ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB Lounge => Topic started by: Debbie Dunkley on November 28, 2017, 12:25:25 PM
-
About this time last year, I started a thread - " My Shure BLX receiver - defective?"
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161349.10
It wasn't defective at all and the simple solution to my problem of RF cutting in and out was to move my Shure receiver one space further away from the closest iem transmitter in the rack. I did this and never had another problem with it......
till this past saturday.
The only thing that had changed from the last time it worked 2 weeks ago to this weekend was that I had replaced the SKB rack it had sat in for a new one. It was actually an SKB warranty claim and the replacement molded case is the same material as the old one - just a slightly different design. The old one is no longer made.
I found the problem when I tried to use it at the show and after 20 minutes of messing around trying to find a frequency that would work, I pulled it out of the rack to use it and had no issues the whole night.
The next day I put it back in the rack and found I am able to use it fine if I don't turn on the closest iem transmitter which is one space away ( as it has been all year) fortunately I have 4 iem transmitters in the rack but only ever need 3 at a time so this solution works for me for now.
It is weird that I got the problem back even though the rack case is the same material and size, everything was in the same position as before and that just one more space makes all the difference.
-
Another reason I am not a fan of wireless. It is just fickle sometimes and there is usually no rhyme or reason. Once you can source the cause of the problem it is usually easy to mitigate, its finding the cause that is half the fun :)
You may find that you simply need two wireless racks so you can keep them far enough separated to not be of detriment to one another. What I can say is that I own 4 RF units and they are not racked. I stack them in separate groups. This has yielded the best results for me. A lot of time the case of the RF unit acts as the ground plane for the whips. When there are too many boundaries that ground plane can be interrupted rendering the antenna useless for its purpose. I can tell you that the Sennheiser and Line 6 units I have DO NOT like being placed on a concrete floor even if the transmitter is nearby and in direct LOS. They just like open space.
-
About this time last year, I started a thread - " My Shure BLX receiver - defective?"
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161349.10
It wasn't defective at all and the simple solution to my problem of RF cutting in and out was to move my Shure receiver one space further away from the closest iem transmitter in the rack. I did this and never had another problem with it......
till this past saturday.
The only thing that had changed from the last time it worked 2 weeks ago to this weekend was that I had replaced the SKB rack it had sat in for a new one. It was actually an SKB warranty claim and the replacement molded case is the same material as the old one - just a slightly different design. The old one is no longer made.
I found the problem when I tried to use it at the show and after 20 minutes of messing around trying to find a frequency that would work, I pulled it out of the rack to use it and had no issues the whole night.
The next day I put it back in the rack and found I am able to use it fine if I don't turn on the closest iem transmitter which is one space away ( as it has been all year) fortunately I have 4 iem transmitters in the rack but only ever need 3 at a time so this solution works for me for now.
It is weird that I got the problem back even though the rack case is the same material and size, everything was in the same position as before and that just one more space makes all the difference.
I suspect that even when it "worked" having IEM transmitters and mic receivers that close together would not have been optimum.
As noted in other RF threads, TX and RX antennas need to be kept apart.
I can't comment on why you were OK for a while and now not, but the fact that separating the units solved the problem shows you need to come up with an antenna spacing solution.
-
I suspect that even when it "worked" having IEM transmitters and mic receivers that close together would not have been optimum.
As noted in other RF threads, TX and RX antennas need to be kept apart.
I can't comment on why you were OK for a while and now not, but the fact that separating the units solved the problem shows you need to come up with an antenna spacing solution.
To continue, it is likely that the issue isn’t the proximity of the boxes but that of the antenna. A transmitter antenna near the receiver antenna is likely overloading the input stage of the receiver. With a strong local signal, it wins over the desired signal. Remember, in FM, the strongest signal gets captured.
How many iem transmitters and mic receivers do you have?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
To continue, it is likely that the issue isn’t the proximity of the boxes but that of the antenna. A transmitter antenna near the receiver antenna is likely overloading the input stage of the receiver. With a strong local signal, it wins over the desired signal. Remember, in FM, the strongest signal gets captured.
How many iem transmitters and mic receivers do you have?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
I may not have been clear in my previous post but as Rob said, it's the antenna locations that are the issue and not the rack mounted "boxes"
It would be helpful to combine the IEM transmitter outputs and have one antenna located outside the rack on a mic stand.
The mic receivers would be OK, as is, in the rack.
-
I may not have been clear in my previous post but as Rob said, it's the antenna locations that are the issue and not the rack mounted "boxes"
It would be helpful to combine the IEM transmitter outputs and have one antenna located outside the rack on a mic stand.
The mic receivers would be OK, as is, in the rack.
+1
I was going to say to see if Shure has an antenna combiner.
I use one with my 4 Senny receivers and it provides power and a much simpler setup.
-
I realize that a combiner would be optimum but I can honestly say I have never had any issues other than these 2 occasions a year apart caused by a change of rack case, where simply moving the unit further away by only one space cured it.
I have 3 iem transmitters on and the mic receiver so total of 4 units. Chris and the the other 2 guys in the band tell me they get very few problems - the odd RF whoosh from time to time and rarely drop out so they seem to be fine stacked in the rack case. It is only my unit that is a bit more fussy and needs that extra few inches. There's a joke there somewhere.......
Like I said in my first post, this solution works for me "for now", and might not continue to do so for much longer so a combiner is on the cards for me.
I just thought it was weird that we have played many shows - different venues, bars, weddings etc with the set up the way it was in the old rack without issue but I switch out the rack keeping everything exactly the same -and first show, same issue we had before when moving it was the solution too.
However, if I get any further issues with the mic I will remove the receiver from the rack completely- I have a cool little Gator case it can go in so no worries there. Any iem issues and it will be combiner time.
BTW- mic is Shute BLX and iems are Sennheiser EW300. I know - the iems are superior quality.
-
Real quick- if I were to choose a better wireless system for my headset, what would be a good move? Bear in mind I only sing backing vocals so I don't need anything fantastic. Also I sing from the audience so there is a tiny bit if latency which we get away with quite well whereas a digital system might be too problematic in that regard.
-
About this time last year, I started a thread - " My Shure BLX receiver - defective?"
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161349.10
It wasn't defective at all and the simple solution to my problem of RF cutting in and out was to move my Shure receiver one space further away from the closest iem transmitter in the rack. I did this and never had another problem with it......
till this past saturday.
The only thing that had changed from the last time it worked 2 weeks ago to this weekend was that I had replaced the SKB rack it had sat in for a new one. It was actually an SKB warranty claim and the replacement molded case is the same material as the old one - just a slightly different design. The old one is no longer made.
I found the problem when I tried to use it at the show and after 20 minutes of messing around trying to find a frequency that would work, I pulled it out of the rack to use it and had no issues the whole night.
The next day I put it back in the rack and found I am able to use it fine if I don't turn on the closest iem transmitter which is one space away ( as it has been all year) fortunately I have 4 iem transmitters in the rack but only ever need 3 at a time so this solution works for me for now.
