I have used these two freeware pieces of software for several years now. They are both designed with radio stations in mind but I have found them extremely useful in the live sound arena. I think that once you've used them, you won't go back to the Windows Media/Itunes players again.
CABAN
http://www.caban.nl/
This software gives you essentially 4 playback decks with the ability to see a count up and down. The software allows for each deck to go out individual outs if you desire. You can build playlists, have the next song just load and wait for your play command or continue on. One of the greatest features is that you can remote start the decks via midi or through the game port. This software makes doing live theatrical events an ease due to the programming flexibility.
I have also been able to run multiple instances of the program successfully as well, when in a pinch.
JazlerShow!
http://www.jazler.com/products/JazlerShow.asp
I use this software with a touchscreen when travelling with tracks. It is much more intuitive than finding a mouse and such.
drum booth design
Here is a drum booth that I designed for a client once. The importance was to make it simple so that the average carpenter could wrap his head around it. Also, the panels were standardized.
My pet peeve for most drum booths is that that they don't make it easy to get into front of the kit. So my plan calls for the front wood panel fronts to be on hinges or removable so that if you need to readjust the kick mic (which you usually have to fairly often), you simply address the kick from outside the front through the removable/hinged panel.
I made this one on a rather large scale to minimize the reflections inside the booth. Also the carpenter added some cross support on the ceiling which actually made a great place to mount one of those mic studs and remove overhead stands. The other reason for having wood on the bottom 1/4 is to visually remove the clutter of stand bases, mic cables, mic stands, etc.
Ventilation is important. Most booths forget this. The client actually left some space in the ceiling for heat to rise out of the booth. The plan asked for a vent low where some sort of fan could push air towards the drummer. But some sort of vent on top will keep the heat from building up inside.
The back wall is standard fiberglass filled wall with a cloth cover that creates better acoustical environment.
This plan, I feel, looks better than those commercial ones, especially since you can choose your own color scheme. It is also cheaper, and at worse, the same cost.
OT - my idea to improve the internet experience
I know that everyone has an opinion, but this is my space and I will voice mine.
I have stated for years that I see a simple solution to the cleaning up of the internet experience. I see it as a similar issue that cities today have when trying to control the adult industry. We live in the USA and there are freedoms that can't be trampled on, but we can corral or steer them. Most cities in these United States, have in already in place, laws that limit where an adult oriented establishment can set up shop. More importantly, they limit where they can't be. Usually it goes something along the lines of being at least X amount of feet away from places that are known haunts of underage children (schools, parks, etc.) These laws have been in effect for years and have stood the test of our freedoms.
So I ask, why not do something similar in the world wide web (or within the US borders, more specifically).
I remember reading a couple things a few years back. First, there are only a handful of locations that all internet traffic comes through when entering the US proper. Second, by far the majority of adult entertainment internet sites are hosted outside of the US borders. I want to say that the figure is somewhere above 90%. Most adult entertainment is there for monetary purposes.
Here's my logic. If most of these sites that mom's find offensive are coming from outside of our borders, and there are pinch points at our borders, why not use that to our advantage. We can't stop the traffic because of the "freedoms" allotted in our country. But, we can direct the traffic, just like our cities already do.
My plan is simple.
First, make it a federal law that internet browsers only show material that contains a simple 2 bit header code that delineates the content being sent. 2 bits gives us 4 levels and the powers that be can determine what those are, but basically you will have a code deeming it good for all and a code deeming it only good for those above the age of 18. Also, the browser comes preset to only show the G rated stuff by default. So you don't try to go after the criminals who are outside of the US jurisdiction, you limit the browser companies (there are only a few out there, you know).
Second, you make it a federal law that any content coming through the major internet hubs (again only a few exist) must contain that header information, or it will be blocked.
So, if you are in the adult industry (gambling fall under this as well), then you will comply in order to keep your customers and profits. If you make a browser that doesn't comply, you will be fined, or jail or something.
Finally, there is a creation of an enforcement division somewhere that reacts to consumers reporting any unwanted content finding them. The enforcement folks issue a command to block that IP address at the pinch points until the offending organization complies.
There it is. I find this to be simple and it doesn't step on anyone's freedoms than before. If you want the content, then you tell the browser to show it. Just like the adult industry in the physical world, people will find their way to it if they want, but it isn't found accidentally by little kids. I am sure people will find a hack to the browsers but again, those will be the people that want to get that content. By far the majority will not go those lengths, and the conservatives will remain happy.
