Author Archives: dmaland

About dmaland

Danny Maland was introduced to the world of pro audio back in his high-school days, almost accidentally. Danny has experience in both the recording studio and live-sound reinforcement worlds, and has found that he prefers the immediacy and intensity that live-sound offers. In past years, he was a key player in establishing and operating "New Song Underground," an all-ages music venue offered as an outreach by New Song Presbyterian to Salt Lake City. He is currently the "inconveniencer of electrons and air molecules" at Fats Grill. Danny holds a vocational diploma (MRP II) from the Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences, and also a Bachelor of Science: Information Technology from Western Governors University.

It’s Terrible And The Best

Some gear is genuinely bad, but no gear is genuinely the best.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

I’ve owned mics and speakers that were objectively poor performers: Lots of distortion, terrible frequency response, power handling in the double digits, no wind-noise rejection, the ability to transmit every tiny vibration of the chassis…you get the idea. I’ve also owned various bits of gear that I’ve loved, and other people just couldn’t find a way to like. They worked for me, but not for someone else.

When it comes down to it, that’s the rub with the perennial question of, “What’s the best [audioGearObject]?” There isn’t a best. Your desires and applications will line up with some products, and miss others by light years. For example, listening to the Sweetwater Kick Drum Mic Shootout, I preferred the Sennheiser E602 to the Shure Beta 52. Is the 602 the best, then? No – not if I have to worry about filling tech riders, which will probably specify Audix D6s or Beta 52s. It’s not the best if you want the Beta 52 “mountain peak” at 4 kHz. It’s not the best if you want a Telefunken M82, which is a $400 kick mic that I really do NOT like the sound of very much.

Similarly, I’ve had occasion to mix on a system which had an output side built of JBL Vertec modules. It sure did sound good when tuned, and it sure was capable of effortless volume. Such a setup wouldn’t be “the best” for most of the shows I work on, though, because the rigging requirements would blast most of my time restraints out of the water. Also, the transportation needs aren’t realistic for me. The story is similar for consoles. An Avid SC48 is a much more expensive, expandable, and high-level accepted console than my X32s, yet its high mass, bulky frame, and lack of real remote control make it completely unattractive in my context.

The question “What’s the best…” really should be “What’s the best for this specific application?” If we narrow the scope of the query, an answer can be meaningful. If we don’t carefully define the domain of the question, then we end up with a pile of opinions and caveats that have to be picked through and examined for hours upon hours. Of course, if we want to have a free-for-all, we can still ask, “What’s your favorite…?” That prompt will still generate a gargantuan haystack of responses, but at least the output expectation is opinions and not something we’ll try to factualize.

If You Have To Ask

You don’t have “enough.”

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

I recently provided the PA for a gig powered by a generator. After my experience over the summer, you might understand if I was a bit nervous. My anxiety being sparked, I made no bones about what I needed: A generator capable of 14kW minimum. (See, when you’re connected to a municipal power grid, there are usually megawatts of capacity to spare when a big peak gets drawn. With a generator, there’s no such situation. You can’t get a 10kW peak out of a 2kW gennie. Physics is a harsh mistress.)

Well, guess what the show organizer did? They rented a GORGEOUS, 25kW diesel with one-button start. It came with a full tank of fuel, and get this: It left with a full tank of fuel. I think the continuous load on the unit at any given time was about 1200 watts. That’s less than 5% of the generator’s rated capacity; Statistically, it’s right on the border of significant vs. insignificant. We sipped at the well of power, and yet were sated, because the well was deep.

And that’s what you want, especially when the cost to rent portable power really isn’t that high. You want the gennie to be out of sight, out of mind, just like municipal power.

If you have to think about the generator, you got the wrong generator.

If you have to wonder if you got enough generator for the gig, you got the wrong generator.

It’s similar with PA systems as a whole, although I think the functional realities are harsher. If you have to ask if you have enough PA, you don’t have enough PA…and I bet that most of us, on a regular basis, don’t have enough PA. That is, we don’t have a functionally unlimited reserve of output that we barely touch as the show goes on. We regularly run our rigs at very large fractions of their total capability.

I’ve seen column-style portable systems run up to their limiters.

I’ve seen affordable “point and shoots” run up to their limiters.

I’ve seen three-ways stacked on double 18s where the system was run up to its limiters.

I’ve seen reasonably-powered, multi-box-hang array systems over a huge pile of subwoofers where the system was run up to its limiters.

Lest you get the wrong idea, all of those cases involved reasonable operators who were simply asking the rigs to deliver what they felt they needed to keep up with the needs of the show.

The audio side of audio is pretty unforgiving. Even a very solid system can be outrun by a band that’s moderately determined to be “extra loud.” The system capacity necessary to avoid thinking about that ever again is incredibly expensive and shockingly voluminous in physical size. Everything is a logarithmic curve, and that means the point of diminishing returns starts at zero capability.

It’s a sobering thought, yet when we realize how many of us navigate those waters regularly, we don’t have to be crushed by it. If we have to ask, we don’t have enough PA. Most of us will have to “ask” a lot in our careers. The economic and logistical factors that real shows deal with in real rooms are just that way.

I think.

Stageplot Aggravation

Sometimes no stageplot is better than the wrong one.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

Folks, may I please be brutally frank with you? I really want to have input lists and stage plots. They are monumentally valuable for readiness – they tell me what to expect and where to expect it, which gives all of us a huge head start on patching and setup.

Please send me the correct plot or list, though.

