Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Dated as I am, I've not a real clue on what's new and good in the realm of hardware for live sound support. I'd written previously asking for your recommendations for speakers, passive or active? We broke down just before Christmas and went for active. Other than for monitors attached to computers, using active speakers for live sets is new to me. My past has been with passive speakers, mixing boards, inline outboard kit of various types etc. Now we need to think about purchasing a mixer, and we're also shopping for microphones and cables. That's where I'm seeking your experience, expertise and opinion this time, to guide our purchasing to the best options for our intent - to clearly and cleanly amplify acoustic and traditional music, the greater aim to help, excite and motivate dancers...
1. ) - a passive mixer... I've experience with and been inside and impressed with a few makes, if dated - Yamaha, Allen & Heath, Soundcraft, etc... Some of the companies I've known are no more. We don't need any more than 6 to 8 mic inputs, and I'd like a split mid for EQ on each of those, and stereo would be welcome too. Any and all recommendations are welcome.
2. ) - microphones... I'm a condenser mic fan, and amongst my all time favourites of the past are AKG's C535EB, Neumanns, Countryman, etc. But we're not talking that kind of price range. At present we're thinking of say 5 microphones, needing at least one that will produce a clean crisp vocal result. Here's what we're thinking - a good multi-purpose Swiss Army kind of mic for both calling/prompting and instrumental work, a couple of dynamics, and a couple of pencil condensers for instrumental use, for guitar, fiddle, etc.
What follows are some of the recommendations given so far and we're hoping to not spend more than £40 to £150 / $60 to $200 per mic -
Swiss Army condenser mics, with a battery powered option -
AKG C1000S
Audio-Technica ATM710 ()
Rode M3 (now being made back in Australia)
Dynamics -
AKG D-5 / D-5S - I've been offered a good price on these
BLUE En-CORE 100 / 100i
Beyerdynamic Opus 69
Audio Technica PRO31
Samson Q8
Shure SM58
A pair of small diaphragm condenser mics -
Behringer B-5
M-Audio Pulsar II
sE Electronics sE1A
Samson C02
I'm amazed at how China has taken over most things in the manufacturing of sound reinforcement, from mics to amps, speakers and cables - "Made in China"! Some of it is well made, decent kit, like China's own company, sE Electronics. It just feels like we've given up too much for cheap labour costs and no constraints on poisoning air, water and land, and no union hassles, as long as it isn't in our backyard and we can get it cheap. As a manufacturing war, by what I've seen, China has definitely won. Even more amazing is the skill there in producing counterfeit items. I've kept a counterfeit Sennheiser mic I'd chased up, on purpose, which is amazing, right down to the enclosed literature and the embosed glossy cardboard sleeve. And the mic, amazing, you'd have to look inside and have some knowledge to realize it was a fake.
Back to recommendations, most of the dynamic mics we've had recommended so far, like the AKG D-5, are listed an described as being primarily vocal mics. Having been away from sound reinforcement for some time I need your help. We really need these mics, on the whole, to be multi-purpose, but their main use will be for instruments.
I've used Shure mics since I was a kid, and we used to multi-task with something they've made since the Jurassic, their SM57... Slap my wrist, but I was in a music shop recently where when asking what mics they carried I was told "just Shure", and just one model. Some old codger, though I might have been his senior, pipped up with "The best microphones in the world!" I should have shut up, but I was in a grouchy mood and returned with, "No, they're not!" But softening my outburst with "But they are good workhorses." My own preferences seem to be for the European made mics, but with a respect and appreciation for Shure too, and some North American and Asian makes. I like the Rode and BLUE folks and the kit they make, and was pleased to hear Rode was moving their manufacturing back to Australia from China...
What, you'd prefer I didn't ramble, you wanted 'short'?
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Ceolachan, I recently faced similar questions.
On workhorse dynamic mics, look at those from Heil sound:
www.heilsound.com
They've been specifically designed to be the new SM57/58, you can get one for $100-$150, and the reviews are good.
Mixers:
I have a new Allen & Heath zed14 which is very nice and easy to use. The Spirit/soundcraft epm series also looked good and are even cheaper. Both with sweepable mids rather than split mids.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Mixing boards are basically the UI for your system. As long as the board isn't losing electrical contacts (scratchy pots, dodgy jacks, etc.) which is mostly going to happen with old gear that's seen a lot of use, your most important concern is that you reach for the right thing first.
That being said, I like the Mackie layout. The 1202 was the board I used, small enough to fit in a briefcase but enough lines to run a four-piece band comfortably, and flexible enough to handle the configuraions you'd reasonably expect to need. There are larger models that offer more channels in and out, but they're all more or less the same basic interface.
Behrenger makes basically the same board for a bit cheaper, and I've never heard any horror stories from people using them, so that might be worth a look.
As for microphones, I'm not the guy to ask. I always used whatever was lying around and got on pretty well with those. However, Audix is a line that has very good reputation, and I know one singer who carries her Audix mic to every gig - won't sing through anything else. She's got excellent ears and excellent taste, so that in itself is enough to put them on my short list - for what that's worth.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Thanks Edward, I'll give the Heils a look, and the ZED14 is one of our top considerations. Yes, I meant 'sweepable' rather than 'split'... And Jon, thanks also, while I've no experience with the Mackie kit, I like the look and the reviews, and the size of small boards, though I am addicted to sliders. One of the Audix mics is particularly good for the female voice, yes, they have decent reviews too. Thanks for your recommendation Alasdair, the AKG is a fair mic for live use and doesn't do too bad with avoiding feedback, unless you point it at a speaker, satellite cab or monitor. However, I am definitely leaning toward the Rode, feeling even more favourable their way since they returned their manufacturing from China to Australia. And no, I'm not anti-Chinese, I like the sE mics and am leaning toward them for the pair of small diaghragm condensers.
Does anyone have any epxerience or knowledge of the M-Audio Pulsar II?
I should also open this up to ideas for miking uilleann pipes, so please, tell my your secrets, or horrors?!
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Here's what I'm amplifying and what I've been using:
2 Fiddles with onboard AT condensers
Electric Piano
Guitar with onboard LR Baggs M1 Active (into a pedal board)
Flute - playing into an SM58 with a TC Electronics preamp
Board wise: I did a lot of price conscious looking for the band and landed on the PV14 passive mixer. The price was right, it had basically what I wanted, offers a couple of stereo channels, phantom, basic effects, XLR and 1/4 inputs. It's served us well for 3 years, and in fact, I bought a PV8 to run my active monitors, too. If I wasn't on a budget I'd probably buy Mackie (or better), as the resale is better than PV - but in an operational environment, they're very similar. (I wouldn't buy a Behringer board based on reviews of their breakdowns).
For mics: I've been happy with a mix of condensers and dynamic mics, again on a budget.
Condenser:
AKG C1000S - a good mic for live sound - includes an array modifier for changing the pattern from omni to cardioid/hyper cardioid. Down side is they are heavy and large and require a specific mic clip. It has a switchable roll off and on board battery power (if you want it).
MXL 604 - a very nice, inexpensive pencil mic (requires phantom) with great tone range. Also includes an omni or cardioid adapter. Standard pencil clip works and it has a switchable roll off.
Behringer B5 - an OK standard condenser, not as clean as the MXL, with switchable roll off. Requires phantom. Uses a standard pencil clip.
I run the condensers into ART tube preamp boxes before they get to the board, and this really smoothes out the rough edges, and allows each player a bit of control over their volume, ground lift, phantom off/on. The preamp boxes also address the problem of Mixer preamp inconsistencies or cheap components.
Dynamics:
SM58 - Can't beat it for the money.
Old AT Switchable mic - I find that I need to have a mic with an ON/OFF switch for callers/announcers. I like the old AT as it's strong in the mids and can be dropped without many consequences.
Cables: Don't buy cheap ones - I've thrown lots of them out, or have had to replace the XLR ends routinely. A good investment (I wish I'd had this years ago) is a Behringer CT100 cable tester. It's a small box that identifies broken wires, bad connectors for XLR, TS, TRS, RCA, 1/8", Midi cables. All this for about $25USD
I've done a couple of modifiers that are a bit outside of your discussion:
1) I use active monitors, and they are far better than any other small monitor system I've ever used. I use a Roland CM30 (Cube Monitor) connected to the house mix (as I run sound from stage and like to hear what's in the house), and a Behringer B212A for the onstage mix. Were I to add more monitors I'd add the CM30's since they have a really broad sound array, lots of functionality, and are pretty small - way more effective than a hot spot monitor. In between the mixer and the monitor speakers I have a Behringer FBQ2496 Feedback Destroyer that allows me to turn the monitors up without having to fight the feedback monster on the fly.
2) Between the mixer and the main speakers (JBL P15s), I added a Behringer SX3040 Sonic Exciter that really kicks in when you're notching up the intensity, and a Behringer FBQ1502 equalizer that allows me to identify and eliminate feedback frequencies on the fly.
I have these three items in a 3 bay rack case with all of the patch wires, speaker cables, and electrical cords stuffed into the back. I sit my mixer on top of this rack case - it's efficient space wise, and powerful sound wise.
This system works well in a hall up to about 200 people. Any more than that and I need to add another pair of active speakers halfway down the hall.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Thanks Toppish... Yes, I'd forgot to add that to the pencil condenser list, but I have used MXLs before and the 604s were being considered too. As to dynamics, the AKG and the BLUE vie handsomely against Shure's SM58 for a comparable price...
AT, I'm taking you mean Audio-Technica, a company I've had good experiences with, as far as their mics, but which model is it you've got, dynamic or condenser? I love switchable mics, however, nowadays you can pay quite a bit more for a mic with a switch. Another option is to use switched Neutric plugs, though it requires a little soldering skill. As well, the common sense amongst many sound techies is not to let a singer or a caller have a switched mic, as they can inadvetently switch it off in mid stream, preferring to leave that control with the board.
LIke you, I hate the hell and misery that cheap cables can cause. The Behringer CT100 cable tester is available here for around 20 quid. Another fine cable tester, for 5 quid more, is available over here, with more connections than the Behringer, and that is Studiospares - http://www.studiospares.com/
Thanks for the rest, and yes, it was helpful and interesting, and appreciated...
Howdy Dave, I'd guess you knew that PV was Peavey, the U.S. company, though I think, like so many others, they also have all their kit made in China nowadays... And AT is Audio-Technics. But, I'm sure Toppish with me would be willing to take any questions and try to achieve some understanding, if you really wanted? Would a translation in Welsh, Irish or Scottish help?
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
C,
My old Audio Technica dynamic mic is discontinued and and has been repaired so many times that a model number is useless. Its shape is bulb on the top, pencil on the bottom - it uses a pencil mic clip. Suffice to say, the on/off switch and the fact that it works well for talking are its greatest attributes. Actually, I prefer, for callers (contra) or prompters (Scottish Country Dance), a silent on/off switch on the mic since it gives me one less thing to do while running the board and playing. (I had forgotten about the Neutrik with the on/off switch. A great idea the I'll try some time. Also, thanks for the StudioSpares link - if I used Speakon connectors, I'd buy one, but I don't have a single one - yet).
A detail that I left out was the standard contra caller's mic. For years we used a Shure wireless headset. It worked OK, but if you had different callers it usually was stretched out to the largest head. Also, the mic, situated on a not quite strong enough mini-gooseneck, was very directional, so if a caller wasn't used to the unit, they could be talking into the backside of the mic while wondering why they were feeding back when they approached the mains. It turned out to be too much management.
With the changes in the US FCC bandwidth rules last year, many wireless mics became obsolete - meaning if you use them in out in the countryside they're fine, but once you try them in a densely populated area, the static and data bandwidth overlap could cause interference.
So I decided to try an Audio Technica Freeway 200 wireless hand held - for an amazing $80USD - and it has worked out well. Compared to the equivalent Samson on the low end, or Shure on the higher end, I've been pleasantly surprised. The down side is that the output is 1/4" TRS, but I simply connect it to a DI and insert it into an XLR channel. (I don't use the mixer line 1/4" input because the voltage is potentially too high for the Op-Amp -read: signal translator- and will fry it, which I've done before)
Blah, blah, blah - it's the beauty - and the curse of doing sound. In my case, the band sounds way better as a result, but it's taken years to figure it out even this far……..
My advice to a budding musician would be to get someone else to do this and concentrate on the music.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Toppish said "My advice to a budding musician would be to get someone else to do this and concentrate on the music."
But it is very hard to find someone competent to do this at every gig. And you have to pay them, generally.
My conclusion after working in a variety of sound situations is, if you want to sound good reliably, you have to have the knowledge and means to do so. It's possible to do this without going to far into gearheadedness. And, as someone who runs sound occasionally, it's easier to deal with musicians who know something about their sound setup.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The first bands I was in, I'm pretty sure that I was brought along at least partly (possibly mostly) because I knew how to run the gear. It's a good trick to have in your belt.
And yes, you absolutely would have to pay me to turn up and run sound for you, so again, it's worth knowing at least the basics. They're not hard to learn, and it'll keep some money in your pocket.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Welcome home, ceolachan
I just sold our remaining SM57. I like your comments on "multitasking" and "workhorses" -- you can use it to build your stage, mike your performance, and it makes a nice hood ornament.
My experience with MXL 990s is that they sound really nice if you can get a good one. Test several to compare before buying anything. We had two - one of them was way too bright, the other just the opposite. If you buy them through the post you're taking your chances as they get jostled and dropped, etc.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
I've been hearing a lot about modding Chinese mics - in Oregon we have a pro whose Neumann mic alterations have elevated our local folk music to surreal heights. Maybe you have your own genius nearby?
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
This is a new one on me, Shannon. Anyone I know, or someone new on the scene? "Surreal heights", I like that. Like some of those folkies weresn't surreal and high already...
Chinese mics are a different matter - but there's a company in Olympia, Washington called Cascade that imports Chinese ribbon mics that are supposed to be really good (better with the Lundahl mod)
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The question is presented but not answered in the novel, nor the movie. If my memory serves me it is implied in the novel (though not the movie) that Decker is the latest generation android but doesn't know it. He does own an electric sheep (in the novel).
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
There's a scene where Harrison Ford falls asleep and he dreams of a unicorn. Then, at the end, the weird police guy who's following him about leaves him an origami unicorn. The inference being, that the unicorn is an implanted memory.
But the best thing about the director's cut is the crap 1950s detective style voice over from Ford is lost. The studio execs put that on because non of them knew the what the feck was going on. Far be it for any hollywood studio exec to ever sit down a bother to read a bloody book.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Definitely see the director's cut - it really is a better movie. A few very small changes make a huge difference. The original release was a pretty okay (if nonsensical) science fiction movie, which shared almost nothing with the book in terms of atmosphere, dialog, plot, or even title. The director's cut shows you that Scott understood what Dick was after, and he managed to do the same work with his film that Dick did with his novel.
Probably the only really successful adaptation of a book to a movie, ever, to my mind.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Not a bad movie, but it's a transcription. It doesn't try to do anything that the book didn't do, so it doesn't really succeed.
(I shouldn't be talking - I haven't seen it in years, or read the book since I was in high school...)
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Disagree, The biggest difference to the book is that the book is narrated by the big Chief bloke. Milos Forman changed that and Ken Kessy walked out as consultant to the screenplay.
Changing the film to centre on the McMurphy character, not in the fist person, but he is in every scene (except the last, of course), is brilliant. It makes my favorite moment from the film, Juicy Fruit.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
It's not a case of 'might be right', Jon, since Michael's absolutely spot on the ball here.
However, your assertion that 'Blade Runner' is 'probably the only really successful adaptation of a book to a movie, ever, to my mind', shows a worrying lack of knowledge of both film history and film theory.
I'll cut to basics. Cinema and literature are two separate entities. The former may draw from the latter far more often than vice versa, but is not duty bound to adhere to the rigidity of a work of fiction's plot, characters or atmosphere.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Well, I agreed that since I haven't seen the movie or read the book in about twenty years that I'm not in a position to dispute about the relationship between the two. If you say he's on the ball, great. It wouldn't be unusual.
As for the relationship between film and literature - yes, exactly. That's why there are so few successful adaptations. Directors get confused because both forms have characters, plot, and dialog, and they think that all you have to do is put the right scenes in the right order. Faulkner's screenplay for the Maltese Falcon is a good example of this - a fine movie, but it doesn't do anything the book didn't do. There's no real point to the movie except that it's a movie instead of a book.
Then there's the "Total Recall" treatment - buy a title, ignore the book, change the title, and put a line that says "Based on the novel by Philip K. Dick" in the promo copy and release a film tie-in edition of the novel. More pointless than this, it doesn't get.
I'm looking for something that does with film what the novelist does with text - that, for me, would be a successful adaptation. If you have any suggestions for ones I've missed, I'd like to have a look at them.
Come to think of it, I should read Howl's Moving Castle. The movie was quite good, and I'd be willing to believe that it might make the list.
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The earliest really successful film adaptation from a book that I can think of is Dracula/Nosferatu. It not only caught the horror of the book in the language of film, it had to invent a good proportion of that language.
And how about The Wizard of Oz? It has everything of the book and bucket loads more. And also added to the continuing growth of the language.
I'm very willing to admit my mistakes. Obviously including everything from the book would be tedious if not impossible. IMHO the movie (w/Judy Garland) tends to be iconic, possibly to the point it is considered *the* story. Fair play, a movie is not a book & vice versa. Personally I don't think one needs to dictate how the other is done. Having said that, I often find myself loaning out a copy of the book to people who have assumed they read the book but have not. So far each person has thanked me, even one who read the entire series as a child. It's worth a read. Now I'll find some of the other Oz books & begin reading.
Ben
Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Dated as I am, I've not a real clue on what's new and good in the realm of hardware for live sound support. I'd written previously asking for your recommendations for speakers, passive or active? We broke down just before Christmas and went for active. Other than for monitors attached to computers, using active speakers for live sets is new to me. My past has been with passive speakers, mixing boards, inline outboard kit of various types etc. Now we need to think about purchasing a mixer, and we're also shopping for microphones and cables. That's where I'm seeking your experience, expertise and opinion this time, to guide our purchasing to the best options for our intent - to clearly and cleanly amplify acoustic and traditional music, the greater aim to help, excite and motivate dancers...
1. ) - a passive mixer... I've experience with and been inside and impressed with a few makes, if dated - Yamaha, Allen & Heath, Soundcraft, etc... Some of the companies I've known are no more. We don't need any more than 6 to 8 mic inputs, and I'd like a split mid for EQ on each of those, and stereo would be welcome too. Any and all recommendations are welcome.
2. ) - microphones... I'm a condenser mic fan, and amongst my all time favourites of the past are AKG's C535EB, Neumanns, Countryman, etc. But we're not talking that kind of price range. At present we're thinking of say 5 microphones, needing at least one that will produce a clean crisp vocal result. Here's what we're thinking - a good multi-purpose Swiss Army kind of mic for both calling/prompting and instrumental work, a couple of dynamics, and a couple of pencil condensers for instrumental use, for guitar, fiddle, etc.
