Praise & Worship

[Brad]

After several months of anguish over this ( and several other problems ) very situation, I finally stepped down from the worship team last week. One of the problems was the mandate to get rid of all amplifiers and run straight thru the board. The sound person has no experience and they thrust him in front of a brand new Yamaha DM2000 digital board! It was pretty bad sound wise before, but now....well....I could no longer fight with trying to be heard. As you have all stated, I am there to worship the Lord through my instrument. If I can't hear myself and my tone sufferes, I find myself concentrating on that instead of why I should be up there in the first place. No one else seems to have a problem, so I figured it would be best to step down and not let my attitude bring down the rest of the worship team. I'm really very sick about it as I believe I added a much needed dimension to the team. But I can't see standing up there fighting for tone and volume while the soundman tries to figue out whats going on.

[telemike]

Sorry to hear that. Hang in there though. Maybe you and the others can start a side project and just play in church using your own equipment.

I don't want to make anyone jealous, but at my hometown church, my cousin runs the board. He plays several instruments, can sing well, and went to school for music. He does a great job. The only problem is that the church is very small, with a mostly senior citizen congregation. So 99% of the time his talent is being used to balance a single piano and probably 2 mics...

[Michael Murphy]

I've been in that same situation, and you're right- you can't concentrate on why you're there in the first place.

Offer to go in and help the guy out on the board and give him some pointers.

If you have (or can get) access to a wireless setup, you could go sit back with him and show him exactly what needs to be done at a few rehearsals until he picks it up.

Don't exclude yourself until you've explored all the options.....

[Bob Rogers]

Brad-
Why don't you volunteer to help run the board for a few weeks. Help the sound guy move up the learning curve and maybe learn a few tricks yourself at the same time. You might suggest that a few other members of the congregation get trained at the same time.

With the help of a well trained soundman and some equipment, you can get a good sound going direct. It may not be as good as the tone coming direct from a tube amp, but it's certainly in the ballpark with a mic'ed tube amp.

Keep pluggin'

[Mik]

Using one of those guitar interface speaker/amp emulator boxes, perhaps your sound would be more distinct and desireable to be brought forward in the mix. Just a thought,
Mik

[ShawnS]

I know exactly what you are talking about. However, The Big Guy hears all the notes you play even the sour ones, and you don't even have to plug in an amp for Him to hear. The problem you described will be resolved when He is ready. So many times we want our problems solved on our time schedule. The Big Guy will resolve this situation when the time is right. In the mean time, I encourage you to be persistant, and play to your Lord not the congregation. I just feel that stepping down is what the ole devil wants you to do. Don't give him the satisfaction. Praise the Almighty with your Tele. That's what he wants you to do.

in Him,
Shawn

[Silverface]

Using one of those guitar interface speaker/amp emulator boxes, perhaps your sound would be more distinct and desireable to be brought forward in the mix.

I respectfully disagree, as a player (and soundman for over 30 years). Direct-inject guitar signal through ANY emulation box sounds bad enough...and when handled by inexperienced board personnel it will only sound worse.

Simply, a small enough, good sounding amp...properly mic'd...will provide god tone. It's up to the sound guy to know his job and how to mix. Unfortunately, that's usually the problem - inexperienced sound guys that don't know how to mix. Using a direct signal though some magic-wonder box o' cheesy tone only gives them more power to mess it up IMO.

Caveat - if you're trying to use a 50-watt Marshall with a 4x10 in a small hall it's certainly a problem, as is inability to get decent tone out of your rig. But a smaller amp rig dialed in correctly will beat a POD or some other fake-box every time.

[JDO]

sorry to hear that. i know how you feel though. it seems like it's the people who have no clue what they are talking about that end up behind the board. i went to a church one time where the guy running the board was deaf (i'm not joking - he really was).

personal story. i went to a real small bible college (roanoke bible college in elizabeth city, nc). i was in a six piece band while i was there. it was pretty cool.

-two girl singers
-our drummer grew up playing drums in a gospel church
-i grew up playing bass in heavey metal bands
-we had a sax player (that would also play guitar or bass when i played guitar)
-and our guitarist listened to things like the indigo girls.

anyway, we played around different churches and things and got kinda popular for the area. the school got it's new chapel and when we went in to practice for a weekend retreat they were having for some high schoolers, one of the big wigs from the college decided we should all plug into the system. he had received a letter from someone complaining about how we were too loud the last time they were there.

needless to say, we all plugged in and it sounded like doo doo. and we kept complaining about how we couldn't hear anything on stage. eventually they realized that the musicians knew more about music and how it should sound then some guy in an office.

hopefully the same thing will happen for you. maybe someone will wise up and realize that they way they are trying to do it just don't work.

[Matt Plescher]

Originally Posted by Silverface

I respectfully disagree, as a player (and soundman for over
30 years). Direct-inject guitar signal through ANY emulation box sounds bad
enough...and when handled by inexperienced board personnel it will only
sound worse.

I use a DG-Stomp direct into the board, and to my ear my tone is no better or
worse than the guitarists using amps, miced or direct, and it's not that we all
have bad tone, it all sounds good. That is, when we get mixed in right. I'm sure
nobody in the crowd could tell the differece between the amps and my emulator
unless they were a VERY experienced listener. Just my .02.

Cheers
Matt

[Silverface]

I appreciate your comments Matt. However, I've tried the DG Stomp, POD, RP100 and a few other digital gadgets and can't get anywhere near the tone I can get with my pedalboard and '55 Deluxe or Holland Little Jimi. It's true that many listeners can't tell the difference - but more of them appreciate a good sound than you might expect (and I say this after decades of hearing comments).

To my ears all of the digiboxes lack attack and the richness & subtleties of sound that comes from a good tube amp mic'd properly.

We had a similar situation to the one that started this thread years ago - a sound consultant was hired and said everything needed to go direct. We told him the tone would suffer and so would the playing quality (face it - we all play better when it sounds good to us). He said point-blank "I don't care about tone, I just want your board people to have 100% control over everyone's level". When we all suggested his suggestions were ludicrous and we'd all walk if they were instituted the "management" got a clue and fired him...

[Mik]

No disagreement from me about the sonic superiority of a mic'd amp

but an amp small or large is not an option for Brad. I thought enhancement between the guitar and board might help Brad to stand out in a pleasing way.

I gather from your avatar SF I should let sleeping dogs lie... :P

Mik

[Matt Plescher]

Originally Posted by Silverface

To my ears all of the digiboxes lack attack and the richness
& subtleties of sound that comes from a good tube amp mic'd properly.

Yeah, there really is no argument that the real thing is better for amp tone. But
how much of your tone is making it intact through the board and out the PA? My
Stomp sounds better though a PA than through my amp. The guys I play with
that mike the amp sound better on stage than in the room. I think a lot of this
kind of washes out in the end.

BUT I MAY BE WAY OFF BASE, and I'm not trying to start a tube vs emulator war
as I'm not in either camp. Maybe it comes down to the board, if we were mixed
right, my Stomp might get killed tonewise by the other players tube amps! Just
curious what works for others and why.

Cheers
Matt

[Tim Swartz]

Our church hosted a regional sound seminar a few weeks back and I was part of the guinea pig band. I was the only one w/ a mic'd amp. I play Princeton Reverb set in front of me, tilted way back and pointed right at my face, it serves as my personal guitar monitor and the source of the sound. One person raised the question, "What can we do to get rid of the amps on stage?". The person leading the seminar stated that I used efx and that is why I had an amp. This is not it, but the guy bought it. The reason I use an amp is because in an electric guitar system, the amp is as much a part of the finished product as the guitar is. None of the sound guys like dealing with it, but at least I hear what they are getting, and I don't have to rely on monitors. If you've not tried the small amp tilted back, you may want to as the primary concern of the sound guys may just be not having stage sound in the house mix. Just a thought.

[Silverface]

The reason I use an amp is because in an electric guitar system, the amp is as much a part of the finished product as the guitar is.

Well said.

Even with the somewhat lame guys doing the mix for us, when done with a flat-EQ the amp sound comes through perfectly, and sounds much more defined and tonally-rich than with a digital unit.

Part of the equation is using the right amp for the room size - (and we also use a plastic screen in front of amps to avoid blasting the front row as well.) I wouldn't drqag in a Twin Reverb - that would be silly. But a 15-watt tweed Deluxe is not blisteringly loud...and I challenge anyone to convince me or the band members I work with that a DG-Stomp or POD sounds better.

[Bob Rogers]

I'd never try to convince anyone that a digital system through a PA sounds as good as an amp that you are standing in front of. However, unless you are in a small room you have to get the sound of the amp through the PA. That is the great equalizer. Micing an amp turns a complex sound wave into a simple voltage signal. At that point you have lost a great deal of the complexity of the experience of standing in front of the amp. That's why live music is better than recorded, small clubs better than big sound-supported venues.

