Re: [Callers] wireless mics - headsets or handhelds?

Why are you considering a wireless mic? If it is to get out and move around during a lesson - I prefer a headset because I participate in the lesson as a dancer so I need both hands free If the instructor does not participate in the lesson a hand held might be better. Many callers just do not like headsets - they take some getting used to.  Everyone knows how to use a hand held.  If you just use it for the caller on stage there might not be much benefit in having a wireless mic - except when the caller goes on to the floor to demo something - and I like to have both hands free for that too. I really enjoy having my hands free when calling - but I have my own headset that I am comfortable with.  Our group also owns a headset that I use at our local dances.  I also own a handheld but it is rarely used. Comfort and fit are also issues for 'community' headsets What works for one caller might be awkward for another. My opinion - if you just buy one wireless and expect all the callers to use it, it should be hand held I haven't shopped for mics for quite a while - so I can't make any specific recommendations. Mac McKeever ________________________________ From: Emily Addison &lt;eaddison(a)trentu.ca&gt; To: callers(a)sharedweight.net Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 12:01 PM 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: 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 (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: &lt;p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]&gt; 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 (richgoss at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:31:49 +0000 Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed Message-ID: &lt;073120072131.11306.46AFAA45000C022300002C2A22007601809C9C0109080C079D(a)comcast.net&gt; 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 (Richard Green) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:14:48 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed In-Reply-To: &lt;p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]&gt; References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>     &lt;p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]&gt; Message-ID: &lt;BAY118-DAV10ACFCAE2B122E0E522CB5B2E80(a)phx.gbl&gt; 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 (Gale Wood) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:14:27 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed References: <000001c7d3b1$3712a770$020fa8c0@maxx>     &lt;p0623090dc2d5571b2a99(a)[192.168.1.100]&gt; Message-ID: <002701c7d3e1$b21ebe10$abe48c40@robbinsd490985> Hi Peter Check places Like Daddys Junky music (is there one near you?) They stock some very good small 'amps' (5 watt)powered by small 9v batteries  ( strange but it does work) Look at the fenders, Roland Micro cubes are not cheap but sound good (and a choice of colors!) happy hunting Gale From: jn32157 at hotmail.com (John Nance) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 07:51:09 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Opinions on Sound Equipment Needed In-Reply-To: <002701c7d3e1$b21ebe10$abe48c40@robbinsd490985> Message-ID: &lt;BAY140-F38A5E014A18F8C6ECB490FF9E80(a)phx.gbl&gt; 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 (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: &lt;mailman.1.1185984002.2260.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; References: &lt;mailman.1.1185984002.2260.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;49371.216.114.172.209.1185991176.squirrel(a)earthcovenant.org&gt; 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 (Warren Pollans) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 16:23:56 -0400 Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations Message-ID: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; 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 (Mark R Dobyns Jones) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:37:38 -0400 Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; References: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;2e45c3c90710011337r29fac9c9i7494b3cc7932f268(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; 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 (Beth Parkes) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:06:38 -0400 Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; References: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; 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 (Jeffrey Petrovitch) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 18:30:14 -0400 Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; References: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;470174F6.4050404(a)verizon.net&gt; 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 (Dave Colestock) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:34:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;523554.5940.qm(a)web52601.mail.re2.yahoo.com&gt; 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 (Richard Hart) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 09:37:04 -0400 Subject: [Callers] wireless mic recommendations In-Reply-To: <38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop> References: &lt;4701575C.6020303(a)gmail.com&gt;     <38D498EA8D964BF4BB1E05B7FBFFAA3D@BethLaptop> Message-ID: &lt;47024980.8000900(a)harts.mv.com&gt; 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: &lt;mailman.1.1191340801.17312.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;74363.4139.qm(a)web38705.mail.mud.yahoo.com&gt; [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 (Will Loving) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 09:38:22 -0500 Subject: [Callers] Microphone/Headset Survey Questions Message-ID: &lt;C5653E8E.2F453%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; 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): 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: 22. Would you recommend this system to other callers: __Yes  __No  __Maybe From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:54:15 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Earset microphone recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;C613B8C7.32064%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; 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 (gregmck at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:30:15 -0700 Subject: [Callers] Earset microphone recommendations In-Reply-To: &lt;C613B8C7.32064%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; References: &lt;49EA7E52.1040700(a)gmail.com&gt;     &lt;C613B8C7.32064%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;7.0.0.16.0.20090422091957.01dc13f8(a)earthlink.net&gt; Will wrote: 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 (Martha Wild) Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:07:14 -0700 Subject: [Callers] Headset mikes In-Reply-To: &lt;mailman.3.1240502427.35777.