What follows are some of the recommendations given so far and we're hoping to not spend more than £40 to £150 / $60 to $200 per mic -
Swiss Army condenser mics, with a battery powered option -
AKG C1000S
Audio-Technica ATM710 ()
Rode M3 (now being made back in Australia)
Dynamics -
AKG D-5 / D-5S - I've been offered a good price on these
BLUE En-CORE 100 / 100i
Beyerdynamic Opus 69
Audio Technica PRO31
Samson Q8
Shure SM58
A pair of small diaphragm condenser mics -
Behringer B-5
M-Audio Pulsar II
sE Electronics sE1A
Samson C02
I'm amazed at how China has taken over most things in the manufacturing of sound reinforcement, from mics to amps, speakers and cables - "Made in China"! Some of it is well made, decent kit, like China's own company, sE Electronics. It just feels like we've given up too much for cheap labour costs and no constraints on poisoning air, water and land, and no union hassles, as long as it isn't in our backyard and we can get it cheap. As a manufacturing war, by what I've seen, China has definitely won. Even more amazing is the skill there in producing counterfeit items. I've kept a counterfeit Sennheiser mic I'd chased up, on purpose, which is amazing, right down to the enclosed literature and the embosed glossy cardboard sleeve. And the mic, amazing, you'd have to look inside and have some knowledge to realize it was a fake.
Back to recommendations, most of the dynamic mics we've had recommended so far, like the AKG D-5, are listed an described as being primarily vocal mics. Having been away from sound reinforcement for some time I need your help. We really need these mics, on the whole, to be multi-purpose, but their main use will be for instruments.
I've used Shure mics since I was a kid, and we used to multi-task with something they've made since the Jurassic, their SM57... Slap my wrist, but I was in a music shop recently where when asking what mics they carried I was told "just Shure", and just one model. Some old codger, though I might have been his senior, pipped up with "The best microphones in the world!" I should have shut up, but I was in a grouchy mood and returned with, "No, they're not!" But softening my outburst with "But they are good workhorses." My own preferences seem to be for the European made mics, but with a respect and appreciation for Shure too, and some North American and Asian makes. I like the Rode and BLUE folks and the kit they make, and was pleased to hear Rode was moving their manufacturing back to Australia from China...
What, you'd prefer I didn't ramble, you wanted 'short'?
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
Audio-Technica ATM710 (replacement for their ATM33A)
Most of the dynamics listed above are available here for £50 or less, so a pair for around £100 or less...
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
ceolachan
As long as there arn't wet dreams, they should be OK -- lol
jim,,,
Happy new year to you Dani...
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by FIDDLE4
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Cheers Jim, and hoping your fairing well, not too many aches and pains, and that your cat is still enjoying your bowing...
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
As to wet conditions, I've only ever been electrocuted once by a mic...
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Ceolachan, I recently faced similar questions.
On workhorse dynamic mics, look at those from Heil sound:
www.heilsound.com
They've been specifically designed to be the new SM57/58, you can get one for $100-$150, and the reviews are good.
Mixers:
I have a new Allen & Heath zed14 which is very nice and easy to use. The Spirit/soundcraft epm series also looked good and are even cheaper. Both with sweepable mids rather than split mids.
Good luck!
Edward
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ewallace
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Mixing boards are basically the UI for your system. As long as the board isn't losing electrical contacts (scratchy pots, dodgy jacks, etc.) which is mostly going to happen with old gear that's seen a lot of use, your most important concern is that you reach for the right thing first.
That being said, I like the Mackie layout. The 1202 was the board I used, small enough to fit in a briefcase but enough lines to run a four-piece band comfortably, and flexible enough to handle the configuraions you'd reasonably expect to need. There are larger models that offer more channels in and out, but they're all more or less the same basic interface.
Behrenger makes basically the same board for a bit cheaper, and I've never heard any horror stories from people using them, so that might be worth a look.
As for microphones, I'm not the guy to ask. I always used whatever was lying around and got on pretty well with those. However, Audix is a line that has very good reputation, and I know one singer who carries her Audix mic to every gig - won't sing through anything else. She's got excellent ears and excellent taste, so that in itself is enough to put them on my short list - for what that's worth.
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
ceolachan -
< As to wet conditions, I've only ever been electrocuted once by a mic...>
Trying sticking a battery on the tip of you tongue -- lol
Good to here from you again mate -
jim,,,
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by FIDDLE4
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
AKG C1000 is a decent all around condenser, never used one live though so I don't know how they handle feedback.
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by Alasdair Paul
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Thanks Edward, I'll give the Heils a look, and the ZED14 is one of our top considerations. Yes, I meant 'sweepable' rather than 'split'... And Jon, thanks also, while I've no experience with the Mackie kit, I like the look and the reviews, and the size of small boards, though I am addicted to sliders. One of the Audix mics is particularly good for the female voice, yes, they have decent reviews too. Thanks for your recommendation Alasdair, the AKG is a fair mic for live use and doesn't do too bad with avoiding feedback, unless you point it at a speaker, satellite cab or monitor. However, I am definitely leaning toward the Rode, feeling even more favourable their way since they returned their manufacturing from China to Australia. And no, I'm not anti-Chinese, I like the sE mics and am leaning toward them for the pair of small diaghragm condensers.
