Yes, someone is checking...

[Chris15]

I'll be just as keen as everyone else to see the product that really hits the digital wireless nail on the head...
I just haven't seen it yet.

First 2 things it needs to have:
Latency <2ms end to end
AES outputs as well as analogue on the back. (Both need to remain under that latency window)

Thereafter it needs to have no noticeable audio artefacts, it needs to have antenna distribution options, the provision for remote antennas (with a designed preamp system as neccessary to help mitigate the signal losses at say 2G4).

What would be REALLY cool would be a system whereby the link between "antennas" and receivers was a piece of UTP and RF - data processing was done at the antenna. Then you are just looking at data and antenna positioning would become really simple. Look at the way the managed wireless network systems operate using multiple APs for diversity and then some how get the latency right down...
Mike, do you see any physics reason this could not be achieved?

 

[mbenonis]

Thereafter it needs to have no noticeable audio artefacts, it needs to have antenna distribution options, the provision for remote antennas (with a designed preamp system as neccessary to help mitigate the signal losses at say 2G4).

The challenge here is of course, amplifying the signal and not overdriving the amplifier. A very good amplifier could be used though with a high -1dB Compression Point (the point at which the output of the amplifier is compressed 1 dB from the expected value).

What would be REALLY cool would be a system whereby the link between "antennas" and receivers was a piece of UTP and RF - data processing was done at the antenna. Then you are just looking at data and antenna positioning would become really simple. Look at the way the managed wireless network systems operate using multiple APs for diversity and then some how get the latency right down...
Mike, do you see any physics reason this could not be achieved?

I'm not really sure you could put the guys fo the receiver into the antenna. What you could easily do, though, is pull a page from Satellite TV. In a DBS system (like DirecTV), the incoming signal is around 12 GHz, and the LNB at the dish converts this signal down to around 2 GHz. If you did something similar, you could convert say, the 2400-2483.5 MHz band down to 100 MHz or so to mitigate cable losses. I just don't see though how one could do significant demodulation at the antenna for a system with a large number of mics.

Does that answer your question at all, Chris?

 

[mstaylor]

At the risk of being a moron, when they bundle a section of frequencies like this, who is buying them? Are the cell phone companies buying portions straight from the govt or are they creating a holding type consortium that then distributes them.
My question is, why couldn't the sound companies do a similar thing. because of a smaller market it would have to be narrower.They would have to either add the cost to each mic setup or charge a fee to use the band.

 

[MNicolai]

At the risk of being a moron, when they bundle a section of frequencies like this, who is buying them? Are the cell phone companies buying portions straight from the govt or are they creating a holding type consortium that then distributes them.
My question is, why couldn't the sound companies do a similar thing. because of a smaller market it would have to be narrower.They would have to either add the cost to each mic setup or charge a fee to use the band.

While Shure has our backs with their lobbying in D.C., they are far too small a company to put up the dough to buy a chunk of the spectrum. It's estimated that their annual revenue is, at most, $5 million.

Chunks of wireless spectrum sell for the billions of dollars -- there's no amount of pitching in that wireless microphone users could do to compete with government agencies and cell carriers short of everyone paying 1000x more for their wireless systems.

 

[mstaylor]

That's why we ask these questions.

 

[mbenonis]

Mike's right. Add to it, though, that by statute each and every band can only be used for specific things. For instance, the 700 MHz spectrum bought by cell phone providers for 4G wireless can *only* be used for that purpose, no matter who buys them. The decisions on what bands can be used for what services is made by the FCC, and sometimes by Congress (who has to direct the FCC to change their rules).

 

[museav]

As an example of Mike's and Mike's responses, in the last auctions the spectrum included in each auction and the general intended use was predefined and parties then bid on each defined 'chunk' of spectrum. Some bands, primarily narrower ones, never received bids, or at least not for the required reserve, and were reassigned for 'public interest' purposes.

A practical challenge with the consortium concept would also be that determining and enforcing violations and compliance would be more difficult when the 'user' consists of a very large, and constantly changing, number of separate entities.

To add to the 'perfect' digital system, it would have to operate in dedicated spectrum. I have encountered higher education and corporate clients whose internal IT groups or third-party data network operators prohibit anything on their campuses operating in the 2.4GHz spectrum other than their wireless data networks. I can understand this, if you wanted me to be responsible for providing reliable, high quality wireless networking on your campus then one of the first things I would probably ask for is for you to prohibit other uses of that spectrum. Regardless of the actual potential for problems, where such edicts exist they effectively eliminate wireless 2.4GHz wireless mics from consideration.