Build Your Career As A Sound Engineer
In this episode of the Sound Design Live podcast I talk to Noam Gingold, composer, teacher, and founder of SoundGym. We discuss how Noam transitioned from composer to teacher to entrepreneur, and how ear training games can make you a better artist and sound engineer.
When you are a student, you have to mix less emotionally. But later, it’s the best way.
Show notes:
If I were starting over again and needed to know how to become an audio engineer, here’s what I would do: find an expert in my city and pay them to train me. And if I didn’t know who in my city could help me or where to begin, I would go to soundgirls.org and sign up for a mentorship there.
The latest science says that the key to becoming an expert is diligent practice. Not just repetition, but focused action with the goal of improved performance. And how do you get that? Individualized training.
One consistent finding across disciplines is that coaches are often essential for sustaining deliberate practice. In many cases, it is nearly impossible to both perform a task and measure your progress at the same time. –James Clear
Schools are great, but the truth is that I could teach you how to do my job in a day. Of course, after only one day you wouldn’t have enough information or experience to do the job really well, but you would know enough to get out there and start working. And as we all know, on the job is where the real learning happens.
So if I were starting all over again and wanted to know how to become an audio engineer, I would do whatever it took to get into the line of fire as quickly as possible. Inexperienced sound engineers always want to know how to operate X, Y, and Z digital console, but if you wait until you feel totally prepared you’ll never get started. No matter how much I learn, some new problem or piece of hardware always shows up. The real skills that you need are quick problem solving and knowing how to find answers fast, skills that, again, you learn on the job. Usually through urgent phone calls to friends, colleagues, or mentors.
The first time I ever attended a Meyer Sound seminar with Bob McCarthy, I asked him if he would be my mentor. Not really. I didn’t have the guts. I asked him how I could get a job designing and tuning sound systems. He said, “See that guy over there? That’s Matthias. He’s is going to fly to Macau next month, on his own money, to see me work on a system there. You could do something like that.”
And I thought, “Oh shit, that’s way beyond me. I barely have enough money to fly to Germany for this seminar.”
After that I began calling Bob McCarthy my mentor, even though I never asked for his permission and we’ve never worked together. I just call him on the phone sometimes and ask him how to do math. He’s a minor celebrity at this point. So I wonder how many other people out there are calling McCarthy their mentor? I guess it’s part of the Choose Yourself economy. We should form some kind of support group.
If I don’t even have it in me to ask my mentor to be my mentor, how can I expect you to do the same?
Bring ideas and commitment to take action.
If you can walk in the door with enthusiasm about what you want and ideas to barter, you are already way ahead of everyone else. I get lots of emails from people asking me for leads on work. They often don’t know where, when, why, or what kind of work, so I have to pull all that information out of them. Then there are people who want to take my courses for free…period. No offer. No ideas. Usually just a sad story about how hard their life is.
I also work with a lot of students who don’t take action. I’ve done about 135 career consultations over the last 3 years. In every one of them, I challenge the person to take some kind of action to move forward. Of those 135, only two have ever followed up with me about the actions they took. And right now I’m running a free business training course for audio engineers that includes 14 homework assignments that involve emailing me. Three people have emailed me.
But you won’t do that, will you? You’ll walk right up to that expert and look right in their big fat eyes and say, “I really want to work as a sound designer on fun, modern musicals like Rock of Ages, because I love the emotional power of audio. I want you to help me get there. I want to meet for one hour every week for two months. In exchange, I’ll write a review of your book and post it on Amazon, Facebook, and LinkedIn.”
And then you’ll commit to taking action on whatever that expert says. The more energy you put into it, the more you’ll get back. Next thing you know, they’ll be referring you for gigs and buying you coffee. All because you listened to them and took action.
The availability of free information today is a false sense of security. You can get lost for hours and hours in forums, tutorials, and Youtube videos. It can feel like progress.
Don’t be fooled. Unless you are seeing results, you are spinning your wheels. I can tell you for sure, if I was starting over again on how to become an audio engineer, I wouldn’t spend years of my life reinventing the wheel. I would find an expert in my city, pay them to train me, and get results fast.
Do whatever it takes to find the right teacher and get started. Free options are available to the creative and motivated.
It doesn’t matter how good a monitor engineer you are. If you have severe halitosis you will not be asked back.
Things that I learned/re-learned from watching Mixing Monitors from FOH on Soulsound.
I’ve been a member of Soulsound for 2 years and 7 months. Their videos are great quality and watching them always makes me want to go back and redo all of mine.
I learned a lot from watching this masterclass with Justin Grealy. He is very thorough and it really motivated me to up my game and deliver better service to the clients I work with. Instead of minimal effort to get the job done, prepare for every possibility and make every comfortable.
The only thing missing from this class is practical work with a band on stage, which would make a great part 2 (hint, hint).
If you have an analog console, Y-split at least the vocal channels.
I’ve done this technique a couple of times. My first question is always: What amI going to do differently to the monitor split compared to the FOH split?
Answer: EQ, dynamics, effects
One of the biggest problems I have in small concert venues is that the mix in the room can be ruined by the LF from loud stage monitors. At first you think, “Who cares, crank it up till their ears bleed if they want it.” But remember, every speaker is omni directional at some point, not to mention reflections from the back wall. So a loud stage monitor is going to give you lots of LF into the front rows as well as the stage. One way to help mitigate that is to raise the HPF on the vocal channel to something insanely high, like, as high as you can get away with. I’m talking 350Hz! And you can get away with that by splitting the vocal channels.
When it comes to dynamics, it’s likely that you don’t want as much compression on your vocals in the monitor mix as you do in the FOH mix. In most cases, on small, loud stages, you want almost no compression so that the vocalist can hear their raw performance to improve their microphone technique. In the same way that an actor learns to “find their light,” a singer must learn to find the pocket for a consistent performance.
The more you compress it, the more you affect the way the musician “actually” plans the instrument. It’s really easy to make people over play.
A gate set correctly can also be a huge advantage in the FOH mix, but tricky in the monitor mix. Vocalists will complain at the first hint of a problem, and we could get into the psychology of that, but what’s important here is that you don’t want to give them any reason to complain. It’s like when you’re on a Skype call and it mutes everyone else while you’re talking. You’d think silence would be nice, but it’s unsettling.
You will rarely meet an analog desk these days.
This is an interesting difference between the US and UK markets. In the US, analog mixing consoles still hold strong, especially in small rooms and hotel AV. They are cheaper and easier to train people on. Which makes me wonder, why have analog desks disappeared from the UK?
Grealy suggests duplicating all inputs for a separate monitor mix for more control, which is ideal, but I never do that. There’s just not enough time to do both jobs comprehensively. I can imagine a situation where maybe you have some of the controls linked between layers or quickly copy and paste your settings, but I can’t imagine anyone having the patience for me to track down technical problems, setup the FOH input channels, and then setup the monitors channels for three different bands. I usually barely have enough time to do one job.
So time management is the main consideration, but hearing is another. Most venues where I’m mixing monitors from FOH are not going to include a stage monitor for me at FOH to listen to my changes. That means I’ll need to listen from across the room, on headphones, or do a lot of guessing. I might be making more problems than solutions.
In the video, Justin inserts graphic EQs in his monitor sends. I never do this anymore since most desks also have a parametric EQ on every output.
There are only two good reasons to use a graphic EQ: 1) ear training and 2) the war zone that is monitor world. But aren’t we in monitor land? Yes, but the reason we might want them in a war zone is the simple speed of grabbing a fader and moving it. That doesn’t work on a digital mixing board.
Check out the graphic EQ setting in the image below. It looks pretty minor. A little shaping. Maybe removing some feedback.
Then look at the shape that it’s actually creating in the measurement below. Yikes!
