Dealing with the sound man

The following paragraph is taken from the Chris Kroff article linked by ST in this thread, I'm having feedback issues. I felt like the author was a bit condescending in this particular paragraph. 

"It helps to try to get the mic as close to the instrument as possible without the risk of the performer hitting it with the guitar as he or she becomes more animated during the louder numbers. This is easier if your guitarist is sitting down for the show, obviously, but even then, many performers (singer-songwriter types, especially) have a habit of swinging their guitar back and forth, which means you may have to deal with some pretty wild variations in volume. Aside from exercising your fader finger, there's not much you can do about that, although more experienced performers may be quite accommodating if you simply ask them to keep their guitar fairly still as they're playing."

While reading the article above I was reminded of an outdoor festival I played many years ago. Although I wasn't using a mic on the guitar, the sound man took it upon himself to interfere with my performance. At the time I had about 20 years stage experience and had developed a style that was popular in the region, and that was the reason I was hired for the festival. At that time I was using a pickup and DI with tone and volume for convenience in outdoor performances. Before my set started I had asked the sound man to set all EQ controls flat allowing me to adjust my own eq, I would give him a strong signal to start then adjust my volume with my onstage DI. As the set progressed he kept making adjustments during the playing that kept me off balance to what I was doing. There was no consistency in EQ or volume from beginning of song to end. If I lightened up my playing intensity he would boost the volume, If I played harder he would cut it. After a couple of tunes I made some adjustment between songs and I politely asked him not to make anymore adjustments while I played. He continued to do so and after another couple of songs I made the most compelling demand I have ever made from the stage to not touch the controls any more. I remember to this day the feeling of having someone I didn't know, who didn't know me, place a nearly impossible condition on my performance. I consider myself a singing story teller. Telling a good story requires dynamics. A sound man cannot create dynamics for a performer. If he insists on riding the faders to raise the low volume or turn down the strong parts the artistry is stolen.

To those who might be in charge of sound, it is of vital importance to accommodate the natural tendencies of a performer whenever possible. It is not the sound-man's job to place restrictions on a performer. In a learning environment, teach performers how to utilize equipment, help them understand limitations and then work within those parameters while allowing them to be an artist.

Strange after all these years I still feel the need to vent.

O.. 

As a sound guy (now mostly retired) I have experienced both performers who, like you, clearly know what they are doing and what they want/need, and those who haven't got a clue but think they are experts. As you suggest, the former need leaving alone to get on with the job but the latter are 'challenging' to say the least. I'd have said Korff's advice was reasonable and gleaned from much experience.  But, as you have experienced, there are poor sound guys too who don't listen to the performance (and, with my guitar players hat on I have experienced both good and bad), you clearly had a bad one that day....... The most vital skill for any sound engineer is his 'people skill', your guy that day could do with brushing his up I suspect.

Don't we all.

My two horror stories are;

Any sound man who mixes the monitors without listening to them.  I had just the opposite last weekend, a sound guy who mixed the monitors WHILE back with us listening to them -- VERY rare great sound on stage.  Another nice advantage of mixing using a Pad via WiFi.

And "Bubba the Sound Man" at the Kerrville Folk Festival -- last time I saw him from the stage he was asleep behind the sound board, last time I heard him he buried John Gorka's voice (and great lyrics) and Michael Manring's bass beneath John's guitar.

Hi O,
The sound tech in me needs to ask, were you in front of the speakers hearing what the audience was hearing? Or was it a typical setup with stage front speakers with you behind them hearing monitors?

Chet,
Ipads are indeed wonderful to use when setting monitors. As a sound tech (vice Sound Engineer as I don't have an Engineering degree), I can't tell you how many times I've heard "more of me" requests that turned out to just need "less of him/her". Having a side-stage monitor tech with their own wedge is nice as well, but iPads put you right where the performer is, which is invaluable in my opinion.

Jeff

Aloha, Jeff.

I'm also someone who has been performer AND sound man over the years (sound since '68).

And of course the best of all possible worlds is now when we can get the same mix onstage as the house gets using modern PA systems.

Yes rycowan, there is a lot of good information in the article, it was just the "particular paragraph" that I though was condescending.

I suspect the stereotypical "singer-songwriter type" is just as good at his job as the "stereotypical sound man".

As I think more about that time period. I had been hired three or four years previous to that festival to play a "Peach Festival" in Hamilton Ontario. I was on the road in Georgia and traveled to Ontario with all my gear and everything that mattered to me, other than family, in the back of a pickup truck.

