Pit Amplification Almost Worthless..You Decide

[Michael Boo]

.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Michael Boo

[actucker]

Okay.

I'd be willing to say there is NO "new school" pit that actually plays in balance with the hornlines either. They wanted balance, but instead we've got a bunch of idiot designers with the same thought process as teenagers and disk jockeys: "TURN THE BASS UP. IT NEEDS TO BE UNNATURALLY LOUD. I DON'T CARE IF IT'S BURYING EVERYTHING ELSE, BASS IS GOOD.". You seem to imply there's balance. Thunderous Goo is not balance. You don't go to a string orchestra concert and see the basses being doubled by some useless idiot with a giant synthesizer because "WE NEED TO BALANCE THAT VOICE OUT WITH THE REST OF THE ENSEMBLE".

I don't think the post you're quoting is referring to synthesizers, but the mics on the mallet equipment. We can argue all day long about whether or not those mics are being used to create our idea of balanced. Of course there will be those who are not, just like there are those who go after an edgier brass sound rather than a more symphonic sound. In many cases its a matter of choice. What I don't think is disputable is that balance was not possible before the implementation of microphones.

[charlie1223]

Okay.

I'd be willing to say there is NO "new school" pit that actually plays in balance with the hornlines either. They wanted balance, but instead we've got a bunch of idiot designers with the same thought process as teenagers and disk jockeys: "TURN THE BASS UP. IT NEEDS TO BE UNNATURALLY LOUD. I DON'T CARE IF IT'S BURYING EVERYTHING ELSE, BASS IS GOOD.". You seem to imply there's balance. Thunderous Goo is not balance. You don't go to a string orchestra concert and see the basses being doubled by some useless idiot with a giant synthesizer because "WE NEED TO BALANCE THAT VOICE OUT WITH THE REST OF THE ENSEMBLE".

Wow so you've devolved your argument to calling synth players (aka marching members) "useless idiots"... Wowww...I respect your opinion so much more now!

NOT

Edited August 19, 2013 by charlie1223

[actucker]

Can I ask a question from a naive point of view?

If you have 80 brass and 4 marimbas, in your opinion do you consider "balance" to be equal? I've always wondered this... in the WGI arena, the ensemble is supposed to be balanced such that the pit is as audible as the percussion as it relates to the ensemble sound.

If you go back to pre-amp pits in DCI, you had an expectation that kids played with some excess technique to max out overall amplitude *but* that's as loud as it gets. Just like a pair of cymbals, crashing them harder and yet harder is still going to produce a maximum amplitude.

Thus, what is the general consensus now? I was always of the understanding that in DCI and Marching world that pits didn't have to match the brass decibel for decibel. In fact, it would be strange to hear a marimba be as loud as a trumpet because the root characteristics of the instrument normally have a trumpet being inherently louder / more focused.

So by balanced, do you mean a reinforcement to allow players of barred instruments to play with good technique but match their historic counterparts in ratio, or is it that a keyboard part of 8 players should in fact equal 80 brass when both are jamming at ff?

My thought is that balance meant that brass could overpower pits at its highest volumes because it seemed natural, but now I've heard lots of WGI every-section-is-equal stuff. Can anyone expand on this nuance?

You're looking at this from a strange point of view. I don't think anyone is advocating for the front ensemble to be an equal voice to the entire brass line. I think they're arguing (rightfully so) that front ensembles should be audible in the same way that the mellophones should be audible at any given point within the rest of the brass line. There will be times when the mellophones will need to be a bigger part of the mix (perhaps if they have the melody) and times when they need to play a less prominent role. That doesn't mean that they aren't present. Until microphones were introduced, front ensembles were relegated to being audible only if they were playing the absolute top of their dynamic range, or if the brass line was not playing. Now there is more opportunity for the front ensembles to contribute musically. Some like that change, and some don't. The motivation is to let each member contribute to the ensemble. Many different types of ensembles use amplification to allow instruments of different natures be heard.

[drumcat]

You're looking at this from a strange point of view. I don't think anyone is advocating for the front ensemble to be an equal voice to the entire brass line. I think they're arguing (rightfully so) that front ensembles should be audible in the same way that the mellophones should be audible at any given point within the rest of the brass line. There will be times when the mellophones will need to be a bigger part of the mix (perhaps if they have the melody) and times when they need to play a less prominent role. That doesn't mean that they aren't present. Until microphones were introduced, front ensembles were relegated to being audible only if they were playing the absolute top of their dynamic range, or if the brass line was not playing. Now there is more opportunity for the front ensembles to contribute musically. Some like that change, and some don't. The motivation is to let each member contribute to the ensemble. Many different types of ensembles use amplification to allow instruments of different natures be heard.

