Contra Callers

contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net

33 participants
4404 discussions

by Jim Phillips

Sue Robishaw Can't get through to you using Sue(a)manytracks.com as I found it on the list. Can you send a working email address? Thanks Much, Jim Austin, TX "It's OK, I'm a Contra Dancer"

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 21

by Martha Wild

Greg, Really, Greg, you are assuming way too much. I didn't say I had trouble keeping a crowd in order. I was talking about our beginner session. If I have a very small group of beginners, I sometimes don't use the mike - but if the diameter of the initial circle I use to teach some figures in is beyond a certain size, I have to. Not everyone participates in the beginner session, many people come in and are socializing while the newcomers are being taught. That means there is some volume in a rather vibrant hall. I'm not about to prevent people from greeting their friends while I teach. In addition, we have an older crowd here, some of whom are hard of hearing and they certainly can't here me without the mike. I do not crank the volume on the headset mike, and since the hall is long, and people enter at the back and I teach near the front, I don't need to overwhelm anyone with the volume. But I do need the mike to teach. Just because you are a guy with a big voice and you don't like headset mikes doesn't mean everyone can do it your way, or that it is the only way. Good for you, use whatever you like. I will use the headset mike. Oh, and once the real dance starts, I don't seem to have trouble with people ignoring the caller because I had the mike on during the beginner session. Martha Wild On Jul 23, 2011, at 9:00 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. looking for "Mad Robin in Love" (Deborah Comly) > 2. Re: Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7 (Dennis Merritt) > 3. Head Mikes and Mike Heads (Greg McKenzie) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:15:12 -0700 > From: Deborah Comly <debcomly(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <Callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: [Callers] looking for "Mad Robin in Love" > Message-ID: > <CAC1TBK2Tziyxh=kpGFRL1PFUgekZD=xETteQnDZcO15LJ7F=Pg(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi I am looking for a dance, "Mad Robin in Love," by Greg Frock. > > Thanks! Deb > > -- > Deb Comly > Flagstaff, AZ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:48:32 -0400 > From: Dennis Merritt <dennismerritt1(a)gmail.com> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7 > Message-ID: > <CAAn1myVRDUeh9ZS_YRXFHcF_7W7k+k=WEVSoe-ifC93OUZdbJA(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I've taught many beginning ladies how to keep a strong dance frame, > how to > use it to regulate the degree of closeness with whoever is swinging > them. > It seemed to me simple for women to learn how to deal with men > that try to > hold them too close. > > And then I started dancing the woman's role from time to time, and > in one > dance in particular, there was a shadow swing, and my shadow was a > larger > man, probably with issues, uncomfortable with a man dancing the > woman's > role, and he grabbed me tight and got all romantic, as a joke?, but > it was > very uncomfortable to me, and he was larger than me, and I couldn't > get > extracted, and didn't say anything, and felt I understood... > > Dennis > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 6:47 PM, <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: mental health and dance calling (Amy Cann) >> 2. Re: mental health and dance calling (Bree Kalb) >> 3. Re: mental health and dance calling (Amy Cann) >> 4. Re: mental health and dance calling (Martha Edwards) >> 5. Re: unwelcome behavior (Martha Edwards) >> 6. alternate formations (Richard Mckeever) >> 7. Re: alternate formations (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 12:03:17 -0400 >> From: Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> >> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling >> Message-ID: >> <CALZWU+t7PGH_zRxzfR >> +tUy2=DJHrFtrpxkm=w4CC9Hvk0Focsg(a)mail.gmail.com >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> It's funny, I'm listening to all of these stories and thinking >> about the >> creepers I've run into over the years, and I'm thinking to myself: >> >> "Well, it's really quite simple, isn't it? Ladies, if a gent is being >> inappropriate, walk away! >> >> Just wait until you're out at the top or bottom, turn to him and >> say 'I am >> uncomfortable with what you are doing and am not going to finish >> this dance >> with you' -- and then do it. Walk off. And if he's really >> offensive, don't >> wait until the end, bail out right then and there. The world won't >> end if a >> line of dancers has to cope with a hole. What's more important, >> ten more >> minutes of perfect dancing for that line, at that dance, or a >> really good >> behavior-modification moment that will actually improve the dance >> community >> more in the long run?" >> >> And yet it isn't that simple, is it? We don't do it. We have these >> halls >> just filled with women who are about as uniformly >> modern/educated/self-actuated/socially conscious/feminist as it >> gets, who >> spend our days running businesses or doing high end IT/research >> -- or >> teaching children or counseling teens or lobbying to pass laws on >> issues >> just like this -- and not once in my experience have I ever known >> a woman >> to >> say "Nope, enough, not going to let you do this." >> >> Heck, I've marched eighth grade boys (and girls) off the >> playground for >> inappropriate behavior without a flinch, but at a dance, when it's >> *me? >> *I've >> been groped and dipped and clenched a few times over the years and >> the most >> overt thing I've ever done is reached back, grabbed his hand, >> moved it up >> about six inches to the small of my back, and said "works much >> better for >> me >> if you keep your hand *there". *The other times, I've simply >> become ice >> cold/distant and stopped making eye contact - which can be quite the >> putdown >> if you really work it, smile and nod at all of your neighbors but >> shut down >> completely every time you return to your partner. But have I truly >> called >> them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. >> >> Food for thought. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 13:15:09 -0400 >> From: "Bree Kalb" <bree(a)mindspring.com> >> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling >> Message-ID: <36DF3156E5FA448B88FBF5C1106D581C@BreeHomeLaptop> >> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; >> reply-type=original >> >> Amy wrote: But have I truly called >> them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. >> >> I have. >> Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does >> occasionally. >> I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him >> back, saying: >> "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." >> The next >> time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with >> you again >> if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always >> agreed and >> behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the >> line, I >> automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an >> exception; the >> younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even >> someone >> like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being >> so bold. >> So it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our >> board >> actually banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on >> teenage girls; >> other dance organizers in the area followed suit. >> >> Bree Kalb >> Carrboro >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 13:27:09 -0400 >> From: Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> >> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling >> Message-ID: >> <CALZWU+s=JBRxuF8ZvN6_vwBDE >> +iQ6D6q_8727TRiseZ8CvNS9Q(a)mail.gmail.com >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> I'll bet this discussion is going to continue for a bit, so let's >> clarify: >> >> I've ALWAYS made people stop what they are doing -- made them >> leave more >> room, move a hand -- I've just always done it non-verbally. If I >> don't want >> to be dipped, I don't get dipped -- I can shift my weight or go >> inert in >> ways that make it impossible. I'm not shy about taking care of >> myself, and >> that cold/silent treatment is pretty darn harsh/unmistakable (just >> ask my >> husband :) >> >> But on reflection, it's always been a private interchange. By >> "calling >> out", >> I mean it in the most specific way: calling them out from the >> crowd, into >> the spotlight, to be addressed in front of an audience. I've very >> rarely >> seen this happen, and have never heard of a woman walking off the >> floor >> mid-dance. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Bree Kalb <bree(a)mindspring.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Amy wrote: But have I truly called >>> >>> them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. >>> >>> I have. >>> Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does >>> occasionally. >>> I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him back, >> saying: >>> "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." >>> The next >>> time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with you >> again >>> if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always >>> agreed and >>> behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the >>> line, I >>> automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an >>> exception; the >>> younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even >>> someone >>> like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being >>> so bold. >> So >>> it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our board >> actually >>> banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on teenage >>> girls; other >>> dance organizers in the area followed suit. >>> >>> Bree Kalb >>> Carrboro >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >>> http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers< >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 14:32:07 -0500 >> From: Martha Edwards <meedwards(a)westendweb.com> >> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling >> Message-ID: >> <CAJjmMcPtmmmmaO5KSLND- >> SEw3Bop2YQADhO2w7xSqtCsQNG=yA(a)mail.gmail.com >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Good points, all, as usual. >> >> The more difficult problem is how to keep the creeps from behaving >> that way >> with younger, or newer, dancers, who don't know yet what sort of >> atmosphere >> we generally maintain, and are reluctant to "cause a scene". >> Mostly, I >> think, if it's too bad, they just go away, never to return and >> find out >> that >> 99% of dancers would never think of acting that way. >> >> So, when we tell these folks a direct "NO" (and we should, oh yes, we >> should!) we can do those dancers a favor and tell the creeps >> exactly what >> they did that was offensive. Tell them what they did and how you >> feel about >> it. And tell a trustworthy board member. >> >> I admit I haven't always been direct with people on my own behalf >> - I just >> get away and move on. Oddly, I'm much more comfortable speaking to >> these >> folks on behalf of others. No fear. Wonder what that's about. >> >> M >> E >> >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> >> wrote: >> >>> I'll bet this discussion is going to continue for a bit, so let's >> clarify: >>> >>> I've ALWAYS made people stop what they are doing -- made them >>> leave more >>> room, move a hand -- I've just always done it non-verbally. If I >>> don't >> want >>> to be dipped, I don't get dipped -- I can shift my weight or go >>> inert in >>> ways that make it impossible. I'm not shy about taking care of >>> myself, >> and >>> that cold/silent treatment is pretty darn harsh/unmistakable >>> (just ask my >>> husband :) >>> >>> But on reflection, it's always been a private interchange. By >>> "calling >>> out", >>> I mean it in the most specific way: calling them out from the >>> crowd, into >>> the spotlight, to be addressed in front of an audience. I've very >>> rarely >>> seen this happen, and have never heard of a woman walking off the >>> floor >>> mid-dance. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Bree Kalb <bree(a)mindspring.