# What is your "official" title?



## NHStech (Mar 30, 2011)

If you are in charge of a PAC/auditorium that people rely on for running sound/lights, and even perhaps seeking your input on such matters, what is your title? I have seen various titles, and am wondering if one is more "standard" than another. I have seen, so far
auditorium manager
technical director
technical coordinator
technical stage manager
PAC Supervisor


----------



## nd925a (Mar 30, 2011)

My teacher is called "Head of A/V"
I'm just the kid that winds up running everything.


----------



## DuckJordan (Mar 30, 2011)

NHStech said:


> If you are in charge of a PAC/auditorium that people rely on for running sound/lights, and even perhaps seeking your input on such matters, what is your title? I have seen various titles, and am wondering if one is more "standard" than another. I have seen, so far
> auditorium manager
> technical director
> technical coordinator
> ...



Since I'm in an Educational environment, they are all termed as Professors, such as Professor of Lights/Sound, Professor of Technical Direction... and so on and so forth.

Now at the convention center i sometimes work We are called AV Techs and our boss is AV Chief (corporate thing)


----------



## sk8rsdad (Mar 30, 2011)

Officially: Director, Operations

Unofficially: technical director, custodian, plumber, building superintendent, rentals manager, etc.


----------



## shiben (Mar 30, 2011)

DuckJordan said:


> Since I'm in an Educational environment, they are all termed as Professors, such as Professor of Lights/Sound, Professor of Technical Direction... and so on and so forth.
> 
> Now at the convention center i sometimes work We are called AV Techs and our boss is AV Chief (corporate thing)


 
You have a professor of technical direction? That seems odd. Professors for acting, directing, design, theory, then an actual technical director and costume shop manager, etc.


----------



## Van (Mar 30, 2011)

NHStech said:


> If you are in charge of a PAC/auditorium that people rely on for running sound/lights, and even perhaps seeking your input on such matters, what is your title? I have seen various titles, and am wondering if one is more "standard" than another. I have seen, so far
> auditorium manager
> technical director
> technical coordinator
> ...


 
I lok at that list of titles and see several disticntly different jobs. Auditorium Manager is NOT interchangable with TD. and T.SM is not interchangeable with TC. 
BTW I'm a TD, FYI it does make me LOL the amount of ego that gets hung on a title but IMHO. TTYL


----------



## chausman (Mar 30, 2011)

Van said:


> I lok at that list of titles and see several disticntly different jobs. Auditorium Manager is NOT interchangable with TD. and T.SM is not interchangeable with TC.
> BTW I'm a TD, FYI it does make me LOL the amount of ego that gets hung on a title but IMHO. TTYL


 
Having fun with acronyms?

I don't have a job or title, just a student, but people seem to rely on for sound at my school.


----------



## NHStech (Mar 31, 2011)

Van said:


> I lok at that list of titles and see several disticntly different jobs. Auditorium Manager is NOT interchangable with TD. and T.SM is not interchangeable with TC.
> BTW I'm a TD, FYI it does make me LOL the amount of ego that gets hung on a title but IMHO. TTYL


 
There is an underlying reason I ask. Laziness. The job I inherited is "Auditorium Manager and Technical Director." I would really like to be able to merge the two job descriptions into one. I am tired of signing things as "Auditorium Manager and Technical Director."
As far as my job description, I run the scheduling of a high school auditorium, as well as the general cleanliness and maintenance of it (the auditorium manager part). Also, I am in charge of a student stage crew that runs the sound/lights/rigging for the stage. I train them in those areas, and run whatever they can't. For performances, I am the stage manager, calling cues to my crew. If outside groups come in, they will have general ideas about lighting and sound ("can we do this?"), but will either directly or indirectly ask for suggestions/comments/ideas in these matters. 
Given that info, is there one title that most closely resembles my job description? 

PS - don't let the laziness about the title mislead you. I am a math teacher by day, and it took me about 40 years to determine what I really love to do - this job (although I enjoy being a math teacher). I am a stage junkie and try to work to the best of my ability in there. I just want a shorter title.


----------



## sk8rsdad (Mar 31, 2011)

NHStech said:


> stage junkie


 
I think you found your title.


----------



## Grog12 (Mar 31, 2011)

shiben said:


> You have a professor of technical direction? That seems odd. Professors for acting, directing, design, theory, then an actual technical director and costume shop manager, etc.


 
Most universites I've encountered had Professors of Technical Direction. They were the shop TD and they taught Technical Direction classes...i.e. proffesors.

I'm the Technical Director of a Performing Arts Complex thats attached to a charter school. But all purpose ***** would be a better title.


----------



## shiben (Mar 31, 2011)

Grog12 said:


> Most universites I've encountered had Professors of Technical Direction. They were the shop TD and they taught Technical Direction classes...i.e. proffesors.
> 
> I'm the Technical Director of a Performing Arts Complex thats attached to a charter school. But all purpose ***** would be a better title.


 
Ah. We tend to have "professors" be on different contracts than "staff", but staff also teach courses. For example, right now I am in a class with a staff member teaching a 3 credit hour course. I guess it seems a bit odd to me to have a tenured TD at a college, but that is probably just the situation I am familiar with.


