QRX100 4 channel receiver

[glenn]

We have just posted the Zaxcom QRX100 page on our web site.

http://www.zaxcom.com/qrx.htm

There is a lot of detailed information on this new 4 channel ENG receiver, its IFB return channel and sync generator options. In the photos page is a shot of the unit in its Zaxcom camera holder. You will notice a group of 12 LEDs (3 per channel) located on the side of the unit. These will clearly indicate from a great distance that audio is being received by the QRX100 on each of its 4 channels. As most ENG receivers face the sky when in use it seemed logical to position the LEDs in a position that could be easily seen when in the camera mount. The unit can be reversed in the camera mount so the LEDs can face the rear or front of the camera. The LEDs are capable of any color and we are looking for suggestions on exactly what the LEDs should indicate. For now we will light the bottom LED green to indicate audio above -40 dbfs.  The center LED will light green at -20 dBfs. The top LED will light green at -10dBfs, yellow at -5dbfs and red at clipping. We will most likely have different software modes for them. With the IFB return option you can listen to the audio directly from the camera monitor as well.

One of the LED modes will of course be OFF.

I hope to see all of you at NAB

Best Wishes

Glenn

[old school]

Seems like another great product from the Zaxcom Gang. Any MSRP? Seems handy for those kinds of jobs that I see more and more of.

CrewC

[Simon Paine]

Looks like a well thought out and promising piece of equipment. Can't wait to try one out.

[rich]

Wow Glenn, thats a lot going on in one box.

i have a question about the timecode generator option.

does it have a battery backup dedicated to it?

for example, with a multi camera shoot using the QRX as your camera sync box as well, some of the cameras go off out of the range of the master QRX of IFB100 (which in itself isnt a problem as you have a generator that carries on timecode), but whilst the camera is away, there is a battery change or even an hour down for lunch (yeah , i know. but it might happen), you need to be able to keep sync without external power so that when the cameras get back together or meet up throughout the course of the day, they are still keeping good timecode. (i am thinking of shows like the apprentice for this example but pretty much any multicamera shoot where you are not confined to a set and cameras can go off for hours at a time).

it could be a good option in the bag as well as it takes up less space than 2 receivers, has ifb control of the transmitters (if i am reading that correctly) and has similar current draw specs to the older RX.

but it would be nice to be able to use output connectors that are right angled so that there is less strain on the cable in the bag - i use neutrik right angle plugs and loon low profile plugs in my bag - as i wouldnt trust ta5's in that situation. but the only suggestion i have to get around this is some sort of plug on adapter to the bottom of the unit that brings audio, power and time code out to the side gives a different set of problems, particularly securing it to prevent damaging any connectors if it gets knocked.

i also like being able to get the confidence return from the camera, but have a question here as well.

it would be nice to get the return using the high quality mode so i could listen to it all the time, rather than occasionally just to check something is getting to the camera (as i suspect i would be doing in low quality mode) would i be unable to send back timecode to the TRX i am using to send sound to camera? or would i need a separate timecode transmission?

and sorry if the answer to some of these questions is read the info in the morning rather than at midnight.

thanks

rich

[Jeff Wexler]

In the photos page is a shot of the unit in its Zaxcom camera holder. You will notice a group of 12 LEDs (3 per channel) located on the side of the unit.

Glenn

Wow ... I have never seen so many features piled into one receiver package ... pretty amazing. The use of LEDs visible, hopefully, while mounted on a camera, is a really good idea. Even if you only get a glimpse of one LED that lets you know signal has arrived at the camera, this is a good thing.

"In the photos page is a shot of the unit in its Zaxcom camera holder"  I may be looking at the wrong website but I can't for the life of me find a "photos page" on the Zaxcom site. I would like to see the camera holder arrangement.

-  Jeff Wexler

[Audio Daddyo]

Jeff,

Follow the link that Glenn gave and look below the list of "Key Features" and you will see a bunch of links.  One of them is the photo link.  It shows the very cool looking holder.  The holder does allow for a good amount of the receiver to be exposed.  I like that my current BEC Rx holder completely covers my Zaxcom Receiver.

http://www.zaxcom.com/qrx.htm

"In the photos page is a shot of the unit in its Zaxcom camera holder"  I may be looking at the wrong website but I can't for the life of me find a "photos page" on the Zaxcom site. I would like to see the camera holder arrangement.

[Phil Rosati]

Looks like a nifty devise indeed.

