upgrading ew100 to 2000, what priority, tx or rx?

[David Aliperti]

I have 3 tx/rx sennhiser ew 100 sistems , now I want to upgrade them to 2000 series in a painless way, so I was thinking to but on piece a time, was wondering about what to give priority at, tx or rx

[Rick Reineke]

It depends... If you need the Phantom powered butt-plug for a wireless boom for instance, obviously the transmitter.
The 2000 series transmitters also have switchable higher and lower power settings than the 100. (max. 50mW; min. 10mW)... whereas the 100 series transmitters are fixed at 30mW.
Other 2000 differences are 'all' metal construction, more banks and channels and other bells and whistles. The EK 2000 portable receiver has a HP out if that's needed.
If interference is a problem with the current 100 system, buying a more expensive 2000 series component or system will not likely help much. Frequency selection and set-up parameters should be closely examined in that case. If replacing just one piece of a system, obviously a compatible frequency block is a must
If everything is set optimally, there would be no noticeable sound quality difference between the 100 & 2000 systems (all other parameters being equal)
The ME-2/4 mic is a POS with either system and should be replaced IMO.

[David Aliperti]

I need to replace once a time rx and tx and dont need phantom, I know that if replacing the tx ill have to change the connector with the lemo one, so to get an immediate improvement is better to replace before tx or rx,

[Rick Reineke]

"so to get an immediate improvement is better to replace before tx or rx"
- What kind of "improvement" are you looking for?
For the same price as a new 2000 system, you may be able to pick up a used Lectrosonics UCR211 / UM400 system.. don't know which or if any frequency blocks are legal in your area.
Lectro uses TA5 input connectors which are easier to solder.. than those f---ing Lemos.. a nightmare.

[David Aliperti]

main improvement i am looking for is a stronger transmission signal, and guess i am going to have it since 2000 are 100 mw vs the 30 of the ew100, but was thinking about was is better to replace first, the transmitter or the receiver since it has the diversity antenna

[Rick Reineke]

The G3 EK100 portable receiver is diversity. The audio output cable is the secondary antenna. (The G2 EK100 however is not diversity.) So if you have the EK100 G3, I'd first get the 2000 transmitter. The higher power output will yield more range, but battery economy will decrease and it won't necessarily solve interference issues. Due diligence in frequency selection and placement is the key to optimum reception. An external RF scanner is recommended. The built-in scanner is not a viable option in populated RF environments and no wireless is trouble-free-set-it-and-forget-it no matter how expensive. If that's the kind of performance your after.. it ain't gonna happen. Use a cable. Take it from someone who frequently works in RF hell. (midtown Manhattan)
BTW, the SK2000 bodypack transmitter power output is 10 / 30 / 50mW. (at least the US model)

[David Aliperti]

recently i talked with the technical service of a big rental company, and they said that since in Italy we have the digital tv that causes many problems especially in some areas to radio mics, they suggest to not working improving the reception but increasing the power transmition

[Rick Reineke]

"they suggest to not working improving the reception but increasing the power transmission"
- Increasing the transmitter's RF power would be of minimal benefit.

DTV is the same issue here in the USA. Many use an external RF scanner to find a vacant frequency range. Otherwise, Sennheiser's online 'Frequency Finder' (if it covers your area) can help finding a vacant or low power DTV channels that would not interfere.
The new wireless systems from AT, Senheiser, ect., in the GHz range may be of consideration.