UHF or Digital wireless mic

[tjentertainment]

Hey guys.....

Quick survey. I'm in the market to purchase new wireless mics. I'm going with either Shure or Line 6. Need to know if making the jump to digital is really worth the extra $$$ Was told by a local tech that he demo'd both Shure products side by side and said there was no noticeable sound quality change between the UHF and the Digital.

Here are the finalists:

Sure PGX24/SM58 (UHF)
Shure PGXD24/SM58 (Digital)
Line 6 XD V75 (Digital)

All thoughts/input are appreciated

[Brandt Slater]

In all honesty, your tech friend is correct. The PGX model will do the same as the other items. Why spend the extra money if there's no need.

[Phil Noize]

It depends what you are using them for. If it's just for speach, I'd go for the cheapest. For singing, it's a different matter.

The Line 6 is a fantastic piece of kit. It uses different wireless technology to the Shure and operates at 2.4GHz (like encrypted WIFI). As a result it doesn't compand the signal (companding in simple terms is a type of compression applied to a signal. It allows a signal with a large dynamic range to be transmitted over facilities that have a smaller dynamic range capability - ie. wireless), so the signal is fatter and cleaner. The XD-V75 also uses DSP to emulate 10 of the top vocal mics available (Shure, Sennheiser, AKG, Audix, EV, etc). Add to that build quality of a tank, and you've got a winner IMHO.

I currently have a wireless Shure Beta 58 that I use in my band (which is a great mic), but I will be upgrading to a Line 6 XD-V75 pretty soon.

[Brandt Slater]

For singing is a different matter? How's that different from speech?

[Phil Noize]

For singing, you are demanding a whole load more performance from a mic ... a bigger dynamic range, bigger frequency range, better clarity, and usually within the context of a live band, much better feedback rejection. This is why I would spend more cash on a mic for singing.

A Shure Beta 58 is quite a bit better than the normal SM58 IMO. The Beta 58 suffers less from handling noise and has better feedback rejection. That's before you consider that it also has an enhance frequency response for singing.

Companding also comes into the equation, but to be honest it's far less noticeable, and it isn't really an issue for speech (it has a negligible effect IMO), but for singing it slightly degrades a voice being used to its full dynamic range.

Of course, a better mic will give much better clarity with speech too, but the difference will be marginal compared to when a mic is used for singing. Maybe I'm just picky as a singer, but making music with my voice for me is far more important than making announcements.

What will you be using the mic for?

[Brandt Slater]

I wasn't looking for anything. I just wanted to know why you believe one is more important than the other? Which is false. Both are equally important.

Sounds like you run into bad sound guys, horrible mixing if you're having issues with how your voice sounds through a wireless mic. In all honesty, just because I work with the stuff everyday, the Line 6 model isn't any different or better than most of the pro models. The biggest issue with Digital wireless is it's still in it's infancy. Also if it doesn't have a switching technology within that range you need a clear line of sight. Where UHF is unlimited. One of many reasons why you don't see this technology in the pro world.

[Phil Noize]

Could you point out where I said that one was more important than the other? ... or where I said I was having issues with how my voice sounds through a wireless mic?

The OP is in the market for a new mic. I was simply expressing my opinion, and pointing out some advantages of a particular model of Line 6 mic, which is built like a tank, and is technically more advanced for a similar price. I didn't even mention built-in loop-through antenna distribution.

Never mind, you just carry on and tell him that there's no difference!! :shrug:

[Brandt Slater]

My opinions are based on experiences and testing. We beta test every piece of new gear that comes out. Digital 2.4 ghz is limited compared to UHF. Which is why you don't see it the pro world. I'm not saying Line 6 is a bad choice, however I don't see a reason why you'd spend money on a technology that's new. There's many upgradeable choices you can choose from within the same price range.

[Phil Noize]

Digital 2.4 ghz is limited compared to UHF.

How so? The testing I've seen seems to be very positive.

[Brandt Slater]

Well considering almost all Internet transmissions use the same bandwidth, it's matter of time before this unlicensed bandwidth becomes heavily clogged and possibly prone to unauthorized listening and transmissions. Also keep in mind the audio world is looking to secure their own bandwidth's for entertainment purposes which isn't in this bandwidth. Another reason why there's not a whole lot of models out. 2.4, 5.8, 6.0 will eventually get bought out by telecommunications, which then makes any wireless system in these ranges illegal. It already happened in the US with 700 MHZ range.

[Phil Noize]

Here in the UK, some the frequencies that used to be legal for radio mics have now been assigned to television, rendering a lot of older mics illegal.

