| | Wireless
Comes of Age by Chris Michie Mix,
Oct 1, 2001 In the '80s, sound designers for Broadway musicals were among
the first to use large numbers of wireless microphone systems in live performance.
Today, the technology has been widely adopted for industrial, concert and TV applications.
These days, it's rare to find a touring band who does not carry at least one handheld
wireless mic system, while large-scale broadcast events like the Super Bowl may
require as many as 1,200 separate wireless systems. Keeping multiple
wireless systems up and running under modern show conditions requires an unusual
combination of technical expertise and operational experience. As a result, many
musicals (and other complex productions that use dozens of wireless systems) now
include a wireless specialist on the crew — the job is too specialized and time-consuming
for the regular audio crew to handle unaided. Despite the great leaps that wireless
manufacturers have made in terms of usability, pros who can pull quality signals
from out of the ether are in high demand. Mix spoke to three such “RF
guys”: Kevin Sanford, president of Wireless First (New York City); Gary Stocker,
director of R&D for Masque Sound (Moonachie, N.J.); and James Stoffo, president
of Professional Wireless Systems (Orlando, Fla.). The interviews cover a range
of wireless topics, from the history of wireless on Broadway, to the loss of wireless
bandwidth due to the digital TV rollout, to new approaches to diversity antennae.
GARY STOCKER Gary Stocker has “done it all” on and around
Broadway. He occasionally mixes Phantom of the Opera, has designed shows for both
Broadway and Off-Broadway, and has toured extensively. Asked to pinpoint the dawn
of the “wireless era,” Stocker recalls the old days when two to four wireless
mics on a show was considered plenty. What was the quality like in
those days? Highly variable. We had what we called the “golden mics,”
certain transmitter/receiver combos that just sounded way better than others.
Typically, if you had a selection of eight or nine mics, two of them would be
excellent; the others would be so-so. And that would be direct from the manufacturer.
At that time, and until very recently, everything was on fixed frequencies.
Back then, everything was VHF, the bandwidth of the upper TV stations of the old
days — 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. The FCC would only allocate every other channel,
in any city. So if they had the odd channels allocated, you might see a channel
7 and a 9, an 11 and a 13. That meant that 8, 10 and 12 were always going to be
clear in that city. If you were traveling, you were in big trouble, because as
you went from city to city, some of your radios would work and some of them wouldn't.
So how did you cope with that? You'd try to convince
the producers to have a few spare mics, so at least you'd have a couple to pull
out if they were really unusable. But back in those days — the late '70s, and
early '80s — only the stars got the mics. So a typical show would have two or
four stars. Everybody else was on a foot mic or an area mic. By 1985, we started
seeing shows asking for 9, 10, 11, 12 wireless mics, and it just slowly increased.
They're now putting a microphone, if not two, on every single person in the show.
And the number of mics also went up as more frequencies became available. Eventually,
the manufacturers moved into the UHF bandwidth. Was that due to the
FCC, or the technology? Mostly the technology allowed them to. There's
a great shift moving from the 170 to 212MHz band, which was the high VHF, then
going up into a band that started at 470 and goes to 800. It's a whole new technology
to handle those higher frequencies and make it clean and meet FCC regulations.
But it also opened up a huge spectrum. So, suddenly, you could put six mics on
a channel — six was typically the maximum you could cram into a TV channel — and
using multiple channels, you could put 24 or 30 mics in a show. When
you say you put six mics on a channel, they're not all on the same frequency,
are they? No. They're all on individual frequencies within the 6MHz
TV channel. Back in the early '80s and in through the '90s, most of the UHF channels
that didn't have a TV station or some sort of low-power transmitter were truly
empty. There was nothing there. So you could easily fit six frequencies on a channel
that was clear; there'd be no problem. So it wasn't a big deal to have that many.
Some of the earlier shows that had a fair number of radios, like Phantom of the
Opera, Les Misérables and Cats, had up to 20 radios once you counted spares. So
that's when it started mushrooming. In the mid-'90s, you had 48 radio mics on
Showboat, and the cast was so large you still had changes. There were 60 people
onstage, so you still had to move microphones, even though you had 48.
What's your advice for minimizing or eliminating interference problems?
Convince the producers to rent enough mics to give you a decent number of
spares. And when touring, check them out in each city to see which ones are the
solid ones. Then, without telling the cast, prioritize the parts and shift things
around so that the mics go where they are needed most. The less-useful mics might
end up on a chorus person, so if you have a little interference, don't bring it
up — bring up the foot mic and sneak by. KEVIN SANFORD Kevin
Sanford, owner and founder of Wireless First, started his rental and sales company
five years ago in Boston and opened a second office in New York in June 2001.
Wireless First specializes in wireless microphone and communication application
for television and live events. His current roster of clients includes MTV, VH1,
NBC and Buena Vista Pictures, among others. You've been independent
for seven years. What developments have you seen in that time? In
the past five years, the frequency-agile units have really changed our end of
the industry. With frequency-agile systems, there are 16 to 32 channels in one
unit to choose from, allowing you to change channels on-site. Between our Shure
and Sennheiser wireless systems, we carry about six different frequency ranges
to choose from. We didn't have this flexibility in the days of the single-frequency,
crystal-based stuff. There's a lot more homework involved now, I think.
I'm doing a show next week in Lincoln Center, and it's heavy coordination because
it's in Lincoln Center, which is typically kind of a rough area anyway for wireless.
In New York, you are susceptible to hundreds of outside interferences. Not only
are there 20 other venues within a five-block radius, but with taxis and DTV,
it's just not that easy anymore. You must do your homework and plan accordingly.
Do you get any help from the people who are in the same bandwidth,
or is it up to you to find out who and what is where? While at a
particular show site, you can check with other vendors in the area, but that doesn't
necessarily guarantee a problem-free environment. There's an FCC Web page, which
allows you to go and actually view licensed frequencies and television stations,
radio stations and such in any given area. Which is good basic groundwork, but
that's not necessarily going to tell you what's in the theater that's doing a
huge musical next door to you. When you get there with the frequency-agile stuff,
you've got options. Why rent all the time, rather than buying their
own? Maintenance and on-site support. You still have the “act of
God” clause in wireless — even the best RF engineer is going to have a bad RF
day, and that's grief that nobody wants. Plus, they're not without maintenance.
It's a lot of electronics in a small device, and they need care. Broadcast-quality
wireless microphones can be quite expensive, as well. In entertainment and television,
it just makes good business sense to outsource to a company specializing in wireless.
A specialist from a niche company will be able to troubleshoot problems and offer
maintenance support a lot faster than the average production engineer. The days
of the P.A. company that comes in and does everything is somewhat in the past.
You mentioned earlier that you were bringing in in-ear monitor systems
as well. In-ears still have a long way to go. They're very temperamental.
They still have issues with range. I think we're still a couple of years away
from really perfecting that science. Shure and Sennheiser are probably the strongest
players in the in-ear market right now. Their units put away old systems like
Garwood and Radio Station, because those were single-channel units, whereas the
Shures and Sennheisers are agile units. Still, they are limited in their frequency
ranges, so there are some areas where heavy frequency coordination is needed to
make things work. And, Shure's currently available two frequency banks are right
in the middle of a major Sennheiser bank. That makes it difficult to use some
Sennheiser equipment along with the Shure in-ears. Could you do the
job that you're doing if you didn't know as much about the actual technology?
These days, it's getting a lot easier for anybody to pick up a unit
and be able to program it and make it work. Again, the agile technology is geared
toward people who don't know. It depends on numbers — when using two, three or
four units in a club or corporate meeting, it's usually no problem, but when you've
got more frequencies involved, or if you're in a susceptible area, you need someone
who understands the technology. I always have a spectrum analyzer with
me on my shows, which can tell you what's going on. It's an RF guy's best friend.
An experienced technician will be able to locate and fix a problem, whereas an
average person is at a disadvantage. The knowledge comes from years of experience
dealing with RF problems on-site. In a larger show, your mic signals are being
split out to several locations, like the TV truck, music truck and FOH. A hum
problem might be easily solved simply by putting a ground lift in-line. But to
recognize that two microphones not close in frequency are getting into each other
because of harmonics, or that somebody left the lav transmitter on and then turned
on the handheld transmitter on the same frequency, that takes experience. There
are distinct sounds to those problems, plus they bring on unique complications,
and without an analyzer or an experienced technician, the average person will
not know what to do. JAMES STOFFO James Stoffo, president
of Professional Wireless Systems, describes his business as “a group of RF technicians
and engineers who focus all their energy on making wireless work in the field.”
How did you get into this business? I was an electronic
radio surveillance technician in the submarine service, back during the Cold War.
When I got out of the sub service, I went to work for Vega Wireless. I was thrown
out in the field to help Broadway shows and Disney World theme parks and to help
coordinate large wireless users. In 1992, I moved to Orlando and started this
business in my house. We do frequency sweeps, we coordinate frequencies for digital
TV, public safety, any other high-power broadcast RF that's floating around the
show site. We design antenna systems, we come in and man the show as A-2s. Once
we're done with the RF engineering aspect and frequency coordination, then we
assume the role of an A-2, miking the artists and the talent and the broadcasters
or whoever. And while I'm doing that, the rest of the company in Orlando is busy
performing warranty repairs for Clear-Com, Vega Wireless and Sennheiser.
Much of what's needed to make wireless work in the field is not provided
by the manufacturer. We feel our custom antennae are the best you can possibly
use for wireless mics. Sennheiser builds a great RF system, but people want the
Shure Beta 87, so we modify Beta 87 heads to work on Sennheiser wireless. I've
gotten more into the technical support business. People bring us in to do frequency
coordination, antenna design and to maybe help design a larger wireless system
that we may not even sell. We simply provide services for the sale.
In the early days, I would assume that the audio engineer for the tour or production
would have been more or less responsible for the wireless systems.
Absolutely true. Responsible, but unwillingly. Everybody had to do it, but no
one really wanted to. And what made it worse was if you had a problem. It was
very difficult to troubleshoot the problem, because without a spectrum analyzer
and a computer and some other little toys, frequency counters and scanners, there
was no way to even know what the problem was. Even I, with about 20-plus years
in the RF business, wouldn't attempt to go out and troubleshoot a problem without
these tools. Plus, don't forget, it just doesn't apply to mics. Now everybody's
got in-ear monitors, wireless intercoms and broadcasters use wireless IFBs [Interruptive
Fold Backs]. When you see a broadcast talent onscreen, and he's got the little
coiled cord that goes into his ear, he's listening to a foldback of the audio
programming from whatever show he's on. And it can be interrupted by a director
or a producer, and the presenter will hear the director's voice saying, “Okay,
you're on in five seconds. Straighten out your tie.” Or whatever.
It's actually comparable to an in-ear monitor system. It's a very
low audio quality in-ear monitor. It sounds pretty bad. It's communications-grade,
but the exact same principle. So on a typical show now that I do, there are 75-plus
wireless frequencies. Back in the old days, when you might have had a half a dozen
RF microphones and a couple of guitars or something, that was one challenge, and
it was difficult enough. But you certainly didn't need an RF specialist. Now,
the average show approaches 100 frequencies. For the Super Bowl, there were over
1,200 frequencies on the field that day. So we had to coordinate with 1,100 other
wireless users so the halftime show would be flawless. That's an awful lot of
RF. And I get hired on shows where the audio person doesn't want anything to do
with the wireless. The mixer just wants to know that it is as reliable as a wired
microphone, so when you pull up the fader, the audio's going to be there.
When the UHF band opened up, people really started promoting in-ear monitor
systems. The problem with an in-ear monitor is that the person wears a receiver
that's right next to a transmitter — the wireless mic. So now you have to be able
to coordinate a transmitter that's about a foot away from a very sensitive receiver.
And on broadcast events, there might be someone with an IFB, plus they have a
handheld mic and a body-pack mic. For broadcasting, sometimes we'll have backups
like that. So now they're wearing three devices for every person. So shows went
from maybe 12 wireless mics to 75 wireless mics for a Latin American Billboard
awards show, for example. And there are maybe 20 channels of stage manager intercom,
anywhere from half a dozen to a dozen in-ear monitors, and there are usually a
half a dozen or more IFBs, and of course about a dozen or more microphones.
And that doesn't include whatever else is already out there in terms of
TV and radio and taxicabs or whatever. Absolutely, which brings
up a major challenge. Over the next three years, the RF band, where wireless mics
currently operate, will become more congested than it ever has in any three-year
period since the invention of radio some 100 years ago. In other words, if you
look at the band that wireless mics currently occupy, and in the UHF band that
was 470 to 806 MHz, the FCC has just auctioned off over 100 MHz of that spectrum.
So we've lost close to 150 MHz. I'd have to do the math to tell you exactly, but
we lost 470 to 512 and 698 to 806 Meg. Those bands, really, in the near future,
will become unusable because of high-power carriers that were not there in previous
years. So my whole inventory is now squeezed into from 512 to 698 Meg, whereas
before you had an extra hundred MHz worth of frequency allocation. What's
left is where digital TV has been lighting off. So in a city like L.A., out of
that couple of hundred MHz band, you may only have 36 MHz to work with because
now there's regular TV and digital TV. And the fact is, I don't have a DTV yet.
Do you? I don't know anyone who's got a DTV tuner and is watching. And if 85 percent
of the U.S. population does not own a digital television tuner by the year 2006,
they are not going to de-energize the NTSC carriers. So you're going to have these
parallel programming carriers, digital and analog TV, which leaves very little
room for wireless. And what room is left, everybody — all your ENG crews, all
your other wireless mics, anybody who has a current wireless system — is going
to try using it. I hate to make it sound like doom and gloom, because
I'm actually a pretty positive guy, but the fact of the matter is, it's getting
more difficult to make wireless microphones work successfully, and the situation
will be worse in three years, when all of the DTV stuff goes up.
Once the FCC's designated a frequency for a DTV channel, does that mean it's illegal
for you to use it, whether or not the DTV channel is up and running?
The law is that you cannot transmit within an active television carrier.
I'm a Society of Broadcast Engineers frequency coordinator for central Florida.
Every major metropolitan area has an SBE frequency coordinator, and it's our job
to make sure that when someone comes in, like a news crew, or some other wireless
operators, they know what the active stations are, and they don't transmit on
any of those. When there's a major event like last week's Daytona Pepsi 400 or
a big launch, like John Glenn's shuttle at Cape Canaveral, I get phone calls,
and I spend a couple of hours coordinating frequencies to make sure that no one's
stepping on or causing interference on anybody else. So I'm the frequency keeper
for central Florida. When CBS or ABC or NBC comes down to Orlando or Daytona or
Ocala — my territory — they need to call me first. And they do. They're good about
it. They run into this all the time, this isn't anything new to these guys in
television or radio. They call me, I get my list out, and I say, “Okay, you can
use this frequency and that frequency and this frequency and that frequency.”
The problem is that with the wireless microphones, no one coordinates.
Beyond frequency coordination, what wireless problems do you encounter?
Other than low-loss cable, possibly a line amp and a splitter, there's very
little to a wireless mic system. The antennae themselves are the most important
part of the whole system. We use helically polarized antennae, because they just
don't drop out. Most antennae you see are log periodic paddles. Those are polarized,
so either you can put them on a vertical or a horizontal polarization. If an artist
has a handheld mic, and holds it down in front of him, and then leans back and
the mic goes up sideways, then a helically polarized antenna picks up the exact
amount of RF no matter what polarity the transmitter is. So you simply don't have
a dropout with these things. I've been using them for three or four years now.
For the Super Bowl halftime show, we were at the 50-yard line on the field, and
I could pick up wireless transmitters halfway outside the stadium, through a concrete
tunnel on the other side of the field. With a 50-milliwatt transmitter! That's
phenomenal. The helical antennae are our own design. There's only one
other guy that I've ever seen use them, and it's in NBC studios in Rockefeller
Center in New York. We've installed them, but they don't ship very well, they're
not good for road tours. We're trying to think of a better way to make these things,
but we really only use them for our own shows right now. We commonly
see incorrect cable used for RF signals — typically unacceptably long runs of
very lossy RG-58 or sometimes RG-59, which is really bad because that's video
cable. But people use it. When we get racks in for repair, the first thing we
do is yank out all that cable and put short runs of low-loss cable between the
RF splitter and the receivers, which only needs to be a foot or two long. We replace
it with the proper 50-ohm RG-58 cable. On the long runs between the antenna and
the splitter, we put in RG-8, which is a very low-loss cable. The cable we use
loses only 2 dB per hundred feet, at 700 MHz. Most systems that arrive here have
cable that loses 17 dB per hundred feet. So right off the bat, you're up 15 dB
simply by swapping the cable. | | |