Sennheiser Evolution G4 Vs. AVX Wireless System

[@WupperVideo]

We're using the AVX for one year now and it's great for run n gun scenarios. It's absolut reliable, we never got any dropouts or connection problems, but if you're working with several mics, you'll definitely hear, that there is a delay due to its digital transmission. If you use the AVX and you see, that the receiver or the transmitter lights up green, you'll get great audio and you don't have to use headphones. With our G3 you always have to check you audio, if there are any interferences. Also you have to check, if your lavalier mics are shielded good enough. We have some lavaliers, that don't work with digital transmitters due to heavy interferences into the capsule or cable.

[@bigtb1717]

I've found that Rode lavalier microphones sometimes introduce interference.

[@DJTEDDY507]

Love this video. I use the AVX for outdoor wedding ceremonies. Luckily I haven’t faced any issues so far

[@KunyeeYT]

Can I just say you have a very soothing commentator voice.

[@imbenmeyer]

Right?! I think KZbin is going to move back towards preferring creators that have quality content, as in high production value... good sound, amicable hosts, etc.

[@MaryNitel]

Wich is the best about the Signal?

[@bigtb1717]

I have not done extensive range testing with the AVX system. I've never had issues with either in the kind of situations I use them in. However, as long as you have a frequency set with no nearby interference on the Evolution G4 system, I feel like that system would give a bit more range with less chance of dropout due to obstructions. But due to the auto frequency selection of the AVX, you might be a bit less likely to find yourself on a channel with interference with that system. With the Evolution system you have to be a bit more proactive to avoid channels with nearby interference.

[@mairiturner2937]

to be clear, we are hearing the opposite system from the one we are looking at?

[@bigtb1717]

Yes. The box in the top left corner says which audio you are hearing. I figured I could record with one while showing and talking about the other.

[@michaelpoczynek]

Thanks, good info.

[@Joshua-iz1go]

Super informative and helpful. Thanks!

[@ahmedadambd1939]

Your videos are very informative and pleasant. I just allow myself to share a little advice that could be useful: Maybe if you will post "pictures" (Thumbnail) a little more "elaborate", it will make reading faster and easier and therefore it might encourage people to orient themselves better towards your content ... A content that I find well done. Thank you

[@miss100percentfunk]

Thank you for this video!! On the AYX system, do you know if the transmitter can be charged while in use? Or is that charging feature only available on the receiver?

[@bigtb1717]

That's a good question. I've never tried it. The transmitter battery does last a lot longer on a charge than the receiver, but I'm not sure on whether it will charge in use. I will test that out when I get a chance and let you know.

[@Gotovodacha1291]

@@bigtb1717 any update on this?

[@teddyb4168]

Can you sync up 2 or more transmitters to 1 G4 receiver?

[@bigtb1717]

Unfortunately, no. The receiver and transmitters are single channel.

[@teddyb4168]

@@bigtb1717 This saddens me in my bones. I will overcome this lol. Any thoughts new G5 models will come anytime soon?

[@teddyb4168]

@@bigtb1717 This saddens me to my bones. I will overcome this lol. Any thoughts if a new G5 model will come out soon? Have you been using either recently or since this video? Any update on which you like better long term?

[@bigtb1717]

No idea on when Sennheiser may release a G5 series. I really like a lot about the AVX system, and I'm tempted to say I prefer it, but ultimately, I've used the G4 system more. Mostly just because of the AA power. When I use it I'm normally mic-ing someone else and I know I can put two AA lithium batteries in the transmitter, turn it on and it will be good for 8 hours. You can get extra batteries for the AVX system and they can even be charged via USB when they aren't in the transmitter, so it's really well done and a great system. And it's simpler and smaller. And the built-in XLR on the receiver makes that convenient if you are recording into a device with XLR input. So like I said, I'm tempted to say I prefer it. But the fact is, I've used the G4 more.

[@loudandclearmedia]

@@bigtb1717 I prefer the G4 because I already own 2 of them. Sure, it's not as simple but once you set it up to be used on a certain camera or within a certain signal chain you really don't have to mess with it further. It's clean enough that you can leave some headroom and boost in post, and most people speak at a comparable level to each other. If the AVX was multi-channel or had a 32bit float recorder built in I may consider switching, but it definitely looks like the G4 is the better current system, all things considered.

[@pascalzauberer9815]

Very good and interest Information. Thank you.

[@divisionoflabor3070]

Do you prefer the G4?

[@bigtb1717]

I like the size and simplicity of the AVX system and I think the sound quality is excellent. But I think I do find myself using the G4 system more often, simply because I know I can throw some AA batteries in it and get through a full day easily, even if it is left on the whole time.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

Kindly, I have a question: If you record at the same time with a boom microphone and this wireless system, is there a risk of having a sort of disturbing delay during listening? Thank you

[@bigtb1717]

The delay with the G4 system is extremely small. It would probably sync up well enough to not be much of a problem. There is a slight delay with the AVX system. If you need the boom mic and the wireless mic to sync up perfectly you'd have to do it manually in post, unless your recorder lets you add a matching delay to the boom mic recording.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

@@bigtb1717 Thank you ^^

[@bobuk5722]

G4 requires a transmission licence to operate in many places, the AVX is usually licence free. The only significant AVX competition in the 1900 MHz band is from cordless telephones, it does not operate in either of the WiFi bands. AVX possibly better for single operator, G4 may be preferred by a sound engineer.

[@divitodan]

How long is the lav wire ?

[@bigtb1717]

1.6 meters.

[@RonHenry]

The G4 sounds more natural to me. Cleaner sound. The AVX sounds muddy.

[@geofflister]

I find the G4 is much noisier, and interference is much more likely in most situations. As a hybrid operator I think the AVX is a better fit. If I was a dedicated sound operator, I'd get the G4-but realistically if you show up with anything less than lectrosonics as a sound op, you're probably not getting hired.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

Hi again ^^ I saw that there are people who have tried to change (DIY) the antenna of the Sennheiser G3 / G4 with another SMA antenna (like the AudioRoot antenna). Is it really worth it to the point that it can really improve the range?

[@bigtb1717]

If you are using a similar antenna it would probably make a fairly small difference in range. The main advantage if you were to mod the system to use an SMA (which is a type of connector) antenna setup is that you could then easily swap or replace antennas, as well as attach a cable via the SMA connector and run it to a remote antenna. It's probably not worth doing for most people, but for certain use cases it's could provide benefits.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

@@bigtb1717 This is what I was thinking since I believe that it depends mainly on the power (which can be selected in the G4 models of the EW500 series). So if it's mainly to "take better care" of the antennas could it be useful... or maybe connect the receivers to more powerful antennas like the "Sharks"? Anyway, again, I'm grateful for your information.

[@bigtb1717]

It is possible for one antenna to be more efficient than another allowing for an increased range with no real downsides. Whether or not you could get that kind of benefit from an antenna swap on the Sennheiser systems will depend on how good the stock antenna is whether "better" antennas are readily available and practical (They might be, but I can't say one way or another.). But no antenna is more "powerful" than another, unless it is literally a powered antenna. High gain antennas simply focus the signal so you get a higher signal strength in particular directions, but that means you will get less in others. For the antenna on a body pack I wouldn't personally want a high gain antenna. I'd rather have a fairly even strength in all directions due to the possibility of subject movement, the transmitter shifting position, etc. But that's just my use case. Someone else might have a completely different situation. An SMA connection on the receiver would allow you to use a high gain, directional antenna. The receiver can often stay pointed in the direction of the transmitter. This likely would provide an increase in range. So I think a high gain antenna makes more sense on the receiver, personally. An SMA connection would definitely open up possibilities, but it's not an automatic range boost in all situations.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

@@bigtb1717 How good it is to read such information. I hope other people will come across your very detailed explanations which can be quite useful. Indeed, it will be wiser to place a relatively more directional antenna on the receiver (if needed) than on the transmitter and to ensure that the antenna is directed correctly. I also saw a video that shows that the G3 system has fewer interference concerns than the G4 (ew100). I don't know if this is a rare case or it depends on the region and the frequency band tested. Anyway, thank you again for everything you shared. This is the kind of information that I want to find especially in a book, for example, which offers such useful tips. Besides, if you had a book, I'd be tempted to read it ^^