IFB Frequencies in Sydney

[Terry "Skeet" kelly]

Hi guys, I'm thinking of getting some more Lectrosonic IFBs, I already have 9 units in Block 30.
My question is, are there any blocks to be totally avoided? I mainly work in Sydney. Thanks. Skeet.

[Predrag Malesev]

Hey Fella, I have block 29 all good.

[Terry "Skeet" kelly]

Thanks Rags, how was Hong Kong? We will catch up soon. Skeet.

[David Glasser]

Hi Skeet,
I have been using Lectro IFB on Block 26 for the last 10 years without any problems. However, my experience with older Lectro 200 series radio mics suggests that Blocks 21 and 22 are absolute shite in Sydney. My 411a units are in Block 29 and seem to work everywhere.
Cheers,
David.

[Steve Foy]

Hi Skeet,
Funny you should mention that, I've just spent many hours trying to find out that very question. This culminated in a 2 hour phone call with the ACMA who are the responsible department in Australia.
I'll spare you all the frustration, but basically there will be a big reshuffle of everything from VHF Band 1 through UHF Band 5 and beyond as analogue TV is shut down by 2013 and the Telco's lobby for more bandwidth. Digital Radio is already broadcasting on VHF Band 3 - Ch 9A and most of the VHF and UHF Channels are spattered with analogue and digital TV broadcasts as well as repeater broadcasts whose frequency allocations vary all around the country. This typically doesn't present any problems for us now as long as you have frequency agile equipment, which most of us do.
That said, if you have a block that works now, then you should be fine until at least 2013. However if you want to plan beyond that you should know this: The ACMA has identified a DRO (Digital Revenue Opportunity) in the spectrum allocation plan that extends from 698Mhz - 820Mhz (Blocks 27 - 31). Basically what that means is that they see a money making bonanza by selling this part of the spectrum to the Telco's for high speed wireless data applications. This will obviously impact on the majority of current wireless operators.
Now you know !!!
Regards,
Steve Foy

[Peter Mega]

Hi Skeet and everyone
Hope your well mate.
I have Lectro IFB in block 24 which works without problems.
My radio mics are block 29 and block 22.
Block 29 is also fine - no problems
Block 22 is not so good. I do manage to still use them but with reduced range.
I've attached some info regarding frequencies and TV channels. You can cross reference the TV channels document with the last page on the frequencies document to work out whats best for you.
Also an Australian frequency spectrum chart.
I've had these for a couple of years now so hopefully not too much has changed in that time.
Ofcourse its only a guide but I used it when I bought my block 29 gear and it seemed to worke for me.
Good luck
Cheers
Peter Mega

[Paul Salty BRINCAT]

Hi Skeet, hows it going, last time i played in Sydney block 24 for my I.F.Bs seemed fine, but im woundering how blocks 25 and 26 are like down that way now, im still fine up this way Northern N.S.W and S.E Queensland. If anyone can help that would be greet to know...Thanks ....Paul ''Salty'''Brincat.

[Peter Mega]

Hi Salty,
Hope your well.
With the info I have at hand at the moment, you should be fine with block 25 and 26 in Sydney, even around Murwillumbah (your up that way right?)
Take a look at the docs I attached in my other post above.
With the frequencies of the blocks from Lectro website and cross referencing from the docs, you should be able to get an idea of whats good etc. Its only a giude though, cant stress this point enough.
Hope this helps
Peter Mega

[Terry "Skeet" kelly]

Thanks guys, gotta love this forum. Skeet.

[Bill White]

Before making your final decision Skeet...

I hate myself for doing this… but some of the above discussion seems 'flawed' and should not go unchallenged.
I avoid writing on spectrum matters because everyone, including the proverbial Drover’s Dog, knows more about it than I do.

To further my education, it would help to know the ACMA contact who actually admitted that 698 to 820 was the ‘target’ spectrum. His name and rank would be helpful. Mind you, his assertions might well turn out to be prophetic.
Given the very limited number of options available to ACMA, he does have perhaps a one in three chance of guessing. Anyone’s guess, no matter how misguided or misinformed, has a one in three chance.
It does seem uncharacteristically candid of ACMA to make definitive statements before officially publishing their ‘Green Paper’ and taking into account public concern as they are required to do under The Act.
If ACMA has already made up its mind, then the House of Reps surely ought to be asking them why public comment was not sought or considered. To borrow a line from Yes Minister, “A courageous decision indeed”.

I am also confused by the phrase “Digital Revenue Opportunity” when everyone else at ACMA, the Federal Government and agencies worldwide, has standardized on “Digital Dividend”. Was this spokesperson in Spectrum Planning, or in ACMA’s Accounts Department?

Also confusing is the reference “ACMA has identified a DRO (Digital Revenue Opportunity) in the spectrum allocation plan that extends from 698Mhz - 820Mhz (Blocks 27 - 31).
A statement like that must surely have originated in the USA as we have no channel that starts at 698MHz; the US does however.
Here in OZ, that should have read 694 to 820, or 701-820MHz. Any ACMA spokesperson, who doesn’t know we have 7MHz Television channels, rather than 6MHz, is not, IMHO, to be given much credence.

To try and understand this mess, we need to appreciate the current situation. The UHF Television spectrum is 520 to 820 MHz.

It is a universal convention that we define the UHF spectrum in MegaHertz (MHz) never by blocks. A block refers to the range of a Lectrosonics UHF system or 25.6MHz. While Zaxcom seem to have adopted that convention, the US regulator, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) uses MHz., as does every European agency or enlightened body worldwide. Blocks are about as useful as pick-axe handles in measuring fence height.

As this group prefers to use this jargon, I will again go with the flow (under protest ;-)

In broad terms, 520 to 603MHz is mostly assigned to high powered stations in major capitols or satellite areas such as the Illawarra. A similar situation is applicable in all states. It is important to note that spectrum allocation varies from location to location. When anyone says Block 22 (663.200 to 688.700MHz) is good or bad, that is purely relative to where you are at the time.

If I said to you that I was comfortable in Apres ski wear, while on holiday, that might be true if I was at Perisher Resort. If you are planning a holiday in Fiji, that advice might be totally inappropriate; i.e. your mileage may vary.

If you operate in Sydney, Block 22 is about the worst choice possible. In other capital cities, it could be just fine.

As the situation is different in every location, generalizations are inappropriate and misleading at best.

The spectrum between 603 to 701MHz is a mix of various powered transmitters while 701 to 820MHz. is generally used for low-power regional translators.

The least preferred option might be to kill off 520 to 603MHz as that would impact upon major networks, i.e. High power transmitters and high population density areas. In political terms, you would offend the largest number of punters, and media moguls, risking a backlash at the polls. The odds are against this choice.

The spectrum above 698MHz was identified by the FCC as their preferred option. It should be noted that the USA always used a different planning model and their pre-existing use of the UHF spectrum was different to ours. Ergo, no conclusions should be drawn from the FCC decision.

In Australia, translators above 701 are predominantly low power but there are thousands of them and that will translate into high cost.

Any decision, for any of the three options, will be unpopular. ACMA must make an unpopular choice as there are no easy options. Nobody wants to concede anything. Everybody wants all inconvenience and burden to be born by others. Nothing is new there.

If we make the assumption that frequencies above 700MHz will go in the reshuffle because we had some ‘insider advice’, then you might want to buy your new gear in either 520 to 603MHz or 603 to 701MHz perhaps?

Before you rush in there… think about this:

There are thousands (yes thousands) of translators (analogue and digital) above 701. Sure the analogues will be switched off but what about the 500+ digital translators that will have to be shifted elsewhere? Where will they go? Easy, somewhere below 701 where you may be intending to buy gear.

Is an alarm going off in the back of your head right now? Because it should be!
Out of the frying pan, etc.

ACMA have kept their cards very close to their chest so far. Consider this:

A previous ACMA discussion paper, released in March 2006, titled 'Future use of unassigned television channels' broached the 'Digital Dividend' enigma and short listed three possible options.
I specifically refer you to their statement:
"The least disruptive option is likely to involve spectrum in the middle of the UHF band with channels in the 40s and 50s (610–750 MHz)."
That statement possibly contains a clue as to what was lurking on the back wall of their psyche at that time. To fairly put it in context, that was a comment (in 2006) on how the Digital Dividend factor might impact upon the auctioning off of two unassigned analogue channels for 'broadcasting related' purposes.
Read my full article at:

http://microphonemagic.tv/articles/3-articles/24-well-all-be-rooned

Officially, ACMA have said little on the subject since. See attached pdf article by ACMA’s Alastair Gellatly

There is possibly a much bigger picture beyond the looming spectrum sell-off.
You will be aware that the industry, in the USA, has lost all spectrum access above 698MHz. There is an even more sinister picture emerging that makes even that look petty by comparison.
Even with a major reassignment of any TV spectrum, there is always ‘White Space’ left in the remaining spectrum. The FCC is currently flirting with major telecom and media players who want to use ‘‘White Space’’ below 698MHz. These players, of the same ilk as those who bid on the 700MHz band, want ‘shared access’ to the remaining ‘White Space’, i.e. they want to use the spectrum when sound recordists are not using it.
How would they know you are not using that ‘White Space’?
Easy, they would use ‘intelligent receivers’ to scan the spectrum and look for unused channels. If you were using it, it would look elsewhere for unoccupied channels. The problem with this is that many sound recordists go home at night to their families or hotel room. Unless you left your gear on 24/7, they could grab your channel and start transmission. When would they stop? Perhaps never? These systems are designed to provide wireless ISP access as an alternative to the 802.1 spectrum (currently overcrowded). You might arrive next morning to find every second laptop in town is using ‘your’ channel for browsing and email.

Having already lost everything above 698MHz., having to share ‘White Space’ below 698MHz, might drive the last nail into the US coffin.
Statistically, for every sound recordist who wants to use ‘White Space’, there may be 10,000 punters who would like wireless broadband. The ISP providers are the ‘usual suspects’ that bid for 698MHz and above in the US. AT&T, Google, Microsoft, America Online, etc. How do you feel about a ‘toe to toe’ stoush with them over who needs spectrum the most? The politicians might see their proposal as servicing thousands of voters, versus your single vote.
Could that happen here in Australia? Are you kidding? There is an old Chinese proverb which runs along the lines of “Never stand between a politician and a pot of money”. Wait and see what happens.
Exactly which spectrum will be lost to Digital Dividend is beyond my ken.
Should we be worried? Yes.
Should we not be writing letters and girding our loins? Not yet.
First rule of war is to know your enemy. Until ACMA release their Green Paper, speculation as to what might happen is as futile as tilting at windmills.
Whether we lose the 600 or 700 MHz band is mostly irrelevant anyway. In either case, we would find the spectrum that survives will change immeasurably and we might eventually be fighting off the Huns and Visigoths of the computer industry for the bones of what is left.
If you do want to take them on, you will need an industry lobby group somewhat stronger than one which seems only capable of conducting an annual piss-up and back-slapping fest.
You will need a representative body with both the balls and brains to provide a convincing case on your behalf.

The best advice I can offer is to hang onto your shotgun and boom pole and make sure your XLR to XLR leads are in good condition.

Bill White

[Terry "Skeet" kelly]

Thank you Bill, what a depressing post for someone just wanting to find out the best Block to buy. I realize the shotgun and boom pole line at the end was tongue in cheek,but as you well know Radio mics and ifb's are a day to day tool we all use.After all that, if YOU were buying, in which Block would you buy. Skeet.

[Steve Foy]

Just to clarify a few issues raised by Bill regarding what the ACMA said or didn't say.

For the record, my comments were based on not only the discussion I had with an ACMA representative but also countless hours of searching websites in Australia, Europe and the USA in an effort to make an informed decision with regard to the purchase of new Radio Mic. and IFB equipment.

To say it's a confusing mess is an understatement and the fact of the matter is that nobody will commit to saying anything concrete at all, basically because nobody knows and at best it's all speculation. Interestingly enough the ACMA itself has distanced itself from this issue by saying that ultimately the decision will rest with the Minister for Communications and that once a decision has been made they will be the Department responsible for the planning and implementation of that decision.

As a result my comments are largely speculation also but are based on what I have been able to find out from research, emails, phone calls and decisions already made in other countries. I don't profess to know much at all about the finer details of Spectrum Planning and Implementation but was merely trying to share some knowledge with my colleges and make them aware of the inevitable reallocation of our current allocation in which we have all heavily invested in and are continuing to invest in.

Like it or not, my work as a Sound Recordist depends on the use of wireless equipment and as with any business investment decision I need to be sure that I will get a return on that investment which means two things: I need to buy wisely to ensure functionality in a variety of locations and conditions and I need to know that I will get a minimum of 5 years use out of that investment.

Personally, I'm going for Lectrosonics Block 27.

Regards,

Steve Foy

[Bill White]

Sorry to dispirit you Skeet,
The situation does looks bleak… but until we get something in writing, by way of a discussion paper from ACMA, we simply do not know what the future of UHF spectrum is. Meanwhile, we do not need unqualified speculation.

When clients ask me what is the best frequency band to be in, I need to know several factors before formulating a response, e.g.

Where will the client be operational? If mostly confined to one city, the decision is made easier.

What other frequencies are they operational on?

Camera Link? Frequency? Is it a Zaxcom system?

IFB systems?. Frequency?

Existing talent mike systems? Frequency?

What recorder are they using?
Some recorders generate serious levels of RF spray and it’s really hard to separate your recorder from your wireless mikes. Read this about the Nagra VI – and weep!
http://www.productionrecording.com/Tools/NagraRFtest.html

Please don’t respond to my above questions, but all of these factors have to be considered before making a recommendation. There is as much potential for interference from within your kit, as outside of it; not just interference from TV transmitters. Your wireless mike supplier should advise you.

It is not my role in life to support my competitors. Despite this, over the last decade, I've had dozens of calls from soundos at the sales counter of Coffey Sound, B&H Photo, TAI Audio or Trew Audio. One call came in at 6:30am (because of the time difference). All wanted to know which Block they should buy their Lectrosonics systems in.

I can’t begin to explain to you how overjoyed I am to get these calls ;-) I appreciate why they want to know, but why don’t they ring the Lectrosonics dealers? Depending upon the hour of day, my recommendation often involves travel and sex ;-)

The last question I need to ask clients is:

Do you want a recommendation for NOW or the FUTURE?

My crystal ball is a bit hazy on the future as ACMA has given us very few clues as to what they are considering. ACMA is a bureaucratic organization which liaises with industry stakeholders, holds public briefings and seminars, considers overseas trends, advices the Minister and makes recommendations. The big end of town also has the Ministers’ ear, but they don’t invite me to their soirees for some obscure reason.

I have a policy of not disseminating rumour or quotes from overseas regulatory authorities that have little interest, and no influence, in the Australian scene.

Some time back, one SPERM (Self-Professed Expert on Radio Microphones) wrote to his local member in Canberra complaining that ACMA were ‘ripping off’ our 700MHz band and that his wireless mikes were already suffering interference from Cell ‘Phone sites.

It is indeed heart-warming and comforting to know that our industry’s future is safe in his hands. Both ACMA and the politician easily dismissed his complaints.

To address your original question Skeet, viz.

After all that, if YOU were buying, in which Block would you buy?

Unfortunately, for the reasons above, I would need to be cognizant of all the details to answer. I’m not.

As luck would have it, Steve has already supplied you with an answer. I will not be adopting his advice, but that choice is yours, not mine.


Good luck!

Bill

“All generalizations are false, including this one.”
Mark Twain.