Guitarist Ego

[The Fonz]

anyone who's sat behind a board before is familiar with the can-i-get-a-little chorus. that's where everyone in the band asks "can i get a little" whatever the hell they want at the same time in their monitors.

 

having a better monitor mix has NO BEARING whatsoever on the problem at hand as greenboy stated earlier. why? because the monitor mix is completely separate from anything else and in general a sound guy will not put someones own instrument into his monitor, i.e. the guitar player won't have ANY guitar in his monitor as the sound guy figures he can hear himself pretty well from where he's standing. thusly the guitar player has no idea from his monitor mix wether or not he should turn down.

 

monitors are there so you can hear what the other eope in the band are doing so you can follow along a little better and so you can hear your own voice against the noise on stage and sing on key. the levels in any given monitor are completely different than the P.A. levels which in turn are different from the on stage levels. can you imagine what you would have to deal with if the singer got the P.A. mix in her monitor?

 

by the way, how do you get a guitar player to play more quietly? give him charts.

[g.]

I think we were all seeing different circumstances here, freddynl. There's lots of variations. I'm not going to count years, but off and on I've ran house and multiple-feed monitor mixes and managed outdoor and indoor stages on a regular basis. I've put together SR systems for clubs and large churches as consultant, freelanced for outdoor festivals, and run some recording in such situations. I'm not god, but I do know approximately where the residence is ; }

 

Anyway. : } For clean tone it may not always be the way to go. But I like 35-watt (or less) guitar tube amps because they get "tone" earlier in the SPL scale. Yeah, tube amps are loud.

 

...Reminds me of an outdoor concert gig I had for a season (seems to me there was at least 5000 watts of PA including monitors). One night, one of the bands had a guitarplayer with a full stack. Man, he was not even on the board, though I ran a cab mic to a channel. And he was over-running the band so bad they were bitching bigtime. As if I could solve that without their help {I did explain to the guy but it fell on deaf ears ; }. And the audience was seriously gun-shy about the earbleed zone. Non-stop, this guy used all 100 watts of his tubie to distort, with a tone that was like a black hole for all other sound.

 

I had to run the rest of the band harder through the PA than I would have liked (and we were getting phone calls from property more than a mile away). There was no riding the guitar mix levels for different parts of the songs. The monitors were EQed to a gnat's ass and driven to the brink! And still the band -- and I verified this by checking for myself -- could not hear vocals for squat! I hope they got to the root of their problem and gave the guy walking papers. This guy was a poster boy for the topic at hand. And I hope he likes wearing his hearing aid at the ripe old age of 30 ; }

 

My current guitar compadre has a 100-watt all-tube Marshall combo driving a typical closed-box half-stack cab. He won {lost?;} the audition partially because -- in spite of the firepower he had at a knob's twist -- he didn't blast us out like a couple other respondents did when they came by to get checked out.

 

 

 

[The Fonz]

hey greenboy, sounds like we had the same gig. i ran an out door dj party for homecoming in buffalo once. the dj was a moron. he would hit the pad so he could speak to the crowd and then just hit the sliders for volume afterward. eventually when the volume was not to his liking he would remember the pad and just hit it without dropping the sliders back. after he did this three or four times i just jacked his compression and limited the shit out of him. 3000w of power and neighbors from 2 miles off campus coming to complain later, one of the gracious party goers complained that i wasn't allowing the dj to be loud enough and that his home stereo in his basement was louder. as the only tech in a hostile crowd i was getting so more complaints about the fact that i was adhering too closely to the law and my equipments safe functioning zone than i cared to handle. i invited him to bring his stereo down and we'd see who had the bigger stones (not too professional, i admit, but i was pretty pissed).

 

the fun really hit a few weeks later when the same jerk came into my office to rent a p.a. for a party. as a student organization operating as a nfp i had the leeway to say "oh, well, you don't need our 3000w, you have your stereo. i suggest you make do with that" the guy responded by filing bias charges against me, my boss, the student association and the school.

[earljam]

great story bastidE- but don't leave me hanging, did he get the 3000 watts or not? i've often swallowed replies like yours in sort of similar circumstances, usually with guitar wanks, and wished the next day that i had spoken aloud. you're a hard nosed dude. i think most of us bass guys tend to be too nice and be team players to the extent that we often put up with crap when we should be offering our candid opinion. maybe guitar players just aren't as sensitive as we are and need a good kick in the ass on a regular basis.

