Working Around Microphones
Sep. 23rd, 2017 01:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysabetwordsmithRecently I came across a couple of discussions about technology, public speaking, and accessibility. One of them is in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
access_fandom and links to the other which is a Unitarian-Universalist post. The crux of the matter is that people with hearing impairment often need amplification in order to hear, but not everyone is willing or able to use a microphone. And those groups don't always know about each other's concerns, which causes friction.
Here's the core argument from the perspective of the hearing-impaired author:
"When a mic is being used at a meeting and someone looks at it and says, ‘Do we really need this?’ I feel outright anger. That person just asked if people like me really exist and demanded that we defend ourselves."
There's also this gem, which does exactly the same thing in reverse:
"My discomfort in hearing my own amplified voice is more important than your need to be included."
Flip that and you get: "My desire for you to use a microphone so I can hear is more important than your need not to be in pain." Not exactly what I'd call inclusive, and yes, there are plenty of people for whom microphones hurt, and they are routinely ignored. Autistic people live in a toxic cloud of "Hurt yourself or don't come out in public." :/
"Universal access" isn't, because people can have conflicting needs. One of my rules of thumb is that the speaker gets to adjust things for their own comfort, because if they can't work, then nobody is getting a show. But if you want to maximize inclusivity, then it it helps to have more than one tool in the box.
So then I raised these points:
Sometimes it's that lack of awareness or consideration for other people's limitations. This can be addressed by raising awareness and setting an expectation of courtesy.
Other times it's an oblique way of saying, "I don't know how to use this device," which is true for a lot of less-advantaged people. This can be addressed by having someone demonstrate how it works, a good idea anyway since different devices may have very different controls or requirements.
For some it's, "I can't stand the sound of that thing so close to me." This happens with people who have sensitive hearing or sensory issues, and is difficult or impossible to fix because it's often a field effect due to the equipment's sphere of influence covering the room. But sometimes it has a shorter range and this is worth checking. Once in a while, the speaker's range of discomfort is shorter than the mike's pickup range, so just scoot it away a few inches and go on with the show.
It can also mean, "If I use that electronic device, it is likely to cease functioning." There is usually zero sympathy for that, people are unwilling to assist in compensating for it, and thus the result is often that the device breaks and now nobody has a damn mike unless a replacement is available for the subsequent speaker. And the current speaker has no mike just like they told you was going to happen.
And you're unlikely to know which of those factors is in play from the audience.
These things are often more complicated than they seem at first glance. As a general rule, if someone says there's a problem, treat that as true even if you don't understand why. There are likely to be variables in play they know about that you don't, and they may not wish to discuss those openly.
As a first step, if a mike is present and there are no barriers to using it, then use it. This maximizes accessibility. You may need to tweak things if it is turned too low or too high. Audience feedback is therefore valuable if available, but not everyone wants to speak up when things go wrong. Watch the people in the back. If they are cupping their hands to their ears, tilting their heads, or looking unhappier than the people closer to you then they probably cannot hear you well. The mike may be too low or not working. If people anywhere are covering their ears, shaking their heads, or wincing then the mike is probably too high and/or emitting obnoxious sounds. Adjust and discuss until it is comfortable, or if not, continue to other solutions.
My experience of microphones is varied. Sometimes they're essential, other times not. Often they're more trouble than they're worth. Sometimes you can distinguish which by testing them, other times not. They are frequently unavailable or malfunctioning, so try not to depend on them completely.
Coincidentally, last night I was listening to several speakers. One didn't use a microphone and was perfectly audible. (Small room, maybe two dozen people.) But the ones using the mike had this bizarre, faint echoing whine added that kept making me cringe. I don't know if the thing was misbehaving because I was there, the other folks were also prone to making technology malfunction, or it was just a piece-of-shit device.
It doesn't take many such negative experiences with a mike for people to start asking, "Do we NEED this fool thing, or are we just using it because it's there and a habit?" The Amish have a wonderful rule about not adopting technology if it's more trouble than it's worth, and this is excellent advice even if one draws the line in a different place than they do. Think about what it's for, what good it does, and whether that could be done better in some other way. Remember that a good mike, properly used, increases audibility; but a poor mike, or an ineptly used one, may make the speaker harder to understand.
