The Samson Zoom H4n is probably one of the more exciting digital audio recorders to come along in a while. Samson has taken the original Zoom H4 and completely retooled it with a better button layout, a new rubberized grip, a new mic layout and better preamps. But while reader Jon Skitch sent us some fantastic sounding recordings he made using the recorder, Neil Ewers of Blind Cool Tech has sent in some evidence that the H4n might not as close to the Sony PCM-D50 and other slightly more expensive digital audio recorders as Samson would have us believe.
Here are a series of audio samples Ewers recorded using both the Zoom H4n and Sony PCM-D50, followed by a recording made on the original Zoom H4. The original Zoom recorder actually had quite decent built in mics, but sounded awful with an external mic plugged in, especially if it was a dynamic mic. To my ear it sounds like the Zoom H4n isn't much better. What do you think?
Sony PCM-D50 internal mics:
Same audio source with Zoom H4n internal mics:Sony PCM-D50 with an Audio Technica mic:Zoom H4n with an Audio Technica mic:Sony PCM-D50 with a dynamic mic:Zoom H4n with a dynamic mic:Final recording with Zoom H4n:Original Zoom H4 reference recording:
(listen carefully)
he mentions that he is using Zoom H4 not H4n.
Zoom 3/10 another shit product.
Zoom H4 new improved 9/10
Zoom H4n 6/10
Sony pcmd50 8/10
External mics
Dynamic
Sony pcmd50 10/10
Zoom H4 new improved 8/10
Zoom H4n 3/10
Condenser
Sony pcmd50 9/10
Zoom H4 new improved 8/10
Zoom h4n 7/10
So the last generation of H4 is the winner. Although its got crap interface.
And while the dynamic mic->H4n had way more hiss than the Sony, the actually reproduction of his voice still sounded pretty good.
http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/03/07/first-look-at-the-zoom-h4n/
I checked the other site and Fostex FR2le was clear winner. While on this site Sony Pcmd5o was the better of the 2. Zoom looks good but does not perform well. But I still think the Fostex FR2le is the best recorder within that division and then followed by Sony. I own both those recorders and was thinking of buying Zoom H4n but its going to the be a miss; I don't desire features I want quality..Fostex FR2le wins by a mile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kad1VLMYTU
Zoom h4n is getting slaugtered by Tascam pocketstudio 5. Zoom H4 is too hissy.
As a reference, with a very short cable (8" long, mini to dual 1/4" adapter cable with no mic attached) plugged into the mic input, and the D50 recording with the gain dial at 10, I have about -32dB noise . Anyone else care to post what the internal noise of their D50 is under similar conditions? I think quality control might be an issue here.
is the Zoom such a bad move - help! The thing will arrive in a couple of days.
Nizman
Zoom H4n is a budget product:
I would strongly consider:
- Fostex FR2le
- Marantz 661
- Wait for Tascam DR-100.
http://www.americanmusical.com/ItemReview--i-ZOO-H4N
But the H4n is a cheap alternative to professional solutions and does not preform miracles. Comparing price and preformance I think the H4n does a pretty good job.
Am still not sure what to do: on the one hand I really like the idea of high quality recordings(tascam or fostex) but the four track function is kinda nice too. I am often away with my job and take my guitar with - being able to do interesting little mixes seems fun.
In Canada we can't even buy this thing yet, and with the rotten exchange rate I'll certainly end up paying more than you guys. And I still really want it.
Well, I can see there are varying opinions out there. In an ideal world, I'd like to see one of the 'top' brands produce something that can do what the Zoom tries to do. I think I'll stick to the Zoom anyhow.
I was hoping the quality may be good enough to transfer guitar and vocal parts to my big Roland 24 track thing in stereo and then do overdubs - one of you guys out there says the zoom is nothing more than an ok voice recorder - sounds a bit like brand snobbism to me -I can't believe it's that bad - I even think if it had the name Sony emblazened on it that person wouldn't have been so harsh.
Could probably play the 'put the cheap whisky in an expensive bottle' trick on him and get away with it me thinks.
thanks to all those with neutral opinions btw.
Zoom=hiss
Sony=Digital
Your choice=cancel the order and wait for Tascam DR100.
As mentioned before, have been burned twice by Sony aftersales.
I'm still going to withhold final judgment until I get a unit to try out for myself. But since Neil got his before me and was kind enough to send in the sample recordings, I wanted to share them.
I don't think it's possible to put out complete rubbish in this competitive environment. 350 bucks is 350 bucks.
I even did some recording with my iphone with some 79 cent four track software , going through the normal phone mouthpiece. The sound was really impressive and I'm sure the Zoom must be much much better.
I burned a cd from my iphone recordings and no-one could believe the quality.
Looking forward to the Zoom arriving.
So to all the detractors: hiss off!
........tooo many to list. I am tired.
Pre-amps from H2 -shit
Features of H4 - but with hiss.
weak mic design - will break no caging to protect it.
Optional remote - wired remote only should be part of the package. (Tascam/Edirol offer wireless remote with the package).
Sony 9/10
Pro recorder
Zoom H4 8/10
Decent recorder
Zoom H4n 3/10
Hisssy Recorder.
(yes rubber meets the road; to much friction=severe handling noise.).
I have turned this feature off and can report with confidence the hiss has gone down by 70%.
I had the impression that Ewers was enjoying his assassination of the Zoom- looks like he doesn't know how to operate a philishave!
Ewers should have made sure that all settings were at default before e-mailing those sample. Should also use proper cables rather than cheap ones. "where rubber meets the road" bullshit!. Look @ those settings carefully and report back "Ewers" or your face will be be rubbing the road.
You guys awarding the H4n 3/10 are actually listening to these samples? Or just trying to reassure yourselves that that your more expensive Sony hasn't quite been beaten yet?
I guess all these sub 500 bucks hand-helds do a fine job recording guitar and vocals.
TRIDENT.
Marantnz 661 - minimum features - High Quality - good all round.
Fostex Fr2le - minimum features - High Quality - ultra low hiss.
Sony pcmd50 - minimum features - High Quality - excellent with low output mics, brilliant drive.
Zoom H4n, OT features - Average Quality.
Its like in Audio world with good amps u don't even need tone control as under the skin engineering will take care of the sound.
How on earth are those other recorders even relevant to this comparison? For the slight improvements in sound quality you pay nearly twice the price? Law of diminishing returns kicks in pretty harsh here, especially if what these guys are saying about the compressor is true, not to mention some of the other comparison tests out there.
Listen to some satisfied customers you brand snob fool!!!!
-Edirol R09HR
-Olympus LS10
-Marantz pdm660
All of the above are in same price range and also seem to perform better too. No excuses please. Thenjust buy little mixer to complete the system.
None of the machines you mentioned are really top notch for professional bird fart recorders like yourself whereas the Zoom is designed for musicians who wanna put down a quick and listenable to demo and maybe also the bootleg .
my requirements are different from yours - maybe you should cough up aqnother grand so you can do your hobby tzhing a bit more professionally.
For album production I have a big fuck-off studio
I wanted to pass along a comment by a fellow connected with the Nature Sounds Society listserv, whose name is Oryoki. (This information came to me by way of Dan Dugan (Dan Dugan Sound) in reply to my inquiry to see what Dan had to say about this new device).
Oryoki had the following to say about his use of the new Zoom H4n recorder:
The following are HIS comments only:
"A little more testing of my H4N revealed some quirks.
First, if you try to record using a single mic connected to XLR with phantom power on, the other channel records a relatively high level of noise. This seems to be caused by the unterminated XLR input. Plugging in a second mic, but leaving it turned off, reduces this noise.
Second, with phantom power on, the noise level is higher than with it off and the mics receiving power from an external power source (ART Phantom II in this case).
Third, the 1/8-inch (3.5 mm) minijack on the rear of the recorder has less self-noise than either XLR input. Recordings made with a Rode NT1A mic powered by an ART Phantom II power supply and connected via the minijack had very low levels of self-noise.
