07: 32 Swedish Champion sound system (from a translation): Champion Presenter A2 Portable Speech Reinforcement System A2 includes the following pieces: 10 Watt High Fidelity Amplifier, Type G17 12” Permanent Dynamic Speaker High Quality Dynamic Microphone Chrome adjustable microphone stand Elegant Blue bag with folding speaker cover In addition to this amplifier, Champion has a history of the absolute highest quality at competitive prices. Mains connection approved. S marked. 1 year warranty. PRICE ONLY 475 kr Retail (approx. $60 USD)
Nicely done. I am a former Shure employee and liked your SM 57-58 comments. They are still being made and continue to be the workhorse of the industry.
@@MrDogonjon We would get them returned in buckets usually all we had to do was a cosmetic repair change screens and clean the diaphragms-lots of spit therein! Most of the major touring bands used them as many still do today. I was manager of technical marketing at Shure.
I can tell you from personal experience that the "wall of sound" system that was used by the Grateful Dead in the early 1970's did not sound "not that bad", it sounded incredible. The contrast with the typical large venue system of the time was unmistakable, and, in fact, emotionally moving. As a non-professional, I attributed it at the time to the shear number of speakers, which meant that the individual drivers were asked to "move less air" than the overdriven large cabinets and horns that were typically used at the time. Also, the fact that the microphones suffered so much less "bleed" than a typical system (because the sound-canceling dual microphones canceled out essentially all of the background bleed), I always thought was a factor. The vocals were so clear (very un-typical of the time.) Whatever it was, the system was clearer, less distorted, and just generally richer than any other large venue sound system of the era that I ever experienced. Too bad it was such a bear (no pun intended...to you Grateful Dead fans) to move, set up, and operate. It sounded SO beautiful, I just feel very lucky to have experienced it.
I was hoping a Deadhead would speak up about the Wall of Sound! I never got to experience it myself (I didn't get on the bus until 1980), but I've studied up on it. I would only add that while it delivered great sound, the band wasn't happy with the vocals. The phase cancellation system worked, but necessitated using less sensitive microphones, and a lot of people (including the band) felt that the vocal sound was thin, not very warm. I can't really tell from the tapes, but that was apparently the consensus at the time. It was also VERY loud for the performers. It is said that the system delivered crystal clear sound a half mile away! The separation of the individual instruments was unprecedented for the time, and even today probably has not really been equaled in those terms. The real downfall for the Wall of Sound was the tremendous amount of human resources & transportation required to set it up and break it down. They actually had to have a second set of trucks & roadies to set up the scaffolding at a given venue 48 hours ahead of the band & equipment. And all of this went on the road in 1974, right when the Gas crisis hit, and fuel costs skyrocketed. It was a glorious experiment, and it worked. But it was impractical and the various parts were sold off during the hiatus of 1975.
My father, Gerald Duffy worked for Sunn from 1968 to 1974 as one of their top product designers and he created the Coliseum series amplifiers. He also worked closely with top artists of the time and he told me all about working closely with the Grateful Dead to create the wall of sound. Without my dad, their sonic evolution might not have happened. And yes, the wall of sound was created using almost entirely Sunn gear. May you rest in peace, pops! (Deceased 2017) John Duffy
Yes! I caught a couple of shows at Winterland with the wall of sound. And it was truly amazing. Many Dead shows after that and the sound was awesome, but never quite so emotional. And yes the rig became too expensive and difficult to tour with. Wonderful while it lasted!
This video is a delight to watch. I would like to say that since their advent in the mid 60's, the Sure SM57 and 58 remain the industry standard for amplifying and recording instrument amplifiers.
As a sound engineer who started in the eighties I've got to say; nice summary. I only missed the inclusion of some other pioneers of audio reinforcement; Clair Brothers. They started as a touring company in '66 and builded their first full range PA cabinet, the S4, in '74. The difference of course is that you normally can't buy their systems, they're only for rent.
Ever since the 70's I have always been the guy in the band who "has a PA" I set and forget. Most gigs are such a blur no one really cared as long as we got our beer for free we were fine with anything and so were our fans. The best tactic is don't try too hard and act like you like it.
Our Band in 1968 was nothing like this but the PA worked at our gigs . You go to the local high school dances in the gym. all the bands had all their instruments played through the individual amplifiers and they played them loud. What was used for vocals was really simple, we had three mic 🎤 one lead and two for harmonies.All the bands had some kind of power amp ( I had a Bogen 50 watt ) and the vocals went out through horns . Atlas Sound was what everyone used like you see at sport stadiums. They came shaped in a rectangular or round 16 inch,all were mounted on horn stands really bigger mic stands with a X base to keep them steady. I hooked out a Realisic mike mixer so it would hold up to 8 mikes. And that was what the local ( even the best local bands) used for a PA system and they worked and sounded better than trying to use an Extra channel out of someone’s guitar amp. I didn’t see the big box cabinets till the next year and only by professional bands. The bands I talked about didn’t have a big truck to transport and it was not on a budget, when we getting 35 to 70 dollar payouts to divide between 4-5 members But that was pretty good money for a teenage hobby. People turn their nose up when I’d explain this but I heard many bands using this type of sound system. I recently found a picture of Moby grape with the horns like these for vocals.
Thanks GLB ,many have expressed “ you had no bass bins it must have sounded tinny “ , all in all my PA setup sounded good and none of the people that saw us ever complained.I’m only telling this because there is nothing really anywhere that I can find about using this type system to explain this was sound reinforcement that bands used.If anyone ever finds something about this please let me know !
@@Charlieosgood52at first we did not even bi-amp or Tri-amp. Economics was part of the equation, necessity was surely the mother of invention. I remember a lot of 15” drivers , the voice of the theater (was also heavy - two man job) and like the PEAVY 15”/horn driver set (forgetting the famous model number … SP3 ???) , systems (like my Cerwin Vega set up) were created for the one man PA operation as they were lighter weight , easy to cargo and could be run passively or using an active crossover.
As a live audio engineer in the mid-1980s to 1990s I recall doing numerous gigs in the UK with the Meyer MSL3 cabinets and subs. Incredible detail and big sound for their size. Also horrifically expensive.
The reason for flying line arrays was to cover more of the audience and the biggest advantage was being able to add more seats that would have been taken away by traditional stacks. One of the most distinguished live sound co's is Ultrasound which is the touring sound division of Meyer Sound.
Big fan of your channel. I have learned so much in less of two hours of your videos. I have bought a sound system and unable to wire them correctly until today. thanks for what you do for us bringing so needed help.
+bruce cedeno Very glad to hear that - knowledge is power! If you would like to support the channel please consider signing up to become a patron at www.patreon.com/glbproductions?ty=h Every little bit helps!
I appreciate and enjoyed this instructive video, thank you. Please allow me to correct a few inaccurate statements regarding the Beatles. They did not really "more or less give up" touring in 1965 after the Shea Stadium concert on August 15. Two weeks later I saw them at the Hollywood Bowl. They toured again the following year, played Shea once again, and went on to play Dodger Stadium in LA on the 28th of August. I was at that one too, and couldn't hear a thing over the insane screeching. Their Candlestick Park concert in San Francisco on August 29, 1966 was the following night, and it was that concert (and tour as a whole) that made them say "no more" to touring. And the following album was not "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band", but rather "Revolver", released August 5, 1966, exactly one year after the first Shea concert pictured here. "Pepper" didn't come out until the following year, in June 1967. Generally, I think you might have conflated the 1965 Shea concert with the 1966 Shea concert, and thus I think your "turning point" is really 1966. I can state firsthand that they hadn't solved their PA difficulties by the time of that second tour.
I remember seeing my first rock concert in a small hockey arena in Ontario, Canada. It was KISS on their 'Love Gun' Canada Tour. That show utilized the 70s style 'stacked' P.A. with the bass, midrange and treble cabinets piled-up on either side of the stage. The sound was deafening (my hearing after felt like a jet airplane taking-off in my head) for three days later. The actual musical performances of Cheap Trick as the opener and KISS as the headliner sounded like their songs had been put through a grinder. I loved every minute of it, and it gave me the belief every rock band of that day played at a volume you could feel. As most of the speaker cabinets were 'air-suspension' type, I noticed when the KISS members stepped in-front of the PA it blew their hair like a high-speed fan.
