Will PMM's replace monitor engineers in the future?

[mrcog]

I'm not really looking for a definitive answer here however more looking for a well mannered debate and the various reasons as to why you think your view.

 

Personally I'm in the view that the monitor engineer is never going to be replaced with PMM's. Your always going to get muso's who wont want to deal with the technology involved, and also your going to get performers who want to perform and set their mix with hand signals to their engineer. However, I recon that PMM's, as they are introduced further you will get more musicians (not performers), wanting the ability to configure their own monitor mix. I know as a drummer myself I would love to be able to own a Personal Monitor mixer like the Aviom system or the Rowland M-48. However, this increase in the use of PMM's will likely reduce the number of monitor guys required in the industry, potentially having some shows completely on systems like the Aviom.

 

So whats everyone else's views?

 

James

 

P.S. This is just my view on the whole thing, it is not a definitive right or wrong. I'm genuinely interested to see other peoples views and to see if they sway mine!

[jmaudio]

My personal view is that we won't see the demise of monitor engineers due to this technology for a long while yet. My reasons for this?

 

1) Multiband set ups. PMMs are just not a workable solution for festivals and band nights. In situations where there is barely time for a line check, setting up your own PMM just isn't practical. A monitor engineer who has years of experience will be able to create a better monitor mix for a teenage band (where all too often you get the classic line, "I'll just have a bit of everything please") without needing to hear them play. Furthermore, what if the band don't haven't used the system before? Or are not technically minded? They don't have the time, nor inclination to learn how to operate specific brands PMM products. Bands are much more interested in putting on a good show, than learning how to use equipment.

 

2) Feedback. How is a performer going to know when his monitor is going to feedback when he decides to go for a wander around the stage? As monitor engineers, we know where the limits of the system are. We know if we push the lead guitar fader up by another few mm, we're going to be treated to a howl of feedback, so even when the performer asks for more level, we know not to give it to them. (Even if we do nod and smile at them!) How is the aforementioned lead guitarist going to know this, while he pretends to be that bloke from Metallica? He isn't, So when he goes to adjust his monitor mix, the system get pushed too hard, and feedback occurs.

 

3) Not particularly cool. Performers are there to perform. The service we provide, as engineers and sound system designers, should not interfere with that performance, If we start off loading technical responsibility onto performers, we are doing exactly that. If they have to mess around changing there mix between songs, then that surely detracts from the performance. Being able to communicate, either by hand signals subtly mid song, or by having a quick chat across the stage between songs, to someone who understands their needs is a far better solution than a PMM. That said, for drummers and keyboadists, PMMs can work. as they typically have plenty of kit to hide behind, are set back so the audience can't see them as clearly and are stationary.

 

Cases where PMMs might become more popular?

 

I think systems integrated with the FOH desk are the way forward, For pub bands, where monitors are frequently done from front of house, systems like Rolands are a great solution to a problem. - But only if the performers are happy with this. Systems could potentially use wifi to communicate between the desk and small beltpacks on the performers. Desk integrated solutions are better as the engineer maintains a certain amount of control, and can lock out features, and set limits during soundcheck.

 

Of course pub bands are hardly the environment innovative new products are trailed, as these are usually expensive. So until we see a huge reduction in price of digital desks, I don't believe PMMs will really catch on. Hire companies want robust, flexible technology, and it seems to me that regardless of the situation, a human sat behind a monitor desk is still the most flexible, cost effective solution.

[hounsome]

Hi as a monitor eng. PMM's are good but will not replace me as someone needs to do sub aux mixes to them as most of them are only 16ch's

 

I use them lots on stages where I have a band and lots of backing singers that do not move around lots and I put them on the BV's and I can give my full attention on the band. the BV's can change levels between each of the singers.

[charlyfarly]

Performers are there to perform.

I think the points made in jmaudio's post are spot on.

 

The thought of using a PMM for our singer was raised but given the fact that his mix changes from song to song it would not be a good look if he was fiddling away with the PMM throughout a song!....so the suggestion was discarded.

 

Fantastic bit of kit for static house bands in theatres, cruise ships etc. where conditions are more settled.

[J Pearce]

They are great for pit bands, churches, cruise ships, house bands at venues, that sort of thing.

Fed premixed stem mixes they could also be good for drummers/keyboardists/backing vocalists stood in a long line sort of thing, but this still requires a monitor engineer to mix the stems.

 

I doubt they will ever replace the monitor engineer, they're just another tool in the engineer's toolbox.

[TimmyP1955]

Performers are there to perform.

