Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Ask The Tapers => Topic started by: redbook on January 06, 2005, 02:26:05 PM
-
Hi there,
I have now a JB3 in addition of my D8, and I always go to the shows I tape with another friend (always doing stealth).
I was thinking in doing using my old D8 now to do the IEM recordings and then mix them with my other audience source, so I can get a nice matrix.
I know I have to use one of those FM receivers, but could you please explain the proccess, pros and cons of this... anyone with experience on this?
Thanks
-
search iem on here and you will find a ton of different opinions on this both from an ethical standpoint and a practical standpoint.
-
Hi there,
I have now a JB3 in addition of my D8, and I always go to the shows I tape with another friend (always doing stealth).
I was thinking in doing using my old D8 now to do the IEM recordings and then mix them with my other audience source, so I can get a nice matrix.
I know I have to use one of those FM receivers, but could you please explain the proccess, pros and cons of this... anyone with experience on this?
Thanks
Sorry if this comes across as harsh but I feel very strongly about this.
IEM recording is not right, IMO. How would you like it if somebody recorded your private conversations and distributed it to the masses? That is basically what you are doing. Especially if the band you are recording already allows audience taping, IEM taping is a slap in the face. It also jeopardizes the future ability to openly record. Plus, they sound like shit. I think anyone would take a good aud over an IEM recording any day of the week.
Dave
-
IEM recording is not right, IMO.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about stealth taping non-taper-friendly bands? Where and how do you draw the line about what is ethical or not? Not trying to start any arguement, but just trying to understand this. I pretty much only stealth because there are few taper-friendly bands I enjoy. So if I'm taping bands who either have a non-taper policy, or are anti-taping I've already gone to the dark side ethically. At that point, is it really much worse to tape IEMs?
I agree that many of them sound like shit. I agree that for taper-friendly bands, taping IEMs can jeopardize a good thing. I've never taped an IEM. I don't collect IEMs (although I have a few from years ago). I'm not pro-IEM. I'm just trying to understand the ethics argument. (wow, how was that for a bunch of disclaimers!)
-
IEM recording is not right, IMO.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about stealth taping non-taper-friendly bands? Where and how do you draw the line about what is ethical or not? Not trying to start any arguement, but just trying to understand this. I pretty much only stealth because there are few taper-friendly bands I enjoy. So if I'm taping bands who either have a non-taper policy, or are anti-taping I've already gone to the dark side ethically. At that point, is it really much worse to tape IEMs?
I agree that many of them sound like shit. I agree that for taper-friendly bands, taping IEMs can jeopardize a good thing. I've never taped an IEM. I don't collect IEMs (although I have a few from years ago). I'm not pro-IEM. I'm just trying to understand the ethics argument. (wow, how was that for a bunch of disclaimers!)
There's a big ethical difference between stealth recording and IEM recording, even of taper-unfriendly bands. Stealth aud tapes only capture the audio coming out of the speakers, audio that is intended to be heard by the crowd. IEM recordings record conversations between band members that no one is supposed to hear. Can you see the difference now?
-
IEM recording is not right, IMO.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about stealth taping non-taper-friendly bands? Where and how do you draw the line about what is ethical or not? Not trying to start any arguement, but just trying to understand this. I pretty much only stealth because there are few taper-friendly bands I enjoy. So if I'm taping bands who either have a non-taper policy, or are anti-taping I've already gone to the dark side ethically. At that point, is it really much worse to tape IEMs?
I agree that many of them sound like shit. I agree that for taper-friendly bands, taping IEMs can jeopardize a good thing. I've never taped an IEM. I don't collect IEMs (although I have a few from years ago). I'm not pro-IEM. I'm just trying to understand the ethics argument. (wow, how was that for a bunch of disclaimers!)
There's a big ethical difference between stealth recording and IEM recording, even of taper-unfriendly bands. Stealth aud tapes only capture the audio coming out of the speakers, audio that is intended to be heard by the crowd. IEM recordings record conversations between band members that no one is supposed to hear. Can you see the difference now?
I see the difference, I just don't see it as the big ethical difference you do I guess. As far as taper-unfriendly bands go, neither is intended to be recorded. Neither is intended to be heard outside of a specific audience (a smaller audience for the IEM, granted), and both recordings violate a band's rules/wishes. Also, not all IEMs involve chatter between band members. I know DMB has Dave and Carter chatting all of the time, but for many bands it seems that they use IEMs strictly as monitors, not as walkie talkies. So if there is no coversation between band members is an IEM recording still an unethical thing?
-
Ethically it is not right because you can interfere with the IEM system that they are using by introducing more material in the wavelength and frequency that they are dialed into. That's why is sucks and that's why you shouldn't do it.
-
IEM recording is not right, IMO.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about stealth taping non-taper-friendly bands? Where and how do you draw the line about what is ethical or not? Not trying to start any arguement, but just trying to understand this. I pretty much only stealth because there are few taper-friendly bands I enjoy. So if I'm taping bands who either have a non-taper policy, or are anti-taping I've already gone to the dark side ethically. At that point, is it really much worse to tape IEMs?
I agree that many of them sound like shit. I agree that for taper-friendly bands, taping IEMs can jeopardize a good thing. I've never taped an IEM. I don't collect IEMs (although I have a few from years ago). I'm not pro-IEM. I'm just trying to understand the ethics argument. (wow, how was that for a bunch of disclaimers!)
There's a big ethical difference between stealth recording and IEM recording, even of taper-unfriendly bands. Stealth aud tapes only capture the audio coming out of the speakers, audio that is intended to be heard by the crowd. IEM recordings record conversations between band members that no one is supposed to hear. Can you see the difference now?
