Quantcast
Direct from headphone out of guitar amp into PA, or stomp boxes + DI box? - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Direct from headphone out of guitar amp into PA, or stomp boxes + DI box?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
Direct from headphone out of guitar amp into PA, or stomp boxes + DI box?

I'm trying to make my whole band have a silent stage as I'd like us to use in ear monitors and have everything DI'd into the PA. However the other guitarist in the band prefers to use stomp boxes plugged into his Roland Cube Street EX amp, rather than using an amp modeller floor unit or VST. What would be the best way to keep him happy but also plug him direct into the PA?

Apparently the line outs on Roland amps sound crap plugged direct into a PA, though I'd like to try it. Another option could be to plug directly from the headphone out of the Roland amp into the PA, but is it ok to do that? (This would hopefully have speaker simulation on it so he gets a good guitar tone through the PA). The final option could be for him to not use the Roland amp at gigs and just run his stomp boxes through a DI box or some other sort of speaker simulation into the PA. Would that work or does there need to be more to get a better guitar sound direct to a PA?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Who told you the line outs sound bad, and have you heard them? If this is just from reading online, ignore it.

Try the line outs since that's what they're designed for and let the guitarist use his amp. Don't make him (or you) buy extra gear when he already has an amp with direct stereo outs. Also, pedals into a DI sounds horrible for most genres of music.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
He might just prefer his amp as a monitor but if you want to get a better signal to the PA then I think a cab sim box is way better than just a basic DI.

The ADA GCS units work quite well, has XLR out, and a bunch of controls like a "mic placement" knob and a few switches that offer some additional tone shaping.

I use the GCS5 and it makes my pedals sound pretty decent straight into a mixer, without it sounds pretty crap.

I would say try one of the GCS boxes with the Roland output and if that doesn't sound good then have him run right from his stomp boxes into the GCS and then to the PA.

The GCS also has a 1/4" thru out so he can still run to his Roland to use as a stage monitor if that is needed as well as the XLR to the PA.

The GCS does need to be used with at least one stompbox rather than just a guitar plugged straight in though. The impedance of the GCS loads pedals well and is a huge improvement over a standard DI box but you can't run a guitar straight into it as it loads guitar pickups too heavily and that way it sounds muffled and dull.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #4
Quote:
Originally Posted by nedorama ➡️
Who told you the line outs sound bad, and have you heard them? If this is just from reading online, ignore it.
Someone in a post in another forum told me:

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/in...ation.2282454/

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedorama ➡️
Try the line outs since that's what they're designed for and let the guitarist use his amp. Don't make him (or you) buy extra gear when he already has an amp with direct stereo outs.
Do the line oust on the Roland Cube Street EX have speaker emulation for the guitar sounds? I'm guessing they do, because they will presumably be routed after the preamp which already has speaker simulation on it, but I can't be sure.





Quote:
Originally Posted by nedorama ➡️
Also, pedals into a DI sounds horrible for most genres of music.
Does it? I did some research and this guy on Youtube says that it sounds great if you simply put a DI box at the end of the pedal chain before plugging into the PA:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7pYctBBgZY

I think what I am looking to achieve is to have an 'ampless guitar rig' so we can have a silent stage but still have great guitar tone. A good solution for someone who doesn't like modelling amps might be to use a pedal valve preamp or a DI box and plug direct into the PA, as is discussed in the following tuorials:

https://blog.andertons.co.uk/learn/w...MSIAHlRg%3D%3D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex4gug2r2ec

There are so many options that it takes a lot of research and knowledge! In my opinion, having guitar amps onstage is old hat and has had its day. You get a much better, clearer and more consistent sound by having a silent stage, going direct to the PA and using IEMs, and you can actually hear the vocals too, unlike with a lot of bands!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Lives for gear
You just need to try some stuff for yourselves.

What is acceptable sound for one person might be totally unacceptable for somebody else because of any number of other factors from expectations to the particular gear used and how it interacts.

Lately I'm using a bunch of pedals (fuzzes and overdrive) into a Joyo American Sound pedal then into the ADA cabsim pedal.

The Joyo also has built in cab sim (that can't be turned off) but using it along with the ADA GCS5 cabsim pedal is far better sounding than just either pedal on their own.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #6
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
He might just prefer his amp as a monitor but if you want to get a better signal to the PA then I think a cab sim box is way better than just a basic DI.

The ADA GCS units work quite well, has XLR out, and a bunch of controls like a "mic placement" knob and a few switches that offer some additional tone shaping.

I use the GCS5 and it makes my pedals sound pretty decent straight into a mixer, without it sounds pretty crap.