----------



## Footer (Mar 31, 2011)

NHStech said:


> There is an underlying reason I ask. Laziness. The job I inherited is "Auditorium Manager and Technical Director." I would really like to be able to merge the two job descriptions into one. I am tired of signing things as "Auditorium Manager and Technical Director."
> As far as my job description, I run the scheduling of a high school auditorium, as well as the general cleanliness and maintenance of it (the auditorium manager part). Also, I am in charge of a student stage crew that runs the sound/lights/rigging for the stage. I train them in those areas, and run whatever they can't. For performances, I am the stage manager, calling cues to my crew. If outside groups come in, they will have general ideas about lighting and sound ("can we do this?"), but will either directly or indirectly ask for suggestions/comments/ideas in these matters.
> Given that info, is there one title that most closely resembles my job description?
> 
> PS - don't let the laziness about the title mislead you. I am a math teacher by day, and it took me about 40 years to determine what I really love to do - this job (although I enjoy being a math teacher). I am a stage junkie and try to work to the best of my ability in there. I just want a shorter title.


 
I think you are looking for "Production Manager" or "Production Coordinator". However, TD is often used in the education world as a blanket term for anything auditorium related. The only time I see Technical Coordinator instead of TD come up is when you are in a city/state/federal owned building where having "Director" in your title changes your pay grade. One of my freinds who is the TD of a space in the middle of Ohio has this exact issue. If he had director in his title he would have to attend every city council meeting and a bunch of other random stuff.


----------



## bull (Apr 1, 2011)

I don't work in a Performance center, however I do work in the same position at a production company. My official title is "Technical Operations Manager" was the first time I'd ever heard of nybody calling that. haha.


----------



## drewski91 (Apr 2, 2011)

shiben said:


> Ah. We tend to have "professors" be on different contracts than "staff", but staff also teach courses. For example, right now I am in a class with a staff member teaching a 3 credit hour course. I guess it seems a bit odd to me to have a tenured TD at a college, but that is probably just the situation I am familiar with.



At my school, we have an "Assistant Professor of Technical Direction," meaning that he is a tenure-track faculty member. He teaches probably 9-12 credits a semester in tech direction and other stagecraft areas (I had him for Intro to Stagecraft and have him for a CAD class right now). He's also the departmental TD for our four-show season. I believe he is paid an additional stipend to be the TD in addition to being a prof.

Conversely, we have a Production Manager, who is staff, not faculty. She also acts as the Instructor of our Stage Management class. Since she acts as an Instructor once a year, I'd assume she also gets paid extra for teaching that class, just as any other Instructor who comes in would get paid for teaching one class. She has an MA, which isn't a terminal degree, so she wouldn't qualify for tenure-track at my school anyway. 

So it just depends on what your primary, salaried job is... teaching (faculty) or production work (staff).


----------



## gafftapegreenia (Apr 3, 2011)

My "official" title: student.

Realistic title: House M.E.


----------



## venuetech (Apr 3, 2011)

Facility Technician

But I have a stack of hats to wear.


----------



## Taffey (Apr 3, 2011)

I currently teach at a large performing arts high school. I am one of two technical theatre teachers. I teach classes in set design, lighting design, sound engineering and a "practical application" class -which is just a long phrase for these are the best students in their classes who actually design and execute the show (under my colleague's and I supervision). 

What do I actually do besides teach? Well, everything thats not makeup or costume.

Title? Technical Theatre Teacher
Unofficial title? (Until August 2011) Technical Program Director

It may sound selfish but I am extremely happy about the upgrade in title, even though I haven't gotten the pay raise I've been promised for 3 years.

I love teaching, but at the end of the day I need to pay my bills.


----------



## drummerboi316 (Apr 3, 2011)

similar to gafftapegreenia....

officially: student 

hats i wear: LD, ME, MC, SD, sound engineer, crew chief and others. with a tech department of 4-5 I get to do alot.


----------



## mstaylor (Apr 3, 2011)

I work for an arena, am called a stage manager, with my original job being to schedule and supervise hands for the visiting live events. I grew the position to include the rigging also. It then went to all types of live events ranging from theatre, concerts, truck shows, rodeos and sporting events such as basketball and wrestling. That means I run heavy equipment, sound, lights, video anything else they dream up. The problem is they still call me a stage manager. I am more a steward, technical director and tech.


----------



## SteveB (Apr 3, 2011)

We have a Production Manager, who's theoretically responsible for all technical theater operations in the facility, including staffing, operation and maintenance. In reality, the Dept. of Theater, which has 5 tech positions, is responsible to their own department for their events in the shared spaces. 

Thus the PM runs the road house essentially, with a the full time staff of 3 that works the road house as well as supporting the Conservatory of Music events. The PM is a state funded administrative and unionized position, full time, semi-tenured (certificate of full time employment or some such). Known in the City University of NY as a Higher Education Officer (or Associate, abbrev. as HEO or HEa). We used to have an Assistant Production Manager that was also a full time HEa. He was actually the head carpenter/rigger and was laid off in the mid 90's as they decided the PM didn't need an assistant, even though he was the head carp., and they didn't really care. Now there's nobody and the PM covers which is why he's gone/done/finished/retired ASAP (2 years ?).

Full time staff is a Lighting Director - Head Electrician (Myself), also state funded, tenured as a "Chief College Laboratory Technician" (just made Chief last year, was a Senior. Get a big junk of money over about 6 years time). The LD position becomes a Local One IATSE Head when I retire. 

Then there's a Local One Head Sound full time, as well as a Local One SM/Crew Chief. 

Then a lot of freelancers under IA1 jurisdiction and I have to say we have a core group of about 12-15 that are fabulous .


----------



## sdauditorium (Apr 4, 2011)

I work at a performing arts space attached to a school district. I am basically a co-auditorium director with a colleague of mine. While we both receive the same pay and have the same authority (can both submit requisitions for purchases, do budgets, etc.), for whatever reason she is viewed as the "Auditorium Director" and I as the "Technical Director." 

She handles the marketing/publicity, programming, contracts, etc, and I take care of the facility side of things..lighting and sound, supervising of student crews, maintenance and equipment purchases.


----------



## bhallerm (Apr 5, 2011)

Performing Arts Technical Manager or Director.

Mid sized private high school.

I'm responsible for all technical aspects of our 600 seat auditorium. Live sound, lighting design/hanging/programming, concert recording, video recording, media/projections, special FX, outside rental tech needs, anything else the fine arts department can dream up.

BJH


----------



## jstroming (Apr 5, 2011)

"All-Around Great Guy"


----------



## GBtimex (Apr 6, 2011)

My official title is "Stage Manager" 

my duties include those of a: Elec, Audio guy, Rigger, Janitor, Video guy, PR guy, tech advisor, sign hanger, pipe and drape provider, EXIT sign installer for tents (still wondering how that happened), AV guy and of course Stage Hand and manger. 

I am a jack of all trades and a master of none. I am more of a building manager than anything but I go where the job goes. 

GBTimex.


----------



## jglodeklights (Apr 6, 2011)

Plays and Players- Master Electrician

Off the record- Resident Lighting Designer, assistant technical director, rigger, flyman, IT guy (now we have someone to take over that, thankfully) secondary liaison between the theater and renters, water leak finder, bar back, chauffeur to the Social Club Manager, Stage Manager, and probably a few other things.

The High School- Production Manager and Technical Director, Drama Club Assistant

Also- Kid Motivator, Lighting Designer, Scenic Designer, Sanity Keeper, and Penguin Dance Instructor.


----------



## museav (Apr 6, 2011)

Taffey said:


> I currently teach at a large performing arts high school. I am one of two technical theatre teachers. I teach classes in set design, lighting design, sound engineering and a "practical application" class -which is just a long phrase for these are the best students in their classes who actually design and execute the show (under my colleague's and I supervision).


Just a pet peeve of mine but Florida is traditionally fairly strict regarding the use of the terms "Engineer" and "Engineering" and per the Florida statutes:

> “Engineer” includes the terms “professional engineer” and “licensed engineer” and means a person who is licensed to engage in the practice of engineering under this chapter.




> “Engineering” includes the term “professional engineering” and means any service or creative work, the adequate performance of which requires engineering education, training, and experience in the application of special knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences to such services or creative work as consultation, investigation, evaluation, planning, and design of engineering works and systems, planning the use of land and water, teaching of the principles and methods of engineering design, engineering surveys, and the inspection of construction for the purpose of determining in general if the work is proceeding in compliance with drawings and specifications, any of which embraces such services or work, either public or private, in connection with any utilities, structures, buildings, machines, equipment, processes, work systems, projects, and industrial or consumer products or equipment of a mechanical, electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, or thermal nature, insofar as they involve safeguarding life, health, or property; and includes such other professional services as may be necessary to the planning, progress, and completion of any engineering services. A person who practices any branch of engineering; who, by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, or card, or in any other way, represents himself or herself to be an engineer or, through the use of some other title, implies that he or she is an engineer or that he or she is licensed under this chapter; or who holds himself or herself out as able to perform, or does perform, any engineering service or work or any other service designated by the practitioner which is recognized as engineering shall be construed to practice or offer to practice engineering within the meaning and intent of this chapter.



Since this is related to an educational setting you might want to reconsider the "engineering" aspect. And can someone explain to me why you tend to see "sound engineer" used so often but not "lighting engineer", "rigging engineer" or "set engineer"?


NHSTech, most venues I work with tend to separate the Managerial and Technical roles, with their often being two different positions (some venues also have a third lead Production role as well). While combining the titles may be easier for you, might you then run into challenges with someone wanting to deal with the Manager rather than a tech person or where someone wants to talk to someone who really knows the tech and not just an administrator?


----------



## sk8rsdad (Apr 6, 2011)

museav said:


> Since this is related to an educational setting you might want to reconsider the "engineering" aspect. And can someone explain to me why you tend to see "sound engineer" used so often but not "lighting engineer", "rigging engineer" or "set engineer"?


 
... because lighting technicians, riggers, and carpenters are not trying to overcome an inferiority complex? 

sk8rsdad, P.Eng.


----------



## peacefulone61 (Apr 29, 2011)

My Official title is the Head of Theater Technology and Theater Manager.


----------



## blindbuttkicker (Jun 8, 2011)

At the church i work at our Sound/Lighting/Technical Support Department/Team is mainly either 

Audio/Visual/Media Services Department
Audio/Visual/Technical Support Staff

For the techies that are on the Staff we have multiple titles/roles

Officially: 

Audio/Visual/Technical Support Staff Member
Audio/Visual/Technical Support Coordinator

Sound Ops:
-Booth Audio Engineer
-Booth Audio/Visual Engineer (meaning cross trained in lighting as well)
-Booth A/V Operator (can run Lights and Sound themselves)
-Lead Booth A/V Operator (meaning someone who can run the booth themselves, me for 1, as well as someone who is in charge of operations within the booth)
-Audio Team Lead

Light Ops

-Lighting Engineer
-Light Board Operator
-Lead Lighting Operator 
-Lighting Team Lead

Projectional Ops

-Presentational Graphics Operator


The Lighting and Audio Team Lead is the A/V/Tech Support Coordinator. Our present Coordinator is currently only a Audio Team Lead and a bit of a Lighting Team Lead, he's not fully trained in Light Ops yet so our Lead Lighing Operator is currently the Lighting Team Lead. He knows Sound and does it well. Because Im both trained in Lights and Sound Ops and know them both extremely well, Im a Lead Booth A/V Operator as well as a Lead Lighting Operator, and Presentatiinol Graphics Operator (me and a few other Techs are also in charge of getting the mobile projection equipment set up and torn down at the end of each service, event, etc.), and im only 18 ha ha shocking i know... well thats what you get for being a bookworm most of your life and from doing this kind of work since not even the start of 7th grade, you can say you learn alot, as well as do alot over an amount of time.


