Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Pete Erskine]

On the Macys parade at 34th street we are using almost 40 Freespeak beltpacks.  20 on a 1.9GHz system and 20 on a 2.4GHz.  5 antennas for each line the street from mid block east to 6th avenue on a cat5 connected splitter.  The remaining 5 for each, are in the TV compound and up 6th avenue via a fiber connected splitter.

Initially with all antenna cable lengths at minimum, BP could roam from the stage on 34th street into the TV compound and up 6th ave.  However they could not go back...the BP stayed connected to the TV compound and the only way to get them back on the 34th st stage was to cycle power on the bp.

at first I adjusted the various antenna cable lengths as high as 300 M with no results.  I did notice that setting a fiber antenna at 1540 would evict it back to the stage.  I set all the fiber splitter antennas at 1000M and then they began to sync properly with the cat5 splitter.  The fiber conversion probably introduces a lot more latency than a cat5 cable would.

Notes from Clearcom:  We measured the sync/data latency in the lab and found no real difference between the new/old splitters and fiber/cat cabling just to isolate that from the equation.

[Riley Casey]

Not really familiar with the Freespeak gear but this does make me curious about how the difference between copper and fiber translate to possible Dante issues.  Was the fiber conversion taking place in a dedicated Freespeak piece of hardware or some generic Ethernet switch with a fiber port?

[Mac Kerr]

Not really familiar with the Freespeak gear but this does make me curious about how the difference between copper and fiber translate to possible Dante issues.  Was the fiber conversion taking place in a dedicated Freespeak piece of hardware or some generic Ethernet switch with a fiber port?

Freespeak antennas use a proprietary splitter. It is not RF over IP. It is still analog signals, just via light instead of EM signals, so latency can cause phase errors if not corrected for. Dante is digital, and the timing signal within Dante keeps everything in sync, so while overall latency can be greater, it does not impede the transmission.

Mac

[Pete Erskine]

(currently) Freespeak antennas use a proprietary splitter. It is not RF over IP. It is still analog signals, just via light instead of EM signals, so latency can cause phase errors if not corrected for. Dante is digital, and the timing signal within Dante keeps everything in sync, so while overall latency can be greater, it does not impede the transmission.

Mac

CC announced that FSII antennas will soon be IP Based and will operate on a normal network with other data like Dante.  This will eliminate the need for a special splitter.  Not sure if the antennas themselves will be fiber but switches could be fiber while distributing to the antennas.

[Ross Goldman (2)]

CC announced that FSII antennas will soon be IP Based and will operate on a normal network with other data like Dante.  This will eliminate the need for a special splitter.  Not sure if the antennas themselves will be fiber but switches could be fiber while distributing to the antennas.

Wow, that's great news. Is that a software update for existing transceivers, or new hardware?

[Pete Erskine]

Wow, that's great news. Is that a software update for existing transceivers, or new hardware?

Don't know yet.

[brian maddox]

CC announced that FSII antennas will soon be IP Based and will operate on a normal network with other data like Dante.  This will eliminate the need for a special splitter.  Not sure if the antennas themselves will be fiber but switches could be fiber while distributing to the antennas.

Best news i've heard all week.  I'll be watching for this....

[Chris Johnson [UK]]

Wow, that's great news. Is that a software update for existing transceivers, or new hardware?

The latter, I believe.

I once did a gig with some loaner antennae from CC, and one of them had a POE jack...

[Pete Erskine]

CC announced that FSII antennas will soon be IP Based and will operate on a normal network with other data like Dante.  This will eliminate the need for a special splitter.  Not sure if the antennas themselves will be fiber but switches could be fiber while distributing to the antennas.

Sorry for perpetuating a rumor.  This networkable antenna was hinted at at NAB/NYC by some salesman at CC and in reality, although it can be done, there is no plan currently to make the antennas IP networkable such that the antennas are all in sync.  There has always been notes in the manyal about extending an antenna over a network or fiber with certain limitations, namely that the remote antenna location is not a roaming connection and it is in another rv zone away from the other non networked antennas.

The fiber connection currently offered to the splitter has not only the ethernet E3 audio data but a 422 Sync pulse.  We have previously used 2 divverent media converters, 1 for E3 and 1 for 422 to extend the splitter.  Read more and see a video of the method on my  Freespeak page

[brian maddox]

Sorry for perpetuating a rumor.  This networkable antenna was hinted at at NAB/NYC by some salesman at CC and in reality, although it can be done, there is no plan currently to make the antennas IP networkable such that the antennas are all in sync.  There has always been notes in the manyal about extending an antenna over a network or fiber with certain limitations, namely that the remote antenna location is not a roaming connection and it is in another rv zone away from the other non networked antennas.

The fiber connection currently offered to the splitter has not only the ethernet E3 audio data but a 422 Sync pulse.  We have previously used 2 divverent media converters, 1 for E3 and 1 for 422 to extend the splitter.  Read more and see a video of the method on my  Freespeak page

Well bummer, but thanks for the followup.

Just to make sure i fully understand this...  In this non networked scenario, a user could travel to the remote location and speak to folks in the local location,  but would need to 'resync' their beltpack to do so.  It would not just seamlessly move from one antenna to another?

And just to be really pedantic.  'resync' would mean a power cycle AND a change/reselection of BP Role?  Or just a power cycle?

[ProSoundWeb Community]