Are you compressing the vocals?

kmetal, post: 403757 wrote: My guess is that all the stage noise is creating some kind of nulling effect and causing cancellation. and then when they stop i'm just amplifying the air and magnetic field.

Pretty much,but not sure what you mean by magnetic field.
I think the room ,and surface resonances get excited by different frequencies as well,and that comes into play.When there are fewer interfering waves causing cancellation,the dominant frequency wave can propogate creating a feedback cycle that is free to build.

boulder, usually barely, and not to start. by barely i mean a couple db @ like a 2.5 ratio, and a medium fast attack/release. Live compression is one of my wonders, so i keep it easy, or none at all for now until i figure out what much better/experienced live engineers do, to tame vocal dynamics.

audiofreek, i just meant the magnets between the mics/mons/mains being powered as creating some sort of magnetic field. where maybe the power amps were interacting w/ all of them to create some sort of physical movement. i dunno if thats even really why. but like how you can just turn a vacant mic up enough to squeak. not sure what causes that, gonna have start researching my 101's i guess.

So, your saying that basically it's that the 'lone' cranked vocal is interacting badly w/ the room.? is there another way to remedy that besides just push the fader down, that you know of?it makes sense based an my basic level of acoustics knowledge.

i'm gonna have a lot of questions about live stuff coming up, even tho i've been at it for a few years, i've just got a very demanding person that wants his band to sound like it's concert, even in small bars... while his fantasy may/may not come true, it's a chance to improve my skills. even a couple of national acts i worked for didn't complain to me, so i expect a certain level of um, pretentiousness, on his part, but either way, i can get better/more refined.

any insight is worth it's weight in gold to me, and i appreciate all your time.

thanks. kyle.

do you know how to "ring" the monitors out?

not really man. in a caveman way i used to (get mix levels, mess w/ graphic eq for a couple).

all the stuff i've been reading about the past couple weeks on feedback, mentions 'ringing out' the room. even the manual for my dbx 166xl, which i use for my bass rig.

I don't know how to execute the process the right way. for mains, or mons.

especially in front of a place that already has patrons there already. i did modestly try it last night after 5min soundcheck, cuz their presonus boars has rta and feedback indication.

i spent hours reading 'feedback suppressor' units manuals thurs night, and opinions on them. seems like a fixed installation thing to me, and since i already like the driverack, no practical use for me if i'm gonna invest modestly in that technology.

From what i gathered i need to know how to ring out something besides a t-shirt, manually, or semi-manually. my concern is that patrons are there. is there a modest way that won't kill the 8'0 clock bar crowd. or do i need to step up and tell the band to get there the night before, or, have the bar open early for us.

How do you ring the monitors out? and at what point in the soundcheck? in front of people, and not in front of people?

thanks.

p.s 'ring out a..." became new to me only a couple days ago. i have a lot to learn.

to ring monitors out you set up all the mics and speakers floor monitors , side sweeps ... then you start with the monitor system ...depending on how many programs of monitors you are using, start with one and set the eqs flat and open up all the mics on that program at the approximate levels they will be at. then slowly bring up the main volume. at some point he system will start to feed back or "ring". locate the point of feed back and attenuate it with your graphic eq (1/3rd octave eqs are best for monitors). repeat this process twice more .. repeat the procedure for any other programs of monitors you may have .. now your monitors are rung out .. shouldn't take more than a few minutes to do but yes it will annoy other people in the room so if you can gain access early it helps.

now repeat the same procedure for the mains with the monitors turned off. this will also annoy other people in the room. 10 or 15 band eqs are usually best for mains imo.

last bring down all levels and power up mains and monitors together and bring the levels up slowly .. search out any last freqs. that are still resonating and attenuate them. that's a s loud as it's going to get.

imo, compression should only be used on the main 2-bus mono bus to protect speakers. adding compression on the channels only creates situations for feedback to occur.

especially in front of a place that already has patrons there already.

Yup. Sound checking in a room filled with customers sucks. The band you are working with wants it to sound like a concert? Then they should be willing to get there and be there early enough for a proper sound check at an appropriate time for you to ring out FOH and Monitors without killing a dinner crowd.

Then again, there are times when the club won't let you set up and check until a certain time that they dictate, so you are kind of at the mercy of the club owner, too.

In very rare cases do you see a pro act's sound company still adjusting noticeable levels after the audience has arrived. Yeah, there's a bit of tweaking here and there, or the occasional problem that the crew will be fixing, but by and large, if you go see a "pro" act concert, the FOH and the monitors were taken care of hours before the audience arrived.

And It's a two way street...while you can ring out the PA to a large degree before the band gets there, you can't do everything. Proper sound checks generally deliver good sounding shows... so, if they want it to sound "pro", then they have to do their part, too.

