Fishman Artist Loudbox

[tnranger]

Our 5 piece bluegrass band often plays venues that are too small for our full sound system (2 speakers on stands, amp, mixer), yet some sound reinforcement would be nice.

I've been wondering if a good acoustic amp, like the Fishman Loudbox Artist would be worth considering. It has 2 XLR inputs, 120 watts, phantom power, and is easily portable. We are pretty good at the one mic thing, and have used an AT4040, or 2 small condensers (AT Pro 37's) in an XY pattern many times.

Any thoughts?

[Atlanta Mando Mike]

I've done it at restaurants and it works. Issues, 1 point of sound, you don't get saturation. Also, without a full eq, you can run into feedback. Still, you can use it to be louder than you can be acoustically for sure but as expected, it's relatively mild amplification for a whole band.

[UsuallyPickin]

Well ..... for about the same investment you can purchase a small PA. Fender and Kustom both make workable models. The other direction is to add a small mixer to 6/8 channels to a Loudbox. AMM is right in that it won't provide saturation but it will give you presence in a small venue. R/

[multidon]

I own the Artist Loudbox and love it. That said, I only use it solo, accompanying myself singing with guitar or uke. I don't know how it would be with a band.

Another option might be the Carvin AG200 or AG300. Either 200 or 300 watts and 3 inputs for 449 or 499, respectively.

[tburcham]

I've used my Artist in a small church with a single condenser mic (old school style)...worked great and allowed us to preserve a pure natural sound.

[almeriastrings]

While it may work (especially if you get it off the floor and raised up well), I would suggest looking at the Fishman SA220 (http://www.fishman.com/product/sa220-solo-performance-system). This has very similar input capabilities, but is much more potent, and has very much better dispersion. Costs a bit more, but it really is very good. I have two of them, and have used them for several years now in all kinds of situations. They continue to impress. Very articulate, accurate sound and can be heard all over even quite large spaces without requiring deafening volume up front. See other posts on these. There are several other users on here.

[oldwave]

Yes they are nice I have used the Fishman SA220
There is a new line of TurboSound line arrays that is just out from 5 to 800 dollars and look excellent
I have been using a HK Audio Nano 300 and the larger version the Nano 600 (a new purchase). Light weight sound great. The 300 is in the neighborhood of 700 and the 600 around 1000. I like these boxes a lot.

[TonyP]

Yes they are nice I have used the Fishman SA220
There is a new line of TurboSound line arrays that is just out from 5 to 800 dollars and look excellent
I have been using a HK Audio Nano 300 and the larger version the Nano 600 (a new purchase). Light weight sound great. The 300 is in the neighborhood of 700 and the 600 around 1000. I like these boxes a lot.

So I've even dying to ask more about that Nano 600 John. I'd never heard of it till you mentioned it in the digital mixer thread. I looked it up and it looks interesting but it's hard to tell how big it is and how it sounds. They make a big deal about the dispersion baffles. Do you run two of the little satellites and two subs, or? Also seems kinda pricey for a little system, but if it can do more than it looks like maybe it's worth it.

[allenhopkins]

Another vote for the Fishman SA-220. Used it today with a single MXL condenser mic, (quiet) audience of about 75-80. Have had mine for seven or more years, found it flexible and tres useful. Cost around $1K, but worth it IMHO.

[almeriastrings]

For some reason the HK Lucas Nano's are more common in Europe than in the US, but as Oldwave says, they are a very nice sounding system. You can use them as a single column type thing, or you can split the mid/HF boxes off to the sides for a 'stereo' or 'dual mono' rig. They're very compact and have a good, solid, tight bass. I know a keyboard player who uses them. Always sounds very good. For a compact but fairly powerful PA system, they are worth considering.

As with most of these systems, the 'inbuilt mixer' is somewhat limited, but OK for really basic stuff. If you want to get more sophisticated EQ, or extra fx, or need more inputs, as long as you have a direct line level input you can bypass that and use an external mixer. The SA220 is a bit of an exception, in that it is not supposed to be 'general purpose', but has a front end with an acoustic performer in mind... excellent ultra-high impedance jacks, plus a mic (with phantom), and loads of output options... DI out, with fx or not, a balanced line input, and if you run two of them, a 'crossfeed' mix. It is really the front end from a Loudbox in a tower format.

