multiple issues... first of which shows the implied direction coming out (or in) the top of a dipole and back of a sharkfin. Second is the polarity is wrong on the dipole.
I bought the same RF Venue Diversity Fin earlier this year and it was worth every penny. You also forgot to mention that you can get some longer coax cables and mount the fin on a stand closer to the talent or around corners. There really aren't a lot of videos about antenna systems on UA-cam. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing a deeper dive into this from Curtis.
Currently using MCR54 with the passive Wisycom antennas and got incredible range at the beach. Never had to move my cart in the sand and got all the way to 20+ feet with the boom fully extended at edge of the water at 50mw. Only twice went to 100mw on talent in over a month filming at the same beach, and it was more of a precaution exceeding our usual distance than we had suffered dropouts.
this video is amazing man thanks so much for taking the time to explain everything so well!!! If I had multiple receivers would you recommend getting an antenna splitter? Kind regards
Superb vid Curtis many thx for sharing this. i can't believe how bad the RF performance is for a UHF product! That should be making it to that farm up on the hill at +17dbm (50mw)! I got to look into that rxr on what it's noise floor is.
Antenna orientation is paramount ...many an R/C plane has been lost because the Pilot pointed the antena right the plane. Especially when turning Downwind to base. The Farthest the plane gets from the transmitter and the least RF out the tip of the Transmitter antenna.
Hi Curtis,always a great pleasure listening to your reviews ,I got a good mic as advised by you …now I wish to request if you may do an in-depth review on the sennheiser E WD mic and which capsule fits better for a church set up
Thanks for posting this video and showing how this works out in the real world. I do have one question- before you elevated the Dfin the whip antennas were folded up and not extended horizontally. This basically would kill the performance of the Dfin. We never got to see what the Dfin looked like once it was elevated.
I use the Sound Devices SL2 slot system which has an in-built antenna distribution. You’ll need something to distribute the two leads like that. I’d contact one of the nearest production sound retailers to help identify options.
These types of comparisons are very challenging and you did a fantastic job - Thank you 🙏. Do you think that there are advantages diversity fin has over two passive shark fin antennas mounted in the vertical orientation, pointed at the transmission source in either of these scenarios. 1) A venue with rf reflective surfaces (walls, ceilings, etc.) and 2) with handheld wireless mics that tend to change position/orientation in use. 3) when using low-power narrow band "linear" transmitters that rely more on reflective surfaces?
@@curtisjudd ... every situation is unique. But I would expect you would see very large advantage using the DFin compared to whips or standard paddles when indoors. This is because the multipath reflections are constantly flipping polarization which doesn't really occur much outdoors. Diversity flies are immune from polarization cross fades that plague other antennas.
Love this Video. Thanks for sharing. Hoping you can share some knowledge. I am a mobile DJ looking to strengthen my set up for wedding ceremonies and corporate events. I just made a big upgrade by mounting 4 Shure ULDX mics in a rack with Antenna Distro. Since I dropped some serious $ on this set up I’m looking to maximize my Antenna set up in order to get the most out of the system. My set up is primarily for live PA as I don’t really do much on the recording or production side so I’m looking for everything to sound real clean with a live audience. How does the paddle you featured differ from Shures UA-847. Also is the paddle you featured compatible with all brands of mics on the UHF spectrum. Also I noticed your system only had 1 fin. Anything you willing to share is appreciated.
Hi Jeremy, The Shure you refer to is a log periodic dipole array (LPDA or fin or paddle), but it is only oriented vertically. The difference with the Diversity fin is that it has two outputs - an LPDA oriented vertically and a dipole oriented horizontally. I don't know that one would sound better than the other, but if you have a diversity wireless system, then the Diversity fin is sort of like two antennae in one and with them oriented on different axes to decrease the chances of dropout.
Thanks for the tips. I just bought one. Where did you buy that adapter to mount the antenna to a mic stand? And what is that part called? I couldn’t find one.
