Lectrosonics DSQD & DPR field review
Throughout the years working in production sound I’ve typically integrated wireless technology and all other mission critical production sound gear such as mixers, recorders and microphones with what I’ll call cautious optimism. I tend to take my time with it and test thoroughly in tandem with my existing set up before installing onto my cart and fully integrating it into my daily workflow. While currently working in Network TV as a production sound mixer, hammering out one hour episodes on eight day shooting schedules keeps me and my team multitasking from reading scripts, prepping for specialty scenarios such as playback with live capture, process trailer work, coordinating practical microphones with props and planning for high cast counts. We need our wireless tech to be physically robust, technically reliable and interference/dropout free. Earlier this year I purchased a Lectro 822 receiver, two DSQD receivers and two DPR transmitters all from the D squared Lectrosonics line up to add to my existing digital hybrid receivers and transmitters. The DSQD was announced in 2019 as part of the D squared digital wireless line up with its four channel half rack 1RU design, digital hybrid backwards compatibility, full frequency 470-614Mhz wireless and Dante/AES output option.
Initial Set Up of the Lectro DSQD’s sitting on top of my production Cart being fed Dante into my Cantar X3.
Most of you reading this article are familiar with the feature set so I won’t be going into much detail here on those specifics. The purpose of this review is to share with you the results of my initial real world testing on a film set for the first week which has the end goal of implementing what I’ve already purchased into my daily workflow. My primary goal is I need to know I can trust it, and it has to be on par performance wise with my current set up which includes the Venue 1 Wideband low, SRC’s, UCR411a’s and a mixed back of digital hybrid wireless. One of the many challenges that wireless manufactures face today is the race to innovate and compete in the marketplace for tech hungry sound engineers who lust after new and innovative features. Similar to us they have to make profits, pay employees and make a living. It just doesn’t make good business sense to say, “Hey we have this innovative new product, but you’ll want to give it some time before you purchase and let us get everything ironed out firmware wise before you integrate this into your system.” As much as we wish this utopian dream of a flawless Version 1.0 firmware release in reality the fact is that tech takes time and will need to go through its paces in the field before finding its place as a mission critical rock solid piece of gear on a professional film set. It’s amusing to me to see the screaming rants online to our manufactures from OCD sound folk outraged that their gear isn’t perfect in firmware Version 1.0 and things went wrong on set as a result! The truth is we have to keep our sound package well tuned and learn to test and integrate tech slowly and cautiously with back ups on hand, that’s our job as mixers not the manufacture’s responsibility.
RF Scan on Film Stage, Working in Atlanta.
Pictured above is a scan from Wireless Designer on my Wideband low venue 1’s inside our film stage on my current project which is located in the heart of Atlanta, GA. As you can see the RF landscape is quite challenging and this is the polar opposite of any unrealistic walk test you may have seen on YouTube. This is a modern film set we’re talking about here and those working in production cities such as LA, NY, and Atlanta are very familiar with these kinds of scans. Also notice the RF peaking (square waves in block 19, 21 & 22) Our stage is located very close to some broadcast radio towers and the RF noise floor is quite high and the RF signal to noise is a key factor when it comes to range and interference/dropout free reliability. In addition to this busy RF scan all of our lighting systems are completely wireless using high powered 2.4GHz transmitters plus a multitude of other 5G devices for video transmission and consumer devices. On a typical day we are using anywhere from six to about twelve talent wireless body packs. In addition we have two wireless boom transmitters using plug ons, crew coms on 941Mhz, IFB’s on Block 20, Comteks on 216Mhz and time code transceivers on 941Mhz. So once you add all that in I’m typically deploying and coordinating about eighteen channels each day in Wireless Designer. Let’s face it, a modern film set can be a RF war zone! Learning how to implement eighteen plus channels into a RF landscape like this takes fundamental RF coordination and deployment knowledge and you need to have a realistic picture of your wireless capabilities.
A set of Lectrosonics ALP620 passive LPDA’s and Betso Sharkies with 470-600Mhz analog passive inline filters
Why did I invest into the Lectrosonics D2 system before testing? The answer is two part and simple. One I’m already invested in the Lectrosonics eco system so it made most financial and business sense so I could continue to use my digital hybrid transmitters with the new digital receivers and two, my experience with their products has been that they work and are robust. What I needed with this upgrade is wider and tighter tuning capability. For example as you can see from the RF scan picture above is that block 21 and block 22 are borderline unusable. This knocks out four of my talent transmitter options in my single block digital hybrids forcing us to try RF acrobatics and make things work on a less than desirable signal to noise ratio so I’m in need of the upgrade. For the DSQD initial testing install my first task was simply rack mount and deploy the DSQD’s into a portable rack, provide power, install a small 12V power network switcher, and deploy Cat5e cables to the Dante and network ports in the rear of the DSQD. All of this was accomplished fairly easily and I love the fact that you can use a network for wireless designer and also combine the older Venues for an all in one coordination in Wireless Designer. The two pairs of LPDA’s you see pictured above was to simply test performance of the DSQD’s with the Venue 1’s in tandem. We ran like this for a full filming day and we found that the Venue 1’s and DSQD performance on digital hybrid transmitters was basically the same with no significant gains or losses. To me this is an incredible value that I can step into a new system and still use my sixteen existing transmitters which is a very large investment that will continue to give me valuable performance and returns.
Rear Image of DSQD pre install in portable rack
I did however notice a difference in sonic character between using the analog outputs of the Venue 1 Wideband coming into my Cantar X3 and the Dante outputs of the DSQD feeding my Dante inputs. When using the Dante output of the DSQD’s feeding the Dante input of the Cantar X3 it can be best described as a fog being lifted improving clarity making everything more detailed. Everything was just cleaner with Dante and felt more in focus to me. However I can’t help but feel at the same time that a bit of sonic character was lost not using the analog inputs on the Cantar X3 which I find can add sonic depth to a mix giving it a cinematic feel without too much colorization. For this reason when I do the final install into the cart I plan on using the analog input for at least the first two booms. It’s tempting at this point to get into the age old debate of analog vs digital and it’s sonic characteristics and benefits. A good analogy I’d like to share is to think about the differences in cinema lenses and the process of color correction to create the look of a film. Often DP’s like the look and feel of vintage glass such as legendary Cooke primes versus more modern glass which is sharper because of the character or emotion or how it affects the lighting. Also color grades are far from realistic but footage is shot in log or flat for the most flexibility in post. The same concept can easily be applied to microphone or preamp choice in an analog or digital path. My opinion is we’re telling stories here and sonic character is often welcome over sterile reality, but the path to get there is not so clear and opinions will vary and so will characters and how they can sound on different set ups.
I also purchased two DPR plug on transmitters and have been using them with the DSQD’s as well. One clear difference between the DPR’s and the previous generation digital hybrid plug on transmitters is its improved sonic fidelity. The sound is better with the DPR as it really brings out more of the character of the microphone. But there is a caveat. The issue is you can hear a bit of a noise static in the noise floor of the DPR forcing you to engage NR normal mode on the DSQD receiver which basically takes you back to the fidelity of the Digital Hybrid. This makes the primary benefit of the DPR in my opinion to be the wide band frequency coordination therefore accomplishing my goal in the first place when purchasing these upgrades so it’s a win for me. However I do really wish this unwanted noise floor can get ironed out in a future update because the sonic difference is clear when NR is off. I also noticed that the DPR is also more prone to interference and dropouts then the digital hybrid equivalent which is a bit disconcerting. However, the range is on par with digital hybrid without the necessity of the DPRa which includes the exterior antenna which I thought was overkill for our use on a film set where the LPDA antennas are typically never farther than 100’ away. I’m hoping future firmware updates can make some headway on reducing dropouts and possibly decreasing the noise floor of the unit allowing users to confidently use NR off.
With the decreasing usable frequency available to wireless microphone users after the FCC auctions and the new regulations regarding deviation and output power for wireless microphones, manufactures were thrown an unexpected curve ball forcing them to innovate quickly to meet the demand of today’s production sound professionals on film sets and live venues with a multitude of challenges. Here we are two years later and today’s wireless technology from the leading manufacturers such as Lectrosonics, Shure, Zaxcom and Audio Limited is undoubtedly enticing with its incredible feature set, wide frequency tuning availability and digital outputs and one can easily acquire GAS known as Gear Acquisition Syndrome with no known cure! In conclusion, I think the DSQD’s are the next best choice for myself and those who are already invested and committed to staying on the Lectrosonics eco system allowing the valuable gains of Dante outputs, full frequency Wideband and use of the new line of D2 digital transmitters. I’m looking forward to seeing how the D squared continues to evolve in the Lectrosonics eco system with the hopes of continued firmware updates making it the workhorse with the reliability, robustness and build quality that the Lectrosonics brand is known for.
Michael Wynne CAS, Production Sound Mixer