In-ear-monitors vs. Hot Spots vs. floor wedges (another live setup ?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter quadrajet
  • Start date Start date
Q

quadrajet

New member
As I mentioned in another post, I'm in the middle of revamping my live rig.

As a singer, one thing I've always had a problem with is hearing myself over everyone else - especially in practice situations in cramped spaces. Since I still need to invest in some type of monitors (and I've never had really good luck with floor wedges), I was considering switching over to in-ear style monitors or trying out those Galaxy Hot spots in order to cut through the mix.

Has anyone had any experiences with either or these? I'm concerned about the in-ear monitors because it just plain scares me that a feedback could blow out my eardrums. Also they look a little dorky, and I move around a lot on stage so I'd have to duct tape the receiver to my belt. On the plus side, I'd definitely hear myself clearly in order to stay in key.

As far as the hotspots go, I've heard things on both sides of the spectrum. Some people swear by them saying it puts the volume right in your face where you need it. On the other hand, I've also heard that they are just too small to do the job and as soon as you get even close to being loud enough for them to be of any use, they start feeding back.

Anyone have any feedback (no pun intended) on either setup? It should be noted In either case, vocals are all I'd be monitoring with these, and I use an SM87a condenser mic which is pretty sensitive.

Thanks in advance!
 
quadrajet said:
As I mentioned in another post, I'm in the middle of revamping my live rig.

As a singer, one thing I've always had a problem with is hearing myself over everyone else - especially in practice situations in cramped spaces. Since I still need to invest in some type of monitors (and I've never had really good luck with floor wedges), I was considering switching over to in-ear style monitors or trying out those Galaxy Hot spots in order to cut through the mix.

Has anyone had any experiences with either or these? I'm concerned about the in-ear monitors because it just plain scares me that a feedback could blow out my eardrums. Also they look a little dorky, and I move around a lot on stage so I'd have to duct tape the receiver to my belt. On the plus side, I'd definitely hear myself clearly in order to stay in key.

As far as the hotspots go, I've heard things on both sides of the spectrum. Some people swear by them saying it puts the volume right in your face where you need it. On the other hand, I've also heard that they are just too small to do the job and as soon as you get even close to being loud enough for them to be of any use, they start feeding back.

Anyone have any feedback (no pun intended) on either setup? It should be noted In either case, vocals are all I'd be monitoring with these, and I use an SM87a condenser mic which is pretty sensitive.

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

Well, as a Shure employee, I can tell you a bit abou the In-Ear monitors. There are really two components, the earphones themselves, and the reciever/transmitter system. There are quite a few options out there, especially for earphones. The big question for earphones is, do you want custom molded earphones, or universal fit?

As for your feedback problem, it shouldn't be an issue. With something like stage wedges, a feedback loop occurs because the signal goes like this:
Voice->Microphone->Monitor Desk->Wedge->Microphone->Monitor Desk->Wedge->Microphone...And so on and so forth.

With In-Ears, there's really no way that the signal coming out of the earphones is going to bleed into the microphone causing a feedback loop.

As for the transmitter/reciever system, I can't speak for all of what's out there, but the Shure PSM systems all have built in limiters, and that is certainly something you want to make sure your system has done right. We have both wireless and wired systems, and the reciever packs have belt clips. I think with most musicians who use them, you never see the recievers, just like with most theater performances, you never seen their lav mic transmitters (at least you shouldn't).

The other nice thing about In-Ears is that you can listen to stuff at a lower volume because they block out all the other unwanted noise, and you're not fighting to hear what you want.

So I hope that's somewhat helpful. And remember, you can always mix and match your transmitter/reciever you want to use, with whatever earphones you want to use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SRR
That being said, DO NOT plunk down your cold hard cash on in-ears until you've test-driven some. I've used Shure's E1's all the way up to E5's and not gotten a sound I liked out of them yet. I really want them to work for me, but wanting and having are two different things. Floor wedges have been used since stage monitoring became necessary, but they are bulky, inefficient and leave you with flat spots across the stage. Hot spots are so localised, you can barely move without dropping out of the sweet spot.
 
Stage wedges do not have to be as bad as mentioned above. The key to a good sound on stage is a combination of all the different aspects from instrument placement, to instrument quality to equipment quality to engineering etc... A good implementation of a stage monitoring setup is what is required for it to sound good and to be clear. Well implemented wedges will definately sound better than poorly implemented in ears. Some people take to liking in ears very easily, while others never really like it. Personally, the Shure ear peices sound "OK". I personally prefer Futuresonics, but everyone has different likes and dislikes. If however you can not make the Shure earbuds sound pretty good, the problem does not lie in the equipment, but somewhere along the chain of implementation. The biggest problem I have with in ears is their lack of response to adversity. If something happens and the in ear mix changes, it can be very hard to maintain focus and perform. It is very easy to get distracted whereas with wedges there is always a certain amount of stuff going on that even when the mix is just halfway decent it is a little easier to continue on.
 
for some reason when wearing earplugs I barely even need the monitors....that's with a loud ass rock band.... I can pretty much hear everything coming through my head to the inside of my ears or something.....
 