There is quite a lot going on in that little box, but it looks promising. Would something like this be able to interface with a Red camera? Not that I am trying to encourage recording anything more than a scratch track on that thing, just imagining what a producer will think when they find out its capabilities. if it were to be used in a bag, or if two were to be used in a bag, or on a cart setup, would the antennae be gangable? It would be interesting to be able to get eight wires into two receivers.

Phil

[Philip Perkins]

Ok, this has the possibility of being a cool box (but I bet it will be an EXPENSIVE cool box).  But I still have to ask--we are going thru all this expensive technology to eventually record on a camera in order to avoid a small amount of work for an assistant editor (post-syncing double system audio files)?  For a job where 4 channels of audio was a required minimum, (and why only 4?) why go to all this trouble?  If the turnaround has to be so fast then an editor getting a 4 channel audio recording from the camera (all isos) then has to sort out the mix, as opposed to the location sound guy doing his job and making a 1 or 2 mix that is pretty ready to go, where's the time savings?  I'm sure there are people here who can set me straight on this, but for the jobs I see I don't see how I'd ever get enough extra rental to justify this thing over a 2 channel hop, if we used a hop at all. 

Philip Perkins

[André Boisvert]

Ok, this has the possibility of being a cool box (but I bet it will be an EXPENSIVE cool box).  But I still have to ask--we are going thru all this expensive technology to eventually record on a camera in order to avoid a small amount of work for an assistant editor (post-syncing double system audio files)?  For a job where 4 channels of audio was a required minimum, (and why only 4?) why go to all this trouble?  If the turnaround has to be so fast then an editor getting a 4 channel audio recording from the camera (all isos) then has to sort out the mix, as opposed to the location sound guy doing his job and making a 1 or 2 mix that is pretty ready to go, where's the time savings?  I'm sure there are people here who can set me straight on this, but for the jobs I see I don't see how I'd ever get enough extra rental to justify this thing over a 2 channel hop, if we used a hop at all. 

Philip Perkins

Thanks Philip,

I was typing my reponse and saw your post. It says a lot of what I thought and more.

Of the 6-10 different cameras I'll probably work with this year, how many can accept 4 tracks?

I like my stereoline, but Zaxcom hasn't made a piece of gear for my market since.

Marketing it as an ENG receiver... I don't get it.

[Bartek]

yes, so true.

The only time I ever was asked to provide 4 tracks of audio on a camera was when I did a show on the Viper a few years back, at the insistence of the camera vendor (he talked the producer into it). It lasted for a day! With a two man crew it proved to be a major drag.  The editor requested a mono mix the next day and that was the norm for the rest of the show.

[glenn]

Prices are not set in stone yet but I can tell you it is very competitive. The starting price should be a little lower than our current ENG receiver and a lot less per channel than any other solution.

It should be a natural for the red camera. A total solution for audio and synchronization.

Yes the time code generator has a battery backup so it will not lose time when powered off. This does require our IFB or Video sync option board.

Power consumption as a 4 channel receiver should be about 200ma at 12 volts. The interesting thing here is that the unit runs fine down to 6 volts and has full line level output up to +20 dBu full scale for line level connection to camera. But if you have AES in on the camera that is how you will use it and it is the only way to go on XDcam. At this power consumption we have still archived a no intermod system.

If you get the internal IFB return option the unit will draw about 300ma at 12 Volts.

The camera mount will fit any of our older ENG receivers. It is also very light weight and provides receiver ventilation. It connects to the Anton Bauer battery mount with 2 thumb screws. The mount is available seperatly.

Glenn

[André Boisvert]

Prices are not set in stone yet but I can tell you it is very competitive. The starting price should be a little lower than our current ENG receiver and a lot less per channel than any other solution.

It should be a natural for the red camera. A total solution for audio and synchronization.

Yes the time code generator has a battery backup so it will not lose time when powered off. This does require our IFB or Video sync option board.

Power consumption as a 4 channel receiver should be about 200ma at 12 volts. The interesting thing here is that the unit runs fine down to 6 volts and has full line level output up to +20 dBu full scale for line level connection to camera. But if you have AES in on the camera that is how you will use it and it is the only way to go on XDcam. At this power consumption we have still archived a no intermod system.

If you get the internal IFB return option the unit will draw about 300ma at 12 Volts.

The camera mount will fit any of our older ENG receivers. It is also very light weight and provides receiver ventilation. It connects to the Anton Bauer battery mount with 2 thumb screws. The mount is available seperatly.

Glenn

Glenn, no ENG guys work with the RED. Mainly one track, sometimes two.

