Altec "Voice of the Theatre" Speaker systems
Carla Fong
I just helped our local cinema replace their old Altec speakers with new
JBL units that are supposedly slightly more compatible with higher
powered modern solid-state amplifiers. Whatever.
So now they have three of what I think are Altec A6 speaker systems that
were originally installed in about 1956 sitting backstage as surplus.
Each system has two LF drivers each consisting of a 15" speaker and
horn/reflex cabinet plus a small cellular tweeter and a passive crossover.
I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they worth?
Thanks in advance for your opinions -
Carla
"Run if ya want, Missy, but I'll have you hog-tied quicker than you can
say 'stay away from me you Skoal-chewin' freak.'"
Eeyore
Carla Fong wrote:
> Hi all and a Happy New Year!
>
> I just helped our local cinema replace their old Altec speakers with new
> JBL units that are supposedly slightly more compatible with higher
> powered modern solid-state amplifiers. Whatever.
>
> So now they have three of what I think are Altec A6 speaker systems that
> were originally installed in about 1956 sitting backstage as surplus.
> Each system has two LF drivers each consisting of a 15" speaker and
> horn/reflex cabinet plus a small cellular tweeter and a passive crossover.
>
> I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
> big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they worth?
Put them on ebay and find out.
They're certainly not worth keeping to listen to yourself but there are plenty
of suckers out there you can fleece.
Graham
Scott Dorsey
>I just helped our local cinema replace their old Altec speakers with new
>JBL units that are supposedly slightly more compatible with higher
>powered modern solid-state amplifiers. Whatever.
I can believe that.
>So now they have three of what I think are Altec A6 speaker systems that
>were originally installed in about 1956 sitting backstage as surplus.
>Each system has two LF drivers each consisting of a 15" speaker and
>horn/reflex cabinet plus a small cellular tweeter and a passive crossover.
>
>I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
>big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they worth?
Do an Ebay search. Basically, they were worth a huge amount before the
Asian currency crisis, and they are probably not worth so much now.
They ARE a major pain to drive with modern low-Z amps and would benefit
a lot from some simple modifications. Problem is that those modifications
will generally devalue them.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Peter Larsen
> Hi all and a Happy New Year!
> So now they have three of what I think are Altec A6 speaker systems
> that were originally installed in about 1956 sitting backstage as
> surplus. Each system has two LF drivers each consisting of a 15"
> speaker and horn/reflex cabinet plus a small cellular tweeter and a
> passive crossover.
According to:
http://www.audioheritage.org/html/history/altec/1973-1987.htm
the loudspeaker model is from 1983. They could be quite good. I'm a luddite,
so I'd have asked very hard questions about the benefit of replacing them
....
> I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
> big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they
> worth?
They are quite possibly worth most in Japan, but shipping also costs. It is
obvious from watching ebay that such systems frequently are dismantled and
sold as components. My opinion is that doing that is unwise and needlessly
destructive. Perhaps someone can suggest a sound broker to contact.
Watching ebay is some of the time a good way to estimate a probable price
range, they are however worth what a buyer wants to pay.
> Thanks in advance for your opinions -
That's just my DKK 0.02 ...
> Carla
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
OFFICIAL RAM BLUEBOOK VALUATION
<carla.xs...@verizon.net> wrote in message
GN6dndb_x6HbI-fa...@giganews.com...
> I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
> big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they worth?
As either boat anchors or speakers, they're worth nothing.
They should have been replaced 20 years ago.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
Bret Ludwig
<nowh...@nowhere.org> wrote:
> <carla.xspamx.f...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> GN6dndb_x6HbI-fanZ2dnUVZ_gidn...@giganews.com...
>
> > I lusted after these but I don't think I'll ever have a home situation
> > big enough to fit them into - so now the question - What are they worth?
>
> As either boat anchors or speakers, they're worth nothing.
>
> They should have been replaced 20 years ago.
>
They have considerable value although transportation costs can eat
into that sharply and it is often more desireable to part them out,
with Japanese and other ollie buyers paying colossal sums for the
drivers.
hank alrich
> Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!postnews.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.
nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newsh
osting.com!post02.iad01!post01.iad01!news.buzzardnews.com!not-for-mail
> User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618
> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:08:47 +1000
> Subject: Re: Altec "Voice of the Theatre" Speaker systems
> From: OFFICIAL RAM BLUEBOOK VALUATION <now...@nowhere.org>
> Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,rec.music.classical,rec.audio.tubes
> Message-ID: <C3A14B6F.95ABC%now...@nowhere.org>
> Thread-Topic: Altec "Voice of the Theatre" Speaker systems
> Thread-Index: AchM9SwPas0kOLjoEdycKAARJDMMbA==
> References: <GN6dndb_x6HbI-fa...@giganews.com>
> X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
> Mime-version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 14
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@buzzardnews.com
> Xref: uni-berlin.de rec.audio.pro:1315649 rec.music.classical:612997
> rec.audio.tubes:331257
This was not posted by Bob Morein.
--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
Soundhaspriority
Sorry guys, forgery.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
Chris Hornbeck
Nice try. Mildly amusing. Most folks here are already
over-entertained; we're really looking for something
more human and less malicious, but that's a good start.
Keep up the good work?
Chris Hornbeck
Chris Hornbeck
<now...@nowhere.org> wrote:
X-Complaints-To: ab...@buzzardnews.com
Oh no. You're THAT guy too? Holy Crap.
