First Presidency Broadcast quiet in chapel

Discussions around meetinghouse sound systems, microphones, assisted listening devices, and translation equipment
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon, USA

#21

Post by rmrichesjr »

RussellHltn wrote: ...

Speaking of feedback controllers, I ran across a very old Altec anti-feedback device. Looking at it, I think what it did was modulate the audio into a Single-Sideband and then demodulate it. That would cause the frequency of all sounds to shift sightly. Thus the feedback couldn't reinforce itself.

That must have been interesting to listen to. When you pushed it to where it started getting echo-y, it must have gone up or down in frequency with each "ring". It must not have worked too well as Altec made very few of them. I think it goes back to what the sound guy was saying - the mic hears and speaker. No getting around that.
If putting the audio through a SSB mod-demod channel did result in a frequency shift, that could create some interesting effects. The Doppler effect from a passing train whistle comes to mind.

In some ways, phase is even more important than frequency in terms of preventing audio feedback. Many years ago, (long before FM groups) I designed and built an audio preprocessor for my stake center cultural hall. It included a polarity reversal switch, because I had thought the two possible polarities through the electronic part of the loop could yield different profiles of the first frequencies to feed back. It turned out at least the first few frequencies to feed back were the same, regardless of the polarity setting.

What I did discover was that moving that switch from one position to the other would instantly (well, so it sounded) kill any feedback energy that had built up. I found that by periodically (or aperiodically) toggling the switch, I could contain the audible feedback to a modest volume level, even with the gain turned up quite a bit higher than would normally be possible. I toyed with the idea of an automatic polarity toggler but never built one. With a modern DSP, one could do some wild things to the phase of the signal. However, I suspect it would likely not be feasible to get more than at most a few dB gain above unity without some rather unpleasant audible effects.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34622
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#22

Post by russellhltn »

rmrichesjr wrote:If putting the audio through a SSB mod-demod channel did result in a frequency shift, that could create some interesting effects. The Doppler effect from a passing train whistle comes to mind.
I suspect the shift was a constant. So it would be more like listening to a SSB transmission with the receiver slightly mistuned.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon, USA

#23

Post by rmrichesjr »

RussellHltn wrote:I suspect the shift was a constant. So it would be more like listening to a SSB transmission with the receiver slightly mistuned.
That would be the case for the first echo. However, if the loop gain were near unity, the second echo would be one more step lower in frequency, the third echo one more than that, etc. A short, beep would turn into something like sliding a finger down a piano keyboard.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34622
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#24

Post by russellhltn »

OK, I see what you're talking about now. Yeah, that would be interesting.

BTW, I think your prior quote "I suspect it would likely not be feasible to get more than at most a few dB gain above unity without some rather unpleasant audible effects." sums up the issue with any anti-feedback device.

Filtering is useful, but only knocks off the high peaks. But once you hit unity in a broad range, it just won't work. Not until you can invent something that will broadcast the "sound" into the nerve system bypassing the ears. <mad scientist mode>
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
mmathson
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:41 am
Location: United States

#25

Post by mmathson »

Thanks for the great discussion.

I am relieved to know that it 'wasn't just me'.

On the other hand, someone had suggested to report this issue to some place so FM and broadcast dept gets the message. How do we go about that, and/or has it already been done?
jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 9986
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:30 am
Location: USA, TX

#26

Post by jdlessley »

For facilities issues that need FM group attention the issue should be passed through the high councilor for physical facilities. He is your stake's single point of contact with the FM group. Sometimes a stake technology specialist may have a relationship with the FM manager that permits direct communications for technology issues. Even if he does have a direct line, the high council PF rep should be kept in the loop.

To get the issue before the people handling the broadcast I am not certain. I would use the feedback link on the http://lds.org/broadcast page. That feedback link is the generic lds.org feedback link. There is hope that the right people have been informed because of this thread. Others may have a better communication method for this.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the ChurchofJesusChrist.org Help Center or Tech Wiki?
mmathson
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:41 am
Location: United States

#27

Post by mmathson »

Thanks, that is a great answer and makes sense.
Post Reply

Return to “Meetinghouse Audio”