The only downside that I see to this will be a temporary slowdown in the internet due to those extra bits, but things will speed back up again just like in the past when streaming video/audio hit the net by force.
I have stated for years that I see a simple solution to the cleaning up of the internet experience. I see it as a similar issue that cities today have when trying to control the adult industry. We live in the USA and there are freedoms that can't be trampled on, but we can corral or steer them. Most cities in these United States, have in already in place, laws that limit where an adult oriented establishment can set up shop. More importantly, they limit where they can't be. Usually it goes something along the lines of being at least X amount of feet away from places that are known haunts of underage children (schools, parks, etc.) These laws have been in effect for years and have stood the test of our freedoms.
So I ask, why not do something similar in the world wide web (or within the US borders, more specifically).
I remember reading a couple things a few years back. First, there are only a handful of locations that all internet traffic comes through when entering the US proper. Second, by far the majority of adult entertainment internet sites are hosted outside of the US borders. I want to say that the figure is somewhere above 90%. Most adult entertainment is there for monetary purposes.
Here's my logic. If most of these sites that mom's find offensive are coming from outside of our borders, and there are pinch points at our borders, why not use that to our advantage. We can't stop the traffic because of the "freedoms" allotted in our country. But, we can direct the traffic, just like our cities already do.
My plan is simple.
First, make it a federal law that internet browsers only show material that contains a simple 2 bit header code that delineates the content being sent. 2 bits gives us 4 levels and the powers that be can determine what those are, but basically you will have a code deeming it good for all and a code deeming it only good for those above the age of 18. Also, the browser comes preset to only show the G rated stuff by default. So you don't try to go after the criminals who are outside of the US jurisdiction, you limit the browser companies (there are only a few out there, you know).
Second, you make it a federal law that any content coming through the major internet hubs (again only a few exist) must contain that header information, or it will be blocked.
So, if you are in the adult industry (gambling fall under this as well), then you will comply in order to keep your customers and profits. If you make a browser that doesn't comply, you will be fined, or jail or something.
Finally, there is a creation of an enforcement division somewhere that reacts to consumers reporting any unwanted content finding them. The enforcement folks issue a command to block that IP address at the pinch points until the offending organization complies.
There it is. I find this to be simple and it doesn't step on anyone's freedoms than before. If you want the content, then you tell the browser to show it. Just like the adult industry in the physical world, people will find their way to it if they want, but it isn't found accidentally by little kids. I am sure people will find a hack to the browsers but again, those will be the people that want to get that content. By far the majority will not go those lengths, and the conservatives will remain happy.
The only downside that I see to this will be a temporary slowdown in the internet due to those extra bits, but things will speed back up again just like in the past when streaming video/audio hit the net by force.
yet another SPL
I recently read some comments about Radio Snak spl meters and how they can be off by "X" amount in their readings. I understand the concept of wanting an accurate reading or an accurate piece of equipment, but what gets me is the underlying thought process.
It is like people think that some person out there in the crowd is walking around with their own personal dosimeter (which if read my previous comments about SPL you know is the only legal way to determine spl) and is going to call the cops and have someone arrested that very hour. Now, admittedly, I do not live in a military state here in the USA. So, maybe someone in one of those dictatorial situations might have to be worried about this. But here in the USA and most other free nations, it takes proof and time (lots of time in the US) to get to that point of a new pair of bracelets.
Without going into it again about how a real spl is determined, if for some reason someone complained and found a lawyer, then that lawyer will compose a document (more than likely a cease and desist) and send it to the offending party. But then someone who owns a dosimeter and is qualified to run it will have to show up to the next event and take readings. Even if this person is hired and brought in before a document is constructed, it would seem pretty obvious when someone shows up with a testing device mounted on a tripod is set up in your house of worship. BTW, most live events are not weekly in the same room except for those in the religious world.
So you went out and bought a Rad Snak meter and, Oh No!, it is off by 6 dBspl. Then someone comes by and makes a stink. There is this little concept called "due diligence". The fact that you even bought anything and are aware of what is going on shows that you care and that if you happen to fall into a grey, let alone harmful, situation, you are adequately showing that it wouldn't be intentional.
Alarmism isn't the prudent process here, folks. If you really want to cover your tail, then just keep a box of those squishy ear plugs in the booth with a little sign somewhere stating that hearing protection is available. Maybe charge them for it. We live in a free country, no one is forcing these folks to stay in the loud environment anyway. So how are they going to sue you intentionally. The only lawsuit that could stand would be where someone could state that they didn't know about the harm of loud environments and they can prove hearing damage. But if they own any personal music device they can't make that case since everyone puts in that little warning card in their packaging.
You want to watch your volume. That is great. I am all for it. But if you really want the true deal then go out and spend the money to get the true test equipment and stop worrying about the Snak. You know that they sell consumer level equipment anyway, it would be absurd to assume their gear be professional.
Look, you change your tires on your car to a different size, your speedometer is no longer accurate. Besides, your speedometer may or not be accurate with the factory tires anyway. Change the air pressure and it will make it wrong as well. That is why the cops usually go after folks going 5 or more over. Its all about intention. They know that there is that fudge factor.
My whole point is that you should use your ears and make the volume feel good and right. 95% of your crowd will go willingly to whatever that volume falls into. I have never heard a non-audio professional say, "Man if that was only 2.5 dBspl quieter, I would have been in heaven!" Its all perception.
It is like people think that some person out there in the crowd is walking around with their own personal dosimeter (which if read my previous comments about SPL you know is the only legal way to determine spl) and is going to call the cops and have someone arrested that very hour. Now, admittedly, I do not live in a military state here in the USA. So, maybe someone in one of those dictatorial situations might have to be worried about this. But here in the USA and most other free nations, it takes proof and time (lots of time in the US) to get to that point of a new pair of bracelets.
Without going into it again about how a real spl is determined, if for some reason someone complained and found a lawyer, then that lawyer will compose a document (more than likely a cease and desist) and send it to the offending party. But then someone who owns a dosimeter and is qualified to run it will have to show up to the next event and take readings. Even if this person is hired and brought in before a document is constructed, it would seem pretty obvious when someone shows up with a testing device mounted on a tripod is set up in your house of worship. BTW, most live events are not weekly in the same room except for those in the religious world.
So you went out and bought a Rad Snak meter and, Oh No!, it is off by 6 dBspl. Then someone comes by and makes a stink. There is this little concept called "due diligence". The fact that you even bought anything and are aware of what is going on shows that you care and that if you happen to fall into a grey, let alone harmful, situation, you are adequately showing that it wouldn't be intentional.
Alarmism isn't the prudent process here, folks. If you really want to cover your tail, then just keep a box of those squishy ear plugs in the booth with a little sign somewhere stating that hearing protection is available. Maybe charge them for it. We live in a free country, no one is forcing these folks to stay in the loud environment anyway. So how are they going to sue you intentionally. The only lawsuit that could stand would be where someone could state that they didn't know about the harm of loud environments and they can prove hearing damage. But if they own any personal music device they can't make that case since everyone puts in that little warning card in their packaging.
You want to watch your volume. That is great. I am all for it. But if you really want the true deal then go out and spend the money to get the true test equipment and stop worrying about the Snak. You know that they sell consumer level equipment anyway, it would be absurd to assume their gear be professional.
Look, you change your tires on your car to a different size, your speedometer is no longer accurate. Besides, your speedometer may or not be accurate with the factory tires anyway. Change the air pressure and it will make it wrong as well. That is why the cops usually go after folks going 5 or more over. Its all about intention. They know that there is that fudge factor.
My whole point is that you should use your ears and make the volume feel good and right. 95% of your crowd will go willingly to whatever that volume falls into. I have never heard a non-audio professional say, "Man if that was only 2.5 dBspl quieter, I would have been in heaven!" Its all perception.
Choir mics
I have a new favorite mic for choirs.
Recently, I have been dealing with a church that has a decent sized choir but they sing primarily with tracks. They want a decent amount of monitor thrown back at them (unfortunately, not unusual) plus they don't project a lot of volume in their singing. Part of this is due to the arrangement of being spread out and standing in straight lines vs. in a choral arrangement. So even with all of my experience in feedback control, I wasn't getting quite the level that I needed to make the pastor happy. Due to the stage design, the pastor didn't want to use hanging mics either.
I started looking at all of the options that I could find out about, calling friends and such. Throughout this, I heard that a large church of the same denomination of this church had done a mic shootout and had settled on the Earthworks SR series hypercardiod mics. Knowing that it would be an easier sell to this church, I thought that I would take a serious look at these mics.
Well, after looking a many polar plots it became obvious that the cool feature of the the earthworks hyper mics is that they basically have a cardiod front pattern with the hyper pattern on the back side. So really wide front pickup but great rejection on the back. Their rejection is fairly even across the frequency spectrum which most of the smaller mics don't have.
Here's the kicker that Earthworks doesn't want you to know. They have a series called the Flex series, which is designed for podium purposes. Upon looking at the costs of their mics, I noticed that the flex series is priced almost half of the SR series. This is more than likely due to the SR series picking up to 30Khz (but what PA speaker can adequately reproduce and throw such high freq's?) Also, the flex series has an option called "stiff center" that isn't really noted on the site. The stiff center only had a short gooseneck section then a straight tube followed by a goose section at the mic head.
So here's what I ended up getting. I bought the Earthworks FM720/HC stiff center. I bought the 27" version so that I don't use a boom arm on the mic stand. I let the 27" of the mic due the reach out. It looks actually very nice as noted by the pastor and his wife.
As I stated at the top, I now have a new favorite choir mic. These things performed extremely. During rehearsal, I could barely hear the choir director talk since she was standing within 6 feet of backside of the mic. Yet, it felt like I could hear the choir breathing - got them to about 85dBspl at FOH. The church is in heaven with the performance of their choir now. Plus the money that I saved them by finding the flex series.
I would like to thank the guys at Earthworks for helping me in this venture especially Dennis.
Recently, I have been dealing with a church that has a decent sized choir but they sing primarily with tracks. They want a decent amount of monitor thrown back at them (unfortunately, not unusual) plus they don't project a lot of volume in their singing. Part of this is due to the arrangement of being spread out and standing in straight lines vs. in a choral arrangement. So even with all of my experience in feedback control, I wasn't getting quite the level that I needed to make the pastor happy. Due to the stage design, the pastor didn't want to use hanging mics either.
I started looking at all of the options that I could find out about, calling friends and such. Throughout this, I heard that a large church of the same denomination of this church had done a mic shootout and had settled on the Earthworks SR series hypercardiod mics. Knowing that it would be an easier sell to this church, I thought that I would take a serious look at these mics.
Well, after looking a many polar plots it became obvious that the cool feature of the the earthworks hyper mics is that they basically have a cardiod front pattern with the hyper pattern on the back side. So really wide front pickup but great rejection on the back. Their rejection is fairly even across the frequency spectrum which most of the smaller mics don't have.
Here's the kicker that Earthworks doesn't want you to know. They have a series called the Flex series, which is designed for podium purposes. Upon looking at the costs of their mics, I noticed that the flex series is priced almost half of the SR series. This is more than likely due to the SR series picking up to 30Khz (but what PA speaker can adequately reproduce and throw such high freq's?) Also, the flex series has an option called "stiff center" that isn't really noted on the site. The stiff center only had a short gooseneck section then a straight tube followed by a goose section at the mic head.
So here's what I ended up getting. I bought the Earthworks FM720/HC stiff center. I bought the 27" version so that I don't use a boom arm on the mic stand. I let the 27" of the mic due the reach out. It looks actually very nice as noted by the pastor and his wife.
As I stated at the top, I now have a new favorite choir mic. These things performed extremely. During rehearsal, I could barely hear the choir director talk since she was standing within 6 feet of backside of the mic. Yet, it felt like I could hear the choir breathing - got them to about 85dBspl at FOH. The church is in heaven with the performance of their choir now. Plus the money that I saved them by finding the flex series.
I would like to thank the guys at Earthworks for helping me in this venture especially Dennis.
Consultants and the right Sound System
I was reading a forum and someone was expressing frustration with consultants. This person had brought in several consultants to help that person's church determine what to do to install a new PA. The person has been at this for a year and had received so many different answers that this person seemed frustrated in not having a decisive answer agreed upon to present to the church. . . .
A consultant is expected to provide a solution to a problem that has many viable answers. These answers are viable because just like a car, a sound system is made up of many parts. So just like there are many options when choosing a car, there are many options for the final sound solution. That is why the consultants don't like giving pat answers and why like the original thread of the "It depends" noted all of the frustration in lack of decisiveness that he felt with consultants. Every church is expecting different performance specifications. When I was touring, the PA that I had met our specs so it worked in multiple locations to varying degrees of success.
So with the car analogy, there are brand decisions and the cost differences related there. Each brand has different specs involved. Why do some people spec some brands over another? Well simply, it has to do with the concern over reputation. Why the concern? That is how you get your jobs and keep your family fed. Just like my mechanic will not ever tell me to go down to the giant megastore (you folks in arkansas know) to get parts for my car, but go to certain parts companies that cost more. He doesn't want inferior (in his opinion) performance to affect my opinion of him. The consultant will spec and and use stuff he trusts.
Everyone must make their profit. Otherwise they wouldn't be feeding the family. But, where this profit is made will vary from company and such.
Consultants that only consult make it straight. They make money off of their knowledge not equipment. Also, the cost the consultant will charge will also be based on his reputation (perceived expertise). So it is simple. The less the client knows what they want, the more time it takes to figure it out. The more it costs to consult the job. (BTW - this idea works with other contractors in the building trade - hence the reason a good architect is worth it.)
Installation and design/build folks can put that profit in several areas. They have the design/consultant area, they have the equipment area, they have the installation labor area. That is why you can take two bids with two similar systems and get ranges. If you are spec'ing specific equipment, some guys can't get it direct and go through wholesalers, therefore another discrepancy.
One thing that I do to try to get a better feel for an apples to apples comparison is to have just racks and stacks as well as FOH console and speaker processing bid on first. This limits the choices that the people make, allowing me to see what is going on in the bid. Plus, the items above are the bulk of any PA cost. Once I choose the company I wish to use, then I will ask for a comprehensive bid but with the new items separated out.
If I was a small church, I would make friends with larger churches that are doing something similar to your vision. The larger churches will have more experienced staff that can be a valuable asset. I know that in the large church that I worked for the smaller children's rooms were set up with the same amount of equipment that a smaller church would use in the main auditorium. Visit several of these churches and take notes. Most larger church engineers seem willing to help for not much if anything since they already have their day job. They usually won't be able to provide the services nor attention that a consultant can but most smaller situations don't need that to get something usable. But they can tell you what they would do based on their experiences.
All in all, the creating of a PA is like making a car. There are so many decisions that affect other decisions in the process, it is very hard to get the exact same answer from different consultants or installation companies. There are usually several "right" sound systems for a situation and not everyone will agree upon what is the best between the "right" choices. But that doesn't make any of the "right" choices wrong, just different.
My daughter turned 16 and wanted a car. I got her something that gets good gas mileage, fairly reliable, decently safe, and didn't cost much (since statistics show the first car accident happens in the first five years) nor required a loan. It is a good car and it meets the needs to get around. But she wanted something that looked cool, got worse gas mileage, wasn't as safe, and would require getting a loan. It took years before she saw the wisdom of my decision. I was her consultant. Still, I had a choice of many different cars that met her needs. If someone else was consulted, she may have gotten a different car. It would have cost a different amount as well. But I am sure that a good "consultant" would have chosen a car based on similar criteria and not hers. If that was the case, then who was right? The cheapest? The most reliable? All I know is that her decision wasn't. Why? She didn't have the experience to make a good one.
A consultant is expected to provide a solution to a problem that has many viable answers. These answers are viable because just like a car, a sound system is made up of many parts. So just like there are many options when choosing a car, there are many options for the final sound solution. That is why the consultants don't like giving pat answers and why like the original thread of the "It depends" noted all of the frustration in lack of decisiveness that he felt with consultants. Every church is expecting different performance specifications. When I was touring, the PA that I had met our specs so it worked in multiple locations to varying degrees of success.
So with the car analogy, there are brand decisions and the cost differences related there. Each brand has different specs involved. Why do some people spec some brands over another? Well simply, it has to do with the concern over reputation. Why the concern? That is how you get your jobs and keep your family fed. Just like my mechanic will not ever tell me to go down to the giant megastore (you folks in arkansas know) to get parts for my car, but go to certain parts companies that cost more. He doesn't want inferior (in his opinion) performance to affect my opinion of him. The consultant will spec and and use stuff he trusts.
Everyone must make their profit. Otherwise they wouldn't be feeding the family. But, where this profit is made will vary from company and such.
Consultants that only consult make it straight. They make money off of their knowledge not equipment. Also, the cost the consultant will charge will also be based on his reputation (perceived expertise). So it is simple. The less the client knows what they want, the more time it takes to figure it out. The more it costs to consult the job. (BTW - this idea works with other contractors in the building trade - hence the reason a good architect is worth it.)
Installation and design/build folks can put that profit in several areas. They have the design/consultant area, they have the equipment area, they have the installation labor area. That is why you can take two bids with two similar systems and get ranges. If you are spec'ing specific equipment, some guys can't get it direct and go through wholesalers, therefore another discrepancy.
One thing that I do to try to get a better feel for an apples to apples comparison is to have just racks and stacks as well as FOH console and speaker processing bid on first. This limits the choices that the people make, allowing me to see what is going on in the bid. Plus, the items above are the bulk of any PA cost. Once I choose the company I wish to use, then I will ask for a comprehensive bid but with the new items separated out.
If I was a small church, I would make friends with larger churches that are doing something similar to your vision. The larger churches will have more experienced staff that can be a valuable asset. I know that in the large church that I worked for the smaller children's rooms were set up with the same amount of equipment that a smaller church would use in the main auditorium. Visit several of these churches and take notes. Most larger church engineers seem willing to help for not much if anything since they already have their day job. They usually won't be able to provide the services nor attention that a consultant can but most smaller situations don't need that to get something usable. But they can tell you what they would do based on their experiences.
All in all, the creating of a PA is like making a car. There are so many decisions that affect other decisions in the process, it is very hard to get the exact same answer from different consultants or installation companies. There are usually several "right" sound systems for a situation and not everyone will agree upon what is the best between the "right" choices. But that doesn't make any of the "right" choices wrong, just different.
My daughter turned 16 and wanted a car. I got her something that gets good gas mileage, fairly reliable, decently safe, and didn't cost much (since statistics show the first car accident happens in the first five years) nor required a loan. It is a good car and it meets the needs to get around. But she wanted something that looked cool, got worse gas mileage, wasn't as safe, and would require getting a loan. It took years before she saw the wisdom of my decision. I was her consultant. Still, I had a choice of many different cars that met her needs. If someone else was consulted, she may have gotten a different car. It would have cost a different amount as well. But I am sure that a good "consultant" would have chosen a car based on similar criteria and not hers. If that was the case, then who was right? The cheapest? The most reliable? All I know is that her decision wasn't. Why? She didn't have the experience to make a good one.
rules when putting in a new install
Rule of thumb when planning conduits underground in a building.
If you need 1, put in 2.
If you need 1" pipe, put in 2" pipe.
For main runs from FOH to amp or stage location never use anything smaller than 4" .
A pipe filled more than half full is full.
PVC pipe is relatively cheap and the cost difference between 2" and 4" is negligible. It is extremely, significantly (can I make the point even stronger?) cheaper to put pipe in the ground when the building is being built than later.
Always put your pipe the deepest into the ground, save sewer and water.
Never run your pipe within 2 feet of electrical.
Electrical rule of thumb.
Always run your own ground and ground rod.
Spec an isolated ground buss bar in the breaker panel.
Don't forget to use isolated ground receptacles.
Get audio/video on its own isolation transformer.
Make sure that every location that the audio/video system is plugged in is run back to the same box.
If you need 1, put in 2.
If you need 1" pipe, put in 2" pipe.
For main runs from FOH to amp or stage location never use anything smaller than 4" .
A pipe filled more than half full is full.
PVC pipe is relatively cheap and the cost difference between 2" and 4" is negligible. It is extremely, significantly (can I make the point even stronger?) cheaper to put pipe in the ground when the building is being built than later.
Always put your pipe the deepest into the ground, save sewer and water.
Never run your pipe within 2 feet of electrical.
Electrical rule of thumb.
Always run your own ground and ground rod.
Spec an isolated ground buss bar in the breaker panel.
Don't forget to use isolated ground receptacles.
Get audio/video on its own isolation transformer.
Make sure that every location that the audio/video system is plugged in is run back to the same box.
the subsnake style of wiring
I can't tell you how many churches that I have been in where there are cables running from one side of the stage to the other. Interesting phenomenon. Like a audio spider web set up to entangle whoever is walking across stage that is being "managed" through judicious use of tape that will eventually mess up the carpet.
What causes this mess? Well, designers have always assumed that once you decide where things are going to be on stage that you will never change. Therefore, they have created this notion that you put floor pockets here and there to meet the current needs. That may have worked years ago, but today's production environment is in constant flux.
So why not do what I did at the last church I worked for. Before settling into a situation with an installed PA system, my experience was with portable and roading systems. You utilized the sub-snake concept.
The concept is simple. You have the main bundle of inputs (snake or whatever) come to either one or two locations and run smaller bundles or snakes from there.
In my auditorium, I had the main snake run to an XLR patch panel in the amp room which was located just behind the stage. This represented the back of the console, so I never needed to crawl over the large console to make patches. Plus I knew that 1 on the snake to the FOH was 1 on the console.
From back stage I had 6 locations permanent boxes (in one auditorium there was a privacy wall and we put panels on the backside of the wall to save cost) on the stage. Drum booth, Stage Left Back, Stage Right Back, Mid center stage, Pulpit Left, Pulpit Right. The general rule was to put in more inputs in these locations than what you needed. So 12x4 in drum booth, 24x4 stage left and in stage right, 8x2 mid center stage, 2x1 in both pulpit locations. All of these locations came back to that patch panel and I used 2 foot XLR's for patching.
Why XLR patchbay? Normal patchbays need to be "cleaned" at least once a year with the expensive ones or monthly on cheap ones. You have to buy patch cables and enough that you don't run out. In the XLR patchbay, you can use any mic cable in a pinch, or make your own (try making a TT cable someday!). I had one patch that took over 5 years before it failed and all I needed to do was unplug and plug back in with the XLRs.
When the stage was being designed, we made sure to make it hollow. The architect didn't understand but we knew that the current setup would change inside of a year. The hollow stage allowed us to put holes wherever needed at later dates. In fact, we ended up putting in a hole in the front far left and right and used just the floor box cover in those locations. I could feed a snake or drop the mic cable under the stage and route it back to the backstage patch panel (another good reason for XLR).
Next, we purchased little 6 input snakes and ran them from the primary locations to central areas where needed. Like the keyboard location, who had a guitar player close so I just ran the guitar cabling through the keyboard snake.
Amazing! Its a flexible system. Want to move someone, then just take their stuff and re-route the snake to the closest location, re-patch backstage so the new stage inputs go to the same console inputs.
In one auditorium, we had a digital console that had a "stage box" with just the control cable going back to FOH. So I placed the "stage box" on stage and ran sub-snakes to it, since it literally represented the inputs to the console.
What causes this mess? Well, designers have always assumed that once you decide where things are going to be on stage that you will never change. Therefore, they have created this notion that you put floor pockets here and there to meet the current needs. That may have worked years ago, but today's production environment is in constant flux.
So why not do what I did at the last church I worked for. Before settling into a situation with an installed PA system, my experience was with portable and roading systems. You utilized the sub-snake concept.
The concept is simple. You have the main bundle of inputs (snake or whatever) come to either one or two locations and run smaller bundles or snakes from there.
In my auditorium, I had the main snake run to an XLR patch panel in the amp room which was located just behind the stage. This represented the back of the console, so I never needed to crawl over the large console to make patches. Plus I knew that 1 on the snake to the FOH was 1 on the console.
From back stage I had 6 locations permanent boxes (in one auditorium there was a privacy wall and we put panels on the backside of the wall to save cost) on the stage. Drum booth, Stage Left Back, Stage Right Back, Mid center stage, Pulpit Left, Pulpit Right. The general rule was to put in more inputs in these locations than what you needed. So 12x4 in drum booth, 24x4 stage left and in stage right, 8x2 mid center stage, 2x1 in both pulpit locations. All of these locations came back to that patch panel and I used 2 foot XLR's for patching.
Why XLR patchbay? Normal patchbays need to be "cleaned" at least once a year with the expensive ones or monthly on cheap ones. You have to buy patch cables and enough that you don't run out. In the XLR patchbay, you can use any mic cable in a pinch, or make your own (try making a TT cable someday!). I had one patch that took over 5 years before it failed and all I needed to do was unplug and plug back in with the XLRs.
When the stage was being designed, we made sure to make it hollow. The architect didn't understand but we knew that the current setup would change inside of a year. The hollow stage allowed us to put holes wherever needed at later dates. In fact, we ended up putting in a hole in the front far left and right and used just the floor box cover in those locations. I could feed a snake or drop the mic cable under the stage and route it back to the backstage patch panel (another good reason for XLR).
Next, we purchased little 6 input snakes and ran them from the primary locations to central areas where needed. Like the keyboard location, who had a guitar player close so I just ran the guitar cabling through the keyboard snake.
Amazing! Its a flexible system. Want to move someone, then just take their stuff and re-route the snake to the closest location, re-patch backstage so the new stage inputs go to the same console inputs.
In one auditorium, we had a digital console that had a "stage box" with just the control cable going back to FOH. So I placed the "stage box" on stage and ran sub-snakes to it, since it literally represented the inputs to the console.
the perfect mix
Mixing is like creating an ice cream sundae.
The band gives you all of the ingredients plus you can change texture through the use of effects. So you have to assess what you have before you can create the final product.
The rhythm section is like the ice cream. It needs to stay in a cohesive group (not melting into sludge) and always be there as the basis (foundation) for the toppings.
The lead instrumentation is like the toppings. You can handle a lot of flavor for short periods of time but you don't want to flood the ice cream. Some toppings don't work as well with other toppings either, so you must give balance to the flavor overall.
One cool thing that I like to do is to hide a flavor to reveal itself as you eat on this sundae. Like putting a cherry in the middle of the ice cream.
Like all analogies, this one breaks down at a certain point.
