The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
GEQ Collection for different wedges
Old 1 week ago
  #31
Lives for gear
 
jude's Avatar
 

All ask when mixing monitors is that the processing is set to the latest factory spec for the amps and boxes, then I'll have a chat (or yell depending on the gig) and maybe end up with a few cuts depending on the room and stage. Cant remember a gig lately where I've cut more than 3 or 4 frequencies by up to 3dB. Works well, still has tons of gain before feedback.
Old 1 week ago
  #32
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris661 View Post
Sam,

I've said this in other threads, but it bears repeating: the difference between a good studio monitor and a good HiFi speaker is that the HiFi speaker comes in a range of finishes to make it more domestically acceptable.

A good example of a studio monitor or HiFi speaker ought to translate electricity into sound with as little distortion (linear* or non-linear**) as possible.
* Frequency or phase response deviations
** Where extra frequency components are added - inter-modulation distortion, harmonic distortion, etc

Unfortunately, there are many HiFi speakers which, instead of aiming to be low-distortion, deliberately add their own sound signature. To me, that makes them an FX box, and nothing more. Certainly not accurate.


Accuracy = electrical signals are perfectly translated into sound = zero linear distortion + zero non-linear distortion

So, I'd say that accurate sound demands a flat response, among other things.
I think we agree in principle on this point, I've listened to the Hi-Fi models of some really good studio monitors from the same manufacturers side by side and the sound was very different between the two. The Hi-Fi versions always sounded 'nicer'/more hyped in the right places, but were never as accurate as their studio brethren which sounded more brutal by comparison.

All I want from a stage wedge is accuracy and clarity in a very specific space, I don't care or want to have a unified sound on stage from all the monitors on the stage. Each musician should have his own little hot and sweet spot and nothing else, because a unified sound means interference as far as I'm concerned.
Old 1 week ago
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jude View Post
All ask when mixing monitors is that the processing is set to the latest factory spec for the amps and boxes, then I'll have a chat (or yell depending on the gig) and maybe end up with a few cuts depending on the room and stage. Cant remember a gig lately where I've cut more than 3 or 4 frequencies by up to 3dB. Works well, still has tons of gain before feedback.
This is the perfect approach as far as I'm concerned....too much intervention and messing around screws up the process in my experience and opinion.

Based on what I hear in the venue, I also ask for the latest factory setup for FOH too, I remember going through a period when systems were being tuned based on the genre of the music. So reggae bands got the stupid, over the top bass response tuning, and house guys were always puzzled when I asked for the factory setting.

Meyer sound was the first company to start using propriety processing that people couldn't mess with and I'll forever thank them for it.
Old 1 week ago
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
And make sure the wedge is positioned only at the BACK of the mic, not the side.
Unless you have a glass back drop behind the band this should stop most feedback problems.
Does this rule still hold when the microphone in question is a super-cardioid or hyper-cardioid? I always believed that the positioning of the wedge in relationship to the position of the mic should be based largely on the pickup pattern of the mic...

Behind the mic for cardioid and wide cardioid, and a little to the side for super and hyper cardioid....but even then this is just a guideline more than a rule because oftentimes other circumstances dictate where we have to set things on the stage.

In fact I don't really care if monitors sound "good" or not, as long as the person listening is satisfied and its not affecting anything else negatively I'm good.
Old 1 week ago
  #35
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
(...)
Behind the mic for cardioid and wide cardioid, and a little to the side for super and hyper cardioid....but even then this is just a guideline more than a rule because oftentimes other circumstances dictate where we have to set things on the stage.

In fact I don't really care if monitors sound "good" or not, as long as the person listening is satisfied and its not affecting anything else negatively I'm good.
things imo only become critical when HIGH monitor levels are required, when the singer severely messes with the mic pattern or when one needs to follow a singer walking around on a very large stage, feeding the mix into multiple wedges without the mix being static (which i so far only had to do twice in my entire life)...

i'll do whatever does the trick, meaning trying to get the artist happy (without throwing off the foh mix)!
Old 1 week ago
  #36
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Does this rule still hold when the microphone in question is a super-cardioid or hyper-cardioid? I always believed that the positioning of the wedge in relationship to the position of the mic should be based largely on the pickup pattern of the mic...
Sam,

I half-remembered this, and thought I'd dig it out for you.

https://en-de.neumann.com/file-finde...ry=microphones

Click on Lecture by Martin Schneider, AES 2006.