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Amy wrote: But have I truly called >>>> >>>> them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. >>>> >>>> I have. >>>> Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does >>>> occasionally. >>>> I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him back, >>> saying: >>>> "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." The >> next >>>> time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with >>>> you >>> again >>>> if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always >>>> agreed >> and >>>> behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the >>>> line, I >>>> automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an >>>> exception; the >>>> younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even >> someone >>>> like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being so >> bold. >>> So >>>> it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our board >>> actually >>>> banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on teenage girls; >> other >>>> dance organizers in the area followed suit. >>>> >>>> Bree Kalb >>>> Carrboro >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >>>> http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers< >>> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >>> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> As you set out for Ithaka, pray that your journey be long, full of >> adventure, full of discovery... >> May there be many summer mornings when, with what pleasure, with >> what joy, >> you enter harbors you're seeing for the first time. >> ~Constantine Cavafy, "Ithaka" 1911 >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:09:25 -0500 >> From: Martha Edwards <meedwards(a)westendweb.com> >> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] unwelcome behavior >> Message-ID: >> >> <CAJjmMcPMteUijM5uawWOCauvUZvwJGJVL05Dkkca=Bb6j9pssg(a)mail.gmail.com >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Here, it's easy. We don't allow lifting people off the floor. >> >> We have one person with a very mild mental illness who wasn't >> judging very >> well when to do it and when not, and wasn't always doing it >> safely, so we >> just made it a rule, not to be broken, that no one does it, to >> make it >> easier for him to remember. >> >> We also have a board member who loves doing aerials, does them >> with safety >> and with permission and all other good stuff, but he can't do it >> at our >> dances either, just because the hard-and-fast rule is the only way >> we can >> keep the rest of us from being cut off at the knees when the other >> guy was >> swinging new dancers off their feet and their legs cut a six-foot >> circle >> sweep. >> >> I also saw a caller in Kansas City stop a dance once and tell a >> particularly >> aggressive dancer to stop lifting people off the ground. "I have >> liability >> here, and I'm not going to continue calling if you keep doing >> that." I >> think the dancers applauded. >> >> I had the pleasure of meeting Frankie Manning, who invented the >> aerial in >> swing dancing in 1935, and was particularly impressed with the >> amount of >> practice he and his partner did before they ever tried it on a >> dance floor >> - >> with mattresses covering the floor of his living room while they >> learned >> how. >> >> M >> E >> >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> I would love to hear how other dance communities have dealt with >>> this >>> issue. >>> >>> - Greg McKenzie >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >>> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 14:12:41 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Richard Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> >> To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: [Callers] alternate formations >> Message-ID: >> <1310245961.53389.YahooMailNeo(a)web120406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Here is a new topic... >> >> Recently I have noticed that many of the programs presented have >> consisted >> solely of duple improper contras with a couple Becket dances >> thrown in for >> variety. >> >> I would be interesting to hear how other callers incorporate other >> formations in their programs and how they and the dancer feel >> about it >> >> This would include - but not be limited to: >> >> circles dances >> Sicilian circles >> Squares >> 4 facing 4 >> triple minors >> scatter mixers >> other?? >> >> Comments by formation would be interesting as would regional >> variations in >> programming >> >> Mac McKeever >> St Louis >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:22:23 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing >> <winston(a)slac.stanford.edu> >> To: Richard Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> >> Cc: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> Subject: Re: [Callers] alternate formations >> Message-ID: <01O3G5YHDG8WBPO4IB(a)SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii >> >> Mac asked about how other callerrs incorporate other formations >> into their >> programs. >> >> >> I call English (for 25+ years), barn dances, historical-themed >> (Regency/Early >> American, Civil War, Dickens) and contra (for the last five or so >> years, >> but >> only a few times a year). >> >> My answers are different for each kind of thing. >> >> For English, I typically call more duple minor (usually proper) than >> anything >> else, but try to mix it up with small-set dances (two-couple set, >> three-couple >> set, squares) and a triple minor or two in an evening. Since >> tunes go with >> particular dances, I also consider variety in mood, key, meter, >> and tempo >> when >> I'm making up the program. (I'll also use what I know about the >> musicians >> I >> have that night and try to keep away from notey reels for a >> fiddler with >> tendinitis, bias toward Bb tunes if I have a cello player, etc.) >> >> For barn dances, anything goes. Sicilians, threesome Sicilians, big >> circles, >> grand march, circle mixer, whatever. >> >> For historically-themed, it depends somewhat on what I can justify >> historically, so Regency has lots of longways duples and some >> triples, >> mixed >> with an occasional three-couple set (adapted from a triple minor, >> like >> Fandango, Prince William, etc), interspersed with waltzes. >> >> For Civil War / Victorian, Sicilians, threesome Sicilians, whole >> sets in >> longways formation (Gothic Dance, Virginia Reel/Roger de >> Coverley), mixed >> up >> with waltzes, polkas, schottisches and galops. >> >> Around here (SF Bay Area) if you do a whole evening of duple-minor >> improper >> contras at a contra dance, nobody complains about it. Some >> callers like to >> include a square or two in an evening. A noticeable number of >> people will >> sit >> down if they realize it's a square. (As a dancer, I've had a >> partner bail >> on >> me when she realized it was a square.) That doesn't happen as >> much at >> local >> weekend or week-long camps, but at regular dances with local >> callers, 10% >> or >> more of the people who'd be up for a contra sit down for a >> square. I'm not >> the >> miracle square dance caller who's going to change their minds >> about it, >> either, >> so I don't program squares. >> >> When I first started calling contras here, my ten-dance program >> might have >> a >> circle mixer in slot three and a triplet sometime after the >> break. I've >> had >> complaints relayed to me about calling 'gimmicky' dances, and I >> wasn't >> getting >> great response from the triplets, so I've dropped those. I want >> to get >> invited >> back to call again, and I don't need to change everybody's mind >> about what >> a >> good time is. >> >> My most recent program (a very successful outing in Monterey last >> month) >> had a >> circle mixer in slot three (setting the ground for the poussette >> figure I >> used >> in "Joyride" later) and a four-face-four right after the break, >> and I got >> positive response to both of those. (The music was great; if it >> weren't I >> could have had the best program in the world and it wouldn't have >> been a >> wonderful evening.) >> >> -- Alan >> >> -- >> >> ===================================================================== >> ========== >> Alan Winston --- WINSTON(a)SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU >> Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: >> 650/926-3056 >> Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA >> 94025 >> >> ===================================================================== >> ========== >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >> >> >> End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7 >> ************************************** >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 07:36:32 -0700 > From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: [Callers] Head Mikes and Mike Heads > Message-ID: > <CAFqkWLuYAUE5e1qyv7f5ae9z1dWa2GCf1Q5ZLR3FfWG1Kssp8Q(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Martha Wild <mawild(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> Well, I love a headset mike. I don't have a loud voice, and no >> amount of >> voice training is going to give me one. If there are more than a few >> newcomers, and a small number of people in the hall talking, I >> will be >> hoarse by the time I finish the beginners workshop without a >> headset mike. >> > > I don't know what kind of voice training you have had. It > certainly is > possible to learn how increase your volume without causing > additional stress > on your voice. That, however, misses the whole point. Volume is > just one > tool we can use as masters-of-ceremony, but it is a poor substitute > for > learning how to earn and hold the attention of a crowd. > > Learning how to earn and hold attention is a core calling skill. > Cranking > up the volume and bludgeoning the crowd into submission with higher > decibels > is all too common at all kinds of events using a PA system. On its > own this > tactic naturally results in a much higher noise level in the room and > increased stress for everyone. This kind of thing can make you > tired just > by being in the room. Fortunately, most good callers have learned > that this > tactic has major pitfalls. Those with naturally loud voices are > usually the > worst offenders because they have learned to shout down competition > and > dominate the sound space. This is a poor communication strategy. > It can be > effective in the moment but over the course of the evening the > caller loses > the respect of the dancers. > > Excellent callers know how to manage the communication process. > Who are you > competing with for attention and why? Is there some way to > accommodate the > other communication processes going on? How do you pace the > evening to give > everyone a chance to communicate easily? A large part of the > reason people > attend social events is to talk, and isn't it the caller's job to > accommodate that? Do you provide cues and time to allow dancers to > transition gracefully from social talking to a walk-through? Do > you work > with the band to provide clear transitions to gather folks into the > hall or > to switch from socializing to listening? Does the band understand > when to > remain quiet themselves? Do you start with instructions that require > physical movement of the dancers? Is it clear to the dancers that > listening > to the caller is the quickest and most effective way that they can > achieve > their own personal goals? Is the information you're giving out > essential? > Do you choose your words carefully, articulate well, and speak > slowly and > clearly? > > A first-timers orientation session is problematic for numerous > reasons. If > the session is held in the main hall, using the PA system violates > the first > rule of microphone etiquette because you are speaking to a smaller > group > over the mike. (Always speak to the entire hall when when using a > microphone!) Consequently you are training everyone else in the > room to > ignore your voice--a questionable strategy for a caller on its > face. If you > attempt to teach any dance figures in your session you will face the > additional problem created by spreading the listeners into a line, > which > makes it more difficult to speak without a mike. (This is one of many > reasons I recommend *not *teaching any figures during the optional > first-timer's orientation.) It is much more effective to teach the > basics > of walking and giving weight in a small circle where you can > communicate > without a mike and keep the session under 10-15 minutes. > > We spend a lot of time here talking about sound engineering issues, > microphones, and monitor speakers. It might be more productive to > discuss > how the caller can manage their own communication as well as the > entire > hall. When used appropriately an unamplified whisper can be much more > effective than shouting through an expensive PA system. It's not the > volume. > > -Greg McKenzie (who has a degree in Speech Communication and sometimes > obsesses about these things) > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 21 > ***************************************

