Why is ZOOM so popular when it is such poor quality?

[Noiz2]

yeah i saw philip's post regarding mine, but didn't feel like digging up that link to his blog. but thats exactly why i posted what i did.

...

I'm also a profesional who hates that folks think that with the right box they are a "pro".

BUT if you want to blame somebody go for something that actually has some serious market presence like Apple. FCP was sold as the app that instantly turned you into a one man band able to turn out "Hollywood" level films with no experience.

Philip does what he does and he blogs about what he does. I haven't ever heard him say that is how high end professional narrative films are produced. He talks about what he uses and likes and that is what he is very qualified to do. Why should he talk a lot about a workflow he doesn't use? But you also have to look at his films. Other than the docs he hardly uses any production sound. He's a one man band and he uses what works in that context. Just because others are trying to do different things with that set up and doing them badly is not his fault.

As to the h4n, it was ahead of the pack. When it came out it was probably the best bang for the buck going. It was, and probably still is, used by professionals all the time. Just not for narrative production work. It's a fine tool if use for what it does best and a poor choice if used for things it doesn't do well.

But the best hammer in the world makes a lousy screwdriver. Don't blame the hammer OR the guy who said it was a great hammer, blame the idiots who decided a great hammer would make a good screwdriver.

 

[Doc Bernard]

But the best hammer in the world makes a lousy screwdriver. Don't blame the hammer OR the guy who said it was a great hammer, blame the idiots who decided a great hammer would make a good screwdriver.

Concise, as always, Noiz2!

 

[Noiz2]

BTW I know a number of people who have reviewed gear for companies, none get paid. The sole perk is that they get to borrow one to play around with. Software reviewers usually get a copy but that is because you can't really return software so they will often get a NFR version to review. But hardware is almost always returned. Maybe some small things they would let you keep and maybe they would cut you a deal on the one your playing with, maybe.

But they (the manufacturer) doesn't want a tainted endorsement because it can come back and hurt them.

Any claimes that any of the boosters of certain products are doing it because they get paid for it is IMHO total BS and has no basis in my experience.

 

[Noiz2]

...
he is deep enough in this industry that nothing less than Sound Devices or Zaxcom or the like should be used...

At the risk of insult I think that is a very uninformed opinion. A more correct version might be "he's deep enough into the industry that he knows just about anything can and has been used to get professional results and that the results are far more dependent on the user than the box".

I don't personally like the h4n much but there is plenty of professional work being done with it. Less now maybe, because there is a lot more competition than when the h4 first came on the market.

Now if you narrow that down to say "full budget narrative film production sound" then you would probably be correct. That however is not what Philip does or was talking about.

 

[ben_r_]

Okay, Ill agree that perhaps my comments were a bit too harsh or closed minded. Perhaps I do suffer a bit of the "gear snobbery" aliment because I have worked hard to put together a kit of high quality components. AND I def do believe that you can give $100,000 worth of gear to someone who has no idea what they are doing and nothing good will be produced, and likewise you can give $1000 worth of gear so someone whos knows the job well and the results can be more than useable.

Im sorry if I offended anyone, I just follow two old sayings when it comes to any project I do: 1) Buy the right tool for the job, and 2) Buy the best first so that you only buy once and dont have to lose money reselling and upgrading. With respect to this thread, I tried the Marantz PMD661 with a Rode NTG-2 at first to start out cheaper and wasnt happy with the sound I got. Then I sold it, lost some money and decided a 702 with 416 and AT4053B was more where I wanted to be and so far has given me results I am much happier with.

There is another psychological attribute here to take into account however. Ten years ago when pretty much no one had a DSLR and everyone was shooting with point shoots, people would go out and buy a $1000 point and shoot, like the old Sony F707, come home and take pictures and think they were amazing. And for the time and for being a point and shoot, they were. However, a step up in cost into a DSLR around that time, say the Canon 10D yielded results that blew every point shoot on the market out of the water. But most couldnt afford the DSLR and thus never knew how much better it could be or saw the results. Or, they just wanted to snap photos, they didnt take the time to learn WHY and WHAT makes a digitally captured image better. I was one of those people with a $700 Sony point shoot back in 2001 that I thought was amazing. Then I bought my first DSLR in 2003 and instantly realized that point shoot was a toy and never used it again. I could see right off the bat the difference. And years later, tons of gear bought I know KNOW why the differences exist. When I read things like <$400 digital recorders competing with >$2000 recorders I think huh, sounds familiar, I wonder how many of these people have owned and heard the results of a $2000+ recorder or mixer with extremely silent pre-amps and top end A-D conversion, coupled with a high end mic and can really truly compare. Likewise with the DSLR HD video capable cameras. They def offer an advantage in their sensor that allows them to compete with the big guys like RED and ARRI, but they have some definite draw backs as well that most average consumers dont even know about.

