Jump to content

New from Zaxcom....


Jack Norflus

Recommended Posts

You would just "y" the cable 3 ways to each device from your 788 with the IFB200. The slight reduction in power output will only effect range about 10% and should not be an issue.

 

Glenn

Glenn

 

Thanks for your reply, but with the utmost respect, this is an obvious assumption that I also made - however, sadly like most assumptions, they are the mother of all f_ckups...!

 

My cable guy did the maths and the current/load draw from the first two devices takes the load capacity to very close to the maximum that the 788T is prepared to give over. A third load draw on the available current from the 788's TC output will put it over the edge and result in no TC to any of the devices.

 

Its a real bummer as it would've made life easy, but thats not gonna work!

 

Any other ideas?

 

I initially wanted to make a small TC distribution box not unlike the various power distribution boxes available commercially and the many personally designed versions. I wanted a 1 x TC in to  5 x TC outs using the industry standard 5-pin Lemo connectors. 

 

Using this design, one could still manually jam TC with several other devices using the usual 5-pin Lemo TC cables. I could send TC to my three existing devices and have 2 x spare outputs for manual TC jamming, when required.

 

I'd of thought that such a TC distribution box would be quite a successful item to manufacture but it'd need some kind of signal amp to boost and hold the current levels so all 5 x outputs could be used simultaneously - hence it'd also need a 12v power supply too... maybe its too hard, I dunno, but if one were available, I'd sure buy it!

 

Your thoughts?

 

 

Rgd's

 

 

 

Andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew: if you got a camera link, why would you split it 3 ways? The one "cameralink" box is your Zaxnet and camera hop transmitter, then the other leg of the Y could go to your Betso. Am I missing something? 

I'm pretty happy to not deal with Lemo5 plugs, especially in a bag where they get shoved around in an average day of work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I wanted a 1 x TC in to  5 x TC outs using the industry standard 5-pin Lemo connectors."

 

If you find that the only real solution to your specific TC distribution method is some sort of TC distribution box (active), then that's whart you've got to go for. You don't necessarily have to try and build it yourself (and i doubt that it would be marketable because I'm not sure anyone else would need it). There has to be commercially available solutions out there, ones that would actually work in the bag. 

 

I think a further exploration of HOW you want to distribute TC might be in order --- what about johnpaul's suggestion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A common headphone amp/distributor would work for timecode I would think. Think sound devices hx-3. Tons of other choices out there too.

The new Camera Link system may be able to replace your IFB100 entirely. So you'd just need a Y to the Betso and camera link, as John Paul suggested above. Of course you have to wait and see if the power output is enough for your usage and also we'll see if zaxcom gives it full IFB functionality or if they will limit it when compared directly to the IFB100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" A common headphone amp/distributor would work for timecode I would think. "

maybe, but some may not be able to handle the TC waveform properly for a downstream device to be able to read it.  something that regenerates the TC might be needed,  but first I'd try what Glenn suggested...;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew: if you got a camera link, why would you split it 3 ways? The one "cameralink" box is your Zaxnet and camera hop transmitter, then the other leg of the Y could go to your Betso. Am I missing something? 

I'm pretty happy to not deal with Lemo5 plugs, especially in a bag where they get shoved around in an average day of work. 

JP

 

Well, I send TC to my TRX900, my IFB100 and my Betso TC display - so thats three needs for TC. At the moment I send TC to the IFB100 & the TRX900 via a "Y" TC cable from the 788, and then use the TC out socket on the IFB100 to feed the Betso unit.

 

Its all quite stable and works well, but,  if I have a 2nd or even 3rd camera that wants TC directly from me as well, then I'm out of options with regards to a "hard" TC source. One of my devices will have to go without, in this case I'd probably sacrifice the Betso feed.

 

But I guess I could supply these extra camera/s with ERXTCD units too...

 

Maybe I'm missing something in your suggestion? Or perhaps I'm not using the full potential of the Zaxnet system, which wouldn't surprise me at all as I'm sure as hell not the sharpest knife in the drawer!

 

Consequently I'm happy to take advice on this!

 

Rgd's

 

 

AT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" A common headphone amp/distributor would work for timecode I would think. "

maybe, but some may not be able to handle the TC waveform properly for a downstream device to be able to read it.  something that regenerates the TC might be needed,  but first I'd try what Glenn suggested...;

Senator

 

Well, I could try to make the 3-way cable as Glenn suggests, but as I stated, my cable guy who is SD trained and quite capable, has done the maths with regards to load capacities from the 788's TC out socket and he believes that it won't work - the 788 won't like it at all and the probable result will be no TC to any of the devices... the other result will be time and money spent on making a useless cable...

