 |
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
|
|
73 members (bcalvanese, amc252, akse0435, 20/20 Vision, benkeys, apianostudent, Bellyman, AlkansBookcase, accordeur, 14 invisible),
2,097
guests, and
324
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 452
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 452 |
1) If I am understanding everything correctly, this device is the recording version of a digital camera. If I have it, I can record anywhere (with no extra mics or cables unless I need external power) and then transfer those files to my PC at my convenience. Is that right?
2)Does it have playback? If I record my piano playing, can I then use headphones and record another track of me singing? (I bet I'd need a mic unless I wanted my voice in stereo, is that right?)
o3) People have mentioned that it's a hassle to insert/remove the SD card, and that you don't need to because you can just hook up the USB cable. I would prefer to use the card and not a cable. Why is it a hassle to insert the card? Is that a design problem or something more significant? If I were planning on mainly using the card, will I be disappointed?
4) A question about Audacity (Monica?) When you nomalize, do you have to set any levels, or does audacity do it automatically?
5) When recording with the H4, can you select the type of file or does it automatically record into a WAV file?
6) Who here is recording an upright, only Ragtime88?
7) The discussion of MP3 vs WAV was very interesting. If file size is not an issue, is there any reason to convert to MP3? If you're making an audio file, you can just leave it as WAV and any regular CD player will still play it, is that correct?
8) Monica and anyone else, have you made any recordings and left them as WAV and noticed a difference?
I've been satisfied with the quality of my recordings so far, now the thing to figure out is whether I'd be giving up any quality for the convenience of the H4. 1. Correct. It has 2 small mics in an X-Y pattern at top of unit. Records onto the SD card you inserted. 2. Has output port. you connect small stereo jack to it. Plays back nicely w/earphones or amplifier connected. You may use internal or external mic for S-on-S. 3. The card IS the recording medium. You can xfer files by taking out card & putting it in a card reader or hook-up USB cable to link to computer. Hard for chubby-fingered people to get to card in between the batteries. Is mostly a non-event since card doesn't need to be taken out much once in, esp. w/ a Big capacity card. 4. Don't remember, sorry. I do like Audacity though. 5. Your choice. 6. Sorry, I have a Grand. 7. Your choice. WAV's can be burned to CD and played on any CD player. 8. Only recorded w/mp3 format so far. (When I can make La Campanella sound like music all the way through, I'll record it as a WAV  ) When I playback thru my Stereo system, things sound great. I would endorse it. There are some who say the Edirol (sp?) is better but I have no knowledge of it except the Edirol costs more. Happy Decision Making.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 67
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 67 |
Just to add to playliszt comments
1) It runs on batteries, so you don't need external power. You can take it anywhere (unless you buy external mic’s that need power, I don’t do this)
2) It plays back through a headphone jack. It is pretty easy to play songs back (once you get used to it)
3) I transfer files from the H4 to my PC directly. This is very easy to do. I don't ever take the card out any more.
4. In Audacity, you do 'select all', 'effect -> normalize'. On a dialog box, it has a few settings (which I leave at default). Hit ok, and poof it is done.
5. You can select MP3 or WAV, and you can select the quality.
7) I also leave them in WAV (they do sound better). I only convert to MP3 when I upload them to the internet.
8) Same as 7
Mike
Estonia 168 in ebony polish, serial no. 1378
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 243
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 243 |
Has anyone thought of buying an Edirol or other USB interface for their notebook computer? One can buy a great interface with adequate preamp's and 48V phantom power along with two large diaphram mikes for less then $500.
Record straight to the notebook in wave format at 24khz /44.1 Edit and create CD's. All in one.
Edirol or any USB interface $200.00
Two MXL or Samson Omni directional large diaphram mikes $200.
These mikes are equivalent to $600 mikes just 10 years ago and do very well. They handle piano SPLs with ease. Technology has come a long way in terms of bang for the buck.Even the pre amps in the interfaces are not bad and certainly better then those in the H4.
Unless one just wants quick recordings I would go this way rather then sweat placement of the H4 which is very limited as compared to the set up above. Provided you have a notebook computer of course.
Piano, pro audio,guitar and MI sales.
Yamaha, Pearl River, Bergmann, Remington.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,242
1000 Post Club Member
|
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,242 |
I seem to recall that Monica started with a Samson C01 first. Judging from the pieces she's posted, the Zoom is a vast improvement. I think MXL's are fabricated by the same Chineese manufacturer as Samsons. I have an Edirol R09 and it seems to be on par with the Zoom, quality-wise. The Zoom with its higher sample rate converter might actually be a tad better.
Howard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,356
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,356 |
ShiroKuro, looks like all your questions got answered by people who were up and going faster this morning than I. Kingfrog777, I tried for a very long time to do exactly the kind of thing you are suggesting, albeit with a single, cheaper mic (hv was right; it was the Samson C01 USB mic). And it drove me crazy. I'd fiddle with mic placement and try take after take, and adjust the mic input levels on both the laptop and audacity, and I'd STILL get clipping and hissing. To add insult to injury, after many laborious hours when I would get something sort of decent, the next time I'd set the stuff up IN THE EXACT SAME PLACE it would give me hissing and clipping again!  Now, I will be the first one to admit that I don't know what I'm doing when it comes to recording equipment and computers. I am sure that your setup, operated by you (I see from your signature line that you're a recording engineer) is superior, and probably significantly so, to the Zoom. But unless you're willing to come stay in my house every time I want to record, I'll stick with the Zoom, where I don't get hissing and I don't get clipping no matter where I put the thing. And setup only takes 1 second (plug in, turn on), not the 10 or 15 minutes minimum it was taking me to get a chair to set the laptop on, drag out the mic stand, set up the mic, hook the mic up to the computer, turn on the computer and get audacity going, set the mic levels, and then try futilely to find a mic location and input level that wouldn't result in clipping.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923
8000 Post Club Member
|
|
8000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923 |
Playliszt, 2play4u, thanks! Hmm, so the Zoom has one design flaw. (Unless there are others that I've missed!) I would prefer to use the card rather than hooking up the USB cable all the time, but it sounds like inserting and removing the card is just a hassle, not a serious problem. Is that a reasonable conclusion? Kingfrog, the reason I'm considering the Zoom is because I don't want to have to deal with complicated set-up, and I'd like to be able to record without having to have a computer. I don't have a dedicated music studio, my piano is in my living room. I don't record as often as I might because right now it's too much trouble. Also I'd like to be able to record at a lesson or in a concert hall when I can't have my computer with me. So at the top of my priority list are ease of use, portability and an inexpensive price tag. From what I can tell this far, no other product has all of these elements to the extent that the Zoom does. BTW, the Zoom doesn't have a remote control does it? So if you wanted to record yourself in a concert or something, someone would have to set it up and press record beforehand, and then you'd have to let it go for the entire performance (no starting and stopping.) Do you think if I wrote the company, they'd make me a special one with the card slot in a different place, and a remote rec/stop control? 
Started piano June 1999. Proud owner of a Yamaha C2 ![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/9medals.jpg) ![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/medal_c_3.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 64
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 64 |
Hi, I haven't had any trouble getting the card in and out, but I have fairly small hands. I don't have a card reader so that isn't an option for me. The USB cable is long enough to leave it plugged in at the back of the systems box and just attach the Zoom as necessary (provided you have enough USB ports to dedicate it of course). The Zoom doesn't have a remote control; someone else would need to be organising the recording for you. Great idea though; you should write to them. I'm also recording an upright, but I haven't played around with positioning etc. very much. I just have it sitting on the top on some folded fabric (to absorb some vibration), with the piano 'top' open a little. The only position problem I've had (which is my own incompetence) is working out what balance problems are related to my own playing (I'm a lousy pianist LOL) and what's the position of the Zoom. I'll need to do some research and experimenting I think. Good luck with it, Tana
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 67
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 67 |
Removing the SD card is not that difficult (although they could have made it easier), I am sure once you have done it a few times that you would be a pro at it. I leave the cable plugged into my computer, and so when I want to transfer the files, I plug in the H4, press one button, and pow!, the H4 is mapped as a drive on the computer, and it is trivial to transfer the files to the computer.
I wish there was a remote control (there is not). I position my zoom quite far from where I sit, so I start recording, walk back to the piano, and play. When done, I walk to the Zoom, and stop recording. When I edit the file in Audacity, it is so so easy to remove the dead space. If you go and buy a big SD card (2GB), you can record for hours, so even if you record a concert, you position the H4 in the ideal position, start recording, and leave it for the entire concert. Then when you edit the file, you could edit out the individual performances using Audacity.
