use of blue tooth technology

[hnbhagavan]

Dear Rasikas,
This is for the technology minded rasikas.The concert platform has not at all changed over the years.How about introduction of blue tooth technology
so that physical jumble of wires for the mikes are eliminated?
I request friends to respond as to how the same can be achieved.

[Rsachi]

Even today audiophiles swear by special, shielded cables and gold-plated connectors.
I have tried a variety of bluetooth devices and find them acceptable for normal signal device to device transmission.
Even today Tech journals rate bluetooth below wired connectors.
I don't think bluetooth will help if I have to connect several mikes wirelessly at the same time to a preamp. But other Wireless/Wifi solutions do exist and are used in some concerts.
Good quality, carefully laid, concealed mike cabling will be the most cost effective. It has been done in several venues. Not in our sabhas yet!

[Nick H]

The wires really don't matter too much, although it's nice if they are neatly laid and concealed where they can be. Wireless technologies may be just wonderful, but it is something else to go wrong. How many times, when an artist or speaker is handed an ordinary wireless mic, does one see the proceeding delayed because it doesn't work? All too often. Probably just a flat battery; the mic is replaced, and that's it, but it is an interruption.

Both artists and so-called engineers are bad enough at dealing with wired mics: let's not make the technology morechallenging!

[mohan]

I have seen a musician use bluetooth to connect his phone (which is playing iTanpura) to an external speaker on stage.

[harimau]

hnbhagavan wrote:

This is for the technology minded rasikas.The concert platform has not at all changed over the years.How about introduction of blue tooth technology
so that physical jumble of wires for the mikes are eliminated?
I request friends to respond as to how the same can be achieved.

The use of wireless mics pre-dates Bluetooth technology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_microphone

[Nick H]

in fact, I don't think bluetooth is anything special outside the sphere of mobile phones --- but, never having had one of those ear implants, I really know little about the technology: does it have much bandwidth?

Wireless mics have been around for yonks. Maybe even longer than cell phones.

[hnbhagavan]

Dear Rasikas,
The accoustics is well planned at music Academy.Krishna gana Sabha also has good System.In Bangalore Gayana Samaja,Accoustics is not good.
By using Wireless/blue tooth,If synchronised properly with Instruments,lot of time spent on mike adjustment can be avoided.

[Rsachi]

Perhaps we need to discuss this offline as I am not able to follow your reasoning.
Bluetooth is best for pairing two devices like a phone and a PC or speaker etc.
If you want to eliminate the cables from mikes, each mike has to wirelessly connect to a mixer/preamp. Bluetooth can help here except you need high quality bluetooth mikes, a good computer with the software for a bluetooth network, etc. Etc.
It will still not solve problems of poor settings of hall amplifier, mismatch between monitors and main speakers, wrong placement of mikes or poor quality mikes.
And so on.
Anyway such discussions are always enlightening . Thanks to this thread, I just discovered on eBay a bluetooth receiver battery device for Rs 845 to connect my big Bose 5.1 Lifestyle system to my iPad for immersive rich music! The most severe critics of technology have simply loved how the Bose improves the experience big time.

[cmlover]

Blue tooth also has a distance limitation, usually 10 ft.
The sound operator is usually located far away from the concert platform
to be able to manipulate the different mike systems!

[vasanthakokilam]

The biggest audio problem in CM concerts is of course the artists not hearing themselves properly via the monitor which results in quite sub par experiences in otherwise great performance. That is really a pity.

If we can give each artist on stage a wireless or blue tooth in-ear monitor that is an accurate representation of what the audience is hearing, that will be great. That is not uncommon but it takes a little getting used to.

[rajeshnat]

If we can give each artist on stage a wireless or blue tooth in-ear monitor that is an accurate representation of what the audience is hearing, that will be great. That is not uncommon but it takes a little getting used to.

Vik,
Will that not be an intrusion for them to get the next manodharmic sangathi, they may end up in a loop keeping on singing what they have heard in their in-ear monitor.

[vasanthakokilam]

they may end up in a loop keeping on singing what they have heard in their in-ear monitor.

Quite funny

I am sure they will get over it. It is worth a try.

I vaguely remember someone saying that Unnikrishnan uses in ear monitors. Can some one confirm/deny this?

In a recent concert which was held in a non traditional room ( it was not an auditorium but think of it as a hall with musicians and audiences sitting on the floor in a 30 feet semi circle. There was no monitor but the speakers were mounted on the wall in front ( and up ) of the musicians. So that may as well could have acted as the monitor. It was to the back of most audience. It was sufficiently loud for us but the main artist and mridangist wanted to increase the volume. The sound person was afraid that it is already at too high a volume and it might do some damage if he increases further. It was loud. Few people felt it was too loud for them and left. But we got used to it after a few minutes and so it turned out to be a decent experience. But the mystery is why they wanted to increase the volume when they are hearing exactly what the audience is hearing and it was perfectly fine for us. But I do believe them when they said it was not loud enough for them when they were actually singing. I even went to their side for a few minutes to hear from their vantage point. I thought the volume is just fine. So it looks like they need higher volume so they can hear their sound when they are actually singing.
I wonder if the in-ear monitor would have helped here.

[Rsachi]

Guys,
Look at this sequence of events:
1. Musicians don't hear themselves.
2. They ask for more volume...more and more.
3. Audience gets a blast.
4. Audience suffers hearing impairment and needs hearing aids.
5. Audience recommends in the canal earphones with Bluetooth etc for the musicians.
6. Musicians go deaf as the volume far exceeds safe limits in the ear.
7. The volume settings in the auditorium reaches 'megaton' levels.
8. The CM is heard in all the three worlds and wakes up all the saints and gods and of course demons.
9. Chidambaram calls in the army to monitor the situation.
10. Better monitors in the first place would have avoided steps 1 to 9.

[rajeshnat]

I vaguely remember someone saying that Unnikrishnan uses in ear monitors. Can some one confirm/deny this?

http://www.google.com.my/search?gs_rn=1 ... B287%3B339

The picture above kind of confirms it.

[rajeshnat]

But the mystery is why they wanted to increase the volume when they are hearing exactly what the audience is hearing and it was perfectly fine for us.

VK
There is no mystery here. The musicians since singing continously with loudspeakers may gradually lose a bit of hearing . That is why we always have musicians jacking up volume more than what is needed.

[vasanthakokilam]

Well, I can understand if the musian is a seasoned citizen. This is one from the younger generation who has good concert experience and who has some knowledge of audio equipment ( based on how phrased his request for change in levels etc. )

[Nick H]

Hearing loss among musicians is well known --- but for performers in a classical, acoustic tradition, it is absurd that it should happen.

[vasanthakokilam]

Rajesh, thanks for the picture. Yes, that confirms it. Now, to gather a data point for my hypothesis, how are sound levels at Unnikrishnan concerts? Not too loud? ( But then mridangists and violinists, unless they also wear IEM would need traditional monitors )

Just to be sure, my hall anecdote/data point is not to complain about the audio but to primarily add possibly a different dimension to this enigma. To point out that the artist, quite intelligent and of this generation who knows a thing or two about audio and who should also be as much a rasika as us can not sense that the level is too high when he is actually singing. Sachi, in this situation the monitor issue does not even arise since the speakers are facing him blaring at the same level as heard by the audience.

One possibility is that there is some sort of attenuation in hearing whens some one is actually singing, attenuation in psychological perception of hearing sounds. I do not know if that is true or not but that will explain the various data points I have noticed. ( Incidentally, the violinist was cool as a cucumber, he was fine when the audio was at a lower level )

[mahavishnu]

One possibility is that there is some sort of attenuation in hearing whens some one is actually singing, attenuation in psychological perception of hearing sounds. I do not know if that is true or not but that will explain the various data points I have noticed.

