Ramsay Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 I've been watching all the interesting products which Zaxcom have come up with and I'm wondering if companies like Lectrosonics and Sound Devices can legally build devices which have similar cool features like radios which record or Zaxnet type communication between devices. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gilbert Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes they can. If they want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old school Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 I have no idea about legal, but I'm sure they have the technical expertise to build almost anything in their respective fields. rew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 All three companies and lots of others you don't mention, have patents, so there are some things that would require licenses... however these companies, and other "usual suspects" (plus newcomers and others) all have their own ideas and tend to go their own way, rather than copy each other... This is really no different that in so many other fields and industries. As I recall, there is, or was a company in China knocking off SD mixers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Visser Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 (NOT A LAWYER) I would think that a modern Zaxcom transmitter is a combination of a radio and a recording device. Neither function is a patent specifically awarded exclusively to Zaxcom. Some of the methods of control probably are patented, such as Zaxnet, which is a network mostly comprised of a 2.4GHZ wireless network that transmits control data embedded in a SMPTE timecode signal. Some of the feedback of the system is via the UHF signal though, so not all of the features are specific to Zaxnet. I'm not aware of any other recording transmitters, but Zaxcom is not the first to offer remote control, that award goes to, I believe, Sony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 " network that transmits control data embedded in a SMPTE timecode signal. " err... NOPE... got that backwards... " that award goes to, I believe, Sony. " Shure is also doing remote control on their premium systems (Axient)... Our little universe (a niche, actually) is pretty small... there are a lot of folks out there making and selling lots of wireless microphones. very few of their customers are interested in transmitters recording, especially since there are also a lot of various small recorders being widely sold for folks who want a small recorder. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundslikejustin Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 " network that transmits control data embedded in a SMPTE timecode signal. " err... NOPE... got that backwards... Err... NOPE... Tom's correct, actually. The remote gain and freq. etc commands of Zaxnet are in a "hi-jacked" (quote Glenn Sanders) version of standard UBits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 " "hi-jacked...version". " Then it is no longer a "SMPTE TC signal". Thus, TC information is contained in a Zaxnet signal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmahaAudio Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 " "hi-jacked...version". " Then it is no longer a "SMPTE TC signal". Pedant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 do I detect a note of hostility ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundwil Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 I'm sure I've read here in the last year or so that the combination of a 'recording transmitter' was patented by Zaxcom. I could be completely wrong though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay Posted August 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 So let's see: Lectrosonics SMVR recording transmitters and Sound Devices 1212 12 input 12 channel recorder wish list?! Or just buy Zaxcom.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zack Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Who made the first mixer that can also record?...... and look how many choices there are now. Patent or not, if SD or Lectro wanted to compete with Zax's ideas, then they better start soon IMO. I hope the show in Amsterdam this September shows something promising from SD, if not..... well, I guess my decision is an easy one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Visser Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Peanut butter and jelly, chili and rice, frank and beans, lubricated condom... some ideas are obvious inventions, others are valid protected intellectual property, guess this one goes to the patent attorneys and corporate IP law to hash out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Feeley Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Some Zaxcom press releases mentioning patents: Zaxcom Receives U.S. Patent for Wireless Recording Technology June 15, 2010 http://www.zaxcom.co...recordingpatent Zaxcom Launches Two New 125mw Transmitters with PowerRoll (Pat. Pend.) August 11, 2011 http://www.zaxcom.com/pr-trx900la Zaxcom Introduces New Plug-on Digital Recording Wireless Transmitter Featuring NeverClip April 12, 2012 (patent pending) http://www.zaxcom.com/pr-trx742 (At least some of the) US Patents issued to Zaxcom: http://1.usa.gov/PvWe8L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I think Tom Visser is right. The "big concepts" may not be patentable -- a wireless transmitter that can also record -- but I think the specific implementation of how they do it is most likely patented, especially the control signals and use of WiFi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Kittappa Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 It would be a sad day if the boutique companies that we know and love get into patent trolling of the kind that is going on in the smartphone arena. SD, Zaxcom and Lectro all make great products and I pretty much use a mix and match of all them since some seem to work better in some situations than others and as long as their R and D people are continually working to bring us great toys then I'm sure all three companies will have a bright future within our specialised community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Wang Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 just buy them all,take advantage from every brands......i enjoy the mix brands too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyHall Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 " "hi-jacked...version". " Then it is no longer a "SMPTE TC signal". Thus, TC information is contained in a Zaxnet signal If the ubits are being twiddled, but the protocol itself is untouched, I'd say it's still SMPTE TC. But the fact that it's being sent over radio as a digital signal (rather than an analog one) might make both statements true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Why ask somebody to build something that already exist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundslikejustin Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Why ask somebody to build something that already exist? Because, like any competing manufacturer, they may have improvements or other ways of solving problems that are better/more flexible/easier etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDirckze Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I can't wait for Lectro to build recording transmitters with timecode capabilities across their wireless range a la Zaxcom... Don't get me wrong, I love my Zaxcom gear, but Lectro gear in my experience is better built to withstand the daily abuses of location sound. I really hope Lectro is listening! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I agree. However I am done waiting for SD and lectro to catch up. The only thing I wanted for sd to build is a mixpre 552 style. Because, like any competing manufacturer, they may have improvements or other ways of solving problems that are better/more flexible/easier etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Zaxcom has patented our recording wireless transmitters and has many patents pending for this feature as well as other features on different products we make. As a company we work very hard to invent, perfect and commercialize new technology. The patent process allows us to have exclusivity to the inventions that we develop for a period of time. The development of our products especially in a limited market is very costly and the patent process allows us to get a return on that investment and to continue to innovate new products. Glenn Sanders President Zaxcom Inc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 " "hi-jacked...version". " Then it is no longer a "SMPTE TC signal". Thus, TC information is contained in a Zaxnet signal " If the ubits are being twiddled, but the protocol itself is untouched, " yes, I thought of this last evening, and ate CROW for dinner...since if only the contents of the UB in a SMPTE standard TC signal are modified, in accordance with SMPTE spec's, that "it" would remain a SMPTE TC signal; in this case, the signal would be readable, jammable, etc., directly by any SMPTE TC device. IOW, if the signal is not directly acceptable to other SMPTE devices, cross platform, then it is no longer a SMPTE signal, it is either a propriatary signal, readable and usable on specific devices, or it is an unusable signal (maybe not up to spec's) " The development of our products especially in a limited market is very costly and the patent process allows us to get a return on that investment and to continue to innovate new products. " ...in a very limited market. excellent point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.