Help on building a dual wireless setup for a zero-cable rig

Lohengrin

Lohengrin

Inspired
I'm struggling with a routing problem to build a zero-cable rig. I’d like to know if there is anyone out there with a stage setup where a signal is sent wirelessly to two different receivers, and advice on how to implement it.

We run a rack hosting IEM bases, IEM mixer, PA patchbay, backing & tempo track player, and MIDI sequencer to automate preset changes. Currently, I have a separate rack for guitar, with the AxeFx and a wireless receiver. Therefore, I need to run audio and MIDI cables sending audio to the band's rack and receiving MIDI PCs.

However, I would like to integrate all guitar gear also inside the band’s rack, so I can walk in a venue with, literally, my guitar in one hand and IEM/wireless body packs in the other. The problem is that the band’s rack is not always within my line of sight in the stage, and I need to have access to a tuner. So I could have a separate tuner near me and connect that with a cable to the band’s rack. However, that would mean to still having to use cables.

What could I do? The cheapest option for me would be to put in the band’s rack another wireless transmitter and have a small and light rack with only a wireless receiver and a tuner (I could live with the extra latency for tuning). Another option is to have two matched wireless receivers, one in the band’s rack and another one for the tuner, so both of them capture the same signal broadcasted by the single transmitter.

But in general, I’d be curious to know if there is anyone out there running a similar setup, where the signal from the guitar is needed at two different points of the stage and wirelessly carried there.
 
I have some ideas, but I have some questions first:

Are you currently muting your guitar from the Axe FX front panel when you tune? If so, how do you plan to mute with the new setup?

What model Axe-FX are you using?

Would you compromise for a “one cable” rig instead of zero? If not, would you be okay with extra latency?
 
kelso1 said:
clip-on headstock tuner
Click to expand...

as much as i hate them that is the cheapest option. get a small one that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.
If you go wireless you could split your wireless signal and run to a cheapo wireless unit, as you are just sending a signal, dont care about quality. would be cool if the transmitter end could be plugged up too so it wont need batteries changed.
 
getlostinsound said:
I have some ideas, but I have some questions first:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the fast response!

getlostinsound said:
Are you currently muting your guitar from the Axe FX front panel when you tune? If so, how do you plan to mute with the new setup?
Click to expand...

When a song ends, a specific muted preset for tuning is selected automatically, so I can tune between songs. In case I have unexpected tuning problems in-song, I simply take the backup guitar which is always within reach.

getlostinsound said:
What model Axe-FX are you using?
Click to expand...

Currently Axe FX II XL+, but will be most probably substituted by III or (racked) FM3 in the near future.

getlostinsound said:
Would you compromise for a “one cable” rig instead of zero? If not, would you be okay with extra latency?
Click to expand...

One is better than two, of course. I’d contemplate one-cable options as well. Extra latency for tuning is ok, but I’m not sure about something I could notice while playing.
 
Yeah, the headstock tuner that @kelso1 and @dpeterson mentioned is the cheapest and smallest option if you’re ok with it. That’s probably what I’d do.

If that won’t fly, a separate rack with a wireless and a tuner seems like overkill, since you’re trying to consolidate gear. Technically, there aren’t any cables connecting the two racks, but you still need to get a power drop for the second rack, and it’s a lot more to carry than “guitar in one hand, wireless packs in the other”. If you were going to go this route, I’d consider a micro pedalboard with a pedal-style wireless receiver and pedal tuner. You may even be able to fit it in your guitar bag.

The other option, if you upgrade to an Axe FX III or FM3, would be the FC6, run with a single XLR to wherever you want. This would give you a handy backup for switching presets, and you may find you use it for other bands/projects that don’t have all of the automated changes programmed.

Or, since you already have click track and changes programmed, just record all your parts and just mime them on stage. No tuner needed! 😂
 
dpeterson said:
as much as i hate them that is the cheapest option. get a small one that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.
If you go wireless you could split your wireless signal and run to a cheapo wireless unit, as you are just sending a signal, dont care about quality. would be cool if the transmitter end could be plugged up too so it wont need batteries changed.
Click to expand...

I think I'll try the cheap transmitter, maybe even using Output 2 of the AxeFx for the split. I have to admit a clip tuner is a much more sensible option, but I'm afraid of losing it in stage.
 
Lohengrin said:
I think I'll try the cheap transmitter, maybe even using Output 2 of the AxeFx for the split. I have to admit a clip tuner is a much more sensible option, but I'm afraid of losing it in stage.
Click to expand...

reason i said the split would be to avoid having to add output 2's on all your patches, now and in the future.. but would still work.
 
getlostinsound said:
The other option, if you upgrade to an Axe FX III or FM3, would be the FC6, run with a single XLR to wherever you want. This would give you a handy backup for switching presets, and you may find you use it for other bands/projects that don’t have all of the automated changes programmed.
Click to expand...

I'll have to ponder this one as well.

Edit to add that it would be sooo sweet to have a wireless-enabled FC6... :sweatsmile:

getlostinsound said:
Or, since you already have click track and changes programmed, just record all your parts and just mime them on stage. No tuner needed! 😂
Click to expand...

It's not the first time I've thought about this. :tearsofjoy: Life would be much easier, isnt't it?
 
dpeterson said:
reason i said the split would be to avoid having to add output 2's on all your patches, now and in the future.. but would still work.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, it makes sense too, although I currently I feed the clean signal from output 2 into my IEMs to hear the guitar while tunning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom