wireless transmitter receivers at DVinfo.net

ja135321 · March 10th, 2003, 02:15 PM

I've searched thru all the threads concerning wireless mics/systems only to come up with these conclusions.

1. UHF better that VHF.
2. Diversity better than non diversity. (Questionable. I spoke to a guy a B&H, he said that one always gets the signal and the other always picks up noise. From users comments they say that they had both and couldn't tell the difference.)
3. channels = systems. (means you can buy up to that many units of the device to use simultaneously. ie 4 channels, then you can buy 4 receivers and transmitters and use them together. So if you have a 32 channel receiver it means squat if you only ever plan to use 1.)
4. Balanced is better than unbalanced because you'll have less change of getting interference noise.
5. Frequencies the more the better so you can switch if something is on the one you're on.

After reviewing all of the above I decided to purchase the Sennheiser Evolution 500. Except when I called someone at LocationSound they said that the only diff between the 100 and the 500 was the connector for the headset jack. Now, if you were to pay double just for a headjack I would think you're nuts. After further research, I discovered that the 500 has 32 channels(not that it matters) but it has Balanced XLR output which makes the biggest difference in terms of sound quality and it comes with a headset jack to boot.

Don Palomaki · March 10th, 2003, 04:35 PM

Some amplifying thoughts:

UHF is better only because there is more space for channels, and in most areas fewer other users, so you run a bit less chance of interference. Sound quality potential is the same.

Diversity is an advantage only when you need it, ie., locations with multipath potentail and moving transmitter and/or moving receiver and/or moving RF reflective surfaces. Only one receiver-antenna combinatioin is used at any given time. The second kicks in only if the first receiver signal drops out. And I have encountered situations where diversity has saved the day, most often when the transmitter is located at some distance from the receiver; e.g., 75 feet or more in busy environments.

32 channel receiver usually means that you have 32 frequencies to select from. If one is already in use or covered with interference you can pick another. But some vendor ads (Azden) may also mean simultanelus reception capability; e.g., the receiver can receive from two mics on different frequencies at the same time. Note that there usually are frequency separation requirements, so even if you have 32 different frequencies available, you may not be able to have 32 wireless systems on the same shoot with one on each frequency. They may interfere with each other.

Balanced is of value mainly on the output to the camcorder. If the cables are short and you are using consumer/prosumer grear, it will be of limited value.

Nathan Gifford · March 11th, 2003, 08:42 AM

You may want to look closer at the 500. There are several different versions of the hardware, some are not intended to be mounted on the camera.

The 500 is a true diversity system, (though I am not sure if the bodypack receiver is). Having XLR output would be nice, but certainly not required due to the short length of the cable run (XLR/balanced audio is more noise immune). Certainly having 32 channels is a plus on the receiver (the 100 has 4 programmable freqs, but both 100 and 500 have the same available bandwidth).

Other than that, I think you will be pleased with Sennheiser.

David LeBlanc · March 11th, 2003, 10:06 AM

Hi all I have ordered 2 evo 500 and i would to know if there is any difference in sound besides the noise reduction in balanced and unbalanced and would there be any interference if 2 are mounted on a MA 200. That is balanced or unbalanced. 100or 500 Thanks David LeBlanc

March 10th, 2003, 02:15 PM	#1
ja135321 Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 90	wireless transmitter receivers I've searched thru all the threads concerning wireless mics/systems only to come up with these conclusions. 1. UHF better that VHF. 2. Diversity better than non diversity. (Questionable. I spoke to a guy a B&H, he said that one always gets the signal and the other always picks up noise. From users comments they say that they had both and couldn't tell the difference.) 3. channels = systems. (means you can buy up to that many units of the device to use simultaneously. ie 4 channels, then you can buy 4 receivers and transmitters and use them together. So if you have a 32 channel receiver it means squat if you only ever plan to use 1.) 4. Balanced is better than unbalanced because you'll have less change of getting interference noise. 5. Frequencies the more the better so you can switch if something is on the one you're on. After reviewing all of the above I decided to purchase the Sennheiser Evolution 500. Except when I called someone at LocationSound they said that the only diff between the 100 and the 500 was the connector for the headset jack. Now, if you were to pay double just for a headjack I would think you're nuts. After further research, I discovered that the 500 has 32 channels(not that it matters) but it has Balanced XLR output which makes the biggest difference in terms of sound quality and it comes with a headset jack to boot.

March 11th, 2003, 08:42 AM	#3
Nathan Gifford Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Tickfaw, LA Posts: 1,217	You may want to look closer at the 500. There are several different versions of the hardware, some are not intended to be mounted on the camera. The 500 is a true diversity system, (though I am not sure if the bodypack receiver is). Having XLR output would be nice, but certainly not required due to the short length of the cable run (XLR/balanced audio is more noise immune). Certainly having 32 channels is a plus on the receiver (the 100 has 4 programmable freqs, but both 100 and 500 have the same available bandwidth). Other than that, I think you will be pleased with Sennheiser. __________________ Nathan Gifford Southern Cyclist Magazine & Productions For quick answers try our Search! To see me and Rob Lohman click here

March 11th, 2003, 10:06 AM	#4
David LeBlanc Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Cape Breton Nova Scotia Canada Posts: 37	Hi all I have ordered 2 evo 500 and i would to know if there is any difference in sound besides the noise reduction in balanced and unbalanced and would there be any interference if 2 are mounted on a MA 200. That is balanced or unbalanced. 100or 500 Thanks David LeBlanc __________________ Regards David LeBlanc

March 10th, 2003, 04:35 PM	#2
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,488	Some amplifying thoughts: UHF is better only because there is more space for channels, and in most areas fewer other users, so you run a bit less chance of interference. Sound quality potential is the same. Diversity is an advantage only when you need it, ie., locations with multipath potentail and moving transmitter and/or moving receiver and/or moving RF reflective surfaces. Only one receiver-antenna combinatioin is used at any given time. The second kicks in only if the first receiver signal drops out. And I have encountered situations where diversity has saved the day, most often when the transmitter is located at some distance from the receiver; e.g., 75 feet or more in busy environments. 32 channel receiver usually means that you have 32 frequencies to select from. If one is already in use or covered with interference you can pick another. But some vendor ads (Azden) may also mean simultanelus reception capability; e.g., the receiver can receive from two mics on different frequencies at the same time. Note that there usually are frequency separation requirements, so even if you have 32 different frequencies available, you may not be able to have 32 wireless systems on the same shoot with one on each frequency. They may interfere with each other. Balanced is of value mainly on the output to the camcorder. If the cables are short and you are using consumer/prosumer grear, it will be of limited value.