I would say try one of the GCS boxes with the Roland output and if that doesn't sound good then have him run right from his stomp boxes into the GCS and then to the PA.

The GCS also has a 1/4" thru out so he can still run to his Roland to use as a stage monitor if that is needed as well as the XLR to the PA.

The GCS does need to be used with at least one stompbox rather than just a guitar plugged straight in though. The impedance of the GCS loads pedals well and is a huge improvement over a standard DI box but you can't run a guitar straight into it as it loads guitar pickups too heavily and that way it sounds muffled and dull.
Hey, thanks for the suggestion. I just Googled the ADA GCS boxes and they look really good as well as straightforward to use. I was wondering, if he runs his stomp boxes into the GCS, will he need a pedal preamp for his tone, or can he just get distortion from a pedal or 2 and clean by switching the distortion pedals off? (As presumably the ADA GCS boxes sound fine for clean tones?)

He uses delay and chorus pedals too, so would the signal chain be guitar > distortion pedal > chorus pedal > delay pedal > ADA GCS > PA?

This would be much easier if he was willing to embrace a multi-effects/amp modelling unit, but I have to say everyone has their own preferences with their guitar setup I suppose.

Ideally I'd like everyone in the band to be using in ear monitors rather than wedges onstage, but it could well be an option to use the Roland amp as a wedge monitor as it's tilted.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
If all the pedals are true bypass the guitar will be loaded by the GCS which isn't a good thing because it's only 100,000 ohms.

It's common to use a preamp type pedal at the end of the pedal chain just before the GCS (or whatever cab sim pedal you use) but if you have a pedal that is an always on buffer then you might get by without a preamp pedal.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #8
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
If all the pedals are true bypass the guitar will be loaded by the GCS which isn't a good thing because it's only 100,000 ohms.
So the GCS is designed to be used with existing pedals, not on it's own? Ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
It's common to use a preamp type pedal at the end of the pedal chain just before the GCS (or whatever cab sim pedal you use) but if you have a pedal that is an always on buffer then you might get by without a preamp pedal.
Wouldn't you put the preamp pedal before any modulation effects, then finally the GCS? Usually with guitar amps, you put the distortion pedal(s) before the preamp, so I'm thinking:

Guitar > distortion pedal(s) > preamp pedal > modulation effects (chorus, delay) > GSC

Normally you put modulation effects in the effects send and return of a guitar amp, but going the DI method as described above the modulation effects would go after to preamp pedal but before the amp sim pedal.

My personal opinion is that it would be much less hassle, much more cost effective, and much more compact for him to simply use a high quality modelling/multi-effects floor unit or even a VST controlled by a floor controller. With individual stompboxes you need to power each pedal individually also, which adds to the hassle. I don't know why some guitarists are hell bent on clinging to old technology when it doesn't necessarily sound any better and just adds to the inconvenience and cost.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #9
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
If all the pedals are true bypass the guitar will be loaded by the GCS which isn't a good thing because it's only 100,000 ohms.

It's common to use a preamp type pedal at the end of the pedal chain just before the GCS (or whatever cab sim pedal you use) but if you have a pedal that is an always on buffer then you might get by without a preamp pedal.
Another thing I'm thinking - some of these pedal preamps already have speaker simulation in them and are therefore designed to be plugged direct in a PA, for example the Hughes & Kettner Tubeman 11:

https://www.andertons.co.uk/guitar-d...ner-tubeman-ii

So this begs the question as to whether the GCS would be necessary in the chain also? I suppose it would help. As you say, we just need to try a few things out.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
I don't know why some guitarists are hell bent on clinging to old technology when it doesn't necessarily sound any better and just adds to the inconvenience and cost.
Because people play for years and often spend a lot of effort finding gear that does what they want and gets the sounds they are after so no surprise they are often hesitant to drop it all for something new that somebody thinks is convenient.

A lot of this is personal taste, how gear interacts with other gear and what gets sounds that are acceptable to the player.

Also in ears are great in many ways but are not perfection and aren't for everyone.

If I go to a small to medium sized venue to see a band I like to hear some stage volume. If you are right up close to the stage and the band is using in ears and no amps it can sound kind of weird. My personal opinion is that drum shields suck too but again everyone has a different idea about stuff.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #11
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️

Normally you put modulation effects in the effects send and return of a guitar amp, but going the DI method as described above the modulation effects would go after to preamp pedal but before the amp sim pedal.

My personal opinion is that it would be much less hassle, much more cost effective, and much more compact for him to simply use a high quality modelling/multi-effects floor unit or even a VST controlled by a floor controller. With individual stompboxes you need to power each pedal individually also, which adds to the hassle. I don't know why some guitarists are hell bent on clinging to old technology when it doesn't necessarily sound any better and just adds to the inconvenience and cost.
Sez who?
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #12
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
Because people play for years and often spend a lot of effort finding gear that does what they want and gets the sounds they are after so no surprise they are often hesitant to drop it all for something new that somebody thinks is convenient.

A lot of this is personal taste, how gear interacts with other gear and what gets sounds that are acceptable to the player.

Also in ears are great in many ways but are not perfection and aren't for everyone.

If I go to a small to medium sized venue to see a band I like to hear some stage volume. If you are right up close to the stage and the band is using in ears and no amps it can sound kind of weird. My personal opinion is that drum shields suck too but again everyone has a different idea about stuff.
I always thought that Bun E. Carlos had a GREAT drum sound, shield or not.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #13
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Someone in a post in another forum told me:

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/in...ation.2282454/



Do the line oust on the Roland Cube Street EX have speaker emulation for the guitar sounds? I'm guessing they do, because they will presumably be routed after the preamp which already has speaker simulation on it, but I can't be sure.







Does it? I did some research and this guy on Youtube says that it sounds great if you simply put a DI box at the end of the pedal chain before plugging into the PA:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7pYctBBgZY

I think what I am looking to achieve is to have an 'ampless guitar rig' so we can have a silent stage but still have great guitar tone. A good solution for someone who doesn't like modelling amps might be to use a pedal valve preamp or a DI box and plug direct into the PA, as is discussed in the following tuorials:

https://blog.andertons.co.uk/learn/w...MSIAHlRg%3D%3D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex4gug2r2ec

There are so many options that it takes a lot of research and knowledge! In my opinion, having guitar amps onstage is old hat and has had its day. You get a much better, clearer and more consistent sound by having a silent stage, going direct to the PA and using IEMs, and you can actually hear the vocals too, unlike with a lot of bands!

The idea of a "silent stage" is really dumb. AVOID, AVOID, AVOID. If you want a "silent stage", why bother "playing" in the first place?

I don't know about you, but I see NO REASON to go to a "show" with a silent stage. Sounds boring as hell. Just stay home and jerk off...
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
The idea of a "silent stage" is really dumb. AVOID, AVOID, AVOID. If you want a "silent stage", why bother "playing" in the first place?

I don't know about you, but I see NO REASON to go to a "show" with a silent stage. Sounds boring as hell. Just stay home and jerk off...
Sigh. People like you just don't get it. The whole point of a silent stage is to get a better out front mix, and for the musicians onstage to wear in ear monitors to hear themselves clearly. When we say 'silent', we simply mean no backline or loud drum kits bombarding the stage with volume, muddying up the out front mix and making the vocals inaudible. All that is old hat, it's time to move with the times.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Sigh. People like you just don't get it. The whole point of a silent stage is to get a better out front mix, and for the musicians onstage to wear in ear monitors to hear themselves clearly. When we say 'silent', we simply mean no backline or loud drum kits bombarding the stage with volume, muddying up the out front mix and making the vocals inaudible. All that is old hat, it's time to move with the times.
I disagree. In small to medium clubs the stage sound is a lot of what the audience in the front hears.

For example here in Solana Beach CA there is a club that holds about 600 people and the sound sytem (which is flown and pretty good size) shoots over the heads of about the first several rows of people standing.

I usually choose to get right up front so I can hear the stage volume and most of the mix besides vocals usually sounds better there. It actually has some impact and isn't compressed to death like so many sound mixers choose to do these days.

When a band does a drum shield or a very low stage volume being up front sounds like crap.

In clubs that are smaller than that the stage volume is even more important as the PA is usually crap and they often don't even bother to mic many things besides vocals.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #16
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Sigh. People like you just don't get it. The whole point of a silent stage is to get a better out front mix, and for the musicians onstage to wear in ear monitors to hear themselves clearly. When we say 'silent', we simply mean no backline or loud drum kits bombarding the stage with volume, muddying up the out front mix and making the vocals inaudible. All that is old hat, it's time to move with the times.
A major reason why shows are no longer as interesting as they used to be.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #17
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Sigh. People like you just don't get it. The whole point of a silent stage is to get a better out front mix, and for the musicians onstage to wear in ear monitors to hear themselves clearly. When we say 'silent', we simply mean no backline or loud drum kits bombarding the stage with volume, muddying up the out front mix and making the vocals inaudible. All that is old hat, it's time to move with the times.
No.

