Hi, i need a wireless audio system. If anyone can suggest such system or mixing and matching brands etc it would be mostnhelpful.

I wantbto be able to give an interviewer a wireless mic to interview others, so this mic would go to a receiver that would be connected to my cam. Most systems i have seen have a fairly big receiver and would need a power supply to run it in the field. Nowhere near ideal. I would also like to lav up some people and do same thing. So the bp units would be used, now, is there a system for around 500 dollars that has the hand held mic, a receiver (like a modem/router size) and a bp transmitter and receiver kit out there somewhere? I also at times would like to patch into the mic audio at an event l7ke a rodeo, drags etc and transmit that to my cam. Sooooo pissed off atm, i bought a videography setup and got 2x bp receivers and 2x bp transmitters worth about $1200 new and have to bin them because our frequency bands have changed and they are now illegal to use.mi wonder if i can sell them overseas?

Look forward to comments and ideas.......cheers

Gary

You will need to check your local vendors to sort out what systems/frequencies can operate in your region.
You may be able to sell them to another user if their frequency bands are OK to use on their region.

Read over past posts here to see what people are using, and like.

I've used low cost Azden VHF, Shure VHF (w/o body pack x-mitters), Sony UHF (before the frequency switch in the US), and Audio-Technica AT-1800 series UHF - and all have worked well for my purposes. The AT-1800 is probably the best and the Azden probably had the poorest sound. Except for the Shure system, all had small receivers that were usable with a camcorder and operated on common alkaline AA or 9V batteries. Sennheisers are popular, but I've not used them.

A lot will depend on the specific features and quality you need,

Generally, a transmitter/receiver combination needs to be brand/model specific to operate properly, even if the frequency is the same, this applies to both the analog and digital systems. Unfortunately you can't get anything very good for $500. But I spose it depends on one's expectations of "good"..

It has been the conventional wisdom for many years that the lowest-price "decent" wireless kit would cost US$500-650, typically the Sennheiser G3. However, that MAY be changing now that they are starting to use low-cost 2.4 GHz "wi-fi" technology for wireless mics.

Audio-Technica introduced their "System 10" last year, and just very recently added an on-camera, battery-operated receiver. I just got two systems and I am planning on making a "teardown" video to reveal the internal technology, as well as some REAL performance tests. Initial tests in my WiFi intensive office showed that it appears to work fine in the presence of lots of WiFi "competitors".

And the other potential issue, latency, subjectively appears to be a non-issue. I could not perceive ANY latency even though I was looking for it.

And Australian microphone manufacturer Rode will be introducing their RodeLink 2.4GHz wireless products here in the next few months. The RodeLink appears to use nearly the same technology as the AT System 10, although they do not appear to be inter-operable. Also TBD is whether they will co-exist together in the same venue, but I would be that they will behave themselves.

The street price for the AT System 10 is US$450 and the RodeLink is supposed to be US$400.

From what I have seen so far, this is a major breakthrough for affordable wireless audio gadgets. The spread-spectrum, frequency-hopping, 2.4 GHz technology is already ubiquitous in WiFi and BlueTooth protocols, so the supporting chipsets, etc.have become "jelly-bean" commodity components, and the prices of this new design reflects that economy.

Another benefit (although also potentially a curse) of using the 2.4 GHz ISM band is that it is already allocated for short-range, unlecensed communication anywhere on the planet. So producers who move around to different countries won't have to worry about whether their wireless kits are legal. And the manufacturers can make a single model for sale in all geographies, further decreasing the cost.

Kind of like Freeways. The price is right and the ride is good - until rush hour or in high population areas like LA.!
in contrast there are variable toll roads. The ride is almost always good, but the cost sure hurts!

There are many times this question has been asked. Search is your friend.

My answer is the Sennheiser G3 but it's out of your budget buying new. Some kits also provide a handheld transmitter but you have to turn off the body pack transmitter (lavaliere). If you want to transmit sound from a mixer, you need to adapt line level mixer output to your transmitter input that is usually mic level. The Sennys are good for all of this but $500 won't cover 2 pairs. If you go to three pairs, you need to add a field mixer assuming your camera only has two channels.

Sennheiser's EW 112-p ENG Combo system, has a body pack transmitter and a plug-on transmitter which can be used with any XLR dynamic or self-powered condenser mic. For a H/H mic, I would recommend an EV RE-50, Sennheiser MD42 or 46. As Les stated, two transmitters can't be used at the same time with just one receiver. The other way around is possible though.. one transmitter and multiple receivers.

Hi Gary

Although it hasn't been enforced yet, there are legally only two bands we can use .. 556-608 MHz and 638-698 Mhz Be very careful as a lot of suppliers are selling off the 700-800 Mhz systems still at el-cheapo prices so avoid them. Sony units UWP-D11 have the new frequencies but places are still listing the ones which are D12 and D16's with the old frequencies.

I have yet to read any reviews of Rode's new "non radio" system but it does solve the frequency changes as it's a WiFi system at 2.4GHz so that could be an option too?? Sony also make a Bluetooth system and both of these are at lower price points than the UHF systems .... I found a BT unit that is actually designed for musicians and has a transmitter and receiver (again on 2.4GHz) and gives you a cordless connection between your guitar and the amplifier with a range that should be good enough ...the send unit has a mic input and level control but you would have to mod the receive unit output as it has a 6.3mm male jack so that would have to be ripped out and rewired so you have an XLR cable for the camera. Whether it would actually be as good as a dedicated unit I have no idea but they are a mere $75.00 ..I just might buy one and see how it works ?

Chris

Thanks everyone, yes chris, i am aware of the bandplan changes as i have 2 transmitters and 2 receivers ready to go but in the 700 and 800 meg region. I thought the new changes came in in 2015, ie 1.1.2015. I hope not, i might be able to use these ones this weekend at a rodeo. Btw chris, do you know of any aus forums like this one? This is a fantastic forum and i am learning a lot but i am looking for lots of legal tips etc that apply to us and not the U.S. , great forum but......

Oh yeah, i did stumble across 2.4 gig wireless system but havnt read too much about it yet.

Hi Gary

Shhhh!!! I'm still using my 800mhz kit at weddings and there is a guard band which seems to be un-used right at the top of the range so if you set your units right up near the top end you are unlikely to get any issues.

Being Government controlled it's probably still wrapped in red tape so I'm getting as much use out of the old units while I can.

Plenty Aussies on this forum especially in Victoria too!! If you look around the Sony forums here Chris Young is quite active amongst many others ... I posted a comment a few months ago on this very subject so do a search on this forum and you will find it along with more useful information!!

Chris

Hi, i need a wireless audio system. If anyone can suggest such system or mixing and matching brands etc it would be mostnhelpful.

I wantbto be able to give an interviewer a wireless mic to interview others, so this mic would go to a receiver that would be connected to my cam. Most systems i have seen have a fairly big receiver and would need a power supply to run it in the field. Nowhere near ideal. I would also like to lav up some people and do same thing. So the bp units would be used, now, is there a system for around 500 dollars that has the hand held mic, a receiver (like a modem/router size) and a bp transmitter and receiver kit out there somewhere? I also at times would like to patch into the mic audio at an event l7ke a rodeo, drags etc and transmit that to my cam. Sooooo pissed off atm, i bought a videography setup and got 2x bp receivers and 2x bp transmitters worth about $1200 new and have to bin them because our frequency bands have changed and they are now illegal to use.mi wonder if i can sell them overseas?

Look forward to comments and ideas.......cheers

Gary

ok. 1 microphone (handheld) , and 1 lavalier
you need 2 receivers (1 for the handheld and 1 for the lav)

polsen UHF handheld and polsen UHF lav system
ulw-16
the handheld is a transmitter
the lav must be connected to a transmitter (bodypack)
the camera gets 2 receivers (to be set at different channels)

they are fairly good UHF systems with only 16 channels:
CH. 1 584.400 MHz
CH. 2 587.500 MHz
CH. 3 589.575 MHz
CH. 4 591.050 MHz
CH. 5 593.425 MHz
CH. 6 595.200 MHz
CH. 7 598.450 MHz
CH. 8 599.650 MHz
CH. 9 601.275 MHz
CH. 10 603.775 MHz
CH. 11 605.500 MHz
CH. 12 606.750 MHz
CH. 13 586.025 MHz
CH. 14 590.525 MHz
CH. 15 594.150 MHz
CH. 16 602.450 MHz

the cost is $229 + $249

I have the handheld and it works even in NYC . The quality of the sound is good to very good.
Now the problem is that it only gives 16 frequencies (pre-set) . Nobody can be sure if they work before testing on the specific location. Plus the frequencies may be regulated by the stadium , so check with them and show the 16 frequencies that you have (listed below).
if you have 2 XLR inputs on your camera they will install on ch1 and ch2 separately (connect the two receivers to each XLR)

links
Polsen ULW-16-HL 16-Channel Camera-Mount UHF Wireless ULW-16-HL

Polsen ULW-16 - 16-Channel Camera-Mountable UHF ULW-16-PL4 B&H

about the 700MHz systems (now illegal in the U.S.) you can sell'em on ebay, stating the frequencies , to overseas buyers. Not sure about this but it couldl also be illegal to sell them in the US. But you clearly state the frequencies and you should be fine.

