Seeking caller and musicians for special event community dance
Date: Friday, July 6th, 2012
Time: 6:30pm-
Place: Raymond, NH
The dance is an evening activity for adults and youth 14-18 (around 90 total) participating in a historical reenactment of Western Expansion (1840s.)
Contact Noel Metzger, joeandnoel(a)yahoo.com
I've usually preferred a hand held mic most of the time, It just feels more
natural to me and less "rock star" like. I like to move around a lot as I
teach and call, so this usually works. Our local family dances rarely have
more than 30 dancers, so I usually call from the set with no mic.
I recently had to use a headset to lead some Civil War dancing for 8th
graders with the Dodworth Saxhorn Band. We had to have the dancers line up
perpendicular to the band, so the head of the set was not near the conductor's
mic. I borrowed a vocalist's headset to use. It worked really well, except the
transmission unit kept coming lose as I capered around. There wasn't a good
place on my costume to anchor it.
Your choice.
John B. Freeman
Dancing Master
The Dodworth Saxhorn Band
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(a)[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: <073120072131.11306.46AFAA45000C022300002C2A22007601809C9C0109080C079D(a)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(a)[192.168.1.100]>
References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
<p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <BAY118-DAV10ACFCAE2B122E0E522CB5B2E80(a)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$020fa8c0@maxx>
<p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <002701c7d3e1$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-F38A5E014A18F8C6ECB490FF9E80(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.1.1185984002.2260.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <49371.216.114.172.209.1185991176.squirrel(a)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.6020303(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
References: <4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2e45c3c90710011337r29fac9c9i7494b3cc7932f268(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
References: <4701575C.6020303(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
References: <4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com>
Message-ID: <470174F6.4050404(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
Message-ID: <523554.5940.qm(a)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.nethttp://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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
<38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop>
Message-ID: <47024980.8000900(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <74363.4139.qm(a)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%will(a)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: <49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C613B8C7.32064%will(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com>
<C613B8C7.32064%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090422091957.01dc13f8(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.3.1240502427.35777.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <472256C1-AF1A-4D2B-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)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-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <248537.13560.qm(a)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%will(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)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: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <758653.29737.qm(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
References: <C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
Message-ID: <2e45c3c90905072100o8b95a42n6a974a811f56af4c(a)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.qm(a)web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C6292C79.3250B%will(a)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-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)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…
>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: <124966573(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET>
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20091116/f2d19fb7…>
>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-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <C7281C08.35F2F%will(a)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-C3DE0EFE84F1(a)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: <128884898(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET>
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20100306/8bd2b3a7…>
>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%richgoss(a)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: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)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: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
<1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d8d864a1003070733k2e811273xd2af80b102af7412(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Message-ID: <SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)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:…
>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-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
<SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4BFCFE31.8000401(a)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: <4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org>
References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net> <SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
<4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org>
Message-ID: <001201cafd2b$3015da40$90418ec0$(a)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
At the risk of being excoriated again for my previous championing of headset mikes, I'll put in my two cents and say yes - all the things Laura said - handhelds hurt my hand, I can't do demos during large teaching sessions, and if you are teaching family dances with children, it is best to be actively in there doing things with them, which a handheld makes difficult. And some of us do not have big voices and can't project or have problems already with our vocal chords (one caller I know had polyps removed) and we are not going to do it sans mike if we want to have any voice left. I'll try and find out the brand of the mic we have - I like it. Remember, your equipment has to suit you and the way you call, so get what works for you.
Martha
On May 23, 2012, at 10:32 AM, callers-request(a)sharedweight.net wrote:
> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> callers(a)sharedweight.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> callers-request(a)sharedweight.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> callers-owner(a)sharedweight.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: wireless mics - headsets or handhelds? (Laur)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 10:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Laur <lcpgr(a)yahoo.com>
> To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] wireless mics - headsets or handhelds?
> Message-ID:
> <1337794321.12001.YahooMailClassic(a)web121705.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>
> Love to hear the updates as well.
>
> Emily, as a caller I prefer the headset.
>
> I'd rather be handsfree. It's cumbersome to hold the mic, and it's physically uncomfortable for me to hold it all evening. The advantage of the hand held is the freedom to talk or cough or breath without putting it over the hall. I typically move or cover the mic on the headset, or simply turn the mute on where there is a mute. Someone with sound experience needs to talk about the differences in that aspect.
>
> There's a good bit of difference in headset models in terms of comfort and fit and sound interference. Also consider a mute button and the cords and the transmitter you need to hook onto something.
>
> I'm also in the market to purchase so I'm sending thanks in advance to current comments and to Will's survey. The communities I call with have their own systems but I need to borrow a system for weddings and festivals, and not all communities have wireless mics.
>
> Laurie
> West MI
>
>
> --- On Wed, 5/23/12, Emily Addison <eaddison(a)trentu.ca> wrote:
>
>> From: Emily Addison <eaddison(a)trentu.ca>
>> Subject: [Callers] wireless mics - headsets or handhelds?
>> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
>> Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 1:01 PM
>> 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(a)[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: <073120072131.11306.46AFAA45000C022300002C2A22007601809C9C0109080C079D(a)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(a)[192.168.1.100]>
>> References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>
>> ???
>> <p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]>
>> Message-ID: <BAY118-DAV10ACFCAE2B122E0E522CB5B2E80(a)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$020fa8c0@maxx>
>> ???
>> <p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]>
>> Message-ID:
>> <002701c7d3e1$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-F38A5E014A18F8C6ECB490FF9E80(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> References: <mailman.1.1185984002.2260.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> Message-ID: <49371.216.114.172.209.1185991176.squirrel(a)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.6020303(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> References: <4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <2e45c3c90710011337r29fac9c9i7494b3cc7932f268(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> References: <4701575C.6020303(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> References: <4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <470174F6.4050404(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <523554.5940.qm(a)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.6020303(a)gmail.com>
>> ???
>> <38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop>
>> Message-ID: <47024980.8000900(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> Message-ID: <74363.4139.qm(a)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%will(a)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: <49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <C613B8C7.32064%will(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> References: <49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com>
>> ??? <C613B8C7.32064%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090422091957.01dc13f8(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> References: <mailman.3.1240502427.35777.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> Message-ID: <472256C1-AF1A-4D2B-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)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-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)sbcglobal.net>
>> Message-ID: <248537.13560.qm(a)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%will(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> References: <C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)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: <7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)earthlink.net>
>> Message-ID: <758653.29737.qm(a)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%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> References: <C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com>
>> Message-ID: <2e45c3c90905072100o8b95a42n6a974a811f56af4c(a)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.qm(a)web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
>> Message-ID: <C6292C79.3250B%will(a)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-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)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…
>>
>>> 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: <124966573(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET>
>>
>> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20091116/f2d19fb7…>
>>
>>> 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-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)phx.gbl>
>> Message-ID: <C7281C08.35F2F%will(a)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-C3DE0EFE84F1(a)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: <128884898(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET>
>>
>> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20100306/8bd2b3a7…>
>>
>>> 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%richgoss(a)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: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)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: <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com>
>> References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>
>> ??? <1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <7d8d864a1003070733k2e811273xd2af80b102af7412(a)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.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> Message-ID: <SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)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:…
>>
>>> 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-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
>> References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net>
>> ??? <SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
>> Message-ID: <4BFCFE31.8000401(a)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: <4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org>
>> References: <mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net>???
>> <SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl>
>> ??? <4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org>
>> Message-ID:
>> <001201cafd2b$3015da40$90418ec0$(a)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
>> Callers(a)sharedweight.net
>> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)sharedweight.net
> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
> End of Callers Digest, Vol 93, Issue 30
> ***************************************
Coming out of the shadows here to respond to Peter & Will & others -
My husband Bill spent a long time researching and looking and asking all
kinds of people, including sound equipment sellers (with experience), and
he got a Mackie SRM-150 which is usually used as a monitor (that's what he
uses it for).
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SRM150/?utm_source=Google&utm_medium…
He uses it for a sound system by itself for small groups. It's only 7
pounds (MUCH lighter than the Roland), loud, and has 2 multi-use XLR/1/4"
plugs and 1 RCA plug). We mount it on top of a sturdy Hercules microphone
stand, which is much more portable than speaker stands. It mounts
upside-down when mounting it on a microphone stand, but that was not too
confusing.
I've used it in a big multi-purpose room at a town hall where I lead a
weekly traditional country dancing session (mostly trad squares) for
seniors, and it worked wonderfully well.
I wanted something that I could take with my laptop (I'm not at iPod mode
yet, but my music is all in iTunes) and microphone and go.
On a completely different note, take a look at the Yamaha Stagepass 300.
It's not a powered speaker. It's a 2 speaker powered mixer, the PA mixer
module fits right into the back of one of the speakers, and it has 4 XLR
inputs and more....see it here. I often use it with just one speaker. The
detachable PA mixer part is also the amplifier. The speakers weigh just
under 20 pounds each - the mixer/amplifier weighs almost nothing. We use
this for medium-sized gigs where we don't need the full power of the Mackie
and we need more than the SRM 150.
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/search.php?s=stagepas+300
Regarding microphones - I used to have an airline 77 wireless headset mic
that I LOVED (and Bill HATED because he always had to tweak the sound
system - usually had to cut off the high end and boost the low). Then it
died and I couldn't even try to get it fixed because of that frequency
ruling - it was one of the ones that became illegal.
I then switched to one that has a belt pack (I do not like belt packs
because I don't wear belts and I'm always having to figure out another
solution), and it was okay (again, had to tweak the sound a lot). I just
recently switched to a Countryman E6 *Directional *and I LOVE it and Bill
LOVES it because he doesn't have to use the whole PA system equalizer to
adjust the low and high ends for all sound - he can just adjust the treble
and bass for that channel (before, he had to use the main equalizer for the
whole system - a Mackie PA/Mixer 800 watts). The sound is great, the mic is
weightless and easy and wonderful.....I just still don't like the belt
pack, but that's the price you pay....speaking of which - it took me a very
long time to decide to spend that much money on a microphone, but as
someone else pointed out, the caller's mic is like the musician's
instrument, and I needed something that would sound really good. I do all
kinds of different types of gigs, from family & community dances to 18th
century balls to school programs to May Fairs, etc. and I can count on it
working well in all kinds of places.
One more thing about wired vs wireless handheld vs wireless headset. I
started out using a wired mic. Then I got a handheld mic. Then a wireless
headset mic without belt pack, then with belt pack. Now the Countryman E6.
I love having the freedom of a wireless mic for the times I need to either
be dancing with the people or demonstrating things. The handheld mic
sounded good but was too much of a hassle to either move from hand to hand
or have someone hold my elbow instead of my hand. Whether I'm staying up in
front of the band or I'm out on the floor (I'm always visible to the
dancers), I like the freedom of being able to turn or move my head or
whatever and not have to worry about either holding the wired mic or having
my voice drop out because I moved my head away from it.
Patricia
*Patricia Campbell*
*Newtown, CT*
*www.countrydancecaller.com*
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. wireless mics - headsets or handhelds? (Emily Addison)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Emily Addison" <eaddison(a)trentu.ca>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:01:25 -0400
> Subject: [Callers] wireless mics - headsets or handhelds?
> 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 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(a)[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 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: <49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com>
> Message-ID: <C613B8C7.32064%will(a)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
>
>
>
>
> (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???
>
It is considered by some to be a wise idea to have a wired mike ready for use for those cases where the caller has a wireless mike. Wireless stuff tends to fail every once in a while (batteries, interference..) so a backup is ready just in case. And it is good for announcements by someone else.
For small dances callers sometimes go down on the floor to help out beginners and having a wireless mike makes that feasible. A head set frees up both hands for gestures, etc.
I've occasionally seen callers with headsets dancing and they can still interject an occasional call when needed.
d0nv wrote:
As a starting caller (and a dance committee member) I've got a genuine
interest. Is there a course or book saying this?
Thank you for your posting.
I don’t recall the original source, and I don’t want to encourage the
authoritarian leanings of this list so I won’t try to find it. For me the
principle stands on its own merits. I do recall that many callers stated
this principle as: “It’s always the caller’s fault.” This was to emphasize
that the caller should assume that any misunderstanding is an error on the
caller’s part…not the dancers. It can lower the confidence of many
first-timers if they believe that *they* are the reason something went
wrong, and that anxiety will make it difficult for those newcomers to
follow subsequent instructions. By taking responsibility for any
“mistakes” the caller defuses this anxiety reaction somewhat.
I think most callers, however, assumed that this principle was an
exaggeration intended as a form of humor. This is unfortunate because it
is the most useful framing I know of to cultivate leadership in the dance
community.
Note that this maxim also applies to many other roles where the speaker
uses a PA system. Any Master of Ceremonies with experience will also take
full responsibility for what happens in the hall. In the case of a dance
caller, this individual has the added authority vested in them by the
tradition they follow to instruct those in the room regarding their precise
physical movements. This is an awesome power which can only be wielded
effectively when the speaker also takes responsibility for the hall.
Notice that the dance caller:
- is at the front of the room, usually on an elevated platform, where
they can be seen by anyone in the room.
- is able to see anyone in the room from that position.
- is using a PA system that effectively makes them the only one in the
room who can project their voice clearly to every person in the room.
- is the only individual in the room who knows the requirements of the
dance, the capabilities of the band, and who also has a pretty good idea of
the capabilities of the dancers. (The caller knows all of this
simultaneously.)
The ideal situation is, of course, when everyone in the hall takes full
responsibility for what happens in the hall. In fact, this is the way
collective community dance works! But the person at the mike is in a
unique position.
Given the advantaged position described above it might be well to ask: If
the caller is not willing to take responsibility, then why should anyone
else?
Karen D. quoted, from the list archive, the following comments on what the
caller is probably NOT responsible for. Yet these are excellent examples
of challenges a caller can address by personally owning the problem. Here
are some of my thoughts just off the top of my head. (And these responses
must come off the top of your head when any emergency presents itself.) The
“wonderful dance community” frame is your best resource in an emergency:
I can stop and re-start the band several times, but it's not my "full
> responsibility" if they are determined to play at a certain tempo.
This is a real problem many of us face. Some musicians are unable to play
at higher dance tempos on some tunes. In that case the caller should
consider substituting dances that “work” better at the favored tempo. If
it is too slow the caller can add excitement through some other
means—perhaps with a punchy vocal emphasis. Bottom line: Make sure the
musicians feel good about what they do. Make sure they get applause.
The owner of the barn we're dancing in decides to make another loop on his
> tractor with the mosquito broadcaster, blowing bug spray through the open
> doors and windows.
The caller: First signals the band to cut off the music mid-tune and says
something appropriate on mike, such as, “My apologies. We have an
emergency situation with the farmer’s spray drift. Could some of you
please quickly close the windows and doors on that side of the hall. Perhaps
someone could reposition that fan to get some fresh air into the hall. Thank
you all for your understanding. Let’s take a short break until the hall is
danceable again.”
A crash occurs on the street adjacent to our parking lot dance hall, and
> dozens of participants run to see what happened.
Caller: “My apologies. There seems to have been an accident outside. Is
there a doctor in the house? Wonderful. Thank you. If there is anyone
else with medical training please go with her to check on the situation and
let us know if there is any assistance we could offer. Everyone else
should probably just wait here. I appreciate your understanding. Thank
you all.”
The host didn't think to provide cool water, there's no drinking fountain.
> "There's a Coke machine, they can buy a pop."
