Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 23051186; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 03:00:38 -0700 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #426 Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 03:00:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on prxy.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.3 X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #426 1. Re: Is it too good to be true? by Boyd Ostroff 2. vw people symbols by ken frederickson 3. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Bill Nelson" 4. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Paul Guncheon" 5. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 6. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Chris Warner" 7. Re: Sound Levels? by Mick Alderson 8. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Bill Conner" 9. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Tony Deeming" 10. Re: Sound Levels? by Jerry Durand 11. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 12. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 13. ABTT by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 14. Re: Stubborn carriage bolts by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 15. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 16. Re: Is it too good to be true? by Mark O'Brien 17. Anyone in Kansas City area by "Sam Fisher" 18. Re: Is it too good to be true? by Jerry Durand 19. Re: Is it too good to be true? by Jerry Durand 20. Re: ABTT by Bill Sapsis 21. Re: Anyone in Kansas City area by The Westons 22. Re: Rigging Certification Exam by Bill Sapsis 23. Re: Sound Levels? by CB 24. Re: The LRLR Ride by Bill Sapsis 25. Re: Anyone in Kansas City area by J Burch 26. Re: Sound Levels? by Charlie Richmond 27. Re: Sound Levels? by Charlie Richmond 28. Re: Sound Levels? by Jerry Durand 29. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 30. Re: [Fwd: Re: AOL workaround] by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 31. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 32. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Charlie Richmond 33. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 34. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Tony Deeming" 35. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "James, Brian" 36. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 37. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Tony Deeming" 38. Re: ABTT by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 39. Re: Sound Levels? by Adam Fitchett 40. Re: Sound Levels? by Dan Mills 41. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 42. Stand Environ Dimmers by "James, Brian" 43. Re: Sound Levels? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 44. Re: Stand Environ Dimmers by Mike Brubaker 45. Re: Sound Levels? by Adam Fitchett 46. Re: Sound Levels? by Charlie Richmond 47. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 48. Re: Is it too good to be true? by "Bill Nelson" *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:31:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: When you have to ask "is it too good to be true" the answer is almost always "yes." I don't know what these guys are up to, but I really don't think it's a charity drive to give you a free CAD program. Spend a few bucks, get some real software. Don't waste your time looking for a free lunch. | Boyd Ostroff | Director of Design and Technology | Opera Company of Philadelphia | http://tech.operaphilly.com | ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050612131348.36565.qmail [at] web50805.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:13:48 -0700 (PDT) From: ken frederickson Subject: vw people symbols Cc: cad [at] landrudesign.com In-Reply-To: I can copy the symbol out of an older drawing...but i only have 2 and i remember there being many different symbols.... they are named MAN5,MAN9, GROUP1,GROUP 3, and similar. I have gone to resources and looked in textures and other folders but cant find them anymore... __________________________________ Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1316.64.28.63.1.1118584001.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:46:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? From: "Bill Nelson" > A web site advertising a free program...? But ONLY if 100,000 people > register by August 1? 'Reserve your copy now?' > > I don't think I'll be the first to sign up for this! Yep. Sounds like a data mining attempt. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 03:59:03 -1000 From: "Paul Guncheon" Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Message-id: <007101c56f56$e4b95930$683e4104 [at] yourxhtr8hvc4p> References: <> No Worries... there are over 22,000 signed up already. Wow... Chris had a pony... Laters, Paul "Who discovered radium?" asked Tom curiously. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 09:59:46 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c56f57$0149aa50$6801a8c0 [at] Dell> In-Reply-To: > > I don't think I'll be the first to sign up for this! > > Yep. Sounds like a data mining attempt. Not a problem. Just do what I do -- give your name as "Bill Sapsis". ------------------------------ Message-ID: <03c301c56f58$a4241340$6401a8c0 [at] chris> From: "Chris Warner" References: Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 07:11:35 -0700 The software sounds like it is a clone of Autodesk's Inventor ( a good tool if your a mechanical engineer). It appears they have the CAD trade sites publishing information for it. Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "James, Brian" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 10:32 PM Subject: Is it too good to be true? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I ran across this page for a free cad program. I thought it may be of interest to some of you. http://www.x-cad.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.8 - Release Date: 6/11/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.8 - Release Date: 6/11/2005 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <42AC54B1.10307 [at] uwosh.edu> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 10:28:49 -0500 From: Mick Alderson Subject: Re: Sound Levels? CB wrote: > Ehm, I don't know what =8CA=B9 weighted is (that's how it showed up to me) > but you had better be at least this specific about how the measurement will > be taken. The "It can not go over 96 dB" in the contract is easily dealt > with by pointing to the console and saying "Look, it isn't even peaking > above 6 dB!" 'You know what we meant' is no way to defend a contract, ask > ANY lawyer. There have been times when I have turned the console off, and > instructed the complainant to go ask that little girl there to stop hitting > her drums so hard (I loved mixing for Andrea!), and others when the cop's > have brought out their Rat Shack meter and I bring out my digital. "Hey, > you A weighted or C weighted? Fast or Slow response on that lil' thing?" > "Uh, I dunno..." > Yeah, that went far... I'm not sure if C.B. is just trolling for a response or what, but I'll bite. We're currently having one thread about riggers not risking harm by flying the kiddies, another about a summer stock setting up dangerous lighting positions. We've had many discussions in the past about how bad it is for carpenters and electricians to risk harm to actors and audience. We all agree that due diligence is required. How come its only the lofty sound guys who are permitted to harm the audience and co-workers with damaging sound levels, nay even encouraged to do so? Why are we even talking about "threshold of pain"? Hearing damage occurs at lower levels than THAT! Why do you get to do that? I read C.B.'s diatribe to mean that only "Sound Guys" are qualified to decide what is too loud (doesn't matter if MY ears hurt), and if the local AHJ (the cop with the Rat Shack meter) tells you it's too loud, that the proper response is to bury him in jargon until he goes away. What happened to due diligence here, and the duty not to harm those around you? CB, I hope I read you wrong! -- Mick Alderson TD, Fredric March Theatre University of Wis. Oshkosh ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000d01c56f63$9f5413a0$6a01a8c0 [at] BCA1> Reply-To: "Bill Conner" From: "Bill Conner" Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 10:30:06 -0500 Someone posted: "A couple months ago I bought my son a 40 year old erector set on ebay for forty bucks. Almost the same one I had 40 years ago, with the blue plug-in motor and gear box!" "that same Erector set probably couldn't be sold today, the parts would probably be considered too dangerous, and would require significant modification. That motor doesn't have a ground does it I bet ? " I had those - and still have three sets all with those blue motors. I still recall getting my finger stuck in the gearing - more than ones. Maybe that explains why I always have punch list notes on guards on electric winches with chains. I wonder if someone that's been protected from all those incidents can really learn from the mistakes of others and really be as cautious and concerned for safety as those of us who have experienced painful education first hand (or finger in this case). Bill ------------------------------ From: "Tony Deeming" Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:04:21 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net]On Behalf Of Paul Guncheon Sent: 12 June 2005 14:59 To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- <> No Worries... there are over 22,000 signed up already. >>>> You reckon??? 8-)) ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050612095320.0382ee38 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 09:58:51 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In-Reply-To: References: At 08:28 AM 6/12/2005, you wrote: >I read C.B.'s diatribe to mean that only "Sound Guys" are qualified to >decide what is too loud (doesn't matter if MY ears hurt), and if the local >AHJ (the cop with the Rat Shack meter) tells you it's too loud, that the >proper response is to bury him in jargon until he goes away. What happened >to due diligence here, and the duty not to harm those around you? Some years ago I attended a presentation that took place in the Dolby Theater in San Francisco. They were showing films covering the history of film sound and when they got to a modern film clip, I and a lot of the people around me had our fingers in our ears. Someone said that clip was way too loud, but the Dolby guy said "the sound levels are calibrated to be what the original mixer called out". I attended a similar presentation a year or so later and the sound was quieter. They mentioned that there was a problem with theaters turning down the sound so the mixers are mixing louder. Now you have to guess what the "calibrated" levels are. *sigh* ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <29.7513cc8a.2fddce8d [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:44:45 EDT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In a message dated 09/06/05 21:53:09 GMT Daylight Time, delbert.hall [at] gmail.com writes: > My lawyers told me the same thing, so I stopped doing waviers of > responsibility around 1984. There must be a lot of people who think > that waviers of responsibility have some merit since I continually see > notices in hotels stating that they are not responsibility