Sound & Communications Worship Center AV Survey, March 2019

22nd Annual

Worship Center AV Survey

C O M M E R C I A L

A V

T E C H N O L O G Y

A N D

A P P L I C A T I O N

22nd Annual

Worship Center AV Survey

2

Sound & Communications

By Dan Ferrisi

When boiled down to its essentials, audiovisual technology is about communication.

Whether we’re talking about telepresence systems in office settings, digital signage networks in healthcare environments or 4K videowalls in sports stadiums, the purpose of the technology is to facilitate the transmission of information—or, in other words, to communicate. We, as sensory creatures, are often wowed by fine pixel pitches, audiophile-quality sound and so-sharp-they-look-real images, but those are just the icing on the cake; communication is the name of the game.

That fact makes AV professionals and worship leaders kindred spirits of sorts. Whether the faith is Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism or any other, the worship leader, when one steps into his or her holy site, seeks principally to communicate…to transmit a particular message and ensure the faithful receive and understand it. Over a few decades, worship leaders have come to realize—and then to embrace fully—the power that AV integrators possess to outfit their sanctuaries and ancillary spaces with technology that can not only enable transmission of the message, but also enrich its presentation, amplify its power and underscore its importance.

It’s not surprising, then, that in Sound & Communications’ annual Commercial Systems Integration Survey (the 33rd annual edition was published with the July 2018 issue; the 34th edition will be published this summer), the house of worship (HoW) market consistently ranks near the top among component pieces of integrators’ overall business. Looking at this past year’s survey, more than 70 percent of integrator respondents indicated that HoWrelated projects composed five percent or more of their activity. (The only vertical market whose percentage was higher was education; other top finishers included theaters/auditoriums/ concert halls, large commercial buildings/ offices and boardrooms/conference rooms.) The strength of this market segment is why Sound & Communications has featured our “House of Worship: Business” column, written by David Lee Jr., PhD, for more than 10 years, and why we share an in-depth HoW install six times yearly in Anthony Vargas’ “House of Worship: Technology.”

Given that Sound & Communications has kept its finger on the pulse of the HoW segment for years, we’ve closely tracked its evolution during that time. One of the hottest topics right now is the multi-site approach, whereby, as the pastor preaches a live sermon at the “broadcast campus,” that same service is streamed to (or played back at) “endpoint” campuses scattered

elsewhere in the town, city or state. Prominent Christian congregations—for example, Saddleback Church, North Way Christian Community, Southside Church and Fairhaven Church—are cases in point, achieving rapid growth and enrapturing hundreds, if not thousands, of the faithful. As we explore this year’s Worship Center AV Survey report, let’s keep an eye out for how these forward-leaning HoWs might be influencing their peers.

For this survey, we query HoW personnel from around the US; the results appear in Sound & Communications’ March issue. We provide this ad- and sponsor-free report as a service to our subscribers as part of the most comprehensive coverage of low-voltage systems integration and related IT communications offered anywhere.

Information for the Worship Center AV Survey is supplied by individuals who are directly involved in the purchase, installation and implementation of AV technologies. To learn about who was polled, see the section about METHODOLOGY. In the RESULTS section, you’ll find details about the graphics.

As always, we thank our Art Director, Janice Pupelis, for her expertise in creating a presentation that makes this information more visually appealing and easier to understand. Let’s get to this year’s results.

METHODOLOGY

This year, our methodology changed significantly, and that change helped produce a marked shift in our results. Formerly, survey respondents came from a database of music/ AV ministers across all Christian denominations, including unaffiliated congregations and nondenominational churches. This time, Sound & Communications invited all of our subscribers who characterize their employer as “Worship Facility,” and who, in addition, describe their job category as “Executive Management,” “Engineer/Technical Management,” “Consulting/ Designing,” “Technical/Installation Services” or “Education/Training,” to participate in the survey. Although this change shrunk the universe of potential respondents, it improved the rate of recipients responding (68 individuals responded) and prequalified all potential respondents’ interest in, and conversance with, commercial AV technologies.

The discussion that follows is based upon data from respondents who answered “Yes” to the question that pertains to whether respondents are planning to spend money on AV technology in the coming 18 months.

Different types of graphics illustrate responses. For questions that allow multiple

Q #1: Does your congregation plan to install a new, or upgrade an existing, audio, video or multimedia

system in the next 18 months?

2019

Yes

2018 2017 2016

No

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Q #3: Congregation locations?

Northwest 9%

Central Plains 1% North Central 3% Great Lakes 9%

Western 17%

Northeast 1%

Eastern 7%

Southwest 12% Midwest 25% South 16%

22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey

3

Ease of use for our volunteers.

Something easy to teach and simple to plug into and use effortlessly.

—Non-Denominational, Midwest, 701 to 1,500 Members responses, or for which several-year trends are illuminating, you’ll find bar graphs. Where responses should total 100 percent, we sometimes opt for pie charts. (Note that, due to rounding, not all figures add up to 100 percent.)

The questionnaire provides one open-ended question: “If there is one thing in particular you are looking for in a new system, please explain.”

Sample responses can be found throughout this report.

Each year, we tweak the questions to reflect technology changes. This year, we created a new question to ask about podcasts and other digital-only programming, which are major areas of interest among HoWs.

Q #4: Primary worship space seating capacity?

2019 1,501+

2018 2017

701-1,500

301-700

Up to 300

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

RESULTS

In Question #1, we ask respondents whether their congregation plans to install a new—or upgrade an existing—audio, video or multimedia system in the next 18 months. For the bulk of the survey (everything after Question #4), we only concern ourselves with those who answer affirmatively. For those who don’t have near-term AV-related spending plans, we gather information about denomination, region and congregation size only.

As noted earlier, our methodological changes this year have resulted in significant deviations from the previous norm in some of our results; we find our first deviation in the very first question.

For many years, there was relative parity between respondents who indicated they had immediateterm AV spending plans and those who indicated they did not. This time, however, a large majority (71 percent) affirmed that they plan to invest in AV technology over the next 18 months.

One theory for this change, which I find compelling, is that HoWs whose personnel read Sound & Communications are likelier to be more technology-savvy, along with being more aware of AV equipment’s power to enhance the worship experience. As such, whereas the average HoW might have a neutral view as regards the spiritual “return on investment” from sound-reinforcement equipment and hi-def displays, the more niche

4

Sound & Communications

Q #5: Which types of systems are installed currently?

Audio/Sound Audio/Sound Reinforcement Reinforcement

VideoVideo Playback/Projection Playback/Projection

Ancillary Ancillary Displays Displays (Flatscreens, (Flatscreens, Projectors, Projectors, etc.) etc.)

DigitalDigital Signage Signage

Live Video/TV/Streaming Live Video/TV/Streaming

AudioAudio Recording Recording

VideoVideo Recording Recording

Stage/Pulpit Stage/Pulpit Lighting Lighting Systems Systems 0

0

5

5

10

10

15

15

20

20

25

25

30

30

35

35

40

40

45

45

50

50

Better sound. Parts of our system are over 30 years old.

—Independent Baptist, Western, 301 to 700 Members

Q #6: Which types of systems do you plan to install in the next 18 months?

Audio/Sound Reinforcement Audio/Sound Reinforcement

Video Video Playback/Projection Playback/Projection Ancillary Displays Ancillary Displays (Flatscreens, Projectors, (Flatscreens, Projectors, etc.) etc.)

Signage DigitalDigital Signage

Live Video/TV/Streaming Live Video/TV/Streaming

Audio Recording Audio Recording

Video Recording Video Recording Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems 0

0

5

5

10

15

10

20

25

15

30

35

40 20

45

50 25

Q #7: Which types of systems do you plan to upgrade in the next 18 months?

Audio/Sound Reinforcement Audio/Sound Reinforcement

VideoVideo Playback/Projection Playback/Projection Ancillary Displays Ancillary Displays (Flatscreens, Projectors, (Flatscreens, Projectors, etc.) etc.)

