pvanstry Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I again ask the question, what is the sampling rate used on the rest of the products. Is the TRX operating at 32khz ? Maybe the product should be described as a audio dialogue system? For me an audio system is not limited to the human voices but can also record sources like music, sound fx, wild sound etc... Which certainly contains frequencies over 16k that are very important. The common aggrement around audio professional is that 48khz is the standard. I certainly don't want to be limited to cables when I want to record other things then dialogue especially if I pay the kind of money these system cost. Especially if I am under the assumption that it is a superior system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Here is something else to think about: look at a real world frequency plot for any of your favorite lavaliere microphones. Published chart for one of the most commonly used microphones that you might be plugging into a transmitter, the Sanken COS-11, is 8db down at 15K on it's way to the stated frequency response of 50K to 20K. Now, take that mic and bury it under some clothing and it is unlikely that there is anything coming out of that mic above 15K. My point is you need to assess whether the gear that you are using, the microphone, the preamp, the transmitter, the recorder and so forth, is giving you the sound you want --- you can just gather all the specs you want, listen to the sales pitches and hyperbole, but in the words of Ray Charles: "I don't care if you've got ninety tracks... what does it sound like, baby" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 pvanstry says: "I certainly don't want to be limited to cables when I want to record other things then dialogue especially if I pay the kind of money these system cost. Especially if I am under the assumption that it is a superior system." Well, it looks like you will have to limit yourself to using a cabled system if you can't find a wireless system that suits your criteria or standard. Forgetting about the "spec war", I think your "assumptions" about what is "superior" and what isn't, needs to be informed by a real world listening test, recording the program material you want while using one of these systems that you have declared are "dialog only" systems. Out of curiosity, what wireless gear are you using now to record these non-dialog sources (music, sound effects, etc.?) and if that is working well for you (not limiting you to cables) why are you even interested in the Zaxcom Digital wireless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I again ask the question, what is the sampling rate used on the rest of the products. Is the TRX operating at 32khz ? Maybe the product should be described as a audio dialogue system? For me an audio system is not limited to the human voices but can also record sources like music, sound fx, wild sound etc... Which certainly contains frequencies over 16k that are very important. The common aggrement around audio professional is that 48khz is the standard. I certainly don't want to be limited to cables when I want to record other things then dialogue especially if I pay the kind of money these system cost. Especially if I am under the assumption that it is a superior system. You are trying to create a non issue here tbh and its getting a bit boring. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvanstry Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Jeff I agree BUT: What about when getting a music feed? What about a wireless boom where most microphone will far exceed 16k ( more like 40k )? For me, it's when statement are made and they are incorrect but left without being corrected and even encouraged. How many time have I heard that it was as good as a cable, and not just by members of the forum... It is clearly not. It is fine to say that in some aspect it is as good, or to say that it is more convenient but to say that it is as good, trust me a MKH8040 in front of anything with a cable, captures sound in frequencies far exceeding 16khz!!! It does the job on dialogue, but not as a generic audio device should do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsnd Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Jeff I agree BUT: What about when getting a music feed? What about a wireless boom where most microphone will far exceed 16k ( more like 40k )? For me, it's when statement are made and they are incorrect but left without being corrected and even encouraged. How many time have I heard that it was as good as a cable, and not just by members of the forum... It is clearly not. It is fine to say that in some aspect it is as good, or to say that it is more convenient but to say that it is as good, trust me a MKH8040 in front of anything with a cable, captures sound in frequencies far exceeding 16khz!!! It does the job on dialogue, but not as a generic audio device should do. If you are getting a music feed, why are you using a wireless system? I answered the question pretty thoroughly about wired booms vs wireless booms I even referenced and linked to an article you clearly did not read or understand. The statement is not incorrect. It's variable. For the distances commonly required for a cable run, it could go either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 One, if you believe all advertising you're a fool (and I've got the impression you're not) Always form your own opinions based on anything but advertisements. Two, they say "it rivals" a cable. Technically, it does. Where a cable shines (full range audio), Zaxcom is a bit weaker), but where the cable is a bit weaker (long runs) the wireless shines. So on average they are equal. Three, even with music