• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Sine RFC-1/B vs Broadcast Tools WVRC-8

B

bmcglynn

Hello,

I have a relatively new Since RFC-1/B that came with a radio station I bought. The only thing that surprises me is that it does not have TCP/IP or web connectivity.

For $2,000 I can bring the Sine up to the 21st century with the RAK-2 control interface. I can also get the entire Broadcast Tools WVRC-8 for about half of that price.

What are some opinions on these two units? Is the Sine worth the large premium it seems to command?

Brian
 
The Sine is a rock solid unit. I also have the WVRC-8 at a site. While the web control is okay (it's Java) it doesn't have the same flexibility of the Sine or the great voice interface.

$2k is a lot of money to bring an older unit up to spec though... You could sell the Sine and invest in something completely more modern if you want.

What are you controlling? How many status inputs, metering and relay outputs do you need at your site? Is telco control something that's important to you? It would be to me, especially since the WVRC-8 only has Java, and if you have an iPhone made by stubborn Apple, you're screwed on running it on your phone. If telco was important then I would keep the sine.

You could always parallel a WVRC-8 along side the Sine for web interfacing.
 
The Sine is a very good RMC unit. To bring it into your realm of needs, and the resultant cost is left to your decision. if you have a unit meeting your requirements for less. I think I would choose it. BUT...this is your
decision...so you make it. Regards...JBI
 
WNTIRadio said:
The Sine is a rock solid unit. I also have the WVRC-8 at a site. While the web control is okay (it's Java) it doesn't have the same flexibility of the Sine or the great voice interface.
Click to expand...
The Java app is not too good sounding, and I'd agree that $2K is kind of steep to bring it up to spec. Do you recommend any other types of RC units with real web and TCP/IP control?

Brian
 
The Davicom Mini-Mac has a nice web interface and you can also program it with the Mac Comm software. My only gripe about it is the phone interface stinks.

You know anyone that has a used GSC series remote? You could run Auto Pilot on a PC and VNC into it. The voice module on the GSC is the easiest to use, at least from my experiences. The Sine is close second and the Burk units aren't too bad.

If Davicom could fix the "woman" that's inside the remote control they would have a winner. The Mini-Mac will run you around $3-4k depending on options.
 
It's not necessary to throw out the baby with the bath water and bust your budget in the process. In other words, you don't have to get rid of the RFC-1 to add web connectivity. There are several Web-only remote controls on the market that can be paralleled with the RFC-1/B to give you the Web interface. Broadcast Tools makes some relatively cheap Web only products and so do we (CircuitWerkes). By just adding one of these boxes in parallel with your existing Sine, you can achieve your goal of Web monitoring, typically for under $500. Broadcast Tools makes the Site Sentinel 4 and Site Sentinel 16. We make the Site Sentry4 and SiteSentry2.

And for a few $$ more, we can add streaming audio (send or receive) to the remote control which is something that you cannot do with the Sine at any price.

One other advantage to this approach is that you get a backup system so that if the main R/C fails, there's a good chance you can still control the transmitter.

The main disadvantage to this approach is that you don't have just one, integrated, system. When you calibrate meters, you have to do it on both products and you have to keep track of a slightly more complex installation, plus the number of channels is typically not a match.

In the end, it's what you can afford combined with what you are comfortable with that should inform your decision. I'm sure you'll get a lot of good suggestions from this board. Good luck!
 
I can't tell you how many Sine Systems remotes I've had paralleled with Burk ARC-16 units!! ALL of them, whatever the exact number was.

I forgot about the CircuitWerkes boxes. They'll do what you want to, and you can leave the Sine in place.

The telco interface on the Sine is still one of the best. Programming it, if you've never tackled one before, can be a bit of headache. Could probably program one in my sleep at this point, but that's about 10 units later. The bonus is that you can make it answer like Curly from the 3 Stooges!!! Woo woo woo, nyuk nyuk!!
 
I've pretty much replaced all my old junk with Sicon 8s. They work quite well for the money. What I find to work best for us is putting a reliable older computer (on UPS) at the site also and using it with VNC remote login to look at meters and control stuff. The web interface is sort of a backup for us. One thing I really don't like about the unit is how it goes about alerts via email. We just use a phone line to call out mainly for alerts. I can control stuff that way but I find myself just hanging up and logging in via the VNC on my iPhone.
 
The StarTec NETRS232_# will plug into the RS232 port on a non-IP remote control making it IP accessible. I've got a Burk ARC16 one one and it shows up as a "local" COM port on the PC.
Up to four ports per device. Not quite "web based" since you have to have the Autopilot software installed on the remote PC.

You can even "tunnel" between a pair of NETRS232 for a continuious IP com link in place of a telco "loop".

They just released Window 7 32 bit Port drivers for it.

Plus it's Much Much faster than the 300 baud of the control loop or radio link.
 
boiseengineer said:
The StarTec NETRS232_# will plug into the RS232 port on a non-IP remote control making it IP accessible. I've got a Burk ARC16 one one and it shows up as a "local" COM port on the PC.
Up to four ports per device. Not quite "web based" since you have to have the Autopilot software installed on the remote PC.

You can even "tunnel" between a pair of NETRS232 for a continuious IP com link in place of a telco "loop".

They just released Window 7 32 bit Port drivers for it.

Plus it's Much Much faster than the 300 baud of the control loop or radio link.
Click to expand...

I think what you are describing is a serial to Ethernet converter. If you have a device that uses a serial port and want to get the data over the Internet or LAN, these can be handy devices. They are pretty inexpensive at about $100, so if you have a product that only has a serial port on it, but has nifty software and you want to access it via the Internet, they will work. The downside is that you don't get a Webserver that you can access with any device. Also, you typically don't get e-mailing or texting of alarms or logs, either.
 
I would not recommend the WVRC-8. If your plant has an older tube-type transmitter, chances are good that it cannot easily be interfaced with the Broadcast Tools unit. Also, there are two calibrations required for each metering channel, one for the dial up interface, and a different one for the web based interface.

I fought one of these for nearly a year. Finally Broadcast Tools took the unit back and issued the distributor a credit.

Frankly, I was very disappointed with WVRC-8. Broadcast Tools generally makes bullet-proof products.

As always, YMMV...
 
I put in a WVRC 8 about three and a half years ago. The site is an FM that is 1900 feet above sea level on a mountaintop (lots of lightening and power issues there). The unit interfaced easily with the Nautel V5. We have had 2 issues which were both related to firmware and both required trips back to the factory since the unit was 'bricked'. Turn around time was decent and service was reasonably priced (first was under warranty) but having to reload everything both times was a pain and calibration is not easy. The upper and lower limits are also strange to set. Bottom line is the unit works but like anything has its' own set of problems along the way. I would probably recommend it over the Sine due to the price and web interface but I don't get excited about either of them.
 
A box that dies due to lightning is one thing, but any product that is bricked as a result of bad firmware should always be a free repair. Other than physical damage or component failure, a remote control should never simply lock up. At the least, it should be possible to unbrick the unit yourself by resetting to the factory defaults and then reprogramming.
 
http://www.usconverters.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=66&products_id=225

I have about 6 of these all over the network at our stations here, they work great, using the eltima virtual com port software with them. If you just need network console access, you can just telnet to these and access the serial console on a device.

I also have a WVRC8 at a site, its a touchy beast but I seem to have it working well, I particularly dislike having to record my own voice prompts on the unit, much prefer the synthesis on the sine but needed network capability. its also nice to have the capability of putting the phone line on the air and being able to monitor the audio over the phone line.

Stephen
 
I am surprised nobody has ever made a workable software add-on to talk to multiple sines on their serial port. Keeping the dialup functions intact, a direct serial or converted to IP connection to a PC somewhere running software that can do the logging and send texts and emails out when needed. And backup & restore programming too! There is so much Sine hardware out there, it is a no brainer!
 
special ed said:
I am surprised nobody has ever made a workable software add-on to talk to multiple sines on their serial port.
Click to expand...

In nearly 20 years working with Sines at a number of stations I have never seen an RFC with a serial port, and I suspect that they are not common. I think it likely that relatively few stations purchased that option.
 
I have stations with both of these (not in the same place though).

The WVRC units work great in places where you want web access, you (maybe) have a daily up/down/pattern change function, and not a lot else. You can program the WVRC with your whole year's worth of clock-based functions and leave it alone. Being web-based, it maintains its own clock. It notifies by email, but you can use that to text, if you want.

As mentioned, the big disadvantage to this unit is the separate phone / web interfaces. I don't bother with the phone interface on any of the WVRC units I have.


The Sine units have all been bulletproof. They lack web access, so between the two, they're a natural choice where dial-up is the only option. They're the obvious choice if you need multi-closure sequences for pattern changes, antenna monitor control / monitoring, etc. I don't see the WVRC units doing that at all. Also, the WVRC will not trigger an event sequence upon an out-of-tolerance or time-of-day condition. The Sine will. The clock is reasonably accurate, but you do have to trim it up every few months or so. That's easily done over the phone.

You can be happy with either... just a matter of matching up to what you need.
 
Grounded Grid said:
The Sine units have all been bulletproof. They lack web access, so they're a natural choice where dial-up is the only option. Beyond that, they're the obvious choice if you need multi-closure sequences for pattern changes, antenna monitor control / monitoring, etc. I don't see the WVRC units doing that at all. Also, the WVRC will not trigger an event sequence upon an out-of-tolerance or time-of-day condition. The Sine will. The clock is reasonably accurate, but you do have to trim it up every few months or so. That's easily done over the phone.
Click to expand...

Grounded Grid, this review was excellent and very helpful. Thank you, and thanks to the others who commented.

In short, I'll keep the Sine for one of the sites and look at the WVRC for the other.

Brian
 
... and if you keep track of the Sine clock error, there's a setting where you can correct it. After a few months of trimming it I had a clock that drifted less than a minute a year.
 
Any one know how to force the Sine into a DTMF dialing mode? All I can find in the manual is DTMF dial for the modem mode.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom