Tips for Mono IEM's (AKA the death of guitar tone)

In the 80's hard rock band, do you all have two guitarists? I'm in an 90's/hard rock/light country band that is currently using mono IEMs. The other guitarist and I are struggling to get a mix where we can discern each other w/o stepping all over each other. We often do not play exactly the same part, or tones, so the mono seems to be the culprit. He uses a FM9 and I an III.

The same guitarist and I also play in a thrash band that uses the behringer personal monitors at practice. Those do stereo, and it is very easy to get a great mix where we can hear ourselves and each other very well. We just pan ourselves to one side of the field and the other guitarist to the other. We both use FM9s.

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated! Have a good one!

with the mono IEM situation with the two guitarists, what's your IEM monitoring setup ? do you each have separate AUX/mono busses that you're using?

one thing you could do is use two AUX/busses (which will give you a stereo IEM mix to each of you so you can hard pan each guitar, the only negative is that you no longer have personal control over the levels
 
with the mono IEM situation with the two guitarists, what's your IEM monitoring setup ? do you each have separate AUX/mono busses that you're using?

one thing you could do is use two AUX/busses (which will give you a stereo IEM mix to each of you so you can hard pan each guitar, the only negative is that you no longer have personal control over the levels
I interpreted his issue as being that the IEMs receivers are functioning in mono, so you can't pan. This is what we are doing currently (and unfortunately). A common practice is to take a stereo IEM transmitter and configure it to run two IEM receivers (mainly to reduce the number of transmitters you need, which are somewhat expensive). Each gets one of the channels and there is a setting on the receiver to present it in mono (in Senheiser this is called focus mode or something). So basically for six people you only need two transmitters. Everyone can still control the mix of their own AUX/bus send, but it is mono.

Another possibility would be that they are using something like the XVive IEMs systems which only take a single AUX/bus (XLR).

I just assumed this is probably one of these situations the OP is dealing with, but could be wrong.
 
Update:

I'm building a dedicated Stereo and Mono Preset... Correct me if I'm missing something here but this would seem to be the best real-world setup.

FM3 Stereo Preset:
Amp is set to Sum L/R
Cab has two ir's panned hard L/R and the input is set to stereo
All Effects following the cab are stereo set to 100% (Ex: Stereo BBD, Stereo Tape Delay)
I switch the FM3 audio output globally to stereo

FM3 Mono Preset:
Amp is set to Sum L/R
Cab has two ir's NO PANNING and the input is set to Sum L/R
All Effects following the cab are mono effects (Analog mono delay, mono Tape delay, Rich hall w/ 0% stereo spread)
I switch the FM3 audio output globally to Copy L/R

* I found that the Sum L/R audio output setting that allows you to turn stereo presets into mono just doesn't seem as full sounding as building a preset instead with dedicated mono effects and using Copy L/R.

------

* For my FM9 I run Dual Amps which could be another thread perhaps so forgive me if this should be in the FM9 Discussion...

FM9 Dual Amp Stereo Preset:
Both amps are set to Sum L/R with centered balance (This is a dual amp "Blend" approach, not a hard pan stereo L/R dual amp approach)
Cab has two ir's panned hard L/R and the input is set to stereo
All Effects following the cab are stereo set to 100% (Ex: Stereo BBD, Stereo Tape Delay)
I switch the FM9 audio output globally to stereo

FM9 Dual Amp Mono Preset:
Both amps are set to Sum L/R with centered balance
Cab has two ir's NO PANNING and the input is set to Sum L/R
All Effects following the cab are mono effects (Analog mono delay, mono Tape delay, Rich hall w/ 0% stereo spread)
I switch the FM9 audio output globally to Copy L/R

Phewww... hope you're with me, just trying to optimize these two units for the various applications I encounter.
I think I followed correctly and that all sounds correct to me. Interesting about the difference between Sum L/R and Copy L/R. I may need to check that out.

Anyway, this is pretty much what I'm doing with my stereo vs mono presets.
 