One technique I've found useful is just asking people. "Can everyone in the back hear me?" "Is this thing too loud for the folks in front?" "Is this even on?" "Does anyone else hear that aggravating whine/rattle/buzz?"
Another is that, if the equipment is malfunctioning or incompatible, change the venue. Ask for a different room or equipment, if available. Switch from talking to text display if people have the resources for that -- that would've actually worked last night, as they were running the slideshow from a laptop. In a small group you can often shuffle the chairs into a better configuration to reduce the need for a mike. Sometimes you can get different results with a shuffle: "Would the people who can't hear from the back move toward the front, and anyone who doesn't need to be right on top of me move back to make room?" "If anyone tends to fry technology, could you move to the back or step out a minute, and see if this thing will revive if we give it a little breathing room?" A drawback of this approach is that it requires people to out themselves, which not everyone is comfortable with, but it does solve some problems that other methods won't. But if you've ever seen me sitting panel on the end of the table instead of by the mikes, that's often why.
Bear in mind that socially anxious or touch-averse people often prefer to hang back, and if you pressure them to move closer, it makes them uncomfortable. There are many reasons why someone might need elbow room, so if you say "move forward" and some stay put, that may be a deliberate choice on their part. It could also be that they can't hear you. Beckon people toward the closer seats as well as giving verbal instructions. You may also ask, "If you can hear me, raise your hand." For people who can't hear, you can walk over and explain that the mike is dead, or whatever, and invite them to help work out a solution. But remember, if you tend to fry technology, don't stand too close to someone wearing a hearing aid! Send an audience member instead.
EDIT 9-25-17:lauredhel raised the excellent point that some people (parents with babies, people with fatigue, anyone on call, etc.) may not want to move forward because they need the ability to leave quickly. If this is a concern, there are at least two possible workarounds. First, check the room for frontal exits; many event rooms have multiple doors. Second, seat them on the aisles, preferably outer, but inner will do. In this manner, they can leave unobtrusively if necessary. When seating people, it helps to remind folks that special needs have priority on seats with functional advantages, and it's polite to leave those for other attendees if you don't need them.
For babies in particular, ask if the venue has a cry room. Those used to be more common, but some venues have a place where parents of fussy children can observe the event. Cry rooms are also helpful for a variety of disabilities including autism, Tourette's syndrome, PTSD, social anxiety, etc. In theaters, they're often a loft or balcony and may double as ADA space. One of our local theaters has ADA balconies, and they'd work just as well for most of those other conditions as for wheelchairs.
If you are an event organizer, you can prevent some of these challenges by asking in your registration/volunteer forms:
* Do you know how to use a microphone? Our venue has Brand X Product Y sound equipment. If you're unfamiliar with that, we are happy to teach you.
* Are you comfortable using a mike? If you need special accommodations, talk to us and we'll see what we can do. If you're uncomfortable or incompatible with such equipment, we can book you in a small venue where amplification is less necessary.
* Do you have a disability or other limitation for which accommodation would help? If so, let us know what you need and we'll be happy to help. See our list of available accommodations if you need ideas!
It's also a good idea to reserve at least some of the front-row seats in any venue for people with disabilities. That means not just wheelchair users but also people with impaired hearing or vision for whom that proximity makes a big improvement in their experience. At a very large event, or one for special needs, consider providing separate accommodations for people who are very sensitive to loud noises than for people who need heavily amplified speech to hear. Today's sophisticated audiovisual systems may be able to route the input from the main auditorium to a soft room and a boost room for those different needs. Some venues can even broadcast to private hotel rooms, a popular feature for masquerades.
For anyone who does public speaking regularly, it's worthwhile to practice pitching your voice, in case equipment is unavailable or ineffective. We teach this for ritual purposes, but it works just as well in a lecture or whatever. I stand 20-30 feet away, outdoors, and coach until I can hear the speaker clearly. If you can learn that and really want to push your limits, ask a hard-of-hearing friend to provide feedback. There are official voice coaches who teach pitching and enunciation and so forth, which used to be common for public speaking clubs and such, but it seems to have dwindled down to acting classes now. The results are kind of hard to describe, as it's not only raising your voice but changing the quality so it carries better. One time I was at a con where George Takei was speaking, in a largish room without a mike. His voice went within a fraction of an inch of the wall, and didn't pile up next to it like what usually happens when people speak to carry. Crystal clear through the whole room. I have no idea how he did it but I remain in awe. I doubt I did anywhere near that well in my following panel, but then I didn't have people six-deep along the back wall, so it went okay.
