Compression in Monitors?

[ggunn]

No FX in the monitors is almost always quoted by people who aren't singing anything difficult.

Why wouldn't the singer want to hear their voice the same in the monitors as it sounds in the mains? If the effect changes how the voice sustains, and the singer hears it dry, how do they perform accurately?

I want all you tech-heads to really THINK about this one. If a singer wants effects in the monitors, there better be some effects in the monitors.

Well, we disagree, no biggie.

I've already said that if I'm the sound guy and the band wants wet monitors, that's what they get.

But when I am on stage, it's a different story. What makes monitors hard for me to hear, apart from instrumental stage volume, is room reflections. Virtually all effects are some sort of processed delay, which is to my ears more of the same.

If a singer cannot perform without hearing him/herself drenched in effects, he or she is, IMO, not much of a singer.

YMMV.

 

[claytitan]

Clear and dry for vocal monitors is the best for me. I wish my guitar player would cut back on the crazy effects a little too but that's a different story.

 

[seanm]

I would think wet versus dry monitors would be more about what you are used to. Many people on TB can't be happy unless they hear their amp sound, even when practicing. Many of us are used to bass -> mixer -> headphones and are quite happy with that sound.

 

[walterw]

As an occasional lead vocalist, give me both a healthy amount of "pull-up" parallel compression and peak-taming compression in the iem's, because I'm going to work both ends of the dynamic range and I need to hear what is happening. Flip the polarity in the monitor feed for me too.

haven't messed with comp'd IEMs too much; i suppose that done right the singer doesn't approach pushing too hard anyway, since it's easy to hear oneself.

what does flipping the monitor send polarity do for you?

 

[mellowinman]

Well, we disagree, no biggie.

I've already said that if I'm the sound guy and the band wants wet monitors, that's what they get.

But when I am on stage, it's a different story. What makes monitors hard for me to hear, apart from instrumental stage volume, is room reflections. Virtually all effects are some sort of processed delay, which is to my ears more of the same.

If a singer cannot perform without hearing him/herself drenched in effects, he or she is, IMO, not much of a singer.

YMMV.

You don't get to decide who is a good singer, and who is not. That is subjective, and up to the audience. Some singers hit big notes, that are hard to perform night after night. Sometimes, they want to hear something in the monitor that tells them what they are sounding like in the mains. "Drenched in effects" is a strawman argument, and if someone uses a strawman, they do not have much of a point, IMO.

No one said, "drenched in effects," and no one said, "cannot perform." A good sound man doesn't make the singer's job harder, or less enjoyable based on his opinion. A proper performer does what they do with some degree of inspiration. And a good sound coming from the monitors is one source of inspiration.

I am a good singer, and you can link to over eighty of my performances.

Are you a good singer, and can I link to any of your performances?

I don't care if I have a dry monitor or an effect; it's all the same to me. But I have worked with singers who prefer to hear some effects, and they are much better singers than I am. Are you a much better singer than I am?

Because if you are not, then your opinion is worthless on this subject. Your opinion is simply not worth consideration. I don't have an opinion on what choices a person makes coloring whether they are a good singer/bass player/guitarist/drummer, etc, because that opinion would be rendered with a certain degree of ignorance on my part.

Are you so certain your opinion is not?

My posts are a chance for all of you to LEARN something. There are GOOD singers who can do a better job with some effects in the monitors. That is not my opinion; that is the opinion of these singers, whose opinions are NOT worthless, because they have backed them up with years of solid performances, and don't need sound professionals dictating to them what tools they should or should not have at their disposal.

Bottom line, and this is NOT an opinion at all, is that it is not difficult to put some effects on monitors. I can do it, and I am far from a pro sound person. I can do it with no ill effects at all. So why not do it, if a vocalist wants it? And why not do it without judging that vocalist?

To say a singer can't be good if they prefer effects in their monitors is like saying a bass player can't be good if they don't play flats, or if they play with a pick.

It is simply being opinionated for the sake of being opinionated.

Time to learn something, and I hope all of you on this thread did.

Different vocalists have different styles, and different needs. They deserve a certain amount of respect. A bad night on bass sound isn't going to give you vocal nodes. A singer puts their BODY into the performance, far more than any other performer. Every sound person who has an opinion on whether a singer should use this mic or that mic, or this type of monitor or that type of monitor, or effects or no effects is WRONG, because it is always up to the performer.

