[RWP] Zoom H6

Tue Aug 13 12:42:18 EDT 2013

the zoom, for me, is hands down the best live stereo recorder out there.
If you want something to record live music from coffee shop level up to and 
including arena or stadium conserts, the zoom handles it all very well.
The down side is that unless you are in a good sweet spot in the stereo 
field, the recording will sound off kilter.  I've got some excellent 
recordings from pubs and such, but some of them were taken with the recorder 
on a table or bar off center from the front house cabs.  This is not such a 
big deal if you can close enough to the band to get the stage mix...the 
onboard mikes on the zoom gear are wonderful in many ways, but their stereo 
imaging is so wide that sometimes it's hard to get a good solid enjoyable 
recording when you have such a severe stereo field.

Not sure about the olympus stuff, but I've heard recordings from those and 
they are very good as well, though lacking some of the character and 
posative coloration found on the zoom products.

Has anyone tried some of the cheaper condenser mikes such as the behringer 
C4 set using either a laptop or one of the hand held recorders at a live 
show?
The c4's go for about 75 bucks brand new and I think they actually sound 
quite good from what I've heard.

regards
Colin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Goldfinga Productions" <goldfingas at gmail.com>
To: "Reapers Without Peepers" <rwp at reaaccess.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [RWP] Zoom H6

I'm not really trying to go totally professional, although I don't want to 
sound like I am recording from the bottom of the can either.
I've heard recordings from Olympus as well as zoom products, and I kind of 
like both. I'm going to have to maybe get my hands on either the LS 100, or 
the zoom H6 to see which one I like
On Aug 13, 2013, at 3:25 AM, Stephan Merk <dl7fos at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I started recording with the H4, then LS-11 and now LS-100. What I dislike
> on Zoom is the many many features and the bad usability. This might be
> better in current versions, but on older ones I got much features, but not
> quite good at all. It's a really all-in-one but with no clear focus on one
> situation. The Olympus devices have speech output, that's an unique 
> feature.
> TheLS-10 gives in my opinion a clear, different sound and a good depth of
> the recording. However, it is right that they are not really wind 
> resistant
> but Olympus gives a shield as an accessory which makes a very great job. 
> The
> 140 DB in loud situations is much better than the mics in the LS-11. But 
> the
> device uses a special battery, is larger, nothing for the pocket. The only
> things I don't like is that you can only make stereo recordings or
> multitrack recordings in stereo using either the internal mic, the 3,5 
> jack
> or the XLR/6,33mm jacks. So you can't get 4 simultanious parts in one 
> file.
> The usability of the 4-track is not good without sight, but all other
> features are nice to use. Olympus presents regulary firmware updates so 
> they
> listen for their customers which is not usual for each brand.
>
> However, we say that the musicians will find in Zoom devices more features
> for their needs as well as good sound. The H6 I think will be a good 
> device,
> but it costs much lower as really good mics. So if you want to have
> professional recordings, you should spend more money in good microphones.
> However, expensive devices will surely not as sounding better as the price
> difference is. Good DACs and ADCs take much place so that they never get 
> as
> portable as the recorders are. In a test of a company for example the more
> expensive SONY D50 is not much better than the LS-100. Or think about
> Marantz PRD-620 which is a nice device, but with usual and not really good
> microphones.
>
> So if you decide in purchasing an audio recorder you should at first think
> about what you will do with it. If you want to take recordings in a
> professional way, spend more money in microphones. If you need a small
> all-in-one solution, I think that Olympus and Zoom can fit your needs.
>
>
> Viele Grüße
>
> --
> Stephan Merk, www.merkst.de
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RWP [mailto:rwp-bounces at reaaccess.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Perdue
> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:29 AM
> To: Reapers Without Peepers
> Subject: Re: [RWP] Zoom H6
>
> The LS100 is a very clean machine. The internal mics, when taken
> individually, are pretty nice, but I don't particularly like the image 
> they
> give, and they are in bad need of a windscreen, purchased separately, of
> course.
> They are, however, rated at 140DB SPL, and I can very well believe that.
> It's got plenty of headroom. It's probably the best portable recorder you
> can find in terms of self-noise until you get to the multi-thousand dollar
> Sound Devices recorders.
> It's XLR inputs are quite nice as well, which I can't say for the H4N.
> It's a little on the power hungry side when compared to some of the 
> smaller
> recorders, and it runs on a LI50B battery, 5 volts, I think.
> It, like everything else, has it's quirks as well.
>
> On 8/12/2013 11:22 PM, Goldfinga Productions wrote:
>> Okay.
>> I guess I could work with that… I learn more about the stuff every day.
>> Is the LS 100 any good?
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2013, at 11:17 PM, Patrick Perdue <patrick at pdaudio.net> wrote:
>>
>>> They're a little noisy, but it's the general sound of them that gets me
> more than the noise. And mic noise won't be so much of a problem in those
> types of environments anyway.
>>>
>>> Also, I've never seen a point in recording any higher than 48 khz with
> any of these recorders. Bit depth matters more than sampling rate for
> dynamics, which is why I was particularly annoyed to find that I couldn't
> record at 48 khz in 24-bit land with the LS14. So, my LS14 pretty much 
> stays
> at 88.2 khz, 24-bit stereo most of the time, because that is the most
> conservative version of 24-bit it offers. Sure, I could record at 24/96 
> all
> the time and get away with it, I have the card space, but that's even more
> processing to deal with for frequencies it probably doesn't pick up 
> anyway.
>>>
>>> Everything does HCSD these days, even the H1. I have 32GB cards in both
> my LS14 and LS100, and they can both take up to 64GB, possibly even 128GB.
> There are 128GB SD cards around, not sure about MicroSD in that size.
>>> I don't need a card that big though.
>>>
>>> On 8/12/2013 11:09 PM, Goldfinga Productions wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The bit rate and all of that doesn't really matter, as long as I can 
>>>> get
> 44.116 I'm good.
>>>> I will more than likely use 2496 though.
>>>> Are the Mike's very noisy on it?
>>>> I will most likely be recording rehearsals and/or gigs with it anyway,
> so I really just need something that can handle a lot of bass.
>>>> And I usually recording wave and then bring it home and process it as
> needed, so something that can hold I high-capacity ST card would be pretty
> cool.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:37 PM, Patrick Perdue <patrick at pdaudio.net>
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If the Olympus LS14 had better internal mics than it does, I might
> recommend that. I don't particularly like them, but maybe they would work
> for you. These things are all so subjective.
>>>>> It runs forever on a pair of AA's, much longer record time than the 
>>>>> H4N
> or H1. My biggest complaints about the LS14 are the following:
>>>>> No 24-bit recording under 88.2 khz. In otherwords, you have five
> options -- 44,100 hz, 16-bit stereo, 48000 hz, 16-bit stereo, 88,200 hz,
> 24-bit stereo, 96000 hz, 24-bit stereo, or 44,100 hz, 16-bit mono. I would
> rather record at 48000 hz, 24-bit stereo, but this particular unit doesn't
> have the option. Also, the headphone output is pretty weak, so in my case, 
> I
> have over-compensated with input gain a few times thinking it should be
> louder than it needed to be. It does have a pretty good mic preamp though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tascam and Roland's recorders all seem to feature omni-directional
> capsules, yielding very little image. However, the Tascam DR100 has both
> omni and cardioid microphones, as well as XLR. I've not used this 
> recorder,
> and haven't heard anything from it, but it looks interesting.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess it depends on which set of issues you're willing to deal with.
> Nothing is perfect.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/12/2013 10:16 PM, Goldfinga Productions wrote:
>>>>>> So Patrick, what do you suggest I look into? I want something with
> internal mics. I don't really feel like carrying a whole lot of extra gear
> with me. I just want to grab my recorder, point, and shoot.
>>>>>> I had an H2, and didn't really care for its interface.
>>>>>> The h1 seems a little cheap and plasticky to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like something kind of small and pocket-sized, but if I have
> to go with something a little, bigger, it's all good.
>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2013, at 8:07 PM, Patrick Perdue <patrick at pdaudio.net>
> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had a Zoom H4N for about six months. Made it go away because I was
> so disappointed about how noisy the XLR mic inputs on it are. Having come
> from the original Zoom H4, that part of it really was quite a downgrade. I
> eventually replaced the H4N with an Olympus LS100, which, granted, costs
> about as much as the H6. I didn't buy the H4N to use it's internal
> microphones. Same for the LS100. Most people I know who are happy with 
> their
> H4N's just use the internal mics, and nothing else. Those mics sound 
> pretty
> good, but they're a little noisy, more of an issue if you want to capture
> quiet/detailed stuff. You won't notice or care if you're, say, recording 
> bar
> gigs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The 3.5mm input on it is OK if you want to use plugin powered mics 
>>>>>>> or
> whatever, but honestly, that part of the recorder is almost identical to 
> the
> much cheaper and floppier Zoom H1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've heard the H6, and I'm not a fan of it's included mics, either. 
>>>>>>> I
> can't call them internal, because they're technically not. The fact that 
> it
> has four xlr/phone jacks, and you can use it as a multi-channel or stereo
> USB audio interface with the ability to mix levels and pan on the unit
> itself would be kind of nice in certain situations, but I don't think I
> would personally need something like that enough to justify buying one, at
> least not at the moment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, one really bad thing about the Zoom H4N, which could have been
> fixed with a firmware upgrade but wasn't, is that the bigger your SD card,
> and the more stuff you have on it, the longer it takes to boot. Then, on 
> top
> of that, the longer it takes to actually start recording when you press 
> the
> record button. Sometimes it could take nearly a minute from cold boot to
> recording if you had, say, a nearly full 32GB SD card. A great way to
> potentially miss things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I really wanted to like the H4N, but I just couldn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/12/2013 6:55 PM, Kevin Brown wrote:
>>>>>>>> OK,...The "Zoom H4N" is going for $270...At "American Musical
>>>>>>>> Supply", you can setup a "3" payment plan for $90 per month...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "Zoom H6" is going for $399,...You can setup a "3" payment
>>>>>>>> plan at "American Musical Supply" for $133.33 per month...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I usually get all of my gear from "American Musical Supply",
>>>>>>>> because they have an extensive payment plan that won't break the
> bank...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GF
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check me out on twitter
>>>>>> http://www.twitter.com/goldfingas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> GF
>>>>
>>>> Check me out on twitter
>>>> http://www.twitter.com/goldfingas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RWP mailing list
>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>
>>
>> GF
>>
>> Check me out on twitter
>> http://www.twitter.com/goldfingas
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com

GF

Check me out on twitter
http://www.twitter.com/goldfingas

_______________________________________________
RWP mailing list
RWP at reaaccess.com
http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com 