Interesting development in the Amp world

[DrumCorpsFan27]

Hoppy says:

"If this was a normal environment, people would take hours to set up what we have to set up in minutes."

Does this say to you that amps don't belong in this kind of activity? Does to me....

MikeD will appear in this thread in 3-2-1......

I hate to say this Hoppy, but, told ya so, before you voted it in, we told you so.

[DrumCorpsFan27]

Sorry - my knowledge of how amps work is limited.

Hoppy? Is that you??? Edited June 28, 2006 by DrumCorpsFan27

[WoobieATL]

I saw this coming from miles away. I tried to find my post I made almost 2 years ago, but alas, couldn't find it.

I had discussed how live sound is it's own animal and could be very scary if you don't know what you are doing, especially when it comes to combating feedback during a performance.

This type of thing should not be left up to amateurs to run. Audio Engineers start off going years and years to "pay their dues" while learning the craft in order to make a career out of it. Then, when they can run a rig on their own and do it at a professional level, they get compensated for it. Not too far off from what a professional musician goes through.

I do agree with the school of thought that suggests each show should have a "standard" audio console, amps and speakers. But, the problem is greater than that simple solution: wireless transmitters for mics have different output levels, corps will have different reverb and fx settings and rack units. I'm sure not all corps use some sort of dynamics (compressors and gates) in their signal chain. The variables are way too wide to accomodate every corps. Way back when they were thinking of adding this to the activity, they should have consulted with the kind of people that Hoppy is calling for right now.

With the addition of amplified equipment, they should have made a mandate that would require all corps to at least purchase the same audio console and DCI, DCM or whomever would provide a general palate of effects and dynamics at the site.

I guess the way to go would be to recommend a medium sized digital console. Then, each corps could make a recall or a snapshot file that they could load so that all their parameters would come back. Then a little tweaking and you are off. Most digital consoles already come with dynamics of each channel and some come with effect processors on board as well.

I also would recommend that the speaker placement is uniform for all performances. (I'm not sure if they do or not) The pit had a box they had to be in... make a mandate on speaker placement. This would hopefully reduce the probability of feedback during a performance.

Having a uniform amplifier with regulations on how much level you output from it would make it easy to go from gig to gig with little variation.

DCI has opened up a big can of worms....they may have to take a couple of steps back before going forward on this one.

Live sound is all about controlling the environment. The more you can control, the better off you will be.

[JimF-LowBari]

I would think it would just be a standard mixing (Sound) board and standard amp and a snake. <rest clipped for brevity>

Standard amp is what makes the idea unworkable IMO. Reason is it sounds like the same amp would be used at places as huge as Whitewater and as small as Westminster, MD and Gettysburg, PA. Either Westy and G-burg would get blasted back to the Stone Age by the volume or 90% of Whitewater fans couldn't hear a thing.

PS - Anyone at the ends of the stands at Gettysburg couldn't hear Cadets amp beacuse it was pointed away from them.

And audiodb.... <smacking head> NOW I get you, I was beginning to worry buddy.

[oldbandguy]

That being said, They should still have a #### good sound system. They are running three mics maybe 10 tops. Bands like Chicago use a sound board with, 64 channels? Or more. Quite a different thing really. My band in the 80s I think we had a 24 or 26 channel mixer. It was top of the line at that time. But much less than what the corps quality mixer would be today. Cadets probably use a 12 channel, just a guess. Depends on how much they mic. Remember, the Beatles recorded SGT. Peppers on a 4 track. 4 track recorders have been about pocket size (the size of a keyboard really) for over 2 decades now. I am just saying that with todays technology with few dollars should not have these problems.

Yes, you're right that a DCI crops would not need a 64 channel mixer, BUT in order to get the quality of sound to match the quality of sound of the unamplified instruments, they would need MUCH more than the 2-4 speakers the corps are using. That would also require a MUCH more powerful amplifier. It would also require MUCH more set up time, and MANY more people to transport and operate. There is a reason that most professional bands (rock, country, classical)

have a semi or three JUST FOR THE SPEAKERS.

