I'm looking to get a wireless bodypack for a lapel mic that I have.

It needs to have 1.5 - 10V Plug-in power capability and be as cheap as possible without compromising quality too much. Basically the audio has to be clear.

It is being used to transmit to a sound desk with a preamp.

Thanks guys.

Assuming your 'sound desk with a preamp' has Phantom Power via an XLR connection and you just need to power the mic, you could get a XLR Phantom power adapter, which is normally used to run a mic used with a wireless transmitter in a hardwired configuration. A specific/correctly wired adapter would be needed.. for instance, a 3.5mm TRS plug used for the Sennheiser Evolution G2/3 or a TA5 plug for Lectros' are common.. AFAIK, it's usually not low-cost option, and probably more cost effective to just buy a properly terminated new mic
This thread may help some.
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/514394-xlr-mini-jack-adapter-phantom-power.html

Thank you. Yes that sounds like a good solution.

I'm not sure what the sound desk is. I know it is an 8 channel, professional quality desk with phantom power but it's in for repair at the moment and it's not mine.

Having looked online, this might be the solution we go with.

Does anyone have any experience with either Beyerdynamic or this product in particular?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beyerdynamic-TG100-Belt-Pack-Microphone/dp/B00LPHGM0Y/ref=sr_1_11?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1430934835&sr=1-11&keywords=wireless+belt+pack+microphone

what is the mic you have? Few radio packs supply phantom power, and realistically, radio is going to be expensive for anything worth having. Most will come with a mic - so this could be better or worse than the one you have.The adaptor to use a cable is also expensive - so both routes with your mic could be a problem.

What's so special about the "lapel mic that you have"?

The reason for asking is that it will be almost impossible to buy a wireless kit (transmitter and receiver) that does NOT include a microphone with the kit. And then interfacing an existing microphone to a transmitter is not a trivial matter and could quite probably involve re-wiring the "lapel mic that you have" .

You should know that there are almost no wireless kits under €500 that are worth having. Practically anything cheaper than that is an unreliable, fiddly, disposable, plastic toy that will fail when you need it most.

Furthermore, do you REALLY need wireless for your (undisclosed) application? A $30 cable is MUCH BETTER than even a $3000 wireless kit.

The mic is an Olympus ME-15.

I have ordered this item to power it because this is fine for the application I have in mind:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B003ZDX3DA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I'm also thinking about using this headset with it:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/171-857-Neckband-Wireless-Microphone-Headset/dp/B005FQGML0/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1430959106&sr=8-2&keywords=headset+microphone

Should it work? It says wireless but if it plugs into a transmitter, it should work wired right?

Really confused - the XLR adaptor you ordered has a micon connector, to fit the Rode lav mics, not a 3.5mm jack? Why did you pick that product, it won't fit the mic you have.

The product you ordered is an OEM mic that's quite common. They don't sound too bad, but they use the 5V superimposed onto the audio to power them, and it doesn't work on devices that use the more common 3 circuit 3.5mm connector - and even they are often wired differently between wireless pack manufacturers.

Confused for sure. As Paul stated the XLR Phantom power adapter has a Micon connector, for the Rode lav mics.
The headset mic seems to have a 3.5mm locking connector, typically used on the Sennheiser G2/3 wireless transmitters, however the competitive Sony wireless, also uses the 3.5mm connector, but it's wired differently, and the seller doesn't elaborate. Regardless, the above adapter would not work with either.

I spotted this after I'd ordered and ordered this instead:

CANFORD ELECTRET MICROPHONE ADAPTER 3.5mm jack (http://www.canford.co.uk/Products/20-769_CANFORD-ELECTRET-MICROPHONE-ADAPTER-3.5mm-jack)

What are you doing? You ordered a 3 circuit locking jack (for Sennheisers)???

You have a 2 circuit jack. Well - it will be interesting to see if it works. Fingers crossed.

These adapters cost more than the microphone!

