3 arena hall and Oates sound quality

OwaynOTT

The sound on that video is brutal! Where they that bad? Glad I didn't go now.

Wheety

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I am quite certain that bad sound quality at a gig is the promoter's responsibility.

Why? They don't have the expertise to set up the stage. The band bring their own experts for this reason.

ghostdancer

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I am quite certain that bad sound quality at a gig is the promoter's responsibility.

is a guitar out of tune the promoter's fault too? after all, it's the same principle: sound isn't right for the audience because of technical incompetence from the band and their crew.
what about a singer's voice? if they're a bit hoarse after smoking too much the night before, is that the promoter's responsibility too?

at the end of the day, the 3Arena has been designed by audio and building experts, and the sound is excellent for almost all gigs. if the sound is poor for an act, it's almost certainly down to the band and their crew, and then you get into basically unquantifiable levels of responsibility. it is reasonable for the promoter to assume that if a band chooses not to use the in-house sound-desk and/or FOH engineers, that they know what they are doing and the sound is in their hands and the promoter cannot be held responsible for unforeseen mistakes that the band/crew subsequently make.
if there are clear indications that the equipment/engineers a band has are not fit for purpose, then perhaps there's a case against the promoter, but I can't see that happening often, especially with established acts, and is unlikely to have happened in this case.

blackwarrior

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

At least the sax sounded fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeAWcdTYmo8

Well, that was awful!

AndrewJRenko

Wheety wrote: »

Why? They don't have the expertise to set up the stage. The band bring their own experts for this reason.

Follow the money.

The band bring in their own experts who are ultimately paid by the local promoter from the ticket sales paid by the punter. The local promoter are responsible to the punter to provide a service that is fit for purpose and of merchantable quality.

AndrewJRenko

ghostdancer wrote: »

is a guitar out of tune the promoter's fault too? after all, it's the same principle: sound isn't right for the audience because of technical incompetence from the band and their crew.
what about a singer's voice? if they're a bit hoarse after smoking too much the night before, is that the promoter's responsibility too?

Yes, all of those issues are the promoter's responsibility too. Whether any of them would constitute a reason for a refund is very debatable - they probably wouldn't.

But if the failure to provide sound expertise to make the gig fit for purpose possibly would constitute reason for a refund.

ghostdancer wrote: »

at the end of the day, the 3Arena has been designed by audio and building experts, and the sound is excellent for almost all gigs. if the sound is poor for an act, it's almost certainly down to the band and their crew, and then you get into basically unquantifiable levels of responsibility. it is reasonable for the promoter to assume that if a band chooses not to use the in-house sound-desk and/or FOH engineers, that they know what they are doing and the sound is in their hands and the promoter cannot be held responsible for unforeseen mistakes that the band/crew subsequently make.

This is business. It's not a few lads getting together for the craic. It is big business. If the promoter makes any assumptions about any of the people providing services on the night, whether the bar people, the bouncers, the medics, or the band's sound engineers, those assumptions are the promoter's problem - they are responsible for the outcome.

ghostdancer wrote: »

if there are clear indications that the equipment/engineers a band has are not fit for purpose, then perhaps there's a case against the promoter, but I can't see that happening often, especially with established acts, and is unlikely to have happened in this case.

I wasn't there, and I have no knowledge about who did what on the night, so I can't say anything about who was at fault. I can say that if the sound experience was as bad as described here for large numbers of paying punters, there is certainly the possibility that a Small Claims Court case could result in a refund. It is a possibility, not a certainty by any means.

paulsil17

Received the following from Live Nation the promoter for the O2 concert in London. Apparently the sound was great and we are all making it up.  I am also not sure they are aware of their very real obligations...
I intend to continue...
Hi Paul,
Thank you for your email, I am sorry you have cause to complain.
 
I am very sorry that you were unhappy with the sound quality at this concert. Although it may not be apparent to all of our patrons, the sound equipment that is installed for a touring show and the subsequent sound mix for the concert is controlled by the tour production manager and his sound engineer, and is not directly under our control. Clearly the sound from concert to concert will vary, as there are countless variations of sound equipment that can be employed, but the specification of equipment used will have been approved by the band and their management and the concert sound will be monitored by the engineers throughout the event. 
 
Inevitably the way that patrons experience sound is entirely subjective, and what may be right for one listener may not suit another. However, we are entirely confident that there was no problem with the sound production at this concert, and that the sound mix was as intended by the band. 
 
I am sorry you did not enjoy the show as we intended, though I assure you of our best intentions at all times.

