Zoom F2 recorder with lav mic

[Joshua Milligan]

So I have a question for those of you using COS-11D's. I have a couple of them that I use on my Sony wireless systems and I notice that they often don't sound good with certain pitches, like a higher pitched female speaker. They almost sound like they are breaking or peaking with higher pitched voices, but my audio levels are all great. It's frustrating because they aren't exactly cheap mics and everyone seems to love the sound from them, so perhaps I'm doing something wrong?

 

[mico]

Interesting discussion. I tend to prefer my COS-11's than my DPA 4060.
Just seems to have richer bass to my ears.
My DPA 4060 also didn't play well with my Tascam DR-10Ls so has been benched for a number of in jobs that it otherwise would have been used for.

Again the dpa and the cos need 5v or more plug in power and the tascam zoom f2 and dr10s only deliver 2.5v. Also bumble bee industries make cos 11 mounting accessories that make it easier to deal with.

Seems to me that the tentacle sync track e is for use with high end lavs and the zoom for prosumer ones.

*the cos 11's need 3v-10v, dPA"s need 5v-10v and higher depending on model

 

[puredrifting]

Again the dpa and the cos need 5v or more plug in power and the tascam zoom f2 and dr10s only deliver 2.5v. Also bumble bee industries make cos 11 mounting accessories that make it easier to deal with.

Seems to me that the tentacle sync track e is for use with high end lavs and the zoom for prosumer ones.

This ^^^^

 

[Thomas Smet]

have not used this product but I use a Zoom H1 with a lav mic plugged in as an alternative to a wireless lav all the time. No control but using 32bit and recording a bit lower like 6 DB lower helps cover any random surprises. It beats not having access to a good $1,000 wireless lav that doesn't get interference.

That lack of signal interference is the trade off. No ability to adjust level or monitor but at the same time no sudden drop outs or static. I have had too many situations of even expensive wireless mics failing for a second with no way to ever fix it except recording backup audio with a second wireless lav or camera audio.

This product looks like a much better solution since it can be kind of controlled from an app and its more compact. Plus it comes with a lav mic vs trying to find a good one to add to the H1. I just happened to have a bunch of lav mics with mini plugs from wireless sets I no longer trusted. Lavs themselves were good, it was the wireless transmitter and receivers that were the problem.

 

[puredrifting]

...It beats not having access to a good $1,000 wireless lav that doesn't get interference. That lack of signal interference is the trade off. I have had too many situations of even expensive wireless mics failing for a second with no way to ever fix it except recording backup audio with a second wireless lav or camera audio.

I get your comparison but:

$1,000.00 wireless is cheap, it's more disheartening when your using a $4,000.00 wireless and it's getting interference. Wireless mics, even the best one made, are all prone to interference, especially since the FCC has auctioned off about 40% of the avialble UHF bandwidth.
The FCC was just convinced NOT to auction off about another 1/3 of the UHF spectrum used by wireless mics by lobbyists in the pro audio industry. Wireless microphones remaining even remotely usable, is hanging on by a thread. Right now, UHF mics are a terrible investment
unless you're a working pro sound mixer. It's just a matter of time before the FCC auctions off the rest of the main UHF spectrum and the only alternatives will be 1.9Ghz, 2.4Ghz, 941Mhz and devices like the Tentacle Sync E.

As the available UHF bandwidth has shrunk over the past decade with the FCC auctioning it off, the number of wireless mic users has grown immensely over the past few years. More users, trying to use less available bandwidth, you get the picture. In Los Angeles. there are only three usable blocks
and one block can work fine, you move 300 yards and it suddenly is unusable. The sound mixers I often hire are tearing their hair out, rarely knowing if any of their wireless will work in a given location until they get on set. A good portion of the congestion is being caused by video users with
wireless video transmitters like Teradeks, etc. 2.4Ghz isn't really usable in most professional demand settings, although it can be useful for the occasional shoot where the transmitters can be very close to the receivers, if there isn't too much WiFi traffic nearby.

 

[Run&Gun]

I get your comparison but:

$1,000.00 wireless is cheap, it's more disheartening when your using a $4,000.00 wireless and it's getting interference. Wireless mics, even the best one made, are all prone to interference, especially since the FCC has auctioned off about 40% of the avialble UHF bandwidth.
The FCC was just convinced NOT to auction off about another 1/3 of the UHF spectrum used by wireless mics by lobbyists in the pro audio industry. Wireless microphones remaining even remotely usable, is hanging on by a thread. Right now, UHF mics are a terrible investment
unless you're a working pro sound mixer. It's just a matter of time before the FCC auctions off the rest of the main UHF spectrum and the only alternatives will be 1.9Ghz, 2.4Ghz, 941Mhz and devices like the Tentacle Sync E.

As the available UHF bandwidth has shrunk over the past decade with the FCC auctioning it off, the number of wireless mic users has grown immensely over the past few years. More users, trying to use less available bandwidth, you get the picture. In Los Angeles. there are only three usable blocks
and one block can work fine, you move 300 yards and it suddenly is unusable. The sound mixers I often hire are tearing their hair out, rarely knowing if any of their wireless will work in a given location until they get on set. A good portion of the congestion is being caused by video users with
wireless video transmitters like Teradeks, etc. 2.4Ghz isn't really usable in most professional demand settings, although it can be useful for the occasional shoot where the transmitters can be very close to the receivers, if there isn't too much WiFi traffic nearby.

Yep. It’s a craps shoot everywhere. I’ve even taken hits in frequency coordinated venues. When I started in the 90’s, you could get upwards of a half mile to mile range with a UHF Lectro in the right environment. Today, you’re sometimes lucky to get 50 feet. And it’s only going to continue to get worse. I know guys using ‘shark fins’ in their portable mixer bags, now. And it’s not a new thing. I saw some NFL Films guys doing it five or six years ago. I actually got a text from one of my audio guys last week expressing his joy that the FCC didn’t sell-off that chunk of spectrum. It even scares me, knowing I have about $30K(or more) worth of wireless audio that could be made completely unusable.

 

[Clermond]

I don't know about the F2 but with the Track E you can at least check and adjust levels and waveform on your mobile device. With the non US version you can also attach a wireless transmitter to the headphone jack and monitor audio. Works great. And you have the timecode sync with all Sync E devices

 

[Clermond]

Yep. It’s a craps shoot everywhere. I’ve even taken hits in frequency coordinated venues. When I started in the 90’s, you could get upwards of a half mile to mile range with a UHF Lectro in the right environment. Today, you’re sometimes lucky to get 50 feet. And it’s only going to continue to get worse. I know guys using ‘shark fins’ in their portable mixer bags, now. And it’s not a new thing. I saw some NFL Films guys doing it five or six years ago. I actually got a text from one of my audio guys last week expressing his joy that the FCC didn’t sell-off that chunk of spectrum. It even scares me, knowing I have about $30K(or more) worth of wireless audio that could be made completely unusable.

The "shark fins" are amplifiers with antennas. They extend the range but don't help with interference. Events, sports, theaters TV shows etc. have their own frequencies. Quite pricey but free from interference.

 

[puredrifting]

The "shark fins" are amplifiers with antennas. They extend the range but don't help with interference. Events, sports, theaters TV shows etc. have their own frequencies. Quite pricey but free from interference.

I think that's the licensed 941Mhz I hear some of the people over at JW Sound talk about occasionally. You have to get a license and follow procedures,
kind of like getting your Part 107 for drones. Kind of sucks that our government (the FCC), has basicaly taken it upon themselves to just auction off the
bandwidth that belongs to all of us, that many of us have used to make a living with for decades. The public comment periods have been a joke, they "listen",
and then just do whatever the hell they want anyway, it's complete lip service.

 

[Clermond]

I'm in Germany so I don't know about the FCC regulations but it's probably the same all over the word. Since frequencies have been opened (sold) to LTE transmission has become very fragile. -> I just ordered another Track E

 

[scorsesefan]

I think that's the licensed 941Mhz I hear some of the people over at JW Sound talk about occasionally. You have to get a license and follow procedures,
kind of like getting your Part 107 for drones. Kind of sucks that our government (the FCC), has basicaly taken it upon themselves to just auction off the
bandwidth that belongs to all of us, that many of us have used to make a living with for decades. The public comment periods have been a joke, they "listen",
and then just do whatever the hell they want anyway, it's complete lip service.

Exactly. Hopefully it will get better with the incoming administration but if memory serves me the C band was sold under Obama and the B under our current administration. The airwaves belong to the public but our government sees fit to sell them tonthe highest bidder...

 

[puredrifting]

Exactly. Hopefully it will get better with the incoming administration but if memory serves me the C band was sold under Obama and the B under our current administration. The airwaves belong to the public but our government sees fit to sell them tonthe highest bidder...