Again, I am not trying to offend anyone here. I just calling it like I sees it. My 2 cents.

 

[Terry_Lasater]

But the best hammer in the world makes a lousy screwdriver. Don't blame the hammer OR the guy who said it was a great hammer, blame the idiots who decided a great hammer would make a good screwdriver.

A more correct version might be, "Owning a hammer doesn't make you a carpenter.".

 

[Doc Bernard]

A more correct version might be, "Owning a hammer doesn't make you a carpenter.".

And being a carpenter means you know there are a variety of hammers out there that can do the job quite well. You may have your favorite, but if you don't have it, another will work just as well, as long as it is capable to do the job needed. It all in how you use them.

Ben, I am not offended in the least. And since you have higher end gear, I can understand your position. The reason for my comments was that we have a lot of new people who are learning sound here, and don't have the money to dump on high end gear. We don't want to discourage them by saying their gear is junk, just based on price-point. Personally, I like to encourage them by showing that even with "lower-end" gear, they can get good results. It is technique over equipment every time. Once they get good with the lower stuff, they will be able to appreciate what the higher gear offers.

 

[thesoundguy]

you CANNOT get professional results with a H4n.
1. Sync Drift
2. TERRIBLE preamps
3. Time Code (yes, time code is part of being professional)
4. File Naming (dasfdsf#### is not a professional way to name your files)

Sure, some of these things can be fixed with seperate mixer, But why would you buy a nice mixer and Sh##y recorder?

I can't tell you how many job's I have lost out on because production got a bid for $50 a day with someone with a zoom and ntg2. I usually hear back about a week after production asking "Hey can you fix this?"

There is nothing worse than someone that buys the H4n and a crappy shotgun and calls themselves a location sound mixer, sound guy, sound engineer, etc.
You are a sound enthusiast with the ability to record low quality audio.

 

[Doc Bernard]

you CANNOT get professional results with a H4n.
1. Sync Drift
2. TERRIBLE preamps
3. Time Code (yes, time code is part of being professional)
4. File Naming (dasfdsf#### is not a professional way to name your files)

Sure, some of these things can be fixed with seperate mixer, But why would you buy a nice mixer and Sh##y recorder?

I can't tell you how many job's I have lost out on because production got a bid for $50 a day with someone with a zoom and ntg2. I usually hear back about a week after production asking "Hey can you fix this?"

There is nothing worse than someone that buys the H4n and a crappy shotgun and calls themselves a location sound mixer, sound guy, sound engineer, etc.
You are a sound enthusiast with the ability to record low quality audio.

Ahem. I run with a H4n, have a degree in audio engineering, make my living from doing location sound, have repeat clients, am hired for HIGH prominence gigs......... but according to you, I am not a professional????? I (and my resume) beg to differ. You should tone down the rhetoric and realize that by what you said you have insulted a lot of sound pros here. It's the person doing the recording, NOT the gear, that makes the professional. And..........since many productions have been opting towards the DSLR's lately, you do know that they don't accept timecode.......yes? Then why even mention TC? As to file naming..........the date and take # is a very acceptable naming convention. The script supe notes what the start take # is and what card/roll I am on. If you have higher end gear, good for you, but keep in mind, I get gigs where I am way over the lowest bid because of my experience and education......not the gear. I get gigs over guys with top end gear, but no real grounding in flying sound. But that is because I have paid my dues.

Once you actually delve into sound and understand more about it, you will find your mixer is the link in the chain that is more important. The recorder is not as crucial, as long as it does it's job......record at the format needed. :happy:

 

[ben_r_]

Ben, I am not offended in the least. And since you have higher end gear, I can understand your position. The reason for my comments was that we have a lot of new people who are learning sound here, and don't have the money to dump on high end gear. We don't want to discourage them by saying their gear is junk, just based on price-point. Personally, I like to encourage them by showing that even with "lower-end" gear, they can get good results. It is technique over equipment every time. Once they get good with the lower stuff, they will be able to appreciate what the higher gear offers.