----------



## chausman (Jun 8, 2011)

:shock: How big's your *church*!!


----------



## Tex (Jun 8, 2011)

Official Title: Director of Theatre Arts
Jobs: Everything from mopping floors to paying bills.


----------



## MNicolai (Jun 8, 2011)

museav said:


> And can someone explain to me why you tend to see "sound engineer" used so often but not "lighting engineer", "rigging engineer" or "set engineer"?



If I had to guess, it's because the sound guy at the professional level _usually_ (but certainly not always) has a pretty good grip on the physics of sound. You _design_ a light plot or _program_ a lighting console, but you _engineer_ a sound system.

As a transitive verb, the word means:

> tr.v., -neered, -neer·ing, -neers.
> 1) To plan, construct, or manage as an engineer.
> 
> 2) To alter or produce by methods of genetic engineering: "Researchers . . . compared insulin manufactured by bacteria genetically engineered with recombinant DNA techniques to the commercial insulin obtained from swine or cattle" (Fusion).
> ...


 
A sound engineer has to deal not only with the hardware of the gear, but they have to tune all of it with finesse to the acoustics of local environment.

That said, for every "sound engineer" who does their job with professionalism and finesse, there's another guy just crankin' gains and connecting his iPod to a sound system with a poorly made cable, then juicing it with +48v phantom power and wondering why the iPod started smoking.

While I agree with you, museav that the use of the word "engineer" as a noun is sloppy, the use of the word as a transitive verb definitely makes sense. For that matter, a rigging install could be "engineered" by a rigger.

At our facility, we tend to refer to the person at the lighting console as a board op, light op, or programmer. Meanwhile, the person at the audio mixer is the sound op or audio op.

The roles of "lighting designer" and "sound designer" are distinctly different and while they may double as the light or sound ops, what makes them a designer isn't that they know how to push buttons on a piece of equipment -- it's that they've slaved over planning their work for an event, and through that process they have had to make very deliberate decisions on what they can do, what they can't do, how they can get away with certain things, and what parts of their design they need to sacrifice to improve other parts of their design. The cherry on the top of being a designer is that _all_ of their decisions on their design need to fall within the constraints provided by the client and they need to be solving a real problem for that client.

You could say most of the qualities necessary for a good designer could also be extended to engineers, which is because engineers are almost always designing something for someone. Sometimes they're the people called in to fix something when it breaks, but there's no engineering school I know of that would ever let an engineering student graduate who could not produce their own designs for a project from scratch.

A designer plans how to overcome an obstacle. Then they move onto something else. An engineer plans how to overcome an obstacle, and they execute their design, analyze it, tweak it, know how to make it work, know how to fix it when it breaks, and know how to manipulate their design to make it better.

The reason you don't have lighting engineers is because for a given show, the people who design the lighting, hang the lighting, focus the lighting, plan the lighting system riser, and program the entire system are usually not one in the same. There's a disconnect between the lighting designer, electricians, and programmer so that the designer doesn't have to know how the magic works -- they know they just have to tell someone to turn a group of channels to 50% and focus them on that table over there. For what they've doing, they don't care if the console is a Hog 3, an Eos, or a GrandMA 2. They also don't particularly care if the lighting fixtures have some missing nuts and bolts.

Meanwhile, the "sound engineer" usually has every part of their system they have to worry about. On larger events there may be other people helping out that the sound engineer can delegate tasks to, but usually there's one guy at the top of the food chain who coordinates which equipment is in use, how the mixer is setup, how the gear on stage is setup, and so on. Even if that person doesn't have to do execute every task on their own, it's imperative for their role that they know how to do every task that is needed to get the sound system setup.

I wouldn't consider the 10th grader who knows how to plug a couple microphones into a 16-channel mixer a "sound engineer", but the guy who's in charge of all of the PA for a touring show has almost all of the qualities of someone who engineers something except that they have not passed a PE exam. For that matter, there are lots of engineering students who make it out of college with their BSE's who don't even bother taking a PE exam. If you're an electrical engineering student graduating from college, there are thousands of different things you could end up doing, some that require a PE and many that do not.

"Engineer" may not be appropriate in the job title of someone who is not a PE, but that certainly doesn't mean it's inappropriate to say that they've have engineered something.


----------



## SteveB (Jun 8, 2011)

MNicolai said:


> If I had to guess, it's because the sound guy at the professional level _usually_ (but certainly not always) has a pretty good grip on the physics of sound. You _design_ a light plot or _program_ a lighting console, but you _engineer_ a sound system.
> 
> Snip
> 
> "Engineer" may not be appropriate in the job title of someone who is not a PE, but that certainly doesn't mean it's inappropriate to say that they've have engineered something.


 
In many environments, the lighting designer is also the console operator as well as head electrician responsible for the rig. A title of Lighting Director is sometimes used for such a position. Thus the Lighting Director has similar responsibilities as a sound/audio engineer to both the artistic elements of the event, as well as the technical details of the system. 

I know I do, as that's my title and it's what I do.


----------



## MNicolai (Jun 8, 2011)

SteveB said:


> In many environments, the lighting designer is also the console operator as well as head electrician responsible for the rig. A title of Lighting Director is sometimes used for such a position. Thus the Lighting Director has similar responsibilities as a sound/audio engineer to both the artistic elements of the event, as well as the technical details of the system.
> 
> I know I do, as that's my title and it's what I do.



On a more basic level than my previous post, if you say "Lighting Director," I know what that means. The immediate image in my mind is of someone who designs the plot, has a hand in getting it in the air, and may or may not sit behind a console.

If you say "Sound Director", the last thing I think of is the guy who sits behind the mixer. It sounds more like someone who is not very fluent in the English language is confused with the Musical Director or the Band Conductor.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 8, 2011)

Where I'm from, an audio engineer is someone who designs the audio system, but unlikely one to implement its use. Obviously the sound designer, like the lighting counterpart, has the responsibility of deciding which equipment to use and how to use them (and many lighting designers DO care which console is used). This is different from engineering a system. An audio engineer is someone who creates the implements for creating sound, like those fine engineers at Meyer.

MNicolai said:


> If I had to guess, it's because the sound guy at the professional level _usually_ (but certainly not always) has a pretty good grip on the physics of sound. You _design_ a light plot or _program_ a lighting console, but you _engineer_ a sound system.


 
I think that you are rather biased against many professional lighting designers in saying that the audio designers understand sound, but the lighting designers don't seem to know how things work. While I agree that some people who get paid to design light do not understand the physics behind what they do (I even heard one designer say that there was no need for anything in your design besides PARs and Lekos), good professional designers know the physics of light and electricity quite well. They will also understand psychology in the way people react to certain levels and colors of light. 

This is why there are groups like the Audio Engineering Society and the Illuminating Engineering Society. These are professional societies that help develop the systems that we can then use. While I don't know my theatrical history quite well enough, but my guess is that "Sound Engineer" title came into theater due to the fact that they had to hire actual engineers to design audio in its theatrical infancy. Meanwhile, lighting had been used in theatrical aplications for much longer (back in the gaslamp days), before there was an engineering position.


----------



## MNicolai (Jun 9, 2011)

ruinexplorer said:


> I think that you are rather biased against many professional lighting designers in saying that the audio designers understand sound, but the lighting designers don't seem to know how things work.



I know which position I believe involves more art and which involves more science, but that's not to say I think professional lighting designers don't know how to wipe themselves.

With lighting, the designer doesn't _need_ to know about Net3, ACN, or how an effect is programmed. It can be _helpful_ to know all of those things, but you can always defer to other people on the science of how a moving light works or what the best way to program a certain effect is. (this presumes you're at the level of theatre where the designer _isn't_ the person behind the lighting console)

The lighting person may know all of the science behind optics -- they may even be a genuine optics engineer, but that doesn't mean they'll be any better at designing a show just because they know how a lens manipulates wavelengths of light.

With the guy sitting behind the sound console, it's a rough show if that person doesn't know the details behind each and every piece of gear in the system. You can fake it 'til you make it, but the quality is going to be awful until you get a strong grip on both the art of balancing levels as well as the science of how the system works.


----------



## blindbuttkicker (Jun 9, 2011)

chausman said:


> :shock: How big's your *church*!!


 
We used to have more than 2,000 people in attendance weekly, that was over 20 year ago, now its down to about 400 to 500 weekly, its changed over the years. And trust me when change is a bad thing, its also a good thing. And i know our sound and lighting system inside and out, well on account of doing lighting and sound during the school year and in-class sometimes, im very well oriented with a technical mind so yeah im sort of a "theater geek" ha


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 10, 2011)

MNicolai said:


> I know which position I believe involves more art and which involves more science, *but that's not to say I think professional lighting designers don't know how to wipe themselves*.



Again, I am not going to have you turn this into a flame war. You are treading on thin ice with the emphasized comment. It's obvious which side of the booth you sit on. Since I have had the position of all the above (sound designer, light designer, sound operator, and light operator), I think I know where you are coming from.

I truly hope that you have an opportunity to work with designers of a high caliber on both sides of the booth in the future and then refer back to what you have written. Judging by your opinions, it appears that you have not had this experience yet.


----------



## MNicolai (Jun 10, 2011)

ruinexplorer said:


> Again, I am not going to have you turn this into a flame war. You are treading on thin ice with the emphasized comment. It's obvious which side of the booth you sit on. Since I have had the position of all the above (sound designer, light designer, sound operator, and light operator), I think I know where you are coming from.
> 
> I truly hope that you have an opportunity to work with designers of a high caliber on both sides of the booth in the future and then refer back to what you have written. Judging by your opinions, it appears that you have not had this experience yet.


 
What I was trying to say is that though I think lighting is more art, a little less science, does not at all mean that I think lighting designers aren't intelligent people with valuable skills. I was just trying to characterize the differences between "engineers" and "designers", and whatever my thoughts may be on what those differences are, I still hold high regard for people on both sides of the fence be it engineering, designing, lighting, or audio.

While I routinely work with audio, most of my time is spent working on lighting. The characterizations made are based on my personal experiences. When I'm doing anything related to audio, I feel like the science side of my brain is lighting up moreso than when I work with lighting, which has far more to do with emotions and art.

I'd say 60% of my workload is lighting and 40% is audio. I may not have an MFA in Lighting Design or Acoustical Engineering, and I haven't worked on Broadway, but I know that my brain processes thoughts differently when I'm tuning my audio system's DSP than when I'm analyzing a script for my next lighting design.

For the sake of discussion, all I was trying to do was draw definitive line through a fuzzy matter so that someone could step forward, disagree with me, and change my mind. I apologize if you got the impression that I have a beef with lighting designers -- I don't.


----------



## rochem (Jun 11, 2011)

_(warning: long post)_

As an interesting point of reference, my college is known for having turned out two of the most well-known theatrical designers working today. One is a lighting designer, and the other is a sound designer. We were fortunate to have both of them spend a significant amount of time at our school this past year, and they each spoke to students at length about their design processes, their lives and careers, and many other topics. Prior to meeting these two individuals, I had always kind of been under the impression that lighting designers created art, and sound designers just picked whatever equipment would work best in that venue. 