Running the front end in reverse phase with monitors helps alot to reduce howling feedback.

kmetal, post: 403796 wrote: boulder, usually barely, and not to start. by barely i mean a couple db @ like a 2.5 ratio, and a medium fast attack/release. Live compression is one of my wonders, so i keep it easy, or none at all for now until i figure out what much better/experienced live engineers do, to tame vocal dynamics.

Good. Keep compression to a minimum until you have more experience. It can increase the likelihood of feedback. When the person is singing (or there's enough bleed) the compressor is reducing the gain. When they stop the gain will come back up and possibly make the mic feed back. One trick is to use an XLR splitter and put the mic into two channels, one with compression for the main speakers and one without for the monitors. That also gives you different eq for monitors (if your board has post-eq pre-fader aux sends).

Good. Keep compression to a minimum until you have more experience. It can increase the likelihood of feedback. When the person is singing (or there's enough bleed) the compressor is reducing the gain. When they stop the gain will come back up and possibly make the mic feed back. One trick is to use an XLR splitter and put the mic into two channels, one with compression for the main speakers and one without for the monitors. That also gives you different eq for monitors (if your board has post-eq pre-fader aux sends).

i agree. mons should be pre eq and pre fader even if you are sending the monitors from the FOH board. but you will be limited by the number of pre aux sends you have on the console for monitor programs and this may impact the amount of aux send available for efx.

most boards send aux signals pre insert so compression can be used on FOH without a separate split but imo i would not compress vocals ... maybe bass or guitars. in most large venues i have worked the sound guys only compress the mains. live is different than recording.

another thing is most expierenced monitor and FOH engineers have developed relative pitch so when they hear ringing they can readily identify what frequency it is ... i know a 5K ring when i hear it.

Kurt Foster, post: 403806 wrote: i agree. mons should be pre eq and pre fader even if you are sending the monitors from the FOH board. but you will be limited by the number of pre aux sends you have on the console for monitor programs and this may impact the amount of aux send available for efx.

I actually like post eq monitor sends. I deal with feedback by making the monitors as flat as possible (except for perhaps a HPF) and then cutting at most a few narrow frequencies. Flat response sounds louder and clearer right off the bat which tends to head off requests for more monitor volume. Above a certain threshold of stage volume the situation collapses into damage control, cutting more aggressively as you increase the volume. But at sensible stage volume I use the eq primarily to get flat response from the monitors rather than ring out.

Kurt Foster, post: 403806 wrote: most boards send aux signals pre insert so compression can be used on FOH without a separate split but imo i would not compress vocals ... maybe bass or guitars. in most large venues i have worked the sound guys only compress the mains. live is different than recording.

Pretty much all the analog consoles I've used have the insert ahead of all the aux sends, usually:

preamp -> HPF -> insert -> pre fader aux sends -> eq -> fader -> post fader aux sends -> pan -> main/sub bus assign.

Sometimes the insert is before the HPF, sometimes the pre fader aux sends are after the eq.

I actually like post eq monitor sends.

this is fine and dandy if you are using separate mixers for FOH and Monitors. If you are mixing mons from FOH if you use a post eq aux send then every time you make a change in the eq or ride the fader (for the mains) the monitors change too. Nothing upsets a band more than monitors that are constantly changing.

I deal with feedback by making the monitors as flat as possible (except for perhaps a HPF) and then cutting at most a few narrow frequencies. Flat response sounds louder and clearer right off the bat which tends to head off requests for more monitor volume. Above a certain threshold of stage volume the situation collapses into damage control, cutting more aggressively as you increase the volume. But at sensible stage volume I use the eq primarily to get flat response from the monitors rather than ring out.

i agree with this. if you ring the monitors as i said, that will be as flat as possible. each time feedback is encountered you should cut a dB or two no more ... so if you do this three times, you should come up with cuts of no more than 2 or 3 dB at three different frequencies.

Pretty much all the analog consoles I've used have the insert ahead of all the aux sends,

which mixers would that be? i have not encountered that. pre means pre .. at least eq and usually pre insert. my computer is slow but i'm going to d load some pdfs of different mixers block diagrams. i'm pretty sure most will show the pre aux's are pre insert as well as pre eq. i have seen higher end consoles that feature both pre and post inserts. i'll give you that.

Kurt Foster, post: 403818 wrote: this is fine and dandy if you are using separate mixers for FOH and Monitors. If you are mixing mons from FOH if you use a post eq aux send then every time you make a change in the eq or ride the fader (for the mains) the monitors change too. Nothing upsets a band more than monitors that are constantly changing.

I don't change eq much after sound check (which may include the first couple of songs at a smaller show with limited setup time) and anyway the changes tend to be improvements on stage as much as out front.

Kurt Foster, post: 403818 wrote: i agree with this. if you ring the monitors as i said, that will be as flat as possible. each time feedback is encountered you should cut a dB or two no more ... so if you do this three times, you should come up with cuts of no more than 2 or 3 dB at three different frequencies.

I used a reference mic and a digital parametric eq to get my monitors' response as flat as possible. I have a preset that leaves a few filters free to deal with variables like acoustic environments and performers' habits. I haven't used a graphic on my monitors for the last couple of years.

Kurt Foster, post: 403818 wrote: which mixers would that be? i have not encountered that. pre means pre .. at least eq and usually pre insert. my computer is slow but i'm going to d load some pdfs of different mixers block diagrams. i'm pretty sure most will show the pre aux's are pre insert as well as pre eq. i have seen higher end consoles that feature both pre and post inserts. i'll give you that.

Pre just means pre fader. They are post insert on:

Mackie 1604VLZ Pro (pre eq)
A&H Mix Wizard WZ3 16:2 (post eq, jumper selectable)
Soundcraft GB2R (post eq, jumper selectable)
Midas Verona (1-6 switched per channel pre/post eq, 7&8 post eq but jumper selectable to follow the pre/post eq switch)
Yamaha MG 206C (eq -> insert -> pre fader aux sends)

As a side question... just curious...

are you dealing with guys who are pros when it comes to stage volume or are you dealing with rock stars who are constantly turning up and battling each other?

bouldersound;

you are correct and i was wrong ... most pre send aux's are post insert ... live and learn. i have never run into this as an issue because as i noted, i don't use compression or separate effects on individual channels. only on sub and 2 mix bus's ...

as far as having a global overall preset for the monitors, i don't see this as really viable. i have noticed drastic differences from venue to venue in my experience. now if i were working the same venue with the same band / stage set up every time, then a preset with minor tweaking would work but the minute you have a different band with a different stage plot the whole game is changed.

if what works for you works, i say fine but i don't think what you discribe would work for me. i am much more comfortable relying on my ears than a reference mic and having monitors (that i can't hear from FOH) that change with every tweak i make on the mains, would be a no go for me.

Yeah, what I'm doing is a fundamentally different approach from the old ringing out procedure. Getting the monitors really flat is the key. A 1/3 octave eq is too blunt an instrument to do that, with wide filters and fixed centers. Cutting with a 1/3 octave eq takes out relatively large chunks of the spectrum, which decreases intelligibility, which drives up monitor levels, which adds to stage volume which makes you have to cut more, which decreases intelligibility... Sure, sometimes I have to revert to combat audio mode and hack the eq to get through stupid loud stage volume, but I don't make that my default starting point.

I do use compression and it does go to monitors, but I keep the thresholds high on vocals so it's just knocking down momentary peaks and not affecting the signal most of the time. I've seen people mixing live where the vocal was in gain reduction the whole time. That's the kind of situation that can exacerbate feedback, hence my original question to the OP about compression.

A couple quick notes:

1) Outboard feedback suppressors suck. Their only valid application is as a last line of defense in an install where they are absolutely clueless beyond the On/Off switch. Suppressors will destroy the sound once they start taking out notches.

2) You've got all the tools you need in the Presonus mixer, which apparently you're using with a computer for the RTA - perfect! More than enough right there. The RTA makes this really easy, and eliminates the need for a trained ear for identifying the freqs. (not that you shouldn't be making mental notes correlating tones to EQ bands)

3) If, like bouldersound, you would prefer the Aux sends to be post-EQ on the Presonus you have to change a setting in your StudioLive's System Menu.

a) The default setting is "Pre 1" which sends signals to the Aux mix AFTER the Gain, Phase, High-pass, and Gate (but BEFORE compressor, EQ, limiter, and fader).

b) If you change your System Menu to the "Pre 2" setting, your Aux mix reflects ALL of the Channel / Fat-Channel settings, (Gain, Phase, High-Pass, Gate, Compressor, Limiter, and EQ) everything except the fader.

c) Whether you're set to Pre 1 or Pre 2, the Post button does exactly what you'd expect, post everything including fader (which as Kurt says, the band will HATE if it's controlling their monitors).

4) If you're using the SL24.4.2, dialing in the Expander would be all you need to keep from riding the fader between songs. If you're using the 16.4.2 you still have an Expander, but it loses the, very useful in this case, "Range" control. If it's a 16.0.2, no Expander for you.

5) Whether or not you annoy the bar patrons ringing out the monitors will depend on your fine-motor-skills. Regulars at a live music bar won't even notice you doing it, as long as it's not loud sustained ringing. If you have the gentle touch to v e e r y . . . . s l o o o o w l y increase the Aux send master until it just barely starts to regenerate for a half second that's all you need. It doesn't have to ring loudly for the RTA to show you that most sensitive frequency. If you go slowly, it will only ring the one worst / most over-sensitive freq. rather than a shrill painful combination of two or three at the same time. And as Kurt described, repeat the process until you knock off the worst 2, 3, or 4 offending frequencies and you're usually in pretty good shape. Notice how much farther you can turn the Aux up with each freq. you tame down. Make sure nobody repositions any monitors after that, or you may have to do it again.

