Cacophony Forums
Unofficial Mackie User Forums => DL1608/DL806/DL32R/ProDX Mixers => Topic started by: takis on June 29, 2015, 07:39:00 PM
-
Well, it was a newer sanheiser receiver wireless microphone system that was placed on top of my rack where I have the Apple router that connects to the DL32R.
Basically, some white noise at full volume went throuh the system intermitently.... After we moved the mic to the other side of the stage everything was OK...
So, beware of hooking up wireless mics near the router...
Unfortunately, it took a while to figure out because of the rain on the stage leaking from the ceiling.. it was an outside festival... never worked with the singer before, thus the wireless seinheiser mic system was new...
The mic system had a hard time 'syncing' with its own system... this should of been a sign to move it to the other side from the beginning...
Unfortunately, it was my large sound system and the white noise was loud... but fortunatley all of my electrical power conditioning stuff saved everything.. nothing blew... except for the one speaker that the actual wind blew over to fall 15 feet off the stage... no one got hurt... the tweeter fell off inside, but the 15" was still working.. when i opened ithe JBL MR410 up today, the tweeter fell off and I just screwed it back on and everything works.... got lucky there...
Overall, the entire day was a bad day with issues... other than the loud noise through the system, the overall system worked well and was happy with the sound. People really did not notice anythign because the speaker fell over and the white noise happened to happen at the same time.. so we took a short break and figured things out...
Taki
-
I take it that your new Sennheiser wireless is of the 2.4 gig variety. A bad choice in my opinion. The traditional 500 Mhz to 698 Mhz have no such problem with any of my gear. I don't have a DL32R or for that matter any Apple routers.
-
I use a Shure - PGXD24/SM58 wireless mic system and have always set the receiver next to the AirPort Express without any issues. Of course the express is running only on 5GHz. I had to disable the 2.4GHz radio, it was making my mic crap out all the time. Now no issues.
-
I place my receivers on top of the rack with the DL32R, and haven't had any issues so far. But I do appreciate the heads-up. If it happens, I'll know what to look for.
-
Hi Taki,
I hope in the future you have all speakers safely gsecured.
A speaker falling from 15' could really hurt somebody.
Good health, Weogo
-
I hope in the future you have all speakers safely gsecured.
A speaker falling from 15' could really hurt somebody.
This.
It's very likely a 35 lb. speaker falling from 15' onto someone's head will kill them. If your MP410s were on stands, you need to put theatrical sand bags on the stands to ballast them. I keep 35 lb. bags around just for this reason.
http://www.fullcompass.com/product/446973.html
-
I take it that your new Sennheiser wireless is of the 2.4 gig variety. A bad choice in my opinion. The traditional 500 Mhz to 698 Mhz have no such problem with any of my gear. I don't have a DL32R or for that matter any Apple routers.
Hey Bill, I have one of those. What a piece of junk. Should have gone with the UHF unit in the first place. And yes, interference city :(. It's collecting dust on my shelf in the garage.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
2.4GHz wireless mics and guitar transmitters were a good idea back before WiFi controlled mixers and the explosion of smartphones - not-so-good now :( .
-
When our sennheiser rep showed us the new digital wireless models he specifically said to not have a router anywhere near it. They don't play well together.
-
When our sennheiser rep showed us the new digital wireless models he specifically said to not have a router anywhere near it. They don't play well together.
So, basically completely useless :P ?
-
I'm getting inclined to put all the receivers in a separate box from my mixing stack. With modular snake, you can have both ends connected up and only have to do one connection for every set of 8. (I only own 3 wireless receivers.) It would provide more isolation for the receivers from the WiFi. Haven't done it yet, but it's on my mind.
-
Sounds like I was very lucky. I needed two wireless mics to meet the requirements of a new client and was looking at both the SLX24 (UHF) and the GLXD (2.4GHz).
I was really tempted to go with the Shure Digital because of the clever battery charging function. Lucky one of my mates warned me off the digital.
Cheers
-
I've got one of the Shure digital headset mic and fanny pack. It's always worked perfectly. What have you heard that's different?
-
I never looked to see what the digital's operating frequency is. I've also never had any interference from it. My Shure receiver is mounted just below the mixer and my airport express is mounted to the rackmount Mackie plate. Guess I'll check the frequency later today.
-
I've got one of the Shure digital headset mic and fanny pack. It's always worked perfectly. What have you heard that's different?
My mate suggested that the UHF microphones would work better when there wasn't a good line of sight. It was nothing to do with interferrence with or from a wireless router.
Cheers
-
UHF is much better than VHF. (I've had both and the UHF is nearly impossible to have drop out.) Don't think the digital mic is VHF. Like I said, I will check and see what mine is.
-
I've got one of the Shure digital headset mic and fanny pack. It's always worked perfectly. What have you heard that's different?
My mate suggested that the UHF microphones would work better when there wasn't a good line of sight. It was nothing to do with interferrence with or from a wireless router.
Cheers
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
-
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
Oddly, this doesn't seem to hold true for 2.4GHz in other use areas. For instance, radio control hobbyists enjoy the same or greater range, with less interference, using 2.4GHz digital systems as opposed to the 72MHz FM and digital systems that are being phased out -- and the 2.4GHz gear operates at lower power.
I've been having to do a fair amount of research on 2.4GHz equipment lately for other reasons, and from what I can see, if there's a problem going on with interference between wireless routers and wireless mics, something is not playing by the rules with regards to the 2.4GHz ISM space.
-
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
Oddly, this doesn't seem to hold true for 2.4GHz in other use areas. For instance, radio control hobbyists enjoy the same or greater range, with less interference, using 2.4GHz digital systems as opposed to the 72MHz FM and digital systems that are being phased out -- and the 2.4GHz gear operates at lower power.
I've been having to do a fair amount of research on 2.4GHz equipment lately for other reasons, and from what I can see, if there's a problem going on with interference between wireless routers and wireless mics, something is not playing by the rules with regards to the 2.4GHz ISM space.
Oddly enough the laws of physics still hold true even though some would think otherwise. 72 Mhz has more distance capability than 2.4 Ghz.
-
Given the probably future overuse of the 2.4GHz band I would be very wary of a 2M wingspan 250mph model jet aircraft controlled by the same wireless as my smartphone turning into a 2M/250mph unguided flying bomb :facepalm:
-
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
Oddly, this doesn't seem to hold true for 2.4GHz in other use areas. For instance, radio control hobbyists enjoy the same or greater range, with less interference, using 2.4GHz digital systems as opposed to the 72MHz FM and digital systems that are being phased out -- and the 2.4GHz gear operates at lower power.
I've been having to do a fair amount of research on 2.4GHz equipment lately for other reasons, and from what I can see, if there's a problem going on with interference between wireless routers and wireless mics, something is not playing by the rules with regards to the 2.4GHz ISM space.
Oddly enough the laws of physics still hold true even though some would think otherwise. 72 Mhz has more distance capability than 2.4 Ghz.
Anecdotal experience proves otherwise. Yeah, I know. Theoretically, it's a physics thing.
But, as Yogi Berra said, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
And as an engineer working in television by day, and musician and working sound guy by night (and weekend), I can certainly attest to that. :)
Cheers!
-
Given the probably future overuse of the 2.4GHz band I would be very wary of a 2M wingspan 250mph model jet aircraft controlled by the same wireless as my smartphone turning into a 2M/250mph unguided flying bomb :facepalm:
The R/C manufacturers are very careful to play by the rules. With the 2.4GHz stuff, there are safeguards in place to keep one pilot from inadvertently interfering with another's aircraft. With the older systems, the only safeguard is being sure you're transmitter is turned off when you don't have the proper clothespin attached to your antenna.
