Do you the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit on speed dial?holy cow.
i just did a quote request
10 UM400a Transmitters
2 VR Recievers
waiting on a reply
holy cow.
i just did a quote request
10 UM400a Transmitters
2 VR Recievers
waiting on a reply
So basically the best idea is to move the receivers over the center of stage to maximize range?
Not necessarily. But close to the stage. A good location would be right off stage left or stage right, or behind the back curtain or scrim. Hopefully this will get you above the noise. And as I've said multiple times, get people to turn off their laptop's wireless card, their bluetooth accessories, their 2.4 GHz cordless landline phones, and the like. All of these things will make the Sabine system less reliable. And by off I mean powered down, not just "not in use."
As a rule of thumb phones should be off anyway (why on earth do you need a phone in a theater?).
That isn't just "interference", it is other systems in use and you can be interference to them just as much as they can be to you, which is why I know some college campuses that prohibit 2.4GHz systems other than their wireless networks.D) Use the scanning software - Sabine provides FREE scanning software, which will scan all 70 channels, and alert you to which channels have interference, as well as the level of interference on each channel. This software is a MUST if you use the system.
Overall, its not really a problem with the 2.4GHz technology, or everyone would have this same problem. Lets face it, there is 2.4GHz wireless EVERYWHERE.
Did they actually operate on all those channels or was it just that their software showed them to be open, that is two very different things.
In the defense of 2.4GHz, a UHF wireless microphone could also cause interference problems as well. In fact, UHF signals go much farther than a 2.4GHz will, therefore the odds that your system will interfere with someone eals's use of that frequency also increases. UHF mics are not sparred from causing interference.That isn't just "interference", it is other systems in use and you can be interference to them just as much as they can be to you, which is why I know some college campuses that prohibit 2.4GHz systems other than their wireless networks.
Well, I have never ran into this problem in our tours. There are plenty of other musicians using this system, including the worldwide tour of Brittany Spears last concert. There also many other touring musicians using the system.which is why I know some college campuses that prohibit 2.4GHz systems other than their wireless networks.
He only had good things to say about the system, and he even commented that he had much more trouble with UHF systems than this system. That combined with the very favorable reviews on the internet about the system, and our personal testing, have shown that the Sabine Wireless is not an evil beast. In fact, it works better and sounds better than any UHF system I have used.
Before we bought our 24 channel Sabine Wireless system, I rented out a total of 24channels of the Shure U14D. Not only did I have trouble finding enough interference free channels to operate all 24, but the sound on the low-end was horrible. Compared to the Sabine, the system was very low quality and difficult to work with. The Sabine had almost all of its channels available, interference free, the whole time; and we never had a problem getting the 24 channels.
Now again, I would like to stress that the technology used by Sabine reduced interference from things like Wifi networks, as the Spread Spectrum used in the Wifi should not interfere with the Smart Spectrum technology used by the system.
In the defense of 2.4GHz, a UHF wireless microphone could also cause interference problems as well. In fact, UHF signals go much farther than a 2.4GHz will, therefore the odds that your system will interfere with someone eals's use of that frequency also increases. UHF mics are not sparred from causing interference.
I remember we use to use a VHF system at our small community theater, and one day the owner of the speedway within 500 feet of our theater came into the theater and commented about how great our performance the night before was... This was a surprise, as it was a dress rehearsal, and not open to the public.
I remember hearing our President ask him how he seen the performance... He replied "I didn't, I heard it". Turns out there communication systems used the same frequency as one of our our wireless mics. Talk about embarrassment.
Overall, I don't think that the problem the original poster was having had much to do with the systems itself, but more with the way the systems was being used. With any show like this, you can't just plug everything in and expect it to work. In order for the Sabine system to work good, you need Antenna splitters, RF monitoring software via the Network I/O port on the systems, proper placement of the system away from interference devices.