It is weird that I got the problem back even though the rack case is the same material and size, everything was in the same position as before and that just one more space makes all the difference.
+1 to what Keith and Rob said. As for the "mystery" of why this would happen, I wonder if all of the antennas ended up in exactly the same position as they were in in the old rack? It wouldn't take much...
-
I realize that a combiner would be optimum but I can honestly say I have never had any issues other than these 2 occasions a year apart caused by a change of rack case,
Just because it "worked" doesn't make it a good setup.
I would bet that if you really dug into it, you would find a lot more available frequencies on your mic receiver with the IEMs turned off.
If you only have 1 receiver, make that a remote antenna setup.
-
Debbie I’m dealing with RF issues too. I’m not cured yet but have made some headway. Have you read through my thread?
-
Just because it "worked" doesn't make it a good setup.
x2 to this - Keith, Dave and Ike speak the truth. If you find yourself talking about your RF setup with the words "If I only..." or "If all I do is..." then it's not stable.
I will respectfully disagree with Keith, however, in that remoting your receive antennas will be better. If you have a bunch of IEM Tx in a rack, the spacing of those may be enough to cause intermod products by themselves. Combine that with the proximity to your Rx antennas, and your antenna farm has a lot of produce that you don't want.
Don't be an antenna farmer, Debbie - get yourself a combiner and get rid of the farm. :D
-
I will respectfully disagree with Keith, however, in that remoting your receive antennas will be better.
Don't be an antenna farmer, Debbie - get yourself a combiner and get rid of the farm. :D
I agree this is the best solution but I was offering a cost effective, partially better solution ;)
Having a bunch of TX antennas together is not optimum but as I recall, the OP claimed a problem on the mic receiver not the IEMs.
-
I agree this is the best solution but I was offering a cost effective, partially better solution ;)
Having a bunch of TX antennas together is not optimum but as I recall, the OP claimed a problem on the mic receiver not the IEMs.
Right ...
I have only ever had the 2 issues with the mic - NOT the iems- EVER and the fact that moving the receiver 1 rack space away from the closest iem transmitter has solved the issue on both occasions, makes it hard to justify at this point spending money on a combiner.
If I had problems with the iems, I'd have no choice because that would become a nightmare for the guys in the band and I can't have that. But my issue is with my mic and I have a solution - it might not be considered the best solution but bottom line it works.
Also, something to consider, I never get RF noise or interference through my mic system. On both these 2 occasions, I couldn't get any stability on the RF signal meter whatsoever so it was obvious even before I unmuted the mic that something was up. When I unmuted and spoke, it sounded like a helicopter.
So its not like I ever get problems having the set the way it is.
That isn't to say I won't and this is why I am watching closely and aware I will probably need a combiner in the future.
That is unless the FCC screw us all first and take away what is left of the band width.
-
Debbie I’m dealing with RF issues too. I’m not cured yet but have made some headway. Have you read through my thread?
I just took a look Terry - thanks .. but I don't get those problems at all - just this one thing with the mic receiver that never normally happens except when it is within 1 rack space of an iem transmitter. Otherwise everything plays nicely.
-
Right ...
I have only ever had the 2 issues with the mic - NOT the iems- EVER and the fact that moving the receiver 1 rack space away from the closest iem transmitter has solved the issue on both occasions, makes it hard to justify at this point spending money on a combiner.
If I had problems with the iems, I'd have no choice because that would become a nightmare for the guys in the band and I can't have that. But my issue is with my mic and I have a solution - it might not be considered the best solution but bottom line it works.
Also, something to consider, I never get RF noise or interference through my mic system. On both these 2 occasions, I couldn't get any stability on the RF signal meter whatsoever so it was obvious even before I unmuted the mic that something was up. When I unmuted and spoke, it sounded like a helicopter.
So its not like I ever get problems having the set the way it is.
That isn't to say I won't and this is why I am watching closely and aware I will probably need a combiner in the future.
That is unless the FCC screw us all first and take away what is left of the band width.
A friend had a similar problem and I suggested she mount the receiver on the rear panel of the rack and the IEM on the front.
Worked out well.
-
A friend had a similar problem and I suggested she mount the receiver on the rear panel of the rack and the IEM on the front.
Worked out well.
Ooh - I could try that too Keith - thanks.
-
I had a band come through a corporate event the other week with their 2x TX antenna bnc's loomed together. Their TX LPDA's would have been 2 feet apart. When I saw what was happening I politely said, 'You're not using that on this gig'. I offered up a spare 50ft LMR400 they could use to separate the antennas.
Maybe their setup is successful on most of their gigs, probably not, but with 50+ frequencies in the coordination I'm not going to let them try it on my watch. My point is even without an antenna farm not properly deploying an IEM system can eat up a lot of usable/much needed spectrum.
-
So thinking about this ....
As I get no issues with the iems at this point, I have no real need to combine those antennas until there comes point down the road when it might become necessary. $1000 is a lot to lay out when no issues exist.
So for now, what if I get me some extension antenna cables, attach to the existing mic receiver BNC's in the rack and take the extended cable out to my boom stand I'm already using for the router ?
It would move them away from the iem antennas and get them up high too. I'd just need to find a suitable way to attach them easily to the mic boom stand .
If I come across a combiner at a good price I'll get one for the iem units.
Would that help with the mic RF problem and allow me to stack the receiver back directly above the iem transmitter?...
-
So thinking about this ....
As I get no issues with the iems at this point, I have no real need to combine those antennas until there comes point down the road when it might become necessary. $1000 is a lot to lay out when no issues exist.
So for now, what if I get me some extension antenna cables, attach to the existing mic receiver BNC's in the rack and take the extended cable out to my boom stand I'm already using for the router ?
It would move them away from the iem antennas and get them up high too. I'd just need to find a suitable way to attach them easily to the mic boom stand .
If I come across a combiner at a good price I'll get one for the iem units.
Would that help with the mic RF problem and allow me to stack the receiver back directly above the iem transmitter?...
Perhaps a Faraday cage around the offending unit(s)?
I'd separate the IEM transmitters and wireless mic receiver - put them in different racks. You can put the IEM transmitters on the stage and your wireless mic receiver at FOH with you
-
If I come across a combiner at a good price I'll get one for the iem units.
Debbie, there are a couple of used ones on ebay right now.
-
Perhaps a Faraday cage around the offending unit(s)?
Hmm...some heavy duty tin foil or blackwrap on a piece of flat cardboard could work well to provide some RF separation, mayhaps?
Maybe some RF filters for the mic antennas?
-
Debbie, there are a couple of used ones on ebay right now.
I was looking today Dave. I see a few G2 units at good prices but I read that I shouldn't use the g2 combiner with my g3 iem units.
