Sennheiser Wirelees Excellent Performance

[David Fleming]

I just bit the bullet and spent the $500 for a Sennheiser evolution wireless set. I was a little worried because it featured non diversity receiver. After talking with the local dealer who assured me I could return it if I was not satisfied, I went ahead and bought it.

After the very disappointing results using the Nady stuff I bought I was thrilled at how well the Sennheiser worked. I mounted the camera on a tripod and roamed all around the house without a single dropout. With the camera still in the house, I went into the garage and moved around with no incident. Finally I walked to the mailbox across the street with the camera still recording good audio inside. I am now sold on the Sennheiser stuff.

With the digital feedback on the transmitter and receiver the Sennheiser system tells you what frequency you are operating on and how the RF signal and audio signal look. I am sure after I read the manual I will figure out more cool stuff this baby does.

[Dan Robinson]

My brother and I tested out my Sennheiser wireless setup when I bought it last year. On the rural road outside his house, we did a line-of-sight distance test and got clear audio up to 1,500 feet (over 1/4 mile).

[Jaron Berman]

RF is a bit voodoo, and nobody can REALLY explain it but one thing we found with our G2 packs was that the antenna HAD to be up-and-down. In NYC, there's a tons of rf interference, but as long as the receiver's antenna was upright, the system worked extremely well. I made a small hot-shoe adapter which was basically a hotshoe->mocrophone stand fitting which I screwed a plate 1.5"X3" into. Essentially it looked like a flag standing on end sticking up off the hotshoe. I then put velcro on the receiver backs and on the mount, so when I set up my camera, all I had to do was slide my mount onto the hotshoe of the camera and plug in the xlr's. Very quick. Kinda strange that Sennheiser doesn't offer a mount for 2 receivers at once?

Anyways, the short of it is - You'll get WAY better range if the receiver is oriented vertically, and better yet if both the trans and receiver are standing upright. Voodoo.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Jaron Berman

Anyways, the short of it is - You'll get WAY better range if the receiver is oriented vertically, and better yet if both the trans and receiver are standing upright. Voodoo.

Well, it's not so much voodoo if you understand what RF is and how it propagates through space.

Transmitting antennas have vertical, horizontal, or circular polarization. For optimal reception, the receiver's antenna must be of the same type polarization which is often achieved by the way it's oriented.

RF energy is a set of electromagnetic and electrostatic waves that travel through space at a 90 degree angle to each other.

In rather simplistic terms, the transmitting antenna's polarization determines how the waves are spit out into space. Why have different polarizations? Because different frequencies of the RF spectrum have optimum radiation with a certain type of polarization.

As you discovered, your wireless mic likes vertical polarization which is what many VHF and UHF transmitters use.

The voodoo comes in when you take a flourescent tube and hold it near the transmitter or open wire antenna feed line and it lights up with nothing attached. (grin)

-gb-

[David Fleming]

From my days as an amateur radio operator I am also familiar with the principal of polarity. I think having a receiving antenna out of sync with the transmitting antenna accounts for a signal loss of nearly 20bd (which is HUGE). I am almost certain this is why satellites transmit adjacent channels oppositely polarized in order to squeeze more stuff in the same band space without out interference. Fortunately the MA100 XLR adapter on my XL1 has a nearly vertical bracket for the receiver to mount too. The setup can easily hear farther than the camera will need to see, so I am quite pleased.

If a can find someone that wants my Nady stuff I will likely order a second Sennheiser set. After some additional testing with the Nady VHF equipment this evening I may have been a little hard on it. It seems that my XL1 produces a lot of RF noise that the Nady receiver hears. Due to the nature of FM, the transmitter has to overcome off of that camera noise signal before the receiver will capture it. When I plugged the Nady receiver directly into my mixer and took the camera out of the system it worked much better. Perhaps with other camera makes the noise performance is much better but I still think Nady needs to build a better receiver, but I guess I should have expected as much for the price.

[Cal Johnson]

I just bought the Sennheiser G2 wireless as well. I tried it out and it worked fine. I thought it seemed really well made, and very easy to use. I still haven't put it through its paces on a shoot, but glad to hear you're happy with yours.

[Bruce S. Yarock]

I bought the G2 with the mic plug and have had good recults for the last 2 years. Most of the pro location sound ,however,mixers go with zaxcom or lectro,and I wonder if it's for better sound or longer reception.
I did a wedding in central florida, out in nowhere, and had the g2 on the groom. When he was in the house and back yard (maybe 100 feet away) there was loads of distortion. But that was the only time I had problems.
Bruce S. yarock
www.yarock.com

[Paul Cypert]

Just bought one as well. Putting it through the paces in Cambodia and Phuket this week. So far so good...

Paul