It's a really interesting read - they find out what happens when you put a dummy head in front of a microphone.
Long story short is that the polar patterns actually get rather messy.

It gets an order of magnitude worse when you consider how the singer might move.
... and then one of the singers puts on a hat.

You can end up with huge arrays of all the different permutations for this stuff. Fortunately, modern mics and wedges are well-behaved enough to cause very little trouble in my experience.

Chris
Old 1 week ago
  #37
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris661 View Post
Sam,

I half-remembered this, and thought I'd dig it out for you.

https://en-de.neumann.com/file-finde...ry=microphones

Click on Lecture by Martin Schneider, AES 2006.

It's a really interesting read - they find out what happens when you put a dummy head in front of a microphone.
Long story short is that the polar patterns actually get rather messy.

It gets an order of magnitude worse when you consider how the singer might move.
... and then one of the singers puts on a hat.

You can end up with huge arrays of all the different permutations for this stuff. Fortunately, modern mics and wedges are well-behaved enough to cause very little trouble in my experience.
Yes, I agree, but although things will change, it will not change totally...the chance of feedback will still be greater in the general angle of the lobe. In the video I posted the singer always wears a wide brimmed hat and even though his monitor is at a really low level, the mic is more sensitive to how he moves etc when the monitors are placed behind the mic. But If he takes off the hat, or I move the monitors to the side, he can do what he wants while I hit him with heavy metal SPL without any problem at all...the pattern is super cardioid.

I'm still curious why the instruction to "make sure the wedge is positioned only at the BACK of the mic, not the side" was mentioned.

Last edited by Samc; 1 week ago at 05:06 PM..
Old 1 week ago
  #38
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I'm still curious why the instruction to "make sure the wedge is positioned only at the BACK of the mic, not the side" was mentioned.
Sam, if you take a look at the link I posted, the information is there.

Putting an obstacle in front of a mic produces some very interesting effects.
In the mid-to-low frequency region, it decreases the directivity index of the mics: Cardioid becomes sub, super becomes cardioid, and hyper becomes super.
At high frequencies, you're in the domain where reflections rule, and you get something like a pattern inversion.

Interesting stuff.

Chris
Old 1 week ago
  #39
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris661 View Post
Sam, if you take a look at the link I posted, the information is there.

Putting an obstacle in front of a mic produces some very interesting effects.
In the mid-to-low frequency region, it decreases the directivity index of the mics: Cardioid becomes sub, super becomes cardioid, and hyper becomes super.
At high frequencies, you're in the domain where reflections rule, and you get something like a pattern inversion.

Interesting stuff.
I read what they wrote and believe they are right, but I do this almost everyday, and interpret it differently from you because I have to respect what happens on the stage when the band start playing.

Unless all microphones become cardioid under ALL circumstances, the instruction I quoted needs a qualifier...nobody sits/stands in front of the mic without moving, therefore the diffraction and reflection of the singer's head is not static and in my experience the general angle of the lobe is always the most prone to feedback generally. and what if its not a head, what if the mic is on a saxophone instead, what does the pattern change to then? Furthermore, as Deedeeyeah rightly pointed out, if the volume is low enough it does not matter where you put the wedge.

In the case of the singer in the video when I position the monitors a little to the side the risk of feedback is reduced, and this is theoretically where the wedges should be placed in the first place. I still want to know why the wedge must be placed behind the mic as GreenNeedle instructed...is there something I'm missing?
Old 1 week ago
  #40
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
(...) I still want to know why the wedge must be placed behind the mic (...) is there something I'm missing?
must be a generic advice and is only valid if the rear of a cardioid mic is pointing at the wedge. there are plenty of situations when this is not the case: when the mic is angled differently, gets moved all the time, its pattern gets affected etc. and either a mic with a different pattern, a different mic or wedge position would be more helpful...

