Cheap UHF wireless systems

[babsobass]

Hello all. First, if this isn't the right places for this, mods, please feel free to move.

I am looking at inexpensive wireless guitar systems, the ones with simple plugin transmitters and receivers that don't need base stations, antenna, etc. I'm rarely playing on stages where I'm more than 10-15 feet from my amp, so I don't need anything elaborate (yeah, I can continue using a cable, but I like the idea of being untethered). The plugin and go products, as long as they have decent latency, battery life, and reliability, are all I need at this point.

I like the idea of the 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz products (e.g. XVive, and others), but worry that those WiFi frequency bands are already crowded and getting more so. The UHF band products seem very intriguing since they operate outside WiFi bands.

The 2 units I'm looking at are the Swiff WS-50 Blackwing and the westshell G5. They are both UHF and advertise low latency, >5 hours battery life, connectivity distances way more than I need, and their prices are right, in the $55 to $65 range. Was wondering if anyone has used either of these? If so, please comment on your experiences! If you have experience with another similar UHF product I'd really like to know what it is and your thoughts on it.

 

[One Way]

I've successfully used the xVive system with passive basses.
The instructions state they are not for active basses and I should have listened.
Both my G&L's provided too much signal for the xVive and the wireless system distorted. The xVive is my only experience with wireless, I'm not familiar with other systems you mentioned.
Playing wireless is very freeing, nice to walk out front during sound check or mingle with the audience while playing.

 

[frankie5string]

Honestly, for the price and the liberal return policy on Amazon, the best thing you can do is to try them at home, then at a rehearsal, and finally at a gig.

Be prepared to yank them and swiftly plug in your wire though.

Bass is somewhat taxing for those kinds of wireless units and while they may work ok for some guitar players, they are usually substandard for bass.

 

[babsobass]

Bass is somewhat taxing for those kinds of wireless units and while they may work ok for some guitar players, they are usually substandard for bass.

Not sure I understand why bass would be any more taxing than guitar. The frequency range of all the units I've investigated is more than sufficient to cover bass. I can't think of any reasons why things like range, latency and battery life would be any different for bass vs. guitar.

I'm just curious what makes these units substandard for bass.

 

[eriky4003]

Babsobass,
I just worked with a 'Cable Free Guitars' cheap wireless. The end result was a passive bass direct to amp worked perfectly. I'll vouch for about 3.5 hrs of battery based on our rehearsals. This unit did not like my active basses and liked working through my effects pedals even less (plugged directly into my pedal chain). My active Yamaha 5 string bass was probably designed late 90's and purchased in 2001 - I had a hiss along with notes. My SBMM Ray 25 is a more recent active design and had occasional dropouts and static direct to amp. Through my effects, the same but also volumes spikes! I don't believe the cheap wirelesses are there for us yet.

 

[frankie5string]

Not sure I understand why bass would be any more taxing than guitar. The frequency range of all the units I've investigated is more than sufficient to cover bass. I can't think of any reasons why things like range, latency and battery life would be any different for bass vs. guitar.

I'm just curious what makes these units substandard for bass.

In a lot of cases it's due to the companding in these units. Most of these wireless units use a combination of compression and expansion to send the signal down an narrow RF signal. Some even use variations of noise-reduction standards to squeeze things down even more. On the receiving end, the system expands it back as best it can to something close to the original dynamics.

While the stated frequency ranges of those plug-in devices seem to cover the range of bass, the rest of the signal chain inside of them, and the processing they use to squeeze everything down into a narrow band may not behave all that well.

The high transients, low-frequencies, and power in bass signals tends to trick and mess up the companders in these systems if they're not adjusted for bass. You end up with pumping, hiss that rides along wit hate signal, or odd distortions of the upper mids as it tries to compensate for the large fundamental.

That's why I say it's best to try them... Don't go on specs alone. See if you like the sound they may impart on your signal.

 

[babsobass]

Interesting inputs here. I decided to go with the Swiff WS-50. I hope it will be acceptable, we'll see.

 

[eriky4003]

Babsobass,
Let us know!

 

[babsobass]

Stumbled on my own thread and realized I did not report back. Well, I've had time with the WS-50 and can report on my experience.

Initial impression was very good. Latency is imperceptible and battery life is excellent. Mechanically, it's still in good shape, although I baby it. Not much of a difference in tone vs. a cable. I have read that wireless can sound different due to lack of capacitance found in cables; I might be noticing this a little. I will say the volume is ever so slightly lower through the wireless as compared to a cable.

Reliability is one place I have an issue. The first few uses were flawless. I then started noticing drops. The first one was during a gig and occurred just once that I noticed. A gig or two later I had several drops during the first few songs and replaced the wireless with a cable. This was disappointing to say the least.

I got two things I can do to address the drops. First, because I was concerned with the transmitted signal having to go through me while playing, I rigged a short patch cable so I could velcro the transmitter to my strap. This gives direct line of sight to the receiver. Second, I read up on the system and discovered that you can switch channels with a push of the transmitter button. If the default channel selected on power up has or develops interference, you can force a change to a new channel. I used the transmitter attached to the strap on a recent gig and had no drops! If I do notice another drop I'll give channel switching a try.

That's the report. Overall I've had a good experience for the price. If the things to remediate drops work then I'll consider the WS-50 an excellent wireless option.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

Hello all. First, if this isn't the right places for this, mods, please feel free to move.

I am looking at inexpensive wireless guitar systems, the ones with simple plugin transmitters and receivers that don't need base stations, antenna, etc. I'm rarely playing on stages where I'm more than 10-15 feet from my amp, so I don't need anything elaborate (yeah, I can continue using a cable, but I like the idea of being untethered). The plugin and go products, as long as they have decent latency, battery life, and reliability, are all I need at this point.

I like the idea of the 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz products (e.g. XVive, and others), but worry that those WiFi frequency bands are already crowded and getting more so. The UHF band products seem very intriguing since they operate outside WiFi bands.

The 2 units I'm looking at are the Swiff WS-50 Blackwing and the westshell G5. They are both UHF and advertise low latency, >5 hours battery life, connectivity distances way more than I need, and their prices are right, in the $55 to $65 range. Was wondering if anyone has used either of these? If so, please comment on your experiences! If you have experience with another similar UHF product I'd really like to know what it is and your thoughts on it.

While UHF is probably the best choice these days for wireless, you may run into similar issues only on steroids, in UHF bands.

The issue with wi-fi is that everything can be great during the sound check. But when the place fills up with people bringing in their phones, it all can go to poopie. The upshot is that your wi-fi and everyone else is on a relatively level playing field for the power everyone is using.

In the UHF bands you have the potential sleeping giant of local TV stations, operating at millions of watts. Though hopefully any distance between you and a TV transmitter may help mitigate things. Bottom line is that if you're planning on UHF, you also need to be sure your wireless system is frequency agile so you can change your operating freqs. away from TV channels in the area.

Also note, that knowing the operating channel is more complicated now that the FCC allows stations to display a virtual channel on screen. Virtual channels are a station logo carry-over from the analog TV days. Many stations show a virtual channel that is rarely the actual channel/frequency where they broadcast now. Many of those virtual channels indicate a VHF channel that station used for maybe 60+ years or more. To unpack it all takes a bit of detective work in areas that most folks not involved in broadcasting may have trouble navigating. To further complicate matters, you have to do your frequency searches again if you're playing in different towns, aka different TV markets.

You can go to sites like Sennheiser or Shure and find frequency vs TV channel info. These manufactures put a lot of effort into providing good information about avoiding not only TV, but other restricted bands and frequencies up in UHF land. You can try contacting the company of interest for your two figure price-tag wireless. Maybe they'll help and maybe not. Won't hurt to try.

Before retiring from my nearly five decades career as a broadcast technician, I managed (juggled) about 30 separate Sennheiser UHF wireless systems. We rarely had issues because I did the homework. Only when someone went off script and started jacking the frequencies away from where I set them, was there a problem.

One guy had a problem unrelated to frequency settings, but decided on his own to reset them anyway. He set his frequency near that of high power a UHF TV station frequency that displayed a virtual Channel 6. He said he knew Channel 6 wasn't in the UHF band (more like the bottom end of the FM radio band) so thought it was OK. What made matters worse was his story he was supposed to shoot was within a couple of miles of the transmitter. Needless to say his audio was total garbage. Horseshoes? Hand Grenades? Now add TV transmitters, being close is good, or in this case bad, enough.

This is more of a cautionary tale than an attempt to steer you away from wireless. For $50 or $60 bucks it might well be worth a go, and you could get lucky and not run into any of these issues. I hope that's the case. The high-end stuff can run upwards of ten times that amount. So from that perspective, I don't disagree with your decision. Just be sure you have an instrument cable handy for plan B.

My intent here is to recognize that most everyone seems to be aware of the potential wi-fi issues, but few know what they might get into down in the UHF bands. I hope this helps shed some light.

 

[babsobass]

My intent here is to recognize that most everyone seems to be aware of the potential wi-fi issues, but few know what they might get into down in the UHF bands. I hope this helps shed some light.

Shed some light? I feel like I have one of those old Hollywood premiere spot lights shining on me!

Seriously tho, great details. I'm hoping that with 100 channels (according to the manual) I will have the ability to avoid in-use frequencies. The cable will always be at the ready just in case.

