Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

Wireless transmitters are very low power, so it is unlikely one will be heard by anyone, even the spectrum cops, more than a few hundred yards away. However, wireless receivers are reasonably sensitive, so they will hear any reasonably strong signal in the air where they are. Notionally a 30 mW transmitter (typical of wireless system output power) at 100 yards provides roughly the same signal strength at the receiver as a 1000 W transmitter 10 miles away.

I shot video at a wedding reception in downtown DC, the DJ's system was picking up the DC cops. Another case at a high school stadium north of Richmond, VA. One Shure VHF system was swamped by a TV transmitter ~20 miles away, The mic was 100' from the receiver.

While interfering with teenage chatter on cell phones is likely not a big deal, interfering with emergency service communications is.

Latency can be an issue, so check system latency as you shop. I believe Rode claims 4 ms, about 1/4 of an NTSC field. The physical effect is as if standing about 4 feet further from the person speaking.

If you really need wireless, VHF band systems are available at low price points, and can work reasonably well for voice in a "home" environment where the user owns the gear. (IMO home use tends to be less abusive to gear then professional environment use where it is used by the hired help focused on other concerns.) Just check frequencies against local TV & FM transmitters.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

From a price perspective the RodeLink is dirt dirt cheap.

But from a professional perspective I can't recommend it, as their bulky size is unacceptable (but if you don't care about concealing the transmitter? Then this doesn't matter), and their functionality is rather lacking.

Instead my go to recommendation is the Sony UWP-D11, which only costs a little bit more but offers you so much more.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

Not having a locking connection (on either the TX or RX) is a shocking oversight! Quite unacceptable in my eyes.

And no user replaceable battery is just yet another strike against it.

But again, everyone's needs are different, if you don't mind this serious flaws then this could be an ok choice to consider.

But in a professional environment these are serious dealbreakers for the sound department. (before we even get onto the topic of sound quality / reliability / etc)

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

The UK is very small, but we have no on-call protection from the licensing authorities unless it's big and important. For radio systems the real problem with un-licenced frequencies is the huge scope for interference from the legitimate users, and while if they are the local tv company's camera crews, unless they're in the same location, a few mW doesn't travel far, it gets bad if the other user is the telephone company with hundreds of Watts of digital, thats's bad.

Most of my hire stock is Sennheiser - and they have been dropped a LOT! G2 and G3 both have occasional issues with the buttons - but these fail more often from being sat on, rather than dropped. The flaps can get damaged, if they open and get caught, but they're pretty good. I also have some of the cheaper ones and while they're better value, plastic battery compartments, clips and flaps are terrible. I won't buy any more Line 6 for this reason. I also have some Chinese kit modelled on the Sennheiser shape and these have been no worse than the Sennheiser oddly.

Keep in mind that radio packs are designed for people like actors and dancers who drop them on the floor, drop them down toilets and get them squashed by scenery. This is why for hire I use Sennheiser.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

How cheap is cheap. £150

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

The noise floor in that video is truly horrible, what are you trying to demonstrate?

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

We certainly heard clothes rubbing noises from a casually-positioned clip-on microphone. There are widely-known methods of eliminating that kind of noise. Including choice of wardrobe, etc.

The remainder of the background noise wasn't so easily categorized. It was probably a combination of:
1) Ambient noise in the room. We don't have any way of knowing how much noise was there already.
2) Self-noise of the microphone. How good do you expect to get from TWO microphones, two transmitters and a receiver all for 150 GBP? That is why many people upgrade the microphone in their wireless kit.
3) Noise from the mic preamp in the transmitter and the audio output circuit of the receiver. I didn't hear any kind of noise or other artifacts that could be attributed to the digital (or RF) domains of the signal path.

I thought the performance was pretty good for a system with two mics/transmitters and receiver for 150 GBP.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

David, Buy cheap get cheap. I was annoyed they were not stereo. Also, don't forget many of us are amateur hobbyists with little money.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

I've used Sennheiser's ew100 series in the past. Recently I purchased a newer Sennheiser AVX-ME2 set, not cheap but somewhere in the middle, and I couldn't be happier.