EDIT 9-23-17:technoshaman mentioned heralds. The Society for Creative Anachronism has people whose job is to shout announcements in venues where electronic support is rarely available and is undesirable. So if you want to learn how to make yourself heard, look them up. This page offers links to vocal techniques for making yourself heard. They work!
EDIT: 9-24-17:siliconshaman shares this idea:
"I'm reminded of the Occupy Movement's use of echoing or vox populis, or people's mike. Where a group at the front, who could hear, would echo in unison what the speaker was saying. Thus making it loud enough to be heard at the back.
It's a little clumsy, as the speaker has to pause to allow the repetition, but it's quite a powerful technique. For whatever reason, it makes more of a psychological impact. The pauses also allow the speaker to consider their words, and that makes for better presentation or wording."
I'm less sure of workarounds for folks who find mikes aggravating, but I have some ideas. Based on personal experience and observation, things sitting nearby are less troublesome than things hanging on one's person. Also close contact greatly increases the chance of technical failure. For anyone who codeswitches between sign language and spoken English, anything with an attached wire -- clip-on or handheld -- is a disaster waiting to happen. (A sign language interpreter is only useful to people who understand that language, but if you have hearing-impaired audience members, it can be a good idea.) So using floor/table mikes is much safer than the kind meant to attach to a person. There may be other solutions.
EDIT 9-25-17:alatefeline has commented with an extensive list of excellent ideas, so I'm linking it instead of repeating it.
Generally speaking, seek to define a problem as precisely as possible, and respect different needs. Then ask if people have solutions to the various aspects of it. Once those are found, you can spread them around. I'm starting to see some really good tipsheets on disability etiquette. I've also seen a few lines worth of "What do I do if the mike dies?" advice for panel moderators.
If you find these ideas useful, please copy and share with your company, school, church, club, or other organizations in the interest of improving comfort and communication.
Does anyone else have further ideas for working around the challenges of microphones?
access_fandom and links to the other which is a Unitarian-Universalist post. The crux of the matter is that people with hearing impairment often need amplification in order to hear, but not everyone is willing or able to use a microphone. And those groups don't always know about each other's concerns, which causes friction.Here's the core argument from the perspective of the hearing-impaired author:
"When a mic is being used at a meeting and someone looks at it and says, ‘Do we really need this?’ I feel outright anger. That person just asked if people like me really exist and demanded that we defend ourselves."
There's also this gem, which does exactly the same thing in reverse:
"My discomfort in hearing my own amplified voice is more important than your need to be included."
Flip that and you get: "My desire for you to use a microphone so I can hear is more important than your need not to be in pain." Not exactly what I'd call inclusive, and yes, there are plenty of people for whom microphones hurt, and they are routinely ignored. Autistic people live in a toxic cloud of "Hurt yourself or don't come out in public." :/
"Universal access" isn't, because people can have conflicting needs. One of my rules of thumb is that the speaker gets to adjust things for their own comfort, because if they can't work, then nobody is getting a show. But if you want to maximize inclusivity, then it it helps to have more than one tool in the box.
So then I raised these points:
Sometimes it's that lack of awareness or consideration for other people's limitations. This can be addressed by raising awareness and setting an expectation of courtesy.
Other times it's an oblique way of saying, "I don't know how to use this device," which is true for a lot of less-advantaged people. This can be addressed by having someone demonstrate how it works, a good idea anyway since different devices may have very different controls or requirements.
For some it's, "I can't stand the sound of that thing so close to me." This happens with people who have sensitive hearing or sensory issues, and is difficult or impossible to fix because it's often a field effect due to the equipment's sphere of influence covering the room. But sometimes it has a shorter range and this is worth checking. Once in a while, the speaker's range of discomfort is shorter than the mike's pickup range, so just scoot it away a few inches and go on with the show.
