Print

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

[Matt Greiner]

I wouldn't settle for the BLX though, not having external/removable antennas are a non-starter.

There are a few of the BLX units that are rackmountable and have external antennas.  They are designated with a "R" in the model number.  A church that I help with has several of these units, and they work great in that environment.  They are in a very rural town, however.  YMMV

[Jean-Pierre Coetzee]

There are a few of the BLX units that are rackmountable and have external antennas.  They are designated with a "R" in the model number.  A church that I help with has several of these units, and they work great in that environment.  They are in a very rural town, however.  YMMV

Not sure how you can read my post and miss the fact that I recommend the R version over the BLX...

I haven't had too many issues with the BLX series, it's not amazing though but if you aren't expecting a massive RF issue then go for it. Also keep in mind that RF isn't set and forget, specially in the US where you guys have a ton of RF congestion. IMHO if you want foolproof then buy some good long cables but if you really need 2 or 3 channels of wireless the BLX-R will probably get you there.

There have been some recommendations from other guys for what I've only known as off brand systems and these are people I trust so I think they are worth a look as well.

[Brian Adams]

I have 2 GLXD guitar wireless, which I use with a couple of my acts. I bought them after I worked with quite a few B-level national acts who were using them for guitar and bass. They work really well, but I don't think I'd rely on them as my primary wireless. They can have issues in a really crowded Wifi environment. I've only run into that once, but there was literally nothing I could do to make them work in that space. I think it was lighting and wireless DMX causing the issue, but I never conclusively tracked it down.

I sold some BLX and distros to a church in my area, and it works very well for them. The transmitters are plastic, but that's what you get at that price point. I've used QLXD with excellent results. My inventory is all ULXD, which is great. The SB900 rechargeables you can use with QLXD and ULXD are fantastic.

[Matt Greiner]

Not sure how you can read my post and miss the fact that I recommend the R version over the BLX...

Well it's pretty simple actually how missed it, I think it was a lack of sleep.....  lol. All of the Shure letters were merging in my head apparently.

 Yes as I reread your post, I see that now. 

[Taylor Hall]

How good is BLX-R on finding reliable channel in congested RF and here w reliable is it compared to something mid-range like SLX ?
(even thou I have one BLX)
I have 2 PGXd systems, which are not reliable, but BLX is even more affordable so I’m being a little concerned.

and if I decide to expand mic count to let’s say like 7 total, replacing wired mics to wireless, is BLX / BLX-R a good investment?

and another off topic question:
usIng different systems , let’s say 2 SLX, 4 BLX, 2 sennheisers etc, will there be any interference between them, or best to stick to single system type ?
because I’ve seen on big shows a stack of about 10 shure systems and a stack of 10 sennheisers  working flawlessly

It's pretty good at finding usable holes in its wireless band, I might check them once or twice a day to be sure nothing else bumps into it if it's not a dry-rent. We usually use these in set-and-forget situations however, and rarely in RF dense areas if we can help it.

As far as investment, BLX is a great bang for buck product, but when you compare it to the Senn EW lineup you can get some of the same features that are only available in GLX and up for a $100 or so more per channel. Swappable capsules, li-ion batteries, more robust tx/rx display info, etc.

It's not unheard of to mix brands/models, just be sure their frequency bands aren't stepping all over each other. Having a homologous setup is always preferred, though.

[Russell Ault]

usIng different systems , let’s say 2 SLX, 4 BLX, 2 sennheisers etc, will there be any interference between them, or best to stick to single system type ?
because I’ve seen on big shows a stack of about 10 shure systems and a stack of 10 sennheisers  working flawlessly

Making one wireless microphone work involves making sure nothing outside your show is interfering with it. This is something that scanning will reliably do for you.

Making two wireless microphones work involves making sure nothing outside your show is interfering with them, and also that they aren't interfering with each other. Again, scanning will handle this with no problem.

Making three or more wireless microphones work involves making sure nothing outside your show is interfering with them, and also that they aren't interfering with each other, and also that the additional spurious RF noise produced by operating two or more wireless transmitters in close proximity (called inter-modulation distortion, or IMD) isn't interfering with the other mics. This requires both scanning (for the first part), and math. Lots of math.

By way of example: two microphones operating at 500 MHz and 501 MHz, when placed in close proximity, will produce IMD that will show up strongest at 499 MHz and 502 MHz, a bit less strong at 498 MHz and 503 MHz, still weaker at 497 MHz and 504 MHz, etc. The math itself is very simple, but you have to do this analysis for each pair of microphones. Then, if you're using lots of mics in very close proximity, you do the same analysis again but using three microphones at a time. Lots and lots of math.

Wireless microphone manufacturers try to save you the math by creating pre-defined combinations of frequencies that won't produce IMD that will interfere with other mics in the same combination of frequencies. Shure refers to these as Groups. If you only use one kind of wireless microphone, all in the same Band, and select all your channels from the same Group, then you shouldn't really ever run into IMD problems. This is why it's typically recommended to stick with a single system type: it can make life easier.

When you mix manufacturers, or lines of gear from the same manufacturer, or even different Bands from the same line of gear, you can't rely on the built-in Groups to prevent IMD interference. This means you have to do the math part yourself or, more correctly, you have to learn how to use a piece of software to do this math for you. This is called frequency coordination, and there are several people on this forum who do this for a living.

Those professionals almost invariably use a piece of software called IAS. It's very powerful, which is important if you're, say, coordinating a football game using 150+ wireless microphones/IEMs/IFBs/etc., but for a dozen mics it's overkill, especially at that price. Personally, I (and many of the rest of us who can't justify buying IAS) use Shure's Wireless Workbench, which includes profiles for many other manufacturers' equipment (including Sennheiser) and is also free.

TL;DR: It's absolutely possible to make a couple SLX, a couple BLX, and a couple Sennheiser mics all work together in harmony, but you have to know how to coordinate their frequencies.

-Russ

[Scott Helmke]

Nicely written, Russell!

Regarding IAS vs. Wireless Workbench, I have both but tend to use WWB more often even in complicated multi-stage events.

[Pete Erskine]

Audio Technica System 10 is one of the best 2.4 GHz systems around and not too expensive.  Sort of an MI quality build but I have seen it work really well.  Digital 24-bit/48 kHz wireless operation for ultimate sound quality and dependable performance

2.4 GHz range – completely free from TV interference
Three levels of diversity assurance: frequency, time, & space
Automatic frequency selection for seamless, interference-free operation
Extremely easy operation with instantaneous channel selection, sync, and set-up
State-of-the-art digital receiver for reliable performance
Balanced XLR and unbalanced 1/4” output jacks with level control

https://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wls_systems/b8c9b60d06ff6943/index.html

[Jay Marr]

I have 2 GLXD guitar wireless, which I use with a couple of my acts. I bought them after I worked with quite a few B-level national acts who were using them for guitar and bass. They work really well, but I don't think I'd rely on them as my primary wireless. They can have issues in a really crowded Wifi environment. I've only run into that once, but there was literally nothing I could do to make them work in that space. I think it was lighting and wireless DMX causing the issue, but I never conclusively tracked it down.

I have the GLXD guitar wireless as well.  Biggest issue I run into is proximity to routers.  Some venues I have no control over that though because the venue has it mounted and I can only move my guitar rig so far away from it.
I keep it because I play rhythm guitar for the most part and if I have an issue mid show....not the end of the world.
I am however the lead vocalist and would never rely on a GLXD for a wireless mic.

Just got a Senn G4 965, and it's smooth and clear.

[Don Gspann]

I have the GLXD guitar wireless as well.  Biggest issue I run into is proximity to routers.  Some venues I have no control over that though because the venue has it mounted and I can only move my guitar rig so far away from it.
I keep it because I play rhythm guitar for the most part and if I have an issue mid show....not the end of the world.
I am however the lead vocalist and would never rely on a GLXD for a wireless mic.


Just got a Senn G4 965, and it's smooth and clear.

For a lower cost Shure wireless, look at the PGXD1 900 MHz. I have a friend who has been using 4 in different hotels and has had no issues. He also uses the BLX. He tried 2.4 GHz and it was useless. Only downside with the PGXD1 is it’s not rackmount nor does it have removable antennas, but that have been working very well in many different locations. He also has a QLXD!

[ProSoundWeb Community]