14 years, 3 months

Head Mikes and Mike Heads

by Greg McKenzie

Martha Wild <mawild(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Well, I love a headset mike. I don't have a loud voice, and no amount of > voice training is going to give me one. If there are more than a few > newcomers, and a small number of people in the hall talking, I will be > hoarse by the time I finish the beginners workshop without a headset mike. > I don't know what kind of voice training you have had. It certainly is possible to learn how increase your volume without causing additional stress on your voice. That, however, misses the whole point. Volume is just one tool we can use as masters-of-ceremony, but it is a poor substitute for learning how to earn and hold the attention of a crowd. Learning how to earn and hold attention is a core calling skill. Cranking up the volume and bludgeoning the crowd into submission with higher decibels is all too common at all kinds of events using a PA system. On its own this tactic naturally results in a much higher noise level in the room and increased stress for everyone. This kind of thing can make you tired just by being in the room. Fortunately, most good callers have learned that this tactic has major pitfalls. Those with naturally loud voices are usually the worst offenders because they have learned to shout down competition and dominate the sound space. This is a poor communication strategy. It can be effective in the moment but over the course of the evening the caller loses the respect of the dancers. Excellent callers know how to manage the communication process. Who are you competing with for attention and why? Is there some way to accommodate the other communication processes going on? How do you pace the evening to give everyone a chance to communicate easily? A large part of the reason people attend social events is to talk, and isn't it the caller's job to accommodate that? Do you provide cues and time to allow dancers to transition gracefully from social talking to a walk-through? Do you work with the band to provide clear transitions to gather folks into the hall or to switch from socializing to listening? Does the band understand when to remain quiet themselves? Do you start with instructions that require physical movement of the dancers? Is it clear to the dancers that listening to the caller is the quickest and most effective way that they can achieve their own personal goals? Is the information you're giving out essential? Do you choose your words carefully, articulate well, and speak slowly and clearly? A first-timers orientation session is problematic for numerous reasons. If the session is held in the main hall, using the PA system violates the first rule of microphone etiquette because you are speaking to a smaller group over the mike. (Always speak to the entire hall when when using a microphone!) Consequently you are training everyone else in the room to ignore your voice--a questionable strategy for a caller on its face. If you attempt to teach any dance figures in your session you will face the additional problem created by spreading the listeners into a line, which makes it more difficult to speak without a mike. (This is one of many reasons I recommend *not *teaching any figures during the optional first-timer's orientation.) It is much more effective to teach the basics of walking and giving weight in a small circle where you can communicate without a mike and keep the session under 10-15 minutes. We spend a lot of time here talking about sound engineering issues, microphones, and monitor speakers. It might be more productive to discuss how the caller can manage their own communication as well as the entire hall. When used appropriately an unamplified whisper can be much more effective than shouting through an expensive PA system. It's not the volume. -Greg McKenzie (who has a degree in Speech Communication and sometimes obsesses about these things)

