Fixing voice – too wide DR – using AMM or compression

[Anonymous]

We do not have a spare channel that is needed to do it that way. Although we may have to give one up to achieve it if it is more important for people to understand the speaker than care about the music.

@volounteer
We all have acheived combined sucessful multiple years of live sound and recording in some of the most difficult situations and a lot of times “on the fly mixing OR in the heat of the moment” as one would say. And so sometimes had improvise instantaneously so I’m sure we have all had to think out of the normal square.

If you are short of channels why not as a suggestion supply us a channel list and see if we can help find another channel? Including groups and the show etc… I’m not asking for your show files , just an over-all image so we can understand.

With the personal accusations flying within here please remember because of this demanding industry we all have pretty tough skins!
Sure offence can only be taken however lets just try to keep it non personal unless… humour of course.

Hope this helps
Regards

[Dick Rees]

V…

If your quest is for vocal intellgibility in live sound, dynamic processing such as compression or expansion of the problem source/channel is not the path to take. Instead of managing dynamic range and mixing by volume, you need to deal with it in the sonic realm. This is more easily done on a properly deployed and tuned PA system.

To fairly address the problem it needs to be defined. As is, the question seems to relate to the technique you assume will solve the problem without ever having really defined the problem, mentioning only dynamic range, background noise and such. As stated above…if your quest is vocal intelligibility, dynamc processing is the wrong path.

Mixing live audio is more than controlling envelopes and balancing volume levels. So…

What is your desired result: to achieve vocal intelligibility or have your idea of using dynamic processing validated?

[volounteer]

@DickRees

We are using a technical paper with data on intelligiblity.

Our problem is too much DR complicated by the level of HVAC noise.

There is nothing , per the technical paper, not some internet opinion, that will maximise intelligibility except UPwards compression. That is based on measuring our room, noise, yada yada, and attempting to match the optimum S/N and SPL level according to the tech paper.

***content removed – personal comment that does not contribute to the thread***

[volounteer]

@MikeC

It will work out very well. The dealer tweaked the system again and identified one big problem. Some other volounteer twisted the wrong knob without pushing the select button first. The MD has backed up the system now that we got a USB to work and is downgrading the other volounteers to BASIC user instead of the middle level. MD is the admin user.

AMM may be close to Dugan but I need to adjust one mike not mix many of them. Was trying to see from the block diagram if there were some way to use AMM to do it along with an FX compression insert before the AMM sampling point but it turns out all the AMM is in use with choir mikes so that idea was moot.

[Dick Rees]

There is nothing , per the technical paper, not some internet opinion, that will maximise intelligibility except UPwards compression. That is based on measuring our room, noise, yada yada, and attempting to match the optimum S/N and SPL level according to the tech paper.

This interpretation/assertion is not correct. You are considering only volume levels, not sonic content, speaker system deployment/tuning and other salient factors. If the HVAC is noisy, see about putting some proper baffling in the ductwork. If this is not practical, implement some noise cancelling.

It would seem you are treating the symptoms, not the cause.

[volounteer]

@Dick Rees

Have you actually read the tech report?
For our situation we absolutely need UPwards compression as part of the solution.
There are a couple other very easy things that are also needed per the paper.

The paper considers S/N, volume, room noise , and more.
***content removed – personal comment that does not contribute to the thread***

Yes, we are treating symptoms because the *cause* is not something we can control.
If we only ever had perfect professional speakers with small DR and good volume talking into the mike we could solve the problem with just the fader and an SPL meter.

But the UPwards compression would fix *our* real problem which is complaints from the audience that they cannot understand the talker.

[Mfk0815]

Again, the QU cannot do that, neither the dLive as a standalone mixer. If you want to do upward compression you need th ability to run external plugins in any way. But this is not possible with the QU. Its like you want to carry your 18 tons of equipment with a VW Beetle.
So you can insist that you *need* it desperatly on the QU as long as you want. But the reality is that you won‘t get it, they have to redisgn the whole mixer but why should they do that? You can switch over to the SQ and then you can run your fancy plugin on an external computer and insert it to the desired channel.
But maybe even then you find out that the nice upward compressor is not that remedy you need. But thats another story.

[Mike C]

***content removed – personal comment that does not contribute to the thread***

[volounteer]

@MikeC

I cannot identify what I did not get to see myself. I run evenings with different scenes. The problem was AM.

You can think that you can do it, and you might be right if you meant hitting cues and muting/unmuting mikes at the proper times.
As to the mix itself, I really doubt it. The ops are often amateur volounteers who have had minimal training. But they will improve. You certainly cant improve the intelligibility problem by yourself.

We know what the Qu can do.

I am looking for a workaround on one specific problem area that the Qu can NOT do it on our device with our assortment of inputs. Namely improve intelligibility for the speakers orating with too much DR.

AH said to use parallel compression but I do not have a spare channel to use for that. Our old analog boards had a way to patch in and return to the same point after applying external FX. Digital boards go cheap and remove that connector but do hype all the software FX they have ‘free’. Too bad they dont have upwards compression. ***content removed – offensive comment that does not contribute to the thread***

[Mike C]

You can think that you can do it, and you might be right if you meant hitting cues and muting/unmuting mikes at the proper times.
As to the mix itself, I really doubt it. The ops are often amateur volounteers who have had minimal training. But they will improve. You certainly cant improve the intelligibility problem by yourself.

Properly operated by someone who does this as their full time job and has worked in all kinds of challenging environments…….. yes I could.

***content removed – personal comment that does not contribute to the thread***

[volounteer]

@MikeC

Okay you can do it better.

The real issue is can we do it good enough. Complicated by my being a perfectionist.

And like I said earlier: you mix with the volounteers you have, not the volounteers you wish you had.

Overall they do a good job. They will miss fewer cues as they gain experience.
I suspect the MD needs to explain using the cue sheet to one of them:)

And actually I do it Sunday and Wednesday evenings. Not much for me to do but turn it on and select the scene, and later shut it down properly and put on the dust cover. Worst case somebody new is talking that night and holds the mike at their waist so I have to increase the fader levels. I think I can handle that.

Sunday AMs are more demanding and we do have two experienced folks helping then. But they need an occasional break, and sometimes they travel for work, so we have some new folks being trained.

[volounteer]

@Mfk0815

you said: If you want to do upward compression you need the ability to run external plugins in any way. But this is not possible with the QU. …. they have to redesign the whole mixer but why should they do that? ….
But maybe even then you find out that the nice upward compressor is not that remedy you need. But thats another story.

They do not have to redesign anything. It is a simple software ap to be added to their library.
I could write it with an SDK if they would provide one.
They say use parallel compression. I would if I had a spare channel.

I will be surprised if the UPwards compressor did not drastically improve things.
If you actually know something that I do not know then explain why it would not improve or even fully solve the problem we have.

[DavidCo]

I’ll say again: You need to fix this with physics, not DSP.

DC

[garyh]

How about someone in the front row with a shotgun mic? Might scare the log folks though, someone pointing a long barrel at people.

[Mike C]

I will say one thing to your credit you have had the living S**T kicked out
of you and your still here!

[Author]

Posts