glenn Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 "I have an idea. Since the new lectrosonics are digital and there is no eng size reciever, how about zaxcom and lectrosonics get together and make the Lectro TX work with the Zaxcom qrx receiver. In theory it should be very easy." It is an Honor for me to read this thread. To think that our QRX200 receiver is such a desirable thing that you would want it to work with other companies transmitters. The fact is that it would not be easy at all. Making an FM wireless work with a different compander other than the one that is standard with the product is not a big deal in comparison. To receive a different digital modulation that would be totally unique in many ways would be a daunting task and not one we would be able to do even if were desirable for both companies. The QRX200 is the result of 12 years of innovation and producing digital wireless. Its ability to receive 2 separate mono or stereo transmitters at once and combine its output into a single AES stream or 4 discrete audio channels on 2 AES streams is in itself almost magic. Getting a true dual receiver diversity digital receiver into an ENG package was also no small task. ;-) The Zaxcom system is feature rich and designed for production sound. Much of the processing of the QRX200 is dedicated to the mission critical elimination of dropouts utilizing true diversity reception. The Lectro system seems to me to be designed for encrypted corporate work. With our system optimized for production sound there would most likely not be enough DSP processing left to decode the lectro encrypted signal designed for encrypted transmission and industrial applications. Now lets talk about transmitter recording, RF remote control, stereo modulation, power roll, Neverclip and the QRX200s Flux capacitor. (You know it makes tunable wide band wireless receivers and time travel possible). ;-) Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Maybe Larry can shed some more light on the eng size digital receiver... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 "I have an idea. Since the new lectrosonics are digital and there is no eng size reciever, how about zaxcom and lectrosonics get together and make the Lectro TX work with the Zaxcom qrx receiver. In theory it should be very easy." It is an Honor for me to read this thread. To think that our QRX200 receiver is such a desirable thing that you would want it to work with other companies transmitters. The fact is that it would not be easy at all. Making an FM wireless work with a different compander other than the one that is standard with the product is not a big deal in comparison. To receive a different digital modulation that would be totally unique in many ways would be a daunting task and not one we would be able to do even if were desirable for both companies. The QRX200 is the result of 12 years of producing digital wireless. Its ability to receive 2 separate mono or stereo transmitters at once and combine its output into a single AES stream or 4 discrete audio channels on 2 AES streams is in itself almost magic. Getting a true dual receiver diversity digital receiver into an ENG package was also no small task. ;-) The Zaxcom system is feature rich and designed for production sound. Much of the processing of the QRX200 is dedicated to the mission critical elimination of dropouts utilizing true diversity reception. The Lectro system seems to me to be designed for encrypted corporate work. With our system optimized for production sound there would most likely not be enough DSP processing left to decode the lectro encrypted signal designed for encrypted transmission and industrial applications. Now lets talk about transmitter recording, RF remote control, stereo modulation, power roll, and Neverclip. ;-) Glenn well obviously I am not a wireless engineer. In my mind digital is zero and ones. I assumed that seamless interconnection between the lectro TX and Zaxcom RX is easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Wang Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 the vision I had about a CRAZY future type of wireless is: the lavalier mic head self does not have any cable connect to the transmitter, it will be using some CODED or PAIRED tech to talk to the transmitter pre-programmed with it, which is always no longer 1 to 2 meters from lav's mic head,power free,much more easier to hide anywhere without a cable,no more cable noise and no more under tight Tshirt print,transmits the audio to the transmitter directly by 2.4G or some other frequency for short distance but with high quality, then via UHF again by body pack transmitter to further distance. I wish I could see this before I get retired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelo Waldron Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 I have an idea. Since the new lectrosonics are digital and there is no eng size receiver....... They already made it a couple years ago. http://www.lectrosonics.com/US/Press-Releases/lectrosonics-debuts-srb-series-dual-channel-slot-mount-eng-receivers.