Without knowing his exact setup, and the locations of this systems in location to other 2.4GHz devices and lighting, I can't say that "Yes, its the fault of the wireless system". No one can.
NEW ORLEANS JAZZ & HERITAGE FESTIVAL 2003
"The computer interface for the Sabine SWM7000 is great ... We used the built-in RF scanner during the middle of the day — when there were thousands of cell phones going — and still we had all channels available.” Scott Thompson, A V Presentations sound engineer at the New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival's Sheraton Hotel Fais Do Do stage.
As the above review states, he got no interference from the cell phones. I personally have never received any interference from Wifi or Bluetooth devices on the system either.[/quote
I wouldn not expect to see any interference from cell phones, except those with BlueTooth or WiFi interfaces in them. That said, WiFi channels are 11 MHz wide and the Sabine channels are 300 kHz wide - so the amount of noise actually passed into the Sabine unit would be significantly lower than the amount of noise the WiFi device is spewing out, thus helping to reduce the possibility of interference (but not eliminate it).
A) Perform a RF scan of the spectrum. I'm not talking about those "RF Scanners" that act as radios, but the Software that comes with the Sabine System. You will need the receivers that have the Network I/O, but its worth it. If you can't afford the added expense on ALL of your receivers, just buy one network receiver and the rest non-network. The RF Scanner will scan the entire spectrum from the one system.
Agreed. One should always do a spectrum analysis before using a wireless system.
B) Group the channels together. Don't use channel 1, 2, 45, 69 and 70 at the same time. This allows for more interference in the system. Use groups, such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and if you can't get ALL the needed channels together, group them throughout the band... such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, 16, 31, 32, 33, 34, 54, 55, 56, etc.
According to the manual, this is to essentially group the channels into one WI-Fi channel (11 MHz wide) to avoid interference. Makes sense to me.
By the way, the manual states the actual operating frequencies that each channel maps to (I am very happy to see this information published).
C) Use a proper setup... You cannot use this system effectively on a professional stage environment unless its setup the correct way. First, you need to make sure your receivers are rack mounted, and that the placement of the antenna's for each receiver are at least 1 foot apart. If this cannot be done, you'll need to upgrade to the Antenna Distribution box, which will allow one set of antennas to control 12 channels. Doing it this way, on a 24 channel system, you would have 2 distro, spaced several feet apart in the rack.
Agreed, again. It is very important to separate the antennas by more than a wavelength (which at 2.4 Ghz is approximately 13 cm). This allows for spatial diversity. It is curious that I can't determine the actual diversity system that these mics use - Sabine claims "true diversity" but this is just a marketing term that is meaningless. I would be interested to know if it is switched antenna diversity, or switched reciever diversity (essentially, switched after demodulation).
Agreed, IF AND ONLY IF your coax run provides less loss than mounting the antennas at the rack. One must do the math here to determine which is better. Coax cable is very lossy at 2.4 GHz, and 100' of cable might attenuate the signal by 10 dB or more. Carefully consider how this will work before doing it.
E) Line of site: NEVER, NEVER place the antennas too far from the stage. They really need to be right off of the proscenium edge, and never more than 100' from all of the transmitters, if at all possible. The closer the transmitters are to the receivers, the better signal strength. However, if you get them too close, it will also cause problems. The BEST possible solution is keep them no more than 100' apart, but no closer than 20'.
Line of sight is very important. I am bothered, however, by a minimum distance. This tells me that the RF Front End for these units is incapable of handling strong RF signals - not a good sign. A properly designed reciever should be able to handle signals that are very strong, probably in the 0 to +10dBm range. The same does for the antenna splitter, which explicitly states that it's 1 dB compression point is -20 dBm - not good.