Upon arrival the sound company hired for the festival didn't show up so on opening day they paid me to use my equipment. No snake, only two monitors and nothing really designed for long throw outdoors, but, we pulled it off and I did the next two days as well. I was consequently hired for the next three consecutive years to play and provide sound and returned better prepared.

At that time my home town was just getting a new festival off the ground and one of the bar owners I worked for was one of the main producers. I was able to get a copy of the charter for the Ontario festival and the home town built their festival around that charter. I ended up doing sound for the hometown festival the first three years as well.

My goal was never then, or now, to be a sound company, it happened purely through chance and need at the time.

Over the years I offered my equipment and services on other rare occasions but, never advertised or considered it a business. I don't offer services now, but just last week was hired to provide sound for a political rally. 

I say all that to say this, my very limited time as a "sound man" was approached from a performers point of view. My goal was to make the performer feel as comfortable as possible and give them what they want.

One year in Ontario I arrived with some new untried horns. On the first sound check the diaphragms burned out on two of them. They had been built with the wrong components. I was unable to secure repair parts or rent speakers and the sound was difficult to balance across the listening area. That year we got some complaints from fans of one band who knew we just didn't get it right. Other than that I don't remember ever having an issue with a promoter, producer, or performer.

O..

 

Jeff K posted:

Hi O,
The sound tech in me needs to ask, were you in front of the speakers hearing what the audience was hearing? Or was it a typical setup with stage front speakers with you behind them hearing monitors?

Chet,
Ipads are indeed wonderful to use when setting monitors. As a sound tech (vice Sound Engineer as I don't have an Engineering degree), I can't tell you how many times I've heard "more of me" requests that turned out to just need "less of him/her". Having a side-stage monitor tech with their own wedge is nice as well, but iPads put you right where the performer is, which is invaluable in my opinion.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Good and fair question. Mains and monitors were being controlled from about 40 feet in front of a ground level stage. Mains were turned in and the stage got a wash from them. 

It really doesn't matter what the audience heard or what the sound man heard. If what I hear on stage is constantly being adjusted then I can't make the artistic adjustment that I need to make, to make my performance mine. In any given song I might go from single note flat picking, to soft strum, to hard strum to a combination of flat pick and fingers, I think my guitar playing, though not exceptionally good, is still very expressive, and a valuable and needed dynamic in any performance.

I don't recall anytime ever, other than that, of a sound man messing so much with the outcome.

O..

Boy, does this hit home.....

Oldghm posted:

Hi Jeff,

Good and fair question. Mains and monitors were being controlled from about 40 feet in front of a ground level stage. Mains were turned in and the stage got a wash from them. 

It really doesn't matter what the audience heard or what the sound man heard. If what I hear on stage is constantly being adjusted then I can't make the artistic adjustment that I need to make, to make my performance mine. In any given song I might go from single note flat picking, to soft strum, to hard strum to a combination of flat pick and fingers, I think my guitar playing, though not exceptionally good, is still very expressive, and a valuable and needed dynamic in any performance.

I don't recall anytime ever, other than that, of a sound man messing so much with the outcome.

O..

I would agree that he should not be adjusting monitors once a performance started for just the reasons you mention (also why I don't like using compression on monitors; performers need to hear their dynamics even if the house has compression on that side of things). 

My comment on what the audience was hearing is based on the fact that it is, as you know, not what you hear on stage (assuming the mains are not turned in and washing over the stage...that shouldn't be). Notwithstanding the possible fact that he may not have had a clue of how to mix, it's not a fair rule to apply that a soundman shouldn't adjust your mix in the audience once you get initial levels set, as conditions out front can change and affect how the audience is hearing you. Otherwise you wouldn't even need a sound tech, just a guy to plug in your cables. Dynamics are great and all, but in a live, especially outdoor, situation, if you drop your vocal/guitar down low and now one can hear it, the sound tech may very well have to push it up so you can be heard. Which of course means they (should know to) pull it down when you get louder again (a good place to use that handy compression thingy .

