I wish these videos had been around when our band first got an XR18 several years ago. They're great. We learned everything the hard way. I'm sending links to band mates who still manage to mess things up! :)
I found that setting the mic preamp gain ever so slightly higher where it picks up the feedback earlier helps with ringing it out. Also proximity of hand to the mic in a cupping method also helps me out on stage ringing out with a tablet and sorta mimics someone on stage especially if mic holding technique is lacking. After it is rung out I would lower the mic preamp to the normal typical gain, that seems to help keep things in line pretty well.
Great video - your videos have help me get started doing sound for my band. Please do a video on how to set up, mix, monitor, and soundcheck horns (Trumpet & Sax) using xr18. Thanks
I finally got things setup to do the requested video about ringing out monitors (and house). It felt odd to be recording feedback to intentionally include in the video! And even more odd listening to it while I was editing the video! ;) But ultimately it makes the examples more impactful to hear and see the feedback on the RTA. Amazon affiliate links: Shure SM58 on Amazon: amzn.to/3bcxKF4 Gator Cases G-TOUR ATA Style Road Case - Custom Fit for Behringer X32 with Dog House and Heavy Duty 4" Casters; (G-TOUR X32) on Amazon: amzn.to/3rTss8j Suggested videos: Five Tips For Better Live Vocal Mixes: ruclips.net/video/oP4sdpkkNhY/видео.html 5 Typical Mistakes Behringer X32 and Midas M32 Users Make: ruclips.net/video/tP7dO2Za6bw/видео.html 5 Typical Mistakes Behringer XR18 and Midas MR18 Users Make: ruclips.net/video/EilVDp39A9g/видео.html X32/M32 Gain Staging and Signal Flow (Soundcheck Basics Series): ruclips.net/video/7MJ3rfj7HNc/видео.html How To EQ A Snare Drum: ruclips.net/video/gITnB0hQ9as/видео.html FB: facebook.com/groups/livesoundproduction
Thank you Alan! Learning so much from all your videos. I just purchased the Allen&Heath CQ-20B Digital Mixer and I will start applying a lot of the universal concepts of live sound discussed in your channel - thoughts on Allen&Heath??
Hi Alan. I can't tell you how much I've been learning from your videos. I've had my XR18 for a few years now and tinkering around and learning more as I go. Thank you for creating such useful and clear content! I had a couple of questions about this video. First, the EQ you're setting the filters on are the AUX and LR bus filters, right? In the first mic slider video, I noticed you had the channel selected that the mic was on and not the aux channel strip on the right. So I just wanted to clarify that the filters are added to the bus channel or the mic channel. Then, when repeating the process, would that process then be using different mic channels that are near the monitor or, if we are EQing the bus channel, then its the same mic, or closest mic to the monitor to help find the next sensitive point. Lastly, when narrowing the filter, what control am I using on the XR18? The video shows you adjusting it on the 32. Thanks again!
Yes, normally this would be using the Aux or LR bus filters, not the channel filters. Closest mic to the monitor is what I would recommend for ringing out monitors. The control to narrow and widen filters is the "Q" which in the X-Air Edit software is labeled "Qual". In Mixing Station it is just "Q" and that is what most people call it regardless of the console "the Q". After you've made 2 or 3 passes on the system and everything is stable, if later (like during the soundcheck or show) you hear a lone mic sounding holllowish/ringy you might call up that channel and apply the cut just to that mic. That area should show itself just by being hotter and you should be able to roughly recognize where on the RTA to look for it. IOW... if you hear a ringy high end 'thing' happening, you know not to pay attention to the lows or mids on the RTA. I know some people will look at the RTA and think anything that pops up needs knocked back, but that could just be the dominate note being sung or played in the moment. You're listening for a 'problem' and then looking to confirm it. Not just looking for a problem. For example, a kick drum might have a healthy 60Hz spike on its channel each time it's hit. That doesn't mean the kick drum needs 60Hz cut unless you actually first hear a problem, in the kick, you recognize to be low and then see that spike at 60Hz and can confirm that's what you're hearing that is wrong or a problem. But in that kick example, you also have to be aware, the kick could be a symptom... with the real problem coming from the vocals and too much low end/not enough high pass and the kick (or kick in the PA) is simply triggering the vocal mics to ring at some low frequency. A quick mute of the vocal mics will usually give you your answer.
Hi Alan, really helpful video. Once you’ve rung out your FOH EQ for vocals, is there a way of copying this setting onto the Monitor EQ without having to do the whole process again? On the X32 Compact. Thanks
I haven't tried on Mixing Station, but with X-Edit and I'm pretty sure the console itself you can save an EQ preset and reload it elsewhere. So even a channel preset can be loaded in the mains... or a bus preset can be saved and recalled in the mains... or wherever you want it. OR... even quicker... You can copy and paste EQ settings from one place to another.
Thank you for the video. Very well explained. But why would someone choose to use Graphical EQ over Parametric EQ since it's less surgical. You said it's one of the drawbacks for GEQ, but are there any advantages? Oh and also you lose FX slot on X32 (weirdly that on XR18 which is a cheaper mixer you don't have to waste FX slot to use Graphical EQ for monitor and main mixes)
Some people are used to GEQs from using them for years. Old habits die hard. They are quicker on them. Some people don't want to believe PEQ's are better because they think more EQ bands on the GEQ make it 'better' for some reason. Other than comfort factor from year's of use of GEQ's for some, I don't really see any benefits.
Parametric EQ is the best to use... But some people are just more comfortable with the graphic EQ, so I showed both. About the only real reason to have both engaged is if you have guest engineers... If so, you might have some that prefer the GEQ. So, having a base scene created that has both in it for that potential scenario is fine. If you build the scene from scratch each time, then there's no need in that type of base scene.
Hi Drew, this very important. Do the M n X airs - MR 18 n X 18s have pink noise. If no why are the manufacturers ...is., music group treat those of us who purchase these smaller digiboards so unfairly. It has no matrix, no capability to couple an aux bus being used as a mono sub bus to the main LR, no updates with new functionalities etc etc ...y are they so insensitive n biased. When I bought mine Mr 18, I paid almost half d price of x32 just for small venues but am so so disappointed that x32 keep getting updates but none of the airs. It's very unfair music group.
Hi Alan, Thank you for posting this vid. You talked about flattening the channel EQ before ringing out the monitor. Did you put back or restore the channel EQ settings after ringing out the monitor or what? Second, I have 2 stage speakers (fills not monitors). They're controlled by Matrix 4 out of L/R. How can I manage feedback with this set up? I feel like that I may be getting feedback from stage fills and mains/FOH. The stage fills are installed behind FOH. Thank you in advance.
I mentioned taking out the channel EQ settings so they don't themselves cause some hotspots. Once you notch the house or monitor EQ, you'd go back to your channel EQ and re-EQ the channel strip based on the new house or Mon EQ settings (re-listening to the source and resetting it anew). It could be a soundperson was doing things to the channel strip that didn't need to be done because of overcompensation for speaker hotspots (or room issues). That said, when you work with the same band, mics, and equipment each gig, you'll likely have solid presets you'll want to use each time on the channels. And it's easy enough to just turn the channel EQ on/off (not necessarily reset it). You might even be comfortable enough to leave the EQ setting ON when you ring out the house/mon. But that's only when you're certain your channel strip EQ is actually solid and helpful (not causing problems by over-EQing for example). Usually sidefills won't be as susceptible to feedback because you have distance working for you. If the stage is big enough to warrant sidefills, then the mics won't be 4-5' from the speakers. Since you said you have the fills on a matrix, are they following FOH changes (where is the matrix getting its signal?)? You might be better off just creating a monitor send, sending whatever you need via that to the sidefills, and leaving that as a static mix. If the matrix is following house changes, that might be too dynamic for the sidefills, especially if they are already close to feedback. Also, if they are being compressed, under compression they might be OK, but when the signal is no longer clamped by compression (no gain reduction because you're above the compressor threshold like you might be on an open mic), then feedback could result (depending on makeup gain (whether made up with the actual makeup gain control or the channel fader). It's hard to say for sure... you could have a good reason to use the matrix... But that's the first thing that comes to mind since a matrix wouldn't normally be how sidefills are done.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Good morning Alan! first of all thank you for quick reply. I appreciate it. The sidefills are getting the signal from L/R or following FOH changes. By the way, I am using a X32 and this is in small church. I decided to use sidefills on the stage/platform because the monitors, being on the floor, were too close to the pastors and were too loud. my FOH speakers are very close to the pulpit. I do not seem to have feedback issues with my wireless handheld mics but with two of my Shure cardioid lavalier mics. I carved out a lot of feedback frequencies using a GEQ inserted on the 2 channels but I do not get some feedback when I try to turn up the volume on those 2 channels. I have low ceiling and the FOH are about 4 feet from the pulpit facing the crowd. I am not sure if my feedback problem is with the FOH or stagefills. The stagefills are further away. I must admit that I did not carve out the feedback frequencies like you show in this video. Should I try carving out the frequencies at the FOH or main L/R bus and the Matrix for the stagefills or at the channel level and second, should I go back to monitor setup for the stagefills but keep them hanging. By the way, I am not doing any compression on the L/R bus or the stagefills' matrix. I do however have eq turn on just for low cut.
