monitors for orchestra

[Mark]

I don't have any experience with wireless monitors; but I really like Mackie monitors. You'll need power cords running to the monitors anyway, so you could run cables for a wireless receiver to monitors and hook a wireless transmitter to the mic(s).

[Mark]

I don't have any experience with wireless monitors; but I really like Mackie monitors. You'll need power cords running to the monitors anyway, so you could run cables for a wireless receiver to monitors and hook a wireless transmitter to the mic(s).

I understand, but the power cords could approach from the back of the orchestra and only run under the chairs of three or four people (total). Mic cords would trail all the way from the front of the orchestra through to the back. Are Mackie "powered" monitors?

Mackie does make powered monitors. The 450 (400 watts) is probably more than you need. They make less expensive ones. If you put the wireless reciever at the back of the stage, the cables from it could be taped to the power cords running to the monitors. You could hook the mics up to batter powered transmitters and there would be no cords at the front of the orchestra. (Sennheiser makes a good wireless system.)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00355 ... d_i=507846" target="_blank" target="_blank

[Rick Denney]

Back when I did sound stuff (decades ago), one of the new fads was mic-stand-mount monitors called "hot boxes". These were self-powered amplified speakers, about 8" tall and maybe 5" wide and deep, with a mike-stand mount in the base. Acoustically, they were used for vocal tracks, but that would work for high strings, particularly for your purposes. Another advantage to a powered personal monitor is that it provides accessible controls to the person doing the listening.

You will still need to distribute the audio signals. Radio systems might be one solution, but most venues do have various under-floor options that might work better and more reliably (and cheaply). And if the amplifier is in the monitor, you must run power to it, too. For the hot-box concept to work, you'd need probably half a dozen of them to cover the back row.

The only one I still own is an Audix monitor, which has a 20-watt amp built in. At teh frequencies in question, 20 watts is plenty. A singer could hear vocals clearly in a well-amplified C-W band for whom I was running the sound board back in my college days. The JBL A7's needed 400 watts for the dance hall, but the monitor is three feet from the performer and pointed right at him--a speaker with an efficiency in the mid 80's dB sound pressure level (1 watt/1 meter) will produce a sound pressure level in the high 90's at 20 watts--potentially loud enough to be heard by the audience. You don't really want anyone but the performer to hear what's in the monitor.

A quick google search turned up an example of what I'm describing:

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MicroSpotDC/

Rick "knowing the difference between amplification and sound reinforcement, and suggesting this is a case of the latter" Denney

[Tom]

Back when I did sound stuff (decades ago), one of the new fads was mic-stand-mount monitors called "hot boxes". These were self-powered amplified speakers, about 8" tall and maybe 5" wide and deep, with a mike-stand mount in the base. Acoustically, they were used for vocal tracks, but that would work for high strings, particularly for your purposes. Another advantage to a powered personal monitor is that it provides accessible controls to the person doing the listening.

Yes! I think these are just about ideal for the sort of thing that Joe has in mind.

We use Mackie self-powered (no external amp necessary) hot spots mounted on mic stands where I work in some specific situations and they work well. The listener accessible controls, as mentioned by Rick, are critical. They serve their purpose for any instrument in the orchestra, but work better overall on the higher end of the spectrum than on the lower.

You will still need to mic the orchestra and have someone mix that into an appropriate monitor mix (unless you intend to run straight into the monitors ). Also as mentioned by Rick, you'll still be contending with having to get power to hot spots along with the line in. They can be chained together, an important feature, as you'll need several of them to cover an entire brass or percussion section.

I'm not sure about wireless...I've never seen wireless monitors other than IEM (in-ear monitors). It's possible, I suppose, but the problem would be on the receiver end: getting that signal into or through the hot spots.

[GC]

The least intrusive monitor system would be in-the-ear wireless. They won't affect the sound the audience hears, which any open-speaker monitor WILL DO no matter how tightly focused they are, and they're almost invisible to the audience. They can be adjusted for individual volume preferences.

If a pickup/broadcast base system was put into place and left in place, this would allow only the musicians who want monitoring to buy individual pickup units (or have them provided) and wouldn't leave a lot of stage clutter.

[Tom]

The least intrusive monitor system would be in-the-ear wireless. They won't affect the sound the audience hears, which any open-speaker monitor WILL DO no matter how tightly focused they are, and they're almost invisible to the audience. They can be adjusted for individual volume preferences.

If a pickup/broadcast base system was put into place and left in place, this would allow only the musicians who want monitoring to buy individual pickup units (or have them provided) and wouldn't leave a lot of stage clutter.

This is not something that I would recommend in this setting.

The biggest problem with setting up a IEM system is that it's expensive to buy the gear, but moreover, you really need a monitor board and engineer to make the most of an IEM system.

However, there are other big issues for orchestral players such as the need to completely plug at least one ear with the mold/IEM system. Truthfully, an IEM system works best when the user wears earbuds in both ears. Obviously the problem here is that completely plugging your ears in a symphony orchestra setting is far from ideal.

I would go so far as to say that running an IEM system without a monitor board and monitor engineer would be darn near impossible. There is virtually no listener control with an IEM system (you're at the mercy of the monitor engineer).

Plus, if you've ever had an IEM system take an RF hit or pickup feedback or some other kind of interference, you know that you can do permanent damage to yourself.

