I now have both, and the sound quality of the Rode is noticeably better. Sounds less flat, and much better at reproducing the true sound. A few other things I didn't care for on the Lark. 1) unless you lock the settings every time you use the system, it's very easy to change a setting inadvertently while going through the menu 2) the noise cancellation can be nice, but seems to get confused and overreacts in certain situations. Example, walking near a waterfall it overcorrects and cancells your voice as well. I've found I trust it more when turned off 3) The Lark receiver is so much larger than the Rode, making it much more noticeable on the camera. I definitely prefer the low profile and smaller overall size of the Rode. The case is nice, but a variety of inexpensive charging cases are available for the Go ii. Bottom line, the Go ii is slightly more expensive overall, but it seems Rode puts the $$$ into a higher quality system.
I can hear that in this video. Funny thing I read some reviews claiming Lark has "fuller" sound. Guess they were paid. EDIT: no, I've watched other TH-cam reviews and they got Lark sound at least just as good, and arguably better than Rode Wireless GO 2. Its just some fault in the recording of this particular video that got Lark sound worse. But the 32 bit float argument in favor of wireless go 2 still stands. With current firmware 2.5 it can do 32 bit internal just as the wireless pro - and neither lark no dji can follow it there. EDIT 2 - Larks have weird high frequencies - while listening to them in headphones they are uncomfortably piercing. So in the end Rode's sound is more natural and pleasing.
not many people mention, and you also omitted the fact that Rode Wireless 2 has got 32 bit internal recording which Lark lacks. This is a big deal and kind of justifies all the hassle with rode central, etc
It is only the Rode Wireless Pro that has 32 bit floating point and this is more expensive than the Lark Max and therefore isn’t a apples to apples comparison
@@CourseBuildersAcademy that is where you are wrong. I have wireless go 2 and updated to current firmware version 2.5 it does have 32 bit internal! Just to be precise I've run the test now, recorded a clip and got 32-bit float confirmed in Invisor Lite
@@SupraKeroGas I think you will find you have the option to export WIGO2 TX onboard recordings as 32-bit float files, even though they are not originally recorded in that format. This conversion allows for compatibility with other files in a DAW Project that already have 32-bit float files. However, it's important to note that converting the files to 32-bit float will not fix any audio clipping issues that may have occurred during the onboard recordings. So like I said and also mentioned by Rode in their documentation, only the Pro version has 32 bit floating point audio recording.
@@SupraKeroGas You are incorrect in your assumption. The Wireless Go 2 can convert to a 32-bit float format but it can not record in it. While this software update will help with compatibility with other devices that do record in true 32 bit the Wireless Go 2 can not record in 32 bit, therefore it won't benefit from preventing audio from clipping or any of the other features that 32-bit recording has. I have the Rode Wireless Go Pro and also the Wireless Go 2 and I 100% know this is the case.
@colinrowland1113 Mine is at 2.5.0 firmware and can record 32-bit float internally. I’ve verified the files are 32-bit float indeed. I have no idea why you don’t get it with your wireless go 2. Are you sure you’ve properly updated the firmware?
It was a toss up between DJI, Hollyland and Rode. I had the opportunity to get a Rode wireless pro for under $300 and leaped at the chance. Aside from the interface on the dji and hollyland the Rode pro adds so many more features that others cannot touch. Great video.
Thank you for the informative video! Something I didn't get: is it possible to use other brands lavalier mic with these systems? Or I can only use the rode lavs with the rode wireless go etc?
Did you try buying a new lav mic, a small investment here will significantly increase quality, a well engineered capsule matched with low impedance cable will help a great deal
I now have both, and the sound quality of the Rode is noticeably better. Sounds less flat, and much better at reproducing the true sound. A few other things I didn't care for on the Lark. 1) unless you lock the settings every time you use the system, it's very easy to change a setting inadvertently while going through the menu 2) the noise cancellation can be nice, but seems to get confused and overreacts in certain situations. Example, walking near a waterfall it overcorrects and cancells your voice as well. I've found I trust it more when turned off 3) The Lark receiver is so much larger than the Rode, making it much more noticeable on the camera. I definitely prefer the low profile and smaller overall size of the Rode. The case is nice, but a variety of inexpensive charging cases are available for the Go ii. Bottom line, the Go ii is slightly more expensive overall, but it seems Rode puts the $$$ into a higher quality system.
I can hear that in this video. Funny thing I read some reviews claiming Lark has "fuller" sound. Guess they were paid. EDIT: no, I've watched other TH-cam reviews and they got Lark sound at least just as good, and arguably better than Rode Wireless GO 2. Its just some fault in the recording of this particular video that got Lark sound worse. But the 32 bit float argument in favor of wireless go 2 still stands. With current firmware 2.5 it can do 32 bit internal just as the wireless pro - and neither lark no dji can follow it there. EDIT 2 - Larks have weird high frequencies - while listening to them in headphones they are uncomfortably piercing. So in the end Rode's sound is more natural and pleasing.
Excellent review and THANK YOU for crafting this without jump cuts, as most lazy bloggers do. Kudos for the editing!
Much appreciated!
Just hit order. Thanks for the video. Very helpful.
Glad it was helpful!
not many people mention, and you also omitted the fact that Rode Wireless 2 has got 32 bit internal recording which Lark lacks. This is a big deal and kind of justifies all the hassle with rode central, etc
It is only the Rode Wireless Pro that has 32 bit floating point and this is more expensive than the Lark Max and therefore isn’t a apples to apples comparison
@@CourseBuildersAcademy that is where you are wrong. I have wireless go 2 and updated to current firmware version 2.5 it does have 32 bit internal! Just to be precise I've run the test now, recorded a clip and got 32-bit float confirmed in Invisor Lite
@@SupraKeroGas I think you will find you have the option to export WIGO2 TX onboard recordings as 32-bit float files, even though they are not originally recorded in that format.
This conversion allows for compatibility with other files in a DAW Project that already have 32-bit float files. However, it's important to note that converting the files to 32-bit float will not fix any audio clipping issues that may have occurred during the onboard recordings. So like I said and also mentioned by Rode in their documentation, only the Pro version has 32 bit floating point audio recording.
@@SupraKeroGas You are incorrect in your assumption. The Wireless Go 2 can convert to a 32-bit float format but it can not record in it. While this software update will help with compatibility with other devices that do record in true 32 bit the Wireless Go 2 can not record in 32 bit, therefore it won't benefit from preventing audio from clipping or any of the other features that 32-bit recording has. I have the Rode Wireless Go Pro and also the Wireless Go 2 and I 100% know this is the case.
@colinrowland1113 Mine is at 2.5.0 firmware and can record 32-bit float internally. I’ve verified the files are 32-bit float indeed. I have no idea why you don’t get it with your wireless go 2. Are you sure you’ve properly updated the firmware?
It was a toss up between DJI, Hollyland and Rode. I had the opportunity to get a Rode wireless pro for under $300 and leaped at the chance. Aside from the interface on the dji and hollyland the Rode pro adds so many more features that others cannot touch.
Great video.
The advantage the Rode Pro has is 32 bit float audio
Can you replace the batteries in the Hollyland?
Don’t think so, but not sure why you would need to, they are rechargable
@@CourseBuildersAcademy if you don't regularly charge rechargeable Lithium ion batteries they go bad and die
How is the battery life ? And charging time for full charge?
Thank you for the informative video! Something I didn't get: is it possible to use other brands lavalier mic with these systems? Or I can only use the rode lavs with the rode wireless go etc?
You can use pretty much any lav mic with either
@@CourseBuildersAcademy thank you!
Thank you. Helpful. Good clear video..
Hi! Could you help me? I have the lark max and the volume is too low. I set on gain 10 and out at max...but still low.
Did you fixed it ?
@@UmangaGhimire no
Did you try buying a new lav mic, a small investment here will significantly increase quality, a well engineered capsule matched with low impedance cable will help a great deal
@@TheLiveEventsGuild sorry could you repeat? I dont understand very well.
He's saying buy a Lavalier microphone and plug it in.
please tell us your opinon on the Lark Max vs The Rode Wireless Pro
I've not used the Rode Wireless Go Pro to any degree yet
How about the new Rode Wireless Pro ;-)
Cheers from LA.
The Rode Wireless Pro is a totally different price point so it wouldn’t be a fair comparison
Thank you very much sir. Now I know on whitch mic I need to invest for our Channel. Be blessed in Christ Jesus
Glad I could help