-
Very few people other than the fliers will have a 72MHz TX set in their pocket though where there'll be dozens of 2.4GHz devices in the vicinity, that, coupled with the interference problems we encounter driving something as relatively harmless at a PA system is what worries me. The RC aeroplane operators are responsible guys and abide by the rules, the 300 spectators with their smartphones trying to connect to the cafe's free wifi is entirely another matter :o
-
Very few people other than the fliers will have a 72MHz TX set in their pocket though where there'll be dozens of 2.4GHz devices in the vicinity, that, coupled with the interference problems we encounter driving something as relatively harmless at a PA system is what worries me. The RC aeroplane operators are responsible guys and abide by the rules, the 300 spectators with their smartphones trying to connect to the cafe's free wifi is entirely another matter :o
What I'm saying is that 2.4GHz in that environment is proven technology and is not a problem. It, like WiFi, operates in the 2.4GHz ISM (Industrial/Scientific/Medical) spectrum, where it can't be a problem -- or people get hurt or die. Further, I would suggest that if a wireless mic system is causing or having problems in an environment with WiFi, then the wireless microphone equipment is most likely at fault. Either it's not "playing by the rules," or the design is inferior in some way.
-
What are these rules you speak of? AFAIK there are no coexisting "rules"?
-
Very few people other than the fliers will have a 72MHz TX set in their pocket though where there'll be dozens of 2.4GHz devices in the vicinity, that, coupled with the interference problems we encounter driving something as relatively harmless at a PA system is what worries me. The RC aeroplane operators are responsible guys and abide by the rules, the 300 spectators with their smartphones trying to connect to the cafe's free wifi is entirely another matter :o
What I'm saying is that 2.4GHz in that environment is proven technology and is not a problem. It, like WiFi, operates in the 2.4GHz ISM (Industrial/Scientific/Medical) spectrum, where it can't be a problem -- or people get hurt or die. Further, I would suggest that if a wireless mic system is causing or having problems in an environment with WiFi, then the wireless microphone equipment is most likely at fault. Either it's not "playing by the rules," or the design is inferior in some way.
Fair comment G but if I lose connection with my mixer it keeps on playing until I regain connection. If something causes the plane to lose contact with it's operator it keeps on flying or crashes. Either way we have the aforementioned 250mph unguided flying bomb scenario.
-
What are these rules you speak of? AFAIK there are no coexisting "rules"?
There are protocols surrounding the 2.4GHz ISM space in which a transmitter (or, more correctly, transceiver) is supposed to listen and scan for an open frequency (or pair of frequencies in some equipment) before powering up the transmitter on an open frequency. Some older 2.4GHz cordless phones and baby monitors skip this step. Some equipment allows for manual management of the selected frequency, similar to UHF wireless gear. I found the info buried in the FCC regs, but the 2.4GHz ISM specifications are an international standard.
The R/C stuff generally grabs two frequencies, and also has a identifier code which allows some really cool stuff to happen to prevent loss of control of the 250mph flying bomb due to interference.
-
Interesting stuff Geren but it still sounds risky to me, how can they can guarantee to prevent a loss of connection on such a congested waveband? 72MHz channels 11-60 in the US are dedicated to RC aircraft so nothing else is competing for the bandwidth and as long as the fliers act responsibly there should be no conflicts. WiFi/2.4GHz is proven to be a different basket of fish..... If the RC guys have enough power to stomp everything else in the vicinity then I guess I'll be refusing those model plane rally PA gigs in the future ::)
-
Interesting stuff Geren but it still sounds risky to me, how can they can guarantee to prevent a loss of connection on such a congested waveband? 72MHz channels 11-60 in the US are dedicated to RC aircraft so nothing else is competing for the bandwidth and as long as the fliers act responsibly there should be no conflicts. WiFi/2.4GHz is proven to be a different basket of fish..... If the RC guys have enough power to stomp everything else in the vicinity then I guess I'll be refusing those model plane rally PA gigs in the future ::)
It's not a power thing. Their transmitters simply will not come up on your frequency.
-
But what if your transmitter comes up on theirs? I'm interested now and will have to do some reading :facepalm:
-
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
Oddly, this doesn't seem to hold true for 2.4GHz in other use areas. For instance, radio control hobbyists enjoy the same or greater range, with less interference, using 2.4GHz digital systems as opposed to the 72MHz FM and digital systems that are being phased out -- and the 2.4GHz gear operates at lower power.
I've been having to do a fair amount of research on 2.4GHz equipment lately for other reasons, and from what I can see, if there's a problem going on with interference between wireless routers and wireless mics, something is not playing by the rules with regards to the 2.4GHz ISM space.
