Jump to content

Wind in New Mexico


LarryF
 Share

Recommended Posts

“patience Grasshopper”

is good advice
I just bought an 888.

currently on 411 RX.

(which are still amazing after many, many years.)

fervently squirrelling away money for wireless upgrade.....

Very exciting times.

Please push another tumbleweed out of the saloon soon.

I am on the fence for a little longer.....

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Peter Mega said:

Thanks Karl. 
 

Are these backwards compatible in any way? With modes? I can’t seem to find anything that says they are or aren’t. 
 

Thanks

Peter 

Hi Peter, digital receivers can (and are in our case) backward compatible with FM/Hybrid transmitters. The new Transmitters, however, are digital only, i.e. not backward compatible. It would be impractical to design transmitters that fit all the needs (small size, efficient battery life, etc.) and have two types of output stages. So, these units work with the DSQD, DCR822, and DCHR receivers (and future digital units) only. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, karlw said:

Hi Peter, digital receivers can (and are in our case) backward compatible with FM/Hybrid transmitters. The new Transmitters, however, are digital only, i.e. not backward compatible. It would be impractical to design transmitters that fit all the needs (small size, efficient battery life, etc.) and have two types of output stages. So, these units work with the DSQD, DCR822, and DCHR receivers (and future digital units) only. 

Thanks for clarifying Karl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2021 at 11:24 AM, karlw said:

Battery run times: 

Models Lithium Alkaline NiMH
DBSM-A1B1 (1 AA):   2 mw - 8:55  2 mw -  2:15  2 mw -   5:25
10 mw - 7:25 10 mw - 2:00 10 mw -  4:55
25 mw - 9:35 25 mw - 1:25 25 mw -  4:25
50 mw - 4:45 50 mw - 1:10 50 mw -  4:20
DBSMD-A1B1 (2 AA):  2 mw -  18:20  2 mw -  7:45  2 mw -  10:55
10 mw - 16:35 10 mw - 7:10 10 mw - 10:30
25 mw - 15:10 25 mw - 6:20 25 mw -   9:20
50 mw - 12:10 50 mw - 4:30 50 mw -   7:25

You are correct - these have TA5 input connectors (the SSM is the only one with a Lemo). There are two accessory TC jam sync adapter cables, one with a BNC and one with a Lemo 5. 

I'm guessing a typo with 25mw vs 10mw on a single lithium? I can't imagine a higher output would get a longer runtime.... Though that would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GNinja said:

I'm guessing a typo with 25mw vs 10mw on a single lithium? I can't imagine a higher output would get a longer runtime.... Though that would be nice.

Misprint and has been corrected in the manual and spec sheet.

LEF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/17/2021 at 5:11 PM, GNinja said:

I'm guessing a typo with 25mw vs 10mw on a single lithium? I can't imagine a higher output would get a longer runtime.... Though that would be nice.

Yes - 6:35 is the correct run time for that setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I'm really interested in the features of all of the new products from Shure, Wisycom, & Zaxcom. However as a longtime user & supporter of Lectrosonics, I really hope they will be releasing new products that can have all, or at least most of the following from the companies listed above:

1. Record & Transmit at the same time (hopefully they can work out a deal with Zaxcom similar to Diety but doubtful). 

2. Remotely change frequency, gain, power, & arm/disarm transmitter (if #1 can be done) from the receiver (e.g. Shure Showlink & Zaxcom Zaxnet)

3. Quad Slot Receiver (e.g. Wisycom)

Curious to see feedback on how other Lectrosonics users would prioritize this list, as well as any additional wishlist features for new products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are itching to buy something new so that you have some functions and features you do not have with your present wireless, why not buy something from one of the other manufacturers? If the most important thing is transmit and record at the same time, buy Zaxcom. If real remote control is your priority, go with Zaxcom or Shure. If slot-in form factor is most important, you have choices, though Wisycom is still analog. Is it just brand loyalty that keeps you from purchasing from some other company? I understand that people that already have a large stake in one manufacturer do not have the financial resources to start buying new stuff, but you are suggesting that you would jump at the chance to buy something new from Lectrosonics if it just had some of the features and functions which other company's wireless already have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Jeff!! It's the stake & financial resources for me right now but I'm certainly interested & researching other companies. I'm not itching to buy any new gear at the present time but maybe in the future depending on how the wireless landscape changes with the new digital products and FCC space. I'd just like to see what other users are thinking or have tested with all of the new products being released from other companies, as well as Lectrosonics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, AudioOnLoc said:

Thanks Jeff!! It's the stake & financial resources for me right now but I'm certainly interested & researching other companies.

Fair enough. Please don't take an offense to my comments, I was just trying to sort out some of the reasons why lots of people seem to not want to do the investigation, research, etc., to discover what there is available for us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, most of the features you list aren’t important to me, or I actively avoid them. 
I once thought that I needed rec & transmit or the remote control thing, but when I had a fair amount of Zax gear, I never used them. A lot of them only make sense when you also have a Zaxcom recorder. 
Although, to be fair, I do miss remote control occasionally. 
For some strange reason people always discuss the preamps of audio recorders, when for most of us the preamp actually is in the wireless gear. Equally strange is that we talk a lot about wireless systems‘ features and range, but rarely about their sound. 
But sound is a major reason why I decided to sell all my other gear and stick to Lectro. Sound and build quality. I am also very impressed by their customer service and feel like I can trust these people with my wireless needs. 

I know others will disagree with everything I just wrote, and tell a story of terrible Lectro customer service experience, or how the others have great service, too. And that may well be true, but I can only speak from my experience and that was very positive with Lectro. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jeff Wexler said:

Fair enough. Please don't take an offense to my comments, I was just trying to sort out some of the reasons why lots of people seem to not want to do the investigation, research, etc., to discover what there is available for us. 

No offense taken, I agree 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Constantin said:

For me, most of the features you list aren’t important to me, or I actively avoid them. 
I once thought that I needed rec & transmit or the remote control thing, but when I had a fair amount of Zax gear, I never used them. A lot of them only make sense when you also have a Zaxcom recorder. 
Although, to be fair, I do miss remote control occasionally. 
For some strange reason people always discuss the preamps of audio recorders, when for most of us the preamp actually is in the wireless gear. Equally strange is that we talk a lot about wireless systems‘ features and range, but rarely about their sound. 
But sound is a major reason why I decided to sell all my other gear and stick to Lectro. Sound and build quality. I am also very impressed by their customer service and feel like I can trust these people with my wireless needs. 

I know others will disagree with everything I just wrote, and tell a story of terrible Lectro customer service experience, or how the others have great service, too. And that may well be true, but I can only speak from my experience and that was very positive with Lectro. 

Thanks Constantin! I have listened to some digital hybrid vs digital recordings and I preferred the hybrid sound over the digital, even though the digital sounded cleaner. I agree with your range vs sound quality debate, what good is great range on a wireless system that sounds terrible. Another thing I hardly see brought up is how seamless (or not) it is to transfer the files from a transmitter that records and transmits simultaneously. It is a great feature that can save you in a pinch but I wonder if the transfer process is easy. Disagreements don't bother me as we all have our own preferences on what we think sounds good or bad and what features are important or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said, Constantin.

The sound of our radios is probably the most overlooked aspect of these discussions about features. We can debate our preferences, but how they sound is what it’s all about.

 

Moe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, AudioOnLoc said:

I'm really interested in the features of all of the new products from Shure, Wisycom, & Zaxcom. However as a longtime user & supporter of Lectrosonics, I really hope they will be releasing new products that can have all, or at least most of the following from the companies listed above:

1. Record & Transmit at the same time (hopefully they can work out a deal with Zaxcom similar to Diety but doubtful). 

2. Remotely change frequency, gain, power, & arm/disarm transmitter (if #1 can be done) from the receiver (e.g. Shure Showlink & Zaxcom Zaxnet)

3. Quad Slot Receiver (e.g. Wisycom)

Curious to see feedback on how other Lectrosonics users would prioritize this list, as well as any additional wishlist features for new products.

Three isn’t currently that important to me.  I would actually put two in front of one.  I currently have a workaround for one, if I need it.  Remote Audio/Trew Audio built me some custom cables(Glen actually got in there when they were having a hard time getting them to work and figured it out) to split my lav’s to simultaneously feed my Lectro belt packs and Track E recorders.  Not quite as elegant as a self-contained, all-in-one pack, but it’s not completely in-elegant, either.

 

I’m sure hell would freeze over before Lectro would license “record & transmit” from Zax.  I’ve also read that some of those patents are up within the next four to five years.  And some of the newer fully digital Lectro belt pack and plug-on Tx’s already have 24-bit/48khz, TC jammable recording capabilities.  I’m sure it’s just a simple firmware update to give those new Tx’s the ability to transmit and record simultaneously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RunAndGun said:

Three isn’t currently that important to me.  I would actually put two in front of one.  I currently have a workaround for one, if I need it.  Remote Audio/Trew Audio built me some custom cables(Glen actually got in there when they were having a hard time getting them to work and figured it out) to split my lav’s to simultaneously feed my Lectro belt packs and Track E recorders.  Not quite as elegant as a self-contained, all-in-one pack, but it’s not completely in-elegant, either.

 

I’m sure hell would freeze over before Lectro would license “record & transmit” from Zax.  I’ve also read that some of those patents are up within the next four to five years.  And some of the newer fully digital Lectro belt pack and plug-on Tx’s already have 24-bit/48khz, TC jammable recording capabilities.  I’m sure it’s just a simple firmware update to give those new Tx’s the ability to transmit and record simultaneously.

It's unfortunate that these 2 parties can't come together to work out some sort of an agreement, but I can't blame either side for their reasons being.

 

IMO #2 seems like a no brainer feature for Lectrosonics to add, as other companies have done it while still maintaining that small superslot form factor. 

 

Splitting your lavs? That sounds interesting, did you test to hear if there is any sound degradation from the split?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RunAndGun said:

Remote Audio/Trew Audio built me some custom cables(Glen actually got in there when they were having a hard time getting them to work and figured it out) to split my lav’s to simultaneously feed my Lectro belt packs and Track E recorders.  Not quite as elegant as a self-contained, all-in-one pack, but it’s not completely in-elegant, either.

 

Why not feed the TrackE HP output into the Lectro TX?

I have done so with an Wisycom SK100 (crude quick'n dirty situation) and I had remotability over TC, input gain and half of the gain stage into the TX via Tentacles App.

Edit:

I did a test with a Wisycom and it worked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AudioOnLoc said:

 

Splitting your lavs? That sounds interesting, did you test to hear if there is any sound degradation from the split?


That was part of the reason Glen jumped-in on the project after the initial build/trial & error.  When they originally built them, it wasn’t useable, because the signal level dropped so much, and when you gained it up enough to get a good level, it was very noisy.  But Glen and the crew put their noses to the grind stone and figured something out.  He said you can see a drop on a scope, but virtually nothing to the ear and was happy with the results(which I guess is saying something).  And after listening myself, I was happy enough with the results to give the go ahead to build them “for real”.

9 hours ago, DanieldH said:

Why not feed the TrackE HP output into the Lectro TX?

I have done so with an Wisycom SK100 (crude quick'n dirty situation) and I had remotability over TC, input gain and half of the gain stage into the TX via Tentacles App.

Edit:

I did a test with a Wisycom and it worked. 


Two reason:

1) The version sold in the US has the headphone out disabled when recording starts(I have no idea how this somehow infringes on (presumably) a Zax patent and would love for someone to explain it, because it seems like complete bull plop).

 

2) I don’t consider the headphone out a great source to feed a wireless transmitter.  Who knows what is happening to the signal between the lav and the headphone out.  The wireless being recorded in the bag and/or in camera is still primary and needs to remain as high a quality as possible.  I would only use the “local” recording as a back-up.

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...