Who does the sound tech serve?

[dune]

The first road band I was in, I ran sound from the stage and HATED it. I used to tell the BL "we really ought to get a sound man", his response was always: "A soundman isn't going to make us any more money." That was one of many things he was wrong about. It wasn't long before we fired that BL, hired a drummer to replace him who happened to know a great sound guy. I didn't know the term at the time, but he definitely had "golden ears".
I knew in the first 5 minutes of talking to him that my life was about to improve tenfold. Our first soundcheck with him I knew immediately, even from behind the PA, that we sounded way better than we ever had before. He immediately took us to a whole new level. The first night we went on, the crowd's reaction only confirmed that as we went over like gangbusters. We were a very tight band and always got over, but not like THAT.
Bottom line: we made a LOT more money because we now sounded better than anyone else on the circuit. Sure, he worked for us, but he'd been around and knew his stuff, so not inviting his input would have been foolish. I've always thought that the soundman is at least as important as anyone in the band, and often moreso. Full disclosure: he was a raging alcoholic (as was I at the time) and really a massive liability in a lot of ways but he was that good that we put up with it. We tried replacing him at one point, but everyplace we played said: "You guys really need to get Steve back." We did, and it was worth it.

 

[Pings Bass]

In a pro setting the tech is going to answer to a promoter or venue. The artist usually has significant say via contract rider, but ultimately it comes down to a hierarchy of who is paying whom. Often the sound tech and the artist both work for the promoter.

At the end of the day everybody should beworking for the audience, i.e. doing whatever is required to give the ticket buyers their money's worth.

 

[mikecd1]

Since the venue is often the one who pays the sound man their objectives are not necessarily the same as those of the band. I've heard recordings from the console that did not flatter the band as well as some great mixes so it all depends in the end who you get, what their goals are and who's paying / directing their effort. There's also techs who know what they're doing and those who don't have a clue. I am so done with guys who just blast the kick drum.

 

[SoonerBill]

She was probably talking about monitors, she could have no idea what it sounded like out front.

She kept asking the audience. I thought I had that in there. And it was true that the drums and bass way overran the vocals. And they're a vocal group.

 

[JazznFunk]

It's a partnership, but a tenuous one. That said, the band is there to help make the venue (and themselves) money by making the audience have a good experience and the FOH (and monitor engineer) wouldn't be there if there was no band - and it's incumbent upon them to work with the band well. So, the band is a very important part of the equation. And if the sound in a venue isn't good and the audience has a negative impression, that's on the sound engineer in the end.

A sound engineer with no ego is there to take whatever the band is doing and make it present well, transparently, in the room. It doesn't mean the engineer has a license to do things that the band ultimately doesn't ask for, especially when it changes the representation of the band's music in a negative way. The quality and motivations of the engineer will reveal themselves in due time.

IMO, one of the best qualities of a FOH engineer is someone who is willing and musically/technically able to solve problems quickly, and who attempts to remain as 'invisible' as possible in terms of the sonic picture presented in the room. They should also be willing to listen to band members when they are relaying specific information about what they do/do not like out front, and find compromises if that desire isn't able to be accommodated. MOST importantly - a good sound engineer should help the band learn something that will enable them to be better and communicate better moving forward with others. Some of the best techs I ever worked with taught ME something, and we all had a great night as a result.

The WORST sound engineers I ever dealt with made it known they had an agenda from the beginning, and they didn't care about what you thought or suggested. The show suffered in the end.

 

[gln1955]

I've heard some big name bands mixed so bad it was clear the sound techs were serving neither the band, the venue nor the audience. This is in a venue that from other experience is very conducive to a band sounding very good. Some people are just not good at their job.

 

[Fuzzbass]

The Sound Engineer answers to whomever is paying them.

A tech hired by the venue is expected to arrive on time, maintain appropriate volume, etc. However the venue probably won't be micromanaging the tech's choices on tone and overall mix: for these the sound tech should answer to the band, but often answers to himself.


My vent: I play harder rock on a regular basis, and for that I like a fairly aggressive bass tone, with presence in the high mids/low treble. The most extreme example is my Cheap Trick tribute band where I'm using octave up, chorus, and distortion to simulate 12-string bass. Unfortunately I've run into lazy house soundmen who probably use a generic EQ patch for bass guitar that rolls off all the fun part of my tone. I got that treatment from the tech at one venue, so I gently mentioned to him that I was emulating 12-string bass, meaning my tone should be more like rhythm guitar. He obliged me with some additional mids... not all of what I was hoping for, but I chose not to push the issue any further.

On the flip side: that same band performed at a different venue, and my faux 12-string tone shone in the FOH mix. Wonderful experience: the entire band sounded great in the monitors and the mains. I complimented the house tech, who said "I'm just here to make you sound like you". Talk about modest, that's so much easier said than done.

 

[micguy]

The sound-tech serves whoever pays them. It's no more complex than that.

When the FOH Engineer and all the musicians are volunteers, it is more complex than you’re thinking it is.

I’ve been on both sides of this, and the thought that the musicians or the FOH person have to be ranked (one serving the other) is not a productive mindset. You’re a team, everyone (paid or volunteer) has a part. You work together to produce something artistic and (more importantly) inspiring enough that the congregation joins in in worship.

FOH is the only person on the team that has the perspective of the whole - they are certainly not only able to, but also charged with the responsibility to make artistic decisions. If there are two acoustic guitars, and one has gone way out of tune (I have experienced this), it shouldn’t be foo big of a surprise that it won’t be up front in the mix. If we’re doing a new tune. the vocals will be more up front in the verses on that tune (words are important) than they will be in the chorus of a tune we’ve done a thousand times - there, the band can come up more relative to the lead vocalist

The worship teams i have done FOH for were all coached that the FOH person was the authority on amp volumes - as FOH needs fo be able to get a clear mix happening, with clear vocals, if you are asked to turn down, you turn down. It’s not a hierarchy, it’s roles and what everyone needs to do for the team to succeed.

 

[Wasnex]

Who's paying the sound tech?

Competing Needs:

1. Band--If the band hires the audio tech, the band gets more say. A problem here is the artistic vision of the band may vary from one member to the next. Which band member calls the shots? How is a tech supposed to make it right, when there is disagreement between band members--This is probably more common than you think. A lot bands are made up of individuals who are most concerned with pleasuring themself.
2. Audience--The needs of the audience can also vary significantly from one person to the next. IMHO most of us are more like service providers than artists. If a band is getting paid to deliver a service, they really should prioritize delivering a quality experience tailored to the audience and venue's needs.
3. Venue--If the venue hires the audio tech, the venue gets more say.
4. Sound Tech--A tech will have his/her own artistic vision. They also have their own reputation to protect. Ideally the hiring entity will hire techs who understand and can realize the desired artistic vision. The best way to guarantee this is for the hiring entity and the tech to have very similar artistic visions. Some techs are more versatile than others.

Even if the band hires a tech who understands/shares their artistic vision, there is no guarantee the artistic vision can or should be realized at every gig. In particular between acoustic problems and the limitations of most PAs, IME house sound is usually more about compromise the being ideal.

The bands ability and willingness to keep volume in check can be a significant limiting factor. In order for the PA to deliver the best possible sound quality it has to dominate the room. Unfortunately, IME elements of the stage wash are often louder than the PA. When this occurs, the audio tech cannot exert control over those parts of the mix without making them even louder. If it sounds bad, everyone blames the tech, regardless of who is really to blame.

 

[trevcda]

At the end of the day, my job is to make what you're doing on stage louder. I've worked with bands that understood this and everybody's goal was the same. I've also worked with bands that think this is their only chance to play rock star and will fight me every step of the way. The one that comes to mind is a band whose guitar player thought he had to carry the room with an extremely beamy stack that was sending people running for the exits. The venue owner/purchaser and their TM all came running up telling me to turn down the guitar. I showed them the guitar fader dropped all the way and briefly dropped the mains to show them that I had no guitar going through the house system. They kind shrugged and walked away. If you have no interest in working as a team to make your product sound good to your audience, I'm going to just let you suck out loud.

 

[TeaTime]

Is music an art or a commodity? If it's an art, then the artists should have final say. That's the people performing the music.

The sound guy should take what the band is trying to deliver, and optimize it for the specific room and crowd. Deal with EQ, overall levels.

Specific tone, or an instrument "overplaying"? That's a performance choice and so it is the decision of the band, not the soundguy.

A good soundguy is invaluable, and makes everything better. A bad soundguy is worse than a bad drummer, and should be fired even faster.

In the 90's I did a fill-in gig for a Nu-Metal band with an established following. From stage I knew something was wrong because I could feel it in my body, and could see it in the audience reaction. People started leaving.

The dumbass sound "engineer" was a classic rock guy and thought the edgy out front bass (which is one of the defining elements of the genre) sounded bad. After sound check he had changed my DI setup without me knowing. We had the proper tone on stage, but out front was just a wall of sloppy mud. I had a friend who videoed the sound check and part of the first set, during the break he showed it to me and the bandleader. Big argument with the sound guy, bar manager was on our side, ended with a call to the owner. One of our gear techs took over sound, and we pulled the night together.

 

[JohnnyChatter]

I have probably used every sound guy in town. I’m in the camp of I can’t hear what the audience is so make me sound good. There are a few in town who are really bad…. I treat them as such. The other 15 or so good ones I tip regularly when I can so they know they are appreciated. If you play Denver the sound dudes at Moes and 404 really do a good job for being smaller venues. Super helpful and easy to work with

I have learned over the years I’m okay with you being a jerk if you make me sound good. If you’re a jerk and suck at your job I’ll let ya know.

