# Wireless Microphone Purchase



## Charlie1974 (Jan 2, 2010)

Good evening everyone. I'm new to this forum, and need some major help. My local theatre for which I am the TC is considering a purchase of mass amount of wireless microphones for their musical productions. 

They have left it to me to decide on which units would be best to use for our purposes. So here I am looking for help from professionals in this area... 

Anyway, they are wanting to end up with a total of 24 channels of wireless audio. I have been exploring the specs of different systems, and I came across the Sennheiser G3 wireless units. Not only are they reasonably priced, but according to the IAS software, each band (A, B and G) has between 16 and 18 available frequencies (12-13 when spaced apart 1Mhz) in our area. Since we only need 8 channels in each frequency, I'm thinking these would be a good purchase. 

However, I want to get a professional opinion on this. I don't want to authorize a $20,000 purchase if they are not going to suite our needs very well. 

Thanks for all your help,
Charlie.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 2, 2010)

Hi Charlie, I agree with the Sennheiser G3 series. I would personally go with the 300 or 500 series for such a large installation though. Not only do the 300 and 500 series have slightly better receivers, but they also network together. You will also need to factor in the cost of microphone elements (and extras!), antenna distribution, directional antennas (2), coax cable, and possibly an installation, though you can do it yourself if need be. I highly recommend finding a professional wireless dealer and working with them to make sure you have everything you need. You will also have the benefit of very good support when you need it.

With regard to antenna distribution, here's how I would do it. I would use a pair of four-way passive power dividers followed by three Lectrosonics UMC16B active antenna splitters. Each of the Lectrosonics antenna splitters can provide RF outputs to eight separate receiver units (two antennas each), and are fully compatible with the Sennheiser receivers (though they will *not* power the Sennheiser units). This configuration will probably cost about the same as the eight necessary 4-way dividers that Sennheiser will spec, and in my opinion will probably work better. It will also take up less space in your rack. You can get directional antennas to feed the system from either Lectrosonics or Sennheiser--get *passive* antennas though and rely on the active splitter to amplify the signal. Amplified antennas and antenna preamplifiers can be one of the biggest causes of poorly performing wireless systems (due to intermodulation from mics and other RF sources...especially since such amps rarely have the front end filtering necessary to clean things up).

Please feel free to ask any questions you might have! We're here to help.


----------



## fx120 (Jan 2, 2010)

Personally I have been so put off with Sennheiser's treatment of their customers, I have a hard time recommending them to anyone unless you like being told to go f*** yourself when you call in looking to have a unit repaired. Of course that is if they will even pick up the phone...

Anyway, take a look at the Shure ULX-P line. And here is why: They take 9V batteries, and you can use rechargeable lithium ion 9v's with it. Shure's antenna distros are also quite affordable and will also provide power to the units. I never have had great luck with Ni-MH AA's, but the lithium polymer 9v's have been a joy to use.

iPower PRO Rechargeable 9V Lithium Polymer Battery 520mAh

Also are you wanting to permanently install the receivers up in the booth, or would you like them portable? 

Personally our shop has racks of ULX-P set up with 8 receivers per rack, two 2sp drawers for keeping the mics, batteries and chargers in, plus two Shure UA844SWB distros using the standard half wave antennas. Personally this is my favorite way of operating, directional antennas are great, but nothing is a true substitute for getting the receivers close to the transmitters (on stage), and then rolling the whole rack back off stage when you're done and locking the whole shebang in a closet. I can send you a picture of what this looks like if you're interested.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 3, 2010)

For what it's worth, I also like the Shure ULX line (with 'pro' receivers). The only drawback to this line (compared to the Sennheiser units) is that the beltpacks are made of plastic instead of metal.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 3, 2010)

Thanks for the fast replies. Now I have a hard choice to make... Both the Shure ULX-P and the G3 300 are about the same price. Both have 3 frequency bands, with roughly 1400 or so "available frequencies".

However, after running the Shure ULX frequencies through the IAS software, I have less possible interference free channels with the ULX than the G3. 

IAS Reads:
ULX M1 - 14 available
ULX J1 - 15 Available
ULX G3 - 14 Available

G3 "A" - 19 Available
G3 "B" - 17 Available
G3 "G" - 18 Available

Clearly, I have a better chance at a clear frequency with the G3 series. However, as you say, customer service can be a pain to work with... 

So at this point, I have three options:

1. Choose the G3 100 series at $600 per channel, including Transmitter and Mic element (probably needs replaced with a Countryman or similar). 

2. Choose the G3 300 series at $850 per channel, including Transmitters and Mic Element (again, might need replacing).

3. Choose the ULX-P series at $880 per channel, including Transmitters and Mic Element (again needs changing?).

Both Shure and Senne seems to have antenna's and distros at about the same price. 

So how on earth do I choose which one to go with?


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 3, 2010)

I think you'd be fine with either the ULX or the G3 300 series. Cost out the accessories needed to make each work--antenna distribution, new mic elements (Countryman B3's go for about $150/ea from reputable dealers), coax, etc.--and see how it stacks up in the end. If the cost is still pretty close, you're just gonna have to pick one over the other.

By the way, you might cost out a Lectrosonics system just for kicks. Lectrosonics makes the best wireless mics money can buy, and they can be surprisingly affordable. It may still be out of your range, but you never know. To make your system work, you'd need four Venue receiver frames, 24 receiver modules, 24 transmitters (SM series is more expensive; LM is reasonably affordable), 2 antennas, and mic elements. No antenna distribution is necessary, as it's built into each unit. PM me if you would like more details on the Lectro and I can help you out.

Lectrosonics, Inc. | Wireless microphone and audio conferencing systems for film, video, church, courtroom, boardroom, school and theater


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 3, 2010)

Thanks for the advice Mike. I will price out the systems and see were we stand. I also priced the Lectrosonics, and our total would come to around $40,000 . A little over our budget, by about $20,000. I would LOVE to have the Lectro's, but I don't think that will happen... Although, one of the members of the board of directors did approach me a couple of days ago and suggest the "Sabine 2.4GHz systems", at around the same cost as the Lectro's (per channel). No way in he** I'm going near the 2.4GHz range though. I'll take my chance with UHF.


----------



## museav (Jan 3, 2010)

fx120 said:


> Personally this is my favorite way of operating, directional antennas are great, but nothing is a true substitute for getting the receivers close to the transmitters (on stage), and then rolling the whole rack back off stage when you're done and locking the whole shebang in a closet. I can send you a picture of what this looks like if you're interested.


In an installed system I prefer to mount the receivers in a fixed rack and extend the antennas. It is the antennas, not the receivers themselves, that benefit the most from being closer to the transmitters.

I like both the Shure ULXP and the Sennheiser G3 300, however in this application the metal beltpacks and ability to network with the Wireless System Manager software for spectrum analysis, offline configuration and remote monitoring capability seem to give the G3 300 a distinct advantage. With the WSM software and networking functionality you could have the receivers at the stage and still monitor and have some control of the receivers from FOH.


----------



## soundlight (Jan 3, 2010)

Just a thought: If you're going to buy new mic elements anyway, get the systems with the instrument cable and then buy your mic elements separately. They're usually cheaper.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 3, 2010)

Okay, here is a question on the G3's. Since each of the Antenna Booster modules are specified for a range (A, B or G), and you want to run all three off of one set of antennas... How does this work? Do you just not use the antenna boosters, or do that come in at a different spot in the chain?

Thanks


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 3, 2010)

Personally I would skip the antenna booster and put the money into better coax (LMR-400 or better for runs over 25'). Let the antenna distributors and receivers take care of amplifying the signal.

If you were to use boosters, you would need to run three different sets of antennas, or split one pair of antennas passively before putting the signal into three sets of boosters (this is due to the front end filtering in the boosters, which is a GOOD THING actually). Even with the filtering though, antenna amplifiers can often cause more problems than they solve due to very strong in-band signals that cause distortion and intermodulation problems.


----------



## Mistermon (Jan 4, 2010)

My school has an install of 14 Shure ULX mics. (we used the S series to save a bit of cash) I too had the dilema to Shure vs sennheiser. having rented both, I found the shure stock mic (wl 93) to be a little warmer (personal preference, i guess) than the sennheiser. absolutely LOVE the Shures. Can't wait to buy more. My 2 cents.


----------



## Anonymous067 (Jan 4, 2010)

+1 for buying the instrument cable package (then you get all your adapters and rack stuff, but don't pay for a mic) Then buy Countryman B3 or B6's.

+1 For Shure ULX-P (and the UHF-R stuff...haha as always)

A question that I had regarding the front end filtering and antenna amps.
I know with the ULX series at least (for example) the receivers provide 12 volts (or so) of DC for antennas. But you can connect active OR passive antennas. Passive antennas would just ignore that voltage, similarly how phantom is ignored on [most] dynamic mics?

Front end filtering? By this we mean bandwidth of the antenna or actual filtering within the bandwidth of the antenna?


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 4, 2010)

One thing I have noticed: The Shure ULX-P are more related to the Sennheiser G3 100's than the 300's. The big "main" difference between the 100 and 300 is that the 300 has networking. The ULX-P does not have networking. Therefore, the price difference then becomes about $300 difference from the Sennheiser G3 100's to the ULX-P's. 

And PLASTIC BELT PACKS! . I think I have decided to take my chances with Sennheiser. Primarily because of the few extra frequencies available, metal belt-packs, etc.

Now heres an additional question: How are the mic's that are included with the G3's (the ME2 and ME4)? Are they relatively small? and would they work well in place of purchasing external microphones from Countryman? 

Thanks!


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 4, 2010)

Blah067 said:


> +1 for buying the instrument cable package (then you get all your adapters and rack stuff, but don't pay for a mic) Then buy Countryman B3 or B6's.



+1 here as well.


Blah067 said:


> A question that I had regarding the front end filtering and antenna amps.
> I know with the ULX series at least (for example) the receivers provide 12 volts (or so) of DC for antennas. But you can connect active OR passive antennas. Passive antennas would just ignore that voltage, similarly how phantom is ignored on [most] dynamic mics?



Hopefully. Usually voltage on the antenna connectors is controllable with a jumper inside the receiver. The type of antenna you use will determine whether there there will be a short or not..a dipole or LPDA (shark-fin) won't have a DC short between center and shield, but other types may. It's always best to check before connecting it up (and probably best to disable the +12V anyway if you don't need it).


Blah067 said:


> Front end filtering? By this we mean bandwidth of the antenna or actual filtering within the bandwidth of the antenna?



By this, I mean the receiver (or preamplifier, in the case of the sennheiser units) has a physical, passive, usually-fixed frequency*, filter between the antenna connector and the first amplification stage within the device. This filter helps to reject signals on frequencies not within the passband of the receiver, which reduces intermodulation and desensitization. It is important to remember that the filters aren't "brink wall" filters and that signals outside the passband can still get in if they're strong enough. But the filters do help a lot.

The antennas we use for wireless mics are fairly wideband--the dipoles and whips will have the narrowest bandwidth, and the LPDA (shark fin) antennas will have a much wider response. Hence, when using these antennas (especially the LPDA's), it's important to have a receiver with good front-end filters.

By the way, most antenna distro units have very wideband filters at the input and let pretty much anything in the TV band through them. This isn't such a good thing.

*Most devices have a fixed frequency bandpass filter that corresponds to the frequency range of the receiver (For Shure M1, 662-698 MHz). Some companies, like Lectrosonics, actually make receivers with filters that can tune around /within/ the passband of the receiver. This is a more expensive, but much better, design that reduces overload and intermod even more.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 4, 2010)

Charlie1974 said:


> And PLASTIC BELT PACKS! . I think I have decided to take my chances with Sennheiser. Primarily because of the few extra frequencies available, metal belt-packs, etc.



The metal beltpacks are a big deal. The "extra" frequencies are not at all (there aren't "extra frequencies" per se, but rather the system has a slightly wider RF bandwidth--that's the way to think about it). 


Charlie1974 said:


> Now heres an additional question: How are the mic's that are included with the G3's (the ME2 and ME4)? Are they relatively small? and would they work well in place of purchasing external microphones from Countryman?
> Thanks!



The ME2's are medium sized--bigger than a B3 and a WL93, but not the size of a Shure WL183. They sound okay. I would probably buy a B3 instead. Make sure you budget for spare elements no matter which one you go with!

I think the ME4 is a non-omnidirectional mic. You *do not* want this...they will sound funny and be a pain in your backside. Omni mics on the forehead are the way to go.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 4, 2010)

I concur. Looks like we''ll be going for the G3's with instrument cables for $499, and then purchasing the B3's for $150 or thereabouts. We would only be saving $50 per mic by using the ME2's, since the G3 setup with the mic's cost $100 more than the instrument cable.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 4, 2010)

Charlie1974 said:


> I concur. Looks like we''ll be going for the G3's with instrument cables for $499, and then purchasing the B3's for $150 or thereabouts. We would only be saving $50 per mic by using the ME2's, since the G3 setup with the mic's cost $100 more than the instrument cable.



This is 100 or 300 series? Also, what antennas and distro did you decide on? If you could post a total list of things you're buying I'll take a look over it.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 5, 2010)

Mike,
I'm still torn between the 100 and 300 series. The price difference is about $350 per transmitter/receiver combo, with the cable in place of the mic's. Other than networking ability, is there really a performance advantage between the two?

Our budget is pretty much dictating the choice right now, and the board of directors really don't want to spend more than $20,000 on the entire setup. From my price estimates, the total cost of the 100 series setup will be close to $21,000. With the 300 series, it's getting closer to $29,000. 

In terms of the networking ability in the 100 vs 300, wouldn't the IAS software we have take care of printing multiple coordinations for each band? It may limit our ability to actually SEE the RF activity, but as long as we know what frequencies to use in our area via the printout, we could just try channels until we find the ones that are compatible? 

ultimately, I want to buy the best system I can, that will work well, and not break the bank account of the organization. 

PS) The Theatre we use is not our venue, so a permanent install is out of the question. I will set-up the wireless in a 20-space road-case, which will be mounted, with the antennas, near the booth at the back of the house (which is really only about 32' from the stage).


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 5, 2010)

I would like to add that I missed something somewhere along the time. According to the Northern Sound and Light website, I can get:

the 100 w/ instrument cable for $499

the 300 w/ lav mic (I have checked 3 sellers, and have no found a setup with wire in place of a mic) for $849

the 500!!! w/ guatar cable for $849... 

looks like the 500 and 300 are potentially the same price ... Still, I think both are probably out of our range in terms of price.


----------



## gobias (Jan 5, 2010)

Out of interest, where are you purchasing your set? I'm also looking to buy some wireless systems and at am a bit of a loss as to a cheap online store. Any ideas?


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 5, 2010)

Well, "cheap" is never a good way to go. The prices I'm quoting are standard across several retailers. 

My main purchases come from Northern Sound and Light and/or Performance Audio. Their websites are Northern Sound & Light - NSL - Call Us 866-796-6232 and Performance Audio - Your Source for Professional Audio & Video Gear.

Good luck.


----------



## BillESC (Jan 5, 2010)

For yucks and giggles, I priced out a 24 unit Audio Technica 4000 series system with 12 receivers in the C band and 12 in the D band along with 3 antenna distribution systems per band.

Without mics, you'd be looking at about $ 18,800.00


----------



## museav (Jan 5, 2010)

Charlie1974 said:


> In terms of the networking ability in the 100 vs 300, wouldn't the IAS software we have take care of printing multiple coordinations for each band? It may limit our ability to actually SEE the RF activity, but as long as we know what frequencies to use in our area via the printout, we could just try channels until we find the ones that are compatible?


The Sennheiser WSM also allows you to see and change the receiver labeling, monitor audio and RF levels and monitor mute status and battery life (with warnings for things like low battery life). You could also remotely change frequencies if necessary, say if some new interfering source or IM was experienced in the midst of a production. Unless the receivers can easily be directly monitored and accessed by the operator, then this type of functionality can be a real benefit when running larger systems.


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 5, 2010)

Let me spec out all of the things you need, to make sure we're on the same page here.

If you go with the 100 series:
24x 100 series EW172-G3, $500 -> $12000
8x ASA/NT Antenna Distribution Unit, $580 -> $4640
2x A2003-UHF Directional Antennas, $280 -> $560
28x Countryman B3 Elements, 3.5mm Connector, $150 -> $4200

Total System Cost: $21400

If you go with the 300 or 500 series, everything remains the same except the EW172-G3's go up to EW3xx-G3/EW572-G3 at $849. Total cost goes up to $29800.

Looks like you're right on the money here, Charlie!


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 5, 2010)

_BillESC_

> For yucks and giggles, I priced out a 24 unit Audio Technica 4000 series system with 12 receivers in the C band and 12 in the D band along with 3 antenna distribution systems per band.
> 
> Without mics, you'd be looking at about $ 18,800.00


Good idea. However, I don't feel safe only having two bands to work with... and my fears were confirmed. According to IAS, there are only 9 frequencies available in the C band and 8 in the D band. This is not accounting for spacing required to prevent intermod... Not to mention, Sennheiser and Shure are more widely accepted in large-scale setups like this. 

_mbenonis_

> The Sennheiser WSM also allows you to see and change the receiver labeling, monitor audio and RF levels and monitor mute status and battery life (with warnings for things like low battery life). You could also remotely change frequencies if necessary, say if some new interfering source or IM was experienced in the midst of a production. Unless the receivers can easily be directly monitored and accessed by the operator, then this type of functionality can be a real benefit when running larger systems.


This sounds like an amazing thing to have... However, I just really don't think we can swing for it. I'll have to bring the idea up to the Board and see if they are willing to authorize an addition $10 grand, which is unlikely.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 5, 2010)

Actually, I just got off the phone with the Artistic Director. He said that they could also do the shows with smaller casting first, and work up to high cast shows this season. That way, we could order a smaller number of more expensive units upfront, and then build the system as each show progresses. Apparently, it not that they don't want to spend the money for the more expensive units; only that they don't have it to spend until some ticket income starts flowing. 

If we can in fact follow this route, then maybe we can go for the higher priced units. Can anyone explain the differences between the 300's and 500's? From reading Sennies specs, they seem exactly the same?

We may even be in the market again for the Lectro's  which would be nice; due mainly to the ease of adding additional channels in the future.

PS) I just saw a video of the Sennheiser WSM software. Pretty neat. However, do we need any sort of networking box to run the 300's or 500's in networking mode? In the video, he had the receivers hooked up to a NET1 Frequency Management Network System. Would we need this as well?


----------



## mbenonis (Jan 6, 2010)

Charlie, check your PM box.


----------



## fx120 (Jan 6, 2010)

Charlie1974 said:


> Actually, I just got off the phone with the Artistic Director. He said that they could also do the shows with smaller casting first, and work up to high cast shows this season. That way, we could order a smaller number of more expensive units upfront, and then build the system as each show progresses. Apparently, it not that they don't want to spend the money for the more expensive units; only that they don't have it to spend until some ticket income starts flowing.
> 
> If we can in fact follow this route, then maybe we can go for the higher priced units. Can anyone explain the differences between the 300's and 500's? From reading Sennies specs, they seem exactly the same?
> 
> ...


Lectrosonics is by far the best way to go if you're going to be starting with something like 12 channels and building on it. Their VRM series reciever chasis can be stacked and daisy chained, significantly reducing the ammount of outboard gear you would need to purchase for RF distribution. 

I just priced out for you a 12 ch system using UM400A transmitters and VRM-WB-N recievers in block 19 and 21, antenna cabling between the units and 25' cables to a pair of ALP500 DLPA antennas, total cost before mics was $19,750.00. Moving up to the SMV transmitters would be about $200 more per unit. 

Lectros software is also quite good for setup and configuration of the units, the only down side is that it's not over ethernet, and requires a direct USB connection, however this elimnates the cost of additional networking gear. .

When your house grows and that ticket income starts rolling in it is going to be an easier upgrade to more VRM receivers which you can just daisy chain to the existing units, and move on to another pair of channel blocks.


----------



## Charlie1974 (Jan 6, 2010)

I priced a Lectro setup with the LMa transmitters and the VRS receivers. Comes to about $13,000. However, this does not include the B3's, at a rate of $160 each. Total would be about $15,000 for that setup. I would off course spread the blocks out from block 20 to block 26 (2 freq. in each block) to begin with. 

True, its not the tracking receivers, but neither is the Sennheiser. The tracking receivers add an addition $200 per channel.


----------



## TimmyP1955 (Jan 7, 2010)

We bought 9 100G3 A range.

We don't have any outside RF to worry about, so I just told SIFM to give me 16 frequencies in the A range. I dialed up the first nine. One of these is fed by the supplied stick antennas, which are mounted atop the rack. The other eight are fed by a pair of splitters, which are fed by a pair of the supplied stick antennas, which are mounted atop the rack. 

We borrowed 4 or 5 G2 A range. I left the freqs where they were set in their home venue. These were fed by paddles and splitters.

We borrowed 4 or 5 G2 C range. Otherwise as above.

We ran 3 or 4 rehearsals and 5 shows with no RF issues.

Wish I'd known about these before buying E6s, as users report that these compare very well: MM Audio - The Next Generation of Pro Audio Equipment


----------

