Worship Adventures: Presbyterian part 3: Technology
Now we get to the fun part of the blog: worship technology. As I go through my thoughts on the technology of worship, remember two things. One no where in scripture does it tell us when and where or how we are to use technology and two a lot of technology in worship is opinion. Ask a group of techies about the best way to capture the sound of a piano and you will get an interesting debate! Anyway, on to the technology used by this church.
I noted as I came into the church several things about the church’s use of technology. First I recognized that they have a decent budget set aside for the support of their worship service. This impressed me since I was expecting more of a liturgical style and most liturgical churches aren’t known for their use of sound equipment and other forms of worship technology.
Stage Layout:
The stage had an interesting layout. The stage was divided in half by a table that was set up for the communion service. There were matching podiums on both sides of the stage. On the left side of the stage was a plain white wall that was used for video and the podium was used for preaching only. This could cause a problem if they ever want to project sermon notes or outlines during the sermon However, since this wasn’t used for that purpose, it made for a good layout. I assume they used the two podiums to distinguish between the sermon proper and the laity, but of course this is just a guess. The right side of the stage was crammed packed with the worship team. This created a very lopsided feel to the stage and with the words on the left, it kept your focus off of the worship team when you were singing along.
Sanctuary:
The sanctuary itself was had a tile floor and wooden pews with a small pad on them. The ceiling was a wood panel. This helped to increase both the clarity of the sound (no muffled echoes) and helped increase a congregational feel. You could definitely hear those around you singing and that made you feel more connected to the other worshipers. While there were no muffled echoes, I would be afraid of the crispness of the echoes that would inevitably be there. I didn’t’ see any acoustical treatment. I was impressed by the lack of echoes. I’m not sure how they tamed that beast, but I was impressed.
Sound:
I noticed a line array of speakers dangling from the top center of the sanctuary. This helped you hear everything that was being reinforced very well and very clear. There was a sub-woofer attached to the bottom of the array, though the room probably didn’t need it and the service I was a part of wouldn’t have used it much. The first thing that caught my eye was the three singers who were sharing two large diaphragm condenser microphones. This meant that the singers were free to use their hands which one did on occasion, and the sound was very sweet. I thought it strange that they didn’t opt for dynamic microphones for each of the singers as this has the possibility to create other problems (feedback, bleed over, phase cancellation, etc.) but none of those problems seemed to plague this church. The singers had in-ear monitors though I was unsure if they were wireless or wired. I know the instrumentalists, piano and guitar, had wired in ears. The piano’s lid was closed which made me think that the piano was being miked by a surface mounted or boundary microphone mounted to the top of the lid. This was reinforced by the sound that seemed a little twangy and too bright in certain note ranges on the piano, a common problem with this method of piano miking. However, with the close proximity of the singers and the use of the condenser microphones, I understand why the lid was left down. I’m fairly certain that the guitar was connected to a Direct Box and patched through directly to the soundboard, a very common practice for guitars with a condenser/electronic pickup.The one major fault I had with the setup of this church was the position of the soundboard. The soundboard was in a balcony that was unused by anyone but the tech crew. While this puts the tech stuff out of reach and out of mind, it causes one major problem. The sound engineers can’t hear the same mix as the people in the pews. I would love to have messed with the EQ on the piano and while it may have sounded fine in the balcony box it was a little shrill in the pew where I sat. The speakers used a small condenser microphone attached to the podium for most of the service and while the pastor had one mounted to his podium he had on a Countryman. (oh how I love Countryman mics!)
Video:
I liked the simplicity in the use of video. It was used during songs with white text on a black background. In between songs pictures of pastoral scenes were displayed. There was nothing to distract from the message of the songs. The projector was located on the furthest corner projecting across the entirety of the room. This projector had to be a hoss. I wonder what the lumens on it were and know it to be better than any I’ve messed with lately.
Overall:
I was very impressed with the use of technology at this church. It was there but it was invisible! A wonderful example of how technology can help out a church without being a focus of the church. I was impressed with the quality of all the components that I could see and know that they have spent quite a bit on what they have, but it wasn’t frivolously spent. Everything was well thought out. Whether they have a professional sound designer who attends their church or hired someone to do it for them I am unsure, but I do know they had a high focus on the quality of their sound and the minimization of distractions was a part of that plan. They get four and a half flames out of five for their use of worship technology. The only thing I would do different would be move the soundboard to be able to hear the same mix as the rest of the church. Kudos!
Until next time. Keep the fires burning. The Match