Good luck, Man. God bless you, and I mean it. God bless ya.
Chris Hornbeck
Scott Fraser
No, they're really kinda crappy by current standards. They're
efficient, but the cellular horn has a weird dispersion pattern,
fairly high distortion, they roll off pretty steeply above 8 or 10k &
a have very notable mid-range squonk. They were designed to blast the
vocal intelligibility range through a perforated screen & taking them
out from behind that screen reveals a pretty unattractive sounding
characteristic. They might be of some small value to another cinema or
as a donation to a school film society.
Scott Fraser
Scott Dorsey
The weird dispersion can be dealt with, and the mid-range honk can be
fixed in great part by reinforcing the cabinet and putting some damping
material on the horn. The rolloff on top depends a lot on the diaphragms
in there. The VoTs with 800-series compression drivers can be retrofitted
with modern Radian drivers that are much cleaner on top than the Pascalite
and Symbiotik stuff. The ones with 288 drivers can still be helped a bit
with modern diaphragms although not as much.
The crossover MUST GO. Because of the wide spacing between the drivers,
these speakers just cannot be phase coherent off-axis. It just does not
happen. The solution for this is to use a tighter crossover so that the
frequency range where it's a problem is reduced. In addition you get rid
of some of the low end problems caused by saturation of the choke in the
N-500. Biamp them if you want, or use a passive crossover designed for
the thing; I may have some retrofit boards for the N-500 in the attic
somewhere still.
They were indeed designed for Academy response when mounted behind a
perforated screen, but they were used extensively for PA work when they
were new. They won't perform like a well-designed modern cabinet, but
with some tinkering you can get surprisingly decent sound out of them.
Bobby Owsinski
<e602f56a-cf0b-4949...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Scott Fraser <Scott_...@earthlink.net> wrote:
You know, you may be absolutely right about this, but I have to say that
by my ears, the sound quality of SR systems with these type of folded
horn cabinets was far superior to anything I hear now in general
intelligibility within the context of loud music. I can't remember one
concert in the last 10 - 15 years that I went to where the vocal was
intelligible over the dull roar of the bottom end and maybe some
high-end fizz on top (I take it back - McCartney's last couple of tours
were pretty good). But I remember lots of concerts that sounded
fantastic back in "the day".
I can remember going to a Gary Wright free concert in Central Park about
1975 where they had such a cobbled together mismatched bunch of horns
and boxes that looked like it could never work, but it ended up being
maybe the best sounding concert I ever attended. And every band in the
circuit that I was playing (PA, NY, NJ, Conn, Del) at the time had some
sort of Altec or Community system (remember the Leviathans?). At least
you could always hear the vocals.
And of course, an entire generation of live mixers learned the wrong
way, concentrating mostly on the kick and snare instead of the quietest
thing on the stage and building around that, and maybe that's the real
problem.
Hate to sound like an old guy bitching about the way it used to be but I
gotta put my 2 cents in here. I really feel that we've been off-track in
the SR world for a long time now.
OK, I'll put the flame retardant clothing on now.
--
Bobby Owsinski
Surround Associates
http://www.surroundassociates.com
Author:
The Mixing Engineer's Handbook,
The Recording Engineer's Handbook,
The Mastering Engineer's Handbook
Thomson Course Technologies Publishing
Scott Dorsey
>
>You know, you may be absolutely right about this, but I have to say that
>by my ears, the sound quality of SR systems with these type of folded
>horn cabinets was far superior to anything I hear now in general
>intelligibility within the context of loud music. I can't remember one
>concert in the last 10 - 15 years that I went to where the vocal was
>intelligible over the dull roar of the bottom end and maybe some
>high-end fizz on top (I take it back - McCartney's last couple of tours
>were pretty good). But I remember lots of concerts that sounded
>fantastic back in "the day".
This is true. But I think 90% of this is due to operators and due to
the various attempts to bring sound levels up insanely high. The concerts
back in the day were not anywhere near as loud as they are today, and
the monitor levels (if they even HAD monitors) weren't up like mad.
Consequently there wasn't huge amount ts of bizarre EQ going on to get
that last bit of gain before feedback out.
And when the levels are too loud, your ear itself becomes nonlinear,
as does the ear of the soundguy mixing it.
On top of this we now have speaker systems that are optimized to be
used at insanely high levels.
>I can remember going to a Gary Wright free concert in Central Park about
>sort of Altec or Community system (remember the Leviathans?). At least
>you could always hear the vocals.
>
>And of course, an entire generation of live mixers learned the wrong
>way, concentrating mostly on the kick and snare instead of the quietest
>thing on the stage and building around that, and maybe that's the real
>problem.
That is 90% of it, and I have no idea where the whole idea of mixing
everything around the kick comes from. I never saw it at all until a
decade ago, and now I am encountering it all the time. If the guy is
a vocalist, the song is about the vocals, you make the vocals sound
good and build the rest of the mix around it. You don't get a slamming
kick drum and then bring the vocals up as an afterthought.
>Hate to sound like an old guy bitching about the way it used to be but I
>gotta put my 2 cents in here. I really feel that we've been off-track in
>the SR world for a long time now.
>
>OK, I'll put the flame retardant clothing on now.
Hey, I do live concert recording, I have to deal with this stuff directly.
You won't hear any flaming from me. Last year, I suggested to the SR guy
for a fairly major act that he might be better off without all those
compressors patched into nearly every channel. He told me that if he
pulled THAT out, he'd be spending the whole night moving faders up and down
to keep the mix under control. Now, you'll have to pardon me, but I thought
that was what the guy behind the console was PAID to do.
