Hi Folks!
I have a microphone question for this awesome community that I'm
hoping you can help us out with. Our contra dance committee (Ottawa)
would like to purchase a wireless mic to use for introductory
lessons as well as family dances. However, we don't have major
sound expertise on our committee and were wondering a few things.
(1) do callers prefer a handheld or headset (thinking of family
dances as part of this as we want to add 3-4 a year to our regular
contra schedule)???
(2) suggestion for particular models of handhelds and headsets???
I know that microphones have been discussed previously on the list
(I pulled some of the discussion from previous years and put it
below). However, more people may now have more experience, maybe
there are more current models... ...
Will (L) - did you ever do your microphone survey that your
mentioned back a few years ago?
For those who have headsets, why did you go that way and do you like
your model?
For those who have handhels, similar questions! :)
Help would be most appreciated as we would like to invest in
something that will be great for various callers to use.
Much thanks!
Emily from Ottawa
___________________________________________
From holt.e at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 16:27:23 2007
From: holt.e at comcast.net (Rickey)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:27:23 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
Message-ID: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
Hi All,
We are shopping for sound equipment. We hold dances in a small
extremely
live hall. We get from 30 to 50 dancers. We also do gigs in other
halls
for up to 100. We are a community band: good musicians with, sometimes
several sit-ins (also good): We are 2 Fiddles, 1 recorder/clarinet/
saxophone
(i.e. one person, who switches between these instruments), 1 Silver
flute, 1
Irish (wooden) flute, 1 guitar (with pick-up soon I hope), 1
keyboard, 1
Bodhran, sometimes 1 added Bodhran, rarely another guitar, a stand up
Acoustic Bass, and an Acoustic Piano (in place of keyboards). With
Caller at
most we need 12 inputs. Below is a list of the equipment we are
considering. We are relatively new to equipment of this caliber.
Ease of
use is an issue. We are choosing from among the following. Do you have
experience with these? Do you have preferences?
MIXERS:
1. Allen & Heath PA20 - 16 mono inputs plus 2 stereo inputs, and a
built-in equalizer
OR
2. Soundcraft MPM12/2 - 12 mono inputs plus 2 stereo inputs. Would
require an added equalizer, possibly the dbx 231 31-Band Graphic
Equalizer,
from Sweetwater
Speakers
We are thinking of using 10" powered speakers, 2 for the room, and 2
for
monitors. The two we are choosing between are:
1. Mackie SRM 350
OR
2. RCF ART 310A
To this we would add a caller's monitor TC-Helicon VoiceSolo VSM-200
MICROPHONES
1. Dynamic Vocal Mikes - Either Shure SM 58, OR Shure Beta 58
2. And for General Purpose Mikes: Shure SM 57
What has you experience with this equipment been.
Thanks for you help,
Rickey Holt.
From peter at amidonmusic.com Tue Jul 31 17:19:02 2007
From: peter at amidonmusic.com (Peter Amidon)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:19:02 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
In-Reply-To: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
Message-ID: <p0623090dc2d5571b2a99@[192.168.1.100]>
Hi,
I am adding to the request.
I need advice on what self-powered speaker with
at least an XLR and a quarter inch input in the
back. I would love a speaker big enough for
dancing with groups of children; right now I use
my amplifier with an EV X300 (I'm spoiled).
I would be using it with my wireless headset
system (the XLR connection) and my iPod
(I have an adaptor into a quarter inch input).
Of course I would love it if it were not too heavy.
It needs to be able to go on a stand.
Any suggestions?
Many thanks.
Peter Amidon
peter at amidonmusic.com
802-257-1006
cell 917-922-5462
From richgoss at comcast.net Tue Jul 31 17:31:49 2007
From: richgoss at comcast.net (richgoss at comcast.net)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:31:49 +0000
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
Message-ID: <073120072131.11306.46afaa45000c022300002c2a22007601809c9c0109080c0...@comcast.net
>
Hi,
I've been giving serious consideration to a Roland AC-90. Peter,
you described it exactly. It's light weight, has both XLR and 1/4"
input. Also has Aux inputs in the back for an iPod (RCA and 1/4".
the cool thing about it is that it has a recepticle to mount it on a
speaker stand built in. Here is a link: http://www.roland.com/products/en/AC-90/index.html
Download the owner's manual for a complete description.
From richard.a.green at hotmail.com Tue Jul 31 21:14:48 2007
From: richard.a.green at hotmail.com (Richard Green)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:14:48 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
In-Reply-To: <p0623090dc2d5571b2a99@[192.168.1.100]>
References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
<p0623090dc2d5571b2a99@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <bay118-dav10acfcae2b122e0e522cb5b2...@phx.gbl>
We recently purchased a complete sound system, and ended up using
FBT Jolly
8ba for the stage speakers and 8ra for the monitors. Both are
powered, and
the ba has a more powerful amp. They weigh about 18 lbs. We have
used them
for contradances in grange halls and they have plenty of sound. You
can get
them from full compass.
Richard
From gtwood at worldpath.net Tue Jul 31 22:14:27 2007
From: gtwood at worldpath.net (Gale Wood)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:14:27 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
<p0623090dc2d5571b2a99@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <002701c7d3e1$b21ebe10$abe48c40@robbinsd490985>
Hi Peter
Check places Like Daddys Junky music (is there one near you?) They
stock
some very good small 'amps' (5 watt)powered by small 9v batteries
( strange
but it does work)
Look at the fenders, Roland Micro cubes are not cheap but sound good
(and a
choice of colors!)
happy hunting
Gale
From jn32157 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 1 07:51:09 2007
From: jn32157 at hotmail.com (John Nance)
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:51:09 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed
In-Reply-To: <002701c7d3e1$b21ebe10$abe48c40@robbinsd490985>
Message-ID: <bay140-f38a5e014a18f8c6ecb490ff9...@phx.gbl>
Weogo Reed runs an email forum much like this one specifically for
sound
technicians who work contra dances. This is the URL to that page:
http://www.harvestmoonfolk.org/sound.htm
Be aware that the discussion can get pretty technical at times.
From chiph at rumney.org Wed Aug 1 13:59:36 2007
From: chiph at rumney.org (Chip Hedler)
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 13:59:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Callers] sound equipment [Callers Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1]
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1185984002.2260.call...@sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.1.1185984002.2260.call...@sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <49371.216.114.172.209.1185991176.squir...@earthcovenant.org
>
Hi all--
Been providing sound equipment for about half the dances I do, many of
them private gigs in all sorts of indoor and outdoor locations. In
really
live setting, like old mostly-concrete school gymnasiums, the most
valuable tool in my rack is the 31-band equalizer, which I've
learned to
use moderately well to identify and suppress the sound frequencies
that
echo loudest and cause feedback. The process ("ringing out") is
tedious
and I'm wondering if anyone's been using a digital "feedback-
destroyer"
sort of appliance to automate the task.
