• 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.

I don't like monster subs all that much.

#81
CryingBass said:
Hey guys, esp @agedhorse, who politely replied to me that large events might stack or fly subs as needed.

Thought you all might find this interesting. From Ken Chesney's 2022 tour. Bring your earplugs!

View attachment 4856094
Click to expand...
It can work ok, to varying degrees depending on the exact problem being addressed. Sometimes active pattern control is used to reduce LF energy on the stage, sometimes it’s used to reduce energy to the sides, sometimes it’s used to focus the energy more forward.

There are to chief drawbacks though, the first being that there are usually artifacts generated, lobes of LF energy can sometimes show up where it’s not wanted or not expected. The other issue is that the added gear doesn’t contribute to the forward (audience) LF energy so the system grows in size, weight and cost without getting louder.

I have heard both good and bad examples of the different types of active pattern control, so it really depends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0c9, CryingBass and Wasnex
#82
As a general note, there are many ways to mix with subs, different genres, different acoustic spaces, different volume levels and the engineer’s personal preferences all factor into the choice.

When I was out there mixing or providing systems for touring acts, I found that the results were generally more related to the skill/experience of the FOH engineer and the cooperation of the band than how the subs were incorporated. Same system same venue and different engineer could result in very different results.

Likewise, I also saw the same engineers in different systems always achieve a solid, acceptable mix where other engineers would struggle. Don’t guys just had a knack for making good choices, good compromises and avoided decisions with negative consequences. Those guys always had more work than they could handle too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrThumpenstein, s0c9, Minimalist and 4 others
#83
Plain Old Barry said:
Have you worked with systems feeding the subs from an post fader aux send?

If not... It naturally high passes everything, and lets only the channels with low frequency information into the subs at varying levels. The first time I used a system like this, I expected it to work just like individually high passing channels, but it was different, and clearer.
Click to expand...
It makes everything HPF to that particular frequency.

IME it's tougher to "tune" everything in the right place in the Low end world
More work if you want to HPF your Tom to 70 instead of the Kit's 90

IMHO it's MUCH better ( And easy ) to use just a L-R on a well tuned kit.
Just set the HPF to each channel frequency on that particular instrument.
 
Last edited:
#84
agedhorse said:
It can work ok, to varying degrees depending on the exact problem being addressed. Sometimes active pattern control is used to reduce LF energy on the stage, sometimes it’s used to reduce energy to the sides, sometimes it’s used to focus the energy more forward.

There are to chief drawbacks though, the first being that there are usually artifacts generated, lobes of LF energy can sometimes show up where it’s not wanted or not expected. The other issue is that the added gear doesn’t contribute to the forward (audience) LF energy so the system grows in size, weight and cost without getting louder.

I have heard both good and bad examples of the different types of active pattern control, so it really depends.
Click to expand...

True, there are always compromises somewhere with any system deployment.
As for the additional weight and cost, I doubt that was an issue for a Kenny Chesney tour
with Clair Brothers supplying the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0c9 and Plain Old Barry
#85
Mike Caldwell said:
True, there are always compromises somewhere with any system deployment.
As for the additional weight and cost, I doubt that was an issue for a Kenny Chesney tour
with Clair Brothers supplying the system.
Click to expand...
Like I said, it depends on the wants, needs and resources of the show. Surprisingly, even for large shows, cost, size and weight do come into play, a lot more now than before. The cost of adding another truck to a tour can be a deal breaker, the show's GP and GR needs to support the added cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plain Old Barry, kittywithabanjo and Wasnex
#87
EastCoastThump said:
I had a show three weeks ago that was IEMs and no stage amps. At one point, the subs had my bass so hyped that they were sympathetically vibrating the bass on stage. It wasn't subtle, and there wasn't anywhere to go that I wasn't getting sub-induced low-end feedback.
Click to expand...

A related experience from a few years ago:

We played an outdoor show on one of those portable stages that folds down into a trailer. Bass direct; kick and the rest of the kit miked, guitar cab miked. During sound check the _kick_ mic started feeding back. It wasn't acoustic feedback from the drummer's monitor. The subs were at the front corners of the stage and vibrated the floor enough to get that to happen.
 
#90
s0c9 said:
I’m as much a fan of them as I am of having all faders set at unity and the mix adjusted with trim/gain control.
YMMV
Click to expand...

Agree that you don't "Mix" that way but in the old analogue console way , that was the way to set the gain.

I still see people doing their gain structure that way with digital boards.
:rollno:
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0c9
#91
I don't like overly boosted boomy bottom end. But when I hit a low now, I expect it to rupture spleens in the first five rows and do permanent damage to the building's structure.

I went to a Toby Mac concert and it was the most awesome live sound I've every experienced. The bass was just massive. When you talked your voice vibrated. Now THAT is bass!
 
#93
Its also a dBA vs dBC issue, I think. With the right weighting the mix can sound and feel louder without exceeding a set decibel limit. You can usually push more bass, but not mids and highs without the meter going over.

The days when you could play insanely loud sine waves through a PA are over. Its too dangerous for the audiences ears. It seems to me that modern boomy bass sound is easier on the hearing than the classic bass sound at concert levels, very broadly speaking. Just my personal observation though,....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Windreaper
#94
sheepshank said:
Its also a dBA vs dBC issue, I think. With the right weighting the mix can sound and feel louder without exceeding a set decibel limit. You can usually push more bass, but not mids and highs without the meter going over.

The days when you could play insanely loud sine waves through a PA are over. Its too dangerous for the audiences ears. It seems to me that modern boomy bass sound is easier on the hearing than the classic bass sound at concert levels, very broadly speaking. Just my personal observation though,....
Click to expand...

Yes, venue SPL limits are often something like <90-100dB LAeq, 10min, so you can push more low end to make the mix sound bigger (since the A-weighting ignores a lot the extreme lows).

upload_2023-3-18_9-50-44.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: sheepshank
#95
I love monster subs and won't apologize for it. I think as some have said earlier, it's a generational thing. What some older people don't like the younger crowd does. Same in opposite direction. When I hear a mix that the older crowd probably prefers I perceive it as overly oppressive high end and high mids. Is my hearing damaged in the lower frequencies or theirs higher up?

If I csnt feel it in my chest and gut and I want my money back in most cases. Genre specific of course.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back