Help.. tips for playing an acoustic live.

Si_

Unfortunately tomorrows practice was cancelled due to a death in the family, but I might book the room myself for an hour at the weekend and spend some time on my own finding the best solution. I can borrow a DI box from a mate just for testing purposes. 

PinstripePhil

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiley_face_curve

Hey guys, I'm not seeking to stand my ground regarding a smile curve technique on a pa graphic eq. However, when a new band starts to rehearse we all know what it's like.
IMH view, it can actually be helpful to try this technique à la the well known Isle of Wight concert mix approach (as set out in the link).
The real solution as I suggested before is everyone turns down.
I am new to this website and forum. I now know how people treat you if they have a small disagreement with something you write.
Not for me.

maltingsaudio

@PinstripePhil  to begin with don't get upset about how your treated here if we didn't like you we'd ignore you!

The linked to article if you read it begins with " This page has some issues" which should give you some clues. You mention the well known Isle of Wight technique, I regret I've never heard of it but the article does go on to say this was applied to the recordings, with no mention of it being used in the live performance, and then only to get a hang on how the recordings should sound I'm guessing it is a personal thing of the engineer quoted.

The article then goes onto mention it being used as a preset in many sound playback systems car audio disco and on bass guitars, but also states that "Though the graphic equalizer was intended to tailor a system's response to match existing venue and performance conditions, the smiley face curve is often applied before the user has heard the system's frequency response."   and there is the problem with using the curve before you've listened to the system flat in a room. 

Now getting back to the original problem of the OP, he has feedback from his guitar, at this point we don't know at what frequency his feedback is occurring, if it is bass feedback then putting a smiley in to begin with will only cause even more problems like wise if it is a high frequency feedback. If the feedback  is in the mid frequency it may solve the problem but as we don't know where the bottom of the smiley will be because that frequency  hasn't been stated we can't say.  We also don't know over what frequencies the particular graphic is working,so  if lets say you are using a system with no subs and you start your smiley at the extreme left hand fader of a 32 band graphic the first 3 sliders will make no signficant change to the sound because the system can't reproduce them and like wise the last three faders . Can you see what I'm trying to get at here? 

This isn't meant in any other way than education and thought provocation.     

ICBM

The smiley-face EQ is *totally* wrong, sorry. You're boosting the exact frequencies which are most likely to cause feedback - the boomy howl the OP is getting from his acoustic guitar and shriek from vocal mics.

The first important rule of thumb with a GEQ for room compensation and feedback control is never to boost any frequency. It's not always 100% true but if you start with that you won't cause more problems than you have already.

The second rule is never to assume which frequencies are to be cut, or by how much.

You can only find this out by pushing the system very close to feedback and pulling down the culprit frequency slightly until it stops. (Do this after setting the basic 'sound' for each channel with the channel EQ.) You then repeat this process until you can't push the level any higher without feedback occuring chaotically at random frequencies. The system is now EQ'd for the room.

At that point, I can guarantee the EQ will not look like a smiley face, or probably any even pattern at all.

The 'smiley face' will help a fairly poor-quality PA sound better for recorded music playback, but that's about all I can think it would be useful for without any reference to the room or what's going through it.

Evilmags

If you have a digital EQ you can set it up so it will only cut out a very small band of frequencies. On the screen it will look like a sharp inverted peak. You need two of these  peaks. Get the guitar feedbacking then sweep the whole spectrum with the first peak. At the frequency of the feedback it will reduce the feedback dramatically. Then place the other peak where the first harmonic of the feedback is. I´ve experimented a fair bit with my Yamaha digital recording devise and monitors, and by doing this can get a lot more volume.

Si_

Just picked up a Fishman Aura pedal as part of a trade deal so hoping that will help me out live.. Reading online reviews it seem sot be perfect for live use. 

Lewy

The Aura is great but not designed to be used with soundboard transducers/body sensors which if I'm not mistaken are part of the Taylor ES aren't they? You may need to go easy on the Aura's image blend control......... just found this from Fishman: ""Unfortuantely, the Aura is only going to work well with single source pickups. The best results are achieved with single source under saddle piezo systems, like our Matrix. You can also get solid results with soundhole magnetic pickups like our Rare Earth. Systems which blend multiple sources, like the Taylor ES, do not provide usable results with Aura. It is my understanding that the ES systems currently let you disengage the soundboard sensors, and go with just the mag pickup. This may give more usable results with the Aura. I don't know for sure, so I wouldn't be able to say one way or the other. You can still use the active DI and EQ functions, but you would want to turn the blend to 100% pickup, if you were using the blended ES output."

Si_

Bummer.

Although, the Taylor GS-Mini has the cut down ES pickup without the soundboard, it's just a piezo bridge system so might work. I'll give it a go tomorrow and if not I'll just sell it on. 

koneguitarist

ICBM said:

To be perfectly honest I detest all onboard electrics in acoustic instruments! They are the bane of my life as a repair tech.

Far better to have a passive transducer onboard and do all the rest with an external preamp and DI (separate or combined) in my opinion. It makes troubleshooting and upgrading far easier, is a lot more reliable in the first place, and if something does go wrong it's much easier to bypass it all and get by, even if the sound isn't as good.

If God had meant acoustic guitars to be plugged in he wouldn't have invented the Telecaster .

Good grief that's twice this year I have agreed with you !

koneguitarist

mellowsun said:

One of the good things about the Trace Elliot TAP-1 is that it has a notch filter, very useful for getting rid of feedback. I'm sure other decent acoustic guitar DI boxes have this too.

Going straight into the PA is probably asking for trouble, and the Taylor expression system seems to be known for being temperamental.

I hate the trace amps, worst acoustic sound I have ever heard, turns even the best Martin into an ovation !

richardhomer

Si_;334185" said:

Although, the Taylor GS-Mini has the cut down ES pickup without the soundboard, it's just a piezo bridge system so might work. I'll give it a go tomorrow and if not I'll just sell it on. 

Correct. It is the EST system (as opposed to 'ES' system).

The EST simply an under-saddle piezo with shoulder mounted ES style controls. Until recently, it was the only system available on Mexican made Taylors.