I think the points made in jmaudio's post are spot on.

 

The thought of using a PMM for our singer was raised but given the fact that his mix changes from song to song it would not be a good look if he was fiddling away with the PMM throughout a song!....so the suggestion was discarded.

 

Fantastic bit of kit for static house bands in theatres, cruise ships etc. where conditions are more settled.

 

The choice here would be the SamePage system. Set up a "sheet music" page for each song, and it remembers the mix for each page.

[charlyfarly]

Maybe Timmy but even though he is on IEM's, his preferences change from gig to gig and in differing environments etc. I'm afraid the human touch is the best! B-)

[mac.calder]

I agree with Mr Pearce.

 

I have worked in a number of venues with PMM's. They have their uses - which are fairly specific scenarios - basically when one performs in a group together regularly, with a monitor mix that is not overly dynamic (whilst most PMM's have presets, generally they are state based, so you loose the little tweeks you make as you play) and generally for a group that is not the focus point. Or.. When you cannot afford a monitor engineer and you keep a regular set.

 

I saw a network PMM system a little while ago called MyMix which cost about $700 for a single unit, and could record the monitor send etc. It excited me a little bit - the possibilities of a band buying one for each player, rehearsing with it as a group, each player recording their own monitor mix and then having something to rehearse with. An it is at a price point that is hard to argue with. A 5 man pub band could get a fully working monitor system (using IEM) for just over US$3000. A theatre could get a minimal orchestra system at under US$10k and walk home with rehearsal tracks on an SD card.

 

I think PMM's open a lot of previously-unseen doors (especially for theatre applications where you often don't have a monitor engineer), and whilst I don't meddle in Audio Land often, it is one of the few new(ish) tools that I find quite exciting. There is also the fact that many of these PMM's are by their very design small (8->16 channel) digital multicores as well. Very useful in the corporate world.

[themadhippy]

will a PMM get towels,put back the overheads the guitarist knocked over during there "energetic" solo,throw drunken punters off the stage,catch drum sticks restock the stage bar mid set or the 101 other things monitor engineers get asked to do,bet they cant even give the foh engineer any decent abuse either.

[BlueShift]

They will never replace Monitor Engineers. Period.

 

Partly because they fulfil quite a different purpose/role. They offer a specific set of functionality for specific applications.

 

Most of the bands I work with prefer an engineer because:

1. They dont want to have to try and mix their own monitors when someone else can (and do it better)

2. They are too busy playing music to be fiddling with mixers

 

Likewise, those people I do work with who do use them do so because:

1. They dont have a good monitor engineer or cant afford/find one

2. Its like Monitors from FOH 'plus one'

3. They supplement the monitor engineer by giving backline techs or certain performers a degree of control over certain parameters.

4. Using a monitor engineer would be too involved and show constraints/budget/time dont permit it.

 

I guess the point is that a Personal Mixer is not comparable to a Monitor Engineer. They perform different functions, so one can never replace the other...

[T.Colwill]

A 5 man pub band could get a fully working monitor system (using IEM) for just over US$3000.

I don't know much about personal monitor systems but I do know that there are many other things that a pub band could spend 3k on! I'm in a 4 man band myself 3k would pay for the practice space for 2 years, or for the van's insurance and petrol for a year and more. But I can see what you're saying with regards to theatres and orchestras.

 

As a drummer, it would be great to be able to sort out my own monitor mix for headphones or wedges. Especially when you're playing many different places each night, and more often than not they have poor sound systems and know monitors at all. But then again, I could buy a lot of drum stuff for what they retail here in the UK.

 

Tim

[jamesperrett]

The iPad monitor app for the Yamaha digital desks looks interesting though - I don't know if you can have more than one iPad hooked up to each desk but it would appear to provide an alternative to a dedicated PMM systems.

 

James.

[BlueShift]

The iPad monitor app for the Yamaha digital desks looks interesting though - I don't know if you can have more than one iPad hooked up to each desk but it would appear to provide an alternative to a dedicated PMM systems.

 

James.

 

It is indeed good. I have used it a number of times in a number of applications.

 

It is worth noting:

1. It only works with the M7, not anything else

2. It doesnt let you control channel/mix pan

3. No access to dynamics, FX or GEQs. Mix and basic EQ only.

4. The M7 only has 1 cue bus, so while 2 people can be adjusting paramaters, only 1 can hear what they are doing! :)

 

It does however allow 2 engineers to be working simultaneously (1 on console, 1 on iPad) which is useful, and of course allows an engineer to be remotely located.