[dcwhut]

2 Questions.

 

¿Qué es SR? and

 

I would like to learn more about setting up sound to make the maximum use of it. No one in our band has a clue how setup affects our TBO (total band output) . Yes, we do have a guitarist that always has to be a little louder than everyone, then the drummer gets louder, the Rhythm guitarist feels left out, not needed. I have to play hard already because I'm on a dinky 15W. I get my Hartke Kickback 15 this week, I am so Stoked! Ahh, the aluminum cone! I don't plan on ever having to push 'eleven' but it's nice to have the power for the simple sake of headroom. clarity, control, and I can stop yanking my strings and get goood, low tone. My lead guitar guy said his dad may get him a 60W Fender Amp. Shees! He doesn't get it! I try to dissuade him as, where we play, He'll never use it. He doesn't go past 6 on his 15W Crate! I told him he would only need 60W outdoors He's kind of a Renegade and lacks some maturity; but he helps us figure out some parts to play and is the most advanced in our band. We play in a small church, so we don't need alot of power. the 60W thing came up after he heard I was getting a bigger amp. (Amp Wars?) .

 

Anyhoo, How can I learn about setting up for sound, rather than plunking our gear on stage when we go places?

Keep Jammin' for Jesus!

[dcr]

DC, there's quite a lot to it, but I'll recommend two things. (1) Monitors. If a person can't hear himself well, he'll start finding ways to get louder--you've GOT to hear yourself. Lack of good on-stage monitoring is a recipe for amp wars & other disasters. (One option is to use amps, properly angled, as on-stage monitors, & run the main signal through the PA.) (2) Sound person. The person who runs your PA has to mix it with the non-PA stuff, such as amps & acoustic drums. Even if you're not running a PA, it is crucial to have a person with judgment you trust who can put together the overall levels so that you end up with something pleasing for the listener. People on stage are in the sonically worst position in the whole room to know what this calls for. In short, you've got to be able to hear yourself & the other parts of the mix you're fitting into, and you've got to have someone else deliver the whole mix to the audience.

[The Bear Jew]

Pardon me for being a little naive, but isn't this whole thread really about communication and respect?

 

I play both bass and guitar (two different bands), and I think the key to playing with other people is LISTENING to them and respecting their sonic space as you would respect them. In a conversation, it's common courtesy to listen to others opinions when sharing viewpoints. Anyone who brashly talks over others and doesn't listen to what they are saying is generally branded an asshole or an egotistical moron. The same goes for music. If someone's blasting everyone else out of the water, they're either stupid or just don't care what the others are doing. Whenever one of the guys in my band is too loud and they can't tell, we usually yell out our secret code sentence -- "It's not all about you, douchebag."

Then we laugh as they adjust their playing volume accordingly.

 

Just as some conversations involve whispering and conspiratorial nods, others include loud disagreements and raucous laughter. The important things to know are: what kind of conversation you're having, and (more importantly) what kind you're NOT having. Either way, you should be properly equipped.

[g.]

You guys harping on MONITORS are just oh so wrong. Monitors are as apt to promote "My Instrument Uber Alles" volume wars with the inexperienced, and the poster-child egotists, as they are to solve them. Even players who should have known better a decade ago, when presented wih clear vocals they can hear better, often just figure, "OK, I can be louder now -- goodie goodie!"

 

Second, the primary purpose of a monitor is STILL to hear VOCALS -- all else being vanity until one starts using bigger, more powerful systems. Does anybody not notice this besides Bastid E? Young bands and churches on budgets should not always be convinced that more equipment will single-handedly solve such problems -- and if they are making do with what they already have they shouldn't be wasting the headroom trying to put instruments in those modest monitors and further muddying the vocal presence, and often trashing their monitors to boot.

 

I mean, look at the guitar and bass amps that are being mentioned here in this thread. Does that sound like people with large efficient 500-watt RMS wedges and experienced sound men to handle them well?

 

The truth of the matter in the long term is rather stark: it requires that people become better musicians by developing honest powers of observation of self and others, and developing judgment based on experience and research and opinions from those more qualified (which in turn can further develop judgment on who actually is worthy of such trust) in order to deal with problems.

 

You also have to have a will to experiment. Psychoacoustic phenomena are not easily quantifiable, are entirely based on local perspective, and sometimes run counter to what inexperienced intuition would suggest. There again, the voice of the more experienced can suggest, often through the printed page, or consultation or ON THE SPOT local advice.

 

And here is another thing to think about: look at some of the greater musical minds in the history of electrically-supported music performance. Many of them did not even have monitors during their formative years, or even in their early careers as national or international performers. And what was there was primitive. Certainly nothing one would want base their development on.

 

Nope. Sorry guys, but even a short term solution does not rely on monitors. It requires a larger local monitor (AKA, BASS AMP), or a more effective EQ curve perhaps... But again, budget suggests that either an attempt to educate the offending party of replace him/her is the way to go.

 

And this really isn't that different whether you are playing through a modest practice amp in front of 30 people for your first time, or in front of thousands on a large stage with primo gear.

 

<-- greenboy ---<<<<    it's about the music

[g.]

Right on, CMDN! There are two levels to this, one is technical, and the other is human. Both need to be addressed.

