glenn Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 Wireless for ENG and EFP use “sound bag” is our main focus at Zaxcom. Solving the engineering problems of intermodulation, power consumption, audio quality, time code transmission/distribution, return channel/IFB monitoring, transmitter backup recording (patented), stereo transmission, encrypted transmission and most importantly transmission reliability is our mission and passion in wireless audio. I do not see the wireless microphone, the IFB system, time code distribution and the mixer/recorder as independent functions but as a single system. Digital technology has opened up many possibilities to improve audio quality and provide real world benefits to the sound mixer who operates the gear over the shoulder and the productions they work for. With the addition of the Nomad mixer/recorder, wireless microphones, IFB and mixing/recording are now integrated in a small power efficient sound system within the operating environment of a sound bag. I hope that our TRX900LTH (125mW transmitter), QRX100 (4 channel receiver), TRX900AA with STA150 (Stereo Hop) and the Nomad become the new reference standard for ENG/EFP production as a complete integrated audio solution. For this to happen each part of the system has to be a better solution than the matching component from our competitors. I truly believe we have achieved that goal. At the minimum let’s get 5-10 lbs of gear out of the sound bag. The medical community does not need the money ;-) Glenn Sanders President Zaxcom Inc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zack Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 The only thing holding me back on that department is the durability of the tx's in the ENG/reality world (I'm used to my receivers being dropped, dragged, and beaten), and also the compatibility with the other mixers I works with. These Tx's have been used "on" NFL players during play, (a story Glenn told me), I'm sure they're durable enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gilbert Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 I've used Zax tx's (and Lectro) on Special Forces soldiers whilst on active duty, I counted them all out, and I counted them all back..... No worries for durability with either manufacturer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_bollard Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 It seems I'm with everyone with Lectro 411 receivers and a Zaxcom link to the camera. Unlike some I have kept my 195Ds. I pull them out occasionally and when I do I am pleasantly surprised at how good they sound; better than 411s. Could it be that the preamps? Or the analogue companding ? Over here in Australia we are about to go thru our own frequency sell off and will be losing a large chunk, from low 600 to mid-high 700 MHz. I dream of a more open mobile Tx/rx system; even something covering two blocks would be great. I have a little feeling that the Zaxcom receiver can operate over a wider range than the one block that it's paired with; maybe someone from zaxcom on the forum could comment. I've seen a receiver in engineer mode with frequency block options, but maybe not. Can't help but think that as our spectrum shrinks that the first company with a block agile portable system will clean up. An aside here, noted from my current location; high school campus that is wired everywhere for wifi. It has taken some searching to find a clear group of frequencies that works. Clear on scan does not equal clear trouble free reception. Damn you wifi! Edit: I understand tech reasons why Tx using a crystal is hard to make work over wide range of frequencies. Does current receiver tech use crystals too, or is it done in software? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 I have a little feeling that the Zaxcom receiver can operate over a wider range than the one block that it's paired with; maybe someone from zaxcom on the forum could comment. I've seen a receiver in engineer mode with frequency block options, but maybe not. Our current systems are set up for 35MHz blocks. We do open that up to 40MHz on request. All of our systems feature overlaping blocks so that a block 21 receiver will work with a block 20,21 and 22 transmitter. Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 Our current systems are set up for 35MHz blocks. We do open that up to 40MHz on request. All of our systems feature overlaping blocks so that a block 21 receiver will work with a block 20,21 and 22 transmitter. Glenn Glenn, Is there any reason why anyone would not opt for the 40 meg block? Does the front-end filtering suffer in this mode? Also, can the transmitters be modified to operate across the same range? Thanks, DH P.S. I totally agree Chris in thinking that a "block-agile" system would be a big deal to most mixers. Though probably a generation or two away I'm guessing.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I will look into opening up our system to a 45MHz span. Our TRX900LT and QRX should have no problem with this. If we do it, a software update is all that would be needed to take advantage of the new capability. Our specifications may be effected at the edge of the block but it would be less than 1 dB and not noticeable to the user. I am sure the extra versatility will be well worth it. Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I will look into opening up our system to a 45MHz span. Our TRX900LT and QRX should have no problem with this. If we do it, a software update is all that would be needed to take advantage of the new capability. Our specifications may be effected at the edge of the block but it would be less than 1 dB and not noticeable to the user. I am sure the extra versatility will be well worth it. Glenn Glenn This would be great - can the TRX900AA be updated as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatthewFreedAudio Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I have a few Zaxcom 900LT transmitters with both 900S and QRX100 receivers and a 900aa/900S stereo hop. All of these units are very durable and extremely well made. I just also purchased an IFB100 transmitter and 5 ERX IFB receivers, they are all built extremely well. I made some pouches with belt loops and clips for my 900lt transmitters but I made them to give me more flexibility to put them on talent, not for duribility reasons. They are plenty durable on their own. I love that I can control the transmitter gain and even change the transmitters frequency remotely via the IFB 100. Not only that but the sound quality is far better than any Lectro I have ever used. I do like that so many people use Lectros for the ability to borrow and swap out units with rental houses and other mixers. But, I much prefer my Zaxcom units. I currently use a Sound Devices mixer and recorder in my bag but I am placing an order for a Fusion 12 within a few weeks. The bells and whistles (putting it mildly) that an all Zaxcom system offer is really unmatched. I would get a Nomad but I don't like that it only has 6 mic pres. But, that is why a Fusion 12 will do the trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 " calculates intermod free freequncies (no need for third party software). " that is true if all of the wireless are also Shure. only the third party application can intermix various brands... " LOVE to see a dual channel front-end tracking receiver! " I speculate that would take a back seat to development of newer technologies (i.e. new products). Dual tracking in one RX would be complex, though not impossible " in 2011 Lectro still does not make a receiver that can receive a wider range than 25.5 MHz " while manufacturers are responding to demand for wider blocks, there are always trade-offs; the good news is that technology marches forward... " a "block-agile" system would be a big deal to most mixers. " also complex, but not impossible...BTW "complex also = more $$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I will look into opening up our system to a 45MHz span. Our TRX900LT and QRX should have no problem with this. If we do it, a software update is all that would be needed to take advantage of the new capability. Our specifications may be effected at the edge of the block but it would be less than 1 dB and not noticeable to the user. I am sure the extra versatility will be well worth it. Glenn probably because i dont know too much about the front end filters on the zaxcom units, but i am surprised to read that by extending the bandwidth by 12MHz - presumably by adding 6Mhz at the top and bottom of the units range, there is less than a 1dB drop of signal. that doesnt seem very steep to me, or does digital transmission not need very steep filters for the front end of the receiver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Spaeth Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 OT: About different plugs for lavs: DPA mics have a screw-on connector mechanism that allows you to use the same lav mic with various receivers. If DPA is too high end and high priced, Rode copied that mechanism for their Lavalier/Pinmic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 "probably because i dont know too much about the front end filters on the zaxcom units, but i am surprised to read that by extending the bandwidth by 12MHz - presumably by adding 6Mhz at the top and bottom of the units range, there is less than a 1dB drop of signal. that doesnt seem very steep to me, or does digital transmission not need very steep filters for the front end of the receiver?" Zaxcom wireless receivers have no intermodulation issues. This eliminates the need for tracking filters and intermod software as the receiver front end cannot be overloaded. We do use a 3 stage helical filter that has about a 40 Mhz bandwidth. Stretching it another +/- 2 Mhz is no big deal. Any more than this would cause a significant loss of signal as it is designed to do. Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Feeley Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 OT: About different plugs for lavs: DPA mics have a screw-on connector mechanism that allows you to use the same lav mic with various receivers. If DPA is too high end and high priced, Rode copied that mechanism for their Lavalier/Pinmic. Ya, that's a nice development. Countryman has something similar on their new B2D lav. Saw it at NAB; looked solid: I asked if we would see this as an option for other Countryman lavs. Chris answered, but I don't recall exactly what he said so I won't post possibly inaccurate info here. --Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 "probably because i dont know too much about the front end filters on the zaxcom units, but i am surprised to read that by extending the bandwidth by 12MHz - presumably by adding 6Mhz at the top and bottom of the units range, there is less than a 1dB drop of signal. that doesnt seem very steep to me, or does digital transmission not need very steep filters for the front end of the receiver?" Zaxcom wireless receivers have no intermodulation issues. This eliminates the need for tracking filters and intermod software as the receiver front end cannot be overloaded. We do use a 3 stage helical filter that has about a 40 Mhz bandwidth. Stretching it another +/- 2 Mhz is no big deal. Any more than this would cause a significant loss of signal as it is designed to do. Glenn thanks for the reply Glenn. look forward to having the extra bandwidth to chose from Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 " a 3 stage helical filter that has about a 40 Mhz bandwidth. Stretching it another +/- 2 Mhz is no big deal. Any more than this would cause a significant loss of signal as it is designed to do." and thus: various laws of physics and our current technologies have a great influence (which includes