Zoom R16 vs H4(N)

[Chamber005]

I was wondering if any of the audio guys here had any ideas on this comparison of Zoom products.

We've gone over the H4 line pretty extensively (H4N better mic preamps, H4 better line-in). But I was wondering if the R16 tops them both.

The R16:

Digital recorder with 16-track playback and 8-track simultaneous recording utilizing Secure Digital (SD) memory

16/24-bit/44.1kHz linear PCM recording in WAV format

Built-in stereo condenser microphones

Includes 1GB SD card and supports cards up to 32GB SDHC

Allows simultaneous recording on up to 8 tracks

Battery operation for remote recording

USB power for audio interface and control surface operation

8 mic inputs / 2 outputs (8 x 2)

8 combination XLR-1/4-inch inputs

High-definition 24-bit/96kHz recording capability using digital audio software

Built-in effects can be used as outboard effects as well

Hi-Z input for direct connection of guitar or bass

Includes preamp with phantom power on two channels

Mackie control emulation via USB for popular DAW software including Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer and more

Over 100 built-in studio effects coming from advanced DSP

Amazing guitar amp and effects models

Professional quality mastering effects including multi-band compressor, normalizer and more

Operates as USB storage device for quick data transfer

Connect two R16s via USB for synchronized operation and 16 tracks of simultaneous recording

Undo/Redo functions

 

[Alex H.]

I haven't had a chance to play with one of these, so I cannot attest to the quality of the pre-amps. But I will comment on the specs, as I was very interested when the R16 was announced.

As a standalone, the device only records 44.1kHz audio. Period. To get a higher sampling rate, it must be used as a USB i/o interface with a computer. That is a very constricting feature in and of itself, and the audio will need to be converted to 48kHz before editing. (It does, however, record in 24-bit mode as a standalone.)

Now, on the flip side of that argument, there were lots of documentary and indie folks that used MiniDisc for years for double-system sound, and those only record at 44.1 (and a compressed 44.1 at that), but with dialog it may or may not be a big deal.

And it only has phantom power on two channels. Ridiculous.

In all, I was a bit disappointed to read just what it cannot do without being connected to a computer. I'm still interested to hear what the pre-amps sound like.

 

[JordanBlock]

The biggest problem is that the R16 is only capable of 44.1 in standalone mode. Connecting multiple units isn't really syncronized, there's a few ms delay in the second unit starting up.

I think there were a couple threads on the R16 a while ago.

 

[Alex H.]

Further info...

Here's the Zoom R16 page on Samson's website.

The demo video is quite funny. The shot of the sound guy using the R16 for a location video shoot is absolutely terrible... standing there holding the darn thing in his arms. If this thing were designed with 48k audio in standalone, it might make a good budget cart solution, but this is definitely not practical to be used as a bag recorder.

And listen to the audio sample of a band recorded live. Honestly, that recording is not good and does not make me any more interested in this thing.

 

[Richard Crowley]

I had not seen one before but I ended up using an R16 last weekend to record 8 channels of a 100-voice chorus and 50-piece orchestra. My Alesis HD24XT failed (first time in 7 years I've owned it) and I used the R16 as a substitute. It did OK, but there were a few things that would deter me from using one regularly...

1) The record levels are set by the small rotary "gain" knobs, not by the larger and easier to use sliders. This makes sense if you consider the primary market it was designed for, but not quite as convienent for multi-tracking.

2) Worst, the 4-segment LED "metering" of each channel made it very difficult to set proper recording levels. They selected the segment levels very strangely (IMHO) and it was a good thing I had TWO identical performances to record so that I could get the levels set during the first performance.

3) Only two of the mic input channels have P48 phantom power. (#5-6) I was using a separate mic preamp unit (Studio Projects SP828), so it didn't matter to me. Most of my mics require phantom power. I was using a pair of Oktava 012 (hyper), a pair of Rode NT5, a pair of Josephson C42 and my Sony ECM-MS5 stereo mic.

It is nice that the R16 records directly to SD flash memory card, and that it operates on AA cells, and it is very small and lightweight (plastic). I might get one as a backup and low-end multi-track recorder.

Since I was using a separate mic preamp, I have no idea how good the mic preamps are. I would presume that they are probably equivalent of the average camcorder mic preamp.

 

[Chamber005]

I still wish there were some other measure we could point to regarding preamps other than "sounds good to me". As we've talked about before, I have Behringer mixers, and although I've read quite a few good reviews on their preamps from sound engineers, the people here absolutely bash them into crud brittle.

It's hard to take anyone's word for anything because there doesn't seem to be actual data regarding preamps, only comments and personal opinions.

I still think it makes more sense to plug Behringer mixers into a H4's line-in than it does to use the H4N's mic inputs -- because it would stand to reason that an inexpensive mixer is going to, by default, have better preamps than an inexpensive recorder.

I thought maybe the R16 could be a decent middle ground, but yeah, the dual phantom sucks, and it doesn't sound like anyone here has heard anything miraculous about its preamps either.

Grr.

 

[JordanBlock]

Considering the price of the unit, you kinf of have to assume it's the same pre-amps as one of the smaller models.

 

[Chamber005]

So obviously I'm still in the learning process with audio, but is it possible to use a great preamp and just ignore the mixer? E.g. could I get a high quality preamp and just go line-in to an H4? Do I have to have the mixer in the mix?

 

[Alex H.]

...is it possible to use a great preamp and just ignore the mixer? E.g. could I get a high quality preamp and just go line-in to an H4? Do I have to have the mixer in the mix?

That takes you back to the Sound Devices MixPre. It's really just a good, dual-channel pre-amp that happens to have a couple of mixer-like functions built in. In fact, many retailers list it in the pre-amp category instead of the mixer category.

There are certainly quite a few dual-channel pre-amps out there that cost less, but many of those a rack-mount units and are not very rugged/portable. The little ones from M-Audio (Audio Buddy) and PreSonus (Blue Tube) aren't the best... probably on par with your busted DSR200, maybe a little better. They're also not baggable. They're table-top, but can be racked with the right hardware. And I think narrative dialog is probably the wrong application for a tube pre-amp, which takes out lots of the less expensive options.

 

[Chamber005]

That takes you back to the Sound Devices MixPre. It's really just a good, dual-channel pre-amp that happens to have a couple of mixer-like functions built in. In fact, many retailers list it in the pre-amp category instead of the mixer category.

There are certainly quite a few dual-channel pre-amps out there that cost less, but many of those a rack-mount units and are not very rugged/portable. The little ones from M-Audio (Audio Buddy) and PreSonus (Blue Tube) aren't the best... probably on par with your busted DSR200, maybe a little better. They're also not baggable. They're table-top, but can be racked with the right hardware. And I think narrative dialog is probably the wrong application for a tube pre-amp, which takes out lots of the less expensive options.

And there's no science at all with regards preamps, right? It's just "I prefer this one or that one"? It seems like everything in audio and video comes down to a specific, easily articulated formula of components except for preamps.

Also, you're saying that I could simply plug a preamp into the H4's line-in and don't necessarily need a mixer? You mentioned bulkier ones, are any of these good brands, or no?

http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1261507...=172282&rh=n:172282,n:!493964,k:preamp&page=1

It seems like the cost of a mic pre and an H4 would be cheaper than a mixpre plus an H4. And if I can find preamps that are as good as what the mixpre has, it would be comperable, right?

 

[Chamber005]

Alternatively, have you looked at Tascam's DR-100? This, again, would be cheaper than a mixpre/H4 combo. But would the preamps be better than the H4N's?

http://www.tascam.com/products/dr-100;9,12,3717,16.html

I could also pick up a Fostex M8 MKII locally for 150 bucks.

http://www.guitarcenter.com/Fostex-MR-8-mkII-8-Track-Digital-Recorder-103729851-i1125873.gc

A Tascam DP-02 for 200 bucks.

http://www.tascam.com/products/dp-02;9,16,3580,16.html

Fostex VF160EX for 300 bucks.

http://www.zzounds.com/item--FOSVF160EX

http://www.tascam.com/products/dp-02;9,16,3580,16.html

 

[Alex H.]

And there's no science at all with regards preamps, right? It's just "I prefer this one or that one"? It seems like everything in audio and video comes down to a specific, easily articulated formula of components except for preamps.

It's a little of both.

The science to pre-amps is, partially, in the quality of construction (like all audio components). Does it have a bad noise floor? It the physical design intended for rack-mounted studio use or portable field use? What kinds of controls does it offer? What kind of frequency response does it have? (How) does it affect the sound of the signal? High-quality pre-amps with low noise and decent signal paths cost more.

The other part is the application of the individual pre-amp. Is it tube-based or solid-state? "Tube pre-amp" is a buzz phrase. Folks tend to think that tubes are better by nature, and they aren't. Yeah... there are some fantastic tube pres out there. Tubes can add warmth and body to the signal. Cheaply-made tube pres can also add noise, kill the frequency response, and give you a poor recording (goes back to the quality of construction). Tubes are generally better suited for critical recording in studio music situations.

For cheap pre-amps that destroy sound signals, it's a matter of worse vs. better. For good pre-amps, there is a lot of room for personal preference. Some folks like a pre that adds a little color. Some don't want much, if anything, added to the signal. For narrative work (film/video), the goal is to record the dialog as clean and flat as possible.

Also, you're saying that I could simply plug a preamp into the H4's line-in and don't necessarily need a mixer?

That's what you asked in your last post, right? Yes... you can use an external pre-amp with any mixer or recording device. A pre-amp takes a mic-level singal in and sends it out as a line-level signal.

You mentioned bulkier ones, are any of these good brands, or no?

http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1261507895/ref=sr_pg_1?ie=UTF8&rs=172282&keywords=preamp&bbn=172282&rh=n%3A172282%2Cn%3A%21493964%2Ck%3Apreamp&page=1

No. Tube pre-amps are not really the right choice for dialog recording like this. You want a clean, flat sound that doesn't have any color added to it.

It seems like the cost of a mic pre and an H4 would be cheaper than a mixpre plus an H4. And if I can find preamps that are as good as what the mixpre has, it would be comperable, right?

A MixPre is a mic pre, remember that.

That said, you can find a two-channel pre-amp that's just as good... but be prepared to pay anywhere from $150 to $500 per channel for a good pre. (Or $1000+ per channel for an outstanding pre.)

As for your other post, I don't have experience with the Tascam DR100, so I can't tell you how good the pres are there. But I can tell you that every other machine you linked in that post is made for hobbyist/sketchpad music recording and they all record at a set 16-bit/44.1kHz.

 

[Chamber005]

It's a little of both.

The science to pre-amps is, partially, in the quality of construction (like all audio components). Does it have a bad noise floor? It the physical design intended for rack-mounted studio use or portable field use? What kinds of controls does it offer? What kind of frequency response does it have? (How) does it affect the sound of the signal? High-quality pre-amps with low noise and decent signal paths cost more.

The other part is the application of the individual pre-amp. Is it tube-based or solid-state? "Tube pre-amp" is a buzz phrase. Folks tend to think that tubes are better by nature, and they aren't. Yeah... there are some fantastic tube pres out there. Tubes can add warmth and body to the signal. Cheaply-made tube pres can also add noise, kill the frequency response, and give you a poor recording (goes back to the quality of construction). Tubes are generally better suited for critical recording in studio music situations.

For cheap pre-amps that destroy sound signals, it's a matter of worse vs. better. For good pre-amps, there is a lot of room for personal preference. Some folks like a pre that adds a little color. Some don't want much, if anything, added to the signal. For narrative work (film/video), the goal is to record the dialog as clean and flat as possible.



That's what you asked in your last post, right? Yes... you can use an external pre-amp with any mixer or recording device. A pre-amp takes a mic-level singal in and sends it out as a line-level signal.



No. Tube pre-amps are not really the right choice for dialog recording like this. You want a clean, flat sound that doesn't have any color added to it.



A MixPre is a mic pre, remember that.

That said, you can find a two-channel pre-amp that's just as good... but be prepared to pay anywhere from $150 to $500 per channel for a good pre. (Or $1000+ per channel for an outstanding pre.)

As for your other post, I don't have experience with the Tascam DR100, so I can't tell you how good the pres are there. But I can tell you that every other machine you linked in that post is made for hobbyist/sketchpad music recording and they all record at a set 16-bit/44.1kHz.

Thanks for the input.

This will probably make you want to strangle me, but if you had to choose between using the XLR inputs on the H4N or the H4's line-in with a Behringer mixer, which would you use?

I'd like to throw the Tascam DR100 into the mix as well as an option, but as you don't have any experience with that one, the specs alone don't help to know if it's better than the Zoom series, right?

 

[JordanBlock]

The big considerations in a preamp for production are noise level and clarity. You want a good signal-to-noise ratio, and you don't want things like tubes coloring your sound.

The mixpre IS a preamp with a couple basic mixer functions tacked on. SD also makes a couple good single channel preamps.

What I think we're getting down to here is budget. Are you basically trying to figure out the least amount of $ you can spend on a preamp?

 

[Chamber005]

The big considerations in a preamp for production are noise level and clarity. You want a good signal-to-noise ratio, and you don't want things like tubes coloring your sound.

The mixpre IS a preamp with a couple basic mixer functions tacked on. SD also makes a couple good single channel preamps.

What I think we're getting down to here is budget. Are you basically trying to figure out the least amount of $ you can spend on a preamp?

Yeah, cheapest price for mic pre and recorder. I was previously using Behringer mixer into a DV cam, but the tape hiss (and potentially hissing from the Behringer mixer and/or DV cam's on-camera mic pres, not sure as DV cam's XLRs require phantom thus the inclusion of the mixer in the first place) isn't going to be good enough moving forward.

So I'm trying to narrow it down to three choices:

H4N

H4 plus Behringer mixer via line-in

Tascam DR100

I know that I can't bypass the H4N's preamps using a mixer (the way you can with the H4). I'm not sure if the DR100's preamps can (or if they should be) bypassed via a mixer.

The highest quality of the cheap set-ups seems to be H4 line-in w/ mixpre. So I'm just trying to figure out what is the next step down from there, as I don't know if I would really care to own a 600 dollar mixer (or, preamp).

 

[Alex H.]

So I'm just trying to figure out what is the next step down from there, as I don't know if I would really care to own a 600 dollar mixer (or, preamp).

Why not? It's a great tool that will be of use to you. Plus SD products hold their resale values very well. If you can make it work in your budget, that's going to be a good investment. And as it is, you're lugging around a half-busted shoulder-mount DVCAM camera. The MixPre is portable, baggable, and MUCH more rugged for field audio.

Your decision may be a bit more limited at this point, though. The H4 is getting harder to find. When the H4n was first announced, Zoom said that the two would coexist, but the H4 has since started to disappear.

 

[Chamber005]

Why not? It's a great tool that will be of use to you. Plus SD products hold their resale values very well. If you can make it work in your budget, that's going to be a good investment. And as it is, you're lugging around a half-busted shoulder-mount DVCAM camera. The MixPre is portable, baggable, and MUCH more rugged for field audio.

Your decision may be a bit more limited at this point, though. The H4 is getting harder to find. When the H4n was first announced, Zoom said that the two would coexist, but the H4 has since started to disappear.

I'm seeing a lot of H4s available and still cheaper than the H4Ns.

And you always avoid this question when I ask it! lol

If you had to pick from the three options, which way would you go?

Come on, live dangerously!

 

[ggrantly]

Hello Listers,

I just purchased a DR-100 which is in transit. It will replace an H4, which despite all the Zoom chatter, produces decent sound when used carefully. The reason I am replacing the H4 is my frustration with the controls, but that is my problem.

When the new gizmo arrives, I'll do some testing and report to the list.

Grant

 

[Alex H.]

I'm seeing a lot of H4s available and still cheaper than the H4Ns.

And you always avoid this question when I ask it! lol

If you had to pick from the three options, which way would you go?

Come on, live dangerously!

Without knowing what the Tascam can/cannot do, I can't really make an educated recommendation between those three options.

I would venture to say, despite my distaste for Behringer mixers, that your noise problems are likely worse in the DSR200. Without seeing/hearing your setup in person, though, that's just a guess. The mixer is still, likely, a part of the problem (albeit smaller). I'd say that you would probably see a marginal improvement with the Behringer + H4... and that would buy you some time to save up for a MixPre.

As has been said so many times around here, cheap audio is actually more expensive.

 

[Chamber005]

Hello Listers,

I just purchased a DR-100 which is in transit. It will replace an H4, which despite all the Zoom chatter, produces decent sound when used carefully. The reason I am replacing the H4 is my frustration with the controls, but that is my problem.

When the new gizmo arrives, I'll do some testing and report to the list.

Grant

Sounds great!!

If you remember, throw me a PM when you've posted your thread with results. I'll be really interested to hear if the DR100 beats the Zoom line without involvement from a mixer/preamp.