»

[The Ghost Of Fudge]

bands still refuse invitations to fudge gigs there on the basis "the sound is shit and you don't get a soundcheck". which is a shame i feel.

you might not get a soundcheck, but even radio lucifer were praising the sound onstage when i 'interviewed' the little buggers last week...

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of Fudge

bands still refuse invitations to fudge gigs there on the basis "the sound is shit

You've gotta hand it to whoever keeps spreading that rumour...

We have arguably the finest quality rig commercially available, the new monitors are literally cutting edge technology, a quality backline, tour spec mics, a fully digital setup including EQ, gates, compressors etc, a sound engineer with platinum discs on his wall, and a studio spec live recording systema, and last but not least a room that's the correct shape, fully deadened, closer to the magic dimensions than most, and built out of wood which is a sonically sympathetic material.

Anyone that claims that this doesn't all but guarantee a great sound is either stupid, lying, talking out of their bottom, in a pish sounding band, or a mixture of all four.

The 'name' touring bands that have played have then gone overboard to say good things, and all have firmly stated their desire to return, one even rebooked in advance of their next tour. Some have gone as far as to upload the live recorded tracks on their websites. And recently we saw the commercial release of live recorded album that just got a first rate review from a well known rock journalist.

So, yeah, obviously there's a serious problem. And it better hope that I don't find out where it lives.

People should learn to trust their own ears and not the poisonous fucker with the hidden agenda. Either that or invest in jar of Q-tips

[PVH]

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of Fudge

"the sound is shit and you don't get a soundcheck"

When we played there the FOH system seemed good...didnt get to use the monitors, but at a quick glance they looked to have been of some twin 12" variety, so they are of industry standard....

And even if the sound is shit...who cares? They have ash trays on the mic stands! Who else caters for you like this?!

[milner]

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of Fudge

bands still refuse invitations to fudge gigs there on the basis "the sound is shit and you don't get a soundcheck". which is a shame i feel.

imo, the only bands who refuse due to this are either;
A, too far up their own arses and think they know everything
or
B, just a bunch of fucking twats anyway who have listened to the shit rumours that went about a while ago.
I know a few bands that come into both of these catagories.
Personally speaking the moorings pisses over most "venues" in aberdeen when it comes to equipment, quality of sound, quality of on stage sound and attituted of bar staff and sound engineers. I've never seen two guys as into what they do as Flash and Mark and they do deliver good results almost everytime. (lets be fair no one gets it right %100 of the time as im sure the guy who did the TBS/My Chemical Romance gig in glasgow will tell you) The new moniters give you the best on stage sound any venue in Aberdeen has to offer and this includes the lemon tree and moshulu. They take good care of their equipment ie replace drum heads regularly, the amps are all in excellent condition ect.
As i say the only bands i know who wont play their are doing for stupid reasons but to be fair their loss. If a band wont play because of a sound check they either dont know how to set up properly or they are not ready for a gig in the first place as they feel the need to go over songs before they get on stage.
As flash says NO touring band has had a problem with their set up although all these local bands who think they know better do, hmmm what does that tell us kids??

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by Project: Ven-Hell

When we played there the FOH system seemed good...

And you had the disadvantage of me doing the sound (for the first time in 6 months) because Mark was on holiday.

Originally Posted by Project: Ven-Hell

didnt get to use the monitors, but at a quick glance they looked to have been of some twin 12" variety, so they are of industry standard....

Those were loan items that we had for several months while waiting on the new ones to come off the production line. The new monitors are serial numbers 52, 53, 54, and 55. There are these:

http://www.funktion-one.com/res1.htm
http://www.funktion-one.com/microbass.htm (sub for drum fill)

The Resolution 1's are cutting edge in that they have dispensed with the use of the compression drivers which standard in virtually every other high powered loud speaker. A compression driver works by forcing air through a tube to produce those 'squeek', 'squeal' and and 'sssss' and 'ssshhh' frequencencies. Compressed air is very difficult to control, especially close to the speakers limits and is the main cause of feedback on stage - see Live8 Edinburgh for good example LOL. The Resolution 1 also has a sensitivity of well over 100db (1W at 1m) when 92dB is considered decent.

Originally Posted by Project: Ven-Hell

And even if the sound is shit...who cares? They have ash trays on the mic stands! Who else caters for you like this?!

Exactly! See - someone gets it!

[Biz]

I HAVE DONE HUNDREDS OF GIGS AND The Moorings is one of my favourite places to see and play in bands-the sound and staff are excellent- go on -visit www.16again.co.uk and gae us anither gig cheeers Biz.

[jon]

I can say in all honesty that the Moorings is our favourite place to play, and part of the reason for that is that the sound is fucking spectacular, both onstage and front of house.

We've got some live recordings and they sound so good people keep asking me if we overdubbed anything, and the monitors are so good I want to fondle myself at the thought of them.

