EBS_freak

Theyre actually Knowles balanced armatures (albeit generic off the shelf ones)... so they are the real deal in terms of quality of components.The issue is going to be finding somebody that is prepared to rehouse a dynamic driver... in fact, at the moment, you are hard pushed finding anybody to rehouse and sort of driver! Re: custom moulds - only had a conversation tonight about the importance of a custom fit. They are definitely the biggest improvement you can make to an IEM solution. Better isolation = less outside bleed = lower volume = drivers not working as hard = less distortion = better sound.

Indeed - the KZ earpieces have certainly ruffled some feathers. But what I would say is that the KZs are using off the shelf balanced armatures which in themselves are compromised to begin with.. and I certainly wouldn't be sure that the tuning, phase alignment, dampening and crossover were as good as the more expensive counterparts. As I've stated earlier, that response curve is quite telling... however, as you say, cheap enough to be great value for money.

They havent - its just the grey import market that enabled the purchase of much cheaper units has been (mostly) sewn up.

Must be quite difficult running a shop like BD so I doff my cap to them... although my most memorable BD gaffe was seen when looking at the used basses, the bass in question was described as mint... yet in the description, went on to detail the small amount of damage that was present on it

The dynamic is probably responsible for helping in the lows... and the smoothing out of the top end is probably due to the notable recess in the highs. Sound like a good result though - glad you are pleased with them. Given the end of the cheaper UE900s, these seem to be a good low cost alternative! Yay for KZ. Talking of dynamics, really looking forward to hearing the new UE live piece... it seems to be that the adding of a dynamic seems to be the on trend thing. Funny - people seem to be taking note now... but Unique Melody were doing it way back with the Merlin (2 high, 2 mid, 1 low (dynamic)) In other news, my Roxannes have gone to JH for an overhaul, the RHS seems to have become recessed in the highs... and it doesn't seem to be a wax buildup... so we shall see. Mind you, they have had a lot of use. Not looking forward to the bill though

I love a good speaker burn in thread...

I guess the easy solution is to get a modeller if you having problems getting things eqed as you’d like. Maybe try the cheaper but highly capable zoom as a starting point.

Here’s my tip! Use IEMs!

True. All complete BS. And then there's the amps...

@stingrayPete1977- The Mottram bass. Of course.

Pretty much!

There's a great deal to be said for this. A good sound man is a good addition to your band line up, not just from a mix point of view... but from a performance point of view. Tapped delays, different fx, muting unused open mics, right down to the turning off of all fx when talking to the audience etc.. all add to the professionalism of the performance. I've only ever known of one band that performs with an unsigned band in this manner... and they sounded great for it (although they did still have to carry a desk and split and give the house engineer a L/R).

In addition to the above (and I know I'm not strictly speaking about the R24 here) if you've got the CPU power to do so and storage space for recording, 96kHz will buy you better latency figures.

Can't really expand on it and it could have got pretty messy fairly quickly... but it saddens me to see that his mafia style bullying is still very buoyant.

It's funny reading about this rig... everybody writes as though it's some ground breaking stuff going on. Maybe it is live.. but these sort of tricks have been going on in the studio for years.

You are probably right - I'd expect all the guitar stuff to be miced up... probably the bass also - although looking at the chain, there's no distortion in the bass (makes sense, distortion on bass robs low end - let the guitar amps take care of that, they do the job better) so it could equally be DIed for a punchier bass signal to work with (less mud from the inevitable mic bleed too - although, I can't confirm whether they do this or not). From a sound engineer point of view, for the bass setup, I would then mix each component (2 guitar and 1 bass signal) and drop them into a VCA so I have one fader to control the whole of the rig volume, whilst still having separate faders to change each component if needs be. They've probably got all sort of compression going on with each of the channels... maybe some tight delay, saturation, harmonic synthesisers etc to further fatten the sound (I don't think that their sound can be classed as subtle by any means!)

I got solicitors letters. Does that count? The guy in question is still a **** to this day - good to see he's still upsetting other people I notice this week.

Yup - and I would put money on them not sounding like they do now. Funnily enough, I don't know a great deal about the history of Royal Blood so did a quick look at their Wiki... -> Initially Royal Blood "couldn't get a gig in Worthing for months, and according to Kerr "we ended up just playing a lot of open-mic nights with acoustic singer-songwriters."[7] The band developed their music in the studios of Brighton Electric, and it was during these months that they were signed by Warner/Chappell Music. The band joined the same management company as the band Arctic Monkeys.[6] During the summer of 2013, Arctic Monkeys drummer Matt Helders was seen wearing a shirt supporting Royal Blood (before the release of their first single) during the Arctic Monkeys Glastonbury Festival concert in July 2013. <- Couldn't get a gig in Worthing for months - probably because no sound guy would want to go near them with a barge pole (?! :P) - Acoustic and open-mic is a lot more simple to mic. So They were formed in 2013 and got the management deal in 2013 and then out gigging at "proper venues". I would hazard a guess, they had access to their own sound guy and processing from pretty much the word go from these timelines.

