UFlyMike Headset Survey

[RTRHD]

We should have a new version out in the next couple of months that has an adjustable gain control for the microphone (for those that insist on flying in a noisy cockpit in hotmike).

Also, survey is going great, BUT WE NEED MORE FOLKS TO TAKE THE SURVEY. The link is in the first post in this threat.

Mike

I really wanted to get the U Fly mike for all the airline's we do. And use them when flying the for the audio input. But after watching and listening to guys that have them wrestle with the VOX,ICS,
Hot Mike,Side Tone,Comm 1 and 2. I said screw it seems like it is just to much trouble. You no sooner get it set and you switch seats. It is the same with all ANR's it seems. Let me know if there is an easy way and I will get a pair.

 

[CA1900]

We should have a new version out in the next couple of months that has an adjustable gain control for the microphone (for those that insist on flying in a noisy cockpit in hotmike).

In the airplane I fly (Citation Excel), we do have a voice-activated intercom, but the UFly is more sensitive than the company-supplied Telex 750s, and will very often keep the mic open just with the wind noise, where the Telex won't. Being able to adjust it to approximately the same sensitivity would be a big help!

Any plans to offer a modification or trade-in program for those with the Pro GA/RJ model?

Thanks.

 

[mblackey]

I really wanted to get the U Fly mike for all the airline's we do. And use them when flying the for the audio input. But after watching and listening to guys that have them wrestle with the VOX,ICS,
Hot Mike,Side Tone,Comm 1 and 2. I said screw it seems like it is just to much trouble. You no sooner get it set and you switch seats. It is the same with all ANR's it seems. Let me know if there is an easy way and I will get a pair.

One of the "problems" with ANR is that you hear things you didn't hear before and shortcomings in the aircraft comm setup are more apparent. This problems goes beyond ANR headsets, though.

When you make a headset, you try to provide as much adjustment as possible. Problem is headsets, despite the TSO myth, are made with a wide variation in sensitivity, capability, etc. When you mix headset types in the same aircraft, you've compounded the problem already present from the aircraft comm system.

We are coming out with a new version in the next couple of months that has a 3-position impedance switch (present one has 2) and a potentiometer mike adjustment (270 degree dial, adjusted with a jewelers screwdriver). Hopefully, that will help.

Someday some of the "hotmike" crowd will stop trying to fly in that configuration in noisy airplanes. I flew a T-6 for awhile. Key the mike, and you get blown out of the cockpit. It wasn't the headsets fault, though.

Mike

 

[JustInfo]

Never have had a "hot mike" problem in the Hawker 800's. Works great with any combination of headsets.

 

[Guitar Guy]

Just completed the survey. I've been considering moving to the QC2/UFlyMike setup but I'm waiting to see if anything is going to come down regarding new rules either from the feds or my employer.

 

[Hung Start]

Someday some of the "hotmike" crowd will stop trying to fly in that configuration in noisy airplanes. I flew a T-6 for awhile. Key the mike, and you get blown out of the cockpit. It wasn't the headsets fault, though.

Try that in a T-28. Not pretty, at all.

Hung

 

[Ultra Grump]

Someday some of the "hotmike" crowd will stop trying to fly in that configuration in noisy airplanes.

In some aircraft, you don't have a choice. The intercom is hot all the time.

 

[mblackey]

In some aircraft, you don't have a choice. The intercom is hot all the time.

That's a new one on me.

Mike

 

[FLYLOW22]

In some aircraft, you don't have a choice. The intercom is hot all the time.

Hmmm. Never have flown an airplane with a constant hot mic.

Which model?

 

[fischman]

Most Piper aircraft do.

 

[JustInfo]

None of the Pipers I flew even had an intercom built into them. Guess I must be showing my age!

 

[Say Again Over]

Hmmm. Never have flown an airplane with a constant hot mic.

Which model?

Well how bout several of the aircraft on your list, say the Airbus, there is no reasonable way to operate the intercom in anything other than HOT, you can select intercom ON or OFF unless you select to xmit on INT only, having to reselect for each radio transmission. Some GA intercom systems have a VOX (voice activation)feature.

 

[Negative Prist]

That's a new one on me.

Mike

The Lear 45's audio panel does have squelch, so the mic isn't necessarily always hot, but squelch control is integrated with volume control. Volume goes up and squelch goes down, and vice versa. The impedance switch helps, but there are probably people who don't know about it.

Another feature I wish you would include is some sort of equalizer for aircraft radio audio. I owned a pair of Bose Xs before I bought my UFlyMike, and although I haven't done any tests, I believe the Bose QC2 frequency response (for aircraft radio audio) is broader than the Xs. Obviously, the Xs are made for voice communication, and the QC2s are designed to reproduce music, among other things. I believe the QC2 have better bass response.

There is a noticeable difference in clarity of the aircraft radio between the Xs and the QC2. I believe the Xs are tuned for this, and the QC2 is not. With the QC2, controller's voice on the aircraft radio sound much less clear, and it took me a long while to become accustomed to that. It still can be a problem, and a simple equalizer, fixed or adjustable, should be included in future designs.

The EQ, of course, would only filter the audio from the aircraft's headset audio, and not the audio from the audio input jack on the UFlyMike itself. The EQ should tune the audio from the aircraft to a narrower spectrum to make the human voice more clear.

 

[FLYLOW22]

Well how bout several of the aircraft on your list, say the Airbus, there is no reasonable way to operate the intercom in anything other than HOT, you can select intercom ON or OFF unless you select to xmit on INT only, having to reselect for each radio transmission. Some GA intercom systems have a VOX (voice activation)feature.

Exactly. We never used the darned thing because of the hot mic. Never had to though. It was quiet enough.

And does Piper even make a real jet (2 engine) that is used for 91K, 135? Nope. Not a problem.

 

[mblackey]

The Lear 45's audio panel does have squelch, so the mic isn't necessarily always hot, but squelch control is integrated with volume control. Volume goes up and squelch goes down, and vice versa. The impedance switch helps, but there are probably people who don't know about it.

Another feature I wish you would include is some sort of equalizer for aircraft radio audio. I owned a pair of Bose Xs before I bought my UFlyMike, and although I haven't done any tests, I believe the Bose QC2 frequency response (for aircraft radio audio) is broader than the Xs. Obviously, the Xs are made for voice communication, and the QC2s are designed to reproduce music, among other things. I believe the QC2 have better bass response.

There is a noticeable difference in clarity of the aircraft radio between the Xs and the QC2. I believe the Xs are tuned for this, and the QC2 is not. With the QC2, controller's voice on the aircraft radio sound much less clear, and it took me a long while to become accustomed to that. It still can be a problem, and a simple equalizer, fixed or adjustable, should be included in future designs.

The EQ, of course, would only filter the audio from the aircraft's headset audio, and not the audio from the audio input jack on the UFlyMike itself. The EQ should tune the audio from the aircraft to a narrower spectrum to make the human voice more clear.

Everyone has their own opinions, and you might prefer the audio of the Bose X but most folks don't. The most recent survey results rate the UFM/QC2 very highly compared to the Bose X.

There are many in the field of professional audio that would also disagree. There are many upper and lower level harmonics (many beyond the range of human hearing) that add clarity and natural sound to the spoken voice. We hear all of these harmonics when we speak to someone face to face. When the audio is EQ'd these harmonics are removed and what is produced is the "barrel" sound.

Take any Hollywood movie that emulates a "radio" transmission. This is accomplished by recording the voice at the full range of a microphone and then drastically EQ'ing it. The point being to produce the publicly understood barrel and scratchy sound associated with radio communication.

This association comes from old radios that produced a lot of noise. It was then necessary to isolate the voice in order to hear clearly. Radios have come a long way over the years and the excess noise has been all but removed. So, in turn, it is unnecessary, and in fact detrimental to clarity, to isolate only the fundamental harmonics of the voice.

We try to make a product that is superior to others and gives you what you want. We appreciate your input and will look closely at whether EQ at any level would be beneficial.

Mike