Yes, by the people, for the people is a joke in 2021. It's whomever the latest Czar in the power seat at the FCC decides he wants to sell our bandwidth to and it's been that way for more than a decade now.

 

[Run&Gun]

Yes, by the people, for the people is a joke in 2021. It's whomever the latest Czar in the power seat at the FCC decides he wants to sell our bandwidth to and it's been that way for more than a decade now.

And the absolute genius part of it all: They aren't really selling "anything". It doesn't physically exist. Auctioning/selling parts of the spectrum is the ultimate snake oil con. These companies are paying millions/billions of dollars for the right to use/make equipment that can operate on certain frequencies.

It's almost like how the government says that certain naturally occurring plants that have existed for millennia are illegal. I guess someone forgot to tell God.

 

[Run&Gun]

I'm in Germany so I don't know about the FCC regulations but it's probably the same all over the word. Since frequencies have been opened (sold) to LTE transmission has become very fragile. -> I just ordered another Track E

Even though the cables that I had built to split my lavs to simultaneously feed a belt pack and Track E don't work(well, they do, but the level drops really low and makes it noisy), I'm going to hang onto the Track E's. Worse-comes-to-worst, we could probably just run a second lav parallel to the wireless and adjacent to each other and roll the dice that if the wireless sounds good(no scratch/rub, etc.) then the other would be clean, as well. Not ideal, but an option if the situation warrants it.

 

[Gweilo66]

Big Tech folk coming in. Who consumes the freqs?

 

[Thomas Smet]

I get your comparison but:

$1,000.00 wireless is cheap, it's more disheartening when your using a $4,000.00 wireless and it's getting interference. Wireless mics, even the best one made, are all prone to interference, especially since the FCC has auctioned off about 40% of the avialble UHF bandwidth.
The FCC was just convinced NOT to auction off about another 1/3 of the UHF spectrum used by wireless mics by lobbyists in the pro audio industry. Wireless microphones remaining even remotely usable, is hanging on by a thread. Right now, UHF mics are a terrible investment
unless you're a working pro sound mixer. It's just a matter of time before the FCC auctions off the rest of the main UHF spectrum and the only alternatives will be 1.9Ghz, 2.4Ghz, 941Mhz and devices like the Tentacle Sync E.

As the available UHF bandwidth has shrunk over the past decade with the FCC auctioning it off, the number of wireless mic users has grown immensely over the past few years. More users, trying to use less available bandwidth, you get the picture. In Los Angeles. there are only three usable blocks
and one block can work fine, you move 300 yards and it suddenly is unusable. The sound mixers I often hire are tearing their hair out, rarely knowing if any of their wireless will work in a given location until they get on set. A good portion of the congestion is being caused by video users with
wireless video transmitters like Teradeks, etc. 2.4Ghz isn't really usable in most professional demand settings, although it can be useful for the occasional shoot where the transmitters can be very close to the receivers, if there isn't too much WiFi traffic nearby.

I invested in one of those bands and a year later my wireless kit was virtually useless. It was at that point I wondered if I should just use a small recorder in a pocket and a lav and sync in post. Would be nice to not have to do that but honestly my life has been so much less stressed since doing it this way. Even with the extra effort of recording to a blind device and syncing in post. I'm pretty much done with wireless for now. I don't want to invest in something that will be a paperweight in a year.

 

[puredrifting]

Big Tech folk coming in. Who consumes the freqs?

T-Mobile, AT&T. I don't blame them at all. The FCC auctions, even though they are paying billions, are a license to print money.
It's the stinking FCC that's infringing on our rights, basically without oversight or accountability.

 

[puredrifting]

I invested in one of those bands and a year later my wireless kit was virtually useless. It was at that point I wondered if I should just use a small recorder in a pocket and a lav and sync in post. Would be nice to not have to do that but honestly my life has been so much less stressed since doing it this way. Even with the extra effort of recording to a blind device and syncing in post. I'm pretty much done with wireless for now. I don't want to invest in something that will be a paperweight in a year.

I don't blame you one bit. I too have used my Tascam DR-10Ls quite a bit in similar situations, especially with the Fuji X-T3s on the gimbal as I can't add a wireless receiver without making it bigger, heavier, more cables.
I have the Deity Connect system, which, when it works, is great but it doesn't always work. I picked up a new in box Sennheiser G3 system for $150.00 but I have yet to set it up to use it as I have not needed a wireless
mic again for a few months but I will be playing with the G3 also as I had a shoot last year where the Deity wouldn't work but my gaffer happened to have his G3 with him and it worked great.

I was going to invest in some Lectros but like many of us, I see the future of UHF as being in the hands of greedy, corrupt bureaucrats who have proven they will screw us, so what's the point?

 

[Run&Gun]

I don't blame you one bit. I too have used my Tascam DR-10Ls quite a bit in similar situations, especially with the Fuji X-T3s on the gimbal as I can't add a wireless receiver without making it bigger, heavier, more cables.
I have the Deity Connect system, which, when it works, is great but it doesn't always work. I picked up a new in box Sennheiser G3 system for $150.00 but I have yet to set it up to use it as I have not needed a wireless
mic again for a few months but I will be playing with the G3 also as I had a shoot last year where the Deity wouldn't work but my gaffer happened to have his G3 with him and it worked great.

I was going to invest in some Lectros but like many of us, I see the future of UHF as being in the hands of greedy, corrupt bureaucrats who have proven they will screw us, so what's the point?

Like always, it depends on what you’re doing. Sometimes there is no time for syncing in post or any post for that matter. There are also times you’re at a distance and need to hear what is being said so you can react to it. The need for wireless audio is not gone, just because we have inexpensive little recorders, now. I mean, I think they’re cool little tools, but the biggest negative with these is just not being able to hear if you have a scratch, a rub, wind, the mic fell or any other problem. And looking at a little waveform on the app isn’t going to tell you that. Probably 80%+ of what I do with a lav is with it buried. Heck, I’ve been in windy situations where I HAD to bury it, even though it wasn’t necessary for the shot.

Having a TV background, I always see the case/need for high-quality in-camera everything that can go straight to air, either live or extremely short turnaround(maybe minutes, maybe being played straight off card/tape[bitd] immediately). I still get nervous on shoots where audio is all recorded in the bag with nothing going to camera.

 

[Paul F]

I'm as unhappy as everyone else about the loss of the spectrum. I had G3s that operated in that band. But how did this all come about? Here's what happened.

The advance from no G to 5G and our insatiable desire to do more things on our phones led to the need for more spectrum. Now I don't know the behind the scenes fights between the cell operators and the TV station owners, but however it happened, the cell guys won and it was Congress that passed a the Spectrum Act in 2012 that started all of this.

The Spectrum Act told the FCC to find a way to auction off spectrum to clear the way for more cell phone spectrum. The FCC came up with an 'incentive auction'; the first of its kind. The spectrum of interest was TV channels 38-52. Now I don't know about you, but I haven't watched much of anything on those channels. It was under utilized spectrum.

Wireless microphones are allowed to operate in that same exact spectrum simultaneously with those TV channels. They just have to find an unused slot to transmit. Unlicensed units like the G3s only put out 50mw and don't go very far.

The auction was called 'incentivized' because it was voluntary. TV channel owners did not have to give up their channel, but could give it up for an 'incentive'. Those channels were first given away free by the FCC back when TV was first being developed, but of course, became very valuable. The TV channel owners had three options; for a fee - give up their license entirely; give up their channel, but move to a lower channel; give up their channel but move onto a shared channel.

The auction - TV channel owners 'bid' a price that they would be willing to give up their channel. In a second auction, telcos bid what they were willing to pay. The FCC looked at the results and determined if enough spectrum came up from the auctions to accomplish what they wanted. They continued rounds like this until there were no more bids. So no station had to give up a channel. But their 'greed' incentivized them to sell. The money was substantial. For example, one station in my area received $72 million. Another, could have received $140 million*.

The results were that 84 Mhz was given up. Of that, 70 Mhz was given to cell phones and 14 Mhz was dedicated to wireless microphones (with no TV channels interfering). Of the $20 billion bid by the telcos, half went to the TV channel owners who gave up their channel and the rest went to cover costs and pay down the federal debt.

So if you want to blame anyone, blame the TV channel owners, who were willing to give up their spectrum for a price.

*Here's a whopper of a story about the auction. The auction was very complicated and took 39 months. Apparently, one station was struggling financially and 39 months was a long time. So, for a percentage of the auction proceeds, another company financed the station for the duration of the auction. During the 'reverse' auction, TV stations put in their bids. Somehow the TV station or its proxy screwed up and failed to place a bid. It seems impossible, but it happened. The result of that was that they were out of the auction and had no recourse to get back in. They lost $140 million. They remained a TV station that did not want to be a TV station. Lawsuits ensued between several entities. In the end, they auctioned off the TV station to anyone willing to take it over as a TV station. It sold for $12 million.