Frank Stearns
>Hey, I do live concert recording, I have to deal with this stuff directly.
>You won't hear any flaming from me. Last year, I suggested to the SR guy
>for a fairly major act that he might be better off without all those
>compressors patched into nearly every channel. He told me that if he
>pulled THAT out, he'd be spending the whole night moving faders up and down
>to keep the mix under control. Now, you'll have to pardon me, but I thought
>that was what the guy behind the console was PAID to do.
Yup. Entirely different ethic and knowledge these days, it seems.
Even the nice guys look at you funny if you say it's "not a competition between you
(the mix engineer) and the feedback threshold..."
Turn it down to suit the music; don't get the system to that phasy weird ringy sound
just before feedback *and then leave it there*. A gentle-soul singer-songwriter does
not need 108+ dB in a 100 seat coffee shop.
Speaks in part to the current musical "culture", IME.
Two recent recording clients who I warned about PA level have sheepishly said, "gee,
wish we'd turned it down a little."
Hey, no problem. I charge hourly for manually applying to individual tracks level
changes that are more subtle than a gate and can save the mix in such a way that it
doesn't sound gated.
Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio
--
.
hank alrich
> You know, you may be absolutely right about this, but I have to say that
> by my ears, the sound quality of SR systems with these type of folded
> horn cabinets was far superior to anything I hear now in general
> intelligibility within the context of loud music. I can't remember one
> concert in the last 10 - 15 years that I went to where the vocal was
> intelligible over the dull roar of the bottom end and maybe some
> high-end fizz on top (I take it back - McCartney's last couple of tours
> were pretty good). But I remember lots of concerts that sounded
> fantastic back in "the day".
I'm attributing this phenomena to idiocy at FOH, when drums have to be
the ludest thing in the mix, closely followed by bass and a few synths
with a bunch of low end. Make it muddy and make it loud, way too loud
way too often.
(Get me a Scott Fraser at FOH and things will come together nicely.)
Scott Fraser
Actually current SR systems are immensely better than they were a
couple decades ago, in terms of intelligibility, controlled patterns,
controlled frequency response at distance, etc. The problem is
entirely, as you say, with the mix. Some moron decided a while back
that the most important instrument in any ensemble, regardless of
genre, was the kick drum, & ever since then SR engineers have been
unable to mix according to any rational understanding of musical
relationships between instruments, voices & frequency ranges. But
they're young, so I'm sure they know a whole lot more than we do.
Scott Fraser
Scott Dorsey
>Actually current SR systems are immensely better than they were a
>couple decades ago, in terms of intelligibility, controlled patterns,
>controlled frequency response at distance, etc. The problem is
>entirely, as you say, with the mix. Some moron decided a while back
>that the most important instrument in any ensemble, regardless of
>genre, was the kick drum, & ever since then SR engineers have been
>unable to mix according to any rational understanding of musical
>relationships between instruments, voices & frequency ranges. But
>they're young, so I'm sure they know a whole lot more than we do.
There's a fellow who works for a large local SR company who seems to
judge levels entirely by the amount of distortion. For many years his
company used a system that looked very nice but actually was a bunch
of randomly-selected crap in big cabinets. He would turn the treble
up way too high, then turn the system gain up until it clipped and
leave it right there.
Then, perhaps seven or eight years ago, this company replaced their
rig with a nice Meyer system. Well, you can imagine the results. It's
a whole lot louder, but no less distorted.
jakdedert
I attribute that to mixers whose ears are well past their prime, but who
won't admit it. You can only take so many years of 110 dB every other
night. That's not to say they 'couldn't' make a smooth, balanced mix if
they'd trust a set of younger ears to tell them when they were getting
excessive....
I used to know a few like that. They were too arrogant to admit they
were putting out crap that they couldn't even hear, but that was
physically painful to others.
jak
Scott Fraser
Yes, but I find the worst offenders are young engineers.
At the Womadelaide Festival in Australia earlier this year the
Mahotello Queens preceded Kronos on the main stage. I went out to
check them out, having been the house tech at a gig they did in LA
many years back, and also to see what the system sounded like. They
had a youngish engineer who was mixing the kick so loud, so out in
front of everything else & so pushed in the sub frequencies that it
was literally making me physically ill to be anywhere other than the
backstage area 100 feet behind the PA. I nearly lost my lunch at FOH,
which was maybe 200-300 feet in front of the PA. That is just plain
stupid.
Scott Fraser
Peter Larsen
> You know, you may be absolutely right about this, but I have to say
> that by my ears, the sound quality of SR systems with these type of
> folded horn cabinets was far superior to anything I hear now in
> general intelligibility within the context of loud music.
The boxes we talk about are dual 16" in bass reflex + a sectoral horn. They
can sound very nice, but not with the ex works x-over and "things" need to
be done to the horn as described by Scott, including possibly an 077 on top.
> And of course, an entire generation of live mixers learned the wrong
> way, concentrating mostly on the kick and snare instead of the
> quietest thing on the stage and building around that, and maybe
> that's the real problem.
> Hate to sound like an old guy bitching about the way it used to be
> but I gotta put my 2 cents in here. I really feel that we've been
> off-track in the SR world for a long time now.
