Jump to content

UMP III, the small, lightweight mic power powered by NP-50 by Ambient


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, codyman said:

but besides "runs for several hours" are there more specific figures available for 48v given that it is using a standardized NP50?

Working on it. We had a Schoeps CMIT running for 6hrs +, so that's the short side of the spectrum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Klaus said:

Working on it. We had a Schoeps CMIT running for 6hrs +, so that's the short side of the spectrum.

Schoeps specs 4.4 mA at 48 Volts or 211 mW power draw. Lectro NP-50 is 1000 mAh at 3.6 Volts or 3600 mWh. Divide 3600 mW by 211 mW and we get 17 hours. The stated 6+ hrs would indicate an overall efficiency of 33%. This seems a bit low unless there is a lot of secondary regulation.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Link to post
Share on other sites

We prefer under promise and over deliver than the other way.So, deliberately tested the worst case scenario with an old NON Lectro NP-50 rated at 650mAh :)
The one supplied (oh and a USB charger cradle, too) is reasonable quality, rated 750mAh and will last longer, considerably longer if people opt for the Lectro/Panasonic batteries (which we have been finding only few people invest into on quopting).
Also, acording to our experience  4.4mA @48V seems a tad on the optimistic side. But we have had other mics running for days.

Again, bare with us while the run time tables are still in the works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Klaus said:

We prefer under promise and over deliver than the other way.So, deliberately tested the worst case scenario with an old NON Lectro NP-50 rated at 650mAh :)
The one supplied (oh and a USB charger cradle, too) is reasonable quality, rated 750mAh and will last longer, considerably longer if people opt for the Lectro/Panasonic batteries (which we have been finding only few people invest into on quopting).
Also, acording to our experience  4.4mA @48V seems a tad on the optimistic side. But we have had other mics running for days.

Again, bare with us while the run time tables are still in the works.

Thanks Klaus. The numbers now begin to make sense. My reason for running the numbers is they seemed awfully conservative, even for you all.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The UMP III is great.

Any chance Ambient could make an AES42 version of the UMPIII?
A Zaxcom TRX743 will make a Schoeps Super CMIT wireless, but it would be very nice to have other options with other TX's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great little device Klaus,

I own, love and use the UMPII. It is nice that I can use the same cables if I upgrade.

Can you do a size compare photos?

On 10/8/2020 at 11:41 AM, pindrop said:

The UMP III is great.

Any chance Ambient could make an AES42 version of the UMPIII?
A Zaxcom TRX743 will make a Schoeps Super CMIT wireless, but it would be very nice to have other options with other TX's.

An AES42 splitter to fit 2 mics in one AES42 is something I would buy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2020 at 8:37 PM, LarryF said:

 

Thanks Klaus. The numbers now begin to make sense.

 

Quite opposite, thank you, @LarryF for putting my attention to it! I was baffled as it is the same convertor we used in the UMP II and this had better life time on the CMIT. So I checked and found there were  lines shifted in the spreadsheet and 6hrs were the time it ran on the maximum allowed current draw of 10mA :D Again, we'll be working on a table that should be available soon.
@RadoStefanov, I can surely get that on the road, meanwhile there's a video showing them side by side on SoundSummit YT channel and it is the same size as the current Lockit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Klaus said:

Quite opposite, thank you, @LarryF for putting my attention to it! [snip]

As I've said to the crew many times, "There's nothing like a second set of eyeballs looking at a problem."

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a suggestion. I’d love to see a new bracket that is lightweight and low profile and mounts to the pole in a way that doesn’t require the little pole section and extra quicklok. The weight adds up and with a smaller UMP and a small transmitter like an SM or even SSM I’d want to minimize the weight as much as possible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2020 at 2:12 AM, Derek H said:

 I’d love to see a new bracket that is lightweight and low profile and [...] doesn’t require the little pole section and extra quicklok.

Suggestion accepted, thank you. We surely can look into making it smaller now and I will bring that up. Still it needs to be large enough for any radio, not just SSM and surely rigid enough so it doesn't move or hit the boom, so, not sure how much we could practically shelf off.

To explain the indisputable clunky design of our current offering:  Quicklok is completely optional, but on a wireless boom most likely want to have it in place, and if so remove Windshield with the radio attached. This again needs to be so rigid it , while at the same time supporting whatever windshield/Mic combo you might want to use (816 with soaking Rycote anyone?) and giving it enough room to position as required. This much why the extra section AFTER the Quicklok and I don't see the product as is change too much.

 

So, most likely we would be looking at an additional product.

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...