# floor mics



## itie (Jun 3, 2010)

hello cb,

my school is looking to buy floor mics. we need good ones because there are going on the edge of the apron and orchestra will be playing in front of the apron. so they need to be good for picking up the actor and not the orchestra. do you guys know of any brand that would would be good. i don't know much about sound. 

thank you
giovanni


----------



## Studio (Jun 3, 2010)

itie said:


> hello cb,
> 
> my school is looking to buy floor mics. we need good ones because there are going on the edge of the apron and orchestra will be playing in front of the apron. so they need to be good for picking up the actor and not the orchestra. do you guys know of any brand that would would be good. i don't know much about sound.
> 
> ...



Not knowing much about floor mics i won't recommend anything but you will have a hard time picking up actors with an orchestra right next to the mics.


----------



## Sony (Jun 3, 2010)

Crown PCC-160's are kind of the industry standard for floor mics, however Studio is correct, there isn't much you can do when it comes to not picking up the orchestra with floor mics other than make sure they are pointed the right direction..


----------



## HSSBO94 (Jun 3, 2010)

Our school uses the crown PCC-160

http://www.crownaudio.com/pdf/mics/101062.pdf

We have 5 for a 50 foot proscenium stage

Since our orchestra was small small for the most recent performance (keyboard player, 2 violins, piccolo, additional keyboard)

we didn't have many issues (the keyboards were plugged into the sound board via snake directly.

But two shows ago, we had a larger orchestra with brass and a drum set and a trombone player who played parallel to the stage so that he could see our conductor. We therefore had to be very careful how much we pushed the center mic.


----------



## CSCTech (Jun 3, 2010)

I would like the others suggest Crown's. We use four and the are very good, pick up our actors more than the hanging areas we use.

However again like others said you are going to have trouble not picking up the orchestra. The Crown PCC 160s are omnidirectional, so that only adds to the proble. But even so with a directional mic you will pick them up. We use four on a 40-50 foot apron with full orchstra during shows.


Edit,

Oh, didnt see that you mentioned you use PCC 160s already.


Wow, everyone uses them don't they? 

I keep random mics I pick up in there bags during the year. Very nice ^^


----------



## MisterTim (Jun 3, 2010)

CSCTech said:


> However again like others said you are going to have trouble not picking up the orchestra. The Crown PCC 160s are omnidirectional, so that only adds to the proble. But even so with a directional mic you will pick them up. We use four on a 40-50 foot apron with full orchstra during shows.


No, they're cardioid. PCC = Phase Coherent Cardioid. I've found that they actually have decent rejection for rear sounds, and the problem is that we just tend to expect more out of them than we should. Considering the volume levels between the pit and the stage, as well as the distance between the two sources, I think that they do an excellent job.


----------



## CSCTech (Jun 3, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> No, they're cardioid. PCC = Phase Coherent Cardioid. I've found that they actually have decent rejection for rear sounds, and the problem is that we just tend to expect more out of them than we should. Considering the volume levels between the pit and the stage, as well as the distance between the two sources, I think that they do an excellent job.


 
Really? Huh. I always assumed they were omnidirectional as the grill is open on both sides.
Alright then.
Yeah, they do a great job and actually we rely on them for mics before we get into wireless for our main shows.


----------



## derekleffew (Jun 3, 2010)

CSCTech said:


> ... Wow, everyone uses them don't they?


Except for those who use the competitor.


DaveySimps said:


> ...
> The Crown PCC's are great mics, but a cheaper and still good quality alternative are the Bartlett stage floor microphones. They are about $100 cheaper than the Crown mics, but they are designed by the same guys who invented the Crown PCC 160. He worked for Crown for 26 years, and for Shure before that. I would suggest the TM-125C. ...
> 
> One last bit of info I always offer when using area micing is that you should not expect the same sound quality as you would get with handheld mics, or even body mics. This is just not possible with this type of micing, even under the most ideal conditions. I only mention this since inexpirenced sound ops, and more often directors, tend to expect the same sound levels and quality, it just is not phyiscally possible.
> ...




brubart said:


> That's good advice. I designed the Crown PCC-160, and yes, it should lie flat on the stage floor.
> 
> No matter what type of mics you use, you need to ride their faders, turning down mics that are not in use at any given time. This reduces the number of open mics, which increases clarity and gain-before-feedback. Ideally only one or two floor mics would be turned up at a time.
> 
> ...


----------



## CSCTech (Jun 3, 2010)

derekleffew said:


> Except for those who use the competitor.


 

Wow I never knew our floor mics where that expensive. Well at least our original installers did one thing right!