Nuff sed

[The Ghost Of Fudge]

"but ye dinnae get a fooking soundcheck, min, ken?"

neither did radiohead at glasto 97, and they still owned the world that night... and i'll bet their onstage sound wasn't a patch on the moorings

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of Fudge

"but ye dinnae get a fooking soundcheck, min, ken?"

neither did radiohead at glasto 97, and they still owned the world that night... and i'll bet their onstage sound wasn't a patch on the moorings

So on to the soundchecks (or lack of them).

The abolition of soundchecks has not produced any noticable degeneration in sound quality.

Bands that have played since the recent introduction of the new monitors have all publically stated that the onstage sound is of the highest quality.

We operate under a stringent noise emissions agreement that restricts high outputs to certain times, days, and to a certain number of hours both at any one time and over the course of a week. This boils down to a straight choice between having the soundchecks or having the gig.

As a result of this we examined the whole concept of soundchecks and whether there were any viable alternatives. The conclusion was that the introduction of the highest quality of sound reproduction facilities would all but eliminate the requirement to check and alter the sound. And that doing so would produce an increase in revenues sufficient to cover the associated expenditure.

Bottom line - Would it sound better with a soundcheck? Yes. Would anyone notice? Unlikely.


1) Technical Details:

i) The rig. One purpose of a soundcheck is to check the rig in relation to the room - mainly for placement, delay speaker, and EQ purposes. The Moorings has an installed rig meaning there is no variation here. The rig is in almost constant use playing the jukebox. The room itself is unchanging. The rig produces a flat frequency response and there is no EQ applied to the stereo bus. Conclusion - there is no requirement to check the performance of the rig in relation to the room.

ii) Feedback. Both the front of house rig and the stage monitors produce a flat frequency response. These systems only produce feedback when driven beyond 95% (~-5dB). For health and safety reasons we are not at liberty to drive the front of house system beyond -10dB (and typicall have it running at between -24dB and -18dB). The new stage monitors are configured in such a way that 0dB on the fader equates to -8dB... which is plenty! There is no feedback on stage.

iii) Sound reproduction. There is no discenable difference between the sound that is input and the sound that is output. We rarely if ever apply any EQ, and when we do it is usually to counteract a 'problem' with the source. Anyone that has listened to our jukbox should acknowledge that the rig has near perfect sound reproduction similar to quality HiFi but with vastly superior dynamic response. In other words the band will sound exactly as they sound without the rig (just louder).

iv) Backline settings. Ask any band why they don't just use the same settings as last time, and most will reply that this does not actually guarantee the same sound, although few will offer any technical explanation (???). The same answer can be elicited by requesting that a band remove it's gear from stage after a soundcheck. The Moorings does not have sufficient stage space to accomodate multiple backlines. It is necessary to remove the gear from the stage between bands, apparently rendering any backline settings null and void. This claim was supported by the fact, that despite undergoing a soundcheck, most bands would invariably recheck and alter their settings after returning their backline to the stage. It may be that settings invariabley become altered during transit and storage.

v) Level check. As it was not uncommon to find that levels had been altered subsequent to soundcheck it was always our practice to level check just prior to the performance.

vi) Line check. Ditto - the equipment had been removed from the stage therefore it was prudent to line check during the performance.

vii) Vocal level. This is quickly and easily adjusted during the first few seconds of the performance.

viii) Monitor levels. The biggest factor here is the level of the backline making it relatively straightforward to ascertain these during level check. Bands will occasionally request alterations during the course of the performance but this occurs to no greater or lesser extent regardless of whether there's been a soundcheck.

ix) Overall. The most common complaint has been the lack of volume in the vocal feed from the stage monitors. This was true regardless of soundcheck. Only 1 band has insisted on a soundcheck, but they later agreed that it was unnessessary. Only 1 band has experienced problems indirectly attributed to lack of soundcheck - we later incorporated procedural changes into the level check to eliminate a reoccurance. The new monitors have addressed the issue of volume.


2) Cost/Benefit Analysis:

i) The Moorings only source of revenue is bar sales. We do not operate 'pay to play', we do not charge promoters for use of our facilities, and we do not share in the admission fees.

ii) The Moorings absorbs the entire cost of the sound engineers time - this is not recharged to the bands or the promoters. Soundchecks mean more engineers time and therefore increased costs.

iii) The bar takings are greater for comparitive nights that do not inolve live music. This is regardless of door charge. Bar takings are greater on a clubnight with a door charge than on a live music night with free admission. We have data going back over 3 years.

iv) Bar takings are significantly reduced during a soundcheck compared with no soundcheck. Customer base was noticably erdoed by soundchecks but has since recovered.

So from this we established that soundchecks produced no source of revenue, had a significant cost attached to them, and depleted existing revenue streams.

[Biz]

It's always a pleasure to be in The Moorings I always meet very interesting people and whatever music is on the sound quality is ALWAYS fine,can't wait to gig with 16again ASA P CHEERS Biz.