Catching up

I'm having to self-discipline myself (is that bad grammar?) lately to produce new podcasts, but I can start to feel it (whatever "it" is) coming back. Plans in the works for all new episodes, including some interviews. Stay tuned. Episode 10 now available.

New Podcasts going up

After a month and half worth of break, I'm resuming the podcasts. You can download them here, at Switchpod or on itunes. If someone would comment as to format I would consider single song episodes that would be easy to cherry pick from... we'll see..

FCC update

Shamelessly heisted from another blog:

Fellow CSC member Doug Gould (from Shure) has requested that we get this
information into your hands right away. This is an update from the message we
sent a few days ago, and has more complete information on how YOU can help
with this fight for wireless microphones.

===================================

On November 4th, the FCC plans to change the rules that govern the use of
wireless microphones and other wireless audio equipment. The new rules may
make it impossible for you to continue using wireless microphones as you do
today, and your entire inventory of wireless equipment may become obsolete within
months.

The current deadline to send comments to the FCC on this issue is Monday,
October 27th. It is critical that you act immediately to tell the FCC and your
legislators that these changes are unacceptable to you.

Background

The FCC is reorganizing the UHF television band, coinciding with the
transition from analog to digital television broadcasting. Soon, TV stations will
occupy a smaller section of the UHF spectrum because digital stations can be
spaced more closely together - even on adjacent channels - without interfering
with each other. There will still be unoccupied channels in every market -
referred to as "White Spaces" - just as there are now.

Why does this matter to you? These "White Spaces" are used by wireless
microphones and instrument systems, in-ear monitors, and production intercom
systems. Beginning on February 18, 2009, the FCC plans to allow consumer
wireless devices - mobile phones, BlackBerry's, etc. - to access the internet using
the same frequencies currently used by wireless audio equipment.

These devices can cause catastrophic interference if operated on the same
frequency as wireless audio devices. The effect on a wireless microphone could
be decreased range (perhaps to as little as 10 feet), an increase in the
number and severity of audio dropouts, or even complete interruption of the
signal. Tests have also proven that White Space devices can interfere with DTV
reception and even cable TV signals.

Two Channels Are Not Enough

Shure has proposed that the FCC set aside eight 'protected' TV channels (2
in the VHF band and 6 in the UHF band) in each market, in which unlicensed
wireless microphones could operate without interference from White Space
devices. The devices would check an online database and avoid transmitting on the
channels that are 'protected'. The problem: the FCC plans to set aside only
TWO TV channels for unlicensed wireless mics - and they won't reveal where
they are in the spectrum. Two TV channels (12 MHz of spectrum) would only be
enough for four to ten wireless microphones - less if other wireless mic users
are nearby. This is insufficient for many users.

Tests Say "No", But The FCC Says "Go"

For wireless microphones operating outside of the two 'protected' channels,
the FCC proposes to use a technology known as "spectrum sensing." This would
require White Space devices to detect DTV stations and wireless audio
equipment and avoid transmitting on the frequencies that they are using. The FCC's
own tests have demonstrated that this technology often fails to detect that
a wireless microphone is present, even at very short distances. The problem:
the FCC plans to allow new devices that rely on spectrum sensing anyway.

No Clear Plan For Large-Scale Users

In situations where many wireless audio devices are in use, several open TV
channels may be required. The FCC has proposed that users would need to
register in an online database that would include the event location and
duration. The problem: the FCC has not revealed who would have access to this
database. Many types of wireless users could be locked out.

The FCC Needs to Hear From You

The FCC needs to hear from wireless users, installers, and resellers that
sufficient protection for wireless microphones is essential. Contact the FCC
and your Congressional representatives directly, using one of the links below.
Tell them how important wireless audio equipment is to your organization's
activities. If you are a performer or producer, tell them how it will affect
your performance or content. If you are an installer or reseller, tell them
how this will impact your business.

