So you wanna be a karaoke host? (Part 8: Watts and RMS and Ohms, oh my!)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

Matching amp and speakers
Years ago, when I was working my way through college working for Radio Shack, we made sure that the power handling capability of the speakers was bigger than the power output of the amp. This makes sense, right? Clearly if you feed 1000W into a tiny little 25W speaker, you will do some damage to the poor little speaker.

When I recently talked with Bob (my favorite sound guy), I got a totally different story. He told me that the important thing is that you make sure the amp is big enough to drive the speakers. Ideally, you want the amp to be able to deliver twice the power that the speakers are rated for.

This blew my mind. If I have speakers that will handle 250W, then I want to drive them with an that will amp will deliver at least 500W?

The folks at Musician's Friend agree with Bob. I quote from their PA System Buying Guide:

Make sure to buy an amp with plenty of power for your speakers plus enough headroom. Many speakers are damaged by getting too little power, causing clipped waveforms that will ruin your gear. You will probably want an amp with twice the wattage of your speaker's rated power handling to ensure clean power gets to them.

The buying guide is not clear on which watts are what. You have an amp, and it has wattage ratings in peak and RMS and it lists wattage for 8 ohms and 4 ohms and maybe two ohms. You have a speaker and it has peak and program and continuous and RMS... How to figger it all out?!?!?

Step 1: Determine the ohms for the speakers and how many speakers you will be plugging into one channel. Generally speaker, you will have one speaker per channel - one in the right channel and one in the left. And generally speaking, the speakers will be 8 ohms. But, just in case you have two speakers plugged into one channel, or just in case they are four ohm speakers, you need to figger out the ohms for the speaker combination. In case you forgot, I mentioned how to do this in the post on amps, under the heading "Ohms".

- Will your amp handle the ohms?  If your amp is only rated for 8 ohm speakers, then you can't plug in a pair of 8 ohm speakers, dude.

Step 2: Determine the RMS power rating of your speakers. I gave a very simple way to convert any of the plethora of speaker specs into RMS in the previous post on speakers:

If there is a spec for peak power, divide by four to get RMS power.
If there is a spec for program power, divide by two to get RMS power.
If there is a spec for continuous power, then multiply it by 1. Or divide by 1. Or add zero. The RMS power handling is the same as the continuous power handling.

Step 3: Find the RMS power per channel for the amp, using the ohms that you determined in step 1. The amp probably list different ohm values, 8, maybe 4, and maybe maybe 2. Pick the watts for that particular ohmage. If they happen to list a maximum power or a peak to peak power, ignore that inflated number.

Step 4: Compare the rating for the amp (from step 3) with the power handling for the speakers (from step 2). Ideally, the ratio will be 2.0. That is, the watts for the amp will be twice the watts for the speakers. Don't get anal about this... there is some leeway. To get a feel for how much leeway, let's look at some systems that were put together by the pros.

I turned to the Musician's Friend website and started looking for live sound systems. The first thing I found was an interesting tidbit. All their systems fell into one of two categories. Either the system included a powered mixer and passive speakers, or it included a mixer and a pair of active speakers. There were no systems that they offered that was all components, that is, an unpowered mixer, an amp, and passive speakers.

Hmmmm... that makes sense. I guess? Having all components, you are of course more flexible. But combining one way or the other means less stuff to carry around. For a KJ, this is important.

Musician's Friend had a long long list of systems to pick from. I picked three of these to compare. All were around the $700 mark.I picked different brands to keep it interesting. I also just looked at systems with a powered mixer and a set of passive speakers. I chose this not because I am partial to that type of system (I am, by the way, but only slightly). I chose this type because you need to match amp and speakers with this type of system. If the amp and speaker are in the same box, the matching has already been done for you. 

The Phonic system

The Phonic system includes their Powerpod 1860 Plus powered mixer, coupled with the Phonic S715 speakers.

Step 1:  The speakers are 8 ohms. We will plug one speaker into each channel of the amp, so each channel of the amp will see 8 ohms. The amp has a rating for 8 ohm operation, so we are cool.

Step 2: The speakers have the following power handing: Power handling: 600W (Peak), 400 W (Program), 200W (RMS). Which spec do we want? Yes, of course, the last one, the RMS power handling of 200W.

Step 3: The amp has the following ratings:

260W per side at 8 ohms
400W per side at 4 ohms
800W bridged mono

We first note that the amp does say "per side", so they aren't pulling anything funny like combining the power from both sides. Since we determined that our speakers are 8 ohms, we choose the 260W number. Note also that they did not specify whether these are peak watts or RMS, so we will assume that the numbers are RMS. If we were actually buying this piece of equipment, we might want to take a close look at the manual to verify this.

Step 4: Compare the two numbers. The output of the amp (260W) divided by the rating of the speakers (200W) is 1.3.

So, is this good? My opinion, the speakers are perhaps a bit underpowered, but nothing to really be concerned about.

If I am figgering how big a crowd I could handle, I would use the wattage of the amp (260W). Since the amp has two channels (right and left) I would multiply this number by 2 to get 520W. In the section on amps, I used the conservative number of 10 watts per person. Based on all this calculation, this system should be ok with crowds of 52. Get that 53rd person in and you need to run out for another bucket of watts.

Well, no... I'm just kidding. You can go ahead and have 53 people.

The Behringer system

The Behringer system includes the PMP1000 powered mixer and a pair of VP1220 speakers.

Step 1:  The speakers are 8 ohms. We will plug one speaker into each channel of the amp, so each channel of the amp will see 8 ohms. The amp has a rating for 8 ohm operation, so we are cool.(Gosh that sounds familiar.)

Step 2: The speakers are referred to as Behringer EUROLIVE VP1220 800W 12" PA Speaker, so they must be 800W, right? Tricky folks. You have to read further down to get the spec that we want: 200 Watts Continuous / 800 Watts Peak Power. Continuous power is the same as RMS power, so we will go withe the 200W number.

Step 3: The amp has the following spec: Ultra-compact 2 x 250-Watt stereo powered mixer (500 Watt bridged mode). I'm gonna call this a non-spec, since they don't tell you whether the spec is for driving 8 ohm speakers or 4 ohm or what. You would think that maybe, since this is all sold as a system, that they would pick the spec that is relevant to the set of speakers that are in the system?

But, no. They make you work a little to get at the number that is really important. When I click on the "Spec" tab, I find all kinds of numbers. In particular, the 250W is clearly much larger than the number we want. First, 250W is peak power, not RMS. Second (I reach for my blood pressure medication), this number is the power when driving 4 ohm speakers. 

Peak Power, both channels driven:
8 Ohms per channel: 135W
4 Ohms per channel: 250W

The relevant number is considerably less impressive: 8 Ohms per channel: 90W.

Step 4: Compare the two numbers. The output of the amp (90W) divided by the rating of the speakers (200W) is 0.45.

Ouch. The speakers are pretty seriously underpowered. Remember, this number is ideally around 2.0. I'm not gonna recommend this powered mixer with these speakers.

But, let's say you decided to go with this system. How big a crowd could you handle? Each channel is 90W, so the total wattage is 180W. Figgering 10W per person, I put the crowd size at 18. Maybe 20? Definitely a small gig.

The Yamaha system
Finally, let's do a little spec check on a Yamaha system, which pairs the Yamaha EMX212S powered mixer with a pair of Yamaha A12 speakers.

Step 1:  The speakers are 8 ohms. We will plug one speaker into each channel of the amp, so each channel of the amp will see 8 ohms. The amp has a rating for 8 ohm operation, so we are cool. (Gosh that sounds familiar. Most speakers are 8 ohms.)

