Jump to content

Lectro UM400a vs SMQV


staudio

Recommended Posts

I've used the UM400a transmitters, but never the SMQV. Might be buying some new wireless (rec and trans) in a few months and looking at the Lectro 411 rec. Originally thought I would just get the UM400a trans but a soundguy i know loves the SMQV transmitter. I do mostly network news magazine type stuff/live shots and corporate gigs. I don't do commercial or features. SMQV retails for $1395 while the UM400a retails around $1069. is the SMQV worth the extra $300?

Any thoughts? Thanks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd think it's worth it.

Access to functions without the need of a screwdriver to change freqs, like BW said .

Variable power: 250mW for long reach when needed (eats up batts faster);

25mW when in ''bouncing'' environments (lockers in a high school could be an example)(there could be more examples into the "corporate world" you seem to work in).

Plus you can use the buzzer to fine tune a few functions like sleep mode (is that it?) via the subject's lav (I think there's an iPod app for that too ?).

I don't own them but from memory, that would be something like this.

Personally, if I had to chose, I'd go with the SMQVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2¢.....

I really like the SMQV. The variable power is something I wasn't sure I would use a lot, but I have been on my current job. They are also considered "water resistant". More so than the UM series.

I know you didn't ask, but personally I recommend the SMQV over the SMV unless you need the smallest transmitter possible. I was issued a few on my current job, and the size reduction doesn't matter in most of my jobs, but the shorter battery life does. The SMQV with the metal clip makes it very low profile (I'm not a big fan of the leather pouches... too thick). The 2 AA batteries means that with NiMH rechargeables you can get a good run time. You can go REALLY long if you use two lithiums. There is a runtime chart on the lectro site.

It doesn't really matter, but I do get a lot of comments on corporate type jobs about the SMQV with the metal clip that people like how it looks. They are a nicely designed piece of gear.

If I was buying new Lectros right now for bodypack use (as opposed to camera hops or IFB), I would be buying SMQVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have both and like with anything else there are pros and cons with anything.

I really like having the variable power on the unit - I actually use it on 50mW more often than I thought I would. I also like that you don't need to use a screwdriver to change frequency's. And that you can actually see the frequency vs looking at a two digit hexadecimal number.

On the con side with the 400a I can change the 9 volt with one hand while talent is wearing the pack (helpful if you are wearing your mixer bag and holding a boom) - with the smqv I need two hands and a bit of fumbling to get the two AA's in there while talent is wearing the pack. And then you need to re-power up the unit after the batteries have been changed - which leads to my next con. I also like that on the 400a there is a physical on and off switch and a physical level adjustment knob. I find it a bit of a nuisance holding down two buttons to power up and and power down - not a deal breaker but definitely a negative in my opinion.

Just my 2 cents.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also like that you don't need to use a screwdriver to change frequency's. And that you can actually see the frequency vs looking at a two digit hexadecimal number.

I always hated the "secret decoder ring" aspect of the 200 and 400 series transmitters. To me, having the actual direct digital frequency readout overcomes any other difficulty. You get used to the double-button on/off.

I did learn a valuable lesson on a shoot a couple of weeks ago: lock the SM/SMQ/SMQV transmitter after wiring up the talent. I encountered an actress who jostled around with the transmitter when my back was turned, and her feed went dead about an hour later. She'd accidentally hit a mode that put the xmitter into "RF OFF" mode. We just swapped it out with a new one and kept going, just for speed, but I eventually diagnosed the problem. From now on: lock the transmitter before walking away.

Only time this has ever happened to me (so far).

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did learn a valuable lesson on a shoot a couple of weeks ago: lock the SM/SMQ/SMQV transmitter after wiring up the talent. I encountered an actress who jostled around with the transmitter when my back was turned, and her feed went dead about an hour later. She'd accidentally hit a mode that put the xmitter into "RF OFF" mode.

As discussed here before - the "RF OFF" mode - in my opinion appearers to be useless and a pain in the ass for field production. Larry is there any thing that can be done about this with a software upgrade in the future?

