Wireless NADY 401X Quad Wireless Lavs

We are looking at purchasing some new lavs for the High School I work for. It has been a long time since I had to make a purchase of audio equipment. While looking around I found the NADY 401X Quad Wireless System. I haven't been able to find many reviews. Has anyone used this product before? Any help would be great.


David
 
We are looking at purchasing some new lavs for the High School I work for. It has been a long time since I had to make a purchase of audio equipment. While looking around I found the NADY 401X Quad Wireless System. I haven't been able to find many reviews. Has anyone used this product before? Any help would be great.


David

I have no experience with Nady products. Let me just point out that this is a four microphone system for less than I would expect to pay for one good quality single microphone. You always get what you pay for. On the other hand, it might meet your needs and expectations.
 
Nady is not a name for quality. Do you have a budget? How many mics do you need?

We typically function with 10 lavs. Currently half are not working and all of them are over 10 years old with HEAVY use. Starting this year I have a budget range of $500 to $1000 yearly depending on fund raising to purchase audio equipment. Any advice?

David
 
Hi David,

Take a look at the Audio Technica ATW 3000 series. They now offer 969 frequencies. The also have one button frequency scan and a transmitter battery life meter on the receiver. Excellent fidelity and range. Under $ 500.00 and until the end of the month there is a $ 30.00 mail-in rebate.
 
Thought I'd post this, hopefully it'll help out.

I have experience using the Nady 401X's...I have 2 sets of them, and a couple of Nady UHF mics too. I'm a volunteer (parent actually) at a small private school that wanted to get into the "big time" theater arena. For the past 5 years we've done 2 main stage shows per year, one being a drama, the other a musical. When I originally got involved, I knew nothing about sound, and today, I'm (alledgedly) the resident expert. I purchased my first 401X when we desperately needed to have more students mic'd and our partially functioning set of 4 AKG's and the two Nady UHF's weren't enough. I was dealing with a budget of $0, so the money came out my pocket. They served the job, in fact well enough that when we did our next show I purchased my second set. Marion and Harold Hill wore them in the Music Man that Spring and we're still using them today after 9 additional shows and 4+ years. Some pros: they're cheap. They're fairly reliable. We've had to move the two reciever racks to the very front of the theater to limit the broadcast distance. The packs themselves have been pretty durable, we are in a jr/sr. High environment and the kids constantly jam the packs in their back pockets. The included lavs have been pretty reliable, the biggest pain has been where the wire meets the connector. I just ordered 20 more of them from Markertek and I'm going to put heat shrink tubing on the connection to strengthen them up. As for the quality of the sound, I think they're good. Not great, but good. Depending on the actor and the placement, I typically have to push up the mid more than anything. One of their biggest pro is that since they're VHF, you're not dealing with the DTV spectrum shift that has obsoleted our other mics. But yes, they are lower quality than the "good stuff". I've used Shure and Sennheiser units and they certainly aren't up to their quality in both build and sound. But at less than $100 per mic, they're a tough value to beat IMHO for wireless in a non-professional space. Having said that, might I recommend something else?

The biggest pain in our environment (school with large cast) is that the mic'd kids sound great but everyone else is ambient. We tried a number of tricks for choir miking, but nothing worked well. I then discovered a thread here on CB talking about stage mic's, specifically the Bartlett mic's Bartlett Microphones in Elkhart, Indiana - home page . We are doing the Sound of Music in a couple of months and that show has 16 individual singers and there was no way I could spend a lot of money to buy more wireless mics, besides, our UHF mics have become so troublesome... So I did some research and went ahead and bought 3 of these mics. They are amazing. We are running all of our singers with no wireless mics and they sound great. We have a 30 piece live orchestra (not in a pit) and the mics do not pick up any thing. My stage is 24 feet deep and 36 feet wide and I could actually do the show with 2, but I've got a third for balance in a couple of scenes. Depending on your situation and needs, take a look at these. No more worries about batteries and wireless hassles. And the mix of the chorus singers is great. I truly believe that I could run the whole show on these 3, but I'm still miking the 7 main characters (my daughter is Maria so I'm playing with fire here...) and they'll all have Nady VHF mics on, with the stage mics picking up everyone else. And if the wireless's cause us any trouble, we'll turn them down and only use our trusty Bartlett's. They are seriously awesome...and only $200 a piece. Hope this helps in some small way.

Mike Shaffer
 
Also forgot to say to David: feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the Nady's or the Bartlett mics. I'd be glad to expand on what I've discovered these last few years.
 
If I remember correctly Bartlett was the designer of the Crown Pcc 160 mic. it is possible to use these either independent of wireless, or with the wireless, you just need to back off the wireless and try to get a good balance between. There have been other threads re wireless and wired mics and I have suggested this sort of solution. The advantage these have is that the rear rejection of sound is good so if you have live music positioned infront of the stage or behind these mics the pcc solution minimizes the pick up.

Sharyn
 
We typically function with 10 lavs. Currently half are not working and all of them are over 10 years old with HEAVY use. Starting this year I have a budget range of $500 to $1000 yearly depending on fund raising to purchase audio equipment. Any advice?

David

A cheap receiver has to save costs by making it less selective. That means they might have trouble dealing with a lot of signals.

One Nady quad system might work fine by itself, but I would be concerned with trying to run it simultaneously with a bunch of other wireless systems in the same venue. That's a recipe for noises and drop outs.

Plan for the total number of units that you expect to run in the future, and buy a model that is designed to work in a system of that size. Have the dealer give you a frequency plan for the system.
 
@SharynF : You are correct. Bruce designed (among other things) the Crown PCC-160...which is also a great mic. I looked at them both and liked a couple of features on the Bartlett mic. And sounds like we're on the same page (along with other threads here on CB) that a couple of well placed stage mics can do some amazing things, especially in a large chorus/cast type of show like a musical. I read on the Bartlett site about a school that did their whole show of Oliver! with only a couple of these mics....which I had them for our production of it.

@FMEng : totally agree on the cheap receiver comment and the statement of checking with your local dealer and having them provide a frequency plot. What I found here in Denver that the none (well, none that I talked to) were willing to consider a big time cheapo (let's call it value) unit like the Nady's. The Audio Technica ATW's that were mentioned above run over $500 for one mic...and many organizations (or at least mine) simply do not have the cash to make that kind of purchase. So have a dealer give you a frequency plot, it's most likely for UHF and that's great because right now, that's where the sweet spot is. And remember that these Nady's are VHF, which is passe' technology, but they do the job. I have 8 total VHF Nady's (the make two flavors of Quads), plus 2 Nady UHF's, 2 Sennheiser UHF's and 4-5 AKG UHF's, all spread apart so there's no harmonics and all that frequency stuff. Our single biggest problem comes from the UHF's and the digital TV interference (they're all 5+ years old and all in the 700MHz band). Our only other problem, regardless of brand, is connector noise and poor condition or application of the lav/face mic itself. All of which are solved by 3 floor mics, costing me about $600 total.

I know I sound like a broken record or worse, a shill for Bartlett but I'm not. Only know him from his courteous and prompt service, superior product and the results...which have to be experienced to be believed.

Later,

Shaffer
 
And remember that these Nady's are VHF, which is passe' technology, but they do the job.

For some reason VHF has developed a bad rap as of late, but there is absolutely nothing about VHF that makes a microphone unit inferior...in fact, the VHF band tends to be less populated, making interference less of a problem. The main issue is that manufacturers stopped making mics in the VHF range (Lectrosonics being a notable exception), leaving only cheap systems down there.

I know of some schools that have Shure LX series mics and still use them--they're workhorses and sound fantastic.


Our single biggest problem comes from the UHF's and the digital TV interference (they're all 5+ years old and all in the 700MHz band).

You are aware that you will have to throw these out on June 12th, correct? See here for more information on this:
Operation of Wireless Mics in 700 MHz Band
 
For some reason VHF has developed a bad rap as of late, but there is absolutely nothing about VHF that makes a microphone unit inferior...in fact, the VHF band tends to be less populated, making interference less of a problem. The main issue is that manufacturers stopped making mics in the VHF range (Lectrosonics being a notable exception), leaving only cheap systems down there.

Manufacturers moved away from VHF for very good reasons. The longer wavelengths have a number of ramifications. The receive antennas are physically much larger. The transmit antennas have much worse efficiency, or have to be annoyingly long wires dangling from beltpacks. The nulls (signal holes) are larger. The receive antennas have to be considerably farther apart, multiple feet not inches, in order to get significant benefits from diversity. VHF can and does work, but it takes a lot more effort to make it perform reliably. Most users won't do what it takes.
 
FMEng is right on all points, though if done right, VHF can and does work just as well as UHF. One might phrase it differently--UHF is more forgiving in poor installations because one can achieve diversity reception with less effort, and holes tend to be smaller (and hence, less noticeable).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back