----------



## Tex (Jun 4, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> the problem is that we just tend to expect more out of them than we should.


Quoted For Truth...
IMO, PCC mics are for sound reinforcement, not amplification. If your chorus is loud, they'll do a good job of making it sound bigger. If the chorus is not loud enough in the first place, the PCC's will be a disappointment.


----------



## avkid (Jun 4, 2010)

Bartlett fixed my biggest problem with PCC's.
Those stupid TA4 connectors.


----------



## gcpsoundlight (Jun 4, 2010)

Interestingly, on a show I was just doing, we had a similar problem of picking up the orchestra, so we swapped out shure whatervers with 2 Rhode NT5A Condensors on 6mm thick pieces of felt, really good noise rejection, not only from the pit, but from the front rows of the audience, and we covered some dead spots on the stage really well. However, at $2500 each, it isn't practical. We only used them becuase we decided that we didn't need sterio drum o/heads, and that Shure Beta 56's sound nicer for Xylo and Glock than the rhodes.


----------



## gpforet (Jun 4, 2010)

Directional microphones (cardiod, hypercardiod, etc) produce their directivity by venting to the rear and using phase cancellation. In fact, any cardiod can be turned into an omni by blocking the rear venting. That's why cupping a handheld microphone produces feedback. By blocking the rear of the microphone, the microphone's ability to reduce off axis sound is diminished.

I work with very directional microphones (long shotguns) when doing location sound for film and these microphones have more venting along the sides then actual diaphram surface area facing the direction I want to capture.

Never block the rear of a directional microphone in an attempt to increase directivity, blocking does just the opposite.


CSCTech said:


> Really? Huh. I always assumed they were omnidirectional as the grill is open on both sides.
> Alright then.
> Yeah, they do a great job and actually we rely on them for mics before we get into wireless for our main shows.


----------



## CSCTech (Jun 4, 2010)

gpforet said:


> Directional microphones (cardiod, hypercardiod, etc) produce their directivity by venting to the rear and using phase cancellation. In fact, any cardiod can be turned into an omni by blocking the rear venting. That's why cupping a handheld microphone produces feedback. By blocking the rear of the microphone, the microphone's ability to reduce off axis sound is diminished.
> 
> I work with very directional microphones (long shotguns) when doing location sound for film and these microphones have more venting along the sides then actual diaphram surface area facing the direction I want to capture.
> 
> Never block the rear of a directional microphone in an attempt to increase directivity, blocking does just the opposite.


 
And now I feel dumb : )

We never tried blocking the rear, but I will make sure they arent for some reason now.


Whoever mentioned the connectors.

Yeah, those arent the best..When tapped the stage, I can't get it off with my big hands  And they break alot when highschool students sit on the edge of apron and well, feel the need to sit on, the microphone...But that isn't the wires fault :/


----------



## TimmyP1955 (Jun 6, 2010)

gcpsoundlight said:


> ..... 2 Rhode NT5A Condensors................... However, at $2500 each, it isn't practical.



$2500? What currency? NT5s are about $400 USD _per pair_. Other than one model, all the Rodes are $700 USD or less.


----------



## MarcusL (Jun 6, 2010)

$400 well spent, too. Though I have to say, I've never heard of them being used as floor mics.


----------



## Chris15 (Jun 7, 2010)

TimmyP1955 said:


> $2500? What currency? NT5s are about $400 USD _per pair_. Other than one model, all the Rodes are $700 USD or less.



I dunno, not Australian dollars... The retail for the pair is about 770, bu tI've seen them sub 500...


----------



## MisterTim (Jun 7, 2010)

MarcusL said:


> $400 well spent, too. Though I have to say, I've never heard of them being used as floor mics.


 That's because using a normal mic on the floor would sound AWFUL. Floor mics use the sound wave reflections off the floor to their advantage because they're so low; they avoid phase cancellations between the reflection and the direct source (in audible range). It's only a few mm off the floor that is the max distance you can have without getting serious phase cancellation. 


Chris15 said:


> I dunno, not Australian dollars... The retail for the pair is about 770, bu tI've seen them sub 500...


I'd guess he meant $250 each, but then the rest of the sentence doesn't make much sense, because in the grand scheme of things, that's a pretty average mic price...


----------



## museav (Jun 8, 2010)

itie said:


> so they need to be good for picking up the actor and not the orchestra.


A very basic concept here but mics can't differentiate the sound source, they are 'source blind' and will pick up whatever sound is present. The only real control over what a mic picks up is via the mic pattern, which can vary with frequency, and the mic's frequency response. All a mic can look at is what sound pressure level is present at it's location, it can't assess what is happening elsewhere. It may seem like an obvious point but I often find people for whom it is a breakthrough to realize that mics differentiate based only on the direction the sound is coming from and the frequency of the sound.


