bad stage acoustics

[sloan]

Magritte-pipe.jpg

[sloan]

smallMiro.jpg

[Donn]

The next time I have trouble hearing the concertmaster or hearing the strike of the percussion (rather than its echo), I'll remember to go get a recording bell tuba.

If nothing else, it could help avoid the problem of seeing the conductor.

[Lingon]

I regularly play on one stage with amazing stage acoustics ("the ability to hear everyone else in the orchestra")

Bloke, you are a lucky person.

Why not stick an omnidirectional mic under the concertmaster and near the percussion? Place some floor monitors in front of the brass (not loud, but audible to the brass musicians) so they can 1/ hear the concertmaster and 2/ hear the percussion when it happens (instead of too late...some echo, etc.).

That would be a great solution in many situations and I have many many times wondered why such assistance devices are used so seldom for a symphony orchestra.

Orchestra halls use other modern technology (climate control, electric lights, flush toilets, etc.) Why not employ some modern technology that makes it easier to hear and to synchronize the sound?

As you said. Why is the main content of the concert hall not given maximum support for a great performance if needed? When the acoustics is bad one solution is of course, for example for us low brass players, to look at the concertmaster or the principal double bass, or some other musician, when we need to be together if spread on each side of the stage which seems to be not so unusual in some orcherstras now.

The conductor has a very important role, which seems to not in every situation be fulfilled by all and everyone. And some persons does not even look at a conductor because of that, even if it is a really good one... In some situations when I have argued that it is not possible to play at the baton or even after, someone always says 'don't look at the guy and you will be fine'... (Conductor's salaries are mostly many times that of an orchestra musician) However in some way you have to get the work done and usually there is some magic, and competence maybe, involved so the result usually works. There may also be different perspectives on this if you are a wind/brass or string player? So there are many things to take in account.

Many times, though, subs that are used to play at the beat in other situations, not three quarter of a beat behind or so, works with us and we must often tell them to not play on the beat with the result of something like this from them. That's not so good...

However back to your suggestion of mics an monitors. We use that sort of stuff on a couple of productions, that is more so called 'popular music concerts', each year. When the whole thing works and is adjusted correctly it is so easy and enjoyable to play together, and the result is tighter.

Many years ago we did a tour when we played in one hall where it was absolutely impossible to hear each other on the stage, not even the colleagues in the trombone/tuba section. Somehow it worked out, but it was clearly not one of the orchestras' best performances ever.

I think the old concert hall at the Danish Radio used some sort of monitor system for the orchestra because of the difficulty to hear each other on the stage. (Maybe Klaus knows something about that??) So, if so, it has then been done and I think it is not wrong to use technology if the sounding results could be bettered. That usually is also good for the audience that, after all, pays for their tickets to listen to the concerts...

So, I think your suggestion is great and should lead to better performances in bad halls... However there may be a risk in that the designers takes these devices and fixes the problems when the hall is built instead of when it is planned. OTOH, the more discussion of these things the better. I mean, it is possible to fly to the moon but...

[imperialbari]

The concert hall in the old Radio House (now the conservatory) first tried to improved hearing across the orchestra by means of plexiglass disks hung from the ceiling in a way that allowed for hight adjustments as needed with various orchestra sizes and set-ups. When computerized acoustic modeling improved they had some wooden geometric structures added to the side and back walls. The immediate reaction from the solo trombonist was that the heavy brasses had to take down their louder dynamics as the hall no longer killed their sound.

Klaus

[Lingon]

...The concert hall in the old Radio House (now the conservatory) first tried to improved hearing...

Thanks for the information Klaus. But did the changes improve the ability for the musicians to hear each other on the stage?

...particularly suffering with this issue this weekend...
...Strong exposed tuba/low brass entrances involve "best guesses"...

Sorry to hear that, the Frank symphony is so good and should be a joy to play.

Isn't it strange that we discusses instruments and their capacities, pluses and minuses so much, but does anyone know if architects and designers of concert halls discusses how the halls should best be designed to work for both artists and audience?! And most important, may some of the concepts work just out of luck? I know there are a couple of persons around the world that are renowned for hall acoustics, but as I understand there are more halls built than the ones these persons are involved with?!?

[Lingon]

...The Franck concert was a pleasure...
...Once several hundred bodies and chairs were in there...

