My first Lectro experience...what did I do wrong?
Dave
I was excited to have the chance to try using a Lectrosonics wireless setup
in a small test shoot the other day (I am a *novice* mixer and have yet to
try all the great Lectro stuff available).
The rental units were a UM195 transmitter and a UCR195 receiver with a TRAM
lav, both operating at 594.150 in Toronto, Canada. Actually, I had two
sytems available and had the problems listed below with both, whether
operating separately or at the same time.
We were in a downtown park with a number of very large office towers looming
on two sides of our setup. One building in particular was extensively made
of a metal and glass exterior.
When I first engaged the unit, everything was great...clean and clear. Once
the actor assumed his first position about 30-40 yards from the receiver I'd
get the odd hit which was an intermittent "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzttttt" sound
and then back to clarity. As the actor walked closer to the receiver (5
yards or so) things improved for awhile. But alas, soon after it was "hits"
every 2 seconds constantly. I ran a long cable and taped the receiver about
6 feet up a tree, much closer to the actors transmitter...unfortunately no
improvement.Under time constraints, I had to abandon the wireless.
What did I do wrong? Was it necessary to adjust any settings on the units to
remedy this problem? I'd like to be much wiser next time so any insight
would be much appreciated.
Thanks very much.
Dave
P.S. Thanks again Eric Toline and Oleg...your advice re: the HHB Portadat
got me through beautifully!
REMOVEIT@netvision.net.il Oleg Kaizerman
> The rental units were a UM195 transmitter and a UCR195 receiver with a
TRAM
> lav, both operating at 594.150 in Toronto, Canada. Actually, I had two
> sytems available and had the problems listed below with both, whether
> operating separately or at the same time.
Are the both systems sitting on the same frequency or the same block?
--
Oleg Kaizerman (gebe) Hollyland
Ray Collins
Hi Dave,
You can't operate on the same frequency at the same time, if you had
both on 594.150 that was your biggest problem. The rental house should
know better. I would ask for a reduced rental.
Is there a UHF TV channel 34 in Toronto? That could be it, or the
rental house hasn't had the 195's tuned since the last mixer dropped the
TX's ;-)) Welcome to radio mics welcome to interference. Were all
Cell phones off? Was there another unit shooting in the area? (could
be on the same or close frequency) Were the AD's cueing over Motorola
radios while the scene was playing? (While standing next to the 195
receiver.) Did the actor have his cell phone off? Not just vibrate OFF.
Diversity may have helped if the signal was bouncing off the high
rises. Was your cell phone next to the 195 receiver? Did you have the
receiver close to the HHB DAT? Answer no to all questions. ;-)
Ray
Simon
> > The rental units were a UM195 transmitter and a UCR195 receiver with a
> TRAM
> > lav, both operating at 594.150 in Toronto, Canada. Actually, I had two
> > sytems available and had the problems listed below with both, whether
> > operating separately or at the same time.
>
> Are the both systems sitting on the same frequency or the same block?
Were these rental units from Sim ? They rent those same models you
talk about, and I have had similar problems with them in the past. I
find a real source of annoyance (fixed in later models) is the 1/8th
inch plug for the transmitter antennas. They are located on the
underseide of the unit, and often tend to loosen up and even fall out
of the transmitter. With the constant use and abuse the rental units
get, it may have become quite lose and your not getting a good
connection with the antenna. An actor standing still may yield a great
signal at first, but when moving around the antenna may loosen.
If you can get the 195b transmitters, they remedied the problem with a
different style of antenna jack, and different location for it on the
unit.
hope this helps.
Glen Trew
want to avoid wadding the antenna in the bottom of someone's pocket.
But what got my attention in your description was that the "zzzzippp" seemed
to happen at regular intervals. This is common when working near airport
radar sites (made worse if the bodypack antenna is in a wad). I wonder what
your proximity to the island airport was? (I don't know where their radar
site is, or even if they have one...)
Glen Trew
"Simon" <simon...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8a87c06c.03101...@posting.google.com...
shooter
Were all
> Cell phones off? Did the actor have his cell phone off? Not just vibrate OFF.
> rises. Was your cell phone next to the 195 receiver? Did you have the
> receiver close to the HHB DAT? Answer no to all questions. ;-)
>
>
phone or pager to either TX or RX? I'm mainly interested in this in
regards to Lectro diversity systems.
Thanks
Charles Tomaras
"shooter" <sho...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:a0d6f1bb.0310...@posting.google.com...
I would say a few feet is a reasonable distance for a cell phone that's not
ringing for Lectros that are plugged into a good mixer with good cable.
Hans W.
"Charles Tomaras" <toma...@comcast.net> wrote
news:MeadnbMlGsb...@comcast.com...
And it of course depends on how close the cell phone is to a "cell phone
base antennae", if it's close, the cellphone will transmit with less power
to save battery. If base is far away, cellphone will increase the transmit
power to "reach base" and thereby interfere more with everything.... At
least that's how it works here in Scandinavia..
Hans W Hansen
Haly-Tek, Norway
REMOVEIT@netvision.net.il Oleg Kaizerman
"Ray Collins" <rc...@intergate.bc.ca*remove> wrote in message
news:3f8b40b9$1...@dowco.com...
