Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

In-ear monitors

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse







X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • In-ear monitors

    I'm doing a little research for the singer in our band who want to get a good set of In-Ear Monitors for $800 or less (preferably less).

    He would love to be able to control the mix of instruments and his voice, but I think a system like that would be pretty tricky and expensive. From what I gather, most entry-level In-ear monitor systems only have an overall volume control that adjusts the volume of the mix being sent to them. Is this correct? Is there a possibility that individual mic volumes can be adjusted (ie. guitar, drums, bass)?

    the Carvin system looks cosmetically identical to one of the Nady units, but the Nady can be had for about $30 less.

    Then you move up a few hundred to the Shure PSM200 series. Are these worth twice the price as the Carvin/Nady?

    How about Sennheiser?

    ...Everything else seems to break the $1000 mark. Any help would be appreciated as far as what features to look for and any other general advice. Thanks!

  • #2
    Wow, I just did a search and came up on tons of useful info. It looks as if we should stay clear of the Nady/Carvin stuff. The Shure PSM200 seems to be the one to get.

    Now I need to really narrow it down between the PSM200, PSM400, or maybe the Sennheiser...

    Comment


    • #3
      Shure PSM400 does EXACTLY what you ask. It has a "more me" feature (essentially it breaks band on one channel - left for instance, and you on other channel - right, but it comes to you mono so you don't get the panning).

      FILAMENT AUDIO around $700.

      I don't know that the PSM200 can do this. I believe it is a mono IEM system.
      www.nextexitrocks.com

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by abzurd
        Shure PSM400 does EXACTLY what you ask. It has a "more me" feature (essentially it breaks band on one channel - left for instance, and you on other channel - right, but it comes to you mono so you don't get the panning).

        FILAMENT AUDIO around $700.

        I don't know that the PSM200 can do this. I believe it is a mono IEM system.


        That's correct.

        PSM400 is my favorite too, though I also have and use some PSM200s which are very good for the price.

        Terry D.
        Telling Stories releases 2nd CD, see our WEBSITE! Please check out my GROUPIE STORY and Tales from the Road.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by telekaster
          Then you move up a few hundred to the Shure PSM200 series. Are these worth twice the price as the Carvin/Nady?

          How about Sennheiser?


          They're worth at least twice the price of the Nady/Carvins. It's hard to put an exact number to it when you're dividing by zero (Nadys are worse than useless, IMO).

          I actually own a set of Nadys, by the way.

          Sennheisers are pretty decent, their weak spot last time I tried them was in the ear buds. I've heard, though, that they've been redesigned since then.

          I stick strictly with Shure because they're very good and very reliable, and I expect Shure will be making them long after the competitors have folded the tent. Shure service is also very good. And finally, when you're on the road, it's much more likely that you'll be able to borrow a transmitter or belt pack from another band, or buy a replacement at a music store in another town. That's worth quite a lot to me.

          Terry D.
          Telling Stories releases 2nd CD, see our WEBSITE! Please check out my GROUPIE STORY and Tales from the Road.

          Comment


          • #6
            I haven't tried the PSM200 series, but we use multiple 400 and 600 units for almost three years now, and have been very happy with them.

            The 400's are a great unit. I think the 600's have juuuusssst a little better sound quality (subjective), and some features on the transmitter I like better than the 400's.

            But the flexibility of the 400's multiple channel selection and better price have outweighed us buying anymore 600's for now.

            Good stuff!
            <div class="signaturecontainer"><a href="http://www.BlackFrogMusic.com" target="_blank">www.BlackFrogMusic.com</a></div>

            Comment


            • #7
              Another vote for Shure. I've been using the PSM 400 for over a year and am quite happy. I've tried, and own, the E1, E2, and E5 earphones. Any one of them is acceptable, although I've settled on using E5 for stage, E2 for portable audio listening, and E1 for spare. Crazy? Yep.