-
Today I did as Keith suggested and even without securing the antennas to the end of the cables, I noticed no RF problem with the cables fed through the back of the rack - a definite improvement. So I might pick up a couple of BNC mounts, drill a couple of holes through a 1 space plate that I have and mount them to it. That way the investment is small and it might buy me some time..
-
It might be worth you money to get a fee minicircuits splitter/combiners and a diploe antenna. For 3 units I don't think you will get any issues and can probably get away with a 3 way unit. Maybe ask in the wireless forums and Henry can guide you to a suitable model
Sent from my 2014817 using Tapatalk
-
About this time last year, I started a thread - " My Shure BLX receiver - defective?"
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161349.10
It wasn't defective at all and the simple solution to my problem of RF cutting in and out was to move my Shure receiver one space further away from the closest iem transmitter in the rack. I did this and never had another problem with it......
till this past saturday.
The only thing that had changed from the last time it worked 2 weeks ago to this weekend was that I had replaced the SKB rack it had sat in for a new one. It was actually an SKB warranty claim and the replacement molded case is the same material as the old one - just a slightly different design. The old one is no longer made.
I found the problem when I tried to use it at the show and after 20 minutes of messing around trying to find a frequency that would work, I pulled it out of the rack to use it and had no issues the whole night.
The next day I put it back in the rack and found I am able to use it fine if I don't turn on the closest iem transmitter which is one space away ( as it has been all year) fortunately I have 4 iem transmitters in the rack but only ever need 3 at a time so this solution works for me for now.
It is weird that I got the problem back even though the rack case is the same material and size, everything was in the same position as before and that just one more space makes all the difference.
I've been [moonlighting] for a while now.. running sound at some local churches as I'm between bands.
One church I helped install their wireless system - 8 G3 wireless mics and 8 G3 IEM xmitters, all housed in one box with TWO Senn combiners and FOUR paddle antennas. We tested them out on their new PA system (4 KW181 subs under the stage) and 4 KLA12's hung one each side of the stage. No DSP (not in the the budget) so we had to time align the outputs and runs subs as "aux fed" using an X32 console and S32 box stageside. I got quite dirty running cables to the stage boxes.
Anyway.. I run the 2nd weeks Sun service(s).. first service ever with the system was the prior Sun.
Line check pastors headset mic.. All good.
He starts his service intro.. Then I get HORRENDOUS INTERMITTENT RF interference.
I "THOUGHT' he was patched into one of the 8 G3 receivers so was troubleshooting that pathway.
While frantically trying to fix this, it turned out that someone had put him into a standalone G3 Receiver (Unit #9), placed that on top of the wireless rack (under the desk) and had NOT connected it to the combiner (there was no room anyway).
I quickly pulled the unit and put it up on top of the "sound booth" wall so I had line-of-sight with the stage.. and BINGO !
Problem solved.
Not being "my" system, this is one of the challenges of showing up and running someone else's system - even with the ability to recall your last config - you never quite know who's been "enhancing" the system since you were last there.
-
I was looking today Dave. I see a few G2 units at good prices but I read that I shouldn't use the g2 combiner with my g3 iem units.
There is also the RF Venue Combine4, if you can spare an entire rack space.
-
There is also the RF Venue Combine4, if you can spare an entire rack space.
This one?
RF Venue Combiner (https://www.markertek.com/product/rfv-combine4/rf-venue-combine4-signal-combiner-for-iem-transmitters?utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_source=googlebase&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIhML6zLfp1wIVTEwNCh12egNeEAQYAyABEgJOvfD_BwE)
I have 2 rack spaces open right now- actually 3 but one space is wasted for the 3 Sennheiser wall warts. If I can power them from a combiner, I get that space back too.
-
This one?
https://www.markertek.com/product/rfv-combine4/rf-venue-combine4-signal-combiner-for-iem-transmitters?utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_source=googlebase&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIhML6zLfp1wIVTEwNCh12egNeEAQYAyABEgJOvfD_BwE
I have 2 rack spaces open right now- actually 3 but one space is wasted for the 3 Sennheiser wall warts. If I can power them from a combiner, I get that space back too.
Looks like a reasonable price. :)
-
This one?
https://www.markertek.com/product/rfv-combine4/rf-venue-combine4-signal-combiner-for-iem-transmitters?utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_source=googlebase&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIhML6zLfp1wIVTEwNCh12egNeEAQYAyABEgJOvfD_BwE
I have 2 rack spaces open right now- actually 3 but one space is wasted for the 3 Sennheiser wall warts. If I can power them from a combiner, I get that space back too.
That's the one. It's not as slick as the G3 combiner in that it doesn't supply DC power to your Tx via the BNC, (RF Venue gives you separate cables for the DC power), but it also doesn't have a huge line lump PSU like the G3 combiner does either. You win some, you lose some.
We've been using it with PSM900/PSM1000 systems and been perfectly happy with it.
-
Actually it is available at B&H too
FIRST LINK (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy4aEjNjp1wIVQ4GzCh27ewH6EAQYAiABEgKfAPD_BwE&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1049155)
BUT what about this one ? Do I need the extras/beam antenna?
SECOND LINK (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy4aEjNjp1wIVQ4GzCh27ewH6EAQYASABEgKsM_D_BwE&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1049156)
Please learn how to embed long urls into a post.
-
Depends on what antenna you currently have, if you have a small whip antenna that came with the units then yes you need a new antenna, the CP Beam is nice but probably overkill, just get a dipole from shure or senheiser or rfvenue or whoever else makes one for 50 ohm units.
There is really no such thing as an RX or a TX antenna although an LPDA with a built in amplifier cannot be used for TX because of the amplifier.
Side Topic:
I dunno if it should be a or an before LPDA or RX for that matter, LPDA has an el sound which would dictate an but it is the abbreviation of Log Periodic Dipole Array which is a consonant(L) which indicates a...
Sent from my 2014817 using Tapatalk
-
Actually it is available at B&H too
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy4aEjNjp1wIVQ4GzCh27ewH6EAQYAiABEgKfAPD_BwE&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1049155
BUT what about this one ? Do I need the extras/beam antenna?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy4aEjNjp1wIVQ4GzCh27ewH6EAQYASABEgKsM_D_BwE&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1049156
If your transmitters are side stage, it's unlikely you need the beam antenna.
A regular 1/2 wave should do fine.
NOT the short 1/4 wave that comes with the Sennheiser units.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/227114-REG/Sennheiser_A1031_U_A1031U_Omnidirectional_UHF_Antenna.html (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/227114-REG/Sennheiser_A1031_U_A1031U_Omnidirectional_UHF_Antenna.html)
-
Please learn how to embed long urls into a post.
Sorry Mac..... although the links were long, they didn't extend beyond the window I see in preview ( the one I'm typing in now) so I didn't think I needed to shrink them.
-
Thanks Jean-Pierre and Keith. Speaking of antenna upgrades, one thing that I find weird is this:
The BLX receiver I use is the BLX /R model. I used to use the BLX (non rack version) with my mic for over a year before I replaced it with the rack version.