If the correct plot is, “We’ll have three vocalists, two guitars, a xylophone, and a drummer, and we always pick new places to stand for each show,” that’s completely fine. It tells me to patch my stage and layout my console with the expectation that your on-stage positions will be unknown until the last minute.

The flipside of that is when I get a plot that meticulously details exactly where everybody is going to stand, where all the instruments are going to be, and even gives me clues on how to construct monitor mixes…and is wrong. Or someone’s mind changes at the last second. For me, that’s almost worse than simply getting a few basics and having to “wing it” on everything else.

This has happened to me in festival situations – with headliners! I recall one instance where everything was mapped out in great detail, as I mentioned before, and when the band took the stage it all went out the window. One person was deleted, another person was added, and they picked almost completely different stage locations for everyone. I had taken the time to label, patch, and even premix as per their instructions, and now all of that was undermined in the space of 30 seconds.

“But, Danny,” you say, “isn’t part of your job to deal with the unexpected?”

Yes.

“And aren’t digital consoles capable of soft-patching everything so that you can get around that kind of thing.”

Also yes.

My retort, though, is that the entire point of a good input list and plot is to not be doing things on a “panic” basis at all. Even with having soft-patching at my disposal, the induced chaos consumed our changeover time such that it was more practical to simply pull up the festival reset scene and rebuild in the moment. We did pull it off, and everyone was happy, yet I still couldn’t understand the whys and wherefores – what was the point of having all that detail if 90% of it was going to be useless in the moment?

Please, then, I ask you: Send me the correct list and plot. If a real part of your plot is that you don’t know what’s going to happen, or you’re probably going to change your mind on some things, please include that. The show advance tells me what to expect, and it’s unhelpful if the wrong expectation lands in my mind. If your info tells me to gear up for a very ordered and pre-planned gig, then that’s what I’m going to build. If the reality is the opposite, then the plot didn’t help. The point is never simply to have the paperwork; The RIGHT paperwork is what’s necessary, even if that’s less extensive information.

PICNICs and PIANOs

Gear has limitations, right?

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

Pro Sound Web’s LAB (Live Audio Board) is a mine wherein may be found rich veins of knowledge. While extracting that ore, precious gems may be found: Glittering rocks of especially concentrated wisdom, convenient packages of conceptual crystals. When you find one, you can’t help but smile – and smile I did when someone (probably Tim McCullogh) brought up and illustrated the concept of PICNIC.

PICNIC is an acronym meaning “Problem In Chair, Not In Configuration,” and it encapsulates a stark reality of this business: There are people who can understand how to deploy a pro-audio system. They can understand how all the different parts of a mixing console operate to route audio to destinations. They can understand what all the knobs do. Yet, they can’t seem to coax a pleasing result out of even the most capable system. Much like a person who could identify every part of an aircraft but never successfully take off, they “just don’t have a feel for flying.”

Our gear is a tool, and at the most basic level, any tool is a force multiplier. An input force is modified in some way to create an output that would be difficult or impossible otherwise. If the system gets bad input, it will inevitably transform that input into bad output. If an operator fundamentally misunderstands the problem they are trying to solve, or misreads what solution is appropriate, the gear won’t save them. It may be possible for their worst impulses to be attenuated, but an operator who can’t suss out what makes a band sound like a band will have the same problems at all scales. Worse, at large scale their inabilities may become painfully magnified. Give a poor driver an underpowered runabout car, and they can only get into so much trouble. Hand them a Lamborghini, though, and they remain a terrible operator…but now they can accelerate out of control and crash with frightening rapidity and force.

So, what’s a PIANO, then?

It’s an idea I came up with after hearing the PICNIC acronym, and it means “Problem Is Acoustical, Nothing Other.”

Here again, is a reality imposed by the limits of our equipment. All sound reinforcement is, by harsh necessity of physics, an additive process. We can impart zero additional energy to an acoustical event, or we can impart some non-zero addition, but we can’t reduce the “starting” energy. That’s imposed on us as a rigid condition, changeable only by modifying the environment where the event is happening. Even such trickery as directional subwoofer arrays don’t subtract energy from the equation. Rather, they involve putting even MORE energy into the environment, such that the additional energy will cancel the perceived effects of other energy.

I’ve been in PIANO situations tons of times, and you probably have been as well. There we were, with plenty of system capability at our disposal and no way to use it to our advantage meaningfully. To our great dismay, different parts of our capable system might actually have worked against us. That nice, loud monitor rig we brought might be killing our night, because the process of making all the noise the band could want is overcoming the main PA’s contribution. If the band needs that amount of acoustical energy in the room, then we’re stuck. Our only option for modification is to add more energy, possibly running out of FOH capacity because of the sheer force of our starting point, or overwhelming the audience with intensity, or both.

Whether it’s a PICNIC or a PIANO (or both), our equipment can’t be more than it is or less than it is. We can be tempted to try to fix the problem with additional or different toys, but in the end we’ll be always disappointed if we’re not addressing – or even understanding – where things are going wrong.

The Skeptic’s Guide To Reading A Music Store Catalog

Suspicion as recreation.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

I really don’t want to be too hard on the folks that write advertising copy. I did for a while, and it involved some truly sour moments of needing to fill space while also not having anything meaningful to say. So – I get it, but at the same time, because I get it, the more sensitive I am to filler and hype when they show up. I also have a special place in my heart for filler and hype that are related to music gear, because the more I know about it, the less I’m willing to “play ball.”