I'm too prone to get tinnitus aggravation to go to loud concert without
earplugs these days. Last time I thought I could so do was with a nice girl
singing with the help of items 1 guitar, acoustic with pickup as I recall it
and items one guy drumming on a box with built in mic. Locale: a 200 seater,
300 if people really likes one another. So of course it needed a bit of
carry. They had a sound check and the star, recovering from stage phobia,
said "this is fine". It is then not difficult to sound engineer it, the job
becomes to sit on ones hands as long as no strange things happen, and I
looked forward to a nice concert.
The sound engineer at the event had not heard about sitting on ones hands. A
bit more people arrived, to me that changed the sound from good to near
perfect. It is world that was something dramatic that needed to be
addressed. Everything louder. It then got sharp. Add reverb. It then got
unclear, add volume. After threee songs I put in the earplugs. So much for
an event that was advertized as "Nanna unplugged" ....
> OK, I'll put the flame retardant clothing on now.
You don't need it, the kids don't know that usenet exists, we're all
luddites here ..... some admit to have tinniblues problems, but most
probably do have it. However knowing how to listen and what to listen for
also matters, and ear frequency response and resolution is not just a matter
of how the hearing threshold curve is changed.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
jakdedert
years in the biz to trash one's ears. It can happen in one day...or an
instant.
I saw a hand at a Lynyrd Skynyrd show, stick his head in a bass bin that
was supposedly dead...just as the drum tech whacked the kick. It wasn't
dead. He staggered away with blood trickling from one ear.
Whenever I'm at a show--working or otherwise--I put a finger in (at
least) one ear and turn my head whenever I must walk past the front of a
speaker...even if there's nothing 'supposed to be' happening.
jak
Peter Larsen
> Whenever I'm at a show--working or otherwise--I put a finger in (at
> least) one ear and turn my head whenever I must walk past the front
> of a speaker...even if there's nothing 'supposed to be' happening.
I've had a jazz drummer decide to warm up on the snare while I was setting
up the bass drum mic. The band wasn't even warming up yet, no reason to wear
the earplugs .... D'OH!
> jak
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
William Sommerwerck
news:ti1gj.62980$K27....@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> One doesn't *necessarily* need 20 years in the biz to trash one's
> ears. It can happen in one day... or an instant.
> I saw a hand at a Lynyrd Skynyrd show, stick his head in a bass
> bin that was supposedly dead... just as the drum tech whacked
> the kick. It wasn't dead. He staggered away with blood trickling
> from one ear.
> Whenever I'm at a show -- working or otherwise -- I put a finger in (at
> least least) one ear and turn my head whenever I must walk past the
> front of a speaker... even if there's nothing "supposed to be" happening.
Almost 25 years ago, I spend several months working for Rupert Neve in
Connecticut. I was one of the engineers installing a computer-controlled
system in an Atlanta recording studio. (I forget the name, but it was the
biggest and/or most-prestigious.)
During a demo of some atrocious "monitor" speakers "designed" by a retired
aeronautical engineer, the volume got so high I stuck my fingers in my
delicate classical-music ears. I was told later this was a very rude thing
to do, but my hearing is more important to me than courtesy.
Peter Larsen
> During a demo of some atrocious "monitor" speakers "designed" by a
> retired aeronautical engineer, the volume got so high I stuck my
> fingers in my delicate classical-music ears. I was told later this
> was a very rude thing to do, but my hearing is more important to me
> than courtesy.
More than 105 dB absolute peak at any frequency in a control room is rude
and a sign of a lack of wisdom. I stopped caring about what people thinks of
my strategy for using ear plugs a long time ago. Which is why my tinnitus is
still manageable and why I can still hear detail and treble.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
Edwin Hurwitz
Bobby Owsinski <poly...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Great Googa Mooga! I do remember all that, I do agree with you, Bobby. I
think it's a combination of factors, but mostly user error on the part
of the people mixing. The whole macho thing of a huge drum sound that
obliterates the rest of the mix is so boring.
I have heard some decent sound at bigger events recently, though. The
sound at the main stage of the High Sierra Festival this past summer was
pretty good for an on the fly event.
Edwin
--
If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends. You talk to your
enemies.
-Moshe Dayan
Edwin Hurwitz
jakdedert <jakd...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Unless there's a good reason, earplugs never leave my ears after the
moment I get on premises. My tinnitus has actually gotten a lot better
in the last few years. I think gingko/gotu kola has helped. I had my
hearing checked about 4 months ago and even the notches around 3khz were
still in the normal range. I figure that's pretty good for being 46. Of
course, as in most audiology offices, they don't check above 8khz.
Hearing protection works!
Edwin Hurwitz
Frank Stearns <franks.pa...@pacifier.net> wrote:
> snips
>
> >Hey, I do live concert recording, I have to deal with this stuff directly.
> >You won't hear any flaming from me. Last year, I suggested to the SR guy
> >for a fairly major act that he might be better off without all those
> >compressors patched into nearly every channel. He told me that if he
> >pulled THAT out, he'd be spending the whole night moving faders up and down
> >to keep the mix under control. Now, you'll have to pardon me, but I thought
> >that was what the guy behind the console was PAID to do.
>
> Yup. Entirely different ethic and knowledge these days, it seems.
>
> Even the nice guys look at you funny if you say it's "not a competition
> between you
> (the mix engineer) and the feedback threshold..."
>
> Turn it down to suit the music; don't get the system to that phasy weird
> ringy sound
> just before feedback *and then leave it there*. A gentle-soul
> singer-songwriter does
> not need 108+ dB in a 100 seat coffee shop.
