Jump to content
stefanosound

new low cost radiomic

Recommended Posts

Senal is a "sister" company of B&H Photo & Video. Most of their stuff looks like low-cost knockoffs of established equipment. Maybe these wireless systems are fine; but I'd want to be REALLY convinced before I'd ever use these...Like by hearing reports from mixers I trust who've used that equipment on real jobs for a few months. I think it will be a long time until I hear such reports.

 

And then:

 

The.AWS-2000T.and.AWS-2000P.Transmitters.feature.two. output.level.settings:

•.  Lo (5 mW).is.ideal.when.the.transmitter.is.relatively. close.(150.feet.or.less).to.the.receiver..It.also.provides. the.transmitter.with.approximately.20%.more.. battery.runtime.

•.  Hi (30 MW).allows.the.microphone.to.cover.a.wider.area. and.more.range..This.setting.is.recommended.if.your. subject.is.moving.around.or.is.consistently.more.than. 200.feet.from.the.receiver...

 

 

Even if the TX had higher output , not for me. But if anyone here buys a set and can compare them to established system, let us know what you find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Janik Hampe said:

 

...not very usable, to be honest.

 

 

Really? Just how much of a human's voice is outside those numbers? And what advantage is there in recording those freqs?

d r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jim Feeley said:

 

The.AWS-2000T.and.AWS-2000P.Transmitters.feature.two. output.level.settings:

•.  Lo (5 mW).is.ideal.when.the.transmitter.is.relatively. close.(150.feet.or.less).to.the.receiver..It.also.provides. the.transmitter.with.approximately.20%.more.. battery.runtime.

•.  Hi (30 MW).allows.the.microphone.to.cover.a.wider.area. and.more.range..This.setting.is.recommended.if.your. subject.is.moving.around.or.is.consistently.more.than. 200.feet.from.the.receiver...

 

30mW is fine for many applications. The Sennheiser G3 range (at least the 100/300 range) also only has 30mW and their range is pretty decent. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Constantin said:

30mW is fine for many applications. The Sennheiser G3 range (at least the 100/300 range) also only has 30mW and their range is pretty decent. 

 

Sure, I can get some work done with 30mW. But when I need more, I don't want to have to switch systems.

 

Constantin and Christian, let us know what you think of your new Senal wireless. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not always about RF power when talking about range. What helps allot with range is pre emphasis and companding settings. System designers tune these parameters to maximize signal to noise in the fm modulation and airwaves domain. This improves range and give us advertising number of 500f of range.

With something like this id be interested to see how it holds up to say a cooking show, with hard transients, fat sizzling, pots and pans chiming and wide dynamics.

Its one thing to have a pre emphasis and companding system and setting to maximise range but its another to have a setting to handle transient noise like cooking shows. For me being able to switch is key. Wisycom's ENR and ENC settings are ideal for lot of real world jobs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jim Feeley said:

Constantin and Christian, let us know what you think of your new Senal wireless. :-)

 

Sorry if you got the impression that I wanted to buy these. Just pointing out that 30mW per se is not a problem with, for example, the very popular Sennheiser G3 range. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G3s are cheap but Sennheiser back them up pretty well--they are included on their freq charts, there are parts easily avail, and the package (when bought new) is pretty well thought out re: mounting especially.  They are also easy to get more of used or rental if you need them.  The Senals look cool, but like Jim I want to hear from some early adopters...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jim Feeley said:

I was kidding. Good point about 30mW G3s.  But then, I don't use them as primary wireless...

 

I don't, either. But I do know quite a few who do. With a DPA mic and the SMA mod they turn into pretty decent wireless systems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2017 at 9:29 AM, Philip Perkins said:

G3s are cheap but Sennheiser back them up pretty well--

 

 

Ya, I agree. And I use them but again, not as a replacement for my Lectros. I could have quoted a better spec in my Senal diss.... I guess my point is I'm not looking for something not quite as good as a G3. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they sold the transmitters/receivers separately, it might make a decent scratch audio system (nice that both the transmitters and receivers are switchable to mic/line inputs) although the antennas do look a bit bulky on the receiver.  Nice that they have detachable BNC antennas on the receiver at that price point though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "look" nice (better designed for bag use for one), but do they sound nice? Who knows! Am still waiting on an in depth review of them. Until then, Sony UWP-D11 continue to reign supreme as the best low budget option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23.10.2017 at 1:09 PM, daniel said:

Really? Just how much of a human's voice is outside those numbers? And what advantage is there in recording those freqs?

d r

 

Well sharp "s" sounds in the human voice can reach up to 16kHz. Okay, it´s not much to be missed but you don´t capture the whole thing this way. Also I like the thought of having a little bit of high end frequency headroom to not technically limit what you record.

 

On 23.10.2017 at 3:14 PM, Christian Spaeth said:

 

So Zaxcom wireless is also not usable to you? ;-)

 

Okay, didn´t expect that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Janik Hampe said:

 

Well sharp "s" sounds in the human voice can reach up to 16kHz. Okay, it´s not much to be missed but you don´t capture the whole thing this way. Also I like the thought of having a little bit of high end frequency headroom to not technically limit what you record.

 

I think I know what you mean by this, but just to point out the obvious: you always limit technically what you record. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that subject Sonosax always fine tuned their electronic circuit to be able to record even the harmonic that exceed the human reach because they have an effect on the overall sound or when used in FX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 4:19 PM, Janik Hampe said:

 

...not very usable, to be honest.

 

 

My wireless and booms operate 80Hz-15Hz . Don't need more then that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Patrick Tresch said:

In that subject Sonosax always fine tuned their electronic circuit to be able to record even the harmonic that exceed the human reach because they have an effect on the overall sound or when used in FX.

Which is a nice feature for a recorder that will get used for many things including speech and music but for a wireless lav mic worn by a speaker(?), so much has gone on before the signal reaches the recorder by way of optimising the signal for the technical limitations/demands of wireless audio that, the audio response quoted is acceptable (however good the recorder is after it), possibly more so than other details about the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×