Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Digital mixer question/suggestion

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 12:54:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Folks-- I need some help and I am coming up short on my research. I
work at a high school where we use a lot of wireless mics, usually
around 20. We have a difficult time tracking folks as they go off and
on the stage, and we don't want the mics muted. So, we've decided to
look into the possibility of purchasing a digital mixer. What we need
is a mixer that is great at playing back presets with the touch of a
button- and preferably in software. We would typically have around 100
"cues" a show. We would need 18-20 mic inputs, although our mics have
line level outputs as well. The ability for expansion would be great--
up to 28 channels. And of course the most important consideration is
price. We can't break the bank on this one. The one feature I am most
confused about is the memory, because in the specs it seems rather
obscured. Can you help? What would be the best mixer for this job?

Thank you!
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 1:21:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

kjones wrote:
> Folks-- I need some help and I am coming up short on my research. I
> work at a high school where we use a lot of wireless mics, usually
> around 20. We have a difficult time tracking folks as they go off and
> on the stage, and we don't want the mics muted. So, we've decided to
> look into the possibility of purchasing a digital mixer. What we need
> is a mixer that is great at playing back presets with the touch of a
> button- and preferably in software. We would typically have around 100
> "cues" a show. We would need 18-20 mic inputs, although our mics have
> line level outputs as well. The ability for expansion would be great--
> up to 28 channels. And of course the most important consideration is
> price. We can't break the bank on this one. The one feature I am most
> confused about is the memory, because in the specs it seems rather
> obscured. Can you help? What would be the best mixer for this job?

If you are talking about a stage play/musical theatre, the best
mixer would be a human being. It might be helpful switching between
scenes to have a mixer with digital presets, but you still need a human
being manning the console because you need someone who can go with the
flow of the show. More important then if you use an analog console or a
digital one.

Someone has to sit there with a script/cue sheet and follow the
action from beginning to end, along with the lighting person and the
stage manager, all playing "follow the Director". Sometimes if you
have experienced techs they can carry a show that lacks Direction (
like just last week at a Cancer benefit Fashion Show that had no
Director, I had to train the StageManager who had no experience at all
what we needed from her and where to stand, when to send the girls out,
etc. By the end of the show she was shouting at people like she had
been doing it all her life, so it went ok. ) Without clear direction,
you will have problems.

Will Miho
NY Music and TV/Audio Post Guy
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 1:35:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

kjones wrote:
> Folks-- I need some help and I am coming up short on my research. I
> work at a high school where we use a lot of wireless mics, usually
> around 20. We have a difficult time tracking folks as they go off and
> on the stage, and we don't want the mics muted. So, we've decided to
> look into the possibility of purchasing a digital mixer. What we need
> is a mixer that is great at playing back presets with the touch of a
> button- and preferably in software. We would typically have around 100
> "cues" a show. We would need 18-20 mic inputs, although our mics have
> line level outputs as well. The ability for expansion would be great--
> up to 28 channels. And of course the most important consideration is
> price. We can't break the bank on this one. The one feature I am most
> confused about is the memory, because in the specs it seems rather
> obscured. Can you help? What would be the best mixer for this job?

If you are talking about a stage play/musical theatre, the best
mixer would be a human being. It might be helpful switching between
scenes to have a mixer with digital presets, but you still need a human
being manning the console because you need someone who can go with the
flow of the show. More important then if you use an analog console or a
digital one.

Someone has to sit there with a script/cue sheet and follow the
action from beginning to end, along with the lighting person and the
stage manager, all playing "follow the Director". Sometimes if you
have experienced techs they can carry a show that lacks Direction (
like just last week at a Cancer benefit Fashion Show that had no
Director, I had to train the StageManager who had no experience at all
what we needed from her and where to stand, when to send the girls out,
etc. By the end of the show she was shouting at people like she had
been doing it all her life, so it went ok. ) Without clear direction,
you will have problems.

Will Miho
NY Music and TV/Audio Post Guy
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Related resources
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 8:37:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> First off, you don't need a digital mixer to get the kind of
> control you are looking for - there are analog mixers that
> have banks of preset mutes that you can all up.
>
> However, there are few if any digital mixers that lack scene
> memory, which is the common name for the feature that you
> are looking for.

Analog consoles usually don't have nearly as much scene recall as
digital consoles, and it's certianly less expensive to do this in a
digital console once you've decided to design a digital console. I
think what he's looking for is confidence that a sufficient quantity of
scenes can be stored and that the user interface lends itself to quick
acceess. The number of scenes that can be stored is often in the poop
sheet, but if not, a call to the manufacturer's tech support will
usually get that information. Since it's pretty common to store a
shapshot of the entire console configuration these days rather than
just mute and fader positions you don't get the "the number of scenes
depends on how complex they are" that we did in the early days of
digital consoles.

The user interface is a different story. With some, you can only recall
scenses by number, so you need a cue sheet. Others allow you to name
the scenes in text (which may be easy or tedious, depending) and the
display might even be large enough to read. Or perhaps there's a port
to connect a computer for an even better (at least larger and more
colorful) user interface.
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 10:19:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net> wrote in message
news:1127620445.672571.103520@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com

> Folks-- I need some help and I am coming up short on my
> research. I work at a high school where we use a lot of
> wireless mics, usually around 20. We have a difficult
> time tracking folks as they go off and on the stage, and
> we don't want the mics muted.

Are you saying that you control these mics by just turning
down their faders?

Normally, mutes are preferred.

>So, we've decided to look
> into the possibility of purchasing a digital mixer. What
> we need is a mixer that is great at playing back presets
> with the touch of a button- and preferably in software.

First off, you don't need a digital mixer to get the kind of
control you are looking for - there are analog mixers that
have banks of preset mutes that you can all up.

However, there are few if any digital mixers that lack scene
memory, which is the common name for the feature that you
are looking for.

> We would typically have around 100 "cues" a show. We
> would need 18-20 mic inputs, although our mics have line
> level outputs as well. The ability for expansion would be
> great-- up to 28 channels. And of course the most
> important consideration is price. We can't break the bank
> on this one.

The ultimate cheap digital mixer is the Behringer DDX 3216,
which appears to be in the process of being closed out, as
it is being currently offered at highly attractive prices.
It has a good rep among people who use it, and it can be
expanded to do what you want to do. Because it is being
closed out, availability may not be good. The sequel has not
yet been announced.

>he one feature I am most confused about is
> the memory, because in the specs it seems rather
> obscured. Can you help? What would be the best mixer for
> this job?

A Berhinger DDX3216, one of its ADAT expansion port cards
and one or more ADA8000 expansion units would seem to be at
the low end of what you are looking for.

In order to handle 20 mic inputs without expansion units
would put you in the realm of the Yamaha DM2000 which is a
ton more $$$, but also very good.

The Yamaha 02R96 has 24 built-in analog inputs, but the
third 8 inputs are line inputs. Still a ton more $$$ than
the DDX3216.

I don't think that *anybody* makes a digital mixer that
lacks something like 100 scene memory slots.
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 11:02:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks for the response guys....
What we need is either fading or muting that can be preset and recalled
instantly, because we may have 10 people going off stage and 10 coming
on. A live person would be there to make on the fly adjustments, but we
have a pro guy come in and run the sound and it is very difficult for
him to do this accurately and quickly at the same time. If an analog
mixer exists that would allow a hundred or more preset mutes or
scenes-- that would be fine- I just haven't been able to find it. Do
most digital mixers have easy access (one button) to the cues? The line
inputs are okay for these mics because our wireless mics will output
mic or line level. Thanks for your help!
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 1:50:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

kjones wrote:
> If an analog
> mixer exists that would allow a hundred or more preset mutes or
> scenes-- that would be fine- I just haven't been able to find it.

You just probably aren't prepared for one of the higher end Midas or
Soundcraft consoles or something like that. You won't find it in the
Mackie class. And even most of the mid-range PA consoles have something
like two or four mute groups, not 100.

> Do most digital mixers have easy access (one button) to the cues?

I think that would be a 'no." You'd have to push one button to tell it
that you're about to select a cue, then another couple of buttons to
enter the cue number (or scroll down a list), then another button to
actually select that cue. There might be a shortcut like a button for
"Next Cue" but that means that the next cue really has to be the next
cue. You can download manuals for most digital consoles, so that might
give you a clue. Better to actually visit one and try it, though.
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 2:22:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich wrote:

> Can you get one-button control via MIDI?