SteM

paulsil17 wrote: »

Received the following from Live Nation the promoter for the O2 concert in London. Apparently the sound was great and we are all making it up.  I am also not sure they are aware of their very real obligations...
I intend to continue...
Hi Paul,
Thank you for your email, I am sorry you have cause to complain.
 
I am very sorry that you were unhappy with the sound quality at this concert. Although it may not be apparent to all of our patrons, the sound equipment that is installed for a touring show and the subsequent sound mix for the concert is controlled by the tour production manager and his sound engineer, and is not directly under our control. Clearly the sound from concert to concert will vary, as there are countless variations of sound equipment that can be employed, but the specification of equipment used will have been approved by the band and their management and the concert sound will be monitored by the engineers throughout the event. 
 
Inevitably the way that patrons experience sound is entirely subjective, and what may be right for one listener may not suit another. However, we are entirely confident that there was no problem with the sound production at this concert, and that the sound mix was as intended by the band. 
 
I am sorry you did not enjoy the show as we intended, though I assure you of our best intentions at all times.

Continue going after the promoter? Good luck with that. Its pretty clear from their response that they're not admitting there was a problem and even if there was they're washing their hands of it and blaming the sound engineer.

Don't know what you expect the promoter to do here.

paulsil17

I have also seen some interesting comments regarding the wisdom of pursuing an action in the small claims court. Please remember that this only requires a balance of probability and the promoter would have to demonstrably show that the sound was not poor, which would be equally difficult.  I have seen very very few favourable comments and I can only find a review in the Times so not a lot to go on for the positive camp.  
Alternatively we can all be cheated of our hard earned money and just lie down and give up...

paulsil17

I expect the promoter to comply with their responsibilities under the Consumer Rights Act Section 49 (1)

Mrs Shuttleworth

Look on the bright side, this gig is now legendary, definitely one of those "you had to be there" moments.

I was down the front on the left right in front of a speaker so honestly didn't notice anything too much amiss but the YouTube videos now posted from the seated sections the sound is very localized and thin.

It strikes me without knowing as much as should about PA systems etc that the configuration for this gig may simply have been designed for smaller venues than the o2 and 3Arena?

endacl

This thread is what rock 'n' roll has become...

paulsil17

If anybody provides a service they are responsible - simple fact in law- 
Its not about who caused it, the responsibility sits with the boss and in concert terms this is the promoter.  If they provide a less than acceptable service I fail too see why anyone would think they should laugh all the way to the bank, while people who use their hard earned money to see there favourite artists get shafted with no redress.  
They do have options other than refunds but promoters don't want to offer anything unless they are forced to. 
It really is a ****ty world where you get nothing without taking extreme steps...

peneau

...ix sound is subjective (in that response) good sound mix is just that, as heard here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmJkd_LMvcs I know its back in '88 when they were at their best but don't tell me in 2017 that it's not possible to reproduce sound quality like this at a venue in Dublin, the sound last weekend was atrocious no excuses

Wrongway1985

It's a contract between 2 parties band and promoter. The band and/or their crew failed to deliver for the promoter, what do you propose the bands party owes the promoter if the sole responsibility now lies with the promoter?

AndrewJRenko

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

It's a contract between 2 parties band and promoter. The band and/or their crew failed to deliver for the promoter, what do you propose the bands party owes the promoter if the sole responsibility now lies with the promoter?

That's a commercial matter for the two businesses to sort out between them. Presumably it's not the first time in that sector that a serious sound quality issue has arisen, so their contracts should cover this possibility.

It is also entirely academic to the punters, who have a financial relationship with the promoter only.

Wrongway1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's a commercial matter for the two businesses to sort out between them. Presumably it's not the first time in that sector that a serious sound quality issue has arisen, so their contracts should cover this possibility.

It is also entirely academic to the punters, who have a financial relationship with the promoter only.

Nope a proper realistic answer would suffice here, not just label a commercial matter and move on, what is the actual solution?

No presuming; there are hundreds of instances and will be more no question, as a ticket purchaser you have entered into a contact also but in contract law there is reason why adequate and the like is used what was plausible for someone in the same room might not be for others. Sound is subjective so unless all attendees or willing to all pile together to bring forth the case its just not happening.

In Finland they passed a law a few years back that 50% of gig tickets could be refunded if by unanimous opinion it was a under par show however the policing of this is practically non existent but it is believed some gigs have been passed on because of such possible demands.

bennyl10

paulsil17 wrote: »

I expect the promoter to comply with their responsibilities under the Consumer Rights Act Section 49 (1)

But they have.
The promoter has literally zero, zero, effect on the sound engineers decisions on the night.