Hence, from that special place in my heart, I’ve decided to take a read through a quarterly musical catalog and make a little catalog of my own: Answers to the various bits and pieces of product blurbs that I perceive as unnecessary, overwrought, fluff, divorced from reality, or just plain deserving of a wisecrack in return.

Also, please refrain from getting the wrong impression here. I do appreciate good design and good quality – but I appreciate it when it actually makes my life easier, or makes something sound significantly better, or is truly an innovative solution. My problem with a lot of spendy music artifacts is that they don’t really do those things. They charge a premium, and lean on nostalgia for old technology, but that’s about it. I don’t need anything that’s heavy, hot, finicky, or prone to distortion, and I boggle at how many dollars are demanded for items that seem to exist mostly to have those features.

More seriously, I’d like to suggest that you look for the patterns in these claims about music gear: The attempts to make “vanity” features valuable, or giving a basic function a fancy name, or trying to pass off a mundane attribute as being notable. It’s everywhere in music-catalog ad copy.

Guitars And Basses

What They Print

What They Mean

“Period correct components.”

Old technology was less reliable and didn’t really sound better, but we’ll charge you extra for saying we used it.

“Legendary sparkle.”

This thing clangs like a chunk of steel dropped 30 feet onto a concrete floor.

“Simple electronics that let you focus on your playing.”

It was cheaper to build this way.

“Spank.”

Another word for single-coil clang.

“Standard sealed tuners.”

This is the cheap version, but we had to write it up like it was something special.

“Classic vibe.”

It looks old. Maybe it will sound better. Or just look old. Who knows?

“Innovative wiring.”

You can’t hear the difference, but we had to write something.

“Delivers the look and feel of…”

This whole guitar cost us $10 to make, but it’s sort of shaped like a famous one, so there ya go.

“Custom fret wire.”

You won’t notice a difference, but we’ll charge you an extra $200.

“Neck features a wide-thin shape.”

We compromised so that nobody would like playing this thing.

“Mini toggle switches…”

You will constantly be hitting these at all the wrong moments.

“Highly playable.”

The same as everything else.

“Improves the natural intonation of the instrument by creating a more synergistic response from the soundboard.”

Nobody told us that intonation and tonality aren’t interchangeable terms.

“Defined tone.”

It sounds like a guitar.

“Narrow-wasted…”

When we’re wasted, we prefer to be wide, but whatever you’re into, Dude.

“Liquid midrange.”

We’re not sure if this is better or worse than gaseous midrange.

“Old school low end.”

The definition of “old-school” is so amorphous that nobody will ever be able to call us on this one.

“…provides tones perfect for any genre.”

You’ll buy this without trying it first, and the tone will only have a 50% chance of being right for you.

“[Company] let [artist] specify everything.”

Do you want expensive guitars? This how you get expensive guitars.

“EQ instantly optimizes your bass for different playing styles.”

By instant, what we mean is that you’ll have to futz with all the knobs for at least an hour to start, and then agonize over them for 20 minutes at every gig thereafter.

“Has the look you need to dominate the stage.”

There are a lot of sharp edges on this instrument. Wear long sleeves and gloves.

“You can’t argue with the amazing sound…”

There’s an entire Facebook group dedicated to hating the sound of this thing.

“The proprietary neck has zero dead spots.”

Unlike this town after 10PM, AM I RIGHT?

Amps And Effects

What They Print

What They Mean

"[Artist’s] signature speaker."

We can’t think of anything else to write to sell this thing to you. It probably sounds like 90% of the other guitar speakers out there.

“Classic, American tone.”

We don’t really know what that is, and we’re hoping you don’t have a very clear idea about it either.

“Modern-vintage vibe.”

There is nothing we can meaningfully say about this thing.

“Focused articulation.”

This thing also produces higher frequencies.

“The power and performance you need on any stage.”

Too loud for anything but an arena. Also too loud there.

“Handcrafted.”

More expensive.

“All tube spring reverb.”

Expensive, but still a spring reverb.

“Liquid tone and smooth feel.”

I wish I was drinking a fine scotch, but I’m sitting here writing copy for a giant book of music gear.

“Class A”

Costs more, may also be useful as a space heater.

“Amazing headroom…”

It’s really FREAKING LOUD. Guaranteed to be misused.

“Utilizes a redesigned volume circuit.”

They picked a potentiometer taper that’s actually useful this time.

“Special edition.”

Exactly the same performance, but $500 more, in a color you’ll hate in a year, and with a fancy badge on the front.

“Your full-stack dream rig…”

We’ll also sell you the 12” combo that you’ll actually gig with and secretly prefer the sound of.

“Active guitar monitor.”

Overpriced combo amp with no tone controls.

“High density enclosure.”

Low resonance sounds great, if you can lift it.

“Nothing but a volume control between you and your tone.”

We don’t know why this thing costs so much after they left out the EQ section on purpose.

“Boutique.”

This thing costs as much your amp and all your guitars put together, but you’ll still have to pay extra for a matching cab.

“Nearly indestructible.”

You’ll scuff it up at the first gig.

“[Artist] signature model.”

Take out a home-equity line of credit to buy this dinky little combo.

“Recording amp.”

If we say this one is specifically for recording, you might spend money on it (even though the amp you have now is just fine).

“Faithfully models 60 amplifiers!”

You’ll only care about one or two.

“Organic, lush delay”

There’s a low-pass filter in the circuit somewhere.

“12 reverb types”

The first day, you’ll play around with all of them. After that, you’ll park the selector somewhere and never move it again.

