Reply #7: I'm skeptical...

[no name no slogan]

I'm a semi-pro musician and do my share of sound engineering work for home recordings and for public events.

There's a BIIIIIG difference between microphones used for live applications (like rallies or concerts) and for studio work.

Studio mikes tend to be of MUCH higher quality, because they're much more sensitive and designed to pick up the slightest sound that comes to them.

Live mikes, OTOH, are not nearly as sensitive because they do not need to be-- if you're only feeding the sound into a PA system, you don't need the same quality level as you do for making digital recordings.

The only way that they could have totally eliminated the background noise would be if they took a direct line out from the mixer, and HD would have to be in an isolated room or booth.

It's possible they could have blocked out some of the background noise with a unidirectional microphone, which is probably what Dean was using. However, it would be nearly impossible to block out ALL sound from the background unless they used some sort of filtering equipment-- and even then, you would NOT catch all of it.

Of course, things would have probably sounded different depending on the listener's proximity to the PA speakers and the dynamics of the room. There's a whole bunch of variables to consider here-- I've just barely scratched the surface.

IMHO, they may have got a feed from the PA, which would make Dean sound louder in relation to the crowd, because they were not deliberately miking the crowd. I'm also guessing Dean didn't have any sort of monitoring system on the stage, which would make his own voice appear softer than it was going out over the PA.

It's unfortunate that media made such a big deal, because it really wasn't IMHO. But it's pretty hard to believe there was a deliberate conspiracy afoot to "doctor" the sound in any way.