Mixers/Consoles multiple users

[NHStech]

My stage crew is made up of some high schoolers, trained by someone (that would be me) who did some acting (about 5 or 6 productions) and directing (3 or 4 shows), and was trained by a SM for exactly one year. Meaning: they are being trained by someone who requires much more training. We have a 24-channel analog mixer in our auditorium. Of course, my directors during musicals and plays want to wireless everyone (whatever happened to PROJECTING?). Other than the spring musical, there is rarely a time where we use more than 4 or 5 channels, so when a kid has to deal with 20 channels all of a sudden, he tends to freak out a little, y'know? My thought is this: what about having two kids run the sound? One on, say, channels 1-12, the other on 13-24? Do you see any inherent complications with this that I am missing? I mean, as long as they are not in each others' way...To split hairs, I understand their ears would be different, so their might be slight differences in their respective outputs of voices, but this is a high school production, and I am simply looking for volume to be high enough w/o feedback, and that the kids don't sound like Alvin and the Chipmunks.

 

[howlingwolf487]

If you're talking about using 20 channels of wireless...I think that you're in over your head and need to help the director(s) understand exactly what they're trying to do entails. Everything will have to be frequency-coordinated and then there's making sure the batteries are all changed out, and.......

Lots of other stuff.

If you're just talking about mixing 20 channels as compared to 5, then I think it's reasonable to assign 2 people to mixing (maybe 1 for wireless and the other for the pit orchestra, etc.).

 

[rwhealey]

If you're talking about using 20 channels of wireless...I think that you're in over your head and need to help the director(s) understand exactly what they're trying to do entails. Everything will have to be frequency-coordinated and then there's making sure the batteries are all changed out, and.......

Lots of other stuff.

If you're just talking about mixing 20 channels as compared to 5, then I think it's reasonable to assign 2 people to mixing (maybe 1 for wireless and the other for the pit orchestra, etc.).

20 channels really isn't that bad. We did it all the time (with decent gear- ULXP). There needs to be a really strict check out procedure at the beginning of the day, and the sound tech should put a new battery in himself at the beginning while monotering the levels the whole time. We stopped having battery problems when we got rid of all the old wireless

2 people is a good idea, but rather then assigning a strict area of responsibility, we would assign a "lead tech" and an "assistant". One would read the script and run the cues and help on one side of the board, while the other would do the majority of the mixing.

 

[museav]

Personally, I would argue against it unless they are mixing two portions that have little or nothing to do with one another. You could try something like one mixing the band/orchestra and one the actors or one doing effects and playback and the other the live sources but two people working on the same console is still going to be different than one person creating a submix and sending it to another. It is hard to create a cohesive mix with two people, they would really have to be on the same page both artistically and technically.

Since you mentioned feedback, that would be a good example. You start hearing ringing and what happens? You potentially have two people doing things in a rush that either interfere with or counteract one another. Or each one thinking that what they did resolved it. Or each thinking what the other did resolved it.

My first thought is to look at how you might more effectively use what you have, it's hard to make suggestion without knowing your system but the use of VCA groups, mute groups, mix Groups, etc. might help considerably if not already being employed. I also think it is important to get across the perception that this is not an impossible situation, it is actually a quite common situation should they want to continue in the role. If you do use two operators it probably needs to be clear that it is a concession to their learning and not a standard or accepted practice for that type of situation. They need to learn to handle it alone and not become dependent upon a second operator.

 

[behindthescenes]

I work with a Church going thru growing pains and one of those is using multiple people on the sound board. We have an all volunteer staff and a training people on the various pieces of equipment throughout the year. We are using a 48 channel analog board

1. You need to have a lead tech who's ear has the final say. We use experienced techs to mix the orchestra and stage mics; while the secondary tech is incharge of the CD play/record, the choir mics, and the pulpit (all of this is on one side of the board)

2. Prior to each performance the techs should know what the responsibilities are, making it up as they go creates unnecessary problems

3. The secondary techs are getting first seat experience during evening services so that they are used to working both sides of the board, once they have gotten a good handle on what sound we are looking for.

But overall we have had few problems with multiple people on the main soundboard. We have been doing this for the last year now.