Fourth, the right XLR of my H4N has a higher self noise level than the left XLR input. The difference is quite noticeable.
These listening tests were performed in a very quiet setting, and with the goal of finding the recorder's self-noise level. If you record in a setting with a higher level of ambient sound, the H4N recorder's input noise is likely to be masked."
Thanks
Richard Links
Links Sound
Berkeley, CA
-Hiss
-unbalanced channels - never mind
multi channel support.
mind u it works fine through that 3.5mm jack(mic) as long u use external box (Art), Then will give it a new name Zoom/Art Combo - both r budget they will work well together.
Sony pcmd50 the "winner"
Zoom H4n floored in 1st round
Fiat beating BMW..hoohahaha "LOL".
http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/...-the-zoom-h4n/ you'll hear that , well ok, there is hiss, but the sound is detailed and warm - and teh guy seems to know what he's doing. He says its not the best in the world but he hardly gives it a slating - quite the opposite in fact.
While the Fostex produces less hiss(not buckets less) the highs seem to have much more of that 'sizzling' digital sound that I hate. Zoom sounds warmer.
I'll try it this week when mine arrives. If it's no good, which I doubt, I'll test teh Tascam dr100.
There seem to be a fair number of satisfied customers out there.
Furthermore I like to know how much better the Sony PCM-D50 performs with internal mic in field recordings, compared with the H4n.
that are very hissy and creates an unusual huming sound when phantom power is activated. Zoom has not got this product right like its previous models - another cheap budget product with a very high markup, simply avoid it.
The recording never distorts thanks to its high quality electronics. Even with Dynamic mics its sounds good - close to Sony pcmd50. So listen carefully to the above sample "Zoom H4n with a dynamic mic - where rubber meets the road;friction;grinding very hard. its neither good with external or internal mics" - by "Ewers"! a PERSON WHO KNOW WHAT HIS TALKING ABOUT!!**DICKHEAD**
$2000
Sound devices 702 rules
$1500
Sony pcm D1 rules
$1100
Korg MR1000 rules with Tascam HPD2
under $800
Sony pcmd50 rules with Fostex FR2 le
next prob Marantz 660
under $400
Marantz 660 with Zoom H4 (classic- recent production).
next prob Tascam DR1
next Marantz 661-correction
You have no win situation.
As for the hiss, other comparison tests (including one with the Fostex, posted earlier in this thread), demonstrate only a marginal increase in hiss, certainly not what we're hearing with Ewers and his self-admittedly faulty test.
Like the guy in the previous post says,the comparisons with Fostex for example do not reveal huge differences and and the on-board extras make this little thing a very attractive option.
If I find the hiss unbearable I will return it but no real evidence yet. Did anyone go to the link for homebrewed music I put up last night? I think the audiofiles are more than acceptable
And as I stated before , the other brands have simply failed in creating a product that leans towards the musician/songwriter ie a product that allows four track recording with all the other features.
If Tascam had one on the market I would be sorely tempted but they don't!
into Mission speakers. Zoom's recording sounds shit-too hissy, a bit like listening to long wave. Sony sounds good with real punch and power at the same time well controlled balanced sound.
Perhaps those so quick to dismiss should listen to a few more samples than Ewers' before condemning outright.
http://www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/article/2429-fostex-fr2le-chosen-for-blast-off-with-nasa.html
Zoom is merely a dictaphone in comparison.
And when I see people coming in here posting "guys now I'm scared did I make the wrong choice" because half of the commenters here are happy to propagate negative perceptions that are only vaguely shaped by actual facts, I get upset. The people posting "IT'S FUCKING CRAP" based on a single set of samples that even the author himself claims are flawed seem to be doing so not out of any desire to actually evaluate these devices critically, but to bolster their already-cemented opinions. And such behaviour is detrimental to the industry, since it convinces those consumers with slightly weaker critical faculties that only the expensive brand-name products are worth buying.
Anyway, listen to more samples before you go making such sweeping, ignorant statements. Check out these links:
http://surround2011.blogspot.com/2009/03/analysis.html
http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/
I have checked that link this is using different recorder so don't get clever.
Homebrew blog uses the H4n with various mics and it doesn't have nearly as much hiss as it does here. And we still don't know for certain if Ewers had the Zoom's compressor on or not. On the homebrew test, the Fostex -- an even more expensive unit than the Sony, and that's without any internal mics -- is only slightly quieter than the Zoom. And even then we're talking about recording a fingerpicked acoustic guitar at 30 inches, which is an extreme test for most setups.
as well. But in the end I went for PCM-D50
H4n has too many features I would never use. And I think the record volume knob alone justifies the extra $$$ I spent on PCM-D50.
This makes more sense to me, I will go for the Sony pcm-d50 because i don't really need that many features and neither want to sacrifice quailty for features. Its definatley worth the extra cash.
"The Sony is quieter, obviously. Maybe with great cables it would be completely silent."
Very intuitive and have already done a couple of recordings. The thing is excellent! Very powerful on-board mics that give loads of colour and detail. Tried the four track mode too and it's real fun!
Very pleased that I went for this machine. I want to put down a couple of guitar tracks with vocals and it performs very nicely indeed. If you're a musician who wants to put more than just a stereo track down this is your machine. Delighted with it - so glad I gave it a chance.
Maybe the Sony is cleaner but playing around with the Zoom in its three main recording set-ups is what its all about for me.
If you want to have birds singing in stereo, get the Sony!
Sony is for serious and critical recording.
Zoom is basically low end back up machine for freaks.
Have you used dynamic mic by any chance.
Sony is for ENG, Field recording, Environmental recording, Nature recording, Important Lectures, Live venues and Live music much much more.
Zoom is for doing guitar recording only.
I have high end mixer for that.
Have you got Sony to compare, if not then keep your mouth shut.
btw just tries my old sm beta58 - of course not as loud as the neumann but sorry guys , more than ample for my purposes.
I will not be interviewing people in the streets and I finished my degree about 100 years ago so I won't be doing lectures.
I'll turn the thing on in my hotel room when working abroad or record a an idea or two whilst sitting outside my tent in the summer while my kids are merrily splashing away in the pool probably while some of bloggers out there are comparing the dulcet tones of the greater spotted blue tit.
Ibtw, just did an old jazz number with dare I say it... four tracks. Sounded great. You can't do that with piece of overpriced crap can you?
Why is this such a mean forum/blog?
Why are people (especially the ones who become so rude and attacking and offensive in the first place, as opposed to those who finally broke down and got rude back) taking a PRODUCT - any product - so seriously that they should act like juvenile clowns who have not one stitch of respect for another human being (or themselves), or maturity, or integrity? Is it okay to treat people this way just because you don't know who they are/can't see their faces? Are you old enough to be on the internet without adult supervision?
I've seen a lot online but I expect most of these comments to be found in a forum that attracts mainly pre-adolescents whose neglectful parents are allowing them to type on a forum all about their favorite Cartoon Network action figure like Ben 10 or something...this is absurd.
Summary:
1. There are high-end recorders that DO produce a better sound than a Zoom, but are geared toward the interests of those who don't mind the relatively limited features (and are also geared toward those who either have much more money to spend on a handheld reorder, and/or get very excited about having the best of the best of the very best sound out of all the very good sounds, based at least in part on audio tests (with tests being valid, one would hope?), regardless of whether the average person with a decent ear would hear much of a difference between very good and "doesn't get better" good.
2. The Zoom in question - at this particular point in time - offers dramatically more features that aren't to many people just useless gimmicks but are actually useful "gimmicks" - than the recorders that have an edge on sound quality. Aside from it being better constructed and w/ a nice heftiness - and easier to use - than older models, it is also appealing because of its price. Many have written that people are getting a lot of bang for their buck - or maybe people on here would prefer it written: people are getting a lot of bang for the good sound-quality.
3. Beyond the obvious above-listed reasons for liking each type of recorder, each type of recorder also appeals to people with DIFFERENT USES in mind (or in some cases, multiple uses).
Okay? Okay. Sheesh.
If you don't like our true opinion then don't use this blog. I know the truth hurts.
As the post before points out, there should really be no grounds for argument here. It's simply a case of horses for courses.
The Sony may well be slightly better for the purists'stuff but I must say, the more I use the Zoom and explore its possibilities, the more I 'm impressed
It's a very very competent all-rounder and is infact the only true all-rounder.
I should add that I have experienced minimal to no hiss problems with this device.
It is truly a great piece of gear , designed mainly with musicians and songwriters in mind and performs admirally.
I found your warning to stay away from 'our' blog kinda redneckish in a 'we don't get many strangers in this town' sort of way.
So this will be my last entry but I would like to suggest to that guy that he should stick his 'true' opinion in
a place where the sun don't shine!
Some of the entries were very helpful by the way. I apologise for some of the things I wrote - it was all good fun though.
Your comments are valued and everyone has there own opinions. Why should you apologise. You haven't done anything wrong; everyone has there on unique views and I respect that and that's how it makes this blog a more exciting place. I also have been very negative and diabolical. I too would like to apologise to all you H4n lovers for being so naive.
http://www.bradlinder.net/2007/10/comparing-sony-pcm-d50-fostex-fr2-le_06.html
Thank you for clarification.
Hava
I have been using Sony Hi-MD MZ-RH1/B with Sony microphone ECM-MS907.
I want to get rid of it because:
1) I would like to have one box not two things
2) Transfering recording music from MZ-RH1 to Mac is time consuming
I would like to buy some recording device in similar price category 300 - cca 450 usd.
I am looking for something with at least the same recording quality.
Does Zoom H4 or H4n fulill this request?
If no, which recorder would you recommend in this price categhory?
I need it for recording of:
1) singing with best possible quality
2)(mainly) acoustic instruments and rehearsals of acoustic band (new acoustic/jazz)
XLR mic imputs are not crucial for me.
Thanks in advance for your time and replys.
Jan, Prague, Czech Repubublic, Europe
Hopefully I can fix this in Cubase but it's disappointing that teh manual is not correct.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed I didn't make a mistake ordering this.
I don't think any of the competition can act as a usb audio interface combined with DAW software so I think I did the right thing. I'll make some recordings and come back with some samples soon. Stay tuned...
Tomorrow I'll record a song with some finger picking and more melodic vocals.
If you watch/listen to this, be sure to click the HQ button, it definitely makes a difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU6QBq5C6sc
Can anyone (Graham?) offer a balanced review of these two units side-by-side?
I can only afford to get one, so some measured feedback would be greatly appreciated!
Yes its a bit hissy at high gain with my Rode NT2a but the things I intend to record(guitar/bass amps) are loud enough to overcome this flaw.
I dunno if I haven't found the right setting but MTR mode seems a little under powered. There's no separation between inputs when recording 2 tracks(eg: guitar and vocal). It forces a mix of the two to be recorded and there's no independent level control, just 2 stereo pairs on the input(could software fix it?).
4 channel mode is fine, but I've not been able to import the files to MTR mode, which is mildly frustrating.
The effects are OK, not awesome, not terrible(though useful for writing on the run).
As a USB interface I highly recommend downloading the ASIO driver from the Zoom site as the DX driver sucks. This thing as an audio interface will give you lower latency(17ms) than my old Digitech 002r(42ms) but not as good as my M-Audio delta 1010le(6-13ms).
So I guess I'll use it when noodling on the couch, staying away from home and a replacement for my cassette 4 track which I've been dragging to band rehearsals(helps with remembering riffs when you've had too much beer).
pro's: 4 track(with overdub),
price, phantom power, fx, high z input, usb.
con's: handling noise, not enough control(really needs external mixer), latency still a smidge high, sound quality not as nice as the sony.
You can find some good tips for using the h4n over at the zoom forum. Just google it. I just added a post today on how to get the files into the mtr mode.
I haven't tried it as a usb interface yet but someone over there said it's really good for that too.
I was just coming back to post that I managed to find that I figured out the file transfer system with it so that I can overdub as I please.
By the way I'm the anonymous from May 25th and that was my first post.
I don't really need the USB facilities as my Delta1010 is awesome for that, but its handy to know its there.
Plugging a guitar directly into it does sound very very good. I think to get the best SNR witha mic is to use a preamp feeding the line in as its mic preamps are a touch noisy, but generating 48v phantom is no mean feat when your supply is only 3v(Best I can do is 18v from a 9v source).
So I don't think the preamp issues are so much bad design, but a limitation of the low power available causing the headroom to be lower and the noise floor to be higher.
My rating on the first day was 85% but now that I can overdub the way i wish, it has gone up to 90%. Now if I could get independent control of each channel....
Oh and I wish they'd thought to have a Midi time Code function for syncing with my drum machine/sequencer(An old tascam does this but sounds terrible and can only handle small flash cards).
best get googling.
Cheers
A
If both Dynamics and Condenser mics go for Sony.
If Condenser only go for Zoom H4n.
Also, what does this bit mean (that somebody recently here):
"I have checked the manual for Tascam DR100 and the problem is its 24/48 not 96khz."
What's the problem, exactly? I don't know what that means... But I'm really leaning towards the Tascam DR-100 as opposed to the Zoom models (especially since it has two XLR inputs included), though I might pick up a Zoom H2 down the road, just to carry around in my man purse for something on the fly. But yeah... Let's talk about that Tascam DR-100. Does anyone here have a testimony about it?
Right after buying it I set the recording volume at 5 and listenning volume at 5 thinking this should be safe. Turn it on and listenned to it and it literially blow my ears. Very loud.
Potentially dangerous too. I think it should have an option in the menu to set a maximum output sound level to the microphone. So that excessively loud sound can be cut/reduced, because if you are playing a quite recording and then a loud recording it could demage hearing. Also if you listenning to birds and someone walks up and talks near you it could really hurt your ears.
Couldn't tell what was noise or the market floor. Until got home. I hear noise from internal microphones starting at a gain of 2.
I've tried many external microphones at a sound shop. Most microphones would work. But the best level I could get to on gain setting with any of the microphones I tried was 8 before I got noise. Usually most microphones would get noise starting at a gain of 7.
For my own external microphone I am limited to a recording gain of between 5 and 7 if I want sound to be good and with no noise.
I've tried turning microphone off and seeing what gain can get to without noise. But it still gets noise at 8gain. If I try just a miniconnecter without cable I get noise at a very low gain setting, but thats just an issue with the resistance being seen.
It is possible that maybe the noise above gain 8 is from environment. But the fact that the mic turned off only gets to 8 gain makes me think it isn't my environment. I guess it is preemps. On line-in I get no noise at any gain setting.
What have we all determined here, people? What's the best all-around field recorder (satisfactory internal mics, good for recording live band practices, great external mic use, etc.) from $400-$600? I need to know... I know it's not a Zoom, so what is it?
I
It's a pity that some idiots use forums like this to display their complete lack of maturity, competence and integrity.
I'm keen to find out if mine is unique in this regard?
I think it's always good to have other peoples' views, but offering them in a prejudicial way doesn't help anyone. Fortunately this isn't the only blog dealing with digital recorders around a certain price tag. Before anyone takes on board all the criticisms voiced here, I recomment them to search out other blogs that are far more rational in their comparisons.
I've been doing some heavy research to start recording and while I eventually will build a studio (not sure if I'll go with Apogee Ensemble or Prism Sound Orpheus or something similar yet as the main I/O,Preamp, Converter) but I need something to tide me over until then.
I'm thinking the Marantz PMD 661 may be the best for sound quality but I'm open to ideas.
I have to say, reading through this as taken my presumed "choice" (H4N) and has left me looking for another small/mobile recorder.
Ultimately I need to pick up some mics...etc as well but the Recorder is going to be my first step.
After much experimentation I found an input level of 25 - 30 to be the sweet spot for minimal hiss.
I'm feeding it from a external portable mixer (Sound Devices 442) and found these settings have greatly improved the overall quality of my recordings. YMMV.
Cheers and happy recording.