 

The TC out socket on the IFB100 really is a great option and I'm sad to see it gone on the new model... I guess they have their reasons.

 

 

Rgd's

 

 

AT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A common headphone amp/distributor would work for timecode I would think. Think sound devices hx-3. Tons of other choices out there too.

The new Camera Link system may be able to replace your IFB100 entirely. So you'd just need a Y to the Betso and camera link, as John Paul suggested above. Of course you have to wait and see if the power output is enough for your usage and also we'll see if zaxcom gives it full IFB functionality or if they will limit it when compared directly to the IFB100.

Derek

 

Yes, I guess that could work, but its not a cheap option with regards to price or real estate in the bag!

 

I use 2 x 2.4Ghz return audio/IFB systems as I often need different audio to the IFB100 than to the return audio option from the camera link.

 

On the occasions where I have needy producers, I may have to use a 3rd IFB100 network to send them what they want to hear, they may only want certain channels and not others, but they invariably also usually want TC with what they're hearing too...

 

Nothing's easy is it!  ;D

 

 

Rgd's

 

 

AT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I wanted a 1 x TC in to  5 x TC outs using the industry standard 5-pin Lemo connectors."

 

If you find that the only real solution to your specific TC distribution method is some sort of TC distribution box (active), then that's whart you've got to go for. You don't necessarily have to try and build it yourself (and i doubt that it would be marketable because I'm not sure anyone else would need it). There has to be commercially available solutions out there, ones that would actually work in the bag. 

 

I think a further exploration of HOW you want to distribute TC might be in order --- what about johnpaul's suggestion?

Jeff

 

I think that perhaps I should invest in a few more ERXTCD's and try to fully understand all of the options with the Zaxcom network.

 

Think old dog/new tricks etc...!

 

I'm a slow learner!

 

Also, please don't read into my post that I'm dissapointed in the Zaxcom products - far from it! I love what these guys are doing, so much so that when budgets allow, I'll be upgrading 8 of my Lectrosonics radio mics to the Zaxcom products. These guys just dance so close to the line of what is possible, and they certainly think outside of the box, its a fun ride to be a part of!

 

Rgd's

 

 

AT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not too familiar with Zaxnet, so maybe I am missing something.

If you use the IFB100 to broadcast TC via Zaxnet, doesn't your trx900 receive TC via Zaxnet? and wouldn't adding a ERX receiver for your Betso box be cheaper (and more useful!) than buying a custom powered TC splitter box?

Yes and yes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not too familiar with Zaxnet, so maybe I am missing something.

If you use the IFB100 to broadcast TC via Zaxnet, doesn't your trx900 receive TC via Zaxnet? and wouldn't adding a ERX receiver for your Betso box be cheaper (and more useful!) than buying a custom powered TC splitter box?

I understand that theory, but I'm running two different frequencies at the same time. One for dedicated IFB for producers/directors and the other for solely return audio for me. So I need to hardwire send TC to each device as the TRX and the IFB100 are on different frequencies...

As I suggested earlier, it's all working well now as the IFB100 has a TC loop through option with TC in and TC out. But the new model IFB200 only appears to have a single TC in. With the older model one could theoretically connect several IFB100's together so that they all have the same TC, but you could also then have them all of different frequencies so as to send different audio mixes to different people. The boom operator really only wants to hear only his boom mic and not the other radio mics that may be in the mix etc, but the director/producer wants to hear the whole mix, but they all want the same TC as what is being recorded.

It's all good, I just won't be upgrading to the newer IFB model and I will have to try and buy some of the older IFB100's instead so I can do what I've described above.

Thanks for your input!

Rgds

AT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm more interested in the IFB200. Can the QRX100QIFB send it timecode with remote transmitter control commands embedded?

 

maybe something similar like current 900 does, the IFB200 boot up as RX first for receiving the TC from main IFB TC source then become IFB TX on a different ch after a certain menu selectable time.

 

but the remote control signal still needs deva/fusion's TC by hardwire feed into the IFB to achieve, it would be really awesome if they can work out a "wireless bridge" to control the 2nd IFB system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...