People can decide for themselves whether all digital modeling devices sound "cheesy." Just listen to recorded sounds. Go to the line6 web site and those of its competitors. Listen to recordings of the artists using them in the studio. If you think any of those sounds are good - well you can get the same signal to the mixing board. (What the soundman does with it is another question.) Getting a good sound to the mixing board is far more like recording than it is like getting a good live sound with a tube amp.

In addition, there doesn't need to be a conflict. You can split your signal and use a tube amp for your stage sound and give the mixing board a steady digital signal. Getting into a tug of war with the sound guy helps no one.

[Silverface]

Micing an amp turns a complex sound wave into a simple voltage signal. At that point you have lost a great deal of the complexity of the experience of standing in front of the amp.

I respectfully don't agree with that statement at all. Listen to any classic recordings from the 60's or 70's - all the nuances and complexities are there, and that's using mic'd guitar amps in the studio.

My point is that the guitar amp is part of the whole tonal package and an instrument in its own right. The sound guys need to deal with it.

It can be done - but the guys twiddling the knobs and sliders need to know what they are doing. That's usually the problem - not the equipment used, but the brains behind the board. Normally there just isn't sufficient training. But that does not mean the musicans have to make equipment sacrifices just because the support folks are unqualified - they need to be educated...and sometimes even listen to us.

As I've said, I've spent years on both sides of the board, so I know what it can sound like....and a direct inject digital system doesn't cut it for me, either as a player or listener, for live applications. Until somebody gets beyong sampling and into some kind of real-time, touch sensitive system, sound guys will have to put up with my amps and try to learn how to make it happen like pro sound guys do.

[Spanky]

I gotta agree with bro Silverface here---the ability to mic an amp properly--proper positioning of the mic and Using the proper mic--go a long way toward transfering the nuances of your amp electronics (tubes,natural compression) your speaker type, and even the tonal qualities of your cabinet ! If we said that micing an amp yielded only an electronic "signal" we are missing the point of the whole tonal chain----that would make vocals into a microphone only a "signal"? .Certainly vocal patterns are dependant on what is sung into a mike and how each note is shaped and sung=========

[Doug C.]

Here's how I solved it... I bought a Pod. This allowed the sound man to think he is in control, and you can get decent tones from it with some teaking.

Now, here's the trick - during your initial sound check, set the output at about 9 o'clock (1/4 volume). When the sound guy is done you have the freedom to turn up to your desired volume. As long as you don't over do it, the inexperienced sound guy will never pick it up, and at least the mix will sound better to you.

Works for me!

-Doug C.

[Tom A.]

I'm in the Silverface camp here. I have tried a POD and to my ears, it really doesn't cut it. A small tube amp properly miked and placed is the way to go. I just could not get a tone I was happy with using the POD. Believe me, I really tried. My Peavey and '52 Tele is hard to beat.

Tom

[Bob Rogers]

I'm not disagreeing that you can get a great sound by micing an amp. Of course you can. No doubt that more and better great sounds have been produced (so far) by miced amps than by modeling devices. But as far as the PA amp or the recording device is concerned they are getting nothing more than a signal. At that point it is nothing more than a voltage. That voltage can be produced by a complex sytem of tubes, speakers ,and mics, or a complex digital device. But the signal starts the same at the guitar cord - goes into a black box - and comes out as a voltage. Of course, the contents of the black box, and the care with which it has been put together, is crucial to how "good" a signal processor the black box is. But it is a false comparison to say one black box is better because it sounds better when you stick your head inside between the mic and the amp.

[Silverface]

But it is a false comparison to say one black box is better because it sounds better when you stick your head inside between the mic and the amp.

That seems to imply that whether you mic an amp through a PA or run things to the PA through a $25 direct box, you'll get essentially the same result.

Yes, you get signal. No, you won't get the same tone.

Of course, it may matter what quality of PA you use. We use Allen & Heath, QSC, Crest and JBL equipment mostly.

Seems to be the same argument we get from the sound guys, actually. They think all methods of getting sound into the main speakers are the same sound-wise.

Fact - they're not. Run them on a scope and it's a different waveform, if technical methods seem better than ears.

:)

[Bob Rogers]

Originally Posted by Bob Rogers

Of course, the contents of the black box, and the care with which it has been put together, is crucial to how "good" a signal processor the black box is. But it is a false comparison to say one black box is better because it sounds better when you stick your head inside between the mic and the amp.

