ROCK CONCERTS

[Murray Keidge]

Hello All,
This discussion is very exciting for me to be involved in. I appreciate both sides of the discussion as I am in the fortunate position of having both types of speaker systems at my disposal.

To the best of my knowledge my company has the largest collection of Altec Lansing loudspeakers still used in concert production in the world today. We have numerous systems and they are used for events ranging from 20 - 100 000 people.

As well as the Altec Lansing speaker systems we also have the EV X-Line line array system and EV X-Array loudspeakers. This system is suitable for the larger events due to it's design and size.

My attitude to the discussion is that both my Altec and EV systems are ideal for some applications but neither is ideal for all situations.

There are situations that I would only use the Altec's for and others that I would only use the EV's for.

In running a production company there are more things to consider than just the audio quality alone. My preference is still the classic "Altec" sound, however, the cost of delivering that "sound" is not paid for by the client in most situations these day's.

We can become very precious about the "Altec" sound but in the production world it has been forgotten along time ago.

After the closure of the company I spent some time talking with some of the executives from Altec, and they looked at what we have done with the Altec product for the concert market.

Comments were made to the effect that they should have taken our approach to packaging and how the product was used and kept ahead of the market, and they might have still been in business today.

I can assure you all that the current professional concert loudspeaker market does not consider A7's and A4's as viable anymore. This has been hard for me to come to terms with, but it is reality.

I think that we all need to realise that it is not the loudspeakers alone that make a "great" sound there are many other factors that come into play and must be considered as well.

The quoting of facts and figures does not tell you how good a concert sounded you need to be there to hear it for yourself and then decide if you liked it or not.

After all audio is all very personal and I have heard Altec speakers and other brands sound very good and I have also heard them all sound very bad, depending on who is at the mixing console and who is on stage.

I have learnt to appreciate more than just Altec Lansing loudspeakers. Altec's are still my prefered speakers, however, there are many others that work and deliver a good sound night after night at concerts all around the world.

If any one is interested in seeing some of our Altec systems please visit www.cpcproductions.com and look in the production and Altec Lansing sections.

Enjoy listening.

Murray.

[joyspring]

Scotty:

About digital! Well, I still have a taste for analog, but, and I mean this, digital has made vast improvements in the last couple of years, and is getting quite good! Yes, ten years ago, digital audio sounded like cheap trash! Not anymore!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, digital has improved in recent years, notably in quantisation depth and higher sampling rates -- storage is much less expensive now.

However, the `sound' of digital ten years ago is comparable to what it is nowadays; low noise floor, flat frequency response, extremely low distortion.

What really has changed and has imparted the most significant sonic improvements are improved recording and mastering techniques. Old habits such as compensating for HF loss for analogue tape wear, cutting heads and dealing with equalisation quirks from RIAA and tape curves were the true cause of `bad' digital sound and those anachronistic techniques are now history, thank goodness.

I am coming to understand that many things of the past that were known for their " sound " actually do have colorations and minute distortion components that while sound pleasing, are exactly what they are, colorations and distortions!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Recording `engineers' who are actually engineers have realised this since the beginning of the `retro-vintage' trend in the recording industry.

Those gremlins (distortion, noise, etc.) are what recording engineers were attempting to abate through the 1970s and 1980s. The promise of lossless transfers and simple editing was a dream soon to be fulfilled.

However, as the era of technically-savvy staff and unionised recording engineers was waning, the rise of the technically incompetent independents strangely coincided with the rise of digital recording technology; hence, the nostalgia for all things tube and analogue in the professional world to mirror the silliness and stupidity in the consumer `audiophile' scene.

There's also economic considerations as well -- as an example: when Alesis introduced the US$3995 ADAT 8-track modular digital recorder in 1991, that's when the large studios _really_ started to tout Analogue tape in earnest. After all, studios had over US$125-200K invested in big Studer A800/A820, MCI/Sony, etc. 2" 24-track recorders.

