The dreaded decibel meter

[EBS_freak]

Quick anecdote.

 

Played a venue where the sound limit was so horrifically low, that a member of staff moving a hostess trolley that had a squeaky wheel tripped it.

 

On stage, I swear you could hear the acoustic sound of the guitar over that what was coming out of the guitar amp. COMPLETE DISASTER - yet the bride and groom loved it. Just proves that most clients wouldn't know the difference between good or bad. (There is some logic behind this though - if the bride and groom have no benchmark of a wedding band, then maybe they are more accepting of low volume, energy-less performances)

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

1 hour ago, EBS_freak said:

The venue are just trying to safeguard their permission to make noise within certain limits. Can't blame them really, as they want to continue to trade... and they don't want a third party wrecking it for them.

 

From my experience, this is how I'd handle the situation. Doddy is defo on the right path - venues see musicians as an annoyance that they are not in control of.

 

Respond to the venue and state the following - 

1. Respond to the venue, stating that you cannot afford to pre-visit every venue that you play but rest assured, as a professional outfit, you have experience of playing with sound limiters.

2. Acknowledge the fact that the venue are worried about sound levels and state that you of course will work with the venue to ensure that the appropriate sound levels are maintained. Suggest that a responsible member of a staff is present at the sound check to confirm that the band is playing to volumes that satisfy them, bringing a separate sound meter with them if required.

3. Also state that as the venue, they have a responsibility to provide a safe, continuous supply of power to the band, hence, you will not be signing any documentation. (Don't finish on this statement as it sound confrontational). As your part of the deal, you can state that all your equipment is PAT tested and you rely on it for your livelihood, therefore it should not be put at undue risk.

4. State that you will finish the set 15 minutes before curfew and then you will play pre recorded music to naturally bring the volume of the evening to a close. (So don't start playing things like I Predict a riot, Ruby ruby ruby, Brightside etc)

5. The band will respect any requests from the venues staff for you to alter the volume as required and you fully understand the meaning of striking that happy median of playing loud enough to generate the party atmosphere and respecting the neighbours).

6. Say you will be bringing an electric kit

 

Speak to the wedding couple and say that the venue is in touch and set expectations.

1. Performance won't be an issue but will be constrained by sound meter and you have had experience of playing sound metered gigs before.

2. Also state that the venue have a responsibility to provide a safe, continuous supply of power to the band, hence, they should not be signing any documentation.

3. State that you are sick of venues selling themselves as band friendly and say that the venue is completely shady if they have not set expectations of volumes at the time of booking the venue. (This plants the seed and makes the client have those conversations with the venue about their disappointment in a "miss-sold" fact about the suitability for entertainment.)

 

First off, write off the fact that this is going to be a high impact, high energy performance. It's not.

When you sound check -

1. Source an electric kit (if you haven't got access to one already). Every wedding band should get access to them.

2. Make the volume ridiculously low. Uncomfortably low even. It will keep the venue happy and give them the confidence that you aren't going to give them any sound pollution problems. They'll forget the signing of any meaningless documents when they realise that you are reasonable people.

3. Stand your ground if people ask you to turn up and politely encourage people to speak to the venue if there is a problem (preferably the person that was present at sound check).

4. Get through the gig. It probably won't be fun.

 

Additionally, look at the list of "approved" bands. If they are all Mumford and Sons-esque, consider going acoustic. You will need to confirm this with the client. I know, I know... but better to give something the beans acoustic-wise and can actually be quite fun as an alternative. 

 

You'll probably find out, this is all just procedure. In reality, once you remove the email chain, it's very rare that the venue will actually be that proactive in the follow up of anything. You'll probably find out the venue are completely different to how they can come across in emails. In all my years of playing wedding venues, there's only one that comes to memory where the tone of the email matched the guy at the venue. He was a complete pr1ck - I'll write about him in the nightmare thread at some point. Anyway... For example, PAT certificates and insurance - they just want to see a document. I have never had known anybody actually validate that the insurance document, or the PAT cert actually corresponds to the equipment that has turned up. All the venue are doing, is providing an audit that they have made reasonable steps to ensure that they have done the relevant Health and Safety steps to insure that there are no mishaps.

 

Also, looking back at the thread, good to see that somebody else is using UPS. We get 30 mins of playing time off the grid. Most amusing when venues are trying to figure out how we've bypassed the system.

 

Good luck - and don't forget to tell us your post gig story.

 

If it is a disaster down to the sound limiter, get the wedding party to post a review on social media. Don't kill the venue - give them a fair review but write how disappointing it was that venue did not disclose the sound restrictions up front (if they didn't... some do but some couples don't understand the significance of it). <- Mega annoyance of mine. I find it incredible that venues aren't required to disclose such massive constraints upfront.

 

As a side note, in my contracts, I specifically call out the safe power requirements and before I enter into an agreement with any client, I get the sound limiter status of the venue. I then explain the options to the client and whether the client wants to go forward with the band playing. In reality, I don't want sound limiter gigs, so tend to price myself out the market. The only ones that I'm not too bothered by taking, are the ones where I plug into sound systems where the venue provides the PA. This is becoming more and more common. I just turn up with the IEM setup and output to venue system.... which no doubt has a horrendous brick wall limiter on it and makes everything sound awful. But hey. What can you do?

 

Good luck and hope this helps.

Sound advice mate, but I think it will over complicate things.

 

The issue is that someone has made the decision, that as the OP’s band is not on the ‘recommended list’ (whatever that is), that the band is required to do a sound check on a day prior to the day they have been booked for. The response should be no, that is not happening and if they are standing by that stipulation, then the band will not be playing the wedding. I’ve never heard such an utterly ridiculous request and I wouldn’t be surprised if this has been suggested by a wedding planner type person rather than being a requirement of the venue itself.

 

The venue, it seems, allows live bands to perform there. Whether the OP’s band is on the list or not should make no difference whatsoever, unless they only have acoustic duo’s and the like in which case they should never have been booked. This kind of nonsense boils my blood. 

[fretmeister]

Just a thought...

 

Get a flat bed wagon, and gennie and a flipload of JCM800s and play the gig from the street.

 

They'll hear it.

[Doddy]

2 hours ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

 

The issue is that someone has made the decision, that as the OP’s band is not on the ‘recommended list’ (whatever that is), that the band is required to do a sound check on a day prior to the day they have been booked for. The response should be no, that is not happening and if they are standing by that stipulation, then the band will not be playing the wedding. I’ve never heard such an utterly ridiculous request and I wouldn’t be surprised if this has been suggested by a wedding planner type person rather than being a requirement of the venue itself.

 

The request to do a set up/soundcheck at an earlier date is crazy, but I honestly think it's just a way to try to scope out the band to make sure they aren't knobs. Every wedding venue has their recommended suppliers for bands, catering, decorations etc. They know who they can trust to turn up and be respectful and do a good job. They are unfamiliar with this band so they want to know that they are cool. One member going to the venue for a chat (or even a phone call if it's too far to go) with the boss/planner could possibly sort it all out.

 

[Greg Edwards69]

You could use this to your advantage. Even though it’s inconvenient for everyone to book a day off of work to do this soundcheck, you could alway tell that it will take 4 hours to setup, play though a range of song styles and pack up again, and thus get a free rehearsal out of it. 

Edited February 2, 2022 by Greg Edwards69

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

54 minutes ago, Doddy said:

The request to do a set up/soundcheck at an earlier date is crazy, but I honestly think it's just a way to try to scope out the band to make sure they aren't knobs. Every wedding venue has their recommended suppliers for bands, catering, decorations etc. They know who they can trust to turn up and be respectful and do a good job. They are unfamiliar with this band so they want to know that they are cool. One member going to the venue for a chat (or even a phone call if it's too far to go) with the boss/planner could possibly sort it all out.

I guarantee there will be more knobs in the audience than there will be playing instruments. Are they going to vet all the guests as well?

There is someone somewhere in the chain of decision making that needs a good kick up the derrière.

The client needs to find out who that is and talk some sense into them.

[Lozz196]

Having read through this I think the way the venue are behaving is potentially going to ruin the brides big day. It seems they don’t care one iota about her, the customer, who should be having the best day of her life. 

