FX in Monitors

[JacoMon]

Mostly I have used fairly small PA's. None had a fold Main FX into Monitors feature. So, I have pretty much allways run the same mix to the monitors as FOH. This is with no sound man, smallish venues. In graduating to more of a full band set up, what is the best approach for hearing FX in the monitors. I would not enjoy hearing dry vocals, it would seem uninspiring. Also, you would lose out on any special effects, harmonie machines Ex. TC-Helicon Voiceworks. Is there a trick for getting this done other than what I have been doing? What is normaly done?

[bassknave]

FWIW, I have generally considered FX in the mons as poor practice. Seems to me that you'd want to hear what you're actually doing, rather than the polished product.

[billiam]

I mixed a Reggae band and they wanted a good echo on the vocals thru the monitors. Sorry. No can do, but they got plenty of the bass they wanted too and they were only 12"+1" monitors.

[tlbonehead]

Originally posted by JacoMon Mostly I have used fairly small PA's. None had a fold Main FX into Monitors feature. So, I have pretty much allways run the same mix to the monitors as FOH. This is with no sound man, smallish venues. In graduating to more of a full band set up, what is the best approach for hearing FX in the monitors. I would not enjoy hearing dry vocals, it would seem uninspiring. Also, you would lose out on any special effects, harmonie machines Ex. TC-Helicon Voiceworks. Is there a trick for getting this done other than what I have been doing? What is normaly done?

What is very much the norm is to have the monitors dry with no effects. You definitely do NOT want effects in them for vocals.

[agedhorse]

We sometimes add a bit of verb in the vocal monitor mix, but that's for an act that has reherased that way, and is already way professional in their vocal techniques.

 

Also, a bit for IEM mixes helps even things out and put into perspective... but for unprofessional singers, it's generally a really bad thing to do.

[Tommy Tune]

IMO, putting effects in your monitors is like having Michael Jackson babysit. Some may be ok with it but most will advise against it. I think a little is fine but if you add too much, you'll run the risk of falling off pitch. I realize that effects can give you a little false sense of security but if you learn to deal with hearing yourself dry, you'll be that much better of a vocalist in the long run.

[abzurd]

It is a little tougher with IEM's and especially harmonizers, NOT to have effects in the mix. I use both. The voiceprism allows effects to be programmed with each harmony patch. I have 65 different harmony/effect patches. The harmonizer has to stay on stage so that I can see whether the harmony light is on or off and what patch I'm using if need be. (I use a tech-21 midimouse for patch changes and a 2 button pedal from a behringer Vamp to toggle on and off the harmonies and effects).

 

For the IEM's having the effects definately inspires more than dry. The biggest complaint I have with them is the sterile enviroment they create (overall still night and day better than wedges though). I also need to hear the harmonies of the processor, not to know what pitch to sing, but to A) confirm they are on and 2) to make sure the harmonies are right. Once in while I'll forget to change the patch. Harmonies in A sound bad when the song is in B.

 

If I were to use wedges (and have on occasion) I'd want the vocals dry (Still needing the harmonies). There's so much else going on with room acoustics and stage volume that you have to have the effects completely overblown to tell the difference. That means the sound gets "fat" and unfocused so it has to be louder to hear it. I want to cut through like a laser on stage with wedges.

[JacoMon]

Thanks for the reply's guys. Abzurd you are the first to address the use of the TC. This was a major reason for the post. I couldn't imagine not having confirmation that the right harmonies were playing, especially in song mode where you are stepping through harmony changes sometimes as fast as chords change. I beleive that you can run a mike inline through the VW (VoiceWorks) and still access the Rev/Dly etc separately through an aux send, but after re-reading the manual, the main voc may still be wet. There may be a work around to have harmonies dry, and rev/delay in the mains. I'll have to play with it. Worst case would be to use other processors for Rev/Dly for the mains and shut it off on the TC.

[abzurd]

I agree that for the singer that "has to have effects to stand him/her self" in the monitors it's not a good idea. Sorry, but if you can't sing, effects are the last thing you need cluttering up the mix.

 

Voiceprism is like a guitar players POD or effects. Try telling the guitar player to listen to his guitar "clean" all night. You have to be able to hear the harmonies, and in some cases the effects too. I will make mental notes about an effects "effect", timing of delay, amount of reverb. I'll tell my wife or sound guy that I'm trying something different and have them listen. Then I'll adjust it in the VP for future shows. I wish the VP had a tap tempo delay. I know the new, cheaper Helicon processor has this.

[rydell]

Reverb in the monitors IS completely reasonable!

 

In fact, some singers do sing better with some reverb, confidence goes a long way. The key is to use decent quality verbs, stay away from the hollow cyber-metallic sounding verbs, they can definately cause feedback in the monitors. Use plate and hall reverbs, not room reverbs- they tend to have lots of feedback-inducing higher mids in them.

 

If your worried about clarity, or the singer singing off-key, then use a compressor to duck the reverb. The dry vocal is fed to the compressor's sidechain- triggering the compressor to lower the reverb when the vocal is present. This technique works great, why more engineers don't do this I'll never know.....Laziness I guess:rolleyes:

 

 

-rydell

[ashivraj]

 

Originally posted by rydell ... triggering the compressor to lower the reverb when the vocal is present.

 

 

... so when there's no vocal, there's lots of reverb of... nothing...

 

and when there IS a vocal, you're reducing reverb... which you might as well do with a comp + gate...

 

mebbe im missing the point here:(...

 

AS

[abzurd]

I don't get it either. IMO, if you can clearly hear reverb in your wedge monitor one of two things is the case.

 

1) You are really really hot in the monitor

 

B) You have an ton of reverb on (and #1 is still also the case)

[rydell]

Ashivraj,

 

The compressor reduces the reverb level by the ratio you set it for, all of the controls affect how the reverb compresses- threshold, ratio, attack, release, etc. The idea is to compress/reduce the reverb just enough so the vocal is clear when present, leaving the reverb tail unaffected. The reverb sort of 'surrounds' the vocal, the end result is a reverberated vocal with alot of depth and CLARITY.

 

 

I didn't really explain how to do this before, so hereagos:

 

 

1) Patch the reverb's output to a channel (NOT an aux return)

 

2) Patch in a compressor to that channel's insert.

 

3) Feed the dry vocal (via- vocal channel's aux send, splitter, direct out, whatever) to the compressor's sidechain input.

 

4) Experiment with the compressor's controls to get the desired affect/effect.

 

 

I hope this makes more sense now,

 

-rydell

[ashivraj]

 

Originally posted by rydell I hope this makes more sense now, -rydell

 

 

it's sorta beginning to make sense... but i guess i'd have to actually hear it to see if it makes a difference (to me).

 

thanks!

 

AS

[ratthedd]

Forgive my ignorance on the details of this, but wouldn't effects like reverb, delay, and echo increase problems with feedback when using wedges?

 

I could see where harmonies or other dry effect (telephone voice, distortion, maybe even pitch correction) could be useful for the singer, but I would think you'd want to stay far away from the effects that lengthen the amount of time a sound is bouncing around on the stage.

 

 

:confused:

[Foooz]

Terry,

More info please... Shure ambient pack? Do these work with the PSM 400 series? How? I have resorted to using a "ambient condensor mike" somewhere off center of stage. Originally had attached to bottom of my mike stand until folks decided they could sing into it....ouch:o

scott

[ashivraj]

 

Originally posted by Foooz Shure ambient pack?

 

 

the Shure AP200 and AP201. what they are is basically a lav mike (the stock WL93 one), and a converter that does 4-pin mini-XLR to 1/4" TRS, with an in-line volume control. this end plugs into the PSM 200's 1/4" input.

 

the difference between the AP200 and AP201 is that the AP200 is meant for wireless users - so you can't add another wired signal to the earmix at the beltpack. the 201 has another locking female 1/4" jack so you can still plug in another signal (as you would if you were running wired).

 

the PSM 200 1/4" input was built (foresight? staggered accessory release?) to supply a 5V bias (sorta like phantom power, i think). so normal line-level signal into the pack is unaffected, but plug in a lav (wired right) and voila, you're powering it up.

 

how it works - you place the lav mike (omni, nice and sensitive) on your chest, or on your bum, or wherever you see it picking up the most ambient noise. then use the in-line volume control to decide how much audience you want in your ears.

 

i've found that placing it slightly below my sternum, gives me the best result (standing on a standard-height stage). picks up audience, but not high enough to pick up my vocals and mess up the mix.

ALSO, the WL93 has a long enough wire, so you can get creative and try clipping it to different thins - tuning peg of guitar? tightening key on mic stand? (stupid story potential there)

ALSO, being black and *small*, it can be easily hidden on a black shirt (or a black mic stand). so don't worry TOO much about aesthetics.

 

and nope, it isn't compatible with any of the other PSM systems.

 

hope this helps!

 

AS