I guess that's my point. I have with my own ears listened to a few different judges say that, in their own words, voices should be equal - specifically that if there is a pit voice and a brass voice, they should be equal, aka "balanced" in the ensemble.

I personally think it sounds out of place to be that loud. I believe that the nature of the instrument is lower in an acoustic setting, and as such should use reinforcement to do literally that; add volume to the degree that it can be heard as a quieter ensemble instrument but is made louder in the process of assisting proper technique.

I'm hoping someone can better explain the section-to-section equality argument, since that is generally where keyboards have been amplified to in the last several seasons - in a similar manner to where they are in WGI.

Of course, this is a generalisation- I am aware of "scenes" and mid-show adjustments. I saw the iPads, etc. In fact, it should be pointed out that to improve the listening environment, usually a staff member will be in or near the judges to mix from that location. 20 yard line seats? Tough tuckas.

[actucker]

I guess that's my point. I have with my own ears listened to a few different judges say that, in their own words, voices should be equal - specifically that if there is a pit voice and a brass voice, they should be equal, aka "balanced" in the ensemble.

I personally think it sounds out of place to be that loud. I believe that the nature of the instrument is lower in an acoustic setting, and as such should use reinforcement to do literally that; add volume to the degree that it can be heard as a quieter ensemble instrument but is made louder in the process of assisting proper technique.

I'm hoping someone can better explain the section-to-section equality argument, since that is generally where keyboards have been amplified to in the last several seasons - in a similar manner to where they are in WGI.

Of course, this is a generalisation- I am aware of "scenes" and mid-show adjustments. I saw the iPads, etc. In fact, it should be pointed out that to improve the listening environment, usually a staff member will be in or near the judges to mix from that location. 20 yard line seats? Tough tuckas.

I've heard the opposite point of view from judges as well. Again, its a matter of personal preference. Personally, being a percussion guy, I prefer a little more mallet presence than others. At the end of the day, when I'm mixing for an ensemble other than my own, its not my call. I do what the guy signing my check says to do.

That being said, the argument could be made that there are different things going on in the front ensemble that are not heard in the brass ensemble, and as such they take on the role of another choir. Consider the role of a piano accompanist to a concerto. Obviously the solo voice is the important part throughout most of the performance, but the accompanying voice is still important, or it wouldn't exist. Imagine if that voice were to be barely audible.

I'm not saying that one way to mix is better than another. Again, preference plays a huge role.

That being said, I think you're overestimating how much adjustment gets done with the iPads. The only thing I use it for is to make sure levels aren't completely out of whack for the venue. Dynamics are still up to the performer. I've met lots of other folks who use them and have not come across one single person who uses the wireless link to control dynamics.

As for the 20 yardline argument, that same issue was an issue before amplification. Horns are pointed towards a focal point for a reason. Brass is directional. Shows have been designed for the judges perspective since LONG before amplification.

Like you said, you prefer the balance to be slightly less mallet oriented. There are those who prefer it otherwise. Its a matter of preference. Some brass instructors prefer to have more low brass presence, and so they structure their dynamics that way. They have that option due to the similar nature of the instruments on the field. Amplification allows that option for front ensembles. What people do with it can be criticized to the ends of the earth. Whether or not they should have that option doesn't really seem like an argument worth having.

Edited August 19, 2013 by actucker

[Jeff Ream]

I guess that's my point. I have with my own ears listened to a few different judges say that, in their own words, voices should be equal - specifically that if there is a pit voice and a brass voice, they should be equal, aka "balanced" in the ensemble.

I personally think it sounds out of place to be that loud. I believe that the nature of the instrument is lower in an acoustic setting, and as such should use reinforcement to do literally that; add volume to the degree that it can be heard as a quieter ensemble instrument but is made louder in the process of assisting proper technique.

I'm hoping someone can better explain the section-to-section equality argument, since that is generally where keyboards have been amplified to in the last several seasons - in a similar manner to where they are in WGI.

