Using Backing Tracks - live

Hi Brett,
 
I'd stay with CD-quality playback rather than mp-3.  A small CD player and stereo DI is low-cost, rugged, and reliable solution.  Lately, I've been using a Roland Sonic Cell that I picked up on eBay.  It plays wav files and can manage a set list. 
 
I've also got a VS-100 that can play wav files and supports a foot switch.  But I've never had a problem pressing buttons, so having yet another foot switch was not that appealing.
 
Keep in mind that a lot of venues don't run stereo in the house, so you'll need a mono solution as well.
 
Your idea of keeping the tracks light is a good one.  The tracks should be just enough to support the two live players and establish the tempo.  Strings/pads on a chorus are fine, but be sure to mix it up.
 
Good luck,
Murray

I do this all the time, typically in places where they want some "body" but not give up a lot of space. I actually have a laptop with Sonar playing back mixes, because I also have a midi track that controls my guitar effects (patch changes). (I'm also working in some video controlled by the laptop, so this is sort of a long term strategy.) I also have the waveform of the recording showing so I can visually peek over to see how much longer, say, my jam measures are going to last, in case I lose count in my head.

I ALWAYS (um, pretty much) have a backup of all my tracks on a Zoom device, so if the laptop ever went south, I'd just plug in the Zoom and flip through the tracks. No midi control for the guitar in that case, but the show would go on. (I'd bring the Zoom anyway, to record some tracks from the audience point of view and review them later, to improve my mixes. I'm past trying to improve my performance, haha.)

Couple of things I've learned:

Keep the tracks simple, like Murman says. Here's the bummer (at least for me). You have to make dedicated backing tracks, they can't just be your release recordings (the ones you sell or give away) sans vox and guitar. The mix for backing is way different. More pushing the low end on the backings, for example. (Depending on your style, your mileage may vary.) If you have percussion (a kit), it generally has to sit in the front of the mix. NO REVERB in the mix, make it dry, dry, dry. (There's natural reverb in the venue, that's why.) And of course, you can't have the same fade out endings that you have on your release mixes. (Well, you can try to "fade out" in live situations, as I used to try sometimes, but be prepared for confused looks from your audience.)

I have my own PA, because a lot of private venues don't have one. When I review my mixes, I do them through that PA. I have given signals to the house PA, like you suggest. I prefer to mix everything on stage and only pass two DIs (backing, me, guitar all together), but maybe you'll get better results. Watch, watch, watch out for the gotcha of stereo mixes in the house's mono system (like Murman says). If you don't mix with mono in mind, your stereo will cause all sorts of bad vibes in a mono venue. Personally, I like stereo (and when the video gets added, stereo will make even more sense), but that's sort of a vanity in most venues. Point is, be prepared to broadcast in mono.

I would avoid the laptop and sending multiple tracks to a mixer.....

I saw a band many years ago that sequenced everything..lots of equipment..potential for major problems.


I have done the one man band thing live a few times..... my suggestion runs along the lines of a few posters above.

Use Sonar to make the tracks... but burn a CD of the backing tracks all mixed down. That eliminates the house sound man from screwing up the levels to badly. Plus, a CD is a very reliable player of wave files.  About the worst thing that could go wrong is a CD gets scratched and won't play. So keep a spare CD. You can even put an entire set on a CD..... in the order it needs to be played.

Mono house mix?.... no problem..... use a Y cord to sum the outputs.  Even a boom box CD player will work well. And CD players don't crash like a windows based PC might.

timidi

... I do think a CD would be cumbersome vs something like minidisc.

Why would you recommend a minidisc?  It's a dieing technology with expensive media.  CD's aren't much bigger, are inexpensive to buy and burn, and can be played by the house player if yours breaks.
 
edit - can't spell: "dying technology"

MiniDisc doesn't skip like CD does if it gets vibrated by Kick and Bass notes.

jeffb9363

MiniDisc doesn't skip like CD does if it gets vibrated by Kick and Bass notes.

Jeff,
 
Good point, but like most things, the answer is 'it depends." 
 
