Backstage At The Grammys
Inside observations on the ins and outs of a large-scale live event

By Karl Winkler

The view from one of the two Yamaha PM1D digital boards at FOH.

As my good friend Joe Dougherty, now with Clair Bros., used to say, “You can tell how important a gig is by how many fat guys with ponytails are around.” Maybe that’s true of live shows and concert tours, but it was a bit different at the 2003 Grammy Awards show, held at Madison Square Garden in New York. I had the opportunity to observe the inner workings of the audio crews in the days leading up to the event. All the usual suspects were there: front-of-house mixers and their airplane-cockpitesque consoles. Line arrays providing good coverage with minimal visual impact.

Wireless microphones and in-ear systems galore, with a dedicated wireless guru. Hundreds more wired microphones. And due to the complexity and size of an event like this, there were also the required communications systems and operators, security stations and procedures, and specialized staging equipment.

But wait there’s more! This is live television! And along with the relatively standard audio stuff, there were two broadcast mix trucks (one for stereo and one for 5.1), mondo-cool lighting systems and Volkswagen-sized projectors. Yes, definitely more to this event than would meet the audio professional’s eye. First, let’s start with the nuts and bolts.

In size and production goals, this was definitely the right type of event for use of a line array loudspeaker system. With the huge volume of air, wide seating arrangement and long RT-60 times, Madison Square Garden can be an audio nightmare. The sound company for the event, ATK AudioTek of Burbank, California, chose to go with a large-format JBL VerTec line array rig for the vast majority of coverage.

Figure 1: Overview of the mic layout deployed for Coldplay with the Philharmonic.

Although the main loudspeakers were low in visual impact, there’s no question the system was able to play loud. In fact, for a few of the acts, I thought it was too loud. But, you say, it is rock ’n’ roll and is supposed to be loud, right? Apparently that was the thinking, because the room was shaking for more than a few of the acts, including Avril Lavigne, Coldplay, Eminem, etc… I’ve never been a fan of overly loud mixes, but maybe it’s just my desire to maintain my hearing into old age combined with a more classical music oriented background. The crowd was sure into it, and that’s the main point. (And note I didn’t say that it sounded bad, because it sounded great. Just a bit loud for my tastes.)

The FOH position was manned by mixer Ron Reaves, a New York local (for music) and ATK veteran Mike Stewart (overall mix), supported by Andrew “Fletch” Fletcher. (See Fletch’s companion report The Nuts & Bolts Of The Grammy Awards System) Two Yamaha PM1D digital consoles sat side by side with a long time-scale RTA set up between them.

CONSPICUOUS ABSENCE

There was simply a FOREST of microphones backstage; I would estimate that more than 500 hard-wired microphones were used for this show. While there were acts that used just a single wireless mic along with a track, there were a surprising number of “live” acts this year. The pinnacle, in my view, was the New York Philharmonic, which performed “Mambo” from Leonard Bernstein’s West Side Story, and then they were accompanied Coldplay (a la Metallica’s musical amalgam from the same event a few years ago...).

The Philharmonic used more than 30 microphones, as indicated in Figure 1. One thing that struck me as a bit odd, however, was that despite the huge number of wired microphones on hand, apparently only four manufacturers were represented: Audio-Technica, Neumann, Sennheiser and Shure. No question these are the brands of mics most commonly seen at higher profile events, but the lack of other brands was conspicuous to me since I’m a mic guy at heart. No Royer, DPA, CAD, Blue, and Beyer, just to name a few.

Left to right, ATK's Mike Stewart and Scott Harmala, taking a break with Fletch.

Speaking of mics, one of the most important developments at this show were input lists that could be dynamically updated, on the fly. In the past, Michael Abbot, audio coordinator for the event, had to make new photocopies after every update to the input lists, and then these copies had to be hand-delivered to every person in the chain - one each for the FOH folks, monitor folks, wireless folks, staging folks, backline folks, audio truck folks… that’s a lot of paper, a lot of walking and a lot of folks!

This year, a new central database system could be accessed by each of these interested parties, live on a network, and any time an update was made, a simple announcement of the update was sent out with everyone then able to quickly check the list themselves. Technology at its best. I heard from several people as to what a great change this was and how much time it saved.

There were a lot of things different about this show because it’s a live television broadcast. For example, four or five TV cameras were positioned on a large platform directly in front of the FOH position, so the sound mixers didn’t have direct line of sight to the stage. Video monitors (which were everywhere) provided what was arguably a better way to see what transpired on the stage. And I think with a venue of this size, direct line of sight isn’t all that feasible anyhow, simply due to the distance between the stage and the house position.