Step 2:  We have the following spec for the power rating on the speakers: 300W program handling (600W peak). Hmmmm.... program handling is twice the RMS rating, so the number we want is 150W.

Step 3: The amp is rated rather sparsely: Dual 200W amps. We need to dig further, since we have learned the the numbers at the front are not necessarily the ones we want. Unfortunately, Musician's Friend does not have the spec that we want.

To get that spec, I had to go to the Yamaha website. On this page we see the important number 130W+130W, which means 130W in one channel and 130W in the other.

Step 4: Compare the two numbers. The output of the amp (130W) divided by the rating of the speakers (150W) is 0.87.

Gosh. This is better than the Behringer system, but it still falls short of the magic value of 2.0. If I were considering this system, I think I would lean toward using the Yamaha EMX312C powered mixer instead of the EMX212C. This amp is rated at 190W per channel, which is a little better suited to the speakers. But... it costs $110 more.

Let's say we bought this system. How big a crowd could we host? We have 130W per channel from the amp, so the total power is 260W. When we divide this by 10W person, we get a maximum crowd of 26 people.

I have looked at three systems. Of the three, the Phonic system comes off the best in terms of matching amps with speakers and in terms of total wattage output. (Time for the weasel words) These specs are only part of the story. I have equipment from all three manufacturers and I tend to think of the Phonic equipment as the best value for a low end system, and the Yamaha as the better value for a slightly higher end system.

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? ( Part 7: Speakers - getting those karaoke vibrations going)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

As a karaoke jockey, you are much more likely to get a two-way than a three-way. Maybe at home, you may have a three-way, but you probably have a two-way at your gigs.

I am talking, of course, about speakers. Specifically, the number of speakers per cabinet. A two-way speaker has a woofer (for the low notes) and a tweeter (for the high notes) in a single cabinet. A three-way speaker will add a midrange speaker to this. Almost all PA equipment will have a woofer and a tweeter in a single cabinet.

Woofer and tweeter

Active versus passive
In a previous section, I described various ways that the pieces of a karaoke system are combined. In particular, I spoke about integrating the amp into the speaker to form an active speaker, which is also known as a powered speaker. The standard speaker (with no internal amp) is referred to as a passive or unpowered speaker.

My examples in this section are largely aimed at the unpowered speakers, although most of the concepts apply whether there is an amplifier in the speaker cabinet or not. 

What do you get with a bigger woofer?
The bigger the woofer, the better the bass. To give an idea how this works, let's look at a series of speakers from Phonic. These low end speakers are sold in a 10", 12", and 15" versions. You can see in the table below that the 10" speaker goes down to 65 Hz, the 12" goes down to 60 Hz, and the 15" goes down to 50 Hz.

Phonic S710         10"    65 Hz to 20 kHz      $70 each
Phonic S712         12"    60 Hz to 20 hHz     $100 each
Phonic S715         15"    50 Hz to 20 kHz     $150 each

Unfortunately, the size of the woofer is really what dictates bass response, and ultimately, the size of the woofer drives the cost, the size, and the weight of a speaker. If you want a good thump coming out of your system, the speakers will be big, heavy, and expensive.

But my earbuds have excellent bass response, and they aren't anywhere near 15". What's up with that?

The difference has to do with the fact that bass notes just don't travel that well. If you put a tiny speaker (as in  earbuds) very close to your ear, the bass will be much louder than when you pull the earbuds away from your ear. If you hold the earbuds even a few inches from your ear, the sound becomes very tinny. 

Watts - peak, program, continuous, RMS
The wattage ratings on speakers are probably the most confusing and most abused spec.

The power handling spec is the number of watts that are safe for a speaker. It indicatives how much power you can pump through the speaker before you start damaging it.

Note that this is different than the wattage ratings that we put on light bulbs. If I compare a 60W bulb with a 100W bulb, I will see a change in brightness. If I replace a 60W speaker with a 600W speaker, there will not be a big increase in volume. But there will be a big difference in how loud I can turn the amp before the speakers self destruct.

Wattage for a speaker could be reported as "peak", "program", "continuous", or "RMS" wattage. How confusing.  The "peak" power handling is the highest of the numbers, indicating the hypothetical level of a quick "pop" that could blow out the speaker. "Program" power is generally about half of that number, and "continuous" or "RMS" numbers are generally half of that number.

So... if you want to compare the power handling of two speakers, you need to first make sure that the numbers are expressed in the same units. I'm not sure any of the units are better than any others, so I will just say that I am going to work with "continuous power".

If there is a spec for peak power, divide by four to get RMS power.
If there is a spec for program power, divide by two to get RMS power.
If there is a spec for continuous power, then multiply it by 1. Or divide by 1. Or add zero. The RMS power handling is the same as the continuous power handling.

Sound pressure level
I said that a higher wattage rating on a speaker doesn't necessarily make the speaker louder. It's not just the watts, but also what the speaker does with them. The "SPL" (sound pressure level) is a measure of how efficiently a speaker deals with those watts. The speaker is hooked up to an amp delivering a standard amount of power. A sound level is measured at a standard distance from the speaker. The result is called the SPL.

The SPL of a speaker is measured in dB, with typical numbers in the high 90's. SPL ratings can be a bit deceptive. The range for the SPL might be only a few dB, but a difference of 3 dB represents a doubling of the amount of sound. 

What the specs don't tell you
Power handling is only part of the story. Sometimes loud is all you really want. Like if you are trying to scare squirrels out of your attic. But usually, you want good and loud. Just because 100W does not damage a speaker, it doesn't mean that it sounds good. Unfortunately, there isn't a spec for how good a speaker sounds. Sorry.

I have gone through the immense trouble to compile a list of specs on a number of 12 inch speakers.

    Speaker                Freq. resp        Power hand.       SPL      Wt      Cost

Gemini GSM-1260  50 Hz-20 kHz     100W RMS       ??        24  lbs     $70
Phonic S712            60 Hz-20 kHz       75W RMS      95 dB    ?? lbs    $100
Behringer 212XL     65 Hz-18 kHz     200W RMS      95 dB    24 lbs    $150
Peavey PR 12          54 Hz-21 kHz     200W RMS      97 dB    33 lbs    $170
Yamaha BR12         65 Hz-20 kHz     125W RMS       97 dB    35 lbs    $250
JBL JRX112M        60 Hz-16 kHz     250W RMS       99 dB    43 lbs    $320

What to conclude?  It would seem from the specs listed that the Gemini speaker at $70 is just about the equivalent to the Yamaha at nearly four times the cost. Like I said, unfortunately, there isn't a spec for how good a speaker sounds. 

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? ( Part 6: Karaoke system amp)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

There is a big question when putting a karaoke system together. How big? How many watts do you need?

Naturally size matters. Especially if you are a guy. More horsepower... more terabytes in your iPod... more watts in your karaoke system. All that stuff. I think it's part of the natural selection process. Male peacocks with the biggest tail feathers are the most successful at attracting mates, and so it is with KJs and watts.

But how much do you really need?

Bad news
The bad news is that watts are expensive and that you probably need a lot of them.

In an earlier post on how bands got their names, I reported that Deep Purple once held the Guinness record for the loudest band. The record is currently held by KISS, with a performance that reached 136 decibels. For reference, hearing damage starts at around 120 decibels, and the "threshold of pain" is above 130. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find a reference to that wattage for that concert.

Just how expensive is an amp?  The chart below is a plot of dollars per watt for a series of amps that I trust from an online vendor that I trust. As a rule of thumb, divide the wattage in half and add thirty. If you figure you need 500W, then the amp will cost about $280. I made this chart, by the way. Did I mention that I am a mathematician?

 
In future generations, this rule of thumb will become known as Seymour's Rule of Amp Pricing. In future generations, this rule of thumb will be obsoleted by inflation, and eventually, by technology. This is in accordance of Seymour's Rule of the Obsolescence of Rules.

Enthusiasts of the history of science will recognize a similarity of this rule to Stigler's law of eponymy, which states that "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." This law was first discovered by Robert Merton, so naturally, it was named after Stigler.

Enough digression. Here is an important corollary of Seymour's Rule of Amp Pricing. It is more cost effective to buy a single amp with twice the power than it is to buy two amps.

For example, the Crown XLS 202D sells for $200 and generates 300 watts. I could get 600 watts if I buy two of them, and it would cost me $400. Alternately, I could buy the Crown XLS 602D, which is rated at 600 watts, and it would cost me $300. Not only is the bigger amp cheaper, but it is less total weight and less to schlep around.


Watts and specs
Before we talk about how many watts a KJ needs, we need to set some ground rules about specing of amps. The problem is, it is confusing.

First, there is the issue of the units that one uses. Some manufacturers spec out their amps in terms of watts peak-to-peak and some use watts RMS. Peak to peak numbers are given when a manufacturer wants to artificially inflate their specs, since peak-to-peak numbers are almost six times as large as RMS numbers.

Another very helpful way that a manufacturer can confuse a prospective KJ is to speak in terms of total power rather than watts per channel. Another bad thing. Well... it's actually not all that terrible. If an amp has two channels (i.e. stereo), you just add the watts RMS. Just be careful when reading the specs.

The next confusing thing is exemplified in a spec on the Crown XLS 202D: "330W/ch @ 2 ohms, 300W/ch @ 4 ohms, 200W/ch @ 8 ohms, 660W bridged mono @ 4 ohms, 600W bridged mono @ 8 ohms." Depending on which number you look at, the amp could be rated at anywhere from 200 watts per channel to 660 watts per channel.

Isn't this deceptive advertising? Actually, not at all. The specs merely reflect the power output that you get with different configurations of speakers. You just have to know a bit about your speakers in order to properly read the specs. In particular, you need to know a bit about ohms.

Ohms
To clarify right off... I am not talking about the kind of oms involved in transcendental meditation.

Speakers are generally described in terms of their resistance, which is measured in ohms. What does that mean?  Well, I could explain it, but the simple explanation requires some explanation of electronics, and the correct explanation says that ohms are actually meaningless when you talk about speakers.

So, let's just say that a typical speaker is 8 ohms and forget the details. Generally speaking, if the speaker has one woofer, it will be 8 ohms. Not always, but usually. If you plug one speaker into each channel of the amp, then the spec from the amp that is relevant is the "watts per channel at 8 ohms" number. In the case of the Crown amplifier, this relevant number is 200W.

With this particular Crown amp (and with most decent amps, for that matter) you can plug two 8 ohm speakers into each channel without blowing up the amp. How can you tell if an amp will blow up with two sets of speakers?

When you plug two speakers in, the resistance (that is, the ohms) of the speakers gets cut in half. If you plug two 8 ohm speakers into each channel, the load for each channel becomes 4 ohms. And now the applicable spec on the amplifier is "300W/ch @ 4 ohms". Just by virtue of the fact that the amp has a power rating for 4 ohms, you know that you can plug in two 8 ohm speakers.

So... hmmmm.... we doubled the number of speakers and the power went from 200 watts per channel up to 300 watts per channel?  That doesn't seem fair! We didn't get twice the power.  :(

I agree that it's not fair, but it's reality. There is a certain amount of inefficiency when you plug two speakers into the same channel. And this leads to another important point: It is more cost effective to run a single set of speakers per channel.

These important points lead in the same direction. Buy a bigger amp, dude, and use a single set of speakers.

That said, I am going to make a case for plugging in multiple sets of speakers. You probably have noticed this, but the closer you get to a speaker, the louder it is. If I have one speaker, and try tomake it loud enough on the opposite side of the room, it will necessarily be too loud near the speaker. If I add a second speaker, with proper spacing, the overall sound levels are more consistent around the room. Each set of speakers that I scatter throughout the room makes the sound level more even.

In a larger room, I will run with two sets of speakers to get this evenness.

Caveats
For the more technically adept: I need to clear some stuff up. I have made a whole bunch of simplifications in describing this stuff above.

When I talked about the resistance for speakers plugged into the same channel, I was assuming that the speakers had the same resistance. The formula is more complicated if the speakers have different resistances.

Another simplification is thatI have assumed that the speakers are combined in parallel, rather than in series. If you go out of your way with a soldering iron you could combine speakers in series. But, if you use standard plugs and cables in the way they were intended, your speakers will be in parallel.

The third simplification was in my discussion of using multiple sets of speakers. I neglected to say that if the listening areas of the speakers overlap, you will get dead spots from phase cancellation. Analyzing this is very complicated. Don't go crazy with it.

Yet another simplification was that I completely avoided talking about the bridged mono mode for an amp. Let's agree to ignore this. Well... unless you get a passive subwoofer. Then I recommend bringing in a sound pro just to make sure.


How many watts do I need?
Boy... good question.

"It all depends" is a good answer, although probably not all that useful. But of course wattage requirements do depend on a lot of things. I should be honest, though. The real reason I say "depends" is to avoid having to accept any responsibility for my actions.

The first big question to ask is whether you want to do outdoor gigs. If a gig is outdoor, the PA is going to be a lot less efficient. A lot. I mean, a lot. There is nothing to contain the sound, so it will just get lost. Most importantly, the bass will get lost. My opinion... if you are playing a gig outside, you should look into adding a subwoofer. You only need one because the stereo effect is less pronounced at low frequencies. But you do need one.

Another important variable is the efficiency of the speakers. I will discuss this in the section about speakers.

(Now I will actually get down to giving some advice.)

The wattage requirement also depends on the size of the venue. Here is one advisor that gives a specific number: "If you intend using the machine at parties or small social events you will need at least 80 watts (2 speakers at 40 watts each)."  Sounds pretty cool. We can get off really cheap!

I am not so excited about 80 watts. The only gig that I have run where 80 watts is sufficient is my New Year's Eve party. This is maybe 20 people, in my living room. And we are generally somewhat older, so we don't need to have music quite so loud. And with 80 watts, the music doesn't interfere much with conversation.

Musician's Friend has a "PA System Buying Guide" that I recommend reading. They offer some advice on power requirements that I find more reasonable:

"The size of the venue you play in can help you determine the continuous power handling (wattage) your system will need. For example, smaller gigs, conferences, lectures, and outdoor meetings may need about 350-500 watts, while club bands, garage bands, and mobile DJs may need 500-1,000+ watts."

 
Here is a different expert who gives a number in terms of people. If we assume that karaoke fits into the category of "bands and average size venues", then 3 to 4 watts per person (in the audience) is recommended. So, if there are 50 people listening to karaoke, you need something like 150 to 200 watts.

The karaoke pundits put a slightly larger number on it. The number tossed about in this forum is around 10 watts per person. So, if you have a venue with 100 people, then they might recommend 1,000 watts.

The Crown amp that I mentioned above (the XLS 202D) puts out 200 watts per channel into a pair of 8 ohm speakers. So, with one set of speakers, you get a total of 400 watts. With two sets of speakers (the equivalent of one 4 ohm speaker per channel, the amp will put out 300 watts per channel, for a total of 600 watts.

I have this amp. I have run gigs where 400 watts (with one set of speakers) is fine. I have had other gigs where 600 watts (two sets of speakers) falls a bit short... I wind up pushing the amp a bit harder than I would like.

