DICK CHENEY'S MIC PLACEMENT SUCKED
JDS
but for TV, just clip it to the lapel of the jacket, where it won't
rub on anything.
Not that I really cared that he sound good, i'm voting for the other
guy...
Jethro S.
Larry Fisher
The mike placement looked almost as bad on Edwards, but Cheney would
roll his shoulders forward and bury the mic when the coat lapels came
together; Edwards didn't make that motion. The other thing I wondered
about was weird tonality when Cheney clasped his hands together in
front of his upper chest, it sounded as if there were severe phasing
(comb filter) sounds. I assume this was reflections off his hands.
Pretty unsatisfactory sound all in all, but I can see how it could
happen. Wonder whether it was a sound type that placed the mics?
Larry F
Lectro
Charles Tomaras
news:8da93ab6.04100...@posting.google.com...
Yes, it was terrible. Should have been placed on Cheney's left lapel and
Edward's right lapel. Or what the heck...I bet a table mic would have worked
just fine and wouldn't have looked any worse than the timer light sitting on
the desk.
John Coffey
Interestingly, I was at the Larry King Live show at CNN in Hollywood. They
were demoing the Pin-Mic for Larry. We are watching the debates on some 50
monitors at same time. The sound bunch and me were commenting on the mic
rubbing as Cheney bent over.
Then they tell me to go with the AD to put the mic on Larry. He's knocked
out by it and said about time, "after 43 years in the business". So I put it
dead center on his tie and walked away to watch the show, about the debates.
As he begins talking, he bends over like Cheney did and I suddenly had a
deja vu that the same thing was going to happen as did in the debates.
Luckily, the shows audio pros (and they are quite impressive pros, btw!) had
a back-up mic in a better position to go to if they didn't like the mic.
Fotunately, Larry was just wearing his suspenders and no jacket, so I was
saved.
So it's actually easy to see how it happened. I'm sure they put it on him
when they were standing up, nice and neat, and never thought about the
consequences about when they sat down and bent over.
It's an easy error to make, but too late to correct when a show is live. No
I have to say, it could happen to anybody.
John
"Charles Tomaras" <tom...@tomaras.com> wrote in message
news:U-6dnbc6Uah...@comcast.com...
Glen Trew
I think what we are talking about are reasons #564, #565, and #566 that
overhead boom mics should be used in this and other scenarios.
Rule #1: Use lavs only when booms won't work. There's is no reason that a
boom (or two) would not have worked at the debate.
The Democrats are saying that it was the wrong mic, in the wrong place, at
the wrong time. But Republicans are saying that Edwards originally had his
mic up high, then moved it lower, before he moved it higher again. Al-Qaeda
hate booms because of the freedom boom miking allows the speakers.
The record speaks for itself. Use more booms.
Glen Trew
k...@nothinghereofcourse.gd.org
Wolf
brought to debates in a previous election fight over light placement and
diffusion. The feud was so bad that neither won and the light was
REALLY bad. Is that why Nixon lost?? or was it the sweat on his lips?
Cheney sounded like he spoke from his bunker. He is said in the press to
spend much time there.
Larry Fisher wrote:
--
NOTE I WAS ASSIGNED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS:
wolfvid (replace this with the at sign) comcast.net
Martin Spencer
September. Both were given Britney Spears style headset mics instead
of the traditional lapel or table mics. Dole looked like he didn't
even know what the thing was, and about 30 minutes into it he took it
off and began using it like a handheld mic. Gore seemed pretty
comfortable with his (I guess compared to inventing the internet,
using a headset mic is a piece of cake), but I couldn't take him
seriously because he looked like the long lost 6th Backstreet Boy.
These people have to deal with mics every single time they speak!
With all that experience, they should be experts by now.
I know all of you watch C-Span religiously, but just in case here's
the link
http://www.c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=southern+methodist&image1.x=0&image1.y=0&image1=Submit
Martin Spencer
Glenn Sanders
transmitter. This way 2 audio channels would be available to choose
from with microphones located in 2 different places.
Glenn
Rob Lewis
I have to agree totally with Charles on this one. I was there working
the event for NBC Nightly and I have to admit that I was quite
disgusted with the mic placement. I was suprised that they didn't use
a table mic or two. This is a very important event in the nations
history and some lazy sound (or worse, Video) person didn't use their
head when considering mic placement. What good is a double lav job if
its buried under the jacket lapel. CMON PEOPLE, TRY AND GIVE A CRAP
!!!