“Studio-grade”

No noticeable sonic advantage. Costs $50 – $100 more.

“Juicy”

With strong notes of tolex, aromas of chicken-head knobs, and a mild aftertaste of distortion.

“Basking Shark/ Electric Banana/ Chromatic Dragon/ Seductive Marmoset”

Why couldn’t they just have called these things a compressor, distortion, EQ, and reverb, so it was easy to figure out what they do?

“Modern, high-gain tones.”

More fizz than a soda.

“100% discrete.”

Our excuse for making a really simple thing into an expensive, simple thing.

“Power and tone to rule any size venue.”

Spend thousands of dollars! Alienate your entire band instantly!

“Specially voiced for matching amps and processing.”

Awful for anything else. Hope you don’t change your mind later!

Keyboard Instruments

What They Print

What They Mean

“Classic analog oscillators.”

You ever see a keyboard that goes out of tune, son? I have.

“Sizable patchbay”

In about a week, you’ll realize what a pain it is to use this thing.

“Built-in vocoder and mic.”

You ever see a keyboard that can cause feedback on stage, son? I have.

“Natural-touch, velocity-sensitive, semi-weighted keybed.”

Like most other models, it pretty much feels like a keyboard and gets louder when you play harder.

“Raw, vintage-style synth.”

Cooked synths have fewer nutrients and less fiber. Make the natural choice – stay regular.

“100 drum rhythms onboard.”

Please send us the video of you accidentally triggering one during a church service. A funeral would be best.

“Almost as good as the real thing.”

We’re not saying you’re cheaping out, it’s just that…you’re cheaping out.

“Offers endless fun.”

Until the batteries die.

Drums

What They Print

What They Mean

“Acoustic-style 22-inch kick.”

We partially undid the compactness advantage of electronic drums in an effort to look cool. It also costs more.

“Collectible, throwback script badges.”

This shell-pack is $200 more expensive than the other one, which is otherwise the same.

“Velvety low-end.”

Those other drumkits have very coarse low-end, which can irritate the skin.

“Not abrasive or tinny as you might expect.”

We ordered a grundle of these, and can’t sell any. Please buy one. Please.

“A floor tom with legs.”

We had to say SOMETHING about it.

“Won’t take over a mix.”

The guitar player and bassist will flatten you like you’re a slow squirrel trying to dart across an interstate highway.

“Broadband maple.”

1000X the download speed of dialup maple.

“Rich, lingering sustain.”

You’ll spend at least a year trying to kill some of that lingering sustain.

“Complex bite and sensitivity.”

This snare drum is really FREAKING LOUD.

“[Artist’s] signature laser-engraved…”

Nobody but you will know or care about this, but we’ll charge you an extra $100 to buy this thing.

“DynaZip system.”

It’s a zipper, like you have on your hoodie.

“Delightfully pliable feel.”

These cymbals will get wrecked in a week. Watch.

Microphones

What They Print

What They Mean

“A locking case, shockmount, and wooden box are included.”

They better be – this mic costs $9000.

“Particularly remarkable as a matched pair.”

Also, buy our book, “How To Get Someone To Drop $18000 On A Pair Of Microphones.”

“Genuine tube for added vintage character.”

Vintage character = distortion.

“Vintage sound and modern technology.”

It’s a large diaphragm condenser with solid-state electronics.

“A bit of a departure from the bright, upfront sound…”

$10 says you’ll EQ that back in.

“Has a drive setting to add vibrant harmonic complexity.”

Pay extra on an expensive mic so that you can distort the signal.

“Fat switch boosts low frequencies.”

You could do the same thing for free with your EQ, but why?

“Sound quality typically found in larger, more expensive mics.”

Because mics are really well understood at this point, so spending a huge premium for a certain name probably isn’t worth it.

“Dual backplate/ dual membrane design is key to the sound.”

The same as every other mic with a pattern switch.

“Multi-voicing technology for forward, neutral, and gentle responses.”

The new version will also have reverse, 4X4 Lo, and manual mode with F1-inspired paddle shifters.

“Low-mass diaphragm.”

Just like any other condenser mic we’ve ever sold, or ever will sell.

“Realism.”

We’re still waiting for a mic from the impressionism school.

“Figure-8 pattern is great at picking up environmental sounds.”

Hope you REALLY like the sound of your room!

“Captures acoustic complexity out of the reach of other mics.”

That acoustic complexity is also out of the reach of human hearing.

“Uses the 2.4 GHz band to avoid interference.”

Except the firestorm of interference in the 2.4 GHz band due to a squazillion smartphones and Wi-Fi access points being everywhere.

Signal Processing

What They Print

What They Mean

“Completely transparent top-end presence boost.”

We’re not sure how an EQ change that you don’t notice is useful, but selling you an $800 EQ module is great for us, so…

“The more you crank it, the more color you get.”

Just like everything else, you get more distortion the harder your drive the electronics.

“Ultra-high-speed front end.”

It handles audio frequencies.

“Forgiving overload tolerance.”

Your terrible gain structure might sound less bad if you buy this.

“None of the bells and whistles that crowd out the most important circuitry.”

Pay a premium, but for fewer features.

“The sound that only analog circuitry can deliver.”

Until you realize that the same transfer-function is totally possible in a digital system for a fraction of the cost.

“The controls you need, including makeup gain…”

Just like every other compressor, except this one costs $1700 per channel.

“Variable silk”

Distortion with a fancy name.

