newbie question: what difference between the recorders

H

Hiro Nakamura

Active member
Hey guys

Sorry for messing around with your standard of audio recording. I just have a question. I am considering a Soundman who didn't graduate from the sound academy etc. So I am lacking of all the basic knowledge I guess.

So my question is what difference between all the recorders in terms of sound quality and sample rate.
For instance, a sound devices 788t recording two channels of audio, sample rate 48/24bit. Compare to a h4n recording the same sample rate.
I am using a h4n and sometimes a h1 for backup audio for my eng shoot and documentary shoot.

Sometimes the clients ask for 744t. Which my setup is to go through my sound devices 302 output for 744t recording. So i couldn't figure what much difference I can make if I use 744t and h4n

Of course I understand 744t is more flexible with lots of options like frame rate, 48k power stuff, but in terms of audio quality?

Sorry for sounds so stupid?
That's how we learn!
Screw me hard please:)

Thanks in advance for all the inputs guys

Hiro
 
Last edited:
The circuitry and design of the Sound Devices recorders is going to be much higher quality, and therefore give you a better signal to noise ratio, a lower noise floor, and ultimately a cleaner sounding recording.

If you're coming out of a 302 mixer and plugging into an H4n, you can't connect the XLR outputs of the 302 without adjusting the output level from the mixer. The H4n cannot accept true line-level signals. You have to feed it a signal softer than line-level, which means that you're hitting the H4n's inferior preamp circuitry during your recording. A Sound Devices recorder will offer you a no-compromises signal path for the cleanest recording possible.

If you're using the 3.5mm line-level input on the Zoom H1, you're making a recording with a "consumer" line-level signal on a mini-plug connection. This will not produce as clean and detailed of a recording as it would with a true line-level signal going in on a balanced XLR input.

If you're using a recorder like the Tascam DR100 which has balanced XLR inputs that can accept true line-level signals, the superior circuitry and design of the signal path in a Sound Devices recorder will still outshine it.
 
Thank you very much Sam,

Now I understand why some recorders are so expensive, some are not.

Another thing, when I use my H4N for back up, I use the tape out (mini xlr port) which I think gives another -15db lower pad, which H4N won't get clip easily,
Of course if I straight connect the XLR output ports to H4N, I adjust the menu of 302 to Mic Level.

Is that a right way of doing it?

Thanks a lot

Hiro
 
Line level?

Line level?

Hi Sam,

I'm also looking at different recorders to pair with my MixPre. I sold my H4n because it didn't have line-level inputs. Currently I use the Sony M10 --which is a sweet little recorder-- but assuming I want to step up to a recorder with line-level XLR inputs (and assuming I can't afford a SD) I thought my only option was the Marantz 661. The XLR inputs on the Tascam DR100 are mic level, like the H4n. Am I right about this?

Thanks, Dan
 
danbell222 said:
Hi Sam,

I'm also looking at different recorders to pair with my MixPre. I sold my H4n because it didn't have line-level inputs. Currently I use the Sony M10 --which is a sweet little recorder-- but assuming I want to step up to a recorder with line-level XLR inputs (and assuming I can't afford a SD) I thought my only option was the Marantz 661. The XLR inputs on the Tascam DR100 are mic level, like the H4n. Am I right about this?

Thanks, Dan
Click to expand...

I think the DR-100 is mic/line switchable.

The Fostex FR-2LE is also quite nice as is the Tascam DR-680.

But the SD 702, 702T, 722, 744T and 788T are well above these in quality. As are also the Nagra LB and VI and the new AETA 4MinX. These last are all pro units. The former are consumer or semi-pro.

If you are going pro and charging for your services, you really should look at the SD as the minimum quality.
 
Yeah... I am carrying around a rented 744t sometimes when the client request or they can afford.
I will get my own 744T or even 788T.... waiting for the $$$
 
Note: The DR100 will take line-in via a 1/8 plug input only. It works fine but you will need a adapter cable to record from a 302.