One advantage of the compact line array designs are that the side-side dispersion is so good that you really don't need floor monitors, or IEM's. It is like playing without a PA... but everyone, including yourself, can hear what you're doing.

A lot of very good technology in all these new(ish) systems. Class D amps, built in limiters and speaker management DSP in some cases... all makes for very compact, lightweight systems that are quick to set up, easy to carry, and sound great.

[TonyP]

I imagine there's always going to be fans for the old analog stuff, but it's exciting to see true innovation come down to where we are. I wouldn't expect an all in one package but after seeing what the ui12 can do I guess it would be pretty easy to build it into a speaker system. But I hope they don't. What's intregueing about the nano is getting just the mids and highs up to head height or above. To me that's where a combo amp fails because even on a chair it's not high enough to carry a small crowd. And most don't have a pole mount and they are usually to bulky to put high on a stand. I have yet to hear the Sa220, but it sounds like it's more powerful than the nano?

[almeriastrings]

No, in fact. It is 220 watts. That said, much depends on stuff like driver sensitivity and efficiency, so you can end up comparing apples to pears or peaches, or something else. Raw power does not say it all. If you have a sub included, they do tend to soak up quite a lot. They are both capable of getting a lot 'louder' than most acoustic performers would reasonably need in practice, though if you are into hard rock or disco stuff, definitely not your cup of tea :grin:

[JonZ]

My son has a jazz combo with violin, guitar, bass, drums and vocals. When they do an outdoor gig at the local cafe, the violin and vocalist share the Fishman, and it sounds great.

I know a guitar/vocal performer who switched from a Bose PA to putting both guitar and vocal through a small amp, because the PA was giving him feedback in small venues. His setup sounds good too.

That Fishman Artist is so nice and compact, and gives a great vocal sound. I would try it out to see if it works for you before trying something more expensive or complicated.

[TonyP]

No, in fact. It is 220 watts. That said, much depends on stuff like driver sensitivity and efficiency, so you can end up comparing apples to pears or peaches, or something else. Raw power does not say it all. If you have a sub included, they do tend to soak up quite a lot. They are both capable of getting a lot 'louder' than most acoustic performers would reasonably need in practice, though if you are into hard rock or disco stuff, definitely not your cup of tea :grin:

That's exactly what I was wondering about. There are so many variables it's hard to compare. And the likelihood I'll ever be able to physically compare the two systems in the same space is probably nil. And speaker systems or more engineered to a specific sound it's like picking a mandolin. One persons dream is another's nightmare. Personally I've learned my lesson about trying to go in minimal especially with trying to do a single mic. Simple eq. is just asking for problems, that's why a small system with one of the new digital mixers with a full suite of eq and feedback killers is the only way to fly IMHO. Otherwise you are just going to not be able to get loud enough because of feedback.

[foldedpath]

What's intregueing about the nano is getting just the mids and highs up to head height or above. To me that's where a combo amp fails because even on a chair it's not high enough to carry a small crowd. And most don't have a pole mount and they are usually to bulky to put high on a stand.

Yep, that's what keeps me using a conventional S.O.S. (speaker on stick) approach, with my K10's.

My starting height when setting up our compact PA is raising the base of the powered speaker cabinet 6 feet off the ground, and my stands can go higher if needed. It solves the problem of audience coverage front-to-back, by firing over the heads of the people in the front row for more even coverage. Those in back can still hear the music, and the people in front don't get blasted with high SPL's.

For me, the conventional S.O.S. approach may take a few more minutes to set up, but it works better than the "tower" or mini line array systems that are based on a floor module like the Bose L2, or are on short stands like the Fishman SA220. Something like the SA220 is much better for audience coverage than an acoustic amp sitting on the floor, but it just doesn't go high enough (for me, YMMV). That HK Audio LUCAS Nano system looks interesting, but unless there are pole extensions available (are there?) it might not go high enough for the kind of gigs I do.

Of course, if you always perform on a raised stage in front of the audience, this is less of a problem. But if you're often setting up a compact PA at ground height with the audience -- very common for wedding gigs, farmer's markets, contra dances, etc. -- that's where raising the sound source on a high stand can offer major benefits in smooth audience coverage.

