A question of wireless...
Karl Winkler
respective bands/ensembles/groups...
I'm interested in your thoughts on the current situation of wireless
systems for bass. I'm aware of some of the shortcomings of existing
systems, but I'd like to learn more from you about the following
issues:
1. Do you use (or have you ever used) an instrument wireless system?
2. What do you like/dislike about it?
3. If you don't use a wireless or never have, why not?
4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
5. Are there any features that such a system "must have"?
I appreciate any/all input you are willing to give me.
Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com
Todd H.
> Greetings to all you who hold down the harmonic foundation of your
> respective bands/ensembles/groups...
>
> I'm interested in your thoughts on the current situation of wireless
> systems for bass. I'm aware of some of the shortcomings of existing
> systems, but I'd like to learn more from you about the following
> issues:
>
> 1. Do you use (or have you ever used) an instrument wireless system?
Yes, just started recently.
> 2. What do you like/dislike about it?
Love it. Hated the first VHF unit I owned, but got Sennheiser EW172
and couldn't be happier
> 3. If you don't use a wireless or never have, why not?
when I used to be a non-wireless guy, I avoided it because my
experience with cheap wireless was quite negative. Lots of compression
and dropouts and ickiness.
> 4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
> system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
> 5. Are there any features that such a system "must have"?
Must have Sennheiser EW172 on the box.
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Todd H
\ / | http://www.toddh.net/
X Promoting good netiquette | http://triplethreatband.com/
/ \ http://www.toddh.net/netiquette/ | "4 lines suffice."
Boom
wrote:
>Greetings to all you who hold down the harmonic foundation of your
>respective bands/ensembles/groups...
>
>I'm interested in your thoughts on the current situation of wireless
>systems for bass. I'm aware of some of the shortcomings of existing
>systems, but I'd like to learn more from you about the following
>issues:
>
>1. Do you use (or have you ever used) an instrument wireless system?
Yes.
>2. What do you like/dislike about it?
I like the freedom to go anywhere I want and not trip on cords, as I
always do otherwise. I dislike the fact that they sometimes pick up
interference (though I have to admit this happens less and less
frequently).
>3. If you don't use a wireless or never have, why not?
I don't feel this way, but I know some people who do, and their
biggest complaint is "it doesn't sound as warm and full as when I plug
in a cord." Personally I don't hear it myself. I hear a bit of
increased treble, but I certainly don't have a problem with warmth.
>4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
>system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
Yes.
>5. Are there any features that such a system "must have"?
Well I like the size of Samson's Airline system but I don't like its
freq. response. And I hate beltpacks but they do sound better on
bass. So stick the frequency response of a beltpack in a capsule and
I'll buy it.
>I appreciate any/all input you are willing to give me.
>
>Karl Winkler
>Lectrosonics, Inc.
>http://www.lectrosonics.com
Lectrosonics? Job change?
krhine
depending on situation. If there is room for freedom of movement, yes; if
not, then no. Mine is a Shure, can't recall exact model--it's on loan to a
friend. BTW, it is a belt model, and using tape ensures it staying put....
"Karl Winkler" <karlwi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:82150ded.04091...@posting.google.com...
gerry gironda
> 1. Do you use (or have you ever used) an instrument wireless system?
> 2. What do you like/dislike about it? no shock hazard,
mobility, less clutter
> 3. If you don't use a wireless or never have, why not?
> 4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
> system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
> 5. Are there any features that such a system "must have"?
AA or AAA rechargeables, no compression, metal transmitter and receiver
cases and 15-12K frequency response
Gerry G
gorgon
wrote:
>Greetings to all you who hold down the harmonic foundation of your
>respective bands/ensembles/groups...
>
>I'm interested in your thoughts on the current situation of wireless
>systems for bass. I'm aware of some of the shortcomings of existing
>systems, but I'd like to learn more from you about the following
>issues:
>
>1. Do you use (or have you ever used) an instrument wireless system?
Yes, the Sennheiser EW 172 G2 system.
>2. What do you like/dislike about it?
True diversity UHF system. No noticable dropouts, little or no
frequency coloration, durable transmitter and receiver, lots of
channel choices (especially important when I play at church, where
there are lots of other wireless systems in use), and the freedom and
mobility are fantastic. And with the Sennheiser I can go balanced out
direct to the house without a separate DI box, and unbalanced out to
my small "stage monitor" amp.
One issue - there is a noticable signal delay when you get too far
away - like at the back of the house when I'm working with the BOH
guys to properly EQ to accomodate the house speakers. This only
becomes noticable beyond about 60 feet (18 meters or so). At typical
stage distances, which for me is under 30 feet, no issue in delay
between plucking the string and hearing the note.
>3. If you don't use a wireless or never have, why not?
N/A
>4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
>system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
Not sure how the signal delay issue would be resolved without a
multi-antenna setup, which would become cumbersome and rarely
necessary.
>5. Are there any features that such a system "must have"?
Battery life indicator. Channel indicator on trans/receiver units.
Metal casing on transmitter. Mute switch on transmitter - this is
truly a must for changing instruments and between sets. Easy and
secure attachibility - I really like the Sennheiser transmitter in
this regard; it clips right onto my rear pants pocket with no problem.
And go with UHF - much better fidelity, range and channel selectivity
than with VHF.
>
>I appreciate any/all input you are willing to give me.
>
>Karl Winkler
>Lectrosonics, Inc.
>http://www.lectrosonics.com
My pleasure, Karl, and best of luck with your search for a good
wireless setup. I highly recommend the Sennheiser.
gorgon
Todd H.
> One issue - there is a noticable signal delay when you get too far
> away - like at the back of the house when I'm working with the BOH
> guys to properly EQ to accomodate the house speakers. This only
> becomes noticable beyond about 60 feet (18 meters or so). At typical
> stage distances, which for me is under 30 feet, no issue in delay
> between plucking the string and hearing the note.
> >4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
> >system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
>
> Not sure how the signal delay issue would be resolved without a
> multi-antenna setup, which would become cumbersome and rarely
> necessary.
Note that this delay you're hearing has nothing to do with wireless
(as RF travels essentially at the speed of light), and everything to
do with the speed of sound in air. The farther you are physcially
lfrom the stage, the longer it takes for your bandmates sound to reach
you, and the more and more behind the beat you start plucking, and
then you hear yourself from your amp that much later.
Best Regards,
gorgon
>gorgon <gorg...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> One issue - there is a noticable signal delay when you get too far
>> away - like at the back of the house when I'm working with the BOH
>> guys to properly EQ to accomodate the house speakers. This only
>> becomes noticable beyond about 60 feet (18 meters or so). At typical
>> stage distances, which for me is under 30 feet, no issue in delay
>> between plucking the string and hearing the note.
>
>
>> >4. If there was a new technology introduced in an instrument wireless
>> >system that would solve these problems, would you consider using it?
>>
>> Not sure how the signal delay issue would be resolved without a
>> multi-antenna setup, which would become cumbersome and rarely
>> necessary.
>
>Note that this delay you're hearing has nothing to do with wireless
>(as RF travels essentially at the speed of light), and everything to
>do with the speed of sound in air. The farther you are physcially
>lfrom the stage, the longer it takes for your bandmates sound to reach
>you, and the more and more behind the beat you start plucking, and
>then you hear yourself from your amp that much later.
>
>Best Regards,
You're right! My brain must have been on idle when I posted last
night. The delay is in the sound, not the signal. I've never tried
playing with the band from distance like that, but the problem would
be the same I'm sure.
gorgon
BucketButt
need it ... yet. Only suggestion I can offer is to design the transmitter
packto work with either rechargeables or alkalines; every battery-operated
device I own has the nasty habit of draining the batteries at the most
inopportune times.
--
Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
Karl Winkler
Thanks for all the great input. I noticed that some of you thought I
might be *looking* for a wireless system... actually I'm working on
*developing* one. I used to work for Sennheiser, so I'm glad to see
that those products are working out well! <g>
To address some of the points you have made thus far:
1. To Gerry: our units will use a 9V for the upcoming version, but
rechargeables will certainly work. They will have a metal case. You
mention a frequency response of 15Hz to 12kHz. I'm curious as to why,
because the lowest fundamental from a low B on a 5-string is only
about 32Hz... and almost no cabinet or even PA system will do anything
lower than that. We had planned to extend our system response down to
32 to ensure even a 5-string is covered. As for the upper response,
our system will go to 20kHz, ensuring that even the most delicate
harmonics are captured.
2. To Gorgon: the system will have true diversity, be UHF, and be
rock-solid in terms of RF performance. The transmitter will put out
more than 50mW of RF power, which is twice what some units do, and 5x
what most units do. There will be no coloration of the singal, mainly
because our unit will not have the dreaded compandor circuit. All
analog UHF wireless systems use a compandor, thus compromising
dynamics and tone to get lower noise. Ours uses a digital encoding
system to remove the analog compandor. Our system will offer 256
channels, and we will offer three blocks, thus overall you'll have
more than 750 channels to choose from. Should be enough... The
receiver will indicate battery capacity. As Todd pointed out, the
delay you are experiencing is acoustic in nature. Thanks for the tip
on the mute switch: I'll relay this to engineering.
3. To Walter, as mentioned above, you can use alkalines or
rechargeable batteries with our system.
A couple of people have mentioned the Samson AirLine system and I'd
love to be able to pack our quality into such a small package. Maybe
for the 2nd generation of this product! I'll discuss it with
engineering.
Again, thanks for all the super-valuable input. As we get closer to
market, I'll let you know about how it turns out.
Sincerely,
Andrew Duncan
I'll just post a me-too about the frequency response. As you know, a
system that claims that it goes "down to 40Hz" (for example) could
well mean a -3 dB point at 40 Hz, which is completely unacceptable
even for 4-string bass. Twiddling with EQs is never satisfactory --
unless the EQ is tailored exactly right you just wind up with an ever
weirder contour, and more time delay to boot. When I look at specs for
many wireless systems they say something like 60 Hz... I won't even
consider them.
I have owned a number of processing boxes for my bass and without
exception they have some loss in the bottom octave. They sound great
on headphones, but live you can tell -- and so can the rest of the
band -- that when you hit the low note it is missing something. To be
sure, we're talking about the hundred dollar range, not the thousand
dollar range for processors. But as it turns out, the only gizmo I use
on stage is my (passive) volume pedal.
So just pay attention to all those stray capacitances and keep the low
end there!
Andrew
Karl Winkler
> Thanks, Karl for taking the time to ask.
>
> I'll just post a me-too about the frequency response. As you know, a
> system that claims that it goes "down to 40Hz" (for example) could
> well mean a -3 dB point at 40 Hz, which is completely unacceptable
> even for 4-string bass.
I'm interested in more details from you on this, because -3 at 40
actually "should" be fine for a 4-string, where the lowest note is
around 42Hz. Of course filter design, and the quality of the
components matter, as well.
> Twiddling with EQs is never satisfactory --
> unless the EQ is tailored exactly right you just wind up with an ever
> weirder contour, and more time delay to boot.
Yes, filters do introduce phase problems... no doubt.
> When I look at specs for
> many wireless systems they say something like 60 Hz... I won't even
> consider them.
Agreed. And unfortunately, many of them are like that.
>
> I have owned a number of processing boxes for my bass and without
> exception they have some loss in the bottom octave. They sound great
> on headphones, but live you can tell -- and so can the rest of the
> band -- that when you hit the low note it is missing something. To be
> sure, we're talking about the hundred dollar range, not the thousand
> dollar range for processors. But as it turns out, the only gizmo I use
> on stage is my (passive) volume pedal.
>
> So just pay attention to all those stray capacitances and keep the low
> end there!
Will do. We're carefully looking at every aspect of the system, and
the low end response is clearly very important. Thanks again for your
input.
Ed Cregger
Look around for an Acoustic 450/470 or 370 (I prefer the latter). Which ever
one is in the wattage class you are seeking. They have graphic equalizers
that are more than up to the job.
The digital junk that I have encountered of late, at least the plug-ins for
Sonar, are disgraceful.
Ed Cregger
Andrew Duncan
> > system that claims that it goes "down to 40Hz" (for example) could
> > well mean a -3 dB point at 40 Hz, which is completely unacceptable
> > even for 4-string bass.
>
> I'm interested in more details from you on this, because -3 at 40
> actually "should" be fine for a 4-string, where the lowest note is
> around 42Hz. Of course filter design, and the quality of the
> components matter, as well.
Well, I'd say it's marginal. I obsess about things like string
balance, and a few dB difference (say between the A and D string) is
unacceptable. It forces you to avoid convenient fingerings and use
more difficult ones. I had this problem with my stock Steinberger
5-string for a decade before I took it over to Seymour Duncan. We
found that the pickups were (internally) a split-type (Fender P-style)
but not well designed for the very narrow string spacing (5 strings in
the usual width of 4). The E and A strings wound up getting picked up
by both of the splits and sounding a few dB hotter. Obviously tilting
the pickups either way wouldn't help because E and A are in the
middle. Replacing the pickups made a HUGE difference in playability.
Back to our topic, when I'm playing a song in E (common enough, no?)
and I go down to the low E I want it to have some impact -- I reserve
that note for important structural spots in the song. Down 3 dB is a
lot. Just for a related example, suppose you're in the studio mixing
down. Levels are just about right. Then the engineer goes and pulls
down the bass 3 dB. I'd be quite disappointed (at least) and would
consider it a bad mix. (To be sure, that would affect all notes, not
just the low octave.)
Anyway, as you point out, when you go to a 5-string bass, it's not
marginal, it's well into just wrong. So... good luck with the project
and I will keep my eyes open for the results.
Andrew
Tim Skelly Cason
Cripple Need Cane, a Los Angeles rock band that is still struggling:
http://www.crippleneedcane.com/PlayBass.html
Not only did he create the basses you'll see on this site, he also
created the entire website himself!
Skelly has made lots of outstanding basses and will be performing in
New York for the Bass Player Live event sponsored by Bass Player
Magazine. Tim Skelly Cason in sponsored by Roland and Boss. He will
be showing the latest and greatest from Roland's line of new bass
products, including the new MIDI configuration for bass. It's
outstanding.
http://www.timcason.com
adu...@expertcity.com (Andrew Duncan) wrote in message news:<c1b18814.04092...@posting.google.com>...
EGO
<Deep South American accent>
"If I didn't know no better, Winkler, I'd swear dis here man done
hijacked yo' thread, son!"
Kloka-mo'
<Deeper south accent>
Do What?
:-P
--
O< "Hey... pull my flipper!"
/(\)
^^ Slidell, LA