 

[photoatdv]

Haha... that reminds me of a fun show. TD who was helping with design through the opening, myself (A1), and a lights op who kept disappearing. There was some cue during a rehearsal that we weren't expecting so it became this giant spiderweb of arms as TD and I jumped for both lights and sound simultaneously in this almost choreographed pattern. And it actually worked!

Then (same show) TD came back for the final show to see how it was going and pick up his gear, and wound up hanging out at FOH and helping me with some of the kill/ turn on 7 mics simultaneously type cues. Also worked pretty well. Though the two of us had worked together a lot and TD was really good (and knew when NOT to jump in). I know when we had feedback he stayed out of the way and even got the director to stop telling me theres feedback (as if I didn't know) so I could hear.

 

[museav]

Too many times people do overlook some simple things that can help. Like assigning a logical group (chorus, band, etc.) of inputs to a Group on the console rather than directly to the main output and using the Group fader and mute to control the overall group while using the individual channel faders more for balance within the group. On consoles that have them, VCAs/DCAs and mute groups take that concept to another level. Also, how you arrange inputs can often help, grouping similar uses and putting channels that need more attention or interaction closer to the master section.

There can be a pretty significant difference between a 48-56 channel console, which are often split arrangements with input channels to either side of the master section, and a 24 channel console in regards to the actual physical area involved and the reach required. I don't know what the console is in this case but having two people trying to operate the same device would seem a bit crowded for some 24 channel boards.

 

[themuzicman]

On Micing Everyone:

Remember in group scenes, that having all 20 channels open at once will actually result in less overall sound (I.E. With each open mic channel on stage in close proximity, the sound has the potential to be quieter)...I don't know the exact math, it's late and I've been I just got of a long load out, but I do know this is a property of mics you need to worry about.

On Board Ops:

If you organize your board efficiently, one op should not have a problem.
I will assume your board has no scene control, and thus no motorized faders?

When I run analog shows with 20+ mics, I usually have the principal characters on the left of my board, I keep them at a nominal level and ride the mutes. Next are the supporting characters, same deal. Then I have the choruses, sometimes separated into Male and female choruses, or whatever their respective script grouping is. I assign these to a mute group, and mute them in one.

When I had a rack mounted mixer in addition to my main mixer, I would run the choruses into my rack mixer, then run the out into the in on my main board, and be able to control each chorus with one fader. It wasn't an elegant solution, but it worked when I passed off the show to an inexperienced tech.

 

[museav]

Remember in group scenes, that having all 20 channels open at once will actually result in less overall sound (I.E. With each open mic channel on stage in close proximity, the sound has the potential to be quieter)...I don't know the exact math, it's late and I've been I just got of a long load out, but I do know this is a property of mics you need to worry about.

Possibly a bit the opposite, with multiple mics picking up the same sounds you typically have to run individual mics lower to maintain the same overall level since the signals from multiple mics will be summed in mixing. With very close spaced mics you may also have to be concerned with phasing between the two mics that are picking up both actors but at slightly different distances and thus may need to ride the gain on one or both of the mics to minimize the effect.

It would help to know what mixer is used, people may be able to offer some specific recommendations based on the capabilities of the mixer.

 

[Sayen]

I frequently use a team of technicians for audio in high school when necessary. If they are new or inexperienced they just don't have the skills needed to run multiple channels.

I would start by examining how many mics you really need - 20 sounds like a lot. We only own 12 and get by with swapping between scenes. I also like to use Crown PCC-160 stage mics. Four or five of these give me decent coverage for large scenes, limiting the number of mics. When I have multiple technicians, one student typically covers floor mics while the other handles SFX and cues.

I've found it's more than worth the cost of batteries to start using mics early in rehearsal. Let the technicians make plenty of mistakes, so they find out exactly where the feedback points are.

If you're uncertain how to EQ the console, try to find a local audio tech to help you. Properly adjusting frequencies will make life much easier on your technicians as well.

 

[jkowtko]

Tell us if you are talking 20 channels of wireless mikes for actors (vocals), and not 10 vocal + 10 band. I will assume you are talking about 20 vocals.

Tell us what board you have.

If the board has VCAs and snapshots, this is your golden chance to learn how to set up mixes the professional way.

If the board doesn't have VCAs (which I'm assuming is the case) then I'd split the vocals most leads vs ensemble, so that each of you has about the same number of script lines to fade. Technique for fading an ensemble will be a bit different than leads.