As intimated in the two previous posts, when nothing you try is working there is a better than even chance that the problem lies with you.
If the person speaking (or indeed singing) can not get enough volume going into the mic, compared to “unwanted” sound , then there is no technical solution.
Maybe one day a computer will be able to separate the human voice from other sounds in real time and process it differently - but we ain’t there yet.
That is not the problem. Not exactly.
The problem is to get enough gain before feedback so the SPL from the room speakers is adequately higher than the BG noise.
UPwards compressing the voice input would help solve the problem.
gain before feedback will not change at all.
no feedback problem when they talk louder so no way for upwards compression to cause feedback at all.
content removed - personal comment that does not contribute to the thread
You just are not getting it!!! AT ALL!
Person speaking louder/closer to a mic does not need as much overall gain in the system
equals a more stable system…even if it’s a piece of crap.
Person whispering two feet away from a mic needs a lot more system gain applied in an attempt to make them louder resulting in anything louder at the mic than the whispering voice gets amplified including the very sound of the sound system resulting in feedback.
If your sound system is not properly tuned, rung out, Processed, Eq’d, deployed, a piece of crap or in any combination of those items your gain before feedback will be lower to non existent.
There is only so much that can be done when you have a whisper talker with no clue about using a mic…AND THERE IS NO MAGIC PROCESSING THAT WILL TAKE THAT AND MAKE THEM SOUND LIKE A SMOOTH JAZZ FM RADIO DJ ON THE PA.
I need to ask…how old are you, do you run sound anywhere other than in church on Sunday morning, do you personally own and operate a sound system, do you do sound production jobs for pay where failure is not an option?
Owning some recording gear set up in your basement does not count for any of the above.
gain before feedback will not change at all. no feedback problem when they talk louder so no way for upwards compression to cause feedback at all.
This is just wrong.
content removed - personal comment that does not contribute to the thread
@volounteer
The gearslutz forum is another good place to find a way to discuss how you can solve your mixing issues.
The gearslutz forum is another good place to find a way to discuss how you can solve your mixing issues.
No more to discuss, anyone there who knows what their doing will tell you the same thing.
Try Pro Sound Web with your same questions.
Remember audio production tricks that work in a recording studio do not always work well in a live audio production set up.
You never did say what the rest of your system was.
@Dick Rees
content removed - personal comment that does not contribute to the thread
We have all the gain before feedback we need with the band screaming loud from the speakers on the ceiling.
There is NO problem with people talking louder or even UPcompressing soft talkers at all as they will never reach the same levels.
content removed - personal comment that does not contribute to the thread
I get it quite well.
You are saying things that no way relate to what I actually said. Non sequitur red herrings are not useful.
Yes a person whispering from a distance needs more systems gain, which is best done at the channel strip.
The best way to solve that problem is with UPwards compression. Raises the voice but does not lower gain before feedback.
One way, and there are others, to achieve that is with parallel compression which you may , or may not, have heard of.
That has been used for decades and is known to work.
The dealer set up the system quite well.
The problem is understanding the voice of the folks speaking especially those with too much DR.
I realise there are limits to what can be done but we have room to make that improvement to increase INTELLIGIBILITY.
No idea where you came up with the smooth jazz thing which is not what we are trying to do at all.
Your questions are irrelevant. But if it will shut up the naysaysere: I am retired, EE degree, ABD math, PhD Computer Science, and worked as a systems engineer. And taught at 3 unis. And I can read and grok technical info quite well.
I am more than qualified to understand what is going on and what our options to improve things are.
I have worked with recording since the 60s when I was a member of AES but did not pursue audio full time as a career.
I helped with a small Behringer analog board at my last church. We now just got a new digital AH board to use at our new church.
While I did not do media mastering, the personal work I have done with a DAW to edit mix and premaster is quite applicable.
I am retired, EE degree, ABD math, PhD Computer Science, and worked as a systems engineer. And taught at 3 unis. And I can read and grok technical info quite well. I am more than qualified to understand what is going on and what our options to improve things are.I have worked with recording since the 60s when I was a member of AES but did not pursue audio full time as a career.
I helped with a small Behringer analog board at my last church. We now just got a new digital AH board to use at our new church.
While I did not do media mastering, the personal work I have done with a DAW to edit mix and premaster is quite applicable.
IOW, you have almost zero experience in live sound, the field in which I began by building my own system components from kits back in the early 1960’s and continue to the present. None of your CV is applicable to the real world of live audio engineering.
With respect…at risk of you becoming combative with me also… if it were me, and I had folks with years of experience in the live sound reinforcement world telling me the same thing, I’d probably at least consider what they had to say. I can personally vouch for Mr. Rees who has forgotten more than most will ever learn when it comes to running sound in a live environment. Listen to what he has to say because you might find it makes sense…
Volounteer. Please educate me.
You said:
“The best way to solve that problem is with UPwards compression. Raises the voice but does not lower gain before feedback.
One way, and there are others, to achieve that is with parallel compression which you may , or may not, have heard of.
That has been used for decades and is known to work.”
Please explain how this works. How (on a desk that does have parallel compression) do I set this up to get more volume from a quiet performer, without getting (closer to) feedback?
How does this Upward compression work?
A good explanation for those interested in the four basic forms of dynamics: https://www.izotope.com/en/blog/mixing/expanding-on-compression-3-overlooked-techniques-for-improving-dynamic-range.html
My 2p: I don’t think this problem can be solved purely in the desk using dynamics. Some form of noise rejection is needed. Perhaps even look at a differential pair? Good old fashioned physics might be the solution here.
DC
No idea where you came up with the smooth jazz thing which is not what we are trying to do at all.
That was just an analogy trying to explain yet one more time that in a live audio production setting no piece of equipment will make up for someone talking two feet or more from the mic with the mic pointed who knows where in comparison to someone talking directly into the mic.
I really hope you do not convince your church to spend money on buying more equipment, a new mixer, ect in an attempt to “fix” this.
They do need to spend some money to have someone come in who knows what their doing and go through the system front to back to make sure it’s operating as the best it can be.
someone come in who knows what their doing and go through the system front to back to make sure it’s operating as the best it can be.
Exactly. It would seem that this entire thread is based on several questionable assumptions, little or no information on system components/deployment, program material and other salient facts.
What is the problem? One time it’s dynamic range, another time it’s lack of mic technique, then it’s voice intelligibility. These are three separate albeit interactive points of focus. There’s no “one button fixes all” solution. If anything, patiently working with the mic users over time to instill good technique is the best overall approach.
But as quoted above, any proposed remedy based on the various possible techniques assumes a competently deployed, tuned and maintained PA to be effective. Without comprehensive and specific information in these regards, everything is pretty much in WAG territory…except the bit about mic technique.
Let’s take a look at the process and procedure here:
A major problem with ping-pong posting in quest of answers and solutions is the tendency of the initial statement (OP) to be couched in terms of the Socratic method rather than the Scientific method ( Scientific method - Wikipedia ). So rather than seeking expansion of or addition to ones knowledge, the objective tends toward seeking affirmation of ones preconceived opinion on an issue of which little knowledge or actual experience exists.
There are many “tells” in such postings. In this case the inquiry regarding the possible efficacy of using AMM and the statement that dynamic processing does not affect system headroom (GBF) indicate: 1. an unfamiliarity with Dugans algorithms and 2. a common mistake carried over by studio folk used to working “in the box” rather than a live audio scenario involving a PA system.
content removed - personal comment that does not contribute to the thread
A good explanation for those interested in the four basic forms of dynamics: https://www.izotope.com/en/blog/mixing/expanding-on-compression-3-overlooked-techniques-for-improving-dynamic-range.htmlMy 2p: I don’t think this problem can be solved purely in the desk using dynamics. Some form of noise rejection is needed. Perhaps even look at a differential pair? Good old fashioned physics might be the solution here.
DC
David…
All well and good IN THE BOX. The link clearly speaks of this as a studio technique rather than live audio. The curious may attempt to export such studio methods to a live sound scenario, but whether or not it succeeds with active sound reinforcement is kind of a crap shoot. I work in both worlds as well as live broadcast and a good few basic processes serve across the board. But in the case under “discussion” here, such transposition results in diminished system headroom. If you have plenty to begin with, then you are in the lucky minority. If you lack headroom you’ll soon run into some pretty ugly consequences.
I will offer that a large portion of amateur speakers the won’t get up on a mic is due to their uncomfort hearing themselves amplified.
Add gain and they’ll likely back off even more!
In that situation I say fine, let’s try nixing’ the foldback monitor.