Are wired mics better than wireless?

Sadly, so could any radio system. We are dealing with low power devices, rotten aerial system, and loads of obstacles. This is before you factor in actual interference which can be on channel, and wreck things totally, or on a different frequency that can impact on another - intermodulation products. The front end of any receiver has to be well designed to filter out unwanted signals, whilst allowing the wanted ones to pass through. Strong signals on a different frequency can also desensitise the receiver inputs - often when somebody places an unused transmitter close to the receiver. This makes a perfectly decent strength signal appear to be very weak, and noisy. Digital systems are not immune to these kinds of problem, but it affects them differently. Intermod and desense still happens, but the error correction helps mask it. However, when enough is enough, the result is silence. Is silence better than hiss, or odd warmly noises? I guess there is a possibility of concealing it on an analogue system, but you can't do much with silence.
 
Point taken, but do you think the G3 is any better than the 2 in that regard? I was considering upgrading but only if the benefits are significant enough.
 
Josh Bass said:
Point taken, but do you think the G3 is any better than the 2 in that regard? I was considering upgrading but only if the benefits are significant enough.
Click to expand...

All I know is that I took a G3 unit into downtown Manhatten and up to the 27th floor of a midtown hotel and spent two days filming interviews and working a trade show floor without a problem. Mostly using an SKP 100 plug on transmitter with an EV RE50N-D/B. Didn't have a single RF problem. But the receiver was never more than 10-15 feet away from the transmitter, I always scan for empty frequencies before using, and I keep the various parts stocked with fresh batteries; I learned the hard way to not run the batteries down too far. :(
 
Josh Bass said:
Point taken, but do you think the G3 is any better than the 2 in that regard? I was considering upgrading but only if the benefits are significant enough.
Click to expand...
Impossible to answer as a generic question. Depends on YOUR situation. There are some kinds of interference that even a $10,000 wireless kit can't deal with.
 
Thanks. Sometimes cant avoid being far from transmitter, for example if filming speaker from 50+ feet away in a hotel conference or ballroom.
 
Bruce Watson said:
I always scan for empty frequencies before using, and I keep the various parts stocked with fresh batteries; I learned the hard way to not run the batteries down too far. :(
Click to expand...

+1 >>> yep that's the proper set-up routine to run with every time ... regardless of the location.

Cheers.
 
I normally check for interference issues with the Sennheiser Frequency Finder / FCC website for a 'vacant' TV channels or one with very low modulation levels. (preferably -80dBm or more) Then check for RF and/or use an external scanner. The G2/3 on-board scanner only IDs 'significant' RF sources, which is not adequate in my experience and frequent 'RF hell' locations.
 
Karlw said:
Yes, they can. The Ambient EMP5S adapter is available from the usual pro audio/film sound shops like LSC, PSS, Gotham, BH.

http://www.ambient.de/en/products/ambient-recording/mic-power-supply/emp/emp5s.html
Click to expand...

Thanks Karl! Another stoopid question: If I am plugging directly in to my C100 (which supplies phantom power), do I need a powered adapter or is there a simple TA5-M to XLR adapter that would do for less money? i.e., http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=533397&Q=&is=REG&A=details
 
mhood said:
Thanks Karl! Another stoopid question: If I am plugging directly in to my C100 (which supplies phantom power), do I need a powered adapter or is there a simple TA5-M to XLR adapter that would do for less money?
Click to expand...

You'll still need the Ambient adapter or something similar. The issue is this: 48V Phantom is "balanced" (i.e. 48 V on pin 2, 48 V on pin 3) and is used with balanced line microphones. Lav mics are not balanced, and they also only take usually 2-5 V. So, some kind of circuit is needed to convert the 48 V to say 4V, and to somehow terminate the lav mic properly then create a balanced signal for the XLR line.

We make the MCA5X which is a simpler adapter, but is only intended for use with our UH400-type and HM plug-on transmitters. Those transmitters have a 5V setting and can accept an unbalanced input.
 
I've never used the scan facility because it's a crude and ineffective way to find frequencies. Most of my work is multichannel, so I'm not looking for empty channels randomly, I'm looking for unused channels that fit the manufacturers suggested frequency list to avoid inter mod and other problems. Scanning may well miss the weak signal being used next door that will suddenly get worse when they pick up the transmitter from the shielded location and of course scanning doesn't find transmitters about to be turned on. All I do in anew location is turn all the receivers on and watch the displays. There's usually one or two that can hear something - either signal, or interference. If I just need one channel, I pick from the 8 to 10 in that band that show no signal. Scanning is just too hit or miss for me.
 
Scanning (available on the UCR211, 411, 411a, 201, 401 and SR Series) is great if you need one or two channels and there isn't much else going on around you. The graphic approach used on this feature in this products is very quick and intuitive, and quite accurate.

However, for multi-channel setups, even the pre-coordinated lists provided by manufacturers can be dicey. For one thing, those lists or groups do not take into account any other equipment on the job, or even the local TV transmissions. So even if those lists or charts help to avoid intermods between the frequencies on the list, there can be intermods between your frequencies and other transmissions nearby. Or, simply strong interference from, say, a TV tower. Those lists or groups have no way to account for anything external to your system. We used to include them with our products but stopped doing so several years ago.

The most reliable way to coordinate frequencies is to use a calculating program like Shure's Wireless Workbench, the similar product from Sennheiser, or a 3rd party program like IAS from Professional Wireless Systems. These programs generally pull in a database from the FCC based on your location (IAS uses your local zip code) so that the local TV signals are accounted for. Then they generate a list of viable frequencies based on the tuning ranges or blocks of the equipment you have. IAS is what I use, and it is so reliable that I've done dozens, maybe hundreds of coordinations remotely just based on a user's zip code and list of equipment with excellent results, even for 40+ channel systems used in metro areas (think reality TV).
 
I personally generally only need one mic on one speaker. My interference issues are likely to be localized--other stuff in the same building that the sennheiser chart wouldnt account for. What you recommend to deal with that as far as finding out whats flying around and could hose you, and what freqs are available?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top