Technical preproduction: venue survey, advance and plans.

Most setup problems are decided before the truck arrives. When the venue replies “you already know what it is like”, when the rider goes unread because “it is always the same”, or when the input list appears handwritten in the dressing room, the event is already accumulating delays: show day will only reveal what preproduction left unresolved.

This guide follows the preliminary document chain: the Venue survey, the Technical advance, the Rider review, and the three plans governing the stage: Stage plot, Input list and Patch list. This is the stage that turns scattered information into verifiable decisions.

Preproduction: from survey to plan

The Venue survey answers a question: where and how will we set up? It may be a visit with a measuring tape and photos, or a remote review with plans, specifications and a video call. Either way, it produces data: dimensions, loading access, heights, suspension points, the location of power demands, and distances between booth, stage and storage.

The Technical advance is the written exchange that finalises that information with everyone: the venue, rental suppliers, safety staff and, where appropriate, the artist’s team. It is not a greeting: it is a list of confirmations, each backed by a name and time. Anything not confirmed in the advance becomes a surprise at load-in.

The two documents have a causal relationship: the survey supplies data and the advance fixes it as commitments. Without the first, the second rests on assumptions; without the second, the first remains a file nobody uses on show day.

Venue survey: what is measured at the venue

A well-executed survey records equipment’s entire route: loading door to stage, stage to booth. Note corridor widths, unavoidable turns, changes in level, ramps and whether a suitable lift exists, because that information determines whether setup takes two hours or four and whether extra staff are needed.

Technical data comes next: available power and connection type, distribution-board positions, distance to the stage, floor area and type, authorised attachment points, clear height and ambient lighting conditions. Photograph and label every critical point, because during setup nobody remembers what the second board on the list is.

Finally, record environmental conditions: permitted schedules, noise restrictions, venue rules and who has the key to what. All that material feeds system design and the rest of this guide’s documents; it is detailed in infrastructure preproduction: power, network, RF, lighting, video and FX.

A survey also resolves invisible logistics: where the truck parks without blocking the fire exit, who opens at six in the morning, whether there is a lift or a ramp must be laid, and where an artist’s equipment arriving tomorrow is stored. Writing those answers down saves repeating the question to three people who are not the same as those at the visit.

The final venue sheet must be readable without having been there. If a new person can reconstruct access, setup and limitations from that document alone, the survey is finished.

Technical advance and rider review

The Technical advance translates the survey into commitments: who supplies each piece of equipment, when it arrives, who receives the truck, and what happens if something is missing. It is done with the venue and suppliers, and results in an email thread or document serving as shared memory. Early confirmation lets you replace failed equipment rather than discover it in front of the audience.

The Rider review is a critical reading of the artist’s rider: check which equipment exists at the venue, what is replaceable, what is essential, and which requests do not apply there. Every deviation is negotiated and recorded here; if the artist requests an unavailable model, respond beforehand with an alternative and cost, rather than in the dressing room.

Reviewing the rider includes non-technical matters: schedules, catering, dressing rooms and transport. That review draws on the framework of the technical rider, recording rights and image rights guide, which explains the clauses accompanying technical requirements.

A properly finalised advance has a format: a list of points, each with a status (confirmed, pending or substituted), responsible person and date. Anything still pending a week before the show is escalated; anything pending the day before becomes the contingency plan. Discipline lies in leaving no unresolved point without an owner, rather than in the number of emails.

Stage plot, input list and patch list

The Stage plot is the overhead plan: where drums, amplifiers, the DJ table, screens, monitors and circulation routes sit. It resolves space disputes before they exist and defines entry and exit routes for changeovers.

The Input list enumerates every signal that will sound: instruments, microphones, tracks, guides and clicks, with connection type and responsible person. It is the line check’s working list, and its order matters: the patch is organised around it, rather than vice versa.

The Patch list translates those inputs into physical connections: console channel, stage input, monitor destination and any channel processing. With up-to-date input and patch lists, an artist changeover is resolved in minutes; without them, it is improvised with tape and memory.

From plans to cables

The chain works when each document feeds the next. The survey establishes possible locations; the advance confirms equipment; the stage plot positions; the input list orders; the patch list connects. Breaking that order produces the typical error: cabling from the memory of the last show, then discovering that the console moved because of capacity constraints.

A version rule helps: one master document per event, with a date and editing owner, shared with the venue, rental suppliers and artists. If each department keeps a private copy, line check becomes a negotiation over which is correct.

That document package is also the basis of the next stage: with it, the show-day timeline is built on real data, rather than optimistic estimates.

The review that prevents surprises

Before setup, cross-review helps: someone who did not write the documents reads them looking for contradictions. A stage plot specifying twelve channels and an input list specifying fifteen is a detail costing ten minutes now and an hour on line-check day.

The review includes checking that all three plans use the same terminology, critical distances remain current, and committed equipment is still available. If something changed since the advance — a failed fixture, a withdrawn player — reopen the point and confirm it again in writing.

Preproduction closes with a simple sentence: everything anyone needs to know on show day is written down and has an owner. With that done, setup is simply execution.

Common preproduction mistakes

The failures recur: a survey without photos or access measurements, a rider skimmed in passing, a stage plot drawn by eye, a half-updated input list, and a patch list never updated after a change. Add the people-related error: sending documents to “the venue” without knowing which technician will receive them.

Another classic is designing for the ideal case rather than the real one: insufficient power accounted for, a network without an address plan, or a stage designed without a route for the next changeover. Preproduction exists precisely to force those questions while the plan can still be changed without cost.

Next step

With the documents signed, it is time to specify the infrastructure supporting the system: infrastructure preproduction: power, network, RF, lighting, video and FX details how consumption, networks, frequencies and effects are specified before reserving equipment.