Is this level of equipment appropriate

[museav]

There are people who have used the TOA HX-5 very successfully in some churches, smaller multipurpose rooms, etc. Of course all of those are also either speech only systems or used in conjunction with subwoofers. I think that people tend to look at the pictures of the HX-5 and think "line array", overlooking that the array is less than 22" high and 18" wide and intended to have a low frequency response limited to around 100Hz. I'm sure that many people do improperly apply the HX-5 but those results are then the fault of misapplication, not the product.

 

[TimmyP1955]

Your room sounds very similar to ours, which is ~55w x 65d x 22h (down front - the floor is 4 or 5 higher in back). (The room is MUCH too lively without treatment, which we don't yet have). Stage is ~4 high, 32w, 22d . We seat 386 + a couple of wheelchair areas.

We cover the room pretty nicely with a pair of U15, which give a nominal pattern of 100x50. They are stacked on the deck for the time being. Fidelity is very good for spoken word and vocals, and there's plenty of SPL capability should someone bring in an overly loud rock show. (There's also aux-fed subs under the center of the deck.)

Console is an LS9. An I-Live or SC48 would have been my first choice, but it was impossible to justify the additional expense given our other needs (acoustical treatment, additional lighting, ....).

Pics and info: H.J. Ricks Centre For The Arts

 

[JChenault]

Sorry to take so long to reply - I've been in tech week.

Someone asked to see the acoustical document. I am attaching it. Interested in seeing what folks may have to say about it.

John

 

[jkowtko]

A quick look through thedocs -- This sounds like the same config that was used to outfit the new Performing Arts Centers at two of our local high schools. A couple of comments:

* I can believe their recommendations on pit opening based on natural sound flow. However I've seen the pro houses start to close up the pit opening and close mic everything and send through the PA instead -- to get better control of final sound to the audience. If you think this may be preferred for some shows, see about getting a way reduce pit opening when needed.

* LCR main PA? I personally think they sound terrible, are set up for lecture but not for anything else. When all the sound comes from the ceiling, no matter which way to look at it it does not sound natural. A couple of notes here:
- The center cluster in my two schools does almost nothing but provide feedback to the mics. I can use it for little more than a low fill. Definitely not for vocals!
- the LR speakers are way too high, so I have to add front/side fills on the stage left and right, on tripod stands, to pull the sound down towards stage level. This results in a nice "wall of sound" coming from the stage. I would suggest that if the ceiling speaker config is chosen, that you also purchase L and R front/side fills to place on stage, with speaker stands, and designated return XLR jacks and properly grounded power outlets.
- flown subs were fine. I wasn't looking for awesome bass power in my shows, but even for the dance shows the bass came out pretty good so I didn't need to bring my own subs in.

* Where are the side fills on the side walls, and the rear fills on the rear walls? I'm surprised the audio company did not recommend these. JBL makes some standard speakers for this, they are useful for cinema and also to use as low fills (with delay -- but you have a digital board) for other types of performance.

* For the board, sure get the LS9 -- that's what they are specing without naming it.

 

[museav]

LCR main PA? I personally think they sound terrible, are set up for lecture but not for anything else. When all the sound comes from the ceiling, no matter which way to look at it it does not sound natural.

LCR mains is pretty much a standard for pro performance venues, I've had performance venue clients that probably would have fired me if I didn't plan on an LCR system. An important consideration here is that humans are much less discriminatory in vertical imaging and localization than they are in horizontal perception. The speakers being located over the proscenium opening does not imply ceiling speakers, which would be in the ceiling.

The center cluster in my two schools does almost nothing but provide feedback to the mics. I can use it for little more than a low fill. Definitely not for vocals!

That sounds like poor system design or improper implementation.

the LR speakers are way too high, so I have to add front/side fills on the stage left and right, on tripod stands, to pull the sound down towards stage level. This results in a nice "wall of sound" coming from the stage. I would suggest that if the ceiling speaker config is chosen, that you also purchase L and R front/side fills to place on stage, with speaker stands, and designated return XLR jacks and properly grounded power outlets.