@@danielalexis9409 There's a lot to unpack here. It's hard to say for sure where the problem could be coming from, but there could be a lot of small things going on that adds up to be big. First, I'd definitely ring out the FOH and the matrix mix. Even if you do nothing else, I'd start there. But, I wouldn't insert GEQ's into mic channels. There's plenty of control on the channel strip parametric by itself to begin with, and then you also have the house EQ that should already have your PA pretty neutral. More than likely, if you've inserted a GEQ onto the channel you've over-EQ'ed the mic. This tends to be worse than under-EQing because you cut out (and sometimes even boost) so much stuff, that the mic is just lifeless or muddy. And the next thing that happens for a lifeless mic is you have to turn it up to be heard... and now it feeds back. So, you cut it some more. Vicious cycle. Removing the GEQ from the channel strip. Resetting the channel strip to flat. Ringing out the house. Setting the gain on the mic to average -18dBFS on the input meter... Engaging the low cut on the mic channel... and rolling it up to 150Hz... That is where I'd start. Leave the monitors/fills off. Have someone wear the mic and speak, and you SLOWLY bring the fader up and just see what kind of level you can get before feedback from that baseline. The odds are good, that won't be perfect... You'll probably hear the hollowness/singing of a frequency creeping in. If it's low, increase the low cut (HPF) even more and see if that helps. For a lav mic that is used for speech, it doesn't need a lot of low end warmth. It needs intelligibility in the speech range. Don't be afraid to set that low cut at 150, 200, even 250Hz sometimes. At a certain point the voice will sound unnaturally thin, but there's still a pretty big window of acceptable tradeoff vs feedback. If the feedback is higher, the channel RTA should show you, go ahead and cut it there with the parametric. Maybe widen the Q rather than being surgical if there are a couple of higher feedbacks. Don't chase your tail too much. Don't try and make it so no matter how loud you turn the lav up, it won't feedback. Try and make it so you haven't done too much EQ work (and don't boost at all here)... and just find the happy medium where the mic still has life and naturalness to its sound, and you know you just can't go louder than a certain point. Look for "loud enough" and "that'll have to do". Since you're doing this only to focus on the house sound, you'll know what the parameters are for the house. If you know with X settings, and Y position on the fader, the mic is stable in the house, then you can have some baseline to start adding monitors and know if it's the mons causing feedback. IOW, eliminate things to one step at a time and don't move on until you've found your limits on each step. I wouldn't do the matrix feed for mons. I'd do a regular pre fader bus feed for mons. Once again, ring out that bus, then bring the mic up in the mon (side fill in this case) and stop when you start to hear it wanting to ring... or hopefully when it's loud enough before it rings. I'd probably go ahead and set the bus as POST EQ (but this is one of those things where there are reasons to go the other way too). But in either case, pre fader. That way, once you've set the monitors/fills, nothing you do on the house faders will change the mons. And don't forget, ANY change to the gain WILL change your mon levels on a channel so best to get your gain set correctly at soundcheck. But this brings up another variable and why I said this is complicated and could be several small problems converging... For a small venue... a small stage... It's pretty rare that it's a good idea to put a pastor or other speaker/lecturer into the monitor system. For one thing, they are many times going to hear what they need from the house speakers and they are talking by themselves, so nothing is competing with their voice and burying it (like a band would to a lead singer). And IF they don't want their voice coming back at them from a monitor, it's typically a tiny bit. So that's another reason you don't want the house and mon mix tied together. But there's another issue besides 'want' here... Most people, in that situation, talk QUIETER when they hear themselves too well. They back away from the mic too (if it's on stand or pulpit mic). So, now they aren't loud enough. So you turn them up. Now they talk even quieter and or back away even more. And pretty soon, you start getting feedback trying to turn their ever quieter voice up. Loudest sound at the mic wins. This is definitely a reason not to tie the mons/side fills to the house. But it also points out the question if you even need the lavs in the sidefills anyway. Even if the sidefills are causing them to speak ever more quietly, you needing more level in the house can lead to feedback in the house as you turn up. And since the sidefills are also tied to the house, you could get feedback there instead or as well. It's possible that the handheld mic does give you less trouble simply because the user is holding it closer to their mouth. Think about that distance compared to the distance a lav is from a person's mouth. And add in a scenario where a person is talking quieter anyway. This is a perfect example of loudest sound at the mic wins. If the person wearing the lav is already speaking quiet, and the mic is 12" (or more) from their mouth, then it's entirely the loudest thing at the mic will be the ambient sound in the room and from the speakers... and that is a recipe for feedback. You could swap the lavs out to earset mics, and that might help (since and earset mic stays closer to the user's mouth vs a lav), but that probably wouldn't be your answer until you get the lavs to where they are working for you... mostly... IOW, once you get the initial problem under control, maybe the earset would allow you to get the wearer up even louder... But until the other issues are cleared up, it might not be enough to make too much of a difference. It could be the icing on the cake to get you where you want to be... but it won't be the magic bullet.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Hi Alan, I can't thank you enough for the time spent sharing your view and giving me advice. I appreciate it alot. I will try everything out and let you know. By the way, I did not fully understand this "...and then you also have the house EQ that should already have your PA pretty neutral." What did you mean by that please? Also, you suggested to ring out the house (FOH) and the matrix. Do you happen to have a video that explains how to do that? if not, could you please give me the steps on how to do it?
@@danielalexis9409 The "neutral" comment just meant that your PA should be fairly free of peaks and valleys and that your house EQ (or even system EQ in a DSP) should have that taken care of... making your PA "neutral" (smooth... balanced... not peaking frequencies or unnatural sound). A hotspot/peak should show up when ringing out the rig, so things should be fairly neutral after doing that (if things are working as they should be... IOW the PA sounds good/natural playing prerecorded tracks). Same for monitors. When the system is balanced, you shouldn't have a lot of channel strip EQ to make things sound good. You'd essentially ring out any output just as in this video. Just choose the output you want to ring out and mute the unused outs, assign your mic(s) to it (or confirm they are assigned to it), call up the EQ and RTA, and have a go at it. I don't know if you've watched the 5 Mistakes X32 Users Make video on the channel, but it might have some helpful info in it: ruclips.net/video/tP7dO2Za6bw/видео.html
Vocal mics will tend to be the most gained up mics onstage. Plus, fairly wide frequency response too. So the problems they reveal will hold true across the board. If you notch those 2, 3, maybe 4 worst frequencies that ring out of your house EQ and/or Mon EQ that should cover you. Your vocal mic won't likely be razor flat in response, so ringing things out isn't 100% perfect, but it still goes back to vocal mics being the hottest mics onstage (and they aren't molded in response like a kick mic for example). Regardless of the vocal mics' overall frequency response, they still are the mics that you can expect to ring first overall- Because the singers won't be able to sing as loud into a mic as a snare drum is into its mic. Or the kick mic at the kick. Or a guitar amp mic right at the amp. So their gain will likely be the hottest to achieve proper input gain... And vocals will ride as loud or louder than anything else in your mix typically so the faders will be as high or higher than anything else.... So that means they're typically the most susceptible to feedback. But for the most part, the feedback you find will apply system wide to the system/room. So when you notch those hotspots out of the mains or mons, you help all those sources not to ring.
The biggest problem I always seem to encounter, is just having enough time to even do any of this. I think that it takes at least a good 30 minutes to an hour of time to do these procedures. Very difficult to find that time at most of the events that I do. How can I talk the band into giving us more time?
If you are always using the same monitors and mics you can get 80% there in advance. A given mic/monitor will always have frequencies that ring regardless of the venue or singer. Set up your kit and spend all day ringing them out using the monitor parametric. Leave the input eq flat as that will give you more filters for various venues. Most of the time I don’t even need to ring them out. Also, cheap monitors with SM58’s will ring at lower levels and more frequencies than a quality mic (like an Audix OM5) and quality monitors.
@jerryrichardson5545 That's a great idea, and I also thought that the problem might be with my monitors. I use self-powered speakers as monitors, and they are Italian made RCF ART 712-A MK4. They sound great but do tend to generate feedback, seemingly randomly. I will work on generating an EQ preset for this monitor, as you suggested, and see how that goes. Thank you for your feedback (no pun intended).
Alan, Iv watched this vid and others time again over ringing out mons and FOH using XR18...your vid is the most informative and intuitive. My confusion is Iv got this troublesome radio mic Iv already posted about...would it be best to take offending frequencies out at the channel graphic using the parametric EQ PEQ or at bus1 31 band graphic EQ TEQ!
I would do the general work on the house... as normal... Then I would work on that specific mic and it's specific problems on the channel strip EQ. I'd just use the parametric. Ideally, you could use narrow cuts to surgically attack the issue on the channel strip, but you might have to widen the Q and allow some margin of error to reduce problem frequency ranges (if the problem is really bad). That said, make sure the speakers are not so low that the mic and horn are at the same basic height so that when your singer gets close to the cab, the mic is not directly or almost directly in the horn. That's going to be a problem no matter what if that is happening. Distance is your friend for feedback issues, and higher horns is more distance from the mic, especially when the singer is close to the cabs and/or in front of them.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Thanks for the great videos. I still don't quite understand how to ring out the channels. Am I using the same eq that I would use to EQ the channel? If so how then do you EQ the channels? If I'm supposed to use a different process can you explain step by step. I'm new to sound engineering. Sorry for the dumb questions.
Hi Alan I’m an absolute avid viewer of your vids....re XR18... my problem is with ringing out a my singers wedge... she’s using a radio and walks around during performance... I’m getting feedback either from FOH and or mons on Aux 1 or both at same time!!! I’m using Yamaha DSR12 boxes. I’m pulling out frequencies but I’m getting feedback.... How would u handle this situation? I’m playing pubs in UK... it’s driving me mad!!! What do I do??
I think the first thing to do is really get a handle on where the feedback is coming from. You probably can't do this at a show, but can at soundcheck... even if the singer is not there, as long as you have her mic and the settings saved for the XR18... Mute everything (as far as outputs... mains... mons...). Now, unmute one thing... one mix... Open the mic to normal setting and see if there's feedback when you walk around the stage and check the mic. If yes, make a mental note of it, mute that mix and unmute another and try that same routine. Do this for all mon mixes. Make a mental note where the problems were. Next mute the mons and unmute the house... same thing... Technically, the house should be the easiest to address since it has (or should have) more physical separation from the mic. Once you know exactly where the problem is, and is not, you can start looking for issues in just that one place. Attack it one place at a time. I don't know how many mixes you are using, but it could be as simple as just turning the mic down in any mix that is not the lead singer's own mix. And maybe looking at the singer's mic EQ and being less aggressive. No matter how good a high mid or high EQ boost might sound, if it's leading to feedback the best sound is less boost and no feedback (and you can apply that concept to the house mix as well). And it could be just setting the mon sends PRE EQ on each channel is best. Once the mons are under control, mute them and listen to the house and see if there's still an issue there... Attack it the same way. Don't forget that excess compression can lead to feedback too. So, changing any compression by changing the threshold or changing to a lower ratio (or both) could also help. That true in the house, but especially true in the mons. Plus, too much compression can have the singer asking for "more me" in the mons not recognizing they are fighting compression and instead just knowing they aren't hearing themselves as well as they want.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio thank you for responding so quickly...the steps ur outlining are the ones I’m trying to take... I have singer that doesn’t like sound checking especially in a open pub with punters in. She walks around directly in front of the FOH boxes and then lowers mic in hand to waist level near the monitor....it’s becoming a nightmare. Last night being particularly bad.. I’m the drummer in band so it’s impossible when playing fir me to make any adjustments. I have notched out a lot of frequencies to try and resolve issues I will take some screen shots of last nights EQ setting both FOH and mons...I’m thinking her radio mic which is not my kit is a cheapo and more prone to feedback?!?! I will follow more closely the disciplines and ringing out procedures you have laid out snd just be more hard ass with her.... we are playing small cramped pubs.... no stages just fire places and corners!!!! But do truly value your advice...
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Hi Alan, if I switch of compression on the channel so it goes clean to AUX1/Mons can I add back compression at main FOH using combinatorial and it not effect the mons and only apply to FOH mix?
@@christopherpurcell-peters1555 You can link another channel in on her microphone, turn off the monitors on that channel, then compress there and not on the first channel.
Alan, thank you so much for these videos! They are so generous. On the subject of gain setting, I am a karaoke host and may get 30 singers with varying power and mic technique. I find that I am very often changing the gain on my analog mixer. I don't have a digital mixer yet and am pretty sure I am going to get the XR18 whenever they are available again. Any reason I couldn't change gain for each singer if I account for effects and monitors too? I know its a lot of work but I try to make each singer sound as good as I can and the right gain is critical.
When you're changing singers constantly like on Karaoke, it's really like starting from scratch. Just know that changing the gain is going to change the monitor level. That's not ALWAYS a bad thing... for one thing, for the loud singer, trimming the gain and lowering the monitor is good. For the quiet singer, raising the gain and monitor might be good. BUT... if you are already at the threshold of feedback and turn the gain up... then it's "squeeeeeal!" ;) But as long as you keep yourself some safe margins and know where that point is, then you should be good. I'd try and chase things with the fader as much as possible as the first line of defense though and only change gain in a "have to" case, since you don't want to get near the feedback threshold. For an alternative method, if you need to chase gain and sometimes it DOES cause feedback- Use a Y cable and split the mic into two channels. Use the first vox channel for the house and the 2nd vox channel only for monitors. That way, you can be conservative and just leave the gain and monitor level alone on the 2nd channel, while you can adjust gain on the house vocal channel with no worry about it changing the level of the monitor or causing monitor feedback. Technically, it could still cause house feedback, but there's usually a much larger margin of error there due to speaker placement and distance being your friend. So it's monitors that you typically have to worry about. But all that said... if you have your system down, and it's working for you now, no reason it won't work the same on the Behringer. Just remember the difference in scale on the meters between you analog console and the Behringer. ...-18dBFS on the digital scale of the Behringer is pretty much equal to 0dBVu on your analog console.
No. The vocal mics are generally the mics with the most level and therefore the most likely sources of feedback. Opening up too many mics can just lead to unintended consequences.
Just take an XLR balanced cable out of your selected "aux out" on the front of the XR18 to the Crown. Connect your monitor to the Crown amp. ruclips.net/video/5gzsEErKdb8/видео.html
@@jlc2093 The default routing should be good. The default settings in the console for the sends is Post EQ. That video I linked you to talks about that. That will work as it is. Some people prefer Pre EQ sends for mons from FOH. Some prefer post EQ. And there's the question if you want your channel comp in your mon feed. So, it's going to work, assuming it's in the default configuration as it is. Whether you prefer to change the sends to Input, Pre EQ, or Post EQ, pre fader (likely you won't want post fader for a monitor send, but that is discussed in the video too) is kind of up to you and the musicians. But if your XR18 still has default routing and default send tap point assignments, then it's ready to work with any of the 6 XLR outs (aux outs) on the front panel as monitor sends in a basic configuration.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio last question... If I set 3 monitors. (Daisy chained) coming from crown amp, coming from slr from xr18 Will I be able to set different mixes? Because as i said before, they aren't coming out of aux 1,2,3 and so on. They're actually all coming out of aux 1. Thats the question I have. Thank you so much for your time.
@@jlc2093 No. You can only do separate mixes from separate outputs. So if you feed everything from 1 XLR then that is just one mix. Although, a 2 channel amp is capable of two separate inputs (as long as the amp is in stereo mode and not parallel or bridged), so you could feed it from 2 of the XR18 XLR outs and, for example, have mix 1 from XLR 1 and Mix 2 from XLR 2. ...which would be bus 1 and bus 2.
Todas las entradas son entradas de combinación de 1/4 "y XLR. El canal uno y el canal dos tienen entradas de alta impedancia para la conexión directa de guitarras, teclados y bajos. El resto de los canales tienen entradas normales de 1/4 "y XLR. El ajuste de ganancia del canal debería permitirle suficiente control para ajustar las entradas de micrófono o línea conectadas a estas entradas.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio muchas gracias por responder. Tenía entendído que la XR si tiene para recibir instrumentos de alta impedancia en los dos primeros canales, y se ubican por que al lado dice, High Z. La MIDAS 18 es igual? Por otra parte, entiendo que la señal de mic esta en -60 dbs, y el instrumento en -30dbs, es decir que el pream debe saber que se va conectar para así determinar si sube 30dbs o sube 60dbs, ejemplo, conectó un micrófono, como hago para que ese canal sepa si tiene que subir 60dbs 0 30dbs para que quede a nivel de línea ? Yo tengo una interfaz de audio pequeña de beringher que tiene un botón, donde uno decide si la señal que va a ingresar es instrumento o mic para así prepararse y subir 30 o 60dbs según se necesite. Perdón, es que ando un poco confundido. De ante mano muchas gracias.
Different channel EQ? You need to either use a Y cable(s) (old fashioned way) split a signal to two channels making one a monitor channel and the other the FOH channel, or (modern way) softpatch channels to have the same source (one being for mons and the other for FOH). Some people just split really important channel(s), like $ vocalist... Sometimes people will split entire layers (X32 for example.... assuming band can fit on 16 channels). Layer 1 then becomes house and layer 2 becomes monitors. But in any case, if separate channel EQ is desired (or other treatments different between channels in the house and channels in the mons, and a monitor console is not being deployed, splitting inputs is the way to do that.
The real question is, why are people still using 58's 🤣 Yeah, they're bullet-proof but are muddy compared to Sennheiser's, Audix, or AKG's. Okay, all jokes aside.....Great video, Alan! Excellent tutorial.
Because all of them have too much coloration. It’s like the come with a preset eq on them make less compatible with wider style of voices. Example: would be the senheiser’s has a lot more top in my opinion great on males but suck on a lot of females. Gets thin really quick or sometimes harsh. Idk just my random opinion
What are your thoughts on using pink noise and an RTA mic to EQ FOH? Would I need to ring out FOH in addition to the pink noise process? Also, if I'm using FOH EQ for feedback EQ, would I use the same for the pink noise method, or is there another i should use? I'm a little concerned about placing a mic in the middle of a bar and blasting the audience with pink noise. What do the experts say?
I'd probably not blast an open bar with pink noise. It's a quick way not to be hired back. Unless you're a major act that the bar is spending big bucks on and really wanted the band. Blasting pink noise and using an RTA mic isn't exactly going to get you spectacular results anyway. ...Unless you're doing it with something like SMAART that allows you to look at the sound in a bit more of a 3D way. Allowing for time and comparing with the signal at the board. And with SMAART, you don't have to even use pink noise. You can just use music. Although you can use pink or white noise instead too. The dual channel transfer function will let you compare the flat sound of your source versus what the RTA mic is hearing at its position. And the software will allow for the difference in time to be accounted for. So, ideally, there would be a flat line as the two things perfectly line up... But ideal isn't happening. Still, you can see the peaks and valleys and adjust the major problem areas. The room, the speakers, the electronics... it's simply not going to perfectly match. But that window can be narrowed. And the way it works, you can look at music just as easily as pink noise. Just make sure it's music with a full response... Low end and top end are happening in the song. SMAART is kind of expensive, but worth it... But there could be some cheaper options out there. The transfer function is far from the only thing that SMAART does. Maybe you can pink your system outdoors somewhere to get the baseline response set where the room reflections won't cloud your judgment. Still, the same rules apply: Don't overdo the EQ. Work in a macro sense to balance tops to subs via the DSP, crossover, or amps. And if the system is factory matched, complete with DSP, you can (for the most part) trust their settings. It's hard to reinvent the wheel. They might be a bit conservative on some things like limiting... but they also have a good idea of how their stuff should sound and how to set it for a wide variety of uses/venues. It might not be the best for any one specific circumstance, but it could be the best for multiple circumstances. And if you set it ideally for one circumstance, it could be terrible for others. So, the baseline needs to be flexible. Then in the club, just ring out the rig to notch a few feedback points specific to the setup there. Assuming you don't get some type of system optimization software like SMAART or something else.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio This is good information. In your opinion, should this be done in a house of worship setting to compensate for room anomalies and modes before ringing out the room? Or can we just ring out the room and call it good?
@@djbassick If you have the tools to do a proper measurement (software, interface, laptop, measurement mic), that's always the best if it's done correctly and the results analyzed and applied correctly. I've not used Open Sound Meter, but I've heard good things about it recently as a free or shareware alternative to SMAART. opensoundmeter.com/en/ The positive about the church is the system staying in one place. So, you don't end up needing to do any of this necessarily more than once . But, it's easy to get skewed or invalid data with system measurement tools so experience helps to minimize that issue. All that said, ringing out the room could get you close enough IF that's your only option, or what you feel the most comfortable trying. Especially if your system is matched and properly deployed, and not overly complicated in the first place.
Hi Alan, I’m using a static position shure 55 for main vocals and I have a radio mic used by a backing singer who gets the crowd going and moves about the stage and goes out front in the crowed (some times in front of FOH boxes) how do I best ring the FOH and or mons out? (Both share 1 wedge 1 mix on stage positioned by main mic stand with shure 55)
I have the same question, as we do a lot of work with rappers, who ALWAYS use wireless microphones, and move left to right constantly throughout the show. One way I found to resolve the potential feedback problem is to use side fill monitors, in addition to the front monitors, and bring down the levels on the front monitors, and have just the track in those monitors, and the rapper in the side fills, which are self-powered and elevated via stands, with horns just above ear level.
Yamaha in general are usually pretty bullet-proof, but bang for the buck I would say goes to the X32. Personally, I'd rather have the X32 between it and the TF5.
I love this. So clear, no extra bs! Thank you!!!
You're so welcome!
I wish these videos had been around when our band first got an XR18 several years ago. They're great. We learned everything the hard way. I'm sending links to band mates who still manage to mess things up! :)
Thanks!!
I found that setting the mic preamp gain ever so slightly higher where it picks up the feedback earlier helps with ringing it out. Also proximity of hand to the mic in a cupping method also helps me out on stage ringing out with a tablet and sorta mimics someone on stage especially if mic holding technique is lacking. After it is rung out I would lower the mic preamp to the normal typical gain, that seems to help keep things in line pretty well.
This analog guy finds your info very very useful. Thanks!!
Glad to help! Thanks!
This is an amazingly explained video and to the point. Thanks !
You're welcome!
Just got xr18 3 days ago. Then found this on yt after watchin a few phil videos on behronger. Great tuts bro. Thank you for this
Thanks! Hope they help! LMK if you have any questions. :)
Great video! WIll definitely be rewatching
Great video - your videos have help me get started doing sound for my band. Please do a video on how to set up, mix, monitor, and soundcheck horns (Trumpet & Sax) using xr18. Thanks
Very clear explanation. Nice work.
Thanks!
Another great video. Thank you.....
Thanks for watching!
You rock, Alan!
Thanks! :)
Thank you, as a bass player / awful sound guy ,I'm always stressed about so many small club issues.
Thank you for watching and commenting! :)
Don’t be afraid and one tip, use your ears more than your eyes
Obviously use your eyes to watch peaking
What is your biggest worry? Ask please
I finally got things setup to do the requested video about ringing out monitors (and house). It felt odd to be recording feedback to intentionally include in the video! And even more odd listening to it while I was editing the video! ;)
But ultimately it makes the examples more impactful to hear and see the feedback on the RTA.
Amazon affiliate links:
Shure SM58 on Amazon:
amzn.to/3bcxKF4
Gator Cases G-TOUR ATA Style Road Case - Custom Fit for Behringer X32 with Dog House and Heavy Duty 4" Casters; (G-TOUR X32) on Amazon:
amzn.to/3rTss8j
Suggested videos:
Five Tips For Better Live Vocal Mixes:
ruclips.net/video/oP4sdpkkNhY/видео.html
5 Typical Mistakes Behringer X32 and Midas M32 Users Make:
ruclips.net/video/tP7dO2Za6bw/видео.html
5 Typical Mistakes Behringer XR18 and Midas MR18 Users Make:
ruclips.net/video/EilVDp39A9g/видео.html
X32/M32 Gain Staging and Signal Flow (Soundcheck Basics Series):
ruclips.net/video/7MJ3rfj7HNc/видео.html
How To EQ A Snare Drum:
ruclips.net/video/gITnB0hQ9as/видео.html
FB:
facebook.com/groups/livesoundproduction
Nice and clear! Thank you!
Thanks for watching!
Excellent explanation, thanks
Thanks for watching and commenting. I appreciate it!
Thank you Alan! Learning so much from all your videos. I just purchased the Allen&Heath CQ-20B Digital Mixer and I will start applying a lot of the universal concepts of live sound discussed in your channel - thoughts on Allen&Heath??
AH makes solid consoles. Good stuff.
Thank you, Your help is awesome
Happy to help!
Hi Alan. I can't tell you how much I've been learning from your videos. I've had my XR18 for a few years now and tinkering around and learning more as I go. Thank you for creating such useful and clear content! I had a couple of questions about this video. First, the EQ you're setting the filters on are the AUX and LR bus filters, right? In the first mic slider video, I noticed you had the channel selected that the mic was on and not the aux channel strip on the right. So I just wanted to clarify that the filters are added to the bus channel or the mic channel. Then, when repeating the process, would that process then be using different mic channels that are near the monitor or, if we are EQing the bus channel, then its the same mic, or closest mic to the monitor to help find the next sensitive point. Lastly, when narrowing the filter, what control am I using on the XR18? The video shows you adjusting it on the 32. Thanks again!
Yes, normally this would be using the Aux or LR bus filters, not the channel filters.
Closest mic to the monitor is what I would recommend for ringing out monitors.
The control to narrow and widen filters is the "Q" which in the X-Air Edit software is labeled "Qual".
In Mixing Station it is just "Q" and that is what most people call it regardless of the console "the Q".
After you've made 2 or 3 passes on the system and everything is stable, if later (like during the soundcheck or show) you hear a lone mic sounding holllowish/ringy you might call up that channel and apply the cut just to that mic. That area should show itself just by being hotter and you should be able to roughly recognize where on the RTA to look for it. IOW... if you hear a ringy high end 'thing' happening, you know not to pay attention to the lows or mids on the RTA.
I know some people will look at the RTA and think anything that pops up needs knocked back, but that could just be the dominate note being sung or played in the moment. You're listening for a 'problem' and then looking to confirm it. Not just looking for a problem.
For example, a kick drum might have a healthy 60Hz spike on its channel each time it's hit. That doesn't mean the kick drum needs 60Hz cut unless you actually first hear a problem, in the kick, you recognize to be low and then see that spike at 60Hz and can confirm that's what you're hearing that is wrong or a problem.
But in that kick example, you also have to be aware, the kick could be a symptom... with the real problem coming from the vocals and too much low end/not enough high pass and the kick (or kick in the PA) is simply triggering the vocal mics to ring at some low frequency. A quick mute of the vocal mics will usually give you your answer.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio thank you!
Thanks for this video 😊
My pleasure 😊
Thank you man! 🙏🏾
No problem. Thanks for watching and commenting! :)
Hi Alan, really helpful video. Once you’ve rung out your FOH EQ for vocals, is there a way of copying this setting onto the Monitor EQ without having to do the whole process again? On the X32 Compact. Thanks
I haven't tried on Mixing Station, but with X-Edit and I'm pretty sure the console itself you can save an EQ preset and reload it elsewhere. So even a channel preset can be loaded in the mains... or a bus preset can be saved and recalled in the mains... or wherever you want it.
OR... even quicker... You can copy and paste EQ settings from one place to another.
Thank you for the video. Very well explained.
But why would someone choose to use Graphical EQ over Parametric EQ since it's less surgical. You said it's one of the drawbacks for GEQ, but are there any advantages?
Oh and also you lose FX slot on X32 (weirdly that on XR18 which is a cheaper mixer you don't have to waste FX slot to use Graphical EQ for monitor and main mixes)
Some people are used to GEQs from using them for years. Old habits die hard. They are quicker on them.
Some people don't want to believe PEQ's are better because they think more EQ bands on the GEQ make it 'better' for some reason.
Other than comfort factor from year's of use of GEQ's for some, I don't really see any benefits.
Hi Alan,
So in the video you showed both EQs... It's a good idea to use both EQ or just The parametric EQ or graphic EQ? Thanks, JJ
Parametric EQ is the best to use... But some people are just more comfortable with the graphic EQ, so I showed both.
About the only real reason to have both engaged is if you have guest engineers... If so, you might have some that prefer the GEQ. So, having a base scene created that has both in it for that potential scenario is fine.
If you build the scene from scratch each time, then there's no need in that type of base scene.
Hi Drew, this very important. Do the M n X airs - MR 18 n X 18s have pink noise. If no why are the manufacturers ...is., music group treat those of us who purchase these smaller digiboards so unfairly. It has no matrix, no capability to couple an aux bus being used as a mono sub bus to the main LR, no updates with new functionalities etc etc ...y are they so insensitive n biased. When I bought mine Mr 18, I paid almost half d price of x32 just for small venues but am so so disappointed that x32 keep getting updates but none of the airs. It's very unfair music group.
Hi Alan, Thank you for posting this vid. You talked about flattening the channel EQ before ringing out the monitor. Did you put back or restore the channel EQ settings after ringing out the monitor or what? Second, I have 2 stage speakers (fills not monitors). They're controlled by Matrix 4 out of L/R. How can I manage feedback with this set up? I feel like that I may be getting feedback from stage fills and mains/FOH. The stage fills are installed behind FOH. Thank you in advance.
I mentioned taking out the channel EQ settings so they don't themselves cause some hotspots. Once you notch the house or monitor EQ, you'd go back to your channel EQ and re-EQ the channel strip based on the new house or Mon EQ settings (re-listening to the source and resetting it anew). It could be a soundperson was doing things to the channel strip that didn't need to be done because of overcompensation for speaker hotspots (or room issues).
That said, when you work with the same band, mics, and equipment each gig, you'll likely have solid presets you'll want to use each time on the channels. And it's easy enough to just turn the channel EQ on/off (not necessarily reset it). You might even be comfortable enough to leave the EQ setting ON when you ring out the house/mon. But that's only when you're certain your channel strip EQ is actually solid and helpful (not causing problems by over-EQing for example).
Usually sidefills won't be as susceptible to feedback because you have distance working for you. If the stage is big enough to warrant sidefills, then the mics won't be 4-5' from the speakers.
Since you said you have the fills on a matrix, are they following FOH changes (where is the matrix getting its signal?)?
You might be better off just creating a monitor send, sending whatever you need via that to the sidefills, and leaving that as a static mix. If the matrix is following house changes, that might be too dynamic for the sidefills, especially if they are already close to feedback. Also, if they are being compressed, under compression they might be OK, but when the signal is no longer clamped by compression (no gain reduction because you're above the compressor threshold like you might be on an open mic), then feedback could result (depending on makeup gain (whether made up with the actual makeup gain control or the channel fader).