When the lighting designer spoke to us, it wasn't a big surprise to me to hear him tell that he didn't know much about the technology behind today's lighting. After all, why should he? He was a competent and well-trained electrician when he started working professionally, but he hasn't touched a lighting fixture or a C-wrench in over 20 years. Fortunately, he's able to rely on a team of highly trained and skilled lighting technicians who specialize in a specific segment of their craft. Just like the ML Repair Technician doesn't need to know how to choose color, the Lighting Designer doesn't need to know how to change out a gobo on a VL3500. When he designs a show, he doesn't decide how many inches off center to hang the Source Four, or whether it should be a 26 or a 36, or even how many zones of front light to hang. Instead, he just sits down with his Associate Lighting Designer and talks about his ideas for the show, sometimes speaking for more than 18 hours in a single session. He discusses the script, the concept, the underlying themes and morals, the character development, the "quality" of the light, the general "feel" of the lighting, the moods he wants to convey, and infinite other elements of the show. Then, he walks away and expects that the ALD will convert those ideas into specific distances, degrees, and areas.

However, I was very surprised when the Sound Designer sat down to talk to us. When he started doing professional sound, he worked as a mixer on Broadway for a number of years before finally making the transition into Sound Design, a field that was still being born at the time. And while he certainly knew nearly everything about his rig back in 1978, he hasn't touched a speaker or a mixing console in over 20 years. Fortunately, he's able to rely on a team of highly trained and skilled sound technicians who specialize in a specific segment of their craft. Just like the Mixer doesn't need to know how to find that perfect level of orchestra underscore, the Sound Designer doesn't need to know how to set a mic frequency into a receiver. When he designs a show, he doesn't decide how high to trim his center cluster, or what model of speaker it should be, or even what kind of processing equipment to use. Instead, he just sits down with his Associate Sound Designer and talks about his ideas for the show, sometimes speaking for hours upon end in a single session. He discusses the script, the concept, the underlying themes and morals, the character development, the "quality" of the sound, the general "feel" of the sound, the moods he wants to convey, and infinite other elements of the show. Then, he walks away and expects that the ASD will convert those ideas into specific distances, model numbers, and zones.

In my opinion (and it's nothing more than that), the reason Sound Designers are more often associated with a higher level of technical expertise is because in the majority of theatres, they're required to have that. Because sound as a design discipline is so new and still evolving, there's often a shortage of highly skilled and knowledgeable sound technicians at all but the highest levels of live production. As a result, the SD is, in many cases, forced to gain the technical knowledge about his tools in order to ensure that his show will work as he designed it. The LD chooses instrument types based on what capabilities and attributes he wants to get out of the fixture - the SD does the same thing. The LD chooses the degree of his instruments based on the coverage he needs and the distance from the focus point - the SD does the same thing. The LD places his instruments based on available space, intended angles, and proximity to the focus point - the SD does the same thing. At the highest levels of live production, when you really break down the position of Designer into its most basic definition, the roles of the Lighting Designer and the Sound Designer are virtually identical.


_Note: I do not, by any stretch of the imagination, work at the "highest levels of live production," and I certainly don't intend to imply that everyone not doing it the 'broadway way' is wrong and bad at their jobs. More than 99% of theatres don't have the budget, time, or need for an army of specialized individuals, and as we consolidate job responsibilities, it's easy to blur the lines between the different hats we wear. _


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 11, 2011)

shiben said:


> You have a professor of technical direction? That seems odd. Professors for acting, directing, design, theory, then an actual technical director and costume shop manager, etc.


 
We had two professors of Technical Direction, one professor of scene painting, and one Professor of Stage Management. Then we had MEs, Head Carps, etc.


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 11, 2011)

Also keep in mind that there are some of us lighting guys that design systems from the ground up that must have both the artistic knowledge (to know what will need to be done with the system) and the technical knowledge. I would say what I do day in and day out is more akin to engineering than design.

Although having been an Electrical Engineering major in college, I would never presume to call myself an engineer.

Also sometimes (outside of the largest productions in the nation), it does help to know the physics of optics and light. Things like the difference in optics, sources, etc can have a HUGE effect on a design, so to say I want a "red spot" is no longer enough because an LED red spot, an incandescent red spot (with dichroic or gel), or an arc red spot (with dichroic or gel) are all very different.

I got to have a (very short) conversation with my design hero Kevin Adams a few years ago, and when you hear him talk about design, and where it is going in the future, you will hear him talk in depth about technology and science. And he designs on the largest stages. If he needs that knowledge and finds it useful, then I think we all would.


----------



## NHStech (Jun 11, 2011)

Really, everyone, maybe we should take a deep breath.
When I started this thread, all I was asking was about job titles. Mine is rather cumbersome, and all I was looking for was something that I could perhaps use to make my title a little less so. Now it has turned into sound versus lighting engineers/designers/et al/use whatever semantics/titles you will.
Obviously, both topics (light and sound) are important to shows. Both require training, albeit different kinds. And a good 90% or more of you - regardless of title - certainly know more than I in both. 
If things are going to get personal, well, isn't that was the messaging utility on this forum is for?
I am sorry this thread has caused the strife it has. Most certainly not my intent.


----------



## mstaylor (Jun 11, 2011)

I find the discussion between sound and lights to be interesting. I remember watching a clip on here where the instruments use to light the stage changed during the song. They were all made to produce the same color but because of the source, how you got there was different. This caused the costumes to appear to change colors. That is an interesting mix between science and art. I think at one time lighting was more art with some science. Sound was the other way around. In my mind you can have all the knowledge in the world, but if you stand behind the console you still have to have and ear and that's art. 
Today, with the advances in technology, the science has equaled out with sound. 
Of course, the bggest problem is sound guys are just snobs.  Guess where I started in the business.