It can also mean, "If I use that electronic device, it is likely to cease functioning." There is usually zero sympathy for that, people are unwilling to assist in compensating for it, and thus the result is often that the device breaks and now nobody has a damn mike unless a replacement is available for the subsequent speaker. And the current speaker has no mike just like they told you was going to happen.
And you're unlikely to know which of those factors is in play from the audience.
These things are often more complicated than they seem at first glance. As a general rule, if someone says there's a problem, treat that as true even if you don't understand why. There are likely to be variables in play they know about that you don't, and they may not wish to discuss those openly.
As a first step, if a mike is present and there are no barriers to using it, then use it. This maximizes accessibility. You may need to tweak things if it is turned too low or too high. Audience feedback is therefore valuable if available, but not everyone wants to speak up when things go wrong. Watch the people in the back. If they are cupping their hands to their ears, tilting their heads, or looking unhappier than the people closer to you then they probably cannot hear you well. The mike may be too low or not working. If people anywhere are covering their ears, shaking their heads, or wincing then the mike is probably too high and/or emitting obnoxious sounds. Adjust and discuss until it is comfortable, or if not, continue to other solutions.
My experience of microphones is varied. Sometimes they're essential, other times not. Often they're more trouble than they're worth. Sometimes you can distinguish which by testing them, other times not. They are frequently unavailable or malfunctioning, so try not to depend on them completely.
Coincidentally, last night I was listening to several speakers. One didn't use a microphone and was perfectly audible. (Small room, maybe two dozen people.) But the ones using the mike had this bizarre, faint echoing whine added that kept making me cringe. I don't know if the thing was misbehaving because I was there, the other folks were also prone to making technology malfunction, or it was just a piece-of-shit device.
It doesn't take many such negative experiences with a mike for people to start asking, "Do we NEED this fool thing, or are we just using it because it's there and a habit?" The Amish have a wonderful rule about not adopting technology if it's more trouble than it's worth, and this is excellent advice even if one draws the line in a different place than they do. Think about what it's for, what good it does, and whether that could be done better in some other way. Remember that a good mike, properly used, increases audibility; but a poor mike, or an ineptly used one, may make the speaker harder to understand.
One technique I've found useful is just asking people. "Can everyone in the back hear me?" "Is this thing too loud for the folks in front?" "Is this even on?" "Does anyone else hear that aggravating whine/rattle/buzz?"
Another is that, if the equipment is malfunctioning or incompatible, change the venue. Ask for a different room or equipment, if available. Switch from talking to text display if people have the resources for that -- that would've actually worked last night, as they were running the slideshow from a laptop. In a small group you can often shuffle the chairs into a better configuration to reduce the need for a mike. Sometimes you can get different results with a shuffle: "Would the people who can't hear from the back move toward the front, and anyone who doesn't need to be right on top of me move back to make room?" "If anyone tends to fry technology, could you move to the back or step out a minute, and see if this thing will revive if we give it a little breathing room?" A drawback of this approach is that it requires people to out themselves, which not everyone is comfortable with, but it does solve some problems that other methods won't. But if you've ever seen me sitting panel on the end of the table instead of by the mikes, that's often why.
Bear in mind that socially anxious or touch-averse people often prefer to hang back, and if you pressure them to move closer, it makes them uncomfortable. There are many reasons why someone might need elbow room, so if you say "move forward" and some stay put, that may be a deliberate choice on their part. It could also be that they can't hear you. Beckon people toward the closer seats as well as giving verbal instructions. You may also ask, "If you can hear me, raise your hand." For people who can't hear, you can walk over and explain that the mike is dead, or whatever, and invite them to help work out a solution. But remember, if you tend to fry technology, don't stand too close to someone wearing a hearing aid! Send an audience member instead.
EDIT 9-25-17:
lauredhel raised the excellent point that some people (parents with babies, people with fatigue, anyone on call, etc.) may not want to move forward because they need the ability to leave quickly. If this is a concern, there are at least two possible workarounds. First, check the room for frontal exits; many event rooms have multiple doors. Second, seat them on the aisles, preferably outer, but inner will do. In this manner, they can leave unobtrusively if necessary. When seating people, it helps to remind folks that special needs have priority on seats with functional advantages, and it's polite to leave those for other attendees if you don't need them. For babies in particular, ask if the venue has a cry room. Those used to be more common, but some venues have a place where parents of fussy children can observe the event. Cry rooms are also helpful for a variety of disabilities including autism, Tourette's syndrome, PTSD, social anxiety, etc. In theaters, they're often a loft or balcony and may double as ADA space. One of our local theaters has ADA balconies, and they'd work just as well for most of those other conditions as for wheelchairs.
