Home Free Library Store
Free Catalog



Save with a Two Year Membership

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.
Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members
Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index Search Posts
Who's Online Log In



Home: Video University Forums: Audio For Video:
New Zoom H4n

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 7, 2009, 11:12 AM

Post #1 of 74 (3958 views)
Shortcut
New Zoom H4n Can't Post

This was just posted in a few spots. Article 1 Acrticle 2

It seems that Zoom has revamped the H4 and made many improvements to it. Thye have seemed to have taken the best parts of the H2 and merged them into the H4's best.
The first being true stereo X/Y mic configuration with the built in mic capsules.

Next, being the much improved user interface, and best of all the ability to record using both onboard mics as well as both external XLR inputs. So now you can record 4 channel using a small audio recorder. So if desired you could use both onboard mics, take a board feed to an XLRs to get a real good live mix.

Even better, imagine recroding a stage production.
Use your onboard mics by singers, then run 2 mic up to the stage into the XLRs. Now you can get a real nice live mix of an entire stage production, including singers, crowd noise, and stage performers.

BTW, the new H4n, seems to have a very similar look to the Sony D50.

The main thing that is most important to me is if Zoom has fixed the onbaord pre amps and configured it properly for level adjustment. If they have, then they might have a real winner on their hands.

I picture Frogman finding a lot of uses for this in his productions.
Especially since he likes the H4 as much as he does.

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 7, 2009, 11:17 AM

Post #2 of 74 (3957 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

...just wished it wasn't manufactured in china....grrrrrrrrr......
_________________________
Mark






MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 8, 2009, 8:29 AM

Post #3 of 74 (3922 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Yeah might be nice if it wasn't China, but hey, if it does the job. Smile

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 8:19 AM

Post #4 of 74 (3899 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

If the internal mics sound as good as their previous stuff, this will be a very good recorder who want 4 channel capability on the cheap...
_________________________
Mark






DGates
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 11:33 AM

Post #5 of 74 (3876 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Have they fixed the sync?



"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

--Abraham Lincoln


MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 11:48 AM

Post #6 of 74 (3873 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DGates] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
Have they fixed the sync?

Sorry, don't know.

Also, I don't really understand what you mean by fixing the sync.
If you mean will it line up exactly and stay in sync with your video, probably not.

But then again, most separate recorders (even identical cameras) will never hold sync unless they are slaved together and use the same SMPTE timecode from one source.

It is true that there are better recorders on the market that will stay in sync better with your video. But most if not all of these recorders will drift over time.
The reason is that they don't share the same crystals. And as such all operate under a slightly different clock.

Yes, the Zooms might drift much sooner than others, but it's not hard to fix in post.
Because of the way I edit, which is in sections, I have never had any major problems with sync and any of the Zoom recorders. I also have never used the Zooms for any critical vocal capture, but rather for any or all ambient audio that I mix into my presentations (as a master reception track, or mixed as a base track for a ceremony or highlight). So critical sync isn't needed. Now if I was going to have to rely on a Zoom recorder for an entire recital o stage production, well that might be a different story. But I capture that audio differently, using wireless and/or Edirol R-44 recorder. But for a wedding, the Zooms are more than adequate for our use. Especially for those who are coming from the older iRiver units. There's no comparrison between the to, as the Zoom's are far and away better recorders in every way.

My biggest problem with the Zoom's are the internal pre amp circuitry and the way it's laid out, where the pre amps kcik in after the volume input. As a result the pre amps clip easy and if you lower the input level to the unit, you don't prevent clipping, but rather have a quieter clip that is still clipped.


Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


DGates
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 1:14 PM

Post #7 of 74 (3863 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
But then again, most separate recorders (even identical cameras) will never hold sync unless they are slaved together and use the same SMPTE timecode from one source.


I understand that.

But it just boogles the mind as to how my iRivers do hold sync. All of them, for 4-5 years now. And they would never be classified as a 'pro' audio recorder.



"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

--Abraham Lincoln


MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 1:24 PM

Post #8 of 74 (3862 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DGates] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
But it just boogles the mind as to how my iRivers do hold sync. All of them, for 4-5 years now. And they would never be classified as a 'pro' audio recorder.

The funny thing about this is that some iRivers held sync and some didn't.
The same goes for the Zoom recorders, as it seems that some hold sync better than others.

This is most likely due to cheap crystals being used, so the quality control on these crystals are not consistent when developed.

Either way the Zooms are nice and have their place, as long as you understand their limitations and strengths.
Which goes for any of the tools that we use.


Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Scott Brooks
Veteran

Jan 9, 2009, 2:18 PM

Post #9 of 74 (3856 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DGates] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

That irritates me as well ... even though I know they're not built for that function.

My iRiver does a great job of holding sync, but my Zoom H2 is pretty sucky. Therefore, I use the iRiver at the podium during a ceremony and the H2 in front of the DJ's speakers for the toasts and a little bit of other audio. Or, I'll use it for music at the ceremony. It does work excellent for that.


MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 2:41 PM

Post #10 of 74 (3847 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Scott Brooks] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Just a quick question...
(Scott this isn't really directed to you but anyone who might read this post)

Is everyone using only one audio source for their audio, or multiple sources.

I ask because, everyone should be using multiple sources when ever possible. If for nothing more than to get good consistent audio and have backup.
I'm not saying that you need 5-6 sources, but 2-3 at least. For a ceremony, you should have one one the groom (wireless or recorder), one on lectern (for readings), and one for musicians if needed.
You notice that I didn't mention on camera mic, as this is generally almost always useless.

If you get your audio from different sources, then you can mic your subject closely, thus getting good to great audio.

Then it's a simple matter of mixing in post.

So Scott, why does it matter if you mic lectern with an iRiver or H2?
Is is so hard to sync up the short vocals needed in post, or do you simply sync your start points for a ceremony and then cut as needed?

Yes the Zoom recorders don't hold sync for long periods, but it's not hard to mix audio sources in post as needed, even for long form edits.
Anyone can easily use a grooms mic as the main audio for the entire ceremony, and mix the other audio sources in as needed to create your entire edit.

Or, as you stated, you can just use the H2 or other recorder for recording musicians (which these do fantastic at) and mix in post.

For the reception, it's the total opposite, as you can use your audio recorder for most if not all of your reception edit. Simply layout the all of your main recorder audio first and build your edit around this.
To do this you need only one recorder (board or PA mic) and a wireless (board or PA mic) to your camera. (You can have more if desired, but I wanted to say the easy minimum)

I don't want to sound like I am preaching, but I really think that too much is made of sync with these inexpensive recorders.

As I mentioned earlier I never really ahd issues with the iRivers holding sync either.
But I was maybe the only person in the world who had ALL 6 iRivers fail to be recognized by my computers. As such I was not able to retrieve the info off of the units for each particular event. Also I always hated to ahve to use software to convert and download files to my computer. I much prefer the plug and play, drag and drop method, which many of these new line of SD recorders are setup to do. Much less potential for problems.
It was this that and the quest for better fidelity audio that made me say bye bye to iRivers and seek out better solutions.

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro

(This post was edited by MLiebergot on Jan 9, 2009, 2:46 PM)


DGates
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 3:20 PM

Post #11 of 74 (3833 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll answer. I double up the groom with 2 iRivers. I gave up wireless almost 5 years ago and have never looked back.

As to the drift of the various brands (and as I stated, mine don't drift), I find it odd that a unit made by a company that added an external mic input as an afterthought to their MP3 recorder, seems to outshine the more established pro audio gear when it comes to keeping the audio in sync.

We can hem and haw about the variables, but to me, sync is the most important aspect of a mic used for recording the ceremony audio when wireless isn't a choice.



"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

--Abraham Lincoln


Scott Brooks
Veteran

Jan 9, 2009, 4:32 PM

Post #12 of 74 (3825 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

That's ok ... I don't take it personally. Wink

Usually the best we can do around here is to mic the groom, lectern and musicians. Priests are not fond of additional microphones, so unless I get really good vibes from them I don't even approach them.

The reason I don't use a Zoom on the lectern is simply size and has nothing to do with sync. With the iRiver I can tape a non-conspicuous lavaliere to the top of the lectern for good audio. And yeah ... it pretty much stays in sync.

With a Zoom ... not sure how I would utilize it in that situation. It's just too big to set on top and I see no benefits to attaching a lavaliere to the Zoom.

I still utilize the wireless on the groom as opposed to anything else. I've only had two problems in all the years and only one of them did I find out too late that it was a problem.

My iRiver ... I've set it wrong too many times for me to feel comfortable with it. I think it has to have the most confusing menu I've ever seen. If I shot more weddings then that would probably take care of the problem.

This past week I "thought" we had missed the toasts. Turns out that they didn't get recorded to the CF card on the camera, but DID get recorded to tape. The only thing I could think of ... was that I had the photos and I DID have the toasts recorded on the Zoom. Had the video not been there, I at least had the audio along with photos, so it wouldn't be a complete loss.

Thankfully that wasn't the case.


Brackish
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 4:56 PM

Post #13 of 74 (3818 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
For a ceremony, you should have one on the groom (wireless or recorder), one on lectern (for readings), and one for musicians if needed.
You notice that I didn't mention on camera mic, as this is generally almost always useless.


Are you mic'ing the priest, Michael?



------------------------------------------------------------
"still motion is who everyone else is trying to be like"


MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 9, 2009, 6:13 PM

Post #14 of 74 (3815 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Brackish] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Like Scott, in most cases no I'm not.
The priest is either close enough to the groom to get good vocals, or he will be at the lectern speaking.

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 10, 2009, 12:58 AM

Post #15 of 74 (3792 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

I always mic the officiant....
_________________________
Mark






Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 10, 2009, 2:17 AM

Post #16 of 74 (3788 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

I find this sync issue rather silly at times and by no means am I taking a poke at anyone. If you have a non-timecode capable recorder that keeps good sync, consider yourself lucky as it wasn't designed that way as Michael refers to.

I had a Marantz PMD 670 that was horrible for staying in sync...but it was rock solid reliable, could record uncompressed pcm, and was perfectly happy taking a mic level input or a high output (over +20dBu) line level. I would rather spend a few moments movings waveforms on a timeline to correct a sync drift than to look at a overdriven digital capture on a timeline and wonder what to do now....
_________________________
Mark






MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 12, 2009, 7:48 AM

Post #17 of 74 (3728 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Mark, I have to agree with you on the sync issue.

I really think too much attention is given to sync with different external audio sources. Either you record audio right and have ALL sources slaved together to hold sync.
Or, deal with it in post, which is very easy to do in any NLE.

I think that all of us get too caught up in the technical side of things, such as sync with recorders, low light with cameras etc.

All in all there are only slight differences in how these units perform in the filed. And especially when it comes to cameras and low light. Where people want to know how each camera does in "AUTO" in low light. Which is absurd to em, as any camera person worth their weight, does not shoot in full "AUTO", but rather knows his camera enough to be able to shoot in "MANUAL" and run their gain, exposure, shutter speed, white balance independently to achieve the best picture. After all we are all artists, adn while some are more tchnical in their approach than others. And while, it's true to some extent, that an artists is only as good as his tools, the artists has to know how to properly sue hs tools in order to create. So, wheater it be audio recorders or video cameras, everyone should take the time to learn how to use their equiptment inside and out before they use them for critical work.

Know your tools and their limitations and push them to their limits of what they can do. Then simply be creative if needed and find ways to work around the limitations.
While the Zooms aren't the best units on the block by far, they do perform very well in many areas. I love my H2, but know it's limitations, and either know ways how to work around them or find another tool to use in situations where they don't perform well. The improvements that seem to ahve been made from the Zoom H4 to the now Zoom H4n seem very good and have intrigued me enough t maybe pick one up to use in places where I can't use my Edirol R44.

And for someone who doesn't even have a unit suc as an Edirol R44, this little unit might do wonders to enhance their audio productions.

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 12, 2009, 8:20 AM

Post #18 of 74 (3725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
And for someone who doesn't even have a unit suc as an Edirol R44, this little unit might do wonders to enhance their audio productions


100% Agree...this weekend's gig assisting Shane was a good example. We had plently of time after the bridal shots and before the ceremony to setup our audio. I had to capture three musicians playing in 3 differents areas. I ran a bunch of mic cords to feed my R44 at my camera location (used almost 200 feet of mic cords). However, normally I may not have this extra time. Could have been a bit easier if I used the H4n (with its internal mic) to record one musician and then simply ran mics/mic cords back to the unit.

Another process I could see this unit doing is the PA/Ambient capture I've decribed in past threads. At the reception instead of tying into the DJ's board, setup a couple of mics at the PA and then use the internal mic for ambient capture...

Do hope they upgraded the pre amps as they claim :-)
_________________________
Mark






MLiebergot
Veteran


Jan 12, 2009, 8:51 AM

Post #19 of 74 (3717 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
Another process I could see this unit doing is the PA/Ambient capture I've decribed in past threads. At the reception instead of tying into the DJ's board, setup a couple of mics at the PA and then use the internal mic for ambient capture...

This is exactly how I envision using the H4n.

I could easily attach the H4n to a mic stand and record as you mentioned, while still being able to move the rig where ever I need.

This method is harder with the R-44 due to it's size, in which I can't attach the R-44 to a mic stand but rather have to have it in a bag at the base of the mic stand. Even though the R-44 has decent internal mics and can record using the internal mics as well as 2 additional XLR inputs, the mics on the H4 will be better than the R-44's.

As you siad, the only thing that I thought that they ahd to correct were the internal pre amps, whcih they said were improved.
We'll have to wait and see, or rather hear. Wink


Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 12, 2009, 11:32 AM

Post #20 of 74 (3711 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

If the R44 has any shortcomings, it is the internal mics.
_________________________
Mark






Brackish
Veteran


Jan 15, 2009, 12:36 AM

Post #21 of 74 (3623 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
If the R44 has any shortcomings, it is the internal mics.


Correct me if I'm wrong but ...

Wasn't it here that someone was saying they were having trouble
getting good volume out of some mic when using the R44? Lead me to
think that R44 is a bit weak in the mic gain department. If I get something
like the R44 I wouldn't expect I'd need to add on a preamp in the chain to
get good levels. Now that I think more about it ... wasn't the advice
given to accept the low record levels and just crank it up in post?

I did a quick search for the spec's on the R44 as far as how many
dB of gain the R44 offers and that spec seemed conspicuously
absent in the advertising materials I ran across. I'd normally
expect to see the available gain spec'd out in a device like this.



------------------------------------------------------------
"still motion is who everyone else is trying to be like"


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 15, 2009, 4:53 AM

Post #22 of 74 (3616 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Brackish] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

Actually Brack, the R44 has not only a vast amount of gain...but has exponetially more control over that gain than any recorder in its price range...actually you have to move up a few thousand dollars before you get this kind of control.

Typically with most low end recorders, you have either a line & mic input or on slightly higher price recorders (like my original R4) a single input with a sensitivity switch to selct either line in or mic in. With these recorders you have sensitivity ranging from 0 dBu (if you're lucky...typically more like -10 to -20 dBu) to about -35 to-40 (this will vary obviously among manufacturers). This sensitity usually is not user selectable...but you will have a gain (or trimmer as it is called) to adjust/fine tune to a point the incoming signal. With these type of recorders..especially the cheaper ones is where some folks have trouble with capturing a line level feed as the 0 dbu theshold put the control of the signal on the ragged edge right from the start.

With the R44 you have 11 user selectable sensitivity settings ranging from +4dBu to -56 dbu (the outer big knob on the front of the unit). The inner knob is your trimmer or gain. If at full trimmer setting you're not getting enough signal, simply bumb the sensistivity to the right and now you have a whole new level and with more precision control over the input signal.
_________________________
Mark






Brackish
Veteran


Jan 15, 2009, 12:06 PM

Post #23 of 74 (3591 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
It seems that Zoom has revamped the H4 and made many improvements to it. The first being true stereo X/Y mic configuration with the built in mic capsules.

I thought the original zoom had built-in XY mics.


In Reply To
best of all the ability to record using both onboard mics as well as both external XLR inputs. So now you can record 4 channel using a small audio recorder.


Yeah, that's nice: 4 channels at once. And I'm assuming it's got
48V phantom for the XLRs so you're unlimited in your mic choice.

Offers quite a lot at this price point. Wonder when it will be out. I'd
like to hear a bit of user feedback before purchasing.

Do (or did) any VUers have the original H4?

In Reply To
BTW, the new H4n, seems to have a very similar look to the Sony D50.


I hear good things about the D50. I think (not positive) that the D50
has a peaking LED that lights up - similar to the Senn G2 transmitter - so
that you can see peaking from a distance in a dark room.

In Reply To
I picture Frogman finding a lot of uses for this in his productions.
Especially since he likes the H4 as much as he does.


I thought Fr0gman uses the H2. Could be wrong but I don't think
Fr0ggy does much in the way of running XLR cable at this time.

I was checking out a location recording forum yesterday and was
surprised to see that a lot of the guys were saying how much they
liked their H2s.



------------------------------------------------------------
"still motion is who everyone else is trying to be like"


Brackish
Veteran


Jan 15, 2009, 12:19 PM

Post #24 of 74 (3589 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post

As far as 4-track recorders, what are the next couple of steps
up in price point above the R44?



On a side note ...

I saw in the hidden Members Only forum where you had offered to
help a VUer by doing the audio for that beach wedding.
Besides the money issue of bringing in someone just to do the audio,
I think they stated that they don't want to have to sync any
audio tracks in post so, hypothetically, if you did do the audio
you'd have to find a way to take it straight to cam. I was trying
to think of how something like that might be done. Maybe
take a 4-into-2 mixer and run it to a stationary cam. Then there's
the issue of running XLR cable across sand ... running it across
a normal venue floor you can tape it down but in sand might
be a trip hazard???



------------------------------------------------------------
"still motion is who everyone else is trying to be like"


Mark Foley
Veteran


Jan 15, 2009, 12:54 PM

Post #25 of 74 (3579 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Brackish] New Zoom H4n [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
As far as 4-track recorders, what are the next couple of steps
up in price point above the R44?


The R4 Pro -$1,800 approx and then the Sound Devices 744T - around $4000


Actually it is quite easy...you go from the RCA out on the R44 to a wireless transmitter. Granted this will be a composite mixed signal going to the cam, and if you wanted to do any up to 4 channel mixing in post you would simply lines up the start of waveforms in post and you're done.
_________________________
Mark





First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All