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 11, 2011)

mstaylor said:


> I find the discussion between sound and lights to be interesting. I remember watching a clip on here where the instruments use to light the stage changed during the song. They were all made to produce the same color but because of the source, how you got there was different. This caused the costumes to appear to change colors. That is an interesting mix between science and art. I think at one time lighting was more art with some science. Sound was the other way around. In my mind you can have all the knowledge in the world, but if you stand behind the console you still have to have and ear and that's art.
> Today, with the advances in technology, the science has equaled out with sound.
> Of course, the bggest problem is sound guys are just snobs.  Guess where I started in the business.


 
Well, after all, their consoles are bigger than ours. ;-)


----------



## chausman (Jun 11, 2011)

Esoteric said:


> Well, after all, their consoles are bigger than ours. ;-)


 
But not more expensive! (most of the time)


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 11, 2011)

NHStech said:


> Really, everyone, maybe we should take a deep breath.
> When I started this thread, all I was asking was about job titles. Mine is rather cumbersome, and all I was looking for was something that I could perhaps use to make my title a little less so. Now it has turned into sound versus lighting engineers/designers/et al/use whatever semantics/titles you will.
> Obviously, both topics (light and sound) are important to shows. Both require training, albeit different kinds. And a good 90% or more of you - regardless of title - certainly know more than I in both.
> If things are going to get personal, well, isn't that was the messaging utility on this forum is for?
> I am sorry this thread has caused the strife it has. Most certainly not my intent.


 
Honestly, I'm not sorry that you started the thread. I think that there has been a lot of great discussion on titles and how they are used. Granted, I will be sending a personal appology to MNicolai to make sure that everything is good, but I think that this is a very valuable thread.

I have worked places where the titles that I was given just didn't make any sense to what I was doing, but that has a lot to do with the way corporations do things. The biggest difference comes when people give themselves their own titles. These can often be presumptious and can be quite misleading. After all, the titles we use helps others to get some expectations of our capabilities. When we tend to mis-use or abuse titles, they become meaningless. In some ways, this was exactly the desire that early Americans used when referring to gentlemen as "Sir", devaluing the noble title that the English were using. It is exactly that which we tend to want to avoid. After all, we want to respect those who deserve it. 

I find it funny that you would say that you know less than 90% of us. I had a friend whom I thought the world of his skills. I felt that I could never live up to what he could do. One day, I happened to be designing a show in his space and came to learn that he thought the exact opposite, that he could never match my skills. So, while I hope that nobody would present themselves as greater than they may be, I also hope that each of you don't underestimate your value and abilities.


----------



## MNicolai (Jun 12, 2011)

ruinexplorer said:


> Honestly, I'm not sorry that you started the thread. I think that there has been a lot of great discussion on titles and how they are used. Granted, I will be sending a personal appology to MNicolai to make sure that everything is good, but I think that this is a very valuable thread.



I originally typed this as a response to ruinexplorer's PM to me, but I realized it's far more appropriate to post it here directly:


> I look at conversations differently than many people, and because of that I have a tendency to come off as an aggressor. I firmly believe that I never really know what my position is on something until I write it down, then read it out loud, then erase it, then write it again, then erase it again, then write it again and have someone tell me how wrong I am. That's why I'm always eager to get into a debate, even if it turns out I couldn't have been any more wrong about the topic at hand. My hope is always that I'll walk away from a debate/discussion/conversation having learned something and heard some other perspectives.
> 
> From the different perspectives that have been expressed here, I think it's safe to say that I was wrong anyway. Every person in lighting or in audio has a different background, and it's unfair to characterize our entire discussion around Lighting Designers v. Sound Engineers. Very few people in our industry have duties that fit under a single job title, and even if they did, two people can have very dissimilar experiences that equally qualify them for the same positions.
> 
> There are many different aspects of both audio and lighting, each dealing with different balances of art and science. For that matter, one man's art is another man's science.


 
Personally -- I have no job title. To HR, I look like some guy who comes in a few days out of the month to do work on a show here or there. The way that my timesheet is setup, HR only even sees which events I've worked and for how long -- they have no idea which work I did for a given event. My boss sort of understands, but the most part I do things that need to get done so that they don't end up flying across his desk and taking up his time (he already spends 60+ hours in the theatre each week, with his record as high as 92 hours in a single week). As far as he's concerned, I've done my job well when things he shouldn't have to worry about don't get dumped in his lap.

What my boss knows that HR doesn't though, is that I do a lot of volunteer work. My volunteer duties (that I assigned to myself on my own accord) in the last couple months have included:
-> Reprogramming our ETC Unison fader/button stations.
-> Designing a rep plot and all of the necessary paperwork to go with it.
-> Hanging 40 dead-hung points from the grid for an event with wire rope cables I made myself from materials I purchased myself.
-> Taking 3000 photos of events to grab another 20-30 photos for our marketing and promo purposes
-> Fixing a snag in our fire curtain's tension line.
-> Conceiving a sensible hiearchy for how the doors in the building are keyed.
-> Coordinating a PA rental and an outdoor PA setup for a full band on a day with light rain
-> Driving back and forth to ETC's HQ and Full Compass' HQ to drop off gear for repairs and pick it back up.
-> Being the point-man for several clients looking for technical info on our facility.
-> Planning a workshop series this summer for our high school students and new additions to our call lists so that they can become qualified enough to work our professional, rental, and school events.
-> Skyping with the VP of Luci Della Ribalta (who was in Italy and in China while dealing with this) on the problems we've had with our Canto 1200 followspots, then working with a technician out of Atlanta, GA to get the problems resolved.
-> Setting up a backstage blog to show the community the personality and "magic" that keeps our theatre running.
-> Planning the capital projects for the year (buying a new projector and screen, installing a new lighting position, reorganizing the scene shop, contacting a real estate agent to scout for possible off-sites we could use for set construction and storage)
-> The list goes on...

