--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEI00000 Date: 10/12/96 From: IVAN SZE Time: 04:53pm \/To: COWGIRL (Read 2 times) Subj: DROP DROP ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] --- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4H1 * Origin: Cowgirl's Rodeo *Fido* ->Hub400<- (1:250/401) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEJ00000 Date: 10/14/96 From: KURT J. TISCHER Time: 03:51pm \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: P.A. Gear For Sale PA GEAR FOR SALE: 1 Carvin MX1644 16x4x2x1 Audio Mixer $500 2 Carvin 1200E Midrange cabinets loaded w/EV Proline 12" speakers $200ea. 2 Carvin H560 Horn cabs loaded with Carvin stock 2" drivers $150ea. 2 Carvin H290 Horn cabs loaded with Carvin stock 1" drivers $100ea. 2 Carvin 790H 15"w/horn Monitor wedges $150ea. 2 Yamaha SM2115HIII 15"w/horn monitor wedges $150ea. 2 Ashly FET1500 350Wx2 Stereo Power Amps $350ea. 1 Ashly FET2000 500Wx2 Stereo Power Amp $450 1 Rane RA27 1/3 Octave Equalizer/Real Time Analyzer w/Analyzer Mic $300 1 Ashly CL50 Stereo Compressor Limiter $150 1 Audio Logic MT-44 Quad Noise Gate $150 1 Carvin XC1000 (2-way stereo, 3-way mono) active crossover $100 1 Carvin EQ2029 1/3 Octave Equalizer $100 1 Carvin 16x4 Snake 100ft. $200 2 Carvin CM67 Mics $50ea. 2 Carvin CM68 Mics $50ea. 1 21 space road case w/casters $200 1 11 space ANVIL road case $150 Other assorted Direct Boxes, Mic Cables, speaker cables, etc. If you can afford it, you can take the whole list for $4000.00 * SLMR 2.1a * We have Soundmen. And then we have guys that run sound. --- SLMAIL v4.5a (#4334) * Origin: 3RD EAR BBS - Middleburg Heights, Ohio - 216-234-6088 (1:157/438) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00000 Date: 10/15/96 From: ROBERT MANCI Time: 07:47pm \/To: ALL (Read 3 times) Subj: test test --- FMail 1.0g * Origin: The Scrap Bin, Hampton, VA (757)825-9502, 9503 (1:271/320) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00001 Date: 10/16/96 From: TIMOTHY TRACE Time: 06:24pm \/To: BONNIE GOODWIN (Read 3 times) Subj: Processed Systems Bonnie: ->I suspect that there are few practicing audio people that really know ->how to use the equipment and have the time to do a complete alignment ->from venue to venue. 'Scuse me? As if it mattered at 110db with grunge music. Did someone say, "Smashing Pumpkins" ?? :-) Okay, that aside... Many things have contributed to the "plug-n-play" sound system that keeps the engineer from having to spend hours tweaking a system out after setup. Most of the major manufactures have gone to single-box systems, with separate non-flying subs being used on an as-required basis. In most cases, the tops are very nearly full-range systems: the Clair Brothers S-4r has a pair of 18" drivers, four 10" drivers, a pair of 2" horns, and (I believe) four 1" horns. It's a four-way, specification-perfect, long-throw, computer-controlled box that needs absolutely no operator intervention to function to factory specifications - each and every time it's set up and plugged in. The engineer merely has to throw a few sliders on the system EQ to find "his" sound, and the show goes on. Who at the venue needs to be concerned with time-alignment, or driver-to-driver balance, when everything was taken care of at the factory? You can see the efficiency here... And what if a sub is required? The S-4 sub is an extremely efficient triple-18" box, but used only in very small quantities at most of their shows. It's just not really needed when you get up into 96 box rigs. With 2 18" drivers per top box, who needs subs? As long as you make the top boxes aware of the subs' presence (via the system processor), and place the subs somewhat intelligently, you won't ever run into an alignment difficulty (as if anyone could hear an alignment problem at 50hz/120db). The S-4 system certainly must be acceptable; I'm sure you recognize Clair Brothers as the world's largest sound-reinforcement provider, with clientle from Yanni to Reba to Pearl Jam. And the list of manufacturers goes on and on: EAW KF-85x, Meyer MSL-x, Showco Prism, Turbosound Fl***light (choose Flashlight _or_ Floodlight!), Community RS-**0, etc. Heck, even Peavey and Yorkville have gotten on the big-box bus. By building large top boxes with healthy driver populations, the manufacturers avoid time-alignment problems that were introduced along with single enclosure per bandwidth rigs in the '70s and '80s. Thank God for the '90s. ->...just more "das blinken lighten" to impress the ignorant. Remember, these systems - which are on the cutting edge of live sound reinforcement technology - use factory designed computers to perform many, many functions