But . . think of something. If mixing music is like creating a sundae for people to enjoy, then this sundae is magical in that you get to constantly change its flavoring throughout the whole experience. Maybe even giving them some odd tastes through the process, since you have no control over the ingredients.
But you can always make sure to leave them with a good taste in their mouth at the end.
Because that is what draws them to try your sundae again.
The band gives you all of the ingredients plus you can change texture through the use of effects. So you have to assess what you have before you can create the final product.
The rhythm section is like the ice cream. It needs to stay in a cohesive group (not melting into sludge) and always be there as the basis (foundation) for the toppings.
The lead instrumentation is like the toppings. You can handle a lot of flavor for short periods of time but you don't want to flood the ice cream. Some toppings don't work as well with other toppings either, so you must give balance to the flavor overall.
One cool thing that I like to do is to hide a flavor to reveal itself as you eat on this sundae. Like putting a cherry in the middle of the ice cream.
Like all analogies, this one breaks down at a certain point.
But . . think of something. If mixing music is like creating a sundae for people to enjoy, then this sundae is magical in that you get to constantly change its flavoring throughout the whole experience. Maybe even giving them some odd tastes through the process, since you have no control over the ingredients.
But you can always make sure to leave them with a good taste in their mouth at the end.
Because that is what draws them to try your sundae again.
perception is reality
While I am in the vein of psychological mixing. . .
I once was doing one of my part time gigs at a church over a period of several months. Before they had asked me, I had already set up a weekend thing with another church so I had the church use a friend of mine for that one weekend that I was pre-booked. I call my friend after the weekend was over and she told me that everything went well, no issues.
The following weekend, I asked the music director and Pastor what they thought of my friend's mixing because I was hoping to get her this gig on a more permanent basis. They both responded that they had got comments about not hearing the violin enough.
So I called my friend back asking about the violin specifically and she told me what I already knew. The player doesn't play much and when they played it wasn't very good. So she never really brought the violin up much in order to make a better mix.
There in lies the difference between what I did instinctively and what she didn't do.
Once I got to thinking about it, I realized that I never really used the player much either due to the exact same reasons. But, I would try to find at least once during the service and push the violin forward for even a short period of time. I did it because, knowing church politics, I didn't know who's kid this player was and if I would offend someone of value (read: monetary value) by not letting them hear the violin at all.
So think about it. They loved my mixing because I found maybe 30 seconds or less where the player sounded halfway decent and let the audience hear it pronounced but didn't like her mixing because she didn't - yet technically her mix may have been better by not subjecting the audience to the sub-par music.
Even though I had the violin up for an extremely short period of time, if someone was asked, "Did you hear the violin?", they would answer. "Yes." They didn't realize that the amount of time but the fact that they did hear it. This ties into the old coaching trick of telling the players in the huddle the most important thing last before they go back into the game.
Something to keep in mind when doing contract gigs. And interesting when thinking about people's perception of what we do and how their needs may not line up with what is actually the best thing technically.
I once was doing one of my part time gigs at a church over a period of several months. Before they had asked me, I had already set up a weekend thing with another church so I had the church use a friend of mine for that one weekend that I was pre-booked. I call my friend after the weekend was over and she told me that everything went well, no issues.
The following weekend, I asked the music director and Pastor what they thought of my friend's mixing because I was hoping to get her this gig on a more permanent basis. They both responded that they had got comments about not hearing the violin enough.
So I called my friend back asking about the violin specifically and she told me what I already knew. The player doesn't play much and when they played it wasn't very good. So she never really brought the violin up much in order to make a better mix.
There in lies the difference between what I did instinctively and what she didn't do.
Once I got to thinking about it, I realized that I never really used the player much either due to the exact same reasons. But, I would try to find at least once during the service and push the violin forward for even a short period of time. I did it because, knowing church politics, I didn't know who's kid this player was and if I would offend someone of value (read: monetary value) by not letting them hear the violin at all.
So think about it. They loved my mixing because I found maybe 30 seconds or less where the player sounded halfway decent and let the audience hear it pronounced but didn't like her mixing because she didn't - yet technically her mix may have been better by not subjecting the audience to the sub-par music.
Even though I had the violin up for an extremely short period of time, if someone was asked, "Did you hear the violin?", they would answer. "Yes." They didn't realize that the amount of time but the fact that they did hear it. This ties into the old coaching trick of telling the players in the huddle the most important thing last before they go back into the game.
Something to keep in mind when doing contract gigs. And interesting when thinking about people's perception of what we do and how their needs may not line up with what is actually the best thing technically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
statcounter.com
Posts
