Members Ryan. Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 http://sacramento.craigslist.org/msg/1866721757.html IEM System Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 No, not in bad range. It looks to be a decent price. New is around $1000 from what I'm seeing (for G3 version). You may want to check at www.northernsound.net (call them) and see what a G3 runs new. They sell for well under MAP price. I have heard the ear buds that come with the G2 aren't very good. If the G3 comes with better ones and the price is $800 or less I'd probably go with the new as you'll likely end up replacing the G2 buds and have that much in it anyway, plus you'll get the newest version and a warranty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan. Posted July 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Ok cool. Our singer is dying for IEM. Do you have to have one of these for each person that wants to go IEM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan. Posted July 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Looks like it might be discont'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mogwix Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Do you have to have one of these for each person that wants to go IEM? Yes. For every musician, you need a transmitter and receiver system. Conversely, you can have one transmitter and multiple receivers, but additional receivers will cost about as much as new systems entirely, and everyone will get the same monitor mix. Keep in mind that while using an IEM system, everything has to be mic'd for it to be heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan. Posted July 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Wow thats crazy talk! $4000 to hook us all up new! I think not! I think I'll just make hats out of soup cans and fishing line and use those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mogwix Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Wow thats crazy talk! $4000 to hook us all up new! I think not! I think I'll just make hats out of soup cans and fishing line and use those. Think about it, would it be any cheaper to buy 4 quality monitor speakers and 2 quality power amps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan. Posted July 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Thats true. I do have crap monitors as of now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Read down where it says Broadcast TV http://gigaom.com/2010/03/17/fccs-broadband-plan-mobile-broadband-will-save-us/ There is currently a 5 year plan to sell off the 500's just like they just did to the 700's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted July 27, 2010 Members Share Posted July 27, 2010 Read down where it says Broadcast TV http://gigaom.com/2010/03/17/fccs-broadband-plan-mobile-broadband-will-save-us/ There is currently a 5 year plan to sell off the 500's just like they just did to the 700's super - Well that's good for line6. The market will come to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimmyP Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 A transmitter and two belt packs can be used to deliver two mono mixes, which keeps the cost down in the beginning. In addition to the IEM300G3, look at the AT M3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gonzobassman Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 Think about it, would it be any cheaper to buy 4 quality monitor speakers and 2 quality power amps? Don't forget the two 31 band stereo eqs you will need to make those four monitor mixes work!!! Lol:thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BillESC Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 I'd suggest looking at Audio Technica's M2 or M3 IEM systems. http://www.audio-technica.com/cgi-bin/product_search/wms/wms.pl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members monthlymixcd Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 +1 for M3 system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gonzobassman Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 Didn't notice any pricing in that link,Bill. Any idea what that M3 would run a person (just in case they were wondering)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BillESC Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 The M2 has a MAP of $ 599.00 and the M3 MAPs at $ 799.00 YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kmart Posted July 28, 2010 Members Share Posted July 28, 2010 Wow thats crazy talk! $4000 to hook us all up new! I think not! I think I'll just make hats out of soup cans and fishing line and use those. You haven't even budgeted for upgrading earbuds to high-end custom molds... Try this one on for size: my Shure PSM600 wired bodypack, which a quick Google search tells me sells for ~$650, was FREE, because it was in a demo unit at a store I used to work at. Only thing it didn't come with were earbuds (demo unit had Sony headphones). Add on the hearing test, fitting/taking of molds, tax, and a slight upcharge for custom color and my custom-molded earbuds from Sensaphonics were STILL ~$1k Understand to start with that IEMs fall into the same category as any other SR gear: it usually isn't cheap to do it WELL. Understand also that IEMs fall into a product category of even more specialized/niche use, which means even more cost to the end user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members karlw Posted July 29, 2010 Members Share Posted July 29, 2010 Read down where it says Broadcast TV http://gigaom.com/2010/03/17/fccs-broadband-plan-mobile-broadband-will-save-us/There is currently a 5 year plan to sell off the 500's just like they just did to the 700's Don, quite honestly it gets a bit tiring chasing you to correct these misconceptions that you tend to spread - starting with your Sabine days and now with Line6. Perhaps its easy to confuse something like this, but hopefully you would A) know better and B) take