Hi Folks,

I've been working with Chris Walden and Alan Steinberger of this community on difficulties they're facing with Chris's (outstanding) LA-based big band on smaller stages.

For those of you wishing to learn more about Chris and his big band go to www.chriswalden.com.

Chris owns two L1 model II systems with T1 ToneMatch engines. Alan, who it is my understanding often plays keyboards in the band, brings a third L1.

When the band plays the Typhoon at the Santa Monica Airport, with more generous stage space, here's how they set up.

Recently, the band played at The Jazz Bakery in LA, with a stage that means the band is pretty packed in, according to Alan.

When I spoke to Alan last night by phone he said they had a frustrating experience there, a big contrast to what they've been experiencing at Typhoon. You can read all about the Typhoon gigs in this thread about the Typhoon gigs.

Alan told me that the number one problem was with the sound of the singer. She was very loud at Alan's position which was close to the stage right L1 she was using but there were complaints from the audience that she was not loud enough. Not good. Alan said they were also out of gain before feedback so even if he could tolerate more singer sound, they didn't have it. Double not good.

A few months ago, I did a big band gig here at the Bose Corporate Center Auditorium. I was worried about the large number of players on stage and the fact that if I pushed the L1 systems upstage (as they're customarily used) I would have trouble getting the sound past all those bodies, and second, that some players would be awfully close to the L1s and others not close at all and that would set up disparities in balance of sound on stage.

I elected instead to push two L1 systems downstage, left and right, and to use a third just for the rhythm section. Here's how that system looked:

This system worked well. The singer was very happy. You could hear her well throughout the audience although she was a little louder on the right side of the house.

Some of the trumpet players on the stage right side (left of stage plot) felt she wasn't loud enough, although when I pushed them about whether they could hear her they said yes. They said that they were used to a floor monitor closer to them and it was louder. They wanted to hear a little more sax too.

The gig was a big success and the sound was very, very good in my opinion.

At the same time, I acknowledge that I'm not very expert on what a contemporary big band WANTS and NEEDS to hear. I could use some education here and I hope Alan and Chris will chime in with some more detail.

- How does the brass in the back row expect to hear the saxes in the front?

- How much of the singer does the brass want to hear?

- I'm guess that the singer wants to hear the rhythm section clearly, but does he/she want to be blasted by the horns?

- What does the rhythm section want to hear?

I'm very interested in these questions both in a historical context (mid twentieth century, when minimal amplification was used but the genre thrived) and with contemporary big bands where amplification is used extensively.

With some of these questions still in mind, together with my experience with the big band at Bose and listening to what went wrong at The Jazz Bakery, I'd like to propose a different setup for smaller stages, shown below:

The main thing this proposal does is push the vocal system way downstage. I am confident that this will nail the vocal problem, both for the audience and for the folks that before were sitting too close in the rhythm section.

Because you are using L1 Model II systems, I am confident that the singer will hear herself very well.

Note that I've divided the soloist microphones (in the horn sections) between the two downstage L1 systems.

The third system, for the rhythm section, is currently being used only for the keyboard. The bass player and guitar player could easily plug into this (something I recommend) which would significantly reduce stage clutter. I realize that bass and guitar players cling mightily at times to their favorite amps and that this may be a battle you wish to postpone or to sneak up on once the main concerns about the singer sound are resolved.

In essence this system is sort of like using L1 systems in the same location as PA speakers, but retaining the important properties of an L1 system where a) musicians and audience share a single sound field and b) where the musicians control the sound field.

I am eager to get the reactions of Chris and Alan to this proposal. Please confirm that I have a good understanding of the problem and please add/subtract anything. It's vital that we are all sharing the same understanding of the issues.

I'm also thrilled to have our great community here comment freely on the problem and the proposed solution. I know there is a million times more knowledge and problem-solving capacity in the community than in my head alone.

Hi Ken,

A small correction: we have even less space at Typhoon than at the Jazz Bakery. The wait staff merely moves some tables out of the way to clear room for the bands a couple of times a month. The Jazz Bakery at least has a fixed stage.

I have crammed in my own L1 several times at Typhoon, but invariably some poor percussionist winds up standing inches in front of the column. Since the restaurant is already successfully running a house mix through their two L1 classics (flanking the band on each side, and canted outwards some 30-45°), I'm going to experiment next gig with a very small, high-end combo amp for use as a monitor.

Would that we would have another seven or eight feet behind the band to put up a few L1s. Given a little space around the systems, nothing can compare with the sound. But when we're packed in like sardines, I'm afraid we have little choice but to rely on a house engineer.

Also:

While the sound at our last Typhoon gig was fabulous in the room (both the owner and the sound tech were thrilled), the mix within the rhythm section was extremely loud and unbalanced. We weren't getting anything other than ambient noise from the house L1s, thus my decision to bring a monitor to the next gig.

Alan: Do you have a bit more room at the sides? That is, could the L1's function as throwing some sound 'across' the stage? (which could be 'controlled' by the angle you rotate the column) ... my guess, however, is that may leave the L1(s) too far out in 'audience' or foot-traffic areas.

Ken: In your modified layout (3rd one in this topic, with Systems 1 & 2 up in front, #2 to the right), I'd suggest moving System #2 back a bit, rather than fully up front. Then, enable some AUX output from the Singer's T1, feeding that Aux into channel 4 of T2 #2, to provide some 'monitoring' for that side of the band.

Some of the problems you are describing, of course, are similar (but not exactly the same) as with a convention FOH and stage monitors.

The biggest difference is that with the L1's you can much more easily use positioning & rotation changes of the L1's to help rectify 'monitoring' problems without causing too many other "bad" side-effects (as well as judicious "bleed" monitoring electronically, too).

Hi Dan,

Not only don't we have more room at the sides (I'm sitting so close to diners that I've been offered food on more than one occasion), but the band is set up on the longest wall, which is why the columns are canted outwards (patrons on three sides). I don't think we could shoot sound across the stage without blowing away the players on each end.

In any other situation, though, I think that's an excellent idea and well worth trying.

I appreciate everybody's concern. Indeed, we had some trouble to make it work at the last few gigs. But the problem is not the L1. I strongly believe that the L1 systems itself are a the greatest invention in sound amplification since the invention of the phonograph. But they work best when they're used in a setting which they were designed for. And that is a group of musicians where every player uses and controls his own L1 unit, and where each player stands or sits in a comfortable distance to the unit, so he/she can hear fine as well as the audience. Those settings are found with rock bands, small jazz bands, chamber music ensembles in small to mid-size venues. Basically, a hand full of players on a stage with some space around them.

But the reality of our big band gigs is a different one. We're 17 players plus a singer and we're usually cramped on a stage that is way too small, often we're using the space in front of the stage to place the saxes. This is already an unbalanced situation to start with. Now we only have space for two or three L1s (if at all) and multiple players are using one unit, but the players sharing a unit are not positioned in the same distance to the unit. And that's where the (venue-given) unbalance becomes even greater. Even though we're only using the mics for the horns that are soloing, (there's more then one mic connected to one L1 but it's only being used by one player at a time), the musician not soloing but standing closer to the L1 than the on soloing is hearing it way too loud.

In perfect world for a big band we would use 5-6 L1's and have enough space behind the last row of players (in our case the trumpets) to place them 5 feet behind them. But that's just not the reality.

We did a gig a while ago with a 7-piece band and 3 L1s where we had a decent size stage. That worked out perfectly! That's where the L1s shine!

This topic is as scintillating as they come! I am totally excited at the prospect of having this problem myself someday! (as in, I'd love to sing with a big band, not that I would love to have actual problems)

With that...

How much area (total room size and patron number) needs to be covered? A simple question, but the answer to which will help me understand better.

From the "Typhoon Thread", quoting Chris Walden:

quote:

But I also lead my own big band, we play at jazz venues in and around Los Angeles. Since it's not practical to mic the whole band for a small venue we only mic the singer, piano and the soloist (sax, trumpet, or trombone.) The rest of the band plays acoustically. The L1s are perfect for that kind of set-up since they blend nicely with the rest of the band that plays unamplified. That way we don't need monitors. In our current set-up we use 2 L1s. One for the piano and the singer and one for soloists. So far we had nothing but positive comments from the audience.

Questions in no particular order, only as they are coming to me:

Is there a director? Stand-alone, or one who also plays an instrument?

Any chance of using a smaller band at the cramped gigs? Does anything or anyone demand that every piece (e.g., horn), and number of pieces, be used at every gig?

From Ken, above, describing the recent Walden gig...

quote:

Alan told me that the number one problem was with the sound of the singer. She was very loud at Alan's position which was close to the stage right L1 she was using but there were complaints from the audience that she was not loud enough. Not good. Alan said they were also out of gain before feedback so even if he could tolerate more singer sound, they didn't have it. Double not good.

