Sound Design Live

Build Your Career As A Sound Engineer

  • Podcast
  • Training
    • My Courses
  • Archive

Sound system design for the largest public event in Philadelphia’s history: The Eagles Super Bowl Parade

By Nathan Lively

Subscribe on iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play or Stitcher.

Support Sound Design Live on Patreon.

In this episode of Sound Design Live I talk with Chris Leonard who is Director of Audio at IMS Technology Services. We discuss his sound system design and mix for the largest public event ever in Philadelphia covering 1 mile for the Eagles Super Bowl Parade, dealing with wide dynamic energy coming through a podium mic, and how to build relationships and get more work with Project Managers.

sound-design-live-mixing-monitors-tears-for-fears-chris-leonard-headshot

Yes this is a large scale event, but you’re taking the principles you already know and scaling them up.

Chris Leonard

Notes

  1. Hardware: VTX speakers, CL5, QL5, BSS BLU806, iTech amplifiers, SG300 switches, Rio rack
  2. Outreach
    1. Do
      1. Connect on LinkedIn.
      2. Show that you are actively working with your posts. Make them authentic about the level you’re working at, but focus on more of the work you want to be doing. How organized are you? What equipment are you using?
      3. Follow other freelancers and companies.
      4. Send your blackout dates (vs available) every 1-3 months.
      5. Make your emails personal and interesting.
    1. Don’t
      1. Expect a response to your availability updates.
      2. Email your availability updates more than once a month.
      3. Offer to travel if the request is for someone local.
  3. Quotes
    1. The city learned their lesson and got it right this time.
    2. With Dante over CAT5 you don’t want to go beyond 300ft, but with fiber I can go for miles.
    3. I heavily use LinkedIn.
    4. I need people who can be an A1 for a massive show and some that can be basic breakout AV tech.

Condenser Microphones For Live Sound

By Nathan Lively

sound-design-live-condenser-microphone-live-use

sound-design-live-condenser-microphone-live-sound

Last week’s podcast with Philip Graham revealed some of my misconceptions about condenser microphones being a bad choice for live sound. Most sound engineers and musicians are so used to close miking with dynamic mics like SM57s that they don’t really know how to use condenser mics for live performances. I know that I’m guilty of this, but many situations do not require close miking and actually would sound better without it. Let’s take a look at some of Philip’s ideas from his post, Condensers For Live Use.

Myths About Condenser Microphones For Live Sound

There are two main reasons that most sound engineers prefer dynamic mics for live sound:

  1. They are less susceptible to feedback.
  2. They are better at controlling bleed.

As for feedback and bleed, it’s all a matter of what the specific microphone is designed for, and how well it is implemented. Both are entirely controlled by the frequency response and polar pattern (directionality) of the mic, and especially the polar pattern across the frequency response. Most people look at polar patterns at 1K, which is in the middle of the mic’s response; but for feedback control the microphone really has to have the same off-axis rejection all across its response range. However, the polar pattern is never the same at all frequencies (except for a ribbon mic’s figure-8 pattern). Almost always, the high frequencies have worse directional control – and it’s usually the high frequencies that are the most problematic for feedback. Taming the off-axis high frequency response can be done through acoustic adjustments to the capsule and careful design of the headbasket, as well as controlling overly-hot high frequencies in the overall EQ of the mic circuitry. I make all these adjustments in my mics, and they have gain-before-feedback that is directly comparable to common stage dynamics like a Shure 58 or an Audix OM5, even in tough acoustic environments.

So it turns out that frequency response and polar patterns have more to do with controlling bleed and feedback than the dynamic/condenser characteristic. You could just as easily have a dynamic mic with poor pattern control at high frequencies as a condenser mic.

Still, Philip cautions against using large diaphragm condenser microphones meant for the controlled environment of a recording studio.

sound-design-live-philip-graham-head-thumbnail[U]sing mics not designed for the extreme feedback rejection needed on a live stage can be problematic. Many modern LDCs have a quite hyped high end that can be beneficial in the controlled environment of a studio, but on stage it not only makes feedback control difficult, it doesn’t sound very natural.

So, why use condensers?

The big advantage of condenser mics is their sound. A well-built condenser capsule is inherently capable of a smoother response through the full frequency range than a dynamic. This is simply due to the physics of their construction. The moving part of a dynamic capsule, which is driven by the sound in the air being captured, must have much more mass than the diaphragm of a condenser capsule. It will be much more difficult to make it respond to high frequencies, and it will have severe resonant peaks and valleys at various frequencies. A good dynamic capsule is very carefully designed to add a whole series of these acoustic resonances together, which combine to give a fairly smooth response. But it’s still inherently more irregular and “peaky” than a condenser, and less responsive at very high frequencies. Worse high-frequency response is the same as saying that it reproduces transients less accurately. There are certainly some fantastic-sounding dynamics out there – many of which are designed for the studio and are no more appropriate on stage than a U87. But at any rate a dynamic capsule is a complex mechanism engineered to work in a specific microphone body and cannot very effectively be transplanted and modified, whereas I can control almost every aspect of the sound of my condenser mics.

This brings me to my final observation: when I was in school I learned that because dynamic microphones reproduce transients less accurately, as Philip states,  they are more forgiving and therefore helpful for inexperienced vocalists. In the interview, Philip disagrees. So, what is your experience? Comment below.

Condenser vs. Dynamic Microphones For Live Sound

By Nathan Lively

sound-design-live-condenser-microphone-vs-dynamic-thumbnail

Subscribe on iTunes or SoundCloud.

In this episode of Sound Design Live, I speak with Philip Graham of Ear Trumpet Labs in Portland, OR about condenser versus dynamic microphones for live sound, close miking, and and why Shure SM57 microphones sound terrible from more than a few inches away. We compare the Ear Trumpet Labs Edwina microphone to a Neumann KSM105. Plus, we talk about stage monitor feedback, building condenser microphones, and quality control.

If you’re playing an acoustic guitar and singing, there is absolutely no reason for you to be kissing an SM58. That’s just silly. Yet, that remains the default.

Details from the podcast:sound-design-live-philip-graham-edwina

  1. Mics: Edwina, Chantelle, KMS105, SM57, SM58
  2. Philip on Facebook
  3. Electret (the magic material used for the microphone diaphragm)
  4. Microphone Polar Patterns
  5. Proximity Effect
  6. Are dynamic mics more forgiving than condenser mics?
  7. Venues: Freight & Salvage, Mississippi Studios
  8. John Huntington’s article: There Is No Perfect Sound
  9. Yahoo Micbuilders Group
  10. Quotes: “Most of the good sound guys that I know talk about the book that they want to write, explaining to the world how they should behave and what goes into doing decent sound.”

https://youtu.be/HuPeYzue7CY

Search 200 articles and podcasts

Copyright © 2022 Nathan Lively

 

Loading Comments...