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always hated the "secret decoder ring" aspect of the 200 and 400 series transmitters. To me, having the actual direct digital frequency readout overcomes any other difficulty. You get used to the double-button on/off.

I did learn a valuable lesson on a shoot a couple of weeks ago: lock the SM/SMQ/SMQV transmitter after wiring up the talent. I encountered an actress who jostled around with the transmitter when my back was turned, and her feed went dead about an hour later. She'd accidentally hit a mode that put the xmitter into "RF OFF" mode. We just swapped it out with a new one and kept going, just for speed, but I eventually diagnosed the problem. From now on: lock the transmitter before walking away.

Only time this has ever happened to me (so far).

--Marc W.

The only way to put the SM into "RF OFF" would be to turn it off - two buttons held 1/2/3 - then to turn it back on with two buttons held.  This seems impossible to happen accidentally.  But I have had people inexperienced with using the SM put them on and actor in "RF OFF", and I have had actors turn themselves off for privacy and then turn the SM back on incorrectly.  It does happen that an actor can change frequency by a quick push of two buttons simultaneously, but it's only happened to me once or twice in the 5 or 6 years I have been using the SM as my only transmitter type for actors.

I agree the "RF OFF" mode should engage differently, if at all.

To answer the OP, I prefer the SM for hiding on actors.  I prefer the UM for other applications.  Ease of battery change, perceived durability, access to level change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As discussed here before - the "RF OFF" mode - in my opinion appearers to be useless and a pain in the ass for field production. Larry is there any thing that can be done about this with a software upgrade in the future?

Jack

RF Off Mode can be useful to turn on the transmitter, check the frequency and change it if need be before transmitting it out into the RF spectrum. (Comparable to tuning a UM400 before turning it on...).

I think that it is a very useful feature.

-Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As discussed here before - the "RF OFF" mode - in my opinion appearers to be useless and a pain in the ass for field production. Larry is there any thing that can be done about this with a software upgrade in the future?

Jack

Hi Jack and others,

The RF off mode was not chosen lightly and is necessary for applications in which there are multiple microphones in critical live performances. Consider a stage production with 40 wireless systems, not untypical. If it is necessary to re-tune one transmitter for a replacement during a performance, you don't want the RF on as the stage crew tunes it from the bottom of a block to the top, stepping on every other transmitter for a moment. Also, the SM does not display frequency when it is off. How do you know what frequency it is on unless you turn it on and then discover that the main character's frequency is the same as the one you just turned on, and that Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" is not. The UM400's didn't have this problem because you had switches that could be read out when the unit was off.

Speaking of a "...pain in the ass", the reason for the two button press and the three second turn on and off was to combat real occurrences of accidental turn on and off due to ample glutus maximuses (glutei maximi ?) being applied to the membrane switches. Telling the user that they really should have put the unit in the lockmode, doesn't cut any ass, ...er ice.

All this to say, we are listening, we know it is a PITA and have come up with a scheme that is simpler and should address 98% of your concerns. Stay tuned, so to speak.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this to say, we are listening, we know it is a PITA and have come up with a scheme that is simpler and should address 98% of your concerns. Stay tuned, so to speak.

Thanks Larry,

You may already be taking this into consideration - but ideally if the SMQV can have a way of disabling the RF off feature for those of us who don't need, and don't use it, but leave it there for those who want it.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way to put the SM into "RF OFF" would be to turn it off - two buttons held 1/2/3 - then to turn it back on with two buttons held.  This seems impossible to happen accidentally.  But I have had people inexperienced with using the SM put them on and actor in "RF OFF", and I have had actors turn themselves off for privacy and then turn the SM back on incorrectly.

I was completely baffled and flummoxed when it happened, because we had just done two takes in a row that were perfect. Suddenly, take #3... dead as a doornail. The actress feigned indifference, but I always carried spares, so we were back in record in about 1 minute.

I was suspicious when at the end of the shoot, I walked over to retrieve the lav from her and she had already completely disconnected herself and handed me the SMa and the lav in a pile of cable. I considered strangling her with it, but I just smiled and gritted my teeth. Weird experience.

