Dumping Ground for Random Thoughts

By Schoon Published: June 3, 2009

Now we’ve all been there… Ringing out monitors and you can’t quite get hold of a frequency that is feeding back, or when you do, the monitor just sounds dull and dead….

Here are a few quick tips to help you out…

To Start

• Two people makes things EASY
  • One person on the mic/wedge and one at the console/EQ makes the whole process go much faster.
• Graphic Equalizers are a must. Or in Digital World, a 5+ Band Parametric EQ
• Make any corrections to the tone of the Microphone on the channel, the rest on the Graphic EQ
  • Example: High Pass Filters, The Annoying 200-250 Hz “Woof” of a SM58 or the 400-500 Hz Bump on a Sennheiser Vocal Mic
• Bring up the Vocal Slowly, to Avoid Hurting Your Ears. No one Likes the Sound of Feedback

Prepare for the Evening

• Working with one artist you know always remember
  • EQ to their Mic Handling, and their Taste (IE, liking it Crispy or with a little Extra “oomph” in the low mids)
• Working with multiple Arists, IE a House Gig
  • Prepare for the Genre (Singer Songwriters are quiet, Rock Acts are Loud and Cup the Mic, Ect)
• Always attempt to Emulate what the artist will be doing (IE Cupping the Mic when ringing if thats most likely, take off your hat/glasses if the artist doesn’t wear them)

Ringing Out

• Get to know your Frequencies (download test tones to practice, get your 1k 2k whistle down)
• Don’t cut too much (start with 3dB cuts, and cut more as needed to avoid dull-ness)
• Always remember, feedback can be between Frequencies
  • Try cutting a little of two frequencies next to eachother, rather than gouging one frequency
• Know your Limits
  • When you’ve made some decent cuts, and the Volume gets to 11, you’ll have 3-5 different frequencies take off at once. That’s the point of no return. You COULD cut these frequencies and continue, but at the cost any clarity in the wedge.
• Most Importantly, 90% of the time the rule is…
  • QUALITY OVER QUANTITY
  • A performer will be able to hear a wedge much better over their band/amp if the high mid range (1k-6.3k) is fairly present. You can add all the volume in the world if these are lacking, the monitors still won’t cut through.

Final Touches

• Get your Vocal Stable (No Feedback) at a max volume, then bring back the send some to give you some headroom if the artist needs more (some artists ask for more vocals my default, no matter how loud it is)
• Always use a Cue wedge without an EQ on it to listen to your Lead vocal during the show. It’ll allow you to hear feedback that is about to go off before the artist, hopefully letting you solve the problem before it manifests.

One day a florist went to a barber for a haircut.

After the cut, he asked about his bill, and the barber replied, ‘I cannot accept money from you , I’m doing community service this week. Remember, President Obama suggested we all pitch in.’ The florist was pleased and left the shop.

When the barber went to open his shop the next morning, there was a ‘thank you’ card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.

Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he tries to pay his bill, the barber again replied, ‘I cannot accept money from you , I’m doing community service this week..’ The cop was happy and left the shop.

The next morning when the barber went to open up, there was a ‘thank you’ card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.

Then a Congressman came in for a haircut, and when he went to pay his bill, the barber again replied, ‘I can not accept money from you. I’m doing community service this week.’ The Congressman was very happy and left the shop..

The next morning, when the barber went to open up, there were a dozen Congressmen lined up waiting for a free haircut.

And that, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between the citizens of our country and the politicians who run it!

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published in the New York Post on July 21, 2009

If the Democrats obey President Obama’s command and pass a health-care bill by the August recess, they’ll be committing partisan suicide.

Obama’s insistence that we completely remake our health-care system — and do it two weeks after the first bill was marked up in the first committee — is too arrogant by half. It smacks of the kind of overreaching of FDR’s second term in 1937, when, after his landslide win in 1936, he tried to pack the Supreme Court to reverse its anti-New Deal rulings.

Americans are increasingly turning against Obama’s program. A Washington Post poll has the plan’s public approval below 50 percent; Rasmussen has it trailing 46-49.

For Obama to ride roughshod over Americans’ rising concerns about a matter so intimate will be too much.

What’s the rush? they’ll ask. The bill isn’t even slated to take effect until next year. You passed the stimulus package, they’ll note, in a similar rush during the administration’s first week — only to see it fall flat. Now Obama aides are claiming the package was never intended to have much effect this year!

