Question:
Today at my church we got rid of ALL the monitors. Every single one. We replaced them all the with a digital monitor system, now everyone has in-ear monitors and a personal mixing console.
See, I'm used to a nice, reverby, post eq monitor send. These things are raw signal. Wow, talk about a frank representation of your own skills. Every little mistake, flaw, pit and rough spot amplified right to your brain. And to EVERYONE else.
But a very cool system! The house sound is cleaned up considerably, and 95% of the sound guy's monitor duties have been transferred to the musicians.
Oh... and here's the system we bought.
http://www.heartechnologies.com/hb/hearbacksystem.htm
Answer:
Our main worship team uses something similar except it isn't *all* in ear, we still have a couple of floor monitors and of course the bass cabinet. Each musician controls what comes out of his (or her) own monitor and how loud it is. If you want hear the keyboards but not that loud then you just push a button and turn a knob, same thing if you want loud, rattle your brain kick drum. I think it is a really cool system and really takes out a lot of sound check time because 1. Everyone does their own. and 2. If something doesn't sound right during the set, you fix it yourself.
Answer:
I would be more inclined to want a sound guy to set my levels...having a console at every musician is just more clutter.
Pat D
Answer:
I'm waiting around for the system where the mixing console is just another computer in the network (wireless, of course), and each musician has a personal monitor channel which is connected to a PDA-like device, and where the mix for that channel is controllable from the PDA.
I might be waiting for a while, and then what I get might not be all that great, but I'd still be curious.
The way things are right now, I think a good way to go is the in-ear monitors with a limited amount of available mixes (2-4 or so). This makes people listen attentively and really interact with what they're listening to. In the end, having a monitor isn't mostly for hearing yourself play, it's for hearing others play so that you can play in synch with them. Of course, hearing yourself play is a good thing so that you can evaluate your performance as you play, but it's really a secondary function of a monitor...IMO.
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by paat I would be more inclined to want a sound guy to set my levels...having a console at every musician is just more clutter.
Pat D
Actually it doesn't make that much clutter because the unit is as small or smaller than a direct box and the way our team sets it up, they mount them on their music/keyboard stands or on a small stand by itself. So in reality it takes the huge floor monitors and takes them off the floor and makes them the size of a direct box.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Wildcats2008 Actually it doesn't make that much clutter because the unit is as small or smaller than a direct box and the way our team sets it up, they mount them on their music/keyboard stands or on a small stand by itself. So in reality it takes the huge floor monitors and takes them off the floor and makes them the size of a direct box.
I agree.....this kind of system takes a whole lot less room.....we use something like it as well.....each instrument has thier own (direct box sized) mixer unabling us to mix the sound to our own preferance.....for example, I personally don't want to here the backing vocals so I cut them out of my mix......and I stand right next to the drummer so I don't need any extra of him in my mix.
I like this system, right now we have 6 channel mixers we are upgrading to 18 channel mixers real soon.....cause right now we have 3 guitars all running through the same channel and the piano and keys running through the same channel......it'll be nice to mix it down even further.
Answer:
Yes, you are right. I didn't realize the size until after I posted and looked at the actual unit. Of course, I am against using music stands anyway.
I would still rather have a sound guy doing my moniter mixes. And I would disagree with Nate that a "2-4 mix" would be sufficient. Can you mic drums with only 2-4 channels? How do you expect to get those to the moniters? What about the bass, and all the guitars, and the vocals? Right away, I'm way about 4 channels. I'm not saying I use in-ear moniters, but when I do get to that point, I can tell you right now that it will be used for obviously as you pointed out to hear the other musicians, but also to have my own channels louder as well as a click track.
Pat D
Answer:
Originally Posted by paat Yes, you are right. I didn't realize the size until after I posted and looked at the actual unit. Of course, I am against using music stands anyway.
I would still rather have a sound guy doing my moniter mixes. And I would disagree with Nate that a "2-4 mix" would be sufficient. Can you mic drums with only 2-4 channels? How do you expect to get those to the moniters? What about the bass, and all the guitars, and the vocals? Right away, I'm way about 4 channels. I'm not saying I use in-ear moniters, but when I do get to that point, I can tell you right now that it will be used for obviously as you pointed out to hear the other musicians, but also to have my own channels louder as well as a click track.
