Tim: Of course, I try to be as diplomatic as I can, but I'm usually not afraid to tell them it is probably going to be louder than what they are used to. The follow up - which can be very powerful - is to explain how, yes, it may be louder, but now it might actually be understood, instead of the wash of garble that so many churches are content to put up with.

Weogo Reed: Hi Y'all, I'm just now joining. Any discussion of how to optimize intelligibility in reverberant rooms?

Tim: Intelligibility, when referring to installations, is of course always critical. I'm happy to offer some thoughts but I must admit that some of those who have preceded me on these chats are a bit more qualified! The long and the short comes down to good speakers, focused properly, from a good design, in a room designed by someone who has had more experience than just two classes in architectural school (which I'm afraid is the real problem in most of our churches).

Weogo Reed: In particular, reverberant rooms that are used temporarily and can't really be improved?

Tim: Very difficult, Weogo, but not impossible. While it probably isn't an option, about all you can do is try and hang as much absorptive material on the walls as you can. Also try and get your speakers up above the congregation/audience, so you can focus as much energy as possible where you want it and not at the back wall of the room.

Michael: Tim, do you have the problem that the minute you introduce a drummer with snare drum into the equation, you’re done for? Same goes for open-air wedge monitors…

Tim: Ah! Now we come to the issue of stage noise! Yes, Michael, particularly if you are in a smaller room. If your drummer is any good he'll want to play loud. I suggest brushes (which he won't like) or the current electronic drums (I know I've said a curse word there). But they really sound pretty darn good.

Tim (continued): The other thing I highly recommend is moving to in-ear monitors as much as possible. Everybody hears better and your stage noise is drastically reduced.

[yam4000vca: I have had much success with Bose in many churches. Do you have any opinions on this?

Tim: Bose can work well in some applications (just ask Paul Harvey). And in truth, I have installed Bose in the past. I can also say that Bose does have some serious shortcomings, and in spaces where you need directivity and high SPL (i.e. reverberant spaces as we have discussed), you need to have things that are horn-loaded. Bose systems will fill a space, but I have always struggled with getting enough gain out of a lapel.

MattKal: Hi Tim. With the onset of many new digital tools for system control (i.e. BSS Omnidrive, dbx DriveRack, Sabine ADF-4000, Ashly, XTA, etc.), what product have you found to offer the best "useful-benefit-to-price" ratio?

Tim: A lot depends on how much control you, as the user, want or need to have. Most of the DSP boxes on the market require setting with a PC, but then they are not terribly user
friendly from that point on. I like the the DriveRack for the usability on its interface, but I have encountered some fishy things. It seems a bit noisy for my taste and I must have a serious discussion with someone from dbx as to why they would make a product that
actually sends a "pop" through your sound system when it un-mutes all of its outputs on startup. Not that I'm bitter :).

Tim (continued): I've been very impressed with the White Paramedics, although it’s limited on inputs and outputs. Bang for the buck and maximum flexibility (assuming you have a PC), I'd still opt for the Media Matrix. The X-Frame 88 (8 in, 8 out) is still the most versatile and flexible interface.

Tim (continued): The Crown USM810 is a very powerful unit with 8 ins and 10 outs but don't go near the software unless you're prepared to be frustrated Yes, version 5 will be better, but I don't think they've released that just yet.