Wireless???

[fokof]

Originally Posted by mrokern

EDIT: I could see where you'd have possibly noticed a difference in TV world, assuming you were in the truck or booth listening to studio monitors / phones and had the chance to A/B signals. Still...a Sennheiser body with Neumann capsule is gonna sound pretty rocking...

Bravo!
When I say that a cable sounds better than a wireless for bass , it's not by listening through a bass amp or through your laptop speakers......
I'm alergic to wireless because I had the chance to compare alot of kits on a lot of situation through a lot of different references.
A cable ALWAYS came on top when listening through good reference.

Of course you won't hear any difference between a cable and whatever wireless through a B15.....

Originally Posted by georgestrings

How long ago was that???

Last year , through a PM-1D , and an M7CL , Meyer HD1 as reference and 7506.

[billjr]

Our guitar player has a friend that periodically gets tired of playing and sells off most of his equipment. I wasn't going to go wireless, but he was selling a Sennheiser system with alll the cables, for $250. I couldn't say no to this deal. I also got a pouch that attaches to my strap and holds the transmitter. I first used it this past Saturday, and I think it sounds great! I had to turn the gain down on the mixer, as I was much louder than I was through cable, but I didn't notice any change in tone. When I got home, the increased gain wasn't as great on my Yorkville, but I did make some adjustments to the tone. Sounds great!!

Just a few minutes ago my rack mount kit was delivered, so I will install it in my rack this afternoon. I just wish my amp had an input on the rear panel so that the receiver cable wouldn't have to run around to the front.

All in all, I'm very happy with the tone and mobility, and not having to think about stepping around my cable.

[fokof]

Originally Posted by georgestrings

Well, I don't know where you the "cheap" part of this, because I don't consider a $500 racked wireless to be all that cheap -

I didn't say a $500 racked wireless to be all that cheap , I said a 500 A\D-D\A is cheap.

Originally Posted by georgestrings

and I also don't know where you get the "analog" part of this, because the X2 is digital -

Do you know what the "A" means in A/D - D/A ?

Originally Posted by georgestrings

but, yes - after we get past your erroneous assumptions, that's exactly what I'm saying... I sure would like to witness you doing a blind A/B between the cable of your choice, and my XDR-95 - because I think you'd find it to be enlightening...

Put the load of your preamp to 1M , plug your bass with a cable , play and listen.
Then plug your wireless with the same bass. Play and listen.
I could tell a difference , maybe you could too.

[JimmyM]

Fokof, maybe we would hear a difference, but I'm more about real world usage. I don't use wirelesses to record. I use them to do live shows. And to my ears, the X2 absolutely holds up vs. a cable. Maybe to your ears it wouldn't, but let me ask you...have you tried the X2?

[mrokern]

There are a lot of benefits to the digital signal, but there is always a trade-off (nothing's free, even in the techie world...).

billjr-those Sennheiser systems are EXCELLENT units. The freedom of not being tethered is why we go wireless. I'm willing to accept a little tone loss for live performance (heck, if Geddy deals with it, I'll deal with it ) in exchange for that freedom.

The good news with a digital unit such as the X2 is that the compander issue goes away. There's simply no way around a compander circuit in a standard analog system, and that is the biggest source of tone loss in cheap wireless systems.

With a digital unit such as the X2, you don't have a compander, but you DO have an A/D conversion in the transmitter, and a D/A conversion in the receiver. While tests (shown here on TB, actually) showing frequency response and waveforms show that the X2 is AMAZINGLY close to a cable, there are still some differences in the waveform. You can't avoid that; some errors are intrinsic to the conversion process (e.g. quantization, linearity issues). Unless we change the way we understand electronics and physics, those aren't going to disappear.

There also will always be latency with a digital system....the conversions take time. I seem to recall it was about 1ms with the X2.

Why all this technical babble? I love my X2, and it is a revolutionary piece of kit as far as I'm concerned. But there IS a difference between it and a cable; whether you'll notice it is another issue.

So, all that said....

I'll record with a cable through a good DI.

I'll perform with my X2.

-Mark

[fokof]

Originally Posted by mrokern

There are a lot of benefits to the digital signal, but there is always a trade-off (nothing's free, even in the techie world...).
......
......
......
I'll record with a cable through a good DI.

I'll perform with my X2.

I didn't think about the induced latency......

All very good points , agree on everything , except your last sentence ,personaly I would change the word "X2" for "cable"

Enough said
I stop here

[EricF]

Originally Posted by fokof

Bravo!
When I say that a cable sounds better than a wireless for bass , it's not by listening through a bass amp or through your laptop speakers......

A cable ALWAYS came on top when listening through good reference.

But, for most folks who are using a wireless for playing live, what it sounds like through a bass amp is ALL that matters.

It's no surprise to me that in a proper studio listening environment, the differences can be heard. I don't think the unit is designed for that kind of application.

Originally Posted by fokof

I didn't say a $500 racked wireless to be all that cheap , I said a 500 A\D-D\A is cheap.

I totall agree. For recording applications, $500 for A/D-D/A conversion is considered a step above entry-level for a home-studio application.

[mrokern]

Originally Posted by EricF

I totall agree. For recording applications, $500 for A/D-D/A conversion is considered a step above entry-level for a home-studio application.

And the $500 in this case includes a lot more than just the A/D-D/A.

And actually (in response to the original cost comment), $500 for a racked wireless is still pretty cheap. Mid-range, possibly...but it's not anywhere near what the top-shelf models from the big names cost. Personally, I'm thrilled to have a great sounding wireless for well under that in the XDS95.

-Mark

[Gruntollio Bass]

I've got the X2 XDS95. I've found it to be eqivalent if not ever so slightly better than the cable I was using. To my ears it seems like the X2 gives me a barely noticeable boost in my signal. Don't know why but that is just how it sounds.

I run A/C power to the receiver and put lituims in the transmitter which seems to give me a bit extra on normal battery life. Standard batteries will give me approx 8 hours play and the lithiums tend to extend it to about 12 hours.

Never had any problems with interferance or static. It clean and clear and makes live play much more enjoyable as I'm not worried about kicking out my lead or the singer doing it for me!

[georgestrings]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Fokof, maybe we would hear a difference, but I'm more about real world usage. I don't use wirelesses to record. I use them to do live shows. And to my ears, the X2 absolutely holds up vs. a cable. Maybe to your ears it wouldn't, but let me ask you...have you tried the X2?

Exactly - in the real world of actually playing a bass in a live band, I highly doubt he could *hear* any difference...


- georgestrings

[georgestrings]

Originally Posted by fokof

Bravo!
When I say that a cable sounds better than a wireless for bass , it's not by listening through a bass amp or through your laptop speakers......
I'm alergic to wireless because I had the chance to compare alot of kits on a lot of situation through a lot of different references.
A cable ALWAYS came on top when listening through good reference.

And how is that relevant in any way to a live performance, playing bass through an amp in a band setting???



- georgestrings

[georgestrings]

Originally Posted by fokof

I didn't think about the induced latency......

All very good points , agree on everything , except your last sentence ,personaly I would change the word "X2" for "cable"

Enough said
I stop here

Hey, to each his or her own - but in my world, "live performance" means just that - I highly doubt you could hear ANY discernable difference between my XDR-95 and the cable of your choice, in a band setting, performing live.... HOWEVER - even if you *could* detect a difference - which I doubt - to *most* people, it would be outweighed by the advantage of freedom of movement that a good wireless offers over being plugged in... In my own situation, besides that aspect, I often run sound while playing in my own band - so the ability to get out in front and hear the mix is definitely worth any slight trade-offs in "high fidelity"...



- georgestrings

[georgestrings]

Originally Posted by fokof

I didn't say a $500 racked wireless to be all that cheap , I said a 500 A\D-D\A is cheap.




Do you know what the "A" means in A/D - D/A ?



Put the load of your preamp to 1M , plug your bass with a cable , play and listen.
Then plug your wireless with the same bass. Play and listen.
I could tell a difference , maybe you could too.

OK, you got me on the A/D-D/A thing - but, in regards to your challenge: maybe so, but that isn't significant to actual live performances in the typical settings most of us would use a wireless in - and I would be willing to wager that in a blind test, you wouldn't be able to hear any differences...



- georgestrings

[Ezbass]

I've been using a Samson Airline for 8 years and only once had a problem with a local cab company transmitter. Given the typically below standard wiring of a lot of venues anything that isolates me from the mains is good. In terms of tone there is hardly any difference between my wireless and the George Ls cables that I use. In a live setting it's great to be able to go FOH and check your sound and any potential loss of tone is pretty much negated in a live setting anyway IMO.

[mrokern]

Originally Posted by Ezbass

I've been using a Samson Airline for 8 years and only once had a problem with a local cab company transmitter. Given the typically below standard wiring of a lot of venues anything that isolates me from the mains is good. In terms of tone there is hardly any difference between my wireless and the George Ls cables that I use. In a live setting it's great to be able to go FOH and check your sound and any potential loss of tone is pretty much negated in a live setting anyway IMO.

Those old Samson units were actually pretty good deals! There are a lot of players around here who still use and swear by them. Geddy Lee still uses a higher-end Samson unit.

-Mark