Sean McCormick Posted February 26, 2010 Report Share Posted February 26, 2010 http://www.listentech.com/lr-400.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean McCormick Posted February 27, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2010 Decided to throw myself on the grenade, will report my findings once it arrives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 I'd love to hear more about this. They gotta sound better than a Comtek PR-72B... --Marc W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 I'd love to hear more about this. They gotta sound better than a Comtek PR-72B... A lot of things sound better than a 72b. However, I've found that under the conditions they're subjected to, few things perform as well. "The suits from Chevrolet left HOW MANY Comteks lying out on the cold dark ground near the race track after the first setup?" For simple, but nonetheless ingenious, purpose-built, foolproof (mostly), little lightweight receivers, the PR-72Bs are amazing. A bit of kit that meets the specified need so well they define the term for all such devices. I tried the Genter frequency-agile portable transmitters quite a while back and promptly abandoned them as, IMO, they didn't hold a candle against a Comtek M-72. And that's before factoring in the legendary Comtek support. I also use 216s for Director, Script Super, Producer, etc. but am still a big fan of the 72 series for the denizens of video village. For those who have tracked such info over the years, have they ever been considered for a technical Academy Award? Having said all that, if there IS a good alternative, it's worthwhile information to have. John B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Gilchrist Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 I did a job a while back with the 72 mHz version of the Listen receivers which look to be identical to the 216 band units mechanically. As I recall, they sounded OK but the build quality is a little light. I doubt they'd survive being dropped as well as either a 216 or M72 receiver. Best regards, Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean McCormick Posted March 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 They do appear to be less rugged, mine should show up mid-week. I did a job a while back with the 72 mHz version of the Listen receivers which look to be identical to the 216 band units mechanically. As I recall, they sounded OK but the build quality is a little light. I doubt they'd survive being dropped as well as either a 216 or M72 receiver. Best regards, Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curleysound Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 With digital audio bringing the cost/quality ratio way down, I'm surprised that comtek or others haven't gone this way. After seeing Zaxcoms ERX demo today, I can imagine that a bargain version isn't far behind. If not, I hope someone gets to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Gilchrist Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 They do appear to be less rugged, mine should show up mid-week. I'd really like to hear your thoughts. I was on the 2nd unit of an HBO show when I met the Listen 72 mHz units, so I really didn't have time to come to a reasoned judgement. Best regards, Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted March 1, 2010 Report Share Posted March 1, 2010 Sean, What did you pay for a 216 receiver? I use the Comtek PR216 for a PL, so I have 2, but it might be nice to have a spare if they are cheap. In terms of a 72, I still prefer the PR72b, and they are almost always available used. Comtek provides great support and virtually rebuilds them when sent in for repair, which costs much less than a replacement. They are also quite durable, due to their simplistic lack of function (one of my favorite things). Give something with buttons to someone, and they will play with them. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean McCormick Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2010 Hi Robert, I paid $162.94 shipped from Performance Audio. It's a gamble, but I need some extra units for general village flotsam and "producers". It would be nice to save a few bucks for these less essential participants. Cheers, Sean Sean, What did you pay for a 216 receiver? I use the Comtek PR216 for a PL, so I have 2, but it might be nice to have a spare if they are cheap. In terms of a 72, I still prefer the PR72b, and they are almost always available used. Comtek provides great support and virtually rebuilds them when sent in for repair, which costs much less than a replacement. They are also quite durable, due to their simplistic lack of function (one of my favorite things). Give something with buttons to someone, and they will play with them. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean McCormick Posted March 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2010 Just came today. Initial impressions: This will get beat up pretty quickly in a production environment without a protective case. The belt clip will go fast, I predict. Using the channel table in the online manual, I picked one near where I already was (55 on Comtek, 2P on Listen). Locked the channel. I threw a tone on the 788 and it picked it up fine. Volume is plenty loud. It's self noise is higher than the Comtek, but with the SQ switch enabled (which is only supposed to help if you are using a Listen transmitter, but I find it helpful) it isn't unusable. Playing back some production audio from yesterday sounded fine (for non-critical reference) via some ghetto walkman-style headphones. Walking through the house and outside a ways, the Comtek definitely had less interference/glitching. I'm just using the stock Option 7 antenna at present. I'm gonna do more testing on this with a better antenna later. It's pretty much what I imagined it would be; a lower cost option to hand some kid actors' grandma or some naughty gear-abusing director. I'll be playing with it more and I'll post further observations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted March 5, 2010 Report Share Posted March 5, 2010 Thanks for the report. Sounds like it's still not quite a perfect replacement for the PR-72B. I'm going to try out a PR-75A and see if that might be better for the existing Comtek system I'm trying to squeeze some more life out of. Though I have to say, the new Zaxcom ERX IFB system is very tempting... --Marc W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.