The issue of the audience hearing hot spots is nearly a non-issue. Unless they are absolutely cranked wide open, they're just not that loud. Plus, we're not talking about introducing new material through the system...it would be to put existing material (music) into other areas of the stage. 99% of the audience will detect no discernable difference. I've produced hundreds of concerts and have never once noticed a hot spot as being intrusive. Some of the big 15" floor wedges running at 110db, sure, but never from a hot spot.

[GC]

Sensible comment on the in-the-ear monitors on the dangers of feedback and rf spikes, in particular.

On the hot spot monitors, I agree when you only have one or two they're not intrusive, but when you get a bunch of them, you have issues. Several of them spread apart for several players can generate quite a bit of sound. I've had unfortunate experiences with them causing feedback or too much reflected sound. I still think they are stage clutter, but certainly no more than acoustic baffles.

[DPlander]

Being that I am a Tuba player and a professional Sound engineer, I would advise against this setup. Omni-Directional Microphoens are just that, Omni-directional. That being said, as soon as you get everything set up there will be more sound (not to mention the possible soft buzzing from the monitor that your going to set up), and being that this is a very "Live" hall you don't want to add any extra noise. Plus, seeing that I tried something very similar to this it will go something like this

A: hey, you got a monitor set up, thats great. Lets turn it on and set it real low for some presence
B: hey we can't hear anything out of this monitor, can you turn it up?
(so you do, and of course your playing either a really loud or a really soft piece of music, normally it is a soft piece of music)
So you turn up the monitor and no sooner than you think everyone is happy you play some hugh fanfair number where the entire orchestra is playing and the next thing you know you have a 4k ring going through the monitor becuase the omni-directional mic is picking up everything.

So my advice is to skip the monitor/mic setup, unless there is going to be someone sitting in the house and listening to it 24/7. If your playing and trying to change the levels it will never end well. Just my two cents.

Douglas Plander, Sound Engineer
US Pacific Fleet Band

[Lingon]

We do a couple of concerts each year with monitor setup for the orchestra. While it is necessary to use mics and monitors in such situations it is also necessary to use a special monitor sound person that can change the levels when the music changes, i.e. for almost every piece. Otherwise the situation DPlnder describes occur, often. Even with individually adjustable monitors there is the trouble both to remember to adjust and also having the time to adjust. Therefore the sound person should/must optimally have a board that is programmable. Initially I also thought of the IEM but as pointed out there are risks for the hearing with those too.

However, I really wish there was an easy and simple solution to this problem, because we also need it the whole time more or less. Even for the so called classical repertoire where we need to hear not only the high strings but also, as low brass players, would be very helped by hearing the basses... The wws are always heard over everything;-)

[GC]

Rant time: most people have gotten so used to hearing everything at a blasting level or through cranked headphones that they've lost the art of picking up enough clues to their pitch and time by careful listening. I'm not saying that this applies to Bloke's situation; his performance talents are a matter of record. But doing PA work for years, I've seen situations where people want the monitors cranked to the point where the offstage volume of the monitors is louder than the mains.

School kids are the worst about this. Their teachers play piano loudly in a closed area or they play accompaniment tapes through a boom box turned up to the level of distortion. They get so used to this that the moment they get into an acoustic situation where they can't hear the accompaniment at levels they're used to, they panic and want more and more monitor. I grew up in an environment where a 200+ voice choir was expected to work with a piano placed far away on the stage, and my ability to hear and keep pitch is all the better for it. There needs to be more emphasis on careful listening rather hitting everyone over the head with the accompaniment.

Even adults who grew up in bands or choruses seem to be falling prey to this lately. Very often I have to cut my personal hot spot off completely because other band members want them too damn loud, and then they gripe because they're getting feedback.

[Mark]

Please let us know what you end up trying and how it works.

[Trevor Bjorklund]

Not that anyone is still considering it, but there is one more thing about in-ear monitors that I find super-annoying: the way it makes the inside of your head sound when you play brass... same thing happens with ear plugs.

I've used wedge monitors in large ensemble situations and pits and never had a problem with the audience hearing it because they don't really have to be very loud, just pointed at you. In fact, many of the world's top orchestras are now using discreet amplification in their concert houses.
Powered monitors are great because you can control the volume at the box instead of needing a technician to ride the board. Just don't empty your horn into it by accident. Doesn't solve the microphone issue, though. Would it work to feed the overhead directional mics into the back row (time lag notwithstanding)?

[GC]

@Bloke: It's a shame that there are concert halls that are worse than playing in a tiled school bathroom, and that great groups are forced to play in them. It may be better in the long run to start a campaign to switch venues, but I know that some situations are impossible to get out of. Best of luck.

Also, omnidirectional mikes will also pick up the brass and percussion and send them back through the monitor; how about directional microphones picking up the front rows of the strings only (if you're close to the basses, they may not be needed in the mix)?

@Trevor: I agree so long as the monitoring can be kept discreet; discretion is the key, but too often it's not properly appreciated. As for powered monitors, I agree with the ability to turn up as needed, but that's were discretion can tank. For that matter, even passive monitors usually have volume pots and can be turned down. It's much a matter of who controls what.

[imperialbari]

Is there a delay to digital sound?

If not, what about directional microphones on each string section leader including the lead double bass are mixed into a laptop that transmits Bluetooth to small self-powered monitors mounted on vertical tubing of the music stands of the musicians needing this aural guide. Some filtering could be applied to take out booming noises. The resulting sound out of the small monitors will not be beautiful, but the high frequency chiffs will come through, and it is those we react to, if we can hear them.

The investment during tests maybe can be kept down if the players at the receiving end bring their own computer monitors.

Klaus