...or just wanted for all sorts of reasons: habit, reduced hearing ability on one ear, to counterbalance bleed from a nearby instrument or wedge, to make room for a pedal board, for unobstructed camera angles, for instruments which need a much different wedge position anyway such as piano/keys/hammond or drums etc.

all fine as long as levels are reasonable and the musicians get happy - what i truly hate though is when a wedge is firing off stage and can be heard from the audience (which is also the reason why i don't like using sidefills much, see another thread)! in this case, i'll ask musicians to change position and direction of their wedge(s).

here's a pic from a band for which i mixed monitors two days ago: front vocal mics were behind wedges (or the other way round, depending one how one looks at things...), angles of mics and type/pattern of mics varied a bit, there were two wedges for keys plus a drum fill, the latter were firing in from the sides.

btw: peaks from the wedges as measured at the vocal mics were in the high nineties during soundcheck - not sure whether this can be considered 'reasonable' but still was a few db's from feedback'; i'm sure though that the band would have been happy with lower levels - unfortunately, the provider of the pa had no clue how to set it up so the wedges were mainly used to overcome the rear blast of the nearby subs which were arrayed in a rather silly way, creating a weird pattern: not funny! - the band and the 'venue' (a raft on a river) were fun though! :-)
Attached Thumbnails
GEQ Collection for different wedges-20190812_194100.jpg  
Old 1 week ago
  #41
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
must be a generic advice and only valid if the rear of a cardioid mic is pointing at the wedge - there are plenty of situations when this is not the case: if the mic is angled differently, gets moved all the time, its pattern gets affected etc. and either a mic with a different pattern, a different mic or wedge position would be more helpful...
How is it "generic advice" if its incorrect in so many different situations?
Old 1 week ago
  #42
Lives for gear
 

i wouldn't bother much as long as other folks get happy with it.

on specific topics though, some folks go ballistic if someone contradicts or just challenges their opinion: they attack everyone and try to shout down any opinion which does not fit their view on things...

that's not (yet) the case here.
Old 1 week ago
  #43
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
i wouldn't bother much as long as other folks get happy with it.

on specific topics though, some folks go ballistic if someone contradicts or just challenges their opinion: they attack everyone and try to shout down any opinion which does not fit their view on things...

that's not (yet) the case here.
Its a general rule that holds true most of the time obviously. I have no interest in dissecting it down to the finest detail given every possible variable that may occur in Sams magical little world of minutia.

Sam, I can see why it must be so hard after 30 victorious years to learn you have been doing these things wrong for so long. Truly sorry for your pain, but its never too late to improve.
Old 1 week ago
  #44
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I never ring-out monitors and don't have feedback problems...over 40 festivals this year alone and not even a hint of feedback...go figure.
You are using pro, well designed and appropriately set up gear in a well balanced system with musicians who generally know what they're doing. You know what you're dealing with and you know what you are doing.

Sometimes the gear available is not ideal or well matched. In this case the evils of processing the signal to ameliorate the hot-spots in the system are better than the evils of not doing so.

We should also clarify that "not ringing out" does not necessarily mean "not eq-ing the system. There appears to be some confusion in this thread.

For my money, less is usually better but some is often necessary.

"Standard" presets are bad, presets based on specific gear in specific situations are useful and save time by avoiding repetitive work.
Old 1 week ago
  #45
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shufflebeat View Post
You are using pro, well designed and appropriately set up gear in a well balanced system with musicians who generally know what they're doing. You know what you're dealing with and you know what you are doing.

Sometimes the gear available is not ideal or well matched. In this case the evils of processing the signal to ameliorate the hot-spots in the system are better than the evils of not doing so.
All of this is true for the most part, but I started using this method of working before this was the general condition of most of my gigs, and if I worked a bar gig with inexperienced musicians, I would still use this method, and it would still work better than me ringing out the monitors.

Quote:
We should also clarify that "not ringing out" does not necessarily mean "not eq-ing the system. There appears to be some confusion in this thread.

