Jump to content

Is mic transmitter power important to you? Might want to read...


karlw

Recommended Posts

If you routinely use mic transmitter power greater than 50 mW (and I know many of you do) then you might want to read then consider filing a comment on Shure's filing here: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=60001013997 look on p. 31

 

Shure proposes applying a 50 mW limit on all Part 74, Subpart H transmitters (that means *your* transmitters) in the VHF and UHF bands.

 

Lectrosonics and Sennheiser argue the opposite, not only that we wish to maintain the current 250 mW limit for UHF transmitters, but also to raise the limit for VHF transmitters to 250 mW as well.

 

The deadline for comment is tomorrow, Feb. 25.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see there are about 20 comments as of right now from users on the filing. Our thanks to those that took the effort. If you would like to have more than 50 mW for the times you need it, this is your chance to influence policy. With 20 comments, just by yourself, you would have a 5% influence.

Best Regards,
Larry Fisher
Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick here's a summary from our VP of engineering:

 

They are proposing to:

 

-- Retain the 50 milliwatt power limit (for VHF), but revise Part 74 Rules to allow output power to be measured on either a conducted or radiated (EIRP) basis.

-- Apply the conducted limit to devices with detachable antennas, while the radiated limit would apply to devices with embedded or permanently affixed antennas.

-- Apply this rule revision to all VHF frequencies regulated under Part 74 (54-72 MHz, 82-88 MHz and 174-216 MHz) and from 470 MHz to the upper edge of the UHF band.

-- Apply this rule uniformly to licensed and unlicensed wireless microphones.

 

Note the application is "from 470 MHz to the upper edge of the UHF band.". They in fact proposing to bring the power limit *down* to 50 mW (conducted or EIRP) for *all* Part 74 Subpart H transmitters!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see how the language can imply that, I commented against doing that just in case.

 

But I feel like you could interpret that the 50mw limit is only to be applied to VHF, hence the parenthesis, and that the rules that should apply to UHF are written after, mainly output power being measured differently.

 

It definitely requires more elaboration, but it doesn't make sense for Shure to want to limit UHF output, they make UHF wireless equipment!

 

I think we need to get Shure on the line to clarify.

 

But either way I commented against any limitation to output power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I looked through the filing and it only seems to mention maintaining an existing 50mw limit on certain VHF devices. Am I wrong?

Hi Nick,

Go to pages 30 and 31.  

 

[snip]

"Shure recommends the following revisions to Part 74 to improve the viability of wireless

microphones in the VHF bands, and urges the Commission to harmonize power limits
throughout all UHF and VHF television broadcast frequencies regulated under Part 74.
 
- Retain the 50 milliwatt power limit, but revise Part 74 Rules to allow output
power to be measured on either a conducted or radiated (EIRP) basis.
- Apply the conducted limit to devices with detachable antennas, while the radiated
limit would apply to devices with embedded or permanently affixed antennas.
- Apply this rule revision to all VHF frequencies regulated under Part 74 (54-72
MHz, 82-88 MHz and 174-216 MHz) and from 470 MHz to the upper edge of the
UHF band.
- Apply this rule uniformly to licensed and unlicensed wireless microphones.
These proposed rule changes, although subtle, will help wireless microphones..."
[snip]
 
Subtle indeed. Their word not mine.
 
Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No

 

I can see how the language can imply that, I commented against doing that just in case.

[snip]

 

As John B. pointed out with his bolding, they have said it twice and used different words. They make low powered gear, even less than 50 mW as standard.

Best Regards,
Larry Fisher
Lectrosonics


And Nick, thanks for commenting by the way.

Best,

LEF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying. 

 

Larry, would you be able to speculate as to why Shure would want such limitations? 

An attempt to level the playing field against the competition?

 

(I'm not Larry, but I play him in my dreams.) 