>
There's a bootleg of a Grateful Dead show at the Fillmore East ca 1970
where during a couple of acoustic numbers a member of the crowd shouts
out "Play louder!" Without missing a beat, Jerry Garcia tells him to
"Listen louder!" It might have been a joke, but it was good advice.
What's the point of turning it up to where you need earplugs? Why not
mix so you don't?
I think that the previous post about distortion is right on. People
experience distortion as volume, so some guys push a system until it
distorts thinking it's not loud enough unless it does.
There are some people who are able to mix loud but it doesn't hurt or
even seem that loud. It just feels big and you can hear everything,
including every word sung.
jakdedert
the drum tech or even a random stage hand--to be 'on the throne' when
I'm micing drums....
jak
jakdedert
Actually, the 'tones in my head' are much higher than that...around
13-14k...and all the more annoying since at my age, that's getting to be
the limit for my case-hardened rock & roll ears. But that goes back
more to a shooting accident in my adolescent years, than to the abuse
they've taken in the biz for 30+ years.
jak
jak
West
"Chris Hornbeck" <chrishornbe...@att.net> wrote in message
news:lm4un35nlkqkri1sf...@4ax.com...
I was wondering why you like to juggle nitroglycerin.
west
Andre Jute
> west
You juggle that stuff, you better catch the container gently. Back in
my reckless youth, to kill crocodiles eating too many people on the
banks of the Oubangie in the Congo, we mined the river with nitro in
jam jars on twine and then threw in a log to blow up a couple or three
miles of the river at once. We made the nitro by heating dynamite in a
frying pan over a campfire to sweat out the jelly. There's a complete
description in "African Revenge" by Andrew McCoy
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/THE%20WRITER'S%20HOUSE.html
For a test I made a hole in a tree about four feet thick, put in an
ali cigar tube of nitro, then threw a log against the tree from about
thirty paces, and landed another thirty paces back and about fifteen
feet up in the branches of a tree face to face with a black tree snake
(no antidote; you die excruciatingly in 7-9 minutes); fortunately the
snake decided I was unlikely, considering my explosive habits, to live
to be a threat to it, and glided away with only a single disdainful
look over its shoulder.
Of course, that was before you could look up stuff on the internet,
and get an "engineer" to advise you on how to handle dynamite and
nitro and lethal snakes.
Andre Jute
I wasn't always a little old intellectual
Richard Corfield
>
> That is 90% of it, and I have no idea where the whole idea of mixing
> everything around the kick comes from. I never saw it at all until a
> decade ago, and now I am encountering it all the time. If the guy is
> a vocalist, the song is about the vocals, you make the vocals sound
> good and build the rest of the mix around it. You don't get a slamming
> kick drum and then bring the vocals up as an afterthought.
It's an interesting question. I started out playing sound effects in
theatres through the right speakers at the right time and level, so not
live at all unless we had a couple of musicians on some shows. This was
back with the Loft Theatre in Leamington Spa. I've moved up north since.
Now I do some mixing for a church which brings interesting challenges.
Nothing as big as a big band, but still some work. Beyond the challenges
of having to get-in and basic sound check in very little time and
essentially do the real mix in the first hymn as the congregation are
walking in, also deal with varying levels, it's how to mix it.
If it all goes well people go and congratulate the musicians on how
well they sounded together. Fortunately this is more frequent than
not. Sometimes people have told me though that I ought to give it plenty
of piano as the congregation need that piano to sing to. Others have said
"Yes, plenty of vocals, let us hear and follow them". There's personal
taste in there too. A female vocalist who I find sings very clearly some
don't like her voice.
I find it's a case of play it by ear also made complex because of all
the vocalists standing around me in the congregation as I mix it, and
my position being near the back to one side and varying results around
the church. I'm aware that those at the front near the speakers will be
getting more mix, and therefore more piano, than me who'll be getting
lots of congregation.
(Another side in churches is that it's considered impolite to leave
the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to listen to levels
elsewhere or even to go fix something or check with the musicians
on stage.)
- Richard
--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard Corfield <Richard....@gmail.com>
_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street,
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ except in the Twilight Zone
Arny Krueger
message
news:slrnfojmpr.v8s....@gateway.internal.littondale.dyndns.org
> Now I do some mixing for a church which brings
> interesting challenges. Nothing as big as a big band, but
> still some work.
I'm doing more and more work with a small orchestra present.
> Beyond the challenges of having to
> get-in and basic sound check in very little time and
> essentially do the real mix in the first hymn as the
> congregation are walking in, also deal with varying
> levels, it's how to mix it.
I don't think I've ever had what I would call a true dress rehearsal in 5
years of regular church work. Rehearsals, such as they are, often lack
critical staff. The organist plays just about every morning, but I've almost
never ever seen him at a rehearsal, for example. I'm trying to teach the
worship leader what a technical script is. An order of service is about as
good as it gets, and that isn't always adhered to. You know, about 15
minutes before the service someone adds or subtracts something fairly
signficiant.
> Sometimes people have told me though that I ought to
> give it plenty of piano as the congregation need that
> piano to sing to.
You must be in a piano/organ (traditional) church. The group I work with
includes a pipe organ, a grand piano, and an electronic piano which play
singly and in various combinations. Who is on first?
> Others have said "Yes, plenty of vocals, let us hear and follow them".
After all, thats why people speak of vocalists who are leading the singing.
