Portable Recorder / Mics

[dave111]

Hi -

I'm trying to figure out the best option for purchasing a portable recorder and mics. I'm mainly looking to record solo piano right now, but I will probably also use it in other situations down the road, such as jazz combo.

I've been looking at the zoom H5 and H6, as well as the zoom F4 and F6 and the Sound Devices MixPre-3 II. For mics, I'm mainly looking at the zoom capsules, the Audio-Technica AT2022 X/Y Stereo Microphone, and 2 Rode NT5 mics with additional omni capsules. I've also considered the Tascam DR-100mkIII.

I'd like to keep the budget as low as possible, but at the max it's around $1,000 for recorder and mics.

I'm wondering how important 32-bit float and getting to 192 sample rate are. If I don't need these, it seems I can be ok with the zoom h 5 or 6 might be better off investing the rest in mics. On the other hand, it might be nice to have the option to use the the zoom f or mix pre as an interface with my laptop when I have it for more serious projects.

I definitely need 2 tracks, but I think I would probably need 3 tracks at the most. I'm trying to balance portability and ease of set up and take down with quality.

Any advice or other options I might consider?

Thanks -

[clepsydrae]

Originally Posted by dave111

I've been looking at the zoom H5 and H6, as well as the zoom F4 and F6 and the Sound Devices MixPre-3 II.

Be advised that location sound recorders like the SD MixPre-3 II use a strange terminology where they include the internal mixdown tracks in their PR... e.g. the SDMP3-II is called a '5 track recorder' but it really only has 3 inputs -- you can use the 3 XLRs or the 1/8th" jacks in combination with an XLR, but not the XLRs + the 1/8th inch jacks. Just mentioning this because I got caught by it. Probably won't be relevant for you.

I'm wondering how important 32-bit float

32bit is cool, but not at all a feature you need to worry about if you want to save money. It will make no difference in recording quality if you take time to set levels properly. It's a feature for location sound people, mainly, where it's nice to still get a great recording even if you didn't have time to set levels (or made a mistake). For studio-type recording, it's not so important. 24bit vs 32bit isn't just "more bits" it's an unfortunate nomenclature quirk; 32bit is a different type of math, if you will, which in conjunction with hardware tricks makes it so you don't have to worry about setting input gain. Don't think of it as simply "better audio".

and getting to 192 sample rate

Unless you're recording bats with specialized mics, or slowing your recordings down in a sound design context, 44.1k is all you need and neither you nor anyone else will ever hear a difference between that and any higher sample rate. There is admittedly some controversy about this, and mmmmmaybe 96k is worth worrying about, but certainly don't worry about 192.

might be better off investing the rest in mics.

Mic choice will definitely make a much larger difference to the result than the recorder. That said, you don't need to spend much on mics either, these days, especially if you just want an "honest/clear" type of recording.

Any advice or other options I might consider?

The features/specs of the Zoom H4N made me a believer for some years, but I've recently had one of the built-in mics go bad, and buying used units on eBay for parts is strangely expensive now, so I'm hesitant to recommend it anymore. (They have a new version of the H4n out now, so maybe they've improved this, I don't know.) I use the SD-MP3-II for documentary film work, and it's great (despite only being a 3 track recorder, which is a bummer.) A friend uses the DR-100mkIII and likes it.

The differences between the various recorders you should be focused on are number/type of inputs, build quality/longevity/battery life/etc, feature set, interface, quality/orientation of the built-in mics, and noise floor. In terms of the XLR inputs, the "quality of the sound" (besides noise) will be identical. There might be a difference in terms of EMI resistance, but I bet it won't be significant. I would not worry about bit rate, and I wouldn't waste time reading/watching reviews about the aesthetic "quality" of the preamps and how it impacts the "feel" of the recordings; that stuff is likely to be hokum.

[dave111]

Thanks for the reply -

haha - not recording bats - One thing I might want to do is stretch edit though, which could involve stretching a note or chord out to 2x or 3x it's value. In this context, I thought the 96 or 192 might be helpful.

I thought the 32 bit float might be helpful in a situation where it's a quick set up and record.

[clepsydrae]

Originally Posted by dave111

One thing I might want to do is stretch edit though, which could involve stretching a note or chord out to 2x or 3x it's value. In this context, I thought the 96 or 192 might be helpful.

I'll defer to others' opinions on that. I'd be surprised if 192 vs 96 made any difference in that context. I'd be mildly surprised if 96 vs 44.1 did, too, but not shocked.

I thought the 32 bit float might be helpful in a situation where it's a quick set up and record.