 

[JimmyM]

Yes, always have a cable at the ready, but I played in a band with 8 wireless mics and guitar/bass wireless (sometimes more) and never had a problem with interference. It can happen, but it's not a crazy widespread problem you have to worry about everywhere.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

Yes, always have a cable at the ready, but I played in a band with 8 wireless mics and guitar/bass wireless (sometimes more) and never had a problem with interference. It can happen, but it's not a crazy widespread problem you have to worry about everywhere.

Yup! That is most often the case.

However, in recent years I've seen the FCC continue to restrict the usable frequencies in the UHF band.
There is just too much demand for frequency spectrum and not enough to go around. It's not a renewable source.
Matters will get worse, and probably do so exponentially in the not too distant future. And this is not just limited to UHF. It pretty much an issue in any of the usable radio spectrum.

The FCC tends to follow the money. And while the money is in wireless, it is not necessarily in wireless mics, IEM, wireless instruments or anything related to what the good folks here on TB are interested in.

The available TV channels were cut way down to make room for other wireless services. You know when the big money is no longer in broadcast TV, that the landscape is changing drastically.

Given that music related use for wireless often goes unlicensed that means that a licensed facility will always win a frequency turf battle. TV stations are all licensed. If you operate a wireless device and cause interference to TV reception, you could potentially be cited and possibly fined by the FCC. It's not highly likely, but I think folks should be aware that there are potential legal issues involved.

Wireless use of any kind seems like the wild west with no rules, but that could not be further from the truth. The rules will get brought down if the FCC decides they want to pursue something. The problem is that they are neither consistent in enforcement, nor do we hear about it through normal channels when they do bring down the hammer.

 

[PinkFloyd60]

No UHF TV stations in our area to worry about. I've been using the Lekato WS-70 for a few months now, both at home and on stage at church (5 events this month plus weekly team nights). No interference, no hiccups in signal. The little system has been simple to use and has given flawless performance. I'd say it's the best $40 I've ever spent on bass gear.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

No UHF TV stations in our area to worry about. I've been using the Lekato WS-70 for a few months now, both at home and on stage at church (5 events this month plus weekly team nights). No interference, no hiccups in signal. The little system has been simple to use and has given flawless performance. I'd say it's the best $40 I've ever spent on bass gear.

Well TX is pretty big. Where's about in TX do you hail from?

 

[PinkFloyd60]

Well TX is pretty big. Where's about in TX do you hail from?

We're about 100 miles east of Dallas.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

We're about 100 miles east of Dallas.

OK. That seems to puts you in the Shreveport, LA TV market?
Looks like there are a number of TV stations serving that market.
Link Removed

Keep in mind that channel number shown on the screen may be a virtual channel, not the actual channel where they broadcast. Also some stations went through a thing called Repack, and may have been further reassigned to different channels.

In the link above, if you click on the call letters it will tell the actual channel the station is on. Then you need to convert channel to frequency. Here is a chart for that.
TV channel to Frequency converter | Frequency to TV channel converter

 

[oddeotek]

I've been using the $39 Westshell G7 UHF units from Amazon with very good success. I also own a much more expensive Shure GLXD-16 pedal wireless that works almost flawlessly but when it has issues, most commonly in crowded casino showrooms, the Westshell keeps working since they are on very different frequencies. It does slightly attenuate the volume vs a cable but I just turn up my amp to compensate. The battery life is about 5 to 6 hours and the transmitter and receiver are small enough to easily fit in any gig bag. I actually bought two of these units so I always have a fully charged backup. At 1/10th price of the Shure unit, It's easily 90% as functional. There is a UHF unit by Legato that appears to be the same unit.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

I've been using the $39 Westshell G7 UHF units from Amazon with very good success. I also own a much more expensive Shure GLXD-16 pedal wireless that works almost flawlessly but when it has issues, most commonly in crowded casino showrooms, the Westshell keeps working since they are on very different frequencies. It does slightly attenuate the volume vs a cable but I just turn up my amp to compensate. The battery life is about 5 to 6 hours and the transmitter and receiver are small enough to easily fit in any gig bag. I actually bought two of these units so I always have a fully charged backup. At 1/10th price of the Shure unit, It's easily 90% as functional. There is a UHF unit by Legato that appears to be the same unit.

That's great! Glad it works for you. If it's running at 5.8gHz (which is not UHF BTW) then those usually do better in crowded Wi-Fi environments than 2.4gHz.
I looked at the Westshell web site, based in China and didn't see any mention of FCC compliance. Is there any such label on the equipment or in the instructions? Just curious.

 

[PinkFloyd60]

OK. That seems to puts you in the Shreveport, LA TV market?

Shreveport is about 90 miles to our east. Not too concerned about UHF interference from there.