Building Your Band

A better conversation about music, with David Loftis and Peter Bulanow

Love Ran Red, a few production notes

By

Here are my production notes for translating Chris Tomlin’s (Amazon | iTunes) Love Ran Red to a live Band.

  • This is a piano record. I would personally enjoy playing songs from this album, partially because it uses so much piano (and that’s my first love), and partially because it comes across as a movie score (which is how I like to think about music).
  • There is room for your classical-pianist and your keyboardist-pianist, as well as your synth/programming guy on different songs, so be intentional about booking the right person for the right song (or call me up). There are lots of different piano sounds on this record that you’ll want to be aware of. There’s a standard Steinway or Yamaha grand, a more muted grand with the highs rolled off at the board, a compressed acoustic piano (Michael English’s Finally Free being a particularly egregious example of a compressed piano), and a plain-Jane keyboard-piano.
  • There are also plucked sounds on this record that could be covered by acoustic guitar, but I’m not sure they were originally acoustic guitar on the record (if so they’ve been highly produced), so they could also be covered by a keyboard or programmed.
  • The electric guitars are actually pretty understated on this record – standard U2/Edge delayed guitar – but one could elect to mix the guitars up to create gutsier renditions.
  • Lots of cinematic toms are present, which I personally love, but they require some special preparation from your sound engineer to get them sounding big and awesome.
  • There are some EDM influences, like four-on-the-floor kick, synth appreciators, and filter sweeps not usually found coming out of Nashville (maybe some Crowder influence?)

Greater

  • These opening lines are right out of a Hans Zimmer score, so you’ll need your gorgeous string pads handy to not waste this moment. Maybe you’d want to consider doubling the intro. You’ll want your synth guru booked for this day.
  • Programmed synth bass would be cool, but a decent live player can do this.
  • This song has some of those plucked sounds on the first verse that could be covered by acoustic guitar or a 2nd keyboard guy.
  • A modern piano/keyboard sound with some delay on it plays the thematic element on verse 2, or this could be covered quite nicely by some delayed guitar and simply layered with some acoustic piano (the latter being my preference).
  • Make sure you have your guy who loves playing toms booked for this day.
  • Starting at the 2nd chorus, you’ll want a few additional harmony vocals to join.
  • If you have an old school choir at your disposal, have them waiting in the wings and enter Fortissimo at the bridge, and then again echoing the bridge part over the final chorus. This is what the kids call “epic”.

How to get this right: let it be relaxed, sweeping, even cinematic.
How to get this wrong: overplay it.

Waterfall

  • Opens with electric piano and quickly gets into EDM synth dance sounds, so you’ll need to be playing to a click track to keep the arpeggiators in sync. Season with filter sweeps.
  • Acoustic piano on chorus is compressed (ask your sound tech do to this) and should be played live by someone with strong (classically trained?) hands. I can see a case for two keyboardists this day, one on the grand, another doing the synth work. Pads on verse 2 can be string pads or synthier square waves.
  • On that note, think about having another vocalist that sounds like you to do sound of the random overdubs. There’s room for a little extra vocal goodness if they want to run with it a little.
  • Make sure you have your guy who loves playing toms booked this day.

How to get this right: preproduction, keep it tight.
How to get this wrong: fail to give it enough rehearsal time and it’ll fall apart.

At the Cross (Love Ran Red)

  • Use compressed piano with some delay on it.
  • Plucked sounds could be covered by acoustic guitar or a 2nd keyboard guy.
  • Bring all your vocalists online for the bridge.
  • It’s OK to build to a wall of sound on this one 😉

How to get this right: keep it relaxed, create some space.
How to get this wrong: rush the kick.

Jesus Loves me

  • I would probably play this ballad on the house grand, even though it sounds more like a sample on this recording.
  • Electric guitar can cover the quiet tremolo pads, and all other tasteful / big / ambient parts.
  • Piano and Drums propel this one.

How to get this right: be passionate.
How to get this wrong: let it drag.

Boundary Lines

  • Your sound tech is definitely going to need to listen to this recording. You’ll need a second vocal mic for the intro vocal that has the highs and lows rolled off to sound lofi, run through a tap delay, and then your sound guy will play the low-pass filter live and open that up.
  • Book your synth/keyboard person who knows what filter sweeps are. They’ll also have access to vintage Rhodes sounds and compressed pianos, besides all the warm pads and undulating sounds.
  • Everything should happen to a click track so the band stays tight and in sync. You’ll probably want all those 16th note delayed claps to be programmed ahead of time and a nice click going to the drummer.
  • Ask the drummer if they want to play the tambourine or have that programmed.
  • Program the hand clap on 2 & 4 and four on the floor kick.
  • Play the toms, snares, fills, live and wail on that hi-hat like any good EDM song does.
  • More of that plucked stuff that could be played by a 2nd keyboardist or acoustic guitarist.

How to get this right: preproduction!
How to get this wrong: expect a live version to come together quickly.

Almighty

  • This song is one of those sit-on-a-stool-with-a-spotlight solo tunes, at least to start. Not too much rocket science here, even though it feels a little complicated. Eventually it builds with lots of vocals on the chorus.
  • A nice classic Yamaha or Steinway grand anchors this song. I love the bridge that drops back to solo piano. Whomever you give this solo to will thank you.
  • For the signature figure that seems to go through a 5/4 measure followed by a 3/4 measure, don’t count it that way – just play straight through with a 4/4 count.
  • More of those wonderful U2 guitars on the chorus.
  • There might be room for a second keyboardist to do some pads on this, just don’t overdo it.

How to get this right: tight transitions.
How to get this wrong: telegraph your transitions (with fills) or not choking your cymbals.

The Roar

  • There are nice pads and compressed piano on this one.
  • Four on the floor kick, but play it live.
  • Crazy backing vocal on the chorus! Never fear, the electric guitar can cover this.
  • Nice half-time feel on the bridge. You booked your choir for this right??

How to get this right: 16th note hi-hats keeps the momentum.
How to get this wrong: That’d be pretty hard.

Fear Not

  • The intro is a lo fi variant of the chorus. I don’t think it’s critical to try to sound like the record. Maybe have a 2nd mic tuned up to sound like a megaphone…or use a megaphone!
  • Mechanically, this song is straightforward. One guitar playing the arpeggios, and another something – could be guitar could be keyboard – holding down the chord. Add that and solid drums.

How to get this right: Bring in your youth and kids choir to yell out the bridge!
How to get this wrong: Fail to drive the song with all those 16th note hi-hats, or hold back even a little.

The Table

  • Grand piano, electric guitar doodling, nice drum groove. This song just comes together.
  • You may or may not want to go up a step after the bridge, especially if you’re shaky and may not nail it a capella. Either way this is another one where you want your choir coming in at the bridge.

How to get this right: Get everyone snapping on two and four before you start the song.
How to get this wrong: If you’re not having fun, you’re doing it wrong. It’s a celebration. It’s about community. It’s about relationships: vertical and horizontal.

Psalm 100

  • It’s cool to see some of that EDM influence. You’ll be playing to a click, but a tight live drummer should be able to cover all the drums parts. Live bass is the way to go. Straightforward Edge electric guitars.
  • In fact, you may be able to play this entire tune live with your synth guy running arpeggiators, as long as you’re playing to a click. If they want to program it, that’s cool too.
  • The piano arpeggiation on the bridge would sound pretty awesome if it can be played tight on a grand. Better be practicing your Hanon for the finger strength.
  • P.S. Those are some great mellotron strings at the end!

How to get this right: Preproduction!
How to get this wrong: not play to a click track.

I Will Boast

  • This is a beautiful rubato grand piano song.
  • If you have some live strings, violas, cellos, this is the time to let them sing out. Some of this could be augmented by keyboard pads, or covered by mellotron-type samples.
  • There are some tasteful guitars, but I’m not sure you even need ’em – give your strings a chance to shine!
  • There are some really nice harmony vocals in a few spots. The whole tune might be really nicely reconfigured as a male-female duet.
  • Ends with Rhodes electric piano, which I don’t get the point of, other than to facilitate a transition to a coda of “At the Cross”.  I would label this an album artifact and ignore it live by sticking to just the piano and ending the song, particularly unless you actually did “At the Cross” earlier in your service.

How to get this right: Have a gorgeous well-mic’d, well-tuned, grand piano.
How to get this wrong: Rush it.

Jesus, This is You

  • This is the guitar song on the record. It sounds like it’s from a recent U2 album.
  • Keyboards – use atmospherics – maybe some keyboard / piano / melodic-chime sounds, but don’t get in the way of what your particular guitarist is doing. This is a guitar song – listen!
  • There is room for lots of vocals on this. The choir can possibly come out for this. Let it build to a wall of sound. Maybe add an extra chorus.

How to get this right: Book The Edge (U2) to play guitars and sing that thematic part for you.
How to get this wrong: Let it get too big / full / muddy / wall of sound (looking your way, keys).

In the End

  • A neat little rhythmic device opens this tune on the riff. That could come from a keyboard guy (arpeggiator?) or a guitar guy (acoustic guitar with delay?). Since there is already a piano part, I would look to your electric guitarist to pick up an acoustic and run it through a delay.
  • The piano part would probably be a modern piano keyboard sound, not necessarily a grand. Be ready to layer a nice big atmospheric pad like Absynth.
  • Also that’s a pretty cool compressed drum loop on the second chorus, so you’re playing tight to a click, right?
  • Kick and a couple toms build at the Bridge. The drum kit is finally in after the bridge. It’s called building tension!

How to get this right: Rehearse.
How to get this wrong: Think this song will magically come together.

REMIXes

I really love that they are offering these. It shows the songwriting can stand up to reinterpretation.

Waterfall Tritonal Remix

  • I don’t know that I’d attempt this version live, but if you can it’s got lots of nice production. Vocoder on the harmonies anyone?
  • The programmed synth and snare stuff are epic. You can probably do a hybrid with the regular version and whatever synthy stuff you can come up with.

How to get this right: preproduction.
How to get this wrong: fail to integrate live sounds well with the programmed sounds.

At the Cross (Love Ran Red) [Acoustic]

  • This song utilizes picked acoustic guitar, and very minimal warm pad on the first verse.
  • If you have a second acoustic guitar that can pick, there is room for some tasteful layered harmonies starting at the chorus.
  • Use kick and shaker on the second verse. I would probably replace with a mic’d Djembe and shaker (and tambourine) instead, as I think a drum kit is too big for this.
  • Some gentle well-mic’d grand piano comes in at the second chorus.

How to get this right: show restraint, be tasteful.
How to get this wrong: overplay.

Let It Be Jesus [Acoustic]

  • This is an acoustic piano ballad.
  • There is a little extra acoustic guitar in the recording that I don’t know I would want in right away. Maybe hold off until the chorus when the tempo gets established. That way the instrumentation stays tight.
  • I get the piano dropping out on the second verse and switching to acoustic guitar before bringing the piano back in. We need that sonic break.
  • Personally I think this would sound so much more epic with some solo string lines. Somebody score something for this!

How to get this right: restraint.
How to get this wrong: let it get too big.

Do you hear things differently? Anything I missed? Leave a comment below!

Playing the Mic

By

I generally haul in $5k of hardware and $5k of software when I play a keyboard gig, even if I have access to a house grand piano. An electric guitarist probably has as much investment in what he is doing. A drum kit is in the neighborhood of $10k, and a good acoustic guitar is at least $5k. A good cello is more. Setting up all of that equipment takes a bit of time. Loading in and setting up a keyboard or guitar rig probably takes twenty minutes, a drum kit even more. We show up early; it comes with the territory.

Backing vocalists, by comparison, have no equivalent investment to make either financially or in set up. Quite honestly, it seems like sometimes their commitment suffers because they have so little skin in the game. The one investment they could make, that I argue they should make, is in selecting and owning their own microphone.

A microphone is very personal thing. Not only is it very close to your lips, allowing it to serve a dual purpose as both a germ repository and a voice-amplifying device, but not all microphones pair equally well with all voices. Each kind of mic has its own frequency response, its own dynamics, its own proximity effect. All of these are things that a vocalist should care about, and should ideally be matched to the voice.

Vocalists commonly refer to their voice as their “instrument”. By analogy, that would make my fingers my instrument. My fingers are what I warm up; they have the muscle memory. However, I would argue that the piano or keyboard is my instrument. Similarly, I argue a microphone is the instrument that a vocalist actually plays, that converts what their body does to electrical sound that goes down to a mixing board. Even if you don’t like my comparison on the basis that my fingers don’t actually create sound but vocal chords do, a carefully matched microphone is the last step a vocalist could and should take to impact their sound.

