Does your pastor use Lavaliel Microphone?
if yes, which one? and how does he/she like it? or how does the sound system guys like it?
I'm looking at this one, but not enough reviews from church peeps..
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002N3GZ88/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
Excellent choice. It works very well.
I've used these a number of times for installations, although I'd prefer a better connection such as those used on Audio-Technica radio mics (3.5mm jack plugs don't give quite as much surface area for contact).
However, I've only found this to result in a noisy connection in the lower cost, and now discontinued Freeport belt-pack radio mics which were rebranded and sold by Sennheiser. The mic cable coming can become damaged over time where it exits the jack plug if not handled carefully (e.g. if bent under stress when coiled up tightly around the transmitter body while plugged in, when stored - I recommend that the cable remains loose for a short distance where it exits the plug when stored), but this damage can occur on any type of plug.
As Brother Mark has mentioned, a face mic is a good option too, although the Sennheiser model is quite expensive (although it is a very good design). I would recommend a face-mic rather than a lavalier mic for a few reasons; (i) it provides consistent audio pickup regardless of whether the speaker/preacher turns left or right, or faces up or down, and (ii) it greatly decreases feedback for the same level of pickup (not so much of an issue in a large auditorium where the PA speakers are at quite a distance from the microphone, but it can be a problem in a small auditorium), (iii) it can be used more effectively with people who don't wear ties or shirts (e.g. youth leaders wearing T-shirts or on women's clothing), (iv) it allows more freedom to wander around the auditorium than a lavalier mic would before the onset of feedback. But I appreciate that the choice of microphone often depends on the tradition of the church too.
Unless you need a wireless receiver for portable camera work, I would recommend that you use the more commonly bought fixed base receiver along with the wireless transmitter unit such as shown in this link: http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-Wireless-Microphone-Diversity-Rack-Mount/dp/B005OBC62U/ref=sr_1_7
Countryman headsets paired with Sennheiser transmitter/receiver will give consistent results.
http://www.countryman.com/
Hey, this is a question right in my wheelhouse! I'm a professional audio engineer, one of the house techs at my seminary and I volunteer at my church too.
First off, you definitely don't want the system you posted in your Amazon link. That system is designed to mount to a video camera, so the receiver is small, battery-operated, and short-range. The output won't be right either—it's an unbalanced 1/8" connection, which is the standard for video cameras but not for soundboards. Make sure the system you get has a half-rack receiver (it'll look something like this).
I agree with the previous poster who suggested headworn microphones. Lavaliers are great for recording (thus their popularity for video capture) but they are very feedback-prone, so I try to avoid them for live stuff. Those problems are compounded in a lot of church sanctuaries, which aren't known for top-notch acoustics.
The "old faithful" of headworn mics is the Countryman E6. It's a solid microphone, time-tested. They can be a little bit of a pain to fit, but if your preaching pastor is normally the only person using it you can just set it and forget it. Make sure to look up the fitting instructions—their recommended process really does work best. If you're going to have a lot of different people using the mic (or just want to save $100) the Audio-Technica MicroSet is a good option. The fit is more secure than a hastily-fitted countryman, but less secure than a well-fitted one. I know some people who swear by the DPA 4066, but I don't think it's worth the money.
As for the wireless transmitter and receiver, Shure and Sennheiser are both solid brands, I'd stick with those. Stay away from the budget brands and from Shure's PG series. Cheap wireless is worse than no wireless at all, you don't want to even mess around with that. Our church uses the Sennheiser 100 series, and I'd recommend it.
A few other notes: make sure you get the connector on your microphone matches your wireless transmitter. The two mic links I put in here have Sennheiser terminations, but they also come in Shure versions. Second, make sure to get the right frequency band for your area. In rural areas this is less important, but if you're competing with lots of TV stations you want to minimize interference. Shure and Sennheiser both have easy-to-use tools to help with this, just punch in your zipcode and it'll tell you what to look for.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm overcomplicating things, but believe me, it's better to deal with the complexity upfront than get the wrong system and figure it out later! Let me know if you have any questions.
As Brother Mark has mentioned, a face mic is a good option too, although the Sennheiser model is quite expensive (although it is a very good design). I would recommend a face-mic rather than a lavalier mic for a few reasons; (i) it provides consistent audio pickup regardless of whether the speaker/preacher turns left or right, or faces up or down, and (ii) it greatly decreases feedback for the same level of pickup (not so much of an issue in a large auditorium where the PA speakers are at quite a distance from the microphone, but it can be a problem in a small auditorium), (iii) it can be used more effectively with people who don't wear ties or shirts (e.g. youth leaders wearing T-shirts or on women's clothing), (iv) it allows more freedom to wander around the auditorium than a lavalier mic would before the onset of feedback. But I appreciate that the choice of microphone often depends on the tradition of the church too. Unless you need a wireless receiver for portable camera work, I would recommend that you use the more commonly bought fixed base receiver along with the wireless transmitter unit such as shown in this link: http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-Wireless-Microphone-Diversity-Rack-Mount/dp/B005OBC62U/ref=sr_1_7
Thanks John for the input.
First I apologize for my lack of knowledge, I will ask more questions..
1. Is there a big difference between the rack-mount type you recommended and the travel-size I mentioned in first post? because it seems more "professionals" are leaning towards the lavalier because of the discreetness. I feel the face-mic is to flashy for some, plus the skin color may not always match.
2. Is the Sennheiser rack-mount easy for traveling speakers?
I prefer the Lavaliel microphone because we can hide the mic under the collar or behind the tie, and the sound would still be fine.
Plus when I look at the big speakers or News interviews, most of them tend to use the Lavalier mic rather than the face-mic.
Thank you
Hey, this is a question right in my wheelhouse! I'm a professional audio engineer, one of the house techs at my seminary and I volunteer at my church too. A few other notes: make sure you get the connector on your microphone matches your wireless transmitter. The two mic links I put in here have Sennheiser terminations, but they also come in Shure versions. Second, make sure to get the right frequency band for your area. In rural areas this is less important, but if you're competing with lots of TV stations you want to minimize interference. Shure and Sennheiser both have easy-to-use tools to help with this, just punch in your zipcode and it'll tell you what to look for.
Hi Mitchell,
Sorry, would you help me read the chart..I don't know what I'm suppose to look for..
our address is 5121 Hayter Avenue, Lakewood, CA 90712
Which freq would you recommend? A, B or G for the Sennheiser?
Sorry about that, looks like I accidentally lied about the ease of use for Sennheiser's tool! Shure's is easier.
If you go Sennheiser, you definitely want A band. If Shure, you want H5.
If you don't mind, I'll tackle the questions directed at John:
I think you're conflating some things, so let's take a step back. There are three components to a wireless system—I'll list them in order of signal flow.
1) The microphone. This could be a lavalier or a headworn ("face-mic"). Or, in theory, a handheld or an instrument. This is usually purchased on its own. Sometimes a company will make a bundle that comes with all three components, but those aren't necessarily the best value.
2) The transmitter. This is the "body pack" that the microphone plugs into and the speaker wears on his or her belt (or wherever). Just about any microphone can match with just about any bodypack, so long as you have the right connector or adapter. However, the transmitter must match the brand and model of the next component, the receiver, so those two are usually bundled together.
And to actually answer your question, yes, there is a very big difference. We can't use lavaliers at all in my church, which is a large and old sanctuary with very live acoustics. Some newer, acoustically treated sanctuaries will be a little more amenable to lavaliers, but even in those a headworn mic will be clearer.
In terms of appearance, a well-fitted headworn microphone is very discreet when worn right along the jawline, and most professionals gravitate toward them in any live sound situation. Unless you're projecting your speaker's head onto a big screen, it's unlikely anyone will notice the microphone. Skin color is an issue though, there's no way around that unless you're going to buy an assortment of microphones. Still, speech intelligibility is the first priority in my opinion. If people have to struggle to make out what a speaker is saying, they will tune out very quickly.
I think I answered that above. The rackmount stays with the soundboard. The body pack that the speaker carries is the same size either way.
Unless you mean your speaker is going to be taking this system from venue to venue, in which case the answer is still yes. The portable receiver in the package you linked doesn't have an XLR output, so you'll need a series of adapters to plug it into a standard sound board. A rack-mount receiver will plug directly into any sound board with a standard microphone cable.
lol ..Sorry Mitch,
I was editing my post and got interrupted (@work), when I came back I didn't re-read my writing & posted it on the wrong line. Sorry.
But thank you for the explanations. They are very helpful.
..
Actually the portable one I mentioned to have this XLR cable included according to the description in B&H & YouTube tutorial clips I've watched.
Another question
Is there lavalier mic that covers all 3 bands A, B and G for travelling purposes?
Excellent choice. It works very well. I've used these a number of times for installations
I've used these a number of times for installations
How bad was the feedback?
and yes, we're planning to do some Digital SLR work with it, but we might get the mount-rack one also if you think the non-mount rack isn't as good as the mount-rack one.
Yes, with an adapter you will be able to get that portable one into a sound board. It will still be lower range (and thus more prone to interference) though. I don't see the advantage, personally.
Unfortunately no. If you're really worried about interference (which is a perfectly rational fear in the LA area) you might want to look into Shure's digital wireless systems, like the ULX-D or the upcoming QLX-D. Expensive, but bulletproof reception. If you do that, you'll want the G50 band.
Good answers to those questions. I've a few more comments too...
Hi Mike,
The feedback will be pretty much the same for whatever lavalier microphone system you use, because the onset of feedback is a function of the overall level of amplification between the mic and PA speakers, not what brand of components are used (that is ignoring the difference between cardiod and Omni-directional lavalier microphones, but don't worry about that). The amount of feedback should always be zero - the difference is really how high you can push the volume before it occurs - that is, the presenter's volume will vary from maybe a little too quiet to even a little too loud, depending on how much amplification can be given before feedback occurs.