What RAK said is pretty accurate, but there are other (if not quite as likely) possibilities for feedback, especially with a mic like that - mains to the mic, etc. My thoughts - hotspots are great when you're stationary and don't need a ton of volume or bass. If you're just using it for vocals (and assuming that your vocal mic is stationary) it could work pretty well. Just don't look to it for bass or for a wide range of movement. Floor monitors are kind of the "throw lots of sound" version - they work, sure, but I guarantee you that unless your mains are much louder, they're going to color your sound pretty badly - they tend to make things muddy real quick.

I personally am a big fan of IEMs (In-Ear Monitors) - I use Etymotic ER-6s, which sound awesome, but are a little lacking in bass. They also isolate like crazy, which is a favorite feature of mine which you may not like if you're just monitoring vocals (they cut out everything, so you tend to need some other stuff in the monitor mix, too). If you're really interested in trying IEMs, hook up some headphones during a practice, and see how you like it. If you already have some small bud headphones, those may work... and there are kits out there somewhere that let you convert standard earbuds (like iPod headphones) to isolated headphones. Those kits were actually discussed on here not too long ago...

Anyway, I personally love IEMs, but I use those as my sole monitors when I play, with the exception of a sub if I'm playing bass or drums - you definitely lose a bit of the "feel" of things when you're playing to headphones instead of big monitors. They're definitely different, though. The isolation really bugs some people.
 
I forgot to bring up this point...
What if I'm the only one with in ear monitors while everyone else is using floor wedges to hear me? That does open up the threat of eardrum piercing feedback, does it not?
 
quadrajet said:
I forgot to bring up this point...
What if I'm the only one with in ear monitors while everyone else is using floor wedges to hear me? That does open up the threat of eardrum piercing feedback, does it not?
Click to expand...

The threat of feedback is there if you have other mics in your in-ears, or if your mic is in the other's wedges. But the eardrum piercing part is avoided by the built in limiter, and the fact that you won't need to turn up as loud because of the "earplug" isolation effect.

Also your own voice won't need to be as loud in the other wedges. The other musicians never need as much of you as you do.
 
I should add that with good isolation, properly used, IEM's can be great hearing protection in a loud musical environment. It's actually one of the best reasons to use them.

While you're looking into the Galaxy Hotspot, check out their Anyspot too, Galaxy's IEM solution. I think you can pass your mic thru the transmitter to put it in and control your own level, not sure about that though.

http://www.galaxyaudio.com/ANYSPOT.html
 
I made a "wired" in ear set-up in my last band . It was out of desperation...we had no cash for adding cabs, amps, EQ etc. I used a Behringer 4 channel headphone amp(used-50.00) and some thin cableing with some decent sony ear buds. It worked great. Good volume, and no feedback.
I think the thing I liked the most was that It sounded the same night after night. Once I had the levels and eq. figured out, all i had to do was power it on and check to make sure the knobs hadn't changed. I hanked the cables to the guitar cords and had the buds plug into female jacks near the input jack of the guitar. We found that it worked best if we only used one ear bud and left the other open to hear each other on stage.
 
goldtopchas said:
I made a "wired" in ear set-up in my last band . It was out of desperation...we had no cash for adding cabs, amps, EQ etc. I used a Behringer 4 channel headphone amp(used-50.00) and some thin cableing with some decent sony ear buds. It worked great. Good volume, and no feedback.
I think the thing I liked the most was that It sounded the same night after night. Once I had the levels and eq. figured out, all i had to do was power it on and check to make sure the knobs hadn't changed. I hanked the cables to the guitar cords and had the buds plug into female jacks near the input jack of the guitar. We found that it worked best if we only used one ear bud and left the other open to hear each other on stage.
Click to expand...

That's actually a darn good idea! If I ebay a used headphone amp and combine it with a good set of earbuds, I'd still be saving well over 100 clams. If I decide IEM's aren't for me, I only lose out on the cost of the earbuds. If I do end up liking them, I can buy one of the lower end wireless setups from Nady -of which everyone seems to recommend upgrading the earbuds for anyhow- and I'll already have a good pair to work with.

It just might work!

Maestro - the isolating and hearing protection properties are a HUGE part of why I'm considering these. I always use earplugs to protect my hearing, but they have one design flaw - they have to remain in the ear to be effective! What usually ends up happening is I don't hear myself very well in the mix or I have that "stuffed up" feeling and can't tell if I'm in key or not, so one or both intermittently gets removed.
 
