The Beatles and the screaming girls problem.

[Saiyaman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkSSirZBAU8
The Beatles live at Shea stadium 1965, John is goofing off in front of the microphone because he figured (Quite correctly) that nobody was able to hear him anyway. The screaming of the fans was so loud that the band didn't have a chance in hell to even hear themselves play.

So what caused this problem in the first place?

First of all, it's the instruments they used.
http://www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/shop_image/uploads/Image/george66.jpg
George Harrison playing his Rickenbacker 360 guitar.
The Beatles and other contemporary bands were using hollow body guitars, because of their sound and light weight but they were prone to feedback if you turned them up too loud.

Most bands in those days were using Vox AC-30 amps as their backline.
http://the-sixties.nl/AC30.JPG
Both the Vox and the contemporary Fender Bassman amplifiers were popular because of their clear sound and ability to be turned up without distorting too much. Distortion in those days was something to be avoided, so that was another reason why the fab Four couldn't turn up their amps.

And then there were the venues where they played. The PA systems of those stadiums was meant to report a game with just the voice of the reporter going over, it was never meant to have the sound of a complete band be blasted through. Same with TV studios, ever wondered why the overall sound of a broadcast from a band appearing on "Shindig" or "Ed Sullivan" sounds so grainy and distorted? Because of the screaming being so loud that the overhead mikes were breaking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGJMZgSFsck
Merman's Hermits live at "Shindig" in the mid sixties.

This inability to properly hear themselves drove the Beatles to stop touring and concentrate on working on their music in the studio. But while the fab four abandoned playing live, other bands went on the offensive.

Jim Marshall had a music shop in London that sold drumkits and guitars and when American-made Amplifiers became increasingly difficult to import, he decided to copy the circuit and make amps in house.
http://www.woodstockmusiccenter.nl/paulmei08/IMG_3072.jpg
Realizing the potential that a custom made amplier could have over a stock underpowered one, Pete Townshend, guitarist with The Who, went to Marshall, put his Fender amplifier in front of Jim Marshall and told him "I want this sound but ten times as loud." because he wanted to get rid of the screaming, he wanted that the band was overpowering the audience instead of the other way round. Marshall, who was inspired by that request and set to work.

The result became an enduring staple of Rock N roll
http://profile.ultimate-guitar.com/profile_mojo_data/3/5/9/2/359200/pics/_c151562_image_0.jpg

And along with the Marshall stacks that that encounter proved to be the genesis of, Marshall also applied that idea of "Overpowering the audience" into powerful PA systems.
http://www.thewho.net/whotabs/images/pa/661025_nalen_stageview.jpg
The Who live in 1966, note the speaker columns on either side of the stage. The battle of volume over the audience had been won, now the bands could play live and hear themselves over the audience.

Of course by the time those came around, the Beatles had stopped touring, but they enjoyed the merits of Townshend's request when they played their solo tours, the screaming was still there but the powerful amps and equally loud PA made sure that the band was always louder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqrypsYtHkE
John Lennon live in Toronto

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaLvBVtYgVA
George Harrison and Ringo Starr live at the concert for Bangladesh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3wA4ZxGd3U
Paul McCartney and Wings live.

 

[Handley_Page]

#
Very good bit of research, there.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Did The Who really win? Both Daltrey and Townshend suffered significant hearing loss.

And I can definitely confirm that The Who were by far the loudest band I ever saw live. Sitting in the upper deck at a 1979 show, the sound was so loud that I felt nauseous. I had sat in the front row--right in front of the speaker stacks--at other shows, but nothing was louder than that show by The Who.

 

[Dual_Triode]

Nice Article

Thanks Saiyaman. I've often wondered if Jim Marshall had Leo Fender's blessing when he "borrowed" the 5F6-A circuit. Jim certainly put his signature on the JCM line-up. The EL34 valves give that classic Marshall sound while Leo used the beam tetrodes (6V6 and 6L6, etc) for that American Fender vibe.

It might destroy what little is left of my hearing, but I still want to stand in front of a Wall-Of-Marshalls:

\m/ \m/

 

[JackLuis]

Thanks Saiyaman. I've often wondered if Jim Marshall had Leo Fender's blessing when he "borrowed" the 5F6-A circuit. Jim certainly put his signature on the JCM line-up. The EL34 valves give that classic Marshall sound while Leo used the beam tetrodes (6V6 and 6L6, etc) for that American Fender vibe.

It might destroy what little is left of my hearing, but I still want to stand in front of a Wall-Of-Marshalls:

\m/ \m/

God it's been thirty years since I heard 6V6.

