the pinnacle of what we do?
It seems about once a year that this band engineer vs. house engineer battle flairs up, and what it always seems to come down to is who is allowed to mix. I have never understood the focus that many people have on the mixing aspect of sound. It seems to me to be one of the easiest skills in sound to learn, and to teach. Leaving aside the question of musical taste (disagreeing with someone taste's doesn't really make them an idiot or unskilled), most of the live sound problems I have witnessed first hand don't come from the board or the choices of the mixer.
I really have enjoyed Phil's blogs (http://www.soundforums.net/blog/entries/40-Live-Mixing-Primer-Part-4) because of the practical, systematical approach he describes. However, the fact that he can explain things so simply suggests to me that the skill is really not as arcane as many people believe (Maybe we all want to believe that we are good at what we like to do and therefore it is important).
I am currently wrapping up an extremely busy festival season, where I have been a guest on what seems to be an endless set of systems deployed by others. Many of our big festivals were bracketed by routing dates in smaller clubs/listening rooms. I don't think I have actually set up my own system since early May. During these shows, no one ever hinted that I would not be the one to mix. However, some places were clearly not receptive to the idea of a guest engineer, others were accepting, while a few went out of their way to make things easy for a guest. At one festival this weekend, on the day we were playing, 4 of the 5 bands had hired techs with them. One of the bands used their tech for monitors and wireless (both IEMS and instruments). 2 of the bands (including mine) used the techs for FOH and IEM wireless (carrying our own boards and splits). One of the bands used their tech for both monitors (wedges) and FOH. While I had never worked with the sound company before, I knew all three of the other techs and their bands prior to this show. I would guess that any of us could have done a perfectly adequate job of mixing for any of the other bands. On the other hand, the second festival we went to, I was the only guest engineer. Guess which festival had the stronger lineup of bands.
Instead, it seems to me that system design and deployment should be considered the pinnacle of what we do. If the system is well designed and deployed, I am going to have an easy time mixing on it. In a festival setting I really have to trust the system engineer that the sound is at least relatively consistant at as many listening positions as possible. One problem that consistantly came up this summer was front fills. During a festival, the bands fans tend to move front and center for the groups they like. So the fans are most likely to be hearing the fills, which cannot be heard at FOH. One festival had great fills (to the point that I spent a lot of time sitting there when other bands were on stage), one festival had ok fills, but I felt they were significantly brighter than the mains, one festival had searing fills to the point that I couldn't stay in front of them for more than a couple of minutes, and a couple of festivals had no fills at all (Nothing like seeing a video filmed from the front row with no highs).
The second system problem that greatly effects the mix is system bleed. One festival had the stage under a tent with the mains on the outside. With no monitors, the low mid bleed off of the mains was terrible on stage, but could not be heard out front. I thought it was interesting that I ended up cutting 4 frequencies on the FOH graphic to deal with this, when I was done the system tech reflattened the graphic, only to have both of the other guest engineers cut the exact same frequencies.
Finally,the last system deployment problem that affects the mix is the one we are so familiar with that I think we take it for granted, and that is the sub power alley. I have gotten in the habit during the act before me on a festival to check for the high point and low point for the subs and to figure out where the FOH is in relationship to those. One festival (the same with the great fills) had flown subs, which I thought was a great solution for evening out the sub volume.
I think I have a definite mix style, but that style is based on the equipment I like to use. While my tech rider does not name any particular brands, it does list the capabilities of the equipment. Not having the equipment means falling back on basics. I prefer 4 channels of insertable compression for instruments. Adding in 2-4 extra for vocals, you get what my rider asks for. Several festivals have had none available, or had a single one slapped over the whole mix (8:1 on the whole mix for bluegrass? Excuse me while I hit bypass). Sure, I can fall back on riding faders, but that locks me to the desk, and keeps me from being able to respond to other problems. If mixing is more than just setting relative volume, I would prefer not to spend all of my time adjusting volume. If I feel limited in what I can do mixing by the equipment provided, I think I should be less critical of other peoples mixes without knowing what limitations they think they are working with. And if they have no limitations, then it is a matter of taste and there is no accounting for taste. I actually like to hear different engineers step to the board at a festival or else everything starts to sound the same.
So if I would have to take a SWAG, I would say that maybe 80% of the quality of MY MIX is actually the skill of the system engineer. So thanks to those guys making me look good.
