CALLING: Grouping Standbys

[Thespi620]

Hey everyone!

I'm currently working on a production of Eurydice by Sarah Ruhl.  There are many occasions when I have to call standbys for 2 or 3 each light and sound cues at a time.  I have tried to group my standby Qs with as few per call as possible, but sometimes I am in standby for 7 or 8 cues at once.  I've been grouping standbys by department and calling them "standby LXQ 48-50 & SQ R4-S2", but I'm wondering if there is an efficient way to indicate how many Qs are between LXQ48 and 50--because I have a 48.5, and 49.3 through 49.6.

Any input?  I'm not having an issue with my current method but I'm curious as to how other people would call this.
 
 

[maximillionx]

I think the way you're calling it is fine. The less numbers to confuse, the better.  You don't want to warn with: "LQ 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 and SQ A, B, C, and D," but rather with your method.

Also, the board op should know that they are in warn for the next cue through the last cue you listed is fired. I know when I board op, I don't relax until the last cue I'm warned for in a group gets a "go."

[kiwitechgirl]

I do pretty much what you're doing; it does vary a little between operators (I work with four operators on a regular basis) and because we run a single-op system often I'll tend to stand cues by the way they happen - "standby LX28 with SQ15, LX29, LX30 with SQ16, LX 31 and 32" but it does depend on the operator.  If it's a particularly big sequence I'll just say "standby for the Vivaldi sequence which begins with LX67 and ends with LX97" - or when I did The Producers, it was just "standby for Springtime for Hitler"!

[Mac Calder]

Also, look at natural chains. Sometimes operators can be trusted to take point cues by themselves. Ie, you may only need to call LX 10, 11, 12, 15 and 16 because 10.5, 13, 13.5 and 14 are all closely related to their preceeding cue and can be left to the operator.

Another method is the count method. When things fire in a structured manner it is often possible to create a counted sequence - for example, the following cues may fire in a tight sequence over a 10 count:

10: LX 12, SD 4, Deck 14 to preset, line 5 out
9: LX 12.5, SD 5
8:
7: LX 13, Deck 15 on stage, line 7 in
6:
5:
4: Deck 14 to first position, line 7 out, line 8 in
3: LX 13.1
2: LX 13.2, SD 6
1: SD 7

And you can call it something like "Stand by LX, Sound, Deck, Flys for opening Sequnce. With a 10 count, Go!..9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1...Sequence complete, standby whatever comes next...."

Provided you talk to your ops about how you want to call it, there is no right or wrong way to call complex sequences.

[MatthewShiner]

I find giving standbys in groups is fine.

Standby
LX 123 - 456
Sound 84 - 93
Rail
Standby LX 134 operator take when actor blows out the candle
Standby scene shift

In the era of computer boards, the stand by tends to be just a wake up call for the operator to pay attention.

I personally only give standbys to difficult sections, huge shifts and cues after long periods of in activity, other wise my style is to give a five second wind up.  "Lx 26 (beat beat beat beat) go!".