Sennheiser vs sony
 

Looking at a setup for two wireless transmitters/receivers two lav mics and the ability to connect one transmitter to a boom on occassion. For the boom I am looking at a Rode NTG-2.

That said what have been people experiences with the sony UWP-C1 (66) or UWP_C1 (62) and the sennheiser evolution G2 100 series with the ME2 or ME4 mic. Seems the ME2 is a better seller than the ME4 any reason?


And finally being mainly east coast what is the best frequency A-B-C and what problems do I face traveling to LA(often) Las Vegas (not that often) Miami (Often)?

I have ruled out the audiotechnica 1800 so far as the dual setup would be 1250.00 plus an additional 900 for a second receiver which I need for safety and redunadancy, and the two single systems would also be more and much larger to mount two setups to the camera than either of the other two options. And I ruled out the azden since the price is great but the reviews are horrible so I rather spend some more and not have to worry.

The ME2 is an omni pickup, which is almost always the best choice for recording applications. The ME4 is a cardoid pattern (somwhat directional), sometimes chosen for sound reinforcement. Cardoid is bad for a recording lav because levels will vary greatly when the subject turns their head, and also if the mic mount slips at all you may lose coverage.

Haven't used the Sony UW series, but people report good experiences with them. Have used Sony 800 series, very good experiences there.

Chris,

I decided on the Sennheiser because the transmitters are metal, not plastic. That said, I believe the Sony is a true diversity system and the Senn is not.

I was told that A & B are the best frequency choices for the west coast, and C is the best for the east coast. I'm not sure if that's accurate, but it was from a dealer who sells lots of Senns.

Here's a link to regional frequency charts provided by Sennheiser.

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...inder-open.asp

Hope that helps.

AudioTechnica does make a single channel version which is the same price as the G2. I'm kind of confused though about what you mean by needing a second receiver for redundancy. One cool thing about the AT is you can get the excellent AT899CW lav for a measly $160. They even make a dedicated boundary mic for the system.

Redundancy is the only way to work in the real world, you have to be able to finish if something breaks, so having one receiver is looking for it to break. So you need two even if its a dual receiver. Its slightly safer to have two seperate units incase one breaks, but using a dual receiver means having a second dual receiver incase that breaks.

And the audiotechnica is 15 oz vs 5.5 to put two on a camera and use a steadicam or handhold and thats a problem.

Another question. Is it better to have two setups on different frequencies. Say B and C or have them both on the same?

I've asked this same ?. Here's the take on it I was given:

If you you will be relying on the second channel, then get the frequency that you know works where you do most of your shooting (persumably the same frequency as the first unit). You don't want to have one wireless working and the other not b/c one of the frequency ranges is too cluttered.

But if you're using the second one as a backup in case the first one can't lock in, then get a different frequency range for the second unit.

HTH.

So wanting to use them both on most shoots and having two seperate units cause if one goes down the other is the back up, enough to let you finish even if limited, would it be worse if they were both the same frequency and that is too busy for either to be useful? Can that happen? Is this a real common problem or issue? Especially since I will be in NY, LA, Miami, as well as Vegas and who knows where else on occassion, but mainly LA/NY/Miami

Hi Chris......
 

Got a bit lost with your last post, so not exactly sure whether I got it right - you cannot use two units on the same frequency, least not in my experience. All sorts of gremlins will crawl out of the woodwork attempting to do so.

The frequency spectrum situation in the States for radio mic's is an utter mess and can only get worse, from what I've read.

I really do not know what you can do to protect yourself in the circumstances, if you have checked the frequency you want, it's clear, then all of a sudden in the middle of a shoot, you get breakthrough. If you have a second unit working on another frequency IT may not suffer the same breakthrough, but how many are you seriously going to use to cover every eventuality?

Bottom line, less someone developes a "channel hopping system" like the military have, with the current mess in the States, radio mikes are an iffy proposition from the sounds of it.

Buy shares in a cable manufacturing company? Who knows?

CS

There are some solutions coming. Although they will require some expense and timecode. If you look at some of Zaxcom's latest offerings (TRX900 series) you have full digital recording, plus the ability to record directly to a mini-SD card. It is the recording direct option that I think will end up being more of the standard at some point for higher end productions. Jam the timecode, put it on the talent and do your take. It does take a few things away from us though. First is the ability to mix in the field. But if the airwaves go away (or at least part of the spectrum) this may be the only real option without having to pay licensing fees to some company.

Wayne

Chris,

I just want to be sure, you mean the same exact frequency, not the same frequency operating range. Right?

B and C refer to frequency ranges of the EW100 systems, not specific freqs. So, yes, to enable mix and match as needed, you'd buy two or more systems in the same frequency range. Then, as I recall, you get 1440 freqs in a range.

Um... Forum postings will, I think, lead you to believe that using radio mics in the US is hazardous. There is more smoke than fire about this issue. Properly operated (you did have someone walk the area with a transmitter, right?) frequency agile UHF will get you out of almost all interference situations. All bets are off if you're next to a radio/tv transmitter, or, in a metal framed building that is resonating in the radio frequencies, but that's true in NZ as well.

Of course wired microphones are more reliable no matter what area of the world you're in.

Hi Pete.
 

Yeah, I meant a specific frequency, not a bank.

From my reading of the Senn literature, each bank of 4 frequency's in the G2's memory are designed so that you can use each of the 4 at the same time (if you had 4 systems) with little risk of co - interference.

It is not so clear (from my reading) whether using a frequency from Bank 1 and Bank 2 (say) at the same time has the same or an increased risk of interference.

Seth,

My comments about the mess in the States (re - radio mikes) was not entirely based on Forum postings, but a number of articles that have appeared about the forthcoming auction of spectrum and the little thought that has gone into just what part, if any, will be allocated for this purpose. That would seem to leave all current systems in a difficult position at some point down the track. That there is already a problem with interference would seem to be without doubt.

Luckily here in NZ I seem to be blessed with being the only one on the air waves with RM's - although you can bet your bottom dollar the day I absolutely must get that take I'm gonna get nailed out of the blue. C'est la Vie!

CS