Wired Vs Wireless

[mykoolbuble]

Hi guys

 

You were really helpful last time and the P.A. is sounding totally awesome, so thanks for that !

 

Just after some more advice.

 

Currently I use a Shure Beta 87a wired microphone, love it, love the frequencies and everything about it, and, although the wired version is more conducive with my show "Michael Bublé" tribute, I do find more and more that I could do with a 100ft cable or a radio mic ** laughs out loud **.

 

So, IF I was to switch to the a Beta 87a Wireless system, what is the difference between them all? I am getting very confused.

I don't/won't want more than one mic, I will only want a max of 100ft but the most important thing is that the sound quality should be exactly the same. The only reason I say this is because in the past when I've "played around" with friends mics etc I find for some reason the quality if more superior from the wired mics.... could just be me...

 

So yes, any thoughts would, as always, be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

MKB

[revbobuk]

The Shure SLX, ULX and UHF-R systems (all of which can use the Beta 87a) are systems which are on an increasing scale of price - from £800 to around £3.5k - and increasing numbers of systems working in the same place at the same time. Shure's Digital low-end system, this one is more affordable (£600-ish) and for a solo performer probably more appropriate.

 

The truth is, going wireless will always degrade the sound - somewhere from 'imperceptible' to 'lots' depending on what you get. But decent radio mics are in use by top class acts all the time, and everybody is happy.

 

The Line6 X75 system has a number of built in mic models, if you think that's worth a play. But if you know you like the 87a, stick with it.

[BigYinUK]

The Shure SLX, ULX and UHF-R systems (all of which can use the Beta 87a) are systems which are on an increasing scale of price - from £800 to around £3.5k - and increasing numbers of systems working in the same place at the same time. Shure's Digital low-end system, this one is more affordable (£600-ish) and for a solo performer probably more appropriate.

 

The truth is, going wireless will always degrade the sound - somewhere from 'imperceptible' to 'lots' depending on what you get. But decent radio mics are in use by top class acts all the time, and everybody is happy.

 

The Line6 X75 system has a number of built in mic models, if you think that's worth a play. But if you know you like the 87a, stick with it.

 

I seem to recall in a thread a while back, someone saying that Line6's X75 emulation of some of the Shure microphones sounded better than the real thing. I use a Line6 Relay G30 wireless system for guitar and I have to say its extremely good, way better than any other "budget" system I've used. So the X75 might well be worth a try for you?

[pete10uk]

Or just stick a 30 m cable on it and see if your still happy. That's the cheapest way.

 

I've had mic signals running 80 m in the past with good results.

[Bobbsy]

There's an old saying in pro audio...

 

You can spend up to several thousand pounds on a wireless microphone to make sure it sounds almost...but not quite...as good as a £10 cable.

 

Well, if you need 100 feet then a fair bit more than £10 but you get my drift. If using a longer cable makes any audible difference in the sound at all, it's the wrong cable. I regularly use a 100 foot (well, 30 metre) multicore and I'd defy anyone to tell the difference between that an a mic right at the mixer.

 

Wireless systems, on the other hand, use various forms of companding to fit the audio signal into the available RF bandwidth. If that sounds better to you, great...but it's not the same as the original signal.

 

Seriously, if you need the ability to move around then wireless works...but if you don't need to escape the confines of the cable, wired sounds better, is far cheaper and is far more reliable--there's no interference, signal nulls or intermod issues with a properly made XLR, even a long one. Oh, and don't forget the ongoing cost of batteries!

[kerry davies]

As a ballad tribute artist I would stick with cables every time. It gives something for the other hand to play with.

 

I am only half joking, think about it. Why fix something like the sound you like or the way you perform if it ain't broken?

[sam.spoons]

+1 to all the above, radio mics are the spawn of the devilhttp://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif Only consider getting one if you really can't manage without.

 

OTOH, I'm struggling to understand where you'll ever need a 30M mic cable (or at least how you prevent it being an unacceptable trip hazard if you do) http://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif

[paulears]

If you don't need wireless, then don't do it! The Line 6 emulations are actually very good, but don't forget they only cover the sound - the capsule, with it's side lobes and general performance is NOT the same as the mic it's emulating.

[mykoolbuble]

Hi everyone

 

Thanks so much for your responses, all very valid points and have made my mind up for me, I'm sticking with what I have but just get a longer cable.....

Some of the venues are large and so 30ft is not beyond the realms of possibilities.

 

Thanks again, you guys have been brilliant as always :)

 

MKB

[sam.spoons]

Hi everyone

 

Thanks so much for your responses, all very valid points and have made my mind up for me, I'm sticking with what I have but just get a longer cable.....

Some of the venues are large and so 30ft is not beyond the realms of possibilities.

 

Thanks again, you guys have been brilliant as always :)

 

MKB

 

Sorry am I missing something? here you mention 30ft not being "beyond possibilities" but in your first post you refer to needing 100ft mic cable. I find it hard to see where you'd need a 100ft (or 30 metre, is that where the confusion is creeping in?) mic cable.

 

BTW do I recall another thread where we were discussing mic cables with you and a couple of people suggested cutting your 30M cable into 3 x 10M ones?

[MarkPAman]

I find it hard to see where you'd need a 100ft mic cable.

Have you never seen a singer leave the stage & walk around the audience?

 

Or stage dive into the audience for that matter, though I don't imagine that's the case here ;)

[mykoolbuble]

Hey

 

Sorry for the confusion, I was talking with someone about 30ft speaker cables whilst I was replying yesterday and got my numbers all about face....

 

Yes, you are quite right, leaving the stage and going into the audience is exactly what I would need the extra length for, but I have to weigh that up against losing quality in the sound, but all the info provided has enabled me to make my decision, and that's the most important thing so thanks again guys, once again :)

 

Have a good week.

 

MKB

[Just Some Bloke]

Whilst I don't want to disagree with anything that has been written above, I should point out that if you're running a cable 80ft (asuming a 20ft stage) into an audience then that is one hell of a trip hazard! It's not just yourself you're exposing to risk but paying customers too. If someone was to decide they needed to answer the call of nature and didn't spot your cable and tripped on it you could have quite a claim on your hands. Now in the past it might have been seen as "one of those things", but nowadays the lawyers will be making the point that you could have chosen wireless and you chose not to because it was cheaper. That won't go down well. For me, that would be the main reason for going wireless!

 

Sorry to be the bringer of doom but this is one of those occasions when crying "Health and Safety made me do it" may actually have a point!

[Bobbsy]

No, JSB, I agree.

 

The trip...and tangle...hazard of a hundred foot run through the audience would, for me, qualify as needing "to escape the confines of a cable" as per my original post. I can't think of a better reason to put up with the issues of going wireless.

[GaryNattrass]

I think it is all relative and whilst I agree that a radio mic will never be as good as a cable mic you will only tell in reality if you do a comparison side by side.

Radio mics are well established these days and range from less than £40 for a VHF Kam diversity system thru around £500 for a sennheiser G3 to thousands for the top end systems.

They all have their limitations but I would have thought that a good quality UHF ch38 diversity system would be acceptable quality and you would get used to it in time and some of them can actually improve live sound as they can slightly compress the dynamic range, you can even get capacitor inserts for the sennheiser range of you like the sm87 and I would say contact a good dealer and try some out.

They can offer a lot more freedom than cabled mics and will allow you to concentrate on your performance without the worry of where your cables is or if it may be a safety hazzard.

Look at major concerts and they all tend to use radio systems these days but the mid range well known brands will be your best bet although I still hwve some £100 sennheiser non diversity ch70 mics that are still in use for broadcast and live sound.