For my money, less is usually better but some is often necessary.
I made that clear in previous posts...this is not magic, it ensures that you only attenuate whats necessary and eliminate unnecessary steps in the process. This reduces setup time and you generally don't need to hack the system as much, so you end up with better sounding wedges in the long run. Better sounding wedges generally means you will get what the musician needs with less SPL.

Quote:
"Standard" presets are bad, presets based on specific gear in specific situations are useful and save time by avoiding repetitive work.
Obviously, if you work in the same venue with the same gear all the time, you will become familiar with the specific behavior of the room. You'll know for example that at certain SPL, if the room is less than half full you might get standing wave at a certain frequency, so you prepare for that. That's just common sense.
Old 1 week ago
  #46
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Its a general rule that holds true most of the time obviously. I have no interest in dissecting it down to the finest detail given every possible variable that may occur in Sams magical little world of minutia.
This advise is not even disputable, it's plain wrong on a technical level and proves that we really need to be vigilant about the info that that is being passed out like candy around here. The accepted general rule is that monitors should be aimed at the null in the microphone's pickup pattern for better feedback performance, and there is a compelling technical reason for this. If you can't perform your own test with wedges and a microphone, you should at least read what every article on the net (including microphone manufacturers) have to say about this topic.

stage monitor placement with hypercardioid microphone

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-a...event-feedback

https://www.prosoundweb.com/topics/s...nd_monitoring/

https://www.sweetwater.com/sweetcare...rophone-usage/







This is just a sample after a 3 second google search, I was not able to find a mic or monitor manufacturer, an experienced sound pro or anyone else that second your advise for this generally accepted rule that holds true most of the time.

Quote:
Sam, I can see why it must be so hard after 30 victorious years to learn you have been doing these things wrong for so long. Truly sorry for your pain, but its never too late to improve.
See above...apparently a lot of us have been getting this wrong for a long time now.
Attached Thumbnails
GEQ Collection for different wedges-unknown.jpeg   GEQ Collection for different wedges-unknown.png  
Old 1 week ago
  #47
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
All of this is true for the most part, but I started using this method of working before this was the general condition of most of my gigs, and if I worked a bar gig with inexperienced musicians, I would still use this method, and it would still work better than me ringing out the monitors.


I made that clear in previous posts...this is not magic, it ensures that you only attenuate whats necessary and eliminate unnecessary steps in the process. This reduces setup time and you generally don't need to hack the system as much, so you end up with better sounding wedges in the long run. Better sounding wedges generally means you will get what the musician needs with less SPL.


Obviously, if you work in the same venue with the same gear all the time, you will become familiar with the specific behavior of the room. You'll know for example that at certain SPL, if the room is less than half full you might get standing wave at a certain frequency, so you prepare for that. That's just common sense.
In this case I am agreeing pretty much 100% with you, it's just that you are not the only person I'm addressing so it may appear like I'm reiterating something you've said as though I'm not aware you've said it already.

Let's pause to fully appreciate the glorious harmony of agreement.
Old 1 week ago
  #48
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
obviously, if you work in the same venue with the same gear all the time, you will become familiar with the specific behavior of the room. You'll know for example that at certain SPL, if the room is less than half full you might get standing wave at a certain frequency, so you prepare for that. That's just common sense.
Are you suggesting the standing waves disappear or change position when the room is full of people?
Old 1 week ago
  #49
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
This advise is not even disputable, it's plain wrong on a technical level and proves that we really need to be vigilant about the info that that is being passed out like candy around here. The accepted general rule is that monitors should be aimed at the null in the microphone's pickup pattern for better feedback performance, and there is a compelling technical reason for this. If you can't perform your own test with wedges and a microphone, you should at least read what every article on the net (including microphone manufacturers) have to say about this topic.

stage monitor placement with hypercardioid microphone

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-a...event-feedback

https://www.prosoundweb.com/topics/s...nd_monitoring/

https://www.sweetwater.com/sweetcare...rophone-usage/







This is just a sample after a 3 second google search, I was not able to find a mic or monitor manufacturer, an experienced sound pro or anyone else that second your advise for this generally accepted rule that holds true most of the time.