[Grimalkin]

The venue does sound overly cautious, as if they have had a smack on the wrist before. It's going to be a rinky dink gig, whether it's worth it or not is up to you.

[Doddy]

1 hour ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

I guarantee there will be more knobs in the audience than there will be playing instruments. Are they going to vet all the guests as well?

But the guests aren't being hired to work at the venue for the night.

 

There must be someone in the band who can liase with the venue?  The reason wedding bands charge what they do is partly to deal with situations like this. 

[Grimalkin]

Bars I've played in the past that were not happy with them, taped a piece of sponge over the front, where the mic grill is.

 

Jus' sayin'.

[SumOne]

 

7 minutes ago, Grimalkin said:

Bars I've played in the past that were not happy with them, taped a piece of sponge over the front, where the mic grill is.

 

Jus' sayin'.

 

And it's worth knowing what power outlets it trips.....e.g. kitchen plugs will stay on. 

 

I did a DJ gig once where the noise enforcement people came along and said to turn it down, I asked the soundsystem operator/promoter if we should (they had control of the amps and it was their equipment just there for that night) and the reply was 'no we're turning it up!' ....police turned up and night came to an abrupt end and the venue was closed down and has never re-opened. I'm not entirely sure that the promoter had the same priorities as the venue owner! 

[Happy Jack]

I just hope the fee is large enough to justify all the electrons that have been sacrificed to this thread!

 

My advice can be summarised thusly: Sex and Travel. 

 

One to walk away from.

 

[Grimalkin]

An acoustic set, followed by a rousing chorus of Kumbaya, to bring everyone together.

[Dan Dare]

I wonder whether the venue is trying to steer the couple in the direction of using one of its "approved" bands. The venue will then book one of its "approved" bands and take a cut of their fee. The insistence that the band turns up on another day to "soundcheck" is ridiculous. It guarantees nothing. There would be nothing to prevent a band from turning everything right down at the so-called "soundcheck" and then cranking it on the day.

 

I reckon the venue is trying to scam a few pounds extra for itself. I agree with others who suggest turning it over to the couple to negotiate with the venue.

Edited February 2, 2022 by Dan Dare

[scalpy]

Thanks for all the advice folks.

We’ll definitely send one of us up there if possible to talk to the venue.

 

Good pointer about the safe power supply as well, although I’ll keep my powder dry with that caveat. 

 

We simply can’t do the audition/ sound check- most of us are teachers of one description or another and don’t have the option to book time off, so it won’t happen. 
 

The general feeling in the band is that we don’t appreciate being scapegoated here. I don’t have an issue with recommended suppliers, we have that arrangement with 3 venues ourselves. But this smacks of this particular venue talking a big talk to land the booking, understandably especially since COVID, but that being the priority over the event which has rightly been pointed out as the proper focus. 
 

We’ll go in ears, I’ll run 100% through the PA, the drummer will go behind his screens, trumpet player will have to take the exciting bits down an octave and we’ll do our best- if we’re allowed in at all! It’s just good to know it’s not just us who think this arrangement is completely daft and unreasonable. 

[Maude]

12 minutes ago, Happy Jack said:

 

My advice can be summarised thusly: Sex and Travel. 

 

 

Dammit! I thought that going to read 'Sex On Fire'. 

 

😄

[Drax]

10 hours ago, scalpy said:

For instance, I’ve had dB meters trip because of audiences singing along, dancing on wooden floors, somebody telling a funny story and people laughing (that venue a had meter at the bar set at 70dB 🤦), and fights. 

Fights?! With guns? 

[scalpy]

5 minutes ago, Drax said:

Fights?! With guns? 

The leave ‘Leave it Wayne- he’s not worth it’ type as drunks roll around on the floor with onlookers giving various forms of enthusiastic advice. 

[Downunderwonder]

1 hour ago, scalpy said:

trumpet player will have to take the

night off" is what I was auto completing as I read it, make sure he's playing to the floor not the room and definitely not the meter mic.

 

I would seriously look at getting B&G to spring for hiring in an electric kit. Either drummer can 'hit' quietly maintaining energy or he can't.

