Thanks you much. I motion for a sticky. Do I hear a second?
PS I now have a un-uber-techy bookmark to share when friends and family call me.
PS I now have a un-uber-techy bookmark to share when friends and family call me.
The $500 Wireless Question, or, "What cheap system should I get?"
- Thread starter kgimedia
- Start date
Groovy. And on it goes:
http://tvtechnology.com/article/116514
http://tvtechnology.com/article/116514
Yes, and it will continue to go on. The information in your link does not add any frequencies to the band that's already reallocated, and this is getting away from the purpose of the original post in this thread.
That's a good place to start, and there are several others. It was mentioned that the buyer should plan to upgrade from the stock lav, and that there are already several reviews and recommendations around here. See Audio 101 for that.
John Willett
Veteran
Yes, the output cable is the second antenna - as it's at a different angle to the other antenna it actually should work better in diversity than two antennas on the top.
This is to be expected - VHF does travel much better out of doors than UHF; it's a longer wavelength and longer waves travel further than shorter ones.
The interesting thing was - in the UK recently the Institute of Broadcast Sound did range checks of various radiomics under the same conditions - including Lectrosonics, Zaxcom, Audio Ltd., Sennheyser 5000 series as well as the G3 - it surprised us all that the G3 actually came out the best in thsi test.
John, can you give us some additional details about this test? Specifically, which Lectrosonics system was included? When we hear of reduced range with our systems, it is often due to the fact that the transmitter audio modulation (gain) is set too low. RF power to RF power, generally Digital Hybrid outperforms companded audio. It's even more unusual to hear of a 30 mW system outperforming a 50 mW system for range (admittedly - it may be difficult to observe a real difference in range just based on a 5/3 difference in RF power) unless there are mitigating circumstances. Of course - I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just interested in the details.
John Willett
Veteran
The test was done at Pinewood Studios by a couple of top notch sound recordists.
The receivers were on a sound trolley all set to UK Channel 38 and with a 3-element Yagi used for everything.
One person then got on his bike with a stopwatch and cycled away from the sound trolley - he was talking all the time. He got off his bike and walked through a security office - in one door out the next. He then went into a metal-clad building where sets were stored - there was lots of metal around.
All this was videoed as well. Most systems performed well, one or two dropping out in the security office. All dropped out at some time as he went into the set store. As Audio Ltd. tune for range I was surprised they didn't win. When they did drop out there were nasty noises. The Lectro performed well (I can't remember if they were better or worse than the Audio in this respect) buy they dropped out in a nicer way that was not so annoying. The G3 was better than them all (but not by much).
All systems used the same receive antenna and the recordist was careful to have the transmitters on the body in the same way.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure what model Lectro was used. It was certainly not a failure in the Lectro as the range was pretty good on them all - and it was testing the ability to receive in nasty situations where there was physical blocking, rather than a straight line-of-sight walking away until it dies.
When it comes to real pro systems, I still think it comes down to just three - Sennheiser, Lectro and Audio Ltd. But we were all surprised that the G3 came out so well on this test as I would normally think of the 3000 (or maybe 2000) series more of a competitor to teh Audio and Lectro, rather than the G3 (but the G3 is basically the same general spec. as the 2000 series).
(No idea why this is appearing as one large block of text - I laid it out in paragraphs which were deleted when I posted them - sorry, it's the forum software doing this, not me).
GREAT! - I re-edited today and the text blocking has been fixed - thanks!
Last edited:
Does the G3 have a decent sounding limiter in its preamp? I used a UHF lectro for some time and felt the limiter was pretty high quality..almost impossible to overload and didn't mangle the sound too bad. At the time I didn't use a mixer for interviews and would use the wireless even for sit down interviews just to have the limiter protection.
John Willett
Veteran
My old mate Rob Piddington (UK distributor for Lectro) just rang me and I went through all the details with him that I had. No doubt he'll fill you in. It's easier to talk it through than write it all down.
John Willett
Veteran
I can't answer this. The G3 and Lectro are in totally different price brackets.
We were only talking about range and how they dropped out in nasty circumstances and not about the sound quality and the like.
The G3 is exceptionally good value for money, but it's in a different class to Lectro and Audio Ltd., which are three or four times the price.