Correction- There were mixing consoles in the late 70's that had variable bus sends to for monitors. Yamaha PM1000 came out in '74, and PM2K in '78. By the early 80's it was common. Prefader was called "Foldback" (the term still used in theatre sound design, and by us ancients), and postfader was called "echo". If you were lucky, you'd even get TWO of each and maybe a built in spring reverb! This bit of work is quite well done. Thanks Bruno!
I got to see/hear the Wall of Sound system in the mid 70s (back when my hearing was still excellent :). It did in fact sound wonderful. Of great interest to me was the dual mic feedback reduction system. I have since used this technique and found it actually works well (It does however have it's drawbacks).
There's widely available live stereo recordings from audience members, tapers, that are incredible good. It was a phenomenal system, albeit an extraordinary amount of work ... however, their crews were legendary. - No comb filtering like typical Left/Right systems. - Low distortion, high clarity as each band element had zero corruptive inter-modulation from the other musicians.
When I was in high school at work, we build speakers frames for SHOWCO in Dallas. They backed up Paul McCartney on his Wings tour in the mid 70s. First time I heard the final product! lol
The Beatles played Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium in 1966. The local man who set up the sound, knew how to deal with sound in a large venue & put monitor speakers on the stage, & it was the first time in a large venue, that The Beatles could actually hear themselves. He correctly set up the rest of the sound system as well, resulting in a great sounding concert. The Beatles wanted to hire the man to finish the tour with them, but he had a family & plenty of work, so he turned them down. Who knows? If he'd traveled with The Beatles then, maybe they'd have continued touring longer? I can't remember the man's name, as I read about that concert many years ago. Atlanta is in the Deep South of the US, & music has long been part of the regional culture, so it's likely, that this sound engineer had set up sound systems in large venues, perhaps for religious revivals, touring preachers & such, who heavily featured music in their shows which drew huge audiences.
Someone may have already mentioned it, but the slide with the EAW loudspeakers are actually KF750 and KF755's. KF850's were more on the idea of the previous slide with the Turbosound enclosures. The KF750 represented a very interesting shift in how an array was put together. there is no tilt to any of the enclosures, they are hung vertical. In a way, I beleive this bridged the gap between the "traditional" loudspeaker cluster like the Turbosound or EAW KF850 and the "line array" (curvilinear array) systems that came later. eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF750/KF700_Touring_Usage_Guide.pdf
I've been looking for a video like this for awhile, thank You for that. I hope in near future there will be a documentary about this topic, with old footage and interviews with the technicians from that time.
+Will Isleshill I seem to recall that there have been attempts at this before - for example examining the wall of sound that the grateful dead used. But yes it would be great to have one covering the same period that this video does, with more detail. I suspect it would be about two hours long though ;)
Good summary. You might have mentioned some of the work of Telefunken in 1930s - 1950s Germany. Please note that the Beatles toured off and on for another year after their 1965 Shea Stadium concert., and that it would not be until almost two years after this show that "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" got released. _
In the '70's and '80's here in Australia, the front of house engineer also did his share of crew work, with all the major acts on tour here. I know, because I'm one of them. Cut my teeth on a Nova twin Voice Of The Theatre system.
Very interesting and orderly progression of the development of the systems. It was unfortunate that JBL wasn't mentioned, they did exist and participate in this and their equipment remains in use worldwide. The Clair brothers and their seminal contributions likely deserve mention as well.
In fact, the "Line Array" came about when us old guys got tired of hauling all of these huge boxes around. Going to smaller boxes was a huge mistake. Line Array sucks almost all of the time. You can typically hear better sound at home vs a concert. It didn't use to be that way.
They're just used everywhere nowadays. Is there a reason so many indoor venues install line arrays? It always seemed like a weird choice to me since you don't have to worry about moving them around so much, so I would think enclosure size wouldn't be as much of an issue. I never really was super satisfied with the sound of any line array systems I've heard when attending concerts as a spectator. I only really work audio in smaller venues with point source systems, so maybe I just need to adjust my expectations? You're right about being able to get better sound at home. I've never heard a line array system that was able to make pre recorded music sound as good as my mid range, cobbled together home audio setup. The one time I was allowed to sit in the driver seat of a line array, I tired to get my bearings by playing back Genesis' Behind the Lines and Tom Sawyer by Rush, I was pretty unimpressed with the capabilities of the system.
brad !!! ❤😂😂❤ these new line arrayes are dogshit!!lame weak db level 100db weak, the old days were 145db front row 130 row 10 . 120db row 50...line arrays aare also never installed correctly because a forklift is required to tilt the bottom array downward at the front row, NEVER EVER EVER HAPPENS!!!! pathetic!!! and jbl who does have good speakers doesnt explain the tilt requirement in line arrays!! dogshit everywherre, i complain at concerts, they will scrounge up some big full range refridgerators in the row 1 sides, to at least provide some loud mids and highs!
@@zambotv8150 Agreed, although it must be said that all of the above can be achieved with non line-array systems. I think this argument is a wash today - what matters most is good sound, not how one achieves it.
since i added next to nothing to make a contribution :D, ill just say that at the beggining of the 70's ( 73 i think ) pink Floyd started using some of the new bass bins( 215 mk1 bass bin) designed by dave martin, and later on he started working on a 3 way modular pa system, and he delivered in the 80's with the 115 bass bin and the "philishave" and toured with dire straits, they were on top of it pretty much from the start also great video and thanks for the great content
@@whytboysam9467 i love them, i and my friends have 4 bins with pd1550 in them and they are great, i like them more then funktion one's f215, that we also have 4 of
When I saw the Beatles at Boston Garden in 1964, they had Shure Vocalmasters arrayed across the front of the stage. There were maybe 6 or 8 of them. We could tell what song they were playing, but that was about it! They were totally drowned out by the screaming!
In January 1984 I stood in the center of that stage at Epidaurus while Caroline stood in the top row. She heard my whispered words, but even more amazing to me was my own sound reflected off those concentric rows---an effect almost like standing in the most beautiful ambience chamber but also with almost a "chorus" thickening. I was in awe.
A good presentation, but I think it leaves out an important stage in the development of PA and monitor systems. In the late 70's I toured with a Midas/Martin system. The Martin speakers were the predecessor of the line array, with the components designed to couple properly, and the Midas consoles had comprehensive EQ on each of up to 32 channels. A dedicated monitor console provided up to 10 discrete monitor mixes for the band members. One particular band that I toured with using this system had a reputation for excellent live sound.
Yes, we had Philishaves and the 2 x 15 bass bins. The Philishaves were such a pain as the phase bung would come loose and trash the speaker cones. The band was Supertramp.
@@GLBProductions if you see this, and don’t mind replying again…. So, the sole reason for hanging arrays is prevention of feedback? Was that the genesis of it, or was it born out of sound “throw”? Don’t you lose , more than gain by hanging subs? Why not have them all at stage, or ground level?🤔✌🏻
That is one of them, but definitely not the only one. Others would include improving sightlines to the stage and especially improving loudspeaker coverage - the higher you can get the speakers the more evenly you can cover the audience area, especially in stadiums and amphitheaters where a majority of the crowd sits above the level of the stage. A lot of the time the subwoofers **will** be on the ground, either under the stage or immediately in front of it.
Nice to see you back, Bruno. Meaningful video as always. Is it possible for you to do a video for phase cancellation, comb filtering and subwoofer placement. I read some articles online but didn't quite get them. Thanks.
My first band was in 1965. Good sound reinforcement for local musicians was frustrating. Over the years I used various PA systems. It was amazing when I was able to get my first large Carvin system. And as I approached retirement age I found the large Carvin system too much to handle. And so I went to a QSC system which although much smaller sounded even way better.
Yup, modern sound systems are smaller, lighter, cheaper and can sound much better - that last one of course depends on the skill of the person using it 😉
Great video! I especially enjoyed the excellent pictures of early audio gear and systems. I want to let you know I did not see a thumbnail popping up in my feed. I have noticed this happening to many older videos lately. I hope you can update that when you get a chance.
Many years ago we needed to hire a pa the company said there "rock rig" ( you know big towers of bass bins mids and horns) was already out with suzi quattro, so we had to "settle" with this much smaller Bose rig, it blew us away with its power and clarity. Now days our little pub band uses 10" powered HH for front of house and little near field monitors on mic stands, Never been happier, a great compromise between sound quality and portability
Yes, modern sound systems are smaller, lighter, simpler to use and usually sound better, especially at the portable end of the market - active speakers have been a game-changer for those who need to set up fast and keep things simple.
Let’s be real. A high end, correctly configured Line Array System is stunning and wonderful. It’s true that the tiniest fractions of degrees can make or break a given room, but even with that, don’t you think it’s easier to hang a pair of line arrays right than it would be to get scores of stacked cabinets all in phase and aimed? Peace, thanks for this great video 🔥
One thing I use to react to when listening to small outdoor conserts, is that the aimd sunjective (me) heard sound is way way madness loud, sometimes we had to step back over 100 meters to stand the sound volume. I do not understand wy - so loud - I really liked youre video, really informative so don't get me wrong. I would like to hear moore "High Fi" consert, with moderat volume. Thanks for good video. SB. Sweden.
Hello Stig, I completely agree with you on the volume problem - I have stopped mixing these louder gigs just to look after my hearing 😳 There are several possible reasons for this - one is the volume of modern acoustic drumkits (can easily be over 100dB SPL in the front row with the PA turned OFF) which means that the PA then needs to be run louder than that in order to balance the band. Another is that modern PA systems have huge amounts of power available, which makes it very tempting for sound engineers to turn things up way too loud! I would suggest a couple of things: 1. If you have a choice, sit or stand near the mixer position - this is typically where the best sound is, and the most reasonable volume, assuming the sound engineer is responsible. 2. Buy some musician's earplugs - I use those from Etymotic - these provide a moderate amount of protection (around 12dB SPL) without attenuating too much of the high frequencies and thus spoiling your appreciation of the music. Finally, I have found that there are certain types of music that lend themselves to more finesse when it comes to sound reinforcement: musicals, jazz and funk/soul. These genres tend to attract seasoned and professional musicians who are much more concerned with the overall musical experience than blowing the audience out of the back of the venue with sound! All the best, and look after your ears 😄
@@GLBProductions You're most welcome! I shared it with my friend/assistant ... he had asked me some questions on how SR came into being ... your video answered the question perfectly! Thank you for making this video.
hey very infotaining! credit to your and mr. Coules, research. my impression is you maybe a little hazy on the late 60's state of the art but I can say, large rock festivals sprang up like daisies, monterey and woodstock most famously and obv. had crowd pleasing sound. saw procol harum (whiter shade of pale) in 1969 in my local hockey arena and they had what looked like bass bins stacked like small houses on each side of the stage. i was used to seeing local bands with little column speakers. 3 acts that night, same system but sound progressively improved until the headliner were able to recreate the sound of their records at roof lifting volume but with a wonderfully detailed full range reproduction. waves of sound pulsing off the stage you could feel in your chest. we can laugh about chemical enhancements back in the day but no, my ears don't lie. then bob dylan and the band reunion tour in ?1974? by then i believe speakers hanging from the rafters but incredible clean full range but gut shifting sound in a much bigger hockey arena. i've heard more recent day concerts from major acts with sizzling treble and such flaws that take a lot of the fun out of it. i guess there is progress no doubt, but most of it truly came in those early years of modern rock just after the beatles quit the road. imho ha ha thanks again for your excellent mini doc
Hey, Bruno. I wanted to ask you: do you know if the WEM Audiomaster mixer was the first electrical signal mixer used for musical purposes, be it recording or PA systems? I was curious especially about the recording usage of mixers. I was wondering as to when was it that recordings started to make use of multiple microphones for recording an orchestra or a choir, for example. I imagine it would be technically achievable at least after 1925 as electric signals entered audio systems at this date, and I know of the movie Fantasia and the Fantasound sound system used several microphones to capture the orchestra but, as far as I know, the system recorded each signal input to a different record disc and later used each disc separately for different speakers in the reproduction venue. What I was wondering was if it was possible that there had been audio mixers during 1930's onwards, which would have allowed for more than one microphone to be mixed into a single mono signal and recorded into a record despite technically not using multitrack isolation of different microphones during recording. Do you know if this (mixers existing previous to the Audiomaster and having been used in recording situations) has been the case in any point in time? This question has been with me for very long but I cannot find bibliography that would inform me about it.
That's a good question - I'm not an expert on this topic, but I'm pretty sure the answer is no. PA systems were in use since the nineteen-teens, so there should have been audio mixers available not too long after that.
The references to EAW at 24:50 are not technically correct. The Photo is an array of KF750 that did not come out until the later part of the 1990s. The KF850 was introduced in the early 1980s and rapidly became the largest selling touring sound loudspeaker system in the world through the mid-1990s.
A very good ouverview of PA system history...cascaded systems where used since the 40ties...Stadion concerts for 10 to 20 000 listeners were organized...it`s not always true that for example the Beatles could not hear themselfs...my father heard the Beatles live in 65 in Milano Velodrome, he told me the sound was pretty good, he only missed the most of bass frequencies...
At the 25:50 Mark you talk about the EAW KF850 cabinets , But show the EAW KF750 Cabinets in the Picture ..You Know How I know This? The Fly Points are on the Top and Bottom of the EAW KF850's . The Flyware on the EAW KF750 is on the Fronts and back . By the Way , WHERE is all of the KUSTOM and SHURE PA Equipment . Seems you Favor The ENGLISH Companies Pal...LOL.... If you ever need any Cool Pictures I have been at this since 1967 in Northern California ...
Really good stuff Bruno. I've learned a lot from this, not least about distribution over CAT 5 networks. Please forgive one criticism - it is a shame to hear your speech popping so much.
If you look at that,i think roman theatre,what did they call that was it amphitheare,I am not sure. But it looks like what came to modern sound reproduction,modern like 1930s and the use of horns,to amplify realy low power amplifiers,for a much bigger sound! Just a thought?
Fantastic.. Very well done and shows my age.. I cut my teeth on the EAW KF-850 still works great in the right situation.. Along with the SB-1000 made a rockin' little rig..
Absolutely - there's nothing wrong with the older gear as long as you know how to drive it. The newer arrays rely very heavily on the use of computer modeling software for correct set up and it's really easy to make them sound bad in a hurry.
Except that the EAW KF 850 was not developed in the "80's" as claimed but in the 70's with Carlo Sound in Nashville in conjunction with their serving the Allman Bros.
Amazingly, the 850 rigs were so prevalent, ... at least here in the US. There was quite an extended period of time whereby the 850 based rigs were spec'd and used everywhere. Heavy things for sure.
For the wall of sound, you commented that they used two microphones one in phase and one out of phase in order to stop feedback because they're standing in front of all the speakers. Can you actually make a video of attempting this and explain how it's done in detail please. Thanks
I just stumbled onto this excellent video ..a bit late but just to give an answer to your question...the two vocal mics were out of phase ( to eachother) but were not positioned side by side...the vocalist sang into the mic in the normal position on the stand and the other out of phase mic was further away...the first mic sent the singer's voice along in + phase but both mics received the sound of the PA from behind at the same dB and essentially at the exact same time with one flipping it over thus canceling out pretty much all of the feedback while passing the vocal signal along as normal Hope this was clearer than mud :)
On the Beatles at Shea Stadium picture, I see mics on guitar cabinets. So how, did they do it if there were no Mixers that time? Each mic is amplified into its own Loudspeaker?
Audio mixers did exist at the time, but they were designed for public address and broadcast use - not stadium rock and roll shows 😆 The mics on the cabinets are apparently for the recording that was made of the concert. Additional information here: www.mixonline.com/issue-type/beatles-shea-stadium-429036
The Shea Stadium speakers were tall column cabinet type and weren't really designed for music; more for as speech or announcement public addressing. It was adequate for that use. I guess they really pushed the limit when they tried to feed every part of the band's sound through that house system. I wasn't born back then, so I have to best guess. If you want to look at a good history on live sound, check out Bob Heil and Heil Sound (pronouced "High-el"). His first big client in the mid-60s was the Grateful Dead. Bob saved the day for them by loaning out his system with the huge Altec Lansing A4s, after "Bears" Owsley got arrested for drug possession along with the band's sound system and instruments. That put Bob and his company on the map as the go-to for reliable modern sound.
+GLB Productions Ah i see i see, hahaha we dont get such training in our Sec School/JC for live sound if any at all, for the most part passed on from seniors to juniors and mostly self-learnt to be more proficient.
