Church acoustics and reinventing the wheel

Earlier in the month I received Understanding Church Acoustics, a free booklet from Acoustic Sciences Corporation in Eugene, Oregon. Here’s some of what the author, Arthur Noxon, had to say about the acoustics of “The Traditional Church” described on pp. 26-27:

This church is not the large cathedral…long and narrow with a high peaked roof overhead and usually a balcony in the back. The size ranges from small, 25′ wide to big, 60′ wide but their length is always 2 to 3 times as wide, and the peak is as high as the width…They are delicately balanced, clear sounding enough for speech and reverberant enough for singing, when occupied. Generally there is not much sound absorption material in the room.

This design is time-proven…high peak ceiling acts like an overhead reverb chamber, which, with its megaphone shape, keeps pushing the reverb down into the seated congregation area where it is both heard and absorbed. The side walls are narrow and the pastor speaks from a raised platform. This allows much of the side traveling sound to keep reflecting back and forth over the congregation, adding early reflections to improve intelligibility. These rooms are great for natural acoustic speaking. If an overhead speaker is used, it should be adjusted quiet enough to only reinforce the natural voice of the pastor—but not overpower him.

Quite an interesting view from a professional acoustician, especially in light of a lot of the “renovations” which rotate the nave 90 degrees (such as this one), seem to eliminate any practical choral use of the choir loft, and depend primarily on electronic amplification. The “new orientation” may work acoustically…does it?

How does my parish’s ‘worship space’ compare to this description? Our campus ministry usually holds its Sunday Masses in an auditorium whose acoustic design baffles me. Due mainly (I think) to the sound-deadening material which covers the rounded ceiling and the back wall, the space is dead. Ironically, if one tears out the ceiling tile, one uncovers—that’s right—a high peaked ceiling made of sheetrock, a superb sound reflecting material!

The poor acoustics of our ‘worship space’ make it difficult for our congregation to sing at Mass. Yet they sing (especially the Ordinary), and for that I commend them.

Leave a Reply




*Required. E-Mail will not be published.


*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

6 Comments

May I ask a question? Why are accompanying instruments in churches always played too loudly - more loudly than the choir? Our church has miked the grand piano, which you can hear beautifully without amplification.
My dad says that church accompanists need to take a lesson from jazz accompanists. (I know I must have spelled accompanists and accompanying wrong. sorry!)


Instuments are usually too loud because of improper mixing (volumn balence). There are three volumns that are important: What the congregation hears. 2. What the musiscian hears of other instruments and voices - to stay together, and 3. feedback of their own instrument or voice - sometimes called sidetone.

Most performers turn their own volume up in order to hear themselves properly. This in turn causes an imbalence in the overall volume.

This is a technical issue that can be solved, but rarely is the proper mixing equipment and experienced person with acoustic training available. Also it can be next to imposible to achieve in a church with too high an acoustic decay time - too much reverberation. In extreme situations musicians and singers will have to wear earphones.

Although your choir director probably already knows about the problem, mention it. However, note that mixing of sound is an art not a science, and what sounds imbalenced to you may sound just right to someone else. Also changing your location in the church may make a big difference.

Finally, there are some choirs that just do not know how to project.

God bless,
Al


No, the real problem is that boys like electronic toys, and some people become more interested in volume and mixing and nonsense than in the beauty and propriety of the music they are producing to praise the Lord.

Down with all mikes, all amplified music.

If acoustic instruments aren’t available, use nothing but the human voice.

Sing to God from your heart and from your diaphragm, and if anyone needs ear-phones, get whatever equipment that is making the NOISE that seemingly necessitates those earphones, the h*** OUT of your music program, and OUT OF YOUR CHURCH.

Nothing you are using should be CAPABLE of producing feed-back.

God doesn’t like ugly music.


Dear Gurlll

The problem predates electronic amplification by several thousand years. Quite a bit was written by the ancient Greeks about acoustics and the proper way to design a building to allow good sound production and music in particular. See for example A History of Western Music by Donald Grout and Claude Palisca.

I am old enough to have sung in choirs before amplification was common in churches. Balance was a problem then and placement of musicians and singers was of some concern. Also I was taught the trick of cupping your hand behind your ear in order to hear yourself in large groups.

Lately I have been putting on a “Coffee House” singing Christian songs I have composed. For some I used digital music driven by a computer, some a guitar, some I sing with a microphone, some I sing without any accompaniment, without any amplification. The point is I view all these things, including my voice, as tools. Tools to get across the Good News. These songs are not trivial, for example: (Copyright Al Boehm)

Mother, Mother,
What is my name?
You chose not to bear me,
I love you just the same.
…

The song was based on a visit to me by the spirit of an aborted girl who asked me to tell her mother to give her a name. My heart is very much in it when I sing this song. Indeed the first dozen times I could not finish it because I started crying.

Those who use some tools but not others fall into three categories. 1. Those who are trying for a specific effect or targeting a particular group. 2. Those who do not know how to use a tool so they are not able to use it, not everyone knows how to play a violin. 3. Those who do not know how to use a tool so they say the tool is no good. (See Aesop’s Sour Grapes)

You mention that “…boys like electronic toys.” Well I’d say of the boys and girls that I have met that in general boys are more mechanical. However, I have met too many exceptions to base any decisions on such generalizations. For example, one of my 11 year old granddaughters is very much into science and space and mechanical things.

I have been in churches were everyone was singing. But many churches I have been in are very concerned about the lack of congregations singing. I have come to the conclusion the problems are in order of importance:

1. The Music style is not appreciated, indeed is found boring.
2. Lack of regard for acoustics, feedback, and amplification.
3. Poorly trained musicians.

Thus, I encourage you to learn about acoustics. Learn how to use amplification rather than be cowed by it.

God bless,
Al


Thanks for the reference to the acoustics book. It is downloadable. So I did.

The before and after pictures of the nave of San Fernando Cathedral on the Richard Vosko site, on the other hand, were shocking. He removed all the … people!


In my years of church work (20+), although detesting sound systems for various reasons, I have learned that they are a necessary evil. An early electronic “school of thought” was to deaden the room (remove all reflective surfaces), and recreate the acoustical environment via sound system. Talk about messing with mother nature! We still suffer at the hands of that school of thought. However, I must say that having worked in a few large parishes, a well-placed sound system (rare as it may be), can be a real asset. I do not condone use of handheld mics in worship. I have had cantors using wireless mics, which requires a degree of educating, as mic placement is integral to the success of your singer. The most successful sound system-using churches in my experience have been those which are pre-set, and are not constantly adjusted (typically by folks who have no business behind a mixer).
As far as the organ or instruments overpowering the congregation and soloists….this is generally the product of an inexperienced musician, or one that should study the term “accompanyment” a little closer. Good accompanying skills are a grace, and should undergird and serve to lead a congregation. Solid, steady, well-thought-out playing should never make the singer felt overpowered, but more encouraged to sing. Further, an organist should sing along with his or her playing, that he or she be sensative to text, breathing and phrasing of the hymn. All to often organists (myself included) are inclined to set a few “hymn” registration pistons, with little variation. We should all be a little more focused on “feeding the flock” with our “console leadership abilities”, and leave concertizing to the appropriate places…hymnody not being one of the appropriate places.


A Musical Journey through GIRM