Budget friendly wireless...

M

Matt Vivlamore

Senior
Jan 11, 2011
913
4
18
41
Southern MD, USA
www.meerkatsound.com
Alright, of the budget friendly wireless mics system out there, what would you buy to stick in the hands of a Bar Band or on a budget gig? I’m talking like: Shure PGX ($400), EV R300 ($300). I do not want to spend any more than $400; rack mount isn’t needed.


Own a mix of ULX-P and SLX mics; but those are now live in a 8 space rack along with 4 channels of IEMS all . I don’t feel like bringing that rack out in a bar.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

My experience is almost every time I prefer anything over anything but an expensive Shure.
The cheaper Shure's all end up going to hell with most singers.
Senns seem much better. AT as well.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

I just used a PGX SM58 versus my UHF-R SM58 and the difference was extreme. The PGX sounds like crap. Literally.

I have used SLX before and it worked OK, I was fighting it a bit more than I would have liked.

I used to own ULX-P with 58 heads and it sounded great.

Then I switched to UHF-R with 58 heads and could not figure out why I had more feedback with the UR than the ULX...then I figured it out...UR actually has HF response that the ULX lacked. A few EQ cuts and bingo it's just as feedback resistant.

I have also used AKG WMS450, which is getting discontinued, and it sounds dramatically better than PGX at less cost. The EV RE-2 sounds good, and EW100 sounds great too.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

I've used A-T 3000 series. Their hand helds are not bad, but I HATE the connector on the bodypacks. After a while, they get just a little bit loose, and make audible pops as the connector loses contact.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Mipro ACT series with the the condenser capsule. There is no comparison to the other budget mics mentioned. You will spend in excess of $1000 per channel to get anything even remotely close. Otherwise I like Tom's suggestion of buying another receiver if you like the mics you already have.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Tom Manchester said:
How about just buying an additional SLX or ULX receiver and borrowing a transmitter from your big rack system as needed?
Click to expand...

True, I could always 'demote' the SLX receivers by upgrading to the new ULX-D. Also Shure announced a 2 & 4 channel receiver for the ULX-D series, and it looks promising: Shure Americas | Coming Soon | ULX-D™ Dual & Quad Digital Wireless

I would love 4 of the Shure UHF-R, but those are way out of my budget; $2600 for a single and $4800 for a dual channel. The ULX-D looks more promising at $1300 per channel; it uses AA batteries (IEMs use AA's as well). My only complaint with the ULX-P is that is uses a 9v batteries.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Matt Vivlamore said:
True, I could always 'demote' the SLX receivers by upgrading to the new ULX-D. Also Shure announced a 2 & 4 channel receiver for the ULX-D series, and it looks promising: Shure Americas | Coming Soon | ULX-D™ Dual & Quad Digital Wireless

I would love 4 of the Shure UHF-R, but those are way out of my budget; $2600 for a single and $4800 for a dual channel. The ULX-D looks more promising at $1300 per channel; it uses AA batteries (IEMs use AA's as well). My only complaint with the ULX-P is that is uses a 9v batteries.
Click to expand...

If you're spending $1300 / ch, try clicking the new Lectrosonics ad to see their wireless price comparison chart. Their Venue system actually comes in at a price comparable to ULX's. (I wasn't aware of this until we started running that advertisement, I always thought they were priced in the UHF-R range.)

When I was in a position to purchase 60+ channels of wireless, I went for ULX/P. Another time when I made a purchase of 24 channels, I went with the same. These were both ~4-5 years ago. At the time, I had never used anything from Lectro, and to be honest, barely knew of the company's existence. Cost per channel at the quantities I purchased was about $1k. That included either a 58HH, or a (plastic) bodypack with either a Countryman B3/B6 lavalier. If I were doing that again now, I'd probably be looking at Lectrosonics.

For lavs where I was, Countryman was a great choice. Bodypacks didn't hold up very well though. Receivers were fine, we only had one or two issues with the displays on them. Sound quality... it's ULX. Nothing spectacular, but you know what to expect, and can make it work. I think it's the minimum somewhat acceptable product of Shure wireless. We were located in rural area where frequency coordination wasn't a problem, but note that you can't fit too many of them together in a dense area. Phil LaDue can probably chime in on how that's doing now that it's been installed for a few years. With that said, I do love the higher end Shure products.

For real budget wireless though- I recently was sent out with some AKG D5 handhelds / receivers. I don't recall the models, but they sounded a lot better than the budget Shure gear. 470 maybe?
 
Last edited:
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

How many channels at once are we talking about. If it is just a few, for a true budget mic, I would think seriously about Line 6 XD V35. It MAPPS at $299, fits the budget, and can be sent out by itself with minimal possibility for operator error.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

I got one of the new EV R300 (for about half of what you're looking for) and this it's a good option for what you're looking at. You need to scan each gig, because it doesn't reject interference very well, and the receiver should be pretty close to the transmitter. But it sounds pretty good and is easy to work with. You can only change the frequency on the transmitter by holding it up to the receiver and hitting "sync". A 2 step set of instructions taped to the receiver could get any musician able to do the scan then sync steps.

Cheap enough that if they came back with beer breath you wouldn't need to get too worked up over it.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

I would love 4 of the Shure UHF-R, but those are way out of my budget; $2600 for a single and $4800 for a dual channel.
Click to expand...