that used to bog an operator's mind: crossover points slide with program material and output voltage, limiters are activated and controlled automatically by monitoring the amplifiers' output waveform (called "sense" by most manufacturers), time-alignment is set correctly for the driver population of the proper enclosure (and in some cases slid semi-automatically to provide "aural exciter" type effects), and much more. The engineer neither has to monitor or even be aware, in most cases, of what's going on. The box simply sounds killer while maintaining and protecting itself via it's rack-mount processor. An engineer may have a White or Ivie piece in his FOH gear simply to montior SPL. Granted, that's a _way_ excessive choice for a volume meter, but the artist pays the bill, not the engineer. He also may use it to double-check his ears after mixing 75 minutes of shredding guitars at 110db: a quick glance at the LEDs can tell him if something wierd is _indeed_ happening around 2k (or whatever). And, it's sometimes interesting to note what the system is capable of producing, frequency-wise, during a performance. The enclosures I've mentioned span a number of manufacturers, from the high-end proprietary stuff to mid-level (club-level) gear. You've doubtless encountered most all of it during your career, and haven't had many dissapointing experiences. Enclosures aren't just thrown together any more (as they were in times past), and the new dels don't require nearly the attention the old ones clamored for. Processed, self-monitored systems are the way of life now, and it's a damn good thing, too. Leaves more time for the engineer to operate, and not technically analyze, his system. Regards, Tim == --- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 * Origin: Visualize Whirled Peas. (1:100/440.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00002 Date: 10/17/96 From: BONNIE GOODWIN Time: 11:45am \/To: TIMOTHY TRACE (Read 3 times) Subj: Processed Systems Hi Tim! >>I suspect that there are few practicing audio people that really >>knowhow to use the equipment and have the time to do a complete >>alignment from venue to venue. >'Scuse me? As if it mattered at 110db with grunge music. Did someone >say, "Smashing Pumpkins" ?? :-) Okay, that aside... After a nice round up of the all in one box systems and array setups that take time alignment of the drivers out of the picture, which is only one of many things involved in aligning a sound system. >Remember, these systems - which are on the cutting edge of live >sound reinforcement technology - use factory designed computers >to perform many, many functions that used to bog an operator's >mind: crossover points slide with program material and output >voltage, limiters are activated and controlled automatically by >monitoring the amplifiers' output waveform (called "sense" by >most manufacturers), time-alignment is set correctly for the >driver population of the proper enclosure(and in some cases >slid semi-automatically to provide "aural exciter" type effects), >and much more. The engineer neither has to monitor or even be >aware, in most cases, of what's going on. The box simply >sounds killer while maintaining and protecting itself via >it's rack-mount processor. Yes I agree, we have some amazing tools at hand to to our work. You can almost set up a sound system and push a button and you have an automated concert.... NOT! Most of those that have visited my echo (AUDIO) will recall me ranting and raving to home audio people about how the environment a sound system is placed in has to be considered in this equation SOMEWHERE. Even the finest sound system in a football stadium will still sound like a football stadium. That's where there is a sizable difference between a set of ears that runs the front of house and monitor mixes, and a technician that knows how to plug all of the wires together and set the equipment up and an audio engineer that knows what components to use where at what sound levels required to cover the audience areas and not be hitting places that is just going to contribute to lessening the signal to noise level between direct sound and the ambient reverb field of the environment. This interface between the acoustics of the room and the electroacoutsics feeding it is crutial to the success of a sound system, and it is largely not even being addressed by the majority of the "sound engineers" out there. Most rock or other concert acts have no consideration of even coverage over the entire room, even spectral distribution over the seating areas. >An engineer may have a White or Ivie piece in his FOH gear simply to >montior SPL. Granted, that's