Article

Wednesday, April 06, 2011

The “Vibe” Is The Thing: Monitor Wedges Or In-Ear Monitors Or Both?

Insights, clearing up misconceptions and approaches on monitor wedges and in-ear monitoring systems

The first time I saw a show where stage wedges weren’t used as the primary monitoring system was a Steely Dan tour in 1993.

The rumor at the time was that founding players Donald Fagen and Walter Becker only agreed to tour if their long-time studio engineer and “audio wizard” Roger Nichols agreed to mix monitors, including in-ear monitoring systems (IEM).

I attended a rehearsal with a couple of colleagues (all audio engineers), and during a break, I asked Nichols about the rumor, which he confirmed to be true.

As a result of that experience, the importance of the role of the monitor engineer dramatically increased in my eyes.

Also during that rehearsal, I noticed that there were some microphones at the front edge of the stage pointed toward the audience. Nichols told me they were there so the musicians - again, using IEM - could hear the audience and get a sense of how they were being received.

In other words, without that additional input, they’d think the audience wasn’t digging the show. Interesting! Of course this is old hat now, but 12 or so years ago it was news to me.

Over the intervening years, these and other related concepts have me thinking about how the role of the monitor engineer has changed.

To get up to date on the subject, I contacted a number of monitor engineers who have worked with both wedges and IEM, including Ian Beveridge with Foo Fighters, William Miller with Josh Groban and Chris Sharp with Rob Thomas. Each provided insight on the topic while dispelling some of my misconceptions.

Although so many artists have moved to IEM during the past decade, there are still plenty that still prefer wedges and sidefills.

And many acts use a combo of both. Beveridge, in fact, notes that only one band he’s worked with over the years has been completely on IEM.

The only common element I could find is that for many “more experienced” performers, particularly in the rock ‘n’ roll genre, wedges are the norm.

Obviously, artists in this genre want to interact with the audience, and they also have performed for decades using wedges, so it’s their “comfort zone.”

Further, they want to “feel the vibe” of the show, and frankly, this is easier with wedges because the audience, backline, mains, wedges and fills all forge a cohesive overall soundscape for artist and audience alike.

Miller puts it this way: “In a traditional wedge situation, your job as an engineer is to augment the world on stage. There’s already some sound happening up there, some acoustic energy. In other words, there’s sound present before you ever switch on your console.”

There are several reasons for the trend toward IEM and away from wedges. The most obvious is leakage, i.e. loud volume on stage makes it more difficult to mix because of bleed into the stage mics, reducing isolation and therefore control. And, feedback (or at least the potential for it) is always a cause for concern.

That said, Miller and Beveridge both feel that the job can still be done just as well with the traditional tools. According to Miller, “Feedback is most often caused by improper gain structure, misplaced monitors and poor equalization.”

Beveridge adds: “Modern mics and loudspeaker technology allow you to make a very good sounding conventional monitor system with whatever coverage you like - sound quality does not have to be sacrificed for volume.”

But on the issue of stage coverage, Miller doesn’t completely agree. “Assuming no RF (radio frequency, with wireless systems) problems, an IEM mix is going to sound relatively the same no matter where you are on stage,” he notes.

“Obviously this isn’t the case with wedges. However, on a recent tour I found that by using line array loudspeakers as sidefills we could really provide the ‘sonic glue’ to the stage sound. The vertical consistency certainly helped to widen the ‘sweet spots’ on stage and provided a fuller sound when performers weren’t right in front of their wedges.”

Performers are also interested in protecting their hearing and feel that this can be better accomplished with IEM. Sharp adds: “It’s always nice to start off with your lead singer on ‘ears.’ It makes life easier at FOH when the engineer doesn’t have to fight stage wedges blowing into mics.”

Finally, the use of IEM can result in less stage “clutter,” which is desired by some artists and production designers in addition, to providing added space for things like more elaborate dance sequences.

To all of this, Miller lends a bit of perspective: “Now, performers don’t have to make a choice between good sound and a massive set. Artists have always used the entire stage for performances - think of Michael Jackson and The Rolling Stones in the 1980s - but with IEM, artists can take their mixes with them wherever they go on that stage.”

More Responsibility
Because IEM systems for touring are generally wireless, monitor engineers are sometimes faced with the need for more of a working knowledge of RF issues, frequency coordination and wireless system maintenance.( In addition to often being responsible for vocal wireless mic systems.)

Due to the added challenges of more wireless, one misconception can easily be dispelled, which is that using IEM saves time in comparison to setting up and “ringing out” a wedge/sidefill system.

“When you have as many wireless channels as I was dealing with on a recent tour, tuning for clear frequencies took as much or more time than tuning wedges,” Miller explains.

Sharp agrees, adding: “You must do your homework and know what frequencies that you as well as other bands are using at a particular gig site in order to avoid train wrecks.”

Most wireless manufacturers offer resources to help in this regard, and fortunately, current systems provide both RF and sound quality that is better than ever.