----------



## gcpsoundlight (Jun 16, 2010)

Chris15 said:


> I dunno, not Australian dollars... The retail for the pair is about 770, bu tI've seen them sub 500...



Sorry, Just Guessing, they were not mine, and I'm not really into condensers. My main point was for the outlay and then to put them on a stage where they could get damages is a bit risky. one of ours got mopped by the stage crew!


----------



## NHStech (Jun 19, 2010)

We have some floor mics,and truthfully, I am not at all impressed. Off the top of my head, I am not sure which ones I have (I believe EV), but the gain before feedback is horrible, and being on the floor - the front of the stage is hollow hardwood, there is a lot of low-hum that happens any time any action goes on around them, even with a low-pass filter.
What I tried last musical was to use my three AT853s on boom stands with their stand adapters (love those things), and had the mics about 2-3 feet above the stage pointing at a 45 degree angle. Seemed to work much better than the floors in pick up, lack of feedback, and NOT picking up the pit (the stands were in the pit, which is not really a pit, but just the area in front of the front of the stage.


----------



## museav (Jun 20, 2010)

NHStech said:


> We have some floor mics,and truthfully, I am not at all impressed. Off the top of my head, I am not sure which ones I have (I believe EV), but the gain before feedback is horrible...


Which seems to indicate that it may be the application of the mics, not the mics themselves, that is the problem. Boundary mics still have the same factors of pattern, inverse square law, phasing between mics, etc. that all mics have. Go from a mic being 6" away from a performer's mouth to being 10' away and that's up to 26dB of gain lost regardless of the mic. Push a mic from being back on stage out to the front edge or stage apron and you are probably pushing it more into the house sound system coverage and into the mic's pattern, thus more losses in gain before feedback.

What you often get with mics mounted 2' to 3' above the stage is combfiltering due to reflections off the stage.


----------



## NHStech (Jun 20, 2010)

Good point. I would love to push in the boundary mics further in. Problem is, actors and actresses tend to lose track of where they are. My fear would be a well-placed choreography move would knock one of them right off the stage. They get perilously close to doing that as it. 
As far as the other mics, they work better than the alternative.


----------



## MisterTim (Jun 21, 2010)

NHStech said:


> Good point. I would love to push in the boundary mics further in. Problem is, actors and actresses tend to lose track of where they are. My fear would be a well-placed choreography move would knock one of them right off the stage. They get perilously close to doing that as it.
> As far as the other mics, they work better than the alternative.



Knocked off stage? Gafftape, man. I don't know about your el cheapo plate mics, but the PCC-160 can be run over a car and still work fine, so I don't know what the problem is.


----------



## Chris15 (Jun 23, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> Knocked off stage? Gafftape, man. I don't know about your el cheapo plate mics, but the PCC-160 can be run over a car and still work fine, so I don't know what the problem is.



The problem is what it's always been with the PCC160, the TAF connector...


----------



## brubart (Sep 24, 2010)

Brad is right on in his quote below. We need to educate sound people about the differences in gain-before-feedback of headworn mics vs. floor mics, just based on the difference in mic'ing distance.

We've found that many schools and churches who do theater cannot afford headworn wireless mics, and the sound operators cannot deal with them effectively. So floor mics are a practical compromise. The laws of physics (such as the PAG/NAG equations) dictate the gain before feedback of any particular mic/speaker system, and these laws suggest various ways to get the reproduced sound as loud as possible given the mic'ing distance of floor mics.

Some ways to optimize the gain-before-feedback of floor mics are:
* Place the loudspeakers closer to the audience than to the microphones. To do that, some schools rent portable PA speakers on stands, and sometimes delay the speakers' signals so that the precedence effect localizes the sound on stage.
* If a speaker must be used over the center of the stage, try to use a line array to reduce the sound radiation down toward the microphones.
* Reduce the number of open microphones (NOM) - turn up only one mic at a time when possible. The more mics that are on, the poorer the clarity and gain before feedback.
* Another way to reduce the NOM is to use one amplifier channel and loudspeaker per microphone. Place the speakers close together.
* Use a graphic equalizer, or automatic feedback suppressor, to notch out frequencies that feed back.
* Place the mics as close to the actors as is practicable. If this creates the problem of the mics being stepped on, use a TM-125C mic which has a permanently attached cable, and no tiny TA3F connector to break.
* Use highly directional mics, such as half-cardioids or half-supercardioids.
* Most important, teach the actors to project! The mics need something to pick up.
 -- Bruce Bartlett, Bartlett Microphones

museav said:


> Which seems to indicate that it may be the application of the mics, not the mics themselves, that is the problem. Boundary mics still have the same factors of pattern, inverse square law, phasing between mics, etc. that all mics have. Go from a mic being 6" away from a performer's mouth to being 10' away and that's up to 26dB of gain lost regardless of the mic. Push a mic from being back on stage out to the front edge or stage apron and you are probably pushing it more into the house sound system coverage and into the mic's pattern, thus more losses in gain before feedback.
> 
> What you often get with mics mounted 2' to 3' above the stage is combfiltering due to reflections off the stage.