In the 80's hard rock band, do you all have two guitarists? I'm in an 90's/hard rock/light country band that is currently using mono IEMs. The other guitarist and I are struggling to get a mix where we can discern each other w/o stepping all over each other. We often do not play exactly the same part, or tones, so the mono seems to be the culprit. He uses a FM9 and I an III.

The same guitarist and I also play in a thrash band that uses the behringer personal monitors at practice. Those do stereo, and it is very easy to get a great mix where we can hear ourselves and each other very well. We just pan ourselves to one side of the field and the other guitarist to the other. We both use FM9s.

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated! Have a good one!
I think you answered your own question.
 
with the mono IEM situation with the two guitarists, what's your IEM monitoring setup ? do you each have separate AUX/mono busses that you're using?

one thing you could do is use two AUX/busses (which will give you a stereo IEM mix to each of you so you can hard pan each guitar, the only negative is that you no longer have personal control over the levels
We each have our own aux going to an IEM system that is mono only, so we are currently stuck with that. We are probably going to change our IEM solution soon so that we can have stereo mixes to our IEMs. Only down side is that we will eat up all the AUXs to do so.
 
We each have our own aux going to an IEM system that is mono only, so we are currently stuck with that. We are probably going to change our IEM solution soon so that we can have stereo mixes to our IEMs. Only down side is that we will eat up all the AUXs to do so.
Can you clarify whether you are already controlling your own IEM mix using one of the phone apps? As was mentioned, all of the hardware you have should be compatible with that (for instance MX-Q with the Behringer mixers). I guess I'm trying to figure out why you are wanting to bring in an additional signal into your IEM. Even with mono mix, I can typically dial in a mix that lets me hear everything I need to but a little more of myself if I need.
 
I'm forced to play with mono IEM's (and no stage monitoring) in a band at work and it really leaves me feeling like crap. Everything I've dialed in through my studio monitors in stereo sounds like garbage with mono IEM's. If I plug into one of my two EV PXM12's floor wedges and run mono it's not bad but that's probably some fletcher mofo effect or something... The Mono IEM's sound so sterile :(

Does anyone have any tips to make mono IEM's sound better?
The scenario sounds familiar to me. And that was the reason why I rejected IEM immediately afterwards.
After several more attempts, we realised that only a really good setup would make IEM fun.

We work with two systems. One consists of a Midas system with the M32 and a HUB to control our personal mixers on stage (the solution with iPad apps is terrible). The IEM mixers from Midas have the option of adding ambience reverb and - very importantly for us - real knobs for setting all the parameters.

Of course we run stereo. This enables spatial panning of the individual musicians.
We collect the signals on stage first and split everything analogue so that the FOH technicians can work completely independently of us.
The sound is always the same. Whether club or arena.

The other system is called KLANG and - if I understand it correctly - it works with DANTE.
That, in turn, is an app-based system. But I have familiarised myself with it. Although I prefer the Midas system, the overall sound with the KLANG is also very good.

https://www.klang.com/
 

Attachments

  • MIDAS.jpg
    MIDAS.jpg
    690 KB · Views: 16
Can you clarify whether you are already controlling your own IEM mix using one of the phone apps? As was mentioned, all of the hardware you have should be compatible with that (for instance MX-Q with the Behringer mixers). I guess I'm trying to figure out why you are wanting to bring in an additional signal into your IEM. Even with mono mix, I can typically dial in a mix that lets me hear everything I need to but a little more of myself if I need.
Sure. All of our signals get routed to a SI UI24R. Then each IEM gets a mono input from an aux input. (Different one for each IEM) Each performer uses the web GUI to control their own mix. The issue is that since there is no stereo field, we are finding it very difficult to get a mix where we can hear ourselves and the other guitar player well. In the other group I mentioned, we have stereo mixes and it is much easier. So, as it was pointed out, I have probably answered my own question. ;)
 
Sure. All of our signals get routed to a SI UI24R. Then each IEM gets a mono input from an aux input. (Different one for each IEM) Each performer uses the web GUI to control their own mix. The issue is that since there is no stereo field, we are finding it very difficult to get a mix where we can hear ourselves and the other guitar player well. In the other group I mentioned, we have stereo mixes and it is much easier. So, as it was pointed out, I have probably answered my own question. ;)
OK. Thanks for the clarification. I get it.
 
The scenario sounds familiar to me. And that was the reason why I rejected IEM immediately afterwards.
After several more attempts, we realised that only a really good setup would make IEM fun.

We work with two systems. One consists of a Midas system with the M32 and a HUB to control our personal mixers on stage (the solution with iPad apps is terrible). The IEM mixers from Midas have the option of adding ambience reverb and - very importantly for us - real knobs for setting all the parameters.

Of course we run stereo. This enables spatial panning of the individual musicians.
We collect the signals on stage first and split everything analogue so that the FOH technicians can work completely independently of us.
The sound is always the same. Whether club or arena.

The other system is called KLANG and - if I understand it correctly - it works with DANTE.
That, in turn, is an app-based system. But I have familiarised myself with it. Although I prefer the Midas system, the overall sound with the KLANG is also very good.

https://www.klang.com/
Your comment about making IEMs "fun" reminded me on this. I've actually talked to a couple of big act touring folks that have to deal with stuff like this. I'm not sure I could handle it.

 
My last post actually makes me wonder about something: How many people are trying to get enjoyable mixes in their IEMs? I've generally thought of IEMs as a pure utility and not really designed to provide an ideal listening experience. I've bought 3-driver IEMs to make sure I get enough usable frequency response (particularly in the lower frequencies), but am usually not trying to get my mix to be enjoyable. I tend to set my mix up to optimize my performance and not necessarily provide the most enjoyable experience. For example, I usually pipe in a bit more snare and high hat and less of the other guitarist and vocals than I would do if I was mixing it to sound good. I mainly just want to hear what I need to keep time and know where I am in the song and mostly to make sure I can hear what I'm doing (I don't want to bury my mistakes in the mix).

Am I doing it wrong? What are other's thoughts on this?
 
In my band it's strange. My drummer only wants to hear click, kick and snare, little guitars. I want it to sound like a cd. Everyone else just wants "more me". We use click, count ins, and song names so we don't have to ask "what's the next song" or print setlists. We also use Ableset and have some pc monitors disguised as monitors up front with the song info, next song, lyrics scrolling etc. We also sync to video, from Ableton, and it's all controlled by an ipad my drummer runs.

It's fun to watch guys who haven't worked with iems before deal with it at first. I like having structure, and being able to hear myself. I like being on time instead of fluctuating. It's a different thing. Whenever you bring in more production, you have to sometimes have it less than ideal so you can hear everything. Next thing for us is adding geysers and some moving head lights.
 
My last post actually makes me wonder about something: How many people are trying to get enjoyable mixes in their IEMs? I've generally thought of IEMs as a pure utility and not really designed to provide an ideal listening experience. I've bought 3-driver IEMs to make sure I get enough usable frequency response (particularly in the lower frequencies), but am usually not trying to get my mix to be enjoyable. I tend to set my mix up to optimize my performance and not necessarily provide the most enjoyable experience. For example, I usually pipe in a bit more snare and high hat and less of the other guitarist and vocals than I would do if I was mixing it to sound good. I mainly just want to hear what I need to keep time and know where I am in the song and mostly to make sure I can hear what I'm doing (I don't want to bury my mistakes in the mix).

Am I doing it wrong? What are other's thoughts on this?
I think for it to be enjoyable, you have to spend some money.
This thread is timely as I'm in the midst of the IEM journey.
I have a Sennheiser G2 system (15 yrs old now) with their entry level ear buds.

