Zoom h4n, Zoom h2, or Zoom Q3?

[alexphyd]

Hi all,

Zoom devices have been discussed extensively, as well as being compared to other similar devices from other manufacturers.

Could someone nevertheless post a quick comparison of the Zoom h4n (most expensive), Zoom h2 (least expensive), and Zoom Q3 HD? This last one has also video, so I would sort of assume that sound wise is not comparable to the other two...

Which one would you go for in terms of pure sound quality? I should also add that I only play solo guitar in a domestic environment...
I also have an EEEPC asus notebook with windows xp and debian lenny, in case it can be of some use for further sound editing...

So which ZOOM should I go for do you think?

Thanks for your time and help!

Cheers,

Ale

[alexphyd]

Forgot to ask:

I tried a friend's H4 (old product, not produced anymore): how does it compare to H4n?
I ask this as the sound quality was somehow disappointing, although I heard the track on my netbook, which may not be ideal....

[rojarosguitar]

...the sound quality was somehow disappointing, although I heard the track on my netbook, which may not be ideal....

Hi Alexphyd, I guess so, the sound quality is not ideal on a netbook

I have an H2 and as I wrote in some other places, for what it is, it's more than good enough. And it is more versatile than many others, because you have 4 inbuilt mics, you can record four track simultanously and edit balance afterwards, which is the way to go if you work in an ensemble that is not sitting in a row.

It doesn't have the phantom powered mic inputs of the H4, but If I wanted to use external high quality mics, I wouldn't rely on the inbuilt mic preamps anyway. So as a portable device it is unbeatable in price, quality and versatility. And you can shave yourself with it, too (looks like an old Remington shaver).

best wishes

Robert

[banl]

All three can be found on Portable Recorder Reviews & Ratings.

[alexphyd]

Thanks so much for your replies! I actually did not know about this web site (thanks Banl!), and am now even considering going for an

Olympus LS-11

instead, which is rated better than H4n and is actually even cheaper here in Switzerland...

[banl]

Thanks so much for your replies! I actually did not know about this web site (thanks Banl!)

Some searching in this sub forum would probably have given you the same result. Audacity for some extra editing is nice, even if it is only deleting the seconds before and after playing.

[Fran Guidry]

I did a comparison between the H4n and H2 along with a couple of higher performance systems in my Homebrewed Music blog: http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/03/ ... -zoom-h4n/

The difference in quality between the H2 and H4n is small, but I think it's noticeable, and most people would probably prefer the H4n. The H2 wins big for convenience - its "electric shaver" form factor allows it to sit on a table without a stand, while the H4/H4n/H1 all seem to need a stand of some kind.

If you're at all interested in video, the new Q3HD seems like a better bet than the Q3. The world has moved to HD in a big way, the quality of the video is superior, and the new version even has audio Line In. The Q3s can also be used as audio only recorders.

Fran

[dmcharg]

I would also consider the little Edirol R09HR. Given its size and cost i think it produces excellent results.

[rojarosguitar]

Without wanting to confuse you again ... I think the actual rating of the quality depends very much on what you actually want to do with the recorder. Sometimes certain practical issues wheigh heavier than 5-10% better sound quality. I'd try to define my needs as precisely as possible and than look what suits you best. Technical data is only one aspect.

One thing that could be easily underestimated is the possibility to have full visual control of the meters without compromising the microphon position. If you're recording yourself on guitar, tat might be an important issue. I thing, in this the H2 is unbeatable.

best wishes
Robert

[dmcharg]

Very good point robert. Its not too easy to see the levels on the Edirol if you have it 2-3 feet away and horizontal. I have the edirol about 2ft away and generally always pointed down so that i can see the levels but i never noticed this is easier on the H2. Interesting comparison above of the H2 and H4N. Not as big a difference as one would expect.

[Halexx]

Wow,

i'm exactly shopping for the same thing now...Syncronicity!!!

What i found, for the Zoom ones:

H1: inexpensive, simple, seams to sound good from you tube video, so if you don't make 10 000 copies of your CD...

H2: more recording option than H1,4 mics (good for recording a praticing band or ambiance) anf includes accessory. From test file on the net, seams to cut some high frequency, like putting a blanquet on the sound,but guitar recording on the net looks good.

H4n: A little better quality,open than H2, but with 2 XLR input. Can record with the two internal mics and an external source at the same time on four tracks.

Q3: Not much option for recording audio, but can record video at the same time

May i suggest you to find the PDF manuals on the net and read them, it is really instructive to see if they can do what YOU want.

I think i'l go with the H4n with the capacity to record my piezo pick-up while using the two internal mikes.

[aNovitiate]

All three can be found on Portable Recorder Reviews & Ratings.

Thanks for that, banl - VERY helpful.

Those sound samples indicated a bass boominess in the much advocated Zoom H2, compared to the Sony PCM M10 and other more expensive alternatives.

[Carl]

Those sound samples indicated a bass boominess in the much advocated Zoom H2, compared to the Sony PCM M10 and other more expensive alternatives.

I am looking really hard at the Sony PCM-M10.
Started first looking at the Zoom models - then spied the Tascam models - then the Sony (it has a remote control).

[aNovitiate]

... then spied the Tascam models - then the Sony (it has a remote control).

While I, too, found the Tascam (the old Teac recording company) models appealing, particularly the lower end handhelds, listening to the sound samples validated comments suggesting that they are relatively 'noisy' i.e. have a too-high noise floor ... or mediocre signal-to-noise ratio.

I'm starting to suspect/conclude that one needs to spend $200+ (in the current market) - in order to get flat frequency response and good s/n, including in the external mic pre-amp circuits.

[Valéry Sauvage]

I'm a H2 user, with a Sony Handycam, and I'll move soon to the Q3 hd... I'll tell you whant I'll have it (I hope before Xmas, some waiting time for shipping in Europe)