“Active monitor controller with pristine transparency and low noise.”

You’re about to pay $1600 for a volume knob and output routing.

“Audiophile-grade.”

The manufacturer wanted to pay slightly more for capacitors and inductors, and then charge you a huge premium.

“One channel of do-it-all compression.”

There are 32-input consoles with flexible compression on each channel that cost less and consume the same amount of rackspace as this thing.

“Mastering-grade.”

Extremely expensive, with knobs that have click-stops.

“Mojo.”

Mostly just wider EQ bands and a bit of distortion, if we’re honest.

“Proprietary, feed-forward detection topology.”

The same as many other modern compressor designs.

“Elma switches.”

You won’t notice a difference, but you’ll pay more.

“Pure, active, analog summing.”

Every analog mixer does the same thing.

“Diamond-buffer based headphone amplifiers.”

It’s a very basic and common circuit design, but we’re hyping it up.

Studio Monitoring

What They Print

What They Mean

“Tri-amped design gives these monitors an amazingly natural sound.”

There’s nothing inherently more natural about a tri-amped design, but we needed to make this blurb longer.

“Amplified by a custom, discrete MOSFET class AB triamp pack.”

Has solid-state amplifiers that won’t blow up the drivers easily.

“Truly impressive, even in less than ideal rooms.”

Most decent loudspeakers can achieve this.

“Sonic reach outside the range of your own hearing.”

No practical application outside of us making more money.

“Flax-sandwich cones.”

Gluten-free, with dijon mustard. Hold the mayo.

“Extended linear excursion.”

The woofers can move more.

“Mathematically Modeled Dispersion.”

Everybody designs their waveguides and horns using numbers.

“Acoustically concealed woofer.”

It really means optically concealed, but this is music, so we say “acoustically”.

“Innovative class AB amplifier.”

Class AB amplification has been around for a very long time, but we’ve got to hype this thing.

“Low-mass tweeter.”

All tweeters are low-mass, especially when compared to drivers for lower-frequency passbands.

“A no-compromise studio monitor.”

There’s no such thing.

“Features a no-crossover design.”

It’s only got one driver, so of course there’s no crossover.

“Broad, deep soundstage.”

Unquantifiable claim.

“Varimotion transducer.”

Yup, it’s a loudspeaker.

“Untouchable frequency response.”

Except for all the other headphones that can reproduce the entire audible spectrum.

“Amps with wide frequency response.”

Any modern amplifier will do 20 Hz – 20 kHz just fine.

Computer-Based Audio

What They Print

What They Mean

“Boutique transformers.”

You’ll pay more, and you’ll try to convince yourself that you hear a difference.

“Streamlined version.”

“Crippled” version.

“Premium mic-preamps.”

Sounds the same as everything else.

“Unbeatable conversion.”

It gets signals into your computer and back out again.

“Tackle sample-rates up to 768 kHz.”

Our favority frequency is 384 kHz. You’ve probably never heard it before.

“Independent controls for input and monitoring levels.”

There’s nothing interesting to say about this thing.

“Unlimited track count.”

The manufacturer finally discovered that people hate paying more for what software should have always done.

“May be the best DAW you ever buy.”

Unquantifiable!

“Record, edit, arrange, mix, and master like never before.”

Just like every other DAW with a new version this year.

“SSL modeled console.”

It looks like an old mixing desk, so it must sound better, right?

“Flagship control surface.”

Because you haven’t spent that million-dollar inheritance yet.

“Do anything you could use a mouse and keyboard for.”

Except you’ll spend $5000 instead of $100.

“[Artist]/[Producer]/[Engineer] Signature Plug-In Pack”

The same EQ, dynamics, and reverb processing as everything else, but with the interface tweaked for faster access to certain settings.

Live Sound

What They Print

What They Mean

“[Proprietary Name For System Tuning].”

Like every other half-decent powered speaker, this was equalized and time-aligned by the manufacturer.

“Abundant bass, due to frequency shading technology.”

Has a passive crossover with the tweeter padded down appropriately.

“1200 watts of power.”

Compared to the common 1000 watts, it’s less than a decibel difference.

“Hybrid amplification…”

A class D amplifier for LF with an AB for HF is pretty mundane, in truth.

“Up to 2000 watts peak power capacity.”

Put 2000 watts into one of these for more than a second, and you’ll be buying a new one.

“Low-profile design.”

High-profile price relative to overall performance.

“180 degree dispersion at all frequencies.”

Splattering sound everywhere seems like a good idea until you’re in a real room.

“Warm, musical EQ.”

Wide filters with no Q control.

“1-4 multitouch screens.”

How much money you got?

“Enough I/O to get started.”

But not enough I/O to finish. You’ll need the spendy expansion unit for that.

“Remote control via iOS devices.”

Oh, you’re invested in Android tablets? Too bad.

“Completely compatible with any device sporting an AES50 connection.”

Unless the console only works at 96k sampling, which means you’re totally out of luck.

“Won’t clutter up a house mix with too much volume.”

Doesn’t get loud enough for anything but a jazz gig.

One Side, Please

Another take on a monoblock.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

It’s tough to challenge our preconceptions, right? When deploying an audio system, you have a left and right, correct? That’s just how it’s done. You might have a center cluster as well, but really – you always deploy left and right.

Hey, let’s be honest. We like symmetry, and almost every performance is set up with the players in the center, so what do we do?

PA boxes left and right.