Signage DigitalDigital Signage

Live Video/TV/Streaming Live Video/TV/Streaming

Recording AudioAudio Recording

Video Recording Video Recording Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems

0

0

5

5

10

15 10

20

15

25

30

20

35

40 25

45

50 30

community we surveyed this time is highly aware of what our industry can help them achieve. That theory will be tested next year, when we repeat the same methodological approach.

Looking at Question #3, we see the normal year-to-year fluctuations. As generally holds true, areas of the country where faith plays a more significant role in people’s lives are over-represented. For instance, the Midwest composed 25 percent of our responses and the South was 16 percent, whereas the Northeast represented only one percent. If history is any indication, regional fluctuations do not meaningfully affect our survey results.

The results for Question #4, which centers on the actual seating capacity of worship facilities, are particularly interesting. As indicated by the three-year trend, our respondents shifted notably between 2017’s survey and 2018’s iteration to HoWs whose facilities are physically larger. For example, in 2017, only 35 percent of survey takers indicated their HoW had 301 or more seats; by contrast, in 2018, 46 percent of respondents answered that way. Well, this time, the trend has gone “pedal to the metal!” Fully 71 percent of our survey takers came from HoWs that accommodate 301 or more people, with the number of respondents coming from small churches (300 people or fewer) dropping 25 percentage points since last year.

Next, we turn to the types of AV systems potentially applicable to worship facilities, examining which are installed currently, which might soon be installed and which might soon be upgraded.

In Question #5, it is clear that “Audio/Sound Reinforcement” is the category of equipment most widely installed in HoWs, with all 48 qualifying respondents (survey takers who have immediate-term AV spending plans) affirming their worship facility has that technology. Following close behind were “Audio Recording,” “Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems,” “Video Playback/ Projection” and “Ancillary Displays,” which drew 41, 38, 38 and 37 respondents, respectively. The biggest laggard was “Digital Signage,” which was selected by only 12 survey takers; as such,

22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey

5

High-quality camera system/ switch for livestreaming and video venue.

—Nazarene, Eastern, 301 to 700 Members

Q #8: Primary use(s) of system(s)?

Worship Services

Music Ministry/Programs

exactly one-quarter of the 48 respondents with AV spending plans have a digital signage system installed in their HoW. Question #6 looks to AV systems soon to be newly installed (as opposed to being updated).

Here, the power of the multi-site approach really comes into focus. The top response (22 survey takers) was for “Live Video/TV/Streaming,” which aligns well with the idea of a broadcast campus serving endpoint campuses. Because this trend, although not new, is still blossoming, it makes sense that such equipment would appear on HoWs’ to-do list, rather than on their alreadyhave list. Also garnering significant response were “Ancillary Displays,” “Video Recording” and “Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems” (17, 15 and 13 respondents, respectively).

For Question #7, we ask about currently existing systems that responding HoWs plan to upgrade during the next 18 months. Given that we’re talking about previously installed AV that’s due for an upgrade, we’d naturally expect the answers to cluster more around conventional technologies, rather than the “bleeding edge.”

That is, indeed, what we find: “Audio/Sound Reinforcement” drew the most response by far, attracting 29 survey takers. The next-closest was “Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems,” followed by “Video Recording” and then “Ancillary Displays.”

It’s surprising to see displays far down the list of technologies due for an upgrade, given the dramatic rise in interest in direct-view displays instead of projectors. One might surmise that either (a) the cost curve hasn’t bent enough yet, or (b) projectors are still working well for those HoWs that have them.

Naturally, one might expect churches would use AV systems primarily for worship-related activities; with Question #8, we inquire about the purposes for which our technologies are used.

Although many survey takers (40 respondents) affirmed that their HoWs utilize AV for “Worship Services,” other choices also garnered significant response. For instance, 23 indicated that “Music Ministry/Programs” rely on AV systems and “Audio and/or Video Production” garnered 10

Non-Religious Events

Audio and/or Video Production

All Purposes

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

40

2019

Yes, Via Local Cable

2018 2019 2017 2018 2016 2017

Yes, Via Local Cable

Q #9: Where are system(s) being used?

Yes, Via Streaming (Live Or Delayed)

2016

Yes, Via Streaming (Live Or Delayed) Main Sanctuary Only

Main Sanctuary Only Main Sanctuary Only

Yes, Both Local Cable & Streaming 2019 Main Sanctuary & General Purpose Room Yes, Both Local Cable & Streaming

Main Sanctuary Only MainSanctuary Sanctuary&Only Main General Purpose Room MainSanctuary Sanctuary&Only Main General Purpose Room

2018 2017 2016

No, We Do Not Broadcast Main Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms MainSanctuary Sanctuary&Only Main General Purpose Room Main Sanctuary & General Room MainPurpose Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms Main Sanctuary & General Purpose Room Main Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms No, We Do Not Broadcast 0%

10%

20%

2015

30%

40%

50%

60%

70

40%

50%

60%

20 70

20

Youth/Singles/AncillaryMain Rooms ONLY & General Sanctuary Room MainPurpose Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms 10% Rooms 20% Rooms ONLY 30% Main Sanctuary0% & Several Other Youth/Singles/Ancillary Main Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms Youth/Singles/Ancillary Rooms ONLY

20

20

20

Networking/Streaming With Remote MainLocations Sanctuary & Several Other Rooms Youth/Singles/Ancillary Rooms ONLY Youth/Singles/Ancillary Rooms ONLY Networking/Streaming With Remote Locations Youth/Singles/Ancillary Rooms ONLY Networking/Streaming With Remote Locations 0%

10%

20%

30%

Youth/Singles/Ancillary Rooms ONLY Networking/Streaming With Remote Locations = Not Available Networking/Streaming With Remote Locations Networking/Streaming With Remote Locations

6

35

Sound & Communications 0%

0% 10%

0% 0%

40%

10% 20%

50% 10% 10%

20% 30%

60% 20% 20%

30% 40%

30% 30%

We are in the process of installing LED video displays.

—Baptist, South, 1,501+ Members

Q #10: How will you choose an integrator/consultant?

Already Have One In Mind

2019 2018 2017 2016

Internet Research

2015

Volunteers From Congregation

Referral From Other Congregations

Magazines

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Q #11: Would a third-party certification system be helpful in selecting

an integrator/consultant?

Yes

2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 No

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

50%

responses. Indeed, nearly 19 percent of respondents said they’d best characterize their HoW as deploying AV for “All Purposes.” As noted earlier, it seems beyond dispute that AV professionals and worship leaders are kindred spirits when it comes to facilitating effective communication.

Question #9 probes not the purposes for which HoWs use AV technologies, but, rather, the physical locations in which they deploy them.

Looking at the multiple-year trend chart, we see that, this time, fewer respondents selected “Main Sanctuary Only”; that answer dropped from 57 percent to 46 percent. It appears that those percentage points went to “Main Sanctuary & General Purpose Room,” which leapt 12 percentage points to reach 29 percent. The other answer options fluctuated a few percentage points, but, given the margin of sampling error, none of the changes seems notable.

Question #10 centers on how churches go about selecting an AV integrator or consultant.

Our methodological change is influencing this question’s results, because “Already Have One In Mind,” which has always been the top answer, grew substantially from all previous years’ surveys. This time, a near-majority (49 percent) selected that answer, with the next-closest being “Volunteers From Congregation” at 23 percent. It seems plausible that the church personnel surveyed this time, all of whom subscribe to Sound & Communications, have a firmer grasp of the AV professionals that serve their area and, therefore, they go into prospective projects with ideas about preferred AV partners.

Third-party certification (Question #11) is an important topic because it confers a level of professionalism on an industry that, prior to the AV/IT convergence, had relatively few standards.

It’s unsurprising, then, that this question has delivered the same result year after year: End users consider third-party certification systems helpful.

Looking at the past five years, the percentage of respondents answering affirmatively has ranged from 58 percent to 80 percent; this year, “Yes” drew 71 percent. It is fortunate, therefore, that AVIXA and other industry organizations continue

22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey

7

Digital audio mixer and powered speakers.

—Non-Denominational, Northwest, Up to 300 Members

Q #12: How will you decide what equipment to include in your system(s)?

In-House Technology Manager

Installer's Recommendation

Internet Research

to invest in certification initiatives, not least being the very prominent Certified Technology Specialist (CTS) designation and Audiovisual Providers of Excellence (APEx) program.

In Question #12, we turn to how the brands of equipment included in a HoW’s AV system are selected. The top three vote-getters are all clustered together: “Internet Research,” “In-House Technology Manager” and “Installer’s Recommendation” led with 32, 28 and 26 affirmative responses, respectively. The rise of the in-house technology manager is a trend we’ve been watching for a few years now, and we’re seeing its effects throughout our industry. Walking the show floor at Integrated Systems Europe (ISE) and InfoComm, we’ve seen the shows rebranded to focus on the end-user experience; at the same time, Sound & Communications’ BPA audit indicates that technology managers are now the plurality (45 percent) of our readership. It seems that, as our industry shifts toward being experience-focused, third-party AV professionals and in-house technology managers have been forced into tight alignment.

The preceding discussion leads neatly to Question #13, which inquires about the most important person(s) in determining how an AV budget is created. Underscoring the trend that we’ve identified, 36 percent of respondents answered “In-House Technology Manager” as the top dog in creating AV budgets. Going back several years, the power used to be held by church committees, and, to be fair, “Committee” still drew 17-percent response this time; however, it’s clear that, when it comes to experiential AV, technology managers are now likeliest to be the deciders. Notable is that “Pastor” also drew 17-percent response, whereas all other answers lagged.

Question #14 inquires about the relative importance of the AV systems that HoWs use.

As always, “Sound Reinforcement” left all other answers in the dust, attracting 44 first-place votes. Earlier in this survey, we discussed how communication is central to both audiovisual implementations and worship; it seems clear

8

Sound & Communications

Consultant

Referral From Other Congregations

Recommendations From Congregation

Magazines 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

30%

35%

40%

Q #13: Who determines an AV equipment budget?

In-House Technology Manager

Pastor

Music Minister

Media Minister

Committee

Needs Analysis

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Ease of use for volunteers.

—Non-Denominational, Northwest, Up to 300 Members

Yes, Both Local Cable & Streaming

Q #14: Relative importance of AV systems?

No, We Do Not Broadcast Sound Reinforcement 0%

10%

20%

30%

Most Important 50% 60% Second Place

40%

70%

Third Place Fourth Place

Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems

Least Important

Video Playback/Projection/Streaming

Audio Recording/Production

Video Recording/Production

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Q #15: Budget for audio and video systems?

<$5,000 17%

>$100,000 12% $50,000 to $100,000 10%

$5,000 to $9,999 21%

$25,000 to $49,999 15%

$10,000 to $24,999 25%

45

that, according to church personnel, the AV component most critical to conveying their message is the sound-reinforcement system.

“Stage/Pulpit Lighting Systems” generally ranked second most important, followed by “Video Playback/Projection/Streaming” in third.

As usual, the relative laggards were “Audio Recording/Production” and “Video Recording/ Production,” which drew the most fourth-place and fifth-place votes. Considering our earlier observations about multi-site churches, I expect streaming to grow in relative ranked importance in the coming years for those HoWs that have larger congregations.

Question #15 asks about the combined budget for audio and video systems. In looking at the answers, we see a remarkably equitable distribution of percentage points. The leader was “$10,000 to $24,999,” drawing 25 percent of the response; following that were “$5,000 to $9,999” and “<$5,000,” which attracted 21 percent and 17 percent, respectively. However, it’s worth noting that, collectively, 37 percent of respondents pegged their combined AV budget as being $25,000 or more, with 12 percent indicating the budget is “>$100,000.”