And - NB - the test we were talking about was done in the UK with equipment to ISO spec's. and not to the higher power rating that is allowed in the US.
Something I would like to add:
If there's not enough light, you can play with available light, candles, fireplace, decorationlamps.... For the camera in case of emergency you can use the crappy handy camera. And no-one will notice anything.
But for sound....it just needs to be good. And that you can't just give a solution by using a "decoration-microphone" or "candle-microphone"... Sound during production is just something....pure technical 90%.
If there's not enough light, you can play with available light, candles, fireplace, decorationlamps.... For the camera in case of emergency you can use the crappy handy camera. And no-one will notice anything.
But for sound....it just needs to be good. And that you can't just give a solution by using a "decoration-microphone" or "candle-microphone"... Sound during production is just something....pure technical 90%.
what about dual system wireless mics? i'm tempted to purchase something like this, but kind of wary too. anything to keep in mind with these dual systems? thanks
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/733909-REG/Azden_330ULT_330LT_UHF_On_Camera_Dual.html
[h=4]Product Highlights[/h]
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/733909-REG/Azden_330ULT_330LT_UHF_On_Camera_Dual.html
[h=4]Product Highlights[/h]
- 566.125 - 589.875 MHz
- Discrete 2-Channel Operation
- 188 UHF Selectable Frequencies
- 330UPR Camera-Mount Dual Receiver
- 2x 35BT Bodypack Microphone Transmitters
- 2x EX-503 Lavalier Microphones
- Main and Headphone Receiver Outputs
- Pivoting Diversity High-Gain Antennas
- x2 AA Battery Powered
Chadfish
Veteran
No Azden! Please. It's not worth it.
I was thinking of getting a dual system. The AAT1800 series caught my eye, but in reality, I thought, how often do I need a dual system? Hardly eveer. Mostly I use one lav, and sometimes two, so for 99% of the time I'll be toating around this huge receiver. So I went with the Sennheiser G3, which sounds much better. Less (no) hiss. The Senn G3 stuff is the lowest level you want to go. It's 600.00 and it works great for budget filmmakers/videographers. Anything less (cough Azden) will get a lot of dropouts and just have an overall lower sound quality. That will plague you my friend, when you don't get a 2nd chance and your client is pissed. It's not worth the little bit you save getting el-cheapo stuff. If you want dual system - get 2 Sennhiser G3 units. They are small, and you only pull out the 2nd when you need it.
Trust me on the G3. It's agreed by everyone who posts info here that it's the best quality/budget ratio out there. Next step up gets very pricey.
I was thinking of getting a dual system. The AAT1800 series caught my eye, but in reality, I thought, how often do I need a dual system? Hardly eveer. Mostly I use one lav, and sometimes two, so for 99% of the time I'll be toating around this huge receiver. So I went with the Sennheiser G3, which sounds much better. Less (no) hiss. The Senn G3 stuff is the lowest level you want to go. It's 600.00 and it works great for budget filmmakers/videographers. Anything less (cough Azden) will get a lot of dropouts and just have an overall lower sound quality. That will plague you my friend, when you don't get a 2nd chance and your client is pissed. It's not worth the little bit you save getting el-cheapo stuff. If you want dual system - get 2 Sennhiser G3 units. They are small, and you only pull out the 2nd when you need it.
Trust me on the G3. It's agreed by everyone who posts info here that it's the best quality/budget ratio out there. Next step up gets very pricey.
As this is asked on a daily basis, if not more often, here's the answer to the golden question:
Audio falls as an afterthought so often, and after a $1000+ investment in a camera, lenses, batteries, etc., people want to know how little they can spend on audio gear. Folks, good audio is not cheap and cheap audio can cost you a lot.
Also, wireless audio is not a first solution. Use a boom mic, or a hard-wired lav, whenever possible. But there are some times that you need the flexibility and mobility that wireless offers. Once you've determined that you do need to get a system, here are a few things to know about cheap wireless systems, and wireless systems (aka radio mics) in general:
The Sennheiser Evolution G3 ENG system runs around $600 per channel as of this posting. This is by far the leader in price-to-performance for budget wireless. The predecessor, the G2, was also a very reliable system. Beware buying on your favorite auction site. There were floods of Chinese counterfeit G2 units, so know your seller.