You never answered the question what is so special about the cheap €10 lav mic?
Then you ask about buying a €500 wireless kit (which comes with a much better mic)
Then you start looking at 3.5mm to XLR adapters (NOT "wireless")
And, besides they won't power the mic, anyway.
Not to mention being several times more expensive than the cheap mic.

You can see why we are completely confused what you are trying to do here, and why.

You want to try starting all over again and tell us what you are trying to accomplish, and what is your budget?

I've got a lavalier mic. There is nothing special about it.

I want a way of sending the signal from it, to a sound desk.

That means powering it.

The first option I considered, was using a wireless bodypack and transmitting the signal wirelessly.

This was obviously a terrible idea.

Then I saw these xlr to 3.5 converters (which allow phantom power to be converted to the low voltage required for the levalier mic).

This seems to be a workable solution.

I will probably upgrade the levalier once I know I can connect it up.

It's not necessarily a bad idea to use wireless, it's just a bad idea to purchase a wireless based on its compatibility with such a cheap lav. But you still haven't addressed the key issue: what is the exact application you're aiming for? You said you need to connect to a sound desk but in what environment? Are you shooting news, interviews, vocal recitals, speakers on stage at a conference, singers in a musical, a walk-and-talk plant tour, what ?????? The optimum approach for, say, dramatic dialog in a TV production will be wildly different from what works well for a lecturer in front of a classroom. Be precise and detailed about exactly what you're trying to achieve.

John - what we are saying is that you could have bought a lav with an xlr output for less than you have spent, and keep in mind you may have to send the canford unit back anyway as it is 50/50 on if it will even power it! I understand you want to try it, but you initial asked for cheapness, and it has got expensive very quickly, for what it is. If the sound desk is being used for PA purposes, be aware (you probably already know) that volume before feedback with omnis is never very good.

I'm guessing that it's for PA but if so, audio technica used to sell a cardioid lav with xlr output. I've even got one somewhere. If you want to borrow it to try, I could hunt it out and post it?

"Audio Technica used to sell a cardioid lav with XLR output"
- AFAIK they still do.
The AT898.. a cardioid version of the (decent sounding) AT899.
That said, cardioid lavs are still not a preferable option unless feedback is an issue.
A better option is a headset, if appearance permits it.

I am the pastor of a church. It is for when speakers speak

We used the Canford converter today and it works. The lavalier microphone is not up to par as expected.

I have ordered this as a temporary measure, until we can afford a decent headset mic:

chord 171.857 Neckband Wireless Microphone Headset: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics (http://www.amazon.co.uk/171-857-Neckband-Wireless-Microphone-Headset/dp/B005FQGML0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1431210374&sr=8-1&keywords=headset+microphone)

I don't expect any awe inspiring quality but with the mic being in front of the mouth, it should be good enough for now.

We can throw some cash at it in the future when it's not such a pressing issue to get any workable solution in place (there is a deaf woman in the congregation and her hearing aid picks up the speakers much better than just a speaker talking).

It was buying the lavalier that triggered this. If I'd known it needed to be powered, I would have gone about this differently.

The wireless option was a poor choice because it was far too expensive.

We basically just want a mic to play the speaker's voice out of the PA.

Does the speaker (or speakers) at your church stand at a lectern? That is the case at any church I've ever attended. (Forgive me, but I'm pretty conservative about worship: I would never attend any "church" with a rock'n'roll band instead of a real choir and organ.)

If a lectern is always used, I'd think a good lectern mic with an appropriate gooseneck would be more convenient than putting on and taking off an over-the-ears headset mic like the link you provided. A lectern mic would be especially practical in a service where one minister reads the scripture, another gives the sermon, perhaps another delivers a "message for the kiddies."

And a lectern mic would be much less susceptible to breakage compared an any mic worn on the person. A lectern mic is not plugged and unplugged with every use. There is no ultra-small-diameter wire that is easily fatigued and broken, a lectern mic will not be dropped, etc.

There is a lectern but we don't use it because it's in an elevated position on a platform. We don't like the feeling of standing above the congregation. That's not the role of a pastor.

We stand in front of the lectern.

This could lead to an interesting discussion, but it's too far off topic.