I always feel a little dumb when a client asks me what my position is at our facility and the best I can say is that I'm an "unofficial technical advisor". Every time someone asks, I make up some new flavor of poo to describe what it is I do -- something that gives them enough of an idea of what I do without misleading them that I'm higher on the food chain than I am.

I cannot possibly describe what it is I do in a two or three-word job title. Back when I used to have business cards (when I felt I "needed" to have business cards), the least stupid descriptor I could put on them as my job title was "Live Event Technician". It's not wrong, but it barely scratches the surface on the roles that I play in the projects I work on.

I'm willing to bet that most of the people here on ControlBooth cannot sum up when they do in a single job title; a job title just isn't enough information. Unless you're the Commander in Chief, a job title doesn't effectively communicate the value of your skills and what it is that you do to earn your paychecks.


----------



## mstaylor (Jun 12, 2011)

In my arena I am called a Stage Manager, essentially the same job as a steward in a union house. At least that's the basis of it, it has grown over the years and I cover many duties other depts are supposed to do. Anyway, when asked what I do, I tell them I supply labor for the shows and am the liason between the show and the building.


----------



## bobcatarts (Oct 4, 2012)

Title: Technical Associate
The description from our arts non-profit website: facilitates artistic and event design, production and day-to-day operations across our creative performance and production spaces. 

Yes, but what do you actually _do?_ 

Advise and oversee our resident theatre and visual art companies and renters with all of their technical issues in our two small black boxes, dance studio, gallery and support spaces in both our buildings across town; change lamps in the instruments, or the offices or the bathroom (upgrading to LEDs one burnout at a time); fix the network or people's computers or the copier when they get fussy; patch the leaky roof; do pyro and firearm tests for productions; consult on new venue design (I love doing this); repair sinks and toilets when they clog or otherwise break (I do not love doing this); help with artist installs anywhere in the city; planning and executing the lighting/sound/AV/effects for our gala and special events; occasionally design & run lights and sound for outside rentals. "And other duties as necessary."


----------



## avkid (Oct 4, 2012)

My only credited position is Assistant Technical Director.

Really:
Stagehand
A1,A2, RF Tech
Electrician, Lighting Tech
Truck Driver, Fork/Aerial lift operator
Carpenter, Rigging Trainee
Inventory Management Specialist


----------



## gafftapegreenia (Oct 4, 2012)

These days it seems to be "Freelance _______________"


----------



## neotrotsky (Oct 15, 2012)

Actual University Term: 
Technical Director Assistant (Yes, they put that in reverse. It is a State University after all...)

Actual Job:
Well, there are two Technical Director Assistants. "OK. Cool." You think. It would be, except that there is no technical director at the venue. 

Yep, you heard me right. There is no technical director.

Our supervisor is the General Director. She manages the ENTIRE venue, and an executive would. She's quite good at her job, and was a rigger, lighting engineer and directed a small school district's theater program. But, she's not the technical director per se. She doesn't hold that title. She'd be the one in *charge* of the Technical Director, if we had one. But, we don't.

The story is that our venue doesn't pull enough audience and/or profit in the grand scheme of the events division to merit a Technical Director. But, they can provide the pay of two Technical Director Assistants, part time. That means we have two part time Assistants, acting as co-directors, at part time pay. For "general time", i.e. the time we get to actually repair things, commit to administrative duties, train employees and the like outside of actual shows is 8 hours/week. That's. It. Otherwise, the HR guys and gals assume that we can do all of our jobs during the booked show times. As you can see, this means our Executive Director needs to get creative with hours to get everything done. I specialize in Audio, so to make it easy for the clients I'm the "Chief Audio Engineer". The other Technical Director Assistant specializes in lighting and was a general contractor, so he's the "Lighting Specialist". We each have "assistants", one for each diciplline. He's got a lighting guy from another university who works for us part time, and I have a grad of the local recording conservatory. Both awesome guys! And, we have two general technicians that are equally awesome. 

But, while I have all the duties of a Technical Director, I only get half the pay and half the hours. My boss is pushing for a full time position, but can only *maybe* get resources for ONE full time. And that's only a *maybe*. This means that me and the other Technical Director Assistant (man, that gets tiring to type out over and over and over...) are in a way in direct competition. He's got about 15 years experience on me, but by the end of this spring I will have two MORE degrees and several more certifications. It makes for a strange and tense but still enjoyable workplace since we both get along well. 

Needless to say, this makes work "interesting". The fun of working for a state university.


----------



## zmb (Oct 15, 2012)

I've got the catch-all title for the school district I start working in later this month: Theater Technician. Guess that means I can do anything then.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Oct 17, 2012)

neotrotsky said:


> Actual University Term:
> Technical Director Assistant (Yes, they put that in reverse. It is a State University after all...)
> 
> Actual Job:
> ...



Sounds like a venue I worked at in downtown Phoenix. Three theaters, three assistant TDs, no TD, just a VP of Operations (could have just been an inflated title, though he rarely stepped out of his office). One of us was an audio specialist, another lighting/rigging, the other was an actor/carpenter (he really wanted to have his own theater company). It was a city owned building, operated by a non-profit, which meant the pay scale was pitiful. I made more money as a technician when I left there.


----------