IMO the Christian gospel is about the Word and if the words aren't
understood, it is not really happening.
> There's personal
> taste in there too. A female vocalist who I find sings
> very clearly some don't like her voice.
Often this can be largely mitigated by choice and use of vocal mic, and
certain kinds of equalization, if your board is capable of it. My basic
strategy is a Q ca. 1.5 peak of a few dB around 250 Hz, and low pass
filtering as required in the 3-8 KHz to address any harshness and/or excess
sibillance. Of course a lot of boards that are used in churchs don't have
true parametric eq.
If they sing off-tune then you want an autotune, but not many churches have
environments where they can go there.
> I'm aware that those at the
> front near the speakers will be getting more mix, and
> therefore more piano, than me who'll be getting lots of
> congregation.
Good insight. I have lots of experience with worship leaders who stand a few
aisles from the front and critique my mix during a rehearsal. As you say,
there is a ton of spill in front from the stage, monitors, singers and
acoustic instruments. They listen in an empty room that is very live and
sensitive to absorbtion by bodies, with no congregation singing, and then
try to tell me how to mix for the majority of a full room, with about 300
people singing.
Let's hear it for digital consoles. I tune the current mix for them while
they are listening, and when it is Sunday morning I pull up the production
mix that takes all those things into account. ;-)
> (Another side in churches is that it's considered
> impolite to leave the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to
> listen to levels elsewhere or even to go fix something or
> check with the musicians on stage.)
I get away with walking up the middle aisle about half way when the
congregation is standing and singing.
The big failing of sound systems that are designed for uniform distribution
in an empty room (which is how most seem to be designed and set up) is the
effects of spill from the stage and the consequences of having a
congregation present and singing their hearts out.
Richard Corfield
>> Sometimes people have told me though that I ought to
>> give it plenty of piano as the congregation need that
>> piano to sing to.
>
> You must be in a piano/organ (traditional) church. The group I work with
> includes a pipe organ, a grand piano, and an electronic piano which play
> singly and in various combinations. Who is on first?
All in the same service? Is yours traditional or more modern? Mine
(if I can call it 'Mine') is CofE.
The morning service is a band - electric piano often with a synth sitting
on top too, electro-accoustic guitar, bass guitar, electronic drums
and 5 vocalists. Evening can be organ who doesn't go through the desk,
or maybe a small group with 3 or 4 vocalists, electric piano, maybe any
combination of flute, cello, guitar, oboe, but normally no more than 2
at once.
>> Others have said "Yes, plenty of vocals, let us hear and follow them".
>
> After all, thats why people speak of vocalists who are leading the singing.
> IMO the Christian gospel is about the Word and if the words aren't
> understood, it is not really happening.
It is a balancing act. Everyone around me is singing so there's plenty of
Word going round. There's also the SongPro projection with the words on
it. I don't know how similar or different this would be to a theatrical
performance or rock concert where the audience do sing along, though
I think in a rock concert the audience are nowhere near as loud as the
band. Loudness also an interesting one - right for the right atmosphere
if you want to get things going but too loud and people stop singing.
I've generally had the musicians mixed and clearly audible to me at the
back so we get the tune, and the vocals such that they can be picked out
over the congregation, but we have some good singers in the congregation
too. Some singers are clearer so I prefer those a little. I wonder if
I can afford more vocal.
For things like communion where the congregation aren't singing I mix
it more as a performance piece with the vocals above the instruments.
The musicians play/sing quieter though some better than others so it
does need alteration.
It's an analog desk an no subgroups though I've thought about suggesting
we wire things up so we can run it in mono and use left and right as
groups. Just to separate music and clergy would really help.
One thing I wonder, especially with the acoustics of a church, is
whether if you have too much going on you can get a confusion of sound
as things maybe run together a little.
>
>> There's personal
>> taste in there too. A female vocalist who I find sings
>> very clearly some don't like her voice.
>
> Often this can be largely mitigated by choice and use of vocal mic, and
> certain kinds of equalization, if your board is capable of it. My basic
> strategy is a Q ca. 1.5 peak of a few dB around 250 Hz, and low pass
> filtering as required in the 3-8 KHz to address any harshness and/or excess
> sibillance. Of course a lot of boards that are used in churchs don't have
> true parametric eq.
We're on SM58s which seem the stock microphone. I can try that EQ and
see what happens thanks. One of the vicars is obviously sibilant, even
without a microphone! so she gets that but I've not played with the
singers mics.
> Good insight. I have lots of experience with worship leaders who stand a few
> aisles from the front and critique my mix during a rehearsal. As you say,
> there is a ton of spill in front from the stage, monitors, singers and
> acoustic instruments. They listen in an empty room that is very live and
> sensitive to absorbtion by bodies, with no congregation singing, and then
> try to tell me how to mix for the majority of a full room, with about 300
> people singing.
The speakers are quite high which I hope should help. It is a high
building though with lots of flat reflective stone surfaces and
interesting acoustics which can be notable when we just have the vicar
speaking.
>> (Another side in churches is that it's considered
>> impolite to leave the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to
>> listen to levels elsewhere or even to go fix something or
>> check with the musicians on stage.)
>
> I get away with walking up the middle aisle about half way when the
> congregation is standing and singing.
I've just had a couple of comments about it so need to watch out, this
over a year or so. The band defended me last time saying that I needed
to be there to set things up in the short time we had. I suppose with a
congregation of a couple of hundred there's a probability that someone
will take note. People have expectations as to what a church is.
