A question for Greg (and anyone else who want's to chime in)

[bouldersoundguy]

It's one of those old 2 story theaters that is 3 times wider than it is deep...with a balcony. If they moved front of house in front of the balcony, it would take up 1/3 of the audience area in the center...

I get why it's there, it just sucks.

Oh, I get the conflict between FOH footprint and seating, but he still deserves to drive with a mostly blacked out windshield so he understands that when there are sound problems it may not be the fault of the person mixing. In rooms like that putting FOH on the balcony may suck less than putting it under the balcony, especially if the coverage is properly worked out. If FOH is still an analog board and racks of gear then maybe they need an upgrade to a small footprint digital mix setup with remote mixing. If the mix position sucks you have to walk the room, so if you can mix on a tablet you don't have to do as much back and forth to the board. That and/or it allows the mix position to be where the audience is without losing too many prime seats. What good is prime seating at a musical event if the sound sucks?

 

[Greg_L]

Oh, I get the conflict between FOH footprint and seating, but he still deserves to drive with a mostly blacked out windshield so he understands that when there are sound problems it may not be the fault of the person mixing. In rooms like that putting FOH on the balcony may suck less than putting it under the balcony, especially if the coverage is properly worked out. If FOH is still an analog board and racks of gear then maybe they need an upgrade to a small footprint digital mix setup with remote mixing. If the mix position sucks you have to walk the room, so if you can mix on a tablet you don't have to do as much back and forth to the board. That and/or it allows the mix position to be where the audience is without losing too many prime seats. What good is prime seating at a musical event if the sound sucks?

I saw two massive concerts a few years ago - AC/DC and KISS - in the same place (The Toyota Center) about a month apart. AC/DC sounded incredible. Everything was loud and clear. The drums were punchy and you could hear every note Malcolm and Angus played clear as a bell. That was some super-duper soundguy action. Fantastic. Then a month later I saw KISS in the same place and it was a mush of shit.

 

[RFR]

What do you expect? AC-DC is a band.
Kiss is a cartoon show.

 

[Greg_L]

What do you expect? AC-DC is a band.
Kiss is a cartoon show.

Yup, but still, artistic merit aside, if AC/DC could sound killer, why couldn't KISS?

 

[RFR]

Someone was not on the ball.

 

[Greg_L]

Someone was not on the ball.

Right, a shitty soundguy!

 

[RFR]

Either that or Gene don't care. I've met him and had to deal with money with him.

Cheapest bastard, and biggest dick I've ever met. He was producing the band "Black and Blue" who was rehearsing at my studio.

Oddly enough, Tommy Thayer is now "Ace" in the band. I think Gene was grooming him for the gig way back then.

 

[Greg_L]

Either that or Gene don't care. I've met him and had to deal with money with him.

Cheapest bastard, and biggest dick I've ever met. He was producing the band "Black and Blue" who was rehearsing at my studio.

Oddly enough, Tommy Thayer is now "Ace" in the band. I think Gene was grooming him for the gig way back then.

Tommy plays Ace's parts very well, but he has none of the coolness that Ace had.

 

[Farview]

Tommy plays Ace's parts very well, but he has none of the coolness that Ace had.

And somehow, he can never get his guitar to feedback at the beginning of King of the Nighttime World...

Having Eric and Tommy make the band better, but the magic is gone.

No idea why AC/DC would sound better, other than the AC/DC guitar sound has always been better. Kiss always gravitated toward and overly bright guitar tone. (except in the 70's when a cranked Marshall simply sounded like a cranked Marshall)

 

[notCardio]

Ya gotta love the stream of consciousness of these threads. It's like one of those nights I'd have in my youth where you kind of snap back to reality at 5 am and ask yourself 'where am I, and how the hell did I get here?'

 

[JDOD]

Ya gotta love the stream of consciousness of these threads. It's like one of those nights I'd have in my youth where you kind of snap back to reality at 5 am and ask yourself 'where am I, and how the hell did I get here?'

Like a day/night where you've been on the piss for so long you can't remember points earlier on in the evening!

 

[majax]

If you blast an amp into a mike, aren't you just blasting air into it & losing all tone & definition in a big mush of noise? I always thought it best to record at lower volumes, get the exact tone etc you want, then you can crank it up in the mix?

 

[Farview]

If you blast an amp into a mike, aren't you just blasting air into it & losing all tone & definition in a big mush of noise? I always thought it best to record at lower volumes, get the exact tone etc you want, then you can crank it up in the mix?

Most of the time, the amp doesn't sound like it's supposed to unless it's at a good volume. A lot of the 'warmth' and 'sweetness' of the tone of a tube amp comes from distorting the power section of the amp, until you get enough volume to do that, you won't have the tone. If you turn the amp up so loud that it sounds like crap, then you are correct.

Unless you actually overload the mic, it will pic up the sound you give it and reproduce it the way it should.

