Zoom H4n

[Rolo 46]

Originally Posted by daveybasso

well, looks like this disposable plastic toy has now recorded on hell of a awesome sounding album lol.....just goes to show, dont trust anyones opinion, because the nay sayers all have the top end gear....trust your ears....trust the outcome....and now it has been proven with this album, that the h4n is capable of greatness and if anything but a "cheap plastic toy"...thank god for 100% irrefutable proof lol!....id rather have a recorder that makes recordings so close that you wouldnt be able to tell with the human ear and KEEP my 10 grand, than have a piece of gear that you CANT tell the difference between IT and a 300 dollar recorder, and be out 10k.....the microscopic difference is NOT worth 10k..... that would be like sayng "im not gonna buy this ford mustang that goes 150mph for 14k, but instead im gonna buy THIS ford mustang that can go 151 mph for 70k..........56k for 1 more mile per hour?.......the same thing is happening here with gear and im sorry but its just plain ******** lol...soooo glad ill never fall into the brand name trap...

Dont be delusional dear boy
Its still a plastic toy
A chinese copy of a Swiss Army knife.

[Richard Crowley]

Originally Posted by daveybasso

well, looks like this disposable plastic toy has now recorded on hell of a awesome sounding album lol.....

I'm sure that there have been photos from point-n-shoot cameras that turned up on magazine covers. And we occasionally see cell-phone video of breaking news on commercial television. But professionals don't RELY on inexpensive plastic consumer gear for 7x24 serious use.

If you are happy with your gear, then good for you. You don't need our validation of what YOU hear.

[boojum]

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.

[baslotto]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

Dont be delusional dear boy
Its still a plastic toy
A chinese copy of a Swiss Army knife.

Did it do so bad to you? What happened between you and the toy? It didn't do anything but good to me so far. I'm not really getting the bad analogy. It's a 2 track in a pocket and a 4 track in a backpack that gets usable sounds, how better could it be for its price?
Suggest me anything for $300 that makes you happy. If you have no answer then my point is made.

[Richard Crowley]

Not sure exactly what your point is? Aryan Kaganof is making a "feature film" (SMS Sugar Man) with a cell phone camera. (albeit with $10,000 worth of glass in front of it). But don't hold your breath waiting to see others shooting serious work with their cell phones.

[baslotto]

My point?
I wrote it in the post above: It's a 2 track that fits in a pocket and a 4 track in a backpack that records usable sounds for a low price.
I'm happy it exist and I'm happy to use it.
I stated above it doesn't substitute Abbey Road Studios or Black Bird's Equipment, but it delivers usable sounds.

Read the whole thread. The question is not: should I throw away all my equipment because the Zoom is like Abbey Road, the topic of this thread is "Zoom H4n".

$300 pocket recorder? good
Usable quality sounds? Good.

That's my point.

[baslotto]

Originally Posted by rcrowley

Aryan Kaganof is making a "feature film" (SMS Sugar Man) with a cell phone camera. (albeit with $10,000 worth of glass in front of it). But don't hold your breath waiting to see others shooting serious work with their cell phones.

This analogy would better apply to those iPhone mic quality recordings on youtube compared to studio recordings.

This plastic box goes up to 96k/24 with the possibility of having 4 mics simultaneously, with hi-pass filters and overdubbing capabilities. It's very different from comparing an iphone camera to a professional HD movie set camera, don't you think?

[tourtelot]

Originally Posted by boojum

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.

Love this!

BTW, this is, all and all, one of the funniest threads I have ever read on GS.

Ignore them and they disappear.

D.

[baslotto]

Yeah! I think I should work for Zoom, at least I would do it for something!

[Rolo 46]

Originally Posted by baslotto

Did it do so bad to you? What happened between you and the toy? It didn't do anything but good to me so far. I'm not really getting the bad analogy. It's a 2 track in a pocket and a 4 track in a backpack that gets usable sounds, how better could it be for its price?
Suggest me anything for $300 that makes you happy. If you have no answer then my point is made.

My Sharp MD portable fitted in a TShirt pocket and with a pair of ECMs or DPAs did a wonderful job
My WM DC6 bigger but with metal evap tape could be brilliant
Both those devices worked in any climatic conditions
Both were brilliant back ups, as is this chinese shaver
It is not however a reliable front line device imho.

[baslotto]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

My Sharp MD portable fitted in a TShirt pocket and with a pair of ECMs or DPAs did a wonderful job
My WM DC6 bigger but with metal evap tape could be brilliant
Both those devices worked in any climatic conditions
Both were brilliant back ups, as is this chinese shaver
It is not however a reliable front line device imho.

Yeah and maybe a portable wax cylinder.
These are solutions from the 80's, all fixed 2 inputs and obsolete technologies.
I bet you had something to say about them too back in the days didn't ya!

I say "good usable sounds" you reply "not a front line device", we are not communicating well around here...

[operaman]

I kind of understand the frustration. I understand this device does good for quick and dirty, but you have to understand that a lot of the guys on here are pros and make their living doing this, and you are in essence minimizing their work and experience.

Because there are more and more people who have no idea of what good or mediocre is when looking at the difference in recordings some of these guys are losing work. I might add unfairly. There seems to be a growing trend towards accepting mediocrity in our society. While I understand your view, you are waving a red flag in front of a bull. It comes off as cheeky and insensitive.

To put this in perspective, I am an opera singer. I was passed over for a job for a younger tenor because he was 500 EU a night cheaper and I would not come off of my fee per performance. If you want me you pay. I might add I am not overly expensive, but I have my limits of what I will and will not accept. I got a call after the first orchestra rehearsal with this guy because he simply was not at my level and they grudgingly paid my fee. It is a good correlation. Unfortunately not everyone is so lucky, and I have lost work to cheaper singers before, and will again I am sure.

While I certainly respect that the H4n is good for the quick and dirty recordings, it would be ignorant to put the recording on par with what these guys can do with a very nice setup and more importantly YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL experience. I know they have made my job easier over the years and I look forward to working with some of these guys in the future.

That said, the H4n is a nice device for the money if you accept what it is. a device for demo recordings. I still would prefer a Sony PCM D50 in that situation though...

[neddy]

Originally Posted by daveybasso

here ya go!

the nagra used in this comparison is my friends nagra Vi same as this one ---> http://www.nagraaudio.com/pro/images/Nagra_vi_large.jpg

Could you post an uncompressed or lossless (flac) version of the comparison? The mp3 compression truncates the high frequencies back to 16khz.

Interesting comparison though despite using the lossy codec. Doing an A/B switching comparison between the two with a spectrum analyzer didn't show much change between either one, but for a real comparison you'd need an identical source recorded simultaneously to both units.

Thanks for taking the time to make these kind of comparisons. They do have value, especially for those who don't have access to either devices.

cheers

[StevenEdwardsAud]

To everyone who thinks the zoom blows: how does it hold up when using an external mic? Still not good enough?

I actually do charge for some live location sound - have been using my mac and mbox as portable but it isn't quite portable enough. If most of you guys say that the zoom isn't up to par because of the pre-amps I trust your judgment, but what would be a better portable recorder at a reasonable price to go with?

P.S. I use an ME66 mic, if that helps at all.

[Bibster]

Honestly, With an H4n and some reasonable (external) mics, one does get decent recordings. Add a (DIY?) battery pack (4 x D-cell) and it runs for hours. (I tested 10+ hours!)

Not stellar, but decent, yes.

ym2c, ymmv etc. etc.

P.

[daveybasso]

Originally Posted by neddy

Could you post an uncompressed or lossless (flac) version of the comparison? The mp3 compression truncates the high frequencies back to 16khz.

Interesting comparison though despite using the lossy codec. Doing an A/B switching comparison between the two with a spectrum analyzer didn't show much change between either one, but for a real comparison you'd need an identical source recorded simultaneously to both units.

Thanks for taking the time to make these kind of comparisons. They do have value, especially for those who don't have access to either devices.

cheers

ill do that if i get some time to have him come back down.....im not one to argue things for months once ive been shown rock solid evedence that this thing records 99.9999999% as good as the nagra....all that will do, is fuel a needless gear battle that honestly im not interested in fueling. i got the facts, i know they are correct, so all thats left is the ranting of those who unfortunatly needlessly blew all that cash....they HAVE to defend the spending of that cash lest they look dumb for spending it in the first place......( id prolly do the same lol )..so i know that any replies henceforth, are going to be nothing but that.....and personally i dont have time for that. if someone keeps arguing that the sun is not hot over and over , you dont keep that arguement going, you walk away from it because time is money and valuable.... ive already started doing field recording with the h4n ( a wedding and a radio commercial )..and ive already charged big $$ and gotten that big $$ for my recordings.....in fact, those 2 jobs paid for the H4N, both mics, cables, boom and all other equippment ive bought 3 times over...and thats just my first 2 jobs LOL...i dont need much more proof than that.....im getting paid at the same rate that the guys who blew all that cash needlessly on the nagras get paid, so honestly, ...thats all i need to know. The customer is fully pleased and "quite impressed" with the results of my h4n, so at the end of the day......shrugs......thats all that matters.....am i sorry im making the same as mr.spent-too-much?.....hell no why should i be?

[neddy]

Originally Posted by daveybasso

...all that will do, is fuel a needless gear battle that honestly im not interested in fueling.

I can see your point considering the general tone of the thread so far. Debate is healthy only to a certain point before it degenerates into entrenched parties slagging one another for their views. So not much point in trying to convert people one way or the other. To each their own I guess.

[piotr]

FWIW I used zoom H4n with external binaural mics, and was very happy with the results.

p.

[daveybasso]

Originally Posted by neddy

I can see your point considering the general tone of the thread so far. Debate is healthy only to a certain point before it degenerates into entrenched parties slagging one another for their views. So not much point in trying to convert people one way or the other. To each their own I guess.

yeah im done with this thread

[Shubi]

I don't think the Zoom or any other handheld recorder belongs in a garbage bin. Even if you record sound for a living. I own a Tascam DR-40 and have it with me at every single gig. I can't say I've ever used the recordings from it, but if I'm ever in a pinch and my 788t goes down, that little backup recorder might save my butt.

99.999999%? Interesting.
"..im getting paid at the same rate that the guys who blew all that cash needlessly on the nagras get paid"
Really? Your getting paid $1000/day to record audio on a Zoom? I'll call my production manager tomorrow and see if MTV is cool with me recording to a Zoom. It is, afterall, 99.99999% of a Nagra...

I'm not gonna get into comparisons of audio quality, but every piece of gear has its place. Of course we don't want people thinking that they can buy cheap gear and get professional results, but we also don't want to bash peoples decisions and rain on their parades. He's happy with his new Zoom. I'm happy with my DR-40. Cheers to gear, no matter the price tag.

[daveybasso]

Originally Posted by Shubi

I don't think the Zoom or any other handheld recorder belongs in a garbage bin. Even if you record sound for a living. I own a Tascam DR-40 and have it with me at every single gig. I can't say I've ever used the recordings from it, but if I'm ever in a pinch and my 788t goes down, that little backup recorder might save my butt.

99.999999%? Interesting.
"..im getting paid at the same rate that the guys who blew all that cash needlessly on the nagras get paid"
Really? Your getting paid $1000/day to record audio on a Zoom? I'll call my production manager tomorrow and see if MTV is cool with me recording to a Zoom. It is, afterall, 99.99999% of a Nagra...

I'm not gonna get into comparisons of audio quality, but every piece of gear has its place. Of course we don't want people thinking that they can buy cheap gear and get professional results, but we also don't want to bash peoples decisions and rain on their parades. He's happy with his new Zoom. I'm happy with my DR-40. Cheers to gear, no matter the price tag.

1500 per day so far....and completely happy customer too....jhon q public cant tell the microscopic difference between the zoom and the nagra...as long as you have decent mics 24/96 is 24/96...the end product is all that matters

[Jaymz]

Originally Posted by daveybasso

as long as you have decent mics 24/96 is 24/96..

Not true at all, the file being created isn't what matters in terms of bit-depth, what matters is the dynamic range of the A/D conversion. When we take into consideration that 1-bit = 6db of dynamic range, not even the best converters out there actually utilize all 24-bits. They're more around the 21-bit area.

There are no published specs for the H4n's A/D dynamic range. However, this gentleman has tested it and come to the conclusion that the H4n has a dynamic range of approximately 91db. So essentially, it doesn't matter which bit-depth setting you use, you're recording 15-bits of dynamic information with 9-bits of noise.

[daveybasso]

test