Zoom H2 comes out in May

[John McManimie]

The H2, the smaller, less expensive little brother of the H4 will be coming out in May. It may not look great for Pros (no XLR) but it is half the size and will sell for $199 (I may have to upgrade from my little iRiver):

http://www.musicgadgets.net/2007/02/...andy-recorder/

[Brian Standing]

Hmmmm... this looks like what I've been waiting for. I'm particularly interested in the integrated Mid-Side stereo microphone(s) arrangements.

Can't wait for the user reviews.

[Greg Quinn]

Thanks for the headsup. This looks to have much more obvious controls on it; one of the problems that I've found with the H4 is that the menuing system is far from obvious and that's made it a pain to use.

[Michael Liebergot]

Placed my order with Sweetater.com last week.
It should arriving next week, according to my rep.

I already own a Edirol R09, and Zoom H4, and use them differently. Looking for small recorders to use in different setting.

Used to use IRiver (worked for a while then they all started failing)
Moved to Microtrack (too many issues).
Been very happy with R09 and H4. teh H4 is too large to use on someone (like in a jacket pocket) and you can't use a lav mic. But it has balanced XLR's and pretty good built in mics, 48v phantom, 24/96 recording and pretty good battery life.

The R09 works great and I use most often. Small enough to place in pocket, fairly good built in mics, great battery life, great manual controls (on outside of unit not menu driven), and you can use a 4GB SD card with the latest firmware update.
But the H2 is $200 less than the R09,a nd if it works just as good as the R09, then I will pickup 2-3 more.

For those, who used IRivers, this will be the inexpensive small stealth recorder that you have been waiting for. should blow away the IFP7xx/8xx series recorders. Built in mics, guarantee much better preamps than IRiver 9Not great, but much better than IRivers), separate line/mic inputs, removable SD media (No more Media Manager crap), and it looks like most contols are on the unit (not menu driven like H4).

I really think that the R09 will be a better overall unit. But Edirol builds better products (especially pre amps) than Zoom. But the Zom being $200 less than the R09, the H2 should be a huge hit.

[Brian Standing]

For a while Full Compass was taking orders for this, with an expected June delivery date. Now I see it's off their website.

Has shipping from Zoom been delayed? Anyone received theirs yet?

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Brian Standing

For a while Full Compass was taking orders for this, with an expected June delivery date. Now I see it's off their website.

Has shipping from Zoom been delayed? Anyone received theirs yet?

Seems like there is a delay in the relase date from Zoom. As sweetwater (I pre-ordered from them) says they're looking at an August delivery date. This is a quote from the sweetwater site:
"The Zoom H2 is expected to begin arriving in stores in August (slightly delayed by an improvement to the microphone design)."

A delayed changing release date isn't highly unusual though for a new product release from any manufacturer. Personally I would rather have a later release date to work out product bugs than a product loaded with flaws that have to be corrected with firmware updates (ala M-Audio Microtrack).

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Michael Liebergot

teh H4 is too large to use on someone (like in a jacket pocket) and you can't use a lav mic. But it has balanced XLR's and pretty good built in mics, 48v phantom, 24/96 recording and pretty good battery life.

Who says you can't use a lav mic with the H4? Most brands sell versions that can be powered off 48v phantom.

But the H4 it's probably large for using on a pocket.

[Brian Liloia]

What are the chances that the H2 might slip into stores before the projected August release? I was considering scooping one up sooner rather than later, but there is a bit of a time crunch now...

[Brian Standing]

I was originally interested in this unit because the original releases had stated that it would use 3 microphones in a Mid/Side configuration. I was particularly interested in M/S miking because of the better mono compatibility over X/Y microphone set ups.

Now, however, the Zoom website for the H2 (http://www.samsontech.com/products/p...fm?prodID=1916)
says the H2 will use a 4-microphone "W-XY" configuration.

What the heck is "W-XY?" What advantages does this give over M/S? Would stereo recordings recorded with a "W-XY" setup allow for mono playback compatibility?

I'm a bit cranky about Zoom delaying this unit and then changing the specs. I'm about ready to give up on the H2 and just get an Edirol R-09 instead.

[Jim Boda]

Originally Posted by Brian Standing

...What the heck is "W-XY?" ...

Looks like W-XY provides for a "Wider" stereo pattern option. It simply extends the range.

[David Ennis]

Originally Posted by Brian Standing

... I was particularly interested in M/S miking because of the better mono compatibility over X/Y microphone set ups ...

I believe that coincident X/Y collapses to mono as well as M/S. Near-coincident like on the H4 will collapse virtually as well as coincident X/Y or M/S at voice frequencies and will also be fine in the bulk of the musical range, but will start to give a little cancellation of high frequencies (where the wavelengths are getting down toward twice the distance between capsules) coming from either side. I want M/S too, but mainly because you can vary the stereo width in post to get the balance between left, right and middle that you want.

[Ty Ford]

Coincidence IS the big factor.

Some M/S mics have their figure of eight pretty darn close to the Mid element, some don't.

Unless you have absolute vertical coincidence, if the sound comes from 90 degrees off either side or behind (as one might expect in a concert venue), the stereo image gets wacky.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by David Ennis

I believe that coincident X/Y collapses to mono as well as M/S. ...

The reason M/S does especially well reduced to mono is the left stereo channel is derived from M + (+S) and the right is M + (-S), assuming the side figure-8 is mounted with its "front" facing 90 degrees stage left. When you sum them you get (M+S)+(M-S) or 2M, with the side signals cancelling out completely to leave only the mono signal recorded from the mic used for the mid signal.

[David Ennis]

Originally Posted by Steve House

The reason M/S does especially well reduced to mono is the left stereo channel is derived from M + (+S) and the right is M + (-S), assuming the side figure-8 is mounted with its "front" facing 90 degrees stage left. When you sum them you get (M+S)+(M-S) or 2M, with the side signals cancelling out completely to leave only the mono signal recorded from the mic used for the mid signal.

Steve, correct. But you stopped short of the key point and reason we say that it has reduced to mono well--that there is virtually no distortion due to phase cancellation in the remaining signal. Ditto for coincident X/Y, and hence my notion that they were equal in this respect.

Come to think of it, since X/Y mics are in phase, when they're reduced to mono it would seem that the effective pattern would have more even coverage of the sound field than the cardioids that are used for mids in the Shure VP88 and the AT835ST.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by David Ennis

Steve, correct. But you stopped short of the key point and reason we say that it has reduced to mono well--that there is virtually no distortion due to phase cancellation in the remaining signal. Ditto for coincident X/Y, and hence my notion that they were equal in this respect.

Come to think of it, since X/Y mics are in phase, when they're reduced to mono it would seem that the effective pattern would have more even coverage of the sound field than the cardioids that are used for mids in the Shure VP88 and the AT835ST.

I suppose it depends on your point of view but I wouldn't say there's no phase cancellation when you combine two M/S derived stereo channels back down to mono. Quite the contrary, there's extreme phase cancellation but it's selective, only affecting the side portion of the signals but affecting them so much that they dissappear altogether<grin>! You are correct, however, that of the various other stereo micing arrangements - concident, near-concident, spaced arrays, etc - the X/Y arrangment has the least problems with phase issues when collapsed down to mono.

I can't speak to the quality of the sound coverage of single unit M/S mics such those as you mentioned when their outputs are combined to mono. To have a valid comparison, one would need to use 2 physically separate and comparable mics - say a pair of AKG Blueline SE300 + CK 91 Cardioid capsules in an X/Y arrangment versus a CK91 Cardioid and a CK94 Figure-8 capsule in the M/S arrangment. It would be an interesting experiment!