This one goes in the category of why didn’t I think of this sooner?

Last time I wrote about the improvements to our IEM system that have come from implementing a new transmitter/receiver combo and some additional ear piece options.  The problem with adding more wireless into an already congested environment is a higher probability of failure.  I’ve personally managed to avoid Murphy’s Law when it comes to IEM for a long time but I realize it was only a matter of time before someone’s system failed during a service and we’d be in big trouble.

Enter Sidefills.  A friend spent a couple services with me post-Christmas and suggested that what we were missing was a good holistic stereo mix that will fill in the missing pieces when someone pulls an ear out and also provide some added energy to the first couple rows that might be a tad light from the PA over their heads.  It seemed like a good idea.

In my past life as a monitor engineer, sidefills were an important part of getting a great onstage sound since I worked with lots of vocal groups who would often times only wear 1 ear anyway.  For some reason, I never even considered it at KCC since our old PA already put energy everywhere except where I really wanted it – the prospect of adding an additional full-range sound source was unappealing.  However, in the new reality of a controlled PA without a ton of stage spill, it seemed possible this might just work.

Work it does.  I have a set of EAW KF300s that have been unused for a while.  I put them on top of the subs, about 5 feet off the ground, pointed in towards center stage.  Stereo mix gives more clarity & separation than mono, add some EQ to smooth out the rough edges of the boxes themselves, and add a few milliseconds of delay to the PA so the clusters in the air are in relative time alignment with the sidefills and the result is really good.  I’m feeding these boxes from FOH subgroups so they essentially get a rebalanced FOH post fader mix.  The mix is split up to rhythm, band, and vocals.  Using this approach keeps them specifically music-focused – playback and speech mics stay out of them.

We still keep a set of wedges on the front row for lead vocal monitors.  The addition of the sidefills allows the vocal to literally be surrounded by themselves – just a touch of vocal in those front wedges pulls the singer’s image forward.  Needing less band in those front wedges reduces mud heard at FOH since the sidefills are actually working with and as a part of the PA rather than against it.  I find myself putting 100% vocal in them, 80 or 90% band, and 60% rhythm (since the acoustic kit on stage adds its own ambient sound).

If you mix on a primarily IEM stage as I am and haven’t revisited sidefills in a while, this experience enthusiastically suggests they’re worth a try.

We’ve had a few updates & upgrades that have significantly benefited IEMs and figured this would be a good place to start getting back into this post the past few crazy months.  So here we go…

First, a few weeks before Christmas we were finally able to upgrade from wired IEMs driven from a headphone amp to Sennheiser EW300G3‘s.  The difference has been awesome in a few ways.  First, the sonic quality of the 300s is nothing short of amazing.  The low end is tight, the top end natural.  When paired up with a good set of ear pieces, I’ve been blown away by the mixes some of our guys are dialing in.  Second, not being tied to the IEM wired cable has made a big difference in the comfort level of our artists.  Often times we had to be very careful in how the service was programmed to make sure artists had ample time to get on stage, plug in their ears, put on guitars, tune, etc.  If something went wrong plugging in their ears or they accidentally pulled the cable out, we were in trouble.  Along with using more wireless instruments (I’ll write about this soon), the result has been a much smoother & more polished presentation.

We purchased 4 transmitters & 6 receiver beltpacks.  For the majority of things we do, we will use the 4 transmitters/beltpacks, along with our existing PSM600 and 2 wired mixes for keys & drums.  With some extra beltpacks for the 300s and our PSM600, we can easily expand by adding a few more mono mixes the few times a year they are needed.  It is so hard to justify extra transmitters in a rack if they aren’t going to be used very often so this seems like a reasonable compromise.

A big surprise is how much some of our female artists enjoy the bundled Sennheiser ear bud – the IE4.  The sound quality of the buds is probably on par with a Shure SCL3 or good set of iPod buds.  What is appealing about them, though, is how well they seem to fit smaller ears.  Our vocal director, who’s been wearing our generic Shure pieces for a year and a half or so, felt like these were the most comfortable thing and for the first time she can actually forget she’s wearing them.  Definitely a good problem solver.

Another important piece of the puzzle is the addition of some Westone UM2′s to our inventory.  After someone recommended trying them out, I’ve finally found something to make me give up my Future Sonics that I’ve had forever.  These are the most comfortable universal fit I’ve ever worn and they are the first universal bud that I’ve heard with really natural midrange, which is really important for vocals & guitars.  The Shures, Future Sonics, and Ultimate Ears I’ve heard all can sound really nice in the low and high ranges, but often times feel a little scooped, honky, or just otherwise unnatural in the midrange.  The Westones seem to bring a lot of that presence back.  Best of all, the Shure foamie’s I can purchase in bulk fit on these as well so its a win on all fronts.  Adding Westone’s into the mix have brought 2 of our hold-out musicians into the IEM fold.  Finally they feel like the guitar sound they hear in the ears feels like what it should actually sound like.

I’ve been really disappointed with the build quality of the Shure SCL3′s and 4′s so time will tell if the Westone’s can withstand heavy use.

So from a music team standpoint, we now have 100% of our band members transitioned to IEM.  Next time I’m going to outline another addition to our monitoring system that feels like its filled in the missing link in the chain.

We finally made it to the last and likely most important mix in the IEM series…lead vocal/worship leader.  In this particular example our lead vocal is also playing acoustic, so not surprisingly you’ll hear those two inputs most focused in the mix.

As with some of the other mixes we’ve discussed, our vocalists seem to largely prefer their voices dry…if they want to wetten things up, adding more of the extras channel does the trick.  This works well in our particular setup since the vocals are fed to the IEM system direct off of board channels – adding verb would increase the complexity of routing.

I strongly encourage everyone who wears ears to keep both sides in all the time.  My primary reasoning is that your brain does a cool thing when it receives similar input from both ears in summing that source 6 dB internally.  So, if you only wear one ear, you’re going to have to turn up your IEM mix approximately 6 dB in order for it to feel as loud as both ears in.  Obviously you have to be really careful with this because an untrained artist could easily cause themselves hearing damage night after night of crazy levels in their IEM.

I say all that to say, the mix an artist wants changes pretty dramatically depending on whether they are wearing one or two ears.  These mixes you’re going to listen to today are one ear in mixes, so you’ll find that the acoustic, vocal, and click are WAY more out front then in the other mixes we’ve analyzed since the artist is getting a lot of their sound ambiently through their other ear not wearing the IEM.

Our philosophy at Kensington regarding ears has been to do everything possible to gain band acceptance.  By doing that, the stage volume lowers significantly and vocals have a much easier time just hearing themselves through a wedge.  I’ve mentioned that we have 6 channels of wired ears and 1 wireless transmitter/receiver system.  Because of this wireless limitation, we haven’t pushed very many vocalists to jump to ears.  This isn’t necessarily a bad thing since vocalists often have a much harder time adjusting to performing through IEM systems then instrumentalists because it can effect their pitch center, how loudly they perceive their head voice, etc.  So we’ve had good success getting musicians on ears and, by doing that, getting enough sonic space on stage for the vocalists to be able to hear themselves comfortably through wedges and not have to deal with their transition yet.

I’ve heard from another large church that they have the policy that a new vocalist must sing BGV on ears for at least 6 months in order to get used to them before they would ever ask them to sing lead VOX.  I can certainly see the wisdom in that approach.

We’ll wrap this whole thing up next time with the live mixes of the 2 songs we’ve been using for test material so you can hear overall context.  See you then!

Continuing the IEM series, today we’re talking about the keys mix. We’re departing from the two tunes we’ve used for the rest of this series since there weren’t any keys in that band.

On a given week, we submix as many as three keys sources in mono to send to the IEMs. The first source is Ivory from our Slam Grand.  If the piano shell is not in the set, often times I will still run MIDI out of the primary keyboard into the Ivory system so that tone is available if we want a grand piano patch in the day.  The other two inputs are our house keys – a Yamaha Motif8 and a Korg Triton.  Every once in a while one of our artists might bring in their own boards but it doesn’t happen very often in a month.

I was concerned when we first installed our IEM system that the keys would need to be in stereo just like the drum kit in the ears mixes and that would present channel count issues with our desired allocation.  Thankfully, I don’t think anyone has ever commented on the keys being submixed to mono rather than stereo.  As a result, the only truly stereo submixes in the ears are the drum mix and the extras channels.  Everything else goes to the IEMs in mono and can be panned around in each individual mix as desired.

I’ve received a few questions via email for more information about the ambience mics specifically so I am preparing more info about that to tag onto the end of this series.

With that said, check this out…

Next time we’ll listen to the final IEM mix – lead vocal/worship leader.  Thanks for reading!

Continuing our series on IEM mixes, today we’re going to focus on the drummer’s mix.  If you’ve missed the other parts of this series, go back through the last few days posts to catch up.  Sorry for the data dumps in some of these posts but I’m just trying to make sure I cover things as thoroughly as possible.

When we first adapted the PQ system for our IEM mixes, I was concerned that a stereo drum mix that everyone shared might cause problems.  The reality couldn’t be further from that.  A stereo aux creates the submix for the drums and it is slaved to the channel pan so whatever panning is done for the house translates to the ears.  I actually leave the sends to this aux set to unity in my default console setup.  That way, as I soundcheck the drums, I can build my house mix with the faders near unity and it translates almost perfectly to the ears.  It is RARE to need to tweak the mix for the ears – I actually can’t tell you the last time I listened to it other than preparing for these posts.  It just works every time.

By now you should be sensing some trends.  The ears mixes are pretty dry and really simple.  If we had a separate monitor desk, I’m sure there are more things we could do to make the environment even better for the artists (things like manually riding audience levels, riding solos, adding effects if desired, etc) but this system works for our guys, as evidenced by the wide acceptance factor.

Song #1 is still “My Savior, My God”.  Check it out…

Song #2 adds the click and track.  Again the click takes almost singular focus in the mix since everyone is locking to it.  I can’t speak very much into what it takes to be successful with the whole click track thing from an artist perspective.  Kensington has been using click’s for so long that it was just something we do by the time I got here.

Again, if there are questions, let’s use the comments section to discuss.

Next time:  keys mixes.  We’ll have to use different songs then the ones we’ve been using so far since there wasn’t a keys player in this band.  It will be good to change it up a bit, as well!

Today’s IEM mix we’re going to evaluate is from our bass guitar player. Again, there’s very little processing on the mix. This one would probably benefit from listening on better speakers then those on a laptop. The experience is pretty different for me listening to these clips on my speakers vs. on some good IEMs so you’ll probably find the same thing.

Right now is a good time to stress the importance of good ear pieces in order to achieve wide acceptance.  When I started at Kensington, all that we owned were some Shure E1s and NO ONE was excited to put those things on for anything.  The first time we did a band with ears for a holiday, everyone but the bass player wore E1s and it was painful.  Now we use Shure products exclusively (I’ve written about this before – check the archives if you’re interested in why) and have a mix of SCL3, SCL4, and SCL5′s.  Since I consider us still in the early days of a transition campus-wide to IEM, only a small handful of our artists own their own ear pieces.  Most use our house sets.  We stock the replacement foam and change it for each set whenever a new artist is using them.

Focusing now on the mix, our artists get a stereo drum mix to their PQ mixer for their IEMs. Everyone gets the same drum mix and we find that works fine for us. The only exception is that the bass player also gets the kick channel individually in addition to the stereo mix since bass players always want more kick then the rest of the band. When you listen to the first clip from “My Savior, My God”, the first thing that jumps out is the placement of kick and bass in relation to everything else in the mix. There’s also quite a bit more of the extras channels in this mix then in the electric mix we listened to last time. One caveat though – due to the channel limitations of our system on this particular night, the bass player chose to have mono extras rather than the normal stereo. Personally the stereo part of ambience is really important to me but this particular artist isn’t reliant on ambience so its a simple trade off. I’m actually surprised in listening to his mix that he has this much extras present. Regardless…

The second clip, like last time, adds a click and track into the mix. What is interesting is that with this mix, the click is pretty buried. In fact, once the drums kick in I don’t think it is very present at all. Again you can get a better idea of the importance of the extras channel in the mix when you hear the crowd singing along.

Again, if there are questions, let’s use the comments section for this. I’m really not sure what else is helpful to share.

Next time: drums IEM mixes

Today we’re continuing the series on IEM mixes.  I’m in my fourth year mixing at Kensington and when I started here, every artist on stage used a wedge and those wedge mixes were created for better or for worse at FOH.  The job was daunting, to say the least.  Fast forward to today and all but three artists (40+) now use IEM solely when they play at our main Troy campus (the portable campuses have not begun transitioning to IEM yet but hopefully soon!).  All of these things I’m sharing in this series of posts are things we’ve learned along the way in order to gain such wide acceptance from artists.  This is by no means the only way to do it but it is OUR way.