 

[Lt. Bob]

Most of the time, the amp doesn't sound like it's supposed to unless it's at a good volume. A lot of the 'warmth' and 'sweetness' of the tone of a tube amp comes from distorting the power section of the amp, until you get enough volume to do that, you won't have the tone. If you turn the amp up so loud that it sounds like crap, then you are correct.

Unless you actually overload the mic, it will pic up the sound you give it and reproduce it the way it should.

agreed .... fact is ..... some tones you want can NOT be gotten at lower volumes. That doesn't mean there aren't good sounds available at low volume but if the sound you want is a cranked Marshall .... then you have to crank a Marshall to really get it.

 

[majax]

Shit sorry, I didn't realise this thread was a couple months old lol... Still, thanks for the replies! I should have mentioned, I was talking about what's the point of lugging your big hefty Marshall stack into the recording studio? I agree, need to blast a power stack to get good tones. But wouldn't it be better to use a low-wattage amp for recording & get nice lush tones without blasting wind into a mike? I don't see the point of using a 100W head & quad etc etc for recording?

Thanks again, I've lurked around here for years. Good forum! I thought about posting this because I wanted to gauge some opinions here, as it came up just recently for me, I was mixing some friends' home-recorded set & what I was given was some guitar tracks that were pretty much just zero-definition harsh noise lol. The guy had blasted his stack in the recording room at full volume. I figured he should have turned it down, or better still, used a lower-wattage amp. And I thought about this thread & what Greg L was saying about loud on stage, loud in the recording studio etc...

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Shit sorry, I didn't realise this thread was a couple months old lol... Still, thanks for the replies! I should have mentioned, I was talking about what's the point of lugging your big hefty Marshall stack into the recording studio? I agree, need to blast a power stack to get good tones. But wouldn't it be better to use a low-wattage amp for recording & get nice lush tones without blasting wind into a mike? I don't see the point of using a 100W head & quad etc etc for recording?

Thanks again, I've lurked around here for years. Good forum! I thought about posting this because I wanted to gauge some opinions here, as it came up just recently for me, I was mixing some friends' home-recorded set & what I was given was some guitar tracks that were pretty much just zero-definition harsh noise lol. The guy had blasted his stack in the recording room at full volume. I figured he should have turned it down, or better still, used a lower-wattage amp. And I thought about this thread & what Greg L was saying about loud on stage, loud in the recording studio etc...

Speakers do things at high volumes that just don't happen otherwise. That's one reason for volume.

It's hard to diagnose by a written description, but it's a common problem for players to use too much distortion. For some reason what sounds right in the room is too much on the recording. Less gain up front and more master volume at the end of the chain often helps this. The problem with those tracks may actually have been too little volume and trying to compensate with preamp gain.

 

[majax]

The problem with those tracks may actually have been too little volume and trying to compensate with preamp gain.

That's an interesting take, thanks. Yep it's definitely maxxed-out distortion sorta stuff. I just assumed it was the decibels pumping out wind into the mike, but you could very well be right! I'll go do some experiments heh...

 

[Greg_L]

And I thought about this thread & what Greg L was saying about loud on stage, loud in the recording studio etc...

Keep thinking about it because Greg is right and your small amp/low volume ideas are generally wrong.

Instead of explaining this stuff from ground zero, again and again and again, let me ask you a question here - what do you think you're going to gain in tone by using smaller amps and lower volume? And don't say "blasting wind" again, because 1) that just isn't happening, and 2) it's a ridiculous assumption.

 

[Greg_L]

That seemed a little harsh. I didn't mean it like that. I'm just trying to be efficient with my words because I don't feel like typing a book about this again.

 

[majax]

Keep thinking about it because Greg is right and your small amp/low volume ideas are generally wrong.

Instead of explaining this stuff from ground zero, again and again and again, let me ask you a question here - what do you think you're going to gain in tone by using smaller amps and lower volume? And don't say "blasting wind" again, because 1) that just isn't happening, and 2) it's a ridiculous assumption.

Lol. Never said you weren't correct. My contemplative hypothetical thinking process was a 1W/2W/whatever valve amp is gonna crank out gnarly tones at much lower & mike-friendly volumes. I'm talking recording scenario here, of course.

To be fair, this ain't my idea. It's a common tip around, to use low-wattage amps/practise amps/etc in the studio. Now, whether it's all baloney as you seem to insist... is another matter.

Of course I love gut-mashing cranked-to-buggery rockin' amps like the next guy! I guess I question the idea that sticking a mike up to this volcanic cock-holocaust is going to capture in any real way this organic live vibe? But... I'm not really siding either way in the argument. To be honest I think both sides have good points. "Loud & defined" may indeed capture well, and my idea of "blasting wind" into the mike may be erroneous. I guess the question is, how does it compare to a low-wattage amp miked up? What is this anomalous "power vibe" thing that is somehow captured by a mike onto a digital track?

[ducks in advance]