Jump to content

alenK

Members
  • Content count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About alenK

  • Rank
    Hero Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    USA
  • Interested in Sound for Picture
    Yes
  • About
    Sound Mixer

Recent Profile Visitors

494 profile views
  1. Folding Bag Cart v1.0

    Thank you. I have looked through the Magworld and General catalogs and have missed finding it.
  2. Folding Bag Cart v1.0

    bump
  3. Hello, As a recent recipient of a FCC Part 74 license I was evidently included in the recent T-mobile mailing of their certified letter notifications about their intent to use the 600MHz space. I am on the road, but have become aware that a USPS notice of an attempt to deliver was left on my door. I will not be available to travel to the post office to sign for and retrieve the letter before it is returned to sender. I am wondering how this circumstance relates to the FCC policy that my address of record needs to be current and accurate. My address is accurate and current (I have resided at the same location for 25+ years) but I am not available to sign for unanticipated certified transmissions. I know I am overthinking this but do not want to find out my part 74 license has been revoked because it may appear to T-mobile that my address is not current. I do not appreciate the fact that they have burdened me with the obligation to sign for their letter. I imagine the letter simply repeats the message that was already sent to me via email. I would rather disregard the situation and let it pass but want to retain my part 74 license in good standing. I was happy to have gotten signed up, but I guess I have finally learned what the part 74 license is actually useful for. Will the FCC be concerned that I have not signed for this letter? Thank you.
  4. 664 panic

    Is WaveAgent able to play the problematic files?
  5. Coax cable for use with passive antenna?

    Thank you for the suggestions. Here are some line loss specs (obtained from an online calculator) that prompted me to consider RG-8 for a 10 foot connection to a passive antenna system; Belden 8216 (RG-174) loss @500MHz = 2.181dB Belden 9913 (RG-8) loss @500MHz = 0.302dB Belden 9258 (RG-8X) loss @500MHz = 0.888dB Belden 9201 (RG-58) loss @500MHz = 1.054dB Placing my dipoles higher in the air may improve line of sight conditions, but I don't expect them to provide much more than 1 or 2 dB of Gain so negating that positive gain with an inconsiderate choice of cabling seems counterproductive. The RG-8 seems like the most effective way to address the concern, but the convenience of working with a more flexible cable certainly seems valuable. Thank you.
  6. Coax cable for use with passive antenna?

    Thank you for the information.
  7. Hello, I am trying to learn about occasionally and temporarily augmenting my bag mounted Lectrosonics SRc receivers with supplementary antennas mounted up in the air on a pole. For the foreseeable future It's unlikely that I will make the leap to using an antenna distribution system and multiple receivers. I am primarily interested in being able to quickly hook up one SRc and cover an occasional long distance walk and talk shot with two radio mics and then resume a day of near proximity scenarios. I started experimenting with some home made dipole antennas and they have provided an effective improvement in range during testing. The Lectrosonics SRc receivers introduced me to SMA connectors. Previously all my receivers used BNC connectors. I bought some 5 foot SMA to BNC RG 174 cables for my dipole experiments, and I look forward to using slightly longer cables, perhaps 10 feet in length. The "low loss" RG 174 cable is specified to have much greater loss than a familiar RG 8 cable (such as the specification used in Lectrosonics RF cable products). I am second guessing the merit of combining an antenna that only adds a few dB gain with a RG174 cable that loses 1dB (5 foot length at 500MHz?) or 2dB (10 foot length at 500MHz?) of signal strength. Which brings me to the question; How do other people connect the SMA connections on a Lectrosonics SRc receiver to an antenna? I realize that a lot of people use an interim buffer system such as the PSC Multi SMA, but I am not that sophisticated yet. I am reluctant to hook a SMA terminated RG-8 cable directly to my SRc radio because it seems like the relatively stiff cable could strain the radio's connector, so I am considering using a very short 6" length of SMA to BNC RG174 cable as a strain relief and then connecting a RG-8 to that. I am wondering what other people have done in a circumstance such as I have described. Thank you.
  8. I work NABET and IBEW local 1200 gigs, and it is true that lately my cam op brothers have been sneaking out and working sound without insisting on being accompanied by a union sound tech. At the very least the cam ops could helpfully remind the assignment desk about the agreements by billing a few extra hours to wrangle all those extra cables they never had to mess with before.
  9. Folding Bag Cart v1.0

    Does anyone know what this C-stand "base" part is called and where it can be purchased? Thank you. :
  10. I feel the same way. The Lectrosonics M2R Wireless IEM/IFB seems like a good starting point for wishful thinking.
  11. Folding Bag Cart v1.0

    Thanks for the reply. I am actually asking about the stand base clamps/brackets featured in the 3rd photo.
  12. Folding Bag Cart v1.0

    Hi Max, Where did you get the C-Stand holding brackets? Thank you.
  13. TA3f to TA5f (Lectrosonics)

    The output impedance of the 3M XLR on the 633 mixer is 100ohm so the bridge into the line level input of a SMQV is 1:27. I expect that there will be less voltage drop. For my 633 wires I am going to leave Pin 3 disconnected at both the XLR and TA3 outputs. For my 552 I will tie Pin 3 of the XLR outputs to Pin 1 and 4 of the TA5F. For a 664 or 688 I will leave Pin 3 disconnected on the TA3 outputs, and for the XLR outputs I will tie Pin 3 to Pin 1 and 4 of the TA5F.
  14. TA3f to TA5f (Lectrosonics)

    Yes, impedance bridge ratios are usually loose suggestions when you start with a ratio such as 1:10, which is often quoted as a good starting point. With the Sound Devices 633 TA3 output impedance at 1kOhms and the SMQV input impedance at 2.7kOhms the bridge is 1:2.7 rather than Sound Devices suggestion of a minimum of 1:3.2. The difference between the two ratios is very small but the difference between either of them and 1:10 made me pasue and take notice. I am confident that the SMQV input impedance will not cause the outputs of the 633 to melt due to excess current flow, but I do find the circumstance to seem a curiosity. I found humor in the idea that reading the manuals carefully can elicit more questions than answers. Thank you. I am thankful that Lectrosonics' and Sound Devices' service departments both took the time to answer my specific questions. For my part, it was worth every minute to learn the details regarding this interconnection.
×