The claims Line 6 are making for the 2.4GHz ISM band seem pretty convincing. They claim: Encoded DCL™ (Digital Channel Lock) technology distinguishes XD-V75 digital audio from any other third-party signal, including Wi-Fi, thus preventing reception of audio interference from other 2.4GHz devices.

Basically, the XD-V75 outputs four seemlessly switching encrypted wifi signals (from what I've read). I haven't yet had a chance to try one out for myself, but users are claiming very reliable 100m range with great signal quality from a standard antenna & receiver setup.

[Brandt Slater]

Convincing now, however what are the terms of longevity? I mean everything from digital tv, to LAN all rely on this bandwidth. Eventually its gonna get clogged up and someone with a lot money will lobby governments and regulators that they need to sell them this bandwidth for some meaningless use. Which then users and manufacturers will have to scramble again. Also I'm speaking from the US point of view. Every country has different regulations.

Again I'm not saying it's a bad product. For what you're using it probably is a good fit. However, speaking from a big wireless set up 10 or more channels there's not much benefit yet. Also there's no clear direction of what road manufacturers may take.

[Phil Noize]

Fair play, it's great to get your point of view.

From my perspective though, in the UK I think it's really a lottery as to what frequencies the authorities might or might not allow us to use. As the Line 6 stuff sits clearly in the wifi band, I actually think it's more likely to stay legal and useable for us. If you think about it, this equipment must already be in use sometimes in rooms full of phones, tablets and PCs all using wifi simultaneously. Therefore it must hold up pretty well.

I'm not using my stuff in a big wireless setup like you, and I love trying out new technology, so I reckon I'll still be tempted to get a Line 6 mic when the timing and price is right.

However, if I were in your position, I'm sure I'd be using what is more familiar, tried and tested. :tup:

[Brandt Slater]

That's the fun part of the business. Trying out new technology. Many years ago, I was only a Shure guy. Then started trying out Sennheiser, and Audio Technica. Twenty years later, those are my three top brands. With the exception of Lectrosonics which is a digital hybrid system. My only concern with the 2.4 stuff is with everything operating in that range, I wonder how much they can push it till its maxed. My other concern which is probably on others minds. Hackers. I think these two factors are the big concern. Plus here in the states, when we lost the 700 band, that caused a big uproar. Costing users and manufacturers a lot of money to change out frequency blocks to legal ones or offering the buy back program. Which for the majority of us wondering which direction are we going.

Let me know how you like it when you get it. I have a lot Line 6 products. Pod, Bass Pod, various effects units. Love that stuff.

[JamminDownJD]

Second year with the Line 6 XD-V70 as my go-to system. No dropoffs whatsoever. Never had a problem. I absolutely love this system. I'm thinking of picking up two Line 6 XD-V75 systems next year.

For the record, I still also own and use Shure PGX, PG, and SLX wireless systems in addition to my growing selection of wired mics. I've gone through so many of the cheapie wireless system brands in my 26 years in the business (VocoPro, Nady, Behringer, Gemini, Samson). Except for the VocoPro (which I discontinued because it fell into the now-illegal 700mHz-905mHz range), all of those cheapies were pure crap that broke easily or experienced way too many dropouts. I learned my lesson: stick with either Shure, Line 6, Sennheiser, Audio-Technica.

In terms of digital vs UHF: here in the United States, they are still contemplating selling off even more bandwidth beyond the 700mHz-905mHz range. That could happen anywhere in the UHF spectrum. Yes, there are several devices that use the digital 2.5gHz spectrum-- but I have never experienced a problem yet. Something to do with how they packet and encode the signal... I'm no expert.

[Phil Noize]

Joe,

Have you used the mic modelling feature much? ... or just stayed with it in the Line 6 custom-voiced microphone model mode (default I'm guessing)?

[Brandt Slater]

In terms of digital vs UHF: here in the United States, they are still contemplating selling off even more bandwidth beyond the 700mHz-905mHz range. That could happen anywhere in the UHF spectrum. Yes, there are several devices that use the digital 2.5gHz spectrum-- but I have never experienced a problem yet. Something to do with how they packet and encode the signal... I'm no expert.

We only lost the 700 MHZ bandwidth. 698-806 MHz. I and no one in the pro side has heard of them giving up frequencies beyond that. 800 and 900 MHZ band would be a few years down the line before it's gone. FCC isn't very up to date. One of our wireless techs was telling me there's two bands the audio world is looking at reserving for themselves. One in MHZ one GHZ. However he wouldn't say which ones specifically.

Here's one link which breaks down bandwidth allocations in the US. It's the only current one I can find.
http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/default.htm?job=bandplans#Frequency%20Allocations