Grant
 
I would strongly recommend that you test before buyinng, because the Sony M10 has very good circuitry for a cheap recorder, and you may not see much improvement ( or any at all ) by switching to a Marantz 661 or Tascam DR100. ( the Doug Oade modified versions of these recorders might be a different story )
 
If I can piggyback on the question... I intend to buy the MixPre-D; unfortunately, my budget doesn't allow for a recorder that's more than $1000 at most... what are my options? This is for feature work, theatrical. I looked at the Tascam DR-680, but the reviews are kinda scary wrt. quality control (tons of units either don't work, or are hinky). The Fostex FR-2LE seems overpriced for what it does and is not Mac friendly (I do prod and post on the Mac). I just can't afford to pay more than $1000 at most, but it seems like the choices are either the $300-$400 stuff like Tascam DR100 or an immediate jump to $1800 for SD gear. What happened to "X" recorders $400< X <$1800? I'm lost here... help?
 
If I can piggyback on the question... I intend to buy the MixPre-D; unfortunately, my budget doesn't allow for a recorder that's more than $1000 at most...
Click to expand...

I would buy the MixPre D and the Sony M10 recorder which can use the tape-return output from the MixPre. I own the old MixPre and use it with an Olympus LS-11, which works great, but the Sony M10 has a better noise-floor than this Olympus and most of the mid-priced recorders. The Sony MD-50 is even better but a bit of a pig on batteries. ( MD-50 has very good mics too )

Are there any sub $1,000 recorders with a 100+ dB noise floor ? Edirol R-44 maybe ?
 
I have been very pleased with my DR-680 which I feed from my PSC Alphamix via direct outs from each channel. I started with the DR-100 fed via the 1/8" line inputs and still have it for other uses. No matter what recorder you choose, I HIGHLY recommend a mixer on the front end. The PSC promix 6 feeding the Tascam DR-680 would make a very nice rig.
 
Thank you, TheDingo. I have not tested the Sony MD50, I'll look into that. I'm concerned about getting a good noise floor, because the project I'm going to be using this on, will have quite a bit of atmospheric sound that needs to be picked up at low levels (obviously, getting a good mic is gonna be another whole ordeal, but one step at a time). So low, low, low noise is what I'm hoping for.
 
None of the Sony recorders mentioned have XLR inputs with phantom power. If you were going to limit the recorders use to taking the output from a mixer, I guess that is ok, but IMHO, that would be a limiting factor and a feature I would want on any recorder.

Grant
 
The DR680 is decent quality for the $$, and at $3200 less than a 744, I am more than happy. It doesn't have a all metal chassis like a SD product, but the buttons and plugs are decent, you get 4 XLR inputs, and a reasonable design for bag use which of course gives a lot of protection. I still have my DR-100 and for what it is, it performs well. In my case, I wanted to set up a genuine field bag, and for that, none of the mini recorders are very good. IMHO.

Grant
 
ggrantly said:
None of the Sony recorders mentioned have XLR inputs with phantom power. If you were going to limit the recorders use to taking the output from a mixer, I guess that is ok, but IMHO, that would be a limiting factor and a feature I would want on any recorder.
Click to expand...

But none of the sub $1,000 recorders have pre-amps that are in the same class as the Sound Devices MixPre, so by using a separate field mixer you gain: much better pre-amps, much better limiters, much better headphone amp, in a more durable body. If the recorder has a very good noise-floor when recording a LINE level feed from the mixer ( like the Sony M10 and MD-50 do ) you end up with better sound being recorded for about $1,000. ( Sound Devices MixPre + Sony M10 recorder ) Sure it's not as compact, but you end up with a more flexible system that records better audio.
 
Dingo,

I do usually run a 302 in front of my recorders and or cams, and that will improve most any recorder Just sayin, a recorder without XLR inputs is a negative. My DR-100 takes line in via 1/8" connector, and the audio is good, but the plug leaves a lot to be desired compared to a line in XLR input. I wouldn't want to move around much with that setup. It lacks plug security and the 1/8" plugs can be noisy if they pivot. The DR-680 takes line in via XLR and other mid-range recorders probably do also. The point here is that with any inexpensive recorder, there will be compromises. You prefer the Sony product because you feel the recorded audio is better. I would prefer a recorder that can stand alone with a phantom mic. There might be reason why someone chooses a Zoom.

