lowregisterhead Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 I know this product probably doesn't exist, but does anyone manufacture a wireless setup that sends two separate signals - guitar/bass to the amp, and in-ear from the receiver back to the same belt pack, all in one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colgraff Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Not that I have ever seen. I'd like one, but if it does exist it is probably prohibitively expensive. Most live acts I've seen with IEMs and wireless seem to have two packs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunburstjazz1967 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 I have an invention in my head, band in a box, digital mixer like the behringer x air, inbuilt wireless inputs and wireless iem, basically you buy the mixer, a pair of high end powered pa tops and as many instrument packs and iem packs as required. Job done perfect mix at every venue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colgraff Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 [quote name='sunburstjazz1967' timestamp='1458402445' post='3007352'] I have an invention in my head, band in a box, digital mixer like the behringer x air, inbuilt wireless inputs and wireless iem, basically you buy the mixer, a pair of high end powered pa tops and as many instrument packs and iem packs as required. Job done perfect mix at every venue! [/quote] Can we visit your Caribbean island when you have made your fortune? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunburstjazz1967 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Oh yes no problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBS_freak Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Theres a number of reasons I can see why - IEMs haven't hit the mainstream on the digital front, mainly due to latency. Latency is not as important on an instrument -but very important when being piped directly into your ear. Typically, the trend for consumer products would be UHF for your IEMs and digital (typically 2.4 Ghz or 5 Ghz) for your instrument. - different bits of the spectrum are not universally available around the globe... and for example, if you were to make the all in one pack a consumer product that fits in channel 70 for example, that would only give you a maximum (if that) of 4 broadcast channels. So really, you can only legally kit out 2 members of your band. Granted you could get into other channels within the radio spectrum... but if you are using licensed spectrum, then a lot of users would want the extended features found in the existing IEM and mic systems. - IEM transmitters and receivers don't like to be housed next to each other. Transmitters and receivers should be worn on opposite side of the body. Typically IEM systems and mic systems are located on opposite sides of the stage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowregisterhead Posted March 20, 2016 Author Share Posted March 20, 2016 [quote name='EBS_freak' timestamp='1458431175' post='3007636'] Theres a number of reasons I can see why - IEMs haven't hit the mainstream on the digital front, mainly due to latency. Latency is not as important on an instrument -but very important when being piped directly into your ear. Typically, the trend for consumer products would be UHF for your IEMs and digital (typically 2.4 Ghz or 5 Ghz) for your instrument. - different bits of the spectrum are not universally available around the globe... and for example, if you were to make the all in one pack a consumer product that fits in channel 70 for example, that would only give you a maximum (if that) of 4 broadcast channels. So really, you can only legally kit out 2 members of your band. Granted you could get into other channels within the radio spectrum... but if you are using licensed spectrum, then a lot of users would want the extended features found in the existing IEM and mic systems. - IEM transmitters and receivers don't like to be housed next to each other. Transmitters and receivers should be worn on opposite side of the body. Typically IEM systems and mic systems are located on opposite sides of the stage. [/quote] Thanks for a very comprehensive explanation! I've already got one of OBBM's double-feed cables, which works very well, but I can dream, can't I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBS_freak Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 [quote name='lowregisterhead' timestamp='1458468139' post='3007741'] Thanks for a very comprehensive explanation! I've already got one of OBBM's double-feed cables, which works very well, but I can dream, can't I? [/quote] To be honest, if you are wired, taking an IEM feed up alongside your bass lead, is always going to give you a better performance than a radio pack, assuming that is, that you don't need to run around. Like anything, your IEM feed is only as good as what you put in to transmit to your ears... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowregisterhead Posted March 21, 2016 Author Share Posted March 21, 2016 [quote name='EBS_freak' timestamp='1458573223' post='3008696'] To be honest, if you are wired, taking an IEM feed up alongside your bass lead, is always going to give you a better performance than a radio pack, assuming that is, that you don't need to run around. Like anything, your IEM feed is only as good as what you put in to transmit to your ears... [/quote] Run around? At my age?? I just like the idea of it I think - in practice I wouldn't stray 10 feet from my rig! And the cable's 20 feet, so no biggie, then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.9ad672bb8b84505709f76b39c8c256ec.gif)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.