One thing I’ve never understood is the doubling up of stage monitors for the main vocalist. I mean, I’ve asked people about this. When I asked Michelle Sabolchick Pettinato about why Eddie Vedder has 8 stage monitors she said, “SPL and coverage,” which I still don’t quite understand. In all cases, why not just turn one speaker up louder or get a louder speaker?
Maybe someday I’ll work on a show like that and finally understand it.
The way Grealy uses polarity and phase interchangeably is confusing. Grealy says he is going to “check that all of the monitors are in-phase with each other.” He then proceeds to verify polarity. It’s important to remember that phase shift is frequency dependent and caused by delay in the signal. Polarity is frequency independent and has no time offset. So if we are checking phase we are going to need a delay line or physical offset and if we are verifying polarity we just need a polarity inversion switch or cable. So when Grealy says that on tour he found an out of phase cable, he basically discovered a time machine. That being said, I do appreciate his quick and dirty method of listening to stage monitors in pairs. Nice!
Grealy’s explanation of pink vs white noise is a little confusing. Although white noise is statistically equal level over the frequency range, we perceive it as spectrally tilted toward the high frequencies because our ears respond on a logarithmic basis and are more sensitive in the high end. Pink noise is filtered white noise, attenuated at 3 dB/octave, to sound more even to our ears.
Some people cheat and use an analyzer. I use these [pulling on ear], because I find that they work rather better.
You didn’t think I was going to let Grealy bash audio analyzers and get away with it did you?
Grealy goes on to say that an audio analyzer can mislead you, but fails to demonstrate how, which seems like fear mongering. There is enough misunderstanding about audio analyzers as it is without Grealy turning it into a pissing contest. An audio analyzer is a tool to supplement the two audio analyzers you already have attached to your head, not to replace it.
Grealy says that he is a big fan of decoupling the stage monitor from the stage to get it closer to the performer’s head. Somewhere along the line I learned that stage monitors are tuned for half-space loading, but I’ve never measured the effects of the change. My question is: Does removing the stage monitor from the stage require EQ compensation in the LF? My guess is yes, but I’m not sure how much.
I would test this by comparing measurements of a stage monitor on the stage and 2 ft up on a stand.
I like Grealy’s suggestion to keep two monitors as close as possible if you want LF coupling, but I wonder where he came up with 30cm? Two LF drivers spaced 30cm apart would give you coupling up to 755 Hz since the wavelength of 755 Hz is 45cm long and 2/3 of that is 30cm. But the fundamental range of a 4-string bass goes from about 40Hz to 400Hz. So if all you need to do is support the fundamental range, then you can get away with a wider displacement, up to 58cm. Maybe Grealy is counting the overtones, but that would go way past 755 Hz.
I would test this by pulling stage monitors apart until the bass player complained.
Are you a person that listens to business books at 1.3x speed? I am. Grealy is very well spoken, but there are enough pauses and “uhs” that I installed the Vimeo repeat & speed extension for Chrome so I wouldn’t get distracted.
Bottom line: “How Sound Systems Work” is a solid introductory course that is well worth the $200 price tag.
At first I thought “too expensive”, but then I compared the cost to my first semester at the Sonic Arts Center, which is basically what’s covered in this course. Let’s see, $200 vs $4,000? Now it makes more sense.
Here’s the intro video:
The human hearing system is quite easy to fool. -Pat Brown
I’m a big fan of step-by-step courses, so this is perfect for me. Also, most of the lessons are videos, which is good for me since I am a better audio learner who tends to skim long passages of text. Written summaries of the videos are also provided for folks who learn through reading, but I found I didn’t need those.
I like that Brown separates the art and science of audio.
The art of audio takes place in the mixing console. Not in the post-mixer signal processing. – Pat Brown
I also picked up some facts I never knew:
I failed the first quiz and immediately thought, “Shut up Pat Brown, you don’t know anything!” After going over the answers I realized that a lot of this course is getting familiar with its particular vocabulary. For example, Brown uses high Q and low Q where Bob McCarthy would use first, second, and third order.
