H4N and mixpre-d or Roland r-44

[egproductions]

From purely a quality standpoint what are your thoughts on which is a better setup? H4N with mixpre-d or straight up Roland r-44?

Also, is there any benefit of using the H4N with an r-44?

 

[Steve House]

From purely a quality standpoint what are your thoughts on which is a better setup? H4N with mixpre-d or straight up Roland r-44?

Also, is there any benefit of using the H4N with an r-44?

Depends on what you're using the H$n for. As a backup recorder in case something goes wonky in the R-44, sure, but since they're both recorders using them both makes no sense otherwise.

 

[tommyp]

I am kinda struggling with this as well. I like the idea of the MixPre-D but it might just make sense to buy a higher end recorder and not worry about the mixpre since I am going to record the audio besides just to the camera anyway.

 

[Noiz2]

In terms of quality the MixPre D is going to out last everything else on your list by a large multiple. Some folks really like the r-44, I didn't. It felt plasticy and fragile. I also thought the specs were not so great, very short battery life for one. I saw a demo and there were about five different things that I thought a field recorder need to have that the R-44 lacked.

BUT I haven't used one so this is an impression from seeing a demo and talking to the rep.

The h4n has it's own issues and is a bigger pain to operate so...

The MixPre you may well be using for years to come. I would go with whatever combo includes the MixPre-D.

Where cheap recorders cut costs is in the quality of the analog section. With the MixPre-D you have a very high end analog section and can send a digital stream to a recorder than only needs to be able to record a digital in with out glitching. You can move all your level control etc to the MixPre and that will stay consistent when you move on to the next recorder.

I have the original MixPre and it has been the front end for two DAT machines a MiniDisk recorder, a sew of cameras and a pair of flash recorders.
Easily the best audio $ I have spent in terms of use hours per $.

 

[tommyp]

In terms of quality the MixPre D is going to out last everything else on your list by a large multiple. Some folks really like the r-44, I didn't. It felt plasticy and fragile. I also thought the specs were not so great, very short battery life for one. I saw a demo and there were about five different things that I thought a field recorder need to have that the R-44 lacked.

BUT I haven't used one so this is an impression from seeing a demo and talking to the rep.

The h4n has it's own issues and is a bigger pain to operate so...

The MixPre you may well be using for years to come. I would go with whatever combo includes the MixPre-D.

Where cheap recorders cut costs is in the quality of the analog section. With the MixPre-D you have a very high end analog section and can send a digital stream to a recorder than only needs to be able to record a digital in with out glitching. You can move all your level control etc to the MixPre and that will stay consistent when you move on to the next recorder.

I have the original MixPre and it has been the front end for two DAT machines a MiniDisk recorder, a sew of cameras and a pair of flash recorders.
Easily the best audio $ I have spent in terms of use hours per $.

You make a great point. Thanks!

 

[egproductions]

Thank Noiz2. I guess that's the question I'm asking. Is the analog circuitry superior in the mixpre-d or the h-44. It sounds like what you're saying is that it's better in the mixpre-d.

 

[Alex H.]

H4n's analog section is horrid. Marginally improved from the original H4, but not by much. If you're absolutely convinced to get a hand-held recorder, take a look at the TASCAM DR-40 instead of the Zoom H4n. But there's another question that will impact your decision: will a stereo (2-track) recorder do everything you need, or do you need 4 discrete record tracks? If it's the latter, then your decision is pretty much made... and at that point I'd take a look at the TASCAM DR-680 instead of the Roland R-44.

I have a MixPre-D and it is excellent. I had the MixPre and loved it, but sold it to pay for the D. I use it in front of a Fostex FR2-LE and get great results.

 

[Jema]

If you don't think you absolutely need to have four channels, and since you consider two I'd say you don't, then go for the mixpre. It's a solid piece of gear with good metering, low cut, and limiters that have saved me many times (original mixpre that is).

Noiz, I'm just curious, what were the faults you saw with the R-44? I've been considering one myself, as I've used the R-4 Pro and quite like it. Two of them I guess is the lack of analogue limiter and low cut.

 

[Chadfish]

IF you need more than 2 channels to record, I'll suggest the Tascam DR-680. It's cheaper than the R-44 and it sounds better AND it has 8 tracks - 6 analog and stereo digital. But if you only need 2 channels I'd say get the MixPre-D and that will make almost any recorder sound good because the MixPre-D has 66db of gain, which will allow you to turn the recording level of any recorder way down - eliminating noise from the recorder's pres.

 

[mwtownsend]

I used to use the H4N, but switched to the Tascam DR-100 and I would never go back. Worth a look - sometimes you can find them on sale -

 

[Noiz2]

...
But if you only need 2 channels I'd say get the MixPre-D and that will make almost any recorder sound good because the MixPre-D has 66db of gain, which will allow you to turn the recording level of any recorder way down - eliminating noise from the recorder's pres.

Actually with the D it's even better since you can go in digitally and eliminate the analog section of the recorder altogether.

 

[Noiz2]

Noiz, I'm just curious, what were the faults you saw with the R-44? I've been considering one myself, as I've used the R-4 Pro and quite like it. Two of them I guess is the lack of analogue limiter and low cut.

It's been awhile and I think I wrote about it when it was fresh so you could probably do a search but...

Battery life was awful, like an hour or so. A lack of a limiter and a cut would be an issue. Other things I would balk at would be prerecode buffer very important for what I do. But I really can't remember. I know it was very intriguing going in and then after asking some questions and handling it it was not an option. It also has a pretty small display for field work.

They showed the R-44 and the other one (r-4?). One used a hard drive and had insanely low batt life and the other used flash ad had a bit better.

But as I mentioned there are folks that like them a lot that actually own them so I would talk to them and ask them about what you need and see if it fits the bill. For me it didn't work but that's me not you. It's not like I thought it was a piece of junk, just didn't have make or break features I asked about.

 

[RichT]

At the time I got it (about 4 years ago) the R-44 was the cheapest recorder I could get with a reliable digital in, it could be a nice setup with the MixPre-D in front (I run it with a Sonosax SX-M32 when I don't need timecode- fits nicely into a Petrol PS607 bag). It's quite well suited to bag work, although you have to go to the top when changing filename. I occasionally hire a Sound Devices 7 series if I need timecode, but otherwise it does the job

Battery life is about 2 hours for the internals (use NIMH for backup), but I run it off an NP1 battery, along with the mixer.

It's got a digitally controlled limiter where the gain's taken down with signals over -12dBFS (I think), it's ok at a push but I've only used it once. It's got a low cut filter. Preamps are pretty neutral but get noisy once you're past around 50%

I've been pretty pleased with the build quality, under the plastic there's a metal frame (I've had it apart).

A cheaper option would be the Marantz PMD661 which also has a digital in, with the MixPre-D in front- although it'll be less easy to use in a bag. There's also the M-Audio Microtrack, but I've heard a lot of reports of them failing.

 

[Hutchman]

I have a MixPre-D and it is excellent. I had the MixPre and loved it, but sold it to pay for the D. I use it in front of a Fostex FR2-LE and get great results.

Which mics do you use, Alex? Thanks.

 

[Hutchman]

If you only need 2 channels I'd say get the MixPre-D and that will make almost any recorder sound good because the MixPre-D has 66db of gain, which will allow you to turn the recording level of any recorder way down - eliminating noise from the recorder's pres.

Thanks for that, Chad. So if I got the MixPre-D and say, the TASCAM DR-100, would there be much difference than if I got the more expensive Fostex FR2-LE?

Also, would you recommend the AT4053b with that gear, to get good quality dialogue for an Indie feature?

I saw your audio samples with the AT4053b into the EX1 and thought it sounded great. It's the sort of quality I'm after. I currently have a DVX100 which I only use for audio, do you know if the DVX and EX1 would have similar audio capabilities? I would assume the EX1, being more expensive, would have better quality?

The Indie film only has 2 people onscreen at a time, with simple audio setups. Kind of like ANOTHER EARTH if you've seen it. So I don't need lots of tracks, but I do need very clean dialogue with no noise that can go through a theatre's audio system.

I'd appreciate your advice on which audio setup to use, thanks a lot.

 

[Noiz2]

At the time I got it (about 4 years ago) the R-44 was the cheapest recorder I could get with a reliable digital in, ...

The Tascam HD-P2 and Marantz PMD671 both are less than the R-44. I picked the 671 up over four years ago for around $850. Of course I am comparing list with street, but they should have all been in the same range.

------------

OP:
If you can swing it I would highly recommend a larger foot print recorder like the HD-P2. You get better battery life and generally better build plus they are much easier to use in a bag than the mini recorders like the H4n.