[The Fonz]

what would also help are sound guys who give a shit. how much easier would life be if the guy at the board would say "hey guitar player, you're way too loud." these guys know what the problem is, they just work with 6 bands a night 7 days a week and see maybe one a week (if they're lucky) who's any good. most of the work i do is because i will tell the band to turn this down or turn that up. in a small room a p.a. is only going to compensate so much.

 

and earljam, based on the fact that they guy filed civil charges against me, you can assume he didn't get his p.a. that company was great. the guy on the rung above me taught me a lot when it comes to dealing with unprofessional ego cases. one act had listed nothing more than a dat player on the rider the submited for a talent show (A RIDER FOR A TALENT SHOW ). we didn't bring a monitor mix. after getting a 45 min lecture on what our job was as the engineer we were told "we want a monitor mix." marco's reply? "yeah? how does it feel to want?"

[dcr]

I don't see the whole allergic reaction to monitors, honestly I don't. It's pretty common that people will reason, "Can't hear myself; better turn up." Using a monitor can remove the "can't hear myself" part. OF COURSE they're not a cure-all; OF COURSE they don't take maniac wankers & make good musical citizens of them. But I certainly didn't interpret THAT to be dcwhut's problem, though. If your problem is that you've got people who are trying to do the right thing, but find their amps creeping up as they struggle to hear themselves, then for cryin out loud do what it takes to make it easier for them to hear themselves. If THAT's the problem, I just don't see why monitors are oh so wrong. (Heck, they might even trick some players into thinking they're louder than they really are!)

 

Another part, as B.E. pointed out, is to make sure that your PA person is someone who will know when your level is off, & will tell you--and you've got to trust them & adjust.

[The Fonz]

Originally posted by dcr:

I don't see the whole allergic reaction to monitors, honestly I don't. It's pretty common that people will reason, "Can't hear myself; better turn up." Using a monitor can remove the "can't hear myself" part.

something is very wrong if you're standing in front of a 100w or 200w gained out amp and you can't hear yourself. and where else do you stand when performing. everyone stands in front of his amp. this is why you have never had and will ever have your own instrument in your monitor. trust me on this. you won't hear yourself in the monitor because YOU ARE NOT IN YOURS. there may be a little guitar in the singer's and bass monitors, there's probably some kick in everyone's monitor as well as a ton of vocals. there is never guitar in a guitar players monitor and every time i try to put a little bass in the monitor mix everyone but the occasional drummer acts like i just raped his daughter. if people turned up because they couldn't hear themselves in the monitor, everyone would be at 11, all the time. if you can't hear yourself at all then you're probably dead because everyone else in the club can hear you just fine.

[Tom Capasso]

Originally posted by dcwhut?:

2 Questions.

¿Qué es SR?

SR is the abbreviation for Sound Reinforcement. You'll also see FOH (Front Of House) at times.

 

This has to do with sound systems/PAs, as opposed to us bassists setting up our own rig.

 

SR is it's own science (as I'm sure you can see). Anyone willing to help out here can give you advice, but there are other ofrums here that you might want to check out as well (SSS, etc.)

 

Tom

[Metal_Boy16]

This is one hell of a contraversial topic, isn't it? Monitors, amp wars, and arguing. What setup would you suggest for punching through the guitar? I was looking in a 4x10 and an around 500 watt amp. Brands?

[g.]

dcr: I don't see the whole allergic reaction to monitors, honestly I don't.

If you are saying that you really aren't reading what is being said. You aren't really reading the posts. You are reacting to only certain phrases or sentences. And the originating post for the thread would be a good place to start. It wasn't per se even ABOUT ON-STAGE SOUND. Then, as the thread [de]volved, that somehow had something to do with it too. That, and assumptions seem to have been made that bands with what are almost practice amps are somehow playing large venues with great wedges and plenty of power behind them, or can afford them themselves -- even though they don't even yet have amps at the level many of us enjoy.

 

   repeat 16x

||: related text in several posts :||

 

...And huh? Allergic reaction to monitors? Every gig I have ever done sound for or played, I have attempted to have great monitors and lots of headroom for them. It doesn't mean that nilly-willy everything on stage gets run through them however. They are NOT used to solve problems that are fundamentally meant to be dealt with first by the GIGO (garbage in garbage out) Principle. And I realize that many venues cannot support kitchen-sink monitor mix without conflicting with FOH because of over-run from wall and ceiling glancing.

 

It's pretty common that people will reason, "Can't hear myself; better turn up." Using a monitor can remove the "can't hear myself" part.

Hmmm. First thing I do to make sure I can hear a good stage balance is to make best posssible amp and personal stage space placement, maybe even shifting angles and positions around at the start of the gig, make an EQ curve that makes me less competitive and more supportive, and try to get the same out of my bandmates.