----------



## techfreek (Sep 26, 2010)

While I will not argue with the types of floor mics others have suggested (I am sure they are better than what ever I suggest) one thing we do in our theater to try to stop picking up the pit band is to make some shields (2 pieces of door skin about 4" high, glued at a 90 degree angle and when finished will go around either side of the floor mic). I do believe it helps a little


----------



## brubart (Sep 29, 2010)

techfreek said:


> While I will not argue with the types of floor mics others have suggested (I am sure they are better than what ever I suggest) one thing we do in our theater to try to stop picking up the pit band is to make some shields (2 pieces of door skin about 4" high, glued at a 90 degree angle and when finished will go around either side of the floor mic). I do believe it helps a little



Another method that improves rear rejection of floor mics (at least at high frequencies) is to put a 2-foot-square piece of 4" thick acoustic foam behind each microphone. The foam piece lies flat on the stage floor.

In the link below, search for "Baffles Improve PCC Rear Rejection". It's an article I wrote in 1993 that suggests ways to increase the rejection of sounds behind a floor microphone:

http://www.crownaudio.com/pdf/mics/memo22yr.pdf

-- Bruce Bartlett, Bartlett Microphones


----------



## DavidDaMonkey (Sep 30, 2010)

One tip that I can share is that we place a conduit clamp

over the point where the connector connects to the mic, and then screw it into the deck. It blocks the fragile connector from being broken off by misplaced feet.


----------



## enterprise (Oct 7, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> Knocked off stage? Gafftape, man. I don't know about your el cheapo plate mics, but the PCC-160 can be run over a car and still work fine, so I don't know what the problem is.


 
I have used my aging PCC160s for everything you could think of (mostly for recording) -- from covering multiple acts, to plays, to lecterns, to mounting them on 4x8 (or larger) plywood sheets overhead for reinforcement! I had one chorus' front row break into choreography and actually dance over my Crown's! (whatever happened to "No Surprises for the Production people, huh!" ??) They held up like troopers. I'm now using them to mostly mic table conferences (Public Access TV) and I still love them.

A note to "novices": They have a beautiful pickup "hemisphere" of about 12 ' L/R and about 8' "upstage" with very high rejection at their ass-end. HOWEVER, if your actors stand closer than 3' then they're talking "over" them and they're going to be pretty useless. And yes they do a pretty good job of rejecting the band/orchestra, depending.

I learned about the principal behind the Crowns about 40 years ago, long before I ever heard of them, when boundary mics were called "floaters". I began using directional dynamics on mic stands just in front of the apron, with the elements pointed at the edge of the stage , and at a stand height that put them 3/8" above the deck. No more. Worked like gangbusters for live reinforcement. Even better for recording. Also laid them on foam as has been mentioned above. (still doing that one when the Crowns are busy elsewhere) Then I discovered the Crowns and have been trying them in every situation I could imagine. Someone mentioned inside a piano, and that _can_ work (although I believe the surface area of the lid will negatively affect how the mic handles certain frequencies, which is why I always start with another style of mic pointing up at the bottom of the instrument's soundboard.)

Anyway, my undying gratitude to the gentleman above who designed them (and BTW their original little connectors are still going strong!)


----------



## enterprise (Oct 7, 2010)

OH

DavidDaMonkey said:


> One tip that I can share is that we place a conduit clamp
> over the point where the connector connects to the mic, and then screw it into the deck. It blocks the fragile connector from being broken off by misplaced feet.



OH yes! -- simple and elegant. So long as they can stay there for a while -- Nice idea!


----------



## derekleffew (Oct 7, 2010)

enterprise said:


> ...I learned about the principal behind the Crowns about 40 years ago, long before I ever heard of them, when boundary mics were called "floaters". ...


"Floaters" conjures up all sorts of distasteful images. I believe the proper term is "float mics"--floats being the British term for footlights. Before PZM and PCC boundary mics, the mic mouse was used, with limited success.


----------