if anything > get stolen from my room, or if my car is vandelized while in their > parking lot, or if I drown in their pool. I bet you have seen these > too. I know that common-sense and the law, in both our countries, are often at variance. Take hotels as an example. Most modern hotels either offer secure storage for valuables or fit wall safes in every room. To allow the cleaning staff to get in, they usually fit a more or less complicated mastered locking systems, sometimes so hard to use that I have trouble. If you fail to use the systems that they have made available to you, that's your fault, and I am sure that their insurers ill think so, too, and yours. Other hotels are very different. I stayed in one a year or two, admittedly in a fairly isolated part of Wales, where there were no room keys at all, nor locks! I'm not sure whether they even bothered to lock the front door. (The food and beer were both good, and the prices reasonable.) They worked on the assumption that, if you had valuables, you would take your own care of them. Lock them securely in the boot of your alarmed car, perhaps, since a car was the only way to get there, apart from a long walk. Which approach is more reasonable? But, of course, this has little to do with it. Like almost all responsibility cases, it would have wound up with your insurers fighting mine. Not for your or my benefit, or even for a just settlement. Solely for the profits of their respective shareholders. And at our cost, when the premiums go up, next year. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <8.6a46052a.2fddd2ad [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:02:21 EDT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In a message dated 10/06/05 00:50:05 GMT Daylight Time, ladesigners [at] juno.com writes: > Your position appears to be the increasingly more popular one. The key these > days is to have company manuals that cover every conceivable combination of > factors that could effect any company action or activity that could possibly > happen in the operation of a business, from what do if there is a claim of > sexual harassment, to having MSDS forms in every language available on each > jobsite,, to exactly when a certified welder is brought in, to the > recordkeeping that must be retained by the company that shows that the > company followed its own rules as reflected in its manuals, plus plenty of > insurance, of course. Does anyone, I wonder, figure into the costs that of employing those who try to write them? And, it can't be done. All the incompetent technicians, and failed lawyers who write these things, with a mix of ACLU. Lawyers, I am happily ignorant of: engineering, not. Well, not much. In my own field, I can cope, but I have met this. One of our guys designed a superior helicopter mount for film cameras. But he still had to get an ARB certificate before he could assemble, and fly it. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <87.297f90ab.2fddd3d1 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:07:13 EDT Subject: ABTT In a message dated 10/06/05 03:37:00 GMT Daylight Time, doomster [at] worldnet.att.net writes: > Richard? Whatcha think? > Bill S. Are you coming over this year? I always like to meet you. I may well be in the bar by the back door of Hall 1. Otherwise, in any area where smoking is allowed! Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1e9.3dde936e.2fddd603 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:16:35 EDT Subject: Re: Stubborn carriage bolts In a message dated 10/06/05 08:25:26 GMT Daylight Time, nimmck [at] charter.net writes: > I'm curious: what sort of fastening method do you suggest in place of > carriage bolts? Two suggest themselves, three, actually. First, big,big,big woodscrews. Second, recesed steel plates to recess the nutheads. Third, machine screws into tapped toggles. It is important that fastenings can be undone, and carriage bolts fail in this. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <216.2b3bac2.2fdddb6b [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:39:39 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 10/06/05 13:11:53 GMT Daylight Time, Cosmo.A.Catalano [at] williams.edu writes: > I'm putting together an info sheet for our facility. I'm aware that > other venues have information regarding maximum sound levels allowable. > We are an indoor venue, so our local noise ordinances is not > applicable. OHSA regulations (1926.53) can be offered, they permit > 115db for 15 min and refer to constant levels This seems pretty darn > loud (to this old fart) for a theatre. Can anyone speak to what > their venue permits and any action they have taken when it is exceeded? > Specific info (db, what scale, location of measurement, etc) would be > helpful. You have just stepped into the jungle. I can offer some advice, but not a lot. First, sound measurements specify a frequency spectrum. dBA, dBB, dBC, and dBD all use different ones. Don't worry too much about that: most measurements use dBA. Those that use others, you need really specialist advice on. dBA is the one which corresponds most closely to a normal ear. I am of the personal opinion that 115dBA,is likely to cause permanant damage if sustained. I shall check my numbers, and post again. Location of measurement is again hard. Like you, I am an old fart, and I should say that any area to which the public has access. Restrictive, yes: probably upsetting your audience:yes. But they may thank us in later life Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050612115239.uh7okg0swk80kgow [at] www.email.arizona.edu> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:52:39 -0700 From: Mark O'Brien Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? References: In-Reply-To: Quoting "James, Brian" : > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > I ran across this page for a free cad program. > I thought it may be of interest to some of you. > > http://www.x-cad.net I thought about it being too good to be true, but just for s & giggles, I signed up with an expendable E-mail address. If nothing else, I can delete it. Could be fun, could be junk. Mark O'Brien Opera Technical Director University of Arizona, School of Music 520-621-7025 520-591-1803 Mobile` ------------------------------ From: "Sam Fisher" Subject: Anyone in Kansas City area Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:55:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I just picked up a welder on Ebay, only problem is it is in Kansas City and I am in Maryland. I'm searching out shipping company options. Anyone on the list in the area and interested in making a few bucks by picking it up and shipping for me? Sam Fisher ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050612115938.0390d818 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:07:41 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? In-Reply-To: References: At 11:52 AM 6/12/2005, you wrote: >I thought about it being too good to be true, but just for s & giggles, I >signed >up with an expendable E-mail address. If nothing else, I can delete it. Could >be fun, could be junk. I just did the same. If I start getting junk I'll just delete that alias. ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050612120923.0394acb8 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:10:27 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? I just received the confirmation e-mail from them, it made it through the sbl-xbl blacklist from Spamhaus, so that's a good sign. ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:29:23 -0400 Subject: Re: ABTT From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Alas, Frank. I am not coming over this year. I signed up for ABTT and I just got my conference pass, which makes it all the more tempting, but work restrictions and the lousy exchange rate have conspired to keep me out of it. I'm afraid you'll have to drink without me this time around. Be well Bill www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Please support the Long Reach Long Riders on their 2nd annual benefit ride http://sapsis-rigging.com/LRLR.html on 6/12/05 2:07 PM, FrankWood95 [at] aol.com at FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > Are you coming over this year? I always like to meet you. > > I may well be in the bar by the back door of Hall 1. Otherwise, in any area > where smoking is allowed! > > Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <42AC8DB5.5020502 [at] ku.edu> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:32:05 -0500 From: The Westons Subject: Re: Anyone in Kansas City area References: In-Reply-To: Maybe. I'm in Lawrence which is right next door (30 miles away). If you can't find someone in KC I'd be happy to help you out. for a nominal fee... and a per diem... plus expenses... :-) Alex Weston Stage Manager Kansas University Theatre. Sam Fisher wrote: >For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see >--------------------------------------------------- > >I just picked up a welder on Ebay, only problem is it is in Kansas City and >I am in Maryland. I'm searching out shipping company options. Anyone on >the list in the area and interested in making a few bucks by picking it up >and shipping for me? > >Sam Fisher > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:53:51 -0400 Subject: RE: Rigging Certification Exam From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Katie Dougherty, the Certification program manager for the ETCP has asked me to remind y'all that there's still some space open to take the Rigging Certification exam. The exam is being given at LDI in Orlando, FL on November 12th. I'm sending some of my people to take the exam and I'll be there to cheer them on, so if your still trying to decide, now would be the time. For more info on the program and the exam please go to www.etcp.esta.org Thanks Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Please support the Long Reach Long Riders on their 2nd annual benefit ride http://sapsis-rigging.com/LRLR.html ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20050612132519.01712f10 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:25:19 From: CB Subject: Re: Sound Levels? >Almost. A +3dB increase is a doubling in power (from 100 watts->200 >watts). For doubling in level it is a +10dB increase. And typically the >just noticeable difference in sound level is 1dB, most every one should >notice a 3dB change. >Ahh, my sound Prof would be so proud. :) Maybe not so much. On a log scale, +3 dB doubles the power. 3 dB is the smallest increment that is 'normally' perceived as a change in program material, 1 dB having that sidtinction with tone, or other 'constant' signals, and +10 dB is what it takes for the signal to have 'seemed' to double for a listener. Close, though... Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:13:17 -0400 Subject: Re: The LRLR Ride From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hey Herrick. You shouldn't read this post. The rest of you however... The Long Reach Long Rider cross country charity ride is now just 2 weeks away. If you haven't made your donation yet, there's still time. You may remember from last year that we did a daily trip diary on the website. We'll be doing it again so you can follow us as we go careening around the countryside. If you live or work along the route maybe you could come out and say hello. Alex, we'll be stopping for lunch in downtown Lawrence, KS on the 28th. Sorry Sam. Can't pick up the welder. Not enough room in the saddlebags. We start from DC and San Diego on June 26th and end in Rapid City, SD. E-mail to the group can be sent to lrlr [at] sapsis-rigging.com Thanks Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Please support the Long Reach Long Riders on their 2nd annual benefit ride http://sapsis-rigging.com/LRLR.