bongomania
Commercial User
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
low output from Mixwizard aux sends
- Thread starter NickFromNY
- Start date
bongomania
Commercial User
I'm guessing whoever was running the soundboard for you to have those experiences didn't know what he was doing. It is utterly false to suggest that power ratings, or the size of the PA, have anything to do with whether compression can be properly used.walterw said:
Well, I don't deliberately add it to the wedge mixes. If I had the option to set the AUX sends to be pre-dynamics, I would. But, I can't, and I like having compression on the vocals coming through the mains.
Like I said though, I haven't had a problem yet. Same goes for the IEM mixes (we have both).
is this a fairly quiet band? i'm thinking more about loud-ass "i need more monitor" rock and roll in clubs; i similarly prefer comp on vocals out front, but it's deadly in wedges that may already be near their limits.
i haven't messed with comping IEM mixes (my band is all on IEMs, but un-comped).
Yeah I don't think I've ever come close to the limits of the monitor wedges. I only run the band at about 94dBA.
Funny thing though, the two lead singers don't use monitors. They just listen to their vocals through the mains. That was a strange thing to adjust to, but eventually I figured out how to work with it. Oddly enough, the male lead was happier when I increased the amount of compression on his voice.
Don't compress vocals in the monitors. Ever. This is sound 101.
People who know the difference will be pissed. People who don't know the difference will just think your monitors suck and not say anything.
People who know the difference will be pissed. People who don't know the difference will just think your monitors suck and not say anything.
thumbknuckle said:
Seriously. I jammed with a band recently (as a vocalist), and the vocals were compressed through the monitors. I left without a voice and never heard a thing I sang.
bongomania
Commercial User
"Sound 101" is if you heard the compression on the vocals, whoever set it up was doing it wrong. Same goes for if "people who know the difference" say the monitors suck. It's operator error.
OTOH, I guess it's reasonable to expect that at these bar gigs and jams you won't have an actual pro soundman running the board. In fact at every small bar gig I've played, the soundman was either the bartender or the bar owner's cousin or somesuch. So on a practical level with that consideration, I guess it actually makes a lot of sense to advise not to use compression.
OTOH, I guess it's reasonable to expect that at these bar gigs and jams you won't have an actual pro soundman running the board. In fact at every small bar gig I've played, the soundman was either the bartender or the bar owner's cousin or somesuch. So on a practical level with that consideration, I guess it actually makes a lot of sense to advise not to use compression.
Show me a rider that specifies compression on the vocal monitors. Maybe you can find one, I've never seen it, but maybe somebody out there wants that.
What I can find you is a million riders that specifically state that the vocal monitors should be uncompressed. I see that all the time, often with a "I shouldn't have to be telling you this, but ..." sort of disclaimer.
If a singer sings louder they should hear it getting louder in the monitors. If a compressor starts clamping down on their voice it will feel unnatural and cause the singer to try to compensate. In the din of a loud stage they probably won't even know they are doing it. Until they blow their voice out, that is.
If you want to compress your own vocals, for whatever reason, that's your business. Every band has it's little quirks about how they want to do things.
If you are getting paid to provide sound for someone else do not compress the vocal monitor.
I'm going to repeat that for emphasis: do not compress the vocal monitor.
I can not stress this enough. This isn't about individual taste or equally valid ways of doing things, you are risking the singer's ability to go out on stage the following night and do a show.
I'm not just digging in my heels and trying to win an internet argument here, it really is a safety issue.
What I can find you is a million riders that specifically state that the vocal monitors should be uncompressed. I see that all the time, often with a "I shouldn't have to be telling you this, but ..." sort of disclaimer.
If a singer sings louder they should hear it getting louder in the monitors. If a compressor starts clamping down on their voice it will feel unnatural and cause the singer to try to compensate. In the din of a loud stage they probably won't even know they are doing it. Until they blow their voice out, that is.
If you want to compress your own vocals, for whatever reason, that's your business. Every band has it's little quirks about how they want to do things.
If you are getting paid to provide sound for someone else do not compress the vocal monitor.
I'm going to repeat that for emphasis: do not compress the vocal monitor.
I can not stress this enough. This isn't about individual taste or equally valid ways of doing things, you are risking the singer's ability to go out on stage the following night and do a show.
I'm not just digging in my heels and trying to win an internet argument here, it really is a safety issue.
I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I am the guy tasked with doing it for my band. I have solicited and received a metric ton of advise from people that DO know what they are doing though and pretty much without exception the things I know about monitors are A) do not compress, B) do not add effects and C) use EQ to notch out frequencies that cause feedback.
bongomania said:
+1
If I compress vocals, I make it a point to apply about 1.5x as much makeup gain as there is gain reduction (usually around 6dB GR, enough to tame the loud screams, followed by about 9dB makeup gain). That keeps the softer lines from getting lost, and keeps the screams from parting hair. Oddly enough, I never have feedback problems either. Strange how that works.
You are going to have a very short career as a monitor engineer, and probably do a good amount of damage to some people's voices, but whatever works for you.
thumbknuckle said:
Note that I said 'if'. I don't, usually; more trouble than it's worth.
But I still don't understand how compression is an instant recipe for blown voices. If the makeup gain is adding more than the compression is reducing, then the singer will sing quieter, and have the same volume in the monitors. How could that ever cause problems?
Post insert auxes? No problem: wye each vocal into two channels each, one with compression for the house, one w/o for the monitors. If the console has groups, run each vocal to its own group, and insert the comps on the groups.
That assumes you have the channel count necessary to afford two per vocal.
My console has no sub-groups either so can't do it that way.
It is possible you are not using equipment appropriate for the problems you are trying to solve. I would go without compression in the FOH if it was the only way I could get the vocalist loud, clean, wide dynamic range monitors.
Just ride the fader if they get excited. FOH is easy, it's mixing monitors that separates the men from the boys. It's also the most significant part of the most significant part of the whole endeavor: getting a good performance.
What are you using? There could well be a workaround.
Just ride the fader if they get excited. FOH is easy, it's mixing monitors that separates the men from the boys. It's also the most significant part of the most significant part of the whole endeavor: getting a good performance.
What are you using? There could well be a workaround.
