BG> > heavily in the modern concert world, where folks have to
BG> > realize that there's lots more than _sound_ involved in a production.
BG> > The tickets  aren't being sold to folks coming to "hear" the band;
those
BG> > ticket buyers are looking to "experience" the band.  I guarantee you
BG> > that absolutely _no_ major concert artist would perform with a
BG> > half-setup sound system - but I also guarantee you that doors would be
BG> > held for a half-setup light rig as well.  Same goes for video.
BG> > I agree, and as it is said in theatre, "The show must go on!".
BG> > And so it does.. In the highly competitive world of concert sound, BG>
> closer is what gets the gigs. Even George Lucas admits that half of his BG>
> movies is  sound. Don't you think that hearing the band is at least that
BG> > amount if not much more, after all, what sold this audience on that
band
BG> > in the  first place?
I *TOTALLY* agree with you, Bonnie! 
I've heard, (in other echoes as well as from folks outside the bbs/internet
communities), folks complain about having gone to concerts and not been able
to hear the vocalist (Patti Loveless's section of the concerts with Vince
Gill comes to mind as well as Blackhawk and Neal McCoy concerts). Those
particular folks were so disgruntled with the sound, they past the info on to
others who might have been considering going to one of those artists concerts
in their area in the future.  Granted the show *looked* good; but a big
reason (the reason for the concert) is to HEAR the performer do the material.
After all, a concert (in the beginnings of concerts) is to HEAR a performance
done, not so much see the *trappings*.  For me, the performer(s) could be
standing on a soapbox with no backdrop/backdrape or no lighting show, laser
show or wide-screen video.  I would have come because I LIKED the music the
performer did, not because I wanted to see Joe BLow fly through the air on a
trapeze or a boom!  If I wanted that, I'd go to the circus! One of the
most aggravating situations is to be sitting in the audience, and knowing
what needs to be done to fix the mix and not being able to do so. On several
occasions, I, along with the rest of my party, have left shows cause the
sound was so bad (albeit, the visuals were excellent).  There were squeaks,
squalls rumbles and rings that just never got corrected, even into the
headliner(s)' segment of the show. I eventually (in Florida) got to the point
of asking ahead of time "Who's doing the final mix?" If it was a particular
company doing all the work, I stayed away - I enjoy music too much to listen
to shoddy sound, even if it's a group or performer I really like.
BG> As an aside, isn't it interesting that much of the audience
BG> wants to hear the same performance as the record down to the tiniest
BG> nuances  exactly? I prefer to hear how the song has matured since it
BG> "went into the can".
A lot of 'em don't realize that studio (session) musicians were brought in on
the most part to do the cuts, and very few people play exactly alike
(especially night after night).  Plus, having been a road musician myself, it
gets a great deal boring doing the same material night after night with no
changes.  If they want to hear something exactly like the recording, they
should stay home and listen to the recording (and save 'em some money!)
BG> effort. Heck, with the amount of redundancy in equipment and total
expense BG> to package  a tour, wouldn't this be worth having such a test
system go BG> out with a show tour.
I think that's a great idea... Now to sell someone on it! 
BG> At today's ticket prices, thats $10k-$15k or more in revenue
BG> that you might not have thinking about coming back to another show run
BG> by that promoter.
You're right.  Check what I stated earlier... There's a lot of folks who
think the same way.
BG> pissed. If you can take steps to reduce that "2% rule" to a lower level,
BG> it could be the competitive edge that gets you more work as a sound
BG> system  company. The additional expense of the test setup and a
BG> qualified  engineer to run it could be well worth the effort.
To me, the percentage should be less than 1%.  Granted, some folks are gonna
complain about the volume, that's a given.  But to figure a given 2% as the
standard, geesh, no wonder concerts have gone down in audio quality in the
last 10 years.
Amen on the qualified engineer! With the quality of home stereos, car stereos
and even video equipment, more people attending concerts are gonna be
disgruntled, not only because of the cost of the tickets but the quality of
the audio.  No one likes to go and watch someone singing and not be able to
hear... or hear something that even an unqualified person knows isn't right.
I've had people who knew I did sound approach me at concerts and ask me to 
fix the "horrible sound!"  Since it wasn't my show, nor was my company 
involved, my hands were tied...
Nancy
--- FMail 1.02
---------------