Hi Quant Bit, I recorded this with the Sennheiser MKH8050 microphone and Sound Devices 888 mixer/recorder. Links are in the description if you'd like the details.
Why did you have the dipole antennae angled up? They are supposed to be horizontal. I’ve seen the RF Venue antenna many times but never saw that configuration. Maybe I missed something.
Thank you for this great video Can it be installed directly on a wisycom mcr54 ? Does it need a different power source? Or is it fed from the same mcr54?
This is not magical, no. I found the range to be more reliable for slightly longer distances as we covered in the video, but not magically able to cut through any barrier.
Sorry for the newbie question: Can I use this antenna with two pairs of Lectrosonic transponders at the same time? (two lavs with individual senders broadcasting to two independent receivers but just one of these shark fins)
@@HannesFamira Antenna receives all frequencies, similar to TV antenna on the roof, that can get all channels in RF band it designed for. So, it does not matters how many receivers you connect to antenna. If antenna can receive for example 450-900 MHz, you can use many sets even with different bands. Only problem is frequency management, but it's solvable. P.S. Sorry for my english.
I'm not familiar with the conversion but unless you're using one of the half-rack 500 series receivers, the G4 system is not a true diversity system. But you could probably put the shark fin part of this to work on a converted G4. It just wouldn't get the full benefit of true diversity.
Thanks for the great video. What kind of antenna wires would you recommend? The ones in the video look very thin. I am using this RF Venue antenna with a Shure Axient quad receiver with the Shure antenna cables which are quite thick.
For example, I'm using UHD 5G SDI 50 ohm video cables, they work very well, more than 100m outdoor (but with handheld mics, not bodypacks). Every cable brand have datasheet, that describes frequencies, signal attenuation per meters, wave impedance (must be 50 ohm for most wireless microphone systems). You can find radio electronics engineer that can made custom cables for your purposes.
Now I'm curious what people do when they're mixing/recording wireless sound at large venues, football-field size or bigger. Is it just even bigger antennas? A (repeater) network of some sort?
A very interesting demonstration. I keep reading everywhere that the 2.4GHz wireless systems, such as the Rode Wireless GO I and IIs are rubbish and UHF systems are far superior. Perhaps the UHF system is less prone to interference, but when it comes to distance, they don't seem to be better. Your demonstration certainly appears to indicate that such. Or have I missed something?
2.4GHz wireless systems are tricky for different reasons. I didn't get anywhere near the distance with the DEITY Connect system as with the A10 with the whip antennae. So there's some nuance to that discussion.
@@curtisjudd I guess there's always subtleties involved, but I was expecting the UHF system to operate way further than the 2.4GHz systems and not experience dropouts as you did. Early this year I was able to test the Wireless GO II in a vehicle to vehicle situation (both moving) and was surprised that it worked when separated by around 100m+ according to the driver in the vehicle following mine. If we ever get out of lockdown, I'll be doing more rigorous tests to see what it can do.
@@AustralianImage The 2.4 GHz systems do have more unstable connections, but they usually compansate by having a massive delay buffer so any data that wasn't recived within the last 2 miliseconds could be received within the next 18 ms after that and it'll play back fine. Compared to something like the A10 system which only has a 2 ms delay, or the Sony system where this is variable and can go down to like 1.5 ms, meaning nearly no margin of error.
@@sanjacobs6261 I guess it's a matter of swings and roundabouts, knowing when, where and what type of a wireless system will work best or allow for a reasonable compromise. When someone relatively new to videography asks what type of wireless system they should get, I find it somewhat annoying that many will instantly bag 2.4GHz systems and only recommend much more expensive UHF systems. Often a balance is never considered.
@@AustralianImage If you want cheaper stuff, you still have a bunch of good options from Sennheiser, Sony and even Saramonic if you want, all of which operate with UHF. I don't see a reason to mess around in 2.4 GHz, when it's no more expensive to upgrade out of it.
