Another need wireless microphone suggestions thread

[wogster]

We have a AKG WMS40, this operates in the 700MHz band, and ceases to be legal here in Canada next year. This is a beltpack with a lavalier microphone and receiver. According to the FCC it can not be modified.

This was new last year, and will need to be replaced next year. Can anyone recommend a suitable replacement? I would like to add a handheld wireless microphone at the same time. This raises a couple of questions though.....

Is it better to go with a dual station receiver, or two single station receivers, with single station receivers how would you make sure they use different frequencies.

Do all belt packs use the same connection or are they all different, in other words would we be able to keep the lavalier microphone, or is it junk?

How do we make sure we don't run into this problem again in a couple of years.

Thanks,

Paul

[dboomer]

Originally Posted by wogster

How do we make sure we don't run into this problem again in a couple of years.

That's the big question ... isn't it? In the US we have "safe harbor" frequencies but I don't know if Canada has something similar. So I guess the answer is to learn all you can about the "digital dividend" as it relates to you and the plans for re-assigning the TV band UHF frequencies. Or you could avoid the TV band frequencies altogether.

[Brad Weber]

Originally Posted by wogster

Is it better to go with a dual station receiver, or two single station receivers, with single station receivers how would you make sure they use different frequencies.

Selecting and setting frequencies should be about the same process for single or multi-channel receivers. Multiple channel receivers tend to be more cost effective and often include integrated antenna and power distribution. The downside is that if there is a general problem or if there is a problem with a channel and the unit is not modular then you may have pull the entire unit and will be minus all of the related channels.

Originally Posted by wogster

Do all belt packs use the same connection or are they all different, in other words would we be able to keep the lavalier microphone, or is it junk?

Assuming you mean the microphone connector, they do vary by manufacturer and sometimes even within a manufacturer. Whether you could reuse, adapt or rewire your existing lavs depends on what you get,

Originally Posted by wogster

How do we make sure we don't run into this problem again in a couple of years.

While such changes usually require longer than a couple of years, I don't think there is any way in any countries with legislated RF assignments to insure that things won't change. There is certainly some spectrum that is less likely to change but other than spectrum that was auctioned with leases that include minimum time period terms there is really no guarantee that any of the RF spectrum may not be reassigned at any time. Don mentioned the 'safe harbor' frequencies that were to be created in the US yet before those were even firmly established there was already talk about further spectrum changes that would affect those.

I think the White Space Device or TVBD debacle shows the problem with trying to plan for future wireless spectrum as technologies with big backing and seemingly bright futures may never mature or be widely embraced while other technologies may suddenly appear and have great demand. This seems to mean that legislation is constantly reacting to either what has already happened or to who has the most influence with them.

[wogster]

Originally Posted by Brad Weber

Selecting and setting frequencies should be about the same process for single or multi-channel receivers. Multiple channel receivers tend to be more cost effective and often include integrated antenna and power distribution. The downside is that if there is a general problem or if there is a problem with a channel and the unit is not modular then you may have pull the entire unit and will be minus all of the related channels.


Assuming you mean the microphone connector, they do vary by manufacturer and sometimes even within a manufacturer. Whether you could reuse, adapt or rewire your existing lavs depends on what you get,


While such changes usually require longer than a couple of years, I don't think there is any way in any countries with legislated RF assignments to insure that things won't change. There is certainly some spectrum that is less likely to change but other than spectrum that was auctioned with leases that include minimum time period terms there is really no guarantee that any of the RF spectrum may not be reassigned at any time. Don mentioned the 'safe harbor' frequencies that were to be created in the US yet before those were even firmly established there was already talk about further spectrum changes that would affect those.

I think the White Space Device or TVBD debacle shows the problem with trying to plan for future wireless spectrum as technologies with big backing and seemingly bright futures may never mature or be widely embraced while other technologies may suddenly appear and have great demand. This seems to mean that legislation is constantly reacting to either what has already happened or to who has the most influence with them.

The issue I think in North America is that the cell phone companies have a lot of money available to buy up the use of spectrum and that the governments are taking advantage of that. Why else do you think it costs $50/month in North America to get a phone with the same service as a phone in South America that costs 50¢ a month.

There is a simple way to make devices that are fairly immune to frequency changes, and that is to put an adjustable frequency capability inside the unit, even if this is only service centre adjustable. I would much rather ship the unit to a service centre for a $50 frequency change, then have to replace a $500 piece of equipment that is less then 2 years old.

[pdc]

Originally Posted by dboomer

That's the big question ... isn't it? In the US we have "safe harbor" frequencies but I don't know if Canada has something similar. So I guess the answer is to learn all you can about the "digital dividend" as it relates to you and the plans for re-assigning the TV band UHF frequencies. Or you could avoid the TV band frequencies altogether.

Boomer is right. The only way is to roll the dice, or go digital and go GHz. In the USA, we are going to go through a second consolidation in about two years. The frequencies they are telling us to get into are between 470MHz and 512MHz. That area should be safe. The only way I would be down there is with the Shure ULX-Ds. Other than that, it is Line 6 city.

[waynehoskins]

Originally Posted by pdc

In the USA, we are going to go through a second consolidation in about two years. The frequencies they are telling us to get into are between 470MHz and 512MHz. That area should be safe.

Anyone have more information on this upcoming consolidation? I've heard precious little on it, and I'd like to read up more on it.

Of interest to those in metro areas (such as myself), portions of that spectrum may be allocated to public-safety or business radio systems, varying from one metro area to another, so do be sure to do your homework before putting transmitters down there.

[pdc]

Originally Posted by waynehoskins

Anyone have more information on this upcoming consolidation? I've heard precious little on it, and I'd like to read up more on it.

Of interest to those in metro areas (such as myself), portions of that spectrum may be allocated to public-safety or business radio systems, varying from one metro area to another, so do be sure to do your homework before putting transmitters down there.

Don't have anything final. Congress just approved the consolidation for the FCC, so I assume the FCC has completed their inventory. I was just told by Shure and Sennheiser engineers and reps that everyone would be buying new wireless in two years. The days of cheap analog wireless are about over. You will either do expensive analog, like Axiom, or digital, unless your church is out in the boonies.

[wogster]

Originally Posted by pdc

Boomer is right. The only way is to roll the dice, or go digital and go GHz. In the USA, we are going to go through a second consolidation in about two years. The frequencies they are telling us to get into are between 470MHz and 512MHz. That area should be safe. The only way I would be down there is with the Shure ULX-Ds. Other than that, it is Line 6 city.

I can see Industry Canada will probably follow the FCC on this, they did the last two times, there is too much border overlap for them not to. 470MHZ to 512MHz is a pretty narrow range, that's essentially TV frequencies for channels 14 to 20 about 7 channels worth.

The problem with digital is going to be cost, Line 6 has some nice stuff, unfortunately it looks well past our budget. Then again a few prices on a basic system would be helpful, for when we start looking at budget.

[waynehoskins]

Ordinarily I'd have suggested Sennheiser G3s at about $500 a channel, but the last time I looked they didn't make any below 512 megs, and that will probably become important soon.

I haven't seen anything in the sub-$500 per channel range that I've liked.

There are a few options in the 500-1K per channel range. If possible, I'd try to push the budget upwards to 1500/channel. That will provide a little bit more breathing room and perhaps also allow for things like directional antennas, multicouplers, etc.

[wogster]

Originally Posted by waynehoskins

Ordinarily I'd have suggested Sennheiser G3s at about $500 a channel, but the last time I looked they didn't make any below 512 megs, and that will probably become important soon.

I haven't seen anything in the sub-$500 per channel range that I've liked.

There are a few options in the 500-1K per channel range. If possible, I'd try to push the budget upwards to 1500/channel. That will provide a little bit more breathing room and perhaps also allow for things like directional antennas, multicouplers, etc.

I don't know how important this stuff will be for us, as we are out in the boonies, there are only 2 channels that the TV picks up with a roof mounted antenna (both are still analog) and we are on the top of the Escarpment here, I don't think the cell companies put their latest and greatest equipment here either, they don't need the extra capacity, in an area where you would be lucky to scare up 40,000 people within a 100 km radius. I really think our 700MHz unit is probably going to work for quite a while. Even $500/channel is pushing the maximum budget. Probably why they went with the current unit just under 2 years ago, it was a low price because it only had a couple of years left.

[pdc]

It will not be the cell companies exactly that will be adding these devices alone. Medical companies will have wireless devices in those bands. Like I said, it may not bother you too much, but there will be a law for you to consider observing.

[dboomer]

Originally Posted by pdc

The frequencies they are telling us to get into are between 470MHz and 512MHz.

That would likely be a bad move. That band (T band) is already scheduled to be auctioned off next year. There are more auctions planned and more than half of the remaining UHF TV band will be sold by 2021.