Working the mic versus installing pickups and clamping mics

[RustyMadd]

Knowing that so much great music has been performed and recorded around a couple of mics on stands, do we really need the complexity and expense of adding clamp-on mics and/or pickups?

I guess I feel like if it was good enough for my heroes, why should I want to change it?

I have tried many systems, some of which (Myers PUs) are really wonderful, and they even have a local volume pot to vary your volume on the fly, but it's still much easier to step into and out of a mic on a stand.

So what's with all the effort to electrify the mandolins, banjos, fiddles, etc? Will it improve the music or the experience of hearing or performing it?

Thoughts please, y'all know much more about this stuff than I do. I appreciate your input.

[onassis]

IME, the reasons for plugging in always have to do either with the venue or with the performers desire for ease of set-up and control of their own sound.

Venue-wise, acts that regularly play on festival tickets have to deal with high stage volumes, high monitor volumes, rock-oriented sound guys and changeable wind and weather conditions. All of these are much more easily dealt with when using pu's.

For sound control, a lot of touring acts just want to be able to get the same sound night in and night out, regardless of the venue. Even if it's not the optimal sound. So, once again, pu systems run by guys who run them every day. A lot of acts just want to remove as many potential hazards as possible from the system.

Personally, I've gone to using a clip-on condenser, and moving in to the vocal condenser for solos. That way, I'm not tied to one spot on the stage when playing rhythm. It just seems to make it easier for me to communicate with bandmates via a nod or a raised eyebrow when I can move around a bit during the song.

[foldedpath]

Well, one reason you hear some discussion about clip-on mini condenser mics and pickups, is that not everyone here plays Bluegrass.


In a loud Rock or Blues band, a pickup might be the only reasonable way to get mandolin volume up high enough before feedback. In a quieter acoustic group, the choice of amplification might depend on whether you're playing standing up in a Bluegrass or Country band where "working the mic" is easy because you're standing up, or playing seated in an Irish Traditional or Classical group. It's not easy to "work the mic" when you're sitting down, even if you have your own mic on a stand.

If you prefer the tone of a mic and don't like pickups, a clip-on mic will usually provide better gain before feedback compared to an external mic on a stand. I assume that's why Chris Thile uses the clip-on mic with Punch Brothers, for the combination of mobility and tone. He's also working with the type of band that knows how to lay back and create space, when someone takes a solo. The Bluegrass dance around a single mic takes care of that automatically, but it can also be done with individual pickups or clip-on mics and a band that knows how to control dynamics.

Anyway, the short version is that I use a clip-on mic because I play Irish/Scottish trad, usually seated, but it works when standing and playing for dancers too. If I played Bluegrass, or was in a loud Rock or Blues band with a drummer, I might be making other choices.

Edit to add: Mitch makes a good point above about consistency in different venues. And also about how an external mic can still be used as a volume boost, as well as a cue for the audience about who is taking a solo.

[Mandoplumb]

If the number of mics on stage is limited, no need for every instrument and vocal to have a separate mic Then the volume of each mic can be "hotter" and each instrument can be heard a reasonable distance from the mic. I agree totally with Rusty, if you can find you tube videos of Reno and Smily, Flatt and Scruggs, Stanley Brothers listen to the mix, you can hear everything even as they move around. They are playing to one or two mics. It makes my hair stand up and chill bumps all over when Earl steps around to the mic and starts his break or Geroge throws that Martin into the mic and starts cross picking.

[RustyMadd]

It just seems to me that while it is irrefutable that many want more volume, consistency, control or whatever, the bluegrass and old time music we love and are inspired by was about taking a hunk of wood and making liquid happiness drip from the stage. Whereas today seems to be about consuming devices and gear so that our personal egos are fed with inane and irrelevant questions about your choices.....blah, blah, blah until the music and performance becomes somehow secondary to our roles as engineers and clever shoppers. And somehow it seems that something precious and pure is being lost. As we all decide what's best for us and 'of our taste' we give up our focus on our communities in favor of individualism.

The thing is that the best music is produced by a team, not a collection of individuals. But that possibility aside, do you really think recordings and performances have gotten significantly better since the introduction of hyper-consumerism and gadgetry?

[Dave Sheets]

"And somehow it seems that something precious and pure is being lost. As we all decide what's best for us and 'of our taste' we give up our focus on our communities in favor of individualism."