I used to have the BLX directly above the iem transmitter, velcroed to a shelf but wanted a properly rack mounted version. Also the BLX/R has auto freq find and a couple of other extra features.
The thing is that the BLX/R has 'real' antennas and the BLX had internal antennas - YET the BLX NEVER let me down even though it was stacked directly above the iem transmitter.
It seems the BLX/R has to be 2 rack spaces apart from the closest iem to work.
-
I've got a whole lot of BLX units( 12 and I can get them all into the 600MHz band with 6 SLX units, miracles I tell you) and I must say haven't had too many issues with them as long as they aren't very far away from the body packs.
Why the BLX-R is worse is anyone's guess, could possibly be a worse ground plane although I dunno if the R version is metal or the same ugly plastic. I'm not about to disassemble a BLX unit to see what kind of antenna they are using but chances are that it is a microstrip which if designed correctly could possibly be better than the ground plane 1/4" that comes with most wireless units.
I think the real advantage of the R over the standard unit is that you can get them on a much better antenna and use them with an antenna distro. Also you could actually get some diversity, I doubt the normal BLX unit has diversity at all and if it has 2 antennas in that little box I doubt they are spaced far enough apart to be of any significance.
I'm wondering if your rack case plastic or are you using a front mount kit for the antennas, the antennas being in a steel case would certainly not be very effective.
If your wondering remoting the antennas will be a significant change simply because steel anywhere near an antenna messes with it quite severely.
Sent from my 2014817 using Tapatalk
-
Are 1/4 and 1/2 wave antennas frequency specific? I see frequency numbers quoted a lot on these.
-
All antennas are frequency specific.
LPDAs are broadband but still due to size are are not that broad, most LPDAs cover the whole UHF spectrum though.
1/4 wave ground plane and 1/2 wave dipole would be quite narrow range though. Thing that you would be able to get the whole 600MHz or 500MHz range on one though.
If your using IEMs from both 600 and 500 though you might want to consider a different type of antenna( or maybe use it as an excuse to replace the 600 stuff)
Buy one in the correct range is what I'm saying in an elongated way, there is a significant difference if its far from its tuned frequency and more so with the lower end units.
BTW this is what I was eluding to with the steel near an antenna(it tends to detune the antenna) as well as the ground plane on the BLX-R vs whatever is in the BLX in my previous post.
Sent from my 2014817 using Tapatalk
-
And to continue... 1/4 wave antenna (uhf are about 4 in long) require a ground plane. Think trucks with an antenna in the middle of the roof. On most wireless receivers, the chassis provides the ground plane. To remote a whip antenna, you would want a 1/2 wave as it is in fact a dipole (as in two poles). The second pole obviates the need for a ground plane so you could just make a bracket to attach it to a mic or speaker stand. The uhf 1/2 waves I have from Shure are about a foot long.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
There's a pair of used Senny omni antennas on ebay for a decent price.
-
I came across this thread from a year ago:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161545.10
This product was referenced:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,161332.0.html
Would something like this work for my needs?.....
I had issues again on saturday. Whilst I was on stage with everyone else my system worked perfectly but as soon as I got more than 10ft from the stage, the RF stopped working. I threw up my spare BLX (the one not in the rack) and the night went smoothly.
I want to use the receiver in the rack so I think getting a remote antenna would be best at this point.
This is my priority and combining the iems is next on the list.
-
I came across this thread from a year ago:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=161545.10
This product was referenced:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,161332.0.html
Would something like this work for my needs?.....
I had issues again on saturday. Whilst I was on stage with everyone else my system worked perfectly but as soon as I got more than 10ft from the stage, the RF stopped working. I threw up my spare BLX (the one not in the rack) and the night went smoothly.
I want to use the receiver in the rack so I think getting a remote antenna would be best at this point.
This is my priority and combining the iems is next on the list.
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already...
Have you tried more physical separation in the rack between tx and rx units?
The BLX may be getting some rf overload from the tx units...I think it has a plastic casing so maybe not the best shielding from the outside world.
-
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already...
Have you tried more physical separation in the rack between tx and rx units?
The BLX may be getting some rf overload from the tx units...I think it has a plastic casing so maybe not the best shielding from the outside world.
Two things...
Based on my one time observing a show, a paddle may not be a good choice for your headset mic. The distance is not far. Gain not needed. A 1/2 wave whip on a short stick a few feet away from the iem transmitters should solve it.
Perhaps, some aluminum foil between the iem transmitters and the mic receiver can help?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already...
Have you tried more physical separation in the rack between tx and rx units?
The BLX may be getting some rf overload from the tx units...I think it has a plastic casing so maybe not the best shielding from the outside world.
John ... the receiver is metal - not plastic. The back up one that is not in the rack which I used to get me out of trouble is plastic.
I already moved the unit 2 spaces away from the closest iem unit and this worked but only on stage - not farther away.
-
Two things...
Based on my one time observing a show, a paddle may not be a good choice for your headset mic. The distance is not far. Gain not needed. A 1/2 wave whip on a short stick a few feet away from the iem transmitters should solve it.
Perhaps, some aluminum foil between the iem transmitters and the mic receiver can help?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
I'll do both of these Rob. Can I get any 1/2 wave antenna that accommodates my frequency range?
Also I'll need to get an extension BNC which I see readily available online.
-
I'll do both of these Rob. Can I get any 1/2 wave antenna that accommodates my frequency range?
Also I'll need to get an extension BNC which I see readily available online.
Yes, any 1/2 wave in the right freq range with the right connector will do. Personally, I do not like the Shure ones for ULX. Too limp, they spin on the bnc.
Given your propensity to do things as right as you can, here is what I would do...
Get a feed through bnc ( https://www.parts-express.com/neutrik-nbb75fg-bnc-feed-through-grounded-nickel--092-252 ).Mount it to one end of a short length of metal (3” x 1” for example). Get a female mic thread mount ( http://www.audiopile.net/DE-019 ) and mount it to the other end. The 1/2 wave whip can attach to the top of the bnc, the bracket can go on a convenient mic stand and a length of coax will connect it to the receiver.
Did this make any sense?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
I'll do both of these Rob. Can I get any 1/2 wave antenna that accommodates my frequency range?
Also I'll need to get an extension BNC which I see readily available online.
If you extend the 1/2 wave antenna and put it in free space you will lose the ground plane.
-
If you extend the 1/2 wave antenna and put it in free space you will lose the ground plane.
With a 1/4 wave, yes, but a half wave should be fine.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
My first thought - was the problem ever *definitively* determined?
If so, then Debbie's most recent problem may well be something else or an indication that we didn't get it 100% right the first time around... or that there is a new problem related the venue she was in (didn't say if it was the same or different place).
-
Yes, any 1/2 wave in the right freq range with the right connector will do. Personally, I do not like the Shure ones for ULX. Too limp, they spin on the bnc.
