Zoom R4 Preamp noise?

[Eastbound]

I see guys on here using the R4 with the internal mic, but what about the pre's for the external mics? Are they "noisy" so to speak? Looking at buying one of these but the EIN specs have me second guessing. I believe this measurement is derived from a logarithmic function, which small differences can have a big affect.

EIN
R4 -120dbu
Zoom F3 -127dbu
SSL interface -130dbu
Scarlett 2i2 - -127dbu

How much do these numbers actually affect the noise in the recordings? Especially with 32bit float? You dont adjust the gain, do the soft sounds inherently have more noise on the R4?
The pre's on my SSL 12 are super quiet. I notice the F3 is more expensive then the R4, but doesn't have any of the features of the R4. Is this because the pre's are so much better?
Anyone record nature sounds with the R4? Is it too noisy? Anybody have problems with the noise on the preamps of the R4?

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by Eastbound

I see guys on here using the R4 with the internal mic, but what about the pre's for the external mics? Are they "noisy" so to speak? Looking at buying one of these but the EIN specs have me second guessing. I believe this measurement is derived from a logarithmic function, which small differences can have a big affect.

EIN
R4 -120dbu
Zoom F3 -127dbu
SSL interface -130dbu
Scarlett 2i2 - -127dbu

How much do these numbers actually affect the noise in the recordings? Especially with 32bit float? You dont adjust the gain, do the soft sounds inherently have more noise on the R4?
The pre's on my SSL 12 are super quiet. I notice the F3 is more expensive then the R4, but doesn't have any of the features of the R4. Is this because the pre's are so much better?
Anyone record nature sounds with the R4? Is it too noisy? Anybody have problems with the noise on the preamps of the R4?

Interesting question.

I looked at the "on paper" specifications for the R4 before purchase and did note the -120dbu specification. My other main recorder has a -123dbu spec and I never noted that it had any problem with recordings that I made, so I "bit the bullet" on the extra 3dbu loss in noise specification and purchased the R4.

It's working fine for me and there's nothing that I've recorded that indicates any problem for my workflow.

Most of the time I see any reference to problems from preamp noise in portable recorders is for folks who are doing field work with birds or insects. In those cases I'm sure 7dba better performance would make a difference, but I don't think that's the market for the R4.

Zoom walks a fine line between what it thinks the features should be for its target market and the cost of the recorder. Zoom is obviously working towards a compromise, stating that the internal microphone features improved performance over earlier microphone capsules. Since those capsules are typically back charged electret elements I'm assuming they manufacture the capsules with lower noise FET internals than their previous offerings.

Small design decisions like that allow them to produce a recorder with acceptable OVERALL noise specifications that meet their target market consumer.

Bottom line, it's not the best field recorder if someone needs the best possible noise performance for demanding applications, but it probably meets or exceeds the needs of the average user. I'd bet that most of the self-noise of consumer grade condenser mics are more of a limiting factor than the R4's internals. For me, I love the form factor of the R4 and it's just fun to use!

There are a whole bunch of very good Youtube videos that attempt the "should I or shouldn't I use 32 bit float" technology, and I know a few of them must address the preamp noise specifications more directly.

[Eastbound]

Rudy 4 - That makes sense and I agree with all your points. Zoom products are great and Ive had a couple of thier older recorders. Have you tried the external mic inputs on the R4? Almost all the vids I have seen on this uses the internal mic. I've yet to see an example using external mics

I've almost pulled the trigger on this a few times

I want to be able to use this for recording guitar and voice outside. It would be nice if I could have a backing tracks pre-recorded and loaded before I head out. I know the R4 can do this, while the F3 cannot

I also want to record nature sounds and also an occasional choral concert. Seems like the F3 would be better for this.

Im leaning towards the R4. I wish someone would do a vid testing the preamps for the external mics and compare them to others

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by Eastbound

Rudy 4 - That makes sense and I agree with all your points. Zoom products are great and Ive had a couple of thier older recorders. Have you tried the external mic inputs on the R4? Almost all the vids I have seen on this uses the internal mic. I've yet to see an example using external mics

I've almost pulled the trigger on this a few times

I want to be able to use this for recording guitar and voice outside. It would be nice if I could have a backing tracks pre-recorded and loaded before I head out. I know the R4 can do this, while the F3 cannot

I also want to record nature sounds and also an occasional choral concert. Seems like the F3 would be better for this.

