re: Irresponsible Sound Design?

[MikeH]

Posted: 12/14/06 at 11:20pm

What are your feelings on the state of amplification in theatre today? I think that things have gotten way out of hand and designers are being pressured to just turn things up to unintelligible and deafening levels. There's an interesting interview with Tony Meola where he talks about this- I guess the blame can also be put on directors and producers as well.

http://www.meyersound.com/applications/story.php?type=15&id=308


I've heard horror stories about the sound levels at some shows like "Dance of the Vampires". It's a fine line between good sound levels and bad. I personally try my best to keep levels comfortable yet supportive to the show. I'd rather the audience leave the show without any headaches and hearing damage. It just saddens me because hearing loss is cumulative and cannot be regenerated and yet some people are blatantly pushing levels past what is safe.

I know that this can be dangerous for both audience members and for the musicians in the pit, but can it also be bad for the actors onstage since they are essentially behind the wall of sound? For big musicals do performers onstage have their own monitors or do they just go off of what they hear from the house speakers and orchestra pit? I know there are some pit musicians who post here and I'd really like to hear your input as well!

It's easy for us to avoid obnoxiously loud movie theaters and wait for the DVD to watch it in a comfortable environment, but what about live theatre?

[morosco]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 9:42am

"...I'd rather the audience leave the show without any headaches and hearing damage..."

The person who mixes the show is obviously subjected to the same deafening levels night after night after night. Surely their hearing has become damaged. Because of that, I've often wondered if they were the best people to determine how loud the show should be? Probably not.

I remember seeing FOSSE and at several times during the show I witnessed audience members actually putting their fingers in their ears because of the deafening levels. Is that what theatre is supposed to be??
Updated On: 12/15/06 at 09:42 AM

[lildogs]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:00am

I think the sound problem has a few root causes: older theatre patrons who can't hear very well regardless of where they sit, drowning out young audiences that like to talk and wiggle around and plain laziness. It takes effort to LISTEN, none to HEAR. I appreciate seeing a play that isn't miked.

In defense of sound techs though, when it's a touring show, they have to adjust for EVERY performance and it's much more difficult to calibrate levels in a new venue every day or so.

[morosco]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:04am

"It takes effort to LISTEN, none to HEAR."

That's a very smart observation. Have audiences lost the ability (or desire) to listen??

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:31am

"Desire" would be my guess.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:41am

Part of it is also to cover up the white noise generated by cooling fans on automated lights and automated winches, etc.......

[philcrosby]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 12:13pm

Of course, most Broadway theatres were designed to deliver unamplified sound just fine. But the changes are everywhere ... audiences are lazier in their listening habits, singers don't have the same technique they used to, staging requirements are different ... it's endemic.

All I ask is to let the lyrics be audible. Last year's tour of EVITA was laughable ... once two people started singing together, not a word was intelligible.

[Calvin]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 12:17pm

When I saw the recent production of WSS at the Hobby Center during a trip to Houston, I was appalled at how terrible the sound system was. Perhaps it's because I've gotten so used to the smaller Broadway houses, but the over-mic'ed orchestra sounded like a recording when the show started. And a few crackles is understandable, but constant crackles are unbearable.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 1:03pm

The first time I saw Rent, the speakers were blasting so loudly that you couldn't understand what people were saying.

[kelzama]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 1:23pm

I've taken to carrying ear plugs with me to nearly any theatrical event. I find they remove the distortion from overamplification and allow you to hear and understand better. And perhaps save some hearing, too.

No matter how loud you make it, you can't make up a lack of talent with an increase in volume; in this case, lack of talent on the part of the sound staff.

[lildogs]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 1:24pm

I had a hard time understanding words in HAIRSPRAY too--I think too many actors and directors often forget the sage advice: "Speak the speech."

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 1:35pm

Morosco, how funny you should mention Fosse, as I was just about to mention Dancin' in the late 70s. That was one of the few shows that I actually left the theatre with a headache because the sound was just unnecessarily too loud. There was absolutely no point to that.

[Mythus]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 2:50pm

The first time I saw Rent, the speakers were blasting so loudly that you couldn't understand what people were saying.

I couldn't hear a word during the title number when I saw it, everything was so loud. It was ridiculous.

[Dover]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 3:37pm

It seems like a lot of the time it's the director or producer who asks for more volume. Either because they're deaf, or they think louder will somehow magically make their show better. Of course the sound designers/engineers want to keep their jobs, but it would be nice if they had a certain level where they would feel comfortable saying, "I'm not putting it any louder than this because it's not safe." I'm sure some do, but I would hope all would. They make machines that can measure decibels, it doesn't even require the engineer's judgement or hearing ability to know when it's dangerously loud.

[Jade]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 7:57pm

The first time I saw Rent (in London) I believe they were having problems with the sound in the theatre. Their solution seemed to be to crank the speakers up as high as possible, which meant that not only was it way too loud, but I still couldn't hear a word. (Every other time I saw it, though, I thought the sound was fine.)

[Copeman63]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 8:05pm

Ugh... It's a fine line... I personaly think some shows should be louder. I used to work on Cruise ships, and every week some 70 year old would coplain about the volume, while the younger crowd wanted it louder. It may be more of a generation gap than an irresponsible sound designer/board op.

[Plum]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 8:57pm

I spent a lot of Movin' Out with my fingers in my ears because I had a rush ticket in the front row...right in front of a giant speaker. Not good times.

[MikeH]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 9:40pm

The touring shows I've seen aren't nearly as loud as the sit-down productions, probably for the same reasons you stated lildogs. I'm young and recently had a wake-up call and realized how precious my hearing is to me as a musician and sound designer. Board ops and designers need to take responsibility for the health risks that they expose audiences to when they push the sound past safe levels regardless of what directors/producers demand (I know, easier said than done). Until science figures out a way to restore hearing loss, I'll be listening more carefully :)

[morosco]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:55pm

The otherwise excellent tour of 42ND STREET (with Mara Davi) had some of the loudest sound levels I have ever experienced. I was absolutely FURIOUS! What would make them think that dangerously loud sound levels would be an appropriate choice for a show like 42ND STREET? (Yes, it was a tour and yes I understand that they don't have the luxury of time to make adjustments to new performance spaces week after week but WHAT THE HELL DOES CRANKING IT AS LOUD AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE ACCOMPLISH??!?!?! The last moments of "We're In The Money" were as loud as a Motley Crue concert!) It was early in the run and the director of the show was actually sitting near the sound board. I knew it was her because she had been talking up the show that morning on a local TV show. I really wanted to say something but I figured that her response would probably be something along the lines of, "Pardon me...I didn't hear you...what did you say?"

[MikeH]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:46pm

One of my friends worked for a show where the director absolutely hated black-outs for scene transitions. He said "I hate 'em! Gives the audience time to realize this show isn't very good!" I think that's also the case with some of the in-your-face sound levels today- what better way to try and disguise a mediocre show than with an ear-blasting sound system? Do directors and production staff actually believe that the audience will buy that?

I know this doesn't apply to all loud shows, but I'm sure it does to some.

[emg_sound]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 3:14am

OK I'm going to play Devil's advocate (Partially since as a sound designer [currently acquiring his mfa] I'm the devil in this discussion),

let's do the following experiment, somebody (I would if I could, but I'm studying in California) go to a bunch of broadway musicals, with a dB meter (you can find one at Radio Shack) and try to get a seat in the same location of the house every night, and take measurements throughout the show. Odds are the jukebox musicals will peak out at the 100-102 dB SPL A weighted and the more traditional musicals will be at around the mid 90s, with the average level being in the upper 80s to low 90s (for reference, films are generally in the mid 80's) [as a personal experiment, I did this during the out of town tryout of hot feet from the balcony, and it was getting up to about 102-103 {and I personally felt that it was the worst, most bass heavy mix I have ever heard}]. Because everyone will just make the catcall, "It's too loud!" without backing it up with hard numbers, and perhaps we can also use this to figure out some of these generational issues (Earlier in this thead someone made a crack that a show was as loud as a Motley Crue concert, as a person who Has worked in the live rock and roll industry, I HIGHLY doubt that). At the bottom of my post I've given you a link to OSHA's requirements for prolonged exposure to higher spl levels.

The other part of the equation we are missing out on is one of frequency response. I encourage all of you to read up on the Fletcher-Munson curves before we continue this discussion, because frequency response is a major factor in speech intelligibility. And lets consider this physological fact, as men get older, we lose our ability to hear high frequencies, conversly as women ger older, they lose their ability to hear low frequencies.


http://www.elvex.com/facts07.htm