Members nchangin Posted November 5, 2014 Members Share Posted November 5, 2014 Hi Folks, my PGX SM58 has gone missing, please don't ask why. (sigh) anyway, I still have the receiver, I have not pulled it out of the trailer yet but I do know they have certain frequencies for these mics. Does the Mic itself show the frequency it has to use? From what I know (not much really) the PGX2 series will work with the the old PGX only receivers. Anyone know this for sure or mixed the two? I assume you just have to make sure the bands match? I found a used one PGX2/Beta58 for 100 bucks, so if the bands match that means they would work together right? Thanks in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 6, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 My understanding was that "PGX2" was still the PGX analog system but the "2" indicated it was a handheld mic transmitter (which could be fitted with different mic heads), where "1" would indicate a beltpack transmitter, and "4" indicated it was a PGX receiver. I also understood this system as having an automatic scan feature. The receiver scans for a clear channel, which you can select. Then remove the battery cover from the mic, and point the base at the receiver about 6in away. The IR port picks up the transmitter's selected channel, and you accept it by pushing the power button on the mic. So yes, that mic should work. Bring your receiver along to verify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 6, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 6, 2014 My understanding was that "PGX2" was still the PGX analog system but the "2" indicated it was a handheld mic transmitter (which could be fitted with different mic heads), where "1" would indicate a beltpack transmitter, and "4" indicated it was a PGX receiver. I also understood this system as having an automatic scan feature. The receiver scans for a clear channel, which you can select. Then remove the battery cover from the mic, and point the base at the receiver about 6in away. The IR port picks up the transmitter's selected channel, and you accept it by pushing the power button on the mic. So yes, that mic should work. Bring your receiver along to verify. Hi Craig, yes I did get an email from shure support apparently the newer stuff works but there is something disabled on both ends and only certain model mics work with certain receivers. I'm thinking Line 6 XD V75, love the idea of the modeling of other popular mics and really like the fact there is no issues with the wireless bands being sold off or "illegal". Just out of the budget with christmas and kids and the wife and etc.... Oh and another thing saw Don Boomer's discussion about the XD series on you tube! Very informative video Don! It's the audio companding feature that's not compatible between PGX4 receiver and BLX series transmitters. http://shure.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5420/~/will-a-blx1-or-blx2-work-with-a-pgx4-analog-receiver%3F Not really that knowing of the technology but it sounds like if I did use a newer transmitter with my old receiver this could cause issues including artifcacts in the sound. Also with Line6 I don't think I'll get that "lag" effect I did with the PGX, meaning the farther away from the receiver the more delay there was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 6, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 Sorry, you didn't mention the mic being BLX. You wrote that it's a PGX2/Beta58. Is that still accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 6, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 6, 2014 Lost the mic all I have is the PGX receiver. So I wanted to replace the mic only, they don't make the pgx anymore. It was a PGX/SM58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted November 6, 2014 Members Share Posted November 6, 2014 I'm thinking Line 6 XD V75' date=' love the idea of the modeling of other popular mics[/quote']Check your mixer - it may have mic modeling built-in already. It's usually disguised as a bunch of knobs labeled "High", "Low', "Mid", "Freq", and/or "Q" - or buried on a page called "EQ" in a digital mixer . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 6, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 Lost the mic all I have is the PGX receiver. So I wanted to replace the mic only' date=' they don't make the pgx anymore. It was a PGX/SM58[/quote'] So is the Beta58 you're considering a PGX or BLX? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 6, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 6, 2014 Craig I guess I don't follow you. I think I have everyone very very confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 6, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 6, 2014 Everyone I think I'm sold on a Line 6 wireless as a replacement. A. I don't have to worry about frequencies being sold or being illegal. B. The Line 6 XD V75 seems to be an all around great mic. You can emulate multiple mic brands right on the mic, how cool is that? C. The capsule is interchangeable with other capsules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 7, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 Craig I guess I don't follow you. I think I have everyone very very confused! Nah, probably only me:D. I saw this in your second post: "It's the audio companding feature that's not compatible between PGX4 receiver and BLX series transmitters." ...and wasn't sure whether you were still considering a PGX mic or a BLX mic. Regarding Line 6; I'm with you there. I've had a couple of their wireless systems for several years now, and they are very nice. I've never had a problem with them, even the prototype Don sent has worked flawlessly. As far as the emulation goes, in my opinion it only demonstrates how subtle the differences among mics really is. It's probably worthwhile to get the used PGX2 mic, and still get the Line 6. At least you'll have backup, and you can still sell the PGX system as a fully functional kit if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 7, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 7, 2014 Craig: Thank you for the insight! Did you get any lag with the line 6? What kind of a range did you get? Ever have a drop out? Also my concern is USER error. The buttons are on the mic to change channels, and what do users do when you give them the mic? The first thing they do is start pushing buttons, if they select a different channel inadvertintly does the mic mute out? Is there a "lockout" like on the Shure's where they press the button and nothing happens? Also regarding the line 6 mics, have you actually used the modeling