Yes, this is true. We recently published a paper on this sensory attenuation phenomenon. It is called the Lombard effect.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi ... ne.0049370 (it is open-access, so you should be able to read it).

This escalation effect of people speaking louder and louder was first noticed in soldiers who were exposed to a huge amount of gunfire noise in the trenches in World war 1.

[Rsachi]

Guys, I know for a fact that musicians would cringe to hear themselves at the unsound levels set inside auditoria. They are hugely handicapped due to three extremely important factors:
1. Modern day singers sing at a whisper level compared to the old timers like Chembai and Ariyakudi.
2. Modern day theatre style acoustics and high power system speaker directionalities and placements pretty much shield the musicians completely from actual sound levels inside the hall.
3. Monitor speakers are NOT well calibrated to represent the sound levels inside the hall and make musicians hear each other as we hear them.

I just attended this Sunday an excellent informal session with a dear friend and master flutist singer with a rising star mridangam player. It was a 18 x 14 unpretentious room. The mridangam sounded TOTALLY different and infintely superior to what we hear in concerts and radio also. Even the vocal and flute were undistorted.

[Nick H]

1. Modern day singers sing at a whisper level compared to the old timers like Chembai and Ariyakudi.

This I have no sympathy whatsoever. SIngers should learn to sing, and if they don't, that is their problem, not ours. The elderly and frail, of course, are excepted. SInging is their job, for goodness sake: and if they can't do it then maybe they shouldn't be on stage. Next to singing, microphone technique is a major part of their work, and many are really lousy at that too. We grumble, rightly, at the destructive influence of the "engineers," but a great many artists don't give them even half a chance to get it right --- and that includes some of the great-name elders. (rant over )

I just attended this Sunday an excellent informal session with a dear friend and master flutist singer with a rising star mridangam player. It was a 18 x 14 unpretentious room. The mridangam sounded TOTALLY different and infintely superior to what we hear in concerts and radio also. Even the vocal and flute were undistorted.

Was it micless? Aren't micless concerts wonderful! There is vastly more subtlety in the mridangam than manages to make it through most pa amplifiers and speakers.

[hnbhagavan]

Dear friends,
In make shift halls where music concert is planned,the amplifiers are kept in high volume.One such instance at Bangalore Krisna temple for gokulastami concerts.
Sanjay's concert in Oct 2012 was marred by high volume.

[Rsachi]

Nick, it was at home so obviously no mic's. the audience were two people.

[VK RAMAN]

Hearing loss among musicians is well known - do they use hearing aids while performing in stage and does hearing aid stand in the way of singing? I have one and I am not comfortable wearing hearing aid as the echoing effect affects performance? comments please.

[vasanthakokilam]

SIngers should learn to sing, and if they don't, that is their problem, not ours.

Nick, while that is true, I think Sachi mentioned that in relation to yesteryear singers.

Sachi: What does the 'right calibration' of the monitor involve?

Thanks Mahavishnu. I will read your paper more later. It is right on the aspect I was hypothesizing about. That will explain why that singer wanted the volume to be higher when the audience was perfectly fine with it.

[Rsachi]

VKM,
one has to run sound checks with specific tones etc. while checking aurally and with sound meters the reproduction in different parts of the hall as well as at different positions corresponding to the seating on the stage in advance.
After balancing things, one has to be very careful not to tweak up and down different mike preamps at the mixer.
Musicians take part in these tests as they have preferences for tone adjustments and while trying this during the concert other things go out of whack.
The only difference will be then when so many bodies troop in... Their attenuation needs to be compensated BOTH on monitors and main speakers.

These are observational and occasional hands on learnings over years for me. I don't man sound systems routinely.

[vasanthakokilam]

Sachi. Thanks.

OK, so I can see that the artists would like the monitor volume to be raised slightly as well. If the monitor volume is a function of the main hall volume, then even that should be more or less taken care of, though I can understand artists having an opinion on it since they should be comfortable with it.

