I'm thinking of getting Sennheisser G4 IEMs because I hear the quality is a lot better than Comteks. Plus I can use them as additional hops by just turning off the pilot tone. But I notice that there are some complaints online about extraneous noise on the G4 units when the volume knob is turned down. Anybody have issues? I think this may be an issue that only affects G4s and not the older model G3s or G2s. Thanks.
Sennheiser G4 IEM? Or just stick with Comteks or Lectro IFBs
- Thread starter DNN
- Start date
Comteks are pretty common on professional sets. They’re perfectly fine, especially if the client isn’t looking for listening quality that’s close to monitoring straight off the mixer/recorder with cabled headphones. The small M-216 transmitter is only 10mW, though. Not usually a problem since TX and any client RX will be out in the open and generally line-of-sight, but it can limit range especially between rooms/structures. The BST 75-216 can be powered from a BDS and sits in a bag just like any baggable RX, and bumps the output to 100mW.
Getting a Sennheiser G4 100 TX gives you 30mW output, and it can be used with the G4 IEM RXs. Or, you could get a G4 ew512 system plus three more receivers. Those make excellent camera hops or client IFB with 50mW output and an RX that has both a balanced AF output and a dedicated headphone out. The ew512 is a great multitasker.
There’s not a huge price difference between purchasing a Comtek system with 4x client RX or purchasing a Sennheiser G4 TX and 4x IEM RXs (or ew512 and three more RXs). A couple hundred dollars, less if you compare price with the Comtek BST. You’ll definitely get a little better sound quality from the Sennheisers, plus more frequency options. (Not sure how many RXs you need, but I’m just using 4 for comparison.)
Moving up to the Lectro IFBT4 system is a huge price jump. Sound quality difference between this and the Sennheiser system may not be huge, but you do move up to 250mW output with the Lectro system. I’ve used these riding in chase cars and they’ve held up reasonably well.
If you go the Sennheiser route, I highly recommend modding the antennae to SMA whips.
Getting a Sennheiser G4 100 TX gives you 30mW output, and it can be used with the G4 IEM RXs. Or, you could get a G4 ew512 system plus three more receivers. Those make excellent camera hops or client IFB with 50mW output and an RX that has both a balanced AF output and a dedicated headphone out. The ew512 is a great multitasker.
There’s not a huge price difference between purchasing a Comtek system with 4x client RX or purchasing a Sennheiser G4 TX and 4x IEM RXs (or ew512 and three more RXs). A couple hundred dollars, less if you compare price with the Comtek BST. You’ll definitely get a little better sound quality from the Sennheisers, plus more frequency options. (Not sure how many RXs you need, but I’m just using 4 for comparison.)
Moving up to the Lectro IFBT4 system is a huge price jump. Sound quality difference between this and the Sennheiser system may not be huge, but you do move up to 250mW output with the Lectro system. I’ve used these riding in chase cars and they’ve held up reasonably well.
If you go the Sennheiser route, I highly recommend modding the antennae to SMA whips.
Having used all three, and owning both Sennheiser ew512 systems and a Comtek system, I absolutely agree that Lectros are built like tanks.
In practical terms, I find that IFB systems aren’t as subject to abuse on set (in my experience) as they aren’t buried in wardrobe or subject to actor movement or stunts. They’re belt-clipped and out in the open. If budget allows for Lectro IFB, you’ll be making a good purchase. If budget doesn’t allow, both of the other options are perfectly useful, with the Sennheisers being excellent multitaskers. If you often work with clients who tend to throw their IFB receivers on the floor, then Lectro may be a best bet.
Rick R
Veteran
In my experience on commercials and movie sets, it is often a scavenger hunt after a shooting day when multible IFB Rx are distributed and loss is pretty much inevitable. It can be a costly if you are the 'production company'. In fact, I will not even work on a set with gear if the production cannot provide a loss and destruction insurance document.
Thanks for the reply. I can definitely vouch for how beefy Lectro gear is. I've got a few sets of 411a's and smqv's and they've held up. As for the Lectro IFBs, I ask because I've been seeing them used for decent prices. But I hear the sound quality isn't that much better than Comteks. I already have a couple of G4 sets which are the 50mw versions. I figured the IEM receivers would be a nice match but people online have mentioned they have some noise issues. Maybe I'll just stick with Comteks. I always see big sets of them for sale online.
Paul, I was talking about buying IEM receivers to use with my G4 transmitters. They're compatible if you turn off the pilot tone and you even get a talkback channel if you use the rack mount transmitter.
Alex, does the SMA mod really make that much of a difference? Other than having the ability to swap out whips and use a dipole antenna? Do you recommend doing both the transmitter and receivers?
Alex, does the SMA mod really make that much of a difference? Other than having the ability to swap out whips and use a dipole antenna? Do you recommend doing both the transmitter and receivers?
Last edited:
Rick R
Veteran
I have used the EK100 portable receiver in a pinch situation where I needed one additional mix-minus IFB . It certainly was not ideal but it worked. The only volume control is in the software menu (AF out) and it only plays through the left channel on standard stereo HPs.
On the ew512 systems, which are the ones I’ve been discussing in this thread, the receiver has a dedicated headphone output (separate from the AF output). The up/down arrow buttons function as headphone volume up/down when not in menu mode (this does not affect AF out in any way).
On the ew112 systems, I have used them in a pinch but have patched the AF output through a Behringer P2 headphone amp. This is a bit of a kludge, but can work when there’s no better option.
I just have my receivers modded right now on my ew512 systems. I’ll probably do the transmitters once I get through my next big project.
It does make a big difference. The stock antenna is flimsy and starts to droop over time. It easily gets bent, crimped, and pinched in storage. All these things reduce signal efficiency. Adding a rigid SMA whip means a more durable and rigid antenna that will hold up for a very long time, the ability to quickly swap out if one does somehow get damaged, and the ability to remove the antenna for storage so there’s no stress when it’s in the box.
The SMA mods have given me better range and stability on location as well.
I do have my TX modded on my G3 ew112 kit, in addition to three RXs, since I use that as a camera hop system. For that system, I’ve put the articulated whips on the receivers so they can be mounted in just about any position on the camera and the antenna can be positioned to remain vertical.
It's definitely for the budget minded only; at least in my application. I bought the Leicozic receiver to try with a G3 transmitter. I don't recommend it. It works, but if you want to use it with a Sennheiser G3 like I do:
- The maximum volume is just ok. I'd want a lot more headroom.
- It has a very small subset of frequencies in common with the G3, making it vulnerable to not finding an open channel.
- You have to do a tedious process of charting all of the Leicozic channels and mapping those to the G3 and then make up a table so you can cross reference channels as the Leicozic does not use the same channel numbering system as the G3.
- The maximum volume is just ok. I'd want a lot more headroom.
- It has a very small subset of frequencies in common with the G3, making it vulnerable to not finding an open channel.
- You have to do a tedious process of charting all of the Leicozic channels and mapping those to the G3 and then make up a table so you can cross reference channels as the Leicozic does not use the same channel numbering system as the G3.
Listen Technologies has units that are Comtek compatible. I suspect they are former Comtek employees as I understand their companies are in the same city. I just bought some 216 mhz units on ebay for about $45 each. You can't get them with the external antenna (option 7) though, so reach is limited. But compatibility with Comtek and plenty of volume makes them a viable option.
Rick R
Veteran
The Comtec and ListenTech noise reduction circuitry is different, so for instance using a Comtek Tx and an LT Rx has a sound quality trade off. Experiment with NR enabled/disabled for the best sound. Either way it is usable for most clients. A matched ListenTech Tx/Rx sounds very good with plenty of volume. Not as robust as the Comteks though. Clients have broken the LT LR-400 plastic HP jacks on two of Rx in the last two weeks alone, not to mention the belt clips break easily as well.
Indeed, they are more toyish than I'd like. If I were in the Zaxcom/Lectrosonics world, I wouldn't be using these. But as I am in the lower budget world, I'm giving them a go. The Leicozic are much nicer in that regard, being housed in the Sennheiser G3 style case. I wish those things had more volume. I'd much prefer them otherwise. At the $50 range, they are a lot more disposable than other brands. But then, as you indicate, they may end up costing more if they keep breaking.
Last edited:
I am retracting my comment about the Leicozic lacking volume. It was operator error. I thought I had the sub out on the F8 set to line, but it was set to microphone level. Duh. It has plenty of volume. I'm starting to like these. Much better than the Listen units now, unless I doing something stupid with those as well.
Rick - have you used the Listen LR-700 portable transmitter? It doesn't seem to have hardly any range at all. On the wideband channels, I only get about 30-40' away and I am getting fading. It's even worse on the narrowband channels. It seems useless.
Rick - have you used the Listen LR-700 portable transmitter? It doesn't seem to have hardly any range at all. On the wideband channels, I only get about 30-40' away and I am getting fading. It's even worse on the narrowband channels. It seems useless.
Rick R
Veteran
Yes Paul, I have a LT 700-216 as well as a the LT 800 base station and 10 Rx. The base station Tx works better, but I get decent performance with the portable for most IFBs and/or camera hops. The portable Tx uses the input cable as the antenna, (similar to the VHF Lectros). So the cable should be a certain length or optimum performance. I recall 14 inches is for a 5/8 wave antenna for a 216 MHz system. Off hand, I do not recall the formula to calculate antenna lengths. I think it is on the Lectro site somewhere for 1/4, 5/8 and full wave calculations.
btw, I also feed line level to the transmitters. In case you do not know already, the LT-700 input's 'Ring' terminal is for line level sources, whilst the 'Tip' is mic level (same configuration as the Sennheiser G series SK-100 Tx). The mute switch does not function in line level though.
For testing I connected a Tram TR-50 to the LR-700. I wonder if the Tram wiring is incompatible with the antenna function? I have the ring and sleeve tied together per Sennheiser's recommendations. I'll try connecting the F8 sub-out @line-level to it, which is the way I plan to use it.