Possibly, if "MIDI" was a keyboard with a lot of buttons. Hmmmm . . .
the soda shop where the cheerleader is making a phone call and the
milkshake mixer is running . . . that'd be E-flat two octaves above
Middle C.
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 8:27:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

kjones wrote:

>Thanks for the response guys....
>What we need is either fading or muting that can be preset and recalled
>instantly, because we may have 10 people going off stage and 10 coming
>on. A live person would be there to make on the fly adjustments, but we
>have a pro guy come in and run the sound and it is very difficult for
>him to do this accurately and quickly at the same time. If an analog
>mixer exists that would allow a hundred or more preset mutes or
>scenes-- that would be fine- I just haven't been able to find it. Do
>most digital mixers have easy access (one button) to the cues? The line
>inputs are okay for these mics because our wireless mics will output
>mic or line level. Thanks for your help!
>
>

Analogue mixers do exist that have this, but kind of irrelvant as they
are not in any sort of price range that can be considered affordable. I
have a tactile technologies which would do this and they are relatively
cheap second hand (maybe between $3000-$7000 depending how lucky you
get), but you have a huge rack of electronics and a controller.
The Digital desks will all do it basically. Usually you will either have
an up/down button for choosing scenes or you enter the scene number and
press enter. I had a yamaha and you can name the scenes and jump to them
easily. You can also select them via midi.
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 9:16:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> kjones wrote:
> > If an analog
> > mixer exists that would allow a hundred or more preset mutes or
> > scenes-- that would be fine- I just haven't been able to find it.

> You just probably aren't prepared for one of the higher end Midas or
> Soundcraft consoles or something like that. You won't find it in the
> Mackie class. And even most of the mid-range PA consoles have something
> like two or four mute groups, not 100.

> > Do most digital mixers have easy access (one button) to the cues?

> I think that would be a 'no." You'd have to push one button to tell it
> that you're about to select a cue, then another couple of buttons to
> enter the cue number (or scroll down a list), then another button to
> actually select that cue. There might be a shortcut like a button for
> "Next Cue" but that means that the next cue really has to be the next
> cue. You can download manuals for most digital consoles, so that might
> give you a clue. Better to actually visit one and try it, though.

Can you get one-button control via MIDI?

--
ha
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 9:55:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sorry to ruin your day. We hire someone because our school has limited
sound capabilities, so we rent mics and and the button pusher comes
with the rental; naturally he will not let students operate it. We have
just found out that we will be able to make a one time purchase of
sound equipment, so our plan is to purchase wireless mics and a digital
mixer and replace the sound guy WITH STUDENTS. However-- Yes it is a
great educational exercise for students to learn to do this with an
analog board, but what about the poor actor (who is also in an
EDUCATIONAL experience) who can't be heard because a student cannot
adjust 18 faders within 2 seconds? There is a time and place for this,
but we need some assurances that we can count on good sound during the
musicals. I don't see this as a poor educational approach, but looking
out for all concerned.

I hope your sickness passes... By the way are you connected to
educational theatre in any way?
Anonymous
September 25, 2005 10:01:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The students still need to know how to adjust levels and EQ. So saving
cues in sound is no different than what you do on the lighting board.
One of our productions was sweeney todd with 250 light cues. Would you
have done this on a manual board? Students eq and save to a digital
mixer-- what's the difference?

Okay - now the 4 person setup is not a bad idea. But they won't run
into that situation either- so why have them do it now- except for just
wanting to do a good job for the production- which by your definition
is "anti educational?"
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 12:20:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I know this doesn't answere your question, but I can't help but
comment. You're in a High School. Part of education is learning how
to deal with difficult situations like these. It would be more
productive from an educational point of view to use this as an
exersise in dealling with numerous inputs simultaneously. That way
they'll know how to work when they don't have a digital mixer, which
is 99% of the time. When training on lighting consoles, for example,
I start with running shows manually, cues be damned. Then, when I
teach cues, it makes life easier, but they don't NEED them to run a
show!

So, here's an idea. Get three consoles with 8 mics each and put one
student on each. That student has responsibility for just those mics,
which is managable. Run the outputs into submixes on the main console
and a fourth student is responsible for the main mix. One thing you
have is a large supply of free labor. Use it!

On 24 Sep 2005 20:54:05 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
wrote:

>Folks-- I need some help and I am coming up short on my research. I
>work at a high school where we use a lot of wireless mics, usually
>around 20. We have a difficult time tracking folks as they go off and
>on the stage, and we don't want the mics muted. So, we've decided to
>look into the possibility of purchasing a digital mixer. What we need
>is a mixer that is great at playing back presets with the touch of a
>button- and preferably in software. We would typically have around 100
>"cues" a show. We would need 18-20 mic inputs, although our mics have
>line level outputs as well. The ability for expansion would be great--
>up to 28 channels. And of course the most important consideration is
>price. We can't break the bank on this one. The one feature I am most
>confused about is the memory, because in the specs it seems rather
>obscured. Can you help? What would be the best mixer for this job?
>
>Thank you!
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 12:25:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

What? You have students who could be learning to do this, and you
hire someone? This is the ultimate anti-educational approach. I'm
sorry, but don't look for help from me, I'm already sick of your
approach.

On 25 Sep 2005 07:02:20 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
wrote:

>Thanks for the response guys....
>What we need is either fading or muting that can be preset and recalled
>instantly, because we may have 10 people going off stage and 10 coming
>on. A live person would be there to make on the fly adjustments, but we
>have a pro guy come in and run the sound and it is very difficult for
>him to do this accurately and quickly at the same time. If an analog
>mixer exists that would allow a hundred or more preset mutes or
>scenes-- that would be fine- I just haven't been able to find it. Do
>most digital mixers have easy access (one button) to the cues? The line
>inputs are okay for these mics because our wireless mics will output
>mic or line level. Thanks for your help!
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 12:42:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Brandon Anderson" <bdanderson@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:g81ej1djc35mcbuhfjlnb1n8e7eka60553@4ax.com...
>
> So, here's an idea. Get three consoles with 8 mics each and put one
> student on each. That student has responsibility for just those mics,
> which is managable. Run the outputs into submixes on the main console
> and a fourth student is responsible for the main mix. One thing you
> have is a large supply of free labor. Use it!

Round here, schools are competetive; one of the factors in students' choice
of school is how well-equipped the school seems to be when they visit it.

This is a great shame, but what can you do? (I'm reminded of the part in
Feynman's book, when MIT told him they wouldn't ley him do a PhD there. He
went to Princeton, and mentions the cyclotron, At MIT, the cyclotron was a
marvellous device in a purpose-built building; at Princeton, he aske dwhere
it was, and someone said they thought it was in the basement ... and it was,
bits and pieces all over the place. But Princeton was getting the results,
because the researchers could get theur hands on things.)

Tim
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 4:24:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Brandon Anderson wrote:

> One thing you have is a large supply of free labor. Use it!

That's a hell of an assumption. These are not compulsory educational
activities, and if capable students don't take interest in mixing you're
either screwed out of presenting a program or you bring in pros.

--
ha
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 7:34:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 25 Sep 2005 18:01:55 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
wrote:

>The students still need to know how to adjust levels and EQ. So saving
>cues in sound is no different than what you do on the lighting board.
>One of our productions was sweeney todd with 250 light cues. Would you
>have done this on a manual board? Students eq and save to a digital
>mixer-- what's the difference?
>
>Okay - now the 4 person setup is not a bad idea. But they won't run
>into that situation either- so why have them do it now- except for just
>wanting to do a good job for the production- which by your definition
>is "anti educational?"

I've actually run lights for Sweeney Todd in an opera setting
on a manual board, complete with two guys pre-setting scenes
as fast as they could and another guy-or-gal on an auxiliary
board upstage. Plus the stage director calling cues.

This could have been done, and perhaps better, by students.
And would have been *wonderful* training in theater.

Maybe the modern question might be about how to give a real
theater experience to students, including on and off stage.
IMO, everybody should do some of both, to get the flavor.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 2:02:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I think that if you have $900, just get the Behringer DDX3216 ($650)
that Arny mentioned earlier and an ADA8000 ($230) and be done with it.
You'll get the mixer, the ADAT interface, and 20 channels of mic in for
under $900 delivered to your door. It has 128 preset scenes and will do
what you want quite nicely.

And you won't have to reply to any more messages about how
anti-educational your approach is because the high school kids can
learn how to use a digital mixer.

Good luck,

Dean
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 3:29:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Chris Hornbeck <chrishornbeckremovethis@att.net> wrote:
>On 25 Sep 2005 18:01:55 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
>wrote:
>
>>The students still need to know how to adjust levels and EQ. So saving
>>cues in sound is no different than what you do on the lighting board.
>>One of our productions was sweeney todd with 250 light cues. Would you
>>have done this on a manual board? Students eq and save to a digital
>>mixer-- what's the difference?
>>
>>Okay - now the 4 person setup is not a bad idea. But they won't run
>>into that situation either- so why have them do it now- except for just
>>wanting to do a good job for the production- which by your definition
>>is "anti educational?"
>
>I've actually run lights for Sweeney Todd in an opera setting
>on a manual board, complete with two guys pre-setting scenes
>as fast as they could and another guy-or-gal on an auxiliary
>board upstage. Plus the stage director calling cues.

When I was in 8th grade, my school put on a production of the Mikado,
and the lighting console was a big resistive dimmer board. The guys
at the dimmer console couldn't see through the port glass at the
stage, so we basically bad two people on the console, each operating
four controls, and a spotter at the window calling out cues to us.

As I recall, I was the guy running the far stage-left and far stage-right
channels.

We had no communication with the stage at all. Not even flashlight or
hand signal, which I think was a bad thing.

>This could have been done, and perhaps better, by students.
>And would have been *wonderful* training in theater.

Isn't that the whole point of school?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 4:57:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

david morley wrote:

>Analogue mixers do exist that have this, but kind of irrelvant as they
>are not in any sort of price range that can be considered affordable.

The tascam M2516 and M2524 provide 100 mute scenes that can be recalled
via a front panel keypad and via MIDI. They're not available new anymore
but they do appear on the used market. Hey, I've even got an M2516 in my
garage, in its shipping container and for sale. My most recent use of it
was sound for theater, even!

<snip>

--
========================================================================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mrkesti at comcast dot net | - The Who, Bargain
Anonymous
September 26, 2005 11:59:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In high school I learned to mix choir musicals because the choir kids
couldn't sing. Theatre students learned to project, and could be
heard clearly at the back of the house without mics. This may be a
lost art these days, but is still invaluable to an actor. First teach
the kids to project, then give them mics. It not only helps them if
they don't have a mic or the mic stops working, but it makes it easier
on the engineer since they won't have to ride the gain as high.
And my HS director hated mics...

I'm over it. In high school I trained replacements (see one of my
other posts as to the system) but they all decided they were too good
to participate in HS and got real jobs instead. There's the danger in
doing too good a job. Anyways, as a result, I have to go back every 6
months and teach a workshop (my apprentices never had their own
apprentices, and the kids I teach keep getting jobs). I alternate
sound and lighting, though I'll have to do both this winter. I was
also hired as a professional to help mitigate the damage of intro
lighting students (clean up their mess before someone dies) at UT. It
would have been better if I was allowed to teach them how to do things
before they were supposed to do them (the TAs ddin't do a good job at
that), but at least they learned the basics through trial and error.

A funny (not really) story about that: We were striking a show and
bringing in the ladders (lighting). They were filled with Altman
360Qs and so we started pointing them down and closing shutters for
storage. When we pointed one of them down, the lense fell out! One
of the students had mamanged to remove the knob when focussing and not
tell anyone. It's a good thing that no one got hurt.

Anyways, if you HAVE to do this the tech-heavy way, the before
mentioned Behringer is your cheapest rought. At least you'll no
longer be wasting money on paying outsiders. You should take heed,
though, that mutes are there for a reason, and are preferable to
sliders for your situation. In theory, if the actors are consistant,
the faders may never need to be adjusted after the sound check. Having
to re-set levels every entrance IS too time consuming. If your "pro"
is killing faders instead of using mutes, then he probably isn't
really worth the money anyways.

I'm sorry, but I get a bit irate about this issue. Choir used to pay
someone, and their students had to hook the stuff up one day when the
guy was running late. Since they were in the space, I was running
arround, and i noticed they had 4 8-ohm speakers on a 4-ohm minimum
tap. It was too late, the amp was on and fried. By the time the guy
got there, he had to run out and get a replacement. If the students
were taught how to do this to begin with, they would have saved a lot
of money, and the students would have been better off. The point of
HS theatre isn't to put on perfect shows, it's to learn. These days,
there is way too much enphasis on perfection and not enough on
education.




