Headphone or In-ear recommendations for mixing

[James]

Hi all.

 

Our church (like I suspect many others) has adapted quite a bit over the last year to the change in scenarios and for many months we have been live streaming our services with varying numbers of people depending on what guidelines are in place for safety.

 

Are there any recommendations for headphones or in-ears that would give enough isolation to be able to mix for broadcast without being too coloured by the ambient acoustics. Typically at mix position we will be getting 75-85 dB A(slow) from backline and monitors alone, 90-95 with FOH running and I don't want to be killing my hearing running cans loud enough to get over this.

 

Somewhat frustratingly for the last few months I've been doing this remotely from another room, acoustically isolated from the church using a tablet remote and I have been very happy with the results. Recently policy has changed and I'm required to mix the streaming sound from within the church itself on cans (Currently using DT770s), and listening back I'm very unhappy with the results. This policy is highly unlikely to change and therefore I'm trying to find the best solution to work in the situation and if investing in different cans or in-ears will help then it's something I'd like to consider.

 

Thanks for any advice in this situation.

 

James.

[Alec]

Are there any recommendations for headphones or in-ears that would give enough isolation to be able to mix for broadcast without being too coloured by the ambient acoustics. Typically at mix position we will be getting 75-85 dB A(slow) from backline and monitors alone, 90-95 with FOH running and I don't want to be killing my hearing running cans loud enough to get over this.

 

Somewhat frustratingly for the last few months I've been doing this remotely from another room, acoustically isolated from the church using a tablet remote and I have been very happy with the results. Recently policy has changed and I'm required to mix the streaming sound from within the church itself on cans (Currently using DT770s), and listening back I'm very unhappy with the results. This policy is highly unlikely to change and therefore I'm trying to find the best solution to work in the situation and if investing in different cans or in-ears will help then it's something I'd like to consider.

You've already discovered that the best way to mix broadcast audio is exactly as you were doing, in a separate isolated room with reasonable monitors.

 

Even in a silent room, you'll find it much harder to mix on headphones. Getting the reverb right - which is critical for a decent band mix, is nigh on impossible. And stereo imaging is completely different as there's no crossfeed between L & R channels. And a broadcast mix needs much more precision - in the room, you've got pretty much every source present acoustically, so you can get away with a *much* rougher mix without it sounding dreadful.

 

On top of that, by moving into the auditorium, you're now trying to do something that's very hard in the first place under assault conditions.

 

What I can't understand is why "policy" is requiring you to move from an optimal location to probably the worst location. The only reason I could see for this is that you were mixing FOH for the room as well as for broadcast. Fair enough if you have to, but these are really two separate jobs, and there aren't many people who can do a good job of both at the same time. The "policy" makers need some assistance in understanding what policies help, and what policies hinder.

 

And, finally, you're risking your hearing in that audio battle, which is where I hit a red line. By all means, make me mix in a suboptimal way, as long as you know that it'll produce suboptimal results. But, if you ask me to risk my ears (health), then I'm probably walking.

[timsabre]

I think it depends how professional the results need to be. Our church has broadcast its services for about 6 years now but the purpose is to link in those church members who are stuck at home through illness or childcare or whatever. We aren't broadcasting on BBC1 or anything. Most people are watching on laptops or phones without using headphones so fairly tinny sound. We strive for a good result but in the end you have to consider it it's worth taking an extra person out of the service to do a dedicated livestream mix, or to add in extra equipment, etc, and we judge not so the FOH guy also mixes the livestream (though it is fairly automated using compressors to control levels between songs and speech). Your situation may vary.

 

For us the FOH desk operator monitors the livestream audio on trusty DT100's. We regularly listen back afterwards (using various devices) to see how it sounded for the viewers and make adjustments to what we do for next time. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it could be improved, but the folks at home appreciate it just the same.

[GR1]

My advice is that as you are unhappy with the results explain the problem to the policy makers and if they don't accept the health issues they are imposing on you and return to your preferred set up invite them to get someone else to do the job. It's not beyond the bounds of possibilty that you are doing a much better job than is required and the decision makers 'don't get it'.

When you explain that this is a health issue if the policy makers don't accept your way of working you wouldn't want to be working for them any way.I've been in similar situations and sometimes people see sense and sometimes not but I'm still alive and I can hear properly.You have to value and protect yourself.PS: I agree with the comments Alec made above.

 

 

[Stuart91]

My advice is that as you are unhappy with the results explain the problem to the policy makers and if they don't accept the health issues they are imposing on you and return to your preferred set up invite them to get someone else to do the job.

 

Especially in churches, people's passion for the end result can leave them blinkered somewhat. It's easy for policy-making to become skewed and volunteers take the brunt of that.

 

I quoted one church for a full audio installation. They didn't go with us, next time I spoke with one of their volunteer techs I asked what had happened with it. Turned out they bought the kit themselves, and had their "team" do the installation work. Apparently it was only completed after a marathon 24+hr shift - they worked solidly from 9am Saturday until doors opened for the big service on Sunday morning. Then the same people operated kit for two services, and were back to their day jobs on Monday morning.

 

This is a fairly extreme example, but it's a slippery slope. (And, for the record, their speaker system was an incoherent mess)