See above...apparently a lot of us have been getting this wrong for a long time now.
I can just imagine the conversation with the singer about not daring to touch or move the mic because you have 30 years experience and have the monitor placed just so. I thought you were on their side?
It doesn't matter, if it does use a 58 and get on with it.
Old 1 week ago
  #50
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
I can just imagine the conversation with the singer about not daring to touch or move the mic because you have 30 years experience and have the monitor placed just so. I thought you were on their side?
It doesn't matter, if it does use a 58 and get on with it.
Seriously dude? Who said singers shouldn’t touch the mic? It doesn’t concern you enough that the info you posted is incorrect, so you’re deflecting by trying to make this about something and someone else instead...really?

I support the artists I work with by learning how to properly use the tools we work with and by giving them factual information regarding said tools.
Old 1 week ago
  #51
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Seriously dude? Who said singers shouldn’t touch the mic?
Well, you did actually, because i have never met or seen a singer(and i hope i never do) who has the direction of the back of their mic as a major concern during their performance. The technical theory is non applicable and way down the line in priority over everything else. If your system falls apart, its the wrong system, if its the right system it won’t be a problem. If you have blaring wedges, don’t use a hyper/super cardioid. The back of the mic is going to point at that wedge as much as it isn't inevitably, eliminate the real problem and get on with it. And as general rule, keep the wedge at the back of the mic.
Old 1 week ago
  #52
Lives for gear
 

You really don’t know what you’re talking about do you...conventional wisdom and common practice is to use a super or hyper cardioid mic on loud stages to reduce the risk of feedback and to reduce unwanted sounds in the vocal mic.
Experienced professionals know this.

It’s already been established that your previous statement is false/incorrect and misleading.
Old 1 week ago
  #53
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
You really don’t know what you’re talking about do you...conventional wisdom and common practice is to use a super or hyper cardioid mic on loud stages to reduce the risk of feedback and to reduce unwanted sounds in the vocal mic.
Experienced professionals know this.

It’s already been established that your previous statement is false/incorrect and misleading.
No, you established it in your mind so you don’t have to discuss your poor practices.
Old 1 week ago
  #54
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
No, you established it in your mind so you don’t have to discuss your poor practices.
This level of ignorance is embarrassing...
Old 1 week ago
  #55
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Are you suggesting the standing waves disappear or change position when the room is full of people?
Didn’t get an answer to this yet either.
Old 1 week ago
  #56
Lives for gear
 
Pro Sound Guy's Avatar
 

There comes a point in some threads when it becomes no point anymore and everyone should go home and have a beer.
Old 1 week ago
  #57
Lives for gear
 

Unfortunately a whole bunch of really bad information which could set back the learning and understanding was spread here in the interest of winning...stupid.
Old 6 days ago
  #58
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Unfortunately a whole bunch of really bad information which could set back the learning and understanding was spread here in the interest of winning...stupid.
Okay mr. self professed “head of security of the truth”, why not wander on over and answer the questions you have been avoiding on the condenser mic thread and prove that you aren’t the one spreading bad advice.

There is lots of good info on this thread to help take a newbie out of the dark ages and it wasn’t given by you ...2 2 two

Last edited by GreenNeedle; 6 days ago at 11:02 PM..
Old 6 days ago
  #59
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
There is lots of good info on this thread to help take a newbie out of the dark ages and it wasn’t given by you ...2 2 two
Let’s take an overview of the so called “good info” that was given....Use music to flatten the monitor system, always place the monitor directly behind the mic to avoid feedback, do not use super/hyper cardioid mics on a loud stage. It’s the black hole this bad info leads to that concerns me.....
Old 6 days ago
  #60
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Let’s take an overview of the so called “good info” that was given....Use music to flatten the monitor system, always place the monitor directly behind the mic to avoid feedback, do not use super/hyper cardioid mics on a loud stage. It’s the black hole this bad info leads to that concerns me.....
Meanwhile you are telling people to turn the gain down and the fader up to lower the room sound on a condenser, doode...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump