David Winfrey

FCC ruling could have churches singing a new tune

By David Winfrey

Louisville—Church leaders and technical specialists who use wireless microphones should prepare now for changes that might render their gear useless by early next year.

That’s the advice from manufacturers and other observers, who say recent actions by the Federal Communications Commission might have churches, concert halls and other groups shelling out bucks for new sound equipment.

“The sky is falling, but just not yet,” said Larry Brannin, an audio-video specialist with the Kentucky Baptist Convention, who has been researching this issue for several months.

The issue is a complex one involving access to the broadcast channels used by TV stations and others to deliver their signal. When signals from two or more TV stations, wireless microphones or other devices compete for the same channel, interference results in static sound or a dropped signal. The result is someone does not hear the sermon, solo or soap opera.

Three interrelated actions by the FCC have a variety of groups scrambling to respond.

Auction and eviction. Earlier this year, the FCC auctioned off channels 52-69 to wireless carriers for $19.6 billion. (These channels also are known as the 700 MHz channels of the spectrum.) Wireless carriers will introduce products that use these channels to deliver broadband Internet and other data service to their customers. As a result, any device, including wireless microphones, currently using those channels run a real risk of conflicting with these new devices.

DTV transition. As you probably have learned from the recent barrage of announcements, the FCC has mandated that all broadcast television channels complete their transition to digital television signals on Feb. 17. Currently, many stations occupy two channels on the spectrum to transmit the new digital signal and the older analog signal. On the day your rabbit ears antenna becomes obsolete, the channel spectrum will be freed up for use by other devices.

Crowding airwaves. A variety of companies are beginning to develop commercial devices that will use these open (also known as “white space”) channels. The FCC is instituting rules regarding their use, but some technicians and other observers question whether what is being mandated now is how these devices will work in the future.

Brannin said the initial concern is for churches whose current microphones operate in channels 52-69. “At some point it’s going to happen that they’re going to have problems if they’re operating in that 700 band,” he explained.

The Kentucky Baptist Convention falls into that category. The KBC uses wireless microphones for its annual meeting and other events, and Brannin said some of those use channels 68-69. “Now, I’m faced with the reality of having to go out and purchase new wireless systems because the microphones I have are no longer available to use,” he indicated.

While migration from the 700 MHz band of channels is a straightforward issue for all parties involved, manufacturers, technicians and the FCC agree less when it comes to equipment using other “white space” channels.

If unchecked, these devices could interfere with the wireless microphone signals at churches, plays or sporting events. For example, everyone in the congregation might hear static instead of the pastor or soloist if a bored church visitor decided to discretely check her e-mail using one of these new handheld devices.

An FCC spokesman said most churches should receive minimal to no interference and need to do nothing at this time. In addition, FCC regulations are requiring manufacturers to build two safeguards into any equipment they produce:

• Equipment must be able to determine its location and access an Internet database that lists who has registered to use broadcast channels in that area. Churches, sports facilities and other wireless microphone users can register a channel.
• Equipment must be able to scan the airwaves for signals and avoid interference.

But Brannin and others contend these FCC requirements are unproven.

So far, an instrument made by Philips Electronics NV is the only product that senses nearby wireless microphones. It was tested alongside wireless microphones at a Washington Redskins game and at a Broadway performance of “The Phantom of the Opera.” Wireless microphone sellers insist they failed at both, while device advocates say the opposite. The FCC has yet to weigh in.

“No determination has yet been made,” noted Rob Kenny, an FCC spokesman. “We are building a record to decide how best to proceed.”

Plan strategy, budget

Brannin said churches should proceed by being aware of the issue and preparing for the possibility that they might need to replace equipment.

“It’s going to take some homework,” he noted. “There is an issue that churches are going to have to deal with. It’s just a matter of where they’re located as to when they’re going to have to deal with it.”

Churches whose microphones broadcast in channels 52-69 should take action now. Brannin suggested that churches purchase “frequency agile” equipment, which can be programmed to use one of several channels. That will help avoid further interference in the future. Of course, the wider range of the system, the more it costs, he added.

“I think churches should be prepared to spend $300-400 minimum, and that’s for each microphone and receiver,” Brannin said. “Therein is the problem for small churches, it’s affecting those who can least afford it.”

For churches that do not have to take immediate action, Brannin recommended setting aside money in their budgets now for new equipment purchases in the future. “They might stick with what they’ve got, but start saving for it so that when the time comes they can go get what they need,” he advised.

And churches should be cautious when buying used equipment, Brannin added. “Don’t be buying used microphones on eBay without checking what frequencies they’re on.”

As for current equipment that a church discovers causes interference, Brannin recommended considering donating it to a partner congregation in another country where the interference might not occur.

“I don’t know that those frequencies would work there, but it’s worth a shot.”

With additional reporting by Religion News Service. (Full disclosure:  Two paragraphs about Phillips Electronics.-dw)