The first IEM mix we’re going to evaluate is lead guitar. Most of our worship arrangements are electric driven so this is a pretty important place to start. Our mixes are generally very dry and we use the extras channels to add space when desired. I’ve worked with artists who like more processing in their ears but this setup seems to work for our artists since we don’t have a dedicated monitor engineer.  There isn’t any significant processing on the mixes you’re going to listen to – they are created with a stereo PQ channel on the Venue, the on-board limiter is engaged to protect the output on the top end, and that mix then feeds the wired IEM system.

I have two samples from tunes to listen to for the electric guitar artist. This first one is from “My Savior, My God”. The instrumentation is electric, acoustic, bass, drums, lead vocal, and BGV. It sounds a little cliche, but you’ll quickly see as we go through this series that each person’s mix probably starts with a “more me” philosophy. This makes sense when you remember that I strongly encourage all of our artists to wear both ears all the time and this results in lots of isolation from the outside world in what they’re hearing. The result is a big need to hear what the artist is doing individually, and then surround that with the other instruments to provide timing, pitch, and ensemble. The band is not playing to a click in this one so you’ll see where our artist placed the drums in relation to everything else. I think it is interesting how out front his guitar really is in his mix, yet you can clearly maintain the placement of the kit, vocal, and the worship leader’s acoustic.

DISCLAIMER – this obviously isn’t the only way to build an IEM mix but hopefully it is helpful to hear what a really good musician is listening to.

The second sample is a little different in the band is playing to a click & track. At the start of the tune, you’ll hear the count off and a really broken down intro. The electric is just doing atmosphere stuff at the beginning and really kicks in at 1:12. The interesting thing here is the difference in placement between the click and the drum kit in this one. As I listen to the mixes that most of our guys dial in, it seems when playing to a click, everyone really dials into that click and keeps it out front with the kit tucking in behind it. This might just be a preference thing but it works for our guys since everyone is so used to playing to a click. Obviously your mileage may vary.

If you have any questions based on what you’re hearing, feel free to use the comments on this post for discussion.

Next time: IEM mixes for bass

One of the biggest questions and challenges I hear about from other audio guys, especially in churches, has to do with IEM mixes – what should be in them, what do good ones sound like, how do you help your artists have successful mixes, etc. etc.

Today we’re going to start a little journey over the next 2 weeks to cover each major instrument – bass, electric, keys, drums, and vocals – and talk about what makes good mixes for each category.  I also have actual samples that I have recorded so you can hear what real guys dialed in and we’ll analyze each one.  I’ll be posting Mon-Wed-Fri this week and next to continue this little series.

To start things off, I want to refer you to a video blog I did a few months ago about our PQ system that might be helpful so you can see more about how our particular system functions for our artists, just for context.

Next, a tool that is REALLY critical to good IEM mixes is what we call our “extras channel”.  A common complaint you’ll hear from artists who are first transitioning to IEM is that it can feel really disconnecting and isolating.  All of a sudden, guys hear themselves in glaring detail – for good and for bad.  If the tone is aweful, it’s much easier to ignore it when its just coming from an amp at your feet or a wedge.  When it’s in your ear, there’s no escaping it.  The biggest trick to making the ears feel real and less isolating is effective use of ambience mics.  I’ve written about this before, but we have three sets of ambience mics that I use as the primary foundation of our “extras channel” – a set of shotguns on the side of the stage, a set of PCC mics on the 1/3 and 2/3 lines of our stage lip, and a set of small diaphragm condensors hanging over the crowd about half way back.  These mics are mixed on a stereo aux that is fed to the IEM.

The “extras channel” allows the artist to decide how isolated they want to feel when they’re wearing their IEMs.  It is really important that this mix be stereo so it will feel right.  A couple of our guys choose to have mono extras just because they want to use one of their PQ channels for something else, but for the majority of artists I don’t recommend letting them go mono.  Stereo is really important.

Along with the ambience mics, I also mix post fader sources for anything else the artist might need when they AREN’T playing so they can remain connected to what’s going on – speaker and greeter mics, video playback sources that might role while they’re waiting to play, and talkback from the stage manager so they can hear rehearsal requests and communicate back and forth.

Here’s a sample of what the “extras channel” sounds like when we isolate it all by itself during a worship tune.  It really doesn’t sound like much on its own, but the presence that this adds to the mix has done wonders for IEM acceptance at Kensington.  If you don’t have something like this in your ear mixes, you don’t know what you’re missing!

Next time:  electric guitar IEM mix

Continuing the discussion from Friday, here is part 2 of a cool thread I ran across recently on one of the discussion forums about the unwritten rules for mixing monitors that they don’t teach you at Full Sail.  This is all the kinds of things I think many of us take for granted but will take a growing engineer up several levels by mastering.  Credit goes to everyone who contributed to the thread!

1. This is mostly personal preference, but I like having my cue wedge on the ground just like the performers have it. Some people put them up high on cases, but I think I should be hearing it exactly like the performer does, so mine goes on the ground.
2. Keep your eyes open: sometimes you can ‘see’ where feedback comes from and fix it easier than trying to guess where it is coming from…
3. For festivals I sharpie and board tape “You’re sound guy’s name is __________________” on the monitors.
4. For tours I sharpie and board tape “You’re playing in ________________” on the monitors.
5. Get the band to work on the best stage balance they can before you add wedges, this can save a lot of grief and makes the job a whole lot easier. I know of at least one band (and have heard of others) who taken to moving back-line offstage (usually to the wings) to keep levels sensible.
6. Listen to what the artist asks for in their mix, then give them what they need. If you get a good working balance, with good musicians you shouldn’t have to push faders around much as they will be able to make adjustments themselves in their own dynamics. This has the added benefit of the artists being able to communicate better, musically, and should lead to a much better vibe on stage, hopefully leading to a great gig. They feel good, they are happy with the monitors because they were able to play well, you get the credit, win, win , win!
7. Amateur vocalist that have problems staying on the mic and pulling away, lowering their level in the monitors can help get them the on top of mic better in an effort to hear themselves. From time to time I’ll get vocalists that will back off the mic when the monitors are hot, then complain they can’t hear themselves. Then the vicious circle of upping the gain, hacking the EQ, them backing off the mic more may ensue. Dropping their level all the time may not help, but it often can when they are afraid hot monitors whilst on on top of the mic.
8. I also put “Mix # _____” on the tape, for the artist to see. It helps them in sound checks feel more involved and communication is good.
9. I think a lot of the discussion in this thread is saying “get the band on your side early into the game by serving them with a pro attitude.”  If there’s ever a situation where they’re just not happy in the check, I always go out on the deck and listen next to them, rather than just sit on my butt and use the listen wedge. This is usually a good thing to do for both tech shooting and gaining trust with the band. “Can do” is always the best approach.
10. When troubleshooting a problem such as no sound from a channel or mix, don’t turn it up before isolating the problem. When you do find the problem you could end up with horrible feedback until you can get to the trim or mix level.

I came across a cool thread recently on one of the discussion forums about the unwritten rules for mixing monitors that they don’t teach you at Full Sail (I added that last part!).  This is all the kinds of things I think many of us take for granted but will take a growing engineer up several levels by mastering.  Part 1 today, part 2 on Monday.  Credit goes to everyone who contributed to the thread!

1. Never put anything in someone’s wedge mix they didnt ask for.
2. Never change a mix after the third song, unless its a ballad or something rehearsed in soundcheck.
3. The best soundcheck adjustment can be moving a monitor slightly or changing the angle using a short 2×4.
4. Know what your wedges and IEM’s sound like. Know what wedges sound like solo, in pairs, and with and without the foh rig on.
5. Every stage is different but low end and especially low mids build up fast with 6 or 8 wedges all blasting away. Once you start adding a vocal to 2 or 3 different mixes you may have to start dialing back more low end than you did when you tuned one wedge with one vocal in it.
6. Be responsive. Sometimes on crowded stages this is hard to do when every musician seems to have wishes at once.
7. Don’t rely on your cue wedge all the time. Listen on stage whenever you can during soundcheck time so you can hear the actual mix, wegde and stagenoise combined on the musicians spot.
8. When the stage is loud and the singer wants more of his/her vocal in the wedge, and you’ve reached the point where this can’t be easily done, you can often subtract competing instruments/vocal from the mix and solve the problem.
9. Unless it is specified on a rider, number your mixes from downstage to upstage, and from stage right to stage left. This is consistent with how you would see it from FOH. It should also match the way vocals are typically laid out too. It doesn’t matter which side of the stage you are on, keep the mixes the same way. Usually the drum mix is the last mix in line.  A typical 4 piece band would be like this. Downstage right is mix 1. Center vocal is mix 2. Downstage left is mix 3. Drums are mix 4. You will find that this numbering scheme has become a de facto standard in the SR world and engineers and bands alike will appreciate the consistency.
10. Take care of your ears. The stage is a very, very loud place to be. Add in the fact that you have to listen to a cue wedge at pretty extreme volumes to get over the stage wash only makes it worse. I usually mix 2-3 songs off the wedge, then pop in my ear buds and use the headphone out on the console. This really helps you prevent ear fatigue, and it actually lets you here those tiny squeeks a little easier.