+Mervin Ling Yes, unfortunately most schools do not realise the value of having regular and systematic training for their students, but my partners and I are working to slowly change that :)
A lot of it has to do with user error - deploying a line array correctly requires a lot of calculations to determine the correct number of boxes, the flown height of the array and the angle between each box to get the correct coverage to suit the specific venue at hand. None of this is simple and a lot of vendors don't bother resulting in bad sound.
@@GLBProductions Do you think setting up a point source system in large venue presents less technical issues,because I have heard more better sounding point source systems to be frank.
Hard to say because every venue is different 😉 So much depends on the coverage that is needed, the required SPL, type of event, indoors vs outdoors etc. One of the reasons that line arrays became popular is that they require relatively few rigging points compared to traditional arrays so for simple L-R configurations they may actually be simpler - it really depends on the specifics of the show.
Excuse me but you said that it still helps to have the subs on the ground to augment the low frequency of the system. This sounds intuitively obvious to me. But why is it so?
It has to do with something called the boundary effect: when a speaker is located close to a reflective surface such as a wall or floor, the sound waves bouncing off the surface reinforce the original sound of the loudspeaker. This is particular true with low frequency sounds, because the wavelengths involved are so long. You can read more about it here: www.soundonsound.com/techniques/all-about-boundary-effect
I dunno man... I visited a rock venue in an old city I used to live in, which I previously knew to have really awful acoustics, being in a large multi-level brick building with no acoustic treatments whatsoever. I remember a show right before I left that was just awful. It was a Jazz show too, which disappointed me. The rock show I returned to the venue to see was astonishing in that they seemed to have completely solved the problem using a new L'Acoustics line array with far fewer and smaller cabs than they had before. They may have had very minimal acoustic treatment, and it was crystal clear at any place in the venue! Clever DSP they've got these days...
The unfortunate truth is that the advent of electronic sound reinforcement took sound quality way, way down from the live acoustic familiar to music loving audiences. It would take many years before a true musical quality was available from loudspeakers. It needs to be said that sound reinforcement is not the right term for popular music’s application. Sound ‘replacement’ is more apt and it is often done brutally, by a mixer with no knowledge of the sound of musical instruments. Often, but not always. Reinforcement, on the other hand, is a delicate art and those who came up through that art are often doing the best job mixing on modern sound replacement systems. Today, we have the tools to create as exquisite a sound as the mixer can achieve and the result is neither reinforcement nor replacement but a craft all its own.
Thanks for the comment - I like your idea and concept of 'sound replacement systems'. It's true that in larger venues the majority of the audience does not hear much or any of the direct sound from the stage.
@@GLBProductions It is a term that makes enough sense to stick with me. I have mixed for each scenario countless times and they aren’t distinguished by the degree of amplification so much as by the desired result. A symphony orchestra makes a soundfield that no speaker system can reproduce, so I have occasionally mixed for large venues by mic-ing it minimally - say 12-24 microphones - placed by ear and as the score requires for solos and features. They have to be extremely high quality microphones to be effective in such use; very flat response with as near-perfect a polar response as possible. The difference between the enforcement method and replacement method is largest with a symphonic band. Lovers of symphony respond favorably to the enforcement method. They usually have a keener ear than most and have expressed appreciation almost every time I’ve done it. For one show, the audience of 300,000 on a beach meant reinforcement would have no role at all. The show was a success but it was a giant challenge to achieve, requiring some 45 Schoeps microphones and careful time alignment at the mixer where it seemed no amount of time spent would be enough. Fortunately, an orchestra can soundcheck forever, as they are not listening to my mix at all.
07: 32 Swedish Champion sound system (from a translation):
Champion Presenter A2
Portable Speech Reinforcement System
A2 includes the following pieces:
10 Watt High Fidelity Amplifier, Type G17
12” Permanent Dynamic Speaker
High Quality Dynamic Microphone
Chrome adjustable microphone stand
Elegant Blue bag with folding speaker cover
In addition to this amplifier, Champion has a history of the absolute highest quality at competitive prices.
Mains connection approved.
S marked.
1 year warranty.
PRICE ONLY 475 kr Retail (approx. $60 USD)
Ah very good, many thanks for the translation!
Great video, Thank you!
RetroElectroville I
my pa speaker is a dual 18 inch subwoofer ngl that 6400 peak watts power and that's 1600 Watts RMS
You forgot the part about bikinis being included 😂
Nicely done. I am a former Shure employee and liked your SM 57-58 comments. They are still being made and continue to be the workhorse of the industry.
Thanks for watching, Ken.
You can still pound in a nail with a SM 58 and it will work.
@@MrDogonjon We would get them returned in buckets usually all we had to do was a cosmetic repair change screens and clean the diaphragms-lots of spit therein! Most of the major touring bands used them as many still do today. I was manager of technical marketing at Shure.
The old joke was use the SM58 to pound nails to hang your banner then put it in the mic stand and get on with the show...
@@bradjohnson9671 Thank goodness that was a joke 😆😆😅😅
I can tell you from personal experience that the "wall of sound" system that was used by the Grateful Dead in the early 1970's did not sound "not that bad", it sounded incredible. The contrast with the typical large venue system of the time was unmistakable, and, in fact, emotionally moving.
As a non-professional, I attributed it at the time to the shear number of speakers, which meant that the individual drivers were asked to "move less air" than the overdriven large cabinets and horns that were typically used at the time. Also, the fact that the microphones suffered so much less "bleed" than a typical system (because the sound-canceling dual microphones canceled out essentially all of the background bleed), I always thought was a factor. The vocals were so clear (very un-typical of the time.)
Whatever it was, the system was clearer, less distorted, and just generally richer than any other large venue sound system of the era that I ever experienced. Too bad it was such a bear (no pun intended...to you Grateful Dead fans) to move, set up, and operate. It sounded SO beautiful, I just feel very lucky to have experienced it.
Thanks for sharing your experience 😊
I was hoping a Deadhead would speak up about the Wall of Sound! I never got to experience it myself (I didn't get on the bus until 1980), but I've studied up on it. I would only add that while it delivered great sound, the band wasn't happy with the vocals. The phase cancellation system worked, but necessitated using less sensitive microphones, and a lot of people (including the band) felt that the vocal sound was thin, not very warm. I can't really tell from the tapes, but that was apparently the consensus at the time. It was also VERY loud for the performers. It is said that the system delivered crystal clear sound a half mile away! The separation of the individual instruments was unprecedented for the time, and even today probably has not really been equaled in those terms. The real downfall for the Wall of Sound was the tremendous amount of human resources & transportation required to set it up and break it down. They actually had to have a second set of trucks & roadies to set up the scaffolding at a given venue 48 hours ahead of the band & equipment. And all of this went on the road in 1974, right when the Gas crisis hit, and fuel costs skyrocketed. It was a glorious experiment, and it worked. But it was impractical and the various parts were sold off during the hiatus of 1975.
My father, Gerald Duffy worked for Sunn from 1968 to 1974 as one of their top product designers and he created the Coliseum series amplifiers. He also worked closely with top artists of the time and he told me all about working closely with the Grateful Dead to create the wall of sound. Without my dad, their sonic evolution might not have happened. And yes, the wall of sound was created using almost entirely Sunn gear. May you rest in peace, pops! (Deceased 2017) John Duffy
@@jrohnduffy1003 Thanks for sharing 🙂
Yes! I caught a couple of shows at Winterland with the wall of sound. And it was truly amazing. Many Dead shows after that and the sound was awesome, but never quite so emotional. And yes the rig became too expensive and difficult to tour with. Wonderful while it lasted!
This video is a delight to watch. I would like to say that since their advent in the mid 60's, the Sure SM57 and 58 remain the industry standard for amplifying and recording instrument amplifiers.
Thanks for watching Sam.
As a sound engineer who started in the eighties I've got to say; nice summary.
I only missed the inclusion of some other pioneers of audio reinforcement; Clair Brothers. They started as a touring company in '66 and builded their first full range PA cabinet, the S4, in '74. The difference of course is that you normally can't buy their systems, they're only for rent.
Thanks for sharing 🙂 What was your experience using Clair Brothers systems?
Ever since the 70's I have always been the guy in the band who "has a PA" I set and forget. Most gigs are such a blur no one really cared as long as we got our beer for free we were fine with anything and so were our fans. The best tactic is don't try too hard and act like you like it.