The trickiest part of setting up has been adjusting monitor
placement and
levels for the musicians. They usually ask me to make adjustments
after
the dance is in progress. Give them too much, and the mics start
picking
it up, sometimes creating a shower-stall reverb effect or feedback. My
dream: inconspicuous wireless monitor headsets with volume controls
for
musicians.
Besides that, I've seen enough other people's rigs to realize that
usually
you get what you pay for, quality-wise. I started out with cheapo
mics and
found that replacing them with Shures made a huge difference. My first
speaker stands were very affordable, but the knurled knobs to clamp
the
poles in place gradually stripped their threads so they're now
history.
Haven't gone to a wireless mic yet, but someday!
Whenever I can, I do small gigs with no equipment at all, perhaps
like the
era when this genre of music and dance was more or less
contemporary...
Chip Hedler
From wpollans at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 16:23:56 2007
From: wpollans at gmail.com (Warren Pollans)
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 16:23:56 -0400
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
Message-ID: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
Hi Folks,
I'm finally getting ready to consider buying a wireless microphone -
handheld, not a headset. What are the minimum requirements I should
consider? What should I expect to pay for such a mic (with receiver)?
Any/all advice is appreciated. Feel free to point me elsewhere.
Thanks,
Warren
From markrdjones at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 16:37:38 2007
From: markrdjones at gmail.com (Mark R Dobyns Jones)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:37:38 -0400
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
References: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2e45c3c90710011337r29fac9c9i7494b3cc7932f...@mail.gmail.com
>
Without halting people's comments here,
You may wish to check in with a sound-forum list, and report back on
the advice you get.
Take a llook at Contra Sound Forum
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/contrasf/
I subscribe to it.
Mark Jones
From ebay at hands4.com Mon Oct 1 17:06:38 2007
From: ebay at hands4.com (Beth Parkes)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:06:38 -0400
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
References: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop>
As a caller, I consider my mic my instrument. The musicians you are
working
with have paid thousands of dollars for an instrument that helps
them sound
good. We get off cheap, imho. Depending on whatever the hall happens
to have
limits how you sound. The mic is often the weak link in the sound
chain. All
of this is to say "Congratulations" on deciding to make this
investment.
Tony and I have been very happy with our SM58s. They are affordable
workhorses. I just got a new one. They come in several grades. Do
not get
the cheapest, it will not choose a frequency for you. Before buying,
be
absolutely sure to visit the Shure web site and get the list of
frequencies
for use in your area. The transmitter/receivers use the same
frequencies as
TV stations and shure will get you a set that are less likely to be in
conflict. The midrange PGX24 has a street price around $400.
HTH,
Beth Parkes
From jeffrey.petrovitch at verizon.net Mon Oct 1 18:30:14 2007
From: jeffrey.petrovitch at verizon.net (Jeffrey Petrovitch)
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 18:30:14 -0400
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
References: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <470174f6.4050...@verizon.net>
I currently use a wireless Shure SM58 with a PXG24 transmitter (like
Beth). I was able to pick the system up for about $400.00 and all and
all it has served me well. I also use a Beringer pre-amp/digital
voice
processor in combination that allows me to control the frequencies,
gains, highs, lows, expander, compressor, de-esser, etc. It really
allows me to have my voice sound exactly how I want my voice to
sound...
My first recommendation would be try, try, try different wireless
microphones if possible. Everyone is going to sound different in the
same microphone and you want to find the microphone that makes you
sound
the way you want to sound. You are not going to be able to do this by
reading about different frequency ranges of different microphones. I
have also used a BETA58 and a BETA87A, which I can both recommend.
The
BETA87A (one of the top of the line microphones by Shure) is my
favorite
and I think it makes me sound like I want to sound, but I have also
heard other people use the BETA87A and sound horrible, this just means
spending more money is not always the best way of picking out a
microphone.
My other recommendation would be is a wireless mic for you? It seems
like there are a lot of advantages to having a wireless mic, I use
one,
and a lot of people use them, but it is important that it once again
works for you! I would recommend calling with a wireless microphone,
calling with a wire microphone, and calling with a microphone and see
what works best. I would argue that this could be a huge psychology
piece and you may find you just call better with a microphone on a
stand. We could talk about proper technique on holding microphones,
the
frequency ranges of microphones, etc. all day long, but when it all
comes out in the end, you need be comfortable with what you are using
and you need to love how it makes you sound. I think it is 90% psych
and 10% equipment IMHO.
Respectfully Submitted,
j_petro
From contradancerdave at yahoo.com Mon Oct 1 18:34:07 2007
From: contradancerdave at yahoo.com (Dave Colestock)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <523554.5940...@web52601.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
I like the Shure BG3.1 handheld. I got mine on ebay, but they are
generally found in the 200-300 price range new.
Dave Colestock
Warren Pollans <wpollans at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm finally getting ready to consider buying a wireless microphone -
handheld, not a headset. What are the minimum requirements I should
consider? What should I expect to pay for such a mic (with receiver)?
Any/all advice is appreciated. Feel free to point me elsewhere.
Thanks,
Warren
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
From rich at harts.mv.com Tue Oct 2 09:37:04 2007
From: rich at harts.mv.com (Richard Hart)
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 09:37:04 -0400
Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations
In-Reply-To: <38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop>
References: <4701575c.6020...@gmail.com>
<38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop>
Message-ID: <47024980.8000...@harts.mv.com>
From sharedweight.99.kyoto at spamgourmet.com Tue Oct 2 14:59:28
2007
From: sharedweight.99.kyoto at spamgourmet.com (sharedweight.
99.kyoto at spamgourmet.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 11:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Callers] Japan dance and self intro/update
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1191340801.17312.call...@sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <74363.4139...@web38705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
[n.b. this has been 'cross posted' to the yahoo traditional callers
list, in case anyone is on
both lists...]
This post from a llooonnnngg time dancer and first time caller who is
requesting some advice for an unusual situation...but as it is my
first post, I will explain a little about myself, and along the way
that will explain the unusual situation and help guide and refine any
replies.