for different model mics? If so what were your thoughts? To be frank without that audio companding, I just think it's a bad investment if it's not going to perform like it should right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 7, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 These comments apply to the XDV70. I've also got G30 and XDR instrument systems. Let's see: No noticeable lag, and no complaints from users, so I'm guessing it's minimal. Range; I've tested it out to about 75 feet line-of-sight as well as "through" a 10" concrete block wall and an interior partition, and ran out of backyard. In use I've never needed the mic or pack to be more than 40 feet from the receiver with relatively clear line-of-sight. No dropouts ever, nor has anyone I've loaned the system to complained about any interference, dropout or reception problems. I've played around with the modeling...I'll set it to one mic or another and then sometimes switch to another model mid-show to hear the results. As always, it depends on the singer...adjust to taste. But the differences are quite subtle, which is nice. There is no lockout, but you can't switch channels without pressing "Select" for 2 seconds, then press the power/mute button to another channel, and THEN press Select for another 2 seconds. I always explain how to mute (hold mute for 1 second) and unmute (same), and that if they play around with the select button I refuse to fix what they broke. So far nobody has attempted to earn my wrath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 7, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 7, 2014 chuckle, I can't tell a client that I refuse to fix your dumbness and your need to press buttons just because they are there, but I do like your analogy. I do see why they ahve a 2 sec threshold most users would'n't think to do that, so they were thinking of this when they designed the product! Question: this line of sight I keep hearing. I had a bad bad bad experience with crappy mics that used infrared, turned out to be garbage, complete garbage cause it required "line of sight" litteraly to work (think about your remote control not pointed at TV that doesn't work). These don't require that do they? What you are saying that obviously it's not going to support X range if teh signal has to pass through 3 walls, I get that affects the performance of distance, just don't want a mic that has to have direct line of sigith to the receiver. Some of these halls I play at are huge, you could have a whole crowd of people between the mic and the receiver thus no "line of sight". I do understand physical objects in the way of the reciver transmitter will affect the overall distance of range. Thank you for the input craig, Line 6 does seem to the no brainer solution. Did you do any direct comparisons of the modeling to the real deal mics by chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted November 7, 2014 Members Share Posted November 7, 2014 There is no lockout Well then why did I put that little switch behind the battery compartment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted November 7, 2014 Members Share Posted November 7, 2014 Question: this line of sight I keep hearing. All radio waves move in a straight line and do not fan out like audio waves. So they don't go around corners. When a receiver cannot directly see the transmitter then the only way the signal can get there is by reflection (think ball on a pool table) or by penetrating the wall. In either case you lose an enormous amount of energy and greatly shorten the range. And as you found out this is absolutely the case with IR mics. It's not nearly as bad with RF though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pro Sound Guy Posted November 8, 2014 Members Share Posted November 8, 2014 ELF will travel through the crust of the earth.Submarines used it.Navy dosnt use it anymore with current technology.The higher the frequency the straighter the line.Microphones use high frequency on a big scale.Fm radio frequencies are line of sight.UHF is even higher freqs then FM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 8, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 8, 2014 Well then why did I put that little switch behind the battery compartment? To make old guys who need bifocals look foolish? Hah! In how many years, I've never noticed it. And I even physically rechecked it yesterday. My kit didn't have the Pilot's Guide for the mic...it came with the XDV-70L beltpack guide. So I figured it out on my own. So much for that.... Just tried it, and to be honest, I'll still leave it unlocked. Nobody has changed channels or even muted unintentionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted November 8, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted November 8, 2014 Did you do any direct comparisons of the modeling to the real deal mics by chance? Yep. SM58 and e835. I'll only say that of those who've used both A/B'd, and who aren't gear snobs, the concensus was that Line 6 did a damn good job of modeling both. In rehearsals where we did informal "blind" testing nobody could discern which mic was being used. However, I'll also state that few could consistently discern whether an SM58 or e835 (real or modeled) was in use either. Hence why I've been stating how subtle the differences really are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted November 8, 2014 Members Share Posted November 8, 2014 All waves travel in a straight line. Waves can appear to bend due to effects like diffraction and reflection, which depend on the ratio of dimensions and surface reflectivity at the frequency being used. There are ways to bend a wave, but not in these cases. They involve using large electromagnetic fields, impractical at mere mortal budgets. The reasons audio appears to bend is due to diffraction (because of long wavelength relative to structure dimensions) and reflection (because of surface properties at audio frequencies), Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted November 8, 2014 Members Share Posted November 8, 2014 As far as emulation goes, I occasionally get folks used to "working the mic" with an SM58 (AKA "real" musicians ) and no way does the Line6 emulate the SPL/distance, frequency-response/distance, or off pattern pickup characteristics of an SM58. Oh, and with the emulation off it's a pretty nice mic that takes EQ well . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nchangin Posted November 10, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 10, 2014 Thanks for the input Don! Liked your presentation BTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.