I'm of the mindset of making the performer feel as comfy as possible by finding out what I can of their needs and concerns (both prior to the date and at the show) so we're all on the same page. I can't tell you (but you probably know) how many performers are in awe that someone takes the incentive to do that lol. If they know I've got their best interests at heart, it generally makes them feel more comfortable with changes I have to make out front. But I still run into some folks who go so far as to tell me how to EQ the mains, from the stage

However, I've been on the other side of that as well as a performer, where I wish I'd just brought my mixer up on stage as it would sound better than what the "sound" person was doing (or not doing). Not paying attention to which one of our 4 singers was singing lead on a given song so the harmonies overpower the lead. Or despite notating on our set list some simple vocal FX requests, such as "light reverb", "50's slapback echo" or "lush reverb" and being able to tell even from the stage they've got the same barely-there generic reverb setting on the entire set, if any at all.

What can I say? It's hit or miss on both ends. Unfortunately the "we're a team" mentality can be sorely lacking on one side, or both.

Jeff

Much good info in this thread, I have constant, low level, 'discussions' with my duo partner who is convinced he can consistently assess the FOH sound from onstage....... (he also insists on singing quietly to conserve his voice and on 'keeping a little in hand' WRT his guitar volume during the soundcheck). We are, despite this, good mates but I have had to learn to run his gains around -10dB or lower. 

I have heard that in the US Navy only a former fighter or attack pilot can captain an aircraft carrier. Conversely, only a current or former performing musician should attempt live sound man duties.... 🙂 IMHO

Harry 3 posted:

I have heard that in the US Navy only a former fighter or attack pilot can captain an aircraft carrier. Conversely, only a current or former performing musician should attempt live sound man duties.... 🙂 IMHO

Nah, while it helps, I've seen good sound guys that can't play a lick, but they have an appreciation for music and the best ones are good people at heart. Just like not all good music producers play an instrument (but it helps). I have heard the FOH tech referred to as a Mix Musician and can agree with that. If they're good "musicians", they can make a group sound their best. If they're not, they can make good musicians sound like ****. The key is that everyone understand they are on the same team. The moment we think that we inherently know the other's job better than they do before we even shake hands or put ourselves in their position, that's when the problems arise. I can guarantee you if you're my sound guy or I'm yours, if you come up to me with an unwarranted condescending attitude that doesn't go away within 5 minutes of talking with me, it's going to be a rough day.

Jeff
#UsedToTeachNewCarrierCaptainsAboutNuclearPower

Sam Spoons posted:

Much good info in this thread, I have constant, low level, 'discussions' with my duo partner who is convinced he can consistently assess the FOH sound from onstage....... (he also insists on singing quietly to conserve his voice and on 'keeping a little in hand' WRT his guitar volume during the soundcheck). We are, despite this, good mates but I have had to learn to run his gains around -10dB or lower. 

Depending on the room, you can certainly get an 'idea' of how things may be going out in front, but you generally don't have the full picture. Most shows my acoustic group does we run our own sound (dual Bose L1 Compacts help), but even with the speakers behind us I still have a long guitar cable to allow me to walk out front and hear what the "developed" sound is like during sound check. It sounds a bit different than what's coming directly out of the speaker. And if you're behind the mains? Fahgetaboudit.

Regarding saving your voice, sure...as long as you don't expect 100dBA SPL coming out of your monitor while your doing your best "Happy Birthday Mr. President" impression

Cranking up your guitar after soundcheck is a real good way to piss off your sound guy (as it sounds like you know). It affects the blend everywhere (house, all monitors, record mix, etc) when he may just need a little more in the monitor. That's what hand signals are for (assuming your soundguy is paying attention...sigh...). Or just say it in the mic between songs. I mixed Lauren Daigle once when she was just getting popular and she missed sound check due to a delayed flight, so we did our best with her band to set things at a good starting point for her. A couple times between the first few songs she asked for a monitor adjustment here or there and nobody cared, especially since she was such a sweetheart about it and completely took the blame (not that there was any to take, things happen). She made a big deal about how we took such great care of her and the band before the show and just couldn't have been more of a pleasure to work with.

Jeff 

Jeff K posted:
Harry 3 posted:

I have heard that in the US Navy only a former fighter or attack pilot can captain an aircraft carrier. Conversely, only a current or former performing musician should attempt live sound man duties.... 🙂 IMHO

Nah, while it helps, I've seen good sound guys that can't play a lick, but they have an appreciation for music and the best ones are good people at heart. Just like not all good music producers play an instrument (but it helps). I have heard the FOH tech referred to as a Mix Musician and can agree with that. If they're good "musicians", they can make a group sound their best. If they're not, they can make good musicians sound like ****. The key is that everyone understand they are on the same team. The moment we think that we inherently know the other's job better than they do before we even shake hands or put ourselves in their position, that's when the problems arise. I can guarantee you if you're my sound guy or I'm yours, if you come up to me with an unwarranted condescending attitude that doesn't go away within 5 minutes of talking with me, it's going to be a rough day.