It's hard to say for sure... you could have a good reason to use the matrix... But that's the first thing that comes to mind since a matrix wouldn't normally be how sidefills are done.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Good morning Alan! first of all thank you for quick reply. I appreciate it. The sidefills are getting the signal from L/R or following FOH changes. By the way, I am using a X32 and this is in small church. I decided to use sidefills on the stage/platform because the monitors, being on the floor, were too close to the pastors and were too loud. my FOH speakers are very close to the pulpit. I do not seem to have feedback issues with my wireless handheld mics but with two of my Shure cardioid lavalier mics. I carved out a lot of feedback frequencies using a GEQ inserted on the 2 channels but I do not get some feedback when I try to turn up the volume on those 2 channels. I have low ceiling and the FOH are about 4 feet from the pulpit facing the crowd. I am not sure if my feedback problem is with the FOH or stagefills. The stagefills are further away. I must admit that I did not carve out the feedback frequencies like you show in this video. Should I try carving out the frequencies at the FOH or main L/R bus and the Matrix for the stagefills or at the channel level and second, should I go back to monitor setup for the stagefills but keep them hanging. By the way, I am not doing any compression on the L/R bus or the stagefills' matrix. I do however have eq turn on just for low cut.
@@danielalexis9409 There's a lot to unpack here. It's hard to say for sure where the problem could be coming from, but there could be a lot of small things going on that adds up to be big.
First, I'd definitely ring out the FOH and the matrix mix. Even if you do nothing else, I'd start there.
But, I wouldn't insert GEQ's into mic channels. There's plenty of control on the channel strip parametric by itself to begin with, and then you also have the house EQ that should already have your PA pretty neutral.
More than likely, if you've inserted a GEQ onto the channel you've over-EQ'ed the mic. This tends to be worse than under-EQing because you cut out (and sometimes even boost) so much stuff, that the mic is just lifeless or muddy. And the next thing that happens for a lifeless mic is you have to turn it up to be heard... and now it feeds back.
So, you cut it some more. Vicious cycle.
Removing the GEQ from the channel strip. Resetting the channel strip to flat. Ringing out the house. Setting the gain on the mic to average -18dBFS on the input meter... Engaging the low cut on the mic channel... and rolling it up to 150Hz...
That is where I'd start. Leave the monitors/fills off. Have someone wear the mic and speak, and you SLOWLY bring the fader up and just see what kind of level you can get before feedback from that baseline.
The odds are good, that won't be perfect... You'll probably hear the hollowness/singing of a frequency creeping in.
If it's low, increase the low cut (HPF) even more and see if that helps. For a lav mic that is used for speech, it doesn't need a lot of low end warmth. It needs intelligibility in the speech range. Don't be afraid to set that low cut at 150, 200, even 250Hz sometimes. At a certain point the voice will sound unnaturally thin, but there's still a pretty big window of acceptable tradeoff vs feedback.
If the feedback is higher, the channel RTA should show you, go ahead and cut it there with the parametric. Maybe widen the Q rather than being surgical if there are a couple of higher feedbacks.
Don't chase your tail too much. Don't try and make it so no matter how loud you turn the lav up, it won't feedback. Try and make it so you haven't done too much EQ work (and don't boost at all here)... and just find the happy medium where the mic still has life and naturalness to its sound, and you know you just can't go louder than a certain point. Look for "loud enough" and "that'll have to do".
Since you're doing this only to focus on the house sound, you'll know what the parameters are for the house. If you know with X settings, and Y position on the fader, the mic is stable in the house, then you can have some baseline to start adding monitors and know if it's the mons causing feedback. IOW, eliminate things to one step at a time and don't move on until you've found your limits on each step.
I wouldn't do the matrix feed for mons. I'd do a regular pre fader bus feed for mons. Once again, ring out that bus, then bring the mic up in the mon (side fill in this case) and stop when you start to hear it wanting to ring... or hopefully when it's loud enough before it rings. I'd probably go ahead and set the bus as POST EQ (but this is one of those things where there are reasons to go the other way too). But in either case, pre fader. That way, once you've set the monitors/fills, nothing you do on the house faders will change the mons.
And don't forget, ANY change to the gain WILL change your mon levels on a channel so best to get your gain set correctly at soundcheck.
But this brings up another variable and why I said this is complicated and could be several small problems converging...
For a small venue... a small stage... It's pretty rare that it's a good idea to put a pastor or other speaker/lecturer into the monitor system. For one thing, they are many times going to hear what they need from the house speakers and they are talking by themselves, so nothing is competing with their voice and burying it (like a band would to a lead singer).
And IF they don't want their voice coming back at them from a monitor, it's typically a tiny bit. So that's another reason you don't want the house and mon mix tied together.
But there's another issue besides 'want' here... Most people, in that situation, talk QUIETER when they hear themselves too well. They back away from the mic too (if it's on stand or pulpit mic). So, now they aren't loud enough. So you turn them up.
Now they talk even quieter and or back away even more. And pretty soon, you start getting feedback trying to turn their ever quieter voice up.
Loudest sound at the mic wins.
This is definitely a reason not to tie the mons/side fills to the house. But it also points out the question if you even need the lavs in the sidefills anyway.
Even if the sidefills are causing them to speak ever more quietly, you needing more level in the house can lead to feedback in the house as you turn up. And since the sidefills are also tied to the house, you could get feedback there instead or as well.
It's possible that the handheld mic does give you less trouble simply because the user is holding it closer to their mouth. Think about that distance compared to the distance a lav is from a person's mouth. And add in a scenario where a person is talking quieter anyway. This is a perfect example of loudest sound at the mic wins. If the person wearing the lav is already speaking quiet, and the mic is 12" (or more) from their mouth, then it's entirely the loudest thing at the mic will be the ambient sound in the room and from the speakers... and that is a recipe for feedback.
You could swap the lavs out to earset mics, and that might help (since and earset mic stays closer to the user's mouth vs a lav), but that probably wouldn't be your answer until you get the lavs to where they are working for you... mostly... IOW, once you get the initial problem under control, maybe the earset would allow you to get the wearer up even louder... But until the other issues are cleared up, it might not be enough to make too much of a difference.
It could be the icing on the cake to get you where you want to be... but it won't be the magic bullet.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Hi Alan, I can't thank you enough for the time spent sharing your view and giving me advice. I appreciate it alot. I will try everything out and let you know. By the way, I did not fully understand this "...and then you also have the house EQ that should already have your PA pretty neutral." What did you mean by that please? Also, you suggested to ring out the house (FOH) and the matrix. Do you happen to have a video that explains how to do that? if not, could you please give me the steps on how to do it?
@@danielalexis9409 The "neutral" comment just meant that your PA should be fairly free of peaks and valleys and that your house EQ (or even system EQ in a DSP) should have that taken care of... making your PA "neutral" (smooth... balanced... not peaking frequencies or unnatural sound). A hotspot/peak should show up when ringing out the rig, so things should be fairly neutral after doing that (if things are working as they should be... IOW the PA sounds good/natural playing prerecorded tracks).
Same for monitors.
When the system is balanced, you shouldn't have a lot of channel strip EQ to make things sound good.
You'd essentially ring out any output just as in this video. Just choose the output you want to ring out and mute the unused outs, assign your mic(s) to it (or confirm they are assigned to it), call up the EQ and RTA, and have a go at it.
I don't know if you've watched the 5 Mistakes X32 Users Make video on the channel, but it might have some helpful info in it:
ruclips.net/video/tP7dO2Za6bw/видео.html
Great videos as always, focus is on vocal mics but what about other mics on stage like guitars amps, or drums?
Vocal mics will tend to be the most gained up mics onstage. Plus, fairly wide frequency response too. So the problems they reveal will hold true across the board. If you notch those 2, 3, maybe 4 worst frequencies that ring out of your house EQ and/or Mon EQ that should cover you.
Your vocal mic won't likely be razor flat in response, so ringing things out isn't 100% perfect, but it still goes back to vocal mics being the hottest mics onstage (and they aren't molded in response like a kick mic for example). Regardless of the vocal mics' overall frequency response, they still are the mics that you can expect to ring first overall- Because the singers won't be able to sing as loud into a mic as a snare drum is into its mic. Or the kick mic at the kick. Or a guitar amp mic right at the amp. So their gain will likely be the hottest to achieve proper input gain... And vocals will ride as loud or louder than anything else in your mix typically so the faders will be as high or higher than anything else.... So that means they're typically the most susceptible to feedback.
But for the most part, the feedback you find will apply system wide to the system/room. So when you notch those hotspots out of the mains or mons, you help all those sources not to ring.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio I never thought of it like that. Thank you.
The biggest problem I always seem to encounter, is just having enough time to even do any of this. I think that it takes at least a good 30 minutes to an hour of time to do these procedures. Very difficult to find that time at most of the events that I do. How can I talk the band into giving us more time?
Buy them a dinner and then do it while they're eating it ;)
If you are always using the same monitors and mics you can get 80% there in advance. A given mic/monitor will always have frequencies that ring regardless of the venue or singer. Set up your kit and spend all day ringing them out using the monitor parametric. Leave the input eq flat as that will give you more filters for various venues.
Most of the time I don’t even need to ring them out.
Also, cheap monitors with SM58’s will ring at lower levels and more frequencies than a quality mic (like an Audix OM5) and quality monitors.
@jerryrichardson5545 That's a great idea, and I also thought that the problem might be with my monitors. I use self-powered speakers as monitors, and they are Italian made RCF ART 712-A MK4. They sound great but do tend to generate feedback, seemingly randomly. I will work on generating an EQ preset for this monitor, as you suggested, and see how that goes. Thank you for your feedback (no pun intended).
@@AlanHamiltonAudio LOL, that's a great 👍 suggestion Alan!
Alan, Iv watched this vid and others time again over ringing out mons and FOH using XR18...your vid is the most informative and intuitive. My confusion is Iv got this troublesome radio mic Iv already posted about...would it be best to take offending frequencies out at the channel graphic using the parametric EQ PEQ or at bus1 31 band graphic EQ TEQ!
I would do the general work on the house... as normal... Then I would work on that specific mic and it's specific problems on the channel strip EQ. I'd just use the parametric. Ideally, you could use narrow cuts to surgically attack the issue on the channel strip, but you might have to widen the Q and allow some margin of error to reduce problem frequency ranges (if the problem is really bad).
That said, make sure the speakers are not so low that the mic and horn are at the same basic height so that when your singer gets close to the cab, the mic is not directly or almost directly in the horn. That's going to be a problem no matter what if that is happening.
Distance is your friend for feedback issues, and higher horns is more distance from the mic, especially when the singer is close to the cabs and/or in front of them.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Thanks for the great videos. I still don't quite understand how to ring out the channels.
Am I using the same eq that I would use to EQ the channel? If so how then do you EQ the channels? If I'm supposed to use a different process can you explain step by step. I'm new to sound engineering. Sorry for the dumb questions.
Hi Alan I’m an absolute avid viewer of your vids....re XR18... my problem is with ringing out a my singers wedge... she’s using a radio and walks around during performance... I’m getting feedback either from FOH and or mons on Aux 1 or both at same time!!! I’m using Yamaha DSR12 boxes. I’m pulling out frequencies but I’m getting feedback.... How would u handle this situation? I’m playing pubs in UK... it’s driving me mad!!! What do I do??
I think the first thing to do is really get a handle on where the feedback is coming from. You probably can't do this at a show, but can at soundcheck... even if the singer is not there, as long as you have her mic and the settings saved for the XR18...
Mute everything (as far as outputs... mains... mons...). Now, unmute one thing... one mix... Open the mic to normal setting and see if there's feedback when you walk around the stage and check the mic. If yes, make a mental note of it, mute that mix and unmute another and try that same routine.
Do this for all mon mixes. Make a mental note where the problems were.
Next mute the mons and unmute the house... same thing... Technically, the house should be the easiest to address since it has (or should have) more physical separation from the mic.
Once you know exactly where the problem is, and is not, you can start looking for issues in just that one place. Attack it one place at a time.
I don't know how many mixes you are using, but it could be as simple as just turning the mic down in any mix that is not the lead singer's own mix.
And maybe looking at the singer's mic EQ and being less aggressive. No matter how good a high mid or high EQ boost might sound, if it's leading to feedback the best sound is less boost and no feedback (and you can apply that concept to the house mix as well). And it could be just setting the mon sends PRE EQ on each channel is best.
Once the mons are under control, mute them and listen to the house and see if there's still an issue there... Attack it the same way.
Don't forget that excess compression can lead to feedback too. So, changing any compression by changing the threshold or changing to a lower ratio (or both) could also help. That true in the house, but especially true in the mons. Plus, too much compression can have the singer asking for "more me" in the mons not recognizing they are fighting compression and instead just knowing they aren't hearing themselves as well as they want.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio thank you for responding so quickly...the steps ur outlining are the ones I’m trying to take... I have singer that doesn’t like sound checking especially in a open pub with punters in. She walks around directly in front of the FOH boxes and then lowers mic in hand to waist level near the monitor....it’s becoming a nightmare. Last night being particularly bad.. I’m the drummer in band so it’s impossible when playing fir me to make any adjustments. I have notched out a lot of frequencies to try and resolve issues I will take some screen shots of last nights EQ setting both FOH and mons...I’m thinking her radio mic which is not my kit is a cheapo and more prone to feedback?!?! I will follow more closely the disciplines and ringing out procedures you have laid out snd just be more hard ass with her.... we are playing small cramped pubs.... no stages just fire places and corners!!!! But do truly value your advice...
@@AlanHamiltonAudio Hi Alan, if I switch of compression on the channel so it goes clean to AUX1/Mons can I add back compression at main FOH using combinatorial and it not effect the mons and only apply to FOH mix?
Use a pair of self-powered side fill monitors on stands with the horns just about ear level. Problem solved.
@@christopherpurcell-peters1555 You can link another channel in on her microphone, turn off the monitors on that channel, then compress there and not on the first channel.
Alan, thank you so much for these videos! They are so generous. On the subject of gain setting, I am a karaoke host and may get 30 singers with varying power and mic technique. I find that I am very often changing the gain on my analog mixer. I don't have a digital mixer yet and am pretty sure I am going to get the XR18 whenever they are available again. Any reason I couldn't change gain for each singer if I account for effects and monitors too? I know its a lot of work but I try to make each singer sound as good as I can and the right gain is critical.
When you're changing singers constantly like on Karaoke, it's really like starting from scratch. Just know that changing the gain is going to change the monitor level. That's not ALWAYS a bad thing... for one thing, for the loud singer, trimming the gain and lowering the monitor is good. For the quiet singer, raising the gain and monitor might be good.
BUT... if you are already at the threshold of feedback and turn the gain up... then it's "squeeeeeal!" ;)
But as long as you keep yourself some safe margins and know where that point is, then you should be good.
I'd try and chase things with the fader as much as possible as the first line of defense though and only change gain in a "have to" case, since you don't want to get near the feedback threshold.
For an alternative method, if you need to chase gain and sometimes it DOES cause feedback-
Use a Y cable and split the mic into two channels. Use the first vox channel for the house and the 2nd vox channel only for monitors. That way, you can be conservative and just leave the gain and monitor level alone on the 2nd channel, while you can adjust gain on the house vocal channel with no worry about it changing the level of the monitor or causing monitor feedback.
Technically, it could still cause house feedback, but there's usually a much larger margin of error there due to speaker placement and distance being your friend. So it's monitors that you typically have to worry about.
But all that said... if you have your system down, and it's working for you now, no reason it won't work the same on the Behringer. Just remember the difference in scale on the meters between you analog console and the Behringer. ...-18dBFS on the digital scale of the Behringer is pretty much equal to 0dBVu on your analog console.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio splitting the mic channel is ingenious! Thank you! I will consider it.
thank you
Hi Alan, Can we just disable the vocal channel eq instead of flattening it or selecting pre eq sends?
Sure.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio thanks, just making sure I wasn’t missing something important
Should this type of thing be done with any instrument mics if you have then on stage ?
No. The vocal mics are generally the mics with the most level and therefore the most likely sources of feedback. Opening up too many mics can just lead to unintended consequences.
Please answer....
I do not have powered monitors.
I DO Have a crown micro tech 600.
How can I hook that up to my xr18 and work that as monitors?
