Could be my ears ........ but ..... "BRIGHT" PA

[Phil Starr]

43 minutes ago, Chienmortbb said:

On the hill above  my old house in Poole is Sontronics. I bought one of their SOLO mics when it was released.  I love this mic as it sounded how my voice did when recorded  with a really good studio mic. It is more akin to the 945, being a super cardioid but it does show that thinking out of the SM58 box works well if you take the time. Don't get me wrong the SM58 is a fine mic but the design is over 50 years old and what once was the outstanding performer is now amongst the also-rans.

 

Amongst my collection of old mics I have a Sontronics STC80. Now discontinued I think it was the forerunner of the Solo but is a cardioid, one of the best sounding mics I have and probably the equal of the Sennheiser 935/945 at a lower price. If someone wants a good mic at a great price the Solo has to be a recommendation. They weigh a ton though

[Pirellithecat]

The thoughts about a more benign vocal Mic, are very interesting!!
Sounds like it might be well worth investing in the Sontronics Solo, sounds ideal ..... !
So thanks for the info ... could make a big difference!   (and be slightly less costly than an A&H CQ18-T!)   

In the light of input on here, last night tried the following;  
More dramatic management of Monitor volume and EQ - replacing our old monitor with a more "modern" one, with much better EQ controls (and adjusting input EQ's on desk).
More robust management of the EQ's and volumes to FOH.  (Lot's of CUT!!!).  And no Compression!
(Didn't use the Graphic Equaliser on this occasion as complexity is an issue - but plan to in future.)
Spent more time on my IEMs to sort the "sound in my head".  - lot's to do here but continuing to make progress and it allowed me to ignore the Stage Sound (as I wasn't much affected by it!!)

Pretty much sorted the FOH sound at Sound Check and, fortunately, had a musician friend in the audience to confirm all was well at various points during the gig.
And it Worked well ......

Bonus point. 
During the gig I noticed the Drummer scowling in the general direction of the Guitar amps, so I enquired .... "too much midrange "mush" from guitar(s)!  Can't hear drum monitor as it's just part of an overall noise".   I may have smirked, shrugged, and said "Yeah, tricky one that - you should probably mention it - nothing I can do from the mix point of view" .   I am, though, a child!!! 

Seems like the Serenity Prayer might have to become the amateurs mixer(er)'s creed 
 ...........grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Edited June 30 by Pirellithecat

[Phil Starr]

12 hours ago, Pirellithecat said:

grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

 

Amen

[Dan Dare]

21 hours ago, Phil Starr said:

Amongst my collection of old mics I have a Sontronics STC80. Now discontinued I think it was the forerunner of the Solo but is a cardioid, one of the best sounding mics I have and probably the equal of the Sennheiser 935/945 at a lower price. If someone wants a good mic at a great price the Solo has to be a recommendation. They weigh a ton though

 

Agreed. Our singer picked one up on t'Bay for £35 in mint condition. It's far superior to a SM58.

[Chienmortbb]

 

22 hours ago, Phil Starr said:

They weigh a ton though

I agree, they are reassuringly solid. However I think you meant Tonne 🤣

[Chienmortbb]

4 hours ago, Phil Starr said:

 

Amen

+1

[Phil Starr]

21 hours ago, Chienmortbb said:

It must have been the pollen count but I was wrong in that it was the 912s I auditioned. I did an A/B against the HH Tensor TR1201. The bottom end of the 912s was marginally better than the HH, but overall sound was probably better from the HH. AS you may remember, in the end I decided that neither were worth the money and the 912 was particularly poor value considering the higher price.

 

 

I didn't pick this up when you posted it but I'm not surprised at what you noticed. I've not heard the HH's so no comment there. RCF have a huge range of speakers but within the ART series the numbering is at least consistent. The last two numbers give the size of the horn and the bass driver so x12 is a 1" throat horn with a 12" driver and an x35 has a 3" compression unit with a 15" bass driver. as you go from the 3xx series (now discontinued) to the 7xx series and 9xx series you get a better bass driver with a bigger magnet, more weight and higher efficiency. You'd expect better bass from the 9 series but a better midrange from the 932 compared with the 912. That ties in with @Al Krow s experience with his band's speakers

[Acebassmusic]

On 23/06/2024 at 14:36, Bill Fitzmaurice said:

I did that too, until 20 years ago, when I went to DSP with auto EQ. But you can manually tune EQ almost as easily with one of these on your phone https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=radonsoft.net.rta&hl=en_US

and one of these for your mixer http://www.flatkeys.co.uk/P!NG.php

Hey @Bill Fitzmaurice, I like the idea of the Audio Analyser on my phone to be able to guide me when tuning EQ. From what I know (not much! 🤣) RTA's are usually calibrated etc. How does using the in built mic on the phone affect the readings or is it "near enough for a guide"?

[Acebassmusic]

Repeated post!! 🤔🤣

Edited July 1 by Acebassmusic

[Acebassmusic]

Repeated, repeated post!! 🤔🤣

Edited July 1 by Acebassmusic

[Chienmortbb]

27 minutes ago, Acebassmusic said:

How does using the in built mic on the phone affect the readings or is it "near enough for a guide"?

I would say yes but remember that most phones have a built in HPF. So don't trust the phone below about 120Hz. The iPhone 3,3S and 4 I believe were full range but the HPF was introduced in the 4S. The electret mics used are remarkable good.

[Chienmortbb]

18 hours ago, Pirellithecat said:

The thoughts about a more benign vocal Mic, are very interesting!!
Sounds like it might be well worth investing in the Sontronics Solo, sounds ideal ..... !
So thanks for the info ... could make a big difference!   (and be slightly less costly than an A&H CQ18-T!)   

In the light of input on here, last night tried the following;  
More dramatic management of Monitor volume and EQ - replacing our old monitor with a more "modern" one, with much better EQ controls (and adjusting input EQ's on desk).
More robust management of the EQ's and volumes to FOH.  (Lot's of CUT!!!).  And no Compression!
(Didn't use the Graphic Equaliser on this occasion as complexity is an issue - but plan to in future.)
Spent more time on my IEMs to sort the "sound in my head".  - lot's to do here but continuing to make progress and it allowed me to ignore the Stage Sound (as I wasn't much affected by it!!)

Pretty much sorted the FOH sound at Sound Check and, fortunately, had a musician friend in the audience to confirm all was well at various points during the gig.
And it Worked well ......

Bonus point. 
During the gig I noticed the Drummer scowling in the general direction of the Guitar amps, so I enquired .... "too much midrange "mush" from guitar(s)!  Can't hear drum monitor as it's just part of an overall noise".   I may have smirked, shrugged, and said "Yeah, tricky one that - you should probably mention it - nothing I can do from the mix point of view" .   I am, though, a child!!! 

Seems like the Serenity Prayer might have to become the amateurs mixer(er)'s creed 
 ...........grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

PM sent.

[Al Krow]

On 30/06/2024 at 12:07, Chienmortbb said:

It must have been the pollen count but I was wrong in that it was the 912s I auditioned. I did an A/B against the HH Tensor TR1201. The bottom end of the 912s was marginally better than the HH, but overall sound was probably better from the HH. AS you may remember, in the end I decided that neither were worth the money and the 912 was particularly poor value considering the higher price.

 

Just to balance this, we've been very happy with our 912As at both pubs and function gigs, and we alternate the 912As with our 732As, which our singer has. At £500 a piece they've provided a really good sound and were comfortably within our budget (50% less than the 732As) and they've certainly not been too bright or harsh.

 

I'd be happy to recommend them as a workhorse PA set up which provides enough low end without a sub.

 

Edited July 2 by Al Krow

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

4 hours ago, Acebassmusic said:

Hey @Bill Fitzmaurice, I like the idea of the Audio Analyser on my phone to be able to guide me when tuning EQ. From what I know (not much! 🤣) RTA's are usually calibrated etc. How does using the in built mic on the phone affect the readings or is it "near enough for a guide"?

You only need to calibrate it if you want an SPL reading, which you don't need for seeing the system response.

[Owen]

On 26/06/2024 at 23:16, Phil Starr said:

some times you don't need the weakness of your third vocal exposed, they'll cover a multitude of sins 

So much yes. 

[Owen]

On 26/06/2024 at 23:16, Phil Starr said:

some times you don't need the weakness of your third vocal exposed, they'll cover a multitude of sins 

So much yes. 

[Owen]

Incompetence masquerading as comedy gold!

[Pirellithecat]

Well another gig .... and another comment about vocals being "bright" on the full-on bits!   
Tried even more EQ cut to the mids, but  - with one Mid frequency knob labelled 100hz to 8kHz - with a mid point label of 600hz- trying to do this "live", on stage is problematic.  Hopefully will try a different Mic at next outing (SennHeiser e 935 or a Sontronics Solo), and in the meantime I might "play" with the mids to see if I can "find" the right freq (location on the dial) to cut. 
The alternative is to get a friend (who is a sound engineer) to come and mix us "live" offstage and then use his settings as our "benchmark"  in the future. I don't think using the Graphic is going to be realistic in terms of having time (or offstage ears) to adjust it from the stage during a gig ........ 
May just be that if the Mics don't solve the problem, I'll have a look at a more flexible mixer ....................   

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

4 hours ago, Pirellithecat said:

I don't think using the Graphic is going to be realistic in terms of having time (or offstage ears) to adjust it from the stage during a gig ........  

You can't adjust EQ from the stage, you have to do it listening or measuring, preferably measuring, out front during sound check.

[Pirellithecat]

51 minutes ago, Bill Fitzmaurice said:

You can't adjust EQ from the stage, you have to do it listening or measuring, preferably measuring, out front during sound check.

Exactly what everyone tells me ............  at sound check I'm in the "audience" playing bass to the one song we use as a sound check.  I obviously teleport from there to the stage to adjust the EQ .... zip back to check it's OK (whilst playing bass), repeat as necessary in the allotted 4mins of the song, and then ...... hope for the best! 
It's not perfect, but between England dithering over penalties (leaving us an hour to get everything unloaded, set up, tested to make sure all the bits are joined together, and work) and a 4 min song to see how it sounds, it's unsurprising that we have a few issues.  But - most are now manageable - it's just the Shrill Vocal, and after that's sorted I'll have the luxury of 4 mins to adjust stuff at my leisure........  🤭
The context of this is the band's attitude ... "why do you fiddle about with the PA?   Why don't you just use the settings from last time and then we wouldn't have to do anything other than adjust the volume if the space is bigger" .   Tough job, but someone has to do it ............. That's my experience of Pub gigs here in the North of England.   Perhaps I'm the only one!!  😂

[linear]

18 minutes ago, Pirellithecat said:

The context of this is the band's attitude ... "why do you fiddle about with the PA?   Why don't you just use the settings from last time and then we wouldn't have to do anything other than adjust the volume if the space is bigger" .   Tough job, but someone has to do it ............. That's my experience of Pub gigs here in the North of England.   Perhaps I'm the only one!!  😂

You're definitely not the only one.  No good deed goes unpunished.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

3 hours ago, Pirellithecat said:

The context of this is the band's attitude ... "why do you fiddle about with the PA?   Why don't you just use the settings from last time and then we wouldn't have to do anything other than adjust the volume if the space is bigger" .

Because the same settings will sound different in every room. Sometimes you really have to wonder how guys who make money creating sound have no idea how sound works.

Quote

  I obviously teleport from there to the stage to adjust the EQ .... zip back to check it's OK (whilst playing bass), repeat as necessary in the allotted 4mins of the song,

That's why you take an RTA with your phone. You don't need to guess which frequencies need adjusting or by how much. It's right there for you to see.