Does anyone have any epxerience or knowledge of the M-Audio Pulsar II?
I should also open this up to ideas for miking uilleann pipes, so please, tell my your secrets, or horrors?!
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
That's damn hard to pronounce - 'epxerience' - meaning, of course, 'experience'...
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by ceolachan
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Here's what I'm amplifying and what I've been using:
2 Fiddles with onboard AT condensers
Electric Piano
Guitar with onboard LR Baggs M1 Active (into a pedal board)
Flute - playing into an SM58 with a TC Electronics preamp
Board wise: I did a lot of price conscious looking for the band and landed on the PV14 passive mixer. The price was right, it had basically what I wanted, offers a couple of stereo channels, phantom, basic effects, XLR and 1/4 inputs. It's served us well for 3 years, and in fact, I bought a PV8 to run my active monitors, too. If I wasn't on a budget I'd probably buy Mackie (or better), as the resale is better than PV - but in an operational environment, they're very similar. (I wouldn't buy a Behringer board based on reviews of their breakdowns).
For mics: I've been happy with a mix of condensers and dynamic mics, again on a budget.
Condenser:
AKG C1000S - a good mic for live sound - includes an array modifier for changing the pattern from omni to cardioid/hyper cardioid. Down side is they are heavy and large and require a specific mic clip. It has a switchable roll off and on board battery power (if you want it).
MXL 604 - a very nice, inexpensive pencil mic (requires phantom) with great tone range. Also includes an omni or cardioid adapter. Standard pencil clip works and it has a switchable roll off.
Behringer B5 - an OK standard condenser, not as clean as the MXL, with switchable roll off. Requires phantom. Uses a standard pencil clip.
I run the condensers into ART tube preamp boxes before they get to the board, and this really smoothes out the rough edges, and allows each player a bit of control over their volume, ground lift, phantom off/on. The preamp boxes also address the problem of Mixer preamp inconsistencies or cheap components.
Dynamics:
SM58 - Can't beat it for the money.
Old AT Switchable mic - I find that I need to have a mic with an ON/OFF switch for callers/announcers. I like the old AT as it's strong in the mids and can be dropped without many consequences.
Cables: Don't buy cheap ones - I've thrown lots of them out, or have had to replace the XLR ends routinely. A good investment (I wish I'd had this years ago) is a Behringer CT100 cable tester. It's a small box that identifies broken wires, bad connectors for XLR, TS, TRS, RCA, 1/8", Midi cables. All this for about $25USD
I've done a couple of modifiers that are a bit outside of your discussion:
1) I use active monitors, and they are far better than any other small monitor system I've ever used. I use a Roland CM30 (Cube Monitor) connected to the house mix (as I run sound from stage and like to hear what's in the house), and a Behringer B212A for the onstage mix. Were I to add more monitors I'd add the CM30's since they have a really broad sound array, lots of functionality, and are pretty small - way more effective than a hot spot monitor. In between the mixer and the monitor speakers I have a Behringer FBQ2496 Feedback Destroyer that allows me to turn the monitors up without having to fight the feedback monster on the fly.
2) Between the mixer and the main speakers (JBL P15s), I added a Behringer SX3040 Sonic Exciter that really kicks in when you're notching up the intensity, and a Behringer FBQ1502 equalizer that allows me to identify and eliminate feedback frequencies on the fly.
I have these three items in a 3 bay rack case with all of the patch wires, speaker cables, and electrical cords stuffed into the back. I sit my mixer on top of this rack case - it's efficient space wise, and powerful sound wise.
This system works well in a hall up to about 200 people. Any more than that and I need to add another pair of active speakers halfway down the hall.
A lot of information here - hope any of it helps.
# Posted on January 18th 2011 by Toppish
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Is a translation of this thread available in English ?
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by bazouki dave
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Thanks Toppish... Yes, I'd forgot to add that to the pencil condenser list, but I have used MXLs before and the 604s were being considered too. As to dynamics, the AKG and the BLUE vie handsomely against Shure's SM58 for a comparable price...
AT, I'm taking you mean Audio-Technica, a company I've had good experiences with, as far as their mics, but which model is it you've got, dynamic or condenser? I love switchable mics, however, nowadays you can pay quite a bit more for a mic with a switch. Another option is to use switched Neutric plugs, though it requires a little soldering skill. As well, the common sense amongst many sound techies is not to let a singer or a caller have a switched mic, as they can inadvetently switch it off in mid stream, preferring to leave that control with the board.
LIke you, I hate the hell and misery that cheap cables can cause. The Behringer CT100 cable tester is available here for around 20 quid. Another fine cable tester, for 5 quid more, is available over here, with more connections than the Behringer, and that is Studiospares -
http://www.studiospares.com/
Thanks for the rest, and yes, it was helpful and interesting, and appreciated...
