Sunday, October 18, 2009
All Saturdays
Roadies in the Midst: "I remember one show back when I was mixing Rage Against the Machine in a field and the venue told me I had a 98db A weighted limit at mix position. Bummer, especially with Rage. 'Who measures, it? How is it measured?' I asked. They introduced me and and I saw the sound meter and met the human. That's the rule? No variation? 98 at mix, period? 'yes, no leeway, do not go over or the band will be fined $10,000 per minute over, it is in the contract.'. I pondered and looked out at the FOH setup and then asked for 6 stage hands. I had them break down mix position which was at 80 feet and moved it to 175 feet away. They had a full meltdown, but hey, it was in the contract. I was happy. The rules make it fun. I love finding the lines and seeing how far they bend."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The really interesting part of this article was how he kept things below the 98 mark when mixing the sound. Its these kinds of on the spot fixes that make a good technician in any field, and he handled the situation pretty well. He was able to get around the rules and give the audience a good time as they watched the show, and he didn't cost the band extra money by going too loud. Its really interesting that the venue would book that band with that sound limitation. Interesting choice of venue.
The 98 dB limit that the article describes reminds me of the typical noise ordinances people like to cite but never seem to read the details of. Pittsburgh has one, but the actual text includes provisions such as measuring the noise level inside the house of the person complaining some minimum distance from the outside walls, only if that measurement is over the limit is there actually anything to complain about. It still doesn't stop people from calling in complaints and often also being able to get the police to act on the complaints, but when pushed even the police have been known to say they're not sure how to measure the noise levels.
I thought the that what he did at the Ford Amphitheatre was especially clever to get around the rules. Of course, the people writing (and enforcing!) the rules should do it in a way where everything is based off of a particular reason for having noise limits. The main reason for having a noise limit is to not disturb the neighbors (too much), and at the Ford Amphitheatre, the way he followed the rules actually made things worse for the neighbors because of where they were measuring and the stack configuration. I think the larger problem here (and Tom hinted at this) is that the city ordinances in various places aren't well known, or are interpreted in ways that allow the sound engineer to circumvent them. The neighbors should know that if they live next to a concert venue it will be loud, and they shouldn't live there if that's a problem.
There were a lot of interesting tid bits in this article however it was written in a sort of unfocused manner. Despite it jumping around a lot, I feel like the article gave the reader an interesting peak into the life of a sound technician. I think its funny how he talked about seeing how far he can bend the rules,though I don't know if that's always the best idea. Nevertheless, I found his creativity in trying to fool the measurement mic interesting.
While this was certainly a solution to the problem at the time, I wonder if it was beneficial to the artist/FOH team to do so. I feel that while, yes it did solve your problem by finding a loophole, the mixer was essentially undermining the authority of the venue. And yes, it was within the letter of the law, but it wasn't in my opinion the best route to do it. I don't know what a better way of accomplishing the end goal would be but, I think there should have been a better way of doing it.
I found the stories of how the crew got around the noise ordinances to be the best part of the article. I'm always fascinated by the disconnect that seems to exist between the people that make the laws and rules and those that wind up dealing with them. Often there's just so many loop holes in the rules that people create that's it's almost comical how easy it is to get around them. The idea of simply moving the mixing area farther away so that the distance between the indicator and the speakers changed is genius, and probably had an entire office of rule makes scratching their heads and asking "can they do that?"
I enjoyed reading the stories about how the author dealt with certain sound "issues" that various venues pressed upon him with their limits on loudness. It's interesting to see how people can maneuver about certain rules, and bend them in various creative ways. I think if you live next to a some kind of performance venue, you just either have to learn to deal with the noise and the spectacle, or move somewhere else because there will always be that creative techie with a mind on making things a little crazier. It's an interesting look at living as sound guy on the road.
This article is a great reminder of how there can be some very creative approaches to limitations within our industry, especially when it comes to personnel, rules, regs, etc. While some might say he was being sneaky in some of his approaches,and they are a tiny bit backhanded, all he is trying to do is look out for the interests of his direct employer, in the best way he can. I think his "creativity" is admirable.
Post a Comment