Just take an XLR balanced cable out of your selected "aux out" on the front of the XR18 to the Crown. Connect your monitor to the Crown amp.
ruclips.net/video/5gzsEErKdb8/видео.html
@@AlanHamiltonAudio thank you. Will I have to mess with routing as well? Since it's only one cable coming out of auxes?
@@jlc2093 The default routing should be good. The default settings in the console for the sends is Post EQ. That video I linked you to talks about that. That will work as it is. Some people prefer Pre EQ sends for mons from FOH. Some prefer post EQ. And there's the question if you want your channel comp in your mon feed.
So, it's going to work, assuming it's in the default configuration as it is.
Whether you prefer to change the sends to Input, Pre EQ, or Post EQ, pre fader (likely you won't want post fader for a monitor send, but that is discussed in the video too) is kind of up to you and the musicians.
But if your XR18 still has default routing and default send tap point assignments, then it's ready to work with any of the 6 XLR outs (aux outs) on the front panel as monitor sends in a basic configuration.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio last question... If I set 3 monitors. (Daisy chained) coming from crown amp, coming from slr from xr18
Will I be able to set different mixes? Because as i said before, they aren't coming out of aux 1,2,3 and so on. They're actually all coming out of aux 1.
Thats the question I have.
Thank you so much for your time.
@@jlc2093 No. You can only do separate mixes from separate outputs. So if you feed everything from 1 XLR then that is just one mix. Although, a 2 channel amp is capable of two separate inputs (as long as the amp is in stereo mode and not parallel or bridged), so you could feed it from 2 of the XR18 XLR outs and, for example, have mix 1 from XLR 1 and Mix 2 from XLR 2. ...which would be bus 1 and bus 2.
Gracias por compartir, como puedo configurar mis entradas en la consola mr18 para recibir señal de mic, de instrumento o de línea? Muchas gracias.
Todas las entradas son entradas de combinación de 1/4 "y XLR. El canal uno y el canal dos tienen entradas de alta impedancia para la conexión directa de guitarras, teclados y bajos.
El resto de los canales tienen entradas normales de 1/4 "y XLR. El ajuste de ganancia del canal debería permitirle suficiente control para ajustar las entradas de micrófono o línea conectadas a estas entradas.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio muchas gracias por responder.
Tenía entendído que la XR si tiene para recibir instrumentos de alta impedancia en los dos primeros canales, y se ubican por que al lado dice, High Z. La MIDAS 18 es igual?
Por otra parte, entiendo que la señal de mic esta en -60 dbs, y el instrumento en -30dbs, es decir que el pream debe saber que se va conectar para así determinar si sube 30dbs o sube 60dbs, ejemplo, conectó un micrófono, como hago para que ese canal sepa si tiene que subir 60dbs 0 30dbs para que quede a nivel de línea ?
Yo tengo una interfaz de audio pequeña de beringher que tiene un botón, donde uno decide si la señal que va a ingresar es instrumento o mic para así prepararse y subir 30 o 60dbs según se necesite.
Perdón, es que ando un poco confundido. De ante mano muchas gracias.
I want different EQ per channel in the FOH vs monitor/aux mix. How do I accomplish?
Different channel EQ? You need to either use a Y cable(s) (old fashioned way) split a signal to two channels making one a monitor channel and the other the FOH channel, or (modern way) softpatch channels to have the same source (one being for mons and the other for FOH).
Some people just split really important channel(s), like $ vocalist... Sometimes people will split entire layers (X32 for example.... assuming band can fit on 16 channels). Layer 1 then becomes house and layer 2 becomes monitors.
But in any case, if separate channel EQ is desired (or other treatments different between channels in the house and channels in the mons, and a monitor console is not being deployed, splitting inputs is the way to do that.
Do it in buses
The real question is, why are people still using 58's 🤣 Yeah, they're bullet-proof but are muddy compared to Sennheiser's, Audix, or AKG's. Okay, all jokes aside.....Great video, Alan! Excellent tutorial.
Because all of them have too much coloration. It’s like the come with a preset eq on them make less compatible with wider style of voices. Example: would be the senheiser’s has a lot more top in my opinion great on males but suck on a lot of females. Gets thin really quick or sometimes harsh. Idk just my random opinion
Cool
Thanks!
What are your thoughts on using pink noise and an RTA mic to EQ FOH? Would I need to ring out FOH in addition to the pink noise process? Also, if I'm using FOH EQ for feedback EQ, would I use the same for the pink noise method, or is there another i should use?
I'm a little concerned about placing a mic in the middle of a bar and blasting the audience with pink noise. What do the experts say?
I'd probably not blast an open bar with pink noise. It's a quick way not to be hired back. Unless you're a major act that the bar is spending big bucks on and really wanted the band.
Blasting pink noise and using an RTA mic isn't exactly going to get you spectacular results anyway. ...Unless you're doing it with something like SMAART that allows you to look at the sound in a bit more of a 3D way. Allowing for time and comparing with the signal at the board.
And with SMAART, you don't have to even use pink noise. You can just use music. Although you can use pink or white noise instead too.
The dual channel transfer function will let you compare the flat sound of your source versus what the RTA mic is hearing at its position. And the software will allow for the difference in time to be accounted for.
So, ideally, there would be a flat line as the two things perfectly line up... But ideal isn't happening. Still, you can see the peaks and valleys and adjust the major problem areas. The room, the speakers, the electronics... it's simply not going to perfectly match. But that window can be narrowed.
And the way it works, you can look at music just as easily as pink noise. Just make sure it's music with a full response... Low end and top end are happening in the song.
SMAART is kind of expensive, but worth it... But there could be some cheaper options out there. The transfer function is far from the only thing that SMAART does.
Maybe you can pink your system outdoors somewhere to get the baseline response set where the room reflections won't cloud your judgment. Still, the same rules apply: Don't overdo the EQ. Work in a macro sense to balance tops to subs via the DSP, crossover, or amps. And if the system is factory matched, complete with DSP, you can (for the most part) trust their settings. It's hard to reinvent the wheel. They might be a bit conservative on some things like limiting... but they also have a good idea of how their stuff should sound and how to set it for a wide variety of uses/venues. It might not be the best for any one specific circumstance, but it could be the best for multiple circumstances. And if you set it ideally for one circumstance, it could be terrible for others. So, the baseline needs to be flexible.
Then in the club, just ring out the rig to notch a few feedback points specific to the setup there. Assuming you don't get some type of system optimization software like SMAART or something else.
@@AlanHamiltonAudio This is good information. In your opinion, should this be done in a house of worship setting to compensate for room anomalies and modes before ringing out the room? Or can we just ring out the room and call it good?
@@djbassick If you have the tools to do a proper measurement (software, interface, laptop, measurement mic), that's always the best if it's done correctly and the results analyzed and applied correctly.
I've not used Open Sound Meter, but I've heard good things about it recently as a free or shareware alternative to SMAART. opensoundmeter.com/en/
The positive about the church is the system staying in one place. So, you don't end up needing to do any of this necessarily more than once .
But, it's easy to get skewed or invalid data with system measurement tools so experience helps to minimize that issue.
All that said, ringing out the room could get you close enough IF that's your only option, or what you feel the most comfortable trying. Especially if your system is matched and properly deployed, and not overly complicated in the first place.
if the x32c/w rta auto eq like deq 2496it will perfect n unbeatable in the world
Hi Alan, I’m using a static position shure 55 for main vocals and I have a radio mic used by a backing singer who gets the crowd going and moves about the stage and goes out front in the crowed (some times in front of FOH boxes) how do I best ring the FOH and or mons out? (Both share 1 wedge 1 mix on stage positioned by main mic stand with shure 55)
I have the same question, as we do a lot of work with rappers, who ALWAYS use wireless microphones, and move left to right constantly throughout the show. One way I found to resolve the potential feedback problem is to use side fill monitors, in addition to the front monitors, and bring down the levels on the front monitors, and have just the track in those monitors, and the rapper in the side fills, which are self-powered and elevated via stands, with horns just above ear level.
X32 and yamaha TF5 which is better and faster to use?
Yamaha in general are usually pretty bullet-proof, but bang for the buck I would say goes to the X32. Personally, I'd rather have the X32 between it and the TF5.
Yamaha QL1
Hiiiiiiiiii Alan! 😁
Hellooooo Cindy!!