Jeff
#UsedToTeachNewCarrierCaptainsAboutNuclearPower

I attended a Band of Heathens concert in Austin, TX over the weekend. When the singer introduced the musicians, he listed their sound engineer as a full fledged member of the band.

rycowan posted:I attended a Band of Heathens concert in Austin, TX over the weekend. When the singer introduced the musicians, he listed their sound engineer as a full fledged member of the band.

The Southern Gospel group I run sound for does that as well. It's nice to be part of the Fam

Jeff

Well for me those days are over, I don't seek and nobody is knocking down my door to do the kinds of shows where I would encounter a sound man. Still it's an interesting subject.

I think that rycowan deleted the post I responded to earlier. but something he said prompted me to go back and re-read the article.

I realized that I had stopped reading when I got to the Big Squeeze part.

The author in the EQ On Board segment after stating, "as far as the on-stage sound goes, the performer is always right! Leaving the musician in charge of their monitor sound also saves you having to do much to the guitar's monitor send, leaving you to concentrate on the front-of-house sound."

In the next paragraph writes:

" In some smaller venues, where the sound from the PA is significantly affecting what the musicians are hearing on stage, I have occasionally found that the guitarist is compensating for my front-of-house desk EQ changes by making the exact opposite moves on their pickup system's EQ! This can be frustrating, but it's one of the inevitable compromises when putting on a gig in a small room, and the only thing you can do about it is be subtle with the tweaks you're making, and to apply boosts and cuts slowly so as not to throw the performer off."

So he admits that even when he knows his actions are detrimental to the performance from the performers view, he continues to tweak.

I think this is what was going on in my case, and I don't think venue size is the deciding factor. If the performer is truly hearing the mains and desires to make a change, he should be allowed to make a change.

Reading through the article again makes me think the author is more comfortable with bands and electric instruments. His reference to "singer songwriter types",  "six-string strummer or plucker",  "musicians of the 'singing hippy' variety", I think, shows a bias and I truly believe he thinks his work will improve the performance of any acoustic player he does sound for.

Another story,

Going back through my memory of memorable shows with a sound man I recall a set in Ambato Ecuador. I was on an Embassy sponsored cultural exchange tour of the country doing shows not so big, small and smaller. This particular one was a regional beauty contest in a college size gymnasium with bleachers all around, seating for maybe 6000, a fancy stage, lighting, catwalks, big bands and the President of Ecuador in attendance. I was a token Gringo folk singer. My driver who was supposed to also be my interpreter, couldn't speak English and I don't speak Spanish. He got the time wrong and we were caught out away from the hotel without a change of clothes or my gig bag. I had the guitar because I had done an acoustic living room set earlier in the day. My guitar pickup was active without tone or volume controls. Just the eq built into the preamp end pin jack.

When we arrived I was shown to a dressing (?) locker room shared by other performers, none of which spoke English. I got tuned up and waited. Eventually someone came and directed me outside the building, around the back into another entrance where I waited for my introduction. Standing just off stage was an apparent stage manager who gestured about my guitar. I showed him the end pin jack and motioned best I could a desire to be plugged in. In a few minutes I was introduced and he waved me down a catwalk to stage right where a vocal mic was set up and a tech waiting to plug in the guitar.

The set went off without a hitch. When I was back off stage I started to leave the way I had come in to go find the driver, when a woman who spoke English came up and said, "don't go out there by yourself, the President wants to meet you". By this time it was dark and she motioned to a uniformed man who came and escorted us back around the building to the other side of the stage. I never met or talked to the sound man, the monitors were good, I didn't get to meet any of the pretty girls, but they loved Hotel California. The President did come back stage to shake my hand and all I could think of was two days prior I had been a dinner guest of a resort owner who had talked about how bad a criminal he was.

Meeting the President had nothing to do with me or my music. Because I was sponsored by the Embassy I think it was just a political courtesy to show mutual respect. We shook hands and talked briefly under the bleachers in a peeling paint concrete corridor that smelled of urine.

O..

 

Sometime the performer has to accept a compromise the monitors, it's a performance, for the benefit of the audience. If the sound guy is not trying to make the sound the audience hear as good as possible he's not doing his job.

