is there an "industry standard" when it comes to wireless?
- Thread starter ugafan
- Start date
Best for how much? I have Sennheiser G2's and they are OK, and as many here will say, they are about the minimum in quality for around $600/channel. Multiply that x4 for the better quality units from Lectrosonics. I am sure they are better, they must be better for the price.
There is a sticky about wireless in the headers.
Grant
There is a sticky about wireless in the headers.
Grant
Richard Crowley
Veteran
There is no "industry standard" for wireless systems.
There is no "industry standard" for the microphone interface/connector/pinout, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for mic preamp quality, analog vs. digital transmission, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for receiver capabilities, single vs. multiple/diversity reception, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for operational frequency band or number of available channels, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for inter-operability. The only Transmitter/Receiver combination guaranteed to work is the pair sold as a kit.
There is no "industry standard" for different brands of transmitters and receivers working properly together.
There is no "industry standard" for even different models of transmitters and receivers from the same brand name working together.
It is good to know what microphone and destination gear you want to use.
But now you need to set a budget for the wireless system.
Note at the top of this audio forum are several "sticky" discussions/postings.
The very first one is called: The $500 Wireless Question, or, "What cheap system should I get?"
Very strongly recommended that you read that before doing anything else.
Keep in mind also that more and more of the historic frequency bands we used for wireless mics are disappearing.
A couple years ago, here in the US, the FCC sold off the 600MHz band to the highest bidders.
And declared millions of $$$ worth of otherwise perfectly good wireless systems as useless junk.
It seems within the realm of possibility that the same thing will happen to the 700MHz band in a few years.
Most mic manufacturers have started selling 2.4GHz digital wireless mic systems.
The advantage of 2.4MHz is that the technology is ubiquitous as it is used for WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.
That makes 2.4GHz products quite inexpensive to develop, manufacture, and sell.
And because 2.4GHz is an "ISM" band, it is free of legal restrictions around the entire planet.
So you don't have to worry about whether your wireless kit is legal in the next country you travel to.
And the digital technology means that most systems auto-scan the band and automatically select the best channel (and backup channel)
Disadvantages include: The 2.4GHz band is shared with a GREAT MANY other users so there are potentially more competitors and interference sources.
Digital technology may add enough latency to be noticeable in SOME applications.
I rambled on for several more paragraphs if you aren't already weary of this post.
Even more at: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/30/874404
There is no "industry standard" for the microphone interface/connector/pinout, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for mic preamp quality, analog vs. digital transmission, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for receiver capabilities, single vs. multiple/diversity reception, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for operational frequency band or number of available channels, etc.
There is no "industry standard" for inter-operability. The only Transmitter/Receiver combination guaranteed to work is the pair sold as a kit.
There is no "industry standard" for different brands of transmitters and receivers working properly together.
There is no "industry standard" for even different models of transmitters and receivers from the same brand name working together.
It is good to know what microphone and destination gear you want to use.
But now you need to set a budget for the wireless system.
Note at the top of this audio forum are several "sticky" discussions/postings.
The very first one is called: The $500 Wireless Question, or, "What cheap system should I get?"
Very strongly recommended that you read that before doing anything else.
Keep in mind also that more and more of the historic frequency bands we used for wireless mics are disappearing.
A couple years ago, here in the US, the FCC sold off the 600MHz band to the highest bidders.
And declared millions of $$$ worth of otherwise perfectly good wireless systems as useless junk.
It seems within the realm of possibility that the same thing will happen to the 700MHz band in a few years.
Most mic manufacturers have started selling 2.4GHz digital wireless mic systems.
The advantage of 2.4MHz is that the technology is ubiquitous as it is used for WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.
That makes 2.4GHz products quite inexpensive to develop, manufacture, and sell.
And because 2.4GHz is an "ISM" band, it is free of legal restrictions around the entire planet.
So you don't have to worry about whether your wireless kit is legal in the next country you travel to.
