Holy Smoke! AT 1800 - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

All Things Audio
Everything Audio, from acquisition to postproduction.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 8th, 2007, 04:24 PM   #16
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 195
Convenient

Hey Nate,

I posted this earlier but I never left a link. I use http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...4MTRE3_content

I bought this as an in ear monitor system for bands when you can't use wedges. Now when I need multiple lav's, I can hook 4 lines in to each, mix them right and left and send a mix out or 4 channels to my laptop. I use the bodypack with a mini to XLR and clip it on my belt so it's always where I need to run & gun. I know it's not as portable as Spot's but I can get good reference on my tape while simultaneously sending signals to my laptop for better editing.

What do you think?

Jeff Mack
Jeff Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2007, 08:23 PM   #17
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
it's a great idea. I do much the same thing using a Firestation/Garwood system. This is an awesome means of monitoring a boom-mounted mic as well.
I'm one of those guys that believes in always monitoring a boom or any other mic, so the Garwood is perfect for me, allowing our boom ops to monitor two mics, a radio in one and boom in the other.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2007, 02:59 PM   #18
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Posts: 475
Can anyone compare these AT's with Sennheiser's G2's in terms of audio quality (besides it's diversity vs non) and build. And does the diversity really works on these ones, because I hear a lot of negative reactions from audio guys if I tell them that you can get a dual diversity kit for less then 1500...
Vincent Rozenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2007, 03:04 PM   #19
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
Vincent...

Can't say how they sound compared to the G2's as I don't have G2's. But they do compare favorably to a Lectrosonic that I had, when I compared an AT system to a Lectro system using the same Countryman B3 mics.

As for diversity, these have individual receiver circuits and are supposedly true diversity units. You can see the receiver switching between the two antennas as the signal varies. Ideally the antennas should be much farther apart for really take advantage of a diversity unit. If you have the space and cabling you can rig them that way since the receiver has BNC antenna connectors. But trying to do that when everything is mounted on a camera isn't easy.

The build quality seems good. The transmitter has a plastic body that seems rugged enough. It's lightweight and the controls are easy to use. One of the transmitter's been dropped already. The talent stood up with the mic still attached. The transmitter was only resting on the chair and dropped almost two feet onto a stone floor. No damage.

The receiver is metal. The readout and frequency control is on the top. The output jacks and controls, however, are on the bottom. Could be hard for some to get at these, depending on how it's mounted on the camera.

The output jacks are mini-XLR's. AT provides a pair of short cables which adapt to standard XLR connectors. Or you can make your own to suit your particular setup.

All the mic and output jacks are multi-pin locking-type connectors. Way better than 1/8" TRS audio plugs. Connections are positive and stay in place.
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2007, 03:21 PM   #20
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Posts: 475
Thanks a bunch Dean, for this information. So basically you say that you can compare the AT with a Lectrosonics, in terms of audio quality, or even better then. What about receive? Is that comparable as well? One of my sound guys uses Lectrosonics and I'm very happy with them, but if these are comparable and just at a fraction of the costs...

Last edited by Vincent Rozenberg; March 12th, 2007 at 04:16 PM.
Vincent Rozenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2007, 03:38 PM   #21
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
Vincent...

I'd say that the audio quality seems to be at least as good as the Lectro 185 that I was using. I notice a little bit of compression/expansion occasionally but not much.

Some of the Lectro units also put out a stronger signal. Up to 100 milliwatts, compared to 30 milliwatts. The stronger the signal the more reliable the signal can be. But so far I haven't had any dropouts or interference problems with this AT system.

I don't know if these AT units can hold up as well as the Lectro units in the long run -- some of those things go through a heck of a lot of abuse over a long period of time and keep coming back for more. Lectros are built like tanks and are milled from a solid piece of aluminum. That kind of workmanship doesn't come cheaply.

But for what I do the AT's are a great value. Especially considering their features.
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 07:56 AM   #22
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wash. DC area
Posts: 154
Receiver position

Dean,
Can AT receiver (or any diversity receiver) function well in a horizontal position? I often use a Jimmy Box under my HVX/HDV cameras with non-diversity systems.

Aloha,

chris /DC metro dop
Chris Li is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 01:53 PM   #23
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
Chris...

The unit itself can be in any orientation. But the antennas will work best if they're vertically oriented and clear of any obstructions as much as possible. That's true with any type of radio receiver.

It would be possible to set up the antennas on a bracket, place them high on the camera, and run a pair of coax cables to the receiver below.

You could also connect the antennas with a 90-degree BNC connector and point the antennas downward. A lot of aircraft have their radar transponder antennas mounted that way under the fuselage.
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 02:58 PM   #24
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Having transmit and receive antennas oriented in the same plane works, regardless of whether they are up or down or whatever. Having a bigger receive antenna also helps increase range and cut down on interference.

Regards,

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 03:24 PM   #25
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
For greater efficiency you could use a full-wave antenna and ditch the less-efficient rubber ducky antenna. A full-wave antenna at these UHF frequencies (about 600 MHz to 700 MHz) would be about 17 inches long. A metal mounting bar could act as a decent ground plane.

For diversity systems, a minimum of a quarter-wave of spacing is recommended. So in this case the antennas should be at least 4 to 5 inches apart. Preferably wider. Some recommend 2x to 10x the wavelength as the distance between the two antennas, and in this case that comes to 8.5 inches to more than 42 inches.

For ideal reception antennas should be oriented based on the desired polarity of the radio signal. For omnidirectional applications, vertically oriented antennas are preferred. For certain beam applications, a horizontally oriented antenna might be employed. In either application, both the transmission antenna and the receiving antenna should share the same orientation.

In what we do the ideal situation isn't likely to be maintained. But to ensure the best possible performance, it's better to create a setup that is as efficient as practical.

I just thought of something: Since this is a diversity system, what if one antenna were oriented vertically and the other horizontally.

Then you're covered in both axis should the transmission orientation shift.

A dual diversity/multiple polarity system... Now that sounds impressive!

:-)
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 03:37 PM   #26
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Sensui View Post
I
A dual diversity/multiple polarity system... Now that sounds impressive!

:-)
? sounds like my X's personality. Sorry, couldn't help myself.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 04:18 PM   #27
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle View Post
? sounds like my X's personality. Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Yikes!

Another consideration: My other AT wireless receivers got a bad case of RF noise when placed adjacent to a Firestore FS-100. Needed at least a few feet of separation to mimimize that problem. Even then it wasn't entirely eliminated.

Another source of RF noise: LaCie external hard drives. I was able to pick them up a few feet away, through a wall consisting of two 1/2" layers of drywall.

I don't know if other more expensive units, such as the Lectrosonics, are immune from this kind of interference.
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 10:31 PM   #28
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Which AT receivers.

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 10:48 PM   #29
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
That was the ATW-101x.

Operates around 700 MHz or so.

Focus Enhancements said that the Firestore was a Class A device and that there was the possibility of RF interference. Matt from Focus sent some ferrite chokes for the Firewire cable to see if it would solve the problem but there was still RF being picked up.
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2007, 10:55 PM   #30
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Dean,

I'm going out on a limb here, but I have heard of proximity problems with the Sound Devices 744T and some wireless mics in certain frequency ranges. Not always heard as noise, but as a reduction of range.

I have an FS4Pro and a U100 (no x) in the higher frequency range. Haven't tried them together yet. The different receive frequency MAY make a difference.

I'm sort of jammed, but I'll try to check my FS4 pro. Is that what you have?

Regards,

Ty
Ty Ford is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:23 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network