Sounds like a winning combination 😄😄😄👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Kudos to the original poster. You’ve done a very good job showing and explaining the history of electronic sound systems.
Thanks for watching 🙂
Our Band in 1968 was nothing like this but the PA worked at our gigs . You go to the local high school dances in the gym. all the bands had all their instruments played through the individual amplifiers and they played them loud. What was used for vocals was really simple, we had three mic 🎤 one lead and two for harmonies.All the bands had some kind of power amp ( I had a Bogen 50 watt ) and the vocals went out through horns . Atlas Sound was what everyone used like you see at sport stadiums. They came shaped in a rectangular or round 16 inch,all were mounted on horn stands really bigger mic stands with a X base to keep them steady. I hooked out a Realisic mike mixer so it would hold up to 8 mikes. And that was what the local ( even the best local bands) used for a PA system and they worked and sounded better than trying to use an Extra channel out of someone’s guitar amp. I didn’t see the big box cabinets till the next year and only by professional bands. The bands I talked about didn’t have a big truck to transport and it was not on a budget, when we getting 35 to 70 dollar payouts to divide between 4-5 members But that was pretty good money for a teenage hobby. People turn their nose up when I’d explain this but I heard many bands using this type of sound system. I recently found a picture of Moby grape with the horns like these for vocals.
Thanks for the contribution! It really doesn't matter how old your sound system is as long as it sounds good and goes loud enough for your needs.
Thanks GLB ,many have expressed “ you had no bass bins it must have sounded tinny “ , all in all my PA setup sounded good and none of the people that saw us ever complained.I’m only telling this because there is nothing really anywhere that I can find about using this type system to explain this was sound reinforcement that bands used.If anyone ever finds something about this please let me know !
@@Charlieosgood52at first we did not even bi-amp or Tri-amp. Economics was part of the equation, necessity was surely the mother of invention. I remember a lot of 15” drivers , the voice of the theater (was also heavy - two man job) and like the PEAVY 15”/horn driver set (forgetting the famous model number … SP3 ???) , systems (like my Cerwin Vega set up) were created for the one man PA operation as they were lighter weight , easy to cargo and could be run passively or using an active crossover.
My home system was a pair of Altec A-7 speakers with the crown amp and a bogen table.
As a live audio engineer in the mid-1980s to 1990s I recall doing numerous gigs in the UK with the Meyer MSL3 cabinets and subs. Incredible detail and big sound for their size. Also horrifically expensive.
Meyer had to recoup their development costs somehow 😅
The reason for flying line arrays was to cover more of the audience and the biggest advantage was being able to add more seats that would have been taken away by traditional stacks.
One of the most distinguished live sound co's is Ultrasound which is the touring sound division of Meyer Sound.
Big fan of your channel. I have learned so much in less of two hours of your videos.
I have bought a sound system and unable to wire them correctly until today.
thanks for what you do for us bringing so needed help.
+bruce cedeno Very glad to hear that - knowledge is power! If you would like to support the channel please consider signing up to become a patron at www.patreon.com/glbproductions?ty=h Every little bit helps!
another excellent and enlightening half-an-our, courtesy of RUclips and its fantastic contributors!!
I appreciate and enjoyed this instructive video, thank you. Please allow me to correct a few inaccurate statements regarding the Beatles. They did not really "more or less give up" touring in 1965 after the Shea Stadium concert on August 15. Two weeks later I saw them at the Hollywood Bowl. They toured again the following year, played Shea once again, and went on to play Dodger Stadium in LA on the 28th of August. I was at that one too, and couldn't hear a thing over the insane screeching. Their Candlestick Park concert in San Francisco on August 29, 1966 was the following night, and it was that concert (and tour as a whole) that made them say "no more" to touring.
And the following album was not "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band", but rather "Revolver", released August 5, 1966, exactly one year after the first Shea concert pictured here. "Pepper" didn't come out until the following year, in June 1967.
Generally, I think you might have conflated the 1965 Shea concert with the 1966 Shea concert, and thus I think your "turning point" is really 1966. I can state firsthand that they hadn't solved their PA difficulties by the time of that second tour.
Thanks for these insightful details 🙂
WHERE HAS THIS CHANNEL BEEN ALL MY LIFE?! This is great information on this channel, SUBSCRIBED.
+Jevanni Ellis Welcome! Glad to have you on board :)
This is such a great idea as a Netflix show
You have done what is mostly not even considered being done for the next generation of audio/sound engineers...Thanks!
You're welcome Teddy.
I remember seeing my first rock concert in a small hockey arena in Ontario, Canada. It was KISS on their 'Love Gun' Canada Tour. That show utilized the 70s style 'stacked' P.A. with the bass, midrange and treble cabinets piled-up on either side of the stage. The sound was deafening (my hearing after felt like a jet airplane taking-off in my head) for three days later. The actual musical performances of Cheap Trick as the opener and KISS as the headliner sounded like their songs had been put through a grinder. I loved every minute of it, and it gave me the belief every rock band of that day played at a volume you could feel. As most of the speaker cabinets were 'air-suspension' type, I noticed when the KISS members stepped in-front of the PA it blew their hair like a high-speed fan.
Thanks for sharing, John :)
Ported enclosures blow your hair not sealed !! Ported are FAR better for PA systems due to their extended bass and efficiency
@@janinapalmer8368 Sweet.
...similar experience with Uria Heap in a hockey arena. My ears rang for three days as well.
Big thumbs up to JBL for making great drivers back in the day.
They still do and they are better than ever…
But the JBL line Arrays arent that good in my opinion.
Correction- There were mixing consoles in the late 70's that had variable bus sends to for monitors. Yamaha PM1000 came out in '74, and PM2K in '78. By the early 80's it was common. Prefader was called "Foldback" (the term still used in theatre sound design, and by us ancients), and postfader was called "echo". If you were lucky, you'd even get TWO of each and maybe a built in spring reverb! This bit of work is quite well done. Thanks Bruno!
Oh yes I remember those consoles - there were still quite a number of them around when I started in live sound 20 years ago. Thanks for the comment!
@@GLBProductions The sheer tonnage of the PM2K's input transformers was impressive in and of itself!
I agree. I was using bigger and more flexible PORTABLE systems as the SOLE soundman for my city government activities in the mid-seventies.
Bill Hanley was said to have built a line array at Madison Square Garden, I believe it was '68 for The Stones.
I got to see/hear the Wall of Sound system in the mid 70s (back when my hearing was still excellent :). It did in fact sound wonderful. Of great interest to me was the dual mic feedback reduction system. I have since used this technique and found it actually works well (It does however have it's drawbacks).
Glad to hear it sounded good in person 😄
There's widely available live stereo recordings from audience members, tapers, that are incredible good.
It was a phenomenal system, albeit an extraordinary amount of work ... however, their crews were legendary.
- No comb filtering like typical Left/Right systems.
- Low distortion, high clarity as each band element had zero corruptive inter-modulation from the other musicians.
When I was in high school at work, we build speakers frames for SHOWCO in Dallas. They backed up Paul McCartney on his Wings tour in the mid 70s. First time I heard the final product! lol
Those turbo sound point source speakers still sound great to this day when set up correctly
The Beatles played Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium in 1966. The local man who set up the sound, knew how to deal with sound in a large venue & put monitor speakers on the stage, & it was the first time in a large venue, that The Beatles could actually hear themselves. He correctly set up the rest of the sound system as well, resulting in a great sounding concert. The Beatles wanted to hire the man to finish the tour with them, but he had a family & plenty of work, so he turned them down. Who knows? If he'd traveled with The Beatles then, maybe they'd have continued touring longer?
I can't remember the man's name, as I read about that concert many years ago.
Atlanta is in the Deep South of the US, & music has long been part of the regional culture, so it's likely, that this sound engineer had set up sound systems in large venues, perhaps for religious revivals, touring preachers & such, who heavily featured music in their shows which drew huge audiences.
Thanks for the comment - please let me know if you find the source for this information 🙂
Okay.
Someone may have already mentioned it, but the slide with the EAW loudspeakers are actually KF750 and KF755's. KF850's were more on the idea of the previous slide with the Turbosound enclosures. The KF750 represented a very interesting shift in how an array was put together. there is no tilt to any of the enclosures, they are hung vertical. In a way, I beleive this bridged the gap between the "traditional" loudspeaker cluster like the Turbosound or EAW KF850 and the "line array" (curvilinear array) systems that came later. eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF750/KF700_Touring_Usage_Guide.pdf
Thanks for your contribution :)
This was the coolest little doc I’ve seen in a long time… great job!!!👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
Thanks for watching Brandon!
Very nice. Thanks so much for sharing. Anyone who is into sound should watch, learn & appreciate this awesome video. Thanks again.
+Tony Draper Thanks for watching!
I've been looking for a video like this for awhile, thank You for that. I hope in near future there will be a documentary about this topic, with old footage and interviews with the technicians from that time.
+Will Isleshill I seem to recall that there have been attempts at this before - for example examining the wall of sound that the grateful dead used. But yes it would be great to have one covering the same period that this video does, with more detail. I suspect it would be about two hours long though ;)
Thank you for this video. As a music lover, I found it both informative and entertaining-especially because I’m a nerd.
You're welcome, us pro-audio guys have a great appreciation for the kingdom of Nerd 😄
Good summary. You might have mentioned some of the work of Telefunken in 1930s - 1950s Germany.
Please note that the Beatles toured off and on for another year after their 1965 Shea Stadium concert., and that it would not be until almost two years after this show that "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" got released.
_
Thanks for watching Sharon :)
In the '70's and '80's here in Australia, the front of house engineer also did his share of crew work, with all the major acts on tour here. I know, because I'm one of them. Cut my teeth on a Nova twin Voice Of The Theatre system.
Do share your experiences with that system!
Very interesting and orderly progression of the development of the systems. It was unfortunate that JBL wasn't mentioned, they did exist and participate in this and their equipment remains in use worldwide. The Clair brothers and their seminal contributions likely deserve mention as well.
Thanks for watching Ed!
@@GLBProductions The Grateful Dead are pivotal in the development of the modern P.A. Meyer Line Arrays, JBL speakers,, Macintosh amps.
Clair S4 still the best sounding cabinets I've heard.
JBL?? How about ElectraVoice? I guess the Brits only see what they want to see
In fact, the "Line Array" came about when us old guys got tired of hauling all of these huge boxes around. Going to smaller boxes was a huge mistake. Line Array sucks almost all of the time. You can typically hear better sound at home vs a concert. It didn't use to be that way.
Well I don't blame you! Times are a changin' though! Have you heard the big Danley boxes? They have the line array lads quaking in their boots....
They're just used everywhere nowadays. Is there a reason so many indoor venues install line arrays? It always seemed like a weird choice to me since you don't have to worry about moving them around so much, so I would think enclosure size wouldn't be as much of an issue. I never really was super satisfied with the sound of any line array systems I've heard when attending concerts as a spectator. I only really work audio in smaller venues with point source systems, so maybe I just need to adjust my expectations?
You're right about being able to get better sound at home. I've never heard a line array system that was able to make pre recorded music sound as good as my mid range, cobbled together home audio setup. The one time I was allowed to sit in the driver seat of a line array, I tired to get my bearings by playing back Genesis' Behind the Lines and Tom Sawyer by Rush, I was pretty unimpressed with the capabilities of the system.
brad !!! ❤😂😂❤ these new line arrayes are dogshit!!lame weak db level 100db weak, the old days were 145db front row 130 row 10 . 120db row 50...line arrays aare also never installed correctly because a forklift is required to tilt the bottom array downward at the front row, NEVER EVER EVER HAPPENS!!!! pathetic!!! and jbl who does have good speakers doesnt explain the tilt requirement in line arrays!! dogshit everywherre, i complain at concerts, they will scrounge up some big full range refridgerators in the row 1 sides, to at least provide some loud mids and highs!
That was only one benefit. Cardioid bass, predictability, beam steering, efficiency there's loads of reasons we use line arrays
@@zambotv8150 Agreed, although it must be said that all of the above can be achieved with non line-array systems. I think this argument is a wash today - what matters most is good sound, not how one achieves it.
Excellent presentation about the sound system, thanks
+Prabin Pradhan You're welcome, thanks for watching.
Fantastic as you truly are. An absolute education for the average guy like me. Thank you Bruno!
+Jonny Rocker You're most welcome, I always love to hear when one of my videos has added to somebody else's knowledge of music :)
just a small add, martin audio did some great work on sound reinforcement back in the 70's
Thanks for the contribution!
since i added next to nothing to make a contribution :D, ill just say that at the beggining of the 70's ( 73 i think ) pink Floyd started using some of the new bass bins( 215 mk1 bass bin) designed by dave martin, and later on he started working on a 3 way modular pa system, and he delivered in the 80's with the 115 bass bin and the "philishave" and toured with dire straits, they were on top of it pretty much from the start also great video and thanks for the great content
@@Pookytroll i own a pair of 115s they used 😏😁
@@whytboysam9467 i love them, i and my friends have 4 bins with pd1550 in them and they are great, i like them more then funktion one's f215, that we also have 4 of
When I saw the Beatles at Boston Garden in 1964, they had Shure Vocalmasters arrayed across the front of the stage. There were maybe 6 or 8 of them. We could tell what song they were playing, but that was about it! They were totally drowned out by the screaming!
That's apparently pretty much how it was back then 😅
Epidaurus Theatre is shaped like a loud speaker, the stage is the cone.
Awesome stuff, I noticed that to.
In January 1984 I stood in the center of that stage at Epidaurus while Caroline stood in the top row. She heard my whispered words, but even more amazing to me was my own sound reflected off those concentric rows---an effect almost like standing in the most beautiful ambience chamber but also with almost a "chorus" thickening. I was in awe.
A good presentation, but I think it leaves out an important stage in the development of PA and monitor systems. In the late 70's I toured with a Midas/Martin system. The Martin speakers were the predecessor of the line array, with the components designed to couple properly, and the Midas consoles had comprehensive EQ on each of up to 32 channels. A dedicated monitor console provided up to 10 discrete monitor mixes for the band members. One particular band that I toured with using this system had a reputation for excellent live sound.
Thanks for the comment - do you recall which specific Martin cabinets you toured with? Was it the "Philishave" system?
Yes, we had Philishaves and the 2 x 15 bass bins. The Philishaves were such a pain as the phase bung would come loose and trash the speaker cones. The band was Supertramp.
As a bit of an audiophile, I find this _VERY_ interesting. Thank you.
You're welcome, and welcome to the world of pro audio 😄
@@GLBProductions if you see this, and don’t mind replying again…. So, the sole reason for hanging arrays is prevention of feedback? Was that the genesis of it, or was it born out of sound “throw”? Don’t you lose , more than gain by hanging subs? Why not have them all at stage, or ground level?🤔✌🏻
That is one of them, but definitely not the only one. Others would include improving sightlines to the stage and especially improving loudspeaker coverage - the higher you can get the speakers the more evenly you can cover the audience area, especially in stadiums and amphitheaters where a majority of the crowd sits above the level of the stage. A lot of the time the subwoofers **will** be on the ground, either under the stage or immediately in front of it.
Nice to see you back, Bruno. Meaningful video as always. Is it possible for you to do a video for phase cancellation, comb filtering and subwoofer placement. I read some articles online but didn't quite get them. Thanks.
+Apache Cai Thanks for watching! Those are relatively technical topics but I will definitely add them to the list!
21:16....This gentleman here🤣🤣🤣🤣
You mean Jerry Garcia?😉
Awesome vid.
Thanks for watching 😄
Reading about The Beatles live reminds me about lack of available sound equipment 50,s 60,s in the UK. 15 watt amps ww2 bomber mike,s, crap gtrs
Thanks for watching Alan.
As usual, the absolute best there is on RUclips or anywhere else!
Thanks for watching, Danny!
The back part of the stage in Epidaurus is missing. It is presumed that it added up even more to the loudness of voices.
just an idea, but perhaps its to let open air in at the back, which helps carry the sound out?
nexgenhippy it just fell with age and earthquakes. It was needed back then
My first band was in 1965. Good sound reinforcement for local musicians was frustrating. Over the years I used various PA systems. It was amazing when I was able to get my first large Carvin system. And as I approached retirement age I found the large Carvin system too much to handle. And so I went to a QSC system which although much smaller sounded even way better.
Yup, modern sound systems are smaller, lighter, cheaper and can sound much better - that last one of course depends on the skill of the person using it 😉
Great video! I especially enjoyed the excellent pictures of early audio gear and systems. I want to let you know I did not see a thumbnail popping up in my feed. I have noticed this happening to many older videos lately. I hope you can update that when you get a chance.
This was very enjoyable! Thanks
You're welcome, thanks for watching :)
I love the historical portion. I know many people who saw the Beatles in Shea Stadium, I don't know anyone who heard anything.
That really sums it up, doesn't it?
20:06 24:24 Paul McCartney’s first show at the LA Forum (cir. 1983) used suspended speakers, with maybe 12 separate horns on each side. Sounded great.
26:36 Yes! A line array! Early iteration. Nice job!
Wow - you were there? What did it sound like in person? 😃
Thank you Bruno 👍🏼 Great job
Glad you liked it!
Wondering how Michael Jackson biggest tours went.. listing it sounds great tho..even the bass
Nicely done. Very cool and informative.
Many years ago we needed to hire a pa the company said there "rock rig" ( you know big towers of bass bins mids and horns) was already out with suzi quattro, so we had to "settle" with this much smaller Bose rig, it blew us away with its power and clarity. Now days our little pub band uses 10" powered HH for front of house and little near field monitors on mic stands, Never been happier, a great compromise between sound quality and portability
Yes, modern sound systems are smaller, lighter, simpler to use and usually sound better, especially at the portable end of the market - active speakers have been a game-changer for those who need to set up fast and keep things simple.
You really should have included danley in this presentation as the senergy horn is the future.
Yes, for sure - this video was made before I started using Danley loudspeakers.
Fantastic work!
Beatles had good PA on their 1965 Atlanta concerts.
You were there? Please share your experience 😊
Let’s be real. A high end, correctly configured Line Array System is stunning and wonderful. It’s true that the tiniest fractions of degrees can make or break a given room, but even with that, don’t you think it’s easier to hang a pair of line arrays right than it would be to get scores of stacked cabinets all in phase and aimed? Peace, thanks for this great video 🔥
Thanks for watching 😄
The Swedish is probably that is a permanent magnet speaker rather than a electromagnetic field type.
good stuff Bruno... you da man !
One thing I use to react to when listening to small outdoor conserts, is that the aimd sunjective (me) heard sound is way way madness loud, sometimes we had to step back over 100 meters to stand the sound volume. I do not understand wy - so loud -
I really liked youre video, really informative so don't get me wrong. I would like to hear moore "High Fi" consert, with moderat volume.
Thanks for good video.
SB. Sweden.
Hello Stig, I completely agree with you on the volume problem - I have stopped mixing these louder gigs just to look after my hearing 😳 There are several possible reasons for this - one is the volume of modern acoustic drumkits (can easily be over 100dB SPL in the front row with the PA turned OFF) which means that the PA then needs to be run louder than that in order to balance the band. Another is that modern PA systems have huge amounts of power available, which makes it very tempting for sound engineers to turn things up way too loud! I would suggest a couple of things:
1. If you have a choice, sit or stand near the mixer position - this is typically where the best sound is, and the most reasonable volume, assuming the sound engineer is responsible.
2. Buy some musician's earplugs - I use those from Etymotic - these provide a moderate amount of protection (around 12dB SPL) without attenuating too much of the high frequencies and thus spoiling your appreciation of the music.
Finally, I have found that there are certain types of music that lend themselves to more finesse when it comes to sound reinforcement: musicals, jazz and funk/soul. These genres tend to attract seasoned and professional musicians who are much more concerned with the overall musical experience than blowing the audience out of the back of the venue with sound!
All the best, and look after your ears 😄
Good stuff. Thanks.
You're welcome :)
This, good sir, was brilliant! 👍
Thanks for watching David :)
@@GLBProductions You're most welcome!
I shared it with my friend/assistant ... he had asked me some questions on how SR came into being ... your video answered the question perfectly!
Thank you for making this video.
You have forgotten the Clair S4, and although I am not a fan the Showco prisim. The S4 was the rig for decades.
Thank you for this very informative video
You're welcome 🙂
Awesome stuff 😎
Thanks Samuel!
I enjoyed this. Thank you.
You're welcome Scott!
Very informative! Thank you!
You're welcome Brendan!
Great and informative video ! Thanks
You're welcome Greg!
hey very infotaining! credit to your and mr. Coules, research. my impression is you maybe a little hazy on the late 60's state of the art but I can say, large rock festivals sprang up like daisies, monterey and woodstock most famously and obv. had crowd pleasing sound. saw procol harum (whiter shade of pale) in 1969 in my local hockey arena and they had what looked like bass bins stacked like small houses on each side of the stage. i was used to seeing local bands with little column speakers. 3 acts that night, same system but sound progressively improved until the headliner were able to recreate the sound of their records at roof lifting volume but with a wonderfully detailed full range reproduction. waves of sound pulsing off the stage you could feel in your chest. we can laugh about chemical enhancements back in the day but no, my ears don't lie. then bob dylan and the band reunion tour in ?1974? by then i believe speakers hanging from the rafters but incredible clean full range but gut shifting sound in a much bigger hockey arena. i've heard more recent day concerts from major acts with sizzling treble and such flaws that take a lot of the fun out of it. i guess there is progress no doubt, but most of it truly came in those early years of modern rock just after the beatles quit the road. imho ha ha thanks again for your excellent mini doc
Thanks for the contribution - it's great to hear from those who were there back in the day 😄
Hey, Bruno. I wanted to ask you: do you know if the WEM Audiomaster mixer was the first electrical signal mixer used for musical purposes, be it recording or PA systems? I was curious especially about the recording usage of mixers. I was wondering as to when was it that recordings started to make use of multiple microphones for recording an orchestra or a choir, for example. I imagine it would be technically achievable at least after 1925 as electric signals entered audio systems at this date, and I know of the movie Fantasia and the Fantasound sound system used several microphones to capture the orchestra but, as far as I know, the system recorded each signal input to a different record disc and later used each disc separately for different speakers in the reproduction venue. What I was wondering was if it was possible that there had been audio mixers during 1930's onwards, which would have allowed for more than one microphone to be mixed into a single mono signal and recorded into a record despite technically not using multitrack isolation of different microphones during recording. Do you know if this (mixers existing previous to the Audiomaster and having been used in recording situations) has been the case in any point in time? This question has been with me for very long but I cannot find bibliography that would inform me about it.
That's a good question - I'm not an expert on this topic, but I'm pretty sure the answer is no. PA systems were in use since the nineteen-teens, so there should have been audio mixers available not too long after that.
A Fair summary ..
Thanks for watching Tom.
The references to EAW at 24:50 are not technically correct. The Photo is an array of KF750 that did not come out until the later part of the 1990s. The KF850 was introduced in the early 1980s and rapidly became the largest selling touring sound loudspeaker system in the world through the mid-1990s.
Thanks Ken - this video has been up for years and you're the first person to spot that 😄
bro. thanks for this. always doing great work. keep it up
+zerodaysoon You're welcome, thanks very much for watching.
i learned a lot from this video... thanks for posting...
+emilio roe serquiña gapit You're most welcome, knowledge is free to share and enriches both the giver and receiver :)
By the way 24:50 those are the EAW KF750 not the 850, you may want to change that.
Love this stuff.
Thanks for watching William!
Very interesting Bruno!it reminds me of the Live Sound Engineer course I did 3 years ago...which included most of what you talked about :)
+Cris Valk That's good, glad to hear that my teaching aligns with other curricula around the world :)
Outstanding
Thanks James!
No worries mate. I learned so much from your post. My first sound system was in 1977 OMG! 😮, but I didn’t know that much. Great job.
I miss those huge bass horns nonetheless.
Fantastic
Thanks for watching :)
A very good ouverview of PA system history...cascaded systems where used since the 40ties...Stadion concerts for 10 to 20 000 listeners were organized...it`s not always true that for example the Beatles could not hear themselfs...my father heard the Beatles live in 65 in Milano Velodrome, he told me the sound was pretty good, he only missed the most of bass frequencies...
Clearly the Italians had their act together long before the Americans ;)
Great presentation! But links don't work know... Can you upload them, please?
Thanks Lena, I've updated the links and they work now :)
At the 25:50 Mark you talk about the EAW KF850 cabinets , But show the EAW KF750 Cabinets in the Picture ..You Know How I know This? The Fly Points are on the Top and Bottom of the EAW KF850's . The Flyware on the EAW KF750 is on the Fronts and back . By the Way , WHERE is all of the KUSTOM and SHURE PA Equipment . Seems you Favor The ENGLISH Companies Pal...LOL.... If you ever need any Cool Pictures I have been at this since 1967 in Northern California ...
Thanks for information
You're welcome Mayur.
@@GLBProductions i am live sound engineer, but your knowledge about live sound is great I'm big fan of you sir
God bless you
Really good stuff Bruno. I've learned a lot from this, not least about distribution over CAT 5 networks. Please forgive one criticism - it is a shame to hear your speech popping so much.
+48snapper Haha spoken like a true sound engineer! Thanks for the feedback :)
If you look at that,i think roman theatre,what did they call that was it amphitheare,I am not sure. But it looks like what came to modern sound reproduction,modern like 1930s and the use of horns,to amplify realy low power amplifiers,for a much bigger sound! Just a thought?
Yes an amphitheater is somewhat horn-shaped for sure.
Fantastic.. Very well done and shows my age.. I cut my teeth on the EAW KF-850 still works great in the right situation.. Along with the SB-1000 made a rockin' little rig..
Absolutely - there's nothing wrong with the older gear as long as you know how to drive it. The newer arrays rely very heavily on the use of computer modeling software for correct set up and it's really easy to make them sound bad in a hurry.
Except that the EAW KF 850 was not developed in the "80's" as claimed but in the 70's with Carlo Sound in Nashville in conjunction with their serving the Allman Bros.
Amazingly, the 850 rigs were so prevalent, ... at least here in the US. There was quite an extended period of time whereby the 850 based rigs were spec'd and used everywhere. Heavy things for sure.
For the wall of sound, you commented that they used two microphones one in phase and one out of phase in order to stop feedback because they're standing in front of all the speakers. Can you actually make a video of attempting this and explain how it's done in detail please. Thanks
Thanks for the suggestion!
I just stumbled onto this excellent video
..a bit late but just to give an answer to your question...the two vocal mics were out of phase ( to eachother) but were not positioned side by side...the vocalist sang into the mic in the normal position on the stand and the other out of phase mic was further away...the first mic sent the singer's voice along in + phase but both mics received the sound of the PA from behind at the same dB and essentially at the exact same time with one flipping it over thus canceling out pretty much all of the feedback while passing the vocal signal along as normal
Hope this was clearer than mud :)
Amazing. Thanks!
+Marc F Claret You're welcome, thanks for watching!
On the Beatles at Shea Stadium picture, I see mics on guitar cabinets. So how, did they do it if there were no Mixers that time? Each mic is amplified into its own Loudspeaker?
Audio mixers did exist at the time, but they were designed for public address and broadcast use - not stadium rock and roll shows 😆 The mics on the cabinets are apparently for the recording that was made of the concert. Additional information here: www.mixonline.com/issue-type/beatles-shea-stadium-429036
The Shea Stadium speakers were tall column cabinet type and weren't really designed for music; more for as speech or announcement public addressing. It was adequate for that use. I guess they really pushed the limit when they tried to feed every part of the band's sound through that house system. I wasn't born back then, so I have to best guess.
If you want to look at a good history on live sound, check out Bob Heil and Heil Sound (pronouced "High-el"). His first big client in the mid-60s was the Grateful Dead. Bob saved the day for them by loaning out his system with the huge Altec Lansing A4s, after "Bears" Owsley got arrested for drug possession along with the band's sound system and instruments. That put Bob and his company on the map as the go-to for reliable modern sound.
Great video! Can i know where these uni students were from or what course? Interested in pursuing a course in uni, but havent really looked into them.
+Mervin Ling Thanks for watching! They were from SMU - doing the training as part of their CCA, not their university course ;)
+GLB Productions Ah i see i see, hahaha we dont get such training in our Sec School/JC for live sound if any at all, for the most part passed on from seniors to juniors and mostly self-learnt to be more proficient.
+Mervin Ling Yes, unfortunately most schools do not realise the value of having regular and systematic training for their students, but my partners and I are working to slowly change that :)
Very cool
Thanks for watching!
I'm not too sure if you covered the whole mic pointing back at the wall of sound problem.
It wasn't a problem - they used sound-cancelling microphones :)
Very Good!
"Live Sound Systems Engineer" ♦
Most Difficult & Most Beautiful Job In The World ♦
.. From Tubes - To Cat 5 -
Music Please...♪
I am yet to hear a line array system that actually sounds good am sure they are out there but I certainly never heard any.
A lot of it has to do with user error - deploying a line array correctly requires a lot of calculations to determine the correct number of boxes, the flown height of the array and the angle between each box to get the correct coverage to suit the specific venue at hand. None of this is simple and a lot of vendors don't bother resulting in bad sound.
@@GLBProductions Do you think setting up a point source system in large venue presents less technical issues,because I have heard more better sounding point source systems to be frank.
Hard to say because every venue is different 😉 So much depends on the coverage that is needed, the required SPL, type of event, indoors vs outdoors etc. One of the reasons that line arrays became popular is that they require relatively few rigging points compared to traditional arrays so for simple L-R configurations they may actually be simpler - it really depends on the specifics of the show.
@@GLBProductions Keep up the good work. I really appreciate you sharing your knowledge,I have learned a lot from you .
Thanks for supporting the channel :)
thanks
You're welcome :)
Excuse me but you said that it still helps to have the subs on the ground to augment the low frequency of the system. This sounds intuitively obvious to me. But why is it so?
It has to do with something called the boundary effect: when a speaker is located close to a reflective surface such as a wall or floor, the sound waves bouncing off the surface reinforce the original sound of the loudspeaker. This is particular true with low frequency sounds, because the wavelengths involved are so long. You can read more about it here: www.soundonsound.com/techniques/all-about-boundary-effect
I dunno man... I visited a rock venue in an old city I used to live in, which I previously knew to have really awful acoustics, being in a large multi-level brick building with no acoustic treatments whatsoever. I remember a show right before I left that was just awful. It was a Jazz show too, which disappointed me. The rock show I returned to the venue to see was astonishing in that they seemed to have completely solved the problem using a new L'Acoustics line array with far fewer and smaller cabs than they had before. They may have had very minimal acoustic treatment, and it was crystal clear at any place in the venue! Clever DSP they've got these days...
That's great to hear! Clearly whoever installed the new system knew what they were doing 😄
Actually they returned in 66 with Revolver then they quit touring and released Sgt Pepper
The unfortunate truth is that the advent of electronic sound reinforcement took sound quality way, way down from the live acoustic familiar to music loving audiences. It would take many years before a true musical quality was available from loudspeakers.
It needs to be said that sound reinforcement is not the right term for popular music’s application. Sound ‘replacement’ is more apt and it is often done brutally, by a mixer with no knowledge of the sound of musical instruments. Often, but not always.
Reinforcement, on the other hand, is a delicate art and those who came up through that art are often doing the best job mixing on modern sound replacement systems. Today, we have the tools to create as exquisite a sound as the mixer can achieve and the result is neither reinforcement nor replacement but a craft all its own.
Thanks for the comment - I like your idea and concept of 'sound replacement systems'. It's true that in larger venues the majority of the audience does not hear much or any of the direct sound from the stage.
@@GLBProductions It is a term that makes enough sense to stick with me. I have mixed for each scenario countless times and they aren’t distinguished by the degree of amplification so much as by the desired result. A symphony orchestra makes a soundfield that no speaker system can reproduce, so I have occasionally mixed for large venues by mic-ing it minimally - say 12-24 microphones - placed by ear and as the score requires for solos and features. They have to be extremely high quality microphones to be effective in such use; very flat response with as near-perfect a polar response as possible.
The difference between the enforcement method and replacement method is largest with a symphonic band. Lovers of symphony respond favorably to the enforcement method. They usually have a keener ear than most and have expressed appreciation almost every time I’ve done it.
For one show, the audience of 300,000 on a beach meant reinforcement would have no role at all. The show was a success but it was a giant challenge to achieve, requiring some 45 Schoeps microphones and careful time alignment at the mixer where it seemed no amount of time spent would be enough. Fortunately, an orchestra can soundcheck forever, as they are not listening to my mix at all.