Why is this? The simple thought, to me understand, is that everyone else was too loud. Is that possible? Was this as much an issue of just not respecting the lyric? Could the instrumentation have played more quietly?

From Ken, above...

quote:

Because you are using L1 Model II systems, I am confident that the singer will hear herself very well.

I am quite curious about trying this, personally. At first glance, I am not at all sure that I will like the sound (of me) as well. Keep in mind, all I have ever known for live sound is the L1 in its traditional (intended) placement. In Ken's last Sketch, I think I would also put vocal into L1 number 3, and/or number 2 as well. Where is the director (if any) positioned?

From Ken, above...

quote:

- I'm guess that the singer wants to hear the rhythm section clearly, but does he/she want to be blasted by the horns?

You know, all I ever hear of the band are the times that I am not singing. After the intro, I couldn't tell you what's being played...unless there is a big mistake. Not hearing any, though, is a testament to the players, and for this I am so thankful. Such talent! I love it. To answer the question, surely I would not want to be blasted by the horns, but why on earth would the horns be blasting when there is singing going on? Even in fortissimo situations, everyone has built to a certain point - it's just marvelous - but mustn't the vocal remain on top of everything else? I guess the sound engineer makes sure of this (to an extent), and the question still remains as to how can everyone blow (appropriately and proportionately), and still enjoy decent sound (quality) and hear on stage?

Other times when I am aware of the band is when I find my pitch off a hair (at least to my ear). I found this to be the case recently when there was no monitoring of any kind, save the overhead, house PA (thread here). I had to make myself listen, acoustically, to the band on stage and not listen to myself, a tiny bit delayed, through the PA. I got back on quickly, ignoring the PA for the rest of the night (or at least that particular tune).

Ken, Alan, thank you for this educational opportunity!

N

More later, but let me clarify that there's no problem with the singer's sound (as in tone, pitch or phrasing). She's one of the finest artists anywhere. The problem was one of volume, getting her on top of the mix.

I could have put up with the very loud volume of the singer from my seat upstage right, but I was flabbergasted when the audience started shouting "can't hear the vocals" after the first tune. I couldn't believe that what was nearly blowing me off the piano bench was still insufficient for the house (perhaps 200 seats max).

Had I anticipated this, I would have given the engineer direct outs from the T1s so that he could add in the house PA as necessary.

And although some gigs come along which call only for a combo, when it's billed as the Chris Walden Big Band, it's always the full complement of players.

quote:

Originally posted by Alan Steinberger:
More later, but let me clarify that there's no problem with the singer's sound (as in tone, pitch or phrasing). She's one of the finest artists anywhere. The problem was one of volume, getting her on top of the mix.

If the clarification is for me, I understand this totally. My pitch comment was just about myself - a related topic - not that I thought Chris's vocalist had a pitch issue.

quote:

I could have put up with the very loud volume of the singer from my seat upstage right, but I was flabbergasted when the audience started shouting "can't hear the vocals" after the first tune. I couldn't believe that what was nearly blowing me off the piano bench was still insufficient for the house (perhaps 200 seats max).

That is queer. Was that for the audience members nearest to you, too?

quote:

Had I anticipated this, I would have given the engineer direct outs from the T1s so that he could add in the house PA as necessary.

How did you end up coping, ultimately? You or Ken probably said above. I need to read again. Couldn't you have snagged the engineer during a quick break and given him that line out, or do you guys play straight through?

quote:

And although some gigs come along which call only for a combo, when it's billed as the Chris Walden Big Band, it's always the full complement of players.

Sure, without question. It's what one would expect. I was just thinking about future bookings where you know the venue is super tight, and then only book the players that will fit. It would depend on what the client was asking for, sure, but if he/she wasn't adamant about having 17 pieces, then why not make this suggestion to him/her if it is known that the venue is small?

In response to Chris's post, which, given the time, appeared to have been in moderation when I first posted...

L1's or no L1's (perish the thought, but for the sake of discussion), what is the best way to amplify a big band?

Is there a best way?

I know there isn't a one size fits all answer.

I would ask again about dynamics, though. Heavens, no way am I second-guessing the musicianship. A resounding NO. But as a second to Ken's question - about the time that bands had less than perfect amplification means (if any) - it had to be a lot of give and take, didn't it? How was it done then? One would assume...I would assume successfully. Whatever it actually was, I would think today's issues would be comparable and solved, at least at a very basic level, in a similar way.

Just thoughts.