But sometimes you get to a gig, and you realize that a traditional L/R setup won’t do what you need…or is just pointless. That’s a great time to think about using the toys you brought in a different way. That’s exactly what happened for me at a recent Lazlos gig.

As we were loading in, we were informed that the layout of the dining tables would be different, and also that a certain homeowner was well and truly displeased about the music that had been lately pouring out of the restaurant’s lot. Standing there, looking at where our canopies were going to go, and thinking about what we were just told, I had a revelation.

There was no point, at all, in doing a traditional L/R deployment. The stage-left side of the PA would be doing nothing except either:

A) Missing the audience, if I kept the coverage away from the home in question, or

B) Hitting the same audience as stage right, but at a loss of coherence due to the delay (not that it doesn’t happen all the time – but still), and ALSO hitting the home that was having a problem with us.

In other words, going L/R stuck me with the choices of having “R” being a waste of power and coverage, or not being totally wasted but riddled with downsides.

At that point it seemed obvious to me that the solution was a “double-hung monoblock.” As I often do, the vocals would go through one output, and everything else would go through another. The only difference from a normal setup would be that we’d use two boxes total, instead of two pairs. Those two boxes would be set to cover the audience without line-of-sight to The House That Wished We Would Go Away.

Hence, a double-hung monoblock was what I did. It worked just fine, nobody noticed a lack of stereo (I mix The Lazlos in mono anyway, like the overwhelming majority of every show I do), and it didn’t work against us in regards to having someone call the police on the show. Sure, it didn’t LOOK like what people expected, but nobody cared – and all the coverage/ power in the equation was being used for the actual audience.

AI?

There’s a lot of stuff we can automate, and it’s really cool even if it’s not really AI.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

If you haven’t heard, there’s a new Midas Heritage-D console being released. (Video here.) It looks, to use academic parlance, “pretty rad, Dude.” In particular, it has tons of advertised I/O capability, which is exciting to me as a co-producer on a Pink Floyd tribute that is continually growing its mix-output count. Not that we can afford the $70,000 price tag for two tour-packs, but maybe there will be a spillover effect to new, affordable offerings down the line.

Anyway.

A feature being touted on the new desk is an AI assist for things like compression. Provide the system a set of directives on what you want, and your console works to create a compression solution on the channel which satisfies those aims. (It’s probably something like “fast attack relative to the program material, slow release relative to the same, use a low ratio, and try for an average gain reduction of 3dB.”)

Now, I don’t want to poo-poo something without a caveat. I think it’s possible that some sort of AI technology is involved…but my strong suspicion is that the “AI” label is mostly marketing. Do you remember when high-def TV was a new thing? And everything else started having “HD” added to the model numbers? My guess is that “AI” actually refers to an algorithm-driven automation system.

I mean, we’ve had program-dependent attack and release for a long time. They existed almost 20 years ago, when I was in school for audio, and were handled with both digital logic and analog circuits. This isn’t some sort of miraculous thing. Further, my slowly-clarifying definition of AI is that it’s a network of process nodes that can communicate with each other, and independently form a solution to a problem based on training data. You don’t need that for a well-defined process, like setting a compressor such that the peak gain reduction across some number “n” of gain reduction events averages out to, say, 6 dB. That’s just simple arithmetic and access to the threshold knob, when you look at it.

But that doesn’t make an algorithmic assist any less cool! The coolness is in the automation, utility, and the ability to save the EFFECT of a processing solution, rather than the CAUSE.

I mean, let’s say I have a preferred spectral content for vocals. Which I do. Definitely. And so do you, I’m sure. I can’t graph it, but I know it when I hear it.

Somebody starts singing into a mic, and what do you do? You grab the channel EQ and go to work, trying to make the tonality of the vocal match your preference. Upon success, we may save the curve as a preset. Later, we recall that curve on similar setups, hoping for a sound that’s essentially the same. This works because the whole signal chain greatly resembles our original solution: A person sings at some reasonable distance from a mic we’re familiar with, and that mic is connected to either a FOH PA we know, or one we’ve tuned to sound rather like what we know.

Even though the applied EQ curve on the channel is a cause (a change to a transfer function) rather than an effect (the actual spectral content of the channel), we can get close to a desired result when the other parameters are well controlled. Our results skew, though, when the other causes (microphone choice, singer distance, etc) no longer resemble what we worked with when we saved the channel EQ curve.

But what if we didn’t save the curve? What if we saved the effect of the EQ settings, which is a vocal channel that has a certain magnitude response when averaged over some specified time period? What if we could press a button on the console that allowed the internal software to compare the live, average magnitude curve of the channel with what we stored, and then  auto-adjust the channel EQ to seek that target? What if we could do that with with any EQ, including whatever is available on our outputs?

Do you see how powerful that could be?

There are algorithms available right now that can do this kind of work, it’s just that they’re not natively available to any consoles that I know of.

And hey, maybe Midas has done some AI development on pre-training a system to use parametric and graphic EQs in a reasonable way to accomplish such a task. AI doesn’t have to running live to be impressive.

So, anyway, whether there’s live AI running inside a new Heritage-D (or any other console) or no real AI at all, the ability to ask the console to help you match an outcome, rather than just a set of parameters, is a very nifty thing indeed.

A Survey Of My Measurement Tools And Techniques

From ears to computers and back again.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

I was recently asked specifically to write about how I measure and tune audio systems. I was tickled; Having topics suggested to me is something I dearly love. Here you go, then…an article about how I figure out what’s going on with a PA system, and the tools involved.