6) The best way to sound like a big-time band in a small-time room is to have a band who knows how to rock at minimal stage-volume and let the PA fill the room (assuming you've got a PA that's up to the task). It takes a good soundman, with a good PA, and a band willing to put their personal preferences aside for the good of the team - as long as it doesn't completely suck the energy out of the performance. To get a band to turn that much control over to the soundman, you will definitely have to earn their trust. I've been on every side of this problem, but I'm a musician first. I completely understand that there's a level below which the band gets uncomfortable and un-energized. Then on the other end of the spectrum, the louder they get on stage, the harder it is for everyone to hear - even them. If I had to choose between a tiny bit of feedback and an uninspired, lifeless performance - I'd take riding the slider, and occasional feedback every time.

7) If you're having ongoing problems with feedback from the Mains, you need to rethink speaker position, mic selection, and whether future gigs at Larry's Chicken Shack are really advancing your band's career. Don't think club owners don't know which bands can't get their feedback under control.

8) If the singer holds his mic watch him closely, and make sure he's not relaxing between songs in a way that would let his arm fall to a natural resting position that points his mic directly at the monitors. Also, if you have a singer with a wireless mic who thinks it's cool to wander around the dance floor and in front of the stacks, without any regard to which way his/her mic is pointing - a pool cue to the knee caps ought to fix that.

Rock on! Good luck!

I have a "dumb question"....are you SURE that the feedback is only when the band stops?

moonbaby, post: 403830 wrote: I have a "dumb question"....are you SURE that the feedback is only when the band stops?

Sometimes the stage-wash is so much it masks this feedback, so every song has this standing frequency adding to the overall volume. Its more noticeable if its not in the same pitch as the song....

wow, this is why i like RO's members, good answers no BS. all of your thoughts are really useful.

are you dealing with guys who are pros when it comes to stage volume or are you dealing with rock stars who are constantly turning up and battling each other?

20 year vets, not battling for stage volume. Drummer the exception who while good, has one hitting style, 'as hard as he can', think rock, not finesse. it's a 5 pc band w/ two 'lead singers', the main one is female (very talented/trained), the male not so much ala karaoke..

They run a presonus 16.4.2.

The battle is getting vox over drummer. There is unselfish stage volume otherwise. gtrs/bass i can put thru the jbl (dual 2x15s, (2)1x18 subs) all night. and i have been compressing the bass. the monitors are pretty simple powered jbl 15's (eon), w/ each singer getting there own blend, which is all vocals.

3) If, like bouldersound, you would prefer the Aux sends to be post-EQ on the Presonus you have to change a setting in your [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.presonus…"]StudioLive[/]="http://www.presonus…"]StudioLive[/]'s System Menu.

a) The default setting is "Pre 1" which sends signals to the Aux mix AFTER the Gain, Phase, High-pass, and Gate (but BEFORE compressor, EQ, limiter, and fader).

b) If you change your System Menu to the "Pre 2" setting, your Aux mix reflects ALL of the Channel / Fat-Channel settings, (Gain, Phase, High-Pass, Gate, Compressor, Limiter, and EQ) everything except the fader.

some gold right there man, it's not my board, so even tho i read the manual, i have to get down to the nitty gritty usually, or face the 'wrath' of a perfectionist cover band leader. which he is embarrassingly (of himself) too visibly adamant.

as far as pre/post, i'm not sure at what point the audio gets dumped into the auxes, but def pre fader. the way its setup is the graphic eqs are 'linked' (which they don;t have to be). the mains get a pair, and the monitors do. the auxes i use for the mons each have a parametric as well, which right now i've been leaving flat till i get a real handle on this. as far as 'efx' i barely use them right now, in such small bar-room type places, i find it's more clutter, the last thing i need in a barely audible vocal is verb, right now.

7) If you're having ongoing problems with feedback from the Mains, you need to rethink speaker position, mic selection, and whether future gigs at Larry's Chicken Shack are really advancing your band's career. Don't think club owners don't know which bands can't get their feedback under control.

its not my band, i just do sound. i think the fact that chicken shacks band hires a sound guy is pretentious on their part. completely unnecessary for me to be there, the leader is one of those 'i want everything pro' while playing dives. hey i'll take the whipping post position, which i guess helps freakouts on band members that could do the sound.

I have a "dumb question"....are you SURE that the feedback is only when the band stops?

yes. am i thinning out the vocal, well i dunno, i guess, ya know that 'canned' effect. which is partly why i've been trying to get more 'power' out of her from some low mid boost, she's talented, but gets shrill when she opens up. that's the hard part, cuz they do covers, it's very dynamic, from almost talking, ta full out gwen steffani. i find the mild compression has helped, but maybe across the bus would just be better, or fader riding better. but yeah, sometimes, usually first 4 songs of first set is the battle, and eventually it gets dialed into when there just talking, but even then, i'm battling that 'almost' feedback effect, so i ride down a bit to keep it full. it's like hearing phase issues.

I might have missed a couple thoughts i wanted to touch on but thanks.

the dude (bandleader) wants to get a board so they aren't using the drummers (presonus 16.4.02). think the yamaha 01v96, is what he's decided, even if i say no this guy is prob gonna get it (stubborn man) no mattr what. anyone have experience w/ this thing, i told him to give me a couple days to grasp thoughts on this move, as i's not cheap.

i'll get to take it home fwtw, but i already stated it's gonna be a OJT type thing. me menu pushing in front of a stereo is a world of difference from a full blown pa. i just question his move.

that presonus board has alot, maybe too much, for bar gigs. but maybe a couple of 'spot monitors' or tiny side-fills would be far more productive. i don't doubt either board, as i always say it's the musicians performance and engineer before the gear. i don't blame my level of expertise on equipment, unless it's guitars, where it's like ok i merit this level of gtr/amp.

i'm just picturing a situation where 2k is spent on old digi board, sound, not improved, and we start looking like jokers. (aka my foh product remains the same) i am not afraid to recommend the more advanced live cats i know, and i have. i'm not like that. but i'd like to be prepared as a can to be thrown into the fire. Thanks all! any advice ya got is welcomed shop talk.

as far as placement, the speakers are usually only about 2ft in front, the mons maybe a ft or less in fron of the mics, and the band in an area not much larger than their equipment. mons prob 6ft in front of drums, vocalist center. if i have to i have some budget graphic eq's and compressor/limiters i can push it hru.

-kyle

I'll keep this one short. I'm all for trying to sound great regardless of the size (or prestige) of the venue.

I had the predecessor to the 01v/96 (the 01v) for a good many years, and sold it IMMEDIATELY after I got the StudioLive. The 01v, like most Yamaha gear, was a very nice piece of equipment. I had no complaints with the sound, or reliability, but the 01v is VERY menu-driven and it generally forces you to do one thing at a time. It was very powerful, but took a lot of button-pushes to get where you want to go sometimes, to get to Page 3 of Sub-Menu #5. I also felt it could have used more physical connector options for aux and sub-groups. The flying faders are nice, but I never liked the idea of multi-function faders. If you're mixing FOH and something goes crazy with the monitors - you have to push buttons to have the faders turn into the Aux mixer. So you can't adjust the monitors without giving up the ability to ride the FOH mix in any way. You can't adjust FX level either without letting go of the FOH mix. (same with the new Bhrngr Digital mixer, which is also similarly menu driven with multi-faders) I'm not saying you can't get a good mix with that sort of mixer, but when I'm using a mixer like that, adjusting something is more of a thought-process than a natural reflex.

With the PreSonus all you have to remember is to push the Select button on the appropriate channel/sub/aux. It adds one step more than analog, but it's the trade-off of using a digital board. I normally use the Presonus 24.4.2 without a computer, so the graphic EQs are a bit cumbersome. So I tend to use the parametrics whenever possible. However, that's another advantage of the 24-channel version over the 16-channel StudioLive. With the SL24, they had enough real estate to provide a fully adjustable Q on all 4 bands of the parametric - where the 16 can only give you a narrow/wide switch on the 2 mids. The new SL32 will address the clunky graphic EQ interface just by virtue of having enough knobs to do a 31-band EQ without scrolling left/right - which gets confusing. If yours is hooked up to the computer (or iPad) the graphic EQs are much more useable regardless of the number of channels.

The Yamaha 01V96i and the Presonus SL ranges are both nice mixers, and each has features that make them especially suitable for certain tasks, both live and in the project studio. I, too, found the layer swapping of the 01V96 rather tedious at first, but having got used to it, it's actually very quick. There are 20 layers if you add them all up, but once set up, for a gig with 16 or fewer main mic channels, you generally only use 1 + n layers, where the 1 is the main FOH mix and n is the number of aux mixes required.

The big thing about the Yamaha digital mixers over the SL range is that the scene storage includes all the fader positions, although of course these do not include the (analog) pre-amp gains. For gigs that have lots of acts that you soundchecked earlier, it makes things so much easier to pull in each act's settings from the soundcheck with a couple of button taps. Set against that is the undeniably better sound of the pre-amps in the SLs. However, this does not come into play if your method of use is based around external pre-amps and converters for quality and secure recording reasons.

I do greatly prefer the sound of the SL pre-amps. It will recall fader setting, but not physical position.

I agree 100%, the Yamaha is a very capable mixer. I added the 8-channel analog TRS inputs to mine and it was ideal for a couple of large stage productions I did. It took a lot of prep and tweaking during rehearsals, but by show time the show was all but fully automated. 22 wireless headset & lavalier mics wrangled back and forth among 40+ speaking parts, would have been a nightmare without the 01v.

The flying faders in the 01v are a big plus, and it's easier to bump your way up through the scenes than it is on the SL, and the SPX caliber delay and reverb are excellent. I never liked the sound of my old 01v's compressor though, perhaps they've improved that in the more recent incarnations. Again, I'm making all of my comparisons to an original 01v.

Have the newer versions added dedicated outputs for each aux and subgroup?

from what i could did up, it looks like improvements are in sample rate (01v96), usb2 audio out/full 16 ch 96k (01v96i).   as well as improved pres in both, as compared the the original. (the latter models feature the same ones)

But it looks like they all make use simply of the four 'omni' outs which are assignable. i think you have to buy the 8ch expansion card, as there are no dedicated aux/bus outs on either one.

Attached files

Yes, there's big difference between the old 01V and the newer 01V96 range.

On the 01V96, the Omni outs are assignable to almost anything. The channel direct outs, auxes and buses (subgroups) can be assigned to any output with only a few limitations. You get 1 ADAT in/out (8 chans) on the unexpanded unit going up to 3 ADATs (24 chans) I/O when the MY16-AT exapnsion card is fitted.

To the OP: you should also take a look at the new Allen & Heath Qu-16 digital mixer.

This has nothing to do with equipment. It has to do with a small stage and a loud drummer. You can throw gear at this problem all day and it won't go away.

Thanks boswell. that thing smokes ! love the dedicated knobs, love the metering (one of my complaints about sl), and the touchscreen doesn't hurt either! from the videos it looks very intuitive workflow wise, and like the the didgital board at the studio (d8b), it looks like you never have to press more than one thing to get access.

basically from what i gathered it has the best features of the SL/01v96's and then some.

Totally doing my best to try to convince the band leader to go w/ this, it seems state of the art, where the 01v96, was state of the art. not that it isn't a nice console. but to spend 1500 on a decade old mobile console, doesn't seem worth smart to me regarding future reliability, and features. If i were personally buying one it would be the one, as long as the audio quality is in the range of the others.! thanks for the heads up!

the Yamaha is antiquated .. as you said 10 year old design. the SL is cutting edge and is winding up in every bodies arsenal. everybody and their mother will be mixing on the SL series for the next few years. there is so much more that can be done with these boards and as you have brought up you are comparing a board that is 10 years old to one that is brand new with warranty and support. it's a no brainer imo.

this is coming from someone who has not been a fan of PreSonus pres since they stopped using the Jensen transformers in them. believe me i have had my go arounds with the people at PreSonus when i was writing reviews for RO but even i have to admit they have a real winner with the SL boards and the Studio One software.

it sounds like your band leader is hard headed a real pain and on a control trip. he's going to do what he wants to do, for his own reasons, regardless of how it affects others. someone needs to draw the line for him. it's up to you in the end but maybe you should tell him if he gets the Yamaha you won't deal with it and he's going to need to get a new sound person too and then back that up with action? ... who needs all of the drama? is the gig that good to put up with BS from a power trip freak?

I would like to get my hands on the A-H for a test drive too. It looks like it lives up to the A-H name.

kmetal, post: 403924 wrote: ... love the metering (one of my complaints about sl) ...

You know that if you push THIS button, it changes all those Fat-Channel LEDs to meter the ins / outs / gain reduction / auxes / fader location... right?

Attached files

You know that if you push THIS button, it changes all those Fat-Channel LEDs to meter the ins / outs / gain reduction / auxes / fader location... right?

totally. i was more referring to the lack of gain reduction metering on the channel compressors, when using the i-pad. I actually very much like the SL, i had an hour before the first gig to get a handle on it and i thought it was useful, and workflow fine, if your used to a digital board, which i was used to enough. i think you touched earlier on the issue of the graphic eq metering making more sense in the 32ch version, which was another complaint of mine. It does take a bit of learn to use the meters as parametric eg meters on a channel basis, but still, it's a good board imo.

The A-H looks like it offers more custom 'options' better or for worse. i mean re callable gain? i know what gain setting's i use consistently for the same people, thats not a bragging point to me, just look at the trim knob for a few gigs, and it's usually about the same. I like the 'assignable' layer that they jump off of the yamaha. that's cool. really, though, it's the section of dedicated knobs, that sold me. (purely feature-wise, i haven't heard it)

it sounds like your band leader is hard headed a real pain and on a control trip. he's going to do what he wants to do, for his own reasons, regardless of how it affects others. someone needs to draw the line for him. it's up to you in the end but maybe you should tell him if he gets the Yamaha you won't deal with it and he's going to need to get a new sound person too and then back that up with action? ... who needs all of the drama? is the gig that good to put up with BS from a power trip freak?

Hammer hit's nail on the head. that's why i'm trying to tell this guy if your gonna get into a 'p$$ing" match don't lose by buying a used up console, when the drummer will supply an SL. and the Pad. The A-H looks, and i mean 'looks' like a step up. get that. Or something the next step up from that range.

well i was double booked booked a few weeks ago and chose my faithful studio dudes gig over his, and ego trip band leader said to me after i was 'sorely missed'. So he knows, it's just part of working w/ them that he'll dis-respect me until the point in the gig where he feels it's okay. what kinda guitarist really manages vocal mon mixes? the vocalists are fine w/. yeah that kind. believe me it's the the first gig i'll drop when i get more busy, but since i'm at my age living home and scraping gas money, i gotta just have thick skin.

quickly, like i said, i don't have a prob w/ the SL for bar/club gigs. the yam is seeming passe to me, and the A-H looks like it's gonna kill. i used the gl 3200 and thought it was fine compared to mackie's nothing astounding quality wise, these are gig boards. ease of workflow, and reliability, decent sound, is what i look for. Maybe ego-maniac will take my word and invest in a toy i'm not willing to invest in right now. after all i got a cheap mackie, drummer has SL, let him put his money where his ego is. provided the A-H doesn't sound crappy, i expect it to sound 'standard' for it's range. thank you guys!

p.s i dunno how you guys deal w/ being yelled at, but i just go 'ok' 'yes' and do what i have to do. it's one of the few regular gigs ever since i picked up a mic that were personally degrading, and not fun. even amongst ups's almost catching fire and stuff. Someone unwilling to do less than a 5 min soundcheck, expecting 'perfect'. !!?? even the most anal studio guy i tape op for gives me time if i need it, jerk comments or not.

kmetal, post: 403757, member: 37533 wrote: I've notice numerous times in various bar/club type places that the acceptable vocal level when the band is playing, feedsback when the stop. i just ride the fader, or hopefully find an optimal balnce, and gate setting. or turn the monitors down a bit My guess is that all the stage noise is creating some kind of nulling effect and causing cancellation. and then when they stop i'm just amplifying the air and magnetic field.

But i don't really have a solid explanation, if any does, it'd be great. or there could easily be an error in my technique. thanks!

I just found this thread after a few years posted and couldn't help but chime in. I haven't read through it so maybe it was already mentioned?

Over 2 decades performing live in bands, here is another one for you Kyle, that I bet is the answer you are looking for most.
Wind, breeze, aircon, crowd surging air towards the stage , heat or cool air moving towards the stage when you are at idle will cause feedback all the time. When the band is playing, the woofers are pushing the audio away from the mic's.

NOBODY yells at ANYBODY on any gigs I'm associated with. ABOUT ANYTHING. EVER. Oh shoot...Now I'm yelling. There aren't enough hours in the day or money on the table for me to ever put up with stupid egotistical and ignorant assholes that want to control every moment of something that should be fun and interesting every moment of its being.

Of course theres a right way and wrong way to approach anything but the "my way or the highway" doesn't fly with me. And there is NO COPY BAND GIG on this earth that would ever shake that belief system.

I've played in and ran sound systems for bands like that for years . Some were MY bands, some were cooperatives, some I was hired to bring the sound to a Pro level in a small club setting just like this thread is about. Working WITH someone in a mutual understanding of roles is the only way to effectively accomplish goals. If the drummer doesn't want to cooperate with stage volume then a change needs to be made with replacement of the player as the last course of action. If it can't be accomplished through a reapplication of style and attack, then there's several options as far as drum head selections that will work. Double thick hydraulics allow the drummer to bash away but decrease the apparent volume as well as cutting down the decay time to an effective number allowing the sound person to use the mics and the power of the system to its ability. Drummers will complain at first, but a real pro wouldn't be in this position to begin with. Electronic kits have come so far these days as far as feel and who can argue with the samples available? Steve Gadd is only a click away.

I've worked with bashers who completely changed their minds about what they think they hear from behind the kit when they were given an excellent in-ear mix of their kits. Most, in fact, are unaware of just how noisy and tone-poor their drums actually are in a live mix. If you listen to the BIG GUYS' drum mixes on stage they are sampled, properly tuned, cognizant of their stage volume and they STILL get to whack- a- mole as much as they want.

So if you're working sound for a cover band thats wants to sound like the record, you have to think in terms of what conditions these records were made in. If theres a huge drum sound on the songs you normally play, chances are the drums were recorded in a big, tall, controlled environment and you aren't going to get that in the chicken shack. So the compensation is to get SMARTER than the environment. Equip will need to be up to the task, but more importantly is cooperation and quality craftsmanship working towards a set goal without rancor or the egotistical bombardment of someone who has no control of their own environment emotionally.