If you are an event organizer, you can prevent some of these challenges by asking in your registration/volunteer forms:
* Do you know how to use a microphone? Our venue has Brand X Product Y sound equipment. If you're unfamiliar with that, we are happy to teach you.
* Are you comfortable using a mike? If you need special accommodations, talk to us and we'll see what we can do. If you're uncomfortable or incompatible with such equipment, we can book you in a small venue where amplification is less necessary.
* Do you have a disability or other limitation for which accommodation would help? If so, let us know what you need and we'll be happy to help. See our list of available accommodations if you need ideas!
It's also a good idea to reserve at least some of the front-row seats in any venue for people with disabilities. That means not just wheelchair users but also people with impaired hearing or vision for whom that proximity makes a big improvement in their experience. At a very large event, or one for special needs, consider providing separate accommodations for people who are very sensitive to loud noises than for people who need heavily amplified speech to hear. Today's sophisticated audiovisual systems may be able to route the input from the main auditorium to a soft room and a boost room for those different needs. Some venues can even broadcast to private hotel rooms, a popular feature for masquerades.
For anyone who does public speaking regularly, it's worthwhile to practice pitching your voice, in case equipment is unavailable or ineffective. We teach this for ritual purposes, but it works just as well in a lecture or whatever. I stand 20-30 feet away, outdoors, and coach until I can hear the speaker clearly. If you can learn that and really want to push your limits, ask a hard-of-hearing friend to provide feedback. There are official voice coaches who teach pitching and enunciation and so forth, which used to be common for public speaking clubs and such, but it seems to have dwindled down to acting classes now. The results are kind of hard to describe, as it's not only raising your voice but changing the quality so it carries better. One time I was at a con where George Takei was speaking, in a largish room without a mike. His voice went within a fraction of an inch of the wall, and didn't pile up next to it like what usually happens when people speak to carry. Crystal clear through the whole room. I have no idea how he did it but I remain in awe. I doubt I did anywhere near that well in my following panel, but then I didn't have people six-deep along the back wall, so it went okay.
EDIT 9-23-17:
technoshaman mentioned heralds. The Society for Creative Anachronism has people whose job is to shout announcements in venues where electronic support is rarely available and is undesirable. So if you want to learn how to make yourself heard, look them up. This page offers links to vocal techniques for making yourself heard. They work!EDIT: 9-24-17:
siliconshaman shares this idea:"I'm reminded of the Occupy Movement's use of echoing or vox populis, or people's mike. Where a group at the front, who could hear, would echo in unison what the speaker was saying. Thus making it loud enough to be heard at the back.
It's a little clumsy, as the speaker has to pause to allow the repetition, but it's quite a powerful technique. For whatever reason, it makes more of a psychological impact. The pauses also allow the speaker to consider their words, and that makes for better presentation or wording."
I'm less sure of workarounds for folks who find mikes aggravating, but I have some ideas. Based on personal experience and observation, things sitting nearby are less troublesome than things hanging on one's person. Also close contact greatly increases the chance of technical failure. For anyone who codeswitches between sign language and spoken English, anything with an attached wire -- clip-on or handheld -- is a disaster waiting to happen. (A sign language interpreter is only useful to people who understand that language, but if you have hearing-impaired audience members, it can be a good idea.) So using floor/table mikes is much safer than the kind meant to attach to a person. There may be other solutions.
EDIT 9-25-17:
alatefeline has commented with an extensive list of excellent ideas, so I'm linking it instead of repeating it.Generally speaking, seek to define a problem as precisely as possible, and respect different needs. Then ask if people have solutions to the various aspects of it. Once those are found, you can spread them around. I'm starting to see some really good tipsheets on disability etiquette. I've also seen a few lines worth of "What do I do if the mike dies?" advice for panel moderators.
If you find these ideas useful, please copy and share with your company, school, church, club, or other organizations in the interest of improving comfort and communication.
Does anyone else have further ideas for working around the challenges of microphones?
(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-23 08:09 pm (UTC)You're welcome!
Date: 2017-09-23 08:57 pm (UTC)Re: You're welcome!
Date: 2017-09-23 09:03 pm (UTC)Re: You're welcome!
Date: 2017-09-23 09:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-23 08:14 pm (UTC)Yes...
Date: 2017-09-23 08:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-24 02:18 am (UTC)One technique I've found useful is just asking people. "Can everyone in the back hear me?" "Is this thing too loud for the folks in front?" "Is this even on?" "Does anyone else hear that aggravating whine/rattle/buzz?"
I love this, and I also love the idea of asking the crowd to show that they can, in fact, hear the speaker. I wish more speakers would do this, especially because the answer is so often something easily fixable, like when EVERYONE in the room just thinks the speaker is too close to the mic (or doesn't know that that's the issue, but has complaints that are solved by the speaker stepping back from the mic).
Thoughts
Date: 2017-09-24 02:52 am (UTC)"Do WE need this thing?" would be more inclusive.
>> sometimes it's a matter of people's problems WITH the mic being more obvious to the speaker than people's problems WITHOUT it. <<
That's true, but not necessarily obvious unless one has carefully observed a wide variety of audiences. So it is good to spell out.
>> I love this, and I also love the idea of asking the crowd to show that they can, in fact, hear the speaker. <<
I learned it from more experienced moderators. I don't always remember to do it when I'm speaking, but I try to.
>> I wish more speakers would do this, especially because the answer is so often something easily fixable, like when EVERYONE in the room just thinks the speaker is too close to the mic (or doesn't know that that's the issue, but has complaints that are solved by the speaker stepping back from the mic). <<
This requires knowing something about mikes -- specifically, their prevailing failure modes. They can be unplugged, switched off, turned down, malfunctioning, or quashed by a high-energy field; and thus nobody can hear the speaker. Or they can be turned too high, too close to another device, too close to the speaker, malfunctioning etc. and then they are too loud or make obnoxious noises. True howlback is an umistakeable rising shriek, but lesser problems can be harder to troubleshoot. This is why it's a good idea to ask if people know how to use a mike before handing it to them and hoping for the best.
Re: Thoughts
Date: 2017-09-24 04:01 am (UTC)This is very true. My dad was very upset the other day when it SEEMED like the new microphone system he'd bought for his synagogue was malfunctioning. As it turned out, it was a combination of poor design (headset as opposed to podium), poor understanding by those involved of how mics work (NO! Get AWAY from each other! You CANNOT be that close together while you're both wearing--*SKREEEEEEK*), and general user error (the cantor is a soprano, and the mic amplifies whatever your style is, so when she sings mezzo-soprano, it's fine, but when she sings coloratura, it exacerbates the shrillness).
Re: Thoughts
Date: 2017-09-24 04:39 am (UTC)Not fun. Perhaps it would help to have a "Meet the Sound System" session for those who will be using it regularly? People often make these mistakes because nobody ever explained how this stuff is supposed to work.
>> it was a combination of poor design (headset as opposed to podium) <<
That's going to be a persistent problem for anyone who can't or shouldn't wear a headset. That includes everything from certain types of hairstyles (weaves and some wigs are delicate) to injuries or illnesses to sensory issues. A podium mike would be very helpful. Some sound systems are modular; if so, budget permitting, one could be added.
Re: Thoughts
Date: 2017-09-24 10:14 am (UTC)What made them decide on headsets?
(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-24 10:28 am (UTC)At the other end, we have my husband, who claps his hands over his ears at certain volume and frequencies. Loud whining or wailing puts him nearly out of commission, and joyful shouting that has no negative effect on me, even at close range, puts him in pain twenty feet away.
Even worse, husband always has tinnitus and a mild headache.
Housemate/BFF falls right in the middle, with the added fillip of having grown up in an abusive household and being extra-sensitive to loud adult baritone annoyance.
And the children, especially younger child, get very frustrated when I don't realize they're addressing me (as opposed to one of the other adults) or ask them to repeat more clearly. And they too have a strong sensitivity to certain volume or frequencies.