They’ve done all they can

AndrewJRenko

bennyl10 wrote: »

But they have.
The promoter has literally zero, zero, effect on the sound engineers decisions on the night.

They’ve done all they can

Then the promoter is taking on a million euro contract with 'literally zero, zero effect' on their ability complete that contract. That doesn't sound like very good business to me.

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Nope a proper realistic answer would suffice here, not just label a commercial matter and move on, what is the actual solution?

No presuming; there are hundreds of instances and will be more no question, as a ticket purchaser you have entered into a contact also but in contract law there is reason why adequate and the like is used what was plausible for someone in the same room might not be for others. Sound is subjective so unless all attendees or willing to all pile together to bring forth the case its just not happening.

But is sound quality entirely subjective?

If you were to put an independent sound engineer or two in the room, moving around and testing or assessing quality on the night, could they come up with an independent assessment of sound quality?

You can be sure that somewhere along the line, there is an independent accountant signing off an audit or similar on the financials for the night. So why not have an independent sound engineer on contract to carry out the same function?

But really, it's not up to the punter to tell these two businesses how to get their act together. Either way, if the promoter is taking on a million euro contract providing services to consumers, it is their responsibility to meet their legal obligations to ensure the service is fit for purpose.

Wrongway1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Then the promoter is taking on a million euro contract with 'literally zero, zero effect' on their ability complete that contract. That doesn't sound like very good business to me.

But they did complete their part, sold the acts tickets supplied them a venue to set up, perform sound check etc and subsequently perform on the night.

Things don't always run smoothly at all. Not all gigs pull in a million euros you know the same still has to apply though.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But is sound quality entirely subjective?

Absolutely perhaps type is sound subjective into google

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You can be sure that somewhere along the line, there is an independent accountant signing off an audit or similar on the financials for the night. So why not have an independent sound engineer on contract to carry out the same function?

This is being very speculative who is this accountant for? Traders for the bands merch (which some venues take a % ), How many pints pulled? The tickets sold in advance? Hot dog man?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It is their responsibility to meet their legal obligations to ensure the service is fit for purpose.

What law is there against playing a shocker of a gig? No laws were being broken here.

Venue was supplied met regulations and as was suitable for many a show throughout the year.

The band had played past your typical contracted time there's not much else you can say; many a fan disappointed, arguably felt robbed but everything was legal about this robbery.

Event tickets are bought in the hope of great entertainment it's not guaranteed. You'd pay a pretty penny to top tier sports events game doesn't live up to expectations, is this the promoters fault? No and people will likely blame the manager or players etc in this case that's Hall and Oates.

OnDraught

Hall & Oates were ****. The best thing all the rightfully pissed off punters should do is not go see them next time they come to take their money.

Ash.J.Williams

Here's what one of irelands more important musicians has to say about the 3 arena

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/sound-opinions-1.2951126%3fmode=amp

mdwexford

OnDraught wrote: »

Hall & Oates were ****. The best thing all the rightfully pissed off punters should do is not go see them next time they come to take their money.

I had the time of my life.

Heroes, I'd go again tomorrow.

AndrewJRenko

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Here's what one of irelands more important musicians has to say about the 3 arena

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/sound-opinions-1.2951126%3fmode=amp

His concern seems to be about volume, rather than quality.

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

But they did complete their part, sold the acts tickets supplied them a venue to set up, perform sound check etc and subsequently perform on the night.

Things don't always run smoothly at all. Not all gigs pull in a million euros you know the same still has to apply though.

Absolutely perhaps type is sound subjective into google

This is being very speculative who is this accountant for? Traders for the bands merch (which some venues take a % ), How many pints pulled? The tickets sold in advance? Hot dog man?

What law is there against playing a shocker of a gig? No laws were being broken here.

Venue was supplied met regulations and as was suitable for many a show throughout the year.

The band had played past your typical contracted time there's not much else you can say; many a fan disappointed, arguably felt robbed but everything was legal about this robbery.

Event tickets are bought in the hope of great entertainment it's not guaranteed. You'd pay a pretty penny to top tier sports events game doesn't live up to expectations, is this the promoters fault? No and people will likely blame the manager or players etc in this case that's Hall and Oates.

The law against 'playing a shocker of a gig' is the legal requirement that any service sold is fit for purpose and of merchantable quality.

I'm not talking about the subjective issues of whether you liked the songs on the set list. This is a technical issue of crap sound quality that affected a large number of paying punters.

Wrongway1985

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The law against 'playing a shocker of a gig' is the legal requirement that any service sold is fit for purpose and of merchantable quality.

