"Bob Howes" <bob.howes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message news:SOhMj.1164$ko5.191@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> There are similarities in style between church and
> theatre work but also some major differences.
> I suspect the biggest of these is that you work each week
> in your "own" facility;
True, for better or worse. In my case, far worse.
> While there have been some
> theatres that I've worked in more regularly than others,
> I've done enough tours that I've worked in literally
> hundreds of different theatres, each with their own
> acoustic issues to work round.
The absolutely worst theatre I've ever been in, in my life was acoustic
heaven compared to where I work. If you've never worked in a traditional
church, you just don't know how bad it can be. Ours is worse than most.
> Similarly, while you have an installed system that
> remains pretty constant; occasionally I can use the
> installed system in a theatre but, more often than not,
> each show has it's own system which is taken into the
> theatre, rigged, used, then removed at the end of the
> run.
Yes, but its a room that was designed for the purpose, no matter how
badly.
You also have some latitude about where your speakers are located.
> A third difference (and a favourite of mine) is the need
> for sound effects.
In church, drama includes sound effects. The last drama we did, I ended up
having to record and produce all of the sound effects.
Many church dramas are cantatas - a musical drama. So, not only do you
have
SFX to mix with the spoken word ****tions, but all of the instrumental
parts
may be pre-recorded and therefore cued from recordings and by their nature
very inflexible.
> You're right that we have the luxury
> of scripts and rehearsals but, on some shows at least,
> there can be hundreds of different effects requiring
> precise timing and often very specific routings to
> dedicated speakers so the effect comes from the correct
> direction. Personally, I find creating these effects is
> a very satisfying part of the job...but adding this
> playback onto the mixing of live mics makes for a busy
> time!
The good news is that church dramas are relatively short compared to a
stage
play or musical. Maybe 40 minutes. That means that we only had to hit
about
40 cues for the last cantata. But like you said - a busy time.
> You mention the proscenium arch and, while it's true that
> the majority of shows are done this way, I've also mixed
> shows on thrust stages, traverse style, in-the-round and
> even an outdoor "promenade" production of Shakespeare. All present their
> own challenges.
I've never seen a theatre with a stage that was only 18 feet from the
masonry back wall to the lip of the stage. For the first 3 years I did
sound
at church we had an empty choir loft on stage, and that reduced the
effective depth of our stage to about 38 inches. We demoed the vacant
choir
loft, and thats how we got the whopping 18 feet of depth
About half of the services I do have mics under or in front of the main
speaker cluster. Yes, it should be moved forward, but did I tell you about
my operations/capital budget? $100 a week. Can't hire a lot of riggers
with
that kind of money.
> Yet another difference is that, on many shows, if the
> audience can tell you're using sound reinforcement then
> you've failed. Yes, there are some "rock-style" shows
> but, on the majority, you have to go for a very subtle,
> natural style of sound.
One novel addition at church is an audience that sings along with most of
the music. Mix that with a very live room, and you may understand why I
take
advantage of the fact that they are usually standing and walk about a
third
down the center aisle to check my mixes, and actually hear what they sound
like! ;-)
> Just as an example, the last theatre musical I worked on
> used 22 lav-style radio mics, 5 boundary/shotgun mics, 3
> wired handheld (mimicking a 1960s nightclub), 4 channels
> of sound effects, a 14 piece orchestra (including 4
> stereo keyboards, drum kit, guitars, bass guitar, a
> string section, a horn section and a flute....and an
> annouce mic with the Stage Manager to do the pre-show
> chat. In terms of outputs, between mains, multiple
> monitors, special speakers for SFX, feeds for video, show
> relay to backstage etc etc. we used 25 or 26 outputs from
> the board. Oh, and on a couple of nights there was 32
> channels of ADAT out for digital recording. On top of
> all this, sound was also responsible for a 16 station
> intercom system, split among 3 channels. During the show
> I had 60 odd scene presets...and almost 200 sound effects
> cues (which took a couple of months in advance to record
> and compile).
One other thing - for you, its pretty much the same show every time you
do
it. Every show we do is a one-time event.
On microphones:
A combined choir/drama/praise/sermon announcements service easily gets me
up
to 30 plus channels.
5 wireless mics, 1 lav, 4 head-worn (E6)
6 wired mics for the vocalists, 2 for the percussionist, 2 for the
violins,
1 for the piano, one for the flute
Electronic instruments are keyboard, bass, guitar, drums
Playback sources are all stereo - DVD player, CD player, PC, digital
player. BTW those players are consumer players, and if you haven't tried
to
cue to drama with a consumer DVD player, you haven't had real fun! ;-)
Orchestra mics are Strings (2), winds (2), drums, brass.
2 more mics for other spoken word, one lectern, one other for communion,
etc.
I think that's 34 channels, or 31 if you count the stereo channels as one
input each which is IMO fair.
Audio outputs are 6 monitors, the main (mono), and a slightly
differently-mixed stereo feed to three other rooms.
On top of that we also mix live video, coordinate a powerpoint
presentation
or three, and control both archtectural and dramatic lighting. There are
video and audio recordings of every service, and 28 channel multitrack
audio
recordings from time to time.
Typical tech booth staffing is 2 or occasionally 3 people for everything.
All equipment is on a shelf that is about 2 feet deep and 18 feet long.
> I'm not saying theatre sound is more difficult than
> church sound--just different.
My point is not that church sound is more difficult than anything else,
but
rather that when people are dismissive of church sound as being way too
easy, they simply aren't dealing with the facts. I'm not trying to brag
here, I'm trying to overcome very vocal people here who say that people
who
do church sound don't have much to do.
And lets be clear - a large amount of the effort that goes into doing
media
for an event goes into a big intangible - quality. I can count mics but I
can't count up quality nearly as easily.
I know that there are people who have done traditional church services
which
are far simpler, but the contem****ary church can be something else.
Remember, we're just a little church in Grosse Pointe with about 300 in
attendance.
For real fun, check out the megachurches. However, they typically have
signficantly more resources than we do.
|