According to what I've read here, because of all the sofware versions available, it's best to treat the Red as a film camera and just send it a scratch track, and clap it. Also, I think there's a new Red around the corner, we'll have to wait and see how it works with sound.

Again, where do the 4 tracks go to?

[Jeff Wexler]

I am somewhat concerned about the suggestions that this is the ideal piece of gear to record 4 channel to the CAMERA. I believe that it IS the ideal piece of gear for this, but as several others have pointed out, recording ANYTHING to the camera (and especially the RED) is not ideal. I have been pleased that the trend has seemed to be going in the direction of treating these high end IMAGING devices (cameras) just like film cameras --- this can go a long way towards preserving double system workflow which I still feel is very important.

Now, the 4 channel receiver with all the extra features will prove to be a very useful item even when NOT being used to feed the RED camera. It was mentioned here that it could work out very well in a bag situation. Isn't that what the Lectro Octabox (sp.?) was supposed to do?

-  Jeff Wexler

[John Blankenship]

And, harkening back to an earlier discussion about holding the line on maintaining crew size and keeping boom ops working, on many mid-level productions, producers will see this device as a way to have the sound mixer work out of a bag, boom pole in one hand, mix knobs in the other juggling even more wireless, instead of having a full cart, a recorder, and a more costly crew.

If you really want to earn the love of sound guys, find a way to de-emphasize the use of camera sound, not increase it.  I'm not knocking Zaxcom, they've been stellar at coming up with heretofore unrealized solutions, but more toys that help us improve quality and keep more soundies working would be most welcome.

We helped get rid of the cable puller with wireless booms, now we can trim the sound department even more.  The phrase "shooting yourself in the foot" comes to mind.

It looks to be an interesting and well thought out product, but sometimes technology can be our worst enemy.  If it helps us improve our quality of work, that's one thing; if it helps convince the powers that be that we can do an "adequate, but good enough" job with less people, that's another.

John B.

[Bartek]

AMEN!

[Philip Perkins]

Prices are not set in stone yet but I can tell you it is very competitive. The starting price should be a little lower than our current ENG receiver and a lot less per channel than any other solution.

It should be a natural for the red camera. A total solution for audio and synchronization.

Yes the time code generator has a battery backup so it will not lose time when powered off. This does require our IFB or Video sync option board.

Power consumption as a 4 channel receiver should be about 200ma at 12 volts. The interesting thing here is that the unit runs fine down to 6 volts and has full line level output up to +20 dBu full scale for line level connection to camera. But if you have AES in on the camera that is how you will use it and it is the only way to go on XDcam. At this power consumption we have still archived a no intermod system.

If you get the internal IFB return option the unit will draw about 300ma at 12 Volts.

The camera mount will fit any of our older ENG receivers. It is also very light weight and provides receiver ventilation. It connects to the Anton Bauer battery mount with 2 thumb screws. The mount is available seperatly.

Glenn

Glenn--your gear sounds great, and I'd have lots if I could afford it.  But your box is not a "natural" for the RED or any other camera.  There is no good place to mount such a box on the Red, the Red has very minimal audio features (no externally viewable meters, no trim/volume controls, non-standard level sensitivity, non-standard connectors, no ability to output all of its channels discretely, very poor TC clock accuracy, issues w/ audio files getting lost in transfer) and is seen by most producers as a "crew" camera, ie one requiring an AC or, more likely, two.  If you believe that you have a market for this device in the ENG/handheld/doco world, then you might want to consider packaging in a similar fashion to the Lectro SR or receivers sold by Panasonic and Sony to work as "drop-in" types on cameras w/ slots.  However so far most cameras of this type can only take two channels, some still only take one via the slot.  If this receiver was requested of Zaxcom, I'd be very interested to know how the requestor intends to use it and with which camera for what sort of job.

Philip Perkins

[Derek H]

Cool product!  I can see this kind of device playing well in the reality world IF the cameras begin to implement 4 ch audio properly.. and assuming those particular cameras catch on in certain markets (reality etc..).  As of now it's true, very few cameras provide 4ch audio in any useful sort of way for us (even fewer that would be considered game for ENG use) but I have a feeling this will change over time and 4ch sound on the tape may become standard (like it or not!).  I'm picturing something like an HD full size camera with dual XLR-5pins on the rear panel and physical trim knobs and meters for each channel, AES/Line/Mic switchable and full matrix style monitoring selection. 

Another issue here for the mixer (poor bastard!) is trying to mix and feed four channels of camera send out of a bag.. with the current lineup of field mixers I see no elegant solution..  What do you do?  mix two tracks and then use the direct outs to feed 3 and 4?  seems clunky to me.  The only bag-sized mixer I know of that has a true quad mix bus scenario is the Twelco and I've yet to encounter one of those here in the states.  Maybe this is an opportunity for sound devices to wow us with the next gen 442?

Seems like this box is made to play with equipment that doesn't exist quite yet.. but it's good to be ahead of the curve.. right?  I guess we'll see.

-d   

[glenn]

When we started the QRX100 design we looked at making a slot in receiver and ruled it out.  The limited amount of available power, intense camera heat with no ventilation, only 1 channel of audio interface in most cases, lack of compatibility between cameras, lack of space for I/O connectors, ground loop/audio quality issues and lack of support in the case of Sony make the slot a non starter for us. By keeping the receiver the same size as our current receiver we are instantly compatible with all broadcast cameras and are not locked into a limited feature set with limited RF performance. Freelancers will find it easier to just pop the receiver in the BEC box or Zaxcom holder when they work with different camera people. The presentation of our channel audio verification LEDs would also not be possible in a slot configuration.

Use of the QRX100 with the Red camera is just like any other solution except with a single box you can sync the camera and feed 4 channels of audio from the sound cart. I do think that the audio on the RED is scratch track. The QRX100 is a single box solution that the Camera department will favor due to its size and weight. The Red application is a good one but the QRX100 was designed for ENG/EFP/Reality television applications. I am sure it will find its way onto those shows and productions first.

How the 4 camera tracks will be used is up to the sound mixer and the production. I think the more places the audio can go the better. When the Deva II came out with 4 tracks I was told many times that more than 2 tracks was not necessary. I think this is a case of “if you build it they will come” The QRX100 can be purchased in 1,2 and 4 channel configurations so no one has to purchase capabilities they do not need. The channel count can be updated if desired after the unit has been purchased.

To feed the 4 tracks you can use our Fusion mixer/recorder. It has 12 recordable tracks and 8 output buses so there will never be a problem mixing or routing any combination of tracks to the camera.  Sound Devices makes some good mixers as well ;-)

Best Wishes

Glenn

[rich]

okay, but any thoughts yet on the sync generator powering, using bottom mounted ta5s in a bag and timecode and high quality ifb?

thanks

rich

[studiomprd]

" It looks to be an interesting and well thought out product, but sometimes technology can be our worst enemy. "

" If you really want to earn the love of sound guys, find a way to de-emphasize the use of camera sound, not increase it. "

the way the system works is the manufacturers build the best products that technology permits,  that will satisfy the wants and needs of their customers and can profitibly sold at prices they will pay.

Like the Lectro Slot RX (SR), I suspect the main target market for this product is actually the camera owner/operators and rental facilities.

progress!

[Gene Martin]

I think this is a great idea. Everyone needs to forget the RED and forget the 4 channels for now. 

First off the comments on the RED might as well be all forgotten. The quote that "There is no good place to mount such a box on the Red" is depending on the accessories the camera is equipped with. I've put a receiver on the top cheese plate and I've mounted a receiver off the camera rails. It all depends if you are equipped to do it, not the camera. And who knows, maybe when the QRX is released the RED will be more reliable in the audio functions/recordings. It's still a new camera and there are constant updates with it. Also it's not about "if you really want to earn the love of sound guys, find a way to de-emphasize the use of camera sound, not increase it" Don't forget not all sound mixers have the same tools or opinions on how things should be done. Besides it's about equipment possibilities not worth of the camera sound.

The other thing that people seem to be missing is Zaxcom basically designed a 2 channel receiver for bag or cart use. So you can have 1 QRX instead of 2 RX 900's taking half the space in your bag or cart. This alone makes it worth buying. Now sense each TRX 900 can send a mono or stereo signal (with the STA 100/150) why not have the possibilities of 4 ch. Glenn/Zaxcom would be criticized if he came out with a receiver that just excepted 2 mono transmitters, it's already been done. The 4 ch receiver doesn't just have to be for camera.  I've done shows where I was at a mixing counsel and had 2 ENG units back stage sending there mix back to me via 2 separate lectro 411's each (4 wireless total). Now I would have the possibility to have each ENG unit set up with a TRX900 with the stereo adapter and I would only need a single QRX at the counsel. I would also be able to send time code (via IFB) back to each ENG bag and have there audio recorded for further backup. If you really wanted you could also talk to them via the IFB. This would eliminate 2 transmitters and 3 receivers and give me a TC synced recorded backup and the possibility to be able to communicate to each ENG mixer. There are many possible variations. Also... if you are concerned with the straight TA5's in the bag or on the camera, lectro makes a part (RATPAC) to make any TA connector into a right angle. The way I see it is Zaxcom has future proofed the QRX for whatever you may or may not need.

http://www.lectrosonics.com/catalogs/UniversalCatalogPages/RatPacMan.pdf

Gene Martin

[Philip Perkins]

I think this is a great idea. Everyone needs to forget the RED and forget the 4 channels for now. 

First off the comments on the RED might as well be all forgotten. The quote that "There is no good place to mount such a box on the Red" is depending on the accessories the camera is equipped with. I've put a receiver on the top cheese plate and I've mounted a receiver off the camera rails. It all depends if you are equipped to do it, not the camera. And who knows, maybe when the QRX is released the RED will be more reliable in the audio functions/recordings. It's still a new camera and there are constant updates with it. Also it's not about "if you really want to earn the love of sound guys, find a way to de-emphasize the use of camera sound, not increase it" Don't forget not all sound mixers have the same tools or opinions on how things should be done. Besides it's about equipment possibilities not worth of the camera sound.

No, it IS about the worth of camera sound and its fidelity, esp as compared to an audio recorder.  We are in the sound business, and will continue to promote recording audio the best we can regardless of camera manufacturer propaganda or producorial expediency.  Cheese-plates and other RED-centric accessories are absolutely not the responsibility of the sound dept.--and I have yet to see such a thing come with a rental Red, thus "there is no good place to mount the RX"--that quote from a number of experienced Red ACs. 

Philip Perkins

[Gene Martin]

I totally agree with what you are saying.  What I should have clarified is it's about QRX possibilities not worth of the RED's camera sound. I would always choose an audio recorder over a camera. I guess for myself personally, if I can send audio to the camera I will, but I still always record at my end. I may not send 4 ch, but if any camera was ever able to have 4 real ch of audio then who knows? The only time I've personally ever been able was with a Sony F900 w/ a 901 adapter on the back that allows ch's 3&4. I guess what I was trying to get across was that the QRX 100 doesn't have to be used for all 4 ch, but you have them if you ever need them. I would use it in place of my RX900 when it was on the back of any camera just sending 2 ch because I could see the LED's and know audio was getting to the camera. As far as the mounting with the RED, your right. Not all camera houses send out the mounting plates and rods with the RED, but then this would be no different if someone was working with a small HD camera or even a full size camera that didn't have the Anton Bauer side screw in plate. There is still nowhere to put a receiver, but it's sometimes required to have the tools be able to do so.

I'm not out to offend anyone. The only point I was trying to get across is, the QRX doesn't have to be just for a 4ch camera hop. There are many other uses no matter how many ch you may deiced to use, camera or not. The versatility to have 1 single receiver be able to do 1,2 or 4 channels of audio is personally worth having.

Gene

[Andy P]

Hmmm my one year old RX900s seems so outdated now! I will definately be getting a QRX when I can. For me it's  the fact that I wouldn't have to put any more boxes on the camera. At the moment I use a Black Box timecode transmitter as well as the RX900, and no matter how diligent  you are about getting all those cables as safe and out of the way as possible, it's always a potential hazard.

But I wonder if Glenn could enlighten us in relation to Rich's question about the timecode and high quality IFB from the QRX, is it possible to receive both at the same time?

BTW Rich, did you know you can get right angled TA5s ...

http://thebroadcastshop.com/sales/detail.asp?partno=LEC-RATPAC

Sooo....anyone want to buy a RX900s?

Andy.

[Eric Toline]

Hmmm my one year old RX900s seems so outdated now! I will definately be getting a QRX when I can. For me it's  the fact that I wouldn't have to put any more boxes on the camera. At the moment I use a Black Box timecode transmitter as well as the RX900, and no matter how diligent  you are about getting all those cables as safe and out of the way as possible, it's always a potential hazard.

But I wonder if Glenn could enlighten us in relation to Rich's question about the timecode and high quality IFB from the QRX, is it possible to receive both at the same time?

BTW Rich, did you know you can get right angled TA5s ...

http://thebroadcastshop.com/sales/detail.asp?partno=LEC-RATPAC

Sooo....anyone want to buy a RX900s?

Andy.

At $35.50 each it does seem to be a bit pricey.

Eric