 

Because on some of these smaller stages the last thing you want is any more than has to be there in the monitors. It kills me when drummers think they need two overheads and a mic for each drum in many of these rooms. Each mic adds 3dB (!) more feedback potential. The monitors are first and foremost for VOCALS, and trying to be moderate about that in smaller rooms with non-Claire-Bros PA reserves headdroom, increases clarity (less time domain and phasing problems) and doesn't make the monitors another competitive source for level wars.

 

Ooops! Forgot: Originally we were talking about what couldn't be heard IN THE AUDIENCE ; }

 

But I certainly didn't interpret THAT to be dcwhut's problem, though

I see. So we aren't talking about the origanla metalboy13 post at all. Something entirely different. Still. Guess what? Players of electric instruments should learn to think acoustically before resorting to the monitor band-aid. Because all the budgetary and room size/venue size and monitor mix problems still apply, and too much desired levels both off and on stage are too easy to overshoot with needlessly busy monitors.

 

A ferinstance. Some crappy-sounding gigs when I go to check out a band at a local club, they get desperate and at break-time, seek me out. So I go up and check out their staging. They got monitors doing essentially the same as the house mix, and they have mics on every drum (often innapropriate ones, placed poorly). So they can't get enough vocal level in the monitors before feedback to hear what is the most essential element as far as most club patrons are concerned: THE SINGING.

 

Not only that: most these monitors are pointed back at hard ceiling and wall surfaces, except for the ones that are ironically placed in the hot area of the mics' cardioid pattern, which I often find with drummers who sing. So they have this mushy sound coming from all directions with different amounts of frequency and time shift (from the multiple reflections and sources) conflicting with and/or masking the instrument amps. Turning up amps at this point only adds to the muddle. And they have that crap arriving late from these reflecting sources often competing with the mains, which are closer and more direct to the audience. So neither type of listener is being satisfied.

 

So I illustrate to them what happens by running a portable CD through the board with all the mics up and both monitors and mains up. Sludge city. I start dialing out mics that aren't needed on the drums (or place them better), bring the monitor level down, and voila! -- clarity that approaches what the room is capable of!

 

Remember too: many of these bands may get some consultation, but many are going to be running the sound from stage lots of the time (and ironically they may be better off that way, of they are attentive to detail and learn from experience).

 

Sometimes they argue or mistrust about the drum mics. 'Til I get the drummer behind the kit and they see how he can light up the meters and the power-amp led chains just by use of the vocal mics in the front line, and with more clarity than when mixed in conjunction with extra overheads and other drum mics. The essentials are a KICK mic and a SNARE mic (often doing third-place HIGH HAT as well) usually. Anything else mic'd can cost more than it earns in these types of clubs (it's different on larger stages in larger venues).

 

Anyway, enough aside on drums. If players think about what acoustic instrumentalists do in terms of band placement to work well together and apply that to instrument speaker cab sources they can improve both their stage mixes and their club sound in venues of this type. It's just like mic placement (or choosing an instrument): get it sounding as good as possible BEFORE you start trying to fix it with other means. GIGO.

 

Hope that helps you dcwhut and metalboy (and anybody), either now or in the future. I have LOVED equipment and racks of lights and dials, but it's taken ages to really understand the whens and whys. And the learning it never stops if you are paying attention.

[Lee Flier]

I have to agree with you greenboy - monitors won't solve the problem in a small club. Aside from everything you mention there's also the fact that in a typical small club PA system, no way is each band member going to get their own individual monitor mix! So if you put guitar in the monitors for the guitarist, it's going to be too loud for everyone else, and tough for the vocalists to hear themselves. If anything, aside from vocals I usually like a little of the bass and kick drum in the monitors and NONE of myself.

 

As for placement I try to place my amp as far back on the stage as possible, so I can hear it better from where I stand. Elevating it on something like a chair or a flight case can be good too, so that the amp is higher than the audience's ear level and they're not getting blasted - but then I may be getting blasted myself and not be able to hear my bandmates. It's a delicate balance... but definitely messing with placement is a very worthwhile thing.

 

--Lee

[davebrownbass]

Originally posted by greenboy:

The truth of the matter in the long term is rather stark: it requires that people become better musicians by developing honest powers of observation of self and others, and developing judgment based on experience and research and opinions from those more qualified (which in turn can further develop judgment on who actually is worthy of such trust) in order to deal with problems.

 

    it's about the music

Greenboy, I love this statement. Keep preachin'.

 

This thread is about ego-driven guitarist, and/or drummers or bassists or whatever. And it is hard to lay your ego down for the sake of the audience.

 

I get the opportunity to hear a lot of P/W bands, and this is often a problem with them. I know of one drummer who played an outdoor festival Saturday, where the entire group of singers and musicians were in a shell and mic'd, and he sat outside the shell and was still too loud.

 

And if you say something to him, he gets offended just as if you insulted his spirituality. Then he justifies his playing by saying he has to "feel the pop" or he can't play very well.

 

I know of another church where nobody gets and amp on stage. The drummer plays e-drums and everybody wears ear buds. The music is well mixed, but kinda sterile.

 

In the final analysis, we must all remember its not about us. I know how fun it is, and how the audience doesn't appreciate what we're doing, and all the time invested in practice and how much we spent for our tone and all that stuff.

 

But its not about us. Its about them...the audience.

 

And I and many musicians I know forget that all too often.

[earljam]

one thing we do is ask the audience since we don't have a sound guy. they may not have the best ears (although there always seems to be someone who listens pretty well) but they will notice anything way out of line. in smaller places we don't mike the drums at all nor do we run the electric guitar or the bass through the P.A. which we reserve for acoustic guitar, fiddle, accordion and vocals. the drummer and bass stand close to each other with the bass cab behind them and the monitors (two) have mostly vocals, a little fiddle and acoustic guitar. this lets our not-real-expensive-gear put what it has where its needed most. this is only my second band and the first was unplugged bluegrass but apparently i have been real lucky with my choice of bandmates (i'm both the oldest and greenest) because we all understand that the ensemble sound is the only thing that counts. probably doesn't hurt that the elec. guitar and drummer are the most experienced. we also stand close even on bigger stages. our singer/fiddler/accordionist has as much ego as any of 'em but he knows he sounds best when we sound best, maybe metalboy could take that approach. why would anyone even want to be in a band with a guy who is surrounded only by himself? oh yeah- the audience invariably loves to be asked about the mix and it always gets a good rapport going.

[g.]

Lee, I always enjoy your posts here and elsewhere, and am sure I won't offend you when i say that I've found many electric guitarists don't have much of an idea what is going on with the types of cabs they use. In general, guitar cabs, whether open-backed or not, have a very wide cone of dispersion once they get out beyond 10 or 15 feet (open-backed and 412 are even fairly wide up close).

 

Yet I'm always running into these guitarists who are convinced they have to aim their cabs within .001 degrees at some imaginary ideal spot in the room to be heard there. Hell, usually all you have to do is aim it for your stage parnters in these smaller clubs or mid-sized clubs with similar stages to be heard evenly anywhere else in the club.

 

So it's really Not To Worry, I tell them, about being heard in the club, either in terms of mix, or "aiming". Just take care of yourself and your and bandmates and the rest is almost assured. Indeed, the vox mic's on the front line are making that a shoe-in. But so many do not listen.

 

And drums usually have an acoustic dispersion advantage, though drummers don't have a good idea what they actually sound like tonally when they are behind the set usually.

 

In loud settings, bassists, other instruments and vocals are really at a disadvantage. For bassists, it's partially due to frequency masking (higher frequencies especially those with lots of sustain, hide their tone and attack), and partially due to cabinet design and length waveform (this is not entirely accurate but helps visualization).

 

Anyway, don't worry too much about being heard : }

[g.]

Oh yeah, Lee, it's nuts to try to run several good monitor mixes for or on a small stage, even if you have a mixer that's capable. Even on larger stages with good EQ and RTA (real time analyzers) and compression/limiting, and wedges and sidefills that could deal with more bass frequencies, I always held the line at four separate monitor mixes. More than that, you need a dedicated engineer doing nothing but monitors.

 

Also, compression can be a good tool for both mains and monitors, but you have to be moderate and know what you are doing to take advantage of it. I currently use 1.4 to 1.6/1 ratios with around a -20dB threshold (referenced to +4 levels) on subs and mains, but none on monitors. It really sounds great -- nice sheen and clarity, no lost details!

[g.]

Here's A Clue about monitors from someone who knows the game. Over the years Peavey has been a great source of tech papers, articles, and info for working musicians on how to get it happening, and I think they publish some small format books that would be great for bands who want to progress on all fronts.

 

The article URLed out to 'ya here reminds me that, often, bands try to emulate big-time practices on small stages, thinking it will help them arrive. I know I've seen it. But it doesn't work that way.

 

<-- greenboy ---<<<<   typed out but still managed to do an acre of yardwork and fence-mending today as well as getting farmer's neck

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by greenboy:

Lee, I always enjoy your posts here and elsewhere, and am sure I won't offend you when i say that I've found many electric guitarists don't have much of an idea what is going on with the types of cabs they use. In general, guitar cabs, whether open-backed or not, have a very wide cone of dispersion once they get out beyond 10 or 15 feet (open-backed and 412 are even fairly wide up close).

Yep. I'm definitely not worried that the audience won't hear me. My concern is to hear myself and my bandmates, and for them to hear a good balance too, without being too loud in the audience.

 

So no, you're not offending me at all.

