• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

A soundman's rant to younger players.

#161
well unlike some, i often solicit opinions from soundmen. i also try and go and listen out front as well. i am very interested in what they have to say...well, some of them. there are a handful that it's best just to let sleeping dogs lie, and there are a small handful that just plain don't know what they're doing. but in the circle of soundmen i work with that i like and trust, i always ask them for opinions, especially since i have been micing instead of di'ing. i imagine i'll ask less and less these days now that i'm going to use a vt deluxe instead ;)

but i still want and need things the way they need to be, so i doubt i'll be any less demanding or micromanaging ;)
 
#163
I'm in the camp that believes that most live sound nowadays has way to much lowend being produced by the huge amount of subwoofers. Now i know that this is done to move more air and gives the audience the perception that the music is louder. IMO most of the live gigs i've gone to see have been poorly EQ'd in the main EQ's causing more work for the soundman to get the sound right on every channel. Now who has the most stuff going on in the subwwofer range? The kick and the bass. I've seen to many gigs where the bass player sends a flat signal to the board and the soundman has to take out 12-18db of lowend just to get some note definition. redicoulous! Most recent show I've seen like this was Lynnard skynnard at the Ft. sill polo field a few years ago. Nothing but woooooof all night long. He may very well be a good bass player but the EQing in the mains along with the huge amount of subs producing to much lowend i sure couldn't tell it.
 
#164
Rooster009 said:
I'm in the camp that believes that most live sound nowadays has way to much lowend being produced by the huge amount of subwoofers. Now i know that this is done to move more air and gives the audience the perception that the music is louder. IMO most of the live gigs i've gone to see have been poorly EQ'd in the main EQ's causing more work for the soundman to get the sound right on every channel. Now who has the most stuff going on in the subwwofer range? The kick and the bass. I've seen to many gigs where the bass player sends a flat signal to the board and the soundman has to take out 12-18db of lowend just to get some note definition. redicoulous! Most recent show I've seen like this was Lynnard skynnard at the Ft. sill polo field a few years ago. Nothing but woooooof all night long. He may very well be a good bass player but the EQing in the mains along with the huge amount of subs producing to much lowend i sure couldn't tell it.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I follow you. I agree that subs have to be controlled, but what does that have to do with sending a flat signal? I don't know of any bass amps, preamps, or DI boxes have an adequate control for controlling signal that would affect subs. That's something that happens at the board. Putting a HPF on the bass at 60 hz or so is usually pretty easy. Either way, from a bass player's point of view, sending a flat signal is the best thing he can do, at least opposed to actually boosting low end. Most gigs with these huge PA's that we're discussing will be on large stages, and a bass player isn't going to cut bass himself on a stage like that more than likely.
 
#165
Joe Nerve said:
You can twist, turn, and defend this however you like, but a truly good soundperson's job is to take what they get, and make it work. Not to go passing judgements on musicians and their preferences. A bass player might have very good reason to be EQed in a way that you just can't understand. If he and the rest of the band are comfortable with that, if you're going to do a good job, then it's your responsibility to make it work. And I'm certain that this can be done, I've seen it countless times. If you can't accept that as your responsibility then I can only guess that regardless of how many years and how much experience you have doign this, you're going to do a crappy job, or be miserable doing it because the majority of people aren't going to comply with your wishes.

Not sure what all of the "I'm not talking bar scene" is about either. Seems you're making assumptios or judgements here, but I don't know.

Again, I've worked with countless sound people, "and I'm not talking the bar scene", and the ones that did the best jobs and worked in the biggest places were the ones who pretty much kept their opinions to themselves, talked to us only about volume, and compensated for anything we might be missing because of that in our individual monitors.

Perhaps I get defensive about this because it always seems IME that the soundpeople who talk the most, talk the most about DBs, frequencies, and what others are doing wrong, typically do the worst job. :) Or I had to much coffee today, and the last time I posted in this thread. :) :)
Click to expand...

truth.
 
#166
Eublet said:
I'm not sure I follow you. I agree that subs have to be controlled, but what does that have to do with sending a flat signal? I don't know of any bass amps, preamps, or DI boxes have an adequate control for controlling signal that would affect subs. That's something that happens at the board. Putting a HPF on the bass at 60 hz or so is usually pretty easy. Either way, from a bass player's point of view, sending a flat signal is the best thing he can do, at least opposed to actually boosting low end. Most gigs with these huge PA's that we're discussing will be on large stages, and a bass player isn't going to cut bass himself on a stage like that more than likely.
Click to expand...

my point is that if your getting huge volume swells out of the bass say below 100hz and no note definition above say 100hz then the culprit is most likely twenty or so 18" subs being to much for the 4 mains. Thats a little far fetched but hopefully you get my drift. So since some sound company's overdo the subwoofers what does a sound man have to do? Well first of all he should leave the channel EQ's alone and work with the main mix EQ's, and this is even before he puts that 60hz crossover (which may not be needed) inline on the bass channel. Notice this has nothing to do with the bass players EQ yet. Then after fixing the main EQ's the individual channels should be EQ'd with notches in each instrument to fit in the mix. Anything more than say 6db and IMO you have a problem with the main eq still. Thats if all input levels are set to @ 0db. Then after fixing the EQ's in this manner you should have a sound that is close to what a the band actually sounds like.
 
#167
^^^ This is my feeling about it all, as well.

It's all fine and good to suggest that bass players need to "check their signal in a full range system" - IMO though that's never a real world scenario anyway, so what's the point? My rig is flat enough between the important outer ranges of the frequency spectrum. If what sounds good coming out of my cabinets doesn't sound good out front, I expect the sound engineer to start a dialogue with me, and we solve the problem. I've got enough experience doing this that I can usually tell from the stage, anyway, when things aren't vibing out front. On the occasions when my signal to FOH ain't been spectacular, I've often run into the soundguy as we both are heading toward each other to discuss it. These are the guys (and gals) I prefer to work with. I've also had the pleasure of working with some coked up, tantrum throwing idiots who shouldn't be working with other human beings period, never mind mixing live sound.

IMO there are enough variables in the soundsystems from venue to venue, that trying to second guess what I should be sending to FOH is a recipe for disaster. I dial in a reasonable sound out of my amp, and try to keep the lines of communication open. I feel that best serves everyone.
 
#168
Rooster009 said:
I'm in the camp that believes that most live sound nowadays has way to much lowend being produced by the huge amount of subwoofers. Now i know that this is done to move more air and gives the audience the perception that the music is louder. IMO most of the live gigs i've gone to see have been poorly EQ'd in the main EQ's causing more work for the soundman to get the sound right on every channel. Now who has the most stuff going on in the subwwofer range? The kick and the bass. I've seen to many gigs where the bass player sends a flat signal to the board and the soundman has to take out 12-18db of lowend just to get some note definition. redicoulous! Most recent show I've seen like this was Lynnard skynnard at the Ft. sill polo field a few years ago. Nothing but woooooof all night long. He may very well be a good bass player but the EQing in the mains along with the huge amount of subs producing to much lowend i sure couldn't tell it.
Click to expand...

In my case the kit was flat 20-20k , so all the woooooooofff that I was receiving from the bass players would have sound like a woooooooofff in any kit.
It would have more subtil in a "No sub" kit , I agree , but the point of good program material reproduction is to have good flat kit at full spectrum , good low end , and enough of it. (At least as much as the high end)

You can't generalize with the example of one show.

Where were you on the field?
Have you moved around to get a better sound?
What was it sounding like at the FOH?

PA's have come a long way , but the kit that will create the same sound everywhere on a room is still science fiction.
 
#169
I see a lot of musicians who have no idea what they sound like in a band context. Those of you who know what sound you want, are convinced it sounds good, and think the soundguy should leave well enough alone, I say great, me too, but we're in the minority as far as I can tell.

Many guitar players --especially younger ones-- don't know that they sound like a can of bees followed by a 100Hz earthquake, or that the low end they dialed in for a "jazz tone" rumbles and muddies both guitar and bass. Lots of bassists don't know that they clang and click with no real volume (unless they're looking for that, of course) or boom out to the point that the soundguy has to cut bass and turn them down to get a good mix, essentially burying them. I've seen lots of horn players with lousy mic technique who don't know that they're fading in and out, or standing so far from the mike that the soundguy has the gain cranked to the point of feedback so they can be heard. And I'm not just talking bar scene, here, I've seen it happen with opening acts and even national headliners.

I've also seen soundguys who mix everything like it was a Slayer show, or have no idea how to manage bass so that it doesn't just become a loud rumble. I've seen far more musicians that are clueless that what sounds good to their ears sounds thin or overbearing in a band context, especially on larger PAs.

Personally, I walk out front with my wireless during soundcheck, and work with FOH to get the sound we're looking for as a band. It's amazing how quickly things start to sound good when I can advise the soundguy that the keys need to be louder, or tell my guitarist that he's so loud he's overpowering the PA. It's a system that works well.
 
#171
JmJ said:
How about some specific criticism? There's not a lot to learn from your rant. What was so great about the tones from the five guys you liked mixing?
Click to expand...

+1

I'm not sure what all the kids did wrong..

I'm no kid...but I think we'd all like to know.

(okay, maybe I should've read all the pages of this thread before posting....but its almost lunch time.
Let me guess , my question was answered on the very next page..)

;)
 
#173
Having been asked to contribute by the OP, I'm a little hurt and ashamed that so many fellow musicians have bad experiences with other soundmen.
I have to admit that many of them suck, which is why I'm so popular ;)

But to get right to the heart of this thread, fokof is correct that many players aren't helping their own cause when they give bad tone to the FOH guy.
And that it's often (but by no means exclusively) the younger bassists (guitards, drummers, etc) that do this.
But I understand--because I started as a young guitard.
We live and we learn and we improve--hopefully every day.



I'm still waiting for someone in a band to care enough about their show to whip out an iModernDevice and some serious buds to school me on their preferred sound.
You would think that with all this great new technology we could finally get on the same page in a minute or less.
Oh well...
 
#175
KeithAlanK said:
I'm still waiting for someone in a band to care enough about their show to whip out an iModernDevice and some serious buds to school me on their preferred sound.
You would think that with all this great new technology we could finally get on the same page in a minute or less.
Oh well...
Click to expand...

Not sure what the bolded section means, but I've never had to spend more than a minute getting a good soundman up to speed on my preferred tone.

Introduces himself, asks preferred method of sending FOH signal, asks me to play to hear my tone, asks a question or two about tone, or maybe about my pedals, goes back to desk and makes it happen.

The bad ones? Never come on stage, or don't ask about input. Demand that it can only be done one way......their way. Have the bass channel labeled "Fender Bass." Spend all of their time with guitard. Doesn't want to run bass in monitors, but wants me to turn down to an inaudible level.

My favorite had a sign next to his board that said "No musicians beyond this point!!" You know what, he was exactly right.
 
#178
I for one, live for bottom end. I get upset if my shirt isn't moving at a big show. I haven't been impressed with (large venue) live sound for a long time. I saw Tool a month ago and the low mid mud was embarrassing, it was obnoxious, I actually found myself looking at FOH, just out reaction to the hideous mess. for all the supposed advancements in gear, I'd say shows sounded better twenty years ago. I realize that every section in the arena gets a different perspective on the mix but from where I was, it was garbage, some parts of the show were better than others.
 
#180
I know next to nothing about FOH mixes, and I'm not even sure this is relevant. Here goes. I usually play in a concert ensemble(still in high school), and the band director is the soundman. Well, last year I was playing g*****r, and the bass player was playing a Jaguar bass. The Preamp went south one day, and we didn't have time for him to get it fixed. So, he asked around and got someone to let him use a Rickenbacker. At practice one day, we plugged just the bass in. Me, the bassist, AND the band director LOVED the sound. It was the best bass sound we'd ever heard. Then we tried it with the band. We had someone tape a show, and we listened to the bass. It was weak, and thin, it had nothing to it, and just kind of blended in to the background. I let him use my Jazz Bass at the next practice, with the same E.Q., and listened to it. It didn't have the same kind of growl that the Ric had, but it cut through. You could tell that it was a bass guitar. After some discussion, we just decided to keep the Ric and add some bottom end. The reason:it looked cool. I was playing a vintage Fender Tele, BTW. Made us cooler than everyone else. :)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back