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 => LAB: The Classic Live Audio Board => Topic started by: Aisle 6 on June 10, 2018, 06:42:51 AM
-
I am considering Shure Axient wireless systems to replace my Sennheiser EW2000 and wanting to ask for anyone who has had serious experience with Axient for their impressions of the system. It seems to really have some great and unique features which interest me.
As some additional information, I am very happy with my Sennheiser EW2000 systems but am interested in the Axient features and Axient seems well supported by several console manufacturers. I have used Shure ULX-D, UR etc pretty extensively as well as all the Sennheiser systems up to EW2000 so can relate to any advice with these as benchmarks. Pros & cons...spit it all out. ;)
-
I am considering Shure Axient wireless systems to replace my Sennheiser EW2000 and wanting to ask for anyone who has had serious experience with Axient for their impressions of the system. It seems to really have some great and unique features which interest me.
As some additional information, I am very happy with my Sennheiser EW2000 systems but am interested in the Axient features and Axient seems well supported by several console manufacturers. I have used Shure ULX-D, UR etc pretty extensively as well as all the Sennheiser systems up to EW2000 so can relate to any advice with these as benchmarks. Pros & cons...spit it all out. ;)
I assume you mean Axient Digital. I love it. the quad receiver is amazing. Little unhappy with the QOS display since it can be wildly uninformative. RF can be high with low QOS. RF can be low with high QOS. RF low with bad QOS but lock lights are both blue. either needs more info or better algorithm. quad antenna mode terrific. low power high density saved me a couple of times in high RF cities being able to stack the freqs 150 kHz apart.
-
My experience with six channels and a mix of other Shure products (psm1000s and a couple of UHFR) has been flawless. Being able to scan the entire usable spectrum within workbench is great. Syncing without opening the battery compartment is really neat. The battery compartment seems a bit flimsy though and I have to run my paddles with the pad in or they complain repeatedly. Overall, great product.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Pete and David pretty much hit the nail on the head. My only gripe is with the dual receiver, and that there is no quadversity. The antenna inputs are still labeled like there is, and there's nothing in the manual about it, but it's only on the quad receiver.
-
I am considering Shure Axient wireless systems to replace my Sennheiser EW2000 and wanting to ask for anyone who has had serious experience with Axient for their impressions of the system. It seems to really have some great and unique features which interest me.
As some additional information, I am very happy with my Sennheiser EW2000 systems but am interested in the Axient features and Axient seems well supported by several console manufacturers. I have used Shure ULX-D, UR etc pretty extensively as well as all the Sennheiser systems up to EW2000 so can relate to any advice with these as benchmarks. Pros & cons...spit it all out. ;)
I just wrapped up CMA Music Festival at Nissan Stadium, where we had 16ch of AD in the production rig and dozens of channels of it in artists' rigs each day. Its performance was flawless in our high RF noise environment, with 10mW TX settings easily covering the entire end zone stage and playing field out past the 50 yard line.
A constant intermittent barrage of splatter from an errant high power PLMR repeater nearby caused frequent RX interference warnings and RF compression warnings, but the Q meters showed varying readings of 4 to 5 and their audio output was consistently pristine.
A+ grade, IMHO.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
I'm also considering purchasing about 16 channels of the Axient Digital system, however I'm waiting until Shure releases the ADX transmitters before I buy.
Can someone tell me, why would anyone purchase the AD transmitters when the ADX transmitters seem to offer some important advatages?
Tom
-
I have a quad unit, and can only add to what was stated before. It has performed flawlessly, although warnings do appear, there has been no drop-outs and audio has been pristine. I am planning on adding more to my system.
-
I'm also considering purchasing about 16 channels of the Axient Digital system, however I'm waiting until Shure releases the ADX transmitters before I buy.
Can someone tell me, why would anyone purchase the AD transmitters when the ADX transmitters seem to offer some important advatages?
Tom
1. The spectrum repack is already happening and UHF-R is officially obsolete.
2. AD is far less expensive than ADX will be, and does a superb job as-is.
3. ADX is only part of a top-tier system that requires additional components and user skill to fully function. The vast majority of users don't require those functions.
4. Large, expensive productions that can afford ADX are often frequency coordinated events, where automatic scanning and frequency switching for intereference avoidance is prohibited.
I could go on...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
According to the Norwegian National Touring Theatre, Shure Axient is the only wireless system that works when the US or Russian navy passes by with their radar systems on.
It might or might not be important to you depending on your location.
-
1. The spectrum repack is already happening and UHF-R is officially obsolete.
2. AD is far less expensive than ADX will be, and does a superb job as-is.
3. ADX is only part of a top-tier system that requires additional components and user skill to fully function. The vast majority of users don't require those functions.
