Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Rob

In article om,
Rob wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?

--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

On Sat, 05 May 2012 08:44:27 +0100, Rob wrote:

On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but it does have one
disadvantage in real-world use. That is that it has no robust way to
combat data lost through interference. When you send real data over
WiFi it goes at high speed and lost info gets re-transmitted. With
this system, what is lost is gone for good, and you get a glitch
instead.

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.
In a city, with lots of local WiFi systems in use, this is unlikely to
be the case.

d

In article m, Rob
wrote:
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

From the 'reviews' it looks like the specific device is prone to cross
interference because it uses the same band as other equipment, and falls
over if you expect to get the signal though a wall.

Impossible to say much about sound quality since there seems to be no
detail at all on modulation methods, and lossy data compression, etc. Nor
any relevant test results or serious listening.

"Intrinsically" a radio link can work fine. But you would not be buying an
"intrinsic" concept. You'd be buying an implimentation that might be great
or might be rubbish.

Personally, I'm quite happy to use cables. They work nicely.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article m,
Rob wrote:
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Radio links can of course work perfectly well under good conditions. But
many of these sort of things don't work well in practice. Other devices
interfering with the signal or that signal not being powerful enough to go
through walls etc.

All you can really do is try it and see if it works, as so much depends on
local conditions. And hope Maplin will refund if it doesn't suit.

--
*Give me ambiguity or give me something else.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article m, Rob
scribeth thus
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

It I suspect works on 2.4 Ghz which is now becoming very crowded with
the explosion in wi-fi. I 'd expect it to work well in the absence of
any interfering signals, but these places are now very few and far
between..

A lot of wireless problems are simply caused by congestion of the
available spectrum allocated to it.

Also signal attenuation is quite high in some domestic environments

It may well work fine today but tomorrow when next door start using
their new wi-fi point all the time and perhaps the one across the
way?....

Use wire if you can, a lot more reliable..
--
Tony Sayer

Don Pearce wrote...

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.

Out of interest, how do those devices work, are they sending the raw
audio data stream over the radio link to the DAC in the receiver or is
there some conversion to another format in the transmitter before being
broadcast?


--
Ken O'Meara
http://www.btinternet.com/~unsteadyken/

On Sat, 5 May 2012 13:07:57 +0100, UnsteadyKen
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote...

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.

Out of interest, how do those devices work, are they sending the raw
audio data stream over the radio link to the DAC in the receiver or is
there some conversion to another format in the transmitter before being
broadcast?

It sends a kind of broadcast stream, which is decoded by a DAC in the
receiver. I don't know what the over-air transmitted format is - it
may well be proprietary.

d

"Rob" wrote in message
eb.com...
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

In the world of professional audio, wireless connections are considered to
be substandard unless they implement a true diversity reception system.
This means two independent receiving antennas, two independent receivers,
and a detection and logic system that picks the best received signal at all
times. Some of the best systems base the SQ evaluation on an ultrasonic
subcarrier.

Also, the whole system if based on analog (e.g. FM) is surrounded by
companding which can elevate effective dynamic range from about 60 dB to
more like 100 dB.

Finally, there should be some kind of frequency mobility so that
interference sources can be completely avoided.

What you're showing me seems to be a toy, not a professional tool. How these
comments impact you depends on your goals for performance.