However, by not using the lectern (with a lectern mic) for its intended purpose, you're making your audio problem more difficult, with more potential problems, than it could be.

And when you say "we" (assuming you use the word in the literal sense, not the royal sense) that means that two or more people will be putting on and taking off some sort of mic, perhaps plugging and unplugging; and if you chose to go wireless then you'll incur some additional expense not just once but multiple times for multiple systems.

One other possibility: perhaps all the speakers could share a stand mic, even if it's not on a lectern. IMHO that would not be any more off-putting (to me, at least, as a potential member of the congregation) than a head-worn mini-mic (which always conjures the vision of a rock star in my imagination).

We've been using a Shure SM58 but you really have to speak directly into it.A general condenser would pick up too much 'room noise'.

I appreciate what you're saying about wear and tear but that only component that is likely to fail is the headset and at £15, I'm not overly concerned. I don't foresee it failing all that much.

When I say 'we', I mean my co-pastor and I.

Re: the £15 headset. In general you get what you pay for. At that price, there will be some compromise, either in quality, or in durability, or in both. You'll have to evaluate the quality, and weigh the risk once you get it.

The Shure SM58, while very popular with musicians, was designed for very close vocal work. You'll see countless singers with the mic touching (or nearly touching) their lips. Surely that's not the way you want to preach. A condenser in the same price range would probably have better audio fidelity than the SM58 (which is a dynamic). That does not mean the condenser mic would pick up more noise.

The amount of noise picked up at a given distance is related to the directional characteristic of the mic. With omnidirectional as a reference (it picks up equally in every direction), a cardioid pattern will pick up somewhat less noise (depending on the direction of the noise relative to the mic axis); a hypercardioid or supercardioid will pick up a bit less than that. You could probably stand three feet from a hyper and still not be troubled by noise pickup; OTOH the tight pattern of a hypercardioid mic will constrain you from moving around very much, lest you go off-axis and the voice level drops. (And -- not to debate your interpretation of a pastor's role -- one advantage of using a lectern is that it tends to keep you in the right place, relative to a fixed mic.)

Having said that, the amount of noise picked up by a given mic is related to the ratio between "mic-to-speaker distance" and "mic-to-noise distance." If you get a good condenser stand mic, and speak into it from a distance of 12 inches, you will need twice as much amplifier gain as if you speak from a distance of 6 inches. Therefore, you will hear twice as much noise with the gain at the "12 inch" setting as you would hear with the lower gain at the "6 inch" setting. So if you are really worried about noise, then a very close mic (like the headworn device) would have an advantage. But there will be some tradeoffs with the close distance (plosive popping, perhaps proximity effect, etc.) and these may be exacerbated by the low price and resulting quality. Obviously I haven't attended your church, but most churches I've attended are relatively quiet, so room noise pickup would not be a major concern with a stand-mounted mic, gain adjusted for a speaking distance of 12 to 18 inches.

Another consideration is that we will possibly be connecting an output on the sound desk to a laptop to record. That is why I'm concerned over room noise.

We have some young children in the room and with the best will in the world, they are sometimes prone to making noise.

I will have to research other stand mounted condensers because the Shure SM58 is not ideal.

My co-pastor is Charlie Landsborough's son, so he has had a lot of experience with using microphones but for me and other speakers it really is unsuitable.

All in all, I think you are right and that I'll have to assess the headset when it arrives and see where to go from there.

If you're planning to record, consider a few relevant questions. What is the expected purpose of the recordings? How far are the noisy children from the microphone?

I imagine you are not recording your sermons for distribution as a commercial CD which needs to be completely free of background noise. More likely you are making what I would call an "archival" recording of the service. In that case, if there were some noisy children, it's entirely expected to hear them in the "archive" of what happened on that given day. The consideration, of course, is that the noise should not make the desired voice unintelligible. Unless your venue is very unusual (compared to my experience) I think that's unlikely to happen. Sound intensity varies as the square of the ratio of the distance. If you are one foot from the mic, and the children are ten feet away, the mic will be 1/100 as sensitive to them as it is to your voice. That's a difference in level of 40 dB, which is quite a lot. (There will be somewhat less difference if the room is very reverberant; on the other hand there will be somewhat more difference if the mic is cardioid and the children are located somewhere behind the mic's main pickup direction.) So if there is a short cry, it will be unobjectionable on the recording. If the squalling is so loud and so prolonged that it makes your pause in your preaching, then it will be audible enough on the recording that a listener will understand why you paused.

The children will be 20-30ft away.

The recordings are to put on YouTube. We are not a church that follows man-made doctrine from Rome and are entirely Scriptural.

We keep the Biblical Sabbath and God's law so we're of interest around the world and to other groups that have reverted to following Scripture and left tradition (Mark 7:7-8).

The background noise is therefore not a major problem but it is a consideration as we'd like to make the teachings as accessible as possible.

If you hope to distribute your services via YouTube, then audio quality is of more importance than if you are concerned only about speech reinforcement in your local venue. There will be no direct "mouth to ear" sound path, the listener will have only the recording to rely upon. And data compression, combined with unpredictable quality of the various playback systems, means you really want to have good audio fidelity (which is not synonymous with lack of all ambient noise). So in order to evaluate your mic (and the entire recording chain) you need to listen to playback, rather than relying on comments about your local reinforcement system.

If the children are that far away, I doubt that they'll pose a significant audio problem, if you are speaking within 12 or even 18 inches of a cardioid mic on a stand. (The exception to this would be if you are in the Sistine Chapel or St. Paul's, or some equally reverberant space.) If you want to try something other than an SM58, you might start with an Audio Technica AT2021 condenser mic. IMHO it will sound much better than the SM58, and might even cost a bit less. Work it at a distance of 12 to 18 inches .. don't be tempted to "eat" the mic! Use a foam "pop filter" on the mic, to reduce problems from plosives if you are speaking directly into the mic. It will require phantom voltage from your sound desk; any reasonably professional desk of recent vintage should provide that.

Of course the rest of your system needs to be reasonably good, and you need a good sound operator as well. You can't just "set it and forget it" and expect audio good enough for your intended purposes. This concerns me more than a little, because if you already had a good sound operator, you would not have been asking the questions, and making the wrong purchasing decisions, that you've indicated on this forum. In fact if your operation is really "worldwide" in scope, perhaps you should be consulting a professional sound contractor in your immediate locale, to help you with ongoing questions and problems, rather than looking online for help with a home-quality microphone.

We also record the services with a camera but the audio quality is significantly improved with a separate audio input.

At the moment the main focus is the congregation but with it being only the addition of a single wire, we will probably output the audio from the desk into the laptop as well as the video.

The sound desk can be operated by either one of us while the other is speaking.We each have studio experience but not any experience with live speaking. We're just feeling our way when it comes to that.

It's "worldwide" in terms of having viewers from different locales and needing to accommodate an internet audience.

Thank you for your advice. I will take it all into consideration.

I'm sure an audio input from an appropriate mic would be better than the sound of an on-camera mic, if that's how you're recording presently.

If two of you have studio experience you may be quite competent to operate the board. Yet you may have no actual technical background to guide you with the details. (I meet many musicians who are quite decent operators, and are capable of obtaining the sound they want, yet they have no idea how the equipment works, or how to interface it. Indeed, it is probably better for them to turn their own knobs, based on what they are hearing, rather than for them to try to put into words the sound that they want and having me turn the knobs.)

As a side note, I find it interesting that neither of you pastors has experience with live speaking. Am I correct in concluding that you did not have any traditional training in the ministry?

I still feel, if you are trying to attract and retain a worldwide audience, that there would be some real benefit in your establishing a personal relationship with a trusted audio professional nearby, whom you could call upon to help with any audio crisis, and who might even have needed mics, connectors, parts, etc. in stock locally. Be that as it may, I (and other forum members) are more than happy to try to help you out as you go along. So please feel free to keep us in the loop as things evolve.

No experience recording live speaking I mean. We both have previous experience speaking live.

Neither of us went to seminary. I find that seminaries tend to skew the understanding of the Word. I was offered a paid seminary education and declined it. Man has butchered God's Word with their own take on the Bible which removes it from its original Hebraic context and looks at it from a Greek neoplatonic mindset.

Just like in the time of Jesus, when He was rebuking the religious leaders of the day for following tradition rather than the Scriptures. There is nothing new under the sun.

As funding allows, I think that the services of a professional would be greatly beneficial. We've just moved into a new building which needs a new boiler though so that is first on the list of priorities, followed by a better camera. We'll advance bit by bit as God wills.

Thank you again.

Apologies to the audio purists, this post is entirely off topic.

I would think the biggest difficulty with interpretation of the Bible would lie in translation. Since the Bible was written 2,000 or more years ago, in ancient Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, and since I have absolutely no knowledge of those languages or of their history and proper translation, I couldn't possibly sit down and read the actual original Bible. Once I start relying on someone else's translation, I am at the mercy of the political, economic, and religious bias imposed when each successive translation was made. This is not to mention the fact that certain different sects accept or reject various books of the Bible as being legitimate. I would hope that an ideal seminary might be home of scholars who have studied the history and translation of these languages and can help to render the Bible into modern language accurately. But modern institutions, too (including seminaries) are subject to political, economic, and religious bias. So I personally think it's nearly hopeless to really understand the Bible, without having been present when and where its various books were written.

For myself, I would rather find spirituality in some of the great sacred music, be it by Bach, Beethoven, Rachmaninov or someone else whose works have survived the test of time. (I reject the contemporary religious music I've heard as being terribly shallow and un-moving by comparison.) I would like to hope that those writers were truly moved by the Spirit, and hope that listening to their music will consequently impart some sense of spirituality to me. Having said all that, I wish you success in following your chosen path. You are certainly welcome for any help I've been able to provide thus far, and you're more than welcome to ask again at any time in the future.

Peace.

I understand a large amount of Hebrew and there's always lexicons and concordances for Greek. As for Aramaic, I have an Aramaic interlinear Bible. We have the tools to look at the translations in this day and age.

My own studies of scripture have revealed a horrible amount of doctrinal bias in translation in most Bible versions. The KJV for example, as excellent as it is, has some major errors and renders God's mitzvot, mishpatim and Torah as commandments, statutes and law. This horribly misrepresents God's character as something closer to the English monarch James I. The word Torah for example is more accurately translated 'teaching and instruction' than law.

The teaching and instruction of a loving Father has been distorted into something that people feel oppressed by. I once heard someone say that to translate Torah as 'law' would be like using the word disciplinarian rather than father.

This leads to the horrible theology that the law was oppressive or bondage and was 'done away with' and nailed to Jesus' cross. I understand the verses that lead to this confusion but they are divorced from their proper context.

I can't recommend this video highly enough as a good starting point in understanding the Word as it was written and not as the horrible butchered mess that the post-catholic world has been passed on by their fathers:

Grace, Faith, and & Obedience: Understanding the Relationship - 119 Ministries - YouTube

I totally agree over contemporary 'Christian' music. It's nothing other than worldly garbage.

Thanks again for your input and apologies to other forum users for taking this thread off topic.

The headset John linked to is very similar to the Chinese ones I mentioned that are disposable, and they are in fact not that bad at all! They are a little flimsy, and the cable is not too tough, but with care, they're capable of quite good audio.

Make sure you adjust them properly - the mic element itself needs to be just behind the edge of your mouth when you are speaking - they blast quite loudly with even a gentle stream of air, so having them just behind the mouth will work pretty well - a bit of gentle eq and you are away!

Ah, thank you. I will bear that in mind when it arrives.

One approach is to use a wireless lavalier for the pastor(s) who might move about and to have a microphone stand for occasional speakers. It's easy to grab the stand and place it as needed and move it off to the side when not needed. That avoids the preaching-from-on-high-lectern problem.

