Upgrading Audio System - where to start?

[mhentges]

Hi all,

After 10 years in our new sanctuary, its time to upgrade our sound system. We're a small church - about 150-200 attend each Sunday's service. Our current setup works OK for the basics - piano, keyboard, vocalist, mics for pastor and reader. With a new music director coming on board, we've been expanding the instruments and number of participants at special services - not a full praise band, but a couple of guitars, woodwinds, brass, but no drums. Not much changes between services - a "special" service has enough lead-time to plan around.

Current issues for us include:

1. Not enough inputs. Our Behringer MX 2642 mixer only has 8 inputs, and plugging/unplugging different connections obviously starts causing problems.
2. No monitors - Keeping more than 2 people in synch during a performance is difficult.
3. Balancing multiple musicians - Its hard to control the sound when we're doing anything more complicated than a single musician and singer.
4. Feedback on stand mics - Too frequently we run into feedback issues on a couple of the mics.
5. We have an all-volunteer lay-person group that runs the sound system - most of us are somewhat technical, but have no experience with running a sound system.

Our current setup is pretty plain - mixer (Behringer MX 2642), amps, Bose PanArray speakers. We have a hearing-impaired wireless output, and a secondary "the rest of the church" feed, besides the main sanctuary. We're sending sound to the computer to record sermons, through a line-out to USB converter.

I'm quite knowledgeable on software/technical subjects, but a real newbie to this world of sound engineering. We have so far received a recommendation to purchase a Mackie 2404-VLZ3 board, and Galaxy HotSpot PA6S monitors. After reading lots of posts here, and doing other research, I'm now considering the Allan & Heath PA20 or PA28 as well.

Obviously funds are limited, and we need to get the most bang for the buck that we can. But I'm a firm believer that the best value lies in quality products - its always cheaper in the long run to do it right the first time. I'd love to hear any suggestions on a strategy for upgrading our system. Are we looking at the right products? Is there something else we should be looking at?

Thanks,

Mike.

[Tim Padrick]

I'd go with a MixWiz in lieu of the other mixers you mentioned.

Even with a good 1/3 octave or parametric EQ, I don't think you'll find the HotSpots to be very good vocal monitors. The Yamaha 12" are a good value.

[Cliff]

Current issues for us include:
1. Not enough inputs. Our Behringer MX 2642 mixer only has 8 inputs, and plugging/unplugging different connections obviously starts causing problems.

How many channels do you need? Figure that out and add extra, remember that you may need 2 channels for split track cassette tapes (and C.d.'s)
Allan & Heath is a good brand.


2. No monitors - Keeping more than 2 people in synch during a performance is difficult.

Many churches are very reverberant and much of the sound will come from the main speakers, especially without drums and a smaller stage/church. Set house sound first then bring up monitor level as needed.
How many will you need? What size stage, how many people?

3. Balancing multiple musicians - Its hard to control the sound when we're doing anything more complicated than a single musician and singer.

Can you explain this? why?

4. Feedback on stand mics - Too frequently we run into feedback issues on a couple of the mics.

A house EQ properly set up. And sweepable mids on the channel eq are helpful for feedback reduction. Also proper mic use and location of speakers and mics is important.

4. We have an all-volunteer lay-person group that runs the sound system - most of us are somewhat technical, but have no experience with running a sound system.

You need training, You can have the best system in the wronge hands and it will sound awfull, whereas a good operator can make a mediocre system sound it's best.

[Brad Weber]

Cliff seems on the right track, you've provided good information on what some of the problems you're experiencing are but can you go the next step to defining your goals and expectations? And can you tell us anything more about the current setup, for example in relation to the feedback, where are the mics and audience relative to the speakers, what mics are you using and how are you using them?

One of the common factors is just how significant of changes are practical, so do you have a specific budget and/or scope of the changes envisioned? You mentioned a new mixer and some monitors but those seem likely to address two of your five point and then only if accompanied by some additional items (cables, stands for the monitors, etc.). Are you thinking reassessing the entire existing system is in order or are you more along the lines of just a couple pieces of equipment?

You mentioned having difficulty balancing the sources and that you have sources such as guitars, woodwinds and brass. You also mentioned an attendance of 150-200. Is part of that problem due to the feedback issue also noted? Might it be an acoustical issue, as in some instruments simply being too loud or feeling that they have to play louder?

