ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => Installed Sound/Contracting => Topic started by: Jamin Lynch on June 29, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
-
I'm getting ready to install a small background music system at a theme park. They want to have the same music playing throughout the park. I need to get signal to an area about 100ft away. There is now way to run signal cables above or below ground. I was thinking about a wireless trans/receiver.
Is there something else that may work better?
Any suggestions?
Thanks
-
I'm getting ready to install a small background music system at a theme park. They want to have the same music playing throughout the park. I need to get signal to an area about 100ft away. There is now way to run signal cables above or below ground. I was thinking about a wireless trans/receiver.
Is there something else that may work better?
Any suggestions?
Thanks
Your proposed setup will work brilliantly. It's only 100 feet, but you might consider using a directional antenna just to be sure.
I have done 600 feet with a helical, no problem.
-
I was thinking about something like this
http://www.altoproaudio.com/products/stealth-wireless
-
I was thinking about something like this
http://www.altoproaudio.com/products/stealth-wireless
Soundtube has a product designed to do exactly what you're doing. The receiver even has an amplifier built in. We're a dealer, PM me if you'd like pricing.
http://www.soundtube.com/index.php/products/wll/
-
I'm reluctant to use a system in the 2.4 GHz band. Galaxy makes a system that operates in UHF, wall powered & rack mountable transmitter & receiver.
http://www.galaxyaudio.com/ASWSS11T.php
-
I'm reluctant to use a system in the 2.4 GHz band. Galaxy makes a system that operates in UHF, wall powered & rack mountable transmitter & receiver.
http://www.galaxyaudio.com/ASWSS11T.php
While I wouldn't use 2.4GHz wireless for FOH, this is background music. I would prefer it over UHF where there are so many wireless mics and IEMs.
John R.
-
While I wouldn't use 2.4GHz wireless for FOH, this is background music. I would prefer it over UHF where there are so many wireless mics and IEMs.
John R.
I found that devices that transmit over the 2.4GHz seem to have a bit of a buffer where the music will play and when there seems to be interference in the network (it's bound to happen), the audio gets delayed. I know the buffer is there to prevent uninterrupted playback, but I found out this can cause REALLY bad delay on the speakers playing over the network. The lag isn't always there, just on some days where there is some interference on the network.
To give an example of this would be to think about a slow computer, you click a button 20 times because it's not responding, but it starts responding and there's a sudden inflow of 20 commands for the computer.
-
To give an example of this would be to think about a slow computer, you click a button 20 times because it's not responding, but it starts responding and there's a sudden inflow of 20 commands for the computer.
You are comparing two different things. A computer that's slow to respond to mouse clicks is busy servicing other IRQs or higher priority ISRs. IP-based audio (and most digital audio transmission protocols) need to buffer up enough of the data to do error correction beyond what a parity bit or ECC can do, and in the case of 2.4Ghz, possible loss of packets due to channel switching or interference.
For background music where the speakers are apart by 100ft, is audio delay from wireless transmission detrimental? I don't think so, but the installer should come up with worst case figure and let the client to decide.
John R.