ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => HistoryOfConcertSound.org => Topic started by: Garreth Broesche on September 18, 2012, 01:20:38 PM
-
Hello,
I am brand new to this forum and, to be honest, am posting for entirely selfish reasons. Nevertheless, I hope that the live sound pros (or historians) out there can help me find some information that I am seeking.
I am working on a PhD in Philosophy of Music Theory and my dissertation focuses, in part, on certain aspects of the Beatles’ move from live band to strictly studio performers.
I am trying to find as much information as possible about the evening of August 15, 1965 - the famous Shea Stadium concert. Specifically, I am hoping to figure out exactly what sound equipment was in use that evening. (Amps, speakers, microphones, what the PA system at Shea was like and how it was employed that evening, etc…)
Let me tell you what sources I am privy to so far (much of it gleaned from cruising this website):
Andy Babiuk’s book, Beatles Gear, is a very cool resource, but only mentions live sound in a few places and in not very much detail. I did hear about Bill Hanley from this book and I understand that he ran sound at the 1966 Shea concert, but not at the original one. I have an email out to Bill Hanley and I’m hoping he would be willing to discuss what he knows with me. From various online forums, I learned that there is a great book about the Grateful Dead - Grateful Dead Gear - that will help me to get a handle on the technology of live sound during this era, if not about the Beatles specifically (I have not seen this book yet - it is on request through inter-library loan). I also have Lewisohn’s book on the Beatles’ recording sessions and a wonderful book called Recording the Beatles by Kevin Ryan and Brian Kehew. Some of these sources go into great depth on Beatles gear but, again, not so much for live events.
From these sources - and others - I have a general grasp of how the live sound worked in those days but I am lacking in a lot of specifics.
Can you help me? Do you - or someone you know - have specific knowledge about the sound system at the Shea concert? About the Beatles‘ American tours in general? Or do you know of online or print resources (forums? trade journals?) that cover this topic? Any hints you can provide me would be tremendously appreciated.
Thank you!
-
Hello,
I am brand new to this forum and, to be honest, am posting for entirely selfish reasons. Nevertheless, I hope that the live sound pros (or historians) out there can help me find some information that I am seeking.
I am working on a PhD in Philosophy of Music Theory and my dissertation focuses, in part, on certain aspects of the Beatles’ move from live band to strictly studio performers.
I am trying to find as much information as possible about the evening of August 15, 1965 - the famous Shea Stadium concert. Specifically, I am hoping to figure out exactly what sound equipment was in use that evening. (Amps, speakers, microphones, what the PA system at Shea was like and how it was employed that evening, etc…)
Let me tell you what sources I am privy to so far (much of it gleaned from cruising this website):
Andy Babiuk’s book, Beatles Gear, is a very cool resource, but only mentions live sound in a few places and in not very much detail. I did hear about Bill Hanley from this book and I understand that he ran sound at the 1966 Shea concert, but not at the original one. I have an email out to Bill Hanley and I’m hoping he would be willing to discuss what he knows with me. From various online forums, I learned that there is a great book about the Grateful Dead - Grateful Dead Gear - that will help me to get a handle on the technology of live sound during this era, if not about the Beatles specifically (I have not seen this book yet - it is on request through inter-library loan). I also have Lewisohn’s book on the Beatles’ recording sessions and a wonderful book called Recording the Beatles by Kevin Ryan and Brian Kehew. Some of these sources go into great depth on Beatles gear but, again, not so much for live events.
From these sources - and others - I have a general grasp of how the live sound worked in those days but I am lacking in a lot of specifics.
Can you help me? Do you - or someone you know - have specific knowledge about the sound system at the Shea concert? About the Beatles‘ American tours in general? Or do you know of online or print resources (forums? trade journals?) that cover this topic? Any hints you can provide me would be tremendously appreciated.
Thank you!
I did look and then I read they used the house system. My hunch was Altec. I did a search and what little info I could find was this
They had 6 or 8 inputs in their system and no monitor's, I seen an interview with the band saying they had patched the 2 vocal mic's through their Vox amp's for a primitive fold-back. The House PA was 600Watts of Altec tube amp's and 6 very large Altec 2-way cabinet's.
-
I did look and then I read they used the house system. My hunch was Altec. I did a search and what little info I could find was this
They had 6 or 8 inputs in there system and no monitor's, I seen an interview with the band saying they had patched the 2 vocal mic's through there Vox amp's for a primitive fold-back. The House PA was 600Watts of Altec tube amp's and 6 very large Altec 2-way cabinet's.
was it altec A7s?
-
was it altec A7s?
Honestly, I did read that the Beatles used the Shea house system. I had a hunch it was probably Altec. I found that info.
Maybe if you contact these people they can give you more information.
http://www.preservationsound.com/?p=2505
Best of luck!
-
Hey Guys,
a quick google image search got this website with a picture of what looks like columns in the background
http://www.williesimpson.com/the-beatles-live-at-shea-stadium
and here:
http://www.thebeatles.com/#/films/The_Beatles_At_Shea_Stadium4
were these supplemental fill?
I know someone who was there and said he couldn't hear anything for the screaming :)
cheers
ferrit
-
Might want to drop a line to this fellow:
[email protected]
He's a Beatles historian and a super nice guy. If you do speak with him please tell him I said hello.
-
From these sources - and others - I have a general grasp of how the live sound worked in those days but I am lacking in a lot of specifics.
Can you help me? Do you - or someone you know - have specific knowledge about the sound system at the Shea concert? About the Beatles‘ American tours in general? Or do you know of online or print resources (forums? trade journals?) that cover this topic? Any hints you can provide me would be tremendously appreciated.
Thank you!
[/quote]
Disclaimer:
This is my imperfect memory of nearly half a century ago. Much of this I was told and did not attempt to verify.
The/A sound contractor was Central Jersey Sound Center of Oakhurst, NJ; I don't believe they are still in business. CJSC was a dealer for Altec, EV, and Atlas Sound. I was told at the time that they cross rented some of the gear. That said, pictures will tell you that EV sound columns and Altec A7-500s were used. Atlas horn drivers were less expensive and gave acceptable performance, so they were used on the EV 511 horns. I do not know, and have no way to check, but the customary CJSC setup would have used Altec 1567 mixers.
I considered the two partners that ran CJSC old at that time (Bernie and ...? nice guys) so it is unlikely that they are still around to tell you more about it.
I should have paid better attention.
Kevin Gallimore
-
Are these the EV sound columns?
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=101&num=10&hl=en&biw=1046&bih=598&tbm=isch&tbnid=4DxgpSzn8ntfBM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dipity.com/tickr/Flickr_beatles_in_null/&docid=PdRmW_3ewu5lvM&imgurl=http://static.flickr.com/1/128620662_bba5d9ac5d.jpg&w=500&h=342&ei=GRdqULbJFITvygHl94CADA&zoom=1&iact=hc&dur=390&sig=103177919331139181830&page=6&tbnh=130&tbnw=205&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:101,i:96&tx=130&ty=86&vpx=443&vpy=248&hovh=171&hovw=254
Also... I think I have "personal messages" from some of you but I can't seem to access them. I am having a hard time with certain aspects of this web site. I would very much like to be able to communicate with those trying to help me, so here is my email: [email protected].
-
And can someone identify this mike?
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=101&num=10&hl=en&biw=1046&bih=598&tbm=isch&tbnid=Odb1iDJBxfI67M:&imgrefurl=http://www.popscreen.com/v/65D8d/the-beatles--i-m-down--im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965&docid=wdOrdsMpYJHIHM&imgurl=http://v022o.popscreen.com/SHYwZnFuOW9paHMx_o_the-beatles-i-m-down-im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965.jpg&w=480&h=360&ei=GRdqULbJFITvygHl94CADA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=288&vpy=280&dur=830&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=178&ty=146&sig=103177919331139181830&page=6&tbnh=131&tbnw=181&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:11,s:101,i:109
-
Also... I think I have "personal messages" from some of you but I can't seem to access them. I am having a hard time with certain aspects of this web site. I would very much like to be able to communicate with those trying to help me, so here is my email: [email protected].
What browser are you using? There should be a series of link buttons at the top of the page, "Home" "Help" "Search" "Profile" "My Messages" "Calendar" "Members" "Logout". The "My Messages" link should get you a pop up menu of "Read your messages" and "Send a Message". Selecting "read My Messages" should get you to all you private messages.
Mac
-
And can someone identify this mike?
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=101&num=10&hl=en&biw=1046&bih=598&tbm=isch&tbnid=Odb1iDJBxfI67M:&imgrefurl=http://www.popscreen.com/v/65D8d/the-beatles--i-m-down--im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965&docid=wdOrdsMpYJHIHM&imgurl=http://v022o.popscreen.com/SHYwZnFuOW9paHMx_o_the-beatles-i-m-down-im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965.jpg&w=480&h=360&ei=GRdqULbJFITvygHl94CADA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=288&vpy=280&dur=830&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=178&ty=146&sig=103177919331139181830&page=6&tbnh=131&tbnw=181&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:11,s:101,i:109
Looks like 2 mikes taped together-very common "back in the day". One "might" be a Shure Unisphere-but I don't know if they were made back then. That would be the one will the silver ball. No idea on the other-possibly an EV-I seem to remember a mic that "kinda" looked like what I can see.
-
Ivan, my guess would have been an AKG D-24...
Bob Schwarz
-
Thanks for the help, Mac. I was able to find my personal messages.
I'm really surprised that no one can identify those speaker columns! So many mysteries!
-
Thanks to Louis for the personal message.... I will visit those forums you suggested. Thanks!
-
I'm really surprised that no one can identify those speaker columns! So many mysteries!
I don't think they're speaker columns. There's no wiring. I have no idea what they are.
-
I don't think they're speaker columns. There's no wiring. I have no idea what they are.
I had always thought (having seen the photos many times over the years) that they were small speaker columns-maybe with 6" drivers. I had always guessed Vox-since all their other gear was vox.
But as I looked at the photo again-I thought the same thing to myself-I don't see any wiring. But was afraid to post that. glad you did.
-
I had always thought (having seen the photos many times over the years) that they were small speaker columns-maybe with 6" drivers. I had always guessed Vox-since all their other gear was vox.
But as I looked at the photo again-I thought the same thing to myself-I don't see any wiring. But was afraid to post that. glad you did.
Very, very interesting...
Here is a quote from Bob Spitz's recent Beatles biography:
“More than fifty 100-watt amplifiers had been set up along the base paths of the diamond, but they were no match for the wall of piercing sound that blared from the stands. The fans drowned out all the singing and most of the music…"
He's talking about Shea 1965 and clearly means those skinny "speakers" that are in the picture I linked (I guess Spitz doesn't know the difference between an "amplifer" and a "speaker"...?). But you guys are absolutely right - there seems to be no wiring running to them. Wireless technology would not have been in place then (right?) and no one can seem to identify them as any make or model of speaker that they recognize. Were they put up just for show? Did they have something to do with security? If they are not actually working speakers... Is what Spitz wrote above simply urban legend that needs to be debunked???
-
He's talking about Shea 1965 and clearly means those skinny "speakers" that are in the picture I linked (I guess Spitz doesn't know the difference between an "amplifer" and a "speaker"...?). But you guys are absolutely right - there seems to be no wiring running to them. Wireless technology would not have been in place then (right?) and no one can seem to identify them as any make or model of speaker that they recognize. Were they put up just for show? Did they have something to do with security? If they are not actually working speakers... Is what Spitz wrote above simply urban legend that needs to be debunked???
If it was wireless-there are way to many factors that would be "missing". ANd the least of them is the actual wireless system.
You have to look at the technology at the time. Transistors were just getting started. Most all gear was tube. That meant much larger than these days. So you have to have a large amp (yes a 100 watt tube amp is pretty large). Batteries (not as strong as today), power inverter-I'm not even sure there were any back then-at least of a quality good enough run audio gear.
And when you talk wireless-there would also have to be a receiver.
So all that gear must be hiding somewhere that we can't see.
Sorry-but I don't know what the real answer is.
-
Very, very interesting...
Here is a quote from Bob Spitz's recent Beatles biography:
“More than fifty 100-watt amplifiers had been set up along the base paths of the diamond, but they were no match for the wall of piercing sound that blared from the stands. The fans drowned out all the singing and most of the music…"
He's talking about Shea 1965 and clearly means those skinny "speakers" that are in the picture I linked (I guess Spitz doesn't know the difference between an "amplifer" and a "speaker"...?). But you guys are absolutely right - there seems to be no wiring running to them. Wireless technology would not have been in place then (right?) and no one can seem to identify them as any make or model of speaker that they recognize. Were they put up just for show? Did they have something to do with security? If they are not actually working speakers... Is what Spitz wrote above simply urban legend that needs to be debunked???
He clearly doesn't know the difference between an amplifier and a speaker. I vote for small gauge wire that doesn't show up in the photos. We didn't used to wire speakers with nothing but 12ga wire. They may even be 70v speakers with 1 or 2 circuits of small gauge wire.
Mac
-
Bob Spitz' biography is well known to be riddled with errors, so I would take anything he says with a large pile of salt.
When he talks about speakers "around the diamond", he's probably mixing up that 1st performance with the 2nd one in 1966 when Bill Hanley took over the sound.
"Our sound company from Boston, Hanley Sound, drove to Chicago to do the show [opening for the Beatles] with us. They pulled their truck right into the Amphitheater and set up their state-of-the-art sound equipment right beside the in-house P.A. system. What a joke! The in-house stuff was so archaic next to the powerful amps, good mics, and Altec speakers. Right before the show, Brian Epstein looked at the two sound systems and decided that the Beatles should go with our system. So the Beatles hired Bill Hanley to do the sound for the [eastern part] of the tour!"
And thus Hanley next found himself behind the board at the historic Beatles concert at Shea Stadium. He distributed Altec- Lansing speakers all around the stadium, doubled the sound typically used, doubled the power with an impressive (for the time) 600-watt amplifier system… and then when an armored car drove onto the field and John, Paul, George and Ringo stepped out, his sound system was pulverized by the power of 42,000 screaming teenage girls.
"I didn't have a snowball's chance in hell," he laughs. "It was sheer pandemonium. I had the band on the pitcher's mound, the speakers on the first and third base line, and I made this big circle of sound, all facing up, so the speakers didn't cross… but it was going against 135 dB of screaming. I couldn't approach that."
http://www.pbase.com/tg6string/image/66804291 (http://www.pbase.com/tg6string/image/66804291)
(http://i.pbase.com/g3/53/562753/2/66804291.7isthpT4.jpg)
-
Wireless technology would not have been in place then (right?)
There weren't even wireless microphones used at concerts until the 1970's. Wireless speakers? Not a chance.
All accounts I've heard of the 1st Shea performance stated that all they used was the "in-house PA", which in my opinion would have only been paging horns as it was only used for announcements. In fact, all accounts I've read say that they actually intended to only use their specially designed 100w VOX amps (normally they had 50w amps, I believe) for the concert. When someone realized that their 100w amps wouldn't cut it, they hooked into the house PA "at the last minute" to try and make at least an attempt at getting some kind of sound to the audience.
Remember that there were no concerts of this scale ever done before this, and no need for music reproduction at a stadium, so I can only imagine horns, no full-range speakers of any sort would make up the house public address system.
As I mentioned above, even Bill Hanley and his sound company had no where near enough PA for this kind of event. It just didn't exist in the mid-sixties. Things did change quickly, after that, though!
-
There weren't even wireless microphones used at concerts until the 1970's. Wireless speakers? Not a chance.
All accounts I've heard of the 1st Shea performance stated that all they used was the "in-house PA", which in my opinion would have only been paging horns as it was only used for announcements. In fact, all accounts I've read say that they actually intended to only use their specially designed 100w VOX amps (normally they had 50w amps, I believe) for the concert. When someone realized that their 100w amps wouldn't cut it, they hooked into the house PA "at the last minute" to try and make at least an attempt at getting some kind of sound to the audience.
Remember that there were no concerts of this scale ever done before this, and no need for music reproduction at a stadium, so I can only imagine horns, no full-range speakers of any sort would make up the house public address system.
As I mentioned above, even Bill Hanley and his sound company had no where near enough PA for this kind of event. It just didn't exist in the mid-sixties. Things did change quickly, after that, though!
I remember reading an article from a guy who was a Vox factory rep (back when that actually meant something) who was on the tour. His basic job was to keep the amps working through the tour.
He said he spent his time at the concerts basically plugging in the amps into the edison outlets. They kept falling out due to vibration. Remember back then most stuff did not have the ground plug and the contacts were not as tight as today.
A lot was learned in the early days.
-
He clearly doesn't know the difference between an amplifier and a speaker. I vote for small gauge wire that doesn't show up in the photos. We didn't used to wire speakers with nothing but 12ga wire. They may even be 70v speakers with 1 or 2 circuits of small gauge wire.
Mac
Thanks for all the interesting answers, guys. Going back to the pic I linked... This is clearly Shea '65 (based on the Nehru jackets). There seems to be no consensus on what those speaker-like things are! Only Mac (quoted above) even took a stab at guessing what they could be!
I'm still doing my damndest to figure this out (I've got inquiries out to every public library in NYC, for example - looking for some kind of Shea historian). But it seems most likely that they initially thought to just use their Vox amps (Babiuk writes that they had the AC-100s as early as their first full US tour in the summer of '64) and nothing else - they would just run the vocals and drums through them as well - then at "the last minute" tried to also go through the house PA. This perhaps explains why they seem to be singing through two mikes taped together (one to the Vox amps and one to the house PA?). It also, of course, explains why everything sounded so awful.
But this leaves more questions than it answers... What the hell ARE those skinny "speakers"? There is a recording (I have it - it sounds terrible) of the performance made off of the mixer... Would the house PA have had a mixer? I suppose it would have had a very basic one...
Anyways, anything helps at this point. Thanks for your continued interest in this strain!
-
I wonder if Spitz got his information about the "50 amplifiers" from NYT reviewer Murray Schumach. In his 1965 review of the concert, Mr. Schumach can barely hide his obvious disdain for the whole event:
"But their fans did little more than see the Beatles as they strummed their guitars, moved their lips, waved their hands, tapped their feet and beat a drum. For in the piercing shrill acclamation, the fans drowned out almost all of the singing. Little more than the pulsation of the electric guitars and thump of drums reached the stands although more than 50 amplifiers had been set up along the basepaths of the baseball diamond."
And I wonder it Schumach just SAW those skinny, tan "amplifiers" or if he had some insider knowledge into the PA set up...
-
Are these the EV sound columns?
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=101&num=10&hl=en&biw=1046&bih=598&tbm=isch&tbnid=4DxgpSzn8ntfBM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dipity.com/tickr/Flickr_beatles_in_null/&docid=PdRmW_3ewu5lvM&imgurl=http://static.flickr.com/1/128620662_bba5d9ac5d.jpg&w=500&h=342&ei=GRdqULbJFITvygHl94CADA&zoom=1&iact=hc&dur=390&sig=103177919331139181830&page=6&tbnh=130&tbnw=205&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:101,i:96&tx=130&ty=86&vpx=443&vpy=248&hovh=171&hovw=254
Also... I think I have "personal messages" from some of you but I can't seem to access them. I am having a hard time with certain aspects of this web site. I would very much like to be able to communicate with those trying to help me, so here is my email: [email protected].
How bout these? Vox Grenadiers
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1960S-V1091-VOX-GRENADIER-SPEAKER-COLUMN-USED-BEATLES-/251152686627
-
Hmm.... Maybe you are getting warm, Stu.
I don't think the ones on that field quite match with that picture. But I just read somewhere that Thomas Organ did some manufacturing for Vox in the US in the 1960s. Perhaps these are Thomas Organ versions of that Vox speaker? Perhaps they have the same insides as a standard Vox Grenadier, but different casing...?
Just thinking aloud here...
-
Hmm.... Maybe you are getting warm, Stu.
I don't think the ones on that field quite match with that picture. But I just read somewhere that Thomas Organ did some manufacturing for Vox in the US in the 1960s. Perhaps these are Thomas Organ versions of that Vox speaker? Perhaps they have the same insides as a standard Vox Grenadier, but different casing...?
Just thinking aloud here...
In the '60s and '70s column speakers were pretty common. Some of the companies that made them are not around anymore, or at least not making speakers anymore. Temple, University, and Bozak are 3 that come to mind off the top of my head. Those are not Bozaks, they are too skinny, but they could easily be Temple or University, I think there is no way to know.
Mac
-
Hmm.... Maybe you are getting warm, Stu.
I don't think the ones on that field quite match with that picture. But I just read somewhere that Thomas Organ did some manufacturing for Vox in the US in the 1960s. Perhaps these are Thomas Organ versions of that Vox speaker? Perhaps they have the same insides as a standard Vox Grenadier, but different casing...?
Just thinking aloud here...
Or simply painted with different grills. I looked at the size and depth and they looked close to your picture.
-
Hi guys.... I've had a tremendous stroke of good fortune and am now in touch with none other than Duke Mewborn, the gentleman who set up and ran the sound system for the Beatles 1965 concert in Atlanta.
I interviewed him last Friday and got the skinny on the system that night. I'm still transcribing the interview, but I'd be happy to share what I learned.... Would you want to know about this?
-
I would, for sure!
-
Absolutely!
-
Absolutely!
Cool.... Give me a few more days to transcribe the interview then I'll post it. It's REALLY interesting stuff...
-
Hi guys.... I've had a tremendous stroke of good fortune and am now in touch with none other than Duke Mewborn, the gentleman who set up and ran the sound system for the Beatles 1965 concert in Atlanta.
I interviewed him last Friday and got the skinny on the system that night. I'm still transcribing the interview, but I'd be happy to share what I learned.... Would you want to know about this?
Was that the show that Baker Audio provided sound for?
I saw a letter from Brian Epstein to Baker that said the sound in Atlanta was the best on the tour.
My guess is that Altec was the speaker of choice (since Baker was one of the "chosen few").
-
Okay, here’s the skinny on the sound system used for the Beatles 1965 show in Atlanta (based on a conversation with Duke Mewborn).
Atlanta Stadium opened in April of 1965. Duke Mewborn’s company, Baker Audio, was the contractor that installed the original sound system into the stadium. Baker Audio is still in business. They are not primarily in the business of live sound but, rather, are a contracting company that does installations in airports, theaters, stadiums, churches, etc.
When the Beatles booked the show there, Baker was recommended to them to run the sound. This is apparently how it worked - the Beatles would contact the stadium and they would recommend someone to run sound. Since Baker had done the installation, they were the natural choice.
The stadium had a high-quality sound system for its time. It had a control room outfitted with an Altec 250SU console. This was a 10-channel mixer that could accommodate any combination of line or mike inputs. One drawback was that the control room was behind glass. This meant that someone would have to sit in the open air and relay information to the board operator via telephone.