Also of note between the G2 and G3: the G2 ENG systems are not diversity units, meaning there is only one antenna to receive the signal; the G3 systems added diversity (a second antenna, reducing the likelihood for signal dropouts) by utilizing the audio output cable from the receiver as the second antenna.
The Audio-Technica 1800-series wireless systems are around $500 per channel as of this post. They replaced the older U100-series systems, which were very good in the sub-$1000 category. There is a dual-frequency system available in the 1800 series that has two transmitters and a dual-channel receiver. Though the U100 systems were splendid in their class (I had two of them), I have not seen or heard many positive reviews of the 1800 series (I have no direct personal experience with the 1800 systems). These systems offer diversity reception.
The Sony UWP-V1 systems are the third contenders. At about $500/channel as of this post ($450-525), they offer diversity and a surprisingly long range. I demoed one of these systems and was not impressed, however. There was a noise floor from the unit, and the noise breathed with the compander when the transmitter was not muted.
Of the three systems mentioned above, the G2/G3 consistently proves a champion and is the not-quite-universal recommendation.
As with so many things in gear, you get what you pay for. And if you cannot purchase a reliable system now, consider renting on a per-project basis. Equipment rental costs can be passed on to paying clients. Buying a cheap wireless now "until I can afford something better" will actually do you more harm than good, and that's money wasted. There are rental companies that will ship anywhere, and a system can be rented for a song. Weekly rates make it even better.
So what's really wrong with the cheap wireless systems? Unreliable transmitters and receivers, cheap construction, poor companders with deplorable frequency response and hideous noise levels. Often, the uber-cheap systems run on VHF frequencies and are non-diversity, which means terrible reception and more vulnerability to interference. UHF diversity is your best bet. And if it says 2.4GHz on it, don't even bother (I'm lookin' at you, Line 6 Relay).
When you're ready to get serious about wireless audio, consider something from Lectrosonics or Zaxcom. Here begins the $1000+/channel range of wireless, but keep in mind that these offer industry-standard levels of performance and can be found on professional, high-budget sets and locations around the world. These also rent for very reasonable rates.
As a side-note: if you decide to purchase a used system, please do your homework. As of June 12, 2010, the FCC prohibits use of radio mics in the 700MHz band. There are wireless systems in that band that still pop up on the used market, so be sure to check when you buy used and make sure it's still legal.
One last thought: it does not matter what project you're working on, whether it's student projects or indie films/shorts or wedding/event videography or ENG/EFP or full-blown feature productions. These rules do not change.
Best of luck!
-Alex
Audio falls as an afterthought so often, and after a $1000+ investment in a camera, lenses, batteries, etc., people want to know how little they can spend on audio gear. Folks, good audio is not cheap and cheap audio can cost you a lot.
Also, wireless audio is not a first solution. Use a boom mic, or a hard-wired lav, whenever possible. But there are some times that you need the flexibility and mobility that wireless offers. Once you've determined that you do need to get a system, here are a few things to know about cheap wireless systems, and wireless systems (aka radio mics) in general:
1) $500 is about the least that can be invested with some realistic expectation of performance.
2) The stock lavaliere mic that comes with the system is probably sub-par, so plan on an extra $150 - 400 for a lav upgrade. (There are a few lav shootouts and reviews around here, so be sure to check those out.)
3) It does not matter how much you spend on a wireless system: every radio mic will fail at some point. It's just that some systems are stronger and more stable than others, and strength and stability come with financial investment.
4) Buying a cheap system is going to result in audio nightmares for you both during production and in post.
5) No, you can't just buy an extra transmitter and use both transmitters with one receiver. You must have a second receiver with the second transmitter, and run that second system on a different frequency. Yes, there are systems that come with dual transmitters and one receiver unit, but that unit has two receivers built in along with two separate audio outputs.
So back to the golden question: "What cheap system should I get?" Well, there are only three sub-$1000 per channel systems that keep coming up.2) The stock lavaliere mic that comes with the system is probably sub-par, so plan on an extra $150 - 400 for a lav upgrade. (There are a few lav shootouts and reviews around here, so be sure to check those out.)
