Pofessional audio gear

[John Willett]

Hello again
Thank you very much for your comments.
One more question. Does some one has an opinion of the Zoom H4n Sennheiser EW112P G3 wireless prattle recording systemThis is a wonderful forum.

Thank you

The H4n is OK - though, personally, I would go for the new Olympus LS-100 or something better.

The Sennheiser G3 is a great inexpensive pro. system and is actually being used by more pros now that the small receiver is diversity (the G2 wasn't). In a test in the UK last year it actually came out the best for range (which surprised me, I expected the Audio Ltd. to win).

If you go for the ew 100 ENG G3 you will get the plug-on transmitter as well as everything you get in the ew 112p G3 at a saving of about £100 of buying separately.

[Jema]

I would stay away from the H4n. It can be decent in the right circumstances, and is quite flexible for musicians and people doing interviews and similar, but there are better choices for field recording. If you are not using a mixer, it's preamps are noisy and the screen on a place where it's hard to monitor. If you are using a mixer, it does not have a line in, and can overload pretty easily.

For an all-in-one box, I would look at the R-44, HD-P2, PMD661/671, or FR2-LE unless you are willing to step up in price to for instance the SD702. For handhelds, either the Roland R-26, Tascam DR-100mkII, or Olympus 100. If you are going to have a mixer, then a good bitbucket is the Sony M10.

[dre83]

Where in any of the above posts does it mention or suggest "forcing" anyone to buy a certain brand? I see someone offered a suggestion on what to buy. Can you clarify what you were talking about?

If I was new in sound, and I read as suggestion "brand A as recorder, brand B as microphone, brand C as boom,..." I might think: "Ooh, ok, so those brands are the only good ones and everything else is bad".

I thought maybe it's better to some a few brands or to say "I have this and this and that".

[Kit Hannah]

If I was new in sound, and I read as suggestion "brand A as recorder, brand B as microphone, brand C as boom,..." I might think: "Ooh, ok, so those brands are the only good ones and everything else is bad".

I thought maybe it's better to some a few brands or to say "I have this and this and that".

The OP asked for suggestions. In that person's opinion, those are the suggestions he gave. Nobody said anything about those being the only ones, you're jumping to conclusions and making nothing into something. I would have done the same thing, as I have things that I prefer. Nobody said anything about anything else being bad... If I said "I like country music", does that mean I think rap and rock and pop and classical sucks? Hell no. I just said I like country music and that's it. I think it's even beyond assuming, there wasn't even a hint of "that's the only thing".

Sorry, I just hate when people somehow derive and infer negative things from absolutely nothing... It's not personal, dre83, we all do it to a degree, but that was pretty blatent and I think stuff like that has to be corrected. If I even remotely saw him say something to the contrary, I would understand and not say anything, but if I were researching something and someone provided a suggestion after I asked for it, I would take it as that and look into it, but just because some random internet person said it does not mean it is the end all tell all.

[Doc Bernard]

I would stay away from the H4n. It can be decent in the right circumstances, and is quite flexible for musicians and people doing interviews and similar, but there are better choices for field recording. If you are not using a mixer, it's preamps are noisy and the screen on a place where it's hard to monitor. If you are using a mixer, it does not have a line in, and can overload pretty easily.

But using the H4n with a mixer, it can be a great recorder. Just like any piece of gear, with someone knowledgeable in it's usage and application, it can be many, many times better than on-camera audio. Your mileage may vary, based on experience and know-how. I have audio on network TV (Nickelodeon) and for a major camera manufacturer (Canon) using an H4n and a mixer, so......technically, that argument is not valid. No offense intended, but thinking what is possible (and what's not) is only based on experience and actually doing it, theory and belief aside. My clients were amazed at the "low quality" equipment and high quality results using the gear I fly. But you HAVE to know the deficiencies and parameters of the gear you use to replicate the results I get.

I challenge anyone, using a decent mixer and allowing the mixer pre's to do the heavy work, to tell me otherwise. A recorder's job is to translate an analog audio signal into a digital signal of 1's and 0's and well, record it on to a media. Nothing else. Sure there are higher end recorders with bells and whistles, but when the dust settles, it comes down to the signal you feed it. And that comes from your mixer, mic choice, and how you use that equipment. I have to admit, those that claim this recorder or that recorder is better, I feel comes strictly from the allure of the bells and whistles. I really like SD702T, but only for the bells and whistles it gives me. Not because it translates 1's and 0's any better than anything else. 1's and 0's are still 1's and 0's.


The stickies are a great resource. Even low end equipment can give great results, if the person using it knows how to actually use it right.

[dre83]

The OP asked for suggestions. In that person's opinion, those are the suggestions he gave. Nobody said anything about those being the only ones, you're jumping to conclusions and making nothing into something. I would have done the same thing, as I have things that I prefer. Nobody said anything about anything else being bad... If I said "I like country music", does that mean I think rap and rock and pop and classical sucks? Hell no. I just said I like country music and that's it. I think it's even beyond assuming, there wasn't even a hint of "that's the only thing".

Sorry, I just hate when people somehow derive and infer negative things from absolutely nothing... It's not personal, dre83, we all do it to a degree, but that was pretty blatent and I think stuff like that has to be corrected. If I even remotely saw him say something to the contrary, I would understand and not say anything, but if I were researching something and someone provided a suggestion after I asked for it, I would take it as that and look into it, but just because some random internet person said it does not mean it is the end all tell all.

Yes, but that was how it felt/came over for/to me... So if it was not meant like that it means it felt/came wrong to me.... That I had the wrong feeling about it.