I hope you don't mind but I want to ask you a sound question: I would like to record better sound of streams and rivers onto video I take with my Sony A7iii. I probably want or need some kind of stereo setup. Do you have any suggestions on all the products I would need to buy to add on a stereo capability to my Sony A7iii when I am recording streams and rivers and other nature scenes ? I just need a little help on where to start because there seems to be a shortage of material meant to help newbies with this topic. Thank you.
@@curtisjudd Well, I spent part of the day researching the RODE Stereo VideoMic X which you suggested. I like that option a lot but would also be grateful for a recommendation on the next step up in sound quality that I can add to videos I take with my Sony A7iii ( I focus on streams, rivers and nature sounds ). Thank you.
@@newlifeeveryday1821 I would imagine the next step up would be something like a Sound Devices MixPre-6 or a Zoom F6 and an ambisonics microphone like the Sennheiser Ambeo. I haven't done a video on those yet, but hope to in the next several months.
@@curtisjudd Thank you for responding again. Can you suggest a book or document or UA-cam video for a newbie to learn about adding high quality sound to video from a camera and even how to learn about setting up a Zoom F6 device and required other equipment to record nature sounds without a camera ? I just need to find the right book or document or video to start the learning process. Thank you for your help.
Ultra High Frequency and Very High Frequency. They are just different parts of the electro-magnetic frequency range on which wireless communication takes place.
@@curtisjudd thank you , and by watching this video , I came into conclusion that if the wireless antenna is kept at a height it gives more transmitting distance, is that right?
Can you spot the technical inaccuracy on the thumbnail for this video?
It looks as if fin antenna is transmitting while it should be receiving?
multiple issues... first of which shows the implied direction coming out (or in) the top of a dipole and back of a sharkfin. Second is the polarity is wrong on the dipole.
@@chakerian Yes and yes.
@@maciejsamborski8344 Yes.
I bought the same RF Venue Diversity Fin earlier this year and it was worth every penny. You also forgot to mention that you can get some longer coax cables and mount the fin on a stand closer to the talent or around corners. There really aren't a lot of videos about antenna systems on UA-cam. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing a deeper dive into this from Curtis.
Thanks for pointing out the ability to run cables. There are some trade-offs with that, but good idea to cover that in more detail.
Our church must use these. Ours works well. Good to see you Curtis.
Thanks for coming by, Vincent.
Currently using MCR54 with the passive Wisycom antennas and got incredible range at the beach. Never had to move my cart in the sand and got all the way to 20+ feet with the boom fully extended at edge of the water at 50mw. Only twice went to 100mw on talent in over a month filming at the same beach, and it was more of a precaution exceeding our usual distance than we had suffered dropouts.
Nice! Thanks for sharing, Freddie!
Thanks Curtis! I shadowed a sound mixer who used a shark fin and had hardly no dropouts whatsoever
👍
this video is amazing man thanks so much for taking the time to explain everything so well!!!
If I had multiple receivers would you recommend getting an antenna splitter?
Kind regards
Typically an antenna distribution system is the solution.
Inverse square law in action. The normal dipole antenna is like a bare light bulb. The fin is like a spotlight.
Indeed!
Thank you so much sir for your packaged information.
👍
Good job. If you place the whips at the same height of Fin antenna the result will shock you. Thank you.
Thanks.
Superb vid Curtis many thx for sharing this. i can't believe how bad the RF performance is for a UHF product! That should be making it to that farm up on the hill at +17dbm (50mw)!
I got to look into that rxr on what it's noise floor is.
The digital UHF systems don’t generally transmit as far, but also sound really good. At least that’s the case for the A10 in my experience.
Antenna orientation is paramount ...many an R/C plane has been lost because the Pilot pointed the antena right the plane. Especially when turning Downwind to base. The Farthest the plane gets from the transmitter and the least RF out the tip of the Transmitter antenna.
Good point, thanks for bringing that up!
Hi Curtis,always a great pleasure listening to your reviews ,I got a good mic as advised by you …now I wish to request if you may do an in-depth review on the sennheiser E WD mic and which capsule fits better for a church set up
Thanks Max. I haven't used the E-WD system so I don't have any advice at the moment, but I'll surely post a video if I get a chance to use it.
Very interesting and, as usual with you, quite useful. Thanks!
Thanks RustyTube.
can you use this with like the dji mics and the rode wireless packs? and can you use it with UHF?
No, only with UHF systems.
Thanks for posting this video and showing how this works out in the real world. I do have one question- before you elevated the Dfin the whip antennas were folded up and not extended horizontally. This basically would kill the performance of the Dfin. We never got to see what the Dfin looked like once it was elevated.
The whips antennae were extended during the actual test, forming a horizontally oriented dipole.
Orintian is prominent with any antena, it all has to do with the way RF propagation. Even more so with freqs like 2.4ghz
Indeed.
Thank you for the Great video! Can you please explain how to connect it to multiple receivers. I am using two Shure adx5x receivers. Thank you
I use the Sound Devices SL2 slot system which has an in-built antenna distribution. You’ll need something to distribute the two leads like that. I’d contact one of the nearest production sound retailers to help identify options.
🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩 Thank you very very much that's my big problem
👍
These types of comparisons are very challenging and you did a fantastic job - Thank you 🙏. Do you think that there are advantages diversity fin has over two passive shark fin antennas mounted in the vertical orientation, pointed at the transmission source in either of these scenarios. 1) A venue with rf reflective surfaces (walls, ceilings, etc.) and 2) with handheld wireless mics that tend to change position/orientation in use. 3) when using low-power narrow band "linear" transmitters that rely more on reflective surfaces?
Great questions. I don't know the answers, but I appreciate the questions! All worthy of further testing!
@@curtisjudd ... every situation is unique. But I would expect you would see very large advantage using the DFin compared to whips or standard paddles when indoors. This is because the multipath reflections are constantly flipping polarization which doesn't really occur much outdoors. Diversity flies are immune from polarization cross fades that plague other antennas.
@@imakenoise Thanks, Don!
Love this Video. Thanks for sharing. Hoping you can share some knowledge. I am a mobile DJ looking to strengthen my set up for wedding ceremonies and corporate events.
I just made a big upgrade by mounting 4 Shure ULDX mics in a rack with Antenna Distro. Since I dropped some serious $ on this set up I’m looking to maximize my Antenna set up in order to get the most out of the system. My set up is primarily for live PA as I don’t really do much on the recording or production side so I’m looking for everything to sound real clean with a live audience.
How does the paddle you featured differ from Shures UA-847.
Also is the paddle you featured compatible with all brands of mics on the UHF spectrum. Also I noticed your system only had 1 fin. Anything you willing to share is appreciated.
Hi Jeremy, The Shure you refer to is a log periodic dipole array (LPDA or fin or paddle), but it is only oriented vertically. The difference with the Diversity fin is that it has two outputs - an LPDA oriented vertically and a dipole oriented horizontally. I don't know that one would sound better than the other, but if you have a diversity wireless system, then the Diversity fin is sort of like two antennae in one and with them oriented on different axes to decrease the chances of dropout.
Thanks for the tips. I just bought one. Where did you buy that adapter to mount the antenna to a mic stand? And what is that part called? I couldn’t find one.
It is a mast for antennae and I bought it from Trew Audio or Gotham Sound (been a while but it was one of the two).
Thanks for the knowledge and the content. May I please know the sound gears used in studio at the beginig. All the setup for sound.
Hi Quant Bit, I recorded this with the Sennheiser MKH8050 microphone and Sound Devices 888 mixer/recorder. Links are in the description if you'd like the details.
@@curtisjudd thank you Sir.
Why did you have the dipole antennae angled up? They are supposed to be horizontal. I’ve seen the RF Venue antenna many times but never saw that configuration. Maybe I missed something.
They just fold up for storage or transport. When in use, they should be horizontal to the ground.
Thank you for this great video
Can it be installed directly on a wisycom mcr54 ?
Does it need a different power source?
Or is it fed from the same mcr54?
It is passive, no need for power.
does it cut through bodies with salt water, trees, bushes, cars, etc.
This is not magical, no. I found the range to be more reliable for slightly longer distances as we covered in the video, but not magically able to cut through any barrier.
Sorry for the newbie question: Can I use this antenna with two pairs of Lectrosonic transponders at the same time? (two lavs with individual senders broadcasting to two independent receivers but just one of these shark fins)
With an antenna distribution system, yes, they can both share the diversity fin.
Thanks for the super quick response, @Curtis Judd. An antenna distribution system, that is an extra box between the antenna and the Lectro receivers?
@@HannesFamira Yes.
@@curtisjudd Thanks so much again!!!
@@HannesFamira Antenna receives all frequencies, similar to TV antenna on the roof, that can get all channels in RF band it designed for. So, it does not matters how many receivers you connect to antenna. If antenna can receive for example 450-900 MHz, you can use many sets even with different bands. Only problem is frequency management, but it's solvable.
P.S. Sorry for my english.
Great video, this is hi end gear, I understand there is a conversion for the sennheiser G4 system would this work with that conversion?
I'm not familiar with the conversion but unless you're using one of the half-rack 500 series receivers, the G4 system is not a true diversity system. But you could probably put the shark fin part of this to work on a converted G4. It just wouldn't get the full benefit of true diversity.
Hello sir , why the receivers connected to the recorder are taken as line input?
Hi, this is because the wireless microphone system already amplified the microphone signal. So there is no need to amplify it again at the mixer.
Thanks for the great video. What kind of antenna wires would you recommend? The ones in the video look very thin. I am using this RF Venue antenna with a Shure Axient quad receiver with the Shure antenna cables which are quite thick.
These are custom made cables from Gotham Sound.
For example, I'm using UHD 5G SDI 50 ohm video cables, they work very well, more than 100m outdoor (but with handheld mics, not bodypacks). Every cable brand have datasheet, that describes frequencies, signal attenuation per meters, wave impedance (must be 50 ohm for most wireless microphone systems). You can find radio electronics engineer that can made custom cables for your purposes.
Now I'm curious what people do when they're mixing/recording wireless sound at large venues, football-field size or bigger. Is it just even bigger antennas? A (repeater) network of some sort?
several antennas, and spaced out :)
Yes, several spaced out.
Does tweaking the audio gain of the transmitter effects the RF range?
The transmitter output power? Yes. Microphone gain? No.
riveting stuff! 🤟
👍
Hey Curtis. Would this antenna work with my Sony UWP-D11 system and Zoom f8 setup?
If the receiver has diversity SMA inputs for the antennae, then yes, should work. 👍
@@curtisjudd Not too sure what those are. Do you happen to know if they're on the Sony lavs or is that something separate I have to purchase?
@@eddierocha4682 oh, those are the ports that the antennae on the receiver attach to.
A very interesting demonstration. I keep reading everywhere that the 2.4GHz wireless systems, such as the Rode Wireless GO I and IIs are rubbish and UHF systems are far superior. Perhaps the UHF system is less prone to interference, but when it comes to distance, they don't seem to be better. Your demonstration certainly appears to indicate that such. Or have I missed something?
2.4GHz wireless systems are tricky for different reasons. I didn't get anywhere near the distance with the DEITY Connect system as with the A10 with the whip antennae. So there's some nuance to that discussion.
@@curtisjudd I guess there's always subtleties involved, but I was expecting the UHF system to operate way further than the 2.4GHz systems and not experience dropouts as you did. Early this year I was able to test the Wireless GO II in a vehicle to vehicle situation (both moving) and was surprised that it worked when separated by around 100m+ according to the driver in the vehicle following mine. If we ever get out of lockdown, I'll be doing more rigorous tests to see what it can do.
@@AustralianImage The 2.4 GHz systems do have more unstable connections, but they usually compansate by having a massive delay buffer so any data that wasn't recived within the last 2 miliseconds could be received within the next 18 ms after that and it'll play back fine. Compared to something like the A10 system which only has a 2 ms delay, or the Sony system where this is variable and can go down to like 1.5 ms, meaning nearly no margin of error.
@@sanjacobs6261 I guess it's a matter of swings and roundabouts, knowing when, where and what type of a wireless system will work best or allow for a reasonable compromise. When someone relatively new to videography asks what type of wireless system they should get, I find it somewhat annoying that many will instantly bag 2.4GHz systems and only recommend much more expensive UHF systems. Often a balance is never considered.
@@AustralianImage If you want cheaper stuff, you still have a bunch of good options from Sennheiser, Sony and even Saramonic if you want, all of which operate with UHF. I don't see a reason to mess around in 2.4 GHz, when it's no more expensive to upgrade out of it.
Time to add a new caption. Price is $599. 😮💨
Ok.
I hope you don't mind but I want to ask you a sound question: I would like to record better sound of streams and rivers onto video I take with my Sony A7iii. I probably want or need some kind of stereo setup. Do you have any suggestions on all the products I would need to buy to add on a stereo capability to my Sony A7iii when I am recording streams and rivers and other nature scenes ? I just need a little help on where to start because there seems to be a shortage of material meant to help newbies with this topic. Thank you.
The Sony cameras have stereo microphone inputs. So perhaps you might start with something like the RODE Stereo VideoMic X?
@@curtisjudd Thank you for the suggestion. I just watched a video of someone using them and it is a vast improvement to my video.
@@curtisjudd Well, I spent part of the day researching the RODE Stereo VideoMic X which you suggested. I like that option a lot but would also be grateful for a recommendation on the next step up in sound quality that I can add to videos I take with my Sony A7iii ( I focus on streams, rivers and nature sounds ). Thank you.
@@newlifeeveryday1821 I would imagine the next step up would be something like a Sound Devices MixPre-6 or a Zoom F6 and an ambisonics microphone like the Sennheiser Ambeo. I haven't done a video on those yet, but hope to in the next several months.
@@curtisjudd Thank you for responding again. Can you suggest a book or document or UA-cam video for a newbie to learn about adding high quality sound to video from a camera and even how to learn about setting up a Zoom F6 device and required other equipment to record nature sounds without a camera ? I just need to find the right book or document or video to start the learning process. Thank you for your help.
This going to sound stupid, but could you us this with the rode wireless go 2s? Would this work?
No, wrong frequencies and no way to connect it to the receiver.
@@curtisjudd thank you mate for your reply
What is uhf and vhf?
Ultra High Frequency and Very High Frequency. They are just different parts of the electro-magnetic frequency range on which wireless communication takes place.
@@curtisjudd thank you , and by watching this video , I came into conclusion that if the wireless antenna is kept at a height it gives more transmitting distance, is that right?
@@fanofnaturefilms486 Probably yes, but worth testing as well.
can you use that antenna in different brand for example in ears shue?
Yes, any diversity system where the receiver has two antenna inputs.
Better off to buy a remote mic system that has a built in aux recorder too.
That seems to be the trend except in the US where one company holds the patent on that.
Good solution. But many years all concerts, live TV shows using same rf systems without problems.
@@ELFMEDIA In most cases with more than just whip antennae on the receivers.
Not good with that powered antenna. Not much difference with whips. Good test, thanks.
This is not a powered antenna. But it is more directional and provides two options for diversity receivers. It is better than the whip antennae.
Out into the ether 🤔
Yep.
like
👍
JUST FIGHT TONY ALREADY.
No fighting. I have no issues with Tony to fight about. 🙃
@@curtisjudd I was only joking :)