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 They already made it a couple years ago. http://www.lectrosonics.com/US/Press-Releases/lectrosonics-debuts-srb-series-dual-channel-slot-mount-eng-receivers.html There is no portable battery operated DIGITAL receiver yet from Lectro. That's what they're talking about. The Lectro Hybrids are not digital transmitters. The new transmitter from Lectro IS a digital transmitter that mates with their rackmount digital receiver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 (edited) Rado: " If you are not making one , my idea is great. In theory it should be very easy what theory ? actually, not really I assumed that seamless interconnection between the lectro TX and Zaxcom RX is easier. bad idea If you are making a small digital receiver when is it going to be out? when it is ready, --and yes, they will How about what is in our best interest? this requires several college courses to cover, but let me just go back a notch: with Zaxcom RX's quite available for Zaxcom TX's, what is the problem, anyway? I know a lot of lectrosonics users are excited about the new digital wireless. But without an eng receiver it will be only good for cart mixers. Lectrosonics has its own way of running its business, and that includes its philosophies and master plans. Just as Zaxcom has seen special needs in production sound, and focused its philosophies and plans, Lectrosonics has its own visions and priorities in the future when " best case scenario" we will have 10 MHz to work with... not everyone is in agreement with your pessimistic visions, I don't see how practical the current lectro setup will be for most of us... of course not, and certainly Lectrosonics line will continue to evolve, along with technology in general ...If you look at the last 3 years Lectrosonics lost market share to Zaxcom.... not really; you are only considering a small specialized niche of the marketplace; Lectrosonics actually continues to grow, along with Zaxcom and others as the marketplace grows Because lectro does not innovate. sorry, but that is an unfair assessment, and quite untrue only time will tell if Lectro will have an eng size receiver in the future. well time will reveal the new products, but be assured, they are coming Maybe Larry can shed some more light on the eng size digital receiver... of course, but in line with those company goals and policies, he will do so only at the proper time, and in the manner of his chosing --he will not be bullied! " Glenn: " The Zaxcom system is feature rich and designed for production sound.... how true, and how concise! The Lectro system seems to me to be designed for encrypted corporate work. " that would seem to be correct, and is probably the result of Lectrosonics' research and long range strategy; you may remember the Lectro 700 series... and Jeff, Rado said: " Since the new lectrosonics are digital and there is no eng size receiver....... so technically, Angelo is correct what Rado meant was: Since the new lectrosonics are digital and there is no eng size receiver for them....... so, Rado: with Zaxcom RX's quite available for Zaxcom TX's, what is the problem, anyway? Edited August 29, 2014 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Senator you have to read all the way. as I said above: "Now do I need the bulky lectro digital tx? No. Would I be happy to show up on location with my own zaxcom digital receivers package and cover the existing TXs instead of making a heavy lectro 411s bag? YES." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Because lectro does not innovate. sorry, but that is an unfair assessment, and quite untrue Lets be honest... 411 heavy bricks. Stupid, stupid and annoying tone signal to change gain and frequency "that messes your hops" 9v? No recording onbord the TX. Ok they put lights in the SMQV I give them that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old school Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Hey! Let's get Sennheiser and Shure and Lectro and Zaxcom and Quantum 5X to all use the same exact frequencies and transmissions, and we'll live in peace and harmony, and producers will pay their crew members reasonable rates, and everybody will be happy! What dimension does all that happen in? According to the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, there must be a world out there in which all these things are true. Unfortunately... not this one. I was thinking along the same lines when I first read Rado's OP, but I wasn't this clever. Good one Marc. CrewC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Rado: " Would I be happy to show up on location with my own zaxcom digital receivers package and cover the existing TXs instead of making a heavy lectro 411s bag? YES." " or vice versa... but sorry, this is not a huge factor in the marketplace, and I guess neither Lectro nor Zax wants to make you happy..? Let's be honest: Lectro, and a couple others have added compatibility with some of their competitors but the reason is pretty simple: to lure customers away from those competitors by offering an easier transition path, not to make your life happier. " Lets be honest... 411 heavy bricks. Stupid, stupid and annoying tone signal to change gain and frequency "that messes your hops" 9v? No recording onbord the TX. " OK, lets be really honest: 411 is an old (but still reliable!) product still being built, still popular (even if not with you) and selling well but with a limited lifespan; newer products are already superseding it...