A majority of the time I felt like what was being presented was connected with the practical work I do and I could put it to use right away.
If a lot of these topics are new to you, the forum will be very valuable. I was confused by the explanation of dB usage, so I posted a question and Brown got back to me pretty quickly.
The section on common system problems is really valuable. Brown’s advice for dealing with microphone feedback is right on the money. I was happy to hear him say never to defeat the electrical ground on a piece of audio equipment. You would be surprised at how often I still see people use an AC ground lift unnecessarily.
I appreciated his advice on speaker aim for isolation and to avoid overlap when combining elements. That is one of the most common mistakes in sound system deployment.
Never attempt to design a loudspeaker array.
What? Designing an array is fun! And it can be as easy as combining two matched subwoofers for low-frequency control. It’s also necessary. On many events I work on, I arrive to a pile of speakers on the floor. I then have to figure out how to combine them to best fit the room and the event.
One disappointing feature of this program is that you do not have lifetime access to it. Although I appreciate that a time constraint provides motivation to get it done, I would love to be able to review it again after six months or a year.
Make sure you listen to the section on precedence effect in video clip 2 of the final lesson. This is a frequently-misunderstood idea in system tuning and is not served by a rule of thumb. Afterward, make sure you listen to Sound System Design for Small Venues with Bob McCarthy at 20:54.
I’m comfortable with the inverse square law, but the inverse distance law was a completely new idea for me. I wrote to Merlijn Van Veem to make sure Brown wasn’t trying to pull a fast one on me. Here’s what Merlijn said:
The inverse distance law (aka inverse square law) is about loss rates and is often expressed in SPL level drop per doubling of distance. Normally, SPL level drop is 6dB per doubling of distance for point sources that produce a spherical wavefront. Line arrays produce cylindrical waveforms up to a certain distance, which is frequency-dependent. Beyond that point, they revert back to point source behavior. The lows fall back first, then the mids, and finally the highs. But factor in absorption by air, which acts like a HF loss rate accelerator, and effectively, only the mids adhere to cylindrical behavior. Cylindrical wavefronts drop at only 3 dB per doubling distance. This is why poorly-tuned line arrays sound harsh, like the proverbial ice pick in the forehead. Because the lows and highs can’t keep up with the mids.
Got it.
This would be a great place to start if you are new to live sound. I think you will be left with more questions, but it is a great jumping off point to help you identify what you need to learn next.
Working with an accountability partner is the-the best technique for long-term business success in pro audio because:
Unless…
You have an accountability partner.
Why?
[the following is adapted from Ryan Eliason]
It may benefit you to meet with someone in the audio industry, but as you’ll soon see, this exercise is more about building integrity and forward momentum and less about networking and knowledge exchange.
I met my accountability partner in Ryan Eliason’s business coaching program. Pavel works in software development in Australia and knew little about my business and my life when we started. A year and a half later, we are still meeting weekly and I can easily say that it’s the longest lasting benefit I received from that program. Thanks Pavel!
The first place to look would be any local groups of entrepreneurs who are interested in supporting each other for long-term success. Business networking MeetUp groups are great for this. Try to find someone reliable who agrees with your ideal frequency and format. It will also help if they are at a similar point on the path as you, but it’s not necessary.
Split the time equally. Be efficient. Avoid giving advice.
Keep small chat to a minimum. Connect briefly then move to structure.
From last week or month (depending on how often you meet)
For next week or month (depending on how often you meet)
***This structure is a suggested guideline. If you and your partner want to create a modified structure, go for it! If you create something that works really well, I want to hear about it. Comment below.
Listen for their greatness
Hold the space
Do not give advice
Do not make them wrong
Instead, suggest actions
At the very end of the call, once you have completed everything else, if you think you had a brilliant idea that might help them (something to do, someone to call, etc.) then, ask their permission to make a suggestion. If they say yes, keep it brief. For example, “Have you tried this?”, or “I suggest calling Mr. X. They might be a good resource for you.”
Share powerfully, vulnerably and authentically.
