There are LOTS of choices now when it comes to radio microphones. Some are better than others. Some may be smaller, some may be cheaper, some may be really terrible! So, given there are so many choices and the Sony UWP-D series isn’t amongst the cheapest, why choose them over some of the cheaper options?
Perhaps you are looking at some of the new miniature digital microphone kits from other well known brands such as DJI or Hollyland, or perhaps even Sony’s ECM-W3, all of which to be fair, do actually work pretty well, especially when you consider their low cost. So, why use the UWP-D series?
The vast majority of these smaller digital microphones use frequencies in the same range as used by Wifi and Bluetooth. By using these shared and licence free frequencies these devices can be made cheaply. But because the frequencies are shared and licence free the power levels that can be used are very low and there is a high risk of interference from other devices that are also using the same frequencies. Generally interference isn’t normally an issue unless you are somewhere crowded but with almost everyone carrying a mobile phone with WiFi and bluetooth enabled, if you are in a crowded place such as a large event, conference, performance etc, then interference can become a big issue. Range can be seriously reduced or in the worst case you may simply find you can’t get them to work at all.
The other thing about the very high frequencies used by these small devices is that they are easily blocked by solid objects, including people. So, if the presenter is wearing the transmitter on their front and they turn away from the camera so that their body now comes between the transmitter and receiver, the signal can be blocked or degraded.
A further issue with these low cost digital systems is the time it takes to encode the audio to digital, transmit it and then convert the digital data back to a useable audio signal. It takes time, and this introduces a delay into the audio. This delay can affect the lip sync of the recorded audio or make it impossible to mix the delayed wireless audio with any un-delayed audio from a wired microphone – the timing difference leading to an echo or phase issues that can make the audio sound strange.
For me, as a professional film maker these issues are significant. Not being able to mix different types of microphones without an echo or phase shift is a huge problem as often I will have a mic on the camera for atmos sound as well as the radio mic on the talent, and I need to be able to mix these different sources and I don’t want to have to spend time shifting the timing of each audio track separately in post.
A further issue is the rechargeable nature of the cheaper radio mics. What do you do if you forget to recharge them before the job? What do you do if you’ve been shooting all day but have yet to finish and the batteries have gone flat? You can’t simply pop in a fresh set of AA batteries as you can with the UWP-D series. Additional battery cases (BATC-4AA) can also be purchased if you wish to make changing batteries in a rush even easier.
All of the above reasons are why I still prefer to use my UWP-D microphones whenever I can.
The latest versions have a removable battery case that takes two AA batteries, so battery swaps are quick and easy. The receivers can be connected to any Sony camera with an MI Shoe using a cheap adapter that slots into the shoe and then the receiver is powered from the camera and the audio passed directly to the camera with no need to use any cables. If you are using an FX6 with the single channel URX-P40D or dual channel URX P41D you will get an indication of the signal strength of the transmitters on the LCD/Monitor, very handy indeed.
The UWP-D series use a hybrid of analog and digital technologies. The transmitters and receivers use a digital compander system to process the audio so that any loss of quality during the analog transmission is minimised. The URX-P40D and URX-P41D can output using either analog or digital. Most of the more recent Sony A7 and FX series cameras can now accept the digital input which helps to reduce background hiss and noise.
The URX-P41D is a dual channel receiver. It has two separate receivers and these can be switched on and off independently. There is also an additional 3.5mm socket for a wired microphone and this additional input can be mixed with the radio mic channels. It also has a headphone socket and this is very handy for troubleshooting any audio issues as it allows you to check what the radio mic receiver is receiving before the audio is passed on to the camera or recorder. There are two threaded 3.5mm sockets that can be used with the included 3.5mm to 3.5mm or XLR cables to feed the camera or recorder if you are not using the MI Shoe.
They are also very easy to use. Pairing is simple, on the URX-P41D you just press and hold the scan/sync button on the receiver to put it into the pairing mode. It will scan for clear frequencies and then when it has found them it will ask you to pair with the transmitters using NFC. Simply hold the first transmitter against the receiver and it will automatically pair, vibrating when it is done. Then you hold the second transmitter against the receiver and it will then pair with that one. The URX-P41D also has an IR port on the side for pairing with the previous generation of UWP-D wireless transmitters that pair via infra-red.
As well as the compact belt pack transmitter (UTX-B40), there is also a handheld microphone (UTX-M40) and a plug in transmitter (UTX-P40). Most of my own personal experience is with the belt pack transmitters, but I have used them all and they all work really well.
The URX-B40 transmitter is compact and sturdy. It has the same AA battery holder as the receiver and a pair of good quality alkaline AA batteries will run it for around 8 hours. It has a simple but effective removable wire belt clip. These have been dropped, sat on, pulled out of pockets by the mic cable more times than I can remember and never given any issues. The supplied microphone is pretty good. None of my clients have ever found the audio quality lacking and I feel that it is perfectly acceptable for news or documentary production. Perfectionist’s may prefer to use a different capsule, but for me it does what I need it to do.
I have been using various versions of the UWP-D radio mic systems for years and the first versions I got all those years ago still work fine today. The latest receivers with the digital MI Shoe output have a lower noise floor and having the signal strength displayed on the screen of my FX6 is very useful. A decent radio mic system isn’t a small investment, but these should last many, many years. They won’t introduce phasing and timing issues as many of the lower cost digital systems can. The range is great and they can be used in crowded venues or at large events without being worried about interferrence from phones or other devices that use WiFi.
I’ve been using this Sony wireless system for years. Most of the time I work with a sound person so I don’t have to worry but occasionally I do OMB work doing my own sound. More and more I’ve watched sound people struggle to find open frequencies. In fact, the last 2 times working by myself I tried to use this Sony system, there were no open frequencies within the blocks I had so I was screwed. I now have to carry one of those cheaper systems, like the DJI, with me. They seem to work in more places than the very expensive Sony system. They may have some very limiting aspects, but at least here in Southern CA they work more often than not, unlike the Sonys or any other traditional wireless that are squeezed out.
How old are your mics? The blocks available have changed over the years as analog TV was phased out and the those older blocks sold off for other purposes. Certainly here in Europe there are still frequency blocks reserved for radio mics, some require a licence to use, some are reserved for certain broadcasters. But mics from 5 or more years ago on the old blocks may have issues.
I recently shot a large event, we were wirelessly taking an audio feed from the audio desk at the back of the venue to the camera at the front of the venue using a 2.4Ghz system, the distance was about 15m (45ft). It was all good until the audience came in, then we started to get drop outs in the link. Swapped over to the UWP-D and the link remained solid. Similarly I’ve seen 2.4Ghz links completely drop out just because a few people have stood between the TX and RX.
My Sonys are in the block best for us here in SoCal. And they are my first choice to use… but.. this is a very crowded space here. My point really is that sometimes you need a plan B. Or you’re working so fast that the simplest solution may be the best. But to be clear, I’m only talking about ENG audio and working by yourself, nothing more. Most of the time I have a sound person and they have all the toys to deal with whatever comes up.
It’s important to compare Apples with Apples. This article is more a UHF vs 2.4GHz shootout. And whilst most of the arguments are true (apart from the body shielding, it’s more the fact body is >90% water which absorbs RF) these are 2 distinctively different approaches. Whilst processing delay and channel congestion is a definite problem with 2.4GHz “WiFi band” systems, 32bit-float internal recording and sometimes timecode make up for it, something Sony does not offer. Typically camera preamps are poor and noisy. Or see latest Deity Theos UHFs and their timecode integration. I’m yet to see Sony allowing TC input for my A7S3 that the very same FX3 has. Or synchronization to internet time via app. Or 4 ch digital audio input via hotshoe for 3rd party manufacturers. There is more to this than meets the eye
Body shielding is true – as you point out a body is mostly water and the absorption/attenuation of radio waves by water and other molecules changes with frequency, the higher the frequency the more an object will attenuate the signal. This is why the majority of walkie talkies etc use frequencies below 1Ghz with the longest ranges typically the lower you go (most PMR radio uses 150Mhz-500Mhz). Body shielding is a much greater issue at 2.4Ghz than at 800Mhz. Microwave ovens operate around 2.5Ghz because at these frequencies the moisture in the food will absorb most of the RF energy. It’s why 5G wifi doesn’t go as far as 2.5G Wifi, the higher you go the greater the absorption and as a result the greater the impact of body shielding.
There are devices that work at 2.4Ghz without a delay, the delay has nothing to do with the frequency, the delay is cause by the processing and modulation and use of mass produced low cost generic wifi transmitter and receiver chips. There are 100% digital systems at 800Mhz that have no significant delay but these use hardware designed for audio.
Recording on a separate device adds a new issue of needing to sync an external recording source in post and if the timecode isn’t absolutely correct for every source you will still have phase errors for each source – camera timecode is only accurate to at best 1/60th of a second leaving plenty of scope for phase errors with multiple external sources.
And how can you do a live feed if the audio is being recorded elsewhere? Having worked in film and TV for +30 years we seem to be going backwards. 30 years ago when film was still prevalent for TV docs having to sync sound and vision was a time consuming PITA. Then we went to tape and had a sound recordist that would mix on location and sound and vision were recorded together. Then we had a long period where sound and vision were always recorded together at more than good enough quality. Now in the name of cost some are going back to separate recordings or introducing phase and delay issues while banding about “well it’s 32 bit so it’s better” when the audience/viewer won’t be able to tell the difference and post production now have to figure out how to deal with sync and phase errors negating any cost saving. On features and larger productions all audio sources are recorded simultaneously on a single multi-track recorder to ensure there are no phase or timing errors introduced later due to timecode slip etc.
And while a digital system may have 32bit float, if you are recording to the camera you still have to go through the cameras pre-amps — Unless you use the URX-P40D or P41D in which case you can bypass the cameras preamps by using the digital output.
In my opinion it’s time for Sony to release a 4ch-digital hotshoe interface with a small footprint, or open up code for third party developers. Their UWPD series is getting long on the tooth compared to the current offerings from Deity, Zaxcom, Lectrosonics, Sounddevices and alike. Yes UHFs aren’t really their prime product range, but don’t force users to use the brand if better options are out there. And what 32bit float allows to do is record the entire dynamic range without the fear of clipping, this wasn’t around 20 years ago, and cameras still need to catch up to the fact. Transmitter/Recorders already do, so do many professional bag mixer / recorders. Re timecode, with auto sync tools like you can find in Resolve, linking audio to video via timecode isn’t a big deal anymore (and would even be easier if Sonys could be synced via Sidus app etc)
UHF radio mics are a huge part of Sony’s offerings, both analog like the UWP-D series and Digital such as the UTX series.
Why wouldn’t a manufacture develop a system that encourages you to use their own brand accessories – that’s just good business.
There is no microphone or analog to digital converter in existence that can get close to the 144dB dynamic range of 24 bit. A typical high quality microphone will have a dynamic range of around 90dB. The clipping issue is caused by people applying analog thinking, trying to avoid an analog recording noise floor that no longer exists by recording at unnecessarily high levels, wasting vast amounts of entirely noise free, full precision dynamic range. 24 bit has been used for decades and it has never been a bottleneck when used correctly. There is no negative to 32 bit float, it does no harm, but the amount of hype and misguided belief that only 32 bit is good enough is ridiculous.
Timecode is not a sync signal, it does not provide sync between sound and pictures. Sure, you might be able to line up the audio and pictures for the first frame of a take, but as there isn’t actually any sync the audio will gradually drift out of sync over longer takes. To get true sync between sound and vision you must use genlock.
I’m yet to see on-location multicamera shoots using genlock. Last time i did was in live studio environments. Typically everyone runs time-of-day TC and if you’re lucky has a Tentacle or Deity Timecode box attached. Biggest problem is the quartz in (especially those Sony A7S3/FX3) is cheap and drifts quickly, so yes long takes may be a problem. That said, digital or digital hybrid radio mics already have latency which creates sync issues either way, be it recorded in-camera or bag, and as mentioned currently there’s only 2 channels of digital wireless that can be recorded through the hotshoe. These days productions love to use more than ever. But on a more practical note, why would I choose a Sony UWP-D system with limited 638-694 MHz bandwidth in a more and more congested UHF spectrum, If I can get a Deity Theos with on-board recording and TC in a spectrum 550-960, that is even more affordable?
But the UWP-D’s don’t have a latency issue, that’s one of the most important aspects. You can freely mix them with wired mics without phase issues. Even in low latency mode the Theos adds a 19ms delay and in the normal mode it’s 30ms, almost a full frame at 1/24th of a second, that makes mixing with wired or other very low latency audio sources a big issue. Even if you have matching TC and even if you use the 19ms low latency mode, the phase of the audio will still be shifted enough to cause cancellation artefacts unless you do sub frame audio sync. Compare that “low latency” mode of the Theos with 19ms of delay with the 0.24ms of the UWP-D in digital mode and you can see these perform very differently.
The Sony mics cover the entire range of frequencies allocated to radio microphones, and this varies by country with different versions with the appropriate bands sold in each country to comply with the local regulations. So while the international and export versions of the Theos may well cover frequencies outside of the those allocations, in practice you shouldn’t be using frequencies outside of the same range that the Sony’s offer.
“The Sony mics cover the entire range of frequencies allocated to radio microphones”: respectfully, not a 100% sure about this. When I look at the offerings, I see approx. 70MHz of switching bandwidth. In Australia, legal spectrum is 520-695 MHz. This includes DTV which can be an issue depending on where you are. Sony’s “25UC: 536.125 MHz to 607.875 MHz (UHF-TV channels 25 to 36)” is probably the closest fit, offering only coverage of approx. 40% of this spectrum. With regards to Delay, yes you are correct, Theos has Latency, but it is 6.3ms which is ‘pretty good’ industry standard, plus onboard recording with matching Timecode with Zero delay (UWPD has 0.34ms on analog output, which also represents s phase shift) https://deitymic.com/products/theos-digital-wireless/
There is a vast difference between 6.3ms and 0.34ms, one you can mix without an echo, the other you can not. And most people are finding the real world useable Theos delay to be around 30ms as in the low latency mode there is no forward error correction so the audio quality will degrade very readily.
I’m sure the Deity system will find uses in a great many applications. It offers a lot of value for the money. But audio delays are a nightmare for anyone involved with fast turn around projects or broadcasting. The inability to directly mix with other audio sources without an echo is a big problem. The audio delays from mics, in wireless links, during transcoding and distribution are all cumulative and there isn’t always the time to do the work to remove every shift. Plus, when you have different people using different mics from different manufacturers with differing delays (which also depends on whether you use the normal modes or un error corrected low latency modes) it creates a whole world of confusion in post production.
These devices are for one on one interview style recordings.
When i do live tv style productions snd livestreams i use a mixer or get a broadcast line into my camera ( but usually multicam mixer ).
In that case audio is also different from film.
I have lot’s of different audio sollutions for lot’s of different situations. I agree the digital interface is handy – but it is already occupied by my fx3 and fx30 handle so i use the xrl.
Besides all the tech: the weakest link is usually the talent, mic position, unexpected – weird – situations ( talent wrapped in cable etc 😉 )
On the other hand: tv style productions are 80% audio and the image is just supporting the audio content! So audio is key.
The Sony VMC-BNCM1 Timecode Adapter Cable seems to work just fine on my A7siii.
this would indeed be news to me, everywhere I look it only says “FX3 and FX30 compatible cameras” – is this indeed tested with latest A7Sm3 FW and working as intended?
With the latest A7siii firmware, mine seems to work just fine. With that last update, I was told this adapter now works like it does for the FX3 for TC.
Indeed, this has been the case for some time now. As well as the FX3 and FX30 it also works with both the A7S3 and the A1.
A camera is made for video not audio – the ore-amps are meagre and options are low.
I use on board recording as a reference and as an extra channel and record audio seperatly.
Especially now with lots of 32bit float recorders ( and senders like rode wireless pro ) the audio quality is very much improved. 32bit float gives 100% peace of mind for a run n gun shooter like me – the audio will never clip and i can fix all in post ( also have a look at the zoom mictrack m3 and lineup)
In my experience 32bit float onboard recording with timecode and camera recording tef is the way to go when you are in the go… )
There is no benefit to 32 bit float over 24 bit. 32 bit float has a 23 bit mantissa, so there is no additional accuracy or fidelity. There is no microphone in existence that can exceed the dynamic range of 24 bit, so 32 bit float adds nothing. But the manufactures love to sell via the “bigger is better” numbers game to people that don’t understand the technology. In 30 years of using cameras to record audio no viewer has ever complained abut the quality of the audio recordings.
If you are doing news, docs, live etc off-board recording is not wanted. Clients don’t want to have to re-sync audio and pictures, plus unless you have genlock timecode can and will drift on long takes as a timecode does not provide any form of camera synchronisation.
Do you think we’ll have any chance to see coming a smart box that would allow us to plug the Sony’s receivers directly on the top of Burano without using the expensive and cumbersome Fx9 handle? I am very happy for my Sony dual receiver for all the raisons you pointed in your article and I wish I could use it on my Burano without losing it’s nice cine handle. Mid 49 said they were working on one but it seams to be tricky, or maybe Sony isn’t sharing all technical infos….If no-one does it, I guess I’ll have to buy the Fx9 handle and get it into pieces to build one myself.
It’s a great idea and I am sure it would be popular, but based on Sony’s history of not making breakout boxes for the FX6 or FX9 sadly I doubt it is something we will ever see. But – they could surprise us.