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7

by Dennis Merritt

I've taught many beginning ladies how to keep a strong dance frame, how to use it to regulate the degree of closeness with whoever is swinging them. It seemed to me simple for women to learn how to deal with men that try to hold them too close. And then I started dancing the woman's role from time to time, and in one dance in particular, there was a shadow swing, and my shadow was a larger man, probably with issues, uncomfortable with a man dancing the woman's role, and he grabbed me tight and got all romantic, as a joke?, but it was very uncomfortable to me, and he was larger than me, and I couldn't get extracted, and didn't say anything, and felt I understood... Dennis On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 6:47 PM, <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: mental health and dance calling (Amy Cann) > 2. Re: mental health and dance calling (Bree Kalb) > 3. Re: mental health and dance calling (Amy Cann) > 4. Re: mental health and dance calling (Martha Edwards) > 5. Re: unwelcome behavior (Martha Edwards) > 6. alternate formations (Richard Mckeever) > 7. Re: alternate formations (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 12:03:17 -0400 > From: Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling > Message-ID: > <CALZWU+t7PGH_zRxzfR+tUy2=DJHrFtrpxkm=w4CC9Hvk0Focsg(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > It's funny, I'm listening to all of these stories and thinking about the > creepers I've run into over the years, and I'm thinking to myself: > > "Well, it's really quite simple, isn't it? Ladies, if a gent is being > inappropriate, walk away! > > Just wait until you're out at the top or bottom, turn to him and say 'I am > uncomfortable with what you are doing and am not going to finish this dance > with you' -- and then do it. Walk off. And if he's really offensive, don't > wait until the end, bail out right then and there. The world won't end if a > line of dancers has to cope with a hole. What's more important, ten more > minutes of perfect dancing for that line, at that dance, or a really good > behavior-modification moment that will actually improve the dance community > more in the long run?" > > And yet it isn't that simple, is it? We don't do it. We have these halls > just filled with women who are about as uniformly > modern/educated/self-actuated/socially conscious/feminist as it gets, who > spend our days running businesses or doing high end IT/research -- or > teaching children or counseling teens or lobbying to pass laws on issues > just like this -- and not once in my experience have I ever known a woman > to > say "Nope, enough, not going to let you do this." > > Heck, I've marched eighth grade boys (and girls) off the playground for > inappropriate behavior without a flinch, but at a dance, when it's *me? > *I've > been groped and dipped and clenched a few times over the years and the most > overt thing I've ever done is reached back, grabbed his hand, moved it up > about six inches to the small of my back, and said "works much better for > me > if you keep your hand *there". *The other times, I've simply become ice > cold/distant and stopped making eye contact - which can be quite the > putdown > if you really work it, smile and nod at all of your neighbors but shut down > completely every time you return to your partner. But have I truly called > them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. > > Food for thought. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 13:15:09 -0400 > From: "Bree Kalb" <bree(a)mindspring.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling > Message-ID: <36DF3156E5FA448B88FBF5C1106D581C@BreeHomeLaptop> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Amy wrote: But have I truly called > them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. > > I have. > Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does > occasionally. > I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him back, saying: > "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." The next > time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with you again > if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always agreed and > behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the line, I > automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an exception; the > younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even someone > like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being so bold. > So it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our board > actually banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on teenage girls; > other dance organizers in the area followed suit. > > Bree Kalb > Carrboro > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 13:27:09 -0400 > From: Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling > Message-ID: > <CALZWU+s=JBRxuF8ZvN6_vwBDE+iQ6D6q_8727TRiseZ8CvNS9Q(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I'll bet this discussion is going to continue for a bit, so let's clarify: > > I've ALWAYS made people stop what they are doing -- made them leave more > room, move a hand -- I've just always done it non-verbally. If I don't want > to be dipped, I don't get dipped -- I can shift my weight or go inert in > ways that make it impossible. I'm not shy about taking care of myself, and > that cold/silent treatment is pretty darn harsh/unmistakable (just ask my > husband :) > > But on reflection, it's always been a private interchange. By "calling > out", > I mean it in the most specific way: calling them out from the crowd, into > the spotlight, to be addressed in front of an audience. I've very rarely > seen this happen, and have never heard of a woman walking off the floor > mid-dance. > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Bree Kalb <bree(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > > > Amy wrote: But have I truly called > > > > them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. > > > > I have. > > Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does > > occasionally. > > I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him back, > saying: > > "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." The next > > time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with you > again > > if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always agreed and > > behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the line, I > > automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an exception; the > > younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even someone > > like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being so bold. > So > > it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our board > actually > > banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on teenage girls; other > > dance organizers in the area followed suit. > > > > Bree Kalb > > Carrboro > > ______________________________**_________________ > > Callers mailing list > > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > > http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers< > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 14:32:07 -0500 > From: Martha Edwards <meedwards(a)westendweb.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] mental health and dance calling > Message-ID: > <CAJjmMcPtmmmmaO5KSLND-SEw3Bop2YQADhO2w7xSqtCsQNG=yA(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Good points, all, as usual. > > The more difficult problem is how to keep the creeps from behaving that way > with younger, or newer, dancers, who don't know yet what sort of atmosphere > we generally maintain, and are reluctant to "cause a scene". Mostly, I > think, if it's too bad, they just go away, never to return and find out > that > 99% of dancers would never think of acting that way. > > So, when we tell these folks a direct "NO" (and we should, oh yes, we > should!) we can do those dancers a favor and tell the creeps exactly what > they did that was offensive. Tell them what they did and how you feel about > it. And tell a trustworthy board member. > > I admit I haven't always been direct with people on my own behalf - I just > get away and move on. Oddly, I'm much more comfortable speaking to these > folks on behalf of others. No fear. Wonder what that's about. > > M > E > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Amy Cann <acann(a)putneyschool.org> wrote: > > > I'll bet this discussion is going to continue for a bit, so let's > clarify: > > > > I've ALWAYS made people stop what they are doing -- made them leave more > > room, move a hand -- I've just always done it non-verbally. If I don't > want > > to be dipped, I don't get dipped -- I can shift my weight or go inert in > > ways that make it impossible. I'm not shy about taking care of myself, > and > > that cold/silent treatment is pretty darn harsh/unmistakable (just ask my > > husband :) > > > > But on reflection, it's always been a private interchange. By "calling > > out", > > I mean it in the most specific way: calling them out from the crowd, into > > the spotlight, to be addressed in front of an audience. I've very rarely > > seen this happen, and have never heard of a woman walking off the floor > > mid-dance. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Bree Kalb <bree(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > > > > > Amy wrote: But have I truly called > > > > > > them out on it? No. And neither have any of my peers. > > > > > > I have. > > > Now that I'm older, it doesn't happen as often, but still does > > > occasionally. > > > I've put my left palm against a man's shoulder and pushed him back, > > saying: > > > "I don't want to dance that close.' Or: "I don't sleaze dance." The > next > > > time they've asked me to dance, I've said "I'll only dance with you > > again > > > if you don't (do that particular thing again.)" They've always agreed > and > > > behaved themselves, for that dance. When I come to them in the line, I > > > automatically push them back a little. But I know I'm an exception; the > > > younger, shyer women don't feel comfortable setting limits. Even > someone > > > like Amy (who I surmise is not particularly shy) is uneasy being so > bold. > > So > > > it's important that the organizers pay attention and act. Our board > > actually > > > banned a guy from dancing because he was preying on teenage girls; > other > > > dance organizers in the area followed suit. > > > > > > Bree Kalb > > > Carrboro > > > ______________________________**_________________ > > > Callers mailing list > > > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > > > http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers< > > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Callers mailing list > > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > > > > -- > As you set out for Ithaka, pray that your journey be long, full of > adventure, full of discovery... > May there be many summer mornings when, with what pleasure, with what joy, > you enter harbors you're seeing for the first time. > ~Constantine Cavafy, "Ithaka" 1911 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:09:25 -0500 > From: Martha Edwards <meedwards(a)westendweb.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] unwelcome behavior > Message-ID: > <CAJjmMcPMteUijM5uawWOCauvUZvwJGJVL05Dkkca=Bb6j9pssg(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Here, it's easy. We don't allow lifting people off the floor. > > We have one person with a very mild mental illness who wasn't judging very > well when to do it and when not, and wasn't always doing it safely, so we > just made it a rule, not to be broken, that no one does it, to make it > easier for him to remember. > > We also have a board member who loves doing aerials, does them with safety > and with permission and all other good stuff, but he can't do it at our > dances either, just because the hard-and-fast rule is the only way we can > keep the rest of us from being cut off at the knees when the other guy was > swinging new dancers off their feet and their legs cut a six-foot circle > sweep. > > I also saw a caller in Kansas City stop a dance once and tell a > particularly > aggressive dancer to stop lifting people off the ground. "I have liability > here, and I'm not going to continue calling if you keep doing that." I > think the dancers applauded. > > I had the pleasure of meeting Frankie Manning, who invented the aerial in > swing dancing in 1935, and was particularly impressed with the amount of > practice he and his partner did before they ever tried it on a dance floor > - > with mattresses covering the floor of his living room while they learned > how. > > M > E > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > I would love to hear how other dance communities have dealt with this > > issue. > > > > - Greg McKenzie > > _______________________________________________ > > Callers mailing list > > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 14:12:41 -0700 (PDT) > From: Richard Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> > To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: [Callers] alternate formations > Message-ID: > <1310245961.53389.YahooMailNeo(a)web120406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Here is a new topic... > > Recently I have noticed that many of the programs presented have consisted > solely of duple improper contras with a couple Becket dances thrown in for > variety. > > I would be interesting to hear how other callers incorporate other > formations in their programs and how they and the dancer feel about it > > This would include - but not be limited to: > > circles dances > Sicilian circles > Squares > 4 facing 4 > triple minors > scatter mixers > other?? > > Comments by formation would be interesting as would regional variations in > programming > > Mac McKeever > St Louis > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:22:23 -0700 (PDT) > From: Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing > <winston(a)slac.stanford.edu> > To: Richard Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> > Cc: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] alternate formations > Message-ID: <01O3G5YHDG8WBPO4IB(a)SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii > > Mac asked about how other callerrs incorporate other formations into their > programs. > > > I call English (for 25+ years), barn dances, historical-themed > (Regency/Early > American, Civil War, Dickens) and contra (for the last five or so years, > but > only a few times a year). > > My answers are different for each kind of thing. > > For English, I typically call more duple minor (usually proper) than > anything > else, but try to mix it up with small-set dances (two-couple set, > three-couple > set, squares) and a triple minor or two in an evening. Since tunes go with > particular dances, I also consider variety in mood, key, meter, and tempo > when > I'm making up the program. (I'll also use what I know about the musicians > I > have that night and try to keep away from notey reels for a fiddler with > tendinitis, bias toward Bb tunes if I have a cello player, etc.) > > For barn dances, anything goes. Sicilians, threesome Sicilians, big > circles, > grand march, circle mixer, whatever. > > For historically-themed, it depends somewhat on what I can justify > historically, so Regency has lots of longways duples and some triples, > mixed > with an occasional three-couple set (adapted from a triple minor, like > Fandango, Prince William, etc), interspersed with waltzes. > > For Civil War / Victorian, Sicilians, threesome Sicilians, whole sets in > longways formation (Gothic Dance, Virginia Reel/Roger de Coverley), mixed > up > with waltzes, polkas, schottisches and galops. > > Around here (SF Bay Area) if you do a whole evening of duple-minor improper > contras at a contra dance, nobody complains about it. Some callers like to > include a square or two in an evening. A noticeable number of people will > sit > down if they realize it's a square. (As a dancer, I've had a partner bail > on > me when she realized it was a square.) That doesn't happen as much at > local > weekend or week-long camps, but at regular dances with local callers, 10% > or > more of the people who'd be up for a contra sit down for a square. I'm not > the > miracle square dance caller who's going to change their minds about it, > either, > so I don't program squares. > > When I first started calling contras here, my ten-dance program might have > a > circle mixer in slot three and a triplet sometime after the break. I've > had > complaints relayed to me about calling 'gimmicky' dances, and I wasn't > getting > great response from the triplets, so I've dropped those. I want to get > invited > back to call again, and I don't need to change everybody's mind about what > a > good time is. > > My most recent program (a very successful outing in Monterey last month) > had a > circle mixer in slot three (setting the ground for the poussette figure I > used > in "Joyride" later) and a four-face-four right after the break, and I got > positive response to both of those. (The music was great; if it weren't I > could have had the best program in the world and it wouldn't have been a > wonderful evening.) > > -- Alan > > -- > > =============================================================================== > Alan Winston --- WINSTON(a)SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU > Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: > 650/926-3056 > Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA > 94025 > > =============================================================================== > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7 > ************************************** >