Howdy Dave, I'd guess you knew that PV was Peavey, the U.S. company, though I think, like so many others, they also have all their kit made in China nowadays... And AT is Audio-Technics. But, I'm sure Toppish with me would be willing to take any questions and try to achieve some understanding, if you really wanted? Would a translation in Welsh, Irish or Scottish help?
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by ceolachan
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
C,
My old Audio Technica dynamic mic is discontinued and and has been repaired so many times that a model number is useless. Its shape is bulb on the top, pencil on the bottom - it uses a pencil mic clip. Suffice to say, the on/off switch and the fact that it works well for talking are its greatest attributes. Actually, I prefer, for callers (contra) or prompters (Scottish Country Dance), a silent on/off switch on the mic since it gives me one less thing to do while running the board and playing. (I had forgotten about the Neutrik with the on/off switch. A great idea the I'll try some time. Also, thanks for the StudioSpares link - if I used Speakon connectors, I'd buy one, but I don't have a single one - yet).
A detail that I left out was the standard contra caller's mic. For years we used a Shure wireless headset. It worked OK, but if you had different callers it usually was stretched out to the largest head. Also, the mic, situated on a not quite strong enough mini-gooseneck, was very directional, so if a caller wasn't used to the unit, they could be talking into the backside of the mic while wondering why they were feeding back when they approached the mains. It turned out to be too much management.
With the changes in the US FCC bandwidth rules last year, many wireless mics became obsolete - meaning if you use them in out in the countryside they're fine, but once you try them in a densely populated area, the static and data bandwidth overlap could cause interference.
So I decided to try an Audio Technica Freeway 200 wireless hand held - for an amazing $80USD - and it has worked out well. Compared to the equivalent Samson on the low end, or Shure on the higher end, I've been pleasantly surprised. The down side is that the output is 1/4" TRS, but I simply connect it to a DI and insert it into an XLR channel. (I don't use the mixer line 1/4" input because the voltage is potentially too high for the Op-Amp -read: signal translator- and will fry it, which I've done before)
Blah, blah, blah - it's the beauty - and the curse of doing sound. In my case, the band sounds way better as a result, but it's taken years to figure it out even this far……..
My advice to a budding musician would be to get someone else to do this and concentrate on the music.
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by Toppish
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Toppish said "My advice to a budding musician would be to get someone else to do this and concentrate on the music."
But it is very hard to find someone competent to do this at every gig. And you have to pay them, generally.
My conclusion after working in a variety of sound situations is, if you want to sound good reliably, you have to have the knowledge and means to do so. It's possible to do this without going to far into gearheadedness. And, as someone who runs sound occasionally, it's easier to deal with musicians who know something about their sound setup.
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by ewallace
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The first bands I was in, I'm pretty sure that I was brought along at least partly (possibly mostly) because I knew how to run the gear. It's a good trick to have in your belt.
And yes, you absolutely would have to pay me to turn up and run sound for you, so again, it's worth knowing at least the basics. They're not hard to learn, and it'll keep some money in your pocket.
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
ewallace & JK,
Amen.
# Posted on January 19th 2011 by Toppish
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Welcome home, ceolachan
I just sold our remaining SM57. I like your comments on "multitasking" and "workhorses" -- you can use it to build your stage, mike your performance, and it makes a nice hood ornament.
My experience with MXL 990s is that they sound really nice if you can get a good one. Test several to compare before buying anything. We had two - one of them was way too bright, the other just the opposite. If you buy them through the post you're taking your chances as they get jostled and dropped, etc.
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by gravelwalks
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
I've been hearing a lot about modding Chinese mics - in Oregon we have a pro whose Neumann mic alterations have elevated our local folk music to surreal heights. Maybe you have your own genius nearby?
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by airport
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
This is a new one on me, Shannon. Anyone I know, or someone new on the scene? "Surreal heights", I like that. Like some of those folkies weresn't surreal and high already...
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
hah! I swear I'm not making this up!
http://www.bigredstudio.com/article.php/20070108220323606
Chinese mics are a different matter - but there's a company in Olympia, Washington called Cascade that imports Chinese ribbon mics that are supposed to be really good (better with the Lundahl mod)
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by airport
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Oh, Big Red. That makes sense then - Billy would be right on that. He likes sounds, that guy.
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
But back to the original question - "Do androids dream of electric sheep?"
Only if they're programmed to.
# Posted on January 20th 2011 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The question is presented but not answered in the novel, nor the movie. If my memory serves me it is implied in the novel (though not the movie) that Decker is the latest generation android but doesn't know it. He does own an electric sheep (in the novel).
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Tusong200
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
It is in the director's cut.
(which incidentally, is the only "director's cut" of a hollywood movie that is shorter than the studio cut.)
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Kool...I've not seen the director's cut, I'll have to rent it. In fact I haven't seen the movie since the 80's. Big Philip K. Dick fan though.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Tusong200
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
There's a scene where Harrison Ford falls asleep and he dreams of a unicorn. Then, at the end, the weird police guy who's following him about leaves him an origami unicorn. The inference being, that the unicorn is an implanted memory.
But the best thing about the director's cut is the crap 1950s detective style voice over from Ford is lost. The studio execs put that on because non of them knew the what the feck was going on. Far be it for any hollywood studio exec to ever sit down a bother to read a bloody book.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Definitely see the director's cut - it really is a better movie. A few very small changes make a huge difference. The original release was a pretty okay (if nonsensical) science fiction movie, which shared almost nothing with the book in terms of atmosphere, dialog, plot, or even title. The director's cut shows you that Scott understood what Dick was after, and he managed to do the same work with his film that Dick did with his novel.
Probably the only really successful adaptation of a book to a movie, ever, to my mind.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
ah come on ... One flew over the cuckoos nest was pretty good.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
cuckoo's
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Not a bad movie, but it's a transcription. It doesn't try to do anything that the book didn't do, so it doesn't really succeed.
(I shouldn't be talking - I haven't seen it in years, or read the book since I was in high school...)
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Disagree, The biggest difference to the book is that the book is narrated by the big Chief bloke. Milos Forman changed that and Ken Kessy walked out as consultant to the screenplay.
Changing the film to centre on the McMurphy character, not in the fist person, but he is in every scene (except the last, of course), is brilliant. It makes my favorite moment from the film, Juicy Fruit.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
You might be right. I'll have to take another look (at both). Like I say, it's been a long time since I've thought much about either.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
It's not a case of 'might be right', Jon, since Michael's absolutely spot on the ball here.
However, your assertion that 'Blade Runner' is 'probably the only really successful adaptation of a book to a movie, ever, to my mind', shows a worrying lack of knowledge of both film history and film theory.
I'll cut to basics. Cinema and literature are two separate entities. The former may draw from the latter far more often than vice versa, but is not duty bound to adhere to the rigidity of a work of fiction's plot, characters or atmosphere.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Well, I agreed that since I haven't seen the movie or read the book in about twenty years that I'm not in a position to dispute about the relationship between the two. If you say he's on the ball, great. It wouldn't be unusual.
As for the relationship between film and literature - yes, exactly. That's why there are so few successful adaptations. Directors get confused because both forms have characters, plot, and dialog, and they think that all you have to do is put the right scenes in the right order. Faulkner's screenplay for the Maltese Falcon is a good example of this - a fine movie, but it doesn't do anything the book didn't do. There's no real point to the movie except that it's a movie instead of a book.
Then there's the "Total Recall" treatment - buy a title, ignore the book, change the title, and put a line that says "Based on the novel by Philip K. Dick" in the promo copy and release a film tie-in edition of the novel. More pointless than this, it doesn't get.
I'm looking for something that does with film what the novelist does with text - that, for me, would be a successful adaptation. If you have any suggestions for ones I've missed, I'd like to have a look at them.
Come to think of it, I should read Howl's Moving Castle. The movie was quite good, and I'd be willing to believe that it might make the list.
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
'Faulkner's screenplay for the Maltese Falcon is a good example of this - a fine movie, but it doesn't do anything the book didn't do.'
Except diverge considerably from the plot!
# Posted on January 25th 2011 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
The earliest really successful film adaptation from a book that I can think of is Dracula/Nosferatu. It not only caught the horror of the book in the language of film, it had to invent a good proportion of that language.
And how about The Wizard of Oz? It has everything of the book and bucket loads more. And also added to the continuing growth of the language.
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by ...
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
That's an excellent choice, Michael. Murnau's classic film is available here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6185283610506001721#.
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
I've only read the 1st of Frank Baum's books about Oz, but the movie (w/Judy Garland) does not have everything in the book.
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
Ben,
Michael wrote 'everything of the book'. That is distinctly different to 'everything in the book'.
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by MacCruiskeen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
I know.
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by Ben Steen
...
I'm very willing to admit my mistakes. Obviously including everything from the book would be tedious if not impossible. IMHO the movie (w/Judy Garland) tends to be iconic, possibly to the point it is considered *the* story. Fair play, a movie is not a book & vice versa. Personally I don't think one needs to dictate how the other is done. Having said that, I often find myself loaning out a copy of the book to people who have assumed they read the book but have not. So far each person has thanked me, even one who read the entire series as a child. It's worth a read. Now I'll find some of the other Oz books & begin reading.
Ben
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by Ben Steen
Haha
guess what is playing on the radio ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O-LDea7SHY
# Posted on January 26th 2011 by Ben Steen
Re: Do androids dream of electric sheep? - Miking tradition
I must have heard a million versions of that song. And that back beat ukulele sh*te is at the bottom of the pile
# Posted on January 27th 2011 by ...
Back beat ukulele sh*te
Brilliant, Michael.
# Posted on January 27th 2011 by Ben Steen