|
Post by benr on Oct 10, 2006 14:50:34 GMT -5
The sound was pretty good this year, for the most part, but I am still in favor of a modified "Wall of Sound." The one chuck's where I ran sound, all of the speakers were behind the band, so that whatever we could hear was the same as what the audience was hearing. The reason that I don't really like monitors is that the band has no idea what sound is actually being blasted into the audience. The performers could have a perfect mix on stage, but it may sound like crap to the crowd. Also, if monitors blow out, which has happened to us before, the performers are basically left guessing what is going on. just some thoughts.... Here is a page about what the dead did. www.dead.net/cavenweb/deadfile/newsletter19soundrap.html
|
|
Eckert
Pre Panangian
Simsalabim!
Posts: 5
|
Post by Eckert on Oct 10, 2006 15:23:38 GMT -5
This is why you get a dedicated sound person who knows what he's doing. Monitors are the best way to go for each member of the band to be able to hear one another. If you put speakers behind the band, you'll get mad feedback because the mics will all be in front of the sound which will create a frequency loop. That's a no-no.
Props to Phil for a great job, at least with Cootie Brown. I saw what he did at the 2005 Chucks on Friday night and I was impressed with the arrangement, being a sound guy myself. Hats off to him for such a great job.
Eckert
|
|
|
Post by benr on Oct 10, 2006 15:35:16 GMT -5
Right. You find places that won't result in feedback. It has been done before and can be done again. Less equipment = less potential problems
|
|
|
Post by degijames on Oct 10, 2006 19:25:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by steve f on Oct 23, 2006 15:46:44 GMT -5
well, since there's no harm in getting a head start, i'd like to ask the panel what they'd like to do about next harvest moon fest's sound situation...
i will try to make this as constructive and non-judgemental as possible. first off, i'd like to thank dave and phil for all the work they did. any help or contribution at chuck's farm is always welcome and greatly appreciated. compared to the '05 harvest fest sound, i felt this year's overall sound was a big improvement and much more appropriate for the setting (less volume, less magnitude). it felt more like chuck's farm than a rave, which i appreciated. however, i still feel that the size of the system could still use more down-sizing. so, my suggestion to whoever does sound next year is this, "less is more". from all the chuck's farms i've been to and played at, i really believe the best model for sound for this particular venue is a basement setup rather than one designed for the stage. this entails no mics on the drums, no mics on amps, PA only for vocals and acoustic instruments like sax, trumpet, percussion.....chuck's farm is never really the most organized thing, it's organic like everything growing there. with that said, i think keeping it simple is the way to go. if you want to go big, you have to get super organized, but that's just not the way it rolls at chucks. i heard borderless puzzle had tech problems, and having played with p22 and tDS sat. night we had a lot of problems with the sound. it's nobody's fault, it happens, but i think the solution or measure of prevention is to utilize a bare-bones sound system. also, i wouldn't mind having a few new heads behind the sound booth, to offer their hands and support and new ideas, cause it's all an experiment/work in progress, and all i want to see is continued movement towards finding something that works well and makes everybody happy. thank you.
|
|
|
Post by unoclay on Oct 23, 2006 18:51:41 GMT -5
i thought the sound was fine, but not having played in the band, i cannot offer the same insights that Steve is posting. My comment is, "good job", a discussion is worthwhile in any situation"
|
|