Shure SLXD+ for hops... thumbs up! (warning super long post)

[Derek H]

Just wanted to take a few minutes and endorse using the Shure SLXD15+ kit for camera hops. I just completed a documentary shoot using the SLXD1+ transmitter in my bag and the SLXD5+ body pack style receiver on camera. Didn't have any issues with it and seemed to play really well with the other equipment in my bag. Didn't notice any RF bleed over onto my Lectro 411s or SRb despite being placed very close to them and no unusual whining noises induced into the Comtek, just worked as advertised. Well, not really as advertised because Shure doesn't advertise using the SLXD1+ in a sound bag as a point-to-point link like I was doing here but you get the idea. 

 

Things I liked:

- All metal receiver with solid, no-nonsense battery door.

- Nice, physical on/off switches and bright top mounted LEDs to indicate if it's on/off or low batt.

- Locking TA4F input connector on the transmitter.

- Receiver ran 9 hours on 2x XTAR rechargeable lithium AAs (4150mWh version), the transmitter ran significantly longer.

- Balanced output mode available from the receiver's 3.5mm jack (or dual mono for a DSLR, selectable in the menu)

- Strong line level output, could easily feed the line level input on a Sony F55. This is really great.

- Wideband 470-608. Easy to slot one channel in around all your inbound wireless.

- Transmitter magically follows channel changes made on the receiver, even if the transmitter is off during the change (as it should be if you're scanning for a clean freq). Also, has an optional auto freq-hopping mode for dealing with interference though I didn't try that. 

- Channel scan works well

 

Things I don't love.

- Gain staging...Gain-adjustment-free input on the transmitter. It doesn't even have an input level meter on the transmitter or any way to indicate an overload. That said, it has a very wide-dynamic range input and as long as I had my 633 set to -10 I could not get it to audibly clip or distort, even with the 633 limiter off. This kind of dual A/D (or maybe it's dual preamp?) is not something I'm used to yet. There is a "trim" control in the transmitter menu but this a digital trim post-A/D and is only meant for matching two different types of mics. Say you alternate between a handheld and a body pack on the same receiver channel and you want them to match without touching the receive end of things.

- Level meter on the receiver shows post-output-gain-trim levels and as such is kind of confusing. If you're used to a receiver showing you the transmitter modulation regardless of where the Rx output level is set then this takes a minute to get your head around. You'll find YouTube ding-dongs saying that the receiver remotely controls the transmitter gain but that is false. In my case setting the 633 output (X1) to -10 and all the "trim" controls on the the SLXD+ Tx/Rx units to 0 just about perfectly aligns both meters when you send a full-scale tone. The receiver indicates a slight overload but this is not audible, it sounds totally clean. Setting the receiver output to -2 or -3 dB clears the overload warning and that's what I went with. I need to confirm with Shure if the output level setting on the SLXD5+ is just digital gain or an actual amplifier stage but I'm assuming the latter for now. I tried running the 633 output to the SLXD1+ transmitter at mic level but this required a large amount of gain on the receiver side to properly feed a line input and introduced hiss. I decided to roll with my -10 configuration. Full line level out of the 633 was a bit too hot for the SLXD1+. I suppose a pad could be calculated and a special cable made but -10 seems to be very functional and keeps cable construction simple and more reliable.

- No battery eliminator option for the SLXD1+ transmitter though I suspect you could remove the battery door and just use the same unit they make for the SLXD5+. Would be slightly sketchy though with no door to hold it in place. 

- Channel scan doesn't give you a graphic of the whole tuning range like you get with most pro wireless. It's like a G3 that way it just tells you the best group and then which channel is best via a text display.

- Antennas are all permanently fixed. Seems like a matter of time before a camera op or AC finds a way to damage one. Not how hard the repair would be, not ready to open this puppy up yet. Still has the new smell.

- Shure's documentation basically sucks and is lacking some answers that should be in there. Emailing Shure for answers also sucks and takes days to hear back and don't bother asking more than one question per message because they will only respond to one at a time. Shure thankfully has some helpful FAQs posted but you have to dig around in there to find what you need. I also hate how their website is firstly a sales shop. Just makes it irritating all around. 

 

Other Thoughts:

- For sending a high quality mono-mix track to a camera this system seems like a winner. Price-point is correct for this use-case in my oppinion, sound quality is a step up from an analog Sennheiser system and the ergonomics and build quality is solid. - It has very nice modern features like the remote control channel switching which does save time and just works without having to fart around too much.

- Though not a definitive test the remote control signal did not seem to interfere with the camera department's stuff at all.

