Concern with a line in a band's rider

[tk2k]

Hi all,

Got a group that sent me a rider for a band they've booked. Everything looks in-order, except for this one line here...

1. [band's foh engineer] who shall have the ability to, at his discretion, attenuate, or remove completely any compressionor limiting that may be inserted into the main FOH mix.
   

We've set our limiters at a level right before clipping, and I really don't want to sign off on someone being able to come in and remove all system protection, without a line in the rider that says "foh engineer is responsible for any damage as a result of removing protection" which I'm sure they'd never sign off on.

Am I worried over nothing? Is this a common practice?

 

[DaveySimps]

This is standard rider language. If you are really worried about it, tell the client you will not agree to it, and explain why. In the day and age where most system processors are locked off, the engineer would need you to physically do this, (especially if the preset is password protected). In my 14 years in the industry, I have never actually had anyone try to do this.

~Dave

 

[DuckJordan]

I agree with Davey, If someone wants to remove my limiters, they will be paying for any and all damage that may occur to my system. Just red line that and get back to them.

 

[Footer]

Yes and no. Most riders have a line in there like "Act shall have access to all system processing" etc. Now, most FOH engineers are plenty respectful of the house PA and don't want to blow it up. I would try to establish a DB limit measured at FOH with the promoter and the act. In my house we have XTA processing and meyer boxes. THe XTA's just handle distribution and set a house curve. After that, the meyer boxes have limiting in them that keeps the boxes from blowing up. Keep the limiters on, explain to the engineer that the limiters are right before you do damage to the box. Most guys would rather have a PA that is a bit quieter the entire night then a PA that blows 10 minutes into the show. During sound check be at FOH and watch your processing to see if it is kicking. Sometimes you can drop a frequency or two to get a bit more out of the box before it starts limiting. In my case, if you roll some 250 out you can get an extra DB or two out of the system.

How loud can your PA get right now? If you don't know that number, get a meter and find that out. Talk to the promoter and act and let them know this number. If they are not happy with that, let the promoter know they need to pull in racks and stacks from an outside vendor.

 

[tk2k]

Thanks guys,
We can do 109 at mix without any limiting, so should be fine, it was just worrying language.

 

[Footer]

Thanks guys,
We can do 109 at mix without any limiting, so should be fine, it was just worrying language.

You'll be fine then. Most guys are happy if they can get to 105.

 

[bishopthomas]

Yeah, don't worry about it. Only once have I ever needed access to system processing. It was after someone had changed all the crossover points to absurd values and there were no low mids or highs anymore (and those were coming out of the wrong boxes). For the most part, and in large respectable rooms, I trust the house guys who mix one these rigs every night. I typically start soundcheck without even flattening out the graphics. If it sounds bad I'll put frequencies back or cut something; I don't think I've ever had the need to flatten an EQ and start over. But then again, I'm going into gigs as a sound company owner, so I immediately understand what it's like from the other side.

 

[museav]

You'll be fine then. Most guys are happy if they can get to 105.

105 what? If SPL, is that A, C or Z weighting weighting? Is it a momentary maximum with fast, slow or impulse response or is it maybe some form of Leq, Ln or average? Where is it measured? What is the system response? How does the response and level vary over the listener area? So many tech riders seem to identify seemingly meaningless or random numbers without even addressing how those are to be measured or factors such as coverage and response.

I keep hoping that one day BEs and bands will realize that a lot of their tech rider language makes them look ignorant and amateurish rather than cool and professional. However, they specifically included such language and in my experience the people most likely to make an issue out of it may be the ones least qualified to do so, thus I would not just ignore it. Preferably, cross it out. Alternatively, include some language to try to make them responsible for any resulting damage including not just equipment costs but all direct and indirect related costs.

 

[tk2k]

I keep hoping that one day BEs and bands will realize that a lot of their tech rider language makes them look ignorant and amateurish rather than cool and professional. However, they specifically included such language and in my experience the people most likely to make an issue out of it may be the ones least qualified to do so, thus I would not just ignore it. Preferably, cross it out. Alternatively, include some language to try to make them responsible for any resulting damage including not just equipment costs but all direct and indirect related costs.

Yeah that's a good point. We get a lot of B+ bands and some of the rider language just makes no sense. I had an engineer call us about having 'off brand subs'. They were Danley TH-115's......

 

[Talley]

That is normal. Just call them. Any BE that knows what they're doing won't mind being asked about it.

 

[TJCornish]

Hi all,

Got a group that sent me a rider for a band they've booked. Everything looks in-order, except for this one line here...



We've set our limiters at a level right before clipping, and I really don't want to sign off on someone being able to come in and remove all system protection, without a line in the rider that says "foh engineer is responsible for any damage as a result of removing protection" which I'm sure they'd never sign off on.

Am I worried over nothing? Is this a common practice?

+1 to the other responses in the thread. Most riders are poorly copied boilerplate information, made by people who don't even know what they're asking for, with no consideration for the size of gig or room in question.

I see this as all upside for you - calling them and working it out will likely solve the issue and give the BE comfort that you're not a screwball ankle-biter. If not, you either make appropriate provisions for the band to accept responsibility for gear damage - including an up-front deposit, or you can refuse what would ultimately be a nasty gig with unreasonable people, and spend more time with your family. Bad business is not better than no business.

 

[neotrotsky]

Another solution is to email them and let them know of your settings and what threshold your house holds to on compression. As long as they realize that your settings are for system protection, you won't hear a peep out of them in protest. Most of these riders are, as someone mentioned, copy-and-paste jobs to fill out a contract. For those who actually know what's in their rider, many engineers like throwing that bit in for house engineers who over compress EVERYTHING as many young ones are want to do in modern pop music, or who over-process in general (especially reverb! As a Jazz-specific live sound guy this is my biggest pet peeve!)

 

[TimmyP1955]

I would add a paragraph to the contract stating user liability if anything in the system processing is changed on their behalf.

 

[museav]

For those who actually know what's in their rider, many engineers like throwing that bit in for house engineers who over compress EVERYTHING as many young ones are want to do in modern pop music, or who over-process in general (especially reverb! As a Jazz-specific live sound guy this is my biggest pet peeve!)

This one reason I advocate independent system and 'artistic' processing. Set the system processing properly for the venue and system then have dedicated comp/limiting, EQ, etc. at FOH (often the console processing with digital consoles) for any 'artistic'/subjective/personal preference processing. That way the house processing should not have to be adjusted for any individual act or event. The only time that seems ineffective is if someone does a poor job of configuring the house processing, but that's a problem regardless of the hardware approach used.

You can also get all 'legalese' with that approach in that the house processing can be viewed as part of the speaker system and you can give them access to all 'mix' processing without letting them access the speaker processing.