Oddly enough the laws of physics still hold true even though some would think otherwise. 72 Mhz has more distance capability than 2.4 Ghz.
Anecdotal experience proves otherwise. Yeah, I know. Theoretically, it's a physics thing.
But, as Yogi Berra said, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
And as an engineer working in television by day, and musician and working sound guy by night (and weekend), I can certainly attest to that. :)
Cheers!
Well Gerenm63 there seems to be quite a variance in the RC crowd regarding the 72 mhz vs 2.4 gig rigs most still will use the 72 for longer distances. Most reasons are for other factors. Remember that the 2.4 gig received quite a bit more engineering talent than any 72 ever did. Here are some opinions pro and cons.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1546959
And some realty crazy guys. Check out the flying microwave oven.
-
It's the lower frequency, longer distance for the same power. So a 500 Mhz vs. 2400 Mhz makes a big difference.
Oddly, this doesn't seem to hold true for 2.4GHz in other use areas. For instance, radio control hobbyists enjoy the same or greater range, with less interference, using 2.4GHz digital systems as opposed to the 72MHz FM and digital systems that are being phased out -- and the 2.4GHz gear operates at lower power.
I've been having to do a fair amount of research on 2.4GHz equipment lately for other reasons, and from what I can see, if there's a problem going on with interference between wireless routers and wireless mics, something is not playing by the rules with regards to the 2.4GHz ISM space.
Oddly enough the laws of physics still hold true even though some would think otherwise. 72 Mhz has more distance capability than 2.4 Ghz.
Anecdotal experience proves otherwise. Yeah, I know. Theoretically, it's a physics thing.
But, as Yogi Berra said, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
And as an engineer working in television by day, and musician and working sound guy by night (and weekend), I can certainly attest to that. :)
Cheers!
Well Gerenm63 there seems to be quite a variance in the RC crowd regarding the 72 mhz vs 2.4 gig rigs most still will use the 72 for longer distances. Most reasons are for other factors. Remember that the 2.4 gig received quite a bit more engineering talent than any 72 ever did. Here are some opinions pro and cons.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1546959
And some realty crazy guys. Check out the flying microwave oven.
I've been fooling around with R/C airplanes and cars off-and-on since the '70s, and now use 2.4GHz stuff for control of model trains (one of my other expensive hobbies). I did some "stress testing" when I moved to R/C control, and had running about a dozen 2.4GHz R/C transmitters, the two wireless routers that live in my home (and I could also "see" the neighbor's router and the municipal router), the router for the DL (attached to the DL), two iPads, two iPhones, two laptops, and one iMac all on and working with no problems.
There are some old hold-outs out there in R/C land (my dad was one of them until just recently). And, yeah, there are some real nuts flying almost anything they can figure how to get off the ground. I've seen flying lawnmowers, pizza boxes, cars ... you name it. Maybe it depends on region, but I wouldn't say most are still using 72MHz, at least not around here, unless they're real curmudgeons or really strapped for cash.
-
Enquiring minds want to know. Is there any hope for the 5GHz band running wireless mixers etc? I know there's not much traffic on it right now but... :-\
-
Enquiring minds want to know. Is there any hope for the 5GHz band running wireless mixers etc? I know there's not much traffic on it right now but... :-\
Well, the dual-band WiFi routers are using 5GHz in addition to 2.4GHz, and that seems to work pretty well for newer iPads and and the DL mixers (at least in my case).
-
Enquiring minds want to know. Is there any hope for the 5GHz band running wireless mixers etc? I know there's not much traffic on it right now but... :-\
Well, the dual-band WiFi routers are using 5GHz in addition to 2.4GHz, and that seems to work pretty well for newer iPads and and the DL mixers (at least in my case).
I’ve had good luck too on the 5 GHz band running the DL and AirPlay up 100’ and no drop-outs. I haven’t pushed the distance beyond that. Probably this band will fill up eventually too, but hopefully not in at least another few years. 8)
-
Keep in mind that the DL32R can use any Ethernet connection between it and the iPad so if the iPad adds bands or officially supports a wired connection we can just switch to that :) . I'd guess they will have to eventually support Android, PC and Mac options too. OTOH we don't know how much longer the DL1608 will be an active product :-\ .