========

NARAS The National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences
Go here to go to the NARAS Advocacy page, which allows you to find your U.S.
Representatives and Senators by entering your zip code.
http://capwiz.com/grammy/home/

========

NAMM The National Association of Music Merchants
Go here to send a letter to the FCC specifically stating the interests of
the music equipment industry.
http://www.namm.org/publicaffairs/action-alerts/protect-live-music

========

INFOCOMM http://www.infocomm.org
The Audiovisual (AV) Association To express your support for Infocomm's
letter to the FCC representing the interests of AV equipment dealers and
installers, go to www.infocomm.org

========

Shure Incorporated Go here for instructions on how to file a comment with
the FCC, and a direct link to the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System.
http://www.shure.com/stellent/groups/public/@gms_gmi_web_us_pro/documents/web_
resource/us_pro_pr_ws_brief_filing.pdf

A basic, must-have, tool for the church soundman

Number One on my list:
a decibel meter, manufactured for, and sold by, of all places, Radio Shack.

I actually have the "old school" version with an actual VU meter instead of this nifty LCD display model. The principle is still the same, however, acceptable sound pressure levels, (SPL's) can physically be measured. While things like tolerance, enjoyment and annoyance are very subjective and at best a moving target, and actual physical output level is not. Even if you are not trained or even acquainted with the various technical terms or scientific equations, you can still take a reading. At it's simplest form, if the number on the display is "100" and this "feels" too loud for your room or your situation, then it probably is.

Sound nerds will talk about the value of "A" weighting vs "C" weighting, a selectable option on the meter. To a certain extent, it's simply a matter of preference, but to explain it simply:
"A" weighting selected on the meter measures the SPL's of primarily middle and upper frequencies, or, the ones that hurt the most. "C" weighting measures a wider range of frequencies, extending down to the low end frequencies, as low as 90-100 hz, or typically bass notes. A measurement of 104 db C weighted will likely correspond to about 92 or 93 on A weighted. (You can check that out and correct me if you'd like).

The bottom line is this- rather than beating your head against the wall from week to week, it is possible to arrive at an average SPL level that is agreed upon by the interested parties, or at least the parties with the most influence. Our senior pastor at our church has "signed off" on approximately 92 db A weighted, or an average of 102, 103 db C weighted. Our church, as a part of our history and culture, plays a mix of contemporary praise songs, Black Gospel, traditional hymns, and original songs. The approximate length of our church from the back wall of the choir loft to the back pew where I stand (aka Front of the House) is about 96 feet.

My concept when setting the overall level of volume for Sunday worship services has changed over the years, and may be the subject of further articles. But for now, let me say this: my personal goal is to convey the energy and excitement coming from the stage, all the way to the back of the room. High energy music should be played with high level SPL's. This engages the entire audience. People who stand in the last four rows of pews, who have limited vision when the entire congregation is standing anyway, should not be asking themselves, "what's going on?", or be able to carry on a separate conversation while Worship is supposed to be happening. Now, some people might interpret this to mean that I am trying to beat the congregation into submission by overwhelming them with volume- and I must admit, I grin a little at that idea. But it's not the point at all.

The point for me is, the worship team and the musicians are (hopefully) playing their hearts out, and doing so for EVERYONE. That includes the people that come in late, the large groups of visitors all forced to sit together, the people who just have no place left to sit and end up on folding chairs in the narthex.

Over the years I have fielded both criticism and praise for my mix, including, I suppose the volume levels. Suprisingly, no one has ever said to me by way of praise, "Wow, great SPL level today", but rather, "Great mix", or "Nice work". Conversely, the critics have only one thing to say: "Too Loud". I always ask them to specify WHICH specific thing was to loud... the bass? The drums? The organ? The "Too Loud" comment is never directed at any one thing, it only has to do with "overall" volume. But seriously, the critics are outnumbered 10 to 1. This is not because I'm the greatest engineer in the world, but rather because I think we have finally found consistency in our sound. Control of the stage level, and therefore control of the overall room, is how we obtain this consistency. And this leads to me to the next indispensable tool in our tech arsenal: The Aviom system. In our next episode.

Outline for Urban Worship Symposium Tech Clinic

Tech Clinic Outline

How do we achieve consistency and excellence in our worship?

1) Worship Committee
2) Talent pool
3) constant and stable tech enviroment

What does a "constant and stable tech environment" bring to the worship?

1) A stress-free environment for the talent pool
a. things happen when they are supposed to happen
b. nothing bad happens
2) creative freedom and spontaneity
a. spontaneity should not be defined as "changing microphones because one didn't work"
b. creative freedom is born out of comfort and confidence
c. musical performance is affected and changes with the environment
d. pastor can wake up on Sunday and add a slideshow to the sermon

What are the tools that we use on a regular basis to create this "stable tech environment"?

1) Radio Shack db meter
-discussion of SPL levels, the threshold of pain, and the threshold of annoyance
-most churches could afford this tool
- live demo

2) Yamaha M7CL
- why we chose to go digital
- the pros and cons
- live demo

3) Splitter system and stage boxes

4) Aviom system
- why we chose to go "in-ears"
- the pros and cons
- why we chose to clear out the amplifiers
- how this affects the sound in the sanctuary and how it affects the Yamaha

5) The V-drums, and why we chose them

6) Projectors, screens and switchers- and all things Text

Marcos Witt - En Los Montes

A rock and roll legend lives on at New City Fellowship

At the beginning of this year we installed a Helpinstill Piano pickup.

The Helpinstill history goes back to the 1970s with piano rockers turned living legends Billy Joel, Elton John when a loud, present piano sound was needed in the PA. The problem with miking piano's has always been that the ambient sound of the band was far louder than the natural sound of the piano, making it difficult to place microphones in such a way that the necessary isolation was obtained. So Charles Helpinstill had a different idea: what if you didn't use a microphone at all. The piano pickup was born.

You can see a picture of the pickup in our 5' grand at New City Fellowship at the bottom of this page. It takes a little time to get the balance of the three bars correct, and, we've experienced some noise issues when a keyboard is on top of the piano, BUT it is by far the best piano sound that we've had, replacing the British "C-tape" as my piano amplification method of choice.

More New City Fellowship music I've recorded

We Sing your prais...

Other Tech blogs

In the spirit of collaboration and shameless self-promotion, I offer the following link-baits. My newly-created quasi-tech blog is not a new idea. There are other church and worship oriented websites offering information and resources. Faith Tools.Net is the companion site to the Faithtools podcast, which is one of the first related podcasts that I found on I-tunes when researching for this blog.

Church Tech Arts is a very well done blog with lots of links to other church tech websites. Probably the model for my little blog.

Going to 11 has a great tag line: "Making Church Sound "1" Louder". The Spinal Tap reference is undeniable and a hat's off to all Pro Sound/Church/Church Sound guys. To attempt to further explain the ironic twist of this: the relative "loudness" of any given church service would be the high on the list of day-to-day aggravations and concerns of any Sound Deacon, and, I'd be willing to venture, the downfall of more than one.

Anyway, I've enjoyed reading these blogs and will post the links in the sidebar. Hopefully some day I'll earn the return favor.

How can I keep from singing?

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

What's a Sound Deacon?

Are you the "sound system deacon" at your church? Were you elected to that post, or did you volunteer? As it turns out, some of us were called to be "sound deacons".

I got my start while I was still in college. I suddenly became re-interested in music, bought a bass guitar, joined a band, and then proceeded to find out that I was very interested in running the soundboard for the band. This gave me a position of some status, because virtually no one else was interested in standing in the back at the mixer while everyone else got to be in the band.

While in college, I joined a church that had a praise band that included electric bass and drums and an exciting "contemporary" worship style. I introduced myself to "Bob", who was standing behind the mixing board and volunteered my services. He was happy to have me relieve him every other week or so. That was in 1988. At the time the congregation was borrowing space to meet every week, which meant that everything had to be brought in to the room, and set up every week. This included a portable sound system that had it's own rolling case, speakers on stands, about 3 microphones, and so on. It all packed together and rolled away into a closet, along with about 300 chairs, at the end of every service.

Our church finally acquired it's own property from another church that was dissolving. When we moved in, we basically retro-fit the 1950's colonial style room with all of band equipment and the portable sound system became a permanent sound system. The music director, in his administrative capacity, made sure mixing duties were evenly divided between all the volunteers. That was me and "Bob".

