AT 1800 or Sennheiser G2 ??
 

Guys, I know some of you have both system, so c'mon lets put up some uncompressed sounds !!! The AT 1800 is double channel with diversity but still very new and unproven, on the other hand the G2 is single channel, non diversity but a Battlefield tested.

For my application, space for the 2x G2 is not a problem. I dont mind buying 2x of the single channel G2, so if we take that variable out of the equation, is the AT 1800 still a contender ?

Should I get 2x Sennheiser G2 or the AT 1800

If you can live with a single channel, why would you consider a $1200 system over a $500 system? I guess that's the question you're asking.

Diversity is very nice indeed, but at most camera to subject distances in most shooting situations not needed. Your mileage *will* vary.

The MKE-4 mike on the Senn. is a good not great mic. You could easily spend $300 to upgrade to a great one... if important to what you're doing. Instead, I pull out my wired lavs. YMMV.

Although the AT has only been out a very few months, AT has been making excellent gear (including wireless) for years. I personally would not be concerned about the short track record of the AT-1800 system. YMMV.

I have a six-pack of sony wireless with an AC receiver for studio/meeting work, EW100 and EW500 systems for field work. If I had a reasonable excuse I'd upgrade the two senn to a single receiver with diversity in a minute for ease of use and yes, diversity.

I guess i should clarify more. I am not concern about space when comparing a double channel vs single channel system. If i go with the G2, I plan to get 2 sets of those for 2 channel recording.

I have my mixer and recorder on a bag, and also thats where the receivers will go too. So, I am not concerned about having to fix 2 receivers on the camera body. I know that is one of the reasons why people like a double system.

I also plan to use sanken cos-11 lav with the wireless system and making the stock mic as a backup mic.


Like on my original post, I am mainly concerned about the diversity vs non diversity signal and also the overall sound quality of the AT1800. I know some of you guys have both the AT1800 and the G2, will be awesome if you guys can post some audio clips :)

I had exactly the same dilemma a couple of weeks ago. In the end I went with the dual G3 approach ... but for flexibility and cost reasons rather than audio quality.

I'm sure more than a few people would be interested in a quality comparison between these two options....

I'm in the same boat. The AT has the advantages of balanced receiver outs (the EW500 is balanced but the 100 is not) and its plug-on transmitters can provide phantom power. The G2s are cheap and reliable, and I've been using them for the past 6 months.

Have many people used the AT1800? I'm thinking about getting it with Countryman B6s, though it's been recommended that I look at a more durable lav.

that the AT is diversity unit make it worth 500 ( 935 usd ,:- for the dual system , not at b@h or trew audio ))more then the g-2( 425 usd not b&h or trew audio)
don't know about the stock mics but seems they are better then the me2/4 shit

a bit power hungry (half amper) so you will need good external battery

Haven't used the G2, but bought the single channel AT1800 and love it. No dropouts. Great sound. Wish the transmitter had a line input. That's my only grip.

We have a couple 1800 systems. They're solid. In one particular part of the USA, we had a problem with one transmitter on a supposedly clean freq. A few minutes of manual control, it was taken care of.
I've only had a couple of experiences with the G2, coincidentally in the same building, and the G2 failed. I've been admittedly prejudiced since that time.