I see the difference, I just don't see it as the big ethical difference you do I guess. As far as taper-unfriendly bands go, neither is intended to be recorded. Neither is intended to be heard outside of a specific audience (a smaller audience for the IEM, granted), and both recordings violate a band's rules/wishes.
But this is a big difference. IEMs are picking up private conversations. Granted, they are in a public setting, but that doesn't make them any less private. A taper-unfriendly artist that steps up to the microphone is making a public statement, and therefore in my eyes anything that comes out of it is fair game for recording.
Also, not all IEMs involve chatter between band members. I know DMB has Dave and Carter chatting all of the time, but for many bands it seems that they use IEMs strictly as monitors, not as walkie talkies. So if there is no coversation between band members is an IEM recording still an unethical thing?
If the IEM's did not pick up band member conversations than I wouldn't have a problem with them ethically. They would still sound like shit, however.
-
I think one of the more infamous characters in the dmb iem taping scene reads this board, I'm sure he can send you a private message so the rest of us don't have to see this hashed out in public again.
-
I think one of the more infamous characters in the dmb iem taping scene reads this board, I'm sure he can send you a private message so the rest of us don't have to see this hashed out in public again.
bromley reads this board? What's his userid so I can -T him? :)
-
yah id like to know if that douche reads this board.
-
With the IEM recordings that i have, you can obviously hear what the band says...but sometimes you only hear certain members....such as only the guitar and drums, and nothing else
-
yah id like to know if that douche reads this board.
ditto, whats his user id in a few days he'll have more -t's than daryan
-
Ethically it is not right because you can interfere with the IEM system that they are using by introducing more material in the wavelength and frequency that they are dialed into. That's why is sucks and that's why you shouldn't do it.
Not at all--an FM receiver will do absolutely nothing to interfere with their radio system.
-
Not at all--an FM receiver will do absolutely nothing to interfere with their radio system.
you cant receive with an fm receiver....you need an IEM receiver to get the signal which could have impact on the signal...
-
Ethically it is not right because you can interfere with the IEM system that they are using by introducing more material in the wavelength and frequency that they are dialed into. That's why is sucks and that's why you shouldn't do it.
Not at all--an FM receiver will do absolutely nothing to interfere with their radio system.
Most IEMs work on diversity reception system, therefore by introducing another receiver into the system you can easlily cause the *transmittier* to squelch and therefore introduce a noticeable dropout in the audio signal, but most of the time you'll just have noise-ups which are simple clicks and pops. Regardless you ARE intruding with the wireless system so leave this tactic at home, please...
::)
-
Not at all--an FM receiver will do absolutely nothing to interfere with their radio system.
you cant receive with an fm receiver....you need an IEM receiver to get the signal which could have impact on the signal...
I'm not so sure about that. FM receivers can pick up IEM transmissions carried on FM band frequencies. The IEM system transmitters are set up to transmit a particular signal, and any FM receiver that has the ability to tune in that particular frequency can be used to illegally intercept the IEM transmission that is just floating around in the air. But no, you can't carry in your old Sony boombox and try to dial in the monitors on your FM radio, you'll need something that can tune about about, oh, 500 Mhz higher.
Sound quality depends on a great number of things, and are limited to the same kinds of things that limit other recordings. For scanner intercepts, one thing to keep in mind is that most scanners only have mono earphone jacks, intended for listening to mostly voice transmission, not music based professional audio. Further, the mix that is transmitted will more than likely be strange to listen to, not musically pleasing. Signal reception can depend on everything from distance from the transmitter to the particular weather pattern of the day. And then, you could show up to a show to try and record something, and you'll get nothing at all, depending on how the band sets up their gear. And then there is the blacklisting that will occur if you ever get caught working with wireless gear. Most legitimate tapers can't stand the idea of wireless taps. For example, it makes entrance inspections harder for them at the doors of some taper friendly bands. Following the big DMB IEM shakedown of 2001, many MusicToday bands have included a line in their taping policy strictly prohibiting wireless reveivers, so don't think the bands aren't aware of what is or has been going on. Realize that other tapers are aware of what's going on, too.
In the end, you have to ask if this kind of thing is worth the hassle. 9 times out of 10, the answer is "not really".
The argument here should be about the ethics of recording in this manner. The majority of the board has already decided that this kind of wire tapping is not a respectable way to obtain a recording. The biggest problem is the privacy issue. Some of the things that can be overheard on a wireless transmission are none of the public's business. That said, I'm still torn on the ethics of tapping non taping friendly bands. I personally feel that illegally recording a non taping band from a wireless source is equal to illegally recording them with a set of microphones, as long as private audible asides are not recorded, or edited out later. If someone wants to find out how to intercept these kinds of transmissions, the websites of Radio Shack and most major music retailers should fill you in on all you need to know. The internet is a big place, just poke around a bit. But nobody here will really support this behavior, and this will probably be the longest post anyone will write on the subject.
BTW - Craig Bromley is an idiot. He can't convert a FLAC down to a WAV, or set proper recording levels. I wouldn't try to seek him out for advice. At any rate, I think he's been pretty much harassed off the internet.
-
Not being a taper per se, but having worked with many bands.... you would 99% out of the time get a terrible mix...
take for example.... the band i manage, Big Sky... here is the instrumentation of the band..
Lead Vocals
Lead Guitar, Background Vocals
Rhythm Guitar
Bass, Background Vocals
Drums
Keyboards, Organ
now the lead singer is the only guy in the band who uses in-ears..... and all that is in his in ear is his vocal, a little bit of background vocals, and i think one guitar.... that's pretty much it.... record that and you would have a terrible sounding show, i guarantee it!