Excellent!! Thanks Anthony. Ill be looking into those units. Most of my recordings will be at small country towns probably no bigger than 20000 people so shouldnt be too much interference. I have a google earth map with major transmitter sites and frequencies listed for australia so i could check that before going on location. I have an enthusiast background in radio comms, have my ham radio ticket so luckily i know a bit about interference, harmonics, repeater inputs etc. Thanks again, sounds like a good start.

Audio-Technica and some others offer UHF systems with a dual channel receivers. While not cheap, it means only one receiver needed at the camcorder end for two mics transmitting.

"Country towns... 20,000".....
>Country towns of P=20,000? That spells suburbia (aka, RF nightmare). None around here, at least not within 100 miles of mid-town (Manhattan) (that's not underwater), and I grew-up on a dairy farm in NYS's Hudson Valley region prior to seeking fame & fortune in 'the big city'

Excellent!! Thanks Anthony. Ill be looking into those units. Most of my recordings will be at small country towns probably no bigger than 20000 people so shouldnt be too much interference. I have a google earth map with major transmitter sites and frequencies listed for australia so i could check that before going on location. I have an enthusiast background in radio comms, have my ham radio ticket so luckily i know a bit about interference, harmonics, repeater inputs etc. Thanks again, sounds like a good start.

my pleasure, Gary
that's the best solution for your budget in my opinion. Now a note about the handheld:
they are "cheap" , the handheld is nothing more than a 20 bucks (US) karaoke microphone (which means LOTS of handling noise, exaggerated mids and so on). So if you have a low cut filter on the XLR of the camera then DEFINITELY use it.

those are NOT diversity by any means , but in my experience (a week or so in venues around NYC) they perform without problems so far.

Anyway since they are sold by B&H you can try and if they don't work then send them back.

I'm pretty happy with mine, to be honest. But a "real" microphone on a plug on and a true diversity system like the new sony uwpd or the good old sennheiser g2 (non diversity) and G3 (somehow diversity) gives sounds from another planet (to be honest). But you stated a budget and that's the answer.

good luck

Having grown up in the Southern Tier (about 20 miles from Ithaca),,and worked at places like Minot. ND, towns of 20K can be pretty rural as well, with minimal RF sources around, except for 5 KW daytime AM stations and small FM station, and the occasional VHF or UHF TV station 20 or so miles away.

NYC and greater LA, DC, Chicago, etc, are NOT representative of most of the USA land mass

here's a clip from a shoot this week: Audio-Technica System 10 Wireless - YouTube

Regards,

Ty Ford

update on the polsen handheld that I have. (uwl-16 hht)
I was shooting a party today and the DJ saw my microphone on the table and immediately said "that's a Vocopro... I didn't know that they made stuff for cameras".
So they are indeed VERY similar to the karaoke stuff and low-budget DJs
but what can I say..? they work well...
vocopro is a cool company in California, good for them! welcome to the video world!

as long as they work I don't care if this is a karaoke thing LOL
the 2.4GHz are for karaoke too , but at least the Polsen is UHF and can go past 5ft....

anyway Vocopro makes a system in the 2.4GHz for karaoke and smartphones too now , the receiver is small(ish) but not good for a camera, but it works on batteries. But they state the destination clearly, so it's not for cameras.

everything works in your living room with one wireless within 1-2ft, but reality is a totally different animal. in reality you can have 40 wireless systems at the same time right next to you, you may have to put the lav a little more than 1-2ft away from the receiver (try 40-50ft) and steady, again with other wireless working right there next to yours. for the shoot that you (kindly) posted even a corded lav would do fine, and even a cheap VHF would do fine. Anyway they also should make the zoom illegal in studio shoots.

It has been the conventional wisdom for many years that the lowest-price "decent" wireless kit would cost US$500-650, typically the Sennheiser G3. However, that MAY be changing now that they are starting to use low-cost 2.4 GHz "wi-fi" technology for wireless mics.

Audio-Technica introduced their "System 10" last year, and just very recently added an on-camera, battery-operated receiver. I just got two systems and I am planning on making a "teardown" video to reveal the internal technology, as well as some REAL performance tests. Initial tests in my WiFi intensive office showed that it appears to work fine in the presence of lots of WiFi "competitors".

And the other potential issue, latency, subjectively appears to be a non-issue. I could not perceive ANY latency even though I was looking for it.

And Australian microphone manufacturer Rode will be introducing their RodeLink 2.4GHz wireless products here in the next few months. The RodeLink appears to use nearly the same technology as the AT System 10, although they do not appear to be inter-operable. Also TBD is whether they will co-exist together in the same venue, but I would be that they will behave themselves.

The street price for the AT System 10 is US$450 and the RodeLink is supposed to be US$400.