Pat D
we don't use music stands , we have the mix units mounted on mic stands on a bracket about waist high so we can easily reach over and adjust what we want. As far as the drums go we have 6 mics on our kit and it all comes through one channel, I usually cut him out anyway, even though he's in a plexi cage he's still loud enough for me to hear without monitors......
I like to have lead vocals (worship leader), my guitar (lead), a little 12 string rhythm guitar & a little 6 string rhythm, very little bass and piano in my monitor. It's very important for me to hear the worship leader the clearest because I cue off the vocals and I like to have myself up a bit as well (though I don't run through the monitors, see below for reason) so I can hear the mistakes that I make so I can work the kinks out in the future.
So for me these seperate mixers are awesome cause if you have to share a floor monitor with 2 other people and a mix that someone else gives you it really stinks. I can't wait till we get more channels though cause right now if I turn up the guitar channel all three guitars come out of it and there is no way to mix it down, I use a Fender DeVille amp onstage to monitor myself.
Our worship team setup.....
- Piano
-Keyboard
-Drums
-Bass
-6 string acoustic
-12 string acoustic
-Lead Guitar electric
-Percussion
-Lead Worship singer
-5-7 back up vocalists (parts)
and this is only Wednesday night.....Sunday add to the list a second electric guitar and 12 piece horn and string section.
So we really really need at least 12 channels to be able to really refine our personal mixes.........right now we just finished adding on a $20mil addition to the church so we may not see these "proposed" mixers until next year.
Answer:
Originally Posted by paat And I would disagree with Nate that a "2-4 mix" would be sufficient. Can you mic drums with only 2-4 channels? How do you expect to get those to the moniters? What about the bass, and all the guitars, and the vocals? Right away, I'm way about 4 channels. I'm not saying I use in-ear moniters, but when I do get to that point, I can tell you right now that it will be used for obviously as you pointed out to hear the other musicians, but also to have my own channels louder as well as a click track.
Did I say 2-4 channels? What I meant was 2-4 different monitor mixes, with each mix being as many channels as needed.
And as an aside, 2-4 channels is definitely enough to mic a drum kit and do it well. Most of us (who don't have degrees in sound engineering) should probably be using only 1 channel to mic a drum kit, but I think pride keeps us from doing that because it looks funny.
Nate
Answer:
Sorry. I am used to having at least 6-7 channels for drums (this is what we prefer, but not always what happens). And our sound guy does have a degree in sound engineering.
sevens, I think I want to visit your church one day.
Pat D
Answer:
Originally Posted by paat Sorry. I am used to having at least 6-7 channels for drums (this is what we prefer, but not always what happens). And our sound guy does have a degree in sound engineering.
sevens, I think I want to visit your church one day.
Pat D
come on over Rt.59 and 83rd in Naperville IL.... Calvary website
here's a few pics of our church and it's new addition, these are artists renderings......


Answer:
We changed the system up a bit. The stage was so quiet, that it unbalanced our mix in our small building. Also, all the pastors on stage (behind me) could hear only my guitar amp, because of the lack of monitors. So the worship leader (The associate Pastor and I) got a single monitor, and all the stationary musicians got in-ear gear. Works great now.
Answer:
Originally Posted by sevens come on over Rt.59 and 83rd in Naperville IL.... Calvary website
You're not far from me here at school...
Answer:
Originally Posted by sevens I can't wait till we get more channels though cause right now if I turn up the guitar channel all three guitars come out of it and there is no way to mix it down, I use a Fender DeVille amp onstage to monitor myself.
I would commit high crimes to be able to do that at my home church.
Answer:
Originally Posted by paat I would be more inclined to want a sound guy to set my levels...having a console at every musician is just more clutter.
Pat D
Why did you make your comment about American Christianity? I have been to Dorchester several times, was in UK churches for two years and so I have a frame of reference.