And the digital technology means that most systems auto-scan the band and automatically select the best channel (and backup channel)
Disadvantages include: The 2.4GHz band is shared with a GREAT MANY other users so there are potentially more competitors and interference sources.
Digital technology may add enough latency to be noticeable in SOME applications.
I rambled on for several more paragraphs if you aren't already weary of this post.
Even more at: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/30/874404
ugafan
Looking for a woman
as far as the budget, let's say money isn't an issue and i'm renting the gear instead of buying. let's say i have three microphones. are there any receivers that allow for three signals or will i need three separate receivers? is there a specific kit you guys would recommend?
Richard Crowley
Veteran
This is a good summary of the kinds of wireless systems available for rental by producers of major film and TV productions.
http://www.trewaudio.com/rental/wireless-systems-rental/
Lectrosonics is a popular brand of wireless gear here in the US, and Zaxcom is also a premium brand.
Unless your microphones are already wired to the proper connectors for the transmitters, you should probably use the mics from the same rental house.
You will need a separate transmitter and a separate receiver for each microphone.
There are a FEW two-channel receivers which will independently receiver two different microphones/transmitters.
I don't know of any three-channel receivers.
But there are some systems that have a small "rack" where you can plug in up to eight receiver modules for multi-mic operation.
You should consult with the rental house to decide which system is best for your specific requirements.
Important factors include WHERE you are using the system, because the RF competition is much different in New York City vs. central Montana.
And factors like what is your budget. The premium systems likely rent for $100s per day per channel.
http://www.trewaudio.com/rental/wireless-systems-rental/
Lectrosonics is a popular brand of wireless gear here in the US, and Zaxcom is also a premium brand.
Unless your microphones are already wired to the proper connectors for the transmitters, you should probably use the mics from the same rental house.
You will need a separate transmitter and a separate receiver for each microphone.
There are a FEW two-channel receivers which will independently receiver two different microphones/transmitters.
I don't know of any three-channel receivers.
But there are some systems that have a small "rack" where you can plug in up to eight receiver modules for multi-mic operation.
You should consult with the rental house to decide which system is best for your specific requirements.
Important factors include WHERE you are using the system, because the RF competition is much different in New York City vs. central Montana.
And factors like what is your budget. The premium systems likely rent for $100s per day per channel.
Rick R
Veteran
In the US, Lectro or Zaxcom are most popular for pro film sound and ENG work. The G2/3 are good for low budget work. Due diligence is necessary to get optimum performance from all the above... a $20 cable is still more reliable though.
Zaxcom offers a recording transmitter, which is good for extreme distances or other possible loss of RF.
Zaxcom offers a recording transmitter, which is good for extreme distances or other possible loss of RF.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Minor correction, the 700+ MHz band was sold off a few years ago, there is currently an up coming auction in the 600-698 MHz band.
The 'future' seems to require going digital, and that would require the audio be digitized at the transmitter, in order to take advantage of various methods of making transport of the audio more reliable.
There are other bands that the FCC has indicated could be used by wireless mics, but then... that means the wireless mic company has to produce something that operates in those bands... it would be 'nice' if the wireless mic companies made their equipment more easily modified for use in these bands, perhaps with a 'small' fee, or the like, but not requiring an entire rebuy on the system.
The 700MHz band is already gone. Reserved for emergency communications now. For analog wireless you have the TV band from 470-590Mhz left if you can find open space locally. Currently the best future bet is 915 MHz digital as it is reserved for unlicensed consumer systems in all countries. There are 2.4GHz spread spectrum systems too, but the ones that conform to WiFi protocols can be blocked in managed WiFi campus environments. Effective range is shorter too.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Depends on what you mean by 'block'... to be sure a spectrum chunk can have so much traffic so as to be blocked, but the ground rules for 2.4 GHz is that it can't be 'blocked' by some entity. Since I'm not in the 'know' on exactly how the various wireless mic manufacturers are making their 2.4 GHz offerings, I can only conjecture that they may be taking advantage of some sort of 'chip' that allows them to use Bluetooth, or 802.11, type signaling. But there are other types of signaling, and so perhaps they are using some ASIC with some sort of proprietary IP to create their baseband signal. A 20KHz limit signal, with perhaps a 48K sample rate, and a 16 bit (generous perhaps...) would yield about a 750Kbit 'raw' data stream (no compression...), and add a luxurious FEC method perhaps yields a 2 Mbs stream... well under the 20/40 MHz bandwidth that standard 802.11 uses... and even for the 25 Mbs 'premium/latestandgreatest' Bluetooth.