> The big failing of sound systems that are designed for uniform distribution
> in an empty room (which is how most seem to be designed and set up) is the
> effects of spill from the stage and the consequences of having a
> congregation present and singing their hearts out.
Loft Theatre was great! It had high front of house speakers, a proper
sounding board, acoustically treated walls and ceiling in the auditorium,
and was steeply raked. We had to account a little for the audience
absorbing sound between rehearsal and the show, but it was not hard.
Thanks
Scott Dorsey
>If it all goes well people go and congratulate the musicians on how
>well they sounded together. Fortunately this is more frequent than
>not. Sometimes people have told me though that I ought to give it plenty
>of piano as the congregation need that piano to sing to. Others have said
>"Yes, plenty of vocals, let us hear and follow them". There's personal
>taste in there too. A female vocalist who I find sings very clearly some
>don't like her voice.
This is because they don't agree on what the music is about. Some folks
think it's about the choir, some think it's about the congregation singing
along.
Which one IS it about? Ask the Kappelmeister and have him worry about it.
You've got enough to worry about as it is.
>I find it's a case of play it by ear also made complex because of all
>the vocalists standing around me in the congregation as I mix it, and
>my position being near the back to one side and varying results around
>the church. I'm aware that those at the front near the speakers will be
>getting more mix, and therefore more piano, than me who'll be getting
>lots of congregation.
>(Another side in churches is that it's considered impolite to leave
>the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to listen to levels
>elsewhere or even to go fix something or check with the musicians
>on stage.)
Sounds like an application for a dummy head somewhere. Or an assistant.
Richard Corfield
>>the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to listen to levels
>>elsewhere or even to go fix something or check with the musicians
>>on stage.)
>
> Sounds like an application for a dummy head somewhere. Or an assistant.
> --scott
I'd love to play with a dummy head and see what kind of results I get. I
wonder with the binaural microphones that you wear whether every time
you swallow, or if you speak to someone, things will sound really weird.
Also you'd presumably want to keep your head still depending on what you
were after.
So, head still, don't swallow, don't breathe...
Scott Dorsey
>On 2008-01-13, Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>the desk during the show or in the minutes before, to listen to levels
>>>elsewhere or even to go fix something or check with the musicians
>>>on stage.)
>>
>> Sounds like an application for a dummy head somewhere. Or an assistant.
>
>wonder with the binaural microphones that you wear whether every time
>you swallow, or if you speak to someone, things will sound really weird.
>Also you'd presumably want to keep your head still depending on what you
>were after.
No, no. You stick the dummy head in the audience somewhere, brought into
the PA console. You pull the dummy head feed up into your headphones, and
voila, you know what it sounds like at that place in the hall. It can work
remarkably well, and you can set the head at a different place in the room
each time until you figure out where the problems are.
D C
> I can remember going to a Gary Wright free concert in Central Park about
> 1975 where they had such a cobbled together mismatched bunch of horns
> and boxes that looked like it could never work, but it ended up being
> maybe the best sounding concert I ever attended.
Are you sure that wasn't Journey?
Arny Krueger
> On 2008-01-13, Arny Krueger <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>>> Sometimes people have told me though that I ought to
>>> give it plenty of piano as the congregation need that
>>> piano to sing to.
>>
>> You must be in a piano/organ (traditional) church. The
>> group I work with includes a pipe organ, a grand piano,
>> and an electronic piano which play singly and in various
>> combinations. Who is on first?
>
> All in the same service?
Yes.
> Is yours traditional or more modern?
I believe the current word for what we do is "blended".
> Mine (if I can call it 'Mine') is CofE.
The denomination here is Baptist. Lots of Baptist churches do blended
services. There are even several different dialects of blended.
> The morning service is a band - electric piano often with
> a synth sitting on top too, electro-accoustic guitar,
> bass guitar, electronic drums
> and 5 vocalists.
Our whole group is not too different:
Grand Piano
Pipe Organ
Synth/vocalist
Electric Bass
Electric Guitar
Trumpet/vocalist/director
Flute/vocalist
2 other vocalists, one of whom is the lead singer
Percussionist/Clarinet
2 violinists
On special occasions we add the following
a second flute
Two french horns
A string bass
Harp
> Evening can be organ who doesn't go
> through the desk, or maybe a small group with 3 or 4
> vocalists, electric piano, maybe any combination of
> flute, cello, guitar, oboe, but normally no more than 2
> at once.
No evening service here.
>>> Others have said "Yes, plenty of vocals, let us hear
>>> and follow them".
>> After all, thats why people speak of vocalists who are
>> leading the singing. IMO the Christian gospel is about
>> the Word and if the words aren't understood, it is not
>> really happening.
> It is a balancing act. Everyone around me is singing so
> there's plenty of Word going round. There's also the
> SongPro projection with the words on it.
We run Powerpoint, or a special church seems-alike that does video
backgrounds
> I don't know how
> similar or different this would be to a theatrical
> performance or rock concert where the audience do sing
> along, though
I don't think I've ever experienced either of those.
> I think in a rock concert the audience are nowhere near
> as loud as the band. Loudness also an interesting one -
> right for the right atmosphere if you want to get things
> going but too loud and people stop singing.
We run peaks just under 90 dB including congregational singing.