We have all three (hot spots, IEM, and wedges). Each has good and bad points.

In general, you will hear most music and vocals best via IEM. Bass is harder. Your stage volume will be lower and the gear and footprint needed is much less.

I have both Shure PSM200 and Carvin PM1001. We use both at church. The Shure is generally more flexible, but twice the cost.

One key to IEM use is to get yourself a custom ear mold for the ear buds. I have both E2s and E3s, but had trouble getting either to fit well and stay in. I solved the problem by getting a DIY custom ear mold kit (basically rubber that hardens). That made a world of difference in both fit and sound.

Ed
 
goldtopchas said:
We found that it worked best if we only used one ear bud and left the other open to hear each other on stage.
Click to expand...

This is actually quite common, but unfortunately you lose any hearing protection if you do it.

In fact you may do worse damage this way than if you had just wedges. The reason is because the ear you took the plug out of is now unprotected, and the remaining earbud has to be turned up louder than normal to compensate for the loud stage volume in the other ear.

The best alternative is strategically placed ambient mics to pick up the on stage and audience sound and feed them into your in ears. This takes a lot of trial and error, but it can be worthwhile.
 
maestro_dmc said:
The best alternative is strategically placed ambient mics to pick up the on stage and audience sound and feed them into your in ears. This takes a lot of trial and error, but it can be worthwhile.
Click to expand...
One option here, for Shure PSM users, is to use a low cost label mic and connect as the second source on the PSM receiver. Then clip it to you clothing.

Ed
 
We just did a gig where our drummer (who sings BV's) tried IEMs for the first time - no time to set up a separate monitor mix for him, so it was just a case of duplicating the basic monitor sound. Fortunately, he's used to wearing earplugs at gigs as a matter of course, so for him, the IEMs were situation normal, sound-wise with the added bonus that he could hear the vox and guitar clear as day. Result: One very happy drummer!

Next gig I'll take some extra time out to give him a proper mix. Probably fire up one of my ECM800s to pipe in a litle ambient noise for him as well.
 
Personally I would never want to blend an ambient mic specifically for stage sound into the ears. At that point you may as well be back on wedges because that is wqhat you would be trying to make them sound like, only they would have the impression of far less power and clarity. Running a couple of mics pointed at the crowd is a fairly normal venture, but after mixing for probably a couple of hundred bands that used in ear monitors, not a single one of them has wanted an ambient mic for stage sound. In the end the only way to make in ear monitors work well for most musicians is by providing them a good in ear mix. This starts with a properly mic'ed stage and a good engineer.
 
It somewhat depends on the situation. I play at church and stand in the back. We use electronic drums, so there is little onstage sound other than amps. If there is a song change, then someone else on the front will turn around (away from their mic) and announce the change. Without some sort of stage mic, what I get is moving lips. That’s one case where some sort of stage mic is needed.

Ed
 
Isn't it scary? I mean trying to change from ambient rock and roll to this clinical version of my voice on a mountaintop? Foot monitors bite because alot of places we play don't have enough room to put them at the right angle to me. I thought about the hot spots, but we probably play too loud. I played with a band that used them with the sole intent of reducing stage volume. as the lead guitar player, I naturally took offense. :)
 
Footprint is a big factor in most church settings and many small club stages. IEMs have effectively a zero foot print.

Ed
 
Ed Dixon said:
It somewhat depends on the situation. I play at church and stand in the back. We use electronic drums, so there is little onstage sound other than amps. If there is a song change, then someone else on the front will turn around (away from their mic) and announce the change. Without some sort of stage mic, what I get is moving lips. That’s one case where some sort of stage mic is needed.

Ed
Click to expand...

This to me actually seems like a great example not of why a stage mic would be needed, but why in ear monitors maybe should not be used. Any mic that picks up that voice will also pick up a washed out version of everything else on stage. Throw that washed out sound directly in your ears and it will almost always sound even worse.

As for small clubs etc... if you roll in with a rack of in ears, you aren't saving anyone any time or space. Realistically you are just adding to the amount of crap backstage and the wedges will still be out there waiting for the next band. You will most likely be drastically increasing the amount of necessary soundcheck time. Unless you plan on traveling with your own snake split, monitor console, mics, cables, and stands, then you are probably asking for a bigger headache than using wedges with a rare payout. If you are traveling with all of that stuff, than you will still usually require more time to get all set, but the payoff will be good if it is all implemented properly.

In the end, in ear monitors are not the savior that so many people originally thought they might be. There are many bands that are currently switching back to wedges rather than earpeices for various different reasons. The trend of everyone switching to ears has definately come to a halt, but will still always have its place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top