On 25 Sep 2005 17:55:48 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
wrote:

>Sorry to ruin your day. We hire someone because our school has limited
>sound capabilities, so we rent mics and and the button pusher comes
>with the rental; naturally he will not let students operate it. We have
>just found out that we will be able to make a one time purchase of
>sound equipment, so our plan is to purchase wireless mics and a digital
>mixer and replace the sound guy WITH STUDENTS. However-- Yes it is a
>great educational exercise for students to learn to do this with an
>analog board, but what about the poor actor (who is also in an
>EDUCATIONAL experience) who can't be heard because a student cannot
>adjust 18 faders within 2 seconds? There is a time and place for this,
>but we need some assurances that we can count on good sound during the
>musicals. I don't see this as a poor educational approach, but looking
>out for all concerned.
>
>I hope your sickness passes... By the way are you connected to
>educational theatre in any way?
Anonymous
September 27, 2005 12:08:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Most cues aren't total changes from one look to another. Usually a
cue will bring up and down a few channels. I've done shows with 200+
light cues on a manual console. Two-preset consoles help at this
(which is why they were made) but it can be done with a single-scene
console. You learn to patch by changes and have an assistant when you
run out of fingures. Submasters help if a look repeats or there is a
large change cross-fade (bring down all channels as you bring the Sub
up). The point is, it can be done.

Actually, it is common for large events to either have two cooperative
technicians per mixer or two sepperate mixers (or more) doing slighty
diffeent jobs. At large shows you may find that even a large mixer
isn't enough, and several mixers are gainged together. It's not as
common as single console settups, but it does happen.

On 25 Sep 2005 18:01:55 -0700, "kjones" <kjones9999@intrstar.net>
wrote:

>The students still need to know how to adjust levels and EQ. So saving
>cues in sound is no different than what you do on the lighting board.
>One of our productions was sweeney todd with 250 light cues. Would you
>have done this on a manual board? Students eq and save to a digital
>mixer-- what's the difference?
>
>Okay - now the 4 person setup is not a bad idea. But they won't run
>into that situation either- so why have them do it now- except for just
>wanting to do a good job for the production- which by your definition
>is "anti educational?"
Anonymous
September 27, 2005 1:03:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Brandon Anderson wrote:

> You just said there is little funding for the arts. It would be
> better for a student who didn't get cast for a role but wants to
> participate, though he or she may no nothing of mixing, to learn to do
> this, even if it doesn't sound GREAT, then to PAY someone money that
> could have gone to furthering education. Or, better yet, teach the
> kids to project like old fasion times before wireless mics, and
> further the actors' education more, if there isn't anyone willing to
> learn tech.

You're still assuming there are kids who are willing to volunteer to do
this. If there aren't then it's better to get on with the show even if
takes a pro at the board.

Folks who are into tech often assume everybody wants to go there; but
everybody doesn't want to go there.

You also assume everyone can learn to project like that. That is not my
experience. Plenty of people will never have terrific vocal projection.
Do we now expect kids to be able to do what pros used to do, vocally?
When pros did that, did the whole populace also have that ability? Or
were the pros pros for a reason?

--
ha
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 2:17:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I haven't met a high school student who doens't like to play with
knobs and sliders.

Every high school student who signed up for theatre came out knowing
how to project. This isn't a natural ability, it's a learned skill,
and it takes about a week to learn. I even know how, and I'm tech...

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:03:20 GMT, walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich)
wrote:

>Brandon Anderson wrote:
>
>> You just said there is little funding for the arts. It would be
>> better for a student who didn't get cast for a role but wants to
>> participate, though he or she may no nothing of mixing, to learn to do
>> this, even if it doesn't sound GREAT, then to PAY someone money that
>> could have gone to furthering education. Or, better yet, teach the
>> kids to project like old fasion times before wireless mics, and
>> further the actors' education more, if there isn't anyone willing to
>> learn tech.
>
>You're still assuming there are kids who are willing to volunteer to do
>this. If there aren't then it's better to get on with the show even if
>takes a pro at the board.
>
>Folks who are into tech often assume everybody wants to go there; but
>everybody doesn't want to go there.
>
>You also assume everyone can learn to project like that. That is not my
>experience. Plenty of people will never have terrific vocal projection.
>Do we now expect kids to be able to do what pros used to do, vocally?
>When pros did that, did the whole populace also have that ability? Or
>were the pros pros for a reason?
Anonymous
September 28, 2005 10:36:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Brandon Anderson wrote:

> I haven't met a high school student who doens't like to play with
> knobs and sliders.

I know plenty of highscollers who are going to go do something else
instead of doing that. That's their choice.

> Every high school student who signed up for theatre came out knowing
> how to project. This isn't a natural ability, it's a learned skill,
> and it takes about a week to learn. I even know how, and I'm tech...

I've worked with singers, some trained, and some not, for decades. Some
people can project, some people can learn to project, and some can do
neither.

--
ha
!