[almeriastrings]

But if you're often setting up a compact PA at ground height with the audience -- very common for wedding gigs, farmer's markets, contra dances, etc. -- that's where raising the sound source on a high stand can offer major benefits in smooth audience coverage.

I must say that - subjectively - I have used both SA220's and Maui 11's in those kind of situations frequently, and found back-back coverage very even and more than adequate - the SA220's particularly so, using their supplied stands. With the Maui's I agree they are better raised up on a stage or some other stable support. I found you don't have to elevate them very far, but even a couple of feet off the ground results in much better 'throw' in certain (not all) situations. I'll be using a pair of those this coming Thursday at a really nice outdoor venue, with an audience in the 200-300 range. Wandering around with my iPad, I monitor what is going on from various positions, and with both systems, I am really very happy with the end result. We get lots of compliments from other performers and from the audience too on the sound quality. I'll try to get a few photos of the stage setup we'll be using there.

This was a pair of SA220's used in a very large outdoor town square, with an audience in the 400-500 range, from a gig a couple of years ago with a singer-singwriter. Here you can see the two SA220's on the large stage, which gave them loads of effective height. The coverage was very good indeed. You hear every detail all over the area, in fact, I had to go to the car park once and could still hear everything even from there.

136284

[foldedpath]

I must say that - subjectively - I have used both SA220's and Maui 11's in those kind of situations frequently, and found back-back coverage very even and more than adequate - the SA220's particularly so, using their supplied stands.

It depends so much on the situation, especially when you're hired not to "put on a show" but to provide background music at a corporate or wedding event.

Our duo is often setting up in the corner of a dining room or event hall room for a pre-ceremony reception, and again at the cocktail hour before dinner. Usually at floor level, and right in front of us there will be a table with chairs where people will be sitting and talking. The gig is to somehow provide music for the whole room, without overwhelming that first set of tables. Volume management is a big part of what they're paying us for.

I just don't know any other way to do that, except to get the speakers way up off the floor. The SA220's or anything similar just wouldn't cut it in that situation. Different strokes, and all that. I could see using a system like that if we didn't do this type of background music gig, along with other more concert-oriented gigs at louder SPL's, where the audience can self-select for volume by how close they come to the stage.

[TonyP]

As you can tell FP, I find us in somewhat the same situation. I'm more than happy to do a gig sans PA and we've done several this year. This has effected actually how many musicians we field for the gig with folks just wanting the minimum so going with the trio instead of quartet. And like the OP the amount of room in any given venue is always ridiculously small.

But these new digital mixers and smaller more efficient speaker systems are making me totally rethink my scaleable PA idea. To be able to not lose any processing hp and be 1/10 th size not to mention cost is just mind boggling. Every time I decide I'm going to leave something behind because of no space or told we don't need the "big rig" it directly bites me. But still the big question now is speakers and of course $$$.

Seems to me you are close to the same $$$ for the Nano600, SA220 and 2 K10's. And in the OP's case a small mixer and K10 high up on a stand could cover a lot efficiently. And as time goes on and if power requirement go up just add another K10.

[foldedpath]

Seems to me you are close to the same $$$ for the Nano600, SA220 and 2 K10's.

Yes, if we're comparing single source or a pair, it's almost the same -- around $1,000 USD per speaker, including the extras required for the K10, like a speaker stand and mixer to match the SA220's inputs.

For anyone reading this and putting together a compact PA for the first time, don't forget to budget for other things you'll need, like microphone stands, an AC multi-outlet box, long AC extension cable on a reel, nylon gig bags to hold speaker stands and mic stands, a box or bag for instrument, mic, and speaker cables, a small bag with electrical tape, gaffer tape, and multi-tool for repairs. And for peace of mind, a backup compact mixer in case the main one dies! (Not everyone is that paranoid, but I am).

I'm constantly trying to find ways to keep my compact PA as teeny as possible, but there is still all this extra stuff that has to be included, even for the smallest gigs. I can still get everything including instrument cases in the back of a Subaru Forester compact SUV, and as long as I can do that, I'm happy.

[allenhopkins]

...The gig is to somehow provide music for the whole room, without overwhelming that first set of tables. Volume management is a big part of what they're paying us for. I just don't know any other way to do that, except to get the speakers way up off the floor. The SA220's or anything similar just wouldn't cut it in that situation...

Well, with the supplied SA-220 stand at full recommended extension, the top of the column is well over six feet off the floor. And the stand can be set higher than that, though I've never gone past the "recommended" lines painted on the stand's shaft.

Of course, the problem would then be that, if the gain were set high enough to cover the entire room, the bottom speakers of the array would be at the diners' head level, and the ones closest to the speaker might find the music too loud. One of the SA-220's better features is that it needn't be set up in front of the musicians, but can be placed behind or to the side, so it could be located farther from the nearest audience members.

I've used a Fender Passport in similar situations, and have raised the speakers seven or eight feet off the floor, but this has not entirely eliminated the issue of "closer = louder, further = fainter." In situations such as you describe, there's usually significant ambient noise, and we're "background music" to some extent. Volume variance throughout the room is expected, but there are strategies to keep it manageable.

I wouldn't count the Fishman column out on this score, though smaller speakers raised higher do have some advantages.

[almeriastrings]

This article (from 2006) is well worth a read.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar06/articles/live_linearrays.htm

[oldwave]

My latest ultra-light rig is the HK audio Nano 300, the Begrudger x-air 12 and a iPad with a Linux laptop and ethernet cable as a backup. 4 mics and two stands (or DI's in acoustic challenging situations). I am very pleased and its a one trip load in.
The Nano 600 with the Nano 300 for monitors and an Allen and Heath qu-16 for larger venues. Ultra light is great for 60 plus guys like me. I have a Loud box 100 and I do like it if I need an amp.
The maiden voyage for the Behringer is this Saturday, but its a complete PA for coffee house and low volume venues for about a 1000.00 with mixer. Any old laptop that will run linux will work, a 200 refurb from Newegg is what I use and it works great. Just use Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and its extremely stable if you don't have an iPad. If you don't trust wireless (I am a network designer) just use a cable to the laptop.

[tnranger]

This SA-220 looks like it might be just the thing. I like that it has 48 volt phantom power where the Loudbox only has 24.

Any users/owners have any thoughts or experience using a large diaphragm condenser (AT4040), or 2 small diaphragm condensers with the SA-220? Is feedback a problem? Where would we have to set the microphone in relation to the tower to avoid it?

[Astro]

Any users/owners have any thoughts or experience using a large diaphragm condenser (AT4040), or 2 small diaphragm condensers ...

OK not related to the SA-220 but...

We just tried the original 4033 (not reissue) at a local studio during a live recording session. It was kind of a hot sound. It was also quite tricky to get the volumes of everyone right. To my surprise, placement depended on just a matter of inches.

We ended up ditching it and went back to individual mics and sounded much fuller and better for that particular live studio application anyway. My hats off to those bands that pull off the single mic large diaphragm thing. Its tough.

[allenhopkins]

I've been using an MXL 910 "medium diaphragm" (22mm) mic with my SA 220, but only as an individual, not with a group. It's worked fine for me, and I have been able to get sufficient volume for outdoor performance (e.g., a farmers' market) feedback-free, by manipulating the anti-feedback controls of the amp. When I need a separate instrument mic, I use a Behringer C-2 mounted on a side boom.

Even for outdoor applications, I've rarely run the gain controls, individual channel and entire system, over halfway up. So I can't speak to how much feedback I'd have to deal with at peak volumes. YMMV, as they say...

[almeriastrings]

There are no absolute guarantees in terms of mic choice or position, because there are always uncontrolled variables... the room, reflections, required levels, etc.

However, you can do things to minimize the potential for feedback/problems.

1. Very high sensitivity 'true' LD condensers are always challenging in live situations. Basically, that is not what they are designed for (with a very few specific exceptions). You are much more likely to find a mic with a smaller diaphragm easier in practice - one reason why the AT4033 is very popular for this. It is actually a SD element in a LD 'tin'.

