Wireless systems?

[isher1992]

I had no idea where to put this thread, so I figured here it would go.

Would it be a bad idea to use a wireless system from my bass to my pedal board?

The reason I ask is because I tend to do a lot of moving about when I play (Trotting from one end of stage to the next, jumping, singing and spinning, etc...) and I just hate the restrictions of cabling.

[deekay911]

Why might it be a bad idea? That's what wireless systems are designed for

[isher1992]

Originally Posted by deekay911

Why might it be a bad idea? That's what wireless systems are designed for

I've just heard people have problems with it, like it sounds muddy or it sounds too clean, blah blah blah.

[katri]

It should be fine if you get a decent system, I just brought an AKG SR40 and PT40 and it works great. Yet to gig with it, so not sure how reliable it is.

[jbybj]

Originally Posted by isher1992

I had no idea where to put this thread, so I figured here it would go.

Would it be a bad idea to use a wireless system from my bass to my pedal board?

The reason I ask is because I tend to do a lot of moving about when I play (Trotting from one end of stage to the next, jumping, singing and spinning, etc...) and I just hate the restrictions of cabling.

There are many variables that affect wireless operations; the quality of the system you get, the area you are using it in, or, how crowded are the airwaves, and how much interference, like radar and cell towers, do you have to compete with. The advent of Digital TV broadcasts in February will also change things a little bit. There have been many severe predictions about the loss of wireless frequencies for sound applications, and there is lots of info out there, but I got some reassuring information at AES this fall. UHF wireless devices in the 500 and 600 Mhz range, should still have a life after digital TV. It is the 700 Mhz range that will be most significantly regulated for our uses.

Anyway, now for something useful, I hope. I have been using Sennheiser EW100 series wireless mics in the Los Angeles area for about 5 years. These are UHF, about 400-500 bucks at the cheapest, and they work flawlessly. I tuned them once to an empty frequency, and have never had to change the tuning. This goes for ten different units.

On my bass rig, for about 3 years, and only in casual jams, I have been using a Nady UHF-4. $90 bucks, one fixed channel, and it has never cut out on me. As far as tone, I know there is a small sacrifice, not in the low end response, but in the overall signal to noise ratio. Still, the freedom of movement far outweighs the subtle loss of fidelity. The best part by far, since I am playing with sometimes as many as 4 guitar players, is that I can mix the band by where I position myself in the room. Just move around and find the sweet spot.

If you are looking to buy something not too expensive, then just make sure that you can return it if it doesn't suit your needs. My Nady system may work like crap for you, but some other $100 system may be great. Take the plunge, it's lots of fun to not be tied down.

JBY

[isher1992]

Originally Posted by jbybj

There are many variables that affect wireless operations; the quality of the system you get, the area you are using it in, or, how crowded are the airwaves, and how much interference, like radar and cell towers, do you have to compete with. The advent of Digital TV broadcasts in February will also change things a little bit. There have been many severe predictions about the loss of wireless frequencies for sound applications, and there is lots of info out there, but I got some reassuring information at AES this fall. UHF wireless devices in the 500 and 600 Mhz range, should still have a life after digital TV. It is the 700 Mhz range that will be most significantly regulated for our uses.

Anyway, now for something useful, I hope. I have been using Sennheiser EW100 series wireless mics in the Los Angeles area for about 5 years. These are UHF, about 400-500 bucks at the cheapest, and they work flawlessly. I tuned them once to an empty frequency, and have never had to change the tuning. This goes for ten different units.

On my bass rig, for about 3 years, and only in casual jams, I have been using a Nady UHF-4. $90 bucks, one fixed channel, and it has never cut out on me. As far as tone, I know there is a small sacrifice, not in the low end response, but in the overall signal to noise ratio. Still, the freedom of movement far outweighs the subtle loss of fidelity. The best part by far, since I am playing with sometimes as many as 4 guitar players, is that I can mix the band by where I position myself in the room. Just move around and find the sweet spot.

If you are looking to buy something not too expensive, then just make sure that you can return it if it doesn't suit your needs. My Nady system may work like crap for you, but some other $100 system may be great. Take the plunge, it's lots of fun to not be tied down.

JBY

As far as the loss of signal frequencies, it's the FM waves that will be most affected. In a Broadcast Journalism program I'm in, we soon won't be able to use our wireless lavalier mics for interviews, because they use FM frequencies that will soon be used by cell phone companies.

[doctec]

http://line6.com/xdr95/

I originally used an old Nady that worked pretty good for me except that if I did an 'A/B' comparison between the wireless and a cord, I could tell that I was losing some lows with the wireless.

If you compare the specs for wireless rigs, it's pretty obvious that some have better low-frequency responses than others. IIRC, most have a low frequency cutoff around 50Hz. While this is ok for guitars, the fundamental of the low-B string -- and maybe even the E string will be reduced.

The X2 system in the link I posted doesn't have this problem at all. It uses a digital scheme that has a low-frequency cutoff at 10Hz! I can't hear any difference between the wireless and a cable with this unit.

Note that they make several different configurations -- I've got the rack-mount receiver, but they also have a 'stomp box' style receiver that you can mount on your pedal board.

One additional thing about this system -- If you use the operating mode that gives you the best RF signal reliability and the 'gas gauge' battery display on the rack-mount receiver, you'll need to replace the 9V battery in the transmitter after every show (~5 hours).

[isher1992]

Originally Posted by doctec

http://line6.com/xdr95/

I originally used an old Nady that worked pretty good for me except that if I did an 'A/B' comparison between the wireless and a cord, I could tell that I was losing some lows with the wireless.

If you compare the specs for wireless rigs, it's pretty obvious that some have better low-frequency responses than others. IIRC, most have a low frequency cutoff around 50Hz. While this is ok for guitars, the fundamental of the low-B string -- and maybe even the E string will be reduced.

The X2 system in the link I posted doesn't have this problem at all. It uses a digital scheme that has a low-frequency cutoff at 10Hz! I can't hear any difference between the wireless and a cable with this unit.

Note that they make several different configurations -- I've got the rack-mount receiver, but they also have a 'stomp box' style receiver that you can mount on your pedal board.

One additional thing about this system -- If you use the operating mode that gives you the best RF signal reliability and the 'gas gauge' battery display on the rack-mount receiver, you'll need to replace the 9V battery in the transmitter after every show (~5 hours).

Thank you! I may look into one of these down the road.

I may get a power conditioner on the rack though, for it.

I appreciate your help.

[MikeBass]

Originally Posted by doctec

http://line6.com/xdr95/

I originally used an old Nady that worked pretty good for me except that if I did an 'A/B' comparison between the wireless and a cord, I could tell that I was losing some lows with the wireless.

If you compare the specs for wireless rigs, it's pretty obvious that some have better low-frequency responses than others. IIRC, most have a low frequency cutoff around 50Hz. While this is ok for guitars, the fundamental of the low-B string -- and maybe even the E string will be reduced.

The X2 system in the link I posted doesn't have this problem at all. It uses a digital scheme that has a low-frequency cutoff at 10Hz! I can't hear any difference between the wireless and a cable with this unit.

Note that they make several different configurations -- I've got the rack-mount receiver, but they also have a 'stomp box' style receiver that you can mount on your pedal board.

One additional thing about this system -- If you use the operating mode that gives you the best RF signal reliability and the 'gas gauge' battery display on the rack-mount receiver, you'll need to replace the 9V battery in the transmitter after every show (~5 hours).

Yeah, the X-2 is REALLY good sound for a wireless!

[Yodhan]

Originally Posted by MikeBass

Yeah, the X-2 is REALLY good sound for a wireless!

+1

I love mine.