F) Possible causes of Interference: I am not saying that this system is flawless. But really, if you follow the advice here as well as the advice of other professionals, you'll find that getting enough channels free of interference is no problem. You wont have to worry about buying different banded systems if you plan to use a lot of channels. You don't have to wonder which bands are the best, because of what broadcasters are operating there. This is especially tough on tours, where one night you may have no RF interference, but next town over your flooded and can't find enough channels. you don't have to worry about spacing the channels apart as in the UHF band, you don't have to worry about picking up a broadcast from the theater down the road, unless of course they use the same system. Even then, the range is so low that theirs most likely would not interfere with yours.
I agree that not having to worry about being locked into a bandsplit may give some users peace of mind. However, a properly coordinated UHF system will be very unlikely to have RF problems to begin with, so I'm not sure this is a huge selling point. Tours, of course, are a different story.
This only true of semi-professional systems. You shouldn't be buying them anyway!
Generally to find a UHF capable of enough channels, your looking in the price range of $500 plus per channel. Probably the cheapest option is the Sennheiser 100 G2 series with 1,400 frequencies.
Agreed. And this is the bare bones minimum you should even cosndier if you want reliability. Broadway users spend upwards of $3-4k PER channel.
Again though, that does not mean you can operate that many systems.
Yes. You need about 400 kHz of spacing, and 1 MHz is preferable.
RF needs to be spaced apart, and you'll also have interference on a majority of those channels, due to the high powered devices using the UHF band.
Not necessarily true. It depends on what channels are in use in that bandsplit and how much spacing you want to use. You can probably get 8 mics into 6 MHz of spectrum if you try and have decent gear (Sennheier Evolution, SHure ULX, maybe A-T 4000, any Lectro gear).
We looked into the Sennheiser G2, which would have been 1/2 the price of our Sabine setup, but in according to the Sennheiser frequency finder,we only had 18 channels per band available in our area. To get 24, we would have needed to get the system across bands A and B. Even that is no guarantee that there will be enough channels, as the frequency finder probably does not list EVERY possible source of RF interference in your area. From what I seen, it only list's TV broadcasts.
I see no problem operating with two bands of mics. In that case, you probably could have gotten 36 clear chaannels. You are correct in that there is no guarantee of clear operation, however. If you want to guarantee that you need to do a site survey with an RF spectrum analyser (lab-grade, not the handheld stuff you see for a few hundred bucks).
If you go online and search for a more complete frequency finder in your area, it will list a great deal of the entertainment attractions, fire depts, police dept, hospitals, etc that use that part of the band.
Sorry, this is just plain wrong. The TV band is just that - TV. Two-way radio does NOT operate here, with the exception of the T-Band in some cities between channels 14 and 20 (and then only 12 MHz is in use in a given city as I recall).
I don't mean to come off as hating the Sabine systems. I am just trying to point out the facts as they relate to the units. And please feel free to ask any questions related to my responses.
Mike
Right. Our Coax cables are only 20' long. We really have no need for it be any longer. In most cases, we use the 10' cables when we are mounting the receivers in the orchestra pit, since really, the distance between the receivers and antennas are only a few feet.Agreed, IF AND ONLY IF your coax run provides less loss than mounting the antennas at the rack. One must do the math here to determine which is better. Coax cable is very lossy at 2.4 GHz, and 100' of cable might attenuate the signal by 10 dB or more. Carefully consider how this will work before doing it.
Yes, it was a shock to me as well when I bought the system. Upon the first test, I did a walk around to establish a good reception range. For some odd reason, of which I cannot explain, when I get a transmitter within 10 - 15 feet of a receiver, it's sends a loud squealing noise through the system. As if I was picking up very bad feedback.Line of sight is very important. I am bothered, however, by a minimum distance. This tells me that the RF Front End for these units is incapable of handling strong RF signals - not a good sign. A properly designed reciever should be able to handle signals that are very strong, probably in the 0 to +10dBm range. The same does for the antenna splitter, which explicitly states that it's 1 dB compression point is -20 dBm - not good.
In my area, the VHF spectrum does have radios that operate there. UHF is pretty clean as far as that goes, bu the local PD still uses the low 700MHz (If I remember right) range for their communications.Sorry, this is just plain wrong. The TV band is just that - TV. Two-way radio does NOT operate here, with the exception of the T-Band in some cities between channels 14 and 20 (and then only 12 MHz is in use in a given city as I recall).
A number of UHF wireless mic systems offer a similar scan functionality, some can even program the transmitters to match via IR. It is a great functionality but not unique. For example, I know the when Cirque was here one time I was backstage for a tour and they showed how they used the scan function of their networked Shure UHF systems every day and even again right before the show as they sometimes had interfering sources appear only at certain times or had new ones appear.For me, the Sabine system is much easier to use than UHF though. For a situation like ours, were we venture from city to city, state to state, it becomes hard to find different sets of frequency available in each city, and then cordinate them to make sure they have proper spacing.
With Sabine, we can run a quick RF scan, see the empty channels, and set them. Most of time, we don't even have to change the channels, as most channels are clear almost every venue we play at.
I'm confused, on January 21, 2009 you noted that you had just purchased the units and had not toured with them but on March 1, 2009, about 5-1/2 weeks later, you had been touring with them for almost 6 months? Is that supposed to be 6 weeks?I would also like to add that we have been touring with our Sabine system now for almost 6 months.
Yes, we have only had them for a little over 5 weeks. I'm not sure where I got the 6 months at, but I meant close to 6 weeks.While we have not performed a tour with them yet, we have tested them out.
Quote de Landon2006
I would also like to add that we have been touring with our Sabine system now for almost 6 months.
I'm confused, on January 21, 2009 you noted that you had just purchased the units and had not toured with them but on March 1, 2009, about 5-1/2 weeks later, you had been touring with them for almost 6 months? Is that supposed to be 6 weeks?
Yes, there are similar function on some high-end systems.A number of UHF wireless mic systems offer a similar scan functionality, some can even program the transmitters to match via IR. It is a great functionality but not unique. For example, I know the when Cirque was here one time I was backstage for a tour and they showed how they used the scan function of their networked Shure UHF systems every day and even again right before the show as they sometimes had interfering sources appear only at certain times or had new ones appear.
I'm sorry to hear about your bad experience with them. Obviously, we had no problem getting the system on time. Although, often times when a company is releasing a new product, and misses a deadline, its acceptable as long as they have a good reason for missing the mark.'ll add a different personal perspective on the Sabine wireless systems that addresses another aspect.
Well, from the looks of it, UHF is on the way out as a viable use for microphones. Even if the FCC opens up a few frequencies for use ONLY by wireless mics, that's still mostly not going to be enough to run a very large number of channels, like 30 or 40... As some Broadway shows and tours do.Sabine apparently eventually worked out whatever problems they had but has done nothing since then to earn back my trust, in fact their recent "end of UHF" marketing campaign (which is still on their web site despite the changes in the date and the accommodations the FCC has proposed for UHF wireless mics)
Right. Our Coax cables are only 20' long. We really have no need for it be any longer. In most cases, we use the 10' cables when we are mounting the receivers in the orchestra pit, since really, the distance between the receivers and antennas are only a few feet.
In the event that we have to mount the system Stage Left or Right, we use the longer coax, to hide the receivers while keeping the antennas within feet of the proscenium.
This is why I said of you go with this system, your best bet is to have ALL of the receivers networked to the control / Rf software. It also don't hurt to have a full time guy to watch the system...
Yes, it was a shock to me as well when I bought the system. Upon the first test, I did a walk around to establish a good reception range. For some odd reason, of which I cannot explain, when I get a transmitter within 10 - 15 feet of a receiver, it's sends a loud squealing noise through the system. As if I was picking up very bad feedback.
I have not figured this out yet, but ALL of the receiver / transmitter combos do the same thing. It is however not a problem, as I just keep the antenna far enough away that it does not happen.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.