and even with a cabled mic there isn't that much important audio information at or above 16k. Many people on this forum alone can't even hear 16k anymore, but they are still happy (I guess). And if there is important info then you do have to use a cable. Or another wireless system, with a new set of different problems Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvanstry Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Jeff I am not comparing Zaxcom and Lectrosonics here. And I am not recording non dialog audio with a wireless when I can avoid it. What's really boring here is that no one will acknowledge that thing are not as they seem. It's a big problem for me and it is something I really don't like. When I am being lead to believe one thing and it is not correct, then I can't simply stand by and not say anything. I have a lot of people asking me for advice that I feel would not have picked up on the nuance and might make a different decision after this. Now I am done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsnd Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 You have not acknowledged any of the information that has been given to you. The wireless system does and performs as advertised. If all these people are asking you for advice, do not advise them on equipment and tech specs you are not knowledgeable of. That is unprofessional. Everything has been explained to you, and you have chosen to ignore those explanations and continued your rant. It's good you are done, because after all of this, I don't think anybody is going to take the time to discuss the issue with you any further. I know I certainly won't. Good luck to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 what is not as it seems? the AES outs are 32KHz for the reasons Glenn stated earlier in this topic. you can use the analogue outs where the ADC is running at 48KHz. as to the sampling rate of the transmitter, i dont imagine that Glenn would comment on that either way. though the spec on the website does have the transmitter ADC running at 48KHz. but i am sorry i asked the question in the first place. and it was never an issue until someone tried using it into a board without a sample rate converter, and then the issue was getting the two things communicating. and i will still carry on using my QRX's via the digital ins on my 788. edit. and also sorry for posting that after Pascal said he was done, and Chris repeatedly made his point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvanstry Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Simple question: Website says that the DAC IS 48khz. But if it is taking a 32khz signal, in reality is it 32khz not 48khz. Of course a MFG can say that it's DAC is 48khz but you don't find it strange or misleading if the actual signal is coming and this limited to a 32khz? Go ahead and say all you want about me and what I am saying but you are wrong in saying that I am refusing to hear the explanation given. I have listened and still stand by what I said. Nothing said hear denies what I have said. People are simply saying that they can live with the limitation. Cool and great for them. And by the way, I really know what I am talking about and will take any discussion to prove it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Simple question: Website says that the DAC IS 48khz. But if it is taking a 32khz signal, in reality is it 32khz not 48khz. Of course a MFG can say that it's DAC is 48khz but you don't find it strange or misleading if the actual signal is coming and this limited to a 32khz? Go ahead and say all you want about me and what I am saying but you are wrong in saying that I am refusing to hear the explanation given. I have listened and still stand by what I said. Nothing said hear denies what I have said. People are simply saying that they can live with the limitation. Cool and great for them. And by the way, I really know what I am talking about and will take any discussion to prove it... We thought you were done, move along already. Most of us have been living with the 32khz "limitation" for a long time now. In dialogue recording which is most of our work its fine, when ever edit come back to me with a complaint about it then I may change my mind but that won't happen. You are trying to create a non issue, leave it. I have to say Pascal has a point. He is a prospective buyer and there are certain specs that are not clear. Perhaps not clear, but Pascal is trying his hardest to make it sound like a scam. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I am a zaxcom user. Love their products. But I have to say Pascal has a point. If there are misleading information or mistakes in the specs they have to be addressed. If specs show 48khz DAC and it is actually 32khz internal sampling Pascal has a reasonable concerns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I am a zaxcom user. Love their products. But I have to say Pascal has point. If there are misleading information or mistakes in the specs they have to be addressed. If specs show 48khz DAC and it is actually 32khz internal sampling Pascal has a reasonable concerns. I know Rado I love reading your "reviews" or experiences on Zax products and you are one of the more vocal people on the Zax forums with suggestions. I understand that the incorrect listing of 42khz has to be address. I am sure it was just a mistake I get that, but Pascal should address it to Zaxcom and stop trying to make out that the 32khz is some sort of weakness to what we do. Many of us have been using the system for a long time and we know where the strength and weakness of the system are. I have had situations where its worked better than a cable and vice versa. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Chris, I never said this is an issue for me. I can care less between 32khz and 48khz. I am just trying to be objective and fair about what Pascal is saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justanross Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Congrats to Zaxcom and Howy! New website and everything else is looking great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Chris, I never said this is an issue for me. I can care less between 32khz and 48khz. I am just trying to be objective and fair about what Pascal is saying. Just to clarify I know you aren't Rado its directed at Pascal, sorry for the confusion. I have edited it to make it clearer. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 So after all is said and done Pascal can you give me an opinion on the audio quality of Zaxcom wireless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 You are trying to create a non issue here tbh and its getting a bit boring. This recent discussion is anything but boring. I don't concur with your statement that this is an non issue either and am confused at your commitment to shut it down and telling someone to move along. It's nice to see a good discussion about these particular specifics. Thanks to everyone contributing their precise expertise and experience regarding this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Well, I'm guilty of posting after Pascal said he was DONE. "What's really boring here is that no one will acknowledge that thing are not as they seem." The only thing that can remotely be considered "not as they seem" is the stated specification for the Zaxcom wireless. "It's a big problem for me and it is something I really don't like." It appears it is a big problem for YOU but evidently it is NOT a big problem for anybody else. Does this mean you should not bring this "issue" up? No, of course not. You are free to discuss this and I'm pleased at your candor as you admit that you are so easily "lead" to what you believe are false conclusions. "I have a lot of people asking me for advice that I feel would not have picked up on the nuance and might make a different decision after this." I could say the same for you going on and on about the specs and how you have been mis-lead by all this deceptive advertising and the opinions expressed by people you don't agree with --- someone may actually think that this thing that is a "big problem" for you should be a primary concern for them when choosing what gear to use. If this "different decision" you are referring to is whether to use a cable or a wireless, I'm with you on this one --- in almost every case, and this is my OPINION, the cable is the better choice. If that is your only point, and it must be because you said you were not comparing wireless systems, that's fine, end of discussion. I do have this nagging feeling that you do have some other agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Tuzo Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Jeff I am not comparing Zaxcom and Lectrosonics here. And I am not recording non dialog audio with a wireless when I can avoid it. What's really boring here is that no one will acknowledge that thing are not as they seem. Last time I called Zaxcom on Mis-marketing here, JW literally accused me of slander. Condescending "air quotes" and all. Honestly, it drove me to contribute far less frequently to this site. I felt that my opinion was unfairly singled out, and although my opinions were factually based, it didn't fit in with the (ahem) popular opinion. It disappoints me... But I guess you just have to know your audience. Looks like a cool product, and kudos to all involved, but I've always been able to get 2-3 city blocks (at least) out of my wireless, so I'm good for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 This recent discussion is anything but boring. I don't concur with your statement that this is an non issue either. Actually it's nice to see a good discussion about these particular specifics. Thanks to everyone contributing their precise expertise and experience regarding this. Please tell me where the 32khz AES has effected your work? Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvanstry Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Glenn, as per our phone conversation, which I appreciate by the way I will say this, when it is not an option to be wired, indeed the wireless system you make will have the best audio quality for Dialogue recording. That being said, There are reasons why I choose to use other systems, and this thread is not the place to discuss this. Do me a favor, clarify the info on the documentation, and then all will be fine. Pascal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Rubilar Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I can only see mics on wireless for non dialog source in a live music event. Sound reinforcement speakers normaly dont go higher than 16khz. or 17khz. actually , 16khz is the begining of ultra sound, at this point most people cant determind the pitch of an acustic vibration(the brain has no tune to asign to that frecuency,), still they can sense the pressence of the vibration as a pressure in the ear drum, but this is only at very high levels, wich is unconfortable, For most people, audio over 16khz is irrelevant, and consummer speakers cant reproduce that frecuencies, nor even theathre equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Woodcock Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Last time I called Zaxcom on Mis-marketing here, JW literally accused me of slander. You of course mean libel right ;-) Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
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.