Good to hear that.
So the audience was the acoustic treatment...

...We're repeating it in another venue about 80 miles away today...

Very curious to hear your experiences from that event.

[imperialbari]

...The concert hall in the old Radio House (now the conservatory) first tried to improved hearing...

Thanks for the information Klaus. But did the changes improve the ability for the musicians to hear each other on the stage?

It reportedly did, but as the later addition of the wooden wall structures suggests, there still was room for improvement.

Klaus

[Lingon]

...But did the changes improve the ability for the musicians to hear each other on the stage?...

It reportedly did, but as the later addition of the wooden wall structures suggests, there still was room for improvement.

What about the acoustics in the hall of the new house, both from the musicians' and the audience's perspectives? Did it work out as supposed or are there things that have to be worked on too?

[Mirafan]

I must agree Bloke, the concert Sunday was very well appreciated, well done and the acoustics of the venue are quite good in my opinion. I really enjoy concerts there as you really can focus on individual sections of the orchestra or listen to the entire group. Rest assured, our community hopes we will be included for more concerts next season. Large thanks go out from many to Director Gilbert and the group, truly an honor for our town.

[tbn.al]

Isn't it strange that we discusses instruments and their capacities, pluses and minuses so much, but does anyone know if architects and designers of concert halls discusses how the halls should best be designed to work for both artists and audience?! And most important, may some of the concepts work just out of luck? I know there are a couple of persons around the world that are renowned for hall acoustics, but as I understand there are more halls built than the ones these persons are involved with?!?

Our church hired an acoustical engineering firm as part of our multi million dollar new sanctuary program. They charged us about $100,000 and promised the 100 voice choir would fill the hall without amplification. 10 years later and almost as much spent on amplification, it's still awful.

[Lingon]

...It was well-attended and appreciated...

That's good to hear and glad you had a chance to play the Frank in such a situation. Funny, I have a feeling of a contradiction when the acoustics is dry and the sound is good?! But as far as I know about acoustics, almost everything seems to be relative. However, it is so essential to hear each other to be able to play together at such a level that you would feel satisfied. And when the orchestra feel good then the chances are that the audience can see/feel/hear that. So let us hope for more good acoustic spaces to make music together in. If only the orchestras will have resources to continue to make music...

...Our church hired an acoustical engineering firm as part of our multi million dollar new sanctuary program. They charged us about $100,000 and promised the 100 voice choir would fill the hall without amplification. 10 years later and almost as much spent on amplification, it's still awful...

Very sad to hear such stories, but unfortunately it is not the first time either. Our hall was built 1979 and a reputed acoustic designer was involved. Over the years a lot of 'quick fixes' had been done but we still struggle with a lot of acoustic peculiarities... Fortunately every now and then we have a chance to play in other facilities and then, with a bit of luck, we may have a chance to have the whole potential of the orchestra's capabilities released...

[imperialbari]

Can all acoustics be pre-calculated for complex entities like concert halls?

I guess there are always some surprises, when the music plays for real. John asked whether the new Danish Radio concert hall had to be improved after its opening. And yes, first the organ got sort of a background band shell so that the sound was not absorbed by the back structures. Many wall panels in the hall had perforations for a controlled absorption of sound. These took out too much soundand therefor they were filled with a sort of plaster during a summer break. As I understand it, this last change was one of the variable original parameters left open for later decisions.

Klaus

[Rick Denney]

A hall can be "dry" (very little echo/reverberation) but still "resonant" (amplifying, rather than absorbing, the sound).

It's just a matter of where the reflection and absorption is placed in the hall. Absorption at the source makes the hall dead, while absorption at the destination prevents echo and minimizes reverberation. (When it comes to echo and reverberation, echo is always bad, while reverberation is good up to a point. Reverberation without echo happens when the reflecting surfaces don't aim at each other in ways that allow resonant standing waves or undispursed reflections that create echo. Resonance is usually bad--it makes the hall ring at certain frequencies--not a good thing.) Most of the stages on which I play are in high schools, and I'm playing into the curtains behind the proscenium arch. That makes it dead for me, even if it is live out in the hall. The best stage I've heard is the Meyerson in Dallas, which doesn't have a proscenium arch--the stage is open at the top with an adjustable overhead shell that can be raised and lowered as needed to project sound into the hall. It has some square corners on the stage that are not so good, but these can be damped using add-on treatments. But such a hall can only be used for concerts--there's no provision for dramatic staging.