3) It does not matter how much you spend on a wireless system: every radio mic will fail at some point. It's just that some systems are stronger and more stable than others, and strength and stability come with financial investment.
4) Buying a cheap system is going to result in audio nightmares for you both during production and in post.
5) No, you can't just buy an extra transmitter and use both transmitters with one receiver. You must have a second receiver with the second transmitter, and run that second system on a different frequency. Yes, there are systems that come with dual transmitters and one receiver unit, but that unit has two receivers built in along with two separate audio outputs.
The Sennheiser Evolution G3 ENG system runs around $600 per channel as of this posting. This is by far the leader in price-to-performance for budget wireless. The predecessor, the G2, was also a very reliable system. Beware buying on your favorite auction site. There were floods of Chinese counterfeit G2 units, so know your seller.
Also of note between the G2 and G3: the G2 ENG systems are not diversity units, meaning there is only one antenna to receive the signal; the G3 systems added diversity (a second antenna, reducing the likelihood for signal dropouts) by utilizing the audio output cable from the receiver as the second antenna.
The Audio-Technica 1800-series wireless systems are around $500 per channel as of this post. They replaced the older U100-series systems, which were very good in the sub-$1000 category. There is a dual-frequency system available in the 1800 series that has two transmitters and a dual-channel receiver. Though the U100 systems were splendid in their class (I had two of them), I have not seen or heard many positive reviews of the 1800 series (I have no direct personal experience with the 1800 systems). These systems offer diversity reception.
The Sony UWP-V1 systems are the third contenders. At about $500/channel as of this post ($450-525), they offer diversity and a surprisingly long range. I demoed one of these systems and was not impressed, however. There was a noise floor from the unit, and the noise breathed with the compander when the transmitter was not muted.
Of the three systems mentioned above, the G2/G3 consistently proves a champion and is the not-quite-universal recommendation.
As with so many things in gear, you get what you pay for. And if you cannot purchase a reliable system now, consider renting on a per-project basis. Equipment rental costs can be passed on to paying clients. Buying a cheap wireless now "until I can afford something better" will actually do you more harm than good, and that's money wasted. There are rental companies that will ship anywhere, and a system can be rented for a song. Weekly rates make it even better.
So what's really wrong with the cheap wireless systems? Unreliable transmitters and receivers, cheap construction, poor companders with deplorable frequency response and hideous noise levels. Often, the uber-cheap systems run on VHF frequencies and are non-diversity, which means terrible reception and more vulnerability to interference. UHF diversity is your best bet. And if it says 2.4GHz on it, don't even bother (I'm lookin' at you, Line 6 Relay).
When you're ready to get serious about wireless audio, consider something from Lectrosonics or Zaxcom. Here begins the $1000+/channel range of wireless, but keep in mind that these offer industry-standard levels of performance and can be found on professional, high-budget sets and locations around the world. These also rent for very reasonable rates.
As a side-note: if you decide to purchase a used system, please do your homework. As of June 12, 2010, the FCC prohibits use of radio mics in the 700MHz band. There are wireless systems in that band that still pop up on the used market, so be sure to check when you buy used and make sure it's still legal.
One last thought: it does not matter what project you're working on, whether it's student projects or indie films/shorts or wedding/event videography or ENG/EFP or full-blown feature productions. These rules do not change.
Best of luck!
-Alex
flatlander
Well-known member
Hey Guys im about to order a set of ebay are these ok?http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sennheiser-...ltDomain_0&hash=item2eb85fe2f7#ht_3859wt_1327
That dealer is listed on Sennheiser's website, and the price is the same as the major dealers. Those are good signs, but purchase from ebay at your own risk.
Normally there's a kind a "secured thing" with ebay... But "NORMALLY"....
The thing is that if someone doesn't send you the package you can contact ebay and then they will try to force it, but if you want to go further you still have to pay laywers etc
and it will become a whole process...
But I have bought already a few times on ebay and received it... You have to look at the comments from the seller.
The thing is that if someone doesn't send you the package you can contact ebay and then they will try to force it, but if you want to go further you still have to pay laywers etc
and it will become a whole process...
But I have bought already a few times on ebay and received it... You have to look at the comments from the seller.