 

[sawzalot]

It's probably a bit of both trying to make the band sound as good as possible while reproducing the sound of the band. I've seen FOH engineers pull back out-of-key background singers, turn down guitarists that somehow started playing in the wrong key, add signal processing that makes the band sound great, all while solving horrible acoustic problems in the room and politely nodding to drunk patrons telling the FOH engineer to turn it up/down/more/less/bass/guitar/drums/reverb/etc. Basically the FOH engineer has a complicated job and has to balance a lot of competing priorities.

 

[groovaholic]

I saw Metallica/Guns n Roses on their co-headlining tour in 1992:
Metallica went all-out for nearly three hours (despite James' recent 3rd-degree burns from a pyro mishap)
After Metallica's two encores, we waited over 2 hours for G n R .

When they finally started, Axl Rose left the stage halfway through their first song and was absent for 45 minutes or so.

Years later, a promoter who had been involved in the whole debacle was at my house for a party.
Apparently, during that 45-minute gap, Axl was headed to the airport.

The promoter called the limo to remind the driver that the limo contract was with the promoter - not the rock star in the back.
Further, if the limo didn't return said rock star to the stadium immediately, the limo company and driver would not be getting paid.

Not surprisingly, the limo turned around and brought Axl back, and he finished the show - complaining throughout.

TLDR/moral of the story:
A contractor's first loyalty is to whoever is paying them.

If the band hires and pays the sound tech, that tech's goal will be to make you happy.
But if they're working for the club or the promoter, that's who will define their priorities.

 

[allanhearn]

Worst case they help prevent volume wars and tame egos to get a pleasant mix for the room. In bars this means keeping a lid on it so drink orders can be filled.
Better scenario is they help shape the mix to bring out the best in a band. Riding fades when solos come and go, eqing things to make it sound cohesive to the audience.
But yea, who's paying wins! Unless the guitar player is paying them. At that point everyone loses.

 

[Gopherbassist]

I saw Metallica/Guns n Roses on their co-headlining tour in 1992:
Metallica went all-out for nearly three hours (despite James' recent 3rd-degree burns from a pyro mishap)
After Metallica's two encores, we waited over 2 hours for G n R .

When they finally started, Axl Rose left the stage halfway through their first song and was absent for 45 minutes or so.

Years later, a promoter who had been involved in the whole debacle was at my house for a party.
Apparently, during that 45-minute gap, Axl was headed to the airport.

The promoter called the limo to remind the driver that the limo contract was with the promoter - not the rock star in the back.
Further, if the limo didn't return said rock star to the stadium immediately, the limo company and driver would not be getting paid.

Not surprisingly, the limo turned around and brought Axl back, and he finished the show - complaining throughout.

TLDR/moral of the story:
A contractor's first loyalty is to whoever is paying them.

If the band hires and pays the sound tech, that tech's goal will be to make you happy.
But if they're working for the club or the promoter, that's who will define their priorities.

I wonder what Axl's kick was. In Slash's autobiography, he tells an early Guns story about Axl causing some issue or other. Nothing big as I remember, but something that needed to be dealt with.

Slash brought it up while he was driving with Axl in the car. Axl freaked out, and jumped out of the car with no warning.

While it was moving.

I hope that man is medicated these days.

 

[2112]

In my band, the sound guy is there to do my bidding, because it's my band and his pay comes out of my wallet. And my bidding is to make the band sound good. I won't hire a sound guy unless I can trust him to do the job well without intervention.

 

[Podgorny]

When the FOH Engineer and all the musicians are volunteers, it is more complex than you’re thinking it is.

I mean, yeah. But also no. If I'm working for free, I answer to me. It's not to say I won't be a team player. But enforcing some sort of hierarchy on volunteers under the guise of serving at church is really just manipulation and exploitation.
The question posed here is "who has the last word?", and when pay is a factor, you do what you need to do to make the person paying you happy if you want to be hired again. Sometimes, that may mean making things sound not exactly how you want them. When a client asks me for something that I disagree with, my choice is accommodate their request, or stand my ground and risk losing the gig.

 

[Pdaddy1978]

I don't need the FOH guy, or gal, playing producer at a live show. Make everybody heard without overwhelming anybody and let us sound like us. Make sure the sound level is appropriate for the venue. If I'm playin somewhere where some hotshot soundman
runs the show, I acquiesce to his opinions of coloring my sound.
But if I'm hiring him....he works for me/us. Ask first.

 

[BassicJazzy]

I remember reading that Genesis was one of the earliest bands to travel with their own sound engineer. It was critical to them to get their mix right. I have seen hit or miss results when a band comes to a venue that employs its own sound engineer. I remember a Pearl Jam concert with Eddie Vedder threatening the sound man from his stage, because he didn't like what he was hearing. "Oh no, Eddie, it couldn't be your voice, could it?"

I am a terrible sound engineer. I manage to make "bad" sound even worse.