(just not necessarily the products you wanted, think L series) and these will be successful. ...and when the 411 was new, it was quite innovative, with the tracking filters we now expect in every new model. ... and some of us don't really need the lights! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 i just know at some point of time in the near future one is going to see a new Rx from lectro - successor to the 411. dont ask me why... i can't tell. because... if... then... well... etc... and zaxcom too is coming out with a new... dont ask me why... i can't tell. because... if... then... well... etc... and Audio Ltd too is coming out with a new... dont ask me why... i can't tell. because... if... then... well... etc... as of now, wisycom is all set to release a new... dont ask me why... i can't tell. because... if... then... well... etc... i don't know much about what's happening at sennheiser. sorry... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 . ...and when the 411 was new, it was quite innovative, with the tracking filters we now expect in every new model. Sums up what I was talking about. It takes them more then 12 years to put the filter in another model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 (edited) Rado: " It takes them more then 12 years to put the filter in another model. " and Glenn: " The QRX200 is the result of 12 years of producing digital wireless " and vin: " i don't know much about what's happening at sennheiser. sorry... " Sennheiser, as well is coming out with a new... don't ask me why... i can't tell. because... if... then... well... etc... and Rado: " show up on location with my own zaxcom digital receivers package and cover the existing (other brand) TXs " unreasonable expectations. Edited August 29, 2014 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryF Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 I think going to the micro 4 pin lemo like on the original zaxcom digital wireless for the new standard would be the way to go. They were inexpensive and extremely easy to solder..... Page 47 of The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage" states that "Lemo" and "inexpensive" are never to be used in the same paragraph. Best, Larry F Lectro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Rado: " It takes them more then 12 years to put the filter in another model. " and Glenn: " The QRX200 is the result of 12 years of producing digital wireless " . From gold line to qrx 200 with 2 more in between. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ao Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Ooh, Ooh. I have a good one: There's a 26 pin Lemo as well - that's the perfect number for doing 8 channels of AES/EBU instead of the bulky 25 pin D-SUB. A great way to hook up a set of digital wireless receivers to the recorder... sennheiser's broadcast digital receiver rack has dante Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Mega Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Come on Rado, you're being childish. Why are you trying to slag off Lectro. Its unprofessional. We know you've converted to Zaxcom but no one cares. We know you used to use Lectro and Sound Devices before you converted, so what!! My 38 Lectro radio mics (including 411), 5 x IFB, multiple R1a, Venue, UMCWB, antennas, etc etc all from Lectro work flawlessly and reliably year after year, without quirks and issues and amazing range. I applaud Zaxcom for their approach to manufacturing but I prefer Lectro gear. Thats just me and I'm 100% sure no one cares what I do. No big deal. The Senator's replies in post # 34 are correct. I know you are passionate about this industry and your job and clearly you love equipment but you should be careful what you say about manufacturers because, maybe just one day, in this totally crazy world, you might want to go back to Lectro and Sound Devices when they come out with some great new piece of kit you like and when you want support from them, they will remember your comments from the past. They will still support you because they are professionals and do not discriminate. Best wishes to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justanross Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Come on Rado, you're being childish. Why are you trying to slag off Lectro. Its unprofessional. We know you've converted to Zaxcom but no one cares. We know you used to use Lectro and Sound Devices before you converted, so what!! My 38 Lectro radio mics (including 411), 5 x IFB, multiple R1a, Venue, UMCWB, antennas, etc etc all from Lectro work flawlessly and reliably year after year, without quirks and issues and amazing range. I applaud Zaxcom for their approach to manufacturing but I prefer Lectro gear. Thats just me and I'm 100% sure no one cares what I do. No big deal. The Senator's replies in post # 34 are correct. I know you are passionate about this industry and your job and clearly you love equipment but you should be careful what you say about manufacturers because, maybe just one day, in this totally crazy world, you might want to go back to Lectro and Sound Devices when they come out with some great new piece of kit you like and when you want support from them, they will remember your comments from the past. They will still support you because they are professionals and do not discriminate. Best