Originally Posted by Silverface

That seems to imply that whether you mic an amp through a PA or run things to the PA through a $25 direct box, you'll get essentially the same result.

I think my first sentence in my quote (I learned how to use the quote button!) makes it clear that I'm not saying that. In either the analog or digital domain you need to use good equipment and adjust it carefully to send a signal with good tone to the PA or recorder.

I'm saying that if digital modeling can send a good signal to a recorder, then it can send a good signal to a mixing board. If the signal at the mixing board is good, a good sound man can send a good mix to the front of house. He or she can also send a good mix to the monitors. The fact (and I agree that it's a fact) that that monitor tone won't be as good as the tone direct from a tube amp does not imply that front of house mix will be worse than the one produced by a tube amp and a mic. And the front of house is where the paying custurch.omers (in this case praying customers) are.

As an aside, I can never really pray (at least what I think of as praying) when I'm in the band in church. But maybe we shouldn't get into that on this board.

Another aside - this is a fun thread. I guess it is one of the drawbacks of the new system that it has nothing to do with the title that appears on the main board. (Sorry for the hijack brad.)

[PraiseCaster]

seems to be a saga played out at many Churchs these days, but, It's been a problem since I was a lil tike goin to Sunday school: My mother is a trained operatic singer, ie: SHE GOT LUNGS!!! And she can belt it out! It's so beautiful to hear my Mom sing a Hymn, it can, and has brought tears of joy to my eyes (and a few others eyes also).
Now, would you believe there were a couple of people setting on the Church Board, that thought my Mom sang too loudly! They wanted to have my Mom wait outside during Praise And Worship, and when they were finished, she would be allowed back in. Unbelievable huh! Thank God, the Pastor sat some people down, and well, lets say he gave em a private sermon. But, the whole time my Mom would just pray about it, and continue going to Church, saying, "Well, if they let me in today, Hallelujah! If they shut me outside, I'll still sing for God, and the lil neighborhood!"
So, maybe instead of stepping down, continue to play, pray, and let Him take care of things. It's just a suggestion. I cant tell you what to do, your the one that has to make the decision. I hope and pray it all works out for you.

[Silverface]

Bob Wrote:

I'm saying that if digital modeling can send a good signal to a recorder, then it can send a good signal to a mixing board.

I see where you're coming from. The difference is, I think, in a definition of good sound. As far as I'm concerned the digital modeling systems lack much depth and all analog "artifacts" - they're too cleaned-up and slick. My take includes using them for recording - I have had the opportunity to go that way in the studio and in comparison the amp/mic system is far more tonally rich.

That's the rub. I simply don't agree that digital modeling can send a good signal... at all...and there is still something lacking in the live tone - the boxes simply are not there yet. Same problem with modeling amps - fair sounding, but not "real". It's a fairly common discussion that modeling amps just don't have "something" that real amps...tube or solid state even...have. I'm figuring it has something to do with air movement and speakers plus attack and sag, which are real weak points in modeling systems.

Fun to play around with - sure. Acceptable for professional live and studio applications - IMO, nope.

(I record for fun using a computer and modeling systems...and there's a POD XT sitting a few feet away as well. Great toys. I'd never use them for "real recording". I was just in a studio the other day with Neumann mics, tube compressors, 2" analog tape...and it sounds COMPLETELY different than digital processing. And much, much...much better IMO).

[Bob Rogers]

Originally Posted by Silverface

That's the rub. I simply don't agree that digital modeling can send a good signal... at all...

If that's your position it's perfectly consistant. But many people listen to recordings made with digital modeling devices and hear sounds that they would love to be able to produce.

I think that your position (which is held by a lot of others) is going to be harder to maintain as more people produce recordings with digital devices. What may not change is that you can always produce better sounds with analog devices. However, I think it's wrong for you to assume that because you can produce better sounds with analog, anyone can. In my case, I can produce as good or better recordings with a POD as with a miced amp. And I can do it more consistantly and easily. Better musicians than I are coming ot the same conclusion.

You may not find my sounds (or my playing) "acceptable," but it's all that I got.

[Silverface]

However, I think it's wrong for you to assume that because you can produce better sounds with analog, anyone can

I never made that assumption.

However, if a player feels better...and plays better...using an amp/mic setup that is not out-of-the-ballpark power-wise, sound support folks should be able to work with it in a positive manner. The soundboard perception of "we will have no amps" is a combined control issue and a basic lack of competence. If they really knew their jobs thoroughly they'd have no problem.