For larger gigs, I now bring one set of passive speakers (speakers that run from the amp) along with one set of active speakers (speakers with their own amps). My active speakers are the Behringer B212A speakers, that put out 250 watts each. Thus, I get a total of 400 watts from the passive speakers and 500 watts from the active, for a total of 900 watts. Still, I sometimes feel I would like to push a bit more. I have my eye on a Crown XLS 802D...

So, I am gonna agree with that range of 200 to 1,000 watts. To make most customers happy, I think a KJ should be set up to deliver something like that amount of power. o make the KJ happy, you need to push toward the other end.

Now for the weaselwords. If you are running outdoors, you should really consider getting a subwoofer. And more power. And if you are running a large club, then you will probably need a whole lot more power, but (my experience) large clubs usually have their own sound system. And they will usually allow you to hook into their system.

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? (Part 5: Mixing it up)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

A mixer, in it's simplest form, is just a box that combines the signals from one or more mics along with a music signal in order to create a single signal to send to your amp. That's all it really is, but somewhere along the way it got more complicated.

This article is orgamized in such a way as to start you off thinking it is all gonna be really cheap, then suggest that it will really be more, and then finally leave you at the point of "how can I afford not to go all out?"

Taking it simple (CHEAP) first
Let's have a look at the simplest (and cheapest) options for a mixer. Along the way, we will see the features that get added for a price.

One of the simplest mixers is exemplified by the Nady MM-141, which sells for $30.

This particular mixer will combine four mics into one, with a separate volume control for each mic, and then another overall volume control.

Wow. What else could someone possibly want?  Seems like this is all you would need for a mixer. Pipe this into a a set of active speakers, or into an amp and speakers and you are all set. Well, except for a few things. Most importantly, the music.

Let's say that you are running your karaoke show with a laptop. You have the karaoke music coming out of your laptop, but where is it going? Your laptop speaker output should go to the mixer. The job of any self-respecting mixer is to combine the music with the voices of the singers and allow you to balance one against the other.

It would seem at first glance that this cute little mixer has you covered. Four inputs? That sounds like three mics and one input for the music. Cool.... Except.

The inputs for this mixer are mic inputs. They are (go figger) designed for mic level inputs. Your computer puts out a different signal level, called "line level", which is suitable for headphones and amplifiers. I will discuss the difference between these two levels in another section of this tutorial ("Tying it all together"). Suffice it to say right now that to balance the music and the mics, you would need to turn the music all the way down and the mics all the way up. Once you get it balanced, you really don't have much breathing room left to adjust either music or mics during a show.

Oh yeah, and then there is the issue about stereo. The inputs to this simple mixer are mono. To connect stereo up to this, you need to take two of the inputs, one for each channel. And the output of the mixer is also mono, so you have lost the stereo effect. That might not be an awful thing. I would argue that while stereo is a nice thing to have, it is not crucial for karaoke.

But still, I do not recommend this mini mixer for karaoke. 

Bringing in the music
There is another cheap solution that will allow you to mix in a mic: your computer. Sound cards on computers often have a place to plug in a mic. Within the sound card, there is a mixer that will combine the mic input with the music that your are playing, and send this out the line out of the computer.

Which is pretty much what we want, right? Well... once again I intend to try to pop your "I can get my karaoke gear real cheap" bubble.

There is a lot of variability in the quality of mic inputs on a sound board, and this is especially true on  the sound card for a laptop. These inputs were designed for the speaking voice, not for singing. If your mic input is not good enough, you could go with an external sound card. This device (Sabrent USB 7.1 CH 3D) plugs into a USB port and provides two mic inputs. It sells for $24. 

I have one of these. Perhaps I am missing something, but there does not appear to be separate volume controls for the two mics. But in my opinion, a bigger problem is that the volume controls for this box are  software controls. To adjust the volume of the mic, you must first bring up the volume control window, and then adjust it with the mouse.

While this may seem pretty easy just talking about it, but you probably won't think so the first time someone screams into the mic. Why do people do that? I don't know. But they do, and when they do, you need to be right there on the volume control to assert your own dominance. You are in control. You are the alpha KJ.

The solution to both of these problems is to use the two boxes together. I should clarify. The solution to the problem of separate controls for the two mics and of mouse controls is to use the USB sound card and the mini-mixer. All your mics would plug into the mini-mixer and the mini-mixer would plug into the Sabrent sound card.

I don't have a solution to the problem of people screaming into the mics.


While this setup (mini-mixer and USB sound card) would (should) all work just hunky-dory, I'm not going to recommend it.

But before I move on, there is one cool thing you can do with a USB sound card. You can have two sound outputs going at the same time: one for KJ and the other for DJ. I will talk about this in a future blog. 

Mixing it up for under $100
I found five mixers for under $100 that I would call "adequate" for karaoke. True to my noncommittal ways, I am not going to recommend any of these mixers.

When I say adequate, I mean "don't come crying to me when you decide you want something bigger and better". When I say adequate, I mean "base level functionality". (Also, when I say adequate, it also brings back some bad memories of what she said after the first time I "did it". I mean, after the first time I did karaoke, of course.)

Behringer XENYX 1202

Mackie 402VLZ3

Nady SRM10X
Peavey PV6
Yamaha MG102C

What are the base level functionalities?
In my opinion, there needs to be at least two mics, so the mixer has to have at least two mic inputs. When  running with two mics, the KJ has one mic and the singer the other. When two people get up to sing, the KJ passes the mic to the second singer.

There must be at least one stereo, line level input to plug the computer sound output into.

There must be separate volume control for each input. It is imperative to have a volume control on each mic because of the huge variation in volume between people.

There must be a stereo main out (for the club speakers) and then a second output. This second output might be called monitor out or control room out. These outputs must each have a volume control. This second output will be used to run a monitor speaker or two. A monitor is a speaker that sits on the floor, pointing toward the singer. This speaker allows the singer to hear their own voice. In my opinion, a monitor speaker is absolutely essential.

In a pinch, you can use a headphone output to run the monitor speakers. A few of the mixers above have only this as a second output. This is not as good as a real output, but it allows us to achieve base level functionality.

Additional features
So, if I limit myself to spending $100 on a mixer, what great features might I miss?

More mic inputs - To me, it just seems a bit pedestrian for the KJ  to be exchanging the  mic back and forth with the singers, so I think you need a lot of mics, and hence a lot of mic inputs. I normally run with three mics just for the singers. If I am running the gig with another KJ, I will have two additional mics. I don't know if I mentioned this or not, but I am a fabulous karaoke host.

Second stereo line input - Hey, did you know you can hook your iPod into a mixer?  And that it will sound good?  I always bring some sort of mp3 player with me whenever I run a gig. It can provide background music between singers. Just leave the iPod running and bring the volume up on that channel between karaoke songs. Also, the iPod can provide music while you are setting up or tearing down. You can pack up the laptop while you still have tunes going. Finally, having the iPod always ready can help you avoid complete humiliation if the karaoke software crashes. To run an iPod like this, you need to have a second stereo line input.

Sliders - Sliders are just cool. I like sliders. It makes me feel like I am Scottie, running a transporter. I like a mixer where the main output volumes are all controlled via sliders rather than knobs that you turn.

Special effects - This feature is often written "Special FX". (If you are cool, or if you want people to think you are cool, you will also abbreviate effects  as FX.)  Special effects can make a mediocre singer sound great. In order to get that true American Idol sound, you really need to add a little reverb to a voice. Or that's the thought. On the other hand, reverb can make it more difficult to control feedback. It also will take some learnin' to go from "ewwww.... that's sounds like too much reverb" to "wow!  is that Dannie Gokey?"

Bass and treble on mic input - A bass and treble control on each mic input allows you tailor the sound to the person's voice. When I use these, it is most likely to turn down the treble on a shrill voice.

