daveyboy909 wrote:
different earphones can have a big influence as well. I've got a pair of Sony ones which are supposed to be good, think they cost £30 or so. But they make everything to bassy and the songs sound much better through the standard samsung ones that came with the mp3 player.
There are a huge number of variables when listening to audio. In the case of recorded audio, the medium, playback device, cable, amplifier, speakers (or headphones) and listening environment all play a significant part in how a recording sounds to the listener. Since this is also an entirely subjective concept, it gets quite difficult to quantify, and that's why there are no rules on what sounds good and what doesn't. Sound engineers have come up with a lot of rules about how to achieve the best quality of reproduction, but none of us can say with complete accuracy why something is "good". Every sound engineer will have an opinion, but they won't all be the same.
Most people have quite fixed ideas about sound. They have an opinion about what is good, and what isn't. We all know that a chainsaw or screaming child are not pleasant to listen to. But, we all like different elements of more complex sounds - like the combination of drums, bass, guitar and vocals together. People are also influenced by where and how they listen, a good separates hifi will be much better quality than the cd/radio on the kitchen windowsill. Most of the complaints I hear at gigs (when someone else is mixing the band...) are that the sound is "far too bassy". People get really angry and sometimes quite aggressive about this. I can only assume that they are used to listening on a system where there is no bass, like the cd/radio. Being in a hot, sweaty and maybe claustraphobic environment in relative darkness, listening to a band at extremely high volume through a sound system which you can feel, is about as far away as you can get from doing the washing up after lunch on a sunny afternoon.
When we get into live sound, the variables increase massively. The venue, firstly, will have it's own sonic characteristics. People refer to the "sound" of a room. Most people think that the SECC in Glasgow, (a typical tin shed arena, although not with the highest roof) "sounds" awful. In fact, it is possible to make a show sound amazing in there, but it does require money, and a great degree of skill.
A tour or production manager will call the sound crew for a show for a specific time in the morning, often about 9am, they will then supervise the unloading of the system from the truck and make sure the right components are put in the correct places. Then begins the rigging of the system. The system tech will already have submitted a rigging plot, and riggers will have been working for a couple of hours to attach chain hoist motors in the correct places for lighting/sound/video to suspend equipment. The tech will have a design in mind for the sound system for that day, based on advance information, his/her previous experience of the venue and more recently computer prediction software that will give an accurate idea of how many speakers to use and where to point them. They will use lasers and inlinometers to set the angles of the system so they can "see" where the sound is hitting in the venue, and position speakers in addition to the main hangs to fill in the gaps where the audience may not be hearing the main sound system, such as the front few rows of a gig, or the extremes of the audience area. There may also be balconys to consider, or the room might be extremely long, or there may not be any way to suspend the system and it has to be stacked on the ground, or on stage. Once all this is in position, the sound coming out of the speakers has to be aligned in time so that the listener who can hear the front row speakers but can also hear the main system doesn't hear them one after the other, like an echo. This benefits the entire audience, as there are no "confusing" out of time sounds to make the sound indistinct or unclear.
Confused yet? and we haven't even listened to the system yet in terms of how it sounds. The tech must "equalise" the system, that is, to ensure that there are no parts of the audio spectrum which are louder than others. A "Graphic Equaliser" is literally that, a graphic representation of the audible frequency spectrum, with which you can increase or decrease the volume of sound at a particular frequency. Push up the bass side and the sound gets deeper or heavier, and push up the high side and it gets brighter or more "airy". In reality, the system should be pretty well designed so that there isn't much to do here. The tech may also use measurement software here to establish where the problems lie and what is the best course of action to correct them.
By this time, it's about 1pm and time for lunch. The backline (band equipment) techs will have been setting up the band's instruments and equipment for a while, and after lunch the system tech and others will position microphones on the stage (often around 30 for the average show) and begin the process of testing and listening to individual instruments. At this point the techs will work together to try to make everything sound as good as possible, the sound engineer on stage will have equalised each of his monitor systems (6 to 8 pairs of speakers is not uncommon) The sound of the venue, the condition of the band equipment, the precise positioning of mics, and the mental and physical condition of the player are all huge factors in how each individual's instrument will sound.
The band and monitor engineers will also have to consider how the sound of the room will change when it is full of people, and factor that into their decision making process. Sometimes the temperature increase alone can make quite a difference.
Then comes the actual show, and the adrenaline. The band will sound quite a bit louder, as the excitement of the audience affects them and they tend to play everything harder. The band are now at the mercy of the person mixing the show. Their idea of how the band should sound is what they are trying to get across to the audience. It is their opinion that counts, and presumably they have the job because of their ability to make it sound "good". In reality, they often have the job because they know the right people. The engineers who are really good, and there aren't that many, tend to cost a lot of money, and most bands can't afford that.
Therein lies the problem with most gigs, money. The band/production accountant/production manager etc is not willing or unable to pay for the absolute best people to do the job. I takes years of experience, exceptional ability and talent to command the high wages of the best people, and a lot of sound engineers will never get there. There is no career path, chance plays a part as well. There are not many people in the world who are working as live sound engineers and making a living. It's an extremely badly paid job for the skill level required, and it takes a lot of work and dedication, or a lot of luck, to be one of them.
It also costs more money when you start adding more components to the system, in somewhere like the SECC it is possible to make any show sound good, but it depends massively on the budget and the skill of the techs, as well as the multitude of other factors already discussed. Don't judge a venue by it's "poor acoustics". Today, the technology exists to make most spaces sound good all the time for amplified music. Unfortunately, there are few artists willing or able to pay the price, and now that live music is the "primary revenue stream" for the majority of artists, everyone is screwing every last penny out of everyone else.
On the other hand, the band just might not be very good.
It's important to make an informed judgement about "the sound" when you are listening to anything. We can judge spatial concepts, like which direction a sound is coming from, although we can often be confused by our environment too. When you hear a band you don't like the sound of, try moving about the venue. You may be surprised how different it can sound, even in small places. The band engineer ultimately has control over the volume of the different microphones, and can "balance" the mix so that instruments and voices can be heard clearly. This is much, much harder than you might imagine, for all the reasons i mentioned. The band engineer doesn't have control over how badly the band sucks that night, and we can't work miracles. You can change the tone of an instrument, but you can't change the performance.
So, one long ramble later, headphones do sound different, and although 30 quid may be a lot of money, it's not much for a pair of headphones. My work headphones cost 150 quid, and they sound fantastic. I'm not suggesting you need to spend that kind of money, but you get what you pay for. If you like listening to music, why not spend a bit on some nice headphones? You'd spend it on a hi fi.
Ohh well.
) just to see the numbnut doing his 
)
Jack
)
