver would be under layers of costume most likely and not easily accessible, and most performers (Correctly) won't break character to do this, they will just rip out the earpiece first the mixing yourself just isn't as powerful a tool as a result in theater. It is far more important to get the mix right at the console.

And of course you have another wire to hide on the head, which no A2 really wants;)

Seablade

---

Sorry, not explaining myself very well.

What I'm suggesting is a headphone output on the headset transmitter, allowing the performer to dial in some of (just) themselves into an earpiece/buds to complement a basic mix (possibly including enough of all vocals for cues) coming from wedges/sidefills or whatever.

I find this the best monitoring setup for me anyway (wired Beta58) when I'm with the band. They hear enough of me to work with through the wedges, I get the detail and an element of isolation from one ear of IEM.

It just seems a pity not to when your mic is already bolted to your head anyway.

--------------------
Ohm's Law states, "Your PA isn't as powerful as you think it is".

Quote seablade:

---

Quote Bob Bickerton:

---

Side fill might still be a good idea to create a better mix for singing to (more piano?) and because it might seem strange to have the band coming from behind the singers (from the singers point of view).

Bob

---

Side fills are common on a theater stage to help keep them out of sight and a good solution. In as far as it seeming strange for the band to be behind the singer, not sure why you would think that to be honest, but I can assure you it is a non issue for anyone I have ever worked with. If you think about it the band behind the vocalist is what happens in concert music anyways, so I think I am misunderstanding what you think is strange there.

Seablade

---

I was thinking it may sound strange if the band is distant and the balance from the band is not good, presuming the singers are getting direct sound from band elements but aren't hearing much of FOH and particularly from the point of view of hearing the principal instrument they would need to pitch to, which is generally piano/keyboard.

Bob

--------------------
www.bickerton.co.nz