Caller: “I understand there is no cool water available. I’m sorry about
that. Is there someone here who would be willing to drive to a nearby
store and purchase some bottled water? Wonderful! Please, if you would
like some water, give some money to this man over here. Hopefully we’ll
have some water in time for the break.“
PA bleed from a nearby event that's louder and bigger and echo-y.
Caller: “My apologies. We seem to be competing with an amplified event
nearby. I’m going to ask all of you to pay careful attention and please,
do not talk during the walk-through. Thank you all for your understanding
and your assistance.”
I think you get the idea. The caller should lead by example. Everyone in
the hall wants to be proud of their dance community, and the caller can
take the lead in making that happen. Remember; it is a wonderful dance
community and you should expect them to react to any “situation” with grace
and compassion.
This is not rocket science. It is certainly easier than memorizing all of
your dances. If the caller is either unable, or unwilling to take
responsibility then s/he should hand the microphone to someone who will.
Speaking of untoward situations in the hall....
I remember once seeing an actual fight break out on a dance floor between
two women. This was a full-on altercation with swinging fists and hair
pulling. The caller did *not* lead effectively. He did NOT apologize but
treated the incident as a distraction from his dance. Luckily there were
many dancers nearby who took action. Three of us actually restrained a man
who wanted to join the fray. Others separated the combatants, and still
others moved in to stand between the belligerent parties. The caller
failed to own the problem and, rather, simply tried to get the sets to
re-form so he could re-start the dance. Some dancers motioned for the
caller to just shut up and everyone, correctly I think, ignored the
caller’s instructions so that the situation could be resolved to help put
folks at ease.
For a more positive example....
I also remember, more recently during a contra dance, when some of us
noticed some severe scratches in the newly-refinished floor. A dancer had
broken off a heel on his dance shoe and continued dancing without
it—thinking that it would do no damage and unaware that there were still
nail tips sticking out where the heel had been. It did damage the
floor—during the one dance in which he continued dancing—to the tune of
hundreds of dollars in floor repair and refinishing. Luckily we had a
visiting caller who took ownership of the situation immediately when we
showed her the broken heel.
I remember the caller standing on stage and holding the broken heel up in
the air. She did not try to blame any individual but insisted that we
locate the shoe that had lost that heel. She cautioned the dancers that
this problem could make us lose access to the hall we were dancing in and
she refused to start the next walk-through until she had verified that the
dancer with the broken heel had left the hall to change shoes. That caller
was Andrea Nettleton of Atlanta Georgia. She is a very good caller.
She showed leadership as a caller. It would have been easier to simply
assume that this was “not her responsibility.” Taking responsibility makes
a difference. It sets an example for everyone. We need more of that from
callers, not less.
- Greg McKenzie
We are currently adding on to our house and when done will have a 50’ x 20’
family room/dance hall. Ultimately we want wood flooring, but our starting
point will be finished concrete. I am looking for advice on and
experiences with installing wood floor over concrete.
Thanks
Jim Hemphill
Arcadian35(a)gmail.com
I think my A.D.D. has helped give me a good perspective on the role of the
caller.
I see a dance as being like a three-legged stool. The band, dancers and
caller are the three legs. It is primarily the caller's job to keep things
level. This is how it usually works. However, the band and dancers must also do
their part. I have led dances during which the energy and enthusiasm of the
dancers kept me level. I have also led dances where the band kept us level
through its choice of tunes, playfulness, and musicianship. It is a true joy
when the three legs keep each other level.
I have been an organizer/producer for several series, the sound guy, a
dancer, and a member of the band. I have tried to remember that even those who
don't get the "glory" have an important part in making a dance successful.
The caller may get the thanks, but all of us make things happen.
John B. Freeman, SFTPOCTJ
I can think of some others:
Present a program consistent with the vision of the producer. If this means for example "one chestnut per night", then so be it.
Raise the dancing level of the crowd a wee bit each time.
Be as prepared as you can be.
Dan
