bmfsnd Posted September 18, 2015 Report Share Posted September 18, 2015 On bigger productions, I've been coupling three to four MCR42 receivers together with a PSC RF Multi SMA, routed to two PSC sharkfins. This setup has worked fine until last week, when my RF performance decreased all of a sudden. Scans are now much dirtier, and less open frequency choice, compared to using the standard ENG whips. It seems like something is introducing noise, but this worked fine for months. I've swapped SMA cabling, BNC cables, fins. No extra BNC right-angle adapters or splitters. I'm also giving the RFM its own NP powering to isolate from main BDS. Since I don't have another RF Multi lying around, that's the only thing I haven't swapped out. Does anybody else use this configuration? Any suggestions? Thanks,Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efksound Posted September 18, 2015 Report Share Posted September 18, 2015 (edited) Hi MattIs your PSC Multi SMA one of the first batch or is it a new one ?The first batch had an issue where the front end of the unit could overload when placed near a transmiiter and blow the RF amp There are some old threads talking about this issuehttp://jwsoundgroup.net/index.php?/topic/10483-psc-rf-multi-sma-part-2/&page=1 Edited September 18, 2015 by efksound Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Meyer Posted September 18, 2015 Report Share Posted September 18, 2015 Indeed if you have an early model, they were problematic. Those units were built in 2012 and had serial numbers staring with the digits 12.xx.xxx All units built after January 1st, 2013 do not have this issue. The serial numbers on these units will start with 13, 14 or 15. Our serial numbers work as follows: YYMMxxx YY= year, MM = Month, xxx = serial number made that month. For example: 1501001 2015, January, 1st unit made that month. If you have any question about the performance of your RF Multi SMA, please feel free to send it to me at PSC and I will test its performance for you. Best regards Ron Meyer, PSC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmfsnd Posted September 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Indeed if you have an early model, they were problematic. Those units were built in 2012 and had serial numbers staring with the digits 12.xx.xxx All units built after January 1st, 2013 do not have this issue. The serial numbers on these units will start with 13, 14 or 15. Our serial numbers work as follows: YYMMxxx YY= year, MM = Month, xxx = serial number made that month. For example: 1501001 2015, January, 1st unit made that month. If you have any question about the performance of your RF Multi SMA, please feel free to send it to me at PSC and I will test its performance for you. Best regards Ron Meyer, PSC Hi Ron, While most of the numbers on the unit are faded/worn out, it does seem to start with a 13. I still would like to test this out, as I've tried ruling out all other hardware. I even have similar result with an SRb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason porter Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Matt (and Ron, I guess) I have been having similar issues. 2 weeks ago, it was working well, now all of a sudden I'm getting crowded scans and my 411's are constantly saying "check freq" One thing I've noticed, with or without antennas connected, I get similar results (just the BNC to SMA cables connected) I've tried whips, sharkfins and dipoles with only slightly better range with the sharkfins. Another thing- Nomad on + RF Multi = bad scans Nomad on + just whips = much better scans. Would it help if my cables were not routed next to the receivers? The seem to be acting as antennas. I am perplexed...I just pulled it apart and put it in a box, and shelved it. Frustrated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Last year I compared the PSC RFmultiSMA to the MicplexerII using qrx200 wideband receivers. I found that a very wide band combiner does not work as good as the 35mHz filter. "I also tested the micplexerII without the filter" The wide band was not providing as good and stable signal especially when interference was introduced. The worst offender was my walkies in the 470 range. Every time I pressed the walkie the RXs freaked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason porter Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Last year I compared the PSC RFmultiSMA to the MicplexerII using qrx200 wideband receivers. I found that a very wide band combiner does not work as good as the 35mHz filter. "I also tested the micplexerII without the filter" The wide band was not providing as good and stable signal especially when interference was introduced. The worst offender was my walkies in the 470 range. Every time I pressed the walkie the RXs freaked out. yeah, i wonder if a filter (Lectro PF25) would help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 yeah, i wonder if a filter (Lectro PF25) would help. Yes it will. 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.