2. Fixed pattern vs variable pattern mics have a more linear off-axis rejection response, so using a 'straight' cardiod or supercardiod vs. one with multi-patterns can help.

3. With a cardiod mic, maximum rejection is towards the rear. With a super or hypercardiod, it is off to the sides. This is where your house speakers are likely to be, and where monitors (if you use them) should be positioned.

136336

This is important - and makes a huge difference. A lot of issues occur because people get this wrong.

4. The most expensive studio mics are not necessarily the best live mics. The requirements are very different. It is not just sonic performance, but shock mounting, wind resistance, and even whether you'd want to risk $2K+ mics within reach of the public. or other performers! Blowing into them, knocking them over, or worse... in any event, you may find a carefully selected $200 mic does the job perfectly well, and even causes you fewer problems.

[TonyP]

Any users/owners have any thoughts or experience using a large diaphragm condenser (AT4040), or 2 small diaphragm condensers with the SA-220? Is feedback a problem? Where would we have to set the microphone in relation to the tower to avoid it?

This is all stuff you already know I'm sure, but.

Like has been said it doesn't matter the sound system, there is inherent feedback problems with any single mic. There are ways to minimize it, but you are working against the laws of physics. In order for one mic to pick up a whole band it has to be set up "hot" and that with the fact it's already sensitive means there is going to be a threshold volume level. That means anything over that you are going to feed back. You can gain a couple of db with feedback busters and graphic eq's. But like Almeria points out there are just too many variables.

The ideal situation is one that Allen describes. One person so you can keep the volume down and work the mic close. And being outside. A LDC in a small noisy bar is just plain old not doable. The background noise and being in a small space with reflections means even if the tower is in front of you it's going to be rough. I've used the 4040, got a 4033 and 4050. I only use them for one person in close proximity in live situations anymore, and only in more ideal situations. If it's noisy it's back to separate dynamic mics on vocals and condensers on instruments.

[tnranger]

Good points, Tony. We have learned the hard way what you can and cannot do with a LDC. We have had better luck with 2 small condensers in an XY arrangement.

We recently played a family reunion in the clubhouse of a local condo. There would be 40-50 people in a 35 by 35 square foot room. We were thinking we would play as background music, without sound reinforcement. When we got there, the contact person decided she wanted us to do some of our comedy bits and novelty songs. So we could be heard without yelling, we ended up using the ancient, totally unfamiliar system that belonged to the condo. It was new when Elvis walked the earth. It was a very frustrating gig. We could not hear each other, and the audience could not hear us very well either.

My impression is that the SA220 may have been just enough reinforcement for that size room to sweeten the vocals, and let the comedy bits be heard by people in the back, and help us to hear each other. Maybe I am expecting too much.

[TonyP]

All of us are trying to be respectful and not be total downers, but single mic is a tough nut to crack. It takes a dedicated soundman to pull off like when you see Dell & the Boys. And like so many of my heroes they make it look simple, when it's not. There is I'm sure a LOT of practice that goes into performing with a single mic. And yeah, it's a lot setup, but having somebody to ride faders and keep things under control keeps the band more focused. I don't mind a tweek here or there while I'm playing, but realizing something was overlooked or something has changed when the gig is in progress just cross wires my brain. Sound is totally left brain for me, and playing mandolin is totally right brain. I guess I don't change hemispheres easily :)

I can totally relate and sympathize with showing up and being at the mercy of junk equipment. Or being misled into thinking I could do the gig acoustic and all the sudden they've changed their minds. What's weird is my impression is the audience think it's the band and not the junk you're having to use.

I wish you all the luck and I wish you'd check back if you find the SA220 works for you.

[allenhopkins]

+1 to what TonyP said. Most of us don't have "dedicated soundmen (soundpersons, whatever)"; we're doing our own sound while performing, making adjustments on the fly after setting things up ourselves the best way we can. We have a bunch of experience as to what works and doesn't work for us in a variety of settings and situations, but we're still going by "seat of the pants" many times.