I'm not talking about the subjective issues of whether you liked the songs on the set list. This is a technical issue of crap sound quality that affected a large number of paying punters.

But you use the word subjective again, look at most gigs you constantly get people wanting to get close to the barrier/stage likely where the worst sound is, might make for a better overall experience but its their choice.

You simply cannot guarantee good sound at any gig, the same way you can't guarantee a good setlist or show overall you expected and when purchasing tickets it's in the terms and conditions that once purchased there is a no refund policy.

Show went ahead, Hall and Oates gave up their time and now they off to next city, don't pay them? Have it fall on the promoter as you seem to suggest? Either way best of luck in securing other acts in either scenario.

rubadub

bennyl10 wrote: »

But they have.
The promoter has literally zero, zero, effect on the sound engineers decisions on the night.

They’ve done all they can

Do you have inside knowledge of the business?

I find it odd how many are seemingly 100% certain that neither the promotors nor 3arena management could do anything -hands completely tied. They would be both idiots to leave themselves so open.

I simply cannot imagine the heads of both 3arena and MCD hypothetically sitting through a soundcheck and having say barely audible sound playing or excruciatingly bad sound playing and the sound engineers saying that is exactly what they want, and just going "ah bollocks, the fans are going to be fcuking furious, they'll be all over both our facebook & twitter pages badmouthing us, they'll be 1 star reviews but the venue online, we will definitely loose future customers, but sure we can't do a damn thing, ah well. All we can do is not sign up these jokers in future". Or the same if the band said they are going to play just one song and finish up -do people also think nothing could be done there?

I know a guy who does work in a venue, some bands decide to employ the "house staff" sound & lighting, some use their own. If using their own there are still some house staff there on the night in the background. It would be pretty stupid not to.

RTE mentioned it, and plenty on facebook
https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2017/1101/916725-steely-dan-reel-back-years-and-do-it-again-in-dublin/

After complaints about the quality of the sound at Hall and Oates on Sunday evening, Monday's show saw a vast improvement in the acoustics in the cavernous venue

https://www.facebook.com/3ArenaDublin/photos/a.184771694926594.44194.126879580715806/1725365857533829/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/BluesfestUK/photos/a.190774074366780.37220.124849824292539/1340468989397277/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/mcd.productions/photos/a.131282934547.104454.49009319547/10155991966664548/?type=3&theater

ghostdancer

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Here's what one of irelands more important musicians has to say about the 3 arena

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/sound-opinions-1.2951126%3fmode=amp

not sure i'd really trust a member of My Bloody Valentine to comment on sound levels.
they could be standing beside a jet engine and would still be whinging about how quiet it was.

if they were manning the sound desk, there would have been walkouts and MCD would definitely be in court for multiple cases of tinnitus .

paulsil17

Promoters will never be incentivised to ensure that the audience gets a quality service as long as people are prepared to accept poor service.  Not giving a reasonable service (whatever it may be) is not okay, it is 'robbery' and robbery is NEVER legal.  Sometimes you just have to stand up and say, I deserved better than this... and if you ignore me 'Promoter' I will make you stand up and account for yourself in public.  That's why we have consumer law in the first place.

ionapaul

Hopefully some of the more savvy among you who are unsatisfied have looked into the small claims court route - as mentioned earlier I wouldn't be surprised if this is everyone's best bet for addressing the issue.

AndrewJRenko

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

But you use the word subjective again, look at most gigs you constantly get people wanting to get close to the barrier/stage likely where the worst sound is, might make for a better overall experience but its their choice.

You simply cannot guarantee good sound at any gig, the same way you can't guarantee a good setlist or show overall you expected and when purchasing tickets it's in the terms and conditions that once purchased there is a no refund policy.

Show went ahead, Hall and Oates gave up their time and now they off to next city, don't pay them? Have it fall on the promoter as you seem to suggest? Either way best of luck in securing other acts in either scenario.

Something went wrong here. The sound was good for the support act but not for the main act. The sound was good for the main act at the Monday gig, but not the original gig. Someone screwed something up. 3Arena specifically promote the acoustics of their venue on their website "A stunning, state-of-the-art entertainment venue, with the kind of world-class acoustics that great music deserves". If you're going to promote it, you have to deliver it.

H&O didn't 'give up their time'. This wasn't charity - they are providing a service to paying punters.

The old 'best of luck in securing other acts' is BS too. This is a question of adequate quality. The vast majority of acts provide adequate quality sound - nothing like the quantity and extent of complaints that arose for this one act at this one gig. These acts would have no problem signing up to a contractual commitment to that adequate sound, because they do it every night.