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050612202611.69006.qmail [at] web33313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:26:11 -0700 (PDT) From: J Burch Subject: Re: Anyone in Kansas City area In-Reply-To: i am in the Kansas City Area. email me off list and I can help you out. Jean jeanburch_td [at] yahoo.com __________________________________ Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:25:34 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, CB wrote: > Maybe not so much. On a log scale, +3 dB doubles the power. 3 dB is the > smallest increment that is 'normally' perceived as a change in program > material, 1 dB having that sidtinction with tone, or other 'constant' > signals, and +10 dB is what it takes for the signal to have 'seemed' to > double for a listener. Now I'll jump in with a slightly dissenting opinion, based on what is, of course, all subjective measurements but which are the ones I have always relied on: It completely depends on the nature of the material and the acoustics what increase in level can be perceived -- plus, of course, the individual listeners are a variable here, too, with some being more perceptive than others. Professionally trained listeners can often hear changes of 1.5dB or less from one day to the next even and certainly less than 1dB instantaneously. Since 1968, when Dan Dugan created the 'standard theatrical audio point scale' at ACT in San Francisco, I've been calibrating all our equipment in this fashion until the MMA came up with their 127 point scale which is now rather standardised across the sound industry. Dan made his faders go from 0-10 just like lighting consoles with 0 being off and 10 being full on. Each point represented a 6dB gain change (or what he considered to be a rough doubling of the apparent volume) and had marks for 1/2 (3dB) and 1/4 (1.5dB) increments between each point. Designing sound on his console in my first professional gig, I discovered that many directors could actually tell when a cue was set 1/4 of a point incorrectly and also often requested changes as small as 1/8 of a point (between the smallest increments) and could easily hear the setting change, even with music as the material (not a tone). I eventually trained my ears to be this discerning but was still not as good as the best directors... Charlie + Charlie Richmond - Richmond Sound Design - Skype: charlierichmond + + http://www.RichmondSoundDesign.com "Performance for the Long Run" + ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:40:43 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, CB wrote: > Maybe not so much. On a log scale, +3 dB doubles the power. 3 dB is the > signals, and +10 dB is what it takes for the signal to have 'seemed' to > double for a listener. Just to clarify: it is an indisputable fact that a 3dB increase doubles the power and a 6dB increase doubles the amplitude of the signal. It is has been discussed extensively what is actually perceived as a 'doubling of the volume' by the typical listener but 6dB is very close to what many people feel is correct plus it is indeed a mathematical doubling of the signal so it does make some sense.. Charlie ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050612135648.0294c768 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:57:10 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In-Reply-To: References: At 01:25 PM 6/12/2005, you wrote: >Dan made his faders go from 0-10 just like lighting consoles with 0 being >off and 10 being full on. And they go to 11 on really good amplifiers. :) ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1a8.39551939.2fde11fc [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:32:28 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 10/06/05 13:32:35 GMT Daylight Time, stagecraft [at] jeffsalzberg.com writes: > We permitted 100 dB SPL for 5 minutes, measured at the back of the house. That seems low. Not according to my taste, but to accepted rules as I remember them. Maybe not, since the time element in important. A search for "Bruel and Kjaer" should give you a lot of up-to-date information. Granted, they are in the busines of acoustic measurement, and of selling gear to do it. But their handbooks contain a lot of solid information. My own copy is dated 1971, and the rules will have changed, probably. Maybe the psycho-acoustic levels of tolerance by the body will not: those that our legislators and administrators set certainly will. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <92.28b6fdee.2fde1382 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:38:58 EDT Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: AOL workaround] In a message dated 10/06/05 14:22:41 GMT Daylight Time, StevevETTrn [at] aol.com writes: > On AOL 9.0 Optimized SE, I just replied here by highlighting the portions of > > the original > message that were pertinent (clipping the post) and then selecting the > "Reply" button. > > At that point, I right clicked, in the message area, and selected the > "Compose as plain text" > option in the dialog box. Then typed the reply and sent. Simple. That's information I want. I have stuck with AOL 5.0 for years, because its succesors have made this difficult, if not impossible. Thank you. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1d7.3e63f97b.2fde1904 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:02:28 EDT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In a message dated 10/06/05 19:44:19 GMT Daylight Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: > > There are still other activities, like racing cars down dark > >public streets at 130 mph, taking certain drugs, and not wearing fall > >protection when working at heights, that are just plain foolhearty and > >no one should do them, so here the law tries to protect us from > >ourselves and each other. Why? Why does the law try to protect me from myself? If I do something stupid, and we all do or have done, why should we not suffer the consequences? If we survive, we shall hopefully have learned from our experience. If we fail to survive, then the world is well rid of a fool. Doing stupid things which may involve someone else in the consequences of our folly is different. Driving at high speed may well kill innocent pasers-by, as may incompetent flying. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 00:17:59 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > Why? Why does the law try to protect me from myself? If I do something Because when you hurt yourself, there is a subsidiary cost to society. The cost of the police, medics and ambulance to attend the accident site, the investigators to find out what happened, the repair crew to fix what you broke while you were stupid and the doctors, nurses and hospital to look after while you were recovering or dying -- all is borne by society either directly or indirectly, depending on the exact type of society you live in. Some charge the miscreant for some of these costs and others bear it all, but we certainly suffer as a whole, even if not in a specific economic way but sometimes just because of the traffic delay because of the gawkers... Charlie ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1c8.2a9a0a89.2fde1cbe [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:18:22 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 11/06/05 14:54:50 GMT Daylight Time, adam [at] fitchtech.net writes: > Almost. A +3dB increase is a doubling in power (from 100 watts->200 > watts). For doubling in level it is a +10dB increase. And typically the > just noticeable difference in sound level is 1dB, most every one should > notice a 3dB change. > Ahh, my sound Prof would be so proud. :) He'ld be wrong. By the strict definitions, yes 3dB is double the power. 6dB is double the level. Bu youu need to consider the impedances, as well. Go back to your notes, or to the textbooks. Define level. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: "Tony Deeming" Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 00:24:24 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: > I ran across this page for a free cad program. > I thought it may be of interest to some of you. > > http://www.x-cad.net I thought about it being too good to be true, but just for s & giggles, I signed up with an expendable E-mail address. If nothing else, I can delete it. Could be fun, could be junk. Mark O'Brien My first indicator of the spam-trap etc was the fact that I didn't recognise the name of the original post. (Apologies to Mr James if he actually IS a regular!) ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:26:20 -0400 Message-ID: From: "James, Brian" No apologies needed. -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net]On Behalf Of Tony Deeming Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 7:24 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? =08 For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- > I ran across this page for a free cad program. > I thought it may be of interest to some of you. > > http://www.x-cad.net I thought about it being too good to be true, but just for s & giggles, I signed up with an expendable E-mail address. If nothing else, I can delete it. Could be fun, could be junk. Mark O'Brien My first indicator of the spam-trap etc was the fact that I didn't = recognise the name of the original post. (Apologies to Mr James if he actually IS a regular!) ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1b8.1508e249.2fde1f87 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:30:15 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 11/06/05 21:55:23 GMT Daylight Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: > Ehm, I don't know what =8CA=B9 weighted is (that's how it showed up to me) > but you had better be at least this specific about how the measurement will > be taken. The "It can not go over 96 dB" in the contract is easily dealt > with by pointing to the console and saying "Look, it isn't even peaking > above 6 dB!" My friend, I suggest that you study the subject a little. The figure of 96 dB you quote is the Sound Pressure Level to which youur audience's ears are subjected. This needs to be measured. There is absolutely no relationship between that and the numbers on your console. What is heard depends on the gain of the power amplifiers, and on the efficiency of the speakers, Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: "Tony Deeming" Subject: RE: Is it too good to be true? Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 00:30:24 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: My first indicator of the spam-trap etc was the fact that I didn't recognise the name of the original post. (Apologies to Mr James if he actually IS a regular!) From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net]On Behalf Of James, Brian Sent: 13 June 2005 00:26 To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- > No apologies needed. Ah - but it would appear that you're wrong! I do therefore repeat my apology for doubting your reality! (I get so many spam hits from 'real' names, I tend to assume the worst if they're none too familiar!!! 