4. Large, expensive productions that can afford ADX are often frequency coordinated events, where automatic scanning and frequency switching for intereference avoidance is prohibited.
I could go on...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
+1 I've got 20 channels of ADX in use on my current tour, along with about 54 channels of other UHF systems, and I've been quite happy with it. I also used it on several shows earlier this year and loved it as well.
The only "issue" that I've encountered is that with a large multi-zone antenna set up, you want to be sure that the zones are set up so the ADX is very clear on what zone it is operating in at any given time. Otherwise, if it is seeing multiple "A" antennas and multiple "B" antennas, it can get a bit confused and have a few drop outs. This is, of course, true for any system but the AD seems particularly susceptible to it. If you are just using a pair of antennas, or even two zones of two, as I was on the earlier shows, this is definitely not an issue.
-
+1 I've got 20 channels of ADX in use on my current tour, along with about 54 channels of other UHF systems, and I've been quite happy with it. I also used it on several shows earlier this year and loved it as well.
The only "issue" that I've encountered is that with a large multi-zone antenna set up, you want to be sure that the zones are set up so the ADX is very clear on what zone it is operating in at any given time. Otherwise, if it is seeing multiple "A" antennas and multiple "B" antennas, it can get a bit confused and have a few drop outs. This is, of course, true for any system but the AD seems particularly susceptible to it. If you are just using a pair of antennas, or even two zones of two, as I was on the earlier shows, this is definitely not an issue.
I'm confused. I thought the ADX transmitter's were not yet available.
tom
-
For a major production of the types that Ike would be working on, I'm absolutely certain they get "the hookup" with pre-release final-production models... :)
-Ray
-
For a major production of the types that Ike would be working on, I'm absolutely certain they get "the hookup" with pre-release final-production models... :)
-Ray
+1
Shure is diligent about their RF products getting thoroughly field tested by expert users in their final development stages as they transition from prototype to production.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
I'm confused. I thought the ADX transmitter's were not yet available.
tom
Your confused, I'm distracted :P I meant AD, and corrected that oversight in one preview of the post, but missed this one. I just have regular AD.
-
I am considering Shure Axient wireless systems to replace my Sennheiser EW2000 and wanting to ask for anyone who has had serious experience with Axient for their impressions of the system. It seems to really have some great and unique features which interest me.
As some additional information, I am very happy with my Sennheiser EW2000 systems but am interested in the Axient features and Axient seems well supported by several console manufacturers. I have used Shure ULX-D, UR etc pretty extensively as well as all the Sennheiser systems up to EW2000 so can relate to any advice with these as benchmarks. Pros & cons...spit it all out. ;)
We swapped out our UHF-R vocal and backline rf for AD this tour and are very happy with it.
The battery life with the Li-Ion Shure batteries is pretty awesome with a real time counter on the rx display.
-
We swapped out our UHF-R vocal and backline rf for AD this tour and are very happy with it.
The battery life with the Li-Ion Shure batteries is pretty awesome with a real time counter on the rx display.
+1 Shure rechargeables give well over 6 hrs. of confident use @ 10mW power, which also yeilds unbelievably long range when properly freq coordinated.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
What’s the big difference between the Axient and ULXD line? The pricing of the AD4Q is only slightly more than the ULXD4Q.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
What’s the big difference between the Axient and ULXD line? The pricing of the AD4Q is only slightly more than the ULXD4Q.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
this is true, of the receivers. the tx considerably more, i asked my shure rep what the differences were...and all he could come up with is AX has a wider tuning range,
has anyone tried ULXD tx with AX rx ?
-
I thought I read somewhere that Yamaha was going to provide "native" Dante support and control from within the firmware of their CL and QL consoles. Has anyone else heard this? This may well influence my decision on what wireless systems to purchase.
Tom
-
What’s the big difference between the Axient and ULXD line? The pricing of the AD4Q is only slightly more than the ULXD4Q.
AD receivers have true diversity, ULXD not really.
AD tunes the full (soon to be) legal range of 470-608, ULXD divided into old-style frequency bands.
AD will have "classic Axient" remote control of transmitters when the ADX transmitters start shipping.
ULXD was available several years ago, AD much more recent. Time marches on.
-
I thought I read somewhere that Yamaha was going to provide "native" Dante support and control from within the firmware of their CL and QL consoles. Has anyone else heard this? This may well influence my decision on what wireless systems to purchase.
Tom
I would imagine it would be like their implementation of control for ULX-D (which is pretty slick). It hasn't been released yet, though.
One possible caveat--you'd have to put the Axient control on the Dante network, as the AD doesn't combine Dante and control in the same port the way the ULX-Ds do.