 

A large part of Shure's market is music and stage performance.  In that application, such as on Broadway, cramming a large number of wireless into a small footprint is critical.  Toward that end, staying at 50mW and below can help greatly, especially in close quarters to other wireless systems.

 

For wireless systems, we're not Shure's primary, or even secondary, market.

 

(Real Larry, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying. 

 

Larry, would you be able to speculate as to why Shure would want such limitations? 

An attempt to level the playing field against the competition?

Fifty mW is probably the sweet spot for their products, is a fairly worldwide power level and is easy to mass produce. We and Sennheiser have different viewpoints because we have units with more output power. Instead of speculating about playing fields with friendly competitors, let me just say we are small compared to Shure so I feel sure they don't need to level anything. That doesn't mean I don't think they are wrong about 50 mW always being sufficient.

Best,

Larry F

Lectro

(I'm not Larry, but I play him in my dreams.) 

 

A large part of Shure's market is music and stage performance.  In that application, such as on Broadway, cramming a large number of wireless into a small footprint is critical.  Toward that end, staying at 50mW and below can help greatly, especially in close quarters to other wireless systems.

 

For wireless systems, we're not Shure's primary, or even secondary, market.

 

(Real Larry, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

Too funny.

LEF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, nothing like getting a heads up on this!

Larry, any chance that we might be able to get an extension on the comment period!

"I don't care what they're talking about, all I want is a nice fat recording".

Harry Caul "The Conversation"

I think late comments are also read.

LEF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the date on the letter from Shure is February 4th. Really a shame that we somehow didn't get more of a heads up on this, I'm sure there are many more individuals and companies that would comment on this if they were aware of what the impact is.

 

Not even a mention on the Facebook FCC Part 74 Users group! (which I don't think has many followers anyway).

 

--Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 I had 3 Sennheiser 2012 channels years ago and 50mW does not necessarily offer much "distance"

 

2 There was a rumour a few years ago that Australian "FCC" guidelines were to be

   No radio transmitters on children or pregnant women

 

3 Hold on what it the transmit power of a cell phone, up to 6 watts?????

 

mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just received this email today:

I am a lawyer for Shure Incorporated representing the company on FCC matters here in Washington. I just wanted to reach out and let you know that Shure has never supported a reduction in UHF power levels below 250 mW, and we just filed an ex parte letter with the FCC clarifying our position. A copy of the letter is attached.

If you have any questions or concerns, I would be happy to speak with you. My contact information follows below.

Best regards,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, Shure has stepped up to clarify their position with an Ex Parte filing which includes the following:

 

"Pursuant to Section 1.1206b of the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR § 1.1206b, Shure
Incorporated (“Shure”) submits this ex parte communication to clarify comments filed on
February 4, 2015, in the above-referenced proceedings (“Shure Comments”).1 Specifically, this
ex parte clarifies Shure’s position on maximum output power levels for Part 74 wireless
microphones operating on a secondary basis in UHF broadcast television frequencies from 470
MHz through 698 MHz.

Section VIII(A)(1) of the Shure Comments contains ambiguous language that may create
confusion about the level of maximum output power Shure supports for UHF wireless
microphones currently operating under Part 74 rules. Shure does not support rule amendments
that would reduce the existing 250 mW maximum output power limit for UHF wireless
microphones. Wireless microphones have successfully operated with up to 250 mW of output
power in UHF broadcast television frequencies pursuant to Part 74 rules for many years. There
is no technical or policy justification for a reduction in the permissible output power of such
microphones."

 

Even though Shure did not intend to advocate for a reduction in max RF power for UHF mic transmitters, there were statements in two places in their original filing that could be (and were) misinterpreted to mean just this. We among others were concerned that if the FCC interpreted these statements the wrong way (and Murphy's Law tells us this was very possible, even likely!) we could have had some real trouble when the new rules come out. Kudos to Shure for jumping on this and issuing a clear statement of their position on the matter.

 

And, thank you to those that took the time to comment - it made a difference!

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...