Looks to have a street price of $499. Might be the bigger better mousetrap compared to the H4 & H4n.

At first glance, it looks like a high-end hobbyist device. Too many options, bells and whistles, and too complicated for PHD* recording.
Maybe for nature recordings or such where one has unlimited setup time.

With the h4, I turn it on and record. Also, street price on this Roland is going to be around $500 US.

*PHD = Push Here, Dummy

musicvid, are you now calling yourself a dummy :)

Mike

Yes, with increasing frequency each passing year . . .

[FOOTNOTE] I was able to figure out how to remove and repair the EGR on my 18 y/o S10 Blazer, so there are still some flashes of brilliance.
;?)

Records in WAVE/BWF.

BWF?

John

BWF= Broadcast Wave Format
Same as Wave but with a bunch of extra metadata, including timecode stamp.
Still uses the .wav extension, so you might not even know if you have a bwf file.

Also it captures 3 stereo pairs but only one pair is XLR/TRS. Another can be from the powered stereo mini input and there are also two pairs of on-board mikes. Wishing for 4 XLR inputs but Roland is keeping that for their higher end models.

I'd say given Roland's efforts with the two field recorders of theirs that I own it would be considerably better than the H4n. According to the published info this device uses analog gain control before the A/D converters which should get over the problems with the H4n where distortion goes up as you reduce gain.

If you want a reasonably priced field recorder the R-44 is quite decent for the money but it is roughly twice the price of this unit, no mics worthy of note either and it is larger. You do get 4x XLR inputs with phantom power and each input has separate gain and level controls.

Bob.

Thanks for the input.

I'll get one tomorrow, and will try to put some test files on-line for those who would be interested, and maybe a comparison to the H4N too.

/Ulf

My experience of the H4n.
I had a H4n for exactly 1 day - took it straight back to the shop. The preamp noise while using boom mics was horrendous. The gain had to be full up just to get any kind of decent recording level and the noise floor was so bad it was hard to filter out in post. Absolutely hated it.
Was advised to try a Tascam DR-100. And glad i did, its excellent. No audiable noise at all even with gain full up. 2 x Phantom powered XLRs, a stereo mini jack for Line in, manual recording levels for both inputs, easy to use and a clear display. You can hear hiss while recording with high gain in the headphones but this noise is not actually recorded to file! Its clean.
It lives on my Canon rig. I have now tried this unit using booms, dynamic mics and just the other day with a radio pack to the line in, all excellent.
Thats my 10p's worth, highly recommended piece of kit.
Paul.

I have tried the line inputs on the H4N with two mixer line outs -- one was ok (but noisy) and the other was distorted beyond usability. It is ok with onboard mikes for music and audience and sets up quickly. If I have to spend $1K or more to get a reliable recorder for line level situations, so be it. I just don't want a collection of half baked $300-$500 solutions laying around.

Sound Devices are starting to look like a bargain :-)

Sound Devices are starting to look like a bargain :-)

You do get what you pay for.
A MixPre or a 302 would be a really nice addition to your gear list :)

Mike

Sound Devices is very good kit. You can spend a lot more of course.

One thing to keep in mind though, not much to be gained by putting one of those SD preamps in front of the H4n. As tests linked to here previously show if you were to feed the line level ouput of the SD preamps into the H4n then you of course have to turn the gain down in the H4n and doing that causes the distortion to increase.

Much better to buy a SD recorder. Then you've got excellent preamps and A>D converters in a package built like a tank.

None of this quality is cheap BUT if you ever decide to get out of the game it holds its value very well. Good audio gear is a better investment than video gear.

Bob.

Got it, weakest link in the chain and all. At some point you also start thinking of yourself as an audio guy who also shoots video and those can be different kinds of gigs.

Here's a side by side comparison chart of many portable recorders that may be of some help.

http://www.musicedmagic.com/audio-video/portable-digital-audio-recorder-buying-guide-with-reviews.html

I don't own a H4n but understand the 1/4" 'Line in' is actually a cross between instrument and line level. So I would assume some external attenuation would be necessary to optimize the input stage, especially when imputing a +4dB rated signal.

Since the discussion has drifted a little, I thought I'd offer some input on my audio kit: Sound Devices 302 fed into the line-level inputs of a Korg MR-1000 field recorder. The Korg records in the "1-bit" DSF format. I swear I've never heard such good recordings. What goes in comes out exactly as I heard it with my ears. No noise.

The SD302 and Korg will set you back some coin, but they are nearly bullet proof and I've schlepped them around the globe in all weather conditions.

-Steve

You may want to look at the Marantz PMD661.
It is the field recorder of choice for professional broadcasters.
The cost is a bit more, but they are rugged, dependable and give you a high quality audio file.
Two XLR inputs on this, mic and line, and lots of other options.

I had the predecessor 660 for about five years that worked flawlessly, not even a glitch.The 660 and the 661 are one of the few portables that will record mono files. Not exactly pocket-size or bag-friendly though, and the internal mics are only good for note taking IMO.

"It is the field recorder of choice for professional broadcasters."

Wandering journalists rarely require audiophile-grade recordings, just the spoken word, and for that the Marantz is just fine.

The reason you see so many of them pointed at people's faces at news events are that they are smaller, and less intimidating than the h4/h4n, which can look a bit like a taser in some settings.

The Marantz PMD-670 line inputs handle levels that the H4N distorts on. I am curious to hear if the R-26 does better in this area. When I got the 670 it cost in the region of $700. Its unmodded mike preamps add a lot of hiss though.

I ran across this: http://www.lcd4video.com/facebook-special-tascam-dr-680-8-track-portable-field-audio-recorder/

Tascam 680 "8-track" recorder for only $699.
It has 4 XLR inputs and two TRS inputs (all with phantom) plus S/PDIF input for a total of 8.
For my uses it has 6 usable phantom powered inputs in the field. Their next step up has 8 XLR inputs, but costs nearly $5k.

Has anyone used one of these before? I am pretty tempted. For on-site production recording we usually bring out our portable pro-tools system, but many times it is like hiring an F1 driver to go to the store for milk - just a little excessive. (but very cool)

Andrew