[Phil Starr]

So you've narrowed it down to the vocals sounding shrill, It could be so many things including the singers voice which may be great in some of their vocal range but not others. You may be singing in a key which is difficult for her and she may be out of tune in places Singers voices are said to work in a series of registers and there are crossover points where they have to shift registers, the point is these crossovers are the weak points where the vocal sound is least under control and can sound harsh. All voices have resonances and the mic may be picking that up too. can you record the performance and try and find out if the shrillness is all the time or just now and then. if so is it the same places in the same song every time? Come to that you can't hear the PA from behind so who is telling you it is shrill.

 

To be honest I'd probably avoid telling the singer she is shrill though That really isn't going to end well.

 

Shrill isn't really a very descriptive term, it describes too much upper mids to me but others will use differnt words. One thing you can do is to fill out the sound with extra low mids to make it sound richer and see how that works. You can sweeten a voice with some reverb and delay applied judiciously. Why not book a session with the singer to just tweak her voice on the mixer. If you optimse it through the monitors then you can pass that on to the FOH as well and the two of you will be working together to make her sound and feel good. I've done this with my own voice and  since then with one of my singers and once they started it was actually a fun experience. If you don't have enough control on your mixer then short of buying a new one there are plenty of affordable pedals for voice enhancment https://www.thomann.de/gb/vocalists.html

 

[Pirellithecat]

Thanks everyone! 
I have a spectral analysing app on my phone ...  I can try that. 
I know that "shrill" doesn't really help, but, until i can identify the frequencies responsible it's the best I can do.   I hear it as "shrill" when I perambulate round the audience during the sound check and sometimes when I venture out to check (whilst playing).   I've had feedback from a sound engineer I know who said our vocalist had a fantastic voice and he'd really like to record her with a decent Mic and proper studio equipment. he's very diplomatic so i guess he meant "is that the best you can do!!".  Apart from that I've had 2 separate reports from musicians in the audience, "sounds great except for high volume, high frequency notes in really loud bits of songs.  Described as "painfully  bright"!  And yes it's just the main vocal. 
And suggesting any of this to the vocalist (and/or her partner .... The Drummer ).... wouldn't be a wise move! 
Thickening up other parts of the mix might work as long as I don't end up getting more feedback issues, but a Vocal Pedal or a better EQ "strip" might be an economic way to go.  I don't think its something that will need much adjustment gig by gig as once I can work out how to tame the frequencies involved, they'll just be part of the EQ for her Mic . 
I'll check out the pedals .... ta!     

[Phil Starr]

Sounds like you know what the issues are, that all makes sense and makes it easier for us to make suggestions and ultimately for you to find an answer. You've isolated the problem and the solution will follow.

 

If it helps I have had similar issues with male vocalists, both with incredibly strong and good voices, one of them has a four octave range!! The trouble is that not all of that range sounds as nice as other bits. He can hit all the notes but there's no point hitting a high C if it clears the room. His mic technique is appalling.

 

This sounds like she might be singing the wrong songs or singing them in the wrong key for her voice. Alternatively she may have poor mic technique. Commonly singers go for extra volume on the notes they aren't confident singing, that's fine if they back the mic off a little for the high notes. On the low ones the easiest thing is to sing them quieter and use the mic's proximity effect to boost the low end. Your sound engineer may not have been diplomatic, it may be the simple truth and she has a fantastic voice but she needs the right mic. I'd prioritise talking to him first, he's actually heard the problem and almost certainly the experience to help. getting her in the studio and copying his settings sounds like an efficient and fun way to go and you'll get a decent demo out of it with any luck. It might save you a bit of money if you don't need to buy a fancy mixer to get the best out of her.

 

Singers are also like bass players and guitarists, they have favourite songs they've always wanted to sing/play since they were 8 years old and won't let you take them out of the set even though they are just wrong for them.

 

Good luck