The IEM (in ear monitors) Bible thread

[EBS_freak]

Thats the quality of the gate and compander in play. If it's any consolation, the chances of you hearing this when playing in a band context is low. Its worse because you are listening close. I know theres a fair few BCers who are happy with the LD in a live context. (Granted they may not of heard any alternatives)

 

If you want to improve this from an analogue system, you'll need to dig deep into your pockets - even the Sennheiser has a bit of residual hiss, the Shure is the best - but you pay through the nose for it.

 

Otherwise, I reckon the 5.8 Ghz digital system is the way - that should get rid of the compander... and should be clear as a whistle. Granted, again more money than the LD setup. The 2.4 Xvive is probably your next best bet - but that will be mono.

 

I know you don't want to hear it - but I don't tend to recommend much from the analogue world - Shure EW300 G2+ and Shure 900+ (or 300 with the pro pack) being my go to. 

 

[fleabag]

Thanks EB, i can live with it i reckon. 

 

 

[fleabag]

Just a thought ..  say the transmitter works on 5.8 Ghz ( Mipro 58 ) ,  does the belt pack receiver also have to work on the same freq ?

 

 

 

 

Edited February 28, 2023 by fleabag

[EBS_freak]

56 minutes ago, fleabag said:

Just a thought ..  say the transmitter works on 5.8 Ghz ( Mipro 58 ) ,  does the belt pack receiver also have to work on the same freq ?

 

 

 

 

Yeah - it's a pairing.

 

As such, I *dont* think that you can have multiple receivers receiving the same mix from one transmitter (but dont quote me on this). Also means you cant do the two seperate mixes by using Focus mode either. 

[EBS_freak]

1 hour ago, fleabag said:

Thanks EB, i can live with it i reckon. 

 

 

I'd wager you'll be OK. When you are gigging - and certainly when everybody is playing, you probably wont notice it. And you'd still probably take it as it will still be more clear and have all the IEM advantages over using a traditional monitor.

[Woodinblack]

Just now, EBS_freak said:

Yeah - it's a pairing.

 

As such, I *dont* think that you can have multiple receivers receiving the same mix from one transmitter (but dont quote me on this). Also means you cant do the two seperate mixes by using Focus mode either. 

 

Its radio - unless its encrypted you can have as many recievers as you like recieving the same mix from the same transmitter, as long as they are on the same frequency (ie, channel)

[EBS_freak]

Yes - it's radio. But payload is used to transmit digital packets, so when you connect, it could be a case that it negotiates a one to one connection. Certainly you can't do multiple connections with ULXD (granted thats not IEM though (wireless mic system)).

That also offers a encrypted/non encrypted connection... however, I believe the peering is negotiated to lock in a pairing.

 

[Woodinblack]

Indeed - so if you need to synchronize with something it gets more expensive as you need a transmitter and receiver on both ends. The cheaper something is, the less likely it is.

[EBS_freak]

Eh?

I think I understand what you are saying.

One to one, not one to many.

[fleabag]

I'm very green regarding IEM's , but most of my reading has revealed that we can have  more than just 1 receiver body pack per transmitter  ?

[EBS_freak]

9 minutes ago, fleabag said:

I'm very green regarding IEM's , but most of my reading has revealed that we can have  more than just 1 receiver body pack per transmitter  ?

In the analogue world, yes.

[Woodinblack]

2 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

Eh?

I think I understand what you are saying.

One to one, not one to many.

 

Not sure what the Eh? was about - Digital or analogue, the signal goes out, and everything on the same frequency that can handle its protocol receives it.

However, if you want to encrypt to one device, you either have to have set it with some unique code in manufacture or setup, or have a pairing time, where you can press a button on something to set the code (but then you can press the button on multiple things at the same time to get round that), or the receiver also needs to be able to communicate back to provide a code to the transmitter (so both need to be transceivers, so more expensive).

 

I am sure my XVives talk to multiple receivers (I can check, I have 1 tx and 2 rx)

 

 

[mcnach]

10 hours ago, fleabag said:

I'm very green regarding IEM's , but most of my reading has revealed that we can have  more than just 1 receiver body pack per transmitter  ?

 

I'm pretty sure the Xvive U4 accepts at least up to 4 receivers per transmitter. Might work?

 

https://xvive.com/audio/product/u4-in-ear-monitor-wireless-system/

[Al Krow]

On the subject of Xvives - used mine for the first time at a gig a week back. Generally good: excellent at individual sound check, but with the full band I felt that the bass was clipping / distorting through the IEMs.

Bandmate suggested it was because both me and the singer had a wireless set-up (her's were not Xvive U4 but the more upmarket / bulkier LD MEI G2) and that, in general, wireless was less good at dealing with the top end treble / lowest end bass frequencies but that the treble would win over the bass. 

 

Does what he said make sense and is it something I'm just going to need to suck up?

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

Does what he said make sense and is it something I'm just going to need to suck up?

 

Not really, no. Yes, you can get interference although it tends to knock the channel out rather than distort the sound.

If your bass is clipping it is too loud for something, Either for your headphones (don't know what you are using) or  too loud as an input somewhere - maybe turn your iem output on the mixer down and the xvive volume up?. Wireless is fine at dealing with the whole signal, I don't get any clipping anywhere.

 

Also if it was fine at the soundcheck and not with the band, I assume there was a volume difference?