What are yours?  Add them in the comments section.

I need to take a few minutes to sing the praises of the Digidesign PQ controllers as a part of a Venue system.  I know there are some other alternatives out there, but after going through my first major holiday on our Venue platform, I can’t imagine doing monitoring any other way without adding another console (which is out of the question for us).

When Kensington began 18 years ago, FOH and monitor duties were covered by a single desk and operator.  Fast forward 18 years and FOH, monitor, and broadcast duties are still covered by a single desk and operator.  Because we’ve lived this way for so long, it is not in our paradigm to do it differently.  Enter PQ.  Now we get the best of both worlds because we are still technically functioning under a single desk and operator, but we’ve been able to move the far bulk of monitor mixing out of the engineer’s head and into the hands of the artists.

The magic of the PQ system for us is in a couple things…

1. Because PQ is simply a remote control for a stereo matrix on the console, we are able to provide an artist with control whether they are using ears or wedges.  Our stage is probably 80% ears week to week, but there’s normally a mix or two of wedges in each service.  Because PQ is so tightly integrated into the console, I don’t have to worry about giving the artist control since if it gets out of hand, I also have access to the mix.
2. Being able to automate PQ mixes throughout a service is really cool.  I’ve found that the majority of our guys would rather not have their mixes automated since they don’t need very many changes.  But PQ ties so cleanly into the console automation that it is wonderful to be able to offer a patch or level change to be stored so they don’t have to worry about it.
3. It sounds great.  I’ve listened to some other systems and have never been impressed by how they actually sound.  PQ really sounds good.  You can drive it hard and it will respond just like the console – smooth and analog sounding.
4. Because no audio passes through the PQ controller, we’ve been very successful giving a mixer to the stage center worship leader for rehearsal so they have full flexibility to dial their mix, store it into each song’s snapshot, then remove the mixer for the service so we don’t have to look at it.  Works great!

Now it is rare to have to worry about monitors.  Soundcheck has been revolutionized because we don’t have to spend all the time for me to do FOH things – dial gain and get stuff happening, then go around the stage and build everyone’s mixes.  Once I’ve established gain for everyone, the band just needs to run a verse/chorus a time or two so that everyone can dial in, and we’re ready to go.  It should go without saying that I’m also able to provide a better FOH product because of not having to think about monitors.

Dave Skaff shared an interesting story on building the relationship with U2 as their monitor engineer. As you know, their stage designs are always very open and unique with the monitor desks placed under the stage, viewing the performers via video on their consoles.

I asked what were the challenges in trying to communicate and be in relationship with the band when you’re so disconnected by location. Video was so important to him in seeing the band, but he also relied heavily on an internal talkback system between him and the band techs so they could pass on notes to him from the guys. He also spent time up on the deck listening to what they were hearing for context.

What I found really interesting wasn’t so much what Dave needed but what Larry, the drummer, requested. Larry wanted a camera so that he could see Dave at all times down under the deck. His biggest concern was knowing when he needed something that he could see Dave responding. This little psychology lesson is HUGE towards the importance of good relationship and communication between the engineer and band.

Dave said as he was early in his relationship with them, they were used to it taking a long time or require multiple requests before changes would be made. Their requirement to him were that changes happen FAST – 10 seconds or less. With this in mind, in order to train them that he was always watching, he would sometimes make drastic changes when asked knowing full well he’d dial it in more finely but he wanted them to know he was paying attention.

On one of the largest stages in the world, for arguably the biggest band in the world, the same rules apply: responsiveness, attention to detail, and relationship are everything for success in the world of audio!

Some of you know I’ve been actively working towards learning and implementing a consistent sound check process for Kensington at the urging of our music director a few months ago. Remember that we do not have monitor engineers at KCC, so everything is done from FOH at all of our campuses. While my personal process has worked, based on my time spent as a monitor engineer on the road a few years ago, many of our campus engineers or guys who mix when I’m off weren’t having the same luck getting monitor mixes up and going fast and effectively. Sometimes it took as long as 45 minutes to get a 5 piece band checked and in our fast-paced world, this just isn’t acceptable.

