Does the H4 or H4N require a mixer?

C2V said:
I never said the H4N isn't a good device in any way. As a stereo field recorder, it is much more rugged in construction than its predecessor, and the stereo mics are better designed.

The pre-amps in the H4N are vastly improved over the useless pre-amps of the H4. I've heard some relatively good stuff come from them, but I would never assert that they are up to par with Sound Devices or the like.

So before I'm misrepresented again...

The original H4 is the better of the two as a double-system or backup recorder when a mixer is involved, as it is a fantastic recorder for line-level signals. And honestly, a mixer is an indispensable tool in audio form film/video/TV. I woudln't go out in the field with just a 2-channel recorder. Don't expect miracles out of the H4 if plugging mics in directly.

The H4N has some challenges in accepting line-level signals, but even with a padded line-level signal coming in (and attention to gain staging) it can be workable with a mixer, and that will still minimize any noise introduced from the pre-amps. It's a great handheld recorder for ambience/FX... probably better than the H4 in that respect.

Another thing to consider is the need for phantom power. This is a battery killer with both of these devices, and there have been some reports of folks experiencing noise/interference when using the DC power adapter.

The original question here is regarding the necessity of a mixer in order to use either of these recorders. And I stand by my assertion that a good mixer will improve performance here. And I'll also say again that I'd never run a handheld recorder as my primary audio device... unless, of course, I'm using the built-in stereo mics for ambience.
Click to expand...


D'oh!

Okay, but based on specs alone, what would be the better option, the H4N plugging mics straight into the XLR inputs or running an XLR into a JuicedLink and into the HF200 via its 1/8"?

I just think that a mixer is going to be too expensive for what I'm trying to do on this no-budget project. That was the point of the original question. Do I HAVE to have a mixer in order to get a DECENT dialog track. I just want something that is better sounding than what a camcorder's onboard mic (or a native 1/8" mic being plugged into it) would sound.

I just don't understand the specs.

Like, based on specs, would the DSR200 (XLR/DV) record better audio than the HF200 (XLR to 1/8"/SDHC cards). I just can't interpret the specs and if there's any way to avoid spending a bunch of money renting or buying a bunch of different equipment to "test" the multitude of options, that would be awesome.


DSR200: The DSR-200 is capable of PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) digital recording of stereo sound both in the 32kHz mode (4-channel/12-bit nonlinear) and in 48kHz mode (2-channel/16-bit linear). In the 32kHz mode, the DSR-200 records audio on two channels during shooting, and another stereo channel can be added onto it. If a higher sound quality is required, equivalent to DAT, record in the 48kHz mode.

The DSR-200 has two XLR connectors (3-pin) for audio input from professional microphones and audio equipment. Microphone input or line input can be selected by a slide switch.

External audio input: XLR 3-pin x 2 (MIC/LINE selectable)

HF200: Dolby Digital 2 channel. 3.5 milli meter Stereo Mini-Jack (it has an attenuator switch, that's all I know)

The Juicedlink: The mixer mounts to the base of camcorders and features two XLR inputs for balanced or unbalanced connection of microphones, recorders, additional mixers, etc. The CX231 is capable of providing 12 and 48V phantom power to condenser microphones. A 1/8" (3.5mm) mini output and 9 inch (22.86cm) long cable (supplied) connect to the camera audio input. There are three gain settings and two attenuation knobs for controlling audio level. The High/Mid/Low gain settings help control signal-to-noise ratio, resulting in clear audio results with a low noise floor. The CX231 is powered with a 9V alkaline battery for up to 16 hours (not included) and supplied with an output cable and allen wrench. (and just so we're crystal, this device is better than the Behringer mixers, correct?)


How does the H4N stack up against these options on paper?


Thanks again
 
Last edited:
Chamber005 said:
Okay, but based on specs alone, what would be the better option, the H4N plugging mics straight into the XLR inputs or running an XLR into a JuicedLink and into the HF200 via its 1/8"?

I just think that a mixer is going to be too expensive for what I'm trying to do on this no-budget project. That was the point of the original question. Do I HAVE to have a mixer in order to get a DECENT dialog track. I just want something that is better sounding than what a camcorder's onboard mic (or a native 1/8" mic being plugged into it) would sound.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know how the HF200 sounds, and Canon has not published the audio specs on their website. But I can't imagine that a good mic through a JuicedLink or BeachTek won't give you better results than a cheap mic with a 1/8" connector.

I can't find audio specs on the DSR200, though for a camera of that age that's obviously been kicked around, the factory specs may not matter (may be part of your hiss problem).
 
C2V said:
Well, I don't know how the HF200 sounds, and Canon has not published the audio specs on their website. But I can't imagine that a good mic through a JuicedLink or BeachTek won't give you better results than a cheap mic with a 1/8" connector.

I can't find audio specs on the DSR200, though for a camera of that age that's obviously been kicked around, the factory specs may not matter (may be part of your hiss problem).
Click to expand...


Gotchya,

So your final determination is...? lol

How about this -- if you had to hazard a guess based on what you've encountered over the years, if you had to bet on a single set up, would you go

A) DSR200 XLRs + phantom power

B) HF200 1/8" + Juicedlink

C) H4N using XLR ports

And, as an addendum, if you had to choose between using an H4N with a mixpre or an H4 with a mixpre, which would you choose?

Again, thanks so much for everyone's help!
 
By the way... the "specs" you posted earlier tell me nothing of the device's performance. Things you have to look for:

Frequency range/response: 20Hz - 20kHz is considered "full range," though some higher-end digital systems will go past that.
THD: Total Harmonic Distortion. This will be given as a percentage. The lower the number, the better.
S/N: signal-to-noise ratio. This will be given as a dB rating. The higher the number, the better.

My "final determination" doesn't really matter here. Honestly, do what you feel is going to give you the best performance within your budget. I'd get a MixPre and an H4, as far as the best of the options you've listed.

But you might get by for now with a BeachTek or Juicedlink... and they both have models that offer phantom. This still won't be on par with SoundDevices, but it could be a workable option if it's what you can afford. I'm heading out for the weekend...
 
For reference this is what I'm currently getting out of the DSR w/ Behringer (my no cost set up).

This was just rehearsal stuff while checking out the sound. Just posted it and Vimeo can be a little laggy, but it's up.

http://www.vimeo.com/7986630
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top