> I've generally had the musicians mixed and clearly
> audible to me at the back so we get the tune, and the
> vocals such that they can be picked out over the
> congregation, but we have some good singers in the
> congregation too. Some singers are clearer so I prefer
> those a little. I wonder if
> I can afford more vocal.
> For things like communion where the congregation aren't
> singing I mix it more as a performance piece with the vocals above the
> instruments. The musicians play/sing quieter though some
> better than others so it does need alteration.
> It's an analog desk an no subgroups though I've thought
> about suggesting we wire things up so we can run it in
> mono and use left and right as groups. Just to separate
> music and clergy would really help.
I mix with an 02R96 digital desk. I've had over 36 inputs running at a time
but usually run 24 or so.
There are usually 2-4 scenes per service. This week I ran about 30 inputs
and 4 scenes because we did a choir number.
We run six monitors.
> One thing I wonder, especially with the acoustics of a
> church, is whether if you have too much going on you can
> get a confusion of sound as things maybe run together a
> little.
>>> There's personal
>>> taste in there too. A female vocalist who I find sings
>>> very clearly some don't like her voice.
>>
>> Often this can be largely mitigated by choice and use of
>> vocal mic, and certain kinds of equalization, if your
>> board is capable of it. My basic strategy is a Q ca.
>> 1.5 peak of a few dB around 250 Hz, and low pass
>> filtering as required in the 3-8 KHz to address any
>> harshness and/or excess sibillance. Of course a lot of
>> boards that are used in churchs don't have true
>> parametric eq.
> We're on SM58s which seem the stock microphone.
I retired our SM58s years ago. Our vocal mics are a mix of Audax OM5, OM6
and CAD 95s.
> I can try that EQ and see what happens thanks. One of the vicars is
> obviously sibilant, even without a microphone! so she
> gets that but I've not played with the singers mics.
You can mitigate a limited degree of sibilance by adding reinforcement that
is pretty heavily low-pass filtered. Their voice gets a little louder,
except for the sibillance.
>> Good insight. I have lots of experience with worship
>> leaders who stand a few aisles from the front and
>> critique my mix during a rehearsal. As you say, there
>> is a ton of spill in front from the stage, monitors,
>> singers and acoustic instruments. They listen in an
>> empty room that is very live and sensitive to absorbtion
>> by bodies, with no congregation singing, and then try to
>> tell me how to mix for the majority of a full room, with
>> about 300 people singing.
> The speakers are quite high which I hope should help.
Our cluster is on the ceiling, which is 27 feet up. It is right over the
front of the stage. One horn points almost straight down, but I've mitigated
some tendency towards feedback by attenuating it quite a bit. The other horn
covers the back 2/3 of the room.
> It is a high building though with lots of flat reflective
> stone surfaces and interesting acoustics which can be
> notable when we just have the vicar speaking.
There are no absorbtive surfaces of signficance in our sanctuary. There is a
huge reflection off the back wall about 200 msec out. RT is about 6 seconds.
>>> (Another side in churches is that it's considered
>>> impolite to leave the desk during the show or in the
>>> minutes before, to listen to levels elsewhere or even
>>> to go fix something or
>>> check with the musicians on stage.)
>> I get away with walking up the middle aisle about half
>> way when the congregation is standing and singing.
> I've just had a couple of comments about it so need to
> watch out, this over a year or so. The band defended me
> last time saying that I needed to be there to set things
> up in the short time we had. I suppose with a
> congregation of a couple of hundred there's a probability
> that someone will take note. People have expectations as
> to what a church is.
Our congregation has some interest in good sound and are happy to have
someone take an interest in it. I hope to be doing something with the
acoustics later on this year.
Arny Krueger
news:fmdos5$5ul$1...@panix2.panix.com
> Sounds like an application for a dummy head somewhere.
> Or an assistant.
I think our congregation would find the dummy head more disturbing than
mine. ;-)
Richard Corfield
I was thinking of recording things. Dummy heads are expensive, though I
read somewhere about cheaper ones involving some kind of balloon.
Carey Carlan
> I was thinking of recording things. Dummy heads are expensive, though
> I read somewhere about cheaper ones involving some kind of balloon.
Dummy heads are cheap and plentiful at beauty shop supply houses.
Microphones are extra.
Arny Krueger
news:Xns9A256C5BC...@140.99.99.130
They are usually made out of foam, which is not what is used for the audio
variety.
It's pretty important that the dummy head have similar acoustics to the real
kind. That usually involves something that simulates bone, and something
that simulates soft flesh.
> Microphones are extra.
Often, even on the audio variety.
Richard Corfield
> The denomination here is Baptist. Lots of Baptist churches do blended
> services. There are even several different dialects of blended.
Ours has different types of service through the day aimed at different
types of audience.
Your setup sounds a bit bigger than ours, though I've walked into
some churches and seen the big desks. Some do things like "Rock
Connection" (or is that "Connexion"?) which are much more pop music.
> I mix with an 02R96 digital desk. I've had over 36 inputs running at a time
> but usually run 24 or so.
> There are usually 2-4 scenes per service. This week I ran about 30 inputs
> and 4 scenes because we did a choir number.
Presumably with that many inputs you can give each musician their own
channel, or as you've said just restore the setup at the start which is
nice. Restoring for us is reading all the dial positions off a piece of
paper.
> We run six monitors.
3 - vocals and piano, drum and bass.
> Our congregation has some interest in good sound and are happy to have
> someone take an interest in it. I hope to be doing something with the
> acoustics later on this year.
Time for churches to discover the joy of tapestries?