well, its one of those things that's tricky to put into words, but basicall=
y the mid & low end frequencies are less well defined, the material the cas=
ing is made from seems to affect the quality of the sound (folks often comm=
ent about it sounding plastic-y), the high freq. are sharp - a bit over bri=
ght. Overall the sound is less pleasing on the ear & you tire of listening =
much quicker.
--- In Peter Shute <> wrote:
>
> Jez, I haven't listened to a Zoom recording. Can you explain "thin and br=
ittle"?
>
> Peter Shute
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > On Behalf Of Jez
> > Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2013 6:41 AM
> > To:
> > Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Zoom H2n opinions please
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I know some folks will be ok with it but, as with zoom in
> > general, the construction is a bit iffy - very plastic indeed
> > - + the pre-amps are noisy & the mics themselves aren't that
> > good. Whenever we do group mic tests on workshops - all set
> > up in a semi-circle recording at the same time etc. the
> > zoom's can always be spotted when we playback the recordings
> > without telling folks which is which. They're thin & brittle sounding.
> >
> > --- In
> > <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> > "lamprophis1963" <sandboa@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://www.zoom.co.jp/news/article/548
> > >
> > > That is certainly an intriguing looking piece of equipment.
> > Particularly for US$399 with the MS and XY microphone
> > attachments included.
> > >
> > > It ain't pretty, but I record after dark anyway (frogs).
>
|