And yes, the Beatles did record Sgt. Peppers on a 4 track, but did you ever have the chance to hear them live? I did (yes, I am an OLD band guy) and their sound system sucked too... check out any of the video recordings from that time period (especially at Shea Stadium). You see and hear the Beatles trying to fill up a stadium with 4 speakers. Didn't work then, doesn't work now.

Again, I want to make clear I'm stressing QUALITY of sound...not just VOLUME.

[MarimbasaurusRex]

That being said, They should still have a #### good sound system. They are running three mics maybe 10 tops. Bands like Chicago use a sound board with, 64 channels? Or more. Quite a different thing really. My band in the 80s I think we had a 24 or 26 channel mixer. It was top of the line at that time. But much less than what the corps quality mixer would be today. Cadets probably use a 12 channel, just a guess. Depends on how much they mic. Remember, the Beatles recorded SGT. Peppers on a 4 track. 4 track recorders have been about pocket size (the size of a keyboard really) for over 2 decades now. I am just saying that with todays technology with few dollars should not have these problems.

Big misconception here. Number of channels has nothing to do with it and recording techniques are unrelated. The problem is delivery of the sound coming out of the mixer. It's about dispersion, distribution, projection, power, etc. This is achieved with proper design of amplification and speaker delivery systems. Definitely not budget stuff.

In my opinion, the inherent problems of drum corps amplification include:

• an audience sound delivery area 100 yds wide, maybe 40-60 yds deep, 50+ yds high.

• speaker placement about 20 yds in front of the audience, very short for it's width yet still requiring a very deep throw.

• mixture with an extremely dynamic and widely dispersed acoustic sound source that is always moving and changing dimension.

Good luck. It can be done, but not quickly, not easily and definitely not cheaply.

___________________

Almost forgot my note to Mr. Hopkins:

Dear George,

Call a professional stadium sound company and get a consultation. Explain the situation and invite them to a show. They will have many suggestions and you will get a true idea of what is needed to do this properly.

Edited June 29, 2006 by MarimbasaurusRex

[jbenburton]

Standard amp is what makes the idea unworkable IMO. Reason is it sounds like the same amp would be used at places as huge as Whitewater and as small as Westminster, MD and Gettysburg, PA. Either Westy and G-burg would get blasted back to the Stone Age by the volume or 90% of Whitewater fans couldn't hear a thing.

PS - Anyone at the ends of the stands at Gettysburg couldn't hear Cadets amp beacuse it was pointed away from them.

And audiodb.... <smacking head> NOW I get you, I was beginning to worry buddy.

Thus why I mentioned that they could have two sizes of amps, it was later on in my post.

[PR_ducky]

Sorry Hoppy, you opened this can of worms now you have to live with it.

[Kamarag]

Yes, you're right that a DCI crops would not need a 64 channel mixer, BUT in order to get the quality of sound to match the quality of sound of the unamplified instruments, they would need MUCH more than the 2-4 speakers the corps are using. That would also require a MUCH more powerful amplifier. It would also require MUCH more set up time, and MANY more people to transport and operate. There is a reason that most professional bands (rock, country, classical)

have a semi or three JUST FOR THE SPEAKERS.

Nope. Not even close.

If I were designing the system, I would use self-amplified speakers (ex. Mackie's powered speakers), a speaker control system (DBX Driverack), and a 16 or 24 channel mixer (with built in effects). Adding a Feedback Destroyer for good measure in a good rolling rack, and you're good to go.

A system like this could be set up in minutes (easily with the pit..just roll it in) and "checked" fairly quickly (eusing the built-in saves settings on the Driverack).

I'll put together a complete system later tonight just for giggles.

[MiamiSun76]

That being said, look for Hopkins to make a proposal to lengthen the time needed between corps to allow for testing and setup of the board.

Didn't he offer a proposal a couple of years back to SHORTEN the time between performances?

I love his opening "people don't like amps". Which is why he does it. Isn't that called passive aggression?