Austin Storms
for Download on Itunes' Music store for free. You now can get down
and critique it on your commute to your next job or maybe just a nice
pleasant background bed for your next cocktail party. If you've got
the Ipod you could listen to it while you're on a morning run to give
you that extra kick of aggresion to pick up your pace. And yes, even
on my Genelec studio monitors it sounds like crap! Enjoy all.
Austin Storms
Sound mixer
Los Angeles, CA
Eddy Robinson
film - who cares if we see it? Do they want us to believe that the
candidates are so super-powered that they broadcast directly? Pfff.
They shouldn't be allowed to have any of their own people there besides
a makeup team, maybe not even that. I wonder if this only happens here?
Can't recall ever reading about such nonensense in European political
debates.
Glen Trew
news:1097195641.3...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Reason #567 to have used overhead boom mics.
Hello... Hello... Is this thing on?
gt
William Sarokin
department of a major corporation. He called me this morning in a panic.
They were doing a shoot not far from my house, and they forgot a case and
didn't have their lavs. So I quickly pulled out a couple of Trams (they're
the only lavs I have that are not wired for my wireless mics) and rushed
over to their interview set. When I got there I saw they had a beautiful
Schoeps rigged 6" over the spokespersons mouth, but they were so happy to
see me and my Trams I didn't have the heart to tell them they were better
off with the Schoeps.
This is a funny thread. I think every sound person in the world who saw the
debate cringed (Vin? Oleg?). It was a topic of conversation in my house
too. Funny though, they got the mic placement correct on the moderator.
Billy Sarokin
"Glen Trew" <notth...@either.com> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnafvStU...@comcast.com...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.773 / Virus Database: 520 - Release Date: 10/5/2004
Eric Toline
Re: DICK CHENEY'S MIC PLACEMENT SUCKED
Group: rec.arts.movies.production.sound Date: Thu, Oct 7, 2004, 9:57pm
(EDT-1) From: notth...@either.com (Glen Trew)
Reason #567 to have used overhead boom mics.
Hello... Hello... Is this thing on?
gt<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Trust me on this one. I worked the 1st Presidential debate in Miami.
Sufficeit to say there is no way the Secret Service is going to allow
overhead boom mics.
Eric
Jeff Kreines
debate...
Bush's mystery bulge
The rumor is flying around the globe. Was the president wired during the
first debate?
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Dave Lindorff
Oct. 8, 2004 | Was President Bush literally channeling Karl Rove in
his first debate with John Kerry? That's the latest rumor flooding the
Internet, unleashed last week in the wake of an image caught by a
television camera during the Miami debate. The image shows a large solid
object between Bush's shoulder blades as he leans over the lectern and
faces moderator Jim Lehrer.
The president is not known to wear a back brace, and it's safe to say
he wasn't packing. So was the bulge under his well-tailored jacket a
hidden receiver, picking up transmissions from someone offstage feeding
the president answers through a hidden earpiece? Did the device explain
why the normally ramrod-straight president seemed hunched over during
much of the debate?
Bloggers are burning up their keyboards with speculation. Check out
the president's peculiar behavior during the debate, they say. On
several occasions, the president simply stopped speaking for an
uncomfortably long time and stared ahead with an odd expression on his
face. Was he listening to someone helping him with his response to a
question? Even weirder was the president's strange outburst. In a peeved
rejoinder to Kerry, he said, "As the politics change, his positions
change. And that's not how a commander in chief acts. I, I, uh -- Let me
finish -- The intelligence I looked at was the same intelligence my
opponent looked at." It must be said that Bush pointed toward Lehrer as
he declared "Let me finish." The green warning light was lit, signaling
he had 30 seconds to, well, finish.
Hot on the conspiracy trail, I tried to track down the source of the
photo. None of the Bush-is-wired bloggers, however, seemed to know where
the photo came from. Was it possible the bulge had been Photoshopped
onto Bush's back by a lone conspiracy buff? It turns out that all of the
video of the debate was recorded and sent out by Fox News, the pool
broadcaster for the event. Fox sent feeds from multiple cameras to the
other networks, which did their own on-air presentations and editing.
To watch the debate again, I ventured to the Web site of the most sober
network I could think of: C-SPAN. And sure enough, at minute 23 on the
video of the debate, you can clearly see the bulge between the
president's shoulder blades.
Bloggers stoke the conspiracy with the claim that the Bush
administration insisted on a condition that no cameras be placed behind
the candidates. An official for the Commission on Presidential Debates,
which set up the lecterns and microphones on the Miami stage, said the
condition was indeed real, the result of negotiations by both campaigns.
Yet that didn't stop Fox from setting up cameras behind Bush and Kerry.
The official said that "microphones were mounted on lecterns, and the
commission put no electronic devices on the president or Senator Kerry."
When asked about the bulge on Bush's back, the official said, "I don't
know what that was."
So what was it? Jacob McKenna, a spyware expert and the owner of the
Spy Store, a high-tech surveillance shop in Spokane, Wash., looked at
the Bush image on his computer monitor. "There's certainly something on
his back, and it appears to be electronic," he said. McKenna said that,
given its shape, the bulge could be the inductor portion of a two-way
push-to-talk system. McKenna noted that such a system makes use of a
tiny microchip-based earplug radio that is pushed way down into the ear
canal, where it is virtually invisible. He also said a weak signal could
be scrambled and be undetected by another broadcaster.
Mystery-bulge bloggers argue that the president may have begun using
such technology earlier in his term. Because Bush is famously prone to
malapropisms and reportedly dyslexic, which could make successful use of
a teleprompter problematic, they say the president and his handlers may
have turned to a technique often used by television reporters on remote
stand-ups. A reporter tapes a story and, while on camera, plays it back
into an earpiece, repeating lines just after hearing them, managing to
sound spontaneous and error free.
Suggestions that Bush may have using this technique stem from a D-day
event in France, when a CNN broadcast appeared to pick up -- and
broadcast to surprised viewers -- the sound of another voice seemingly
reading Bush his lines, after which Bush repeated them. Danny Schechter,
who operates the news site MediaChannel.org, and who has been doing some
investigating into the wired-Bush rumors himself, said the Bush campaign
has been worried of late about others picking up their radio frequencies
-- notably during the Republican Convention on the day of Bush's
appearance. "They had a frequency specialist stop me and ask about the
frequency of my camera," Schechter said. "The Democrats weren't doing
that at their convention."
Repeated calls to the White House and the Bush national campaign office
over a period of three days, inquiring about what the president may have
been wearing on his back during the debate, and whether he had used an
audio device at other events, went unreturned. So far the Kerry campaign
is staying clear of this story. When called for a comment, a press
officer at the Democratic National Committee claimed on Tuesday that it
was "the first time" they'd ever heard of the issue. A spokeswoman at
the press office of Kerry headquarters refused to permit me to talk with
anyone in the campaign's research office. Several other requests for
comment to the Kerry campaign's press office went unanswered.
As for whether we really do have a Milli Vanilli president, the answer
at this point has to be, God only knows.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
About the writer
Dave Lindorff is the author of the new book "This Can't Be Happening!
Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy." Reach him at
dlin...@yahoo.com.
Gerry Formicola
First, obviously there is no application ever illustrated on this
newsgroup that wouldn't in some way benefit from a Zaxcom product of
some type being a part of the system.
That said I would hope Glenn that in your future feature sets,
although who knows it may already be in there, that the stereo
transmitter offer both a CONSERVATIVE and LIBERAL setting for the
individual signal paths in just this sort of political application.
I imagine the the LIBERAL setting to be one that has a wide dynamic
range with lots of options for change and adjustment, filters, eq,
gain, etc.
The CONSERVATIVE setting would be a brick wall limiter.
Whaddaya think?
Gerry Formicola
Chicago, Illinois
John B., Indianapolis
Gerry Formicola wrote:
>
> That said I would hope Glenn that in your future feature sets,
> although who knows it may already be in there, that the stereo
> transmitter offer both a CONSERVATIVE and LIBERAL setting for the
> individual signal paths in just this sort of political application.
>
> I imagine the the LIBERAL setting to be one that has a wide dynamic
> range with lots of options for change and adjustment, filters, eq,
> gain, etc.
>
> The CONSERVATIVE setting would be a brick wall limiter.
>
> Whaddaya think?
>
It sounds like a useful feature. Don't forget that when you select the
LIBERAL setting, you are taxed every year for using it -- but it's, "for
your own good."
