Going wireless?

VellaJ

I think this is the right board for this... not completely sure, but hey ?

I've been considering getting one of those wireless transmitter/receiver units to replace the Guitar -> Amp lead. I just wanted to know people's opinions on them? My gut feeling would be that, being wireless rather than the more traditional approach, they could be tone suckers, and mess with your sound somewhat. Now I know they aren't cheap, so I was wondering if they've found some feasible (albeit pricy) way around the sound problems...

sharonzaz

line6 - the most expensive one is 9k retail, cheapest about half that.
diff is the range and amount of channels, that dictate the amount of
units u can run in the same area.

all units are digital and do not affect the sound.

lots of other units are good, more or less offer similar things.
price plays some factor in quality and range.
today it is hard to find a really bad bad unit.
unless you're really cheap ?

Mr-M

+1 for Line 6 Digital wireless units. There is no compromise in tone with these units - at least not that mere human ears can discern.

VellaJ

Now I have huge respect for Line6, but R9k is a lot of money :'(

I was at Music Mate this morning, and took a look at one by Shure, retailing at about R3.3k, and one by AKG, for about a grand less. That's slightly more in my budget. I know Shure stuff is pretty decent, and I know AKG is pretty reputable as well. Experiences? Opinions?

Mr-M

Line 6 Relay G30 is the entry level model and the one I use and have been using for 3 years. Full Retail before discount is R4595. I think sharonzaz was just giving you an example of the most expensive they get - which is actually not very expensive vs what Shure and Sennheiser get up to.

Skywalker

Line 6 all the way!!!

I use a G30 live and it rocks!!!

http://line6.com/relay/#

DO IT!!! 8)

Keira-WitherKay

? to me i guess the question you should be asking is if you really need to go wireless , in my years i seen way too many guitarist go wireless only to stand next to their amps ,or don't move from their pedalboards where a 3m cable would suffice and do the job technically better , to date i've yet to do a studio session where wireless is used instead of top end cables so i assume the technology is improving but not quite the same yet as good cable and lets not forget most band venues you play have tiny cramped stages ?

so spending 5K or more on a system which can have its purpose done better , with a R300 cable , makes me wonder

however if you that swinging from the rafters and sprinting around the stadium stage guitarist its fabulous, especially if you do stage productions that require the band onstage and doing coreography , and of course if you risk stage diving with your guitar,

this may sound cynical but unless you really need it that 5k could be used to upgrade gear and pedals or your amp , just the way i look at it ?

Mr-M

VellaJ wrote: I know Shure stuff is pretty decent, and I know AKG is pretty reputable as well. Experiences? Opinions?

The real difference here comes in with these being analog systems vs the Line 6 being digital. In analog systems they have something called a compander which is a series of gates and compressors which squash the signal so that the dynamic range is as narrow as possible to make it easier to avoid interference. This generally destroys your tone. Digital wireless systems have no compander, but instead have A/D or analog to digital converters (like a high quality soundcard) which converts your sound to ones and zeros with virtually no alteration and far higher dynamic range and converts it back to your pristine tone on the other side. There's almost no alteration of your signal vs a potentially pretty big difference with the companders in an analog system. It really sounds like a good cable.

Another plus with the G30/ 50 is that they run on 9V same as other pedals, so you can use your existing pedal power supply.

That help at all?

Just so it's clear, I have no affiliation with Line 6, but I do think it's a great product - at least when it comes to wireless. For guitar amps I'd much rather you bought our products. ?

VellaJ

Thanks all, that certainly helps a lot...

Yeah I've also thought that a wireless system is quite a lot more expensive than a cable, that's why I haven't pulled the trigger yet. I just figured, playing lead in a band, one needs to periodically move around during solos, try and "connect" with the audience...

One other thing that just occurred to me: If your backing guitarist is using a similar unit (especially if identical) there could be some major confusion in store for the receivers...

AlanRatcliffe

Mr T wrote: In analog systems they have something called a compander which is a series of gates and compressors which squash the signal so that the dynamic range is as narrow as possible

Just a pedantic point of order - a compander is a combination of a compressor at one end and an expander (the reverse of a compressor, which increases dynamic range) at the other. So using a compander is not the same as just using a compressor. With a good compander circuit you end up with a signal that has the same dynamics as the source. Of course, no circuit is perfect (including A/D-D/A converters) - they all introduce distortions of one type or another. What is important is that the circuit minimises these as much as possible and that they sound good.

I think the bigger problem (for some players) with all wirelesses is that they buffer the signal. The better ones made for guitar will simulate cable losses to keep the tone the same, but you still miss out on some of the interaction with simple effects circuits like fuzz and wah pedals and the way they react to different volume and tone settings on the guitar.

VellaJ wrote: If your backing guitarist is using a similar unit (especially if identical) there could be some major confusion in store for the receivers...

It's not just the base frequency band either - every transmitter throws off a series of side bands and if one of those falls on another transmitter's main frequency, you get interference. That includes any wireless mics and wireless monitoring too. That's why you stick with not only one brand of wireless in your band, but also with a specific product range and a specific range of frequencies within that range (you'll often see systems will have a colour code - e.g. "blue", which means that you can use any product coded blue with other "blue" products. Each colour within a brand has selection of specific frequencies that are designed to be used together without interfering with one another. The better systems have more available frequencies and can scan for one which is not being used.

Gets quite complicated... and I must spend some time catching up on the latest innovations.

sharonzaz

Mr T wrote: Line 6 Relay G30 is the entry level model and the one I use and have been using for 3 years. Full Retail before discount is R4595. I think sharonzaz was just giving you an example of the most expensive they get - which is actually not very expensive vs what Shure and Sennheiser get up to.

yes, I did say that the cheaper one is half the price of the G90.
one needs to read my WHOLE post ?

Mr-M

VellaJ wrote: One other thing that just occurred to me: If your backing guitarist is using a similar unit (especially if identical) there could be some major confusion in store for the receivers...

The G30 has 6 channels selectable on the receiver and the transmitter. The G50 and G90 have more channels available. Interference is unlikely from other RF signals (and vice-versa) as these send encrypted data signals over the 2.4Ghz band - same as WiFi. Interference from WiFi is also unlikely because of the aforementioned encryption.

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: Just a pedantic point of order - a compander is a combination of a compressor at one end and an expander (the reverse of a compressor, which increases dynamic range) at the other.

Point. Just didn't want to cause any confusion by over elaboration.

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: I think the bigger problem (for some players) with all wirelesses is that they buffer the signal. The better ones made for guitar will simulate cable losses to keep the tone the same, but you still miss out on some of the interaction with simple effects circuits like fuzz and wah pedals and the way they react to different volume and tone settings on the guitar.

Maybe so, but mine seems to play nice with my fuzz and overdrives and all the numerous other pedals I've had. Rolling back on the guitar volume seems to work just fine. It's integral to the way I play, so I wouldn't use one otherwise. Of course because of the buffering on the output, my fuzz pedal can't oscillate, but that's to be expected without a direct connection to the pickups.

AlanRatcliffe

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: Just a pedantic point of order - a compander is a combination of a compressor at one end and an expander (the reverse of a compressor, which increases dynamic range) at the other.

Point. Just didn't want to cause any confusion by over elaboration.[/quote]
Yeah, but in this case it makes a very important difference. It makes it sound that by using analog wireless your guitar signal will end up being totally compressed (which is not the case).

Of course because of the buffering on the output, my fuzz pedal can't oscillate, but that's to be expected without a direct connection to the pickups.

And there will always be people who regard that as a downside. ?