A good sound professional is tasked with making the performers sound as good as possible.

Forget that, and you are not a competent sound person.

And that is NOT my opinion.

That is a simple FACT.

 

[TomB]

If a singer cannot perform without hearing him/herself drenched in effects, he or she is, IMO, not much of a singer.

YMMV.

With this I disagree. I work with some truly great singers who insist on effects in their monitor, whether I'm on bass or not. As sound guy, it's not to my taste to provide it, but I do see making them happy with their monitor as part of my job. So is avoiding feedback, which is easier if there's no compression on the monitors. A good singer will use mic distance to control dynamics, and if you play with them regularly you can coach them in this regard. If a guest singer grabs a trumpet or a harmonica (and they will!), I keep the channel gain control handy. It's a one-knob solution .

 

[modulusman]

You don't get to decide who is a good singer, and who is not. That is subjective, and up to the audience. Some singers hit big notes, that are hard to perform night after night. Sometimes, they want to hear something in the monitor that tells them what they are sounding like in the mains. "Drenched in effects" is a strawman argument, and if someone uses a strawman, they do not have much of a point, IMO.

No one said, "drenched in effects," and no one said, "cannot perform." A good sound man doesn't make the singer's job harder, or less enjoyable based on his opinion. A proper performer does what they do with some degree of inspiration. And a good sound coming from the monitors is one source of inspiration.

I am a good singer, and you can link to over eighty of my performances.

Are you a good singer, and can I link to any of your performances?

I don't care if I have a dry monitor or an effect; it's all the same to me. But I have worked with singers who prefer to hear some effects, and they are much better singers than I am. Are you a much better singer than I am?

Because if you are not, then your opinion is worthless on this subject. Your opinion is simply not worth consideration. I don't have an opinion on what choices a person makes coloring whether they are a good singer/bass player/guitarist/drummer, etc, because that opinion would be rendered with a certain degree of ignorance on my part.

Are you so certain your opinion is not?

My posts are a chance for all of you to LEARN something. There are GOOD singers who can do a better job with some effects in the monitors. That is not my opinion; that is the opinion of these singers, whose opinions are NOT worthless, because they have backed them up with years of solid performances, and don't need sound professionals dictating to them what tools they should or should not have at their disposal.

Bottom line, and this is NOT an opinion at all, is that it is not difficult to put some effects on monitors. I can do it, and I am far from a pro sound person. I can do it with no ill effects at all. So why not do it, if a vocalist wants it? And why not do it without judging that vocalist?

To say a singer can't be good if they prefer effects in their monitors is like saying a bass player can't be good if they don't play flats, or if they play with a pick.

It is simply being opinionated for the sake of being opinionated.

Time to learn something, and I hope all of you on this thread did.

Different vocalists have different styles, and different needs. They deserve a certain amount of respect. A bad night on bass sound isn't going to give you vocal nodes. A singer puts their BODY into the performance, far more than any other performer. Every sound person who has an opinion on whether a singer should use this mic or that mic, or this type of monitor or that type of monitor, or effects or no effects is WRONG, because it is always up to the performer.

A good sound professional is tasked with making the performers sound as good as possible.

Forget that, and you are not a competent sound person.

And that is NOT my opinion.

That is a simple FACT.

Well my opinion is that singers who need a lot of effects in their monitors are not very confident about their singing ability. At least that is my experience.

 

[wcriley]

It's been my experience that most people (myself included) like to hear a little bit of the "room" when they sing. Kind of like singing in the shower vs singing while wearing -30dB earmuffs. So outdoors or in a very dead room, with little or no reflected sound making its way to the stage, adding some "ambience" in the monitors can make a singer feel more comfortable. I'm not talking "drenched in effects", just a subtle touch of "room bounce".

If a singer wants some sort of heavy special effect for song or two, I think it's advantageous to put it in the monitor so he/she can "work with it".

 

[mellowinman]

Well my opinion is that singers who need a lot of effects in their monitors are not very confident about their singing ability. At least that is my experience.

You play country.

 

[longfinger]

Anyways.. before this goes into a flame fest...

I'm wondering how come more singers do not take command of their sound by using in-line effects boxes for singers (the way a guitarist uses effects)? There are not that many products out there, but they could be very handy when doing sound from the stage or when there is no sound person at the console. Singer can apply the desired effects to the desired outputs, and be done, PA just makes it louder. A foot switch can be used to turn the reverb off when talking to the crowd, and then back on when singing.

 

[Chromer]

Oh come now, many don't even own a microphone and now you want them to bring FX boxes too?

 

[lowfreq33]

I like the same compression in my monitor that I have in FOH. I have a wide dynamic range and good mic technique, and I need to hear what it sound like out front to blend properly.

 

[seanm]

Anyways.. before this goes into a flame fest...

I'm wondering how come more singers do not take command of their sound by using in-line effects boxes for singers (the way a guitarist uses effects)? There are not that many products out there, but they could be very handy when doing sound from the stage or when there is no sound person at the console. Singer can apply the desired effects to the desired outputs, and be done, PA just makes it louder. A foot switch can be used to turn the reverb off when talking to the crowd, and then back on when singing.

I believe it is because singers *excpect* the PA to have effects. And, to be honest, a real PA with rack mounted effects is going to sound better than any pedals you can buy.

That said, I have a mic mechanic that has a footswitch to turn off the reverb (or whatever effect you are using). Very handy if it weren't that the pedal is on top of the PA.

Harmonizers are very popular for fools on stools type gigs.

 

[modulusman]

You play country.

I also play rock. Of course you actually have to no how to sing to play country.

 

[Floyd Eye]

All those floor pedals for vocals suck and they all create headaches for the sound guy.

I agree that a singer who CANNOT sing without effects is no singer. That's not saying they don't prefer effects, but come on. As bass players we often play under WAY less than ideal conditions. I gigged with my B rig for 2 months. Played some bad ass shows.

 

[mellowinman]

Flame fest, schmame fest. What we have here is a bunch of people who are NOT lead vocalists giving their opinions on what constitutes being a good lead vocalist. THE single most specialized position in any band. THE hardest person to replace. THE position where the truly talented vs wannabes ration is the absolute lowest.

If a singer is doing SOME vocals, they don't need anything! No PA, no effects in the monitors, NOTHING.

If I'm singing "Freebird," or anything by the Eagles, Tom Petty, Eric Clapton, ALL country, or any other type of music where I simply SING, then I really don't need any help, and could do the song at a campfire with my acoustic guitar, and no mic.

But if I'm singing Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Guns N Roses, or if I'm a lady singing Janis Joplin, Melissa Etheridge, etc, I am duplicating the vocals of someone with a singularly unique talent, and I need all the help I can get.

Anybody who plays BASS GUITAR tells me that because I don't do it some way they think I should, or even better, A SOUND PERSON tells me I should do it how people doing the aforementioned material do, somebody is getting busted in the mouth.

Just try me.

 

[Floyd Eye]

Doesn't change the fact that a singer should be able to sing the song the same way with or without reverb in their monitors. Otherwise, they are not a specialized, hard to replace, truly talented member of anything. What you prefer is irrelevant. I prefer that my cab be mic'ed. Doesn't always happen. I prefer my cabinet makes the hair on my neck stand up when I slam a low D. Doesn't always happen. Guess what? I still play the same line the same way.

 

[Downunderwonder]

About that compression tool....

 

[ggunn]

You don't get to decide who is a good singer, and who is not.

Of course I do, because, as you say...

That is subjective...

You and I might agree on who is a good singer, or we might not.

Bottom line, and this is NOT an opinion at all, is that it is not difficult to put some effects on monitors.

I never said that it was. It's usually one turn of a knob. If you are on stage and I am your sound man, and if you and your band want effects in your monitors, you can have all you want. If our positions are reversed, our monitors will be dry.

And that is NOT my opinion.

Of course it is. It's all your opinion, all of it (except the bit about how not hard it is to put effects in the monitors, and I concur), and on some points I disagree. It's no big deal. Your opinion is no more absolute than anyone else's. Mine either. So what?

 

[Floyd Eye]

That's right. MY opinion is the correct one though, just so you all know.