John Blankenship,
Indy
Glen Trew
But they'll allow a suspicious looking pack with an antenna to be placed
right on the body? Or is the Secret Service just disgusted by boom shadows
like other production novices ?
Come on Eric, you giving up way to fast on this one!
Glen Trew
G. John Garrett, C.A.S
>
> But they'll allow a suspicious looking pack with an antenna to be placed
> right on the body? Or is the Secret Service just disgusted by boom shadows
> like other production novices ?
>
> Come on Eric, you giving up way to fast on this one!
>
> Glen Trew
>
>
Betcha they were hard wired.
John
ed...@handmadesound.com
> It sounds like a useful feature. Don't forget that when you select
the
> LIBERAL setting, you are taxed every year for using it -- but it's,
"for
> your own good."
With the conservative setting, you can use it for free! No taxes in
sight! However the cost will be added to the national debt and you
(with everyone else) will pay many more times over in compound
interest. It's wealth redistribution in action!
Well, seriously...I have been wondering about the bulge. It's clearly
there, and it's obviously the right size - in fact the first thought in
my mind was 'why didn't they just hook it onto his belt?' At first I
thought it might just be a backup lavalier, but then the network people
would wonder where the extra feed was coming from. So I'd bet a buck on
the audio prompter. Perhaps the extra stimulation in his right ear was
what caused Bush to grimace so often - might have made it difficult to
listen to Kerry's answers.
The White House is still treating it as a joke story, but it's been
hovering on the fringes fo the mainstream news for several days now -
as a former journo, that suggests to me that it has legs. Hmmm...
Glen Trew
news:ckfoat$c8f$1...@pcls4.std.com...
Hardwired to a transmitter maybe. As I recall, they walked out, went their
chairs, and started talking. When it was over, they stood up and walked
around. It would, however, be nice to know what wireless system they were
using.
GT
g1r2o3b...@thisisatozemail.com.au
wrote:
>
>Re: DICK CHENEY'S MIC PLACEMENT SUCKED
>
>Group: rec.arts.movies.production.sound Date: Tue, Oct 12, 2004, 8:35pm
>(EDT-1) From: notth...@either.com (Glen Trew)
>Don't know for certain but my guess is that it was made in the USA.
>
>Eric
Of course! Can't trust anyone else in the world can we:)
Eric Toline
Re: DICK CHENEY'S MIC PLACEMENT SUCKED
news:8572-416...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
GT<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Don't know for certain but my guess is that it was made in the USA.
Eric
That could mean Lectro, Zaxcom, or Sennheiser.
GT<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Sennheiser? Are you Shure of that? :-))
Eric
Glen Trew
>Eric
Yep. Some Sennheiser wireless products are manufactured in the US.
GT
William Sarokin
lots of breath puffs that slammed the compressors. And they had the LONGEST
decay time. It seemed to take 30 seconds for the level to come full up
after each 'hit'. I was watching the broadcast on C-Span. Don't know if
the compression thing was on their end or in the master feed to all
networks.
Billy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.777 / Virus Database: 524 - Release Date: 10/14/2004
Glen Trew
news:ffAbd.153$gf3.65@trndny08...
> They didn't do too well last night on the presidential debates. There
were
An excellent example of Reason #579 to use overhead booms.
Reason #580: No podium transduction.
GT
>... that slammed the compressors. And they had the LONGEST
Larry Fisher
I was watching on a public radio station and had the same results. Who
in the world would setup a compressor with that kind of release time
on a vocal mic. And are windscreens (pop filters) only known to the
few? On top of that there was a feedback ring on Bush's mic that
lasted for about 5 minutes before some one adjusted the PA (?) gain. I
have been kind of put off by the quality of sound for the whole of
the debates. This was after all a nationally important presentation
and sound was (or should have been) number one. M2CW.
Larry F
Richard Kuschel
>
>Reason #580: No podium transduction.
>
>GT
There were no podiums used in the debates.
There, however, were two lecterns which the candidates stood behind. And you
could have lectern transduction from microphones fastened to a lectern.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty
JDS
on the compressors.
also, Chris Matthews' show (Hardball) sounded horrible with wind
blowing all over the mics, they really needed micro-cats on everyone,
also, reduce some of the bg crowd noise on the open pots not being
used mr audio guy!!! it's hard on a show like that because you don't
know when someone is going to talk...5 open mics+lowd crowd bg=i can't
hear a thing!