Budget: $500 or less
Features required:
-XLR inputs with phantom power- minimum 2x (stereo)
-battery and AC power capabilities
-ability to record at least 4hrs at high-quality
-independent channel (input) level controls with metering

Objective: Transitioning to Blu-ray delivery and want to record compatible high quality audio that will sync well with HDV footage without wordclock or TC in (since cams are not sync capable.)

Primary usage: To record supplemental audio from board feeds or external microphones or wireless receiver.

Example of usage: Cams record ambient via shotgun, recorder captures direct feed from wireless lavs or 2 (or more) channels from soundboard with mics on one channel, music on the other, etc.

Background: I have been doing more stage and dance recording lately and have in the past always rented a Marantz PMD-660 and have had good experience with it so far. However, I have reached the point where it makes more sense to purchase than rent and I want to make sure I am not overlooking a better recorder before I move forward. B&H is currently offering the 660 for $469.99. What are your opinions of the 660 vs other recorders in this price range? Thanks!

Hi Bryan ...

Don't know if you've seen the new Zoom R16 which is causing a bit of a stir- I'm considering getting one to record shows.

Samson - Zoom - R16 (http://www.samsontech.com/products/productpage.cfm?prodID=2009)

It records up to 8 channels simultaneously - ideal for recording soundboard feeds as well as your own mics. It has 8 XLR/line inputs (2 phantom), can run on batteries (not sure if it will do 4 hours) and as a bonus will connect to your PC to act as an audio workstation and controller - can't wait to get my hands on one !

Tony

The Samson R16 only records 44.1kHz when portable, not good enough for professional use. I bought the Zoom H4n recently, it's a great recorder when coupled with a mixer.

Tony,
Great to hear from you. That Samson does look like a nice piece of kit but the 44.1kHz limitation would be a problem. It is too bad that they don't offer a 48kHz (or better) option...

Nicholas,
I am hoping to use a recorder without a mixer. With the 660, I would monitor the level while recording but do all of my mixdown in post. Would you still recommend the H4n when used without a mixer? How do you feel it compares to the Marantz 660?

Thanks!

'The Samson R16 only records 44.1kHz when portable, not good enough for professional use. '

When you're recording a stage show, two or even four channels is never enough. You need to grab as many channels of audio as you can and do a proper mix-down in post.

So eight channels at CD quality is much more useful to me than 2/4 channels at studio quality with something missing - its a personal preference.

Tony,
I see where you are coming from but since I can't sync (TC, genlock, blackburst, etc not supported on cam) then wouldn't there be a greater risk of recording drift at 44.1 kHz? I really like the layout of the recorder though. In the past, for stage events, I capture 2 shotguns stereo to tape (on camera) the orchestra pit on one channel of the recorder, and the house lavs on the other channel of the recorder then in post I mix

LF-left channel shotgun
Center-lav mics
RF-right channel shotgun
LR-orchestra
RR-orchestra
LFE-extracted from all audio

I do have some other events where the additional tracks could come in handy, though. What has been your experience with this?

After thinking about it some more, the r16 also doesn't seem very portable. It still presumes you are mixing/recording from a table-top environment vs the 660 which can fit in a mixing bag or on a shoulder sling.

Would you still recommend the H4n when used without a mixer? How do you feel it compares to the Marantz 660?

Bryan I'm not sure how it compares to the Marantz 660. I do not recommend the H4n without a mixer, the two XLR ports gain is linked you cannot adjust the level on both channels independently you have one recording level for both mics. The H4n is not much of a 4CH recorder either the on board mics are useless so it's basically a 2CH recorder with one gain level for both channels.

Nicholas-Thanks for the follow-up. Those issues make the H4n out of the running but at that price point it probably was too much to hope for the extra features. Thanks!

I just got my H4n and haven't even had a chance to test it out, so can't really comment from personal experience... but you should know Nick is the only one I've heard who is unhappy with either the mics or the 4ch recording on this unit. The reviews at B&H are pretty glowing.

But the complaints that the manual is the worst one ever written? Take those seriously.

Again, take with a grain of salt ....

Features required:
...
-independent channel (input) level controls with metering...
...the two XLR ports gain is linked you cannot adjust the level on both channels independently...Adam, Thanks for your input. My main issue with the H4n that would rule it out would be that the inputs cannot be separately controlled. In my experience, it is not uncommon to have your board feeds fluctuate in level and require adjustment independently.

