For those of you who do not recognize the name Howard Page, you should. His audio credits include Van Halen and Sade, as well as the design and creation of six sound consoles, including the Showco Showconsole, one of the first digital mixing desks (OK, digitally-controlled analog). In addition, Page currently serves as director of engineering for Showco, part of Clair Brothers Audio. In a career measured not in years but in decades, Page has mastered the art of the live mix, so there is little wonder why many in his native Australia refer to him as "The Legend." Currently Page serves as FOH audio engineer on the Mariah Carey Adventures of Mimi tour, and FOH managed to catch up with him at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas, a room with a challenging FOH position and a tendency for low-end build-up. Page delivered a wonderful mix, clean and defined, even in the nosebleed seats. In a city noted for its blinding lights and incessant motion, Page found time for a conversation that swayed between the techniques of live sound reinforcement, the methods of mixing and Page's own philosophy on FOH control. Howard Page has built a career on keeping artists' voices true, now we get a taste of how.
FOH: Tell me about the main FOH system.
Howard Page: I'm using a Clair Brothers i4 line array system, hung in a classic "J" style array. After extensive research I consider this style of array best matches the power coupling versus distance ratio of the vast majority of arena style venues being played on this tour.
There is, of course, designed into the i4 System the option of curving the array into more of a banana style array, but I have found that by hanging the "J" style array the same way for nearly all venues on this tour I have removed a huge variable from the daily setup/tuning process, and we are achieving really predictable, consistent results. The interesting thing about using the "J" style array is that it follows my old (before line arrays!) golden rule for big loud shows — concentrate more components, or "power band," to the longest throw of the venue, and as the throw distances get smaller, fewer components are required to achieve the same overall SPL.
The low end of this show is tight and even. Why do you have the sub bass arrayed so differently than I have ever seen before?
My approach to reproducing the low frequencies for this show is a little different to most others. In my usual role as company director of engineering, I have been called out to fix way too many other tours where the entire low end of the system was just way out of balance compared to the mids and highs. So bad, in fact, that the low end in the large arena space had zero definition and became just an audience-numbing noise.
When, at the last minute, I became involved in mixing this tour, I was determined not to have a show where the low end had those negative qualities. To this end, I am using our Prism II sub cabinets, which I knew from being involved in the design, would give me the tightest, shortest, highest impact response in a large space. We must always remember the space will give our low end the extra length and, if installed correctly, the depth we need. Of course depth is a relative term in some of these bad arenas — if the room won't hold the extreme low end tight and short, but only serves to lengthen all the notes, don't put those frequencies into that room. I designed the array of these subs to be the best compromise between achieving the best audio result, but also to satisfy some show production front edge of stage specific design criteria.
What I ended up with is a steered sub bass array with even, solid coverage across the room, continuing above the floor area seating up into the higher arena seats. I am using multiple drive elements feeding the separated sub bass stacks, and careful alignment timing to the main hanging i4 arrays. The final ingredient is exact level balance matching of the whole steered sub bass array, relative to the main array low end. The sub bass becomes what I believe it should be, a perfect low frequency extension of the main array, with all the retained low-end definition of the original recorded material.
The low end needs to be very strong for this style of music, and at first the elimination of the gut pounding, intense, false, out of balance lows which I traded in for tight (but still loud!) studio-style low end took a little while for some to get used to, but after a few shows many people started noticing and enjoying the difference: "I can hear all the notes the bass player is playing just like on the CD, and I don't have a headache after the show" — We may be on to something!
You seem to be preaching a philosophy there?
Yes. After being involved in live sound engineering for so long I am very, very sad to see the way it has all evolved in the last few years. When did the kick drum become the lead singer? Show after show, regardless of the style of music, ends up being just a solid wall of badly mixed, way too loud, over the top, low-end-heavy noise. I have tried to help and nurture so many young guys over the years to understand what mixing live shows is all about, and my often repeated sermon is to make it "sound as close as possible to the recorded material by the artist." If some artists ever came out front at their shows and listened, I'm sure they would be horrified at how their performance is being brutalized. True, lately, some artists set out to use the sound system to deliberately beat up the audience, but those shows are way beyond any help.
I'm sure that most people mixing live shows are trying to do their best, so what do you think is the real cause of these bad sounding shows?
Analyzing what the real cause of this current situation is leads to the two key problems: tuning the system with a very out-of-balance low-end level before mixing, and then a total loss of good console gain structure management after starting to mix. These two factors absolutely cause most bad live shows. Tuning a large-scale sound system with any form of outof- balance level between the lows/mids/highs (and we are not talking about EQ here) directly applies that bad balance to every channel of the mixing console before even beginning to mix. I think of system tuning this way — say I decide to use a brand new expensive microphone on a show. When I open the fancy box, I get a frequency response plot that shows that my mic is beautifully flat. If I badly tune the system with the low-end +6dB too high in level relative to the mids and highs, then I have just added +6dB from 30Hz to 250Hz to every channel of the console, including my fancy mic. Here is the real key to live system tuning: On any of the current state-of-the-art large-scale sound systems, which have carefully designed elements with crossover systems custom tailored to the cabinets, nearly all actual system tuning can be done by balancing the relative levels between the lows/mids/highs first, and then adding the absolute minimum amount of EQ to get the system to a flat, reference starting point.
So what is the key to good console gain structure?
When mixing a large live show, it is vital to set up the console gain structure so that you have absolute command of every single element/channel forming that mix. The goal of any rehearsal or sound check before the show is to be able to start that actual show with all channel faders, VCA/DCAs and Masters at zero/unity with a great sounding, under control "reference mix." This mix is the point you will constantly come back to during the show after solos, big mixing "pushes," dynamic psycho-acoustic level shifts to create different moods or just when it all seems to be getting a little sideways! This is done at sound check by very careful use of the input channel mic pre gains on each channel to establish this core mix. A big mistake is to run the individual input channel gains of a large mix too hot — the lower the better! The PFL/ cue metering on a console should be used only as a guide to prevent input overloading problems. Do not ever set up input channel mic pre gains using a PFL/cue meter — that sets an absolute level, not a musical mix relationship between channels! If the drummer arrives first to sound check you need to be very careful listening to and setting up input gains for just one element of the entire mix. Get a great drum sound, but be prepared to back off all of the drum channels' mic pre gains once the full mix is up. In fact, to get really good long-term, consistent gain structure for a large tour, at first you will find yourself mixing a lot of the time on the input mic pre gains until you have the whole mix under control with all the faders at unity. If you use this disciplined approach to using any live console, then you will end up with a totally controlled gain structure "reference mix" for any show. A show that you will never lose control of.
I've heard many shows where the vocals were lost from using too many effects. How do you feel about the use of processing for live shows?
Every time we attempt to mix sound in a large closed space like an arena, we get reverb for free — whether we want it or not! This room reverb must be taken into account as a part of our mix in that space. I have a philosophy with the use of any effects and processing in generaI — "less is more." You cannot get a wonderful, defined, emotional, up-front vocal sound if it's ruined with too much processing of any sort. It is nice to have that stuff available for the rare occasions when you get to a dry room, but honestly, for most large arenas — leave it alone! The key to all of this live sound stuff is definition in the mix — excessive processing will ruin definition in a heartbeat!
