Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Peter Morris]

OK - here is the solution for you.

•   Generally you need to use a high-pass-filter (HPF) on FOH vocals and a similar HPF on your vocal monitor sends.
•   When doing monitors from FOH you don’t usually want the channel strip EQ to affect the monitors, just the FOH

You can set up the Qu so your Aux monitor sends are pre-channel-EQ but post-channel-HPF (can’t remember if it’s post-preamp or post-delay etc.) That way when you engage the channel HPF filter it will also affect the monitors as well as FOH.

If you want the channel strip EQ to also affect the monitors (as some people do) then use a pre-fader-post-EQ send point for the aux/monitor send. It will also include the channel HPF setting.

If you want a little more or less LF in the monitors just use your Aux output GEQ and or PEQ to tune to taste.

Using the channel HPF that way will mean that those things that do not require a HPF are sent full range to that monitor send. e.g. drum fill - Kick drum full range, Snare high passed, drum vocal high passed.

[David Morison]

Although I'm trying to envision how an RLC filter can have a slope and then suddenly a flat response beyond that.

My (barely educated) hunch is that it must leave some resistance in parallel with the reactance to act as a bypass at frequencies which would otherwise receive more attenuation.

[Isaac South]

No.  The EQ you have on L/R outputs will not influence or change the monitor sends, channel strip EQ or anything else regardless of whether the monitor sends are pre/post/intergalactic.

Ok thank you. That’s what I was wondering. If I run my monitor sends post EQ, the LR eq won’t affect the monitors, but any channel EQ will.

Im not sure if I want to do that or not. Just because it sounds good to the audience doesn’t mean it will sound good to the singer.  Is that correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tim McCulloch]

Ok thank you. That’s what I was wondering. If I run my monitor sends post EQ, the LR eq won’t affect the monitors, but any channel EQ will.

Im not sure if I want to do that or not. Just because it sounds good to the audience doesn’t mean it will sound good to the singer.  Is that correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a subjective judgment between FOH mixerperson and the singer.  Frankly what the singer wants and what the FOH needs... the FOH wins as that's where the money is... congregation, recording or streaming ministry, etc.

That said, no *singer* needs 100Hz in the wedges unless he's a Guinness record holder (and I've worked with both of them).  Most consoles have the HPF ahead of *everything*, whether it's a fixed frequency filter or variable... and if it's variable chances are you can use a much higher frequency that you might think appropriate.  Don't be afraid to HPF a half-octave above the lowest fundamental pitch of the voice or instrument.  For women that means a starting HPF frequency of 200-250Hz, for men 150-200Hz unless he's a low, low, low bass.  Some mixers have very gently sloped HP filters and you may need to go up higher to be effective.

But in general, for singers you can HPF the monitor output EQ at 125Hz or higher, and then use the HPF on the input strips as well.  You're not "throwing away" any useful musical information from vocalists.

Also remember that a directional microphone's proximity effect can go as high as 200Hz and you may need to use your input strip EQ to take a bit of that as well for the benefit of FOH if the singer really stays on top of the mic.

[Jay Barracato]

That's a subjective judgment between FOH mixerperson and the singer.  Frankly what the singer wants and what the FOH needs... the FOH wins as that's where the money is... congregation, recording or streaming ministry, etc.

That said, no *singer* needs 100Hz in the wedges unless he's a Guinness record holder (and I've worked with both of them).  Most consoles have the HPF ahead of *everything*, whether it's a fixed frequency filter or variable... and if it's variable chances are you can use a much higher frequency that you might think appropriate.  Don't be afraid to HPF a half-octave above the lowest fundamental pitch of the voice or instrument.  For women that means a starting HPF frequency of 200-250Hz, for men 150-200Hz unless he's a low, low, low bass.  Some mixers have very gently sloped HP filters and you may need to go up higher to be effective.

But in general, for singers you can HPF the monitor output EQ at 125Hz or higher, and then use the HPF on the input strips as well.  You're not "throwing away" any useful musical information from vocalists.

Also remember that a directional microphone's proximity effect can go as high as 200Hz and you may need to use your input strip EQ to take a bit of that as well for the benefit of FOH if the singer really stays on top of the mic.

Old school 4 band eq for vocals.
1. Set the high pass at 100, roll up to diminish the boom with losing body.
2. Set the low mid at -3 db and sweep from 100-1000 to reign in any remaining proximity effect.
3. Set the high mid at -3 db and sweep from 2000-5000 to clean up unnatural "cut through the mix" vocal pressence the mic has built in
4. Set the high shelf about 10000 to reign in the too end "air" which to me is "fuzz" and tiring to listen to. ( I will get the top end of the cymbals from my cymbal mics not my vocal mics thank you).