8-)) Ynot ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <194.40bac1ed.2fde2505 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:53:41 EDT Subject: Re: ABTT In a message dated 12/06/05 20:26:05 GMT Daylight Time, bill [at] sapsis-rigging.com writes: > Alas, Frank. I am not coming over this year. I signed up for ABTT and I > just got my conference pass, which makes it all the more tempting, but work > restrictions and the lousy exchange rate have conspired to keep me out of > it. > > I'm afraid you'll have to drink without me this time around. My regrets. The dollar exchange rate is beyond me. Given that I have a house in France, the Euro rate will do for me. But if you, or any of you, are in South-West France, I shall be glad ti see you. I can be reached on 05 53 36 35 52, when I am there. I shall be there from early July until September. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <42ACCFCA.6070706 [at] fitchtech.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:14:02 -0400 From: Adam Fitchett Subject: Re: Sound Levels? References: In-Reply-To: I apologize, the phrase that I left out was: for a doubling in level "as perceived by the ear" is a +10dB increase. A +6dB difference would be a doubling in voltage or SPL. And impedance should remain constant within a given system, so why would one need to account for that? -Adam Fitchett FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 11/06/05 14:54:50 GMT Daylight Time, adam [at] fitchtech.net >writes: > > > >>Almost. A +3dB increase is a doubling in power (from 100 watts->200 >> watts). For doubling in level it is a +10dB increase. And typically the >> just noticeable difference in sound level is 1dB, most every one should >> notice a 3dB change. >> Ahh, my sound Prof would be so proud. :) >> >> > >He'ld be wrong. By the strict definitions, yes 3dB is double the power. 6dB >is double the level. Bu youu need to consider the impedances, as well. Go back >to your notes, or to the textbooks. Define level. > > >Frank Wood > > > ------------------------------ From: Dan Mills Subject: Re: Sound Levels? Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:26:11 +0100 References: In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <200506130126.11237.dmills [at] spamblock.demon.co.uk> On Monday 13 June 2005 01:14, Adam Fitchett wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > I apologize, the phrase that I left out was: for a doubling in level "as > perceived by the ear" is a +10dB increase. A +6dB difference would be a > doubling in voltage or SPL. And impedance should remain constant within > a given system, so why would one need to account for that? > > -Adam Fitchett Ever heard of power compression? As the voice coil heats up its resistance rises and the power output for a given voltage drops. What this means is that with real speakers double the voltage across the terminals may NOT correspond to 6db! This is mainly an effect seen in bass units, but it is real and can be obvious. Regards, Dan. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1c0.2a7d79cc.2fde3156 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:46:14 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 12/06/05 21:26:54 GMT Daylight Time, charlier [at] RichmondSoundDesign.com writes: > > Maybe not so much. On a log scale, +3 dB doubles the power. 3 dB is the > > smallest increment that is 'normally' perceived as a change in program > > material, 1 dB having that sidtinction with tone, or other 'constant' > > signals, and +10 dB is what it takes for the signal to have 'seemed' to > > double for a listener. With this, I disagree strongly. BBC practice was to use 1dB increments as imperceptible. The faders were, in general, so constructed, with discrete steps. Obvoiusly, outside their normal ranges, wider steps were used. I do mean steps. the standard sound fader had 64 steps. This made for problems when we went for stereo, since two ganged faders would lead to positional jumps, if they were not in exact mechanical synchronism. The normal way round this was to use the faders as an M-S pair. Mis-alignment there merely gav you minor width errors. > > Now I'll jump in with a slightly dissenting opinion, based on what is, of > course, all subjective measurements but which are the ones I have always > > Since 1968, when Dan Dugan created the 'standard theatrical audio point > scale' I have never heard of this, before. I should be very interested to learn more about it. > at ACT in San Francisco, I've been calibrating all our equipment in this > fashion > until the MMA came up with their 127 point scale which is now rather > standardised across the sound industry. I haven't head about this one, either Dan made his faders go from 0-10 > just > like lighting consoles with 0 being off and 10 being full on. Each point > represented a 6dB gain change (or what he considered to be a rough doubling > of > the apparent volume) and had marks for 1/2 (3dB) and 1/4 (1.5dB) increments > between each point. > > Designing sound on his console in my first professional gig, I discovered > that > many directors could actually tell when a cue was set 1/4 of a point > incorrectly > and also often requested changes as small as 1/8 of a point (between the > smallest increments) and could easily hear the setting change, even with > music > as the material (not a tone). I eventually trained my ears to be this > discerning but was still not as good as the best directors... > > Charlie Frank Wood ------------------------------ Subject: Stand Environ Dimmers Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:57:59 -0400 Message-ID: From: "James, Brian" Is any one here familiar with the Strand Environ 2 dimming systems? One of my systems had a home made bypass in it that allowed the use of = an AMX console to run the dimmers. Unfortunately, the connector was = ripped off the other day. Unfortunately, who ever put it in left no = notes. So I have four wires that can go into four wholes, some how. All I know for sure is in the dimmer rack it's self, the wire are = connected to terminals 60,61, 62, 63. I was hoping some one may have an idea about this so I can avoid = soldering all possible combinations or wiring to make this thing work. As always, any thoughts would be very helpful. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <96.293785d5.2fde3451 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:58:57 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In a message dated 13/06/05 01:14:43 GMT Daylight Time, adam [at] fitchtech.net writes: > And impedance should remain constant within > a given system, so why would one need to account for that? Study what dB really mean. Study the diffrent uses to which they are put. Study the impecision with which they are used. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.0.20050612202248.054ab2a0 [at] mail.insightbb.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:24:16 -0500 From: Mike Brubaker Subject: Re: Stand Environ Dimmers In-Reply-To: References: I would guess that you might get a response from Paul Sanow; he reads this list, as do a few others from Strand. If not, though, call either Vincent Lighting or Strand's tech support and ask them. Mike At 07:57 PM 6/12/2005, James, Brian wrote: >Is any one here familiar with the Strand Environ 2 dimming systems? >I was hoping some one may have an idea about this so I can avoid soldering >all possible combinations or wiring to make this thing work. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <42ACE197.9000006 [at] fitchtech.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:29:59 -0400 From: Adam Fitchett Subject: Re: Sound Levels? References: In-Reply-To: Frank would it kill you to give a useful answer rather than trying to assert your authority because of what you assume about another person? Perhaps it's just me but that seems to be counterproductive to the intended use of this list. I understand what a deciBel is and I know it is nothing more than the log of a ratio that is used for all sorts of comparisons. However what you wrote didn't do anything to explain the posed question, so perhaps the proper course of action was to not say anything? On that note, thank you to Dan Mills for actually answering my question by explaining the effect of power compression. -Adan Fitchett FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 13/06/05 01:14:43 GMT Daylight Time, adam [at] fitchtech.net >writes: > > > >> And impedance should remain constant within >> a given system, so why would one need to account for that? >> >> > >Study what dB really mean. Study the diffrent uses to which they are put. >Study the impecision with which they are used. > >Frank Wood > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 02:35:33 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Sound Levels? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/06/05 21:26:54 GMT Daylight Time, > charlier [at] RichmondSoundDesign.com writes: > >>> Maybe not so much. On a log scale, +3 dB doubles the power. 3 dB is the >> > smallest increment that is 'normally' perceived as a change in program >> > material, 1 dB having that sidtinction with tone, or other 'constant' >> > signals, and +10 dB is what it takes for the signal to have 'seemed' to >> > double for a listener. Frank ya did it again... ;-) I didn't write this, I quoted it in my message... > I have never heard of this, before. I should be very interested to learn more > about it. check the papers published on our web site.. Cheers! Charlie + Charlie Richmond - Richmond Sound Design - Skype: charlierichmond + + http://www.RichmondSoundDesign.com "Performance for the Long Run" + ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 03:45:17 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050612.204547.28900.67172 [at] webmail15.lax.untd.com> And this is the rationale behind the Motorcycle Helmet laws, as well as the Automobile Child Seat laws that I enforce often when I hear cases as a judge in the Los Angeles Superior Court. /s/ Richard Frank Wood wrote: > Why? Why does the law try to protect me from myself? If I do something Because when you hurt yourself, there is a subsidiary cost to society. The cost of the police, medics and ambulance to attend the accident site, the investigators to find out what happened, the repair crew to fix what you broke while you were stupid and the doctors, nurses and hospital to look after while you were recovering or dying --all is borne by society either directly or indirectly, depending on the exact type of society you live in. Some charge the miscreant for some of these costs and others bear it all, but we certainly suffer as a whole, even if not in a specific economic way but sometimes just because of the traffic delay because of the gawkers... Charlie ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1487.64.28.54.206.1118638934.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Is it too good to be true? From: "Bill Nelson" >> I don't think I'll be the first to sign up for this!>> > > No Worries... there are over 22,000 signed up already. Not surprising. Even with all the information on ebay about foreign scams, there are hundreds of people that fall for them every day - each one for thousands of dollars. Bill ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #426 *****************************