 

[TE999]

Huh? Whadjasay? You wanna hold my what?

 

[Handley_Page]

Thanks Saiyaman. I've often wondered if Jim Marshall had Leo Fender's blessing when he "borrowed" the 5F6-A circuit. Jim certainly put his signature on the JCM line-up. The EL34 valves give that classic Marshall sound while Leo used the beam tetrodes (6V6 and 6L6, etc) for that American Fender vibe.

It might destroy what little is left of my hearing, but I still want to stand in front of a Wall-Of-Marshalls:

\m/ \m/

God it's been thirty years since I heard 6V6.

A question for you guys, then.
Would the output stage of the amps you're dreaming about be parallel or push-pull ? (or even both?)

 

[Dual_Triode]

A question for you guys, then.
Would the output stage of the amps you're dreaming about be parallel or push-pull ? (or even both?)

I apologize in advance for getting all technical. I can't help it, I'm an engineer.

Both, actually. The typical 100 watt head would use 4 valves, configured for parallel push-pull operation. The push-pull topology uses two valves in parallel on the "top" half to amplify the positive half cycle. There is exactly the same circuit on the bottom half to amplify the negative half cycle. The anodes for each push or pull section are connected to the output transformer.

Each valve (EL34, 6L6GC, 5881, etc) can handle about 25 to 30 watts continuously on the anode. The output stage is biased for class-AB operation, so peak power dissipation for each valve can exceed 25 watts since they are only amplifying half of the signal. The bottom line is that the amplifier can deliver 100 watts of continuous power into a pair of 300 watt, 4x12 speaker cabinets.

How loud is that? A typical 12 inch guitar speaker (Celestion, Emminence, etc) has a sensitivity of about 100 dBSPL per 1 watt of power at 1 meter away. A dBSPL is a decibel of sound pressure level. A value of 100 dBSPL is as loud as a passing train.

That's pretty loud, but not as loud as Shea Stadium filled with screaming girls. Decibels are logarithmic, so if you double the amplifier power, you increase the decibels by 3 dB. To increase the sound level by 10 decibels, you need 10 times the power. Going back to the example, 1 watt of power in the speaker produced 100 dB. 2 watts produces 103 dB. 10 watts produces 110 dB, and all 100 watts produces 120 dB. A sound level of 120 dB is as loud as a ship's engine room and is also about the level of sound on stage at a rock concert. So far, we've drowned out the first row of girls.

Clearly, we need more power. 1000 watts will produce 130 dB, as loud as a jet taking off at 200 feet away. Now we're talking, but there is another factor to consider. For each doubling of distance from the stage, you lose 6 decibels of sound pressure. That means you need 4 times as much power to keep the decibel level the same. To achieve 130 dB at 100 feet (about 32 meters) you will need 1000 times as much power, or 1 megawatt. You don't want to be that poor girl in the front row!

These incredible numbers are why large venues use so many amplifiers and PA cabinets dispersed all around the stadium.

[/technical]

 

[oggbashan]

When my wife drags me along to Status Quo concerts I DON'T wear my hearing aids but I do wear earplugs.

I can still hear as much as I'm ever likely to want to hear.

 

[Handley_Page]

When my wife drags me along to Status Quo concerts I DON'T wear my hearing aids but I do wear earplugs.

I can still hear as much as I'm ever likely to want to hear.

I'll gladly take her to the next one if you really don;t like it.

I apologize in advance for getting all technical. I can't help it, I'm an engineer.

Both, actually. The typical 100 watt head would use 4 valves, configured for parallel push-pull operation. The push-pull topology uses two valves in parallel on the "top" half to amplify the positive half cycle. There is exactly the same circuit on the bottom half to amplify the negative half cycle. The anodes for each push or pull section are connected to the output transformer.

Each valve (EL34, 6L6GC, 5881, etc) can handle about 25 to 30 watts continuously on the anode. The output stage is biased for class-AB operation, so peak power dissipation for each valve can exceed 25 watts since they are only amplifying half of the signal. The bottom line is that the amplifier can deliver 100 watts of continuous power into a pair of 300 watt, 4x12 speaker cabinets.

How loud is that? A typical 12 inch guitar speaker (Celestion, Emminence, etc) has a sensitivity of about 100 dBSPL per 1 watt of power at 1 meter away. A dBSPL is a decibel of sound pressure level. A value of 100 dBSPL is as loud as a passing train.

That's pretty loud, but not as loud as Shea Stadium filled with screaming girls. Decibels are logarithmic, so if you double the amplifier power, you increase the decibels by 3 dB. To increase the sound level by 10 decibels, you need 10 times the power. Going back to the example, 1 watt of power in the speaker produced 100 dB. 2 watts produces 103 dB. 10 watts produces 110 dB, and all 100 watts produces 120 dB. A sound level of 120 dB is as loud as a ship's engine room and is also about the level of sound on stage at a rock concert. So far, we've drowned out the first row of girls.

Clearly, we need more power. 1000 watts will produce 130 dB, as loud as a jet taking off at 200 feet away. Now we're talking, but there is another factor to consider. For each doubling of distance from the stage, you lose 6 decibels of sound pressure. That means you need 4 times as much power to keep the decibel level the same. To achieve 130 dB at 100 feet (about 32 meters) you will need 1000 times as much power, or 1 megawatt. You don't want to be that poor girl in the front row!

These incredible numbers are why large venues use so many amplifiers and PA cabinets dispersed all around the stadium.

[/technical]

A very erudite and well-expressed summary, DT.

I had a pair of parallel-PP KT66 Amps at an RAF station's little Theatre in 1963/4 and they were good and loud (I opened the taps one night when we were working and played a Thunderstorm sound effect. Apparently the houses a hundred yards away phoned the weather centre. The Commanding Officer was most impressed according to the Duty Officer; at three in the morning, I'll bet he was, but we didn't get into too much trouble.).

 

[Dual_Triode]

A very erudite and well-expressed summary, DT.

You are very kind. From one engineer to another, I thank you.

I had a pair of parallel-PP KT66 Amps at an RAF station's little Theatre in 1963/4 and they were good and loud (I opened the taps one night when we were working and played a Thunderstorm sound effect. Apparently the houses a hundred yards away phoned the weather centre. The Commanding Officer was most impressed according to the Duty Officer; at three in the morning, I'll bet he was, but we didn't get into too much trouble.).

The KT66 (Kinkless Tetrode) was the forerunner to RCA's 6L6. With 400 volts on the anodes, a quartet of KT66s would be thunderous, indeed.
Three in the morning, eh. Perhaps there was a wee bit of ale involved?

 

[Handley_Page]

You are very kind. From one engineer to another, I thank you.



The KT66 (Kinkless Tetrode) was the forerunner to RCA's 6L6. With 400 volts on the anodes, a quartet of KT66s would be thunderous, indeed.
Three in the morning, eh. Perhaps there was a wee bit of ale involved?

Strangely enough - no!. Well, not that night, anyway.

We were trying to get ready for a new play; my job was in the Sound Booth.
A Ferrograph, a Brennel, two turntables and faders galore. I liked the one that moved the sound front to back. I had that Thunder rolling about quite nicely in the end. And we had LOTS of speakers, usually hidden about the cloth ceiling. With at least 50 watts each, we could deafen a Titan !

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Those are good points, although you omit Spinal Tap's breakthrough of having their amplifier controls go to 11, which as anyone can see is 1 more than 10.

Given the levels of sheer mass hysteria the Beatles evoked, I doubt there was any] sort of equipment that would have let them cut through the shrieking and screaming. But didn't they use stage monitors back then in big venues like Shea so they could hear the whole band and not just themselves? If you're using monitors, then isn't the sound man and the house system controlling what you and the audience hears?

And yes, that's true about semi-acoustic guitars and feedback. Guitarists back in the day liked them, maybe because they seemed more "serious" than solid-bodies. All the great jazz guitarists back then played acoustic-electrics (so did the great C&W guitarists, come to think of it), and Fenders were considered unworthy of a 'real' musician. It wasn't uncommon to stuff a scarf or towel into a semi-acoustic when you amped up as a way of avoiding feedback.

 

[Dual_Triode]

Those are good points, although you omit Spinal Tap's breakthrough of having their amplifier controls go to 11, which as anyone can see is 1 more than 10.

My Fender Hot Rod DeVille goes to 12, so there! Oh, and no playing "Stairway To Heaven", either!

Given the levels of sheer mass hysteria the Beatles evoked, I doubt there was any] sort of equipment that would have let them cut through the shrieking and screaming. But didn't they use stage monitors back then in big venues like Shea so they could hear the whole band and not just themselves? If you're using monitors, then isn't the sound man and the house system controlling what you and the audience hears?

I'm not sure what the setup was at Shea Stadium in 1965. But yes, it is normal to have the stage monitors and PA speakers controlled at the FOH (Front Of House). That would have proved futile, however, considering there were 55,000 screaming teenage girls in the seats.

I have personally measured a B-movie scream from a young woman at 120 decibels. A quick calculation reveals that 55,000 is 15.75 powers of two. Each doubling of screams adds 3 decibels. That puts the total sound level at 120 + 47 = 167 decibels. That level of sound is well past the threshold of pain and will cause permanent hearing damage.

Modern technology is the in-ear stage monitor which allow each musician to have a custom mix. They also serve to block out the ambient noise. Even then, I'm not sure they could block out so many frenzied fans.

 

[Saiyaman]

That's the thing, the Beatles did NOT have stage monitors when they did those stadium tours, they only had their Vox amps and the PA system of the venue.

It wasn't until well into the seventies that stage monitors were invented because of people looking at how tough it was for the Fab Four to do those tours and they couldn't even hear themselves and deciding to do something about it.

I mean look at this picture of The Beatles playing on the roof at Saville row.
http://profile.ultimate-guitar.com/profile_mojo_data/5/8/5/1/585103/pics/_c622528_image_0.jpg
There are two, count them TWO Vox PA speaker cabs turned at the band, acting like what we now would recognize as Stage monitors.

Here's Jimi Hendrix, Stage monitors? I don't see them.
http://www.fehmarnfestival1970.com/daythree/feh.jpg
Big picture.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think the Fab Four were also largely responsible for the whole phenomenon of the outdoor Rock Concert and all the huge and daunting problems in acoustical engineering they entailed. Almost all pre-Beatle pop performances (they weren't even called concerts back then) took place in clubs or theaters where the audiences were at most a few hundred. Outdoor performances did exist at festivals (like the Newport Jazz (later folk) Festival), but jazz and folk performers rarely used amplified instruments, and the engineers could use the same amplification and broadcasting techniques they used for orchestral concerts.

When the Beatles announced the Shea Stadium concert, people were kind of incredulous. Stadiums had occasionally been used for political and religious rallies, but I don't think even Elvis had ever performed before a crowd that huge. The equipment and techniques for broadcasting music on that scale just didn't exist.

Even after Shea, bands still tended to perform in pretty small venues. That picture of the Who playing in a theater is probably typical. I saw Jimi Hendrix in Madison, WI back in like '67-68 just before he became really big, and that was in a student beer joint that held maybe 250-300 people tops. They didn't even have a stage and the band just set up and played on the floor in a corner. Jimi still used a stack of amps though (I assume they were Marshalls), the first time anyone had ever seen such a set-up.

It was also the first time any of us had ever seen a musician use his amp as an integral part of his instrument rather than as just some ancillary broadcasting device. And of course, Jimi changed everything.

 

[oggbashan]

I have damaged hearing from my early working years in a Dockyard.

Apart from the noise of the equipment I was working with, immediately across the road was a blast furnace, several steam hammers and rivetting guns. In those days ear protectors were rarely available.

Now if I go to a Status Quo concert their normal level of sound is very painful for me. I like Status Quo, not as much as my wife, but enough to enjoy them. However I have to wear ear plugs to reduce the sound to a level that I can endure.

I take ear plugs when going to a cinema. Usually I don't need them, but sometimes I do.

My cousin who attended, and sometimes performed as part of the backing group, more pop concerts in the 1970s and 80s than ever I did in the 1960s has severe hearing loss, as do many performers from that era.

 

[Saiyaman]

But if we're talking about "so loud that it hurts" nobody can beat The Nuge.

I saw Ted Nugent live a couple of years ago and it was so fucking loud that my body continued to shake for a couple of hours after the thing was done.

Apparently, the Nuge himself is completely deaf, which I don't find that surprising.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

I carry ear plugs everywhere I go. I used to see a lot of bands (and was in afew as well), and it came in handy.

Pantera was the loudest band I ever saw. Even with the earplugs, standing in the other room from where they were performing (Hammerstein Ballroom in NYC, 5,000 or 6,000), they still hurt my ears.

They were the loudest act at Ozzfest 1997 as well.

 

[Verdad]

I carry ear plugs everywhere I go. I used to see a lot of bands (and was in afew as well), and it came in handy.

I carry ear plugs to movies. The sound in theatres has become more taxing than in concerts or clubs.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I carry ear plugs to movies. The sound in theatres has become more taxing than in concerts or clubs.

I think the loudest sustained sound I ever heard was in a theater showing some WWII movie. I remember my cuffs actually fluttering around my ankles in the sonic wind as I walked toward my seat.

 

[jomar]

Don't like loud for loud's sake, but do like to feel the bass in my belly.