My name is david crespo, a name some of you no doubt fear -- I mean
recognize -- or would (recognize, that is) (if you saw my ugly
mug) (well, maybe fear...) from my 20 odd (quite odd) years of
dancing and involvement in the dance community in New England, mostly
Vermont (Etna, Norwich, Thetford, to Northern Spy etc.) and Maine
(SMFA (Yarmouth), Falmouth, Bates, Bowdoinham...). As some of you
thus know, about 3 years ago, at a Wake the Neighbors Bates dance I
was met by a cute and not very frightening Japanese exchange student,
Yukie, who with a very little gentle nudging at Deffa a week later,
eventually (rapidly, that is) was able to parlay that happenstance
circumstance into what is now a beautiful and happy marriage. She
returned to Japan shortly after we completed our courtship and about
a year later I followed. We're living in Kyoto.
Alas, there is one tragic note attending this otherwise joyous and
perfect scenario. Japan, you see, is a land thouroughly devoid of one
essential nutrient: contradancing. You can imagine my dismay, tears,
and lamentations. Sadly, then, since my arrival, I have been quietly
(well not so quietly) teaching english while secretly incubating evil
plans to conquer Japan, then Asia, then the world in 64 (drastic)
measures (hmmm--- good name for a dance). This month, my long patient
agony of waiting has begun to pay off. I have been given the
opportunity to indoctrinate a few trusting and innocent souls into
the sublime mysteries of la dance du contra and create an army of
swiftfooted robots, ready and willing to do my bidding at every call.
SOON I WILL CONQUER THE WORLD!!!
ahem.
please excuse me while my medicine kicks in. Ah, yes, thank you. OK,
where was I? The fact is, my wife and I have been invited to lead a
contradance workshop at a local festival on October 20. When we found
out, we began doing as much research as we could on calling and so
on. We found a few basic dances, like Baby Rose and Diane's Visit and
Atonement Reel that we like and figured would be suitable and we have
been practicing calling them. But I really welcome any suggestions...
Actually, above and beyond some decades of doing things proper and
improper, I took a caller workshop or two from Rick Mohr (thanks
Rick) so I have a rough idea of what's involved. And I've learned a
bit from practicing calling and writing a few ad hoc dances on my
own. For example, I learned that being a dancer has habituated me to
act ON the beat, but as a caller I need to act BEFORE the beat,
eh....this flustered me at first. Are there any other typical first
caller pointers we should be on the lookout for?
In addition, there are a few other associated circumstances in this
project that create the aforementioned unique situation. In brief
(HA! fooled you), since I've rattled on too long, here is what I mean:
I don't speak more than the rudiments of Japanese. My wife is still a
beginner dancer, to wit, she isn't a strong enough one to call on her
own. Between us we are trying to teach each other what the other
lacks and hopefully make one good caller out of the two of us. One
question that has come up is is it better to keep the standard names
for the figures, or to Japanify them. (We are leaning to the
former...Japanese has a very high percentage of english loan words,
and they learn english (poooooorly) in school.) Still, has anyone
ever tried to call across a language barrier?
Japanese are touch sensitve. They don't touch, they don't give eye
contact. They don't give weight. (They give wait). They don't hug.
They don't even say I love you. They are very shy. For example, I am
told that this is to the point that standing in a line of men facing
a line of women is likely be uncomfortable, even for the younger
generation, so Yukie feels we should use mixed couples with armbands
to distinguish "gender"--I mean position. As we build a community of
experienced dancers, it would be expected that some of this
inhibition might wear off...). You can see why they need to dance. On
the other hand, they are good followers. Any advice for working with
a shy crowd?
Some or many of the attendees at this workshop, we just found out,
are likely to be children. Depending on the percentage, it may be
necessary to do a kids dance, or at least a dance kids could enjoy. I
am good at working with kids in general, but I would love any advice
for doing a dance with young people. I don't know or haven't been
able to find any children's dances, though I assume the Family Dance
in Yarmouth is still up and I plan to contact Jeff Raymond about it,
because I can't remember the caller's name (Nancy....) (though we
have danced and chatted about dancing and calling several times at
the May Day Festival...gads! say hi if you're listening..).
So, children's dances are one thing I am looking for.
We are working in a small space...maybe two lines of six couples
each. Advice for small spaces???　
We are doing three workshops. If the same people return, we may do
more advanced things, or we may just repeat teh workshop...but I
would like to try different dances each time, for my practice.
The room will be full of beginners, so no experienced dancers to rely
on. Ballroom dancing had a certain following here (and in Kyoto there
is a small set dancing group that we visited...small 14 or so... and
a square dancing group that we plan to visit. ) but not enough to be
helpful, in the sense that there are few cultural supports for
learning (i.e. in the US most everyone knows (even if they don't
admit it) how to at least fake a waltz or ballroom position...not
here.) Think martian territory...
I should add that we are seriously working towards starting a regular
dance here (we've found an available and very suitable space, a
church hall in a nearby church, for example) and this is for us a
tryout and possible stepping stone. We want to whet people's
appetite, and leave them wanting more. We have a half hour to do it...
OK...apologies for the verbose and windy post. Fond regards to all of
you I know, hajimemashite ("nice to meet you" in japanese, literally
"beginning") to the rest and many thanks in advance for your time and
help...cheers...david
nothing rhymes with nostril...
From will at dedicationtechnologies.com Wed Dec 10 09:38:22 2008
From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 09:38:22 -0500
Subject: [Callers] Microphone/Headset Survey Questions
Message-ID: <c5653e8e.2f453%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
I?m looking into getting a wireless microphone or headset for
calling and
while the past discussions have been helpful, the database
programmer in me
longs for more organized and detailed information. With that in
mind, I?m
thinking about making an online survey for individuals to report the
experiences with various makes and models. My plan would be to
summarize the
results so we can get a sense what makes and models people like and
dislike
and why.
Before I create the survey, I?d like to get feedback on the
questions as
follows below. Please feel free to comment on the following and to
suggest
revisions or additions.
