Mini-Recorder: Zoom U-22

G

ggrantly

Veteran
I searched and didn't see any threads for this product, so thought I would share. Seems like a bargain if the audio is decent.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1282311-REG/zoom_zu22_u_22_handy_audio_interface.html


USB interface
1 channel of Phantom power

Drawback:
No visible metering. Though given the price....

They have a two channel version as well, but it is larger. The U22 would still fit in a pocket, sort of.

I haven't been a huge fan of zoom products and have preferred Tascam for my economy level product needs, but this one really hits some right buttons for $70 on special. Now wondering how strong the preamp is? I didn't see any external mounting options in the photos, but some good velcro might do the trick. Seems like a belt clip would be a great option also.

Grant
 
I too thought it recorded.
I wonder how long the internal AAs batts run w/ the 48v Phantom Power engaged. The specs state five hours, but don't specify w or w/o Phantom Pwr. But with no XLR out, it's not much good as portable PP supply either.

I just can't get over the Zoom stigma of poor quality as well. I was thinking of a F8 purchase but.... I'd be embarrassed to have gear w/ the Zoom name. Guess I'm stuck w/ my 302/744 for awhile and renting when more tracks are needed.
 
Considering the connectors and lack of recording ability, this piece of gear has limited usefulness, seems to me. I wouldn't pay $70 for it for sure.
 
Rick said: "Guess I'm stuck w/ my 302/744 for awhile and renting when more tracks are needed."

Rick, this what I use and can't really imagine any 5 into 4 channel setup which would perform any better. I suppose the newer SD equipment gives you an all in one solution, but I sure prefer the led metering on the 302 and 744.

Old Corpse said: "Considering the connectors and lack of recording ability, this piece of gear has limited usefulness, seems to me. I wouldn't pay $70 for it for sure."

I'm wondering if the output from this device would match up to a dslr input. If so, it would be an interesting solution to get phantom power and some improved control to record in cam.

Grant
 
Rick R said:
I just can't get over the Zoom stigma of poor quality as well. I was thinking of a F8 purchase but.... I'd be embarrassed to have gear w/ the Zoom name.
Click to expand...

Ah, there it is. "I'd be embarrassed...". In other words it is not what the equipment will do, it is how impressed others are by the name on it.

A Rolex is a very nice $500 watch, but if you could buy one for $500 no one would be impressed with your income, so you willingly pay $5000 for that $500 watch. On the other hand, if you want to work on the big bucks projects you have to impress those guys wearing $10,000 watches. But somehow I suspect showing up with a sound truck and a 7 man crew would be even more impressive, even if you were using Zoom recorders.
 
I think that is a bit unfair. Zoom has a horrible reputation for build quality and general professionalism. The markings on their handhelds wear off, card doors just break off under normal use, etc. They did originally gat a fair amount of use from FX recordists because they were one of the first handhelds with decent sound quality, but they also had a lot of use issues. It didn't matter so much for FX work, you don't have a crew on the clock if you need to redo a take.

No budget folks, many of whom had really no idea what they were doing (for sound anyway) started using them for production because they were cheap, and if you are shooting with a camera with absolutely terrible onboard sound it was a big step up. Or it would have been if the "production sound" people had a clue. To be fair some did but many... I worked post on a film where the "sound guy" used a Zoom taped on a stick with a rubber glove over it so it wouldn't get wet, but he recorded at 96k. The same guy shot a different scene from about 100 ft away with a shotgun mic "cuz it's just like a telescope".

So one has reason to be concerned showing up to a professional shoot carrying a Zoom.

Now it looks like Zoom is working very hard at reversing that reputation and I have to say the F4 is probably in my near future, but if they didn't have the history I would already be there.
 
graywolf said:
Ah, there it is. "I'd be embarrassed...". In other words it is not what the equipment will do, it is how impressed others are by the name on it.

A Rolex is a very nice $500 watch, but if you could buy one for $500 no one would be impressed with your income, so you willingly pay $5000 for that $500 watch. On the other hand, if you want to work on the big bucks projects you have to impress those guys wearing $10,000 watches. But somehow I suspect showing up with a sound truck and a 7 man crew would be even more impressive, even if you were using Zoom recorders.
Click to expand...

This is about much more than sound quality. When you show for a professional shoot, for real money, you want to bring skill and professionalism to the project. I have owned multiple economy recorders, and I have never been disappointed in the audio quality (mostly). I still have and use a small inexpensive recorder in my travel kit. Maybe a SD device has a slight advantage in audio quality over the economy models, but at this point the difference is modest. But that is only a small part of the reason for using SD or other pro level gear. Build quality, reliability, customer support are equally as important. Your Rolex comparison doesn't hold up here; if your cheap watch craps out, it usually doesn't matter except for a minor inconvenience. If your cheap recorder craps out and production stops while you figure it out, you probably won't be invited back. If this happens during a non-repeatable live event, you are really screwed. I always want to give my efforts the best opportunity to succeed, and using the best and most reliable gear helps me to accomplish that. Any gear can fail or break, but when you compare the plasticky economy gear to Sound Devices, well there really isn't any comparison. I'm not a gear bigot, but I do want to bring my best effort to each project.

Grant
 
Thanks Grant, that's why I'm reluctant to purchase the F8. Even with the SD gear, I'm a little paranoid and keep backup gear close by.
 
ggrantly said:
Your Rolex comparison doesn't hold up here; if your cheap watch craps out, it usually doesn't matter except for a minor inconvenience.
Click to expand...

You kind of misunderstood what I was saying. I used to repair watches. A Rolex is a very nice $500 watch, the other $4500 is entirely what you are paying to impress people with your income, it is pure profit for the manufacture. Oh, sorry, Rolex does not make a profit, 100% of their profit goes to charity. Of course they do have to pay the Board of Directors who are all family members. Last I heard was they each got 1 million dollars a year but that was a long time back.

For a long time I have wanted a professional grade digital recorder, but could not afford one. My opinion of Zoom was they were cheap junk. But I bought the F4 as soon as it came out. Entirely happy with it even though it was still twice what I could afford, but that is better than 10 times what I could afford. No idea at this time about its actual durability, but would one SD be more reliable than a half dozen F8's. I kind of doubt it. The F series recorders seem only to be related to the H series by name. H series look and feel cheap, the F series does not.

I am, of course giving my opinion here, your are entirely entitled to your own. But I have not seen much negative from people who actually have used them. Suggestion: rent one for a shoot and see what you actually think after using it.
 
I get it. I worked my way up from zero by starving my wife and dog. Nothing wrong with economy gear if fulfills your need. The big players in economy gear, Zoom and Tascam, have come lightyears in the last decade. They both make recorders that have real audio for video features. Before, they only catered to music recording. Although smaller than the music market, it seems they both have enough business to cater to video for some models. Unless you are working your gear hard as a profession, or need a particular feature, or need that last bit of performance, it would be a hard sell to justify equipment from SD, Lectro or Zaxcom.

G
 
More on topic. If the U22 works as an interface for DSLR's, it would be a bargain.

Funny thing is that the reason there is so much compitition in the video world now is that thousands and thousands of digital photographers suddenly found out they could do video with their new DSLR. It was a cheap add on for the manufactures, my 2002 dp&s had the capability. But of course adding real audio to it was a hardware issue that the manufactures didn't want to raise the price to add. So nifty cameras with lousy sound. Hence all the film orientated recorders now coming out.

Me, as a hobbiest, I chose an out of date camcorder with all the features of a real pro camcorder including decent, for old stuff, sound. Funny thing, I met a pro video journalist (got his card here on my desk) up in town the other day with a Canon DSLR and one of those skinny hot shoe shotgun mic's (no tripod). I kind of thought that my old Sonys were a lot better fror that kind of work. But, what do I know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top