How, voters will ask, can we cover 50 million more people without any new doctors or nurses? The answer is to ration health care, with the government deciding who’ll get hip and knee replacements, heart-bypass surgery and other medical treatments. And what does rationing mean? It means that the elderly will be denied care that they can now get whenever they want.

The Obama plan effectively repeals Medicare, putting a Federal Health Board between the elderly and their doctors. This board will instruct public and private insurance carriers on what procedures are to be approved, at what cost and for what patients.

The bulk of this rationing will fall on the elderly. We’ll have to revisit the idea that the elderly have, in the words of former Colorado Gov. Dick Lamm, “a duty to die.”

The more word gets out about what the bill contemplates, the firmer opposition will grow. That’s why Obama wants to push it through now, while he retains some popularity.

And if the bill passes? The howls of protest from the elderly the first time they’re denied care will be something to behold. It will become evident that the health-care resources being denied to the elderly are going instead to immigrants — legal and not. The anger will be enormous and instant.

Most Americans aren’t sick and don’t use medical facilities often. But the elderly constantly stay in touch with their doctors and medical providers. The curtailment of that access will become immediately apparent — and in more than enough time for the 2010 elections.

Some votes live on and on. People remember senators’ votes on the Kuwait war resolution. President Bill Clinton chose Vice President Al Gore for the 1992 ticket largely based on Gore’s vote in favor of the invasion. It sent a signal that Gore and he were a “new kind of Democrat.”

This health-care vote is similarly consequential; it will linger for years.

By BOBBY JINDAL

In Washington, it seems history always repeats itself. That’s what’s happening now with health-care reform. This is an unfortunate turn of events for Americans who are legitimately concerned about the skyrocketing cost of a basic human need.

In 1993 and 1994, Hillary Clinton’s health-care reform proposal failed because it was concocted in secret without the guiding hand of public consensus-building, and because it was a philosophical over-reach. Today President Barack Obama is repeating these mistakes.

The reason is plain: The left in Washington has concluded that honesty will not yield its desired policy result. So it resorts to a fundamentally dishonest approach to reform. I say this because the marketing of the Democrats’ plans as presented in the House of Representatives and endorsed heartily by President Obama rests on three falsehoods.

First, Mr. Obama doggedly promises that if you like your (private) health-care coverage now, you can keep it. That promise is hollow, because the Democrats’ reforms are designed to push an ever-increasing number of Americans into a government-run health-care plan.

If a so-called public option is part of health-care reform, the Lewin Group study estimates over 100 million Americans may leave private plans for government-run health care. Any government plan will benefit from taxpayer subsidies and be able to operate at a financial loss—competing unfairly in the marketplace until private plans are driven out of business. The government plan will become so large that it will set, rather than negotiate, prices. This will inevitably lead to monopoly, with a resulting threat to the quality of our health care.

Second, the Democrats disingenuously argue their reforms will not diminish the quality of our health care even as government involvement in the delivery of that health care increases massively. For all of us who have seen the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s response to hurricanes, this contention is laughable on its face. When government bureaucracies drive the delivery of services—in this case inserting themselves between health-care providers and their patients—quality degradation will surely come. House Democrats seem willing to accept that problem to achieve their philosophical aim—the long-term removal of for-profit entities from the health-care landscape.

Third, Mr. Obama’s rhetoric paints a picture of a massive new benefit that will actually cost average Americans less than what they pay today. The Democrats want middle-class taxpayers to believe they won’t feel the pinch of this initiative, even as their employers are assessed massive new taxes. They might as well try to argue that up is down. The analysis of the Democrats’ proposal by the Congressional Budget Office shows that it will not reduce government spending on health care, and that it will substantially increase the federal deficit—and this despite all the tax increases.

I served in the U.S. House with a majority of the current 435 representatives, and I am confident that if given the proper amount of legislative review, they will not accept the flawed Pelosi plan that is currently stuck in committee. Yet there is general agreement among Republicans and Democrats that we need health-care reform to bring costs down. This agreement can be the basis of a genuine, bipartisan reform, once the current over-reach by Mr. Obama and Mrs. Pelosi fails. Leaders of both parties can then come together behind health-care reform that stresses these seven principles:

•Consumer choice guided by transparency. We need a system where individuals choose an integrated plan that adopts the best disease-management practices, as opposed to fragmented care. Pricing and outcomes data for all tests, treatments and procedures should be posted on the Internet. Portable electronic health-care records can reduce paperwork, duplication and errors, while also empowering consumers to seek the provider that best meets their needs.

•Aligned consumer interests. Consumers should be financially invested in better health decisions through health-savings accounts, lower premiums and reduced cost sharing. If they seek care in cost-effective settings, comply with medical regimens, preventative care, and lifestyles that reduce the likelihood of chronic disease, they should share in the savings.

•Medical lawsuit reform. The practice of defensive medicine costs an estimated $100 billion-plus each year, according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, which used a study by economists Daniel P. Kessler and Mark B. McClellan. No health reform is serious about reducing costs unless it reduces the costs of frivolous lawsuits.

•Insurance reform. Congress should establish simple guidelines to make policies more portable, with more coverage for pre-existing conditions. Reinsurance, high-risk pools, and other mechanisms can reduce the dangers of adverse risk selection and the incentive to avoid covering the sick. Individuals should also be able to keep insurance as they change jobs or states.

•Pooling for small businesses, the self-employed, and others. All consumers should have equal opportunity to buy the lowest-cost, highest-quality insurance available. Individuals should benefit from the economies of scale currently available to those working for large employers. They should be free to purchase their health coverage without tax penalty through their employer, church, union, etc.

•Pay for performance, not activity. Roughly 75% of health-care spending is for the care of chronic conditions such as heart disease, cancer and diabetes—and there is little coordination of this care. We can save money and improve outcomes by using integrated networks of care with rigorous, transparent outcome measures emphasizing prevention and disease management.

•Refundable tax credits. Low-income working Americans without health insurance should get help in buying private coverage through a refundable tax credit. This is preferable to building a separate, government-run health-care plan.

These steps would bring down health-care costs. They would not bankrupt our nation or increase taxes in the midst of a recession. They are achievable reforms with bipartisan consensus and public support. All they require is a willingness by the president to slow down and have an honest discussion with Americans about the real downstream consequences of his ideas. Let’s start there.

Mr. Jindal is governor of Louisiana.

• Ghacks Technology News
  (tags: Technology Blog News)
• Tips You Are Looking For Studio Lighting Techniques
  "Tips You Are Looking For Studio Lighting Techniques" http://bit.ly/AIrxg
  (tags: Photography)

Scott Raymond Lindstam 43, of Tarpon Springs, passed away on July 14, 2009, after a long and courageous battle with cancer. Born in Newport, RI, he moved to Florida in 1966. He was Founder & President of Hi-Tech Assembly. Scott was an avid bass fisherman & in his youth, traveled the country as a factory sponsored BMX bike rider. He is survived by his wife Teri, children Scott Jr., Ashley & Kayla, parents Patricia & Roy Lindstam of Pinellas Park, grandfather Norman Arsenault of New Bedford, MA, sister Kimberly Starling of Maryville, TN & brothers Eric Lindstam of Washington, NC & Fred Lindstam of Bridgetown, NC. He was preceded in death by his grandmother Nana Arsenault & brother Bruce Lindstam. A Celebration of Life will be held for Scott on Saturday, July 25 from 2-4 pm at The Conway Center at Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, 750 San Salvador, Dunedin, FL. In lieu of flowers, donations may be made to Suncoast Hospice Foundation, 5771 Roosevelt Blvd., Clearwater, FL 33760.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — Space shuttle Endeavour and its seven-member crew launched at 6:03 p.m. EDT Wednesday from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The mission will deliver the final segment to the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Kibo laboratory and a new crew member to the International Space Station.

Endeavour’s 16-day mission includes five spacewalks and the installation of two platforms outside the Japanese module. One platform is permanent and will allow experiments to be directly exposed to space. The other is an experiment storage pallet that will be detached and returned with the shuttle. During the mission, Kibo’s robotic arm will transfer three experiments from the pallet to the exposed platform. Future experiments also can be moved to the platform from the inside of the station using the laboratory’s airlock.

Shortly before liftoff, Commander Mark Polansky thanked the teams that helped make the launch possible.

“Endeavour has patiently waited for this,” said Polansky. “We’re ready to go, and we’re going to take all of you with us on a great mission.”

embedded by Embedded Video