ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?  (Read 1909 times)

vadim martynyuk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« on: May 19, 2019, 09:13:00 pm »

Have been using shure PGX-D for more than 5 years, (and recently got blx).
I use wired mics for the band and 2-3 wireless mics for talkers - hosts - guests etc.

With pgxd occasionally had little drops outs , but this last wedding gig it was unusable , drop outs and loud interference clicks
, rescanned frequencies - channels couple times no luck,
good thing I had and extra wireless mic shure blx,
blx worked flawlessly the entire day at distances around 200 ft.

Selling pgxd. And need to get reliable wireless mics (lavalier and handheld) ,
Even thou blx worked ok I havenít used it that much to determine if itís reliable.

Will be using the mics for talking mostly so reception reliability is higher priority than sound quality.

I was thinking BLX, GLXD or SLX systems
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 09:25:49 pm by vadim martynyuk »
Logged

Russell Ault

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 498
  • Edmonton, AB
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2019, 02:39:04 am »

I was thinking BLX, GLXD or SLX systems

Welcome to the forum!

2.4 GHz anything is basically a hard-avoid if you need it to actually work. Doesn't matter which mic, doesn't matter which manufacturer, 2.4 GHz is begging for poor reliability.

Do you need Shure mics? In the price range of the SLX you can get a Sennheiser EW100 G4 systems that are, to my mind, superior to the SLX stuff. If you do need Shure mics and can find a larger budget then I'd encourage you to take a look at QLXD. Otherwise, of the models you've listed, SLX is the only one I'd even think about spending money on, but personally I'd try for something better.

-Russ
Logged

Scott Holtzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5611
  • Ghost AV - Avon Lake, OH
    • Ghost Audio Visual Systems, LLC
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2019, 02:41:43 am »

Have been using shure PGX-D for more than 5 years, (and recently got blx).
I use wired mics for the band and 2-3 wireless mics for talkers - hosts - guests etc.

With pgxd occasionally had little drops outs , but this last wedding gig it was unusable , drop outs and loud interference clicks
, rescanned frequencies - channels couple times no luck,
good thing I had and extra wireless mic shure blx,
blx worked flawlessly the entire day at distances around 200 ft.

Selling pgxd. And need to get reliable wireless mics (lavalier and handheld) ,
Even thou blx worked ok I havenít used it that much to determine if itís reliable.

Will be using the mics for talking mostly so reception reliability is higher priority than sound quality.

I was thinking BLX, GLXD or SLX systems
QLXD, honestly don't waste your money with less.  The QLXD is very high quality and has the features you need to properly manage them. 

Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk

Logged
Scott AKA "Skyking" Holtzman
River Delta Audio is now:

Ghost Audio Visual Solutions, LLC
Cleveland OH
www.ghostav.rocks

Jean-Pierre Coetzee

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 772
  • Gauteng, South Africa
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2019, 03:42:35 am »

No offence but QLX-D is a pricey piece of kit for some applications. If you are only running one or two channels and it is for wedding use get BLX-R units. I wouldn't settle for the BLX though, not having external/removable antennas are a non-starter. Agree with the 2.4GHz stuff, don't touch it.

Don't discount the Sennheiser units though, they are quite good I just really don't like how a large amount of their mics sound though but maybe its because I have used SM58s for so long...
Logged
Audio Technician
Word & Life Church

"If you want "loud", then run a piece of sheet metal through a table saw------

If you want "watts"-then plug in a toaster"
- Ivan Beaver

Kevin McDonough

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 313
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2019, 10:21:46 am »

yeah as everyone else has said, it's such a shame that especially Shure, but also sennheiser and others, have insisted on moving all their more cost effective models to 2.4 GHz.

It always follows the same story of being fine in soundcheck when the room is empty, and then the problems start when the audience arrives and their mobile phones start filling up the radio space.

Sticking with the proper radio mic frequencies for whatever area/country you are in really does make a big difference.

Sennheiser ew100 is about the most cost effective between shure and sennheiser, and there are also other brands such as MiPro and JTS that have "middle ground" options that would work fine for a wedding band and are a cut above the really cheap DJ and karaoke systems, without being quite the expense of the higher up Shure/Senn models.

K
Logged

Taylor Hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 756
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2019, 11:41:22 am »

No offence but QLX-D is a pricey piece of kit for some applications. If you are only running one or two channels and it is for wedding use get BLX-R units. I wouldn't settle for the BLX though, not having external/removable antennas are a non-starter. Agree with the 2.4GHz stuff, don't touch it.
I'll echo this. We have several channels of BLX like this that we use for 'budget' rentals that still want a wireless setup. Easy to use, decent battery life, built in channel scanning, slam dunk for small events. Really the biggest downside to the BLX line is not having swappable capsules (if for no other reason than being able to replace it if damaged). They've paid for themselves about twice over at this point after a year and a half.
Logged
There are two ways to do anything:
1) Do it right
2) Do it over until you do it right

Scott Holtzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5611
  • Ghost AV - Avon Lake, OH
    • Ghost Audio Visual Systems, LLC
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2019, 12:42:56 pm »

I'll echo this. We have several channels of BLX like this that we use for 'budget' rentals that still want a wireless setup. Easy to use, decent battery life, built in channel scanning, slam dunk for small events. Really the biggest downside to the BLX line is not having swappable capsules (if for no other reason than being able to replace it if damaged). They've paid for themselves about twice over at this point after a year and a half.

We still have CAD's in inventory that have paid for themselves 100 times, doesn't mean I would but more.

I was sticking with Shure produce.  It the QLX-D is too pricey (I am not fluent in current Sennheiser) I would have a good look at the JTS, the RU-901G3 is a good inflection point in their line.  Wide tuning range, great build quality.  Take Shure capsules.  (caveat we are dealers).  They are imported by ISI, the same people that brought FBT loudspeakers from Italy to US.
Logged
Scott AKA "Skyking" Holtzman
River Delta Audio is now:

Ghost Audio Visual Solutions, LLC
Cleveland OH
www.ghostav.rocks

Mike Caldwell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1462
  • Covington, Ohio
    • Mike Caldwell Audio Productions
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2019, 03:47:35 pm »

The revised Audio Technica 3000 series will now take Shure mic capsules.

.......I still don't know why they changed the connector on the body pack though!!

vadim martynyuk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2019, 11:39:33 pm »

Thank you all.

Iíve had experience with Line6 before, was almost unusable, and heard bad things about line6 wireless.
 
was hoping shure 2.4ghz GLXD will be reliable due to their 3 streams per channel technology.. but I guess 2.4ghz is still 2.4ghz..

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 Iím being a little concerned.

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

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



Logged

Matt Greiner

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 110
Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2019, 12:14:05 am »

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

Without knowing what shows you've seen, I would venture a guess that they were Axient Systems (for Shure), which are well above the price point for the systems you've mentioned.  Again, a total shot in the dark guess, not knowing what shows.

I've personally had great luck with running 4 SLX systems at the same time, using a UA844 with 1/2 wave antennas.  But that's also in my market, and with my budget.

With the more budget friendly units, you get less bandwidth, which means fewer options in a congested RF environment.  However, it's not just the bandwidth to take into consideration, the features of each line also vary widely.

A few examples -
QLXD - 64 MHz of tuning bandwidth
SLX - 24 MHZ of tuning bandwidth
BLX - 30 MHz of tuning bandwidth
Axient Digital - 150 MHz of tuning bandwidth

Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: 2.4ghz (shure GLXD) or not to ?
¬ę Reply #9 on: May 21, 2019, 12:14:05 am ¬Ľ


Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.05 seconds with 23 queries.