Wireless Sound quality and range with EW100 and QLX-D

[akej]

I'm trying to choose a wireless system for a theatre project. I know a lot have been written on this subject, but after reading many threads, and asking at another forum, I still don't know.

My question is about the Shure qlx-d and the Sennheiser ew100 systems. I need two systems and one antenna distribution with directional antennas. They will be used with two DPA 4060 lavalier mics, for speech and sound effects. The audience will listen with good headphones and I want the whole chain to keep a real good sound quality. Noise and sound artifacts will be heard very clearly. Range is also important since some scenes will be far away or with obstacles between actors and audience (of course we'll choose situations that works with the system, but I want one that let us do as much as possible).
So what do you think will be the differences between Sennheiser ew100 and shure qlxd (both with antenna distribution and passive directional antennas) regarding sound quality and reach?

The shure system is more expensive and newer, and I would like to know if the difference in quality will be noticeable? Will the ew100 be good enough? The qlxd is a bit over budget, though I might be able to get more money if I can motivate it.

Any experiences or thoughts on this?

 

[NickVon]

Others may disagree or chime in, but I believe the QLX-d is more akin to the Sennheiser EW300 series in terms of feature set. for a simple 2 channel system the EW100 are great wireless. With all the audio clarity of professional wireless. Sennheiser with in the last year as also released a "digital" version of the EW100 that may be worth looking into for much stronger future compatibility if that is necessary. That is really the big difference of the QLX-d verse the EW100, and EW300.

 

[FMEng]

The analog EW100, being analog, will get noisy and have companding problems as it approaches the end of its range. A digital system, like the QLX will likely sound perfect until it gets to the end of its range. At that point it will likely have silent dropouts. The EW100 squelch adjustment can be set high to make it act more or less like the digital system, going silent before audio quality degrades much, or it can be opened up to keep going just as far as it can along with some noise. My comments are based on RF theory, not actual experience with those particular models.

I strongly suggest that you put a brickwall limiter on the feed to the headphone amps to prevent hearing damage if something goes amiss. An Aphex Dominator would be a good choice.

 

[AsherSB]

I just recently did a show with both a rack of EW100 lavs, and a few new QLX dynamics. We had constant issues with the EW100s because we had very little time to set up, but the QLX system was working with out any real setup at all, not to mention it sounded fantastic. If you can get the money together go QLX, if you can't an EW100 system will work, just understand the limitations.

 

[akej]

Thanks for all answers! As I understand it the sound quality of the two systems will be equal (correct me if I'm wrong please) as long as the connection is stable. And it will likely be a better and more reliable connection with the QLXD system.

So I will try to afford the Shure system, but if I can't it seems like the EW100 will do the job as well.

(FMeng: I will run it all through a ULN-8 interface, with a limiter plug in on the outputs.)