a _way_ excessive choice for a volume >meter, but the artist pays the bill, not the engineer. I find a 1/3 octave display to be very useful EVERYWHERE, in the studio, in the live sound, etc. to check for basic spectral balance, feedback points, room resonances, etc. >Processed, self-monitored systems are the way of life now, and it's >a damn good thing, too. Leaves more time for the engineer to operate, >and not technically analyze, his system. Too often the engineer is left at the shop and the operator operates. It's the seeming lack of REAL engineering that goes into the design and installation of some of these systems and the arrogance of some of the operators who mistakenly believe that they are engineers is what bugs me. Those of us that have engineered major installed systems and had to meet specifications in contracted systems have to do much more than turn the amps on (after warming up everything else before it) and then starting to tweak knobs to taste. Granted, good equipment and experience go a long way to getting acceptable sound quickly, but excellent sound takes that extra effort, experience, engineering and tweaking USING TEST EQUIPMENT EXTENSIVELY. Bonnie *:> --- QScan/PCB v1.18b / 01-0249 * Origin: The Capitol City Gateway, Since Dec 1979, 916-381-8788 (1:203/909) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00003 Date: 10/17/96 From: NANCY WOOD Time: 09:04pm \/To: BONNIE GOODWIN (Read 3 times) Subj: Processed Systems BG> sound and the ambient reverb field of the environment. This BG> interface between the acoustics of the room and the electroacoutsics BG> feeding it is crutial to the success of a sound system, and it is largely BG> not even being addressed by the majority of the "sound engineers" out BG> there. Most rock or other concert acts have no consideration of even BG> coverage over the entire room, even spectral distribution over the BG> seating areas. Reminds me of a "consulting" job a family-run country show wanted done (at least the papa of the bunch) in PCB, Fl. The ex and I went in, during a slow night, (cause they didn't want to run the system on an empty building - their sound "man" wasn't gonna be there any other time except prior to and during a show.). The night was a "slow" one, and it didn't take long with two of us moving through the seating (theatrical in an aluminum building with theatrical drape everywhere to deaden the room.) They knew ahead of time there were hot spots and dead spots in the room and wanted to know how to fix them. They had an overhead array about 5 feet from center stage front and whoever sat in the seats that the array pointed directly toward got blasted. There were about 10 seats on each side of the seating area that were dead (total about 20) and no matter what we told them, they weren't convinced the array needed to be at least re-arranged if not removed entirely. They also had side stacks on each side stage on the floor with the audience seating. No matter what we tried to do to convince them to move the speakers, they couldn't see it... but they knew they had a problem. (Go figger). They even wanted an analysis of the mix itself - and when we told them there were problems but nothing that a good mix master couldn't fix, they didn't want to change the mix. I guess they figured we'd come in there and rant about how good everything was. Bottom line: when they wanted more information, we said, "let's talk money!" Then they didn't need any sound consulting whatsoever. I guess they figured we'd do it for the admission price for each person (3 of us). BG> to tweak knobs to taste. Granted, good equipment and experience BG> go a long way to getting acceptable sound quickly, but excellent sound BG> takes that extra effort, experience, engineering and tweaking USING TEST BG> EQUIPMENT EXTENSIVELY. Amen on that! BTW, I got to work with IATSE folks (as a decorator today) Local 76 - nice bunch of fellers (and ladies!) Nancy --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: Electronic Avenue * San Antonio, TX * 210-333-0060 (1:387/510) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00004 Date: 10/17/96 From: BONNIE GOODWIN Time: 11:43pm \/To: ROBERT MANCI (Read 3 times) Subj: test -> test It works! Bonnie *:> --- QScan/PCB v1.18b / 01-0249 * Origin: The Capitol City Gateway, Since Dec 1979, 916-381-8788 (1:203/909) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEM00005 Date: 10/18/96 From: BONNIE GOODWIN Time: 10:25am \/To: NANCY WOOD (Read 3 times) Subj: Processed Systems Hi Nancy! - BG> sound and the ambient reverb field of the environment. This ->BG> interface between the acoustics of the room and the ->BG> electroacoutsics feeding it is crucial to the success of a ->BG> sound system, and it is largely not even being addressed by ->BG> the majority of the "sound engineers" out there. Most rock or ->BG> other concert acts have no consideration of even coverage over ->BG> the entire room, even spectral distribution over the seating . -> Reminds me of a "consulting" job a family-run country show wanted -> done (at least the papa of the bunch) in PCB, Fl. The ex and I went -> in, during a slow night, (cause they didn't want to run the system on -> an empty building - their sound "man" wasn't gonna be there any other -> time except prior to and during a show.). The night was a "slow" -> one, and it didn't take long with two of us moving through the -> seating (theatrical in an aluminum building with theatrical drape -> everywhere to deaden the room.) They knew ahead of time there were -> hot spots and dead spots in the room and wanted to know how to fix -> them. Ah yes, free consulting.. what a concept. So many times I've been stuck in similar situations where they wanted a complete system design and then expect to get it for free. Most of the time I have been directly working with a contractor/dealer so we could "absorb" the consulting in the profits. I even had one small hotel/convention center purchase a system and when I came to install it, told me that they had shopped my bid and gotten a better deal elsewhere (with a lot of corners cut), but when it went to court, I knew I was out of luck when the judge knew him personally.. small towns... You be amazed at the sloppy job this other contractor did, maybe not though, come to think of it, I've seen so much schlokky work done under the guise of "professional sound" over the years. -> No matter what we tried to do to convince them to move the speakers, -> they couldn't seeit... but they knew they had a problem. (Go -> -> figger). They either became instant experts (isn't if funny how often THAT happens, after all they know someone who owned a stereo system once) ->They even wanted an analysis of the mix itself - and when we told ->them there were problems but nothing that a good mix master couldn't ->fix, they didn't want to change the mix. I guess they figured we'd ->come in there and rant about how good everything was. They were looking for validation that their sound system was primo. It wasn't, they didn't want to hear about it apparently. Note how they all of a sudden knew enough to reject any ideas you gave them! Regarding mixes, though, I've never heard of setting the knobs and walking away from a serious mix, I'm constantly adjusting something to tweak the mix correctly from an acoustical, sound system and most importantly, musically valid mix. -> Bottom line: when they wanted more information, we said, "let's -> talk money!" Then they didn't need any sound consulting -> whatsoever. I guess they figured we'd do it for the admission -> price for each person (3 of us). That is a tough thing to do, having the value of your information percieved and how your information compares in value what Joe Schmoe from DJ Sound just told them. Sounds like you gave them a bunch of consulting for free. Hopefully, they at least listend to the ideas for future reference. I've seldom been able to get paid just for my knowledge, hearing ability and audio expertise. It's even harder when you are female to get that "trust" level sufficient to be able to charge for what you're worth (besides I can't work that cheap!). Fortunately, locally, I've estabishled a good degree of credability with the the local theatre folks with sound design, operation, and consulting. As an example, now that the Sacramento Ballet can't afford a live orchestra any more (and the Sacramento Symphony is becoming the Sacramento Symphathy and going bankrupt), I do most of the editing of their program material, and am hired as an "extra set of ears" when it comes to setup and alignment of the sound system for the performances at the Community Center Theatre, which is a very nice roughly 3000 seat "opera house" style venue locally. I just talked with someone that works in a convention center about 100 miles north of here that had me come up and do what I could with their equipment. The original contractor had sold them 4 of the large Altec Multicell horns and had set them up in a very cockeyed fashion in the 1000 seat auditorium. I've always liked the Altec line, making stuff that will last as long as the facility it is put in, but not necessarily THE finest. After viewing the room from the cluster for a while, and mulling it over, we rearranged the horns, placing two of them side by side on the bottom to splay across the front to mid seats on one of the amplifiers, and took the other two horns and placed them on top of each other and pointed them to a center point about 2/3s back of the room on the other amplifier, readjusted the levels in the room, and over 12 years later, they are still using the same sound system and it is doing the job for them (except for larger shows requiring more extensive and specialized systems). While the horns were not really "ideal" for the situation, they did work fairly well after we were done. I guess that it is still doing the job after that long is proof. Everything else about the installation was fine except for that electroacoustical interface.. matching the sound system to the room. Another system designed by a techinician, rearranged by an engineer to work better, not ideally, but better. Bonnie *:> --- QScan/PCB v1.18b / 01-0249 * Origin: The Capitol City Gateway, Since Dec 1979, 916-381-8788 (1:203/909) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEP00000 Date: 10/18/96 From: TIMOTHY TRACE Time: 09:55am \/To: BONNIE GOODWIN (Read 3 times) Subj: On to production considerations... Bonnie: -> ...that take time alignment of the drivers out of the picture, -> which is only one of many things involved in aligning a sound system. Ever see the gunsight that clips into the E-Track on a Flashlight system? That kinda takes care of physical dispertion alignment in a big way, there... -> Even the finest sound system in a football stadium will still sound -> like a football stadium. You're right. And there's a point of diminishing returns that can be reached rather quickly in those environments. -> Most rock or other concert acts have no consideration of even -> coverage over the entire room, even spectral distribution over the -> seating areas. Right again. SPL is the _major_ consideration in rock concerts - all that has to be done is to get a lot of volume to most of the arena, with frequency response being a secondary consideration (unfortunately). We're speaking of highly portable, road-rugged systems, designed to do a down-and-dirty job in as efficient a manner as possible. And, of course, the "football arena" reasoning comes into the picture as well. -> It's the seeming lack of REAL engineering that goes into the design -> and installation of some of these systems... I'll tell Roy Clair & M.L. Procise you said that. }:-> They'll look you up next time they're in Sacramento... -> ...but excellent sound takes that extra effort, experience, -> engineering and tweaking USING TEST EQUIPMENT EXTENSIVELY. Your use of the word "extensively" concerns me greatly. In today's one nighter concert world, and with Teamster, IATSE, and IBEW calls to be considered, the labor "fat" needs to be trimmed everywhere possible. If an engineer/operator/whatever is holding up the entire production crew and union call whilst tweaking a system at 105db, then you've got major problems on your hands with the promoter. There comes a time during setup when you've got to call it quits. The lighting crew can't focus their 600+ cans while pink noise (or worse, a Yanni CD) is blasting out from the mains, the ushers and decorators can't hear themselves think while they prepare the venue, the video people can't communicate effectively while tweeking their ten Barcos, etc. etc. etc. There's lots to be said for expediency. "Close Gets It!" applies heavily in the modern concert world, where folks have to realize that there's lots more than _sound_ involved in a production. The tickets aren't being sold to folks coming to "hear" the band; those ticket buyers are looking to "experience" the band. I guarantee you that absolutely _no_ major concert artist would perform with a half-setup sound system - but I also guarantee you that doors would be held for a half-setup light rig as well. Same goes for video. And that's where the plug-n-play systems come into the picture. Speed is everything, and if the system can be made mostly pure in a half-hour, without compromising more than 2% of the seats, well, then, that's good enough for the evening, thank you very much. And don't be too concerned about every last single member of the audience - you can't please all of the people all of the time, but you _can_ please most of the people most of the time. The 2% rule is applied _heavily_ in the midwest, where Contemporary Group, one of the nation's largest concert promoters, came up with that theory. The reasoning is simple: of your audience, less than 2% of them should have a major problem with any aspect of the production. And in a worst case scenario at a shed, 2% of 25,000 is 500 people. I don't think it's even possible for an engineer or a system to piss off 500 folks, even out of 25,000, without destroying the system, or being called on the carpet by the promoter or the road manager. Catchya... Tim == --- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 * Origin: Visualize Whirled Peas. (1:100/440.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 200 PRO AUDIO Ref: DEP00001 Date: 10/19/96 From: BONNIE GOODWIN Time: 09:33am \/To: TIMOTHY TRACE (Read 3 times) Subj: On to production considerations... 09:33:0010/19/96 Hi Tim! First off, that was a wonderful response to my post about sound system installation at venues for concerts. Nice to see that there are a few really experienced people participating in here. You made some very valid points in your response that need to be addressed. Some of my comments are addressed from the point of view of what would be done in permenant installations, where you have all the time in the world to accomplish that perfect alignment of all components to the room and engineers have tweaked everything to death. >> ...that take time alignment of the drivers out of the picture, >> which is only one of many things involved in aligning a sound system. > Ever see the gunsight that clips into the E-Track on a Flashlight > system? That kinda takes care of physical dispertion alignment > in a big way, there... Yes, that is a nice way to ballpark array alignment. What does this have to do with time alignment, which is different than taking a little time to get alignment. Time alignment of drivers is usually not a problem with today's rigging and speaker systems that are self contained full range units already in alignment and designed to work in the arrayed configuration. Most of the currently touring systems have some "down angle" systems for the frontal seats, but seldom do I see a difference between "mid distance" and "far throw" array components in most of the shows that come to our largest venues which should allow more appropriate SPLs fed to each section of the house. Using seperate control of amps on each section of coverage helps for quick alignment in venues, which, as you know, is usually done. -> Even the finest sound system in a football stadium will still sound -> like a football stadium. You're right. And there's a point of diminishing returns that can be reached rather quickly in those environments. That's why some attention to getting dispersion of sound only to the seating areas is so important in such places and why control over the array(s)is so important. -> Most rock or other concert acts have no consideration of even -> coverage over the entire room, even spectral distribution over the -> seating areas. Right again. SPL is the _major_ consideration in rock concerts - all that has to be done is to get a lot of volume to most of the arena, with frequency response being a secondary consideration (unfortunately). We're speaking of highly portable, road-rugged systems, designed to do a down-and-dirty job in as efficient a manner as possible. And, of course, the "football arena" reasoning comes into the picture as well. >> It's the seeming lack of REAL engineering that goes into the design >> and installation of some of these systems... > I'll tell Roy Clair & M.L. Procise you said that. }:-> They'll look > you up next time they're in Sacramento... Great!! Haha! I don't proclaim to know more than they do about the business that they excel at, but I may have a few fine points to discuss with them that could enhance their efforts. -> ...but excellent sound takes that extra effort, experience, -> engineering and tweaking USING TEST EQUIPMENT EXTENSIVELY. > use of the word "extensively" concerns me greatly. In today's one > nighter concert world, and with Teamster, IATSE, and IBEW calls to be > considered, the labor "fat" needs to be trimmed everywhere possible. > If an engineer/operator/whatever is holding up the entire production > crew and union call whilst tweaking a system at 105db, then you've got > major problems on your hands with the promoter. There comes a time > during setup when you've got to call it quits.The lighting crew can't > focus their 600+ cans while pink noise (or worse, a Yanni CD) is > blasting out from the mains, the ushers and decorators can't hear > themselves think while they prepare the venue, the video people can't > communicate effectively while tweeking their ten Barcos, etc.etc.etc. All valid points and very true. Typical IATSE calls that I have worked cuts most of the workforce after the initial 4 hour call and usually, the sound crew has been given an hour to fiddle and tweak the sound system. It is the efficiency in using the available time for tweaking the environment that I question on EVERY call I've been on. Since I don't believe that the majority of the mixers that work the shows actually have a clue on how to use most of the test equipment out there (real time analysis, TEF, SIMII etc), they waste most of that audio tweaking time seasoning to taste, which also is important somewhere in the equation, but after real testing has been done. There are much more expediant ways of adjusting a sound system than to have someone walk the room with an SPL meter while hitting the room with 140dB while making almost obscene jestures at who ever is tweaking things. One easy way that comes to mind is to take an hour of that expensive IATSE labor to run out cables and calibrated mics to representative locations for testing purposes in an automated testing setup that will allow you to have access to many views of the room simultaniously, and with some of the existing and new equipment out there such as some of the Crown TEF software for making inverse EQs that can communicate with parametric EQ units and such, can help take the majority of the drudery out of basic system alignments and inconsistancies from night to night. I would love to design such a system for your buddies! > There's lots to be said for expediency. "Close Gets It!" applies > heavily in the modern concert world, where folks have to realize that > there's lots more than _sound_ involved in a production. The tickets > aren't being sold to folks coming to "hear" the band; those ticket > buyers are looking to "experience" the band. I guarantee you that > absolutely _no_ major concert artist would perform with a half-setup > sound system - but I also guarantee you that doors would be held for > a half-setup light rig as well. Same goes for video. I agree, and as it is said in theatre, "The show must go on!". And so it does.. In the highly competitive world of concert sound, closer is what gets the gigs. Even George Lucas admits that half of his movies is sound. Don't you think that hearing the band is at least that amount if not much more, after all, what sold this audience on that band in the first place? As an aside, isn't it interesting that much of the audience wants to hear the same performance as the record down to the tiniest nuances exactly? I prefer to hear how the song has matured since it "went into the can". > And that's where the plug-n-play systems come into the picture. Speed > is everything, and if the system can be made mostly pure in a 1/2hour, > without compromising more than 2% of the seats, well, then, that's > good enough for the evening, thank you very much. And don't be too > concerned about every last single member of the audience - you can't > please all of the people all of the time, but you _can_ please most of > the people most of the time. Ah yes,"The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few!"-StarTrek But what if you can make 10 times the amount of alignment in the same amount of time, don't you believe this is worth that extra effort. Heck, with the amount of redundancy in equipment and total expense to package a tour, wouldn't this be worth having such a test system go out with a show tour. > The 2% rule is applied _heavily_ in the midwest, where Contemporary > Group, one of the nation's largest concert promoters, came up with > that theory. The reasoning is simple: of your audience, less than 2% > of them should have a major problem with any aspect of the production. > And in a worst case scenario at a shed, 2% of 25,000 is 500 people. At today's ticket prices, thats $10k-$15k or more in revenue that you might not have thinking about coming back to another show run by that promoter. > I don't think it's even possible for an engineer or a system to piss > off 500 folks, even out of 25,000, without destroying the system, or > being called on the carpet by the promoter or the road manager. The one time I ever had the chance to see Frank Zappa live, I couldn't a word of what he said intelligably, and I was some kind of pissed. If you can take steps to reduce that "2% rule" to a lower level, it could be the competitive edge that gets you more work as a sound system company. The additional expense of the test setup and a qualified engineer to run it could be well worth the effort. > Catchya... Very thought provoking comments, Tim. I haven't had to work so hard in a long time to clarify points in defense of such a good reply to my ranting and raving! I'm looking forward to your response on this. Bonnie *:> bonnie.goodwin@juno.com --- QScan/PCB v1.18b / 01-0249 * Origin: The Capitol City Gateway, Since Dec 1979, 916-381-8788 (1:203/909)