Bandpass equalizer on output - All rooms are different, all speakers are different, songs are different, quiet sound needs more bass. All these require that you have some control over the equalization of the final output. Having five channels is nice. Seven? Gee I dunno. Do you need it? Do you have time to tailor it for each gig, or will they always be set to whatever you used at the last gig?

Level set LED indicator - My mixers have little LEDs next to each mic input to tell me when the signal level is starting to get too high. I try to keep the signal level just below the point where this LED flashes.

More better mixers
Here are some examples of mixers that I would consider pretty darn good for karaoke. They all run from $200 to $300. Note that the basic price difference has to do with the number of inputs.

This is the Mackie ProFX8, selling for $230.

Here we have Yamaha's MG124CX, coming in at $290.

And here is the Peavey PV14, with a price tag of $300.

Which to buy?  I dunno. I have two Mackie mixers (one a little bigger than the ProFX8, and one a little smaller -- both older models), and I have one Yamaha powered mixer that is real old. I use the Yamaha mixer most often, simply because it has the built in amp. Convenience. I think I like the mixer functionality a bit better, but partly that's just my own familiarity.

Running a mixer
Mixers have a lot of buttons and switches. It will necessarily take a while to learn how to run the crazy thing. I will save that long discussion for another blog, but I will motivate the discussion a bit.

If the volume of a singer is too high, you could ask the singer to sing quieter. You could ask the singer to hold the mic further from their mouth. You could lower the gain knob right next to the input plug. You could lower the bass, midrange, and treble controls for that mic. You could lower the AUX or the Main for that mic. You could lower the main mix volume. Or, you could lower the volume on the amp. All of these will serve to lower the volume of the singer. Which is the correct one to adjust?

When I first started running a mixer I found that my knobs would run away by the end of the gig. Eventually, certain knobs would be pushed all the way one way. I didn't know how they got there, except that every time I adjusted a knob I was doing something that made sense. The thing is, I knew what each of the knobs did, but I did not have a coherent strategy for adjusting them.

There is some artistry to running a mixer and there is some science. I will go into that deeper in another blog. 

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? (Part 4: Microphony for karaoke)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

Ok, so, I was checking out the mics before a show. The club manager, Mike, was standing at the end of my row of mics. I spoke into the mic at the end and said "mic three". I spoke into the next mic and said "mic two". Then "mic one". I stepped over and looked into the manager's face and said "Mike zero". He laughed. He's a good guy. I make dumb jokes.

Trying to sell you on buying a decent mic
The requirements for a karaoke microphone are fairly simple. It must be rugged and it must not make decent singers sound bad. Oh, and it's gotta be cheap. Not much to ask! Oh yeah, one more thing: it's gotta make people look cool.

Rugged is important. Karaoke singers routinely abuse the mics. They spill beer on them, blow cigarette smoke into them, spit on them, drop them, scream into them, swing them by their cords, and every once in a while, they throw them. So you either must buy really cheap mics and consider them disposable, or you must get mics that can stand the abuse.

Really cheap mics, of course, make people sound like they are singing into a really cheap mic. Sometimes maybe that's the effect you are going for, but I'm guessing not. (Then again, this is karaoke. I mean, get real.)

Cheap mics do two things that expensive mics won't do. Well, besides being inexpensive. Cheap mics will give you a really cool "singing into a can" sound. Chicks dig that. Cheap mics will also "bottom out" - that is, they will distort badly when you sing too loud. Again, chicks dig this. There was an evolutionary advantage to this. Guys that could sing loud were just plain better at scaring away saber-toothed tigers.

Seriously, I bought a cheap wireless lapel mic for my wife (the Gypsy Songstress) for her singing gigs. It was less than $20, which was great. It sounded lousy. Which was not great. Not much of an evolutionary advantage there. I invested in a more expensive wireless mic... still not excellent sound quality, but I was only willing to put $100 into it. I'm cheap. Which is another evolutionary disadvantage for me.

How do you know if a mic is a cheap mic? Well, the price is one give-away. And the case... is it plastic? If a mic has an attached cord, rather than a detachable cord, it is likely to be lower quality. How about the plug? If it comes with a quarter inch plug or 1/8" plug (as shown below), it is likely not high quality.

Professionals use mics with what is called an XLR connector, shown below. This sort of connector and cable will reduce the chances of an unwanted hum sneaking into the system. Why? Read the post on "Tying it all together".

Decent quality mic
There are two common types of mics: dynamic and condensor. A recording studio engineer or member of Aerosmith or the guy in the music department at WalMart might tell you that you need to buy a condensor mic. Arguably, some of the best mics are condensor mics.

But for karaoke, there are reasons to go with a dynamic mic. First, condensor mics tend to be a bit more fragile than dynamic mics. Second, condensor mics need what is called "phantom power". You need to run a high voltage (but very weak) signal to the microphone for power. A decent mixer will give you this signal, but if you have an indecent mixer, you may not even be able to use a condensor mic.

Dynamic mics may not be the highest quality, but, let's face it, this is not a recording studio. This isn't even Summerfest. (Interesting thing here... I sang at Summerfest once. They had a karaoke stage. Great fun. I thought I sounded pretty good. Too bad the audience couldn't hear how fabulous I sounded inside my head.) My own opinion is that a decent dynamic mic will give you a pretty good sound.

As I have said in this tutorial, I am not about to recommend equipment, like for example, the Shure SM58. I would not think of saying anything like the Shure SM58 is a mic that gives an excellent sound and really holds up to any sort of abuse. And I certainly won't mention that I own six of these puppies. I don't. I own seven.

 
The Shure SM58 sells for $99. Shure won't allow them to be sold cheaper. If you are buying a new mic for less, then it's probably a cheap knock off. And it's likely that it does not have the sound quality or durability. I found a very good description of how to tell a real SM 58.

You may ask if I paid $99 for my Shure mics? I bought several used mics on eBay for less. I think at least one of them was a knock-off. You pays your money, you takes your chances.

Omnidirectional versus cardioid
If you happen to use a mic other than the SM 58, you should know one very important distinction about mics. This is more important than all my useless drivel about cheap versus expensive and dynamic versus condensor.

Microphones are designed to either collect sound from all directions (omnidirectional) or to collect sound preferentially from one direction (unidirectional, cardioid, or hyper-cardioid). Omnidirectional mics are great for studios, but are a big problem if they are used with PA equipment. The problem is feedback.

Think of a movie scene where someone steps up to talk into a microphone. The guy who puts the sound togerther for the movie will cue up a stock sound clip of feedback. There will momentarily be a weee-ooow. This sound is the universally accepted indication that what you will hear next is coming from a PA system. I've started noticing this in movies. Totally ruins the movies for me. 

We have all heard feedback. Feedback is that high pitched squeal that occurs when a sound is picked up by the mic, amplified and sent out to the speakers, and then picked up again by the microphone only to get amplified even further, and so on. Kinda like rumors of Sarah Palin running for president. Feedback, like Sarah Palin in the White House, is generally not considered a good thing.

One good way to assure that you will always get lots of feedback is to use an omnidirectional mic. If for some reason you or your patrons don't appreciate loud shrill noises that completely drown out the singer and the music, then I would recommend using a cardioid (or hyper-cardioid) mic.

The cardioid mic, when pointed directly at the singer's mouth, will not be particularly sensitive to the sound coming from the speakers, and feedback will be avoided. At least until the singer decides to stop pouring beer into the mic and point the mic directly at the main speakers. Wow. That's cool. A good reason for you to have one hand at all times on the volume control for the mics.

By the way singers, point the mic at your mouth, ok? Unless you wanna look cool. It looks cool to hold the mic above your mouth, pointed down at your toes. It just doesn't sound as good. Oh, and close your eyes, too.