I didn't even know the SMa had an RF OFF mode until this happened. We had two other actors miked, and they were fine throughout. Go figure...

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I was completely baffled and flummoxed when it happened"

lol

...just reading your post as sound mixers, we already feel the same !

The good side is that according to some scientific experience, the fresh, welcoming after work brew always tastes better after these things are sorted out  :o)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...just reading your post as sound mixers, we already feel the same ! The good side is that according to some scientific experience, the fresh, welcoming after work brew always tastes better after these things are sorted out  :o)

Yeah, I took a tip from the Senator and "RTFM." Sure enough, Lectro covered this mode in the SM manuals. I never stumbled upon "RF off" in my travels, and I was doubly shocked that it would happen after a couple of perfect takes. I think I was a victim of "Big Booty + membrane switches = unpredictable mode selection."

and of course this sort of crap happens the most with the least experienced "talent"...

That goes without saying!

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

For SMQV users (and other models that support it) do you use the dust boot? I am about to purchase two Tx and would love to hear your thoughts. I'm thinking it could be great for reducing sweat into the TA5 connection, but could also slow down workflow (wiring time). I rarely do narrative work anymore, so for me wiring is about speed.

Just had an idea as I was typing this... Perhaps I could have all my EMWs wired with the boot, and my COS-11s without the boot and use the EMWs when people are going to be really sweaty...

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For SMQV users (and other models that support it) do you use the dust boot? I am about to purchase two Tx and would love to hear your thoughts. I'm thinking it could be great for reducing sweat into the TA5 connection, but could also slow down workflow (wiring time). I rarely do narrative work anymore, so for me wiring is about speed.

Just had an idea as I was typing this... Perhaps I could have all my EMWs wired with the boot, and my COS-11s without the boot and use the EMWs when people are going to be really sweaty...

Thoughts?

Hi Alex,

The boot is hard to pop over onto the transmitter flange but does get easier with practice. It is good for dust, sweat and splashing water. With the boot on, the SM's are splash resistant but not immersion resistant (!). The battery door is already o-ringed and the membrane switches are water proof. The down side to the boot, other than it is a PITA to put on the flange, is that it becomes a fairly permanent part of your mic cable, even when you don't need it. If you have to wire some one up quickly, you can always slide the boot up the wire a few inches so that it is unused and mostly out of the way. Mounting the SM upside down, gives you a drip loop before the wire enters the boot.

Best,

Larry F

Lectro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had actors turn themselves off for privacy and then turn the SM back on incorrectly.

Speaking of privacy, I have had the experience so far that while actors usually comment on how they like the size and looks of the SM transmitters, they don't trust me and my iPhone dweedles for turning them off. Not once has an actor come to me asking to send them to sleep mode. They'd rather pull out the plug, sometimes without pushing the release button, thus damaging it.

They do know how to properly turn off and on an LMa, though, so that would be kind of a plus for the LMa/UM400 even though I had thought otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of privacy, I have had the experience so far that while actors usually comment on how they like the size and looks of the SM transmitters, they don't trust me and my iPhone dweedles for turning them off.

I make that part of my "wired up" speech. If they express any doubt, I reassure them, "we want to make sure if you need a private moment you get privacy." I've never had anybody question the dweedle tone -- and they know I'll run after them if it's still on when they're leaving the set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alex,

The boot is hard to pop over onto the transmitter flange but does get easier with practice. It is good for dust, sweat and splashing water. With the boot on, the SM's are splash resistant but not immersion resistant (!). The battery door is already o-ringed and the membrane switches are water proof. The down side to the boot, other than it is a PITA to put on the flange, is that it becomes a fairly permanent part of your mic cable, even when you don't need it. If you have to wire some one up quickly, you can always slide the boot up the wire a few inches so that it is unused and mostly out of the way. Mounting the SM upside down, gives you a drip loop before the wire enters the boot.

Best,

Larry F

Lectro

Thank you very much Larry. This sums it up entirely.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...