But Royal Blood don’t play spit and saw dust venues. Royal Blood have their own dedicated sound engineer and PA system. There is no unknown quantities. They turn up with their rigs, backline, foh and monitor. No surprises for them. Comparing a band that doesn’t carry around their own foh and processing to Royal Blood is not a sensible comparison.

Because the guitaramp is highly, highly coloured, through pre, poweramp and speaker. It's the most dishonest audio chain ever. Capturing that is possible digitally... but a lot quicker with a mic. Even better with some of the great modellers on the market too - and they solve alot of the "but I need to crank it to get my tone" arguments. And some bassists are less precious and don't see their backline as an extension of their manhood. Let's face it, how many gigs have we been to where we see a guitarist turn up with a 100W Marshall head and 2 4x12s to play a broom cupboard? Idiots. Something like a decent modeller would sound better and more consistent from broom cupboard to stadium.

Perfect. You amp is a monitor, nothing else. At which point, I would argue that an equivalent priced wedge (or IEM setup) would be even better!

Key to a good band sound - low stage volume (or at least being quieter than the PA and the backline and drums being far away enough from the vocal mics to avoid bleed (especially from the cymbals on the drums). Any soundman worth their salt with a handful of toys at their disposal, will be able to do way, way better than you could achieve with just backline. Compressors, EQs, gates, notch filters... I never understand why bands work so hard to not work alongside the sound engineer. Mind you, there are some proper cack sound engineers out there.

Depends upon the amp but typically, it would remove the pre entirely from the equation. If you want the "valve" like pre, then a valve DI is a more expensive alternative. I wouldn't bother with that either at this level, if you've got a capable desk. When you consider what you can get in the world of PA, I don't know why people get so worked up about maintaining their tone - the processing on modern desks are far more powerful than what you would find in any traditional bass amp. (e.g. compressors, multiband compressors, 4 band parametric EQ with HPF and LPF... and thats before you get into saturation (e.g. valve) emulations and exciters and the like). Try playing around with the amp emulator on your X-Air if you are craving more saturation in your sound. Be careful of over saturation though! Little is good, too much can lead to distortion and too much mid range harmonics (it'll also rob you of low end). Here's the thing, if you can get your bass sounding like you want from the desk alone, (I can't see why you wouldn't - assuming you are running a pretty simple setup) you are onto a massive winner. Get your volume on stage lower and everything will sound much, much better out front.

"My bass sound in the pa isn't as good as my backline, not as punchy and defined. I use a pretty flat eq on my amp, just tweaking to suit the room. Quite a few effects and I di from the amp." As stated above, the sound that you get from your amp on stage is a combination of EQ, any baked in sound of the amp itself and the influence of the sound of the speaker cab. I am not a post eq DI fan per se from a traditional amp, I would still send the signal to the board pre EQ and then doing any processing at the desk (typically tone shaping, compression and maybe add a touch of saturation). Your on stage tone is your onstage tone. You outfront tone is your outfront tone. What you want to hear on stage can be very different to what is ideal FoH so treat them independently. With regards to those that run loads of effects, then yeah, you want to get the effects in the feed to the PA - but personally, I would still remove the colouration of the speaker cabs... but like many things, this is all subjective. Some people like to dial in EQ, some people like cab emulation devices. It's all down to personal preference and what works for you. I actually run two desks - one for IEM monitors and one for front of house, for reasons that I have hinted at above. With two desks, I can EQ every instruments differently for front of house and monitors, different processing, different compression and fx etc. If you don't have all these lines of processing, you will be compromising somewhere... but in reality, as long as people can hear themselves on stage so that they can play, an aux with just one EQ over the top to help prevent feedback is what most people can cope with. The Aux fed sub is a good technique - and probably also worth mentioning, that you don't actually want a lot going through your subs at all. In fact, You may end up HPFing your bass around 80Hz to stop things getting swampy (remember, a 80hz HPF is not a fixed cutouff, you get a slope (typically 24dB/octave) so you still get some bass in the subs but not as much as you'd think. Number one problem with subs is that people tend to push too much through them and it ends up destroying the mix - I'm guessing that this is where your "not as defined" bass problem is coming from. Certainly a decent PA should outdefine and out punch a traditional backline no sweat. Depending what your tops are, switching to 80 on the crossover will probably help you clear up any swampiness - if thats a problem... and that's before you reach for the desk. Remember, little bits of EQ, focusing on cuts as opposed to boosts. Certainly you'll want to calm the top end, also some cut around 2-5k and try a HPF at 100 and work down until the bass starts to get a little swampy. You'll find the sweet spot for your setup. But remember! This will change for every room that you are in... but at this point, you should be primarily reaching for the master EQ on that main outputs to compensate for the room. Once you've got your EQ sorted for your instruments, they shouldn't really change from gig to gig.

Now these could be a good bet for a cheaper universal inear for people dipping their toe in - https://www.revonext.com/en/product/QT3-Quad-Drivers-In-Ear-Headphone-66.html Dual dynamics and a double armature top. Theoretically, these should be a very nice piece, especially in the lows. Can't find a graph for them at the moment though, but the QT2s review very favourably.