Tell me if I'm right about this...

[Joe Nerve]

If I were to count, I'd say I have close to 2000 gigs under my belt. I'll guess that about half of them went through the clubs system. I've always had this notion, but I'd like to know if it's true, or at least get a better understanding of it.

Some (most) sound people let you set up, get comfortable on stage, and do your thing. Then they do their thing. And 99% of the time it sounds awesome, on stage and in the club.

Then there are the other sound people, who beg that you go as low as you possibly can on stage, and get upset and roll their eyes if your amp is above speaking volume. Because they need it like that for a good mix in the front of house.

Anyhow, my thoughts are that the people from the latter group are those who studied sound, probably went to school for it, and work according to "the book", while the ones that let you do your own thing work more from their ears and experience, and do a far better job.

The club mix always seems way better to me from the first group - and I can't help to wonder why the others don't learn to roll with whatever the band is putting out, with an understandable stage volume tweak here and there. I generally don't pay much mind to any of this, and usually don't care all that much, but I've been playing a particular club a lot lately where it's a quick line check and go, and all I hear is drums. Not a fan of the, "can I get some more guitar in the monitors" stuff between songs, so I usually just eat it. But it's not fun to play that way. And some audience members told me the sound in the club was horrible.

Please shed some light. I'm a bass player, trying to understand the other side. Why the 2 camps, when it seems a great job can be done either way?

 

[ibateur]

2nd group is more people who think they know better. Whether they studied sound or sound engineering is beside the point. They're confident in their knowledge and capabilities and act as the insider. You can do a Jesus and preach to them about letting the musician be the guide bla bla bla in the hope of converting them. Good luck.

I would do my best to work with them and 'nuff said at the end.

 

[ggunn]

If I were to count, I'd say I have close to 2000 gigs under my belt. I'll guess that about half of them went through the clubs system. I've always had this notion, but I'd like to know if it's true, or at least get a better understanding of it.

Some (most) sound people let you set up, get comfortable on stage, and do your thing. Then they do their thing. And 99% of the time it sounds awesome, on stage and in the club.

Then there are the other sound people, who beg that you go as low as you possibly can on stage, and get upset and roll their eyes if your amp is above speaking volume. Because they need it like that for a good mix in the front of house.

Anyhow, my thoughts are that the people from the latter group are those who studied sound, probably went to school for it, and work according to "the book", while the ones that let you do your own thing work more from their ears and experience, and do a far better job.

The club mix always seems way better to me from the first group - and I can't help to wonder why the others don't learn to roll with whatever the band is putting out, with an understandable stage volume tweak here and there. I generally don't pay much mind to any of this, and usually don't care all that much, but I've been playing a particular club a lot lately where it's a quick line check and go, and all I hear is drums. Not a fan of the, "can I get some more guitar in the monitors" stuff between songs, so I usually just eat it. But it's not fun to play that way. And some audience members told me the sound in the club was horrible.

Please shed some light. I'm a bass player, trying to understand the other side. Why the 2 camps, when it seems a great job can be done either way?

There have been beaucoup threads on this kind of thing and many have devolved into sound engineer bashing, to the point where the moderators of this forum have placed a sticky thread admonishing posters not to go there. Suffice to say that there are varying degrees of expertise, experience, and methodologies among sound persons, just as there are among musicians.

One thing you can do is to get one of those little digital recorders (Edirol, Zoom, etc.) and put it on a mic stand at the sound board so that you can critique the sound person's work (and your own, incidentally) and compare it to your experience. That way you will know what worked and what didn't without having to rely on second hand subjective information.

I record everything.

 

[Muttleybass]

IME, less stage volume gives more control to FOH mix. This doesn't translate well to the real world where musicians need to hear themselves. That's why the two camps... In all probability, the first group is made of musicians, the second group is made up of guys who strictly do sound.

I really don't know for sure, but that's what I've always thought. Made sense to me.

 

[projectMalamute]

The problem isn't people going to school, the problem is that they are going to the wrong schools.

Some of the most capable audio tech people I know have degrees. Real degrees, from real engineering departments at real universities.

I would bet a good sum of money that a Full Sail graduate has never even seen the wave equation derived. And they call themselves 'engineers'.

 

[lowfreq33]

Going to school can teach you how to operate the equipment, how acoustics and hearing work, and what are considered best practices in studios and venues. They don't necessarily give you good ears. I have an audio degree, but school was NOT where I learned to mix.

 

[Jimbob Jones]

the first group is made of musicians, the second group is made up of guys who strictly do sound.

You hit it on the head there. All of the best techies are musicians IME.

Also, you must remember that you're a mature musician. So many bands see gigs as a chance to turn their amps up as far as they'll go, and that is bad for the FOH mix. As a sound guy, you either choose to trust the band to do what they do and accept the concequences if they suck, or you try and take control, which rarely goes well with people you don't know.