I’m going to set this against a “background” of a composite case study: Deploying a monitor system, FOH PA, and delays for the IAMA Bluegrass Night at Gallivan Plaza. I’ve done two iterations of the full setup now, handled slightly different ways, and have had success at it both times. Yes, I’m aware of the irony that Gallivan Plaza is definitely not a small venue. I may need to change the name of this site at some point. Well, anyway…

I Start With My Ears

When everything is placed, powered, and attached to signal, it’s time to get out a pink noise generator and do some listening. I’m fortunate in that my preferred consoles (Behringer/ Midas X/M 32s of various configurations) have noise generators built in. The point of this step is twofold.

  1. Confirm that everything is working and getting signal.
  2. Find out if anything is glaringly, obviously out of spec or set incorrectly.

If everything is passing noise, the polarity of the subwoofers seems right at one setting or another, and all boxes of the same model sound essentially the same, it’s time to move on. I don’t spend a lot of time on this step. There is no “agonizing” here. If something is clearly broken, mispatched, level-trimmed incorrectly, or significantly different in transfer-function than it ought to be, I act on it. If it doesn’t grab my attention immediately, it’s fine.

I want to note right here that many of the middle steps I’m about to discuss are often skipped. The Gallivan show is one where I have the time, support, and necessity to do more intensive measurement. On many other shows, instrument-aided analysis doesn’t make it onto the priorities list. That might seem a shame, and it might be to some extent, but it also highlights just how much mileage you get out of strong basics. Especially now, in the days of ultra-engineered loudspeakers, a simple check for correct function and level goes a long way.

Two Methods For System-To-System Time Alignment

I generally don’t worry about bandpass-level time alignments, especially when they involve boxes that are offset to the left or right of each other. For example, getting the full-range FOH speakers to line up exactly with the center-clustered subwoofers at some chosen point is more work than it’s worth in my case. Alignment that’s (effectively) along the horizontal axis is a situation where correction at one point is likely to be hugely UN-correct at many other points.

Delays are a different story. Alignment of whole, full range systems along the depth axis is much more effective. When you’re correcting for a distance that’s largely described by walking away from the main system, on axis, your chosen solution will be much more stable – that is, relevant and correct – for more audience members. (It still won’t be perfect, though, but that’s life.)

Because I don’t have a dual-FFT measurement system with a delay finder, I have two methods for measuring propagation time.

Two Mics And A DAW

The first method is to set a microphone right up against a main PA loudspeaker. Then, another microphone is set at the point that the solution is going to be tuned to. I recommend moving the second point off the delay speaker’s location horizontally, so that you’re midway between center stage and the audience’s outside edge. This is because, statistically, more people will be close to that horizontal location than dead center or to the far outside.

You then record both microphones into an audio workstation, like Reaper, on separate channels. While the recording is running, you play a single click or other, similar sound through the main speaker you’re using for reference. You do NOT play the click through the delay. Remember: You want to find the time that it takes that single click from the main to arrive. The click has to be loud enough at the delay point to be clearly distinguishable from ambient noise, so keep that in mind when setting levels.

At some time, the impulse will arrive at the first microphone. At time+delay, that same click will arrive at the solution-point microphone. If you get into your recording and measure the time between the click arrivals, you get your delay setting.

Those Two Funny Things On The Side Of Your Head

This method is significantly less accurate than a two-mic measurement, but it can be okay in a pinch. Remote control of your system is very helpful when trying this.

For the measurement, set the delay speaker to have an apparent level that’s very similar to the level of the main PA at the solution point. Now, stand at your desired solution point, and play a click through BOTH the main PA and delay speaker. (Use only one “side” of the PA if you can.) It will probably help to plug one ear, or at least turn so that one ear is pointed toward the overall sound system. You should clearly hear multiple arrivals. Adjust the delay time to the delay speaker slowly, listening for when the two arrivals seem to merge into one. Now, play some music or noise through both the main PA and the delays, listening for comb-filtering effects at your solution point. Adjust the delay until you get the least-objectionable result possible. Finally, restore the delay speaker to full level.

*****

Sidenote: My current methodology with delays is for them to be significantly louder than the main system when you’re standing close to them, so as to mitigate comb-filtering problems. If the signal that’s misaligned is relatively low in level, like 15 dB down or an even lesser magnitude, its summation effects are greatly reduced.

Meddling In The Affairs Of Wizards (Possibly With An Omnimic)

As I mentioned before, I don’t have a dual-FFT measurement system available. This doesn’t bother me very much; I’ve come to prefer single-ended measurement tools. They do have limitations, in that they require a known measurement stimulus signal to operate and thus aren’t good for “real time” readings, but they can still tell you a great deal about your system’s initial state. They’re also less fiddly in certain ways, like not being affected by propagation delay to the measurement mic.

I’ve used both the Dayton Omnimic system and Room EQ Wizard, and I’ve come to like REW’s more contemplative, “measure, tweak, measure again” workflow over Dayton’s “measure and tweak while annoying signals are running and the magnitude graph is bouncing around.”

The specifics of each system are beyond the scope of this article, but I will make some generalizations:

  1. Make sure your measurement signal is loud enough to swamp ambient noise, but not so loud that everyone around hates you. Sine sweeps have better signal-to-noise performance overall, because at any given instant the signal is a single frequency at a certain SPL, rather than all audio frequencies forming a total SPL.
  2. A basically okay measurement mic is just fine. I have a Behringer that I got for something like $50, and it’s survived occasional bouts of nonsense (like gravity plus a hard floor) while still delivering results that I can use meaningfully.
  3. Put the mic where your head is going to go.
  4. I generally don’t average a bunch of measurements. Mostly, I try to pick a point that represents my average audience member decently, and capture that for tuning. It’s important, though, to keep in mind that your tuning will deflect at physical points that aren’t where your mic was.
  5. Smooth your traces so that you can read them, but not so much that they lie like the people who were trying to sell me beachfront property in Topeka. I recommend 6dB per octave smoothing to start.
  6. Don’t chase every peak and dip. Look for trends and major deviations.
  7. Try to find a “hinge frequency” that represents the center of overall magnitude, such that overall boosts and overall cuts balance out. Be especially resistant to boosts that seem very large relative to any cuts you might make.
  8. Go for flat response in a reasonable passband for the boxes and application. Don’t boost anything to your subwoofers below about 45 Hz, or even better, don’t boost anything. If you find an egregious sub peak, cut it and leave everything else alone. A regular ol’ monitor wedge can often start rolling off around 75 Hz without anybody being upset about it.
  9. Measure after you tune whenever possible. If something in the trace doesn’t seem to be responding, that’s almost certainly to do with acoustics or time, and your EQ alone will not fix it. If a tweak doesn’t produce a meaningful response, free up that EQ band.

I End With My Ears

The final analysis goes right back to my hearing. This is also why tablet-driven mixing is so helpful. I can walk out to a monitor, or the main PA, or the delay system, and hear it while I make my last few decisions. Does my tuning make any sense in real life? Do the mains kill me when I’m up close? These are questions that are answered by listening. Also, for every practical purpose I’ve stopped doing any real tuning with music. I do use music for a basic reference point on listenability, but what I really want to know is how a vocal mic sounds through the boxes. If a vocal mic sounds terrible in FOH or monitor world…surprise! It sounds terrible, and no amount of “the trace looked right” can defend that. Be concerned about your reinforcement inputs, not your break music.

Repeats Are The Tops

It’s a good bet that your repeat customers make you the most money.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

A CRM is a “Customer Relationship Manager.” It’s software that shows you who your clients are, and what they’ve bought from you. I have a CRM for my audio clients – a very, very simple one that I coded up from scratch in the space of a few hours. Even being so simple, it’s revelatory: 43% of my clients represent 78% of my revenue, and every single one of them is a repeat client. Some of them get very significant discounts due to being longtime, “frequent-flyer” customers that I enjoy working with.

Let me restate that for impact. Less than half of the people I’ve worked with constitute the overwhelming majority of the money I’ve made as an audio-human in the last few years.

Here are the lessons as I see them, in no particular order.

  1. Basic tracking of who you work with and the business you’ve done with them is very helpful for keeping perspective. You don’t need big data support or lots of features to get started. Simply keep some meaningful records that you can sort and compare easily.
  2. Avoid being seduced by the concept that a bazillion calls from a bazillion different people will make you the revenue you want. It’s about being called over and over again by the same people.
  3. Getting called over and over again by the same people sometimes means that your per-show rate has to be negotiable – when multiple shows are definitely on the table, that is. For instance: “There might be more if you give us a break” would have me decline to give a discount, but “We’re going to do 10 of these” would make me consider some options.
  4. Single-shot, high day-rate calls are often also “big-hassle.” Repeat clients tend to be the high-quality ones that you look forward to seeing.
  5. If repeat clients are so important, shouldn’t long-term client delight be a top priority for you, above short-term wins? (Hint for audio engineers: When a client or client-related person says, “I never have to worry when you guys show up,” you’re doing something right.)

If you want a fighting chance in this business or any other, I’m betting that landing repeat clients is a crucial ability.

Localization Failure

If you thought it was all mush, it might be because you couldn’t localize the FOH PA.

Please Remember:

The opinions expressed are mine only. These opinions do not necessarily reflect anybody else’s opinions. I do not own, operate, manage, or represent any band, venue, or company that I talk about, unless explicitly noted.

 
Want to use this image for something else? Great! Click it for the link to a high-res or resolution-independent version.

Last night, I was running a show in a very, VERY reflective environment. The whole thing was inarticulate mush, like what you would expect in a stadium/ hockey rink/ basketball arena, even though the place was probably fire-rated for only 200 people.

Listening to the splatter, I had an epiphany. I couldn’t figure out where the FOH PA was with my ears, even though I could see it with my eyes. The wash from the monitors and drums hitting the back wall was overwhelming the “timing information” from the mains. I mentally contrasted this with recent experiences mixing outside, where FOH could easily separate from the monitors due to lack of reflections. You could instantly point to a mid-high and say, “That’s where the singer is coming from.” Not so during my last gig. This crystallized a thought in my mind:

If you think a mix sounds bad, but can’t figure out why, the reason may be that you can’t separate FOH from everything else.

In the case of last-night’s mix, achieving separation would have meant very high volume. With all the blast and smear, though, it was already too loud. As such, I was using FOH to just barely fill in the subwoofer range and information above 1 kHz or so. Doing that wasn’t enough to create a sonic impression that the band was coming from FOH, though. It was a mere blend to make it seem that the reflections had a better magnitude response.

Overall, that was the appropriate choice. We weren’t there to be loud, achieving a great sound in an acoustically hostile space. We were there to play some tunes that people might want to dance to, without being overwhelming. As often happens “best overall show” won out over “best sound.” That’s part of the job…and so too, thankfully, is having a small revelation every so often.