Hi Nathan,

Most of the big band gigs in town have two sets over a three hour time span. I spoke with the engineer on the break about tying into the Jazz Bakery's system, but I didn't have any of my cables and direct boxes with me, and although he did have DI's, he didn't have ¼" cables available to connect to the T1s.

Chris was wanting to go cold turkey on using house sound, and based on our successful experiences with a couple of other events, there didn't appear to be any reason to even consider a backup plan.

I was not correcting you (or Ken) regarding the "singer's sound" comment; just trying to make sure that it was understood that Ken was referring to volume, not quality.

Big bands have a pretty standard instrumentation with only a bit of variation: typically 4 or 5 trumpets, 4 trombones, 5 saxes, piano, bass, drums, often guitar, and sometimes vibes and/or hand percussion. When a group is billed as a jazz orchestra you'll see things like French horns, tuba and interesting woodwind doubles. But generally you're looking at 17-22 players in either case. It's a lot of bodies and equipment.

As far as how things have changed over the decades, basically it's all gotten louder thanks to larger and heavier-gauge drums and cymbals, electric keyboards and basses, better amps, etc. We in the rhythm section balance ourselves to the drums, and the rest of the band attempts to keep up with the rhythm.

I usually carry a few packs of ear plugs to give away to people as necessary.

Hey, Alan! and thanks.

How about this? Now, granted, I am used to a really quiet combo (man, I love my drummer - well, I love them all, but Slu can play with sticks quieter than most other guys can play with brushes...ask Pete), but how would it be to adjust the rhythm section much quieter, then build around that? Like it was only the trio or quartet in a restaurant. That would bring it way down, yes? It may be too much to ask of everyone. Ah, you'd probably be accused (by audience or client) of not packing enough punch then.

As I was back out in the shop after my last post this afternoon, I wondered about durms specifically, and how things were mic'd (or not) in the 40's. In the recordings, the drums are always way down in the mix. To me, it's what really contributes to the signature sound of swing and jazz of that time. To replicate that now, means playing quieter. However, was it simply an issue of the drums not being up in the mix because there wasn't a way to get them there? Do you think they actually were as loud in person as we might experience today (from someone I might call a loud player)?

Good information there, Alan. Thanks!

Nathan

Ken, to answer your questions:

quote:

Originally posted by Ken-at-Bose:
- How does the brass in the back row expect to hear the saxes in the front?

Either acoustically or through some kind of monitoring.

quote:

- How much of the singer does the brass want to hear?

None.

quote:

- I'm guess that the singer wants to hear the rhythm section clearly, but does he/she want to be blasted by the horns?

No.

quote:

- What does the rhythm section want to hear?

The singer and some of the horns, mainly the soloists.

quote:

I'm very interested in these questions both in a historical context (mid twentieth century, when minimal amplification was used but the genre thrived) and with contemporary big bands where amplification is used extensively.

This is actually a very good point. In the heydays of the big band era (30s and 40s) the bands played a different kind of music. Even though we're playing with the same instrumental setup as these bands, we're playing a different kind of jazz today. One where the drums play louder, where solos are extended and therefore amplification becomes more crucial.

quote:

Originally posted by Ken-at-Bose:
The main thing this proposal does is push the vocal system way downstage. I am confident that this will nail the vocal problem, both for the audience and for the folks that before were sitting too close in the rhythm section.

I'll give it a try. As mentioned before, sometimes we don't even have the space to put them that far downstage, but where we do, it's worth a try. The only thing that strikes me right away is that now the soloing trumpets or trombones are to far behind the L1 to hear them selfs.

Dear Nathan,

quote:

Originally posted by BabyBlueEyes:
I wondered about durms specifically, and how things were mic'd (or not) in the 40's. In the recordings, the drums are always way down in the mix. To me, it's what really contributes to the signature sound of swing and jazz of that time. To replicate that now, means playing quieter.
Nathan

I we were playing the same kind of music as the bands in the 40's were playing, then yes, we could easily replicate that by playing it the same way they played it then. But we don't. Music has evolved and we play a different kind of big band jazz today. The dynamics within the band has shifted over the last 50 years.

quote:

It would depend on what the client was asking for, sure, but if he/she wasn't adamant about having 17 pieces, then why not make this suggestion to him/her if it is known that the venue is small?

It's no about the client or venue owner demanding the full 17-piece band. It's my arrangements that demand the instruments that I've written for. Try performing a piece written for string quartet only with two violins. You'll miss the viola and the cello part. The musical piece would not be complete. The same with my big band charts.