[help=
Im currently trying to figure out what is going wrong with my system. I'm thinking it's the age of the mixer and needs to be replaced.
My situation is that I have 14 Audio Technica goosneck mics (49Q pro / AT81615RS) connected to and old 16 xlr Mackie mixer with 2 crown amps broadcasting to 12 overhead speakers. The speakers are a good 40 feet up over the mic. I have the mixer at about 1/2 gain, anymore I get feedback, the channels at about 0 to +20. Phantom is on. The problem is that it should be a nice volume but it comes out very soft and I have the volume at about 75 to 85%.
Is the mixer the problem or am I missing something? If more information is needed I can fill in holes.
]%[/help]
Im currently trying to figure out what is going wrong with my system. I'm thinking it's the age of the mixer and needs to be replaced.
My situation is that I have 14 Audio Technica goosneck mics (49Q pro / AT81615RS) connected to and old 16 xlr Mackie mixer with 2 crown amps broadcasting to 12 overhead speakers. The speakers are a good 40 feet up over the mic. I have the mixer at about 1/2 gain, anymore I get feedback, the channels at about 0 to +20. Phantom is on. The problem is that it should be a nice volume but it comes out very soft and I have the volume at about 75 to 85%.
Is the mixer the problem or am I missing something? If more information is needed I can fill in holes.
]%[/help]
No I have not. The mixer has somewhat of an EQ but not really anything special not to mention the room is sharing a wall next to a commercial freezer and washroom. Open doors and and HVAC unit. So the ambient noise in the room changes a lot. Never had an issue using 58's in the room but switiching to condensors makes a world of difference. You think maybe getting a better mixer would help this?
SM58's are reputed to respond only to mouths right in front of them. That is why they sell so many. See this thread where a new SM58 purchaser is complaining they only have sensitivity right in front of them. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/instruments-amps/197862-reduced-output-level-dynamic-mic.html Right.
Last edited:
Are these mics right in front of mouths? Or is this a conference table sort of situation, or some kind of panel discussion? SInce they are goosenecks, I am guessing this is not a choir or musical group.
COnsider some PZM mics. They can be placed in the center of a conference table without sounding way off mic. They also work sitting on the surfacce of a lectern rather than sticking up in the air. They are made specifically for this sort of thing.
I doubt there is anything wrong with the mixer, but if you made wholesale changes to the microphones, then I imagine your system needs to be EQed from scratch.
Has the room installation been EQed ever? DO you run a graphic equalizer between mixer and amplifiers? ANd the brute strength approach would be to add a feedback buster unit to the system
COnsider some PZM mics. They can be placed in the center of a conference table without sounding way off mic. They also work sitting on the surfacce of a lectern rather than sticking up in the air. They are made specifically for this sort of thing.
I doubt there is anything wrong with the mixer, but if you made wholesale changes to the microphones, then I imagine your system needs to be EQed from scratch.
Has the room installation been EQed ever? DO you run a graphic equalizer between mixer and amplifiers? ANd the brute strength approach would be to add a feedback buster unit to the system
No the room has never needed to be EQ'ed mainly for reasons that they are using it for not its original purposes. The mics were setup in a hollow square table formation so every one in the meeting could make eye contact. I have never had to EQ the room but this is also the first time that I have used this many condensor mics in the room together.
The pickup pattern of the mics is probably your issue, as I would expect like a lot of condenser mics they are good at picking up ambient sounds, which is both a good thing and a bad thing depending on the application. As other people have suggested, get an EQ (Behringer do a relatively cheap unit with feedback detection that you can use to quickly identify the problem frequencies and attenuate them) and try and tame the system.
Is it quite a hard surface room as well?
Is it quite a hard surface room as well?
Seriously, look up PZMs - "pressure zone microphones"
It is a type of mic, not a brand name. Crown made them first, I think, but nowdays many make them. Even if they are not what you seek, the information on them may be illuminating to your situation.
I agree with the above poster who suggested pickup pattern as the issue. An omnidirectional mic will tend to feed back more than a cardioid. I don't think the condenser-ness is the problem.
It is a type of mic, not a brand name. Crown made them first, I think, but nowdays many make them. Even if they are not what you seek, the information on them may be illuminating to your situation.
I agree with the above poster who suggested pickup pattern as the issue. An omnidirectional mic will tend to feed back more than a cardioid. I don't think the condenser-ness is the problem.
As others have stated the Dugan is the answer but quite cost prohibitive. If this is a periodic event they are available to rent.
A graphic would be better than nothing, but with so many simultaneous input sources a parametric would do much better to keep your phase response more intact. A used xta 200 series or on the new budget end an Xcilia or even a Behrigner would be ok (buy one as a backup)
A graphic would be better than nothing, but with so many simultaneous input sources a parametric would do much better to keep your phase response more intact. A used xta 200 series or on the new budget end an Xcilia or even a Behrigner would be ok (buy one as a backup)
No, I think changing back to the SM 58's would solve your current problem.
But let's start at the beginning. Why did you change out the Shures?
I am looking at either a graphic EQ or a feedback destroyer for the band I engineer for, in order to tame a couple of issues I have experienced with feedback in the monitors. On ebay you can pick up the Behringer DSP series for between £40 and £50 with postage second hand. That makes then a bit of a bargin as you can just put it inbetween the desk and the amps / powered speakers to attempt to solve the issue. If it doesn't work then chances are you are going to only loose the postage costs as you'll be able to resell on at the same price you paid for it. Considerably cheaper than new mics, a new desk or acoustic treatments.
Nothing wrong with your mixer, you just can't turn up the sensitivity on the mics without feeback.
SM58's are omni, and have LOTS of proximity effect, they get louder and bassier when you get really close. There's some Beyers that have a ball back but a flat front to let you get even closer, often contacting the mic.
You can do like the Dead. On their large system, they used two small condenser capsules at each singer, each out of phase with its twin, but the vocalist sang into only one. I didn't really like it, but it worked. Now most live acts use in-ear monitors.
You could get 14 Behringer feedback destroyers, which detect feedback and assign a filter. Next feedback, assigns another filter. When it runs out of digital filters (LOL) it deletes the oldest (or the whole system would get progressively quieter). Handles a dynamic changing environment better than static people sitting.
You want the orators to be the listening audience? Doesn't really work out too well or it WILL feed back. Put a speaker at each push-to-talk mic, use directional mics, and use some kind of hybrid to reverse phase and re-mix at each seat, to eliminate the orator's own voice from his own speaker. THAT works great!
Or you can introduce a short digital delay. And make the delay really long for that Japanese ambassador lobbying for aid to fight Godzilla.
Good luck.
SM58's are omni, and have LOTS of proximity effect, they get louder and bassier when you get really close. There's some Beyers that have a ball back but a flat front to let you get even closer, often contacting the mic.
You can do like the Dead. On their large system, they used two small condenser capsules at each singer, each out of phase with its twin, but the vocalist sang into only one. I didn't really like it, but it worked. Now most live acts use in-ear monitors.
You could get 14 Behringer feedback destroyers, which detect feedback and assign a filter. Next feedback, assigns another filter. When it runs out of digital filters (LOL) it deletes the oldest (or the whole system would get progressively quieter). Handles a dynamic changing environment better than static people sitting.
You want the orators to be the listening audience? Doesn't really work out too well or it WILL feed back. Put a speaker at each push-to-talk mic, use directional mics, and use some kind of hybrid to reverse phase and re-mix at each seat, to eliminate the orator's own voice from his own speaker. THAT works great!
Or you can introduce a short digital delay. And make the delay really long for that Japanese ambassador lobbying for aid to fight Godzilla.
Good luck.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.