It don’t matter cause the audience can’t tell the difference..

[Diary Of An Axeman]

The audience can't tell the difference between a Behringer V Amp Pro or Kemper .... all they know is that they're hearing live music.

Let the Butt Hurt Snivel Snot Gear Snob Ninnies crying.... BEGIN !!!!

 

[Orvillain]

Do you believe that means silent stages and IEM's are NOT used by a ton of other touring acts?

No, and I never said anything like that.

You're building strawmen and kicking them down, just so you can feel big and powerful. Well... do ya .... punk???

What ISN'T part of the territory is high stage volume as I have defined it several times. That is just bad no matter how you slice it .... period.

Incorrect.

I do have to give it to @Orvillain. He actually came up with a situation where high stage volume wouldn't much matter. Its music that is rarely seen in a live concert, but still ..... it IS a use case..

The genre lives and breathes on live music actually.

Bands that have high stage volume simply sound like crap.

Incorrect.

the vocals are the MOST important part of the music. Sorry guitarists, but it's true

Incorrect.

 

[OneEng]

Ok, I mostly agreed with you on this until here. Instrumental post-rock isn’t some dark corner genre, some of these bands are selling out big rooms every tour.

My bad. My anecdotal experience is out of line with this, but I'll accept that it is a more popular genre than I have previously believed.

In that case, I suppose loud stage volume would be less of an impediment to good FOH sound.

No one is arguing for excessive volume. Just not zero volume.
You're ranting about a bunch of nonsense and talking in circles.

Some are. See @Orvillain post above.

I agree that zero volume isn't needed to have a great mix. I have never said anything different. In fact, zero stage volume has some issues with regard to the blank space created between the FOH speakers in a L/R tops over subs arrangement. I have seen shows where a center channel is used to fill the middle on a silent stage in this arrangement.

The audience can't tell the difference between a Behringer V Amp Pro or Kemper .... all they know is that they're hearing live music.

Let the Butt Hurt Snivel Snot Gear Snob Ninnies.... BEGIN !!!!

I think this is sadly true. In a good mix, the tone of the guitar is mostly lost in the mix. In fact, in many recordings and live setups, the tone of the guitar in isolation (as setup by the mix engineer) is downright ugly .... yet it sounds great in the mix.

 

[Orvillain]

Some are. See @Orvillain post above.

Nope. I never have argued for excessive volume.

 

[spawnofthesith]

My band uses IEMs and that doesn't change the fact that "micing cabs = hard/bad" is still an exceedingly dumb premise/hill to die on


Ironically, I'd actually vastly prefer NOT to use IEMs but unfortunately there's some specifics with my band that necessitate it

 

[la szum]

I like how we fight about what other people do or don't do with their gear. That's next level brilliance.

Classy stuff, I tell ya. So. Astute.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Love my IEMs, so much easier to be tight when everything is clearly audible.

 

[ejecta]

Love my IEMs, so much easier to be tight when everything is clearly audible.

Yeah how in the hell bands before in ears were able to be super tight is a head scratcher.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Yeah how in the hell bands before in ears were able to be super tight is a head scratcher.

Tightness is varying degrees. 4/4 at 70 BPM is easy, a constant barrage of signatures at 96 isn’t always easy. A hardcore band can be pretty loose and still put on a good show. A tech death band, not so much.

 

[OneEng]

Nope. I never have argued for excessive volume.

From your post a few lines above:

What ISN'T part of the territory is high stage volume as I have defined it several times. That is just bad no matter how you slice it .... period.

Incorrect.

That was you .... right?

I have defined for you that "High stage volume" is when the guitars/drums/etc volume is near to or exceeds the volume level of the singer at the singers mic positions.

All bands that reach this stage volume level sound like crap out front period. There is no getting around it. It's physics at that point.

You also disagree that vocals are the most important part of the mix (except when there aren't any of course).... but lets stick with the 95% case here. Vocals are the most important part of a mix. If you drown them, it sounds like crap .... period.

My band uses IEMs and that doesn't change the fact that "micing cabs = hard/bad" is still an exceedingly dumb premise/hill to die on


Ironically, I'd actually vastly prefer NOT to use IEMs but unfortunately there's some specifics with my band that necessitate it

I agree mostly. Within my own band, they are mandatory ... because I sold my wedges in the mid 90's and they are the only method of hearing yourself. Many a guitar player has passed on playing with our band because they wouldn't use them. No issue with that. They will be happy in a different band that uses wedges. Using IEM's does necessitate micing things up though, or you simply can't hear them.

I don't use IEM's because I like the way my guitar sounds better through them..... I certainly do not. I use them because the out-front mix is so much tighter and more controlled vs wedges and higher stage volume. But this is a personal choice.

For bands that use wedges and a vocal only PA setup, it is still very important to keep the stage volume out of the vocal mics .... so it is trickier to do .... and harder to control out front, but it would be silly to suggest that a band can't sound good doing it.

Tightness is varying degrees. 4/4 at 70 BPM is easy, a constant barrage of signatures at 96 isn’t always easy. A hardcore band can be pretty loose and still put on a good show. A tech death band, not so much.

Overall, I would say that there are many more "tight" sounding bands today than 30 years ago. Much of this is due to the changes in monitoring techniques. It's just a butt ton easier to make a band on IEM's sound good out front than it is for a band with a bunch of wedges and loud amps. Being able to actually HEAR the rest of the band clearly and not having a ton of stage blead in the vocal mics, just greatly increases your bands chances of sounding good.

This is, of course, assuming that the band actually has talented musicians in it.

 

[Orvillain]

That was you .... right?

Yes. And it isn't an argument for excessive volume. It is an argument for loud or high stage volume, sure. But not excessive.

Your reading comprehension is utterly abysmal.

 

[spawnofthesith]

I had a sound guy tell me to turn UP last summer

 

[ian_dissonance]

Overall, I would say that there are many more "tight" sounding bands today than 30 years ago. Much of this is due to the changes in monitoring techniques. It's just a butt ton easier to make a band on IEM's sound good out front than it is for a band with a bunch of wedges and loud amps. Being able to actually HEAR the rest of the band clearly and not having a ton of stage blead in the vocal mics, just greatly increases your bands chances of sounding good.

This is, of course, assuming that the band actually has talented musicians in it.

I don’t think any of my projects prior to using in-ears was sloppy or loose, the music mostly necessitated it not be, but we’re definitely TIGHT-ER with in-ears.

 

[OneEng]

Yes. And it isn't an argument for excessive volume. It is an argument for loud or high stage volume, sure. But not excessive.

Your reading comprehension is utterly abysmal.

If the volume of the stage is near to the volume of the singer at the vocal mic position, it is too loud.

Not sure how many times you need to be told to get the message through to the grey matter.

You seem to believe that the laws of physics cease to exist on your stage. I assure you they don't.

 

[Orvillain]

If the volume of the stage is near to the volume of the singer at the vocal mic position, it is too loud.

Not sure how many times you need to be told to get the message through to the grey matter.

You seem to believe that the laws of physics cease to exist on your stage. I assure you they don't.

Not always true, and I never said that either. But oooohhhhh, do tell us about the laws of physics. lmao. We're waiting!!

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

If the volume of the stage is near to the volume of the singer at the vocal mic position, it is too loud.

Really depends on the mic used..and a bit on the mic use of the singer.

Omnidirectional condenser mic a few inches from the singer on one end of the extreme….where what you say is 100% true.
Sm58 that gets almost swallowed by a singer on the other side….gives a looooot of wiggle room.

As a reference…vocal monitors can be crazy loud, the very directional nature of a mic allows that.

 

[ejecta]

If the volume of the stage is near to the volume of the singer at the vocal mic position, it is too loud.

Yep gotta turn those drums down especially since they are typically right behind the singer.

 

[OneEng]

Not always true, and I never said that either. But oooohhhhh, do tell us about the laws of physics. lmao. We're waiting!!

Seems like a waste of time to attempt to explain physics when common sense has left the room.

Really depends on the mic used..and a bit on the mic use of the singer.

Omnidirectional condenser mic a few inches from the singer on one end of the extreme….where what you say is 100% true.
Sm58 that gets almost swallowed by a singer on the other side….gives a looooot of wiggle room.

As a reference…vocal monitors can be crazy loud, the very directional nature of a mic allows that.

Having a vocalist directly on the mic does help. Using a super-cardioid mic also helps. If you must have wedge monitors for the vocalist, placing them in the "null spots" in the microphone pickup pattern helps.

Despite all this, it is very easy to get stage volume that is louder than the singer at the mic position because:

1) The singers head doesn't shield the entire mic pickup area
2) The singer isn't always directly on the mic (even for singers that sing like this most of the time)
3) The null spots aren't big enough to keep the wedge from getting into the mic's too much anyway.

The last one is easiest to verify. The vast majority of feedback in bands that use wedges comes from the monitors. Turn down the monitors, and the feedback goes away.

The other 2 are harder to verify since we aren't talking about a feedback limitation, but rather a signal to noise limitation. If the "noise" is louder than the "signal (or voice), then your vocal mic just became a guitar and drum mic that has some vocal bleed in it.

Yep gotta turn those drums down especially since they are typically right behind the singer.

You may be joking, but it is true. For eDrums this is easy enough to do. For acoustic drums you will frequently see higher end stages having drum shields to do EXACTLY that.

Of course, a good drummer can do it just by not pounding the drums with gorilla arm hits .... but that seems to be difficult to do for some reason.

 

[Orvillain]

Seems like a waste of time to attempt to explain physics when common sense has left the room.

You're a dork.

 

[ejecta]

For acoustic drums you will frequently see higher end stages having drum shields to do EXACTLY that.

I know… before shields all you heard was drums through the vocal mic.