|  | | 
02-21-2013, 03:26 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, Ontario, Canada | | | As a local PA tech put it to me, "the government didn't leave us much to work with when they changed the rules. Everyone is going to be duking it out in increasingly crowded parts of the wireless spectrum, until the next big technological leap comes along"...
As a computer dweeb in my day job, I'm already aware of the interference problems that IT guys have with WiFi networks in crowded places like convention centres, and Bluetooth runs in the same spectrum.
If this was easy, Presonus would have done it already.
At a couple of venues, I am using their mixers with as many as 7 or 8 iPads and 4 iPhones running on a crowded stage, plus at least 3 macs running back at the desk. We're using a mixture of bluetooth and WiFi to run Qmix (remote monitor level mixing), SL Remote (remote FOH and streaming audio mixes), and OnSong (sharing chord charts). We also have Sennheiser UHF wireless IEM packs (8 channels of audio).
We're already having the odd issue with bluetooth and WiFi links intermittently dropping on the 'phones and iPads (Qmix and OnSong), and none of the band members are using wireless transmitters for their instruments.
We are looking at getting an amplified antenna array to fix some IEM performance issues, but I can't get a straight answer as to whether that will further impact our WiFi and bluetooth signals. " Try it and see" seems to be the answer.
From what I can see, expecting low-latency, stable and wide-response in-ear monitoring across the same network that's struggling to run our chord charts and adjust monitor levels, would just be asking for trouble. | 
02-24-2013, 03:39 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Long Island, NY | | | All the responses and explanations of latency are great, but we already use wireless mics and instrument systems that are up to gig specs. Why cant we use that technology, and reverse it, maybe create a simple plug in device to your iphone, ala an irig, to facilitate the use of an iphone as a iEM receiver? I think its easier than people think | 
02-24-2013, 04:11 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Austin, TX | | Quote:
Originally Posted by NickfromSOS All the responses and explanations of latency are great, but we already use wireless mics and instrument systems that are up to gig specs. Why cant we use that technology, and reverse it, maybe create a simple plug in device to your iphone, ala an irig, to facilitate the use of an iphone as a iEM receiver? I think its easier than people think | Are you a software/hardware engineer? If not, you really aren't in a position to judge whether it would be easy or not. | 
02-24-2013, 04:32 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Long Island, NY | | | B
Last edited by NickfromSOS : 02-24-2013 at 04:40 PM.
| 
02-24-2013, 04:55 PM
| | | Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_rolfeca As a local PA tech put it to me, "the government didn't leave us much to work with when they changed the rules. Everyone is going to be duking it out in increasingly crowded parts of the wireless spectrum, until the next big technological leap comes along"...
As a computer dweeb in my day job, I'm already aware of the interference problems that IT guys have with WiFi networks in crowded places like convention centres, and Bluetooth runs in the same spectrum.
If this was easy, Presonus would have done it already.
At a couple of venues, I am using their mixers with as many as 7 or 8 iPads and 4 iPhones running on a crowded stage, plus at least 3 macs running back at the desk. We're using a mixture of bluetooth and WiFi to run Qmix (remote monitor level mixing), SL Remote (remote FOH and streaming audio mixes), and OnSong (sharing chord charts). We also have Sennheiser UHF wireless IEM packs (8 channels of audio).
We're already having the odd issue with bluetooth and WiFi links intermittently dropping on the 'phones and iPads (Qmix and OnSong), and none of the band members are using wireless transmitters for their instruments.
We are looking at getting an amplified antenna array to fix some IEM performance issues, but I can't get a straight answer as to whether that will further impact our WiFi and bluetooth signals. " Try it and see" seems to be the answer.
From what I can see, expecting low-latency, stable and wide-response in-ear monitoring across the same network that's struggling to run our chord charts and adjust monitor levels, would just be asking for trouble. | What make/model of router? Check the security and see if it's set to WPA. I'm hearing that a lot of custom integrators are having problems with WEP and Apple i-Devices. | 
02-24-2013, 05:20 PM
| | Registered User Endorsing Artist: J.C. Basses | | Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Phoenix, Arizona 85029 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by NickfromSOS All the responses and explanations of latency are great, but we already use wireless mics and instrument systems that are up to gig specs. Why cant we use that technology, and reverse it, maybe create a simple plug in device to your iphone, ala an irig, to facilitate the use of an iphone as a iEM receiver? I think its easier than people think | We're talking about a few different types of latency, here. Wireless mics and instrument systems only have to deal with latency induced by physical distance because they are analog and transferring the signal as radio waves. It's simple.
Digital brings a whole new issue into play. Analog signals have to be first converted into digital signals, which then have to be transferred via some wireless method (wifi or bluetooth are the fastest wireless options), and then that signal has to be converted back into analog to be played in the ear. That's at least two extra steps of conversion, which are not instantaneous, and add to the overall latency in the system.
__________________ Quote:
Originally Posted by McThumpenstein I don't think the wife would buy the "I need to take off this knob and put a whole new bass under it" story. | | 
02-25-2013, 12:08 AM
| | | These guys have 2 ways and stereo and are digital. http://www.widigitalsystems.com/
Radio waves are speed of light.
A to D, D to A takes micro seconds
Buffering creates some latency.
Digital is the way to go - no squelch knobs or companding.
The problem is everything has to share the same frequencies and channels. Only so many cars get on the freeway and the whole thing slows down.
Wired is a good way to go. Many bi-direction channels over a single cat6 - no interference. microsecond latency.
__________________
My opinions are the result of years of rational, objective analysis. I analyze all factors before making a choice. I update my opinions to include new facts. Fallacies? No?
| 
02-25-2013, 12:31 AM
|  | mi la ré sol | | Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Reims, Champagne, France | | | My wireless is fully digital and uses wifi to carry the signal. It works just fine.
What I wonder is, why would you want to use an iPhone for this?
It doesn't meet any of the standards of quality or reliability to achieve such a task.
You'd need a specialty receiver and a contraption to plug your bass into the phone.
An iPhone also emits a lot of waves that would produce static in the sound. Ever tried to bring a cellphone near your pickup? | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |