DR-100, FR-2LE or Zoom H4N?

R

rallymatt

Well-known member
Looking for a nice field recorder to compliment my Canon 7d setup. Will be used primarily with an NTG-2 and i'd like to add an Oktava at some point.

Everyone seems to love the H4n, but some pro's say it has noisy pre-amps.

The DR-100 seems rock solid, but can't record 4 channel. Although that is something I do not think I would use that much. I cannot find any solid writeups on it's noisiness or lack thereof.

The FR-2LE is about $200 more expensive than the Tascam and Zoom, but I am willing to pay the additional cost if it means far superior recording quality.

I am mostly concerned with external mics and phantom power. The onboard mics of the dr-100 and Zoom are bonus additions to me. But I don't consider them a serious need.

I am coming from generally using a Rode Videomic recorded into a camcorder. Mostly shoot run&gun sporting documentary type stuff, and promo pieces.
 
Hi rallymatt. I own a fr2le and I must say that it´s really lightweight, not too big, excellent sound field recorder. The preamps are a little tricky if you go too hot, the ALD is useless and the builtin limiter has too much release time. The headphone amplifier it´s noisy if you go to loud, but that doesn´t appear in the recordings. It´s easy to configure, you can put tamiya batteries (7.2v) on it and run for 8hs aprox (probably with dynamic mics - no phantom required). One important note, if you connected the headphones, then both L/R RCA outputs are disable, you can´t use both at the same time. The built in mics are good enough (they´re stereo and has two type of sensibility).

You can purchase at $500 from here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Fostex-FR2LE-Field-Recorder-FR-2LE-FR2-LE-BRAND-NEW_W0QQitemZ370307159277QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item563806d4ed
 
I just purchased a DR-100 and although I haven't used it much yet I am happy with the what I've heard. Using with NTG-2 as well. I read up on the DR-100 and most reviews are excellent.
 
I would recommend the Fostex FR-2LE or the Tascam DR-100. I have used all except the DR-100(but have read up on it. heard sound examples and those sounded pretty good) I like the FR-2LE better than the Zoom H4.


Nicole
 
jaredgiese said:
You could always go with this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...vices_744T_744T_4_Channel_Portable_Audio.html

:)
Click to expand...

I used to own 3 of these and I returned them. My main issues were I need 32 bit/ 256 kHz and it only has 2 XLRS. Can you imaging only using 2? Also 160 gigs is not enough I think 500 should be the minimum.

Of course none of that is true but I was trying my hand at the DVXUSER style "grass is greener" talk.

I only have a couple DSLR shoots under my belt but I have been using my DVX-100. It works really nice. It is not quick, easily portable, or quick to transfer. It is high quality, much easier to sync (because of embedded video track along with audio), and something I already own.

I also have this an ancient Sony video light that plugs in and mounts via cold shoe. So my DVX on tripod can become a 200 watt light if needed.

Ok, Ok I am off topic. The reason is I am in the same thought process as the parent and as long as I am not doing any DSLR run and gun I think I am gonna wait to see which device reigns supreme I have never been thrilled with the Zoom stuff.
 
I can't speak regarding the pre-amps on the other recorders, but the DR-100 pre-amps, when using phantom powered mics are very good. Using dynamic mics, leaves something to be desired and a mixer is really needed to boost the volume and avoid hiss. You will like the controls on the DR-100.

Grant
 
if you're planning on being bag based, then the fr2. i had the dr-100 for a few days and i did like it. but i sent it back to get the dr680, which STILL isn't out yet and that was over a month ago. not sure why tascam is taking so long to get that thing out.
 
Is the DR-680 going to replace the HD-P2? Whats up with no XLR output? If you are using this in a audio bag, how is that going to work with all those switches on top = not. Though the DR-100 had the same issues with switches all over the body.

Is this recorder aimed more musicians?

Grant
 
i don't think its going to replace the hd-p2. but i'd be having a mixer in front of it, as i do with all of my recorders. so after i set tone, thats usually the last i touch the levels on my recorder. and why need xlr out of your recorder? i've got 2 more sets of xlr outs on my mixer.
 
Look into the Marantz PMD661. I bought one recently after quite a bit of research into the matter, and have not been disappointed.

Listen to the noise floors comparisons of most recorders on the market today here, when tested with various types of mics. The dynamic mics are really the torture test as far as hiss is concerned, since they naturally have lower output.

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portable-recorder-noise.html

The Marantz PMD661 has quiet preamps, 24/96 operation, runs on easy to source AA batteries (and can use NiMH rechargeable batteries), has a 1/4" headphone output, has true line level XLR inputs via a mic/line switch (as opposed to just dialing down the mic preamp gain for line level signals).

It's not really documented well, but it does have a built in analog limiter and high/low pass filters. It also has a nice dual mono mode where it records the left input at normal volume, and the same input on the right channel 20dB down as a safety. I have personally tested this and it does work properly. The headphone amp could be louder, but with Sony MDR-7506 headphones I think it should be loud enough if you turn it up toward the top of the dial.

Be aware that the built in mics on the PMD661 are not as good as the built in mics on the Zoom H4N. In general, built in mics get worse and more vestigal before disappearing completely as you go up the food chain. Any stereo recording I do with the PMD661 with be with a Rode NT4 and not with the built in mics.
 
I spent literally a year researching all of the options and I finally went with the Fostex FR2LE. The Edirol-44 is, to me, the best of the sub-1K recorders, but the Fostex is half the price (because you get half the XLR inputs with phantom). The Fostex and the Edirol sound nearly identical, though, so if you don't need the additional inputs, go for the Fostex. It's the only thing you'll ever need until you can swing a SD 744.
 
Today partly disassembled my DR-100.

Internally it is not possible to compare to Zoom H4N.

This thing is metal parts screwed to metal frame. Build quality is very good.
Interface is clear even for 4 year olds.

Only drawback that I can see is very low maximum boost(gain) levels (for all sources).
To record normal voice you need to set gain to high and level close to maximum.
This is clearly abnormal. It could be ideal recorder otherwise.
And omni mikes are crap, of course. Because they use tiny capsules buried inside case.
 
Thanks so much for the link. Seems like under 400$ Marantz 620 and Edirol 9 are the best options with the least amount of noise. Funny, but Zoom H4N got the most amount of noise.

robotsound said:
Look into the Marantz PMD661. I bought one recently after quite a bit of research into the matter, and have not been disappointed.

Listen to the noise floors comparisons of most recorders on the market today here, when tested with various types of mics. The dynamic mics are really the torture test as far as hiss is concerned, since they naturally have lower output.

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portable-recorder-noise.html


thanks a lot for the provided link. Seems like under 400$ Marantz PMD620 and Edirol R-09HR are much better options than Tascam DR100 and Zoom H4N, they don't have as much of a noice and the other 2 have.. Funny, but ZoomH4n is the noisiest

The Marantz PMD661 has quiet preamps, 24/96 operation, runs on easy to source AA batteries (and can use NiMH rechargeable batteries), has a 1/4" headphone output, has true line level XLR inputs via a mic/line switch (as opposed to just dialing down the mic preamp gain for line level signals).

It's not really documented well, but it does have a built in analog limiter and high/low pass filters. It also has a nice dual mono mode where it records the left input at normal volume, and the same input on the right channel 20dB down as a safety. I have personally tested this and it does work properly. The headphone amp could be louder, but with Sony MDR-7506 headphones I think it should be loud enough if you turn it up toward the top of the dial.

Be aware that the built in mics on the PMD661 are not as good as the built in mics on the Zoom H4N. In general, built in mics get worse and more vestigal before disappearing completely as you go up the food chain. Any stereo recording I do with the PMD661 with be with a Rode NT4 and not with the built in mics.
Click to expand...
 
Personally, I don't like the FR2 (for a stack of reasons - I'm sure they are in a number of threads if you search). The LE version might be better but I doubt it. I haven't used the small Marantz but own the PMD-671. The pres are pretty good, better than the rep (that they apparently got for noisy ones on the PMD-670). I've used the Zoom and it's siblings. For a pull it out and grab some sound it's good, but now that it has some good competition It's not on my recommended buy list any more. The reason is mostly build quality. Ones that have been in use for awhile are usually pretty ragety. The labels wear off, the card door breaks easily, especially on the H2. They just don't seem to hold up well and there are other recorders out there that are built better.

The ergonomics of all these palm recorders suck for production work. Better bigger screens are a big Plus, back lit is a must. It doesn't get much better till you move up to a recorder that is at leas the size of a book, there just isn't enough room on the small ones.

Someone complained about buttons on the top of the FR2 Le. I don't like the FR2 series but the buttons on the FR2 weren't a problem and the Marantz has a bunch of switches/ buttons on the top also and it's not really an issue. It depends of course which buttons are on the top. But mostly the buttons and switches that you see ending up on top are for setup and playback, neither of which your likely o need often over the shoulder. In the years I've been using the Marantz there are a hand full of times when I wished a switch or button that was on the top wasn't. The alternative is the menu nightmare of the Sound Devices recorders. I like the recorders but the menu system drives me crazy. They are also just a touch too small. Another couple of inches and it wouldn't be a finger jam to get to things.
 
galapagos said:
Thanks so much for the link. Seems like under 400$ Marantz 620 and Edirol 9 are the best options with the least amount of noise. Funny, but Zoom H4N got the most amount of noise.
Click to expand...

fasinating link, thanks. But there is something wonky with the samples, at least the line input ones. They either are using a very noisy mic pre or were recording in a noisy environment. It sounds like there is a computer going in the BG??? Anyway there is no way those are accurate. If they were it would mean that the line in on a Sound Devices recorder is much noisier than say the built in mics on an Olympus....

What I found fascinating is how wide the range in preamp "sound" was. The Zooms all came of rather dark and muddy.
 
Noiz2, after browsing all the posts on sound on the forum I think I know now how big productions get "Hollywood sound" :) , besides the knowledge of acoustics and using proper mics for different environments , a very expensive sound gear is used to record everything without any noise, adding some EQ, delays, reverbs and you're good to go. While amateur dudes record on a crappy Zoom with bunch of noise and then try to edit it in post, still having a lot of noise.
 
Last edited:
Actually if you go to the sticky on post sound you would come to a different conclusion, sort of. One part is getting good production sound, which does not nec. involve "very expensive gear". The gear most pros use IS expensive but a lot of that has to do with the specialized nature of it and build quality. An H4n is not light years away from a Nagra V, if used well, but that Nagra will "take a licking and keep on ticking" and the Zoom will just fall apart. But low budget films can afford to be gentler and are not out millions if the gear fails and you have to come back tomorrow. So you can use gear that no professional would stake their job on and if your careful you can get excellent results at a fraction of the cost.

BUT, to capsulize all the info on post, film sound is created not recorded. Take Public Enemies. One of the worst most amateur sounding dialog tracks ever put on a big budget film (not the sound dept fault... director intervention). It has a "Hollywood" sound even with really bad dialog. It's all the other layers that make that happen. EQ's,Delays & Reverbs have little to do with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top