 

--Lee

[dcwhut]

Actually, I was referring to both directions, with one goal in mind. That is, to give a good, pleasing sound to our audience. We are now starting to play in some larger places ( 3 appearances in the next 2 months at a Local High Scool auditorium stage- 800+ seats, great mic's, PA, Lighting) and we don't have alot of gear. We want to get more gigs to raise money for the church and eventually put some in our own pockets. The ONLY way to help this to happen is to sound clean and together onstage. Wouldn't you all agree? If we don't sound together, or my lead g*** (it's a four-letter word sometimes) has an attack of Egocentricity, we will not be invited back, and will not be invited anywhere else. We're playing our next two out-of-church gigs for free (Exposure). We can't afford to annoy our audience as the organization we are playing for will only continue to exploit our efforts by our unprofessionalism citing that we aren't quite good enough to rate payment or a donation to the church. Also, the filipino people we are playing to are a close-knit community. When they have a function and want a band, they'll call a filipino band. There's one band in the area that plays secular and filipino traditional songs, and they sound really good (2 KB's, Drum, Bass) but they aren't doing much right know (As a matter-of-fact, their bassist goes to my church frequently and said they turned down playing this Saturday because they don't have time to get together and practice, We got their gig!) They are only allowing us to play one song. They're kindof gunshy about us playing too much, in case we flop. They are going to let us sell tickets to our July 27th concert that day as well. If all goes well, we'll get exposure, sell tickets and can start booking other engagements. If not, we've slammed the door shut, locked it and have thrown the key in the river, and you know how hard it is to get a good key made! So for that next party, event or what-not, we won't get the call for sure. They'll call up the Manila Rhythm Section or the filipino DJ they tend to use.

Now that you know my band's current status....

You can see why this two-fold topic has me asking questions. I take alot of responsibility for my band's growth. I helped a reluctant church on a tight budget, because they don't want to spend a dime, find instruments. My wife and I found people in the church that were interested in music (all of them teenagers). My wife taught them some basic music theory to get started, and I found printed music (Tab, Chords, cheats, whatever) So we could figure out how to play some songs.

This thread has made me aware of how any member of a band suffering from their own ego can potentially ruin a band's survival and their audience's ear(s). Throughout the thread, as stage setup became discussed as a factor, I realized that if I knew how to properly set up and angle equipment I could help control 'Egoitis' and make my band sound good, thus opening the doors for us. Get it?

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by Bastid E:

...having a better monitor mix has NO BEARING whatsoever on the problem at hand as greenboy stated earlier. why? because the monitor mix is completely separate from anything else and in general a sound guy will not put someones own instrument into his monitor, i.e. the guitar player won't have ANY guitar in his monitor as the sound guy figures he can hear himself pretty well from where he's standing. thusly the guitar player has no idea from his monitor mix wether or not he should turn down.

 

monitors are there so you can hear what the other eope in the band are doing so you can follow along a little better and so you can hear your own voice against the noise on stage and sing on key. the levels in any given monitor are completely different than the P.A. levels which in turn are different from the on stage levels. can you imagine what you would have to deal with if the singer got the P.A. mix in her monitor?...

Thank you for explaining monitor systems for me. All that mixing and touring I've been doing and I hadn't a clue.

 

With all due respect.. What are you talking about??

 

You have an extremely limited view of the role of monitors. I often put instruments (yes, even the players own instrument) into various monitor mixes. It depends on several variables. The number of mixes available, the preference of the musicians, etc. Sometimes you have to limit what instruments are introduced... sometimes.

 

It absolutely can help a musician to play at lower levels when they are receiving reinforcement from a monitor directly in front of them. Sometimes I mic amps offstage and the only sound the musician gets from his/her amp is from monitors. Depends on the gig. I prefer to put acoustic instruments and vox only in small, low powered monitor systems (read: small bars), but that doesn't always cut it. Sometimes it's required by members of the band to hear some instruments in their monitor.

 

As to how a musician knows when to turn down, I'll tell them! That's part of my job! He/she may not know it's too loud, but I'm certainly aware.

 

I tell every unknown band the truth at the beginning of soundcheck. (Name bands tell me how it is, but I have the choice of walking if they're totally unreasonable.) I mix for great sound. Listen to my direction and the gig will sound as good as the music and the gear can. Ignore me and I bear no responseablilty for the mess you make.

 

monitors are for hearing whatever is necessary and/or comfortable for you to play your instrument and/or sing.

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by CMDN:

Pardon me for being a little naive, but isn't this whole thread really about communication and respect?

 

I play both bass and guitar (two different bands), and I think the key to playing with other people is LISTENING to them and respecting their sonic space as you would respect them. In a conversation, it's common courtesy to listen to others opinions when sharing viewpoints. Anyone who brashly talks over others and doesn't listen to what they are saying is generally branded an asshole or an egotistical moron. The same goes for music. If someone's blasting everyone else out of the water, they're either stupid or just don't care what the others are doing. Whenever one of the guys in my band is too loud and they can't tell, we usually yell out our secret code sentence -- "It's not all about you, douchebag."