THE FINAL FEED

Broadcast feeds were mixed for stereo and 5.1 surround in separate trucks. Although some of the recording industry’s “best and brightest” stars might be in the audience for the Grammys, the majority of viewers (and listeners) are out there in front of their television sets, and many now with home-theater audio systems. The main broadcast truck was Effanel’s L7 mobile studio, and then audio “stems” were sent to an additional truck owned by Joel Singer for a final 5.1 broadcast mix and feed.

Nothing quite extends the budget for audio technology like major TV advertising dollars. Even though the budgets are still (VERY) carefully planned, it’s still a different animal in comparison to a “typical” concert. In those terms, the Grammys appeared to have an unlimited budget. There were the two PM1Ds consoles, another forest of Neumann mics for the Philharmonic, and the stage had cleverly-designed hydraulic lifts and elements allowing for continuous set up and strike over the three-hour broadcast.

That's a big orchestra, requiring both sides of the stage for the only time in the production.

In this type of environment, audio sometimes takes a back seat. The almighty visual, which means the cameras, lighting, staging, costumes, etc., gets first priority. Not that audio isn’t considered important. Indeed, several times I witnessed a last-minute request for an audio “thing” due to the whims of the directors and producers. Politics is big in Washington, D.C., but shows of this type take the concept to a whole new level. Here, every interested party had equally interested egos and agendas, and being in New York City meant the attendant union issues are never far behind.

NARAS, the various audio companies (ATK, Effanel, Wireless First, CenterStaging) had to work together closely to first coordinate such a massive show, and just as importantly, to insure that communication lines remained open. Clearly each “stakeholder” was looking out for his/her/its own agenda first.

Then add the presence of glad-handing VIPs, glad-handing artists relations people and glad-handing manufacturers. (Present company excluded, of course!) All wanted to be sure that the artists had what they needed and were also watching out for last-minute changes that might upset the fine balance between all these forces.

PLAYING IT COLD

As mentioned, one of the most impressive performances at this year’s Grammys proved to be the combination of the New York Philharmonic and the rock band Coldplay. For the first and only time, both sides of the stage were used simultaneously. Normally, as one side of the stage hosted a live act, the other side was concealed with a huge scrim while set and instrument changes could be made, unseen.

I counted something like 65 musicians with the Philharmonic - 18 violins, nine violas, 10 cellos, six basses, a full woodwind section, three trombones, three trumpets, other horns, a tuba, full percussion including tympani… you get the idea. They performed on a specially constructed set of risers designed to be quickly rolled on/off the stage. The microphone selection here included 16 Neumann KM 184s, seven Neumann TLM 170s and a Schoeps stereo mic.

Kevin Sanford of Wireless First (left), who provided all RF for the show, with Ryan Cecil, Norah Jones' monitor engineer.

A trio of Neumann M 150 tube mics were considered for the main left-center-right mic positions, but the tube warm-up time was not compatible with the short staging time. Early on, there was a possibility that the orchestra performance would follow an advertising break, which would have allowed enough time for the warm-up to happen properly, but plans changed. Overall, this selection of mics may not seem all that large for this size of ensemble, but close micing is often not the best way to present an acoustic symphony orchestra. With careful placement under the supervision of veteran engineer Murray Allen of Ele-ctronic Arts, the balance was very natural and convincing. Sound in the house ended up quite good, and the truck mix was even better when I popped my head in to listen. Larry Rock, director of audio for the Philharmonic, was stationed in the truck as well and he seemed pleased with the mix.

When Coldplay join-ed the orchestra for re-hearsal, the combination worked better than might have been exp-ected. But watching the camera feeds from the truck, I noticed that in places where the orchestra members weren’t playing, they were holding their ears! Another curious thing happened as well. At one point, the engineers in the truck realized that while the band was playing, it was difficult to get a decent orchestral mix. Of course, this is the down side of using area mics instead of individual mics ­ better sound, but much more stage wash.

Pre-show prep: a drum kit already on riser and fully miced up, ready to be moved into position.

WHAT BIZ IS THIS? Basically, the same lessons can be learned at this show as at any other: know the politics and know what business you’re really in. I saw Albert Leccese from Audio Analysts in the audience during rehearsals, who noted “you have to know at an event like this, even as a sound reinforcement company, you’re in the business of construction, not sound.” There’s a lot at stake at a live televised event like the Grammys, and for the most part, the pecking order follows the greatest areas of risk. TV comes first (cameras, cues, etc.), followed by lighting and staging. Audio, in some ways, takes a back seat. But at the same time, innovative approaches were utilized to produce some very good audio. Mistakes were corrected very quickly and discretely. Although let it be said that there were a few things I witnessed that I can’t talk about, to protect the innocent. (And you know who you are!)

Karl Winkler is director, marketing communications for Sennheiser Electronic Corp. (U.S.). We thank him for delivering this even-handed behind-the-scenes report.

May 2003 Live Sound International