Although AV integrators can’t count on working six-figure HoW projects every day, it’s clear that they’re out there for AV professionals who can secure them.

Regarding Question #16, in which HoW end users rank AV system attributes by relative importance, the changes from year to year have been minimal. As always, the clear leaders are “Reliability” and “System Cost,” which drew far more first-choice ratings than any other answer.

“Ease Of Use” was far behind, with “Flexibility Of Use” coming in fourth and “Ease Of Upgrading” a very distant fifth. Even though, as indicated in the previous question, some HoWs have AV budgets that are quite substantial, there is no doubt that churches are price-conscious AV clients. At the same time, they are also reliability-conscious. Given the relative rankings, only arguments that are rooted in reliability are likely to be strong enough to overcome worship

22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey

9

Quality for the price we can afford.

—Non-Denominational, Western, 701 to 1,500 Members

Q #16: What do end users want? How respondents rate the importance of system attributes.

Most Important Second Place

Flexibility Of Use

Third Place Fourth Place Least Important

Ease Of Upgrading

leaders’ price-based reservations.

Question #17 relates to funds being budgeted for theatrical-style lighting. For many years, answers to this question remained quite stable; this time, however, we see a change.

From 2015 to 2018, respondents saying they are budgeting funds for theatrical-style lighting ranged between eight percent and 20 percent.

For this year, however, those answering “Yes” leapt to 27 percent. What’s more, from 2015 to 2018, those indicating they “Already Have” theatrical-style lighting ranged between 13 percent and 23 percent; for this year, by contrast, response jumped to 38 percent—the highest level yet recorded. Accordingly, the 35 percent who indicated that lighting was neither already present nor in the budget was by far the lowest response we’ve ever found. We’ll bear these shifts in mind next year to see whether the change is anomalous or a burgeoning trend.

Throughout this survey report, we’ve made several allusions to multi-site worship and the rise of streamed worship services. In Question #18, we ask about plans related to livestreaming. What caught my eye is how few respondents answered “Do Not Plan To Stream” when we inquired as to their plans; only 16 percent of respondents—fewer than one in five—indicated general disinterest. Conversely, 46 percent of survey takers have already jumped on board, answering either “Looking To Increase Streaming” or “Satisfied With Current Streaming.” But the plurality vote-getter (38 percent) was “Plan On Adding Streaming,” which means that, for AV integrators, there’s plenty of room to grow as it relates to integrating streaming technologies for HoW clients. If our sample is representative, then nearly four in 10 churches embarking on AV projects will be interested in implementing streamed worship.

In Question #19, we broach the subject of rebroadcasting services. Because of a data anomaly in 2017, it’s difficult to discern a clear, stepped pattern in the multi-year graphic.

However, it’s clear that rebroadcasting is on the rise among our reconstituted sample of HoW

10

Sound & Communications

Reliability

Ease Of Use

System Cost

0

5

10

15

20

25

Q #17: Budgeting funds for theatrical-style lighting?

2019 2018

Yes

2017 2016 2015

No

Already Have

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Q #18: What are your plans regarding streaming?

Better lighting.

—Non-Denominational, Midwest, 301 to 700 Members

2019

Yes, Via Local Cable

2018

Do Not Plan To Stream, 16%

Plan On Adding Streaming 38%

2017 2016

Satisfied With Current Streaming Yes, Via Streaming (Live Or Delayed) 21% Looking To Increase Streaming 25%

Yes, Both Local Cable & Streaming

Q #19: Do you rebroadcast your services?

No, We Do Not Broadcast

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60% 2019

Yes, Via Local Cable

70%

2018 2017 2016 Yes, Via Streaming (Live Or Delayed)

Yes, Both Local Cable & Streaming

No, We Do Not Broadcast

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Q #20: Do you have a podcast or other digital programming?

Yes 44%

No, And No Plans 37%

Not Yet, But Planning To 19%

60%

70%

personnel. Last year, 65 percent of respondents answered “No, We Do Not Broadcast”; this time, those offering the same answer dropped 11 percentage points to 54 percent. Those answering “Yes, Via Streaming (Live Or Delayed)” made up 36 percent of respondents, marking a fivepercentage-point jump from last year. “Yes, Via Local Cable” continues to lag far behind, hitting a modern high at a meager four percent.

Question #20 is a new one for us this year, asking about whether HoWs offer a podcast or other digital-only programming. Clearly, this is a question whose time has come, as 63 percent of respondents either have such programming already (44 percent) or are planning to launch it (19 percent). Those answering “No, And No Plans” will be interesting to watch as we bring this question into its second year. I expect the 37 percent who answered that way this year to shrink as it becomes ever clearer that digital media is the currency of the contemporary communications landscape. What’s more, podcasts and digital programs can reach homebound individuals who, nonetheless, want to engage with their worship community.

Question #21 relates to whether responding HoW personnel already have, or are currently considering, a maintenance contract with the AV integrator who installed their equipment. This time, we find 81 percent answering “No” and 19 percent answering “Yes.” Whereas some AV integrators specialize in maintenance contracts, remote monitoring, service level agreements (SLAs) and the like, others have explored those profit-generators comparatively less. Year-toyear changes in this question have been slight; we’ll see what 2020 brings.

For Question #22, we take stock of whether HoWs invest in assistive-listening systems. The trend here could not be clearer, nor could it be more welcome. Every year, more HoWs invest in the needs of hearing-impaired congregants.

Starting in 2015, when 40 percent answered “Yes,” we’ve seen steady growth every year—42 percent in 2016, 53 percent in 2017, 67 percent in 2018 and 79 percent this time.

22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey

11

Q #21: Maintenance contract with integrator that installed your equipment?

22nd Annual

Worship Center AV Survey

Yes,19%

No, 81%

Q #22: Address the needs of the deaf and hearing impaired?

Yes

2019 2018 2017 2016 2015

No

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

At the risk of editorializing, I would like to see the percentage answering “No” drop to zero sometime soon.

Sticking to the same subject, Question #22a inquires about which specific technologies HoWs use to serve the hearing impaired.

Even though much has been made of hearing loops—for good reason, many say—their implementation among our survey respondents remains low; only six survey takers said they’re using them. By contrast, the clear leader was “FM Transmission (Assistive Listening),” which drew 28 responses. “Visual Presentation (Projection Or Flatscreen)” was a rather distant second, only attracting half the response that “FM Transmission” drew.

We hope the data presented in this Worship Center AV Survey report continues to be useful.

We welcome suggestions about how we can improve this survey or how better to present the information gathered. Send comments to dferrisi@testa.com.

A P P L I C A T I O N

Q #22a: Which technologies do you employ to support the hearing impaired?

PEPPERMILL SPORTSBOOK G O E S T H E E X T R A YA R D

RENO CASINO GOES BEYOND LARGEST DISPLAY, CREATES VIDEO ATMOSPHERE

A N D

Sign Language

March 18, 2019 Vol. 65 No. 3

T E C H N O L O G Y

Visual Presentation (Projection Or Flatscreen)

A V

Induction Loop (Assistive Listening)

Voices Carry Multi-site churches are utilizing advanced AV to reach the masses

100 Acres of Discreet AV Tulsa OK’s Gathering Place creates an ‘organic’ attraction

C O M M E R C I A L

22nd Annual

Infrared (IR) Transmission (Assistive Listening)

FM Transmission (Assistive Listening)

0

12

5

Sound & Communications

10

15

20

25

30

Worship Center AV Survey

INSIDE: 22nd Annual Worship Center AV Survey Report

C O M M E R C I A L

A V

T E C H N O L O G Y

A N D

A P P L I C A T I O N

VIEW OUR INTERACTIVE DIGITAL EDITION: www.soundandcommunications.com VIEW OUR INTERACTIVE DIGITAL EDITION: www.soundandcommunications.com

This is a supplement to Sound & Communications.