If you find yourself singing through a standard SM 58, or even a much improved Beta 58, you really owe it to yourself to check out a Beta 87A if you use traditional monitors, or Beta 87C if you use in-ear monitors.

What’s my motivation?

By

This story begins with the one thousandth time I’m playing “This is the air we breathe” and a simple question that actors ask all the time: what is my motivation? The point being, a good actor (and by that I mean not Keanu Reeves or Tom Cruise – as much as I enjoy their movies) can deliver the same set of words a thousand different ways with a thousand different nuances. What should inform those decisions? Luck? Or outside direction?

Musicians can do the same thing with a song. There is so much nuance in music, that if all we have is a chart, precisely what we want a song to “say” is still totally up in the air. That meaning, that motivation, can be filled in by the musician and sheer luck, or can be informed by something more deliberate.

All the inspiration I ever needed was a phone call from a producer.  Cole Porter (1891 – 1964)

If we already decided we don’t want “throw away songs“, someone should be able to fill in those blanks and precisely describe why I’m doing this song and how it fits into the metanarrative of the service. That person is the producer (informed by the service planning process).

This past Sunday, my community did a “Hungry Service”. We were all asked to come to church hungry, having fasted for some indeterminate amount of time, even if it was just breakfast. (The beauty of this kind of thing is that we’re asking people to invest themselves in the service before they even arrive.)

Let me tell you, when you do “We are Hungry” or Crowder’s “Hungry”, when you really are actually hungry, you understand precisely why you are doing the song and it takes on a significant meaning. The longing becomes much more than theoretical and the metaphors are much more concrete.

Do you have any examples of where you didn’t know why you were doing a song, or even had conflicting ideas about it, or success stories?

What’s next at BYB

By

Even though I love blogging and hope to get back to it more, I haven’t been posting as much, because we are in the midst of planning some big new things.

The first one (and only one) I will tell you about right now, is we’re creating a weekly podcast with a new special guest each week to begin in December.

The podcast will interview guitarists, bassists, drummers, keyboardists, solo instrumentalists, vocalists, sound engineers and music directors to gain their perspective on music production. We may even interview a worship leader or worship pastor along the way, but with a focus on issues facing them with music production. We will also talk to songwriters about how they deal with producing their new music (choosing a producer, vision, control, etc.) Right now it looks like episodes will be about 45 minutes.

While the demographics for the initial group of interviewees is fairly diverse, it is nevertheless centered on people I know, and thus on the east coast of America. However, I really hope to grow it outside of the United States, and am open to recommendations and nominations (via my contact page). I’m not looking for famous people or big names as much as I am looking for someone doing it with something to say. While I expect cultural differences will impact the context of the discussion, I nevertheless expect that we all share many of the same problems and will learn a lot from each other.

With the podcast come opportunities to promote useful products or services, as well as new songs. Each podcast will promote one product or service, and conclude with an original song. If you have a product or service, or you’re a songwriter with an original song seeking a wider audience, please contact me to discuss those opportunities.

I can’t wait to release it, and can’t wait to hear what you think of it!

Sound – Feedback

By

 

Microphones (and pickups) are sources of feedback

Microphones (and pickups) are sources of feedback

Seemingly one of the great mysteries of running sound is the source and cause of feedback. Perhaps the greatest sin one can commit behind the sound board is allowing feedback. Running sound truly is a thankless job. If everything is going right, no one takes notice. So thank your soundman today!

Since we paid attention at math in school, can we use math to understand feedback? The answer, to all of our relief, is a resounding “yes”. Incredibly, the language of mixing and sound is entirely one of engineering (as is perhaps all of reality), which makes me happy.

Feedback implies the idea of a loop. All the math we need to understand feedback is multiplication and the concept of “unity“, or 1, meaning if you multiply this number by itself, you get this number back again.

But, if you multiply this number by a number smaller than itself, you get a smaller number, and if you keep multiplying, the numbers keep getting smaller. Similarly, if you multiply this number by a number larger than itself you get a larger number, and if you keep multiplying, the numbers keep getting larger. This is the essence of a feedback loop and why it can seem to hang on a knife’s edge – because it does.

To be clear, the loop we are talking about is sound that goes into a microphone, then into a mixing board where it might get EQ’d, then over to an amplifier, and then out via main and/or monitor speaker.