limitations) on our agility... " I understand tech reasons why Tx using a crystal is hard to make work over wide range of frequencies. Does current receiver tech use crystals too, or is it done in software? " Actually there are crystals in modern wireless, too, and ah, if only it were actually so easy... I guess this might apply: 'if it were really so simple, everyone would be doing it' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Wynne Posted August 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Hi Everyone ! Thanks everyone for the incredible feedback ! I learned a lot while reading all of your posts. I figured I would send an update on what I decided to do. I ended up purchasing one of the Lectro UCR411, SMQV, with a Sanken COS11 too match. I've used Lectro in the past when renting and always have been happy with it and I feel it will be best for my particular use which for now seems to be mostly industrial bag work. And thanks to my buddy Whit in Atlanta on the COS11 recommendation. I feel very confident in Lectrosonics service and they were very helpful on the phone helping me determine which block to purchase in my area, and am totally in love with my sound device gear. My second wireless set will be the same models in a different block and I'll mostly likely get the SMV as my second transmitter so I have a smaller option. I learn so much from you guys here on this forum and I love reading about all this stuff ! Best ! Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razastudio Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Hi! I intend to buy new wireless systems. I do mostly film work and use a cart. Reading this thread got me very much inclined towards Zaxcom. If so, what configuration would you advise for 1 boom and 4 lavs? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Hi! I intend to buy new wireless systems. I do mostly film work and use a cart. Reading this thread got me very much inclined towards Zaxcom. If so, what configuration would you advise for 1 boom and 4 lavs? Thanks! I'd suggest looking at their catalog. They make rack units as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan McL Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Hi! I intend to buy new wireless systems. I do mostly film work and use a cart. Reading this thread got me very much inclined towards Zaxcom. If so, what configuration would you advise for 1 boom and 4 lavs? Thanks! Hi, Raza, While I haven't had the QRX/MicPlexer/ZaxPaq configuration for very long, seems like were I to begin collecting Zax wireless today, this is how I'd go, for flexibility. Will know more soon performance-wise as I fly the QRX out in the field. The RX4900's are great for the cart, but when I needed to fly one out remotely, it became a larger can of worms than I'd prefer, having to carry a small rack to protect the unit, and un-rack/re-rack/un-rack/re-rack, the 4900 etc. Still, it worked just fine. Definitely consider an outboard 2.4Ghz antenna, amp and DC power injector to get the IFB range to match the range of the wireless transmission, and good antennas. Sounds like you want five receivers. If you do, you'll have to go a bit overboard. Love the TRX992 for boom. Maybe just four receivers and the option to hard wire the boom if you wind up needing four lavs would suit you. Let us know what you decide to do. -- Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razastudio Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Hi Jan! Thanks for your answer! Doing a bit of research, I came with this setup: - 2 QRX in dual mode for the 4 lav transmitters - 1 QRX or RX in single mode for the boom - Mic Plexer + Zax Paq - IFB 100 Do you think this could be a good starter Zaxcom package or the dual mode isn't that reliable? I wouldn't go for the 4900 because it restricts me to cart use, and in case it breaks, I would have my entire rig rendered futile. Also, it isn't very clear to me if the Mic Plexer is intended to be used with shark fin/ dipole antennae. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan McL Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Like I said, have not yet flown the units in the field. Nor am I likely in the near future to hook it into my cart package. This is for car rig/bag/remote deployment. I'll soon have the rig in the trunk of the picture car (with 1/4 wave antennas receiving the TX signals), with an external, amped 2.4Ghz antenna mounted to the trunk to send IFB audio to the follow vehicle. Free-driving with camera op, 1st AC, and actors in the picture car where no other individuals will fit. Project's too low budget for me to invest in helical antennas to mix from the follow vehicle. Plan to hit record and kiss 'em goodbye with fingers crossed and let post have at it if they need to. If you get the IFB option in your MicPlexer, it seems to me that you might not need the IFB100. I managed to scan for and change freqs, and adjust TX gain. Didn't explore adjusting TX power, but time code and IFB audio were delivered to ERX units as expected... -- Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 " what configuration " it depends... " I wouldn't go for the 4900 because it restricts me to cart use, " see...?? this is a subjective choice you will need to make for yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimPitot Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 ^ although it's certainly helpful asking others what has worked for them. That's why we're all here - to share knowledge and experience. Isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) " Isn't it? " sure. " I'd suggest looking at their catalog " makes it easier to discuss... and it is an individual's subjective choice, right?? Edited August 9, 2011 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
.jpg.60deb0716219777743dadbbc5c367e0c.thumb.jpg.1c9a3a88e16c9817f9ba0b039743d08a.jpg)
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.