Quite right and I def agree. And the only reason I am taking this stance is because of the question posed in this thread. Any other topic or anywhere else I wouldnt discourage anyone from working with the tools that they have and/or can afford.

 

[thesoundguy]

Ahem. I run with a H4n, have a degree in audio engineering, make my living from doing location sound, have repeat clients, am hired for HIGH prominence gigs......... but according to you, I am not a professional????? I (and my resume) beg to differ. You should tone down the rhetoric and realize that by what you said you have insulted a lot of sound pros here. It's the person doing the recording, NOT the gear, that makes the professional. And..........since many productions have been opting towards the DSLR's lately, you do know that they don't accept timecode.......yes? Then why even mention TC?

Once you actually delve into sound and understand more about it, you will find your mixer is the link in the chain that is more important. The recorder is not as crucial, as long as it does it's job......record at the format needed. :happy:

Ahem. The H4 IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL RECORDER THAT DOES NOT GIVE PROFESSIONAL RESULTS. I have a Degree in telecommunications as well as a degree in acoustics. I too make my living doing location and post production audio. I'm not saying you are not a professional, but I am saying you do not have professional gear. Anything with an audio input can accept time code (which the H4 does not generate, and using one input on the h4 for timecode will force you to listen to timecode as you cant mute channels individually) I send TC to dslr's successfully every shoot I'm on.

I too have many repeat clients, and I have several things currently on TV and in theaters. The mixer is not the most important thing in the link. your set up is only as good as it's weakest link - your precious H4. you have a lot to learn if you think the requirements of being a sound engineer is "recording at the format needed"...

 

[Doc Bernard]

You can believe what you want.

I will stand by my statements, continue to do what I do and make my living doing it. That is the true test, isn't it? Letting the results speak for themselves and they do on my end. So any comments that this piece of gear or that piece of gear is not "professional" is actually inane. It's all in how it is used.

So you are saying you send TC to a 7D and it sync/slave's to it? Or are you just sending and it just records it on an audio channel? BIG difference.

 

[thesoundguy]

If there is a TC signal going into a camera, It can easily be converted in post. If you are such a professional, you should understand what I meant without having to ask about it.
As to my comments being "inane", This discussion is literally about why people like the zoom, when in fact it sucks.

 

[David W. Richardson]

If there is a TC signal going into a camera, It can easily be converted in post. If you are such a professional, you should understand what I meant without having to ask about it.
As to my comments being "inane", This discussion is literally about why people like the zoom, when in fact it sucks.

People like the Zoom because it does what they want it to do. Period.

I don't understand why people want to be so arrogant and condescending in these threads. Aren't there enough asses in the world already?

 

[Doc Bernard]

I knew exactly what you were saying, hence the question. So you really aren't doing TC sync on set, as you implied. Because neither the DSLR's or the Zoom can be set to Master or Slave for timecode. It's a function in post, which really doesn't help on set where TC abilities really shine. You still have to realign audio and video in the edit room using your method, just the same as if you didn't send TC to an audio channel. It makes it a tad easier, but not much. Both the DSLR's and any of the lower end recorders are not known for high caliber TC oscillators.

As to my professionalism.........well, friend, you can question it however you want. You can attempt to insult me. But the facts are what they are.

As to my comments being "inane", This discussion is literally about why people like the zoom, when in fact it sucks.

If the question why people like the Zoom, why get involved in the thread if you don't like it? Start your own thread about why you DON'T like it.


So we are back to the beginning.

EDIT: Thanks, David. Some people just feel it is a right to be rude, for whatever reason.

 

[thesoundguy]

no you don't....
no we aren't....

My recorder sends a signal (the exact same one its recording) to the camera.
When my audio gets imported with timestamps, and video is imported with audio L being the TC signal it syncs up.
no aligning anything manually...

 

[thesoundguy]

if you use the zoom to record ambient noise, to take notes, or basic interview stuff, That is the intended use of the zoom. It was never initially intended to have the entire audio department revolve around it on a feature film.

 

[Terry_Lasater]

Wow!...

 

[thesoundguy]

Both the DSLR's and any of the lower end recorders are not known for high caliber TC oscillators.

That is why you need to have a constant connection between them at all times. It's the same with the red

 

[David Jimerson]

Hey -- let's stop with the personal attacks and the adolescent bickering, NOW. I don't care who started what or why. Knock it off. Professionals act like professionals.