Given your propensity to do things as right as you can, here is what I would do...
Get a feed through bnc ( https://www.parts-express.com/neutrik-nbb75fg-bnc-feed-through-grounded-nickel--092-252 ).Mount it to one end of a short length of metal (3” x 1” for example). Get a female mic thread mount ( http://www.audiopile.net/DE-019 ) and mount it to the other end. The 1/2 wave whip can attach to the top of the bnc, the bracket can go on a convenient mic stand and a length of coax will connect it to the receiver.
Did this make any sense?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Yep - thanks Rob!
-
My first thought - was the problem ever *definitively* determined?
If so, then Debbie's most recent problem may well be something else or an indication that we didn't get it 100% right the first time around... or that there is a new problem related the venue she was in (didn't say if it was the same or different place).
You have a point Tim.
Originally when I tested the mic receiver at home and found it was that top iem unit antenna messing with the mic receiver antenna, that is when I simply switched off the top unit, and with the other 3 iem systems on and working, I got no issues so I figured I was set for now at least until I go the extra mile ( antennas moved to back of rack, remote antenna etc).
At the show, everything worked great together keeping that top iem unit switched off and I thought we had a temporary solution. Then I left the stage area and as I walked away, the RF started to become noisy and intermittent again - just like before.
Normally I would spend the time checking out different frequencies but after trying a couple different ones selected by the auto freq select, with the same problem as last time, I just used my back up that I took with me this time which took all of 30 secs to set up and it sounded great even 30- 40 ft from the stage.
Could the problems have been caused by the venue? Perhaps - but it's time I got this to work as well as it can regardless of any RF issues caused by venue/environment.
-
You have a point Tim.
Originally when I tested the mic receiver at home and found it was that top iem unit antenna messing with the mic receiver antenna, that is when I simply switched off the top unit, and with the other 3 iem systems on and working, I got no issues so I figured I was set for now at least until I go the extra mile ( antennas moved to back of rack, remote antenna etc).
At the show, everything worked great together keeping that top iem unit switched off and I thought we had a temporary solution. Then I left the stage area and as I walked away, the RF started to become noisy and intermittent again - just like before.
Normally I would spend the time checking out different frequencies but after trying a couple different ones selected by the auto freq select, with the same problem as last time, I just used my back up that I took with me this time which took all of 30 secs to set up and it sounded great even 30- 40 ft from the stage.
Could the problems have been caused by the venue? Perhaps - but it's time I got this to work as well as it can regardless of any RF issues caused by venue/environment.
Short answer, yes. All additional rf in the room makes it harder. The 3 iem transmitters are hammering your mic receiver. Transmitters and receivers in close proximity are a bad thing.
Debbie, something for you to know. Multiple transmitters near each other generate intermod spurs. Two performers with wireless mics near each other can cause intermod that may screw up some other mic.
When you coordinate your wireless, you do the items and your headset, right?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
When you coordinate your wireless, you do the items and your headset, right?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Every show.
-
After having searched online for a couple of half wave antennas to remotely position on stage, I haven't been able to find reasonably priced generic ones that cover my frequency band.
However, I am seeing mainly Shure, Audio Technica and Sennheiser.
I need 2 and saw this ad on eBay. Good price so would these work for me?
I am H9 band 512- 542mhz.
The rest is easy and I am going to go ahead and do as Rob suggested here.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/2-PCS-1-2-Wave-UHF-Antennas-BNC-Connectors-for-Sennheiser-2000-3000-5000-Series-/331868570313?_trksid=p2385738.m4383.l4275.c10
-
Debbie, I still think you should try removing the mic receiver from the rack and set it up a few feet away from the IEM transmitters.... just as an experiment.
That this seems to happen in only 1 venue tells me there is more going on than just physical proximity and antenna position, though.
-
And one more thing for clarification:
I will get a good long pair of 50 ohm coax cables with BNC's - maybe 25ft?
Would I be able to bring the antenna connections out from the back of the receiver to a 1 space panel with BNC's fitted on the back of the rack, connect the extension coax cables to that - then to the remote BNCs ?
It adds one more connector per antenna and I wanted to make sure it wouldn't affect the reception in any way. It's just easier and quicker to do this at shows than having to connect the extension coax cords directly to the back of the receiver - and connecting to the front of the receiver will look messy.
I am excited to put this together and stop the madness - LOL !!
-
Debbie, I still think you should try removing the mic receiver from the rack and set it up a few feet away from the IEM transmitters.... just as an experiment.
That this seems to happen in only 1 venue tells me there is more going on than just physical proximity and antenna position, though.
These 2 shows I have had problems with have been different venues.
I never had any issues using just one space gap between the closest iem unit and the mic receiver for well over a year till I changed out the rack itself. ...Same material and size yet the problems arose after the change.
So, 2 weeks ago when the problem occurred after the rack switch out, I did remove the mic receiver from the rack at the show, placed it next to the rack and it worked fine all night. So I know it would work if not in the rack but I really would like to keep it in there if possible.
I have a patch bay in the rack and everything is nicely wired in for ease of connection to the mixer. .....so I will try anything within reason to get it to work in situ.
My last resort would be removal from the rack.
-
And one more thing for clarification:
I will get a good long pair of 50 ohm coax cables with BNC's - maybe 25ft?
Would I be able to bring the antenna connections out from the back of the receiver to a 1 space panel with BNC's fitted on the back of the rack, connect the extension coax cables to that - then to the remote BNCs ?
It adds one more connector per antenna and I wanted to make sure it wouldn't affect the reception in any way.
As I recall, technically, each connection can count as a .5 db loss.
You need 1 connection from the receiver to the coax cable, another to the coaxial "barrel" at the antenna and another from the "barrel" to the antenna.
Counts for 1.5 db loss,plus cable loss which in practice may not be an issue.
I think the gains (pun...) you will get from remote antennas up in the air will FAR outweigh any inline losses.
-
These 2 shows I have had problems with have been different venues.
I never had any issues using just one space gap between the closest iem unit and the mic receiver for well over a year till I changed out the rack itself. ...Same material and size yet the problems arose after the change.
So, 2 weeks ago when the problem occurred after the rack switch out, I did remove the mic receiver from the rack at the show, placed it next to the rack and it worked fine all night. So I know it would work if not in the rack but I really would like to keep it in there if possible.
I have a patch bay in the rack and everything is nicely wired in for ease of connection to the mixer. .....so I will try anything within reason to get it to work in situ.
My last resort would be removal from the rack.
My observations have been with bands that carry their own RF/IEM rack - a small mixer of some flavor on top, with the wireless mic (& often instrument wireless) receivers mounted under the mixer, then the splitter or i/o panel, with the IEM transmitters clear down at the bottom of the rack.
I understand you want to keep this all in one rack but Reality is telling you a different story.
Now that all said, I contend your symptoms are more consistent with broadband RF interference. I had a similar problem several years ago with a fixed frequency wireless system owned by a youth musical theater company. Their mic #2 was almost always assigned to the male lead and for several years it was all fine and dandy. Then the DTV transition and 700mHz auction came about and the #2 mic started having issues that cropped up when the actor faced stage left, putting his body between the transmitter and receiver. The RF level at the receiver didn't seem to change but his voice would fade out quickly and if he turned to face stage right or downstage, it would feed back briefly before the level stabilized.
That mic transmitter was square in the middle of a re-aligned TV stations new digital TV channel and it was desensitizing the receiver, and overwhelming the front end of the receiver when the mic transmitter RF level dropped due to the salt water bag it was attached to.
I suspect you have a source of interference in those locations that is either direct, or creating an intermodulation product that cannot be predicted because the source of the interference is not in the FCC data base (we have that problem at a venue near our airport, but that's another matter).
-
My observations have been with bands that carry their own RF/IEM rack - a small mixer of some flavor on top, with the wireless mic (& often instrument wireless) receivers mounted under the mixer, then the splitter or i/o panel, with the IEM transmitters clear down at the bottom of the rack.
I understand you want to keep this all in one rack but Reality is telling you a different story.
Now that all said, I contend your symptoms are more consistent with broadband RF interference. I had a similar problem several years ago with a fixed frequency wireless system owned by a youth musical theater company. Their mic #2 was almost always assigned to the male lead and for several years it was all fine and dandy. Then the DTV transition and 700mHz auction came about and the #2 mic started having issues that cropped up when the actor faced stage left, putting his body between the transmitter and receiver. The RF level at the receiver didn't seem to change but his voice would fade out quickly and if he turned to face stage right or downstage, it would feed back briefly before the level stabilized.
That mic transmitter was square in the middle of a re-aligned TV stations new digital TV channel and it was desensitizing the receiver, and overwhelming the front end of the receiver when the mic transmitter RF level dropped due to the salt water bag it was attached to.
I suspect you have a source of interference in those locations that is either direct, or creating an intermodulation product that cannot be predicted because the source of the interference is not in the FCC data base (we have that problem at a venue near our airport, but that's another matter).
It is all very strange. The last time we played the same venues as these 2 shows in question was 6 - 8 weeks earlier with no problems using the old rack, same iem units, same mic unit - same everything in exactly the same position and configuration. The rack is the only difference.
-
Did anyone get a chance to consider the antenna I linked to on eBay? If they will work, I'm going to grab them.
-
It is all very strange. The last time we played the same venues as these 2 shows in question was 6 - 8 weeks earlier with no problems using the old rack, same iem units, same mic unit - same everything in exactly the same position and configuration. The rack is the only difference.
Then I'd borrow another rack and swap out my RF stuff to see what happens.
I'm not buying that the rack, in and of itself, is responsible for intermittent problems in only 2 locations but it might be worth a substitution to see. If changing racks fixes the problem there IS a difference in the racks that is not visible to the eye. More likely is that in your rack change out, there was damage to coax or BNC connections...
But this is taking on a "Doc, it hurts when I do this..." "Then don't do that" connotation.
The antennae you linked to appear to be suitable for your use.
Another consideration - the reassignment of TV stations and installation of new 600mHz cellular equipment means FCC construction permits and testing permits (and testing can be very intermittent) for both services. That might help account for both the geographic and chronological differences.
-
The rack is the only difference.
That you are aware of.
You may not have all the info to make that conclusion.
-
That you are aware of.
You may not have all the info to make that conclusion.
It is the only difference to the way the equipment is stored and used.
-
Then I'd borrow another rack and swap out my RF stuff to see what happens.
I'm not buying that the rack, in and of itself, is responsible for intermittent problems in only 2 locations but it might be worth a substitution to see. If changing racks fixes the problem there IS a difference in the racks that is not visible to the eye. More likely is that in your rack change out, there was damage to coax or BNC connections...
But this is taking on a "Doc, it hurts when I do this..." "Then don't do that" connotation.
The antennae you linked to appear to be suitable for your use.
Another consideration - the reassignment of TV stations and installation of new 600mHz cellular equipment means FCC construction permits and testing permits (and testing can be very intermittent) for both services. That might help account for both the geographic and chronological differences.
It is frustrating and quite the mystery to me.
I switched out to this rack because it was a warranty claim with SKB. The latches on my old rack had become loose over time and wouldn't stay closed so I contacted SKB - I was told that design was no longer made and this design was the replacement.
It seems a bit sturdier than the old one. It is essentially the same rack but different mold design.
I set it up the same way as the old one when I made the switch yet when everything was in the old one ( making sure to leave 1 rack space between iem and mic receiver) my mic worked fine. In the new one, not working fine.
With the iems switched off - the mic works fine...... with the closest iem transmitter off and within 20ft of it -works fine. So it is as if the rack change ( subtle difference in location of units perhaps) put any failing of RF over top enough now that the mic receiver is more prone to interference.
I got away with doing things the old way for 18 months so I came complacent.
It is ironic though that the less expensive plastic back up mic receiver I have works fine when placed either in or outside of the rack.
I'd use it instead but it is not rack mountable and I have to strap it to a shelf ( which I did do till I got the metal rack mount receiver).
I have placed aluminum foil between the top placed iem unit and the mic receiver - just tested it and it is working OK.... Won't hold my breath or really know till used in anger with all the nasty RF traffic at a show.
I ordered the whip antennas and will get the coax and connectors too. Hopefully this will be enough and won't have cost me a fortune either.
-
For your use, 25’ cables may be a bit much. That said, I use them all the time. Sometimes with a whip and sometimes with paddles. In any case, shorter is better.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
Yes, any 1/2 wave in the right freq range with the right connector will do. Personally, I do not like the Shure ones for ULX. Too limp, they spin on the bnc.
Given your propensity to do things as right as you can, here is what I would do...
Get a feed through bnc ( https://www.parts-express.com/neutrik-nbb75fg-bnc-feed-through-grounded-nickel--092-252 ).Mount it to one end of a short length of metal (3” x 1” for example). Get a female mic thread mount ( http://www.audiopile.net/DE-019 ) and mount it to the other end. The 1/2 wave whip can attach to the top of the bnc, the bracket can go on a convenient mic stand and a length of coax will connect it to the receiver.
Did this make any sense?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Rob... that BNC is rated at 75 ohms.. do I need a 50 ohm? Should the coaxial be 50 or 75 ohm?
-
I want to make sure to get the right thing - should I get 50 ohm or 75 ohm BNC connectors and cable OR does it matter? The only Neutrik BNC feed through connectors I can find are 75 ohms.
-
I want to make sure to get the right thing - should I get 50 ohm or 75 ohm BNC connectors and cable OR does it matter? The only Neutrik BNC feed through connectors I can find are 75 ohms.