I love the H4. There may be better quality recording equipment, but I doubt there is anything that is easier to use.
Mike
Estonia 168 in ebony polish, serial no. 1378
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923
8000 Post Club Member
|
|
8000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923 |
Tana, I am guessing that one of the first recording placements I try will be with the top open. My upright's top folds over so that when you open it, you're only opening half of it, and there's a "ledge" so it would be very easy to set the Zoom on that ledge. Then the other placement I've thought of is to use a tripod (we have a nice big one) and set it up so the Zoom sits behind me, almost directly over my head (again with the piano's top open.) Tana, if you're feeling ambitious, you might consider taking the front panel of the piano off and recording that way. Of course this kind of negates the Zoom's ease of set-up! (And it's also hard to get used to playing with that wall of sound if you're not used to it.) 2play4u, I'm already comfortable with Audacity, so it won't be a problem to edit into individual pieces. But still a remote would be nice. Maybe I will write to the company! Umm, so I guess I've pretty much decided to buy one too!
Started piano June 1999. Proud owner of a Yamaha C2
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 64
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 64 |
Wow... the front panel of the piano comes off? I guess it would have to; otherwise how would you get in there. Needless to say I've always been at work when the piano's been tuned. That sounds like great fun, but I think I might get someone who knows how to show me first time around. I could get into all sorts of trouble, not to mention the poor piano LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923
8000 Post Club Member
|
|
8000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,923 |
I have seen a lot of different uprights (I teach in elementary schools, lots of hard working pianos!) and there are different mechanisms for how they come off, but as you point out, they all do because that's how the tuners can do their work. The bottom panel comes off too. The idea is that, if you're recording, this will give you a better shot at a less muffled sound. But, depending on the mics and recording instruments, it can also be overpowering. I don't record this way anymore, partly because of that and also because I had to re-adjust to playing that way every time I wanted to record, which took too long. Not only is the difference in sound dramatic, but suddenly having to watch the hammers move and seeing all that color when I'm used to seeing just the black piano panel, it was too distracting! Sorry for the thread-drift!
Started piano June 1999. Proud owner of a Yamaha C2
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,242
1000 Post Club Member
|
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,242 |
Uprights certainly seem to generate their most rich and full sound if you remove the front panel. But I get better recording results from the back, right off the soundboard. Less hammer and pedal noise. The sweetest spot seems to be just below where the keybed is on the front. When recording in homes, I often swing uprights and consoles out into the middle of the room if necessary to get the back away from any walls.
Howard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728
500 Post Club Member
|
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728 |
Just a quick follow-up on some things I mentioned earlier in the thread... I did a couple of quick mic recording tests of a harpsichord yesterday. Strangely, the 44.1KHz/16-bit recording seems to have more high-frequency extension than a 96KHz/24-bit recording (processed and downsampled). Placement of the Zoom (on a tripod, about 12" above the rim of the harpsichord, at the middle of the bent side) and recording levels were the same for both recordings, and the only processing I did was to normalize and export to MP3. 44.1KHz/16-bit recording: http://www.box.net/public/dee3z73rgv 96KHz/24-bit recording, downsampled after all processing complete: http://www.box.net/public/cok2sb2gx6 Rather than deal with installing a device driver for the Zoom, I got a 4-in-1 memory card reader for my PC. That way I can read CompactFlash cards for my digicam and SD cards for my Zoom with one device. Haven't tried Cubase yet, as Audacity does the minimal processing I have needed so far (cut out noise at start/end of session, normalize, export MP3, etc.). Microphone recording of the harpsichord did seem more "muffled" than an analog cable connection from a digital piano. I'm not sure if that was due to placement, or just that the cheap built-in mics have a limited high-frequency response. Later on, I'll record the harpsichord again with the different microphone modeling settings, and post some files so everyone can listen to the differences. I suspect these settings will EQ the microphone signal and may give the highs a little boost.
Colin Dunn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 252
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 252 |
Originally posted by Colin Dunn:
-snip-
I did a couple of quick mic recording tests of a harpsichord yesterday. Strangely, the 44.1KHz/16-bit recording seems to have more high-frequency extension than a 96KHz/24-bit recording (processed and downsampled)-snip-
Microphone recording of the harpsichord did seem more "muffled" than an analog cable connection from a digital piano. I'm not sure if that was due to placement, or just that the cheap built-in mics have a limited high-frequency response.