From what I have seen so far, this is a major breakthrough for affordable wireless audio gadgets. The spread-spectrum, frequency-hopping, 2.4 GHz technology is already ubiquitous in WiFi and BlueTooth protocols, so the supporting chipsets, etc.have become "jelly-bean" commodity components, and the prices of this new design reflects that economy.

Another benefit (although also potentially a curse) of using the 2.4 GHz ISM band is that it is already allocated for short-range, unlecensed communication anywhere on the planet. So producers who move around to different countries won't have to worry about whether their wireless kits are legal. And the manufacturers can make a single model for sale in all geographies, further decreasing the cost.

Hey Richard, I'm looking at the AT System 10, I need to replace one of my Sennheiser systems. What has been your impression so far with the AT System?

I just noticed that the range on the digital sets I've found is 20% less than UHF. Hmmm.. Wonder if the technology will expand the range. The AT set is 100' according to the specs, I shoot a lot more than 100' so that's a bummer. I may go back to the UHF set, maybe try the Sony set.

Hi Steve

I was looking at the AT system too and bandwidth is becoming an issue here but I wouldn't even think about a 2.4GHz system beyond 60' at best .. I think you will get dropouts at 100' and that's a sorta max possible range with a clear line of sight. I doubt whether you would get even 60' if you have people or objects in the way. Wow what do you shoot where your mic needs to be so far away?? I have been told the new Sony UHF gear is pretty good but you need to find someone to test their's for you at extreme ranges to make sure it will be clean over a long distance before you buy it!!

Chris

I promise to shoot a proper test and "teardown" of my AT System 10 when I get back from NAB next week (And after I have had a chance to talk to the Audio Technica people!)
.
Meanwhile, this test by Fred Ginsberg is not perfect (what is?) but it is probably the best one I have seen on YouTube so far: https://youtu.be/SnudYcodS0U

"Meanwhile, this test by Fred Ginsberg is not perfect (what is?) but it is probably the best one I have seen on YouTube so far"
In addition, Fred works for AT at trade shows and such, so his 'tests' could be skewed to put the product in the best light.
I'd like to give on a 'real-world' test myself, here.in RF hell.

Please identify something in the video where you think Mr. Ginsberg was putting the gadget "in the best light".

My main criticism of the test was that it didn't cover the "worst-case" where you are using it in a WiFi-saturated place. For example a campus coffee shop where everybody is using WiFi. I intend to perform a test in exactly that kind of environment to see how it operates with that kind of competition.

Hi Steve

I was looking at the AT system too and bandwidth is becoming an issue here but I wouldn't even think about a 2.4GHz system beyond 60' at best .. I think you will get dropouts at 100' and that's a sorta max possible range with a clear line of sight. I doubt whether you would get even 60' if you have people or objects in the way. Wow what do you shoot where your mic needs to be so far away?? I have been told the new Sony UHF gear is pretty good but you need to find someone to test their's for you at extreme ranges to make sure it will be clean over a long distance before you buy it!!

Chris

Hey Chris,

Around my area, there are some pretty big churches. One was over 140' from the balcony to the front. As for borrowing, Richmond is pretty bad about having that. I typically have to research things to death and then purchase.

I was pretty excited to see the digital sets, although I'm glad I read about the range first. Hopefully the technology will grow since the government is insistent on taking all our ranges to spy on my choice of toilet paper lol. I have a set of Sennheisers, but they're not in the optimal range, so I'll be selling one or two of them. I might go back to the Sennheisers since I know their operational quirks.

Please identify something in the video where you think Mr. Ginsberg was putting the gadget "in the best light"
He could have omitted tests where it didn't perform well. I don't know for sure, I'm just skeptical by nature, as I am of any low cost system.

Fair enough comment Steve

Most of our ceremonies here are civil outdoor ones rather than Churches (in fact I only did my first 2015 Church wedding this weekend and I have been super busy this year) My issues are mainly clashing with the Church/Officiant's wireless system or DJ/venue wireless systems ... I guess it depends on your environment as to what will work best.

Since he does do reviews for AT Fred could have omitted any poor points about the system 10 but I would doubt that it would be published if the system was a complete and total failure ... It will be interesting to see other tests but again it also depends on what you do and where you do it!

Chris

A funny thing happened on the way to the office........ side joke.

I did call Sony because of all the literature and reviews I found on line, nobody could spec out the working range of the Sony UWP-D11. After spending 365 days on hold, the pro product support guy from Sony told me that he didn't have any information on the working range of the units. After I got off the floor, I said thank you and hung up. I then was like, do what? lol. Oh well, I did like the monitor output of theSony UWP-D11, but might end up with the Sennheiser again, or an AT system.