I will urge you again to look seriously at the Mipro Act700 or 800 systems. I paid less than $2600 for a 4 pack of the Act700's and got both handheld and bodypack transmitters for each channel. The nicer ones too, not the plastic transmitters.

The system comes in a 1 rackspace frame with antenna distribution built in for four channels.

RF performance is off the charts good. And the sound quality of the handheld is on par with the KSM9. It sounds different, but at least as good. Feedback rejection is excellent.

The downsides are that the magnesium mic bodies scratch pretty easily, and they are a larger diameter than the shures so finding compatible mic clips can be a challenge if you loose the MiPro clips.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Jay Barracato said:
How many channels at once are we talking about. If it is just a few, for a true budget mic, I would think seriously about Line 6 XD V35. It MAPPS at $299, fits the budget, and can be sent out by itself with minimal possibility for operator error.
Click to expand...

Well I am looking to purchase 1-2 wireless mics in the next month.
 
Last edited:
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

I completely agree with Tim Weaver about his Mipro recommendation. Really great gear
for way less than the brand name stuff. (hint, they OEM for some of the major players )
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Mike Mullin said:
I completely agree with Tim Weaver about his Mipro recommendation. Really great gear
for way less than the brand name stuff. (hint, they OEM for some of the major players )
Click to expand...

No matter how good the MiPro stuff is, try to convince the average "Shure is the best" band member of it.

I bet you, given the option of something really nice by Lectrosonics or something basic like Shure SLX, the average client will pick the Shure.

So, I vote sucking it up and buying the Shure because it will make you the most money.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Doug Moran said:
Has anyone tried the Shure PGX Digital Wireless systems? Same quality as the PGX? Better? Worse? What does the extra $50 buy?

Thanks - Doug
Click to expand...

Our singer has a PGX D2/D4 combo with the Beta 58 head. One gig we did where there was too much cross interference and had to go to a wired 58. We then learned you need to set the channel to the least interfering before the gig, it resides in a bandwidth territory that seems to pick up digital cell phone interference if you are not careful setting the frequency. It only happened in that one place*, everywhere else I am happy with the performance; although would like to get him on a ULX system eventually. The digital seems to be better sound quality translation than the analog PG systems I've worked with, but I have very limited experience with wireless in general.

*When we went back to the same place for another gig, the problem was not there.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

SHURE is a well known brand name. When renting gear to the average masses, brand name matters more than the grade, as Silas pointed out. Yes, I use Shure and JBL gear for that very reason.

Now, as far as quality versus price, there are often times better solutions out there. The cheap SHURE mic systems are nothing but garbage. The PG and PGX mics are barely good enough for spoken word use. The SLX line would be acceptable for a crappy bar band, but generally I wouldn't recommend anything below the ULX line from SHURE. Of course, the UHF-R is the way to go if you want equal quality to your wired counterpart.

Anyway, what I'd recommend doing is setting up your rack with all matching wireless gear, instead of a mishmash of other stuff. The reasons to do this are plenty. First off, the channel assignments are designed to work together. Once you start mixing, it requires a lot more thought to make sure you aren't going to get interference. Secondly, it allows easy swapping of parts as needed.

If looking at a system for cheap rentals, in the SHURE line, the SLX line isn't horrid. But, what is the real difference in rental cost from a SLX to a ULX system? I'd rent out a ULX system for $45. The SLX system would rent out for $30. Not a huge difference, for quite a bit of difference in quality.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Nate Strickland said:
I've used A-T 3000 series. Their hand helds are not bad, but I HATE the connector on the bodypacks. After a while, they get just a little bit loose, and make audible pops as the connector loses contact.
Click to expand...

I have a pile of AT 3000 stuff, and have put dozens in installs. I've found the handhelds to be just "OK", they're fine for speech etc but I don't like them for loud stuff. I also have had some issues with the newer, Neutrik-style Hirose connectors, the ones that assemble like the Neutrik XLRs. A bit of DeOxit temporarily takes care of the pops, but I've never had the popping/crackling with the older style Hirose, the ones with the set screw and different boot. Some of my omni lavs are 8 or 9 years old and have never had any issues with popping or crackling, they all have the set screw style Hirose. I did send a bunch of PRO92cW earset mics that I use for community theater type stuff back to AT and had the better ends put on them, as they go out on rentals and I can't rely on the renter to spray them if they start popping. I do like the Hirose better than the TA3F/M, the TA3 stuff just falls apart and they're easier to connect improperly after the locking spring breaks, which happens as soon as someone attempts to connect them wrong.
 
Re: Budget friendly wireless...

Mike Mullin said:
I completely agree with Tim Weaver about his Mipro recommendation. Really great gear
for way less than the brand name stuff. (hint, they OEM for some of the major players )
Click to expand...

I have the Beyerdynamic units as well (for when rider issues are involved) and they do interchange. The receivers are identical (except the badges). The transmitters are different and have Beyer capsules. Great units as well but lots more money. The Beyerdymic SCM 930 M is the best analog wireless mic I have ever used on many vocalists but it is expensive. It is interesting that most all of us who have tried the better Mipro stuff have been impressed but the masses have not caught on yet. I tried it on the recommendation of a user and have never looked back. As it has been said you really have to go way up the line in the other brands to get something I would even consider acceptable.
 
Top Bottom