As we had discussed before, the soundman has to put his foot down and tell the artists that he will only comply with any requests to change the monitor volume but not the main hall settings. Is that too strong a position to take?

I looked into the IEMs. They do work but the current state of the art is still too visually conspicuous to fit into the CM stage decor.

[Nick H]

tell the artists that he will only comply with any requests to change the monitor volume but not the main hall settings. Is that too strong a position to take?

He doesn't need to tell them! He just responds, knowing that the front-of-house levels are correct, to requests for change from the stage, by changing the monitor levels. The musicians will never know, because that is what they hear ] ]

Artists should not be concerned with the volume of front-of-house speakers at all, but, of course, they should be concerned with balances and tonal qualities. This can either be reported back to them by a friend, during sound check, or one of them can get down from the stage to listen. The only thing is that, especially in Western auditoria with general purpose proscenium-arch stages, there can be a feeling of performing in a vacuum. This is made even worse by lighting making the audience invisible. Not good for the sense of relating to the audience.

[SrinathK]

Question # 1) How did artistes hear themselves when they had to perform without a mic? Then they have to be responsible for the sound balance themselves, and the audience has to behave and maintain absolute silence, wouldn't they?

Question # 2) Speaking of acoustics don't most of our sabhas have acoustics designed for lectures? Dry with no reverberation...Is there any place in India with the acoustics of a true concert hall?

Question # 3) Also it's surprising to see how feeble many musicians' voices are now -- they have to be so close miked that it's literally brushing their teeth . Are they really so weak? I mean even MS Amma even into her 70s and 80s kept the mike a good distance away.

Question # 4) Why is the violinist so close miked? I mean Right ON the bridge. But still they can barely / never hear themselves as that mic is reserved for audience only -- NO ONE suffers more than the poor violinist in the matter of not being able to hear themselves. In fact the close miking forces them to play extremely softly otherwise all the "bowing noises" would get picked up or the bow might even hit the mic -- hence the true tone of the violin is often handicapped and it results in poor bowing habits and a huge loss of volume and tonal variations -- has anyone seen how powerful bowing can be in western classical solos? How do they hear themselves next to an orchestra?

Question # 5) Why does the mridangam artiste of all people, despite naturally being far louder than both vocalist and violinist keep insisting on more and more sound until he gives some audience members (personal experience) enough migraine to cause puking? (Note: In my experiences mridangams seem to sound way better without microphonic distortion)

Question # 6) What is the general level of understanding regarding the subject of tonal colours & acoustics in Carnatic music? Loud loud and Feedback at the cost of tone doesn't make for great music.

I have a theory that our modern apartment style of living is to blame a lot for vocal weakness as it has demanded people sing softly (I have observed that apartment acoustics are surprisingly good and one can sound quite loud at home when one is actually singing very feebly). City style living is essentially a death sentence on loud instruments like the nadaswaram and tavil. Any thoughts?

@vasanthakokilam & rajeshnat, I can recall a particularly troublesome concert at our institute. Most of the concert involved huge amounts of noise, bangs and booms especially in the final stages of neraval and swaras. The surprise came in the tani which was exceptionally well balanced and was such a sea change that it was the only part I wanted to remember. On the other hand we had a nadaswaram concert for which (obviously) no mics were used and it was just beautiful -- none of the hassles and horrors -- we could enjoy the music in peace. Equally great was the Lalgudi siblings' concert -- they insisted the mics be kept low so they could bow naturally and the audience also had to keep quiet and it was a divine experience that day.

[Nick H]

Interesting questions, but missing one ingredient: it is, for the accompanists, important to hear themselves, but much, much more important to be able to hear each other and especially the main artist. For every time I have seen a mridangist request an increase in his volume, there must be a dozen instances of the mridangist complaining that they cannot hear vocalist or violin. If they can't hear, they can't accompany.

