Members waga Posted June 15, 2007 Members Share Posted June 15, 2007 Our band (ElPapoVecino.com) from Panama Central America has a female singer with a medium to high pitch voice but very low in volume (kind of airy?). Its a big problem for monitoring her because of feedback issues. Right now we use an Sennhiser e835 mic to a peavey small console (just 3 bands eq) and to 2 powered speakers. she stands in a corner in our really small practice room and we send her a monitor signal with her voice through wired in-ear. Douring Live performances we try to keep using in-ear but we can't listen to her like we wish in our floor monitors. We are thinking to make investments in some ways but are not sure where to invest aour money (tight budget).1. A better mic for her kind of voice.Alternatives like Beyerdinamic TG-X 60, Audix OM-5, Shure Beta 58, ElectroVoice BLUE Raven. (No way to test them from here, just de Beta) 2. Hot Spot monitors. But are kind of expensive.Mackie, Galaxy, TC Helicon. 3. Feedback destroyer (Is it going to affect the sound too much?)Our butget only goes for Behringer DSP 1124P Feedback Destroyer Pro 4. Any other gadget like preamp, compressor/limiter? I hope we are in a good path but more info would be great. Thanks all for your time reading this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gregidon Posted June 15, 2007 Members Share Posted June 15, 2007 I know you really don't want to hear this, but the best thing you can do is teach her to sing correctly and more powerfully. Toys only help so much. Perhaps take the money you would invest in toys and have her take a couple of voice lessons. You'd be amazed at how much of a difference a skilled vocal coach can make in a couple of lessons. In the long run you will be doing your self (and her) a huge favor and save yourself many headaches in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted June 15, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted June 15, 2007 Agreed. None of the devices listed will do any good. If the desired source is only a few dB higher than the stage volume, you'll never get the desired volume before feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jbutler1982 Posted June 15, 2007 Members Share Posted June 15, 2007 I had a feedback issue at our practice space. Two thoughts after dealing with that: First, a used Peavey QF 131 EQ with FLS on the offending signal (i.e. her monitor mix) can do wonders for a very cheap price. Mine was $74 shipped on ebay. It accurately and concisely shows you which band is offending, and you can often just reduce that band without compromise on the overall signal that much. Plus, its only her monitor signal - not FOH. This would be my first recommendation. Second, how married are you to the e835? I have no technical data to back this up (it might exist), but our singer used to bring his own e835. One day he came straight from work to practice and used a spare 58. We were able to get much higher volume before feedback given the same configuration of room and speakers (this was prior to the FLS EQ) for some reason. So, I have had feedback issues as well with the e835, but the combination of a switch to a SM58 and the utilization of an EQ with Peavey's FLS did the trick. Used 58s go cheap on ebay, and if it doesnt work, you can always just sell it for what you paid minus the $7 or so shipping. Best, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jbutler1982 Posted June 15, 2007 Members Share Posted June 15, 2007 As a theoretical question for those more knowledgeable (i.e. CraigV), can changing mics ever do any good? I can say from experience that the e835 hit feedback way, way, way earlier than the SM58 with all settings equal (only mic in the room, going into same channel of mixer, into RMX 1450 powering two HX121Ms in stereo, wedges in the same position, amp attenuators in the same position, no effects or EQ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gregidon Posted June 15, 2007 Members Share Posted June 15, 2007 As a theoretical question for those more knowledgeable (i.e. CraigV), can changing mics ever do any good?I can say from experience that the e835 hit feedback way, way, way earlier than the SM58 with all settings equal (only mic in the room, going into same channel of mixer, into RMX 1450 powering two HX121Ms in stereo, wedges in the same position, amp attenuators in the same position, no effects or EQ). Different mics definitely have different GBF (gain before feedback) characteristics. However, I would also look into the fact that what you might have been running into is your monitors response not being flat and that mic being more sensitive in a frequency range that the monitor was "hot" in. That is the monitor might have been outputing more, lets say, 2k and that mic might be more sensitive in that frequency range. The new mic might have not been as sensitive in that frequency range, allowing more GBF. This is just a thought, no real experience with the equipment listed to back it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members waga Posted June 16, 2007 Author Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 Thanks all, we are working on the class issue. Now, in any case I was planning to buy a mic for backup voice. I can keep the e835 for myself and buy another one for her. Is any of the posted on top better? I read that the BETA 58 has a good response for her type of voice and more gain before feedback than the SM58? Is that true? or what about the TG-X 60? Thanks again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted June 16, 2007 Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 Possibly hyper-cardioid (pickup pattern) could help. Mic choice is really about what fits the instrument (or voice) best but if you're having a problem with feedback due to low initial gain (that would be her voice), the tighter the pickup pattern the better. You might try a Beta 57. I don't know it tonaly it would be correct for her but I've had great results with them rejecting feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Terry Allan Hall Posted June 16, 2007 Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 I know you really don't want to hear this, but the best thing you can do is teach her to sing correctly and more powerfully. Toys only help so much. Perhaps take the money you would invest in toys and have her take a couple of voice lessons. You'd be amazed at how much of a difference a skilled vocal coach can make in a couple of lessons. In the long run you will be doing your self (and her) a huge favor and save yourself many headaches in the future. Great advice...all I can add is the concept to turning the rest of the band down until the volume is balanced... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevetree Posted June 16, 2007 Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 Is the singer right up to the mic? It might help a little if you can convince her to get her lips right up to the mic. That last inch seems to provide alot of extra volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted June 16, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted June 16, 2007 As a theoretical question for those more knowledgeable (i.e. CraigV), can changing mics ever do any good?I can say from experience that the e835 hit feedback way, way, way earlier than the SM58 with all settings equal (only mic in the room, going into same channel of mixer, into RMX 1450 powering two HX121Ms in stereo, wedges in the same position, amp attenuators in the same position, no effects or EQ). Different mics will obviously respond differently, but there's no way to predict whether a given change will improve a situation/problem or make it worse. For example, a hypercardioid replacing a cardioid may seem like a great way to improve GBF, but depending on the mic and speaker positioning, it could make things much worse....in a small room the 'tail' of response directly behind many hyper-'s could pick up an area of reflection in a small room. Your example of e835 and SM-58 is a good one; the change worked for you, but in my rooms both mics are nearly identical in GBF. If you've got a box full of miucs to experiment with, you could find one that helps, but if you've got to go out and buy those mics, it's simply not a good way to fix this problem. The bottom line is that the problem is already identified.....it's the singer. Fix this, and the problem no longer exists. If your car gets a leaky tire, you don't correct the problem by dropping in a bigger engine in hopes you get to your destination before the tire goes flat...you fix the leaky tire. This is no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted June 16, 2007 Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 Great advice...all I can add is the concept to turning the rest of the band down until the volume is balanced... Maybe some of the best advice yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimmyP Posted June 16, 2007 Members Share Posted June 16, 2007 She needs to eat the mic at all times. Try an Audix OM7 - best stage wash rejection and gain-before-feedback I've encountered. If you use 1/3 octave, you'll get a better result from a dbx 1231 than from the PV (which is not bad). I've used Feedback Destroyers (want to buy some Sabine GRQ3102s?), but find that manually controlled parametric works better than computer controlled parametric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alcohol Posted June 17, 2007 Members Share Posted June 17, 2007 I've had the opposiet experience with the Peavey Feedback Ferret. I've found that the Peavey Feedback Ferret sounds much better than a 31 band graphic EQ because it attenuates narrower bands and it hones in on the actual frequency better than the graphic EQ. Oftentimes the frequency that's feeding back is to the side of a graphic EQ's setting and you sacrifice fidelity by turning down other frequencies that are not the resonating offenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted June 17, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted June 17, 2007 I've had the opposiet experience with the Peavey Feedback Ferret. I've found that the Peavey Feedback Ferret sounds much better than a 31 band graphic EQ because it attenuates narrower bands and it hones in on the actual frequency better than the graphic EQ. Oftentimes the frequency that's feeding back is to the side of a graphic EQ's setting and you sacrifice fidelity by turning down other frequencies that are not the resonating offenders. I think you may be talking apples and oranges here to some extent. A parametric is a good solution in some cases, as the Q can be set very narrow and dialed to the exact frequency center needed....provided of course the user knows how, and this is the common stumbling block. It's also a very slow means of killing feedback, so it can really only be used as a "static" control, with 'live' control being provided by a graphic EQ. It should also be noted the that Peavey's got two different feedback devices....FLS and the Feedback Ferret....the former merely dedects and displays the frequency band that's 'loudest' on a graphic EQ, while the Ferret is a FBK, sensing and automatically reducing level of the offending EQ band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members waga Posted June 18, 2007 Author Members Share Posted June 18, 2007 Thanks you all. I'm happy to be in this community now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.