A producer could purchase three ADATs and a Mackie 16-input console for under US$20k and have a much lower noise floor than the LA studio that buried perhaps US$350K+ on a Studer A827 and big Neve console.

Studio owners were scared sh*tless. Many medium-sized LA facilities went **** -up in the 1990s.

Anyhow, this reaction is very comparable to the flood of inexpensive, high-performance mass-produced Japanese hi-fi equipment in the 1970s which prompted a similar reaction: retro-stupidity and `boutique' salon audiophilia.

BobR

[Steve Burger]

"I do not see degreed mechanical and electrical engineers, acousticians, mathematicians or physicists currently on Iconic's roster."

This is certainly true of myself, on the technical level I know a relatively minuscule amount. However if you were to look deeper into some of the "roster's" resume's you would see that our both our Comptroller (Mike Jordan) and President (Jim Dickinson) literally grew up in the sound business. In my life experience I have noted that in many fields hands on experience counts for a **** of lot more than degrees, I believe this includes many aspects of the world of sound. In addition, on paper, many sound systems should be "the best" but in reality are not. While I know my technical limitations and understandings, I do know what sounds good to me.

There are also contributors behind the scenes that are not listed on the "roster" who do have the degreed credentials BobR seems to need to value their input. For various reasons their names are not included as staff.

[Todd W. White]

I think the thing to remember is this:

The largest venue for professionally engineered sound systems is not the rock-and-roll touring market - it's the fixed installation market.

And, while it IS true that many of these require high SPL output, the vast majority of them use equipment of the type being mentioned here (like the line arrays, etc.) because there simply isn't anything else being marketed to them as viable.

Most of the venues that use fixed installation systems need them for a variety of applications - everything from voice to hard rock (yes, even some churches today are in the rock music business...so sad), and the result is they need a system that is verstile.

That said, however, it is also true that most will never operate them at the ear-splitting levels heard at most live rock concerts - their patrons/congregations just won't tolerate it.

We tend to look at the "big" things in life as being worthy of our emulation - big business, big cars, big aircraft, big body parts on models (female AND male these days), and this is no less true with sound systems. Often, the sound system designer/installer is forced to sell something he KNOWS isn't right for his customer, all because some "big" group, singer, or facility the customer admires has one just like it.

The SAD truth is that realism in sound reinforcement design - AND OPERATION - has all but vanished from the list of expectations and requirements of owners, operators, and listeners today. It's all about how loud your system can play - not how well does it reproduce, yea, reinforce the NATURAL sound being generated by the singer, speaker, performers without being in the way.

If Altec were in business today, I would think they would offer a variety of products for different venues, to be sure. It would be the only way they could compete.

Or would it?

Perhaps had Altec been allowed to have the money necessary to do so, a series of sound system training seminars - "clinics" - could have been held across the country for several years in the 1980's and 1990's for the END USERS. If they would have educated the end users as to the proper way to design and use a sound system in their fixed-installation venues, perhaps the number of really BAD sounding systems being purchased (not to mention the marginal ones) would not be so high.

Something like that might also have prevented the SPL wars, which do nothing to serve the customer, except to deprive him of the sense of being "where the action is" (no realism - no sound REINFORCEMENT), and, instead, leaves him with less hearing capabilities than when he went in...

[thinking]

"I do not see degreed mechanical and electrical engineers, acousticians, mathematicians or physicists currently on Iconic's roster."

I usually have enough sense to keep my comments to myself, but in this case...

A degree in any of these areas is certainly not a necessary and/or sufficient condition for the ability to make valuable contributions in the audio field.

I make this assertion, not as an endorsement of Iconic, (to date I do not have any personal experience with their product) but as a disclaimer of degrees. I could expound more on the subject, but it is probably not necessary, and I could point out which of those areas I have a degree in, but it's really not necessary for me to have a degree to make the assertion. I just wanted to put in a couple of cents worth.

[joyspring]

Murray / Todd:

Let's separate the operators from the equipment; undoubtedly, there are *far* more bad operators than bad sound systems.

That said, an Altec-based sound system can sound good within its limits with the right operator. Can't rightly comment on the CPC Altec-based system since I've not heard it but will state that it does look impressive. Indeed, Altec may have had a second chance producing modular, riggable systems in the early 1980s.

However, the basic tenets of `good sound' are relatively unchanged since essentially codified in the early 1980s (by David Clark): flat frequency response, low distortion / noise, and for electronics, high input impedance / low output impedance.

For electroacoustic transducers (microphones / loudspeakers), add off-axis frequency-dependent behaviour as a significant consideration.

And you'll note that all the major advances in sound reinforcement address those very issues; distortion is at least an order-of-magnitude lower at equivalent sound pressure as older transducers, coverage is better and much more highly-predictable. What operators choose to do with new kit is something else altogether...

So far as sound pressure levels are concerned - at least to sensible folk - the massive increases are not to increase average listening sound pressure but to increase headroom, lower distortion and increase system reliability.

It's all about how loud your system can play - not how well does it reproduce, yea, reinforce the NATURAL sound being generated by the singer, speaker, performers without being in the way.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anything electrically-amplified through a sound reinforcement system in a performance setting will hardly resemble `natural' sound... getting relatively `good' sound to so many paying audience members is perhaps a more apt description.

All that said, it's been quite a while since I've been to a large-scale electrically-amplified concert to evaluate sound reinforcement systems, not only to avoid the hearing damage that Todd alludes to but also to avoid many of the patrons as well. It's primarily classical and small club venues now... perhaps I'm just getting old.

BobR

[joyspring]

Steve:

Please review what I stated:

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but by my reckoning, Iconic Manufacturing Company appears to be a low-quantity run shop specialising in catering to retro-hi-fi and supporting existing Altec installations rather than high-volume, high-tech, high-performance professional audio.

If Iconic were to break into the latter, they need engineers; real engineers.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, based on the current product offering, the present Iconic does NOT necessarily require engineers, unless to optimise workflow and make incremental changes to products.

All the `heavy-lifting' was done 20+ years ago by degreed engineers, applied mathematicians and physicists (I know and have worked with a couple from the Anaheim Altec at different pro audio manufacturers...).

However, if Iconic were to develop NEW products from the ground-up, competetive with the other majors (JBL, EV, etc.), then Iconic would require a significant R & D department and budget.

`Literally grew up in the sound business' is a far cry from designing audio equipment.

Operators may know how-to-use good equipment and even know how to integrate great systems... and they offer valuable advice, suggestion, and feedback to audio manufacturers.

However - despite experience - designing cutting-edge audio equipment requires a firm, solid foundation in engineering and hard science: mathematics, physics, chemistry.

Sorry, there's simply no other way around that.

There are also contributors behind the scenes that are not listed on the "roster" who do have the degreed credentials BobR seems to need to value their input. For various reasons their names are not included as staff.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As it should be. So unfortunate as it is, engineers in the audio industry cannot command the same salaries as their peers in the world's largest welfare program: the US Military-Industrial Complex.

Particularly in the past twenty years, many audio companies rely on consultants who work full-time at defence firms but moonlight on the side rather than attempting to retain a loyal engineering staff on miniscule budgets.

In any event I'm glad (and relieved) to hear that Iconic retains that level of expertise - to develop new products, you'll require it.

BobR

[joyspring]

Thinking:

A degree in any of these areas is certainly not a necessary and/or sufficient condition for the ability to make valuable contributions in the audio field.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That is true, especially amongst audio end-users; however, in the research and development and in many areas of the manufacture of electromagnetic transducers, a degree in electrical/mechanical engineering, applied mathematics or physics is a minimum requirement.

Yes, people can acquire real-world skills and Edison-like insight on-the-job but a four-year degree in any of these areas of study is an indication of a minimum set of quantitative and analytical skills necessary for design, research and development in audio manufacturing.

BobR

[gearjammer]

If anyone is intrested in hearing the JBL Vertec system, catch Def Lepard on there current tour. I caught them in Winnipeg Manitoba on there Canadian leg of the current tour and I have to say that is one of the loudest systems I have ever heard!!! I think the last time I heard a system that loud was when "THE WHO" came to town back in the 70,s I think that was a JBL system as well. Keith Moon was still their Drummer and I have to say that was one of the best shows I have seen, and I have been catching shows from around 1974 By the way that Vertec system was as clear sounding as any 70,-80,s Arena system, in fact I would have to say clearer. You might even want to equip your self with some ear plugs just to be on the safe side???

[scott fitlin]

I agree, the AJBL Vertec can produce insane SPL,s! I myself, have heard them at shows, amd in some clubs. But, as loud and clean as they can play, something about them, I just dont really care for. Possibly the setup of the system in various venues, and the mixing personnel were responsible for what I hear, but its ok, just not really great. The other side to this is that some of the SPL,s these systems are being used to produce, is totally ridiculous! TOO LOUD is TOO LOUD.

I have another Line Array story to tell. At Coney Island, every summer we have a Saturday which the newspaper " The Village Voice " hosts their " Siren festival " right in the Coney Island amusement area! They have all sorts of art displays, and food, and of course, live bands playing on band stands setup in the streets! This last year, the bandstand on Stillwell Av and Boardwalk had a McCauley Line Array system, and it was unbearably loud! REALLLLLY LOUD! I had the opportunity to be up close to the stage, and just had to run for cover, too much for me, and I like loud, but not this. The system they had was powered by mostly QSC Powerlights, and some Crest 1001,s, all XTA digital processing, some Klark-Teknik digital EQ,s. The McCauley line arrays midbass sounded pretty good, but the mids were harsher than anything I have ever heard before. The things that I noticed the most were the highs and subs! The drummers kick drum actually sounded pretty good. nice round, well damped, decent tone! I was talking to one of the FOH guys, and I told him I liked the sub bass, what are they using? he tells me they had 24 McCauley 18,s in custom ported cabinets, and they were using the crest 1001,s to run these. I said, you know, for digital signal processing, the subs sound good! He then told me that from the 15,s up, the system was digitally controlled, and QSC Powerlight driven, but the subs utilized an analog setup with massive heavy power amps that had the beef to deliver all day long! Surprise, surprise!

Then the highs! Now, this is live bands here, not pre recorded material! So Im listening to the band play, and the drummer is using the cymbals, and there is a distinctly synthetic sound to them! Like we were listening to a CD or something. XTA processors are considered to be one of the, if not the finest DSP units out there, and they had supposedly good speakers, and of course, plenty of power! While the drummers kick drum had a natural sounding tone, the cymabals had that synthetic waxy sheen that sounds artificial! Yet, from up close, if you could stand to be that close, the csound you heard directly from the drummer sounded proper. So in fact I was hearing the system, and its electronics!

I pointed this out to the sound tech I had been chatting with, his response was, yeah, thats why we still do analog bass, but for the rest, I dont care, the powerlights are much easier to move around, the Line Arrays produce the SPL, and you need HIGH SPL, and the DSP makes it simple to setup anywhere! And the people dont know or dont care as long as its loud! And his last statement was He doesnt care as long as he gets paid!

Some digital sounds good, but, even though I do like some things available today, you can still hear digital, and it still doesnt sound as natural or real as analog!

This took place well over a block away from my place, and as I was walking into the front of my place, I turned around to face the direction the music was coming from, thought to myself, man, I am over a block away, and it sounds like Im right there! THAT is too loud!

Most Line Arrays are used at insanely high SPL,s! Would Line Arrays sound better at more modest levels? Line Arrays are specifically designed for Long Throw at extreme High SPL,s! Seems to me, the very thing that was bothering me, is the very thing the Line Arrays were designed to do!