I would have lasted only part of a night in this environment and the egomaniac in question would have been nursing a serious shiner for a few weeks.

Homey don't play that.

Oh and this...I NEVER EVER compress drum anythings in small environments especially when theres a volume problem. The compression actually contributes to the problem by holding the decays too long. Small live environments have ONE THING that needs to be addressed every time. Its all about the TIME FACTOR. Mains that throw too far, compression, too much boost EQ, time based delays and reverbs....the list of mistakes made by even seasoned soundmen in these places is endless.

Well said Dave.

Since this thread started the band used a couple different soundguys, I got a sweet summer gig, the band in this threads drummer quit, and got more toys (we re still cool), and the band leader called me back. Got one tomm. We do a thing called sound check, and settle for 'as loud as they can go' for monitors. All in all I told him to let me do my job, and without the other band member adding his 'advice' as well, so far so decent. Band members are even (somewhat) allowed to manage their own monitor mixes instead of the bandleader. Well, we will see tomm...

It's interseting to me to note the difference in how I was treated, when I was perceived as replaceable, vs now where the dude realizes he needs me. I guess that's what walking power is. Lmao everyone else walked on him. I'm learning that more more more as I'm developing from entry level to more journey man as a whole in the music service world.

One jnteresting thing Ive been doing for them is just showing up doing the sound check and leaving after the first set or so, for a discounted rate, on their smaller gigs. That has been working out well for us as well. I'm almost at the point where I not have to move gear :) or at least stuff that's not my toys.

An interesting video , could be related and could help knowing some tricks explained.
[GALLERY=media, 354]Dave Rat - Mic Polarity Setup Part 1 of 3 for Live Sound Engineers - YouTube by audiokid posted Mar 26, 2015 at 7:05 PM[/GALLERY]

Mics don't simply invert polarity when they are turned 180° from a source unless they have a bipolar pattern.

I've found inverting a bottom snare mic to be fairly pointless since what it's capturing, mainly the wires, is largely incoherent with the top mic, and high passing to keep the kick out of it removes what little coherence there might have been. And down at least to 1k the difference in distance from the top head is enough to put things out of phase by a big range of degrees, rendering the polarity flip even less reliable as a fix.

Dave Rat has some rather interesting ideas but not all of them make sense. He once described a rather clever setup involving bus compressors and VCAs, but along with it claimed that unlinking the stereo bus compressors maintained stereo image, which is simply not the case.

bouldersound, post: 426846, member: 38959 wrote: He once described a rather clever setup involving bus compressors and VCAs, but along with it claimed that unlinking the stereo bus compressors maintained stereo image, which is simply not the case.

Hi Bolder, in a video I just watched (might be the same one you are referring to?) , I heard him talk about this, which could have been miss-understood, he corrected it very quickly which was really clear he didn't mean that in all cases. From what I've watched , he's got his his shit together more than most people I've listen to in years. But, sometimes the none technical Rockers say things they don't really mean to come out like that. I for one am really guilty of that. :)

Glad you chimed in, its a great topic here! Can I ask why you don't think its accurate?

From a mixing and "mastering" POV, many of us who are super critical about smearing the transients on 2-bus duties, we avoid linking bus compression like the plague. 2-bus mixes with detailed stereo content can sound much better if they are uncoupled .
I heard Dave mentioned this, Wasn't it where he was referring to guitars panned left and right, one being more busy/ louder than the other, or toms... , you wouldn't want comps linked and effecting the other side.
Its a subjective topic but from from not accurate.

audiokid, post: 426847, member: 1 wrote: Hi Bolder, in a video I just watched (might be the same one you are referring to?) , I heard him talk about this, which could have been miss-understood, he corrected it very quickly which was really clear he didn't mean that in all cases. From what I've watched , he's got his his S#$% together more than most people I've listen to in years. But, sometimes the none technical Rockers say things they don't really mean to come out like that. I for one am really guilty of that. :)

It was actually something he posted on a another pro sound forum on their live audio board. If the gain reduction doesn't match on both channels it will make things panned close to the center move around in the stereo field. That probably works okay live and/or when the group's inputs are all panned hard, but technically it's not maintaining the stereo image.

audiokid, post: 426848, member: 1 wrote: Wasn't it where he was referring to guitars panned left and right, one being more busy/ louder than the other, or toms... , you wouldn't want comps linked and effecting the other side.
Its a subjective topic but from from not accurate.

Right, this is when you might not want to link, but it's not accurate to say that unlinking preserves the image.

I bet that was related to a stereo effects being part of the bus and a mono vox, in reference to the VCA groups. If the stereo effect is sharing a mono channel on a stereo bus, it could give the effect that sounding is moving around. Do you think that is what he was getting at?