ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Mixer?  (Read 4798 times)

Dan Timon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 292
Re: Mixer?
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2004, 06:23:35 pm »

I compared the AKG system with a Clear One and a Polycom system, and the AKG system did not have as much gain-before-feedback in the conference room as the others.

The reason my cost estimate was higher than the others you have seen, is that for best gain-before-feedback and best echo cancellation performance (critical for phone and videoconferences) you really need distributed echo cancellation, and while a simple matrix solution will switch mics on and off, the echo cancellation circuitry needs to have a constant room reference at each mic input to give you the best rejection of echo. With distributed cancellation, the reference is already taken at each mic input, and awaits a gate to open it. Without distributed echo cancellation, you have to wait for the echo cancellation unit to establish a new reference (the sonic snapshot of the room, taken at the location of the microphone gated on) each time the gate opens, before the echo is cancelled. And even when your unit has a fast convergence time, those partial seconds can seem like forever when impatient executives are waiting for the echo to go away before they can participate in the conversation. Properly set up, the far site will never hear echo from your room, no matter how many mics are on-and videoconferencing is so often a blame-shifting game, that if you never bless the far site with echo (and its ugly sister, feedback) you are far ahead in credibility when the connections are a little flaky.

Regards,

Dan Timon
Logged

Tom Young

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2620
Re: Mixer?
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2004, 06:31:06 pm »

Thanks, Mac.

I actually did peruse the AKG system a while ago (I now recall) and for a city council chamber to be used for public forums and the like.  As you know, I'm sure, these functions are also used extensively throughout the countries of the European Union for what they call "congress" events.  For that matter, they are probably also very similar to our congressional systems..... both state and federal.  It as much or more the hardware and specifically the mic stations that make these sytems so useful for these public hearing events.  I'm not sure the original poster needs these, though.  I think he needs basic, simple automixing only.
Logged
Tom Young
Electroacoustic Design Services
Oxford CT
Tel: 203.888.6217
Email: dbspl@earthlink.net
www.dbspl.com

Dan Timon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 292
Re: Oops
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2004, 07:31:21 pm »

Sorry for a little mistake-I did evaluate the above AGK system, but also evaluated the CS 2 system you mentioned in a separate session, for another purchase. Mac and Tom are correct-the CS 2 system is similar to the Brahler or DIS systems.(I ultimately purchased tne DIS system because there were not any performance or price reasons to lose compatibility with some legacy equipment.) The CS 2 system has no echo cancellation capabilities and very simple microphone selection capabilities. Its only defense against feedback is the operator selecting how many microphones will be open at a given time, and it allows the open mics to share the available gain. So more mics open = less gain per mic. Definitely not my choice for videoconferencing.

Regards,

Dan Timon
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.103 seconds with 19 queries.