14 years, 3 months

looking for "Mad Robin in Love"

by Deborah Comly

Hi I am looking for a dance, "Mad Robin in Love," by Greg Frock. Thanks! Deb -- Deb Comly Flagstaff, AZ

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Caller's Fees

by Brian Hamshar

I was thinking the same thing, as I'm sure many of us were. I was willing to bet one of them was PeM, given that I've had the same discussion with them myself as a booking rep, and they make a really good case for a special arrangement. I'm a little less familiar with Double Apex, though I can possibly see it with them too. Brian Hamshar -----Original Message----- Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 9:00:37 pm To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> From: "Jeff Kaufman" <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller's Fees Dennis Merritt wrote: > > Sounds like we've all been talking to the same popular band... :-) > Actually, I don't see what purpose it serves to use only confusing references. The two bands that have asked bida to be paid as three person bands are perpetual emotion and double apex. Jeff _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 17

by Dennis Merritt

Sounds like we've all been talking to the same popular band... :-) We have lots of very good local two person bands as well. One problem I see with the equal share for all performers formula is callers try to line up gigs with the smaller bands. It seems more logical to me to disconnect the two, so that the caller's compensation is not a function of the size of the band, either in a positive or negative sense. --Dennis On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:00 PM, <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: Caller Fees (Will Loving) > 2. Re: Caller Fees (Jeff Kaufman) > 3. Re: Caller Fees (Donald Perley) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:20:26 -0400 > From: Will Loving <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>" > <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees > Message-ID: <CA49C77A.44A66%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" > > As both a dance series organizer and a caller, I'm thrilled that we are > having this discussion. Performer payment was the area that I spent the > most > time talking with other organizers about prior to starting our Downtown > Amherst (MA) series. > > Several posts have mentioned paying the band only a certain number of > shares, usually four, even if there are more than four musicians. Though > both the caller and the band are essential to the dance, this is presumably > being done to protect the callers pay. Now lets consider the other side of > the coin. > > What if your band consists of only two musicians? The assumed "normal" > arrangement would be that everyone get's a 1/3 share. Now consider that the > band is bringing and setting up their own top-notch sound system. Normally > the person providing and working sound gets paid anywhere from $25-200, or > a > full share, depending on the venue, whether they are supplying equipment > and > their level of expertise (the high end being someone like Bob Mills). Next, > let's add in the fact that this particular band will draw substantially > more > dancers, usually 25-50% more, than other 2-person bands. > > Is it appropriate to pay the band more? In this scenario would it be > appropriate to pay the band 3 shares instead of 2? From the band's > perspective, they are not only bringing and doing sound, but are also > bringing in a lot of value/income for the dance and should be rewarded for > it. Isn't this the same as limiting a band to getting 4 shares to protect > the caller's pay, even if there are more than 4 musicians? Is the band > correct in wanting to protect their pay as well based on the extra value > they bring? > > My guess from reading most people's posts is that you would in fact agree > with this, but some callers I've been talking with strongly disagree. I'm > interested to hear people's thought on it. As an organizer, I'm feeling a > bit caught between callers' feelings that 'equal shares for all performers' > is a hard and fast principle and the band wanting something for the extra > value they bring. From reading everyone's posts, talking with people and > looking at Jeff's spreadsheet, it seems to me that while there may be an > ideal of 'equal shares for all performers' (kind of like 'liberty and > justice for all') the reality of how pay is divided is quite varied. > > I'm deeply committed to paying all performers/artists well for the efforts > and energy, including minimums and profit sharing. Our dance series is only > 9 months old but we committed to doing this critical piece properly. We are > working hard to fund-raise for a high-quality and fully paid for sound > system so we can eliminate that as a weekly expense and have more money go > to the performers. We are slowly growing a reserve fund in order to be able > to guarantee minimums even when weather intervenes - such as the recent > tornados that came through Western Mass on our dance night. > > Thanks for your thoughts. > > Will Loving > Amherst Area Contra Dances > Amherst, MA USA > http://amherstcontra.org > > > on 6/18/11 10:32 PM, Sue Robishaw at sue(a)manytracks.com wrote: > > > Hi, > > I know that "it varies" and probably quite widely, but I'm trying to > get > > an idea of what is typically charged for one-time or semi-regular dance > > calling (not the high end festivals and balls and camps) or how receipts > are > > divided between caller, band, and house. My interest is as caller, band, > and > > dance organizer so all input would be appreciated. You can reply off-list > to > > sue(a)manytracks.com. > > Thanks, > > Sue Robishaw, Upper Peninsula of Michigan > > > -- > > William M. Loving > Dedication Technologies, Inc. > 7 Coach Lane > Amherst, MA 01002-3304 USA > will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com > Tel: +1 413 253-7223 (GMT ?5) > Fax: +1 206 202-0476 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:42:53 -0400 > From: Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu> > To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees > Message-ID: <20110718154251.GD16154(a)melfpelt.swarpa.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Will Loving wrote: > > > > What if your band consists of only two musicians? > > > > Bida has dealt with requests by two person bands to be paid more in > two ways: > > 1) paying them as a three person band, or > 2) paying them the fee that would normally go to a sound person, in > exchange for bringing and running their own sound > > The second option is equivalent to the first, but the band gets only > two shares of profit instead of three. > > We don't have a thought out policy on this; these are just the > solutions we went with for the two bands who asked. We also almost > never have two person bands. > > Jeff > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:43:08 -0400 > From: Donald Perley <donperley(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees > Message-ID: > <CAMKNU+-VH=y06xnmbr6u10UtpOcb5NLDNpvcd5dRkHM109gbOQ(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Will Loving > <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> wrote: > > Now consider that the > > band is bringing and setting up their own top-notch sound system. > Normally > > the person providing and working sound gets paid anywhere from $25-200, > or a > > full share, > > At our dances, if the band brings their own sound system, they get > paid for that function, and as far as I've seen they always get first > option on that. Some bands prefer not to if they are coming a > distance (or one stop on a tour) and it would mean 2 cars or a van > instead of 1 car. > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 17 > *************************************** >

