Microphones and face shields

I saw a piece that said to think of it like HIV - initially it was thought to only affect a very small specific part of society then we realised that that wasn't correct, and as we began to understand how it spread, suddenly the idea of unprotected sex with a stranger was like contemplating suicide. So mask up when you're with strangers (i.e. not your immediate family).

Similarly, we may have to consider that, like HIV, we cannot eradicate it or vaccinate against it, we may only be able to control it and, like HIV, getting to that stage may take 10 or 20 years of research. Meantime, unprotected activities remain off menu.
 
And we have effective anti retroviral treatment for HIV although it took 15 years. There is currently no virus-level treatment for SARS CoV2.
 
The real question is whether or not people should be allowed to make their own risk assessment about their own lives. The whole "haircut" arguments and protests boil down to the conflict between who knows what's best for you? You or the government? One side says if you want to risk catching covid in the process of going about your life, that's your choice. The other side says we must all do as we're told on any particular day by the current experts, in order to preserve even just one life.

So we're talking about whether or not we should have live performances. Granted, businesses are worried about the potential onslaught of lawsuits if someone gets sick at their venue, so take that into account. Anyone who buys a ticket to a show assumes the risks of attending that show. Mass shootings have not stopped live performance. Some venues put up metal detectors, some do pat downs, some just do bag searches, some implement keycard access for backstage areas, some develop emergency response plans, some do nothing. Where are the cries that these measures aren't 100% effective and therefore we should suspend all live performance until we are assured that no one can get their hands on a black gun anymore? I haven't heard anyone talk like that, and before covid, tickets kept selling. We put up signs that warn patrons of strobe lights and gunshot sound effects, why can we not also post our covid procedures and allow the patron to decide whether its good enough or not?

We do what we can to take reasonable measures to ensure safety. If an audience member is uncomfortable with the environment or protocols in place, they can choose not to attend or buy the ticket in the first place. Nothing in this world is without risk, why are we not able to choose for ourselves how much risk we're willing to tolerate?
 
Fortunately HIV (retroviruses) are a tougher nut to crack.. They are RNA strands that incorporate into you by reverse transcription into DNA that actually becomes part of your Genome.
Corona is much more conventional.. Hijacks then kills the cell. There are persistant forms of corona in cats that hide in the background for years, but we have much more reason to be optimistic
about a vaccine for corona than one for HIV. We do have a vaccine for Feline Leukemia Virus.. which is a retrovirus.. so it is theoretically possible even for HIV. But in cats they had the luxury of actual challenge studies, rather than field population/exposure studies. But really shouldn't compare the difficulty with an HIV vaccine
with the liklihood of a successful corona vaccine.
 
The real question is whether or not people should be allowed to make their own risk assessment about their own lives. The whole "haircut" arguments and protests boil down to the conflict between who knows what's best for you? You or the government? One side says if you want to risk catching covid in the process of going about your life, that's your choice. The other side says we must all do as we're told on any particular day by the current experts, in order to preserve even just one life.

I could agree with personal risk assessment, if this was not a disease that you can spread to 100 others before you know you are sick. The nature of the beast negates the "personal choice" argument. So maybe if you go to the theater, and then have to self isolate for 14 days, I could be onboard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fortunately HIV (retroviruses) are a tougher nut to crack.. They are RNA strands that incorporate into you by reverse transcription into DNA that actually becomes part of your Genome.
Corona is much more conventional.. Hijacks then kills the cell. There are persistant forms of corona in cats that hide in the background for years, but we have much more reason to be optimistic
about a vaccine for corona than one for HIV. We do have a vaccine for Feline Leukemia Virus.. which is a retrovirus.. so it is theoretically possible even for HIV. But in cats they had the luxury of actual challenge studies, rather than field population/exposure studies. But really shouldn't compare the difficulty with an HIV vaccine
with the liklihood of a successful corona vaccine.

Maybe I didn't phrase things correctly - I'm saying that HIV comparisons are valid for the first 10 years or so of HIV in the population... we had no actual treatment that affected the virus itself (remember the first 3 or 4 pill treatment protocols?). Protection was by not doing things known to transmit. That's where we are right now with SARS-CoV-2.
 
The real question is whether or not people should be allowed to make their own risk assessment about their own lives. The whole "haircut" arguments and protests boil down to the conflict between who knows what's best for you? You or the government? One side says if you want to risk catching covid in the process of going about your life, that's your choice. The other side says we must all do as we're told on any particular day by the current experts, in order to preserve even just one life.

So we're talking about whether or not we should have live performances. Granted, businesses are worried about the potential onslaught of lawsuits if someone gets sick at their venue, so take that into account. Anyone who buys a ticket to a show assumes the risks of attending that show. Mass shootings have not stopped live performance. Some venues put up metal detectors, some do pat downs, some just do bag searches, some implement keycard access for backstage areas, some develop emergency response plans, some do nothing. Where are the cries that these measures aren't 100% effective and therefore we should suspend all live performance until we are assured that no one can get their hands on a black gun anymore? I haven't heard anyone talk like that, and before covid, tickets kept selling. We put up signs that warn patrons of strobe lights and gunshot sound effects, why can we not also post our covid procedures and allow the patron to decide whether its good enough or not?

We do what we can to take reasonable measures to ensure safety. If an audience member is uncomfortable with the environment or protocols in place, they can choose not to attend or buy the ticket in the first place. Nothing in this world is without risk, why are we not able to choose for ourselves how much risk we're willing to tolerate?

With infectious disease you remove the power of choice from others. This is why public health is a 'superior right' to individual rights. We can cite case law and court decisions if you want to get into the weeds of public policy.

As for @JonCarter those other causes of death are not highly contagious diseases. If you have cancer, it's not because someone coughed on you. If you have heart disease, it's not from a contagious virus. If you die in a car wreck, it's not because an outside genetic material strand invaded your cells.

The "Spanish" flu pandemic ended about 100 years ago. We've squandered those deaths by ignoring the biological and human behavior lessons of our ancestors.

That's all I can write without instigating moderator intervention and sending this thread even further off its topic.
 
Last edited:
For those that think their individual rights absolve them of having to wear a mask, let me ask two questions:

1. Why do we test and license drivers?
2. Why is assault against the law?
 
So maybe if you go to the theater, and then have to self isolate for 14 days, I could be onboard.
Perhaps if it was buy a ticket for a show then quarantine for 14 days to make sure you're not infectious , go to the show, then isolate for a further 14 days in case anyone at the show didn't quarantine propelry an you're now infectious. Rinse, repeat.
 
I could agree with personal risk assessment, if this was not a disease that you can spread to 100 others before you know you are sick. The nature of the beast negates the "personal choice" argument. So maybe if you go to the theater, and then have to self isolate for 14 days, I could be onboard.
The entire argument about choice is also negating the employees. You can go get a haircut or see a show and self isolate for 14 days but the barber and or performers will be at work again tomorrow.
Kind of like the smoking indoors argument. It wasn't about the patrons who could choose weather or not they wanted to eat at a restaurant that allowed smoking inside, it was to save the staff who were smoking 20 packs a day of 2nd hand smoke.

I really feel for the service community because they're at risk as these restaurants and businesses reopen. When people were picking up food to go, atleast both parties were wearing masks. When they're taking an order from 2 tables that are 6' apart, they're within the overlap from multiple tables, all patrons not wearing masks. They don't have a choice because they need to make money and the government told businesses it was ok to open.
I'm very thankful cities are fining restaurants and bars for allowing too many people in and ignoring social distance rules.
 
I like the smoking analogy. Taking it a step further, have you ever noticed how far a smoker's exhale carries in a room? The same thing happens to the smaller aerosols of people's breath, and those carry the virus.
 
I am reluctantly running audio for a school musical in early August. Actors will have B3 microphones, and the director is requiring them to wear face shields. What kind of issues will I have with the microphones and face shields, besides the obvious? 😕

Experiment with placing the mics on the lapel or costume, not in the head/face area if wearing shields. Easier to control q and eq outside the shield as well as maintain some level of covid control.
Assign every performer their own mic, batteries, body pack sleeves, safety pins, etc. Teach them everything about them and don't, dont, come in contact with it during the production. Consider purchasing lots of disposable covers for all mics.

In addition to germicide protocols, we use UVC for 1 hour upon leaving the building for all tech gear, console no matter how minor the touching is. No chance of my school district (CCSD) allowing wearing shields as they dont provide any protection. We have mask requirement inside buildings in Nevada. This semester is a wash with 100% remote classes here at LVA. If you must proceed, you are putting yourself at personal contamination risk.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back