From my tiny morsing experience, I have, several times, told sound engineers about this: "never minding hearing ourselves: we must be able to hear them."

Speaking of acoustics don't most of our sabhas have acoustics designed for lectures? Dry with no reverberation...

Many of our sabhas are not designed for acoustics at all. They are just open spaces, big rooms, and we are lucky if their designers didn't just focus on acres of horribly reflective marble!

[SrinathK]

Dear Nick H, I just added a couple of extra points in my post -- specifically one regarding poor acoustics and loud mikes contributing to bad audience behaviour (had this bad time where I was sitting behind two people who chattered along with no consciousness of how loud they were).

Ok so how did artistes hear each other before the time when each of them got their own mics -- Old recordings of GNB or MMI seem very well balanced. Do you think one single mic placed far enough (or above) the artistes would force them to balance the sound themselves (if the acoustics were good, if at all) or would that be defeated thanks to the teeny tiny voices of the vocalists? Or would the violinist need another mic (as the violin is not naturally a loud instrument?

On a side note -- why do you think orchestras have as many as 35 violins but only 3 flutes, and only 1-4 oboes and bassoons and only one of each percussion instrument ? In fact the whole string section consists of about 70 players while the woodwinds would have about 5-8 players total. Ans: That's how they achieved sound balance in the mic-less era. One flute is about as loud as ten violins, a viola about 3x as loud as a violin and a double nadaswaram would probably be match the entire string section. Veenas are even feebler than violins and it might take a couple of hundred of them in the strings section by that formula . But that's not applicable to Carnatic concerts

Also another thing is that sound levels during sound check are carried out for each individual mike, but a test run of vocalists + all instruments isn't done until the concert actually starts, after which the technicians keep adjusting and re-adjusting for the rest of the concert (often causing feedback in the process).

[Nick H]

I had the pleasure of attending a series of micless concerts last year, and mostly the artists managed very well. Sometimes the audience had to work a little harder at listening, but that is no bad thing.

Were your chatty neighbours elderly? All too often increasing years brings poor hearing, and some of us are unfortunate enough to have had that since long before "elderly" fits. We find ourselves being asked why we are shouting when there is a background noise. I have little patience with concert chatters anyway, but, even when I feel the need to exchange a quite word with a neighbour, I know I can't exchange a quiet word, because I won't be able to hear them, and when I reply I will be speaking louder than I think I am. Doesn't make me any more patient with concert chatters, but at least it gives some understanding.

What you say about orchestral balance is certainly true, but it is also true that there are very small string groups and, of course, solo violins playing with large orchestras in concertos.

Artists hearing each other, I suspect, is more a question of acoustics than volume. I've sat next to twenty veena players, the mridangist and I almost unable to hear them at all. We could not work out how that was possible --- but it was.

[vasanthakokilam]

As an aside, talking of acoustics of concert halls, I was surprised to read about how bad the acoustics are at the famed Sydney Opera House. It is a masterpiece of late modern architecture, it is a symbol of Sydney and Australia and it is a UNESCO world heritage site. It is indeed a privilege to perform at the center and to attend a performance there. All true, BUT there seems to be major acoustics related problems, similar to some of the discussions in this thread.

"..The small pit makes it difficult for musicians to hear one another..."

"..The Concert Hall, meanwhile, is too big and the sound gets lost in the 25-m-high ceiling. Acoustic upgrades in 1973 and 2009 have helped some, but the sound isn't full enough for many music lovers. "In the Concert Hall, you just want to turn the volume knob up, especially when you're sitting at the back," says Limelight editor Francis Merson.."

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 47,00.html


The price tag to make it a better performing venue is 1 billion dollars!

It is probably at a different level than what we are discussing here in terms of acoustics problems in Chennai sabhas but nonetheless surprising to read about the disconnect between the popular impressions about the place and the reality.

[Nick H]

Acoustics of big auditoria seems to be a hit and miss affair. I believe similar problems beset London's Royal Festival Hall over the years since it was built.