a little more time to read and understand what is being proposed before you post a link to it and "explain" what it means. The government and the FCC are looking for 500 MHz of spectrum total, which is very different than saying that the 500 MHz band will go away. What they are saying is that 120 MHz of the total 500 MHz may come from the broadcast band. We'll see how that shakes out. It may be a "5 year plan" but it is very doubtful it can or will take place in that time. 10 years would be more like it, just like the last time. And I suspect that content creators (i.e. broadcasters, Broadway, NFL, theme parks, etc.) will have a lot to say about this. They all just ate it on the last shift and won't take this next one sitting down. Particularly broadcasters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted July 29, 2010 Members Share Posted July 29, 2010 Karl ... seems like you are the one who didn't read it I didn't say they wanted to take away 500 mhz ... I said they wanted to take away the 500's (that's why there is an "s" on the end of it.) I also pointed out the relevant section from the article as it pertains to wireless mic users (that's why I said read the "broadcast TV" section) Here is the author's conclusion (not my conclusion ... although I do agree with him) ... "To bolster its controversial move, the FCC points out that cellular companies have valued each megahertz of spectrum per person covered at $1.28 while the television spectrum is currently valued at 11-15 cents. Why? Because mobile broadband is the future and over-the-air television is on its way out." Simply stated ... the FCC see it as a $50Billion loss. Just like they did with white space devices. As much as the old school wireless manufacturers wanted to cry and moan about it ... the majority of players knew it would happen. There was simply too much money at stake (and there was too much benefit to the general public, even though it was at the hands of wireless users). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members karlw Posted July 29, 2010 Members Share Posted July 29, 2010 Don, Then the author got it wrong. The original statement from the FCC was that they were looking for 500 MHz of spectrum. You didn't see that? You just found an article that would work to confuse the market? There are also economic issues that the author (and probably the FCC) is not addressing: content creation. Is there a way, today, to get 200 channels of wireless to work, without using the standard broadcast bands? How many channels does your system offer, again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 30, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted July 30, 2010 Karl, Regardless of the validity of either your or Don's version of events, your posts are peppered with personal and professional attacks. This wouldn't fly if you had posted anything more solid (such as a link to the original FCC statement you mention) than your opinion, but lacking this, they're over the top. And if I'm correct that you sell competing products, you've really got no business airing your laundry here. If this discussion doesn't take a dramatic turn towards civility, it will be removed. Please continue, but without the insults, direct or implied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members karlw Posted July 30, 2010 Members Share Posted July 30, 2010 Karl,Regardless of the validity of either your or Don's version of events, your posts are peppered with personal and professional attacks. This wouldn't fly if you had posted anything more solid (such as a link to the original FCC statement you mention) than your opinion, but lacking this, they're over the top. And if I'm correct that you sell competing products, you've really got no business airing your laundry here.If this discussion doesn't take a dramatic turn towards civility, it will be removed. Please continue, but without the insults, direct or implied. Craig, heard and understood. I tend to get upset about this kind of thing, and perhaps I took it too far. I probably should have started by posting a link in the first place. Here it is: http://www.televisionbroadcast.com/article/102684 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 30, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted July 30, 2010 It says they want 500MHz, but not from where. Don's article is from March, but the memo from Obama is 32 days old. So the author may be wrong, or was reporting what was true in March. I'm still interested to see where they plan to rob from Peter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted July 30, 2010 Members Share Posted July 30, 2010 Until June there was 330 mHz available whitespace for wireless mics. Today with the 700's gone there is 220 mhz. Regardless of where they take it ... they will take another 120 mHz out of the UHF/TV bands leaving roughly 100mHz of space for over the air TV broadcast, wireless mics and for the new white space devices (TVBDs) when they come on-line) to all have to try to share. If we don't know what frequencies will be taken then it makes it even more difficult to plan ahead as anything could go. I guess we'll know better in October of this year. To your second question, Yes it is possible to do 200 channels of wireless without using the TV bands although we're not quite ready to go just yet. In order for wireless to be reliable I see no option but to use technologies that can co-share the air waves. Current technologies that require their own individual unused frequency to operate on will become more and more challenging to operate. And thanks for asking, our new system XD-V70 has 12 simultaneous channels that are immune from the new National Broadband Plan. They will still be working 2, 5 or 10 years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 30, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted July 30, 2010 Yeah, but that 11th year....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.