 

[fleabag]

3 hours ago, mcnach said:

 

I'm pretty sure the Xvive U4 accepts at least up to 4 receivers per transmitter. Might work?

 

https://xvive.com/audio/product/u4-in-ear-monitor-wireless-system/

 

 

It would be a huge expense,  now i have the MEI 100 G2 and if necessary,  could get more receivers for the G2

[jimmyb625]

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

 

Not really, no. Yes, you can get interference although it tends to knock the channel out rather than distort the sound.

If your bass is clipping it is too loud for something, Either for your headphones (don't know what you are using) or  too loud as an input somewhere - maybe turn your iem output on the mixer down and the xvive volume up?. Wireless is fine at dealing with the whole signal, I don't get any clipping anywhere.

 

Also if it was fine at the soundcheck and not with the band, I assume there was a volume difference?

 

Agreed. I'd start by looking at the input signal going to the transmitter. 

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

 

Not really, no. Yes, you can get interference although it tends to knock the channel out rather than distort the sound.

If your bass is clipping it is too loud for something, Either for your headphones (don't know what you are using) or  too loud as an input somewhere - maybe turn your iem output on the mixer down and the xvive volume up?. Wireless is fine at dealing with the whole signal, I don't get any clipping anywhere.

 

Also if it was fine at the soundcheck and not with the band, I assume there was a volume difference?

 

 

1 minute ago, jimmyb625 said:

Agreed. I'd start by looking at the input signal going to the transmitter. 

 

Thanks chaps. I'm using a pair of KZ ZS10Pro which should be perfectly fine, so more likely to be something in the signal chain - so I guess easiest solution is to cut the pre EQ gain and boost the fader volume to compensate.

[Woodinblack]

5 hours ago, Al Krow said:

 

 

Thanks chaps. I'm using a pair of KZ ZS10Pro which should be perfectly fine, so more likely to be something in the signal chain - so I guess easiest solution is to cut the pre EQ gain and boost the fader volume to compensate.

 

I dont' know what desk you have now, you have been through a few - on my X18 I just turn the aux output for my IEMs down, so the same thing as that.

[EBS_freak]

Suspect that you are clipping on summing. Roll back your aux sends on each channel by the same amount.

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

 

I dont' know what desk you have now, you have been through a few - on my X18 I just turn the aux output for my IEMs down, so the same thing as that.

 

Haha I've been through 2 and now on my 3rd. Not too outrageous over 10 years? 😁

 

39 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

Suspect that you are clipping on summing. Roll back your aux sends on each channel by the same amount.

 

Take the point about reducing the aux send output - that's helpful. I can boost it at the receiver end to compensate.

[mrtcat]

I haven't ever experienced hissing or clipping of any sort in over 5 years of iem use. I was therefore going to suggest people use the Shure PSM300 setup I do until I saw how much the prices have gone up. I paid about £400 including the uprated receiver but they're touching on double that now. That seems utterly insane.

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, mrtcat said:

I haven't ever experienced hissing or clipping of any sort in over 5 years of iem use. I was therefore going to suggest people use the Shure PSM300 setup I do until I saw how much the prices have gone up. I paid about £400 including the uprated receiver but they're touching on double that now. That seems utterly insane.

 

Well I hope that's not further fuelling your feeling of being very middle class and having to look down on us plebs with our cheap gear? 😁

 

But more seriously if you're in a successful covers band making £'000s annually from gigging, then it makes complete sense to be getting the best quality kit that you and the band can afford, whether it be KS12.2s or quality wireless to enable you to deliver a great sound for your audiences. Although Russ has previously commented that we're often paying quite a premium for Shure kit over sometimes equally good / better alternatives e.g. Shure SE425s vs KZ ZS10 Pros. I don't know if that point would extend to something like the PSM300 wireless currently retailing for £730+?

 

I guess the other point is it's nice to have the option of something more budget, like the Xvive U4 which together with a KZ ZS10 Pro have together come in at around £200 / head all in, for those of us wanting to dip our toes into IEMs and wireless for the first time and see if "conceptually" it's a runner. Very much looking like it is for my covers band, I'm really happy to say.

[Woodinblack]

 

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

I guess the other point is it's nice to have the option of something more budget, like the Xvive U4 which together with a KZ ZS10 Pro have together come in at around £200 / head all in, for those of us wanting to dip our toes into IEMs and wireless for the first time and see if "conceptually" it's a runner. Very much looking like it is for my covers band, I'm really happy to say.

 

Honestly I would like something better, but for me, the XVives, while being mono and maybe not the best, don't cost that much (I think they are on the high side of what they are worth), but the fact it is a bit of equipment that I don't have to put somewhere, find a plug for, set up etc is worth it for me. I already have the PA, the cables etc. OK, not quite so bad now as we have a new guitarist and unlike the old one, he helps setup / breakdown (I would have mentioned that I wouldn't carry the evox 8 and the alto back to my car in one go had I seen him start - still, he will know next time!)

 

If someone else was doing it for me I woud be happy with something else, but when I look at equipment purchases now, after years of gigging, my views are "How does this make my setup easier?". If its no easier but better, thats fine, but if it actually is more complicated, then it better be a hell of a lot bettter than what I have to be used.

[Al Krow]

@Woodinblack - totally agree with where you're coming from. The compactness and plug and play ability of the Xvive U4s along with their price point were all key factors in us deciding on using them.