The reason for having the receivers In the sound booth is so you can monitor transmitter performance which appears on the front of the receivers. I know sound companies that use 10M RG 58 cables all the time for 700MHz systems with no issues. I'll give Sennheiser a call and see what they say
Scott
Sent from my iPhone
On 19/06/2014, at 3:21 AM, Colin McDonald <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think most of the audio stuff uses BNC style connecters?
> wireless mikes in a studio with 15 or 20 meters of feed line to an antenna
> doesn't seem logical to me.
> If it were me, I'd place the wireless receiver with it's antenna close to
> where the mikes will be used. Then run longer audio cable runs back to the
> processing equipment.
> Sounds to me like you want to place the receivers with the rest of the audio
> gear and put antennas close to where the mikes will be used instead. This
> isn't necesarily the best way. Because you'll be using line level audio out
> from the receiver, you can get away with fairly long runs of audio cable
> with little signal loss. If you are going to try and run hardline for the
> antennas, not only will the cable be large and bulky, but it'll be
> expensive.
> Not only that, at 700MHZ, you'll have loss on almost any feed line, as
> compared with a long audio cable run where you'll have very little loss.
>
> just my thoughts.
>
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Alan R. Downing" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:51 AM
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Replacing my coax cable
>
>> At 700 MHz, you really want hard line. I'd go with Andrew/ComScope
>> LDF4-50A
>> which is also known as half inch Heliax. Tessco sells it. Also, you
>> definitely don't want to use PL259's, AKA UHF connectors. You want at
>> least
>> N connectors. They are available for all sorts of cable, including
>> LDF4-50A.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Alan/KD7GC
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Alan R. Downing
>> Phoenix, AZ
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> On Behalf Of Scott Gillen
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:53 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Replacing my coax cable
>>
>> Any one know the frequency response of rg313? I'm looking at it for
>> wireles=
>> s microphone receiving antennas in the 700MHz band in a TV studio. Would
>> u=
>> se rg58 but the runs are between 15-20 meters and I am told it will be to
>> lo=
>> ssy. It's possible we could end up with units in the 2GHz band.=20
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 18/06/2014, at 3:15 AM, Steve Forst <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike,
>>> =20
>>> Nice theory on the numbering system, but not right. RG-213 is the=20
>>> same size as RG-8, which is kind of the "standard" size. Both of=20
>>> these, and a bunch of others in the RG-8 catagory, are just under a
>> half=20=
>>
>>> inch diameter. I think .405 inch. A regular PL-259 connector
>> threads=20=
>>
>>> onto the jacket without any adapter.
>>> =20
>>> For what it's worth, several years ago I redid the station with Davis
>> RF=20=
>>
>>> Bury-Flex, which is a low loss, direct buryable RG-8 size with a super=20
>>> tough jacket made of poly something or other.
>>> =20
>>> Davis also carries a wide variety of other cables, like Andrews.
>> They=20=
>>
>>> are in New England. Coax can be heavy, don't know if shortening the=20
>>> distance would save any on shipping compared to getting from
>> somewhere=20=
>>
>>> else in the States.
>>> =20
>>> davisrf.com
>>> =20
>>> 73, Steve KW3A
>>> =20
>>> On 6/17/2014 10:11 AM, Michael Ryan wrote:
>>>> Hi all:
>>>> =20
>>>> As I got to order some tubes from RF Parts, I'm looking at ordering some
>> r=
>> eplacement coax as well as the prices look pretty good.
>>>> The problem is, I'm not sure on what to order as the site has such a
>> vari=
>> ety from Andrew Heliax to LMR600 and everything in between.
>>>> I need a direct berry, low loss to replace my RG-213 and I'm wondering
>> if=
>> the LMR240 will do?
>>>> I'm thinking that the LMR240 is a little larger than the 213 and that's
>> w=
>> hat those numbers mean. 213 =3D .213 of an inch, 240 =3D .24 of and inch
>> and=
>> so on. Therefore the LMR400 or 600 would be a pretty thick cable and may
>> re=
>> quire me to drill a larger hole to thread it. LOL
>>>> My current PL-259s fit the exit hole of the shack.
>>>> =20
>>>> 73:
>>>> Mike VO1AX
>>>> =20
>>>> =20
>>>> =20
>>> =20
>
|