Im leaning towards the R4. I wish someone would do a vid testing the preamps for the external mics and compare them to others

Yes, the pres are clean sounding to me. I've used them with my lowly Behringer C-2 SDCs as well as my Roswell Mini K-47 with good results from both. I haven't posted anything recorded with the mics but I probably will in the near future. When I do that I'll post in our AGF "definitive R4 topic":

"Zoom R4. Anyone else?"

I'll probably use the Behringer C-2 SDCs because it better demonstrates what folks can expect by recording on lower tier equipment. I suspect that's a lot more useful than using the R4 with a top dollar Neumann.

[dnf777]

I dont mean to ignore your question, but I dont feel qualified or experienced enough to give you a reliable answer.

I guess I wondered the same thing without realizing it, when I first used the R4 (with an external Ear Trumpet mic) for a single-mic acoustic-vocal recording. I think my questions centered more on the 32-bit technology than preamp noise level. Traditionally in that setting, one would have a relatively high gain setting (not so with 32 bit) and notice any noise. So with this set up, I wondered, how can I get a good signal with no noise? Still coming to grips…

[Rudy4]

Dave has a good point.

In my previous experience with using any type of technology to capture audio a prime concern was the noise floor associated with the preamp. The problem really only became an issue when using dynamic mics because the amount of gain applied to create a digital WAV file that was reasonable in level would highlight the noise of the preamp. I mostly solved that by using condenser mics which didn't need the higher gain settings of the preamp to get an acceptable signal level.

I'm really a rank amateur at dealing with the technicalities, but I do love the R4 for simply setting up mics, using reasonable distance and placement guidelines and letting the recorder do what it does best.

So far it's been a win-win situation for me.

I am anxious to see how this all shakes out for users.

[Eastbound]

In practice, preamp EIN values range between about -120 and -129 dBu. The larger this negative figure, the quieter the preamp — I regard -125dBu as the minimum acceptable for professional results.

I got this from a Sound on Sound article. This would mean (in general) the R4 has some pretty high noise levels from the preamp. Comparing with pre's from other products....it does seem like the noise from these are probably pretty bad.

Im gonna hold off on the R4 and search for some better options

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by Eastbound

In practice, preamp EIN values range between about -120 and -129 dBu. The larger this negative figure, the quieter the preamp — I regard -125dBu as the minimum acceptable for professional results.

I got this from a Sound on Sound article. This would mean (in general) the R4 has some pretty high noise levels from the preamp. Comparing with pre's from other products....it does seem like the noise from these are probably pretty bad.

Im gonna hold off on the R4 and search for some better options

A totally good reason not to purchase an R4!

The author of the Sound On Sound article immediately follows his statement with "However, the EIN figure can be manipulated to make a preamp look better."

I certainly don't understand the intricacies of those EIN numbers and all of the variables in measurement. Manufacturers are most definitely aware of how consumers evaluate their products and I hesitate to put any faith in evaluating a product by the manufacturer's published specifications. The best we can hope for is a modicum of honesty, but I'm not hedging my bets on that.

The proof is indeed in the pudding, so to speak.

[Eastbound]

Rudy 4
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I totally get where your coming from . I read all specs before purchasing and usually try to buy from a place that will accept returns if I'm not satisfied.

Manufacturers do manipulate specs but it usually shows up in how the spec is written out. If the EIN is not in the typical dbu format, I become suspicious. You really can't correlate to the same spec of other preamps unless you know how it converts. I usually dont!. The manufacturers know this is confusing and this is why they do it. So you cant see how much worse the product is when comparing to others.

Also I've noticed some products that don't clearly give the spec sheet, or certain specs are defined differently as noted above. Shady

I believe the specs of mics, preamps and the like can pre-define how the equipment will sound. Nothing will ever replace real world usage on testing equipment