Another way that a singer can absolutely guarantee that they generate lots of the sort of ear-splitting feedback that the audience will love is to cup the microphone. I don't quite know why, but some people mistake the ball at the end of the mic for a handle. They will wrap their hand completely around the ball of the mic so as to keep any of their lovely voice from being heard. The part of their voice that does make it into the mic will make them sound like they have their head deep in a toilet bowl. This also drives chicks wild.

On top of this, cupping the mic will disturb the very carefully engineered sound pattern of the mic. And because of this, I guarantee there will be feedback. But damn! People really look cool when they use the mic ball as a handle.

While I am on the subject of feedback, lemme put in a plug for my post "Speakers - getting those karaoke vibrations going". This post talks about how to position speakers to avoid feedback.

Keeping one hand on the volume control
Feedback is one reason to keep monitoring the volume on the mics. Another reason is that singers come in all shapes and sizes. And their voices do as well. Most audio engineers have the luxury to set mic volumes before the show. A karaoke host is paid the huge bucks because he/she must be constantly raising the volume for timid voices and dropping the volume for people with huge or excessively annoying  voices.

As you get used to your equipment, you will learn how to adjust bass and treble for each singer. I have noticed that some people sound great when you boost the bass a little, and for some people you really need to cut out some of the highs. Some people need to cut out the highs. But that's a whole 'nother subject.

Keeping the mics straight
If you run your karaoke show with only one mic, then you don't need to read this section. Of course, in my opinion, every professional karaoke host will have three mics on stage available for the singers and at least one mic for the host. But, I don't want to criticize others. BTW, I have three mics on stage available for the singers and at least one mic for the host.

If you have decided that you want to be considered a great karaoke host, then you will have several mics so that the guy and the gal each have a mic when they sing "I Got You Babe" or the naughty version of "Summer Nights". And when you have that duet singing, you will invariably need to individually adjust the volume to balance the two singers.



When I first started this great job, I put colored electrical tape on each of the mics. After the first night, I realized that I needed to put different colors of tape on the mics if I was going to tell the difference. (It really doesn't take me long to figger this stuff out. Who says I'm not the sharpest crayon in the shed?) So, the second night I wrapped different colors of tape on each mic. And I put matching tape on the ends of the mic cables.

This was great, but I eventually came to a better solution. I now put the colored tape on each end of the mic cables, and nothing on the mics. This way, I don't have the problem of trying to match the color of the mic with the color of the cable when I set up. And another bonus... when people hold a mic with tape on it, the tape will eventually slide and people's hands will get sticky. Gross.

Wireless vs wired
Another popular option for karaoke mics is the wireless mic. This mic saves time setting up, since you don't need to run the cables. There is one less cable for singers to trip on, which is good. And the singer is free to wander around the room so that they can hit on various people in the audience.

This last thing can be good or bad. Some people in the audience, believe it or not, don't appreciate some random singer hitting on them when they are trying to concentrate on drinking their beer. Go figger. People who like getting drunk shouldn't hang out at karaoke bars. Ummm.. wait. I take that back. I keep forgetting what the whole point of karaoke is.

Another bad thing about a singer wandering around through the bar with a mic is that they will be out there where the main speakers are loud. Just in case you kinda missed the whole section on feedback, this can be a problem.

Another downside to wireless mics is that, for the same quality of mic, wireless mics will be more expensive. The wireless version of my favorite Shure SM58 runs about $600. I don't have one, by the way. If I did, I would not use it for karaoke. (Note, you can find the "handheld transmitter" for a bunch less, but you still need to buy the little box that receives the signal from the mic.)

Batteries for your wireless mic
Here's a little tip about batteries. The handheld part of the wireless mic needs a 9V battery. The battery generally runs out after one night of karaoke... you need a fresh battery for every gig.

This is expensive and also a bit disturbing if you happen to have any "green" thoughts about the proper disposal of batteries. You might immediately think ":rechargeable batteries", but I have a caution. Don't use NiCad rechargeables. You just won't get any kind of battery life out of them. They won't make it through a show. I recently discovered a new type of rechargeable battery, the Ni-MH battery. To my delight, these batteries are relatively cost-effective, and they do hold a charge long enough to make it through a show.

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? (Part 3: Formats for karaoke tunes)

First part of karaoke system tutorial        Previous part          Next part



A popular question in Yahoo Answers is this: "How can I remove the vocals from this song?" I think the hope is that you can send an mp3 file through a magic piece of software and the vocals will go away, leaving just the instrumental parts. Cool. I wish it would work.

Sometimes this could work. Sometimes, when the studio mixes a track, they will put some instruments and the vocal in one channel, and some other instruments and the vocal in the other channel. By subtracting one from the other, you should get just the instrumentals. It would be great if they did that all the time. I don't think it's all that common.

Another way that the vocals could be removed - kinda - is by using "sophisticated mathematical algorithms". Neural networks. Wavelets. Fourier transforms. As an applied mathematician, I have learned that if it's easy for a person to do, it's hard for a computer. It's pretty easy for a human to isolate the vocals in a song. Computers have a lot of trouble with that. 

So how do they create karaoke songs, Mr. Smarty-pants Math Dude Revelator?

One way they could do it is to remix the original tracks. Rather than add Lady Gaga into the mix, they could just leave her out. They could, but the studios aren't particularly interested in that. Karaoke is such a tiny market. And the distribution channels are different. And the original recording artists would get a cut.

So, studio musicians are hired by karaoke studios to re-create the instrumental parts of a song. For a very good karaoke studio, this is a laborious process, listening over and over to get every rift and nuance correct. For other karaoke studios, this could be some guy picking out the melody on a synthesizer.

Next, the words are typed in and sequenced with the music. The computer then knows when to display the words and when to highlight them. The music and the words are then assembled onto a CD+G format disc.

CD+G? What's that? 
I'm glad you asked. When the format for a CD was decided upon, there was a small amount of space left on the disk. Someone came up with the idea that it might be useful to stuff some low resolution graphics in that extra space. This extension to the standard CD format was called CD+G for "compact disk plus graphics". Later, someone hit on this as an ideal format for karaoke.

If you put a CD+G disk into a standard CD player, it will play just like a regular CD, only without the vocals. Naturally, the graphics part will not show up. If you play that same CD on your computer using Windows Media Player or iTunes or WinAmp, you still won't see the graphics. You need a special program to display the graphics as the music is being played. Three examples of such programs are: Siglos, RoxBox, and Karma, but I talked about these in the previous post.

A few years back, if you wanted to be a KJ, you would buy a special CD+G player. This would connect to your audio equipment and to a TV and you would be all set. Well... except that you would need the CD+G disks. And probably a lot of them. Several hundred maybe? That can be a lot of CDs to schlep around, and a lot of CDs to sort through when looking for a song.

Just like regular DJs, KJs are making the transition from CD players to computers. Enter the mp3+G format. As I mentioned before, karaoke CDs are just like regular CDs in terms of the music. Naturally, you can rip the music to an mp3 file just like a standard CD. Karaoke ripping programs will do this normal rip, but will also create a second file for the graphics that is hidden on the CD+G disk. These graphic are stored in a file with a .cdg extension.

So, if you rip your karaoke CD with Jefferson Airplane's "White Rabbit", you will find two files: "Jefferson Airplane - White Rabbit.mp3", and "Jefferson Airplane - White Rabbit.cdg".

The two files, the .mp3 and the .cdg, will likely be about the same size. As for disk space, I figger about 200 songs per gigabyte for karaoke. 

Where do I find these karaoke tunes?
I have two favorite sites to buy karaoke tunes: karaoke.com and buy karaoke downloads. Here is a more complete list of where to look.