The stadium was also outfitted with “field amplifiers” for occasions when loudspeakers were needed on the field, such as a concert. Also, the installed speakers were for voice only - they were not full-range speakers - so they would have been inappropriate for music. The field amplifiers were Altec 1570s.
For the Beatles show, the stadium was set over second base, the geometric center of the circular stadium. Seats were only sold for 180 degrees of the stadium, so the sound crew did not have to worry about projecting sound behind the stage. (About 30,000 people attended.)
The installed speakers were not used at all. The mains, rather, were two clusters of Altec A7s. Mewborn recalls that 12 were used, set up to the left and right of the stage, and fairly tight to it.
The monitor speakers were set up in a line array in front of the stage, set low so as not to obstruct anyone’s view. I did not get the make and model of these.
All of these speakers were driven by the field amplifiers. Mewborn recalls that four were in use that night, linked together to achieve a total of 700 watts of power. (Mewborn says that nowadays large concerts use upwards of 100,000 watts.)
Mewborn used three microphones and does not recall the exact make and model. He is certain that they were dynamic cardioid mikes (comparable today to a Shure SM58) and were likely Altec, EV, or Shure. One mike was set over the drums and two were set out front for the three singers. As was customary for Beatles concerts, the guitar amps were not close-miked.
Stage monitors were of course unusual at that time, but Mewborn had a lot of experience running sound in large stadiums and often found that “slap-back” was a problem. It seems that the monitors were set up for this reason - so that the performers would not hear the music returning to the stage at a delayed interval.
Mewborn never met the Beatles, Mal Evans, Brian Epstein, or anyone else traveling with them. They did no sound check - they were just driven to the stage by limo at around 9:30, played their 30-minute set, and were gone. He did, however, receive a letter from Epstein. In this letter, Epstein praised the sound in Atlanta and asked Mewborn if he would travel with the band to help with sound. He declined, saying that he had a business to run. The Beatles never played in Atlanta again and did not contact him at any point before or during their 1966 US tour.
If you haven’t heard the bootleg from the Atlanta show, I highly recommend it. Especially in context with the bootleg of Shea, it’s striking how the Beatles react to being able to hear themselves. On “Everybody’s Trying to Be My Baby,” it sounds as if Harrison ALMOST improvises a guitar solo.
That’s the basics!
-
Thanks.
And to keep the power in perspective-the origional woodstock concert had 10,000 watts of power. Barely a good monitor system these days.
Amps were also MUCH smaller in those days-with a 300 watt amp being a HUGE amount of power.
Oh how times have changed
-
Thanks.
And to keep the power in perspective-the origional woodstock concert had 10,000 watts of power. Barely a good monitor system these days.
Amps were also MUCH smaller in those days-with a 300 watt amp being a HUGE amount of power.
Oh how times have changed
isn't part of this due tho to 'tube' watts being different than 'digital' watts...
for example... bass guitar rigs...
an Ampeg SVT 'fridge' is 300 tube watts, which is much louder than one of their 300 watt digital amps... in order to get the same perceived volume level, you need one of their 1600 watt digital heads...
I could be off base here, just thinking out loud...
-
isn't part of this due tho to 'tube' watts being different than 'digital' watts...
No. This is no such thing as a "digital watt."
And further, watts do not drive loudspeakers, VOLTAGE does.
-
No. This is no such thing as a "digital watt."
And further, watts do not drive loudspeakers, VOLTAGE does.
+1
Watt
noun /wät/
watts, plural
The SI unit of power, equivalent to one joule per second, corresponding to the power in an electric circuit in which the potential difference is one volt and the current one ampere.
-
isn't part of this due tho to 'tube' watts being different than 'digital' watts...
for example... bass guitar rigs...
an Ampeg SVT 'fridge' is 300 tube watts, which is much louder than one of their 300 watt digital amps... in order to get the same perceived volume level, you need one of their 1600 watt digital heads...
I could be off base here, just thinking out loud...
What you are talking about is the way the amps overload-(and how they sound when doing so) or when they are operated in the non linear range of operation.
Whenever anything is operated in its non linear range-it is a totally different type of discussion. Then personal preferences come into play. It becomes a lot harder to qualify measurable differences. Different people like different things.
It is amazing to me when somebody says they want accurate sound-but they want it to sound a particular way-that is non linear. DO WHAT?????????????? I want it to sound accurate-but still change the sound to make it "better". Maybe I just get confused easily.
-
I remember seeing ground level pics in which there was a ring of Vox columns (complete with tilt stands like that of the Super Beatle) placed in the grass out a bit from the stage.