Of course, this is a generalisation- I am aware of "scenes" and mid-show adjustments. I saw the iPads, etc. In fact, it should be pointed out that to improve the listening environment, usually a staff member will be in or near the judges to mix from that location. 20 yard line seats? Tough tuckas.

in WGI, you have a much smaller venue, and the balance is pretty much good. However in DCI, when you do 90% of your shows outside, settings are always being adjusted, and IMO, especially in Indy, staffs continually over compensate for how loud it needs to be. Also, since you have concrete right underneath the pit, that helps drive the sound more.....and the synth is really 90% of the balance issue in DCI

[cixelsyd]

You're looking at this from a strange point of view. I don't think anyone is advocating for the front ensemble to be an equal voice to the entire brass line.

Then I guess you missed a few posts in other threads.

I think they're arguing (rightfully so) that front ensembles should be audible in the same way that the mellophones should be audible at any given point within the rest of the brass line.

That could be an interesting analogy.

First, I presume that when you say "front ensemble" in this context, you have the keyboards specifically in mind. Front ensembles, unlike mellophones, have the luxury of selecting from among an assortment of different instruments to play at different times. Some of those instruments, such as the ride cymbal or jumbo concert bass, are undeniably audible in the ensemble without amplification.

Now, if we are talking marimbas or vibraphones, you have the question of whether they should be audible in the same way as mellophones. As drumcat was asking, should an instrument that has limited dynamic range be audible to most ears over 100 field musicians at fortissimo, when even in a symphonic setting, that instrument is rendered inaudible to most ears at an orchestral fortissimo?

Another issue I see from other posters is the desire to have each mallet musician playing unique parts. The mellophones, like any other voice in that 80-horn line we are envisioning, are typically grouped eight to a part. No corps has each players in any brass section playing unique parts, and no one (that I know of) would expect each of the unique parts to be heard in that scenario. It would be even more difficult to make that possible for a lower-volume instrument like the marimba.

You also have the question of technique. A common thread among advocates of amplified pit is the desire to play with softer mallets and/or lower arm movement, more like concert techniques. Evidently, this is something that is desired to be audible at ensemble fortissimo. Again, that desire deviates from the natural reality, where even the symphonic setting would render softer mallets and lower strokes inaudible to most ears when the orchestra is loud. The analogy applies to the brass, where fortissimo comes with a different tone characteristic than softer playing.

There will be times when the mellophones will need to be a bigger part of the mix (perhaps if they have the melody) and times when they need to play a less prominent role. That doesn't mean that they aren't present.

Yes, but they are not quite as "mello" at fortissimo.

Until microphones were introduced, front ensembles were relegated to being audible only if they were playing the absolute top of their dynamic range, or if the brass line was not playing.

Sorry, but my observations differ greatly from yours. For many years, we had pits with no amplification where even instruments of limited sound output like the marimbas, vibes, etc., were used effectively when the brass was playing; could play with dynamics, not just at the top of their range; and could even employ softer mallets and/or lower arms when the rest of the corps was not loud.

[skywhopper]

Sorry, but my observations differ greatly from yours. For many years, we had pits with no amplification where even instruments of limited sound output like the marimbas, vibes, etc., were used effectively when the brass was playing; could play with dynamics, not just at the top of their range; and could even employ softer mallets and/or lower arms when the rest of the corps was not loud.

I agree. Marimbas and vibes were used for decades, presumably with some perceived value for the corps and the judges. They could certainly be heard. Check out Cadets 91 opener and see if you can hear the pit amid the FFF brass. Why yes, you can...

Related to this point is that the front ensemble members no longer have any responsibility for their volume, balance, or blend. That's entirely in the hands of the staffer running the mixer. The players can change their tone, and can impact the volume, assuming the mix is not being touched by the sound guys, but in reality, the sound guys are tweaking the mix constantly throughout the show, and can "correct" individual players or sections who are failing to achieve the right volume levels. (They could also theoretically mute performers who are not cutting it in terms of hitting the right notes.)

[scottgordon]

I actually felt that - before the days of amps - I could hear the individual contributions of pit players better than I can today. That's because every sound made was emerging from the physical point at which it was produced. Now, all of the pit sounds (and even some horn sounds) are coming out of two speakers on the sides. When a sound comes out, I cannot tell who made that sound, because the performer and the resulting sound are disconnected in physical space. That is one of the fundamental differences between amplified and acoustic music, and in my opinion it has made drumcorps less impactful.