Jump to content

Slightly different frequencies on Lectro UM190 CR187 Transmitter and Receiver. How well will it work.


Recommended Posts

Posted

Hello everybody. I am building a monitoring/one way communication system, pretty much stationary in a studio, except one receiver needs to be on a person who moves about the facility (The facility is not very large). The desire is of course to spend as little money as possible. Have an old, but very good sounding Lectro UM190 transmitter and CR187 receiver, fixed frequency. Need to add one or two more receivers. I found one that has a frequency different by 0.025 Mhz, it is my understanding it should work fine, but has anyone tried how wide the difference can be on those units? Thank you.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Constantin said:

I don’t know these receivers well, do they expect a pilot tone? If so, it likely won’t work, but in any case what’s stopping you from just trying it out?

 

No pilot tone. Trying out will cost about 50 bucks, so I guess nothing's stopping me, except the potential of gaining more junk I won't use, heheheh. Those receivers have a very descent headphones preamp, minding how cheap they are nothing even comes close from price/quality perspective. In general this system sound surprisingly well minding it's age. 

Posted

If you had two compatible single freq sets, you could send your audio signal to both TX...

 

Many years ago, when 187s and 190s were fairly new, on complicated Live Shots for network news I would use one 'Lectro TX to send an IFB signal to multiple wide-band radio transceiver scanners which could receive my 'Lectro TX signal. I had three of these wide-band transceivers plus the one 'Lectro RX in the frequency matching the TX. It worked OK at a time when real wireless IFB was not really available.

 

Before that, I used multiple 187 sets, on different frequencies, sending the same IFB audio signal to the multiple TX. Each talent had a receiver with an earpiece coming from the headphone jack, in addition to their microphone bodypack on yet another different compatible frequency. The wide-band transceivers offered an acceptable audio signal in a smaller package than the 187/190 receiver and an easier TX setup.

 

Neither fix was nearly as elegant as real wireless IFB or a modern IEM system, but it worked.

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

Posted
40 minutes ago, Tim Norris said:

If you had two compatible single freq sets, you could send your audio signal to both TX...

 

Many years ago, when 187s and 190s were fairly new, on complicated Live Shots for network news I would use one 'Lectro TX to send an IFB signal to multiple wide-band radio transceiver scanners which could receive my 'Lectro TX signal. I had three of these wide-band transceivers plus the one 'Lectro RX in the frequency matching the TX. It worked OK at a time when real wireless IFB was not really available.

 

Before that, I used multiple 187 sets, on different frequencies, sending the same IFB audio signal to the multiple TX. Each talent had a receiver with an earpiece coming from the headphone jack, in addition to their microphone bodypack on yet another different compatible frequency. The wide-band transceivers offered an acceptable audio signal in a smaller package than the 187/190 receiver and an easier TX setup.

 

Neither fix was nearly as elegant as real wireless IFB or a modern IEM system, but it worked.

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

Yes it is indeed a nostalgic piece of equipment. Still sounds better than most IFB systems I tried. 

Posted

One small factor in this situation is that with TX/RX this old there is no real guarantee that they are really solidly "on" their labelled freqs.  There are pretty few techs around still willing to work on this gear, is there a reason why you would not consider a low-cost current wireless if your application isn't very demanding (especially range)?  Deity, the low-end BT Sennheisers, other Chinese Brand-X, even used old Senn. G2s might work out better for you?

Posted

Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought that the UM190 was UHF where the CR187 was VHF (and as such would not overlap by anything close to 0.025MHz).

 

As far as servicing things, last I knew JayCee Comms in NYC still worked on the old Lectrosonics stuff.  But the cost of servicing vs getting something new probably doesn't make sense.

I doubt a M185/R185 would fit the bill for you (neither battery powered nor small enough to be mobile) but we still have a number of those in the closet.

 

 

Posted
35 minutes ago, Matthew Steel said:

Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought that the UM190 was UHF where the CR187 was VHF (and as such would not overlap by anything close to 0.025MHz).

 

As far as servicing things, last I knew JayCee Comms in NYC still worked on the old Lectrosonics stuff.  But the cost of servicing vs getting something new probably doesn't make sense.

I doubt a M185/R185 would fit the bill for you (neither battery powered nor small enough to be mobile) but we still have a number of those in the closet.

 

 

 

Some are VHF, yes, the one I have is 470 Mhz

2 hours ago, Philip Perkins said:

One small factor in this situation is that with TX/RX this old there is no real guarantee that they are really solidly "on" their labelled freqs.  There are pretty few techs around still willing to work on this gear, is there a reason why you would not consider a low-cost current wireless if your application isn't very demanding (especially range)?  Deity, the low-end BT Sennheisers, other Chinese Brand-X, even used old Senn. G2s might work out better for you?

 

I have some Sony units I can use, receivers with headphone jacks (unlike Sennheiser) but I was looking for equipment that can be just left in place semi-permanently and that have one turn on button and that's it, hehehe.  In any case it'll be spending about a grand vs. spending about a 100.....

Posted
On 2/4/2025 at 7:33 PM, Pocketsizesound said:

Trying out will cost about 50 bucks, so I guess nothing's stopping me, except the potential of gaining more junk I won't use

Definitely not worth it. 

It's easy enough these days to find ancient Lectrosonics non-diversity wireless that is matching frequencies for a hundred-ish bucks. So why take the risk? 

 

On 2/5/2025 at 10:29 AM, Matthew Steel said:

Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought that the UM190 was UHF where the CR187 was VHF (and as such would not overlap by anything close to 0.025MHz).

That's what I was thinking as well. 

 

 

On 2/5/2025 at 11:06 AM, Pocketsizesound said:

In any case it'll be spending about a grand vs. spending about a 100.....

Sony prosumer wireless that is a generation or two (or three...) old is often under a couple of hundred dollars these days, sometimes even under a hundred bucks. 

Just doesn't make sense to me to buy non-matching ancient Lectros on the hope that maybe "somehow" it will "work". 

Posted
10 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

So why take the risk?  

 

 

Curiosity and extreme cheapness, hehehe! Anyway, I tried a 0.025Mhz difference with different equipment and it worked ok. But, we decided to spend a little money and get used Sony receivers, which I'll SMA modify. 

Posted

Really old wireless stuff is rarely worth the trouble to use and even more rarely worth the service cost at current USA bench rates.  If this rig doesn't work for you the first time you test it (hopefully before you buy) then don't bother.  There is SO much more recent wireless gear available used.

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...