Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Brad Weber]

Sorry that you felt some of the responses were condescending, since most of us don't know you or the project we can only respond to what is presented.  If the project location and your background had been known then the responses may have been much different.
 

Once again coming back to the fundamental of recommending not the only BEST gear for the money, but the best gear for the money and that THEY can operate.

Is the church looking for the best gear or the best system solution?  You seem to be fighting the battle that sometimes occurs by approaching an installed system from the equipment perspective rather than the system and results perspective.
 
What you might want to consider is to start with developing a Program or Needs Analysis.  That is basically a document that defines the needs and goals for the system in terms of the functional, operational, practical and budgetary perspectives.  What does the church want or expect from the new system?  What practical constraints exist or are being placed on the system or installation?  Who is going to operate the system and what is their skill level and experience?  What is the budget?  This should be something where you can sit down with the church representatives and they can understand what is presented so that it can be discussed and modified until you get a document that all parties feel accurately reflects the goals for the project.  The resulting document not only allows the system to be discussed in terms of the factors that typically define a successful result but it also provides a basis for the system design and later for assessing if the results meet what was defined.
 
In fact one reason I often hesitate to provide any specific recommendations in forums is that more often than not there is not enough information presented to make a valid recommendation.  It's easy to recommend something that makes sound and a bit more difficult to recommend something that might make sense but to recommend something that you believe will meet the Owner's expectations requires that those expectations be identified and that information is often not presented (and apparently in some cases not established).
 
The 'Needs Analysis' process would also be an opportunity for your concerns regarding the operators to be addressed.  You could have a discussion with the chuch leadership regarding the system operation and the potential need for a dedicated operator.
 
For the pulpit, they are no longer in production but you might look for a used http://www.sabine.com/sabine-professional-audio/phantom-main.htm.  It uses an IR proximity sensor to turn the microphone on and off so while it won't address muting the headset mic, it might address automatically turning the pulpit microphone on and off.  Some of the other features these products offer might also further help with 'hands off' operation of the pulpit mic.

[Ivan Beaver]

Sorry that you felt some of the responses were condescending, we can only respond to what is presented and since most of us don't know you or the project we can only respond to what is presented.  If the project location and your background had been known then the responses may have been much different.
 Is the church looking for the best gear or the best system solution?  You seem to be fighting the battle that sometimes occurs by approaching an installed system from the equipment perspective rather than the system and results perspective.
 
What you might want to consider is to start with developing a Program or Needs Analysis.  That is basically a document that defines the needs and goals for the system in terms of the functional, operational, practical and budgetary perspectives.  What does the church want or expect from the new system?  What practical constraints exist or are being placed on the system or installation?  Who is going to operate the system and what is their skill level and experience?  What is the budget?  This should be something where you can sit down with the church representatives and they can understand what is presented so that it can be discussed and modified until you get a document that all parties feel accurately reflects the goals for the project.  The resulting document not only allows the system to be discussed in terms of the factors that typically define a successful result but it also provides a basis for the system design and later for assessing if the results meet what was defined.
 
In fact one reason I often hesitate to provide any specific recommendations in forums is that more often than not there is not enough information presented to make a valid recommendation.  It's easy to recommend something that makes sound and a bit more difficult to recommend something that might make sense but to recommend something that you believe will meet the Owner's expectations requires that those expectations be identified and that information is often not presented (and apparently in some cases not established).
 
The 'Needs Analysis' process would also be an opportunity for your concerns regarding the operators to be addressed.  You could have a discussion with the chuch leadership regarding the system operation and the potential need for a dedicated operator.
 

And that is what separates people who "put some old gear in" and people who actually design systems for a specific end result.

Doing installs RIGHT is VERY different than most people think.  It is not just "sticking some speakers on a wall and hooking them up".

You PLAN for a intended coverage-you look for other areas of "problems" that should be addressed-you work WITH the customer to get them the result THEY are looking for/needing.

Of course all of this costs time and money-but is the right approach to get them the result they are looking for.

Just walking into a room and throwing up some speaker and doing a gig is quite a different thing.

The expectations are lower-they don't get to listen to it for years to determine where some coverage issue may be and so forth because tomorrow it is out of there.

[Brad Weber]

At least in my experience, what it comes down to is that with church system installations I've rarely had an Owner complain at the end of the project or consider the results unacceptable as a result of a specific piece of gear, the most common exception probably being if you have to be compatible with existing equipment and aren't.  Instead any complaints or comments regarding unacceptable results usually relate to functional, performance or operational factors.  The system doesn't do something they thought it would, does not operate as they envisioned or doesn't perform as they believed it would.  That is why it is typically so important to define those types of expectations and goals and to do so before getting too far into the system design effort or the selection of specific products.

[Thomasjacob]

Aside from the fact I don't think your design is right for this application, why would you install something you don't want to support?  If you're trying help them out, steer them towards a bonded and insured business that can be responsive in a timely manner.  Churches, due to turn over and non-professional volunteers who think it would fun twist any every knob once a day, need permanent support.  And often. As a business, I would be selling support contract with this install.

Exactly Alexander, even I would agree with Lee. If you're not sure about the installation then what's the use of providing the church with unsecured system.

[eric lenasbunt]

At least in my experience, what it comes down to is that with church system installations I've rarely had an Owner complain at the end of the project or consider the results unacceptable as a result of a specific piece of gear, the most common exception probably being if you have to be compatible with existing equipment and aren't.  Instead any complaints or comments regarding unacceptable results usually relate to functional, performance or operational factors.  The system doesn't do something they thought it would, does not operate as they envisioned or doesn't perform as they believed it would.  That is why it is typically so important to define those types of expectations and goals and to do so before getting too far into the system design effort or the selection of specific products.

+1

The only issue I have ever had with installs in when I installed gear that was more complex then the weekly volunteers could handle. It was my fault for not explaining or demonstrating clearly the level of training needed. The solution was that I "babysat" as you said and then provided volunteer training (beyond what was contracted) free of charge. You only make that mistake once.

I would recommend offering a one or two hour training for the church staff/volunteers as well as clearly labeled equipment and power on/off procedures, etc.

Even with that you will still get phone calls. If you don't want phone calls and babysitting requests then don't do the install. I work that time and energy into the price, because it WILL happen.

[eric lenasbunt]

At least in my experience, what it comes down to is that with church system installations I've rarely had an Owner complain at the end of the project or consider the results unacceptable as a result of a specific piece of gear, the most common exception probably being if you have to be compatible with existing equipment and aren't.  Instead any complaints or comments regarding unacceptable results usually relate to functional, performance or operational factors.  The system doesn't do something they thought it would, does not operate as they envisioned or doesn't perform as they believed it would.  That is why it is typically so important to define those types of expectations and goals and to do so before getting too far into the system design effort or the selection of specific products.

Edited for Tapatalk double post

[Martin Morris]

Not sure if this belongs in "install" or "church" forum...

Anyway, having run PA on a hobby level for many years, I was asked to plan and do a church install.
This is the church in question:



More pics can be seen in the below link:
http://scaniacultura.se/Kyrkor/SodraAsumNyaTxt.html

It is about 28 m / 90 ft from pulpit to rear wall, perhaps 45-50 ft wide, has tile floor and brickwall/plaster walls and ceiling.

I have run my SOS PA there twice and it works well. That rig is 2 Community SLS920 on tripods along with 2 single 12 LF speakers. Powered by QSC PLX and processed through a Behringer DCX 2496.
That setups sounds surprisingly good in this enironment and retains good intelligibility all the way back. Tripods were symmetrically positioned about halfway between altar centre and side walls (in line with the big columns.) The tripods extended about 6ft up, with the 920s on top of that.

The cantor and priest commented how much better our "demo" sounded compared to some recent BOSE Line Array inställs in nearby churches.

My idea is to install an identical rig.
The SLS 920s would have to go wall mounted, the left one hanging with its lower edge between the "roof" of the pulpit and the "fundament" where the arcs from the ceiling domes meet. The right one of course in a mirrored position. The LF boxes would have to be sitting at the floor, next to the wall below the tops. A 16 channel console will be installed at the back of the room.

The PA should support preaching, cantor singing alone and with the choir, smaller concerts with choir, keybord, acoustic guitar, percussion (not drum kit), wind instruments etc. The music is hymns as well as more modern, soft to medium in intensity and SPL, no "Urban gospel" with drum kits and electric guitar etc.

So, what are your ideas? My two main concerns;
The cantor says their two "vergers" (lack of better translation) who today run the current, level only mixer into a dozen "clock radio" speakers are not interested in "technical stuff". Not a good indication...

"Gain Before Feedback" is the other potential problem. You will need to "work the mix" during service in a very different way than they do today.

I am worried I sell them a rig that perform at "Ferrari" level, but that is also as "unforgiving" as a Ferrari.
Example: This install will require muting of headset when someone enters the pulpit (that needs a fixed mike panned to the right.)
They will need to work the EQ for different inputs. They might need to adjust gain as well.

I do not live close, am not a part of the congregation etc and do not want to be supporting this install "permanently".

Your comments are very welcome!

http://audiosystemsgroup.com/3Times.pdf

[jasonfinnigan]

That room may need acoustical treatment as well as a sound system. I would say your first step should be to to put the room into EASE (http://ease.afmg.eu/) and see how it could respond plan your gear and plan of action around that as well as the needs and budget of the church don't just get gear in hopes of it working. That room looks like it has a high potential slapback/being reverberant.

IMO that would likely save the money they spend on having a true systems engineer/installer to come out and do an analysis of the room, design the system and install it, as they money would likely be spent down the road multiple times trying to fix problems with the original install.

[ProSoundWeb Community]