It is fairly common to use front fill to help the first few rows, and to allow minimizing spill from the mains on stage, but multiple sources as noted can cause issues from imaging varying throughout the listener area to combfiltering so it should only be used where the benefits outweigh those factors. Typically, you don't have to get too far back in the house before the path length difference and imaging issues become negligible compared to the benefits of having the speakers overhead.

flown subs were fine. I wasn't looking for awesome bass power in my shows, but even for the dance shows the bass came out pretty good so I didn't need to bring my own subs in.

Flown subs have several advantages (coverage, alignment to mains, etc.) and don't have as much of a disadvantage as many think as the floor plane gain is already achieved by the audience being on that plane and thus putting the subs on that same plane does not really gain anything. The reasons to not fly subs are usually primarily related to weight, size or aesthetics.

Where are the side fills on the side walls, and the rear fills on the rear walls? I'm surprised the audio company did not recommend these. JBL makes some standard speakers for this, they are useful for cinema and also to use as low fills (with delay -- but you have a digital board) for other types of performance.

Perhaps some terminology issues here. Side fills are usually used to provide 'fill' for seating to either side that may be out of the mains' coverage or may even refer to side fill monitors on stage. Similar to how balcony and under balcony fills relate to speakers covering those areas that might be outside the main speaker coverage. The side and rear speakers they and you are referencing would usually be considered surround or effects speakers and where budget is a factor it is quite common to use portable speakers for those purposes. I also would not use the board for any system processing including delay, I always recommend leaving the board effects and processing for performance specific use and separating the house system processing, just as they are proposing. While this has advantages in almost any application, it is a very important consideration for touring houses or anywhere someone might bring in a console and use it in place of the house console.

For the board, sure get the LS9 -- that's what they are specing without naming it.

How does a 32 channel, digital console with scene recall specifically define an LS9? If you read the earlier posts you'd find that it is apparently an A&H iLive-T being recommended.


My comments:

• I was surprised that neither document contained a discussion of the envisioned use and functionality for the space. I always try to define the goals used in developing the recommendations before making any recommendations as the two are (or at least should be) directly interrelated. Maybe that was addressed in a separate document earlier in the process, but the one issue that really jumps out in this regard is not knowing the balance of lecture, orchestral/symphonic and drama/musical performance use.keep in mind that my comments are without such information and thus have to be viewed in the context of not really knowing the goals.
• I found it interesting that the acoustics report identified an excessively low reverberation time but then recommended absorption rather than diffusion to treat the rear wall. That may be the result of a cost consideration.
• Is there a stage shell planned? There seemed to be much of the acoustics report geared toward orchestral performance but I did not see mention of a shell (orchestra supporting a musical is typically looked at differently than orchestral performance).
• Carpeting under the seats is always a matter of debate. I often prefer to have it simply to cut down on the noise from toes tapping, people dropping things, etc. And acoustically it may make minimal difference, if all the seats are filled not much sound gets down there anyways. However, it can often be a cost and maintenance consideration.
• The description of the intercom system references only speaker stations including for tech positions. While this probably makes sense for backstage, you'd normally use beltpacks and headsets for tech positions. It also references paging microphones being at the stage and control booth, do they mean master stations?
• You had noted previously that the TOA HX-5 were suggested but the report references line array speakers and those are not line arrays. Without knowing more about the room it is hard to say if line arrays are appropriate or not but the section of the stage area on the acoustics report seems to indicate limited height above the proscenium.
• Related to the above, because of the apparent height, it looks like there may have to be some careful coordination between the speakers and the ceiling reflectors recommended so that the reflectors do not cut off the pattern or otherwise negatively affect the speakers.
• It looks like the only stage I/O defined is one plate to either side of the proscenium (each with 8 mics, 1 line level input and 4 monitor lines) along with a center stage floor box for a lectern. That at least seems rather limited, but may reflect some specific input or goal.
• Support of up to 24 wireless mics in addition to the I/O noted seems to suggest something larger than a 32 input console or some form of patching that is not noted. However, it sounds like only one wireless mic is initially being provided.
• You might want to consider including the stage wings, or at least a SM position, and the pit, for te conductor, in the video system destinations. Maybe the TD's office if there is one as well. And you might want to consider audio to go with that video, perhaps their thought is to use the Program functionality of the intercom system for that, however I personally prefer to separate audio distribution systems especially since the video apparently feeds the Lobby.
• Speaking of Lobby, is anything planned to support pre-function events, intermission chimes, etc.? Maybe something to consider.