              Mitchell
              www.trickdogband.com

              Comment


              • #8
                If you want control over multiple channels of audio, check out the hearback system, limiting is onboard the mixers and because it is ethernet- based the sound quality is alot cleaner than the shure system. My band uses this system and we love it.



                www.heartechnologies.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  This looks like a good solution if you don't need to be wireless.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Island
                    because it is ethernet- based the sound quality is alot cleaner than the shure system.


                    No, because it is wired the sound quality is a bit better. Shure makes wired versions of their IEMs also.

                    Terry D.
                    Telling Stories releases 2nd CD, see our WEBSITE! Please check out my GROUPIE STORY and Tales from the Road.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Good point Terry.

                      We were using the wired PSM 400 beltpak's for about a year before we got the hearbacks and there is a noticable difference in quality. Our old system required a long run of analog cabling from FOH do the beltpak, whereas in the hearback system, the signal stays digital until you plug your IEM's into your mixer.

                      I have A/B'd them (without the long cable run) and there definitly is a difference, the PSM beltpaks add some hiss and hf loss (possibly due to compression?) that isn't present in the hearback signal.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Island
                        Good point Terry.

                        We were using the wired PSM 400 beltpak's for about a year before we got the hearbacks and there is a noticable difference in quality. Our old system required a long run of analog cabling from FOH do the beltpak, whereas in the hearback system, the signal stays digital until you plug your IEM's into your mixer.

                        I have A/B'd them (without the long cable run) and there definitly is a difference, the PSM beltpaks add some hiss and hf loss (possibly due to compression?) that isn't present in the hearback signal.


                        It is probably me, but I can not find anything about transmitter and beltpacks/receivers on the Hear TEchnologies website.

                        What do you have and where did you get them?
                        <div class="signaturecontainer">***<br />
                        JULES: The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd.&quot;<br />
                        <br />
                        SOMERSET: I just don't think I can continue to live in a place that embraces and nurtures apathy as if it was virtue. <br />
                        MILLS: You're no different. You're no better. <br />
                        SOMERSET: I didn't say I was different or better. I'm not. Hell, I sympathize; I sympathize completely. <br />
                        <br />
                        <br />
                        ***<br />
                        <br />
                        <br />
                        <br />
                        <br />
                        <br />
                        </div>

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          We're using the Aviom ethernet-based monitor system and I love it. I have up to 16 channels of choices and I can mix it the way I want it. Need more me, just turn it up to my heart's delight. Someone too loud to hear the sax? Turn him down. The controller fastens to my music stand and is very convenient. I'm using wired E-5s and the (stereo) fidelity is fantastic. You run the wireless transmitter directly off the individual control head.
                          <div class="signaturecontainer">Yeah, now!</div>

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by J the D
                            We're using the Aviom ethernet-based monitor system and I love it. I have up to 16 channels of choices and I can mix it the way I want it. Need more me, just turn it up to my heart's delight. Someone too loud to hear the sax? Turn him down. The controller fastens to my music stand and is very convenient. I'm using wired E-5s and the (stereo) fidelity is fantastic. You run the wireless transmitter directly off the individual control head.


                            I was really interested in those but it seems that for a hub and 4 mixers for 4 people, you're in over $2,500 and then you have to buy transmitters and receivers if you want an IEM system.

                            In contrast, $1,000 (street price) gets you the Hear Technologies hub and mixers for 4 along with the cables.
                            <div class="signaturecontainer">***<br />
                            JULES: The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd.&quot;<br />
                            <br />
                            SOMERSET: I just don't think I can continue to live in a place that embraces and nurtures apathy as if it was virtue. <br />
                            MILLS: You're no different. You're no better. <br />
                            SOMERSET: I didn't say I was different or better. I'm not. Hell, I sympathize; I sympathize completely. <br />
                            <br />
                            <br />
                            ***<br />
                            <br />
                            <br />
                            <br />
                            <br />
                            <br />
                            </div>

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MrKnobs


                              That's correct.

                              PSM400 is my favorite too, though I also have and use some PSM200s which are very good for the price.

                              Terry D.



                              ... which brings us to http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=467373

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X