Will Loving
Amherst, MA
--
Wireless Microphone/Headset Survey ? Sample Questions
(Again, these are suggested survey questions, please don?t answer
them now)
1. Microphone Type: __Handheld __Headset
2. Microphone Brand:_______ Model:________ Year
Purchased:_________
3. Base Station: Brand:_______ Model:________ Year
Purchased:_________
4. Transmitter (if sep) Brand:_______ Model:________ Year
Purchased:_________
5. Battery Type/Size: __Built-in __AAA __AA __C __D __Other
6. Does this unit use rechargeable batteries or have built-in
rechargeable
pack: __Yes
7. Do you use rechargeable batteries: __Yes
8. Preferred Battery Brand: ___________
9. Battery capacity (If you know it) in MilliAmp Hours (mAh) printed
on the
battery: ____mAh
10. Battery life on a full charge or fresh set of batteries
(approx):____hrs
11. Does unit (mic or battery pack) have a battery-charge-remaining
indicator: __Yes
12. Sound Quality 1 (poor) <-> 9 (superb)
13. Construction/Quality: 1 (poor) <-> 5 (Avg) <-> 10 (superb)
14. Durability/Reliability: 1 (poor) <-> 5 (Avg) <-> 10 (superb)
15. Range: 1 (poor) <-> 5 (Avg) <-> 10 (superb)
16. Interference Rejection (resistance to interference from other
radio
sources): 1 (poor) <-> 5 (Avg) <-> 10 (superb)
17. List up to three things you LIKE about this unit:
* __________________
* __________________
* __________________
18. List up to three things you DON?T LIKE about this unit:
* __________________
* __________________
* __________________
19. What kinds of calling/instruction do you use this for (check all
that
apply):
* Contra Dance
* Square Dance
* Family/Community Dance
* English Country Dance
* Waltz
* Ballroom
* International/Folk
* Aerobics
* Other ______________
20. What size group do you use this for: Average Size ___ Largest
Size ___
21. Questions for Headset users: When you need to speak off mike, do:
* Switch the unit off
* Cover the mike with your hand
* Move it out of the way
* Other_____________
22. Would you recommend this system to other callers: __Yes __No
__Maybe
From will at dedicationtechnologies.com Tue Apr 21 17:54:15 2009
From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:54:15 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Earset microphone recommendations
In-Reply-To: <49ea7e52.1040...@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c613b8c7.32064%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
I am in the process of buying a Shure PGX1/PGX4 transmitter/receiver
system
with the intention of using it with an earset microphone, the small,
nearly
invisible 'rice grain' style.
A friend of mine is singer and I borrowed her Countryman E6 earset
(the
omni-directional model) to use at a dance the other night. I really
liked it
though I did deal with some feedback getting too close to one of the
speakers, so I'm thinking about the directional model. The E6 is
however
$310
http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/COU-E6IO5TSL-SL.prod?Origin=C
ategory
and so I'm interested to know what else people like and find durable.
So, I'm looking for experience and recommendations on any of the
following:
Countryman E6/E6i (omni)
Countryman E6/E6i (directional)
OSP HS-09 (omni)
These next three all the same rig sold under different companies
MM-PSM Pro Series Earset
Electovoice RE97Tx
Point-Source Audio CO-7
In particular, I'm interested in knowing about the OSP HS-09 and the
directional E6. Has anyone using the directional E6 had problem with
the
mike staying in proper position or being too sensitive? The
directional
aspect should make feedback a non-issue but I've been told that
positioning
can be a problem....
Thanks,
Will
--
Will Loving
Amherst, MA 01002
From gregmck at earthlink.net Wed Apr 22 12:30:15 2009
From: gregmck at earthlink.net (gregmck at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:30:15 -0700
Subject: [Callers] Earset microphone recommendations
In-Reply-To: <c613b8c7.32064%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <49ea7e52.1040...@gmail.com>
<c613b8c7.32064%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090422091957.01dc1...@earthlink.net>
Will wrote:
I am in the process of buying a Shure PGX1/PGX4 transmitter/
receiver system
with the intention of using it with an earset microphone, the
small, nearly
invisible 'rice grain' style.
Well, now that you mention it, here is another perspective on this
technology. Before making the investment you might want to consider
all of the implications.
Regards,
Greg McKenzie
************
Un-tethered from Reality: Some Thoughts on Wireless Microphones
I have tried using a wireless headset microphone and found the
experience wanting. I owned one for several years and used it
regularly. I abandoned it for several reasons. Not primarily
because of the increased instances of feedback--something I find
devastating to the sense of safety and community spirit in the
hall. And not because of the monetary and environmental cost of
batteries, the extra trouble of setting up the mike and receiver, the
complications of switching the mike off and on again to make "off
mike" comments, or the feeling of being wired and walking around with
an electronic device attached to my head. My decision was also not
primarily based on concerns about exposing myself and others to
high-frequency electromagnetic radiation--though I recognize that
some people are very sensitive to the idea of such exposure.
My primary reason for giving up on the wireless headset was because I
saw that it was interfering with my ability to connect with the
dancers, musicians, and others in the hall.
Any speaker at a public event needs to be in a position where the
entire audience can see them. This is a very basic
principle. People naturally prefer to watch someone who is speaking
to them. When someone hears a voice hailing them the most natural
reaction is to turn one's head toward the source of the sound. It
can be disconcerting to look toward the sound source and see an empty
stage. The natural reaction is to feel a little bit silly, and to
look around to try to find the source of the voice. This is a
relative small matter but keep in mind that there are probably dozens
of people going through this reaction whenever a speaker is not in
the spot where the audience is accustomed to seeing them. That means
that for at least a few seconds a big part of your audience is
feeling silly and disconnected. Those people are not feeling
confident or relaxed. They cannot listen carefully to what the
speaker is saying.
As an aside here I would point out that an "off-stage mike" is
commonly used in theatre and stagecraft. Please note, however, that
the purpose of the "off-stage mike" is always to build suspense and
tension. Something that I, personally, try to avoid when calling
because I want people to feel relaxed and sociable. The off-stage
mike is, therefore, usually accompanied with a visual cue (such as a
spotlight at the edge of the stage during an introduction) to direct
the audience's attention in the absence of a physical speaker they
can see.
I have attended dances where the caller has used a wireless headset
mike off-stage freely during the evening. I always found it
disconcerting to have to look for the caller in the room. It also
seemed a bit creepy to think of a live microphone moving around the
hall without warning. Callers sometimes use these mikes while
speaking to individuals or small groups of dancers who are
confused. This is unprofessional because it draws the entire hall's
attention to the confused dancers and exacerbates the situation by
creating even more tension.
I quickly learned that when using a wireless headset it is the
speaker's duty to alert the audience whenever they change
locations--particularly if they move off stage. I would say
something like: "Ladies and gentlemen. Please direct your attention
to the center of the hall," before stepping off the stage. This is
the courteous thing for a speaker to do. This helped a lot, but it
also complicated the process of moving away from my regular
location. Ultimately I found that the headset mike was more trouble
than it was worth.
I can see that these headset or "earset" mikes are very appropriate
for entertainers who dance or move while singing or speaking and, in
particular, when they have a spotlight to keep the audience cued as
to their location. They also work well for instructors who must
gesture or handle props while talking, such as in demonstrations. I
think such mikes are of particular use to exercise instructors such
as Jazzercise leaders who generally remain in the same location
while teaching.
At calling gigs the sound engineer will often offer me a wireless
mike to use. My response is that I am happy to use any mike that
delivers a good range of high-frequency sounds so that my voice can
be clearly understood. Wireless mikes are acceptable, as long as
they are securely fastened to a mike stand where I will leave them
during the entire dance.
########
From mawild at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 24 03:07:14 2009
From: mawild at sbcglobal.net (Martha Wild)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:07:14 -0700
Subject: [Callers] Headset mikes
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1240502427.35777.call...@sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.3.1240502427.35777.call...@sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <472256c1-af1a-4d2b-aab8-869874a2d...@sbcglobal.net>
Well, I have an entirely different and positive perspective on
headset mikes.
We have a nice headset mike here in San Diego. I love using it, and
our sound engineers set it up nicely so that I have no trouble with
feedback. I have to remember to keep it a little ways from my mouth
so that it won't pop on Partner and Promenade and any other P sounds,
but as long as I do that, it's great.
I call up on some steps here because I'm short and like to see the
whole hall while I'm calling - and they can see me. I don't usually
run around the hall while calling. During the beginner sessions, a
handheld mike that is attached to a cable is a nightmare - my voice
is not big, and I have a hard time teaching a large group without a
mike. Trying to demo a ladies chain with a cable following you around
is a recipe for disaster, and I hate having to use one when I'm
calling elsewhere. During walkthroughs here I am no longer tethered
to the stage, and can hop down to demonstrate a move, though I often
just ask regulars to do it. I can move down once a dance gets going
and briefly consult with the musicians without worry (I usually just
move the mike away a little and then back, and don't worry about the
mute). I can keep calling even if I need to quickly flip through my
cards as I realize that the next dance might be too difficult or too
easy and another would be better.
I find that a handheld mike hurts my hand if I hold it all night.
It's just too darned heavy and a real inconvenience. When I call in
places that set up a mike in a stand, I find that I often stand in
such a way in front of it that I'll end up with a backache or my feet
or legs aching by the end of the night. Not fun.
As far as connecting with the dancers, I really don't see how
juggling a stupid mike in one hand or being constrained by a mike in
a stand in front of you, inhibiting your ability to look around you
at the dancers or at the musicians while calling, is in any way
helpful. Those of you who enjoy having your hands cramp up and
tripping over cords can keep doing it, but for anyone who hasn't been
thrilled with the experience, I recommend you get a good "Madonna
mike", as we call it, and free yourself from the tyranny of a tether.
Enjoy!
Martha Wild
From lcpgr at yahoo.com Tue Apr 28 23:54:14 2009
From: lcpgr at yahoo.com (Laur)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Callers] Headset mikes
In-Reply-To: <472256c1-af1a-4d2b-aab8-869874a2d...@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <248537.13560...@web52906.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
can you identify the mic,? Martha?? thx
I agree,? if I could? find a? comfortable good? quality headset I
prefer hands free.
Laurie~
--- On Fri, 4/24/09, Martha Wild <mawild at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
From: Martha Wild <mawild at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Headset mikes
To: callers at sharedweight.net
Date: Friday, April 24, 2009, 3:07 AM
Well, I have an entirely different and positive perspective on
headset mikes.
We have a nice headset mike here in San Diego. I love using it, and
our sound
engineers set it up nicely so that I have no trouble with feedback.
I have to
remember to keep it a little ways from my mouth so that it won't pop
on
Partner and Promenade and any other P sounds, but as long as I do
that, it's
great.
I call up on some steps here because I'm short and like to see the
whole
hall while I'm calling - and they can see me. I don't usually run
around
the hall while calling. During the beginner sessions, a handheld
mike that is
attached to a cable is a nightmare - my voice is not big, and I have
a hard time
teaching a large group without a mike. Trying to demo a ladies chain
with a
cable following you around is a recipe for disaster, and I hate
having to use
one when I'm calling elsewhere. During walkthroughs here I am no
longer
tethered to the stage, and can hop down to demonstrate a move,
though I often
just ask regulars to do it. I can move down once a dance gets going
and briefly
consult with the musicians without worry (I usually just move the
mike away a
little and then back, and don't worry about the mute). I can keep
calling
even if I need to quickly flip through my cards as I realize that
the next dance
might be too difficult or too easy and another would be better.
I find that a handheld mike hurts my hand if I hold it all night.
It's just
too darned heavy and a real inconvenience. When I call in places
that set up a
mike in a stand, I find that I often stand in such a way in front of
it that
I'll end up with a backache or my feet or legs aching by the end of
the
night. Not fun.
As far as connecting with the dancers, I really don't see how
juggling a
stupid mike in one hand or being constrained by a mike in a stand in
front of
you, inhibiting your ability to look around you at the dancers or at
the
musicians while calling, is in any way helpful. Those of you who
enjoy having
your hands cramp up and tripping over cords can keep doing it, but
for anyone
who hasn't been thrilled with the experience, I recommend you get a
good
"Madonna mike", as we call it, and free yourself from the tyranny of a
tether.
Enjoy!
Martha Wild
From will at dedicationtechnologies.com Wed May 6 21:42:16 2009
From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving)
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 21:42:16 -0400
Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
Message-ID: <c627b4b8.3247e%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
A very knowledgeable pro audio person just gave me a mini-course on
how to
do basic sound setup for a mike, something I?ve always wanted to
know more
about. At many dances there is a sound person who will do this for
you but
sometimes there isn?t and this little bit of info may be of help. It
certainly demystified things for me. I wrote this up and then edited
it a
bit more after getting his feedback. Others may have additional
comments.
How to ?Ring Out a Channel? for a microphone
You overall goal is to adjust the sound coming out of the house
speakers to
get as much volume as you can without any ?ringing? sound. Every
room is
different in terms of what frequencies it absorbs and reflects, so the
necessary settings will differ from place to place. Different mikes
will
also require different settings. The adjustment described below can
be done
systematically and in just a few minutes.
1. Setting Initial Gain from the Mic (aka input level or ?trim?)
* Turn house volume (for your mike) completely down ? usually the
last knob or
slider
* Set all EQ controls to flat (middle position)
* Turn up Gain - usually the first control knob or slider for your
microphone
?channel? - while speaking into mike until you see levels on the
meter or the
clipping light flashes. Adjust gain to just below clipping or 0db
(same thing)
depending on what kind of feedback ? level meter or clipping light
- is
available on the sound board.