I'm going to be doing a pretty big Civil War re-enactors' dance this weekend, maybe 2-300 dancers and onlookers in a huge metal barn. (In case you'd didn't know, corrugated metal structures are very mid-19th-century period-authentic -- NOT!) I'll be using a 300-watt Samson 8-channel, two main and two extension speakers to cover the large space, condenser mics for the caller, hammered dulcimer and fiddle, DI for the guitar, dynamic mic for my bass fiddle. Minimal monitor, probably just a single powered Hot Spot, because we can all hear each other acoustically; just need a bit of balance.

I wish I had a sound tech, but I don't. I'll have to play bass and run the sound at the same time. So my objective is to be as close to "set it and forget it" as possible. No way to ride gain, balance and rebalance, pick up breaks, customize EQ for different tunes, etc. If the audience can hear the caller and pick up the beat of the music, I will consider the gig a success. Not that I advocate low standards, just that I have to be realistic about what an on-stage "sound person" can accomplish.

So if a particular mic configuration is difficult or temperamental -- even if when, if properly adjusted, it produces really high-quality sound -- it may be more than an on-stage musician can handle. Can't let the ideal be the enemy of the possible.

[almeriastrings]

Again, this is an area where some of the more advanced digital mixers can really help.

For example, on the Stagescape M20D there is a feature known as "trim tracking".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrY6rCGz0m8

Things like this, combined with a high quality anti-feedback system can make life easier if you find yourself having to do both jobs... perform and run your own sound.

There are other features built in to these things that can also help make setups really fast and easy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9NKdSwcz3k

The simpler, lower cost mixers will not offer all of these options, however.

[oldwave]

Very nice feature in the StageScape. However even at the low end one band member can take a wireless tablet or workstation out front while the rest of the band sound checks and adjust levels eq for the rest of the band. That's how I do it and then send some one else out for my balance (or use phones). A huge benefit for the mixing from stage musicians. Back before tablets and Ethernet capable mixers I use to use a wireless usb print server to connect to my o1V96 to do the same thing. It required a driver to capture and transport the usb signal but worked pretty well for what it was. The ipad apps are a dream compared to that though. Ultralight and ultra convenient is the buzz words here. That said the laws of physics and sound propagation still apply and these tools can mitigate a performance in a horrible space but its still a horrible space. The one mic method takes skill and foresight to deal with various acoustic spaces. Sounds great when it works and the band is experienced (think Flatt and Scruggs at Carneige Hall recording) and a disastrous experience when the conditions are bad. I have in bag of tricks a number of scenarios, from pickups on the instruments with hypecardiod vocal mics to fine quality recording mics (at 4054 vocals at AT4051 and 4053 instrument mics when the conditions are just right (nice hall or outside with minimal monitor needs and volume. I do have in ears but no one I play with now uses them, its another skill set but works great to clean up stage volume with their own compromises though. The bottom line is the gigging musicians are now gaining access to digital tools that are affordable and effective, lightweight and sonicaly wonderful.

[TonyP]

Can't let the ideal be the enemy of the possible.

Wow, that says it all.... about everything. We who take on the sound are trying to hit a hole in one with a blind fold on and somebody has changed the course after we put the blind fold on :) You can ring a rig before everybody gets there, but it's going to change and sometimes drastically when the audience shows up. I've also had band members give me the stink eye and complain because even though I'm early a significant number of the "mature crowd" have gotten there early and staked out seats right down front while I'm going through the process with the related squeals and squawks.

I like to "case the joint" beforehand to see what I'm up against. This is not always possible. And like the OP I learn the hard way and try to adapt and understand what didn't work. All while having min. time to set up and tweek then do final adjustments during the performance.

The difference here lately is our new guitar player does the sound for his jazz bands and has been a real help in the recent gigs. To have an extra head when things go south is a blessing. He's also a very calm guy which I'm not faced with something that doesn't make sense and it's time to go on.

Then there's the gig like Allen's where there's nothing you can do. Metal buildings with no insulation, big hard surfaced parallel walls, big plate glass windows , gazebo's and band shells all just make my heart sink. The rest of the band has no clue whatsoever. And always give me the scowls or pleading looks as I try to do my best to ride it out.

[almeriastrings]

There is, unfortunately, no quick and easy digital fix for really horrible spaces.....and we all have to try and work in those all too often!

All you can do is have several options available. I too try to carry enough stuff to try to overcome things as much as possible, even in bad scenarios. It is all smaller and lighter than it used to be, thankfully... but you always seem to end up with either too much, or not enough! :)) i.e., the one time you decide "I really won't need XXX tonight", you get there and find you do....if you do toss it in, it sits there unused!

With regard to:

"My impression is that the SA220 may have been just enough reinforcement for that size room to sweeten the vocals, and let the comedy bits be heard by people in the back, and help us to hear each other. Maybe I am expecting too much."

I would be very confident it would have handled that easily. It can do a lot more than that. They really are a very good system. I would suggest trying one out if possible, in a real-life situation (store tests can be very misleading).

One thing that really help is to have a reasonably wide range of different mics available, that you select from according to the venue. This can prevent a lot of problems at source.

In difficult situations, I like the AKG D5 (dynamics) and both Rode M2's and Audix VX-5 (condensers). These are all hypercardiod mics with really excellent off-axis rejection. They are very good sounding, well built, and tough enough to withstand most things life could throw at them. You can usually get nice, reliable results in really horrible spaces with these.

In nice rooms, you can get a bit more esoteric and try other options, but when all else fails, those are my "go to" life savers.

[foldedpath]

You can ring a rig before everybody gets there, but it's going to change and sometimes drastically when the audience shows up.

Or when part of the audience leaves, towards the end of a show. :)

The first time I noticed that, was on a St. Patrick's Day gig on a year where it fell in the middle of the week. I was sub-mixing on stage in a nice local folk club, feeding the house mixer and speakers. I had the room nicely rung out and a good volume level for most of the show. Then, because it was a week night, and it was an older crowd (or people had to work the next day), the last set played to around half the audience we started with. Suddenly I was dealing with bad feedback problems, because half the water bags had left the room. It was a lot more reflective.

I learned that lesson... keep an eye on the size of the crowd, and be ready to pull back the volume a tad, if the room starts to empty out late at night.


I've also had band members give me the stink eye and complain because even though I'm early a significant number of the "mature crowd" have gotten there early and staked out seats right down front while I'm going through the process with the related squeals and squawks.

An automated feedback reducer can help with that situation. Something like the Sabine FBX rackmount system I've used in the past. During the setup routine, you slowly increase volume, and the system immediately clamps a filter on each feedback frequency as it starts to ring. It happens so fast that it's not too intrusive for an audience that shows up early, or if you're setting up in "combat audio" conditions with an existing crowd in place.

As we've all discussed here before, auto feedback reducers aren't a magic bullet. You still need to know how to arrange mics and speakers to minimize feedback, try to avoid ridiculous stage volumes, etc. But it can buy a few precious db of gain before feedback, and the setup routine (assuming you have time to do it) is easier on the ears of an early audience.

As it happens, I don't use a feedback reducer any more, because so many of our gigs are low volume background stuff, and I'm familiar enough with the rig that it's just never a problem to get enough gain without actually having to ring out the PA before playing. If we played louder, or in places like loud bars, I'd be using one.

[tnranger]

Thanks for all the interesting discussion. (No, TonyP, you were in no way disrespectful!)

I volunteer to run sound at our church, mostly as a way to serve, but partly to learn what I can about live sound reinforcement. It has helped me better set up and EQ our band when we play. I have learned that EQing is an art in and of itself. However, what I do know pales in comparison to what I don't know. That's why I appreciate these threads. Unfortunately, sound systems are a necessary evil. I equate knowing how and when to use one as important as learning your instrument.

Almeria, thanks for your comments on the SAS220. Like everything else, it's hard to know without trying it out. The power, portability, and simplicity are very attractive. I just don't want to buy a mini cooper when I really need a pickup truck.

[almeriastrings]

The only way to know is to try one. What I have done in situations like that is use a dealer who offers a 30 day return window. As long as you look after it and keep all the original packing, it is long enough to give it a good test and see how you get on with it. Even if you have to pay return shipping, it is good education... and cheaper than ending up with the wrong thing.

One thing to look for is expandability and flexibility... whether with something like K10's, or SA220's or Maui (Fender)/Bose systems. All of these are good in that you can very easily just add in a second one for bigger gigs, or for a small gig, just throw one in the car. Very handy indeed.