wishes to you. #nailedit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Come on Rado, you're being childish. Why are you trying to slag off Lectro. Its unprofessional. We know you've converted to Zaxcom but no one cares. We know you used to use Lectro and Sound Devices before you converted, so what!! My 38 Lectro radio mics (including 411), 5 x IFB, multiple R1a, Venue, UMCWB, antennas, etc etc all from Lectro work flawlessly and reliably year after year, without quirks and issues and amazing range. I applaud Zaxcom for their approach to manufacturing but I prefer Lectro gear. Thats just me and I'm 100% sure no one cares what I do. No big deal. The Senator's replies in post # 34 are correct. I know you are passionate about this industry and your job and clearly you love equipment but you should be careful what you say about manufacturers because, maybe just one day, in this totally crazy world, you might want to go back to Lectro and Sound Devices when they come out with some great new piece of kit you like and when you want support from them, they will remember your comments from the past. They will still support you because they are professionals and do not discriminate. Best wishes to you. Peter , I don't think anything I said is disrespectful. And I am not trying to slam lectro. On the contrary. I am very excited to use lectro with Zaxcom receivers " for the reasons I mentioned above". Or if Lectro makes an ENG size receivers I can see myself "CONVERTING TO LECTROSONICS" mainly so I can use 5V DPA microphones and not be limited to lowDC 4063. "zaxcom only works with 3V lowDC DPA which pisses me off". Believe me If Lectro and sound devices releases a product that better fits my workflow I will happily jump ship. I don't think Sound Devices and Lectro really feel bad about me expressing my opinions "which are mainly based on facts" and stating the obvious. I did get drunk with the sound devices crew at NAB2014 and had a lot of fun. I love those guys... We are in a community where brainstorming and civilized discussion should be encouraged. Too bad the senator always hijacks the topic .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I know you are passionate about this industry and your job and clearly you love equipment but you should be careful what you say about manufacturers I spent my childhood under communism...It is all behind me know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulluysavage Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Remember, capitalism creates through consumer choice the most efficient system. See video format wars. Our truly free market is upheld by a fierce commitment to freedom of speech. /sarcasm [ducking] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Sorry to say this, Radio, but to me it did appear that you were taking swipes at Lectro. The fact that Lectrosonics may employ more time bringing their products to market, isn't necessarily a negative. As just one form of evidence, consider the fact that their products maintain resale value well beyond that of some competing units. Simply said, Lectrosonics and Zaxcom have vastly different corporate and design philosophies, and that doesn't make either of them wrong. One of the things these different philosophies offer to us end users, is choice. That's a good thing that should not be undervalued. I know you are extremely proud of your current setup and certainly have every right to be. You've put a lot of thought into what will serve your needs and then added a measure of personal innovation to that. The way you've adapted and incorporated your choices into a cohesive system has helped to inspire others' designs -- mine included. The thing that you don't seem to be accepting here is that your approach to our industry, is just one among many. Several here who have many more years of slinging gear under their belts have weighed in to that effect. Peter, Marc, and yes, even Mike, have hit the nail on the head in this regard -- others, too. I own large piles of gear from each of the manufacturers mentioned in this thread, and have great respect for the accomplishments of every one of them. I like that I have choices. I like that those choices offer different solutions to the constantly evolving landscape encompassed by the work we do. Vive la différence! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Page 47 of The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage" states that "Lemo" and "inexpensive" are never to be used in the same paragraph. Best, Larry F Lectro Nice chuckle! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted August 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Sorry to say this, Radio, but to me it did appear that you were taking swipes at Lectro. Vive la différence! It is not my intention to hurt anybodies feelings. It was not supposed to become such a serious topic.. It was an interesting brainstorming in to the future possibility of digital wireless that escalated "with the help of the senator". I respect Lectrosonics and was genuinely excited this april when I heard that Lectrosonics are coming out with a digital line. Innovation "Vive la différence!" is what I want. More digital choices. P.S. I have to once again stop responding to the Senator. 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.