Rick "who prefers halls with enough reflective reverberation on the stage to hear himself, enough projection to fill the hall, and enough non-echoing reverberation in the hall to give the sound ambiance without losing presence" Denney

[Lingon]

...Can all acoustics be pre-calculated for complex entities like concert halls?...

That seems to be a big problem. How could it be that the old guys could build good theaters at the time when there were no electronic stuff like mics and loudspeakers purely relying on the acoustics to work? An old amphitheater seems to be very good, but a new concert hall designed by experts with the aid of massive computers and knowledge does in many cases have to be improved in one or more steps?!

Our hall, that is a six cornered version, built 1979 have always had it's share of problems but was designed especially with the acoustics in mind. Here in Sweden we have another great little hall, Helsingborgs konserthus, that is built like a shoe box, from the beginning of the 1930s I think. It is renown as a very good hall both for the orchestra and the audience. Another great shoe box example is the Musikverein in Vienna. So, why is there such a big difference in the results when building the halls? As I said earlier, it is possible to travel to the moon but we can not make a concert hall work?!

[imperialbari]

I don’t know the Hälsingborg hall. And only know the Wiener Musikverein hall from TV.

But isn’t the benefit of the shoebox style hall with its full width stage that the sound can go directly from the stage to the back wall without being killed by the public seated in an amphitheater hill of dampening material? And then that viennese hall looks like made out of hard material like wood and plaster. The latter in form of elaborate stucco work formally designed for visual purposes, but creating much more diversified reflections than the more modern wall structures calculated on computers.

We had a somewhat similar hall in Copenhagen (Odd Fellow Palæets store sal), which was not very well maintained paintwise. Despite its shabby looks it was very much used for concerts. And the opera and the radio orchestras used it for rehearsals, when their own facilities were not available. Sadly a musical comedy act didn’t turn off its PA-system after a dress rehearsal some 20 years ago. Something shorted and the hall itself burned down totally. Even if the smaller halls and the lobby were saved, the hall was not rebuilt.

Klaus

[Rick Denney]

As I said earlier, it is possible to travel to the moon but we can not make a concert hall work?!

We use that phrase a lot. But flying to the Moon is actually not that hard to do. The tricky bit is 1.) doing it cheaply and 2.) carrying enough payload there and back to be worth it.

And that's the problem here. We don't build buildings the way we used to, either structurally or in the finishes we use. We can't afford to. But we want comfortable seats for 2500, instead of cramped seats for 900.

Rick "the vacuum of space is a lot less stochastic" Denney

[sloan]

Rick "the vacuum of space is a lot less stochastic" Denney

Not keeping up with Modern Physics, are we?

[Slamson]

I'm often puzzled as to why there is less knowledge about Chris Jaffe's ERES (electronic reflected energy system) amongst musicians. Many of the prominent halls in the US (and a couple in Europe) use this, but of course nobody wants the public to know that they aren't hearing "pure" orchestral music. This would hardly be Chris' definition of what the ERES system does, but basically there are a gang of microphones suspended over the stage (in strategic areas) that feed into a large bank of speakers hidden in the top of the hall's ceiling, usually hidden by clouds. A computer controls the delay - release time that the sound from the microphones goes through the speakers, which simulates reverberance against certain surfaces (the clouds are usually handy) that would come from a well-designed hall. All too often the original designs of architects in cooperation with acousticians are changed by a well-meaning public (Avery Fisher Hall is a classic example of this), never thinking that putting in more seats or changing the slope of the balconies or the height of the stage will in effect kill the acoustic intent of the original designers. This is usually when JaffeHolden Assoc. is called in to patch things up with their ERES. I'm not going to "name names" because it would color the perception of those who think they're playing (or listening) in a very good hall, but there are plenty of places in cities of over a million population who are benefiting from the system now. Unfortunately, in some cases in spite of JaffeHolden's admonishment to "'leave the system alone" sooner or later many of these systems get tampered with, and they either pay JaffeHolden to come back and re-tune the system, or they just fall into disuse.