Again, all of these are simply questions to ask or ideas to consider, there may be good reason for what is presented that is simply not apparent or clear from the limited perspective possible here.

 

[SHARYNF]

I typically look at what they company writes but also how they present them selves. I am sure that their selection is firmly decided but if you go to their website theater systems design is not really highlighted. IT is there, it is covered but I just get the subtle feeling that that is not their primary area of expertise.

SSA Acoustics - Our Work


If you go thru the various projects the Arlington High School PAC seems to be the only really highlighted theater space.

if you contrast this to another firm I am familiar with you can see the difference

http://www.jsfarchs.com/projecttypes/entertainment/entertainment.html

This is not necessarily a major issue, but it would lead me to want to really investigate the recommendations. Personally I would have felt more comfortable with a real specialist in theater design instead of a more general firm.

I guess I would want to get some references on other theater projects and try to use these to determine areas that you might want to really focus on getting it right. Talking with other theaters that used this firm for similar projects give you an incite on possible areas of weakness or strength.

I would agree with Brad, there seem to be a few inconsistencies (line array vs recommended) but it is really impossible to just tell from a document independent from the facility.

All this really is a blend of art/science and experience

Sharyn

 

[JChenault]

musaev ( and others)

To clarify - the space is for musical theatre ( at least 99 percent of the time). The company does 6 full stage musicals a year, and where appropriate has orchestras to match. This was briefly mentioned in the introduction "It is our understanding that the sole function of the space is to conduct musicals which include both orchestra and vocals."


The pit opening will probably be smaller than they recommend. Given a choice between a large pit and smaller stage / less audience seating it is likely we will take the smaller pit. In a similar vein we will not be increasing the ceiling height for better reverberation.

Since this is for musicals, there is no stage shell planned or desired.

Intercom and video feeds. I had not looked closely at their recommendations there as yet. Thanks for the heads up.

The ceiling height in the auditorium is low. The distance from the top of the proscenium arch to the ceiling will be about four feet.

Re stage IO - Given the planned use, it is unlikely that we will want too many on stage hard wired outlets. I expect that we may want a few more in the pit in case we need to amplify some of the orchestra. Again something to dig into after the architectural details are figured out.

As I read other parts of the spec, they are suggesting we get 12 new wireless mikes. Not sure if they expect this to supplement the 12 to 18 we currently use or to replace them.

Video feeds and lobby chimes. Again had not thought enough about these issues. Thanks for the comment.

Sharyn - I understand you comments about experience. For a number of reasons we are committed to them.

 

[fx120]

Another core question:

If your planned console is going to be a 32ch desk, what are the considerations for hard lines run down to the deck? You say that there are plans to purchase an additional 12 channels of wireless on top of the 12-16 channels you already have. I have done a few rock concerts in spaces normally used for theatrical performance and found a severe lack of wired inputs because only 12 channels of inputs were specified to be dropped on to the stage (6 SL and 6SR) because they had "filled up" their board already with wireless. I would advise to run no fewer than 24 channels of copper from the mix position to the stage regardless of what the planned use is, they're cheap to put in now.

Even if you only plan on ever needing a few of these lines, they're worth having in the event that some day they're needed to run a show with a good number of on-stage wired devices. I helped out with a musical a few months back that had a full on rock band across the back of the stage, and the drum kit alone used 8 channels.

The other option would to take advantage of the iLive's remote mix rack and locate that on stage with the wireless receivers and just run a single cat5e (preferably more) line back to the mix position. This way in the event that all 32 inputs are needed on stage for some reason it's a simple patch away.