"it's a performance, for the benefit of the audience"

As someone who is a performer first but who has also done sound for my bands over the years for hundreds (thousands?) of performances since '68 as well as for numerous festivals, sometimes accommodating up to 4 acts per hour, I DO NOT AGREE.

A performance is a shared experience between the audience and the musician(s).  It's the sum of the parts - not a one-way conversation. 

Nothing kills the artist side faster than terrible stage sound.  In addition to killing the "buzz"-ruining the mood, it also promotes physical damage as the artist tends to hit the guitar harder, strain their voice, etc.

With today's equipment, mainly the mixers with WiFi connection to pads that are ubiquitous today, there is NO EXCUSE for a sound person not taking the time to at least get the stage sound "close enough" before engaging their ego and subjecting the audience to their personal vision of the mix the "paying customers" will be allowed to hear.

Hearing the side wash from the mains and their echoing from the back wall is better than TERRIBLE sound on stage.  The last time I had to deal with terrible, performance killing stage sound earlier this year, I was enraged by seeing the sound guy with his pad at the back of the audience during the entire show while he NEVER ONCE came back to hear the massive wall of distortion coming out of the stage monitors.  It was so bad that we couldn't hear the mains and because he took all of 2 minutes during setup for "sound check".  I finally had to use the live mic during the show to tell him that the monitors were horribly distorted and to turn them down and he STILL didn't come back with his pad to hear them -- and didn't turn them down enough - still distorted and sounded like sh*t.  By then it was pretty much too late to recover and rescue the balance of our relatively short set at that fancy venue.

Plus, if a sound guy can't mix stage monitors what guarantee does the artist have that he can mix the mains?

My favorite response to stage monitors was my old, late friend U. Utah (Bruce) Phillips who used to get on stage, sit down, pick up his guitar, point and the monitors and say, "Just turns those things off, they just confuse me."  Of course, as a single guitar/vocalist/story teller, he didn't need ANY monitors.  I usually do that when I perform as a single...NO monitors!

And again, with the equipment I have, we can monitor using the mains...

My 2 (or maybe 6) cents on the matter, having been on both sides of the fence, is that it's a team effort.  Saying that sound engineers and other technicians are only there  as servants is just as unproductive as the sound engineer ignoring the musicians or reading a magazine.  

Sometimes there isn't time for a proper sound check and everyone noodling on their instruments while trying to set up one instrument wastes that precious time.  An experienced engineer will ask for each person individually to play/sing then the group as a whole.  If you're stepping all over the time that isn't for your instrument or voice, you're part of the problem.  

Different sound systems will have different idiosyncrasies.  If you want the exact same sound all the time, get a mixer and some in ears, or bring your Bose and use it as a monitor and give the sound person lines out to FOH.  Then you can be happy, they have less to worry about during the show and the audience gets the best of all worlds. 

By the same token, as a musician, I'd love the sound to be great all the time, but that's not reality.  Things go wrong, they break, some people are inexperienced or lazy or just not good and you just have to move on with the performance as best you can.  Having also worked in theatre, one of the paramount things was that if there's a problem, the audience should never be aware of it if at all possible.   

There's responsibility on both sides.  An engineer or tech should be as accommodating as they can given the time, equipment on hand and their experience level with it.  A musician should make the effort to help things as go as smoothly as possible as well, within reason.  

If things don't go right for whatever reason, at some point you just have to accept that it's as good as it's going to be.   

Wow, two brilliant posts! Chet, I agree with almost everything you say, I have less miles under my wheels than you but have followed an otherwise identical 'career' path playing in bands, duo's solo, sound engineering everything from office meetings to press conferences (21 live mics) to function gigs, small festivals and (occasionally) theatre.

But one slight disagreement, the audience are paying to see the performance, the performer is (usually) being paid to give it so it is his job to perform the best he can. The sound guy is being paid to make the sound good both for the audience and the performer but if it sounds great on stage and **** out front he has failed, likewise the reverse but the priority has to be on the FOH sound, if the audience don't like it they won't come back and the promoter/organizer won't hire the sound guy again. If the performer complaints, usually it is he who won't get hired again (I have experienced this from both sides of the mic).

And yes, acoustic singer/guitarists don't need foldable, ever......

Scottcald, Agan I agree with everything you say, particularly WRT the difficulties of setting monitors up with virtually no time to soundcheck. 

We have all experienced bad sound and bad sound guys, but we have also experienced 'difficult' performers, it's much better if we all work as a team and my good experiences far exceed my bad ones.