Christian Spaeth Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Trust me Rado I would have no interest at all giving false information on here, as Glenn could surely confirm, I am a very critical Nomad owner. The blurry SRa is a block 28 and I figured it wasn't of much concern as you Americans don't really use that block any more. By the way it was more affected than the block 21 SRa. I myself was very surprised about the block 21 result on the photo because I had done scans before and with the SRa positioned lower and it was as badly sprayed as everyone else's block 21 gear. Then I raised it higher and did a new scan and it looked like this. So I encourage everyone to play with the position of your receivers. By the way I had a shoot yesterday and my block 21 txs had more range than the block 28 txs. I will shoot the whole week so I can give more reports later. Looks way better then mine... My block 24 however just gets a few pixels here and there and it is totally fine. Maybe not every Nomad is created equal. BTW how come the scan in the blurry background seams to be more crowded then the one on the nomad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Sorry about the blurry SRa. The color coding looks like Brown which is block 21. Trust me Rado I would have no interest at all giving false information on here, as Glenn could surely confirm, I am a very critical Nomad owner. The blurry SRa is a block 28 and I figured it wasn't of much concern as you Americans don't really use that block any more. By the way it was more affected than the block 21 SRa. I myself was very surprised about the block 21 result on the photo because I had done scans before and with the SRa positioned lower and it was as badly sprayed as everyone else's block 21 gear. Then I raised it higher and did a new scan and it looked like this. So I encourage everyone to play with the position of your receivers. By the way I had a shoot yesterday and my block 21 txs had more range than the block 28 txs. I will shoot the whole week so I can give more reports later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Spaeth Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I must say I am not impressed by the SRa's range so far with the Nomad. Both blocks 21 and 28 give me about 20 meters range before I get the light crackle, depending on where the Txs were hidden on the talent. Using them with LMas and 50 mW SMs. Will do a scan again today when I have the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hemmerlinj Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I have a setup similar to Jack's with my Nomad. I definitely get RF spray, but the range I actually get when I have someone wired up is no different than when I was using my 442, or on occasion a 552. The RX that gets the most spray, which sits roughly to the center of the nomad with just the petrol divider btwn them, seems to have the best range over my other rx's. I've tried the setup with a single power source as well as 1 bds setup for the wireless and one for the Nomad. The rx's are all blk 26. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 " The RX that gets the most spray, which sits roughly to the center of the nomad with just the petrol divider btwn them, seems to have the best range over my other rx's. " " Pixels reduce range. From 1 to 3 pixel you can get 50% less range. " ?¿ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I must say I am not impressed by the SRa's range so far with the Nomad. Both blocks 21 and 28 give me about 20 meters range before I get the light crackle, depending on where the Txs were hidden on the talent. Using them with LMas and 50 mW SMs. Will do a scan again today when I have the time. I have a setup similar to Jack's with my Nomad. I definitely get RF spray, but the range I actually get when I have someone wired up is no different than when I was using my 442, or on occasion a 552. The RX that gets the most spray, which sits roughly to the center of the nomad with just the petrol divider btwn them, seems to have the best range over my other rx's. I've tried the setup with a single power source as well as 1 bds setup for the wireless and one for the Nomad. The rx's are all blk 26. " The RX that gets the most spray, which sits roughly to the center of the nomad with just the petrol divider btwn them, seems to have the best range over my other rx's. " " Pixels reduce range. From 1 to 3 pixel you can get 50% less range. " ?¿ The Reason I am a crazy Pixel Peeper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Finely organized my Nomad bag. Since RF garbage is the same regardless if I put my RX outside I decided to leave them inside. I will try UMF230/MiniCircuits antenna distro system which MIGHT improve RF Garbage spray from Nomad. Now the big question is if Zaxcom QRX100 has the same RF spread from Nomad... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Block 24 not working good as well. For the last 2 days I have been trying all kind of combinations. 2 different battery systems, stand alone batteries. Physical separation. SRa,411a. Block 21 and Block 24. I have a lot of RF garbage regardless of the combinations. It is very frustrating!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Spaeth Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Rado, does your frustration come from the scan results on your receivers or actual walk tests? I talked to a fellow sound mixer who uses a Deva and SRas and she said she doesn't get much more range than I do (20 meters). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDirckze Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Block 24 not working good as well. For the last 2 days I have been trying all kind of combinations. 2 different battery systems, stand alone batteries. Physical separation. SRa,411a. Block 21 and Block 24. I have a lot of RF garbage regardless of the combinations. It is very frustrating!!! How is the RF spray across your UCR411/24 in comparison to the SRa/24? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Gilchrist Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Rado, does your frustration come from the scan results on your receivers or actual walk tests? I talked to a fellow sound mixer who uses a Deva and SRas and she said she doesn't get much more range than I do (20 meters). Christian, you are really getting that short a working range with these radio systems and recorders working together? And Rado, you're getting around the same? Best regards, Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundslikejustin Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Wow. Something is wrong here. It's not an 'apples to apples' test, but I get 30-40m with my block 26 QRX in dual mode and LT's (50mw) and a 744T (i can see the RF noise on the scan almost double when it gets turned on) AND the QIFB running full blast in the same bag. If I turn the IFB off I'll get another 10m ish. The QRX is separated from the 744T by the divider wall that comes with the Petrol PS602, and is not directly in line with the body of the device. If I move the QRX so that it's inline with the middle of the 744T, I get a 10m reduction in range, and it's a little bit less stable than the normal setup. But that's still more than you guys are getting with your Nomads... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McQueen Posted February 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 I'm having pretty good result with my block 24 SRa. I have the tx's set at 100mw. I just got a block 26 SRa last week and have been getting same results as 24. And the scans are both pretty clean with nomad powered on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Rado, does your frustration come from the scan results on your receivers or actual walk tests? I talked to a fellow sound mixer who uses a Deva and SRas and she said she doesn't get much more range than I do (20 meters). Walking test. But mainly my frustration is that the scans do not mean anything. If I choose a free frequency after the first scan it starts having 3 bars RF 10 second after. 20 meters with SRa your friend is getting sounds like something is wrong. Might be the RF from Zaxcom recorders. How is the RF spray across your UCR411/24 in comparison to the SRa/24? Actually my 411a craps out 10 feet before my SRa block 24 and the scans are the same. I don't understand why people think SRa delivers less range then 411a.... I'm having pretty good result with my block 24 SRa. I have the tx's set at 100mw. I just got a block 26 SRa last week and have been getting same results as 24. And the scans are both pretty clean with nomad powered on. Is your Nomad the 6 or 8? I guess not all Nomads are created equal. I will shoot a video of UCR411a and SRa both block 24 next to the nomad tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 I am gettting very good results with my Lectro blocks 25 and 26 411's I get a small amout of spray but nothing of any real concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blankenship Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 ... But mainly my frustration is that the scans do not mean anything. If I choose a free frequency after the first scan it starts having 3 bars RF 10 second after. ... Sometimes the real world and the theoretical world coincide and sometime they collide. ... I don't understand why people think SRa delivers less range then 411a.... ... The UCR411a has a tracking front end -- The SRa doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justanross Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Correct me if I'm wrong guys. But the SRa's are not true diversity right? They only have one antenna per receiver. Is it possible that might be part of the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryF Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Correct me if I'm wrong guys. But the SRa's are not true diversity right? They only have one antenna per receiver. Is it possible that might be part of the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryF Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Each antenna goes to an amplifier and then to a two way splitter. Each receiver has access to both antennas in either antenna diversity or receiver diversity. Best Larry f Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryF Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Receiver sensitivity means very little in the presence of noise. The external noise dominates the receiver noise and and all receivers work poorly. The solution is to remove the noise. The receiver is not the problem and is not the solution. Best Larry Fisher Lectrosonics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Larry there has been a lot of speculation so perhaps you can clear something up. In real world usage what is the rough correlation between the number of pixels in a scan and the decrease in range - is there a correlation? And obviously after you do a scan it is better to choose a frequency with no pixels - but if you choose a frequency with one two or even three pixels being caused by "electronic spray" what does that really mean in wireless performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 The senator is like an annoying neighbor: Unfortunately a very experienced and knowledgeable neighbor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomboom Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Zaxcom talent mics block 21 and cam hop block 24 here, still ain't no Nomad though. Needless to say, I'll at least be waiting 'til everything's cleared up ... :-/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryF Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 One pixel is roughly a 50% reduction in range. Three pixels will reduce the range another 50%. These are all rough numbers. Ymmv. Best Larry F Larry there has been a lot of speculation so perhaps you can clear something up. In real world usage what is the rough correlation between the number of pixels in a scan and the decrease in range - is there a correlation? And obviously after you do a scan it is better to choose a frequency with no pixels - but if you choose a frequency with one two or even three pixels being caused by "electronic spray" what does that really mean in wireless performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Spaeth Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Christian, you are really getting that short a working range with these radio systems and recorders working together? And Rado, you're getting around the same? Best regards, Jim The first walk test I did gave me about 50 meters without dropouts (on block 21) but on a real shoot with wired actors and hidden transmitters (LMas and 50 mW SMs) at times I would get dropouts starting about 20 meters from where I was. I guess I wouldn't say that I generally dom't get more than 20 meters working range but sometimes yes. Which may or may not have anything to do with the Nomad. I agree with Rado that the scan results seem unreliable, at times there are very few pixels throughout and another test would give me an extreme amount of pixels everywhere in the block. 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.