Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1 Follower

About karlw

  • Rank
    Hero Member
  • Birthday 10/28/1966

Profile Information

  • Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
  • Interests
    Music, good books, astronomy, audio.
  • Interested in Sound for Picture
  • About
    VP of sales & service at Lectrosonics, Inc., classical musician, family man.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. karlw

    Sound Devices new firmware - w/ Auto Mute !!

    They've added control support (via Superslot) for the SRc-941 receiver, for their 688/SL-6 which is nice for any users with that combination of equipment, or at least considering it.
  2. The new ALP690 can be used actively or passively, and offers two filter settings, along with variable gain from -6 to +12 dB. https://www.lectrosonics.com/US/lectrosonics-releases-the-alp690-high-performance-uhf-lpda-antenna-with-built-in-rf-amplifier.html
  3. karlw

    SRC "mismatch" IR sync problem

    What firmware versions are in your SRc and SMWB? What happens if you select Block 21 or 22 only (i.e. not allow it to choose from the entire B1 band) with SmartTune? If you manually tune receiver to a known good (US legal) frequency, and use IR sync to set the transmitter, what happens?
  4. Hi all, For anyone interested in a 2-day, in-depth training class on wireless microphones, this class is held once a year in different locations. This time it is in Anaheim, CA, on Oct. 1 & 2. https://www.prosoundtraining.com/making-wireless-work/ -Karl
  5. karlw

    Dual Tumbleweeds

    Nothing to see here....
  6. karlw

    Lectrosonics RPS4 Rackmount Power

    No plans for an RPS8 at this time - it would likely take 2 rack spaces, not sure it would be a practical solution vs. two RPS4.
  7. karlw

    Lectrosonics RPS4 Rackmount Power

    The fans run at a low speed are very quiet - I can barely hear them when the unit is on and running for a while. There is no user control of the fans.
  8. karlw

    Oxidation on SMQV housing

    We got a few batches of housings from a plating supplier that have exhibited these symptoms. We can replace the housing under warranty, if you can get your unit to one of our warranty stations or here to the factory.
  9. karlw

    The horse has left that barn

    And I can assure you that we (a group of pro audio wireless manufacturers including Lectro, Shure, Sennheiser and AT) DID make an effort to bring about compensation for those displaced, in a pro-rated manner (the more recently you bought it, the more $$ back from proceeds of the spectrum sales). This is what they did in Japan, and also to some extent in the UK for the West End Theaters. I was at the meeting at the FCC in DC in 2014 with my industry colleagues when this question was brought up. The FCC representative's response was "You will run into significant legal challenges if you choose to pursue this". No matter than a mere 1% of the 19B spectrum sale would have funded the replacement of probably every professional wireless mic in the 600 MHz band.
  10. karlw

    Lectro sra to srb upgrade. What's it worth?

    The cost to upgrade your SRa to SRb is $620 and involves replacement of the RF board.
  11. Hi Matthew, First off, thanks for posting these details so that we may comment and hopefully provide some enlightenment on the subject. The firmware changes have not affected mic wiring for this transmitter. If you were to load v2.10 or v2.11 firmware into a recently purchased LMb, the results (with the microphones) would be the same. Back in 2005, when we introduced the SM Series, we updated our mic wiring recommendations for two types of inputs: "servo bias only" (to work with the then new SM Series, the UM400a, later the LMa, and every subsequent bodypack transmitter introduced since then), and "compatible" wiring that would work both with the servo bias input units, and the older units (UM200a,b,c, UM400, LM, etc.) It was possible for lav mics wired for the older "legacy" transmitters (such as the M150 you mention) to work, if perhaps not ideally, with servo input transmitters due to a voltage offset spec for the op amp used at that time. In 2015, that part was changed in all Lectrosonics bodypack transmitters, and the result is that old lav mics, or any lav mics not wired to either the "compatible" or "servo bias only" standards, will no longer work very well, which is what you've experienced with your newer LMbs. So, although perhaps painful, the correct solution is to have your microphones re-wired to the 2005 standards, either: "Compatible" (will work with servo or non-servo inputs): Shield to pin 1 Bias (likely red) to pin 3 1k resistor between audio (likely white) and pin 1 Wire jumper from pin 4 to pin 2 Or "Servo bias only" wiring (generally the best audio performance with most lav mics): Shield to pin 1 Bias (likely red) to pin 3 Audio (likely white) to pin 5 Wire jumper from pin 4 to pin 2 For details on wiring for specific lav mic models, please visit https://www.lectrosonics.com/Support/Microphone-Wiring/uhf-transmitter-5-pin-input-jack-wiring.html
  12. karlw

    NAB 2018 Products update

    I agree that using the same mic is the only way to evaluate any differences in sound quality between systems. Similarly, wireless range tests are only valid if the two systems are on the same frequency. This means that they have to walk each separately, which is somewhat inconvenient. As far as I know, there have never been any RF or audio differences between 100, 300 and 500 series of each generation - only features, with the higher series numbers having more options, etc.
  13. karlw

    Wireless Frequencies France

    This document from APWPT (Association of Professional Wireless Production Technologies) provides a nice listing for wireless frequencies and allowed RF power levels in several countries, including France: https://www.apwpt.org/downloads/handoutfrequencies2018.pdf
  14. Brent, there is an effort to make these frequencies available in Canada but we don't yet know the outcome. Our Toronto office has been working with RABC on this issue. Keep your fingers crossed! If you are looking for details on the status, progress, etc. check with Colin Bernard - he is the point person on this.
  15. Hi Derek, Here's what the FCC says: From the FCC regulation Part 74.803 c) In the 941.500-952.000 MHz, 952.850-956.250 MHz, 956.45-959.85 MHz, … bands low power auxiliary station usage is secondary to other uses (e.g. Aural Broadcast Auxiliary, Television Broadcast Auxiliary, Cable Relay Service, Fixed Point to Point Microwave) and must not cause harmful interference. Applicants are responsible for selecting the frequency assignments that are least likely to result in mutual interference with other licensees in the same area. Applicants must consult local frequency coordination committees, where they exist, for information on frequencies available in the area. In selecting frequencies, consideration should be given to the relative location of receive points, normal transmission paths, and the nature of the contemplated operation. *** Note that it says “Applicants” are responsible for selecting frequencies. And that they must consult committees “where they exist”. In short, scan and avoid anything you see that is already there, as you normally would anyway.