Longing For Better
During my touring days, I was well aware of how much difference that mics could make in terms of vocal quality, stage bleed and resistance to feedback.

For example, it’s not wise to use a single wedge directly behind a hypercardioid mic; rather, far better to use two wedges, each placed at the “nulls” of the hypercardioid pattern.

At the time, my choice for vocals was usually a Sennheiser MD431, an “old-school” high-end dynamic mic that sounded great and was very good at resisting feedback.

But still, I longed for something better, and the condenser mics I tried at that time sounded a bit harsh for my tastes, plus they tended to pick up too much stage wash.

Later, when I worked with Neumann, I was part of the team that developed the KMS105 handheld condenser. And although it picks up more stage wash than most dynamic mics, the sound is quite good with certain singers, particularly jazz vocalists where excessive stage volume is not the norm.

Additionally, at the time of its creation, the idea that vocalists were moving toward IEM was already in play.

Over the past decade or so, there’s have seen a sort of renaissance with respect to mics, a renewed passion for new and improved designs.

“In the past, the subtleties of mics were much harder to detect, but with higher fidelity concert systems, everyone is looking for the very best sound possible. And the best sound starts with the right microphones,” Miller notes.

In addition, these newer mics are more rugged and less expensive than they used to be, and condensers designed for both live applications and the rigors of the road are in abundance.

Beveridge also considers mics to be part of a larger picture of what’s happening on the stage: “Spill must be given a lot of consideration. What may make a snare-top sound amazing may absolutely destroy the rest of the drum sound.”

For Dave Grohl’s vocals, Beveridge uses a MD431 mkII, a new version of the old classic, for its flat response, lack of distortion regardless of level, good rejection and stability against moisture and humidity.

“It’s a good example of modern materials technology applied to an older design,” he says of the MD431 mkll. “The Neumann 105 is an amazing sounding mic but it would be useless for the Foo Fighters because of the amount of ambient sound it collects. We used a Crown CM310 for Kurt Cobain because of its amazing rejection.

“Both mics are condensers but at the opposite ends of the spectrum as far as picking up stage bleed.”

Most Important Thing
In talking to these highly qualified monitor engineers, I’ve come away with the impression that the “vibe” is the most important thing with monitor mixing, whether it’s done with IEM or wedges or both. But with IEM, there’s more of a mix challenge.

“In an IEM situation, there is no vibe - the mix engineer is responsible for building the artist’s entire world,” says Miller. “In my view, this is what separates a mix where you can simply hear everything from a mix that is exciting, dynamic and inspiring to the performer.”

Of course, there’s an art to creating this world, and everyone approaches it differently. What I saw with Steely Dan back in ’93 was a pair of AKG C3000 mics, one on each side of the stage, pointed out towards the audience.

Several years later, while touring and recording what would be the Mirror Ball album, Sarah McLachlan and band were outfitted with a combination of different mics at the edge of the stage, in combination with shotgun mics hanging from a front stage truss.

I found this interesting, because it reminded me a lot of how large audiences are mic’d for events like award shows. Generally, it’s done to pick up the overall “wash” of audience response, but is also key in getting some of the individual clapping and vocalization of audience members to provide the sound some added immediacy.

“Don’t just set and forget audience mics, place them with the same care you would for any other mic,” Miller cautions. “In fact, I’m more obsessive with audience mics than most others I use on stage because they can make or break your performance.

“With Josh Groban, I’ve used up to six and am considering taking more next time. Covering a crowd 17,000 is difficult, but you have to make a huge audience sound huge.”

Miller also employs some additional tricks, sharing one in particular. “While I don’t time-align stage mics, I find aligning audience mics to be absolutely critical, especially when some of them are placed at FOH, which I tend to do,” he explains.

This parallels nicely with something that Sharp points out, which is the importance of time alignment for wedges and fills. “I time align my center wedge mix to my sidefills, and am careful about the quality of my mixes without having to over-EQ,” he says. “’Ears’ take away the time-alignment issue, at least for the most part.”

Not As Expected
The world of monitors has definitely changed since IEM came along, but not always in the ways I had expected. With the addition of audience mics and wireless systems, running monitors on IEM is a more sophisticated operation than the standard wedge/side fill method – of course, with some notable exceptions.

At the same time, with proper gain structure, mic placement and loudspeaker placement, there’s no reason to abandon wedges.

However, I do think that with the proliferation of better quality wireless, mics and PA systems, as well as more demands from artists, there will be more using the IEM approach. By the time we get it perfected, naturally, some new technology will come along.

Digital wireless cochlear implants, anyone?

Karl Winkler is Director of Business Development for Lectrosonics and has worked in professional audio for more than 15 years.

More articles by Karl Winkler on PSW:
Back To Basics: Seven Habits Of Highly Effective Sound People
Steps You Can Take To Improve Your Mix Right Now
Things I’ve Noticed About Working With Sound, And What They Might Mean
Top 10 Reasons For Bad Sound (And What You Can Do About It…)

{extended}