I’ve been so focused on the importance of effective leadership from the engineer lately and a lot of that came out of the creation of this process. Here it is and it really is pretty simple. Are you ready?

LEAD.

Talk one on one with each band member as they arrive for rehearsal, help them setup and get comfortable, then go out to FOH and set their preliminary gain and signal integrity while they noodle by informally asking each to play a bit as they come online.

Then once you know everyone is ready to go, tell them where you’re going, then do it. My words are this:

“Ok guys, we’re going to get our check done and your mixes up quickly so you can get started rehearsing. Here’s the plan: I’m going to have each of you play for me one at a time. Once you start playing, everybody motion to me up, down, or stop with your hand when you have enough of the player in your monitor. Once we’re good with the first guy, we’ll move on until we’re through everybody. Ok? Here we go, let’s start with the…”

That’s it. Then do it. There are a couple tricks I’ve found that I think are helpful to making it work from here:

1. You have to be fast. If this takes too long to get through building the mixes, you’re no better off. So know your console, know where your mixes are located, have them labeled, and move fast.

2. Bring up the input in the house first before you put it in everybody’s monitors. Don’t worry about tone in the house, just get the level in a place where the fader is in the range you want it, tweak the gain so you’ll be comfortable creating your house mix since once you commit to channel gain and build mixes, you have to live with it. Then put it into everybody’s monitors. I missed this for a while and if you do, you end up with hotter monitor mixes than is normally needed since they don’t have the reference of what the house will add to the equation.

3. Think for your musicians so you can move fast. Assume someone is going to need a little bit of everything and let them tell you when they don’t. This is much faster in practice than asking everyone who wants each input before you actually start bringing it up in their mix. Same goes for the kit…assume everyone is going to want some kick/snare/hat and treat them as a group. You’ll waste gobs of time if you have to ask everyone who wants kick, then who wants snare, etc etc.

With some practice, you should be able to sound check a band in no more than 10 or 15 minutes. Bands you work with all the time will be even less than that. The most amazing part I’ve found is that, especially when working with new guys you’ve never been with before, at the end of the day when you’re wrapping up, you’ll be very surprised at the feedback you hear. Countless times, band members do not tell me about how great their mix was on stage (although it was) or that so and so said it sounded great in the house (although it usually does). They thank me for a smooth sound check and getting them what they need so quickly because it set the tone for the entire day, made everyone feel comfortable and set them off on the right track from the getgo.

Try it. It takes guts to be willing to take charge and lead, but I promise you it works. I’m watching some of our other engineers start implementing and it’s going to work for them too. Thanks Danny for the advice!

UPDATE: The question came up about not really dealing with rough EQ before starting monitor mixes.  First, for some channels, like kick and snare, the rough EQ is a part of my default scene on our console, so it is already roughed in when we start the day.  For guitars, acoustics, and bass, I’ve been running our monitor mixes for these channels pre-EQ as well as pre-fader.  That way, what the player hears on stage is exactly what the mic is picking up and I can do whatever I need to do for the house without effecting him.  Our guys have really liked this because it makes it easier for them to turn down their guitar amps when necessary and still trust their tone coming from the wedge.  If the tone doesn’t sound right in the wedge, we need to address mic placement, mic choice, or their settings because what they’re hearing is what I’m starting with in the house as well.

(This is kinda a hybrid of the stereo monitors mix idea.)

I really like having two mixes down front for a lead vocal rather than one. At KCC right now, I havethree wedges down front rather than two, split up so the outside pair is Mix 1 and the center wedge is Mix 2. When there is a vocalist down front, I set it up so the outside pair is a nice band mix with kick/snare, bass, some guitars, and maybe even a bit of keys. The center mix is vocals only. The result is a mix for the vocalist where they can hear their voice front and center in their face, but they also don’t feel so isolated down there because they feel the band directly all around them, have good pitch and time reference, etc.

This also works well whenever band guys have to come down front for solos or artistic stuff because that outside mix only needs a bit of tweaking to be a great band mix for them to play from. This worked well for Fight Club Jesus weekend with the Nickelback tune when the bass player and lead guitar came down front on either side of the lead vocal for the entire song.