2. Setting EQ (balancing the sound for the room by getting rid of the
ringing)
* Turn up house volume on the mic channel until you hear a ringing
along with
your voice
* Reduce level on first EQ slider/dial (often labeled ?highs?) to
see if it
reduces or eliminates ringing. If it does, increase house volume
again until
ringing is again apparent. If no change, reset to flat and go to
next EQ
range.
* Reduce level on next EQ slider/dial to reduce/eliminate ringing.
Increase
house volume again until ringing occurs.
* Repeat for each subsequent EQ range available on sound board ?
some may just
have highs, mids and lows, others may have multiple mid-range
adjustments. You
may not need to adjust all the EQ?s, e.g. the low frequency in
particular,
just keep running up the volume and adjusting out the rings until
you have
plenty of volume. Your objective is to get as much volume as you
need for the
performance without ringing.
3. Fine-tuning: If time permits after you?ve rung out the channel
you can
then play with the EQ to adjust for sound quality. Keep talking into
the mic
and make very subtle adjustments to the EQ until you get a smooth
natural
sound.
Will Loving
Amehrst, MA
From gregmck at earthlink.net Thu May 7 22:01:02 2009
From: gregmck at earthlink.net (gregmck at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 19:01:02 -0700
Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
In-Reply-To: <c627b4b8.3247e%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <c627b4b8.3247e%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b...@earthlink.net>
Will wrote:
"Your overall goal is to adjust the sound coming out of the house
speakers to
get as much volume as you can without any 'ringing' sound."
Thank you Will for this information. I
understand how this process would work for most
PA system setups at musical concerts and other
performances. It is certainly targeted at
minimizing feedback--a worthy goal in any situation.
I have concerns, however, if this is the best way
to set up a caller's mike. When I attend dances
I find that the caller's mike is often set up
with a lot of low frequency response and little
high frequency. I wonder if that may be because
the audio person has followed this very advice.
With little high frequency response the caller is
likely to have difficulty being understood
clearly because the highs are essential for
hearing the speech articulation sounds that help
us to distinguish between words. The words
"left" and "right," for example, will sound
almost identical when the high frequencies are removed.
A concert is a very different situation than a
social event. At a concert the fans already know
the words and those who don't can simply buy the
album and read the insert, (if that kind of thing
is important to them). The voice is really being
used as a musical instrument and clear
articulation is not vital. The context of words
in a song will often reveal the meaning without
being able to make out every word. In any case
there is no pressure to catch every word either sung or spoken.
Do you remember the sound of a PA system on a
military ship? You've heard it in movies. The
voice is transmitted through metal horns that are
very tinny, reproducing all of the high
frequencies with great effectiveness. This may
not sound soothing or melodious but in a critical
situation--where lives depend on instructions
being understood clearly--this setup is perfect
for cutting through the roar of the sea, the
engines, and the wind to make the message understandable.
At a contra dance we don't need the blare of a
ship's PA system, but the principle is an
important one. English is not a tonal language
and fricatives, stops, and glides are essential
for communication. We need to hear these speech
elements clearly, and they all occur in the higher frequencies.
Contra dances are social events. As such the PA
system is really there for reinforcement only and
high volume does not need to be the primary
goal. Perhaps our efforts would be better
directed at discussing the skills a caller uses
to earn and hold the attention of the hall so
that we can lower the overall volume. For many
dancers this would be greatly appreciated. It
would lower stress levels in the hall and
encourage a more sociable and gracious tone. I
find that at a lower volume I can crank up the
treble on my mike without feedback problems. It
is much easier to be understood at a lower volume
with the high frequencies emphasized.
Thank you Will for educating me on this
technique. I can see why it is done and I can
also see how it can create problems for a dance caller.
I would be very interested to hear what others think of all this.
Just a thought,
Greg
*********
From joemicheals1 at yahoo.com Thu May 7 22:50:29 2009
From: joemicheals1 at yahoo.com (joe micheals)
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 19:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b...@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <758653.29737...@web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
I totally agree with Greg on cutting the low frequencies.? I also
appreciate the info on ringing out the room.??I have wondered: ?do
men need to hear higher frequencies and women not so much?
Joe Micheals
Seattle
--- On Thu, 5/7/09, gregmck at earthlink.net <gregmck at
earthlink.net> wrote:
From: gregmck at earthlink.net <gregmck at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers at sharedweight.net>
Date: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 7:01 PM
Will wrote:
"Your overall goal is to adjust the sound coming out of the house
speakers
to
get as much volume as you can without any 'ringing' sound."
Thank you Will for this information. I understand how this process
would work
for most PA system setups at musical concerts and other
performances. It is
certainly targeted at minimizing feedback--a worthy goal in any
situation.
I have concerns, however, if this is the best way to set up a caller's
mike. When I attend dances I find that the caller's mike is often
set up
with a lot of low frequency response and little high frequency. I
wonder if
that may be because the audio person has followed this very advice.
With little high frequency response the caller is likely to have
difficulty
being understood clearly because the highs are essential for hearing
the speech
articulation sounds that help us to distinguish between words. The
words
"left" and "right," for example, will sound almost identical
when the high frequencies are removed.
A concert is a very different situation than a social event. At a
concert the
fans already know the words and those who don't can simply buy the
album and
read the insert, (if that kind of thing is important to them). The
voice is
really being used as a musical instrument and clear articulation is
not vital.
The context of words in a song will often reveal the meaning without
being able
to make out every word. In any case there is no pressure to catch
every word
either sung or spoken.
Do you remember the sound of a PA system on a military ship? You've
heard
it in movies. The voice is transmitted through metal horns that are
very tinny,
reproducing all of the high frequencies with great effectiveness.
This may not
sound soothing or melodious but in a critical situation--where lives
depend on
instructions being understood clearly--this setup is perfect for
cutting through
the roar of the sea, the engines, and the wind to make the message
understandable.
At a contra dance we don't need the blare of a ship's PA system, but
the principle is an important one. English is not a tonal language
and
fricatives, stops, and glides are essential for communication. We
need to hear
these speech elements clearly, and they all occur in the higher
frequencies.
Contra dances are social events. As such the PA system is really
there for
reinforcement only and high volume does not need to be the primary
goal.
Perhaps our efforts would be better directed at discussing the
skills a caller
uses to earn and hold the attention of the hall so that we can lower
the overall
volume. For many dancers this would be greatly appreciated. It
would lower
stress levels in the hall and encourage a more sociable and gracious
tone. I
find that at a lower volume I can crank up the treble on my mike
without
feedback problems. It is much easier to be understood at a lower
volume with
the high frequencies emphasized.
Thank you Will for educating me on this technique. I can see why it
is done
and I can also see how it can create problems for a dance caller.