Again, haven't used it yet, but looking at p24 of the manual, seems to imply that while the onboard mics cannot be adjusted independently of each other, the two XLR inputs can:

"Target setting:
Press INPUT [MIC], [1]
and [2] buttons and
select the input source
which you want to
adjust the recording
level.
0 _ 100
+ : Increase Volume
− : Decrease Volume."

And yes, that gives you an idea of the quality of the manual.

Again, haven't used it yet, but looking at p24 of the manual, seems to imply that while the onboard mics cannot be adjusted independently of each other, the two XLR inputs can:



And yes, that gives you an idea of the quality of the manual.

It'd be great if we can get a definitive answer on this, can't go by the manual since it was written by a moron.

I went hunting in the boards looking for an answer and have found quite a bit of confusion on level control with the H4n and also asked for help on a few threads where the conversation is already in the same vein. But here are some of the posts/threads I found so far:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1397705-post15.html
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/465086-using-zoom-h4n-recording-levels.html
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1026192-post1.html
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1026245-post2.html
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1028108-post21.html
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1028174-post25.html

As best as I can tell, the consensus is that there is no consensus. Most seem to say that you cannot adjust levels independently except when in multi-track mode using all four inputs and recording at lower quality...

All of that aside though, I don't really see the H4n as a great option against the PMD-660.

I really appreciate everyone's input so far. Keep the info flowing! Thanks again.

Again, haven't used it yet, but looking at p24 of the manual, seems to imply that while the onboard mics cannot be adjusted independently of each other, the two XLR inputs can:

Adam turn ON the unit and see for yourself, you are only creating doubt on an established fact, make sure you have tried something first before posting it on a forum, these forums are information hubs we rely on. The XLR's are linked and once you use the H4n you will understand what the manual is refering to.

I created the other thread regarding levels on the H4N.
I have NOT been able to adjust the XLR input levels independently of each other - they adjust only as a pair - 1 and 2 XLR's.
Right now, after my first experience using the Zoom, I have auto levels OFF, and I use the toggle switch on the right side - rec levels and its this situation that feels wrong. I had a line into the xlr 1 and I could not get the levels down using the rec level button - but listening to the recorded file, it sounds very good and this Zoom saved my bacon on its first day out.

Adam turn ON the unit and see for yourself, you are only creating doubt on an established fact, make sure you have tried something first before posting it on a forum, these forums are information hubs we rely on. The XLR's are linked and once you use the H4n you will understand what the manual is refering to.Good idea; I did just that and it appears Bryan is right. In MTR (multi-track) mode you can easily set the two XLRs to different REC levels. I've just done so and I'm looking at it right now. But in Stereo or 4CH mode, you can't; they are ganged together.

If you're unhappy with the built-in mics you can easily plug a different one, mono or stereo, into the EXT MIC mini-plug input on the back without affecting the XLR inputs.

If you're unhappy with the built-in mics you can easily plug a different one, mono or stereo, into the EXT MIC mini-plug input on the back without affecting the XLR inputs.

So does this mean you could use one xlr and the mini plug in stereo mode and record two different levels?

So does this mean you could use one xlr and the mini plug in stereo mode and record two different levels?
No. In stereo mode, you must EITHER select the internal mics/3.5mm input, OR the xlr inputs.

To take advantage of all the inputs you need to be in 4ch. mode.

4ch. mode, as some have discovered, by default presents the H4n as a dual-stereo recorder. However, if you closely inspect the menu structure, 4ch mode also enables a "mixer" selection in the menus, that will allow you true independant control of each input, ie. 4ch mono recording.

I wrote about it in this post: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1073003-post95.html , which was post #95 of the very long initial thread on the H4n, http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/145625-new-h4n-recorder.html

Oh, I get it. Even though there is only one volume slider for each pair, by using that in conjunction with the PAN function you can adjust each side of each pair in relation to the other. Very crafty. In stereo mode, you must EITHER select the internal mics/3.5mm input, OR the xlr inputs.

To take advantage of all the inputs you need to be in 4ch. mode.
Right. By plugging in an external mic it automatically kills the onboard mics, but of course this would mean nothing if you were using, and had selected, the XLR inputs in Stereo mode. But the plan would work in 4CH mode, as Seth points out.

Personally, I'm not sure I understand what all the fuss is about, since you'll likely be doing all your mixing in post anyhow, no? I mean, as long as it's not clipping and distorting....

Thanks to everyone for their input and I am glad we have put this question to rest. Apparently the H4n will allow independent level controls in 4channel mode but not in stereo mode. Now before this gets turned into yet another H4n thread I want to get back to the OP. Thank you everyone for the thoughts on the H4n, what other recorders in the sub $500 range would you recommend. How do they compare to something like the Marantz PMD 660? Thanks...
Budget: $500 or less
Features required:
-XLR inputs with phantom power- minimum 2x (stereo)
-battery and AC power capabilities
-ability to record at least 4hrs at high-quality
-independent channel (input) level controls with metering

Objective: Transitioning to Blu-ray delivery and want to record compatible high quality audio that will sync well with HDV footage without wordclock or TC in (since cams are not sync capable.)

Primary usage: To record supplemental audio from board feeds or external microphones or wireless receiver.

Example of usage: Cams record ambient via shotgun, recorder captures direct feed from wireless lavs or 2 (or more) channels from soundboard with mics on one channel, music on the other, etc.

Background: I have been doing more stage and dance recording lately and have in the past always rented a Marantz PMD-660 and have had good experience with it so far. However, I have reached the point where it makes more sense to purchase than rent and I want to make sure I am not overlooking a better recorder before I move forward. B&H is currently offering the 660 for $469.99. What are your opinions of the 660 vs other recorders in this price range? Thanks!

I don't know how much they cost in the USA but if the dollar price is the same as the pound price (it often is) the Fostex FR2 LE should be within your budget.

I got the original Zoom H4 and really wasn't very keen on it at all. So I sold it and bought the Fostex. I've been very happy.

It's a lot bigger than the Zoom and hopeless if you want to mount it on a camera. But it's very good if size is not an issue.

I assume also that the latest Zoom must be a lot better than the original as so many people seem to like it.

FWIW i just picked up a H4n NEW for 267.00 today. Purchase the remote control for an additional 30 bucks...

Right. By plugging in an external mic it automatically kills the onboard mics, but of course this would mean nothing if you were using, and had selected, the XLR inputs in Stereo mode. But the plan would work in 4CH mode, as Seth points out.

I don't think this is accurate. I was just testing a microphone in the Zoom H4N the other day and I accidentally recorded the Onboard microphones. The "MIC" button was lit up on the front panel, I had to manually select the "1" button beneath the "MIC" button in order to get the feed from the XLR microphone.

As I recall, the Zoom H4N had defaulted to the onboard mics, but it is possible that that was the last state selected. However, I have no batteries in my Zoom H4N so I am guessing that the onboard mics are selected by default.

***

Which brings me to another question: Which rechargeable AA Batteries do you guys find to be the best or the most reliable? I have never purchased a rechargeable AA battery in my life.

You're talking about onboard mic vs. XLRs. We were talking about the 1/8" EXT MIC minijack on the back vs. the onboard mics, not the XLRs. Plugging anything into the minijack kills the onboard mics. If you were in Stereo mode and had selected mic rather than INPUT 1/2 as your source, or are in 4CH mode, plugging an external mic into the mini jack would kill the onboard mics. If you had selected the INPUTs as your source they would still work and no matter what you did to the mini-jack; nothing would change.

Ahhhh, I see. I didn't know that because the main reason I got the Zoom H4N was to record XLR microphones, so I haven't even looked at the minijack.

I am going to get around to testing some of my minijack mics with the Zoom H4N at some point.

I really don't like the placement of the minijack, it doesn't make sense to me. I have my Zoom H4N mounted on a tripod at the moment (nice) but getting to the minijack is not possible while it is. It seems that it needs to be standing upright or something similar which I think is precarious, but that is an entirely different conversation!

Ken

Thanks to everyone for their input and I am glad we have put this question to rest. Apparently the H4n will allow independent level controls in 4channel mode but not in stereo mode. Now before this gets turned into yet another H4n thread I want to get back to the OP. Thank you everyone for the thoughts on the H4n, what other recorders in the sub $500 range would you recommend. How do they compare to something like the Marantz PMD 660? Thanks...

661 is a better choice than 660.
How about get a Sound Devices MixPre (or Shure FP24), and you can take any even compact pocket recorder and lower cost.
When you get feed from the board, you don't really need XLR input.
When using wireless lav, you don't need XLR.
With a smaller pocket recorder, you can hide it to your subject.

When you really need phantom power, and XLR input, get the MixPre, and you can feed both your camera with XLR output, and feed your pocket recorder with line out (unbalanced, 1/8" jack).

With MixPre, you get prestige microphone pre-amplifier, you get decent limiter. Much better than any recorder in this price range. Well, it is more than 500 for a new one, but you may get good chance to save some on ebay. (I got FP24 for less than 400, and paid 160 for a Tascam DR-1. Sony PCM-D50 could be a better choice, but pricer.)

My 2 cents.

I really don't like the placement of the minijack, it doesn't make sense to me.Yeah, it's silly. I think they expect you to use the adapter and a regular mic stand, rather than just mounting on the tripod.

661 is a better choice than 660...

I have looked at the 661 too and am not sure it is worth the price difference. What, in your experience, makes it a better choice than the 660?

...How about get a Sound Devices MixPre (or Shure FP24), and you can take any even compact pocket recorder and lower cost...

Sound devices Mix Pre = $665
Zoom H4N = $299
sub total = $964

Marantz 660 = $469
that is a savings of $495 or 106% savings, not sure I am understanding where the lower cost comes in.

...When you get feed from the board, you don't really need XLR input.
When using wireless lav, you don't need XLR...
In my experience you do need XLR when getting fed from the board.
My wireless receiver uses XLR. I have tried trading out with a 1/8 mini and always get noise.

Anthony, thanks for your thoughts. If you could clarify on any of these points it would be much appreciated. Thanks!

Yeah, it's silly. I think they expect you to use the adapter and a regular mic stand, rather than just mounting on the tripod.

I've been using my mic stands for mics so a spare tripod tripod works very nicely for the Zoom H4N, which I was worried about knocking on the floor when I was laying it on a table.

The minijack placement is really my only gripe about the Zoom H4N (So far) and it really doesn't bother me much because I specifically purchased the H4N as a double-audio phantom-power recording solution for XLR microphones.

I still need me some rechargeable AA batteries, what do you use?!

If you will be taking a feed from a pro console type mixer, in general, this will be +4dB via an 1/4" TRS. The PMD661's XLRs have a mic/line switch. 'Most' of the solid state recorder's 1/8" input (front end) cannot handle +4dB, So you may very well need an attenuator if you go that route.

I find the Rayovac "Hybrid" AA's work very well.

I have looked at the 661 too and am not sure it is worth the price difference. What, in your experience, makes it a better choice than the 660?

PMD660: 16 bits, 48KHz, S/N only 60dB (Mic), 80dB (Line)
PMD661: 24 bits, 96KHz, S/N 65dB (Mic), 85dB (Line)

Here you see a 20dB lower S/N performance, indicating mic-preamp is not very quiet.

However, 661 perform 3 times higher resolution to 660. Or, you can compare a 4M pixel camera with a 12M pixel camera. (Based on file size)

I don't like these 2 recorders to my personal taste. They are too bulky, I only try them in a trade show.



Sound devices Mix Pre = $665
Zoom H4N = $299
sub total = $964

Marantz 660 = $469
that is a savings of $495 or 106% savings, not sure I am understanding where the lower cost comes in.


In my experience you do need XLR when getting fed from the board.
My wireless receiver uses XLR. I have tried trading out with a 1/8 mini and always get noise.

Anthony, thanks for your thoughts. If you could clarify on any of these points it would be much appreciated. Thanks!

Sound Devices MixPre, dynamic range is 110dB (It is so quiet).
If you take a low cost recorder such as Tascam DR-07 (I just found $144), you can get 87dB SN via line input.

You get much better pre-amp, and a decent limiter. Meaning you can get a hotter level, and keep a higher S/N result.

After a year or 2, you can keep the MixPre, and get a even better recorder without lossing a great value. (MixPre holds its value, most of the ebay items sold over 500.)

Feed from the board issue...leave your recorder next to the console, get the feed from the "tape out" which usually is unbalanced output.

