Jump to content

URX100 reception


Recommended Posts

I am noticing lots of digital artifacts i the audio signal with URX's and my camera link vs rx200 at the same distance. wondering if there is anything to help improve reception? from a technical standpoint, curious if i can put a wire whip antenna attached to ground on the 1/8" connector (that connector is also carrying audio signal to the 1/8 input) to help put the 2nd antenna in the air similar to the standard antenna next to it, or will that not have any affect?

 

-Ken

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, glenn said:

URX will not give the same distances  as RX200. It is a different animal. If you use a properly sized antenna in the headphone jack you might get close. 

 

understood. i failed to mention this last comparison was at relatively closer ranges. but getting close is all i care as its usually in the case of 2nd/3rd cam stuff etc. i will give it a shot with a modded audio cable and add an antenna and see how it works

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, osa said:

 

understood. i failed to mention this last comparison was at relatively closer ranges. but getting close is all i care as its usually in the case of 2nd/3rd cam stuff etc. i will give it a shot with a modded audio cable and add an antenna and see how it works

Let me know how it works for you. I currently use a URX for cam (with 3.5mm for audio) and Would like a bit more range.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, John Blankenship said:

Ken - does the camera have any RF gack on it such as a Teradek?

 

None - my test was on 2x sony fs7’s with cabled returns for testing purposes. I know many unmentionable rf factors could be at play in any given situation so who knows.  I also - again know this is not what it was designed for - did a side by side with a qrx200 at my recorder. I recorded both tuned to same freq.  I was toying with using urx’s in a pinch for extra talent receivers. The urx worked better than i expected in that test maybe 80-90%, audible digital artifacts that i heard were very slight and could be usable in a recording emergency? This urx product is very versatile in that respect

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, John Blankenship said:

I admit I've never tried using a URX100 on a camera. Perhaps they're more susceptible to the camera's spurious RF. 

 

 

That might be it, just the different housing alone on the urx with all that camera spray. If I get a chance to run my double antenna test I will also play with articulating arm’ing the urx away from the camera a bit. 

Link to post
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...