Here are a couple of interviews I recorded with it, if you'd like to hear what it sounds like.
This was in light-to-medium wind; I added a cheap cat ear on top of the Sennheiser mic which worked great.

I have not done a drop test (and don't plan to), so no feedback on that requirement. :-)

- Martin

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

I think we should confirm something - radio mics are never stereo. You have two transmitters, and one receiver - but are you saying the receiver merges the two transmitters at a fixed level, and outputs both channels as one single channel containing two separate microphone sources? That's really useless and pointless. You are looking nag through a viewfinder and wouldn't have any way of knowing if the balance is right? Very strange device, I can't imagine ever wanting to merge two mics, before recording?

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

As I recall, AT 1800 dual-channel receiver had a mode, which could dum the two Tx audio to the outputs. it had independent channel output volume, so they could be mixed somewhat, but I certainly wouldn't want two sources on one channel either way.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

There are other dual wireless mics such as the Saramonic which have two transmitters and one receiver with two independent outs. Not like my cheap Boya which blends the two receivers into one. Most times it is better to save a bit more and buy better as it will save you cash in the future. I have a box full of crap to prove it.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

I'm about to replace my old Sennheiser G3s that are in the retiring 600MHz band. There are trade-in rebates until the end of the month I want to take advantage off, so I have been contemplating the choices. Good discussion and data points in this thread.

I have my reservations about the digital 2.4GHz systems, mostly because that spectrum is beyond crowded, especially in big metro markets (NYC in my case). Just opening your computer and the list of available networks in range doesn't fit on the screen by a mile. It's a big leap of faith in some way thinking that finding a good reliable sliver amongst that even with all the advantages of digital will work out.

Also, I do work in post production and timecode sync my audio, so the thought of having to shift all clips a few frames, and do that on the wireless audio clip, but not the boom clip is an absolute non-starter, and I wouldn't expect anyone editing my footage to do that.

I've considered the Lectros, but I'm primarily on the camera side. For bigger or sound critical productions I'll hire a sound crew. But I maintain a base set for smaller jobs, and occasionally I am the sound crew for others on smaller productions. The step up in price to the Lectros is considerable and I'd probably invest it elsewhere first right now. The G3 ew100s have been ok, and I do have a hand-held signal scanner to backup the built-in scan just in case.

So that has lead me down to looking at the just released G4 ew500s as a middle ground. Still affordable but better mic and a few more bells.

Any thoughts on other alternatives stepping up from the G3 ew100 without spending $3K per channel and not going digital? Any thoughts on the G4 and 500 series?

Oh, and on the getting caught for frequency violations - not a wireless lav, but a crypto miner got served a FCC shutdown notice in NYC a few months ago because of some hardware issue his mining rig was interfering with T-Mobile's mobile signal and they tracked him down (https://www.coindesk.com/fcc-bitcoin...obile-network/).

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

In my eyes the entry level G4 is not worth it over the G3, and neither is the next step up in the G4 range which doesn't really add that much more.

Sony UWP-D11 remains as the best option in the sub $1K ish market.

Unless you want to wait for the new Aputure/Deity wireless to come out later this year.

The delay for *good* (not stuff like Sennheiser AVX!) 2.4GHz is mere milliseconds, that is not even half a frame worth. Much less.

Re: decent cheap wireless lav system?
 

Thanks, good to know. I do have to replace a few G3s due to band, so I guess it's trade band or trade-up.

It occurs to me that I may be mounting this horse backwards. For me lavs are generally the backup channel to the boom. I have either a MKH-50 or 8060 on the boom. So I think the better way to ask this question is what lav system is of comparable quality to the boom signal. If I can afford it, that's what I should pair it with, not whatever is the best sub $1K unit. 2 channels is the minimum, 4 would be great over time.