I would be very interested to hear what others think of all this.
Just a thought,
Greg
*********
From markrdjones at gmail.com Fri May 8 00:00:28 2009
From: markrdjones at gmail.com (Mark R Dobyns Jones)
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 00:00:28 -0400
Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
In-Reply-To: <c627b4b8.3247e%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <c627b4b8.3247e%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <2e45c3c90905072100o8b95a42n6a974a811f56a...@mail.gmail.com
>
Speaking as a dance producer and sound mixer...
Everything is in proportion to the need of the moment and the
current set-up.
It is worthwhile and fundamental to ring out a hall for rock concerts,
where the voice is often competing with extremely loud instruments,
and the producer/sound engineer needs to have as loud as possible
voice amplification, and feedback is a genuinely limiting factor in
voice amplification.
It is not so common that contra dance sound approaches the limits of
feed-back levels, hence adjusting for the hall, by ringing out the
channel may or may not be all that significant, and it can be that the
contribution of either the hall or the speakers toward emphasizing
some particular set of frequencies is less significant than figuring
out the relationship between the current caller's voice, microphone,
and sound system at hand.
And it can be quite useful to ring out channels for troublesome halls.
And even for non-troublesome halls. It matters in relation to many
other things too. Placement of the speakers, if they can be adjusted,
for example; also placement of the caller in relation to the speakers.
For Contra dance it may well be that adjustments made for a turned-up
channel and speaker system are helpful, but also may not be that
important. Further, it's an artistic and producer standard for the
music to be turned down in relation to the caller, when desirable, as
in a no-walk-through contra and for squares.
Can there be value in ringing out the hall and the caller's mike? Yes.
You can also end up with strange sounding vocals, because you may be
adjusting for a sound level you will never approach during the show.
Intelligibility, which can involve ringing out the channel, yet mostly
involves appropriately, as-needed reducing low-intelligibility
fundamentals, especially but by no means exclusively for male voices,
somewhere below about 700 or so hertz, and potentially slightly
boosting higher ranges, 1,500 hz to 4,000 or so, depending on the
voice, caller, hall, speaker location, monitor (if any), type of
speakers, the pointing of speakers, sound system, humidity, and so on.
The typical caller doesn't have a monitor, and the relationship with
the monitor is a primary starting point for feedback for musicians,
where ringing out the channel can really matter.
Caller technique, though, can have much more influence on
intelligibility.
Does the caller have his mouth on the mic the whole time? Then the
bass-proximity effect of directional cardiod microphones will
emphasize the base end of the caller's voice, to great detriment of
intelligibility in higher frequencies, even if the caller's lows are
turned down radically.
If the same caller spoke from a foot away from the mic,
intelligibility can be improved many-fold, by reducing that
bass-proximity effect, and this alone can be far far more important
than adjusting the channel for the hall's reverberation on certain
frequencies, and a god deal quicker. Indeed, this could aid the caller
in challenging halls, if the sound person is not able to change the
difficulty, for whatever reason. Step back from the mic and speak up,
can be a useful strategy in such cases. (Recognizing the caller must
save her voice for the next performance too.)
Is the caller consistent in volume?
I can say that some callers are wildly inconsistent, by spurts loud,
and by spurts soft, or maybe they are punchy in voice, or perhaps
worse, loud on a walk through and soft when the music is played. A
punchy voice which is loud and soft from phrase to phrase is quite
challenging for a sound person to adjust for. If turned up, then the
loud is booming. If compressed, by the sound system to squash the loud
and bring the soft up in volume, then the vivaciousness of the voice
can be quite flattened.
Does the caller enunciate clearly, with verve, enthusiasm, melody
and joy?
Are words well chosen, and few in number so that the audience hangs on
every sound, instead of ignoring the caller because he talks too much,
or a conversely a challenge to understand because only every 3rd word
"counts" informationally?
These non-sound amplification aspects of the caller performance too
can be more important than technical sound efforts.
Mark
From will at dedicationtechnologies.com Fri May 8 00:25:29 2009
From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving)
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 00:25:29 -0400
Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel"
In-Reply-To: <758653.29737...@web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c6292c79.3250b%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
It's been my experience with contra dance that, in general and with
some
exceptions, I hear female caller's voices more easily than those of
male
callers. I've always attributed this to the timbre of many men's
voices
being closer to the background sound people talking and moving about.
However, as I've recently been learning more about sound management
I've
realized that there are sometime other factors involved such as the
sound
mix and the type of microphone used. In particular, I've discovered
that the
Shure Beta 58A mic instead of the more common SM58 makes it easier for
people to hear my baritone voice.
Will
on 5/7/09 10:50 PM, joe micheals at joemicheals1 at yahoo.com wrote:
I totally agree with Greg on cutting the low frequencies.? I also
appreciate
the info on ringing out the room.??I have wondered: ?do men need to
hear
higher frequencies and women not so much?
Joe Micheals
Seattle
From jeremykorr at hotmail.com Mon Nov 16 11:25:24 2009
From: jeremykorr at hotmail.com (J L Korr)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:25:24 -0500
Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder
Message-ID: <snt101-w226e591b736f6e80d488e8c7...@phx.gbl>
Greetings all,
I'm looking to say goodbye to the 1970s and replace my analog tape
recorder with a portable digital one. (My 4-year-old can inherit the
old unit and play around with it to his heart's delight.) The
digital recorder will be used for recording at dances as well as
recording interviews in my professional life.
I've seen some callers and musicians using small digital recorders,
but I know little about the specific units. I'd appreciate advice on
recommended digital recorders and external microphone attachments,
from those of you who have gone down this path long before me.
Thanks in advance!
Jeremy Korr, southern California
_________________________________________________________________
Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MFESRP&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MFESRP_Local_MapsMenu_Resturants_1x1
From David.Millstone at VALLEY.NET Mon Nov 16 14:22:24 2009
From: David.Millstone at VALLEY.NET (David Millstone)
Date: 16 Nov 2009 14:22:24 -0500
Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder
Message-ID: <124966...@retriever.valley.net>
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20091116/f2d19fb7/attachment.txt
>
From will at dedicationtechnologies.com Tue Nov 17 09:23:20 2009
From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:23:20 -0500
Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder
In-Reply-To: <snt101-w226e591b736f6e80d488e8c7...@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c7281c08.35f2f%w...@dedicationtechnologies.com>
Jeremy,
I've been using the Zoom H4 for some time for recording dances as
well as a
number of other situations, and am extremely pleased with it. The H4
costs
more than the H2, but the H4 has the advantage of having two input
jacks
that accept both XLR and 1/4" phone plug connections. I regularly
use this
ability to record from the "Tape/CD Out" jacks on the sound board.