You'll never hear someone complain because a system is "too flexible".

 

[SHARYNF]

musaev ( and others)

Sharyn - I understand you comments about experience. For a number of reasons we are committed to them.

Didn't mean you have to change the company, BUT I do suggest that you still try to get a lot of additional references so that you can check out what went wrong what went right and use this as a guide. Many times when you check references a while after the fact you will be given information from the venue somewhat along the lines of "well at the time this looked fine BUT" or If I had it to do over again I would have" This tends to point out weaknesses in the firm and areas that you really need to be careful about

Like some of the on there comments, I would question the treatment of the rear wall, the equipment spec'd vs the comments line array, I would look carefully at the center cluster, vs side hangs vs the low ceiling height along with the addition of the reflector panel. While I agree with Brad a well designed system should not have feedback issues on the front of the stage, John's comments about what you can find in problems in existing installs can be quite true.

Personally when it comes to reverb times, I would rather have an ability to alter these values based on the performance. I have seen very effective traveling drapes placed on the catworks work to allow for control of the liveness/deadness of the space instead of specing to a single amount.

Even thought TODAY you are only doing musicals, this could and based on experience tends to change, so while you can focus on that, I would be careful about making too many tradeoffs against other uses.

Ie the comments about hard lines from stage instead of mainly using wireless, size of the pit etc

Just some cautions
Sharyn

 

[museav]

John,

You know better than anyone else what your needs and goals are. And I am not going to question your Consultant when they are much more familiar with the project and probably have a lot more insight into all the project requirements. I also realize that renovations have many considerations that are not present in new construction. However, I will reiterate a couple of points already made and then add three.

It is very unusual for focusing on just the current use to be a good idea. It is typically better to think of what might be done rather than just what is currently or has been done. A simple example, say you want to build a speaker or mic into a set piece or simply want four mics and stands on stage for a performance, with the stage I/O planned that seems to require running cables around the stage including across entry and exit paths. It sounds like this is a comprehensive renovation so it would be a great opportunity to accommodate future flexibility by things like adding additional conduit, boxes and connectivity now.

Think carefully about your I/O and the console. The Narrative Description calls for a four channel effects system and there is reference to an Owner Furnished laptop for effects and program audio, so that sounds like six channels of input for that source (four effects channels and stereo program). They call for a CD/MP3 player in the booth, so that is another two channels. Eight channels of mics and one line input one each side of the stage. A couple of mic inputs, a line input and stereo program in the stage floor pocket. That is a total of 31 wired inputs. Add 12 to 18 wireless to start with the possibility of up to 24 wireless mics and that results in a minimum of 43 inputs initially and up to 55 inputs (or more if you add any in the pit, etc.) that appear to be planned. Yet the plan is for a 32 channel console. Even if the laptop is only a stereo input, the floor box has only one mic and you do not add any other inputs, it appears that you are still going to have to incorporate a larger console or some type of patching system, which is not at all unusual for this type of venue. However, that would be a significant operational consideration and should be clarified. It also relates to the planned multipin connections for the console.

I am surprised to not see any diffusion apparently recommended for the pit. With the recommended absorptive rear wall treatment there seems to be little to support ensemble amongst the musicians.

Has their been any effort to verify that your existing wireless mics can be reused? While I understand that it may not be possible to assess the potential of reusing some existing equipment items until the design progresses further, you should be able to determine if any wireless mics can be reused or if some might be affected by recent changes in the related laws.

The AV systems overview talks about an automatic mode that includes projection and there is later reference to a center stage floor box for audiovisual presentations including "video" inputs and to video control and scaling in the booth, however I have not found any actual discussion of video projection or mention of a projector, screen, etc. From what the "video" inputs are to how it could affect the budget to how you have a center stage lectern location that doesn't interfere with the projected image, it might be nice to know what is actually planned.

There are many other things that are unusual such as the mix position in a booth, the multipin connections for what seems to be a fixed console, the DSP at the booth instead of the amp rack, etc., but there may be specific reasons for these.