Sonicake's Wireless Mic System (QWM-10) review/demo

BDJohnston

Active member
I’m not a professional podcaster, but I’ve been dabbling lately; and to date, I’ve been using my computer’s built-in microphone to capture my audio. The sound is decent, although there’s a metallic flavor (room ambience) coming through the audio. I wanted something that was ‘dry’ and clear, while removing any room reflection, reverb, etc. I requested the new QWM-10, a 2.4GHz wireless microphone system by Sonicake, better known for their guitar pedals. I put together a quick demo (link below) that covers some of the features, as well as a wind and audio test. The quality and clarity of the mic should be obvious when you consider the background music was played through my Kali Audio IN-8 monitor speakers, and I simply held the Sonicake transmitter between the two speakers and recorded a second-generation audio.



Everything comes in a sturdy travel case, which houses everything you need, including the transmitter, receiver, wind muff, USB charging cable and TRS to TRS cables for both camera and phone. You may require additional adapters or conversion cables, depending what you’re plugging into. For example, when recording direct to my computer (e.g., podcasts), I plug into a mini TRS female that splits into two ¼ mono males (L + R stereo). Conversely, I plug direct into my camcorder.

Operation is simple, and once charged (takes 3 hours), both units turn on and pair up by holding their power buttons for 5-seconds. The charge is good for at least 10-hours. You can check battery status by pressing the power button (4 blinks = fully/high charged, 1 blink = 25% remaining). The Transmitter has a mute button and the Receiver has a volume button, so that you can adjust the speaker’s level from low, to moderate, to high. Both units have a quality clip, for fastening where you need them. And if you want the transmitter less noticeable, clip it inside your shirt, as it works perfectly fine inside or out.

There really isn’t any ‘bad news’ with this product, as it works well and is easy to operate. I saw one review where the 50m (164ft) range did not work as well as it did in other reviews, although it’s non-operation (cutting out or glitching) had more to do with having the speaker’s back to the camera/receiver. Once turned around, in direct line of sight, communication was fine. Otherwise, there are a few glitches in the manual, such as the transmitter’s audio button is for mute only, whereas volume changes are made with the receiver’s audio button (the manual indicates the transmitter). Not too big a deal, as the manual was translated from Chinese and sometimes instructions become a little skewed.

There are several pluses with the QWM-10, bearing in mind that I have not tried any other mic system before, aside from using my Shure SM57 to record vocals for music compositions. First, it is clear and dry. This system does a good job at reducing room reverb, reflections, etc., and minor noises. Second, and related to the first, point, the wind muff works very well. I didn’t stand outside in a wind storm, but I could not hear any wind blowing into the mic while placing it in front of a fan on low to high speeds. Third, it is versatile and can be used in a number of ways and with different electronics, e.g., phone, camera, computer, etc. Fourth, the price is excellent, at $69.99 USD. Yes, this unit was provided to me, but I did invest the time in writing this review and creating the demo. Regardless, considering the cost and clarity of signal, the QWM-10 would have been an obvious choice, which is why I requested this product for review. I saw a few less expensive lavalier mic systems out there, but were manufactured by far more generic (unknown to me) brands and I’m familiar with the quality and reputation of Sonicake. Overall, no complaints and two-thumbs up!
 
Let's be honest. It's crazily cheap and it has loads of useful accessories, so I can't see anything really that negative. Clearly, it was, er, 'inspired' by the Rode - so most of the negatives that apply to the Rode, at three times the price, don't really apply because it's so cheap. I'd buy one.

The negatives are pretty obvious - the receiver end is fine, but the transmitter, especially with the hairy cover is hardly inobtrusive, but you plug in an external mic if you need to look nice. Some of the claims are a little OTT - the 'noise reduction' technology, for example. It's digital, so what noise? The RF link is good till it's not. Looking at the Shure digital gear I have here at the moment at crazy cost per channel, I've had to do a couple of days as A2 - the audio role that involves mics and I hate digital. Not for any sensible reason other than when I did this job on analogue, you would have 10 or 12 channels in a rack, put on headphones andflick through them. Some would be missing - no path, or switched off and some would be hissy - fluttering in and out, but what you did hear would be reassuring - somebody running down stairs or a fluttery conversation so you knew where they were - then, the solid quality signal when closer. With digits, they work, or they don't. Signal strength is on a display and until it gets to a certain point, it stays 100% decent. It's also so good I can hear which packs have the better microphones - it's subtle but you hear it.

In this cheap mic - th audio is fine - because the preamp is good enough. Once through the A to D conversion, and back the other end - it will either sound good or there will be no sound, that's the digital choice.

I suppose the missing specification is latency. How much is the digital signal delayed by the two conversions? More than 7 or 8 mS and you can notice. If you plug headphones into the camera and speak - can you hear the delay? On the system here which is a Yamaha digital mixer, with a Shure digital wireless system, using Dante digital networking there is a big enough delay that trying to record an announcement via the system with headphones was delayed enough to impact my speech - so I had to remove headphones. How is the latency on yours? Not important for video - slipping the audio is simple in the edit, but it's a point?

2.4GHz does worry me. It is a very busy band and you might get interference, or you might be causing it to others? My Line 6 transmitters are rock solid - and I smile when I hear somebody complaining they can't get their ipod to talk to a lighting control - it's me! public wifi allocations are just a bit unpredictable - how does this one cope? Has anyone with one of the new frequency hopping 2.4GHz walkie-talkies been close?
 
The wind screen is for outdoors. Even reporters who talk outdoors in windy conditions have big furry coverings to block the wind. You wouldn't use it indoors. Noise I'm referring to are incidental background noises, e.g., humming, equipment running, etc. I can do direct recording with my computer's mic, and it picks up minor background noises, but it doesn't with this system. Common with other systems? Sure, I guess, but I'm not reviewing them. I never noticed interference, but I only used it for a few days. Never noticed any latency. You're bringing up issues I haven't encountered. Have a good one!
 
I'm asking if there ARE any issues? Before people buy them and discover they're brilliant or flawed? I've just had delivered at home a really cheap system and latency and resistance to interference will be the first thing to assess, because we get loads of people posting here trying to solve noise, interference and other problems. I worked out the windshield was for outside, but what radios systems look like is pretty important. You say it picks up minor background noises? That's normal of any microphone, with or without a cable. You report this one doesn't pick these up? Omnis usually pick up everything, so why is this product different? Did you get any digital or RF issues? Does it work if your phone in your pocket is connected to wifi, or somebody nearby is using 2.4 for loads of digital radios? I suppose my question is do I spend the money on one, or not? Wireless is never problem free, so I just wondered about the performance?
 
I'm asking if there ARE any issues? Before people buy them and discover they're brilliant or flawed? I've just had delivered at home a really cheap system and latency and resistance to interference will be the first thing to assess, because we get loads of people posting here trying to solve noise, interference and other problems. I worked out the windshield was for outside, but what radios systems look like is pretty important. You say it picks up minor background noises? That's normal of any microphone, with or without a cable. You report this one doesn't pick these up? Omnis usually pick up everything, so why is this product different? Did you get any digital or RF issues? Does it work if your phone in your pocket is connected to wifi, or somebody nearby is using 2.4 for loads of digital radios? I suppose my question is do I spend the money on one, or not? Wireless is never problem free, so I just wondered about the performance?
Got it. I've used the system about a dozen times so far. Zoomers at the other end indicated no issues... clear, good volume, no latency. I recorded my voice (commentary over a video) and no latency, background noise, etc. In regard to interference, not in my area (in my home). I'm in a suburban area about 8-10 minutes from downtown, to be clear. Uncertain whether standing in NY City would be a problem. It doesn't seem to take in background noise as readily as my SM57, for example. Perhaps because the mic on this system is flush with the casing, as opposed to a round ball (SM57 mic) exposed to the surroundings.
 
That's good - the mic you have is an omni directional mic, as in, it picks up all around equally while the SM57 is a cardioid, as in directional. Normally, the SM57 would actually pick up less background than the omni? That's a bit odd. However, dynamic mics do tend to be a bit deafer, but the usual difference is at the treble end - condenser mics tend to have more up top!
 
That's good - the mic you have is an omni directional mic, as in, it picks up all around equally while the SM57 is a cardioid, as in directional. Normally, the SM57 would actually pick up less background than the omni? That's a bit odd. However, dynamic mics do tend to be a bit deafer, but the usual difference is at the treble end - condenser mics tend to have more up top!
Yes, that's my point. The SM57 seems more sensitive. The Sonicake mic is plenty sensitive enough to pick up a person's voice, but does well in wind, or if there's a hum or other noise. There's a sensitive setting and also a high-pass filter. There could be better systems, but I haven't tried them (new to this type of tech), but it seems to operate and sound very decent for the price.
 
Back
Top