Who's using digital wireless with a unified receiver?

[Jay Ashworth]

What do you think?

I'm talking about systems similar to the Shure MXW stuff; one digital receiver that serves for all your mics, and routes to the board over AES50, Dante, or something similar.

(Since my board is an x32, and I'd prefer not to lose the USB card, AES50 would be preferable. I know K-T makes a translator box, but it's over a grand, I think.)

Anyone using this class of mics? Which brand? What type of service? What do you think of it?

 

[Jay Ashworth]

(I should note that I need discrete channels from each mic to the board; systems which might mix the audio in the receiver wouldn't be suitable.)

 

[rphilip]

Be aware that the MWX has a high latency, 15ms or so.

The only other wireless I'm aware of with multichannel digital out is the Shure ULX-D with 4 channels of dante out of the receiver.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

How many feet is 15 milliseconds? and is that below the threshold of perception? I assume they couldn't sell it if it wasn't usable.

 

[superuser2]

Generally no single commercially available link or step in the signal chain is going to cause noticeable problems. Where you get into trouble is when they are combined in unfavorable ways - the milliseconds add up.

Digital wireless over the air -> XLR on an analog console: very unlikely to be perceptible.

Digital wireless over the air -> Dante switch backstage -> a few hundred feet of cable -> Dante switch by the board -> the board -> Dante switch by the board -> Dante switch in the amp room -> DSP -> Dante switch in the amp room -> More DSP -> Dante switch in the amp room -> DAC in the amps: people do this, it's a very natural design if you're thinking like an IT network engineer, and brand new cutting-edge installs can turn out *very* poorly because of it.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

Got it. In my case:

Receiver -> 3 foot cable -> x32.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

The other side of that coin is this: is there a number of milliseconds of delay which don't materially impact sound feel in the room, but do prevent or reduce feedback?

 

[woolycd]

How many feet is 15 milliseconds? and is that below the threshold of perception? I assume they couldn't sell it if it wasn't usable.

The speed of sound in air (c) at room temperature is about 1130 fps. For a simple calculation use c = 1000 fps or 1 ms = 1 ft; therefore, 15 ms = 15 ft. For more accuracy, add 13% to 15% depending on temperature (and humidity). The added accuracy only makes a real difference for longer delay times (higher latency) or greater distances. At 15 ms, the added accuracy adds about 2 ft, about the same as turning your good ear away from the sound.

 

[FMEng]

If a musician is using IEMs, any latency is very critical. Notice that Shure is targeting the product toward conference rooms, not live stages. There's a reason for that. Delay isn't going to do much of anything for feedback suppression. If only it were that easy.

Dante receivers might make sense for systems with very large wireless counts. You have to weigh the cost of hardware against the cost of wiring conventional equipment. Another consideration is the amount of redundancy. Lose one box, one cable, one wall wart, and there goes 8 mics.

Like everything in engineering, it is a series of tradeoffs.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

Sure. We don't have amy musicians much less IEMs; see my other thread.

Redundancy is an issue.

 

[themuzicman]

What do you think?

I'm talking about systems similar to the Shure MXW stuff; one digital receiver that serves for all your mics, and routes to the board over AES50, Dante, or something similar.

(Since my board is an x32, and I'd prefer not to lose the USB card, AES50 would be preferable. I know K-T makes a translator box, but it's over a grand, I think.)

Anyone using this class of mics? Which brand? What type of service? What do you think of it?

I use a bit of Shure ULX-D at a venue I service. You can get a Quad receiver that connects via Dante to your network.

That being said, I would stay away from the Shure MXW. If redundancy is of concern, I would much prefer an analog RF rig that folks could trouble-shoot a little easier. Plus the latency on the bodypacks is 18ms, the X32 has closer to 1ms in ideal settings, assuming you are going digital out and not running through any outboard processing. You are running at a level that will definitely be noticeable if you are performing on a smaller stage. Imagine your performer standing 20' further away from you. I bet the reason they say it is great in conference rooms and corporate auditoriums because time coherence isn't essential in those settings - a huge corporate auditorium won't have delay issues because if the presenter is 20' away you don't need input delay to image your source properly. And even in smaller rooms, they aren't worried about losing an audience because something wasn't transparent - they really don't care how the image sits in the room, the information being presented is the only thing they are worrying about.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

That being said, I would stay away from the Shure MXW.

Yeah; that's kinda what I'm getting. Owel. Charge management and inventory control would have been nice, but you take what you can get.