The first site sells mostly CDs, although they have downloads now as well. The cost of karaoke CDs is similar to the price of regular CDs. You can find cheap cheap CDs for a few bucks. I have paid $30 for a single CD. Their prices for downloads are currently 99 cents a song, generally.

The second site sells individual downloads for anywhere from 99 cents to two bucks, with a 20% discount after you buy five songs. They claim they have 20,000 songs, but there are a lot of songs not available. I go to karaoke.com when I can't find it at buy karaoke downloads.

The second website is great for me during a gig. If the venue has wireless, and someone asks for a song I don't have, I can often download it and have it right there. I don't know if patrons are impressed by this, but they sure should be.

Those are my two favorite sites. Here are a few others: Loud Karaoke, Ace Karaoke, and Tricerasoft. Since I have not dealt much with them, I can't recommend them.

How many songs do I need?
In order to be considered a big shot KJ, how many songs do you need? My experience has been that no matter how many songs you have, there will be people disappointed that you don't have their favorite song. My opinion - you need a few thousand songs at least.

For my first big gig, I had 3,844 songs. (Math geeks will immediately recognize this number as 62 squared.) In that first year, I was buying CDs every week. Now, I am at something over 8,200 songs, and I have slowed down the frantic buying.

At the other extreme, I visited two bars in New Orleans that offered karaoke. Each of the bars had a list of songs that was two pages long. Huh? I don't get it. Bourbon Street is not the main street of Karaokeville.

Ripping
Important point here for the KJ wannabe. This is gonna take a bunch of time. When you order a stack of CDs from karaoke.com, and they arrive in the mail, you could use them directly in your laptop. But you are gonna wanna rip them to your hard drive. Each one. One at a time.

And by the way, if you use the standard rip and burn software to copy a CD+G file, all you will get is the audio part. You will need to get a CD+G rip program. Although you can get a program from any of the companies that sell karaoke hosting programs, I would recommend Siglos' Power CD+G Burner, for $39. (Warning: I had a bad experience with a piece of freeware that was not worth what I paid for it!)

Other formats
The wonderful thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. The mp3/cdg format is not the only game in town, but it does seem to be the most popular.

Another format that I have seen is .bin, which seeks to overcome one of the disadvantages to the mp3/.cdg format. The problem is that the .cdg portion is not compressed. Given the size of disks today, this is not a big disadvantage. The benefit of leveraging the standard format has far outweighed the disadvantage of the extra file size.

Another interesting format is the midi format. This is the format that is used to communicate to midi keyboards. Basically, some of the karaoke host programs have adopted the standard midi format as one way to compose and play karaoke songs.

Like I said, this is interesting. It has the advantage of leveraging all the software that is available to compose midi files. There is a big disadvantage, however. When you play back a midi file, it sounds like, well, like a midi file.

There is one additional format for karaoke files that I consider just a bit more interesting, the mp4 format. This is standard for encoding video information. But, a karaoke song is really just a video, right? The audio track is the music and the video part is the words.

Here is where it gets interesting. Siglos sells a program called "Power CD+G to iPod Converter". For $39, you can have a program that will translate all your karaoke files into a video format that you can play on your iPod.

Hmmmm.....   Karaoke on the go?  I do gigs at retirement centers where I don't lead karaoke, I just sing. I used to carry along my laptop, a set of small speakers, and a table. With this, I don't need the laptop. Cool.

Just in case you want to feed the iPod display to your TV, all you really need is a cable. I found an iPod to TV cable on Amazon for about $9. One side of the cable plugs into your iPod, the other side has three RCA plugs for S-video. (S-video is an input that you will find on most TVs.) One of the RCA plugs is for the video, one for the right channel and one for the left. You will need to tell your iPod to send this TV output. Go to video settings on your iPod and make sure TV output is enabled.

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour

So you wanna be a karaoke host? (Part 2b: Working dog category)

First part of karaoke system tutorial         Previous part            Next part

Those of you who are still reading this blog are at least willing to consider the idea of a component karaoke system... a system where the various pieces of the system are in separate boxes. In this post, I will consider some various options for components.

As I have mentioned before, I hope it is understood that the products mentioned in these posts are meant as examples, and not as endorsements. I heartily welcome comments about people's experience with this equipment and with other equipment.

Getting away from CDs

Have I ranted enough about how bad all-in-one systems are? Well, I have one more rant. All of the systems mentioned in the previous posts are CD based systems. The KJ has to schlep in a big box of karaoke CDs. These CDs must be organized nicely because the KJ must be able to locate the proper disk and load it every three minutes throughout the evening. If a singer changes his mind when they get to the stage, the KJ must be able to quickly respond with a different song. 

Just like the  mp3 file has freed us from the wretched, tyrannical CD, new formats have been created for karaoke CDs. And guess what?  You can use your laptop to run a karaoke show. What you need is some karaoke tunes and a piece of software to play them. And of course, a laptop. I will talk about the karaoke tunes in the next post "Formats for karaoke tunes", but lemme just say a bit about the software to play karaoke songs.

 

 A laptop with karaoke host software will encompass the music player and the lyrics generator components. The karaoke host software will play your karaoke tunes just like any mp3 player program. As it plays the songs, it will display the lyrics in a window, in sync with the music.

Here's the cool part. The window with the lyrics? You can move it around. Wait, I'm not done yet. Let's say you have a laptop that you can plug a second monitor into. This is true, by the way, of all laptop computers that were built after the war of 1812. Let's say you plug a second monitor into this laptop. And let's say that you tell Windows to extend your desktop to the second display. Ok, here is the really cool part. You can move that window with the lyrics out to that second computer monitor. The singer looks at the second monitor, and can read the lyrics without seeing that you are playing solitaire on the main monitor. 

There will be more discussion about monitors and displaying the words in the post "Getting the word out". I don't know yet if I will mention playing solitaire during a show.

Here are a few examples of karaoke hosting programs: Compuhost, MTU hoster, RoxBox, Siglos, and Tricerasoft.

I am sure this list is not complete. In case you want to see some discussion about which is best, have a look at the karaoke forum. 

Which one do I use? Well, I started years ago with the home version of Siglos, basically because it was cheap. I later graduated to the professional version of this package because I already knew how to use the home version.

Why did I go to the pro version? Well, naturally because I am a pro, but there are two features that are very useful for me, especially at my Monday night gig where I typically see a few hundred people every night. (Brief pause for the reader to say "wow". Thank you.) 

The first great feature is that the software will automatically start a regular song when the karaoke song completes, and then will automatically fade this out when you start up the next karaoke song. Great stuff. Dead air during a karaoke show is, well, dead.

The second feature is that the software will keep track of people and songs for me. Someone hands me a slip or what to sing, and I enter their name and the song into the computer. When they come up five minutes later and ask when they sing, I can quickly check the computer and tell them that they are the sixth singer and they will sing at about 11:20. When they come up the second time, at 11:05, and tell me that they need to sing right now because they are more special than everyone else in line, then I can use the software to bump them back to singer #15.

In the clever diagram above, I drew the box around the karaoke tunes as well as the other two pieces. I debated with myself for some time about that. I hope that I didn't give the impression that laptop computers generally come with a huge collection of karaoke tunes. They don't, unless of course you are buying your laptop from a KJ who for some unfathomable reason has decided to get out of the business. 

(A word of caution here. Some unscrupulous sorry excuse for a KJ may attempt to sell you a laptop onto which they have illegally copied 74,619 karaoke songs. All that for the low low price of only $2,000. Wow. Such a deal. Unless you are the sort of person who will buy TVs and stereo equipment and original Van Gogh paintings out of the back seat of a minivan, I would suggest that you steer clear of that deal.)

