EBS_freak

Nice compact setup that. Good work that man!

The scanning technology is fine for most who want to run up to say four channels - but anything more than that you are going to need some considered radio planning. For example, I run 14 wireless devices and two wireless access points with my band - there's no way that the scan function would get those running intermodulation free - but appreciate that my setup is not typical. I'm guessing the Smooth Hound is very much in the consumer camp - or maybe the prosumer camp at a push but is unlikely to find itself on bigger stages with lots of wireless due to the inability to tune specific frequencies. This is also true of most of 2.4/5ghz stuff - so is not really a shortfall of the Smooth Hound - Line 6 is all fixed frequency also. Again, although used in some professional environments, you are more likely to see the likes of Lectrosonics, Sennheisers and Shures in play. I think sometimes you just have to accept when you are using the free for all wifi channels, there may be instances where you can't go wireless. It's how you are prepped for that situation that counts! The ability to control rf output is critical though. People think more is better when in reality you can get a lot more stable connections if you aren't boiling up a melting pot of RF. You only have to look at how much Shure ULXD and Axient you can get into such a small section of the rf spectrum - but they are reliant on working at 1mW as opposed to 10mW+.

I think I get the concept of what you are saying... I'm just not aware of any other product where this is a necessity?

It's clearly better than sticking some tape on a G30 battery door!

Can you detail your wireless gear? Is it all running on 2.4Ghz? Unless you are running the same brand, you are likely to be running into intermod issues very quickly (brands tend to have fixed channels that can be used together intermod free (for info, theres only 3 channels that are truly intermod free - but you sneak some extra stuff in there a la line 6). I'm not sure whether the Smooth Hound works on fixed channels and switches between them... or actually allows for discrete tuning depending whats already been detected as being in use. You can improve the situation if you can decrease the transmission power for starters - I know you can do it on the Line6 stuff but not sure if you can on the Smooth Hound stuff. What mics are you running? Ch 38, 70 or 2.4ghz/5ghz? For the desk, ensure you are running a router in 5Ghz only. I tend to stay away from the 2.4/5 Ghz stuff for particularly this reason - with venues with many wireless access points (e.g. conference rooms/hotels) can be a nightmare for these types of systems. Of course, the big nightmare is that on big gigs where the audience turn up with their phones with wifi turned on, things can soon become congested in the airwaves... particularly if they are trying to connect to the router on your desk in a desperate attempt to try and get some free internet access. Hide the SSID for starters - although any savvy tech heads will be able see the hidden SSIDs if they want to, it's will detract the opportunists though.

I doubt I have the receipt!

I have one SM58 which has always been awful - I kinda knew that it was a duff mic from the word go but didn't think it would actually be duff given that it was from a "reputable dealer" doing a show special. Box, case and cable ties all present... all looked to be spot on. Anyway, in the height of boredom I stripped down this mic to see why this mic has never been as good as my other 58s (not that I tend to use 58s now, I favour 935s and 945s, Audix and Heil). All of it checked out to the letter. After looking at all the fake sites etc on how to spot them, it came down to one thing that my mic is missing - the rubbish bin imprinted in the xlr connector at the end of the mic. So yeah, finally confirmed after ten+ years. Fake - and that would explain why it sounds even worse than a standard 58 and has a tendency to feedback at any opportunity! Guess I now know why the show special was 50% off! The fakes back then seem to be better than the fakes now!

In the interest of keeping the balance, the Smooth Hound even comes with tape to stick it to your guitar. All solutions have pros and cons.

And in the interest of keeping the balance, particularly if you are an IEM user, the 8ms latency from the Smooth Hound is awful. A consideration that you should take into account if you have anything digital in the chain - e.g. digital pedals, digital mixers... all of which will add their own latency. For a comparison, G30 as mentioned above, <4ms. Smooth Hound 8ms.

Analogue yes - due to the companders. Only the very best systems will give you the sense of a wired system. The lows and highs are generally impacted. Generally the more expensive you go, the better the compander. With digital, there is no perceivable loss at all - although there will be a slight (but in reality unnoticeable) delay as the signal goes through the analogue to digital (and back) conversion.

Sounding great.

Is this what everybody is buying? https://www.geekbuying.com/item/KZ-ZS10-HiFi-10-Drivers-Earphones-394070.html

And the UE reference monitors (which are sold as being as flat as you could realistically expect) Again, smooth until you get into the 2k and above region. This is where the crossovers are critical - and simply sticking drivers in a shell makes for an awful sounding earpiece. Funnily enough though - and as JH has often stated - flat is boring - but crucially it's what the earpiece is doing in the 1kJz+ range that makes or breaks the IEM.

I've uploaded the response of my Roxannes (bass in neutral position on the controller) - as you can see, the troublesome balanced armature 2k region is still present in these also. That's the nature of balanced armatures for you!

Ah sod it. I'll join in too. Off to geekbuy to have a closer look. 32 Ohm for starters... so they are harder to drive than your typical IEM. Interestingly enough, if that response graph is to be believed, these headphones will be proper mellow in the highs due to that steep roll off. Also, that peak between 2k and 5k is a little worrying - that is where the human ear is most sensitive (think baby's crying)... so they could sound quite harsh. The bass looks fairly encouraging - but that will be down to the imbalance between the dynamic and balanced armatures. In short, from that graph, far from flat. Could make for an interesting piece - just got to wait for it to arrive. "Shocking bass" would never be a marketing term I would use either!

They seem to be on uk ebay, shipped direct from china.

In terms of construction, not a great deal. It's the frequency response that matters. For hearing aids, they tend to be hyped around 2k and not very linear in terms of their response. They also tend to not go very low. Things have moved on though - there's dsp in hearing aids that can assist with compensating for an individual's frequency loss and also flattening out the frequency response of the balanced armature itself. For IEMs though, the devices are all passive, so like speaker manufacturer, the deficiencies have to be scienced out of the equation. It was Jerry H that realised that you could get the extended lows out of an IEM by using a pace maker balanced armature in conjunction with a traditional BA. By putting the drivers in phase (to some extent) by changing the bore and length of the connecting tubes and by dampening the air flow to reduce the peaks, you could get a pleasant sounding IEM, albeit far from flat. That is why for some time that his inears could do what everybody else's couldn't - getting the extended lows. Of course, by then specifying your own balanced armatures, you can have drivers that are designed for sub, low, mids and highs which work in conjunction with your own specific crossover design. Each of these BAs will each have their own peaks and that's where the tuning and crossover design comes in again. The more drivers you have, the higher the complexity and task of actually getting a nice sounding ear without the inherent peaks that you get from a balanced armature. Some manufacturers are better at this than others (remember that the final product is the sum of lots and lots of variables) and of course will result in a specific sound signature. That is why when people A/B brands, they'll tend to favour a particular brand because their sound signature is more to their liking. Additionally, by specifying the impedance, you have more control in controlling what the super highs are doing - which is why balanced armatures can reach super high frequencies - that give the feeling of "air" to the sound. Thats the high level version anyway :-p

How did this clown get in here? What is this nonsense?

Oh wow - looks like they could be Knowles drives in those KZs. OK, off the shelf armatures... but assuming that they have got some level of knowledge in tuning, damping and implementing the passive crossover, they could be a very good shout... especially for that kind of money. It would be silly not to take the risk at that price. Great find @Ceebass

I'm guessing they are off the shelf bulk purchase balanced armatures - probably from the Chinese wholesale manufacturers where a single balanced armature can be had for as little as 1 USD. Given that KZ themselves originate from China, it doesn't work out why their retail costs are so low. The main players in the IEM world tend to stick with Sonion and Knowles (I don't believe Sony make their balanced armatures available to others) as the manufacture and audio output from balanced armatures can vary widely. Given the prices of the balanced armatures from these manufacturers, (a quick look shows that they are more like 9x the prices of the Chinese equivalents), it doesn't take long to work out why their is the price difference. It's probably worth also mentioning that the balanced armatures that you buy direct from the manufacturers are primarily used for hearing aids and pace makers, not hifi audio reproduction. Additionally, the various balanced armatures used by the CIEM world, (eg the quad balanced armatures etc) are specifically made for each IEM company, the specs of which are kept between the manufacturer and IEM company... and certainly not available off the shelf to anybody. For BAs like that, you'll pay a premium... and there will be a minimum order. This is why a lot of the small fish IEM companies using off the shelf components don't tend to compete with the offerings from the larger players. The KZs are definitely worth a go though - in fact, I may be tempted myself! I quite like the idea of having a dynamic drive in the mix. In fact, I have GAS for the new Ultimate Ears Live piece... I want to hear it!!

Probably speakers in the audience facing back at the band so you can hear yourselves. Or something equally as daft.

The Shure 215 - the gateway drug of the IEM world!

As above - the 30ms or above latency will kill ya!

I've come across them before (well, not this model, their others) but never heard them. As you say, they tend to appear on forums. Almost worth a shot for that kinda money isn't it? :-p

And another one...