-
Tim,
I'm sure you are referring to these column speakers from Shea '65?:
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=184&num=10&hl=en&biw=1178&bih=619&tbm=isch&tbnid=fUlWb-HzU6qYfM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dmbeatles.com/forums/index.php%3Ftopic%3D13905.0&docid=Oa_e-wnetyRYrM&imgurl=http://i49.tinypic.com/34xnn81.jpg&w=1024&h=681&ei=byyEUO_qCYWxygHjwoGwDA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=384&sig=103177919331139181830&page=10&tbnh=133&tbnw=214&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:200,i:4&tx=131&ty=54
I've been trying to figure out the make and model of these... I don't know that they are definitely Vox, but they are certainly similar to some Vox speakers of the time. If you happen to know that these ARE Vox, that would be a great piece of info...
To be clear, no column speakers of any kind were used at Atlanta Stadium. The mains were two clusters of Altec A7s, according to Mewborn.
-
(http://i49.tinypic.com/34xnn81.jpg)
Looks like the light brown color that Altec used on some of their products.
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Vintage-Altec-Lansing-850-8A-Column-Speaker-8-Ohms-L-K-Nice-/00/s/OTEwWDMyOQ==/$(KGrHqJ,!h!E-7S82Jb6BP)83ks++!~~60_57.JPG)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Altec-Lansing-850-8A-Column-Speaker-8-Ohms-L-K-Nice-/120927656807
I've never seen or heard a factory column being that long, but there was a lot of custom built stuff going around too. You have to remember that most soundco's back in the day built most of their own stuff.
P.S. I see wire in this pic...
-
Yeah, I see that wire too. But the way it is "snaking" makes me think that it's for one of the cameras - but maybe they wouldn't have needed any sort of cable? Oh jeez... Am I going to have to learn about camera technology of the day now too!!??
-
Yeah, I see that wire too. But the way it is "snaking" makes me think that it's for one of the cameras - but maybe they wouldn't have needed any sort of cable? Oh jeez... Am I going to have to learn about camera technology of the day now too!!??
TV cameras of that era were big and used... wait... TUBES. The cables were big & fat. The cameras were very heavy and I'd be surprised if there was more than 1 or 2 on the field, but I suppose anything is possible.
-
TV cameras of that era were big and used... wait... TUBES. The cables were big & fat. The cameras were very heavy and I'd be surprised if there was more than 1 or 2 on the field, but I suppose anything is possible.
Correct. I see the one TV camera on the third base line. The PSU (big battery pack?) and other equipment is right behind. The small wire at the foreground is for speakers. Probably nothing more than lamp cord running 70 volt speakers.
The still photographers would not have any reason to have a wire dangling behind them like that. If they used anything it would be a 3-4 foot coily cable that ran from the camera to a "potato-masher" flash. Still camera's of that day and age used no power at all. Strictly mechanical.
-
I think they had 12 or 13 cameras on hand for this. I really need to get the Shea DVD. I know that the music has been doctored, but I might find some visual evidence... Man, I wish I could find the equivalent of Duke Mewborn for this show's set up!
-
A bit of a change of topic...
By way of comparison, I am hoping to find out as much as I can about the sound system used for Paul McCartney's 2009 US tour. It occurred to me that his performance at Atlanta's Piedmont Park was 44 years to the day after Shea '65 and so it would be cool to compare these two sound systems.
Hypothetically, this should be easier than unraveling Shea - I know that Clair Global ran the sound (probably with Pab Boothroyd as primary FOH engineer) and I'm sure they have exhaustive records of what was used. I did find this article on FOH online:
http://www.fohonline.com/current-issue/71-showtime/4652-10-paul-mccartney.html
Although this refers to a 2011 tour, I'm sure it's very similar to 2009. I don't know the field well enough to know what all that means, and I'd very much like to speak with someone who was on the crew for the Atlanta 2009 show.
Unfortunately, I have so far had no luck finding anyone at Clair willing to talk to me. So I thought I'd post here just to see if there's anyone reading this who could help connect me with a kind soul at Clair. I don't know why they've been so reticent to speak with me - other than, I guess, that it's annoying!
Anyways... Can anyone help me with this?
-
Could one of the mics taped on be the EV 635? News mike standard?
the columns could these also be 70V Constant voltage systems? Smaller cable less likely to be seen but able to provide good vocal response.
-
And can someone identify this mike?