[cacm]

I just wish to point out that when the Sydney OPERA House was designed it was specifically OPTIMIZED for the voice of Dame Joan Sutherland- the FIRST AUSTRALIAN OPERA SINGER whose Colaturo voice was considered in the same level as the all time legendary ones like Maria Callas - & it was truly great but changes in musical tastes plus the lack of financial support- not too different than the likes of Perambur Sangeetha Sabha in a symbolic sense- led to the deterioration of the standards. In those days in public places the design emphasis was to avoid NULL regions where specific frequencies cancelled to audiblty distort the music & even today the Metropolitan Opera in NYC has "BAD" Seats etc. However all these factors are common to any scheme and the questions of Digital VS Analogue, Coupling of the ENTIRE TRANSDUCER SCHEMES from MIKE TO AMPLIFIER TO HALL ACCOUSTICS TO SPEAKER CHARACTERISTICS are far more FUNDAMENTAL in nature......VKV

[SrinathK]

For acoustics, try Carnegie Hall, The Boston & Vienna symphony halls - despite being built in the last century, their acoustics are still the very best. For that matter, the typical apartment or bathroom when stripped of furniture with no fans and other equipment running has surprisingly good acoustics -- although octogonal walls are far superior to rectangular walls.

I can make do with poor audio quality. What I can't tolerate is the tendency for more and more noise and banging. I got migraines from a chitraveena Ravikiran concert where the mridangam banged so loudly that neither chitraveena nor violin were audible. The Music academy has a very good sound system and keeps the volume down to an acceptable level.

Also this habit of putting earphones deep inside the ear canal and listening at high volume is very dangerous and can cause permanent damage. I could recall that most of my college friends could not hear anything at the volume I typically listen to which is very low -- already the hearing damage had begun.

@ Nick H, it was a pair of middle aged mamis and one mama chatting to his friend with a lot of gesticulations. I don't mind talking as long as it does not disturb others, but that was just obnoxious on that occasion. Overall there is a lot to improve in the civic sense of some people in the audience. Not to mention the occasional mobile phone that just blares loudly in the middle of the concert -- god can't some people keep that in vibrate?

[Nick H]

For acoustics, try Carnegie Hall, The Boston & Vienna symphony halls - despite being built in the last century, their acoustics are still the very best. For that matter, the typical apartment or bathroom when stripped of furniture with no fans and other equipment running has surprisingly good acoustics -- although octogonal walls are far superior to rectangular walls.

An empty room would be a little too resonant for most tastes, although that bathroom effect might indeed make us think we are far better singers than we are

I can make do with poor audio quality.

Sadly, we usually don't have a choice --- but I do not accept it gracefully, because even the poorest of equipment can probably give better results, and the best is wasted in the hands of those who don't have a clue.

where the mridangam banged so loudly

A frequent complaint, but I always respond that, unless there is evidence that it is the mridangist's ego at play, blame the sound man, not the musician! And, even when it is performers' egos causing the problem, a good sound man would either be firm, or control the monitor levels to satisfy those on stage.

Also this habit of putting earphones deep inside the ear canal and listening at high volume is very dangerous and can cause permanent damage.

If you a rock musician, part of the idea of IEMs is to protect you from the very high on-stage volumes, not to subject you to even worse. Sadly, sometimes carnatic musicians and audiences do have to bear volume levels more akin to a rock concert. The reason that these things (custom made) fit deep is i) exclusion of, and protection from, that outside din, and, ii) there is a point in the ear canal that they must reach to prevent one hearing one's own voice like an echo in a cave. This also applies to hearing aids. Technically, I can't explain further: I just read about this stuff and dream of buying things which I can't afford.

Actually, it is not just the electronic instruments that can be deafening. Have you ever sat with the end of a flute pointing at your ear?

I could recall that most of my college friends could not hear anything at the volume I typically listen to which is very low -- already the hearing damage had begun.