The loop occurs when some of that sound leaks back into the microphone. If the amount of sound that leaks in is greater than 1x what it was originally, by even a tiny little bit like 1.001 x bigger, that sound will start feeding back on itself and continue getting louder. If it’s smaller, like .9999, that sound may ring momentarily, but it will die out.

Knowing what we know then about the nature of sound, that the atoms of sound are sine waves, this feedback could occur at any frequency that our sound system is capable of making, which is another reason we cut and try not to boost gain at a specific frequency using EQ.

Furthermore, the acoustics of the room will come into play as every room will have a bunch of resonant frequencies (just like a coke bottle or flute) that will be more prone to build gain. And even the angle of the microphone with respect to the speakers will have a role, as some mics reject on the side purposefully for this reason.

Positive feedback like we discussed above is ultimately unstable and applied socially can be unhealthy. Positive feedback can make a diva or a spoiled child. Negative feedback is required for stability.

Sound: Quiz

By

Unclipped sine wave compared to a sine wave 1dB higher that is clipped

Unclipped sine wave compared to a sine wave 1dB higher that is clipped

What happens when a signal clips (runs out of headroom, or hits a digital ceiling, or an amplifier runs out of power)?

Well, when a sound (such as a sine wave) clips, we start to see a corner that looks like a square wave forming. So what is happening to that sound? We know that the sharp corners on a square wave are high frequencies consisting of odd harmonics – which is exactly what happens.

Spectrogram of 40 Hz sine wave 1 dB into hard clipping

Spectrogram of 40 Hz sine wave 1 dB into hard clipping

So on the one hand, odd harmonics are not atonal, so as a signal starts to clip, the sound still could be pleasing / musical as it’s still related by integer harmonics – at the very least it’s not inharmonic!

But on the other hand, pushing that much power normally found in the low frequencies up into the higher frequencies which need/use less power is a formula for disaster.

THIS is how speakers get blown: when an amplifier runs out of power. As shown above, when (for example) a 40 Hz / low frequency signal meant for the big woofer clips because an underpowered amplifier runs out of power, basically a square wave is formed, converting much of that signal into typical square-wave odd harmonics. These odd harmonics are higher frequency, which get directed at the little tweeter speaker, which then fries.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, too little amplifier blows speakers. You can never have too much amplifier.

And now the term “total harmonic distortion” makes a lot more sense!

Sound 202 – Inharmonic Timbre

By

Welcome to your second semester of Timbre! I hope you have everything from first semester under your belt! 🙂

Integer Harmonics

Integer Harmonics

Previously, we looked at the harmonic structure of some nice pretty harmonic sounding sounds. That is, sounds that seemed to have a very clear note (tonal center if you will) and a nice even pleasing timbre to them. We did this by looking at platonically ideal waveforms like square waves and sawtooth waves – which are actually common starting points in many synthesizers.

Acoustic instruments are generally pretty harmonic but a little richer sounding. They mostly follow these same integers for their arrangement of harmonics. Although often when I hear instruments from the far east I hear less harmonic, or inharmonic, sounds that sound “clangy” to my ears. I am not at all an expert on these instruments however so I’ll stop there.

White Noise

White Noise

But I am somewhat of an expert at the piano, which employes stretch tuning, meaning that harmonics are progressively sharper as you go up the piano. This is done to align the fundamentals of higher notes to the slightly sharp harmonics of lower notes. This is also why you will see season stringed musicians tune their instrument to their harmonics.

So inharmonic sound starts on a continuum starting with strech-tuned pianos, extending to clangy sounds, and ending up with atonal sounds and finally random noise. To get that type of sound we start with harmonics that are increasingly not related by whole numbers to the fundamental, extending to atonal sounds  such as a snare drum with rattles, through completely random pink or white noise.

Sound 201 – Timbre

By

Sine, square, triangle, and sawtooth waveforms

Sine, square, triangle, and sawtooth waveforms

Before we dig deeper, let’s remind ourselves of some basics:

Typically we humans hear down to 20 Hertz (Hz) or vibrations per second) and up to 20,000 Hz (also said 20 KHz).

If we were to hear a note at 440 Hz, that note would be the A above middle C, also known as “Concert A” which is the note an orchetra tunes to.

The question we pose is, “How would we be able to tell if a 440 Hz ‘Concert A’ sound came from a violin or a clarinet?” The answer is, we can tell by the harmonics, or the mathematically related sine waves above 440 hz that give each instrument their characteristic sound or timbre.

Let’s understand this better by looking at a mathematically ideal square wave and sawtooth wave. For reference, a square wave sounds somewhat string-like -any early string emulation was built on these square waves. However, a sawtooth wave sounds somewhat reedy, like a clarinet.

Animation of the additive synthesis of a square wave with an increasing number of harmonics

Animation of the additive synthesis of a square wave with an increasing number of harmonics

So mathematically, a square wave contains the odd harmonics (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, etc), each one half as quiet as the previous while a sawtooth wave contains all harmonics (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc).

What we see as we add harmonics, is that the waveform gets less wobbly, more mathematically precise, and eventually (with the harmonics going out to a theoretical infinity requiring an infinite frequency response) we have a perfectly sharp corner.

Thinking about sound as sine waves lets us make sense of a lot of things which we will talk about soon.

Sound 101 – Sine Waves

By

Transforming Sound from the Time Domain to the Frequency Domain

Probably the most foundational thing any musician or sound engineer could take the time to understand is sound. And probably the most important way one could do that is to understand Fouriers theorem.

If you ever said to your math teacher “how am I ever going to use this in the real world,” you are about to eat those words. I hope they’re delicious.

Fouriers theorem says that any waveform (i.e. timbre) can be made by adding sine waves at various multiples (i.e. harmonics) of the fundamental (i.e. note).

More mathily – Fouriers Theorem transforms sound from the time domain (the way we see and experience it) and rotates it 90 degrees to look at it sideways in the frequency domain (which actually provides insight).

The six arrows represent the first six terms of the Fourier series of a square wave (they are sine waves!). The two circles at the bottom represent the exact square wave (blue) and its Fourier-series approximation (purple).

Put another way, Fouriers Theorem shows us that sine waves are the atoms of sound.

Isn’t that cool? It doesn’t get much more awesome than that people. All of a sudden, sound is much less mysterious.

And the more you think about it, the more situations it helps you make sense of, the more situations you see people who don’t understand this get things wrong, the less mysterious sound becomes.

(So that’s why they test our hearing with “pure” sign waves, because they’re checking our hearing at a given frequency and don’t want our ability to hear overtones to affect the results.)

Throw-away songs

By

I thought Brandon Peoples raised a really interesting point in this tweet. We’ve all seen the people walk out during the last song of a service. We’ve maybe even done that ourselves (I know I have). Sometimes we have places to go. Sometimes people are just trying to get out of the parking lot. Sometimes we may not like the music that much. Some churches try to smooth this habit over and say “it’s OK if you want to leave early”. But I’ll be honest it doesn’t feel great to have worked on a worship song and see people leaving early. I think Brandon is on to something here.

Yet don’t we intentionally program songs to be used in this very way when we use them as transitions at the beginning of a service? I’ve played hundreds of services where the first two songs were used as nothing more than a mechanism to gather everyone into the sanctuary. Essentially, as throw-away songs. Why then should we be surprised when the last song is perceived by the congregation to have an identical purpose – as a transition to the end of the service?

I do think there is a real travesty here, but would argue the issue is with us – the people who plan and create services, not them – the people who are simply trying to read the cues and respond appropriately.

Let me put it this way: what if sermons were used as bookended transitions to a service, so that the time spent in music-worship was safely nestled inside. I reframe this as an absurd argument, to illustrate how we sometimes intentionally treat worship music. Why should it be my skill, the one with which I’ve banked my 10,000 hrs, be the one that treated like Musak? And to Brandon’s point, is this really how we prioritize worship?

Thus we identify a conundrum. We want to gracefully transition people into and out of our sanctuary and worship time without sounding bossy and while creating connection. So starting with these (or other) values, let’s brainstorm solutions that might allow us to achieve our goals better.

So for example, in transitioning to a service, might not an engaging personality do a better job of bringing everyone in before the service begins especially if this is what we’re trying to accomplish? Isn’t this exactly what already happens at the start of any professional music concert? So we’re not really even reinventing the wheel here! But please don’t just take this solution – decide your communities values, decide what it is you really want to accomplish, and then brainstorm ways to solve your problem!

If we do this, I bet we’ll resolve our people walking out early problem because we have chosen with our actions how much we value our music-worship time.