About Alternative Technologies: 2.4 GHz Range

With the advent of HD TV, and the resulting anticipated changes to the rules regarding the UHF spectrum, several companies are offering alternative technologies as a proposed solution. One such alternative is the use of the 2.4 GHz range for transmission. While on the surface it seems viable, there are some serious drawbacks to the use of this frequency range.

To begin with, the 2.4 GHz range is already non-exclusive and allows unlicensed devices — just as UHF would become IF white space legislation was enacted WITHOUT any limitations (which is not likely). As such, it's subject to the same issues that would confront an unregulated UHF spectrum — most notably, interference. The 2.4 GHz range has comparatively poor propagation characteristics and requires far more power to transmit the same distance (see supporting charts). This is the reason computer companies and the like want to use UHF ranges for white space devices (WSD). It's common knowledge that the UHF spectrum is the ideal range for wireless microphone use. And while it will be undergoing some change, we are confident that wireless microphones will continue to be a part of the UHF frequency range — perhaps into perpetuity. Finally, the 2.4 GHz range is much more susceptible to interference. Microwaves can wreak havoc on a single 2.4 GHz signal. This range is also prone to signal interruption from being locked by small solid objects. Just imagine the challenges in putting together a reliable multi-channel live application.

It's clear that the UHF range is still by far the most desirable because of its advantages over power management and interference. Existing 2.4 GHz technology is not yet ready for RF Wireless standards set by Sennheiser.