I still don't buy the Fletcher Munson thing...

Discussion in 'Digital & Modeling Gear' started by Tito83, Jan 12, 2018.


  1. Tito83

    Tito83 Member

    Messages:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    The number of people too lazy to read past the title is a bit disturbing.
     
    tripp2k and FuzzFacetious like this.
  2. stujomo

    stujomo Member

    Messages:
    74
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2016
    How are your monitors placed. Are they the typical wedge, positioned on the floor in front of you? Could be the other instruments are too loud in your monitor mix or the monitor mix is has not been EQ'ed correctly.
    Could you get the monitor off the floor if it is on the floor or get the monitor mix EQ'ed so you can better hear yourself.
     
  3. The Lo Lands

    The Lo Lands Member

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Location:
    The Low Lands
    I really don't get your point of listening with monitors or using modelers and the Fletcher Munson effect? Maybe you are talking about modern production vs 'vintage' production where everything was recorded/mixed and mastered analog and nowadays its all digital? Also the fact that many musicians nowadays record and mix at home instead of going to pro studio's may affect the end results.

    Question 1: no, mediocre recording gear and knowledge will give you mediocre results
    Question 2: no, reason imo, analog vs digital recording. More dynamics in the early days and later on brick wall limiting which makes music louder but not more dynamics. Modern productions using layers instead of recording a live band in a real (studio) room.

    Maybe i'm completely off but i still don't get what Fletcher Munson effect has to do with all this?
     
  4. Tito83

    Tito83 Member

    Messages:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    I can try that for sure, but as I've pointed out, I've been through a bunch of different monitors and sound engineers, I don't think it will uncover anything - buy still, you never know.

    Placed everywhere, even over my head a few times. (Is that as weird as I think it is?)

    Again, I've been through a number of venues and experience with different engineers and sound systems have been consistent when it comes to monitoring. Some a bit better, but still very much alike and unpleasant.

    This:
    That's pretty much it.

    I used some classic tones as example, but I could just as easily use any good recorded tone done last years and in any style that do not rely on "sounding vintage". I don't think "vintage" has anything to do with it. Or maybe I'm not getting in what way you're using the term "vintage".
     
  5. dlc86

    dlc86 Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Interesting discussion but I didn't see anyone mention another key factor which adds up to the Fletcher-Munson thing: feedback.
    And I'm not talking about the situation where the guitar whistles and screams by itself, that's just the extreme case (sort of auto-oscillation). There's always some amount of signal feeding back energy to guitar strings and pickups (unless you play on headphones) and this actually increases the signal coming out of the guitar jack the more you turn up volume.
    The effect is basically the same of increasing gain and, as we know, gain accentuates harmonic content and actually increases bass and trebles. That's also why we tend to use way more gain when playing at low volumes, we just compensate for the lack of feedback.

    Ps: when I tweak my presets at home, besides making them more mid-heavy to prevent FM, I usually place a studio monitor on my desk in front of my guitar, just 30-40 cm away. This easily creates some feedback even at low volumes.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018 at 6:32 AM
    Tito83 likes this.
  6. Makai conjecture

    Makai conjecture Member

    Messages:
    35
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2018
    True. And the number of people that think they can post "factual" comments with an insane amount of confidence just because they read about "Fletcher Munson" once, is disturbing too.

    If i have read your first post correctly (and excuse me if i didn't), you should forget about Fletcher Munson for now and eliminate all other possible reasons for your problems.
    You used a mixed and produced record as an example for something that sounds good everywhere.
    A: That is true (to an extend) but if you turn up a boombox to gig volume you will suddenly find that the record is "overly bassy", noisy, screechy, etc. because the speakers crap out. While your monitors are "solid state" and are supposed to sound the same at all volumes, they don't. To add to that you have different venues. Take the boombox, place it on a carpet and listen, then place it on a tiled floor and listen again.
    B: The records are already produced with a lot of work, experience and care. Unlike your guitar sound, which isn't properly produced... even if you apply some high or low cut somewhere in your signal chain.

    Without knowing your exact gear, venue, sounds, volume, etc. etc. people are just guessing and spreading their half knowledge about Fletcher Munson.

    What i think after reading your comments is that you just need proper gear and most important of all: experience. I often roughly know what i'm gonna do to my EQs by just looking at the venue properties.... but that isn't something i learned by reading a forum, i learned that by setting up my gear a lot of times.
    So....
    Forget about "FM" (for now) and go back to understanding all the basics of sound. Why is your favorite record produced the way it is. What kind of reflections are happening in the room and what do they do. What are phase issues. What is frequency cancellation, crossovers, feedback, frequencies that "fight", Etc. etc.
    Understand the properties of the venue, understand the EQ bands and what they do by just messing around with the EQ and listening. Get someone to play your gear or record a dry track of yourself and feed it into your chain so you can focus solely on listening and be at different spots in the venue.
    Get to know your gear at gig volume, not only from a players perspective.
    Read articles and try a forum that is specifically geared towards live sound engineering.
    Let your band all chip in and hire a professional live sound engineer for one evening that can give you tips and insight, which will give you more insight and has 10 times more worth than all the comments here combined.

    Hope that makes sense and again, sorry if i misinterpreted your comments.
     
  7. Sascha Franck

    Sascha Franck Member

    Messages:
    3,581
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    For whatever it might be worth, while I believe in FM (and whatever other acoustic effects), when setting up my stuff, I just don't give a d**n. I simply adjust my sound until it sounds good. That's what all these knobs and sliders are made for.
     