The curse of the Walkman/iPod generation, I'm afraid.

@ Nick H, it was a pair of middle aged mamis and one mama chatting to his friend with a lot of gesticulations.

Regular event, I'm afraid ...but I do find that a request made with a smile can be effective.

Overall there is a lot to improve in the civic sense of some people in the audience.

Big topic. Chennai audiences are spoiled, and much of the bad behaviour, even amongst sincere and knowledgeable rasikas, may stem from the fact the concerts are free and somewhere to go for the evening. Even talking on the phone is becoming more common. X(

[vasanthakokilam]

chatting to his friend with a lot of gesticulations

If only there is some blue tooth way of sharing thoughts among them

Seriously, it is technically possible, not thoughts ( though that is coming, it is in nascent stage now ), but one can make almost inaudible speech which can be picked up by a 'contact' mike, amplified and sent to the paired blue tooth device near by ( note to self: file a patent!! ). One way to experience how this almost inaudible speech sounds like, put both your palms together and cover your mouth and speak as low as possible ( both amplitude and pitch ). With some sAdakam, it can get very natural.

Gesticulations is a form of sign language. That is another solution.

I do use gesticulations to try to silence the talkers and high decibel 'thala putters'. Like Nick, I am usually polite with a smile. With the palm facing down move it up and down a few times with a decreasing amplitude. it all takes two seconds. You know what I am talking about.

If it is a bunch of kids, I add a 'sternness' harmonic to my facial expression to change the timbre of my admonition.

[Nick H]

If only there is some blue tooth way of sharing thoughts among them

It could be worse: they could be phoning each other!

Seriously, it is technically possible...

Technical solutions: key it into a mobile phone display. This is relatively easy and comes in very useful, but, perhaps not so easy as my favourite piece of appropriate technology for the problem ...a pen and paper!

Gesticulations is a form of sign language. That is another solution.

I do use gesticulations to try to silence the talkers and high decibel 'thala putters'. Like Nick, I am usually polite with a smile. With the palm facing down move it up and down a few times with a decreasing amplitude. it all takes two seconds. You know what I am talking about.

If it is a bunch of kids, I add a 'sternness' harmonic to my facial expression to change the timbre of my admonition.

A thread on manodharma in intra-audience communication might be coming on? )

[cacm]

If only there is some blue tooth way of sharing thoughts among them

Seriously, it is technically possible, not thoughts ( though that is coming, it is in nascent stage now ), but one can make almost inaudible speech which can be picked up by a 'contact' mike, amplified and sent to the paired blue tooth device near by ( note to self: file a patent!! ). One way to experience how this almost inaudible speech sounds like, put both your palms together and cover your mouth and speak as low as possible ( both amplitude and pitch ). With some sAdakam, it can get very natural.

As you probably know the entire meetings of Bulganin Kruschev Brezhnev etc was ROUTINELY picked up from inside their offices during meetings etc from miles away! Only proves PMI'S OBSERVATIONS that all music or speech is just how one deciphers the sound waves being produced first & more importantly processed next is a truly amazing observation....VKV

[Ramasubramanian M.K]

Apropo VKV's comment of PMI reminds me --one time in the Fifties when DKP visited Bombay for a concert in Shanmukhananda, when she visited our house there was a discussion amongst the elders about the microphone(however primitive the audio technology might have been @ that time!!), the trend of the discussion veered around how the audio systems do not help the musicians because of distortions etc--the thrust of it was negative towards mikes. I butted-in much to the dismay of my parents and said "I am able to enjoy her music better with the amplification of her subtle nuances --to which she calmly and promptly replied "our concern as artistes is that it amplifies some of our mistakes as well--apaswarams or sruthi infractions !!!!-Not that DKP could ever be accused of those infractions,her concern perhaps was more for lesser talented artistes!!!

Like PMI DKP was always an epitome of reticence and restraint when it came to controversial topics but could easily hold her ground where she felt she should assert herself!!!