*sigh*
(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-25 03:55 am (UTC)As a note, 'face the speaker' was utterly counterintutive to me as a smol autistic person, because it introduced visual/sensory 'static' to my listening from imperfectly processed body language in front of me, and I didn't realize how much it muffled the sound of my VOICE to be facing the other way.
(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-25 05:14 am (UTC)Hugs accepted.
Yes...
Date: 2017-09-25 05:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-26 03:42 am (UTC)*subvocal purring*
Yes...
Date: 2017-09-25 05:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-24 12:24 pm (UTC)It's a little clumsy, as the speaker has to pause to allow the repetition, but it's quite a powerful technique. For whatever reason, it makes more of a psychological impact. The pauses also allow the speaker to consider their words, and that makes for better presentation or wording.
Thank you!
Date: 2017-09-24 05:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-25 03:43 am (UTC)Have a couple pairs of noise-canceling headphones - the type that decrease ambient sound and screechy noises but allow for hearing a conversation - on a handy table with a sign that they are for people to borrow if they need them, possibly with other sensory tools. Even if a speaker does everything perfectly, crowds generate a lot of ambient noise unless everyone present is ACTIVELY being VERY quiet indeed, so it's a good option to have!
Have choices of microphone pick-up: a clip-on works well for some people who are moving a lot; an adjustable mike stand helps others.
For inexperienced speakers or audience participation: remind speakers to be LOUD, and as a speaker, ask people in the back / across the room practice telling / signaling you to speak up.
When using the 'mic check' means of relaying and amplifying content, or when singing/chanting as a community etc, start off a very short explanation and some practice so people can feel competent to participate, and not muffle themselves out of uncertainty. Not doing this before an audience participation segment causes the dread 'second verse of the national anthem' phenomenon, in which people drop out and/or mumble when they get to the part they aren't sure of, and almost everyone is experiencing this simultaneously, so it's all mush.
When at a series of community events, build and use a common vocabulary of specific nonverbal signals that are always paired with specific actions or words, e.g. a spinning motion before the announcement of the student of the day, a lifted hand for 'talk louder', and whole-arm sweeping motions to direct traffic. If there are fluent signers in the community, or alternately experts in other types of formalized nonverbal communication such as dance, follow their lead on these so they can be distinct, visible, and replicable.
Teach a silent cheer so that people can applaud in that manner if they choose.
Post signs or colored tapes for the edges of effective pickup for mikes, crossing cords, dead zones, and 'this is too close and there will be a horrible shriek'.
If there is a person or people running sound for the event, schedule time for them to do sound checks, and acknowledge them by name when giving credit.
Use musical intervals and timed periods of quiet to make the experience more paced and less overstimulating.
Have a printed programme so people can follow along.
Consider using resources aimed at musicians to help with writing spoken content too. If it's singable, it's also likely rhythmic and pithy enough to be easier to hear and understand.
Remember that hearing aids amplify bad stuff too - the people wincing from feedback squeals may be the same people who can't hear at all if the volume is low!
Ask Deaf & HOH people about their needs.
Thank you!
Date: 2017-09-25 06:53 pm (UTC)>> Have a couple pairs of noise-canceling headphones - the type that decrease ambient sound and screechy noises but allow for hearing a conversation <<
Also disposable earplugs are great. As the world has gotten noisier, I've just started carrying them everywhere. 0_o They're ideal for venues such as concerts and movies where the sound is sometimes cranked up to where it makes your teeth vibrate. Which is not safe, but is spreading.
>> When at a series of community events, build and use a common vocabulary of specific nonverbal signals that are always paired with specific actions or words <<
:D Terramagne uses those, especially the Activity Scouts. I know of a scene that would show it, but haven't written that yet -- with Mallory doing it during a fire drill. Here, I've seen examples in both scouting and the military. It is enormously useful.
>>Teach a silent cheer so that people can applaud in that manner if they choose.<<
Sign language applause: hold up both hands palm forward and swivel wrists slightly.
Re: Thank you!
Date: 2017-09-26 03:25 am (UTC)Re: Thank you!
Date: 2017-09-26 03:27 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-09-25 05:17 am (UTC)