Don't add connections with a panel, just plug your antenna cables into whatever device you would have connected to the panel. Ideally cable should be 50Ω with 50Ω BNC connectors to properly mate with mic antenna systems, but anecdotal evidence suggests that RG59 (75Ω cable) will work at least as well as RG58 (50Ω) for longer runs due to generally lower loss.
Mac
-
Impedance mismatches are to be avoided at (almost) any cost. Every time a impedance-mismatch occurs standing waves will occur, therefore degrading your signal. So: All cable, connectors and antenna either 50 ohm or 75 ohm.
NO COMBINATIONS OF THE TWO!
That being said, 50 ohm it should be. Also consider that a RG58 100 feet cable has a signal loss of more than 5 dB, according to Shure.
http://soundhub.audio/shure-whiteboard-understanding-rf-cables/
-
Impedance mismatches are to be avoided at (almost) any cost. Every time a impedance-mismatch occurs standing waves will occur, therefore degrading your signal. So: All cable, connectors and antenna either 50 ohm or 75 ohm.
NO COMBINATIONS OF THE TWO!
This is a common misconception as it pertains to real world performance for low power wireless microphones, coms, IEMs and IFB's.
First of all, the mismatch between 50Ω and 75Ω is 1.5:1 - This is a return loss of 14dB, equivalent to a power loss of .177dB (96% transmitted power). This is better performance than the typical wideband antenna (LPDA, omni, circular polarized) sold for use with wireless mics, coms and IEMs, where a VSWR of 2.0:1 (return loss of -9.5) is considered good.
Here's the formula and online calculator. (https://www.pasternack.com/t-calculator-vswr.aspx)
Secondly, remember that an antenna is a transducer, which means it's actual impedance varies with frequency (just like a speaker). With wideband antennas marketed to cover in excess of 200MHz, their impedance will vary anywhere from about 37Ω to over 80Ω, being 50Ω roughly only in the center of the band.
Third, as it regards the front end of the wireless mic receiver, it too varies in impedance, somewhere between 50Ω & 75Ω with frequency due to parts choices and tolerances, and circuit design.
In the end, using 75Ω coax to the antenna will be no better or worse than using 50Ω coax. What will matter is the shield construction of the coax: A low loss braid over foil dual shield construction (e.g. LMR series, Belden 9913F7, PWS S9046), having 100% coverage, will exhibit far less attenuation and permeability to RFI than a single shield style such as standard RG58, RG8X. RG8, and RG213 having only 95% - 96% shield coverage.
There can be some merit however to matching impedance when connecting passives (splitter/combiners, filters, isolators, hybbrids, etc) together if they're being being used within their optimal performance range, but again, the mismatch loss is so small it's insignficant in RX applications and only marginally an issue in most TX situations. Now, if you're deploying a large distributed antenna system, with a lot of passive components throughout, the cumulative mismatches could add up enough to impact TX performance (but then your gain structure map would reveal that).
On the flip side, you can toss this entire commentary into the garbage if you're building commercial RF sites for land mobile radio, cellular/PCS/LTE/AWS, satellite earth stations (or the satellites), TV/radio transmission facilities, etc., where every .01dB matters.
-
Debbie wants to use a feedthrough, which, if 75 ohm and used with 50 ohm cables, will (can) have an extra signal loss up to about 10% (0,5 dB), which might be acceptable or not, but easily avoidable. It all adds up. I stand by my previous recommendation: use either all 75 or 50 ohm, especially when splitters, feedthrough's and barrels are in play.
Of course, it all depends on (very) specific cable lenghts, frequencies and antennae used.
-
Taking into consideration everything discussed here, I have everything I am going to need on order : 2 x Sennheiser half wave whip antennas, 4 x 50 ohm feed through BNC connectors and 2x 50 ohm 10ft coax with BNC.
I already have a blank 1u rack plate which I will drill out for the BNC feed through's. I also have a mic mount that can be adapted to attach the whips to the boom I am already using to keep my router up high.
I'll report back when it all arrives and I have used it at a show.
Thank you again everyone.
-
I had a tough job finding BNC feed-throughs at 50ohms. Neutrik is only 75ohms and any others that I recognize are very expensive.
So I took a risk which didn't work out very well. I purchased a 10 pack for cheap and they were - VERY.
They arrived today.....2 of the locking nuts came already cross threaded and stuck tight, all the others seem to slip so I can't get them tight enough to hold without twisting. Also the BNC fit is different on each one - mainly far to tight to get the BNC cable in and out. Chinese no name stuff....
Anyway, Amazon refunded my money so I need some decent ones.
I've seen some Amphenol which I have had experience with - mainly XLR's....
Any other suggestions?
-
I had a tough job finding BNC feed-throughs at 50ohms.
Don't use feedthroughs. Connect your remote antenna directly to where the feedthrough would lead.
Mac
-
It is all very strange. The last time we played the same venues as these 2 shows in question was 6 - 8 weeks earlier with no problems using the old rack, same iem units, same mic unit - same everything in exactly the same position and configuration. The rack is the only difference.
The rack material could be affecting this. Over the years I have noticed that plastic can be affected by whatever material is used to color it. Back in the 80's there was a brand of cable with a polymer shield that I used quite a bit (can't recall the name) but I noticed that the jacket would behave differently when stripping it, depending on the color of the cable. Some colors were more liable to split or crack than others.
With the two racks, it's possible that the new one has, for example, more carbon black in it for pigmentation, which could affect it's RF transmission/reflection qualities.
-
The rack material could be affecting this. Over the years I have noticed that plastic can be affected by whatever material is used to color it. Back in the 80's there was a brand of cable with a polymer shield that I used quite a bit (can't recall the name) but I noticed that the jacket would behave differently when stripping it, depending on the color of the cable. Some colors were more liable to split or crack than others.
With the two racks, it's possible that the new one has, for example, more carbon black in it for pigmentation, which could affect it's RF transmission/reflection qualities.
Interesting theory Ike - thank you.
-
Don't use feedthroughs. Connect your remote antenna directly to where the feedthrough would lead.
Mac
I'm going to need some kind of coupler - I have female BNC on my cables and female BNC on the antennas.
-
One other thing.
Each time I try things at home when testing intermodulation/RF drop out etc, I get a result that can easily change when used live. Of course I understand why this is the case - all the wifi traffic, venue appliances etc...but it makes it tough to test anything I do until I am in situ.
With that in mind, today I tested for RF stability with the only change being the aluminum shelf I made last week and I placed it between the top iem unit and my mic receiver unit. Also 1 space gap in between.
I had the iem rack in the garage and I was able to move all the way to the other side of the house - 1 firewall and 3 house walls between us and it worked perfectly.
Last time I tried this with the top iem unit on, and it failed miserably standing right next to it!!
This could be a good sign already so I am hoping for a good result.
-
I'm going to need some kind of coupler - I have female BNC on my cables and female BNC on the antennas.
You sure about that? Those should be males, the feedthroughs are f/f. I don't know what Mac's objection to them is. It will cost you about 1 db.
BTW - BNC stands for Biconic Naval Connector, in case you are ever asked. Many reference it as a Bayonet-Neill-Concelman connector however I have numerous avionics and military manual substantiating the Naval Connector reference.
-
I'm going to need some kind of coupler - I have female BNC on my cables and female BNC on the antennas.
These claim to be 50 ohm.
https://www.globalpc.co.nz/Electronics/Connectors/BNC-TNC/Product-Specification-P0524.aspx
https://www.showmecables.com/BNC-Female-to-BNC-Female-Adapter
-
I don't know what Mac's objection to them is. It will cost you about 1 db.
1dB if the feedthru is of good quality and in good condition. It's simply an extra failure point that most of the time is unnecessary.
BTW - BNC stands for Biconic Naval Connector, in case you are ever asked. Many reference it as a Bayonet-Neill-Concelman connector however I have numerous avionics and military manual substantiating the Naval Connector reference.
Hmmm, sounds like the Navy co-opted their own phrase for the initials. How exactly is a BNC connector biconic? For that matter, what do you (or the Navy) attribute the initials TNC to? Or just "N" as in N connector?
-
1dB if the feedthru is of good quality and in good condition. It's simply an extra failure point that most of the time is unnecessary.
Hmmm, sounds like the Navy co-opted their own phrase for the initials. How exactly is a BNC connector biconic? For that matter, what do you (or the Navy) attribute the initials TNC to? Or just "N" as in N connector?
Hmmm..
TNC is TNT's alphabetic little brother... / ::) ::) ::)
-
You sure about that? Those should be males, the feedthroughs are f/f. I don't know what Mac's objection to them is. It will cost you about 1 db.
Obviously not - LOL.... I was using the same principle as XLR's. The BNC feedthrough goes 'into' the cable and antenna BNC so I referred to it as a male........(made sense to me)
-
1dB if the feedthru is of good quality and in good condition. It's simply an extra failure point that most of the time is unnecessary.
Hmmm, sounds like the Navy co-opted their own phrase for the initials. How exactly is a BNC connector biconic? For that matter, what do you (or the Navy) attribute the initials TNC to? Or just "N" as in N connector?
As usual you challenge long held truths in my history. The T is of course threaded and the ubiquitous type N connector which the male will conveniently accept a BNC female in a friction fit.
Clearly bayonet is the correct deciphering of the B and my memory somehow transposed that to Biconic fiber connectors.
I did find several references to the N referring to Naval, however as you stated that appears to be co-opting of the acronym as clearly they are all variants of the Neill connector.
I see while brushing up on my history that Paul Neill was a researcher at Bell Labs, yet another amazing product of the Halls of Whipany.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
-
I am very happy to report that last night's show was flawless ( as far as my RF issues are concerned). This venue is one of the worst I have encountered for RF problems.
I have fabricated a mobile antenna set up. Wanted it to be fast, not look to much like an alien on stage and work!!
I used a double mic yoke bracket, removed the mic thread pieces and connected the 2 BNC feed through's in their place.
I used my Stage Ninja mic clamp ( because it is so quick and easy to place) , screwed on the dual mic yoke and clamped to the boom stand on stage that I already use to raise up my router.
Then all I had to do was connect my 2 half wave antennas to one side and my 2 BNC coax cables to the other and the other end of the cable to the mic receiver.
It was less than 2 feet from the iem transmitters but it was enough to make the difference. Makes sense because each time I used my stand alone receiver on stage, it didn't have to be that far away to work.
It looked somewhat 'different' on stage but relatively neat and tidy as far as I am concerned.
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MY500
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8Zu7yeyg2AIVUwOGCh17Pg-UEAkYAiABEgJPhPD_BwE&is=REG&m=Y&sku=815277
I will also make a BNC panel for the rack to be able to connect the half wave antennas to it as Keith had suggested. Simpler set up which might work well most of the time.I have the extra BNC feed throughs now so I might as well try it.
-
Yay!
Merry Christmas Eve
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
-
So, to confirm...your gear is racked the same as always and the only change is re locating the receive antennas.
The fact it worked well in a “tough” gig is great!
As for looks, sometimes function over form wins.
Well done😄
-
So, to confirm...your gear is racked the same as always and the only change is re locating the receive antennas.
The fact it worked well in a “tough” gig is great!
As for looks, sometimes function over form wins.
Well done😄
Basically yes - although I added that aluminum shelf last week also ( piece of aluminum foil ) between the top iem transmitter and the mic receiver.
The remote mount really didn't look too odd I suppose - I hid it well.
At last night's show in a slightly less busy RF environment ( but one that was a problem in the past), I chose to not use the remote set up and instead I risked a simplified set up. This time I used the half wave antennas in place of the stock 1/4 wave ones and this change along with the aluminum piece in place worked well too. I did get a couple of drop outs but not too bad. I was about 35 feet from the receiver, belt pack on my pocket and a dance floor FULL of people.
The Amphenol BNC connectors came yesterday - boy are they nice compared to the others I got. So I switched out the others and these stay tight and connect up real nice. I am now taking my remote set up with me every show so I should be all set.
-
Yay!
Merry Christmas Eve
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Merry Christmas to you too Rob and Deryl.......and to all....
-
Still don't get why you don't just use a cabled microphone.
-
Still don't get why you don't just use a cabled microphone.
Debbie is also mixing and running lights. I expect her next questions to be about... video. <gasp> ::)
-
Debbie is also mixing and running lights. I expect her next questions to be about... video. <gasp> ::)
Well actually Tim, now you mention it........
-
Debbie is also mixing and running lights. I expect her next questions to be about... video. <gasp> ::)
OK, a wireless mic is more practical when you are running...
-
OK, a wireless mic is more practical when you are running...
So now I'm picturing Debbie on a treadmill fitted with holders for her ipads, sporting a Madonna mic (is that sexist? OK a Garth mic or whatever), getting in a few miles.
-
So now I'm picturing Debbie on a treadmill fitted with holders for her ipads, sporting a Madonna mic (is that sexist? OK a Garth mic or whatever), getting in a few miles.
And sometimes I feel like I am doing cartwheels and spinning plates too.
-
And sometimes I feel like I am doing cartwheels and spinning plates too.
Debbie, That's what happens when you "graduate" from amateur to Pro.
and no, it NEVER ends...... Hahaha
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
Chris. Damn, broke another plate......
-
A friend had a similar problem and I suggested she mount the receiver on the rear panel of the rack and the IEM on the front.
Worked out well.
I just wanted to update here having done many shows using my wireless headset mic since this thread started.
The method Keith suggested has worked every show. I still take my purpose built adapter and coax cables with me each show just in case I need to add height and distance but placing the larger half wave antennas on the back of the rack work great so far.
-
Thanks for the follow up. Sometimes we don't know which suggested solution works.
No RF issues makes for a more comfortable gig :)