[RWP] Zoom H6

Tue Aug 13 12:48:22 EDT 2013

The C4's, which are supposed to be matched, never quite sounded matched 
to me.
It seems like every C4 is just a little bit different. Also the same for 
the pair of C2's I have. They're also a bit noisy, but you wouldn't go 
around recording classical stuff with them anyway.

On 8/13/2013 12:42 PM, Colin McDonald wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com