The "point" of a "silent stage" is simply that youngsters have largely become too damn lazy to deal with hauling and setting up a full rig.

The music usually suffers for it, but those in the audience who are not very critical might not notice.

AFAIK, the stage from many, in not most bigger bands who use sims is not, in fact, really 'silent". Reduced volume, maybe.. Silent, i seriously doubt it.

Just try getting feedback sustain on a silent stage. Go ahead, show us.....
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLast ➡️
I disagree. In small to medium clubs the stage sound is a lot of what the audience in the front hears.

For example here in Solana Beach CA there is a club that holds about 600 people and the sound sytem (which is flown and pretty good size) shoots over the heads of about the first several rows of people standing.

I usually choose to get right up front so I can hear the stage volume and most of the mix besides vocals usually sounds better there. It actually has some impact and isn't compressed to death like so many sound mixers choose to do these days.

When a band does a drum shield or a very low stage volume being up front sounds like crap.

In clubs that are smaller than that the stage volume is even more important as the PA is usually crap and they often don't even bother to mic many things besides vocals.
This idea the sound 'shoots over the heads' of the people in the front rows of a gig is totally laughable nonsense. Hearing stage volume doesn't guarantee a better sound either. Unless you're standing back and in the centre of the room, what you hear will depend on which side of the stage you're standing, for example you'll hear more guitar if you're stood in front of the guitar amp, more bass if you're stood in front of the bass amp, etc. You get a much more consistent, better balanced sound when you listen to the sound coming out of the FOH PA speakers.

Any professional sound guy worth their salt will tell you that onstage wedge monitors interfere with and muddy up the outfront mix, and it's easier to get a great outfront mix if you don't have wedge monitors and if you don't have backline either.

I remember being at a Deep Purple gig in 2002 in a theatre and being stood right at the front. I could hear the sound coming from the onstage monitors as well as the backline, and it sounded terrible compared with the FOH mix. For a start, the vocals through the onstage monitors were bone dry, with no effects at all which sounded plain and one dimensional.

I think the only reason a lot of musicians cling onto using backline and wedge monitors is because that was how it was done in their day, before modern technology such as amp modellers and IEMs became so good and more affordable, but not because backling and wedge monitors are 'better'.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #19
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
A major reason why shows are no longer as interesting as they used to be.
I think shows being 'less interesting than they used to be' is more to do with the lack of innovation or showmanship amongst newer bands/musical artists today and nothing to do with them using IEMs and no backline.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
The "point" of a "silent stage" is simply that youngsters have largely become too damn lazy to deal with hauling and setting up a full rig.
Nope. The point of a 'silent stage' is to save bands from having to lug around a ton of irrelevant equipment, which can be condensed into a smaller size/space, as well as to get a better and more consistent sound through the FOH speakers and through the IEMs onstage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
The music usually suffers for it, but those in the audience who are not very critical might not notice.
I don't think the music itself suffers for it. Good music is good music, and bad music is bad music, regardless of whether it's played through a 'slient stage' or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
AFAIK, the stage from many, in not most bigger bands who use sims is not, in fact, really 'silent". Reduced volume, maybe.. Silent, i seriously doubt it.
There's some truth to this, especially if a band is using an acoustic drum kit, which can't ever be played 'silent'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein ➡️
Just try getting feedback sustain on a silent stage. Go ahead, show us.....
You can get feedback on your guitar amp at lower volumes by putting the pickups against the speakers.

You can also do that with pedals such as the DigiTech FreqOut, which allows you to choose specifically which frequencies you want to feedback, unlike being onstage with a loud amp, which is much more hit and miss depending upon where you're standing on the stage.

You can get infinite sustain with things like the Sustainiac, Ferandez Sustainer, or Ebow too.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #21
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
This idea the sound 'shoots over the heads' of the people in the front rows of a gig is totally laughable nonsense. Hearing stage volume doesn't guarantee a better sound either. Unless you're standing back and in the centre of the room, what you hear will depend on which side of the stage you're standing, for example you'll hear more guitar if you're stood in front of the guitar amp, more bass if you're stood in front of the bass amp, etc. You get a much more consistent, better balanced sound when you listen to the sound coming out of the FOH PA speakers.

Any professional sound guy worth their salt will tell you that onstage wedge monitors interfere with and muddy up the outfront mix, and it's easier to get a great outfront mix if you don't have wedge monitors and if you don't have backline either.

I remember being at a Deep Purple gig in 2002 in a theatre and being stood right at the front. I could hear the sound coming from the onstage monitors as well as the backline, and it sounded terrible compared with the FOH mix. For a start, the vocals through the onstage monitors were bone dry, with no effects at all which sounded plain and one dimensional.
I think your memory is tainted, or youre hearing things that dont actually happen. Because unless you were in that special place onstage, inbetween the back of the mains and the backs of the monitors. Youre mostlikely going to hear the FOH, quite clearly. Which would also make it highly unlikey you could pickout and locate specific sources, also its unlikely that you would hear a "bone dry" vocal because at that point it'd be surround sound, so you would absolutey hear any kind of FX. When I use the term "unlikely", im really meaning to say it just doesnt happen like that in real life. Im Pretty sure.
Old 2 days ago | Show parent
  #22
Lives for gear
 
grannis's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Sigh. People like you just don't get it. The whole point of a silent stage is to get a better out front mix, and for the musicians onstage to wear in ear monitors to hear themselves clearly. When we say 'silent', we simply mean no backline or loud drum kits bombarding the stage with volume, muddying up the out front mix and making the vocals inaudible. All that is old hat, it's time to move with the times.
You think the audience wants a “mix”?? Like to be able to hear a balance of all the instruments through high powered, high quality speakers. No no no, the want a beamy guitar amp to either melt their ears on axis or be muddy off axis. The very idea that they want to hear anything else is dangerous modern blasphemy that should be relegated to the Live Sound forum. Tut.
Next you’ll be trying to tell us we’ll damage our ears if the stage volume is too high. Partypooper.
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #23
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Any Amateur, hack sound guywith zero real experience will tell you that onstage wedge monitors interfere with and muddy up the outfront mix, and it's easier to get a great outfront mix if you don't have wedge monitors and if you don't have backline either.

Assuming that neither your FOH nor you monitor engineer is actually competent, I guess.

Yeah, it's "easier" to get a really sterile, lifeless (but "perfect" ha-ha) out front mix that way. Why anybody would want that is beyond me.

Give me a real band mix with people actually interacting. MUCH better music.

REMEMBER THIS: The point of the sound is to serve the music. The music is NOT there to serve the sound.
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #24
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
You can get feedback on your guitar amp at lower volumes by putting the pickups against the speakers.
No, you can't. Not and maintain control of the feedback.

A somewhat extreme example - Ted Nugent, when he was doing his feedback thing with the hollow body guitar, used to carefully map out and spike the places onstage which favored particular notes.

You can't just jam your guitar against the amp and expect to maintain any real control.

You'll also be likely to get "pickup feedback",. which is horrible squeals, a lot more than string feedback if you do that.

I'm guessing that you don't actually use feedback much, if at all...?
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #25
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
Nope. The point of a 'silent stage' is to save bands from having to lug around a ton of irrelevant equipment, which can be condensed into a smaller size/space, as well as to get a better and more consistent sound through the FOH speakers and through the IEMs onstage.



I don't think the music itself suffers for it. Good music is good music, and bad music is bad music, regardless of whether it's played through a 'slient stage' or not.



There's some truth to this, especially if a band is using an acoustic drum kit, which can't ever be played 'silent'.



You can get feedback on your guitar amp at lower volumes by putting the pickups against the speakers.

You can also do that with pedals such as the DigiTech FreqOut, which allows you to choose specifically which frequencies you want to feedback, unlike being onstage with a loud amp, which is much more hit and miss depending upon where you're standing on the stage.

You can get infinite sustain with things like the Sustainiac, Ferandez Sustainer, or Ebow too.
None of those gimmicks sound the same. They're useful, but they don't do anything remotely close to the real thing.

So what's your experience, Mr expert? Me, I've been playing since the early '60s, been doing sound since PA systems were Bogen heads with home made cabs. I've worked gigs from the tiniest clubs to Day On The Green.

And you?
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #26
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 
58 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nksoloproject ➡️
I think shows being 'less interesting than they used to be' is more to do with the lack of innovation or showmanship amongst newer bands/musical artists today and nothing to do with them using IEMs and no backline.
I think it's a combination of both. I also believe that the reduction in real back line has a strong negative effect on the musicianship of the players.

Can you imagine a band like AC/DC on a silent stage? Do you honestly believe that they would have ever had a chance of succeeding under such limiting circumstances? Motorhead? Black Sabbath?

Hell, when I saw Chuck Berry at Carnegie hall he was loud as F***, two Fender Twins with JBLs.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 592 views: 28848
Avatar for Lethem
Lethem 24th June 2021
replies: 3306 views: 61105
Avatar for Synth Guru
Synth Guru 3 weeks ago
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump