Another thing I wonder about:

[WorshipFocus]

Why do churches spend lots of money on iWorship and the like.... when they could easily use the money they use for THAT to pay a trained musician to develope a music program? I can see where it helps in the short term.... but also have seen where it becomes a wall too hard to climb in the future (if you know what I mean.) The difficulities "down the road" outweigh the short term benefits by far.

[russhutto]

It's a big leap from iworship to paid staff member.

Time is money in this case.

Is it possible to actually spend the same amount per week/month on cds/dvds or a person to develop a worship program and get the same or a better quality of worship expression?

Personally, I think we put too much emphasis on trying to build a band in the early phases of church launches and even in smaller churches. I really believe if you've got one person who can rock an acoustic guitar and sing, then empower them. Create an atmosphere that works to the strength of what you've got.

If all you can do is iworship vids, then rock it.

If all you can do is a vocal team with trax, then rock it.

If all you can do is a coffeehouse acoustic singer/songwriter feel, then rock it.

All the while making connections and developing relationships with people who might volunteer in the future.

P.S. To the OP, it might be helpful to actually put what you wonder about in your topic subject so that people will actually click on your thread and join in the discussion :)

[pastornate@gcclink.com]

how much is iWorship?
Is it a resource like CCLI Song Select or is it actual videos to sing to for a congregation.
I have CDs from iWorship but it is just the audio music? I think?

[chipshot0701]

What difficulties do you foresee down the road?
We incorporate all of these in our service: ivideo, live band, live soloist, live singers with rhythm tracks.
I haven't stumbled across any difficulties. But am curious what you are coming across so that I can be on the look out.

MC

[WorshipFocus]

Difficulties down the road....

1.) Teaches the vocalist by "rote" because that's easier. If they ever have to use a song they do not know or have the vocals spoon fed to them, they won't be able to learn it very easily. (This could be a problem down the road when using a live band and the worship leader pulls out a song the vocalists do not know.)

2.) The congregation gets used to hearing professional quality music (just like on the radio) and when you finally get volunteers for a live band, there WILL be a difference in quality. The congregation may be displeased with what they are hearing while the band grows and gels. The volunteer band members will most likely have a complex from having to compete with iworship, etc.

3.) From what I have seen, good luck trying to find a worship leader who wants to take 2 steps back to move one step forward. It would put a new worship leader in an odd position.

4.) While I and others know the flexibility and benefits of live music, certain lay people will not. All of the sudden the music budget will more than quadruple when you have live music. Less quality for more money is what the finance committee will be screaming.

These are just a few. What other problems do some of you all see?

[mikeymo1741]

We've never used canned music for worship, but we have used it for our choir for quite some time. Last year, we made the decision to move to live music for them as well for a couple of reasons. The biggest problem is that with pre-recorded music, you get locked into a particular arrangement. Extending a song, repeating a verse, doing a drum lift - not an option. We also felt there was a certain dynamic missing.

But it has it's benefits as well. Most churches, especially a small one, cannot replicate the instrumentation and arrangements of a professional track. For instance, we have no horn section, and only one keyboard. The arrangements need to be stripped down for much of our choir music.

I think people appriciate live music more, but that could be a personal bias. :)

I agree with Russ (as I often do). I'd rather have one dude with a guitar than recorded music. But I don't think that cutting down on buying iWorship is going to fund a music department.

[russhutto]

1.) Teaches the vocalist by "rote" because that's easier. If they ever have to use a song they do not know or have the vocals spoon fed to them, they won't be able to learn it very easily. (This could be a problem down the road when using a live band and the worship leader pulls out a song the vocalists do not know.)

Personally, I don't see a huge problem here if you have rehearsals and learn new music one song at a time. Honestly, the longer I do this, the more that I believe worship leaders/directors should not just wing stuff and spring it on their team, regardless of ability levels.

I do see the potential problems with the other 3 you mentioned, Focus.

I wouldn't worry too much though. The bottom line is that if you bring someone in to build a team, then that person should be on board from the get go. This actually goes to a deeper issue which is whoever the person/people in charge of bringing in/training up the "next" worship leader have to transparent about the situation.

I know there are different seasons for us as worship leaders. God forbid we ever not take a position because we're afraid of a little work. By work I mean training and equipping God's people to express their worship through serving others through music. Because it is indeed work.

In a perfect world, I'd still say that each church is responsible and capable of making the decision for themselves and shouldn't be bothered if during that season they so choose to use something along the lines of iworship or "canned" music.

In my mind, the only difference between us live musicians and canned, is that you have to feed us. God can and still does receive our expressions of worship whether we're singing along with a living, breathing sack of flesh and bones, or to a quality, professionally mixed recording.

Plus, like we say down here in Valdosta, Georgia. If you don't like it and haven't done anything to help change it, then there is a great church for you after all...it just ain't here.

[Smitty]

I also prefer live music over canned...BUT...we work with what we have.

Smitty

[chipshot0701]

reply to your number one reason:
Its been my experience that singing along with backing tracks is alot harder to do then singing along with live band. As far as pulling out a song that noone knows....don't you teach it to them in a way that they can learn it? Sometimes, don't you listen to the professional version together to learn it?
reply to your number 2:
Our congregation likes our live band much better then the canned music. They get to hear both qualities each month. BUT they keep coming to church and they keep giving us compliments on both live and canned performances. No insecurities here.

number 3:
I don't understand what you mean by two steps back and one step forward. Do you mean that reverting back to using canned music is a step back from your goal of all live performance? I get that point. But we also have to use what we've got and when we've got it! I mean that our team of volunteers is very busy. Teachers, Principles of schools business men and women. So we are rotating in and out of our church service. I don't like it but it is the way it is. So we incorporate live when we can and as often as we can. But we have to use canned. And the canned music works fine.

number 4.
$$$$ whats that? a music budget? lol I wish ours was more the the $500 a year that it is. But we get by.

[Viclyn]

I would also like to add that being led by a paid person who really isn't part of your church (iworship is much cheaper than a full time worship leader, so I'm assuming you are just talking about an accompanist) has its drawbacks as well. They aren't always consistent, have other commitments, and aren't known by your church. I think having people who get paid to do something (unless they are on staff at your church) makes things a bit awkward at times. I want someone to lead me who loves the Lord and loves the church they have been called to. And I say this as one who has been paid (I actually had them make a donation to a Bible giving ministry) to sing with other teams. It is somewhat awkward for me as well as I really don't know anybody and connecting with them is difficult. So, you may gain some musicianship, but you lose the family feeling of being led by people who know you and connect with you and you are familiar with. It's hard to put in words but bringing in someone who just walks in and out does change the environment.

[Rahel]

Hm...honestly.....I never heard of iworship...:rolleyes:

[way2tyred]

I want someone to lead me who loves the Lord and loves the church they have been called to.

My church loves me mistakes and all. It moves them to see me moved by worship. It is a different feeling with someone paid, at least in our experience in our church.

[WorshipFocus]

I think some may have misunderstood. I wasn't talking about paying someone "outside" the church to lead the music. I was talking more along the lines of "calling" a worship pastor to lead the worship and then supporting that person and their family as we should. I believe a ministry as important as the worship ministry really should have (if at all possible) a worship pastor (leader) and that the members of the church should take care of them. Sorry if I was confusing in earlier post.

[mikeymo1741]

I think some may have misunderstood. I wasn't talking about paying someone "outside" the church to lead the music. I was talking more along the lines of "calling" a worship pastor to lead the worship and then supporting that person and their family as we should. I believe a ministry as important as the worship ministry really should have (if at all possible) a worship pastor (leader) and that the members of the church should take care of them. Sorry if I was confusing in earlier post.

I agree. But remember that (according to the National Congregations Survey) the median church size in America is 75 regular attenders, including children. More than a third of churches in America only have ONE paid staff member, usually the senior pastor.

It is very easy to throw around the idea that everyone should get a paycheck. I happen to think that's the case. But reality states otherwise. The vast majority of individual people serving in churches do so as volunteers. Most churches simply cannot afford to pay a staff, yet they are doing vital work in their communities.

This gets into a whole different area, but we need to look at the church as a whole, rather than individual congregations fending for themselves.