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 16

by Martha Wild

Re: microphones Well, I love a headset mike. I don't have a loud voice, and no amount of voice training is going to give me one. If there are more than a few newcomers, and a small number of people in the hall talking, I will be hoarse by the time I finish the beginners workshop without a headset mike. I also participate in the beginners workshop using it as that way what I'm doing with one person or group can be seen by the others at the same time. I've occasionally had to do this at other venues with a cord snagging around underfoot, and that is a nightmare. I have tried handheld cordless, but I have a small hand and the ones I've used have been big and heavy and my hand aches by the break. If I put it in the mike stand I seem to stand in such a way that my legs and back ache by the break. With the headset, I make use of the mute feature if I do leave the stage to help anyone (which is rare) or have to speak to the band or an organizer while the dance is running. It's also been useful at small venues where a person who wanted to dance had no partner and I could be their partner and still call. Yes, it's definitely a good, wireless headset for me! Hooray for the Madonna mike! Martha On Jul 18, 2011, at 7:59 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: searching archive? (Laur) > 2. Re: Wireless Microphone (Greg McKenzie) > 3. Re: searching archive? (Mark Widmer) > 4. Re: microphones (Will Loving) > 5. Re: microphones (Will Loving) > 6. Re: searching archive? (Laur) > 7. Re: searching archive? (Greg McKenzie) > 8. Re: Wireless Microphone (Lewis Land) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:02:09 -0700 (PDT) > From: Laur <lcpgr(a)yahoo.com> > To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? > Message-ID: > <1310918529.92855.YahooMailNeo(a)web121714.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > ? > Thanks Chris - I kept defaulting to the info page and getting to > the archives. > ~ > > >> ________________________________ >> From: Chris Weiler (home) <chris.weiler(a)weirdtable.org> >> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net >> Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 10:12 AM >> Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? >> >> Right on the home page is a box on the left that will let you >> search the archives: >> >> http://www.sharedweight.net/ >> >> Chris >> >> >> On 7/16/2011 6:17 PM, Laur wrote: >>> Chris (everyone), >>> >>> >>> Am I correct in thinking there is not a way to search the archives? >>> Laurie >>> Grand Rapids MI >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:09:47 -0700 > From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Wireless Microphone > Message-ID: > <CAFqkWLvJKv24mvh_cL=F3mP2P-ej3iN8yQReqm0kxt27Sy+Qow(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I used a wireless headset mike for a short time. I found it > cumbersome and > limiting. In addition to losing the ability to control my own > volume by > moving away from the mike I don't do a lot of floor demonstration > so it was > really only a "hands free" device I used on stage. I like shifting > to an > off-mike mode while on the floor. It is an attention-getting > technique when > the caller steps down and speaks without amplification. > > I know lots of folks on this list do gigs with much more teaching and > demonstrating than I do when calling at open public contra dances. > The > wireless route might be good for that kind of event. But I would > caution > the wireless mike users to consider the effects on dancers when > they look up > on stage and see the caller missing. It can be unnerving to hear a > headless > voice speaking over the PA system. (This is why they invented > follow-spots > for theater performances. The audience always knows where to > look.) I like > to keep the dancers in control and to never make them feel > foolish...even > for a moment. > > I suggest that head-mike callers lead the audience with a prompt > whenever > they step down from the stage as in: "Ladies and Gentlemen: Please > direct > your attention to the center of the hall," as the caller steps > down. This > will avoid the feeling that someone with a live mike is "stalking" > around > the hall floor. Keeping the audience oriented will help them to feel > relaxed and confident. > > The worst offense of a wireless mike user is to walk down on the > floor, > without prompting, and to begin giving instructions to a single > dancer or a > small group that is confused. The presence of the caller--speaking > to them > over the PA system--can make newcomers very uncomfortable and > distracted, > and undermine any assistance the caller is attempting to offer. When > on-mike, the caller should always speak only to the entire hall. > Directed > comments should always be off-mike. > > -Greg McKenzie > > ************* > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Colin Hume <colin(a)colinhume.com> > wrote: > >> On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:44:39 +0100, John Sweeney wrote: >>> I find hand-held mikes very strange. Why would you lock yourself >>> into a fixed position, or tie one of your hands up when you can use >>> a wireless headset? >> >> I much prefer a hand-held. I find that as soon as I put on a headset >> I feel the need to cough, sniff, clear my throat, etc. Also with a >> hand-held I can pull my head away from the microphone to call out to >> the band "Another B" or "One more time" or "Slower", whereas with a >> headset I have to find the switch first, speak, then switch it >> back on >> again. I've got quite good at transferring the mike from one hand to >> the other when I'm dancing, and most people can cope with holding my >> elbow rather than my hand if necessary. >> >> Colin Hume >> >> Email colin(a)colinhume.com Web site http://www.colinhume.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:31:44 -0400 > From: Mark Widmer <mark(a)harbormist.com> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? > Message-ID: <4E230E70.8030805(a)harbormist.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > There's always google. Just include site:www.sharedweight.net among > your search terms. > > For example: > > http://www.google.com/ > #sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=wireless > +site:www.sharedweight.net&pbx=1&oq=wireless > +site:www.sharedweight.net&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1937l8842l0l9 > 249l34l26l0l3l3l0l305l3446l5.14.3.1l23&bav=on. > 2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=86582d5fedad0c80&biw=1280&bih=587 > > -- Mark Widmer > >> From: Laur<lcpgr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> Chris (everyone), >> >> >> Am I correct in thinking there is not a way to search the archives?? >> >> Laurie >> Grand Rapids MI > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:44:43 -0400 > From: Will Loving <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>" > <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] microphones > Message-ID: <CA4889BB.44A2F%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" > > This may be changing. On my new cell phone, an LG Cosmos, I can > hear myself > in the speaker when I talk. It was a little disconcerting at first > because I > was so used to NOT hearing myself and it doesn't exactly sound like > and old > wired phone, but it may be that manufacturers are starting to add this > feature in. > > > on 7/16/11 11:09 PM, Amy Cann at acann(a)putneyschool.org wrote: > >> There are plenty of people like me out there - and you can spot >> them as soon >> as they get out their cell phones. Old phones have a speaker in >> the ear end >> that not only carries the other person but also your own voice -- >> you have a >> monitor, and you get to hear yourself from the outside. Cell >> phones don't, >> the ear part is dead unless the other person is speaking. Older >> folks used >> to exterior feedback can get really thrown off by this and start >> TALKING >> REALLY LOUD; > > > -- > > William M. Loving > Dedication Technologies, Inc. > 7 Coach Lane > Amherst, MA 01002-3304 USA > will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com > Tel: +1 413 253-7223 (GMT ?5) > Fax: +1 206 202-0476 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:53:49 -0400 > From: Will Loving <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>" > <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] microphones > Message-ID: <CA488BDD.44A33%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" > > This is a note I wrote and posted a while back on my experience > with my > headset: > > As far as I?m concerned, if you can afford it, the way to go is with a > Countryman E6, and specifically the E6i which is the directional > model vs > the omni-directional one. The E6 is not cheap, generally $300-350 > for the > mike and a spare cable, you still have to buy the body pack and > transceiver > (I got a used Shure PGX with carrying case on ebay). These are the > same > mikes that are used in Broadway shows and by many performers, > church pastors > and choir soloists, etc. One or two people I?ve seen use the big Shure > headsets that come with the PGX kits, and I?m sure they are > adequate, but I > like the fact that the Countryman is almost invisible and the > quality is > such that people have literally said to me ?it?s like you are > standing right > next to me?. > > I purchased mine from CCI Solutions (http://ccisolutions.com ? Jeff > Brown > was my rep) a place that supplies lots of churches. Their prices on > Countryman mikes are about $50 less than anyone else because they > were the > very first Countryman dealer. They also include an extra cable > which is > normally $50 extra. > > I tried both an the Omni (E6) and directional (E6i) versions before > going > with the latter. Jeff at CCI told me that they sell 100 omnis for each > direction they sell, but that he agreed with my reasoning and > experience > that because as caller I would be standing very close to (or > sometimes in > front of) the mains that the directional would be better than the > omni. And, > in fact, experience has found that to be true. > > I can be almost directly in front of the mains doing a demo and get no > feedback unless I turn at precisely the wrong angle. With an omni, the > chances of getting feedback from multiple angles is MUCH higher. > The caveat > is that placement of the directional mike at the corner of your > mouth is > critical. You need to follow the detailed directions so the clip > fits your > ear well - both snug and comfortable - and so that the pickup is > right at > the corner of your mouth and not wiggling around. Not hard to do > and once > you've got it set it should stay that way. > > Will > > > on 7/16/11 5:30 PM, JoLaine Jones-Pokorney at jolaine(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> Hi all - I'm considering a wireless headset mic. It sure would be >> nice to >> have hands free when demonstrating, teaching the introductory >> workshop. But >> I don't see many callers using them. Is there a downside to this >> that I'm >> not seeing, or is it just the expense? And if someone could >> recommend a >> good one, I would appreciate it as I know NOTHING. Our local >> sound guy has >> recommended the SHURE brand, but doesn't know a specific model >> number. >> Also, what are your thoughts about using a monitor? We have a >> visiting >> caller that SCREAMS into the mic and it was suggested that if he >> had a >> monitor, he might not do that. >> Any help is appreciated! >> JoLaine >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > -- > > William M. Loving > Dedication Technologies, Inc. > 7 Coach Lane > Amherst, MA 01002-3304 USA > will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com > Tel: +1 413 253-7223 (GMT ?5) > Fax: +1 206 202-0476 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:58:48 -0700 (PDT) > From: Laur <lcpgr(a)yahoo.com> > To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? > Message-ID: > <1310932728.49656.YahooMailNeo(a)web121710.