Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums > Wireless and Communications
Best Bang for the Wireless Buck
Russell Ault:
I work for a vocal a capella ensemble. Currently they're using all wireless microphones and IEMs which, while making mixing a lot easier (no stage noise and GBF for days), the equipment they own is...not what I would have recommended (decent-sounding capsules on a pretty mediocre RF platform). We're hoping to start replacing them soon (and assuming Industry Canada follows the FCC's lead on 600MHz, which seems almost a given, we may be forced to).
So the question is, what would be the best bang for our wireless buck? We use the gear often enough (and live in a small enough rental market) that purchasing almost certainly makes sense (even though that's not necessarily my preference).
We'd be looking for 7 hand-held mics, 5 condensors and 2 dynamics. The group has already auditioned wired versions of the KSM9/Beta58 and the e965/e945, and would be happy with either, although they'd probably be open to other brands if there was a compelling case and they sound comparable.
Currently, I'm leaning toward the new Shure QLX-D systems as being cost-effective and (at the right frequency bands) relatively future-proof. The other option I've been considering is the Sennheiser ew500 systems (which, because of the weak Canada/US exchange rate, is actually cheaper here than comparable QLX-D equipment).
I've also looked at some more expensive gear (ULX-D, Sennheiser 2000) but on paper they don't look like enough of an improvement to justify the added cost. I haven't really considered other brands (which is a large part of the reason I'm asking the question here; I'm sure I'm ignoring a possibility I shouldn't be).
So, what would people with much more RF experience than I have recommend (which, if I haven't made it clear before, is basically everyone reading this)?
Thanks!
-Russ
Keith Broughton:
--- Quote from: Russell Ault on November 23, 2015, 10:38:39 PM ---I work for a vocal a capella ensemble. Currently they're using all wireless microphones and IEMs which, while making mixing a lot easier (no stage noise and GBF for days), the equipment they own is...not what I would have recommended (decent-sounding capsules on a pretty mediocre RF platform). We're hoping to start replacing them soon (and assuming Industry Canada follows the FCC's lead on 600MHz, which seems almost a given, we may be forced to).
So the question is, what would be the best bang for our wireless buck? We use the gear often enough (and live in a small enough rental market) that purchasing almost certainly makes sense (even though that's not necessarily my preference).
We'd be looking for 7 hand-held mics, 5 condensors and 2 dynamics. The group has already auditioned wired versions of the KSM9/Beta58 and the e965/e945, and would be happy with either, although they'd probably be open to other brands if there was a compelling case and they sound comparable.
Currently, I'm leaning toward the new Shure QLX-D systems as being cost-effective and (at the right frequency bands) relatively future-proof. The other option I've been considering is the Sennheiser ew500 systems (which, because of the weak Canada/US exchange rate, is actually cheaper here than comparable QLX-D equipment).
I've also looked at some more expensive gear (ULX-D, Sennheiser 2000) but on paper they don't look like enough of an improvement to justify the added cost. I haven't really considered other brands (which is a large part of the reason I'm asking the question here; I'm sure I'm ignoring a possibility I shouldn't be).
So, what would people with much more RF experience than I have recommend (which, if I haven't made it clear before, is basically everyone reading this)?
Thanks!
-Russ
--- End quote ---
I suggest going with the EW500 system.
Usually Seennheiser will have a "kit" price available that is quite good.
Milt Hathaway:
Keep in mind that when comparing costs between the QLX-D and ULX-D systems is the fact that for the price of only two ULX-DQ receivers you cover the cost of all the receivers you need (plus a spare) plus the cost of antenna combiners and associated antenna cable, plus all of that fits in 2 rack spaces.
Keith Broughton:
--- Quote from: Milt Hathaway on November 24, 2015, 07:07:27 AM ---Keep in mind that when comparing costs between the QLX-D and ULX-D systems is the fact that for the price of only two ULX-DQ receivers you cover the cost of all the receivers you need (plus a spare) plus the cost of antenna combiners and associated antenna cable, plus all of that fits in 2 rack spaces.
--- End quote ---
That's a good point!
I have been using the ULXD systems and they are quite nice. When kept close to the stage, you don't need extra antennas either.
Having 2x4 ch receivers does save quite a bit of extra hardware and space. (As a note, you can only cascade from one receiver to another once, no matter what the reciver config)
If you are flying this stuff, it would be worth the $$ to go with the ULXD or similar.
Still, when we purchased a bunch of RF a few years back, Sennheiser was better priced with their package deals.
Worth looking into both options.
Russell Ault:
--- Quote from: Milt Hathaway on November 24, 2015, 07:07:27 AM ---Keep in mind that when comparing costs between the QLX-D and ULX-D systems is the fact that for the price of only two ULX-DQ receivers you cover the cost of all the receivers you need (plus a spare) plus the cost of antenna combiners and associated antenna cable, plus all of that fits in 2 rack spaces.
--- End quote ---
I know, and there are a lot of reasons why I'd prefer the ULX-D. However, right now, Canadian pricing on a ULX4Q is over $6k, whereas I can buy four QLX-D receivers for roughly half that (and, without the spare, the $7000 difference in receiver price for the whole system will buy a lot of distro). Factor in that the transmitters are each also nearly $200 cheaper, and the nice form-factor and lack of distro doesn't really seem to be worth the extra $8k for our system (heck, not even the Dante output is worth $8k).
--- Quote from: Keith Broughton on November 24, 2015, 07:03:29 AM ---I suggest going with the EW500 system.
Usually Seennheiser will have a "kit" price available that is quite good.
--- End quote ---
Sennheiser would definitely be the cheaper option (and, unlike the Shure digital equipment, I've spent some time with the Sennheiser gear on other gigs and I'm definitely a fan). My concern is that, with the impending reduction in available spectrum, we'd be better off buying a digital system for the greater operational flexibility and channel density. Am I over-blowing this concern?
Thanks!
-Russ
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version