When Danny is leading worship and wearing ears, I turn off the center wedge since he’s getting vocals primarily from his ears, but keep the outside mix pretty well as is. This gives him a great sense of space, again so it doesn’t feel so naked and exposed down front all by yourself.

In cases where we have a bunch of vocalists (more than one), the two mixes can easily be treated as a single vocal mix just by what’s assigned to them, allowing you to spread out the outside wedges a bit more from their normal position and cover a larger area of the stage lip for good vocal mix coverage.

I think I’m going to keep that third monitor there for a while.

Stereo Stage Mixes: Pro and Con
By Dan Laveglia

Try It, You’ll Like It…Maybe
For a long time I wondered about mixing wedges in stereo. I was sure it would sound good, so recently I took the plunge and set up a pair of loudspeakers to see what it was all about.

For about a week I tried different things to see what I could find out. During the afternoons on show days I listened to various instruments and vocal mics. In many ways the sound was better than listening in mono. Particularly when a stereo reverb was applied to a vocal mic, or listening to the grand piano. (We have a seven-foot Steinway with three Barcus Berry Planar Wave pickups to choose from.) I continued to monitor during the shows, using my cue wedges in stereo and setting up a mix with EQ’s for myself with real musicians playing real instruments during the performance.

It was really no surprise that this set up was more pleasing to the ears, but was it actually a better stage-monitoring configuration?

All Things Being Equal
What I learned initially was that the equalizers being used must be set precisely in order to keep things where you place them in the stereo mix. I suggest using a stereo unit that tracks both channels with one adjustment if you must go here. The wedges (including their crossovers and power amplifiers) must be well matched too so that you have very consistent performance from both the left and right loudspeakers. This is essential for controlling the stereo field you are trying to create.

Differences in the frequency response between channels in this type of configuration will cause things to shift location in different ways within the field. For example, if you assigned the high hat to your stereo wedges, with the pan slightly to the left, but the speaker on the left was deficient in reproducing the main frequencies contained in this sound (compared to the right speaker), the apparent location of this source when you listened would not be where the pan pot indicated!

While this in itself may not seem too large a hurdle, consider an instrument that reproduces a wide range of frequencies like an acoustic guitar. While it might sound “spacious” being played as a rhythm instrument by itself, I don’t think you really want the guitar to pan from one side to the other as the player picks a lead break playing up or down a scale of notes. (Or maybe you do?)

The addition of more instruments and more deviations at other frequencies soon presents the listener with an auditory mess. Remember, we are trying to accurately monitor audio on a stage in a live acoustic environment.

Sometimes You Do and Sometimes…
Assuming that you have been successful in setting up and tuning your stereo wedges so that the spectral shift is not an issue, this configuration can present good results in some applications. Many keyboard players gain advantage in being able to hear what their rigs are doing in stereo. Even a guitar player with a true stereo set-up may like to hear exactly what he is sending to FOH. Good players will use the stereo mix as a tool to make them even better. But these examples are different. They are for monitoring a stereo instrument with an appropriate playback system, not trying to place mono instruments in a stereo field.

Yes, it is possible to get a great stereo sound and a great mix going with the right console and some good loudspeakers. Guys do it at FOH all the time, right? But as I mentioned above, we are trying to create an environment on the stage where it is easy for the band to hear what they want to hear. Do you really want to create phantom images of instruments and voices in an area between two loudspeakers to make it easier for the musicians to hear? In most cases I don’t think so.

However…
With that said I would like to add that with the right musicians, under the right circumstances, good results are certainly possible. But it will require a musician who understands what he is listening to, and a willingness to experiment to achieve the desired results. (It won’t be something you just stumble on and it’s right.) As for a one-off with a band you’ve never heard…. I won’t be trying it.

In Your Space… or In Your Face
When all of the experimenting was done, when it was actually show time, I made one simple observation that decided it all for me. Yes, stereo instruments sounded better and effects were wonderful…but you know that sound when you are listening to stereo program on your headphones and then you hit the mono switch? BAM… all of a sudden the image is right in the middle of you head, and oh so balanced between your ears. Well, I observe the same phenomena with two wedges in mono. With the loudspeakers placed properly in front of the musician, a mono mix puts the sound (particularly your own vocal) right in your face! And if the object is for the musician to easily hear what he wants in his mix, especially in a difficult environment… I’m going to mix audio the old fashioned way.