"Bob" left the church a few years later. He left without saying goodbye to me. He just handed his key to the music director, who immediately handed it to me and said, "You're it". According to the music director, "Bob" had "had it" and was tired of the "hassle". I have always suspected that "Bob" was tired of a young know-it-all like me coming in and changing the EQ every Sunday.

It's 2008 now, and 20 years later I'm still standing in the back of the church. Many changes have taken place, both in our congregation, and in the world of technology. The largest change, however, has probably been in my heart.

I've gone through many phases in those 20 years, and struggled at times with my own attitude on Sunday morning. Generally speaking, the "sound guy" is often the first one at the church and one of the last to leave. For the large part, it's not a paid position. The job is under-appreciated and not very visible. After all, we do stand in the back! I have felt misunderstood, criticized, and taken for granted at times when I felt I was pouring all my energy into my efforts. At other times I have been passive and apathetic, showing up at 7:45 am Sunday morning and performing perfunctorily. Some weeks I wish that I church sound was my full-time job. I could not imagine anything better than to make a living in a church setting, especially if it was my church!

For must of us, though, money and fame are not why we started volunteering in the first place. While I hesitate to call what I do a "ministry", I understand one that one common usage of that word means that we do what we are ABLE to do, in the service of the Lord. Performing a technical service for a body of believers is serving the Lord, not some menial or perfunctory task.
Our church has grown from a small close-knit community church meeting in borrowed space to a large,urban church with a large staff, two Sunday morning services, multiple buildings, and a very strong community outreach program. Technology and media have begun to become commonplace in our church, and weekly events require use of all of our equipment and resources. The need for staff in place capable of handling the tech needs and providing equipment and engineering services has increased steadily. Volunteers, while being well-intentioned, may not have all the skills necessary to perform each task. Additional administrative duties become necessary to keep track of the event calendar and all the requests from various departments.

As I stand at the back of the church on Sunday morning, I am faced with the challenge of the growth and development of the Tech Department, and I sometimes believe I am alone in my efforts. Technology and equipment needs are oftened relagated to the bottom of the priority list, below of host of ministry and outreach projects. Many times, the sound of the morning worship service may go unnoticed- unless something goes wrong. If you are the person in charge of the sound system at your church, you have experienced this yourself more than once.

The struggle that I deal with every week is one every sound deacon faces- how to do an important job without developing an over-inflated sense of self-importance. This requires humility and grace. The change in my heart did not happen overnight, and in fact I resigned for a couple of years, and then returned. Worship services did not grind to a halt, despite my absence. The lesson that I learned was that instead of despite all of my best efforts to prove otherwise, God was still in control of the sound, the music, the worship and that He calls some people to preach, and others to turn the microphone on.

When I realized that I had been called to this service, I became the Sound Deacon.

Another article not by me

It Takes Three: The Silly Decisions Churches Make With Sound Systems
I could write a book on the subject of sound for churches. Unfortunately, it would have to start with stories about bad sound, and two good friends of mine published this very thing a few years ago. The book is titled “If Bad Sound Were Fatal, Audio Would Be The Leading Cause Of Death,” by Don and Carolyn Davis, founders of one of the world’s leading audio education organizations, Syn-Aud-Con. The book is entertaining and offers a host of true stories, including many of which are historical in nature, taken directly from the lives of these two extraordinary people.

The sad truth is that while bad sound in churches is not literally killing people (thank goodness!), it does put them to sleep. In psychological education, there is the study of what has come to be known as psychoacoustics. It delves into the way the ear works in conjunction with the brain – not only how sounds that enter the ear canal get to the brain, but also, how the brain then processes these (now) electrical signals into meaningful “data” that a person can understand.

An even more detailed study of the science of psychoacoustics reveals how the brain works its way around hearing deficiencies, background noise and other audible annoyances. While the brain is very forgiving of bad sound, enough of it in high doses eventually forces the brain to ignore the input or even shut down.

How many times have you heard a pastor or other person speaking say, “I see someone snoozing?” Of course, for the person in the pulpit, this is a truly annoying thing, and it conjures up all sorts of subconscious thoughts: “Am I that boring? Is my message over their heads? What’s wrong with them? I’ve prepared well and am delivering well, but there they go, nodding off again.”

But the cause of sleeping in church (or other public gatherings) doesn’t have much if anything to do with the person speaking. Nor does it mean that many in the audience were out way too late the night before, or that they didn’t drink enough coffee that morning.

Nope - many times the sleeping can be directly attributed to the quality of the sound system being used to amplify the voices. A lousy system triggers an outward portrayal of the confusion that is being caused in the brain by material that is being poorly delivered to the ears of the listeners. When a high enough level of psychoacoustic confusion has been met, the mind simply moves elsewhere, likely to daydreaming or sleep.

JUST ONE YEAR IN
Not so long ago, I attended a Sunday worship service held in a classic church sanctuary, in order to evaluate the room’s sound system at the request of a church member. Within just one year of opening, there were far too many complaints about audio quality to ignore.

Turns out that the building’s architect had recommended a local “not-so-good” (and now out of business) sound contracting firm to work with the facility’s electrical contractor and the church committee to implement the sanctuary sound system. It is what we shall now term “Sound System Number 1.”

Some of you might know where this is going…

This system was compromised from the outset due to the location of a large, beautiful cross, lovingly built by a parishioner. The cross location was deemed unchangeable, and thus, the only saving grace would have been for a quality sound contracting firm to stand firm and argue for a different sound system design to work around the obstacle. Unfortunately, this didn’t happen, because the contractor was only interested in turning a quick and highly profitable job.

After sitting through a service, I must say it was truly one of the worst sounding systems I’ve ever heard. As Don and Carolyn might say, it should have killed me on the spot.

I left with virtually no memory of what the pastor had said.

In preparing my written evaluation, I waited until mid-week and finally composed a detailed analysis of the system, and sent this along with a two-page cover letter, the gist of which said, “the only correction to your system that will work is to tear it out, throw it away, and start over, using a competent sound contractor.” And I recommended three.

Did they follow my recommendation, which, by the way, they paid me to provide? The answer, sadly, was no.

Instead, they went back to the original contractor and told him of my concerns. He confidently replied that he could fix the system, and at a price of “just” $35,000. Of course they took him up on his “generous” offer – the classic good money after bad scenario.

COBBLED TOGETHER
Several years later, I ended up becoming a member of this particular church. By then, they had moved on to “Sound System Number 2” – a truly cobbled together thing, done with the help of a different contractor and the “input” of several church members. Just to complicate matters a bit further, an audio equipment manufacturer was also directly in the mix.

You guessed it - another bad system design. In most of the seats, one can either hear the loudspeakers before they hear the person speaking, or vice versa. Add in some regular doses of feedback, distortion and other quirks, and it’s a fine mess. One that cost more than $80,000, by the way.

You probably know the rest of the story.

Currently, the church is in the evaluation process for “Sound System Number 3.” While that process continues, the only thing I can tell you for sure is that my wife and I are always certain to arrive very early, in order to sit in the few seats where sound is delivered without the “bonus” of psychoacoustic fatigue. When we look around during services, we see at least a dozen folks sitting in the “worst seats,” and invariably, they’re dozing off.

Pastors, friends, sound system operators – can you now better understand why so many people are taking a nap during worship services? It rarely has anything to do with what’s being said, but everything to do with how it’s being heard.

Or not.

Charlie Moore has been involved in management positions at various professional audio manufacturers and large installation contractors for more than 35 years. He also has first-hand experience in live mixing, system design and installation and has been active as a volunteer in a number of church sound system operations.

Here's a good first article.... not by me....

Five Audio Myths
Common misconceptions about working with audio contractors.
By Jerry Horn

Church leaders often make poor decisions about sound systems and about working with professional audio contractors because their underlying assumptions are false. Throughout this article, we will dispel the five most common myths.

Myth #1:
A church sound system is like a home stereo system, only bigger.
Size is not the only difference between home stereo components and a speaker system for an auditorium. To believe that a worship center is no different than a large living room is an invitation for disappointment. Even the smallest church auditoriums are large enough to be considered commercial venues.

Home-use audio equipment will not hold up to the rigors of commercial use. Professional equipment may seem to cost more at the outset, but it saves money in the long run because it lasts longer. Buying equipment from a local electronics superstore and expecting it to have long-term durability in a live sound environment is a surefire recipe for disaster.

Myth #2:
We'll save money by not involving an audio contractor.
As church leaders considering a sound system project, you are probably not sure if the money spent on hiring an audio contractor will be money well spent. After all, it might be possible for your staff or volunteers to do all the work and make all the right decisions. If you're right about this, you save some money. But if you're wrong, the consequences can be very costly.

"Most systems today involve many coordinated systems that must interface with each other to work properly," says John Fuqua, co-director of system contracting for All Pro Sound. "My concern here is that we see so many churches that are sold bits and pieces or some equipment that may not be the right gear for the application. We have been called in many times after this has happened and the client ends up spending more or doing more work than if we had been involved from the start."

Fuqua doesn't rule out the possibility of a church tackling an audio project on its own. "It depends on the size of the project, the technical expertise of the church staff, and the complexity of the work," he says. But with the involvement of a competent consultant or contractor at the start of a project, churches will avoid costly mistakes.

Myth #3:
With new construction, it's best to wait until the architect's plans are completed before involving an audio system contractor.
The best time to select an audio contractor is before any plans have been put to paper. Unfortunately, many churches avoid talking about technical needs until the very last minute, often relegating the sound system to last place in the budget discussions. Regrettably, that is one of the biggest and most costly mistakes that any church can make.

Acoustics, room dimensions, ceiling elevation, building materials, special architectural features, and other variables determine the type and scope of equipment that will be needed to accomplish your goals. Involving an audio contractor early will save you money. Churches frequently incur additional costs because the original plans did not adequately address the issue of room acoustics.

For example, I once belonged to a church where the exterior roof elevation had to be completely changed after an acoustic engineer suggested that the architect's original design would be an acoustical nightmare. Had the acoustic engineer been involved at the outset, the original roof design would not have been proposed, and, thus, the expense of a second set of plans would have been saved.

Myth #4:
It's impossible to evaluate a contractor's work until the job is complete.
This is simply not true. As leaders, you need to fully evaluate your contractor before hiring them. "Selecting an audio contractor should be based on the experience and reputation of the contractor, the number of similar size and scope projects they have done, their status in the industry, and how they respond," says Fuqua. "All a contractor can offer is service. If they are a full line dealer, then equipment cost should be competitive. Check some references and be sure the contractor has the ability to provide complete results for your project."

Myth #5:
The best way to save money on a sound system is to contract with the lowest bidder.
Think about it. The main reason that sound systems exist in worship centers is to enhance communication by making the spoken word more intelligible. And yet, many building committees shortchange the selection process by cutting the audio budget. The problem is that the committee does not recognize the importance of the audio system.

If you need open-heart surgery, you won't select a cardiologist based on price. Instead, you would ask your trusted family physician to recommend a highly skilled, experienced surgeon, regardless of price. When the results are more important than the money potentially saved, price is not a determining factor.

Shouldn't the church have the same attitude when it comes to equipping the house of God? The first priority in selecting an audio contractor should be professional experience. Yes, cost is important—but it should never take precedence over quality. The idea that price shopping for a sound system will save money is valid only if you are willing to settle for second best.

Depending on the size and complexity of your venue, prices for installed systems generally start at around $15,000-$20,000 for a basic system. Fuqua states that there is no "cookie-cutter" approach to designing a sound system for church use. While some factors may be similar, every church and every building is unique.

In estimating costs, an ongoing dialogue with the contractor is essential. First, ask your contractor for a ballpark figure. Then, talk to the key decision makers in your church and go back to your contractor and tell him how much money you can spend. Then let him make recommendations based on your needs and available monies. If you find yourself in a situation where your budget will not cover all your needs and desires, an honest contractor will make alternate suggestions.
Copyright © 2005 by the author or Christianity Today, Inc./Your Church magazine.
Click here for reprint information on Your Church.
January/February 2005, Vol. 51, No. 1, Page 24

The Sound Deacon

This is a new idea of mine... The Sound Deacon. A blog and podcast about technology in worship, my experience as sound engineer in the church, and my own personal theories, opinions and resources.