Increase the amount of cut as needed.

It is a thing a beauty and wonder when you can use the channel eq to adjust the interaction of the source and mic and not chase feedback.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

[Keith Broughton]

Ok thank you. That’s what I was wondering. If I run my monitor sends post EQ, the LR eq won’t affect the monitors, but any channel EQ will.

 Just because it sounds good to the audience doesn’t mean it will sound good to the singer.  Is that correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is correct and why some run monitors pre fader AND pre EQ. That is my preference if running monitors from FOH and extra channels are not available.
Also, if you are having issues with feedback, a pre EQ monitor send takes one more variable out of the mix.

[Mac Kerr]

That is correct and why some run monitors pre fader AND pre EQ. That is my preference if running monitors from FOH and extra channels are not available.
Also, if you are having issues with feedback, a pre EQ monitor send takes one more variable out of the mix.

On the other hand, it is likely that if a mic has frequency response anomalies that require eq in the FOH PA, it may also need that correction in any other speakers it is going to. Monitors that sound vastly different than the PA can be partially corrected with system eq and processing on the mix.

Mac

[Keith Broughton]

On the other hand, it is likely that if a mic has frequency response anomalies that require eq in the FOH PA, it may also need that correction in any other speakers it is going to.
Mac

That pre supposes that the only reason to apply EQ is to "correct" some response issue.
EQ might be applied to better sit the instrument or vocal in the mix and, as such, may not be needed or create problems, in the monitor mix.
Also, there are many posts about "my monitors are feeding back" and  having strip EQ to the monitor mix could make it more difficult to correct.
There is no "right" way on this topic

[Tim McCulloch]

That pre supposes that the only reason to apply EQ is to "correct" some response issue.
EQ might be applied to better sit the instrument or vocal in the mix and, as such, may not be needed or create problems, in the monitor mix.
Also, there are many posts about "my monitors are feeding back" and  having strip EQ to the monitor mix could make it more difficult to correct.
There is no "right" way on this topic

Mac's post and your reply illustrate the compromise in mixing monitors from FOH or any mixer with a primary task other than performer monitors and having its own analog or competent digital split.

[Luke Geis]

This is just my preference, but YMMV. I prefer to utilize the mix bus / Aux EQ for all corrective EQ needs. This includes Hi-Pass / low-cut and feedback mitigation. I prefer to utilize the channel eq ( assuming you have a separate monitor feed channel ) to do the make it pretty and fix channel specific issues. If you run monitors from FOH this is challenging with analog mixers or digital mixers where you are running out of channel count. I try not to use the low cut / hi pass filters from the channel in the monitors if I can get away from doing so. More on that later.

With a digital mixer I will simply copy the vocal channels into another set of channels and utilize those for monitors. I will set them for Post EQ / Pre Fader and I can then EQ them as needed. With an analog mixer you will have to split the channels with a Y. In either case it's an extra step and it can lead to confusion and frustration; obviously a dedicated monitor desk would be preferred.

About why I don't like using the channels Hi-Pass and low-cut in the monitors. It may be nit picky, or perhaps nuts, but I try and keep as much stuff in as clean a phase relation as I can. If you can imagine the phase shift around the corner frequency that is exhibited at different channels ( due to different Hi-Pass frequencies ) all being placed into several mixes. Take that and then combine it with all the stage wash and all the low level energy that each mic takes from the monitor in front of it and injects back into the monitor mix. If you utilize only 1 Hi-Pass, you reduce the number of phase shifts significantly. Not to mention that you now have eliminated lots of low end energy potential on the stage by X number of monitors, which reduces that much more stage wash for mics to pick up and place back into the monitors. While it seems a bit over the top, it really helps keeps things as clean and clutter free as it can be. I will often times end up with a Hi-Pass frequncy on the aux EQ set around 120hz - 200hz quite commonly. Each mix may need a tailored setting ( like drums obviously ). With this approach I have found that it solves many more problems than it creates.

As Tim mentioned, there is no singer on the planet that needs 100hz in the monitor. They may want it for their own silly reason, but from a practical and functional standpoint, it is want / desire, not a need / requirement. Since my stance on monitors is that they are meant to be heard, not sound pretty, I have found a way that for me at least works very well. The first place I start is by utilizing a Hi-Pass / Low -Cut filter on the aux bus. I shoot to go as high with it as I can before it starts sounding too thin and unnatural. I give a little back if the artists mix needs it. Bass guitar, keys and drums are mixes that often need a little more low end extension to sound right. This usually puts the filter closer to the PA's crossover point. It depends however on if that artist sings or not. If they sing, I try and keep it as high as possible. If they don't sing, I am more opt to give them a less adulterated mix.

[ProSoundWeb Community]