For hard of hearing members, consider rechargeable wireless headphones. That allows them to crank up their volume while you keep the front-of-house volume at moderate levels to avoid feedback.

Personally, I prefer omni lavs to cardioid lavs. Cardiods work great when aimed properly, but if one shifts during the service, you can have a technical problem at the wrong time.

Regarding quality, my wife used to use an AT803b and a wire. It was affordable and workable. The quality was adequate for live use. For recording YouTube videos, I think the quality is too low. Audiences have different perceptions and expectations regarding live events vs. recordings.

BTW, these are the wireless headphones used:

Amazon.com: Sennheiser RS120 On-Ear Wireless RF Headphones with Charging Dock: Electronics (http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-RS120-Wireless-Headphones-Charging/dp/B0001FTVEK)

They worked well, but it was a small church. In a large church, you might need to put the transmitter near the person's favorite pew.

The big advantage was in keeping the house volume low enough to avoid resonance and feedback while providing loud audio for those who need it. Not all appreciated it though. One gentleman in particular was no longer able to ignore the service. ;)

I am the pastor of a church. It is for when speakers speak

We used the Canford converter today and it works. The lavalier microphone is not up to par as expected.

I have ordered this as a temporary measure, until we can afford a decent headset mic:

chord 171.857 Neckband Wireless Microphone Headset: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics (http://www.amazon.co.uk/171-857-Neckband-Wireless-Microphone-Headset/dp/B005FQGML0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1431210374&sr=8-1&keywords=headset+microphone)

I don't expect any awe inspiring quality but with the mic being in front of the mouth, it should be good enough for now.

We can throw some cash at it in the future when it's not such a pressing issue to get any workable solution in place (there is a deaf woman in the congregation and her hearing aid picks up the speakers much better than just a speaker talking).

It was buying the lavalier that triggered this. If I'd known it needed to be powered, I would have gone about this differently.

The wireless option was a poor choice because it was far too expensive.

We basically just want a mic to play the speaker's voice out of the PA.


ALL tie mics need powering of some sort. The Canford adaptor you have is the most cost-effective solution - you made the right choice there.

The headmic. you linked to is pretty cheap, but should do the job (the industry standard DPA nd Sennheiser headmics are in the region of £2-300).

The advantage of a headmic is that it keeps the mic. a constant distance from the mouth and avoids sound changes due to head movement.

John-Paul - if you have any questions please feel free to send me a PM - I am in the UK and am well acquainted with sound systems for churches - I supplied and installed the system (with 16-channel Soundcraft mixer) into my own church.


And - lots of churches in the UK now have orchestral groups of some sort playing at services - it's great.

I have attended a few services with orchestral instruments augmenting (or replacing) the organ. Anything from one harp for Ceremony of Carols, to a trumpet to play descants, to a chamber orchestra for works like Handel's Messiah. Yes, if the music is good to begin with, and some classical instruments are used (or added) tastefully, the result can be beautiful. I would love to hear more of that, John.

What I do not like are the rock'n'roll "church services" where one needs earplugs to avoid hearing damage. I can't imagine that God wants us to deafen ourselves, especially while in His house. I was asked to consult on the sound system for one such venue, and when I heard the mic'ed drum set behind plexiglass isolation panels, I declined the job. I knew I just couldn't make myself do it. Just a personal opinion. I suppose, sadly, that some people can relate to rock'n'religion better than they can to Handel, Bach, or Britten. More's the pity.

Thank you for all the advice guys.

The headset mic seems to work great. It may not be very durable, but it has provided the immediate solution that we needed.

The cardoid lavalier was not suitable because we often teach from a screen next to us and head movement really disrupts the sound. We should have gotten a omni-directional one but lessons have been learned.

The lady who we are concerned with was able to hear the last service perfectly.

Greg, I agree, I think that a lot of worship has become entirely man-centric and it's all about triggering an emotional response. The Creator is not the centre of a lot of modern worship. I also love Handel's Messiah.

John, thank you for the kind offer of assistance. I will certainly bear that in mind as our needs develop.

To quote Larry Norman:- "Why should the Devil have all the good music?"