ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Poor man's paddle antenna  (Read 10874 times)

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7055
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #10 on: November 26, 2016, 12:28:05 PM »

If I use  LP type antennae will I have too narrow of a reception coverage pattern to handle a choir at 90 degrees 20 feet away and a separate mic 270 degrees and 100 feet away?  That is 180 degrees of coverage is needed.  Or would I have to point the paddles to where they are needed?

Position your LP antennas so they can cover both areas within their approx. 90 wide coverage pattern. If you current position puts them 180 apart, locate them on the other side of the stage pointing back at the stage and the for location.

Mac
Logged

Lyle Williams

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1556
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #11 on: November 27, 2016, 04:40:23 AM »

... would not an omni with a clear line of sight be ok for 100' ?
Logged

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3545
  • Toronto
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2016, 08:03:19 AM »

... would not an omni with a clear line of sight be ok for 100' ?
I would think so.
However, in most cases, the omni antennas are mounted on the receiver and most likely not up as high as a mic stand mounted paddle would be.
I have used the SHure omnis mounted on truss, well up in the air, and it makes quite a difference.
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Mike Karseboom

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2016, 02:35:06 PM »

I would think so.
However, in most cases, the omni antennas are mounted on the receiver and most likely not up as high as a mic stand mounted paddle would be.
I have used the SHure omnis mounted on truss, well up in the air, and it makes quite a difference.


So would this mean that I could expect better results by taking 2x of the 1/4 wave antennae that came with the receivers and put them up on a pole with good line of site?  I would connect them with 10' of coax cable and plug them right into the antenna distribution amplifier.  That is, would this be better than the 2x 1/2 wave antenna on the front of the unit that are not getting good line of site?
Logged
--Mike
"If you're not confused, you don't know what is going on"

Live Sound for the Mt. Shasta area
http://www.shastalivesound.com

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7055
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2016, 02:44:42 PM »

I would think so.
However, in most cases, the omni antennas are mounted on the receiver and most likely not up as high as a mic stand mounted paddle would be.
I have used the SHure omnis mounted on truss, well up in the air, and it makes quite a difference.

A paddle on a mic stand isn't really very high. I would think along the lines of a speaker tripod that can get up 8 or 9 feet.

Mac
Logged

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3545
  • Toronto
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2016, 05:53:33 PM »


So would this mean that I could expect better results by taking 2x of the 1/4 wave antennae that came with the receivers and put them up on a pole with good line of site?  I would connect them with 10' of coax cable and plug them right into the antenna distribution amplifier.  That is, would this be better than the 2x 1/2 wave antenna on the front of the unit that are not getting good line of site?
Well worth a try.
As usual, the line of sight rule should be followed as much as possible.
Yes, paddle antennas on a mic stand isn't that high but far better than omnis in a rack or on a table.
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Jason Glass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 876
    • CleanWirelessAudio.com
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2016, 09:16:37 PM »


So would this mean that I could expect better results by taking 2x of the 1/4 wave antennae that came with the receivers and put them up on a pole with good line of site?  I would connect them with 10' of coax cable and plug them right into the antenna distribution amplifier.  That is, would this be better than the 2x 1/2 wave antenna on the front of the unit that are not getting good line of site?
*No. The rubber ducky antennas that are included with a system are designed for use connected to a rack unit, which acts as a counterpoise and becomes part of the antenna. When mounted on a mic stand, most antennas of this type actually have zero to negative gain values. The correct omnis for this omnidirectional application are the Sennheiser A1031-U and the Shure UA860SWB, which both have approximately 2-3dBi gain in the horizontal plane when erected vertically and do not require an external counterpoise.

Both diversity antennas should be oriented to cover all of the desired performance area. A single antenna covering an area is susceptible to multipath dropouts and the receiver has no other option to switch to when this occurs.

The best way to extend the range of any RF mic system is to use the highest gain passive directional RX antenna possible. Active antennas do not increase range, because they amplify noise along with signal, and usually significant IMD. In our biz, the antennas must be wideband, so the highest gain passives readily available are helicals like the PWS HA-8089 or the RF Venue CP Beam, which typically have 11-14dBi axial gain.

*EDIT- My statement here about rubber ducky antennas is too general and there are many exceptions. As I replied to Keith later in this thread:

"Hi Keith,

I think you are correct. Shure UA8 and UA820 whips may actually be coil-loaded dipoles, and Shure indeed shows illustrations in various system literature that show them mounted to UA834 inline amps, which would offer little counterpoise surface area. I humbly stand corrected and regret making such a general statement about whip antennas."

Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse the inevitable spelling and grammatical errors.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2016, 11:19:34 AM by Jason Glass »
Logged

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3545
  • Toronto
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2016, 07:05:38 AM »

No. The rubber ducky antennas that are included with a system are designed for use connected to a rack unit, which acts as a counterpoise and becomes part of the antenna.
It is my inderstanding that a 1/2 wave can be mounted on it's own and a 1/4 wave needs a ground plane.
The Shure sticks are 1/2 wave (dipole)and the Sennheiser sticks are 1/4 wave.
Have I got this wrong?
It would be easy to create a mount with a disc of metal to make a ground plane antenna that could be on a mic stand.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2016, 07:09:39 AM by Keith Broughton »
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Jason Glass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 876
    • CleanWirelessAudio.com
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2016, 11:14:02 AM »

It is my inderstanding that a 1/2 wave can be mounted on it's own and a 1/4 wave needs a ground plane.
The Shure sticks are 1/2 wave (dipole)and the Sennheiser sticks are 1/4 wave.
Have I got this wrong?
It would be easy to create a mount with a disc of metal to make a ground plane antenna that could be on a mic stand.
Hi Keith,

I think you are correct. Shure UA8 and UA820 whips may actually be coil-loaded dipoles, and Shure indeed shows illustrations in various system literature that show them mounted to UA834 inline amps, which would offer little counterpoise surface area. I humbly stand corrected and regret making such a general statement about whip antennas.

Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse the inevitable spelling and grammatical errors.

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3545
  • Toronto
Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2016, 02:42:14 PM »

I humbly stand corrected and regret making such a general statement about whip antennas.


Considering the vast ammount of useful, and accurate, info you have provided here, 1 small transgression is allowed  ;D
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Poor man's paddle antenna
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2016, 02:42:14 PM »


Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 21 queries.