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > ? > I love it!? thanks Mark. > > >> ________________________________ >> From: Mark Widmer <mark(a)harbormist.com> >> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net >> Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 12:31 PM >> Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? >> >> There's always google.? Just include site:www.sharedweight.net among >> your search terms. >> >> For example: >> >> http://www.google.com/ >> #sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=wireless >> +site:www.sharedweight.net&pbx=1&oq=wireless >> +site:www.sharedweight.net&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1937l8842l0l >> 9249l34l26l0l3l3l0l305l3446l5.14.3.1l23&bav=on. >> 2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=86582d5fedad0c80&biw=1280&bih=587 >> >> -- Mark Widmer >> >>> From: Laur<lcpgr(a)yahoo.com>? wrote: >>> >>> >>> Chris (everyone), >>> >>> >>> Am I correct in thinking there is not a way to search the archives?? >>> >>> Laurie >>> Grand Rapids MI >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >> >> >> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:04 -0700 > From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] searching archive? > Message-ID: > <CAFqkWLvdV3qvwss+mTJ2rMccap6xSRmtSGiK9Ty0HzHyqJJG0A(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Mark, > > This is a great tip! I am viewing the list through the google web > interface. I see no "search archive" options anywhere. Google > works well. > > - Greg McKenzie > > ********** > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Mark Widmer <mark(a)harbormist.com> > wrote: > >> There's always google. Just include site:www.sharedweight.net >> among your >> search terms. >> >> For example: >> >> http://www.google.com/#**sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&** >> source=hp&q=wireless+site:www.**sharedweight.net&pbx=1&oq=** >> wireless >> +site:www.**sharedweight.net&aq=f&aqi=&**aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=** >> 1937l8842l0l9249l34l26l0l3l3l0**l305l3446l5.14.3.1l23&bav=on.** >> 2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=**86582d5fedad0c80&biw=1280&bih=**587<http:// >> www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=wireless >> +site:www.sharedweight.net&pbx=1&oq=wireless >> +site:www.sharedweight.net&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1937l8842l0l >> 9249l34l26l0l3l3l0l305l3446l5.14.3.1l23&bav=on. >> 2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=86582d5fedad0c80&biw=1280&bih=587> >> >> -- Mark Widmer >> >> From: Laur<lcpgr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Chris (everyone), >>> >>> >>> Am I correct in thinking there is not a way to search the archives?? >>> >>> Laurie >>> Grand Rapids MI >>> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers<http:// >> www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers> >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:59:52 -0600 > From: Lewis Land <lewisland(a)windstream.net> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Wireless Microphone > Message-ID: <4E244A68.5020309(a)windstream.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I have only occasionally used a cordless headset mike, but I found > it to > be quite liberating. I really enjoyed the opportunity to step down > from > the stage and walk between the lines of dancers. Apart from > participating more directly in the excitement of the dance, it gave > me a > chance to see if there were any problems in one of the lines that > required me to continue calling a couple more sets. I'm sure we > have all > had that experience of one line "getting the dance" very quickly while > another line, usually populated by novices dancing with each other, is > on the verge of falling apart. Very often that second line is the one > farther from me on the stage and more difficult to observe. If I > have a > headset mike I will wait until the dance gets going before I > venture out > onto the floor, at a point where I don't feel the need to call > specific > moves very much. > > I honestly don't think the dancers would find it that unnerving to > hear > calls over the PA system when the caller isn't visible on the stage, > unless they are very old and haven't had any experience with modern > public address systems in other venues. And I think it would be > extremely distracting to specifically advise the dancers to direct > their > attention to the floor when the caller is out there. I mean, the whole > point is to get the dancers to focus on each other and forget that the > caller is even present, so why go out of your way to remind them? > > Last weekend I called a dance where I was offered a handheld cordless > mike, and it worked wonderfully. I was later told that several dancers > enjoyed seeing me on the floor while they were dancing. Certainly > no one > suggested that I was stalking them. > > Finally, even though I have a voice that carries pretty well, I > find it > physically very stressful to call without a mike unless I'm calling > in a > very small room to a very small group. Calling without amplification > just leads to shouting at the dancers, something I believe they would > find far more irritating and distracting than listening to amplified > calls while the caller is absent from the stage. Again, I have to say > that our main purpose is to cause the dancers to lose themselves in > the > moment and forget that the caller is there. I admit that it's possible > that Greg is used to calling at a very different, and perhaps smaller > venue than I'm used to. > > Finally, I certainly agree that we should avoid giving specific > instructions to a single dancer or small group during the dance, > regardless of the kind of amplification available. I will occasionally > do this during the walk-through, but by the time the dance has > started I > deal with problems like that by trying to call more clearly and > consistently. -Lewis Land > > On 7/17/2011 10:09 AM, Greg McKenzie wrote: >> I used a wireless headset mike for a short time. I found it >> cumbersome and >> limiting. In addition to losing the ability to control my own >> volume by >> moving away from the mike I don't do a lot of floor demonstration >> so it was >> really only a "hands free" device I used on stage. I like >> shifting to an >> off-mike mode while on the floor. It is an attention-getting >> technique when >> the caller steps down and speaks without amplification. >> >> I know lots of folks on this list do gigs with much more teaching and >> demonstrating than I do when calling at open public contra >> dances. The >> wireless route might be good for that kind of event. But I would >> caution >> the wireless mike users to consider the effects on dancers when >> they look up >> on stage and see the caller missing. It can be unnerving to hear >> a headless >> voice speaking over the PA system. (This is why they invented >> follow-spots >> for theater performances. The audience always knows where to >> look.) I like >> to keep the dancers in control and to never make them feel >> foolish...even >> for a moment. >> >> I suggest that head-mike callers lead the audience with a prompt >> whenever >> they step down from the stage as in: "Ladies and Gentlemen: Please >> direct >> your attention to the center of the hall," as the caller steps >> down. This >> will avoid the feeling that someone with a live mike is "stalking" >> around >> the hall floor. Keeping the audience oriented will help them to feel >> relaxed and confident. >> >> The worst offense of a wireless mike user is to walk down on the >> floor, >> without prompting, and to begin giving instructions to a single >> dancer or a >> small group that is confused. The presence of the caller-- >> speaking to them >> over the PA system--can make newcomers very uncomfortable and >> distracted, >> and undermine any assistance the caller is attempting to offer. When >> on-mike, the caller should always speak only to the entire hall. >> Directed >> comments should always be off-mike. >> >> -Greg McKenzie >> >> ************* >> >> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Colin Hume<colin(a)colinhume.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:44:39 +0100, John Sweeney wrote: >>>> I find hand-held mikes very strange. Why would you lock yourself >>>> into a fixed position, or tie one of your hands up when you can use >>>> a wireless headset? >>> I much prefer a hand-held. I find that as soon as I put on a >>> headset >>> I feel the need to cough, sniff, clear my throat, etc. Also with a >>> hand-held I can pull my head away from the microphone to call out to >>> the band "Another B" or "One more time" or "Slower", whereas with a >>> headset I have to find the switch first, speak, then switch it >>> back on >>> again. I've got quite good at transferring the mike from one >>> hand to >>> the other when I'm dancing, and most people can cope with holding my >>> elbow rather than my hand if necessary. >>> >>> Colin Hume >>> >>> Email colin(a)colinhume.com Web site http://www.colinhume.com >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 16 > ***************************************

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Caller's Fees

by Dan Pearl

In answer to questions, we give $50 to the person who provides/runs the sound. Dan

14 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Wireless Microphone

by John Sweeney

In response to various notes: There is an on-off switch and you very quickly get used to finding it and using it automatically when you need to speak to an individual. You definitely need to check for feedback. I always walk around the whole floor before the dance to make sure there is no feedback. Adjusting the height and direction of the speakers can help. If there are some really bad spots that can't be fixed then I avoid them or turn the mike off when walking through them (Yes, it is hard to remember, but if you use one all the time you get used to it). Definitely use a directional mike and make sure it is in the right position very close to your mouth - that cuts feedback. I don't just call contras. Calling a circle mixer or Sicilian Circle from the centre can be really helpful - especially if I dance the moves with my partner in the middle of the floor so that everyone can see them. I also teach contra waltz and polka and again the wireless mike is invaluable. Yes, it is possible to project your voice without a mike when you need to demo on the floor - but it is MUCH easier with one and you know EVERYONE can hear. The response from the dancers is always very positive. I am sure they are not for everyone, but I love mine :-) Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

14 years, 3 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Contra Callers