On the skills and experience of the operators, there are some educational and training resources available but often the best approach when you have volunteer operators with limited time available is to find someone from another area church who might be willing to help you and offer some 'hands on' training on your system.

[cmchamp]

Welcome Mike
Something simple needs to be addressed. No amount of electronic technology will "cure" an acoustics related issue due to the physical properties of the space.
You are correct in your premise that it's "cheaper in the long run to do it right the first time."
I sing in many "small" churches with congregations of 150-200, even less, and can envision some of the possible acoustical issues in a space initially designed for a more traditional service with few "reinforced" sources other than speech.
It is my experience that a Bose™ Panaray (402/502) will not provide the pattern control necessary for a high volume live event with multiple open microphones. We have 502's at my church, and I deal with this misapplication every Easter for our annual drama. This year, possibly 20+ open microphones at a time, though most head-worn, I will have several choir mics and boundary type mics open as well.
We can make recommendations on pretty much all gear till we get to the speakers. At that point, more information about the physical space, heigth, width, depth measurements, location of present speakers, chancel (stage) depth and orientation, will be required to provide any proper guidance.
C.

[mhentges]

Hi again,

Thanks for all the feedback - makes me feel better that the response wasn't as simple as "just buy X, Y, and Z in this order and you'll be all better".

As I've dug into this, and based on the feedback here, I'm pretty sure that everything in our sound system will need "refreshing". But, I don't think we'll be able to do that as a single event - I'm envisioning a 3-5 year plan. If we could find a way to invest $1k to $2k per year in improvements, I think we'd be doing pretty well. Maintaining a consistent strategy and momentum over that time will be the challenge - and showing incremental improvement along the way will be key to doing that.

I may have over-stated the feedback issues - it's really a couple of fixed mics mounted on podiums that cause us trouble, I don't think they are isolated from vibrations well enough - and we don't have trouble with other mics in similar locations (wireless lapel or headset mics, or hand-held wired mics work in these locations).

Our sound mixing issues are probably a combination of not setting the board right, and not having enough mics on different instruments to allow levels to be independent. If we have a couple of unamplified brass instruments, they can drown out the piano (even though the piano is mic'd) - and trying to get a couple of guitars mixed in there is rough.

Since what we have works OK for 80+% of our services, covering piano, vocalist, pastor, and readers, I can't justify throwing it all out and starting over. At least not in one big bang. For the other 20%, it seemed to us that getting a larger mixer would at least allow us to get everything connected and set, without rewiring or having people unplug and "pass the wire" during a service. At least at that point I feel we would have a chance at putting together something that could work.

The monitors were next, in part because I experienced first-hand trying to keep up with the musical director while watching my fingers fumble their way through a few chords - and I can't hear what he's playing. I don't know how he and the pianist do as well as they do!

Past that, it gets a lot harder for me. Cmchamp's comments on acoustics are dead on - I'm sure our squarish room with a vaulted ceiling, with the performance area the first 10' of the room in a corner, isn't doing us any favors. I'm sure our speakers were chosen more for their ability to amplify the spoken word, not for playing back a "band".

I guess that leaves me with the question - are we doing anything dumb? Are there alternatives we should be considering as we begin this journey? Can we make the pieces we are adding fit into a general improvement plan? Is there someplace we should look at first (or next)?

I'll have to follow up on actual physical dimensions - I'd guess a single room 80'x100', with a slanted ceiling that goes from 9' at the outside to 20' in the middle. All drywall construction with very few soft spots on walls. 2 speakers 10'-15' from the short wall, hung from the ceiling. Piano and any other instruments get stuffed into the corner up front.

Thanks again for all your input.

Mike.

[Cliff]

I just did this with the previous church I was at then moved and will likely end up doing it again here.

I will share my experience with you and perhaps you can get something from it.

First what I did wronge. I should have put training at the top of my list, I did not. The skill of the operator is perhaps the biggest factor in the sound sounding good. Why spend 5-10 thousand on a system and not a few dollars on training someone to run it? We will spend $200 on this or that gadget, but yet do not do so for training.

Now what I did right . Right being right for us with our level of expectation & budget.