So, I don't mean to imply that karaoke tunes come bundled on the laptop. I merely meant to underscore an important point. Once you get your laptop all set up, all the karaoke tunes will be on your laptop. There is no need to cart your 500 CDs around with you. This convenience alone is a good reason to consider a laptop.

One might consider a different approach, for example Vocopro sells a Karaoke player component that encompasses the same pieces as the laptop. It will play karaoke CDs and it will display the lyrics. I see two disadvantages to this system, however. First, it does not allow you to store a zillion karaoke tunes - you need to schlep CDs, and find CDs, and feed them in one at a time. Second, the user interface is rudimentary. It is limited to selecting one of the tracks on the CD. Of course, the Vocopro system is cheaper than a laptop.

Now, on to the discussion about combinations of mixer, amp, and speakers...

Option 1: All separate components

One way to put together the mixer, amp, and speakers is to use all separate pieces. Here is one set of components. The prices I give here were pulled from the Musician's Friend website. As I said before, I welcome comments about the merits of various components.

Mixer  - Mackie ProFX8 - $230

Amp - Crown XLS202D - $250

Yamaha S112V - $660 / pair

Again, I am not endorsing this equipment, but these components are all pretty decent quality. You could use these for a gig.  Still, the tally comes up to over $1100. Can you get a better price? Can you get by with cheaper stuff? Maybe you could contact my friend Bob at Cascading Waters Audio for other recommendations. 

Since the speakers are the most expensive part, you might consider going with a smaller speaker. As for me, one of my sets of speakers is an older version of the Yamaha speakers above. I bought them used. Go figger. I'm a cheapskate.

I don't always use that pair, though, since they are heavy and bulky. For a smaller gig, I use a smaller set of speakers, the Phonic SEM710, which go for about $100 each. They are certainly not as good a speaker as the 12" Yamaha, but for the price, I was impressed.

It all depends on the size of the gigs you will be running, and what kind of sound quality you are comfortable with. For more discussion on speakers, have a look at my post "getting those karaoke vibrations going". Discussion on amps? "Karaoke system amp"  Mixers? "Mixing it up"  If you would like to better understand the silly specs or want some guidance about how much power is needed, take a look at my post entitled "Watts and RMS and Ohms, oh my!"

Option 2: combined mixer and amp

When you combine a mixer and an amp, you call it a powered mixer. I have one and I like it. (I also have a separate amp and I have two regular mixers. Just bragging.) I like the powered amp because I don't need to carry around both a mixer and an amp. If you have these as separate pieces, you kinda need to have a DJ box to put them in as well. This box is another hundred bucks and a bunch more weight. 

 

My own powered mixer is rather old. There isn't really an equivalent on the market anymore. I bought it used. Go figger. I'm a cheapskate. But, to give you an idea of what a powered mixer might look like, here is the Yamaha EMX212S.

This piece of equipment sells for $420. The specs are similar to the combination Crown amp and Mackie mixer that are listed above at a total of $480. Hmmm... similar functionality, and a slightly lower cost. All in one box. These are all good things.

Why go with separate components? Let's say you have a gig where you require more power? If you have components, then you would need to buy another amp and another set of speakers. If you bought a powered mixer, then you would buy another amp and another set of speakers. Then you would probably use this mixer, cuz it has (I believe) a line level output that you could send to the amp. Bringing this along for the ride means that you have the extra weight and space of the amp inside the mixer.

Ok, try this scenario. Let's say you want a fancier mixer?  Well, then clearly it makes sense to have originally gone with the components so you can just swap this out.

Option 3: combined amp and speaker

Rather than put the amp in the mixer box, you could skin the cat by packaging an amp in each of the speakers. They call these powered speakers or active speakers (as opposed to passive speakers). 

The Behringer B212D is one example of a powered speaker. They sell for $280 each.

Let's stop and figger here. Rather than going with the Crown amp at $250 and a pair of Phonic speakers at $100 each for a total of $450, you could go with a pair of Behringer powered speakers at $560. That sounds like a good deal.

But of course, you have the whole upgrade path/components thing. And then another issue. (Thanks Bradley, for pointing this out.) 

If you have a pair of powered speakers out there, the powered speakers are probably "out there". That is, they are not right where you are sitting. If you need to adjust the volume of the speakers, you kinda have to walk over to each speaker and crank it up. 

Why do I say that? Can't you just adjust the mixer to change the volume at the speakers?  Yes, you certainly could. To do that, you would start with the volume at the speakers pretty close to maxed out. Then at the mixer, you would run the levels very low. That causes a problem, though, with noise. (Have a look at my post on "Tying it all together".) The signal coming out of the mixer is a very low level signal, so it is very sensitive to noise. When the speakers are high and the mixer is low, you will probably hear a 60 Hz hum. To get rid of this, you want the mixer all the way up.

Hence a conundrum. When I run with my powered speakers, I normally set them to about half-way at the start of the night (when the music is quietest) and then adjust them up when it gets crowded and my mixer starts getting close to maxing out.

I actually have a pair of the Behringer 212XL speakers, by the way. I like the sound quality, but for a larger venue, I have had these "bottom out". When you try to run them too hard, the woofer sounds like it is farting. Loudly. This, by the way, is not a good thing. Farting too loud can blow out your woofer. Talk to your doctor about that. I had to crank down the bass.

As far as powered speakers go, I would love to have a pair of JBL Eon 315 speakers at $500 each. I'm salivating. But then I also salivate when I think about Angelina Jolie. I may never have either one.

 

Option 4: Combined mixer and amp and speakers
Here is another interesting option. Fender makes a portable system where all the pieces (mixer, amp, and speakers) fit together into one nice box. I said, "nice", but note that I did not say "cute". It weighs in at 44 lbs. If you are not comfortable lifting this much weight, then this might not be your system.

This system, the Passport 500 is 500 watts total and includes a pair of speakers with 10" woofers. In other words, the system is similar in specs to the other systems discussed here. This unit sells for about $1000. They also have a systems that are 300 watts and 150 watts.

I have actually used one of these models, I forget which one. My only beef with it was that the mixer does not provide a separate output for a monitor speaker. This is perhaps my own bias, but I feel a monitor speaker is essential if you want to get the best sound out of the singers. I will talk about monitor speakers in my section about speakers.

Another beef about this system is just my general disinclination toward buying everything in one box. It does make it hard to upgrade.

Summary
Let me summarize by recalling the costs of seven different combinations of mixer, amp, and speakers.

1a - Total cost $1140
Mackie ProFX8         $230
Crown XLS202D      $250
Yamaha S112V X 2  $660

1b - Total cost $680
Mackie ProFX8         $230
Crown XLS202D      $250
Phonic SEM710 X 2  $200

2a - Total cost $1080
Yamaha EMX212S    $420
Yamaha S112V X 2  $660

2b - Total cost $620
Yamaha EMX212S    $420
Phonic SEM710 X 2  $200

3a - Total cost $790
Mackie ProFX8         $230
Behringer B212D X 2 $560

3b - Total cost $1230
Mackie ProFX8         $230
JBL Eon 315 X 2       $1000

4 - Total cost $1000
Fender Passport 500  $1000

Let me stress a few things here. First, I have made comments about some of the equipment here, but I do not consider myself an expert. I have not worked with some of the equipment mentioned here, and I have not worked with enough different equipment to consider myself qualified to give advice on specific products.

The second thing I want to stress is that, while there are some differences in these seven options in terms of price, the big difference in price is not in how the components are packaged, but rather in the quality of the stuff in the package. I could make a case for going entirely with components, for using powered mixers, or for using powered speakers. I have all of them.

Copyright (c) 2010, John Seymour