- Watched Nick Houston's Gotham NAB interview with Amanda Beggs at the Shure booth who seems to be using these for all sorts of fun aux purposes and uses the SLXD plug-on transmitters for everything. This is interesting. I was torn on which transmitter to order and I wonder how the plug-on compares to the body pack transmitter. More RF power with the former (30mW vs 10mW) but proper whip antenna with the latter. I asked Shure but they forgot to respond or are too busy selling SM58s to everyone on the planet. Amanda, if you're reading this and have an opinion to share please let me know!

- Shure sells a nice silicone rain guard for the SLXD5+ that might help you in a light rain. Oddly, it only protects the side with the battery door and screen as well as the top connectors.

- SLXD5+ receiver has a dedicated headphone jack kind of like the prosumer Sony's. Has a separate volume control that you can map to the front arrow buttons. Seems to work well and was able to drive a pair of 70 Ohm HD25s to loud levels but wearing this thing as an IFB would not be ideal, antennas are not flexible enough to be comfortable on a belt or waistband, kinda too heavy as well. Nice feature to have anyway and maybe good IFB alternative for a boom op who wouldn't mind the weight and a dedicated pouch or something but not so much to hand off to a director or village plebs.

- Firmware updates are easy enough. Requires Shure's sort of goofy update-everything-we-make utility and take a LONG time. I thought something was wrong and I was going to brick it but it did eventually complete after 20 minutes of chugging along. You update just the receiver and load the transmitter firmware into the receiver as well and then you update the transmitter wirelessly via the receiver. Fun.

 

 

Well there you go.   

 

[edward chick]

Thanks for this Derek! I have been thinking about using the Shure Slx system for hops. I have the ADX series in the bag and love them.

 Receiver size is nice, considering the continually shrinking real estate market on cameras these days!

[Conor]

Thanks for the write up, interesting read! These units look like they'd be good candidates for SMA modding.

[IronFilm]

I honestly think if I had to start over again on a budget, and had a gun held to my head that I had to immediately buy all the wireless now and brand new then I'd go all in Shure SLXD+

12 hours ago, edward chick said:

hanks for this Derek! I have been thinking about using the Shure Slx system for hops.

If you don't know already, then just be aware that these are three very different things: Shure SLX, Shure SLXD, and Shure SLXD+ (the last one is what this thread is about)

[edward chick]

I do in fact know already. 

[Derek H]

5 hours ago, Conor said:

Thanks for the write up, interesting read! These units look like they'd be good candidates for SMA modding.

 

Yes possibly, though I will be waiting until the warranty is up to crack the case open and then only if there's an issue. 

 

16 hours ago, edward chick said:

Thanks for this Derek! I have been thinking about using the Shure Slx system for hops. I have the ADX series in the bag and love them.

 Receiver size is nice, considering the continually shrinking real estate market on cameras these days!

 

Yea, agreed. I hate putting anything larger than a single bodypack size receiver on camera now. Long gone are the big shoulder-mount ENG cameras that made mounting multiple wireless Rx a breeze. I also never offer "stereo hops" and will only do it begrudgingly if the client insists. It's antiquated at this point. Make a good, useable mono mix and stereo hops are unnecessary, I mean we have auto-mix on our machines now! Not to mention syncing sound from my recorder as primary should be standard practice in 2026 even for stuff with 'quick turnarounds'. I don't buy it. If it's so urgent then they're better off with the mono-mix anyway. Not that I'm such an amazing mixer but that it's surely good-enough if they truly need to get something out the door the same day. Really, I think of the hop to camera as a convenience for the client and a backup recording for me. I hear about multi-cam shoots where each camera gets a stereo hop and I think what a bunch of dinosaurs stuck in their workflow from the 90's! No offense meant to hard working sound mixers who regularly get paid good money to provide clients with stereo hops for umpteen cameras... it's just a personal pet peeve. Maybe they haven't noticed how completely F'd the wireless spectrum is for us now? Can't be wasting good frequencies on stereo hops. Also, I don't miss the RF burden on all the receivers in the bag when you present two 100mW transmitters 4 inches away. 

[codyman]

Any reason you didn't go with the plug on transmitter instead?  For bag transmission, I feel that going directly into XLR would be easier to deal with?

[Derek H]

Because I wanted the whip antenna. Plug-ons are designed to use a handheld mic body as their antenna. I was concerned that without a mic plugged into it the transmission would be compromised. Probably would work just fine though. The plug on has more RF power available and a built-in pad. 

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

Fabulous write-up ... definitely has me considering Shure in the future ... don't have a use case for it right now, but you really hit all the right details.

[Aprikot]

Gotham's initial overview: 

 

 

Amanda Beggs cart tour mentioned by Derek: 

 

[Jim Feeley]

Would like to see a two-channel compact/bag/cam RX for the SLXD+

[damien78]

Hi, Thank you for all the feedbacks. I would be interested in sending one channel of the outputs of my mixpre 10-t throught the slxd1+.  I have difficuties to identify a satisfaying way to connect x1/x2 output (trs jack) or outputs L/R ( TA3) to the TA4F of the shure transmitter. What kind of cables/adapters are you using? Thanks!

[Audio RIch]

I've adopted the Shure SLXD as cam hops too (the non + version).  I went with the plug on in the J52 band and use the guard band to keep it away from the talent dedicated to the UHF spectrum.  For the price point, I think its an excellent system when needing to send a higher quality useable feed to cams.  I haven't noticed any RF issues in regard to it being a plug on and I actually like its one less antenna protruding from the bag.  Haven't used it is a super long distance scenario yet, but I think it would do just fine, at least for my jobs.  

Damien78: I've used it a bunch with my mixpre 10ii output from one of the TA3 connections.  Works great and if I need to attenuate the gain, I'll do it on the mixer's output.  The x1/x2 output won't work with the plug on but it should work with the bodypack transmitter.  

[Derek H]

To Damien 78 and Audio Rich..

 

You need a custom cable to go directly from a TA3 to the TA4 the Shure uses. Find a friend who solders, learn how or have Trew audio or Gotham make it for you. You can find wiring diagrams on Shure’s website if you dig around for about 3 hours. The good news is it doesn’t require any resistors inside the TA connectors. 
 

Audio Rich I also almost went with the J52 band and the previous version as there were good deals available but decided future me would be happier to have the wideband version.

[Bouke]

18 hours ago, Derek H said:

Find a friend who solders, learn how or...

Honestly, I'm amazed that it seems that around here there are people who can't. We're all tech guys (any gals?).
I've learned it when I was 10 (ish).

 

[Olle Sjostrom]

 

6 hours ago, Bouke said:

Honestly, I'm amazed that it seems that around here there are people who can't. We're all tech guys (any gals?).
I've learned it when I was 10 (ish).

 

Sorry to keep OTing, but I would have you know that I was born in 85 in Sweden, a country that’s had a history of being a land of skilled workers, craftsmen and whatnot, but my generation saw wealth growing rapidly and the need for being skilled at all greatly dropped, and I would dare say this is true in a lot of countries. So I would venture there are quite a lot of people who, like me, grew up not knowing you actually COULD solder at all, other than experimental things like small circuits that were totally useless other than in school assignments. I learned to solder at 30, because I had to and I realized you actually could make cables yourself; you didn’t need to have a factory or buy it off the shelf. Capitalism has been really successful in that department (please not this is not a political sentence, only a reflection on this matter)

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

Same deal in Canada.  Electronic repair techs can make a fortune right now because nobody in the Millennial generation ever learned how (or, as Olle said, knew they could learn) and the generation that does know is rapidly retiring.  The electronics repair shop in my city (the *only* one as far as I can tell) is staffed by grumpy Eastern Europeans who learned their trade behind the iron curtain.

So many skills in our generation are like this.  Nobody builds, nobody sews, nobody cooks, nobody grows for themselves anymore.  It all comes from a store.  You don't *need* to know how to do those things, so many people don't.

The modern title of 'sound engineer' is a joke, none of the technical skills that used to underpin our profession are necessary anymore.  We record sound, we manipulate it, but we do precious little engineering of sound.

[Bouke]

Ok, thanks both, for making me feel really old : -)
For the archives, soldering your own cables is NOT hard, very often cheaper, custom made to specs (length being the most obvious one).
Start with XLR / Jack, buy a decent iron, don't forget a wet sponge, don't forget to ALWAYS add tin, as it is used to transfer heat, not only 'fill' the hole.

It will take you no more than an hour (or perhaps two) to master it to a level of usable cables that will outperform most stock.

 

 

 

[Pocketsizesound]

It will look more presentable with some 3D printing (when I get around to it) meanwhile I present the prototype "Viking SMA Mode"

Works as should. 

 

We mostly use these Shure with a stationary rack receiver for live events, but the usage is expending. 

[Olle Sjostrom]

If you rebrand them Shore, the Viking reference is even clearer. If you have a ROW of them it'll be even clearer. Nice job!

[johngooch]

Very interested in SMA mod for SLX RX....   

 

NIce job.

 

j

 

 

[Pocketsizesound]

On 9/2/2026 at 1:36 AM, Olle Sjostrom said:

If you rebrand them Shore, the Viking reference is even clearer. If you have a ROW of them it'll be even clearer. Nice job!

Hehehehe, that's a good one I can't believe I haven't thought of it, heheh

[Pocketsizesound]

On 9/2/2026 at 1:33 PM, johngooch said:

Very interested in SMA mod for SLX RX....   

 

NIce job.

 

j

 

 

Hi, we don't have any SLX on hand currently....Though I used them in the past and it's probably not too complicated. 

[frankaudio]

I have some slxd posted here if anyone is interested