 

[shtik]

In all probability, the first group is made of musicians, the second group is made up of guys who strictly do sound.

I do know of musician-sound engineers that care about stage volume, but I mostly agree with this.

I don't do much live engineering these days, but when I did I always let the guys on stage do their thing, even when sometimes they over-exaggerated and I didn't even have their instrument going through the FOH..

When I perform, I usually go with what the engineer says and don't argue. Sometimes (or most of the times, depending on the type of venue), the FOH system just don't have enough headroom and your bass amp will just overpower the FOH without you even knowing it.

There are times when musicians should have an understanding of where they play - i.e. small clubs with horrible acoustics and weak FOH. If the drummer hits like he's playing MSG - of course no one will hear themselves on stage, they will need to raise the level of the amps, and as a result:

But it's not fun to play that way. And some audience members told me the sound in the club was horrible.

I bet that if the drummer had played a little softer - closer to the backline amps volume, the FOH sound would have been much better.

I hate playing restrained when all we want is to just rock on, but when we play however we want when the venue don't allow, we give up on sounding good as a band, and totally rely on the show and the vibe to save us. At these situations, you have to choose something over the other.

When you play big stages with powerful FOH, no engineer will ever tell you how loud to play your amp on stage.

 

[millsbass5]

I'm very,very fortunate to have played in a band for the last 18+ years that has our own soundman. Yeah,he went to a school in Nashville specifically for that. What makes it even better is that he's also an accomplished musician. I just don't see how the situation couldn't be any better for us as a band. We have someone that's able to see/hear from our perspective.
And,what's even better for me is,he's primarily a bass player! Can't get much better than that,folks. So,when it comes to the FOH sound,I don't even worry. I know it's spot on,for sure.

 

[uhdinator]

If the stage volume is too loud the sound guy has no choice but to pull everything down except vocals to try his best to have the vocals heard. If he suggests reducing stage volume and you don't like it then you get what you get.

If a sound person asks you to do something it's usually because he/she wants to do their best. If they didn't try to improve something that is an issue I would assume they are not really interested in doing a good job or have given up as they got tired of dealing with resistance.

 

[Vinny D]

I have been providing sound for local bands for the past 4-years now, I average about 70 shows per year working with about 8 different bands.
From my experience a lower stage volume certainly gives the FOH engineer control over your overall volume levels, and makes it much easier to please the venue owners when they request to please lower the volume.

Now, I am not saying that I request any of the bands that I work with to do that....I am just saying why IME it is better to have a lower stage volume.

I let the bands that I work with play as loud/soft as they want and I base my overall mix on what they give me.
Sometimes the bands have a decent stage volume and I can still dial in a great mix....sometimes I am left with just vocals coming through the PA.

Another factor in all of this is the venue you are working at.
If the band has the room packed to capacity, you pretty much can do whatever you want and nobody ever complains.
If it is just tables and chairs you are playing to and the band is still playing like they are in a arena, you can be sure by the time the band hits the first chorus of the first song the management will be all over the sound tech to waive there magic wand and lower the volume.
If the tech has no control over the stage volume, they have no control in lowering the volume in the venue.

Thats how I see it every weekend.
Again, makes no difference to me what the band wants to do.
They can play as loud as they want....my systems can go louder.
But when a band is playing to loud, I have no way of turning them down.

 

[projectMalamute]

As a sound guy, you either choose to trust the band to do what they do and accept the concequences if they suck, or you try and take control, which rarely goes well with people you don't know.

I do the former. Absolutely every time, I won't take work where I am expected to do any different. I am not your producer.

I have mixed some truly terrible sounding shows. I have also mixed some absolutely fantastic sounding shows. The quality of sound tends to correlate pretty precisely with how good of a band I am working for. I often mix shows that I think sound pretty stupid or horrible in some way that are precisely what the audience and bands seem to want. People by Mesa Triple Rectifiers fully aware of the fact that they will get the thing to a gig, plug it in, and it will sound like a Mesa Triple Rectifier. Who knows why, but there you go.

You see, I absolutely don't care if your band sounds 'good'. My job is to make your band sound 'loud', for whatever definition of 'loud' you require. If you have your act together and give me sounds that are appropriate to the mix you are trying to achieve I'll get the balance together and scale the sound up to fill whatever room we are working in, and you will sound great. If your band is a mess I'll do the same thing, and you'll sound like a mess. Don't worry though, I'll get blamed for it.

 

[TimmyP]

I'm in camp 2. Yes, I can make you sound good if I just let you 'do your thing'. And everyone in the room will suffer a bit of hearing damage as a result. Which is why I'm in camp 2. Oftentimes it's still TFL because of the ape behind the drum kit.