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; References: &lt;mailman.3.1240502427.35777.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;472256C1-AF1A-4D2B-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)sbcglobal.net&gt; 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 (Laur) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Callers] Headset mikes In-Reply-To: &lt;472256C1-AF1A-4D2B-AAB8-869874A2D54D(a)sbcglobal.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;248537.13560.qm(a)web52906.mail.re2.yahoo.com&gt; 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 (Will Loving) Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 21:42:16 -0400 Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel" Message-ID: &lt;C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; 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?) 2. Setting EQ (balancing the sound for the room by getting rid of the 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 (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: &lt;C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; References: &lt;C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)earthlink.net&gt; 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 (joe micheals) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 19:50:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel" In-Reply-To: &lt;7.0.0.16.0.20090507185818.01d6b480(a)earthlink.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;758653.29737.qm(a)web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com&gt; 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 (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: &lt;C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; References: &lt;C627B4B8.3247E%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;2e45c3c90905072100o8b95a42n6a974a811f56af4c(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; 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 (Will Loving) Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 00:25:29 -0400 Subject: [Callers] How to "Ring out a (microphone) channel" In-Reply-To: &lt;758653.29737.qm(a)web50702.mail.re2.yahoo.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;C6292C79.3250B%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; 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: Joe Micheals Seattle From: jeremykorr at hotmail.com (J L Korr) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:25:24 -0500 Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder Message-ID: &lt;SNT101-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)phx.gbl&gt; 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&a… From: David.Millstone at VALLEY.NET (David Millstone) Date: 16 Nov 2009 14:22:24 -0500 Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder Message-ID: &lt;124966573(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET&gt; An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20091116/f2d19fb7/attachment.txt> From: will at dedicationtechnologies.com (Will Loving) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:23:20 -0500 Subject: [Callers] Digital audio recorder In-Reply-To: &lt;SNT101-W226E591B736F6E80D488E8C7A50(a)phx.gbl&gt; Message-ID: &lt;C7281C08.35F2F%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com&gt; 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 (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 (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: &lt;643A5417-2D04-491B-9463-C3DE0EFE84F1(a)mindspring.com&gt; I'm also interested in a similar card stand! From: David.Millstone at valley.net (David Millstone) Date: 06 Mar 2010 23:44:23 -0500 Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers Message-ID: &lt;128884898(a)retriever.VALLEY.NET&gt; An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/20100306/8bd2b3a7/attachment.asc> From: richgoss at comcast.net (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: &lt;C7B88510.88BD%richgoss(a)comcast.net&gt; 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 (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: &lt;1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; 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 (Martha Edwards) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:33:11 -0600 Subject: [Callers] card stand for callers In-Reply-To: &lt;1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; References: <4B92E6B4.7464.987191@localhost>     &lt;1bf75db1003070255s5f486764labbe926da556315b(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; Message-ID: &lt;7d8d864a1003070733k2e811273xd2af80b102af7412(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; 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 (J L Korr) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 19:29:46 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal In-Reply-To: &lt;mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; References: &lt;mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt; Message-ID: &lt;SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl&gt; 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 (Chris Weiler (home)) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 06:55:45 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal In-Reply-To: &lt;SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl&gt; References: &lt;mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt;     &lt;SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl&gt; Message-ID: &lt;4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org&gt; 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 (Beth Parkes) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 19:28:45 -0400 Subject: [Callers] Wireless mikes -- many soon illegal In-Reply-To: &lt;4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org&gt; References: &lt;mailman.3.1274803201.99857.callers(a)sharedweight.net&gt;    &lt;SNT101-W40DB28B8262348D631AF54C7E80(a)phx.gbl&gt;     &lt;4BFCFE31.8000401(a)weirdtable.org&gt; Message-ID: &lt;001201cafd2b$3015da40$90418ec0$(a)hands4.com&gt; 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