Jump to content

Lecro SRC receiver and Zaxcom camera link issue


Favio
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Favio said:

with the SRC receivers, i get all sorts of hits when its on, when I add back my 411a's it all works well

The 411 has a much better front end filter than the SR series receivers. With that your hop is so close in frequency to the receiver you are most likely overloading the front end of the SR. 

As a general rule of thumb is always want at least 1 block separation between in-bag transmitters and in-bag receivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

live n learn, i was originally using block 22, but tested all including block 19 at home and all are same, yup 411a's are the best, to bad about the SRC's would of liked to keep them around.

Another issue apart i had with the zaxcom camera link was the boom mic i was using  AT4073a, created a terrible hiss when the boom stick was close to the zaxcom, I was told that the boom needed a capacitor filter, but that didn't help either, then i was told it was an old boom mic and the new boom mics out don't have that issue, so i got a new sanken boom mic and end of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jack Norflus said:

The 411 has a much better front end filter than the SR series receivers. With that your hop is so close in frequency to the receiver you are most likely overloading the front end of the SR. 

As a general rule of thumb is always want at least 1 block separation between in-bag transmitters and in-bag receivers.

Jack I agree with you but have had disappointing results when using SRc Band B1 & SRc Band C1 in bag while using Block 19 hops in bag (well within frequency distance).

I did some testing at home and this is what I have: SRc C1 (SMQv BL26 686.900, SMQv BL26 667.000) Src B1 (SMQv BL22 576.000, UM400a BL21 563.100). All freqs scanned using the SRc SmartScan feature on both SRc units. Two BL19 UM400a transmitters in bag for cam hops (504.000, 487.400). When just B1 SRc is on (with its respective SMQvBL22/UM400a BL21 TX's) -all good. When B1 is on with the two BL19 UM400a TX's on -also all good. When SRc B1 is on, with two BL19 UM400a TX's and then turn on SRc C1 (with it's two respective BL26 SMQv TX's) -their are intermod problems/RF hits on the SRc B1 unit. and yes it appears to be a proximity thing since I couldn't get closer than 10-12 feet until I heard anomolies on the B1 unit. Now interestingly, when I turn off ONLY the two BL19 TX in bag then there are no problems on the B1 unit no matter how close I got to my bag with the two BL 26 SMQv transmitters.

Then I went out on a shoot, downtown NYC, scanned again using the SRc smartscan feature and then confirming with freqfinder. Using two BL19 UM400a transmitters for hops and 1 talent transmitter BL26 sent to SRc Band C1 receiver. Had terrible results on the SRc Band C1 when using the block 19 hops. Once I ditched using the hops in bag, all was fine. With this situation I had only one talent, so I tried ratio mode with the C1 SRc. Didn't matter, was receiving hits/intermod with that talent receiver and I was at worst 10 feet away from talent. Now I agree it was downtown NYC, so there is RF, but never had this much concern when using 411a's for talent receivers.

Also to note, with all of these scenarios I did have a Block 29 UM400a transmitter for IFB in bag - no issues on either SRc Band B1 or C1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Digital transmitters emit a constant RF stream all over their bandwith. So they interfere more than the FM analogue ones.

Over their (entire?) bandwidth? That sounds strange, and as far as I'm aware it would violate FCC as well as ETSI regulations.
Moreover, Zaxcom seems to claim the exact opposite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Constantin said:


Over their (entire?) bandwidth? That sounds strange, and as far as I'm aware it would violate FCC as well as ETSI regulations.
Moreover, Zaxcom seems to claim the exact opposite

That is not correct. There is no more interference from a digital system than from an analog system as long as FCC specs are met or exceeded as we do. The only difference is the amplitude component of the digital signal that can more easily show rf interference on microphones and other gear that does not have proper RF shielding. A cell phone will do that as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not correct. There is no more interference from a digital system than from an analog system as long as FCC specs are met or exceeded as we do. The only difference is the amplitude component of the digital signal that can more easily show rf interference on microphones and other gear that does not have proper RF shielding. A cell phone will do that as well.

What is not correct? I was agreeing with you. Or at least questioning the statement by the previous poster, Mungo. I wrote that if he, Mungo, were right, that it would then be a violation of FCC rules
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...