Ok by now maybe you got your answer but in case you didn't you have two mics there side by side. I would suspect that the black one is an EV live broadcast mic, maybe an Re series like the RE50 perhaps. Since it was way too early for the SM58 Shure, I wonder if it could have been a Shure 565 or very close. It is very difficult to see for sure. Steve Pleasant Star Audio
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=101&num=10&hl=en&biw=1046&bih=598&tbm=isch&tbnid=Odb1iDJBxfI67M:&imgrefurl=http://www.popscreen.com/v/65D8d/the-beatles--i-m-down--im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965&docid=wdOrdsMpYJHIHM&imgurl=http://v022o.popscreen.com/SHYwZnFuOW9paHMx_o_the-beatles-i-m-down-im-down-live-from-shea-stadium-1965.jpg&w=480&h=360&ei=GRdqULbJFITvygHl94CADA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=288&vpy=280&dur=830&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=178&ty=146&sig=103177919331139181830&page=6&tbnh=131&tbnw=181&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:11,s:101,i:109
-
Those aren't Vox columns. The Vox columns had their cosmetic treatment of piping around the cabinet, the diamond grilecloth and a tilt back stand that was a hoop connected to the middle of the sides with large round fittings. Kind of like a basket handle going the long way. My garage band in the late '60s had one that had 4 drivers. I think 10".
Those look like the kind of columns (early line arrays?) used to limit vertical dispersion in churches and gyms. The most common brand I remember was Argos. But also made by University and others. Those are the largest such I've ever seen, but it's possible that some were made for larger venues. They were typically mounted flat against the wall. Here it looks like someone hooked a 2x4 to the rear to lean them back.
I've seen pictures of the Candlestick Park show where they strung a bunch of University paging horns around the front of the stage and actually used a few of the Vox columns off to the sides.
-
Those look like the kind of columns (early line arrays?) used to limit vertical dispersion in churches and gyms.
Anytime you put speaker in a vertical "line" you get the "line array" effect at some freq.
As you go up in freq you need to start using smaller and smaller drivers to get them to work decently.
This was described (as well as the lobing that occurs-and the manufacturers would like for you to forget), a couple of decades before this photo was taken.
Shure actually described the "effect" in ads for the "Vocal Master", and the narrowing of the pattern. I have some early ads that talk about it.
That is part of the reason that the 8" drivers in the vocal master were in the middle, and the 10" were on the top and bottom of the cabinet. Because the lower freq can be further apart to get the same "narrowing" as the higher freq.
-
Agreed. Most of the old Argos columns used 5 or 6" drivers and were intended for speech. So unless Johnny Cash was giving the sermon they did function as line sources. The four 10's in the Vox columns or the mix in the Vocal masters were less of true line sources over the range of singers but went louder, which was more important at the time. Those things on the infield in Shea look like they must have had 8 or 10" drivers as well.
-
Agreed. Most of the old Argos columns used 5 or 6" drivers and were intended for speech. So unless Johnny Cash was giving the sermon they did function as line sources. The four 10's in the Vox columns or the mix in the Vocal masters were less of true line sources over the range of singers but went louder, which was more important at the time. Those things on the infield in Shea look like they must have had 8 or 10" drivers as well.
However what those old columns "missed" was the spacing of the drivers.
I am not aware of any of those columns that had the drivers actually touching-or close enough to work well.
Simply using small drivers does not mean you will get better performance. Only if they are close enough.
My "gut feeling" is that they used small driver due to lower component costs and smaller cabinets for lower costs. And they provided enough output for the intended purposes.
Heck even Marshall (yes the guitar amp company) had various "line" columns-starting with 8" speakers and 20 watt PA heads.
Yes times were different back then-----------
-
Ivan,
In the 60's there weren't many drivers available that could handle the punishing power of 50-100 watt amplifiers. We used 8" and 10" drivers in most cases, and always an even number, because the correct 8 or 16 ohm impedance was easier to achieve. A common large column consisted of 6 to 10 8 or 10" drivers usually rated at 15-25 watts. 10" Jensens became popular because they were cheap, but if one let go, they all let go. Just couldn't handle much power. In the later 60's we started to move to 12" columns, 4 drivers per box, because they were easy to handle in that format. Surprisingly even the home made columns of the day could be made to sound pretty good, and I have many fond memories of PA's made up of Bogan amplifiers columns and big University horns. Monitors? We were lucky if we had some Fender cabinets to use, but back in that day whatever worked, worked.
http://www.beatlesbible.com/1965/08/15/live-shea-stadium-new-york/ (http://www.beatlesbible.com/1965/08/15/live-shea-stadium-new-york/)
http://www.thebeatles.com/film/beatles-shea-stadium (http://www.thebeatles.com/film/beatles-shea-stadium)
-
We used 8" and 10" drivers in most cases, and always an even number, because the correct 8 or 16 ohm impedance was easier to achieve.
In England, Charlie Watkins would often parallel connect two 16 ohm Celestion drivers in one cabinet them put a 6 ohm sign on the back.
Steve.
-
.
.
.
Atlas horn drivers were less expensive and gave acceptable performance, so they were used on the EV 511 horns.
.
.
.
They were probably Altec "511 horns". I used 511Bs, with Peavey 22A drivers, successfully throughout the 80's.
-Dennis