It is hard to say how bad it will be, and it's not really good to use a few installations as benchmarks. It varies from one room to another, as Mitchell has noted, since some have good acoustic treatment and others do not. It depends on a number of factors, including how far in front and how far away the PA speakers are from the preacher in proportion to the overall dimensions of the room, the frequency and directivity characteristics of the PA speakers, their orientation, whether there is carpet on the floor, a balcony at the rear, how many people are in attendance, and so on. I've found that lavalier microphones can still cause some people to not hear sufficiently well (feedback is a problem before a sufficient level of amplification is reached), whereas face mics are far, far better. And, of course, if someone is a very, very quiet speaker, there is no amount of amplification in the world which will produce the required volume without feedback - people need to speak loudly if they are to be heard well (also because the tone of their voice changes when they speak more loudly, further increasing their clarity).
we're planning to do some Digital SLR work
If you're looking for studio quality photos, go to a photography studio or have a stills session in the church without the congregation being present. But just take photos of the person speaking as they are during a service. I would not recommend making significant choices to the sound system to suit some photo opportunities, especially when those choices affect the sound quality significantly, e.g. purchasing a lavalier mic instead of a face mic.
but we might get the mount-rack one also if you think the non-mount rack isn't as good as the mount-rack one.
Both are good, but serve different purposes. For a fixed installation in a church building, always go for the rack-mount receiver. For mobile work using a camera only, use the non-rack mount receiver (which looks like the transmitter) e.g. if doing news reporting or street interviews. Each is optimised for its different use, so as Mitchell advises, use the rack-mount version for a fixed installation in church. (If you need to do both, buy both types of receiver.)
Also, you mentioned about hiding the lavalier microphone under a collar. That is not a good idea. While the person might be heard on some occasions, it will be at the expense of clarity since the higher frequencies will be lost - it will sound muffled to some degree. Also, with a collar or other clothing rubbing against the microphone hiding under it, the resulting noise can be significantly distracting, depending on the type of cloth - this is not advisable.
Overall, I suggest that you choose the system that produces the best sound, trying out both a lavalier and a face mic if necessary, and then tell people that they have to get used to what it looks like. In the long run, if it is not satisfactory, people will complain about poor sound quality and not worry about how nice or unobtrusive it looks. The problem is not so much how a face mic looks, but people getting used to how different it looks - the issue is generally coping with change, and after a while the new system become the norm and people don't care that it is different from what went before it - those who resist change will get used to a face mic and possibly even in time feel pleased that they are more up to date technologically too.
I really don't get how the over-the-ear face mic is an improvement. One NEVER sees them used on broadcast TV. Even when a congressman is interviewed in noisy Statuary Hall in the Capitol they clip a lavalier mic to his lapel.
Hi Donn,
Broadcast TV is not concerned with sound reinforcement through PA speakers to enable a large audience to hear the amplified sound in the same auditorium. There is rarely a feedback issue.
The news presenter or interviewee is always pointing in the same direction too, towards the camera or interviewer, so there are much fewer dips in sound level when they turn to the left or right away from the mic, or peaks when they face down closer to the mic.
Broadcast situations can even on occasions get away with an overhead boom mic which is completely out of view, if there is little background noise.
Also, for live TV there is a trend for redundancy by using two mics, in case one should fail - it is much easier and less obtrusive to use a double-lavalier setup (two small mics on the same tie-clip) than two face mics.
Also, the visual appearance is much more important on broadcast TV, which is not the case in churches where the content of the message spoken is usually of utmost importance.
But I agree, a face-mic would not be appropriate for broadcast.
Thanks John & Mitchell
I learned a lot from reading y'all posts.
I'll bring this up to the budget meeting.
It didn't escape my attention that a thread about Lavalier's was started by a guy named Mike. [:)]
(It's been a LONG time since I have had to purchase one... so I don't have any useful info. Sorry.)
Hey Mitch & John,
How does the Sennheiser's frequency work in other countries?
If we're planning to use the portable & rack-mount overseas, what advice would you give?
Hey Mitch & John, How does the Sennheiser's frequency work in other countries? If we're planning to use the portable & rack-mount overseas, what advice would you give?
I'm not an expert in international use of radio mics. The actual legal requirements of what frequencies (i) do not require a license (ii) require a licence, or (iii) are illegal to use at all, vary from country to country. In Ireland where I live, there are four frequencies which do not require a license, and more which are available which do, with all others being illegal to use.
But it seems to me that the very wide variety of frequencies which are possible on such professional radio mics means that there will always be a good range of frequencies available for use in any country both with and without a license. In other words, the equipment should more than suffice wherever you are - you just need to find out what frequencies to use legally in the country you are going to.
The only thing I can think of is that, if possible, check with people locally in other countries as to what advice they would give on how suitable and interference-free the legal frequencies are which don't require a license.
Just one other thing, is to take into account the mains voltage supply in other countries - I can't remember if the Sennheiser PSU works across the range of 100-240V, but I think that it is OK. Check with your supplier first, to ensure that the PSU being supplied in your country has this wide working voltage range.
