ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Matrix Comms (Part 2)  (Read 32259 times)

Neil White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #50 on: February 08, 2013, 05:47:08 AM »

How do the newer digital two way radio technologies such as Motorola MotoTrbo or Kenwood Nexedge compare to traditional analog two way radio systems for production communications? Are there any significant factors that need to be considered when designing systems that use these type of products?

N.
Logged

Pete Erskine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1457
    • Best Audio
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2) - radios
« Reply #51 on: February 08, 2013, 02:18:02 PM »

How do the newer digital two way radio technologies such as Motorola MotoTrbo or Kenwood Nexedge compare to traditional analog two way radio systems for production communications? Are there any significant factors that need to be considered when designing systems that use these type of products?

Don't know.  Maybe Henry Cohen will chime in.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 11:10:04 AM by Pete Erskine »
Logged
Pete Erskine
917-750-1134
www.bestaudio.com
[email protected]

Henry Cohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1221
  • Westchester Co., NY, USA
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #52 on: February 08, 2013, 04:43:03 PM »

Quote from: Neil White on Today at 05:47:08 am

    How do the newer digital two way radio technologies such as Motorola MotoTrbo or Kenwood Nexedge compare to traditional analog two way radio systems for production communications? Are there any significant factors that need to be considered when designing systems that use these type of products?


Don't know.  Maybe Henry Cohen will chime in.

I've been summoned . . .

There's two aspects I've found when looking at using DMR (digital [land] mobile radio) in production environments; first as a stand alone communications platform and second, if being interfaced to a hardwired PL system.

As a stand alone platform the biggest considerations are:
- Audio quality; slightly less pleasant than analog but generally fine. In high SPL environments however, TDMA codecs tend to get overwhelmed and intelligibility can suffer greatly.

- TDMA (Motorola Trbo and Vertex) vs. FDMA (kenwood & Icom); we all know what happens when a TDMA GSM phone is transmitting on the control channel when too close to RFI susceptible audio devices. FDMA also has the advantage of being true 6.25kHz voice channels in simplex mode without the need for the repeater, versus analog's and TDMA simplex's 12.5k.

- DMR bases and repeaters have some built-in or easily added option card capabilities for IP back bone connectivity to multiple sites, remote control & monitoring and voting. But this comes at higher base price for the DMR repeaters over analog.

- Analog maintains a price advantage for a similarly durable portable radio.

- DMR in digital mode can offer better battery life per charge.

- Higher tier analog radios can be found in compact models whereas all the current DMR offerings remain at the traditional size and weight.

- At the service fringe, analog will be noisier but can remain intelligible. Digital may remain completely clear a bit further, but will suddenly cut out completely or be unintelligible; it's not a graceful degradation.

- DMR offers immunity from casual evesdropping and many of the radio models offer some level of encryption.


   When interfacing DMR repeaters or bases to a PL system, things can get interesting.

- Some DMR repeaters, when in digital mode, have no A/D - D/A for getting analog 4-wire audio in and out; you must purchase a separate dispatch console interface.

- There's inherent latencies in the A/D and D/A which could cause echoing or other anomalies with the interfacing.

- DMR radios in constant transmit seem to need greater cooling capacity and/or can't be set to the same power levels as analog. Not a major issue unless building multi-channel systems with transmitter combiner(s). 


    I've come to the conclusion that unless there is a feature or features specifically offered by digital radios that one would regularly use, it's not worth changing over one's inventory. That said, the fact that FDMA radios can be true 6.25kHz/voice channel in simplex, the spectral efficiency aspect is not insignificant these days.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 07:25:29 PM by Henry Cohen »
Logged
Henry Cohen

CP Communications    www.cpcomms.com
Radio Active Designs   www.radioactiverf.com

Neil White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2013, 10:48:04 AM »

Hi Henry,

Thank you for the comprehensive response.

- Higher tier analog radios can be found in compact models whereas all the current DMR offerings remain at the traditional size and weight.

It looks like Motorola have started to address this with some of the newer MotoTrbo products such as the DP2000 and SL4000 ranges.

I've come to the conclusion that unless there is a feature or features specifically offered by digital radios that one would regularly use, it's not worth changing over one's inventory.

I wonder if the digital radios would make sense as a new investment in radios, since many of then can be used with the older analog systems and then transfered to digital mode if the need arises in the future, perhaps in response to changing spectrum legislation.

Are trunked radio systems something that is best avoided in a production comms environment? I would think it would definitely be a disadvantage for channels that are in constant transmit or heavily used during a show.

Neil
Logged

Pete Erskine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1457
    • Best Audio
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2) - radios
« Reply #54 on: February 09, 2013, 11:06:34 AM »

Are trunked radio systems something that is best avoided in a production comms environment? I would think it would definitely be a disadvantage for channels that are in constant transmit or heavily used during a show.

Trunked radios cannot be in constant TX.  More over they are totally unsuited for the production purpose except maybe as a transportation or runner communication.  Because of the uncertainty of getting a channel in the time sensitive live show environment Trunked radios will not work.

We would probably not like any digital radios for production because of the slight latency and busy channel beeps.  This is not really a problem but production people would complain.  They are use to analog and even the times when two people step on each other is recognized as the users mistake and not the equipment which would be the case in the other TX methods.

For these reasons Analog is the preferred communication in a production like the ones we do for the Olympics and similar events.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 11:09:28 AM by Pete Erskine »
Logged
Pete Erskine
917-750-1134
www.bestaudio.com
[email protected]

Neil White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2013, 11:54:09 AM »

Reading this article http://sportsvideo.org/main/blog/2013/02/08/during-power-loss-super-bowls-wireless-sound-stays-on/ regarding the wireless and comms at Superbowl 2013, it seems like it wasn't standard operating practise to have all the comms equipment on UPS'

Quote
It was more complex for BSI’s larger areas of responsibility. “The power outage was a challenge for everyone,” says Underwood. “The impact to BSI was not immediately apparent as our RF cameras and microphones continued to operate as the transmitting devices are all battery-powered and the receive sites employ a battery backup system. Because all of the TV compound, including BSI’s mobile unit, was on generators, there was no sign except for the darkened images from a less fully illuminated field of play.

“However,” he continues, “our inside-the-stadium communication systems were on house power, and [they] failed on the loss of power. This meant that, although the cameras and microphones were still working, the communications to the operators and our crew was disabled.

“Thankfully, the outside-the-stadium equipment seemed to be on an unaffected power source and were just strong enough to reach the operators and crew with the director PL. The harder part was getting in touch with personnel to switch their radios to the outside channel. Through the use of cellphones and word of mouth, we were able to get everyone switched over. We were able to communicate with production that the MIC1500 talent microphones were still operational but they would not have any IFB facilities until the power was re-established.
Logged

Chris Johnson [UK]

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 446
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2013, 12:43:50 PM »

That indeed seems to be the case Neil, and seemingly a bit of an oversight?

Although adding UPSes is an additional cost, it would seem to be small compared to the investment already there, and compared to the issues that arise from losing system components.

Logged
Riedel Communications

Henry Cohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1221
  • Westchester Co., NY, USA
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #57 on: February 09, 2013, 06:03:57 PM »

It looks like Motorola have started to address this with some of the newer MotoTrbo products such as the DP2000 and SL4000 ranges.

Yes, I forgot Motorola recently introduced compact models.

Quote
I wonder if the digital radios would make sense as a new investment in radios, since many of then can be used with the older analog systems and then transfered to digital mode if the need arises in the future, perhaps in response to changing spectrum legislation.

Like any other equipment purchase, the answer depends on your specific economic factors.

Quote
Are trunked radio systems something that is best avoided in a production comms environment? I would think it would definitely be a disadvantage for channels that are in constant transmit or heavily used during a show.

See Pete's response.
Logged
Henry Cohen

CP Communications    www.cpcomms.com
Radio Active Designs   www.radioactiverf.com

Neil White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #58 on: February 09, 2013, 06:26:28 PM »

Hi Henry,

Can you reccomend any good resources for learning more about the components and techniques used in putting together multi channel two way radio systems and antenna systems?

Neil
Logged

Henry Cohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1221
  • Westchester Co., NY, USA
Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #59 on: February 09, 2013, 08:04:57 PM »

Can you reccomend any good resources for learning more about the components and techniques used in putting together multi channel two way radio systems and antenna systems?

Start with these:

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/white-papers/HowtoProperlyDesignanInBuildingDistributedAntennaSystemPt1.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/white-papers/HowtoProperlyDesignanInBuildingDistributedAntennaSystemPt2.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/app-notes/Applications-for-Directional-Hybrid-Couplers.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/app-notes/Combiner-and-Receiver-Multicoupler-Design.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/app-notes/Directional-and-Non-Directional-Couplers.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/app-notes/Insertion-Loss-in-Bandpass-Cavities.ashx

http://www.txrx.com/Resources/~/media/Bird/Files/PDF/Resources/app-notes/Passive-Intermodulation.ashx

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/ferrite_combiners(27-35).pdf

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/reciever_preselector(45-53).pdf

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/Multicoupler_Manual.pdf

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/hybrid-filter_combiners(36-44).pdf

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/rf_isolators(1-14).pdf

http://www.emrcorp.com/documents/Technical%20Information/cavity_resonators(54-67).pdf

To properly configure and align both TX combine and receive multi-coupler systems requires either two real spectrum analyzers that have external input and output triggering or at least a two port VNA in order to look at both VSWR and bandpass/reject simultaneously.

Oh, and check each and every jumper on the SA as you install it  :-[
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 08:11:21 PM by Henry Cohen »
Logged
Henry Cohen

CP Communications    www.cpcomms.com
Radio Active Designs   www.radioactiverf.com

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Matrix Comms (Part 2)
« Reply #59 on: February 09, 2013, 08:04:57 PM »


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 25 queries.