AFWIW, I'm not so sure that for audio for video, at the cheapo recorder level, there is enough difference in audio quality to make much difference. Are we splitting hairs here (hear)? In my mind it is more about thefeatures which make recording easier or more reliable like user interface, physical controls, display quality, build quality and power options. These are just as important than a very slight improvement in audio quality. Please don't take that statement out of context regarding audio quality. I started off with an original H4 and the audio quality was OK, but the user interface and build quality were awful. When I traded to a DR-100, The audio didn't improve enough to notice, but the factors I just mentioned were greatly improved and it was worth losing a bit on the Zoom to trade. I haven't used the Sony products, and maybe they are better in user interface, build quality, and audio, but in this case, they have the non-XLR drawback also.

Grant
 
MixPre/M10 combo

MixPre/M10 combo

TheDingo said:
But none of the sub $1,000 recorders have pre-amps that are in the same class as the Sound Devices MixPre, so by using a separate field mixer you gain: much better pre-amps, much better limiters, much better headphone amp, in a more durable body. If the recorder has a very good noise-floor when recording a LINE level feed from the mixer ( like the Sony M10 and MD-50 do ) you end up with better sound being recorded for about $1,000. ( Sound Devices MixPre + Sony M10 recorder ) Sure it's not as compact, but you end up with a more flexible system that records better audio.
Click to expand...

+1. This combination works great for me. I certainly don't have any complaints about sound quality. I got some bird calls out in the desert yesterday that sound fantastic over the studio monitors. Admittedly the ergonomics of it all in a field bag are a little awkward, but workable, especially with right angle 1/8" connecting cables. And yes, not having more secure XLR connection is a drawback, hence my initial inquiry into getting a Marantz/Fostex/Tascam. But I think I want to hold out until the time and finances are right for a SD 7xx recorder, used either standalone or with the MixPre. This seems to be the next logical upgrade for me.

Dan
 
Last edited:
OldCorpse said:
The Fostex FR-2LE seems overpriced for what it does and is not Mac friendly (I do prod and post on the Mac).
Click to expand...

I'm a Mac user, and I use the MixPre-D and FR2-LE for small projects. While the unit itself may not be able to interface with a Mac, a card reader works just fine and the files all transfer without a problem.
 
ggrantly said:
Just sayin, a recorder without XLR inputs is a negative.
Click to expand...

Yes, XLR connectors definitely beat out mini-plugs any day, but if I am going to move up to a recorder with XLR inputs I also want something with a very low noise floor. The cheapo Sony M10 unit has a very good noise floor, better than -80 dB, that many other recorders in the sub $500 price range do not have. ( my Olympus LS-11 is in the -65 dB range )

Noise floor is far more important to me than having XLR connectors. I have my SD MixPre tucked in to a PortaBrace bag that also stores my Olympus LS-11 recorder, so it's easy to use these two components together, despite the crappy mini-plug connection between the mixer and the recorder. ( the bag also makes it easy for a boom-op to ride the levels while holding the boom )

ggrantly said:
I haven't used the Sony products, and maybe they are better in user interface, build quality, and audio, but in this case, they have the non-XLR drawback also.
Click to expand...

Since I own a Sound Devices MixPre, I don't worry about audio recorder having XLR connectors. So far I've owned Marantz, Olympus, Sony, Tascam, Zoom audio recorders ( in the $100 - $800 price range ), and out of all of these Sony have been the best for low noise.

Marantz PMD-671 : Big and clunky, good sound, but ate batteries like crazy.
Olympus LS-11 : Great build quality, good sound, but average noise-floor. ( I still own this )
Tascam DR-07 : Noisiest recorder I've ever bought. Sold it 2 weeks after buying. Yuk!
Sony PCM-D50 : Great microphones, great build quality, very low noise, limited memory expansion, ate batteries.
Zoom H4 : One of the first on the market. Not a great recorder. Sold it 1 year after buying.
Zoom H1 : Fantastic cheap and tiny recorder. Good sound, good noise-floor, drains battery if left in unit. ( I still own this )

...I would like to move up to a better audio recorder, but I don't know if anything can come close to Sound Devices audio quality at a cheaper price. I am tempted to buy an Edirol R-44 recorder with a custom battery pack, as I think this will get me close to that SD sound for $1,000, but I wish there were more options available around this $1,000 mark.
 
Dingo,

If you had taken all the money you spent on cheapo recorders, you could have....awe well you finish the sentence. I have practiced that investment strategy myself, said with a knowing smirk.

Grant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top