The mixer. We went with the Yamaha 32/14fx. For us this represented the best bang for the buck. Yes it is not as highly regarded as the Allen & Heath, not as highly priced too! We needed at least 16 sliders. Be careful some boards have "stereo channels" for tape decks, CD players & such. So they will say they have 32 channels but actually only have 28 sliders or something like that. We could have got the 24/14fx but the 32 was only $200 more and the guys felt we should get it.

Speakers. We built or own. We had them designed for us, the woofers and tweeters were spec'ed, and we built the boxes and wired them up. I was a cabinet maker/carpenter so I was comfortable doing this. This represented quite a savings for us. We decided on a "line Array" style speaker with 6-8" woofers and 12 ( I think) Tweeters on each side. We had tested a line array speaker and found in our space it gave us even coverage. Way better than 2 regular speakers did.

Monitors. We were going to build our own, did not get to it before I moved so they still use one ancient bad sounding Peavey. We were going to run 2-4 monitors. And possibly a Headphone system for drums, Guitars & Bass. using a rolls Headphone amp. They have one where you can mix 6 inputs, or ones that have a 'more me' function.

Microphones - We went cheap The Behringer XM1800S is a three pack for $60 these are not top of the line but not bad at all. We decided to use these because of bang for the buck. Also if one got dropped by a kid or something no big deal, if the mic cost $500 then it would be a problem. We tried them side by side with SM58's and found them very similar, a little brighter sounding and a little hotter (Less gain needed). Because of the brightness I did not like them with some female vocals. And had I stayed I would have added a couple of other mics, Audix

House Eq - We went with the art Dual 31 band, did both monitors and mains. Again bang for the buck and staying in budget.

Amps - Behringer, this is another of the Behringer products that seems to be Ok (Many do not like their gear).

We were also looking at a new headset mic for the pastor, better headphones for the operator. Things like this can easily be added after.

Not saying all our equipment was top of the line but it di work excellent for our needs. The only thing I wish I could have done before I left was to get someone in to set the house EQ.

[SLJ Audio]

I would also look at a SAC rig. It is not expensive and expandable. (made in USA)

[Cliff]

We looked into SAC also. Actually it did fit in the same budget, was more flexible.
Only downside was using a computer interface. Some people will find this awkward.

[Brad Weber]

Originally Posted by SLJ Audio

I would also look at a SAC rig. It is not expensive and expandable. (made in USA)

What is "made in USA"? SAC is simply software and one of the potential benefits of it is not being tied to specific hardware. You might be able to put together a SAC system where everything was made in the USA, but you could probably also put one together where the software is the only thing that was "made" in the USA.

I think the comment "We have an all-volunteer lay-person group that runs the sound system - most of us are somewhat technical, but have no experience with running a sound system." may be important. If that means people who are computer and network savvy, and maybe even some with home studio or similar experience, then a SAC system may be a good choice, although the "no experience with running a sound system" could still be a challenge as far as initially configuring the system. But if it means something else then SAC may be a less attractive option.


On a more general level, I think some of the comments offered are very enlightening as they address the basic, and critical, issue of expectations. Equipment and results that meet or exceed one set of expectations may be totally unacceptable for a different set of expectations. Defining what results may meet, exceed or fail someone's expectations is often the most difficult aspect to assess, especially in forum environments and can affect just about every aspect of a system.

While it may take some back and forth, the functionality aspect of expectations is typically easier to ascertain, however I find that a bit of 'reading between the lines' is often involved especially in terms of qualitative expectations. For example, your only comment on the exiting Behringer MX 2642 mixer has been that is has insufficient inputs, which leads me to assume that it works for you in general, you just need more input capacity. That may be an insight into some of your expectations.

[[Director] drew ryan]

Another insight to the needs is the fact that the lectern mics are what cause the most feedback. So, either the room needs a bit more tuning, or the mics need a little more defined EQ.

[Frank DeWitt]

Originally Posted by Cliff

We looked into SAC also. Actually it did fit in the same budget, was more flexible.
Only downside was using a computer interface. Some people will find this awkward.

I use a SAC mixer but I wouldn't want to use it with just a computer interface. I run it with 16 faders, and dedicated real buttons for mute, solo, and wide mixer selection. I also have dedicated buttons to bring up a max of 24 scenes. Some run it with a computer interface but many like real faders and buttons.

Frank