Lectrosonics or Sennheiser?

D

DVX100Shooter

Veteran
I am coming down to the wire on a decision between 2 wireless audio systems. I am considering the Lectrosonics UCR190 system and the Sennheiser EW112P- G2 system. The Sennheiser is geared more towards MiniDV where as the Lectrosonic is made for a ENG camera which for me makes no difference because I can strap the receiver to my DVrig Pro. I use Lectrosonics wireless at work but never used Sennheiser products.
 
Use VHF

Use VHF

I my experiance, first rule is ALWAYS go with VHF, not UHF, too many obscure intereferences and problems in general. Thats why they cost more. Second, if you go with the Sennheiser, your range will be a good 300 feet indoors or out, as long as there are no blockages, remember, VHF is line of sight.
Finally, and especially if your recording a band, what is the Freq Response of each system? If it only goes down to 50hz, thats all your going to get is a low of 50hz. In audio recording, it is always nice to have at least 40hz minimum, because sooner or later, someone is going to pop that DVD into a decent sound system, and the low end just will not be there (bass, of course) Remember also, that the human ear can hear approx 20hz-20,000hz, thats why they make and sell sub woofers. Try to use a sub woofer when monitoring if you can, then also mix it with a garbage boom box as the output or a **** TV, just to hear the difference. If you only mix with premium monitors, you'll get spoiled and then surprised when it sounds like total **** when viewing/listening it on a regular 4:3 TV with internal speakers.
People will forgive video mistakes a lot easier than audio ones. The scenes change quickly and the eye "forgets" easily, although some here may argue that philosphy. But in audio, it's like hearing a band who is out of tune - it grates on the brain, and you remember that for quite a while- probably to the point where you stop listening.
The DVX100a has EXCELLENT audio. When recording, you can go into the red with no degradation in quality - now I said a LITTLE into the red, not slammed into the red continously.
Hope all this helps.
 
Before going freelance, we used 100's at work. So, I bought two systems and then a third for my own use. That was a while ago. Today, there is no point in spending $1200 on a Lectro when the $500 Sennheiser has more features, uses less expensive batteries, and also has a locking connector. I'm about to replace mine with Sennheisers.. Just gotta get the plugs changed on my mics....... :)

FWIW, I live a couple of hours away from Albuquerque and know some of the guys at Lectrosonics.. They're good folks, but the 100's are six year old technology. There are better options now.

If I were buying today, I would go with the Sennheiser and purchase top shelf microphones with the difference in money I would save. I personally own/use two Sanken COS-11 (red dot version) and one Sonotrom lav. In my prior staff job we had two Countryman B6's and eight DPA 4060's. So, I'd like to think I've used many of the good ones, and would strongly encourage anyone looking into wireless to put spend towards good mics and less on the transmitter and receiver.

Sorry for the diatribe....... :lipsrseal
 
cassee is confused about VHF and UHF. Few systems use VHF anymore because those frequencies are being stomped on by TV stations, require large antenas, and use the transmitter uses the mic cable as the antenna - a poor design. Most portable modern systems are all UHF.

I'm glad thisiswells has had good luck with the Sennheisers. The industry standard is still Lectrosonics. I have been a freelance soundman for all of the national news network shows for 13 years and have never met a colleague with Sennheisers in his/her bag. Did I say never? Yes, I did.

The comment about putting your money in the mics and not the transmitter/reciever makes no sense. If your unit is clipping frequencies, cutting in and out, flattening out with a limiter - what good is a quality mic?

I'm sympathetic with people trying to save a buck. I'm in the same boat. But don't decieve yourself into thinking you're buying a cadilac for a chevy price. The chevy may suit your needs just fine, but it ain't no cadilac. The 100's will work a lot of the time, particularly outdoors. They're not going to sound great as often as the equipment the PRO's use. If you're trying to use them indoors, down the hall, through cubicles, etc., you may not get LUCKY.

Another tip before buying: go to the Lectrosonics web site and check their frequency table for the tv stations in your area. Make sure what you buy is NOT the same frequency of a station where you will be using these. Of course, they make frequency agile units, but it doesn't sound like that's in your budget.
 
Reply - - - VHF vs. UHF

Reply - - - VHF vs. UHF

To re-debate on this - I meant to say UHF, I DID switch them in my head, sorry about that. The reasoning about this is a bit more complicated though.

Facts:

VHF operates (mostly) in the range of 169.5 - 213.8 MHz (Megahertz)
UHF operates (mostly) in the range of 650.1 - 951.9 MHz (Megahertz)


One of the advantages of VHF is it's inherently LONGER wavelength - and longer wavelengths penetrate [non-metallic] objects better than shorter ones.
Also, when reading my post, it says VHF costs more, which should be reversed as well.

The most noticeable difference between UHF and VHF is sound. If you had two really good systems, one being VHF and one UHF, the UHF typically should sound better. Why? VHF systems compress the signal before transmitting. UHF does not. Since UHF is not compressed, it delivers a more natural sound, and general overall increased quality. Hearing audio on a regular 4:3 TV compared to a high quality 1000 watt surround system is NOT what I am trying to describe. The difference is subtle, but noticeable.

All RF transmissions create both harmonic and sub-harmonic tones, which can be visualized like waves. Sometimes two or more waves can come together to create a larger wave, or even cancel each other out. The problem in wireless systems is when a harmonic overtone lands right on or very near the same frequency that another wireless system operates on. This type of problem usually occurs when more than one wireless systems are used together. Lower priced wireless systems are typically designed without filtering to handle these issues for cost reasons. If you want to use more than a two wireless systems together, and you want to spend under $150.00 per unit, you are asking for trouble. This principle is described in just about every mixing or sound design manual or book out there - including the Audio Cyclopedia, which is what I have.

From Larry:

In fact, the radiated power from an UHF system is approximately 10 times better than for a comparable VHF system. These radiated power ratios are actual measurements - indoors and out. When you add in the fact that the maximum FCC allowed transmitter power level is 50 milliwatts at VHF but up to 1 Watt at UHF, then UHF has an even larger advantage in radiated power. In comparisons between 50 mW VHF transmitters and 100 mW UHF transmitters, there is ALWAYS a three to one range advantage in favor of UHF. They have been measured over hills, around corners, line of sight, on the front side and back side of the body, inside masonry rooms, and rooms with metal lathing and even with chicken wire inside stucco. The tech's have NEVER found a situation where UHF didn't have much more range. Another setback for UHF is the increased amount of radio waves reflections by metal objects, resulting in more frequent and more severe dropouts due to multi-path cancellations.

So, why do VHF owners sometimes report better results? (This is for you SHAW)

One reason, is that a lot of UHF transmitters don't produce the power that is "quoted" in the spec sheets. The typical user doesn't have an RF power meter handy to check this specification and the manufacturer can safely let it slide by, or lie using a more straightforward word. Also, if you read the spec sheets, there will be various "wording" that make the specification less than guaranteed. So what happens is, some people get the same range with a VHF and UHF system since they may have a VHF transmitter that is producing a true 50 mW and a UHF system that is producing only 10 mW or less.

A second reason is receivers that have different sensitivity levels. Some expensive receivers from big name manufacturers don't even have a gain stage before the first mixer and have correspondingly poor sensitivity. This of course reduces the range of the system.

A third and obvious reason can be interference on or near the UHF frequency. With the "wide open" front ends being put on most UHF receivers, interference is becoming gradually more probable as DTV begins to use up the available UHF frequencies. And VHF is also close to getting used up as well.

IMHO, your priority on which system or individual units should be based on checking off what you need the system to do like a laundry list. Factor in your budget first, that should narrow down the list quite a bit. Below are a couple of links to read more on this "fascinating" subject!
Seriously, hope this helps...



http://www.svconline.com/mag/avinstall_wireless_mics/
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/wireless_microphone_buyers_guide.htm
 
I've been testing the Lectro 100 (with 50mW LM transmitter) versus the Sennheiser G2 100... and so far the Lectro wins in all cases. I've done several tests in differing environments and the margin of victory varies... but it always wins.

Personally I don't think this is an apples to apples comparison because the cost is so much higher... but I just thought I'd let you guys know what I'm finding. For the cost I think it's hard to beat the Sennheiser... but 6 year old tech or not the Lectro 100 does perform audibly better.

I don't mind saying so because I'm still going to buy a G2 also... there are a lot of good things going on in that set... and it's bargain priced.

If you're only going to buy one set and you don't get into freakish ranges (like I do) then the G2 with a high-end mic is a good choice.
 
Faced with having to rent a wireless unit for a gig, I decided to purchase the G2... knowing full well that units were VHF... but getting a plug-on, lav, on-camera reciever, and using cheap AA's for around $500 was TOO attractive for me. I don't regret the purchase.

I guess I've been lucky too. They sound amazing (I especially love the plug on!) and have yet to encounter hits; although I rarely let the unit search for frequencies. I do close work though: interviews, weddings, and my productions... I'm usually not that far away.

I'm not familiar with other systems, beside renting Lectro's and the rackmount Shure UHF pro combos each day in my profession.... but these units were much more expensive options. UHF doesn't mean invulnerable, either: I had to use Audition to remove frequency spikes when I used the Lectro, but it is a much more versitile unit and the STANDARD... which goes a long way when you sell yourself.

Personally, I'll probably get a couple of I-river drives before springing for a Lectro. But I'm lo-budget and small/ no crew. Wish I could afford Lectro, but thus far with G2... I haven't had the need.

Good Luck..
 
panther0271 said:
knowing full well that units were VHF...
Click to expand...

The G2's are UHF... and yeah, I like the plug-on too... I can't believe anybody would buy the set w/o the plug-on only to save a hundred (or less) dollars. I wouldn't consider getting a set w/o it.
 
Dont bye VHF, thats old technique.

Sennheiser ew 112-p G2 have 30 mW output at UHF
 
i am in the same boat right now with the whole budget thing. i am only slightly versed in audio for video and have used the 100's with great success. this price is steep, but i was told to look into the azden (i know what you might be saying) uhf units at around the same price as the G2. the only thing i could see that was very different on the specs is that the azden has a signal to noise ration of 62 db instead of the 110 on the G2's and the 105 on the lectro. could you all comment on how much this should play into my decision?

thanks
 
We're using a flock of the G2 Evos right now with decidedly mixed results. Hits aplenty, hits aplenty. We've been working on this from a frequency management standpoint, but I'm starting to suspect other issues. Additionally, the supplied ME2 microphone and mount... well, you get what you pay for.

I'm a little jaded after using TR50 mounting systems for three years in a single-camera film environment, but I think if you can't make a mount that is functional then you shouldn't make one at all. Heck, the Sony ECM66 has a better mounting system than the ME2. Okay, that might be a little extreme...

:shocked:

e
 
Yeah... it's a weird situation between the Lectro and G2... Since I started critical testing of the two systems the one thing I've found is that you really shouldn't be pushing to rediculous ranges with a wireless and expecting perfection... I've also found that in normal ranges you are less likely to get hits and dropouts with the Lectro... and I've had more hits and drops with both sets then I would have expected. Basically a G2 is a sub-60' system for 90% success and the Lectro is a sub-120' system for equivalent performance. With both systems in sub-50' range the Lectro will have 1/4 the hits or drops that the G2 has. Using both systems in ranges of 25' or closer results in the primary differences being determined by the lav used. (meaning it's rare to get a hit or drop from across a fairly large room... in my experience)

If the Lectro 100 and G2 were the same price I don't think there would be too many G2's sold... but Sennheiser put a few nice bonuses into the G2 system by including cables, a cam-mount, and a lav (although not a very good one)... not to mention very easy setup... so kudos to Sennheiser for including that stuff standard.

With the Lectro you get a receiver and a transmitter... and you have to buy a cable (and lav) and provide your own mounting solution. Lectro handles their package from the perspective of a professional company... expecting the buyer to already have really nice lavs (or figuring they'll buy one). I don't have a problem with that logic... but the mounting system of the G2 (to cam shoe) is a nice option that I'd like to see Lectro incorporate.
 
I guess the real question I have to all is do you need a battery operated receiver or can you use one that plugs in? I have three different wireless kits I use, a Senn G1, an AKG (both battery operated at both ends) and a Shure PGX. Which is my favorite/best kit? the Shure...hands down. I'm using B3 mics on all of them, so it's a fairly equal test. The main problem I see with the Senns and the Lectro 100's is that they are not diversity. I get drop outs all the time with the Senn kits I've used (I had a G2 on another shoot...but I've told that story already).

The Shure is amazingly easy to set up. You push a button, it searches for the most clear channel. You push another button and the receiver synchs channel info with the transmitter and voila, you're good to go. And, another thing you have to factor into your cost equasion with the Senns or the Lectros is battery cost. I have yet to find 9V's available in the same price range as AA or AAA.

But, all this being said, I still consider boom to be my primary audio source. I mix the boom L and all the wireless kits R.

Finally, I do agree absolutely with one post above...spend the money on good mics. I would bet even Zaxcom digitals would sound poor with crappy mics attached.

Phil
 
got a lectro from ebay

got a lectro from ebay

Matt and et al, god damn it guys this board makes me want to go out and spend more money than I can afford. I just won a lectrosonics 210D from ebay for 960US. I just got a sennheiser G2 and I'm quite happy with it but you guys keep on saying there's better (and I needed 2 wireless anyway) so I went roving for it on ebay. I also picked up a 416 for 700US too.

Anyway it'll be interesting to see what it sounds like so I'll post my observations if anyone's interested.
 
That 210 should smoke the G2... please let us know what you find. Congrats on the 416... you'll be very happy with it and you'll be surprised how versatile it is. Point it away from you and listen to how well it rejects sound from the rear... plus you'll notice that you can handhold it with virtually no handling noise...

I found the G2 to be totally satisfactory... you just can't push the range much w/o getting significant hits.
 
Re 416 ,now I have to get a windscreen and mount. I'm thinking of getting a rycote softie. Do you think it would be satisfactory for camera mounted and boom use most of the time? The zeppelins are rather bulky. Why did you sell your 416 by the way? to get a cs3 or mk41?

I listened to the sanken cos11 vs the at899 on the wireless and wired and they sounded very different to me . The sanken picks up alot less background noise and sounds more true to life whereas the at899 seems to pick up excessive sibilance and makes the person sound like they are speaking real close to a mic. I think a great mic can turn the sennheiser G2 into something alot better.

I think I'm more concerned about dropout rates and sound quality rather than range for the wireless. I find using wired lavs a pain and using a mic on a boom means two people hooked via a wire again. I'm no pro but for shooting events I think wireless is so useful.

The thing that use to confuse me alot about the lavs was that I wasnt sure whether they will all work with any wireless transmitter . I thought you needed special power supplies etc but that only applies to phantom powering I think. Any lav will work off the small voltage that any transmitter gives out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top