Feed from the wireless, most portable receiver provides un-balanced output. Especially line level if there is one. Get a line level feed is a better choice.

Well, this is my case, and I do DIY all kinds of converters, or custom cables. Hope this help.

Consider the Edirol R-44 4 ch portable recorder. Very flexible flash recorder. But, a little bit more expensive.

I find the Rayovac "Hybrid" AA's work very well.

Thanks Rick, I will look into those batteries.

What do the rest of you guys use? Fresh one-shot batteries or rechargeables?

Ken

I just get Duracells by the 24-pack at Costco. Toss 'em at the end of the day, fresh ones every morning.

If you will be taking a feed from a pro console type mixer, in general, this will be +4dB via an 1/4" TRS. The PMD661's XLRs have a mic/line switch. 'Most' of the solid state recorder's 1/8" input (front end) cannot handle +4dB, So you may very well need an attenuator if you go that route...
Having borrowed a colleague's unit and rented this unit (PMD 660) for past events I have used it on a total of 6 events spaced out over 3 years. Every time, I have been offered only XLR from the mixing board, not once did they offer TRS. A couple years before that, I had to beg for RCA connection to rig a CD-recorder for a friend who is a singer-songwriter who wanted a master CD of his live show at a large venue. In my experience, you need XLR inputs for a(n XLR) feed from the sound board.

PMD660: 16 bits, 48KHz, S/N only 60dB (Mic), 80dB (Line)
PMD661: 24 bits, 96KHz, S/N 65dB (Mic), 85dB (Line)
Here you see a 20dB lower S/N performance, indicating mic-preamp is not very quiet.

However, 661 perform 3 times higher resolution to 660. Or, you can compare a 4M pixel camera with a 12M pixel camera. (Based on file size)

I don't like these 2 recorders to my personal taste. They are too bulky, I only try them in a trade show...
It is my understanding that unless you want to risk sync drift, you should always record audio for video at 48KHz sample rate unless you have TC syncing capability. So how are you able to get the "higher resolution" without running into sync drift? I am probably one of the few people who likes the size of the Marantz unit compared to the tascom and zoom units....

...Sound Devices MixPre, dynamic range is 110dB (It is so quiet)...You get much better pre-amp, and a decent limiter. Meaning you can get a hotter level, and keep a higher S/N result...Feed from the board issue...leave your recorder next to the console, get the feed from the "tape out" which usually is unbalanced output.

Feed from the wireless, most portable receiver provides un-balanced output. Especially line level if there is one. Get a line level feed is a better choice...
I won't argue the point that the MixPre is better at field mixing. I think that goes without saying. At this time (as noted in the original post and re-post) my budget is $500 and the Mix pre with any recorder is outside the range. But I will keep it in mind for future investment. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I have used one of it's big brothers in the past (can't remember the model but it was in the $1100-$1400 range and had meters that ran in an arc across the side) and thought it was great but too expensive for my needs, the Mixpre could be a good solution in the future.

My wireless receiver is a line level feed but I have yet to find a 1/8"-1/8" cable that isn't noisy with this receiver. Oddly enough, the 1/8" to dual XLR that shipped with the receiver is quiet as could be.

Consider the Edirol R-44 4 ch portable recorder. Very flexible flash recorder. But, a little bit more expensive.
Arild, thanks for the suggestion but as noted it is outside of my price range for this round. I think if I were to go higher end I would rather invest in the Edirol F-1. Both are outside of my budget range, though so they will fall into the someday bin...

It is my understanding that unless you want to risk sync drift, you should always record audio for video at 48KHz sample rate unless you have TC syncing capability. So how are you able to get the "higher resolution" without running into sync drift? I am probably one of the few people who likes the size of the Marantz unit compared to the tascom and zoom units....

My wireless receiver is a line level feed but I have yet to find a 1/8"-1/8" cable that isn't noisy with this receiver. Oddly enough, the 1/8" to dual XLR that shipped with the receiver is quiet as could be.


Yeah, seems PMD661 could be the right one for you. It is a little over 500.

There is no syncing problem between Sound Devices 722 (none TC version) at 96KHz with EX-1. But I experienced 48KHz drift with Olympus LS-10 and EX-1. (20 minutes+ clip)