James Arnold Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Have you seen numbers? Based on specs posted, I calculate about 1 pound difference. Noticeable, but not what I call big. You have to compare with 2 micplexers, BDS, and cabling, all that weighs more than the qrx's do. I'd have to find his quote, but he may have been sizing up the RX-12 with 6 pull out units vs his own 6 RX with Micplexer. The inference being that in a bag situation your are unlikely to be carrying the full whack for most jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I'd have to find his quote, but he may have been sizing up the RX-12 with 6 pull out units vs his own 6 RX with Micplexer. The inference being that in a bag situation your are unlikely to be carrying the full whack for most jobs. I'm not trying to speculate on what comparisons others have done, my point is you can't compare the rx12 to just qrx200's, of course alone they are much lighter. But if you compare a pull apart system that has all the functionality of an rx12, the weight difference becomes small (around 1 pound from what I can tell) IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I'm not trying to speculate on what comparisons others have done, my point is you can't compare the rx12 to just qrx200's, of course alone they are much lighter. But if you compare a pull apart system that has all the functionality of an rx12, the weight difference becomes small (around 1 pound from what I can tell) IMO. I guess we need the exact weights of the rack itself and each RX. I can't seem to find those anywhere, only the fully loaded spec. You'd still need some kind of BDS with the RX-12 to power the Nomad, although that is probably the most negligable weight next to the batteries and cabling. I wonder how long you'd get off a single NP1 if powering it and a mixer/recorder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I guess we need the exact weights of the rack itself and each RX. I can't seem to find those anywhere, only the fully loaded spec. You'd still need some kind of BDS with the RX-12 to power the Nomad, although that is probably the most negligable weight next to the batteries and cabling. I wonder how long you'd get off a single NP1 if powering it and a mixer/recorder? each qrx200 is 170grams. 6 qrx are 1kg 20 grams - les then 2.4lbs. RX12 is 6.2 lbs loaded with 6 wireless So the RX12 is almost twice as heavy then qrx200s. Another important detail is the power consummation. I run my Nomad, 3 qrx200s and micplexerII for 4:30 hours on one battery. RX12 has a DSP. The power consummation will be a lot more. As far as what the RX12 gives me over the qrxs... I don't really care because I never use a scan. I just scroll the freqs up or down till I find a good freq. The way the scans work on wireless receivers is not very optimal because sometimes you have pulsating RF. When the scan goes over and select a frequency it might be clean. But half a second later It will not be. So manually scrolling and selecting a frequency is the best way "IMHO" since you can look at how a frequency performs for more then a fraction of a second. Another downside of the RX12 is the SMA antenna connectors. I prefer BNC so I can swap between antennas in a hurry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 each qrx200 is 170grams. 6 qrx 1kg 20 grams - les then 2.4lbs. RX12 is 6.2 lbs loaded with 6 wireless So the RX12 is almost twice as heavy then qrx200s. Another important detail is the power consummation. I run my Nomad, 3 qrx200s and micplexerII for 4:30 hours on one battery. RX12 has "I asume" DSP. The power conumation will be a lot more. Thanks Rado. How much would all the cabling required for 6 QRX add up to though? That has to be considered although as you'll still need output leads from the RX-12 (split if using analogue) I don't know how much of a reduction that gives you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Thanks Rado. How much would all the cabling required for 6 QRX add up to though? That has to be considered although as you'll still need output leads from the RX-12 (split if using analogue) I don't know how much of a reduction that gives you. I use AES ta5 for each qrx200 so not really a lot more weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vale Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Another important detail is the power consummation. I run my Nomad, 3 qrx200s and micplexerII for 4:30 hours on one battery. RX12 has a DSP. The power consummation will be a lot more. Rado, what battery are you using? Another downside of the RX12 is the SMA antenna connectors. I prefer BNC so I can swap between antennas in a hurry. Where do you have BNCs in your QRXs setup? I'd prefer that kind of connectors too. Thanks for all the calculations, anyway. Very useful. Vale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 each qrx200 is 170grams. 6 qrx are 1kg 20 grams - les then 2.4lbs. RX12 is 6.2 lbs loaded with 6 wireless So the RX12 is almost twice as heavy then qrx200s. The qrx200's are the lightest part of the system, so this is not a complete weight comparison. You will need a BDS, 2 micplexers, 14 sma cables, and 8 DC cables to compare the same functionality of a loaded rx12. All of those weigh more than the qrx's. This is the comparison that's important to me because I either have to run all of those items, or an rx12, and the difference in weight is small IMO. I'm only comparing 12 channels of complete wireless, not the rest of the bag. I run 1 np1 for my nomad, and 1 for my wireless, so for me there is no change there with either system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Another downside of the RX12 is the SMA antenna connectors. I prefer BNC so I can swap between antennas in a hurry. The micplexer has sma inputs also, so aren't you running an sma to BNC adaptor anyway? How would it be different with the rx12? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Another important detail is the power consummation. I run my Nomad, 3 qrx200s and micplexerII for 4:30 hours on one battery. RX12 has a DSP. The power consummation will be a lot more. This is a consideration, but the specs show the chassis consumption at 100ma, the same as a single micplexer. You would need two micplexers to run 6 QRX200's, so in this regard the RX12 might actually be more power efficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 The micplexer has sma inputs also, so aren't you running an sma to BNC adaptor anyway? How would it be different with the rx12? The real estate on the rx12 is perfect for bnc. The inputs are on the side. With micplexer regardless of the bag position one or both cables are in the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 The real estate on the rx12 is perfect for bnc. The inputs are on the side. With micplexer regardless of the bag position one or both cables are in the way I agree. I also prefer BNC for my primary antenna connection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 This is a consideration, but the specs show the chassis consumption at 100ma, the same as a single micplexer. You would need two micplexers to run 6 QRX200's, so in this regard the RX12 might actually be more power efficient.I would not take the published specs for granted. Each qrx200 is "tested" 0.18A.so 6 will be 1.08 Micplexer II is 0.08A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I would not take the published specs for granted. Each qrx200 is "tested" 18ma.so 6 will be 110ma. Specs are all I have to compare the systems with because I don't have an RX12, but I am considering one. My Remote Audio BDS show a current consumption of 0.29 with only 1 QRX200 running. Not a scientific test, but the closest I have, and considering the max power spec should be a little conservative, this points to me that the spec is reasonably accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Specs are all I have to compare the systems with because I don't have an RX12, but I am considering one. My Remote Audio BDS show a current consumption of 0.29 with only 1 QRX200 running. Not a scientific test, but the closest I have, and considering the max power spec should be a little conservative, this points to me that the spec is reasonably accurate. My numbers are from measuring my gear while we are having this conversation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 By the way maxx and nomad voltage always shows approximately 0.30V less then the actual voltage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 My numbers are from measuring my gear while we are having this conversation... Mine too. What did you use to test the current draw from you QRX with? I'm not saying that the RA BDS I used is highly accurate, it's just the easiest way I have to check right now. By the way maxx and nomad voltage always shows approximately 0.30V less then the actual voltage. Not sure how this is relevant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Mine too. What did you use to test the current draw from you QRX with? I'm not saying that the RA BDS I used is highly accurate, it's just the easiest way I have to check right now. Not sure how this is relevant? It is not. This is way i used separate post and "by the way".Just an interesting fact about how Zaxcom recorders measure voltage. I am measuring with my SM audioroot distro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 It is not. Just an interesting fact about how Zaxcom recorders measure voltage. I am measuring with my SM audioroot distro. It is interesting to not. I wonder if the difference is the voltage of the battery under load, vs. unloaded? I have never looked at it. I just checked with everything off except the BDS, and it shows a current draw of .05, so that means my QRX200 is actually pulling closer to .24A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I think if you are regularily running 8 -10 zaxcom wireless channels in a bag then the RX-12 makes sense. For 6 and less the weight differential may not be as favourable. I dunno. I haven't added it up. You'd certainly lose a lot of flexibility but end up with a much tidier bag and a powerful 'control centre'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I think if you are regularily running 8 -10 zaxcom wireless channels in a bag then the RX-12 makes sense. For 6 and less the weight differential may not be as favourable. I dunno. I haven't added it up. You'd certainly lose a lot of flexibility but end up with a much tidier bag and a powerful 'control centre'. You might be right. Since Zaxcom doesn't publish the wieght of the chasis or the modules individually, it's hard to know, but is likely heavier. Weight isn't everything, I'm just trying to get as accurate of a comparison as possible for myself to decide if the RX12 makes sense for me. If it does, I will likely demo one so I can compare in the real world. Until then, it's specs and numbers. And of course deciding if the additional features of the RX12 are worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 It is interesting to not. I wonder if the difference is the voltage of the battery under load, vs. unloaded? I have never looked at it. I just checked with everything off except the BDS, and it shows a current draw of .05, so that means my QRX200 is actually pulling closer to .24A. my battery system uses SMBus. "Smart Battery". SMBus reads the battery electronics. Very accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I would not take the published specs for granted. Each qrx200 is "tested" 0.18A.so 6 will be 0.100A. Micplexer II is 0.08A. Check your decimal points! 6 x .18 does not equal .1, it equals 1.08a. I imagine you intended the rounded-off total of one amp rather than a tenth of an amp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Fixed 0.108A. 108ma Nope. 6 x .18=1.08 (not 0.108) i.e. 6 x 180ma = 1080ma (which is 1.08a) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 6 x 18ma = 108ma = 0.108 Ampere It is a metric. 1 ampere = 1000 milliampere .18A is 180 mA, not 18 mA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.