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> You can't operate on the same frequency at the same time, if you had
> both on 594.150 that was your biggest problem. The rental house should
> know better. I would ask for a reduced rental.
>
> Is there a UHF TV channel 34 in Toronto? That could be it, or the
> rental house hasn't had the 195's tuned since the last mixer dropped the
> TX's ;-)) Welcome to radio mics welcome to interference. Were all
> Cell phones off? Was there another unit shooting in the area? (could
> be on the same or close frequency) Were the AD's cueing over Motorola
> radios while the scene was playing? (While standing next to the 195
> receiver.) Did the actor have his cell phone off? Not just vibrate OFF.
> Diversity may have helped if the signal was bouncing off the high
> rises. Was your cell phone next to the 195 receiver? Did you have the
> receiver close to the HHB DAT? Answer no to all questions. ;-)
>
Welcome to the real world ,did you check the units in the rental house
when you took it or got them directly to the set?
--
Oleg Kaizerman (gebe) Hollyland
>
Nordy
201s. We had a good discussion about the problem in the thread "Best
Wireless Range." What helped the situation the most for me was to set
my two systems to frequencies well separated from one another. I was
encountering the problem with the two systems on adjacent channels.
It was curious to me that the artifacts only happened in the window of
about 30-50 yards, then it got clearer again (only a raised noise
floor) as distance increased or decreased.
David Waelder
"Dave" <dave.mc...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I was excited to have the chance to try using a Lectrosonics wireless setup
> in a small test shoot the other day (I am a *novice* mixer and have yet to
> try all the great Lectro stuff available).
> The rental units were a UM195 transmitter and a UCR195 receiver with a TRAM
> lav, both operating at 594.150 in Toronto, Canada. Actually, I had two
> sytems available and had the problems listed below with both, whether
> operating separately or at the same time.
I have a somewhat different take on the circumstances than others here.
(Although I'm generally in agreement with the remedies.)
I think that Dave means that he has two UCR 195 systems available. The
primary unit had a transmitter and receiver, each operating at 594.150 MHz
and, therefore, properly matched. The second system was, presumably, also
made up of a frequency matched transmitter-receiver set. Only one unit
operates at any one time, so there is no possibility of interference between
the units.
Interference from another source is the likely cause of difficulty. There is
an almost infinite menu of interference possibilities in a big city. Others
have mentioned a cell phone on the actor, the use of walkies by an AD near
the receiver, and other film companies working nearby. Any of these could
cause a problem. Building security in any of the high rises might have
walkies, there could be a taxi dispatch system nearby, or something none of
use would anticipate. Sometimes, especially if you don't have the
flexibility of frequency agile units, circumstances overwhelm you. Sometimes
the bear eats you.
Whenever range seems unreasonably limited, it's good to check for other
sources by turning off the transmitter and checking to see if the rf light
on the receiver stays lit. Sometimes one can hear the offending radio
station, or whatever, on the receiver when your own transmitter is off. Of
course, if the interference comes from a source outside your control and you
don't have other radios on a very different set of frequencies, it's little
comfort to accurately identify exactly how you're being screwed.
David Waelder
(remove shades to reply)
>
>
Ray Collins
there. Every FM radio station and every TV station are up there.
Probably enough RF to blow the Lectrosonics input circuit while the unit
is turned off. ;-)
Ray
Dave
Thanks for all the tips. My situation was as David describes...I had two
separate systems (each system on it's own properly matched frequency). These
were rental units from David J. Woods. I only ran one system at a time and
had the exact same zzzzzzzzttttt thing on both systems. You guys really know
your equipment, the little transmitter antenna on the receiver bottom was
definitely wanky...it fell out on the ground on one occasion...thank God I
found it or the rental house would have had my head. I clipped the receiver
to the actors belt on his backside, so the little antenna hung down freely ,
covered by his light cotton shirt tail.
For those who know Toronto, we were shooting in a park about a block west
of the Yonge-Sheppard corner...lots of high-rises and general chaos. I'd say
close to 10 miles north of the CN Tower and island airport. Most likely
there were a lot of taxis, building security walkies, etc. in the area. I
think every second person on the set had their cell phone on...lesson
learned here. I had the receiver (running on 9 volt batteries) on a short
XLR cable, within 2-3 inches of the Portadat and Shure FP 32a mixer. I tried
taking the wireless audio out of the mixer and put it into the Portadat
directly but no difference...my levels were set and adjusted accordingly
too.
All in all, from what you all describe, I'm thinking that my problem began
with the wiggly transmitter antenna and was further complicated by all the
external factors. Live and learn I guess.
Anyhow, I was sure glad to have a trusty Neumann KMR 82I handy...don't know
what you guys think of this mic, but I thought it was amazing. It really
saved my bacon on this shoot. Aside from all the traffic, overhead jets, and
trucks roaring by, there was a huge water fountain about 40 yards away. The
KMR 82I dimmed out a whole whack of this BG noise and the dialogue sounded
very good even though we couldn't get the boom in as tight as I normally
like.
Sorry to ramble and thanks for helping with the wireless issue.
All the best,
Dave
"David Waelder" <davidsh...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BBB18703.68B%davidsh...@earthlink.net...