Members trevcda Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 To add to Aged's take on latency; in your home system(s), you have no actual source producing sound in real time to compare the latency of your transmitted audio to. This is why it works in that environment. The fact that this varies and is not consistent is also problematic. That aside you've got to get all of your audio/mic inputs to your FOH mixer (regardless of where it's located) anyway, what's two more cable for main outputs? The IEM/instrument wireless I and others have used as a work around to get audio to areas with accessibility issues, is generally not a cheap one channel wireless device and is used with an understanding of the compromises in reliability and/or sound quality and usually when there is no other option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rezrover Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Monster Cable is like the oil companies, they're holding that technology back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mogwix Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 If it seems like I'm being stubborn on this, it's because I genuinely don't understand what the reason is behind why this is so difficult. I still don't understand what problem we're trying to solve in the first place. Why wireless speakers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rezrover Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Or "In Mouth Microphones" to pair up with IEM's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 I still don't understand what problem we're trying to solve in the first place.Why wireless speakers? There are situations in which wireless is useful.... delay stacks for instance. Even in smaller setups like mine I've gone wireless a few times. Background music and announcements at a wedding reception where the cocktail hour is in a different location or where guests are seated in more than one room. Running long cables isn't always practical in these situations. Wireless is faster, cleaner, and safer than running cables across thresholds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 I think the reasons have been stated clearly enough. Latency bandwidth & dependability vs cost are the issue. Home G series router systems don't have any of the qualities required (except the cost & bandwidth). Yes the Line 6 (and soon others) make low latency - full bandwidth transmission systems but reliability is still an issue (albiet a small one). I'd consider taking that risk for 1 mic (usualy for mission critical jobs (the $$$ mic) there's at least a BU wireless channel and often a hardwired one) but not for the whole FOH system. I agree it's a great idea and probably will soon come into being but demand/cost is what's currently holding it back. just my .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Nxt Lvl Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Isn't Peavey's new powered main "set up" for wireless? "A module bay allows for future expansion including Wireless I/O, Delay/Time Adjustment, Mixer Expander, Ethernet I/O, and more" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Zeromus-X Posted August 18, 2011 Author Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 To add to Aged's take on latency; in your home system(s), you have no actual source producing sound in real time to compare the latency of your transmitted audio to. This is why it works in that environment. The fact that this varies and is not consistent is also problematic. So you're saying a source in real time is more difficult to transmit wirelessly than a pre-recorded source? Got any links to back that up? It seems that if this were the case, wireless IEM units wouldn't exist. Once the sound is mixed down, especially in a digital mixer, there's no reason for that to be difficult. If the snake is converting 16 inputs to 16 digital channels and sending them wirelessly, and the mixer is decoding that signal into 16 different channels again, I don't see the latency issue there either. I can download 16 different files from the Internet and my computer can determine that they aren't all one big ball of file. I understand there may be a latency issue there as the snake box would have to do its own internal processing, and maybe that's a bottleneck from that perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 So you're saying a source in real time is more difficult to transmit wirelessly than a pre-recorded source? no, he is not saying that. pay attention before jumping to conclusions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 So you're saying a source in real time is more difficult to transmit wirelessly than a pre-recorded source? Got any links to back that up? It seems that if this were the case, wireless IEM units wouldn't exist. Once the sound is mixed down, especially in a digital mixer, there's no reason for that to be difficult. For the simple reason that on a recorded source you have no fixed point of reference to compare with, you coiuldn't tell if you were off by 1/4-second because you aren't comparing with the original. On a live source, you have the realtime live source component that will be compared with the wirelessly transmitted component, so a 1/4-second (or whatever it ends up as) latency will be obvious compared with the realtime source. If it didn't vary, it might work ok for a delay speaker where you can position it to take advantage of the dealy, but certainly not for monitors, or conventionally placed mains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 For the simple reason that on a recorded source you have no fixed point of reference to compare with, you coiuldn't tell if you were off by 1/4-second because you aren't comparing with the original. On a live source, you have the realtime live source component that will be compared with the wirelessly transmitted component, so a 1/4-second (or whatever it ends up as) latency will be obvious compared with the realtime source. If it didn't vary, it might work ok for a delay speaker where you can position it to take advantage of the dealy, but certainly not for monitors, or conventionally placed mains. I don't get this. If wireless "input devices" (guitar and vocal wireless) don't suffer noticeable delay then how is it any different on the outbound side of things. In my case it works fine. I've done it. "Are we there yet?" sure.... there are just few options to choose from that are specifically intended for this purpose. The Phonic units are the only products I know of that are designed and specifically meant to be used for wireless speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KF650SB1000 Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 So that's $13,000For $3500 you can do this same thing and gain a Macbook Pro in the process. I've used this set several times including outdoor concerts for a few thousand people.StudioLive 16.4.2 = $1800Ipad = $600Macbook Pro = $1000Router = $100Ipad app = freeVSL app (runs on macbook) = free How do you come up with $13,000? If you want 16x8 in/output then its $6000, but if you want a 32x16 in/ouput then it'll be $8000. Yea; if you want that StudioLive as your board, I know its not my "go to" board. Presonus's slogan about the StudioLive; "great board, but we left a few things out". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 How do you come up with $13,000? If you want 16x8 in/output then its $6000, but if you want a 32x16 in/ouput then it'll be $8000.Yea; if you want that StudioLive as your board, I know its not my "go to" board. Presonus's slogan about the StudioLive; "great board, but we left a few things out". Preference of the board isn't the same as "can or can't do it". You're analysis isn't "wrong", I was just illustrating that it's being done now, reliability and sounding great, by my standards anyway. $13,000 with your board, $3,500 with mine. If it's worth $10K for whatever was "left out", great, spend the 10K for those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 I just came across another wireless setup. Not the best name in the world "VocoPro", but it's 2.4 Ghz digital and looks to be around $370 (edit: found for as low as around $312 shipped. I've almost convinced myself I need this). VocoPro Air-Net I just watched the video and it's a pretty well thought out setup. Has 1/4", RCA, and XLR inputs in the rack mount transmitter and comes with corded adapters for those same types of connections on the receivers. The receivers can run on batteries (~10 hrs) or AC (AC adapters included). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mutha Goose Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Latency should not be an issue here... Please explain where you believe the latency would arise from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Latency should not be an issue here... Please explain where you believe the latency would arise from. Was referring to the networked wireless audio routing and transmission that was suggested earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KF650SB1000 Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Preference of the board isn't the same as "can or can't do it". You're analysis isn't "wrong", I was just illustrating that it's being done now, reliability and sounding great, by my standards anyway. $13,000 with your board, $3,500 with mine. If it's worth $10K for whatever was "left out", great, spend the 10K for those things. Once again, my set-up is between $6000 and $8000 depending on how many inputs you need... not $13k. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Flogger59 Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Or "In Mouth Microphones" to pair up with IEM's? Someone tried that already. There were two problems, mic'ing before the lips is an inarticulate mess, and what do you do with the wire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 Once again, my set-up is between $6000 and $8000 depending on how many inputs you need... not $13k.I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted August 18, 2011 Members Share Posted August 18, 2011 what do you do with the wire?Is this a trick question? :D:DI some ideas but they might not always be pretty:freak: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Zeromus-X Posted August 19, 2011 Author Members Share Posted August 19, 2011 I just came across another wireless setup. Not the best name in the world "VocoPro", but it's 2.4 Ghz digital and looks to be around $370 (edit: found for as low as around $312 shipped. I've almost convinced myself I need this). VocoPro Air-NetI just watched the video and it's a pretty well thought out setup. Has 1/4", RCA, and XLR inputs in the rack mount transmitter and comes with corded adapters for those same types of connections on the receivers. The receivers can run on batteries (~10 hrs) or AC (AC adapters included). Bingo. Now, take this system and implement it into a powered speaker system. Stick one in all the PRX cabinets, and JBL can now sell a "PRX Transmitter" rack module that hooks right into your mixer and transmits wirelessly to any PRX speakers in the area. Make it two channel, conveniently called "Left" and "Right", and put a switch on each speaker. Drop your left stack in place, switched to "left", drop your right stack in place, switched to "right", plug them in, take the lid off the mixer rack, and you've got no cables to run to FOH. JBL's cabinets already have a "monitor" switch so maybe we could have a 4-way selector for monitor mixes on them as well. Now, instead of buying EV tops and a JBL sub, people have a reason to (a) buy the same brand for everythind and (b) buy the special PRX Transmitter module, more money for JBL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 19, 2011 Members Share Posted August 19, 2011 Except for the little reliability problem and range issues in the 2.4 GHz band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 19, 2011 Members Share Posted August 19, 2011 Except for the little reliability problem and range issues in the 2.4 GHz band. Depending on implementation this could be a big issue or a moot point. I've read some not so kind reviews from the VocoPro unit. No real big surprise there I guess. Line 6, on the other hand, has rock solid 2.4 Ghz performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted August 19, 2011 Members Share Posted August 19, 2011 Once again, my set-up is between $6000 and $8000 depending on how many inputs you need... not $13k. I hesitate to continue this discussion, but the setup you mention does seem to be missing the control surface, which, from what I can tell start at around $8,000 for the iLive R72. So that is an investment of $12,000 minimum. Again, my point was never to insinuate the setup I posted was in any way better. I'm not an idiot and know that's not the case. It was simply pointing out another option that gives similar functionality. My example lacks the digital snake so in order not to have to run a snake the mixer would have to be located on stage. One application of that would be for a monitor engineer operating the board from side stage while the FOH is controlled wirelessly from an iPad. Anyway, it's a solution that is more practical for MANY more people here, certainly from a financial standpoint and likely from a technical one as well. I'm sorry if it came across as anything other than that. It was never my intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted August 19, 2011 Members Share Posted August 19, 2011 You do not need a control surface to run an iLive stagebox/mixer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.