Wireless Comparisons, Sony UWP-C1 series vs Sennheiser Evolution Wireless G-2

[Alessandro Machi]

Occasionally I'll rent a Lectrosonics wireless microphone for shoots where we don't get a second chance to do a take.

However, it appears the lower cost Sennheiser and Sony wireless microphones are quite useful for many "less stressful" situations.

I just recently purchased a Sennheiser Evolution G-2 and rented it to somebody who said it performed quite well, but it is not diversity.

The Sony wireless UWP-C1 costs only 50 dollars more than the Sennheiser, it has diversity but less channels and I think it does not have the auto tuning capability that the Sennheiser has.

Does anybody have an opinion on which system they like better?
Please mention if you think the camera you use affects which microphone works better.

I guess Azden's aggressive foray into diversity wireless has been met by Sennheiser and Sony lower cost wireless microphones, anybody have an opinion on the Azdens from a cost and quality point of view?

[Troy Tiscareno]

I've used the Sony lav setup, and it worked very well, but I also needed a plug-on adapter for a handheld mic, and this turned the Sony setup into an $1100 system, vs the G2 ENG kit at $600, so I purchased the G2.

I use the G2 at least once a week on shoots, from suburban areas to downtown San Francisco to near cell towers, and I've yet to have a problem with them at all. The audio has been crystal clear and no dropouts.

The G2 systems are available in 3 UHF bands, so you have to choose which band (A, B, or C) you want, because the gear will be fixed to the band you choose. Within each band, the system is capable of being set to any of 1440 different frequencies, and comes with 32 presets that are spaced far enough apart that you could use 32 systems simultaneously, assuming that there is no interference on any of those freqs.

Most UHF gear is currently on the A-band, which is fairly crowded. The B-band is less so, and in most places, the C-band is little-used and very clear. Note that there is some talk of the FCC *eventually* reallocating the C-band UHF freqs for other uses, once the transition to digital TV broadcasting has been completed, so there's a chance that 5-10 years down the road, this band could be crowded. That's no concern for me NOW, and if I have to replace my gear in 5 years for that reason, it will have MORE than made back my $600 investment.

The rack-mount G2 receivers ARE diversity, but the portable/cam-mounted receivers are NOT. Again, this hasn't been a problem for me yet.

IMO, the G2 is quite advanced and much less expensive than its quality suggests it should be, having compared it to other systems like the Sony, Azden, and AudioTechnica. Being able to adjust settings from a push-button, menu-driven display instead of using analog pots with a screwdriver is a plus. Being able to get a bundle with a lav AND a plug-on transmitter is great. And having zero problems, after having had issues with Azden and Samson systems, is fantastic.

-Troy

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

I love my Sony kit. Note the Sony portable receivers are diversity. One thing I don't like about the Sony though is that the audio input on the transmitter is not described in the specs., so I have not been able to build myself an adapter to plug in another mic. I'll manage to do it with some experimentation I guess. If anybody knows the mini-plug's pin configuration, please share it!

[Alessandro Machi]

So you are stuck using the microphone that came with the unit?

Do you have the plug adapter so you can use your own microphones?

--------------

Troy, thanks for the feedback. I feel better about keeping the sennheiser rather than changing to the Sony. The diversity aspect of the Sony does intrigue me however.

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> Do you have the plug adapter so you can use
> your own microphones?

Not yet. I have not figured out the pin layout of the miniplug input on the transmitter. Eventually, I will make it. Should be simple.

[Alessandro Machi]

I think they call it a "butt plug". It's normally sold as an additional accessory to go along with the lavalier and it plugs onto the bottom of any microphone, instantly turning that microphone into a wireless microphone.

Is that what you are thinking of making?

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> Is that what you are thinking of making?

Yes that is the idea.

[Troy Tiscareno]

<<<-- Originally posted by Alessandro Machi :
Troy, thanks for the feedback. I feel better about keeping the sennheiser rather than changing to the Sony. The diversity aspect of the Sony does intrigue me however. -->>>

Others have suggested that the diversity feature on most portable receivers is of limited use due to the short distance between the antennas. There is a minimum distance that they really need to be apart in order to function as intended, due to the wavelengths involved, and you just can't do that on such a small receiver. However, diversity is a big "feature", so it's going to be added anyway on the higher-end products.

On a desk/rack receiver, the antennas can be placed much further apart, and there's a real advantage for a diversity receiver there.

-Troy

[Yi Fong Yu]

on a related note are there wireless mic/systems using 2.4ghz? 5ghz? or other frequencies that don't have interference within FCC guidelines?

are these wireless systems analog based or digital based?

[Troy Tiscareno]

Those freqs are pretty heavily used by wireless networks and many new cordless phones, so I'm not sure it would be a great place for mics. The systems we're referring to are all analog.

-Troy

[Alessandro Machi]

I used the Wireless Sennheiser with a Digital 8 camcorder (TRV-350).

One audio setting on the Sennheiser worked well, the rest seemed to induce overmodulation, however I was surprised to discover that the lavalier placement is super critical.

I had a noticeable amount of hiss (I was able to take most of the hiss away by knocking down the highs (the sound still was pretty clear). On the second hour of the interview I had the mike placed a bit higher on the chest and the sound came out a bit louder with a lot less hiss.

What I am concerned about is I really didn't move the microphone that much higher, which means the lavalier placement is super critical.
In the past I have have had quite a bit of latitude when it came to the lavalier positioning.

Acceptable sound quality, so overall I am happy.

[Troy Tiscareno]

You will want to make sure you adjust the output level of the receiver to match your camera. The default level is VERY hot, using something like +10db of gain. I use -10db or so and that matches the range of a VX2100 much better.

-Troy