Just to comment here, I work as a volunteer sound guy for some local dances. I'm really happy when I can help make a band sound good, whether it is microphones or pickups or whatever it takes- the band likes it and the crowd likes it when the sound is good. Some bands, if they can't hear each other well in a noisy hall, don't play well- so if you get the monitors and the sound right in that setting, everyone is happy, geez the fiddler stays in tune and everything. If the sound on stage and in the dance hall isn't right- it's a long night...

So, yeah, this is fussing about gear and sound, but it's not necessarily consumerism. Sometimes, it's just wanting to go your best, particularly when the hall is loud.

All that said, I'd agree with RustyMadd that the best playing is often down sitting in a circle on old chairs in somebody's living room, with no electronics in sight and not worrying about much of anything but the music

[Timbofood]

Rusty, you have made a fine point about good sound being a group effort!!
My band did a saloon gig a few weeks ago and we were lucky enouagh to have a not too young guy from Tennessee running sound! He had the background, and talent to really help us out. Other times we’ve had, at the same spot, some young kid who has no concept of how BG music works, let alone how to work with instruments with no pick ups. Our guitar player has one but, who really wants to put a pick up on a banjo? (Sorry, obligatory dig at the banjo)
The importance of someone that understands the genre of music being presented at any venue cannot be overstated! Knowledge of the acoustics of strange rooms is a plus too.
For me, less is more. We try to play smaller gigs where all we have to do is show up, tune up and get to work! Tear down is so much easier that way!

[colorado_al]

I love it when our 5 piece can play into a single condenser mic and dosey-doe for solos. It is rare for us to play a venue that allows for that acoustically. We usually have about 30-45 minutes to setup sound and that is almost never enough time to ring out feedback in a room or really test in any meaningful way. So we have to resort to pickups or individual mics in order to get setup quickly and have decent control over our sound. We do want it to sound as natural as possible however, and spending some money on getting each instrument's amplified sound to be the best it can be, is worth it to us. It has nothing to do with consumerism and everything to do with wanting to sound our best for ourselves and our audience, who is paying for us to enjoy ourselves playing music. We want them to derive as much enjoyment from the gig as we do!
If you're lucky enough to have all afternoon to setup with competent sound people, or play venues that have their sound and mics already dialed in, then consider yourself lucky. For most bands, that is not an available luxury.

[RustyMadd]

So many excellent points being made by y'all and I appreciate the necessary "evil" so to speak. Well it sounds like so far y'all are aware of the pitfalls possible and have your priorities straight. That is very encouraging to me. Perhaps being of modest means I have become slightly jealous or envious and overly sensitive to the purchasing necessities to be a viable musician in today's environment.

I do know I am getting a little old and taking a bit of a set in my age. I sure do appreciate all your feedback and considerate responses.

So, while many if not the majority still "pine for the fjords" of the old ways, y'all workin musicians have had to remain flexible? Is that about it?

[onassis]

So, while many if not the majority still "pine for the fjords" of the old ways, y'all workin musicians have had to remain flexible? Is that about it?

That's it in a nutshell. After so many disheartening gigs with feedback and sounds techs who seem baffled by acoustic instruments, you just have to bite the bullet and prepare for these situations. When you aren't a well known touring act, your leverage and options are limited. I was the last holdout in my main group, and the clip-on condenser is the best option I've found. I play a second hand Northfield that came to me with a K&K pickup installed, but I hate using it, even though it sounds pretty good (for a pickup, at least . It just seems to lose all nuance and subtlety. But, you do what you have to to be able to play.

[sblock]

And let us not forget that the original bluegrass bands worked a single microphone because back in the day, that's really all there was to a "sound system". It was well before the days of mixers, monitors, equalizers, condensers, phantom power, and preamps! The simplicity of their rigs was forced upon them by practical circumstance. They did the very best they could with (by today's standards) primitive, heavy equipment, and they did pretty darned well! It took some careful stage choreography to pull it off -- and it didn't always work. The first and last bits of solos were often inaudible, for example. I very much doubt that they would have chosen the same route back then if they'd had access to any of today's electronics. Very few professional bluegrass bands opt today for the single-microphone solution. And neither, for that matter, did Bill Monroe himself, in his later years! By then, he and the Bluegrass Boys had long transitioned to using stage monitors and multiple microphones.

Face it: Old school ways are not necessarily the best ways. There hasn't been much improvement in the acoustic sound of the mandolin since the 1920's, but there have been huge improvements in the way that we can amplify that sound electronically for a large audience.

[Tom Wright]

Can we note that working the mic is actually an artificial condition? In the playing circle there are no microphones to help your dynamics. So it is more "natural" for all instruments to be equally amplified, and the dynamics are your technique. Boost pedals are a cheat, in a way, but so is advancing to the mic.

To my ear, modern recordings are far superior to old ones, whether in folk music, or jazz, or classical. My only complaint with modern sound reinforcement is it is too good---volume levels tend to be quite high even for acoustic acts, jazz gigs begin to suggest earplugs, and a rock act is hopeless to survive with protection.

[Mandoplumb]

I know it required skill to work one mic but that is part of the " sound" of bluegrass in my opinion. Earl got that banjo in front of the mic without losing a note and tucked it away when he didn't want it to be heard, as did many others when as was stated that was what they had. My point is that was part of the sound, there is no other way to get that sound. Doyle Lauson has never sounded as good in person as when Dale Perry was with him and they used one mic. You can even hear first generation bands "working" the mic on early recordings. You cannot duplicate that sound with electronics and sliders. If you want a processed sound fine but I played to one mic for 10 years or more until the band disbanded and we received man compliments on our sound.

[Josh Levine]

When my 5 piece bluegrass band first started playing gigs I got a large diaphram condenser thinking "this will be the easiest way, won't have to worry about all these pickup and sound equipment, we will be old school and it will be cool". It took 1 gig to realize we needed a much bigger kit with different options. It was a crowded bar gig and it was loud. We couldn't get any volume without getting feedback and it was hard to focus on playing trying to wrestle my mandolin up to the level of the microphone and through my bandmates. Now we typically use dynamic microphones and pickups with monitors. I use a shertler contact microphone for my mandolin. It isn't perfect and it is kind of a pain dealing with the puddy, but it sounds pretty good and I can mainly just focus on playing and singing during the gig as opposed to fighting my way to the microphone, making sure my mandolin is adequately positioned and worrying if we are loud enough or if we are going to cause feedback. Hey maybe one day I will play in a quiet listening environment and I can shed some of this equipment, perhaps then I will be less materialistic.

[MediumMando5722]

Face it: Old school ways are not necessarily the best ways. There hasn't been much improvement in the acoustic sound of the mandolin since the 1920's, but there have been huge improvements in the way that we can amplify that sound electronically for a large audience.

Amen.

Whether it's playing more quietly, stepping in and out of a mic, or using boost pedals, they're all for the same purpose, and work fine if done well. If you're listening with your ears rather than your eyes, it shouldn't make much difference.

I think it's cool that the Earls use a couple mics, or that Del and Dawg use just one. However, I've seen the Boxcars and Michael Cleveland and Flamekeeper at the same venue, with individual mics for each vocalist and instrument. I'd love to see Greensky Bluegrass and The Infamous Stringdusters, both of which use pickups and pedals. I can't imagine walking away from any of them wishing they'd done anything any different.

[pops1]

Acoustic gigs are best, or were when I was younger. I like a pickup as it allows me to play lighter and keep my aging hands from hurting and helps me make it thru the gig. A mic may sound better, but my pickup sounds very good. A mic is physically harder because you have to play harder. I still occasionally play for dances acoustically, but it is not easy. As you age some things are easier with change, your body changes, your technique/tools must change to accommodate those changes. Here is to all those older guys/gals still playing gigs, keep it up.

[RustyMadd]

Well, "the old ways aren't necessarily the best ways", I can certainly understand that and agree to some extent. But when people start using the pickups, the next thing you know they're using a flanger, or phase shifter, or delay, or reverb pedal, or or or...and that ain't Bluegrass or Old Time. I respect and admire Billy Strings, but when he steps out of genre to the degree he does, he loses me. And I think the music suffers. But maybe I'm just prejudiced.

And I am 60 pops so I know what you mean about the challenges. But Ol Sam don't complain, so I keep my challenges silent. For that matter, why not just play a mandocaster? You know, there are lines, and then there are lines.

Blessings and thanks all for your responses.

[RustyMadd]

If any of you caught the "Live From Here" video stream (aired 10-13-18) you surely saw "Anna and Elizabeth" working a single microphone with tremendous skill and grace. Those two can play and sing! And while their instrumentation was varied, they were primarily acoustic. Great stuff. Anyone catch those two sireens? ;-)