Best overstage relay monitor Microphone?

[Malcolm Gordon]

and couldn't notice the difference.

The sensitivity's rather different though, -53dB for the Pulse compared with -33dB for the PCC160.

[paulears]

Although I've been buying different ones recently, I have 5 of those that I use on stage edge duties when needed. I can confirm that they are excellent. Physically very tough, and an open, clean sound. Noise is low enough that gain can be added with no problems for stage typical levels. They're also rather cheap!

[dbuckley]

Thats quite scary. Thirty quid for a PCC160 standard microphone.

 

Problem for me is that Beesley fellow has yet to enable CPC to deliver to New Zealand. I'm holding him personally responsible :D

 

Farnell (UK), and RS (UK), and Mouser (US), and Digikey (US) can all have .nz websites priced in NZD and deliver here, why is CPC dragging its heels.

[Bobbsy]

...especially as the company web site is "CPC Farnell"....

 

Bob

[TomHoward]

Although I've been buying different ones recently, I have 5 of those that I use on stage edge duties when needed.

Do you know what the polar patterns on those are like, and do you mind advising what you've been buying instead? Alot of our concerts include vocal groups of 20-30 kids, and currently we're trying to cover them with 10 or 12 vocal condensors on stands (with about 3 kids to a mic) and the results are a nightmare to mix.

[paulears]

These are the ones I have replaced them with - not quite so large or heavy, but similar in tonal qualities.

 

The other ones are quite wide - I'd probably describe them as omni (hemispherical, obviously), but with substantial rejection on the audience side - not really conventional cardioid. The stage edge at the orchestra pit is 9m, with 11 m as complete width - 3 will cover just the 9m easily, if people use the outer extensions/stair platforms, then 5 work better.

 

There are some alternate pics here. I bought some to use myself, and ordered more than I needed, and sold the rest.

[TomHoward]

How interesting - it would be good to see what kind of gain we can get on them before feedback in our venue. We've got a 13m width (not a pros arch, just an end of the room) with the cabs about 5m above ground at the outside edge of the span. I might try the original ones out - the size and weight doesn't really worry me, it'd just be better to get something that isn't so point source in a crowd.

[AndyL]

On the double glazed control room window subject...

 

A well known theatre complex in London featured (might still?) really thick soundproof, noisily motorised, windows on the sound parts of the control rooms but wafer thin single glazed windows on the LX boxes in the two main houses. Consequently sound could not open or close their windows during performances, opening the window was part of the sound 'preset' routine, and if the LX ops dared to speak above a whisper during the quiet bits the back row would all turn round. As for what it was like when the alarm went off signifying that the LX desk was crashing (again), well the whole audience knew about it.

 

I remember being very envious of the silent mechanism on the ones at the Barbican Theatre.

 

On arrival at the home of a foreign National Theatre with a 'tour' of a 'play with songs' I discovered that due to a communications failure - no technical crew allowed on the recce, just the staff director and production manager; apparently they recce'd the local bars really well though! - there were a large number of technical deficiencies in the venue's facilities as compared to the shows needs, including a double glazed sound control room at the rear of the immaculate auditorium stalls. It then emerged that all the seats had already been sold; normally very good news, but scuppering any chance of an auditorium mix position. Our mortified hosts on hearing of our distress promptly and without further ado sent in a team of workmen who proceeded to chisel out the masonry and remove the offending window!

 

All of which is no help at all, sorry.

[boswell]

These are the ones I have replaced them with - not quite so large or heavy, but similar in tonal qualities.

 

The other ones are quite wide - I'd probably describe them as omni (hemispherical, obviously), but with substantial rejection on the audience side - not really conventional cardioid. The stage edge at the orchestra pit is 9m, with 11 m as complete width - 3 will cover just the 9m easily, if people use the outer extensions/stair platforms, then 5 work better.

 

There are some alternate pics here. I bought some to use myself, and ordered more than I needed, and sold the rest.

 

Paul, did you find any difference in the 2 models with rejection on the audience side? or with pickup due to vibration through the stage?

Thanks

[TomHoward]

I would also be interested in the differences - we have a chorus production coming up and I'm one for buying rather than hiring. We've got a 10m width to cover, so I'm thinking three of either Pulse model or similar, with a budget of about £150 max for the lot. PCC160s would be what I would hire, but obviously I'm looking a lot lower cost than this.

[paulears]

There was no difference I could detect in the pickup of stage noise. In our case, the front edge is a pit cover - 18mm ply on steel 100mm box section - so it's hollow and fairly springy. There were no problems with mechanically transmitted noise, the only snag being they did pick up the squeaks that came from where the panels touched together and flexed. I think this was direct audio pickup, not mechanically transmitted noises.

 

As for audience sound reduction - the circular ones are slightly better - but it's a small difference. using a mix of the circular ones and triangular ones which I did on the last show, the main difference was the circular ones are slightly warmer. To match took a little top end lift and LF roll off - but only a small twist of the knob. Once done, PFLing across the stage front gave very similar results. If it helps, and it's only a feeling, nothing I can document - but the triangular shaped ones seem to be a little narrower - which would be good if there are a few across the width - but with a smaller number, my feeling was that there would be small gaps as sensitivity dropped off. I didn't have 5 to try the last show I did used 2 circulars and 3 triangulars - with the older ones on the outers, and the other 3 centre, left and right.

 

I would not worry about using either. If I opened the case and the first ones out were either of these two models, I'd simply use them. At the price - which compared to the usual ones people recommend, is a bit silly - you can't go wrong!

[TimmyP1955]

There's nothing like a room that's designed by someone who has no ****ing idea what live sound mixing is about. And no matter how much we try to educate them, the powers that be do not listen.

 

I'd put dark tint on the window. When asked why, I'd say "if I can't hear what I'm doing, why should lighting guy be able to see what he's doing?".

 

Actually, I'd refuse to ever mix a show of any sort if I could not hear the sound in the room. If you can't hear the nuances and the "almost a problem" artifacts, you can't give the audience what they paid for. I'd tell them that I want to be able to do the job to a reasonable standard, and if the situation prevents that happening, I have no interest in it.

[boswell]

Many thanks Paul, Just what I wanted to know, 3 going on order now!! ;)