Requiring a player to use a direct-only signal is a quick-and-dirty way to overcome an inability to mix, plain and simple. I'm not saying players can't play well through digital devices...even though I don't care for the sound - yet...but the player should be able to make his/her own equipment choices within reason. Eliminating amps is not within reason IMO.

[Tim Swartz]

As much as I really hate to say it, I think it may come down to a discriminating ear. I know a fantastic player who uses a Pod, this guy would sound good playing through the worst junk imaginable, but I definitely prefer his sound when he goes "old school" through an amp, he prefers the convienence of the Pod, and thinks it sounds fine. The modeling amps sound OK until you actually a/b them with a tuned up example of the amp they are emulating, which at that point, they become very one dimensional. There is only one reason good studios stock and maintain costly tube mics, compressors and preamps, and that is because the digital stuff just doesn't do it....yet.

[Bob Rogers]

Requiring a player to use a direct-only signal is a quick-and-dirty way to overcome an inability to mix, plain and simple.

I absolutely agree with that, but since so many of us deal with inexperienced soundguys in church situations let me explain the problem of a miced amp from their point of view. (This is probably elementary stuff to many reading this.) When I'm running sound, during soundcheck I'll try to set the level of each input amp so that each instrument shows a pre fader level (pfl) of 0 to +3 db. During the performance two things happen. Musicians turn up their amps to compensate for changes in the room acoustic caused by the room filling up and they just play louder because they are "on." If you are not aware of this situation and ready to recheck the pfls the (solid state) input amps will clip and that carefully crafted tone is now garbage. The reaction of someone inexperienced often is to turn the output amp down (or off). The same thing can happen if you try to control the front of house mix (or monitor mix) at your end by turning up.

A church setting is a pretty hard setup for a beginner to manage. We usually have 10 inputs going. I'm sure many places have more. Even experienced sound guys like to see a signal at a consistant level. If you have a preamp out you can send that to the mixer and control the stage volume with master volume control.

Like it or not, the sound guy has control of the foh sound. Making his or her job harder almost never helps.

[Silverface]

I agree it's not good to make the sound guys' jobs harder...but we have players with enough experience to know not to adjust amp levels after sound check. In that we rotate players, though, the ones sitting in the congregation (plus a bunch of non-church players we have as attendees) note often that the mix is mud and the guitars are buried in the wash.

We have around 24 channels out of 36 available in use at any one time. That is a lot to deal with, but we also have experienced board people on the stage...and what I would hope is that the inexperienced sound folks would listen to those who have experience and learn. More often than not, though, we get the "I built a Heathkit amp 25 years ago and know what I'm doing" attitude. Oh, well - I've been playing at the same place 15 years and the sound guys seem to come and go - so I guess it'll never end!

But going to an inadequate guitar sound system (IMO) just to accomodate uneducated/unqualified ears is not the right way to do things in my view.

[davidmenke]

If the church is desiring 'that clean look' on the alter, suggest that the amp be behind the alter or in another room. Saw Petra and they had all guitar cabinnets off the alter, but the marshall amps were on the side to make adjustment. A small amp could be set up and adjustment of volume with volume control or pedal volume.. or for leads, the soundman needs to adjust according.

[Bob Rogers]

Since I'm playing the sound guy's advocate (and from the stories many people have brought to the board that is the same as being the devil's advocate) let me list two more advantages of going direct rather than micing an amp. First, every additional open mic decreases gain before feedback. Inexperienced sound guys (or those with poor equipment) fight feedback by pulling out big chunks of the frequency spectrum - result: mud. Second, mics bleed. They pick up sound from other than their intended source. Again this can contribute to mud. A driect feed (either from a digital source or from the preamp of a tube amp) produces an isolated signal from one instrument and does not contribute to feedback.

Yes an experenced, professional sound guy can deal with these problems, but the problems are real.

[LuthierTom]

I don't disagree with any of the posts here. Given my druthers, I'll use a mic'd Princeton Reverb, but I've had to learn to go direct using a DG stomp. Our church has a "no amps on the platform" policy, not because they look bad but in order to keep the platform volume levels down. We each have our own monitor mixes fed to us through earbuds. It took me a while to get used to it, but I did and I'm making the setup work. Is it my first choice? No. Would I use it in a tone-critical application, such as in a studio? Most likely not.

But can I live with it and make it work? Yes.

[alabubba]

I wouldn't drag in a Twin Reverb - that would be silly.

This made me laugh, because my Twin Reverb's "last gig" before I traded it for my '52RI was on a praise and worship team for a new church that was meeting in a large American Legion hall; it was the only amp I had at the time. It was marvelous with the volume set at about 3 1/2. Since then, I've used mostly a Peavey Classic 30, but I've even used a Champ (miked up into the sound system), but with the RI Jenson P8R speaker I put in it it has enough stage presence to serve as my monitor and the other musicians can hear what I'm doing as well.

I think the Twin worked so well because being what it is, I always played it clean regardless of volume, since otherwise it would be too loud. So it really didn't lose anything by being turned down.

[Amos]

I think the Twin worked so well because being what it is, I always played it clean regardless of volume, since otherwise it would be too loud. So it really didn't lose anything by being turned down.

I tried my SFTR once and couldn't get it to be soft enough at any volume to work in our medium sized sanctuary. An SFPR is plenty big enough for the room I'm in.

You know, this may come across as wierd, but sometimes I wish I was just getting into music now.
The digital stuff looks cool and fun, and is easier to get to the board, but I've got so many miles on tube gear that anything else just doesn't feel right. If I didn't have all those years on tube gear, it might be easier to be open to trying different stuff.

I've even had problems trying different tube amps. Last Sunday, I tried a smaller tube amp at first service; it sounded great at home, but the highs were very thin and the lows were too boomy live, no matter how I tweaked it. The tone sucked so badly that I had reverse inspiration, just couldn't get into the music.

A younger guy on our worship team is in a praise rock band called Hyperstatic Union (www.hyperstaticunion.com), and he said he gave up on using Mesa's and went to POD's because he got tired of sound guy hassles. We talk about the tone vs. digital stuff, and I think he's resigned himself to it because it means fewer hassles. For me, I need to have something with good tone or I just don't play my best, regardless of whether others can hear me or not.[/i]

[dubs]

I am blessed enough to be in a large church that loves praise & worship and it can get pretty loud, where quite a number of musos actually wear earplugs. Our church is quite liberated in worship, guitar solos and all!
Anyway we have a website with online resources for all you musos & worship leaders, with streaming video tutorials for various instruments & worship, nothing like it on the web.
You can also sign up for free weekly worship notes, which encourage & inspire you to be a better worshipper. Check it out:
www.cccworships.com

Cheers
Darren
:)

[Brad]

I sincerely thank you all for your very insightful posts. I had a long ( 1 1/2 hr ) talk with the pastor last night. He sought me out and we set a time to get together. I was able to air my thoughts over the system and all the other problems that led to my decision to step down. My decision was not a hasty one. I prayed about it for several months and talked about it daily with my wife who is very, very insightful. The pastor was able to inteject some excellent thoughts that quite honsely, I did not think of. He told me ( in a very loving way ) that he felt I was robbing him and the congregation of my ministry. That I needed to work through this with the worship team rather than run away. On the no amp situation, I explained that my style is much different than the other two guitar players. One is an excellent country, Atkins type ( he's 49 ) player and the other is a younger guy ( 28-30 ) who plays the power chord, distorted lead type stuff. My style is based on using my guitar, amp, effects and volume pedal to create parts that don't interfere with what they are doing. He told me the ear pieces were not set in stone. I won't take up more space than I already have with more details, but I am strongly considereing coming back to the worship team. They left the door open for me anytime I changed my mind. So, I'm going to pray about it this week and see where the Lord leads me. Thank you all again for your excellent and very helpful posts. God Bless.

[PraiseCaster]

I am really :) glad to hear that you sat down and talked about your situation, with your Pastor! Sometimes all it takes is a clear line of communication It sounds like ya got a real cool Pastor their! That's a blessing!
Keep praying about it! I'll be praying for a quick resolution, with confirmation for you to know exactly what ya gotta do (which I pray is to get you back up their Praising God!).
Keep us posted, and let us know when you get back up their, and 'Dance Like David Danced' (cause that's what we are doin isnt it?)!

[Wanker]

Sorry to hear about the problem. Hope you get it resolved. A friend of mine's church went "amp-less" what they are doing is running through POD type units and using in ear monitors. They love it.

[Wanker]

One thing I do to help our stage volume situation is put my amp in front of me on a stand and face it towards my head. This way I'm the only one getting blasted. In the area we play there is a small half-wall that we are behind so that further dampens the stage volume. There's still some reflected sound, but since the soundman can't hear my amp he HAS to put me in the system. In the past he would hear my amp and pull me out of the mix. This meant that the video tape had no guitar.