 

It's rather important where the meter is situated!

 

A well kicked kick drum is 100dB at the kick mic if I remember. Concrete block walls have a hard time slowing down the kick, your screens won't slow it down much at all.

 

You might have to go mono with the (vocal only) PA. Half the sound right off the bat. So long as band is as good as you seem to think about playing hard out but quietly nobody will notice the lack of chest thump back at the bar.

 

 

[gjones]

My experience of playing in a room with Db meters is, always bring a very, very, very long extension lead.

 

If you know what I mean.

[iconic]

Some great advice here.

 

As an aside, surely 96db is plenty loud. Snetterton, my local race track, has a drive by limit of 92db and, that's loud enough to feel uncomfortable without ear plugs over quite short a period. 

 

92db is a lot less than 96db being a logarithmic scale.....every 10db is twice as loud. 

 

We live close to a pub that has live music, since last 5 years or so.

 

We love it, even more so when a decent bass player turns up😉but, understandably other neighbours don't. One man's music is another mans relentless noise and invasion of their privacy. The licence was granted with strict conditions. 

 

The pubs music licence is looking like it will be pulled, too many bands have bypassed the noise limiter, with the permission or otherwise of a DPS, outside doors left open etc in all the excitement.

It's immediately noticeable when the limiter is bypassed, even to us and we aren't next door or, if we are at the pub it's a case of shouting into a cupped hand into an ear to be heard for only as long as we can stand..... just the ammo the neighbours have needed to get the licence revoked.

 

Doesn't matter to the bands doing it, they don't give a flying f*ck, just another gig. The real shame is that there are precious few venues left around these parts so it hurts everybody with an interest in live music.

 

........and on a selfish note I may loose access to firming up over some bass gear and, listening to some very tidy players....even the bad ones are great entertainment though, the guy with the a couple grands worth of shiny new F bass was so spectacularly dreadful he made the night😀

 

Good luck with the wedding do😎

[Downunderwonder]

1 hour ago, iconic said:

96db is plenty loud

It is if it's where you are.

 

Everything depends where the mic is. If it is stage side it's not nearly as much headroom to play with than if it's at the other end of the room, but then the rowdies could get too close to it and upset everything so you actually have less headroom than you think even though you are way louder. ( Using headroom in the not strictly correct sense of dynamic range )

[jimmyb625]

3 hours ago, iconic said:

Some great advice here.

 

As an aside, surely 96db is plenty loud. Snetterton, my local race track, has a drive by limit of 92db and, that's loud enough to feel uncomfortable without ear plugs over quite short a period. 

 

92db is a lot less than 96db being a logarithmic scale.....every 10db is twice as loud. 

Well, yes and no.

 

If you're looking at sound pressure levels, in a free field, then it's a 6dB decrease with doubling distance. 3dB is a doubling of power and 10dB is an apparent doubling of loudness.

 

The 10dB value is also conflated by our (humans) non-linear frequency perception, where we naturally perceive frquencies around the conversational area to be louder. 

 

According to one reference on t'interweb, 96dB is (roughly) equivalent to a Boeing 737 or DC-9 aircraft at 1 nautical mile before landing. I live directly under the flightpath for Runway 2 at Manchester airport and the sound/noise of a 737 has never concerned me. However, having lived here as long as I have, I rarely pay much attention to them, which highlights the problem of perception.

[Downunderwonder]

5 minutes ago, jimmyb625 said:

Boeing 737

The new ones are about 1/2 as loud as the ten year old ones which are about half as loud as the original ones. I would question how old that reference is. It sounds like they might be referring to the originals as 96dB is pretty damn loud, which they were!

[jimmyb625]

4 minutes ago, Downunderwonder said:

The new ones are about 1/2 as loud as the ten year old ones which are about half as loud as the original ones. I would question how old that reference is. It sounds like they might be referring to the originals as 96dB is pretty damn loud, which they were!

Pales into insignificance compared to the old PIA 747, which used to struggle to meet minimum altitude...

 

This was the source:

https://www.chem.purdue.edu/chemsafety/Training/PPETrain/dblevels.htm