When
that's not possible the Zoom devices (either one) do a fabulous job
with
their external mikes.
You can record at various sampling rates including MP3, standard CD
quality
WAV files, plus two levels above that, and it has a built-in limiter
and
compressor which I've found quite useful. Using NiMH 2700mAh
rechargeable
batteries, I get 6-7 hours of recording time. And, recording at the CD
standard 44.1Khz rate to a WAV file, I can easily fit a long evening
of
music on a 4GB SD card with room to spare.
The Zoom H2 is smaller, has four built-in mikes that you can use in
twos or
all four for 90 degree, 120 degree or almost 360 degree recording
and it has
a standard tripod mount. But, the H2 doesn't have the same inputs
and input
control as the H4 (though it might accept a mini stereo mike
input...). The
H4 has a clumsy wrap on tripod mount but I've gotten used to it. Both
devices suffer from a WAY too small screen, somewhat awkward
controls and
the inability to skip ahead quickly when checking a large file
(which is
what I always wind up with at a dance - a 1GB+ file for each half of
the
dance.
If you are on a Mac and just getting started with sound editing, I
highly
recommend the shareware editing program "Fission" by http://rogueamoeba.com
Will
From aawoodall at verizon.net Sat Mar 6 23:35:16 2010
From: aawoodall at verizon.net (aawoodall)
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:35:16 -0500
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
Message-ID: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
Hi,
I am looking for a stand that attaches to a mic stand to hold my
cards. I have seen some callers with one. Does anyone know
what I am talking about and where to purchase one?
Send responses to aawoodall at verizon.net.
Thanks.
Andrea
From joy2the at mindspring.com Sat Mar 6 23:41:22 2010
From: joy2the at mindspring.com (Joy Greenwolfe)
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 23:41:22 -0500
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
In-Reply-To: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
Message-ID: <643a5417-2d04-491b-9463-c3de0efe8...@mindspring.com>
I'm also interested in a similar card stand!
From David.Millstone at valley.net Sat Mar 6 23:44:23 2010
From: David.Millstone at valley.net (David Millstone)
Date: 06 Mar 2010 23:44:23 -0500
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
Message-ID: <128884...@retriever.valley.net>
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20100306/8bd2b3a7/attachment.asc
>
From richgoss at comcast.net Sun Mar 7 01:17:52 2010
From: richgoss at comcast.net (Rich Goss)
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:17:52 -0800
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
In-Reply-To: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
Message-ID: <c7b88510.88bd%richg...@comcast.net>
I got mine at our local music store. You may have better luck at
music
stores that carry band instruments vs a Guitar Center type place.
From limerickfarm at gmail.com Sun Mar 7 05:55:24 2010
From: limerickfarm at gmail.com (Donald Primrose)
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 05:55:24 -0500
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
In-Reply-To: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
Message-ID: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da5563...@mail.gmail.com
>
They come in two sizes... actual card size 3x5 and page size 81/2 x
11. The
3x5 works for me. Any music store. . usually needs to be ordered. -
don
From meedwards at westendweb.com Sun Mar 7 10:33:11 2010
From: meedwards at westendweb.com (Martha Edwards)
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:33:11 -0600
Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers
In-Reply-To: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da5563...@mail.gmail.com
>
References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
<1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da5563...@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d8d864a1003070733k2e811273xd2af80b102af7...@mail.gmail.com
>
Online, Elderly Instruments has them - I bought one last year. It's
pretty
good, though you'll have to find little extra bits of grippy stuff
to keep
it stable on the mic stand. I used a tip of a pressure curtain rod
and bits
of that shelf stuff you get at the grocery store that is
so...rubbery sticky
grippy.
M
E
From jeremykorr at hotmail.com Tue May 25 19:29:46 2010
From: jeremykorr at hotmail.com (J L Korr)
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 19:29:46 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.call...@sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.call...@sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <snt101-w40db28b8262348d631af54c7...@phx.gbl>
Hello friends,
I received the following message from a local sound tech, and found
to my dismay that my wireless mike, and many others, become illegal
in three weeks. I encourage anyone with a wireless mike who isn't
familiar with this imminent policy to follow the links below.
Meanwhile, a quick plea for advice: I have been very pleased with my
Samson Airline system, recommended to me by users of this listserv,
and would love to know what Samson Airline systems you all would
recommend that don't operate in the 698-806 MHz band. Thanks --
Jeremy, Southern CA
In January 2010, the FCC announced that the operation of wireless
microphones in the 700 MHz band (698 ? 806 MHz) will not be
permitted after June 12, 2010. These frequencies have been
reallocated for new wireless communication services (cell phones and
public service).
For more information: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/wirelessmicrophones/
To see if your wireless microphone operates on the 700 MHz band, go
to; http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/wirelessmicrophones/manufacturers.html
Click on the name of the manufacturer and see if your model is listed.
If it is listed, it is a 700 MHz wireless microphone and can not be
used (sold or repaired) after June 12, 2010.
If you can find your manufacturer?s name and your equipment is not
listed, then you may continue using your wireless microphone because
it does not operate in the 700 MHz Band.
If your manufacturer is not listed, please contact the FCC for
additional assistance.
Some of the 700 MHz equipment can be modified and there are trade-in
rebates available.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more
from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
From chris.weiler at weirdtable.org Wed May 26 06:55:45 2010
From: chris.weiler at weirdtable.org (Chris Weiler (home))
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 06:55:45 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal
In-Reply-To: <snt101-w40db28b8262348d631af54c7...@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.call...@sharedweight.net>
<snt101-w40db28b8262348d631af54c7...@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4bfcfe31.8000...@weirdtable.org>
It's important to note that this is not every microphone, so it's
important to check to see if yours is affected. My Shure PGX system
operates in the 600-650 range, so will be fine, for example. There is
usually a label on the product that indicates what frequencies it
uses.
Chris
From ebay at hands4.com Wed May 26 19:28:45 2010
From: ebay at hands4.com (Beth Parkes)
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 19:28:45 -0400
Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal
In-Reply-To: <4bfcfe31.8000...@weirdtable.org>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.call...@sharedweight.net> <snt101-w40db28b8262348d631af54c7...@phx.gbl
>
<4bfcfe31.8000...@weirdtable.org>
Message-ID: <001201cafd2b$3015da40$90418ec0$@hands4.com>
In our household half our wireless mics affected and the other half
not (we
have 4). So Tony has to upgrade his mic. Poor guy.
Beth
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
call...@sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