As a side note... the Wife's hearing aid has direct Bluetooth communication in the 2.4 GHz band, and she uses her iPhone to control as well as setup her 'remote' mic which also uses the 2.4GHz. Again since I'm not privy to the details, all I can assume is the company that makes the aid and accessories is using some cheap Bluetooth IP to get it all done. Her older aid still had an 'fm' rf link which was awkward since it required an additional accessory module to connect to Bluetooth devices... as well as perform some control of the aid itself. The new aid allows her to control the aid directly from the iPhone and select such things as 'restaurant' mode which has some amount of 'noise abatement' as well as some 'beam shaping' to mitigate 'noise' coming from angles other than directly in front of her.
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
In Sweden I always see Sennheiser used for all sorts of work. Lectrosonic pop up on occasion also but I would say that Sennheiser is the standard.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Honestly, that's what I would say too. But the technicians like giving technical answers. Yes, there are always better options and worse options, but its like shooting Canon DSLRs for video. I still see them being used all over the place, despite there being far better options on the market.
I think by "industry standard", the OP meant if you don't want to get confused by tediously weighing the pros and cons of different options, what's a relatively common and popular option?
I'd say the Sennheiser G2 or G3 is a common enough tool to be considered that. But I'm admittedly not much of an audio guy- I'm just going by what I see others using, and what I myself use.
Bruce Watson
Veteran
The best thing to use is a wire. Wireless is a last resort, not a first. Only use wireless when there's no other possible way to get the job done. Why? No wireless system, no matter how expensive, can sound as good as a $20 XLR cable. None can be as reliable. None can even come close to the economy.
XLR cables can be run for miles, and often are, with no problems (go look at just about any sports stadium that's ever used for TV). Can't say that about wireless. If XLR cables are reasonably healthy they are nearly immune to RFI. Sure as heck can't say that about wireless -- wireless *is* RFI. XLR cables work fine without line-of-sight, where wireless will began breaking down.
In my humble experience, wireless is 10x the trouble, 30x the cost (at least), and 1/10th the reliability of wireless. And it sounds better. Just sayin'.
All that said, read the wireless sticky. Basically, lots of indy people are using the Sennheisers (g3). Pros are more Lectrosonics and Zaxcom. Europe has some other brands, and more use of the high end Sennheisers. It's all very spendy stuff compared to that $20 USD XLR cable.
Last edited:
This.
"Industry Standard" became more of a marketing term than an actual gear qualifier. It really means "lots of people use this thing on their productions or in their studios."
Many, but not all, audio post houses use ProTools, so it is often billed as an "industry standard" DAW. Many, but not all, video post houses use AVID, so it is often referred to as an "industry standard" NLE. In these cases, I might venture to say that they have the majority share of high-end shops (major studios and networks) in the US and may fit the descriptor more accurately than any piece of gear. But then, this is based on the major players and not on boutique shops where there are more users of other DAWs and NLEs.
When it comes to gear, there are more options and no one brand has the market share anywhere. Take the Sony MDR-7506 headphones, for instance. Popular? Yes. The only one you'll find on professional sets and locations? Not at all. Yet, they still get billed from time to time as "industry standard".
There may be names that are more popular on large budgets, and names that are more popular on small budgets, but there's no one gold standard. Only devices that are known to perform better than others in the same price range, which is more varied in the lower-budget world.