-
AD receivers have true diversity, ULXD not really.
Explain?
AD tunes the full (soon to be) legal range of 470-608, ULXD divided into old-style frequency bands.
AD will have "classic Axient" remote control of transmitters when the ADX transmitters start shipping.
ULXD was available several years ago, AD much more recent. Time marches on.
Is the AD receiver compatible with ULX transmitters?
-
I would imagine it would be like their implementation of control for ULX-D (which is pretty slick). It hasn't been released yet, though.
One possible caveat--you'd have to put the Axient control on the Dante network, as the AD doesn't combine Dante and control in the same port the way the ULX-Ds do.
ULXD (and Q) support has been there for years. Axient support is already there for the AXT400 and a few other Shure models.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0bTpP5nrCA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0bTpP5nrCA)
AD is coming in the next firmware update as is the first Sennheiser support - for the EM6000.
-
AD receivers have true diversity, ULXD not really.
AD tunes the full (soon to be) legal range of 470-608, ULXD divided into old-style frequency bands.
AD will have "classic Axient" remote control of transmitters when the ADX transmitters start shipping.
ULXD was available several years ago, AD much more recent. Time marches on.
AD also has a headphone jack, which ULXD lacks. And it has the ability to monitor multiple units through the one headphone jack (something that I had been asking for for years).
AD has tone generator built into both the RX and then TX. This can be really helpful on a large show where multiple consoles are seeing the same inputs.
-The short answer to Andrew's question about diversity is: The ULXD is an either/or situation where it picks antenna "A" or "B". AD uses the more sophisticated approach that UHF-R used where it is always receiving on both A&B and chooses (or derives might be a better term) the best of both.
-
-The short answer to Andrew's question about diversity is: The ULXD is an either/or situation where it picks antenna "A" or "B". AD uses the more sophisticated approach that UHF-R used where it is always receiving on both A&B and chooses (or derives might be a better term) the best of both.
Thank you. Where can I find out the details about this, and how it relates in the real world to better reception?
-
the AD doesn't combine Dante and control in the same port the way the ULX-Ds do.
I don't get why Shure haven't done this, it seems like the obvious way to set up AD with Yamaha control. Hopefully it will be added at some point.
-
I don't get why Shure haven't done this, it seems like the obvious way to set up AD with Yamaha control. Hopefully it will be added at some point.
I actually like having the option of it being totally split apart--not having a dedicated control port on the ULX-D can be annoying in situations where you don't want control on the Dante network but still want redundancy. I just patch the control network into the Dante network when I want to merge them.
-
I actually ilike having the option of it being totally split apart--not having a dedicated control port on the ULX-D can be annoying in situations where you don't want control on the Dante network but still want redundancy. I just patch the control network into the Dante network when I want to merge them.
Yup. Neither way is the right way all the time. I'd much rather be able to choose.
-
ULXD was available several years ago, AD much more recent. Time marches on.
To fully appreciate the this point, AD shares nothing in common, with respect to the RF design and implementation, with UXLD. It's a wholly new, far more comprehensive and superior design. (Though ULXD development and case studies played a big role in AD's.)
-
I just wrapped up CMA Music Festival at Nissan Stadium, where we had 16ch of AD in the production rig and dozens of channels of it in artists' rigs each day. Its performance was flawless in our high RF noise environment, with 10mW TX settings easily covering the entire end zone stage and playing field out past the 50 yard line.
A constant intermittent barrage of splatter from an errant high power PLMR repeater nearby caused frequent RX interference warnings and RF compression warnings, but the Q meters showed varying readings of 4 to 5 and their audio output was consistently pristine.
A+ grade, IMHO.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Hi Jason
Have you compared this Axient stuff to the Sennheiser digital 6000/9000 (sound quality and noise floor). The Sennheiser systems are a lot more expensive but people are still buying into so there gotta be some truth to that.
-
Hi Jason
Have you compared this Axient stuff to the Sennheiser digital 6000/9000 (sound quality and noise floor). The Sennheiser systems are a lot more expensive but people are still buying into so there gotta be some truth to that.
I had 8ch of 6k in the production rig alongside the 16ch of Axient D, and they all performed perfectly. Of course, it's my job to make it so. FWIW, the Senny's have network quirks that the AX don't, but in the end they all did their jobs very well. IMHO, 9k is a technical PITA when part of a larger system, and doesn't play well with integrated multizone antenna systems, so I avoid it when I can. 6k, however, integrates very nicely.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
I had 8ch of 6k in the production rig alongside the 16ch of Axient D, and they all performed perfectly. Of course, it's my job to make it so. FWIW, the Senny's have network quirks that the AX don't, but in the end they all did their jobs very well. IMHO, 9k is a technical PITA when part of a larger system, and doesn't play well with integrated multizone antenna systems, so I avoid it when I can. 6k, however, integrates very nicely.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
This mirrors my experience with working with a mixed set-up of 9K, 6K and AD pretty much exactly, point for point.
-
This mirrors my experience with working with a mixed set-up of 9K, 6K and AD pretty much exactly, point for point.
I'm going to get a pair of either Axient D or Sennheiser 6K for small events. Which one do you think sounds better? I was able to use the MD9235 capsule with the ULXD through an adapter (lower gain but sounds great) so Shure is fine.
-
Yup. Neither way is the right way all the time. I'd much rather be able to choose.
Agreed, but i'd prefer to have the choice as a software as well as hardware setup as the ULXds are.
-
Random question about the axient d's. When having them in switched mode, so all 4 ethernet ports are the same dante/control on all. Does it work like an actual switch or more like daisy chaining? Asking in regards to linking up several receivers and other dante devices.
-
Random question about the axient d's. When having them in switched mode, so all 4 ethernet ports are the same dante/control on all. Does it work like an actual switch or more like daisy chaining? Asking in regards to linking up several receivers and other dante devices.
"Daisy-chaining", like on most Dante things, involves a switch. Even if it's only for two external ports and whatever is inside the box. So if you daisy-chain a bunch of Dante things you'll have rather a lot of switches in line upping your latency.
-
Random question about the axient d's. When having them in switched mode, so all 4 ethernet ports are the same dante/control on all. Does it work like an actual switch or more like daisy chaining? Asking in regards to linking up several receivers and other dante devices.
From page 14 in the manual.
• Split/Redundant: This mode places Dante audio and Shure control on
separate networks, while allowing you to take advantage of Dante redundancy.
• Switched: In Switched mode, the receiver acts as a 4-port network switch.
Shure control and Dante audio are present on all network ports.
-
AD Audio Gain question here:
We just setup our 12ch AD system with 3 AD4Q rx's. Coming from UHF-R, the gain staging is completely different. On the transmit side, you're given Pad and Mic Offset which as I understand it is used to match 2 transmitters in level for a redundant frequency setup.
Since the receiver meter includes the "system gain" in the receiver, there is no way of metering just the transmitter gain. I read somewhere that AD does some auto gain voo-doo so you don't have to worry about it unless you get an Audio overload error on the TX (at which point engage the -12db pad). Is this correct?
The Shure manual isn't very clear on gain setup procedure, just what each function does. I haven't sound checked a band yet but I'm running our KSM9's at 0 pad, 0 mic offset, and -5 on the receiver. Just talking into it, I can see where I may have to bring that back a few more clicks for a loud vocalist.
-
AD Audio Gain question here:
We just setup our 12ch AD system with 3 AD4Q rx's. Coming from UHF-R, the gain staging is completely different. On the transmit side, you're given Pad and Mic Offset which as I understand it is used to match 2 transmitters in level for a redundant frequency setup.
Since the receiver meter includes the "system gain" in the receiver, there is no way of metering just the transmitter gain. I read somewhere that AD does some auto gain voo-doo so you don't have to worry about it unless you get an Audio overload error on the TX (at which point engage the -12db pad). Is this correct?
The Shure manual isn't very clear on gain setup procedure, just what each function does. I haven't sound checked a band yet but I'm running our KSM9's at 0 pad, 0 mic offset, and -5 on the receiver. Just talking into it, I can see where I may have to bring that back a few more clicks for a loud vocalist.
The backline techs I tour with are using the pad and mic offset controls on the AD gear in the same fashion as they used the pad and gain on UHFR tx...to match the levels between different guitars that are on the same input to the patch. Seems to work well for them.
I use the mic offset to trim the tx gain down a bit for the person who tends to yell a bit in their HH.
The menu on the receiver will show what the gain is at the tx and at the rx and what the total gain is through the system.
Don't know if that makes things clearer, but i hope so. :)
-
The backline techs I tour with are using the pad and mic offset controls on the AD gear in the same fashion as they used the pad and gain on UHFR tx...to match the levels between different guitars that are on the same input to the patch. Seems to work well for them.
I use the mic offset to trim the tx gain down a bit for the person who tends to yell a bit in their HH.
The menu on the receiver will show what the gain is at the tx and at the rx and what the total gain is through the system.
Don't know if that makes things clearer, but i hope so. :)
That makes sense apart from the meter on the rx now includes receiver gain. I guess if that was set to "0" the meter would be showing the tx gain, however the system doesn't seemed to be designed that way. I've seen the total gain screen but that still doesn't let you monitor what is coming off the tx.