Vibration tolerance depends mostly on the size of the playback buffer and somewhat on the optical design.  All MiniDisc players, even the early ones, have a playback buffer, whereas older CD players didn't.   Early CD players designed for home use were definitely vibration sensitive.  Current CD players, especially the portable devices, have playback buffers and vibration-resistant optical mechanisms. 
 
Brett -
Don't let my comments stop you from going MiniDisc if they are still popular in Japan.  I just don't see them in the US that much.
 
Murray

Why would you recommend a minidisc? It's a dieing technology with expensive media. CD's aren't much bigger, are inexpensive to buy and burn, and can be played by the house player if yours breaks.

 
you could be right. I didn't mean to "recommend" minidisc. sorry. More of a recommendation against CDs I think. I just don't like handling CDs and locating and cueing songs on CD players. minidiscs do tend to break alot too. I've been thru about 5 of them over the years. If I was to start playing out live alot again, I'd probably just use an old laptop or an ipod or something that plays MP3s.
(that is after my current minidisc player dies:) But then the idea of playing again to pre-recorded tracks makes my skin curl.
I really don't think the quality of the format makes any difference live either.
 
JMO

p.s. 99% of people like the 'over-produced' sound . just because we are artists, it doesnt mean the rest of the world is

 
Not from 1 guy on a stage pushing buttons.

Actually, I'd rather not see a 5 piece rock band. Usually just a bunch of noise to my ears.
Unless, of course, it's the best of the best.
But then, I'm an old fart.
I'd rather see one guy playing a guitar singing a song with minimal backing if any.
But, that's just me.

I'm not claiming anything other than your assumption that 99% of the world prefers overproduced sound is ridiculous. Not the concept, just the number (99%).
Especially in a live environment.

Yes, there is a market for everything. And, the demographic thing too.

I think I was talking about 1 or 2 man bands. Maybe I missed something.

Zoom has an all-in-one I was thinking about for live performance (R16?). It's maybe not ideal, but it might be pretty close. (I would not use this for a primary recorder under any circumstances, but think it might work for live backing track playback). First it runs 32 GB SDHC (no disk). It runs 24 bit audio (although I'm not sure if 24bit mode puts restrictions on track counts). Up to 16 tracks playback. Supports wav files over USB. The internal click track is routable to HEADPHONES ONLY to sync with a drummer (this is where Roland/Cakewalk blew it on the VS100). It has two balanced sends and supports some form of playlist. It is also relatively inexpensive (street price about $400US).
What I cannnot confirm is how rugged it is (plastic case) and since the click is produced internally (not from a track), how much drift might be encountered in clicking to a project downloaded from Sonar (and how difficult it would be to align the click to a mixed project at the same supposed tempo). It has a wall-wart supply (although it can run on batteries). Other things like headphone volume, and how readable the display is, I don't know and might mess up the works as well.
Also, I second the mention of getting your mono mixes working well before running them to a house system. Even if you send two sends, chances are the house will sum them. (Mix for mono, then pan if you like for backing tracks). Try to get the volume consistent on all backing tracks. Assume the FOH guy/gal will do everything possible to screw up your backing tracks during the first half of your first song, and promptly abandon the console and head for the bar never to be seen again.

I've done this off and on for several years.  The two big keys to getting a live sound in my experience is first you absolutely MUST have a decent subwoofer.  Bigger is not always better when it comes to subs either.  It's about how well they carry the lows throughout the venue.  It's the only way I've ever found get the 'live' feeling from the drums or the bass.

Second, the drums definately need to come forward in the mix.  Live drums tend to dominate a greater portion of the live sound stage and that's for a reason...they build the excitement.  You don't want them to overwhelm everything, but they have to come forward more than they would in a traditional mix.  I've personally found that a hotter kick drum than normal combined with a decent sub and a slightly hotter snare really enhances that live drum feel.  I also do not use compression on the drums, but that's more dependent on the type of music you're playing.

As for formats, I just use a standard MP3 player at this point.  I've tried CD's and I've also at one point used a laptop with a specially developed application that played the audio track along with a MIDI track that syncronized DMX-512 lights.  I can't tell that much difference in a live venue of a CD over an MP3 since they're both 16 bit anyway, so my audience probably can't either.