Then we laugh as they adjust their playing volume accordingly.

 

Just as some conversations involve whispering and conspiratorial nods, others include loud disagreements and raucous laughter. The important things to know are: what kind of conversation you're having, and (more importantly) what kind you're NOT having. Either way, you should be properly equipped.

Amen, CMDN!

 

The Jamie Hartford Band plays most bars by mixing all but vox and solo harp (he moves into a mic for solos, otherwise it's just his amp) in the mains and monitors. They don't sound anything like a garage band, as most other bands tend to when playing this way. If every set of musicians I worked with in bars had their respect for each other's sonic space, I'd always go with sparse monitor setups on those gigs.

 

Greenboy, I have no qualm with fixing the problem at it's source, by having the guitarist turn down. If this isn't going to happen, there are other ways to combat it without an amp war. I suggested guitar in the monitor as one possible answer. I also suggested an EQ curve for the bass as well as getting the guitarist to limit his space in the mix by EQ'ing out some low end.

 

BTW, it amuses me that you linked that paper from Peavey. It's half good information and half deception. Sidefills are used for far more than the author's narrow definition. I have NEVER used them as the sole monitor system with the reverse stereo image he paints, although I could see using it in some cases. I have used sidefills as a unique mix to augment something else onstage. As I wrote to Peavey, Lila McCann's front wedges had her voice (strong), her acoustic guitar, and some backing vox. On larger stages it might include a small amounts of other instruments. The sidefills were mono. They were mostly keyboard and backing vox, with some of her lead vox. She liked to gauge her distance to the side of stage for some songs dependent on how much background vox and keys she wanted to hear. The moral; Take these papers with a grain of salt. They're far from all inclusive, at least on this subject.

[dcr]

fantasticsound--glad to meet a kindred spirit! What everyone agrees on is that if the cause of amp creep-up is that the user is an egotistical jerk, at the end of the day there's no real fix besides ditching the guy. Fine. This *might* be metalboy's problem. But it doesn't sound like dcwhut's problem (please, folks, indulge me while I address his post, 'kay?). This led me to speculate that sometimes creep-up happens for REASONS, and sometimes one of those reasons is that folks honestly have trouble hearing themselves. And believe it or not, some folks have actually reported the phenomenon that they can't hear themselves distinctly even when directly in front of the amp, especially given certain angles (heck, I think folks even came up with tilt-back thingies because of this). IF this is your problem, your solution is simple: hear yourself without boosting overall level. One way to do this is to angle your amp, & use it as a sort of monitor, running (most of) the main volume through the board. People have been known to do this. Another way is to run a cable from the quarter-inch out jack on a DI box to a small monitor; this puts a little more of your own sound (& that only) right in your face. Our guitarist does this; it gives him full control over his ability to hear himself, & the soundman full control over his level in the mix. And it actually works. It also means that keys & vocals can share a monitor from the board with relative ease, i.e. without guitar crowding their monitor. And so on. The upshot is that there are lots of creative solutions, and some of these may include--gasp! horror!--the use of monitors.

 

 

dcwhut--I'm jealous, bro! You've got a great opportunity, & you guys have obviously been able to pull off more than you could have expected at this point in the band's life. And you've got a good assessment of what you need to do. In addition to woodshedding your songs, woodshed your sound. You'll need VERY good sound support, for all the reasons folks here have said. From on-stage, you can't trust your ears to tell you what it sounds like to the audience (well, you can probably tell if it's blaring, or inaudible; but you see my point). I'd also say that if you're running a PA, ask yourself how much of the overall level really needs to be handled by amps. Some folks could go direct, no amp at all; some could use their amps for their own listening only; etc. Of course, ymmv. Point is to get creative so that everyone can hear himself, hear the people around him, & put out a sound the *audience* will love.

 

Peace! It's all good.

[g.]

fantasticsound: BTW, it amuses me that you linked that paper from Peavey. It's half good information and half deception.

It amuses me (my, aren't we smug) that you seem to have missed the distinction the author imparted on the type of sidefill monitor mix he wished to discuss. It seems obvious to me right from the git-go he specifically was not going to be talking about sidefill mixes that were carefully chosen, unique sub[set] mixes -- but that he was addressing sidefills that are basically a clone of the entire board [FOH] mix. He drew the distinction and then presented his reasons, and his chosen alternative.

 

I'd also say "deception" is a word to be more careful of using. Perhaps you don't share the writer's conclusions or perceptive, or perhaps you somehow missed the qualifying statements that were woven throughout the article. But "deception" has a connotation that is hardly desirable, and going for such a word makes me question what it is you are trying to do here.

