Over the years, I’ve worked with countless churches, and one trend that keeps catching my eye is the tendency to overcomplicate the audio mixing process. It’s all too easy to get swept up in the latest gear, shiny new plugins, and rigid methodologies promoted by industry influencers and online training providers. These experts often push complex solutions that might work well in a professional studio or large concert venue but aren’t always practical—or even necessary—in a worship setting.
This is especially true with techniques popular in the studio world, often taught in college audio programs. While they might sound impressive in a controlled environment, these methods can lead to frustration and poor results when applied to the dynamic, unpredictable nature of a live church service. For instance, techniques involving meticulous mic placements or complex signal chains often don’t translate well when you’re dealing with a volunteer team, a live congregation, and a tight Sunday morning schedule. In these situations, a straightforward, adaptable approach is often more effective than rigid adherence to theory.
In our age of overwhelming information, many well-meaning audio teams are simply trying to make the most of their systems, sifting through a mountain of data, tutorials, and expert opinions. However, I’ve also encountered cases where overcomplicating an audio setup comes from a less innocent place. Some audio or tech directors, driven by a desire to protect their job security, implement unnecessary complexity. By making the system so intricate that only they can operate it, they ensure they’re indispensable—but at the cost of team cohesion and the overall effectiveness of the system. Encouraging team members to learn and grow, rather than gatekeeping knowledge, helps create a system that’s easy to manage and serves the congregation better. After all, as a good friend of mine likes to say, “If it sounds good, it is good”—regardless of how many people are capable of making it sound that way.
The Dogma of Formal Techniques: Missing the Forest for the Trees
Not long ago, I worked with a great team preparing for a sound check when I noticed they were meticulously using a tape measure to ensure the left and right overhead microphones were equidistant from the snare—or maybe the kick drum. This “spaced-pair” method, common in recording studios, works well in controlled environments because it helps with stereo imaging. However, in our live setting, the drummer’s uneven cymbal heights and dynamic inconsistencies made this setup less effective. The cymbals on the right sounded nice, but those on the left were challenging to mix. I suggested we adjust the mic placement to better suit this specific situation, though one of the younger audio guys was hesitant. This experience highlighted how a textbook methodology, while valuable in theory, wasn’t serving our real-world needs. Instead of recreating the drum image, our priority was simply getting a balanced cymbal sound.
In all my years in recording studios and live environments, I’ve learned to never say never. Use the tools, education, and experience you have, but don’t be afraid to throw out the rule book when the situation calls for it. Wisdom is recognizing when it’s time to change course. After all, sometimes adapting to the moment’s needs is the key to achieving the best sound.
Majoring on the Majors and Confirmation Bias
Many years ago, I was mixing for a special event at for a large church at a 7,000-seat venue. One of my teammates, who was the system engineer, insisted on time-aligning the main PA to the drums. Now, I completely understand the importance of time alignment when multiple speaker sources are involved, but in this situation, I was happy to let him do the math and set it all up. During soundcheck, we created two scenes on the console: one with the time-aligned delays engaged, and one without, to compare the difference. Full disclosure: when I listened, I couldn’t tell much of a difference anywhere in the auditorium. When the event started, I decided to ditch the time-aligned scene and go with the standard one. The place was packed, and the event turned out to be a huge success. At the end of the night, my system engineer friend said, “The mix was awesome, and I think the time alignment really made a difference.” One of us fell prey to our own confirmation bias, and I’ll let you decide who that was.
To be clear, I believe that time-alignment is crucial when setting up and tuning large systems with a Digital Signal Processor—especially when dealing with multiple line arrays or point source delay rings. The technology is necessary in those contexts. But when it comes to time-aligning individual inputs or microphones to each other or to a specific instrument, I need to be convinced of an actual audible improvement before I buy in. After all, some of the greatest studio and live recordings were produced long before digital time-alignment ever existed. The nugget of wisdom I want to pass on from this experience is simple: be honest and ask yourself, “Is this exercise making anything actually sound better?” If the answer is no, don’t waste your time on it. Major on the majors and focus on what truly enhances the sound for your audience.