I have come to terms with (after speaking to many musician friends).
You have to invest a decent amount to get really great sounding ear buds. I'm likely going to go with some Westone Custom Molds.
I also think that stereo will turn it from 'hearing myself' to 'enjoying the music'.
Since I need vocals in my mix, I can't go right from the Axe to my IEMs. So I'm going to experiment with some of the mapping some of the internal effects from my X32, to my IEMs. If I can apply something like a stereo enhancer to my IEM feed, I'm hoping to get a stereo image that makes it all sound great. I'll report back.

also @Keybi - your Midas rig is beautiful!!
 
I'm like dpeterson as I prefer almost CD "perfection", although I do have my vocals a little hotter to make sure I'm not correcting my voice when hearing someone else off-key or the reverse situation.
 
The scenario sounds familiar to me. And that was the reason why I rejected IEM immediately afterwards.
After several more attempts, we realised that only a really good setup would make IEM fun.

We work with two systems. One consists of a Midas system with the M32 and a HUB to control our personal mixers on stage (the solution with iPad apps is terrible). The IEM mixers from Midas have the option of adding ambience reverb and - very importantly for us - real knobs for setting all the parameters.

Of course we run stereo. This enables spatial panning of the individual musicians.
We collect the signals on stage first and split everything analogue so that the FOH technicians can work completely independently of us.
The sound is always the same. Whether club or arena.

The other system is called KLANG and - if I understand it correctly - it works with DANTE.
That, in turn, is an app-based system. But I have familiarised myself with it. Although I prefer the Midas system, the overall sound with the KLANG is also very good.

https://www.klang.com/
I can't tell you how much I despise the App system... The IEM route is really not one worth cutting corners on so I completely agree with your motive of going big on the IEM's. I hope our budget will go up so we can get a proper rig.
 
My last post actually makes me wonder about something: How many people are trying to get enjoyable mixes in their IEMs? I've generally thought of IEMs as a pure utility and not really designed to provide an ideal listening experience. I've bought 3-driver IEMs to make sure I get enough usable frequency response (particularly in the lower frequencies), but am usually not trying to get my mix to be enjoyable. I tend to set my mix up to optimize my performance and not necessarily provide the most enjoyable experience. For example, I usually pipe in a bit more snare and high hat and less of the other guitarist and vocals than I would do if I was mixing it to sound good. I mainly just want to hear what I need to keep time and know where I am in the song and mostly to make sure I can hear what I'm doing (I don't want to bury my mistakes in the mix).

Am I doing it wrong? What are other's thoughts on this?
Enjoyable and REALISTIC is the goal. When everyone is using monitors on stage even if you turn someone down in the floor monitor you will likely still hear a bit or even most of them on stage whereas with IEM's you can totally block out people in the ears. This for me is horrible because why the hell are you playing music with people you don't want to hear... I get that situationally IEM's make sense sometimes but for me they make sense way less than not using and everybody listening to each other.
 
Your comment about making IEMs "fun" reminded me on this. I've actually talked to a couple of big act touring folks that have to deal with stuff like this. I'm not sure I could handle it.


In my band it's strange. My drummer only wants to hear click, kick and snare, little guitars. I want it to sound like a cd. Everyone else just wants "more me". We use click, count ins, and song names so we don't have to ask "what's the next song" or print setlists. We also use Ableset and have some pc monitors disguised as monitors up front with the song info, next song, lyrics scrolling etc. We also sync to video, from Ableton, and it's all controlled by an ipad my drummer runs.

It's fun to watch guys who haven't worked with iems before deal with it at first. I like having structure, and being able to hear myself. I like being on time instead of fluctuating. It's a different thing. Whenever you bring in more production, you have to sometimes have it less than ideal so you can hear everything. Next thing for us is adding geysers and some moving head lights.
I don't know man, that's just way to many things to set up and room for technical error when everyone could be running monitors and devote more time to practicing their time so a click isn't necessary. I've seen it both ways and I just gravitate to the plug in and play approach.
 
Post taken from > https://www.basschat.co.uk/topic/343757-joe-bonamassa-on-in-ear-monitors/

Joe is one of my early influences and I praise him for his dedication to keeping Blues/Rock guitar alive and LOUD!

"Hello, Joe Bonamassa here… yeah, you know, the same guy who was accused of calling pedal users lazy (not quite) and has been labelled everything from overrated to overweight. Anyway, I have been asked to write a few words in defence of us loud guitar players out there seeking redemption or at least some sort of validation for our methodology. So here it goes…
It all started in 1939, when a guitarist named Charlie Christian who was tasked as being a featured soloist in the Benny Goodman Sextet (tough gig, those horns are loud!). He needed a guitar with a pickup and an amp… next thing you know, the Gibson ES-150 and amp was in production. Then in 1945, Paul Bigsby, Leo Fender and ultimately Les Paul started a revolution of sorts. The electric guitar was front and centre. Loud and proud, as you would say.
article-img1.jpg
Since then, the electric guitar has been the focal point of most vocal and non-vocal popular music for almost 80 years. In 1967, Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton took electric-guitar music to a fine art – the finest, in my opinion. Some others have used it as pure songcraft (Neil Young), while others for basic chords in the youthful expression of anger (Sex Pistols, Nirvana, etc).
Now we can all agree on these basic historical facts, the question we must ask is, why do we now find ourselves marginalised by live sound engineers and stage managers that insist we achieve little-to-no stage volume at all? Basically, treating us and the electric guitar as the Typhoid Mary of the onstage environment? When did this happen? Why do we find ourselves chided and picked on as if we’ve done nothing to justify our place onstage?
I have a few ideas why.
article-img2.jpg
First, let’s talk about in-ear monitors. In my opinion, they do more damage than good. Why? There’s no respite nor sweet spot on stage. It’s all the same and you run that loudness directly into your eardrums for 90 minutes at a time. In reality, you are not saving your hearing at all, regardless of popular belief.
All of this audio goodness is predicated on your willingness to turn down and sacrifice yourself for the ‘greater good’ onstage, which is one misnomer I found shocking when I was convinced to do it five years ago. It lasted one tour and I found I was living in divergent reality from what the audience was experiencing. The sound engineers found themselves in control of dynamics. That was unacceptable to me. It should be unacceptable to you as well, purely from an artistic point of view. It’s like letting Siri control the throttle on your car during the 24 Hours Of Le Mans road race.
Second, and most importantly, is concerning the guitar sound or tone in general. You will find the lower volume onstage and higher volume in the PA does not necessarily equate to a fatter, fuller sound. Most of the times it does not, especially when you listen back to live recordings of your gigs.
You must admit most all of your favourite guitar sounds are based on an amp working hard through a tough speaker or multiple speaker cabinets. ‘All dials to the right’ worked for Eric, Eddie, Jimi, Leslie and many of us at all levels of legend and skillset. You have to admit that a one-watt amp through a speaker simulation isn’t gonna cut it in comparison to a 100-watt Marshall through four cabs like Alvin Lee had at Woodstock. It is certainly not going to sound like Brian May at Live Aid in 1985, even if it sounds like that in your in-ear monitors.
It’s the concept of clean headroom – and tonal variations you get by having clean headroom. The knobs on your guitar were put there for a reason, remember. Not all gigs call for that type of sound, but most times you are told it sounds ‘massive’ out front. Truth be told, it sounds like a hive of bees and if you were in the audience during your own gig, you would not be impressed at all. That’s the truth, 99 times out of 100.
Bottom line: you need to play to the gig (volume- and amp-appropriate), but don’t change what you do to suit someone’s engineering and audio fantasy. They will come at you fast and furious with solutions and ways to take you off your game plan. My advice is to stand your ground and be the guitarist you worked so hard to be. Make Buddy Guy and Jimi Hendrix proud. Also, most importantly, make yourself proud of the work you do and legacy that you leave behind."


With all this in mind... if like me you have to wear IEM's for a gig, pray you can get a stereo setup with an analog controller to mix from otherwise work with your engineer closely before hand. If you're mixing from an app, turn your tablets sleep mode off so the screen doesn't go dark while playing and then your fiddling around with a password and logging back in cause the wireless connection dropped meanwhile you've missed the last 5 chords you should have played...

If at worst (like my case) you're forced to have a mono IEM mix... I hate to say it but just eat :pileofpoop: and smile because I'm not convinced it will ever sound or feel good. I tried building mono presets and it aint significantly better than simply setting the fractals output to SUM L/R and using your stereo presets. All the "Phase issues" I read about don't really make a difference when the overall mono IEM experience is already :pileofpoop: from the start.
 
Last edited:
Post taken from > https://www.basschat.co.uk/topic/343757-joe-bonamassa-on-in-ear-monitors/

Joe is one of my early influences and I praise him for his dedication to keeping Blues/Rock guitar alive and LOUD!

"Hello, Joe Bonamassa here… yeah, you know, the same guy who was accused of calling pedal users lazy (not quite) and has been labelled everything from overrated to overweight. Anyway, I have been asked to write a few words in defence of us loud guitar players out there seeking redemption or at least some sort of validation for our methodology. So here it goes…
It all started in 1939, when a guitarist named Charlie Christian who was tasked as being a featured soloist in the Benny Goodman Sextet (tough gig, those horns are loud!). He needed a guitar with a pickup and an amp… next thing you know, the Gibson ES-150 and amp was in production. Then in 1945, Paul Bigsby, Leo Fender and ultimately Les Paul started a revolution of sorts. The electric guitar was front and centre. Loud and proud, as you would say.
article-img1.jpg
Since then, the electric guitar has been the focal point of most vocal and non-vocal popular music for almost 80 years. In 1967, Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton took electric-guitar music to a fine art – the finest, in my opinion. Some others have used it as pure songcraft (Neil Young), while others for basic chords in the youthful expression of anger (Sex Pistols, Nirvana, etc).
Now we can all agree on these basic historical facts, the question we must ask is, why do we now find ourselves marginalised by live sound engineers and stage managers that insist we achieve little-to-no stage volume at all? Basically, treating us and the electric guitar as the Typhoid Mary of the onstage environment? When did this happen? Why do we find ourselves chided and picked on as if we’ve done nothing to justify our place onstage?
I have a few ideas why.
article-img2.jpg
First, let’s talk about in-ear monitors. In my opinion, they do more damage than good. Why? There’s no respite nor sweet spot on stage. It’s all the same and you run that loudness directly into your eardrums for 90 minutes at a time. In reality, you are not saving your hearing at all, regardless of popular belief.
All of this audio goodness is predicated on your willingness to turn down and sacrifice yourself for the ‘greater good’ onstage, which is one misnomer I found shocking when I was convinced to do it five years ago. It lasted one tour and I found I was living in divergent reality from what the audience was experiencing. The sound engineers found themselves in control of dynamics. That was unacceptable to me. It should be unacceptable to you as well, purely from an artistic point of view. It’s like letting Siri control the throttle on your car during the 24 Hours Of Le Mans road race.
Second, and most importantly, is concerning the guitar sound or tone in general. You will find the lower volume onstage and higher volume in the PA does not necessarily equate to a fatter, fuller sound. Most of the times it does not, especially when you listen back to live recordings of your gigs.
You must admit most all of your favourite guitar sounds are based on an amp working hard through a tough speaker or multiple speaker cabinets. ‘All dials to the right’ worked for Eric, Eddie, Jimi, Leslie and many of us at all levels of legend and skillset. You have to admit that a one-watt amp through a speaker simulation isn’t gonna cut it in comparison to a 100-watt Marshall through four cabs like Alvin Lee had at Woodstock. It is certainly not going to sound like Brian May at Live Aid in 1985, even if it sounds like that in your in-ear monitors.
It’s the concept of clean headroom – and tonal variations you get by having clean headroom. The knobs on your guitar were put there for a reason, remember. Not all gigs call for that type of sound, but most times you are told it sounds ‘massive’ out front. Truth be told, it sounds like a hive of bees and if you were in the audience during your own gig, you would not be impressed at all. That’s the truth, 99 times out of 100.
Bottom line: you need to play to the gig (volume- and amp-appropriate), but don’t change what you do to suit someone’s engineering and audio fantasy. They will come at you fast and furious with solutions and ways to take you off your game plan. My advice is to stand your ground and be the guitarist you worked so hard to be. Make Buddy Guy and Jimi Hendrix proud. Also, most importantly, make yourself proud of the work you do and legacy that you leave behind."


With all this in mind... if like me you have to wear IEM's for a gig, pray you can get a stereo setup with an analog controller to mix from otherwise work with your engineer closely before hand. If you're mixing from an app, turn your tablets sleep mode off so the screen doesn't go dark while playing and then your fiddling around with a password and logging back in cause the wireless connection dropped meanwhile you've missed the last 5 chords you should have played...

If at worst (like my case) you're forced to have a mono IEM mix... I hate to say it but just eat :pileofpoop: and smile because I'm not convinced it will ever sound or feel good. I tried building mono presets and it aint significantly better than simply setting the fractals output to SUM L/R and using your stereo presets. All the "Phase issues" I read about don't really make a difference when the overall mono IEM experience is already :pileofpoop: from the start.
Interesting perspective and while I respect Joe, I wish he would have presented that more as his subjective experience and preference rather than a "this is better" factual statement. My feeling is he is someone (like many, many guitarists) who just love the visceral aspect of playing on a loud stage next to loud amps. There isn't anything necessarily wrong with that, especially if your primary motivation is your personal experience as a player, but I think it tends to ignore valid reasons for using IEMs such prioritizing the sound the audience is getting over your experience as a player. This latter aspect is really the reason so many pro acts (let's be real, pretty much the vast majority) are using in ears. And to his point, if not having that visceral experience is going to negatively impact your performance than this is an important consideration, but it isn't the only consideration.

Again, I'm not saying his opinion is "wrong", I'm just saying it disregards any valid considerations of why someone would choose to use IEMs in the first place. Based on the increasing prevalence of these (particularly among professionals), it is hard to argue there aren't valid reasons to go with IEMs.

I will point out (since this is a Fractal forum) that Joe is the kind of guitarist I would also tend to steer away from a modeler like a Fractal. Some guitarists are never going to be happy using a modeler because it isn't going to ever give them the "amp in a room" feel that comes up in this forum continuously. The other guitarist in my rock band would fall into this category. A few times he's listened back to audience videos and been pissed about his tone in the crowd compared to mine and starts talking about using modelers, but I truly think he won't be happy because he needs that visceral feel of his amp. Personally I'm thankful for people like this. I just scored a screaming deal on an FM9 from a local gigging musician who tried it and had to go back to his "real" amps. :tonguewink:

One thing I will objectively disagree with is Joe's point about ear health and IEMs, which I think is nonsense. Sure, if you are someone who is trying to recreate the auditory experience of a loud rock concert with your IEMs and have them blaring loud, then yeah, that is going to be bad for your hearing. But most IEMs are actually designed to allow you to get a good mix at reasonable auditory levels. Most of these will offer in the range of 40dB attenuation which is pretty substantial and allows you to bring in a good mix at relatively low levels. I have played with loud bands on loud stages many, many times and while you might be able to find some spot on stage that provides some relief from the immediately painful decibel levels, it is still way louder than the levels I routinely have with my IEMs. I think this sentiment is shared by many folks who have gone the IEM route (I recall Satchel from Steel Panther just stated something similar in his last rig rundown). I can tell you that my wife commented that she noticed a difference after I switched to IEMs because I don't come home speaking at the top of my lungs to her after a rehearsal or a gig. :D

BTW: This loud stage thing always makes me think of the story Lukather tells about playing with Jeff Beck where he had to jump in front of the stage wedges because the entire stage was painfully loud. Hilarious.
 
Back
Top Bottom