 

Anyway, I linked that paper because it had some general basic information mentioned in passing that I felt could be of use to people here, and to point out another source. Not because I felt it supported in particular anything said up to this point in the thread...

 

Sidefills are used for far more than the author's narrow definition.

Uh. Perhaps you missed the couple of times he qualified what he was mainly talking about: the practice he felt was poor, of placing an entire mix in the sidefills. Let's see, how did he close that little article?... "if this article upsets anyone who has been doing Side Fills as a full FOH mix, GOOD, then they can keep on doing it their right way, and I'll continue doing it my right way. The rest of you can choose for yourselves."

 

I have NEVER used them as the sole monitor system with the reverse stereo image he paints,

Well, then -- he MUST be wrong ; }

 

although I could see using it in some cases.

Don't do it on account of me ; }  But if you have an instance where it would fit the bill, by all means... That is why the information was presented, after all.

 

I have used sidefills as a unique mix to augment something else onstage. As I wrote to Peavey, Lila McCann's front wedges had her voice (strong), her acoustic guitar, and some backing vox. On larger stages it might include a small amounts of other instruments. The sidefills were mono. They were mostly keyboard and backing vox, with some of her lead vox. She liked to gauge her distance to the side of stage for some songs dependent on how much background vox and keys she wanted to hear.

I'm sure the author has done much the same, many times. In fact I think I've seen him mention it elsewhere, in Peavey's MONITOR magazine or somat.

 

The moral; Take these papers with a grain of salt. They're far from all inclusive, at least on this subject.

It's bluntly obvious they are not inclusive. I mean, technical papers can often run into tens of thousand of words. The subject matter is biblical. Nevertheless, if one does not apply Selective Reading Skill blinders they can read a mini-article or blurb and not fault the author for not trying to shove the entire bible there, and for imparting useful information about a case or two.

 

I'd say the main point (which I grasped in about 0.2 seconds in spite of bad html formatting/editing) was that if you are of the school that shoves an entire FOH mix into the sidefills, that there is a better way to do it: so that the instruments farthest away from each side are the ones best represented in that sidefill. No big deal.

 

 

<-- greenboy ---<<<<    of course, i could be deceived

 

 

[g.]

I'm probably done with this debate, fantasticsound. We've gone too far afield, cluttering with quotes of quotes. And seem to have different opinions on what a small tech article must be written like to be useful.

 

You seem to think the guy's an ass for his writing style, I'm quite cool with him.

 

Whatever.

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by greenboy:

...You seem to think the guy's an ass for his writing style, I'm quite cool with him.

 

Whatever.

Your words, not mine. I never isinuated any of that. Style doesn't equal content. The article is incomplete, and as such, is as much a disservice as a service to many readers.

 

My last comment on the subject. You conveniently ignored the fact that I offered an EQ solution and a political solution in addition to the monitor solution. In a perfect world, CMDN's comment on the interplay of band members would be the solution for this band. Respect before playing. A little thought before action.

 

Travelling to Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf states, we had to adhere to weight limits that precluded a powerful bass amp. 30 min. prior to our departure I was in a car, speeding to Gibson for a miniscule Trace-Elliott Commando because the bassist's 2-10" combo was far too heavy. We made out alright for two reasons: A single 18" sub on each side of the mains pumped low bass to the crowd and the stage, and more importantly, the guitarists and drummer did whatever was necessary for the bass player to hear adequately. (They did what was necessary for each gig, in adverse conditions, every time.)

 

Metal Boy 13 should be so lucky as to have bandmates who pay attention to each other. And Metal Boy, this is surely easier said than done, but you need to let the band know that the gig you described can't be typical. Something's got to give. How you say it will have more impact on the outcome than what you say. Think it out first.

[g.]

fantasticsound: You conveniently ignored the fact that I offered an EQ solution and a political solution in addition to the monitor solution[

So now I am beholden to comment on your every remark, when myself and others in thread also talked EQ and band member human dynamics? I did NOT ignore your remarks, but they had already been discussed and I didn't really see anything new there that spurred further thoughts from me on that subject.

 

In return I will not expect you to address, agree, or refute every item I cover in my posts (such as the bits that what ever SR practices may be appropriate for some venues are not always the way to fly for others).

 

I figure you and I would probably have a decent time together running some system through its paces and supporting a band's expression. But this debate is pretty side-hilled, so us, I guess I'll just dork around with some other topics that aren't so touchy.

 

<-- greenboy ---<<<<    DISCLAIMER: THIS GREENBOY POST AND ANY OTHER, REGARDLESS OF WORDCOUNT, IS NOT INTENDED, OR CAPABLE, OF BEING THE LAST FINAL AND MOST ACCURATE OVERVIEW OF EACH AND EVERY TOPIC INVOKED. THE AUTHOR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COVERING ALL EVENTUALITIES NOR THE DAMAGE TO MINDS SHOULD THE CONTENTS BE MISUSED