older13 « Not perfect, but good value for money »
Published on 11/22/13 at 02:46
Value For Money :
Excellent
Product bought new H4 to replace a first generation who began to MALFUNCTION.
I have not considered other competing product because the H6 is unique in its price category.
Most notable is its versatility: Interchangeable internal mics, 6-track simultaneous recording, compact and cheap.
The increase compared to H4 and H4n is enormous, especially in terms of ergonomics. It is now well adapted to what must serve a portable recorder: record field. The sound is not perfect, but for the price it is acceptable to.
Highlights:
- Finish the plastic shell "rubber effect". It's not likely to take the time (this type of coating tends to "peel"), but it limits the handling noise. The micro blocks are fully interchangeable metal, and also the locking system. It inspires confidence.
- Analog Potentiometers level adjustment for each input. Simple and effective. Scalloped would have been better.
- The backup to -12 dB to avoid saturation. But only on the stereo input (built-in microphones or XLR / Jack optional module).
- The carrying case well designed and of good quality.
- The thread mic stand (1/8) robust and well placed.
- Power of 4 batteries R6, which is used to supply 48V external microphones without putting flat batteries in 2 minutes.
- The start-up super-fast.
The weak point
- Screen too small: the meters are virtually unreadable.
- Still too laborious manipulations in menus, for example to initiate the phantom power supply or adjusting the monitor mixer is frankly horrifying.
- No phantom power on the XLR / Jack optional module, which is the only one to have the backup to -12 dB!
As for audio performance is good but not perfect:
- The preamps are a good surprise: much higher than the H4n and especially H4. With a pair of external microphones Rode NT5, I get almost the same result as a Track Ultra M-Audio interface Fast in background noise, which is not bad at all. Headroom is still larger with the M-Audio. No noticeable difference in sound.
- The two micro modules provided sufficient sensitivity for recording near-field but insufficient as soon as we move away from the source. First test on an acoustic guitar folk 1m50: to wedge the crete-6dB FS, I had to put the gain to 10 (max) on the built-in mics (XY or MS), but only 7.5 in pair of NT5 XY couple connected to the XLR inputs (which are still that of the entry level). Result: the background goes so sensitive with the internal mics: + 10dB on my test. I have not tried yet, but it may become prohibitive on the "field recording". But it was even worse on the H4, which meant that I did not use that on the line inputs.
- The measured noise level (with Adobe Audition) on the MS cup is equivalent to the XY pair, but the audio is different: Subjectively, the module MS seems to blow over. Question spectral distribution without doubt.
- Asked sound, the record is much clearer than previous generations of Zoom. It has a significantly higher resolution printing, but I found the XY pair a bit garish, significantly more than Rode NT5 are bright enough yet. On a folk guitar, it can become unpleasant limit. MS torque is much rounder and seems much better suited to the voice or instruments.
Review: Not perfect, but for the price, could we ask for more? My only real regret is the built-in mics. Their sensitivity is too low to achieve good quality recording as soon as you move away a bit from the source. The XY pair is a bit garish. MS torque is much nicer, but breath a bit too. The internal mics are rather troubleshooting in my opinion. Provide good external microphones (if possible with built-in power to benefit from the backup copy to 12dB on the optional XLR module), and an expensive recording system is obtained is not good enough. If needed again, I do it again this choice without hesitation, because I do not have the means of a portable multi-track recorder professional that would cost (at least) 10x more expensive.
I have not considered other competing product because the H6 is unique in its price category.
Most notable is its versatility: Interchangeable internal mics, 6-track simultaneous recording, compact and cheap.
The increase compared to H4 and H4n is enormous, especially in terms of ergonomics. It is now well adapted to what must serve a portable recorder: record field. The sound is not perfect, but for the price it is acceptable to.
Highlights:
- Finish the plastic shell "rubber effect". It's not likely to take the time (this type of coating tends to "peel"), but it limits the handling noise. The micro blocks are fully interchangeable metal, and also the locking system. It inspires confidence.
- Analog Potentiometers level adjustment for each input. Simple and effective. Scalloped would have been better.
- The backup to -12 dB to avoid saturation. But only on the stereo input (built-in microphones or XLR / Jack optional module).
- The carrying case well designed and of good quality.
- The thread mic stand (1/8) robust and well placed.
- Power of 4 batteries R6, which is used to supply 48V external microphones without putting flat batteries in 2 minutes.
- The start-up super-fast.
The weak point
- Screen too small: the meters are virtually unreadable.
- Still too laborious manipulations in menus, for example to initiate the phantom power supply or adjusting the monitor mixer is frankly horrifying.
- No phantom power on the XLR / Jack optional module, which is the only one to have the backup to -12 dB!
As for audio performance is good but not perfect:
- The preamps are a good surprise: much higher than the H4n and especially H4. With a pair of external microphones Rode NT5, I get almost the same result as a Track Ultra M-Audio interface Fast in background noise, which is not bad at all. Headroom is still larger with the M-Audio. No noticeable difference in sound.
- The two micro modules provided sufficient sensitivity for recording near-field but insufficient as soon as we move away from the source. First test on an acoustic guitar folk 1m50: to wedge the crete-6dB FS, I had to put the gain to 10 (max) on the built-in mics (XY or MS), but only 7.5 in pair of NT5 XY couple connected to the XLR inputs (which are still that of the entry level). Result: the background goes so sensitive with the internal mics: + 10dB on my test. I have not tried yet, but it may become prohibitive on the "field recording". But it was even worse on the H4, which meant that I did not use that on the line inputs.
- The measured noise level (with Adobe Audition) on the MS cup is equivalent to the XY pair, but the audio is different: Subjectively, the module MS seems to blow over. Question spectral distribution without doubt.
- Asked sound, the record is much clearer than previous generations of Zoom. It has a significantly higher resolution printing, but I found the XY pair a bit garish, significantly more than Rode NT5 are bright enough yet. On a folk guitar, it can become unpleasant limit. MS torque is much rounder and seems much better suited to the voice or instruments.
Review: Not perfect, but for the price, could we ask for more? My only real regret is the built-in mics. Their sensitivity is too low to achieve good quality recording as soon as you move away a bit from the source. The XY pair is a bit garish. MS torque is much nicer, but breath a bit too. The internal mics are rather troubleshooting in my opinion. Provide good external microphones (if possible with built-in power to benefit from the backup copy to 12dB on the optional XLR module), and an expensive recording system is obtained is not good enough. If needed again, I do it again this choice without hesitation, because I do not have the means of a portable multi-track recorder professional that would cost (at least) 10x more expensive.