Yeah, it is good for that. If you're familiar with your mics and pay some attention, it's not a hard thing to set some levels... can take literally like 15 seconds. But if you might be pressed for time and don't want to think about it, 32bit is nice.

[Studiodawg]

If you have a laptop, I would recommend getting a USB interface, mic cables, stands and mics. I've used many on-location setups and in the end this will be the most time efficient way to go. Less fuss and directly into REAPER. For two tracks, I use the Sound Devices USB Pre2. Have fun!

[dave111]

Thanks. Maybe that's the best idea. I think i may just go with the zoom H6 first for quick and easy stuff, and then get a - computer interface / laptop / mic - setup for more serious stuff. For interfaces, I've looked mostly at the apogee element and the focusrite scarlet series. The SD USB pre II looks really nice though!

[vdubreeze]

Originally Posted by dave111

I've been looking at the zoom H5 and H6, as well as the zoom F4 and F6 and the Sound Devices MixPre-3 II. For mics, I'm mainly looking at the zoom capsules, the Audio-Technica AT2022 X/Y Stereo Microphone, and 2 Rode NT5 mics with additional omni capsules. I've also considered the Tascam DR-100mkIII.

Whatever you do, DON'T get the H5 if you think you may at any time use it as an interface, IOW, recording on location directly into Reaper. The audio is noticeably inferior due to a design flaw which doesn't exist in the other Zoom units. Zoom acknowledged this years after the release and say they have no plans to fix.


Zoom's official response: https://imgur.com/a/pQQn1P9

[BIAM]

Originally Posted by vdubreeze

Whatever you do, DON'T get the H5 if you think you may at any time use it as an interface, IOW, recording on location directly into Reaper. The audio is noticeably inferior due to a design flaw which doesn't exist in the other Zoom units. Zoom acknowledged this years after the release and say they have no plans to fix.


Zoom's official response: https://imgur.com/a/pQQn1P9

Never liked the sound of the H5 as a audio interface. Now I know why.

The sound quality of the H5 as recording unit is very good.

I love this device.

Recording with 4channels can only be done @ 44,1/48k, also the useful backup recording option when overloading the input.
I mostly record mix output 2ch @ 96k. Field recording with external mic.

Does the H4n Pro not have the same converters as the H5/H6?

[frood]

the zoom r16 is marketed as a portable recorder (among other things) and it is possible to power it with batteries, so I guess this is true. I used mine as my main interface so I don't have much to say about it as a portable device, though the built in mics are actually pretty nice, though very room dependent. If you're doing multi-track and "bouncing" stuff (moving it onto the 9th-16th tracks), it gets quite finnickety and awkward, which may be quite off-putting.

one thing to consider is that when you are powering it by USB, it doesn't have enough oomph to phantom power - i'm not sure if this is the case when powering it with batteries too. still, it's not too difficult to carry the power supply around too (and even when you're on the move, you can usually find a plug socket).

[Eddy]

the mixpre is excellent but the tascam DR100mk3 is also excellent if not quite as good - but if you want to spend more on mics the DR100 mk3 is easily good enough (apparently a big upgrade from the mk2 model). I would probably get the dr100 and spend more on the mics and upgrade the recorder if at any time in the future you need something better. The usual advice is that good mics are much more likely to last in your kit than a recorder. So at $700 left over for mics you could get a secondhand pair of something quite nice or a new matched pair that would also be pretty good eg Rode NT5 which are good for piano
Keep in mind you will need stands and carrying cases etc

[gvdv]

Hi,
I do not know how you define "portable", especially when you consider the issue of flexibility (e.g., of either built-in or add-on devices to your main recording device).

I am posing this as an issue worth considering and defining because I have a Zoom
R 16, among many other interfaces, some of them portable, and have used the unit to successfully record piano, which is what the OP wants to do.

I should also say that I recorded piano once, but I did not do a bad job considering my inexperience and the difficulties of recording in a regular apartment - mind you, I got help from people on this forum!

So, here are some questions for you to reflect on (for yourself, but it might help us here to help you a little more):

1. Do you have a maximum size and weight in mind for the recording device?
2. Maximum price?
3. Does using an stand alone / self-contained / all-in-one recording unit (like the Zoom R 16 make more sense than carrying a separate recorder, and perhaps an audio interface?
https://www.boss.info/ca/products/micro_br_br-80/


If it is simply audio you want to capture, and you want something small, you might want to consider the Boss Micro BR BR-80 (8 track recorder), which is about 6" X 3 1/2", and fits into one's shirt pocket. (Can record .WAV or .MP3)
https://www.boss.info/ca/products/micro_br_br-80/

Both the Zoom R 16 and the Boss Micro BR BR 80 can function as stand alone recorders, or as audio interfaces.