The WAVEs Plugin Trap: When Tools Become a Crutch
WAVEs plugins are fantastic—there’s no denying that. They offer powerful tools for shaping and enhancing sound, providing engineers with a wide array of options to polish a mix. However, in my experience, these plugins can sometimes become more of a crutch than a tool. Too often, engineers pile on plugins before they even listen to the input. Or to fix issues that could have been resolved more simply by focusing on fundamentals like proper mic placement, gain structure, and mix balance.
It’s easy to get swept up in the allure of what plugins can do, but I’ve learned that sometimes, less really is more. In fact, I’ve worked with several churches where, much to the chagrin of young Skywalker, we “unplugged the plugins” and got back to basics. By stripping away the unnecessary layers of processing, we were able to focus on building a solid mix from the ground up.
There are plenty of plugins designed to compensate for unstable dynamics among musicians, like compressors and limiters. But using these effectively requires a certain level of skill and understanding. My advice to churches is simple: if you don’t know what something does, don’t use it until you do. Plugins should enhance an already good mix, not act as a band-aid for poor fundamentals.
It’s also important to remember that technology can fail. An external WAVEs server can crash, and when that happens, you need to know how to build a good mix without it. That’s why I always stress the importance of mastering the basics—so that even if all the plugins in the world were taken away, you’d still be able to create a mix that serves the worship experience. Going back to basics not only simplifies the process but also ensures that you’re not overly dependent on technology to achieve great sound.
I tell young engineers and volunteers to never underestimate the value—and yes, the creativity—of simply pushing faders. As I mentioned earlier, some of the greatest recordings and live mixes in history were executed without a single digital plugin.
DCAs, Groups, and Busses, Oh My
A few years ago, bus mixing gained significant popularity. It’s a powerful technique that routes multiple audio sources (like vocals and instruments) to a single auxiliary channel or “bus” in a mixing console, allowing for collective processing and volume control. While I’m a fan of the practice, I believe it’s become a bit overused. With DCAs, Groups, and Busses all potentially controlling individual channels simultaneously, there are multiple volume and mute points in the signal flow. These features are helpful but can add complexity, especially when training inexperienced engineers and volunteers. Proceed with caution—and by the way, on most consoles, any channel can still be routed directly to the main output without involving a DCA, Group, or Bus. It seems like this gets forgotten sometimes.
I’ve found that simplifying the signal flow and using these tools wisely can prevent unnecessary confusion. While DCAs, Groups, and Busses are valuable, they should be employed with a clear understanding of how they impact the mix. The goal is to enhance control without creating a system that’s overly complicated or prone to errors, especially in a live worship setting where things need to run smoothly.
The YouTube Influence: Applying What’s Relevant, Ignoring What’s Not
In a previous article, I discussed the reliability of Church AVL advice on Facebook, and much of that content applies to YouTube as well. While YouTube is great for tutorials and gear reviews, not every technique suits your church’s needs. I’ve seen churches try to replicate intricate studio setups from online videos, only to find that what works in a controlled studio often fails or has no audible impact in a live worship setting. Variables like acoustics, audience size, and performer dynamics require careful adaptation of these methods.
Instead of replicating everything you see, focus on extracting principles that fit your situation. Take away what’s useful—whether it’s a new mic placement idea or an EQ approach—and leave the rest. This way, you can avoid overcomplication and create a sound that truly enhances your worship services.
YouTube, like studio microphone techniques, fixed time alignment, basic plugins and control groups, can be a fantastic starting point, but discernment is key. Tailor what you learn to fit your circumstances, and you’ll find your mixes become more effective and better suited to your ministry.
In the pursuit of great sound, simplicity is often the key. The best mixes come from understanding your environment, your team, and your tools, while staying true to what serves your church. Keep it simple, let your ears guide the way. And remember, if it sounds good, it is good.
As always, I’d love to hear your comments. You may contact me rcochran@worshipfacility.com. Until then, don’t forget to listen!