  8. -Empire

    -Empire Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,202
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2016
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Could you post some clips of your tone? Might be helpful to get some feedback from other users on the issue because we all have different FRFRs, monitors, and headphones. A lot of times I’ll listen to a tone posted on here and think “that would not translate well live,” just based on my own experience with this issue.
     
  9. Tito83

    Tito83 Member

    Messages:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    The part I feel I'm not making myself clear is that most of the time FOH is fine. Never got any complaints really in hundreds of gigs with different musicians, venues and sound engineers. Not saying it was always perfect and could not be improved, but always sound good enough for the FOH. The monitoring part is where things get weird, and in my experience monitoring through FRFR's has always been a problem. At every gig it's possible I check my sound using the looper while the band plays to see how it goes and it's very rare I feel the need to make any adjustment, and it's usually reverb related more so than EQ. But that's FOH, again, when it comes to monitoring my tone seems to vanish and seems really thin, just weird.

    Yep, my approach is pretty much this to be honest. But no matter what I do my sound always sucked through FRFR monitors.



    This is the latest one I made, feel free to poke around my channel, there's a few more clips covering different stuff.
     
  10. Stokely

    Stokely Member

    Messages:
    470
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    Haven't read the rest of the thread, but how things sound through FOH is why you have a soundperson to mix...plus when I've mixed guitars (typically not live, but it's similar) I do end up cutting lows most of the time simply to make them sit in the mix with the other instruments. The typical story in a studio is having a guitarist (or drummer, or singer etc) ask to solo themselves, then they complain that it's "thin" or whatever. Obviously a song with solo guitar will be mixed differently than a full band and even then depends on the band, low singer vs high etc.
     
  11. Sascha Franck

    Sascha Franck Member

    Messages:
    3,581
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    I only have live clips of my old setup and some rather irrelevant noodling clips of my current "intermediate" setup. They're not too great but do the job. I could as well record some stuff using said intermediate setup later on (well, possibly tomorrow or monday, no way to get to my music refuge during a family weekend).
     
  12. -Empire

    -Empire Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,202
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2016
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    IMO that tone is great and will translate well to a loud live band context. Great playing as well. So you're saying a tone like that works well in FOH but sounds harsh in your monitors?
     
  13. vtgearhead

    vtgearhead Member

    Messages:
    319
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2016
    As with your tale, my initial experience with FRFR in my stage rig was disappointing. I had tried a QSC K10 (sounded great for FOH use), but it didn't translate well to near-field situations. Sounds that seemed fine in my hobby room (some at high level when the spouse was absent) just didn't hold up during ensemble playing. I chalked it off as a failed experiment and went back to combo amps (most recently a Katana 100).

    Recently, I bought an Atomic CLR powered wedge and revisited the situation. Night and day difference. As others have pointed out, there's more to the big picture than merely extended frequency response. When you're sitting right on top of the device, phase-coherence through the crossover region and smooth off-axis response are absolutely critical factors. The CLR just kills it, and in my opinion is in a different class from the dozens of look-alike (QSC, JBL, EV, Peavey, Beheringer, Mackie, etc, etc.) powered systems. It's definitely not the low-priced spread, but I feel like I've gotten my money's worth.
     
    Ferg Deluxe and 9fingers like this.
  14. yeky83

    yeky83 Member

    Messages:
    571
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    It's a simple test that'll tell you exactly what your issue is.

    If music sounds balanced through your monitors, and your guitar sounds bassy and harsh, it's your guitar tone. What else can it be?
    If music sounds bassy and harsh, then figure out your monitor situation.
     
  15. Sascha Franck

    Sascha Franck Member

    Messages:
    3,581
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    Again, my recommendation for this issue: Use a dedicated monitoring EQ!
    FOH dude is happy with your sound? DON'T change a thing there!
    Monitor (whatever it is) sounds bad? EQ the living hell out of it if required!
     
  16. jpage

    jpage Member

    Messages:
    8,223
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    Dunno man, that sounds like an awful lot of additional work. Personally I create a "home" version of my live scene/snapshot that adds in an EQ tweak boosting the highs and lows for lower volume. Without it my "live" tone sounds dull/muddy at lower/home volume. Why would you want your monitored tone to be different from FOH anyway?
     
  17. Sascha Franck

    Sascha Franck Member

    Messages:
    3,581
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2017
    .

    To accommodate different situations. Or different monitor types.
    And why would it be an "awful lot" of additional work?
     
  18. jpage

    jpage Member

    Messages:
    8,223
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    Well to me anything "additional" I need to remember to bring and do is an "awful lot" lol. I guess I think that if the OP cannot get his stage monitor to reproduce the tone he is getting from FOH he should prob look into another stage monitor. They really are all over the map soundwise--esp in the mid-priced $500-$1500 range that most of us shop within.
     
  19. Ferg Deluxe

    Ferg Deluxe Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,096
    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Location:
    Baltimore
    It's not a matter of the monitored tone being different from FOH, as much as correcting the monitored tone to more accurately reflect what's happening FOH.
     
  20. Ferg Deluxe

    Ferg Deluxe Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,096
    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Location:
    Baltimore
    I agree with this, and not because I'm trying to push a product preference on folks. I don't even own a CLR any longer, as I'm not playing guitar live (bass these days).

    Using a CLR was a night and day difference from using the QSC, JBL, and other solutions that I see recommended around here.
     

Share This Page