Great idea or a silly thing?. Affordable stereo wireless audio

[Jose EB5AGV]

On my quest to learn to play the guitar, I have been buying some accessories to make the playing experience more enjoyable. One thing I don't like are wires hanging from the guitar, so I got a wireless transmitter/receiver system, a Lekato WS70 (that model is multi channel and works on the UHF band). As I liked it a lot, I bought an identical second unit, so I could have two guitars connected same time and do A/B tests and fast switching among them. It works nicely so I can switch from Strat to Les Paul easily, without any wire around nor plug-unplug things.

 

And then I had an idea: could I use both units to send an stereo signal from a keyboard or any other stereo source? 🤔

 

And, yes, it works! 😅

 

So, for about 50-60€ (those systems are often on sale), you can have an stereo sound transmitter for your keyboard / synth / audio mix stereo signal, whatever you use.

 

Sorry if this has been commented before, I don't recall seeing it, but may have missed it.

 

Jose

[Stokely]

Yeah, our guitarist is wireless, and both he and the singer have wireless microphones.

They occasionally have issues, not sure exactly what.

I've thought about it, but I have:   keyboard outs, mic out, and monitor in(s) (this last either an ethernet cable or xlr depending on whether I'm using Ultranet with a Behringer mixer).  If I'm going to one run cable, it's just as easy to run them all as they are all in a custom snake made of flex sleeve.   If I continue to use Ultranet, I don't think there's any wireless option; I may sell my P16 monitor mixer and go with stereo XLRs now that we have enough sends for everyone to go stereo.  So if I did that, I'd need five wireless transmitter/receivers.

I'm honestly not sure it'd be worth it, and I'm not sure the setup would save me much time.    Using my snake is rock solid and unless a cable fails there's nothing to worry about.    Especially now that the bandleader just got a drop snake for my side of the stage, I won't need the longer cables I have been using.

[stoken6]

12 hours ago, Stokely said:

Yeah, our guitarist is wireless, and both he and the singer have wireless microphones.

They occasionally have issues, not sure exactly what.

I've thought about it, but I have:   keyboard outs, mic out, and monitor in(s) (this last either an ethernet cable or xlr depending on whether I'm using Ultranet with a Behringer mixer).  If I'm going to one run cable, it's just as easy to run them all as they are all in a custom snake made of flex sleeve.   If I continue to use Ultranet, I don't think there's any wireless option; I may sell my P16 monitor mixer and go with stereo XLRs now that we have enough sends for everyone to go stereo.  So if I did that, I'd need five wireless transmitter/receivers.

I'm honestly not sure it'd be worth it, and I'm not sure the setup would save me much time. 

I'm with @Stokely on this. Sleeve together your cables into a snake, label the connectors and sockets, and the entire snake is virtually as easy to connect as a single cable. Plus I'd be panicking about batteries going flat if I went wireless. 

 

Cheers, Mike.

[Jose EB5AGV]

1 minute ago, stoken6 said:

I'm with @Stokely on this. Sleeve together your cables into a snake, label the connectors and sockets, and the entire snake is virtually as easy to connect as a single cable. Plus I'd be panicking about batteries going flat if I went wireless. 

 

Cheers, Mike.

 

Well, I should say my idea was not to be used always that way. When there is a cabled option, it is of course better.

 

But whenever you need to go wireless, this is a cheap and seemingly effective way to send an stereo signal, in case you need it (it may be applied to any audio device)

[J.F.N.]

One of my good friends is an AV Sales Technician working with large installations, universities, conference centers, etc. and whenever we talk about gear and studio stuff (he's a composer/producer at home) his mantra is always "Is there a problem that needs to be solved? If not, save your time and money...".

 

🤪

[Jose EB5AGV]

33 minutes ago, J.F.N. said:

One of my good friends is an AV Sales Technician working with large installations, universities, conference centers, etc. and whenever we talk about gear and studio stuff (he's a composer/producer at home) his mantra is always "Is there a problem that needs to be solved? If not, save your time and money...".

 

🤪

 

Well, I am all for recycling items or use things for multiple purposes. That is my aim here 😉

[stoken6]

1 hour ago, Jose EB5AGV said:

Well, I should say my idea was not to be used always that way. When there is a cabled option, it is of course better.

 

But whenever you need to go wireless, this is a cheap and seemingly effective way to send an stereo signal, in case you need it (it may be applied to any audio device)

Agree @Jose EB5AGV. I wasn't suggesting your idea is a bad one. Simply that I'm not looking for wireless in my rig.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[TJ Cornish]

A $5000 wireless unit doesn’t sound as good as a $5 cable. Unless you are going to take on understanding of government regulations (in the US the FCC have limited much of the UHF bandwidth that was at one time available and penalties can be life-altering for violations) and interference with other systems already in use, I think it’s difficult to make a case for wireless technology used on a fixed instrument.

[D. Gauss]

1 minute ago, TJ Cornish said:

A $5000 wireless unit doesn’t sound as good as a $5 cable. Unless you are going to take on understanding of government regulations (in the US the FCC have limited much of the UHF bandwidth that was at one time available and penalties can be life-altering for violations) and interference with other systems already in use, I think it’s difficult to make a case for wireless technology used on a fixed instrument.

 

fwiw, I have done hundreds of gigs with one of these $45 dollar wireless units (pic below) on guitar and not once had an issue.  Just returned last night from a week's tour in Pennsylvania with it. To add context, it replaced a $500 shure glx16d unit (2nd pic) that i used previously.  When I bought the cheapie, i kept the Shure in my bag "just in case."  After the 10th gig or so, i left the crazy, heavy shure at home and now just keep a cord on top of my amp as a "spare."  Wireless is important to me not because i jump/run around on stage, but because i play a lot of dive bars/clubs with bands that set up shitty PAs without paying attention to things like proper AC grounding.  A couple of healthy 120 volt AC shocks to your lips via an ungrounded mic when singing and you quickly become a wireless convert.

 

 

[Jose EB5AGV]

2 hours ago, TJ Cornish said:

A $5000 wireless unit doesn’t sound as good as a $5 cable. Unless you are going to take on understanding of government regulations (in the US the FCC have limited much of the UHF bandwidth that was at one time available and penalties can be life-altering for violations) and interference with other systems already in use, I think it’s difficult to make a case for wireless technology used on a fixed instrument.

 

Incidentally, I am a Telecommunication Engineer. I know the bands which are permitted. And this one works on a ISM (Industrial, scientific and medical) UHF band, which is allowed in ITU Region 1 (which includes Spain). I am sure there will be units sold in USA which use the locally allowed ISM bands. Or you can use the 2.4 or 5GHz WiFi band ones.

 

I selected the LEKATO WS-70 as it has auto-channel select and also manual channel select. And when  you put two close by and power them sequentially, they use a different channel automatically. Also, you can broadcast one transmitter to several receivers, which could also be useful.

 

So, all in all, for such a cheap unit, the performance is awesome. And the 20Hz-20kHz bandwidth is good enough for me.

 

Both the guitar and bass player on my band use similar systems from LEKATO (but other models) and they have used them on last 4 or 5 gigs, outdoor and indoor, without problems. I don't need to use it usually on gigs, as there is always the cable option. But taking them to the gig may save a night.

 

So, well, I see your point but my experience is not corroborating it. And, yes, this model is legal here!

 

Jose

[TJ Cornish]

I do professional event production and have a fair bit of experience as an RF coordinator.

 

I’m not necessarily saying it can’t work. For small shows, assuming you have cable backups, it’s probably fine, assuming you have legal band space. 

 

There are three concerns people should know about, at least from a USA perspective. I have no experience in Spain, so will defer to you there.

 

1. I was not able to find the frequency range of the WS-70, so I don’t know what their definition of “UHF band” means. The exact definition of “UHF” varies, but in the US for entertainment wireless equipment this has historically been the 400Mhz through 700MHz bands. Due to the need for cellular bandwidth, huge chunks of those ranges have been sold to wireless carriers and are illegal to use for unlicensed operation. Further, the remaining 400 and 500 MHz spaces are much busier than they were previously, as the TV channels that previously operated in the 600MHz and 700MHz bands have been repacked down to the 400MHz and 500MHz bands, so there is much less room than was previously available. If this device is capable of transmitting in any restricted band - even if part of the range it can transmit in is still legal, the device is illegal to use in the US. If the FCC finds this and decides to take enforcement action, your fine could be six figures. Lastly, if you whipped this out after I did my frequency scanning and coordination work and pushed the “wheel of MHz” button to pick a random channel, I would be very unhappy as an RF coordinator.

 

2. The 2.4GHz band and 5GHz bands are unlicensed and so are legal to operate in (within allowable parameters), but so can every other device. If a person is using one of these in a small room, this may not be an issue. If you expect this to work on a large show with hundreds or thousands of people connected to house WiFi, you are going to have a lot of competition.

 

3. Transmission quality issues. If this is an analog system, there is companding and other sound-quality affecting monkey business going on that will make what comes out substantially different than what goes in. It may be “good enough”, but it’s not the same thing. If this is a digital system, there is compression and latency. This is the genesis of my comment about an inexpensive cable sounding better than the industry’s best wireless equipment.

 

If you are a roaming guitar player and your show allows you the flexibility of falling back to a cable if your wireless unit stops performing and you don’t have to play RF ball with others, then Godspeed to you. For a fixed keyboard setup where presumably you have to power it and at least have a sustain pedal, it just doesn’t make sense to me.

 

 

[Jose EB5AGV]

18 minutes ago, TJ Cornish said:

I do professional event production and have a fair bit of experience as an RF coordinator.

 

I’m not necessarily saying it can’t work. For small shows, assuming you have cable backups, it’s probably fine, assuming you have legal band space. 

 

There are three concerns people should know about, at least from a USA perspective. I have no experience in Spain, so will defer to you there.

 

1. I was not able to find the frequency range of the WS-70, so I don’t know what their definition of “UHF band” means. The exact definition of “UHF” varies, but in the US for entertainment wireless equipment this has historically been the 400Mhz through 700MHz bands. Due to the need for cellular bandwidth, huge chunks of those ranges have been sold to wireless carriers and are illegal to use for unlicensed operation. Further, the remaining 400 and 500 MHz spaces are much busier than they were previously, as the TV channels that previously operated in the 600MHz and 700MHz bands have been repacked down to the 400MHz and 500MHz bands, so there is much less room than was previously available. If this device is capable of transmitting in any restricted band - even if part of the range it can transmit in is still legal, the device is illegal to use in the US. If the FCC finds this and decides to take enforcement action, your fine could be six figures. Lastly, if you whipped this out after I did my frequency scanning and coordination work and pushed the “wheel of MHz” button to pick a random channel, I would be very unhappy as an RF coordinator.

 

2. The 2.4GHz band and 5GHz bands are unlicensed and so are legal to operate in (within allowable parameters), but so can every other device. If a person is using one of these in a small room, this may not be an issue. If you expect this to work on a large show with hundreds or thousands of people connected to house WiFi, you are going to have a lot of competition.

 

3. Transmission quality issues. If this is an analog system, there is companding and other sound-quality affecting monkey business going on that will make what comes out substantially different than what goes in. It may be “good enough”, but it’s not the same thing. If this is a digital system, there is compression and latency. This is the genesis of my comment about an inexpensive cable sounding better than the industry’s best wireless equipment.

 

If you are a roaming guitar player and your show allows you the flexibility of falling back to a cable if your wireless unit stops performing and you don’t have to play RF ball with others, then Godspeed to you. For a fixed keyboard setup where presumably you have to power it and at least have a sustain pedal, it just doesn’t make sense to me.

 

 

 

Ok, understood. My use case is a lots simpler one, as my group is a mostly amateur band and we play on small venues or small outside stages.

 

But now I am really curious and will check with spectrum analyser which exact UHF sub-band the WS-70 uses. And, yes, I have also a WS-80, which works on 2.4GHz band, and it is easy to pickup some interference, so I prefer the WS-70

 

Thanks for your insights 👍🏻

 

Jose

[TJ Cornish]

25 minutes ago, Jose EB5AGV said:

 

Ok, understood. My use case is a lots simpler one, as my group is a mostly amateur band and we play on small venues or small outside stages.

 

But now I am really curious and will check with spectrum analyser which exact UHF sub-band the WS-70 uses. And, yes, I have also a WS-80, which works on 2.4GHz band, and it is easy to pickup some interference, so I prefer the WS-70

 

Thanks for your insights 👍🏻

 

Jose

Yes - please measure your WS-70 and report back. 

 

It appears that the WS-70 may be hard to get - Amazon suggests the 2.4GHz version as the replacement, but we have a huge problem with Amazon selling a lot of Asian-sourced material of questionable quality and legality. It would not surprise me at all if there were sellers on Amazon either blatantly lying about their equipment’s specs (e.g., operating bands, channel selectivity/interference performance, maybe too much transmitting power) or simply not disclosing and shipping whatever garbage they have to unsuspecting users.