-snip- First downsampling will attenuate any recording. Downsampling to MP3 also removes data in the compression. For best results record at the data rate of your target media. A digital piano connecting to a Zoom or directly to the computer? A speaker cable run directly into the Zoom will act like a analog mic but doesn't have the variables of placement/mic gain/room noise/etc. A digital piano recorded with a mic will be closer to an apples and apples comparison but not exactly. A harpsichord produces sound with an entirely different mechanism-plectrum vs hammer. One needs a microphone that is REALLY transparent with very quick transients to get a good harpsichord sound. Also 'muffled' to me indicates the initial gain stage of the mic wasn't high enough. All the best.
Piano Technician
Pro horn player
Recording Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728
500 Post Club Member
|
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728 |
John -
When I did the digital piano recording, no mics were involved. It was an analog stereo audio cable (RCA jacks to the line-out jacks on the keyboard, 1/4" jacks to the inputs on the Zoom). The "low" gain setting was the only usable choice (the Zoom's built-in preamps distorted at the medium gain setting).
For the harpsichord, I used the built-in mics (I don't own any external mics) and the medium gain setting. Before recording I checked levels, and could get to around the -6dB level by playing chords with all choirs / couplers engaged. The Zoom was placed roughly at the most concave portion of the bentside of the harpsichord. (I am open to suggestions for better placements of an X/Y pair to record a harpsichord; I used that placement because that was what I read was a good X/Y placement for a grand piano.)
Recordings were done in WAV format on the Zoom, and converted to MP3 on my computer just for posting to box.net. To minimize quality loss I used 320Kbps and high MP3 encoder quality settings. Any recordings I plan to keep will stay in WAV format.
Colin Dunn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,356
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,356 |
Colin, thanks for posting the harpsichord recordings. They didn't sound muffled to me, but I don't have a lot of experience with harpsichord music.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 231
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 231 |
I'm looking forward to the new product announcements at NAMM. Perhaps Zoom and Edirol will each announce successors to the H4 and R-09 - could result in price drops on the current models, too...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 104
Full Member
|
|
OP
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 104 |
Colin, the 44.1/16 harpsichord recording is very pretty and has great high note definition. As you remarked, the second downsampled version has lost its "highs." I want to thank Monica and so many others for all the help to everybody who has questions. (Sorry) I just can't spend that much time on line! Another observation on what I'm reading here: Nobody can hear digital sound. We can record it, but whenever we evaluate the recording, it gets turned into analog form and played through headphones or a speaker of some kind. That final transformation affects what we hear, too. Digital pianos, like my Roland, have "sampled" real acoustical (analog) pianos and saved a digital recording (of every note). At the 1/4" output jacks, the digital sound is turned into analog and can be plugged into an H4 to be turned back into digital, and then turned back into analog again when you listen to the recording. Some digital devices have an output format called S/PDIF. The digital signal is imported/exported without any change. This is also what happens (digital to digital) when you copy an H4 file to your computer, or transmit across the USB port. Cheers. I'm off to Ottawa tomorrow. And, I thought Wisconsin was cold!
--Gerry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 252
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 252 |
The 44.1/16 recording is nice. I think the 96/24 is a good example of what downsampling can take away. This is less crucial in the rock'n'roll field but in our acoustic and uncompressed world it makes a difference. As another post mentioned, if you want to oversample then do it in multiples of 44.1/16 (88.2/32; 176.4/64 etc) and you'll get a little better result.
Incidentally, the sound on digital pianos is usually a compressed sound which helps keep the tone consistent when it is amplified via the volume knob.
Keep up the good work.
Piano Technician
Pro horn player
Recording Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728
500 Post Club Member
|
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 728 |
Well, in a way it's good news the 96/24 recording sounds "worse" than the 44.1/16 recording. The 44.1/16 recording was a lot less work to capture, upload, and process. I'm all about getting better results in return for less effort. Not to mention I could record 3 hours (instead of just 1) on a 2GB memory card. Just for fun, I may still experiment tomorrow with 44.1/24 just to find out if the quality degradation with the 96/24 was due to the sampling rate not being an even multiple of 44.1 - or if it was the bit depth not being an even multiple of 16 - or both...
Colin Dunn
|
|
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,391
Posts3,349,273
Members111,634
| |
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/20xmedals.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/10xmedals.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/4medals.jpg)
